Loading...
1974/12/2474-1234 MANAGEMENT CONTROL CENTER Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 19~ 1974~ 7:30 P.M. Mr. Kamphefner com~nted that almost an identical problem has occurred at Sage Park with the adjacent development of an adult apartment complex. Mr. Trapp stated that he would have a plan available of the Savanna School problem for discussion at the next Park and Recreation Coasnisston meeting. Prior to adjournment, Dr. Butterworth remarked, speaking for the Commission, that they support the concept of more Joint meetings with the Council since this is the technique which makes things happen. PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION ADJOURNNENT: Commissioner Mahoney moved to adjourn. Commissioner McGee seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 9:55 P.M. cit Cler City Hall~ ~h~im~ Calif.ornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 24, 1974~ 1.:00 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in Adjourned Regular Session. PRESENTI ABSENT: P~SENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Robert H. Davis CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts CITY CLERK: Alona N. Hougard PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Garry O. McRae CITY ENGINEER: Jemes P. Naddox Hayor Thom called the Adjourned Regular Council Meeting to order at 1:15 P.H. SANTA A~ RIB FLOOD P~OTECTION.AG,,~NCY: City Attorney Watts reported that pursuant to dire~tion given by Council following presentation and discussion of the for- marion of the Santa Aha River Flood Protection Agency at Council Meeting held November 26, 1974, a meeting has been held at which several changes were pro- posed to this Joint Powers Agreement. He reported that all of his objections or points of clarification h~,ve been resolved. Specifically, the agreement now provides that the members of theJoint Powers Agency would be elected public officials. Further it has been established that each entity would have equal voting rights irrespective of size. Contributions to the Budget of the proposed Joint Powers Agency. for the remainder of the current Fiscal Year would be equal. RE~LUT~ON NO. 74R-618: Council~an Sneegas offered Resolution No. 74R-618 for adoption, approving the terms and conditions of a Joint Powers Agreement to form the Santa Ann River Flood Protection Agency, Refer to Resolution ~ook. A I~SOLOTIO~ OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF ANABE~P~V~G~ TERMS AND 0~ ~ ~D C~L DIS~ICT ~ O~ P~TICIPATING ~~~ AGENCIES ~ ~ICIP~ITIES, C~TINC ~g ~A~A RI~R ~D PROTECTION AC~CY, ~ A~R~G ~ ~YOR~ CI~ ~E~ ~ ~C~ SAID ~~T ON B~F OF ~E Roll Call Vote: 74-1235 City Ha!l~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 24~i 1974, I:00'P.M. AYES: COUNCIL M~MBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOBS: COUNCIL M~MBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL NENBERS: None The Hayor declared Resolution No. 74R-618 duly passed and adopted. A~POIN~ - REPRESENTATIVE TO SANTA ANA RIVER FLOOD PROTECTION AGENCY: Councilwoman Kay~ood no~Lnated and ~oved that Council~an Sneesas be appointed as the City's representative to the Santa Ann River Flood Protection Agency. Councilman Seymour seconded the motion. NOTION CARRIED. IN~LF/~ATION OF TH~ 1974 ll~E~TS TO TH~ FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT RELATINC TO FIRE D.~p~ PBRSONNEL: Personnel Director Garry McRae reported on the recommended resolutions required to fulfill the agreement reached with the Anaheim Fire Association to implement the 1974 Amendments to the Fair Labor Standards Act. .~.OLtr~ION NOS. 74R-619 THROUGH 74R-623: On report and reco~mendation of the Personnel Director, Council~an Pebley offered Resolution Nos. 74R-619 through 74R-623, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. ~LUTION NO. 74R-619: A RESOLUTION OF TfIE CITY COUNCIL OF TIIE CITY OF ANAflEIM ESTABLISHING RATES OF COMPENSATION FOR JOB CLASSES REPRESENTED BY THE ANAHEIM FIRE ASSOCIATION AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO. 74R-518, AND AMENDMENTS THERETO. R~OLUTION NO. 74R-620: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, A~ING RESOLUTION NO.: 73R-605, PERSONNEL RULE 5, HOURS OF ~ORKAND PAY DAY, SECTION 5.1, 5.11 AND 5.12, RELATING TO THE AVERAGEREGULAR WORKWEEK, THE REGULAR HOURLY RATE OF PAY, AND THE REGULAR BIWEEKLY RATE OF PAY FOR FIRE SUPPRES- SION PERSONNEL. RF~O. LUTION NO. 74R-621: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIH A~NDING RESOLUTION NO. 74R-206 AND RESOLUTION 74R-53 PERSONNEL RULE 6, PREMIUM PAY, BY AMENDING SECTION 6.0, BY ADDING SECTION 6.26 AND BY DELETING SECTIONS 6.9 THROUGH 6.911, RELATING TO PREMIUM PAY FOR CERTAIN DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. RB~OLUTION NO. 74R-622: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM t/~NDING RESOLUTION NO. 73R-607, PERSONNEL RULE 16, VACATION, SECTIONS 16.1 T~ROUGH 16.15, AND SECTIONS 16.7 THROUGH 16.75 RELATING TO ANNUAL VACATION ACCRUAL RATES AND MAXIMUM VACATION ACCUMULATIONS FOR CERTAIN DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES IN'THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. ~..OLUTION NO. 74R-623: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIH AlbINO RESOLUTION NO. 73R-608, PERSONNEL RULE 17, SICK LEAVE, SECTION 17.02, RELATING TO SIC~ LEAVE ACCRUAL FOR CERTAIN DESIGNATED EHPLOYEES IN THE FIRE DE~ARTHENT. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL HEMBERS: Kayvood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneesas and Thom COUNCIL HEHBERS: None COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Nayor declared Resolution Nos. 74R-619 through 74R-623, both incltmive, duly passed and adopted. PU~.LIG~ION OF 1975~ORK PERIOD. FOREHPLOYEES OF THE CITy OF AI~WRIMENGAGED' IN [IR~,. PROTECTION ACTIVITIES: In'accOrdance vith Department of Labor Rules and R~attons, Nr. Carry NcRae, Personnel Director, read the follovtng state~ente: "The 1975 Work Period for e~ployees of the City of Anaheim engaged in fire suppression activities shall be a recurring twenty-four (24) consecutive day period beginning at 7:30 A.M. on January 1, 1975." (Note: See Minutes of Decmaber 31, 1974, Page No. 74-1253, which reflect the period beginning at 8:00A.M.) 74-1236 City Ha!l~ ~aaheizI California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 24~ 1974;~ 1:00 P.H. "The 1975 Mork Period for employees of the City' of Anaheim engaged in fire prevention, administrative and related fire protection activities shall be a recurring fourteen (14) consecutive day period beginning at 12:01 A.M. on December 27, 1974." CREATION OF NEW JOB CLASSES - SOCIAL SERVICES COORDINATOR~ SOCIAL SERVICES AIDE~ DATA PROCESSING AIDE: Mr. Garry McRae reported that in connection with the recently a~pted proposal to establish a Community Services Center, the decision was made to staff this with C.B.T.A. funded employees. In order to mash C.E.T.A. require- ments with the City's needs in these Job areas, it is necessary to create two new job classifications: Social Services Coordinator, assigned to salary schedule X~56 ($792.13 - $963.73) and Social Services Aide assigned to salary'schedule X436 ($684.67 - $755.73). Additionally, in connection with the C.E.T.A. Program which is designed ~o place unemployed persons in Jobs which they are prepared to perform, it was noted that the City has the possibility of employing someone in Data .Processing under C.E.T.A. funding. This would also require creation of a new Job classifica- tion, that of Data Processing Aide, assigned to salary schedule X556. Mr. HcRae recommended that the Council implement these three Job classifications this date. During discussion, in reply to 'Mayor Thom, Mr. McRae advised that there is a statutory limit on C.E.T.A. employees' salaries of $10,000 per year. Additionally, the person so employed can only work in this position for a period of ode year under C.E.T.A. Funds. He reported that the C.E.T.A. Program is primarily designed to prepare individuals for employment and explained that the alternative after one year of employment would be: 1.) take this position over onto tP~ City payroll or 2.) replace the incumbent with another C.E.T.A. employee if the grant is extended. He responded to Councilman Seymour that if it is determined for any reason that a particular position filled by a C.E;T.A. employee is no longer necessary, the City would have the ability to lay this person off. .P~OLU~!ON NO. 74R-624: On report and recommendation of the Personnel Director, Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 74R-624 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THB CITer COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIMAHENDING RESOLUTION NO. 7&R-520 ESTABLISHING NEW JOB CLASSIFICATIONS AND RATES OF PAY. (Social Services Coordinator, Social Services Aide and Data Processing Aide) Roll Call Vote: AYEs: COUNCIL NEHBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-624 duly passed and adopted. PARTICIPATI~..N IN FEDERAL EMPLOYNENT EFFORT: Assistant City Manager Robert Davis introduced the subject of the City's participation in the Public Employment Progra~ for which additional funding was recently approved under Title 6. Mayor Thom interjected that since the time for the regular City Council meetin$ of December 24, 1974, 1:30 P.M. had now arrived, perhaps it would be beet t° adjourn this session and hold this item over to that regular meeting. ADJ0~NT~ 'Councilman Pebley moved to adjourn. COuncilman Sneegas seconded the ~otion. MOTION CARRIED. AdJourn~h 1:35 P,M. City-Clerk~ 74-1237 F City ~!!~ A~ahei~_i Califo~nia - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 24~-1974~ 1:30 'P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. P~ESENT: ABSENT: PKESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneesas and Thom COUNCIL HEMBERS: None ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Robert M. Davis CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts CITY CLERK: Aloha M. Hougard PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: Thornton E. Piersall CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox MANPOWER COORDINATOR: William HePburn COMMUNITY RELATIONS REPRESENTATIVE: Joe Garza ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts ASSISTANT PLANNER: Robert Kelley Mayor Thom called the meeting to order at 1:35 P.M. INVOCATION: Reverend Father John Saville of St. Michael's Episcopal Church gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman John Seymour led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council Regular Meeting held December 3, 1974, were approved, on motion by Councilwow~n Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour. ~OTION CARRIED. I~h~IVE K OF READING - ORDINANCES AND .RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Pebley moved to waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions, and that consent to the waiver of reading is hereby given by all Council Members unless, after reading of the title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the reading of such ordinance or resolution. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION UNA~IIqOUSLY CARRIED. REPORT - FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST TME CITY: Demands against the City in the amount of $707,053.62, in accordance with the 1974-75 Budget, were approved. PARTI~PATIOW IN FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT EFFORT: (Continued from the Adjourned Regular ~assion, December 24, 1974, 1:00 P.M.) Hr. Robert Davis stated that the City of Anaheim may expect to receive between one and one and one-quarter million dollars in additional funds for public employment about January 6, 1975 pursuant to the latest Federal Employment Effort approved under Title 6. He related that the City of Anaheimhas been requested by the Orange County Hanpower Commission to compile and present to them by January 3, 1975 a list of Jobs which the City intends to fill under this program. He indicated that this is eXPected to per- mit the City to employ 100 to 150 people and the Federal Government would like maploy~ent to begin on January 10, 1975. Councilman Seymour requested a copy of this list as soon as it is pre- pared, as he wishes to have so~2 feeling of the scope in which this employment is to be made available particularly for other entities. Council-m- Seymour referred to the memorandum on the subject submitted by the Manager's Office which indicates that the City will recover the maximum allowable funds for indirect costs associated with administration of this pro- grem. He stated that it was his understanding that the City bas not yet nego- tiated an allowance for these overhead costs with HUD and questioned what the status of this agreement might be. Hr. Davis responded that the indirect costs allotment proposal is in the process of preparation and that the allowable a~ount is less than originally ~ntlctpated, being only up to 181. They plan to present this indirect cost pro- posal to HUD and once approved the other Federal agencies involved must then accept it as well. Mayor Thom inquiredwhy the City would not be receiving the maximum allowable for indirect costs. 74-1238 City ~a!l~ ~a_h~im~ California - COUNCIL HINUTES - December 24~ 1974~ 1:30 P,M.' Hr. Davis replied that he thought the 18% figure was a misconception, that the regulations permit only 10% of the Grant for administrative expenses and the indirect costs for overhead are allowable at a rate of 15% to 18% of this 10% and not of the total funds. Councilman Seymour stated that to insure that the City of Anaheim allocation is the maximum, he would appreciate receiving information as to how it is being calculated. He further offered to review this section of the appli- cation with Hr. Davis at any time,as he would like the opportunity to obtain a closer understanding as to how these figures come about. In reply to Councilwoman Kaywood, Hr. Davis indicated that should the various City Departments list more than 150 Jobs, thosewhich would be filled first would be determined on a priority basis and this would be discussed with Council for direction. Mayor Thom pointed out that this employment program may provide a way to upgrade and obtain optimum maintenance levels at Joint City/school facilities, as discussed at the Adjourned Regular Session, December 19, 1974, 7:30 P.M., since the school districts have had to cutback on these services. Councilman Seymour agreed that this would have high priority. Councilwomen Kaywood advised that the Police Department could use addi- tional persons employed in ancillary capacities such as fingerprinting. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood,: the City Council authorized participation in the new Federal Unemployment Manpower Grant. ~IOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC REARMING - GEN~2kL PLAN .AMENDMENT NO. 136: To consider adding specific language to the G~neral Plan, to permit agricultural and open space uses in the R-A Zone. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-224, recom~nded approval of General Plan Amendment No. 136. Zoning Supervisor Roberts noted that Council is aware that an appliCa- tion has been received from a property owner in Anaheim to incorporate his land into the agricultural preserve. The structure of the Anaheim General Plan cur- rently would not accommodate this and therefore General Plan Amendment No. 136 was proposed which will accommodate the preservation of agricultural/open space uses in the R-A Zone, by amending the language in the text of the General Plan. Mayor Thom asked if anyone wished to address the Council either in favor or in opposition to the proposed General Plan Amendment, there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. ~SOL~I(~ NO.-74R-625: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 74R-625 f~r adoption, approving General Plan Amendment No. 136 as recommended by the City Planning Commission. 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. 136. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL M~M~ERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-625 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC ~*BTNG - A~!)_~ TO TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE'- FLOOR SPACE RE~JI~~ To consider amendment to Title 18, Zoning, of the Amaheim Hunicipal Code to repeal Chapter 18.80 entitled, "Floor Space Requirements in Specific Areas" intts entirety. 74-1239 F City H~I!. Anaheim. Cal,,,~,fo..rnia - CouNcIL MINUTES - December 24 s' 1974 t 1: 30 'P .M. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution. No. PC74-226, recosmanded that the City Council repeal Chapter 18.80 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and amp. nd same by adding the subsections listed therein. Zoning Supervisor Roberts advised that in reviewing the Anaheim Municipal Code, Title 18 in particular for recompilation, it was determined that Section 18.80 providing for floor space requirements in specific areas of the City was antiquated. This amendment proposes to universalize floor area require- m~nts throughout the City. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council either in favor or in opposition to the proposed amendment to Title 18; there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. ORDINANCE NO. 3384: Councilman Seymour offered Ordinance No. 3384 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIH REPEALING CERTAIN SECTION AND SUBSECTIONS OF TITLE 18 RELATING TO ZONING. (Minimum floor area per dwelling - subsections 18.21, 18.22, 18.24, 18.25, 18.26 and 18.27, .062.030) PUBLIC.~ING - VAI~...!ANCE NO. 2649: Application by Warner and Jean Franz for the following Code waiver to establish four R-E (SC) lots on the northwesterly side of Lakeview Avenue, southeasterly of Santa Ana Canyon Road, was submitted together with application for Exemption Status from the requirement to prepare an E.I.R.: a. Minimum lot size. The City PlAnning Colission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-222, reported that the Director of Development Services has determined that the pro- posed activity falls ~rithin the definition of Section 3.01, Class 5 of the City of A~sl~il~Guidelines to the requirements for an enviromae~tal impact report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an E.I.R. and further approved Variance No. 2649 subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner(s) of subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim a strip of land 39 feet in width from the centerline of the street along Lakeview Avenue on an alismment to be established by the City Engineer for street widening purposes. It is anticipated the City will construct ultimate street improvements when traffic needs dictate. 2. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to commence- ~e~t of structural framing. 3, In the event that subject property is to be divided for the pur- pose of sale, lease, or financing, a parcel map to record the approved division of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 4. That the owaer(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. 5. That all lots shall be served by underground utilities. 6. 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 pemaitted between October 15th and April 15th unless all required off-site drainage facilities have been installed and are operative. Positive assurance sh~tl 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 dmiicated 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 th~ commencement of grading operations. The required drainage facilities shall be of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff waters originating from hi~her 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 do~metreem 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 mede available to the developers of said property upon their request. i II I 74-1240 City ~!1, .~aheim~ California - COUNCIL HINUTgS - December 24~ 1974~ 1:30 P.H. 7. That the property owner(s) shall submit grading and site plans to the Plaaning Co2mission and/or City Council for review and acceptance vrior'to the issuance of the Building Permits. 8. 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. 9. That Condition Nos. 1 and 3, above-mentioned, shall be co~plied with prior to the commencement of the activity authorized under this resOlution, or prior to the time that the Building Permit is issued, or within a period of one year from date hereof, whichever occurs first, or such further time as the Planning Commission may grant. 10. That Condition Nos. 5 and 8, above-mentioned, shall be'complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. Rmview of action taken by the City Planning Commission was requested by Councilwoman Kaywood at the City Council meeting held December 3, 1974, and public hearing scheduled this date. Zoning Supervisor Roberts reported that subject property is Just slightly under the minimum requirement of the R-E Zone; that the total parcel is 3.98 acres in size and the Applican~ is proposing to divide it into four individual parcels, three of which would have a gross area of 1.0 acre each and the remaining parcel, 0.98 gross acreage. This smaller parcel would have a panhandle type of configuration and would contain the existing residence. He related that the .Planning Commission felt the deviation to be rather minimal and as a result recommended approval of the variance application. Councilwomen Kaywood inquired how much acreage would be left once required dedications to ultimate width were made from the proposed divided parcels for Lakeview Avenue, to which Mr. Roberts replied that this would be difficult to determine since the alignment of this road has not been firmly establtshad. Further, in the R-E Zone the minimum lot area requirements are based on gross area including any public or private streets. The Mayor asked if the Applicant or his Agent were present and wished to address the Council. Hr. Cal Queyrel, Anacal Engineering representing the Owners, stated that the variance requested is minimal in nature. He related that there are two lots adjacent to subject property which are comprised on a gross acreage basis of 0.9 acres each which were approved before the area was annexed to the City of Anaheim. Me cited that since the Code sets forth the minimum size requirememt~ for the R-E Zone on a gross acreage basis, it would be discriminatory against this particular property if it were made to comply on a net acreage basis. Conncilwo~an Kaywood inquired whether there is any acreage available adjacent to this property which the Applicant might be able to purchase, in order to meet the size requirement. Hr. Queyrel replied that this is always a possibility but this would create an undue hardship on the owner. Hr. Queyrel submitted a copy of the recorded parcel map for review by Councilmen Seymour indicating the two parcels adJacemt to subject property and to the north which are 0.9 acres each in size. (Said parcel ~ap returned to Mr. Queyrel). Councilwom Kay~ood inquired whether anything has ever been approved by Council in the Peralta Hills area since annexation to the City of Anaheim which would create a parcel less than one acre in Size, to which Hr. ~berts replied that he could not recall any variance applications at all iu this area. Couacilwosan Kaywood was of the opinion that if this particularvariance is approved it would serve to create a precedent which would generate similar , raquests fro~ ocher property owners. She cited that this is the ~anner in which the miatsmm 7,200 square foot residential lot has become a miniu 5,000 square foot lot. 74-1241 qity ~[, ~.,._he~-~ ¢~liforala - COUNCILrV..INt~ES - December 24,~ [974~ !:30' P.M. fir. Queyrel replied that this particular land situation is unique and there are none others like it in Peralta Hills. He contended that each variance application should receive due consideration on its o~n intent and magnitude. In reply to Councilman Pebley, Hr. Roberts agreed chat the 0.98 acre lot, once dedications have been made from the other three, would be the largest of all the lots on a net basis. The Nayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council either in favor or opposition to Variance No. 2649. N~s. Charlene Barnes, 5040 East Cresent Drive, Peralta Hills Area, repreeencinS the Peralta Hills Homeowners Improvement Association, read a state- m~nt which indicated their opposition to the granting of this variance based on the following points: 1. At the time of annexation of Peralta Hills to the City of Anaheim, the City agreed to maintain the integrity of one acre minimum estate zoning. 2. At the time of annexation, at the City's request, a compromise was mda from one acre net to the one acre gross standard and they strongly oppose any further erosion of the standard one acre minimum zone. 3. Approval of a variation from the one acre zone would establish a precedent which will make it difficult or impossible to deny further such variance requests. 4. Prior denials of variance requests have already established a precedent for maintain/ns the one acre minimum lot size. 5. -Over 20% of the gross acreage of subject property is dedicated and will become a part of Lakeview Avenue if this is converted to a secondary highway, thereby substantially rmiucin$ the usable lot areas. 6. There is vacant property available, adjacent to subject property, in excess of 1.35 acres which could be purchased to obtain sufficient property to sintain the minimum lot size for the four requested parcels. 7. The mere fact that this particular property owner lacks sufficient lm~i to subdivide and build is not a reason for a variance, since many other property ovv~rs in the area are faced with a similar situation. 8. D~velopers have purchased substantial acreage in the Peralta Hills Ar~a and ~ould apply for similar lot size reductions if subject variance is approved. Counctlamu Seymou~ observed that one of the ma~or points in the statement of opposition presented by N~s. Barnes ~uld appear Co be the usability of t~ l~d, ~d ~ ~tred ~t~r ~s. Barnes ~s su~estin8 that the extsttn8 st~rds ~ t~ Code ~ich d~l ~th Sross acrease s~uld be ~nded to a net acr~ ~sts. Mxs. Barnes replied affirmatively and reiterated that the major ~poet~ton to this particular variance is based on the fact that approval will ~st&bltsh a precedent as this ~ould be the first time any variance has be granted ein~ ~xation. Ng. Clayborn Graves, 4800 Lakevtew Avenue, Peralta Hills Area, advised that ha owns the property directly across the street from subject parcel and has resided in the Peralta Hills since 1947. He indicated that he wished to amplify poimt Ilo. 5 ~hlch ~ introduced by the Peralta Hills Homeowners Improvement i~octation, namely that 20I of the property is involved in the potential widening of Lak~vie~lvenua. He re~rked that the gross acreage of subject property is 3.9~2 acres and the net 3.310 acres, and that 2/3 of an acre is involved in &mticatiou-for Lak~viAv~nu~. N~ referred to and read the lot stse acreages b~fore m~d after ~Licatlon as eat forth in the Development Services staff r~pert to the City Plmml~ Commission. He further noted that once the City ~ establishes the c~nterltne of Lakeview Avenue, subject property o~mer ~ b~ t~qutred ~o ~llcate 39 feet from that established centerline, which e~uld ~ an midttio~l 19-feet plus the existing 40-foot roadway for the 650 foot lm~th of his property. · 74-1242 City ga.ll~ A~beim~ California - COUNCIL MIEfI~S - December 24t 1974~ 1:30 P.M. Mr. Graves further noted Chat subject property is in the Scenic Corridor Zone and, therefore, there is a further requirement for a 25-foot setback from the roadway. In finality, when Lakeview Avenue is widened to its ul$imate width, this particular property would have 1.33 acres tied up either by road dedication or the use controlled by Scenic Corridor requirements, thereby reducing the total available ~sable space by 33%. Mr. Graves recomended that the Council deny this variance proposal and also that they consider initiating the procedure necessary to amend the Code to place the one acre zoning on a net acreage standard to avoid this vroblem in the future. In response to the statement made by Mr. Queyrel that the two parcels to the north of subject property are 0.9 acres each, Mr. Graves advised that this property was subdivided while under County jurisdiction and was on a net acreage basis. At that time a total of 6.5 acres were subdivided into 5 parcels. During further discussion of the dedication requirements from subject property for Lakeview Avenue, Mr. Graves disclosed that he recently learned that his boundary line is on the west side of Lakeview Avenue and not at the center- line and he was of the opinion that his acreage would not be affected by any City requirement for dedication for additional width. Mr. Louis C. Bell, 555 Peralta Hills Drive, related that he is one of the newar residents of Peralta Hills and that one of the important requisites in the selection of their home site was the one acre minimum lot eize. He stated that he has Just completed construction of his home on a two acre lot and has great interest in seeing that a precedent not be set which would permit a reduc- tion of the one acre minimum. The Hayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council, and hearing no response, he offered the Applicant a few minutes for rebuttal. Mr. Queyrel stated that he did not think the term "precedent" has any place in discussion of a variance, since any such variance request should be considered on its own merits. He reiterated that the Code requirement is based on gross acreage and that the application meets all intents of 'the variance conditions and, therefore, he felt approval of same is Justified. Councilman Seymour asked if Mr. Queyrel did not feel that in Justifying the conditions for the variance, it is material to consider'the effect on this particular property of the widening of Lakeview Avenue. Mr. Queyrel replied that he felt this to be valid only to the degree that waight would be placed on the net area. He pointed out that this has never been a factor considered in approval of other acreage divisions. He further noted that the property is already being penalized to a high degree by street dedication requirements. Councilwoman Kaywood inquired specifically whether there is a small parcel of property available adjoining subject acreage which would be sufficient in size to ~ake the variance unnecessary. Mr. Franz replied that there is vacant property adjacent but that he has not discussed the price of sa~e with the owner. He indicated that even though the property might be vacant and "available", if the price was out of his range it ~ould not then be available to him. The Hayor reco~nized Mr. Louis Dexter, 305North Ranchito Street, Anahet~a, who observed that the issue in this discussion seems to be whether or not this Applicant knewthat a portion of his property was dedicated at the time that he purchased sa~e. Since the property was dedicated for Lakeview Avenue in 1937, ~hen Mr. Franz subsequently purchased it, certainly the deed indicated the easement and dedications thereon. He did not feel that the CounCil should be sympathetic resarding the dedication requirements, since this is historically the ~ethod used to acquire the necessary right-of-way and because this has already been accomplished a long time ago. 74-1243 Hayor Tho~ closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Kaywood co~ented that one of the big p~oble~s concerning the Canyon Area General Planning Task Force is that there is very little large estate land area in the City of Anaheim. She referred to the report prepared for the Chamber of Cosmerce relating the fact that many individuals who own businesses located in Anaheim choose to live elsewhere because they cannot find suitable housing of higher quality. She stated that the one protected area left in lataheiJa is Peralta Hills and that she would be very concerned that once the first variance is per~itted, the erosion will continue in. much the same manner as the 7,200 minimum square foot lot standard was eroded by the introduction of 5,000 square foot a~tni~u~ residential lots. She thereupon indicated she would be prepared to offer the resolution for denial of the variance. Councilman Seymour noted that while this variance on the surface appears to be ve~! nLtnor, if the Justification of the variance is considered to~ether with the impact of the dedication which has been and will be provided for Lakeview Avenue which a~ounts to 201 of the total acreage, a rather unique situation appears. He stated he would be in favor of granttn$ the variance if only the approximate 313 square feet were missing from the one acre parcel, since the purpose of a variance is to provide a property owner relief from strict interpretation of the ordinance. However, the facts in this case indicate that 20Z of the land could be used for street widenin$ purposes and the future effect of this on the property ~ust'also be considered, and for this reason he was inclined to agree with Councilwoman Eayvood's resolution to deny the variance. Additionally, he indicated he would be interested in pursuin$ the net acrease c~ncept inasmuch as other properties are going to be reduced in usable size as a result of street wid~nin~ t~prove~ents. Further, Councilman Seymour challenged th~ necessity of widening LakeviewAvenue since it runs through an estate area, and would destroy the very environment that the area residents are seeking. C~T~ICAL ~ION - ENVIR~.~ IHPACT REPORT: On ~otion by Council~n ~ur, ~c~ded by Co~cil~ Pebley, the City Council ratified the dete~ina- ti~ of t~ Director of ~velop~nt Semites that the propo~d activity falls within the deflation of Section 3.01, Class 5 of the City of ~a~ Guidelines to t~ ~quir~uts for ~ enviro~tal impact re~rt and is, therefore, cate- ~rically e~ from ~he requir~nt ~o file an enviro~n~al i~acC report. ~l~ ~O. 7.&1-626: Councilwo~an ~aywood offered Resolution No. 74R-626 ~edoption, deayin~Variance No. 2649. Refer to Resolution Book. I ~UTIO~ OF II~ Cll~ COUNCIL OF llig CI~l OF ilH D~IE VtlLllCg NO. Roll CmlI Vote: AYi~S: NOES: ABSEITf: COUNCIL HENBERS: COUNCIL HEHBERS: COUNCIL N~BERS: Kayvood, Seysour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom None None The Nayor declared Resolution No. 74R-626 duly passed and adopted. Durin~ further discussion which ensued in response to Mr. Franz' q~atlon, the Council indicated that this denial is not meant to be construed as d~mlal of the subdivision of this property should che owner be able to work out arra~es~nt to,~cquire the necessary additional property on a gross basis.. l~r~her, that although the Council does intend to pursue the effects on existin$ ~e~ls of cbs~is~ the standard fro~ a gross to a net acreage basis, this ~r mmld hav~ to he logically considered first by the Canyon Area General l~m~t~ Task Force und then before the Plannin$ Commission prior to any Council ~tio~, which should allow Hr. Franz sufficient tt~e to acquire additiona~ land file the necessary parcel ~p if he so desires. Council~an Pebley left the Council Chmabers. (2:$5 P.M.) 74-1244 City H~I!, ~paheimv Cal. ifornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 24, 19741, 1: 30 P ,M. ' PERMITS - P.UBLIC DANCE, DINNER-DANCING PLACE AND AMUSEMENT DEVICES: The following applications w~re submitted for City Council consideration and approved as recommended by the Chief of Police, on motion by Councilman Sneegas,, seconded by Councilwomen ~ayvood: a. Applications submitted by Isabel A. Lopez on behalf of Sociedad Progreeista Mexicana Lodge No. 24, Anaheim, California, for permits to conduct public dances on January 19, 1975 from 3:00 p.m..to 7:00 p.m. and February 16, 1975 from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. at Carpenter's Hall, 608 West Vermont Street, subject to Chapter 4.16 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and further subject to final arrangements being made with the police Department. b. Application submitted by Lucille V. Vargas on behalf of Anaheim High School M.E.C.H.A. for permit to conduct public dance on December 29, 1974 from 8:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight at La Palma Park Recreation Center, subject to Chapter 4.16 of the Anaheim Municipal COde and further subject to final arrange- ments being made with the Police Department and Director of parks, Recreation and the Arts Department. c. Application submitted by Mr. Pierre Barbey for Dinner-Dancing Place Permit at the Quality Inn Hotel, 616 Convention Way, subject to the provi- sions of Chapters 3.28 and 4.16 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. d. Application submitted by Richard G. Lundvall, for Amusement Devices Permit to allow 14 pinball machines, 4 rifle type machines~ 3 driving machines, 2 video (T.V.) games, 1 air hockey game and 2 coin operated pool tables at The Game Center, 1287 East Lincoln Avenue, subject to provisions of Chapters 3.24 and 4.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. CoUncilman Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Pebley returned to the Council Chambers. (3:00 P.M.) ENVIRO,,N~E, NT~L IMPACT REPORT - ANAHEIM CIVIC CENTER PROJECT: Environmental Impact Report prepared by Environmental Impact Profiles in connection with the proposed Civic Center Project was submitted for Council consideration Vogether with excerpt of Minutes of the City Planning Commission meeting held October 14, 1974 reco~ending that the Council certify subject E.I.R. as being in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Said report was continued from the meetinss of November 5, 1974, (pending results of Proposition "H" on the'general election ballot) and November 26, 1974. The City Clerk submitted a letter from the Heritage Committee, dated December 24, 1974, containing remarks and comments on this draft environmental i~pact report, prepared by The Center For The Study of Urban Development at the request of the Heritage Committee. Councilwoman Kaywood commented Chat she would not want to see the mature trees on Claudina Street destroyed as a result of the Civic Center Project, but would prefer that these be retained in their present location or moved if possible. She further noted that a correction to the Minutes of the Planning Commission excerpt regarding this draft E.I.R. would be appropriate to indicate the "Schueter House" may be saved rather than the '~ther Colony'House". In reply to Mayor Thom's request for a staff reaction to the letter from the Heritage Committee, Mr. Bob Kelley, Associate Planner, stated that there are many detailed co~ents in the letter which should receive accurate, technical response in compliance with theCalifornia Environmental Quality Act. He further noted that the procedure in other JuriSdictions has been to set a cut off date for receipt of such input from the public to allow staff to investigate and reply to same prior to the time of hearing. On motion by Councilman/Seymour, seconded by Cohncilman Pebley, con- sideration of the draft E.I.R. pertaining to the Civic Center Project was con- tinued to January 7, 1975 pendin$ Staff respon~ to conmants from the. Heritage * Committee; and further, the CoUnCil determined/that the cut off date for receipt ** of input andco~ents on said draft E.I.R. would be Decemb'er 31, 1974. MOTION CARRIe. * that since the E.I.R. has been available to the public since September, 1974~ already allowing more than 30 days, * ** See Minutes of January 21, 1975, 1:30 P.M., Page No. 75-47, "Minutes". 74-1145 City m~!!, _A~._abe__tn, California - COUNCIL ~.HI~ES - December 2&it. ~974, I:30'P.M. .B~IRI~,,,SMfD PIT - ~VALUATION OF USg FOR WATER CONSERVATION: A report regarding potentiLt uss of the Burris S~nd Pit for v~ter conservation facilities prepared by Toupe Engineering for the O~nge County Water District vis submitted for Council information, together with Joint report and reCounendation prepared by Public Works and Development Services Departments. A~8o submitted was couments and reconnendations of the Greenbelt Coumission as contained in letter d~ted December 12, 197& from Hr. E. J. ~erger, Greenbelt Coordinator. City Engineer James Haddox pointed out that in the conclusions section of the report prepared by Toups Engineering, they indicate that. the estinmted $3,000,000 cost may be offset by revenues received'from sand and gravel opera- ttons. He pointed out that this operation ~ould entail truck traffic to and from the pit, which was previouslY of concern to adjacent property owners. Councilman Seymour coumended both the Development Services and Public Morks Dep~rtments on the Joint report submitted. Further, Counci!~sn Seymour remarked that he felt the best interests of the City would be served if members of the City Council met with the Board of Supervisors individually to discuss concerns as to the use of the Burris-Pit as well as to convey that the Council feels, based on the report and recoumendations submitted from Public Works and DeveloPment Services Departments, that there are other viable alternatives to that p£oJect. By general Council consent, it ~as dete~nined that Councilman Seymour 8nd Nayor Thou would meet with the Orange County Board of Supervisors to discuss the matter. ~lGffNO. 74R-627 - ~ORK ORDER HO. 828: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution Bo. 74R-627 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. &R K SOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AHAgRINFINDINGAKD DETERMINING ~iATPUBLIC CONVKNLKBCEAHDNECKSSlTY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC ~~q~T, TO ~rlT: THE DOUGLASS ROAD PUMP STATION, IN THE CITY OF AIiABKDf, MORK ORDER NO. 818; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRA~INGS AMD SPECIFICATIONS FOI THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC INPROVKNK~ IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND ~LqG AHD DIRECTLNG THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be Opened - January 16, 1975, 2:00 P.M.) ·oll Call Vote: AYES: HOES: A~SENT: COU~IL I~BE~S: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneezes and Thom COUNC~~W: None COIfl~IL~W: None The Phyor declared Resolution No. 74R-627 duly passed and adopted. FUR~ 0i ~UI~NT - T~.-I~A~E iWIT~S {FIVE UNITS): Mr. Robert Davis, Assistant City Nmmser, reported on informal bide received for the-purchase of five units of three-phase switches for the Electrical Division as follows and recouw-ended · cceptence of the low bid: vm S. E C. Electric, c/o Randloph, E1 Nonte i.T.E. Corporatiou, Fountain Valley A. ~. thence ~tny, los ~ ~ec~c, ~s $21,193.69 27,611.94 incomplete 16,631.~0 tncoupiata 28,988.88 26,341.00 On uotion by Councilmen SnssSas, seconded by Councilman Pebley, the Low bid of S. & C. Electric, c/o Randolph, vas accepted and purchase authorized in the amount of $21,193.69, tncludtn~ tax. NOTI(~ CARIIKD. Councfluuu~n~aFuood left the Council Chambers. (3:20 P.M.) 74-1246 City H~11~ ~ahe/uat California - COONCIL MllflffES - December 24~ 1974t 1:30 P.M.' PUR~E OF..NATERIAL - 750 KCMIL ALOMINUMC2.BLg: Assistant City Hana~er Robert Davis reported on informal bids received for the purchaseof 12,500 feet of 750 KCMIL AlumintaeCable as follows and recommended acceptance of the low bid: VENDOR TOTAL A~OUNT, INCLUDI~ TaX General Electric Supply Company, Anaheim Electric Supplies Distributor, Santa Ana General Cable Company, Los Angeles Westin~house Electric Supply Company, Anaheim Graybar Electric Company, Anaheim Okonite Company, Los Angeles $ 78,744.75 89,807.44 109,643.75 87,450.00 84,137.50 98,487'25 On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman PebleY, the low bid of General Electric Supply Company was accepted and purchase authorized in the amount of $78,744.75, including tax. Councilwoman Kaywood absent. MOTION CARRIED. PUR~E OF EQUIPMENT - 36 FOOT AERIAL DEVICES: Assistant City Manager RobertDavis reported on informal bids received for the purchase of two units,36foOt aerial devices for the Mechanical Maintenance and Electrical Divisions as follows and recommended acceptance of the iow bid: VENDOR TOTAL AMOUNT~ INCLUDING TAX Utility Body Company, C~rce Arko Equipment Company, Comerce California Truck, Los Alamitos $34,065.75 46,406.80 50,251.02 On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the low bid of Utility Body Company was accepted and purchase authorized in 'the amount of $34,065.75, including tax. Councilwoman Kaywood absent. MOTION CARRIED. AUTHOR~ZATII)N FOR REPAIRS TO,pOLICE HELICOPTER: Assistant City Manager Robert 'Davis s~b~i~ied report from tie Special Enforcement Bureau and Police Chief' dated November 21 and 22, 1974, respectively, requesting Council authorization to spend appro.xi~atelY $9,300 as estimated by Tallmantz Aviation COmpany for repair and replacement of parts to restore the Police helicoPter to flying condition, which was d~smied during practice exercises at the Anaheim Stadium, Councilman Pebleymoved to authorize the expenditure of $9,300 for repair of the Police helicopter. Councilman Sneeias seconded the motion.' To this motion, Councilman Seymour voted "no", explaining that he is opposed because he did not feel sufficient efforts have been expended to determine whether or not other Jurisdictions would wish to Jointly finance the helicopter operations. Mr. Davis replied that the staff is currently exploring the possibil- ities of selling t/une to neighboring cities. Councilwoman Kaywood absent. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood returned to the Council Chambers. (3:24 P.M.) CLAIMS AGAII/ST. THE CITY: The following claims were denied as reco~nended by the City Atto~y and ordered.referred to the insurance carrier, on motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Pebley: a. Claim submitted by W. W. Powell for damage sustained to appliances purportedlY-as a result of transformer malfunction On or about December 9, 1974. b.. Claim sub~itted by Stuart L. & Anne Johnson for damage sustained and injury purportedly resulting from electrical work done on power polein rear yard on or about December 10, 1974. c. Claim subm/tted by Mr. George E. Walters [or damages sustained to four tires purportedly as a result of unlighted exit devices at the driveway o£ Anaheim Convention Center on or about December 12, 1974. MOTION CARRIED. ' 74-1247 F RIt:SOL~I~ NO. 74R-628 - REINBURSENEHT OF EXPI~SES - I~I)EVELO~ COt~ilSSION: Council~an Selmour offered Resolution No. 74R-628 for. adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. I~SOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEI//AUTHORIZINC REIHBURSE- FOR EXPENSES TO HEHBERS OF THE REDEVELOPHENT COHHISSION. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSEHT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom COUNCIL NKMBERS: None COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-628 duly passed and adopted. WATER DISTRICT PrP Lrn (ORANGE GOUNTYFEEDER NO. 2): Co~cil~ Pebley offered Resolution No. 7~a-629 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF 'THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERNS AND COI6)ITIONS OF AN AGREENENT ITITH SHELI~ OIL COHPANY, THE HETROPOLITAN WATER DIS- TRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY, COASTAL NU-dlCIPAL WATER DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF SANTA Alta NODIFYINC TRAT CERTAIN ACREENENT DATED HARCH 29, 1965, WITH REFERENCE TO THE ~J~qT OF AN EASEHENT .FOR A WATER PIPELINE. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneega8 and Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: None COt~qClL H~MBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-629 duly passed and adopted. AMsamm ,,,,To,,,S i s, 0r ELSC IC RATES, am,ES RE ATIONS, TO COST ~ ~. ~. ~rdon ~yt, Utilities Director, r~orted that the p~sed c~$ to st~et ~d hinky lighting (LS-1 ~d LS-2) ~ outdoor ll~ (~) rate sch~ules ar~ necessary to provide for the proof accounting of ~r~y c~s~tl~ ~ order for the City to administer the state law ~ich ~~ ~ff~tive Jan~U 1, 1975, (~ 2077). He stated that these changes ~ill ~e~lsh a ~th~ for dete~n~ hov~ny ktlovatt hours 'are dee~d to be used f~r strut ll~hts. ~ reas~s for these c~nges are to provide a ~thod to coll~t th~ costs fr~ the p~ple ~tns the street lilhts and dso to apply t~ ~t~te hr~ Surtax, as ~11 as the fuel cost ~Jus~nt to these rates. In reply to Councilwouan Kaywood, Mr. Hoyt advised that insurance coupenies and banks are stated as e~empt from-the enersy surcharge in the law. Council discussion ensued which disclosed concern that the citizens be reassured regarding the passing along of the two costs, and Mr. H0yt replied that the best assurance he could slve is that the City of Antheimcharges its' e~ste~ers a fu~l cost adjustment of $.00642 per kilowatt hour, but pays to Soutkrn C~ltfornia Edison a fuel cost adjustment of $.00915 per kilo~ltt hour. ~_Og~O. 741-6~0: Councilmn Seymour offered Resolution No. 74R-630 for' Refer to Resolution Book. ~ISOLUTIOH O~ TH~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AHA~IH.AN~BDING TH~ ELECTRIC lULlS ABD I~GULATI~$ TO APPLY THE FUEL COST ADJUSTHIBT TO STIKET LIGHTING ~ IS-l, L~-2, AID LO, 74-1248 City NaZi, ~a~im, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 24, 1974;~ !:~O P.M, ~oll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas. and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolutio~ No. 74R-630 duly passed and adopted. INCREASE IN .~O~fRACT AMOUNT - R. W. BECK AND ASSOCIATES: Utilities Director Gordon W. Hoyt reported that the City's current contract with R. W. Beck and Associates to provide technical services in connection with rate proceedings before the Federal Power Co~mission and agreements being negotiated with Southern California Edison Company provides that the amount paid not exceed 850,000' without written consent of the City. This contract limit has been reached and additional work is neces- sary. It is,therefore,recommended that the total amount to be paid to R. W. Beck and Associates pursuant to this agreement be increased by $20,000, not to exceed new limit of $70,000. Hr. Hoyt reported that no appropriation is necessary as ample funds for this amount have been budgeted. In reply to Council questions, Mr. Hoyt explained the scope and type of services performed by R. W. Beck and Associates. Mr. Watts added to this that R. W. Beck and Associates is an engineering firm and that a rate case is a situa- tion which is tried similar to a lawsuit, with testimony by such expert witnesses. On ~otion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilmen Pebley, the City Council authorized a $20,000 increase to the contract amount in the current asreemealt with I. W. Beck and Associates, to a new figure not to exceed $70,000. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Thom left the Council Chambers and Mayor Pro Tmn Seymour assumed Chairmmship of the meeting. (3:35 P.M.) CORRES_.FOND~C...E~ The followin$ correspondence was ordered received and filed on marion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas: a, Cultural Arts Co~mission - Minutes - November 13, 1974. b. Community Redevelopment Commission - Minutes - December 4, 1974. c. Orange County Mosquito Abatement District - Minutes'- November 21, 1974. d. Financial and Operating Reports for the month of November, 1974 for the ~.,lneering Division. e. Anaheim Park and Recreation Commission - Minutes- November 21, 1974. i' f. City of Seal Beach - Resolution No. 2382 - Opposing the~Faderal Highway id~tnistration and Urban Mass Transportation Administration (I~A~UMTA) Draft ~idelines for a Transportation Development Program (TOP) and ur$in$' I~A/~to workwith the individual urbanized areas to develops progra~ applic~ble to that particular area. $. City of Buena Park - Resolution No. 5465 - Requesting the Orange County Board of-Supervisors to set up infor~ational procedures pertaining to notifiCation of segregation applications. . ~h. Intergovermaental Coordinating Council of Orange County: Los Alamitos hsolution No. 701 La Palms Resolution Nos. 74-73 and 74-75 Huntinston Beach Resolution No. 3997 i. City of Cypress - Resolution No. 1549 - Encouraging Cypress residents to reduce their co~smaption of sugar. J. Airport and Land Use Co=ission for Orange County - Notice of Meetinl - December 19, 1974. Airport and Land Use Comaission for Orange County -Minutes - December 5, 197~. Mayor Tho~ absent. MOTION CARRIED. 01~I1/~ I~. $382: Councilmen Sneesas offered Ordinance No, 3382 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. 74-1249 City _aSA. ia iaahela, california - COUNCLL~X~TE Oa INANCE OP CITY OF ANAa m ING TIT lS OF WE ANAe IM ICIPAt CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (72-73-51 (14) - R-H-22,000) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL HEHBERS: Kayvood, Pebley, Sneegas and Seymour NOES: COUNCIL NE~BERS: None TEMPORARILY ABSENT: COUNCIL N~ERS: Thom ABSEh~f: COUNCIL HENBERS: None The Mayor Pro Tam declared Ordinance No. 3382 duly passed and adopted. ORDINATE NO. 3383: Councilwoman Eaywood offered Ordinance No. 3383 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book; A~ ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEINANENDING TITLE 18 OF THE AI~EIm~ICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (74-75-13 - R-A) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: TENPOm..AJKILY ABSENT: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Pebley, Sneesas and Seymour COU~CIL~ng: None COUNCXLN~ERS: Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor'Pro Tam declared Ordinance No. 3383 duly passed and adopted. ORDIN~BCE NO. 3385: CounCilwoman Xay~ood' offered Ordiance No. 3385 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAgXlMAMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.32, SECTION 1&.32.110 OF THE ANA~XIMMUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THIRTY-MINUTE PAR~ING ZONES. (Im~h~t~ Boulevard west side fro~ 527 feet north of centerline of Ball Road to 482 feet north of centerline of Ball Road) Mayor Thom returned to the Council Chambers and resumed Chair~anship of the~eting. (3:40 P.M.) qO~P~.R~ MOIS~ AMD LI~IITS F~O~~ FREE~AY (ROUTE 57): A raport dated December 24, 1974 from Thornton Piarsall, Director of Public Works, was submitted pursuant to receipt of co~plaints by the City from residents adjacent to the Orange Freevay regarding the noise and glaring lights generated by the freeway traffic. The reco~endation included in said report suggests that the City of An~ communicate with the California Highway Co~sttssion re~ardtn$ noise attmuation ~easuree for the Orange Freeway Project and appear before the Co--sion or other political bodies, with appointed Council Ne~bers to address these bodies of the absolute necessity of these measures being combined with the proposed landscaping proart. Also sub~itted was co~unication from Mr. R. F. Blocker, Chief, Project DevelopmeNt, Depart~nent of Transportation regarding the proposed landscaping project scheduled for construction in May of 1976 along the Orange Freeway. (ORA-5 13.4/15.6 Ball Road to Route 91). I~. Piaraall reported that this c~unication su~marises the meeting held with the Department of Transportation representatives relative to this problem. Follo~ brief diacu~sion the City CouNcil by ~eneral consent i~dicated ~t with t~ r~~tion am ~t forth by t~ Dir~tor of ~blic ~, ~ ~r ~vim~ ~my ~d co,ur ~th him pl~ to ~ar ~fm .t~ ~ifo~ Hi~y ~smi~ at C~ ~ttn~ to ~ ~ld in S~r~nto ~ 'Feb~ 20, 1975. t m ~ubmitted fro~ the City Engineer dated ~ece~her 23, 197~, regarding ~he fXoo~ ~hich occurred during a severe rain stor~ on December 4, 1974. At this t~ ~evera! ho~ss ~era flooded in the vicinity of Ball load and Na~nolia ~, sl~ctfically property owned by Hr. Fred Sedlak, 26~8 West Ball Road and ~. kr~rd Blu~, 2638 West Ball Road. 74-1250 Ball~ ~h~imt California - COUNCIL~NUT~S - December 24~ 1974~ 1:30 P,M." The City gngineer's report recommended, in order'to preclude the situation from occurring again, that concrete sidewalks and a six-inch asphalt concrete berm be constructed along Ball Road at an estimated cost of. $3,600. City Engineer James Haddox noted that the report did not include any proposed methods to finance the recommended improvements, but indicated that gas tax fumds might be used for that portion located within the public right- of-way. Be pointed out that two parcels of property immediately to the east and adjacent to Mr. Blume's property, belonging to Dr. Nilsson (1720 West Ball Road) and Mr. Roy Sharp (1235 South Magnolia) are involved in reclassification pro- cedures and the requirement applies that sidewalks and complete street improve- me, ts be installed on their Ball Road and Magnolia Avenue frontages respectively. Mr. Maddox noted that it would set a precedent if the City were to use gas tax funds to relieve these property owners of a portion of their requirements under zoning actions, since it has always been City policy to require complete street improvements in residential subdivisions and commercially or industrial developed properties, lie advised that a further alternative might be to proceed under Chapter 27 of the 1911 Act since over 50% of the affected block has been improved. Councilwoman Kaywood agreed that using gas tax funds for that portion of improvements covered by reclassification requirements would be inappropriate, but strongly felt that the two property owners, Messrs. Sedlakand Blume, who are not involved in any zoning petitions on their properties should be afforded some protection against the possibility of flooding occurring again during, this rainy s~ason. Council discussion ensued during which various alternative solutions were discussed including contacting Dr. Nilsson to see whether or not his prop- erty development is ready to proceed in the near future. Also discussed was the possibility of stabilizing the existing dirt berm with asphalt concrete as recome~mded by the City ~n$ineer. Mr. Maddox pointed out that such stabilized berm, in the event of a storm of the me~nitude experienced December 4, 1974 which approached a 100 year frequency storm, would erode because of the lack of any concrete foundation. Following discussion it was the general consensus of Council Opinion that the logical ~ay to proceed would be to: 1.) contact Dr. Nilsson regarding the status of his development project and explain the pOtentialfloodsituatiOn ia an atte~ept to ~ain his cooperation in installing street improvements at this t~; 2.) to blacktop one side of the two-foot berm as a temporary precautionary ~sure. ' Councilman Sneegas further su~ested the possibility be discussed with Dr. Nll~son of his installing sidewalks at thistime at .his expense, without driveway cuts, and then perhaps when the development is complete, the City might pay tho expense of making these cuts at the required places. At the conclusion of discussion, staff was instrUcted to explore the alternatives discussed and if no resolution can be reached, Council would a~ain review the situation. :. C.E.T.A. P~FLICATION NOTICE ~LETTE~ OF INTENT):. Mr. Robert Davis reported'that pursuant to Council's direction given at the meeting of December 17, 1974, the City h~ received documents from the Orange County Manpower Co~nission relating to the City's intent to continue participation in the Orange county .Ma. npo~er Consortiusa. ~. Further submitted vas a report from Mr. Bill Hepburn, Manpower Coordin- ator, reco~adiag that the City file a separate preapplication notice for prime sponso~ip under the Comprehensive ~ployment and Training Act of 1973.. Nr. Davis reported that the documents received call for .participation in the Consortiumwith the County of Orange and the City of ~untington Beach, since the Cities of Santa Ann and Garden Grove have both filed separate letters of inter. He noted that .whichever :approach Council elects to take, theClty would ~ until March.l, 1975 to alter their'decision. Onmotion by Councilman Seymour, secondedby Councilman,Pebley,~he City Cmmcfl authorized the filing of a separate letter Of intent to comply with pr~appl,tcation for prime sponsorship for C.E.T.A. Funds as recoe~ended by the 'Nanpover Coordinator. HOTIO~ CARRIED. 74-1251 City ~llt ~ahet~at California - COUNCIL ~F~TES - December 24! !97.4m I:30'P.M. PROPOSED LEASE OF PROP~T~ LOCATED AT 173 ~ST LINCOLN AVENU~ ~C~I~ SERVICES C~TER}: ~. Robert Davis requested Council authorizationfor the City to enter into a 60-~nth lease a~ree~n~ for the Ulvestad proper~y located a~ 173 ~est Lincoln Avenue for the s~ of $655.50 per ~nth. He reported that the building consists of 4,700-sq~re feet includins the bas~nt area, and the proposed impro~emen~s to be installed by the o~er ~uld include air conditioning and heating, new lish~ins, base~nt exit, carpe~ins, drapes and res~room facilities. Mr. Davis explained, in answer to Council questions, that the Job ~cruitment and Development Center is expected to utilize one-half of this space and will be responsible for one-half of the cost. It is also proposed to include legal aid and other agencies within the Center. During discussion, several Council Hembers voiced their concern that this proposed office building is located within the Redevelopment Project Alpha area and consequently that property could become involved in a forthcoming redevelopment project. Upon being informed that the City may withdraw from the lease before the five-year term expires but will still be required to pay $2,500 per year for the cost of capital improvements, a majority of the Council felt that another site should be considered or that the list of proposed capital improvements be reviewed for possible elimination. Both Mr. Garza, Community Relations Representative and Chuck McGinnis of the City's Hanpower Office reported on their space needs and other require~ents for the Center as well as their negotiations with this property owner. It was noted particularly that this Center should be located near City Hall and also close to those individuals who would make use of it, and since most of the downtown area is included vithin Project Alpha boundaries., it would be difficult to find a suitable location outside of the Redevelopment Area. At the conclusion of discussion, the City Councilrequested chat the proposed five-year lease be reviewed once again to determine whether or not some of the capital improvements might be excluded or, if this property cannot be used without these extensive capital improvements, that another site be considered. CLOSIHG.,' OF .A~HEIMN~NICIPAL GOLF COURSE~ CHRISl~/AS DA¥~ 1974: Mr. Robert Davis pre- sented the reco~endation received from the Parks, Recreation and the Arts Director that the City Council consider authorizing the closing of the Anaheim Municipal Golf Course on Christmas Day, 1974. The memorandmn indicates that the past two years play experienced on this day has been extremely low end would not even Justify the expense of starters and maintenance men needed for operation of the course. In answer to Council question regarding the closure of the Anaheim Hills Golf Course as well, Mr. Davis reported that two tournaments are scheduled for December 25, 1974 at that course. On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilmen Sneegas, the City Council approved the closing of Anaheim Municipal Golf Course on December 25, 1974, aa recommended by the Parks, Recreation and the Arts Director. MOTION 'CARRIED. ~ONHKB~.T!ON - THORNTON PIERSALL~ PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: Councilwoman ~ayvood com- m~aded ~ublic ~ork8 Director Thornton Piersall on his being selected as one of the top ten in his field by the American Public Works Association. ..R~VIK~OF Cl.TY'S BID FROCBI)UR~: Councilman Seymour not.ed that a number of the public works ~nd other contracts let by the City go to businesses located outside of the City Limits. He referred to State Legislation recently adopted which pro- video a 5% margin within which' the State may construe the smell businessman as being the low bidder on a Job and inquired whether or not the City Attorney might investigate the possibility and cost effects of chansin$ the .City's bid procedure policies to permit the Anaheim businessman the increased opportunity to enjoy the City contracts. , ' Hr. Watts explained that the City has adhered to a policy whereby the ll'salen tax is deducted in evaluating bids submitted by Anaheiu firms. He cautioned however, that there may be gone problem as regards those contracts which the City Charter requires be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. 74-1252 City H&~I, ~&~l~ Ca~ifornia - COUltCIL IflNUI~S - December 24~ 1974.~ 1:30 P.H, Councilman Seymour explained that he considers when an Ar~heim business receives a contract it means more to the City in sales taxes, and to the extent this addiCion~l degree of benefit can be measured, this is consistent vrlth pro- viding the Aneheimbusinessman that additional opportunity. The City Attorney advised that he vould review the City*s bid procedure as set fo~h in the Charter and vould prepare a report to the Council regarding his evaluation of the City adopting such a policy. ADJOUP, HHENT: Councilman Pebley moved to adjourn to Tuesday, December 31, 1974, at 1:00 P.M. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. ~OTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 4:30 P.H. City Cleric City. H~I, ~ Ge~ifornia - ~ZL .HI...~UT~,.. - Decemhe~. 31,.. 1974., ~:00. ~ City ~cil of the City of ~h~ ~t in adJourn~ ~ar session. ~~i,. ~~ ~~: ~~, ~e~ur, Pebley (~tered 1:12 ~.~.), ~ ~ (ent~r~ 1:06 P.H.) P~t ~~ CX~ ~': ~rt N. Davis ~ C~.~: ~ D. ~he~C8 ~ ~VI~c ~rlee ~rco CI~ ~~ Jmo P. ~dox Pro Tern 'by.our calX~i Cbs maeCtng to order. "The 1975 Work Period for R~ployees of the City of Anaheim fi,To anall~mmwio~ activicXeo shall be a recur~ing cventy-four (24) consecutive d~y pezlod~at 8:00A.M. on January 1, 1975". - Mr. Nclae f~rther recosmmsded Chat the following work period dmcleration b~ .ept~ ~lt ~ tm the ,Cm~mciX statutes Chis dace, in acCOrd~ace with l~l~rt- ue~t of, I,ll~. rules: mBbO LOTS Mork Po-'~MI for Bmpl~ym of the City of ~ ~m~ssod in L~ ~ i~Vt~LEw ~ be · reeurrin$ fourteen (14) day period belinning at lO~iiiPJi,'m ~ ~, 1974". eosssat of the City Cmmcil, the for#oin~ 1975 employes mm mmtbewtmmg co be spt~l 'in f~XX in tim miautm~ of City Co~mcii mt~.