Loading...
1970/12/0170'653 C:I.L~ nnl~. n.,.,a~(.~:. ~allfew-~_ - __nJ3mm'r.z .~~ . l{ov~er 24; 19l'0, l.=~C) P.M. ~ Councilman Clark ~zreed to adjourn. CoUncilman Stephen~ou seconded the mot~. t~YflO~ CA~IED. ADJOUP/~D: 3:55 P.M. \ city cl*r Cit.y Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- Dec~,her 1, 19.70, 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRE SENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCILMEN: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton (entered the meeting at 1:50 P.M.) COUNCILMEN: None CITY MA1K~GER: Keith A. Mardoch CITY ATT(I~NEY: Joseph B. Geisler ASSISTANT CITY ATTOR1TEY: Alan Watts CITY CLERK: Dens M. Williams DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPI~/NT SERVICES: Alan Orsborn CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION: John Collier ASSISTA~ DIRECTOR OF DEVELOI~qTf SERVICES: Ronald Thompson ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts Mayor Pro Tem Pebley called the meeting to order. .INVOCATI0~: Reverend Dorman 'Buttram, of the First Assembly of God Church, gave the Invocation. FLAG .SALUTE; Councilman William J. Thom led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PROCLAMATION; Mayor Dutton proclaimed December 6 to 12, 1970, "Christmas Seal Week." I!~RODUCTION; Hal Steinruck, of the City Personnel Department, introduced new employees attending the City Council meeting as a part of the Cityts orientation program. Mayor Pro TemPebleywelc°med the new employees to the City. SUGGESTION PRO--AWARDSI Mayor Pro Te~ Pebley issued plaques to the follow- ins City employees in recognition of best susgestions received dur- ing the past year: MarJorie Bender, Library Department, for the design of a form to record money transactions, handled by the Library. James Masterson, Utilities I~vtsion, for the design and a way to secure a protective covering device over light pole excavations prior to installation of ligh=standards, to prevent accidents by co~ng in contact w~th exposed electrical wires or stepping in the excavation. 1969-70 SAFETY'~$; Mayor Pro TemPebley issued plaques in reco~nition of Sa£ety Avards as follovs: 70-664 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1970, 1:30 .P.M. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION: Comprised of City Manager's Office, City Attorney's Office and City Clerk's Office, representing 34 employees who worked over 99 thousand hours without a disabling injury. The City Mmnager, Keith A. Murdoch, accepted the award. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT: Representing the Planning and Zoning Staff and the Building Division, comprising 38 employees who worked over 74 thousand hours without a disabling injury. Alan Orsborn, Director of Oevelopment Services, accepted the award. RECREATION DIVISION: Comprising 12 regular employees and 250 part-time em- ployees, working 135 thousand hours without a disabling injury. Lloyd Trapp, Superintendent, accepted the award. ANAHEIM STADIUM: Employees working 38 thousand hours reduced the number of disabling injuries by 50%. Joe Morris, Stadium Foreman, accepted the award. ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER: Employees working over 112 thousand hours re- duced the number of disabling injuries by 53%. Tom Liegler, Stadium and Convention Center Director, accepted the award. POLICE DEPARTMENT: Employees worked over 600 thousand hours and redfaced the number of disabling injuries by 13%. Chief Dave Michel accepted the award. PROPERTY MAINTENANCE DIVISION: Representing 90 employees, working 168 thousand hours, reduced the number of disabling injuries by 36%. Rex Bruhns, Superintendent, accepted the award. ENGINEERING DIVISION: Representing 68 employees working 131 thousand hours, reduced disabling injuries by 67%. Jim Maddox, City Engineer, accepted the award. PARKS DIVISION: Representing 82 employees, working 158 thousand hours, re- duced disabling injuries by 33%. Dick Kamphefner, Superintendent, accepted the award. Mayor Dutton entered the meeting at 1:50 P.M. and assumed Chair- manship of the meeting. MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council regular meeting held November 10, 1970, were approved on motion by Councilman Clark, seconded by Councilman Stephenson. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Stephenson moved to waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions, and that con- sent to the waiver of reading is hereby given by all Councilmen, unless after reading of the title, specific request is made by a Councilman for the reading of such ordinance or resolution. Councilman Clark seconded the motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE: Chapter 18.63 - Billboards, Section 18.63.030(b) (2), extending the scenic highway designation of Katella Avenue from the centerline of Douglas Street easterly to the centerline of the Santa Ana River, thereby prohibiting bill- boards in this area. ~ The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC70- 192, recommended said Amendment. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council, either for or against said Amendment, there being no response, declared the hear- ing closed. ORDINANCE NO. 2878: Councilman Pebley offered Ordinance No. 2878 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18,CHAPTER 18.63, SECTION 18.63.030 OF THE ANAHEIM MDNICIPAL CODE. 70-665 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1970, 1:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE: Chapter 18.68, Section 18.68.010 "Planning Commission Authorized to Grant Variances," and Section 18.68.030 "Required Showings." The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC70-193, Exhibit "N', recommended rewording Section 18.68.010, "Planning Commission Authorized to Grant Variances - Criteria" to read as follows: "The Planning Commission shall have authority, as an administra- tive act, subject to the provisions of this Chapter, to grant Variances. "Variances from the terms of the zoning ordinance shall be granted only, when, because of special circumstances applicable to the property, in- cluding size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict appli- cation of the zoning code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. "Any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is situated." The City Planning Commission further recommended Section 18.68.030, "Required Showings," be amended by rewording said Section, and reducing Re- quired Showings to conform to revision of the State Law, Government Code Sec- tion 65906, as follows: "Before any variance may be granted by the Planning Commission it shall be shown: "(1) That there are special circumstances applicable to the pro- perty, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. "(2) That, because of special circumstances shown in (1) above, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vi- cinity.'' Mr. Alan Watts, Assistant City Attorney, reported that in checking the first Section recommended for amendment, their office found no substan- tial difference than the existing Code Section, as the general intent is the same, and in order to save on publication and reprinting of the Code, recom- mended no amendment to the existing Section 18.68.010. Mr. Watts further reported that the criteria is recommended to be modified, pursuant to a recent enactment to the State Planning Act, to pro- vide fewer conditions to be met, in order to meet requirements for a variance. Mr. Ronald Thompson advised that the Amendment is proposed to en- able more flexibility on the part of the City Council and City Planning Com - mission in granting variances, and even though the City of Anaheim is a Char- ter City it was felt by the Attorney's office that the wording should be changed to comply with the wording of the State Law for a more equitable method in granting variances. Reference was made to an erroneous article appearing in the Anaheim Bulletin, wherein it alluded to the delegation of authority by the City Coun- cil to the City Planning Commission, and Mr. Murdoch explained that nothing along this line is recommended to be changed; that the City Planning Commis- sion, as an administrative act, is presently authorized to grant or deny variances, subject to the rights of appeal by any interested party, or the right of the City Council to review the action taken by the City Planning Commission within 22 days. 70-666 CityHa~t, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1970, 1:30 P.M. Mr. Watts reported that the specific change involves the Show- ings that must be made by an applicant for the variance before the City Planning Commission or City Council can act; the Amendment reduces the required Showings in favor of the applicant. Mayor Dutton asked if anyone else wished to address the Council; there being no response, declared the hearing closed. ORDINANCE NO. 2879: Councilman Pebley offered Ordinance No. 2879 for first reading, amending Section 18.68.030 only. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18, CHAPTER 18.68, SECTION 18.68.030 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE. PETITION FOR VARIANCE FORM: Action on revised Petition Form was deferred to allow for additional review in an attempt to further reduce the form in size. PUBLIC HEARING - HOUSE MOVING: Application of Herbert A. Tanner, for permit to move a structure from 12422 Brookhurst Street, Garden Grove, to 3215 West Stonybrook, Anaheim, was submitted together with report of the Development Services Department, Zoning Division, recommending said permit be granted, subject to rezoning said property to the R-i, One-Family Residential Zone. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no response, declared the hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 70R-567: Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 70R-567 for adoption, granting said House Moving Permit as requested, subject to the condition recommended by the Development Services Department, Zoning Division. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING A HOUSE MOVING PERMIT TO HERBERT A. TANNER, TO MOVE A DWELLING FROM 12422 BROOK- HURST STREET, GARDEN GROVE, CALIFORNIA, TO 3215 WEST STONYBROOK DRIVE, ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA° Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCID~N: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 70R-567 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING - HOUSE. MOVING: Application of Joseph P. Hudson, for permit to move a structure from 4020 West Chapman Avenue, Orange, to 500 North Rose Street, Anaheim, was submitted together with report from the Development Services Department, Zoning Division, recommending said permit be granted, subject to the following conditions: 1. That an addition be made to the structure, to comply with minimum square-footage requirements. 2. Subject to the payment of Park and Recreation fees. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no response, declared the hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO, 70R-568: Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution No. 70R- 568 for adoption, granting House Moving Permit as requested, subject to conditions recommended by the Development Services Zoning Division. Refer to Resolution Book. 70-667 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1970, 1:30 P.M. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING A HouSE MOVING PERMIT TO JOSEPH P. HUDSON, TO MOVE A DWELLING FROM 4020' WEST CHAPMAN AVENUE, ORANGE, CALIFORNIA, TO 500 NORTH ROSE STREET, ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 70R-568 duly passed and adopted. REPORT - SIGNAL-CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM: City Engineer report relative to removal of School Crossing Guards, as traffic signals are installed at guarded cross- ings or locations, was submitted as result of request before the City Council July 28 and August 4, 1970, for crossing guards and/or safety devices in the vicinity of John Marshall School. Said report was deferred to this time to allow for factual survey of traffic after con~nencement of the regular school year. The detailed report noted locations where school crossing guards were removed when traffic signals were installed, and also listed existing guard locations; the schools they serve; traffic volume and the number of chil- dren crossing. Also reported was an indication from the Anaheim School Dist- rict that summer session will be possibly reduced to 4 schools this coming year. The City Engineer recommended the present program be continued, and that signals be installed only as said locations meet required warrants. No further action was taken by the City Council at this time, to al- low additional time for the City Manager to review Council Minutes referred to to determine if the recommended action resolved the 'situation. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1065 - EXTENSION OF TIME AND MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONS: Request of Maynard Kambak, President of Pacific World, for an extension of time and revision of conditions established by Resolution No. 68R-745, for the es- tablishment of an international trade center, etc., on property briefly des- cribed as located south and west of the southwest corner of Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard, was submitted together with Development Services Zoning Division recommendation that 6-month extension, to expire June 3, 1971, be granted, and listed suggested revisions to Resolution No. 68R-745. Mr. Thompson advised that a telephone call was received, just prior to Council meeting, from Mr. Kambak, who requested the extension of time be considered and that the suggested revisions be deferred for a meeting with the Staff. On motion by Councilman Clark, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, six-month extension of time to expire June 3, 1971, was granted as recom- mended. MOTION CARRIED. DINNER DANCING PLACE PERMIT:. Application filed by William R. Boatman, for dinner dancing place permit, to allow nightly dancing from 9:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M., at the "Inn Crowd," 937 South Knott Avenue, was submitted and granted, sub- ject to provisions of Chapter 4.16 of the AnaheimFmnicipal Code, as recom- mended by the Chief of Police, on motion by Councilman Clark, seconded by Councilman Stephenson. MOTION CARRIED. DINNER DANCING PLACE PERMIT: Application filed by Henry J. Leason, for dinner dancing place permit, to allow dancing.seven days a week, from 9:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M., at "The Ball," 1116 Fountain Way, was submitted and granted, sub- ject to provisions of Chapter 4.16 of the AnaheimMunicipal Code, as recom- mended by the Chief of Police, onmotion by Councilman Clark, seconded by Councilman Stephenson. MOTION CARRIED. 70-668 .City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December .!,..1970, .!:.30 P.M. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTNO. 121: To consider increasing the density from low to medium density for the area bounded by Rosewood Avenue on the north, State College Boulevard on the east, Romneya Drive on the south, and the easterly terminus of Briarvale and Arbutus Avenues on the west, was sub- mitted. On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Clark, Public Hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment No. 121 was scheduled December 15, 1970, 1:30 P.M. ~TION CARRIED. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 122: Public hearing was held November 17, 1970, to consider increasing residential density in the area bounded by Imper- ial Highway, Esperanza Road, Eucalyptus Drive, and Santa Aha Canyon Road, at which time said public hearing was continued to February 16, 1971, for receipt of the Army Corps of Engineers letter relative to study be- ing reevaluated on potential flood hazards in the Canyon area. CommuniCation received this date from James A. Liberio, request- ing an earlier hearing date, based on hardships created to property ow- ners who are ready to submit plans for development. ~ROPOSEDANNE.X~.~IO.~ - ESPERANZA-CARRILLO: Mr. James A. Liberio also re- quested that the Esperanza-Carrillo Annexation proceed, and that consi- deration be given to the present County R-S-5,000 Zoning. Discussion was held, and Mr. Roberts advised that Col. Black had indicated that the status of the report is such that it is expected to be completed in January, 1971. Mr. Murdoch noted that the request was not only to proceed with the annexation of the territory, but also that they be allowed to develop under the County Zoning. He questioned proceedings with the an- nexation under these circumstances where the proponents obtained County Zoning based on the recommendations of the City, and as a result reques- ted the annexation based on the fact that at that time the attitude of the City Council appeared to be in favor of the intended use. The prob- lem now is if the annexation does not proceed, it is very possible de- velopmant can take place in any event, however, development wouldrequire City facilities. Mr. Murdoch further advised that the City Council must either wait for the Army Corps of Engineers report or act on the request to pro- ceed with the annexation; the City Council cannot do both, as they are contrary. Councilman Pebley moved that the annexation proceed. Council- man Clark seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Murdoch reported that this type of action has a very defi- nite impact on what will happen to the area. If the annexation proceed- ings are authorized to proceed with zoning approved by the County, as they were by the foregoing motion, and if the action was based upon your feeling that the zoning approved by the County was appropriate for that area, then his concern would be less. Unless the Council does feel this is the appropriate zoning for the area, regardless of the outcome of the Army Corps of Engineers letter relative to flood hazards, then a serious precedent is established as anyone desiring zoning contrary to what the City feels proper could obtain their desired zoning from the County and then initiate annexation proceedings. In this case, the property owners have obtained County zoning on the recommendation of the City, however, subsequent to this reco~nen- dation, the City Planning Commission and City Council have reversed their position when zoning actions were stopped awaiting the Engineers' report. The motion lust made in effect indicates the City is not concerned in this area as to what the Engineers' report recommends. Councilman Clark stated, in his opinion this situation dif- fered, as in some areas where zoning was established the Council allowed the development to proceed, and action was stopped in those areas where 70-669 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1970, 1:30 P.M. no action has been taken on zoning. In subject case the City Council has committed themselves on zoning. Mr. Murdoch noted that the position taken by Councilman Clark would apply to approximately 180 acres out of the requested 285 acres. Councilman Clark advised that the action should only apply to where- ever the Council has previously committed themselves on zoning; that the bal- ance of the area should be held in abeyance. RECESS: Councilman Pebley moved for a 10-minute Recess, to allow further investi- gation as to pending annexations. Councilman Clark secouded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (2:45 P.M.). AFTER RECESS: Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order, all members of the City Council being present. (3:10 P.M.). Mr. Murdoch noted locations of the pending annexations, and again explained the previous actions of the City Council regarding zoning of all of the properties within the three annexation areas. The City Planning Con. his- sion reco~nended to the City Council that the appropriate zoning appeared to be R-S-5,000, if the property was not acquired and utilized by the County for a Regional Park. The City Council letter stated approval of the recommenda- tions of the City Planning Commission, and urged favorable action on the part of the County Planning Commission. Based on these recommendations, the County Planning Co~nission and the Board of Supervisors zoned the property accordingly. In the meantime, the density study was completed by the City Planning Commis- sion, and based on this study, it was recommended that the area would be more appropriately zoned R-1. This was reported to the County Board of Supervisors; however, it was pointed out that the City Council had not taken subsequent ac- tion as result of the density study. Councilman Pebley advised that his motion still stood, to which Councilman Stephenson moved to rescind the former motion. Mr. Murdoch stated that the effect of the motion made by Council- man Stephenson would permit the City Council not to take an affirmative posi- tion on zoning until receipt of the Army Corps of Engineers' report. The Mayor declared the motion made by Councilman Stephenson lost for lack of a second. In finality, it was determined that no action be taken on the re- quest to hear General Plan Amendment No. 122, prior to February 16, 1971, and Annexations designated as Esperanza-Roth and Esperanza-Carrtllo were author- ized to proceed. RESOLUTION NO. 70R-569 - WORK ORDER NO. 637: Upon receipt of certification from the Director of Public Works, Councilman Clark offered Resolution No. 70R- 569 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COM- PLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE BROADWAY, ELM STREET, HELENA STREET AND HARBOR BOULEVARD STREET IMPROVEMENT, IN THE CITY OF ANA- HEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 637. (O.E. Henderson Construction Company) Roll Call Vote: AYE S: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCIL~N: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 70R-569 duly passed and adopted. 70-670 CiitY Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1970, 1:30 P.M. ~ESOLUTION NO. 70R-570 - WORK ORDER NO. 609-B; Councilman Clark offered Reso- lution No. 70R-570 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CON- STRUCTIONAND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE CERRITOS AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT, FROM APPROXIMATELY 1,400 FEET EAST OF TO 150 PEET EAST OF EUCLID STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO 609-B. APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND SPECIFI- CATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be Opened December 24, 1970, 2:00 P.M.). Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 70R-570 duly passed and adopted. PURCHASE - EQUIPMENT: Mr. Murdoch reported on informal bids received for the purchase of 10 Handi-Talkie Radios, primarily for use in the Police De- partment; however, available to any other department for emergency pur- poses. He advised that two types of equipment would provide the type of services needed for field communication in an emergency situation, that are recommended not only by the City Staff but also the Orange County Con~nunicattons Department; the two manufacturers are: Motorola - $8,454.38, including sales tax R.C.A. Personalphone - 50 - $6,195.00 Purchase from R.C.A. was authorized, as recon~nended by the City Manager, on motion by Councilman Clark, seconded by Councilman Stephen- son. MOTION CARRIED. TRANSFER OF FUNDS: On motion by Councilman Clark, seconded by Councilman Thom, transfer of $6,195.00 from the Council Contingency Fund to Account No. 100-312-910-95, to purchase the above-named equipment was authorized. MOTION CARRIED. CANCELLATION OF COUNTY TAXES: On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Clark, the Orange County Board of Supervisors was requested to cancel County taxes on property acquired by the City of Anaheim for public purposes, pursuant to Resolution No. 70R-544, granted by Execu- trix of the Will of Alice E. Brady, as recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder, in Book 9464, Page 230; and Resolution No. 70R- 543, granted by Le Chateau Majorca, a Limited Partnership, as recorded in Book 9464, .Page 227. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 70R-571: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 70R-571 for adoption. Refer to Resolltion Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAI{EIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN GRANT DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (St. Mark's Methodist Church of Anaheim; Golden West Industrial Parks) adopted. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 70R-571 duly passed and 70-671 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1970, 1:30 P.M. C(~RESPONDgNCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Clark: a. Application before the Public Utilities Commission - Western Union Telegraph Company, changes in rates for intrastate service in Cali- fornia. b. 1970 Orange County Grand Jury - Report on Health (dated Novem- ber 10, 1970). c. Application before the Public Utilities Commission - Gray Line Tours Company, for authority to provide sightseeing service between points within the ~orporate Limits of the Cities of Anaheim, Beverly Hills, Buena Park, Glendale, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Pasadena, Santa Montca, and Magic Mountain at Valencia. d. Minutes - Orange County Mosquito Abatement District, (November 13, 1970). MOTION CARRIED. ORDINANCE NO. 2874: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 2874 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICI- PAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (69-70-27 - R-3) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COb'NC ILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 2874 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 2875: Councilman Stephenson offered Ordinance No. 2875 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2867, NUNC PRO TUNC (67-68-98(2) - R-1 and R-2-5,000) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 2875 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 2876: Councilman Clark offered Ordinance No. 2876 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICI- PAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (65-66-24(14) - M-l) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 2876 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 2877: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 2877 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. 70-672 City Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- December 1, 1970, 1:30 P.M. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING, (70-71-11 - R-3) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCII/~: ABSENT: COUNClI2~N: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 2877 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 2880: Councilman Stephenson offered Ordinance No. 2880 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.32 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THERETO SECTION 14.32.195 RELATING TO PARKING. (No Parking, Sundays Excepted - Elm and Helena Streets) ORDINANCE NO. 2881: Councilman Clark offered Ordinance No. 2881 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.32, SECTIONS 14.32.150 AND 14.32.190 OF THE ANAHEIM~/NICIPAL CODE, RELAT- ING TO PARKING. (Parking Restrictions - Broadway - Elm Street - Harbor Boulevard) ORDINANCE NO. 2882: Councilman Clark offered Ordinance No. 2882 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM ~rNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (70-71-15(1) - M-l) ORDINANCE NO. 2883: Councilman Clark offered Ordinance No. 2883 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM. RESOLUTION NO. 70R-572: Councilman Clark offered Resolution No. 70R-572 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RELATING TO MANDA- TORY RETIREMENT OF LOCAL SAFETY MEMBERS TO DESIGNATED INDIVIDUALS. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: AB SENT: COUNCILMEN: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton COUNCILMEN: None COUNCILMEN: None The 'Mayor declared Resolution No. 70R-572 duly passed and adopted. ORAl%GE COUNTY COM~b~NITY SERVICES PROJECT: Mr. Murdoch reported that the City, at the meeting of August 11, 1970, indicated interest in the development of an Orange County Board of Supervisors-supported, coordinated, Social Action Program to analyze various services provided by organizations for the purpose of determining a better method of coordinating a program to identify and diminish community social needs. It was agreed by the City Council to meet December 8, 1970, 1i:00 A.M., with the Community Services Project's Staff to. consider the City of Anaheim as a possible location for implementation of the program. INVITATION: Invitation was extended to the City Council by Chief of Police David Michel to attend the D.C.I. (Delinquency Control Institute) graduation at U.S.C., December 11, 1970. 70- 673 City .Hall, Anaheim, California -' COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1970, 1:30 P.M. MINI-BIKE pARK - SOUND TEST: Agreement between the County of Orange and the City, constituting a license to conduct a sound test for the proposed Mini-Bike Park designated to be established on County-owned property waS submitted. Discussion was held relative to liability, and Mr. Watts reported that the license would be affirming that the City has insurance and would hold the County harmless from any liability that might arise as a result of the test. Mr. John Collier, Parks and Recreation Director, reported that the City of Anaheim has proceeded with the proposal because of community interest, and has scheduled the sound test at the request of the County Board of Super- visors. At the conclusion of the discussion, it was agreed that the County Board of Supervisors be advised of the City's inability to assume County lia- bility, and the City Attorney was authorized to amend the proposed agreement accordingly. PERMISSION TO LEAVE THE STATE: On motion by Councilmen Pebley, seconded by Coun- cilman Clark, Mayor Dutton was granted permission to leave the State for a period of 30 days. MOTION CARRIED. RECESS: Councilmen Clark moved to Recess to 7:30 P.M. Councilman Stephenson se- conded the motion. HOTION CARRIED. (4:05 P.M.) City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1970, 7:30 P.M. PRE SENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCILMEN: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and I)utton COUNCILMEN: None CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph B. Geisler CITY CLERK: Dene M. Williams DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Alan Orsborn CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Ronald Thompson ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts. After Recess, Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order, all Council- men being present. (7:30 P.M.). CO~fI~ED pUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 70-71-13 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1202: Submitted by Bernardo M. Yorba, et al, requesting a change in zone from R-A to R-2 on Portion A, and from R-A to R-1 on Portion B, to es- tablish a planned residential development on Portions A and B; located south? westerly of the intersection of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Imperial Highway, extending in an east-west direction from the future alignmentof Imperial Highway to Royal Oak Road,and in a north-south direction from Santa Ana Canyon Road, north of the future alignment of Nohl Ranch Road, with waiver of: a. Maximum building height within 150 feet of R-A zoned property on Portion A only. TENTATIVE.MAP.OF TRACT NO. 7288: Developer - Calprop Corporation; located on the west side of Imperial Highway (proposed), south of Santa Ana Canyon Road and contains 103 proposed R-2 lots as condominiums. (70-71-13 and Con- ditional Use Permit No. 1202). The City Planning Co~ission,-pursuant to Resolution No. PC70-186, reco~nded said reclassification be disapproved; pursuant to Resolution No. PC70-187, denied said conditional use permit; and by motion, at their October 19, 1970 meeting denied Tentative Map of Tract No. 7288. Public hearing was held November 17, 1970, and continued to this date, at the request of Harry Knisely, Agent for the Petitioners, and an evenin~ meeting was scheduled at the request of various Canyon area home- owners associations. 70-674. City Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- December 1, 1970, 7:30 P.M. Zoning Supervisor Charles Roberts noted the location of subject property, consisting of 58 acres in easterly Portion A, for which the de- veloperhas requested a conditional use permit to construct multiple- family-type units, and 51 acres in westerly Portion B, which the develo- per has indicated for single-family units. He advised that the condi- tional use permit is for a planned residential development over the en- tire approximate 110 acres. The requested waiver is for Portion A only, which lies on the easterly side of the future alignment of Imperial High- way; however, since the developer has submitted revised plans, it is pos- sible no waiver will be necessary. Mr. Roberts further advised that the Tentative Map proposes to divide the first phase of the multiple-family area into 97 condomin- ium parcels, this section being located immediately west of Imperial Highway, and south of a proposed shopping center to be .developed at the intersection of Imperial Highway and Santa Ana Canyon Road. Mr. Roberts stated that the density proposed for the single- family unit development, Portion B, is 3.5 per gross acre, and that Por- tion A, to be developed as multiple-family units, indicates an overall density of 7 units per gross acre. He added that the plans show 55% of the total planned site would be developed, with the remainder desig- nated as recreational and open space, the developers indicating that two-fifths of the site would be left in its natural state. Mr. Roberts reported that the Applicants have estimated the development would take three to four years to complete and that the Tentative Map indicates construction would begin with a portion of the multiple-family units, go on to other parts of multiple-family-type construction, and end with single-family units. He reminded the Council that the General Plan adopted for the Hill and Canyon area in 1965, and the Anaheim General Plan adopted in 1969, designate the Hill and Canyon area to be maintained as basically low-density, although recognizing that very possibly some areas such as those around shopping centers or major recreational areas'might properly be developed for greater density than single-family. Subject plans in- dicate the entire area be developed as a planned c~,m~nity, which would indicate single and multiple-family development, as well as the required commercial and recreational facilities necessary to serve the citizens of that area. Mr. Roberts stated that, current land use projections of the General Plan indicate the Hill and Canyon area density should be re- tained at 2.7 dwelling units per gross acre, based on slope analysis of the area, type of environment desired, and existing development. He added that this density figure took into consideration other than single-family units in the area. Taking the density figure of 2.7 units per acre as the base, the area under consideration at this time should have about 300 dwell- ing units on it, rather than the proposed 580. Mr. Roberts went on to explain that, since the Applicants have stated their intention of constructing a shopping center on the C-1 and C-O property at the intersection of Imperial Highway and Santa Aha Canyon Road, portions of this property probably would be appropriate for higher-density uses. He advised that the City Plan- ning Con~nission had suggested that, since a planned cou~nunity was be- ing proposed, with a shopping center adjacent thereto, the density probably could be increased up to 33-1/3%, which would be approxi- mately 400 dwelling units. In answer to Councilman Pebley, Mr. Roberts stated that the Lusk Development on the west end of Nohl Ranch, and also that directly west of subject property on Nohl Ranch Road have a density of 2.6 or 2.7, and those developments were on a cut-and-fill basis, with no natu- ral terrain left. 70= 675 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 19.70, 7:30 P.M. In reply to Councilman Dutton, M~. Roberts stated that the total subject proposal would have a density of 5.2 or 5.3 and that the single-family area alone, as proposed, would have a density of 3.5. Councilman Dutton voiced disagreement with the comments he had heard that granting a higher density in this one instance automatically would raise the density factor of the entire Hill and Canyon area. Councilman Clark stated that, where there are two arterial highways and a commercial shopping center as in Portion A, he believed higher densities should be allowed; however, he felt that such a density over 110 acres, as proposed, is too high. Councilman Stephenson stated a density of 7 units per acre for the 58 acres in Portion A was too large an area for such a high density, and even the 51 acres of the single-family development, at a 3.5 density in Portion B, is higher than the General Plan indicates and would be setting a precedent. Mayor Dutton asked if the Applicants or their Agent were present and wished to address the Council. Bernardo M. Yorba, Applicant, expressed regret that it is necessary to now develop their property and stated that after seven years of studying possible uses for their land, subject proposal is a sincere effort to preserve some of the atmosphere and part of the natural state of the area. Mr. Yorba advised that at the time their application for permission to construct the proposed shopping center was approved (Resolution No. 65R-29, Exhibit No. 2) projected land usages and densities were almost identical to subject proposal. He summed up his presentation by stating that his family would lose much if subject proposal was not a proper project since they would have residual in- terest in the shopping center and other contiguous properties, and requested the Council approve the petition. James Meyer, Vice-President of Calprop Corporation, Developer, sta- ted that in developing their plans for this area they had begun with the land and worked backward in an effort to preserve the character of the area. He expressed the opinion that the projected density of 5.24 units per acre is not a high density proposal. Mr. Meyer stated that their plan is for a total home ownership co,unity and now calls for 575 dwelling units and that each unit, multiple or single-family, would be individually owned. He added that several modifications have been made in their plans, subsequent to discussions with the Planning Staff and representatives of the cohaaunity, such as making single- family lots a minimum of 10,000-square feet along the west border, adjacent to the Nohl Ranch homes; on the east side of the area, the townhouse area, Imperial Highway now will be a primary street with three lanes in each direc- tion, rather than the secondary street originally proposed, and there would be a 12-foot landscaped median strip all along Imperial Highway; the row of houses along Imperial Highway will be single-story units to preserve the view of the Canyon area when driving down the highway; earth berms are proposed on the 20-foot-wide landscaped stri~ alongside Imperial Highway, probably three or four feet high; sidewalks, although not required, will be installed, wind- ing in and out of the berm areas to provide a view for those walking and also safety for children. He also stated that perpetual maintenance of the green areas would be set up and controlled by a homeowners association.in which total membership by all 575 units would be required. In reply to Councilman Clark, the City Attorney advised that dec- 1stations of restrictions are enforceable by the m~,hers of a homeowners as- sociation, either through equitable relief, injunctions or liens. He added that in this instance, since the single-family unit residents also are to be members of the homeowners association, they probably would be sufficiently interested in their area to see that the maintenance is enforced. In reply to Councilman Dutton, Fir. Meyer stated he had Stipulated to a minimUm of 1,500-square feet for each single-family residence, and'added that these homes are designed for upper, middle-income families (in excess of $15,.000.00 per year) at prices ranging from $35,000.00 to over $40,000.00 and that the entire development would have tile roofs. Mr. Meyer estimated 70-676 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1970, 7:30 P.M. that about 50% of the townhouse area would be owned by adults whose chil- dren are grown, 25% by single, middle-aged people, and 25% by young mar- ried couples who desire temporary housing; thus, there probably would be a limited n,,~ber of children in the area and the recreational facilities would be primarily adult-oriented. He added that these towahouses would be 915 to 990-square feet, with two bedrooms, and are expected to sell in the $20,000.00 to $25,000.00 range. Mr. Meyer gave a slide presenta- tion of the proposed project. In reply to Councilman Stephenson, Mr. Meyer advised the town- houses would be insulated between units as well as possible and that per- petual maintenance could be guaranteed at least for the 30 years that F.H.A. is involved in insuring the loan under their 203B program with the homeowners association. Harry Knisely, 1741 South Euclid Street, Attorney for the Ap- plicants, referred to Resolution No. 70R-283, reaffirming the principles established for the Peralta Hills and Santa Aha Canyon areas in the Gen- eral Plan, and stated that, in his opinion, the plans the Developers have presented comply with all of the requirements stated therein. He quoted the 1965 General Plan that states that land alongside Santa Ana Canyon Road is relatively flat and a density of 5.8 dwelling units per net acre could be appropriate. He contended the accompanying photo was of the property under consideration at this time. He proceeded to quote sections of the General Plan in an effort to prove that the sub- ject proposal equals,or is less than,the recommended densities in all sec- tions. Mr. Knisely summed up by arguing that, in his opinion, it is not feasible that each acre from the intersection of"the two freeways all the way to Corona should or will develop at the same density, since there will be areas where there will not be a home in 40 or 50 acres, and there also have to be some high densities. He further stated that with the present zoning around the shopping center there could be as many as 360 apartment units in 10 acres. Mr. Roberts explained that the densities quoted in the Hill and Canyon General Plan are on a net residential basis, whereas those refer- red ~by Mr. Meyer are on the gross area basis. Thus 5.8 dwelling units per acre for flat portions actually figures out to 4.4 on a gross basis, and the density desirable for subject property is 3.25 net, which would figure out at 2.4 per gross acre. Mayor Dutton asked if anyone wished to address the Council in opposition. Robert Brambley, 331 North Starfire Street, commenting on the limited n,,mher of schools serving Canyon residents and the fact that these already are operating at capacity, asked that the Developers and City Council discuss this'matter with the Orange School District, since it was his opinion subject proposal would overcrowd the schools. Councilman Pebley expressed the opinion that since the Devel- oper indicated townhouse complexes were to be built first, there probably would not be many children from that new development. Mr. Brambley conceded development of the Canyon is inevitable; however, since there is no school construction in process at this time, he asked that some coordination be made with the School District. Councilman I)utton reminded Mr. Brmmhley that the School Board is a separate entity from the City Government; however, since everything the City Council does is public record, the School Board should be ap- prised of what actions are taken. 70- 677 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Decmmber 1, 1970, 7:30 P..M. Hershel Clauder, 321 North Redrock, stated the land indicated on the map has been left in its natural state to retain the beauty of the area, and actually is undevelopable because of the steep canyons and hills. He expressed fear that the Developers may build only townhouses, since that is where they indicated they would start,and then pull out and some other de- veloper would be allowed to construct homes of lower standards, such as the ones in his area where the Federal Government is subsidizing the last few homes in the tract. He asked why the Developers were starting their construc- tion with the high-density portion, rather than the single-family units. Mr. Meyer answered that, at this time the high-priced single-family homes are not selling, and thus it would be economically unfeasible to start them. Mr. Clauder asked what assurance the Developer could give that the entire project would be completed if the economic situation did not change? Mr. Meyer reminded Mr. Clauder that his firm would be paying heavy taxes on the land in an undeveloped state; however, their reputation as a reliable developer was the only real assurance he could give at this time that their project would be completed as presented. Mr. Clauder asked that the petition be denied if development of the total project within a specified period cannot be guaranteed. Phil Joujon-Roche, 21527 Mohler Place, representing the Santa Aha Canyon Property Owners Association, Santa Ana Canyon Improvement Association, Nohl Ranch Homeowners Association, and Peralta Hills Homeowners Association, stated that, although the Applicants and Developers have made some changes in their basic plan in the last two months the organizations he represents did not feel they were significant changes since the density had been reduced only 2%. He reco~mmended 85% of the total acreage, or 93 acres, be devoted to single- family dwellings, and 15% to the townhouses with 7 units per acre. With reference to the possibility of the area around the shopping center being, available for a density of 36 units per acre, Mr. Joujon, Roche also quoted Resolution No. 70R-283, and stated he believed the beauty of the Canyon area deserves special treatment in the way of lower densities, as this area is not a standard or normal area. Mr. Joujon-Roche expressed satisfaction with the way the develop- ment is planned,w~th the exception of density, and preferred that the single- family and townhouse units be constructed simultaneously. Councilman Dutton expressed the belief that too much emphasis is being placed on density. In his opinion, the lower density around the proposed shopping center by spreading the townhouses over a larger area, was better plan- ning than apartment buildings with a density of 36 units per acre, and this would not necessarily mean that this would result in higher densities through- omt the whole Canyon area. Bob McQueen, 4831 McKinnon Drive, representing the Santa Aha Canyon Improvement Association, .stated that consultations with real estate and finance agents revealed that condominiums are a poor risk, especially when located in suburban or natural fire-hazard areas. He quoted Government Code 65906 - "Any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privi- leges inconcistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is situated," - and asked if that meant the entire Canyon could develop condominiums? Councilman Dutton advised there was no variance requested with the application. Mr. McQueen urged that if the application is approved, the Council require that Portion A and Portion B be developed simultaneously. 70-678 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1970, 7:30 P.M. Councilman Dutton stated that if the Developers were required to construct the entire project at the same time the City would have to require the Grant Corporation's proposed development of 3,000 acres be developed simultaneously. Mr. McQueen asked the following questions: 1. Would an owner of a townhouse unit be permitted to lease the unit? 2. If an original owner vacates the property will the unit be sold or may it.be leased? 3. May a purchaser acquire mere than one unit? 4. If a young couple has children would they be required to sell? In reply to Mr. Murdoch, Mr. McQueen advised the Santa Ana Can- yon Improvement Association encompasses approximately 731 homes in the area, bounded on the west by the junction of Newport and Riverside Free- ways, on the east by Imperial Highway, on the south by Santa Aha Canyon Road, and on the north by the Santa Aha River. Hank Fallek, 140 Orange Hill Lane, representing the Nohl Ranch Homeowners Association, stated his group agreed with the concept presen- ted by the Applicants and Developers. However, he sta~ed his home abuts the proposed single-family unit development and he did not feel it was "harmonious" with his area as called for in the General Plan, since Nohl Ranch has 2.7 dwelling units per gross acre, whereas the proposed project would have 3.4 units per gross acre; also, he did not approve of the new homes being situated so the owners could look down into his backyard. He also referred to the fact that area schools are designed for a density of 2.7 dwelling units per gross acre, and 3.9 persons per dwelling, and the schools already are overburdened because of the Federally-subsidized homes that require a minimum of three children. In reply, Councilman Dutton stated that since Mr. Fallek has advised that the proposed development would be 15 feet higher than his home, these homes would not be visible from his property unless they were built out on a bluff. In regard to Mr. Fallek's statement about harmenious projects, Councilman Clark advised that the proposed project would have 10,000-square foot lots, whereas Mr. Fallek's lot was 9,700-square feet. Herbert Christensen, 116 Ttana Lane, objected to using the shop- ping center, which would occupy 10% as much land as the total area invol- ved, as a wedge to develop over half of the 110 acres in higher density. A1 Hyatt, 251 Orange Acres Drive, President of the Peralta Hills Homeowners Association, stated they believed the submitted plans are com- mendable and agreed the area surrounding the shopping center should be higher density; however, he objected to the large area that was proposed to be high density, and also felt the single-family dwelling area, except for the section abutting Nohl Ranch area, had too high density. Mayor Dutton invited the Applicants to again address the Council. Mr..Knisely, referring to Mr. Joujon-Roche's apprehension that the development would not be completed after the townhouses were construc- ted, offered as assurance the fact that the President of Calprop Corpora- tion would r~in in the development in a Management capacity. He reit- erated the belief that the proposed development conforms to the General Plan. Mr. Meyer stated that, in his opinion, the proposed number of single-family dwellings is in accord with those allowed under present zoning, and that the multiple-family units are a lower density than al- lowed. Councilman Stephenson asked about the possibility of reducing the multiple-family unit area to about one-third of the total acreage, rather than mere than half of it. 70-679 City Hal!, Anaheim, Cali[ornia - COUHCIL MINUTES - Dec-mher 1, 1970, 7:30 P.M. Mr. Meyer replied that the number of townhouses was planned for eco- nomic reasons and it' was felt spreading them out over a larger area would make a better appearance, in keeping with the Mill and Canyon area. In reply to Mr. McQueen's query as to whether an owner would, be al- lowed to lease out his townhouse, Mr. Meyer stated they would have no control over such a situation since the townhouses would be individually owned. Mrs. Dorothy Davis, 4332 East Elkstone, remarked that, in her opin- ion, a $40,000.00 home on a 10,000-square foot lot would mean a large yard for such a dwelling. Mr. Meyer replied that most of the homes would be over $40,000.00, but that a 1,500-square foot house at $35,000.00 had been suggested as the minimum. In reply to Mrs. Davis' question as to how many children are expected in the single-family units, Mr. Meyer advised their projections were based on the City of Anaheim average of 3.9 persons per dwelling. It was determined that sufficient evidence had been presented, and Mayor Dutton declared the hearing closed. Councilman Clark expressed the opinion that too large an area was proposed for the higher-density multiple-family units, and stated he would prefer to have only 10 acres used for this purpose, rather than 58 acres., Councilman Dutton stated that, inasmuch as present zoning would al- low as many multiple-family units tnnediately adjacent to the proposed shop- ping center as are proposed to be spread out over the large area, he preferred to have these'units spread out. Councilman Stephenson advised he would prefer to have the townhouse area reduced to about 30 acres. Councilman Dutton asked if the Petittoners, would be willing to deed the middle Canyon area to the City of Anaheim to get it off the tax rolls and still maintain it in perpetuity? Mr. Meyer replied it would be unfair to expect residents to maintain it if it were deeded to the City; however, they would be willing to dedicate the Canyon area to the City for a parksite, in lieu of some of the park fees. Councilman Pebley asked if the Petitioners would be willing to revise the plans on the south half of Portion A to reduce the area devoted to town- houses. Mr. Meyer stated they would prefer to reduce the Canyon area to single- family units, rather than the soUth half of Portion A, since they were endea- voring to separate as much as possible the single-family units from the multiple- family units. In reply to Councilman Dutton, Mr. Meyer advised 70 units had been p~oposed for the Canyon atea that runs up the middle of the property. RESOI/ITIONNO. 70R-573: Councilman Clark offered Resolution No. 70R-573 for adoPtion, den~ng Reclassification No. 70-71-13, as reco~nended by the City Planning Co~ttssion. Refer to Resolution Book. A KE~ OF TH~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMIN- I~C ~ A E~ANCE OF ZONE SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED IN A CERTAIN AREA OF THE CITY I~REINAFTEH D~SC~IBED. (70- 71-13 - R- 2 and R- 1) Roll Call Vote:. 70-680 City Hall, .Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1970, 7:30 P.M. AYES: COUNCILMEN: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley and Thom NOES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton ABSENT: COUNCIL~N: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 70R-573 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 70R-574: Councilman Clark offered Resolution No. 70R-574 for adoption, denying Conditional Use Permit No. 1202, as reco~aended by the City Planning Co~ission. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OFT HE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1202. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley and Thom NOES: COUNCII~N: Dutton ABSENT: COUNCIL~N: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 70R-574 duly passed and adopted. TENTATIVE MAP, TRACT NO. 7288: On motion by Councilman Clark, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, Tentative Map of Tract No. 7288 was denied, as recmmen~d by the City Planning Co~ission. MOTION CARRIED. ~ESOLUTION NO. 70R-575 - CYCLE TEST: Councilman Clark offered Resolution No. 70R-575 for adoption, authorizing the City of Anaheim to hold a cycle test, assuming the City's responsibility and liability and insisting upon Orange County retaining its responsibility and liability, and authorizing entering into an agreement to conduct a test on that basis if any such agreement is necessary. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A PERMIT FROM THE COUNTY OF ORANGE GRANTING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEiM THE RIGHT TO USE CERTAIN COUNTY REAL PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING A MOTORCYCLE NOISE EMISSION EXPERIMENT, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF SAID PERMIT. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: AB SENT: COUNCILMEN: Clark, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 70R-575 duly passed and adopted. ADJ~NT: Councilman Pebley moved to adjourn. Councilman Stephenson secon- ded the motion. MOTION cARRIED. ADJOURNED: 10:25 P.M. City Clerk