Loading...
1971/02/0271-58 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 26, 1971, 1:30 P.M. The City Clerk reported this matter had been referred to the City Engineer for investigation and appropriate action. AD3OURNMENT: Councilman Pebley moved to adjourn. Councilman Stephenson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNED: 5:30 P.M. signed City Clerk City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRE SENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton COUNCILMEN: None CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph B. Geisler CITY CLERK: Dene M. Williams DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION: John Collier CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Ronald Thompson ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order. INVOCATION: Reverend George Dugard, of the West Anaheim Baptist Church, gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Mark A. Stephenson led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PRESENTATION - TOURNAMENT OF ROSES PARADE PICTURE: Larry Sierk, Executive Vice-President of the Anaheim Chamber o~ Commerce, presented a framed picture of the Anaheim Float entered in the 1971 Tournament of Roses Parade. Mayor Dutton accepted the picture on behalf of the City of Anaheim and expressed appreciation to the members of the Anaheim Chamber of Co~nerce Tournament of Roses Con~nittee for their participation. KIWANIS CLUB 50TH ANNIVERSARY: The City Clerk reported an invitation to the City Coumcil to attend a luncheon Tuesday, February 9, 1971, at the Disneyland Motel, con~emorating the 50th Anniversary of the Kiwanis Club of Anaheim. Mayor Dutton indicated he would attend. The City Council directed the City Clerk to prepare a Resolution of Congratulations to be presented to the Kiwanis Club at their luncheon meeting. PROCLAMATION: The following Proclamation was issued by Mayor Dutton and unani- mously approved by the City Council: U.S.O. Day - February 4, 1971. RESOLUTION OF WELCOME AND COM~DATION: A Resolution'welcoming 40 Armed Ser- vices personnel who lost limbs in the line of duty, and commending 71-59 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks for arranging to host these service men February 5, 6, and 7, 1971, was unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Exalted Ruler Ron- ald Costello, and Veterans Affairs Officer Leonard Gutmann. INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES: Hal Steinruck, of the City Personnel De- partment, introduced new employees attending the Council meeting as part of the City's orientation program. Mayor Dutton welcomed the new employees. MINUTES: Approval of the Minutes of the Anaheim City Council meetings held Janu- ary 19 and 26, 1971, was deferred to the meeting of February 9, 1971, on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Thom. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Thom 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 Councilmen, unless after read- ing of the title, specific request is made by a Councilman 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 $997,928.50, in accordance with the 1970-71 Budget, were approved. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-40 - COMMUNITY CENTER AUTHORITY SUPPLEMENTAL LEASE: Council- man Pebley offered Resolution No. 71R-40 for adoption, authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a 4-year, 364-day Supplemental Facility Lease with the Community Center Authority. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE A SUPPLEMENTAL LEASE WITH THE COMMUNITY CENTER AUTHORITY. (Con- vention Center) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: AB SENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-40 duly passed and adopted. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1213: Submitted by Led- ger T. and Gladys K. Smith, to establish a 222-space travel trailer park on M-1 zoned property located on the north side of Katella Avenue and on the west side of Howell Avenue, with waiver of: a. Minimum required front setback area. The City Planning Co~nission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC70- 216, denied said conditional use permit. Appeal from action taken by the City planning Commission was filed by Ledger T. Smith, Applicant, and public hearing scheduled January 19, 1971, at which time it was continued to this date at the request of Harry Knisely, Agent for the Applicant. The City Clerk read correspondence dated January 28, 1971, from F.I.G. Holding Company in opposition to subject request. Zoning Supervisor Charles Roberts noted the location of subject property, the existing uses and zoning in theirx,ediate area, and briefed the evidence submitted to and considered by the City Planning Con~tssion, 71-60 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. noting the surrounding property is presently zoned oz proposed for indus- trial purposes; that the property northeast across Howell Avenue is proposed for an industrial subdivision, subject to annexation (Reclassification No. 70-71-28) and the proponents have indicated a desire to acquire property irmnediately to their west and extend a street from their property to Howell Avenue. Mr. Roberts added that subject plans indicate the main entrance to the proposed travel trailer park would be from Katella Avenue, with an emergency crash gate the only entrance on Howell Avenue; however, at the City Planning Commission hearing the Applicant had favored a secondary en- trance on Howell Avenue. Further, within the Code required 50-foot setback area, the plans show a 30-foot encroachment on Katella Avenue, and 40-foot encroachment on Howell Avenue. He also stated that in 1969 the General Plan was amended to indicate Commercial-Recreation as the appropriate land use south of Katella Avenue, retaining Industrial on the north; however, the County had approved a mobile home park on Douglass Avenue and an R-3 zoning on the south side of Ball Road over the objection of the Anaheim City Council. Mr. Roberts further noted that the City Planning Commission had de- nied subject application on the basis that approval would set an undesirable precedent for introducing an incompatible use into an area planned and almost completely developed for industrial uses and that Katella Avenue appears to be the logical boundary between commercial-recreation and industrial areas. Mayor Dutton asked if the Applicant or his Agent was present and wished to address the Council. Harry Knisely, 1741 South Euclid Street, Agent, referred to approxi- mately 20 letters that had been filed in support of subject application and, with the aid of a map posted on the wall, pointed out the locations represen- ted by those letters, alleging they comprise 90% of the property in the vi- cinity. He specifically referenced correspondence from the Wally Byam Cara- van Club and Adrian Wilson Associates, favoring the application. Mr. Knisely stated he believed the number one industry in Orange County is tourism and this provides most of the employment, either directly or indirectly; thus, the development would be providing a commercial-recrea- tion use rather than residential. He requested that subject application be approved as an interim use to expire in 10 years, to allow the owner a return on his property. In reply to Council questioning, Mr. Knisely advised the afore- mentioned letters favoring the application were from industrial tenants, rather than from owners of the property represented, and that the majority of the land is developed. Also, that subject property is not under an Agri- culture Preserve. Dick VaVerka, 2542 North Pacific Avenue, Santa Aha, Developer, stated he believed subject property was suited for a cormnercial-recreattonal use. In reply to Council questioning, Mr. VaVerka advised that the only permanent resident on the property would be the year-round manager. Also, with regard to setbacks, he stated he would like to use the natural boundaries which would provide an approximately 37-foot setback on the railroad bank; if a 50-foot setback was required at that point, there would be about 10 feet neither visiblenor providims any protection from the roadway. He added he did not believe a 50-foot setback was necessary on Howell Street, and he proposed 10 or 20 feet of landscaping, with a 6-foot block wall, and possibly leaving in some existing orange trees, with other landscaping in between. 71-61 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M Mr. Roberts explained that the setback requirement on Katella Ave- nue, which is a major highway, would be measured 60 feet from the centerline of the street (which would be a half-width of the street), plus 50 feet from that point; since there are additional right-of-way requirements because of the necessary slope for the underpass on Katella Avenue, an actual setback of 10 or 15 feet from the property boundary line may be all that would be re- quired at some points, especially near the railroad tracks. Mr. VaVerka stated that he would be willing to go along with Code setback requirements, if necessary. sition. Mayor Dutton asked if anyone wished to address the Council in oppo- Merrill Skilling, representing Northrop Corporation and Mutual Bene- fit Life Insurance Company, from whom they lease property north of Howell Ave- nue, across from the proposed park, objected to subject application on the basis that it would degrade the area for industrial use. Mr. Skilling stated he also was representing the Industrial Division of the Anaheim Chamber of Co~nerce, and referenced a Resolution of the Chamber of Commerce opposing subject application. Replying to Council questioning, Mr. Skilling advised that although he had not checked into the alleged 20 letters fr°m area tenants favoring the application, some of whom could be members of the Chamber of Commerce, the procedure followed with regard to such issues was that the Industrial Com- mittee, which consists of a cross section of the industrial co~m~unity, re- views such an issue and draws up a resolution if it is deemed advisable to take a position; this resolution then goes to the Executive Comznittee for approval before being submitted to the Board of Directors for a final deci- sion. Thus it is felt each issue gets a thorough review representing the wishes of the industrialist in general before a decision is made involving the Chamber of Commerce. He added that he did not think there would have been a different decision if the Industrial Committee had known the request was for a 10-year period only. Mr. Skilling also stated they realized that the owner could not be required to carry a large tax burden on property over an extended period; however, industrialists locate in an area expecting Industrial Zoning to be retained. He stated he believed the solution would be to develop all indus- trial property in the City as quickly as possible, and advised that the Cham- ber of Cor~nerce is embarking on an active campaign of business development of all types, including undeveloped industrial property. Jack Lorensen, of Keystone Mortgage, a partner in the Stadium In- dustrial Park, read letter in opposition previously submitted by them. Mayor Dutton invited the Applicant to again address the Council. Mr. Knisely repeated the request that subject application be gran- ted for a period of 10 years, since there is an existing need for such ac- commodations for the tourists. It was determined sufficient evidence had been presented, and Mayor Button declared the hearing closed. Replying to Councilman Pebley's query, Councilman Thom stated he did not believe adding a travel trailer park near the Disneyland Hotel had supplied enough facilities to suffice the needs. Council~an Stepl~on =tared his.observations have been that the travel trailer park near the DtsaeYl~nd Hotel has not been half-filled at any time of the year; also; he had no, ed vacancies at ~he travel trailer park on Harbor Boulevard at Ball Road, during the heavy tourist season last August° 71-62 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:30 Mr. Roberts advised that no survey has been conducted in recent years with regard to need for travel trailer parks; however, several such parks in and around the Dtsneyland area have been approved over the past two or three years. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-41: Councilman Stephenson stated he believed granting subject petition even for a 10-year period would set a precedent and also would be spot zoning, therefore, he offered Resolution No. 71R-41 for adop- tion, denying Conditional Use Permit No. 1213. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1213. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCIL~N: AB SENT: COUNC IL~N: Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton Roth None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-41 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 69-70-25 AND VARIANCE NO. 2142 (TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 7137, REVISION NO, 1): Submitted by Geraldine E. Roth, et al, request- ing a change of zone from County Al, to City of Anaheim R-2-5,000, to estab- lish a 451-1ot, single-family subdivision on property located south of Esper- anza Road,. east of Imperial Highway, with waiver of: a. Minimum building site width. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-2, recommended that R-2-5,000 zoning be disapproved and R-1 zoning be approved for subject reclassification, subject to the following conditions: 1. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 2. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezontng subject pro- perty, 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 conditions are complied with within one year from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant. 3. 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 build- ing permit is issued. 4. That these reclassification proceedings are granted subject to the completion of annexation of subject property to the City of Anaheim. 5. That subject property shall be developed in accordance with standards as follows: 1) That prior to the inroductton of an ordinance reclassifying subject property, a specific plan shall be required for any use, subdivision, site design or the construction of any building, fence, sign or structure, or the removal or de- posit of natural material. Plans shall be submitted in- dicating front, side, and rear elevations, plan view and a cross section through the proposal and through sufficient adjacent properties to indicate the relationship of the proposal to ~hoee properties. Plans or drawings should also-show pro~aed bul!din~ or structure locations, and in reasonable detail walls, walks, topography, existing vegetation, proposed parkin~ layout and location, land- scape and irrigation proposals,, building and roofing ma- terials. 71-63 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 197.1, 1:30 P.M. 2) All buildings or mobilehome coaches along La Palma Ave- nue, A.T. & S.F. Railroad right=of-way and Fairmont Bou- levard, shall maintain a landscaped setback area having a minimum depth of 50 feet. Said setbacks shall be mea- sured horizontally from the planned highway right-of-way lines as indicated on the Circulation Element of the Gen- eral Plan to the building. The 50-foot setback may be reduced to 40 feet where variations in wall designs are provided. Variations in the required solid wall that are designed to include such decorative materials as wrought iron, wood, stone or landscaping are encouraged, provided that no more than ten percent of the required wall length consists of variations and that no variation have a width greater than 5 feet. 3) The entire required setback area except where driveways cross said areas, shall be landscaped as follows: land- scaping shall consist of lawn, trees, shrubs, ground co- ver and certain architectural features as listed below. All landscaped areas shall be permanently maintained in a neat and orderly manner as a condition of use and shall be provided with hose bibbs, sprinklers, or similar perma- nent irrigation facilities. The following architectural features, structures, and ac- cessways may be permitted in the required setback area: a. Fountains, ponds, pools, sculpture, planters and open or covered walkways where they are an integral part of a landscaping scheme comprised primarily of plant materials. b. Decorative screen type walls. ¢. Flag poles. (Maximum of 25-feet in height) 4) Where a building site is adjacent to the A.T. & S.F. Rail- road right-of-way a solid decorative masonry wall, an earthen berm or combination of the two shall be provided parallel to the right-of-way line. The wall or berm shall be at least six (6) feet high as measured from the high grade side of the property line. In order to insure pri- vacy to the dwelling units a wall or berm in excess of six (6) feet in height may be approved. Adequate land- scaping to fully screen to a height of ten (10) feet the subject property from the railroad within two (2) years, shall be provided adjacent to the right-of-way line. 5) Where a prospective building site and/or subdivision con- rains a Eucalyptus tree windbreak the developer shall either: (1) leave the windbreak in its natural state; (2) prune the trees to a height of not less than 25 feet; or, (3) re~ove the existing t~ees and replace them, one tree for every three trees (not necessarily in the same location) with windbreak substitute trees. Trees shall be at least eight (8) feet in height at the time of plant- ing. ~here a prospective building site and/or subdivision does not contain a Eucalyptus tree windbreak the developer shall plant trees in windbreak fashion along a convenient property line at the rate of ten (10) trees per gross acre. Trees shall be selected from the list of windbreak substi- tute trees at the end of this chapter and must be at least eight (8) feet high at the time of planting. Any prospective building site and/or subdivision shall be required to have more than ten (10) windbreak trees per ~roil 6) All natural terrain or areas left in an undisturbed state shall ¢omtain or shall be planted with adequate native plant material, An irrigation system shall not be re- quired for these natural areas. 71-64 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNq!L MINUTES - February 2, 1971,. 1;~0 7) All cut or fill slopes shall be planted with adequate plant materials and irrigated with an irrigation system to protect the slopes against erosion. Said planting shall consist of at least one (1) tree per 300-square feet and one (1) shrub per 150-square feet of actual bank slope area and a ground cover to completely cover the bank within two (2) years from the time of planting. 8) The maximum overall height of any building shall be 25 feet measured from the highest portion of structure to the high- est finished grade level at the foundation. 9) Roof mounted equipment including exterior mounted and ground mounted radio and television antennas shall not be permitted. That Condition Nos. (3), (4), and (5), above mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. The City Planning Con~aission, at their meeting held January 1I, 1971, by Motion, deferred action on Variance No. 2142 and Tentative Tract No. 7137, Revision No. 1 to February 22, 1971, to allow the City Council to take action on the Reclassification and for the Petitioner to submit a revised tract map accordingly, in the e~ent R-1 zoning is approved. Zoning Supervisor Charles Roberts noted the location of subject ap- proximate 90 acres of property, the existing uses and zoning in the immediate area, and briefed the evidence submitted to and considered' by the City Planning Commission. He reported that several months ago the City Council indicated their approval of a request before the County Planning Commission for R-S-5,000 Zoning on this property if the Regional Park proposed for that area did not de- velop, and in December, 1970, after several delays on zoning applications area property owners requested the City Council reaffirm its previous decision re- garding the appropriateness of R-S-5,000 Zoning for approximately 330 acres in the area. At that time, the City Council advised the property owners to proceed with pending annexation to the City of Anaheim, primarily on the basis that the City Council felt the finding of the appropriateness of the County R-S-5,000 Zoning would be more or less binding upon the City, and the zoning probably would be appropriate. As a result, the Council directed the Planning Staff to initiate R-2-5,000 actions on the property. He further reported that subsequent to the City Council submitting a letter to the County Planning Commission concerning the appropriateness of the R-S-5,000 Zoning they directed the Planning Staff to initiate a General Plan Amendment (No. 122) for a density study, to determine which properties in the area were appropriate for higher densities. As a result of this study, the City Planning Co~ission recommended several months ago that both the area north of the River (between the River and Esperanza Road), and the properties between the River and the Santa Aha Canyon Road should be retained for Iow- density development, and thus now recommended subject property be zoned R-1 to conform with General Plan Amendment No. 122. Mr. Roberts also stated that at the same time subject petition was considered the City Planning Commission reviewed the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone. The Co=~nission reco~nended approval of the basic concept of the Over- lay Zone, although they requested some changes be made and the study brought back for final approval. In reply to Council~n Dutton, Mr. Roberts advised that the City Plannin§ Co~ission had based their determination to rec0m~nd low density on subject property on ~he fact tha~ the Gouncil had directed initiation of General Plan Amen~nt No. 122, on information received on the flood hazard, and also on the environment felt desirable in the area. Councilman Thom expressed the opinion that the City Planning Co~nis- sion decision had reflected the changing attitude of the Hill and Canyon com- munity, es~ecially in the Scenic Corridor, that low density should be maintained. Councilman Dutton expressed the opinion that subject property was ap- propriate for higher density, because of its location between a railroad track and the River; also that the property north of the River should be considered 71-65 City Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. separately from that south of the River, unless some bridges are planned from Imperial Highway over the River. Mr. Roberts expressed the opinion the City Planning Con~nission had considered the complete area rather than any separate small areas, and also that the areas both north and south of the River had been con- sidered in the whole general study. City Manager Keith Mnrdoch called attention to the Planning Staff report of August 10, 1970, on the preliminary Santa Ana Canyon Den- sity Study,where they reco~m~ended the areas around the Riverside Freeway, Santa Ana River Channel, elevated railway right-of-way, and Imperial High- way would be suitable for higher density residential development; and also that that area north of the Freeway be recognized as suitable for higher densities, while the area south of the Freeway remain low-density resi- dential. Councilman Pebley expressed the opinion that, since the Hill and Canyon property owners were advised that the higher density was con- sidered appropriate for these specified areas prior to annexation, this decision should not be changed at this time. Mr. Murdoch advised that the property owners in the Hill and Canyon Area were assured, prior to annexation, that the Council's deci- sion to recommended to the County R-S-5,000 zoning in certain areas was a serious recommendation. Also, at that time there was a question raised by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding the flood hazard in the Hill and Canyon Area, and now a letter has been received from the Corps of En- ~gineers stating that the design of the pr~.sent Channel by the Orange County Flood Control District is sufficient to take care of up to a 100-year flood, which is the flood level normally used by the City as a develop- ment criteria. Councilman Pebley inquired about a previous decision to require approval of plans and elevations prior to zoning approval. Mr. Murdoch advised that it would put a developer to consider- able unnecessary expense to require plans and elevations for zoning that may or may not be approved. Councilman Button stated that it has been a Council policy to grant the nearest~me to that previously granted by the County when pro- perty was annexed to t~e City. In reply to Councilman Stephenson, Mr. Roberts advised that the majority of subject property is relatively flat, and thus there would be no substantial areas devoted to slope with the exception of Fairmont Bou- levard, which is designed to bisect the property and will have slopes, however, none of Fairmont Boulevard slope area would be a part of any of the proposed lots. Mr. Murdoch advised that one of the owners of subject property had expressed a desire for a planned-residential development, which could incorporate to a much more satisfactory degree the concept of the Scenic Corridor and its applications, rather than an R-2-5,000 development. He further advised that the planned-residential development approach might be a more acceptabter~olution. Mr. Ymrdoch further advised that the Planning Staff had concurred that a planned-reside~tial development would be the best solution; however, he added, the owners first need an indication that they can obtain a den- sity of ~FProximatelyR-2-5,000. In reply to Councilman Pebley's suggestion that subject appli- cation be continued so that plans for a planned-residential development could be submitted, Hr. F~rdoch reminded the Council that an indication that a higher density than R-1 would be approved would be necessary before such plans could be required. 71-66 CitM Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, !971, 1:30 P.M. Councilman Stephenson asked for information on the proposed homes, and specifically asked if the developer was considering 4 bedrooms in a mini- mum 1,225-square foot home. Mayor Dutton asked if the Applicant or his Agent was present and wished to address the Council. Gil Kraemer, Placentia, representing the Applicants, advised that he would like to defer answering Councilman Stephenson's question on home sizes until a later time, since the request before the Council at this time was for R-2-5,000 Zoning. He reviewed the history of subject property and, with the aid of a map on the wall of the Council Chambers, pointed out the proposed development and accessways east of Imperial Highway, in an effort to show that an R-2-5,000, single-family development would not be in oppo- sition to what currently is developing in the area. In reply to Councilman Pebley, Mr. Roberts advised that the condi- tions listed in City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC71-2 would apply if R-2-5,000 Zoning was granted, as well as R-1. Mr. Kraemer referred to conditions listed in Planning Commission Resolution No. PC71-2, and stated that, in his opinion, Condition No. 2 would impose undue hardships on a developer. Mr. Murdoch explained that requiring that a final tract map be ap- proved by the City Council and recorded by the County is a normal prerequi- site of the City of Anaheim in every zoning action involving a subdivision. With regard to Condition No. 5, subparagraph 1), of Resolution No. PC71-2, Mr. Kraemer stated they would agree to submitting building plans prior to issuance of the building permit, but they did not feel it was logi- cal to submit these plans prior to the final zoning. Mr. Murdoch advised this condition was intended to adapt the Scen- ic Corridor Overlay Zone to subject property. Referring to Condition No. 5, subparagraph 2, regarding setback requirements, Mr. Kraemer felt the 40 and 50-foot required setbacks were too severe. He also stated he believed the requirements as set forth in Condi- tion No. 7, regarding plantings, were excessive, since this could amount to as much as $15,000.00 an acre in some locations where there are slopes. Mr. Murdoch advised that the detailed conditions recorm~ended by the City Planning Commission were designed to adapt property to the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone; however, since the Scenic Corridor Plan is not yet ready for Council consideration, and several changes still could be made, it was possible some of the conditions as set forth in City Planning Commis- sion Resolution No. PC71-2 would not meet the final requirements of this zone. He referenced several changes that already had been made in the Scenic Corridor Study as a result of recent work sessions with the City Planning Commission. Mayor Dutton asked if anyone wished to address the Council in op- position. Mrs. Ken Burnap, representing the League of Women Voters of Anaheim- Garden Grove, and also the Orange C~unty Chapter, urged the City Council to take a stewardship role in preserving the Santa Aha Canyon as a unique rec- reational and aesthetic asset for Orange County, and advised that the State Administrators of the Department of Interiors, Land and Water Conservation Fund still are interested in funding the acquisition of the proposed regional "Yorba Park." She suggested that subject property be considered in the con- text of the pending Scenic Corridor Plan; that since the Yorba Park still is a possibility, irreversible changes in the natural resources of Santa Ana Canyon and River should not be allowed to take place. 71-67 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. Mrs. Burnap advised that Orange County recently had adopted a Flood Plain Insurance program, obligating the County to be cautious in permitting development in flood plains, and asked if the City of Anaheim had considered such an insurance program. The City Manager stated he was unfamiliar with the type of in- surance referred to. Albert Yorba, owner of property adjacent to subject property, stated that in obtaining Multiple-Dwelling Zoning from the County for part of his property he was advised he could build as high as 18 units per acre on one side of Imperial Highway, and 12 units per acre on the other side. Mr. Yorba noted uses presently approved in the area by the County north to Orangethorpe Avenue, including mobile home parks and multiple-family zoning, and felt the R-2-5,000 zone should be approved for subject pro- perty and his property. It was determined sufficient evidence had been presented, and Mayor Dutton declared the hearing closed. Councilman Roth, being newly appointed to the City Council, sta- ted he had not seen any information on the proposed Scenic Corridor Over- lay Zone, and was not familiar with the background of subject application. Also, since no stand had as yet been taken by the City Council on the Scenic Corridor he could not give a proper judgment and vote at this time. RESOLUTION: Councilman Thom reiterated his belief that community standards in the Hill and Canyon Area were changing and residents now desire lower densities, whereupon he offered a Resolution for adoption, denying R-2- 5,000 zoning for Reclassification No. 69-70-25 and granting R-1 zoning, as recommended by the City Planning Commission. The foregoing Resolution received the following Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEN: COUNCILMEN: COUNCILMEN: Stephenson and Thom Pebley and Dutton Roth The foregoing Resolution failed to carry,.Hue to a tie vote. Councilman Roth suggested the issue be brought back in one week for another vote and advised that in the meantime he would review past actions in order to render a more intelligent decision. Mr. Kraemer advised that there actually are three annexations involved in the general area of subject property: One 45-acre parcel from the proposed mobile home park to the future Fairmont Avenue. Another 45-acre parcel on the other side of Fairmont Avenue. Also the property to be considered under Reclassification No. 70-71-25, comprising 150 acres, adjacent to the second subject 45-acre parcel. In reply to Mr. Kraemer, Mr. Murdoch advised that annexation proceedings have not yet been completed on the property to be considered under Reclassification No. 70-71-25. 71-68 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. RECESS: Councilman Dutton moved for a 10-minute Recess. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (3:55 P.M.). AFTER RECESS: Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order, all members of the City Council being present. (4:10 P.M.). RECLASSIFICATION NO. 70-71-25: Initiated by the Anaheim City Council for a change of zone from County A1 to City of Anaheim R-2-5,000 on property located on the south side of Esperanza Road, east of Imperial Highway, further described as the Esperanza-Carrillo Annexation. The City Planning Con~nission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-3, recommended R-2-5,000 Zoning be denied on Reclassification No. 70-71-25, and R-1 Zoning be granted, subject to conditions. In view of the fact that decision on Reclassification No. 69-70-25 was deferred to February 9, 1971, which property is adjacent to subject pro- perty, Councilman Pebleymoved to continue public hearing on Reclassification No. 70-71-25 to February 9, 1971, 1:30 P.M. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. SAGE PARK LAND ACQUISITION - LA PALMA LITTLE LEAGUE: The subject of acquisition of additional property at Sage Park was continued from the meeting of January 26, 1971, to determine if necessary funds for this acquisition could be ob- tained by a Budget transfer. City Manager Keith Murdoch advised that a review of the Parks and Recreation 1970-71 Budget had disclosed four budgeted items totaling $11,500. that it was felt could be delayed without considerable adverse effect, and thus it was his recommendation, and that of the Parks and Recreation Direc- tor, that $11,500.00 be transferred for the acquisition of the additional property adjacent to Sage Park, and that the balance of approximately $7,000. needed to complete the purchase, after receipt of $5,000.00 offered as a do- nation by the La Palma Little League, be obtained from the Council Contingency Fund. On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Pebley, authori- '~zation was ~ted to purchase from the McMichael Company, at a total cost of ~-~-~$23,638.00,'i~8 acre of additional property adjacent to Sage Park, by trans- ferring $11,500.00 from the Parks and Recreation 1970-71 Budget, and the bal- ance of approximately $7,000.00 needed to complete the purchase transferred from the Council Contingency Fund, after receipt of $5,000.00 to be donated by the La Palma Little League; and accepted the offer of an additional $5,000. from the La Palma Little League, as outlined in their letter of December 23, 1970, at $1,000.00 per year over a five-year period beginning July, 1972, and ending July, 1976. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Pebley left the Council Chambers. (4:15 P.M.). PUBLIC DANCE PERMIT: Application filed by Mrs. Concha C. Flores, on behalf of Sociedad Progresista Mexicana #33, for permit to conduct public dance Feb- ruary 7, 1971, at Carpenters Hall, 608 West Vermont Avenue, 4:00 P.M., to 8:00 P.M., was submitted and granted, subject to provisions of Chapter 4.16 of the Anaheim M~nicipal Code, as recommended by the Chief of Police, on mo- tion by Councilman Stephem~on, ~ec~ed by Council~m Thom. MOTION CARRIED. DINNER DANCING PLACE PERMIT: Applicatiom filed by Mr. A1 Young, for dinner-dancing place permit to allow dancing seven days a wee~, from 7:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M., at the Purple Lion Restaurant, 919 South Knott Avenue, was submitted and granted, subject to provisions of Chapter 4.16 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, as reco~m~ended by the Chief of Police, on motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Stephenson. I~DTION~IED. 71-69 City Hall, Anaheim, Califo~ia -COUNCIL MI}P0TES - February 2~ 1971, 1:30 P.M. FIREWORKS DISPLAY PERMIT -.DISNEY: Application filed by Raymond Contrucci, President, California Fireworks Display Company, for permit to allow pub- lic fireworks displays February 12, 13, 14 and 15, 1971, at Disneyland Park was submitted and granted as requested, on motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Thom. MOTION CARRIED. COM~fNI~ CONFERENCE - VIO,L~NGE AND VANDALISM: Correspondence dated January 14, 1971, from James D. Brier, Superintendent and Secretary to the Ana- heim City School District Board of Education, was submitted requesting the City Council to call a "Community Conference" regarding growing violence and vandalism in the con~nunity. Parks and Recreation Director John Collier reported that a December 1, 1969 to December 1, 1970 study revealed vandalism in the City Parks and other City facilities and the four School Districts caused out-of-pocket expenses of $55,000.00 during that period; total expenses incurred,including such things as Police investigation, etc., amounted to about $110,000.00. He advised that in discussion with Larry Sierk, of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, it was suggested a Steering Committee be formed, including representation from industry and the Police Department, to discuss the possibilities of such a conference. It was felt such a Steering Co~ttee should include Mr. Sierk, James Brier, Police Chief Michel, himself, and perhaps two or three other people. In reply to Councilman Dutton, Mr. COllier and City Attorney Joseph Geisler advised that parents have been held responsible for acts of vandalism by their children in City Parks where it has been possible to identify the vandal. Mr. Murdoch advised that there has been some success from a program of contacting the Principal of a school near a City Park where there has been vandalism and arranging an assembly to discuss the subject with the pupils. By general Council consent, the City Clerk was directed to re- move from the Council Agenda the subject of the Community Conference on Violence and Vandalism in the community, to be rescheduled at such time as reports and recommendations are received from the Parks and Recreation Director. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION I~BMS: Actions taken by the City Planning Commis- sion at their meeting held January 11, 1971, pertaining to the following applications, were submitted for City Council information and considera- tion: VARIANCE NO. 2225: Submitted by Leo Gogerty, requesting a waiver of the Anaheim Municipal Code on C-2 zoned property located on the east side of Anaheim Boulevard, south of Water Street, as follows: a. Permit expansion of an existing automobile sales and service facility (a nonconforming use). The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71- 4, granted said variance, subject to conditions. VARIANCE NO. 2226: Submitted by Mayer Construction Company, Incorporated, to establish an office use in an existing residence on C-1 zoned property located on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, west of Dale Avenue, with waiver of: (70-71-16) a. Code requirement that parking be provided behind a commercially used residential structure. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71- 5, granted said variance, subject to conditions. 71-70 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. VARIANCE NO. 2227: Submitted by Gulf Oil Corporation of California, to estab- lish a mobile home sales lot on C-1 zoned property located on the west side of Beach Boulevard, south of Ball Road, with waivers of: a. Permitted uses. b. Required 6-foot masonry wall adjacent to R-A property. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-6, granted said variance in part, granting Waiver a, and denying Waive b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1152: Request for a six (6) months extension of time to permit an enclosed restaurant on M-1 zoned property located on the west side of State College Boulevard, north of Ball Road. The City Planning Con~nission, by Motion granted the six-month exten- sion of time to said conditional use permit, to expire July 26, 1971. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1220: Submitted by Brookhurst Shopping Center, to permit on-sale liquor in a proposed cocktail lounge serving "adults only" on C-1 zoned property located at the northwest corner of Ball Road and Brookhurst Street. The City Planning Cormnission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-7, granted said conditional use permit, subject to conditions. The foregoing actions were reviewed by the C~y Council, and no fur- ther action taken. TENTATIVE MAP, TRACT NO. 7218, REVISION NO. 1, AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 7219,. RE- VISION NO. 1 (69-70-56): Developer, Modular Technology, Incorporated; property located at the southeast corner of Rio Vista and Frontera Steets. Tract No. 7218 contains 4 proposed R-3 lots, and Tract No. 7219 contains 3 proposed R-3 lots. The City Planning Commission, at their meeting held January 25,1971, approved Tentative Map, Tract No. 7218, Revision No. 1, subject to the follow- ing conditions: 1. That approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 7218, Revision No. 1, is granted subject to the approval of Reclassification No. 69-70-56. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. 3. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. 4. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That drainage of Tract No. 7218 shall be disposed of in a manner that is satisfactory to the City Engineer. 6. That vehicular access rights, except at street and/or alley openings, to Rio Vista Street and Frontera Street shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim. 7. That the covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be sub- mitted to and approved by the City Attorney's office prior to City Council approval of the final tract map and, further, that the approved covenants, conditions and restrictions shall be recorded concurrently with the final tract map. 8. Prior to filing the final tract map, the applicant shall submit to the City Attorney, for approval or denial, a complete synopsis of the pro- posed fumctioning of the operating corporation including but not limited to, the articles of incorporation, by-laws, proposed rules and regulations, me- thods of operation, funding, assessment, methods of management, bonding to secure maintenance of common property and buildings and such other informa- tion as the City Attorney may desire to protect the City, its citizens, and the purchasers of the project. 71-71 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:.30 P.M. The City Planning Commission, at their meeting held January 25, 1971, approved Tentative Map, Tract No. 7219, Revision No. 1, subject to the following conditions: 1. That approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 7219, Revision No. 1, is granted subject to the approval of Reclassification No. 69-70-56. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. 3. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. 4. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That the owners of subject tract shall acquire access to Park Vista Street. 6. That drainage of Tract No. 7219 shall be disposed of in a man- ner that is satisfactory to the City Engineer. 7. That vehicular access rights, except at street and/or alley openings to Frontera Street, shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim. 8. That the covenants conditions, and restrictions shall be sub- mitted to and approved by the City Attorney's office prior to City Council approval of the final tract map and, further, that the approved coventants, conditions, and restrictions shall be recorded concurrently with the final tract map. 9. Prior to filing the final tract map, the applicant shall sub- mit to the City Attorney, for approval or denial, a complete synopsis of the proposed functioning of the operating corporation including, but not limited to, the articles of incorporation, by-laws, proposed rules and regu- lations, method of operation, funding, assessment, methods of management, bonding to secure maintenance of common property and buildings and such other information as the City Attorney may desire to protect the City, its citizens, and the purchasers of the project. On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, Tentative Maps, Tracts Nos. 7218, Revision No. 1, and 7219, Revision No. 1, were approved subject to the recommendations of the City Planning Commission. MOTION CARRIED. FINAL MAP, TRACT NO. 5827: Developer - Colwell Company. Tract located on the north side of Riverdale Avenue, at Sweetwater Street, containing 48 proposed R-1 lots. The City Engineer recommended approval and reported that said Final Map conforms substantially with the Tentative Map previously approved; that bond has been forwarded to the City Attorney for approval, and required fees paid. On recommendation of the City Engineer, Councilman Stephenson moved that Final Map, Tract No. 5827 be approved, subject to approval of required bond by the City Attorney. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. FINAL MAP, TRACT NO. 7241: Developer - Orange County Development Corporation. Tract located at the southeast corner of Western and Orange Avenues, con- taining 75 proposed R-2-5,000 lots. The City Engineer recommended approval and reported that said Final Map conforms substantially with the Tentative Map previously approved, that bond has been forwarded to the City Attorney for approval,and required fees paid. On recon~nendation of the City Engineer, Councilman Thom moved that Final Map, TraCt No. 7241 be approved, subject to approval of required bond by the City Attorney. Councilman Stephenson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 71-72 City Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. ORANGE COUNTY ZONE CHANGE NO. ZC71-3: Zoning Supervisor Charles Roberts ~eported on the findings of the Development Services Department regarding request pend- ing before the Orange County Planning Commission for change of zone from County A1 to County R-2-(4,000), Group Dwellings, on approximately 3.1 acres of land located on the north side of Santa Aha Canyon Road, opposite Mohler Drive. He noted that in March, 1970, the City Council recommended R-2-(4,000) be denied on property immediately surrounding subject property, and also property to the west of subject property, which zoning subsequently was granted by the Orange County Planning Commission. He added that the persons who had requested R-2- (4,000) for the immediately-surrounding property now are making subject app- lication. Mr. Roberts further reported that plans have been received this date for a proposed mobile home park for subject property, and preliminary review shows no circulation provided. On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Roth, the City Clerk was directed to advise the Orange County Planning Commission that the City Council recommends said zoning request be denied. MOTION CARRIED. DRIVEWAY EASEMENT (RECLASSIFICATION NO. 69-70-21 AND 69-70-4)- RESOLUTION NO.71R-42~ Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 71R-42 for adoption, accepting letter agreement to grant or retain a driveway easement, in connection with Reclassi- fication Nos. 69-70-21 and 69-70-4 (3146 West Ball Road). Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH RECLASSIFICATION 69-70-21 AND 69-70-4. (3146 WEST BALL ROAD). Roll Call Vote: AYE S: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Thom and Dutton None Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-42 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-43 - WORK ORDER NO. 600-B: Upon receipt of certification from the Director of Public Works, Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 71R-43 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOL- LOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE IMPROVEMENT OF LA PALMA AVENUE FROM APPROXIMATELY 184 FEET EAST OF MAYFAIR AVENUE TO EUCLID STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 600-B. (R.J. Noble Company) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Thom and Dutton None Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-43 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-44 - SETTLEMENT OF EMINENT DOMAIN: On recommendation of the City Attorney, Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution No. 71R-44 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE SETTLE- MENT OF CERTAIN EMINENT DOMAIN LITIGATION (SANTA ANA RIVER CHANNEL)-(Shorb We11- $8,386.75) 71-73 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Thom and Dutton None Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-44 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-45 - EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY: On recommendation of the City Mana- ger, Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-45 for adoption, authorizing a proposed exchange of City-owned land located at the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Jefferson Street,for land located at the southeast cor- ner of Western Avenue and Orange Avenue, owned by Dominic Etchandy, et al. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE EXCHANGE OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY. (The southeast corner of La Palma Avenue for the southeast corner of Western Avenue and Orange Avenue.) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Thom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-45 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-46 - PURCHASE OF PROPERTY: On recon~nendation of the City Mana- ger, Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-46 for adoption, authorizing and directing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement for ,the pur- chase of tax deed property at Teranimar Drive, near Western Avenue. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE A CERTAIN AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE BY THE CITY OF ANAHEIM OF TAX DEEDED PROPERTY (TERANIMAR NEAR WESTERN) - ($10.00) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: AB SENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Thom and Dutton None Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 7 1R-46 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-47: Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution No. 71R-47 for adoption, amending Resolution No. 70R-594, nunc pro tunc, by eliminating a deed included and accepted in error. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 0FANAHEIMRESCINDING RES0- LUTION NO. 70R-594, IN PART. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL~N: NOES: COUNCIL~N: ABSENT: COUNCIL~N: Roth, Stephenson, Thom and Dutton None Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-47 duly passed and adopted. 71-74 City .Hall: Anaheim, .California - COUNCIL MINUTES - FebruaKy 2, 1971, .1:30 P.M. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY: Claim filed by The Property Management Company, on behalf of the owners of property located at 1660 Palm Lane, Anaheim, for personal property damages purportedly resulting from po~er failure, on or about Novem- ber 29, 1970, was denied as recommended by the City Attorney and ordered re- ferred to the insurance carrier, on motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Stephenson. MOTION CARRIED. CROSSING PROTECTION - RESOLUTION NO. 71R-48: Councilman Stephenson offered Reso- lution No. 71R-48 for adoption, authorizing a request for allocation from the Crossing Protection Fund, for the crossing of the Southern Pacific Transpor- tation Company tracks at Nutwood Street. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE SUB- MISSION OF A REQUEST TO Tt{E PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION FOR FUNDS FROM THE CROSSING PROTECTION FUND FOR PROTECTION OF CROSSING NO. BAA-511.4 AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY TRACKS AT NUTWOOD STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Thom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-48 duly passed and adopted. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed, on motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Stephenson: a. City of Costa Mesa - Resolution No. 71-4 - Urging that Southern California Agency of Governments (SCAG) consider the adoption of a policy to oppose any bill on a State or Federal level which does not involve local gov- ernment elected representation in the decision-making process regarding the orderly physical development of a region. b. County of Humboldt - Resolution No. 71-3 - Requesting legisla- tive action to eliminate the litter problem created by nonreturnable beverage containers. c. Before the Public Utilities Commission - The Western Union Tele- graph Company application for an order authorizing it to revise certain intra- state rates and charges applicable to message telegraph and other services within the State of California. d. Before the Public Utilities Con~nission - The Gray Line Tours Company application for authority to provide sightseeing service between points within the Corporate Limits of the Cities of Anaheim, Beverly Hills, Buena Park, Glendale, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Pasadena and Santa Monica and Magic M~untain at Valencia. e. Before the Public Utilities Commission - Douglas Bus Lines, Inc., application for authority to extend service area to serve the "Autonetics" Laguna Niguel Facility at 24000 Avila Road, Laguna Niguel, California, 92677. f. Before the Public Utilities Commission - City of Anaheim appli- cation to construct a City street across the right-of-way of the Southern Pacific Railway Company at Sunkist Street, approximately 899 feet east of Cerritos Avenue, Crossing BM 512.9. g. Before the Public Utilities Commission - Southern California Gas Company application for authority to revise its tariffs for natural gas service to offset increases in expenses caused by net increases in the price of natural gas from its suppliers. h. Community Center Authority - Minutes - January 18, 1971. i. Anaheim Public Library Board - Minutes - December 21, 1970. MOTION CARRIED. ORDINANCE NO. 2903: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 2903 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. 71-75 City Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (66-67-61(45) - C-R) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Thom and Dutton None Pebley The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 2903 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 2904: Councilman Stephenson offered Ordinance No. 2904 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 3, CHAPTER 3.04, OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THERETO SECTION 3.04.115 RELATING TO EXEMPTION FROM BUSINESS LICENSE TAX. (Persons Subject to Highway Carriers Uniform Business License Tax Act.) ORDINANCE NO. 2905: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 2905 for first read- ing. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (70-71-10 - R-3) ORDINANCE NO. 2906: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 2906 for first read- ing. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (70-71-21 - R-l) ORDINANCE NO. 2856: Councilman Stephenson offered Ordinance No. 2856 for cor- rected first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (69-70-10 - R-3 - Portion B) ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE - ~3NICIPAL GOLF COURSE: The City Attorney reported that on December 15, ~ the City Council gave permission to R & R Cater- ing to apply for an AI66Rolic Beverage License for the Anaheim Municipal Golf Course; however, it is now necessary for the City of Anaheim, being owners of the property, to request the license be issued and to set forth reasons why the issuance would be in the public interest. On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, the City Clerk was directed to forward to the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board a request that an Alcoholic Beverage License be issued for the Ana- heim Municipal Golf Course, listing the following findings as reasons therefor, as recomended by the City Attorney: 1. Service of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with food at the Anaheim Municipal Golf Course is traditional and is desired by many golfers. 2. Ail public and private golf courses in the general area serve alcoholic beverages, and,in order to afford the level of service of the area at the Anaheim Municipal Golf Course, the service of alcoholic beverages is needed. 3. Anaheim is the tourist center of Southern California, and many tourists play golf at Anaheim Municipal Golf Course and expect to receive the service of alcoholic beverages there the same as they receive at other California golf courses, and to provide such service at the Golf Course is in the best public interest. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-49 - RECRSATION ASSISTANT: CoUncilman Thom offered Resolu- tion No. 71R-49 for adoption. 71-76 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 70R-472 AND ESTABLISHING A RATE OF COMPENSATION FOR A NEW JOB CLASS. (Recreation Assistant - Senior Citizens Advisor) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Thom and Dutton None Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-49 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-50 - AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT - NICHOLAS CASSA, JR.: Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-50 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION BY THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK OF AN A~NDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN NICHOLAS CASSA, JR. AND THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RELATING TO THE ANA- HEIM MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: (Golf Practice Driving Range - Deletion) Roth, Stephenson, Thom and Dutton None Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-50 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-51 - CHANTILLY STORM DRAIN: Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 71R-51 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT IN CONNECTION WITH RELOCATION OF WATER MAINS AT CHANTILLY STORM CHANNEL. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: AB SENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Thom and Dutton None Febley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-51 duly passed and adopted. ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT PROJECT - ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT: The City Mana- ger reported a proposal had been made by the Orange County Water District that Anaheim enter into their program of utilizing for recreation purposes Orange County Water District properties presently used either for replenish- ment of the basin or in some other part of their water replenishment program. Parks and Recreation Director John Collier, with the aid of a sche- matic drawing, outlined the area recommended by Orange County Water District for such a joint recreational facility as that bounded approximately by Lin- coln Avenue, Orange City Limits, Burris Sand Pit, and the 9-acre, Anaheim City-owned property south of Lincoln Avenue.(Map labeled "Orange County Water District, Initial Development Plan - Reach No. 3. (Initial Development from Lincoln Avenue to Carbon Creek,) Environmental Enhancement Project - Santa Aha River.") Mr. Collier advised that the Orange County Water District has em- ployed a firm owned by Harvey Banks, former head of the State Department of Natural Resources, to study all property owned by the Water District, to 71-77 ..City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. determine if such property could be utilized for recreational purposes as well as spreading purposes, and the proposed project is one result of this study. Mr. Collier advised that the Orange County Water District sets aside for such projects 10% of gross revenues received from the sale of gravel from their pits, and also from the joint operation of Anaheim Lake with the City of Anaheim, and they presently have a total of $50,000.00 in this fund. Their proposal is to use this $50,000.00 for the major capital expenditures for such a project, beginning work on it as soon as possible, Anaheim to assume the cost of maintenance thereafter. He added that the Orange County Water District hoped to eventually initiate the same type of project on their properties all along the Santa Ana River in conjunction with the various corm~unities involved. He depicted the project as having an approximate 30-acre lake; a berm separating the Flood Channel from the River bed, and creating a green belt visible from the Anaheim side; bicycle and hiking trail on the north side; with a possible swimming, boating and beach area at the east end of the lake which would be the responsibility of the City of Anaheim; a horse trail on the south side would be the responsibility of the City of Orange. The lake would be approximately 6-feet deep, except for diving areas, and the water would come from the Diemer Plant, if the lake was used for swimming; if not used for swimming, the water would come from the Metro- politan Water District. Access and parking could be provided on the 9-acre former dump site, via a tunnel beneath Lincoln Avenue. Mr. Collier advised that if such an agreement were entered into with the Orange County Water District, he would recommend it be similar to the Anaheim Lake Agreement, wherein Anaheim would assume responsibility and liability for operation and maintenance of the facility, and Orange County Water District would provide the capital for development and also do much of the development work themselves. He also proposed there be fees charged for swimming, parking and paddle boats on a concession basis, as at Anaheim Lake. Netl Cline, Assistant Director of Orange County Water District, advised that if Anaheim chose not to enter into such an agreement with Orange County Water District, the Water District still would provide planting of some kind to make the area more attractive. Also Orange County Water Dist- rict would continue to set aside 10% of the gross revenues from the sale of sand and gravel and put this money back into the River Project in some way. In reply to Councilman Dutton, Mr. Cline advised that, depending on the operation, the proposed lake in this project would have to be closed to the public approximately one month a year to allow for drainage and clean- up. Mr. Murdoch advised that two points would have to be cleared up before such an agreement could be executed: 1. The area immediately on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, which was indicated as a parking area for the project, is partially owned by the City of Placentia. An agreement would have to be effected with Pla- centia for that purpose. 2. It would have to be determined if the Orange County Water Dis- trict would continue to take responsibility for removing silt from the bottom of the Channel. Mr. Cline answered that the Orange County Water District would con- tinue to spread water in the Flood Channel and would physically remove silt. 71-78 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 2, 1971, 1:30 P.M. In reply to Councilman Roth, Mr. Cline advised that the project would be begun with the $50,000.00 available at this time, and would be com- pleted in stages, as funds became available from the 10% of gross revenues set aside for the project. He also advised that although there still are problems with the Burris Sand Pit, a lawsuit now is in progress, and with the new River Improvement Plan to separate the River from the Flood Channel, the potential flood hazard no longer is prevalent at that point. He further advised that the Burris Pit would not delay the proposed project in any way. By general consent, the City Council agreed the proposal should be further explored; that maintenance and operation costs, costs of the parking area and also possible revenues be projected and that a form of agreement of contract between the two agencies be drawn for further consideration. ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Thom moved to adjourn. Councilman Dutton seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 5:10 P.M. Signed~~_ City Clerk City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 9, 1971~ 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton COUNCILMEN: None CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph B. Geisler DEPUTY CITY CLERK: Alona M. Farrens DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Alan Orsborn CITY ENGINEER: James Maddox ASSISTANT. DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Ronald Thompson ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order. INVOCATION: Reverend Carman, of the West Anaheim Baptist Church, gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Calvin L. Pebley led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council meetings held January 19 and 26,1971, were approved on motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Pebley. MOTION CARRIED.