1973/08/2873-688
California- COUNCIL MINUTES- August
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular
PRESENT.'
ABSENT:
PRE SENT;
COUNCII2fl~N:
and Dutton
COUNCILMEN: None
CITY HANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY: John H. Dawson
CITY CLERK: Done M. Daoust
I~PUTY CITY CLERK: Aloha M. Fattens
UTILITIES DIRECTOR= Gordon W. Hoyt
CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Ronald Thmapson .'
ZONINC SUPERVISOR= Charles Roberts
PLANNING SUPERVISOR: Don McDaniel ''
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley (arrived 1:45 P,M~); Thom
Mayor l)utton called the meeting to order.
INvOCA?~ON: Reverend Jim Green of the Bethel Baptist Church gave the Invocation.
F..L~..' SAlUTe: Councilman Ralph G. Sneegas led the Assembly in the Pledge of '-' Allegiance to the Flag.
The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Dutton and unani-
mously approved by the City Council:
"Italian Catholic Federation Days" - August 30 through
September 3, 1973.
PP~$ENT&TIO~ Lieutenant Harold Bastrup introduced Mr. Chester Bar~y, President
of the Anaheim Police Association who presented a check in the amount
of $2,000 to Stephen Rodtck, Captain of the Anaheim Explorer-i~st~ who
in turn presented Mayor Dutton with the keys to the new.~ea~ch~a~d
Rescue van.
Lieutenant Bastrup explained that the Anaheim Police Explorer Post has
been in existence for 11 years and is jointly sponsored by the
City, the Anaheim Kiwanis Club and the Anaheim Police Association. He
advised that the Explorer Post is comprised of boys and young men ages
14 to 21 and is primarily a search and rescue group providtn~ voluntary
services to assist the Police Department by furnishing first ot ~ facil-
ities at con~nunity events, assisting in searches for lost children,
etc. He advised that this new van replaces outdated equipment and will
be used for training of the boys and is outfitted to provide a complete
first aid station with radio console for communications, bede and mat-
erials for medical treatment, search and rescue equipment and a built,
in canteen to dispense hot refreshments.
Mayor Dutton expressed appreciation to the Anaheim Police Association
on behalf of the City Council for the donation vhich enables the Ex-
plorer Post to acquire the truck.
Councilman Stephenson commended Lieutenant Bastrup, the Anaheim Police
Association and the Police Explorer Post for their fine efforts.
The City Council accepted the title to the Police Explorer Post ~earch
and Rescue Van on motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by COuncilman
Thom. MOTION CARRIED.
~ Minutes of the Anaheim City Council Regular Meetit~ held August 14', 1973
were approved on motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Sneegas.
MOTION CARRIED.
~AIV[R ~F I~ING - 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 o=
resolution. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. MOTIO~ UNANIMOUSLY CAR~IJ~D,
73w689
Cit. ¥ _ _ !Hall Anaheim~ California .... - COUNCIL NINUTE$ - August 28! 1973f ;__~1:30 ........
I~P~T -.FINANCIAL DENANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City in-the amount
' of' $1,I~0,711.96; in accordance with the 1973-74 Budget, vere approved.
73'7~'9 ~ 73-74-i0 AND ASSOCIATED ENVIROI~IENTAL INPAL~ R~' ~!~,.' Area .
..... Development Plan initiated by the City Planning CommissiOn [~"s~dy':appropriate
zoning and explore the need for secondary access; rezonin~ petitions also init-
tared by the City Planning Commission. Property is generally located in the
area bounded by Lincoln Avenue on the south; Catalina AVenue and-itsw~aterly
extension on the north; those properties fronting on Kathryn Drive on the wes~
and by those properties fronting on Lindsay Street to the east. (Kathryn-
Lindsay Annexation)
The City Clerk submitted a petition containing '34 Signatures '.(21
which were property owners of record at the time of annex&t'[°n)"deClaringop
position to the proposed Reclassification Nos. 73-74-I and' 73-74,9"and re-
questing that these be referred back to the Planning Commission for reconsider-
ation.
Councilman Dutton was of the opinion that the matter did warrant
further investigation and study, noting that there are many inherent problems
in its conversion to other uses.
Brief discussion ensued regarding the necessity to readvertise the
proposed reclassifications for a new public hearing or whether to con~'lnue ~his
hearing to a date certain.
Assistant Attorney Watts advised that if any of the altermatives con-
templated regarding the property involved a heavier usage than has been adver-
tised, then new advertisements should be publiahed for such heavier zoning.
Zoning Supervisor Roberts reported that
there seems to be a request for heavier commercial usage would be th~ northwest
corner of Lincoln and Brookhurst, and this was advertised, prior to Planning
Commission hearing for a C-3 Zone, however the Planning Commission felt
would be more appropriate and recommended this be approved.
The City Clerk advised that the advertisement for this public hearing
before the Council on the property at the northwest corner of Lincoln and
Brookhurst was for reclassification to the C-I Zone and not C-3.
Public hearing having been advertised for this date, the Mayor asked
if anyone wished to address the Council relative to Area Develbpment Plan No.
112, Reclassification Nos. 73-74-1, 73-74-9 or 73-74-10.
Nr. Oscar W. Louderback, 1220 Bruce Drive, Garden Grove, co-o~ner
of the property at the northwest corner of Lincoln and Brookhurst, advised that
this property has been posted with a C-3 zoning notice since July 26, 1973 and
no protests have been received. ~e inquired as to why the Council could not
proceed with that particular action at this time.
Mr. Watts infomed Mr. Louderback that the City Clerk had not used
the C-3 designation in advertising for this public hearing before the Council,
which was however used for the public hearing before the Planning Commission,
and this might result in a legal problem, therefore the proposed rezoning should
be readvertised.
Nrs. Charles Morris, resident on Bircher Street, asked vhether this
would be the appropriate time to register heft objections to C-1 zoning, or
whether it would be to her advantage to wait for the full public hearing, to
which the Mayor replied that these objections would best be considered at the
new hearing after the proposed reclassifications have been readvertised.
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Council~n Stephenson,
A~ea Development Plan No. 112, Reclassification Nos. 73-7&-1, 73-7~-9 and
73-7~-10 were referred back to the Planning Conmission for readvertisement and
public hearing. NOTION CARRIED.
[ [ I ar J I
City Hall~ .~heim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28~ 1973! 1730
TAX REDUCTION AND LIMITATION AMENDMENT (PROPOSITION 1): Mr. Lewis llhler, former
'-chairman of the Tax RedUction Task Force which assisted in development of this
amendment, and currently with "Californians for Lower Taxes" addressed the
Council to present background information on Proposition 1 which will be on ~the
Special Election Ballot November 6, 1973.
Mr. Uhler related the history of the amendment as follows= Approxi-
mately one year ago the Governor identified key problems facing California and
three of these were selected for specific action, one being tax reduction. Mr~
Uhler was asked to chair the Task Force on tax reduction and he enumerated the
high calibre of support which he received from experts in the fields of ecomon-
ecs and public policy, who constituted the Task Force which put together the
amendment.
The Task Force first analyzed and identified the current tax spending
explosion and determined that since 1930 when 15% of personal incomewent to
government at all levels, the figure has risen to 43% in 1970 and currently is
in excess of 44?°. It is estimated that 50~ would be surpassed by 1982, which
statistics, Mr. Uhler stated underscored the necessity for some type of action
to stem the tide.
The Task Force also analyzed the spending explosion and Mr. Uhler
offered the simple explanation that this is the result primarily of pressures
from special interest groups, via lobbyists, who are more effective in bringing
pressure to bear than are the general taxpayers as a whole, thus the atmosphere
which the legislators face in Sacramento is one of enormous special interest
group pressure.
Mr. Uhler noted that the Task Force looked at the approach to lowering
taxes by program cutting and concluded that this also has limited success be-
cause the interest group which would be affected by the proposed cutback brings
the same pressure to bear to interfere with the reduction. Ultimately the Task
Force concluded that the method to effectly reduce taxes woull be.by pl&¢l~ a
limitation on the amount of taxes which could be taken from the people in any
particular year. At the State level the thrust of the program is to impose con-
straints on the State of California. He advised that there are also subsidiary
limitations and benefits involved for local government as well.
Mr. Uhler explained that all the amendment would do is to place the
State government on the same footing as households and businesses, i.e., subject
to externally imposed Constraints such as salary and marketplace imposed on the
individual and the business. He remarked that historically only government has
been able to decide not only how to spend money but how much to spend. The tax
limitation amendment proposes to impose this external restraint by setting the
amount of revenues which flow into the State of California during Fiscgl Year
1973-74 as the constitutional limitation. Each year thereaf[er the amount of
money the State will have to spend will be reduced by one/tenth of one percent
of the total personal income of the people in the State.
Mr. Uhler explained that since the rate of growth of total personal
income has historically been better than 8%, and the tax increase has been grow-
ing at a rate greater than this, these two rates, if shown on a graph, would form
converging lines, whereas under the proposed amendment the lines would be diver-
gent. This amendment will provide for growth of the State revenues but at a rate
less than total personal income so that each year the citizens will have more of
their earnings to spend as they choose.
Mr. Uhler added that the Task Force, recognizing that the State govern-
ment did not arrive at current taxation levels over night, has recommended a plan
for gradual reduction which will preclude any wrenching effect on existing pro-
grams or on individual wealth since individuals make ~onetary decisions based on
current tax structures.
Mr. Uhler projected that when the tax limitation amen~nt is applied
over a period of time, with the current tax rate structure, revenues will be
generated which are in excess of the limitation amount. It is planned that these
revenues will be placed into a tax surplus fund to be refunded to the people.
Further, it is anticipated that implementation of the amendment will provide, over
73-691
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28.l 1973~.[1;3~ .P.M,
the next 15 years, an 18 to 20% reduction in the total State tax load, yet each
year there will be more absolute dollars flowing to the State than in the past,
it is simply a retardation of the growth pattern of govervment.
The constitutional amendment proposal provides for emergency situ-
ations by permitting the legislature or the Governor to decl.are the emergency.
and appropriate the necessary funds from the emergency fund or to vote a special
tax for that purpose, whichwould last no longer than two years. He emphasized
that the decisions on taxation under the proposed amendment rely heavily on the
people or constitutional control. Similarily, if the people decide to increase
or decrease the State tax revenue limitation they would be able to take that
action. The-individual tax rates themselves (sales tax, personal income tax,
bank and corporation tax, etc.) imposed by the State may be adjusted from time
to time according to this amendment by two-thirds vote of the legislature, which
provision is included to place all taxes on the same basis in terms of control
and protection as currently enjoyed only by the bank and corporation tax. This
would encourage in the future, tax adjustments in a package form, so that all
taxes might receive some relief.
Mr. Uhler, in conclusion, stated that the essence of the State Tax Lim-
itation program is to place a limit on the amounts of money which the State
government can take from the individual taxpayers, but this is done gradually
and responsibly with allowances for additional monies each year but at a de-
creasing rate.
In reference to local government, Mr. Uhler advised, that basically
the proposed constitutional amendment will incorporate a few of the key pro-
visions of Senate Bill 90 and place them in the State Constitution. For ex-
ample,it imposes maximum property tax rates on the local level, allowing the
local government to choose the higher rates of 1971-72 or 1972-73. It provides
for change in the maximum property tax rates by vote of the people. In an
emergency situation, the local government may by four-fifths vote impose an
increase based upon declaration of the emergency, similar to r~les applicable
in emergency situation at the State level.
The most important portion of the amendment as far as local govern-
ments are concerned, according to Mr. Uhler, would be the State Handated Pro-
gram Shield (local protection shield) which affords protection to local govern-
ments by requiring that if the State intends to implement a new program or to
increase levels of service on an existing program, the State must assume the
costs of same. Critics of the amendment suggest that this protection is al-
ready afforded through SB 90 and therefore the amendment is unnecessary. How-
ever Mr. Uhler reported that this is not correct for the following reasons:
(1) By placing the local protection shield in the constitution via Proposition
1, the State Legislature may not change it; (2) Recent activities show that
SB 90 has been honored more in the breach, i.e., if the State Legislature found
it convenient not to assume costs for local programs they simply state "not
withstanding the provisions of SB 90" and proceed withwhatever action they are
taking, so that while they have gone on record to support the principle of the
State Mandated Program Shield this is not being honored.
Mr. Uhler noted that Assembly Speaker Morretti has taken a position
of opposition to the amendment on the basis that it would transfer additional
costs to local government. Mr. Uhler advised that speaker Morretti has intro-
duced a bill entitled "The Collective Bargaining for Local Govermment Bill"
which itself starts out with a disclaimer which avoids the necessity for State
Government to absorb costs. Mr. Uhler stated that the only way to assure that
the protection implied in SB 90 is afforded the local goverranent is through
passage of Proposition i which will incorporate the local protection shield in-
to the State Constitution. Further he explained that the ~mendment will pro-
vide disincentives to the State government tO accrue additional funds by re-
ducing subventions.
Mr. Uhler addressed himself to the criticism received that the amend-
ment is too lengthy and complex and advised that the Tax Limitation Amendment
itself is a simple concept and the reason for any extensive language is because
of the incredible complexity currently extant in the tax and revenue law in this
State and the interrelationship of taxation at State and local levels.
73-692
City Hall~ ~-heimt__ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28, 1973~ 1~30 P.M.
Mr. Uhler commented that the key to this proposal is that it is a
constitutional amendment, which is an act of the people of the State,*calling
for a change in the rules as to how government may act. He referred to the
facts that when the Federal and State constitutions were drawn up, certain
inalienable rights were included, but the founding fathers neglected to include
a provision relative to the invasion of personal income, most likely because
govermments current capacity and modern accounting procedures were difficult to
envision at that time.
Mr. Uhler further felt that the very fact that this amendment carried
within it provision for a 20% tax refund, made it instxu~ental in passage of the
bill which will refund $726,000,000 in surplus funds accrued as of the end of
June as well as a one time reduction in the personal income tax rate fort~ com-
ing.
At the conclusion of Mr. Uhler's presentation, the Mayor asked if
there were any questions, hearing none, offered the League of Women Voters an
opportunity to present their view on Proposition 1.
Mrs. Shirley Modiano, member of the League of Women Voters of Anaheim-
Garden Grove, read a prepared statement expressing opposition to all constitu-
tional amendments which delineate tax sources and rates, grant exemptions, or
earmark funds for specific sources.
As a result of a 1969 study, they decided to work for measures that
would assure adequate revenues to meet changing needs for state and local govern-
ment services, and to support measures to assure a fair sharing by all the people
of the State of the burden of taxation. The members agreed that the tax burden
should be related to ability to pay with decreasing reliance on regressive taxes
such as property taxes and sales taxes and increasing reliance on income taxes.
In their opinion Proposittpn 1 proposes a basic structure for state
finance which is almost directly contrary to the tax reform goals of the 14,000
members of the League of Women Voters of California, and if this initiative
passes, it will have a profound effect upon state and local government for at
least the next fifteen years.
Specifically, the League is concerned about the effect of Proposition
1 on several aspects of city finances, such as:
1. It appears this proposal would make it easier for cities to raise
taxes than for the State to do so, and if so, is a rise in local property and
business taxes contemplated?
2. What effect will this initiative have on the revenue sharing money
the city expects to receive?
3. What effect will it have on state subventions, such as the gas
tax funds now received by Anaheim?
4. Under present state law, when the State requires a local government
to initiate a new program, the State is required to provide the necessary .funds.
Does the initiative proposal strengthen or weaken this state obligation to local
govermments?
5. What effect will Proposition 1 have on the Redevelopment Plan?
In conclusion, Mrs. Modiano stated the League of Women Voters believed
that the short and long range implications of this constitutional amendment are
vitally important to all the citizens of our community, and therefore, urged that
the City Council not take any stand on this proposition before receiving a report
and a knowledgeable, reliable appraisal by City staff members exploring what
Anaheim may lose if Proposition 1 is passed.
The Mayor asked if the Chamber of Commerce desired to make a presenta-
tion.
Mr. Ed Slagle, representing the Legislative Co~nittee of the Anaheim
Chamber of Commerce, advised their Committee attended explanatory sessions in
Sacramento and Los Angeles, and they have taken the position that Proposition 1
is a welcome change in the taxation picture. He felt it was fortunate that
California has enough growth and our State government has acted in such a way to
be able to reduce taxes at the rate of 1% per year at this time, and for the next
fifteen years.
73-693
City Hall; Amaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28! 1973~ 1:30 .P,M"....
The Chamber realizes there is some concern as to the effect this
would have on State services and also what the local govermment's portion of
tax revenues would be, however, State growth is several times the cutback, and
retail sales have grown at an estimated rate of 15% during the past year, and
this rate would be approximately 1/6 of our total sales tax revenue increase.
That if there is anyway possible to give some type of tax relief without sacra-
fica, to free enterprise and homeowners, now is the time. The only reason this
Nation can support the present 44To tax basis per income is because we are an
industrial, forward Nation and can produce enough to support such a tax load.
In conclusion, Mr. Slagle again reiterated the Chamber's position
that Proposition 1 will not affect State and local services.
Mayor Dutton expressed his concurrence with the Chamber's stand on
this issue, however felt a complete staff analysis as to the effect at the
local level was advisable prior to action, if any, by the Council.
The Mayor asked if anyone else had comments to present relative to
subject matter.
Mr. Uhler further advised that there is a basement or safety figure
built into the plan which sets as the lowest possible level of service, the
level of service provided to the citizens of this State. in fiscal year 1973-74.
If the one-tenth of 1% of total personal income each year reduction should tend
to produce a dollar amount which is less than the adjusted 1973-74 service
level, that 1973-74 level would be the limit. It is not a fixed dollar level
but a limit, adjusted to population changes and cost of living changes, so it
would keep pace.
Councilman Pebley felt that the citizens themselves are largely re-
sponsible for the continuous increases in taxes because of their greater de-
mands on government.
Councilman Thom stated that philosophically he was in perfect accord
with the thrust of the program, which is the realignment of the priorities
rather than the instituting of new programs. However, he questioned whether
the California Supervisors' Association and the California League of Cities
were briefed on the aspects of Proposition 1 prior to their stand of opposition.
Mr. Uhler advised that only the staff members were briefed, .and not
the Executive Members or Committee.
Councilman Stephenson noted that at the present time, he was in
accord with Mr. Uhler's presentation.
Councilman Sneegas stated he has often felt that government has been
somewhat in reverse to the working policies of a private business, where you
afford things because of the income, the same as is done in our homes, and he
was very pleased to see a move to put government in the same prospective,
In conclusion, Mr. b'hler submitted for the record, communications
addressed to ~overnor Reagan from Mr. Roger A. Freeman, Hoover Instttu~ion of
War, Revolution and Peace dated June 8, 1973, and from C. Lowell Harriss,
Economic Consultant, Tax Foundation Incorporated dated May 8, 1973.
The Council members expressed their appreciation to Mr. Uhler for
his presentation and advised they would await the staff analysis prior to any
further action.
RECESS: Councilman Dutton moved for a five-minute recess. Councilman Sneegas
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (2:55 P.M.)
AFTgR RECESS: Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order, all members of the Council
being present. (2:60 P.M.)
PUBLIC DANC~ PERMIT: Application filed by Lloyd L. Lowry for a public dance to be
held as part of the 5th Annual Police Benefit Show on September 1, 1973 at the
Anaheim Convention Center, 800 West Katella Avenue, was submitted and granted
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
subject to provisions of Chapter 4.16 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and that
four police officers be hired to police the dance, as recommended by the Chief
of Police, on motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Pebley. MOTION
CARRIED.
REPORT - NOISE CONTROL REQUIREMENTS FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NOS. 7730~ 7731~ 7732~ .7735
AND 7736: In compliance with the condition of approval relative to the installation
of adequate sound attenuation devices adjacent the Riverside Freeway to reduce
the noise level in the rear yards of these homes down to 65 dBA'$ and to 45
dBA's within the home, a supplement to the environmental impact report was pre-
pared by I.P.I. and submitted together with report from the Development Services
Department.
On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the
recommendations contained in said I.P.I. report were approved as being adequate
and meeting the requirements of the noise control requirement for said tracts.
MOTION CARRIED.
DRAiNAgE FACILITIES - TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 7567: Request for exemption from the City's
present Drainage Policy requiring construction of the ultimate downstream drain-
age facility before construction may proceed, as it applies to Tentative Tract
No. 7567 was submitted and continued for one week as requested by the Applicant,
Donald H. Frederickson, Director of Engineering, Grant Company'of California,
on motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Dutton, MOTION
CARRIED.
RESPONSE TO THE ORANGE COUNTY REPORT "PEOPLE~ POLICY AND GROWTH": Report prepared
by the Development Services Department, Planning Division, dated August 28, 1973
in response to the Orange County report "People, Policy and Growth" was submit-
ted and copies thereof ordered forwarded to the Orange County Planning Commission
and further that a staff member be directed to attend any future presentations
and hearings on this subject before the Board of Supervisors to present said
analysis as representative of the City's position on this subject, on motion by
Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Sneegas. MOTION CARRIED.
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 73-1E: On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by
Councilman Dutton, action on Encroachment Permit No. 73-1E, submitted by Mr. Gary
J. Fournier, Arnet, Davis, Newlove and Associates on behalf of Norm's Restaurants,
Inc., was continued to September 4, 1973, to be considered in conjunction with
Variance No. 2527. MOTION CARRIED.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STEMS: Actions taken by the City Planning Commission at
their meeting held August 6, 1973,. pertaining to the following applications were
submitted for City Council information and consideration:
ENVIRO~ENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: As recommended' by the City Plan-
ning COmmission, on motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Sneegas~
it was the finding of the City Council that the impact of the project in the
following zoning applications would be trivial in nature and that no enviror~aental
impact reports or statements be required:
Variance No. 2534
Variance No. 2535
Conditional Use Permit No. 1416
MOTION CARRIED.
1. VARIANCE NO. 2534: Submitted by E. and Sarah A. Fowler to construct an ia-
dustria building without required screening wall along adjacent residential pro-
perty on M-1 zoned property located on the west side of Miller Street, north of
Miraloma Avenue, with waiver of:
a. Masonry wall adjacent to residen~a 1 zone.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-174,
denied said variance.
Review of action taken by the City Planning Com~aission was requested
by Councilman Dutton and the City Clerk was instructed to schedule the matter for
public hearing before the City Council.
73'.695
City Hall! An-AheimI California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28~ 1973} ~i30 P,M'~
2. VARIANCE NOt 2535: Submitted by Comet, Inc., to establish motorcycle
service ~nd repair in con]unction with existing motorcycle accessories and
sales on C-1 zoned property, located on the north side of LinColn'Avenue, east
of East Street, with waiver of:
a. Permitted uses.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution NO. PC73-175,
granted said variance for a period of one year subject to conditions..
The City Council took no further action on Variance No. 2535.
3. CONDITIONAL USE NO. 1406 AND ENVIROm NTAL IMPACT NO. 'App i a-
rion by Anaheim Hills, Inc., and Texaco Venture~, inct',''to 'e'dt'~b[~s~ a private
tennis club on R-A 'zoned property located on the west side of Anaheim Hills
Road, northwest corner of Anaheim Hills and Nohl Ranch Road, was submitted to-
gether with Environmental Impact Report No. 96.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No, PC73-168,
recommended that Council adopt E.I.R. No. 96 as statement and granted Condi-
tional Use Permit No. 1406, subject to conditions.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT: On motion by councilman Stephenson, seconded
by COUncilman sneegas, the City Council accepted E,I.R. No. 96 and COmmittee
Analysis thereof, together with City Planning Commission recommendation and
adopted same as the Environmental Impact Statement of the Council. MOTION
CARRIED.
The City Council took no further action on Conditional Use permit
No. 1406.
4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.. 1416: Submitted by Au&heimWest L T D, to
eStablish on-sale beer and wine in conjunction with a proposed restaurant
an existing shopping center, on C-1 zoned property, located at the southeast.
corner of Lincoln Avenue and Western Avenue.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-176,
granted said conditional use permit no. 1416.
The City Council took no further action on Conditional Use Permit
No. 1416.
5. APPROVAL OF PRECISE PLANS - TENTATIVE MAPS} TRACT NOS. ,8215 AND 8~191 In
accordance with'Condition No. 12 of the planning Co~iS's~0~ 'W~-sb'lgti0~-approv-
lng Tentative Maps, Tract Nos. 8215 and 8219, final specific plans, were sub-
mitted and review of these by the City Planning CommiSsion indicates them to
be in conformance with the standards of the PC Zone, The City Planning Commis~
sion has approVed final specific plans for subject tracts and recommends that
these be approved by the City Council.
Mr. Roberts reported that the Planning Commission did noC have any
details as to the type of walls to be constructed on lots a~Jacent to Canyon
Rim Road at the time that these precise plans were considered by them and that
subsequently the developer has submitted a plan for an open-work type fence to
be built of a combination of wrought iron with slumpstone pilasters, Me
vised that these plans are recommended by staff for Council approval.
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the
precise plan for development of Tentative Maps, Tract Nos. 8215 and 8219, and.
the plans for decorative wall to be 'constructed adjacent to Canyon Rim Road
within these tracts were approved. MOTION CARRIED.
PROPOSAL FOR NAJOR REVISIONS TO THE ANAHEIM NUNICIpAL_ ZON~N~..._COD~.~. Submitted for
' CitYCounctl reviewwere Exhibit "~' (report Which is intended tO sh°w the need
and methodology for a major overhaul of the Anaheim Muntcipal Zoning Code); a
Development Services Department report on the subject; and excerpts from the
City Planning Commission meeting held August 6, 1973, recommending that the
City Council review and consider the need and desirability for ~mend~ent to the
732¢~6''~
City Hall~ ~!heim! California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28, 1973, ~.~0
Zoning Code in accordance with the proposed outline as submitted by staff and
marked Exhibit "~', and if such changes were deemed appropriate, to refer it
back to the Planning Commission for a detailed study and review and later recom-
mendations.
On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the City
Council referred the proposal for major revisions to the Anaheim Municipal zoning
Code back to the Planning Commission for further study as recommended. MOTION
CARRIED.'
TENTATIVE MAPS~ TRACT NOS. 8375~ 8376 AND ~77 (VARIANCE NO. 2542!.E?ItR. NOt 98.}:.
DeveloPer, S & S Construction Company; property located on the' n0~thwest'-~6~er
of Nohl Ranch Road and (proposed) Serrano Aven~e and contains:
Tract No. 8375 - 141 proposed single-family lots
Tract No. 8376 - 50 proposed single-family lots
Tract No. 8377 - 54 proposed single-family lots
On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Stephenson,
action on Tentative Maps, Tract Nos. 8375, 8376 and 8377 was continued, to be
considered in conjunction with E.I.R. 98 and Variance No. 2542. MOTION CARRIED.
TENTATIVE I~P,.~ TRACT NO. 8417 {RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-13}: Developer, Edward
' F.' Foley; property located on the north side of vermont Avenue, and south side
of Tyrol Place, containing 12 proposed RS-5000 zoned lots.
On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Thom, action on
Tentative Map, Tract No. 8417 was continued to be held in conjunction with
Reclassification No. 73-74-13. MOTION CARRIED.
TENTATIVE MAP~ TRACT NO. 8~04: Developer, Calprop Corp., property located westerly
of-Imperial Highway, '~°uth of Santa Ann Road; containing 152 proposed R-2 zoned
lots.
The City Planning Con~nission at their meeting held August 20, 1973,
approved said tentative map subject to the following conditions:
1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 8404 is granted
subject to the completion of Reclassification No. 70-71-13 and Conditional Use
Permit No. 1202.
2. That shoUld this subdivision be developed as more than one sub-
division, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative foma for
approval.
3. That all lots within'this tract shall be served by undersround
utilities.
4. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to
and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange
County Recorder.
5. That any proposed covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall
be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to City Council
approval of the final tract map and, further, that the approved convenants, COn-
ditions and restrictions shall be recorded concurrently with the final tract map.
6. That prior to filing the final tract map, the applicant shall sub-
mit to the City Attorney for approval or denial a complete synopsis of the pro-
posed functioning of the operating corporation including, but not llmited to, the
articles of incorporation bylaws, proposed methods'of management, bonding to in-
sure maintenance of common property and buildings, and such other tnfo~mation as
the City Attorney may desire to protect the City, its citizens, and the purchasers
of the project.
7. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior
to approval of a final tract map.
8. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the appropriate Park and Recreation in-lieu fees as determined tO be
appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building
permit is issued.
9. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a man, er
satisfactory to the City Engineer. If, in the preparation of the site, suffici-
ent grading is required to necessitate a grading permit, no work on grading will
73','697
CityHall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL NINUTES - Ausust .28~! t9..7_3~ L~rl.30..rpi~o
be pennitted between October 15th and April 15th unless ail required off,site
drainage facilities have been installed and are operative. Positive assurance
shall be provided the City that such drainage facilities will be completed
prior to October 15th. Necessary right-of-way for off-site drainage 'facilities
shall be dedicated to the City, or the City Council shall have initiated con-
demnation proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall be borne bY the
developer) prior to con~nencement of grading operations. The required drainage
facilities shall be of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff' waters orig-
inating from higher properties through said property to ultimate disposal as
approved by the City Engineer. Said drainage facilities she11 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 inspections or occu-
.panty permits. Drainage district reimbursement agreements may be made avail-
able to the developers of said property upon their request.
10. That grading, excavation, and all other construction activities
shall be conducted in such a manner so as to minimize the possibility of any
silt originating from this project being carried into the Santa Aha River by
storm water originating from or flowing through this project.
11. That all public streets shall have a maximum grade not in excess
of 12 percent.
12. That floor plans and elevations for the proposed houses shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Council prior to 'approval of the final
tract map.
13. The development plans for the proposed "special recreation area"
shall be submitted to the Planning Conm~ission and City Council for approval
prior to the issuance of a building permit for units of Tract No. 8404, and
said recreation area shall be completed prior to final building and zoning
inspections of the living units in this tract.
Zoning Supervisor Roberts reported that this tract is a Portion of
the Townhouse Project approved for the Yorba property and to be developed in
four different increments. Phase I has been completed and Phase II is nov
under construction. The developer now proposes to combine Phases III and IV
into one final project.
Mr. Roberts further noted that the conditions of approval of Condi-
tional Use Permit No. 1202 which applies to this project, contain a provision
which requires that the canyon site adjacent be developed into a recreational
use approved by the City Council and that plans for such facility were to be
approved during Phase III and the project to be completed during Phase IV.
However, the Planning Commission has recommended, in view of the consolidation
of Phases III and IV into one project, that the plans for special recreational
facility should be approved prior to issuance of a building permit and the
recreational facility to be completed prior to final building and zoning in-
spections.
Mr. Bernardo Yorba had requested an opportunity to address'Council
regarding clarification of Council's intent regarding the Open Space Provision
relative to the canyon area on subject property and was recognized at this time,
Hr. Yorba stated that the development of the canyon is of great con-
cern to both himself and the Calprop Corporation and that they wish to comply
with the Council's intent, and therefore are requesting a further expression
from the Council as to how they might proceed.. He reported that they have ex-
plored the feasibility of a pitch and putt golf course at this site, but have
been informed by their consulting architects that this'would involve a sizable
investment and would produce a relatively uninteresting course. They have also
discussed a tennis club project, however the investment required, whichwould
amount to $400,000 or $500,00~ was again considered unfeasible.
Mr. Yorba remarked that at the current time there is much interest in
the conservation of natural area and that this canyon provides an excellent
opportunity to preserve a great deal of the natural hillside and vegetation and
perhaps to provide nature walks aswell, in similar spirit aa the former Bryant
Botanical Gardens. He advised that any such Open Space proJect~ouldremain
open to the public and that the developer is' willing to incur the liabilities
involved.
73:698~
City Hall~ i~aheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28r 19731 ~!:30 P.M.
Mr. Yorba reminded Council that this developer has pioneered construc-
tion in the canyon, and now they wished to demonstrate further imagination by
developing an Open Space Area more in attune with the current mode of thinking.
Mr. Yorba further emphasized that in addition to the 15% of the total project
which has been left as Open Space as required by ordinance, recreational and
picnic areas have been provided, and in addition the developer is required to
pay park fees. At this time he remarked they are not requesting relief from
these fees and requirements but to be allowed to exercise some imagination in
providing an Open Space Area with nature walks and perhaps picnic areas on the
canyon site. He also referred to the fact that this property was at one time
offered to the City of Anaheim for park development and was declined.
Councilman Stephenson inquired why the pitch and putt course was not
feasible.
Mr. Yorba answered that the architects with whom he has consulted have
advised him that without virtual destruction of the canyon area, only a very un-
interesting course might be anticipated.
Councilman Stephenson was of the opinion that a pitch and putt course
would be both profitable and would provide an attractive, green, Open-Space Area.
Mr. Yorba reiterated that the investment in such a facility would be
large and most likely would require that the course remain open at night and
noted that the residents of Westridge whose property overlooks the canyon area
might not be in favor of the night operation. Further he noted that sewer con-
struction in the canyon has necessitated some repair work and also requires an
access road which would add to the difficulty of developing any type of golfing
facility.
Mr. Murdoch inquired just what Mr. Yorba was asking to do and noted
that no revenue could be expected from nature walks.
Mr. Yorba advised that they wished to proceed with an Open Space con-
cept as he has described, subject to Council approval, as this would eliminate
a substantial investment at this time. He added that there is a future possi-
bility that a commercial-recreational development might become feasible and
could be considered at that time.
Mr. Yorba further noted that such Open Space areas are hazardous espec-
ially in times of dry Weather, and that the project he is describing would.pro-
vide sprinklers and plantings to reduce this hazard. He submitted a photograph
of the subject canyon site, which was'reviewed by Council and returned.
Mr. Murdoch summarized the 0penSpace Concept as presented bk Mr. Yorba
to be a privately developed park area which would be open to the public and noted
that there is a condition that this area be developed as a maintained Open Space
Area prior to issuance of building permits for Phases III and IV.
Mr. Yorba did not feel that this Open Space development as he antici-
pates in the canyon could be accomplished in the time frame as set forth by the
Planning Cor~nission condition, primarily because of the necessity for repair work
in the canyon, the design of this concept, and the fact that there are different
times which are suitable for implantation of different plant materials. He sug-
gested instead that the developer be allowed to submit a plan for development of
the canyon area.
Mr. Murdoch further suggested that this plan indicate that portion of
the project which could be developed prior to completion of Phases III and IV and
the remainder to be implemented at the appropriate time. He further remarked
however that this would be subject to Council's expression as to whether this min-
imal development-Open Space Concept was consistent with their thinking at the time
the condition was imposed.
Councilman Sneegas remarked that the primary concern of the Council is
that there is some development activity in the canyon simultaneous to construction
of the Townhouse Project.
73-699
CSty_.~all~.Amaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES ? August 28~ 1973! 1:30
By general Council consent, the condition imposed upon Conditional
Use Permit No. 1202 regarding development of a special recreation area in the
adjacent area to the west, con~nencing in the third phase of development and
to be completed in the fourth phase, was interpreted to allow the developer to
submit a development plan for the canyon open space area which indicates that
portion which can be developed prior to completion of Phases III and IV and
that portion to be implemented at the appropriate time. Said development plan
to be submitted to Development Services Department for analysis and to City
Council for approval.
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, Ten-
tative Nap, Tract No. 8404 was approved subject to the recormmndations by the
City Planning Commission. NOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Roberts advised that this action will not necessitate amendment
to the City Planning Commission conditions. Further he advised that at the
Planning Commission meeting, an additional condition requiring submission of
plans for individual units prior to approval of the final tract map was dis-
cussed by the developer and he stated that they propose to build identical
units in this final Phase as were approved for Phase II. Mr. Roberts thereupon
recommended that the Council approve the development plans for individual units
for the final phase of construction.
On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas,
development plans for individual units to be constructed during the final phase
(Phases III and IV combined) were approved, on the basis that these are iden-
tical with those submitted for Phase II. NOTION CARRIED.
¢01~Brr~OL!iL USE l~n_--KIT NO, 1356 (RE~=A$$IFIeA?ION NO. 69-70'17) - MODIFI¢iTION
(IONDITION$: Submitted for Council revieww~s &'staff analysis and reco~e.,da-
tion together with City Plarming Comission Resolution No. PC73-195 a~mnding
conditions of Conditional Use Permit No. 1356 with reference to epproval and
recordation of the final tra~t mp.
Mr. Roberts reported that subject property is located a~ the south-
east corner of Romneya and Euclid and that Conditional Use Permit No. 1356
was granted for construction of a private recreational fecility in conjunction
with i commercial condominium building. He advised that the conditions of
al~proval of this conditional use permit were worded in such a wey that the
final tract map would have to be submitted and approved prior to the commenc~
ment of enY activity euthorized under this conditional us~ permit when, in
fact, the &ir space within the structure will be sold on en "as needed" basis.
it would be impossible to delineate same on & final trac~ map until all air
space modules are sold.
Mr. Roberts stated that after review of the situatiol by Development
Services Department, Engineering and the City Attorney's Office, it was deter-
mined that the City's interest would not be impaired by an amendment to the
conditions and therefore a modification of the conditions of approval of Con-
ditional Use Permit No. 1356 was recommended by Development Services Department
and implemented via Planning Comission Resolution No. PC73-195, Which amends
Condition Nos. 2a, 2b, 16 and 17 of Resolution No. PC72-308 granting this con-
ditional use permit.
The City Council took no further action on Conditional Use Permit No.
1356.
I~a._i~$IIIGATION NO. 67-68-29 - TERNINATION: Nr. Roberts 'reported that Development
~ Services Department respectfully requests a clarification of City Council's
position with regard to C-1 resolution of intent approved for Reclassification
No. 67-68-29. He briefly outlined the zoning history on the property and ad-
vised that this request is made subsequent to the following events=
1. A request considered by the City Planning Commission on August 20,
1973 for R-2 zoning and conditional use permit to establish a ll9-unit planned
residential development on approximately the northerly nine acres of the 16
acre parcel included under Reclassification No. 67-68-29.
2. Discussion of the zoning status of subject property revealed that
in connectionwith the public hearing on Reclassification No. 70-71-40, to
73~00'~
City. Hall, ~m~heim~. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28, .1973t..1,30' P..Mt
zoning for a portion of this property, the Planning Commission recommended, and
Petitioner stipulated to termination of Reclassification No. 67-68-29. Members
of the City Attorney's Office and Development Services Department have researched
the files on the property in question and reviewed the City Council resolutions
and minutes and have found no reference to any action being taken by the City
Council to terminate Reclassification No. 67-68-29. However a letter was re-
ceived July 11, 1973 in connection with the request for R-2 zoning from Anaheim
Hills stating their request "...that the previously adopted resolution of intent
designating this property as C-I, General Commercial, be removed concurrently
with the adoption of the resolution of intent for R-2 zoning."
Despite the fact that according to Section 18.72.020 it could be log-
ically assumed that the resolution of intent to C-1 approved under Reclassifica-
tion No. 67-68-29 is null and void due to the fact that the conditions of appro-
val have not been met and extension of time has not been granted by the City
Council, a clarification is being requested, since it is not uncommon for the
City Council to grant time extensions on resolutions of intent that technically
had expired a number of years previously.
Mr. James Barisic, Vice President, Anaheim Hills, Inc., stated that
they are requesting a change of zone from C-1 to R-2 on the vre~erty
cause they feel that they have a valid R-2 project for the location and advised
that they did file a letter requesting termination of Reclassification No.
67-68-29 concurrently with the adoption of resolution of intent to R-2 zoning.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-365: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 73R-365 for
adoPttdn, termlnating all proceedings under Reclassification No. 67-68-29 and
declaring Resolution No. 67R-682, resolution of intent to C-I, null and void.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM TERMINATING ALL
PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH RECLASSIFICATION NO. 67-68-29.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCII/HEN: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-365 duly passed and adopted.
TRANSFER OF FUNDS - WORK ORDER NO. 801 (DUPLICATING AND PRINTING SHOP ADDITION}: Mr.
' Mu~d0Ch advised that the amount carried forward in the Budget'for th~'dUPlica-
ting and printing shop addition is $21,896.74 and obviously not sufftc'ient to
cover the iow bid received for Work Order No. 801 which amounts to $29,§00.00.
however staff feels that this is a good bid and should be accepted. He suggested
that the difference in the contract award and the amount budgeted be transferred
fr°m the funds carried forward for remodeling of the former Bank of America
building.
On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, a
transfer of funds from the amount allocated for remodeling of the former Bank of
America building, in the amount of $7,603.26 was authorized to make up the dif-
ference required for award of Work Order No. 801. MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-366 - AWARD OF WORK ORDER NO. 801: In accordance with recommenda-
tions'of the 'City Engineer, Councilman Pebley °tiered Resolution No. 73R-366 for
adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A SEALED
PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR THE
FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL
[rrILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER~ AND PERFOR-
MING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COt~PLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT: THE DUPLICATING AND PRINTING SHOP ADDITION, PURCHASING BUILD-
ING, 901 EAST VERMONT AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 801
(Contracting Services - $29,500.00)
7 ~70 f
City Hall! ~Aheim! California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28, 1973~ 1:30 P.M,
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN
NOES: COUNCILMEN
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-366 duly passed and adopted.
R~S0~.UT_ION NOS. 73R-367 ANO 73R-368 - A~ARD OF ~O.~KORD~R~_.~.$.. 6&S, A AND 696-R: In
~accOrdance 'with reco~endations °f~the City E~ineet;'-'~Uuctlma~ Sfephens°n
offered Resolution Nos. 73R-367 and 73~-~S for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
c~UNcSOLUTION NO~ 73R-367 - WORK ORDER NO. 648-~.~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
IL OF THE' CITY OF ANAHEIN ACCEPTING A SEALED PROPOSAL AND AWARDING
A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR THE FURNISHING OF ALL
PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND
TI~ANSPORTATION, INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PERFORMING ALL WORK
N~CESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPRO~NT.'
THE LA PALMA AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT FROM WHITTIER STREET TO APPROXI-
MATELY 7'24 FEET EAST OF STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM,
WOltK ORDER NO. 6~8-A. (McGrew Construction Co., Inc. ~ $14,076.30)
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-368 - WORK ORDER NO. 696-B: A RESOLUTION OF THE
COU~(~iL 'OF'-THE-CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A SkALED PROPOSAL AND AWARDING
A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR THE FURNISHING OF ALL
PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND
TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PERFORMING ALL WORK
NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOMING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT:
THE STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD STREET IMPROVEMENT FROM APPROXIMATELY 375
FEET SOUTH OF TO APPROXIMATELY 683 FEET SOUTH OF ORAI~ETNORPE AVENUE,
IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 696-B. (Griffitt~ Company
$9,789.40)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN: Stephenson, Sneegas, pebley, Thom and Button
COUNCII2iEN: None
COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos, 73R-367 and 73R-368 duly passed
and adopted.
P~I~ LMPROVE~NT PROJECTS: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution 'Nos. 73R-369
.... ~-ahd 73R. 370-for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-369 - WORK ORDER NO. 701-B: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY.
COUNCI~ OFTHE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND L~'~'ERMINING TMAT PUBLIC CON-
VENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT! TO WIT: THE HOWELL AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT, PROM 118 FEET
SOUTH OF SUNKIST STREET TO ~ FEET NORTH OF SINCLAIR STREET, IN THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 701-B. APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES,
DRAWINGS AND sPEcIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE
CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS,
SPECIFICATIONS, ETC. ~ AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO
PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF.
(Bids to be Opened - September 20, 1973, 2:00 P.M.)
R~SOLUTION NO. 73R-370 - WORK ORDER NO. 702-A: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF TI~ CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND I~['ERMINING THAT PUBLIC CON-
VENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE CONSTRUCTION, MODIFICATION AND INTERC0NNECTION
OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS ON VARIOUS STREETS IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER
NO. 702-A. APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINOS AND SPECIFI-
CATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF
City H&ll, ~A~laheim,. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28,.!973,.1.:30 P'M'
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 - September 27, 1973, 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. 73R-369 and 73R-370 duly passed
and adopted.
WORK ORDER NO. 1003 - REROOFING OF THE ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER: Request to issue
· the call for bids on Work Order No. 10'03 was sUbmit[ed"for'City Council action.
Councilman Pebley questioned the architect's original specifications
for the Convention Center roof, noting that the structure is currently seven
years old and as he recalled the specifications called for a 15 year roof.
By general Council consent, action on call for bids for Work Order No.
1003 was held over one week to allow time for investigation by'the City Attorney's
Office.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-371 - WORK ORDER NO. 671-A: Upon receipt of certification from
the Directorof Public Works, Councilman Dutton offered Resolution No. 73R-371
for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING
TME CO~4PLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS
AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TILANSPORTATION INCLUDING PO~R, FUEL
AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COM-
PLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE FERN STREET STREET
IMPROVEMENT, FROM BALL ROAD TO APPROXIMATELY 660 FEET SOUTH OF BALL ROAD,
IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 671-A. (El Camino Contracting Co. )
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and I)utton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-371 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-372 - DEEDS OF EASEMENT: Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution
"No~ 7~R-372 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANA}2IMACCEPTIN~ CERTAIN
I~EDS AND OR, RING THEIR RECORDATION. (The Roman Catholic Archbishop of
Los A~eles; Texaco Ventures, Inc. & Anaheim Hills, Inc.; Douglas B.
Browne; Stanley C. Barto)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-372 duly passed and adopted.
PUItC~E OF EQUIPMENT - TWO 500 KVA PAD MOUNTED T,RA~SFORMERS!. The City Manager repor-
~ o~ in'formal bids received for the purchase of two 500 KvA pad mounted trans-
formers for the Electrical Division as follows and recommended acceptance of the
Westinghouse Electric Supply bid as the lowest bid meeting specifications:
73?.70 3
City Hall!_. _~nahetmt California - COUNCIL MINUTES - AuBust 28r !973~ 1:3,0 P-M-
VENDOR
TOTAL AMOUNT ~NCLUDING TAX
McOraw-Bdison, Los Angeles ......... $6,436.32
Allis-Chalmers, Los Angeles ............. 6,444.80
Westinghouse Electric Supply, Anaheim .... 6,495.68
H. K. Porter Company, Los Angeles .......... 6,824.28
General Electric Co., Anaheim ....... 7,214.36
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Pebley,
the bid of Westinghouse Electric Supply Company was accepted and purchase auth-
orized in the amount of $6,495.68, including tax, as the lowest bid meeting
specifications. MOTION CARRIED.
PURCllASE OF EqUIH/ENT - AERIAL LADDER TRUCK: The City Manager reported on informal
bids' received for the purChase of One' aerial ladder truck with alternates 1
and 2 for the Fire Department as follows, and recommended acceptance of the low
bid:
WNDOR
American LaFrance, Elmira, New York
Crown Coach Company, Los Angeles .........
Ward LaFrance, Los Angeles
O'Neil Seagrave ......
Peter Vtrsch & Sons Co.
Howe Fire Apparatus Co.
TOTAL. AMpPNT, INCLUDING TAX
$ 98,201.58
104,894.99
1.27,526.48
NO qUOTE
NO qUOT~
SO qUOTE
Mr. Murdoch advised that the low bid from American LaFrance amounts
to more than the $90,000 which was estimated and allocated from Revenue Sharing
Funds. This increase iS partially due to the inclusion of alternate, the HT-740
Allison transuttssion which is recommended by both the Fire Chtet and Mechanical
Maintenance Superintendent because Of the anticipated substantial reduction in
maintenance cost with this t{ansmission.
On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman stephenson,
the low bid of American LaFrance was accepted and purchase authorized in the
amount of $98,201.58, including tax. MOTION CAP~IED.
[UR~ OF ~QUlPI~,NT - 4 CALCULATORS: The City ltsnager reported on the recommen-
"purchase of two c~ucorpmodel 322g and two model. 324g calculators, and
advised that Compucorp has submitted a quotation for said equipment in the
amount of $3,582.80, including tax. .~e thereupon recommended the purchase be
authorized.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson~ seconded by Councilman Dutton,
purchase was authorized in the amount of $3,582.80, including tax. MOTION
CiRRIED.
CLAI}t$ AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims were denied as recormnended by the
'"LcitYAttorneY and" ordered referred to the insurance carrier, on motion by
Councilman Pebley, seconded'by Councilman Sneegas:
a. Claim submitted by Southern California Water Company for damage
to six-inch "T" main purportedly as a result of City of Anaheim crew installing
a screw anchor at this site, on or about A~gust 1, 1973.
b. Claim submitted by Southern California Gas Company for damage to
gas service at 735 Sherrill purportedly caused by negligence of City employee,
on or about inly 20, 1973.
c. Claim submitted by R. O. Dorey for personal property loss purpor-
tedly as a result of electrical, failure, on or about A~gust 19, 1973.
d. Claim submitted by Ted H. Norri~ for property damage purportedly
as a result of a fireman doing yard work at station, me,er throwing rocks which
hit windshield of truck, on or about August 22, 1973.
MOTION CARRIED.
AME.. NT TO ELE~ICAL RAT~:SI RULES AND REC~UL~TIO~S: Utilities Director, Gordon
'~yt, rep0~ed' on his reC~ndati°n,'in'acc0rdance with previous discussion
73-704
City Hall~ Anaheim,_ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28} 1973}.l.,30. P.,M~
and direction of the City Council, to increase all electrical rates (with the
exception of agricultural power which is seasonal and not convenient to adjust)
in order to reflect the 52% increase in wholesale electrical costs. These recom-
mended increases will bring the City of Anaheim retail rates up to the Edison
retail rates, however, still will not recover the entire wholesale increase, hut
rathe~ will cost the City an estimated $15,000 per month. He advised that a
readjustment will again be recommended within the next few months after a decision
is made by the Public Utilities Commission on the Edison rates. This will be
designed to regain the City's previous relationship with the Edison rates and
the net effect of this forthcoming readjustment would be to increase rates to
cover the additional $15,000 per month.
Mr. Hoyt explained that the recommended amendment to the Electrical
Rules, Rates and Regulations proposed this date would increase rates as follows:
residential rates - 30%; commercial rates - 22%; industrial rates - 30% and will
cost the average customer with a $13.86 per month bill for 430 kilowatt-hours,
$3.41 additionally per month or 11 cents additionally per day.
In addition, it is recommended in the proposed amendment that the pro-
motional rate which has been in effect for electrical space heating be closed
to new customers as of January 1, 1974.
Mr. Hoyt advised that with the constraints within which the Utilities
Department had to work, they found it necessary to retain the blocking of rates as
they were previously, since any change in these would involve manual pro-rating
which would be beyond their capability to perform in manual fashion.
Mr. Murdoch stressed that the recommended increases in electrical rates
will place these at an almost identical position as the Edison retail rates at
the present time.
Mr. Hoyt added that of particular importance is the fact that although
the City is raising electrical rates by 30%, these are Just now coming up to the
Edison rates and therefore the Anaheim consumers have enjoyed a significant sav-
ing over the Edison consumers in the past.
Mr. Hoyt further recommended that the Council authorize the retention
of utility billing transactions so that in the event the pending litigation before
the Federal Power Commission is successful in extending the suspension time beyond
September 7 to December 7, 1973, the Utilities Department will then be in a pos-
ition to make refunds to consumers at the discretion of the Council. He explained
that the Utilities Department would propose to transcribe the computer billing
data onto magnetic tape for storage, but have no plans formulated as yet for im-
plementing any refunds.
Mr. Hoyt also advised, in connection with increased electrical costs,
that he would shortly recommend that this increase be recognized as part of the
water comm~odity clause increase, which will result in increased cost of water.
On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the
City Council authorized the Utilities Director to retain the records of retail
electrical sales transactions for possible future refunds should pending litiga-
tion prove successful. MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-373 - AMENDMENT TO ELECTRICAL RATES~ RULES AND REGULATIONS:
CoUnCilman sneegas o~fered Resolution NO. 73R-373 for adoPtiOn. '
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY' OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RATES,
RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE SALE AND DISTRIBUTION ~F ELECTRIC ENERGY
AS ADOFIIID BY RESOLUTION NO. 71R-478 AND AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NO.
73R-25.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: CObT~CILMEN:
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-373 duly passed and adopted.
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
7 3--q19 5~ -
City ..... H~ll~ Anaheim,... . California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28.! 1973., 1:30 P.M..
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-374 - MODIFICATION - CITY OF ANAHEIM "SELECT SYSTEM": Councilman
.... Du~tton offered Resolution No. 73R-374 fOr adopti0n~" '
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING THE
REPORT AND MAP RECOMMENDING ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS OF ROUTES FOR
SELECT SYSTEM, AND REQUESTING THAT SUCH ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS BE
APPROVED BY THE CALIFORNIA HIGWWAY COMHISSION.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILM~N: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared ResOlution No. 73R-374 duly passed and adopted.
CORR~sPONI~NCE: The following correspondence was ordered receiv&d and filed on
u'~'tiOnbY Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Pebley:
a. City of La Habra - Resolution No. 2221 - Expressing its opposi-
tion to public employer-employee relations legislation;
b. Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange County - Resolution
No. 73-97 - Approving the partial sphere of influence for Northeastern Anaheim
with the exception of area designated A2 known as the Orangethorpe Avenue-
Tustin Avenue Area.
c. Financial and Operating Reports for the Month of July, 1973 for
the Anaheim Police Department, Amaheim Fire Department and City Treasurer's
Office.
MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-375 - ESTABLISHII~. BOND AMOUNTS FOR FINAl. CE DIRECTOR AND CITY
~~R.." 'cOUncilman StePhenson offered ReSOlUtion 'No. '73R-37§ fo~ adoPtiOn,
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING
BOND AMOUNTS FOR CERTAIN DESIGNATED PUBLIC EMPLOYEES.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
AB SENT:
COUNCILMEN: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Outton
COUNCILMEN: None
COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-375 duly passed and adopted.
ORDI~._~r~e~adtng.. CI~ NO. 3207: Councilman Stephenson offered Ordinance No. 3207 for first
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING TITLE 1, CHAPTER 1.04,
SECTION 1.04.390 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, AND ENACTING A NEW
SECTION 1.04.390 RELATING TO OFFICERS AND DEPARTMENTS.
DRI¥IN(I RAN6E - ANAHEIM NUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE: Mr. Murdoch reported on difficulties
exPerienced asa result of use of the driving range at the Anaheim Municipal
Golf Course at unauthorized times, specifically that this has resulted in dam-
ages to mobile homes on the adjacent property as well as a purported personal
injury. Because of these difficulties in the' past,use of the range has been
limited to lessons' with the golf pro only. However since there is no surveil-
· lance of the area, golfers have been utilizing it at unauthorized, times, des-
pite posted notices that the range is closed.
Councilmen Pebley and DUtton concurred with these statements, noting
that they had both personally inspected the' situation.
7 3;.~7~0 6 ~'
Citz Hall, ,~.aheim! California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 281 19731 1:30 Pi..M.
Mr. Murdoch suggested that the immediate solution would be to fence
the range and provide a locked gate, but that some consideration should also
be given to developing an alternate driving range. In this connection, he
vised that the City does have approximately $15,000 available for development
of a driving range. Mr. Murdoch also referred to the draft agreement with thc
County to develop a range on the flood control property, but noted that this
calls for payment of $200 per month plus a percentage of the gross and there
some consideration as to whether it is worth that investment, unless the golf
pro wishes to participate.
Councilman Stephenson was of the opinion that an alternate driving
range is necessary at the Anaheim Municipal Golf Course and that some steps
should be taken in the direction of providing same.
By general consent, the City Council concurred with the fencing and
locking of the existing driving range and exploration of the possibility of pro-
viding an alternate range.
TWO 69 KV ZIGZAG CONNECTED GROUNDING TRANSFORMERS - WESTINGHOUSE: (Action on rescind-
ing purchase order 'fOr 'two' 69 Kv zigzag connected grounding transformers was held
over from the meeting of August 21, 1973 for further investigation and report by
the City Attorney's Office.) Mr. Alan Watts reported that following research and
investigation of the situation, he is satisfied that a Council'action rescinding
the purchase order from Westinghouse for the two transformers which could not
be delivered on time would not affect the legal action which he anticipates
against Westinghouse and thereupon recommended that Council rescind same.
On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, the
authorization to purchase two 69 Kv zigzag connected grounding transformers from
Westinghouse Electric Corporation to be delivered in 38 weeks, was rescinded.
MOTION CARRIED.
IDENTIFICATION CARDS - CHAPTER 4.30 OF THE A~AHEIH ~ONICIPAL COOE: (Presentation made
..... by-Mr.-~manUel OYler, July 31, 1973 and CounCil action deferred, pending further
investigation by the City Attorney's Office.) Assistant City Attorney Alan Watts
submitted a report and an opinion rendered by the Court of Appeals relative to
Chapter 4.30 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, in connection with the case of James
A. Hamilton et al versus Mark A. Stephenson, Chief of Police of the City of
Anaheim. This opinion held that the ordinance was not preempted by State law.
Mr. Watts advised that the City Attorney's Office did read the cases as suggested
by Attorney Gyler subsequent to his presentation, and having reviewed these, and
done further research, have found no other cases which would change the law with
respect to this ordinance. Therefore the City Attorney's opinion is that the
ordinance is a valid exercise of the City's Police power, and they would recom-
mend that the City Council take no action to change or remove Chapter 4.30 from
the Anaheim Municipal Code.
Councilman Pebley felt it was a good ordinance particularly as it ap-
plies to employees of janitorial services since these people have access to com-
mercial buildings. Further he remarked that many businessmen who do contract for
janitorial services and restaurant and bar owners are not aware of the identifica-
tion card requirement and he suggested that copy of the ordinance be mailed out
with the utility bills to inform the public of this requirement.
Councilman Sneegas stated that he would' not be in favor of sending
copies of 'the ordinance with the utility bills, noting that the purpose of the
ordinance is to protect the businessman, and particularly since this could be
interpreted as a mandatory obligation on the part of the businessman, He would
rather consider the ordinance a protective device which the businessman might use
if he so chooses.
Councilman Pebley felt it was particularly important that employees of
taxi cab and Janitorial services be required to comply with the ordinance and ob-
tain identification cards.
Councilman Sneegas stated that the obligation to check for identifica-
tions cards should fall upon the businessman who is hlring the service.
73~707 -
City. Hall~ Anaheim.! California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 28~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Pebley reiterated that this is his point, that many bus-
inessmen are not aware of the identification cards and therefore they cannot
ask to see them.
Councilman Stephenson remarked that he personally knew that the taxi
cab company which operates from Anaheim does comply with the ordinance.
Mr. Murdoch outlined the difficulties encountered in requiring the
bartenders and restaurant workers to obtain identification cards, noting es-
pecially the Hotel-Restaurant Bartenders' Union has strongly opposed the ordin-
ance, and has instructed their membership not to comply. As a result, many
employees currently working at the larger hotels within the City do not have
identification cards in their possession. Further he contended that the pri-
mary reason for the presentation on July 31, 1973 by Mr. Gyler was the activity
undertaken to enforce this ordinance under the direction of Lt. Wilcox.
At the conclusion of discussion, by general consent, the City Council
concurred with the opinion of the City Attorney's Office, and no action was
taken, to change or remove Chapter 4.30 from the Anaheim Municipal Code.
AMENI~NT TO CONTRACT - ROWLAND AND ROSE - ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES~ CIVIC CENTER
PRO~ECT: Mr.'Watts advised that the contract employing Rowland and Rose provided
for a lump sum payment for the first phase within 90 days of execution of the
agreement, which payment was contemplated throughout the negotiations to have
been paid as the work progressed. However, inadvertently, through the various
drafts, the provision for the progressive payments was omitted and Rowland and
B~se have requested that the agreement be amended to reflect the progress pay-
ment schedule through the first phase.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-376: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 73R-376 for
ad°Ptfon,-amending the contract with Rowland and Rose to provide a progress
payment schedule during Phase I.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A BESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THAT CERTAIN A(;BEEM~NT FOR ARCHITECTURAL
SERVICES ENTERED INTO ON THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1973, BETWEEN THE CITY
OF 'ANAHEIM AND DAN L. ROWLAND AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED, AND LE ROY
ROSE AND ASSOCIATES, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, AS A JOINT VENTURE.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT': COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-376 duly passed and adopted.
EME~ENCY SEWER EXTENSION (TRACT NO. 7470~: Assistant City Attorney John Dawson
reported that American Housing Company, in the development of Tract No. 7470
located on the north side of Santa Ana Canyon Road, east of Imlperial Highway,
which was approved and recorded, was informed that the sewer extension was com-
plete to their development and therefore proceeded to construct the cross sew-
ers and house connections and wished to proceed with putting water into the
tract. When looking for the City's sewer connection, they were informed that
it has not yet been extended to that point, the current location being the
easterly boundaries of the Maag property and Solomon Drive.
Mr. Dawson advised that the situation has been reviewed and it is the
recommendation of the City Attorney's Office that this be declared an emergency
and the developer permitted to put in the 27-inch sewer across his property in
order to enable them to proceed with installation of other utilities and the
developer to be reimbursed at the rate of any one of the following which is the
lowest figure: 1.) The cost to him of installing the sewer; 2.) The estimate
of the City Engineering Department; 3.) The unit cost of the low bidder. Mr.
Dawson advised that this solution has been discussed with the City Engineer and
American Housing Company and is satisfactory to both.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Pebley,
the sewer extension project was declared an emergency and the developer,American
Housing Company, authorized to proceed with construction of the 27-tnch sewer
across Tract No. 7470 to be reimbursed as outlined above. MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-377 - EXTENDING CONTRACT TO EMPLOY MAYBELLE SPENCER~ CITY
TREA~UI~R: CounCilman Stephens°n offered ResOluti°n No 73R, 377 for adOption.
73-708
City Hall~.Anaheim! California- COUNCIL MINUTES - Au[~ust 28~. 1973~_ 1:,30 P'M'
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS
AND CONDITIONS OF AN AI~NT TO AN AGREEMENT WITH MAYBELLE E. SPENCER, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AHENII~ENT TO AGREEMENT.
Roll Call Vote..
AYES: COUNCILMEN
NOES: COUNCILMEN
AB SENT .. COUNCILMEN
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-377 duly passed and adopted.
Discussion was held relative to the benefits derived by the City
by the attendance of HayBelle Spencer at the League of California Cities
Conference October ~1 through "4 1973
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES - VOTING DELEGATE: On motion by Councilman Pebley,
seC°nd~d bY Councilman Stephenson, the Mayor was designated the voting delegate
and Mayor Pro Tem his alternate for the League of California Cities conference
in San Francisco, October 21 through 24, 1973. MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-378 - LICENSE - LOW VOLTAGE CONTROL CABLES ATCHISON TOPEKA AND
SANTA FE RAILWAY: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. ~3R-378 for adoption'.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS
AND CONDITIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE ATCHI-
SON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY PERMITTING THE INSTALLATION OF A
LOW VOLTAGE CONTROL CABLE AND ATTACHMENTS TO COMMUNI~TI~ POLE LINE OWNED
BY SAID RAILWAY COMPANY. ($22.50 annually)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNClI24EN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-378 duly passed and adopted.
TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION - FEATHER AND GOODHUE STREETS: Councilman Sneegas advised that
: he has be~n Contacted b~' residents in the immediate vicinity of Feather and Good-
hue Streets and requested that the Traffic Engineer undertake an investigation
of traffic at the intersection of Feather and Goodhue (west of Walnut, south of.
Ball Road) to determine whether or not warrants are met for boulevard stop signs
or other traffic control device.
CALVERY..BAPTIST CHURCH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 72-6E}: Councilman Sneegas advised
that Reverend Ramey of the Calvery Baptist ChUrchhad contacted him and stated
that the school district desires to have the quonset huts which he proposes to
place on church property (contingent upon Encroachment Permit No. 72-6E set for
public hearing on September 4, 1973) moved at this time.
On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the
Calvery Baptist Church was authorized to move the quonset huts onto their property
at their own risk pending the outcome of public hearing on Encroachment Permit
No. 72-6E on September 4, 1973. MOTION CARRIED.
~O~NTS BY MR. HARTNELL: Councilman Thom introduced Mr. Ed Hartnell, who gave his
opinions relative to Proposition I; the Open Space Concept in connection with
the Calprop development; identification cards pursuant to Chapter 4.30 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code; and the driving range at Anaheim Mmnicipal Coif Course.
,P. ECE~S - EXE~.UTIVE SESSION: Councilman Sneegas moved to recess to Executive Session
for the purpose of discussing personnel matters. Councilman Pebley seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (5:05 P.M.)
...AFTER P~CESS~ Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order, all Councilmen being present.
(5:i9 P.M.)
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Sneegas moved to adjourn to Tuesday, September 4, 1973,
'10:'00 a.m., for public discussion of the Civic Center Project. Councilman
Stephenson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Adjourned: 5:20 P.M.
----x - City Clerk