Loading...
1979/01/30 79-125 ~.~ty Ha.il, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Kott, Roth and Seymour COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts CITY ENGINEER: William Devitt PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Garry O. McRae PARKS, RECREATION AND ARTS DIRECTOR: James Ruth ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti Mayor Seymour called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. MOMENT OF SILENCE: In lieu of an Invocation, a Moment of Silence was observed. FLAG SALUTE: Councilwoman Miriam Kaywood led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION: Councilman Kott stated he had seen in the City Clerk's Office the resolution planned to be presented to Sarah Pearson. Knowing Mrs. Pearson as he did, he did not think she would accept it the way it read, as there were some errors in the wording. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Roth, the Resolution of Commendation to be presented to Sarah Pearson for her service to Anaheim citizens and on her 50th anniversary as a California licensed dentist, was continued one week for corrections. MOTION CARRIED. 119: SPECIAL PRESENTATION - COMMUNITY SERVICE AWARD TO MR. HERB LEO: Council- woman Kaywood stated she had accepted an award for Mr. Herb Leo, the Cypress College Community and Americana Award, since Mr. Leo was unable to attend the presentation ceremonies. She thereupon presented the Community Service Award plaque to Mr. Leo and noted that the program had started as part of our Bicen- tennial in 1976. Mr. Herb Leo accepted the award. >~yor Seymour then explained for the edification of the Council and the audience how the award came to be presented to Mr. Leo. A request was submitted annually to the Mayor's Office relative to the Citizen of the Year Award wherein the Mayor or the Mayor's representative unilaterally would make the decision as to a possible recipient. However, this year it was not his decision, but instead he referred the matter to the Community Services Board who did the choosing. They responded unanimously with the name of Herb Leo and thus it was a doubly deserving award when a person was recognized by his peers and other civic leaders in the City. MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held October 10 and 31, 1978, subject to typographical corrections on the meeting of October 31, 1978. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED 79-126 Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. Councilwoman Kaywood then asked that the following addition be made to the last page of the minutes of October 18, 1978, between paragraphs 2 and 3--"Council- woman Kaywood reiterated that both Councilmen Seymour's and Kott's proposed budget cuts also eliminated the architect's fee." Mayor Seymour stated that he would like to digest the minutes in relation to whatever discussion took place, prior to the approval of the addition. Councilman Overholt suggested a one week's continuance. He felt if the addition was on the tape, it was part of the minutes. If not, it was not a part of the minutes. After a brief discussion revolving around the matter of additions to minutes, Councilman Seymour moved to continue approval of the addition to the minutes of the joint meeting with the Library Board, October 18, 1978, for one week. Council- man Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to waive the reading, in full, of all ordinances and resolutions and that consent to the waiver of reading is hereby given by all Council Members unless, after reading of the title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the read- ing of such ordinance or resolution. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $1,268,097.09, in accordance with the 1978-79 Budget, were approved. 160: CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilman Kott, seconded by Councilman Roth, the following actions were authorized as recommended by the Purchasing Agent: a~ Bid No. 3495: Purchase of three-phase Padmount Transformers - Continue award to February 6, 1979. bt Bid No. 3493: Authorizing the purchase of six Padmount, three-phase sectionalizing switches with fused lateral taps (Items 1 and 2), S & C Electric Company, $31,253.04. MOTION CARRIED. 164: AWAJtD OF CONTRACT - GILBERT STREET STORM DRAIN: (900 feet north of Broadway to Broadway - Account No. 13-791-6325-1090) Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolu- tion No. 79R-55 for adoption, awarding a contract as recommended by the City Engineer in his memorandum dated January 24, 1979. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 79R-55: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A SEALED PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PERFORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT: GILBERT STREET STORM DRAIN, 900' N/O BROADWAY, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 13-791-6325-1090. (Buntich & West, $83,686) 79-127 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Kott, Roth and Seymour None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-55 duly passed and adopted. 150/152: ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE USE POLICY FOR BROOKHURST COMMUNITY CENTER: Council- man Kott offered Resolution No. 79R-56 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated January 23, 1979, from the Director of Parks, Recreation and the Arts. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 79R-56: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE USE POLICY FOR THE BROOKHURST COMMUNITY CENTER. Before a vote was taken, Councilman Roth asked Mr. Ruth if he had checked with Garden Grove on the matter since they had the same rules relative to their community center as were being proposed presently. Mr. Ruth stated that they surveyed 19 different agencies and used some of the information obtained in setting the proposed policy. He also commented that there had been some requests to serve hard liquor in the Brookhurst Community Center, but at this point, the Parks and Recreation Commission felt that they needed an experience factor before making that decision. The Police Department also had reviewed the policy and indicated the same sentiments. However, there was considerable interest in serving alcohol and the Council should be aware of that fact. He also believed that someone was present from the public to speak on the matter. Mr. Dick Styles, 1921 West Orange Avenue, President of the E1 Bekel Oriental Band of the E1 Bekel Shrine in Long Beach, first stated that the E1 Bekel Shrine was moving to Anaheim with one more step to be completed before they could do so on a formal basis. He was present to ask the Council to give consideration to their fraternal organization in allowing them to use and have their functions at the Brookhurst Community Center. He continued that although he was a poor person to plead the case for serving alcoholic beverages since he never indulges, their units had to raise funds for their charitable work, and they found it very difficult to get a large attendance at their functions unless alcoholic beverages were served. He was not asking the Council to transform the Center into a beer hall or the like, but merely asking for their consideration with reference to fraternal organizations who had the maturity to police themselves. He reiterated that they wanted the Council to give consideration to their use of the facility until they could get a permanent facility in the City of Anaheim. He also under- stood their concern for the children that might be in the building, but the times they might be using the facility would not be the normal times when children would also be using it. The Mayor stated they were sensitive to Mr. Styles request and he acknowledged their long. efforts to move to Anaheim and expressed the fact that they would be proud to have the Shrine in the City. With regard to his request, he presumed Mr. Styles had discussed the matter with Mr. Ruth and knew of the feeling and empathy he had for creating a policy that would be as fair as possible in treating all equally, and a sensitivity to the other activities jointly carried on in the 79-128 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. Center. With regard to the location, he asked Mr. Styles if he or any other member had an opportunity to ask Mr. Ruth if he would assist in developing alternatives for a temporary location for the organization. Mr. Styles stated that he did not know if that had been done. He indicated ~owever that revenues raised for a City played an important part in the City's operation. At the present time, they had the use of the Garden Grove Community Building where they were allowed to serve alcoholic beverages, and thus, they had a track record with that city. That was also true with their use of the Amerige Building in Fullerton. He emphasized that they wanted to be known as the E1 Bekel Shrine of Anaheim, California. The Mayor stated if the Council were to adopt the policy as currently recommended, the Council should subsequently do two things: (1) through the City Manager, direct Mr. Ruth to initiate a close monitoring of the existing policy to ascertain if it would be possible to expand it on a selected basis or amend it to provide a meeting place for the Shriners in Anaheim, and (2) work with the leadership of Mr. Styles' organization in trying to find, on a temporary/permanent basis, an alternate loca- tion. Then, within a reasonable amount of time, perhaps two to three months, the City ought to have a home for the organization. He asked Mr. Styles if that pro- posal sounded reasonable to him. Mr. Styles answered "yes", and further stated that the facilities they needed had to be such where 400 to 500 people could meet. Relative to a permanent location, their Temple at the present time had approximately 5,000 members and with their move to Anaheim, they anticipated 12,000 to 15,000 members. They would need facilities where they could house or entertain 1,500 people and would, thus, need 15,000 or 20,000 square feet. Councilman Overholt stated that he had an opportunity to speak with the Chairman of'the Parks and Recreation Commission and the issue was a difficult one for the Commissioners to deal with and to come up with unanimous approval. The short statement on page two of Mr. Ruth's January 23, 1979 memorandum indicating approval of the policy by the Commissioners, did not indicate the deep deliberation, soul searching and time they all spent coming up with that unanimous recommendation. He emphasized it was not a resounding approval, but a unanimous one. He was confi- dent that the Commission, as well as the Council, would be observing the situation at the Brookhurst Community Center and they were also relying heavily on staff. By taking positive action, it would give an opportunity to groups in the City to enjoy festivities at the Center at least with champagne and wine. He again commended the Commission for their considered study, as did Councilwoman Kaywood. City Attorney Hopkins stated that in connection with the resolution prepared by the Parks and Recreation Commission, his office had prepared two ordinance amendments: (1) repealing and adding Section 7.16.050 relating to alcoholic beverages, and (2) repealing and adding Section 13.08.020 relating to public parks. The former prohibited the consumption of alcoholic beverages in any park, and thus, the amend- ment would delete the word "park" from that section and in the latter, added to the list of items generally prohibited in parks, "...to consume any alcohol in any public park without first obtaining permission of the City Council." They had 79-129 C~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30, 1979, 1:30 P.M. also defined alcoholic beverages as those defined in the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act of the State of California. This would then permit the Council to delegate to Parks and Recreation the authority to authorize the consumption of alcoholic beverages in the park area. Both ordinances were recommended for first reading. A vote was first taken on the foregoing resolution. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Kott, Roth and Seymour None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-56 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Kott offered Ordinance Nos. 3962 and 3963 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 3962: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING SECTION 7.16.050 OF CHAPTER 7.16, TITLE 7, AND AMENDING TITLE 7, CHAPTER 7.16, BY ADDING THERETO A NEW SECTION 7.16.050 TO THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES. ORDINANCE NO. 3963: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 13, CHAPTER 13.08, SECTION 13.08.020 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THERETO SUBSECTION .200 RELATING TO PUBLIC PARKS. 150: DEVELOPMENT OF A PHYSICAL FITNESS, CONDITIONING AND RECREATIONAL FACILITY: On motion by Councilman Kott, seconded by Councilman Roth, the Parks, Recreation and Arts Department was authorized to solicit proposals from private enterprise to develop a physical fitness, conditioning and recreational sports facility on a portion of City-owned property (Riverdale Park Site) under a 20-year lease agreement and development of the remainder of the site into a neighborhood park facility. MOTION CARRIED. 158: PROPOSED SALE OF EXCESS UNIMPROVED LAND: (Lincoln Avenue and Beach Boule- vard) Councilman Overholt moved to accept the offer to purchase unimproved land owned by the City located approximately 450 feet south of Lincoln Avenue and 240 feet east of Beach Boulevard from Owen Cazier in the amount of $17,500; authorizing the City Manager to sign the agreement to purchase and receipt for deposit; and authorizing the City Attorney to open an escrow account and provide necessary escrow service to consummate the transaction. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Councilman Roth noted that relative to the subject sale, the agreement was subject to obtaining a variance for RM-1200. He recommended that a deadline of 90 or 120 days be stipulated and if the zoning was not accomplished within that period, the purchaser would have to come back to the Council to obtain a time extension. Otherwise the matter could go on indefinitely and the value of the property could change. 79-130 ~ii_~i .H~alj~z_Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979 ~ 1:30 P.M. City Engineer Devitt stated that since a variance would first have to be acquired, the matter would have to go through the Planning Commission and thus at least 90 days would be necessary. Councilman Roth recommended 120 days and Councilman Overholt accepted that condition in his motion. A ~ote was then taken on the foregoing motion as amended. MOTION CARRIED. 169: PRECISE RIGHT OF WAY ALIGNMENT FOR LINCOLN AVENUE BETWEEN HARBOR BOULEVARD AND OLIVE STREET: Councilman Roth stated he would abstain from voting on the subject because of the possible effect in the future relative to his property located at 1000 West Lincoln. Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 79R-57 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated January 18, 1979, from the City Engineer. Refer to Resolu- tion Book. RESOLUTION NO. 79R-57: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING THE PRECISE RIGHT-OF-WAY ALIGNMENT FOR LINCOLN AVENUE BETWEEN HARBOR BOULEVARD AND OLIVE STREET WITHIN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXHIBITS "A" AND "B" HEREOF. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Kott and Seymour NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-57 duly passed and adopted. 123/169: CARBON CREEK CHANNEL BIKE TRAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Overholt, the Carbon Creek Bike Frail Feasibility Study final report prepared by Mohle, Perry & Associates, was accepted as recommended in memorandum January 19, 1979, from the City Engineer. MOTION CARRIED. ~)n motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Overholt, the con- tinuation of the project was approved, with plans, specifications and estimates being prepared in accordance with the contract agreement, as recommended in memo- randum dated January 19, 1979, from the City Engineer. MOTION CARRIED. ~48: WITHDRAWAL FROM SCAG: City Attorney Hopkins stated that at the previous Council meeting, the Council, by motion, determined to withdraw from SCAG (see m~nutes of January 23, 1979). In checking the file, he found an agreement which had been executed in October 1974 between Anaheim and the Southern California Association of Governments which contained a provision that withdrawal from mem- bership must be by legislative body resolution of intention to withdraw and by giving the Executive Director of the Association notice of intention to withdraw at least 30 days before the effective date thereof. In accordance with that pro- ~ision, he had prepared a resolution accordingly, effective March 8, 1979. 79-131 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 79R-58 for adoption, as recommended by the City Attorney indicating that the City's withdrawal from SCAG would be effective March 8, 1979. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 79R-58: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DECLARING THE INTENTION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM TO WITHDRAW FROM THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (SCAG). Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Kott, Roth and Seymour None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-58 duly passed and adopted. 153: PROPOSAL FOR PERFORMANCE OF PRE-EMPLOYMENT MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS: (continued from January 23, 1979 to determine the lowest proposal) City Manager Talley stated that information was requested on specifically how the cost of the subject examina- tions had been obtained. The two facilities involved were Anaheim Medical Clinic and Golden West Medical Group. As was pointed out in the estimate presented, they based the cost on an estimate of 50 Class "A" examinations, 150 Class "B", 150 Class "C", and 30 Driver's License examinations. Anaheim Medical Clinic was $10 under Golden West in Class "A" and thus $500 under for the year for the City's estimated use. The same price for Class "B" existed for each clinic and in Class "C", Anaheim Medical Clinic was $3 more than Golden West. Anticipating 150 examinations in Class "C", there would then be a difference of $450, and the license examinations were the same price for each. They figured out there- fore that Anaheim Medical Clinic was $500 under Golden West on Class "A" and $450 over on Class "C" for a total difference of $50. The actual cost would vary based upon the specific examinations conducted. Staff's recommendation therefore because the sub-committee's visitation ranked the one clinic higher along with the fact that there was only a $50 difference in price based upon their estimate, was that the City maintain the same relationship which had existed for the past four years, that being with Golden West Medical Group. MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood thereupon moved that all pre-employment physicals be placed with Golden West Medical Group. Councilman Roth seconded the motion for the purpose of discussion. Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood referred to a letter that had been received from an Anaheim police officer wherein he commended Golden West and Dr. Whittier for the excellent service received in treating their patients with a warm, friendly and personal relationship, and never having to wait more than 10 minutes for whatever reason, and basically commending them in general. If the C~ty had a four-year relationship which had been that good, she maintained it should be continued. Councilman Kott stated that he was the maker of the motion several weeks ago recommending that both clinics participate. In the case of the annual exams, employees would have a choice and also in the case of pre-employment physicals. In that way, they would be able to divide the non-profit portion of the exams. Staff was directed to formulate that intent, but instead of taking direction from 79-132 ~_~ty. Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30, 1979, 1:30 P.M. the Council, they came back with their own formula with which he did not agree. He agreed with the concept that Golden West and Anaheim Medical Clinic share in the pre-employment physicals by having one organization perform those examinations for six months and the other organization for six months. Councilwoman Kaywood questioned what Councilman Kott meant by the non-profit portion of the exam because the City paid for all of them. Councilman Kott explained that what he meant was, that the fees the two gentlemen quoted were low and what they were saying to the City was that they were going to offer personalized service for a very minimum rate or at their cost. In his esti- mation, they were not making any money on those examinations considering the fees quoted. Councilwoman Kaywood stated she was extremely concerned that they were constantly asking staff to come in with the most efficient and economical way to operate, and with Proposition 13 there was no room for any mistakes, personal friendships, or conflicts of interest. It seemed to her that Councilman Kott was determined to get business for his friend. Although that was very nice, she did not think it had any part in the best way to conduct City business. Councilman Kott answered that he thought that was an accusation that was unfounded. Councilwoman Kaywood requested that the following paragraph be spread verbatim in the minutes. (A complete verbatim of the proceedings on this subject is on file in the City Clerk's Office.) "Councilman Kott: I think you're an ass for making it. Both these men are friends of mine and actually Dr. Whittier has been a friend of mine longer than Dr. Ninburg, about twice as long. So, you see the record doesn't show that, it's just that small amount of material you have between your ears just says that, but that's not true." Councilman Roth stated that he had no objection to the physicals being split half and half and realized that the Personnel Director had some problems rela- tive to the bookkeeping arrangement. Perhaps the solution would be as Councilman Kott outlined, six months with one clinic and six months with another to avoid having to go on a rotational basis. He felt that the issue had been blown com- pletely out of proportion and that both clinics had furnished good service to the City in the past. Councilman Overholt shared Councilman Roth's view that the matter had been blown out of proportion. The original proposal had long been lost which was the result of a committee investigating facilities and analyzing the cost~ He had no quarrel with Councilman Kott's suggestion and was certain that the Personnel Department could live with it and thus, he was going to vote against the motion on the floor. Councilwoman Kaywood stated as she recalled when Jack Jansen of the Anaheim Police Association appeared before the Council, he wanted the Golden West Medical Group with Dr. Whittier retained, because most of the police had their records at that facility. That was at the time when the Acacia Medical Group was recommended as the first choice. She was concerned if the load was split on a six months' basis, some of those employees could not go to Dr. Whittier. 79-133 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. Mayor Seymour interjected and stated that Councilwoman Kaywood was confused because they were talking about pre-employment physicals only and the question had been settled relative to those already employed. They were not now talking about any existing employees. Councilwoman Kaywood stated she was not confused and thereupon asked the Personnel Director if there was going to be any additional cost to the City or any additional bookkeeping involved in splitting the physicals amongst the two facilities, giving each six months. Personnel Director McRae stated his original concerns were based on what he per- ceived as a disruption on an every-other-month basis. As they moved away from that concept to some other kind of arrangements, it would become substantially less difficult to administer. The additional cost would be that every six months or year, dependent upon Council determination, they would have to set up new lines of communication, but he could not represent that as being a monumental task on their part. They would obviously prefer to go with only one person, but would accept whatever the Council concluded. A vote was then taken on the motion by Councilwoman Kaywood and failed to carry by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood Overholt, Kott, Roth and Seymour None City Manager Talley thereupon suggested that if the Council wished to do so, in order to minimize cost and to give the program continuity, they might entertain the thought of splitting the program on eleven and one-half months basis for each facility since the request covered a two-year period. On January 15, 1980, which would end the first eleven and one-half months, the examinations would be taken over by Anaheim Medical Group for the remaining eleven and one-half months. Fhus, the changeover would only have to occur once. 5~OTION: Councilman Kott moved to have pre-employment examinations split between the C~lden West Medical Group (first eleven and one-half months) and the'Anaheim X~edical Clinic (last eleven and one-half months). Councilman Roth seconded the ~no t ~ 0 n. Before a vote was taken, Councilman Kott stated that the concerns Councilwoman Kaywood expressed did not exist and that once people became employed, they tbe~ had a choice of going where they wanted to go. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. Councilwoman Kaywood voted "No". MOTION CARRIED. 123: BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - SPHERE OF INFLUENCE BETWEEN CITY OF ANAHEIM AND ORANGE: Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 79R-59 for adoption, approving an agreement with the City of Orange and Texaco Anaheim Hills, Inc., for boundary adjustment of the Sphere of Influence between the Cities of Anaheim and Orange. Approval was recommended by the Planning Commission and approval in concept was recommended by the Hill and Canyon Municipal Advisory Committee. Refer to Reso- lution Book. 79-134 _City Ha.!.l,~_Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 79R-59: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE CITY OF ORANGE RELATING TO ESTABLISHMENT OF A COMMON BOUNDARY LINE, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT. Before a vote was taken, Mr. Dan Salceda, Anaheim Hills, Inc., stated that in December 1978, he came before the Council requesting approval to a change in the City's Sphere of Influence because they were going before LAFCO to get their estate lots into the Sphere of Influence of Anaheim and ultimately annexed thereto. He then displayed a map showing the areas in question. At that time, a motion was passed by the Council indicating that the eastern portion of the Anaheim Hills property, indicated in blue, would go to the City of Anaheim. Subsequently, Councilman Smith of Orange approached them and asked if there was any property within Anaheim's Sphere of Influence that would make more sense to go to the City of Orange, recognizing that they were using as their basis the 1957 Ridgeline Agreement. After consulting with Anaheim City staff, they were able to provide, plus or minus, 85 acres also depicted on the map, in red and orange, as those areas where there would be some economic detriment to the City of Anaheim simply because services were presently not installed, and thus, would have to be built to provide such municipal services. Again referring to his December presentation, the reason they wanted the Sphere of Influence changed was because they felt, in order to maximize services and minimize cost, it made more sense to do so. They had now come up with a plan and agreement, a copy of which was submitted to the Council signed by Texaco Anaheim Hills and the Mayor of Orange--the bottom line being, they felt it made the most sense in relation to the Ridgeline Agreement. City Manager Talley stated if the Council approved, it would be an agreement that both the Orange and Anaheim Council had approved and one that the landowner also wanted and which both City staffs recommended to the Council. He wished that LAFCO would recognize such instances because it would seem not only fruitless, but also ill-advised to do something else when all parties were in agreement. The Mayor stated if the Council approved the resolution offered, it would again point out the very good relationships and good neighbor policies the City had with its friends and neighbors in Orange. A vote was then taken on the foregoing resolution. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Kott, Roth and Seymour None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-59 duly passed and adopted. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Overholt, the following actions were authorized in accordance with the reports and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda: 79-135 City..~all, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979, 1:30 P.M. 1. 118: CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims were denied and referred to the City's insurance carrier, the self-insurance administrator or allowed: a. Claim submitted by John Forrest Greer for personal injury damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions by Anaheim Police on or about October 21, 1978. b. Claim submitted by Edwin Kenneth Teyler for personal injury damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions by Anaheim Police on or about October 1, 1978. c. Claim submitted by William O'Neal for vehicles damages purportedly sustained as a result of claimant's parked vehicle being struck by a City-owned truck on or about December 6, 1978. d. Claim submitted by the Automobile Club of Southern California, Virgil and Mary Minks, insured, for damages to their vehicle purportedly sustained as a result of holes in the street on or about November 13, 1978. e. Claim submitted by the Automobile Club of Southern California, Robert and Barbara Vineyard, insured, for loss of property purportedly sustained on or about September 24, 1978. f. Claim submitted by Doris P. Rose for property damages purportedly sustained as a result of the removal of a hedge by J. B. Crosby Construction Company at the direction of the City of Anaheim, property located at 511 North Philadelphia Street, on or about the first week in November 1978. g. Claim submitted by Patricia Smith-Neighbors for personal injuries purportedly sustained as a result of a fall in the Anaheim Convention Center parking lot on or about November 24, 1978. h. Claim submitted by Robert Cody for personal damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions by Anaheim Police on or about May 17, 1978. i. Claim submitted by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Frank Gordon, insured, for property damages purportedly sustained as a result of an automobile hitting a trench in the road on or about July 14, 1978. j. Claim submitted by Bernard J. Brennan for his son Robert Brennan, a minor, for personal injuries purportedly sustained as a result of a hazardous baseball backstop condition at Clara Barton Park on or about October 10, 1978. k. Claim submitted by Orange County Florists Association "Holiday Show'! for damages purportedly sustained as a result of Convention Center.maintenance employees disposing of stage props on or about November 19, 1978. 1. Claim submitted by James Henry for property damages purportedly sustained as a result of broken power lines on or about September 26, 1978. m. Claim submitted by Warren K. Rhodes, for Robin L. Rhodes, a minor, for personai injury and property damages purportedly sustained as a result of a traffic signal malfunction on or about November 29, 1978. 79-136 .~j_ty Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. n. Claim submitted by Ian Hughes for damages purportedly sustained as a result of unlawful arrest on or about October 15, 1978. o. Claim submitted by Pacific Telephone for damage to equipment purportedly sus- tained as a result of negligent operation by employees of G. R. Frost, Inc., excavation for sewer line for the City of Anaheim on or about December 6, 1978. p. Claim submitted by Harriet C. Wasserman for damages to her vehicle purport- edly sustained as a result of street flooding without adequate warning devices on or about December 18, 1978. q. Claim submitted by Southern California Gas Company for damage to gas service at 1441 South Anaheim Boulevard purportedly sustained as a result of action by City personnel on or about November 30, 1978. r. Claim submitted by James D. Ferguson, Jr. for damages purportedly sustained to a water meter hook-up as a result of a problem caused by a Water Division employee on or about December 5, 1978. 2. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed: a. 175: Before the PUC Application Nos. 58410, 58411 and 58412, Orange Coast Sightseeing Company, notice to reset the hearing from February 13, 1979 to Tuesday, March 13, 1979. fo 105: 105: 105: 175: 105: Community Center Authority - Minutes of January 15, 1979. Community Redevelopment Commission - Minutes of January 10, 1979. Park and Recreation Commission - Minutes of November 29, 1978. Utilities Department, Electrical Engineering and Field Division - Monthly Reports for September, October and December, 1978. Youth Commission - Minutes of January 10, 1979. 173: Before the Civil Aeronautics Board, Frontier Airlines, Inc., and Hughes Air Corporation, dba Hughes Airwest, Docket 29962, for approval of Equipment Interchange Agreement. ho 173: 173: Before the Civil Aeronautics Board, Hughes Air Corporation, dba Hughes Airwest, for an exemption for Burbank-Denver nonstop authority. Before the Civil Aeronautics Board, Hughes Air Corporation, dba Hughes Airwest, for permission to serve Los Angeles on certain operations (Los Angeles-Denver). j. 105: HACb~C - Minutes of December 19, 1978. k. 105: Community Services Board - Minutes of December 14, 1978. 79-137 Citer Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30, 1979, 1:30 P.M. 105: Public Utilities Board - Minutes of January 4, 1979. m. 105: Project Area Committee - Minutes of January 9, 1979. n. 114: City of Seal Beach Resolution No. 2853, expressing support of the California Mosquito and Vector Control Association and the Orange County Vector Control District in acquiring State Subvention monies from the State Legislature. 3. 108: PUBLIC DANCE AND PRIVATE PATROL PERMITS: The following permits (a and b) were approved and (c) denied in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief Police: a. Application for a Public Dance Permit on behalf of the Classic Car Club ¢>~ Santa Ana, for a dance to be held March 17, 1979, 8:00 P.M. to 1:00 A.M., at the Carpenter's Hall, 608 West Vermont Avenue. (Abraham J. Vargas, applicant) b. Application for a Public Dance Permit on behalf of the Sociedad Progresista Mexicana #33, for a dance to be held February 18, 1979, 3:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M., at the Carpenter's Hall, 608 West Vermont Avenue. (Concha C. Flores, applicant) ~ Application for a Private Patrol Permit for Kohl Security to provide security, services with the City. (Everett E. Kohl, applicant) 4. 158: CANCELLING P-1 AUTOMOBILE PARKING ZONE DEED RESTRICTIONS: In accordan~e with the recommendation of the Assistant Director for Zoning, the cancelling of ?-I Automobile Parking Zone deed restrictions on property located east of Brook- burst Street and north of Lincoln Avenue (a portion of a parcel of land approved for RM-1200 zoning) under Reclassification No. 63-64-27, was approved. 144: RIGHT OF WAY CERTIFICATION FOR NOHL RANCH ROAD, PHASE II: In accorda~c~~ the recommendation of the City Engineer, the Right of Way Certification for Ranch Road, Phase II, from Imperial Highway to Nohl Canyon Road, A.H.F.P. ?roject No. 908, and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute same, was ~pproved. MOTION CARRIED. ~18: CLAIM OF PACIFIC OUTDOOR ADVERTISING: Councilwoman Kaywood removed the subject claim from the Consent Calendar, for purported loss of compensation as a result of having to remove an advertising structure at their lessor's demand, d~ to proposed public street alignment. She was not certain which billboard was being referred to in the claim. She recalled when they permitted billboards downtown, it was on the condition that they would be removed when the land was ue~ded. She wanted to know if the claim involved one of those billboards. Mayor Seymour stated the billboard to which Councilwoman Kaywood was referring was located at the intersection of Broadway and Anaheim Boulevard on the northeast c~orner and he did not believe that was the one involved in the claim. He noted that, in fact, it was the one at the Riverside Freeway and La Palma. Co~ncilwoman Kaywood thereupon moved to deny the claim of Pacific Outdoor Adver~ ~ and to refer it to the City's insurance carrier. Councilman Overholt seconded t-be motion. MOTION CARRIED. 79-138 Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30, 1979, 1:30 P.M. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution Nos. 79R-60 through 79R-64, both inclusive, for adoption in accordance with the reports, recommendations and certifications furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda. Refer to Resolution Book. ~69: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-60: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE EAST STREET, NORTH STREET & STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD STREET IMPROVEMENTS, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS. 13-792-6325-2340, 13-792-6325-2400 & 13-792-6325-2410; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS, AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be opened March 1, 1979, 2:00 P.M.) 164: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-61: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL' OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: WALNUT CANYON DAM ROCK SLOPE PROTECTION PHASE II, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 51-619- 6340-25580-31200; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS, AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be opened March 1, 1979 2:00 P.M.) 164/174: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-62: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM AREAWIDE WATER SYSTEM - PROJECT AREA IV - ~IN REPLACEMENT PROJECT, ACCOUNT NO. 25-606-6340-25140-34320; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS, AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK 'TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bi. ds to be opened March 1, ]979, 2:00 P.M.) 164/174: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-63: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY ~)F ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: COb~UNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM AREAWIDE WATER SYSTEM - PROJECT AREA IV - ~tilN RELINING PROJECT, ACCOUNT NO. 25-606-6340-25150-34300; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS, AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK %0 PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF~ (Bids to be opened March 1, ]979, 2:00 P.M.) 79-139 Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979, 1:30 P.M. ~74: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-64: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM PATT STREET ALLEY IMPROVEMENT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 25-793-6325-3130. (T. J. Crosby Company, Inc.) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Kott, Roth and Seymour None None ~e Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 79R-60 through 79R-64, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. 102: ORDINANCE NO. 3956: Councilman Kott offered Ordinance No. 3956 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 3956: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 8, CHAPTER 8.08 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THERETO SECTION 8.08.060 RELATING TO DOGS. Roil Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Kott, Roth and Seymour None None Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3956 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Kott also noted that he had received a good deal of favorable publi~: sentiment relative to the ordinance. C<,uncilman Roth also clarified that the ordinance was to be reviewed in'90 day~ order to ascertain the experience gained with the City's new ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 3961: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 3961 for adoption. Refer~to 0rdinanc~ Book. ORDINANCE NO. 3961: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (72-73-51(33),. RS-HS-22,000) R~i! Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Kott, Roth and Seymour None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3961 duly passed and adopted. 79-140 ~t~g Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. ORDINANCE NOS. 3964 THROUGH 3966: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance Nos. 3964 through 3966, both inclusive, for first reading. 149: ORDINANCE NO. 3964: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING SUB- SECTION .020 OF TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.32, SECTION 14.32.272 AND ADDING NEW SUBSECTIONS .1040 AND .1050 TO TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.32, SECTION 14.32.190 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING RESTRICTIONS. (portions of Cerritos Avenue and on Hancock Street, west side, from 66' north of La Palma Avenue to La Palma Avenue. 124/137: ORDINANCE NO. 3965: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF COMMUNITY CENTER AUTHORITY REVENUE BONDS, SERIES C, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING FUNDS FOR THE ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCING OF ADDITIONS TO THE ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER FACILITY, AND DES- IGNATING THE ANTICIPATED SOURCES OF REVENUE THAT WILL BE PLEDGED TO SECURE SAID REVENUE BONDS. 124/137: ORDINANCE NO. 3966: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF COMMUNITY CENTER AUTHORITY REVENUE BONDS, SERIES D, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING FUNDS FOR THE ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCING OF ADDITIONS TO THE ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER FACILITY, AND DES- IGNATING THE ANTICIPATED SOURCES OF REVENUE THAT WILL BE PLEDGED TO SECURE SAID REVENUE BONDS. ORDINANCE NOS. 3967 THROUGH 3969: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance Nos. 3967 through 3969, both inclusive, for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 3967: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (78-79-4, RM-1200) ORDINANCE NO. 3968: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (76-77-61, RM-1200) ORDINANCE NO. 3969: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (77-78-28, RM-1200) 119: REPORT ON PRESENTATION TO MEL GAUER: Councilman Overholt reported that on Monday, January 29, 1979, Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood presented Mr. Mel Gauer with the letter of commendation which previously had been signed by all Council Members~ commending him on 56 years of perfect attendance in his Rotary Club and again commending him on his 41 years of service on the Planning Commission, as well as 25 years as City School Superintendent. Mr. Gauer, who is soon going to be cele- brating his 85th birthday, had expressed his deep appreciation for the Commendation. 105: APPOINTMENT TO PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE (PAC): Councilwoman Kaywood stated that they received a communication from PAC recommending that Dr. Warren M. Hollingsworth be appointed to the vacancy on the committee. She thereupon moved that Dr. Hollingsworth be appointed to PAC to fill the unexpired term of Dirk Bode, ending June 30, 1980. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 79-141 H_all, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30, 1979~ 1:30 P.M. ~05: YOUTH COMMISSION: Councilwoman Kaywood noted that they had received a number of applications from those interested in serving on the Youth Commission and they all sounded quite good. However, there were more applicants than vacancies, making it necessary to set up a time to interview the candidates. ~tv general Council consent, Tuesday, February 6, 1979, at 10:00 a.m., in the Council Chamber was set as the date, time and place to conduct interviews of the applicants for the Youth Commission. The City Clerk indicated that she would so notify the applicants and would also supply each Council Member with copies of all applications received. Councilwoman Kaywood noted that 10 letters had been received and there were only five vacancies open and there would be a sixth opening after Suzanne DeLesk steppe~t down. She also stated that she had considered the possibility of appointing six and having Suzanne as a consultant to the Commission. ~73: OPPOSING THE USE OF LOS ALAMITOS AIR BASE FOR CIVILIAN USE: Councilwoman Kaywood offered a resolution opposing the use of the Los Alamitos Air Base for civilian use. Before any action was taken, Councilman Roth stated that he would like to add ~hat the Council encourage the Navy to again utilize the base. They were there first, noting that the first time he landed at Los Alamitos, there were no houses ~r'ound the base. He felt that the next thrust would be to rid Los Alamitos of ~he Army, who was presently using the base and flying out a very low volume of ~e]icopters from that facility. Councilwoman Kaywood stated that the proposed resolution was in line with the fact that Los Alamitos was also being evaluated as an alternate site as well as ti~e "Chino Hills" airport, and she reminded the Council that the air corridor ~= located over one of the most populated portions of West Anaheim and many, ~a~v people were opposed. !a~,r Seymour stated his understanding was that Supervisor Ralph Clark, repre- ~;~7~ing the City and the District, recommended Los Alamitos as a potential i~.=~.'ilwoman Kaywood confirmed that, in fact, he had done so. The Mayor cont~;,,~ in addition to the resolution, he be authorized on behalf of the Council with Supervisor Clark to see why he was of that mind. .5o~mc~ilman Kott then asked that action be delayed until the Mayor could repor~ ~)ac~ to the Council. ~l]ouncilwoman Kaywood stated that already seven cities in North Orange. County passed the resolution in opposition and the matter was going to be taken up at ~!~e League of California Cities meeting next week. Mayor stated that on the other hand, there should be a meeting with Super- ?isor Clark before the resolution was passed. He would be prepared to report the Council at the next meeting. 79-142 ~!Jf~_.Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. MOTION: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, consideration of the proposed resolution opposing the use of Los Alamitos Air Base for civilian use was continued for one week. MOTION CARRIED. 119: PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION TO "DAD" MILLER: Councilman Roth stated ~hat he had personally delivered the resolution issued by the Council to "Dad" M~ller at his home. He reported that he was alert and perky and intended to be carried up to the Council Chamber to give a five-minute speech on why all of the Council Members were good people and to thank each one personally for the resolution. He then elaborated on the heartwarming visit he had with "Dad" Miller. Councilwoman Kaywood commended Councilman Roth for having recommended that a resolution be presented to "Dad" Miller while still alive and well enough to appreciate it and to be so moved by it. 120: CITIZEN COM]~LAINTS: Councilman Kott referred to three recent Hotline complaints received from a Patricia Rice, Dorlene Nicklas and Jim Kruse. City Manager Talley stated that he would have each complaint investigated accordingly. RECESS: By general consent, the Council recessed for 10 minutes. (2:50 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: The ~yor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (3:00 P.M.) PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 3067: Application by Canyon Plaza Shopping Center, to erect a shopping center identification sign on CL(SC) zoned property located at the northeast corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Imperial Highway with code waivers of: type of sign b) maximum number of signs c) maximum sign area The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC78-288, reported that the Planning Director has determined that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 11, of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the requirement for an environmental impact report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an EIR, and further recommended that V~rian~ No. 3067 be granted, in part, subject to the following conditions: 1. 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 3. 2. That the free-standing sign approved in connection with Variance No. 2310 shall not be constructed. A review of the Planning Commission's action was requested by Councilman Kott at the January 9, 1979 meeting, and public hearing scheduled this date. 79-143 Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. Mayor Seymour stated he was going to remove himself from the hearing and thus abstain from any discussion or voting on the matter since he occupied rental space in the subject center. He thereupon left the Council Chamber and turned the meeting over to Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood. (3:10 P.M.) ~l~s Santalahti described the location and surrounding land uses. She outlined nile findings given in the staff report which was submitted to and considered by the City Planning Commission. Councilman Roth questioned Miss Santalahti relative to the 30-inch high decorative wall. Miss Santalahti explained that the Code permitted a shopping center identification sign on a 30-inch high decorative wall only. The applicant was proposing two wall signs of approximately 85 square feet each. The only wall signing permis- sible was for tenant advertising. The Planning Commission granted the two wall signs as requested, 85 square feet, under waiver "a" and "c". Waiver "d" was advertised in error by staff, and thus, it was not necessary. She then explained the basis for the Planning Commission granting the waivers which basically re- volved around the fact that in 1972, another variance was granted allowing a 25-foot high free-standing sign at the intersection of Via Cortez and Santa Ana Canyon Road. She then explained for Councilman Roth that only one person was present at the Commission meeting in opposition and that person was representing HACbIAC. To her knowledge, no other citizens in the community were present in opposition. Councilman Kott asked if in the original approval of the center, a number of concessions and waivers were granted. Miss Santalahti answered that the tower structure was constructed under a variance. ~]ouncilman Roth stated he did not believe the tower had anything to do with sign~ ing, but that the objection to the tower was related to the chimes proposed to be placed therein and the possible resultant noise factor. He did not see where the tower had anything to do with advertising. Councilwoman Kaywood asked if there was something at the time stipulating there was to be no signing on the tower. Miss Santalahti stated she believed the issue was discussed at Commission, if not at Council, that the tower not be used for advertising purposes and that was why she made a note that both of the proposed wall signs were low and not on the tower itself. They were at the base of the structure six feet above the'ground. Ma~or Pro Tem Kaywood asked if the applicant or applicant's agent was present and desirous of being heard. Mr. Harold Hembrey, partner in the Canyon Plaza Shopping Center, first displayed colored renderings to show what they were doing--first showing the elevation facing Imperial and the second showing the elevation facing Santa Aha Canyon Road. The two signs were identical, but facing different roads. He then described the signs which were typical of the other signs in the shopping center which iden- tified the tenants. Those signs were indicated when the tower was presented for 79-144 (~j~ty Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ 1979~ 1:_30 P.M. a variance. He then relayed the historical background relative to signing. They now had approximately 75 tenants and in their association meetings, the thrust had been that in their advertising programs they needed some identifi- cation because the shopping center across the river and freeway had a very s~milar name. Thus, when ads were run, confusion aros~ since the other center was called Canyon Village Plaza and theirs was Canyon Plaza, the latter center t~aving been in existence first. They felt that the wall sign was the most innocuous way of providing the identification that they sought. They were not in favor of free-standing signs and did not think the Canyon was the place for such signs. As an obligation to their tenants, they needed to build some- thing further to identify the Center. Mr. Hembrey concluded that he had just spoken briefly to Mrs. Jan Hall who was in the audience. Apparently the item had been before HACMAC and somehow, because their address was not always very clear, they were not notified, so they did not attend the meeting. Otherwise, they would have met with HACb~C and had tried to work the matter out ahead of time. He reiterated that their request would correct some of the confusion now existing and asked the Council's concurrence. If the Council felt otherwise, they wanted to offer an alternative to the problem. Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood asked if anyone wished to speak either in favor or in opposition. Mrs. Jan Hall, 545 Tumbleweed Road, Secretary of HACMAC, stated that they had talked to many citizens in the Canyon. When an item came before their committee, they normally had a great deal of input. The people in the Canyon were very con- cerned about continuing waivers of the sign ordinance and other violations of the ordinance that continued to occur in the Canyon. It was a fight they had at every HACMAC meeting and one of the major discussions in the Canyon area. There had been other waivers granted and other illegal signs installed that t_i~e people resented and upon which she elaborated. When Mr. Rinker came to them about the tower last spring, they had great reticence in okaying it. They made Mr. Rinker promise there would never be a sign on the tower and he gave word that there would not be, but he would keep within the Code with 30-~inch monument signs which they had been trying to encourage. However, their of approximately 80-square foot signs on two walls would be a horrendous sfght~ She questioned how they could demand that other commercial developments thai would be going into the Canyon comply to the sign code when, in fact, thos<~ developers could point to the huge signs on the bell tower at the Canyon Plaza. She also mentioned that the bell tower itself had not gained that much acc~ptan~ as ~t was, and she could imagine the reaction if signs were to be placed on She reiterated that Mr. Rinker was very adamant in the fact that if they would support the waiver for the tower, that he would install monument signs. Mrs° Hall also explained that any time am application went before the Planning Commission, the person coming to the Planning Department counter was given a letter indicating when they were supposed to appear at HACMAC, but no one from the Center was at their meeting. She then urged the Council to deny the subjec? application because there were other ways to go. 79-145 !~it_v_Hall, Anaheim~ California- COUNCIL MINUTES- January 30~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. f]ouncilman Roth reiterated his feeling that he did not equate the tower with advertising, but as something to beautify the shopping center. The minutes of the meeting where the matter was discussed would probably reflect that the concern was technical in nature. He did not believe the intent was to permit the tower and subsequently there would be no signing on the Center. blrs. Hall repeated the promise that Mr. Rinker had made that he would not ask for any sign waivers for the shopping center and that was why HACMAC gave their support. He also said that monument signs would be installed. Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood stated she remembered no signs were to be on the tower, but not on the Center itself. Mr. Hank Rivera, 6283 East Rio Grande, representing SACPOA and Peppertree Hills Homeowners Association, stated the problem was not just the signing itself, but he believed favorable action would be setting many precedents for the future. He did not think there was any structure right now in the Canyon that had re- ceived a variance for a building height other than the tower and he did not find it to be very beautiful. He then gave some historical background on the Canyon Plaza Shopping Center which led to some of the reasons why HACMAC was formed since there were a number of concerns expressed by the citizenry of the area regarding things that were taking place in the Canyon. Everybody's intent 'was for the retention of the Scenic Corridor. Mr. Rivera then pointed out that the subject project had been riddled, in his opinion, with variances and waivers and the straw that broke the camel's back was the landscape berm and setback wherein a number of criteria were stipulated which the developers could not meet. He was one of the dissenting votes on the project. He emphasized that they were asking for four-times the maximum allowable square footage for signing, and it was just one more step toward another Tustin Boulevard. Allowing the type of signing requested beyond the normal scope would be setting future precedents and he was opposed to the request. In s~mmation, Mr. Hembrey clarified for Mrs. Hall that he did not say that a ~otice had not been sent to them relative to the HACMAC meeting, but they had not received such a notice. As Mrs. Hall was aware, he had appeared several ~£mes at HACMAC and worked along with them, and Mr. Rinker had appeared as well. It was their desire to cooperate with the community and they had a number of ~?od reasons for so doing. They had a definite need for signing which had nothing to do with the tower. He had to disagree with Mrs. Hall in that if she looked at the record, the night they presented the tower to HACMAC, it plainly ~howed the sign they were asking for at this time. He was at that meeting and did not recall any discussion about the signing. If subsequently Mr. Rinker ~old her he was not going to build the sign, he was not aware of it. The tower was not built as an advertising feature, but they were trying to add a landmark ~o the area. They did not want to fight with the neighbors and thought they had done a good job. He did not know how anybody could conceive of a center of that ~ize existing without a sign at all. If it was going to be Council's recommenda- tion that the application be denied, he asked before they took such action that ~hey be allowed to go back and meet with HACMAC since they had not done so pre- '~ionsly on the application. 79-146 .~i_!y Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 30~ ~.979~ 1:30 P.M. There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor Pro Tem closed the public hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood stated it was her own feeling that the confusion would not be eliminated because the two shopping center names were so similar. She suggested it might well be that any advertising should say, at the Tower Center or at the Albertson's Center, rather than Canyon Plaza. MOTION: Councilman Kott stated that although he saw the point presented by the applicant, he believed the issue went beyond that point. As Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood well knew, there were apparently countless hours put into the formation of the sign ordinance and all the people were trying to do within a reasonable extent was to sustain the things they wanted to see within their own community. Further~ in view of the applicant's desire to meet with HACMAC, he would be agreeable to such action. He thereupon moved to continue the public hearing to Tuesday, February 20, 1979, in order to give the applicant an opportunity to meet with HACMAC before returning to the Council with his proposal. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. VISIT OF WEBELOS FROM JUAREZ SCHOOL: Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood acknowledged the Webelos Den from Juarez School who came to observe the Council meeting accom- panied by their Den Leader, Mr. Doug Buck. She welcomed the young men and presented each with a copy of the "Know Your City" booklet. ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Kott moved to adjourn. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 3:40 P.M.