1968/05/21
68-261
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNqIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. l:30 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
COUNCILMEN: None
CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch
CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph Geisler
CITY CLERK: Dene M. Williams
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR: ALAN G. ORSBORN
ASSISTANT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR: Robert Mickelson
ZONING SUPERVISOR: Ronald Thompson
CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox
TRAFFIC ENGlNEE1: Edward Granzow
PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Roy Heissner
r
Mayor Pebley called the meeting to order.
INVOCATION: Chaplain Robert Bergeson, of Martin Luther Hospital, gave the
Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Krein led the AsseL1~ly in the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flag.
PROCLAMATIONS: The following Proclamations were issued by Mayor Pebley:
"Orange County Firemen's Day" - May 25, 1968.
"Poppy Days" - May 24 and 25, 1968.
MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting held April 30, 1968, were
approved, on motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Krein.
MOTION CARRIED.
r
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Schutte moved to
waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions, and that con-
sent to the waiver of reading is hereby given by all Councilmen, unless af-
ter reading of the title, specific request is made by a Councilman for the
reading of such ordinance or resolution. Councilman Clark seconded the mo~
tion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
REPORT - FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City, in the
amount of $683,852.34, in accordance with the 1967-68 Budget, were approved.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 67-68-60: Initiated by the City
Planning Commission, requesting change of zone from County A-l to R-A; two
parcels of land, totaling approximately 30 acres, located as follows: Par-
cel No.1, located on the west side of Sunkist Street, north of the center-
line of Ball Road; Parcel No.2, located on the east side of Sunk~~st Street,
north of the _enterline of Ball Road. (Sunkist Annexation.)
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC68-80,
recommended approval of said reclassification.
Public Hearing was continued from the meeting of April 30, 1968,
to allow zoning finalizing R-l and R-2, 5,000.
r
The City Clerk reported that permanent zoning had been adopted on
both parcels involved in subject reclassification - Ordinance No. 2510, be-
. ing adopted April 30, 1968, changing the zone of Parcel No. 1 to R-2, 5,000,
Single-Family Residential zone, and Ordinance No. 2493, being adopted March
19, 1968, changing the zone on Parcel No. 2 to R-l, Single-Family Residen-
tial. These actions having been taken by the City Council, supersedes sub-
ject appllaatl0n.
Councilman Krein moved that all proceedings on Reclassification
No. 67-68-60 be terminated. Councilman Dutton seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
68-262
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1017: Submitted by Ruth C. Williams,
requesting permission to establish a mobile home park; R-A zoned property,
located on the east side of Kraemer Boulevard, (Dowling Avenue,) south of
Orangethorpe Avenue and adjacent to the southerly boundary of the Orange
County Flood Control Channel.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC68-87,
denied said conditional use rermit.
Appeal from action taken by the City Planning Commission was filed
by Robin H. Fairbairn, Attor ey representing the applicant, and public hear-
ing scheduled this date. .
n
Zoning Supervisor, Ronald Thompson, noted the location of subject
property and the existing us~s and zoning in the immediate area, summarizing
the evidence submitted to an~ considered by the City Planning Commission.
He advised that the proposed 104-space development would constitute a den-
sity of 11.7 mobile homes per net residential acre, and he briefed the find-
ings made by the Planning Co~ission, precedent to their action.
Mayor Pebley asked if the applicant or her representative wished
to address the City Council.
Mr. Robin Fairbairn, 850 East Chapman Avenue, Orange, addressed
the Council, advising that the petitioner also owns the property north of
the Orange County Flood Control Channel and that the total parcel is in-
cluded in the Northeast Industrial Resolution of Intent to zone M-l, adopted
in 1961 and included in the General Plan in 1963.
Mr. Fairbairn stated that the issue under consideration was whether
the use requested was suitable for the property, and that the layout could be
redesigned for the 12 acres. He advised that no one had expressed an inter-
est in purchasing the subject parcel, although it had been signed for sale
for the past four or five years and, in his opinion, the land was restricted
by the M-l designation to a point where it could not be used for any reason-
able purpose, with the exception of a mobile home park; that the taxes had
increased 250% in the past year, and the petitioners wished to develop the
property in a reasonable manner.
1
Discussion was held by the City Council and Councilman Dutton read
excerpts from the comments by mobile home park authorities, as quoted in the
Development Service Department's Staff Report, dated April 8, 1968, together
with several of the questions recommended by the Trailer Coach Association,
for consideration when developing a park. He was of the opinion that an~n-
dustria1 area was not a proper location for a mobile home park, and pointed
out the fact that the Autonetics Division of North American Aviation had
located in Anaheim because of their experience with residential encroachment
into the immediate vicinity of their facilities in Downey; further, that to
approve subject petition would establish a precedent for other similar re-
quests.
The Mayor asked if anyone had opposition to present. There was
no response.
Development Services Director, Alan G. Orsborn, addressed the
Council, advising that the City Planning Commission had recently approved
an industrial subdivision at the northwest corner of Orangethorpe Avenue
and Kraemer Boulevard; property comprising eleven acres. He noted that as
a service to developers, builders, etc., the Development Services Department
maintains a file of information on available industrial property, and yearly
contacts with owners are made to keep the information current; that no res-
ponse had been received to the most recent communication forwarded to the
owner of subject property.
n
The Mayor declared the hearing closed.
.
68-263
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCI~ MINUTES - Mav 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO.68R-264: Coul.~ilman Krein oiiered Resolution No. 68~-264 for
adoption, sustaining t~e action ta~en by the City Planning Commission, deny-
ing Conditional Use Permit No. 1017.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL QF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 10l7.
r
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Krein, Clark and Pebley
Schutte
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 68R-264 duly passed and adopted.
Prior to casting his vote, Councilman Schutte stated that he failed
to see how the granting of subject petition would be harmful to anyone, and
he cited the difficulties experienced by many owners of R-A property, desig-
nated for future industrial use.
PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE:
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC68-99 was submitted, recommending
to the City Council an amendment to Title 18, Chapter 18.52, M-l, Light
Industrial Zone, Section l8.52.0S0 (3), Conditional Uses, of the Anaheim
Municipal Code, said amendment to delete sub-paragraph 3 from Section 18,52.
050, which requires any industrial use proposed to be located closer than
330 feet from the exterior boundaries of any public school or park site,
shall be subject to a Conditional Use Permit.
l
Mr. Thompson briefly reviewed the background of the issue, and ad-
vised that if sub-paragraph (3) were literally interpreted, any use would re-
quire approval of a conditional use permit in an M-l zone,when located within
330 feet of a public school or park site.
Mayor Pebley asked if anyone wished to address the City Council,
there being no response, declared the hearing closed.
ORDINANCE NO. 2519: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 2519 for first
reading, deleting sub-section (3) from Section 18.52.050 of the Anaheim Mu-
nicipal Code.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18, CHAPTER 18.52,
SECTION l8.52.090 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO ZONING.
(Deleting Paragraph 3 - Conditional Uses.)
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 67-68-70. VARIANCE NO. 1965. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 3l:
Petitioners: Alan and Marjorie Ta1t. Location of property, ~ of State ft~
College Boulevard, extending from Ball Road south to Winston Road. '
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 67-68-70: Change of zone from County A-l (City R-A,
Ordinance No. 2514), to R-3.
[
VARIANCE NO. 1965: 1. Waiver of maximum building height within 150 feet
of single-family residential zone. 2. Waiver of minimum sideyard setback.
3. Waiver of carport location. 4. Waiver of minimum distance between
buildings.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 3l: Changing designation from Industrial to
Medium-Density Residential, the area bounded by Ball Road, Orange Freeway,
Cerritos Avenue and State College Boulevard.
AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 94: Alternates A and B, setting forth plan of
development in the event multiple-family zoning is extended south of Ball
Road.
68-264
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
Public Hearing was held May 7, 1968, at which time said hearing was
closed, and decision deferred to this date for an additional report relative
to the impact the proposed use would have on existing and future industrial
developments.
Supplemental Report to General Plan Amendment No. 3l and Area De-
velopment Plan No. 94 were submitted.
Councilman Dutton moved the public hearing on the issue be reopened,
due to additional research made, the Supplemental Report, and the possibility
that new evidence might be offered. Councilman Krein seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
Director of Development Services, Alan Orsborn, briefed the Supple-
mental Report prepared at the request of the City Council.
Incorporated in subject report was an examination of land use in
both Multiple-Family and Industrial categories, briefly as follows:
INDUSTRIAL: Total acreage presently indicated on the General Plan, within
the present City Limits - 3,422 acres.
DEVELOPED. OR COMMITI'ED FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT: 2,879 acres.
PRESENTLY DEVELOPED INDUSTRIALLY: 1,453 acres.
LAND DEVELOPED FOR OTHER THAN INDUSTRIAL USES (Stadium. Commercial. Power-
Line Easements. etc.): 561 acres.
VACANT LAND HELD BY INDUSTRIAL CONCERNS. REALTORS. AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPERS
FOR FUTURE EXPANSION: 865 acres.
VACANT ACREAGE NOT COMMITTED TO INDUSTRIAL USE: 543 acres.
SPECIFIC INDUSTRIAL AREAS OF NON-COMMITTED VACANT LAND. INDICATED SUBJECT
AREA (SOUTHEAST INDUSTRIAL AREA) CONTAINS 74.6 ACRES.
The absorption rate for industrial land from 1961 was estimated at
40 acres per year, with a balance of vacant land, both committed and non-
committed for industry to develop in an estimated period of 28 years.
MULTIPLE-FAMILY: Total acreage presently indicated on the General Plan, with-
in the present City Limits - 1,99l acres.
DEVELOPED OR COMMITTED FOR DEVELOPMENT: 840 acres.
USED FOR. OTHER PURPOSES (PUBLIC BUILDINGS. CENTER-CITY. TRAlIER PARKS. AND
OTHER NON-CONFORMING USES): 661 acres.
NET MULTIPLE-FAMILY ACREAGE AVAILABLE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT: 490 acres.
CENTER-CITY AREA. POTENTIALLY FOR REDEVELOPMENT: 302 acres.
The absorption ratio for multiple-family land, from 1961, was es-
timated at 45 net acres peryear, with the remaining total of land, (490 acres),
within the present City Limits estimated to be developed within the next II
years.
Mr. Orsborn further reported that the Planning Staff was currently
preparing a recommended revision to the present General Plan, which will in-
clude an additional 500 acres for multiple-family uses, to be presented to
the City Planning Commission and the City Council at a future date.
With reference to the fact that only 23% of the industrial labor
force resides within the City of Anaheim, Mr. Orsborn pointed out certain
contributing factors; one being the fact that Anaheim has approximately 32.7%
of the total County labor force, or approximately 127,000, which is equivalent
to approximately 80% of the total population of the City. With an approximate
5l,000 dwelling units within the City, 60% of the total labor force is required
to look elsewhere for housing.
~
:1
J
o
68-265
City Hall. Anaheim. California - CO~CIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
Comparison, for ana1y~is purposes, of this factor was made be-
tween the Cities of Fullerton, Santa Ana and Garden Grove.
COST - REVENUE:
n
I I
MULTIPLE-FAMILY - ItIDUSTRIAL: Mr. Orsborn reported that this analysis
would require an extended period to complete for positive, valid conclu-
sions, and thereupon noted cost and revenue factors that would be consid-
ered in such an analysis.
It was noted that the adoption of the General Plan in 1963 recog-
nized open space as a buffer between residential and industrial uses. Such
open space, or natural buffers, are the Santa Ana River, flood control
channels and basins, freeways, major and primary highways. It was further
noted that Ball Road was designated as a primary highway, and as such, con-
sidered a buffer between the residential and industrial uses.
In conclusion, Mr. Orsborn stated if the City Council felt a
change in the land use to multiple-family, south of Ball Road, was warranted,
the General Plan Amendment No. 31, Exhibit D, should be logically consid-
ered, and Area Development Plan No. 94, Alternate B, would best implement
development, minimizing traffic and environmental conflicts between the
residential and industrial uses.
Mr. Ronald Thompson reported that Area Development Plan No. 94,
Alternate B, would implement the City Planning Commission's recommendations.
r-I
, .
Mr. Thompson ;;urther reported that Alternate B would best provide
for a transition and buffer, and also provide for a circulation system by
extending a local street southerly approximately 660 feet, and extending a
new street east and west, with a cul-de-sac at State College Boulevard, and
opening onto Sunkist Street. Other development criteria depicted on Alter-
nate B was explained, such as width of roads, setbacks, etc.
Area Development Plan No. 94, Alternate A, depicted development
should multiple-family zoning be extended from Ball Road southerly to Win-
ston Road, between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Street.
In answer to Mayor Pebley's question, it was reported that indus-
trial use was presently established on the south side of Winston Road and
the majority of the required right-of-way for future street widening would
be from the north side.
Mr. Thompson reported access to Winston Road from the north, would
be at specific points, primarily designed to minimize traffic conflict.
Councilman Schutte referred to former conversation with Mr. Orsborn,
and at his request, Mr. Orsborn reaffirmed his position taken in that if R-3
zoning is permitted south of Ball Road, it should be extended southerly to
Winston Road, with proper buffering provided.
Mayor Pebley asked if it wasn't a fact that the Planning Staff
and Planning Commission have been studying and considering the land desig-
nated potentially M-l for possible R-3 development, due to the present low-
facancy factor of apartments.
~
I
\
Mr. Orsborn replied that the Staff has been reviewing the General
Plan, in an effort to find additional land properly orientated for residen-
tial use, however, not specifically in the M-l zone, but primarily in the
residential and agricultural areas.
Councilman Dutton was of the op~n~on that the imbalance of R-3
zoning was created by the City Council in creating a small supply of R-3
zoned property for development.
68-266
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. 1t30 P.M.
Mr. Orsborn stated industrial and resid~ntial balance must 0e'main-
tained, however, the pro~lem is greater as traffic circulation an~ anticipated
City services must be considered for both industry and res:i,dential.
Councilman Dutton, relative to the duties of Mr. Orsborl)., noted th~t
among other duties, as Director of Development Services, was the duty to pro-
mote and attract industries to this City. He further noted that in the three
years of Mr. Orsborn's services, with the team effort of the Chamber of Com-
merce and others, the increase of industrial square footage construction has
been from 750,000 square feet to a firm projection for this year of 1,266,4JO
square feet.
Mr. Dutton was of the op1n10n that the absorption factor of the
Los Angeles area made Anaheim the next logical area for industrial develop-
ment.
Councilman Schutte related Council, Management, and his personal
efforts in attracting industries to Anaheim, and further reported that owners
of potential industrial land now find themselves in a position where their
land cannot be disposed of for industrial use.
Councilman Krein, recognizing the importance of the decision on sub-
ject property, felt the decision would determine whether Anaheim wanted indus-
try. He stated that if industry is desired, they must be protected from the
encroachment of residential property.
Mr. Geisler noted Area Development Plan No. 94, Alternates A and B,
both include a center parkway. He further reported that the maintenance of
these areas would be the City's responsibility at general expense.
Councilman Schutte referred to the report indicating percentage of
the industrial labor force residing elsewhere. In his opinion, considerable
revenue was lost to the City by loss of utility sales, sales tax, etc. He
estimated 30 acres of R-3-zoned property, taking all factors into considera-
tion, would return to the City five times the revenue paid by industries
developed on comparable acreage.
Councilman Dutton reported an analysis made by the United States
Chamber of Commerce, on the result of one hundred new employees to a city
in the terms of economy to the community.
The public hearing being reopened, Mayor Pebley asked if the appli-
cant wished to address the Council.
Mr. Alan Talt, l375 St. Albans Road, San Marino, California, owner
of subject property, advised that during his l3-year ownership of the property
no industry has sought to purchase, lease or develop it. He further advised
that within the last three years he has contacted Coldwell-Banker, and other
industrial realtors, in an effort to secure an industrial user for the pro-
perty, with no results; the only choice now being a residential development
or growing strawberries.
Mr. Talt reported that the present use of the property, (strawberries),
yields approximately $400.00 per year in taxes to the City of Anaheim, whereas
the proposed R-3 development, in direct property taxes, would yield approxi-
mately $5,000.00 per year to the City, not including projected sales tax or
other fringe revenues.
Noting the projection of 28 years to develop present land desig-
nated for industrial use, Mr. Talt reported their proposed development would
be amortized in 25 years.
Mr. Talt reported on his recent visit to the Alcoa Plaza in San
Francisco, noting that adjacent to this industrial development there are high-
rise office buildings, commercial and residential, for the apparent reason of
affording their employees a nearby place to live, eliminating the necessity
of commuting to and from their place of employment. He stated they were the
present owners of two apartment buildings in the City of Anaheim, and it has
been their experience that apartment dwellers live near to their place of em-
ployment, and it was his opinion that industry will be attracted by housing.
:l
l
n
68-267
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNC+L MINUTES - Mav 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
With reference to the desirability of residential development ad-
jacent to industrial development, Mr. Talt reported that major lenders have
advised that housing is a major necessity in this area. Regarding Area De-
velopment Plan No. 94, Alternates A and B, Mr. Talt felt they could comply
with Alternate A, however, Alternate B would result in an additional loss
of land utilization of approximately 25%.
r
Councilman Dutton noted that Councilman Schutte presented the
zoning issues before the City P1aQning Commission and City Council, and
questioned the legality of his participation as Councilman at this hearing.
At the request of the City Council, Mr. Geisler reported that
there were several different items in connection with a "Conflict of Interest"
and under the Government Code and City Charter it involves itself with a
financial interest in a contract between the City and some other party.
The Government Code goes further, with a description of basically "Conflict
of Interest," in that if the interest is a remote interest, there is no pro-
hibition from dealing with the City Council, and further specifi~, incidents
which could be considered remote interest, such as an officer or Councilman
also being a member of a body or board entering into a contract with the
City. However, in this instance, according to his interpretation, the Coun-
cilman would not be permitted to vote on the contract"even if it is deter-
mined that he has ol~ly a r:-,.:ot2 il1::0rest.
Mr. Geisler noted that another item was a Councilman's Oath of
Office, to faithfully perform the functions of his office.
He briefed two cases found on the subject, and stated that there
were no specific cases in California.
I
l
Mr. Geisler reported that in this matter the City Council acts in
both a quasi-judicial capacity and a legislative capacity.
In conclusion, Mr. Geisler advised that he could not make a state-
ment whether it was legal or illegal under the Codes as written. He felt
there was no question that there would be some "Conflict of Interest," but
whether the "Conflict of Interest," is such that would automatically dis-
qualify, there is no automatic disqualification under the City Charter or
the Government Code, there is nothing in either Code that specifies that
it would be illegal to act.
Councilman Schutte reported that individuals, other than his daugh-
ter and son-in-law were involved, and that he had no financial interest in
this transaction.
Upon further questioning, Mr. Geisler stated that he could not
deem that it would be anything but a "Conflict of Interest," as he doubted
if anyone could act as an impartial judge involving the interests of their
only daughter. As to whether it constitutes a "Conflict of Interest,"
that would make it illegal, and where he could not vote, he could not make
that ruling. He further stated that he could not Da~e a ruling if Council-
man Schutte owned subject property, as it is not a contract.
r
I I
I
t
Mr. Talt stated there was a substantial difference between passing
judgment on a contract from which the City might suffer, or another party
receive a benefit. In this instance, the City Council is judging a parcel
of real estate, the ownership of which should have no bearing on the decis-
ion and, in his opinion, the proposed development would be a b~nefit to the
City.
RECESS: Councilman Krein moved for a fifteen-minute recess. Councilman Dutton
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (4:05 P.M.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Pebley called the meeting to order, all members of the City
Council being present, and the public hearing on the Talt property continued.
68-268
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. l:30 P.M.
It was reported that the City Planning Commission had not reviewed
or considered Area Development Plan No. 94, and Mayor Pebley noted the possi-
bility that. their recommendations might have differed, in that the R-3 zoning
might have been recommended to extend to Winston Road.
Mr. Orsborn reported that the Exhibits A and B had not been pre-
sented to the City Planning Commission, however, the extension ofR-3 to
Winston Road was thoroughly explored.
At the request of Councilman Dutton, Mr. Orsborn referred to a
map of the Southeast Industrial Area, posted on the east wall of the Council
Chambers, depi~ting land presently used for industry, held in reserve and
owned by industry, and held by industrial developers or realtors for future
development.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council in favor
of the proposed zoning.
Mr. Henry Fredricks, 1500 Maureen Place, Fullerton, California,
owner of the commercial complex at the northeast corner of Ball Road and
State College Boulevard, addressed the Council, favoring the proposed change
of zone. He reported that they have reserved an area in the commercial
complex for a supermarket and drug store, and have been unsuccessful in ob-
taining such tenants, because of the lack of residential in the area, and
if some R-3 were permitted they would be in a position to complete the com-
mercial complex.
Mr. Fredricks further advised that they have constructed approxi-
mately 2,000 apartments in the City of Anaheim and, at the present time,
have no vacancies. Further, the first phase of the apartment complex at
Sunkist Street and Lincoln Avenue, although 30 days from completion, is
fully rented.
Mr. Fredricks advised that they were moving a small plant from the
City of South Gate to the northeast area, and one of the first moves of the
company, in order to hold the labor force, was to charter a 'DUS and 'Visit
~h(; aria to cleterui:!<.: the availaiJility of hou:::ing.
In conclusion, Mr. Fredricks stated that it was his op~n~on that
the requested zoning was not a conflict, but a balanced situation. He agreed
that only sufficient potentially industrial-zoned property should be zoned
for apartments that would produce a proper balance and support for industry
and commercial, and felt that the area between Ball Road and Winston Street,
east to the Freeway, was the logical area for R-3 zoning.
Mr. Albert Tousseau, 6672 Richfield Road, owner of property west
of subject property, advised that most of the owners in the area have owned
their property over fifty years, and felt that uses should be better balanced
than they are, as it was the property owner who suffered.
Excerpts of the Orange County Planning Department report was read,
indicating the availability of 33,8C~ acres in Orange County for industry,
estimating development at the rate of 300 acres per year. Mr. Tousseau
stated it was difficult for the land owner to wait this length of time,
paying taxes on unproductive land which can no longer be used for agricul-
tural.
Reference was made to the Irvi~~ area which purportedly has in ex-
cess of 5,000 acres reserved for industry, and more available if needed.
Mr. Tousseau felt subject area was in jeopardy, and taxed to the
point where the owners cannot afford to keep it, and not to permit a compatible
use would be unrealistic.
J
l
l
68.;.269
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. l~ 30 P .M,
Robert McMichael, 469 West Valencia Drive, Fullerton, Agent for
the petitioner, referred to Area Development Plan NOD 94, Alternates A
and B,and advised that Alternate B would provide 85 feet between the in-
dustry and multiple dwellings, co.mpared to 115 feet shown on Alternate A,
He urged the approval of Alternate A.
I
Mrs. Ann Madison, realtor, 600 South Harbor Boulevard, represent-
ing the Wagner property, directly to the north of subject property, advised
that Mr. Wagner approved of the proposed development and favored R-3 zoning
for the entire area.
Mrs. Madison further advised that she had found Councilman Schutte
very fair and honest in his decisions, and felt that he should have the
right, as a citizen, to speak on the matter. Whether or not he votes on
the issue was a different question,
Mrs, Madison was of the further opinion that the approximate
400 acres available for R-.3 development was not on the market for sale"
Alice Simpson advised that she, and her sister, Vera Wasser, owned
the property adjacent to the east of subject property, requested the R-3
zoning be approved and further requested that the multiple-family zoning
extend east to the Orange Freeway,
Miss Simpson noted on the map posted on the east wall of the
Council chambers an additional 11 acres in the area, under her ownership,
and requested it also be zoned R-3.
I'
I
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council,
favoring the proposed reclassification, there being no response, asked if
anyone wished to address the Council in opposition.
Mr. R.H. Lincoln, Chairman of the Industrial Committee of the
Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, stated that the circumstances had changed
somewhat, in that on two previous occasions Councilman Schutte stepped
down, that new exhibits have been presented that were not considered at
the public hearing held before the City Planning Commission; further, there
has been an indication of a possible new General Plan. He felt there had
been undue pressure, and that the integrity of the City Council, City of
Anaheim, and Chamber of Commerce was at stake.
Mr. Lincoln submitted a copy of the committee's organizational
chart, goa1s and missions. He advised that a meeting of approximately 15
key executives from industries was held this morning because of their con-
cern and interest in working wlththe committee and 'the City in areas of
industrial relationship and industrial growth. It was anti~ipated in ap-
proximately one month half of the industries, 60 or 70 members, will be .
represented on the.committeej they want to support the City's Industrial
Plan however support will bedirficult if irldustty'c~nnot be assu~ed
" . . .
they will not be encroached upon. In his opinion, ~f a new General Plan
is considered, subject application should'be denied until "the. committee
has had an opportunity to review the recommended change.
r--
1
,
Mr. Lincoln stated it was their firm op~n~on that this was an en-
croachment on a prime industrial area, bounded by major highways and the
Freeway, an area where industry presently exists, and no block wall or trees
would prevent residential complaints of unusual noises or odors.
With reference to the company he represents, Autonetics, he ad-
vised that they have one facility on Ball Road and East Street, shared with
Aeronutronics and they have a keen interest in zoning. He stated that in-
dustry must be supported, as well as all other uses, and residential use
in this area could force industry out.
68-270
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
With reference to his own partLular situation, Mr. Lincoln advised
that if this challenge was not met, he felt he could not support the Chamber
of Commerce, on the part of his,,:o:!lpany, in endeavoring to create good indus-
_rial relationships and expansion.
Councilman Dutton noted that the best way to encourage industrial
growth was by satisfying existing industries.
Mr. Lincoln referred to the committee organizational chart, noting
a sub-committee, whose purpose it was to cement relations between the City aQG
industry. He felt if industry was not to be supported, there was no reason
to endeavor to attract more to the City.
Councilman Clark asked Mr. Lincoln what industry's viewpoint was
on the need for housing, and where were these needed facilities to be built.
It was Councilman Clark's opinion that where there was a logical area that
could be developed in harmony for needed housing, it should be considered,
and that industry should also consider this jJJ:'':1t.
Mr. Lincoln replied that industry recognizes the housing problem,
however, this was not a prime consideration, or their plant would not be lo-
cating in the southeast area of Orange County, where housing is a problem. In
his opinion, the subject zoning would not help the overall problem, it would
only help a particular parcel of property, and encroach on industrial.
Mayor Pebley felt that if the Planning Department is anticipating a
recommended ct.ange to the General Plan, establishing additional R-3 areas, the
recommended change to the General Plan should be considered prior to any action.
Mr. Lincoln stated that the committee would like to consider the re-
commended change in the General Plan, and in this particular case, they were
violently opposed to reclassification.
Mr. Ed Leahy, representing the Southern Pacific Railroad, 1631 South
Lewis Street, advised that when their company commenced industrial development
i.n Orange County they produced a film to show various eastern businesses and
Chambers of Commerce, a portion of which was filmed at the Anaheim Chamber of
Commerce, because of their concern and cooperation.
Regarding the problem of selling industrial acreage, Mr. Leahy re-
ported that in 1958 their compan:; owned approximately 300 acres, and at this
time, ten years later, they have only 75 acres. He further advised that the
railroad was not in the real estate business, and they are required by law to
sell their property at the going rate, and they have had no problem selling
property under these conditions; that their interest is in attracting good
rail users, large industries that will be a benefit to the City.
Mr. Leahy explained that they have found that a large industry will
not consider an area adjacent to residential area, knowing the problems that
will be created, and it was logical to anticipate future expansion of residen-
tial in this area, if subject request is granted, thereby eliminating a large
section of potential industr _'_a'. property.
In conclusion, Mr. Leahy advised that as a common carrier, rail
transportation, they were vitally interested in preserving the industrial
:i_ntegrity of the southeast area; that a selling point in attracting additional
i.ndustries is that the City has committed this area for industry.
Mr. Bill McKay, representing the E.H. Sargent Company, located on
Ball Road, west of State College Boulevard, was of the opinion if subject pro-
perty is granted R-3 zoning, the property adjacent to --hem will also be changed
to R-3, and they could eventually be sz::."rounded with R-3 zoning. It was his
further opinion that subject property, and the southeast industrial area,
should be maintained as an industrial area.
Mr. Merrill Skilling, representing Nortronics Division of Northrup
Corporation, reported that they have recently enlarged their covered area by
40%, and this expansion occurred in the southeast industrial area. He stated
they investigated areas allover Southern Ca' ~fornia to confirm their opinion
that this was the best industrial land in Southern California; one of the
reasons was that this area was well-buffered from residential areas, and
according to the General Plan, this appeared to be a firm fact.
l
l
:t
1
I
68-271
City Hall. Anaheim. California - CQ~CIL MINUTES - MaY 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Skilling explained their typical employee as the owner of a
single-family dwelling, and adv~sed that they have never had any problem
attracting labor because of housing.
I
With reference to the hardship of the property owners in selling
their property, Mr. Skilling st~ted -that if the property owners were willing
to sell for twenty times what it was worth twenty-five years ago, there
would be no problem.
In conclusion, Mr. Skilling felt Councilman Schutte should dis-
qualify himself from this hearing.
Mr. Lawrence Herrick, representing Philco-Ford Aeronutronics,
noted their manufacturing facility on Ball Road at East Street, reported
the very reason they located in this area was that they could not perform
their manufacturing activities in the Newport Beach facility because of en-
croachment of residential. He stated it would behoove the City Council
to co~sider that the residential factor was.a1ways a problem to industry.
Mr. Robert Kottman, Production Manager, Pacific Scientific Com-
pany, 1346 South State College Boulevard, advised of his previous objec-
tions raised. He pointed out their faith in the integrity of this par-
ticular area when they located there; the opportunities in the area for
additional growth, and the possible incompatibility of traffic on Winston
Road.
Mr. Kottman noted the conclusions of the E.R.A. Report, wherein
it states that the amount of land adaptable ~or industries was limited.
He further advised the topography of subject area was very much suited
for industry, and much of the undeveloped land in the County is not so
suited.
I
With reference to revenues to the City derived from industry, Mr.
Kottman advised that an important it~m apparently not considered was the
personal property tax or inventory tax, which is approximately three times
the value of other assessments; further, considering the market value since
they purchased the property twelve years ago, they had a capital gain of
three times, based on the market value placed on the property by the County
Assessor, and in his opinion, other owners in the area must have experienced
the same situation.
Mr. Kottman noted an Orange County Apartment House Association
report, relative to the vacancy factors of apartments, and stated that only
in the last two years has the vacancy factor lowered, as the inventory was
being used.
In conclusion, Mr. Kottman stated they joined the Anaheim Chamber
of Commerce in opposing the change to the General Plan.
In answer to further Council inquiries, Mr. Kottman advised that
approximately one-half of the land they own was presently developed. Plans
are completed for an 18,000-square foot addition to the present 50,000-square
foot facility; their inventory tax was approximately two-thirds or three-
fourths of their tax assessment.
r
I
Mr. Bob Ulrich, representing the Neville Chemical Company, re-
ported that the bulk of their tax was on machinery and inventory, however,
in his opinion, the issue should not be determined by money, as a principle
was involved. He stated his company, many years ago, was advised that in-
dustrial land in Anaheim would be scarce, and they purchased an additional
ten acres for future expansion.
Mr. Ulrich also advised that they joined the other industrial-
ists in requesting the industrial integrity of the area be maintained.
Councilman Schutte noted industry paid approximately one-fourth
of the tax revenue to the City, the remaining revenue was derived from other
sources, such as sales tax, sale of utilities, etc.
68-272
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MaY 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Pebley felt the principle involved should be further studied.
Councilman Krein stated he had been an industrialist, having brought
one of the largest plants to Anaheim a few years ago, and completely understood
the problems of industry in this matter.
Councilman Clark reported that ninety percent of his supporters in
his recent campaign were from R-1 areas and small businesses, and expressed
the fact that, they wanted representation and protection of the small business-
man, like himself, on the Council. As a result, he tempered all testimony on
this basis. He further stated that interest and experience of the total Coun-
cil differs, which is to the advantage of everyone appearing before the City
Council.
l
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council in op-
position, there being no response, invited the applicant for rebuttal.
Mr. Talt stated he was interested in the remarks of the representa-
tive of the Southern Pacific Company, as traditionally the Southern Pacific
Company has housed their employees as close to their facilities as possible,
and he assumed that this was done for the welfare of the community, the company,
and the employees.
~
Reference was again made to the Alcoa Plaza in San Francisco, where
employees are housed as close as possible, alleviating traffic and other con-
ditions.
Mr. Talt agreed there were cases where industrial and residential
were not compatible, and the point was to have a compatible industry with an
R-3 development.
Regarding the conflict of Councilman Schutte, Mr. Talt advised that
other uses of the property have been considered, and when proposed, Councilman
Schutte felt they would not be good for the City and, as a result, the use was
never applied for. He felt if the proposed use was not a desirable use for
the City, it would never have gotten before the City Council.
l
Mr. Talt reported their plan to retain the ownership and management
of the property, and that one of the recent uses Councilman Schutte felt would
be detrimental to the City was a horse-type stable, a use which he felt would
not require City permission.
Mayor Pebley stated he was reluctant to vote on this issue until the
recommended amendments to the General Plan are known.
In answer to Councilman Dutton's question, Mr. Orsborn advised that
the contemplated amendments to the General Plan were not necessarily restricted
to industrial land, and the recommended revision will reflect the General Plan
of the entire City.
Mr. Tousseau advised that at the time the General Plan was adopted,
the properties were not within the City Limits and they did not object to in-
dustry in that area. He felt certain had they objected to industry, indicated
on the General Plan for this area, it would not have been designated as such,
and in retaliation, industry was now taking the position that they cannot
develop their property.
In reply to Councilman Dutton's question relative to possible sales,
Mr. Tousseau related his experience in endeavoring to sell his property by ad-
vertising in the Wall Street Journal in 1967, without receiving one response.
l
Relative to the estimated time before the recommended amendments to
the General Plan are presented, Mr. Orsborn advised that their department
has been working on the proposed amendments approximately two and one-half
years, and he estimated that within the next six months they will have been
presented to the City Planning Commission and City Council.
68-273
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Mav 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
Further discussion was held by the City Council, and at the con-
clusion thereof it was agreed by the majority thereof that a vot2 be taken
without first receiving the recommended amendments to the General Plan,
whereupon Mayor Pebley declared the public hearing closed.
Councilman Krein offered Resolutions denying Reclassification No.
67-68-70, Variance No. 1965, and General Plan Amendment No. 3l.
Roll Call Vote:
r-
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton and Krein
Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
It was announced said resolutions failed to carry.
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-265: Councilman Clark offered Resolution No. 68R~265
for adoption, authorizing preparation of necessary ordinance changing the
zone as requested for Portion A, subject to the recommended conditions of
the City Planning Commission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER-
MINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING
SHOULD BE CHANGED. (Reclassification No. 67-68-70 - R-3.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Schutte, Clark and Pebley
Dutton and Krein
None
Mayor Pebley announced Resolution No. 68R-265 duly passed and
adopted.
RESOLUTION .:0. 68R-266: Councilman Clark offered Resolution No. 68R-266
for adoption, granting Variance No. 1965, in part, as recommended and on
conditions established by the City Planning Commission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
r
I
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE
NO. 1965.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN :
Schutte, Clark and Pebley
Dutton and Krein
None
adopted;
Mayor Pebley announced Resolution No. 68R-266 duly passed and
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-267: Councilman Clark offered Resolution No. 68R-267
for adoption, approving General Plan Amendment No. 31, Exhibit "D", as
recommended pursuant to City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC68-l07.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATED AS AMENDMENT NO. 31, EXHIBIT
"D".
r
~
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Schutte, Clark and Pebley
Dutton and Krein
None
adopted.
Mayor Pebley declared Resolution No. 68R-267 duly passed and
68-274
City Hall. Anaheim. California -COUNCIL MINUTES - Mav 21. 1968. l:30 P.M.
AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 94: Councilman Clark offered Area Development Plan
No. 94, Alternate "B" for approval.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Schutte, Clark and Pebley
Dutton and Krein
None
Area Development Plan No. 94, Alternate "B" was declared adopted.
Reasons for the above vote were expressed briefly as follows:
Councilman Dutton stated, in his opinion, a precedent was being
established and this action was serving notice on industry that Anaheim
neither wanted them, nor would they be protected. Councilman Dutton further
objected to Councilman Schutte's participation in the action, feeling there
was a conflict of interest.
Mayor Pebley was of the op1n10n that the recommended Amendments to
the General Plan would indicate this change, in that this issue was before
the City Planning Commission only one month ago.
DINNER DANCING PLACE PERMIT: Application submitted by Jack E. McLean for Dinner
Dancing Place Permit to allow dinner dancing at the Royal Al'cherRestaurant,
815 South Brookhurst. Stteet', 'Was submitted and granted, subject to the .Pfo-
visions of Chapter 4.l6 of the Anaheiin.Municipal Code, as recoJ:Il1Ilended by the
Chief of Police, on motion by Councilman,Dutton., seconded by Councilman
Krein. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Schutte left the meeting, 5:50 P.M.
SIGN REQUEST: Communication dated April 24, 1968, from Luminart Neon Company,
Inc., requesting permission to replace existing sign with a free-standing,
illuminated, non-flashing or rotating sign, projecting l8 inches over public
right-of-way, (12 feet above grade), at Ballman's Appliances, l15 West Broad-
way, was submitted together with plans and report from the Zoning Division,
recommending that said request be approved.
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Krein, the
foregoing sign request was approved as recommended. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Schutte returned to the meeting, 5:55 P.M.
AMUSEMENT AND ENTERTAINMENT PREMISES - POOL ROOM PERMIT: Application was submitted
by Carl A. Norleen for a Pool Room Permit to allow eight billiard tables and
one snooker table at Ps and Qs Family Billiards, l2787-E East Lincoln Avenue.
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Clark, said
permit was granted, subject to provisions of Chapter 4.24 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code, as recommended by the Chief of Police. MOTION CARRIED.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 64-65-l5 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 610 - EXTENSION OF
TIME AND REVISED PLANS: Communication dated April 29, 1968, from Pablo V. and
Laura K. Dominguez, requesting approval of revised plans and extension of
time to conditions of Resolution Nos. 64R-768 and 64R-769, was submitted.
Also submitted and reviewed by the City Council were reports from
the Zoning Division and the City Engineer, recommending the following:
ZONING DIVISION: Inasmuch as (l) these petitions technically expired more
than three years ago, (2) the proposal now differs substantially from the
complex originally proposed, and (3) a variance would be required for the
present proposal for parking, it is recommended that this request be denied
and new petitions processed so that the general public may be informed of the
applicant's proposal.
CITY ENGINEER: That if the requested extension of time and approval of plans
is granted, it be subject to the following conditions:
1
1
1
68-275
City Hall. Anaheim. California -COUNCIL MINUTES - May 21. '1968. 1:30 P.M.
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 State College BoulevardJ for street widening purposes.
2. That the required dedication of Ball Road and State College
Boulevard shall be completed within 30 days.
f"
Mrs. Laura Domingue~, 1522 East Santa Ana Street, requested per-
mission to address the City Coun~il, and advised that plans had been modi-
fied, and it was her understaqdlng that an extension of time was also neces-
sary.
Mr. Ken Kohne, Attorney reprsenting the applicants, addressed the
Council, advising that the revised plans were basically the same concept
but substantially changed and upgraded.
Mr. Thompson reported that analysis of the revised plans revealed
that waiver of off street parking requirements.would be necessary, which
would require the filing of application for a waiver of said parking re-
quirements.
Mr. Kohne cited the need for early determination on their request,
as it was planned to commence construction in the immediate future.
It was noted that the waiver of required parking area was the only
reason for filing a new application.
On the recommendations of the City Manager and the City Attorney,
Councilman Dutton moved that extension of time ';':0 JuJy 1, :~9.J8, ~~(; 2'ra,,-t'.2d, and
that revised plans be approved as they pertained to the restaurant portion
only, insofar as said plans do not violate any portion of the Anaheim Muni-
cipal Code. Councilman Clark seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
r
I
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 66-67-59 AND VARIANCE NO. 1871 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Request
of Loran D. Covington, dated May 10, 1968, for extension of time to Reclas-
sification No. 66-67-59 and Variance No. 1871, to comply with conditions of
Resolution Nos. 67R-308 and 67R-309, was submitted, together with reports
of the City Engineer and Develop~ent Services Department, and recommenda-
tion of the Zoning Division that a six-month extension of time be granted,
to expire November 30, 1968. . .
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Clark, six-
month extension of time was granted, as recommended by the Zoning Division.
MOTION CARRIED.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.964 - EXTENSION OF TIME:
dated April 28, 1968, for extension of time to
964, for compliance with certain conditions of
submitted, together with excerpts from minutes
mission meeting held May 6, 1968, recommending
extension of time, to expire October 24, 1968.
Request of Clarice Graham,
Conditional Use Permit No.
Resolution No. 67R-607, was
of the City Planning Com-
the granting of six months
On motion by Councilman Clark, seconded by Councilman Dutton, six
months extension of time was granted, as recommended by the City Planning
Commission. MOTION CARRIED.
I'
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 66l5: Developer - J.W. McMichael Company; tract located on
the west side of Loara Street, south of the centerline of Broadway, and con-
tains nine proposed R-2, 5,000 zoned lots.
Pursuant to request of the developer, Councilman Krein moved that
Council consideration of said tentative map be continued, to be considered
in conjunction with Public Hearing on Reclassification No. 67-68-64. Council-
man Dutton seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 6607. REVISION NO. l: Developer - Bayport Financial Corpora-
tion; tract located easterly of the intersection of Rio Vista Street and
Lincoln Avenue, containing 30 proposed R-3, and 23 proposed R-2, 5,000 zoned
lots.
;)
68-276
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 2l. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
On motion by Councilman Krein, seconded by Councilman Dutton,
Council consideration of said tentative map was continued, to be considered
in conjunction with Reclassification No. 67-68-64 and Variance No. 1960.
l<<>TION CARRIED.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 67-68-64 AND VARIANCE NO. 1960 - REQUEST: Communication re-
ceived in the office of the City Clerk, May 9, 1968, from James W. Geriak,
was submitted, requesting that forthcoming public hearing by the City Coun-
cil relative to Reclassification No. 67-68-64 and Variance No. 1960 be con-
ducted at 7:30 P.M., at an evening session.
On motion by Councilman Clark, seconded by Councilman Krein, the
City Clerk was instructed to schedule public hearing June 11, 1968, 7:30 P.M.
MOTION CARRIED.
ORANGE COUNTY CONDITIONAL PERMIT NO. 1342: Excerpts from the minutes of the City
Planning Commission meeting held May 20, 1968, were submitted, concerning
Orange County Conditional Permit No. 1342, being a proposal to establish a
nursery school in an existing single-family residence; property located north
of Orangethorpe Avenue, east of Boisseranc Street, (18552 Minuet Lane.)
The City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council urge the
Orange County Planning Commission to deny Orange County Conditional Permit
No. 1342, on the basis that the proposed establishment of a nursery, a com-
mercial establishment with commercial signing, would have a deleterious
effect on the residential character of a well-established, single-family
subdivision.
Councilman Krein moved that the recommendations of the City Plann-
ing Commission be sustained, and a copy thereof forwarded to the Orange County
Planning Commission. Councilman Clark seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 67-68-50 AND VARIANCE NO. 1948 - REVISED PLANS: R-3 zoning,
with waiver of height limit within 150 feet of adjacent R-A zoned property,
was approved by the City Council on parcel located on the east side of Knott
Avenue, south of Lincoln Avenue, on March 19, 1968.
Mr. Thompson briefed report from the Zoning Division, noting that
Condition No.2, of Resolution No. 68R-152, approving the R-3 zoning stated
"That the owner of subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim a strip
of land, 20 feet in width, including standard alley cutoffs, along the nor-
therly and easterly property lines, for alley purposes." Mr. Thompson stated
that revised plans had been submitted, indicating that private, secondary
vehicular access ways are now proposed, rather than dedicated alleys, as was
originally projected.
Upon considering said revised plans May 20, 1968, the Planning Com-
mission recommended that said plans be approved, and in the event that the
City Council concurred, that the following amendments be made to Resolution
No. 68R-152:
1.
2.
Condition No.
3.
Street on the
That Condition No. 2 should be deleted.
Condition No. 13 should be amended by deleting reference to
2.
Condition No. 4 should be amended to permit access to Knott
northerly 30 feet of subject property.
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-268: Councilman Krein offered Resolution No. 68R-268
for adoption, approving revised plans as submitted, deleting Condition No.
2, of Resolution No. 68R-152, and amending Condition Nos. 4 and l3 thereof,
as recommended by the City Planning Commission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION
NO. 68R-l52, IN RECLASSIFICATION PROCEEDINGS NO. 67-68-50.
l
l
J
l
68-277
City Hall. Anaheim. California - CO~Clt MINUrES - May 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
None
i
The Mayor declared Res01ution No. 68R-268 duly passed and adopted.
DEEDS OF EAS~lliNT: Councilman Clark offered Resolution Nos. 68R-269 to 68R-273,
both inclusive, for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-269: 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 AN EASEMENT FOR SEWER LINE PURPOSES. (E & C Development
Company.)
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-270: 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. (James
W. Russell and Ola Mae Russell.)
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-27l: 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. (Gordon
A. Sa1ness and Betty E. Salness.)
r
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-272: 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 AN EASEl€NT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC. UTILITY pm~POSES. (E & C
Development Company.)
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-273: 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 AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES. (Gertrude
Chapman Krull, and Mobil Oil Corporation.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 68R-269 to 68R-273, both in-
clusive, duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-274: On the recommendations of the City Attorney, Councilman
Dutton offered Resolution No. 68R-274 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
I
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM COMPROMISING CERTAIN
EMINENT DOMAIN LITIGATION, ACCEPTING A CERTAIN EASEMENT DEED, AND AUTHORIZ-
ING AND DIRECTING PAYMENT THEREFOR. (Louis J. Myers, et ux., et al.,/Melvin
R. and Joyce M. Bennett - Parcel 6.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 68R-274 duly passed and adopted.
68-278
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-275: Councilman Dutton offered Resolution No. 68R-275 for
adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING THE GRANT
DEED OF TIK>THY W. WALLACE; OHDLIUNG RECORDATION THERI!X)F; AND AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING PAYMENT THEREFOR. (Mechanical Maintenance Department Reloca-
tion - South Street.)
Roll Call Vote:
l
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 68R-275 duly passed and adopted.
OFFER TO PURCHASE CITY-OWNED PROPERTY: City Manager, Keith Murdoch, reported on
offer received to purchase property owned by the City of Anaheim, (water well
no longer in use.) Property located on Magnolia Avenue, south of Ball Road.
Council discussion was held relative to the price offered for said
property and at the conclusion thereof, said offer of purchase was declined
by the City Council.
PURCHASE: The City Manager reported on proposed purchase of Executive Sedan, as
quoted November l5, 1967, and subsequently cancelled by the City, and recom-
mended acceptance of the low quotation received, that of McPeek Plymouth, at
$2,861.25 per unit, (including tax and $90.00 increase.)
On the recommendations of the City Manager, it was moved by Council-
man Dutton, seconded by Councilman Krein, that purchase be authorized in the 1...
amount of $2,861.25, including tax. MOTION CARRIED. .
PURCHASE: Mr. Murdoch reported on proposed purchase of two units to replace City
Pool Cars, advising that McCoy Ford Company would sell two additional units
in accordance with quotation received November 27, ~j67, plus $l7.26 per unit
for additional safety equipment, and recommended purchase of two units at
$4,l75.56, including $34.52 additional, and tax.
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Krein, pur-
chase was authorized in the total amount of $4,l75.56, including tax. MOTION
CARRIED.
CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims against the City were submitted by
the City Manager to the City Council for their information and consideration:
a. Claim submitted by Coldwell, Banker & Company, for damages pur-
portedly resulting from a utility power failure, on or about March 14, 1968.
b. Claim filed by Stanley L. Rosen, Attorney representing Robert
D. Sweet, for personal injury damages purportedly resulting from fall on a
public sidewalk, on or about June 20, 1967.
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Krein, said
claims were denied and ordered referred to the insurance agent, as recommended
by the City Attorney. MOTION CARRIED.
l
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-276: Councilman Krein offered Resolution No. 68R-276 for adop-
tion.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND AUTHOR-
IZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND ORANGE
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT PROVIDING FOR A JOINT PROGRAM OF COMMUNITY RECREATION.
r
n
r
"',\1
I
~,
68-279
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
Roll Call Vote:
!Y!f'
AYES: COUNCILMEN: .Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 68R-276 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-277: Councilman Kreip offered Resolution No. 68R~277 for
adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING THAT ALL
PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY SHOULD BE EXEMPT FROM COUNTY STRUCTtmAL FIRE
PROTECTION TAX.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NO ES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 68R-277 duly passed and adopted.
CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed, on
motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Krein:
a. City of Buena Park Resolution No; 3408, urging the State
Highway Commission to immediately take steps to adopt the Orange line
Route between Route 1, (Pacific Coast) Freeway and Lampson Avenue for
the proposed Route 39 Freeway.
b. Minutes - Orange County Mosquito Abatement District - Meeting
of April l8~ 1968.
c. Financial and Operating Report~ for the Months of March and
April, 1968.
MOTION CARRIED.
ORDINANCE NO. 2517: Councilman Schutte offered Ordinance No. 2517 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE l4, CHAPTER 14.32,
SECTION 14.32.350, PARAGRAPH 3, AND SECTION l4.32.l90, PARAGRAPH 33,
OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO PARKIN~. (No Parking - Stadium
and Conventio,n Events - Ka;ella Avenue - Various Locations.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
None
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 2517 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 25l8: Councilman Clark offered Ordinance No. 2518 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE l8 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNI-
cIpAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (61-62-69 (25) - M-l)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The ~yor declared Ordinance No. 2518 duly passed and adopted.
-,
,
68-280
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
ORDINANCE NO. 2520: Councilman Kreia offered Ordinance No. 2520 for first read-
ing.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 6.56, SECTION
6.56.010 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO POOLS AND PONDS. (Build-
ing and Fence Requirements - Pools and Ponds.)
ORDINANCE NO. 2521: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 2521 for first read-
ing.
1
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNI-
cIpAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (66-67-61 (16) - C-R.)
ORDINANCE NO. 2522: Councilman Schutte offered Ordinance No. 2522 for first
reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNI-
cIpAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (67-68-41 - R-2, 5,000)
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE APPLICATIONS: The following Alcoholic Beverage License
Applications were presented by the City Manager to the City Council, for
their information:
a. Application submitted by James V. and Marie Blancato, for
Person-to-Person Transfer of Off-Sale General License at Zips Liquor, lOl3-
l015 North Magnolia Avenue, (C-l zone.)
b. Application submitted by Stephen William and Vera Dorothy
Bance, for Person-to-Person Transfer of On-Sale Beer License, at Pizza Inn,
940 South Euclid Street, (C-l zone; Conditional Use Permit No. 915.)
No action was taken by the City Council on the foregoing applica-
tions.
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE APPLICATION:
Council, for their information, an
for On-Sale Beer License; premises
(R-A zone.)
The City Manager submitted to the City
application filed by William J. Haskins,
located at 1507 North Kraemer Boulevard,
l
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Clark, the
City Attorney was authorized to file conditional protest against said appli-
cation on the basis of zoning. MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-278: On report and recommendation of the City Attorney, Coun-
cilman Dutton offered Resolution No. 68R-278 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND AUTHOR-
IZING THE EXECurION OF AN AGREEtIENT WITH CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC., WITH
REFERENCE TO THE RIGHT TO DISPLAY SPONSORSHIP SIGNS AND MESSAGES ON THE
SCOREBOARD AND INFORMATION STRUCTURES AT THE ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER, AND
THE USE OF OFFICE SPACE.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
None
]
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 68R-278 duly passed and adopted.
REQUEST - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT - BUS STOP: Communication
dated March l2, 1968, from Southern California Rapid Transit District, re-
questing a bus stop for westbound Line 24, on the north side of Lincoln
Avenue at Anaheim Boulevard, together with report of the Traffic Engineer,
dated March 2l, 1968, was submitted to the City Council at their meeting
held April 9, 1968, and ordered placed on file.
68-281
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
Supplemental report of the Traffic Engineer, dated May 17, 1968,
was submitted, recommending inasmuch as the requested zone would eliminate
two left-turns by the bus, and allow five parking spaces on Chestnut Street
to be installed when the existing zone is removed, that the request be
granted.
~
On motion by Councilman Krein, seconded by Councilman Dutton,
the foregoing request for a bus stop at Lincoln Avenue and Anaheim Boule-
vard was approved as recommended. MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO.68R-279: Councilman Krein offered Resolution No. 68R-279 for adop-
tion.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION
NO. 67R-404 AND ESTABLISHING RATE OF COMPENSATION FOR A NEW JOB CLASS.
(Senior Accountant.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 68R-279 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-280: On the recommendations of the City Manager, Councilman
Clark offered Resolution No. 68R-280 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
r
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING EXAMI-
NATION OF SALES AND USE TAX ACCOUNTS; AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO. 63R-227.
(Finance Director.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 68R-280 duly passed and adopted.
REQUEST - WAIVER OF LICENSE FEES: Communication dated May 20, 1968, from Robert
T. Jones, Candidate for Congress in the 35th Congressional District, was
submitted, requesting waiver of license fees for the operation of a sound
truck, during daylight hours, prior to the California State Primary Elec-
tion. Said request was ordered continued one week for further investiga-
tion.
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-28l: On the recommendations of the City Manager, Councilman
Dutton offered Resolution No. 68R-28l for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
n
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AND THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, WITH REFERENCE TO ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ON
BALL ROAD BETWEEN l, 320 FEET EAST OF STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD AND THE
SANTA ANA RIVER. (Bridge Approach - City's $7,600.00.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 68R-28l duly passed and adopted.
68-282
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 21. 1968. 1:30 P.M.
INVITATION: The City Manager reported on a trip scheduled by the Anaheim Area
Visitor and Convention Bureau to Oakland, California, for the baseball game
between the Oakland Athletics and the California Angels, June 1, 1968.
Mayor Pebley reported that the City Council was invited to attend
a dinner with officials of the City of Oakland on June 1.
RESOLunON 11). 68R-282: On the recommendations of the City Attorney, Councilman
Schutte offered Resolution No. 68R-282 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
l
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND AUTHOR-
IZING THE EXECUTION OF AN "AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE OR FARM CROSSING" WITH THE
ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY, LICENSING AND PERMITTING THE
CITY TO CROSS FOR PRIVATE PURPOSES THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND TRACKS OF SAID RAIL-
WAY COMPANY AT OR NEAR ORANGE, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. (Stadium Property.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 68R-282 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-283: On the recommendations of the City Attorney, Councilman
Dutton offered Resolution No. 68R-283 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND AUTHOR-
IZING THE EXECUTION OF "LEASE OF LAND" BETWEEN THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA
FE RAILWAY COMPANY AND THE CITY, WITH REFERENCE TO CERTAIN LAND SITUATED AT
OR NEAR ORANGE, COUNTY OF ORANGE, TO BE USED FOR PUBLIC PARKING LOT, ENCROACH-
MENT OF CHAIN LINK FENCE, CONCRETE CONE BARRICADE AND CONCRETE CURBING.
1
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Clark and Pebley
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 68R-283 duly passed and adopted.
DISNEYLAND - ADMISSION TAX: Councilman Dutton suggested consideration of a 15%
City admission tax to Disneyland.
ADJOIJRNHENT:
motion.
Councilman Krein moved to adjourn.
MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Clark seconded the
ADJOURNED :
7:00 P.M.
SIGNED ~ A. 2):;~ ~~
City Clerk
1