1964/01/217419
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 14~ 1964~ 1:30
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton~ Chandler, Schutte, Krein and Coons
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
Mayor Coons declared the foregoing MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
PROCLAMATION - ANGE.~ DAY IN.ORANGE COUNTY: Mayor Coons read Proclamation declar-
ing Thursday, January 30th, 1964, "Angel Day in Orange County".
Said Proclamation was unanimously ratified by the City Council,
on motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Chandler. MOTION
CARRIED.
AGREEMENT~ CITY OF ORANGE - WATER SERVI~S: The City Attorney reported on
negotiations between the City of Anaheim and the City of Orange, to sell
20% of the capacity rights in the city's 16-inch water lines iTM the
Peralta Hills area, and also to sell water on a temporary basis to the
City of Orange, to serve a Lusk Subdivision in their area.
On motion by Councilman $chutte, seconded by Councilman Krein,
the City Attorney was authorized to prepare necessary documents in accord-
ance with the terms outlined~ subject to the condition that the sale of
water would be for a period ending January 1st, 1966. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Krein moved to adjourn, Councilman $chutte seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNED: 10:25 P.M.
Clerk
City Hall~ Anaheim~ Califo~.nia - COUNCIL MINUTES .- January 21~ 1964~ 1:30 P.Mo
The City Council of ~the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT~
PRESENT:
COUNCiLMEN~ Dut-ton, Chandler~ Schut~te, Krein and Coons°
COUNCILMEN: None.
CITY MANAGER~ Keith A. Murdocho
CITY ATTORNEY; Joseph Geisler~
CiTY CLERK: Dene M~ ~illiamso
CITY ENGINEER~ J'ames P. Maddox~
ZONING COORDiNATOR~ Martin Kreidt~
A$$iSTAN! PLANNER~ Marvin Krieger.
WATER DIVISION SUPERINTENDENT: Gus Lenaino
Mayor Coons called the meeting to order.
MINUTES: On mo~ion by Councilman Krein, seconded by Councilman Du{ton, minu~es
of the Anaheim City Council meetings held December 2~, and 31~ 1963, and
January 7, 1964~ ~ere approved~ MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 64R-24: Pursuant to Resolution No. 63R-864, approving and
authorizing the execution of an agreemen~ be'[ween hhe City of Anaheim and
Southern California Edison Company, relating to acquisition of Edison
Company facilities by Eminen~ Domain~ Condemnahion No. 3, Councilman Du±lon
offered Resolution No. 64R~24 for adoptlon~
Refer to Resolution Book
7420
C..ity Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Januar¥ 21~ 1964~ 1.:SQ
A RESOLUTION OF 'THE CITY COUNCIL O? THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
COMPROMISE OF CERTAIN EMINENT DOMAIN LITIGAIION. (Southern California
Edison Company~ Condemnation No.
On roll call the foregoing Resolution No. 64R-24 was duly passed
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN~ Dutton, Chandler~ Schutte~ Kreln and Coons
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 64R-24 duly passed and adopted.
SIDEWALK WAIVER .- 525 SOUTH WEST STREET: Request of Warren L. Schutz~ Attorney
representing H. H. Bruns~ for waiver of sidewalk requirement at 525 South
West S'treet~ was submitted together with report from City 5ngineer~ re-
commending denial of ~ald ~eques'[ based on consideration of the following
factors:
1o One elementary school approximately 500~ W/o subject
property~ one elementary school approximately 900"
E/o subject propert¥~
2~ Sidewalks are existing along the east side of West Street
and along 'the north side of San~a Ana Street, west of West
Street° the Church on Santa Aha Street adjoinin9 subject
property to the north has existing walk along Santa Aha Street.
3~ This area is presently fringed ~ith R-3 developments
on the no=th side of Santa Ana Street and a portion
of the rema;inder is potential R-3. It is expected that
pedestrian traffic will increase as developments occur
in the area~
Mr. Schutz addressed the Council asking how a waiver of side-
walks on the west side of West Street between Water and Santa Aaa Streets~
where there are no existing sidewalks, would affect schools to the east
and west or a church ~hich faces Santa Aaa Street. He felt that most of
the factors mention would affect east-west pedestrian traffic more than
north-south in front of subject property~ .
:oun:::ilman K:'ein moved that temporar7 waiver of sidewalk re-
quirement ne granted~ to be in:~talled '~Don demand by the City; and that
the ,City Engineer in'Testlgate to determine existing conditions of possi-
ble sidewalk waivez~ ~cu'L~ of ~ul _iect p~:operty~ Cot~n,:~i].man Scbutte second-
ed the motion,~ MOT[ON CARR2ED.
SERVICE STATION STANDARDS~ Pub~i.r hearing to consider proposed amendment to
Title 18~ Chapter 18008, "Definitiont~"~ Chapter t8,40, "G-l, Neighborhood
Commercial Zone'"'; Chap±er 18,48, '"C~3:, Heavv Commercial Zone"~ Chapter
:.8,,64~ ?'~Co:~di'ti. ona! O::~e_~"~ of the Anaheim Muncipal Code~ and the adop-
"ion of Servi~: ot.::.t~on Minimum Slte Development Standards~ was held
September 3~ 196'3~, and continued to September 24~ 1963~ December 3~ 1963,
and ~fanuazy 14, 1964~, at whi(h t~me s~id hearing was closed~ and Council
action deferred to thi~ date.~
Mro Murdocn :'epo::ted on a city-wide survey, conducted by staff
personnel on ..;anuaz,¥ 20:, 1964~ and ~ubmitted oho±os of various service
stations which a~-e rental agen:ties fo: trailers~ showin9 trailer storage
the properties: He ~ubmltted and teac recommenOation for amendment
to the last three sentences o¢ the "definition" as proposed by the City
Plannin9 Commission as follows:
.... No used o~- dis~.:az'ded au'tomotlve parts or equipment or per-
manen±ly disabled~ junk, cz wrecked vehi~:les shall be located outside
the service station building except wlthin an enclosed trash storage
area° The rental of a maximum of i0 automobileo and/or trailers is per-
mitted~ provided thaz ~aid trailers shall be backed up against a 6-foot solid
mason~y wall ano ~u~ther pzo~ided that ~n¥ ~ervi::e station site located with-
~n ~5-feet of any R-E? R-O, R-l, R~2~ or R-3 Zone shall be limited to the
7421
~ity Hall~ Anaheim~ California ~. COONGIL MINUTES - lanuary 21~ 1964~ 1:30 P.M.
rental of a maximum of flve two,-wheel~ uncovered utility trailers, provided
that said trailers shall be backed up agains't a 6.-foot solid masonry wall.
All painting, body and fender repair, tire recapping, and 'the rental of other
heavy equipment and the sale and rental of other merchandise~ other than
specified above~ is excluded~ Other uses if permitted in the zone where the
Automobile Service Station in located may be conducted in conjunction with
an automobile service station unless otherwise prohibited~ and subject to
the limitations of said zone~
Council discussion was held and consideration given to the wall
requirement~ and de~Eignation of trailers permitted, and the second sentence
of said recommendation further changed to read:
~The storage of ,a maximum number of ten rental 'trailers is per-
mitred, provided tha~ said ~railers shall be backed up against a 6-foot
solid masonry wall and further provided 'that any service station site
located wi~hln 75~-feet of any R-E~ R,~O~ R-i~ R-2~ or R-3 Zone shall be
limited to the storage of a maxlmum of fiv~ two-wheel, uncovered utility
rental trailers~ provided that said trailers shall be backed up against a
6-foot solid masonrf wallo~'
At 'the conclusion of the discussion~ Councilman Krein moved
that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare necessary ordinance amend-
ing the Anaheim Muncipal Code~ and necessary resolution adopting Service
Station Minimum Si're Development Standards in accordance with City Planning
Commission recommendation~ wlth exceptions noted January 14~ 1964, and
this date,~ Councilman Schutte seconded the motiono MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 64R-25~ Council. man $chutte offered Resolution No~ 64R-25 for
adoption~
Refer to Resolution Book,
A RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY COONC[L OF THE C!Ff OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT FOR THE $ALE OF WATER AND WATER-CARRYING
CAPACITY RIGHTS IN A CERTAZN WATER TRANSMISSION LINE 'TO THE CITY OF ORANGE.
On roi1 c~ll 'the foregoing ze?~olution was duly passed and
adopted by 'the following 'vo'te~
.AYES: COO'NCiLMEN:< Dutton, Chandler~ Schut'te~ Krein and Coons
NOE$: COONC i LMEN ~ No ne
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayoz dec,lazed Re~olution No. 64R.,-25 duly passed and adopted~
PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT .- BUDGET~ On motion by Councilman Chandler~ seconded
by Councilman Krein, the Budget of the Park and Recreation Department was ex-
tended to lnclude payment for luncheons for the Park and Recreation Commis-
sioners ~nd Staff at 'the monthl'y Park and Recreation Commission meeting~ funds
for the current yea~ to be provided from the Council Contingency Fund. MOTION
CARRIED.
SIGN REQUEST.~ BALLARD MOTORS~ Application suOmit'ted by Ballard Motors request-
ing permission to erect a non-conforming sign (2~-~foot 6-inch projection) at
1325 North Lemon Stree't~ together with plans and reports from the Building
and Planning Department~ were reviewed by the City Council°
~ Arnold Vang~ of F~doral Sign and Signal, addressed {he Cl{y
Council advisin9 of a need fora sign to direct Lemon Street traffic
through the entrance° He called at't~ntion to the approximately 400~oot
frontage of the property along Lemon Street~ and noted that the existing
free-s'tanding sign at the north side of the property was oriented to
attract freev;a~ traffic, ~s v'~ell ~s Le~pon Street
Council discussion was heid~ and it was noted that subject pro-
perty contains a used car sale lot~ ~n addition to a new car a~ency.
On motion by Councilman Chandler~ seconded by Councilman Dutton,
said sign permit was granted with the provision that there be no projection
over the property line~ To this motion Councilman Coons voted 'No". MOTION
CARRIED.
7422
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California .~ COUNCIL MiiNUTES .-January 21~ 1964~ 1~30 P.M.
SIGN REQUEST - CARL~S JR.: Appl'ication submitted by Carl~s Jr. requesting
permission to erect a non~-~onforming ~ign at the southeast corner of
Dale and Lincoln Avenues, was reviewed by the City Council together with
plans and reports from Buiid:~ng and Planning Departments.
On motion by Councilman Schut'te, seconded by Councilman Krein,
said sign permit wa~ gzanted~ provided that the lighting be directed so
as not to reflect into 'the trailer pa~k to the south. MOTION CARRIED.
CONDiTiONAL USE PERMIT NO~, 378 - RECONSIDERAIiON: Communication dated January
9, 1964, from V~ B~ Wbite~ agent for the owners of property described in
Conditional Use Permit No~ 3'78~ requesting reconsideration of said Condi-
tional Use Permit, wa:s submittedo
Mr, Harry Knisei7, Attorney for Mrs° White, reported that with
the assistance of the Planning Staff and neighbors in the area, the plans
have been .changed in an effort to make them acceptable, In his opinion
the purpose of 'the letter was to determine the most expeditious procedure
for a re-hearing on this application~
Discussion was held by the City Council~ and it was noted that
the 6-months period for re-filing application on the same property has
expired~
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Krein,
request to reconsider. Conditional Use Permit No° 378 was denied as plan
now proposed was an entirely new ~oncept~ and Mr~ Knisely was advised to
file a new appli~:ation ~ith the $ity Planning Commission~ MOTION CARRIED.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOo 265- REVISED PLANS: Revised plans submitted by
Fred Rochlin in ~onnection with Conditional Use Permit No. 265, were
reviewed by the City Council, together with report from Planning Depart-
ment - Development Review°
Mro Ac L~ Wolfert, 3404 West Ball Road, owner of adjacent pro-
perty to the west, asked whether a wall would be required along the west
side of subject property~
Mro Woifert was advised that the revised plans as amended show
a six foot wall o} fen<:~e along the west property line.
On ~otlon by Coun~::;llman Dutton~ ~!,ec~onded by Councilman $chutte~
revised plans marked Exhlb:t 1 and 2,, Revision No. 1, be approved as
amended in red and }e~ommenaed by the Planning Department - Development
Review~ MOriON CARR. i:ED,,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO~ 328 - REQUEST FOR SEWER SERVICE: Communication
dated .January 8th, 196A~ f:rom Nat Neff Engineerin9 Company~ was submitted
and reviewed, together ~ith ::epcot f~om the City Engineer, requesting the
City of AnaheLm fo:rm.--~lly ~equest the City of Buena Park serve sewer and
drainage to property desc:rtbed in Conditional Use Permit No. 328°
On motLon by Soun.::~lm::~n C?'andler, seconded by Councilman Dutton,
.request to the City of Buens Park to ~!~erve sewer and drainage services
to said property wa:~ made in a~,:;ordanee with recommendations of the City
Engineer° MOTION CARR':TED~
SPECIAL USE PERMIT NO~ 88 .- EXTENSION OF TIME: Request of Lev and Lyon dated
December 30~ 1963~ wa~ submitted for additional one year extension to
:Special Use Permit No~ 88 and to the bond posted to guarantee completion
of required ~treet :imp}:ovement:s~ togethe~ with report of City Engineer.
On mo'tion by Coun~:.ilman Chandler~ seconded by Councilman
Schutte, one year extension of time was granted to bond filed~ and one
year extension of t:tme to Speclal Use Permit NOd 88 granted~ in so
far as the City Attorney <~an determine as :in accordance with the facts
existing a% the timeo MOT~iON CARRIED~
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES -January 21~ 1964~ 1:30 P.M.
.~ARIANCE NO 1611 - CLARIFiCATiON: Communication dated December 31, 1963, from
W. Eo Bouck~ Jr,~ on behalf of the petitioners, requesting clarification
of Condition No, 5, City Planning Commission's Resolution No. 985, Series
1963-64, and requesting temporary waiver of Items No. 2 and No. 3 of said
resolution~ was submitted and reviewed by the City Goun¢ll~ together with
report from 'the City Engineer°
Councilman Chandler moved that temporary waiver of street improve-
ments (Condition No~ 2[! be granted ~ubject to posting a two-year bond there-
for and that request for waiver, of ~treet lighting payment (Condition No. 3)
be denied. MOTION CARR!ED,~
Mr. William Bouck requested information as to the ~ype of bond
required and also requested fuzthe~ ~onsideration on Condition No. 3 per-
taining to street light payment° He reported that a street light payment
was refunded to the owner of proper'ty adjacent to subject property°
After first recess~ City Manager reported several actions have
been taken in this area on street improvements as well as street lighting,
and suggested 'the matter be deferred one week to allow further investigation.
Councilman Chandler moved tNe motion be reconsidered, Councilman
Dutton seconded the motiono MOTION CARRiED~
Councilman Chandler moved the action be tabled until the next
meeting (January 28, 1964~ 1:30 PoM~) Councilman Dutton seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED°
REQUEST - iNSTALLATION AND 'USE OF PORTABLE BUILDING (CONDiIIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
~36): Request submitted by Dr~ R~ £~ Hook~ Pastor of Grace Baptist Church, to
permit installation an~ temporary u~e of a portable mission building on
property described lin Conditional Use Permit No. 136~ was reviewed by the
City Council together wi~th pians~ photo of said building~ and report from
the Planning Department .- Development Reviewo
Dr~ Hook addressed 'the Council reporting that the building will be
used for temporary Sunday S~bool and reclreational facilities~ for a period
of approximately two year~, until the permanent buildin9 is constructed, and
that .~ald building ha:~ been used only a~-~ a demonstration modelo He reported
on the construction of the portable buildin9 and further advised the provi-
sion for restroom facliitie~ would not be necessary because of the close
proximity of another-building :~onta.[nLng these facilitieso
On motion by Councilman Chandler, seconded by Councilman $chutte,
said request was granted for a perlod of two years~ subject 'to compliance
with the electrical, heatlng and plumbing codes~ and further subject to pro-
vision that there be a minimum of 20-feet between the portable building and
any other building on the property~ and that the building be placed a mini-
mum of 40-feet from any property line.~ MOtION GARRIED~
Dro Hook expressed ~zs appreciation to the City Council and city
departments for the cooperation and a~,~sistanoe to them during the planning
and construction of their fellow:~hip hall.~
R~QUEST - USE OF TRAILER AS tEMPORARY OFFiCE~ Communication dated January 6, 1964,
from Newman Associates~ reque~ting permi$~ion to install and use trailer as a
temporary office~ to be flanked by two billboard-size signs and fronted by
black-topped sur~a¢~ ar~a, was submit{ed and reviewed by the City Council,
together with pict plan of proposed commercial and apartment development, and
an over-lay illustrating the location of the trailer~
~lro Murdoch reported that no land use permit has been filed with the
City for development of the property as shown on plot plan submitted, and ad-
vised that Reclassification No, 56-57-39 for C,-1 and C-3 Zoning is presently
pending on said property, whi~h is located at the southwest corner of Lincoln
and Euclid.
Mr~ Robert grindle~ representin9 Newman Associates~ leasing agents
for the property, submitted photo of the 'trailer to be used and advised that
they were attemptin9 to develop the property <:ommercially as original1Y in-
tended~ He further advised 'that their request is to facilitate the leasing
7424
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL M,iiNU'TES - January 21~ 1964~ 1:30
activities~ and appli::ations for rezoning and Conditional. Use Permit will
be filed within 30 to 60 day~, Further Zt is estimated development will
take approximately 18 re. on'tbs,,
On motion by Coun::~lman S~:hutte~ ~econded by Councilman Dutton,
said request was granted for a period of six months, Io this motion
Councilman Chandler voted '"No~"~ MO~iON CARRIED,
RECESS: Councilman Chandler mo',zed for a f:tfteen mlnute recess. Councilman
Dutton seconded the motion, MOTION CARRiED, (',3~40
AFTER RECESS: Ma¥o~ Coons :,:ailed the meeting to order~ ali members of the
Council being present~
REQUEST - WAIVER OF LICENSE FEE~ Reque.~t of Lou A. Francis, President of the
Anaheim .Junior Chamber of Commerce, dated .ianuary 6, 1964, for waiver of
license fees and pezmission to conduct a c~zcu$ at the corner of Lincoln
Avenue and Muller Street~ March 21 and 22, 1964, was submit'ted~
Mr. Fran¢i,~, i253 Bluegrass Street~ addressed the Council re-
porting that the King Bro$~ Circus 15 the second largest, three-ring
tent circus in the United States, and that funds derived from a per-
centage from the ticke~ sales will go to the Junior Chamber of Commerce
for their handicapped children fund~
In answer to Coun::il questionlng,~ Mr, Francis advised that
none of the money z.e:eived by the organization will be used for their
treasury or prog.~am expenoes; howevet~ a portion will be used for their
Thanksgiving and Ch~t~tma~i, hat. it~bie a,~,:ttvities~ Further~ any fees or
licenses charged by the City would have to be paid by the Junior Chamber
of Commer<e~ thereby reducing their p.rofi't~
3oun<:ilman Krein moved it be the finding of the City Council
that the ~eque{t is fo~ a fund-~:aising activity for charitable purposes,
,and that pezmi~:~ton to condu<t a ,:ir,~u:~o ,and 'waiver of license fees only
be granted~ :Soun,~ iimi~n S,.'hutte :~e onded the mo'tion, MOTION CARRIED.
FINAL MAP,~ TRACt NO, 5345: JESP .Enterpz:'i:~.~es, Developer; 'Tract located on the
west side of Sunkist Street., 396 feet ~outh of South Street, and con-
tain.,:~ 12 R-1 iots~,
The City Eng:~neer. z. epo:rted :~aid final map conforms substan-
tially with tentative map previousi¥ amended and approved, that bond
has been posted and requ:i:/ed fees paid, and recommended approval thereof.
On the re,ommendatzons of the City Engineer, Councilman Dutton
moved final, map~ '[ra t No,, 5345~ be approved~ subject to approval of the
bond by the City Attorney,s, CounJ~ilman Schutte seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRiED~,
RECLASSIFiCATiON NO. 60-61-82 {VARIANCE NO~ 1348): Mr. Marvin Krieger reported
on a matter regarding Re~ia~sification No. 60-61-82 and Variance No, 1348,
wherein waiver of one-~:~tory height l~mitation within 150-feet of R-1
property, was den~ed~ Subsequently revised plan was submitted, indicating
two-story oonstructton:, and approved by the City Council. The two-story
construction was over-looked in the Planning Department - Development
Review of the revised plan~ and notation thereof omitted from report.
Mr. Harry Knzsely:, Agent for the petitioners, was present and
advised they wou[a be agreeable to one-sto~y construction within 150-feet
of the adjacent property to the north.
No further action was taken by the City Council,
R-3 ZONING - iN!YIA.[ED BY City COUNCIL: On motion by Councilman Chandler,
seconded by Councilman Schutte, the City Council instigated action for
R-3 Zoning on the property adjacent to the west~ to property described
in Reclassification No,, 60-61-82~ and in accordance with the General
Plan~ and the City Planning Com~niss:on was directed to hold necessary
hearings thereon, YOT'ON CARRIED.
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - CO'ONC..IL MINUTES - )~anuary 21~ .19649 1;30 P.M.
ORANGE COUNTY USE VARIANCE NO. 5287: Requesting stablishment of a nine hole,
three par golf course and pro shop in the E-1 Estates District, located on
the southeasterly corner of Santa Aha Canyon Road and Peralta Hills Drive.
Mr. Martin Kreidt read excerpt from the minutes of the City
Planning Commission meetin9 held January 20th~ 1964, recommending to the
City Council that the Orange County Planning Commission consider certain
factors at their public hearing on said Use Varianceo
At the conclu:sion of Councii discussion~ no action was taken by
the City Council~
CITY HALL RESTROOM ADDITION: The City Manager reported that'no bids were re-
ceived for the addition of res/room facilities for the City Hall, Job No.
692.
Discussion was held by the City Council, City Manager and City
Attorney, and it was notes that bids for said job were called for on two
other occasions~ and only one bid received at the second bidding.
RESOLUTION NO. 64R-26; On -the recommendations of the City Attorney,
Councilman $ch~tte offered Resolution No~ 64R-26 for adoption, finding
that no bids were received for' Job No. 692~ and directing that said work
be accomplished by Force Account.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY CO'ONCIL OF THE CITY' OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND
DETERMINING IHAT NO BEDS ~/ERE RECEIVED AT THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE RESTROOM ADDITION IO CITY HALL~ JOB NO. 692,
IN RESPONSE TO THE ADVERTiSEMENi THEREFOR~ AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH SAID IMPROVEMENT. {,City Hall restroom facilities)
On roll call the foregoing Resolution No. 64R-26 was duly passed
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: button, Chandler, Schutte~ Krein and Coons
NOES: COUNC 2LMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 64R-26 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 64R-27: Councilman Krein offered Resolution No. 64R-27 for
adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CI'TY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND
DETERMINING THAI PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND ~ECESSiTY REQUIRE THE CON-
STRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT~ TO WIT: CONSTRUCTION
AND COMPLETION OF COMFORT STATIONS AT THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE,
IN THE CITY OF ANAHEiM~ JOB NO. 839; APPROVING THE DESIGNS~ PLANS~ SPECI-
FICATIONS~ ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH
A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids
to be opened February 13th, 1964, 2:00 P~M.)
On roll call the foregoing Resolution No. 64R-27 was duly passed
and adopted by the following vote;
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Chandler, Schutte, Krein and Coons
NOE$: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT; COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor deciared Resolution No. 64R-27 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 64R-28: On the certification of the Director of Public Works that
C.T. & F., Inc. has completed the construction of Traffic Signals and Safety
Lighting in the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and North Street~ Job
7426
City Hall~ Anaheim.~ California ,~ COUNCIL MINUTE - January 21~ 1964,~ 1'.30, P.M.
No. 798, in accordance with plan~ and specifications~ Councilman Dutfon
offered Resolu'tion No. 64R..-28 for adoption~
Refer 'to Re~;olution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE ~? v ~
~.~T:: COUNC:L OF THE CiTY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING
THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNiSHiNG OF ALL PLANT~ LABOR~ SERVIGE$~ 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 ~IT: FURNISHING AND IN-
STALLING 'TRAFFIC S~GNALS AND SAFETY L~GHTiNG AT THE INTERSECTION OF
HARBOR BOULEVARD AND NORTH STREET~ IN rHE CITY OF ANAHEIM~ JOB NO. 798.
(C.T. g F., Inc.]
On roll call the foregoing Resolution No. 64R-28 was duly
passed and adopted by' the following 'vote:
AYES~ COONGiLMEN: Dut'ton~ Chandler~ Schutte~ Krein and Coons
NOES ~ COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN ~ None
'7he Mayoz declared Resolution No. 64R-28 duly passed and adopted,
RESOLUTION NO. 64R,-29~ On the certification of the Director of Public Works
that Kaufman ,and Walter has completed the construction and installation
of Cabinet Work for the Anaheim Central Library~ Work Order No. 4502~
2rem Noo 1~ in ac~.;ord~nce with plans ~nd specifications~ Councilman
Dut'ton offered Re~oiation ii~o~ 6~R,-29 for adoption~
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLOrlON OF THE }fT?' COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING
[HE COMPLETION OF THai PORTION O~ WORK ORDER NO, 4502 DE~RIBED AS FOLLOWS:
.iTEM ~1 ,- SECTION ~t OF SPECiFiCATiONS - CABINET WORK~ FOR THE ANAHEIM
CENTRAL LiBRAR'¥ AT BROADWA~ AND HARBOR BOULEVARD~ iN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
~Kaufman and Walter'
On roll call the foregoing Resolution NoG 64R-29 was duly
passed ~nd adopted ~'y the following vo'te~
A'TES: COUNCiLMEN: Dut'ton, Chandler~ Schutte, Krein and Coons
NOES ~ CO'UNC '~ LMEN: None
ABSENT~ CO0'NCiLMEN ~ N'one
'The MaTor declared Re.~olution No. 64R-29 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUIiON NO. 64R-30: On the ~ertification of the Director of Public Works
that Ro 7~ Noble Comp~.n? ha.-~ <ompleted the construction of the Winston
Road Street i. mprove~ent~ fob No. 778~ in accordance with plans and
~pecifications~ Coun:-ilman Dutton offered Resolution No. 64R-30 for
adoption°
Refez to Reoolution Book~
A RESOLUTION OF 'THE 'S,~ T'~''''''~' COjNC]L OF THE ,,-,~"~F?'_~ OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING
THE COMPLETION AND THE FURN~fSH~NG OF ALL PLANT~ LABOR~ SERVICES~ ~ATERIAL$
A~ EQUiP~ENT A~ ALL JTiLZTiE$ AND tRANoPORT TiON INCL~ING POWER, FUEL
AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND
COMPLETE THE FOLLOWTNG PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: '~E IMPROVEMENT OF
WINSTON ROAD~ FRO~ STA~E COLLEGE BOULEVARD TO APPROXIMATELY 1320 FEET
EAST OF STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD,, iN THE SiT':f OF ANAHEIM~ JOB NO. 778.
(R. ],~ Noble Coo ',
On roll call the foregoing Resolution No. 64R-29 was duly
passed and adopted b'f the following vote~-
7427
City ,H,all~ Anaheim~ California ,-, COUNCIL MINUTES -January 217 19647 1;30 P.M.
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton~ Chandler~ $chutte, Krein and Coons
NOES~ COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 64R-30 duly passed and adopted.
SANTA ANA FREEWAY AGREEMENT: On motion by Councilman Chandler, seconded by
Councilman Dutton~ the City Attorney was instructed to prepare necessary
resolution accepting the Santa Aha Freeway Agreement with the State Divi-
sion of Highways° MOTION CARRIED,
RESOLUTION NO. 64R-31; On report and recommendation of the Superintendent of
the Water Division, Councilman Schutte offered Resolution No. 64R-31 for
adoption, accepting agreement between the City of Anaheim and the Stanton
County Water District°
Refer to Resolution Book°
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH STANTON COUNTY WATER DISTRICT WITH
REFERENCE TO CONSTRUCTION OF AN EMERGENCY STANDBY CONNECTION BETWEEN
THE DISTRICT'S WATER SYSTEMS AND THE CITY WATER SYSTEM IN TRACT NO.
3349.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and
adopted by the followin9 vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dui'ton, Chandler~ Schutte~ Krein and Coons
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 64R-31 duly passed and adopted.
DEEDS OF EASEMENT: Councilman Krein offered Resolutions Nos, 64R-32 to 64R-37,
both inclusive, for adoption~
Refer to Resolution Book.
RE,SOLUTION.,NO. 64R-32: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY' FOR AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES. (Fritz and
Rose Goossens)
RESOLUTION NO. 64R-33: A RESOLUtiON OF THE CiTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY FOR AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES.
(Nell Ret/man)
RESOLUTION NO. 64R-34: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING AN EASEMENT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR EASEMENTS FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY
PURPOSES ONLY. (Bethel Baptist Church)
RESOLUIION NO. 64R,-35: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING AN EASEMENT DEED CONVEYING '~0 THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITY' PURPOSES.
(Joseph E. Stehly and .June Stehly)
RESOLUTION NO. 64R-36: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY FOR AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES.
(Henry M. and Angola M. Plou')
RESOLUTION NO. 64R-37: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY FOR EASEMENTS FOR PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES. (Manco Develop-
merit Co. )
7428
City H~ll~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES -J'anuary 21~ 1964~ 1:30 P.M.
On roll call the foregoing Resolutions Nos, 64R-32 to 64R-37, both
inclu~ive~ ~r~ duly pa~sed and ~dopted by ~he ~ollowing vo~e:
A?~ES~ COUNCILMEN: Dut'ton, Chandler~ $chutte~ Krein and Coons
NOES ~ COUNCILMEN ~, None
ABSENT ~ COUN.C I LMEN ~. None
The Mayor declared Resolutions Nos, 64R-32 to 64R-37~ both
inclusive~ were dui'? p_~ssea and adopted°
CLAIM AGAINST THE CfT? ~i. CONDiTiONAL USE PERMIT NO. 285): Claim filed by John
C. Glithero~ Sro, Attorney on behalf of Maurioe Pinto, for damages
purportedly resulting from. denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 285~ was
denied and referred to -the Ci'ty Attorney~ on motion by Councilman Dutton,
~econded by''~ounc z" lm~n S,~hut'te ~ MOT?ON CARR..~ED.~
ANAHEIM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE RECOMMENDATION - UNDERGROUND INSTALLATION OF
UTILITIES: Correspondence dated December 20,~ 1963, from the Anaheim Chamber
of Commerce~ together ~ith resolution of the Community Improvement Com-
mittee of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce~ recommendin9 that a study be
made by appropriate Clty departments relative to economic feasibility
of future ins'tailat~.on:.~ of underground utilities., was submitted.
On motion by Coun.::::liman 'Chandler, seconded by Councilman Krein,
~aid ~ecommendation was ordered received and filed~ and the City Clerk
was directed to ad~Lse the Chamber of Commerce that such a study is pre-
;entiy -_n p:og~
ORANGE COUNT~ MOSQUITO ABATEMENt DiSTRiCT: Mlnu'tes of the Orange County
Mosquito Abatement District meeting of December 20~ 19639 were ordered
received and fiied~ on motion by Coun,:ilman Dutton~ seconded by Council-
man Chandlezo MOTJON CARRiED~
CORRESPONDENCE~ The folio~ing .:o:re~spondence was ordered received and filed~
on motion by 3oun~til~an Duzton, :~econded by Councilman Chandler:
~o
C o
do
Sopy of letter from Board of ~[ru:'~tees~ Anaheim Library~
-ommenaing 'the Divtlslon of Proper'ty Maintenance on move of
Letter fro~ State of California, Department of Public Works,
':.once~ning ~ Pro:edural ~anual for Administration of fhe
Prov~.r:,ion:~ of the Collier~Unruh Local Transportation Develop-
ment A~: t~,
Notice of Hea~-ing before the PUC in the matter of the Applica-
tio.n of Stanley 6~'' Alexander for certificate of public con-
venience ~.nd nece~:~it'}' to operate passenger service between
Disneylana Hotel and points and places in Orange County,
Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of Orange County~
,.3alifornia, ~etti. ng forth the user fees currently in effect
at the Pe~..'e Off ir. ers '[raining Facility~
MOTION CARR IED,,.
FINANCIAL AND OPERAFiNG REPORTS: Financial and Operating Reports for the month
of December~ 1963, ~ere ordered received and filed~ on motion by Council-
man Chandler~ ~e¢onded by Councilman Kreino MOTION CARRIED.
ORDINANCE NO. 1964~ Councilman Kzein offered Ordinance No. 1964 for final
readin9~
Refer to Ordinance Book°
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CiTY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14~ CHAPTER 14.20 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUN2CiPAL CODE B'? ADDING SECTION 14o20.100, RELATING TO
ONE-WAY STREETS, 'Durst Street ,-, one,-,way westbound~ 3:00 P.M. to 6:00
P~.)
7429
City Nall~ Anahe.im~ California - COUNCIL MINUIE$ - January 21~ 1964, 1:30 P.M.
After hea~ing read in full the 'title of Ordinance No. 1964 and
having knowledge of the contents therein, Councilman Dutton moved the read-
ing in full of said ordinance be waived~ Councilman Chandler seconded the
motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
On roll call 'the foregoing Ordinance was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN~ Dutton, Chandler~ Schutte~ Krein and Coons
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN, None
Mayor Coons declared the foregoing Ordinance No. 1964 duly
passed and adopted°
ORDINANCE NO. 1965: Councilman Schut'te offered Ordinance No. 1965 for final
reading°
Refer to Ordinance Book°
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (63-6~-53 - C-l)
After hearing read in full the title of Ordinance Nco 1965 and
having knowledge of the contents therein, Councilman Dut%on moved the read-
ing in full of said ordinance be waivedo Councilman Chandler seconded the
motion~ MOTION UNANIMOUSLY' CAR~!ED~
On roll call the foregoing Ordinance was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote~
AYES~ COUNCiLMEN~ Dutton, Chandler~ Schutte~ Krein and Coons
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
Mayor Coons declared the foregoing Ordinance Nco 1965 duly
passed and adopted°
ORDINANCE NO. 1966: Councilman Chandler offered Ordinance No. 1966 for final
readingo
Refer to Ordinance Book.
AN ORDTNANCE OF THE CiTY OF .ANAHEIM AMENDING T~irLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONiNG~ '~62.-63-107 - R-3)
After heaz~ing read :in full the title of Ordinance No. 1966 and
having knowledge of 'the contents therein, Coun~ilman Dutton moved the read-
ing in full of said ordinance be waived° Councilman Chandler seconded the
motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED~
On roll call 'the foregoing Ordinance was duly passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton~ Chandler~ Schutte~ Krein and Goons
NO~§: COU~C I LMEM ~ ~one
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN ~ None
Mayor Coons declared the foregoing Ordinance No. 1966 duly
passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 1967: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 1967 for first
reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CiTY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.329
SECTION 1~o32.155 and i~32~190 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL GODE~ RELATING
TO PARKING. (Restricted parking ~. portion Anaheim Road)
7430
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 21~ 1964~ 1:30 P.M.
After heaI~ng read in full the tltle of Ordinance No, 1967
and having knowledge of the :ontents the:rein~ Councilman Dutton moved
the reading .in full of ~aid ordinance be waived, Councilman Chandler
seconded the mot:~on, MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
ORDINANCE NO 1968; ,Councilman Kr.e[n offered Or. dinance No. 1968 for first
reading°
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CiTY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18~ OF THE ANAHEIM
aUN[CiPAL CODE RELAT/iNG '[O ZON[NG~ ( 63-64,-27 - C-1 & P-l)
After hear'~ng read in full the 'title of Ordinance No. 1968
and hav:ing knowledge of the :ontents ~hereln, Councilman Dutton moved
the reading in full of -aria o:rdinance be waived~ Councilman Chandler
seconded the motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
REQUEST ,- AMENDMENT ZO STATE EMPLOYEES RE'ZfREMENI SYSTEM CONTRACT: Request
dated lanuary 10, 1964~ f~'om Anaheim Municipal Employees Association~
that the City of Anaheim investigate an amendment to the State
Employees Reti~:ement System Contract~ to p~ovZde income adjustments
for retired employees of the City of Anaheim~ was submitted.
On motion by Coun::ilman Chanaler~ seconded by Councilman
Kreln~ ,,~aid request was ~efe:red to the Personnel Department for
:omplete ~tudy ~nd :::epcot. MOTION CARRYED,~
ANAHEIM 'VALENCia ORANGE ASSOCIAtiON - PROXY: Mr. Murdoch reported that
t~e Anaheim Valen:ia Orange A:~:o.:iation w~ll hold a special stock-
holders meeting, F.iida¥, fanua~y 24, k964~, at 9:30 A.M~ to determine
whether of not to ele: / to d!~ol've the Associa/ion~ and to au/ho-
~ze the ~ie o: tran'~fer: of -~1 or part of the assets of the
Association, and 'traa.~d:t u~h further burdines5 as may be inciden-
tal thereto.
On motion by Coun;Liman K~e:~n~ seconded by Councilman
Dutton-~ Coun.::iiman $ butte 'wa~ .author-~zed to represent the City of
Anaheim at ~ald m. eet~ng~ ~:nd as proxy, ~a~t the votes of the city
~tcora~ng to the ~.t'y~'s be~t lnteres't~ MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO~ 64R-38: Soun::iiman Kzetn offer-ed Resolution No. 64R-38 for
adopt ion,,
Refe] to Re:~okutton Book,
A RESOLUTION OF FHE :U.iT? COUNCIL OF FHE CiTY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING
'[HE JOIN'[ COMMUNitY RECREAY .: ON PROGRAM OF t'HE CiTY OF ANAHEIM~ THE
,ANAHEIM UNi.[ON HIGH SCHOOL DLS,rRi"U[~ THE ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT~
AND AUTHORiZiNG ~[HE MAYOR AND Ci[¥ CLERK OF THE CiTY OF ANAHEIM TO
ENTER INTO AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT FOR SUCH JOiNY COMMUNITY RE-
CREATION PR. OGRAMo Fi.~. ai year~ 1963-i96.4'
On roll all the foregoing resolution was duly passed and
aOopted by the following vote:
AYES: COjNCiLMEN: Dutton, 3handlez~ Schutte~ Krein and Coons
NOES: ~..~OgNC ~_LME : None
ABSEN[: COUNCILMEN: None
'.The Mayor de~ iarea Re~oiution No. 64R-38 duly passed and
adopted o
CIVIC CONVENTION CENTER - EMPLOYMENT OF ARCHIIECTURAL FIRM; Mro Murdoch
reported on proposals of 'the four architectural firms interviewed,
to design a Civic Convention Center,~
'Councilman K~:ein moved that 'the City of Anaheim offer a contract
'to Adrian Wilson and Aoso~' zate:~ to design 'the Civic Convention Center~ in
7431
C.i.t¥. Hall~ Anaheim~ Cali£ornia - COUNCIL MINUTES -January 21~ 1964~ 1:30 P.M.
accordance with proposal made by ~ald firmo ~ ' ~
~ouncilman Dutton seconded the
motion~ MOIION CARRZED,
RECESS: Councilman Chandler moved to recess to 7;00 P.M. Councilman $chutte
seconded the motion° MOTION CARRIED.
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Coons called 'the meeting to order~ 7=00 O°Clock P.M.
PRESENT: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Chandler~ $chutte~ Krein and Coons.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN; None o
PRESENT: CITY MANAGER~ Keith A~ Murdocho
CITY ATIORNEY: Joseph Geislero
CiTY CLRRK: Dene M. Wi]liam~
P,LANNI~:G D~RECTOR: Richard Ao Reese~
ZONING ZOORDiNAi'OR: Ma~-czn ~eldt~
.I.NV~AIION; T~':e invocation was glven by Reverend Nether o~ the First Free Metho-
dis~ Churc]- o -'
FLAG SALUTE: Mayor Coons led tlqe assembly in tine Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 512~ Submitted by Albert J. and
Florence Janzen, F. N= Doyle~ L. P. Shields and Wilma L. Miller (David S.
Collins Agent) requesting permission to establish a twenty-two story hotel
(Sheraton-Anaheim) including ~pe<~ialt'y :shops and associated services, on
property presently zoned R-A, briefly d~scribed as localed a~ the northeast
corner of Ball Road and
The City Planning Commission pursuant 'to Resolution No. 987,
Series 1963-6~, granted ~aid Conditional Use Permit subject to the follow-
ing conditions:
i. That 'the owners of ~subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim a --".
strip of land 57 feet in width, as required by Resolution No. 6111, or
the latest revision 'thereof~ from the center line of the street~ alon9
West Street for street widening purposes.
2. That the owners of subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim a
strip of land 53 feet in width, from the center line of the street,
along Ball Road~, for street widening purposes°
3. That street improvemen.t plans shall be prepared and all engineering
requirements of the City of Anaheim along the Freeway off-ramp, Ball
Road~ West S'treet~ and Vermont Street, such as curbs and gutters~ side-
walks~ stree~t grading .and paving~ drainage facilities, or other appurte-
nant work shall be completed as required by ~he City £ngineer and in
accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the Office
of the City Engineer; and that a bond in an amount and form satisfactory
to the City of Anaheim shall be posted with the City to guarantee the
installation of said engineering requirements°
4. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the
sum of $2°00 per {runt foo't~ along the Freeway off-ramp, Ball Road, West
Street and Vermont Street, for street lighting purposes.
5. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved
plans on file in the Office of the Director of Public Works~ prior ~o
final building inspection..
6. That fire hydrants shall be installed as required and determined to be
necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department~ to be installed prior to
final building inspectiono
7. That Condition Nos, 1, 2~ 3, and 4~ above mentioned~ shall be complied
with within a period of 180 days from date hereof~ or such further time
as the Commission may grant~
8. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with
plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim, marked "Exhibit
Nos. 1 through 6~ provided thai the garage parking facilities and abutting
parking area shall be developed in accordance with Exhibit No. 7.
9. Thai tree wells shall be provided at approximate 40-foot intervals in the
West Street~ Ball Road, and off-ramp street parkways abutting subject
property~ that plan5 for said tree wells and planting of trees therein,
shall be submitted to and approved by the Superintendent of Parkway
Maintenance~ and said tree wells shall be planted with trees prior ~o final
building inspectiono
7432
C. ity Ha. ll~ Anahei~ California .-,~OUN~.L MINUTES -.January 21~ 1964~ 1.;30 P.M.
10o That a ten foot strip of land shall be landscaped on West Street,
Ball Road, and the cit.-ramp street frontages and said landscaping
maintained~ as indicated on Exhibit No. 2 on file with the Cityl
'that plans for ~aid landscaping shall be submitted to and approved
by the Superintendent of Parkway Maintenancet and that said land-
soaping shall be installed prio~ to final building inspection.
11. That all air-condi'tioning facilities shall be properly shielded
from view~
Appeal from action taken at the City Planning Commission was
filed by Mro Edwin D~ Ettinger~ Director-Marketing Division of Disneyland~
becouse of visual intrusion to Disneyland, resulting from a building of
such height,.
Mr~ Kreidt noted the location of subject property~ the zoning
and existing u~es in th~ immediate area~ in ~ummarizing the public hearing
before 'the City Planning Commi~sion~ he called attention to Pinding No. 5
of City Planning Commis!~ion resolut~on, notin9 that precise plans of de-
velopmen't be ~ubmitted 'to the City Council for approval prior to the issu-
ance of building permit for each phase of development° He also noted
Pinding No. 6 limiting 'the he%ght of the structure to 260 feet.
Mr~ Kreidt further called at'ten'tlon to Condition Nco 1 of
Resolution No° 987~ advising that the condition was intended to answer
request filed by Mro Collin~ December 6~ 1963~ regardin9 right-of-way
dedication for the ~zaenlng of We~t Street°
~The May'or invited the appeilant to address the Council.
~r. E, D~ Ettlnger, 101,4 Kamen Place~ Anaheim, advised that
Disneyland ,~_~ repre~.enteO tni:~ e~ening by Mr~ Dorm Tatum, Vice-President~
John W~se, Chief 'Enginee~ ~ Mz,~ Vi :'toz Greene~ Senior Art Director,
Robert Fo~tez, Legal Co'un~el, ~r,, Bill Ev.sns~ Landscape Architect and
He c~ilea ~tt,entton to t.e~,eral photos placed on the west wall
of the Coun,::il sha~:be~--~ taken fxom ,~'ariou:~ locations within the Disneyland
Park, with the pzopo,.,ed hotel ~tructure ._~uperimposed to illustrate the
visual intru:.~ion :into t,he p:~k,~
Mz,~ Et'ringer zeaa letter d;~ted ,.anuary 20, 1964~ sent by him
to 'the Anaheim .3it¥ .'~ouncii ::~tat!ng thei: po~ition and basis on which
thei~ appeal ~va:~ f~ied lette~ on file'.,
~r,~ Ettingez ~tated tha't the'? :~dmit to 'the problem created by
zhe Disneyland Hotel. to'~er; ho~ever~ the problem was anticipated at the
.time permi:,,sion wa,~ gr..~n/ed for the high.~ri~e building, and Disneyland
at the same time ant:z.~_ipated the Ne'~ Orleans Square to be completed~
,~'h~<::h, ~ith additzonai ].anr~:~'ap:n. 9, ~ould ~czeen out the visual intrusion.
['ne reason theft tnl:~ h,a~ not o cuzzea,, ~a'~ due to their ~nvolvement in
design etc,~ for the ~ew 'fork Wo~ld F-air~ ho~ever~ the New Orleans Square
is planned for completion th~:~ :oming ~ummero
Regarding the point made ,~oncezning 'the large attendance to
the park, there '~va~ pointed out in their annual report that a signi-
ficant part of thi,; tncr,~a;e i~'~ attributable to the ~uccess off night-
time activi'tie,~ and ~pecial party even't.~,
Mro :i'ohn Wise~ Chief Engineer of Disne¥1and~ 1851 Chalet
Avenue, Anaheim, advl~ed that according to 'the plans presented them
for study~ the propo'sed building h~ .'an over,-ail height of 270 feet to
'the upperm, o'~st extrem.:itv and i:s 400 :feet wide~ and will be located
1700 feet north of the noxth rlm. of the Disneyland Park, 1,000 feet
north of the Pony Farm no:li~ fence line~ and 478 feet from the north
property line of the Di~ne'yl~nd p~opez'ty,~
7433
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California ,- COUNCIL MINUTES - ,January 21~ 1964~ 1.-30 P.M.
Ihe real relationship to them is the location of the proposed
building and the distance from the berm and the height of the berm. He
noted that the Disneyland Hotel tower building is located approximately
Fifteen Hundred feet from the west berm of the park, and is one hundred
and twenty three feet high, and is very much in evidence from certain points
in the park; however~ with the completion of the New Orleans Square and
the completion of the planting of the west berm, it will eventually screen
out the Disneyland Hotel tower buildingo
Mr, Wise advised treat knowing the height, location and width of
the proposed building~ they were able to establish angles both vertical and
horizontal~ by means of a transit located in various critical areas in
the park~ and were able to determine the width and height that the build-
ing would intercept the horizon°
He further advised that the results of thi~ were discused with
the proponents for the hotel; following this Mro Collins floated balloons
approximately 243 feet in the air~ representing the east and west corners
of the building, taking the photographs of them as 'they toured through
the park° Looking at the balloons .~na 'the photographs~ it was found that
they had accurately predicted the location of the buildingo
Slides of the pictures were then shown~ the first being a map
of the Disneyland area~ the non cross-hatched area illustrating those
areas within Disne¥1and at 9rede level where a 'visual intrusion problem
would develop~ the cross-hatched areas repre~enting areas of future
expansion°
Anothe~ picture taken from the back of the Mark Twain, looking
into ~rontierland~ where appeared approximately eight of nine stories
projected above the horizon°
Another view taken from Fantasyland~ showing approximately
twelve or fourteen stories of the proposed building projecting above
the horizono
Another view taken in Frontieriand at the raft area. Mro Wise
stated that a't this location it ~ould require eucalyptus 'trees between
ninety feet and one hundred feet high 'to screen off the intrusion.
Other views were briefly .as follows:
(a) The Painted Desert area, Mine Train ride.
(b) The Indian Village area°
(c) Story-Book Land~ taken from the Casey J'ro~ Train~ which indicated
an intrusion of approximately twelve to fourteen stories.
(d'~ In front of 'the Mark Twain Dock, showing an intrusion of approxi-
mately nine 'to ten storieso
(e) A map indicatin9 intrusion problems as currently exist from the
Disney±and Hotel tower building and 'the map showing the conditions
after completion of the New Orleans Square buildings and comple-
tion of the landscaping° Mro Wise advised that the intrusion shown
on the later map was in all cases in elevated areas.
An aerial photograph showin9 the superimposition of the building
wherein the vertical and horizontal scale of the building was obtained
from the eighty foot high power poles alon9 Ball Road.
Mr. Wise referred to 'the first plot map shown indicatin9 again
the areas of visual intrusiono He further advised that they considered the
possibility of planting which would require 'trees of 'the height of ninety
feet to one hundred feet~ which were not only unavailable, but would be in-
practical. Considered also, was increasin9 the height of the berm~ and to
double the height of 'the present berm to thirty-six feet, would require three
times additional earth fill as 'they now have for 'the eighteen foot berm°
Mr~ Donn Tatum, Vice President of Dl:~neyland Organization, and
Vice President of Disneyland Administration, appearing on behalf of the
7434
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - CO'0NCiL MiNglES - JanuarY 21~ 1964~ 1..90 P.M.
appeal filed~ advised that in the past eight years Disneyland has been
visited by more than forty million people, He further advised that not
long after Disneyland opened in 1955, it was realized that the park was
something different and not .just an amusement park in the sense of the
word 'that had current ~:ognozation at that tlme~ amusement park in their
opinion, did not describe ~hat Di~:~ne'y'iand is, The thing that is differ-
ent about Disneyland ls the thlng the'¥ 'were talking about, and was the
basis of their appe:a],. He noted their position has been consistent and
referred 'to past permits granted where the height limitation was imposed
by the City Council, and as result the D[sneyland Hotel was reduced in
height from what they had con~templated at that time,
To clarify ~he reiationship between the Disneyland Hotel and
Disneyland~ Mr., [arum reported that although the Disneyland Hotel bore
their name~ it was an entirely separate corporation with separate owner-
ship and financing½ ~he relationship to Disneyland is as a lessee of their
land and a contract that gives 'the r~ght to use the name of Disneyland.
Mr, Tatum ;tared that the concept they seek to protect is the
basic concept that when a visitor enters Disneyland~ he enters a
worl~ of tilu~on:, fantasy and nostalgia~ and an area that has been care-
fully constructed in three dimensions to place him in one or more scenes
that bear no relation to the reality of the world he has left behind upon
entering D~sneylan~and thi~ was the 'thing that was different about
Disneylando
He further advised that they, as ~.and owners and citizens~
were exerci:~ir~g the_ir r:ight under the provision of the Anaheim ~uni-
cipal Code as relates to lanO u~e and zoning; that according to the
City Ordinance the proponents a:re requireO to show that the proposed use
will not ad'.~ersely affect the existing 'use of the adjoining land or the
future development of the area,~, in their opinion the encroachment on
Disne'yiand with the :intrusion vi~,uall'y of a large inconsistent structure
against the horizon does present a situation that will adversely effect
the utilization of their ~.andt that it is a fact that the building as
proposed will intrude into the park .and will be inconsistent with the
basic concept on w'hi~'h Di~neytand :t~ based? and will affect the basis of
appeal of Disneyiand to man'? people~ and in turn~, affect the attendance°
Wro Tatum repot'ted that over tmo-thirds of the visitors to
Disneyland come iron out .... de of the Cos Angeles-Orange County area.~
and over one-half of the ~-~itors come f~oro outside of the State of
Cali fornia o
He reported that the question to them. was whether or not the
community would be willing to provide an environment surrounding Disney-
land~ which will be conducive to future expansion and development; en-
abling the pa:~k to mainta._n :its appeal '[he resolution of 'this question
~,?a:s,~ very serious one 'to zhem~ as it involves future evaluation on their
part of an investment and operation pr. ogram..~
Mro Tatum stated that Walt Disney has said that Disneyland
will never 1ge finisheO~ it would :,~ontinue to grow~ alter and change to~
enhance its appeal; and in 'the terms of effort and money~ in the last
eight years they have con~-~istenti'.~' ~ollowed thi:~ pa'ttern~ where the
investment in the park has nearly tripled~ He stated that the park is
dedicated to a yeah-round operation, agaznst a very unfavorable
economic situation during three or four months of the year~ being the
la~e fall and early spring, and the balance of the economy of Disneyland
in this respect is very precarlous~ Any adverse effect on the draw
would necessa~il'y ~equ-ire the evaluation on '~heir part of ~he year-round
operation pol lc'y<~
Mro ~[atum reported 'that Disneyland cannot remain the Disney-
land it is~ if it is to be ringed with high-rise structures~ no matter
how fine the high-rise structures are in themselves° He thereupon
urged the City Council to maintain their appeal and denied the Condition-
al Use Permit application on 'the grounds they have set forth; and also,.
7435
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 21~ 1964~ 1:3.0 P.M.
urged the City Council to study further the land use policy of this area,
Disneyland and the proposed Convention Center; and to a degree the area
dedicated to tourists and Convention Bureau~ in the light of height limit-
ation requirements~ and also as a guide for the future.
In answer to Councilman Dutton~s question concerninq the pines
planted on the berm, Mro Bill Evans, Landscape Architect for D~sneyland,
advised that the berm was planted with Monterey pines and will vary
consistently in height, that the pines have been in position for approxi-
mately seven or eight years~ and planted at the average size of ten to
fifteen feet~ and at the present time the tallest pine has obtained the
height of approximately twenty-five feet or thirty feet; further, the
Monterey pine was typical of the largesi tree thai could be satisfactorily
transplanted°
Mro Evans stated that 'the pines in the picture that appear to
screen the proposed structure were trees closest 'to the camera.
Mr. Dutton referred to picture numbered 6 and asked if the tree
shown in that picture was on the bermo
Mr. Evans replied that the pine referred to, was approximately
ten feet larger than the average~ and called attention to the fact that in
some areas there are two or three berms involved~ and some of the trees appear-
ing to screen the proposed buildin9 are not 'those planted on the berm.
Mro Evans further advised that over 'the period of the last eight
years, 'there have been screenin9 problems, ~nd the landscaping is unique in
many ways, in that ~they have moved more and larqer trees than perhaos any
other project in California; some of the:>~e problems have been solved, and some
difficult but possible to solve; but :in the case of the proposed building,
in his opinion this would be impossible to solve with landscaping.
Councilman Dutton referred 'to remark made concerning future ex-
pansion, and asked if it was anticipated that the expansion will extend
northerly 'to Ball Road°
Mr° Ettinger replied 'that 'the area north of Winston Road is
planned for future expansion~ and is property which ~as a part of the
original permit as 9ranted by 'the Count'? and subsequently endorsed by the
City.
Councilman Dutton asked Mro Ettinger if Disne¥1and perhaps had
not compromised their own position regazding visual intrusion, refering to
the Matterhorn and the Monorail°
Mro Ettinger replied~ regarding 'these attractions~ and specifical-
ly the Monorail~ the guest leaves the area of unreality but is returned to
this land of illusion; this type of attraction differs from others that are
based on visual illusion~ such as thei~ da~k room at%ractions~ submarine
voyage ~ etCo
Mr o Victor Green~ Senior Art Director for the park, pointed out
methods that can be used io 'amouflage the Disneyland Hotel, whereas to the
north in Frontierland and the wilderness area~ they are limited to landscap-
ing only; however~ with the night shows and the reflection of lights on the
water ways~ this was something that would not be camouflaged with plantings.
Councilman Schutte asked Mr~ Ettinger if the hotel project
would be objectionable if located south oi the park°
Mro Ettinger replied, in his opinion, the answer would be general-
ly "No", as most of the visual attractions are oriented to the northeast and
northwest areao
Councilman Dutton stated, he noted that the broadside of the hotel
was located generally in an east and ~est c~rection, and asked if the problem
would be lessened should the hotel be relocated~ so that the narrow side of
the hotel faced the park° '
7436
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 21~ 1964~ 1:30 P.M.
~tr. Ettinger was of the opinion that this would have no bear-
ing on the height problemo
Mro Wise stated that this has not been suggested~ however, the
proposed building is so wide~ that they still would have the problem of
intrusion by virtue of the height, and in his opinion, to relocate the
building would have no material effect on the problem~ as the width of
the building is approximately the length of the Disneyland Hotel, which
is two-hundred feet closer to the park°
Mayor Coons asked what approximate percentage of the forty
million 'visitors to the park were those returning because of constant
expansion and change in operations°
Mro Ettinger replied~ that 'the last figure he recalled, and
as derived by guest opinion polls taken in the park, the percentage of
repeat at'tendance would be approximately seventy percent.
Mayor .Goon.~ referring to last year~s attendance of 5.6 million
people, asked wha± percentage of ±he attendance was during the three
summer months, and what percentage was during the remaining nine months.
Mro Ettinger replied~ the summer months being the period from
Memorial Day to September I$~ the period in which the park pperates on
a seven day schedule, the attendance represents sliqhtly better than
~i~ty percent; that half of their attendance is obtained in one-forth
of the year°
Mr. Murdoch called attention to the question asked~ which he
felt was not answered~ and that was whether the expansion program of
Disneyland would extend northerly to Ball Road~
Mro Ettinger ad'vised that their property did not extend to
Ball Road~ and further advised that at the present time, it was not
known specifically how much of the area to the north would be expand-
ed~ there are plans for expansion of Yrontierland and Yantasyland~
and some of the struc'tures in that area are permanent in nature, such
as the Monorail sheds~ machine shops and warehouse buildings°
The Mayor invited the proponents to address the Council.
Mro David So Collins~ 1077 West Ball Road~ authorized agent~
introduced Mr~ Milton Freeman~ President of Adams Associates~ and
Coordinator for the project~ and Mro Mazko Botich, Architect for the
project°
Mro Milton Freeman~ 1333 South Euclid Street~ Anaheim, with
the assistance of Mr° Botich~ referred to plans placed on bulletin
boards at the rear-of the Council tableo
One, the plot plan indicating the location of the building
and parking area, Mr. Freeman advised that the parking structure
was moved at 'the request of residents in the area, so that the front-
age s'treet (West Street) will be free and clear of traffic.
The general elevation plan of the twenty-two story project~
the Skyroom to be a res'taurant, the lower level planned as a mall con-
cepto
'The general plan of the first floor~ which Mr. Freeman stated
was specifically orientated and geared for large as well as small con-
ventionso Mro Freeman further advised that the general pattern for
the hotel would be somewhat similar to the Statler-Hilton Hotel in
Los Angeleso
Other plans referred 'to and explained were: typical floor
plan iof three types of suites, general elevation of the entrance area, and
elevgtion of 'various room lay-outs.
7437
~ity Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 21~ 1964~ 1:30 P.M.
Mro Freeman then presented written copies of his presentation to
each Councilman~ and read said presentation dated January 21, 1964, for
the benefit of others present (copy on file~
The presentation included background in plannin9 and economic
data on the project~ and the names of the owners of the hotel (the owners
were present at the meeting and introduced to the City Council).
At the conclusion of the presentation, Mr. Freeman requested
an affirmative decision by the City Council°
Mro Robert Sa Barnes~ attorney for the peti'tioners~ stated in
his opinion there has been no evidence presented as to what the so-called
visual intrusion would do to the Di)neyland operation~ t)~ey }':ave not
been able to introduce any evidence other than their open,on that this
project may affect thelz busines~.
He noted last year in spite of the intrusion of the Disneyland
Hotel, the Disneyland Park had a 20 percent increase in their 9ross business~
which was attributed to night functions and special events~ this, he felt,
will continue. As to what effect, if any~ the so-called intrusion would have,
there were as many different opinions as there are people in the room. He
felt it was not a fair concept or that anyone had a right as a matter of law
to say~""You shall not build next to me because I have the right to look in
that direction~.
Mro Barnes further felt that vi~itor~ to the park, returning to
the park, or recommendin9 the park to their friends, would not be deterred
because of the structure that is planned~ that upon entering the park you
are facinated by what is there~ and one is not looking skyward~ Reference
was made to Central Park, which is ringed by huge sky~scrapperso Mr. Barnes
stated~ in visiting Central Park, one wa~ not looking at 'the high-rise
buildings, and in Disneyiand it ~ould be even less so~ as there are so many
things to see°
i't seem~ obvious to him 'that tree~ will grow~ and will assist in
blocking ou't the so-called intrusion; in add~tion, larger 'trees can be pur-
chased,~ ~
He noted that 'the center of the park was twenty-three hundred feet
from the proposed structure, and seventeen hundred feet from 'the outer peri-
phery of the park devel0pment~ Mr. Barnes felt it was unfair and unreasonable,
and close to being quite arbi'trar~, in the legal sense of the word~ to tell
a property owner that because someone else plans at some point in the future
to build within q68 feet from 'your property~ you can only build twelve
stories~ in spite of the fact that there ls seventeen hundred feet distance
at the present time, and no definite plans for development of 'the balance of
the property at this timeo
Mro Barnes advised that as one of the legal counsels for the
proponents, it appeared to him, tha't there is apparently no area of compro-
mise, that a compromise offer to construct a structure up to 208 feet has
been made, and no answer to 'this reduction has been received°
He stated there was an infezence tha't if 'the hotel was built in
any place other than t~at acceptable to Disne¥1and~ there would be a re-
appraisal of their operation, this inference, in his opinion, ~ould be
an unfortunate basis for planning<,
In summary~ Mr° Barnes advised~ that Disneyiand was asking the
City Council to take their statements that possibly the park will be injured
by a building to the west° Planning must be reasonable~ and conditions must
be reasonable. The conditions requested by Disneyland, in his opinion~
were obviously unreasonableo He felt that they were sincere, but that this
was something that was not factual~ nor had any factual basis~
Mr. Barnes requested, on behalf of the principals~ that a decision
be reached this evening because of their critical time schedule, that unless
primary ground work is commenced on or about February ls't~ it will be ex-
7438
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California- COUNCIL MINUTES - January 21~ 1964~ 1:30 P.M.
tremely difficult to open the hotel by the spring of 1966. He stated
the hotel must open by the spring of 1966 or face economic problems~
and any delay could texminate the entire project~
'Tn conclusion, Mr. Barnes noted the progress and example set
b7 the City of Anaheim in planning~ and advised that the City was in the
position to do a great thing for the County of Orange and specifically for
the Cit7 of Anaheim~ by allowing thi.~ project either on the basis approved
by the City Planning Commi~on,, or tn the basis of the compromise offer-
ed,
Concerning the compromLse offered to reduce the structure to
208 feet~ Mro Barnes read letter dated this date from Mr. David Collins
(letter on file)o
~r, Freeman presented elevation revisions of the building,
revising 'the height to 208 feet~ ~eeping the same concept~ both for
air-conditioning purposes, and for highest and best use of the land;
removing fifty-two feet from the top~ reducing the twenty-two story
structure to seventeen stories plus a penthouse, and adding bays,
both to the east and west~ He o'tated that this would crowd the hotel,
but they in 9ood fai[h felt they should do all that they could to make
the project ac~:eptable,~ Mr~ Freeman was of the opinion that many of the
trees now, and with two additional year~s growth~ would totaly obscure
the building in many of the azea:~ shown on the photos presented by
Disneyland:
~zo Freeman further aav~sed of attempts made between Disney-
land and themselves to resolve th:is problem~ and that Friday of last
week they received a definition as to the ~onoep't Disneyland would
approve°
Mr~ Alexande~ Bowie~ Attorney w~th the firm of Rutan and
Associates~ appearing on behalf of Doyle and Shield, owner in part
of the parcel of property under ~:on~ide:r, ation~ stated that the City
Council ha~ heard 'the pre~entation by the Disne¥1and organization,
and in his opinion~ M:r~ Baznes ha:s very ably placed these desires~
thelr pre~=en~::e and effe~;t¢, if any -tn 'the future~ in the context of
· the matte~ before 'the City Counallo
Mz-~ Bowie advlsed that one of the facts which he felt
important in this matter wa~s 'the fact that these gentlemen have spent
a great deal of time and money ~n seeking to erect this very fine
structure whi.:h would be a benefit to the City of Anaheim~ the County
of Orange and to Southern Caiifornia~,
A Conditional Use Permit was applied for, and studied at
length by the Planning Staff and Planning Commission~ and conditions were
~ttached to the granting of the Conditional Use Permit, which were felt
to be reasonable ne:~essary for the promotion of the public health~ safety
and general welfaret these ,~onditions are sound~ and are the proper sub-
jects as set forth in the zoning ordinance~
As far as the purpose of this hearing, one could conclude that
the purpose is to endeavor to establish a land use policy in, and around
the Disne¥iand area, which would preclude the erection of any structure
which might be visible from any one particular location in the Disneyland
Park~ or to establish a policy that the zoning power might be implemented
to preclude a bonafide use of one man~s property~ for the benefit solely
of another, in his opinion the real purpose of the hearing would be
to review the subject project~ and determine if the conditions as imposed
by the Planning Comm:ission were adequate to protect the public health,
safety and welfare.
Regarding specifics, Mz, Bowze noted 'that there are at present
structures around the Disneyland Park that are and always will be visible,
some areas in the park are secluded now, and always will bet further,
some structures may be erected in the area~ which are visible at this time
7439
Ci.ty Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MiNU/ES - January 21~ 1964~ 1~30 P.M.
and possibly visible in the fu'ture, although many solutions can be taken
by Disneyland to remedy this situation°
He called attention to the fact that other people are involved
in this project other than the Disneyland organization~ they are the land
owners~ residents and citizens of the City of Anaheim, whose properties are
involved in this project, and to say that 'this structure should not be
erected by reason of the fact that 'the property is located on the north
as opposed to the sou±hr was in his opinion~ unreasonable and to the point
of being almost confiscatory~,
Mr, Bowie agreed wzth the point made by Mr,~ garnes~ and was of the
opinion that the millions of children visiting the park~ were preocupied
by the structures and projects in the park~ and doubted if the level of
their gaze ever reached above the 'thirty foot trees planted atop the
eighteen foot berm°
Councilman Chandler directed a question to Mro Barnes and Mr.
Bowie~ advising that it has been stated that it has been no fact presented
by Disneyland concerning 'their opinion~ and asked if the pictures presented~
the figures and visualization of the building from 'the park area noted~
were in their opinion erroneous°
Mr° Barnes replied that in his opinion there was no question
that if 'the buildin9 was constructed of 'the size con/emplated~ or the size
suggested in their compromi~e~ it could be seen~ however~ the point he
attempted to make was that there is no evidence of the fact that qlancing
at that building~ would date: anyone from ~:o~inc~ to the park° in his
opinion this was a subjective concept on the part of someone that as
result of this proposed structure the park will lose popularity.
Councilman Chandler asked~ how the reduction of the building
to a height of 208 feet resolve the problemo
Mro Barnes replied~ that additional trees and foliage can be
planted, and if 'the height of the structure is reduced~ obviously as the
plantings grow~ the problem from a visual intrusion standpoint, will be
reduced°
He fur'ther advised that if the impact of 'the 'visual obstruction
of 'this building is a fact~ to which 'they did not concede~ that will
deter attendance of the pazk~ if the l~eight of the structure is reduced,
it would be hoped that this would alleviate the problem from the Disney-
land standpoin't~
Councilman Chandler asked what factors were used to compromise
the problemo
Mro Barnes answered the fa~ztor was e~zonomics~ it was an analysis
by the principals and 'their advisers, tha't 'this would be the maximum re-
duc±ion possible for~ the projec~t to be economically feasible; and in
order to obtain management from Sheraton Hotei~ who are interested only
in a large complex~ the building height was reduced~ and the building
increased in size over additional lando
In answer to a question r~;:sea by Mro Barne$~ the Mayor reported
that all exhibits produced at this hearing, will remain a part of the
record~ however~ the pictures presented by Disneyland, can be substituted
by smaller ones for easier ~ii~ng~
RECESS.. Councilman Krein moved fora hen minute recess~ Councilman Dutton
seconded the motion° MOTION CARRIED ~:'9'00 P M..~
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Coons called the meeting to order~ all members of the
City Council being present~
7440
C..ity Hall~ Anaheim~ California- COUNCI~ MINUTES ,- January 21~ 1964~ 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Coons recognizing the impossibility of everyone in the
audience addressing the City Council, requested any presentation be factual
and related 'to land use~ and thereupon asked if anyone wished to address
the Council either for or against the proposed project.
Mr~ Marko Botich~ Architect~ in rebuttal to comments made by
Mr, lttinger and M:r~ Wise ~n thei:r presentation, referred to the photo-
graphs presented~ :indi~:ating the :~o-called visual intrusion~ which in
his opinion would be impos~i~ie to ~ccur~tely portray a three dimensional
:~culptured object in a flat plane photograph°
Regarding the se~zerai attract:ions designed so as to take the
people out of the park, and return them. to the park, in his opinion, the
proposed building would ha~e the same effect~ that is, they would see the
building momentaril'y, and immediately returned their gaze to the park,
Mro Ho R~ Ha~:rison~, Officer of the Wrather Corporation,' the
parent company of the operating entity of 'the Disneyland Hotel, addressed
the Council in support of the appeal by Disneyland.
Mr~ Harri:~on advi!~ed thai their company and operation was entirely
~eparate and distinct from Disneyland~ and was in no way connected except
through a land lease°
Regarding their posltion with respect to o'ther hotels~ motels
and similar operations in the a~ea~ he advised thai when the Conditional
gse Permit was granted 'them to erect the eleven story Disneyland Hotel
tower Building~ 'the~ ~ere informed theft 'the policy of the City Council
and City Planning Commission would not permit construction above one-
hundred and twenty five feet~ as ze~uit they endeavor to limit their
request to conform a~ neaziy as pos~ible to said policy~ They also
would have liked to nav'e t~ken bettez advantage of their lando
M:t~ Ha:;:ri~on ad'v~:sed that the'/' were extremely conscious of
the magic kingdom that Di~ney'ian~ creates~and are very concerned with
anything that might happen :tn the area that might 'tend to detract from
this magic kingdom.~
He further adv:[sed that the~' '~ere not speaking in opposition
to any hotel oz motel per. ~e, their onl'~,,' con.aern was the proposed
height of the building, they~ were al~-~o .::on::erned 'with the fact that other
people in this area 'were limited by the height policy of 'the City Council
and C:t'~' Plannin9 Comm~tssio~ A~ their compe'titive position has been
established, in his o~.nion, the .same rule should apply 'to everyone
~oming into this area with thi-~ t~pe of ~u~iness~
Regarding the idea of ~isual intrusion and the possible effect~
Mro Harrison stated~ there has been comments made that there has been no
objettive evidence that it would detract or interfere with 'the Disney-
lan~ Park~ He fu~.ther ad',~ed that throagh 'their nation wide efforts
to bring convention.!~ to the Disne¥1and Hotel.~ they have a national out-
look and projection on 'thiu matter~ and in their opinion, they feel very
strongly 'tha't this will ha~ge an a~verse effect on the park~ and what
affects the park affects them~ ~nd every' other business in the area! for
hhis reason they felt ~t woulO ge dangerou~ to do anything which tends
to overcome the illusion of the park.
Mr~ Dick Tevlin, President of Lincoln Park Civic Association,
and in addition representing Nutwood~Ball Civic Association~ Westwood
Civic Association and Oranqewood-Haster Civic Association, advised that
in 'the interet;t of bred/it7 they' fay-or 'the appellant~ Disneyland in this
matter~ and further advised that they' would like to go on record as
suggesting an ordinance be en,a.;ted insuring future development in the
Disneyland area~ to be comp-~tlble with existing land use and heights
of structures as they exl-,t -~t ci e p_~_esent time°
He further advi~ed that acc:ording 'to their information~ they
have heard 'that two other £azge hotel chains are interested in this area
7441
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 21, 1964~ 1:30 P.M.
which hotels apparently would be high-rise structuresl in addition accord-
in9 to the testimony 9iven~ they have heard of the illusional problems
that high-rise buildings would present to Disneyland, aha it has been
stated that there has been no facts presented that this would present a
problem. Mr. Tevlin noted that the United States Government recently stop-
ed a high-rise apartment development along the Potomac River for this very
reason~ that it would be unsightly and incompatible with the land.
Mr. Tevlin~ thereupon requested the proponents request be denied,
on the grounds that it would establish a precedent in the area, which'in
time could obliviate the entire Disneyland complex, resulting in a lone
central park among steel and concrete,,
Mro Jack Shapiro advised that his family were the owners of
thirty-three acres located on the corner of Cerritos Avenue and Walnut
Street. Recognizing t}~e complexity of the problem~ :~nd the future
of this area will to some degree be affected b'y the decision made on subject
application~ Mro Shapiro advised that there wasn't anyone present that
would not like to see a Sheraton Hotel in Anaheim~ and regardless of the
decision made on this matter~ he hoped that they did locate here and were
able to make their plans economically sound°
Regarding subjective values~ Mro Shapiro stated that the dream
of Disneyland was a very subjective one in the minds of a few people before
it grew~ that in his travels he found very fe'~ successful parks of this
kind in the world° The difference between them i~ a m]bjective one, the
one of beauty~ quality and the one that Si'yes a 9ue:~t a good feeling while
visiting the parko
Disne¥1and is of the opinion that their creation is something
which '~iil be affected Dy the structure~ he further noted that thev are
men of art, and when you take a~ay from an ar-ti.st hi~s feeling that he is
on the right road~ that he is creat>~ng 'this subjective thing of beauty
and attaction, you are robDin9 him to some degree of 'that which has origi-
nally made him su.ccessfulo
Mro Shapiro sta'ted~ his dilem~a t[~at he also wanted the
Sheraton Hotel to loca'te here~ and felt the Sheraton Hotel also wanted
success for Disneyland.
Mro Shapiro f'uz.'ther ad'vised thaz 'the Disneyland imitation he
visited in Kioto~ and Freedomland in New '~'ork, cannot compare with Disney-
land~ that the only pla~e tha-t has maint:~ined some of the beauty was
tivoli in Copenhagen°
Recognizing that Dlsne'ylana were experts in their own field,
Mr o Shapiro questioned whether Sheraton Hotel would want 'to take this
chance~ and further advised he was glad the decision was that of the City
Council and not hiso
Mro Ettinger stated that they came w;lth the intent in mind to
present all the fac'ts~ evidence and their opinions~ that Mro Shapiro has
been able to express what 'the'~' feel~ it ls an artist approach to a
situation that ;armor De pu~ down on a s~ Ge ~uie~
Mr. Ettinger reported that the gross percentage of the increase
referred to by Mr~ Barnes? represented dollars and not people~ and the
difference lies in that certain operations within the park, such as food
and merchandisinq, has been assumed by management which }~as been reflect-
ed accord:i~ngl¥. T~:at. the a~tual increase of people was from 5.1~ in the
prior year~ compared to L.6 last year.
Regarding the late day fo~-the filing of the appeal~ Mr.
Ettinger stated~ that as he understood it, with all the time and energy
put into the proposal~ this would date back far later than roughly last
November when this first came to their attention° ~o further clarify
their position, Mro £ttinger stated tha't 'the first time they learned of
the proposal, was when a notice of public hearing was received from the
7442
City` Hall,~ Anaheim~ Salifornia - COUCh, iL MINUTES - January 21~ 1964~ 1:30 P.M.
Planning Commission, which was r~ght and proper, iegal!¥{ however~ in. pro-
poslng a twenty-two ~tory structure~ with all the necessary research, it
seemed odd to him how they overlooked the fact that on two occasions~ in
1961, and in 19622 the same i:~sue came before the Anaheim City Council,
and the issues were ze~olved 'to the extent that some height limitation
was imposed°
As to Disneyland giving the proponents a figure as to what the
height of the building should be, they felt strongly that this was not
'their prerogative to advise any one as to how to design their building;
further, it was true Disne¥1and has every reason to be sensitive to
public opinion~ because they are a large corporate entry in the com-
munity, they would not want to be placed in the position of trying to
influence any deci3ion~ this they have not done and everyone is aware
of this facto
Regarding a comp:omise~ M~o Et%inger stated~ the area norlh
of the present Oerm is plannea for future developement and knowing in
advance that this are~ cannot be designed [or exterior attractions~giv-
lng up this acres~ w~ in their opinion~ a substantial compromise on
their parto In addition with the present height limitation~ additional
funds must be expensed to further shleld the 'visual intrusion~
'Ihs Mayor asksd for a showing of hand of those favoring said
,~ppli<ation,~anm then fo~ a showin9 of hand of those in opposition to
said applicationo
Mayor Coon,s a:~nounce~ that in his, opinion sufficient evidence
had been presented~ and thereupon declared the hearing closed~
Coun,:zilman K_rein felt certain that Disneyland and the promoters
of the Sheraton Hotel h~d given considerable consideration to the other
partie~'~ in'terests~ proble~<s and righ'ts~ unfortunately, mutual agreement
has not been reached~ further~ there was no doubt that the Sheraton
Hotel would be an asset to Anaheim, which he was certain Disneyland ~ould
agree~ in view of the proposed convention facilities~ additional hotels
will be needed~ aha on the other hand? Disneyland has been a success,
and he felt sure tha~ the repre~entatlves of Disneyland were sincere in
their ~tatement that a building of this type would be an intrusion on
the park° Yurther~ the fact ~ould not oe o'~fer,-iooked that if were not for
Disneyland~ this application ~ould probas~y' not have been made°
Councilman Kz~ein was of 'the opinion that 'the problem still
requires consideration on both sides, and could be resolved~ and due to
the fact that material has been received~ both pro and con~ that the
C,ity Council has not h~d an opportunity to consider~ and the matter
would have to be ,,_on%inued,
Councilman Schut'te referred to 'the request that a decision
be made this evening~ and recognized this was important to the applicant;
however~ he also recognized something far more important~was that when
a decision is ~aae~ it 'will be one that is just and fair and to the
best interest of the people of Anaheim~ and thereupon moved that the
~ision on this application De postponed two weeks (February 4~ 1964~
1;30 P.M.)
Councilman Dutton stated that he agreed with the statements
made by Councilman Kreino
Mayor Coons advised that he personally would not be in a
position to make a de<ision this evening, that he also wished to study
the matter further o in his opinlon~ the issue to be decided went
further than the 'two principals involved~ consideration must be given
not only to the two principals, but also to the one hundred and fifty
m~llion dollar investment in the area°
Councilman Chandler seconded the motion made by Councilman
Schutteo
7443
City Hall~ Anaheim~ Califoz-nia .... OOUNCiL MiN'OTF.$ - January 2i~ 19649 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Dutton no'ted the understanding given by the present
and previous City Councils to 'the Disneyland p~oject~ and further noted
that the area has been lkmited to related ube~; at~o ~ndividual
rights must be considereo aha ~ne Oec~s~on mu,~'t ~e mace on the basis of
what would be best for the City of Anahelmo
Councilman Chandler advised that standing between the two parties
involved~ was the City of Anaheim, and the City of Anaheim has made a
certain amount of independent determinations concerning the complex that
exists at the present time at Disneyland, with the hope that other people
will come in but with no certainty 'thai 'they would~ ~urther~ the City is
involved in a commi'tment of a multi-million dollar convention center in
the area~ and he personally would have to be convinced that 'the entire
complex will not be hurt by any other developments in the area which will
include the Sheraton Hotel and its lo~ationo
Mayor Coons repeated the motion made by Councilman Schutte, and
seconded by Councilman ~hand~er~ that the final decision on this hearin9
be rendered at the I~30 PoM. session of the [eOruary 4th, 1964~ meeting°
MOTION CARRIED.
The City Clerk reported that two let'ters received this date
requested a thirty day extension, ~nd the Cit'~~ Council advised that they
were aware of thi~ request°
REC. L. ASSIFiCATiON NO. 63-64-54 AND CONDITIONAL 'USE PERMIT NO. 496: Submitted by
Cecil Keith and Satoshi Cy Yuguchi~ requesting change of zone from R-A to
R-3~ and permission to establi~h a one-story multiple family planned resi-
dential development with carports; propez"ty briefly described as having a
frontage on the north slde and the north half of the cul-de-sac of Winston
Road~ east of Magnolia Avenue ~'2513 ~and 2519 Winston Road).
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution Nco 982~
Series 1963-64~ recommended Reclassification No. 63-64-54 be approved~
subject to the followin9 conditions:
1o That the owners of subject propezt'y shall deed to 'the City of Anaheim
a strip of land 40 feet in ~idth~ from the centerline of the street,
along Winston Road for street widening purposes~ and the owners of
subject propert~ shall also deed to 'the City of Anaheim the necessary
street dedZcation to insure a 50-foot property line radius on the
cul-de-saco
20 That 'the street improvement plans ;shall be prepared and all engineering
requirements of 'the City of Anaheim along Winston Road, such as curbs
and gutters~ sidewalks, ~'treet grading and paving, drainage facilities,
or other appurtenant ~ork shall be completed as required by the City
Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on
file in the Offioe of the City Engineer~ and that a bond in an amount
and form satisfactory to the Clty of Anaheim shall be posted with the
City to guarantee the installation of said engineering requirements°
30 That the owners of subject property shall pay to 'the City of Anaheim
the sum of $2o00 per front foot~ along Winston Road~ for street
ligh'ting purposes°
4. That the completion of these reclas:~Lfication proceedings is con-
tingent upon granting of Conditional Use Permit No. 496o
50 That Condition Nos° 1, 2~ and 3~ above mentioned~ shall be complied
with within a period of 180 days from date hereof~ or such further
time as the City Council may grant°
6. That subject property shall be developed ~ubstantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked
Exhibit Noso 1 and 2~ provided tha't the westerly 21.-foot drive shall
be reduced to 9-feet~ which 9~feet shall be developed in conjunction
with an existin9 21-foot drive on the abutting property to the west,
and that the remaining 12-feet shall be utilized so as to establish a
6-foot landscaped setback of 'the proposed structures from the easterly
and westerly driveso
The City Planning 'Commission pursuant to Resolution No. 983,
Series 1963-64~ granted Conditional Use Permit No, 496 subject to the
7444
City Hall~ Anahe~m~ Galifornla - COUNCIL MINUTES .- January 21~ t964~ 1:30 P.M.
following conditions:
That the owners of ..~ub3ec't property shall pay to the City of Anaheim
the ..sum of $25000 per d,r~'eliling unit to be used for park and recrea-
tion pu:rpo:~e's, ~::~aid amount [o be paid at the time the building is
issued~,
20 That trash ~iorage ~rea~ shall be provided in accordance with approved
plans on file in the Office of the Director of Public ~orks, prior to
final build~n9 inspectiono
3. Tha~ fire h¥,drants ~ha~i be ins~ailea as required and de~ermined %o be
ne~e~sary by the Chief of the Fire Depaztment~ to be installed prior
to final building inspectiono
That thi~ Conditional Use Permit is granted subject to the completion
of Reclassifzcation No. 63-6~-5~
That subject property t:Jhall be de'~eloped substantially in accordance
with pi~n:s and spectficat~_ons on file ~ith ~he City of Anaheim ma~ked
Exhibit No:~) 1 and 2~ prov:~ded that the westerly 21-foot drive shall
be reduced to nine feel~ ~hich nine feet shall be developed in con-
junction with an ex'isting 21-foot drive on the abutting property to
the we.~'t~ and that the remaining 12 feet shall be utilized so as to
establish a six-foot land:~caped setback of the proposed structure
from the easteri'7 ~nd we:oterly drive.~
That an ir~evocabie easement granting access from subject property~
to utilize the proposed 9.-foot extension of the existing 21-foot drive
abutting to the wes~ of subject property~ shall be submitted to and
approved b~ the ]:it¥~' Attorne.~s offiz:e prior to final building
inspections~,
~o That tree weil~ ~h~il be pro~,ided at approximately 40-foot inter-
val~ in the Winston Roan pa~a~)' abutting subject property~ that
plans for. ;:aid tree ~eil~ and planting of trees therein, shall be
..submitted to and ~pp~o~:ed 07 the Super'intendent of Parkway Maintenance,
and ',a:d tree ~eii~, sh..~il be planted wi~h trees prior to final build-
:ing in;)pe.~r~ t:ion ~
That the rear and :~ide .~i1~ of the p~oposed ::arpozts shall be finished
with exterio: ouilSln9 ~.~teriai:):, that enclosed storage cabinets with a
minimum ::~pa..:it~,' of one hunaied ca.u:c feet shall be provided a~ the
rear ~all of each ::arport~ and that adequate bumper guards shall be
provided to protect 'the interior ~ail:s of the carports prior to final
Duilciing in~pet;t'kon
M:r, ~.-trtin ?(reidt noted the location of subject property and
the e×';sting u.,e::'~ ann :zoning :,~n the immediate area~ briefing the evidence
cubmztted to :~ad tone.de_red by tl,e Zit¥ Plannzng Commission.
Plans and the fiia.: were re,,rewea by the City Council, and
Mayo~ Coon:~ asked ff t'ne appll.~at was pxesent and wished to address the
City Count ~1.,
Mz,~ Ce'::l KeZth i.naicated hi~ presence in the audience,
[he Ma¥o:~: asked ~f anyone ~tshed to address the City Council,
there be-~ng no response, de:/:lared the hear:lng closed on Reclassification
No. 63-64-54 and Cond~[iona.~ O~e Permit No. 4960
RESOLUTION NO. 64R.-39: Coun.t:llman Dutton offered Resolution No. 64R-39,
authorizing preparntion of necessary Ordinance~ changing the zone as
requested, sub~ect to the recommendations of the City Planning Commissiono
Refer 'to Re.solution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY COUNCIL OF T~E CiTY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND
DETERMINING THAT 'riFLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND [HAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES
SHOULD BE CHANGED. (63-64-5,4 - R,-3~
On roll call the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and
adopted by 'the following vote:
7445
City Hall~ A.naheim~ California - COUNCIL MIN'OTES -January 21~ 1964~ !:30 P.M.
AYES; COUNCILMEN: Duffon~ Chandler~ $chutte, Krein and Coons
NOES; GOUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No, 64R-39 duly passed and adopted.
RE~OLUTION NO. 64R-40: Councilman Dutton offered Resolution No. 64R-40 for
adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 496, subject to the recom-
mendations of the City Planning Commission°
Refer to Resolution Book°
A RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY CO'ONC!L OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 496o
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted
by the following 'vote:
AYES: COUNC!IJ~EN: Dutton, Chandler, Schutte, Krein and Coons
NOE$~ COUNCiLmEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 64R-40 duly passed and adopted.
PUB.LIC HEARING.t RECLASSiFICATiON NO. 63-64-63 AND CONDIIiONAL USE PERMIT NO. 513~
Submitted by W. No J. investment? !nco~ requesting change of zone from R-A
to R-3~ property located on the south side of Ball Road approximately 664-
feet east of Brookhurst Street (2130 West Ball Road)~ and further requesting
permission to estabii,~h a three~tor¥ apartment building with waiver of the
following:
(1) Garages~ to permit construction of carports°
(2) Two and one-half story or ~5 foot structural height limitation°
(3) One-story height limitation within 150 feet of R-A zones property°
The City Planning Commission pursuant 'to Resolution Nco 988,
Series 1963-64~ recommended Reclassification No. 63-64-63 for approval,
subject to the following eonditions:
1. That the owners of subject property shall deed to 'the City of Anaheim
a strip of land 53 feet in width, from the center line of the street,
along Ball Road~ for street widening purposeso
That street imp~-ovement plans shall be prepared and all engineering
requirements of 'the City of Anaheim alon9 Ball Road~ such as curbs
and gutter$~ sidewalks~ street grading and paving, drainage facilities,
or other appurtenant work ~hall be completed as required by the City
Engineer and in accordance with':~tandard plans and specifications on
file in the Office of the City Engineer~ and that a bond in an amount
and form satisfactory 'to 'the City of Anaheim shall be posted with the
City to guarantee the installation of said engineering requirements.
3. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim
the sum of $2.00 per front foot, along Ball Road~ for street lighting
purposes°
4. That the completion of these reclassification proceedings is con-
tingent upon the grantin9 of a Conditional Use Permito
5. That Condition Noso 1~ 2~ and 3~ above mentioned, shall be complied
with within a period of 180 days from date hereof~ or such further
time as the City Council may granto
That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked
Exhibi~ Noso 19 2, and 3.
The City Planning Commission pursuant 'to Resolution No. 989~
Series 1963-64, granted Conditional Use Permit No. 513~ subjec~ to lhe
following conditions:
?446
City Halti Anaheimz.. California . COUNCil MINUTES -- 3anuary 21~ 19641 1;30 P.M.
That subject property shall be developed substan'tially in accordance
with plans and specifi~'ations on file with the City of Anaheim marked
Exhlbi't Nos~ 1, 2~ and 3,
2. That the proposed alleys along '[he east and south of subject pro-
perty shall be developed in accordance with plan 1000, including
concrete gutters~ prior [o final building inspections.
3. That a six-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the east,
south~ and west property lines pr'~or to final building inspection.
4o That the rear and side walls of the proposed carports shall be
finished with exterior building materials, that enclosed storage
cabinets of a minimum capacity of i00 cubic feet shall be provided
at the rear wail of each carport, and that adequate bumper guards
shall be provided to protect the interior walls of the carports
prior to final building inspection~
5. That tree wells shall be provided at approximate 40-foot intervals
in the Ball Road parkway abutting subject property~ that plans for
said tree wells and piantin9 of trees therein~ shall be submitted
to and approved by the Superintendent of Parkway Maintenance; and
that said tree wells shall be planted with trees prior to final
buiidin9 inspection°
Mr~ Martin Kreidt noted the location of subject property and
the existing uses and zoning in the immediate area, briefing the evidence
submitted to and ~onsidered by the City Planning Commission.
Plans and the files were revlewed by the City Council, and
the Mayor asked if 'the applicant or his agent was present and wished
to address the City Council,~
Robert De.~..3er't, repze::~ent:na the applicant~ indicated his
~?.e ::uu~en e fo: Zbe pu:'po~e of an~,wering auestions.
The Mayor asked :~f anyone else wished to address the City
Council, there beinc no re~;ponse, declared the hearing closed on
Reclassification No, 63.-64.~63 and Conditional Use Permit No. 513.
RESOLUIION NOo 64R.-41: Councilman Kreln offered Resolution No. 64R-41,
authorizin9 preparation of necessary Ordinance, changin9 the zone as
requested, subject to the :recommendation~s of the City Planning Commission.
Refer' to Resolutton Book°
A RESOLUTION OF tHE CiTY COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND
DETERMINING THA~ TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
ZONING SHOgD BE AMENDED AND [HAT [HE BOUNDARi[ES OF CERTAIN ZONES
SHOULD BE CHANGED~, 63-64.~63
On roll call the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton~ Chandler~ Schutte, Krein and Coons
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENt: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nco 64R-41 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO~ 64R-42: Councilman Krein offered Resolution No. 64R-42~
9ranting Conditional Use Permit No. 5!3, subject to the recommendations
of the City Planning Commission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE Ci'TY COUNCil OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITION-
AL USE PERMIT NO~, 513,
On roll call the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and
adopted by the following vote:
7447
City Hall~ Ana%eim~.California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 21~ 1964~ 1:30 P.M.
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Chandler, Schutte, Krein and Coons
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 64R-42 duly passed and adopted.
UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF MAYORS: Mayor Coons announced that the United
States Conference of Mayors will hold their 1964 Convention in New York,
New York, May 24 through 27,19643 and advised that annual dues for the
City of Anaheim membership in said organization are due.
Council discussion was held, and at the conclusion thereof,
Councilman $chutte moved that payment of dues to the United States Con-
ference of Mayors be made, and that legitimate expenses be authorized for
five delegates representing the City of Anaheim, to attend the convention
to be held in New York City, May 24 to 27, 1964. Councilman Dutton
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
EXECUTIVE SESSION~ On motion by Councilman Schutte, seconded by Councilman
Krein, the City Council recessed to Executive Session to consider a
personnel matter. MOIION CARRIED. (10~00 P.M.)
4DJOURNMENT~ The City Council returned from Executive gession, and adjourned,
on motion by Councilman ~rein, seconded by Councilman Schutte. MOTION
CARRIED.
ADJOURNED~' 10: 4 5 P o Mo
· -x City Clerk