Loading...
1969/10/0769-599 C_~y Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 30~ 1969~ 1:30 P.M. ABSENT. COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark PRESENT' COUNCILMEN' None PRESENT: ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST: John Harding CITY CLERK' Dene MJ Williams The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Anaheim was called to order by the City Clerk~ and adjourned for lack of a quorum to the next regular meeting, October 7, 1969, 1'30 P.M. ADJOURNED: 1:35 P.M. City Clerk Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7, 1969~ 1:30 P~M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session~ PRESENT: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None PRESENT: CiTY MANAGER: Keith A~ Murdoch CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph B. Geisler CITY CLERK: Dene M~ Williams DEPUTY CITY CLERK: Alona M, Farrens CITY ENGINEER: James P~ Maddox DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Alan Orsborn ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts Mayor Clark called the meeting to order. INVOCATION' Reverend William D. Auld, of St. Paul's Presbyterian Church, gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE' Councilman Pebley led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag~ RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION: The City Council unanimously adopted a ResolU- tion of Commendation to Los Caballeros de Anaheim for their co~nunity accomplishments~ RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION: The City Council unanimously adopted a Resolu- tion of Appreciation for friendship extended by Mexico City to be taken by Mayor Clark on his forthcoming tour sponsored by the Anaheim area Visitors and Convention Bureau. MINUTES' Minutes of the Anaheim City Council meetings held September 16, 23, and 30, 1969, ~ere approved on motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Council- man Krein~ MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Pebley moved to waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions, and that consent to t~e 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 Schutte seconded the motion. MOT[iON UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED~ REPORT - FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City, in the amount of $198,658.91 for the period ending September 30, 1969, and $696,227~21, for the period ending October 7, 1969, in accordance with the 1969-70 Budge~, were approved~ 69-600 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7~ 1969~ 1:30 P.M. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1120: Initiated by the City Council to consider the establishment of a Metroport, with related facilities, on M-1 zoned property located on both the north and south sides of Oran8ewood Avenue~ between State College Boulevard and the Santa Ana River. Public Hearing was held at the meeting of July 28, 1969, at which time hearing was closed and decision on said application continued to this date to allow further Council study and investigation. The City Clerk reported that during the interim period several letters were received, all of which were duplicated and furnished to each member of the City Council; that a petition was received October 3rd and supplements added thereto, bearing a total of approximately 1,264 signa- tures which~ in brief, request that should the City Council approve the proposed Metroport, such approval be subject to a vote of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Director of Development Services, Alan Orsborn, addressed the City Council and made the following statements with regard to the subject application' In considering the establishment of a Metroport at the proposed location it was not incumbent upon the City Council to request a Condi- tional Use Permit; they could have legally considered a lease agreement with a qualified lessee for the operation of ~ Metroport at one public meeting; that it was not necessary to hold a public hearing, but because the City Council wished to extend to the public the opportunity to express themselves concerning this matter, they followed this procedure, which was commendable on their part. There can be little doubt that transportation is vital to the continued growth, development, and prosperity of any area; however, the State Department of Aeronautics to this date has not responded to the ap- plication filed in connection with the proposed establishment of a Metroport at the subject location~ A sister city has requested a hearing, which will be set some time in the future; therefore, at this time neither the Staff nor the City Council has had the benefit of knowing what decision may be made in connection with this application. Dur~[ng the interval since the public hearing many questions have been rai. sed by citizens of the City of Anaheim to which the Staff has endeavored to respond in a most frank, can- did and honest manner; however, there have been some questions raised which unfortunately could not be answered with the necessary degree of certainty. Additional research was felt to be necessary in order to answer such ques- tions, particularly in light of the fact that technology in the field of STOL Aircraft was advancing very rapidly. In view of the fact that answers to some o~ the~e questions are'not yet available, it was recommended that decision'on this matter~.be continued for a sUbstanti~l"period of tim~ Councilman Schutte called attention to a list of "Metroport Prob- lems Not Resolved," submitted by Mr. Stuart D~ Noble, which he read, as follows. Method of Noise Control 2. Accurate Noise Measurement 3. Control of Air Traffic 4. High Density of Vehicular Traffic Costs to City of Site Development 6. Angels' Position MOTION: Councilman Schutte stated he also would like answers to these questions before making a decision, and thereupon moved that action on the proposed Metroport be postponed until the meeting of June 23, 1970, at 1:30 P~M., at which time public hearing would be reopened and these questions would be discussed and the answers made available. 69-601 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7, 1969.., 1'30 PoM~ Councilman Dutton seconded the motion, observing that many people in the subject area were rightfully concerned and the City Council did not want to take any action until they have all the information on the subjec~ that can possibly be obtained. Councilman Pebley felt that such a continuance would not be fair to the proposed operator, Commuter Centers, Inc~, and further felt the matter would become a political issue if it is dontinued beyond the next MuniciPal Election. He stated that unless all five Councilmen could agree, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the proposed operation of a Metroport in the subject area was in the best interests of the City, approval should not be granted. He reported he had received over 500 letters and telphone calls in opposition to the proposal, and onlY ooe in favor. In all fairness to the proposed Lessee it was Councilman Pebley's opinion, t~at.tke appi~cation should be denied at this time, with the understanding that further investigation wo~ld continue to be con- ducted and a new application could besubm~tted a~ a future date, should the ex- isting circumstances Be altered~ Coumcilman Schutte indicated he was not ready to vote on the matter~ as he has not had sufficient time to read all the letters received or to study the many questions rai sed. Councilman Krein felt that a decision should be made at this time to deny the appllcation and if, at a later date, the weight of evidence indicates a reappraisal of the proposal there is no reason why it cannot be considered again Mayor Clark agreed that in all fairness to the pro'posed operator, the City Council should come to a decision at this time, and stated that should a new applicatlon be filed, the matter should be decided by a vote of the people, rather than by the City Council. A Roll Call Vote was requested on the Motion to continue the matter to the meeting of June 23, 1970, which failed to carry, as follows: AYES Councilmen Dutton and Schutte NOES' Councilmen Krein, Pebley and Clark RESOLUTION NO~ 69R-554· Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 69R-554 for adoption, denying Conditional Use Permit No~ 1120, without prejudice~ Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1120, WITHOUT PREJUDICE. AYES· COUNCILMEN: Krein, Pebley and Clark NOES~ COUNCILMEN: Dutton ABSTAINED. COUNCILMEN: Schutte ABSENT- COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 69R-554 duly passed and adopted~ PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1129: Submitted by Leo Freedman, to establish a church use in an existing theater structure, and to establish a structure having a height in excess of 7~5 feet, with waivers as outlined be- low~ on C-R zoned property generally located on the south side of Freedman Way, east of Harbor Boulevard,further described as the Melodyland Theater site. The following waivers were requested by the Applicant: a. Maximum height of a structure b. Minimum height of the base of a free-standing sign c. Location of a free-standing sign d. Maximum area of a free-standing sign e. Minimum number of required parking spaces 69-602 C__ity Hall~ Anaheim~ California- COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7~ 1969~ 1:30 P.M~ The City Clerk noted that waivers "a" and "e" , requested above, were withdrawn by the Applicant, and the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No~ PC69-175, granted the conditional use permit, subject, to the following conditions® 1~ That this conditional use permit is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification No. 66-67-61.(33). 2. That the sidewalks and driveways shall be repaired along Freedman Way, as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, and shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. 3. That subject property shall be developed substantially in ac- cordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim, marked Exhibit Nos~ 1, 2 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10; provided, however, that the proposed specia{ structure shail be a maximum of 75 feet in height, and that no changes to increase the seating capacity beyond the 3,270 seats are made, as stipulated to by the petitioner~ Appeal from action taken by the City Planning Commission was filed by Richard L. Weatherspoon, Attorney for the Steering Committee of the Anaheim Hotels and Motels and other interested parties~ The City Clerk also reported receipt of a petition in support of the subject application, purportedly bearing a total of 3,.516 Signatures and copies of signatures, as follows: City of Anaheim Residents - - 640 Out of Town Residents - - - 2,433 No Address Given 443 Zoning Supervisor, Charles Roberts, noted the location of the sub- iect property, the existing uses and zoning ~ the surrounding Commercial- Recreation area, and briefed the evidence submitted to and considered by the City Planning Commission. He noted that the petitioner stipulated to a maximum height of 75 feet for the proposed spire, and the present seating capacity of 3,270 would not be increased; therefore, the existing 889 park- lng spaces would be adequate to meet Code requirements of 1 space per 5 seats. c i 1. Mayor Clark. asked if the Applicant wished to address the City Coun- Mr... Odra L. Chandler, Attorney for the Applicant, indicated he would yield his opportunity to speak first, and would present his support- ing arguments in the form of rebuttal, in order to avold repetition · Mr. Richard L. Weatherspoon, Attorney, 2333 South Broadway, Santa Ana, spoke in behalf of the Steering Committee of the Anaheim Hotels and Motels and the Innkeepers Association of Orange County, representing over 75 hotels and m°tels in the Anaheim Area~ or over 4,000 rooms. He called attention to Resolutions of the two Associations he rep- resents, and another of the Directors of the Anaheim Area Visitor and Con- vention Bureau, which were made available at the City Planning Commission public hearing, and which the City Clerk confirmed had been furnished to the City Council. Mr. Weatherspoon stated that he did not invite members of the Asso- ciations ha represents to pack the Council Chambers in attempt to influence the City Council's decision,nor did he submit meaningless petitions signed by non-residents of the City in such an attempt, as he felt the determina- tion would be made using independent judgment without regard to which fac- tion occupies the majority of space in the Council Chambers. The principal objections to the land use proposed on the subject property were outlined by Mr. Weatherspoon as follows: 69- 60 i~ ~ity }{all, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7z 1~969~ 1:30 P~M. 1~ The proposed use will. not serve public necessity or convenience as well as it has in the past or could in the future: Already there are 96 churches in Anaheim~ whereas Melodyland was the only major theater in Orange County~ There are persons ready, willing and able to lease the theater from the church, or any other owner, in order to continue this entertainment and tourist attraction. In view of the population explosion, what will the Com-. mercial-Recreational Area look like in l0 years? How many tourists will be patronizing the area, and how many business con'ventions will be held here? All of these people must be fed, housed and entertained during their stay, and it does not seem to make sense to whittle away 'the heart of this Com- mercial-Recreational Area, where there is a limited amount of land available~ The church should be relocated so that Anaheim's major industry, "tourism"~ will not be jeopardized. Anaheim will have competition in the future, in view of the fact that another Disney attraction in Florida~ and a convention center in Los Angeles will soon be built. The church previously purchased an 18-acre site in East Anaheim, and they were advised by the City that the proposed land use was not appro- priate in an industrial area. The question was asked, are peripheral indus-- cries more important than tourism, when the tourist industry influences all residents of the City of Anaheim? 2~ The proposed use will adversely affect the surrounding proper- ties, in that it is incompatible with the existing uses and will destroy the homogeneity of the area: How will the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board rule in the future on the transfer of existing licenses, or the issuance of new licenses, where the Legislature, through the Business and Professional Code~ gave the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board the power to refuse licenses to businesses winhin the immediate vicinity of churches~ ~hospitals and schools. Was this not an indication by the Legislature that they wished to protect these institutions, and keep tbe'm separated from cocktail lounges? If so, who is to protect the businessman When the church is in the reverse situa- tion? Planning Commissions and City Councils, in their applications of the zoning laws, are the most obvious protection of the vested rights of the businessmen~ A church, which had full knowledge that Theater Hosts had a 25-year lease on subject property for the operation of a restaurant and cocktail lounge and had no intention of selling this lease, went ahead with the purchase of the property in a power move, apparently believing they could force out the bar and restaurant, since it could not long operate in the same building as a church if this permit is granted, the church will put an Anaheim business- man out of business.. Is this the proper use of the church's power, influence, and money? This strong pressure move by the church has done much to create the present fears of businessmen as to how the church will use their voice, zmpact and money in the area in the future. A majority of them believe these actions will adversely affect tourism, discourage new business and property development, and cause property devaluation and loss of profits, resulting in substantial tax losses which the residents and taxpayers of the City wil] have to make up,. Businessmen have relied on the zoning laws and past uses zn the area, and have invested substantial sums of money to build their busi- nesses, and these investments must be protected through the continuation of proper zoning and control of land use~ ~ The public welfare will be injured by the proposed land use: %here is no question that there will be a tax loss, because the church has an exempt status. Figures furnished by the County of Orange for the year 1969 ~ndicate that $34,583.00 in tax revenue will be lost to the County, $4,054 00 to the City of Anaheim~ These figures do not include sales tax revenues By jeopardizing the tourist industry, and by the loss of vested interests of businessmen in the area, property values will decline and further result in decrease in tax revenues. The public welfare will also be injured by the loss of a cultural and entertainment center and major tour- ist attraction. 69-604 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7, 1969~ 1:30 PoM Mr. Weatherspoon questioned the logic of three of the members of the City Planning Commission in castin$ their votes in a 6 to 0 decision to grant the requested conditional use permit. One Commissioner was said to have stated that he would vote for the church this time, but would never again oppose a bar going in next to a church~ It was felt by Mr. Weather- spoon that this would completely overturn proper zoning procedures~ Another Commissioner stated that since God created the Earth, there could be no place on earth where it was improper to worship God~ Mr~ Weatherspoon would not argue with this principle, but noted that individ- ual worship and location of a church for that purpose were two separate considerations~ Another Commissioner stated that churches and bars were located side-by-side in many of the.older cities. These cities were noted to have been developed without the benefit of master planning and'land use control; and it was noted, that thissituation is being eliminated whenever and where- ever it was possible through urban renewal, and is avoided in those cities that do have the benefit of master planning. Mr. Weatherspoon stated that the church will suffer no hardship if the application is denied,for the following reasons: The property was purchased for a '~more than reasonable considera- tion,'' as stated by the church itself; it is a good investment, whether or not it is actually used as a church~ He reported that the purchase price was approximately $1,125,000. and the taxable cash assessment value of the property is $1,544,000. He felt there were people ready, willing and able to lease the property from the church, or the church could prob- ably sell it at a profit. The church may also not be firmly committed to complete the purchase of the property, and it is possible that if it is committed the seller may not require completion of the sale. Mr. Weatherspoon posed a hypothetical question for Council con- sideration. If the conditional use permit sought today concerned an ap- plicant wishing to establish a bar at 1341 North Candlewood Street, would. the Christian Center Church, located at 1340 North Candlewood Street, or any of its members oppose such a conditional use permit? Would the Al- coholic Beverage Control Board grant a license? How would each of the Councilmen vote on such an issue? He noted that in the past many members of this Council have opposed the location of bars next to churches. Mr~ Weatherspoon stated that the business men he represents re- quest consistency in the application of zoning regulations, showing fair- ness and equal treatment for all~ An opportunity for rebuttal was requested, following the Applicant's presentation. Mayor Clark asked whether Mr. Weatherspoon was aware of any other offers for the purchase of the subject property; to which he replied that two gentlemen who have produced plays at the theater were interested in leasing the property and continuing that activity, and ~it was his opinion that the property could be'sold for a profit, in view of the price for which it was purchased by the church. Mayor Clark asked if anyone else wished to spea~ in opposition, hearing no response~ he invited the proponents to speak. Mr. Chandler addressed the City Council, stating he was represent- ing the Christian Center Church, and although he has represented the former owner, Mr. Leo Freedman, on other occasions he does not represent him in this action, Mr. Chandler stated that the problem before the City Council is one of land use and he agreed with the statement made by one of the Planning Commissioners that there was no place on the face of the earth that a man cannot worship God~ He stated that although he would prefer to keep the church out of the discussion it was not possible to do so,as people are fighting a church in a family entertainment center, and it was his belief that the image of the City of Anaheim was suffering because of this. 69-605 Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7, 1969, 1'30 P6Mo He felt that the proponents brought out only one problem having to do with land use, and that was the question of liquor licenses. The State has made stringent regulations concerning the issuance of liquor licenses; however, there is no blanket fiat which would prevent the issuance of such a license next door to a church. Mr. Chandler quoted Section 23789 of the State Code, to which Mr. Weatherspoon referred earlier, noting that renewals or transfers of ownership of On-Sale Retail Licenses cannot~be denied for the reason that the premises is located in the immediate vicinity of a church or hospital. He also noted two recent court decisions whereby the issuance of new licenses was upheld, even though the premises fell within this limi- tation. The case of Reimel vs. the Alcoholic Beverage Appeals Board in 1967 stated "merely the proximity of a store seeking issuance of a liquor license to a school or church is not, as a matter of law, good cause which will con- stitutionally sustain the denial of a liquor license~" Mr. Chandler continued, quoting another decision showing that although the Legislature has authorized denial on such a basis,good cause must be shown by substantial evidence. In the subject case a church is applying for a conditional use permit for its congregation, in an area where liquor licenses are presently allowed~ Within 600 feet of the subject property there are three establishments which hold such licenses, the Grand Hotel, Kings Row Restaurant, and the Charter House~ Mr. Chandler noted tha~ three or four years ago there was an applica- tion for a conditional use permit to allow an establishment to serve alcoholic beverages in the 400 block of North State College Boulevard. The Christian Church, at that time, filed a protest because the property was within 600 feet of the church. The Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, however, granted the license on the basis that there was already another such establishment in the immediate vicinity of the church, for which a liquor license had been issued. It is the function of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board to permit the issu- ance of liquor licenses unless granting it would cause great detriment, to the general and public welfare. It was Mr. Chandler's opinion that should this conditional use permit be granted, liquor licenses would continue to be issued in close proximity to that property. With respect to the three Resolutions submitted by the Steering Com- mittee at the time of the City Planning Commission public hearing, Mr. Chandler pointed out that the action of a particular Board of a particular organization does not necessarily express the opinion of its membership~ He read and sub- mitted the following letters welcoming the Christian Center Church to the for- mer Melodyland Theater site, and stating they have no objection to the church occupying the property. a. Letters dated August 18 and 22, 1969, from Marc Lemieux, General Manager of the Charter House Motor Hotel. b~ Letter dated September ~ 1969 from Mr. Tom Fuentes Manager of The Caravan Inn. ' , c. Letter dated August 14, 1969, from John E. McKennon, Vice-President and Managing Director of the Grand Hotel~ Mr~ Chandler noted there is no area in the City of Anaheim where a church can be established by right simply by complying with the requirements of the Building Code. He noted that a church is permitted in any zone subject to obtaining a conditional use permit. Consideration had been given to the impact on traffic, parking and property values. It was pointed out that Melody- land had 3,270 seats, and there was ample parking to accommodate that many seats. No expansion of the seating capacity was proposed by the church, and it was felt that there would be no more traffic generated by the church use than by the theater. The lease held by Theater Hosts was not felt to be relevant to the ap- plication, as it was a private matter between the original lessors and the pres- ent owners of the property to be settled by Mr. Yates and Reverend Wilkerson, and not a matter of land use. Mr. Chandler stated that he has also represented the former owner of the subject property, and prior to this transaction the last sale of property in this vicinity was property located on West Street, close to Disneyland Hotel, which sold for slightly less than $4.00 per square foot. The subject property, including the building, brought $1,150,000.00 and $150,000.00 of this was paid 69-606 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7, 1969, 1:30 P.M~ for the lease operation itself. The statement that the property could be sold for a profit was wrong° He stated that he personally tried to get others to bid on the property, but no one was interested. He reminded the Council of the difficulties faced during the last year of the theater's operation, noting it was dark the greater portion of the time, and the City threatened to revoke the theater's encroachment permit for the Harbor Bou]e- vard sign because of certain activities. During the first year of operation it was rumored that the entire investment was paid back; yet the lease was sold for only $150,000.00. The producers were practically put out of busi- ness by the people who control theatrical entertainment in the Greater Los Angeles Area~ The question under consideration was not whether the property will be used as a church or as a theater - the theater is defunct. The original investment in the building was $600,000.00~ If it is necessary to sell it, it would be possible to junk that investment by removing the building and 'trying tO find someone .to buy.~the bare land; yet they have not been successful in selling 18 acres o5 land to the east. Prior to the Chapter 11 proceedings4 he attempted to get $100,000,00 per acre for the property which was suPposedly worth $4°00 per square foot but he was unable to do so. ' Mro Chandler questioned Mr. Weatherspoon's statement that the church will not serve the public welfare, and asked whether it was meant that the church will hurt the area because those who attend the church do not drink° Mro Chandler noted that there were two other theaters in the round in Southern California which were under the same auspices as Melodyland, one of which was now a parking lot, and the other was being used as a boxing arena. He outlined Section 18.64,030 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, point- by-point, which lists the required showing for granting a conditional use permit, and made the following observations in connection thereto: a. The proposed use does require a conditional use permit~ b. As evidenced by the petitions submitted, many people come to the church from other cities. This will be good for the local economy, and many eating establishments have already felt the impact of increased business from those attending the church. c. There is nothing of an adverse nature regarding the size and ahape of the property for the proposed use. d. Traffic has already been discussed, and it was felt that it will be no problem. e. The requirement that it shall not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim was, in his opinion, the only one under which the application could be denied. The proposed use was not detrimental to the peace; and the County of Orange regulates the health standards, but regarding the safety and welfare of the public, Mr. Chandler made the following comments: He asked what is peculiar about the Disneyland area that indicates a church should not be there? The church will bring people to the area 'who ordinarily would not be there. The property will be used many days a week and will be available for convention use by churches and other organizations of which the church approves. Noting the activities aimed at youth, it was felt it would be helpful in keeping young people off the streets. As noted earlier, parking was taken care of, and he could see no reason for refusing a conditional use permit for the type of operation proposed° In connection with Mro Weatherspoon's statements regarding the businessmen's reliance on the past zoning, he pointed out that there was no such zoning on the property until recently; that originally development of the area was by use of a variance procedure. With respect to taxes, he pointed out that no matter where the church was located in the City it would have an'exempt status; and although it is claimed that the property is more valuable, no one else wants to buy it. Mr. Chandler stated he has a petition pending before the Board of Equalization to reduce the assessed valuation of the property, based upon ~9-607 Cii:}. Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7~ 1969~ 1'30 P.M. the distressed, sale and income over the past year, but he did not think it would stand. :~e agreed that there were people who would have leased the pro- perty at the right price, but the fact remains that the former owner, because of ti,~ c:conomic situation, was forced to go into a Chapter 11 proceedings, and the property was sold for what they felt to be one-half of its value. Msyor Clark asked if anyone else wished to address the City CouncJ. 1 in favor of the s~bject application. Mr. Seaiy Yates, 840 North Birch Street, Santa Ana, General Counsel for the Christian Center Church, stated he has rep~:esented the church in the acouisition of the subject property and wished to clarify the details of the. purchase. Tl-~..ere is a binding contract of sale between the church and Mr. Bumb and Mr. F~-eedman, and he has not heard any overt,.,res from either Mr. Bumb or Mr_ Freedman that they would be willing to allow the church to back out of the contract ~ In connection with Mr~ Weatherspoon's comments regarding the Theater ~losts lease he stated he personally contacted Theater Hosts' attorney prior to entering the binding agreement for the purchase of the property and was told that not only were they willing and ready to sell, but had accepted an offer to buy from someone else~ conditioned upon that person acquiring the lease, Although they stated they were ready to sell, Mr. Yates indicated he did not agree with the price asked. He stated that he was responsible for t. he fact that the Theater Hosts property still contained a bar; that he has not en- tered into any conspiracy to run any business establishment out of the City of Anaheim~ however., as attorney for the church, he had received no firm commitment to buy or lease the proper'cy although he had received many requests for the use of the p~-operty A Youth Convention is to be held in the facility in November, and over 1,600 people will be staying at the Disneyland Hotel; and the Irvine Chor~s has arranged to hold rehearsals there on Monday evenings. These uses would not be appropriate or available at the Convention Center or Melodyland, prior to acquisition of the property by the church. Councilman Pebley asked if the restaurant and cocktail lounge will. continue operations should the church be unsuccessful in buying their lease= to which Mr Yates replied that to his knowledge they have not operated since A~g~st 2nd or 3rd of this year, and the church does not intend to operate the bar. Co,~ncilman Krein felt it was odd that there was no contingency for zooming when the property was purchased, that it was his information that the property was appraised for one and one-half million dollars, and the church paid Sl,100,O00.00. He asked if the Christian Center Church would be willing to accept a temporary permit to operate, in order to allow them the opportunuty to sell the property. Mr. Yates answered that the property was purchased to be used as a church and not to make a profit; as to a temporary permit, he could not answer the q~est~on asked, but would refer it to the Board or the Pastor. Reverend Ralph Wilkerson, 4839 Circle Haven Road, Anaheim, Pastor of the Christian Center Church, stated it was impossible for the church to utilize the property for Sunday School or Church School use until remodeled~ and when this was done, it would affect the possibility of the sale of the property for other purposes. He stated that the church must have approval of the application at this time, in order to close escrow. Councilman Pebley asked whether escrow was contingent upon approw~l of the conditional use permit, or will the church have to go through with the purchase if the application is denied~ Reverend Wilkerson replied that the church is committed to purchase the property, even if the application is denied; that there is no contingency in the contract d.~e to the fact that the church is purchasing the property in bankruptcy and it could not be handled in any other way~ He stated that there will not be a theater on the premises, even if the permit is denied to the church. 69-608 City Hall, Anaheim~ California 7 CO~N~IL..MINUTES - October 7, 1969~ 1'30 P.M. Mr. Weatherspoon was offered an opportunity for rebuttal and stated that the businessmen~.] he represents do not feel they are £ighting the church; that there is no corner on piety and businessmen, are just as good Christians as anyone else; rather they were trying to determine what is the proper land use £or the subject property. With regard to the Alcoholic Beverage License cases cited by Chandler, it was noted that although the licenses could not be denied on a constitutional basis, solely because of proximity, this certainly was factor to be considered. Mr. Weatherspoon pointed out that The Caravan Inn was not one of the 75 hotels and motels which he represents, however, he was authorized by Mr. Marc Lemieux, o£ the Charter House, to relay his disillusionment with the promises of more business, and his representative was present to corroborate this statement. In answer to Council questions, Mr. Weatherspoon indicated that in four days he obtained approximately 56 signatures of businessmen in the immediate Anaheim area and he noted that the petitions Submitted in support of the subject application contained only 640 Anaheim residents, as opposed to over 3,000 people from out of the area~ He reported that Theater Hosts had a real property lease to oper- ate a restaurant and cocktail lounge on the premises and he felt that the term "liquor lease" was a bad connotation. He stated there were other people interested in purchasing the property; that Mr. Grossman indicated at the City Planning Commission hear- ing that he was trying to purchase it, and he was the author of the state- ment that the original investment was paid back in the first six months cf operation. Mr. Grossman also stated that the Carousel Theater was success- ful and was demolished and sold for reasons other than those stated, and at the Valley Music Theater shows were being produced at the present time. Mr. Zevin was negotiating for the purchase of the 16-acre parc(~l adjoining Melodyland, but broke off negotiations following the decision of the City Planning Commission. Mr. Weatherspoon felt that if the City Plann- ing Commission's decision could affect the sale of adjoining property this was proof that the proposed use would have an adverse effect on the sur- rounding area. He also felt that the impact of church-generated traffic would remain to be seen, and reminded the Council that only 600 Anaheim residents signed the supporting petition and the taxes would be paid by the total population. He noted that the Disneyland Hotel is building a new addition, and will soon be able to handle the types of conventions planned by the church. Sin. ce he was acting as spokesman for all the businessmen' he rep- resented, he noted that the Council was purposely not subjected to many letters and harassing telephone calls on their behalf. While the property occupied by the church would be tax exempt in any location, he questioned the advisability of allowing this use on land where there is such an income potential. He pointed out that the landowner, not the theater operation, entered bankruptcy. Mr. Weatherspoon stated he was confused by Mr. Yates' statement, both before the City Council and the City Planning Commission, which in- dicated he had talked to Mr. 3acob Hall, Attorney for Theater Hosts, where- as he was informed by Mr~ Hall that he had never discussed the matter with Mr. Yates. Mr. Weatherspoon doubted that anyone will make an offer for leasing or purchasing the property until the disposition of the pending application is known. He asked how long the Christian Center Church has been meeting on Monday nights at Melodyland? 69-609 City..Hal.!,~ Anahe._im_, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October .7.,.1.96.9,. 1._:_3.0 P,M. Councilman Pebley observed that the most substantial argument for granting the conditional use permit is the fact that the Charter House and Grand Hotel support the application. The City Council is concerned with the property owners who will be immediately affected. He noted the letters sub- mitted by Mr. Chandler, indicating they do not oppose the proposed church use ~ Mr. Weatherspoon replied that he believed the issue goes much deeper than that; that business in the entire area could be affected and property values could decline. He felt the two hotels favored the request in order to obtain additional business. It was noted that a representative of the Charter House Motor Hotel was present, and an invitation was extended to make a statement. Mrs. Grace Toro, Director of Sales for the Charter House Motor Hotel, stated she represented Mr. Lemieux, who told her immediately preceding this meeting that he was very disillusioned with the promises made to him, and has since questioned his approval or,the proposed use. She felt that the letter was written at a very early stage of the negotiations, and things looked dif- ferent at that time. Councilman Schutte indicated that a signed statement from Mr. Lemieux would have been preferable, and Mrs. Toro felt that he would be willing to send such a statement to the City Council, if it was considered necessary. Councilman Pebley asked if any of the other Councilmen had had an opportunity to discuss the matter with the Managers of the Grand Hotel or the Charter House Motor Hotel. Councilman Dutton stated he talked to Mr. McKennon last week, who indicated that the purchase of the property by the church had been very helpful to his business. Mr. Chandler called attention to the fact that the manager of the Charter House had filed a letter expressing no objection to the proposed church use and felt that the remarks attributed to him were inconclusive; that it was not known what promises were made although it was believed it would increase business. He reported that $210,000.00 will be forfeited by the church if the sale of the property is not concluded by the 29th of this month; and develop- ment of the church on the 18-acre parcel in the industrial area on which a deposit was made by the church was felt to be undesirable. He noted that the area surrounding the present church site at 1340 South Candlewood was primarily residential in nature, and felt that the City Council would answer the hypo- thetical question in not allowingi~'liqu~r license in a~residential.area. Mr. Chandler stated that neither Mr. Grossman nor Mr. Zevin nor any- one else made an offer to purchase the subject property; that Mr. Grossman was endeavoring to lease, and never at any time discussed the purchase of the pro- perty. The owner was forced to sell the property to the church for $1,150,000. Councilman Pebley asked what were the church's plans regarding their present location. Reverend Murray M0rf0rd, 1261 East Santa Ana Street, stated his church, which was located at 1212 East Lincoln Avenue, has contracted to buy the Chris- tian Center Church property on Candlewood, and has entered a six-month escrow, to end December 31, 1969. He stated he was in favor of the subject application and indicated he had not seen any minister or any church in Anaheim do as much for the "kids in trouble" as Reverend Wilkerson of the Anaheim Christian Center Church has done, and felt it would be an asset to the City of Anaheim to have the church in the proposed location. Mr. Weatherspoon stated that the church was suffering from a self- induced hardship and noted that land~owners.~, cannot invest money and them de- mand a variance or use permit on the basis of a hardship, and that this ruling has been upheld by the California Courts. Certain cases were cited in support of this statement. 69-610 City Hall, Anaheim, California~-.COU~..!.L. MINUTES - October .7,...!969..~ 1:30 P.M. Mr. Chandler stated that statement of Mr. Weatherspoon was cor- rect; however, he observed that many courts have helped people in trouble, and this was called equity. It was the opinion of the Mayor that sufficient evidence had been presented, and he thereupon declared the hearing closed. Councilman Dutton stated he lives in the neighborhood of the Christian Center Church and has considered them to be good neighbors. He noted that the Holiday Inn was recently developed directly across the Freeway from them, and to his knowledge, the Christian Center Church reg- istered no protest to this development. Although he was an advocate of free enterprise, he noted that the City Council has never voted to put a liquor license against a church, and in this case it is advocated that a church be put up against a liquor license. This could have an adverse effect in the future on the adjoinin8 undeveloped land, as the church may protest an application for a liquor license on that property~ The subject property may also be sold to another church at some time in the future, which may be more adamantly opposed to drinking. Councilman Dutton reported that he had gone to the Anaheim Minis- terial Association with two questions which he asked of Reverend John Rob- inson: (1) Recognizing the fact that if one church is granted permission to locate in this area the City Council could never deny another church the same privilege, Could he say whether other churches will be interested in locating there? (2) If the City Council were to change its policy of never approving a bar next to a church,would the Ministerial Association agree with the new policy allowing it? To these two questions, he stated, he received no reply. Councilman Dutton noted the Ministerial Association was opposed to hawking beer at Anaheim Stadium and successfully defended this point of view when the matter was considered. ., If the subject application was approved, it could have an adverse effect on the surrounding area, as he felt the potential developers of the adjacent property would be discouraged by the knowledge that they will have to fight the church to obtain a liquor license. If one church is approved in this area, there would be no basis upon which to deny another; and if one church is approved next to a bar, there would be no basis to deny a reverse situation, a situation which he personally did not advocate. For these reasons, Councilman Dutton stated he was opposed to granting the requested land use, noting he was sorry, but it was a self-induced hardship. Councilman Krein expressed concurrence with the statements made by Councilman Dutton and felt the church should have asked for a contin- gency to allow for proper zoning when they entered into the purchase agree- ment. Mayor Clark stated that although he regularly attends church, if his church wanted to go into Melodyland, he would advise against it. He stated he was opposed to it on the basis that this is prime recrea- tional land and there is enough land for the development of churches without locating them in the heart of the prime tourist area. He noted there were 96 churches already in existence in Anaheim, and busses pro- vide service from the Commercial-Recreational area so that the tourists can attend services of their own denomination; therefore, there is no need for them in this area. Councilman Pebley observed that for the price the church paid for the subject property he felt they could have purchased additional property in their present location. He agreed with the statements made by Councilman Dutton, and noted he has never voted to approve a bar next to a church or a school. 69-611 Ci, t.~ Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7~ 1969~ 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 69R-555: Councilman Dutton offered Resolution No. 69R-555 for adoption, denying Conditional Use Permit No. 1129. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1129. Roll Call Vote' AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Pebley and Clark NOES: COUNCILMEN: Schutte ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 69R-555 duly passed and adopted. Reverend Wilkerson requested information regarding a possible appeal of the City Council's decision, noting that the conditional use permit was granted by the City Planning Commission by a 6 to 0 vote. He stated he felt there were certain things involved that had not yet been presented that will be presenned as time permits, and asked if the matter could be placed on the Ballot. The City Attorney advised that a reclassification of property would properly be the subject of a referendum; but consideration of a conditional use permit application does not involve the adoption of an ordinance and, therefore, is not subject to either referendum or initiative proceedings. He advised that the only method of reversing the decision of the City Council in this matter would be by Court action. Reverend Wilkerson asked if this was a final action which could non be appealed in any way, to which Councilman Dutton replied he had recourse in the Civil Courts, if it is felt that the City Council has acted through cap- rice or fancy. Reverend Wilkerson indicated he felt there has been prejudice in the case. RECESS: Councilman Krein moved for a 10-minute Recess. Councilman Schutte seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (3:30 P.M.). AFTER RECESS: Mayor Clark called the meeting to order, all members of the City Council being present. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 69-70-9: Initiated by the City Planning Com- mission, to consider a change of zone from County of Orange A-l, to City of Anaheim M-l; property located on the west side of the proposed extension of Tustin Avenue (formerly Jefferson Street) north of Miraloma Avenue, and fur- ther described as the property within the Linda ViSta Annexation No. 1. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC69-186, recommended said reclassification unconditionally. Communication from the Omange County Planning Department offering "No Comment" was submitted. Mr. Roberts briefly summarized the hearing held before the City Planning Commission, advising that the parcels involved are City owned, one of which is the site of the City of Anaheim Water Reservoir and Booster Sta- tion, the other the site of a City water well. Mayor Clark asked if anyone wished to address the Council. There being no response, declared the hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 69R-556: Councilman Krein offered Resolution No. 69R-556 for adoption, authorizing the preparation of necessary ordinance, changing the zone as recommended by the City Planning Commission. 69-612 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7~ 1969~ Refer to Resolution Book. 1:30 P.M. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (69-70-9 - M-l). Roll Call Vote' AYES' COUNCILMEN. Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT' COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 69R-556 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 2733: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 2733 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (69-70-9 - M-1)~ PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 69-70-11: Initiated by the City Planning Commission, to consider a change in zone from R-A to C-l, to place an ex- isting service station in the most appropriate zone; property located at the northeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Ball Road~ The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC69-188, recommended said reclassification unconditionally. Mr. Roberts briefly reviewed the hearing held before the City Planning Commission. Mayor Clark asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no response, declared the hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 69R-557. Councilman Krein offered Resolution No. 69R-557 for adoption, authorizing preparation of necessary ordinance, changing the zone as recommended by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (69-70-11 - C-i). Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 69R-557 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 2734: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 2734 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (69-70-11 - C-1)~ PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 69-70-12: Initiated by the City Planning Commission, to consider a change of ~ne~rom County of Orange A-l, to City of Anaheim R-A, property briefly described as located northeast and northwest of the intersection of Orangethorpe Avenue and Kellogg Drive (formerly Orchard Drive) and further described as the property within the proposed Orchard-Orangethorpe Annexation. 69-613 Cit~ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7~ 1969~ 1:30 P.M4 Communication from Orange County Planning Department, offering "No C~mment" was submitted. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC69-187, recommended said reclassification unconditionally. Mr. Roberts briefly summarized the meeting held before the City Plann- ing Commissio,. Mayor Clark asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there be- ing no response, declared the hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 69R-558: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 69R-558 for adoption, authorizing preparation of necessary ordinance, changing the zone as recommended by the City Planning Commission, subject to the completion of An- nexation proceedings. Refer to Resolution Book o A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMIN- ING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (69-70- 12 - R-A). Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Du'tton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark NOES~ COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 69R-558 duly passed and adopted. SIDEWALK WAIVER: Request of Mr~ E. Bruce Kinney, on behalf of Thoro.'Bred Racing Plate Company, Inc.,5020 East La Palma Avenue, for sidewalk waiver on property fronting 5020 East La Palma Avenue, was submitted. On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Krein, tem- porary sidewslk waiver was granted, subject to no permanent planting or per- manent type improvements be permitted within the area reserved for future sidewalks, as recommended by the City Engineer. MOTION CARRIED. BUILDING CODE WAIVER: Request of Dan L~ Rowland and Associates, Incorporated, for waiver of 1967 Uniform Building Code requirement of wet standpipes in three- story buildings to apply to the proposed apartment complex to be constructed at 2175 Mallul Drive, was granted in accordance with recommendations of the Building Division of the Development Services Department and the Fire Marshal on motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Pebley. MOTION CARRIED. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 6717~ REVISION NO~2 - EXTENSION OF TIME: In accordance with request of Anacal Engineering Company, and on recommendation of the City En- gineer, one-year extension of time was granted Tentative Tract No~ 6717, Re- vision No. 2, on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Dutton. MOTION CARRIED VARIANCE NO. 2066: Request of the Decon~Corporation for six-month extension of time to complete conditions of Variance No. 2066 was submitted, together with recommendations of the City Engineer and City Planning Commission. On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Krein, six- months extension of time was granted, in accordance with recommendations of the City Planning Commission, it being understood that parking_requirements are to be in accordance with Ordinance No. 2708, effective September 20, 1969~ MOTION CARRIED. FINAL MAP - TRACT NO. 4241: Developer - E.B. Akins Company; tract located on the west side of Kellogg Drive, north of Holbrook Street, containing 104 proposed R-2-5,000 zone lots (66-67-1, Variance No. 1804, and 66-67-46). 69-614 ~Anahei~z_California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7 1969, 1:30 P.M. In accordance with recommendations of the City Engineer, Final Map of Tract No. 4241 was approved, on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Schutte. MOTION CARRIED. ORANGE COUNTY USE VARIANCE NO~ 6313' Submitted by §higeto Fukuda, requesting permission to establish a single-family residence on property briefly des- cribed as located on the south side of Orange Street~ approximately 660 feet east of Blue Gum Street. The City Planning Commission recommended said Use Variance be denied, noting basis for said recommendation. Councilman Pebley moved recommendation of the City Planning Com- mission be sustained. Councilman Dutton seconded the motion° Prior to vote on the above motion, Mr. Murdoch reported that this particular situation differs somewhat from the norm, in that the new home is projected in an area where there presently exists several small homes; that the Fukuda family have owned and farmed the approximate 5-acre parcel for several years and plan to continue this agricultural use. Mr. Roberts advised that had the City Planning Commission been aware of the circumstance~, their recommendation, in all probability would have been different~. ' At the conclusion of the discussion, Councilman Pebley withdrew the Motion, and Councilman Dutton withdrew the second thereto, it being determined by the City Council that no comment on this matter was necessary. RESOLUTION NO. 69R-559 - WORK ORDER NO. 419: Councilman Pebley offered Resolu- tion No. 69R-559 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 CONSTRUC- TION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE IMPROVEMENT OF VERMONT AVENUE, FROM APPROXIMATELY 960 FEET EAST OF DAKOTA STREET TO APPROXIMATELY 278 FEET EAST THEREOF, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 419.~ APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUC- TION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECI- FICATIONS, ETC~; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Open Bids - October 30, 1969, 2:00 P.M.). Roll Call Vote: AYES. COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark NOES- COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT. COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 69R-559 duly passed and adopted. WORK ORDER NO. 7002: In accordance with previous Council action, the following informal bids for the Walnut Canyon Channel Filtration Plant Slope and Reservoir Road Reconstruction were submitted: Matthews Company (Redlands) - Time and Material plus 7% Coxco Co. - Time and Material plus 15% Griffith Company o Time and Material plus 15% Sully Miller Construction Company - Time and Material plus 20% Mr. Maddox reported that upon investigation it was learned that the experience of the apparent low bidder, Matthews Company and also Coxco Company was that of earth moving, and due to the fact that approximately 51% of the job is concrete work,recommended the acceptance of the bid of Griffith Company as the lowest, best qualified bid, meeting specifications. 69-615 City Hall, Anahei.m,. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7~ 1969~ .1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO~ 69R-560: Councilman Krein of£ered Resolution No. 69R-560 for adoption° Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND GRIFFITH COMPANY ON A TIME AND MATERIALS BASIS PLUS FIFTEEN PERCENT (15%) OF THE ACTUAL COST AS DEFINED IN THE BID PROPOSAL FORM. (Work Order Noo 7002 - Filtration Plant Slope.) Roll Call Vote: AYES' COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT' COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 69R-560 duly passed and adopted~ RESOLUTION NO. 69R-561 - WORK ORDER NO. 570-B: Upon receipt of certification from the Director of Public Works,Councilman Dutton offered Resolution No. 69R-561 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: FURNISHING AND INSTALLING TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SAFETY LIGHTING AT THE INTERSECTION OF BROADWAY AND AGATE STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 570-B. (Steiny & Mitchel, Inc.) Roll Call Vote: AYES. COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark NOES' COUNCILMEN- None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 69R-561 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO~69R-562 - WORK ORDER NO. 1131: Upon receipt of certification from the Director of Public Works, Councilman Dutton offered Resolution Noo 69R- 562 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 COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD SEWER IMPROVEMENT, FROM APPROXIMATELY 36 FEET EAST OF SOLOMON DRIVE TO APPROXIMATELY 984 FEET EAST THEREOF, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NOo 1311. (Lynam- Wood Construction, Incv) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte~ Pebley and Clark NOES' COUNCILMEN' None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution Noo 69R-562 duly passed and adopted° 69-616 City Mall,_ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7~ 1969, 1~30 P~M. DEEDS OF EASEMENT: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution Nos~ 69R-563 to 69R- 567, both inclusive, for adoption~ Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 69R~563: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING AN EASEMENT GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR AN EASEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE OF A WATER LINE, IN- CLUDING A WATER METER. (Dunn Properties Corporation) RESOLUTION NO. 69R-564: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING AN EASEMENT GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR AN EASEMENT FOR INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF POLES AND ELECTRICAL POWER LINES. (Dunn Properties Corporation) RESOLUTION NO. 69R-565: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING EASEMENT GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES. (Gene E. Carson) RESOLUTION NO~ 69R-566: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING AN EASEMENT GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES. (Barclays Bank of California) RESOLUTION NO~ 69R-567: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING EASEMENT GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES. (Crystal Disposal Manufacturing, Inc., doing business as Anaheim Manufac- turing Company) Roll Call Vote~ AYES' COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark NOES' COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos° 69R-563 to 69R-567, both in- clusive, duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 69R-568' Councilman Dutton offered Resolution No. 69R-568 for adoption~ Refer to Resolution Book~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A QUITCLAIM DEED REMISING, RELEASING AND QUIT- CLAIMING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN CONNECTION WITH AN ABANDONED WELL. (Jerry V. Maler, et al) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark NOES- COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 69R-568 duly passed and adoptcd~ PURCHASE - 1,400 GALLON USED FUEL TANKER: In accordance with the recommendations of 'the City Manager and Mechanical ~aintenance Superintendent, purchase of used fuel tanker from Humble Oil Company, in the amount of $3,200~00, plus tax, was authorized on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Krein. MOTION CARRIED. CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Council- man Schutte, the following claims were denied and ordered referred to the insurance carrier- a. Pacific Telephone and Telegraph - Setting forth actual amount of damage purportedly sustained to two cables on Brookhurst Street, south of Ball Road, on or about May 2, 1969, resulting from puncture by City Water Division~ 69-617 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7~ 1969~ 1:30 P.M. b. Raymond K. Clark - property damage resulting from power failure on or about September 4, 1969. c. Mrs. Lillian L. Cormtne~, on behalf of Cynthia iLu~ Webber - personal injury resulting from stepping on broken bottle at Anaheim Stadium, August 15, 1969. d. Verna Lemacks - property damage to truck and camper parked in main- tenance area at the Convention Center, September 3, 1969. e. Michael J. Naughton, Attorney, on behalf of Lehman Plummer - per- sonal injuries sustained on or about June 21, 1969, from fall from platform at Convention Center. MOTION CARRIED. APPLICATION TO PRESENT LATE CLAIM - WILLIAM E. DANNEMEYER~ ATTORNEY~ ON BEHALF OF ROBERT ROSS SKILLINGS: It was moved by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Schutte, that application for leave to present late claim be denied on the grounds that neither the application nor the declaration of support thereof indicates that the disability was such as to prevent the filing of the claim within the statutory period. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 69R-569: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 69R-569 for adop- tion. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE OF STATE HIGHWAY IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT' COUNCILMEN' None The Mayor declared Resolutiom No. 69R-569 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 69R-570' Councilman Dutton offered Ra$olution No. 69R-570 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND AUTHOR- IZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT EMPLOYING DAMES & MOORE TO PROVIDE GEO- LOGICAL INSPECTION AND CONSULTATION SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH THE RECON- STRUCTION OF THE SLOPE AT THE LENAIN FILTER PLANT IN THE WALNUT CANYON RESER- VOIR. Roll Call Vote: AYES' COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT' COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No, 69R-570 duly passed and adopted. C0RRE§P0NDENCE: Th~ following correspondence was ordered received and filed, on motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Schutte: ao City of Seal Beach Resolution No. 1806 - Requesting the Resolu- tion Committee of the League of California Cities~.to oppose by Resolution,~any Change in curren~ tax exemptiQn on State,and Local Government bond.~i~terest. b. City of Westminster Resolution No. 1148 - Urging the President and the Congress of the United States and all courts to take steps to assure freedom of religion. c. City of Stan~0n Resolution No. 855 - Urging expediency of Corps of Engineers work in the Santa Ana River. 69-618 City Hall~ Anaheim,. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 7,. 1969~ 1:30 P.M. d. Before the Public Utilities Commission - Application of Ana- heim Jitney Systems for certificate of public convenience and necessity.- notice of hearing October 24, 1969. e. Before the Public Utilities Commission - Applidation of Douglas Bus Lines, Inc., to extend service area - Opinion and Order granting Cer- tificate. f. Before the Public Utilities Commission - Application of Valen Parking Management, Inc., for Certificate of Public Convenience and Neces- sity - notice of hearing, October 28, 1969. g. Minutes - Anaheim Public Library Board, August 18, 1969. MOTION CARRIED. ORDINANCE NO. 2732' Councilman Pebley offered Ordinance No. 2732 for adoption. Refer to OrdinanCe Book.~ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (63-64-62(9) - R-3). Roll Call Vote: AYES' COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein~ Schutte, Pebley and Clark NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 2732 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 2735. Councilman Krein offered Ordinance No. 2735 for first reading. 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 (Western Avenue, on both sides, from the North City Limits to Lincoln Avenue~- No Parking at Any Time) ORDINANCE NO. 2736: Councilman Schutte offered Ordinance No. 2736 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.40, SECTION 14.40.060 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO SPEED LIMITS. (Thirty-five Miles Per Hour - Acacia Street, between North City Limits and La Palma Avenue.) ORDINANCE NO. 2737: Councilman Schutte offered Ordinance No. 2737 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (68-69-80 - C-l) ORDINANCE NO. 2738. Councilman Clark offered Ordinance No. 2738 for first readings. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (66-67-64(6) - M-l) ORDINANCE NO. 2739: Councilman Krein offered Ordinance No. 2739 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (65-66-24(11) - M-l) ORDINANCE NO. 2740: Councilman Pebley offered Ordinance No, 2740 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (67-68-47(2) - R-2-5,000 Tract No 5751) ' - 69-619 City Hall, Anaheim ....Ca, l.ifo.rnia- COUNCIL MI~NUTE, S - Oc,.t,,ob,,.e,.r 7, 196,9,~, 1:30 P.M. ORDINANCE NO. 2741: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 2741 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (68-69-69 - C-O) ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE APPLICATIONS: The following applications were submitted for Council information' a. 1201 West Lincoln Avenue - Billito's - New On-Sale Beer and Wine (Bona Fide Eating Place). Applicant: William Edwin Hatcher and Gloria Alicia Hatcher. b. 2950 West Ball Road - Michael's Markets, Inc. - Off-Sale Beer and Wine, Person-to-Person Transfer - Applicant: Wesley J. Morgan, Sec.-Treas. c. 710 East Katella Avenue - Captain Jack - On-Sale General (Bona Fide Eating Place), Person-to-Person Transfer. Applicant: Jack Warren Haley. d. (Un-named) - 79 ft. west of Syracuse and 81 ft, north of Lincoln Avenue - Off-Sale General, Original Transaction. Applicants: William Raymond Whitla and Walter Joseph Bonomo. No Council action was taken on the above applications. ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE APPLICATION: On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Schutte, conditional protest on the basis of zoning was autho::- ized on application for On-Sale Beer License, submitted by Panchito's Taco House, inc., for premises located at 210 South State College Boulevard. MOTION CARRIED. ~ALLOWEEN £ES'7"~Vz:~L - BUSINESS LICENSES' Communication from Robert J. Hutchison, President, 1969 Board of Governors, Annual Halloween Festival, was submitted, requesting that issuance of permits to outside commercial vendors heretofore doing business during the Annual Halloween Parade and. Festival be eliminated, and that such activity this year (October 31 and November 1, 1969) be limited to the various groups from local schools. Said reqt.~est was granted on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Co'~:~-'~ciirna~t~ Schutte, and the City Attorney was requested to prepare neces- sary ordi_~.~ance accordingly, to apply to forthcoming Halloween Festivals. Mol' 10~ ~ARR~D CONCRESS OF CITIliS - DELEGATES: On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Coun- ci!man Dutton, Mayor Clark was named Voting Delegate, and Mayor Pro-Tem A.J. Schutte was named Alternate Voting Delegate to the 46th Annual Congress of ~ities to be held in San Diego on December 1 - 5, 1969. MOTION CARRIED. Ai~AHEIM STADIUM - BAND FESTIVAL: Agreement entered into September 23, 1969, by Anaheim Union High School Dlgt~ct and T.F. Liegler, on behalf of the City, for use of the Anaheim Stadium on October 15, 1969, on the same terms and conditions as agreement of 1968 was ratified by the City Council on motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Krein. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 69R-571: Councilman Krein offered Resolution No. 69R-571 for ado'o- tion. Refer t:~ Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO EXECUTE AND THEREBY SIGN ON BEHALF OF THE CITY ANY RELEASE AND/OR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS INVOLVING A CLAIM OR RIGHT BY THE CITY WHEREIN THE ORiGINAl. AMOUNT OF SAID CLAIM OR RIGHT IS $2,500.00 OR LESS. Roll Call Vote' AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Pebley and Clark NOES' COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 69R-571 duly passed and adopted. 69-620 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 'l~ 1969~ 1'30 PERMISSION TO LEAVE THE STATE - MAYOR CLARK: On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Dutton, Mayor Clark was granted permission to leave the State for a period of 90 days. MOTION CARRIED. PERMISSION TO LEAVE THE STATE - COUNCILMAN KREIN' On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Dutton, Councilman Krein was granted permission to leave the State for a period of 90 days. MOTION CARRIED. COMMENDATION - TOM LIEGLER: On motion by Councilman Schutte, seconded by Court- cXlman Krein, Mr Tom Liegler was commended on the efforts put forth in the recent successful B~lly Graham Crusade. MOTION CARRIED. RECESS - EXECUTIVE SESSION' At the request of the City Manager, and on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Schutte, the City Council re- cessed to Executive Session for the purpose of receiving the City Manager's report on meeting and conferring sessions of the various employee organi- zations MOTION CARRiED~ (4:25 P~M.) ADJOURNMENT' The City Council returned from Executive Sesszon and adjourned on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Schutte, MOTION' CARRIED. ADJOURNED: 5:2!% P.M.. City Clerk City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 14~ 19697 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Schutte, Pebley and Clark ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Krein PRESENT: ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Robert M. Davis ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts CITY CLERK: Dene M. Williams CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Ronald Thompson ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF: James Heying Mayor Clark called the meeting to order. INVOCATION: Dr. George Raun, of the first United Methodist Church gave the Invocation. ' FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Schutte led the Assembly in the Pledge of Alle- giance to the Flag. PROCLAMATION: Mayor Clark proclaimed the Week of October 27, 1969 as "Halloween Week In Anaheim." HALLOWEEN FESTIVAL TEEN DANCE: Request of the 46th Annual Halloween Fes- tival Board of Governors for permission to conduct a dance for Junior and Senior High School students, on Saturday, November 1, 1969, at the La Palma Stadium, 10'00 P.M. to 12:00 Midnight, was approved on motion by Councilman Schutte, seconded by Coun- cilman Dutton. MOTION CARRIED.