1953/09/28r:... tv 'H~_A_nah' e':m, California... ,. Septemb'r 28, 1953- 8:00 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in adjourned rJgular session.
~*q NT : ~,O~;h~i ; Boney and Heyinq
~, . ATTORNEY, PRESTON TURNER: Present
' o, RAT,VE OFFICER, .
CiTY ADr,'ZNI~T= ~ KEITH A ~R~RD~t-i' Present
E:DS: Pursuant t.o Resolution No. 2239, the City Clerk was ~nstructed to op3n
bid proposals on the construction of ~he H~tSTON AVE~E-CRE~E~ AVE~E TRU~
SERVER MAIN~ on motion by Councilman Van Wagoner~ seconded by Councilman Wisser.
~,~ ~N CARRIED
E!~= RECEIVED
.... ~o Ross~ Construction Co
2~80 Ramona Blvd., Los Angeles Calif.
.7. '~ Popov:.ch
P.O. Box 261, Torrance Calif.
j, 11;. Ba rr c~t t.
1300 ¢~. '"' , ~ , .
~.~ast ,,zghway, ~,~¢~w Port Beach, Cal'~ f
" ~';l!er Co.
g~ No. Bunker Hil~ Ave , Los Angeles 12, Calif
~',~cF M Guho
8335 Atlantic Blvd., Bell, Calif.
Peasen Construcilon Co.
Box 109, Escondito, Calif.
uha:!~s L. Dutch and eons
04}~ No. ¢ ~ Pl Monte Calif
~.,h.~co Ave.~ ~ ) .
Char~es J. ~.orfmar;
. . Calif
12a No La Brea Ave , Los Angeles, .
~ ~ ~anfi d Co
. Cal~ f
05] $o ~u~na Vista, Pomona, . .
~zz~ C~struc~iom Co.
~ ~p!e City, Calif
48!~ Mo. Arden Dr., : .
~o and ~r~dar~ch Co.
~r~!~ r] ehman Rd ~"
C;: o ~ 3 c. Dak ov ~ C >'
24~Q So. Garfield Ave., :,4oni~rfy Park~ Calif.
......... Los Angel..:~s 62, Cal~ f
!~°~ W. Santa Barbara~ ., .
$ 176,606.10
105,043.20
190. 066.10
257,684.90
154,781.90
154)512.00
219)257.50
! 06,736.50
.119,933.84
201,114.20
137,384.77 -
149,997.80
202, O01 .,70
C:;,;nc~ ]man Wiss~,r moved ti;e kids be ref::rred to the Engineering D3part-
for taL~u]~tion and report at next meeting. Councilman Van Wagoner seconded
-~otion ....... ~,, ~ .~ E~'
P!!r~LlC '"~ARi'-:¢ o:,~:~: :-.~,:~,-:^,,,, ~ , : ,
.,~ ~:~ ~,,<.,; GILBERT e~n-~- ,~,,,,rv,~ON Mayor Pearson called the meetinq to
~rd:r for the m:rooso of conducti*n a Public Hearing ~,' ,~ .
..- ,__ . ,,~ , ,_..:rs. ant to R~solution No
or': +z<:. :::oF<:sed annexat[or; k~,owr: as the Gi. lb~r., e
and read said Reso~,,tzon No. 2237 in full.
. :-<.,=;:, .~,~o:,~e~ from Santa Ana, appeared on behalf of protestants who
- ~..:.,, prote~ts which cont. a~nod 44 ~ignature~ ~nd r..2pre~ented 26 ~aparate
:.:~r<:.!,s of pzoperty~ or approx:lmat..~.!y 160 acres of the proposed annexation. He
caIT:~d a+:fz, nt~or: to f. he descript.~or~ whc~re {hero appears to be an error; re{erred
~<',:..- :;-:~-. ,,,,.~p <::f ,.,~:: exterior bounder:es of the proposed annexation to 'the portion
~u~.t below L~nco:ln Ave. the Carroll proper~y~ between Lincoln and Broadway~ ex-
e;,,~ng across to r¢,agnol:a~ there is a call fn the description of 651.85 feet,
~:or_, or less~ ~nd appears to b~,~ a typographical ~rror~ and should read 551.85
fee~'. :*", ex*',:,¢,, ~- i., 100 feet easterly beyond the Carroll property. The qu¢~stion
would be wh:iher the description should be construed accordln9 ~o the footage~
¢'.*~ or accor'dinc to the ~ine at which it :s also t~ed
F.:':,Yf)R PEARSOn': guggested the matter bo raf..~rr:,d to the Sng:,neer Department to
i n'v,:sti aa+',-.~. ,~.,. '~h:. ~ rr:atter.
?R~;::TON ~,~F~ Believed it advisable to do 'that, ....
, .... :,:~ : '1+ ~s his und;~rstanding of the
; ::t :..:-rpr ' f a 't :L :0 r: of tk~ dzscri~*: wh ~ mo 2 .
....... : ...... on :.s ere t 9ocs r.: or 1 ss to a point. Ho~
.v,:,:. ~t. ,~,~<-",t,,.~., b,:, advisabl.~ to correct the call to make ._~t more n~arly the actual
" ..... ER Th
,~z. '<?A]% : ere arc- oth:-r pr-'sor, s here who would lik,:~ to b.', heard generally
rec:-:~rdi nc~ ~ +"~":' ~..:....: .... proposed annexation. Th--,.._ anr',e×at~ on~ 9oes too far, and the ex-
..e::s:ons include p~ope:ty that ts not ready to be annexed to thc C:ty.
Hall, Anane.im,~ Cal~!fo_r~ni_a,~S3~er 28,, 1953- 8:oo..p.M_..
MR. PARSONS: Resident at Magnolia and La Palina, operates a Chicken business~ stated
ii seemed to him that these men have had to go quite ~ ways, they have 65% of the
votes sewed up right now; looks like it is a cinch for them. Looks as if they went
out and lined up just enough votes to carry it, and left the rest of us holding the
sack. These men want in the city for the disposal of their property, the rest of us
bough% and developed our proper!y and would like %o live there. Don't feel we. can
pay tl~.e extra taxes~ we all have water and police protection. ~aybe in a year or so
as the country developes. They have missed a large section between the City of
Anaheim. I would have no objections at all if they would take from the %~est City
Limiis to Magnolia and {rom Houston south :~o Broadway, and tNen if the majority wanted
'to go in.
?~. JOSEPH M. KELLEY: 5 acres, stated he had put a lot of money into a well three
years ago and didn't want to get in the city on account of that.
~S. CARROLL: 20 acres, eta'ted she thought it funny they toOk them in without ask-
lng them. Ihey took the half of the area where we don't live, leaving out the area
where they live~ and without asking them.
~. PARSONS: Stated, Mr. Krogman, one of the twelve on the petition, is building a
new house on his property~ he signed because he could tie into the Magnolia Trunk
Line Sewer. His house ~!1 be ready in a month or two to move into. He promised
to be here tonight, for he is very sorry he signed that petit, lon because he was
mi sinformed.
,VR. DALY: 10 acres, said, I can't see why I should be in the City Limits to pay more
taxes~ when I have -to work out io make a living no~'.
~%~. PARSONS; i see where U. S. Motors are asking to be in the Houston Annexation
and Gilbert Annexation ~o, now they are pei~itlonlng to go in another annexation.
Asked the Clerk if they are asking for M-1 zoning. (No answer)
JOHN RA~iLSTON: Spoke on behalf of mother-in-law, Mrs. Carroll, and called attention
tc~ the area that extends including their property.
BARRETT; 4.75 acres. Stated she objected to the going into the City.
~. :~OHLSTON; Mother has acreage next to the annexation. The people feel that just
a~ s~'~cn as they a~ annexed, they can get water, sewers and everything else, a _big
part of the people have been mlsinfo~ed. I don"t thinR that the city can come out
the~ and put in the utilities they think they can. Lot of people dontt know a thing
about it. Seems funny to~ that they didnot take in F~eway Park. After they get a
strip down there~ they will save F~eway Park~ and then be big enough to control
er;~.,ug~ woad. es to put a big annexation over.
~,~:. RANiSTON~ Asked how this was. considered inhabited territory and how are the
parc~!s made up.
~AYOP, PEARgON: E×plained the procedure o{ annexation~ from receipt of original
request, ?ublic hearings etc.
?~i. PARSO?~S: Mr. Nichol~ is all signed up for a nice figure to'sell his property
t<:~ a ~;ite firm. The only reason they want in is because they think they can sell
ti~eir property for more money.
~:. PCHLSTON: How is it beneficial for the City of Anaheim to have that property
out there?
~.0~ PE.%RSON: Explained, when there is new development, we are asked to annex
property because people ~ant services of oae kind or another, and when they come in
the city, they are entitled to services. In areas out there~ there is already
d.~veicpment in a substandard manner, water, streets, any number of Services that they
~'~igh% have, but if ~e go in there and have to buy: the services, then take services
that ~re substandard and pay for them~ or take them out and have to rebuild them,
this is expensive. It could.be an area serviced by a four inch pipe line, with no
pressure, particularly where it should be six or eight inch line~one fire hydrant.
~here 'there should be two. This is very expensiVe. Insurance-wise, we have to
have services up to prop~r standards. As far as water is concerned, that is only one
of the things. If we can develop~ an area originally, it costs us a lot less money
and ~:rotects the people from the standpoint of zoning. A chicken ranch where the
a~a builds up around him., the value of the property will increase, but the fact that
i~e has a chicken ranch, he feels that the pr6~sure will be on him to move. If in
t]~e area near it~ or around it, the zone was M-i~ then as long as he operated the
City Hall, .Anaheim.,. C.a_!.ifornia,~ Sep%.embe. r 2.8,. 1953.- 83.O0_P.A4. ~
the chicken ranch in a proper manner, he would be O.K. People base their ideas
or, what they thiDJ~ would be best for them, and we have to figure the majority. We
have to decide who is in the majority~ and what is the best for the most people.
~.. POHLS/ON: Supposing that you do annex there~ when would they get wafer and~
sewers, and would the individual places there now be able to hook in the Sewer Line?
I~ the same ih%nc going to happen in this annexation, promises af water and sewers
at ~n early date?
~.~,n PEARSON; ~{e don't promise anything, if %hey want these things they ask for
!hem.. See what has been done before in these places. As far as the sewer is
concerned, it would probably be better %0 work from Magnolia east, than from East
to /.;est.
.~LiDIENCE: How about the Euclid line?
ANS~;~ER; The flow of the land is west.
CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER: Checked the description and stated that the calls
co from one point to another, which are definitely described. ~:Positive there is
no ambiguity intended as the call is quite clear in describing the point. /he
only way ~o correct any portion of the description is to start the entire pro-
ceedings over. Since the call is clear as to its in%en~ion~ ii would seem be(%er
~o !et it sia¥ a~ it is.
MR. !.VALKER: I haven~t made an effort to look up the law. If it is conceded that
there is a one hundred foot error there, then I disagree that the intention is
clear, I think that the intention is not clear, and rather doubt if you could.
I don~t know how a court would look on the intention. 651.85 feet is a precise
footage, as though it had been stepped off and figured to the last foot. I
maintain that if a call is stated, we are guided by the precise footage. This
cuts across four parcels facing Mangolia and bisects a lot that fronts on
Lincoln, bisects five parcels of property, takes about 1/3 off the rear of the
lots. i~e have a feeling of ambiguity in the description. The law calls for
specific description, it would be wise and fairer ~o the people involved-to
redesign the property and republish it.
I~. POHLSTON: I know the people that the one hundred foot takes i~ are very much
against go%n9 into the city. They,would like to have gotten the people in that
arc, facing M@ngo!ia. If they knew part of their land was going in now~ they
would be up he re.
~he description could be more accurately described than it is, on
the other hand, I would believe ~ha% i~ could not be said tha~ the description is
inaccurate or indefinite. It is co~on practice %o use the %e~ "more or less".
!f you have a description fhaf 9ocs from a definite point, more or less, the
thing 'thai controls the distance of the po%n% at which it goes~ and the reason
they use %he te~n mcr or less is ~o reduce ~he uncertain~y fha% 'would arise if
you happen t.o use the 'wrong amount of footage. 100 feet, seems to me you could
net~ closer. This error was in the petition which has been referred fo %he :
~oundary commission, and i% is required to be referred to them for checking.
lit: doesn'! seem %o be of sufficient importance to jusfify the holding up and
~t~,r~in9 again of the proceedings. I fee] sure any Title Company would pass
th ~:~ t ca ! I~
The City Clerk presented to the City Council the protests filed in his
o£~ice. On¢~ of the protests was read in full. There were 26 protests filed
're:;>resentinq Assessor Parcels Numbers. The City Clerk read the names of the
protes%ants~ which were as follows:
1. Rose Carroll, 2. Anthony J. Graves~ 3. Joseph M. Carroll~ 4.
Jo~eph M. Kelly, 5. Timothy E. Daly, 6. August %*;i~zenburg, 7. Ray Landon~
S. Calvin S Gregg, 9. Malcolm C. Gregg~ 10. Glen R. Parsons~ ll.H.L. Dukelow~
i2. Frank J. Byington et al, 13. J. Arthur Barrett, 14. 3. Arthur Bar,eft,
15. ?¢i!!iam F. Schumacher, !6. ?{ill%am F. $chumacher, 17. Frank J. By%nc%on et al,
. 20 20, Danny L. Rowland, 21~
Shoza ~{atsushita et al, 19 Amelia Lenz, .
[~ouis O. Pa!m, 22, Arthur Hartelt, 23, Arthur Hat%el%, 2a, Arthur Hat%eli,
YS, William R. Jaberg, and 26, Harold D. Gregg, which protest was withdrawn
by request before the filing of the same, leaving 25 parcels in protest to the
proposed inclusion in the Gilbert Street Annexation.
' ~ ;"8, 195 -
C~tv Hall, Anaheim,. California, Septemb,~r z~ 3 8:00 P.M.
Tine Cit,/ Clerk checked 66 parcels o£ prepert, y contained within the proposed
Street Annexation. . PetitS on w~s ~iened~. by more than one-fourth of the
voters ~ n ~,~e area
Mayor Pearson declared the .Hearing closed and stated action will be decided
early date and the City Clerk will notify Mr. Walker when the action mi].l be
RESOLUTION NO, 2251: Councilman Van Wagoner offered Resolution No. 2251 and moved for
its passage and adoption.
Refer tn Re~oiution Book, page
~'~ 2n'?''~:~?.~xr'~? OF Tu= "'ITY oO"NC. II OF YME CITY OF ~NAUrIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT
;:V~TAI'w ~S=c r'~P~RATiONS AbJD TYPES 0~ BUSINESS ARE WITHI~ THE PREMISSIBLE USES fiND
~x~,_="'~ ..,"i~'I:~. N THE TYPES Or' Bt~SINESS. AND ~'.~LASSI~IO~TION. ~.. OF t,H= = ,M-l, LIGHT MARRJFAC~RIMG
" D, rI,~.D AND q~'T FORT~4 [~,T ARTICLE IX, CHAPTER 2, SECTION 9200.11
....... ~,~ ,, ,,!CIPAL
On roil call the foregoinq resolution was duly passed and adopted by the
fo!. l owi r~ vote.
....... : ~earson, Wisser and Van Wagoner·
COUNCILMAN: None.
COU~ILMAN: Heyin9 and Boney.
~Ve Mayor declared +he rore.o'ino resolution duly passed and adopted
.iVPEAL FROtA_ACTICN ~ VARIANCE NO. lgq by the City Planning Commission was
~ub~'!t.:+~ and read
"k ng ~ he
Councilman Van Wagoner moved that ru,.~lic Heari ,,e ld upon the matter
1953 ~t 8'00 P ?d Councilman Wisser ~econded the motion MOTION CARRIED.
.Z~C';'iL.;">.i i: j.O.S-_Maintenance Report for the month of August was submitted, read and
ordere~! received and filed on motion by Councilman '4t seer, seconded by Councilman
~Ot . ED.
Ver'~ :4ac<;,aer ..... iON CARRi
?Z:LiCY ~JF iNSURARCE submit,ed by ~,~e Anaheim Union H~gh School for the use of
La ~:'alma Park for regularly schedu]ed football games from September 9, 1953 to
r ' m~ read and ordered received and filed when approved
t<ovemoe 2~, !.953 was sab , ~ed,
ky '~.?:e l t.y /~iLorney on mot~or'~ by e,-'~nc~.~m~n '/Jisser, seconded by Councilman Van
,'-,~a::~:,n=r 4.,: I~N CARRI=*'
i::/.Ut~,~R"3 BOND; Georqe Van Diest and Son, was submitted, read and ordered received
and filed on motion by Councilman Van Wagoner, seconded by Councilman Wisser.
CARRI~m
ORDi'."A:'-r'.: b.!O, 863: Councilman Van ?;aaoner offered 0 ,q:
.......... r,~,_nance No. 863 for final
read~nq, and moved for its passage and adoption.
Refer' to Ordinance Book, paqe
OF TiF*, .',~: CITY <":~-...~ ..:,,NAHE'~,,,;r"' AME~,~DINZ'" ARTICLE IX~ CHAPTER 2 OF THE ANAHEIM
....... " ~,' T~:~ CITY OF ANAHEIM AND
RELATING
~TTMm HEIGHT OF ;XUTLDit'~me ~Tn YARD SPACES: ADOPTTNG
...... ,~,~ THE ~SE
THE BOUNDAR'-S OF CAiD 7n~c: DEFINING mu~ T~RMS USED THEREIN: PRO-
,.,,-~NT: FRESCRI NG PENALTIES FOR VIO-
n~otc (!F SECTIONS T~,
~EA ~ ............. :7 ...... CONFLICT THEREWITH
F.~ ....
roll call t:he fn:recoi.",c~ _. ..:~ f':'rr4inar':ce..,, was duly passed and adopted by the
AYES: o',.-b?C~ ,.?,,::..,-:Pearson, ?~i seer and Van Wagoner.
;',JOES: COUN~ i L~,~EN: ~..b n e.
z~.ezwm COUNEIt ,~c~, ~:~x,; and R. onev
::,,~ r.:avor declared 'the fo~'eaoina r';-,-,~i~r'~ance duly passed and adopted
Councilman .... ';'iisser o'ffered ~esoluti. on No 2252 and moved for
.
Refer io Resolution Book, pa?e
<;l-;v i.-iail~ AnaheLm~ Cali£orn],a, September 28, 1953- 8:00
~, -,~-,., -~':--? ...., ..... --r,-.,~ 'r~:: ":~TT~:.,, 'iS , .... ~.~z.~''~ t,~ ~:/~"~ ANNEXATION: DESCRIBING
'-,,~v ~:~P :~;"." FLACS "~UEP: AND ::'I~--~E~-.~ ,.,, PERSO,.'-~
,,z PROPERTY WTTHIN SUCH
........ ::r>PrTORY ~:~:.: PRCPOSED TO 7--.:: ANNEXED ,,,~'~Pv, ........... AF'PSAR ~ORE THE nTTY CO!I~TL AND SHOW
AN.~,Xr:D .... TTY n~ ~N~HET~:i; AND
/.i[ ?:E '2W St.;':~ TERRITORY ~':qOI~LD NOT
'-~,' .... -,,:'~-~,~ ~"~',~,~C:.~,~ ,'~-. 09~.o ( ' ' Cc .u oq 1.953 2:00 P ~,~ )
. '-: rol! ::.al! 'thc forego]n,.} resolution ,,'.'as dt.:.!v passed and adopted by the
r'ot~,h~z., ..... .,. ~T ......... .,,,~=w: Pearson, ':::isser and Van .Tagoner.
COUNCILMEN: None.
CO!J~ l~ ~.~
~ ........ : Hevina and Boney
~k:~ :~a, or a~clared +he foregoino ResoLution duly passed and adopted
-: ....... ~::, .... ~'as moved :'::y bouncing, ar.; Va~ ago,,er, seconded by Councilman Wisser
::'- ,~ ~ : +~o:'~ "Audito" ~' 30 to Schedule No
.... ~:.'~ ~ .... of r be canoed from ~chedu].~
:,f-roctive <:~:?~,"~.~e~ !6 lq52 and ~,;rther ~. -~ q ]ut~ No. 2242 be changed
~ar'.ordi nql y, ........ ~
Van ':,'agoner moved to adjourn to October 6, 1.953, 10:00 o'clock
sser seconded the mot] on. ?,.~OTION C.~RR!ED.
699