1962/01/165388
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16~ 1962~ 3:00
that he would be willing 'to post a bond guaranteeing these improvements
as shown on the elevation plans; that he plans to make 'this residence his
home for his family and further reported that the value of the home after
improvements would exceed $30,000o
Mr~ Earl McCarty~ 1].35 Wes% Yvonne Place~ representing the
property owners in 'the tract on Yvonne Place~ addressed 'the Council in
opposition to the Moving Permit, and advised that they were not aware of
the number of properties considered by the City to be within 300 feet of
subject property~ however, in circulating their Protest Petition they
felt that they had obtained signatures of fifty per cent of the property
owners as required by the Anaheim Municipal Code~ that they were protesting
this application on ~he basis of non-comp]lance with certain tract ].imita-
tions and restrictions, and felt that 'to allow a dwelling %o be moved in
would decrease 'their property values~
Mro John Reinhardt~ 545 South Harbor Boulevard, now building a
house at 1141Yvonne Place~ advised %hat he had contacted local lending
institutions and received opinions that to allow any move-in would result
in devalutation of the area~ that in their tract deed restrictions~ there
lsa requirement 'that all plans must be approved by an Architectural Com-
mittee~ and that he unders'tands this committee wii1 not approve the plans
if a majority of the owners in the %rat% are opposed°
Mro Leonard Jennings, building a new home at 837 Yvonne Place,
addressed 'the Councii in opposition, stating %ha't he also had been advised
by his ].ending institution that a move-.in would devaluate his proper%y~ no
matter-what amount was spent lin improving the dwelling°
Mr~. Harold Daoust~ 831Yvonne Place, advised %ha% he was one of
the developers and a member of 'the Architectural Committee of the trac%~ and
that subject plans have not yet been submitted to %hem for considera%iOno
Mro Anton stated he wanted to be a good neighbor and was sorry
the neighborhood did not approve of his plans, and under the circumstances
questioned 'the advisabiii%~ of his move~.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council~
'there being no response~ declared the hearing closed~
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-30: Councilman 'Thompson offered Resolution NCo 62R-30
for passage and adop'Lion~ denying the application of Joe Anion for a House
Moving Permit~
Refer to Resolution Book°
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING THE APPLI-
CATION OF 20E ANTON FOR A HOUSE MOVING PERMIT TO MOVE A DWELLING FROM 414
WEST LA PALMA AVENUE~ ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA TO 843 YVONNE PLACE, ANAHEIM,
CALIPORNIA.
On roll call. the foregoing resolu'tlon was duly passed and adop'ted
by the foil. owing 'vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Cnandtez~ Coons~ Fr¥~ Thompson and Schu%'te~
None.
Noneo
The Mayor declared Resolution No~ 62R.~30 duly passed and adopted°
SIGN APPLICATION~ 1672 WEST LINCOLN AVENUE: Applica%ion filed by Ro Bo Furniture
Store, requesting permission 'to erect non-conforming sign (oversize) at 1672
West Lincoln Avenue, together with sketch~ was suOmitted and reviewed by the
City Council°
Councilman Thompson moved said sign application be granted°
Councilman Fry seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
5389
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16, 1962~ 3:00 P.M.
REQUEST, SIDEWALK WAIVER, 920 NORTH WEST STREET (VARIANCE NO. 1417): Request of
Edward Lo and Agnes Jo Hund for sidewalk waiver at 920 North West Street
until such time as all owners on both sides of West Street are required to
install sidewalks, was submitted°
Mr. Maddox, City Engineer~ noted the location of subject property
and the present improvements of the surroundin9 tracts, and as result
recommended that sidewalks be required for this lot split at this time.
On the recommendations of 'the City Engineer, Councilman Coons
moved that request for waiver of sidewalk requirements at 920 North West
Street be denied. Councilman Chandler seconded the motion~ MOTION CARRIED.
REQUEST TO USE CITY HALL FACILITIES: Request of Lo Bo Wallace, County Clerk of
Orange County, for permission to use City Hall facilities as a receiving
station on June 5, 1962 and November 6, 1962~ 8:00 P~M. untii 6:30 A~M~ the
following mornings for the purpose of receivin9 returns of the Primary and
General Elections~ was submitted.
On the recommendation of the City Manager, Councilman Fry moved
that permission to use 'the City Hall facilities be granted as requesteda
Councilman Coons seconded the motion~ MOTION CARRIED.
POLICY: It was determined by the City Council that future requests for the use
of City Hall facilities be handled administratively by the City Manager,s
Office°
TRACT NO. 3812 (RECLASSIFICATION 60.-61-.2[: Communication from L~ Frederick
Pack and Associates requestin9 permission to post a bond in lieu of con-
structing a masonry wall required by Anaheim Municipal Code, and listin9
their reasons for said request, was submittedo
Discussion was held bv the City Council~ and Councilman Coons
moved that the applicant be all~wed to post a 'two 'year bond 9uaranteein9
the construction of said masonry wall within that period~ or upon demand
by the City. Councilman Thompson seconded the motion~ MOTION CARRIED.
FINAL MAP~ TRACT NO. 1246: New Developer~ Jay Lear~ Inc. Tract located on the
southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and State College Boulevard (Placentia
Avenue) and contains 34 R-1 lots, 6 R.-3 iots~ 4 C.~i lots~ and 1 C.-3 .lot
(Reclassification Nco 61-62-36, Variance No. ]411).
M~'o Maddox, City Engineer~ outlined %he boundaries of said
tract reportin9 that the fees have been paid and necessary bonds posted~
and advised that said Final. Map confoz.ms substantial] %o the tentative map
previously approved~ except %hat excess of 3°70 ~ee't of land on the North
and 3°30 fee% on the South side of Sycamore Street~ as shown on said Final
Map~ was not apparent on the tentative mapo
Mro A~ R~ McDaniel~ Tract Engineer~ explained ~ha% at %he time
· the tract was originally considered some time ago~ a sixty foot easement %o
be ultimately Sycamore Street was developed for sewer and'drainage purposes;
that with the present development, they propose ~o improve Sycamore Street
and also have agreed to improve %he two exislin9 parcel,s which are no% a
part of this tract, on State College Bouievard~ subject %o %he City' obtaining
the necessary right-of-Way; that ii is no% %heir intent to hold the two
approximate three foot strips on et%net side of Sycamore Street to hinder
any commercial development of' the adjacent corner, parcels~ and they are
prepared to enter into an agreement prior to the final release of bonds for
the sale of these strips to the adjacent property owners for %he price
indicated in the cost breakdown of the improvements~ which has been submitted
to the City Engineer. for his approvalo Further~ the 'tract developers desire
to construct a solid wall on either side of Syoamore Street a% State College
Boulevard to provide a pleasant entranceway %o the tract to enhance their
sales program for %heir residential lo~s at the rear of %he tract~ that the
developer has no interest in maintaining this wall~ and would stipulate %o
the removal thereof when the residen~esare sold or at the end of one year~
if the adjacent property owners so desire
-'390
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES- January 16, i962~ 3:00
In answer to Councilman Coons question regarding necessary
dedication for the widening of State College Boulevard across the two
adjacent parcels, Mro Maddox advised that as soon as the owners found
that they would not have access 'to Sycamore Stree%~ they asked the City
to hold the easement, which has been done, subject to conclusion of this
problem satisfactory to them° Further, that he has viewed the figures for
paving, curbs and gutters, and %he cost of the land itself mentioned by
Mr, McDanie!~ being $2~058o75 for the northerly s%rip~ and $2~042o60 for
the southerly st. rip~ and finds said amount to be very much in line with
actual cost°
Mro Arnold Maass, 1290 Liveoak Drive, owner of one of the lots
in question, his daughter being the owner of the other lot, felt that
he now has property without an entrance; %hat he gave an easement of
twenty-three feet on Placenti. a Avenue to the City with %he understanding
that he could have a driveway off Placentia Avenue and Sycamore Stree%~
that he received ±}~e request from the C~:y Right-of-Way Department dated
!qovemoer i~, ].961~ for the easemen~ along Placentia Avenue; and also a
request dated January 3~ 1962~ for a triangular easement a% the corner of
Placentia and Sycamore Streets~
At the request of Mrs, Maass, said letters were read in full by
the City Clerk°
Mro Maddox advised that at %he time %he November letter was
writ%en~ they' did not ~eal. ize the strips in q'uestion existed~ and they
were proceeding on 'the basis of the tentative map,~ He fur%her explained
that the City standards cali. led for a 64 foot street; bowever~ in this case,
the street was reduced in width %o conform %o the existing street in the
tract to the east of subjec~ properiy~
Mro Maass further advised that he also has been told that his
driveway must be moved 28 feet to 30 feet to the South~ because i% will be
in the curb ~etu~'n~ that he sold this lot to the original sobdivider, who
staked off %he property~ %o be used for street p'urposes~ and that he was to
have access %o that street°
Mro McDaniel advised that they would have no objection to a
residential type crossing ~? the present owner through these strips~ and
%hat they will permit a residential type access in the proposed wall
to properly develop a driveway°
Discussion was held by the City Council, and Councilman Chandler
moved that the final map be approved, subject to the developer providing
unlimited access rights to Sycamore Street 'to the properties on each side,
in a form satisfactory to the City A%torney~ Councilman Thompson seconded
the motion°
Further discussion was held by the City' Council, and Councilman
Fry moved to recess to 7:00 O~Clock P.M.~ ard that the matter of Tract Nco
1246 be further considered by the Council at that time~ Councilman Coons
seconded the motion° MOTION CARRIED.
RECESS: (5:05 P.M,)
A~IER RECESS: Mayor Schutte called the meeting to order, all members of 'the
Council being presenlo
INVOCATION: Rev. Apol, Pastor o£ the Chris~ian Reform Church~ gave the
invocalion.
FLAG SALUTE: Mayor Schutte led the audience in 'the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flago
5391
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16~ 1962~ 3:00 P.M.
FINAL MAP¶ TRACT NO. 1246 (Continued~: Mr~ Joseph Sahagen, 12680 Kona Drive,
Garden Grove, addressed the Council giving a brief history of the tract
ownersh]p~ and advised that 'they purchased the property less than two
years ago; that they have an agreement with the present developers of the
R-1 portion~ Mr. Shrader, and Mro Diedrich, to install and retain the wall
at the entrance until the houses are sold, or for a period of one year;
that because of this agreement~ they could not dedicate these strips of
land to the adjacent property owner or to the City°
Mro B. J. Shrader, 10357 Atlantic Avenue, Downey, purchaser of
the interior portion of the subdivision~ addressed the Council, being of
the opinion that regardless of the a¢cess~ the subdivision conforms in all
respects to the City requirements, and that the 'two strips of land in
question are not a part of the subdivision~ and he failed to see their
connection with the actual approval of the tract map~
Mr~ William Bush, 10042 McMichael Drive, Garden Grove, one of
the deve].opers~ felt that they have planned a good development and desired
a nice entrance to their 'tract; that they have agreed to improve the
adjacent properties at no expense 'to the owner~ and were doing their part
to develop a nice residential tract for 'the City.
Mr~ Maass advised that. he did not own both properties; that when
he originally sold the lot~ he was promised the right of entrance on Sycamore
Street; that the present developers have not contacted him regarding any
purchase of the three fcc% strip.
Mro Raymond Young~ owner of the other corner parcel in question,
advised that he was not interested in purchasing this additional strip of
land; that he was of the opinion that Sycamore Street should be developed
at a 67 foot width°
In answer 'to Mayor Schutte,s question regarding a proposed wall~
Mr., Sahagen stated that they would be agreeable to retaining the wall
after the one year period~ if the owners of the thirty-four houses so
desired; that they would be wil. ling after the houses are sold to give
clear title of 'these three foot strips to the City°
Discussion was held by the City Council, and at the conclusion
thereof~ Councilmen Chandler and Thompson withdrew their previous motion.
Councilman Coons moved that Final Map, Tract No~ 1246, be
approved~ suOject to the recommendations of the City Hngineer, and further
subject to the following: That the present property owner deed all access
rights to Sycamore Street westerly from the first alley east of State
College Boulevard to the City of Anaheim, and further~ that the present
property owner deposit with the City a deed of dedication for his title to
the 3~.70 feet on the north side of Sycamore Street and the 3~30 feet on the
souzh slde of Sycamore Street~ not a part of this tract, said dedication to
be effective when all the houses are sold~ or on December 3i~ 1962, whichever
occurs first~ Councilman Chandler seconded the motion° MOTION CARRIHD.
CONTINUHD PUBLIC HEARING~ VARIANCE NO. 1422: Submitted by Allen L~ Campbell~
requesting permission to operate a Hofbrau-style Restaurant on property
loca~ed at 417 South Brookhurst Street (west side of Brookhurst Street
between Broadway and Orange Avenue)~
Ihe City Council at their mee%ing of December 26, 1961, referred
said variance back to the City Planning Commission for consideration of
additional evidence, and to give the applicant an opportunity to submit
additional plans and information°
The City Planning Commission pursuant to their Resolution Nog 203,
Series 1961-62, dated January 8, 1962~ recommended that the City Council
grant Variance No~ 1422, subject to the following conditions:
5392
~ity Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16~ 1962~ 3:00 P.M.
1o Development substantially in accordance with Exhibit Nos. 1~ 2 and 3o
Submission of elevation plans of the front of the building to the
Planning Department for review and approval.
3o Installation of sidewalks 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
Brookhurst Street~
5. Time limitation of one hundred eighty (180) days for the accomplish-
ment of Item Nos° 3 and 40
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council~ there
being no response~ declared the hearing closed.
Plans and the file were reviewed by the City Council and dis-
cussion was held regarding action by the City for proper rezoning of the
area on %he west side of Brookhurs% Street south of Broadway, developed
under County jurisdiction.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-31: Councilman Thompson offered Resolution Noo 62R-31
for passage and adoption~ granting Variance Noo 1422 for a Hofbrau-s%yle
Restaurant at 417 South Brookhurs% Street, subject to the recommendations
contained in the City Planning Con, mission,s Resolution Noo 203, Series
1961-62, with the exception that condition number 2 thereof be amended as
follows:
2~ Submission of elevation plans of the front of the building to the City
Council for review and approval.
Refer %o Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE
NO. 1422o
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutteo
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution Noo 62R-31 duly passed and adopted.
Mro Campbell~ applicant, presented front elevation plans and
explained his plans for remodeling.
Action on said plans was deferred by the City Council for one
week, January 23~ 1962~ 3:00 P.M., to allow time for additional study.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING, RECLASSIFICATION NO. 61-62-46: Submitted by Carl
Lawson, et al, requestin9 a change of zone from R-1 to C-1 on property
located at 600-608 South Harbor Boulevard, and further described as the
southeast corner of the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Water Street.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to their Resolution No~ 151,
Series 196]_-62, recommended said reclass~lf'ica~ion subject 2o ~he followin9
conditions:
1. 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 Noo 409o
5393
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16~ 1962, 3:00 P.M.
4o 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-l, One Family Residential,
Zone~,
Maintenance cfa 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 insta.lled at the rear of the second story of
said two-story buildingso
Limitation that all signs erected on subject properties shall have a
maximum area of eight (8) square feet and shall be unlighted~
8o Recordation of deed restrictions by the owners of subject properties
limi[in9 use of said properties to business or professional offices
only prior to Final Building Inspection°
9. Provision of off-street parking facilities in accordance with Code
requirements prior to Yinal Building Inspection.
10. Dedication of forty-five (45) feet from the monumented centerline of
Harbor Boulevard (S7o25 feet existing) for Lot Nos~ 12, ].3 and 14~
Block Dp of Tract Nco 409.
].1. Prohibition of the use of any residential structure for commercial or
combined residential and commercial use°
12o Time limitation of one hundred eighty (180) days for the accomplishment
of Item Nco 10o
Public hearing was continued from 'the meeting of January 2~ 1962,
for investigation and recommendation by the City Traffic Engineer regarding
access drives onto Harbor Bou.!evard,
Mr~ Murdoch submitted and read the report of the Traffic Engineer
dated January 10~ 19629 recommending limitation of access to Harbor Boulevard
and designation of alleys located east and west of Harbor Boulevard as one-
way alley's~
Mro George Baney, Authorized Agent, Reclassification Noo 61-62-46,
and Dr~ Waite~ purchaser, Reclassification NOo 61,=62-49, agreed that the
recommendations of the Traffic Engineer was the best possible solution to
their access problem°
/he Mayor asked if' anyone else wished to address the Councilo
Mro Cook~ 724 South Pirie Street~ property owner west of 715 South
Harbor Boulevard, Reclassification NCo 61-62-49~ addressed the Council in
opposition to the one-.way alley° He advised that the residents on Pine Street
have garages on the alley, so in effect he would now have a one-way driveway
and the commercial traffic would be using his garage access; that to route
the commercial traffic through this narrow alley at their back yard would be
hazardo~s to their childreng that he realized Harbor Boulevard would continue
to Ce developed commercia!i~, however was of the opinion that 'the entire area
includ}n9 their residential properties should be zoned commercially~ thereby
providing an area for a large development including sufficient parking area~
that to allow 'the spot commercial zoning along Harbor Boulevard and to use
the aIleys for access would lower their property values~
Mr~ Oscar Schultz ~uggested the dedica-gion of a five ~oo~ easement
be a requirement of the zoning~ thereby making a twenty foot alley which he
felt could handle two-way traffic if the speed limits were restricted; that
until all the additional dedication is acquired along the alley, the one-way
limitation could be imposed~
5394
~it'y Hai~__~_Ar~aheim_~ California .-- COUNCIL MINUTES January 16~ 1962~ 3:0,, ~
>ti. George Neamy~ ..'10 South Pine S'treet~ spoke in opposition
commercial ,ace of the aLlley
The May'cz asked if anyone else wished to address the Oounci!~
tlhe~e Oeing no response~ dec[tared the hearing e.losedo
Discuss]on ~a.~ held by the City Council regarding access rights
to Harbor Bouievazd and t'he direction of t~aff;ic flow through the al)eye
[he Council. requested that the Traffic Engineer further study
and recommend d]rec, t.].on of one-way 'traffic through the alley°
Mr,, Bane'y came for~a-~.d and stipul, ated to the dedication of
access ~'igh'ts to Harbor Boulevard (Rec. lassificat]on
RESOLUTION NO, 62R-.3.2: Counc ii. man '[hompson offered ~esolution NCo 62R-32
aJthoriz[ng the preparation of necessary ordinance changing %he zone as
reques't, ed~ st~bject, to the recommendations of the City Planning Commission~
with the fo!lowing amendments t. hereto
Condition Nco 3, Hemovai of: existing ~esidentia~ -~., ~
~ s~ruc~ures or development
to commercial stardard-: of exi~t~;~.ng buildings~ and in either case~ final
m:,iJd][ng plans to b:e ~:.~bm~[ted 't:o 'c~e City Council for approval o
Cond:~_tion Nco 6~, ~da:2n'Lehan,:'e of a f~f[~ foe% setback from the easterly
bounda:-y of ~:~ke alley tot an~F ~[wo stor? s" ..... , -
· ~z,.,c~uze~ established on
subject: p;~opez'[.ies~ and f:d~-Lber~ prov~.ded thah no windows sh~l be
~ns-La.l_led at the rea: of 't. he second sLory of said two story bui!dingso
Cond:i(:ion Nco '7~ I-,imi~ha[/.on Lhat al.i signs other than unlighted signs
having a max:i~r, um area of eight square feet sha].l be submitted to the
City Council fo:r appz'oval~
Condition No~ 8o RecordaLion ct deed rest. r:Lctions by the owners of subject
properties iimlt:ing use of said propez!:..[es to business or professional
offices onl¥.~
Condition No~ .[10 Prohibition of the use of any' residential structure
for cor~er-ciaJ, cz com::,ined res:~dential and commercial use unless
remodeled to co~er'ciai standards.:
Condition tio,~ ].20 tLme ]:~.mJtat-~_on of one hundred and eighty days for the
accompZ.tsbmen-[ o~ items Numbers 8 and i0.,
~,~d ±ur'.,:he-r suh. jecL i..o the fei,owing: Ded-ica'Lion of all vehicular
access r:~Oh[s t:o Ha~"bor Bot;ie~,azd,,
Dedlcat::.cn or s~-~,,en feel at the rear of subject property
alley wider,_:ing es~a~]!sh:':[~g one-wa/ t;:aff:~c in ail e~ unti.l such time as
al:.' ded:lcaLio~s al~,:~r~g Lbe a~ley are r'ece].~ed~
!mp: ov~n])er.(, of t >e a! 'Le'? Lo comrnezc:iaii s'Landax.ds as r'equired by
Lbe C'i.~y~ o:r Lbe 'o '~ sh c:~,~,f deposit on a cash face value
~n Lhe amotm~ zeq'uized for ~,a]d :imp~'ovement::5,,
'['ha( vv. Len [:ihe al'eve ~;ond].'[:ions have been met on any parcel or
parcels of p~'opezi:y~ the City' A.[torr:e,/,s Office is di~-ec'hed t.o prepare an
ordinance r_'ezoning sa~d parc. el or pa;rce'J, so
~tefer lo Resolut:l,~,~ Book
A RE$OLU'IIDN OF -~rHE C][i'Y COlJNCII~ OF IPtE Ci-tY OF ANAHEIM FINDING A~ DETER:-
i~iNING 'tHAT YITL, E ~[8 0F THE ANAHEI/~ ~NICIPAL CODE RELATING T0 ZONING
SHOULD BE AMENDED AND "[HAY 'flee BOUNDARIES OF CER'IAIN ZONES SHOULD BE
CHANGED. (6-62 46 ~ C-I'~
On rs'i! (;all the foregc, ing resolution was du].y passed and adopted
by the fol.i.o,~:tng vote:
AYES: 'SOUNC I L~SlEN:
i'~OES: COUNC, I L~aEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandie:.r.~ Coons~ F'x'y.~ Thompson ar~ Schutte.
None ~
None ~,
The Mayor decla.t:.ed Rebo.'Lukion No~ 62R-32 duly passed and adopted~
5395
City Hall Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES January 16~ 1962, 3:00 P.M.
RECLASSIFICA'r[ON NO. 6]-62-49: Submitted by Christie Vail~ requesting a change of
zone from R-1 to C-] (restricted to business and professional offices) on
property located at 715 South Harbor Boulevard (westerly side of Harbor
Boulevard between Water Street and South Street).
The City' Planning Commission pursuant to 'their Resolution No~ 161,
Series 196z-62~ recommended said reclassification be denied.
Public hearing was held before the City Council January 2, 1962, a%
which time the hearing was closed and action deferred to this date to be con-
sidere¢-: in conjunction with Reclassification NoG 61'-62-46, upon receipt of
reporl irom the Traffic Engineer regarding the access and traffic problems in
this area°
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-33: Councilman Fry offered Resolution NCo 62R-33 for
passage and adoption~ authorizing the preparation of necessary ordinance
changing ~he zone as requested~ subject 'to %he following conditions:
!. Deve!opmen% substantially in accordance with plans filed with applicat~Ono
2° Removal of existing res~dent~a~ structures or development Lo commercial
standards of 'the existing buildings~ and in either case~ final building
plans to be submitted %o 'the City Council for approval°
3° Installation of a minimum six foot wide .landscaped strip abut%inn the
front property ~.ines of subject property~ plans for said landscaping %o
be submitted %o and subject to %be approval of the Superintendent of
Parkway Main%enance~ and sa~d landscaping to be instal!ed prior to final
halide, nJ inspec'~iOno
4° Pos%~ng of a t~o year bond to insure the ins%ailation of a wall along
the northerly and southerly bo'~ndar¥ lines of subject property where
subject property' abuts property classified in the R-]~ One-Family Resi-
dential Zone~
5G Maintenance of a fifty foot se%back from the westerly boundary of %he
a]J. ey for any two story structures established on subject property, and
fuTr~her~ provide that no windows shall be installed at %he rear of the
second story' of said two story buildings°
6o LimE%at, on %ha± any signs other than unlighted signs having a maximum
area of e~gh% square fee[ shall be submitted to the City Council for approval~
Recordation of deed rest:fictions by %he owners of subject property limiting
%he use of said property to business or Professional offices onlyo
8~ Provision of off-street parking facilities in accordance with Code require-
ments prior to Flnal Building Inspection~
9~ Dedlca-~ion of' 45 feet from the monumented centeriine of Harbor Boulevard°
10o Prohibition of the use of any' residential structure for commercial or com-
bined residential and com~erciaI use unless remodeled to commercial
standards°
11o Time limitation of 180 days for the accompLishmenk of Items Nos~ 8 and 10o
!2o Dedication of seven fee~ at the rear of subject property for alley widen-
1nj and eskab],ishing one-way traffic in the aliey un%il such 'time as all
dedications along the alley are received°
13o Dedication of ai! vehicular access rights to Harbor Boulevard~
14o Improvement of the alley to commerciaI standards as required by the City
or the posting of cash or security deposit on a cash face value in the
amount required for said improvementso
Refer to Resolution Book°
A RESOLLTION OF' THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE crTY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER-
MINING 'THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING
SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT IHH BOUNDARIHS OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE
CHANGFiD, (61-62-49 -- C,-1)
On roll call the foregoin9 resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler~ Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutteo
None°
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No~ 62R-33 duly passed and adopted°
5396
~Hall~. Anahei_~m California ~ COUNCIL MINUTES - ]anuari~3:00 P~M___._~
RECESS: Councilman Chandler moved for a ten m~lnute recess° Councilman Coons
seconded the motiono MOTION CARRIHD. (9:30 P~M,)
AFTER RECHSS: The ~ayor call. ed 'the meeting ~o o~der,~ ali members of 'the Council
being present ~
OIL ~ELL DRILLING PERM[T: Submitted b~ Standard Oil. Company of California
~equesting permission to establisi~ an oi.[[ ~ell drilling opera%ion on a
parcel of property 200 feet by 400 fee%~ approximately 485 fee% east of
B~ookb. urs% Stree't and
.~2~ feet sou[.h o~ Bail Road o
Pub ic Hearing wa~ held by '~'~
- . ~.h~ City Council January 2~ 1962~ a%
which time :said :nearing ~as closed and action b~ the City Council deferred
to this date°
Ma'.~or .Schutte announced that :request had been received fzom both
sides of' this Lssue reques~'~[n.g t:he publ[c hearing be :reopened°
Councilma. n Chandler st.a%ed because of becoming a party o£ interest
in this controversy~ and not being able to discuss %he mat%er nor vo%e~ anti
naw_ng no interest in [he outcome of [be heaz'ing~ requested permission to
w~.tndraw from '!he rneeting~,
Counc:ilman Chandier~:~ [empora.rF aosence from %he meeting was
approved oy ~:ne rema_~n:ing Counctlmeno
Councilman Coons read excexpi:~, from an editorial published in the
Anaheim B e~:r, Wednesda~.~ January J.O~ ii962~ ~eferrLng to City plans to
lease City owned properh'f~ Co'uncilman Coons stated hSe Councl'] never has
~ona_dezed any proposa.L t:o use Ci['y owned !and ~,o drill these oil wells~
howe'vex~ btandard 0i! Compan~ has present, ed teases %o 'hhe City Attorney
covering City o~ned p'roperf:y'o These leases have been ~i%hheld and the City
Council d~ld not discuss Lhem because hhey did not want to be in a position
of comi~[ing themselves before decision on 'hhis issue was made~
Ma'yoz Schut'he asked Cihy Attorney Preston Yurner for his recom-
mendation pert. aini?g ~::o Erie :'eopenlng of the public heax'ingo
Mr'~ '!'uzner :~ta±ed since the .last public hearing two weeks ago~
he bas checked %ne :.-r~fn',.~fe~ of '[:he meeting :ho ascez-hain whether or not the
Council. had received evidence on all 'the matters upon which ii will be
necessary fo~ them t.o make '[hei. r findings in de~.ezmining ~his ma~%ero He
further adv[sed [:ha'i: f::]ndings must. be made whether ~he application is
granted or denisdo in his opinion~ he fel/'t it wouJd be advisable %o reopen
the hearing '[o rece:~ve an? evidence~ tf ?:here is any ~o be presen~ed~ on
the quest-ion whehbe:r or not: the lo::a/ion of this drill site at the place
requested or a~: an~ -+~
o ..... ez place %hat mig~:t be determined~ in the evenZ the
appl.:ication is gra~(:ed:~ would ~ave an7 detrimental effects upon %he general
pub.l~c we]faze~ of :~z'tounding axeao
Coup.(iJman ]~hompson moved
p.m~-~c hearing be reopened for
'[:he purpose of dete:~minin,~ the plan oui. lined by 'the City Attorne¥~ restrict-
trig presentation to one spokesman for the opposition and one spokesman for
· Lhe applicantt ].imiting said re
P. sen~.a,.~on including testimony of witnesses
to twenty minu[es,, Cocnc.ilman Coons :seconded the motion° MOTION CARRIED.
I'he Ct't? Clerk zepoxted the following correspondence received
since the last pub.itc .hearing:
1o James ~ Dennicko
2° Ywo letters ir. om S~andard Oil Company dahed Jan'uar¥ 9~ 1962~
and January ~0~ 1.962~ (Yhe above letters were duplicated and
copies furnished each Counc[2man)
2o M:r~ and Mrs,, Frank Verano~ received January 25~ ~962o
(Letter read in full.) '
~ Leater L,: Lev~ At[orney~ received ~a
u nuary 15~ 1962~ requesting
the puo][c bea~J, ng be reopened o
5~, Peril:ion of approval rece:lved at open. meeting~ purportedly
conta~ ning sixty-one signat~Jres o
5397
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16~ 1962~ 3:00 P.M.
The Mayor asked if the applica'n% wished to address the Council.
Mr. D. A. Nielsen, Attorney employed by Standard Oil Company of
California, Land Department, addressed the Council agreeing with the
reopening of the public hearing, as they also felt certain items in the
Ordinance had not been adequately covered. For the benefit of the people
who had not attended their last hearing, he called upon their Geologist
for a brief statement indicating why they were in West Anaheim and how
they arrived at this particular area, and this particular drill site.
Mr. T. J. McCroden, employee of Standard Oil, stated he was a
graduate Geological Engineer and also held a Graduate Degree in Geology.
He reported that before proceedin9 with this work, they determined that
they could operate under the Anaheim Municipal Code. The seismic program
was ordered, which program indicated the favorable area that they have
thought %o be present. 1% was on this basis that they recommended the
taking of leases and proceeded to obtain a drill site in an area covering
the Kellogg Exploratory Area. He presented a chart explaining problems
involved should the exploratory well be located in various areas, and
stated that as a result of this study, the drill site selected was one
most centrally located and favorably situated for subsequent development.
Mr. Nielsen asked if Mr. McCroden could state that the drill
site selected, which is west of Brookhurs% Street and south of Ball Road,
was as good a site as could be found in the area~ and was designed ~o reach
all of the areas of the Kellogg Exploratory Area that was defined in the
record, in order that all of the people within that area having their
mineral rights could be given an equal opportunity to share.
Mr. McCroden replied that the present drill site is centrally
located with respect to the Kellogg Exploratory Area %o reach all of the
objectives of the exploratory well, that the outlying corners of the area
could be reached with development wells°
Mr. Nielsen further reported that following the work of the
Geologist %hey proceeded %o lease the area known as the Kellogg Area, and
of these mineral owners, approximately eighty-eight per cent, or 2~265,
have signed leases. He thereupon submitted into evidence Exhibit No. 7,
containing a lis% of the names and addresses of all their lessors in %his
area°
In answer %o a question by Councilman Thompson, Mro Nielsen
further reported that in his opinion, the eighty-eight percent would also
be comparable to the total acreage. He stated among those who have already
leased are the Anaheim Union High School District and the Anaheim Elementary
School District. Mr. Nielsen then called upon their drilling engineer to
briefly present their drilling plans and safety precautions that will be
taken in order to eliminate nuisance or any detriment %o the public welfare.
Mr. Albert M. Cooper, 1004 East Glenwood, Fullerton, California,
Drilling Engineer for Standard Oil Company, stated he was a graduate mechan-
ical engineer from the University of Southern California° Ne reported the
drill site and also the development wells will be drilled with soundproofed
derricks, that the area is to be enclosed with a chain link fence to be
covered with a tarpaulin type cover; however, upon obtaining commercial
production, the area would be enclosed with a concrete block wall, and the
facilities would not extend beyond the top of the concrete wall. He
explained the system planned to handle production would be a closed system~
and production would be automatically trans£erred from the property~ that
there would be no odors expelled into the air, and all State~ Municipal and
industry fire and safety orders in conductin9 their activities would be
adhered to. He further reported that not only during the drilling phase
but during the permanent production facility phase, all machinery would be
housed in soundproofed buildings, and would not add any above the noise
level which already exists in the area.
5398
~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16, 1962~ 3:'"
In answer to further questioning of
testified in substance, as follows: That the operation would be car?~d
on in two phases, first the exploratory well, and then the production
oil. That the equipment used, not only in the drilling but also in the
production phase, will be electrically driven and be double-soundproofed°
Although no dust problem is con'templated~ the area will be paved arid land.-
scaped. Said landscaping plans and plans regarding the structural part of
the walls and buildings to be submitted to the City for approval.
In answer to a question pertaining to a possible fire hazard, Mr.
Cooper stated in his opinion there would be no fire hazard to the people in
the area. He told of safety devices used in their operation.
Mr. Nielsen called Mr. David Fo Culver, Appraiser, to testify-
pertaining to property interests and valuation. Mr. Culver gave a brief
resume of his past experience and stated he had made detailed inspections
of the drill site and district, that he was familiar with the improvements
therein, and in nearby areas, and also informed as to values~ In his
opinion, the oil drilling activities as proposed would not have an adverse
effect on the market value of real property, residential or commercia.,
within the proposed oil drilling district and outside the district. He
further stated in his opinion 'the granting of the oil drilling permit to the
Standard Oil Company would not be detrimental to the orderly development o~
expansion of the City of Anaheim. He further stated that he based his
opinion, not only on general experience in the profession of' rea2 esta'~::e
appraising, but specifically on a study made of a similar situa%ion~ an
incident wherein a drilling permit was sought by Universal Consolidated
Oil Company on property owned by 20%h Century Fox Studios, located nor±th and
south of Olympic Boulevard~
Mayor Schutte asked Mro Nielsen if they would consider moving the
drilling site north approximately 250 feet or 260 fee%~
Nielsen answered that they would have no objections to %ha%o
Mayor Schutte auked if it was economically p~<~%ible whet~ the
field was pr~oved 'to drill several welds-at one time.
Mro Nielsen stated that this question could not be answered until
the limits of the field is known; however, the site was designed for only'
one rig.
Mayor Schutte asked if they would agree to either lower the storage
tank or raise the height of the fence so %ha% the facilities would not be
visible from within five hundred feet.
Mr. Nielsen replied that they would prefer raising the fence to
make the facilities not visible, and would agree to do that~
Mr. Nielsen then filed a letter from Marsh & McLennan-Cosgrove
and Company concerning fire insurance rate marked Exhibit NCo 8~ and a
verified written report of i~.~r~ David Frank Culve~ Appraiser, in support
of his testimony concerning property values, marked Exhibit [[o~ 9.
Mr~ Lester Lev, Attorney representing families in 'the area in
opposition %o the granting of the drilling permit, addressed ~he Council
advising that when an oil well drilling application comes before the
City Council, the City Council was not bound to grant it unless it is
[ound ~ha~ the granting of the permit will not substantially impair property
rights. In his opinion, this drilling permit would in fact deprive many of
the surrounding R-1 owners of a substantial property right° He further
advised that he failed to see what relationship the Fox Hills area as
referred to by Mr. Culver had to do with the West Anaheim area. Mro Lev
stated inasmuch as many of these people in 'the Chanticleer area have
just recently moved in, he felt sure that there would be many lawsuits to
be released from these recent sales° He further advised that two or three
people in the area have told him personally that they signed the oil lease
because they were told by the Standard Oil representative that there would
be no drilling within two or three miles. Mr~ Lev stated he wan'ted i~. ur]~
5399
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16~ 1962~ 3:00 P.M.
derstood that they were pot relinquishing or waiving their stand, which is
that no drillin9 should be permitted here. He reminded the City Council
of a 1959 Court case (172 CA 2nd 142, ?riel vs. the County of Los Angeles)
wherein a drillin9 permit Was denied by the City Council ina residential
zone. He stated further if it was found by the City Council that %he permit
should be allowed, requested briefly the f~llowi, ng additional conditions
being imposed:
1o Relocation of the drill site northerly to the north property line of
the Stehly property.
2. Limiting truck traffic to between the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M.,
and that the doors on the soundproofed enclosures and buildings be
c].~sed between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 8:00 A.M.
Limiting the access road to the one running due west to Brookhurst St.
4. Requiring that the access road be oiled or asphalted the same as the
drill site itself for dust control.
5o Requiring that they counter sink the storage tanks to the height of the
wall to act as a barrier.
6. That the landscapings be with fully grown trees.
7. No open sumps~ tank washing, fuel oil of any kind, all to be exi;elled
from their containers into sealed vesselso
8. That sound readings be taken before drilling in the Chanticleer Tract~
and a requirement imposed that the sound level be kept at that point°
9~ That the chain link fence camoflaged with tarp be a condition if drilling
is permitted.
10. that the chain link fence be changed to a block wall at the time any
of thewells, exploratory or o%hers~ are on test for more than thirty
days.
11. That either kope units or other similar noiseless units be used, and
pumped directly from the tank into the pipe lineso
12o None of their facilities~ tanks or otherwise, to be used for oil
except oil produced from this site.
13. That only electric power obtained from the City of Anaheim be used,
that they generate no power on the site themselves.
14. If they go into production, a meetinq be held with City representatives
to determine whether it is feasible ~or them to drill more than one
well at a time°
15. All machinery to be covered and not permitted to raise above the height
of the wall.
16. That the time limit established be less than two years.
17. That Standard Oil furnish a letter to the people in the area agreeing
to pay the difference in fire insurance if there is an increase in the
fire rates because of the drilling.
In conclusion, Mro Lev reiterated their objection to the granting
of the drilling permit°
Mr. Lev then called Mr~ Montera, who testified substantially as
follows regarding representations made to him by Standard Oil representatives~
Mro Montera stated that he and others were told that they would have
nothing to worry about as far as the wells were concerned, as they wouldn't
consider drilling in the area because they knew that the City of Anaheim
would never allow any drilling in any residential area, that it would have to
be at least a mile and probably would be two or three miles away~ He stated
this was approximately on March 1, 1961 (later in the meeting there was
presented the representative's business card - Jack A. Warren).
i'~ir. Montera stated he dei-inite]y ~ou]d no,.bar, signed the lease ~£
he had kr~own where the drilling ai~ was 'to be located.
There was a showing of hands of those who felt %here had been
misrepresentation by the Standard Oil Company, and also a showing of hands
of those who felt there had not been misrepresentation.
Mr. Nielsen advised that there were no Standard Oil representatives
in the fleld on March 1, 1961~ as their leasing activities did not commence
until March 10, 1961. He stated most of the conditions requested by Mr.
Lev have already been consented %o by them, and thereupon submitted the
letter that had been formerly referred to by Mr. Lev. Mr. Nielsen gave a
resume of %he actions taken both by the City Planning Commission and the
~400
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 169. 19629 3:00 P.M.
City Council since the filing of their application November 29, 1961.
Mr. Lev stated that perhaps the date reported by Mr. Montera
was in error; however, the important thing remembered were the things
that had been told him. He stated he told about the shock these people
had in learning Of the oo~sdbiti~¥ of an oillwell st %his site and the
psychological attitude about wantin9 to get out after they just had
moved in, which he felt was possibly one of the biggest factions in
determining devaluation.
Councilman Coons moved that public hearing be closed° Council-
man Yry seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
At the request of Councilman Coons, Mr. Turner re-stated the
position of the Council regarding the responsibility pertaining to an
application for an oil drilling permit.
Mr. Turner advised and was sure that the Courts in California
would sustain his remarks, that the City Council can prohibit the drilling
in a particular area, if it is found to be a fire hazard~ or detrimental to
the public welfare, or constitute other hazards or nuisances; however, the
City Council cannot absolutely prohibit property owners from recovering
the oil beneath their property. An effort must be made to enable the
property owner to recover and reduce to possession the oil beneath his
land~ and for this reason a provision was written into the ordinance
providing for the drill site to be designated by the City Council.
Councilman Coons asked Mr. Reese, referring to previously
drawn plans of how this area could develop if it had been determined that
such a drill site as applied for would in any way prevent the future
development of the area.
Mr. Reese referred to studies made in conjunction with the
tracts and the community park sites, stated it was generally determined
that it would be possible to develop the surrounding property with single
family residential homes and possibly multiple family residential along
Brookhurst Street. He stated they had also explored the alternate site~
An over-lay over an aerial photo indicating possible development
and showing typical street patterns was submitted and reviewed by the City
Council.
Further discussion was held between the City Councilmen. At
the conclusion thereof~ Councilman Coons moved to defer final action
on this application for one week (January 23, 1962 - 3:00 O'Clock P.M.)
Councilman Fry seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
RECESS: Councilman Coons moved for a ten minute recess. Councilman Fry
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (11:30 P.M.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Schutte called the meeting to order, all members of the
City Council being present.
ORDINANCE NO. 1674: Councilman Coons offered Ordinance No. 1674 for first
reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR THE
ISSUANCE OF MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF SAID CITY IN THE AMOUNT OF
$2,215,000.
After hearing read in full the title of Ordinance NCo 1674 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 UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
5401
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16, 1962, 3:00 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-34: Councilman Fry offered Resolution No. 62R-34 for passage
and adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, DIR-
ECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR
$2,215,000 MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS ELECTION 1960, SERIES C, OF
SAID CITY. '
On roll call the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopt'ed
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Remlution No. 62R-34 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING, VACATION AND ABANDONMENT: Public hearing was held on proposed
abandonment of an easement for public utility purposes (the area of Dowling
Street and Anaheim Road) pursuant to Resolution No. 7494, duly published in
the Anaheim Bulletin January 4, 1962.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council, 'there
being no response, declared the hearing closed.
Mro Maddox, City Engineer, reported this matter cleared all
departments affected°
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-35: Councilman Thompson offered Resolution No. 62R-35
for passage and adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ORDERING THE VACATION
AND ABANDONMENT OR AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES UPON, ALONG, OVER
AND THROUGH THE HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY. (South side of Anaheim
Road, east of Dowling)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None,
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-35 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 1673: Councilman Coons offered Ordinance No. 1673 for final reading°
Refer to Ordinance Book.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.32,
SECTION 14o32.190 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO PARKING.
(East Street~ on either sider between Water and South Streets)
After hearing read in full the title of Ordinance No. 1673 and
having knowledge of the contents therein, Councilman Coons moved ~h~ read{rig
in full of said Ordinance be waived. Councilman Chandler seconded the
motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIBD.
On roll call the foregoing Ordinance was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None.
Mayor Schutte declared Ordinance No. 1673 duly passed and adopted.
~4C
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16, 1962, 3:00
APPOINTMENT, CITIZENS~ CIVIL DEFENSE COMMITTEE: On the recommendations of
Charles E. Griffith, Coordinator of Civil Defense, Councilman Coons moved
that the appointment of Richard C. Martin as member of the Citizens' Civil
Defense Committee and to serve as Vice-Chairman of said Committee for the
calendar year of 1962 be approved. Councilman Chandler seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-36: On the recommendations of the City Manager, Councilman
Fry offered Resolution No. 62R-36 for passage and adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OY THE CITY OY ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING
EXECUTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ARCHITECT
BETWEEN EARL G. KALTENBACH AND ASSOCIATES AND THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the followin9 vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Scnutte.
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-36 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-37: Councilman Coons offered Resolution No. 62R-37 for
passage and adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CHANGING THE NAME
OF EUCLID AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, TO EUCLID STREET.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the followin9 vote:
AYES: couNcILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None,
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-37 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUIION NO, 62R-38: Councilman Coons offered Resolution No. 62R-38 for
passage and adoptiono
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER-
MINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND
COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC I~PROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE IMPROVEMENT OF EUCLID
STREET, FROM THE NORTH CITY LIMITS TO KATELLA AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM~
PROJECT NO. 76; AND APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION
OF SAID PUBLIC I~LPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,
ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE
INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE ~ONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be
openeoFebruary 8, 1962~ 2:00
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 62R-38 duly passed and adopted,
5403
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16~ 1962~ 3:00
RESOLUTION NOo 62R-39: Councilman Chandler offered Resolution Nco 62R-39 for
passage and adoption, awarding the contract for the construction of traffic
signals and safety lighting at the intersection of East Street and Ball
Road, Project Nco 105-1, to the low bidder, Eo Do Johnson Company, in %he
amount of $4,758.00o
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
UTILIT£ES AND TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PERFORM-
ING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT: FURNISHING AND INSTALLING TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SAFETY LIGHTING,
TOGETHER WITH APPURTENANCES, AT THE INTERSECTION OF EAST STREET AND BALL
ROAD~ IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, PROJECT NO. 105-1o (Eo Do Johnson Company)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schut%eo
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No° 62R-39 duly passed and adopted°
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-40: On the recommendations of the City Engineer, Councilman
Coons offered Resolution No. 62R-40 for passage and adoption~ awarding the
contract for the construction of traffic signals and safety lighting at the
intersection of Brookhurst and Cerritos Avenue, Project Nco 107-2, %0 %he
!ow bidder, Eo D. Johnson Company, in the amount of $4,846.00o
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLLrFION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A SEALED
PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR THE
FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL
UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING POWER~ FUEL AND WATER, AND PERFORM-
ING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT: FURNISHING AND INSTALLING TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SAFETY LIGHTING,
TOGETHER WITH APPURTENANCES, AT THE INTERSECTION OF BROOKHURST STREET AND
CERRITOS AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM PROJECT NO. 107-2o (E Do Johnson
Company) ' o
On roll call the foregoin9 resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons~ Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None°
None°
The Mayor declared Resolution Nco 62R-40 duly passed and adopted°
DEEDS OF EASEMENT: Councilman Thompson offered Resolutions Nos° 62R-41 to 62R-44,
both inclusive~ for passage and adoption°
Refer to Resolution Book°
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-41: 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
(Heyer & Perkins) ·
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-42: 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.
(M & H Industries)
.5404
City Hall. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUfES - January 16~ 1962~ 3:00
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-43: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM C£RTAIN
REAL PROPERTY FOR AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES.
(Department of Veterans Affairs of the State of California; Ray Y
and Dorothy A. Mallonee)
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-44: 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, UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES.
(Broadway Village of Anaheim)
On roll call the foregoing resolutions were duly passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons~ Fry, Thompson and Schutte.
None,
None°
Mayor Schutte declared Resolutions Nos° 62R-41 to 62R-44, both
inclusive, duly passed and adopted~
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-45: Councilman Thompson offered Resolution Noo 62R-45 for
passage and adoption.
Refer to Res'olution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DETERMINING THE
NECESSITY FOR,AND DIRECTING THE ACQUISITION BY EMINENT DOMAIN OF, REAL
PROPERTY FOR PARK AND RECREATION PURPOSES. (Northwest corner, Ninth St
Orangewood Ave.)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons~ Fry~ Thompson and Schutteo
None,
None°
The Mayor declared Resolution Noo 62R-45 duly passed and adopted°
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-46: Councilman Fry offered Resolution Noo 62R-46 for passage
and adoption°
Refer 'to Resolution Book°
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF FHE CI'fY OF ANA~JE[ivi DETERMINING IHE
NECESSITY FOR, AND DIRECTING THE ACQUISITION BY E/vlINENT DOMAIN OF', REAL
PROPERTY FOR PARK AND RECREATION PURPOSES. (Southeast corner~ Haster
Street and Orangewood Avenue)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutteo
None°
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution Noo 62R-46 duly passed and adopted°
RESOLUTION NO. 62R-47: Councilman Schutte offered Resolution No° 62R-47 for
passage and adoption°
Refer to Resolution Book.
54O5
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16, 1962~ 3:00 P.M.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT TO BE MADE AND ENTERED INTO
WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BASEBALL ASSOCIATION FOR THE USE OF LA PALMA
PARK FOR A BASEBALL GAME.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Chandler, Coons, Fry, Thompson and Schutte~
None.
None.
The Mayor declared Resolution NCo 62R-47 duly passed and adopted.
CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed on
motion by Councilman Thompson, seconded by Councilman Coons. MOTION CARRIED.
a. A. Bepristis, communication dated January 5, 1962.
b. Donald C. Brandenburgh, Orange County Evangelical Ministers
Fellowship - Christ returned to the word, "Christmas".
Co Feather River Project Association, Agenda and Program.
do Public Utilities Commission, rules for overhead electric line
construction.
e. Motor Vehicle License Fee Fund, Apportionment to Cities for
the period June 1, 1961 through November 30, 1961.
AUTHORIZATION - SECURITY FIRST NATIONAL BANK: On motion by Councilman Fry,
seconded by Councilman Coons, Maybelle E. Spencer, City Treasurer, was
authorized to receive returnable documents from the Security First Nationai
Bank. MOTION CARRIED.
WITHDRAWAL - LANDING STRIP REQUEST: Communication dated January 15, 1962, from
Wu So Messenger, Co-ordinated Construction, Inc., withdrawing their request
for permission to place into use a landing strip to be used in connection
with their construction operation in the northeast area, was submitted and
read. Councilman Coons moved that said request to withdraw be granted.
Councilman Thompson seconded the motion° MOTION CARRIED.
PROXY - WEST ANAHEIM WATER COMPANY: On motion by Councilman Coons, seconded by
Councilman Chandler, George F~ Oelkers, Director of Public Utilities, was
authorized to represent the City of Anaheim on actions taken by the West
Anaheim Water Company at the Annual Meeting of the Shareholders, to be held
on January 22, 1962, or at any Adjourned Meeting 'thereof. MOTION CARRIED.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 60-61-92: On the recommendation of the Assistant City
Attorney, Councilman Fry moved that release of negotiable cash or
negotiable securit?, posted in accordance with Improvement Certificate No.
0002, in the amount of $350.00, guaranteeing the installation of concrete
sidewalks in connection with Reclassification No. 60-61-92, be authorized
as sidewalks have been installed and inspected and R~proved by the Engineering
Department. Councilman Coons seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Thompson moved ~o adjourn. Councilman Coons seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNED: 12:15 A.M.
SIGNED: ~ ~-~, ~~
x City Clerk