Loading...
1972/08/01Councilman Pebley entered the Council Chambers (1 :40 p.m.). 72 -489 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley (entered at 1 :40 p.m.), Thom and Dutton ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph B. Geisler ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY: John H. Dawson ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts CITY CLERK: Dene M. Daoust UTILITIES DIRECTOR: Gordon W. Hoyt FINANCE DIRECTOR M. R. Ringer PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Garry McRae CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Ronald Thompson ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order. INVOCATION: Reverend Lowell Linden of First Presbyterian Church gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Ralph G. Sneegas led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES: Frank Campagnoni, of the City Personnel Depart ment, introduced new employees attending the Council meeting as part of the City's orientation program. Mayor Dutton welcomed the new employees. MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council Regular meeting held July 11, 1972, and July 18, 1972, as corrected (pp 466 and 468) were approved on motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Sneegas. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Thom moved to waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions, and that consent to the waiver of reading is hereby given by all Councilmen unless, after reading of the title, sepcific request is made by'a Councilman for the reading of such ordinance or resolution. Councilman Stephenson seconded the motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. REPORT FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City, in the amount of $1,797,331.50, in accordance with the 1972 -73 Budget, were approved. "NO PARKING" REQUEST EAST STREET FROM BALL ROAD NORTHERLY: Request of Richard L. Shlemmer, Director of Industrial Relations, General Automation, Incorporated, 1055 South East Street was submitted for installation of "No Parking" signs on East Street along their property. Also submitted was report of the City Engineer recommending parking be prohibited at all times from Ball Road to 1600 feet north of Ball Road on the west side of East Street. MOTION: Councilman Stephenson offered a motion to prohibit parking as recommended by the City-Engineer. Councilman Dutton seconded the motion. Councilman Sneegas noted that prohibiting parking as recommended.by the City Engineer would result in only a short section on the west side of East Street between Ball Road and Vermont Avenue where parking was permitted, and suggested the entire west side of the street between Ball Road and Vermont Avenue be considered. 72 -490 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P,M, Councilman Stephenson withdrew his foregoing motion; Councilman Dutton withdrew his second of the motion. City Engineer James P. Maddox agreed to investigate the situation and report at the next regular meeting. The City Manager suggested an ordinance be prepared prohibiting parking on the west side of East Street, from Ball Road north to an undesignated point so that the blank could be filled in and first reading held at the next meeting if desired. RE- HEARING VARIANCE NO. 2375: Submitted by Ernest L. Danker, et al, to establish a 454 -lot single family tract on County of Orange property located on the south side of the Riverside Freeway, on the north side of Santa Ana Canyon Road, east of the intersection of Walnut Canyon Road and Santa Ana Canyon Road and extending easterly to the intersection of Santa Ana Canyon Road and the Riverside Freeway, with waivers of: a. Minimum front yard. (Withdrawn) b. Minimum lot width. c. Minimum lot area. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC72.120, denied said variance. Appeal from action taken was filed by M. C. Nickle, Agent, and public hearing held on Juile 27, 1972, at which time the variance also was denied by the City Council (Resolution No. 72R -264). Request submitted by'M. C. Nickle, for a rehearing was granted at the City Council meeting of July 11, 1972 and rehearing scheduled this date. TEN^TIVE (APS TRACTS NO.. 7617,REVISION NO..2,AND 7730 THROUGH 7734 REVISIONS N 2: Developer, Classic Development Corporation. Property is located on the north side of Santa Ana Canyon Road, east of the intersection of Walnut Canyon and Santa Ana Canyon Roads and contains: Tract No. 7617 75 proposed R -1 zoned lots. Tract No. 7730 80 proposed R -1 zoned lots. Tract No. 7731 67 proposed R -1 zoned lots. Tract No. 7732 68 proposed R -1 zoned lots. Tract No. 7733 94' proposed R -1 zoned lots. Tract No. 7734 70 proposed R -1 zoned lots. Said Tentative Tracts were denied by the City Planning Commission at thier meeting of May 31, 1972, and by the City Council at their June 27, 1972 meeting, on the basis of denial of Variance No. 2375. Inasmuch' as rehearing of Variance No. 2375 was granted by the City Council at their July 11, 1972 meeting, reconsideration of said Tentative Tracts also was scheduled for this date as was requested by M. C. Nickle, Agent. Mayor Dutton asked if the Applicant or his Agent was present and wished to address the Council. M. C. Nickle, Agent, advised that his request for rehearing on the Variance application and reconsideration of the Tract Maps.reeulted from indica- tion that there was confusion as to the condition to which they were willing to stipulate. He referred to tract and plot maps displayed on the east wall of the Council Chamber (which displays were retained by the Applicant) and.noted that the property under consideration is an assemblage of 9 parcels with marry owners. He added that considerable difficulty had been encountered in getting overall agreement among all of the owners on the development project. Mr. Nickle contended there was a hardship involved because of: 72 -491 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. 1. The proximity of the property to the freeway and barriers neces- sary for blocking the noise, which included an additional 30 feet of rear yard, 20 feet of which would be used for a six foot high and six foot wide earthen berm. He estimated the cost of land and construction of these berms and land- scaping would be $50,000.00. 2. The requirement of two major drainage courses across the property to be contained in five foot to six foot pipe would cost approximately $75,000.00 each. 3. Undergrounding the SAVI channel which runs across the front 70% of the property would cost approximately $85,000.00. 4. Scenic Corridor requirements along the Santa Ana Canyon Road of a 30 foot wide scenic belt, including fencing and landscaping, would cost approximately $100,000.00.. He noted the total of these unusual development costs was approx- imately $385,000.00. Mr. Nickle stated he felt the approval of zoning for 5,000 square foot lots to the north and west, and the steep bank to the east of subject property warranted some consideration for their request ()f variance for R -1 zoning, particularly since the overall average size of the lots in the proposed development was 7,200 square feet. Referring to the misunderstanding of a stipulation he had made at the original hearing, Mr. Nickle reiterated that they would stipulate to limiting the 6,000 to 6,500 square foot lots to no more than one story, three bedroom, 1,550 square foot homes, noting that these lots consitute 367. of the total lots. Councilman Dutton stated that he had misunderstood this point at the first hearing, and expressed appreciation for the clarification. In reply to Councilman Pebley, Mr. Nickle advised that conforming to the ordinance requirements of 72 by 100 foot lots would result in approximately four hundred 7,200 square foot lots. Further in reply to Council questioning Mr. Nickle pointed out the various lot sizes on the plot map, noting that 127. of the lots would be between 6,500 to 7,200 square feet and 527. would be 7,200 square feet and larger, with a couple of lots being approximately 15,000 square feet. Mayor Dutton asked if anyone wished to address the Council in opposition; there being no declared the hearing closed. Councilman Sneegas stated he felt the existing topography and surrounding tracts made the requested waivers reasonable and that he was favorably impressed by similar homes constructed by the developer. Councilman Pebley expressed the opinion that approving these tract maps would result in better homes than demanding strict adherence to the 7,200 square foot lot minimum requirement. Councilman Thom stated he did not feel any hardship existed for the owners or developer and thus no waiver of the lot size should be permitted. Councilman Stephenson advised he believed that, inasmuch as the entire property consisted-of 100 acres, R -1 requirements should be complied with; that he could see no evidence an existing hardship. Zoning Supervisor Charles Roberts advised that Mr. Nickle previously had indicated withdrawal of the request for waiver of the minimum front yard requirement (waiver a), which Mr. Nickle confirmed. Mr. Roberts further advised that if the variance and tentative.tract maps are approved the staff has suggested the additional condition requiring completion of Reclassification No. 71 -72 -30 be added to `the variance, that an additional condition concerning Access Point No. 9 on the Santa Ana Canyon Road be added to approval of Tentative Map, Tract No. 7730 prior to approval of the final map, and that each tract have an additional condition that house plans must be submitted and approved by the City Council prior to approval of the final map. 72 -492 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 72R- 322: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 72R -322 for adoption granting Variance No. 2375 in part, granting waivers b. and c., waiver a. having been withdrawn by the Developer, subject to the following interdepartmental committee recommendations amended to include the.recommend- ation of staff and further subject to the stipulation by the Developer that on the 6,000 to 6,500 square foot lots there would be no two story homes and these homes would be limited to a maximum of 1,550 square feet of living space and contain no more than three bedrooms. 1. That this Variance is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification No. 71 72 -30, now pending. 2. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accord- ance with plans and specifications .on file with the City of Anaheim, marked Exhibit No. 1. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2375, IN PART. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Pebley and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: Stephenson and Thom ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 72R -322 duly passed and adopted. MOTION: On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Pebley, Revvi n No. 2 of Tentative Maps, Tracts No. 7617, 7730, 7731, 7732, 7733, and 7734 were approved, subject to the following interdepartmental Committee recommendations amended as recommended by staff. (To this motion, Councilman Thom voted not) 7617, REVISION NO. 2: 1. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for 2. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground 3. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 4. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recre *tion'in -lieu fees as determined to_be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 6. That in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code, a 6 -foot high, landscaped, earthen berm shall be provided adjacent to the north line of Tract No. 7617, Revision No. 2. 7. That the developer shall obtain a favorable flood hazard letter acceptable to the City of Anaheim from the Orange County Flood Control District. 8. The drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 9. That a 15 -foot wide sewer and public utility easement shall be dedicated across Lots 7 and 23 as required by the City Engineer and Director of Public Utilities. 10. That house plans (floor plans and elevations) for this subdivision shall be submitted to the City Council for review and approval prior to approval of the final tract map. TRACT NO. division, approval. utilities. TRACT NO. 7730, REVISION NO. 2: 1. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. 72 -493 City Hall Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. 2. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. 3. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 4. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That reasonable landscaping, including irrigation facilities, shall be installed in the median and the unpaved portion of the north side of Santa Ana Canyon Road right -of -way in accordance with the requirements of the Parkway Maintenance Superintendent. Following installation and acceptance, the City of Anaheim shall assume the responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping. 6. That the City Council reserves the right to delete or amend the assumption of landscape maintenance in the event Council policy changes. 7. That a left -turn pocket for eastbound Santa Ana Canyon Road traffic shall be provided at the intersection of Santa Ana Canyon Road and "A" Street. 8. That the vehicular access rights, except at approved access points, to Santa Ana Canyon Road shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim. 9. That the developer shall obtain a favorable flood hazard letter acceptable to the City of Anaheim from the Orange County Flood Control District. 10. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in -lieu fees as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 11. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer and shill include construction of drainage facilities of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff waters originating from higher properties south of Santa Ana Canyon Road through said property to ultimate disposal as approved by the City Engineer. Reimbursement agree- ments may be made available to the developers of said property upon their request. 12. That house plans (floor plans and elevations) for this subdiv- sion shall be submitted to the City Council for review and approval prior to approval of the final tract map. 13. This tract is approved subject to final determination or agree- ment on the relocation of Access Point No. 9 as delineated on Access Points Santa Ana Canyon Road, Exhibit No. 7. TRACT NO, 7731, REVISION NO. 2: 1. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subdivision, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. 2. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. 3. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 4. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code, a 6 -foot high, landscaped, earthen berm shall be provided adjacent to the north line of Tract No. 7731, Revision No. 2. 6. That the developer shall obtain a favorable flood hazard letter acceptable to the City of*Anaheim from the Orange County Flood Control District. 7. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in -lieu fees as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 8. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer and shall include construction of drainage facilities of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff waters originating from higher properties south of Santa Ana Canyon Road through said property to ultimate disposal as approved by the City Engineer. Reimbursement agree- ments may be made available to the developers of said property upon their request. 72 -494 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. 9. That drainage of subject property manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 10. That house plans (floor plans and sion shall be submitted to the City Council for approval of the final tract map. shall be disposed of in a elevations) for this subdivi- review and approval prior to TRACT NO. 7732, REVISION NO. 2: 1. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. 2. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground. utilities. 3. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 4. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map.' 5. That in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code, a 6 -foot high, landscaped, earthen berm shall be provided adjacent to the north line of Tract No. 7732, Revision No. 2. 6. That reasonable landscaping, including irrigation facilities, shall be installed in the median and the unpaved portion of the north side of Santa Ana Canyon Road right -of -way in accordance with the requirements of the Parkway Maintenance Superintendent. Following installation and acceptance, the City of Anaheim shall assume the responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping. 7. That the City Council reserves the right to delete or amend the assumption :of landscape maintenance in the event Council policy changes. 8. That a left -turn pocket for eastbound Santa Ana Canyon Road traffic shall be provided at the intersection of Santa Ana Canyon Road and "M" Street. 9. That the vehicular access rights, except at approved access points, to Santa Ana Canyon Road shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim. 10. That the developer shall obtain a favorable flood hazard letter acceptable to the City of Anaheim from the Orange County Flood Control District. 11. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in -lieu fees as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said.fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 12. That drainage of said property shall' be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer and shall include construction of drainage facilities of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff waters originating from higher properties south of Santa Ana Canyon Road through said property to ultimate disposal as approved by the City Engineer. Reimbursement agree- ments may be made available to the developers of said property upon their request. 13. That house plans (floor plans and elevations) for this subdivi- sion shall be submitted to the City Council for review and approval prior to approval of the final tract map. TRACT NO. 7733, REVISION NO. 2: 1. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. 2. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. 3. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 4. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code, a 6 -foot high, landscaped, earthen berm shall be provided adjacent to the north line of Tract No. 7733, Revision No. 2. 6. That reasonable landscaping, including irrigation facilities, shall be installed in the median and the unpaved portion of the north side of SantavAna Canyon Road right of-way in accordance with the requirements of 72 -495 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. the Parkway Maintenance Superintendent. Following installation and acceptance, the City of Anaheim shall assume the responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping. 7. That the City Council reserves the right to delete or amend the assumption of landscape maintenance in the event Council policy changes. 8. That the vehicular access rights, except at approved access points, to Santa Ana Canyon Road shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim. 9. That the developer shall obtain a favorable flood hazard letter acceptable to the City of Anaheim from the Orange County Flood 'Control District. 10. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in -lieu fees as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 11. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 12. That house plans (floor plans and elevations) for this subdivi- sion shall be submitted to the City Council for review and approval prior to approval of the final tract map. TRACT NO. 7734, REVISION NO. 2: 1. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. 2. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. 3. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the- office of the Orange County Recorder. 4. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code, a 6 -foot high, landscaped, earthen berm shall be provided adjacent to the north line of Tract No. 7734, Revision No. 2. 6. That reasonable landscaping, including irrigation facilities, shall be installed in the median and the unpaved portion of the north side of Santa Ana Canyon Road right -of -way in accordance with the requirements of the Parkway Maintenance Superintendent. Following installation and acceptance, the City of Anaheim shall assume the responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping. 7. That the City Council reserves the right to delete or amend the assumption of landscape maintenance in the event Council policy changes. 8. That the vehicular access rights, except at approved access points, to Santa Ana Canyon Road shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim. 9. That the developer shall obtain a favorable flood hazard letter acceptable to the City of Anaheim from the Orange County Flood Control District. 10. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in -lieu fees as determined to be appropriate by the City Council said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 11. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 12. That house plans (floor plans and elevations) for this subdivi- sion shall be submitted to the City Council for review and approval prior to approval of the final tract map. MOTION CARRIED. PROPOSED RESOLUTION CLEAN -UP PROGRAM: Correspondence from L. McConville, Orange County Road Commissioner County Surveyor, dated July 18, 1972, was submitted, requesting Anaheim declare their intent to adopt a coordinated Clean -up need concept program, and supplying a recommended resolution therefor. RESOLUTION NO. 72R- 323: Council discussion resulted in a decision to adopt the concept in principle; and Councilman Thom thereupon offered Resolution No. 72R -323 for adoption. 72 -496 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1:30 P.M. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING PARTICIPATION IN A COORDINATED CLEAN -UP PROGRAM IN MAY OF 1973. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 72R -323 duly passed and adopted. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: Actions taken by the City Planning Commission, at their meeting held July 10, 1972, pertaining to the following applications were submitted for City Council information and consideration: VARIANCE NO. 2355: Submitted by Frank Muller Revocable Trust, to construct one free standing sign on C -2 zoned property located on the north side of Lincoln Avenue between Muller Street and Crescent Way, with waivers of: a. b. c. d. e. Maximum aggregate sign area. (Withdrawn) Maximun.sign area. (Withdrawn) Number of free standing signs. Minimum distance between free standing signs. Minimum height of free standing signs. The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC72 -146, granted said variance in part, subject to conditions. VARIANCE N0. 2387: Submitted by Bert P. and Norma J. Boynton, to modify the existing single- family residence and utilize it as a tailor shop. C -0 zoned property is located on the east side of Euclid Street, south of Orange Avenue, with waiver of: a. Permitted uses. The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC72 -151, granted said variance subject to conditions. VARIANCE N0, 2389: Submitted by Jake J. and Alice Westra, to establish the storage cabinets near each apartment unit for convenience, thereby eliminating unsightly storage in the carports. R -3 zoned property is located on the south side of La Palma Avenue, east of Magnolia Avenue, with waivers of: a. Requirement that carports be enclosed on three sides. b. Requirement that carports contain 100 -cubic foot storage cabinets. The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution .No. PC72 -153, granted said variance subject to conditions. VARIANCE NQ. 2390: Submitted by Mr. and Mr. Richard Kamphefner, to construct a room addition projecting into the required front setback on Rul zoned property located on the southwest corner of Vermont Avenue and•Caplan Street, with waivers of: a. Maximum eave projection into the front setback. b. Maximum wall height in the front setback. c. Minimum front setback. The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC72 -152,_ granted said variance subject to conditions The foregoing actions were reviewed by':the City Council and no further action taken. 72 -497 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. VARIANCE NO. 2376: Submitted by William P. Visser, to remove the existing single family unit on the northerly portion of the property and utilize it for park- ing; and to construct a greenhouse to be operated in conjunction with the existing florist shop on C -2 and P -1 zoned property located at the northwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Resh Street, with waivers of: a. Minimum number of parking stalls. b. Minimum front setback. (withdrawn) c. Building setback along an alley. (withdrawn) d. Minimum side setback. (withdrawn) e. Permitted uses. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC72 -147, granted said variance in part, subject to conditions. The City Clerk submitted correspondence from Robert C. and Helen M. Rees, in opposition to the variance, on the basis that it would result in blocking off a deeded alley and in opposition to abandonment of said alley. Council discussion determined that a condition of approval of the variance was successful completion of an abandonment of this alley, which must be determined by public hearing, in which case anyone in opposition would be invited to present their arguments; therefore, the Council, upon reviewing the action of the City Planning Commission, took no further action at this time recognizing Variance No. 2376 can not be exercised until and unless the alley referred to is abandoned. TENTATIVE MAP, TRACT NO. 7940 (VARIANCE NO. 2398): Owner, George T. Reeve. Pro perty is located on the south side of Cul -De -Sac Avenue, south of Riverdale Avenue and contains 6 proposed R -1 zoned lots. On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Dutton, action on Tentative Map, Tract No. 7940 was continued, to be considered in conjunction with Variance No. 2398. MOTION CARRIED. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 70 -71 -17 AND VARIANCE NO. 2215 REVISED PLANS: Zoning Sup- ervisor Charles Roberts reported a request from LeRoy Rose, Agent for the Pe- titioner of Reclassification No. 70 -71 -17 and Variance No. 2215 (approved January 19, 1971) for interpretation of Code Section 18.20.010(12 -a), to per- mit installation of a 6 -foot high slumpstone wall in the front yard setbacks in connection with a 270 -unit apartment complex on R -3 zoned property located on the southeast corner of Beach Boulevard. and Orange Avenue, since they did not feel -a 42 -inch high wall permitted under R -3 zoning would provide the de- sired privacy for patios that would be enclosed by these walls. The City Planning Commission, at its July 24, 1972 meeting, by Mo- tion, recommended approval of the plans of the Petitioner which would permit encroachment in the front setback to within 15 feet of the ultimate right -of- way line in order to provide 6 -foot high slumpstone walls enclosing the patio areas along Beach Boulevard and Orange Avenue as being substantially in con- formance with plans submitted with the original request. In reply to Council questioning, Mr. Roberts advised that these pa- tio walls would be approximately 10 feet back of the right -of -way line, and the right- of- way.line 12 feet behind the curbline; that there would be 10 feet between the patio walls and the building walls. On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Thom, re- vised plans were approved as recommended by the City Planning Commission. MOTION CARRIED. FINAL MAP, TRACT NO. 7439 TITLE °REVISION: On recommendation of the City Engin- eer, Councilman Stephenson moved the phrase "For Condominium Purposes" be re- moved from the Final Map for Tract No. 7439. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 72 -498 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. SANTA FE RAIL liY NON AGENCY STATUS: Report of the Development Services Depart- ment was submitted recommending the City Council protest the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company proposal before the Public Utilities Commission to reduce the Anaheim Station to a non agency status, which could have result- ing adverse consequences to the City of Anaheim. On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Dutton, the City Clerk was directed to forward a letter of protest to the Public Utilities Commission, as recommended by the Development Services Department. MOTION CARRIED. VARIANCE NO. 2218 IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION: Irrevocable Offer of Dedica- tion of property for road and public utility purposes at 506 South East Street, executed by George F. and Pauline Ehr, in conjunction with Variance No. 2218, was submitted and approved as to form, and recordation thereof authorized on motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Thom. MOTION CARRIED. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY: Mr. Gordon Hoyt, Utili- ties Director, submitted and briefed a report and recommendation, background material and settlement agreement between the Cities of Anaheim, Banning and Riverside and the Southern California Edison Company. Mr. Hoyt advised that the recommendation and the proposed settle- ment agreement represents various negotiations and litigations with the Sou- thern California Edison Company since 1969, and resolves a number of issues outstanding between the Southern California Edison Company and the City of Anaheim. Mr.Hoyt further advised that the City has intervened in two hydro- electric plant relicensing cases (Big Creek 2 and 3) alleging violation of Section 10(h) of the Federal Power Act and has intervened and is participat- ing in a wholesale rate case which will be resolved with the proposed settle- ment recommended. Mr. Hoyt reported that they have been seeking other services which would enable the City to have the opportunity to secure for the citizens of Anaheim the lowest cost, most reliable power supply available in the Southern California area. As to the benefits to the City of Anaheim, Mr. Hoyt stated the set- tlement agreement will provide for $1,715,000.00 cash settlement, and as part of the resolution of the wholesale rate case, a refund from retroactive volt- age discount of approximately $200,000.00. The Edison Company agreed during the course of negotiations that they will not press for an additional rate in- crease which could be made effective prior to June 1, 1973. This is valued at approximately $1,500,000.00 that the electrical consumers in the City of Anaheim will not have to pay. The estimated annual saving from increased voltage discounts for 66 KV service presently received is $320,000.00, the added discount for 220 KV service would be $565,000.00 for the first year, or a total of $885,000, once the 220 KV service is instituted. In addition, the City has access to regional transmission system of the Edison Company and through it to other utility companies in the region, plus an opportunity to participate in elec- trical generation resources if it cares to exert that opportunity; plus the opportunity to achieve the lowest cost power supply for the City and an agree- ment from the Edison Company that they will sell to us electricity that is in excess of that which we could generate through our own facilities. He stated they were unable to Complete negotiations on an agree ment on the rate Edison Company will charge; the Edison Company has agreed to provide the services and the City will litigate partial requirements rate during the next wholesale rate case which, they hope, would be effective June 1, 1973. Mr. Hoyt further reported that part of the commitment of the City of Anaheim by accepting the negotiated settlement would be to receive elec- tricity at 220 KV and be obligated to construct a 220 KV receiving substation by July 1, 1974, at an estimated cost of $3,500,000.00. City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August l 1972, 1 :30 P.M. Further, the City would agree to release Edison from claims made by the City related to alleged past anti competitive activities; the City would agree to withdraw or amend by interventions in the Federal Power Com- mission wholesale rate case, the Federal Power Commission's hydro electric plant relicensing case, the Atomic Energy Commission licensing proceedings for the San Onofre Power Plant,our appeal in the United States District Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. related to the wholesale rate case, and the in- tervention in the Midway Vincent high voltage transmission line certifica- tion proceedings before the California Public Utilities Commission. Mr. Hoyt advised that he and Alan Watts, Assistant City Attorney, have represented the City of Anaheim in these proceedings and they jointly recommend basically the following: Recommendation No. 1: That the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the settlement agreement and that the staff be author- ized to carry out Anaheim's commitment under said agreement. Recommendation No. 2: That the cash settlement amount estimated to be $1,715,000.00, the voltage discount refund estimated to be $200,000 and the increased voltage discount of 10 cents per kilowatt of billing demand to be received from date of settlement until July 1, 1974, all be placed in an interest bearing account in the Electric Revenue Fund for the construction of a 220/66 KV receiving and transforming substation. Mr. Hoyt noted additional funds will be needed to complete the sub- station, however, in his opinion, the construction can be financed without the need of a rate increase or additional bond authorization. He reported that when the City receives the 220 KV service an additional voltage discount, estimated the first year to be $565,000.00, will be received. He felt the project could be financed from settlement proceeds, bond funds available but surplus to anticipated needs, and from current revenue as follows: Proceeds from Settlement Agreement Refund from Voltage Discount Estimated interest on proceeds and refund- Estimated proceeds on increased voltage discount from September, 1972 through June, 1974 Presently authorized bond funds Budget in 1973 -74 fiscal year from current revenues Total 72 -499 $1,715,000.00 200,000.00 100,000.00 585,000.00 300,000.00 600,000.00 $3,500,000.00 Recommendation No. 3: That our present engineering and legal con- sultants be retained for the purpose of opposing Edison's proposed wholesale rate increase scheduled by Edison to become effective June 1, 1973, as well as the Partial Requirements Rate proposed by Edison and, if necessary, the form of contract which will evolve from the Principles for Integrated Opera- tion. In this connection, that the Utilities Director and City Attorney be authorized to negotiate with these consultants for the purpose of recommend- ing the terms and conditions of agreements for the retention of these consult- ants. In conclusion, Mr. Hoyt stated the settlement agreement represents 10 months of negotiations and opens up a whole new era of cooperation between the Southern California Edison Company and the resale cities and will provide the most reliable, economical power supply for the people of Southern California. Mr. Hoyt also reported that, with reference to the opportunity to participate in regional generation, a specific offer has been received to participate in Units 2 and 3 of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, scheduled to commence construction March, 1973. Councilman Pebley moved that the three recommendations set forth and explained by Mr. Hoyt be approved and authorized, and that appreciation on balf of the citizens of Anaheim be expressed to the Public Utilities Di- rector, Gordon Hoyt, and Assistant City Attorney Alan Watts for a job well done. Councilman Stephenson seconded the motion.. MOTION CARRIED. 72 -500 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1:30 P.M. Mr. Murdoch noted that while the action may appear to have been taken quickly, without Council discussion, as is common during litigation, the City Council has been kept abreast from time to time on the status of negotiations and the settlement recommended. RESOLUTION NO. 72R -324 EDISON CONDEMNATION NO. 7: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No.72R -324 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING PAYMENT FOR VALUATION INFORMATION IN CONNECTION WITH EDISON CONDEMNATION NO. 7. ($19,185.00) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 72R -324 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 72R -325 BANK OF AMERICA BUILDING: Finance.Director M.R. Ringer reported there were several requests for additional administrative space for departments during the past year, and thus he recommended the former Bank of America site at the southwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Claudine Street be purchased at a total cost of $315,000.00, $140,000.00 to be paid the first year for the bank building and the land upon which it sits, $75,000.00 to be paid the second year for the parking lot and the annex directly behind the bank building, and $100,000.00 to be paid the third year for the final parcel, which. is the vacant parking lot facing Anaheim Boulevard. Mr. Ringer further proposed that the annex and two parking lots be leased for the first year at a cost of $13,125.00,. and the final parking lot parcel be leased the second year for $7,500.00. Mr. Ringer requested that, if the proposed purchase is approved, the Council authorize a transfer of $138,337.00 from last year's Council Contingency Fund for the purchase. In reply to Councilman Pebley, Mr. Ringer advised that the money the City has out on loan is at an interest rate of 57. or more, and thus there would be no advantage to recalling these loans and using that money for the purchase of the bank property. The City Manager advised that present plans are to use the bank build- ing facilities for all of the Development Services Department and Engineering Department activities so that a common counter can be used to serve people who deal with Planning, Zoning, Building and Engineering. He displayed tentative map and layouts showing the proposed usage of the bank property. Mr. Murdoch further advised that, since Customer Service needs more apace to accommodate the additional business engendered'by purchase of the Edi• son facilities, they were proposing moving the Accounting Department to the space now occupied by the Building Department, which would °need considerable remodeling. In reply to Councilman Dutton, Mr. Ringer advised that $125,000.00 had been placed in this year's Budget for leasing of additional space and this now, plus approximately $20,000.00 that will be released with the proposed transfer of funds if approved, will'be made available for remodeling of the various buildings. He advised that it was hoped the space problem ultimately would be solved by construction of a new City Hall and that the remodeling would be done on the assumption these buildings Mould have a minimum occupancy of five years. City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1:30 P.M. In reply to Council questioning, Mr. Ringer advised that the proposed purchase involved 15,500 square feet of building and 64,608 square feet of land. Mr. Murdoch outlined various other possible shifts in location of departments and stated that when plans have been finalized, specific recommen- dations will be brought before the Council. RESOLUTION NO. 72R- 325: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 72R -325 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH MERCHANTS NATIONAL REALTY CORPORATION TO PURCHASE AND LEASE CERTAIN LANDS AND BUILDINGS AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT. Roll Call Vote: 72 -501 AYES: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 72R -325 duly passed and adopted. TRANSFER OF FUNDS: Councilman Pebley moved to transfer funds.in the amount of $138,337.00 from last years Council Contingency Fund .(100 -201 =499) to the Office Space Account (100- 219 -281) for purchase from Merchant- National Realty Corporation of. the former Bank of America building located on south- weat corner of Lincoln Avenue and Claudine Street. Councilman Stephenson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT BASE STATION AND WALKIE TALKIES: The City Manager reported on one informal bid received for the purchase of a base station and nine Walkie- Talkies for the Convention Center and recommended acceptance of said bid. On recommendation of the City Manager, Councilman Stephenson moved that the bid of Motorola Communications, Costa Mesa, California, which was the only bid received, be accepted and purchase authorized in the amount of $6,403.06, including tax. Councilman Dutton. seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. INSTALLATION OF QUARRY TILE: The City Manager reported on informal bid, received for the purchase and installation of'Quarry Tile for the concession kitchen of the Convention Center and recommended_acceptance of said bid. On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Dutton, the bid of Cox Carner Cox Ceramic Tile Company, which was the only bid received, was accepted and work authorized in the amount of $5,995.00, including tax, as recommended by the City Manager. MOTION CARRIED. CLAIMS FILED AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims were denied as recommended by the City Attorney, and ordered referred to the insurance carrier, on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Dutton; a. Claim submitted by Behm Callen, Attorneys on behalf of Lawrence Vincent Connery for purported false arrest, false imprisonment, invasion of privacy, negligence, malicious prosecution, infliction of emotional distress, assault and battery, on or about April 12, 1972. b. Claim of Mrs.Helen Lane, for purported personal property damage sustained as a result of negligence on the part of authorities at a La Palma Park dance, on or about July 14, 1972. c. Claim of Mrs. Barbara Casciano, for purported personal injuries and personal property damage sustained on or about June 14, 1972 as a result of falling off the curbing at Anaheim Stadium. In reply to Council questioning, Recreation Superintendent Lloyd Trapp advised that the La Palma Park teen -age dance involved in claim of Mrs. 72 -502 City Hall, Anaheim California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. Helen Lane was the final dance of this season, and that the program has been discontinued. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 72R.u326 STATE OF CALIFORNIA UTILITIES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT: Council- man Thom offered Resolution No. T2R -326 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING AND DIRECT- ING THE AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THAT CERTAIN AMENDMENT TO UTILITIES AGREEMENT NO. 7Ut -3916 WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 72R -326 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 72R -327 FREEWAY AGREEMENT AMENDMENT: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 72R -327 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING A FREEWAY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, (ROUTE 5 FREEWAY AT BROOKHURST STREET INTERCHANGE). The Mayor declared Resolution No. 72R -327 duly passed and adopted. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed on motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Pebley: a. Before the Public Utilities Commission Application No. 51774 of The Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, a Corporation, for authority to increase certain intrastate rates and charges applicable to telephone services furnished within the State of California. Application No. 52794 of Pacific Telephone and Telegraph.Com- pany, a Corporation, for authority to.increase certain intrastate rates and charges applicable to telephone services furnished within the.State of Calif- ornia in an amount necessary-to offset i -in wage -and salary rates. b. City of Santa Ana Resolution No. 72 -72 Approving the recommen' dations contained in the Orange County Bicycle Study prepared by the Orange County Criminal Justice Council dated March, 1972. c. Anaheim Public Library Board Minutes June 19, and 21,.1972. d. Anaheim Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes June 15, 1972. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None e. Community Redevelopment Commission Minutes July 19, 1972. MOTION CARRIED. ORDINANCE NO. 3071r Councilman Stephenson offered No. 3071 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.32, SECTION 14.32.190 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING. (No Parking at Any Time Streets Designated. State College Boulevard near Rcmneya Drive.) City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: 72 -503 AYES: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3071 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3072: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3072 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (71 -72 -40 R -3) ORDINANCE NO. 3073: Councilman Pebley offered Ordinance No. 3073 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 3064. (61 -62 -69 (50) M -1 Amending description) PROPOSED MAINTENANCE DISTRICT: EQUESTRIAN.TRAILS ANAHEIM HILLS DEVELOPMENT: Request of William J. Stark, President, Anaheim Hills Inc., was submitted'that the Council consider establishing a maintenance district for the equestrian trails in the Anaheim Hills Development. Also submitted was report of the Development Services Department. Assistant Director of Development Services Ronald Thompson pointed out the area in question on the Anaheim Hills general plan, posted on the Council Chamber wall, and advised that, subsequent to distribution of the July 25, 1972 report of the Development Services Department, the subject had been reviewed in depth with Anaheim Hills,Inc. by the-offices of the City. Manager, City Attorney and Development Services Department. He added that it was anticipated there ultimately would be approximately 11 miles of trails which would cost $750.00 to $1,000.00 per mile per year to maintain, or an estimated 650 per year cost for each dwelling unit involved in the proposed maintenance district. Mr. Thompson advised it was the recommendation of staff that, if the Council agrees with the overall concept of establishing a system of riding' and hiking trails, they 'authorize establishment of a maintenance district, and, after a plan has been developed that would provide for an acceptable system of trails and a design satisfactory to the City, the City Council could then consider acceptance at that time. He added that the Developer had expressed the desire to have such a maintenance district established prior to their property being sold into multiple ownerships. In reply to Councilman Thom, Mr. Thompson stated that if the Watson Amendment governing such maintenance districts passes, At would be possible the contemplated assessment would exceed the statutory limitations, and then other means of support would have to be found, such as a user's tax, horse license, etc. Assistant City Attorney John Dawson advised that in discussion, the Attorney for the Developer had expressed the opinion it was questionable whether the Watson Amendment would apply to districts that are variable in amounts such as is proposed; that if it did apply, the amount involved would be minimal. Mr. Murdoch stated he felt the Watson Amendment would be decided prior to the time the general plan for the trails is prepared for acceptance by the City Council; that what was desired at this time was an indication as to whether the Council favored the concept. James Barisic, Vice President of Anaheim Hilia,Inc., advised they would like a resolution adopted favoring the project so that public hearing could be held and plena developed. He added that at the time the effects of the Watson Amendment, if adopted, were determined, the Council could then make a final determination as to whether to actually establish the district. 72 -504 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. Mr. Dawson, in reply to Councilman Sneegas, advised that the proposed 111 miles of trails would be dedicated to the City upon completion and thus the property would be taken off the tax rolls. The City Attorney asked about the plans for the equestrian trails at the time a road is put through the area. Horst Schor, Willdan Engineering, 125 South Claudine Street, Engineer for Anaheim Hills Inc., advised the first segment of the trails will parallel Hidden Canyon Road and will be within the existing Metropolitan Water District easement; that the trail actually is physically in existence at this time because MWD has a 10-foot wide patrol road within the easement so that portion of the trail actually could be used at this time. He added that beyond the first segment, which would be beyond Serrano Avenue, they will continue to be within the MWD easement and will use the existing .patrol roads much as possible. In reply to Council questioning, Mr. Schor advised that at the present time no equestrian trails are within the Agricultural Preserve, although eventu- ally the longest proposed trail would be on the Southern California Edison easement,which is almost totally within the agricultural preserve; that only a portion of the equestrian estates project would be within the agricultural preserve. Mr. Barisic advised that the assessment district boundaries that would be presented at the public hearing, approximately parallel those of the City of Anaheim in this area;that care has been taken to assure they do not go into the agricultural preserve. He added that they hoped to eventually extend the riding and hiking trail system by extending the boundaries of the assessment district, and this then may go into land presently in the Agricultural Preserve; that a request is now before the County Planning Commission to remove a portion of that land from the Agricultural Preserve. Following discussion, Mr. Dawson advised that a proposed resolution setting public hearing on this subject, describes the boundaries of the district and that a map (Exhibit C) of the district is attached. Ed Hartnell, 1313 Candlewood Street, commented that even though the Council may eventually decide against establishing the assessment district, in his opinion approving the concept and setting public hearing would provide the Developer with a favorable sales point. RESOLUTION NO. 721-328: Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution No. 72R -328 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE FORMATION OF A MAINTENANCE DISTRICT TO BE KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS THE ANAHEIM HILLS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT IN SAID CITY; DESCRIBING THE DISTRICT TO BE BENEFITED BY SAID MAINTENANCE WORK AND TO PAY THE COSTS AND EXPENSES THEREOF; AND FIXING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS TO SAID MAINTENANCE DISTRICT. (Public Hearing, September 5, 1972, 1 :30 p.m.) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 72R -328 duly passed and adopted. RESOLU!'IO�. 72R -329 UNCLAIMED PROPERTY: Councilman Stephenson offered Reso ion No. 72R -329 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DECLARING CERTAIN UNCLAIMED PROPERTY IS NEEDED FOR PUBLIC USE AND TRANSFERRING THR.SAMB TO THE CITY PURCHASING DEPARTMENT. (property held by the Police"Dept.) City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 1, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 72R -329 duly passed and adopted RESOLUTION NO. 72R -330 WEED ASSESSMENTS: Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 72R -330 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CONFIRMING THE WRITTEN REPORT OF THE FIRE CHIEF REGARDING THE COST OF WEED ABATEMENT, AND DIRECTING THE FILING THEREOF WITH THE COUNTY OF ORANGE. Roll Call Vote: 72 -505 AYES: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No..72R -330 duly passed and adopted. WELFARE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT: The City Manager reported that notification has been received by the County of Orange that the Welfare Demonstration Project has been cancelled in view of the greater need to employ Vietnam veterans. PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM STATUS: The City Manager advised that notification has been received that commencing August 1, 1972, every effort should be made to reduce the PEP employment to the number of employees authorized by the original grant, which would be 77 persons, and thus there is a possibility this program will be discontinued. He added that at present Anaheim employs 86 under the PEP project, and it is anticipated these extra nine employees can be retained under normal attrition rates so that no layoffs will be necessary. Mr. Murdoch advised that there are several positions budgeted for this fiscal year under the PEP Program and if the program is canceled the Council then would have to make a determination as to whether those positions and the task they are performing are to be continued or the employment dropped on that basis. Personnel Director Garry McRae advised that the City's contract with the Federal Government for the PEP program expires August 26, 1972, and it is felt that by September 15, the nine employees will be integrated into regular employment through regular attrition. CODE OF ETHICS AMENDMENT: Councilman Thom distributed copies of the following proposed amendment to be included in Section 1.01.400 (g) of the Anaheim Municipal Code, the "City of Anaheim Code of Ethics for public officers and employees "No Employee serving this City in the capacity of City Manager, Assistant City Manager or Department Head shall engage in the purchase of real estate in this City, other than his own home, other than for his own personal use and enjoyment such as in the case of recreational property. Such a purchase shall be considered an act of unprofessional conduct and can be considered a conflict of interest." "This regulation recognizes that personal real estate invest- meats may prejudice or influence official actions and decisions. The employee serving in any of the afore- mentioned capacities may, in concert with the City Council, provide for a divesting of such investments prior to the acceptance of his employment or prior to any official action by the City Council that may affect such investments.? 72 -506 City Hall, ,Anaheim, ;.C,aliforn #a; COUNCIL MSS August 1, .1972, :30 P.M. Councilman Stephenson expressed the opinion -that prohibiting certain persons from purchasing property would be unconstitutional. In reply to Council questioning the City Attorney advised that he felt the right to own property is constitutional, although restrictions on that right might be possible. He sighted the similar restriction where in some cities public employees are required to be residents of the City they serve. Mr. Geisler further noted that it was his understanding the present Code of Ethic ordinance involve all employees, and thus if itwas improper for some employees to own properties the same would be true for all employees. Councilman Thom contended the wording was taken from a recently adopted City Manager's Association Code of Ethics. Councilman Pebley stated that in his past 11 years in City Govern- ment he had neither bought nor sold any property within Anaheim; that he is now planning to construct 30 small industrial buildings,and in light of the recent criticism of City Official on land purchase, he felt compelled to construct these buildings in Buena Park rather than Anaheim. There was no further discussion on the subject. BICYCLE SAFETY: Upon invitation of Councilman Pebley, Ed Hartnell, 1313 Candlewood Street, addressed the Council. Mr. Hartnell stated that as a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission he was concerned about the increase use of bicycles and the safety of the riders. He cited the recent death of a woman bicycle rider and suggested that a program of police instruction be launched on the safety rules for bicycles; that bicycle laws be enforced after a brief period of instruction through media such as the newspapers. Mr. Hartnell noted that Garden Grove recently designated certain roads as pathways for bicycle travel. Recreation Superintendent Lloyd Trapp stated that the Parks and Recreation Commission is planning to appoint a committee to study the desig- nation of bicycle trails to coincide with those setup by other cities; how- ever there has been unavoidable delay and it is hoped that this will be done shortly. The Council expressed general agreement that bicycle riders should be more aware of the safety rules, and, inasmuch as the Parks and Recreation Commission is appointing a committee to study the problem, took no action at this time. CROSGUARDS FOR SUMMER SCHOOL FRANCIS SCOTT KEY ELEMENTARY_SCHOOL: Mayor Dutton t submitted correspondence dated July 12, 1972, from Mrs. Peter Allen Benson requesting a crossing guard for the Francis Scott Key Elementary School summer session. Also submitted was report of the Traffic Engineer stating any changes in the present policy of not providing crossing guards for summer school would have to be made by determination of Council. Councilman Stephenson stated that he did not feel that any change in the policy is warrented since, if guards were to be provided for summer school, it would be proper to also provide them for parks. Councilman Sneegas stated. he felt there had to be a limit to how much protection could be provided by a city. By general Council consent it was determined the policy of not pro- viding crossing guards for summer school session would not be changed at this time. City Hall, Anaheim, California,- COUNCIL MINUTES August 1972, 1 :30 P.M. ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Pebley moved to adjourn, Councilman Stephenson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 4 :05 P.M. Signed City C erk City Hall Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES August 8, 1972, 1 :30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph B. Geisler CITY CLERK: Dene M. Daoust CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox RECREATION SUPERINTENDENT: Lloyd J. Trapp ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts 72 -507 Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Mark A. Stephenson led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Mayor introduced former Fire Chief and Mrs. Ed Stringer, attending the Council meeting. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION: Mayor Dutton read in full, and presented to retiring Disneyland Fire Chief Ben S. Meister, a resolution extending congratulations and gratitude for his services, and conveying wishes for a long, healthy and happy life of retirement. The foregoing resolution was unanimously ratified by the City Council. PROCLAMATION: Mayor Dutton presented to Buppa the Clown, a proclamation unanimously ratified by the City Council, establishing the week of August 14, .1972 as "Circus Week in Anaheim MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council Regular Meeting held July 25, 1972, were approved on motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Pebley. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Thom moved to waive the reading in full of all, ordinances and resolutions, and that consent to the waiver of reading is hereby given by all Councilmen unless, after read- ing of the title, specific request is mode by a Councilman for the reading of such ordinance or resolution. Councilman Pebley seconded the motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. REPORT FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City, in the aMount of $565,269.40, in accordance with the 1972 -73 Budget, were approved.