1974/04/0974-325
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9~. !974~ 1:30 P~M,
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session~
PRESENT: COUNCII/~EN: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch
CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts
CITY CLERK: Aloha M. Fattens
UTILITIES DIRECTOR: Gordon W. Hoyt
PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Garry McRae
CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Ronald Thompson
ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts
Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order.
FlAG SALUTE: Councilman Mark A. Stephenson led the assembly in the Pledge
of Allegiance to the Flag.
PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Dutton and
unanimously approved by the City Council:
"Law Day" - Wednesday, May 1, 1974.
MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council Regular Meeting held March 12, 1974
were approved, on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas.
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 reading of
the title, specific request is made by a Councilman for the reading of such
ordinance or resolution. Councilman Pebley seconded the motion. MOTION UNANI-
MOUSLY CARRIED.
REPORT - FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City in the amount
"of $1,374,027.83, in accordance with the 1973-74 Budget, were approved.
CONTINUED PUBLIC ~ARI~ - REC!ASSIFICATION NO, 73-74-45; PUBLIC HEARINGS ON GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 131, REClASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-39~ VARIANCE NO. 2581 AND ENVIR-
ONMENTAL IHPACT REPORT NO. 114:
RECIASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-45: (Continued from the meeting of March 19, 1974.)
Initiated by the City Planning Commission for'change in zone from County of
Orange A1 to City of Anaheim R-A at the southeast corner of Sunkist Street and
Ball Road, and submitted together with application for EXemption Status from
the requirement to file an enviror~nental impact report.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-40,
recommaended that the subject zoning application be declared exempt from the
requirement to prepare an environmental impact report and further recommended
approval, subject to the following condition:
1. That these reclassification proceedings are granted subject to
completion of annexation of subject property to the City of Anaheim.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT NEGATIVE DECIARATION - REClASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-45:
On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, the City
Council finds that subject reclassification will have no significant effect
on the environment and is exempt from the requirement to prepare an environ-
mental impact report. MOTION CARRIED.
Said reclassification was originally scheduled for public' hearing at
the meeting of March 19, 1974, and continued to this date to be heard together
with General Plan Amendment No. 131, Reclassification No. 73-74-39, Variance
No. 2581 and Environmental Impact Report No. 114, at the request of Harry
Knisely, Agent for the Applicants in the latter zoning actions.
I III I II r_ i ~ ii _ i. I ~ iiI i i i ii i_1 ~ i ii i i .11 ii
74-326
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, 1974, 1:30 P.M,
It was also recommended by the Zoning Supervisor that General Plan
Amendment No. 131, Reclassification Nos. 73-74-45 and 73-74-39, and Variance
No. 2581, be heard and considered together.
GENEP~L PlAN AMENDMENT NO. 131: To consider changing the land use designation
from industrial to medium density residential for the area generally located
between the easterly City limits and the Santa Aha River, and Ball Road and
Cerritos Avenue.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-47,
recommended approval of General Plan Amendment No. 131 in accordance with Alter-
hate "A".
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-39~ VARIANCE NO. 2581 (ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
NO. 114): Application by Adolph J. Schutte and Elizabeth Anderson for a change
in zone from R-A to R-3 and M-1 and the following Code waivers to establish a
504-unit apartment project and a service station site, on property located be-
tween the easterly City limits and the Santa Aha River and Ball Road and
Cerritos Avenue, was submitted together with E.I.R. No. 114:
a. Minimum required distance between buildings.
b.' Maximum permitted height within 150 feet of a single-family
residential zone.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution Nos. PC74-48 and
PC74-49, recommended that E.I.R. No. 114 be certified as having been completed
in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the State of
California and further recommended denial of Reclassification No. 73-74-39 and
denied Variance No. 2581, respectively.
The City Clerk submitted the following correspondence received in
conjunction with Reclassification No. 73-74-39 and Variance No. 2581:
1. Letter from the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, dated April 3, 1974,
advising that the Board of Directors and.the Industrial Committee of the Chamber,
after thoroughly examining the subject 504-unit apartment development proposal,
stand opposed.
2. Letter from the Neville Chemical Company, dated April 5, 1974,
declaring opposition to the apartment project proposed for the southeast corner
of Sunkist Street.
3. Letter from James S. Gregg, 14352 Winston Road, withdrawing any
and all previous support he had given for designation of his and adjacent prop-
erties to the R-3 multiple-residential zone, as well as withdrawing his previous
support of Mr. A. J. Schutte for multiple-family residential development of
his property, and further requesting that Reclassification No. 73-74-39 and
Variance No. 2581 be denied, and the area maintained as M-1 property in the
Anaheim General Plan.
Zoning Supervisor Roberts reported that all of the subject zoning
actions referred to above and being considered together relate to the property
generally located between the easterly City limits and the Santa Aha River, and
Ball Road and Cerritos Avenue, which entire area, with the exception of an 8.2-
acre City parcel is currently unincorporated County territory. Reclassification
No. 73-74-45 has been initiated by the City Planning Commission to place subject
property into the R-A holding zone upon its annexation.
General Plan Amendment No. 131 and Reclassification No. 73-74-45 were
both initiated as the result of the request for R-3 zoning on a 21.5-acre parcel
under Reclassification No. 73-74-39, proposed to be developed as an apartment
project.
Mr. Roberts described the surrounding land uses and briefly
outlined the zoning history of subject area, calling attention in particular
to the fact that General Plan Ammndment No. 31, adopted in 1968, established
medium density residential land uses in an area southerly of Ball Road, generally
situated between State College and Sunkist Street, which is located adjacent
to the westerly boundary of subject property. Due to the concern expressed by
74-327
City Hall, Auaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, 1.974, 1:30 P.M.
industrialists and some members of the City Council at that time regarding
infringement into the industrial area, after numerous public hearings Area
Development Plan No. 94, Alternate "B'~ was adopted which determined that med-
ium density residential use would be appropriate for the northerly 660 feet
of property south of Ball Road only and the remaining area suitable for indus-
trial uses. It was further determined that General Plan Amendment No. 94,
Alternate "B", would provide sufficient buffering between these two
uses by establishing a local street at the 660-foot point.
General Plan Amendment No. 131 was initiated to explore the poten-
tial impact on the surrounding area if the request for R-3 zoning on.subject
property were approved. Mr. Roberts related that the entire subject area is
currently reflected on the General Plan as appropriate for M-1 development.
Mr. Roberts outlined the alternatives proposed under Area Develop-
ment Plan No. 131 as follows:
Alternate '~": Proposes to retain the existing industrial land
use designation on the entire 143 acres of the subject area, reflecting the
current land use statement as indicated on the General Plan without change.
Alternate "B": Proposes to designate approximately 56 acres of the
subject area located between Ball Road and Cerritos Avenue and Sunkist Street
and the Orange Freeway for a medium density residential use and includes Sub-
ject property proposed for R-3 development under Reclassification No. 73-74-39,
as well as the adjacent southerly area to Cerritos Avenue.
Alternate "C": Proposes to develop approximately 117 acres of the
subject area located between Ball Road and Cerritos Avenue and Sunkist Street
and the Santa Aha River for medium density residential use and reflects the
inclusion of the industrial designated area east of the Orange Freeway.
Alternate "D": Proposes to develop the entire 143 acre subject
area for medium density residential use including all of the industrial
designated area between Ball Road and Cerritos Avenue, easterly of the City
limits.
In addition, Mr. Roberts reported the park acreage which would be
necessary according to the current formula for each of these alternatives.
In regard to the zoning reclassification and development proposal
submitted in conjunction with the 21% acres (Reclassification No. 73-74-39,
Variance No. 2581), Mr. Roberts reported on the two waivers requested and that
the minimum distance between buildings (waiver "a") occurs in eight to ten
places on the site plan. The proposed density of the project is 29 units to
the acre and lot coverage is 41%. The project is intended to be developed
in three phases, with a public street to enter from Sunkist Street and three
parcels developed around the terminus of a cul-de-sac.
Mr. Roberts related that one of the points discussed at the Planning
Commission hearing was the impact of the noise and dust, etc., which would
be created by traffic on the Orange Freeway and the consequent annoyance to
residents if subject property were developed as a residential use. Further
he advised that concern was expressed by one Commissioner over the fact that
two off-ramps of the Orange Freeway are proposed to be located in this immed-
iate area (Ball Road and Katella Avenue) and that these would generate a
heavy use of Sunkist Street by industrial traffic. In conclusion, Mr. Roberts
read the findings on which the Planning Commission based their recommendation
for disapproval of the reclassification and denial of the variance.
Councilman Pebley, upon being informed that the apartment vacancy
factor has been 8% for the past two weeks, stated that perhaps this would be
a good location for apartment construction if indication is present .that addi-
tional units are needed, since there is usually opposition to placing apart-
ment complexes adjacent or nearby single-family residential areas. He further
noted that being contiguous to the industrial area, these units may serve to
house individuals working in the industrial area.
74-328
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Roberts advised that the Planning Commission took these matters
under consideration but the overruling influence in their decision was that
industrial area is developing at a rapid pace and it would appear that if the
current trend continue~the entire industrial land inventory will be entirely
utilized within the next five to seven years.
Councilman Thom inquired whether it is proper procedure to take zoning
action on property which is not within the City's jurisdiction and not under
application for annexation.
Mr. Watts counseled that it is appropriate to rezone 'property prior
to application for annexation and that any such zoning action would be contin-
gent upon completion of the annexation.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council either in
favor or in opposition to Reclassification No. 73-74-45, General Plan Amendment
No. 131, Reclassification No. 73-74-39, Variance No. 2581 or Environmental
Impact Report No. 114.
Mr. Vern Monroe, 5209 Sea Shore, Newport Beach, advised that he is
an industrial developer who has recently completed an industrial park at State
College and Orangethorpe and is currently in negotiations for some 23 acres of
property adjacent to subject area. He advised that it is an unfavorable situ-
ation for an industrial development to have residential area nearby as the even-
tual residents will find annoyance with trucks and noise and other conditions
which are common and usual as a result of industrial activities. He voiced the
opinion that the two land uses are not at all compatible. He pointed out that
the area is already committed to industrial uses; that Anaheim is an exceptional
area for industrial buildings; and that it would be, in his opinion, a mistake
to con, nit this property to R-3 when there is so little M-1 land available and
there are already R-3 areas all over the City.
Mr. William S. Woods, representing the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce,
as Vice President and Chairman of the Industrial Con~ittee, read the letter
previously submitte4 in ful~whtch urges~that the Council maintain the intent
of subject property for industrial use and uphold the Anaheim General Plan.
In addition, Mr. Woods remarked that the question could also be asked
to what the vacancy factor is in the industrial buildings. He advised that the
residential use of land adjacent to industrial precipitates many detrimental fac-
tors for the industrialist which are difficult and/or costly to contro~ such as
children playing on their property, vandalism, etc.
Mr. Robert Cotman, Production Manager, Pacific Scientific Company,
advised that their position on residential uses in this area has been publicly
known since 1968 when the first hearings were held on the matter. He advised
that they do support the change in the General Plan adopted in 1968 and urged
that the Council adhere to this. He advised that his firm has occupied their
current five-acre site since 1957, in which they have invested approximately
five million dollars. In his experience, having checked with their Personnel
Assistant, it would appear that the availability of nearby housing does not
necessarily mean that the employees avail themselves of it. He admonished that
once industrial land has been developed to residential uses, it cannot be re-
placed, and urged Council to adhere to the General Plan as it stands.
Mr. Merrill Skilling, employee of Northrup Corporation, 500 East
Orangethorpe, advised that his firm has built a plant expansion south of Cerritos
and east of State College Boulevard and that one of the reasons this site was
selected was because of the industrial zoning on the property and the antici-
pation that this would be held. He urged the Council to maintain the integrity
of industrial zoning in the area.
Mr. Ronald E. Moyer, Assistant, Industrial Agent, Southern Pacific
Land and Development, advised that his firm has been approached by industrial
developers regarding the feasibility and cost of providing rail service to 56
acres between Cerritos and Ball Road and Sunkist and the Freeway. He advised
that the railroad has only 25 acres left in the City of Anaheim with which it
can serve an industrial park and they would like to provide this service as soon
as possible because they have nothing more to offer.
74-329
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, 1974, 1:30 P,M,
Mr. Lewis Dexter, 305 North Ranchito, advised that he is a University
Professor in the field of Economics and has a long-standing interest in city
planning. He expressed his position in favor of the Planning C~,u,Lission recom-
mendation that the Council retain the subject area strictly for industrial
development. He referred to the current energy situation which may eventually
lead to decrease in City revenues derived from tourism and that there is nothing
more economically sound than a good industrial base since this places minimal
demand on City services.
Mr. Ken Nelson, Nelson Development Company, 174111rvine Boulevard,
Tusttn, Agent for the Applicant, advised that he is aware of the other poten-
tial uses for the property in subject Reclassification No. 73-74-39, however
they do have a plan develope~ and financing arranged, and are ready to develop
this property if zoning approval can be obtained. He noted that they have
selected the architectural firm of Kermit Dorius to design this project since
they have vast experience with apartment-condominium projects; that Mr. Dorius
has designed proJe~s for other properties adjacent to freeways and is cognizant
of the attendant problems; that the last such complex near a freeway was
rented within 60 days.
Mr. Kermit Dorius, 3111 2nd Avenue, Corona del Mar, Architect for
the project, remarked that the alternatives proposed and considered by the City
Planning Commission were confusing in that they involved parcels far beyond
what is proposed for development under Reclassification No. 73-74-39. He
pointed out that properties adjacent to the 214 acres under consideration are
either in a multi-family residential zone or agricultural preserve. He con-
tended that subject property because of its unique configuration lends itself
to this particular development and pointed out that because of the dual owner-
ship of the two contiguous parcels, it is necessary that these be developed
together so as to avoid a land-locked parcel situation. He indicated that the
intersection of Sunkist and Ball Road is currently predominantly residential
and the R-3 use of subject parcels would continue the tradition of the City
of Anaheim in using R-3 as a buffer zone between residential and industrial
uses,
Mr. Dorius displayed the plot plan and briefly explained that the
cul-de-sac street will divide the project into three villages, each of which
will contain two-story garden apartment units facing green areas within which
will be placed a central recreation area with swi~m~ing pool. A larger recrea-
tion complex with tennis courts, as well as artificial lakes and stream% is
also planned.
Mr. Dorius advised that the apartment complex is intended to be
adult-oriented and consequently would not be expected to create additional
demands for schools. The variances requested are technical waivers.
Mr. Dorius related that the problem of noise was discussed with the
Planning Commission since the majority of the project will be bounded by free-
way and this was taken into consideration in the planning by creating a buffer
zone of carports and a driveway between the apartments and the freeway. The
one building which will receive the majority of freeway disturbance will
receive additional insulation or other precautions as necessary. In conclusion
he mentioned that the developer plans to spend approximately $120,000 on
private recreational facilities for use by the residents of this complex and
in addition, the City will receive approximately $100,000 in park and recrea-
tion in-lieu fees.
Mr. Harry Knisely, 1741 South Euclid, Agent for the Applicants,
explained that this proposal would place no additional demand on the park
system since it involves only 21 acres and not the amounts of property'
discussed under the various alternatives. He remarked that the vacancy
factor in apartments in this area is almost nil which is one of the reasons
the developer has chosen this particular part of Anaheim - in addition, the
location being in close proximity to employment, was an important considera-
tion. He advised that the industrial development has become active only
fairly recently, and the owners of subject property knew nothing of it prior
to that.
74-330
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, 1974, 1:30 P,M.
Mr. Knisely reiterated that most of the property surrounding subject
parcel is developed or zoned as residential uses or as agricultural preserve
and that the northeast industrial development is one-quarter mile from the
southern tip of this property.
Mr. Knisely pointed out that as far as City revenue is concerned,
he could not find anywhere a comparison of revenues received by the City as a
result of R-3 property versus industrial properties. Further he contended that
such comparisons in Huntington Beach indicate that this type of project would
net the City five times as much in revenue as an industrial complex.
Mr. Knisely concluded that this project would further the orderly
growth of the area and would be compatible with everything on Ball Road; that
apartment complexes are con~nonly accepted as good transitional projects.
Councilman Dutton pointed out that according to the Planning Commis-
sion Minutes there was some confusion as to the reasons for the extension of
Sunkist Street. He advised for clarification that this street was extended to
improve the general traffic flow in and out of the Stadium.
Mr. Vern Monroe pointed out that obviously a great deal of the very
recent interest in properties in this particular area for industrial use is due
to the current construction of the Orange Freeway which will provide excellent
access into this area. He advised that the owner of the property south of
Winston Road is planning to petition for removal from the agricultural preserve.
Mayor Dutton asked if anyone else wished to address the Council re-
lative to Reclassification No. 73-74-45, General Plan Amendment No. 131,
Reclassification No. 73-74-39, Variance No. 2581 or Environmental Impact Report
No. 114 and hearing no response, declared the hearing closed.
Following brief discussion it was the consensus of opinion that the
most logical use of subject property would be to retain it for industrial pur-
poses.
ENVIROnmENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 114: On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded
by Councilman Stephenson, the Council certified that Environmental Impact Report
No. 114, prepared and submitted in conjunction with Reclassification No. 73-74-39
and Variance No. 2581 has been completed in compliance with the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act and the State Guidelines and that it
has reviewed and considered the information contained in the E.I.R. To this
motion, Councilman Thom voted "no". MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 74R-148 - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-45: Councilman Sneegas
offered Resolution No. 74R-148 for adoption, authorizing the preparation of the
necessary ordinance changing the zone as ree~m~ended by the City Planning Com-
mission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER-
MINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE REIATING TO ZONING SHOULD
BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED.
(73-74-45 - R-A)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
COUNCILMEN: None
COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-148 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 74R-149 - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 131: Councilman Sneegas
offered Resolution No. 74R-149 for adoption, adopting General Plan Amendment
No. 131 in accordance with Alternate "A", as recon~nended by the City Planning
Commission.
74-331
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, 1974, 1:30 P.M,
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATED AS AMENDMENT NO. 131.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCII/~EN: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley and Thom
COUNCILMEN: Dutton
COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-149 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO, 74R-150 - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-39: Councilman Sneegas
offered Resolution No. 74R-150 for adoption, denying said reclassification
as recommended by the City Planning Commission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER-
MINING THAT A CHANGE OF ZONE SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED IN A CERTAIN AREA OF THE
CITY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED. (73-74-39)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-150 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 74R-151: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 74R-151
for adoption, denying Variance No. 2581, as recon~nended by the City Planning
Commission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING VARIANCE
NO. 2581.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-151 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PIANAMENDMENTNO, 123Bi RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-46
AND ENVIRONMEN~L IMPACT REPORT NO. 115: To consider updating the Anaheim General
Plan relating to an area approximately 4,200 acres in size, located generally
south of Santa Ama Canyon Road, east of the Newport Freeway and extending
easterly beyond Mohler Drive to Weir Canyon and having a southerly boundary
approximately along the Santa Ana Mountains ridgeline, together with petition
submitted by Anaheim Hills, Inc., Texaco Ventures, Inc., for a change in zone
from R-A to PC southeast of the intersection of Nohl Ranch Road and Imperial
Highway, (Parcel No. A) and easterly of the present terminus of Canyon Rim
Road (Parcel No. B). E.I.R. No. 115, supplementary to E.I.R. No. 80, was sub-
mitted in conjunction with said reclassification.
The City Planning Con, mission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-62,
recommended that General Plan Amendment No. 123B be approved in accordance
with Exhibit No. 1. Pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-63, the City Planning
Con~nission recommended that the City Council certify to having reviewed
and considered the information contained in E.I.R. No. 115 and that said
final E.I.R. has been completed in compliance with the California Environ-
mental Quality Act and the State Guidelines and that Reclassification
No. 73-74-46 be approved subject to the following conditions.
74-332
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIl, MINUTES - April 9, 197~, 1.:30 P.M.
1. That dedication of all public streets shall be made to the City
of Anaheim in accordance with the submitted Circulation Element and with the
adopted City of Anaheim Circulation Element.
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 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.
5. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a
manner satisfactory to the City Engineer.
6. That the owner of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in lieu fees as determined to be
appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building
permit is issued.
7. That prior to approval of the final tract maps, final specific
plans shall be submitted and approved in accordance with provisions of the PC
Planned Community, Zone.
8. That a final tract map of subject properties shall be submitted
to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the
Orange County Recorder.
9. That all private streets shall be developed in accordance with
the City of Anaheim's standards for private streets.
10. That ordinances reclassifying the property shall be adopted as
each parcel is ready to comply with conditions pertaining to such parcel; pro-
vided, however, that the word "parcel" shall mean presently existing parcels
of record and any parcel or parcels approved by the City Council for a lot split.
11. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accor-
dance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked
Exhibit No. 1.
12. That these reclassification proceedings are granted subject to
completion of annexation of subject property to the City of Anaheim.
13. That no dwelling units in excess of the number of dwelling units
approved in General Plan Amendment No. 123A shall be approved for construction
on the property included in GPA 123A and/or the "Ranch View" section of GPA
123B until such time as the extension of Fairmont Boulevard is constructed be-
t-ween Canyon Rim Road and Santa Aha Canyon Road.
The City Clerk submitted correspondence from Mr. Tim Burrell, Young,
Henmie and McCarthy, 100 Pomona Mall West, Pomona, on behalf of the Orange
Unified School District, dated March 22, 1974, in opposition to and appealing
the decisions of the City Planning Conm~ission regarding Reclassification No.
73-74-46 and E.I.R. No. 115.
Zoning Supervisor Charles Roberts reported that subject .proposed
reclassification and General Plan Amendment were initiated to expand the limits
of the PC Zone in the Anaheim Hills co~nunity. He indicated the base map which
designates the limits of the original area placed in the PC Zone, pursuant to
General Plan Amendment No. 123A,and advised that subject application intends to
add to that original 675 acres another 244 acres total at two separate locations -
the Imperial area (Parcel No. A) 119 acres of land located southeast of the
intersection of Nohl Ranch Road and Imperial Highway; the "Ranch View" area
(Parcel No. B) 125 acres located easterly of the present terminus of Canyon Rim
Road.
In connection with the requirements for PC zoning, Anaheim Hills, Inc.,
has submitted the necessary elements which include:
1. Land Use and Mousing Element.
2. Circulation Element.
3. Population Element.
4. Services and Facilities Element.
5. Zoning Plan or Element.
The Zoning Element designates the various existing City of Anaheim
zones intended to implement development on each segment of these two parcels.
Mr. Roberts indicated, using the base map, that Parcel No. A (Imperial area) is
proposed to be developed in the multiple-family residential zone, the majority
74-333
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, 1974, 1:30 P,M,
of this parcel is proposed for the R-2 and R-3 Zones, whereas a C-O section is
shown in the northeast and an R-H-10,000 Zone on the southwesterly portion of
the property. Parcel No. B (Ranch View area) is proposed to be designated
primarily R-H-10,000 and R-2 on the remainder, most probably to be used for
a planned residential development.
Mr. Roberts related that under the two previous General Plan Amend-
ments initiated by Anaheim Hills, Inc., the developers were required to sub-
mit the maximum number of dwelling units proposed. Subsequent to this, the
entire ranch was divided into individual planning areas and assigned a maximum
number of dwelling units to be constructed in each of these. Mr. Roberts re-
ported that thus far the actual number of dwelling units constructed has been
3U% below the maximum number originally given. In connection with General
Plan Amendment No. 123B, Mr. Roberts advised that the Applicants have indicated
that it is not their intent to increase the total number of dwelling units of
the overall plan for the ranch or for the specific planning area, they are
still proposing the same basic number of units.
Mr. Roberts stated that one of the points of concern expressed by
the Traffic Engineer, as well as the Planning Con~uission., was the phasing of
development of the project in relationship to traffic congestion. Consequently,
the Planning Co~uission imposed Condition No. 13 on approval of Reclassifica-
tion No. 73-74-46 which restricts the number of dwelling units constructed not
to exceed the number approved in General Plan Amendment No. 123A and/or the
"Ranch View" section of GPA 123B until the extension of Fairmont Boulevard
is constructed between Canyon Rim Road and Santa Aha Canyon Road.
The Mayor asked if the Applicant or his Agent were present and wished
to address the Council.
Mr. Horst Schor., representing Anaheim Hills, Inc., related that .
since the submission of the original PC zoning on 652 acres, this has proven
to be ~ very effective advance planning tool which has allowed builders to
prepare specific site development plans for areas within the PC Zone, these
to be submitted for final approval by the City. This process has allowed the
City departments to plan for the additional required City services and the
extension of these into the area. Because of the success of the PC Zone
method in advance planning, Anaheim Hills, Inc., is now requesting that these
two additions, as outlined in General Plan Amendment No. 123B, be incorporated
into the PC Zone.
Mr. Schor pointed out that the development of the "Ranch View" unit
will permit two significant improvements in the Santa Aha Canyon:
1. The extension of Canyon Rim Road (which presently terminates
at this point) and the extension of Serrano Avenue which will permit construc-
tion of the length of Canyon Rim Road to Serrano Avenue and thereby provide
complete four lane access and circulation.
2. The development of Planning Area 8 will allow the City of
Anaheim Water Division to construct the water main in this project area and
extend this line into the Mohler Drive area to provide upper elevation water
service.
The Mayor asked if there was anyone in opposition who wished to
address the Council.
Mrs. Mary Dinndorf, President of the Santa Aha Canyon Improvement
Association, Inc., inquired as to what effect the recent action in the courts
regarding the necessity for preparation of an E.I.R. on annexations before the
Local Agency Formation Commission and the subsequent moratorium on annexation
proceedings would have on the property within the 4,200 acres under discussion,
which is not within the City limits of Anaheim.
City Attorney Watts advised that there was litigation in Ventura
County regarding this matter and the Court's decision held that annexation to
a city was a "project" in connection with the California Enviroranental Quality
Act and as such the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) is required to
prepare an environmental impact statement. In this regard, IAFCO has prepared
74-334
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, 1974, 1:30 P,M.
some guidelines to implement the effect of that decision, however he remarked
that he had no knowledge as to what stage these guidelines are in presently and
whether or not they are processing annexation applications at this time.
Mr. Roberts pointed out that the only reason that the 4,200 acres
are mentioned in this General Plan Amendment is so that the impact of the
development of the 244 acres can be considered within the total framework of
the Anaheim Hills community. The reclassifications apply actually only to those
two parcels as outlined - the Imperial and "Ranch View" areas, which are within
the City of Anaheim boundaries.
Mrs. Dinndorf raised the point of health and safety of the residents,
noting that there is only one fire station and, on conversation with personnel
of that station, she has been informed that it is responsible for six square
miles of area. She pointed out that this is a health hazard in particular, when
the canyon is dry and in view of the fact that the roads are very often under
repair or construction and unsafe for emergency vehicles. In addition, she
stated that there are no rules in the Building Codes relative to fire retardant
roofs and advised that drywall burns faster than plaster. For these reasons,
she believes additional residential construction in the canyon area poses a
threat to the health and safety of the residents.
Mr. Tim Burrell, Young, Henrie and McCarthy, 100 Pomona Mall West,
Pomona, representing Orange Unified School District, referred to Resolution No.
70R-283 adopted in June of 1970 in which a policy statement was set forth that
in the planning for the Santa Aha Canyon region, there would be no intensive
development. He cited density per acre figures from E.I.R. No. 115, ranging
from 7 units to the acre up to 20 units to the acre for apartments and remarked
that this is not in concert with low-density development.
Mayor Dutton responded, noting that when the overall density figures
are computed for the 4200 acres'the density per acre is 2.2 dwelling units (9200
dwelling units total), which is in his estimation low density. Further
remarked that the development in the canyon area has to be cluster type he
merit because of the topography, develop-
Mr. Burrell contended that in hill and canyon areas the spaces which
are completely unbuildable should not be considered in the density figures.
Further he indicated that the Orange Unified School District is not interested
in a no-growth policy, but would desire to see a policy of controlled reasonable
development, which proceeds with the necessary planning to take care of the
problems created.
Mr. Burrell referred to the condition imposed upon Reclassification
No. 73-74-46 by the Planning Commission to phase growth to the solution of a
traffic problem and remarked that this is a analogous to what the Orange Unified
School District has been seeking; that the City make development contingent
upon solution of the school problem. He stated that the first step towards this
goal would be for the City, School District and developer to work together in
the review of the Environmental Impact Report.
Mr. Roger Wilson, representing the Orange Unified School District,
presented a letter dated April 9, 1974, the subject of which was "Position
Statement regarding General Plan Amendment No. 123B and E.I.R. No. 115."
Councilman Sneegas questioned the validity of the figure used in
paragraph two of the Orange Unified School District position statement for over-
all density, which indicates four dwelling units per acre.
Mr. Wilson advised that this is based on the figures originally given
to the Orange Unified School District by Anaheim Hills for densities.
Mr. Burrell voiced the opinion that the problem basically results from
the fact that there is an overlapping of jurisdictions and a failure of communi-
cation between the t~o. He referred to the dedications in other requirements
imposed upon developers regularly, i.e., dedication of land for street widening;
payment of park in-lieu fees, etc., which are implemented to resolve the
74-335
City Hall, Anaheim, ..Cal%fq~nia .- COUNCIL .MINUTES - April .9,. 1974 1:30 P.M.
immediate short-range impacts resulting from rapid development. He advised
that he felt the Orange Unified School District should be awarded the same
type of consideration with the problems they are facing in providing school
facilities.
Councilman Sneegas advised that he and the City Attorney, having
been appointed by the Council to monitor any meetings with the School District
and Anaheim Hills regarding this situation, have had co,m,unication from Ana-
heim Hills but none from the Orange Unified School District. He remarked that
he would be interested in hearing the School District at least acknowledge
the fact that the City and the Developer are making some attempt to solve the
problem.
Mr. Burrell further addressed himself to certain deficiencies and/
or inadequacies in E.I.R. No. 115 and related that he wished these comments
to apply with full force and effect to E.I.R. No. 110 as well. He indicated
that in both of these E.I.R.'s, in light of the fact that the property to
which they pertain is located rather near the reservoir, which is a part of
the City of Anaheim water system, he would expect some figures to be presented
on the amounts of cut and fill and to where the excess earth will be moved.
However, this information is not contained in these E.I.R.'s. In reply to
Councilman Dutton's comment that there will be actually less runoff when the
project is complete, Mr. Burrell agreed that the E.I.R. does come to this con-
clusion, however, the facts which are necessary to support this rationale are
not contained within the report.
Further, Mr. Burrell pointed out that the number of units shown in
figure 5 of E.I.R. No. 115 does not coincide with the number shown in figure 3;
the regional map (figure 1) would be better if it included the region around
Anaheim Hills; there is a lack of data concerning technical features such as
compliance with the plans required by the Clean Air Act of 1970; economic
figures, he surmise~ would be of great benefit to the City; and a cost/benefit
analysis perhaps should have been included.
Mr. Burrell further noted that under environmental-setting descrip-
tion, some information should be'included on the background level of air
pollution and its effect on health, and the impacts of the project reflect
only short-term impacts,whereas the guidelines clearly require discussion of
both shor~ and long-term impacts. A major item of concern would be air
quality and the impact of this project on surrounding cities such as Corona.
Although the report does give numbers on amounts of pollutants~ it does not
describe the types of pollutants nor their effect on health. In regard to
the noise study portion, there is no discussion of decibel levels and their
effect on people's health. As far as education is concerned, he referred to
the earlier remarks and those incorporated in the letter presented by Mr.
Wilson for the Orange Unified School District. In addition to this, he felt
the E.I.R. should include some discussion of the impact of bussing school
children 20 miles per day because of the school shortage, as well as the impact
this will have on those schools to which they are bussed.
Mayor Dutton remarked that if 9200 dwelling units, as planned,
were develope~ this would mean approximately $9,000,000 in tax revenues of
which the Orange Unified School District would receive 56 cents of every
dollar, or an esti~mted $5,000,000 per year, with which the School District
should certainly be able to provide the necessary facilities and services.
Mr. Burrell agreed that in the long run the School District will
receive more revenue, however, he pointed out that the problem occurring
is a short-term problem, i.e., the need for the schools is immediate and
there is not sufficient capital to cover same. He pointed out that subject
property was maintained as agricultural land for many years and that no tax
penalties were paid to the School District.
Mr. Burrell continued his comments relative to E.I.R. Nos. 110 and
115 noting that under the irreversible impact section, there was not suffi-
cient quantification nor justification given for certain of these impacts.
Further, he pointed out that the destruction of oak trees in the canyon is
not consistent with the Council's policy statement.
74-336
.~ity Hall - Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, 1974~ 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Burrell pointed out that there is no discussion of the impact of
grading outside of the project area contained within subject E.I.R.'s and no
quantitative figures established concerning air pollution and the impact on
schools. He further noted that he would like to see the alternative of allowing
development contingent upon the solution of the schools and other environmental
problems considered in these E.I.R.'s. Further, he advised that there is nothing
in the section on lon~ and short-term comparisons regarding the risk to health
of smog nor the safety risk encountered due to the lack of fire services. These
are irreversible impacts and are not covered in the E.I.R.
Mr. Burrell stated that the E.I.R. regulations require that a list of
organizations and persons consulted, as well as comments by interested indivi-
duals be incorporated into said report, whereas no such documentation exists
within subject E.I.R.'s, nor do the required replies from City Staff or Offi-
cials regarding any significant environmental effects which are thus pointed
out.
Mr. Burrell commented that it would seem to him ea~ter for the City
to revise their process and use a coordinated approach to pre, are their environ-
mental impact reports properly in the first instance and consequently solve
their problems in a timely fashion rather than after the fact.
Mr. Lewis Dexter, 305 North Ranchito remarked that there is really
a problem between two governmental agencies, the City of Anaheim and the Orange
Unified School District, for which he felt the City Council of the City of
Anaheim must accept partial responsibility, and exhorted the City Council to
work with the School District and not against them.
Mr. Stewart Moss, representing the Santa Ana Canyon Property Owners
Association remarked that regardless of the difference of opinion between the
two agencies, the people who are suffering as a result of it are the children
living in the canyon, and they s.hould be accorded some consideration. He advised.
that in regard to General Plan Amendment No. 123B, his Association has to take
a position of opposition to the higher density policies proposed therein. He
stated that for some time they have been of the opinion that the canyon area
would best be developed with no higher density than R-1 or R-H 10,000. He
commented that a density of 2.2 for the overall Anaheim Hills development has
been widely used but that in on~ of the staff reports a .density figure of 3.0
is given, and he questioned the validity of this.
In addition, Mr. Moss pointed out that his Association has been a
proponent of the cost/benefit study and is eagerly awaiting the results. He
advised that one of the reasons this is not yet complete is due to the failure
of several cities, including Anaheim, to meet the deadline for providing
necessary input information. Mr. Moss voiced the opinion that the cost/benefit
study may prove to be the precursor of future planning methods, in which exten-
sive computer application may be used.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to addresB the Council in
opposition and hearing no response,offered the Applicant a few minutes for
rebuttal.
Mr. James Barisic, Vice President, Anaheim Hills Inc., remarked that
it is unfortunate that again a City Council meeting has been turned into a
legal debate, since it is not a court of law. He advised that his firm is
currently conducting negotiations with the Orange Unified School District and
have been for months seeking a compromise solution. He noted that while doing
this they have been served with a fourth lawsuit initiated by Orange Unified
School District.
Mr. Barisic, in response to all of the comments made about traffic.
health, safety hazards, etc. reminded the audience that General Plan Amend-
ment No. 123B is an advance planning tool intended for use to further refine the
General Plan. It provides an opportunity for review and approval or disapproval
by the public agency years in advance of the actual construction on the dwelling
units in that particular location. He stated that Anaheim Hills representatives
have been meeting with the Fire Chief regarding expansion of fire service and
noted that they are doing all that they can to insure the location and reserva-
tion of sites for such public facilities.
74-337
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, 1974~ 1;30 P.M.
For response to the environmental impact reports and any inadequa-
cies in same he introduced the Attorney for Anaheim Hills Inco./Texaco
Ventures Inc.. Ms. Marlene Fox.
Mm. Fox. 610 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, noted the many
references made by Mr. Burrell to the State Guidelines for preparation of
an environmental impact report and advised that these guidelines require
that the environmental impact report deal only with specifics of the project
and not to go beyond that project, whereas Mr. Burrell asked that the E.I.R.'s
cover many other details not incorporated in this project and therefore these
objections are invalid.
Ms. Fox related that regarding the objections raised by Mr. Burrell
on the basis of the Clean Air Act of 1970, that twice in the Superior Court
of Orange County, two different Judges have ruled that the regulations which
were supposed to have been promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency
are not now in force and, therefore, there is no basis for lawsuit due to
violation of these rules.
Further, Ms. Fox related that at the March 19, 1974 meeting she
requested the City Council of the City of Anaheim to intercede in some way
and assist the developer in attaining meaningful negotiations with the Orange
Unified School District. The determination made by the Council at that time
was that Councilman Sneegas, the City Attorney, and/or other staff members
would act as liaison and monitor meetings between Anaheim Hills and Orange
Unified School Distrct. She stated that continuous negotiations have been
conducted by Mr. Jack Sickler with the School District, and they (Orange
Unified School District) in response to these attempts to resolve the situa-
tion. have served Anaheim Hills with the fourth lawsuit as of April 5 1974.
This, she indicated, is an abuse and extortion of the judicial process since
on two occasions the court ruling has not been in their favor.
In addition, Ms. Fox requested Council to consider that the
School Districts of Irvine and Corono-Norco, faced with similar development
problems, have through research and development come up with viable alterna-
tives other than pleas for assistance from other governmental agencies. She
offered to make available to anyone who wished a copy of the Irvine Unified
School District pamphlet discussing their findings. She related that the
State Constitution clearly points out the agency which has the responsibility
to provide schools.
Ms. Fox noted that the Orange Unified School District owns a number
of surplus school sites and suggested, if these are not in areas of projected
growth, that they be sold and the money derived therefrom put to use in the
areas needing schools.
In conclusion, Ms. Fox indicated that it is not a matter of faults,
but of demonstrating good faith to accomplish a solution, and this will not
come about when the Orange Unified School District ceases to file lawsuits
against Anaheim Hills.
F
Mr. David A. Reed, Jr., 914 Fairview Street, wished to correct two
points made during this deliberation; (1) Since the City Council is acting
as a policing board for planning activity, it is the legal place to argue the
facts of police power with regard to land use; (2) the California Environ-
mental QualityAct and Guidelines presented by the State for the cities and
counties to follow require that the agency itself should prepare the final
environmental impact report. This does not preclude the appellant from sub-
mitting a draft E.I.R., but, in his opinion it is incumbent upon Council that
the final report include the facts and considerations of the Planning Com-
mission and City Staff, whereas it has appeared to him (Mr. Reed) in refer-
ence to these E.I.R.'s that the developers'actions are sufficient together
with approval by the City Planning Commission.
Mayor Dutton determined that sufficient information had been pre-
sented and declared the public hearing on General Plan Amendment No. 123B
and Reclassification No. 73-74-46 closed.
74- 338
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, 1974, 1:30 P,M.
R~SOLUTION NO. 74R-152: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 74R-152
for adoption, adopting General Plan Amendment No. 123B in accordance with
Exhibit 1, as recommended by the City Planning Commission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN
AMENDMEIFf TO THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATED AS AMENDMENT NO. 123B.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, and'Dutton.
Thom
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-152 duly passed and adopted.
CERTIFICATIO~ - E1WIRO~MENTAL IMPACT P~pORT NO,' 11~: Councilman Thom questioned
the City Attorney regarding the motion previously used by Council for certifica-
tion of Environmental Impact Reports, noting in particular tha~ he does not
feel that the Council can certify that the E.I.R. is in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act and State Guidelines based on the recom-
mentation given by the City Planning Commission and Staff because there is
nothing in the documentation which states that the technical staff of the City
can attest to the fact that said report is certifiable.
Mr. Watts indicated that the problem is mostly semantical, that he
does not believe the Council's certificate is actually a legal judgment, and
that it is assumed or implied in this certification that such is given on th'e
basis of the Council's best belief and knowledge.
Councilman Thom suggested then that the technical staff report in-
clude the statement that the E.I.R. does comply with State and City Guidelines
to their best belief and knowledge.
The City Attorney concurred that this would be appropriate and also
sugge'sted that the Council's certification could be modified in accordance
with his concern.
E.I.R. No. 115, supplementing master E.I.R. No. 80, having been
reviewed by the City Staff and recommended by the City Planning Commission to
be in compliance with City and State Guidelines and the State of California
Environmental Quality Act, the City Council acting upon such information and
belief does hereby certify on motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by
Councilmam Stephenson that E.I.R. No. 115 is in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act and City and State Guidelines. MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTI~ NO. 74R-153: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 74R-153 for
adoption, approving Reclassification No. 73-74-46 and authorizing the prepara-
tion of the necessary ordinance to change said 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~/NICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED
AND THAT THE BOlrNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (Reclassification
No. 73-74-46 - PC Zone)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley and Dutton.
Thom
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-153 duly passed and adopted.
74- ~39
City Hall. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9. 1974. 1:30 P.M.
RECESS: Councilman Dutton moved for a 10-minute recess. Councilman Sneegas
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED (4:25 P.M.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order, all Councilmen being
present with the exception of Councilman Pebley. (4:35 P.M.)
PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATIO~ ~O, 73-74-31, VARIANCE NO. 2569 (E.I.R. NO. 110.
TENTATIVE TRACTS NOS, 8463, 9464, 8465 AND 8466): Application by the Anaheim
Hills, Inc., and Texaco Ventures, Inc., requesting a change in zone from R-A
to R-H-lO,000 and the following code waivers to establish a 163 lot sub-
division on the south side of Canyon Rim Road, northeast of Nohl Ranch Road,
was submitted together with E.I.R. No. 110:
(a) requirement that single-family structures rear on an
arterial highway.
(b) minimum private accessway.
Zoning Supervisor Roberts reported that the applicant had with-
drawn the petition for Reclassification No. 73-74-31 since the subject property
comprised of 65 acres, was included in the addition to the PC Zone approved
under General Plan Amendment No. 123B.
The City Clerk reported that E.I.R. No. 110, supplementary to
E.I.R. No. 80, was reviewed and adopted as the Environmental Impact State-
ment of the City Council on February 12, 1974.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution Nos. PC74-64
granted Variance No. 2569 subject to the following conditions:
(a) That this variance is granted subject to the completion of
Reclassification No. 73-74-46, now pending.
(b) That. subject property shall be developed substantially im
accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim
marked Exhibit No. 1.
Mr. Roberts noted the'location of subject property and reviewed
the waivers requested pursuant to Variance No. 2569 and advised that in
the four tentative tracts submitted in conjunction with the variance, there
are five instances where the lots would side onto an arterial highway. How-
ever, there is a significant grade differential in these situations. Waiver
of minimum private accessways is no longer necessary due to some revisions.
He advised that based on the tracts submitted, the overall density would be
2 1/2 units to the acre which is consistent with the land use policy for the
area.
Councilman Pebley returned to Council Chambers' (4:40 P.M.)
The Mayor asked if the Applicant or his Agent were present and
wished to address the Council.
Mr. Horst Schor, representing Anaheim Hills, Inc., offered no
additional comments, but reiterated that the proposed project which would
be developed to R-H-10,000 site development standards, does conform to the
density which the opposition has requested.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council either in
favor or opposition to Variance No. 2569.
Mr. Tim Burrell, Young, Henrie & McCarthy, 100 Pomona Mall West,
representing the Orange Unified School District, advised that he wished to
cite the same remarks made earlier in reference to E.I.R. No. 115 as.applying
to E.I.R. No. 110 as well.
In addition, Mr. Burrell registered his objection to E.I.R. No. 110
being completed supplementary to E.I.R. No. 80 inasmuch as the guidelines
require that an impact report relative to a construction project such as
E.IoR. No. 110 must be more specific and detailed than an E.I.R. regarding
a plan change or approval of a concept, such as E.I.R. No. 80. He noted that
74- 3~+0
City ~all, A~aheSm, California - COLr~QIL MIllES - April 9, 1974, 1:30 P,M.
the City of Anaheim Guidelines for Environmental Impact Reports, Section 4.01.04
require a zoning maR whereas no map is contained in E.I.R. No. 110. He also in-
dicated that from his review of E.I.R. No. I10, it appears only short-term im-
pacts are discussed. He stated he would be very interested in the land coverage
statistics for this project which were not included in said E.I.R.
In view of the fact that the property in question is located adjacent
to the reservoir, Mr. Burrell felt some comment should be included as to whether
or not the grading and/or project will comply with the Federal Water Quality
Act. He also did not feel the grading as proposed and as discussed in the
E.I.R. is justified on property not included in this project well in advance
of any development since this con, nits the City to a decision'on future devel-
opments,rather than having an objective evaluation on which the Council could
base its decision at that time. He noted that these same comments would apply
in regard to the Clean Air Act, as indicated earlier in connection with E.I.R.
No. 115.
Further, Mr. Burrell stated that the section of the impact report
regarding alternatives should deal alsq according to the guidelines, with the
concept or alternative of no project on the property and s~at~ the reason for
this alternative being rejected.
Mr. Burrell indicated that one of the directives of the Friends of
Mammouth decision was that vague assurances and conclusions would not satisfy
the Environmental Quality Act, but factual data is necessary, and this is one of
the reasons that it is important for the governmental agency to prepare the
report itself. He further stated that the cumulative impact of this project,
together with others in the area, should be assessed and this has not been dis-
cussed at all in either E.I.R. No. 110 or 115.
Mr. Roger Wilson of the Orange Unified School District submitted a
position statement regarding E.I.R. No. 110 and Tentative Tract Nos. 8463,
8464, 8465 and 8466, dated April 9, 1974.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council in
opposition, there being no response offered the Applicant a few minutes for
rebuttal.
Mr. Schor advised that the reservoir drainage situation has been re-
solved and that the E.I.R. spells out specifically that the present drainage
area which is tributary to the reservoir is 150 acres. After grading of the
projec~ the drainage area will be reduced to 9 acres, a 94% reduction, which
should result in an improvement in the quality of'reservoir water.
Regarding grading, Mr. ScOot noted that the land use and road align-
ment has already been establishe~ pursuant to approval of General Plan Amend-
ment No. 123B.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address theCouncil; there
being no response declared the hearing closed.
TgRMT~!ATION OF PROCEEDINGS - RECLAS_SIFICATION NO. 73-74-31: On motion by
Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, the City Council per-
mitted the withdrawal by the Applicant of petition for Reclassification No.
73-74-31, thereby terminating all proceedings in connection therewith. MOTION
CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 74R- 154: Councilman Dutton offered Resolution No. 74R-154 for
adoption, granting Variance No. 2569, 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. 2569.
Roll Call Vote:
74- '~41
City Hall. Anahe£m. Californ£a- COI~CIL MIFOTES- April 9. 1974. 1:30 P.M.
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton.
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-154 dulY passed and adopted.
TENTATIVE F~&P OF TRACT NOS, 8463, 8464, 8465 AND 8466 (vARIANCE NO, 2569):
Developer-Anaheim Hills, Inc., and Texaco Ventures, Inc.; property located on
the south side of Canyon Rim Road, northeast of Nohl Ranch Road.
Tract No. 8463 contains 40 proposed R-H-10,000 zoned lots.
Tract No. 8464 contains 42 proposed R-H-10,000 zoned lots.
Tract No. 8465 contains 45 proposed R-H-10,000 zoned lots.
Tract No. 8466 contains 36 proposed R-H-10,000 zoned lots.
The City Planning Commission at their meeting held March 18, 1974,
approved Tentative Map of Tract No. 8463 subject to the following conditions:
1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 8463 is granted
subject to the approval of Reclassification No. 73-74-46 and Variance No. 2569.
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 a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to
and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the
Orange County Recorder.
5. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior
to approval of a final tract map.
6. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be
appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building
permit is issued.
7. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner
satisfactory to the City Engineer. If, in the preparation of the site, suffi-
cient 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 ini-
tiated condemnation proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall be borne
by the developer) prior to commencement of grading operations. The required
drainage facilities shall be of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff
waters originating from higher properties through said property to ultimate
disposal as approved by the City Engineer. Said drainage facilities shall
be the first item of construction and shall be completed and be functional
throughout the tract and from the downstream boundary of the property to the
ultimate point of disposal prior to the issuance of any final building in-
spection or occupancy permits. Drainage district reimbursement agreements
may be made available to the developers of said property upon their request.
8. 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 Aha River
by storm water originating from or flowing through this project.
9. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required
and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to
commencement Of structural framing.
10. That in accordance with City Council policy, a 6-foot masonry
wall shall be constructed on the north property line separating Lot Nos. 1,
5, 6, 11 and 14 and Canyon Rim Road. Reasonable landscaping, including irr~
gation facilities, shall be installed in the uncemented portion of the arterial
'highway parkway the full distance ~f said w~ll; plans ~or sa~idlandScaping to
be submitted to and' sUbject to the approval of the Superintendent of Parkway
MaT~tenance. Fo}lowing installation and acceptance, ~the Git~ or'Anaheim shall
assume the responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping.
11. That all air-conditioning facilities 'shall be properly shielded
from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties.
7~- 342
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, 1974, 1:30 P,M.
The City Planning Commission at their meeting held March 18, 1974,
approved Tentative Map of Tract No. 8464 subject to the following conditions:
1. That the approval of Tentative Mmp of Tract No. 8464 is granted
subject to the approval of Reclassification No. 73-74-46 and Variance No. 2569.
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 a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted
to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the
Orange County Recorder.
5. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim
prior to approval of a final tract map.
6. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be
appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building
permit is issued.
7. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner
satisfactory to the City Engineer. If, in the preparation of the site, suffi-
cient 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 of~site drainage
facilities shall be dedicated to the City, or the City Council shall have
initiated condemnation proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall be
borne by the developer) prior to commencement of grading operations. The
required drainage facilities shall be of a size and type sufficient to carry
runoff waters originating from higher properties through said property to
ultimate disposal as approved by the City Engineer. Said drainage facilities
shall be the first item of construction and shall be completed and be functiona1
throughout the tract and from the downstream boundary of the property to the
ultimate point of disposal prior to the issuance of any final building inspec-
tions or occupancy permits. Drainage district reimbursement agreements may be
made available to the developers of said property upon their request.
8. 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.
9. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required
and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to
commencement of structural framing.
10. That in accordance with City Council policy, a 6-foot masonry
wall shall be constructed on the north property line separating Lot Nos. 1
through 8 and Canyon Rim Road. Reasonable landscaping, including irrigation
facilities, shall be installed in the uncemented portion of the arterial high-
way parkway the full distance of said wall; plans for said landscaping to be
submitted to and subject to the approval of the Superintendent of Parkway
Maintenance. Following installation and acceptance, the City of Anaheim
shall assume the responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping.
11. That a second access to Canyon Rim Road shall be constructed
through the property easterly of subject tract concurrently with the improve-
ments for subject tract. This street shall ultimately be constructed in
accordance with the City of Anaheim standards for a hillside collector.
12. That all air-conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded
from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties.
The City Planning Commission at their meeting held March 18, 1974,
approved Tentative Map Tract No. 8465 subject to the following conditions:
1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 8465 is granted
subject to the approval of Reclassification No. 73-74-46 and Variance No. 2569.
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.
74- 34 3
City..Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M.
4. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted
to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the
Orange County Recorder.
5. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim
prior to approval of a final tract map.
6. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be
appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building
permit is issued.
7. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner
satisfactory 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 re-
required or, 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 of~site
drainage facilities shall be dedicated to the City, or the City Council shall
have initiated condemnation proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall be
borne by the developer) prior to commencement of grading operations. The
required drainage facilities shall be of a size and type sufficient to carry
runoff waters originating from higher properties through said property to
ultimate disposal as approved by the City Engineer. Said drainage facilities
shall be the first item of construction and shall be completed and be functional
throughout the tract and from the downstream boundary of the property to the
ultimate point of disposal prior to the issuance of any final building inspec-
tions or occupancy permits. Drainage district reimbursement agreements may be
made available to the developers of said property upon their request.
8. 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.
9. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required
and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to
commencement of structural framing.
10. That the alignment of the storm drain within the golf course
shall be approved by the City of Anaheim. Construction of said storm drain
shall be accomplished with no interference with play on the golf course.
11. That all air-conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded
from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties.
The City Planning Commission at their meeting held March 18, 1974,
approved Tentative Map of Tract No. 8466, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 8466 is granted
subject to the approval of Reclassification No. 73-74-46 and Variance No. 2569.
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 a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to
and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the
Orange County Recorder.
5. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior
to approval of a final tract map.
6. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation tn-lieu fees as determined to be
appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building
permit is issued.
7. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner
satisfactory to the City Engineer. If, in the preparation of the site, suffi-
cient grading is required to necessitate a grading permit, no work on grading
will be permitted between October 15th and April 15th unless all required of~
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 of~site drainage
facilities shall be dedicated to the City, or the City Council shall have
initiated condemnation proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall be
borne by the developer) prior to commencement of grading operations. The
required drainage facilities shall be of a size and type Sufficient to carry
74- 344
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Aoril 9. 1974. 1:30 P.M.
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 func-
tional throughout the tract and from the downstream boundary of the property
to the ultimate point of disposal prior to the issuance of any final building
inspections or occupancy permits. Drainage district reimbursement agreements
may be made available to the developers of said property upon their request.
8. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required
and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to
commencement of structural framing.
9. 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.
10. That all air-conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded
from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties.
Zoning Supervisor Roberts reported that should Council approve
Tentative Tract Maps Nos. 8463, 8464, 8465 and 846~ it would be in order to
amend Condition No. 10 of Tentative Tracts 8463 and 8464 to replace the term
"6-foot masonry wall" with "6-foot decorative openwork wall". In addition,
he recommended that the following condition be added to the approval of all
four tentative maps: "That house plans and elevations be submitted to the
City Council for review and approval prior to approval of the final map."
On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Stephenson,
Tentative M~p Tract Nos. 8463, 8464, 8465 and 8466 were approve~ subject to
the reco~nendations of the City Planning Con~nission, with the amendment and
additional condition as outlined above, and further provided that interpreta-
tion of Condition No. 10 of Tentative Tract Maps Nos. 8463 and 8464 will permit
alternate treatments in place of the 6-foot decorative openwork wall, said
alternate subject to Council approval. MOTION CARRIED.
PU~LIGHEARING - ABANDONMENT NO, 73-7A: In accordance with application filed by
Bernardo Yorba, a public hearing was held on proposed abandonment of a portion
of the dedicated roadway known as Old Santa Ana Canyon Road, west of Imperial
Highway, pursuant to Resolution No. 74R-123, duly published in the Anaheim
Bulletin, and notices thereof posted in accordance with law.
Report of the City Engineer was submitted recon~ending apProval of
subject abandonment subject to the following conditions:
1. Reservation of a public utility easement over, under and across
and along the northerly 20 feet of the subject parcel to accommodate existing
Anaheim electrical facilities.
2. An easement for sanitary sewer line over, under and across the
westerly 20 feet of Lot 8 and the northerly prolongation thereof in Tract 936
as shown on a map thereof recorded in Book 30, pages 1 and 2 Miscellaneous
Map% records of Orange County, California,together with all right of ingress
and egress.
3. The Pacific Telephone Company requires an easement over, under, along
and across the northerly 10 feet to construct, place, operate, inspect, maintain,
repair, replace and remove such aerial and underground telephone, telegraph and
communication structure as the Company may from time to time require, consisting
of poles, anchors, wires, cables, conduits, manholes, marker and necessary
fixtures and appurtenances.
4. The Southern California Gas Company requests an easement be
reserved over, under and across the northerly 10 feet to accommodate existing
Gas Company facilities.
5. Should the applicant desire to utilize any of the area owned in
fee by the City of Anaheim, that arrangements be made to purchase same and/or
an encroachment permit be applied for.
6. Applicant provide a modified cul-de-sac at the proposed easterly
terminus of Old Santa Ana Canyon Road at no cost to the City.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council.
Mr. Don Curtis, 3355 Edgemar Avenue, voiced opposition to the proposed
abandonment since it will discontinue access from the Canyon Acres II Tract to
74- 34 5
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9~.1974~ 1:30 P.M.
the new shopping center. He noted that the traffic on Old Santa Aha Canyon
Road is controlled by both signal and stop sign.
City Engineer James Maddox advised that the intersection under dis-
cussion is a five-point intersection and as the area becomes more frequently
travelled, it will be necessary to delete or modify this intersection.
Councilman Sneegas stated that from his personal observation of
the situation, he feels very strongly that this five-point intersection as
it exists will become extremely dangerous as the traffic volume increases
and that the abandonment of this segment to change the existing traffic
pattern is necessary.
The Mayor asked if anyone else, in favor or in oppositio~ wished
to address the Council; hearing no response, he declared the hearing closed.
RESOLUTION NO. 74R-155: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 74R-155
for adoption, approving Abandonment No. 73-7A, subject to the conditions
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 CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN AND
RESERVING THEREFROM CERTAIN EASEMENTS FOR PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES.
Roll Call Vote.
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-155 duly passed and adopted.
APPROVAL OF PERMITS (PUBLIC DANCE, DINNER-DANCING PLACE, ENTERTAINMENT AND
~EMENT DEVICES): The following applications were submitted and approved as
recommended by the Chief of Police, on motion by Councilman Stephenson,
seconded by Councilman Sneegas:
1. Application for public dance permit filed by Juan A. Sanchez
on behalf of Sociedad Progresista Mexicana, Lodge No. 14 of Garden Grove,
to be held April 14, 1974, 3:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. at Carpenters' Hall,
608 West Vermont Street, subject to provisions of Chapters 3.28 and 4.16
of the Anaheim Municipal Code, and further subject to final arrangements
being made with the Police Department.
2~ Application for dinner-dancing place permit filed by Anthony J.
Borges for Senor Gordo's Mexican Restaurant, 919 South Knott Street, nightly
from 8:30 P.M. to 1:30 A.M,, subject to provisions of Chapters 3.28 and 4.16
of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
3. Application for entertainment permit filed by Ralph E. Cornwell,
to permit a piano player at Shakey's Pizza, 1027 South Harbor Boulevard,
Wednesday through Sunday, 5 hours each evening, subject to the provisions
of Chapter 4.18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, for a period of one year.
4. Application for entertainment permit filed by Bonita R.
Stramaglia to permit Country and Western music at Sam's, 735 North Anaheim
Boulevard, Thursday through Saturday, 9:00 P.M. to 1:00 A.M., subject to
the provisions of Chapter 4.18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, for a period
of one year.
5. Application for amusement devices permit filed by Ben D. Kenney
to allow 30 assorted amusement device machines to be installed at Camelot
Golf Course, 3200 Carpenter Avenue, subject to provisions of Chapters 3.24
and 4.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
6. Application for amusement devices permit filed by Jeffrey Eden
t° allow one juke box to be installed at 134 West Lincoln Avenue, subject to
provisions of Chapters 3.24 and 4.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
7. Application for amusement devices permit filed by David L.
Warman, Servomation Corporation, to allow one juke box to be installed at
Big John's Pizza, 807 East Orangethorpe Avenue, subject to provisions of
Chapters 3.24 and 4.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
74 - 346
City Ha. ll~ A.naheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES -April 9~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M.
8. Applications filed by Robert W. Fellhauer for amusement devices
permits to install two amusement device machines each at the Stop-N-Go Market
No. 48, 1716 Glenoaks Avenue, and the Stop-N-Go Market No. 18, 541 South
State College Boulevard, subject to the provisions of Chapters 3.24 and 4.20
of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
9. Application for amusement devices permit filed by Craig R. Hoenig
to allow various assorted amusement device machines to be installed at Flashy
Flipper Arcade, 505 South Brookhurst Street, and Flashy Flipper Arcade, 516
East Street, subject to provisions of Chapters 3.24 and 4.20 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code.
MOTION CARRIED.
REQUEST - USE OF LA PALMA PARK FOR "CINCO DE MAYO" FIESTA - FREMONT JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL:
Request for Margarita L. Maes on behalf of the Parent Advisory Committee to
E.S.E.A. Title One Program at Fremont Junior High School, for permission to
hold a "Cinco de Mayo" Fiesta at La Palma Park, Sunday, May 5, 1974, from 10:00
A.M. to 7:00 P.M., was submitted for Council consideration, together with r'e-
ports from the Chief of Police, Parks and Recreation and City Attorney's Office,
recommending approval of said request.
The City Clerk pointed out that the report from the Parks and Recrea-
tion Director indicates that in the past religious programs have been conducted
only in the Pearson Park Greek Theatre, and that permission to hold a Catholic
Mass in conjunction with the Fiesta, is part of the request.
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the
request for use of La Palma Park facilities for "Cinco de Mayo" Fiesta, Sunday,
May 5, 1974, was approved with planned activities to include celebration of .a
Catholic Mass, soccer game, booths featuring foods, games and Mexican artifacts,
subject to coordination with the Police Department and that arrangements be made
for insurance to cover any liability that may result from the sale of food
items, etc. MOTION CARRIED.
REQUEST - AMERICAN NATIONAL HOUSING CORPORATION RE: DEED OF PROPERTY ~TRACT NO. 7419):
Request submitted by E. V. Kadow, Vice President Land Development, American
National Housing Corporation, that the City of Anaheim deed to said corporation
certain property located generally west of Anaheim Hills Road and north of
Santa Aha Canyon Road (Tract No. 7419), was continued for one week as requested
by the City Engineer, on motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman
Stephenson. MOTION CARRIED.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 72-73-33 - EX~.ENSION OF TIME: Request of J. T. Abe for a 6-
month extension of time in order to comply with the conditions of approval for
C-1 zoning, pursuant to Resolution No. 73R-88, on R-1 zoned property located
at the southeast corner of Brookhurst Street and Niobe Avenue, was submitted,
together with report of the City Engineer and Development Services Department,
recon~nending said extension be granted retroactively.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Dutton,
a 6-month extension of time to Reclassification No. 72-73-33 was granted, retro-
active to March 13, 1974, and expiring September 13, 1974 as recommended. MOTION
CA~RIEDo
ENVIRONMENTAl, IMPA~T REPORT NOS. 116 AND 117 (TENTATIVE TRACT NOS. 7587 AND 755,8):
E.I.R. No. 116 was submitted in conjunction with property located in the East-
ridge Unit of Anaheim Hills, south of the intersection of Nohl Ranch Road and
Serrano Avenue. Said E.I.R. is supplementary to E.I.R. No. 80 and is required
as a condition of approval of extension of time to Tentative Tract No. 7587.
E.I.R. No. 117 was submitted in conjunction with property located in
the Eastridge Unit of Anaheim Hills, south of the intersection of Nohl Ranch
Road and Serrano Avenue. Said E.I.R. is supplementary to E.I.R. No. 80 and is
required as a condition of approval for extension of time to Tentative Tract
No. 7558.
The City Planning Commission recou~uends that the City Council certify
to having reviewed and considered the information contained within Environmental
Impact Report Nos. 116 and 117 in conjunction with E.I.R. No. 80, and that' said
final Environmental Impact Reports are in compliance with the California Environ-
mental Quality Act and the State Guidelines.
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINIrfES - April 9. 1974. 1:30 p,M,
Mr. Tim Burrell of Young, Henrie and McOarthy, 100 Pomona Mall West,
Pomona, advised that he wished to register the same comments in objection to
E.I.R. Nos. 116 and 117 as earlier stated in connection with Environmental
Impact Report Nos. 110 and 115; i.e., that these E.I.R.'s do not adequately
assess the impact on educational facilities and air quality; nor is the effect
of deteriorating air quality on health discussed; accumulative impacts of the
proposed projects are not assessed; there is not sufficient detail or factual
analysis contained within these reports to enable an independent and objec-
tive evaluation of the projects involved.
E.I.R, NO, 116 - CERTIFICATION: On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by
Councilman Sneegas, the City Council to their best belief and knowledge
certified that E.I.R. N0. 116 has been completed in compliance with the pro-
visions of the California Environmental Quality Act and the State Guidelines,
and that the Council has reviewed and considered the information contained
within said E.I.R.
To this motion, Councilman Thom voted "no" on the basis that there
is insufficient technical supportive data.
~0TION CARRIED.
E.I.R. NO. 117 - CERTIFICATION: On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded
by Councilman Sneegas, the City Council to their best belief and knowledge,
certified that E.I.R. No. 117 has been completed in compliance with the pro-
visions of the California Environmental Quality Act and the State Guidelines
and that the Council~has reviewed and considered the information contained
within said E.I.R.
To this'motion, Councilman Thom voted "no".
MOTION CARRIED.
VARIANCE NO. 2283 - REVIEW OF SCREENING - ROOF-.MOUNTED EQUIPMENT: The City Planning
Commission at their meeting held March 18, 1974, reviewed the status of screen-
ing of roof-mounted equipment in conjunction with Variance No. 2283, property
located at the southwest corner of Santa Ama Canyon Road and Imperial Highway.
Four models proposed as possible enclosures and covers for the roof-mounted
equipment were presented, and the City Planning Commission, by motion, ap-
proved the one model from those presented that would best serve in the area,
being a one-sided slanted screen.
No further action was taken by the City Council·
~CROAC~Cf PERMIT NO, 7374E - ~ARKING/LANDSCAPINGPI4kNS: The City Planning Com-
mission at their meeting held March 18, 1974, approved parking/landscaping
plans for a factory for the sales, rental and service of recreational vehicles
located on the east side of West Street, along the southwest side of the Santa
Ana Freeway, south of South Street, in conjunction with Encroachment Permit No.
73-4E (Conditional Use Permit No. 1373)'
No further action was taken by the City Council·
AUTH~IZATION FO~ CONSTRUCTION OF FULL IMPROVEMENTS FALR~NT BOULEVARD (F~NAT.
T~ACT NO. 7430): The City Engineer submitted recommendation that the City of
Anaheim assume responsibility of construction of the full improvements on
Fairmont Boulevard, including street lighting, from the north tract boundary
of Tract No. 7450 to La Palma Avenue.
As outlined in his memorandum dated April 5, 1974, the City Engineer
indicated that there is an economic advantage for the City to assume the re-
sponsibility for full improvement of Fairmont Boulevard in the future after
the grade separation at the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad crossing is
constructed, in consideration for the developer piecing the full ultimate
embankment and not having direct access to Fairmont Boulevard in the area of
the slope· It is estimated that the City's cost to provide the center 48
feet of paving and the embankment, which is normal City policy for primary
highways such as Fairmont Boulevard, would exceed $100,000 and the estimated
cost of installing the developer's portion of the Fairmont Boulevard improve-
ments, including the street lighting, in exchange for the full ultimate
embankment, is $30,000·
74- 348
City Hall, A~aheim, California - COUNCIL MI~UTES - April 9, 1974, 1:30 P,M
On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Stephenson,
the City Council authorized the City to assume the responsibility of construc-
tion and full improvements of Fairmont Boulevard, including street lighting,
from the north tract boundary of Tract No. 7450 to La Palma Avenue, as recom-
mended by the City Engineer. MOTION CARRIED.
1974-75 WEED ABATEMENT CONTRACT (ACCOUNT NO, 322-297): On motion by Councilman
Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, award of the 1974-75 Weed Abatement
Contract was continued to the meeting of April 16, 1974. MOTION CARRIED°
FINAL COMPLETIONS - WORK ORDER NOS, 1250 AND 9165: Upon receipt of certifications
from the Director of Public Works, Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution
No$.74R-156 and 741%-157 for adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 74R-156 - WORK ORDER NOo 1250:
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING
THE COMPLETION AND IHE 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 COM-
PLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD
AND PEP, ALTA HILLS DRIVE SEWER IMPROVEMENT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK
ORDER NO. 1250: (A. S. Peich)
RESOLUTION NO. 74R-157 - WORK ORDER NO. 9165:
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 FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: REMODELING OF CITY HALL
ANNEX, 150 EAST LINCOLN AVENUE (FORMER BANK OF A~RICA BUILDING), IN THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NOo 9165. (Anaheim Construction Company, Inc.)
Roll Call Vote.
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton.
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 74R-156 and 741{-157 duly passed
and adopted.
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution Nos. 74R-158
through 74R-161, both lnclusive, for adoption.
RESOLUTION NO, 74R-158 - WORK ORDER NO, 829:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER-
MINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND
COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: ADDITION AND REMODELING OF
THE ANAHEIM POLICE FACILITY, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 829.
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 May 2,
1974, 2:00 P.M.).
RESOLUTION NO, 74R-159 - WORK ORDER NO 1007:
A F~SOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER-
MINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND
COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: ANAHEIM POLICE FACILITY
74- 349
City Hall. Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- April 9, 1974, 1:30 P,M,
COM~JNICATIONS CONSOLE, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 1007.
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 May 2,
1974, 2:00 P.M.)
RESOLUTION NO, .74R-160 - WORK ORDER NO, 1313:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND. DETER-
MINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND
COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE SANTA ANA CANYON SOUTH
RIVER TRUNK SEWER IMPROVEMENT PHASE III WALNUT CANYON CHANNEL TO
EUCALYPTUS DRIVE, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 1313. APPROVING
THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CON-
STRUCTION THEREOF: AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVE-
MENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZ-
ING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED
PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be opened May 2, 1974,
2:00 P.M.)
RESOLUTION NO, 74R-161 - WORK ORDER NO, 2067:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND
DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUC-
TION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: WALNUT CANYON
CHANNEL REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER
NO. 2067. APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND SPECI-
FICATIONS 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 May 2, 1974, 2:00 P.M.)
Roll Call Vote.
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton.
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 74R-158 through 74R-161, both
inclusive, duly passed and adopted.
~ESO~U~O~ NO, 74R-162 - DEEDS OF EASEMENT: Councilman Stephenson offered
Resolution No. 74R-162 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN
DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Family Place One, Ltd.; Robert P.
Dupre & Andrea L. Dupre, J. Richard Farley & Carole Farley~ American
Housing Guild-Los Angeles; Sarah Ann White; Richard L Wenrich & Florence M.
Wenrtch; Imperial Properties; Pacesetter Homes, Inc., J. W. Klug Dev. Co.,
Inc.~ Barranca Del Gazapo; Albert J. Yorba, et al.; Dorothy B. Travis.)
Roll Call Votel
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton.
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-162 duly passed and adopted.
LEASE OF CITY-OWNED PARCELS FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES (ANAHE!MWHOLESALE NURSERIES):
The City Manager reported on the recomended lease of two parcels
of City owned property as follows:
74-350
City ~all,. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MIlqlITES - April 9, 1974, 1.:30 P.M
Parcel one located west of Ninth Street, north of Katella, and
originally purchased as an electrical substation site which is no longer
necessary since the Edison acquisition.
Parcel two located on the east side of Brookhurst, north of
Katella, is a proposed neighborhood park site which will not be developed
for some time.
The Lessee proposes to utilize these properties for agricultural
purposes at the rate of $150.00 per acre per year. Both leases contain
renewal options. There is a provision in each lease whereby t.he City
reserves the right to establish rights-of-way for bicycle, hiking or
riding trails in the event such systems would materialize.
RgSOLU~IONNOS, 74R-163 AND 74R-164: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution Nos.
74R-163 and 74R-164 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO, 74R-163:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE A LEASE FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES.
(Brookhurst Street, one-year term).
R~SOLU~!ON NO. 74R-164:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE A LEASE FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES. (Ninth
Street, ~year term).
Roll Call Vote.
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 74R-163 and 74R-164 duly passed
and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO, 74R-165 - AMENDMENT TO T.EARE - SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BANK:
Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 74R-165 for adoption
authorizing Amendment to the Security Pacific National Bank lease for Con-
vention Center expansion equipment (reduction to $150,069.89 which represents
the actual amount of equipment acquired on the first lease).
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS
AND CONDITIONS OF AN AMENDMENT TO A LEASE BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BANK DATED SEPTEMBER 15, 1973, AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AMENDMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM.
Roll Call Vote.
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton.
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-165 duly passed and adopted..
RESOLUTION NO, 74R-166 - AGRm~MENT - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMpANY TO WAS]~
CITY INSULATORS: Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution No. 74R-166 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS
'AND CONDITIONS OF A LETTER AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY
FOR THE PURPOSE OF HAVING EDISON WASH CITY INSULATORS AND ELECTRICAL FACILITIES.
74- 351
City Hall. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, .1974, 1:30 P.M~
Roll Call Vote.
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOgS: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton.
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-166 duly passed and adopted.
PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - TRUCK TIRE CHANGER: The City Manager reported that the
City of Anaheim has an opportunity to purchase a floor model truck tire
changer which was on exhibit at the equipment show in the Anaheim Convention
Center, and that such purchase will avoid a long delivery time. Said equip-
ment is also being offered at a discounted price of $2,938.65, including tax.
Mr. Murdoch indicated that the current method used to change flotation tires
is by using pry bars and requires two men. This is neither a safe nor effi-
cient practice. The City Manager thereupon recommended the truck tire changer
be purchased from Truck & Auto Supply of Anaheim.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Sneegas,
the purchase was authorized from Truck & Auto Supply of Anaheim in the amount
of $2,938.65, including tax, and further authorized transfer of said amount
from Council Contingency Fund. MOTION CARRIED.
FORCHASE OF gQU~PMENT - 1~ ADDITIONAL ~0LF CARTS: The City Manager reported on
the recommended purchase of 15 additional golf carts from Taylor-Dunn at a
cost of $19,191.30, including tax, for the Anaheim Hills Golf Course° He
advised that the City currently owns 62 carts but has consistently had to
rent an additional 10 carts for weekends to satisfy the demand. The City
receives no rental for the carts as the rental cost is equal to the fee
charged golfers. Mr. ~rdoch advised that if the additional carts were used
only on weekends, basing estimates on the past five months' use, they would
be amortized in 19 months. The City Manager recommended purchase be approved
and that the Council authorize a transfer of this amount from the Council
Contingency Fund.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Sneegas,
purchase of 15 golf carts was authorized from Taylor-Dunn in the amount of
$19,191.30, including tax, and the cost of same to be transferred from the
Council Contingency Fund. To this motion Councilman Thom voted "no". MOTION
CARRIgD.
PURCHASE OF MATERIAL - STRUCTURAL STEEL FO~ Tx LEWIS 230 KV SU~STATIOM: The City
Manager reported that structural steel for the Lewis 230 KV Substation was
approved by the City Council on November 13, 1973, in the amount of $172,427.62
for 209.3 tons from Coast Iron and Steel. Subsequent to that authorization,
the consulting engineers have revised the estimated quantities and calculated
the precise tonnage of steel required for this construction which has resulted
in an increase of 20.813 tons. It is therefore recommended that the additional
20.813 tons of structural steel be purchased fr~m Coast Iron and Steel Company
at a cost of $17,309.67, including tax.
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the
purchase of an additional 20.813 tons of structur~l.~tee~ from Coast Iron and
Steel Company was authorized in the amount of $17,309.67, including tax.
MOTION CARRIED.
CLAIMS AGAINST THE C~TY: The following claims were denied as recommended by the
City Attorney and ordered referred to the insurance carrier on motion-by
Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Dutton:
a. Claim submitted by Fredrick R. Dunkinson for damages and
injuries purportedly resulting from condition of freeway offramp at Santa Aha
Freeway and Loafs Street on or about December 24, 1973.
b. Claim submitted by Mary Louise Garza and Alejandro Valdez Garza
and Alicia Gonzales for personal injuries and property damage sustained pur-
portedly as a result of improperly functioning traffic signals on or about
January 24, 1974.
74-352
c. Claim submitted by Mr. & Mrs. Edward Turner for personal property
damage sustained purportedly as a result of City sewer clogging and water and
sewage backing up into rental house at 1309 W. North Street on or about March
13, 1974.
d. Claim submitted by Patricia R. Beisner for personal property dam-
age sustained purportedly in a collision with City vehicle on or about March
19, 1974.
e. Claim submitted by James & Lois Kitchens for damage to furni~
shings sustained purportedly as a result of City sewer backup on or about
March 6, 1974.
f. Claim submitted by Michael Ruggiero for personal 'property damage
purportedly sustained as a result of condition of road on Katella, near Euclid
Street on or about March 12, 1974.
MOTION CARRIED.
FOR CONDE~fl~A ON NO 7: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 74R-167 for adop~ion.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING PAYMENT
TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY FOR CERTAIN BETTERMENTS AND IMPROVF.-
MENTS (S.C.E. CONDE~ATION NO. 7).
Roll Call Vote.
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton.
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared ResOlution No. 74R-167 duly passed and adopted.
AND BUENA PARK: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 74R-168 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF ANAHEIM
AND BUENA PARK IN CONNECTION WITH FIRE PROTECTION AND RESCUE, AND APPROVING
THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF.
Roll Call Vote.
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton.
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-168 duly passed and adopted.
-CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed on
motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Stephenson.
a. Orange County Board of Supervisors - Resolution No. 74-381 -
terminating the state of local emergency within the territorial limits of
the County of Orange caused by the shortage of gasoline and requesting
the Governor to rescind his regulations restricting the purchase of gasoline
within the territorial limits of Orange County.
b. Orange County Clerk & Board of Supervisors - Resolution No.
74-308 - Cancelling the Nohl Ranch Agricultural Preserve Agreement.
c. Petition - Requesting a bikeway system for Anaheim.
d. Community Center Authority - Minutes - March 11, 1974.
e. Financial and Operating Reports for the month of
February , 1974.
Engineering Division
Electrical Division
~OTION CARRIED.
74- 353
City Ha~l, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL .MINUTES - April 9, 1974, 1:30 P,M.
ORDII~ANCE N0, 328]: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 3281 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AI~NDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE HELATING TO ZONING. (71-72-15(4) ' R-H-iO,O00).
Roll Call Vote.
AYES: COUNCII2~N:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCIII~EN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Peb!ey, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3281 duly passed and adopted.
0RDI~ANCg ~0, 3283: Councilman Stephenson offered Ordinance No. 3283 for first
reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
~I~ICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (73-74-26 - R-3).
ORDINANC$ N0, 3284: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 3284 for first reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (71-72-21 - C-l)
ORDINANCE NO, 3285: Councilman Stephenson offered Ordinance No. 3285 for.first
reading.
AN ORDINANCE OFT HE CITY OF ANAHEIMAMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (71-72-41 - R-3)
~EPO~T - CHANGE OF BENEFIC%ARY - MAYOR DUTTON'S LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES: In answer
to Councilman Thom's request on April 2, 1974, regarding insurance policies
used by Mayor Dutton as security'for a third mortgage, the City Attorney
submitted a memorandum in which he concluded that he could see no violation
or conflict of interest in connection with these. He briefly noted that there
are two basic insurance policies which the City has for Councilmen and employees,
one of which is a $25,000 life insurance policy and there is also a $100,000
accidental death policy available for the Council members. The language in
each of these policies is identical to the effect that the insured has the
absolute right to change the beneficiary under these policies. In 1971 the
Mayor did just this, change the beneficiary on one of the policies and Mr.
Watts remarked he could find no violation of the Code of Ethics Ordinance in
this regard.
Councilman Thom reiterated that in his opinion it is unethical for
a Councilman to use something provided for him by the citizens of Anaheim to
further his private business purposes.
Mayor Dutton pointed out that the policy in question is a term
policy and subsequently accrues no equity and cannot be used to secure a loan.
Councilman Stephenson left the meeting (5:30 P.M.)
~ESOL~TION NO, 74R-!69 - INT~R~0~AIN POWER F~OJECT: Utilities Director Gordon
Hoyt reported that the documents for implementation of the Intermountain Power
Project which the Council discussed and agreed to enter into last July are
now prepared and ready for execution. (Articles of incorporation, membership
and study agreement were submitted to the Council with transmittal memorandum.)
He advised that a slide presentation regarding the scope of the project and
economic benefits to the community is prepared and offered to present this for
Council's information at this time.
Due to the late hour and the fact that this is the date of the
General F~nicipal Election, and further noting that they had already discussed
this project i~ depth when first considered on July 17, 1973 (minute page
73-591), the City Council determined to forego the presentation at this time.
74-354
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 9, 1974, 1;30 P,M,
The City Manager indicated he felt it would be important for Council
to hear this presentation at some future date so as to insure that all implica-
tions and benefits of the project are thoroughly understood.
Mr. Hoyt briefly summarized that the benefits to the community of
this particular project over its life span are pr~'ected to be some 600 million
dollars in savings. The action necessary at this time would be for Council to
adopt ~ resolution which would authorize execution of the membership and agree-
ment to enter into the non-profit corporation which was formed specifically to
study the feasibility of a large coal fire generation plant in Utah and possi-
bly the operation of same. The possibility is also being studied of the non-
profit corporation actually doing the financing supported by the capital
improvements, which would be the power plant itself, and the contracts from
the member cities. The participants currently include the Intermountain Con-
sumers Power Association (which is composed of 25 cities and 6 co-ops in
southern Utah, and 6 Southern California Cities). The City of Anaheim would
own 15% of the project. Mr. Hoyt highly recommended that the Council execute
the necessary documents to enter the feasibility study.
City Attorney Watts advised that the resolution proposed to be
adopted by Council would accomplish three things: (1) Approve the terms and
conditions of a study agreement; (2) authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to
sign said agreement; (3) appoint the Utilities Director as the City's member
on the Board of Directors of the Intermountain Power Project.
Councilman Pebley offered a resolution to approve the terms and
conditions and implement entrance into the Intermountain Power Project by the
City of Anaheim.
Prior to voting on said resolution, Councilman Thom indicated that
he felt he would be unprepared to vote on the agreement at this time and sug-
gested that it be deferred for.one week.
Following brief Council discussion regarding the impact of deferring
the adoption of said resolution, Councilman Pebley withdrew the resolution
offered.
Mr. Hoyt advised that a delay in entering would not be critical at
this time but would become so in the next month. He additionally reported
that the City of Anaheim's share of the costs of the study would be $500,000
which includes the cost of its own employees incurred in connection with
various meetings regarding the induction of the study, which would amount to
$12,500 of the $500,000 total. He noted that there is $50,000 in the current
budget which should carry the City's share of the study for the current year.
P~SOLUTION NO, 74R-169: Councilman Dutton offered Resolution No. 74R-169 for
adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS
AND CONDITIONS OF A MEMBERSHIP AND STUDY AGREEMENT FOR THE INTERMOUNTAIN
POWER PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEmeNT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
Roll Call Vote.
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Pebley and Dutton
NOES: COUNCILMEN: Thom
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Stephenson
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-169 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO, 74R-170 - ORANGE COUNTY II~TELLIGENCE UNIT: (Held over from earlier
in the meeting for additional information). In answer to Councilman
Stephenson's question as to the other member agencies involved in this
operation, Mr. ~rdoch reported that there are 23 cities involved,plus the
District Attorney's Office and Sherif~ as well as 12 Associate Members
including the Telephone Company and the Military.
74- 355
City Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- April 9, 1974, 1:30 P,M,
RF. SOLUTIO~ NO, 74R-170: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 74R-170
for adopt ion.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM SUPPORTING THE ORANGE
COUNTY INTELLIGENCE UNIT.
Roll Call Vote.
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCIl:
ABSENT: COIINCII~:
Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton.
None
Stephenson
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-170 duly passed and adopted.
~UDG~T POLICY MEETING: The City Manager advised that it will be necessary to hold
an adjourned regular Council work session in order to ascertain certain policy
directions regarding the 1974-75 budget and suggested Wednesday, April 17,
1974, 9:00 A.M. for such session.
By general consent the Council agreed to schedule an adjourned
regular meeting for Wednesday, April 17, 1974, for purposes of discussing
budget policies.
RESO..~JTION NO. 74R-171 - AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT AGREEMENT WITH DR. JAMES KAUFMAN
(EMPLOYEES PREPAID DENTAL INSURANCE): Personnel Director Garry McRae advised that
it is necessary to amend the contract agreement between the City and Dr.
Kaufman to reflect that the City will determine at the beginning of each
month how many employees they have enrolled in this plan rather than at the
end; in essence the amendment is necessary to implement payment in advance
which was originally included in Dr. Kaufman's bid as submitted in October
1973, but not written into the contract, and that this is in keeping with
what the Council originally agreed to do.
RESOLUTION NO.,..Z4R-171: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 74R-171
for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN JAMES H. KAUFMAN, DDS., INC. AND THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM.
Roll Call Vote.
AYES: COUNCIIR~N:
NOES: COlrNCII~MEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton.
None
Stephenson
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-171 duly passed and adopted.
HOUSING FOR SENIOR CITIZENS: Mayor Dutton presented a petition containing
approximately 100 signatures regarding the use of Federal subsidies or
other techniques to provide moderately-priced housing for Senior Citizens
in Anaheim and advised that the Development Services Department has been
requested to initiate study of the possibilities.
~: Councilman Sneegas moved to adjourn. Councilman Pebley seconded
motion. MOTION CARRIED. (5:45 P.M.)
City Clerk
74-356
Cit~ Rall. Anahe. ima California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 16, !974~ 1:30 P.M.
The City Council of the. City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PT, ESEN T:
COUNCIIREN: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
COUNCII/~EN: None
CITY HANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch
CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts
CITY CLERK: Aloha M. Fattens
UTILITIES DIRECTOR: Gordon W. Hoyt
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC I~0RKS: Thornton E. Piersa11
DIRECTOR OF DEVEIDPHENT SERVICES: Alan G. Orsborn
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOI~fl/NT SERVICES: Ronald Thompson
ZONING SUPERVISOR: . Charles Roberts
Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order.
INVOCATION: Reverend Paul Keller of the First Presbyterian Church gave the
Invocation.
FlAG SALUTE: Councilman Ralph G. Sneegas led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
~SqLUTION OF APPRECIATION: A Resolution of Appreciation, unanimously approved
by the City Council was presented to Hr. Steve Koska, Director of
the Melodyland Drug Prevention Center on the occasion of their fifth
anniversary.
/~NEI~,~ MUNICIPAL ELECTION, APRIL 9, 1974 - CITY
to Resolution No. 74R-93, City Clerk Alona M. Farrens submitted/~tI~£~te-~f
Canvass of Returns of the Regular General Municipal Election held in the City
of Anaheim, April 9, 1974, conveying the number of votes given at each precinct
and the number of votes given in the City to persons voted for, the respective
offices for which said persons were candidates, and for and against ~he/measure.
Charte~'Amendment
74- 35 7
~ ~1 o ~I m 0
Ii
JACK C.
DUTTON
.MARK A.
STEPMENSON
~o Jo
"BILL"
THOM
JOSEPH
A~NDREW
CON~AD
DAVID R.
DOERI~G
GLENN P.
FRY
MADELINE
RAE
JENSON
MIRIAM
KAYWOOD
VIVIAN
PIETROK
DON R.
ROTH
JOHN
SEYMOUR
W.
"BILL"
THOM
O
74-358
74-359
-
JACK C.
DUTTON
¥~RKA.
STEPHENSON
W, J.
"BILL"
THOM
JOSEPH
ANDREW
CON PAD
DAVID R.
DOERING
GLENN P.
FRY'
MADELINE
RAE
JENSEN
MIRIAM
KAlq~OOD
VIVIAN
PIETROK
DON R.
ROTH
SEYMOUR
0~
~0
W. J.
"BILL"
THOM
Z
0
0
74-360
F
JACK C. !
~ ~ .,, ~'~
GLeN P. ~ h
I
/Mli
' ~ ~ .
7&- 361
JACK C.
DUTTON
~A.
STEPHENSON
W. Jo
"BILL"
THOM
JOSEPH
ANDREW
C ON I-~AD
DAVID R.
DOERING
GLENN P.
FRY
MADELINE
RAE
JENSEN
MIRIAM
KA~4OOD
VIVIAN
PIETROK
DON R.
ROTH
@
JOHN
S EYI~IOUR
"BILL"
THOM
o