Loading...
1977/09/0677-990 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6~ 1977, 1:30 P.M. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts CITY ENGINEER: James Maddox STADIUM-CONVENTION CENTER-GOLF DIRECTOR: Tom Liegler ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR: Phil Schwartze ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR - ZONING: Annika Santalahti PLANNING AIDE: Pam Lucado Mayor Thom called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. INVOCATION: Reverend Ted Cathey of the Anaheim Released Time Education gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman John Seymour led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Thom and unanimously approved by the City Council to be presented at the forthcoming banquet for "Dad" Miller: "Henry George "Dad" Miller Day in Anaheim" - Sunday, September 11, 1977 RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT: A Resolution of Support for the third annual Senior Health Fair to be held at La Palma Park, Sunday, September 18, 1977 was unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Honorary Chairman, Mr. Harry VonZell. Mr. VonZell expressed his appreciation for being considered and chosen as Honorary Chairman and concluded by expressing his personal fondness for the Anaheim Community. RESOLUTION OF WELCOME: A Resolution of Welcome to the International Supreme Council of the Order of DeMolay on the occasion of the opening of their new headquarters in Southern California on Manchester Avenue in Anaheim, was unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Mr. Marvin Pixley, Executive Officer. MINUTES: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, minutes of the Anaheim City Council regular meeting held July 5, 19 and August 2, 1977 were approved subject to corrections on the meeting of July 19, 1977 and a verbatim addition to the minutes of August 2, 1977 as requested by Councilwoman Kaywood. 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 Roth seconded the motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. 77-991 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $478,169.46, in accordance with the 1977-78 Budget, were approved. 150: NEJEDLY-HART BOND ACT OF 1976 - APPLICATION FOR FUNDS FOR SPORTS LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPING FOR PERALTA CANYON PARK: ($110,000) Councilman Kott offered Resolution No. 77R-597 for adoption as recommended in memorandum dated August 30, 1977 from the James Ruth, Director of Parks, Recreation and the Arts Department. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-597: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY OF ORANGE TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE STATE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FOR FUNDS PURSUANT TO THE NEJEDLEY-HART STATE, URBAN AND COASTAL BOND ACT OF 1976 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE THE NECESSARY APPLICATION DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-597 duly passed and adopted. 153: CREATION OF NEW HOUSING AUTHORITY JOB CLASSES (HOUSING SPECIALIST~ OCCUPANCY SPECIALIST AND INTAKE INTERVIEWER): Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 77R-598 for adoption amending Resolution No. 76R-681, as recommended in memorandum dated August 31, 1977 from Personnel Director Garry McRae. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-598: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING NEW JOB CLASSIFICATIONS AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 76R-681, PERTAINING TO SOME UNREPRESENTED CLASSIFICATIONS. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-598 duly passed and adopted. 155 AND 169: HACMAC RECOMMENDATIONS PERTAINING TO CODES AND POLICIES FOR HILLSIDE ROAD STANDARDS: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, staff was directed to evaluate HACMAC recommendations pertaining to codes and policies for hillside road standards, as recommended in memorandum dated August 30, 1977 from Planning Director Ron Thompson, pursuant to letter dated August 30, 1977 from Mr. Mike Perry, HACMAC Chairman, and report back to Council. MOTION CARRIED. 160: PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - CHEVROLET SUBURBAN VEHICLE FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT VEHICLE REPLACEMENT: On motion by Councilman Kott, seconded by Councilman Seymour, purchase of one (1) Chevrolet Suburban vehicle in the amount of $8,228.89 from Guaranty Chevrolet, was authorized to replace the 1971 Plymouth station wagon which had been used by the Fire Department but removed from service due to poor mechanical condi- tion, as recommended in memorandum dated August 30, 1977 by the Mechanical Maintenance Superintendent. The purchase was budgeted for the latter part of the fiscal year. MOTION CARRIED. 77-992 C. ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6, 1977~ 1:30 P.M. 123 AND .]'.58: CALIFORNIA TOWEL AND LINEN SUPPLY COMPANY AGREEMENT AND DEED: (A.H.F.P. No. 836, Euclid Street Widening, Riverside Freeway to La Palma Avenue) Councilman Kott offered Resolution No. 77R-599 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated August 31, 1977 from the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-599: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH CALIFORNIA TOWEL AND LINEN SUPPLY COMPANY, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-599 duly passed and adopted. 132: REVISION TO SANITATION CHARGES: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 77R-600 for adoption amending Resolution No. 77R-486 relating to single- and multiple-family unit sanitation charges to correct a one-cent difference in monthly charges, as recommended in memorandum dated August 31, 1977 from Thornton Piersall, Director of Public Works. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-600: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 77R-486 RELATING TO SANITATION CHARGES. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-600 duly passed and adopted. 140: MONTHLY VEHICLE ALLOWANCE FOR LIBRARY DIRECTOR: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Seymour, a $125 monthly vehicle allowance for the Library Director, as recommended by the City Manager who explained that the item was budgeted, was approved. MOTION CARRIED. 164: DRAINAGE AREA REIMBURSEMENT FEES: Councilwoman Kaywood questioned staff as to whether or not developers were notified of the proposed new drainage fees. City Attorney Hopkins did not know specifically if letters were sent but his office would do so if Council desired. Councilman Seymour did not feel there was a need to notify the developers, but he was concerned as to what stage in the process the new fees would apply since he considered it unfair if, in fact, someone was quoted one fee and after the process was initiated subsequently told it would be another. Discussion followed between Councilman Seymour and staff relative to the matter, at the conclusion of which Councilman Kott suggested the incorporation in the proposed resolution that the new fees would apply, except for those projects currently in pro- cess. 77-993 City Halls Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Councilman Kott offered Resolution No. 77R-601 for adoption establishing drainage reimbursement fees, as recommended in memorandum dated August 26, 1977 from the City Attorney's Office and in accordance with Ordinance No. 3743, except for those projects currently in process. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-601: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING DRAINAGE FEES. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-601 duly passed and adopted. 123: ANAHEIM BULLETIN, CONTRACT FOR LEGAL ADVERTISING: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 77R-602 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated August 25, 1977 from the City Clerk's Office, for legal advertising from August 1, 1977 to July 31, 1978. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-602: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO A RESPONSIBLE PARTY WHERE SAID PROPOSAL CONFORMS TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM'S REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL LEGAL ADVERTISING REQUIRED BY LAW TO BE PUBLISHED IN A NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION, PRINTED AND PUBLISHED WITHIN THE CITY. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-602 duly passed and adopted. 108: DINNER DANCING PLACE PERMIT: Application for The Loose Caboose, 801 East Katella Avenue, for dancing Tuesday through Saturday from 7:00 P.M. to 1:30 A.M., continued from August 9 and 16, 1977 was submitted. Disapproval was recommended by the Chief of Police. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Roth, application by The Loose Caboose for the subject Dinner Dancing Place Permit was denied since Code requirements were still not met relative to dance floor size. MOTION CARRIED. 105: APPOINTMENT TO PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE: On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Thom, appointment to fill the unexpired term on the Project Area Committee ending June 30, 1978 was continued for one week. MOTION CARRIED. 173: BUS SHELTER PILOT PROJECT: A report dated August 29, 1977 (on file in the City Clerk's Office) outlining staff recommendations and findings relative to the subject project was submitted. 77-994 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. The Mayor stated his own particular preference was Sheltertop because they not only compared favorably on the comparative matrix of staff's preferred require- ments, but also because they were a local company approximately 12 miles away in Stanton and the workability of logistics would thus be more easily achieved. Discussion then followed between Councilman Seymour and staff relative to Council- man Seymour's previous request for construction and maintenance costs for a minimal- type shelter as depicted on sheet A-20 (photo courtesy of Dayton, Ohio Transit Company) submitted by staff. If he could obtain accurate information revealing that the cost of placing one of these minimal shelters over existing ad benahes would not be any greater than an average of $100 with maintenance of $25 or less, he would prefer such a shelter over those submitted with what he considered excessive signing. At the conclusion of further staff and Council discussion, both Councilwoman Kaywood and Councilman Roth expressed their preference for a trial period for each shelter on which a proposal was submitted in order to gain community input and enabling a more precise evaluation as discussed at the meeting of July 19 and August 2, 1977. Mr. Phil Schwartze, Assistant Planning Director, indicated there was a possibility that all four companies who had thus far submitted proposals would be amenable to building a pilot shelter for such evaluation. Councilman Kott was of the opinion that the comparative analysis submitted was sufficient for Council decision. Mr. Nelson Presthoff, Vice President of Bustop Shelters of California, Inc., Century City, spoke to the matter and indicated his company would be willing to construct a shelter as a demonstration project basically because they were the only substantial company in the business at the present. He then explained that Bustop pioneered the bus shelter program in New York City, and the difference between their company and others was experience and capability, and their 5 percent rebate to the City on each shelter relative to advertising would be greater than a flat rate. He continued by making some comparisons between his company and Sheltertop and concluded by stating that the interest of the public should be in the financial criteria, as well as the design criteria, of the company submitting the proposal. That company had to be prepared to perform by constructing the shelters on schedule and following through to make the venture a profitable one for the City. The Mayor stated that the City's main intent was to provide an amenity to encourage the use of buses and give the opportunity for someone to provide shelters at no cost to the City. Whichever company was selected, they would have to construct the desired number of shelters whether or not they acquired advertising. Councilman Roth was of the opinion that the matter should be handled in a business- like way and suggested that a letter be sent to each of the four companies who had submitted proposals asking if they were willing to construct, install and remove a sample shelter at their own expense incorporating staff recommendations. Councilwoman Kaywood thereupon moved that staff send a communication to each of the four companies who submitted proposals asking for installation of a pilot shelter incorporating staff's preferred requirements as outlined in memorandum 77-995 .City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL M~NUTES - September 6~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. dated August 29, 1977, with maintenance and removal to be at the expense of the responding company; installation to be made within 60 days of September 6, 1977; and shelters to be left in place for 90 days for evaluation purposes and community input. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood also requested staff to ascertain whether or not polycarbonate plastic, recommendation number 4 in the subject staff report, was burnable, if so, that would not be a preferred requirement. 158: PROPOSED SALE OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTY, ORANGEWOOD AVENUE AND RAMPART STREET AND LEASE OF A PORTION OF STADIUM PARKING LOT: (continued from July 19, August 9 and 16, 1977) Mr. Alan Watts, Attorney for Matlow-Kennedy Corporation (M-KC), 1055 North Main Street, Suite 1020, Santa Ana, referred to the three questions posed by the City Attorney's Office relative to the sale or lease of the subject property, the last of which was no problem to Matlow-Kennedy as they were willing to initiate proper zoning action on the property. He had prepared a draft document which contemplated the sale of the Rampart property and air rights over Orangewood, along with a lease of a portion of the Anaheim Stadium parking lot. The attempt was to give the City some ability to control an integrated development over the area. In order to prepare the document in final form, however, they would have to know the answer to question (1) whether the Council desired to sell or lease the Rampart Street property and that acreage south of Orangewood and, (2) what was intended by the Council in connection with the good faith deposit. Mr. Watts thereupon confirmed for the Mayor that the Matlow-Kennedy Corporation would be interested in a development proposal in either case, sale or lease. City Attorney Hopkins clarified that the 18 acres referred to was land that could be sold or leased by the City, and the three questions posed in his August 31, 1977 memorandum must be answered in order for him to carry out Council's directive to prepare a workable document. In answer to the Mayor's question relative to the Council's wishes in the matter, Councilman Roth stated that if it did not make any difference either way, it was the responsibility of the applicants wishing to develop the property to give an indication of their preference. He was, however, interested in the best return for the City. Councilman Kott preferred to see the property sold if there were no legal ramifications for so doing. Thus, the property would be placed on the tax rolls in a clear-cut fashion, but he conceded that the City should have control over the development in terms of its effect on the Stadium. Mr. David Hook, President of Sunset Construction, stated that they were prepared to make their presentation as previously requested by the Council. Mr. Douglas Danielson, a principal in the firm of Hill, Danielson and Associates of Newport Beach, explained that he was commissioned by Mr. Hook and Sunset Construc- tion to explore several ways of developing the Orangewood/Rampart Street property. As depicted from a site plan, Mr. Danielson explained some of the features of the proposal stating that one of the major good points was the fact that it was a totally self-contained project.incorporating commercial space, a restaurant, bank and specialty shops with a two-story office building project and included therein would be a health club for tenants of the project. Parking was around the periphery immediately adjacent 77-996 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. to the buildings with two major entrances off of Rampart. The office'complex itself would involve 210,000 square feet of two-story office space with 3,000 square feet for the private health club. Total parking for the project would be 921 vehicles'and no parking variances would be required. In viewing the project from the freeway, it would reveal a campus-type setting. The architecture was planned to be a modern type, but relating to early California heritage. In answer to Coucilwoman Kaywood, Mr. Danielson explained that the plan did not incorporate any joint use with the parking lot at the Stadium although that aspect was explored. In the final analysis, they considered that such an arrangement would not be feasible because the walking distance would be too great. Mr. Red Patterson, President of the California Angels, posed a question to Mr. Watts relative to how much parking space in the Stadium complex would be necessary for the Matlow-Kennedy concept and how many days of the year, and to what extent it would invade the Angels contract. The Mayor briefly answered Mr. Patterson relative to the initial indication of M-KC that their proposal envisioned usage of some of the Stadium parking lot on the Orangewood side, but there was a stipulation as to additional spaces that would be provided to the contracted spaces with the Angels, and this was also Mr. Liegler's understanding. Mr. Watts elaborated that approximately 8 acres would be utilized on the Stadium parking lot currently in use for Stadium events located in the area of the Orangewood entrance and the employee entrance. A consideration, however, was the fact that there were more parking spaces currently existing than those required pursuant to the agreement between the Angels and the City. Also, they proposed to develop other land for parking if that should be a necessary contractual requirement of the City. Normal utilization would occur during the year Just as with other commercial estab- lishments. Mr. Patterson stated that the Angels favored any project and would cooperate in any reasonable way to enhance the parking and Stadium revenue overall, but any invasion of a choice lot would be an invasion of an existing contract. He explained that they had increased the number of cars getting priority parking and expected they would have to utilize two more rows for parking in the area under discussion that would be turned over to the proposed project. Mr. Patterson then elaborated on the percentages of cars using different entrances to the Stadium during Angels games and pointed out the increase from 18 percent coming in through Orangewood to 30 percent since the opening of the 57 Freeway. He contended if the Orangewood lot was reduced from 14 acres to 6, approximately 1,360 cars would be displaced, having to park somewhere else. He stressed the importance of balanced parking throughout the Stadium. In all his experience with stadiums throughout the country, he stated that Anaheim had the finest ingress and egress and, in consideration of this fact, it should be left that way. He reiterated however, that he was in full accord with anything that would bring more revenue to the City from the Stadium and from the Angels within reason, but it was his hope that any proposed project could find a way to work outside the Stadium without borrowing 8 acres of a 14-acre lot, thus creating an off-balance parking situation. Mr. Hook then interjected that he was asked to deposit a cashier's check or letter of credit. He explained that he brought with him a $50,000 cashier's check deposit of good faith, and his company wanted to be a contender in the bidding. 77-997 ~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES September 6~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Mr. Hopkins stated he would first need Council's direction as the deposit was the subject of question number two posed in his August 31, 1977 memorandum. Mr. Hopkins also clarified for Councilman Roth that a letter of credit usually had certain terms specified therein and if the terms or actions set forth were finalized, then the document could be taken to the bank and cashed, but terms would have to be specified in the letter. The second question dealt directly with the issue of whether or not the monies were intended for negotiation purposes with no return or a guarantee of faithful performance. The Mayor and Councilman Seymour stated that they construed it to be a guarantee of faithful performance wherein, for whatever reasons, if the development contract was negotiated and the proponent could not complete it, the deposit would be forfeited. Councilman Roth contended that stipulations would have to be made relative to those items that would result in a default of the deposit. He was looking for one thing, simple requirements with a minimum of "escapes" and a clear understanding that the $50,000 deposit would be lost for non-performance. Mr. Tom Liegler, Stadium-Convention Center-Golf Director, clarified that the City was under contract with the Angels for 80 home games, to supply 12,000 parking stalls, plus a small amount for their office staff. Several times, in excess of 15,000 cars had been parked. They were able to meet the Angel commitment and still have some stalls left over. As a result of a recent parking lot inventory, it was determined there were approximately 15,000 actual stalls. In answer to Councilman Kott's question relative to potential conflict in the M-KC proposal in terms of Mr. Patterson's contentions, Mr. Liegler explained there were some parking lot operational areas that would have to be considered, but he wanted to evaluate the terms of the operation and traffic flow before he answered yes or no. It was his opinion that in the best interest of the City, in addition to the sale of the subject property, revenues should be realized for continual use of the Stadium parking lot by various private enterprise operators around the Stadium and that was the concept envisioned some years ago. He was confident that the situation could be worked out with the cooperation of the Angels. Mr. Watts explained that he did not want a situation where a few parking spaces were being discussed, speaking in generalities, without being able to develop additional parking spaces. He referred to the fact that the City owned land adjacent to the Stadium which was currently undeveloped, and considered the matter to be a "fail safe" situation relative to the numbers of spaces that could be available. It was his opinion that the City would not be entering into one contract in violation of another. M-KC would also be prepared to undertake construction of new parking spaces. Realizing that the City wished to maximize their revenues from any proposals, as pointed out by Councilman Roth, their proposal, in comparison to Mr. Hook's, would generate greater revenue since it proposed to develop more property. Secondly, he felt Mr. Patterson was directing his comments to access to the Stadium, rather than to who parked where. They did not intend to change any access points and, as a operational matter, people could be directed to park wherever appropriate. Mr. Patterson took issue with Mr. Watts' assumption and stressed the disruption that would be caused contrary to the balance conceived in the original design. Thus, such a move would not be fair to the fans attending Anaheim Stadium. 77-998 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Mr. Hook pointed out that the proposed parking in the M-KC concept would necessitate tenants walking a distance of approximately one-quarter of a mile to their offices every morning. Therefore, he wanted noted for the record that if such an approach was of interest to the City, it was his opinion that the land could accommodate a greater density and much more could be placed on the property. He also maintained that a lender would not go along with such a concept and it would have to be modi- fied when it came down to borrowing the money. His concept was approaching the matter from a logical standpoint and one which would work. The Mayor stated the plan for development was the important aspect and the financing was a concern between a lender and the developer. If the M-KC proposal was approved and it was subsequently determined the project could not be built, they would lose their money. He also clarified for Mr. Hook that any change in a proposal would have to come back to the Council to assure it would enhance the Stadium. The Mayor, Councilwoman Kaywood, and Councilmen Seymour and Kott confirmed their position that the $50,000 deposit was to be construed as a performance bond wherein if the City created a situation obstructing performance, the deposit would be returned, but if the potential developer created such a situation and subsequently was unable to perform, the deposit would be forfeited to the City. Councilman Roth stated that a deposit was defined by its contingencies and these contingencies must be known since they would have an ultimate effect. Councilman Seymour stated that by his original motion at a previous meeting, he intended from the very beginning that $50,000 or an irrevocable Letter of Credit was to be a faithful performance deposit with the reasonable contingencies being the price and value of the land, and, as well, if the property could be used for the intent proposed. Although Mr. Watts may have offered some agreement contingent upon financing, he had not reviewed it, and the City Attorney did not indicate he had received it. Relative to lease or sale of the property, if the land could be sold, he would concur in a sale and preferred that over leasing. The developer should be the one to initiate zoning on the property and the good faith deposit should be contingent upon that zoning; the remaining question being, should the City favor the Matlow- Kennedy Corporation proposal or the Hook (Sunset Construction) proposal. Councilman Seymour stated that it was clear in his mind that although there was some concern relative to insuring the Angels their contractual number of parking spaces, as well as the proximity of the parking spaces, the M-KC proposal was superior from one primary standpoint and a key factor recognized by Mr. Liegler, and that was, dependent upon how adjacent property was developed would depend upon future value of surrounding property. The M-KC proposal was tied to City property and likewise would generate long-term revenues the City favored relative to parking. MOTION: Councilman Seymour thereupon moved to continue and finalize within one week an exclusive right agreement with the Matlow-Kennedy Corporation with a $50,000 irrevocable Letter of Credit as outlined (faithful performance bond) with a sale of the subject 18 acres; the developer to bear the responsibility of all costs of zoning on the property; approval of the California Angels relative to the parking layout; and the City Attorney directed to notify the County Parks and Recreation Department and various State agencies of the sale of public property, pursuant to Government Code. Councilman Kott seconded the motion. Councilman Roth voted "No". MOTION CARRIED. 77-999 .City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. By general Council consent, appraisal report dated September 2, 1977 from Cedric A. White, Jr., MAI, covering the 18.78 acres at the southwest corner of Orangewood Avenue and Rampart Street, was submitted and filed with the City Clerk's Office. RECESS: By general consent, the City Council recessed for ten minutes. (3:15 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (3:25 P.M.) PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 2948: Application by Canyon Plaza Shopping Center, to construct a commercial building on CL zoned property located on the northeast corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Imperial Highway with code waivers of: a) required landscaped berm b) maximum structural height (denied) Councilman Seymour stated that he was a tenant in the subject shopping center and since there could be a potential conflict of interest, he would abstain from discus- sion and voting on the matter. Councilman Seymour left the Council Chamber. (3:33 P.M.) The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-177 recommended that the subject property be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare an environ- mental impact report pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental. Quality Act and further, recommended that Variance No. 2948 be granted, in part, subject to the following conditions: 1. That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim along Santa Ana Canyon Road, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, street grading and paving, drainage facilities or other appurtenent work, shall be complied with as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the Office of the City Engineer; that street lighting facilities along Santa Ana Canyon Road shall be installed as required by the Director of Public Utilities; and/or that a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim shall be posted with the City to guarantee the installation of the above-mentioned requirements. 2. That the above improvements shall be required to be constructed at such time as the ADT on Santa Ana Canyon Road shall reach 25,000 vehicles. 3. That the property owner(s) shall proportionately, on the basis of acreage, participate in the costs of furnishing and installing a traffic signal at the intersection of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Via Cortez, said participation to be 21% of the total cost ($40,000) and amount to $8,400, and said amount shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. That the existing illegal antenna located on the shopping center be removed at the time of the request by the Zoning Enforcement Officer or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 5. That a bus bay (8 feet x 80 feet) shall be built-in on the Imperial Highway right-of-way per Traffic Engineer and Orange County Transit District requirements. 77-1000 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6, 1977, 1:30 P.M. 6. That there shall be no vehicular access to Imperial Highway from subject property. 7. That prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner(s) shall submit to the Planning Commission for review and approval a revised site plan specifying on-site vehicular circulation providing adequate two-way access between the three parcels located south of the Riverside Freeway, west of Via Cortez, north of Santa Ana Canyon Road and east of Imperial Highway, and the two approved access points on Santa Ana Canyon Road. 8. That a perpetual maintenance agreement shall be submitted to the City Attorney's Office for review and approval and then be filed and recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder, said agreement being for the maintenance of landscaping in the public right-of-way adjacent to the proposed 14-foot wide landscaped setback adjacent to Santa Ana Canyon Road and Imperial Highway, as stipulated to by the petitioner. 9. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2. 10. That Condition Nos. 1, 2, 5, 8 and 9, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. Miss Santalahti described the location and surrounding land uses. She outlined the findings given in the staff report which was submitted to and considered by the City Planning Commission. She also confirmed for Councilman Roth that the only item of contention in that which was appealed dealt with maximum structural height. The Mayor asked if the Applicant or Applicant's Agent was present and desirous of of being heard. Mr. Harry Rinker, representing the Canyon Plaza Shopping Center, explained that the request for variance involved the proposed Bell tower which had no functional pur- pose other than the fact that bells would be mounted in it and regulated on a chimes clock recording mechanism. The bells themselves would not ring. The bell tower was an aesthetic amenity costing approximately $30,000 plus $5,000 for the recording of the bell chimes which would be a desirable adjunct. The proposal had been approved by HACMAC and their approval was conditional upon adding the chimes. Councilman Seymour returned to the Council Chamber. (3:45 P.M.) A brief discussion followed between Council Members and Mr. Rinker wherein upon question by Councilwoman Kaywood, he explained the audibility of the chimes was controllable and a matter of regulating them to the desirable level which would be determined by the tenants. They would not be so loud as to pervade any residences and only chime during the hours of operation of the plaza, essentially from 10:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. at specified time intervals. The equipment was very sophisticated to the point where frequency and loudness could be adjusted. Councilman Roth considered the development to be an asset to the conmaunity and aesthetically pleasing. There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor closed the public hearing. 77-1001 _~ity Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the City Council finds that this project will have no significant effect on the environment since the Anaheim General Plan desig- nates the subject property for general, commercial land uses commensurate with the proposal and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. Councilman Seymour abstained. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 77R-603 for adoption granting Variance No. 2948 and reversing the Planning Commission findings on the hardship concerning maximum structural height. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-603: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2948. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Kott, Roth and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-603 duly passed and adopted. 105: REPORT - ANAHEIM FOUNDATION FOR CULTURE AND THE ARTS: Mr. John Malmquist, President of the Anaheim Foundation for Culture and the Arts, submitted to and briefed the Council on the recommended changes to the Foundation's Bylaws under Article V, which changes were formulated at a meeting of the Bylaws Committee on August 30, 1977to encompass the mandate of the City Council to the Foundation concerning the "umbrella" concept and administration of cultural programs for the City. It was expected that the Bylaws would be finalized by the month's end. Mr. Malmquist then explained that a Budget and Finance Committee made up of Mr. Robert Anthony and Robert Hill of UCB, Dennis Yamamoto, Manager of Sumitomo Bank, and Dave Duran, CPA, was in the process of reviewing the City's cultural budget and subsequently would be meeting with James Ruth, Director of the Parks, Recreation and the Arts Department relative to that budget. He stressed, however, there would be no co-minglings of Foundation revenues with City money. Mr. Malmquist added that a Professional Director Search Committee had also been formed and a thorough discussion was given to the important issue of selecting a capable director to coordinate the various groups interested in culture and the arts in the City. The Mayor commended Mr. Malmquist and the Committee in adhering to the original direction established, noting that the general revisions to the Bylaws were exactly what was discussed between the Council and the Foundation Board previously. Progress was being made and he wanted to see the shift accomplished as soon as possible. He recommended that unless the Council had questions, the report and proposed revisions to the Bylaws be accepted as being in accord with the Council's direction. 77-1002 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6~ 1977, 1:30 P.M. Councilwoman Kaywood wanted to know when the "umbrella" committee was going to be chosen. Mr. Malmquist indicated this would be done when all specifics, such as the budget and funding, were put together. He reiterated the need for an outside director who was very capable and knowledgeable and they were trying to determine the amount of salary this person should be paid. He did not know the salary anticipated but he was to work with Mr. Ruth regarding the amount of monies that would be coming from the Parks, Recreation and Arts Department. Councilwoman Kaywood stated her concern was still the same as it was in May when she attempted to ask if the "umbrella" organization would be formed prior to selecting a director. It was her opinion that to select the director first was working in the opposite direction. Mr. Malmquist answered that the matter was being discussed at present but the course of action not yet determined. If a director was hired and subsequently the concept of putting all the arts together was not accepted, then there would be a question of what to do with the director. He continued, however, that if the concept was acceptable, they would then hire a director. After ascertaining that the Council was in accord and selection made of the people the Council wanted, a steering committee could be formed for input. He also felt that the School District should be involved. He expected that acceptance of the basic concept would be accomplished by October 15, 1977 and thereafter he would like to again meet with the Council to receive further input and carry on from that point. The Mayor reiterated that Mr. Malmquist needed concurrence by the Council that the Foundation was doing what they originally were directed to do. Councilwoman Kaywood stated that she had not yet received an answer to her question. Mr. Malmquist stated they could not hire a manager until everything was in line and approval of the concept was given. Councilman Seymour clarified that what Councilwoman Kaywood was trying to determine was whether the existing Foundation was going to hire a director or if the new "umbrella" board of directors would do so. He concurred with Mr. Malmquist that the most intelligent course of action was to be sure a financial package was put together, while at the same time carry on the search and recruitment function. He encouraged the continuation of recruitment but recommended a delay in hiring so that a newly appointed committee out of the "umbrella" board had an opportunity to review the finalist and make a selection. A concern he had in relation to a professional director, however, was whether the Bylaws clearly spelled out the duties of this person as to authority and responsibility to the Board governing the entire operation, as well as the relationship of the director to other employees in the Cultural Arts Center. If these were not defined, he encouraged Mr. Malmquist to look at that aspect because it was important to have a clear chain of command in management. Mr. Malmquist stated that the matter of outlining the duties of the future profes- sional director was discussed at their last meeting and they would definitely be stated. He also commented that those employees now connected with the Foundation would remain and were not going to be replaced. However, the new director would be the one to make any subsequent decisions. 77-1003 ~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6, 1977~ 1:30 P.M. MOTION: Councilman Seymour moved that the report, as presented by Mr. Malmquist, as well as supplemental information provided relative to revision of the Bylaws of the Anaheim Foundation for Culture and the Arts be accepted as being in accord with Council's direction. Councilman Thom seconded tbe motion. Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood explained that she was going to vote "No" because, at a time when the City was looking to cut taxes and reduce every kind of expenditure and expense, it would be a backward step to take something out of one of the most efficiently run departments in the City and duplicate services and salary. The Mayor considered the move to be a non-duplicatory one which would achieve a better run and more uniform approach. A vote was taken on the foregoing motion and carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None MOTION CARRIED. 105: APPOINTMENTS TO LIFELINE ELECTRICAL RATES AD HOC COMMITTEE: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, Mr. Warren Hunziker and Mr. Fred Fleishour were appointed to the subject ad hoc committee; the two names having been submitted and recommended by the Anaheim Senior Citizens. MOTION CARRIED. On motion by CounCilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Kott, Mrs. Margaret Sullivan was appointed to the subject ad hoc committee. MOTION CARRIED. On motion by Councilman Kott, seconded by Councilman Thom, Dr. Ernest Kaye was appointed to the subject ad hoc committee. MOTION CARRIED. 167: AWARD OF CONTRACT - BICYCLE LANES, BOTH SIDES OF SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD, EAST TO WEST CITY LIMITS: (Account No. 10-4309-728-16-9875) Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 77R-604 for adoption awarding a contract to the low bidder in accor- dance with the recommendations of the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-604: 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 EQUIP- MENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PERFORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT: FURNISH AND INSTALL TRAFFIC SIGNS IN CONJUNCTION WITH BICYCLE LANES ALONG BOTH SIDES OF SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD, EAST CITY LIMITS TO WEST CITY LIMITS, ACCOUNT NO. 10-4309-728-16-9875. (Unistruct Los Angeles, $9,376.66) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-604 duly passed and adopted. 77-1004 C_ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6, 1977~ 1:30 P.M. 164: AWARD OF CONTRACT - SANTA FE-ANAHEIM INDUSTRIAL PARK STORM DRAIN: (Account Nos. 10-4309-726-16-0905 and 11-4309-720-16-4004) Councilman Kott offered Resolution No. 77R-605 for adoption awarding a contract to the low bidder in accordance with the recommendations of the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-605: 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 EQUIP- MENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PERFORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT: SANTA FE-ANAHEIM INDUSTRIAL PARK STORM DRAIN, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS. 10-4309-726-16-0905 AND 11-4309-720-16-4004. (Bebek Company of Irvine, $338,608) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-605 duly passed and adopted. 108: APPLICATION FOR SOLICITATION OF CHARITY FUNDS: Application by the American Cancer Society for solicitation of pledges from September 1 through October 1, 1977 for the Bike-a-Thon on September 24, 1977, and request for waiver of the parade permit fee, were submitted. On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Kott, application by the American Cancer Society for solicitation of pledges as outlined above was approved, including waiver of the parade permit fee. MOTION CARRIED. 170: FINAL MAP~ TRACT NO. 9685: Developer, J. F. Shea Company, Inc. of Walnut; Tract located on the north side of Orange Avenue, west of Brookhurst Street con- taining 20 RS-7200 proposed zoned lots. On motion by Councilman Kott, seconded by Councilman Roth, the proposed subdivision, together with its design and improvement, was found to be consistent with the City's General Plan, and the City Council approved final map, Tract No. 9685, as recommended by the City Engineer in his memorandum dated September 2, 1977. MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, the following actions were authorized in accordance with the reports and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda: 1. 118: CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims were denied and referred to the City's insurance carrier or the self-insurance administrator: a. Claim submitted by Ben Lee Frost for personal damages purportedly sustained as a result of his wrongful arrest on or about July 2, 1977. b. Claim submitted by Edward W. Hall for personal damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions by the Anaheim Police at the Stadium on or about July 6, 1977. 77-1005 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6, 1977, ]:30 P.M. c. Claim submitted by Southern California Gas Company for property damages purportedly sustained during street grading at 717 South Echo on or about May 5, 1977. d. Claim submitted by Southern California Gas Company for property damages pur- portedly sustained during excavating for repair of electrical short at 104 and 108 South Milton on or about July 29, 1977. e. Claim submitted by Fred Bartoshevich for property damages purportedly sustained as a result of lightening arrestor malfunction on or about August 19, 1977. f. Claim submitted by John M. Burk for personal damages purportedly sustained as a result of an incident at the Convention Center on or about August 12, 1977. g. Claim submitted by Coloding, Inc., for personal damages purportedly sustained as a result of power outage on or about August 7, 1977. h. Claim submitted by Robert and Marie Cardoza for pr~perty damages purportedly sustained as a result of slippery road conditions on Crescent Way on or about August 14, 1977. i. Claim submitted by Mark R. Johnson for vehicle damages purportedly sustained as a result of a collision with a city-owned vehicle on or about June 10, 1977. j. Claim submitted by Thomas Louis Seitz for property damages purportedly sustained as a result of an accident involving a city-owned vehicle on or about August 8, 1977. k. Claim submitted by Interinsurance Exchange of the Auto Club of Southern California for property damages purportedly sustained as a result of an accident involving a city-owned vehicle on or about May 12, 1977. 2. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed: a. 114: City of Newport Beach Resolution No. 9169 opposing adoption of the draft report entitled "Urban Development Strategy for California" b. 114: City of San Diego Resolution No. 219043 relative to Assembly Bill 1852, an act to repeal Section 25524.1 of the Public Resources Code relating to nuclear power plants. c. 175: Public Utilities Commission of the State of California Notice Resetting Hearing of Application No. 57232 of Southern California Gas Company to increase revenues to offset the impact on revenue requirements of long-term storage pursuant to a proposed subsection (o) Gas Storage Adjustment (GSA) to Southern California Gas Company's Rule No. 2. d. 171 & 178: The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Resolution No. 7715 levying taxes for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 1977 upon taxable property lying within the District. 77-1006 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6~ 1977, 1:30 P.M. e. 173: Public Utilities Commission of the State of California Notice of Hearing of Case No. 10347, Investigation on the Commission's own motion into the status, safety, maintenance and use of the Esperanza Road Crossing at grade of the tracks of The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company, Crossing 2B-35.4 near the City of Anaheim. 3. 108: APPLICATION - DINNER DANCING PLACE PERMIT: The following permit was approved in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Police: a. Dinner Dancing Place Permit to allow dancing Sunday through Saturday at Mamma Cozza's Restaurant, 500 North Brookhurst Street, from 7:00 P.M. to 1:30 A.M. (Leonard G. Smith, applicant) MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution Nos. 77R-606 through 77R-609, 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. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-606: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Winston Industrial Properties, Ganahl Lumber Company; Dale W. Carr, et ux.) 174: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-607: 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: BARRIER FREE ANAHEIM, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, E.D.A. PROJECT NO. 07-51-01053, WORK ORDER NO. 902. (N-D-L Con- struction) 164: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-608: 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: WALNUT CANYON CHANNEL REPAIR, S/O SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 910. (Savala Construction Company) 169: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-609: 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: APPLICATION OF TRAFFIC STRIPE PAINT, PAVEMENT MARKINGS, AND DEVICES ON VARIOUS STREETS, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 12-4309-717-16-0000; 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 September 29, 1977, 2:00 P.M.) 77-1007 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6, 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 77R-606 through 77R-609, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: The following actions taken by the City Planning Commission at their meeting held August 15, 1977, pertaining to the following applications were submitted for City Council information. 1. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 77-78-1, VARIANCE NO. 2950, AND TENTATIVE TRACT NOS. 8116 (REVISION 3), 8117 (REVISION 2), 9602 (REVISION 1) AND 9864 (REVISION 1) AND EIR NO. 203: Submitted by Texaco-Anaheim Hills, Inc., for a change in zone from RS-HS-43,000(SC) to RS-HS-iO,000(SC) to establish a 171-lot subdivision on property located on the south side of Nohl Ranch Road, west of Royal Oak Road, with code waiver or requirement that all lots rear onto arterial highways. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution Nos. PC77-173 and PC77-174, approved Reclassification No. 77-78-1, granted Variance No. 2950, and certified EIR No. 203 as being in compliance with City and State Guidelines and the State of California Environmental Quality Act and further approved the following Tentative Tracts: Tentative Tract No. 8116 (Revision 3), 44 lots Tentative Tract No. 8117 (Revision 2), 44 lots Tentative Tract No. 9602 (Revision 1), 49 lots Tentative Tract No. 9864 (Revision 1), 34 lots, 2 open space lots, and Tree Removal Plan. 2. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 77-78-4 AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 9262: Submitted by Coastal Developers, for a change in zone from County 100-E4-20,000 to RS-HS-22,000(SC) to establish a 9-lot subdivision on property located on the northeast corner of Martella Lane and Martin Road, southeast of Santa Ana Canyon Road. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-175, approved Reclassi- fication No. 77-78-4 and granted a negative declaration status, and further approved Tentative Tract No. 9262. 3. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 77-78-8 AND VARIANCE NO. 2961 (READVERTISED): Submitted by Shashikant M. and Daksha S. Patel, for a change in zone from CL to RM-1200 to con- struct a 7-unit apartment complex on property located at 212 East Broadway, with certain code waivers. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution Nos. PC77-171 and PC77-172, approved Reclassification No. 77-78-8 and granted Variance No. 2961 (Readvertised) in part, and a granted negative declaration status. 77-1008 Ci~Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6, 1977, 1:30 P.M. 4. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 77-78-10: Submitted by Jerry and Sherrie Marks for a change in zone from RM-1200 and CL to CL on property located on the southwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Empire Street. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-178, approved Reclassification No. 77-78-10 and granted a negative declaration status. 5. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 77-78-11: Submitted by Waldeen B. and Betty C. Hart, for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 tp RM-1200 on property located on the west side of Magnolia Avenue, north of Lincoln Avenue. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-179, approved Reclassi- fication No. 77-78-11 and granted a negative declaration status. 6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1737: Submitted by the Central Assembly of God to permit a church expansion on RS-A-43,000 zoned property located at 1026 South East Street with code waivers. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-181, granted Condi- tional Use Permit No. 1737 and granted a negative declaration status. 7. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1738: Submitted by Myung Shik and Kum Ok Yun, to permit a motel expansion on CL zoned property located at 733 South Beach Boule- vard. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-182, granted Condi- tional Use Permit No. 1738 and ratified the Planning Director's categorical exemption determination. 8. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 9981: Submitted by H and H Development for a l-lot, 6-unit RM-4000 zoned condominium subdivision on property located at 2210 South Loara Street. The City Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract No. 9981 and granted a negative declaration status. 9. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 10013: Submitted by Charles Gorman, for a l-lot, 56-unit RM-1200 subdivision on property located at 200-232 Clifton Avenue. The City Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract No. 10013 and granted a negative declaration status. No action was taken by the Council on the foregoing items, thus upholding the actions of the City Planning Commission. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 77-78-14: Application by Carl and Doris Arthofer, for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to CL on property located on the south side of Orangewood Avenue, west of Harbor Boulevard. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-180, approved Reclassification No. 77-78-14 and granted a negative declaration status. 77-1009 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6, 1977, 1:30 P.M. Councilwoman Kaywood questioned staff as to how many kitchenettes were proposed in the 50-unit motel. Miss Santalahti explained that the plans showed five kitchen units which could be shared, but it was not discussed at the Planning Commission meeting as to what these units included. Staff recommendation included a condition which restricted them to a 6-foot refrigerator with two burner stoves. Councilwoman Kaywood noted further that there was a fraction lot of 20 feet left undeveloped to the southwest that would be totally landlocked and was curious as to why this portion was omitted. She wanted to preclude the future possibility that the developers would come in with a hardship request relative to that small parcel. Miss Santalahti explained that was not discussed at the Planning Commission level, except to note that it was irregular. No action was taken by the Council on Reclassification No. 77-78-14. 108: ORDINANCE NO. 3767: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3767 for first reading after receiving clarification from the City Attorney that bingo permits were not included. ORDINANCE NO. 3767: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING SECTIONS 18.41.015.050, 18.41.050.190 OF CHAPTER 18.41; 18.42.025.070, 18.42.050.130 OF CHAPTER 18.42; 18.44.025.050, 18.44.050.040 OF CHAPTER 18.44; 18.45.025.060, 18.45.050.040 OF CHAPTER 18.45; 18.46.025.060, 18.46.050.040 OF CHAPTER 18.46; 18.48.015.050, 18.48.050.030 OF CHAPTER 18.48; TITLE 18, AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS IN THEIR PLACE AND STEAD, AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS 18.41.020.060 TO CHAPTER 18.41; 18.42.020.140 TO CHAPTER 18.42; 18.44.020.430 TO CHAPTER 18.44; 18.45.020.480 TO CHAPTER 18.45; 18.46.020.660 TO CHAPTER 18.46; AND 18.48.020.070 TO CHAPTER 18.48, TITLE 18, OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (requiring Conditional Use Permits for massage establishments and figure model studio establish- ments) ORDINANCE NOS. 3768 THROUGH 3770: Councilman Seymour offered Ordinance Nos. 3768 through 3770, both inclusive, for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 3768: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (67-68-13(9), RS-7200, Tract No. 9482) ORDINANCE NO. 3769: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (76-77-22, RM-1200) ORDINANCE NO. 3770: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (76-77-64, RM-2400) 148: APPOINTMENT TO VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, Judie dePerry was appointed to the Board of Trustees of the Orange County Vector Control District to fill the unexpired term ending December 31, 1977, of Josephine Moretti, who moved from the City. MOTION CARRIED. 77-1010 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. 127: BOND ISSUE COMMEMORATIVES: Councilman Kott wanted clarification that the paperweights presented to Redevelopment Agency Members, commemorating the recent Bond Issue were not worth more than $25. City Attorney Hopkins confirmed that the commemoratives were worth less than $25 each. 175: PROPOSED SALE OF ANAHEIM ELECTRIC UTILITY: Mr. Bill Erickson, 301 East North Street, passed to the Council and read aloud a prepared statement dated September 6, 1977 (on file in the City Clerk's Office), which was a follow-up to his proposal submitted at the meeting of August 30, 1977, suggesting the sale of the City's electrical utility. The statement requested consideration of appointing a special 7-member ad hoc committee to investigate and compile all information relative to the utility for the purpose of placing the question of possible sale on the ballot for a vote of the electorate; five members to be appointed by each Council person with two additional members to be selected by the original five. He also urged that ample time be given for the committee to complete their work in order to place the issue before the voters in either April or June of 1978 with a cut-off date of January 1 or April 1, 1978. The statement concluded that such a committee would reassure the people of Anaheim that they would have all the information possible in order to make the important decision placed before them. Councilman Roth suggested that the matter be proposed to the Public Utilities Board (PUB) since it would take a new committee a considerable length of time to be educated about the utility. The Mayor interjected that if the Council so desired, it could place each member of the PUB on the suggested committee. He was assuming, however, that Mr. Erickson was interested in obtaining citizen input from other than existing board and commission members. Mr. Erickson stated it was up to the Council as to the manner of selection and make-up of the committee. Councilman Seymour emphasized he was firmly of the opinion that it would be unwise to sell the utility at this time and any statistical information would bear that opinion out. Facts would show the difference over the last fifteen years in rates that were paid by the City's ratepayers in comparison to those of Southern California Edison; the latter being the remaining alternative to the City's ownership of the electric utility. The fact that rates were now equal and possibly about to move slightly higher than Edison's was not sufficient reason to sell the business. A continual record of loss, however, would be justification to consider such a move. He explained that since the Mayor and Councilman Kott had stated they felt it was wise to sell the utility, such contentions should not go unanswered. From that standpoint, he would not be opposed to the appointment of an ad hoc committee to study the matter. He would support the concept, conditioned upon the necessary time needed for deliberation in order to make an intelligent recommendation, being provided. He stressed there should be no rush to judgment to meet a deadline of January 1, 1978. 77-1011 ~ty Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6, 1977, 1:30 P.M. Councilman Seymour further stated that it would be acceptable to make appoint- ments from the PUB, but such a committee would not have the credibility afforded by an independent citizens' ad hoc committee. He was confident that as long as all facts were investigated, any committee would come to the conclusion that the City, for the present, should continue in the utility business. He would favor a committee similar to that of the Charter Committee; a 10-member board, two Council appointees each, thus insuring a broad spectrum. MOTION: A brief discussion followed relative to committee size, at the conclu- sion of which, Councilman Seymour moved that the Council appoint an ad hoc committee to study the City's electric utility, its financial worth, to answer whether or not the question of the sale thereof should be placed on the ballot. The committee should be seven in size, one member to be appointed by each Council person and the last two appointments by the full Council. If their work could be concluded by January 1, 1978, that would be acceptable, but should not be a factor in rushing the matter through, since there would be another election in June and November of 1978. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood stated that she was in agreement with Councilman Seymour up until the suggested committee. She was concerned that such a study was highly technical and something with which experts would have difficulty. In her opinion, to make the matter an election issue would make it a political game. She explained that when Utilities Director Gordon Hoyt presented charts showing the savings the citizens of Anaheim reaped in lower bills, as well as the return to the City's General Fund, there was no question that ownership was a bonanza for the citizens of Anaheim. In discussing the sale of the electric utility, it should be seriously considered where the replacement revenue would have to be generated from to make-up for the revenue no longer to be gleaned from the Utilities Department. Also to be con- sidered was the staff time in the Utilities Department that would again be required, such as that which was needed to educate the PUB. Much time, money, and effort would be involved and if such an exercise were just for a game, then it should not be permitted. Councilman Seymour stated that he did not want to see the serious question of the City's continuation in the electrical utility business become a political issue and to do away with that fear, he amended his foregoing motion, stipulating that the question should not be placed on the ballot until June or November of 1978. He felt that no citizens' committee would be able to come up with a decision by January 1978. He believed that when all facts were presented, the people could be trusted to choose the best alternative. Credibility was extremely important, and he did not fear what the proposed committee would find. The Mayor clarified that the issue could not be placed on the ballot until the Council gave its approval. Councilman Seymour thereupon amended his motion to include that, in any event, no question would be placed on the ballot prior to June of 1978. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. 77-1012 .City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 6~ 1977, 1:30 P.M. Councilwoman Kaywood stated that she would still vote "No"; thereupon, the Mayor suggested that a vote be taken on the original motion without the stipulation of the question not to be placed on the ballot prior to June of 1978. The motion failed to carry by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kott and Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour and Roth A vote was taken on the amended motion stipulating that no question would be placed on the ballot prior to June of 1978 and carried by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood MOTION CARRIED. RECESS - EXECUTIVE SESSION: By general consent the City Council recessed into Executive Session. (4:40 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (5:08 P.M.) ADJOURNMENT: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to adjourn. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 5:08 P.M. LINDA D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK