1962/01/02
5350
City Hall. Anaheimo California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCILMEN: Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
COUNCILMEN: None.
CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch.
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph Geisler.
CITY CLERK: Dene M. Williams.
CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox.
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: Thornton E. Piersall.
ZONING COORDINATOR: Martin Kreidt.
Mayor Schutte called the meeting to order.
MINUTES: In order to clarify the intent of the City Council D s action pertaining
to the height limitations established and applying to Conditional Use Permit
No. 124 and Conditional Use Permit No. 154, Councilman Thompson moved that
on page 5341, the word "natural" be inserted prior to the word, "grade
level", in the Council"s recommendation to the City Planning Commission per-
taining to Conditional Use Permit No. 154, and that this also be carried
through to the City Council's Resolution No. 7487 pertaining to Conditional
Use Permit No. 124, in each case, the height established be "above natural
grade level"; with this addition moved said minutes be approved. Councilman
Coons seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 154: The portion of the request originally submitted
by Haldon R. Harrison, Attorney representing Wrather Hotels, Inc., pertain-
ing to a waiver of the $2000 per front foot street lighting requirement on
Walnut Street and Cerritos Avenue, was deferred from the meeting of December
26, 1961, for further investigation by the City Manager and Director of
Public Utilities.
Mr. Murdoch reported on investigation and review of the street
lighting situation on Walnut Street and Cerritos Avenue, and stated that
at the present time, ornamental street lighting is installed on the west
side of Walnut Street, and a wooden power pole line is on the east side, on
which safety street lighting could be installed, and recommended that a
temporary waiver of the street lighting requirement, as requested, be granted
on Walnut Street onlY9 it being understood if at some future time lighting
is required, it would be required of this property owner as well as others,
and the temporary waiver would be removed, and that the request be denied on
Cerritos Avenue, since this is a heavily traveled street, leading away from
the Disneyland area.
On the recommendat ons of the City Manager and Director of Public
Utilities, Councilman Coons moved temporary waiver of street lighting
requirements on Walnut Street be granted, and the other provisions of the
Conditional Use Permit be maintained. Councilman Chandler seconded the
motion, MOTION CARRIED>
TRACT NO. 2567 (56-57~82 - ORDINANCE NO. 1327): Tract located on the north side
of Crescent Avenue, both sides of Moraga Street. Communication from Richard
C, Hunsaker requesting elimination of the requirement to construct a block
wall along the westerly side of the alley abutting lots 1 through 6, Tract
No. 2567, was submitted.
CouncIlman Coons moved that the applicant~ Mr. S. C. Hunsaker and
Sons, be allowed temporary relief from the construction of the block wall as
requested, providing they post a two-year bond guaranteeing the construction
of the wall on demand of the City or within two years; further, said bond to
be approved as to form and sufficiency by the City Attorneyis Office.
Councilman Fry seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 123 (JOHN D. CLAUSSEN - SERVICE STATION. NORTHEAST
CORNER PLACENTIA AND BALL ROAD):
Communication from Leonard Smith, Agent, requesting waiver of
requirements of filing a bond for the erection of a fence (Condition No. 5
of City Planning Commission'is Resolution No. 273, Series 1960-61). Mr. Smith
explained the Land Use Study being made of this area and plans for filing a
Tentative Map and requesting rezoning on the balance of the twenty acre
5351
City Hall. Anaheim. Cal1fornia- COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
parcel, which, if approved, would establIsh a C-l Zoning adjacent to the
service station, making the construction of this fence no longer necessary.
Councilman Chandler moved that the applicant be granted a tempor-
ary waiver of Condition No.5 of City Planning Commission Resolution No.
273, SerIes 1960-61, for a period of eIght months, on condition that he
record a copy of the Conditional Use Permit in the County Recorder's Office,
so that It will appear of record tha~the erection of the block wall fence
is a lien against the property. The recording process to be in accordance
wIth the approval of the City Attorney. Councilman Thompson seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
After further discussion, it was determined that the recording
could be by "Notice" as approved by the City Attorney.
REQUEST ~ LANDING STRIP: Request of Co-ordlnated Construction, Inc., for per-
mission to place into use a landing strip approximately 1100 feet by 200
feet on property located briefly on the south side of La Palma Avenue,
east of Dowling Avenue (portion of lot 20, block K, Kraemer Tract), to be
used in connection with their construction operation, was submitted.
Mr. Murdoch reported that this would be an operational landing
strip for a specific purpose, and would not be considered an airport.
Discussion was held pertaining to the proper methods of handling
the request, the type of planes that would be landing, and the landing
pattern. Reference was also made to the publicity given and protests
received when this general area was considered by the County of Orange as
a possible airport location. It was noted by Councilman Coons that this
Council was on record with the County Board of Supervisors opposing the
establishment of any airport in the northeast area of Anaheim.
At the conclusion of the discussion, it was moved by Councilman
Thompson that this request be set fOT public hearing January 23, 1962,
3:00 O'Clock P.M.; further, that the newspapers be requested to publicize
this matter, and that ML Robert En Shanks, Superintendent of the Anaheim
Elementary School District, and the Sunkist School P.T.A. be so notified.
Counc Iman Chandler seconded lhe motIon, MOTION CARRIED.
SIDEWALK. CURB. GUTTER AND PAVING WAIVER: Communication from Mro William J.
Wesolek dated December 26~ 1961~ requesting waiver of sidewalk, curb,
gutter and paving requirements, fronting property located at 2216 East
South Street, was submitted., (Copies of sa id communication furnished each
Councilman) v .
Mr. James Maddox, City Engineer, reported the location of the
property as well as the location of the proposed guest house, and recommended
a temporary waiver of sidewalks only, chat the other improvements be required
due to the development that has occured on the north side of the street and
also east of subject property.
Discussion was held; at the conclusion thereof, Councilman Coons
moved that temporary waiver be gran ed of sidewalk requirements onlyo
Councilman Chandler seconded the mo ion. [0 this motion, Councilmen Fry and
Schutte voted "No ", MOTlON CARRIED.
INTER-CITY REGIONAL PARK SURVEY STEERING COMMITTEE: Request of Mr. Wayne B.
Reedstrum for Council endorsement of the Inter-City Regional Park Survey
Steering Committee's recommendations to the Orange County Board of Super-
visors with reference to the establishment of a regional park in the western
section of Orange County, was deferred from the meeting of December 26, 1961,
to further study regional park data that was submitted.
City of Buena Park Resolution No" 1602 endorsing said recommenda-
tions was submitted, received and filed.
__c....,.",._~..;"""''''-'-=
,-
I;
-
I
r
---"
'~'
5352
City Hall. Anaheim. Califorma ..~ COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO" 62R~l: Councilman Fry offered Resolution No. 62R-I for
passage and adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ENDORSING THE
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE ORANGE COUNTY SUPERVISORS ACT ON THE RECOMMENDATION
OF THE REGIONAL PARK STUDY GROUP CONCERNING THE FEASIBILITY OF A REGIONAL
PARK IN THE WESTERN PART OF ORANGE COUNTY.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNC I LMEN :
COUNC I LMEN :
Chandler9 Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-l duly passed and adopted.
Mr. Reedstrum thanKed the City Council for their endorsement and
interest shown by the adoption of the foregoing resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-2: Councilman Thompson offered Resolution No. 62R-2 for
passage and adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
PURCHASE AND ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES.
(Salvador R. Herrera and Jacinta P. Herrera, Lot 20, Mary A. Goodman Tract)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNC I LMEN :
Chandler9 Coons, Fry, Thbmpson and Schutte.
Noneo
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-2 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-3: Councdman Thompson offered Resolution No. 62R-3 for
passage and adoption.
Refer to ResolJtlon Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
PURCHASE AND ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES.
(Triney Lemus - Lot 26, Mary Goodman Tract)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNC I LMEN :
COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None>
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-3 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-4: Councilman Thompson offered Resolution No. 62R-4 for
passage and adoption.
Refer to Resol~tion Book.
A RESOLlITION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
PURCHASE AND ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES.
(Marcelino R. Herrera - Portlon of Lot A~ Tract No. 97)
-.""'~^_...
5353
City Halla Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNC ILMEN :
COUNCILMEN:
COUNC ILMEN :
Chandler1 Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-4 duly passed and adopted.
PURCHASE - TWO TRANSFORMERS: Mro Murdoch reported on the following informal
quotations received for the purchase of one, 1000 KVA transformer and one,
2000 KVA transformer, and recommended the acceptance of the Garden Grove
Electric, Inc., quotation, the low bidder>
---
I I
Garden Grove Electric, Inc.
Parks & Co., Long Beach
Maydwell & Hartzell, Inco, Los Angeles
General Electric Co., Los Angeles
Moloney Electric, Los Angeles
$l5,278.64
15,594.80
15,610.40
15,970.24
16,203.20
On motion by Councilman Coons, seconded by Councilman Chandler,
purchase was authorized from the low bidder, the Garden Grove Electric, Inc.
($15,278064). MOTION CARRIED.
AWARD - PROJECT NO. 100: City Engineer reported on bid results for Project No.
100, and recommended award be made to the Sully-Miller Contracting Company,
low bidder,
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-5: Councilman Coons offered Resolution No. 62R-5 for
passage and adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A SEALED
PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR THE
FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL
UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PER-
FORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT: THE IMPROVEMENT OF LEMON STREET, FROM LOS ANGELES STREET TO
THE RIVERSIDE FREEWAY, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, PROJECT NO. 100. (Sully-
Miller Contracting Company, $25,938.80)
l
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNC ILMEN :
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None,
None,
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-5 duly passed and adopted.
DEEDS OF EASEMENT: Councilman Fry offered Resolutions Nos. 62R-6 to 62R-8, both
inclusive, for passage and adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-6:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A GRANT
DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR AN EASEMENT
FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES, (Lakewood Industrial Corp. and Kilroy :~
Orange County Industrial Corporation) \
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-7: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ACCEPTING A GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY
FOR AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES. (Dace Construction
Corporation)
..-...,,-,,-.
....-.-.';,-~...-...."'._,_.._,"'"'-
5354
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-8: A RESOLUfION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY FOR AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES.
(Crenshaw Leasing Corporation)
On roll call the foregoing Resolutions Nos. 62R-6 to 62R-8,
both inclusive, were duly passed and adopted by the following vote:
"
,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNC I LMEN :
COUNC I LMEN :
COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None,
The Mayor declared Resolutions Nos. 64R-6 to 62R-8, both
inclusive, duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-9: Councilman Thompson offered Resolution No. 62R-9 for
passage and adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING THE
DEDICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY, HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED, FOR ALLEY PURPOSES.
(Northerly 298.40 feet of Lot A - Tract 3886)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
C OUNC I LMEN :
COUNCILMEN:
Chandler~ Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-9 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-IO: Councilman Fry offered Resolution No. 62R-lO for passage
and adoption) with intention to vacate and abandon a portion of an easement.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS
INTENTION TO VACATE AND ABANDON THAT PORTION OF AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC
UTILITY PURPOSES UPON, ALONG, OVER AND THROUGH THE HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED
REAL PROPERTY; FIXING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A HEARING THEREON; DIRECTING
THE POSTING OF NOTICES THEREOF AND THE PUBLICATION OF THIS RESOLUTION.
(Tract No. 1599 - Covington Brothers - Public Hearing January 23, 1962,
3: 00 P. M. )
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None.
The Mayor dec ared Resolution No. 62R-IO duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-1l: Counc Iman Coons offered Resolution No. 62R-ll for
passage and adoption,
Refer to ResoJution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND AUTH-
ORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND
SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY WITH REFERENCE TO THE IMPROVEMENT OF BALL ROAD,
CROSSING NO. BK-5lL3, BETWEEN ANAHEIM AND SOUTH ANAHEIM IN THE COUNTY OF
ORANGE. (Ball Road Crossing)
,~~.:.~"~~,'-
5355
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNC ILMEN :
COUNCI LMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.'
None.
None>
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-II duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-12: Councilman Coons offered Resolution No. 62R-12 for
passage and adoption.
! ......,
Refer to Resolution Booko
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND
ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY FOR THE WIDENING AND IMPROVE-
MENT OF A PORTION OF BALL ROAD. (Ball Road Crossing)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNC I LMEN :
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None"
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-12 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-13: Councilman Chandler offered Resolution No. 62R-13 for
passage and adoption>
Refer to Resolution Booko
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM PROVIDING FOR AN ~
OVERHEAD AND ADMINISTRATIVE COST TO BE ADDED TO ALL MISCELLANEOUS BILLINGS
FOR MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES FURNISHED BY THE CITY, AND RESCINDING
RESOLUTION NO. 2032.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by ~he following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
C OUNC I LMEN :
COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None"
None"
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-13 duly passed and adopted.
TRANSFER OF FUNDS: On the recommendation of John Woodstra, Accounting Officer,
transfer of $360~97.50 from the General Fund to the Bond and Interest
Redemption Funcy*wa$ authorized on motion by Councilman Chandler, seconded
by Counc~lman Coonso MOTION CARRIED. H-and $94,680.00 to the Anaheim Lib-
rary Fund,
ALIGNMENT - LEWIS STREET BETWEEN CERRITOS AVENUE AND BALL ROAD: Mr. Martin Kreidt
reported that action of the City Planning Commission resulted from a
request which originated from a meeting of the Engineering Division of the
Public Works Department with staff members of the Public Utilities Commis-
sion" At this meeting, the possibility of obtaining a grade level crossing
of Lewis Street, which is presently undeveloped, where it crosses the Santa
c? ~ailroad, was considered. The Ci~y .- Jineers were informed by the staff
members uf the Public ilt lny Commission that a crossing at this location
would be undesirable, and that considera t ion should be given to the real ignrnent
of Lewis Street.
Public Hearing was held by the City Planning Commission December
18, 1961, for the purpose of considering the validity of the present
alignment as adopted on the circulation element of the General Plan, which
shows Lewis Street running straight through from Katella Avenue to Ball Road.
""..----
~~~."---."_...,-"",.,,,-
5356
City HalL Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
The various exhibit3 presented to the City Planning Commission
were explained by Mr. Kreidt and reviewed by the City Council. Several
plans had been considered in an effort to avoid an additional crossing
of the railroad j
As a result of the public hearing before the City Planning
Commission and the evidence presented, the City Planning Commission
adopted Resolution No" 176, Series 1961-62, recommending to the City
Council that the alignment of Lewis Street be extended in a straight
alignment in accordance with the circulation element of the General Plan,
and that the PUblic Utilities Commission be petitioned to grant necessary
grade crossing in order to provide the extension of the street.
Discussion was held by the City Council on the various plans
that had been considered by the City Planning Commission. At the conclus-
ion thereof, COuncilman Thompson moved that public hearing be scheduled
January 30, 19629 3:00 O"Clock P.M., to consider an amendment to the
Master Plan of Streets and HIghways. Councilman Fry seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED>
ORDINANCE NO. 1668: Councilman Thompson offered Ordinance No. 1668 for first
reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNI-
CIP AL CODE RELATING TO ZONING 0 (59~60-93 - R -3)
After hearing read in full the title of Ordinance No. 1668, and
having knowledge of the contents therein, Councilman Coons moved the
reading in full of said Ordinance be waived. Councilman Fry seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Chandler requested the record to show that he did not
vote on this issue.
ORDINANCE NO. 1669: Councllman Thompson offered Ordinance No. 1669 for first
reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CIrY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNI-
CIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (60~61-60 - P-L and M-I)
After hearing read in full the title of Ordinance No. 1669 and
having knowledge of the contents therein, Councilman Coons moved the
reading in full of said Ordinance be waived. Councilman Fry seconded the
mot io n. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRI ED.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 175: Submitted by Irving Dumm. Planned unH R-3
residential development~ southeast corner, Winston Road and Magnolia Avenue.
Mr. Kreidt reported that the frontage of subject property would
be Magnolia Avenue, and would require a fifteen foot front yard setback;
however the plans of development indicate the construction of a six foot
fence along thJS lneo Mr. Kreidt requested clarification of the Council's
action in approving Conditional Use Permit Noo 175, as the frontage of
subject property s Magnolia Avenue, and would under Code provisions require
a fifteen foot front yard setbaGk~ and the plans of development as approved
by the City Council indIcate a six foot fence along the Magnolia frontage.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-l4: Councilman Chandler offered Resolution No. 62R-l4
for adoption amending Resolution No, 7446~ waiving the fifteen foot setback
front yard requirement on Magnolia Avenue for the installation of a six-foot
masonry fence along said line.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION
NO. 7446 GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 175.
_....."""'I[..:..m'~_
5357
City Hall. Anaheim. California ,- COUNClL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCI LMEN :
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons~ Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None"
Noneo
The Mayor declared Resolution Noo 62R-l4 duly passed and adopted.
CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed, on
motion by Councilman Fry, seconded by Councilman Chandler. MOTION CARRIED.
:..-.,
ao Feather River Project - Notice of meetingo
ba Catholic Youth Organization~ Resolutions 8, 9 and 10 pertaining
to Communism, Narcotics, and United States Foreign Policy.
Councilman Thompson moved that the City Clerk write a letter to
this organization informing them that we have received the three resolu-
tions and recognize that they are studying problems of national and local
interest~ which is very worthwhile; that in the opinion of the City Council,
more organizations and groups would benefit and learn if similar interest
in local and national affairs was taken. Councilman Chandler seconded the
motiono MOTION CARRIED.
c. Uo S. Treasury, advising tax benefits to individuals who
construct Civil Defense Fall-Out and Bomb Shelters would
require legislation.
d. A. Bepristis. regarding public accounting of City Budget.
eo Elva La Haskett and Edith Falkenstein, regarding Service Award
Dinner December 20, 19610
ORDINANCE NO. 1670: Councilman Coons offered Ordinance No. 1670 for first reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNI-
CIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (57~58-52 - R-3)
--,
having
in f ul
motion"
After hearing read in full the title of Ordinance No. 1670 and
knowledge of the contents ~herein, Councilman Coons moved the reading
of said Ordinance be waived" Councilman Chandler seconded the
MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
ORDINANCE NO. 1671: Councilman Chandler offered Ordinance No. 1671 for first
reading,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNI-
CIPAL .CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (61-6247 - C-l III R-3)
Yfivr:-
After hearing read in full the title of Ordinance No. 1671 and
having knowledge of the contents therein, Councilman Chandler m0ved the read-
ing In full of said O::-d<narKe be vFJ.jved, C:J'Jncllman COOfb :,c=c011ded LhE
motion" MOTION UNAN.IivlorrSLY CARRIED.
ORDINANCE NO. 1672: Councilman Coons offered Ordinance No. 1672 for first
reading9 regarding the removing of parking meters and parking time limitations.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING SECTIONS 14032.080 AND
14,320090, CHAPTER 14a32~ TITLE 14'1 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING
TO PARKING.
---.
After hearing read in full the title of Ordinance No. 1672 and
having knowledge of the contents therein~ Councilman Thompson moved the
reading in full of said Ordinance be waived. Councilman Coons seconded the
motion, MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
RECESS: Councilman Coons moved to recess to 7:00 O'Clock P.M. Councilman
Chandler seconded the motion" MOTION CARRIED, (5:10 P.M.)
~'""'""'-".~
-""",,"~..;...:..-."';';.;-'-.,.........._~,
,-.....~,~-
~.-
5358
Cijx Hall" AD2heimo CaliforQia~__~~UNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962o 3:00 PaMo
AFTER RECESS~ Mayor Schutte alled the meeting to ordero
PRESENT:
ABSENT~
PRESENT:
COUNCiLMEN; Chandler" Coonso FrY9 Thompson and Schutteo
COUNCILMEN~ Noneo
CITY MANAGER.: Keith Au Murdocho
ASSISTANT CITY ArTORNEY~ Joseph Geislero
CITY CLERK: Dtme Mo Williams 0
PLANNING DIRECTORz Richard Ao Reeseo
ZONING COORDINATOR: Martin Kreidto
CITY ENGINEER; James Po Maddoxc
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: Thornton Piersallo
FLAG SALUTE: Mayor Schutte led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flagc
PUBLIC HEARINGg RECLASSIFICATION NOo 61~62~32: Initiated by the Anaheim City
Planning Commission pursuant to their Resolution NOa 809 Series 1961-62,
for the purpose of considering the change of zone from M-l and P-L to
R~3~ property located on the west side of East Street between Water and
South Streets9 having a dGpth of 160 feeto
The Planning Commi 510n9 pursuant to their Resolution Noo 1499
Series 1961~629 pertaining to Application 6l~62~329 recommended amendment
to Ordinance Noo 878 (Reclassification 53~54-9) subject to the following
conditions:
I. Preparation of street improvement plans and installation of all improve-
ments9 including sidewalks9 where said improvements do' not exist for
the west side of East Street between Water Street and South Street9
act to the approval of the City Engineer and in accordance with
the adopted standard plans on file in the Office of the City Engineero
20 Removal of an existing driveway on Parcel No. 4 and replacement with
standard curb and gutter and installation of a maximum thirty (30) foot
wide commercial dT\vewaY9 centrally 10cated9 on Parcel No.4 subject to
the approval of the City Engineer and in accordance with the adopted
standard plans on file in the Office of the City Engineer.
3. Installation of a maximum thirty (30) foot wide commercial driveway
at the southerly fifts'~n (15) feet of Parcel Noo 2 and the northerly
fifteen (15) feet of Parcel Noo 3j subject to the approval of the City
Engineer and in accordance with the adopted standard plans on file in
the Office of the City Engineer.
4c Prohibition of driveway construction or vehicular access to East Street
for Parcels 1 through 5~ except as outlined in Condition Noso 2 and 30
5. Installation of landscaping and maintenance thereof in the required
twenty-five (25) foot landscaped portion of the sixty (60) foot P-L,
Parking Landscaping9 Zone on Parcel Noso 19 2, 3 and 4~ plans for said
landscaping to be submitted to and subject to the approval of the
Superintendent of Parkway Maintenance.
6. Installation of a 703 foot wide landscaped strip in the parkway portion
of the East Street right~of=way across Parcel Noso 1 through 4, plans
for said landscaping to be submitted to and subject to the approval of
the Superintendent of Parkway Maintenance; said landscaping to be
maintained by the Ci of Anaheim.
7. Installation of a watering system to insure the proper maintenance of
the landscaping req~ired in Condition Nos. 5 and 6 contained herein9
plans for said system co be submitted to and subject to the approval
of the Superintendent of Parkway Maintenance.
80 Prohibition of all flashing or neon lights or signs on Parcel Noso 1
through 5 and prohibitior. of all signs in the twenty=five (25) foot
landscaped portion of the sixty (60) foot P=L9 Parking Landscaping9
Zone of Parcel Nos. 1 through 4 and in the parkway portion of the
highway right~of-way of East Sireet abutting Parcel Nos. 1 through 5B
90 Time limitation of one h~ndred eighty (180) days for the accomplishment
of and/or compliance with Condition Nos. l~ 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.
~~..;;;,;,,~-=-:-
5359
City Hall. Anaheimo California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 20 1962. 3:00 P.M.
and further recommended that the legal
Ordinance Noo 878 be amended to read:
Water and South Streets; said property
from the westerly right-of~way line of
description of property contained in
"A parcel of property located between
having a depth of 150 feet westerly
East Street."
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council.
Mr. Martin Kreidt presented exhibits which had been prepared and
considered by the City Planning Commission9 indicating present use and
zoning of the area9 as well as plan recommended by the Commission to be
accepted by the City Council.
,-.
Mro Joseph Geisler, Assistant City Attorney, related from memory
the conditions of the former Ordinance9 which as result of subsequent action
would be impossible to comply with; and explained that the City Planning
Commission recommended the former conditions eliminated, and the conditions
as contained in City Planning Commission Resolution No. 149, Series 1961-62,
substituted thereforeo
It was noted that parcel number 1 would have access to Water
Street9 parcels numbers 2 and 3 sharing a common driveway to East Street,
parcel number 4 having access to East Street, and parcel number 5 having
access to both East and South Streetsa
Mrs. Peters, resident in the area, addressed the Council stating
they would prefer the driveway shared by parcels numbers 2 and 3, be located
on the other side, and requested the City to maintain the P-L Zone and not
leave this maintenance up to the property owners.
Councilman Chandler asked if an affirmative dedication of access
rights could be obtained from the owner of parcel number I.
Mr. Havener, 600 Grove Avenue, principal in the Glen Aire property
involving lots 1 and 2,reported that there is an access now existing on lot ~
number l, which had been there prior to the installation of Water Street some
years ago. At the time of the construction of the Glen Aire plant, their
own blacktop driveway was installedo Although the access still exists,
approximately three years ago they installed the required concrete type
curbs fronting both lots one and two, and continued the curb past the access
drive; however9 in his opinion, technically speaking lot one does yet have
an access drive from East Street. If approval is given this reclassification,
each lot would have access from East Streeto
In answer to Councilman Chandler~s question, Mr. Havener agreed to
the dedication of access rights to East Street inasmuch as they have access
from this lot to Water Streeto Mro Havener referred to a discussion held
between Mr. Kreidt, Mr. Geisler and the property owners on the west side of
the street, where the widening of the access on Water Street to include
this existing, but covered up, driveway which is contiguous to Water Street,
was considered so as to give future width in case it was needed for some
subsequent purpose.
Mrs. Peters asked if the existing driveway is already dedic~ted
adjacent to property dedicated to the City, why couldn't this driveway be
opened and the provisions of the original Ordinance carried out.
Councilman Chandler explained the position of the property owner
should he dedicate to the City the access rights which have been restricted.
Mrs. Peters reported that the one main reason they agreed to
this change was because of the possibility of "No Parking" on East Street,
and requested the Council to give this every consideration.
Mr. Kreidt brought the plan as recommended by the City Planning
Commission to the Council Table and further discussion was held.
-_""-."",,,_,," "::"'4.-<':"'::';"F:-_.:~,,..
5360
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council,
there being no response, declared the hearing closed.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-15: Councilman Chandler offered Resolution No.
62R-15 for adoption, accepting the recommendations of the City Planning
Commission with a further condition, that Parcels 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 as
shown on Exhibit No.6, dedicate to the City of Anaheim all access rights
to East Street except a 30 foot access right between Parcels 2 and 3, a
30 foot access right on Parcel No.4, and two 30 feet access driveways on
Parcel No.5; further, that the 180 day time limitation for compliance
apply to all requirementsa
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER-
MINING THAT TITLE l8 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING
SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE
CHANGED. (6l-62-32 - R-3)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-15 duly passed and adopted.
Councilman Chandler moved that the City Attorney be instructed to
prepare an Ordinance establishing "No Parking at Any Time" on both sides of
East Street between South and Water Streets. Councilman Coons seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
City Traffic Engineer was requested to make a study and analysis
of the parking situation on East Street from Center Street to Ball Road.
PUBLIC HEARING. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 61-62-43:
requesting change of zone from R-A to C-l,
side of Placentia Avenue, between La Palma
North Placentia Avenue).
Submitted by Dorothy Antes,
property located on the east
and Underhill Avenues (420
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. 150,
Series 1961-62, recommended said reclassification subject to the following
conditions:
10 Development substantially in accordance with Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2 with
the provision that a minimum six (6) foot wide strip of landscaping
be provided along the highway right-of-way line of subject property,
plans for said landscaping to be submitted to and subject to the
approval of the Superintendent of Parkway Maintenance, and said land-
scaping to be installed prior to Final Building Inspection.
20 Dedication of fifty-three (53) feet from the monumented centerline of
of Placentia Avenue (30 feet existing).
3. Preparation of street improvement plans and installation of all
improvements on Placentia Avenue subject to the approval of the City
Engineer and in accordance with the adopted standard plans on file in
the office of the City Engineer.
4. Payment of $2.00 per front foot for street lighting purposes on
Placentia Avenue.
5. Provision of trash storage areas, subject to the approval of the
Director of Public Works, which are adequate in size, accessible for
trash pick-up and adequately enclosed by a solid fence or wall prior
to Final Building Inspection.
6. Time limitation of one hundred eighty (180) days for the accomplishment
of Item Nos. 2, 3, and 4.
__.---w. <..."___~_.
5361
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
Application file was presented to City Council for review.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council.
Mr. Martin Kreidt noted the location of the subject property,
the zoning and present uses in the area, and summarized the evidence
submitted to the City Planning Commission.
Mr. Louis L. Sinor, owner of C~l property immediately south of
subject property, was concerned with the disposition of the one bedroom
frame house presently existing on the property and requested its removal.
He further called attention to the fact that with the development of the
parking lot immediately north of his property, a l2 inch difference now
existed between the two off-street parking areas, thereby creating a berm
between the two properties, and requested some control be established on
the elevation of the parking lot.
~
Councilman Coons advised Mr. Sinor that according to the proposed
plan in the file, it would indicate the present building to be completely
removed and a building similar to his constructed.
Mr. Sinor stated that he had been advised that where one parking
area is higher than another, a retaining wall is required, and if this
situation exists between these two properties, requested the retaining wall
be made a requirement of zoning.
Mrs. Antes, applicant, stated it certainly wasn't their intention
to build the parking lot higher than Mr. Sinor's, however they were all
individual owners and in her opinion Mr. Sinor's parking lot had nothing
to do with the one next door. She further advised that Mr. Sinor was not
aware of the plans which were a part of the file, and stated the existing
dwelling would definitely be removed.
The Mayor asked If anyone else wished to address the Council,
there being no response, declared the hearing closed.
--,
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-16: Councilman Coons offered Resolution No. 62R-16 for
adoption, authorizing preparation of necessary Ordinance, changing the zone
as requested, subject to the recommendations of the City Planning Commission.
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. (61-62-43 - C-I)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNC ILMEN :
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-16 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING. RECLASSIF ICATION NO. 61-62<s46: Submitted by Carl Lawson and
others, requesting a change of zone from R-l to C-l, property located at
the southeast corner of the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Water
Street (600 - 608 South Harbor Boulevard).
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. 15l,
Series 1961-62, recommended said reclassification subject to the following
conditions:
._._"-~.'.~"".'~5__-,,-
5362
City Hallq Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
I. Development substantially in accordance with Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2 for
the development of Lot No. 12, Block D, of Tract No. 409, with the
stipulation that windows shall not be installed at the rear of the
proposed building.
2. Subject to the review by the Planning Commission and City Council of
the development plans for commercial use of Lot No. 13, Block D, of
Tract No. 409.
3. Removal of the existing residential structures on Lot Nos. 12 and 13
of Block D~ Tract No. 409.
4. Installation of a minimum six (6) foot wide landscaped strip abutting
the front property lines of subject properties, plans for said land-
scaping to be submitted to and subject to the approval of the Superin-
tendent of Parkway Maintenance, and said landscaping to be installed
prior to Final Building Inspection.
5. Posting of a two (2) year bond to insure the installation of a wall
along the southerly boundary line of subject property where subject
property abuts property classified in the R-I, One Family Residential,
Zone.
6. Maintenance of a thirty-five (35) foot second story building setback
for any two-story structures established on subject properties from
the easterly property lines of subject properties and further provided
that no windows shall be installed at the rear of the second story
of said two-story buildings.
Limitation that all signs erected on subject properties shall have a
maximum area of eight (8) square feet and shall be unlighted.
Recordation of deed restrictions by the owners of subject properties
limiting use of said properties to business or professional offices
only prior to Final Building Inspection.
Provision of off-street parking facilities in accordance with Code
requirements prior to Final Building Inspection.
Dedication of forty-five (45) feet from the monumented centerline of
Harbor Boulevard (37.25 feet existing) for Lot Nos. 12, 13 and 14,
Block D, of Tract No. 409.
Prohibition of the use of any residential structure for commercial or
combined residential and commercial use.
Time limitation of one hundred eighty (180) days for the accomplishment
of Item No. lOG
7.
8.
9.
10.
II.
12.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council.
Mr. Martin Kreidt noted the location of the subject property,
the existing zoning and uses in the area. He summarized the evidence
presented to the City Planning Commission, including a Precise Plan of
the area developed by the Planning Department. He further reported that
the original request was made by the owner of the third lot south of
Water Street, and at the suggestion of the Planning Commission, the owners
of the first and second lot became a party to the application, thereby
more properly relating the existing commercial zoning across the street
to the West of subject property. He called attention to the special
set-back requirements relative to second story development and read
conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission.
Mr. Ted Williams~ 609 South Helena Street, called attention to
the small fifteen-foot alley which is the main access to and from two
blocks of houses on the west side of Helena Street and the east side of
Harbor Boulevard. He felt the recommendations of the City Planning Com-
mission paralleled what would be allowed if this application was granted
by variance rather than C-l reclassification. He stated he did not oppose
the reclassification, but felt inasmuch as this is a fast-developing area,
it should be handled carefully and by Variance procedure. He further
stated that if the zoning was allowed, dedication for the widening of the
alley should be required.
Mr. Williams asked what would happen if it was ten years before
development of lot two took place? He stated this lot was similar to his
with garages extending to the furthermost proximity of the alley, which
compounds the problem of widening the alley.
5363
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2, 1962. 3:00 P.M.
Mr. George Baney, Authorized Agent, stated that most of the
garages were right against the alley, and further advised that to widen the
alley would eliminate this particular project, as he would not have suffi-
cient parking.
Mr. Baney was invited to the Council Table. Discussion was
held and plans again reviewed,
Mr. Earl Vipond, 604 South Harbor Boulevard, owner of lot number
two, stated his garage would have to be removed if the alley was widened,
and there would still be a problem on lot number one by eliminating the
parking on this lot that has already been developed. He further advised
that the only reason he and the owner of lot one joined the application
was to eliminate spot zoning.
~
Mr. Bob Joyce, 60l South Helena Street, recalled that at the
time lot number one was developed, it was the thinking of the Council that
all developments along Harbor Boulevard should be by Variance rather than
rezoning, due to the fact that more control could be exercised over the
type of development.
Further discussion was held by the City Council. The close
proximity of the intersection to the access drive onto Harbor Boulevard
was noted, and the possible traffic problem recognized. The City Council
felt that an investigation and recommendation of this situation should be
obtained from Mr. Granzow, Traffic Engineer, and thereupon Councilman
Coons moved that the public hearing be continued two weeks (January 16,
1962, 7:00 O"Clock P.M.) for further study and report. Councilman Thompson
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
RECESS: Councilman Coons moved for a ten-minute recess. Councilman Chandler
seconded the motion, MOTION CARRIED. (9:55 P.M.)
AFTER RECESS: The meeting was cal led to order by Mayor Schut te, all members of
the City Council being present.
---,
PUBLIC HEARING. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 61-62-49: Submitted by Christie Vail,
requesting a change of zone from R-l to C-l (restricted to business and
professional offices)9 property located on the west side of Harbor Boule-
vard between Water and South Streets (715 South Harbor Boulevard).
The City PlannIng Commission pursuant to Resolution No. 161,
Series 1961-62, recommended said reclassification be denied.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council.
Mr. Martin Kreidt noted the location of the subject property
the uses and zones of the area, and stated the CI ty Planning Commission
felt this was premature, and thereupon read the findings of the Commission
resulting in the recommendation for deniaL
Mr. Oscar Schultz addressed the Council advising he was the Agent
for the applicant. He stated the situation here was similar to the one
previously acted upon by the City Council (61-62-46), and that the owner
and builder would like to see all the property have an additional five foot
dedicatIon for alley purposes. Plans could be changed to have access to
Harbor Boulevard; however, he didn't feel this would be advisable. He
further advised that this is a relatively new building, and the original
plans are to build a new structure on the front fifteen feet or twenty
feet, WhICh would blend into the exlsting structure, that the building
would be used by two doctors. He stated there is at present adequate parking
at the rear. Regarding spot zoning, he felt that this is in the path of
progress~ and that commercial l1se should be allowed on the property as
traffic on Harbor Boulevard 15 so heavy that it makes the property undesirable
as a residenceo
_..."..;,,~~;,. '''';'"'''__'_';'''h.'~-C.;"___,,,,~__,,,:=
4.___"=.,,..,,",".,,~
5364
City Hall. Anaheim. California- COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
Councilman Thompson felt this matter regarding parking, the alley,
ingress and egress to Harbor Boulevard should be settled before action is
taken.
Mr> Cook~ 724 South Pine Street, addressed the Council advising
that he represented all the people on the east side of South Pine Street,
and called attention to the fact that the alley is the driveway for all the
homes on the east side of Pine Street. He stated that all of the people he
represented felt no action should be taken on any future development until
a study is made and a proper solution is found to the problem. He further
advised that the widening of the alley would involve moving of telephone
poles along that line. MI'> Cook read a petition purportedly signed by all
the owners on the east side of Pine Street, suggesting to the Council that
consideration of these properties be given in accordance with a Precise
Plan Study, and recommended their properties be considered for a parking
area to service the more valuable commercial business frontage of Harbor
Boulevard, He further stated in polling nine residences on the west side
of Pine Street~ that it was learned they would rather face a well-built
landscaped parking area than what might become a slum transient area.
The petition of nine signatures on the west side of Pine Street
approving a parking area and the petition previously referred to containing
signatures on the east side of Pine Street were retained by Mr. Cook.
Mrs, Waite, 2439 Paradise Road, addressed the Council advising
that it is her husband who intends to build the building. She agreed that
this apparently requires additional study, but doubted if the solution
offered would be the answer> She further advised that they had no intentions
of establishing a large commercial building such as a bank, and felt the
uses already established in the area would be an indication of the type of
businesses that the area would be put to.
Dr. William Kott, 601 South Harbor Boulevard, addressed the
Council stating that it was his opinion the recommended denial by the City
Planning Commission was due to the fact that this would not be a new
structure, and personally doubted if anyone would build the existing
structure for the use contemplated. He stated that he would like to see
the rezoning granted, but he felt that new structures along this street
should be a requirement. Regarding the alley, Dr. Kott felt this was a
good point, but that not only the size of the alley should be considered,
but the quality of the alley. He further stated that Mr. Cook's idea
might ultimately happen; that is, the east side of Pine Street to be parking
area for the west side of Harbor Boulevard; however, that could be in the
far distant future, and you can't stop progress.
Mr> George Neamy, one of the property owners in the area, stated
that the alley in question was two blocks long and so narrow that it was
impossible for two cars to pass each other in the alley.
The Mayor asked if anyone had anything new to offer, there being
no response~ declared the hearing closed.
Councilman Thompson stated that this application needed the same
attention as the one previously considered, and thereupon moved that the
decision on Application No. 61-62-49 be postponed for two weeks (January
16, 1962) to be given concurrently with decision on Application No.
61-62-46. Councilman Chandler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
It was determined that the Traffic Engineer's investigation and
report should include the property on the west side of Harbor Boulevard.
PUBLIC HEARING. OIL WELL DRILLlNC:; PERMIT: Application was submitted by Standard
Oil Company of California requesting permission to establish an oil well
drilling operation on a parceJ of property 200 feet by 400 feet located
approximately 485 feet east of Brookhurst Street and approximately 1230
feet south of Ball Roado
5365
City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINufES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
Notice of said public hearing was given in accordance with Section
17.12.050 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
Application together with Exhibits I through and including 6a was
submitted and reviewed by the City Council.
Mr. Martin Kreidt, Planning Coordinator, posted for all to review
a map of the area indicating the drill site and outlining the exploratory
territory. He summarized the evidence submitted to the City Planning Com-
mission at their hearing held November 27, 1961, and read in full the
conditions under which the City Planning Commission recommended said permit
be granted, which are as follows:
10 Compliance with the conditions specified in Title l7, Section 17.12.050
through Section 17.12.410 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
2. Time limitation for a period of two (2) years subject to review by the
C Council, upon proper request, at the expiration of said two (2)
year period of time.
3@ Subject to conditions Nos~ 19 2) 3, 4, 5, 63 7, 8, 9~ 10, 11 and 12
outlined in Exhibit "3" submitted by the petitioner.
4. Development substantially in accordance with Exhibit Nos. 4, 4 "A",
and 6 submitted by the petitioner.
50 Subject to the requirement that upon completion of drilling, or after
abandonment~ each well site shall be restored to its former condition
with all holes filled and leveJed and all trash and debris removed;
that upon abandonment, a twenty-five (25) foot concrete surface plug
shall be required~ with a steel plate welded over the top of each
dri ling hole at least four (4) feet below the natural ground level,
that the abandonment shall conform to all applicable state, county and
city regulations~ and that compliance with said regulations shall be
effected sixty (60) days after abandonment.
The Mayor asked if anyone wisned to address the Council.
Mr. L W 0 Newman. of Standard Oi 1 Company, Highway 39 and Imperial
Boulevard, La Habra~ Calibornia, advised that Mr. T. J. McCroden, their
Geologist, was present for the purpose of answering any questions as to the
geological possibilities. Also9two production eng~neers were present to
advise as to the type of equipment to be used.
He further advised that thls is what they call their "Kellogg
Exploratory Area" j and by drilling from this one drill site which is less
than two acres in size, it is their belief that eleven wells in the entire
area can be developed.
He further advised that It was their opinion that the drill site
was located a sufficient distance from the streets and residences so that
there wIll be no problem of noise, He stated tha~ over a Hundred Thousand
Dollars had already been expended in this area in exploratory and seismic
and leasing activities, and that considerably more will be spent in the
testing area. Mr. Newman reported that the leases throughout the area are
all ":3ub-s"Jrface leases".
Mr. Tn J. McCroden, of Standard Oil, District Geologist covering
the dIstrict In which this prospect 15 10cated9 advised that Mr. Newman's
estimate of expense was exceedingly modest; that something over twice that
amount of monies have already been spent.
He explained that they were not cer~aln that oil was there, but
they do think that this is a better than average exploratory pOSSibility.
He reported that the primary area of interest was the exploratory area, and
the depth at which they would hope to establ~sh production would be between
Ten and Twelve Thousand feet, which is somewhat deeper than most oil
accumulations in the Los Angeles basin" [hat at this depth, they would be
able to directionally drill a considerable distance, and would be able to
reach the entire exploratory area from this one drill site.
--'_'~'"_"'",""_""_""V"'__'."~
---......-,
,~
i
-
I
5366
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
He further reported that the rock formation which they were
endeavoring to get production from was equivalent to producing formations
that are most productive elsewhere in the Los Angeles basin. He stated
their plans are to originally drill a whipstock hole, whipstock somewhat
southwesterly from the drill siteo
Mrs. Donat, 1775 Castle Ave., Anaheim, California asked how
tall the permanent arrangements would be.
Mr. Albert Mo Cooper, 1004 East Glenwood, Fullerton, California,
drilling engineer for Standard Oil Compan~ answered that the drilling rigs
where they are double soundproofed, are about one hundred and fifty feet
high, and presented a picture of a similar rig. He further explained that
this is temporary and only in use during the basic drilling operation; that
after the drilling is completed, the entire structure is removed and all
that remains is a pad which is levelo Mr. Cooper noted other locations
where similar drilling rigs are used 0
Councilman Coons asked what the height of the permanent improve-
ments would be in the event commercial production was found.
Mr. Cooper answered that the maximum requested and allowed by
City Code is a sixteen foot height limitation for tank structures; however
generally speaking~ they would not want a tank higher than twelve feet.
The other equipment would be housed within the building built according
to the Code applicable in this area.
Mayor Schutte asked how long the l50 foot structure would be
up for the drilling of one well.
Mro Cooper answered that he did not know what was estimated here,
but that normally an exploratory well can be drilled within forty-five to
sixty days.
Mro Al Morse, 1975 West Lullaby Lane, stated he was not interested
in the cost of the well, but they had been given the impression that the
well would be drilled on a slant drilling, close to La Mirada and La Habra,
that in other words, they had not been given the impression that the 150
foot rig would be so close to their properties.
Mr. Morse asked what route the trucks coming into this site would
use, and Mr. Newman replied, probably by way of Brookhurst.
Mr. Bo W. Morris, 1625 So. Lamar Street, property owner in the
area and spokesman for the Citizens" Committee for the Preservation of
Residential Areaj asked why the City Planning Commission finding number 4
was omitted when the action was summarized for the Council.
Mr. Martin Kreidt explained it was to save Council time inasmuch
as they had before them the entire resolution; and at the further questioning
of Mr. Morns, again outlined the area affected by the drilling permit.
Further discussion was held pertaining to the number of wells to
be drilled, and it was established that a total of eleven wells would be
drilled.
Mro Morris again referred to finding number 4 of the City Planning
Commission's resolutions which reads: "That the granting of such permit
will afford equal protection to all property owners within the area affected
by the granting of such permito" He stated that this would affect people on
Lullaby Lane who do not have subsurface rights to their properties. He
also requested to know if Standard Oil Company had ever drilled a well such
as they now propose.
~-'''<'''''-'''~-~~'-
5367
City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
Mr. Newman answered that they have a similar installation in
Culver CIty, and further advised that the exploratory area is strictly
sub-surface, and the people will not be affected.
Mr. Morris was of the opinion that according to the provisions
of the Anaheim Municipal Code, property owners in the area would be
equally protected whether or not they had mineral rights.
Mr. Joseph Geisler, Assistant City Attorney, explained that
it would be his interpretation that equal protection would have to be
equal protection according to ownership. That if people without sub-
surface rights enjoyed the same as those with sub-surface rights, it would
be unequal protection.
--
I
Dorothy Conger, 1616 South Brookhurst Street9 addressed the
Council pointing out those areas within the exploratory area that have
not signed the lease.
Mayor Schutte asked that the City Attorney explain the Ordinance
governing this activity.
Mr. Preston Turner, City AttorneY9 stated he had prepared this
Ordinance approximately ten years ago after a study of every Court decis-
ion in California on the subject. He found, in California, you cannot
absolutely prohibit the drilling for oil; that the most that can be done
is to regulate the activity for the protection of the vicinity in which it
is proposed to drill9 to protect the public welfare, peace, health and
safety, and to eliminate as far as possible noise~ dust, odors and other
thlngs of that nature; that you can require the operation to be conducted
in such a manner that it will not constitute a nuisance, and that it will
not be detrimental to the surrounding area, and that they will be conducted
with the least interference possible in order to recover the mineral from
beneath the land. Mr. Turner explained that they are required to use the
best type of equipment and related other protective requirements of the
Ordinance. He stated the problem before the City Council was to determine
whether or not this is the best site for the exploratory operation. Upon
the question of equal rights to all property owners, he stated that refers
to those who have mineral rights; that if a property owner within this area
has sold his mineral rights, the person who purchased them is the one who
is entitled to the protection.
Mr. John Wright, 1620 South Euclid Avenue, stated that he was a
property owner and resident of Anaheim~ that he is the Chairman of the Parks
and Recreation Commission, and also that he has been an employee of Standard
Oil Company for twenty-five years, He advised that he knew what the people
had in mind when they think of an oil field, but that is not the situation
with today's modern techniques. As a property owner, if this activity is
successful, it will bring revenue into the City, and if oil is found, the
Recreation Department as a part of the City would have mineral rights and
the revenue derived would help defray the cost of the Parks and help develop
them more quickly.
Mro Wright explained some of the modern techniques now used, and
further, that he was of the opinion if water was needed, no one would be
agaInst drilling a water well, and that oil and gas is also needed.
Mr. K. J. Robinson. 1617 Lamar Street, advised that he was under
the lmpression that the drill site would be miles away, and felt it should
be away from this area.
Mr. Bob Dinnebier, 1955 West Cerritos Avenue, stated he was
withIn one-fourth mile of the proposed site, and that he had not signed
the lease. He wondered what effect this would have on the re-sale of his
home. He further reported that according to the Anaheim Bulletin, the well
would be drilled from Stanton.
'_"',,,,,,,,-,.~....._,....,,,.;:.>::_.....k'~,,,,.,c
'I7""'V.______,,-..
5368
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
Mr. Davis, 9831 Chanticleer Road, stated he had not signed the
lease and didn't want to say whether or not he was in favor of this; but
he did want to report thaT he had not been deceived in any way as to
where the well was going to be.
Mr. Robert Mu Stevens, 2157 West Lullaby Lane, felt that all
the people on Lullaby Lane were against this operation. He stated that
they were all working men, and asked that the property values be maintained.
He was of the opinion that more taxes would be derived by the City if the
area was developed into homes. He further advised that he was sure there
would be a gas odor from the operation.
Mrs. Hollingsworth, 2115 West Lullaby Lane, reported the dis-
comfort experienced by the flies and odors from the egg ranch, and stated
that they had not been given any relief. She feared the same would result
if this operation was allowed and a gas odor existed.
Mru Robert Marten~ l338 South Easy Way, objected to the place-
ment of this operation in a residential area, and stated that even though
the derrick would come down in two years, he doubted if the permanent
site would be beautiful, and wondered if the Council had to allow them a
permanent site. He also felt that if this permit were granted, a provision
regulating the venting of fumes away from the residential area should be
written into the permit, and that a noise level regulation be limited to not
more than eighty db" He stated if the well is found, the revenue received
would not be worth it to himo
Robert Melshelmer, l34l Easy Way, called attention to the impor-
tance of this step that the Council is about to take with regards to the
future of Anaheim. He objected to this being allowed in a planned residen-
tial area, and asked if it was possible to get a public referendum on this
matter of drilling in a residential area.
Mr. Joseph Geisler, Assistant City Attorney, replied that since
an Ordinance prohibiting the recovery of hydro-carbon substances has been
declared by the Courts to be invalid, in his opinion a referendum or
initiative to enact an invalid Ordinance would have no effect.
Mr. Melsheimer felt that when the City Council considers this
location for this operation, they should be very sure that it is the best
location for such an operation. He further asked if the tanks c~ld be
totally submerged, and asked if this could be written into the permit.
Mr. Morris again addressed the Council and stated in his opinion
the overall area should be considered by Anaheim for the good of all the
people. He reported that he had circulated a flyer today, but that some of
the people advised that they could not attend, and thereupon signed a
Petition of Protest (said Petition was read in full by Mr. Morris).
Councilman Coons stated he felt a good cross-section of the
people living ln the area nad been obtained9 and thereupon moved that the
public hearing be closed, CounCIlman Fry seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
Councilman Chandler did not take part in the discussion on this
matter and abstained from voting on the motion.
Further discussion was held, and Councilman Coons felt that before
taking action on this request, the plan studies for future parks and develop-
ments should be considered. Questions were asked by the City Council to
representatives of Standard Oil Company pertaining to the operation.
Councilman Fry moved to defer decision on this matter for two
weeks (January 16, 1962). Councilman Coons seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
RECESS: Councilman Chandler moved for a ten minute recess. Councilman Coons
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (11:35 P.M.)
...,~_.._""
5369
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Schutte called the meeting to order, all members of the
Council being present.
PUBLIC HEARING. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 61-62-50: Submitted by Athruz, Inc.,
requesting a change of zone from R-A to C-3 on property located at the
southeast corner of Ball Road and Western Avenue. The City Planning
Commission pursuant to their Resolution No. 162, Series 1961-62, recom-
mended said reclassification be approved~ subject to the following
conditions:
.~
1. Development substantially in accordance with Exhibit No.1.
2. Recordation of C-3, HEAVY COMMERCIAL, ZONE deed restrictions limiting
use of subject property to service station use only or any C-l,
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, ZONE use.
3. Dedication of 53 feet from the monumented centerline of Ball Road
(50 feet existing).
4. Dedication of 45 feet from the monumented centerline of Western Avenue
(40 feet existing).
5. Preparation of street improvement plans and installation of all
improvements for Ball Road and Western Avenue, subject to the approval
of the City Engineer and in accordance with the adopted standard plans
on file in the office of the City Engineer, including a catch basin
and connection to an existing 24 inch reinforced concrete pipe.
6. Payment of $2.00 per front foot for street lighting purposes on Ball
Road and Western Avenue.
7. Time limitation of one hundred eighty (180) days for the accomplishment
of Item Nos. 3~ 4, 5 and 6.
Mr. Martin Kreidt presented map showing the subject property and
the zoning and development of the area surrounding said property, and a
summary of the interdepartmental staff investigations, and also a summary of
the evidence presented to the City Planning Commission at their public
hearing~ including their findings and recommendations resulting therefrom.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council, or had
any new or additional evidence to present, that had not been previously
reported,
-
Mr. Gordon Steen, Authorized Agent, addressed the Council
advlsing that there are no service stations southerly of subject property
on the east side of Western Avenue, which necessitates left turns,
crossing traffic, to reach the existing station on the southwest Corner of
Western Avenue and Ball Roadg constituting a hazard to the free flow of
traffic on these heavily traveled streets.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council,
there being no response, declared the hearing close~
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-17: Councilman Fry offered Resolution No. 62R-17 for
passage and adoption, authorizing the preparation of necessary Ordinance
changing the zone as requested, subject to the recommendations of the City
Planning Commission.
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. (61-62-50 - C-3)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-17 duly passed and adopted.
.....~__c_"'--.__.. ...<'....,,;;.,"""",.._.....
- .,,'"""--,--.:
5370
Cit Hall Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Januar 2 1962 3:00 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARING. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 61-62--51: Submitted by A. A. Edmondson,
requesting a change of zone from R-A to M-l on property located at 1381
North Miller Street, and further described as being on the west side of
Miller Street between Anaheim Road and Orangethorpe Avenue.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to their Resolution No.
163~ Series 1961-62, recommended said reclassification be denied.
Communication dated December 28~ 1961, from Mr. Dominic
Jambon requesting that the Petition of Protest filed with the City Plan-
ning Commission be also considered by the City Council, was submitted.
Mr. Martin Kreidt presented map showing the subject propeTty,
indicating the zoning and development of the area surrounding said property,
and a summary of the interdepartmental and staff investigations, and a
summary of the evidence presented to the City Planning Commission at their
public hearing, including their findings and recommendations resulting
therefrom.
It was noted that subject property is completely surrounded by
R-A, Residential Agricultural, zoned property, and the requested use is for
the parking and storage of construction vehicles.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Councilor had
any new or additional evidence to present that had not been previously
reported.
Mrs. Thelma Murphy, Authorized Agent, addressed the Council and
submitted photos of similar construction storage yards and trucking firms
in the vicinity, being of the opinion that the requested use would be
compatible with the area and would not devaluate the property as this
construction yard would not become a junk yard; that the heavy equipment
could not be moved before 8:00 A.M. or after 4:30 P.M., so it will not
interfere with the traffic from the Autonetics Plant. Mrs. Murphy pre-
sented a petition containing eight signatures of property owners south of
Orangethorpe and north of Anaheim Road on Miller Street favoring the M-l
Zor.ing.
Mr. Edmondson, applicant, advised that their main intent was
to conduct the construction business from this location, that rarely
would there be more than two or three pieces of equipment in the yard
as the equipment would be in use at their job sites. He further advised
that the existing building on the premises will be temporarily used as
a residence and later remodeled as an office.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council.
Mr. McGhehey, 6691 Miller Street, addressed the Council in
OPPosition to said reclassification, being of the opinion that there was
presently more trucking in this area than the existing twenty-four foot
street could adequately handle; that even the school buses changed their
route because of the traffIC situation.
Mrs. Anderson~ Placentia, addressed the Council advising that
she is the owner of properties surrounding subject property, and does not
object to this reclassificatIon.
Mr. and Mrs. Dominic Jambon, 6722 Miller Street, owners of ten
acres across the street from subject property, addressed the Council
advising that they were not opposed to M-l zoning, but were Opposed to
the storage of heavy equipment and trucks, and referred to the petition
of oPposition filed at the City Planning Commission, containing the
signatures of all the property owners on Miller Street with the exception
of one. They spoke of the heavy traffic situation in this immediate area
and felt that the requested use would devaluate their property.
........... -- '-..,--_.'~
5371
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 2. 1962. 3:00 P.M.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council,
there being no response, declared the hearing closed.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-l8: Councilman Fry offered Resolution No. 62R-18 for
passage and adoption, authorizing the preparation of necessary Ordinance
changing the zone to M-l and P-L, subject to the following conditions:
l, Dedication of 45 feet from the monumented centerline of Miller Street
(20 feet existing).
2. Preparation of street improvement plans and installation of all
improvements for Miller Street at the time of development, subject to
the approval of the City Engineer and in accordance with the adopted
standard plans on file in the office of the City Engineer.
3. Payment of $2.00 per front foot for street lighting purposes on Miller
Street at the time of development.
4. Construction of a six foot masonry wall along the north, west and
south boundaries of subject property.
5, Reclassification of the easterly 50 feet of subject propert~ after
dedication, to the P-L, Parking Landscaping Zone for the installation
of landscaping in said P-L Zone, plans for said landscaping to be
submitted to and subject to the approval of the Superintendent of
Parkway Maintenance, and to be installed prior to Final Building
Inspection.
6. Time limitation of one hundred and eighty (180) days for the accomp-
lishment of Items Nos. land 2.
I~
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. (61-62-51 - M-l and P-L)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and
adopted by the following vote:
A-
I i
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNC ILMEN :
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-18 duly passed and adopted.
Mr. Edmondson was advised by the Assistant City Attorney that the
M-l Zone prohibits residential use of the property.
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE APPLICATION: The Assi stant City Attorney reported that an
Alcoholic Beverage Application had been received for on-sale beer and wine
at 1196 West Kate11a Avenue, and advised that subject property is presently
zoned C-l, however Variance Application No. 1438 requesting said use will
be heard before the City Planning Commission on January 8, 1962.
On the recommendations of the Asslstant City Attorney, Councilman
Schutte moved that the City Attorney's Office be authorized to file a
protest with the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, and also advise them of
the pending variance application. Councilman Chandler seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Thompson moved to adjourn. Councilman Fry seconded the
motion.
ADJOURNED: 12:38 A.M.
SIGNED, L ~. ~~
City Clerk
...........<.'.._.._~..,~..-._. .,.,..,. ,"""'''',,,,,-,''',,>