Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1960-10-03435 r0Q_ffjA1V. Council Chamber, City Hall Huntington Beach California Monday, October3rd, 1960 Mayor Gisler called the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach to order at 7:30 o'clock P.M. Councilmen Present: Wells, Lambert, Stewart, Waite, Gisler. Councilmen Absent: None. The Pledge of Allegiance was given by all present in the Council Chamber. Invocation was presented by Reverend Walter Banard, First Assembly of God Church, Huntington Beach. Reports of Dent. Heads were presented by the Clerk. Reports of the Department Heads for the month of September, 1960, On motion by Lambert, seconded by Waite, the reports be received and filed. Motion .carried. Communication From A communication from the Sunset Sunset Beach Chamber of Commerce Beach Chamber of Commerce ex- pressing their appreciation to the Huntington Beach Lifeguard Department for the splendid service rendered -to their community during the Summer, was read by the Clerk. Huntington Bch Chamber of Commerce A communication from the Huntingtonti Beach Chamber of Commerce stating that their Board of Directors in regular meeting had gone on record to request State Senator John A. Murdy and Assemblyman Richard T. Hanna to use their influence in having the Freeway status removed from the Ocean Highway through Huntington Beach. It was requested that the City Council take a similar stand regarding the development of this Freeway in order that the committees involved might present a solid front against it. Councilman Wells Councilman Wells stated that the Freeway Committee to which he had been appointed were endeavoring to work out a satisfactory plan for the development of Freeways -1,- 436 Par-e #2 - :Minutes = October arc, 1960 between all of the Coastal Cities but that nothing had been accomplished at this time. On motion by Stewart, seconded by Waite, the City Administrator be.instructed to contact Senator Murdy and Assemblyman Hanna by letter and request notification of the meeting to be held with Senator Collier regarding this Freeway status. Motion carried. Councilman w,�elts. Councilman Wells requested that a copy of this same letter be sent to the Committee on Coastal Freeway of which he is a member. So. Calif Edison Co. A communication -from the Southern California Edison Company providing indemtxification to the City for all losses, claims and damages which might arise out of their taking immediate possession of property which had been negotiated at a previous meeting of the Council, was presented by the Clerk. On motion, by Waite, seconded by Stewart, the letter saving the City harmless in this matter was received and filed. Motion carried. Governor Edmund G. Brown A communication from Governor Edmund G. Brown to the City Council acknowledging receipt of the Resolution passed by the City Council at a previous meeting regarding the negotiation of a Water Contract between the State and the Metropolitan Water District, was read by the Clerk. Feather Water List Assoc A communication from the Feather Water District Association presenting another Resolution for action by the Council, was read by the Clerk. In view of the fact that Council had previously passed on such a Resolution no action was taken on this communication. Ila 14. Dabney A communication signed by Ila M. Dabney and fifty-nine other residents of Garfield Street requesting that a Sewer Line be put down Garfield Street, -2.- 4 3'7 Page #3 - minutes - October 3rd, t960 was presented by the Clerk: On motion by Stewart, seconded by Wells, the petition for Sewers on Garfield Street was referred to the City Administrator and the City Engineer for report to Council at the next regular meeting on October 17th, 1960. Motion carried. Mrs. Barbara_MaddiSan Mrs. Barbara Maddigan, 5122 Linda Circle, addressed the Council and presented a petition signed by 154 residents of the.Huntington Village area requesting the Council to have the area sprayed, cleaned, and otherwise given maintenance. Vito Engineer dheeler City Engineer Wheeler informed the Council that the Streets in the area being discussed had not been dedicated to the City at this time and that the developer was responsible for the condition of the Streets until such dedication was made. Mrs. Maddigan Mrs, Maddigan informed the Council that the Mosquito situation had been almost intolerable and that health conditions left much to be desired. Councilman Waite Councilman Waite informed Mrs. Maddigan that the Mosquito situation was handled for the City by the County of Orange. Councilman Waite stated that the City has presently only had one Street Sweeper and that it was being used as advantageously as possible but that all areas of the City could not be covered with this one unit. City -Administrator The City Administrator informed Mrs. Maddigan that he together with the City Engineer would meet with the County Health_Department and the Subdivider and try to work out a solution for some of the problems she had presented. On motion by Stewart, seconded by Lambert, the handling of this matter was referred to the Administrator and the Engineer. Motion carried. _3,- 438 Page #4 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 Mr. John Thompson Mr. John Thompson, 727 Williams Street, addressed the Council and stated that he was representing the people in the neighborhood of Williams Street who were complaining because trash barrels are left on the Street for days following the regular pickup. Mr. Thompson stated that all he was requesting Council to do was to initiate a Regulatory Ordinance demanding that trash barrels be returned to the rear yard after pickup. �Lr,. E._. Twitchell Mr. E. C. Twitchell, of 1533 Baker Street, Costa Mesa, addressed the Council and stated that he was representing approximately 500 homeowners on the eastside of the Santa Ana River. Mr. Twitchell stated that the fly situation over there was terrible and that he felt that the City of Huntington Beach should take some steps toward remedying the problem. Mr. Twitchell stated that he had been in contact with Mr: Waible and Mr. Hanna of the County Health Deportment who informed him that the City of Huntington Beach did not have an Ordinance concerning flies, and that the County Health Department's hands were tied because of the lack of such an Ordinance. He stated that he had been informed by the Health Department that the flies were being bred on manure piles located in the farm country on the eastern side of Huntington Beach. City attorney Bauer City Attormey Bauer stated that the Mosquito Abatement District of the County did not deal with the fly situation. Mr. Walter Gainer Mr. Walter Gainer, 1790 Gainer Road, Mesa Verde, addressed the Council stating that he was representing the developer of the Mesa Verde area and the Country Club and that he seconded all Mr. Twitchell had said concerning the fly situation. Mr. Gainer requested that the Council take some steps to remedy the situation. -4.- 439 Page #5 - Minutes - October 3rc, 1960 Public Hearing Mayor Gisler stated that the vm�Lyon-Tract 3903 next item on the Agenda would be a Public Hearing on the Appeal of Mr. William Lyon, developer of Tract No. 3903, to a decision of the.City Planning Commission, and requested that he be excused from consideration of the matter due to his having appeared before the Planning Commission at a meeting held on this matter. Councilman Waite Temporary Chairman On motion by Lambert, seconded by Stewart, Councilman Waite was appointed Temporary Chairman. Motion carried. Chairman -Jaite Chairman Waite announced that at Cnened TEcarin-, 8:00 o'clock P.M. on this day was the date and time:set for a Public Hearing on an appeal of Mr. William Lyon to a decision of the City Planning Commission denying Tract No. 3903, and requested the Clerk to read the legal notice. Legal Notices Hcae' The Clerk read notice of Public Hearing on the Appeal of Mr. William Lyon, developer of Tract No. 3903, from a decision of the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach set for October 3rd, 1960, at the hour of 8:00 o'clock P.M., as published in the Huntington Beach News in the issue of September 29th, 1960. Notice of Anneal The Clerk read notice of Appeal of Decision of Decision of Planning Commission regarding Tentative Tract Map No. 3903, as follows: Heinly, Heinly & Tarr, Attorneys 433 West Eight Street Santa Ana, California September 23, 1960 ,pity Council City of Huntington Beach City Hall Huntington Beach, California In re: Notice `of Appeal of Decision of Planning Commission regarding Tentative Tract Map No. 3903 -5.- 440 Pa;-c 1`6 - ;,Min-utes - Octobcr 3rd, 1960 Gentlemen: Please take notice that William Lyon, the applicant and developer of Tentative Tract Map No. 3903 does hereby appeal the decision of the Planning Commission rendered on September 20, 1960, detail of the action of the Planning Commission is as follows: 1. Said Tentative Tract Map No. 3903 August 31, 1960. 2. That developer had complied with the city subdivision ordinance Chapter 97 without exception. 3. That said Tentative Tract Map had complied with the State Subdivision Map Act without exception. 4. That on September 13, 1960 the Review Committee held a meeting and there were no objections to/said map. anything on 5. At the meeting of the Planning Commission a motion was made to "deny" said Map without pred judice. No legal reason was given for said motion. Und.er,discussion the Chairman stated that the reason he was voting for the denial of said map was that the subject property had always been under consideration for a zone change to M-1. 6. There were three votes taken as follows: a. First vote - Thompson - no; Presson - no; Stang - no; Kaufman - no; Doutt - yes; Letson - yes. At - this point the Secretary of the meeting said "I am a little confused, lefts take the vote over without calling for the vote of the Chairman Bazil." b. Second vote - Thompson - no; Presson - yes; Stang - no; Bazil - yes; Kaufman - no; Doutt - yes; Letson - yes. c. Third vote - Thompson - no; Presson - yes; Stang - no; Bazil - yes; Kaufman - no; Doutt - yes; Letson - yes. The undersigned polled two members of the Commission with respect to their vote as follows: Mr. Doutt as to whether or not he had voted "yes" on the first voting; he said he had; Presson was then polled as to whether or not he had voted "no" on the first ballot and he said he had voted '"yes". This was not so and the audience confirmed the fact that Mr. Presson had voted "no" on the first vote. The undersigned inquired of the members of the Commission if they would state a legal reason why said map was denied. They stated, because of the resolution which was just passed. The subdivider deems himself aggrieved on the grounds that. said denial was contrary to the law in that said subdivider had complied with all of the requirements of the City Sub- division ordinance as well as the State of California Sub- division Map Act as well as the fact that there has been no legal objections found to exist and under the law the Planning Commission had no other alternative but to approve the map. It is requested that your honorable body reverse the action of the planning Commission and approve the map after following the requirements setforth- in Article 977 of Chapter 97 of the Municipal Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach. sm 441 Page #7 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 It is requested that said hearing be set within 10 days of receipt of this notice of appeal. DHH:mw Chairman waits Very truly yours, HEINLY & HEINLY By Dale H. Heinly Chairman Waite then requested the Clerk to read the City Planning Commission's rebuttal to the applicant's written appeal and the finding of fact presented there in. Attorney Heinly Prior to the reading, Attorney Heinly requested that he be furnished a copy of this rebuttal together with a copy of a review of the findings of the Planning Commission and a copy of the report on Zone Cases 128,129 and 13.1, Rebuttal of The Clerk then read the rebuttal Planning. Cotrmtission of the Planning Commission to the appeal of Mr. William Lyon, as follows: HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION October 3rd, 1960 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL City of HuntingL,o �P(=ach City Hall Huntington Beach, California RE: Appeal of Tentative Tract Map No. 3903; William Lyon - Applicant. Gentlemen: In compliance with the State Subdivision Map Act, the Planning Department sets -forth herewith a rebuttal to the applicant's written appeal and a finding of fact as written testimony by representative of the advisory agency, the City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission: STATEMENT OF DETAIL OF THE ACTION OF THE PLANNING CX}`'' ISSION AS OUTLINED BY THE ATTORNEY FOR THE APPELLANT IS LISTED AS FOLLOWS; - 7.- 442 Page #8 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 REBUTTAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION REBUTTAL IS STATED NUMBERICALLY TO COINCIDE WITH DETAIL OF ACT IC N AS STATED BY THE APPELLANT. 1. We concur that Tentative Tract 3903 was filedwith the Planning Department on August 31, 1960. 2. Exception is taken to statement - that map complies to Chapter 97 without exception. Reference is made to statement of the attorney. before both the City Council and the Planning Commission that his client Villiam Lyon was owner of the property designated Tentative Tract Map No. 3903. A check of the records at the Orange County Recorders office indicate that Record Owner of the submitted property is the R. C. A. Corporation. Confidential sources further indicate that the appellant has an option to purchase subject to approval of the Tentative Map and that Escrow is scheduled to close around January 1st of the coming year. Section 9721.6 (subsection b) Huntington Beach Ordinance Code states that record owner shall be indicated upon the map. 3. Exception is taken to this statement, since the State Map Act requires that local ordinance must be complied with. 4. Statement - that "the Review Committee had no objections to anything on said Snap", cannot be considered a valid argument since the Review Committee is not empowered to take action upon or make recommendation for tentative maps other than on an informal basis. The Committee functions exactly as its name implies - it reviews and studies all tentative maps. 5. Statement - "No legal reason was given for said action", is purely a point of conjecture, since legal reasons can only be determined by a court of law. 6. We submit that the statement describing the vote count appeals only to ones emotions. We are yet to be convinced that either a legis- lative body -or an advisory has not the right to take as many ballot counts as necessary -to establish a true and correct vote to the satisfaction of the voting group. THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION SUBMITS ITS FINDINGS OF FACT IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER AS WRITTEN TESTIMNY STATED BELOW: June 7th, 1960 Resolution of Intent No. 114 was adopted by the Planning Commission recommending that the general area east of the Edison Generating Station and north of the Huntington Beach Channel be considered for rezoning to M-1. -B.- 443 Page #9 - Minutes - October. 3rd, 1960 August 2nd, 1960 A report on the conditions existing in the generating plant area in regards to residential development was prepared, and submitted to the Planning Commission by the Planning Department. August 2nd, 1960 The City Planning Commission recommended approval of Zone case No. 1282 129, and 131 to the City Council by adoption of resolutions. Said zone cases concerned establish - went of M-1, M-1-0, and M-1-A Districts surrounding the Generating Plant area. August 31st, 1960 September 6th, 1960 September 13th, 1960 September 2'0th, 1960 September 26th, 1960 Tentative Tract Map 3903 was sub- mitted to the Planning Department. The August 2nd, 1960, Planning Department report was read to the City Council, in reference to Zone Cases 128, 129, and 131. Said report is attached herewith and should be read at this time. Subsequently at this same meeting as a result of the August 2nd, 1960, report a motion was made by Lambert and seconded by Stewart instructing the Planning Commission to study the areas surrounding the Edison Generating Station and initiate incustri.al zoning where it deemed necessary. This motion was approved. The Review Committee studied Tentative) Tract Map 3903 on an informal. basis. Tentative Tract Map No. 3903 was presented to the Commission towards the end of the agenda at which time action was taken. The findings made were predicated upon the August 2nd, 1960, Planning Department Report. The map was disapproved at this time. The appeal for tentative Tract Map No 3903 was presented to the City Council. The Hearing was scheduled for October 3rd, 1960. A SUMMARY REVIEW OF THE FINDINGS ARE STATED AS FOLLOWS: On the basis of Resolution of Intent No. 114, City Planning Commission, a formal report was filed by the Planning Department with both the City Council and the Planning Commission. The findings of fact as established by the City Planning Commission are substantially those which appear on the August 2nd report. EVALUATION OF THE QUESTION BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE AS FOLLOWS: -9.- 444 Pagc Y,°10 - "Minutes. - October 3rd, 1960 A. FINDINGS OF FACT AS ESTABLISHED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. B. ANALYSIS C'F THE FLOOD CONTROL PROBLEM AS MAY BE PRESENTED BY THE APPELLLN-T AND THE CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. 'C. ANALYSIS OF THE SUBDIVISION nIr TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE MAP COLLIES WITH TIfL LCCAL SUBDIVISION IN ITS ENTIRETY D. ANALYSIS ON A LEGAL BASIS OF THE: FOLLUJING: State Subdivision Map Act Local Subdivision Ordinance Code Rights of a non -owing applicant 1'or under law. E. STATUS OF REPORTS: From Huntington Beach Elementary School District. From Huntington Beach Chamber of Commerce Industrial Committee. F. TESTIMONY OF THE APPELLANT. THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS: That cooperative deliberation and sound judgement should determine this ques t-Loi-i of common concern. This written testimony is sub- mitted by the City Planning Department as represe-nLat:ive for the City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission. Respectfully submitted, Clifford E..Tripp Secretary Planning Director ENCL: Copy of Huntington_ Beach Planning Commission Minutes 9-20-60 August 2nd report Excerpts State Map Act Copy of applicant's appeal Attorney Roger Before continuing with the hearing, Howell present City AttorneyBauer asked that the records show that another Attorney was present at the hearing, Mr. H. Roger Howell of Santa Asa, who was the Attorney for the R. C. A. Communications Corporation, owners of the property to be subdivided by Tract No. 3903. Attorne E_,�,Y, '_? Attorney Howell addressed the Council ,n 44 ) Page #11 - Minutes - October 3rdl 1960 are. stater that his client had not been represented at the Planning Commission meeting, he requested that he be per - witted to present a few points at the conclusion of the regular testimony to be presented at the hearing. Wit;nes,es to be At this point Attorney Heinly Sworn in requested that each and every witness that gives evidence at the hearing b(� swor).-i 10-v the Clerk of the Council. He advised the Council that he had a reporter present to take down _ t'1(� proceedings and wished to have all the testimonies given under oath. Attorney Heinly Attorney Heinly then.requested that .he be furnished a copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the Review Committee of the Planning Commission at their meeting on September the 13th, 1960. Mr. Tripp Attorney Heinly was informed by Mr. Trapp that the Review Committee always acts on an informal basis strictly for study of a.proposition and that Minutes are never maintained for those meetings. Attorney_ Heinly Attorney Heinly then asked whether any reports had been submitted by any Department Heads regarding their study of Tract I -lap No. 3903, stating that if there were he would Like to be furnished copies of such reports. H B_High School_ Attorney Heinly then introduced a letter from the Huntington Beach Union High School District acknowled-inrf.c=a pt.: of a map of Tract No. 3903 stating that no action had been taken by the Board regarding the suitability of this tract. Or Co Flood A communication from the Orange Control District County Flood Control District was introduced by Attorney Heinly, stating that a portion of the area covered by the tract was subject to frequent inundation, and recommending that further action on this tract be deferred until the subdivider presents a satisfactory solution to the inundation problem, as proposed by a registered Civil Engineer; 446 Page #r12- llinutes - October 3rd, 1960 and stating that any approval of this tract should include a provision that the subdivider construct a 5' chain link fence around the Flood Control Channel, complying with the Flood Control District requirements. Jeffery _Ii11_et Attorney Heinly then called as his first witness Mr. Jeffery Millet of the engineering firm of Millet'. King, and Associates, 201 South Pamona Street, Fullerton, California. Mr. Millet, having been sworn by the City Clerk, was questioned by Attorney Heinly on direct examination. Millet for the City. William Lyon Attorney Bauer cross examined Mr. Attorney Heinly then called Mr. William Lyon, developer of Tentative Tract No. 3903, to the_ stand. Mr. Lyon, having been duly sworn by the City Clerk, stated that his home address was 552 Magill Place, Fullerton, California, and that his office address was 905 North Euclid Avenue, Anaheim, California. He was questioned by Attorney Heinly on direct examination, after which he was cross examined by Attorney Bauer. Attorney Heinly then questioned Mr. Lyon on redirect examination. James Wheeler Attorney Heinly then called City. Engineer James Wheeler City -Engineer of the City of Huntington Beach who was duly sworn by the Clerk. Mr. Heinly then questioned Mr. Wheeler on direct examination. Attorney Bauer then questioned Mr. Wheeler on cross examination regarding the drainage problems in the area. -12.- 447 Page #13 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 Attorney Heinly then questioned Mr. Wheeler on redirect to establish the caliber of storm on which the capacity of Flood Control Channels had been predicated. Recess of the Council at 9:02 P.M. Council Reconvened P.M. by the Chairman. Earl Presson Chairman Waite called a recess Council was reconvened at 9:12 Attorney Heinly called Mr. Earl Presson, member of the Huntington Beach Planning Commission, as his next witness. Mr. Presson being duly sworn by the City Clerk, was questioned on direct examination by Attorney Heinly. There being no cross examination by Attorney Bauer, Mr. Presson was questioned on the redirect by Attorney Howell. Robert Bazil Attorney Heinly then called Mr. Robert Bazil, Chairman of the Huntington Beach Planning Commission, as his next witness. Mr. Bazil, being duly sworn by the City Clerk, was questioned by Attorney Heinly on direct examination. the witness on cross examination. Attorney Bauer did not question At this point in the proceedings, the Attorney for the Plaintiff rested subject to rebuttal. Clifford E. Tromp Attorney Bauer called as his first witness Mr. Clifford E. Tripp, Planning Director of the City of Huntington Beach. Mr. Tripp, being duly sworn by the City Clerk, was questioned by Mr. Bauer on direct exami- nation Mr. Tripp at this time requested permission to read the Huntington Beach Planning Commission August 2nd, 1960, report on Zone Cases 128, 129, and 131. Mr. Tripp then read the entire report as follows: -13.- 448 Wage #14 -- Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 "HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION August 2nd, 1960 REPORT ON ZONE CASES 128, 129,-_131. IT IS THE OPINION OF THE PLANNING OFFICE THAT THE AREAS SUB- MITTED IN ZONE CASE 1281) 129, 131 ARE IDEALLY SITUATED FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT. DISADVANTAGES OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. GENERATING PLANT AREA ARE: 1. There is a normal fire hazard existing from several large - fuel oil tanks located on the generating station property which could endanger lives if residential development was located unreasonably close to the installation. 2. A noise factor within a localized area may be emanated from the steam generating plant, since emmissions are kept at an absolute minimum level for an industrial unit of this type, but most certainly existent from time to time which would be adverse to any potential residential development. 3. Existence of several well sites in the area, which cannot be completely controlled by zoning regulation. Neither zoning nor regulatory ordinances can be rectroactive ex- cept by reason of the health safety or welfare cause which could prove difficult or next to impossible to impose. 4. Existence of a forty acre rotary mud dump, which at various times past has been contaminated with hot acids. 5. Residential development will place a severe hardship on the school system which will not be allowed to locate within hazard areas or remote locations. 6. Street conditions in the area are deplorable - immediate residential development will cause severe change in the Arterial Highway program. - A costly item. 7. Framing operations will be curtailed, since the lower Talbert Valley is dependent upon a cheap source of water as now furnished by partially treated affluents pumped from the Sanitation District treatment plant. Residential development will seriously restrict sewage irrigation water. B. Close proximity to the existing 40 acres county refuse dump is also detrimental to residential development. 9. Any residential development in close proximity to the Wilshire Oil Tanks would be hazardous. 10. Residential development adjoining the generating plant would preclude the development of complimentary indus- trial units which could jointly utilize steam and power facilities. To establish residential adjoining the generating plant would most certainly handicap the gen- erating plant operation, which currently is the greatest single asset the City possesses. The generating plant should be given adequate protection. -14.- 449 Page #15 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 ON THE BASIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS, THE AREAS UNDER STUDY HAVE THE GREATEST POTENTIAL AS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, CLIFFORD E. TRIPP PLANNING DIRECTOR" Attorney Heinly and Attorney Howell then questioned Mr. Tripp under cross examination. Attorney Bauer then questioned Mr. Tripp on redirect examination. Councilman Wells Councilman Wells then asked Mr. Tripp, which tract was the closest tract, to the tract under discussion this evening. Mr. Tripp informed Councilman Wells that it was Tract 3595. Delbert G. Higgins Attorney Bauer then called Mr. Delbert G. Higgins, Fire Chief of the City of Huntington Beach, to the witness stand as his next witness. Mr. Higgins being duly sworn by the City Clerk, was questioned on direct examination by P Attorney Bauer. Attorney Heinly then questioned Higgins on cross examination. Councilman Steuart Councilman Stewart made a motion that the appeal of the subdivider on Tract No. 3903 be denied. Chairman Waite At this point, Councilman Stewart was informed by the Chairman, Councilman Waite, that a motion could not be entertained while the hearing was open. Request hearing Councilman Stewart then moved be closed that the hearing be closed. The motion was seconded by Councilman Lambert. such procedure. Attorney Heinly objected to Attorney Bauer informed the Council_, that the correct procedure would be to continue -15.- Page, #16 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 the hearing rather than close it, since the hearing was not completed. Request hearing Councilman Stewart made a be continued motion,that the hearing be continued until October 17th at 8:00 o'clock P.M. Recess of the Council at 11:10 P.M. Council Reconvened Chairman Waite called a recess The meeting was reconvened at 11:14 o'clock P.M. by Chairman Waite. Attorney Bauer Attorney Bauer informed the Chairman and the Council, that the Planning Commission had nothing further to present at this time. Councilman Stewart Councilman Stewart left the left meeting meeting at 11:17 o'clock P.M. Attorney Heinly Attorney Heinly informed the Chairman and the Council, that the Plaintiff had no further testimony to present, and that if the Council would be willing to listen, they would go through the proper closing arguments. Hearing to be continued On motion by Wells, seconded by Lambert, the hearing be continued until October 17th, 1960, at 7:45 o'clock P.M. or as soon thereafter as possible. Objections to Attorney Heinly objected to this postponement postponement. Motion carried. Mayor Gisler Resumed his office of the Council. Zone Case #135 Mayor Gisler then assumed his station as presiding officer A communication from the City Planning Commission transmitting Resolution No. 135 of the Planning Commission, recommending approval of Zone Case No. 135, was read by the Clerk. Public Hearing On motion by Waite, seconded by Lambert, a public hearing was ordered for Monday evening, -16. - 4 05 1 Page #17 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 October 17th, 1960, at 8:00 o'clock P.M. or as soon there- after as possible. Motion carried. Grant Deed. A grant deed from Par Estates Par Estates, Inc. Incorporated, to the City of Huntington Beach, for drainage purposes was presented by the Clerk. On motion by Lambert, seconded by Waite, the deed be accepted by the City and the Clerk be authorized to have same recorded with the recorder of Orange County. Motion carried. Subdivision Agreement A subdivision agreement on Tract No. 3733 Tract No. 3733, between Bernard Solomon and Sidney Weinburg and the City of Huntington Beach, was presented by the Clerk. On motion by Lambert, seconded by Waite, the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the agreement on Tract No, 3733. Motion carried. Public F:eari-.g Mayor Gisler announced that this Zone Case No. 134 was the date and time set for a public hearing on Resolution No. 134, of the City Planning Commission, recommending Zone Case No. 134, and instructed the Clerk to read the legal notice. The Clerk read notice of hearing Zone Case No. 134, as published in the Huntington Beach News on September 22nd, 1960, setting the hour of 8:00 o'clock P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible, on Monday, the 3rd day of October 1960, for the purpose of considering a Reso- lution of Intent, as adopted by City Planning Commission.for Change of Zone, relative to proposed change of District Boundary and Use Classification from R-4 Suburban Residential District as adopted by Interim Ordinance No. 668 to R-5 PMT District. -17.- 4 )2 Page #18 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 Mayor Gisler declared the hearing open and invited all persons to speak thereon. No Protests The Clerk stated that there had been no written protests filed in Zone Case No. 134. Hearing Closed There being no protests filed, either oral or written, in Zone Case No. 134, Mayor Gisler declared the hearing closed. Ordinance can On motion by Lambert, seconded Zone Case #I.34 by Waite, the City Attorney be directed to prepare an Ordinance on Zone Case No. 134. Motion carried. Public Ilearirng Mayor Gisler announced that this Zone Case #136 was the date and time set for a public hearing on -Resolution No. 136, of the City Planning Com- mission, recommending Zone Case No. 136, and instructed the Clerk to read the legal notice. The Clerk read notice of hearing Zone Case No. 136, as published in the Huntington Beach News, on September 22nd, 1960, setting the hour of 8:00 o'clock P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible, on Monday, the 3rd day of October, 1960, for the purpose of considering a petition for Change of Zone, relative to proposed Change of District Boundary and Use Classification from: R-1 Single Family Residence District to C-2 Community Business District. Mayor Gisler declared the hearing open and invited all interested persons to speak thereon.. No Protests The Clerk stated that there had been no written protests filed in Zone Case No. 136. Hearing Closed There being no protests filed, either oral or written, in Zone Case No. 136, Mayor Gisler declared the hearing closed. Ordinance On On motion by Waite, seconded Zone Case #136 by Lambert, the City Attorney INUM 4153 Page #19 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 be directed to prepare an Ordinance on Zone Case No. 136. Motion carried. Public Hearing Mayor Gisler announced that Zone _Case #137 this was the date and time set for a public hearing on Resolution No. 137, of the City Planning Commission, recommending Zone Case No. 137, and instructed the Clerk to read the legal notice. The Clerk read notice of hearing Zone Case No. 137, as published in the Huntington Beach News, on September 22nd, 1960, setting the hour of 8:00 o'clock P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible, on Monday, the 3rd day of October, 1960, for the purpose of considering a Resolution of Intent, as adopted by the City Planning Commission, for Change of Zone, relative to proposed Change of District Boundary and Use Classification from: R-4 Suburban Residential District as adopted by Interim Ordinance No. 668 to R-1 Single Family Resident District. Mayor declared the hearing open and invited all interested persons to speak thereon. No Protests The Clerk stated there had been no written protests filed in Zone Case No. 137. There being no protests filed, either oral or written, in Zone Case No. 137, Mayor Gisler declared the hearing closed. Ordinance Zone Case #137 On motion by Lambert, seconded by Waite, the City Attorney be directed to prepare an Ordinance on Zone Case No. 137. Motion carried. Public Hearing Zone Case #138 Mayor Gisler announced that this was the date and time set for a public hearing on Resolution No. 138, of the City Planning Commission, recommending Zone Case No. 138, and -19. - 4 Page #20 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 instructed the Clerk to read the legal notice. The Clerk read notice of hearing Zone Case No. 138 as published in the Huntington Beach News, on September 22nd, 1960, setting the hour of 8:00 o'clock P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible, on Monday, the 3rd day of October, 1960, for the purpose of considering a Resolution of Intent, as adopted by the City Planning Commission, for Change of Zone, relative to proposed Change of District Boundary and Use Clas- sification from: R-4 Suburban Residential District as adopted by Interim Ordinance No. 668 to R-2 Two Residents District. Mayor Gisler declared the hearing open and invited all interested persons to speak thereon. No written. protests The Clerk stated that there had been no written protests filed in Zone Case No. 138. Protest by Mrs. Sylvia Shandrick, 2281 Mrs. Shandrick Main Street, Huntington Beach, who owns property in the area covered by Zone Case No. 138, addressed the Council protesting the change of zone, stating that an area of residential and manufacturing don't go to- gether. Mrs. Shandrick told the Council she felt the best use for the land, was to be found in its present zone. Hearin Closed There being no further protests filed in Zone Case No. 138, Mayor Gisler declared the hearing closed. Ordinance On On motion by Waite, seconded by Zone Case #138 Lambert, the City Attorney be directed to prepare an Ordinance on Zone Case No. 138. Motion carried. Subdivision A Subdivision Bond on Tract Bond -Tract #3733 No. 37331, from the developers, Bernard Solomon and Sidney Weinberg, was presented by the Clerk. On motion by Lambert, seconded by Waite, the Subdivision Bond was accepted. Motion carried. -20. - 4 55 Page #21 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 Agrrmt.-Recr. The Clerk read an agreement Commission & Schools between the Huntington Beach Recreation Commission and the following schools, to coordinate a program of community recreation between the Recreation Department and the schools facilities: Huntington Beach High School Huntington Beach Elementary School Oceanview School Fountain Valley School Westminster School On motion by Lambert, seconded by Waite, Council approve the Huntington Beach Recreation Commission entering into the agreement. Motion carried. Ord. #794-1st Reading Ordinance No. 794 was given District Ma--- -- its first reading in full, by the Clerk, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE BY RECLASSIFYING CERTAIN PROPERTY AND AMENDING SECTION 9211.62 (SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 13-6-11)." Ord. #795-1st Ordinance No. 795 was given Reading -District Map its first reading in full by the Clerk, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE BY RECLASSIFYING CERTAIN PROPERTY AND AMENDING SECTION 9211.46 (SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 35-5-11)." Easement'Dee3 An Easement Deed covering Meredith, et. al. two parcels of property in the Condemnation suit, City of Huntington Beach versus Meredith, et. al., from James J. Brown, Clarence M. Brown, Theodore Manthei, Ernest F. Manthei, to the City of Huntington Beach, for the consideration of one hundred dollars ($100.00), was presented by the Clerk. On motion'by Lambert, seconded by Waite, the City accept the deed and the City Clerk be instructed to record the deed, and payment be authorized as requested. Motion carried. -21.- 456 Page #22 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 Report of On motion by Lambert, seconded by Chamber of Commerce Waite, the report of the Chamber of Commerce for the month of September, as mailed to the Council- men, be received and filed. Motion carried. Mr. Elmer Goetsch- Mr. Elmer Goetsch, 1206 Park Street, Towing Contract Huntington Beach, addressed the Council and asked whether the City was prepared to consider his proposal for a Towing Contract. City Administrator The City Administrator informed Mr. Goetsch that they were making a study of comparable towing contracts in surrounding communities and that they had not at this time completed the proposed contract for Huntington Beach. Leo W. Farwell- City Administrator presented a Leave of Absence request -from Mr. Leo W. Farwell, an Engineer in the Fire Department, for a ninety day leave of absence because of illness, from October 15th, 1960, to January 15th, 1961. Mr. Farwell's request had been approved by Fire Chief Delbert Higgins. On motion by Lambert, seconded by Wells, that Mr. Leo Farwell be granted a ninety day leave of absence, from October 15th, 19609 to January 15th, 1961. Motion carried. Int. Typist Clerk- A request from the Planning Planning Department Director, to fill the position of intermediate Typist Clerk, in the Planning Department, was presented by the City Administrator. On motion by Lambert, seconded by Waite, the Planning Director be permitted to fill the position of Intermediate Typist Clerk in his Department. Motion carried. Engr. Dept. Allocation of Positions A request from the Engineering Department for the allocation of certain positions within the Department be approved, was presented by the Administrator. -22.- 4 15 7 Page #23 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 On motion by Lambert, seconded by Waite, the City Attorney was instructed to prepare an amendment to the Ordinance Code, to allocate the positions requested by the Engineering Department. Motion carried. Building Department -- Additional Positions The City Administrator requested that a position of Structural Inspector and one of Plumbing Inspector be allocated to the Building Department in the Ordinance to be prepared by the City Attorney. On motion by Lambert, seconded by Waite, the Attorney be instructed to include these positions in the amendment to the Ordinance Code. Motion carried. Sully -Miller Cont. Co.-- A request from Sully -Miller 14 Day Extension Construction Company for an extension of fourteen days for the completion of their work, was presented by the City Administrator On motion by Waite, seconded be Lambert, Sully -Miller Construction Company be granted the fourteen day extension in completing the work on the Goldenwest project. Motion carried. City Engineer to A request from the City Engineer attend U.C.L.A. Courses for the use of City transporta- tion to attend courses at the University of Southern California, was presented by the Administrator. On motion by Waite, seconded by Lambert, the request of the Engineer, to use City transpor- tation in attending the courses at Southern California be granted. Motion carried City Engr. & Water Supt. to The City Administrator presented Attend Water Works Assn. a request that the City Engineer and Water Superintendent be permitted to attend sessions of the California Section of the American Water Works Association, Forty First Session, to be held in Long Beach from October 24th to 27th. -23.- 4 58 Page #24 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 On motion by Lambert, seconded by Waite, the Engineer and Water Superintendent be authorized to attend the sessions, with reasonable expenses allowed. Motion carried. ECCO Corp.- A request from ECCO Corporation Partial Payment for partial payment in the amount of Nineteen Thousand Seven Hundred Nine Dollars and Twenty Cents ($19,709.20), was presented by the Administrator, with the en- dorsement of the City Engineer, that the payment would be in order. On motion by Waite, seconded by Lambert, that ECCO Corporation be granted a partial payment in the amount of Nineteen Thousand Seven Hundred Nine Dollars and Twenty Cents ($19,709.20). Motion carried. Street Sweeper A request from the City Engineer For Engr. Dept. that he be permitted to purchase the necessary Street Sweeper which has been budgeted in the 1960-61 budget, was presented by the City Administrator. On motion by Lambert, seconded by, Waite, Purchasing Agent be instructed to get bids on the Street Sweeping equipment. Motion carried. Reso. on Wages Discussed A Resolution on prevailing rates of wages was briefly discussed by the Administrator. On motion by Wells, seconded by Lambert, the Resolution be held over until the next regular meeting of the Council. Motion carried. Demands A roved On motion by Waite, seconded by Wells, the demands as approved by the Finance Committee be paid. Motion carried. Informal meeting called Mayor Gisler called a meeting of the Council as informal Committee of the Whole for Monday, October 17th, 1960, at 7:00 o'clock A.M. -24.- 4 Page #25 - Minutes - October 3rd, 1960 Ifeeting Adjourned 4n motion by Waite, seconded by Wells, the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach was adjourned. Motion carried. ATTEST: -2S City —Clerk an -o icio er of the City C cil of the City of Huntington Beach, California Mayor