The URL can be used to link to this page

1975/04/01City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ 1975~ 9:00 A.M. PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom PRESENT: DEPUTY CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts The adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Anaheim was called to order by the Deputy City Clerk and adjourned for a lack of quorum to the next regular meeting, April 1, 1975, 1:30 P.M. Adjourned: 9:01 A.M. Deputy City'-Clerk 75-277 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 25~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Councilman Pebley left the Council Chamber. (6:05 P.M.) In reply to the Mayor, Mr. Watts counseled that even though this condition was imposed by the Planning Commission at one of their meetings as a routine agenda item and not at a public hearing, he would suggest that Council set the matter for public hearing at which time they may, if they choose, amend the condition referred to by Ms. LeGaye. Mayor Thom thereupon requested that Conditional Use Permit Nos. 1063 and 1072 be set for public hearing. 3. FINAL SPECIFIC FLOOR PLANS AND ELEVATIONS - TRACT NO. 7918~ REVISION NO. 1 (RECLASSIFICATION NO. 71-72-44 (7)): Final specific floor plans and elevations for Tract No. 7918, Revision No. 1, were submitted by George Putnam, Project Coordination Director, Shapell Industries, Inc., for Council approval, together with excerpts from the City Plannin$ Commismion meeting of March 3, 1975, indicating said plans were approved by the City Planning Commission. Tract No. 7918, Revision No. 1, is planned to be located on the north side of Serrano Avenue, east of Nohl Ranch Road. Mr. Roberts reported that the floor plans and elevations submitted are identical to those already approved by the City Council for S & S Construction Company on the tract immediately adjacent to Tract No. 7918, Revision No. 1. On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, final specific floor plans and elevations for Tract No. 7918, Revision No. 1 were approved. Councilmen Seymour and Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-152 - HOUSING REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE TRAINING AND WORK EXPERIENCE PROGRAM (NORTH ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT): Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 75R-152 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE NORTH ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A HOUSING REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE TRAINING AND WORK EXPERIENCE PROGRAM. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour and Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-152 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NOS. 75R-153 THROUGH 75R-155 - POTENTIAL PARK SITE ADJACENT TO TRACT NO. 7787: On report and recommendation by the City Attorney, Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution Nos. 75R-153 through 75R-155, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-153: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE WITTENBERG CORPORA- TION TO PURCHASE CERTAIN LAND AND REIMBURSE SAID CORPORATION FOR IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-154: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING AN EASEMENT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL PROP- ERTY FOR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES. (Wilder and Olson Farms, Inc.) RESOLUTION NO. 75R-155: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A GRANT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES. (Wittenberg) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour and Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 75R-153 through 75R-155, both inclusive duly passed and adopted. ' 75-279 City. Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1, 1975, 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour (arrived 1:35 P.M.), Pebley, Sneegas and Thom ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None PRESENT: ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Robert M. Davis CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts CITY CLERK: Alona M. Hougard DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Ronald Thompson REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR: Knowlton Fernald ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts PLANNING SUPERVISOR: Don McDaniel ASSISTANT PLANNERS: G. Alan Daum and William West COMMUNITY RELATIONS DIRECTOR: Joe Garza PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Garry O. McRae STADIUM AND PARKING LOT MANAGER: Dick Benson SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ADVISOR: Dr. Owen Griffith Mayor Thom called the meeting to order. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Calvin L. Pebley led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT - CALIFORNIA ANGELS: A Resolutiom of Support for the California Angels Baseball Team, re-naming Anaheim as "Angel Town, California" on Monday, April 7, 1975, was authorized by the City Council. MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council Regular Meetings held February 25, March 4, and March 11, 1975, were approved, on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas. COuncilman Seymour absent. 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 Pebley seconded the motion. Councilman Seymour absent. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. REPORT - FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City in the amount of $448,902.08, in accordance with the 1974-75 Budget, were approved. Councilman Seymour entered the Council Chamber. (1:35 P.M.) PETITION OF GRIEVANCES - PEOPLE FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Mrs. Josephine Montoya introduced Mr. Richard Vargas, 411 South Clementine Street, who read the caption of petition circulated by People for Community Development, as follows: "We the undersigned respectfully request an investigation of the Anaheim Police Department by the Civil Rights Commission. We feel that we have used available channels with no satisfaction. It is felt that an investigation by an impartial third party would be beneficial to the entire community." Mr. Vargas advised that the petition contained approximately 100 signatures, and he thereupon submitted said petition to the City Council. Mr. Joel Guerena, 1334 South Claremont Street, addressed the Council and read the following letter written by the People for Community Development: "As we are all aware, we have a problem out in the community which we are all trying to iron out. We have put together two or three different letters between everybody hoping to get our point across, and hoping that we can this afternoon. I will read the first letter that we put together, by the People for Community Development: 'We are concerned citizens who have come together under emergency conditions created by the stress and pressure applied to us, the community, by the Police Department. We believe certain officers within the department are ~uilty of criminal misconduct. We feel that our basic human and civil rights have been violated. For these reasons, and because of the history of abuse suffered by 75-280 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. the minority community at the hands of the Police Department and the feeling of mystery which has arisen amongst the community towards the department, we are asking that the City government request an impartial investigation by the Civil Rights Commission. Although this is not a solution in itself, it will help shedlight on the situation. In working toward the solution, we would like to see the efforts of the Police Community Relations Board continued; however, we do not feel that this is enough. An officer can spend countless class hours studying the Mexican culture, but if his attitude does not change, this is all for nothing. Future applicants to the Police Department should be thoroughly screened. This screening should involve members of the community on a screening committee. Continued misconduct on the part of the Anaheim Police Department will never initiate positive change. Without an impartial third party investi- gation, further progress cannot be realized. We, therefore, request that the City Council formally request an outside Federal agency to investigate our charges.' Thank you." The Mayor asked if anyone else had additional information to present. Tina Ramos, 517 East Sycamore Street, B-3, submitted and read the follow- ing statement: "As concerned citizens we recognize that narcotics have proven to be a very undersirable element in our communities. We also recognize that appropriate patrol by the police is necessary to curb the spread of drug abuse. However, constant harassment and degrading police tactics are not the answer. We believe that the drug problem in the Mexican community, which is a major source of tension between the police and the community, will be solved by a realistic, objective, compassionate, long-range look at the total drug problem. The use of drugs by the minority community is an endless cycle passing on from one generation to the next because the environment and society's attitu~..~ are also the same from one generation to the next. Nobody chooses to become a drug user. It is usually a question of a persons reaction to outside pressures and stimuli, such as a lack of jobs, improper education, alienation from society, further compounded by gross harassment by the Anaheim Police Department. To quote Police Chief Bastrup, "young people are dying out there all the time, and the children we see in L±ttle People's Park today are the teenagers of tomorrow." But what effective drug abuse programs have been instituted by the chief or by city government, none. What can we the community and the city do to alleviate these pressures? Establish drug abuse centers, preferably culturally oriented. Treat the drug problem as what it is, an illness. The real criminals- the people who are getting rich off the narcotics sales are left untouched, while the unfortunate victims both users and non- users are subjected the more criminal elements within the Anaheim Police Depart- ment. We believe that another major source of friction between the police and the community is the lack of proper training for officers, especially those patrolling the low-income, minority areas. We do not believe that the problem of police-community relations will be totally solved by an impartial investigation, however, it will shed light on the situation and perhaps result in some positive suggestions for the future. We will not be satisfied by any city level investigation. We, the People for Community development therefore request that the City Council as a body for- mally ask the United States Commission on Civil Rights to investigate the charges we are making against the Anaheim Police Department." Mr. Johnn Verdin, a U. S. Marine stationed at LTA Marine Corps Helicopter Station Motor Transport, MAG 16, MAB 13, Santa Ana, formerly residing at 123 South Kroeger Street, submitted and read the following statement: "As a repre- sentative for the People for Community Development I come before your body today to make charges against the Anaheim Police Department. 75-281 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April. 1., 1975~ 1:30 P.M. We accuse the Anaheim Police Department of violations of our basic consti- tutional and human civil rights. We accuse the Anaheim Police Department of deliberate and constant harass- ment of various communities in the City. We accuse the Anaheim Police Department of using unnecessary and excessive force in the execution of their responsibilities. We accuse the Anaheim Police Department of brutality and physical abuse. We accuse the Anaheim police Department of using degrading, dehumanizing tactics in the minority communities. We accuse the Anaheim Police Department of incompetence. We accuse the Anaheim Police Department of making deliberate false or unfair arrests. We accuse the Anaheim Police Department of mistreatment of prisoners in custody. We accuse the Anaheim Police Department of excessive patrol of minority areas in the City. We accuse the Anaheim Police Department of racism and prejudice. We make these accusations on behalf of the entire community, in hope that we may soon receive a third party impartial investigation of our charges by the United States Civil Rights Commission." At this point in the meeting, Mayor Thom asked whether the foregoing statements were to be appended and made a part of the petition submitted this date by Mr. Vargas. Mr. Guerena, Mr. Verdin and Ms. Ramos indicated their concurrence. The Mayor asked if anyone else had anything to add. There was no response. As one member of the City Council, Mayor Thom expressed his comments on the foregoing presentations, being of the opinion that the charges which were leveled, including criminal misconduct, should be more appropriately investi- gated by an agency other than the Civil Rights Commission. Further, said charges were so general in nature and lacking in specific incidents, names or dates, that it might be more productive for some of those representatives who spoke at this meeting to meet with himself, the Chief of Police, and any other members of the City Council who are able to attend, and give some type of specificity to the charges requested to be investigated. In his opinion, before the Council can answer directly whether they will or will not request an investigation of the Police Department, there must first be a base from which to start, and he offered this suggested meeting as an alternative prior to the taking of any definite action. Ne invited comments from other members of the Council. Mr. Richard Vargas returned to the microphone to report that formal com- plaints have been filed with the Police Chief, in accordance with his instruc- tions. In addition, some of the petitioners sat on the Police Community Relations Board last week, at which time some positive feedback was offered to the Police Chief and the Commission. In addition, certain lawsuits against the City are pending. He felt that the Council was the supreme ruling body of the City, and all of the issues were on record. Mr. Vargas further advised that they had spoken with the area represen- tative from the U. S. Commission on Civil Rights in Los Angeles, who advised members of the group that if the City Council so requested, they would be willing to come here and investigate the charges which are being made. The information has already been forwarded to the Commission. 75-282 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. The Mayor reiterated that a meeting should be held and the grievances enumerated, or the list previously submitted to the U.S. Civil Rights Commission should be obtained, so that the City Council is aware of what a request for investigation would entail. Mr. Victor Ulloa, 318 South Clementine Street, addressed the Council advising that he had been one of the first persons to file a complaint against the Police Department for police brutality, and the Chief of Police advised that complaints should formally be filed at his office. He further advised that Mrs. Montoya had retained copies of said complaints and could ~mke avail- able additional copies for the City Council. Mrs. Josephine Montoya, 310 North Philadelphia Street, addressed the Council advising that they have been documenting police brutality and harassment cases for over a year. At the present time, the Civil Rights Commission Office in Los Angeles maintains a file on Anaheim, and one of the Civil Rights Commis- sioners visited this City's former Police Chief approximately one year ago. At that time, no investigation was initiated due to the lack of community unity, there being only two or three persons representing the total community and bringing it to the Civil Rights Commission. Subsequent to the Civil Rights Commissioner's visit, she contended there was a great deal of harassment against the two or three people involved, and she dropped the investigation out of fear and for a lot of reasons. At that time there was no publicity, but this time the issue is out in the open and in the news media, and people must deal with it whether they like it or not. Mrs. Montoya stated that they have repeatedly filed complaints with the Police Department, only to have them not followed through. In her own personal case, after filing complaints, before any personal contact was made by the Department to hear her side of the matter, a statement was given to the Press by the Chief of Police clearing his officers, saying that they were complete~~ innocent, reversing the charges, and threatening and slandering her. She expressed the opinion this is common procedure for the Police Department. Today, Mrs. Montoya felt that there is sufficient support in the community and sufficient documentation. She stated that although she had been threatened, harassed, and had to move out of her home, she would continue to fight for her rights and for what she believes in. She advised that time after time the material requested has been filed and time after time it is requested again. Further, the People for Community Development did not feel their request was too general. She indicated she would provide the documentation requested. Mayor Thom noted that on this date, however, the request was made of the City Council to request an investigation. Councilman Seymour stated that he concurred with the Mayor's approach to this matter; that no one wants to deny any citizen his rights or privileges, and immediate action will be taken if any of the general charges prove to be true. However, both sides must be thoroughly considered, information must be assimilated, and if an investigation appears to be warranted, it will be requested. He advised he would be willing to meet with the parties concerned. In response to question by Mayor Thom, Mrs. Montoya indicated her willing- ness to meet with the Mayor, other Council Members and staff at 2:00 P.M. Wednesday, April 2, 1975, in the Mayor's Office. · Councilwoman Kaywood noted the service Mrs. Montoya had rendered by acting as interpretor during a recent public Community Development meeting, and the mutual respect which was manifested at that time. She concurred with the procedure outlined by the Mayor. Councilman Seymour noted the possibility that some of these problems might be solved through the Community Development Program. However, the issue brought out today has apparently been building for some time. The Mayor invited all interested persons to be present at the April 2nd informal meeting with Council Members and staff; however, he felt said meeting would be more productive if the representation could be limited to those who addressed the Council this date. 75-283 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Apri~ 1~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. PURCHASE OF LEAR BOOSTER SYSTEM AND TRANSFER OF FUNDS: Assistant City Manager Robert Davis reported on requests by the Fire Chief for authorization of pro- posed purchase of a Lear Booster System for use in conjunction with the Scott Air Packs used by fire fighters for approximately $4,000. Inasmuch as this was a non-budgeted item, he was further recommending a transfer of funds from the Council Contingency Account. On motion by Councilman %bom, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, said purchase and transfer of funds was authorized as recommended. MOTION CARRIED. URBAN ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROJECT (UEM): Science and Technology Advisor Dr. Owen H. Griffith briefed his memorandum dated March 31, 1975, requesting that the City, through its participation in the California Innovation Group, submit an applica- tion to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for a Community Development Innovation Project Grant to cover a seven-month project on Urban Energy Management (UEM). The City's share of the $60,000 funding through the California Innovation Group would be $16,800, and he advised that in accordance with favorable review of the proposal and instruction by HUD, the application should be submitted by April 20, 1975, subject to approval by the Southern California Association of Governments and authorization by the City Council. Dr. Griffith listed the threefold scope of the project, as follows: 1. Document conservation techniques used by all nine cities in the California Innovation Group, then catalog and assess the results. 2. Develop an energy audit procedure for Anaheim. 3. Develop an energy management plan for Anaheim. He further advised that various sources of energy would be considered under the project. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-157: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 75R-157 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PURSUANT TO SECTION 107 OF THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974, RELATING TO INNOVATIVE RESEARCH AND DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS IN LOCAL ENERGY CONSERVATION. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-157 duly passed and adopted. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CITY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT CONTRACT TO DE-POOL MISCELLANEOUS MEMBER PORTION: Personnel Director Garry McRae reported that he had met with representatives of employee organizations and an in-depth discussion was held regarding the proposed amendment to the City Employees Retirement Contract to de-pool, and expansion of the benefit plan. The representatives requested that action be deferred one week, and he was of the opinion that there would be sufficient time remaining for necessary Council action to effect the amendment for the pay period beginning May 30, 1975. · By general consent of the City Council, further consideration of the pro- posed amendment was continued to the regular meeting of April 8, 1975, 1:30 P.M. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO RETIRED EMPLOYEES INSURANCE BENEFITS: In accordance with request by Councilman Sneegas, Mr. McRae reported that in March of 1969, the employee benefit package was amended to provide for substantial life insurance at group rates for retired employees. In October of 1973, this provision was amended to provide limited paid up life insurance benefits and to permit retired employees to remain in the group health insurance plan at their own expense. Since that time, requests have been received from employees who retired prior to that amendment, requesting to be reinstated into the group health insurance plan, at their own expense. 75-284 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1, 1975~ 1:30 P.M. The requested amendment to the retirement benefits package seemed reason- able, and Mr. McRae suggested that as an alternative, these employees be offered a choice of keeping the life insurance, or voluntarily relinquishing that coverage in favor of reentering the health insurance program. He indicated his intention to discuss this suggestion with representatives of the various employee organizations. Mayor Thom advised he would favor solicitation of comments from the employee organizations and aggressive pursuit of the proposed amendment. Councilman Sneegas concurred and noted that the costs of medical care seemed to be a matter of considerable concern for retired persons. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION - PERSONNEL AND EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVES: Mr. McRae noted the necessary cancellation of the scheduled work session this morning and requested an indication from the Council of an alternate date. By general consent, the City Council indicated they would reschedule the work session for 9:00 a.m., Tuesday, April 8, 1975. ANAHEIM STADIUM ACCESS - KAYCO CORPORATION: The City Attorney reported on request received from the California Angels for reactivation of formerly used access to Anaheim Stadium. Mr. Dick Benson, Stadium and Parking Lot Manager, advised that the access would be used only to alleviate exiting traffic, particularly that which is east- bound on Katella Avenue and northbound on the Orange Freeway. The only neces- sary improvement would involve the removal of an existing temporary curb and gutter. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-158: On the recommendations of the City Attorney, Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 75R-158 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAREIM APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH KAYCO CORPORATION WITH REFERENCE TO TEMPORARY ACCESS TO T~E ANAHEIM STADIUM. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-158 duly passed and adopted. Councilwoman Kaywood left the Council Chamber. (2:25 P.M.) RESOLUTION NO. 75R-159: On report and recommendation of the City Attorney, Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-159 for adoption, accepting the terms and conditions of an agreement with the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency as amended with reference to the indirect overhead rate, and authorizing the execution thereof. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION THEREOF. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None TEMPORARILY ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-159 duly passed and adopted. 75-285 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-160: Upon certification by the Fire Marshal, Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-160 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL LABOR, SERVICES AND EQUIPMENT NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE CUTTING AND REMOVAL OF ALL RANK GROWTH AND WEEDS, AND REMOVAL OF RUBBISH, REFUSE AND DIRT UPON ANY PARCEL OR PARCELS OF REAL PROPERTY OR ANY PUBLIC STREET IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 322-297 (1974-75). (Harold Watts, Contractor) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None TEMPORARILY ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-160 duly passed and adopted. ABANDONMENT NO. 74-9A - REHEARING: The City Clerk reported on request received from Mr. Lynn E. Thomsen for rehearing on Abandonment No. 74-9A, proposed abandonment of an existing public utility easement located on the west side of Dwyer Drive, south of Westmont Drive. (Public hearing held February 4, 1975, and abandonment denied without prejudice, Resolution No. 75R-64.) Mr. Thomsen addressed the Council explaining that the requested abandonment was for that portion of the easement which extended through Lot No. H only and which was not changed to correspond with a subsequent lot division. He stipu- lated that he would be responsible for payment of necessary fees. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Pebley, request for rehearing of Abandonment No. 74-9A was granted, subject to payment of appropriate fees by the applicant. Councilwoman Kaywood temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood returned to the Council Chamber. (2:28 P.M.) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 140 AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: In conjunction with action taken by the City Council March 4, 1975 adopting Resolu- tion No. 75R-117 which authorized the City Manager to file application for a Community Development Block Grant, pursuant to the Housing and Community Develop- ment Act of 1974, the Development Services Department recommended that the Council not certify E.I.R. No. 140 until comments from State agencies had been transmitted to the City from the State Clearing House, and any necessary responses had been prepared for inclusion in the E.I.R. The City Planning Commission believes that said draft E.I.R. No. 140 does conform to the City and State Guidelines and the State of California Environ- mental Quality Act and based upon such information does hereby recommend to the City Council that they certify said E.I.R. No. 140 is~ therefore, in compliance with said Environmental Quality Act. Development Services Director Ronald Thompson briefed the contents of memorandum from the Development Services Department dated April 1, 1975, recom- mending certification of the E.I.R. in accordance with the California Environ- mental Quality Act, and further recommending the adoption of a resolution approving the final application for a grant under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. He called attention to copies of letter and summary from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) attached to the memorandum report (copies furnished each Council Member). Mayor Thom asked whether anyone wished to address the City Council. There was no response. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-161: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 75R-161 for adoption, certifying that Environmental Impact Report No. 140 is in compli- ance with the California Environmental Quality Act and City and State Guidelines. 75-286 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1., 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 140 FOR A THREE-YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, A ONE-YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND A HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN pURsUANT TO THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-161 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-162: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 75R-162 for adoption, approving final application for a grant under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, including a three-year Community Develop- ment Plan, a one-year Community Development Program, a Housing Assistance Plan, and required assurances. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAtlEIM APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AND FILE AN APPLICATION FOR A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PURSUANT TO THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-162 duly passed and adopted. CONTINUED DECISION - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 135: To consider an amendment to the Circulation Element - Highway Rights-of-Way and Arterial Streets and Highways Map of the Anaheim General Plan to realign and/or reclassify Meats Avenue/Lakeview Avenue and Via Escollo and to delete portions of Eucalyptus Drive and Coal Canyon Road and to establish Monte Vista Drive. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-15, recommended approval of said General Plan Amendment. Public hearing was closed and decision continued from the meeting of January 28, 1975, to allow time for joint committee meetings with the Cities of Orange and Villa Park and the County of Orange. Memorandum report dated March 31, 1975, was submitted from the Development Services Department and the Public Works Department recommending that said public hearing be continued for a period of 90 days in order to have staff prepare a comprehensive reevaluation of the circulation in the canyon area and have the project reviewed by the Canyon Area General Planning Task Force Committee and the City Planning Commission. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by ~ouncilman Pebley, public hearing was continued for 90 days, as recommended. MOTION CARRIED. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT TO ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE,. ZONING - TREE PRESERVATION: Public hearing was held March 18, 1975, to consider amendment to Title 18, Chapter 18.84, proposed tree preservation in the Scenic Corridor Zone, Overlay, as recommended by the City Planning Commission. Public hearing was continued to this date for revision to wording of the proposed amendment, as discussed during the public hearing held March 18, 1975. 75-287 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Assistant Planner G. Alan Daum reported that the changes to the proposed ordinance had been made as requested by members of the City Council. Mrs. Mitzy Ozaki, 1122 Timken Road, representing the Santa Ana Canyon Property Owners Association, was recognized and addressed the Council advising she had reviewed the amended ordinance and supported it. She praised any efforts for tree preservation, being of the opinion that the. conservation of trees affects not only the residents but visitors and motorists. Mayor Thom asked if anyone else wished to address the City Council; there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. ORDINANCE NO. 3412: Councilman Seymour offered Ordinance No. 3412 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18, CHAPTER 18.84 BY ADDING THERETO SECTION 18.84.036 RELATING TO ZONING. (Tree Preservation in the Scenic Corridor Zone Overlay) PUBLIC HEARING - CREATION OF A LOCAL HOUSING AUTHORITY: Public hearing was scheduled to consider the creation of a Local Housing Authority. Redevelopment Director Knowlton Fernald submitted and briefed memorandum report regarding the establishment of a Housing Agency in the City of Anaheim, dated April 1, 1975 (copies furnished each Council Member), noting that said report encompasses and enlarges upon the initial staff report dated March 11, i975, taking into consideration the method of establishing a Community Develop- ment Commission, how the Advisory Board would work, and how a department organi- zation would function. He called attention to the last page of his report containing an organizational chart illustrating the structure of the proposed commission wherein the Redevelopment Agency would become the Community Develo ment Commission, and the existing Community Redevelopment Commission would be replaced by the establishment of the Redevelopment Advisory Board. Also to be established would be a Housing Advisory Board. The Redevelopment Department, which might be renamed, would consist of a Director and two Assistant Directors to oversee redevelopment and housing matters. Under these assistants would be the five staff functions, Redevelopment, Relocation, Planning and Development, Property Management, and Housing. Mr. Fernald pointed out there will be a need for relocation in the redevel- opment program, and it will be an advantage to have the ability to use a Housing Agency utilizing Section 8 funds under the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). He outlined the steps necessary to initiate the recommen- dations. Councilman Seymour briefly reported on his March 31, 1975 meeting with the Redevelopment Director and members of the legal staff, noting that if the City is to service this particular area of needs through a housing authority under a federally funded program, it appears there are three methods available; i.e. join with the Orange County Housing Authority, form a separate City Authority, or the method recommended, rendering the Authority a part of the Community Redevelopment Program. His reasons for supporting the latter method was that the funds would be derived from Redevelopment funds. He pointed out that many senior citizens are occupying living quarters in local hotels and when redevelop- ment moves into these areas, living quarters will need to be found for them and a federally funded housing authority will be greatly needed. In addition, since the program will be under the jurisdiction of the City rather than the County, the City will have complete control over the operation, and funds will not have to be derived from the City's general fund. In his opinion it is mandatory for the City to retain control and direct supervision of the redevelop- ment program. Mayor Thom concurred and stated that the recommendation seemed to be the most efficient method of accomplishing the redevelopment and community develop- ment goals. At the request of Councilman Seymour, Mr. Fernald further reported on matters discussed at yesterday's meeting, advising that the housing program would be City wide, however, much of the need is within the area of Project Alpha. 75-288 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Under the HUD Section 8 program, when a grant is received, reasonable reimburse- ment for costs of preparing the application, etc., is allowed. The grant allows 3% of the fair market rents (established by HUD), of the units allocated to operate the program, which he felt should be adequate for a combined housing and redevelopment operation. If the 3% formula does not cover operational costs, the difference can be made up by a legitimate use of redevelopment funds. Further, by using the program in conjuction with redevelopment, when a relocation problem occurs, payments up to $4,000 may be made over a four-year period for relocating a tenant and under Section 8, the subsidy would continue for as long as it is needed. The City would be taking better care of those people who need assistance and would be using the HUD Section 8 funds rather than tax increment funds, leaving the latter available for the redevelopment job. In response to question by Councilman Sneegas, Mr. Fernald explained that Section 8 includes grants for existing units, for rehabilitation of existing units and for new construction. The only program available to the Housing Agency would be that for existing units and enables the City to help people afford to live where they are. He noted the various methods of assistance, pointing out that in all cases, units owned by private property owners would be involved. Councilman Seymour pointed out that certain senior citizen residents of the City are currently under Social Security benefits and have no available program for rent subsidy. As a result of thorough research on his part, he felt that unless the City pursues its rightful share of these available federal funds, there never will be such a program. People are moving to other cities in Orange County where there are current subsidy programs available. Mayor Thom asked if any member of the audience wished to address the City Council pertaining to the formation of a Local Housing Authority. Gloria Lopez addressed the Council noting her years of work with city officials and community leaders for the Mexican-American community in Orange County. She was of the opinion that this segment of the population, along with senior citizens, was living in deplorable housing conditions, and the proper vehicles must be found for better housing and a better quality of life. She was in favor of the formation of a Local Housing Authority. Mr. Anthony Selitto, 131 North Queensbury Street, Anaheim, stated that in working with a broad segment of the population, he had found very poor quality housing available for senior citizens and people on welfare assistance. As an example, he cited one complex in east Anaheim where he found conditions extremely poor. He was of the opinion that the resulting environment created a very detrimental atmosphere, particularly for young people, and he expressed strong support for the implementation of the proposed Local Housing Authority. Mr. Jim Webb of Pacific Telephone Company, representing the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, agreed that there is a shortage of adequate housing in the City and requested an opportunity to submit the recommendation of the Redevelopment Director to the Chamber of Commerce for review and comments. Councilman Seymour explained the time limitation involved, noting that action must be taken immediately in order to take the proper steps to implement the program this year. If action is taken and at a later date the Chamber of Commerce comes back with convincing recommendations, the process can be halted at any time. If there is a better business way to meet these needs, it should be considered. The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the City Council; there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. Councilman Seymour reviewed the structure of the proposed Community Development Commission as outlined by Mr. Fernald and the steps which must be taken by the Council to implement the proposal. He noted it would be necessary to advance out of the General Fund necessary monies to pay the cost of employing a staff member to prepare the proposal and submit it to HUD within the time limit for early initiation of the program. These funds would be reimbursed as soon as the application is approved by HUD. 75-289 City Hail, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ 19.75~ 1:30 P.M. Councilman Sneegas noted that he was not expressing opposition to the recommendation but would like some clarification. He questioned whether there was any method of limiting any particular development as to the percentage of units which may be Federally assisted. He advised that he had observed Federal housing in many areas and felt that moving people from one environment to a new location, thereby creating the same ~nvironment, was not progress. He was of the opinion that people who have not lived in a good environment do not recog- nize a declining environment until the decline has occurred. Councilman Seymour agreed that certain Federal programs in the past were unsatisfactory, as were many Federally and local government constructed and operated housing projects. Mr. Fernald noted that only the preliminary regulations for Section 8 have been published at the present time, however, there is a limitation that 20% of a project or development would be the maximum eligible for housing assistance. HUD has no control insofar as welfare assistance is concerned. Councilwoman Kaywood stated it was her understanding that the 20% maximum was established to preclude mistakes of past Federal programs. Mayor Thom pointed out that a great deal would depend on the administration of the program by the proposed agency. Councilman Sneegas questioned whether the Housing Authority would have the authority to insure that welfare recipients are not mixed with those in assisted housing to avoid the creation of another declining neighborhood. Councilman Seymour was of the opinion that the Agency had that control, and noted that to many people the term "Housing Authority" generates an image of large slum housing projects. Under the 20% limitation, the greatest number of units which could be funded in this City would be 400, the majority of which would be existing properties, some in disrepair. The occupants of these units would be local people who already reside in the community. He noted the problems of senior citizens living on a total income of approximately $250 who do not have enough money for food after paying the current rental fees. Under this program, they would pay 25% of their total income for rent, with HUD making up the difference. Councilman Sneegas asked how the Agency would determine which people could be categorized as local citizens. Mr. Fernald advised that HUD does not allow a distinction to be made; the program consists of local housing for local people, and in any community there are people who may come in from other areas. To verify and approve every person who applies for housing assistance would create a problem under the guidelines. In response to question by Councilman Seymour, Mr. Fernald further advised that the City Council, seated as the Agency, could review the records for the program at any time, and could withdraw therefrom, phasing out the program with the exception of those units already established. HUD administers the program under a 20-year time frame, and under Section 8 the guidelines are the most flexible for all concerned that have ever been established. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-163: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-163 for ~doption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING THE EXISTENCE OF INSANITARY AND UNSAFE INHABITED DWELLING ACCOMMODATIONS, FINDING A SHORTAGE OF SAFE AND SANITARY DWELLING ACCOMMODATIONS, DECLARING THE NEED FOR A HOUSING AUTHORITY TO FUNCTION, AND DETERMINING THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY. Roll Call Vote: 75-290 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1., 1975~ 1:30 P.M. AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-163 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Seymour moved that the form of the Housing Authority will be a Community Development Commission, as outlined and recommended by the Redevelop- ment Director in his memorandum report dated April 1, 1975. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Thom, the staff was instructed to write a job description and proceed with the employment of an individual who will be putting together a package to be submitted to HUD, and to be included in the ensuing year's funding program. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Sneegas noted that the foregoing actions were taken to initiate the program within the time limits established by HUD, however, the City Council retains a prime interest in input forthcoming from the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce. PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1492: Application by Raymond G. Spehar for the following Code waivers, to permit a drive-thru restaurant on CL (SC) Zoned property at the northeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway was submitted together with application for exemption status from the require- ment to prepare an environmental impact report: a. Permitted signing. b. Minimum distance between free-standing signs. c. Minimum number of parking spaces. d. Minimum landscaped from setback. (Withdrawn) e. Minimum landscaped setback adjacent to a residential zone. (Withdrawn) f. Minimum tree landscaping. (Withdrawn) g. Prohibited roof-mounted equipment. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-37, recom- mended that the City Council declare subject project exempt from the requirement to file an environmental impact report and granted Conditional Use Permit No. 1492 in part only, granting waiver "c" for 46 parking spaces and denying waivers "a", "b", and "g", waivers "d", "e" and "f" having been withdrawn, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner(s) of subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim a 25-foot radius property line return at the northeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway. 2. That street lighting facilities along La Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway shall be installed as required by the Director of Public Utilities, and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file ~n the Office of the Director of Public Utilities and that a bond in an amount and form satis- factory 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 and relocated in accordance with approved plans on file with the Office of the Director of Public Works, as stipulated to by the petitioner. 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 commence- ment of structural framing. 5. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities. 6. That a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the north property line. 7. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 8. That an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City for the proposed encroachment in the storm drain easement adjacent to Imperial Highway. 9. In the event that 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. 75-291 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. 10. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2 and 3: provided, however, that the proposal shall be constructed in accordance with site development standards of the CL(SC) Zone, with'exception that a minimum of 46 parking spaces shall be permitted. 11. That Condition Nos. 1, 2, 8 and 9, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to the commencement of the activity authorized under this resolution, or prior to the time that the building permit is issued, or within a period of one year from the date hereof, whichever occurs first, or such further time as the Planning Commission and/or City Council may grant. 12. That Condition Nos. 3, 5, 6, 7 and 10, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. Appeal from action taken by the City Planning Commission was filed by Mr. David B. Garrison, Chief Project Coordinator, Carl Karcher Enterprises, Inc., and public hearing scheduled this date. Mr. Roberts described the location of subject property, the surrounding land uses and zoning. He reported that subject property is slightly under one acre in size and the applicant seeks conditional use permit to establish a drive-thru restaurant in conjunction with a restaurant operation, which will function in similar manner to that which is located at the northwest corner of Harbor Boulevard and Broadway. He reviewed the waivers from site development standards which were requested and regarding waivers "a" and "b" which pertain to signs, the applicant wishes to place a 25-foot free-standing pole sign at the corner of the property near the intersection of Imperial Highway and La Palma Avenue. The other free-standing sign proposed would be located on the northeasterly portion of the property and would not be visible from the street. The sign would carry the menu and prices for the drive-thru portion of the restaurant. He reiterated that free-standing signs are not permitted in the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone. In connection with the waiver requested from the minimum number of parking spaces, Mr. Roberts related that the most stringent interpretation of parking regulations for the drive-thru portion of the restaurant would require 58 spaces. However, because of the type of facility proposed it is impossible to segregate the drive-thru operation from the enclosed restaurant operation in order to formulate the appropriate number of parking spaces. Therefore, he advised that the number of parking spaces originally cited as required (58) could probably be considered excessive. He summarized that the Planning Commis- sion approved waiver "c" relating to parking allowing a reduction to 46 spaces and denied those waivers pertaining to free-standing si'~ns and roof-mounted equipment, these being prohibited in the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone. Councilman Pebley inquired whether the Planning Commission considered in their deliberations that the applicant runs a successful chain of restaurants and uses a certain identifying sign as a trademark in their establishments throughout California. Mayor Thom related that in other cities, fast-food restaurant facilities who use a particular sign or logo have been known to modify the size and/or intensity of their advertising displays to conform with local zoning or sign restrictions. The Mayor asked if the applicant or his agent were present and wished to address the Council. · Mr. Dave Garrison, Chief Project Coordinator, Carl Karcher Enterprises, Inc., referred to a letter submitted by Mr. Raymond G. Spehar, owner of the property asking that the requirement for 6-foot masonry wall be deferred for a temporary period of time until the property adjacent and to the north is either rezoned to a commercial use or developed. He further pointed out that one of the requirements of the conditional use permit was that the applicant obtain a license to encroach into the storm drain easement, with which they have com- plied, and there now appears to be a conflict of 4 inches, inasmuch as the Engineering Division requested the berm be reduced from the required 36 to 32 inches along Imperial Highway. 75-292 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUT. E.S -.Ap. ril 1~. 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Mr. Garrison advised that the basic reason they have appealed the action of the City Planning Commission on this conditional use permit is that Carl's Jr. is a fast-food restaurant whose livelihood depends on advertising, Since this particular property is in the situation of not having access from Imperial Highway, it is extremely necessary that they do have the proposed free-standing pole sign located in such a way that it addresses Imperial Highway and informs motorists of the location of the restaurant within sufficient time to make a right or left turn and enter subject property from La Palma Avenue. He indi- cated that they do not feel their free-standing pole sign is overbearing. He pointed out that there was a variance granted the gasoline station on the southeast corner of this intersection for a free-standing pole sign prior to the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone enactment, but with the knowledge that these regulations were to become effective. Mr. Garrison displayed a rendering of the proposed menu sign which is required for the operation of the drive-thru portion of the restaurant and would contain no advertising on the sign face. This menu sign is proposed to be 4~ feet high and the display area less than 16 square feet. With respect to the waiver requested to permit roof-mounted equipment, Mr. Garrison explained the particular difficulties encountered in attempting to incorporate all of the necessary restaurant equipment into a building without going to roof-mounted equipment. Usually the result is additional square footage in the facility which will in turn require more parking. He displayed a rendering of the solution proposed to conceal roof-mounted equipment on this structure, which consists of a second roof constructed of an open lattice work which creates no conflict with mechanical or building codes. At the conclusion of his presentation he also circulated a picture of the proposed pole sign. In reply to Councilwoman Kaywood, Mr. Garrison noted that the rendering of the proposed roof screen was not shown to the Planning Commission but the lattice work shield was verbally mentioned. Mr. Carl Karcher, 700 North Clementine Street, Anaheim, stressed that the fact that there is no ingress or egress from Imperial to this particular prop- erty makes the proposed 25-foot pole sign essential to the success of the restaurant facility. The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council either in favor or in opposition to Conditional Use Permit No. 1492, and there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. Councilman Sneegas referred to the various types of wall-mounted signs already located on certain buildings in the area of subject property which are also in the Scenic Corridor and indicated that in his opinion just because the sign is wall mounted does not necessarily mean it will fall within the perim- eters of good taste. He inquired whether this is the choice which will be left to the developer if the waivers regarding signing are denied. Mr. Roberts advised that the Scenic Corridor Zone permits wall signs when they do not exceed 10% of the wall area to which they are attached. Councilman Sneegas voiced the opinion that he would far rather see the proposed free-standing pole sign than something attached to the top of the building. He recognized that it is imperative in a business which deals with impulse buying that some type of advertising be displayed and he felt this proposed pole ~ign to be in good taste. Councilman Seymour agreed that a business does need signing and should have that right, but the question in this instance is what type of sign. He stated that the Planning Commission and City Council have already deliberated and have set forth in the provisions of the Scenic Corridor Zone that only wall signs would be permitted. If the Council Members now feel that a pole sign should be allowed, then he felt perhaps the Code is incorrect and should be amended. He stressed that the Council should be consistent in its policy making decisions. 75-293 .~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1, 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Council discussion ensued during which Councilmen Pebley and Sneegas indicated they would not like to force the applicant to use some other method of signing in order to assure the success of his business, since that would, in their opinion, be detrimental to the appearance of the building. Councilman Seymour contended that the applicant had not demonstrated a hardship which would justify the granting of the waivers requested pertaining to the free- standing pole sign and, therefore, unless the Council is willing to amend the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone, he could see no justification for granting the free-standing pole sign. Councilwoman Kaywood stated that if the requested free-standing pole sign were placed at Imperial Highway, she felt this would be misleading and confusing because it would lead a motorist to assume that there is an access there when in actuality there is not. Further, she pointed out there is no reason why a wall sign cannot be designed just as attractively as a pole sign. Councilman Seymour indicated he was prepared to offer a resolution approving the conditional use permit with the waivers requested, except the one free- standing pole sign and those which were withdrawn by the applicant, but first requested clarification from staff as to the discrepancy of 4 inches between the 32- and 36-foot encroachment as mentioned by Mr. Garrison. Mr. Roberts explained the provisions of the Code as they relate to land- scaping which call for a berm of 36 inches in height if landscaping width is reduced from the 20-foot requirement. It was suggested that perhaps the reason 32 inches was recommended by the City Traffic Engineer was to allow for site distance and if this is the case, then perhaps an amendment to the Code should be prepared for consideration by the City Council. Councilmen Pebley and Sneegas were still of the opinion that in this particular instance the free-standing pole sign would be more acceptable than wall sign. Councilman Seymour stated he would only agree to permitting the free-standing pole sign if Council were willing to change the standards set forth in the Scenic Corridor Zone to reflect that change in attitude. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Seymour, 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 requirment to prepare an environmental impact report. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-164: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-164 for adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 1492 in part: granting waiver "a" as it pertains to the menu sign only; denying waiver "b"; granting waiver "c" as recommended by the City Planning Commission; permitting waivers "d", "e", and "f" to be withdrawn by the applicant; the revised plans, as submitted, eliminates the need for waiver "g", subject to the recommendations of the City Planning Commission, amending Condition Nos. 6, 10, 11, and 12 thereof as follows: 6. That a six-foot masonry wall shall be installed along the north prop- erty line and a ten-foot wide landscaped strip shall be installed south of and adjacent to said wall within a period of two years from the date of this resolution, or at such time as the property immediately to the north develops for residential purposes, whichever occurs first; and that a bond in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim shall be posted with the City to guarantee the installation of said wall and landscaping. 10. That subject property shall be developed ~ubstantially in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit No. i (Revision No. 1), and Exhibit Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7; provided, however, that the proposal shall be constructed in accordance with site development standards of the CL (SC) Zone with exception that a minimum of 46 parking spaces shall be permitted; and that construction of the wall and landscaping along the north boundary may be deferred in accordance with the provisions of Condition No. 6 above; and that the menu board proposed in the northeast portion of the property shall be permitted. 75-294 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April it 1975~ 1:30 P.M. 11. That Condition Nos. 1, 2, 6, 8, and 9, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to the commencement of the activity authorized under this resolution, or prior to the time that the building permit is issued, or within a period of one year from date hereof, whichever occurs first or such further time as the Planning Commission and/or City Council may grant. 12. That Condition Nos. 3, 5, 7, and 10, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1492 IN PART. Roll Call Vote; AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pebley and Sneegas ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-164 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Seymour moved that the City Council recommend to the City Planning Commission that they review the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone as it pertains to signing, with particular reference to wall signs versus free- standing signs. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. To this motion, Councilman Thom voted "no". MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 74-75-28 (ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 145, TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 7587, REVISION NO. 1): Application by Anaheim Hills, Inc., requesting a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to RS-HS-22,000 on the west side of Hidden Canyon Road, south of Serrano Avenue, was submitted together with Environmental Impact Report No. 145, which is supplementary to Master E.I.R. No. 80. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-45, recom- mended that the City Council certify E.I.R. No. 145 as being in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and further recommended approval of Reclassification No. 74-75-28, subject to the following conditions: 1. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities. 2. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 3. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner satis- factory to the City Engineer. If, in the preparation of the site sufficient grading is required to necessitate a grading permit, no work on grading will be permitted between October 15th and April 15th unless all required off-site drainage facilities have been installed and are operative. Positive assurance shall be provided the City that such drainage facilities will be completed prior to October 15th. Necessary right-of-way for off-site drainage facilities shall be dedicated to the City, or the City Council shall have initiated condem- nation proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall be borne by the developer) prior to the commencement of grading operations. The required drainage facili- ties shall be of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff waters originating from higher properties through said property to ultimate disposal as approved by the City Engineer. Said drainage facilities shall be the first item of · construction and shall be completed and be functional throughout the tract and irom the downstream boundary of the property to the ultimate point of disposal prior to the issuance of any final building inspections or occupancy permits. Drainage district reimbursement agreements may be made available to the devel- opers of said property upon their request. 4. That grading, excavation and all other construction activities shall be conducted in such a manner so as to minimize the possibility of any silt originating from this project being carried into the Santa Ana River by storm water originating from or flowing through this project. Mr. Roberts described the location of subject property which has no front- age on Serrano Avenue. He reported that approximately three years ago, prior to adoption of the RS-HS-22,000 Zone, this 38-acre parcel was planned to be 75-295 Cic~ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1, 1975~ 1:30 P.M. developed in the RS-A-43,000 Zone, pursuant to Variance No. 2295 which was granted and permitted waivers of minimum lot area and width. The applicant is now proposing to develop in the RS-HS-22,000 Zone to construct a 34-1ot single- family subdivision. He pointed out that only three of the proposed lots have frontage on a private accessway. Mr. Roberts related that there was some staff concern because Avenida de Santiago in initial discussions was not proposed to be extended to the west. The Fire Department has considered the matter and they do agree that the manner in which traffic is proposed to be handled would be satisfactory on an interim basis, since a standard cul-de-sac is to be constructed at the westerly terminus of Avenida de Santiago until property further west is developed, at which time the street would be extended. Councilwoman Kaywood questioned the designation of equestrian and hiking trails on the south side of Avenida de Santiago, which would be in the jurisdic- tion o£ the County, rather than on the north side. Mr. Roberts explained this matter was discussed by the Planning Commission and that the primary reason the trails were shown originally on the north side was that the Planning Commission was concerned they might be deleted. However, Anaheim Hills, Inc. assured the Planning Commission that they do intend to install this section of the trails and in order to incorporate these into the overall system they should be located on the south side of Avenida de Santiago. A further reason presented was that the riding and hiking trails would not be in front of the first homes constructed and by the time the homes are built on the opposite side it will be well evident that there is an established equestrian and hiking trail in front of same. The Mayor asked if the applicant or his agent were present and wished to address the Council. Mr. John Millick, Vice President, Anaheim Hills, Inc., had no further com- ments, but offered to answer questions. In reply to Councilwoman Kaywood, he again reiterated that they do prefer to show the riding and hiking trails to the south side o£ the street and that because of the plans for marketing this entire area, it is necessary that the trail link up with the master hiking and riding trail system. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council in favor or in opposition to the proposed reclassification and there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 145 - CERTIFICATION: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Pebley, E.I.R. No. 145, supplementing Master E.I.R. No. 80, having been reviewed by the City staff and recommended by the City Planning Commission to be in compliance with City and State Guidelines and the State of California Environmental Quality Act, the City Council acting upon such information and belief does hereby certify that E.I.R. No. 145 is in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the City and State Guidelines. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-165: Councilwoman Kaywood offered 'Resolution No. 75R-165 for adoption, approving Reclassification No. 74-75-28 and authorizing the preparation of the necessary ordinance, changing the zone as requested, subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning,Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. 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. (74-75-28 - RS-HS-22,000) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-165 duly passed and adopted. 75-]96 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES, -.~pril 1, 1.975., 1:30 P.M. TENTATIVE MAP TRACT NO. 7587; REVISION 1 (RECLASSIFICATION NO. 74-75-287 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 145): Developer, Anaheim Hills, Inc.; property located on the west side of Hidden Canyon Road, south of Seranno Avenue; con- taining 34 proposed RS-HS-22,000 zoned lots. The City Planning Commission at their meeting held March 3, 1975, approved said tentative map tract subject to the following conditions: 1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 7587 (Revision No. 1) is granted subject to the approval of Reclassification No. 74-75-28. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subdivision, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. 3. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. 4. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. 5. That any proposed covenants, conditions and restrictions shall be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to City Council approval of the final tract map~ and~ further~ that the approved covenants~ conditions and restrictions shall be recorded concurrently with the final tract map. 6. That a firebreak(s) be constructed subject to the review and approval of the Fire Chief. 7. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 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. 9. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner satis- factory to the City Engineer. If, in the preparation of the site sufficient grading is required to necessitate a grading permit, no work on grading will i permitted between October 15th and April 15th unless all required off-site drainage facilities have been installed and are operative. Positive assurance shall be provided the City that such drainage facilities will be completed prior to October 15th. Necessary right-of-way for off-site drainage facilities shall be dedicated to the City, or the City Council shall have initiated condemnation proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall be borne by the developer) prior to the commencement of grading operations. The required drainage facilities shall be of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff waters originating from higher properties through said property to ultimate disposal as approved by the City Engineer. Said drainage facilities shall be the first item of construction and shall be completed and be functional throughout the tract and from the downstream boundary of the property to the ultimate point of disposal prior to the issuance of any final building in- spections or occupancy permits. Drainage district reimbursement agreements may be made available to the developers of said property upon their request. 10. That grading, excavation and all other construction activities shall be conducted in such a manner so as to minimize the possibility of any silt originating from this project being carried into the Santa Ana River by storm water originating from or flowing through this project. 11. That the alignment and terminal point of storm drains shown on this tentative tract map shall not be considered final. These drains shall be subject to precise design considerations and approval of the City Engineer. 12. If permanent street name signs have not been installed, temporary street name signs shall be installed prior to any occupancy. 13. That the proposed 10-foot riding and hiking trail shall be constructed on the south side of Avenida de Santiago, and that said riding and hiking trail be maintained by formulation of a maintenance district. 14. That Lot Nos. 23, 24, 25 and 26, served by the 20-foot wide private accessway, shall record a mutual ingress and egress easement to the owner of each lot, which mutual ingress and egress easement shall provide that said private accessway shall be maintained by each said property owner. Said perpetual easement agreement shall be submitted to the City Attorney's Office for review and approval; then be filed and recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder concurrently with the final tract map. 15. That a 6-foot decorative, openwork wall shall be constructed at the top of the slope adjacent to Hidden Canyon Road on Lot Nos. 6, 7, 8 and 9. Reasonable landscaping, including irrigation facilities, shall be installed in 75-297 City ttall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ .!975~ 1:30 P.M. the uncemented portion of the arterial highway parkway the full distance of said wail, plans for said landscaping to be submitted to and subject to the approval of the Superintendent of Parkway Maintenance. 16. That prior to approval of the final tract map, the petitioner shall make some provision, acceptable to the City Council, for the landscaping and maintenance of the slopes within and/or created by the development of this property. On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Pebley, Tentative Map, Tract No. 7587, Revision No. 1, was approved, subject to the recommendations of the City Planning Commission. MOTION CARRIED. VARIANCE NO. 2295 - TERMINATION: Request was submitted by Anaheim Hills, Inc., for termination of said Variance No. 2295 which was approved in part by the City Planning Commission pursuant to their Resolution No. PC71-207, to establish a 34-1ot subdivision northwest of the future extension of Avenida de Santiago and Hidden Canyon Road, southerly of Serrano Avenue. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-46, terminated Variance No. 2295. No further action was taken by the City Council. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 74-75-27: Application by John A. and Grace C. Steffy for change in zone from RM-1200 to CL at the southeast corner of South Street and Anaheim Boulevard, was submitted together with application for exemption status from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-44, recom- mended subject project be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report and further recommended approval of Reclassificat.~ n No. 74-75-27, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner(s) of subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim a strip of land 45 feet in width from the centerline of the street along Anaheim Boulevard, including a 15-foot property line return, for street widening purposes. 2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of $2.00 per front foot along Anaheim Boulevard and South Street for street lighting purposes. 3. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of 60¢ per front foot along Anaheim Boulevard and South Street for tree planting purposes. 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 commence- ment of structural framing. 5. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities. 6. That any parking area lighting shall be down-lighting from a maximum height of twelve feet (12'), which lighting shall be directed away from the property lines to protect the residential integrity of the area, as stipulated to by the developer. 7. That curbs shall be repaired along South Street as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer. 8. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 9. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans on file with the office of the Director of Public Works. 10. That all air-conditioning, refrigeration and any other mechanical equipment shall be properly shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties to achieve a maximum of 60 dbA at the property line, as stipulated to by the developer. 11. That the property owner(s) shall submit a letter of agreement to the City Attorney's Office for approval, said agreement to insure that in the event the adjacent property to the south is developed with a residential use, then a six-foot (6') high masonry wall shall be constructed along the south property line by the subject property owner(s) and said wall shall be reduced to thirty inches (30") within the setback area adjacent to Anaheim Boulevard, and said agreement shall be filed and recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 75-298 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1, 1975~ 1:30 P.M. 12. That subject property shall be developed precisely in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2 and 3, as stipulated to by the developer. 13. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, Condition Nos. 1, 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 year from the date hereof, or such further time am the City Council may grant. 14. That Condition Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. 15. That deliveries to the subject property shall be restricted to daylight hours between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., as stipulated to by the developer. Mr. Roberts described the location of the property and surrounding zoning. He reported that the applicant is requesting a change to the CL Zone with the expressed intent of developing a 3,500-square foot convenience market. He is not proposing the sale of liquor at this market, although they do intend to have off-sale wine. No customer seating will be provided in the building. The plans conform to all site development standards of the CL Zone. Councilwoman Kaywood inquired whether there were any objections received from the surrounding neighborhood, to which Mr. Roberts replied one person appeared in opposition at the Planning Commission hearing and later withdrew that objection. The Mayor asked if the applicant or his agent were present and satisfied with the recommendations of the City Planning Commission, and Mr. Robert Johnson of Santa Anita Development Corporation, 363 San Miguel, Newport Beach, replied affirmatively. He displayed a rendering of the proposed convenience market for Council. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council in favor or in opposition to the proposed reclassification; there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, 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. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-166: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 75R-166 for adoption, approving Reclassification No. 74-75-27, as recommended by the City Planning Commission and authorizing the preparation of the necessary ordinance, changing the zone as requested, subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. 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. (74-75-27 - CL) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-166 duly passed and adopted. VARIANCE NO. 854 - TERMINATION: On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, Variance No. 854, previously approved to permit a used car lot on the property included in Reclassification No. 74-75-27, was termi- nated. MOTION CARRIED. CONTINUED REQUEST - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 70-71-13, TRACT NO. 8783 - APPROVAL OF SPECIAL RECREATION FACILITY (PELANCONI PARK): Request continued from the meeting of March 18, 1975, for approval of special recreation facility on the Rancho Yorba development plan (original request submitted by Presley of Southern California, Grant Company of California, and Calprop Corporation). 75-299 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1, 1975~ 1:30 P.M. The City Clerk advised that a letter has been received dated March 17, 1975, from Wayne C. Spiekerman, Vice President, Calprop Corporation withdrawing their offer as their property has been sold. Additionally, the City Manager's Office reports that they have received telephone communication this date from the attorney representing the new owner requesting a two-week continuance. On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Thom, the City Council continued the request for approval of special recreation facility on the Rancho Yorba Development plan for three weeks to the meeting of April 22, 1975. MOTION CARRIED. EXTENSION OF TIME - SIGN PERMIT NO. SB-1542: Request of Mr. Peter K. Martin, Trent Wilson Advertising, 1540 East Edinger Avenue, Santa Ana, dated February 27, 1975, for a six-month extension of time to Sign Permit No. SB-1542, sign located at Solomon Drive and Santa Ana Canyon Road, was submitted for Council consideration. Mr. Roberts reported that this sign was established for promotion of Tract No. 7470 and has been in place since prior to the recently enacted amendments to the sign ordinance. It is 112 square feet, whereas the current regulations limit tract signs to 96 square feet in size. They are now seeking to retain this sign for use in connection with sales promotion of Tract No. 7419 which is adjacent, and for this purpose this existing sign would be considered an off- site tract sign at that location. Mr. Jim Levin, representing American National Housing, advised that they have 97 units just beginning construction in Tract No. 7419 and would like very much to be permitted to retain the subject sign until the end of the current calendar year. Councilman Seymour noted that the existing sign proposed for the time extension would conform in all respects to the new sign regulations except for the 96-square foot limitation, with which Mr. Roberts concurred. Mr. Levin stipulated that his firm would be agreeable to reducing tile sign display area to 96 square feet. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Pebley, extension of time to Sign Permit No. SB-1542 was approved, expiring December 31, 1975, subject to the applicant's stipulation to decrease the size of the advertising display area to 96 square feet. MOTION CARRIED. EXTENSION OF TIME - WORK ORDER NO. 830: Action on the extension of time to Work Order No. 830, Parkway Maintenance Office Building Addition, was continued to the meeting of April 15, 1975, at the request of the City Engineer, on motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Pebley. MOTION CARRIED. RECESS: Councilman Seymour moved for a ten-minute recess. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (4:30 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (4:40 P.M.) COMMUNICATION - THE INTERMODE GROUP, INC.: Mr. Norman H. Smedegaard, Attorney of the firm of Rutan & Tucker, 401 Civic Center Drive West, representing The Intermode Group, Inc., presented and read a communication to the City Council dated April 1, 1975, requesting that the City ente~ into an exclusive right to negotiate agreement with his client for development of a railroad station in Anaheim on the Santa Fe tracks and ancillary and related facilities and uses and the operation thereof. Mr. Smedegaard related some of the preliminary steps and discussions which have been undertaken by this group and noted that this activity is all prelim- inary and dependent upon the decision as to whether or not the commuter train run proposed in the tri-County program (San Diego, Orange, and Los Angeles) will stop in Anaheim. He indicated that they propose to construct this facility adjacent to the Santa Fe track near Anaheim Stadium parking lot and have learned there is sufficient right-of-way and vacant property to accomplish this. He indicated proposals may be forthcoming to utilize a portion of Anaheim Stadium parking lot and also for Federal or State funds in conjunction with the project. 75-300 City Hall~ Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ 1975~ .1:30 P.M. Councilman Seymour inquired whether the ancillary and related uses referred to in Mr. Smedegaard's communication all relate to trains or if this proposed exclusive right to negotiate would tie up transportation development rights for other modes of transportation. Mr. Smedegaard replied that this was not their intent at this time, but that they would hope to be considered for such rights when the time is appropriate. In reply to Councilman Sneegas, Mr. Smedegaard related that the time frame for the suggested exclusive period of negotiation is 120 days, but that this time frame is dependent upon successful negotiations with the Railroad for a stop in Anaheim. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Pebley, the City Council instructed the City Attorney's Office to prepare an exclusive right to negotiate agreement with The Intermode Group, Inc., for development of a rail- road station in Anaheim on the Santa Fe tracks and ancillary and related facili- ties and uses and the operation thereof, b~OTION CARRIED. PROPOSAL FOR ACQUISITION OF PARKING SPACES - CONVENTION CENTER: Mr. Bill Asawa, of the A.S.A.W.A. Corporation, Post Office Box 220, Westminster, was recognized by the Mayor and referred to his letter dated March 24, 1975, addressed to Mayor Thom which the Mayor had copied for the remainder of the Council, together with an explanatory memorandum. Mr. Asawa related that the property owners whom he represents indicated two years ago and again in January of 1974 that they would be willing to cooperate in some manner to develop additional parking facilities at the Anaheim Convention Center and they requested to be consulted for input when the matter of additional parking was considered. Since that time the property owners had received no communication and now have learned, via a newspaper article, that the Community Center Authority has tentatively committed itself to construction of a parking facility. Mayor Thom interjected in explanation, that the Community Center Authority has taken the position that they will not use any bond money to acquire further land for parking, therefore, Mr. Asawa's request today is addressed to the City Council and inquires whether they are amenable to acquiring the subject prop- erty out of bond or other funds. Mr. Asawa, utilizing a site plan of the Convention Center and surrounding area which was posted in the Council Chambers, pointed out the location of the property holdings which he represents, located south of the main existing park- ing area which would, if developed, form a continuation of the existing parking because of the location of this property in relationship to the primary median break on Convention Way. He also pointed out the location of the proposed parking structure. He stated that based on the Cost factor for construction of the parking facility, each of the spaces proposed would cost $1,800, however, the construction activity itself would tie up a portion of the parking area for some time. Conversely, he indicated that his clients' property could be developed without disturbing the existing parking in a nominal amount of time for approximately $1 per square foot and could accommodate approximately 1,900 cars. With respect to the question of the advisability of the City removing this 15.12 acres from the tax rolls, Mr. Asawa advised ~hat this property currently generates approximately $34,000 in taxes, but based on the figures issued in connection with the existing parking at the Convention Center, each parking space generates $100 per year. He cited the unique situation which the City of Anaheim finds itself in, i.e., having vacant available property adjacent to its convention facility. In conclusion, Mr. Asawa reported that the property owners whom he repre- sents feel that they can work with the City to provide for the acquisition and financing of the subject property and have offered to provide financing for up to 25 years. He indicated on the site plan the many other vacant land parcels in the surrounding area and also noted that the development of this subject property into a motel or hotel use is unlikely since the market for same appears to be saturated. 75-301 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ 1975.~ 1:30 P.M. Mayor Thom advised that additional parking spaces at the Convention Center was the subject of more than one discussion between the City Council and the Community Center Authority, the last being held in November of 1974, at which time, there being no quorum of the Council, the Community Center Authority discussed this matter on an informal basis with those Council Members present and advised them they were adopting the following positions: 1. That they did not feel a responsibility to provide 100% parking for the Convention Center. 2. That they would not be interested in acquiring any additional land for parking. 3. That they propose and recommend to develop the additional parking spaces needed by constructing a parking structure on the existing property. Subsequent to this, Mayor Thom advised that he understands Mr. Shroeder is ready to execute an agreement with a contractor to build this parking facility. Further, since the Community Center Authority has taken the position that they would not use any bond monies to acquire property for parking purposes, the question being posed by Mr. Asawa is whether or not the City Council is desirous of acquiring any of this property out of other funds or by other means. He noted that Mr. Murdoch has had some preliminary discussions as to the possibility of using a special doctrine fund approach, using the parking revenues to acquire additional property over an extended period of time and that he would probably have more information on this approach to present. However, the Mayor indicated that Council does need to decide at this time whether or not they wish staff to pursue any of these concepts to purchase the property or do they wish to drop the subject. Mr. Eidelson, 17881 Rommell, Santa Aha, one of the property owners involved was recognized by the Mayor and he related some of his past negotiations with the former City Attorney Joseph Geisler, Mr. Murdoch, and Tom Liegler. stated that it would prove a financial advantage to both the City and himself if an arrangement could be made whereby the City pays nothing on the capital investment to acquire his property, but pays on the interest amount only for the next 10 years. He indicated he would be willing to discount the price of the land, which has been estimated at $6 per square foot, by as much as one- half, or $3 per square foot, because of the tax savings he might expect from this arrangement. He indicated that he would have made this offer known to Mr. Shroeder had he been aware of the meetings being conducted, however, he found out about these through the press and after the fact. Mr. Eidelson urged that the Council authorize the City staff to analyze this proposal and compare it with the cost of construction of the parking facility to determine which is the most feasible method for providing the additional necessary parking spaces. Council discussion regarding the proposal ensued during which Councilman Pebley indicated he could not understand why the Community Center Authority would construct parking spaces in a structure if it were possible to develop a flat lot,and Councilman Seymour indicated that their evaluation includes the consideration that using this additional property for parking prohibits any development from occurring on same. Councilman Sneegas was of the opinion that from a business standpoint, if he were not representing a municipal corporation, this proposal would represent one of the best arrangements ever, since the City could acquire the property and utilize it for parking for some period of time, and then make it available for some other use such as a hotel or a motel. The revenues generated by these additional parking spaces could in the meantime have paid for the construction of a parking structure facility. However, he pointed out that acting in this manner is very likely to be misconstrued by the citizens. Councilman Seymour pointed out that he would be concerned as to whether or not the City would divest itself of the property after a period of time since, in his experience, government is very reluctant once it owns real estate to sell same. He further indicated that he had requested some time ago, and has not received, financial projections that would show how much revenue the City might be giving up should it acquire this property since taxes would not be 75-302 <]itv Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. collected on same and further in this data some assumptions need to be made, i.e., that a motel development would be constructed on the property in time periods of three, five, seven and ten years. This type of financial projection would provide a good basis for an intelligent businesslike decision and so far he has not seen this information and to his knowledge neither has the Community Center Authority. Mr. Eidelson related that he has received unfavorable comments from a motel owner and in talking to developers of the Union Bank building regarding the inconvenience and unsightliness of parking structures. He noted that many individuals would hesitate or even go out of their way to avoid using this. Councilman Seymour inquired whether Mr. Asawa had made the same proposal as indicated to the Council this date to Mr. Shroeder and the Community Center Authority, to which Mr. Asawa replied affirmatively. At the conclusion of discussion, Councilman Seymour moved that the City Council request the Community Center Authority: 1) To postpone the signing of any contract for a two-week period from March 31 through April 14, 1975; and 2) that they meet jointly with the City Council to consider Mr. Asawa's proposal on Monday, April 7, 1975 at 4:00 p.m. at the Convention Center. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. ORDINANCE NO. 3411: Councilman Seymour offered Ordinance No. 3411 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING TITLE 17, CHAPTER 17.06 AND ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER 17.06 RELATING TO HILLSIDE GRADING. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3411 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3413 - AMENDMENT TO TITLE 6, ESTABLISHMENT OF PERMIT FEES FOR INSPECTION OF FARM LABOR CAMPS: Councilman Sneegas voiced his opposition and concern over the methodology to be used in the establishment of fees for inspec- tion of farm labor camps, i.e., the per capita assessment of $6. He contended that it takes an inspector no longer to inspect a camp where there are 10 or 100 employees, however, with the proposed fee schedule the County will receive in the latter case a fee which is ten times greater. He indicated that he recognizes the need for such inspections but feels this to be an unfair taxation. Mr. Watts advised that the City has contracted with Orange County to carry out enforcement of the farm labor camp standards and the ordinance proposed for first reading is that document which the County requested each contracting city adopt. He suggested that if Council wishes to go ahead with first reading, he could make further report on these fees at the next meeting. Councilman Sneegas thereupon offered Ordinance No. 3413 for first reading and requested that the City Attorney report back with further information prior to adoption of said ordinance. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 6 BY ADDING CHAPTER 6.95 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY. (Permit fees for Farm Labor Camps; farm labor camp defined, enforcement responsibility, permit to operate fees, and reinspection fees) CONTINUED REQUEST - ANAHEIM SEWER AND UTILITY SERVICES TO PROPERTY IN BUENA PARK (BUENA PARK VARIANCE NO. 714): On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Seymour, the request submitted by Mr. William Rossworn for City of Anaheim sewer and utility services to property located at the westerly terminus of Savanna Street, in the City of Buena Park adjacent to the City of Anaheim, was continued to the meeting of April 15, 1975. MOTION CARRIED. 75-303 Hall; Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1, 1975, 1:30 P.M. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the following actions were authorized in accordance with the reports and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda: (Item Nos. 1 through 3) i. PUBLIC DANCE AND AMUSEMENT DEVICES PERMITS: The following permits were granted subject to the recommendations of the Chief of Police: a. Public Dance Permit for the Santa Ana Police Benevolent Association and Tustin Police Association Benefit Show and Dance to be held at the Anaheim Convention Center, 800 West Katella Avenue, April 18, 1975, from 10:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. (Jack D. George, Applicant) b. Amusement Devices Permit for one cigarette machine, one juke box and one pool table to be located at the Bavarian Inn, 2820 Ball Road. (James T. Moore, Applicant) c. Amusement Devices Permit for one pool table and one pinball game to be located at the Honey Doll, 300 West Lincoln Avenue. (James T. Moore, Applicant) 2. CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims were denied and referred to the insurance carrier: a. Claim submitted by Larry D. Robertson for injuries, loss, disfigurement and punitive damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions of the Anaheim ?olice Department, on or about December 21, 1974. b. Claim submitted by Karen L. Morris for loss purportedly sustained as a result of actions of the Anaheim Police Department, on or about February 7, 1975. c. Claim submitted by Joseph G. Shea for damage sustained to property purportedly as a result of actions of Anaheim Police Officers, on or about March 3, 1975. d. Claim submitted by Ron Cogswell for damage sustained purportedly as a result of collision with Anaheim Police vehicle, on or about March 14, 1975. 3. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed: a. Community Center Authority - Minutes - March 3, 12, and 17, 1975. b. Anaheim Park and Recreation Commission - Minutes - February 20, 1975. c. Library Board - Minutes - HIGHLIGHTS - Joint Meeting with City Council, February 10, 1975. d. Financial and Operating Reports for the month of February, 1975 for the Anaheim Public Library and the City Treasurer's Office. e. Community Redevelopment Commission - Minutes - February 19, 1975. f. City of Pico Rivera - Resolution No. 1895 - Opposing the passage of Senate Bill 275. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-167 - OPPOSING PASSAGE OF SENATE BILL 1 AND SENATE BILL 175: Councilwoman Kaywood requested that correspondence received from the City of Gardena comprised of a minute resolution opposing passage of Senate Bill 1 and Senate Bill 2 be removed from the Consent Calendar Agenda and offered Resolution No. 75R-167 for adoption, declaring the City Council of the City of Anaheim in opposition to passage of Senate Bill 1 and Senate Bill 175. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM EXPRESSING ITS OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 1, AND SENATE BILL 175. ° Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-167 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NOS. 75R-i68 THROUGH 75R-174: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution Nos. 75R-168 through 75R-174, both inclusive, for adoption in accordance with the reports, recommendations and certification furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda: 75-304 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTEg ..- AP.ril 1..,. 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-168 - DEEDS OF EASEMENT: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (The Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Company; David A. Whitehead, et al.; The Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Company; Jed Development, Inc.; Harry Fries et ux.; Horace W. Hempshall, et ux.; Canyon Rim Investment Company; James Emmi et ux.; Anaheim Hills, Inc. & Texaco Anaheim Hills, Inc.; S.I.R. Developers, Inc.; Anaheim Hills, Inc. & Texaco Anaheim Hills, Inc.; Yorba Orange Growers Associa- tion; Woodbine Corporation; Country Hall of Fame, Inc. & Albertson's Inc.; Frances M. Kordish; Jarrold A. Petraborg, et ux.; Oswald Zemitis et ux.; Richard J. Du Bols et ux.) RESOLUTION NO. 75R-169 - WORK ORDER NO. 731-A: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE MODIFICATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SAFETY LIGHTING AT VARIOUS LOCA- TIONS IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 731-A; 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 - April 24, 1975, 2:00 P.M.) RESOLUTION NO. 75R-170 - WORK ORDER NO. 732-A: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SAFETY LIGHTING AT THE INTERSECTION OF CERRITOS AVENUE AND NUTWOOD STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 732- A; 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 DIRECT- ING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CON- STRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be Opened - April 24, 1975, 2:00 P.M.) RESOLUTION NO. 75R-171 - WORK ORDER NO. 733-B: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SAFETY LIGHTING AT THE INTER- SECTION OF SUNKIST STREET AND WAGNER AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 733-B; 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 - April 24, 1975, 2:00 P.M.) RESOLUTION NO. 75R-172 - WORK ORDER NO. 734-B: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SAFETY LIGHTING AT THE INTERSECTION OF BALL ROAD AND EMPIRE STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 734-B; 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 - April 34, 1975, 2:00 P.M.) RESOLUTION NO. 75R-173 - WORK ORDER NO. 748-B: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS & SAFETY LIGHTING AT THE INTERSECTION OF KATELLA AVENUE AND DOUGLAS ROAD, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 748-B; 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 DIRECT- ING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CON- STRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be Opened - April 24, 1975, 2:00 P.M,) 75-305 City Hail, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April ir 1975~ 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-174 - WORK ORDER NO. 713-B: 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: THE SUNKIST STREET AND LINCOLN AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 713-B. (Steiny and Company, Inc.) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 75R-168 through 75R-174, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. LIFELINE UTILITY RATES: Councilwoman Kaywood acknowledged receipt of memorandum from the Utilities Director dated March 18, 1975, describing the status of the Lifeline Utility Rate Study. ESTABLISHMENT OF GOLF COMMITTEE: Councilman Seymour indicated his agreement with the action taken by the Council during his absence at the meeting of March 25, 1975, authorizing a Management Practices Audit of the two municipal golf courses because he feels the data provided to date by City staff is totally inadequate to enable the Council to make an intelligent business or investment decision on this matter. Therefore, Councilman Seymour stated if there is not sufficient expertise on the City staff to properly counsel with regard to financial decisions of this magnitude, then such guidance must be sought from the public sector until such time as the Council may decide to have private enterprise operate these courses. He proposed that the Council initiate a seven member golf commission with representative membership from the interested men's and women's golf clubs at the Anaheim Municipal and Anaheim Hills Golf Courses, and further that some public members, ideally businessmen, be included who would view the golf course operation as a business enterprise. He indicated he had discussed this golf commission concept with the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce and they are in agree- ment. Such a commission he felt should operate in an advisory capacity to develop data which would enable sound businesslike decisions. The City Attorney advised that unless the Council intends this commission to be of a temporary nature, it would be appropriate to create such commission by ordinance. Councilman Seymour was of the opinion that until Arthur Young & Company completes the studies of the golf courses that this body should remain in com- mittee form. Councilman Seymour moved that the City Council initiate a seven-member golf commission and that Council be prepared to name individuals to same in two-week period; that this commission remain in committee form until Arthur Young & Company completes the Management Audit of the golf courses; that the City Attorney be instructed to draft a document setting forth the advisory responsibilities of such golf committee. At the suggestion of Councilman Thom, Councilman Seymour agreed to amend his foregoing motion to include that one of the goals to be established for the golf commission be to formulate a method with which to divorce golf course functions completely from all City departmental ties, setting these courses up as separate independent activities. Councilman Thom seconded the motion as amended. MOTION CARRIED. RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION: Councilman Thom moved to recess to Executive Session. Councilman Seymour seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (6:00 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (6:12 P.M.) 75-306, City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 1~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. APPOINTMENT - COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Pebley, Mr. Stewart Moss, 1019 Via Vista, Anaheim, was appointed to serve on the Community Redevelopment Commission, filling the unexpired term of Mr. I. Gene McDaniel, said term ending June 30, 1977. MOTION CARRIED. APPOINTMENT - SOCIAL SERVICES AD HOC COMMITTEE: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, Mr. Joel Klein, 2200 East Lizbeth Avenue, Anaheim, was appointed to serve in the place of Dorothy Cohen on the Social Services ad hoc Committee. MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Pebley moved to adjourn to Monday, April 7, 1975, 4:00 P.M., at the Anahei~ Convention Center for a joint meeting with the Community Center Authority. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 6:15 P.M. City Cleg~