1959/03/04
-.~~-,~~..-"-;;.
3217
City Ha.il~ Anaheim~ California - March 3~ 1959 - 7;00 PoMa
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NOa
461y, ENTITLED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING A BASIC CO~
PENSATION PLAN FOR CERTAIN CLASSES OF EMPLOYMENT IN THE MUNICIPAL SERVICE OF
rHE CITV OF ANAHEIM AND ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR THE PLACEMENT OF EMPLOYEES
WITHIN THE WAGE AND SALARY SCHEDULES: PROVIDING FOR CERTAIN FRINGE BENEFITS,
PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS, HOLIDAYS AND VACATIONS AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NUMBER
3940 AND AMENDMENTS THERETOo vv .(Accountant)
On TO call the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and ad6pted
the fa lowing vote;
AYE S ~
NOES:
ABSENT;
COUNCILMEN.
COUNCILMEN:
COUNC I LM EN.
Borden9 Fry and Schutteo
Noneo
Coons and Pearsono
fhe Mayor declared the foregoing Resolution duly passed and adopteda
Counc\ 1ma n Fry moved to adj ourn to March 4 ~ 1959 ~ 7: 00 P 0 M~ Counci l~,
ma BO;,'rjAD seconded the motion" MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNEDg
SIGNED, .. L_ ~. "2)/-;.~
City Clerk
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - March 4~ 1959 - 7.00 P. M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in adjourned regular
session9 pursuant to Resolution No. 5028, and legal notice duly published
in the Anaheim Gazette and Anaheim Bulletin February 19, 1959, for the
purpose of holding Public Hearinq on a Proposed New Comprehensive Zoninq
Ordinance for the City of Anaheim.
PRESENT:
ABSENT :
PRESENT :
COUNCILMEN: Borden, Coons, Fry and Schutte.
COUNCILMEN: Pearson.
CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch.
CITY ATTORNEY: Preston Turner.
CITY CLERK: Dene Mo Williams.
CITY ENGINEER: Thornton Piersall.
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: Robert W. Mungall.
Mayor Schutte called the meeting to order.
Mr. Eisner. Planninq Consultant addressed the Council, briefly explaining the
contents of the proposed ordinance as recommended by the City Planning Commission,
and with the assistance of Mr. Steen, indicated on the map those areas that would
be affected by the new zoning ordinance.
Before the meeting was open for general discussion, the City Clerk
submitted the City Planning Commissionvs file of correspondence received on this
matter and also called attention to the many letters received by the City Council.
It was considered,by the City Council, that to go into the correspondence
at this time would consume considerable time at the public meeting; that these
letters which had been duplicated and copies thereof furnished each Councilman
would be discussed and considered at later meetings, where there were any questions.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council.
3218
City Hall, Anaheim, qalifornia - March 4. 1959 - 7:00 P. M.
,Mr. Jim Kerwin, 1920 ~ast South street asked if their petition was
not accepted, would they be abl~ to later request a variance or zone change.
Mr. Eisner advised Mr~ Kerwin that the proposed ordinance provides
within it for request for zone changeso
Regarding the petition, Mr. Murdoch advised that if the petition
was submitted to the City Council and was a part of this hearing, however,it
probably would not be considered at this particular meeting.
----..
Dr. Kenneth Hueler. 906 Pioneer Drive addressed the Council regarding
parking regulations. He felt that to require a certain number of off-street
parking spaces based on the squ~re footage of the professional building was
inadequate and unfair, inasmuch as certain professional catagories require
different amounts of parking sp&ces. Although he favored increasing the park-
ing areas around offices, he felt that setting up a number of parking spaces
per operating room, or something of that nature, might be a bit fairer.
Mr. Ted Hudson addres~ed the Council regarding carports and garages,
being interested, primarily, in garages for apartment houses. He called atten-
tion to the disadvantages of garages in reference to the cleaning problem. He
also referred to the required s~uare footage of bachelor quarters and suggested
that a reduction in the 400 square foot requirement be made, stating his reasons
therefor.
,Mr. Hudson. because of his experience in building apartments was
requested to submit a suggested size for these apartments. He replied that he
would present a letter containimg his suggestions, and also an invitation to see
these smaller sized apartment~ .
Mrs. Hall, 1556 West Katella Avenue, addressed the Council and submitted
a petition to Mr. R. W. Mungall, Planning Director, regarding a matter to be before
the City Planning Commission next meeting.
Mr. Joe Kopsho, 1762 Crescent Avenue, addressed the Council regarding
lot areas, lot frontages,and related a typical example of properties and the
difficulties resulting in endeavoring to develope in accordance with the present
standards. He also called attention to the off-street parking requirements and
standards, which he felt could be at least ten feet narrower and still allow
for parking without any difficulty.
C-6 Use.
Mr. Kopsho asked what the given depth from the highway would be for a
Mr. Hardy~ Assistant City Attorney, replied that the minimum depth was
120 feet, that there was no maximum depth.
Mr. KODsho inquired regarding alleys at the rear of commercial and
multiple family residential lots and to his question regarding the standard'
of these alleys, was advised of the street standard as adopted by the City
Council, however, not as a part of this zoning ordinance.
Further discussion was held regarding landscaping.
Mr. Kopsho indicated on the map the location of his property (North
Euclid Avenue),stating that about one-half of the area was undeveloped, thereby
working a hardship on those persons owning undeveloped property to have to
work in accordance with these new standards.
Mrs. Mildred Kluthe. 821 South Placentia Avenue, regarding the petition
as referred to by Mr. Kerwin, was assured that this would be considered at a
la ter da tee
~-,:_.,~--i,"_~~'
>"'~-~""'_._,
3219
City Hall~ Anqheim~ California - March 4~ 1959 - 7:00 p~ M.
At this point the question came up regarding notification to those
interested property owners, with reference to the date on which their requests
would be considered by the City Council.
Mr. Murdoch advised that we would attempt to notify them, however,
it might be almost imp09sible to notify each individual in time tQ do any good;
that the best way to keep track of the progress would be by watching the local
papers; that the City will endeavor to set up a schedule of items that will be
heard on a particular evening and those interested should check with the City
Clerk.
Mr. Ed Fellha4er~ 2069 South Ninth Street, questioned the R-l B Zone
and asked how it would affect their activities, that of raising cattle.
Mr. Eisner explained the provisions of the proposed ordinance regarding
the continuance of a nonconforming use.
Mr. Hardy further explained that in an R-I Zone where there is a non-
conforming use of the land, without any structures in connection therewith, the
use must stop at the end of three years.
Mr. Fellhauef explained that they preferred their present zoning, however,
he was assured that the Council would, in all probability, investigate this parti-
cular parcel of propertyo
Mr. A. R. McDaniel_ 1333 Merona Place, addressed the Council regarding
our future population growth, the cost of developing lots, the majority of which
are new in the City of Anaheim, and the maintenance and future cost of these lots.
He related a possible solution regarding parkways, in which, by designing a
developer could get more lots per acre and the purchaser could get more property,
resulting in less property being taken off the public tax rolls. Attention was
also called to the 70 foot lot frontages and the problems that result in trying
to subdivideo Mr. McDaniel suggested that there be some provision for lots less
than 7,200 square feet; that this provision, in his opinion, was discrLminatory
against low-income people. He suggested that the developer be allowed 3 to 5 %
deviation from the set~back dimensions and lot area as established on individual
lots.
Further discussion was held on this matter of providing more flexibility
in the ordinance, allowing the developer some latitude for the better development
of the land.
Mro Guy Mize~ representing Coldwell, Banker and Company, addressed the
Council referring to the letter submitted by them regarding off-street parking,
and requested a certain amount of latitude in determining parking requirements,
by computing space to be only that useable floor area, omitting therefrom areas
used for storage, etc. MrQ Mize questioned, specifically, basements, and referred
to the Broadway Shopping Center, which basement is both a non-service and non-
selling basement, and requested consideration be given to the loading tunnel.
Further discussion was held regarding the size of the individual parking
spaces and the size of the driveways between [-hem.
Mr. Halvorsen addressed the Council stating, on behalf of the Real Estate
Board, that they had not taken any definite position for or against the zoning
ordinance,at this time.
Mr. John Griffith, Builder, addressed the Council advising that a letter
would be sent from the Home Builders Association, and further discussion was, again,
held regarding off-street parking requirements for doctors and dentists, carports
and garages, and the sizes of bachelor apartments, lot sizes and house sizes.
Mr. Griffith suggested that cuts be made of the proposed zoning ordinance so that
people can study it in advance of the Council meetings.
3220
City Hall. Anaheim.jCalifornia = March 4. 1959 - 7:00 P. M.
Mr. Richard Lower. 921 Minerva Place, addressed the GounciJ., request-
ing that Section 9200. R-I, D-6, with reference to minimum floor ar~as remain
not less than 1,225 square feetG He elaborated on his reasons therefor, and
statistically reported on our population and average group_ Further attention
was called to R-2, 5 and R-3, 5, regarding structural height limitations;
suggested changes were also m~de to R-2, 8 and R-3, 8, regarding the matter __
of fences and walls. Also, certain changes were suggested for Section 9200.
PRO 6, regarding notices of pttblic hearings for the Planning Commission or the
Ci ty CounciL>
At the conclusion of this discussion, Mr. Murdoch requested a copy
of Mr. LowerVs specific recommendations, to which Mr. Lower agreed to forward
said copy.
At the conclusion of the discussion, Mayor Schutte thanked all those
in attendance for their intereste
Councilman Coons moved that the public hearinq be adjourned to next
Wednesday niqht. March 11. 19f>9.. 7:00 P. M.. Councilman Fry seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
AD JOUR NED ;
SIGNED:~~ /1t ~~
City Clerk
Ci ty Ha 11" Anaheim9 Ca Ii fornia =~ March 10 ~ 1959 ~ "7: 00 p" Mo
The City Council of the City of Anahej.ffi met in regular sessiono
PRESENT.
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCILMEN; Borden~ Fry~ Pearson and Schutteo
COUNCILMEN: Coonso
CITY MANAGER; Kei th A" Murdocho
CITY ATTORNEY. Preston Turnero
CITY CLERK: Dene Mo Williamso
CITY ENGINEER: Thornton Piersallu
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: Robert Wo Mungallo
Mayor Schutte called the meeti.ng to ordero
MINUTES. Minutes of the regular meeting held February 24, 1959 and adjourned regular
meetings held March 3 and 4, 19599 were approved on motion by Councilman Pearson,
seconded by Councilman Fryo MOTION CARRIEDo
RESOLUTION NO. 5074. Councilman Borden offered Resolution Noo 5074 and moved for
its passage and adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book~ page
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND DIRECTING lHE
PAYMENT OF DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY AS OF MARCH 10~ 19590 ($4109754009)
On roll call the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT.
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN.
Borden9 Fry~ Pearson and Schutteo
Noneo
Coonso
The Mayor declared the foregoing Resoluti.on duly passed and adoptede
.1ijI.....a.-~~-fl~