1976/11/3076-891
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 30, 1976, 1'30 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins
CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts
UTILITIES DIRECTOR: Gordon W. Hoyt
PARKS, RECREATION AND THE ARTS DIRECTOR: James D. Ruth~
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Ronald L. Thompson
CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox
~.~ayor Thom called the meeting to order and-welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
INVOCATION- Reverend Carl B. Watts of the Seventh Day Adventist Church gave
the Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE' Councilwoman Miriam Kaywood led the Assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
MINUTES' On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Thom,
minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting of August 24, 1976, were approved
with corrections. 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
reading of such ordinance or resolution. Councilman Roth seconded the motion.
MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount $312,465.02, in accordance
with the 1976-77 Budget, were approved.
REPORT ON WIND EMERGENCY - USE OF ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS. Utilities Director
Gordon Hoyt submitted and read his report dated November 30, 1976, relative to
the wind emergency during the Thanksgiving weekend and further elaborated on
the actions of his department in responding to what'~as the most severe distri-
bution damage that could be recalled. Because it was a holiday weekend, many
City employees were out of town and unavailable to help restore electrical
service. It was necessary therefore, because of the emergency nature of the sit-
uation to employ electric line contractors to help available City crews restore
electric services. Mr. Hoyt requested ratification of his actions to employ
such contractors during emergencies and, in this case, approve the terms and
conditions of a letter agreement with Electrical Contracting Services, Inc., and
Grissom and Johnson Inc.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 76R-754 for adoption, ratifying the
action of the Utilities Director to employ electrical contractors during emergency
situations. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-754' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING THE EMPLOYMENT OF ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS TO RESTORE ELECTRICAL
SERVICES DURING AN EMERGENCY SITUATION; AND AUTHORIZING THE UTILITIES DIRECTOR
TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS PERTAINING TO SAID SERVICES.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS- Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
·
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-754 duly passed and adopted.
76-892
City Hall.~ Anaheim. California- COUNCIL MINUTES,.- Noyember ,30, !976,,..!'3,0 P.M.
On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, actions
of the Utilities Director during the wind emergency were ratified. MOTION
CARRIED.
Councilman Seymour explained that he personally had received many calls
from citizens during the emergency indicating their inability to reach
anyone in the Utilities Departmemt because of limited telephone line% as
well as the lack of communication when a representative was reache~ relative
to obtaining answers concerning the emergency and the actions that were
being taken to alleviate resultant problems.
Mr. Hoyt indicated that he and Property Maintenance Superintendent, Rex
Bruhns, had already started to investigate the possibility of pulling the
telephones at the Emergency Operation Center out of the centrex system and
installing separate outside phone lines for just such occurrences.
Councilman Seymour requested a written response on the matter.
Mr. Hoyt and his department were commended by the Council for the effort
and professional performance put forth during the emergency.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated that this would be a good opportunity to con-
sider underground utilities; Councilman Roth indicated that rates were
high enough at present without adding to them.
Mr. Hoyt explained that relative to electric rates, the situation was chang-
ing for the better and he expected shortly to recommend a rate reduction
based on new estimates from Southern California Edison on fuel cost adjust-
ment and consideration by the Public Utilities Commission of Edison's retail
rates. Concerning undergrounding, he expressed that it would be more appro-
priate to look at that possibility during budget discussions.
APPROVAL OF REDEVELOPMENT BUDGET - BALANCE OF FISCAL YEAR: On motion by
Councilman Kott, seconded by' Councilman Roth, the RedeveloPment BUdget for
the remaining seven months of Fiscal Year 1976-77 was approved. MOTION
CARRIED.
AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT - CALIFOR~,!A pENT.A? ..SE. RVICE! City Manager Talley
requested approval to extend the current premium rate with California
Dental Service through December 31, 1977, with the exception that the
City would be studying the matter with the possibility of proposing an
alternative program.
Councilman Kott questioned the fact that renewal was being considered for
a whole year.
Mr. Talley explained that the contract was presently renewable annually and
that any change would require an amendment wherein for any reason the contract
could be severed on 60 days' notice.
Mayor Thom suggested in light of user dissatisfaction'with California
Dental Service, that staff submit' a report on the feasibilfty of self-insurance
as with the City's medical program and additionally alternate programs
'be researched because of the current dissatisfaction.
On motion by Councilman Roth. seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, consideration of
amendment to the agreement.with California Dental Service was .continued.'[br one week
and the City Attorney instructed to submit a report relative to the severability
clause in the present agreement with CDS at which time action would be taken
or notification made that renewal would be for 60 days only. MOTION CARRIED.
REPORT - "LOW VOLbIME" - "LOW FLUSH" WATER CLOSETS: Pursuant to Councilwoman
Kaywood's request, Planning Director Thompson sUbmitted a report dated November 19,
1976,'on the subject water closets which included a letter report dated
November 18, 1976, from the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical
Officials (IAPMO), both reports recommended that further research and
be done on the subject water closets before making any commitment to them in
view of the problems encountered where these units have been installed
well as the technicalities involved.
76-893
City Hall, Anaheim, California~ - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 30~ 1976, 1'30 P.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood indicated that relative to the IAPMO report there was
a great deal of conjecture as to whether or not the units were viable, con-
trary to the information she had received. As previously requested she was
interested in obtaining information on the experiment conducted by William S.
Lyon Company in the Woodwind condominiums. Mr. Thompson indicated that the
experiment had not yet started.
Mr. Bob Payne, plumbing contractor, 170 West 14th Street, Upland, explained
that he was on the Board of Governors of the Plumbing Industry of Southern
California and Chairman of the Board of PIPE, but today was speaking as a
contractor.
Mr. Payne reported on his actual experience with one brand of the subject
water closet which he used in a housing tract. The experience was a negative
one and in the final analysis the units had to be changed. He stated that he
had also consulted with manufacturers of such units who indicated they could
not get their units to function properly, as well as the Los Angeles City Test-
ing Lab whose Chief Plumbing Inspector indicated the units were not function-
ing as expected on projects where they had been installed. He suggested that
water conservation be directed in other areas, such as water saving shower
heads. He pointed out that only 20% of water is used for housing and commer-
cial purposes, whereas 80% is used for agriculture.
Further discussion followed between Mr. Payne and Councilwoman Kaywood relative
to the different brands of water closets on the market. Councilwoman Kaywood
emphasized that as of January 1, 1978, low volume - low flush water closets
would be required. Mr. Payne indicated that he would not force the issue
but instead wait until the manufacturer is willing to stand behind his product.
Councilwoman Kaywood pointed to an experiment that was presently underway
in Mission Viejo which had thus far proven successful and wanted staff to
follow this as well as other such projects in order to keep abreast of new
developments in the field. She reiterated her request for a status report-
on the Woodwind Project.
On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the subject
requested report was received by the Council. MOTION CARRIED.
CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION PLAN-POLICY ELEMlqNT. Councilman Seymour offered
Resolution No. 76R-755 for adoption establishing a position of the Anaheim
City Council regarding the draft California Transportation Plan-Policy
Element. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-755' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM SETTING FORTH COMMENTS TO BE PRESENTED TO THE STATE TRANSPORTA-
TION BOARD CONCERNING THE DRAFT CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION PLAN-POLICY
ELEMENT.
Roll Call Vote-
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES. COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-755 duly passed and adopted.
PIPE LINE LICENSE AGREEMENT - ATCHISON TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY:
Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 76R-756 for adoption. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-756' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECuT,E A PIPE LINE LICENSE
AGREEI~NT WITH THE ATCHISON, TO?EI~ AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COI~~. (54-INCH
DRAINAGE WATER PIPE LINE NEAR ESPERANZA) (Tract No. 7471)
Roll Call Vote-
AYES- COUNCIL MEMBERS- Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-756 duly passed and adopted.
76-894
Cit~ll, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES - November 301~_~~976 1'30 P.M.
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST- City Manager Talley referred to his report dated
November 22, 1976, regarding his request to transfer the position of
Legislative Analyst from CETA to General Funding. He explained that the
position was budgeted but now instead of one half being funded through the
CETA Program, the entire amount would come from the General Fund. In
view of this, Mr. Talley indicated that he was prepared to eliminate the
presently unfilled but budgeted position of Photographer from the Public
Information Office.
Although Mayor Thom conceded that someone was needed to look over legis-
lation, he objected to having an in-house political advisor and preferred
instead to vote his own instincts. In his opinion, the position was un-
needed and unwarranted as a staff position and he did not agree with the
subject report.
Mr. Talley stated that the Legislative Analyst would not be voting the City's
position but would be working on behalf of the City with staff from other
agencies, such as SCAG and the' League of California Cities, and such a position
was warranted because of activity in Sacramento that could negatively impact
Anaheim.
Councilwoman Kaywood emphasized the need for a Legislative Analyst because
of the far reaching and important matters occurring daily which could affect
the City.
Councilman Roth was of the opinion that there was enough detrimental legisla-
tion coming from Sacramento and Washington to warrant such a position.
On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, the transfer
of the position of Legislative Analyst from CETA to General Funding in the
Budget was approved. To this motion, Councilmen Kott and Thom voted "No"
MOTION CARRIED. '
Councilman Seymour clarified his "yes" vote by explaining that although he
had doubts that the Legislative Analyst position had a priority of needing
to be filled because a great amount of the work was already being accomplished
by the League of California Cities, he was confident that, if the City Manager
in his professional opinion felt a better job would be done with the same amount
of people by a realignment of positions, he was prepared to support that type
of action.
STATUS OF 120-DAY HIRING FREEZE: Report dated November 22, 1976,
from the City Manager's '"0'f~i~e relative to the status of the 120-day
hiring freeze was submitted. No action was taken on the report.
JOINT COMMUNITY RECREATIONAL PROGRAM- TENNIS COURTS' Councilman Kott
offered Resolution No. 76R-757 for adoption as recommended by Parks, Recrea-
tion and the Arts Director, Mr. James Ruth, with the amendment that fees
for lighting of tennis courts be raised from 25 cents to 5'0 cents per half
hour. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-757- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE ANAHEIM UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
FOR A JOINT COMMUNITY RECREATIONAL PROGRAM FOR VARIOUS TENNIS COURTS IN THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK ,TO ~XECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
Roll Call Vote'
AYES. COUNCIL MEMBERS. Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES- COUNCIL MEMBERS. None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS- None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-757 duly passed and adopted.
76-895
City__~all, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- November 30, 1976, 1'30 p.M.
SALE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT - NALCO CHEMICAL COMPANY' Public Works Director,
Thornton Piersall, explained that he had spoken with Southern Pacific Rail-
road regarding the spur track on the subject property and from their stand-
point, utilization of the track within a year would cause them to be receptive
to not considering any action on that spur line. Confirmation of same was
to be submitted in writing by the end of the week.
The information submitted by Mr. Piersall answered Councilman Seymour's previous
concerns and thereupon he offered a resolution authorizing execution of a sale
agreement, option, lease and escrow instructions with Nalco Chemical Company
for acquisition of property located along the south side of Vermont Street at
The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad track, east of Olive Street for
use as a Public Works yard, with the provision that the City of Anaheim
prior to close of escrow be afforded the same rights to the railway agreement
as now afforded Nalco.
Before a vote was taken on the foregoing resolution, Mr. Robert P. Hastings of
the law firm of Paul Hastings and Janofsky, 555 South Flower Street, Los Angeles,
representing Nalco Chemical Company stated that on their behalf, he respectfully
requested that no provision be attached to the resolution relative to the agree-
ment and if the resolution passed, retaining the restriction as articulated by
Councilman Seymour, Nalco would no longer feel morally obligated to cease and
desist speaking to those who had expressed interest in the subject property.
He emphasized that the resolution be passed without the-added condition.
Councilman Seymour stressed that the trackage agreement was the main point of
contention, the benefits of which were appraised at $11,200.00 and if the
agreement was no problem for Nalco as Mr. Hastings indicated, then he would
withdraw his resolution provided Nalco would enter into an agreement where, in
the next year if Anaheim was precluded from the benefits of the trackage
agreement, Nalco would reimburse the City for $11,200.00.
Mr. Hastings stated that Councilman Seymour's suggestion was not acceptable
from Nalco's standpoint.
Councilman Seymour thereupon withdrew his resolution because it would be less
than prudent for the City to purchase the property assuming it was to receive
rights under the trackage agreement when, in fact, it may not. He was of the
opinion that such a move would be an improper use of taxpayers funds.
Further Council discussion revolved around the particular site in question
which in the final analysis would enable the incorporation of several Public
Works Department Divisions .into one location, resulting in a more efficient
operation.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered a resolution for adoption authorizing execution
of a sale and purchase agreement, option, lease and escrow instructions with
Nalco Chemical Company for acquisition of the subject property. The resolution
failed to carry by the following vote-
AYES:
NOES'
COUNCIL MEMBERS- Kaywood and Roth
COUNCIL MEMBERS. Seymour, Kott and Thom
RECESS' By general consent, the City Council recessed for five minutes. (3'05 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS' The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being
present. (3'10 p.m.)
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 76-77-3 AND VARIANCE NO. 2825'
On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, request '
for continuation of public hearing 6n the subject Reclassification.and Variance
by the Applicants' Agent to December 7, 1976, was'appr, oV~d. MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC HE__ARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 76-77-4 AND VARIANCE NO. 2813' Application
submitted by Tom T. and Cherry Hide, for a change in zone fr~3,000 to
RM-1200, to construct a 28-unit apartment complex, on property located at
3539 Savanna Street with the following code waivers'
(a) maximum building height
(b) minimum distance between buildings
(c) required site screening .
76-896
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 30~ 1976~ 1:30 P.M.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC76-204 rec-
commended that the subject property be declared exempt from the requirement
to prepare an environmental impact report pursuant to the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act and further, recommended that
Reclassification No. 76-77-4 be granted subject to the following conditions'
1. That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim along Savanna
Street 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 light-
ing facilities along Savanna Street shall be installed as required by the
Director of Public Utilities, and in accordance with standard plans and
specifications on file in the Office of the Director of Public Utilities; 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 owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim
the sum of sixty cents (60¢) per front foot along Savanna Street for tree
planting purposes.
3. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved
plans on file with the Office of the Director of Public Works.
4. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and deter-
mined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to commence-
ment of structural framing.
·
5. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities.
6. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satis-
factory to the City Engineer, and that grading plans as approved by the City
Engineer, showing drainage of the total site to the Carbon Creek Channel (ex-
cepting the front 15-foot setback adjacent to Savanna Street) shall be sub-
mitted to the Planning Commission for review prior to the issuance of a build-
ing permit.
7. That the owner of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the
appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be'appropriate by the
City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued.
8. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, Con-
dition Nos. 1 and 2, above-mentioned, shall be completed. The provisions or
rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the
City Council unless said conditions are complied with within one year from the
date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant.
9. That Condition Nos. 3 and 5, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior
to final building and zoning inspections.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC76-205 granted
Variance No. 2813 subject to the following conditions'
1. That this Variance is granted subject to the completion of Reclassifi-
cation No. 76-77-4, now pending.
2. That grading plans, as approved by the City Engineer, showing drainage
of the total site (excepting the front 15-foot setback adjacent to Savanna
Street) to the Carbon Creek Channel, shall be sUbmitted to the Planning Com-
mission for review, prior to issuance of a building permit.
3. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with
plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1
(Revision No. 1) 2, and 3.
76-897
~ity Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 30, 1976, 1:30 P.M.
Planning Director Thompson described the location and surrounding land
uses. He outlined the findings given in the staff report which was sub-
mitted to and considered by the City Planning Commission.
The Mayor asked if the Applicant or Applicants' Agent was present and
desirous of being heard.
Mr. Richard D. Bowen of State-wide Investors, 3270 Cherry Avenue, Long
Beach, developers and owners of the proposed project indicated they were
satisfied with the recommendations of the Planning Commission and would
stand behind stipulations as set forth by staff. Mr. Bowen explained
there was still some opposition to the project but they had tried to bend
in every way possible and a major concern regarding drainage had been
alleviated by draining the entire project to the Channel so that no sheet
overflow would occur on the street.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted that there were 28 people in opposition to the
project and asked Mr. Bowen if they were not now in favor.
Mr. Bowen explained that he had met with the people who were opposed and
dispelled most of their concerns one of which was a reduction in density
from 28 to 21 which was now a lower density than that which had been approved
in the area.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak either in favor or in opposition.
Mrs. Joan Todd, 3620 Savanna Street, stated that she had obtained a petition
signed by 25 people, their main objection being density - they wanted lower
density and the proposed project would be increasing the density. She
indicated that existing apartments in the area had densities of 13 at one
location and 15 at another and because of the traffic problem that would
be created, lesser density should be imposed as projects proceeded down
the ~street. She contended if a density of 21were~granted in this case, it
would set a preceden~ granting the same at other locations on the street
thereby impacting the area with traffic upwards of 2000 cars per day which,
in her opinion, could not be accommodated. She was also concerned over
the congestion that would be caused by emergency vehicles should they be
needed and stated further, that at the Planning Commission hearing the residents
indicated a need for an EIR study, but Mr. Bowen convinced the Planning Commission
that a mini-study would do. Mrs. Todd stated that a. General Plan Study was initiated
in the area because she emphasized these areas of concern to the Planning
Commission.
Relative to the proposed two-story building, Mrs. Todd indicated that one
house on the street where the residents had lived for 50 years was now going
to be boxed in on both sides since there was an already existing two-story
building on the other side of their property.
Mrs. Todd requested that the Council wait until a General Plan Study was com-
pleted relative to the impact of traffic in the area and not approve the pro-
posed project at this time because the density of 21 was too high and needed
to be reduced.
In answer to Councilman Kott, Mrs. Todd indicated that she would not be opposed
to two-story buildings, but she preferred that they be avoided.
Mr. Bowen stated that the 50 year residents were present at the staff meeting
and at that time the woman told staff that since the drainage problem was
solved, she had no further objection and indicated there was sufficient
distance between her residence and their proposed two-story project.
Relative to the mini EIR, he explained that the Traffic' Engineer indicated
that the street could easily accommodate 2000 trips per day and that figure
was not the maximum.
With regard to fire, he explained that there was an S-inch water main direct-
ly in front of the property and also a hydrant in front of and in the middle
of the proposed project.
76-898
~11, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 301_~~a976 1'30 P.M.
Regarding density, Mr. Bowen stated that two doors down on the other side
of the property where the 50 year residents lived, there was a two-story
22-unit complex on a smaller piece of property than the proposed project.
Mr. Bowen emphasized that they had bent as far as they could in trying to
please everyone and therefore, besieged the Council to approve the proposed
project.
There being no further persons who wished to address the Council, either in
favor or in opposition, the Mayor closed the public hearing.
Planning Director Thompson confirmed for Councilman Kott that there was a
22-unit apartment complex on Savanna Street on the third parcel west of
Knot t Avenue.
Councilwoman Kaywood reiterated her past and present objection relative to
RS-A-43,000 zoning where the automatic assumption is made that the use will
be for apartments. She indicated there was no such positive feeling in this
case and she also objected to a two-story building within 150 feet of an existing
residence. She empathized with the residents in their desire to keep the
density down and, ·therefore, could not'vote favorably on the proposed project.
Councilman Seymour stated that he had no reason or expression to believe that
the area was to be developed for apartments, however, he pointed to the fact
that the General Plan designated the subject property for medium density resi-
dential uses. Councilwoman Kaywood stressed that these people had been fighting
for six years to have the General Plan changed.
Mayor Thom explained that he was sympathetic with the thrust of the applicant
but also with the determination of the people who lived in the area in trying
to keep the density to a minimum. That, combined with the General Plan Amend-
ment for the area, put him in a position of voting in favor of a denial.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION- On motion by Councilwoman Kay-
wood, seconded by Councilman Thom, the City Council finds that this project
will have no significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, exempt
from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 76R-758 for adoption, denying
Reclassification No. 76-77-4 and Resolution NO. 76R-759 for adoption denying
Variance No. 2813. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-758' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT A CHANGE OF ZONE SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED
IN A CERTAIN AREA OF THE CITY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED (Reclassification No.
76-77-4) '
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-759. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING VARIANCE NO. 2813.
Roll Call Vote-
AYES · COUNCIL MEMBERS- Kaywood, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES- COUNCIL MEMBERS. Seymour
ABSENT- COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 76R-758 and 76R-759 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 76-77-18. Application filed by ~ Carl N.
Karcher, Trustee, for a change in zone from CH to ML on property located on
the east side of Harbor Boulevard approximately 370 feet north of Romneya Drive.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC76-207, recommended
that the subject project be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare
an environmental impact report pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act and, further recommended that Reclassification No.
76-77-18 be approved subject to the following conditions.
1. That sidewalks shall be installed along' Harbor Boulevard, as required
by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifications
on file in the Office of the City Engineer.
76-899
C_j_it~ll, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- November 30 1=~976 1:30 P.M.
2. That street lighting facilities along Harbor Boulevard shall be installed
as required by the Director of Public Utilities, and in accordance with
standard plans and specifications on file in the Office of 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.
3. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved
plans on file with the Office of the Director of Public Works.
4. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and
determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department, prior to
commencement of structural framing.
5. That appropriate water assessment fees, as determined by the Director
of Public Utilities, shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to issuance of
a building permit.
6. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities.
7. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner
satisfactory to the City Engineer.
8. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property,
Condition No. 2, above-mentioned, shall be completed. The provisions or rights
granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the City
Council unless said conditions are complied with within one (1) year from the
date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant.
9. That Condition Nos. 1, 3, 6, and 7, above-mentioned, shall be complied
with prior to final building and zoning inspections.
Mr. Thompson described the location and surrounding land uses. He outlined
the findings given in the staff report which was submitted to and considered
by the City Planning Commission.
Councilwoman Kaywood referred to the staff report wherein the Traffic Engineer
indicated the northern most driveway on Lemon Street would haVe to be .signalized
due to traffic conflicts at that intersection, and therefore wanted to know
if the Applicant was willing to pay for such signalization.
Mr. Thompson explained that at the time .the properties in the area developed
and traffic warranted it, signalization would be required but funding had not
been discussed.
Mr. Schultz, engineer, McLean and Schultz, 200 East Chapman Avenue, Fullerton,
representing the Applicant, indicated that the cost of signalization if
necessary for traffic flow and egress would be paid for by the Applicant.
There being no further persons who wished to address the Council, the Mayor closed
the public hearing.
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 and is, therefore, exempt
from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 76R-760 for adoption authoriZing
the preparation of the necessary ordinance changing the zone as requested subject
to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission and including the
petitioners stipulation to pay for a traffic signal at the northern most drive-
way on Lemon Street when the Traffic Engineer deem~ it necessary. Refer to
Resolution Book.
76-900
~11, Anaheim, California - COUNCI______.____~_LMINUTES - November 3019~_~~76 1; 30 P,M,
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-760' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES
SHOULD BE CHANGED. (76-77-18, ML)
Roll Call Vote-
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS- Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES- COUNCIL MEMBERS- None
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS. None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-760 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 76-77-20, AND' VARIAMCE NO ~861' Application
by Arden Strand, et al, for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to ~-1200 to
construct a 46-unit apartment complex on property located at the southwest
corner of Frontera Street and Glassell Street with the following code waivers-
a) minimum building site area
b) minimum floor area
c) minimum distance between walls
d) permitted yard encroachments
The City Planning Commissiorg pursuant to Resolution No. PC76-208, recommended
that the subject project be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare
an environmental impact report pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act and, further, recommended that Reclassification
No. 76-77-20 be approved subject to the following conditions'
1. That a soils engineering report attesting to the suitability of the site
for the proposed residential development shall be submitted to the Building and
Engineering Divisions for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit,
and a copy of said report shall be filed with the Planning Department.
2. That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim, along Fr°ntera
Street and Glassell Street, including preparation of improvement plans and
installation of all improvements such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, street
grading and paving, drainage facilities, or other appurtenant 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 Frontera Street and Glassell Street shall be
installed as required by the Director of Public Utilities, and in accordance with
standard plans and specifications on file in the Office of 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.
3. That the owner(s) of the subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim
the sum of sixty cents (60¢) per front foot along Frontera Street and Glassell
Street for tree planting purposes.
4. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved
plans on file with the Office of the Director of Public Works.
5. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and deter-
mined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to cor, mence-
ment of structural framing.
6. That the subject property shall be served by underground utilities.
7. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed-of in a manner
satisfactory to the City Engineer.
8. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim
the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees, as determined to be appropriate
by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued.
76-901
9. That appropriate water assessment fees, as determined by the Director
of Public Utilities, shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
10. That ordinances reclassifying the property may be adopted as each parcel
is ready to comply with conditions pertaining to such parcel, provided, however,
that the word "parcel" shall mean presently existing parcels of record and
any parcel or parcels approved by the City Council for a lot split.
11. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property,
Condition Nos. 2 and 3, above-mentioned, shall be completed. The proVisions
or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of
the City Council unless said conditions are complied with within one (1) year
from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant.
12. That Condition Nos. 4, 6, and 7, above-mentioned, shall be complied
with prior to final building and zoning inspections.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC76-209,granted
Variance No. 2861 in part, subject to the following conditions'
1. That this variance is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification
No. 76-77-20.
2. That a soils engineering report attesting to the suitability of the subject
site for the proposed development shall be submitted to the Building and
Engineering Divisions for approval, prior to the issuance of a building
permit, and a copy of said report shall be filed with the Planning Department.
3. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit
Nos. 1 through 7; provided, however, that revised plans shall be submitted to
the Planning Commission showing a reduction in the number of units from 46
to 45 by eliminating two (2) efficiency-type units and adding one (1) two-bedroom
unit and showing conformance with Code requirements pertaining to minimum
building site area per dwelling unit and minimum distance between building walls;
and that said revised plans are to be submitted for approval prior to the
issuance of a building permit, as stipulated to by the petitioner.
Mr. Thompson described the location and surrounding land uses. He outlined
the findings given in the staff report which was submitted to and considered
by the City Planning Commission.
The Mayor asked if the Applicant or Applicant's Agent was present and wished
to speak.
Mr. Robert Sant, representative for I.P.S., 1095 North Main Street, Agent
for Arden Strand, stated that I.P.S. was the property owner on the adjacent
westerly property site on which an 86-unit apartment complex was built. Their
present proposed project was a 45-unit complex on the subject property which
would be comparable to their existing development.
Mr. Sant agreed with the recommendations of the Planning Commission but asked to
have the designer, Bill Phelps, discusss waiver "C',' a waiver which was
granted to his company previously on a development approximately one-half mile
from the present proposed complex.
The Mayor was concerned that because waiver "C".had been withdrawn by the
developer at the Planning Commission level, this was a reversal of their
position. Councilwoman Kaywood indicated that since the developer stipulated
to withdrawing the requested waiver such action may have had a bearing on the
vote of the Planning Commission.
Mr. Sant explained that they did redesign the building to comply with the Code
as they stipulated they would do when they withdrew waiver "C',' but it was con-
sidered to be unattractive for their tenants.
76-902
.C..ity Hall.~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES.- November. 30, 1976, 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Bill Phelps, 1095 North blain Street, Orange, presented a diagram of the
new design and explained the technicalities involved regarding main walls
and the interpretation of same in the Code which interpretation was the point
of contention. He indicated that he was able to redesign without waivers with
the result that the aesthetic effect was a plain Crnnt, as illustrated. He
also indicated that they. wished to withdraw the previous withdrawal regarding
waiver "C" and, based on the revised plan, leave it to the Council to make
the final decision.
Mayor Thom expressed that the alternatives and explanation presented were now
satisfactory to him.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to be heard; there being no response,he
closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION. On motion by Councilman
Roth, seconded by Councilman Kott, the City Council finds that this project
will have no significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, exempt
from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 76R-761 for adoption authorizing the
preparation of the necessary ordinance changing the zone as requested subject
to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission and Resolution
No. 76R-762 granting Variance No. 2861 subject to City Planning Commission
recommendations and including an amendment to Condition No. 3 to incorporate
design scheme, Exhibit 1, Revision 1. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-761' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES
SHOULD BE CHANGED. (76-77-20, RM-1200)
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-762- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2861.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
AYES:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 76R-761 and 76R-762 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFCATION NO. 76-77-21, AND VARIANCE NO, 2865' Application
by Helen Nettles, for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to RS-7200, to estab-
lish two RS-7200 lots on property located at 816 South Agate Street with the
following code waivers:
a) minimum lo t ar ea
b) minimum lot width
c) minimum rear yard setback
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC76-210, recommended
that the subject property be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare
an environmental impact report pursuant to the provi~ion~ of th~ California
Environmental Quality Act and, further recommended that Reclassification No.
76-77-21 be approved subject to the following conditions-
1. That street lighting facilities along Agate Street and Chateau Avenue
shall be installed as required by the Director of Public Utilities, and in
accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the Office of
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.
76-903
.City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL .MINUTES - November 30, 1.976, 1:30 P~.M.
2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim
the sum of sixty cents (60¢) per front foot along Agate Street and Chateau
Avenue for tree planting purposes.
3. That the subject property shall be served by unde'rground utilities.
4. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner
satisfactory to the City Engineer.
5. In the event that the subject property is to be divided for the purpose
of sale, lease or financing, a parcel map to record the approved division of
subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim
and then be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder.
6. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim
the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees, as determined to be appro-
priate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building
permit is issued.
7. That appropriate water assessment fees, as determined by the Director of
Public Utilities, shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance
of a building permit.
8. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning sUbject property,
Condition Nos. 1 and 2, above-mentioned, shall be completed. The provisions
or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of
the City Council unless said conditions are complied with within one (1)
year from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant.
9. That Condition Nos. 3 and 4, above-mentioned, shall be complied with
prior to final building and zoning inspections.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC76-211, granted
Variance No. 2865 subject to the following conditions'
1. That this variance is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification
No. 76-77-21.
2. That revised plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval,
prior to the issuance of a building permit, said plans to show a reversal
of the development plan on the site, relocating the proposed residence.
approximately three feet to the north increasing the minimum front structural
setback to 21 feet, relocating the proposed garage to the easterly side of
subject property, and removing the existing garage, as stipulated to by the
petitioner; and that the subject property shall be developed substantially
in conformance with the revised plans.
Mr. Thompson described the location and surrounding land uses. He outlined
the findings given in the staff report which was submitted to and considered
by the City Planning Commission.
The Mayor asked if the Applicant or Applicant's Agent was present and desirous
of being heard.
Mr. Roger Smelser, 2033 West Chateau Avenue, representing Helen Nettles, owner,
indicated that he was satisfied with the recommendations of the Planning
Commission.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to be heard.
Mrs. Rita Ray, 1927 West Chateau Avenue, who lived to the east of the property
in question stated that her main opposition to the proposed'plan was the lot
size in that it was not deep enough to build a house and that she had also
submitted a petition with 15 names of neighbors protesting to the proposed
building. As an additional basis for her objection, she explained that an
illegal addition had been added to a residence in the neighborhood and now
a total of 17 people were living there. Sh~ as well as the neighbor~were
concerned that if another house was built at the proposed locatio% the same
might occur.
76-904
City Hall~ A. nah,eim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 30~ !.9.76.~ 1'30 P.M.
Mrs. Harriett Bradley, 816 South Agate, explained that her mother was the
owner of the property and she helped her to purchase it with the inten-
tion of being able to sell the portion that was vacant. She indicated
there was nothing else they could do with it and because of its size,
it was difficult for them to maintain. She further indicated that there
were neighbors who were not opposed to having a house built on the lot
because the consensus was the present condition of the property was
quite unsightly. She contended that it would be an improvement to the
whole street.
Mr. Keith Hoffman, 1924 West Chateau, took issue with the claim that the lot
was unsightly and was. of the opinion that a house could not be accommodated
on such an oddly shaped lot and therefore was opposed to the project.
Pat White, 1918 West Chateau, explained that she lived diagonally across from the
lot in question and was opposed to its unsightliness and in favor of having
a house built on it.
In su~nnation, Mr. Smelser explained that he was the person interested in
buying the property that at the Planning Commission meeting, Mrs. Ray
indicated she had always wanted a house built on the proposed site because
of the weed and trash problem and that it was the Planning Commission who
recommended off-setting the house in the alignment stipulated to in trying to
avoid straight line lot houses. He also clarified for Councilwoman Kaywood
that he had lived at his present address since June 1, 1976.
There being no further persons who wished to be heard, the Mayor closed the
public hearing.
Councilman Kott asked for clarification from staff relative to setbacks and
measurements in the rear of the property to which Mrs. Ray referred earlier.
He also questioned whether or not there was sufficient room to build since
the map indicated there was only 65 feet from the center of the street to the
rear of the property.
Planning Director Thompson explained the 65 feet concerned that portion of
the lot abutting Agate Street and the house on the new lot that would be
created would have to be unusual in the sense that most lots are narrow and
deep and this lot was shallow and wide. The requested waivers would make
the present lot conforming and allow the building of a wide home with a ~ foot
rear setback and a 21-foot structural setback. He further indicated that revised
plans would have to be resubmitted and approved by the Planning Department along
with stipulations made relative to reversing the proposed building plan on the
site and that additional waivers would not be necessary if the Applicant
conformed to waivers granted by the Planning Commission should the Council
sustain their action.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION. On motion by CounCilman
Seymour, seconded by Councilman Roth, the City Council finds that this project
will have no significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, exempt
from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 76R-763 for adoption authorizing
the preparation of the necessary ordinance changing the zone as requested subject
to the conditions recommended by 'the Planning Pcommission.. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-763: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES
SHOULD BE CHANGED. (76-77-21, RS-7200)
City. Hall, An. aheim, California -COUNCIL MINUTES - November 30~
Roll Call Vote'
76-905
197..6.~ 1;30 P.M.
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Roth
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-763 duly passed and adopted.
Councilman Seymour offered a resolution denying Variance No. 2865 because,
in his opinion, it was impractical to construct an additional residence on
the property,as well as having an adverse influence on the neighborhood.
Before a vote was taken, Planning Director Thompson suggested that inasmuch
as the variance required a 70-foot wide frontage, that approval in part might
be appropriate because denial would create a non-conforming lot that would not
meet present zoning standards. He recommended that Councilman Seymour propose
approval of the lot width but not the lot split because the present parcel
was non-conforming and by approving RS-7200 zoning another non-conforming lot
would be approved. He explained that if this were done and the owners wanted
to make any building additions to the existing structure, a problem would be
created.
Thereupon, Councilman Seymour amended his previous resolution and offered
Resolution No. 76R-764 for adoption granting Variance No. 2865 in part, waiver
"b" only. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-76~' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2865,IN PART.
Roll Call Vote'
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Ro th
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-764 duly passed and adopted.
SIGNALIZED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK- EUCLID STREET BRANCH LIBRARY' On motion
by Councilman Kott, seconded by Councilman Roth, con§ideration, of ~a signalized
pedestrian crosswalk protection at the Euclid Street Branch Library was con-
tinued for one week. MOTION CARRIED.
APPEAL - DENIAL OF PERMIT FOR FIGURE MODELING STUDIO' Submitted by Steven
Zwick, Attorney for William McIntosh, for denial of a permit for a figure
modeling studio located at 421 South Brookhurst Street.
Mr. Steven Zwick, Attorney, 1651 East Fourth Street, Suite 115, Santa Ana, on
behalf of Mr. William McIntosh stated that the subject denial was unconstitu-
tional if it was based on the prior conviction of Mr. McIntosh. He cited
a case (Perrine) wherein denial of an application for a bookstore license on the
grounds that the Applicant had committed a prior felony was ruled unconstitu-
tional by the courts.
City Attorney Hopkins explained that a figure modeling studio differed from a
book store in that the latter broached the matter of Freedom of the Press, whereas
the former was not protected by the First Amendment and, therefore, subject to
the regulation of the City Council or Municipal Corporation. He explained
further that since the time of adoption of the City Ordinance relative to
figure modeling studios in May of 1976, two Superior Court cases had been
successfully defended and the ordinance upheld. In one case, however, an
amendment had been made concerning due process.
Mr. Hopkins cited a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court relative
to the consideration of an individual's past record, which consideration was
designed not to punish the individual, but to protect the public.
76-906
City Hall, Anaheim~ .California - COUNCIL MINUTES .- November 30, 1.976, .l:3Q P.M.
Mr. Zwick indicated that the wrong thing was being argued and they would
have their chance in court.
Councilman Kott asked Mr. Zwick how he could put the bookstore case in the
same category as a figure modeling studio.
Mr. Zwick reiterated that the Supreme Court of California ruled that you cannot
deny a person a license on a prior felony and where the protection of the public
was involved,the relationship had to be a fiduciary one such as in the case of
a lawyer or a doctor.
City Attorney Hopkins indicated that legal arguments should be reserved for
the court.
MOTION' Councilman Thom moved that the appeal of denial of permit for a figure
modeling studio located at 421 South Brookhurst Street be denied. Councilman
Roth seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Mr. Zwick indicated that if the appeal was denied, the
City Council would probably be involved in litigation for at least the expenses
incurred by Mr. McIntosh. He also wanted clarification that the denial was
based on the prior record of Mr. McIntosh.
The Mayor stated that the basis of his motion was predicated on the report dated.
November 4, 1976, to the City Attorney from Lieutenant Dale A. Wilcox, listing
violations of the Penal Code and the Anaheim Municipal Code with reference to
the modeling studio.
A vote was tak~en on the foregoing motion denying the subject appeal. MOTION
CARRIED.
OFF-SITE STORM DRAIN FOR TRACT NOS. 7567 AND 9268' Request submitted by
Anaheim Hills Inc. for negative declaration and permission to remove 11 specimen
trees in conjunction with the installation of an off-site storm drain for Tract
Nos. 7567 and 9268. This item was continued from November 16, 1976, at the
request of Mr. Jacque Grigry.
The City Planning Commission recommended that the subject project be declared exempt
from the requirement to prepare an EIR and recommended that the proposal to remove 1
specimen eucalyptus trees be approved~ subject to stipulations.
Mr. Philip Bettencourt, 380 Anaheim Hills Road, representing Anaheim Hills Inc.,
briefly reviewed the situation surrounding the proposed off-site storm drain
as well as the tree removal l::lan necessary to complete the project (see Council
minutes of November 16, 1976).
Mr. Bettencourt emphasized the reasons why engineering data supported the fact
that the subject drain could not be moved to the northerly side of Crescent
Drive. He cited from a diagram, the location of existing gas and sewer lines
in Crescent Drive which could not be moved to accommodate the request of the
homeowners and further stated that the Peralta Hills Water Company was going
to install a 12 inch water line in the exact location where it was suggested
the storm drain be moved. He pointed out additional technicalities and
proNe.ms that would be encountered if the proposed drain were to be realigned
on the opposite side of Crescent Drive. He reiterated that the present align-
ment followed the existing natural water course.
Mr. Bettencourt emphasized that the matter at hand was the request for tree
removal and Anaheim Hills was still negotiating with the involved property
owners relative to the acquisition of permanent as well as temporary construction
easements and if unsuccessfuJ then recourse would be requested through condemna-
tion proceedings. He stressed that the property owners should not settle
unless they felt they were going to receive adequate and just compensation for
their property. He also indicated that Mrs. Iverson's request for removal
of additional trees even though it wasunnecessaryto do so, be grantea and the
trees removed and t'eplaced if Council concurred.
Councilwoman Kaywood reminded Mr. Bettencourt that Mrs. Iverson wanted a wall
built instead of replacement trees.
Mr. Bettencourt indicated that the construction of a wall would be part of
negotiations with Mrs. Iverson' and a private matter to be settled with her if
tree removal was approved.
76-907
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MI..NUTES - November 30, 1976, 1;30 P,M,
Mr. Barry Mason, from the law firm of Young, Henry, Humphreys, Mason and
Wellyns, 100 Pomona Mall West, Pomona, spoke on behalf of Mr. Grigry and
Mrs. Carrano. He referred to comments that he understood took place two
weeks prior by the City Engineer wherein alternatives, to the proposed site
were a possibility, one being a location on the north side of Crescent
Drive. Mr. Mason contended that the impact was one of money and not of
aesthetics and if that were so, Anaheim Hills should take the alternative
especially considering the rural nature of the area involved as well as the
monetary investment that both Mr. Gr~gry and Mr. Carrano had in their
homes. If the present alignment of the storm drain were to be allowed, his
clients would be starting out with an entirely new landscape, not the atmos-
phere into which they moved originally.
Since his clients could not live with the situation as proposed, Mr. Mason
asked the Council to consider whether the EIR should be approved as submitted
and reports required and costs solicited relative to construction of the
off-site storm drain along the north side of Crescent Drive.
On behalf of Mrs. Carrano, if the vote should be in favor of Anaheim Hills,
Mr. Mason asked the Council to consider an alternative to their request for
an additional 25-foot easement for construction purposes in front of her
property whereas there was property across the street with open space avail-
able, the use of which would cause much less inconvenience.
Mr. Mason also explained that if the request of Anaheim Hills is granted,
there were 11 eucalyptus trees along Mrs. Carrano's property which should
be removed and replaced, otherwise the proposed excavation close by would
result in their death or deterioration.
Mr. Jacque Grigry, 5128 East Crescent Drive, stressed that his main concern
was his privacy and he did not want any of his trees removed. He was not
against the storm drain but against the location and was of the opinion that
it could be moved across the road. He asked that further study relative to
alternatives be made by the Engineering Division as he was confident .that
other sites could be found.
Mr. Bettencourt confirmed for Councilwoman Kaywood that there were nearly 400
trees along the entire right-of-way for the drain and 2 trees would have to
be removed in front of Mr. Grigry's; property. He reiterated that engineering
data would clearly lead to no other conclusion but that Anaheim Hills had ~
selected, in consultation with City staff and their registered engineers, the
optimum location for the drain considering the unalterable fact that it would
follow the natural water course already established through the area. The
question of compensation for property owners was a matter for the courts to
settle.
In answer to Councilwoman Kaywood, Mrs. Iverson indicated that she did not
object to Anaheim Hills replacing trees as long as it was done in conjunction
with the building of the requested wall.
Further discussion between Council and staff revolved around the technicalities
of the location of the drain at the conclusion of which City Engineer.
Maddox indicated that the proposed alignment was the most practical considering
the present location of sewer, water and gas lines at the bluff on the north
side of Crescent Drive. He also confirmed that it was an accepted practice to
align a drain along a course established by nature otherwise problems could
arise.
Mayor Thom left Council Chamber at 5:04 p.m..
On question by Councilman Seymour, it was established that two avocado trees
would be required to be removed from in front of Mr. Grigry's property.
ENVIRoNMENTAl IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Kott, the City Council finds that this project
will have no significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, exempt
from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. Councilman Thom
was temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED.
76-908
City Hall~ Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES - November 30, 1976~ 1'30
The Mayor returned to the Council Chamber at 5'06 p.m.
On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, the request
submitted by Anaheim Hills for permission to remove 11 specimen trees in
conjunction with the installation of an off-site storm drain in the proposed
alignment for Tract Nos. 7567 and 9268 subject to the stipulation that said
trees and any additional specimen trees which may become damaged or hazardous
from the construction of the storm drain shall be replaced in accordance with
the Tree Preservation Ordinance, was approved with wall installation relative
to Mrs. Iverson's property to be negotiated with Anaheim Hills, along with
the added stipulation made by Mr. Bettencourt that in both Mrs. Carrano's and
Mrs. Iverson's case Anaheim Hills would remove the trees in question on their
property and replace them at their expense regardless of subsequent negotiations.
MOTION CARRIED.
AWARD OF WORK ORDER NO. 796-A - STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT' (Pacifico Avenue
and State College Boulevard) Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 76R-765
for adoption, awarding a contract in accordance with the recommendations of
the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-765: 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, PERFORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE
FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT: PACIFICO AVENUE AND STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 796-A.
(R. J. Noble Company - $106,385.10)
Roll Call Vote'
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
ABSENT- COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-765 duly passed and adopted.
WORK ORDER NO. 880 - PEARSON PARK THEATRE SEATING IMPROVEMENTS' On motion
by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Thom, the award of Work Order
No. 880 was continued for one week for further evaluation by the Engineering
Department. MOTION CARRIED.
AWARD OF WORK ORDER NO. 886 - LA JOLLA STORM DRAIN- (Carbon Creek Channel to
630' N/O La Jolla in Kraemer Boulevard) Councilman Roth offered Resolution No.
76R-766 for adoption, awarding a contract in accordance with the recommendations
of the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-766: 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: LA JOLLA STORM DRAIN, CARBON CREEK CHANNEL
TO 630' N/O LA JOLLA IN KRAEMER BOULEVARD, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK
ORDER NO. 886. (Valverde Construction, Inc. - $229,812.00)
Roll Call Vote'
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES- COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-766 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC FIREWORKS DISPLAY PERMIT' On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded
by Councilman Roth,~application for Public Fireworks Permit filed by Betty
Sweet, Astro Pyrotechnics, to discharge fireworks at Anaheim Stadium,
December 4, 1976, from approximately 7'45 p.m. to 7'48 p.m. and 10'00 p.m.
to 10'03 p.m. was approved. To this motion Councilwoman Kaywood voted
"No". MOTION CARRIED.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS' On motion by Councilman Roth, 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'
76-909
~_ity Hall, Anahe. im, California 7, COUNCIL MINUTES - N_oyember 30~ 197.6.~j .1:30 P.M.
1. DINNER DANCING PLACE PERMIT' Dinner Dancing Place Permit for The Inn At The
Park, 1855 South Harbor Boulevard, to allow dancing from 7'00 p.m. to
2'00 a.m., Sunday through Saturday was granted in accordance with th'e
recommendations of the Chief of Police. (Andrew Schwebel, applicant)
2. CORRESPONDENCE' The following correspondence was order ed received and
filed'
a. Protective Order, Southern California Edison Company, Docket No. ER76-205.
(on file)
b. City of Buena Park Resolution No. 5941, opposing any new study by
Inter-County Airport Authority with respect to a new airport in Orange
County. (on file)
c. Notification from James H. Lyons, attorney for Airport Service, Inc.,
of application to California Public Utilities Commission for an increase
in rates. (on file)
d. Monthly report for October, 1976 - City Treasurer.
e. Community Redevelopment Commission - Minutes - November 3, 1976.
MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NOS. 76R-767 AND 76R-768' Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution
Nos. 76R-767 and 76R-768 for adoption in accordance with the reports and
recommendations and certifications furnished each Council Member and .as
listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-767' 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 TRANS-
PORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, g2~lD THE PERFORCE OF ALL '
WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT,
TO WIT' JUAREZ PARK PARKING LOT LIGHTING, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK
ORDER NO. 868. (Davenport Electric, Inc.)
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-768: 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 TRANSPOR-
TATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK
NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO
WIT' SLURRY SEAL CONTRACT FOR THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 100-421-241-02.
(Pavement Coatings Company)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 76R-767 and 76R-768 duly passed and adopted.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS- Actions taken by the City Planning Commission
at their meeting held November 8, 1976, pertaining to the following applica-
tions were submitted for City Council information and consideration.
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the City Council
authorized the actions pertaining to the following environmental impact
requirements as recommended by the City Planning Commission. and took no
further action on the following applications. (Item Nos. 1 through 15)
1o ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT .-~A.'TEGORICAT, EXEMPTION. The Planning Director
has determined that the proposed activities in the following listed zoning
applications fall within the definitions of Section 3.01, Class 1, 5, and 11,
of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the requirements for an environmental
impact report and ar~,therefore,categorically exempt from the requirement to
file an environmental impact report'
76-910
. .
City .Hall, Anaheim~ California -:COUNCIL .MINUTES - November 30, 1976, 1:30 P.M.
Variance No. 2854
Variance No. 2875
Variance No. 2868
Conditional Use Permit No. 1665
2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION' .The Planning Commission
recommended to the City Council that the subject projects in the following
listed zoning applications be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare
an environmental impact report pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act'
Variance No. 2866
Variance No. 2869
Variance No. 2873
Conditional Use Permit No. 1663
Conditional Use Permit No. 1664
3. VARIANCE NO. 2854' Submitted by Earl L. Singleton and James Clayton Peacock
(Co-Trustees), to permit existing illegal signs on CL zoned property located
at 301 South Euclid Street with code waivers.
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC76-228 denied Variance No. 2854.
4. VARIANCE NO. 2866' Submitted by Fred B. and Norman N. Walls, to establish a
six-lot subdivision on RS-7200 zoned property located at 114, 116 and 118
South Harding Drive with code waiver of minimum lot area.
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC76-224 granted Variance No. 2866.
5. VARIANCE NO. 2868' Submitted by Ronald L. and Yvonne G. Bird, to construct
a room addition on RS-7200 zoned property lOcated at 203 Shakespeare Street
with code waivers.
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC76'225 granted Variance No. 2868.
6. VARIANCE NO. 2869' Submitted by William and Judith Brooker, to construct
an industrial building on RS-A-43,000 zoned property located at the north-
west corner of Miraloma Avenue and Jefferson Street with code waivers° '
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC76-232 granted Variance No. 2869.
7. VARIANCE NO. 2873' Submitted by Family Health Program, Inc., to expand a
medical center on ML zoned property located at 2571 West La Palma Avenue
with code waiver of permitted uses.
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC76-233 granted Variance No. 2873.
8. VARIANCE NO. 2875' Submitted by Louis F. and Phyllis A. Sell, to establish
an automotive repair facility, including engine overhaul, on CG zoned
property located at 1075 North Harbor Boulevard with code waiver of
permitted uses.
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC76-229 granted Variance No. 2875
for one year subject to review by the City Planning Commission.
9o CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1663' Submitted by Southern California District,
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, for a church and pre-school on RS-A-43,000(SC)
zoned property located on the east side of Solomon Drive between Santa Ana
Canyon Road and Constantine Roa~.
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC76-237 granted Conditional Use
Permit No. 1663.
10. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1664' Submitted by Douglas Annex, for an auto-
motive repair shop (trucks) on ML zoned property located on the east side
of Douglass Road, approximately 210 feet north of Katella Avenue.
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC76-230 granted Conditional Use
Permit No. 1664.
· 76-911
11. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1665- Submitted by Dunn Properties Corporation,
for a sandwich shop on ML zoned property located at 2643 Woodland Drive.
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC76-231 granted Conditional Use
Permit No. 1665.
12. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1585 - EXTENSION OF TIME' Submitted by Anthony
D'Arcy, Agent for Sutherland Building Material, for one year extension of
time to Conditional Use Permit No. 1585 to establish a lumberyard on property
located on the north side of La Palma Avenue and west of Imperial.
The City Planning Commission approved the extension of time to Conditional
Use Permit No. 1585 to expire December 8, 1977.
13. VARIANCE NO. 2750 - EXTENSION OF TIME' Submitted by Robert Burglin for one
year extension of time to Variance No~ 2750 to waive maximum number of
signs and minimum distance between signs at a car wash on property located
at 2219 West Lincoln Avenue.
The City Planning Commission approved a one year extension of time to Variance
No. 2750 to terminate at the end of that time.
14. VARIANCE NO. 2805 - REVISED SITE PLANS' Request by Arthur Adams, Bixby Land
Company, for revised site plans 'for a Convenience market on property located
at the northwest corner of Katella and Haster.
The City Planning Commission approved revised site plans on Variance No. 2805.
15o TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 8463 (REVISION NO. 1).-- WALL.. P_I~JkN__S: Request submitted by
the Warmington Company, for approval of revised wall plans.
The City Planning Commission approved the revised wall plans for Tentative
Tract No. 8463 (Revision No. 1).
MOTION CARRIED.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1662' Submitted by John Priem, to permit on-sale
liquor in a lodge on CL zoned property located at 821 South Brookhurst Street.
Mr. Patrick F. Gallup, Agent, 1724 West Catalpa, Number 120, expressed his
concern that one of the conditions stipulated by the Planning Commission
before he would be allowed to start proposed lodge activities was the
removal of any existing illegal signing on the subject property. Mr. Gallup
stated that while all concerned consented to taking down the illegal signs,
one business, Anaheim Sports Center, adammtly refused stressing they had
no intentions of so doing.
Mayor Thom explained that the matter would have to be set for a public hearing
because conditions could not be changed without both sides being present.
Thereupon, Councilman Seymour requested that a public hearing be set with
the condition that if the matter could be settled during the interim, he
would withdraw his request for the public hearing.
VARIANCE NO. 2370 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION. Submitted by R. D. Lutz,
Group Realty Services, Inc., to permit converting an existing residence to
a commercial use on property located at 505 South Euclid Street with
certain code waivers.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 76R-769 for adoption, terminating
Variance No. 2370. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-769' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHE.IM TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH VARIANCE NO. 2370
AND DECLARING RESOLUTION NO. 72R-287 NULL AND VOID. '
76-9~2
City Hall, Anaheim,. California -.COUNCIL. MINUTES.- November 30~ 19.76~ 1:30 P.M.
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. 76R-769 duly passed and adopted.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman
Roth, seconded by Councilman Seymour, it was determined by the City Council
that the filing of Parcel Map No l 598 for property located at 333 North Euclid
is exempt from ~the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report as
recommended by the City Planning Commission 'pursuant to the provisions of the
C~lifornia .Environmental Quality Act. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION CARRIED.
ORDINANCE NO. 3626: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3626 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 3626: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18
OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (73-74-10(1), CH)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3626 duly passed and adopted.
Councilwoman Kaywood explained that she abstained because she was generally
displeased with the appearance of the whole area at Lincoln and Brookhurst.
ORDINANCE NO. 3627: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 3627 for
adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 3627: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18
OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (66-67-61(74), CR)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3627 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3628: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 3628 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 3628: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18
OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (66-67-61(77), CR)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3628 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3629: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 3629 for
adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
76-9~
ORDINANCE NO. 3629'AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18
OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (70-71-47(16), ML)
Ro.ll Call Vote:
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS- Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS- None
ABSENT- COUNCIL MEMBERS- None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3629 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3630' Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 3630 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 3630' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ~ENDING TITLE 18
OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (75-76-35, RM-1200)
Roll Call Vote:
ORDINANCE NO. 3631' The Mayor recognized that Dr. John Mullender, Associate
Superintendent of the Placentia Unified School District, was in the Council
Chamber and explained for _Dr. Mullender that City staff was working with the
Placentia Uni~edSchool District staff concerning the proposed agreement
between the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency and the School District as dis-
cussed at the meeting of November 23, 1976, on the Second Amendment to the
Redevelopment plan for Redevelopment Project Alpha. The Mayor stated that
staff's opinion was to proceed with the second amendment while continuing
to achieve an agreement between both parties that would be mutually advantageous
relative to an equitable solution pertaining to tax increment funding.
Dr. Mullender indicated that through ongoing discussion, progress was being
made and that some agreement would be reached soon.
Thereupon, Councilman Seymour offered Ordinance No. 3631 for adoption Refer
to Ordinance Book. ~
ORDINANCE NO. 3631' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 3190, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 3567, APPROVING AND
ADOPTING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT ALPHA.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS- Kaywood, Seymour, Kott and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3631 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3632' Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3632 for first
reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 3632' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18
OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (71-72-44(18), RS-5000)
NEOCCS STUDY COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT- On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood,
seconded by Councilman Seymour, the appointment of Mary Ruth Pinson to
the Nort beast Orange County Circulation Study Committee was approved MOTION
CARRIED. '
ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION. On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood,
seconded by Councilman Seymour, support of Mayor Henry Wedaa of Yorba Linda
to the Orange County Transportation Commission at the Orange L~ounty Leagua of
Cal'ifo~ia 'Cities Meeting of December 9,1976 was approved. MOT/ON CARRIED.
76-914
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 30, 1976, 1:30 P.M.
REPORT ON PARAMEDICS: Councilwoman Kaywood requested that Fire Chief Riley
submit a report by next week relative to his recommendations concerning which
way the Council should go regardingthe~aramedics Service as the Council was
expected to come up with a plan for presentation at the December 9, 1976,
League of California Cities Meeting.
TV CAMERA- COUNCIL ANNEX: In order to conserve energy, Councilwoman Kaywood
requested that the TV camera set up in the Council Chamber Annex for participation
and Viewing of Council meetings not be utilized unless someone was present.
Staff was instructed to post appropriate signs indicating same.
NUDIE PUBLICATIONS: Councilman Seymour requested that staff answer letter
dated November 16, 1976, from Mrs. John Marsh directed to Mayor Jesse
Davis of Buena Park relative to her concern over the display of "nudie"
newspapers in~ront of a family restaurant since the location .o~ the restaurant
given by Mrs. Marsh was in Anaheim.
PARAMEDICS SERVICE: Councilman Seymour expressed his concern over the
recently published newspaper article relative to the City's proposed
agreement to serve certain County areas referred to as the Gaza Strip
with Paramedics. He explained that the article was the first he knew
that such a matter was under consideration and stated that it should have
first come before the Mayor and the Council.
Relative to providing such service to unincorporated areas, it was Councilman
Seymour's opinion that it would be at the sacrifice of service to the
citizens of Anaheim. He also did not want such action to set a precedent
whereby people living in a County area could pick orchoose the services
they wished to receive offered by the City without being annexed to it and
without incurring the responsibility' for all other services.
Mayor Thom stated that he had discussed the matter with Chief Riley the day
before and he explained that a report was prepared for presentation to
the Council. The Mayor further stated that Chief Riley was extremely con-
cerned over the newspaper article bemuse it was not to be released until
after his report had been considered and either accepted or rejected by the
Council. He did not know how the matter reached the newspaper.
Fire Chief James Riley explained that after reading and considering his
report the Council may or may not want to put it on the Agenda.
City Manager Talley interjected that the report was scheduled to be presented
at the meeting of December 7, 1976, and that it basically contemplated an
interim agreement with a major agreement to take effect July 1, 1977.
CITY-OWNED PROPERTY - 721 NORTH EUCLID: (Sewell) Councilman Kott asked
for a update on the status of the property.
City Attorney Hopkins explained that a complaint was filed in Superior Court
for unlawful detainer and the property was posted because of the inability
to contact Mr. Sewell. Mr. Hopkins indicated that the Heritage Bank was
also served because they are the sub-licensee to Mr. Sewell but, in turn,
a demurrer was filed by the Heritage Bank to be heard in Superior Court on
December 8, 1976, at which time the City would respond.
Mr. Hopkins further explained that the City was proceeding to cancel the
license agreement with the objective of obtaining a judicial order from
the court cancelling the entire matter and authorizing payment of rent to
the City as well as any penalties involved.
EUCLID STREET CROSswALKS' Councilman Roth explained that a serious injury
had recently occurred at the crosswalk on Euclid and Crone Street~ thereby
causing him to be concerned about the effectiveness of 'crosswalks on Euclid
on a general basis.
76-915
REPORT- MITO~ JAPAN TRIP - SISTER CITY PROGRAM- Mayor Thom briefed the
Council on his trip to Mito Japan November 2 through 8, 1976, relative
to the formal establishment of a Sister City Program. He elaborated on
the many courtesies extended to him and the Anaheim dal~egation by the
Mayor of Mito and their 36 Member Council, which included lunches, a
formal reception with a stand-up banquet, and a dinner meeting attended
by Council Members, the Mayor and Members of the International Cultural
Exchange Association ~( ICEA ), which Association Members funded
most of the planned activities.
A tour by chartered bus showed Mito to be a university city with a keen
interest in educational exchange. The Mayor explained that a private session
between Mito's Mayor, himself, Bill Dalv and Police Chief Bastrup, during which
the general concepts of the Sister City'Agreement were discussed and three points
emphasized -- cultural, social and economic exchange; the greater emphasis
being on the value of cultural and educational exchange. It was agreed that
all three aspects were of importance to both cities.
Relative to the particular benefits that come to the City of Anaheim as a
result of a Sister City Program, the Mayor expressed that it was difficult
to attach financial importance to a cultural or social exchange but such
a program was to be viewed as a grassroots level of the State Department
promoting national relationships, as well as a business exchange if countries
wished to avail themselves of such an exchange. It was his opinion that the
value was in the ability to know, understand and communicate with people in
foreign countri~on a personal and city level with their goals basically
being the same as citizens of the United States relative to jobs, education
and the attainment of the good things in life. He contended that there was
a definite advantage to a Sister City Program.
The Mayor stated that of the $1,500.00 authorized for his trip expenses,
approximately $1,270.00 was spent, $1,000.00 being for airfare.
He further explained that the Mayor of Mito and some Mambers of their~
City Council were going to visit Anaheim on December 21 and 22, 1976,
at which time the Sister City application would be finalized.
Councilwoman Kaywood was concerned that when Mr. Daly gave his report at
the previous meeting, he indicated that approximately $10,000.00 was spent
to host the Anaheim delegation and she wanted to know what the reciprocal
visit was going to cost the City.
The Mayor stated that it was not possible for Anaheim to reciprocate in a
like fashion and that at present no plans had been made for any type of
reception other than by the local Kiwanis Clubs. He explained that a meet-
ing was to be held the next day to discuss the propriety of asking the City
in some way to ~host a luncheon for the Mito contingent along with a tour
of the City's facilities. He did not know what expense that would entail but
a proposal would be brought back to Council from that Committee and presented
at the next Council meeting.
ADJOURNMENT' Councilman Roth moved to adjourn. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Adjourned: 6:00 P.M.
LINDA D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK