Loading...
1975/07/2275-649 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1975, 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: .None PRESENT: ACTING ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: William Griffith CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts CITY CLERK: Alona M. Hougard UTILITIES DIRECTOR: Gordon W. Hoyt PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Garry O. McRae PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: Thornton Piersall DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR: Ronald Thompson AUDITOR: Don Henry ZONING SUPERVISOR: Annika Santalahti Mayor Thom called the meeting to order at 1:30 P.M. and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. INVOCATION: Reverend Paul Keller of the First Presbyterian Church gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Ralph G. Sneegas led the assembly in the Fledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Thom and unani- mously approved by the City Council: "Society of Industrial Realtors Week" - July 21 through 27, 1975. MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council Regular Meeting held June 10, 1975, were approved on motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour. 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. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. REPORT - FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City in the amount of $963,410.69, in accordance with the 1975-76 Budget, were approved. UTILITIES DEPARTMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR ARTHUR YOUNG & COMPANY RECOMMENDATIONS: Mr. Gordon Hoyt presented Council Members with copies of the implementation plan for recommendations of Arthur Young & Company in the Utilities Department. He advised that this plan represents the efforts of many Utilities Department employees who have tackled this task with a high degree of enthusiasm. He advised that the plans for implementation have been discussed with Mr. Jim LeSieur of Arthur Young & Company who has no significant disagreement. Mr. Hoyt reported that there is some additional funding required to initiate some of the recommended programs, which amounts are identified in his cover memorandum dated July 21, 1975, incorporated into the implementation plan docu- ment. He reported that he is not asking for Council action on the funding recommendations at this time because he has not yet had an opportunity to dis- cuss them with the Finance Director. Mr. Hoyt advised that a substantial por- tion of the recommendations Arthur Young & Company made for the Utilities Depart- ment were based on consulting work performed by them and implemented at Florida Light and Power. Consequently, it is the intent of the Utilities Department to send the Electrical and Water Superintendents and the Management Services Manager together with Mr. Britton of Arthur Young & Company to Florida Light and Power Company for a first hand look at the manner in which they implemented similar recommendations. Therefore, if this meets with Council approval, Mr. Hoyt reported they would like to discuss the implementation plan at a Council meeting in early September, after the Council has had an opportunity to review same, and after the field trip to Florida Light and Power. By general consent the Council concurred with Mr. Hoyt's suggestion that the implementation plan be scheduled for discussion and possible action on the funding recommendations in September. 75-650 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NOS. 75R-367 THROUGH 75R-369 - ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW JOB CLASSIFICATIONS: Mr. Garry McRae reported on the recommended establishment of four new job classifications as follows: Housing Manager/Negotiator; Redevelopment Planning Supervisor; Circulation Supervisor; and Show Wagon Operator. Mr. McRae explained the justifications presented for these recommended job classifications, noting that those positions relating to Redevelopment and Housing reflect the state of flux which the newly-organized department is in. The Circulation Supervisor position is recommended because the duties and responsibilities of the Principal Library Clerks have expanded significantly. The part-time job class of Show Wagon Operator is consistent with the Arthur Young & Company recommendation to utilize part-time employees and cut down on full-time employee over-time hours. RESOLUTION NOS. 75R-367 THROUGH 75R-369: On report and recommendation of the Personnel Director, Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution Nos. 75R-367 through 75R-369, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-367: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF T~E CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 74R-$21 ESTABLISHING NEW JOB CLASSIFICATIONS AND RATES OF PAY. (Redevelopment Planning Supervisor assigned to Salary Schedule X1045, $1,490.67 - $1,811.33; Housing Manager/Negotiator assigned to Salary Schedule X763, $1,088.53- $1,322.53) RESOLUTION NO. 75R-368: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 74R-520 AND ESTABLISHING A NEW JOB CLASSIFICATION. (Circulation Supervisor assigned to Salary Schedule X583 B-E, $873.60 - $1,010.53) RESOLUTION NO. 75R-369: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 75R-104 AND ESTABLISHING A NEW JOB CLASSIFICATION. (Show Wagon Operator assigned to Salary Schedule P/T 461 $3.79 to $4 61 per hour) ' ' 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-367 through 75R-369, both inclusive duly passed and adopted. ' RESOLUTION NO. 75R-370 - PRESCHOOL ASSISTANT TRAINING PROGRAM FUNDS: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-370 for adoption, authorizing an amendment to the existing contract with North Orange County Regional Occupational Programs to authorize the expenditure of $3,192 in supplementary CETA funds to operate the Preschool Assistance Training Program. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING COMPREHENSIVE EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ACT (CETA) BUDGET MODIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING DISBURSE- MENT OF FUNDS FOR APPROVED ACTIVITIES. (increase in funding - $3,192.00) 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-370 duly passed and adopted. NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES MEETING: Mr. Griffith reported that Mr. William Morgan, who represents the Consortium Cities in Washington, has advised that there is a savings in registration fee of $25 with early registration for the National League of Cities meeting to be held in Florida this year. 75-651 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. A poll of the Council was taken and it was determined that no City Council Members are planning to attend. REPORT - LETTER OF INTENT - ORANGE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: (Construction of elementary school and other public facilities at Nohl Ranch Road and Imperial Highway.) Mr. Watts reported that the letter agreement approved by the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency at their meeting of July 8, 1975 has been executed by the Orange Unified School District and returned. He advised that this will be followed by some formal agreements to be entered into between the two parties in the near future. REPORT - LITIGATION - FREEWAY COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES VS CITY OF ANAHEIM: (Reclass- ification No. 71-72-21) Mr. Watts reported that the litigation filed against the City of Anaheim by Freeway Commercial ProPerties was tried and the parties thereto entered into some stipulations which resulted in resolution of the law- suit. Mr. Watts related that the conditions of zonin$ in relationship to these cases provided for an access point across the northerly portion of Mr. Rinker's property for the Freeway Commercial Properties' parcel, and in addition, provided an accessway from Santa Ana Canyon Road onto the southerly portion of Freeway Properties. Mr. Watts reported that the Findings of Fact basically confirm that these easements do exist in favor of Freeway Commercial Properties, and that so long as they exist there is a relinquishment to any legal claim by Freeway Commercial Properties for access to both Santa Aha Canyon Road and Imperial Highway. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-371 - EMPLOYMENT OF COMMUNITY ORCHESTRA DIRECTOR: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 75R-371 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT FOR THE EMPLOYMENT OF JOHN SAWYER, AN INDIVIDUAL. (Community Orchestra Director) 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-371 duly passed and adopted. RUBBISH CONTRACTOR'S RATE INCREASES: Memorandum from the Director of Public Works dated July 2, 1975 was submitted together with supportive information and correspondence from both refuse disposal contractors regarding the recommended rate increases. The City Clerk submitted a recommendation adopted by the Parks and Recrea- tion Commission at their July 17, 1975 meeting that the City Council pass on the increase in trash collection costs to the consumer so that money would be available for construction of a Community Recreation Building. The Director of Public Works recommended that effective July 1, 1975, the Warren W. Jaycox Company be granted an increase of $.25 per unit and Anaheim Disposal Inc. be granted an increase of $.04 per barrel. This recommendation would provide a 20% increase for each of the contractors. It is further recom- mended that these increases be granted for an interim period ending January 31, 1976 to permit sufficient time for a certified audit to be presented to the City in accordance with recommendation submitted by the City Auditor. Mr. Raul Rangel, Vice President of Warren W. Jaycox Company, requested clarification regarding the independent certified audit which has been requested. He advised that there is no provision in the agreement between their firm and the City, nor has there ever been, which calls for a certified audit. Mayor Thom stated that the Jaycox Company, as a contractor with the City, should make all books accessible for inspection by the City Audit team. 75-652 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Mr. Rangel replied that the books and records were made available to the City Auditor who has reviewed same and now indicates that the company should provide a certified audit by an independent firm at company expense. Mayor Thom stated that as long as the books and records are open to the City Auditor it would seem that the necessary information to substantiate the increase in rates requested is available. Mr. Rangel related that their firm has averaged a rate adjustment of 4% annually, whereas the cost of living increase has exceeded an average of 10% for the last three years. He cited increases in fuel from 10¢ to 28¢ per gallon (pre-taxes); truck costs have risen from $33,000 to $43,000 and a pro- jected insurance rate increase of 100% will become an actuality this year. The recent labor contract reflects a 20% increase. He contended that these figures alone would support the request for an increase which amounts to 6¢ per pick-up. Mr. Rangel further gave some comparative charges made by refuse collection companies in other Orange County cities. He advised that if his firm is granted the requested increase it would bring their charge up to $1.55 per unit as compared to $1.68 in Santa Ana and $1.98 in Huntington Beach. Councilman Seymour stated that without any further input he had no objection to the requested increase in charges. He emphasized that although he is inclined to vote favorably on a rate increase to the trash collection contractors, he remains strongly opposed to passing this increase on to the customers. He recalled that the Council adopted a position at the time the 1975-76 Budget was approved of utilizing the identified surplus funds to offset increases in sanitation, utility rates and employee salary increases. Councilman Pebley moved that the recommended rate increases be granted the Warren.W. Jaycox Company and Anaheim Disposal, Inc. as recommended by the Public Works Director. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. (No vote was taken on this motion. Councilman Seymour requested, prior to voting on the foregoing motion that the Auditor who has requested that the independent certified audit be performed, justify his recommendation. Mmyor Thom stated he too would be amenable to granting the requested rate increases predicated upon the increased costs of business as presented, but agreed with Councilman Seymour that the Council should first hear from the Auditor on what concerns him, or what information he feels is missing. Following a brief interval Mr. Don Henry, the City Auditor, arrived in the Council Chamber and explained that the reason he has recommended an audit by an independent firm is that the cost figures supplied by the trash contractors are based on old cost figures which have never been audited. To substantiate these figures, to the point where he could recommend they be accepted, would require an audit which might take up to 3 months for the Jaycox firm because of the very complicated balance sheet used and number of investments involved. He stated that he has neither the time nor sufficient help to perform the type of audit which should be done. Councilman Seymour suggested that the audit be performed in conjunction with preparation of their annual statement and income tax, the contractors paying for that portion which they would have to pay in any case, and the City being responsible for the balance. In this manner the City would have the audit he felt technically should be performed. He suggested that the City Auditor and the contractor's accountants meet and discuss the setting of a price on the audit within a 90-day period. In reply to Councilman Seymour, Mr. Henry speculated that the audit might conservatively cost $5,000, depending on the audit procedure used. He stated that this is an expense routinely encountered in the cost of doing business. Councilman Sneegas inquired whether the contract agreements with these firms provide for periodic increases. 75-653 City Hail, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1975, 1:30 P.M. Mr. Watts replied that there is no specific provisions for same; that the contracts were executed in the late 1950's and that periodically, when costs have increased, amendments have been authorized to change the rates. Mr. Piersall added that the last amendment, increasing rates by 4%, was related to an increase in labor costs. Councilman Sneegas stated that he is concerned over the principle of requiring an audit of a private firm in connection with a rate increase, par- tially because this was not set forth in the original contract and also because, in effect, what the audit will determine is whether the company is making a fair profit and that information could be used when negotiating a new contract. He felt it would be more appropriate to include the audit requirement as a condition under which a new contract is written. Councilman Seymour voiced the opinion that any firm which contracts to perform a service for a governmental agency should be subject to audit as it is the people's right to be assured that the contractor is keeping straight books. Councilman Sneegas agreed that if chicanery is suspected a thorough and complete audit should be performed, but in this situation, since the requested rate increase does not appear to be beyond what is reasonable, he finds an audit is difficult to justify. Mr. Henry stated that no chicanery is suspected; that the recommendation for audit was made purely to substantiate and validate old cost figures which are no longer valid. He noted that an audit procedure is necessary to allocate the various costs between contracts held by a company. Mr. Rangel stated that he could see no reason for the audit since the con- tractor's rates are in line with what is being charged in other cities or lower. Councilman Seymour commented that government is in a period of openness and credibility and that it behooves them to demonstrate to the people as much as possible that there is no covering up. He felt the $5,000 to $10,000 maximum cost would be justifiable. Councilman Sneegas reiterated that he had no problems with anything but the principle of probing into the private sector. He questioned whether the City Council will be requiring an audit each time they purchase goods, services or materials. Councilman Seymour stated that the audit function would not be probing but validating information. He further responded to Councilman Sneegas that when the City purchases goods and materials by informal or sealed bid procedure, that is an entirely different situation. He noted that the contracts for trash collection are not bid each year. Councilman Thom interjected that all other City contracts require a certified annual statement, noting particularly the concessionaires at the golf courses. Councilman Sneegas stated that he feels the audits are justified in that instance because those companies are collecting money for the City and paying the City its share from the proceeds. Councilman Seymour moved that the requested increases be granted with the qualifications that the City Auditor and accountants of the two disposal firms get together and draft a price for such audits and submit same to Council for approval in September indicating the portion of the cost which would be borne by the contractors in the normal process of business. The foregoing motion died for lack of a second. Mr. S. M. Taormina, Jr., General Manager, Anaheim Disposal Inc., advised that his company is most concerned with implementation of the requested increase because of the increase in their operating costs. He suggested, if there is a 75-654 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. problem in substantiating their cost figures, that it would be easier to accom- plish this at no additional cost, by having the City Auditor work with their accountants for one or two days until the Auditor is satisfied that the informa- tion is substantiated. Mr. Dick'T~o~mina st&ted..that.he felt[the audit will reveal that' their rates for refuse collection should be higher. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-372: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-372 for adoption granting the rate increase to Anaheim Disposal Inc. as requested, and as recommended by the Director of Public Works, effective July 1, 1975; and providing £or independent certified audit to substantiate cost figures submitted by January 31, 1976, subject to finalization of costs of said audit and approval of said costs by the City Council. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR COLLECTION.AND DISPOSAL OF RUBBISH AND WASTE MATERIAL BY THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND C. V. TAORMINA DBA ANAHEIM DISPOSAL COMPANY, (NOW KNOWN AS ANAHEIM DISPOSAL INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION), AND PROVIDING FOR AN AUDIT TO SUBSTANTIATE COST INCREASE BY JANUARY 31, 1976. 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-372 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-373: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-373 for adoption granting the rate increase to the Warren W. Jaycox Company as requested, and as recommended by the Director of Public Works, effective July 1, 1975; and providing for independent certified audit to substantiate cost figures submitted by January 31, 1976, subject to finalization of costs of said audit and approval of said costs by the City Council. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE, RUBBISH AND WASTE MATERIAL BY THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND WARREN W. JAYCOX, AND PROVIDING FOR AN AUDIT TO SUB- STANTIATE COST INCREASE BY JANUARY 31, 1976. 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-373 duly passed and adopted. Councilwoman Kaywood introduced for discussion the recommendation made by the Parks and Recreation Commission; i.e., that the increased costs not be absorbed by the City, but rather passed on to the customer and the $268,000 so generated be earmarked for the purpose of constructing a community center building in Modjeska Park. She noted that the cost of the building is $425,000 so that within a year and a half it would be paid for. She felt this facility would be a tremendous asset to the entire community. Councilwoman Kaywood further noted that a portion of this facility would be a room with slanted floor and seating capacity for 200 which would be used by performing arts groups. She referred to a petition presented to Council about one year ago in favor of the construction of a community center facility in ModJeska Park, which contained 900 signature of individuals living within walking distance to the park. 75-655 _~ity ~all, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Councilwoman Kaywood also remarked that this sum is very easily identified. She noted that for the cost. of 25¢ per month per family, which is less than a package of cigarettes, the City could have a facility which would be a tangible asset to the community. Councilman Seymour advised that he agrees there is a high priority need for a Community Center in Modjeska Park and also agrees that such Center should be built on a pay-as-you-go basis. He therefore stated he would be inclined to favor the proposal except for the fact that only 30 days ago a majority of the Council took the position that if possible they would forestall any increases in sanitation and utility rates by absorbing these costs from the 3~ million dollar surplus fund. He felt it would be hypocritical to change this position now. He noted that Councilwoman Kaywood was not one of those who voted favor- ably on adoption of this policy, but reminded the remaining Council Members that this is the policy they supported less than a month ago. Mayor Thom indicated he supported the construction of a Community Center in Modjeska Park. He also noted it was undeniable that the Council did adopt a position, as cited by Councilman Seymour~ that the reason for the reserve fund was to absorb rate increases. He therefore indicated he could not, in good conscience, reverse his position on a policy agreed to less than 30 days ago. Councilman Seymour suggested that this project might be funded this fiscal year, once the fuel cost adjustment situation and other factors are better known; and that the funds might become available in the same manner as the funding for the two branch libraries currently under construction. Councilwoman Kaywood reiterated that this project would be a benefit to all of the citizens and she felt if a poll were taken, there would be no objec- tion to it. She stated that even with the increased fees to the contractors the City still has a very low rate for trash collection in comparison to other Cities in the County. Councilman Pebley remarked that he was not present at the time this policy of absorbing the increases through the surplus fund was adopted, but advised that his policy is, and has always been, that in order to retain balance in business increased costs have to be passed on to the consumer and that it is good, sound business to do so. Councilman Seymour stated that he was not at all surprised at Councilman Pebley's attitude in this matter. He recalled that approximately one year ago when the City Council was faced with a recommendation to raise the electrical rates to generate an additional 1.8 million dollars, Councilman Pebley voiced the same opinions and labeled any deviation from his own policy "financial idiocy" for which the citizens would pay heavily. Councilman Seymour pointed out that not only did the citizens not pay the 1.8 million dollars in electrical rate increases, they have not paid for any others until the one most recently adopted. Councilman Seymour voiced the opinion that in government increases should not be passed on until it is assured that costs are cut to the fullest extent. Councilman Pebley commented that because the City did not collect the 1.8 million dollars in electrical rates and because of the budget reductions, the City has cut way back on maintenance levels, street and alley improvements, etc. He voiced the opinion that two to five years in the future these decreased levels of service will become noticeable and ultimately it will be disclosed that the taxpayers did not save any money. Councilman Seymour stated that not one foot of street or alley improvement was cut from the 1975-76 Budget. He remarked that he feels the City should develop a long-term financing plan for capital improvements, noting that he did not approve of collecting funds, dumping them into the general fund and then tapping off of this account for salaries, wages and fringe benefits and other 75-656 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. categories. Councilwoman Kaywood responded that the proposal was to earmark these funds strictly for capital'improvement and Councilman Seymour assured her that he approved of that portion of the proposal. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-374: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-374 for adoption reaffirming the position taken by the City Council at the time of approval of the 1975-76 Budget, that increases in sanitation charges, electrical rates and adjustments to employee salaries and wages not be passed on to the citizens as long as the surplus £und established can absorb said increases. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REAFFIRMING ITS POSITION THAT INCREASES IN SANITATION CHARGES PERMITTED BY RESOLUTION NOS. 75R-372 AND 75R-373 NOT BE PASSED ON TO THE PUBLIC AS LONG AS THE CITY SURPLUS FUND CAN ABSORB SAID INCREASE. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood and Pebley ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-374 duly passed and adopted. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - HOUSEMOVING PERMIT: Application for housemoving permit submitted by Mr. John Krajacic, to allow the moving of a structure from 2174 West Catalpa Avenue, Anaheim, to 1401 Damon Street, Anaheim, was continued from the meetings of August 20 and September 17, 1974 to allow the applicant time to purchase a better grade move-on structure and was further continued from the meeting of January 21, 1975 to this date. Communication from the Applicant requesting withdrawal of his application inasmuch as he has sold the property in question, was submitted. On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Pebley, the City Council approved the withdrawal of application for housemoving permit submitted by Mr. Krajacic to move a structure from 2174 West Catalpa Avenue, Anaheim, to 1401 Damon Street, Anaheim. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood left the Council Chamber. (2:50 P.M.) PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 74-16A: In accordance with application filed by George K. Bernharth, Seaboard Engineering Company, public hearing was held on proposed abandonment of portions of dedicated road and public utility easements lying with Tract No. 8660 located north of La Palma Avenue, west of Magnolia Avenue pursuant to Resolution No. 75R-302, duly published in the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law. Report of the City Engineer was sqbmitted, recommending approval of said abandonment request, subject to reservation of sanitary sewer easement to accommmdate existing facilities within Knollwood Circle. Mayor Thom asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-375: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-375 for adoption, approving Abandonment No. 74-16A as recommended by the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ORDERING THE VACATION AND ABANDONMENT OF THAT PORTION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN. (No. 74-16A) 75-657 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975, 1:30 P.M. 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-375 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 74-17A: In accordance with application filed by James C. Olson, L. D. Olson Construction Company, 760 North Main Street, Orange, California, public hearing was held on proposed abandonment of an existing public utility easement located north of Lanerose Drive, east of Western Avenue pursuant to Resolution No. 75R-321, duly published in the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law. Report of the City Engineer was submitted recommending unconditional approval of said request. Mayor Thom asked if anyone wished to address the City Council; there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-376: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 75R-376 for adoption, approving Abandonment No. 74-17A, as recommended by the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ORDERING THE VACATION AND ABANDONMENT OF THAT PORTION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN. (No. 74-17A) 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-376 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 74-75-37~ VARIANCE NO. 2709: Application by Katherine A. Cyprien for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to RS-7200 and the following Code waivers to establish a five lot single-family subdivision between Sunkist Street and Milton Street on the north side of Cyprien Way, was submitted together with application for exemption status from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report: a. Minimum rear yard. b. Requirement that dwellings rear on arterial highways. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-130, recom- mended that subject project be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report and further recommended approval of Reclassifica- tion No. 74-75-37, subject to the following conditions: 1. That street lighting facilities along Sunkist Street, Cyprien Way and Milton Street shall be installed as required by the Director of Public Utilities, and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the Office of the Director of Public Utilities and 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 the above-mentioned requirements. 2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of 60¢ per front foot along Sunkist Street and Milton Street for tree planting purposes. 3. 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. 4. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities. 75-658 Ci~Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1975~ 1:30 P.M. 5. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. That appropriate water assessment fees, as determined by the Director of Public Utilities, shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a building permit. 9. That the building setbacks shall have a minimum depth of forty (40) feet adjacent to Sunkist Street, per City Council Policy No. 538, unless the City Council grants relief from said policy and permits 25-foot setbacks for those lots proposed to front-on Sunkist Street. 10. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, Condition Nos. 1 and 2, above-mentioned, shall be completed. The provisions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by. action of the City Council unless said conditions are complied with within one year from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant. 11. That Condition Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 9, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-131, recom- mended that subject project be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report and granted Variance No. 2709, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance is granted subject to the complRtion of Reclassifica- tion No. 74-75-37. 2. 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 sub- ject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and then be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. 3. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4; provided, however, that the building setbacks of Lot Nos. 1, 2 and 3, as shown on Exhibit No. 1, shall have a minimum depth of forty (40) feet adjacent to Sunkist Street, per City Council Policy No. 538, unless the City Council grants relief from said policy and permits 25-foot setbacks for those lots proposed to front on Sunkist Street. 4. That Condition Nos. 1 and 2, 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. 5. That Condition No. 3, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. Miss Santalahti described the location of the property and advised that the petitioner proposes to subdivide this property into five lots. She reported that it is proposed the existing single-family structure would remain on one of the lots and single-family residences would be constructed on the other four lots. The lots would range in size from 7,200 to 9,640 square feet and three lots would front on Sunkist Street which is an arterial highway. The submitted plans indicate the new structures will be two-stories with identical floor plans having 2,380 square feet of living area. Each structure will have a three-car garage. Councilwoman Kaywood returned to the Council Chamber. (2:55 P.M.) Miss Santalahti summarized the requested Code waivers and advised in connection with waiver "a" minimum rear yard, that the Anaheim Municipal Code, in specifying that the rear setback may be reduced to 10 feet, further stipulates that this reduction is subject to equal usable open living area being provided elsewhere on the lot. In this instance, this condition can be satisfied, the lot coverage proposed is 33%, 40% permitted, and the side yards are approximately 14 to 24 feet in depth whereas a minimum of 5 feet is permitted. 75-659 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. The second Code waiver pertaining to the requirement that dwelling units rear on arterial highways specifies that lots adjacent to arterial highways have a minimum depth of 120 feet, however conditional exceptions may be author- ized in accordance with Council Policy No. 538 which states that these lot depth requirements may be reduced if a specific plan is approved by the City which indicates building setbacks at a minimum depth of 40 feet. Miss Santalahti reported that the submitted plans indicated a 25-foot setback along Sunkist Street, however if the structures are relocated westerly a distance of 17 feet from the rear property line, it appears the required 40-foot front setback can be maintained and equal usable open living space provided elsewhere on the lots. The Mayor asked if the applicant or his agent were present and satisfied with the recommendations of the City Planning Commission. Mr. Chuck McBurney, Atlantic Engineering, 2229 East Lincoln Avenue, replied affirmatively. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council either in favor or in opposition to the reclassification and variance. Mrs. Dorothy Kuhn, 9961Deerhaven, questioned whether there is any restric- tion against the parking of cars in the driveways or on the street. She further questioned whether 25 foot would be sufficient space to allow for parking. Miss Santalahti responded that a 25-foot setback from the curbline is the Single-Family Zone requirement and would accommodate the required five parking spaces per residential unit for that zone (two in the garage and three in the driveway). Mayor Thom asked if anyone else wished to address the City Council, there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. (In response to questions from unidentified persons in the audience, at the suggestion of Councilman Seymour, Mr. McBurney reviewed the plans with those interested and answered questions.) 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-377: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 75R-377 for adoption 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. (74-75-37 - RS-7200) 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-377 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-378: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-378 for adoption, granting Variance No. 2709, 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 GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2709. 75-660 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. 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-378 duly passed and adopted. WAIVER - COUNCIL POLICY NO. 538: On motion by Councilman Peblay, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the City Council waived Council Policy No. 538 pertaining to specific plans for lots adjacent to freeways, arterial highways and railroad rights-of-way as it pertains to plans submitted in conjunction with Reclassifica- tion No. 74-75-37 and Variance No. 2709. MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 74-75-34: Submitted by Kenneth A. and Betty J. Nelson and Arnel Development Company (George L. Argyros, President), owners, for a change in zone from RM-1200 to CL on property located at the southwest corner of Almont Avenue and State College Boulevard. The City Planning commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-126, recom- mended that the subject property be exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report pursuant to the provisions of the California Environ- mental Quality Act, and further recommended that subject reclassification be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of $2.00 per front foot along State College Boulevard for street lighting purposes. 2. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans on file with the office of the Director of Public Works. 3. That appropriate water assessment fees as determined by the Director of Public Utilities shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4. That only one driveway shall be allowed to State College Boulevard for the subject property; said driveway to be aligned with Almont Avenue on the east side of State College Boulevard, as approved by the City Engineer. 5. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities. 6. That a six-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the west prop- erty line; provided, however, if such a wall presently exists along said property line on the adjacent property, an additional wall shall not be required. 7. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 8. That all air-conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties. 9. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2. 10. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, Condition No. 1, 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 condition is complied with within one (1) year from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant. 11. That Condition Nos. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. Zoning Supervisor Annika Santalahti noted the location of subject property and the existing uses and zoning in the immediate area, summarizing the evidence submitted to and considered by the City Planning Commission. Councilman Sneegas left the Council Chamber. (3:00 P.M.) Mayor Thom asked if the applicant or their agent were present and satis- fied with action l~aken by the City Planning Commission. Mr. Gilbert Smith, representing Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan Association, Agents, 399 North Gary, Pomona, was present and indicated they were in accord with recommendations of the Planning Commission. The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the City Council, there being no response, he declared the public hearing closed. 75-661 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Thom, the City Council finds that this project will have no significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. Councilman Sneegas temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-379: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 75R-379 for adoption, authorizing preparation of the necessary ordinance, changing the zone as requested, subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commis- sion. 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. (74-75-34 - CL) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None TEMPORARILY ABSENT: CO~CIL MEMBERS: Sneegas ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-379 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Sneegas returned to the Council Chamber. (3:03 P.M.) RECLASSIFICATION NO. 69-70-5 - TERMINATION: Pursuant to actions taken by the City Planning Commission recommending approval of Reclassification No. 74-75-34, the Commission terminated all proceedings in connection with Reclassification No. 69-70-5, filed on property described in Reclassification No. 74-75-34. No action was taken by the City Council. PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 74-18A: Public hearing was held on proposed abandonment of all access rights to State College Boulevard along the frontage of property located at the southwest corner of State College Boulevard and Almont Place, pursuant to Resolution No. 75R-322, duly published in the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law. Report of the City Engineer dated June 3, 1975, was submitted recommending that partial release be approved to provide for one standard commercial 30-foot driveway to be located directly opposite and across from Almont Avenue on the east. The center of said driveway to line up with the centerline of said Almont Avenue. Mayor Thom asked if anyone wished to address the City Council. Mr. Gilbert Smith, representing Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan Association, authorized Agents, addressed the Council advising that the access rights along State College Boulevard were abandoned by the prior owner at the time the apartment development was constructed to the west, approximately five years ago. Site plans submitted in connection with Reclassification No. 74-75-34 indicate one curb cut along State College Boulevard in a direct line with the extension of Almont Drive, and although he was not opposed to the City Engineer's recommendations, he requested that all access rights be reinstated along the State College Boulevard frontage so that if an additional curb cut should be needed at a later date, it can be accomplished without coming before the City Council. Control would be retained through Engineering recommendations and permit for future development. The City Engineer objected to releasing more access than the one 30-foot driveway recommended. Responding to question by Councilman Pebley, Mr. Smith stated it was anticipated the proposed structure would use the entire parcel as shown on the plans, however changes in the area over the years may alter the situation at this location. 75-662 .City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975, 1:30 P.M. Mayor Thom asked if anyone else wished to address the City Council, there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-380: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 75R-380 for adoption, approving Abandonment No. 74-18A as recommended by the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ORDERING THE VACATION AND ABANDONMENT OF THAT PORTION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN. (No. 74-18A) 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-380 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARINGS - RECLASSIFICATION NOS. 74-75-35~ 74-75-36 AND VARIANCE NO. 2706: Public hearings were held concurrently on the following applications, due to the fact the items include common property: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 74-75-35: Initiated by the Anaheim City Planning Commission for property included in the proposed Frontera No. 1 Annexation, proposing reclassification from the County of Orange AR(O) (Agricultural-Residential - Oil Overlay) District to City of Anaheim RS-43,000(0) (Residential/Agricultural - Oil Production Overlay) Zone; property located at the southeast corner of Frontera Street and Park Vista Street. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-127, found that the Director of the Development Services Department has determined that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 1, of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the requirements for an environmental impact report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an environmental impact report; and further recommended approval of subject reclass- ification, subject to the following condition: 1. That these reclassification proceedings are granted subject to comple- tion of annexation of subject property to the City of Anaheim. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 74-75-36 AND VARIANCE NO. 2706: Submitted by Joseph D. Huarte requesting change of zone from RS-A-43,000(O) to RM-1200(O), and to con- struct a 54-unit apartment complex between Frontera Street and Jackson Avenue on the east side of Park Vista Street, with Code waivers: a. Maximum building height within 150 feet of an Agricultural Zone. b. Minimum distance between buildings. (Eliminated) c. Minimum pedestrian accessway width. (Eliminated) d. Minimum number of enclosed parking spaces. e. Minimum distance between oil drill site and dwellings. (Eliminated) The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-128, recom- mended to the City Council that the subject project be exempt from the require- ment to prepare an environmental impact report, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, and recommended approval of Reclassi- fication No. 74-75-36, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these reclassification proceedings are granted subject to com- pletion of annexation of subject property to the City of Anaheim. 2. That street lighting facilities along Frontera Street, Park Vista Street, and Jackson Avenue shall be installed as required by the Director of Public Utilities and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the office of the Director of Public Utilities; and 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 the above-mentioned requirements. 75-663 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1975~ 1:30 P.M. 3. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of 60 cents per front foot along Frontera Street, Park Vista Street, and Jackson Avenue for tree planting purposes. 4. That trash storage.areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans on file with the office of the Director of Public Works. 5. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to commence- ment of structural framing. 6. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities. 7. That a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the east and northeast property lines. 8. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 9. 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. 10. That the appropriate water assessment fees, as determined by the Director of Public Utilities, shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a building permit. 11. 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 as the City Council may grant. 12. That Condition Nos. 4, 6, 7, and 8, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-129, granted Variance No. 2706 in part, waivers "b", "c" and "e" having been eliminated by the resubmittal of plans and, therefore, withdrawn by the petitioner and waiver "d" granted on the basis of the proposed partially enclosed carports are open only above a height of five feet, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this Variance is granted subject to the completion of Reclassifica- tion No. 74-75-36. 2. That steps shall be taken by the developer to insure that the noise level generated by the adjacent freeway traffic shall not exceed 65 dbA in the private recreation-leisure areas of the units adjacent to the freeway and 45 dbA inside the units with the windows and doors closed, said steps to be indicated on plans submitted for building permits. 3. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 4. Zoning Supervisor Annika Santalahti noted the location of subject property, advising that the parcel proposed for annexation is included with and adjacent on the north to additional property within Anaheim City limits, described in Reclassification No. 74-75-36. She noted the existing uses and zoning in the immediate area, s-mm~rizing the evidence submitted to and considered by the City Planning Commission and action taken on subject applications. Councilwoman Kaywood asked what distance the development would be from active oil drilling operations. Miss Santalahti replied the complex would be located in excess of 150 feet from any oil drilling operation, and in order to commence any new drilling operations in the area, all provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, including distance from established adjacent structures, would have to be met. Mayor Thom asked if the applicant or his agent was present. Mr. Ron McMahon, Architect for the proposed development, was present and advised that recommendations of the City Planning Commission met with their approval. The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the City Council, there being no response, he declared the public hearings closed. 75-664 ~.ity Hall; Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1975~ 1:30 P.M. CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT: (Reclassification No. 74-75-35) On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Pebley, the City Council ratified the determination of the Director of Development Services that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 1, of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the requirements for an environmental impact report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an environmental impact report. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-381: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-381 for adoption, authorizing preparation of the necessary ordinance changing the zone as requested, subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commis- sion. 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. (74-75-35 - RS-A-43,000(0) ) 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-381 duly passed and adopted. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: (Reclassification No. 74-75-36 and Variance No. 2706) On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Pebley, the City Council finds that this project will have no signifi- cant effect on the environment and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-382: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-382 for adoption, authorizing 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. (74-75-36 - RM-1200 (0)) 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-382 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-383: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-383 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2706 in part. 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-383 duly passed and adopted. 75-665 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975, 1:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 74-75-38 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1547: Submitted by William and Virginia Kupfer requesting change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to CL, and to construct a motel on the west side of Beach Boulevard, north of Ball Road. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-132, recom- mended that subject project be exempt from the requirement to prepare an environ- mental impact report pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, and further recommended approval of subject reclassification, sub- ject to the following conditions: 1. That street lighting facilities along Beach Bou].evard shall be installed as required by the Director of Public Utilities and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the office of the Director of Public Utilities and that a bond in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim shall be posted with the City to guarantee the above-mentioned requirements. 2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of 60¢ per front foot along Beach Boulevard for tree planting purposes. 3. 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 sub- ject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 4. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans on file with the office of the Director of Public Works. 5. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and deter- mined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to commencement of structural framing. 6. That all air-conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties. 7. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities. 8. That sidewalks shall be installed along Beach Boulevard as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer. 9. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satis- factory to the City Engineer. 10. That appropriate water assessment fees, as determined by the Director of Public Utilities, shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a building permit. 11. That a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the west property line. 12. 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 as the City Council may grant. 13. That Condition Nos. 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 11, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-133, granted said conditional use permit, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this Conditional Use Permit is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification No. 74-75-38. 2. 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, 3, and 4. Zoning Supervisor Annika Santalahti noted the location of subject property, the existing uses and zoning in the immediate area, and summarized the evidence submitted to and considered by the City Planning Commission. Mayor Thom asked if the applicants or their agent was present, there being no response, he asked if anyone else wished to address the City Council. Mrs. Marilyn Domino, 735 South Beach Boulevard, pointed out that the address of subject property is listed as 735 South Beach Boulevard, while the parcel is adjacent to her property which carries the same address. She advised 75-666 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. that she operates a mail order business and an antique shop at that location, and requested that a fence be constructed along the south side of subject property, noting that there is another motel immediately south of her property. It was noted that the subject property and the Domino property were formerly owned by one party which could account for the discrepancy in the addresses. Development Services Director Ronald Thompson stated that if the application is approved, a new number address will be assigned at the time building permits are issued. Also noted was the fact that the Domino property is commercially zoned, and the Zoning Code does not require a fence or a wall between commercial uses. Mr. Jim Rossi, 738 Hayward Street, directly behind subject property, objected to any windows in the second story units of the proposed motel, which would overlook his property. Miss Santalahti explained that the motel windows would face north and south, and parking would be placed in the rear setback which is a minimum of 60 feet from Mr. Rossi's property. Mr. Rossi pointed out that the proposed six-foot wall would not screen his property from the,proposed motel, due to the higher grade of subject property. It was explained that the six-foot wall would be measured from the higher grade of the two adjoining properties. In response to question by Mrs. Rossi, it is noted that the property was posted and legal notice published in the newspaper. Mayor Thom apologized to Mrs. Rossi, inasmuch as she stated they did not receive a legal notice of subject public hearing. Mr. Domino was recognized and stated that they reside on their property at 735 South Beach Boulevard, and must listen to noises emanating from these commercial properties. He noted problems with customers of the existing motel and the miniature golf course further north. Mr. Domino was informed that so long as his property is zoned and used for commercial purposes, there is no requirements that another commercial development must install a fence adjacent to his property. The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council, there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, 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-384: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 75R-384 for adoption, authorizing preparation of the necessary ordinance, changing the zone as requested, subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commis- sion. 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. (74-75-38 - 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-384 duly passed and adopted. 75-667 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-385: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 75R-385 for adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 1547, subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission, and further subject to the following additional condition: 3. That there be no windows on the second floor along the west side of the motel structure. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1547. 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-385 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 74-75-39 AND VARIANCE NO. 2712: Submitted by John Lyle Cannon requesting change of zone from RS-A-43,000 to RM-1200 and permission to construct a 25-unit apartment complex on the north side of Ball Road, west of Dale Street, with Code waivers of: a. Maximum building height. b. Minimum recreation-leisure area. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-134, recom- mended that subject project be exempt from the requirement to prepare an environ- mental impact report, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, and further recommended approval of subject reclassification, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner(s) of subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim a strip of land 53 feet in width from the centerline of the street along Ball Road for street widening purposes. 2. That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim along Ball Road, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improve- ments such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, street grading and paving, drainage facilities, or other appurtenant work shall be complied with as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the Office of the City Engineer and that street lighting facilities along Ball Road shall be installed as required by the Director of Public Utilities, and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the Office of the Director of Public Utilities; and that a bond in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim shall be posted to guarantee the installation of the above-mentioned requirements. 3. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of 60¢ per front foot along Ball Road for tree planting purposes. 4. That trash storage areas shall be relocated/realigned in accordance with the requirements of the Streets and Sanitation Division and provided in accordance with approved plans on file with the Office of the Director of Public Works, as stipulated to by the petitioner. 5. 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. 6. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities. 7. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 8. 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 appropriate water assessment fees as determined by the Director of Public Utilities shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a building permit. 75-668 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. 10. That the interior walls of the proposed carports shall be stuccoed; that enclosed storage cabinets shall be provided along the rear wall of each carport; and that adequate bumper guards shall be provided to protect the interior walls of the proposed carports from damage. 11. That the minimum dimensions of the parking spaces within the proposed carports shall be ten (10) feet wide by twenty (20) feet long, as stipulated to by the petitioner. 12. That dense landscaping shall be provided along the northerly property line, in addition to a six-foot masonry wall along the northerly and westerly property lines. 13. That the subject property shall be developed in accordance with the site development standards of the underlying zone. 14. 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 as the City Council may grant. 15. That Condition Nos. 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12 and 13, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-135, recom- mended that the subject project be exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report pursuant to the provisions of the California Environ- mental Quality Act, and denied Variance No. 2712, inasmuch as revised plans were submitted and the petitioner agreed to develop the property in accordance with site development standards of the RM-1200 Zone. Zoning Supervisor Annika Santalahti noted the location of subject property and existing uses and zoning in the immediate area, summarizing the evidence submitted to and considered by the City Planning Commission. Councilman Pebley left the Council Chamber. (3:34 P.M.) Mayor Thom asked if the applicant or his agent was present and wished to address the City Council. Mr. Mike Clark, 3303 Harbor Boulevard, Costa Mesa, Builder and Agent for the petitioner, stated they were in agreement with the City Planning Commission recommendation and would comply with any required landscaping. In response to question by Councilman Seymour, Mr. Clark stated he would be agreeable to an added condition that dense landscaping be provided along the northerly boundaries of the property. The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the City Council. Mr. James Hunter, 2856 West Elmlawn Drive, directly north of subject prop- erty, questioned whether the maximum height of the buildings in the proposed development would conform to those in existing apartment complexes in the immediate vicinity. It was explained that revised plans submitted to the City Planning Commis- sion for the one- and two-story development meet site development standards of the Anaheim Municipal Code for the RM-1200 Zone for height as well as for the required recreation-leisure area~ and a variance would no longer be necessary. In response to further questions by Mr. Hunter, Miss Santalahti advised that the north side of the proposed complex will have no windows, and will be constructed so that one-half story of the tuck-under parking area will be below grade level so that in essence, there will be a one and one-half story structure above grade which will be constructed five feet from the property line. Councilman Pebley returned to the meeting. (3:38 P.M.) Mr. Hunter was of the opinion that there was a ten-foot public utility easement along the north property line, which other developers in the area have used as a driveway. Plans were reviewed at the Council Table, and Mr. Clark, authorized Agent, advised that at one time there was an easement which has been abandoned by the City. 75-669 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Councilman Seymour left the Council Chamber. (3:39) In response to question by Councilwoman Kaywood, Mr. Hunter advised that there were existing utility, poles and wires along the north side of the fence on his south property line.' Councilman Seymour returned to the meeting. (3:41 P.M.) It was noted that the City section map depicted a five-foot easement inside the south boundary o£ Mr. Hunterts property. In response to question by Mr. Clark regarding the submission of land- scaping plans and possible delay in obtaining building permits, City Attorney Alan Watts advised that plans could be submitted any time, and would not neces- sarily be a condition precedent to the adoption of the ordinance changing the zone. Mr. Hunter inquired how much protection "dense landscaping" would provide. Councilman Seymour advised Mr. Hunter that the plans would be reviewed by the Planning Commission and Mr. Hunter could be present at that meeting and review the plans and comment if he so desired. Mayor Thom asked if anyone else wished to address the City Council, there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Seymour, 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-386: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-386 for adoption, authorizing preparation of the necessary ordinance, changing the zone as requested, subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commis- sion, and the following additional condition: 16. That the developer shall obtain approval of plans for dense land- scaping along the northerly property line, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 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. (74-75-39 - RM-1200) 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-386 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-387: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-387 for adoption, denying Variance No. 2712. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING VARIANCE NO. 2712. 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-387 duly passed and adopted. The Development Services Department staff was instructed to notify Mr. Hunter when landscaping plans are submitted for City Planning Commission approval. 75-670 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 74-75-40: Submitted by Texaco/Anaheim Hills, Inc., for change in zone from RS-A-43,000 (SC) to CO (SC), property located at the southeast corner of Canyon Rim Road and Nohl Ranch Road. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-136, recom- mended that subject project be exempt from the requirement to prepare an environ- mental impact report, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, and further recommended approval of subject reclassification, sub- ject to the following conditions: 1. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans on file with the Office o£ the Director of Public Works. 2. 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. 3. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities. 4. 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 facil- ities 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 subject tract and from 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 developers of said property upon their request. 5. 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. 6. That appropriate water assessment fees, as determined by the Director of Public Utilities, shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a building permit. 7. That street lighting facilities along Nohl Ranch Road shall be installed as required by the Director of Public Utilities, and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the Office of the Director of Public Util- ities 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 the above- mentioned requirements. 8. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2; provided, however, that the proposed structures shall be construc- ted with Spanish tile roofs, as stipulated to by the petitioner, and that no left turns shall be allowed into the proposed employee parking lot off Nohl Ranch Road unless a left-turn pocket to facilitate left turns shall be provided in accordance with a design approved by the City Engineer. 9. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, Condition No. 7, above-mentioned, shall be completed. The provisions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the City Council unless said conditions are complied with within one year from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant. 10. That Condition Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5 and 8, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. Zoning Supervisor Annika Santalahti noted the location of subject property and the existing uses and zoning in the immediate area, summarizing the evidence submitted to and considered by the City Planning Commission. She noted that the Anaheim Municipal Code required a six-foot masonry block wall where commercial development abuts residential, such as along the north property line of subject parcel; however the site development standards have been slightly 75-671 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1975, 1'30 P.M. revised to provide that where unusual topography exists, site screening can be modified in those instances where the erection of such a wall would not be practical. She advised that the northerly property line of subject property is located at the base of a 35-foot slope to a multiple-family residential develop- ment. Mayor Thom asked if the applicant or their agent was present and satisfied with the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission. Mr. Richard Doyle, representing Texaco/Anaheim Hills, Inc., indicated their concurrence with action taken by the City Planning Commission. Mayor Thom asked if anyone else wished to address the City Council pertain- ing to subject application, there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. Councilwoman Kaywood left the Council Chamber. (3:50 P.M.) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Pebley, 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. Councilwoman Kaywood temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-388: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-388 for adoption, authorizing preparation of the necessary ordinance, changing the zone as requested, subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commis- sion, and including the following: 1. That the construction of the block wall along the northerly property line is not necessary or desirable due to conditions of topography. 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. (74-75-40 - CO (SC) ) 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-388 duly passed and adopted. Councilwoman Kaywood returned to the Council Chamber. (3:52 P.M.) CIVIC CENTER TASK FORCE REPORT: Report from the Civic Center Task Force on a Community Center for Anaheim, dated July 22, 1975, was submitted. City Clerk Alona Hougard called attention to communication received in her office July 21, 1975 (copies furnished each Council Member), from Mrs. Mary B. Jones, Disneyland Community Affairs Manager, requesting that Disneyland repre- sentatives be permitted to address the Council prior to any action as result of recommendations contained in the Task Force report. Mr. Richard J. McMillan, Jr., 924 South Peregrine Place, addressed the Council representing the Civic Center Task Force committee consisting of twelve members, advising that their objective was to review previous proposals for the construction of a civic center and to explore the possibility of a viable financial plan. He briefed the report submitted, advising that the Committee unanimously recommended that there is a need for a new civic center; that many factors must be taken into consideration including the current state of the economy; and that they felt the imposition of additional sales taxes, or any taxes to finance the facility would be an undesirable additional burden on the community, especially to those persons on fixed incomes. In addition, consideration was given to the 75-672 ~ity...Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July ..22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. premise that the civic center might include a cultural center, and it was felt that any financial plan should substantiate and support a civic center, and be devised in such a manner that it could be extended into other areas of community support, such as legitimate theatre~ cultural centers and senior citizen facili- ties. Ten years ago, it was established that the proposed new civic center facility would cost approximately 4 million dollars, while today the projected amount is 13.8 million dollars: if this rate of increase is carried through, the estimate will rise to 45 million dollars in ten more years. Mr. McMillan thereupon reported the following recommendations made by the majority of the Civic Center Task Force Committee: A. Establish a 5% admission-amusement tax for the purpose of financing a new civic center. B. It is recommended that a city hall-civic center as envisaged by the November 20, 1973 report of the Civic Center Joint Task Force and designed by Rowland and Rose be constructed with minor modifications which will be required to effect energy savings and to comply with any new state and federal building code changes. C. It is recommended that use of Alpha redevelopment funds be utilized for the civic center project. The Redevelopment Agency should begin to buy the required Property upon which the civic center must be constructed (cost is $2,063,075). D. A task force representing the community be established for the purpose of developing basic community center requirements including location and design. E. All monies derived from the admission-amusement tax be restricted to the civic center and people-oriented long term capital improvements (community center) and operation of these facilities. A separate account should be main- tained, for the purpose of controlling such monies so that they not be commingled with the general fund. An Anaheim City Charter Amendment be enacted to preclude use of these funds for any other purpose. F. The development of the facilities be on short-term financial arrange- ments only, and in general, a pay-as-you-go basis. G. Monies derived from the sale of existing City owned properties made surplus by building the new civic center shall be added to the development of this program. H. Minimal time, money and effort should be expended to develop architec- tural plans, space studies, etc. of this community center complex until the community has established their approval or disapproval of the basic concept and plan of financing. I. A staff report be prepared by the City for the purpose of developing the total financial concept, revenue estimates, revenue control and operational costs. The report should also include the additional revenues, cost savings and defined efficiency improvements projected by the City Administration in support of the total program. In response to question by Councilman Pebley, Mr. McMillan replied that the committee did not make a determination as to the extent of the proposed 5% admission-amusement tax in an instance such as occurs at Disneyland, where ticket books are sometimes sold at a price combining admission prices with tickets for rides and attractions. Mayor Thom commended Mr. McMillan and the committee for their efforts and time spent in arriving at their report and recommendations. Councilman Seymour stated he wished to add his appreciation to the Civic Center Task Force, and~advised that he served on this committee, which was com- prised of what he considered to be representatives of the full spectrum of the community, and included some of the most resolute businessmen, and people inter- ested in the development of cultural arts activities. After healthy and extensive discussion, realizing that if the proposed facility is to become a reality by any financial means other than a long-term financial relationship there must be some revenue generated to finance long-term capital improvements, the committee investi- gated the available revenues. The proposed 5% Amusement/ Admission Tax is an area of revenue which is feasible, and the citizens of Anaheim would not have to carry the entire burden. 75-673 .City Hall~ Anaheim,. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Mayor Thom called attention to the Minority Report prepared by Pat Kenworthy and Joseph E. White and attached to the committee report, and he invited their comments. Mr. Joseph E. White, 809 West Broadway, stated the majority report did not mention the location of the proposed civic center, and since the citizens had previously voted for the facility to be located on the existing City Hall site, he would not be in favor of any other location without another vote. In place of the proposed tower structure, he expressed a preference for a lower~ more expand- ed structure, being of the opinion that the completed facility would establish a pattern for other development in the area. Mr. White was of the opinion that the entire ultimate community center should be planned at one time, and the people should be involved in the planning process. Councilwoman Kaywood inquired whether the committee minority felt every citizen should have a say in the design of the proposed facility, and she noted that in 1963, 65% of the voters approved a new City Hall, even though no plans were presented. The second time the issue was placed on the ballot, complete plans were available, but the issue was again defeated, and opposition was expressed to the plans. It was her opinion that there would never be complete agreement as to design. Mr. White felt that a broad representation of the citizens should be in- volved in the planning, and reports from the various segments of the population should be thoroughly considered. Mayor Thom pointed out that undoubtedly no action would be taken this date on the proposed Amusement/Admissions Tax, however, he recognized representatives of the entertainment industry present, inquiring whether anyone wished to address the Council. Mr. Jim Ross, 802 Glendale, Orange, representing Disneyland, addressed the Council stating they had just received the Task Force report and asked whether they would be given an opportunity to address the Council on the proposed Amuse- ment/Admissions Tax at a later date. Mayor Thom was of the opinion that the issue would be scheduled at a later time for a public discussion or hearing. Councilwoman Kaywood expressed the opinion that in order to assist the City Council in considering the matter, it would be well to have the representatives of the entertainment industry speak at this time. At the invitation of the Mayor, Mr. Jack Lindquist, representing Disneyland, addressed the Council advising that they are opposed to any type of amusement or admission taxes. He advised that they just received the report by the committee this week, and requested additional time for study prior to participating in any public discussion. Mr. Arthur Patterson, President of the California Angels, 2000 South State College Boulevard, addressed the Council concurring with remarks of Mr. Lindquist, and advised they also wish to consult with baseball groups and counsels. He requested that they be notified when the matter is to be considered further. Mayor Thom asked if anyone else wished to address the City Council; there was no response. Councilman Seymour co~ented that he would like to share some of his thoughts with representatives of the entertainment/amusement industries and with the public. He noted the difficulty, over the past few years, in getting bond issues passed for long-term capital improvements, such as water and sewer lines, street lighting and improvements, parks, libraries, and a City Hall, and he was of the opinion that in effect, the electorate has been saying that it will not stand for additional bonded indebtedness to finance these programs, and if these improvements are considered to be necessary, and are being requested by the community, then some pay-as-you-go method should be used for the financing. 75-674 _Cit7, Hall; Anaheim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1'30 P.M. The question is, are we going to plan intelligently for long-term capital improvement, and if so, how should it be accomplished? In considering a pay-as- you-go plan, it can be noted that this city is unique, in that it is entertain- ment and tourist-oriented, in addition to having a number of sizable industries which pay a larger amount of taxes, including inventory tax. Great numbers of people from outside our community are attracted to the entertainment centers in Anaheim, and they spend their money. At the same time, they demand community services such as increased police and fire protection. Many other cities have imposed a tax similar to what is being suggested here, in order to provide the necessary additional services. Although he respected the City's past position of declining to assess such a tax, he felt that at this time, an admissions tax would be a viable financial plan. He was of the opinion that the amusement and entertainment industry should make recommendations to the City Council for any good alternative methods of financing capital improvements, and he noted that the hotel-motel room occupancy tax has been used only to finance the City's con- vention center. The Civic Center Task Force committee's recommendation is that the proposed 5% tax be used only to finance long-term, people-oriented capital improvements, and although he thought the climate was poor to institute such a tax at the present time, he expected to press for this or some viable alternative method of financing these capital improvements when the opportunity arises. Mayor Thom recalled that in 1970, an amusement tax was proposed and approved; however, it was subsequently rescinded. He pointed out that many taxes levied on services are imposed in such a way that the taxpayer has no control; however the amusement tax would be voluntary; that is, it would not be a necessity in order to live. Mr. Patterson pointed out that in order to attend a baseball game or any other spectator sport or entertainment, under the proposed regulation, members of the public would have to pay the tax. These people don't have to attend the games, and in his opinion they will not do so if admission prices are raised. He noted that the California Angels are in business in an attempt to realize a profit, and such a tax would alter their policy of keeping admission prices down to a family level. He pointed out that the entertainment industry was not represented on the Task Force. Mayor Thom noted that when the tax was considered previously, and ultimately rescinded, the baseball club representatives gave a similar argument, however although the action imposing the tax was rescinded, the ballgame admission prices were increased. Councilman Seymour noted that an additional meeting of the Task Force could be called to allow the participation of Mr. Patterson and/or any other repre- sentatives of the industry; however he was confident they would find that some type of revenue is necessary if capital improvements are to be accomplished on a pay-as-you-go basis. He invited recommendations for alternatives to the proposed tax. Mr. Patterson was of the opinion that when this type of tax is assessed, it is inclined to remain; and he cited taxes imposed on baseball admissions in the past. He inquired as to what amount of Alpha area redevelopment funds might be available for the civic center, as proposed in the committee report. Councilman Seymour stated that his question was the broader one of genera- tion revenue for financing all long-term cpaital improvements. Mr. Patterson indicated that he would study the issue and attempt to make a recommendation to the City Council for a plan to finance these improvements. Councilwoman Kaywood pointed out that most cities in Orange County have civic centers. Having served on the Citizens Advisory Committee six years ago, she advised that the committee felt bonding was the appropriate method to finance capital improvements, and that it was fair for future generations to share the burden of these improvements. She was of the opinion that if the local newspaper had printed more factual information and necessary valid arguments, the public would have better understood the facts and perhaps the bond issue for a new city hall would have passed in 1970. 75-675 City Nall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22,. 1975.~ 1:30 P.M. At the conclusion of the discussion, it was moved by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, that the Civic Center Task Force Report be received by the City Council, together with accompanying Minority Report, and ordered scheduled forfurther'discussion on August 19 or 26, 1975 MOTION CARRIED. · FINAL MAP, TRACT NO. 8713: Developer, Criterion Development Company; tract located on the east side of Country Hill Road, south of Santa Ana Canyon Road, containing 10 RH-22,000 zoned lots. The City Engineer reported that said final map conforms substantially with the tentative map previously approved, that bond has been posted and forwarded to the City Attorney for approval, and he recommended approval of said final map, subject to the following conditions: Road.1. Receipt of dedication of the 25 foot property line return on Old Ranch 2. Amend Condition No. 10 to read as follows: "That all streets shall be developed in accordance with the City of Anaheim Council Policy No. 207." On the recommendations of the City Engineer, Councilwoman Kaywood moved that Final Map, Tract No. 8713 be approved, subject to approval of required bond by the City Attorney, and further subject to conditions recommended by the City Engineer. Councilman Seymour seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. ORDINANCE NO. 3448: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3448 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (71-72-44 (13) - RM-2400) 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. 3448 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3449: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3449 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (74-75-22 - CL) 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. 3449 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3450: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3450 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (71-72-44 (11) - RS-5000) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3450 duly passed and adopted 75-676 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. ORDINANCE NO. 3451: Councilman Seymour offered Ordinance No. 3451 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (61-62-69 (71) - ML) Councilwoman Kaywood left the Council Chamber. (4:45 P.M.) DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - SAN JOA~UIN NUCLEAR PROJECT: Draft environ- mental impact report submitted for the San Joaquin Nuclear Project, consisting of a nuclear generating station to be located in Kern County, a power transmission system, and a water conveyance system, was continued from the meeting of June 3, 1975, for additional study. Memorandum report dated July 22, 1975, was submitted from the Development Services Department recommending that the City Council inform the project manager of the San Joaquin Water Project that it has reviewed the draft E.I.R. and recommends that additional information be provided about the growth inducing impact of the project as it relates to potential expansion of population and economic development in the service area. Councilman Seymour moved that the recommendations of the Development Services Department be adopted. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. Councilwoman Kaywood temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. YORBA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION PROTEST - IMPERIAL HIGHWAY POWER LINES: Yorba Home- owners Association protest against installation of above ground power lines along Imperial Highway was continued from the meeting of July 15, 1975, for further report by Dr. Vernon Armstrong. Mayor Thom asked if Dr. Armstrong was present and wished to address the City Council; there was no response. By general Council consent, further consideration of the Yorba Homeowners Association protest was deferred, pending report by Dr. Armstrong. Councilwoman Kaywood returned to the meeting. (4:47 P.M.) BICYCLE TRAILS FUNDING APPLICATION: Report was given by Recreation Land Planners on proposed bicycle trails for Anaheim at the regular Council meeting held July 15, 1975, at which time no action was taken. Acting Assistant City Manager William Griffith advised that if any action is to be taken in order to take advantage of available Federal funds in the amount of $29,000, it should be done today to meet the August 15, 1975, deadline for application. Councilman Seymour questioned how specific the application would have to be. Mrs. Dorothy Kuhn, of Recreation Land Planners, addressed the Council advising that in accordance with the indication by the Council on July 15, 1975, off-street and on-street route costs have been prepared. In checking with County officials this morning, it was learned that Ball Road and State College Boulevard trails are scheduled for completion in 1976, and State College Boulevard will be completed to the Anaheim City Limits by the end of 1975, with termination at Ball Road. She noted alternative routes connecting Ball Road to Howell Avenue via State College Boulevard, and which would take the cyclist to the Santa Ana River ~Trail; or extending Lincoln Avenue from State College Boulevard to the River, the cost of which would be within the $29,000 budget. She reported that there is a balance of more than $20,000 on hand from the fund which was appropriated to finance the bicycle trails study, making a total of approximately $49,000 work- able cash available. Signing and striping for both sides of Lincoln Avenue could be accomplished for approximately $17,000, which would leave sufficient money for another route. Priorities established by the County have resulted in routes on La Palma Avenue, Brookhurst, and Euclid Street, no longer to be installed by the County. Mrs. Kuhn recommended that the City Council select La Palma Avenue as an alternate route, in order to serve the large residential area in the northerly portion of the City. 75-677 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - J~!Y 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Mrs. Kuhn submitted to the City Council copies of a cost estimate for bike- way on Lincoln Avenue from the Santa Ana River to State College Boulevard, and advised that in applying for the Federal funds, a route must be shown together with approximate cost. Mayor Thom left the Council Chamber (4:51 P.M.), and Mayor Pro Tem Seymour assumed Chairmanship of the meeting. In reponse to question by Councilman Pebley, Mrs. Kuhn advised that the County of Orange would stripe and sign Ball Road at no cost to the City, however the County desires to entertain comments from the City of Anaheim and any studies for possible alternates. The other alternate of less than one mile was the off-street Southern California Edison easement which would have to be signalized and striped by the City. Discussion was held regarding the removal of parking spaces along Ball Road, particularly where there are apartment buildings, and Mrs. Kuhn suggested that in these areas, the pedestrian walks could be extended to provide off-street bike paths. In many cases this would require removal of parkway trees. Councilman Seymour asked why streets having heavy volumes of traffic, such as Ball Road and State College Boulevard, were designated for bike trails. Mrs. Kuhn briefly highlighted the background information presented to the City Council July 15, 1975, and stated that the cyclists seemed to take the quickest and most direct route to schools and other locations, the major schools being located on these arterial streets. Councilman Seymour was of the opinion this did not apply in East Anaheim, and he noted the location of the various schools in the vicinity of State College Boulevard, Ball Road, and Sunkist Street. Mayor Thom returned to the meeting. (4:55 P.M.) Councilman Sneegas failed to see the benefit to school children of placing a bicycle trail along Ball Road. Councilman Seymour stated that these proposed major routes seemed incon- gruous to him; that streets such as Sunkist and Wagner seemed to be the logical routes for bicycle trails. Mrs. Kuhn further explained the studies made, and pointed out that there are 17,000 cyclists using the Santa Ana River trail, and the objective is to get City cyclists to that trail. She further noted that the pyschology studies of cyclists show that they will not deviate from their fastest, most direct route to their destination by more than one-half mile, and the greatest generators of bicycle traffic are the civic centers, shopping centers, schools, hospitals, medical centers, and recreational facilities. Mrs. Kuhn stated that although there are many residences along South State College Boulevard, these were mostly walled communities with limited access, and there were more driveway openings on Sunkist Street. State College Boulevard has traffic signals, the necessary right-of-way and width to accommodate bik~ ways. Councilman Pebley stated he would not vote for installation of bicycle trails without a public hearing to determine their precise location. Councilman Sneegas stated that before he would vote to spend money for this type of project, he would require some evidence of what categories, would be provided greater bicycle safety and accident prevention. Mrs. Kuhn advised that the City has already completed an intensive study of the accident rates, which is an addendum of the study plan which is to be forwarded to the City Council in the very near future. Councilwoman Kaywood reported on a telephone conversation with a La Habra resident who had worked for seven years to get a bicycle route established, and they now have a three-mile s~iped stretch along a busy street which is a route 75-678 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1975, 1:30 P.M. to a school, with parking prohibited during the busy hours of 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. They are using an educational program in the schools, and the entire program is proving to be extremely successful. Mrs. Kuhn pointed out Ghat although Sunkist and Cerritos Streets are perhaps more desirable, the County plans to install the bikeways on State College Boule- vard and Ball Road, and this would leave no route to get cyclists from the north- ern section of the City to the River trail; therefore she recommended the in- stallation of the bikeway along Lincoln Avenue from State College Boulevard to the Santa Ana River trail. In response to questions by Councilwoman Kaywood, Mrs. Kuhn advised that the County of Orange currently has no regional plan for a bicycle trail on Lincoln Avenue, east of Sunkist Street, and whether they do in the future depends on the demand and priorities. Councilman Seymour was of the opinion that Sunkist and Wagner Streets would provide logical routes to the river. Councilman Seymour inquired whether the plan could be expanded after it was initiated, without losing any funds. Mrs. Kuhn replied in the affirmative. Further discussion was held regarding the type and class of the various routes. Councilman Seymour moved that an on-road bicycle trail plan be submitted for funding, said plan to be a prototype which will include Lincoln Avenue, east from Sunkist Street to the Santa Ana River ($4,000), Sunkist Street south from Lincoln Avenue to Ball Road ($24,000), and Wagner Avenue from State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street ($4,000), at an approximate total cost of $32,000. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. To this motion, Councilmen Pebley and Sneegas voted "no". MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the following actions were authorized in accordance with the reports and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda: 1. AMUSEMENT DEVICES PERMIT: The following permit was granted subject to the provisions of Chapter 4.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, as recommended by the Chief of Police: a. Amusement Devices Permit for a juke box to be located at the Foxy Lady, 1007 Balsam Street. (David L. Warman, Applicant) 2. CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims against the City were ordered denied and referred to the City's insurance carrier: a. Claim filed by Thomas A. Lavin, Attorney representing Michael Novack, for personal injuries purportedly resulting from mud and water on sidewalk, on or about May 7, 1975. b. Claim filed by Unigard Insurance Group, on behalf of Louis C. Larson for damages purportedly resulting from collision with City vehicle, on or about June 11, 1975. c. Claim submitted by Ursula A. Doer~ng for damages purportedly resulting from vehicle striking manhole cover, on or about July 8, 1975. d. Claim submitted by Mrs. Jeffrey A. Vice for personal loss purportedly resulting from improper turnoff of electricity, on or about July 1, 1975. e. Claim filed by 20th Century Insurance Company, on behalf of Frank J. McGill, Jr., for damages to vehicle purportedly resulting from collision with City vehicle, on or about May 19, 1975. 3. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed: a. Minute Excerpt - City Planning Commission - Election of 1975-76 Officers: Chairman, Commissioner Farano; Chairman Pro Tempore, Commissioner Morley; Secretary, Patricia B. Scanlan. 75-679 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July. 22~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. b. Local Agency Formation Commission - Minutes - June 11, 1975. c. Community Redevelopment Commission - Minutes - June 25, 1975. d. Before the Public Utilities Commission - Application of the Pacific Telephone and Telesraph Company, a corporation, for authority to file a permanent tariff covering the offering of COM KEY 1434 System Service - Interim Opinion and Order Application of the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, a corporation, for a revised tariff for COM KEY 718 System Service - Interim Opinion and Order. e. Municipal Water District of Orange County - Monthly and Annual Meeting Calendars. f. United States Federal Power Commission - Southern California Edison Company - Ruling on motion o£ Southern California Edison Company to strike portions of Cities' Brief in Docket No. E-8560, and on cross-petitions of Cities to reopen records in Docket Nos. E-8570 and E-8176. g. Southern California Edison Company - Tariff schedule charges. h. Financial and Operating Reports for the month of June, 1975 for the Customer Service Division, Engineering Division and the Police Department. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NOS. 75R-389 THROUGH 75R-391: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution Nos. 75R-389 through 75R-391, both inclusive, for adoption in accordance with the reports, recommendations, and certifications furnished each Council Member, and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda: Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-389 - DEEDS OF EASEMENT: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Elton C. Snavely, et ux.; Clada M. Pletz; Mini-Skools, Ltd.; The Leaverton Co.; Jeffery L. Ritter, et ux.; Ethel R. Nickles; Jed Development, Inc.; Jensen Curtis Industries; Raymond I. Ramos, et ux.; E1 Segundo T.D.'s, Ltd.; Wm. S. Fukuda, et al.; Stephen Chemical Co.; Gaylord Smith, et ux.) RESOLUTION NO. 75R-390 - WORK ORDER NO. 740-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: MIRALOMA AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT, E/o MILLER STREET TO KRAEMER BOULEVARD, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 740-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 - August 21, 1975, 2:00 P.M.) RESOLUTION NO. 75R-391 - WORK ORDER NO. 855: 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: LA PALMA AVENUE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, 180 FEET E/o BLUE GUM STREET TO RIVERSIDE FREEWAY, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 855; 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 - August 14, 1975, 2:00 P.M.) 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-389 through 75R-391, both inclusive duly passed and adopted. ' ANAHEIM CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION RESIGNATION: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, resignation of Dr. Joseph Butterworth from the Anaheim Cultural Arts Commission was accepted. MOTION CARRIED. 75-680 City. Hall; Anaheim, Rallfornia- ~OUNCIL MINUTES- July 22; 1975; 1:30 P,M. ANAHEIM CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION APPOINTMENT: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, Mr. Martin Sklar was appointed to the Anaheim Cultural Arts Commission representing the Park and Recreation Commission, for the ensuing term ending June 30, 1979. MOTION CARRIED. CANYON AREA GENERAL PLANNING TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS - UTILITIES UNDERGROUNDING: Councilwoman Kaywood reported that the Canyon Area General Planning Task Force, at its meeting held July 15, 1975, recommended that 2% of the net revenue from the City Public Utilities be set aside each year for the purpose of conversion of existing utilities to underground facilities. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Councilman Seymour moved to recess to Executive Session. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (5:23 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all members o£ the City Conncil being present. (6:00 P.M.) ADJOURNMENT: Councilman SeymOur moved to adjourn. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 6:00 P.M. Signed