HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-03-1972MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
CITY OF SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA
April 3, 1972
The meeting was called to order at 2:00 lmoM. in the Council Chambers of the
City Hall Annex, 530 North Ross Street, with the following Councilmen present:
Vernon S. Evans, V~rade Herrin, Jo Ogden Markel, Jerry M. Patterson, Ray
Villa, Harry K° Yamamoto, and Mayor Lorin Griset. Also present were City
Manager Carl J. Thornton, City Attorney Jamee Ao Withers, Director of
Planning Herbert V~ieland, Director of Public ~rork:s Ronald V~olford, and Clerk
of the Council Florence I. NIaloneo
MINUTES
of March 20, 1972, were approved,
On motion of Councilman Villa, seconded
by Councilman Yamamoto, and unanimously
carried, the Minutes of the Regular Meeting
subject to the following correction:
Councilman Markel requested that his statement, as follows,
be added under the public hearing on Appeal #295, VA 72-15,
Charles B. Linger: "I consider that this request was one of
the most flagrant to come before Council; that street widening
is one of Santa Ana's most serious needs, and I disapprove of
this request because it is throwing a wrench into it."
CONSENT CALENDAR The following Agenda items were.
removed from the Consent Calendar:
Items 3-A andll~-A, requested by
Councilman Evans; Item 6, requested by Councilman H~errin; Items 5-A, 5-D,
and 5-F, requested by Councilman Yamamoto; Items 7-C, 10-C, and il-B,
requested by Councilman Markel°
On motion of Councilman Herrin, seconded by Councilman Patterson, and
unanimously carried, Council affirmed the recommended action on the following
Consent Calendar items: -.
BID CALLS
Approved plans and specifications and
authorized advertisement for bids o~
the following:
SPEC. 723-105 - Gasoline - annual requirement;
opening date May 19, 1972.
SPEC. 723-106 - Diesel fuel and lubricants - annual
requirement; opening date May 19, 1972.
SPEC. 723-120A and 723-120B - Gate valves and
Tapping gate valves - annual requirement; opening
date May 4, 1972.
SPEC. 723-121 - Butterfly valves - annual requirement;
opening date May 4, 1972o
SPEC. 723-122 - Tapping sleeves - annual requirement
opening date May 4, 1972.
CITY COUNCIL -127- April 3, 1972
CONSENT CALENDAR - (Continued)
SPEC. 723-135A and 723-138B - Fire hydrants (standard
and commercial) - annuar requirement; opening date
May 4, 1972.
SPEC. 723-136 - Cold water meters (positive); annual
requirement; opening date May 4, 1972.
SPEC. 723-137 - Cold water metere~ (fire service);
-~aaxnual requirement; opening date May 4~ 1972.
SPEC. 723-138 - Cold water meters (compound);
annual requirement; opening date Niay 4, 1972..
SPEC. 72-001 - 59,370 square feet of SantaAna
Hybrid Bermuda Sod; opening date April 21, 1972.
SPEC. 72-002 - Conversion of radio system; opening
date May 19, 1972. (Refer to Agenda Item #6)
PROJECT 6054 - Construct asphaltic concrete paving
in Centennial Park maintenance area; opening date
May 8, 1972.
BID AWARDS
Awar~d-contracts as follows:
SPEC. 641-275 - 96 feet 14" steel pipe, cement lined
and coated; including fittings; awarded contract to
March Pipe) Whittier, on basis of low bid; and rejected
all other bids.
PROJECT 3024 - Construct sanitary sewer in McFadden
Avenue from Euclid Street to Corta Drive and in Santiago
Street from Virginia Avenue to 100' north; awarded contract
to Louis Ao Bennett, Imperial Beach, on basis of low bid;
and rejected all other bids°
PROJECT 7016 - Construction of ~ell Pump House for
Well 18 at Bristol Street Station, 2401 N. Bristol Street;
awarded contract to Siino Construction Company, on basis
of low bid; and rejected all other bids.
PROJECT 7024 - Install cathodic protection system for the
east reservoir; awarded contract to Wallace & Tiernan,
Belleville, New Jersey, on basis of low bidder complying
with specifications as recommended in Public Works memo
dated March 28~ 1972; and rejected all other bids.
AGREEMENTS Approved thespians and special
provisions for the improvement of
portions of the Santa Aha Delhi
(F01) and the Santa Aha Gardens Channel (F02) as requested by
the Orange County Flood Control District letter dated March
22, 1972.
TRAFFIC
27, 1972, inclusive.
Received and ordered filed report
of control devices removed or
installed March 13 through March
CITY COUNCIL -128- April 3, 1972
CONSENT CALENDAR ' (Continued)
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE Receive~ and ordered filed the follow-
LICENSE APPLICATIONS ing Alcoholic Beverage License
applications:
.'CAMP.) DORA NMI, 323 S. Bristol, (~ff Sale General,
Person to Person Transfer.
LUCKY STORES, INC. #603, 3329 S. Bristol, Off Sale
General, Person to Person Transfer.
TIC TOC 1VIARKETS, INC., 821 N. Euclid, Off Sale Beer,
& Wine, Original.
VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL Received and ordered filed the
USE PERMITS following applications:
EX 72-3, CHRISTOPHER LUND - To enclose a breezeway
between an existing house and garage, thereby reducing the
rear yard to eight feet, in the R 1 District at 1703 West
Park Lane; APPROVED. ·
VA 72-17, ORANGE COUNTY EMt~LOYEES ASSOCIATION -
To a~riend VA 71-31 to allow cons/ruction of a 4-story concrete
parking structure in the CD and P Districta in addition to the
eight story office building previously approved at 555 Civic
Center Drive West; APPROVED.
CUP 72-5, E. REESE ALLISON - To serve beer and wine
in a bona-fide restaurant (Marie Callender) within 300' of
residential property in the C 1 District at~j8gl N. Grand;
APPROVED.
PUBLIC
PROPERTY USE
Approved the following Application
for Special License to Use Public
Property:
SANTA ANA FIRE DEPARTMENT - Fire Prevention
CarniVal, at E1 Salvador Park, Civic Center Drive West
& Raitt; April 22, 1972, from 10:00A~t%4. to 3:00 P.M.
DEEDS, NO CASH Received and ordered filed report
GRANTEE, CITY of No-Cash Deeds accepted by the
-' City Manager, pursuant to Resolution
#69-156, from March 16 through March ~8, 1972, inclusive.
DEEDS, NO CASH Approved the following deeds and
GRANTOR, CITY authorized their execution by the
Mayor and Clerk:
PACIFIC TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CO., ~eaSt of
Mabury, south of Fruit, Pacific Telephone easement.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, southwest corner of First
Street and Santa Aha Freeway, vehicular access rights
and pedestrian access rights.
CITY COUNCIL
-129-
April 3, 1972
CONSENT CALENDAR - (Continued)
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
Approved the following map, subject to
conditions contained in Planning Director's
report, and waived the alley requirement:
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #739 - Filed by Rosenson
Properties creating two (Z) C 5 parcels for commercial
uses, located generally on the northeast .corner of Santa
Clara Avenue and Tustin Avenue.
FINAL TRACT MAP Approved the final map, accepted the
dedications thereon, and the bonds, and
authorized execution of the subdivision
agreement, on the following:
MAP #7586 - North of Alton Avenue and west of Main Street,
three (3) lots. -
COMPLETION OF
nV[PROVEMENTS
Authorized release of performance,
monument, labor and materials bonds
on the following:
TRACT #7000 - MacArthur Boulevard and Towner Street.
* * * * * * * * * * * * CONSENT CALEND,a=R FINIS * * * * * * * * * * * *
LAND AGREEMENT Councilman Herrin's motion, seconded
by Councilman Patterson, to approve and
authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute
the Land Agreement between Howard B. and Jane B. Lawson and the City of Santa
Ana for dedications and improvements in connection with development of real
property, referred to as Subject Site AA 698, carried~on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Herrin, Patterson, Villa, Griset, Markel
Evans, Yamamo to
None
(A-72-14)
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE Mr. Jack E. Hagen, applicant for an
LICENSE APPLICATIONS alcoholic beverage license at 2509 South
Main Street, stated that the application
filed previously was withdrawn when they were notified that the City would protest
it; that the establishment they wish to open will have no topless/bottomless entertain-
ment; that their landlord informed them the Police Department would withdraw their
protest if there was no further connection wi~h previous operators of the bar; that a
lease has been drawn up which prohibits topless/bottomless entertainment, after hours
operation, etc; that everything in the building will be brought up to Code; that only the
original portion of the building would be used for the beer bar, and there would be a
stipulation in the lease that the other half would not be used for an adult theater; that
the City Attorney had advised them there would be no need for a Conditional Use Permit;
that they are asking for a beer bar where sandwiches will be served at noon.
CITY COUNCIL
-130~ April 3, 1972
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE
LICENSE APPLICATIO~xIS~ (C~ontinued)
Sgt. Mike Mitchell of the Santa Aha Police Department stated that there had been
some discussion between the Police Department amd-the Hagens concerning the
lease; that one of the terms would be an arrangement for the City to have some
method of terminating the agreement; that the Hagen$ had been advised that if the
lease were not finalized at ~he time of the Council meeting, the Police Department
protest would not be withdrawn; and that they have no firm commitment that would
allow the beer bar to be opened without a protest.
The City Attorney stated that, in view of the proposed revision to the Alcoholic
Beverage ordinance, he had suggested i% was possible that there would be no need
'for a Conditional Use Permit when all details are finalized.
Councilman Yamamoto stated he would not be in favor of a change in the ordinance,
asking how it would be possible to separate a bona fide restaurant 'from a beer bar
that serves sandwiches. Councilman Villa stated that, even if the Police protest
were lifted, three other agencies have recommended protest, and that he would
like to have these matters clarified. - -
In response to Councilman Herrim's question, Mr. Hagen stated that he has had
beer bars in Los Angeles County, but never in this area, and that he does not
know the former operators of the business. Councilman Herrin stated that if
Mr. Hagen could comply with a lease arrangement which would give the City full
control of the operation, he would be in favor of glving the application more
cons ide ration.
Councilman Evans stated that no matter what action is taken at this time, Mr.
Hagen will have to make application for a Conditional Use Permit and will not
be able to open his business until he has corrected all the deficiencies.
Councilman Markel :stated that he would not want the Council to do anything that
would offset the good that has been accomplished in the past two years in getting
an ordinance w/~efeby the City can control the sale of alcoholic beverages, but
that if this gentleman is required to file a Conditional Use Permit it will cost him
from$300 to $500.
Councilman Herrin moved to receive and file the following ABC applications:
MORENO, /v~ARY L. , ZlZ E. 4th Street, On Sale Beer, Person to
Person Transfer.
DONALDSON, ARCHIE D., 220 W. Warner, On Sale Beer, Person
to Person Transfer;
and to instruct the City Attorney to file a protest with the Alcoholic Beverage
Control Board on the following application:
HAGEN, JACK & BARBARA, 2509 S. Main, On Sale Beer, Original
(Protests: Police Department; Planning Department - within 300' of
residential area; Fire Department; Building Department).
CITY COUNCIL
-131- April 3, 197Z
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE
LICENSE APPLICATIONS - (Continued)
Motion was seconded by Councilman Villa, and carried on the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Herrin, Villa, Evans, Griset, Patterson, Markel
Yamamoto
None
BUDGET TRANSFER Councilman Herrin objected to ~:onsoli-
datlon of funds for the purchase of radio
equipment and installation thereof in the
Emergency Operation Center with 50% reimbursement by Federal government upon
completion. He stated he b41ieves the cost of the radio facility should be a local
responsibility and that he could not support it as a Federal fund project.
Councilman Evans' motion, seconded by Councilman Villa, to approve the
appropriation adjustment request as recommen~tedby staff, carried on a 6-1 vote,
Councilman Herrin dissenting°
CUP 72-3 The City Manager suggested that it might
STANDARD OIL COMPANY be advisable to set this matter for public
OF CALIFORNIA hearing because of noxious oddrs that
might be generated in the Logan area.
Councilman Markel concurred, stating that he would be for denim of the Conditional
Use Permit, or to have a public hearing. Councilman Markel's motion, seconded
by Councilrnan Herrin, to set for public hearing on April 17, 1972, Conditional Use
Permit #72-3 filed by Standard Oil Company of California to allow the manufacture,
distribution and sale of agriculture chemicals in the M 2 District at 1016 Santiago
Avenue, carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Markel, Herrin, Villa, Yamamoto, Patterson
Evans, Gris-et
None
Prior to voting, Councilman Evans stated he was opposed to the motion since the I
Planning Commission had approved the CUP, and the Fire Department was satisfied
that the hazards are not of a type they cannot handle°
The Director of Planning stated that the manufacturer would have to meet all standards
of the Uniform Fire Code which the City has adopted; that the question raised by Staff
is that this site is located in the Logan area on which the Council has requested a studyi
that it is difficult to control the odors where agricultural chemicals are manufactured;
that it was Staff's opinion that the conflict of uses--heavy industrial and residential--in
the Logan area should not be aggravated; that the basic problem is the conflict of
land uses°
After further discussion, Councilman Evans stated he would not oppose the motion,
but requested more information on the type of chemicals to be manufactured.
The Director of Planning stated that a letter attached to the application states that
the bulk of sales would be in chemical fertilizers, both liquid and dry, bagged material
ammonium phosphate, and distribution of insecticides, herbicides, and other
related material°
CITY COUNCIL
~-132- April 3, 1972
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #731 Councilman Patterson stated that he had
received a telephone call from the developer
which indicated he had just learned on
Friday, 1Viarch 31, that this parcel map would be recommended for d~nial; that the
developer has five days to appeal, and if action is taken now, Council would be
taking away that right of appeal.
On motion of Coua¢ilman Patterson, seconded by Councilman Villa, and carried on
a 6-1 vote, Councilman Yamamoto dissenting, Council continued to the April 17th
meeting the following:
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #731 - Filed by Monterey Park Land
Corporation creating four (4) M 1 parcels on which use has not been
determined, located generally(kn t-he southeast corner of Segerstrom
Avenue and Raitt Street; waiver of alley requirement.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #740 On motion of-Councilman Herrin, seconded
by Councilman Evans, and unanimously
carried, Council approved the following
map, subject to conditions contained in Planning Director's report, and waived
the alley requirement:
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #740 - Filed by Cuyamaca Land Company
creating one CZ and one CZ and M 1 parcels to be used for commercial
or industrial purpose~ located generally ~)n the ~vest side of Harbor
Boulevard, 330 feet south of First Street.
FINAL TRACT MAP On motion of Councilman Villa, seconded
by Councilman Herrin, and unanimously
carried, Council approved the final map,
accepted the dedications thereon, and the bonds, and authorized execution of the
subdivision agreement, on the following:
MAP #7646 - South of Segerstrom Avenue and west of Raitt Street,
forty-eight (48) lots.
RECESS
At 3:05 P.M., a recess was declared.
The meeting reconvened at 3:10 P.M.
with all Councilmen present.
READING WAIVED
reading of ordinances and resolutions,
Agenda, was waived.
On motion of Councilman Herrin,
seconded by Councilman Yamamoto,
and unanimously carried, the full
the titles of which appeared on the public
ORD. NS-1112 ORDINANCE NS-1112, ADDITION OF
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT CLASSIFICATION BY AMENDMENT TO
CHAPTER 41 OF THE SANTA ANA
MUNICIPAL CODE was adopted, on motion of Councilman Herrin, seconded by
Councilman Evans, and carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NO ES:
ABSENT:
Herrin; Evans, Villa, Griset,
Markel
None
Yamamoto, Patterson
CITY COUNCIL -133- April 3, 197Z
ORD. NS-1112
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - (Continued)
Prior to the motion, Mro Mickey Conroy, 2520 Linwood Avenue, was allowed to
address the Council, on motion of Councilman Herrin, seconded by Councilman
Yamamoto, and unanimously carried.
Mr. Conroy asked if the PRD zoning is retroactive° The City Manager replied
that this is a suffix procedure, and application for this suffix may be made at any
time.
In response to further questions from Mr° Conroy, Councilman Patterson explained
that the PRD suffix may be applied for by variance application, conditional use
permit, or by initiation of City Council; that the variance will determine the type
of development of the land. The City Attorney further explained that a developer
would have to make application for PRD to the Planning Department, obtain Planning
Commission approval, and then ratification by the City Council.
ORD. NS-1113 ORDINANCE NS-1113, AMENDMENT TO
PRD - STREET STANDARDS CHAPTER 34 OF THE SANTA ANA
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO STREET
STANDARDS was adopted, on motion of Councilman Herrin, seconded by Councilman
Patterson, and carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES: Markel
ABSENT: None~
Herrin, Patterson, Villa, Evans, Griset, Yamamoto
ORD. NS-1114
REGULATION OF THEATERS
ORDINANCE NS-1114, ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF SANTA ANA AMENDING
SECTION 12-118 OF THE SANTA ANA
MUNICIPAL CODE was passed to second reading on motion of Councilman Herrin,
seconded by Councilman Evans, and carried on the f~llowing roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Herrin, Evans, Villa, Griset, Yamamoto, Patterson
Markel
None
ORD. NS-1115
A.A. #698
HOWARD B. LAWSON
ORDINANCE NS-1115, ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA ON AMENDMENT
APPLICATION #698 PILED BY HOWARD
B. LAWSON TO REZONE FROM R 1 TO R 4 was passed to second reading on
motion of Councilmai'/ Herrin, seconded by Councilman Villa, and carried on a
5-2 vote, Councilmen Yamamoto and Evans voting NO.
RES. 72-35
APPEAL #297
STANDARD OIL COMPANY
Councilman Herrin's motion, seconded
by Councilman Evans, to adopt RESOLUTION
72-35 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SANTA ~kNA GRANTING A PORTION OF
APPEAL #297 AND APPROVING VARIANCE APPLICATION 72-1 PILED BY HOLM,
TAIT & ASSOCIATES FOR STANDARD OIL COMPANY failed to carry on the following
roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Herrin, Evans, Griset
Villa, Yamamoto, Patterson, Markel
None
CITY COUNCIL
-134- April 3, 1972
APPEAL #295 The City Attorney stated that during the
VA 72-15 hearing on this appeal he had improperly
CHARLES B. LINGER advised the Council that they did not have
the power to grant this variance; that it
is within Council discretion to grant the variance; and if any Councilman would
have voted otherwise~ he would suggest reconsideration of the matter°
Councilman Patterson's motion, seconded by Councilman Yamamoto, to reconsider
Appeal #2.95, filed by Charles B° Linger, carried on a 6-1 vote, Councilman
Markel dissenting.
The Mayor stated that the applicant does not desire to go ahead with the expansion
of the second level, but to fill in the area in the existing building which constitutes
an open patio, and would not decrease existing parking° Councilman Evans also
stated that the applicant had shown him new plans0 After further discussion, it was
the consensus that the applicant and the opponents should both be heard under the
changed conditions.
Councilman Yamamoto's motion to set the matter for a new hearing was seconded
by Councilman Evans. Councilman Villa challenged the motion as being out of
order, stating that the public hearing had been closed and the reconsideration of
thk matter was for the purpose of taking a new vote° The City Attorney stated that
in reconsideration, a motion to reopen the hearing is proper.
There was further discussion concerning the propriety of allowing variance
applications to be heard by the Planning Commission, then allowing the applicant
to file an appeal, presenting new information, which the Council considers in
making their determination to uphold the Planning Commission decision or to grant
the appeal° Councilman Patterson stated that Council relies on the Planning
Commission for advice; that in most cases Council can confirm their decision or
deny it, or modify it; that many times information is presented to the Council that
did not come before the Commission; and that he would like to have a Staff report
on the matter.
A substitute motion by Councilman Markel, seconded by Councilman Herrin, to
reopen the public hearing on April 17, 197Z, on Appeal #295 filed by Charles B.
Linger appealing the Planning Commission's denial of Variance Application 72-15
to allow expansion of a non-conforming commercial use with less than required
parking in the C 1 HD II District at 326, 328, 330 W. 17th Street, carried on the
following roll c~ll vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Markel, Herrin~ Villa, Evans, Griset, Yamamoto, Patterson
None
None
RECESS
At 4:05 PoM., a recess was declared.
The meeting reconvened at 4:10 P.M.
with all Councilmen present.
Councilman Villa's motion, seconded by Councilman t~atterson, to reconsider
agenda item #36, carried on a 6-1 vote, Councilmen Markel voting NO.
CITY COUNCIL
-135- April 3, 1972
RESOLUTION 72-35 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA
GRANTING A PORTION OF APPEAL #297 AND APPROVING VARIANCE
APPLICATION 72-1 FILED BY HOLM, TAIT & ASSOCIATES FOR STANDARD
OIL COMPANY was adopted on motion of Councilman Villa, seconded by
Councilman Evans, and carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Villa, Evans, Herrin, Griset
NOES: Yamamoto, l~atterson, MarkeI'
ABSENT: None
SPEED LIMITS On motion of Councilman Herrin,
seconded by Councilman Patterson,
and unanimously carried, Council
approved the proposed speed limits, and instructed the City Attorney to prepare
an ordinance for all porti6ns of Sunflower Avenue from Harbor Boulevard to
Bristol Street, reflecting the speed limits as set forth in Director of Public
Works' report March 29, 1972.
UNDERGROUNDIN~ EXISTING RESOLUTION 72-36, A RESOLUTION
UTILITY LINES OF TF~E CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SANTA ANA URGING THE LEAGUE
OF CALIFORNIA CITIES AND THE COUNTY SUPERVISORS' ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA TO MODIFY THE~RU~ES ESTABLISHED BY PUBLIC UTILITIES
COMMISSION CASE NO. 8209 FOR UNDERGROUNDING EXISTING UTILITY
LINES was adopted, on motion of Councilman Patterson, seconded by Councilman
Yamamoto, and unanimously carried°
1, 1972.
PROPOSED OFFICIAL
CITY EMBLEM
PROPOSED UNDERGROUND On motion of Councilman Herrin, seconded
UTILITY DISTRICT NO. THREE by Councilman Evans, and unanimously
carried, report recommending formation
of Underground Utility District No. Three in the area bordering Main Street from
the Santa Aha Freeway to the north city limits was set for public hearing on May
Councilman Markel stated that in designing
an emblem for the City, there was an
opport~nity for a lot of publicity by having
a contest and awarding a ~ memento for the best design. The Mayor stated that the
City has used this method for a number of things, but that this plaque was designed
by professional architects.
Councilman Patterson state~i he likes the design and would be in favor of some
kind of standardization in using this on autos and equipment.
On motion of Councilman Herrin, seconded by Councilman Yamamoto, and
carried on a 6-1 vote, Councilman Markel dissenting. Council instructed the
City Attorney to prepare a resolution adopting the proposed design as the official
emblem of the City.
CITY COUNCIL
-136- April 3, 1972
SB 325 FUNDS
their letter dated March 21, 1972,
Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plano
Councilman Patterson stated that he
would like to hear discussion from the
Orange County Planning Department on
requesting support for the Santa Aha River/
Councilman Patterson's motion, seconded by Councilman Evans, to request a
representative of the Orange County Planning Department to be present at the
next Council meeting to discuss their proposal for using SB 325 funds for the
Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan, was unanimously carried.
On motion of Councilman Herrin, seconded by Councilman Yamamoto, and
unanimously carried, Council received and ordered filed the following letters:
Letter dated March 21, 1972 from Orange County Planning
Department requesting support for the Santa Aha River/
Santiago Creek Greenbelt Piano
Letter dated March 2~ 1972~ from City of Los Angeles
requesting support for mass rapid transit development.
AB 232 Councilman Patterson stated that the
Meyers~Milias-Brown Act already allows
employees ti/~e off from work for
attendance in the meeting and conferring process, and that the proposed bill gives
them, in addition, time to prepare and reply° I-Je stated that he is opposed to this
amendment°
On motion of Councilman Herrin, seconded by Councilman Patterson, and
unanimously carried~ Council instructed the City Attorney to prepare a resolution,
similar to that of Buena Park~ opposing Assembly Bill 232.
CAPITAL IIViPROVEMENT Councilr~an Patterson requested clarification
PROGRAA/i 1972 - 1977 as to the changes made in the Capital
Improvement Program from the previous
year, and the manner in which the Planning Commission arrived at these proposed
changes.
The City Manager stated that the Planning Commission is dependent upon expertise;
that they issue a request through the Planning Director for in-put from the departments
on what should be included in the long-term Capital Program.
The Planning Director stated that generally speaking, the procedure is to take the
in-put from various departments concerned, put it together in the time frame that
has been suggested, and compare it with the original Capital Improvement Program
outlined in the General Plan. He stated that the Charter calls for a 10-year plan,
but the original program submitted with the General Plan provided detailed proposals
for five years and a lump sum for the balance; that recent proposals have been for
five years; that the Planning Commission does not normally attempt to make
recommendations to Council on financing the improvements.
Councilman Evans' motion to receive and file the Planning Commission report on
the Capital Improvement Program for 1972-1977 was seconded by Councilman
Herrin, and carried unanimously°
CITY COUNCIL -137- April 3, 1972
U-HAUL TRAILERS Mr. Russell Maxwell, 860 S. Placentia
Avenue, Placentia, of the U-Haul Trailer
Company, stated that recently a U-Haul
operation on Edinger near the Preeway was notified that they were illegally
operating trailer rentals in that area; that this is an M 1 zone.
In response to questions from the Mayor, the Planning Director stated that
trailer rentals are allowed in the C 1 or C 2 zone, but the M 1 zone requires a
conditional use permit; the City Manager stated that the M zone is for manufacturing,
with certain auxiliary services allowed. The Mayor stated that if trailers are allowed
in a service station, it should apply equally to a C zone, as well as an M zone.
The Planning Director stated it should be noted that a service station is not a
permitted use in an M 1 zone. The Mayor instructed Mr. Maxwell to £ile a
Conditional Use Permit application and follow the normal procedures.
COUNCIL PROCEDURES Councilman Herrin stated that in the
seven years he has served on the Council,
there has been very good rapport; that
conduct of the meetings has not adhered strictly to Robert's Rules of Order, but
that the Chairman has always been allowed to use good judgment in appropriate
procedures. He requested Council opinion as to whether they wish to abide more
strictly by Robert's Rules of Order, or to continue in the more informal atmosphere
that has prevailed.
The Mayor stated that if there is a better procedure for the Council meeting, he
appreciates direction, however, he believes the Chair~nan should have flexibility
in directing the meeting and that this would not conflict with Robert's Rules of Order.
Councilman Villa stated that recently a committee composed of a Planning
Commissioner, a Councilman, the Planning Director, the City Attorney, and Clerk
of the Council as: an ex-officio member studied the procedures and presented the
rules that the Planning Commission and Council operate under at the present time;
that he believes the Council should follow the approved rules; that this would help
to eliminate the confusion that exists at times; that the Council is a public body,
responsible to the citizens; that the meetings could be expedited if rules are observed.
Councilman Patterson stated he believed there must be a happy medium somewhere;
that Robert's Rules of Order should not be followed simply to be following them; and
that the rules for any meeting are that order is preserved, that it does not bog down,
and that everyone receives fair treatment. He stated he believes what is needed
more than anything else is to show respect for one another so the meeting can run
efficiently. He suggested that each Councilman consider the matter and make
suggestions for smoother, more efficient meetings, and that perhaps a study session
could be held to compare ideas. Councilman Evans concurred, stating that there must
be rules to adhere to, and the matter should be followed up.
The Mayor stated that he likes the outcome of the study committee to improve the
procedures and that he believes Council has adopted most of them; that perhaps they
could be improved or revisions could be made if indicated.
CITY COUNCIL -138- April~3, 1972
COUNCIL PROCEDURES -(Continued)
Councilman Patterson asked that each 'Councilman write down the things he
believes this Council or Chairman could do to improve the efficiency of the
meetings, and submit his suggestions before the next Council meeting, and
perhaps a half hour could be scheduled to discuss them,
Councilman Villa suggested that each Councilman read the Rules of Procedure
and abide by them.
RECESS At 5:00 P~Mo, the meeting was recessed
to 7:30 PolVi,, at which time it was
reconvened with all Council members
present. Following the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, the Invocation was
given by the Reverend II.S. Phillips of the First Assembly of God Church.
SPECIAL ORDER OF THE DAY The Mayor announced that Mr. Jack
McCarley, who has been serving on
the Mayor's Freeway Committee, was
transferred by the Bullock's Corporation from the managership of their local
store in Fashion Square to their central store inLos Angeles. Mr. McCarley
was unable to be present at this meeting, but a Certificate of Appreciation will
be mailed to him.
AMENDMENT APPLICATION #689
MARVIN M. & RUSSELL F. ROHRS
present who would object to that.
The Mayor stated that the applicant has
requested continuance of this item to
May 15, and asked if there were people
Mr0 Mickey Conroy, 2520 Linwood Avenue, stated that the residents in the area
object to further continuance of the prezoning.
Mr. Van Stevens, Pacific Investments, Inc., 1840 E. 17th Street, stated that the
reason for the continuance has been explained to Mr. Conroy; that his company
had promised the Council and the neighborhood that they were proposing a type
of single-family subdivision for which no zoning exists that will allow it; that they
had indicated they would file a variance application so the plans could be approved
by the Planning Commission and the Council; that the plans have been filed with
the City and many people have been there to look at th~m; that if the project is
good, the variance application will be approved. He further stated that the project
contains no three-story buildings for minorities, no rent subsidy for hippies; that
it is a single family subdivision. He suggested ~ha~ the property could be zoned
R 1 and the variance application would still be acted upon at the proper time; that
the reason for the request for continuance is that they have allowed time for one
hearing before the Planning Commission, one possible continuance, and then
hearing before the Council on May 15.
Mr. Conroy stated that he had seen the plans and they were nothing more than
garden apartments; that they are objecting to the continuance of the prezone; that
the property has been annexed to the City as A 1. The Clerk of the Council verified
that the property has been annexed and the papers have been filed with the County
Clerk°
CITY COUNCIL
-139- April 3, 1972
AMENDMENT APPLICATION #689
MARVIN M. gr RUSSELL F; ROHRS - (Continued)
Councilman Patterson stated that he believed the matter should be continued until
after the action on the variance has been taken; that it ~toes not matter whether it
is zoned R 1 or A 1; that the important point is how-it is going to be developed.
Mr. Conroy disagreed, statin:gtHe~ residents had been here in October, November,
and December; that a further continuance was granted in December until after
the Holidays, and they did not want further delay°
Mr. Van Stevens stated that the Variance Application will come before the Planning
Commission on April 10, and it is expected that it will come before the City
Council on May 15.
Mr. Conroy objected further to the continuance of the Amendment Application
hearing. Councilman Patterson suggested that the citizens' attention should be
directed toward the variance application; that the prezoning makes no difference
on the variance application; that the variance will ~tetermine the density and the
type of development.
The City Attorney stated that any evidence on the subject of the variance should
be ruled out of order because it is premature; that the matter before the Council
is the Amendment Application.
In response to a complaint that the citizens of the area have not seen the plans,
the Planning Director stated that the applicant fulfills the requirements of the
Code in supplying the number of copies that the application stipulates; that these
are for internal review; that they may be looked at over the counter, but the
l~lanning Department cannot release their copies.
Mr. MacDonald, 2517 N. Linwood, Mr. Schultz, 1822 E. Camino, and Mrs.
Brobeck, ?-506,N0 Linwood, spoke against continuance of the item. Mr. Schultz
stated that if the matter is continued to May 15, ail citizens interested in the area
will be present, and suggested a larger meeting place.
Councilman l~atterson stated that the important hearing for all these people is
the Planning Commission hearing which will be held in the City Hall Annex on
Monday, April 10, when the Variance Application will be heard; that the variance
will then come to Council for ratification. ~
Mr. Bueche, Pacific Investments, stated that the people have received totally
inaccurate information, and suggested that the property be zoned R 1, without
prejudice, and then let the variance application be heard. He stated he would
provide Mr. Conroy with three copies of the plans; that it is not a garden
apartment; that it is single=family, single-story development, but that is not
the present issue.
Councilman Yamamoto stated that the issue to be considered now is the Amend-
ment Application, and asked if the Council could change the zoning to R 1 rather
than R2 as requested. The City Attorney stated this could be done.
CITY COUNCIL -140- April 3, 1972
A-k4ENDMENT APPLICATION #689
MARVIN M. & RUSSELL Fo ROHRS - (Continued)
In reply to questions from Mr. Val Carter, Z324 No Concord, and Mr. Barber,
1818 Camino, the Mayor stated that the variance is very frequently needed in the
development of a project of this kind; that this is A1 and does not prescribe the
type of development for R 1~ R Z~ or R 4, so that any residential development in
an A 1 zone has ~oberezoned~or avariance has to be'filed.
Councilman Herrin's motion, seconded by Councilman Evans, to continue Agenda
item #70 to May 15, failed to carry on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Herrin, Villa
Evans, Griset~ Yamamoto~ Patterson, 1Viarkel
None
The Mayor opened the public hearing on Amendment Application #689 filed by
Marvin Mo and Russell F. Rohrs to prezone property on the north side of Santa
Clara Avenue between Old Grand Street and Tustin Avenue from 60-A1-7200 (A 1
in unincorporated Orange County) to R Zo
Councilman Patterson stated that rather than open the hearing and talk about R 2,
he would move to approve the Amendment Application, changing the zoning to R 1.
The motion was seconded by Councilman Evans. The Mayor stated he had opened
the public hearing, and the motion was ruled out of order.
RECESS
At 8:30 P.M., a recess was declared. The
meeting reconvened at 8:40 P.M. with all
Councilmen present.
The Mayor stated it was his understanding that the opponents to the Amendment
Application desire an R 1 zone for this area; that representatives of the applicant
have requested that Council proceed with R 1 zoning; and that on that basis, he would
entertain a motion to that effect.
On receiving concurrence from all the parties involved, the Mayor closed the public
hearing.
CO~uncilman Patterson's motion to approve Amendment Application #689, as modified
to R 1 zoning, was seconded by Councilman Herrin, and carried on the following roll
call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Patterson, Herrin, Villa, Evans, Griset,
None ·
None
Yamamoto, Markel
WRIGHT & SANTA CLARA Mr. Zack Anast, 2306 N. Concord stated
INTERSECTION that the intersection of Wright and Santa
Clara'is & very dangerous corner; that
three children have been hit there; that he had c. alled*the Highway Patrol and
Council but nothing has been done. The Director of Public Works requested that
he be given all the information in order that his department might investigate the
complaint.
CITY COUNCIL
-141- April 3, 1972
VARIANCE APPLICATION 71-65 The Mayor opened the public hearing on
ERICKSON PROPERTIES CORP. Variance Application 71-65 filed by
Erickson Properties Corporation to
allow a pole sign 80 feet in height, containing 550 square feet, within 300' of an
existing pole sign on the same property, in the Iv[ 1 District at 2101 E. Edinger
Avenue.
The Planning Director stated that this variance application was before the Planning
Commission, and by split vote, 4-2, with one Commissioner absent, was
recommended to Council for approval; that Staff reoemmended denial because
the proposed sign would be exceeding the standards 4n three ways -- area, height,
and prokimity to an' existing sign. He stated further that a previous request for
a 70' sign was denied in December 1970; that the.~ppt-icant has voluntarily reduced
the size of the restaurant sign to 9 X 27, or a total of 243 square feet; that the sign
is a double-faced sign -- one for the restaurant, and one for the adjacent service
station -- and that nothing was said about the service station sign which is 150
square feet, making the overall sign considerably above the Code limitation; that
the Planning Commission considered the ~ecia~ circumstances of the location which
is well below the grade of the Freeway and a normal sign would not be visible from
the Freeway; that the Staff believes a developer should be cognizant of the sign
requirements before a commitment is made in that regard.
The following persons spoke in favor of the variance:
A.C. Erickson, 1322 E. Edinger, Lorenzo's l{estaurant
Ray Beringer, P.O. Box 31, Long Beach, Standard Oil Company
William Scott, 3025 Lake Street, Los Angeles
Larry Souza, 28771 Ridgewood Drive, Villa Park
Proponents stated that picutres had been taken while driving up and down the
Freeway to determine what height the sign would have to be in order to be seen
from all directions. The pictures were presented to the Council to examine.
Mr. Beringer stated that they found the sign c~ould~be 80' in height and still be
seen. It was stated that a roof sign would not'~be a~quate; that the restaurant
has been in operation but business has not been what lit should be; that the restaurant
cannot be seen from the Freeway; that there is more competition coming into the
area all the time; that people are looking for the res~urant and cannot find it; and
that Standard Oil also taus t have identification. -
There were no opponents in the matter. The Clerk reported no written communi-
cations had been received, and the Mayor closed the public hearing.
Councilm~n Evans stated that he drove to the area and traveled the Freeway in both
directions; that if you don't know just where the restaurant is, you will probably
take the Dyer Road offramp; that it is a dangerous turn-off; that he does not want
to defeat the purpose of the sign ordinance, but this is what the variance procedure
is for~
Councilman Patterson spoke in opposition to the variance, stating that this question
had been before the Council before and was denied; that a sign was denied on the
adjacent property; that Council should adhere to the ordinance; that a roof sign
would give identification from the Freeway.
CITY COUNCIL
-142- April 3, 1972
VARIANCE APPLICATION 71-65
ERICKSON PROPERTIES CORP. - (Continued)
The 1V[ayor stated he was in favor of granting a variance; that identification from
the Freeway is most important; that the size of the ~nvestment in the business
is a very vital thing, not only to the business, but to the City; that after viewing
the pictures presented~ he believed the sign could be less than 80 feet high and
still be adequate,
Councilman Yamamoto stated that the ordinance was passed in order to rid the
City of too many signs; that any sign goes up for economic reasons; that he would
like to go along with the request~ but because of the ordinance could not.
Councilman Markel stated that not more than six months ago the sign ordinance
was discussed~ and Unless Council follows it, it is not worth the paper it is written
on.
Councilman Villa stated that this is a variance application; that this procedure
was set up to make exceptions possible; and that it has been proven to him that
there is a hardship°
Councilman Herrin stated that this type of ordinance destroys the ability of an
enterprise to advertise what they have for sale; that it is important that the
private sectors of the economy have the ability to make a profit, which bears
heavily on their ability to pay taxes by which the Government continues to operate.
The City Manager stated that there is no legal procedure by which a variance
can be granted because of a hardship; that there are specific reasons for granting
of a variance, and they all depend upon equality of treatment.
The City Attorney stated that a variance, when granted, should not be at war
with the underlying concept of the ordinance that has been enacted. The ordinance
says that on-premises advertising within 500 feet of a Freeway shall be less than
Z50' in size and shall be confined to the roof or a free-standing structure not over
35 feet.
Councilman Herrin's motion~ seconded by Councilman Villa, to uphold the decision
of the Planning Commission and instruct the City Attorney to prepare a Resolution
approving Variance Application 71-65 subject to conditions of approval as contained
in the Commission report, carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Herrin, Villa~ Evans, Griset
Yamamoto, Patterson, Markel
None
RECESS
At 9:30 P. Mo, a recess was declared.
The meeting reconvened at 9:40 P.M. with
all Councilmen present°
CITY COUNCIL
-143- April 3, 1972
DRAINAGE ASSESSMENT FEES The Mayor opened the public he aring on
the proposed revision to the Drainage
Assessment Fees Schedule of the Public
Services and Facilities Element of the General l~lan.
There were no proponents or opponents. The Clerk reported no written communi-
cations had been received, and the Mayor closed the public hearing.
ORDINANCE NS-1116 AMENDING SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 34-193
RELATING TO LOCAL DRAINAGE AREA FEE SCHEDULE was passed to second
reading on motion of Councilman Herrin, seconded by Councilman Patterson, and
carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Herrin, Patterson, Villa, Evans, Griset, Yamamoto; Markel
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
APPEAL #298 The Mayor opened the public hearing on
VA 72-16 Appeal #298 filed by Interstate Brands
INTERSTATE BRANDS CORPORATION Corporation appealing the Planning
Commission's denial of VA 72-16 to
construct one rotating pole sign and two roof signs for on-premise advertising
in the C M District at 2430 S. 1V[ain Street.
The Director of Planning stated that the building involved has a very thick roof
which the applicant indicates is a canopy; that there is no definition of canopy
in the Code; that Staff and the Planning Commission have agreed that this 6'
projection is actually a hard top roof; that the applicant has the choice of one pole
sign or one roof sign on the property; that Staff is willing to accept the letters on
the canopy as the roof sign, and the pole sign is well within the limitations of
height and area; but that both signs would be in vidlation of the Code.
Mr. Bob Tichenor, 19021 Chadbourne Lane, Santa Ana, representing the owner,
stated that the building is presently under construction; that this will be a retail
bread store; that there will be a revolving pole sign and canopy lettering; and he
submitted a picture of the building. He further stated that the canopy is part of
the basic building design and is very necessary in preventing the bakery products
from getting too much sun; that it does not protrude over the public area, but
extends 6' out over the building; that the revolving pole sign will be a~proximately
100 square feet, and the lettering on the canopy 140 square feet; that the total
combined area is well within the sign ordinance limits; ~nd they would like to
have the Council's approval.
Mr. Earl Malotte, Architect, 2051 E. Cerritos Avenue, Anaheim, stated that
the lettering on the canopy is an integral part of the building; that be had titled
to design a sign that was unobtrusive; that the ordinance would allow a wall sign,
which they could make twice as big without a variance~ and they felt this should
be taken into consideration in making the judgment.
There were no opponents in this matter. The Clerk reported no written
communications had been received, and the Mayor closed the public hearing.
In response to a question from Councilman Patterson, the Planning Director
stated that the applicant was allowed one sign by the Planning Commission, but
not both.
CITY COUNCIL
-144- April 3, 1972
APPEAL #298 - VA 72-16
INTERSTATE BRANDS CORPORATION - (Continued)
Councilman Markel stated that he would not consider the lettering on the canopy
to be wall signs or roof signs; that they are part of the building; that he visited
the area and believed the signs were attractive and the people need to be
complimented for the fine effect it lends to the area; and that he was in favor
of granting the appeal°
Councilman Yamamoto stated that does not constitute a reason for voting against
the ordinance. The Mayor stated he felt the canopy lettering was preferable to
a much larger wall sign. Councilman Patterson etated he was opposed to any
deviation from the sign ordinance.
Councilman I-Ierrin's motion, seconded by Councilman Villa, to grant the appeal
and instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution approving Variance Applica-
tion 72-16 subject to conditions of approval contained in the Commission report,
carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Herrin, Villa, Evans, Griset, Markel
Yamamoto, Patterson
None
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES Councilman Herrin stated that in
considering the proposed ordinance
amending Municipal Code sections
pertaining to the sale of alcoholic beverages, he interpreted the changes to
indicate that in considering an application for"a tiguor or beer license, if Council
determines it is a bona fide restaurant, the CUP requirements may be waived.
Mayor Griset and Councilman Yamamoto spoke in opposition to the amendment,
stating they believed that "bona fide restaurant" is not an easy term to define;
that the ordinance is satisfactory the way it is presently written. Councilman
Herrin stated that he believed this is a determination the staff could make.
The City Attorney stated that when he presents the ordinance for first reading,
he will incorporate a definition of bona fide restaurant.
Councilman Markel moved to defer action on this matter ~ntil the next meeting.
Councilman Yamamoto seconded the motion.
After further discussion, the second was withdrawn and the motion died for lack
of a second.
Councilman Herrin's motion to approve the proposed ordinance and instruct the
City Attorney to prepare an ordinance amending MuniciPal Code sections pertaining
to the sale of alcoholic beverages, including a definition of a bona fide restaurant,
was seconded by Councilman Villa, and carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Herrin, Villa, Evans, Patterson~
Griset, Yamamoto
None
k4arkel
CITY COUNCIL
-145- April 3, 1972
RES. 72-32 RESOLUTION 72-32 AIViENDING ANNUAL
STENO CLERK I BUDGET 1971-72 IN ACCOUNT NUMBER
11-131- CITY ATTORNEY ADMINISTRATION -
BY ADDING TWO (2) STENO-CLERK I POSITIONS was adopted on motion of Council-
man Herrin, seconded by Councilman Yamamoto, and unanimously carried.
RES. 72-33 RESOLUTION 7Z-33 AMENDING SECTION
TREE TRIMMER HELPER 3 OF RESOLUTION NO. 58-281 TO ADD
CLASS TITLES OF TREE TRIMMER
HELPER was adopted on motion of Councilman {-]errin, seconded by Councilman
Yamamoto, and unanimously carried.
RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT Mrs. Janice Boer, 912 N. lLowell, asked
CITY COUNCILMAN if any action had been taken to remove the
requirement of one year's residence in a
ward in order to file for Councilman. Councilman Patterson stated that the matter
has been referred to the City Attorney and the City l~anager for a report, and
recommendation relative to placement on the November ballot.
COMMENDATION Councilman Patterson stated that the
CITY OF PLACENTIA City of Placentia has been declared an
All-American City and that several cities
have cornxnended Placentla for this award.
Councilman Patterson's motion, seconded by Councilman Yamamoto, to instruct
the City Attorney to prepare a Resolution of commendation to the City of Placentia
congratulating them on becoming an All-American City, was unanimously carried.
ANNUAL REVIEW OF FEES Councilman Patterson stated that he
believed there were areas other than
Drainage Assessment Fees that should
be reviewed annually for the purpose of updating, such as park dedication fees,
streets, sewers, water, etc.
Councilman Patterson's motion, seconded by Councilman Villa, to request a
Staff report with regard to areas where the fee structure can be updated in keeping
with the changing costs, was unanimously carrie~.
REVIEW OF EXPENSES Councilman Herrin stated that, along
the same line, he believed there were
expenses within the City administration
that could be reviewed and, possibly, curtailed. Councilman Herrin's motion,
seconded by Councilman Evans, to have any such item presented to Council for
review, was carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Herrin, Evans, Griset, Yamamoto, Patterson, Markel
NOES: Villa · ~
ABSENT: None
ADJOURNMENT
At 10:35 P.M., the Mayor declared the
meeting a~j~u rned.
Florence I.~K~ aI6~ie'
Clerk of the Council
CITY COUNCIL
-146- April 3, 1972