Minutes 64-11-09~'DEXED
MINUTES OF TIlE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS
HELD
November 9, 1964
The Cypress City Council held a regular meeting o~ November 9, 1964, in the
City Council Chambers, 9471 South Walker Street, Cypress, California, at 7:30 p.m.,
Mayor Frank P. Noe presiding.
PRESENT: Gorzeman, Kanel, ~4cCarney, Wright, and Noe
AHSENT: None
Also present were City Manager/City Clerk Darrell Essex; City Attorney H. ~odger
F,o're]l; '.~ecretary of the I~lanninl7 Com~nission ~nrre]l ~'alton; Public Works Director
Harold Neu; Police Chief O. C. Foster; and Building gu[nerintendent Thomas Nudson.
HINUTES:
It was moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by Councilman Kanel, and unanimously
carried, the minutes of the October 26, 1964, meeting be approved as mailed.
ORAL COM}fONICATIONS:
There were no oral communications at this time.
PUBLIC HEA~ING RE: ,,ZONE CHANGE NO. Z7,119~ STANLEY tl., RI]iT.~,R: The Mayor announced
this was the time and place for the public hearing to consider an application for
amendment eo the Zoning Ordinance ~Io. 90 to change the zone from P-1 (One-family
Residential) to C-I (Neighborhood Stores) or C-2 (General Commercial) on:property
generally located at the southwest corner of Knott Street and Cerritos Avenue,
requested by Stanley H. Ritter, 15300 VEntura Blvd., Suite 300, Sherman Oaks,
California, known as Zone Change No. Z-119.
The City Manager informed the Council that the Planning Commission had recommended
C-1 zoning for the subject parcel.
The Mayor declared the PuBlic Hearing open and asked if anyone in the audience
wished'to speak for or against the proposed use.
There being no written communications and no oral protestS, the .~Iayor declared
the Public Hearing closed.
Following a brief discussion concerning the size of the parcel in question, it
was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by Councilman Gorzeman, and unanimously
carried, the following ordinance he read by title only, title as follows:
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS AMENDINC
ORDINANCE NO. 90, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, BY CHANGING TIlE ZONE OF A
CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND WITItlN THE CITY FROM R-1 (ONE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL) TO C-I (NEIGHBORHOOD STORES) ZONE C[L~NCE NO. Z-119
(STANLEY H. RITTER)
It was moved by Councilman Kanel, seconded by Councilman HcCarney, and unanimously
carried, this Ordinance pass its first reading. The following roll call vote
was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCIL~.~N
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN~
Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
November 9, 1964
PUBLIC HE~RI.N~. BE: ZONE CH~.NGE Np. Z-120 (ROBERT W. HELMS ~ND AUGUSTINE G. GARCIA):
The Mayor announced this was the time and place for the Public Hearing to consider
an application for amendment to the Zoning Ordinance No. 90 to change the zone
from R-1 (One-family Residential) to C-2 (General Commercial) on property generally
located at the northeast corner of Ball Road and Bloomfield Street, requested hy
Augustine G. Garcia, 4902 Cathy Avenue, Cypress, and Eobert W. llelms, 2790
Atlantic Blvd., Long Beach, California, known as Zone Change No. Z-120.
The City Manager stated that the staff recommended denial of the zone change at
this time due to the lack of a demonstrated need for commercial zoning. He
further informed the Council that tile Planning Commission had recommended approval
of this requested zone change.
The Mayor declared the Public Hearing open and asked if anyone in the audience
wished to speak for or against the proposed use.
Mr. Don Proudfoot, representing the applicants, addressed the Council, speaking
in favor of the proposed zone change. Mr. Proudfoot stated that he feels an
error has been made in the total number of acres in the zone change request,
and that it should be a total of 14 acres rather than 17 as reported by the
staff. He further stated that the applicants are prepared to move quickly in
developing this land if the commercial zoning is obtained.
There being no written communications and no oral protests, the Mayor declared the
Public Hearing closed.
Mr. Dave Gill 3460 Farnham Avenue, Long Beach, addressed the Council, stating
that he is opposed to the conmerciat zoning in the subject area since there is
other commercially-zoned property in the vicinity. Mr. Gill further requested
that any commercial zoning of the subject area be postponed until Mr. Carcia
shows good faith concerning the removal of the fertilizer plant on the
property.
Discussion was held concerning the commercially-zoned property in the vicinity
of the subject zone change. In answer to a question from Councilman Gorzeman,
the City Attorney advised the Council that, if desired. it could change the zone
on only a portion of the requested acreage.
Mr. Don Proudfoot, representing the applicants, addressed tile Council, stating
that he would prefer the zone change on the entire parcel, but would not object
strongly to reducing the area.
The City Manager suggested the possibility of continuing consideration of the
subject zone change in order to allow the staff an opportunity to make a study
of the area in question with reference to commercial zoning.
Following further discussion, it was moved by Councilman Wright and seconded by
Councilman Kanel to continue consideration of Zone Change No. Z-120 until the
City Council meeting of December 14, 1964, to allow a study to be made hy the
Staff of the need for commercial zoning in the subject area. Prior to voting on
this motion, discussion was held.
Councilman T1cCarney, requested the staff to investigate the area adjacent to
Bloomfield where there are areas filled with concrete.
Discussion was also held concerning the possibility of the staff making a more
extensive study of the required coF~nercial zoning for tbe entire City, particularly
since t~ recent decision ot locate a Junior College on the City's major
commercially-zoned property.
The following roll call vote was taken on Councilman Wright's motion to continue
Zone Change No. Z-120 until the City Council meeting of December 14, 1964, to
allow a study to be m~de by the staff of the need for commercial zoning in the
subject area.
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN: Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
NOES: 0 COUN~CI~{t~: None
ABSENT: 0 COU~CItMEN: None
November 9, 1964
PUBLIC HEARING RE: A~NDMENTS TO TIlE ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 90: The Mayor
announced this was the time and place for the public hearing to consider
proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance No. 90 pertaining to sideyards
on reverse corner lots, striping of parkinK lots, and paving of non-paved
parking lots.
The City Manager informed the Council that the Planning Commission had
conducted Public Hearings concerning these amendments, and had recommended
approval of the following:
1. A~e.nd Section .12~.4 regarding .Parking Lot StripinK to read as f~I!OES:
All parking lots provided as a requirement in a commercial or
industrial district and in a multiple residential district where
uncovered parking requirements exceed ten (10) spaces, except
those lots in which there is attendant parking, shall arrange
and mark stalls in such a manner as to provide for orderly and
safe loading or unloading of passengers and parking and storage
of vehicles."
2. Amend Section .107.6 Bm paragraph 2 to read ~ follows:
"On any corner lot each side yard which abuts the front yard of
an adjacent lot shall not be less than 20 feet in depth. Any
other side yard on the corner lot may be reduced to 10 feet."
Amend Part 21 b7 adding Section 121.6 as follows:
"Section 1.21.6 PAVING OF EXISTING LOTS: All parking lots that are now
in existence, but are n~t improved, shall be deemed ~ be non-
conforming. Such lots shall be paved te the specifications of
the City of Cypress within eighteen (18) months."
The Mayor declared the Public HearinR open and asked if anyone in the audience
wished to speak for or against the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance.
There being ~o written communications and no oral protests, the Mayor declared the
Public Hearing closed.
With reference to Amendment No. 2 concerning the reverse corner lots, the Secretary
of the Planning Commission explained that the staff had studied this recommendation
to determine if some other method could be utilized to provide safety but also allow
a greater lot cut in the ~ngle-family subdivision. Rather than increase the
width of the side yard, the staff feels it would be more advantageous to reduce
the height of the fence to ~hree feet for tile entire side yard, rather than
maintaining it at the present six feet.
Mrs. Patricia ~Iunn, 10563 Jill Street, Cypress, addressed the Council, asking
what effect this proposed change would have upon her reverse-corner lot.
The Planning Commission Secretary explained the proposed change to Mrs. Munn.
Followin~ discussion, it was moved by Councilman Grozeman and seconded by
Councilman McCarney to read by title only an Ordinance amending Ordinance
No. 90; however, after further discussion, Councilman l{cCarney withdrew his
second and Councilman Gorzeman withdrew his motion.
It was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by Councilman McCarney, and
unanimously carried, to concur with the recommendation of the staff =ather than
the recommendation of tile Planning Commission concerning Amendment ~o. 2, as
follows:
A~ .S.ection No. 107 by deleting "A" and "B" and amending to read as fo~l.o.E~:
"Se.%tion 107.g. FENCES AND WALLS: vences and walls are permitted but not
required. Such fences and walls shall not exceed six (6) feet in hei~bt,
and where the same are located in a required front yard or side yard
~buttin~ a street, the same shall not exceed three (3) feet in height."
The followinZ roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
4OES: 0 COUNCIL~IEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, ~cCarney, Wright,
None
None
and Noe
November 9 1964
It was moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by Councilman McCarney, and
unanimously carried, to read by title only an ordinance amending the Zoning
Ordinance to include 7~nendments 1 and 3 as recommended by the Planning Con~ission
and A~endment No. 2 as recommended by the staff. The title of the Ordinance
is as follows:
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDIN/LNCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS A~{ENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 90, TIlE ZONING ORDINA.NCE.
It was moved by Councilman Kanel, seconded by Councilman Gorzeman, and unanimously
carried~ this Ordinance pass its first reading. TIme following roll call vote
was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCIL~N:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright~ and Noe
None
None
N.O~I.FI.C~ION. FROM ALCO~p~.Iq BEVERAGE CONTROL ..~OARD RE: ON-SALE .G~M~R~L .~ICENSE
FROM GERALD M. LAYER: The City Manager presented a notification from the
Alco'h'olic Beverage Control Board, notifying the City of an application for a new
On-Sale General liquor license for Gerald M. Layer, 4114 Lincoln Avenue, Cypress.
He further pointed out that a Conditional Use Permit would be required of Mr. Layer
for his business.
It was moved by Councilman Kanel, seconded by Councilman Wright, and unanimously
carried, to receive and file this communication and notify both the applicant and
the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board of the City's requirement of a Conditional
Use Permit.
CO~IU~.ICA~.I~. FRO~ LEAGUE OF CALIFO~NI~ CITIES RE: ELI~A%IO~ QF STAT~ .SALES
TA~ ~N. CAPITAL ITEMS PURCHASED ~y CALIFORNIA POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS: The City
Yanager presented a communication dated October 27, 1964, received from
~r. Richard Carpenter, Executive Director of the LeaRue of California Cities,
regarding the request of the City Council of September 28th, for further
information on t~ proposed legislation to eliminate State Sales Tax on capital
items purchased by California political subdivisions.
The communication indicates that the League Board of Directors took no action at
its meeting in Los Angeles on October 11, 1964, on the resolutions submitted by
sevcral ()range County Cities, and set forth the reasons for no action being taken.
It was moved by Councilman McCarney, and seconded by Councilman Wright, timat the
City Council take no stand in support of legislation requesting elimination of
time State Sales Tax on purchases by California political subdivisions. Prior to
voting on this mo[ion, discussion was held concerning the possi~_lity of taking
a stand in opposition £o such proposed legislation, after which Councilman Wright
withdrew his second to Councilman McCarney~s motion. However, after further
discussion, Councilman Wright again seconded the motion~ which was unanimously
carried.
CO~I~N.~C~.I.ON .FROM CYPRESS ~HOOL DISTRICT RE: TRANSFER OF .C~.OSS~NG G~ARD. TO
MORRIS SCHOOL ON BALL.ROAD: The City Manager presented a communiction from the
Cypress School District, dated October 27, 1964, requesting the movlng of time
Crossing Guard from the Walker Street crossing south of Ball Road to the
crossing for time Morris School on Ball Road.
The School has agreed that at the time development takes place on time north side
of Ball Road and time traffic signals are installed, this crosswalk coul~ be relocated
at the intersection of Ball and Walker to provide for more adequate traffic safety
for the school children.
It was moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by Councilman McCarney, and
unanimously carried, to grant the request of the Cypress School District and
authorize the placement of the crosswalk at Graham on Ball Road and the relocation
of time Crossing Guard from the Walker Street location at the time the Juliet Morris
School is completed.
November 9, 1964
COmmUNICATIONS FROM MR. BOB KINQ~ ANAHEIM~ AND CITY OF FOUNTAIN V~L~E.Y RE:
OPPOSITION Tq S~NATE .BILL NO. 856 AND THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSqCI~TION OF
GOVERNMENT.S: The City Manager presented communications from Mr, Bob King,
Anaheim, and from the City of Fountain Valley, requesting the City to oppose
Senate Bill No. 856 and the Southern California Association of Governments.
The basic reasons for opposition in tile communications are the loss of local
control and the possibility that the Southern California Association of
Governments is the first step in promoting metropolitan government in this area.
Following discussion, it was moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by Councilman
>[cCarney~ and unanimously carried, these communications be received and filed.
C~[U~I.CATION FROM ORANGE COUNTY PLanNING DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION RE:.. PRQPOSED
LqS..A~..G~ES. R~.GIO~A~ T.RANSPORTATION STUDY AGREEmeNT: The City Yanager presented
a co~nunication dated November 2, 1964, from the Orange County Plannin~ Directors
Associatiou regarding theproposed Los Angeles Regional Transportation Study
Agreement providing for regional transportation planning, requesting ratification
be withheld until the A~reement is revised to eliminate the possibility of the
Transportation Advisory Committee assumin~ the role of a regional planning agency.
Following discussion, it was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman
Gorzeman, and unanimously carried, this communication be received and filed,
CO~D[UNICAT.ION FROM ROB~T .H. GRANT AND COMPANY RE: APPROVAL OF FINAL. T.RACT .MAPS
NOS. 5565 AND 5072: The City ~anager presented a communication dated November 4,
1964, from the Robert H. Grant Company, requesting the acceptance of Final Tract
~iaps Nos. 5565 and 5072. The ~rant Company requests that these maps be accepted
by the Council aubject to the posting of bonds and fees prior to the City releasing
them for recordation.
Tile City Manager recommended that Tract M~ No. 5072 not be approved at this
time due to technical engineering problems, however he recommended that Tract
Map No.5565, located on the north side of Orange Avenue, west of Moody Street,
could be approved subject to the posting of bonds and fees. The Public Works
Director concurred in this recommendation.
,
Following brief discussion, it was moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by
Councilman McCarney, and unanimously carried, to continue consideration of Tract
Hap No. 5072 and further to approve Final Tract MaD Yo. 5565 and upon posting of
the required bonds, fees, and agreements, to authorize their acceptance and
signature |~y the Mayor and City Clerk, and further authorize the City Clerk
to sign th~ record map. The following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: O COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright~ and Noe
None
None
REQUEST E~O~ .CYPR.ESS CHAMBER OF CO~MERCE RE: PRESENTATION OF CiTY WREATH AT
qI.T~ .qF .CYPRESS .RACE Q.N NOVEM~E~ ~ 196~: The City Manager presented a request
from the Cypress Chamber of Commerce to supply a wreath of flowers to be presented
to the winning quarterhorse in the City of Cypress Race on November 23, 1964, by
Mi~ Cypress.
Following discussion, it was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman
Gorzeman, and unanimously carried, to authorize an expenditure not D exceed
$25.00 for the purchase of the requested wreath, said wreath to have the
designation "City of Cypress" placed on it. The following roll call vote was
taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCIL~N:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
G~rzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
COMMUNICATION FROM GLEN PARK HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION RE: REOUEST FOR CITY
~.SI.S.T.~N.CE I.~ ANNEXING TO CITY OF CYPRESS: A communication dated November 5,
1964, was presented from Mr. Joseph Zdeb, representing the Los Angeles County
portion of the Glen Park Homeowners' Association, requesting the assistance of
the City of Cypress in investigating the possibility of altering the Los Angeles-
Orange County boundaries and subsequently the annexation of ~hier area to the
City of Cypress.
November 9, 1964
The City ~.~anager stated that he has met with a representative of Los Angeles
County concerning this matter, who has indicated a willingness to coooperate in
tile de-annexation of the subject area from the County of Los Angeles.
Following discussion, it was moved by Councilman Kanel, seconded by Councilman
Wright, and unanimously carried, to authorize the City staff to assist the
residents of Los An~.les County's portion of Glen Park in becoming a part of the
City of Cypress. The followin~ roll call vote was taken:
AY}~S: 5 COUNCIL~IEN:
~x~'OES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
A!~SI'ZNT: 0 COUNCIL~N:
Corzeman, Kanel, ~4cCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
REIP~BURSE~.EN.T AGREEP~N.T WITIt ROBERT H. GR/LYT AND CO~{PANY FOR. ROSE ,,AN~,CIRC,LE~
TRACT N,O...4.752: The City Attorney requested that consideration of this Agreement
be continued until the next City Council meeting.
It was moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by Councilman Wright, and unanimously
carried, to continue consideration of this Reimbursement Agreement until the
regular meeting of November 23, 1964.
~lr. Pete Van Ruiten, 9432 South Bloomf~_ld, addressed the Council concerning
the status of drainage problems in Drainage District 2-A.
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION CONCERNING CARPORT ELEVATIONS IN
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. C-156~ LARWIN COMPANY: A report dated November 5, 1964,
was presented from the Secretary of the Planning Commission, stating that the
Larwin Company has appealed to the City Council to reverse the action of the
Planning Con~nission in denying approval of the carport elevations which they
submitted, as set forth in Conditional Use Permit No. C-156. The Larwin Company
first received approval of Conditional Use Permit No. C-156 in September of
1963~ at which time Condition ~o. 10 required that a variation in the roof'styles
of the garages shall be maintained and shall be subject to approval of the City
Staff. There was an additbnal condition that the Planning Commission shall
approve all typical elevation plans of all models submitted to the City.
The Larwin Company submitted for plan checking, .'. a carport which was constructed
of steel supporting beams and had a corrugated aluminum top. The staff took
the position that the carports as submitted do not conform to a variation in
roof styles, therefore, any deviation would have to be approved by the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission, at its meeting of October 15, 1964, reviewed
the plans and determined that these elevations submitted did not conform to the
terms of the Conditional Use Permit and therefore denied the request for approval
of building permits for this type of carport.
The City Manager stated that the staff feels that the carport plans as submitted
would not be desirable for all of the units ~ Larwin's condominium development;
however, suggested the possibility of using these for only a portion of the
entire development.
The Secretary of the Planning Commission stated that the corrugated aluminum top
does not fit in with tile architecture of the dwelling units.
Mr. Lee (]oldin, representing the Larwin Company, addressed tile Council, stating
that the Larwin Company is not requesting this type of cl'port for the entire
Condominium development, but only for the first 69 units. Mr, Coldin further
discussed the desirability of the type of carport requested, with reference to
the appearance of open space.
~lr. Goldin also stated that tile Larwin Company is desirous of constructing this
type of carport at the model-home site.
A motion was made by Councilman Gorzeman to continue this matter to allow time
for discussions to be held between the staff and the Larwin Company concerning
the carports. Tile lnotion died for lach of a second.
Following further discussion, it was moved by Councilman Kanel, seconded by
Councilman :lcCarney, and carried, to grant the appeal of the Larwin Company and
allow the construction of the requested carports at the model home site and for
the first 69 units of the Condominium development. The following roll call vote
was taken:
November 9, 1964
AYES: 4 GOU;~C [L"IEN:
FLOES: ,1 CO[~2jCTL'[
ABSENT: 0 COUNCIL.~EN:
Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
'fr. Lee Goldin addressed the Council, stating that the Larwin Company will
agree to changing these carports after the first 69 units if requested to do so
by the City.
APPROVAL OF FINAL TRACT ?t~.P NO. 5553~ VALENCIA HOMES: A report dated November 5,
1964, was presented from the City Engineer, recommending approval of Final Tra~t
?lap No. 5553, located on the west side of Valley View south of the Pacific
[Electric Railroad, 91 R-1 lots, as requested by Valencia Homes, 8670 Wilshire
Foulevard, Beverly Bills, California.
In answer to an inquiry from Councilman McCarney concerning the drainage in the
area of the subject tract, the Public Works Director reported that the Larwin
Company had been notifed that no construction can be star~ed until plans are
filed for the ocnstruction of a one-barrel pipe in Newman Avenue. He further
stated that the Larwin Company's ~ngineer has indicated a willingness to cooperate
with the City in the solution to the drainange problems in this area.
In answer to a question from Councilman Gorzeman, theCity Attorney stated that
there would be no liability on the part of the City concerning the drainage
at Nex~lan and Walker Streets.
Following discussion concerning the drainage, it was moved by Councilman McCarney,
seconded by Councilman Gorzeman, and unanimously carried, to approve Final Tract
Hap No. 5553 based upon the statements of the City Engineer and City Attorney
and further to authorize acceptance of the Agreements and bonds for Public
Improvements, authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the A~reements, and
authorize the City Clerk to sign the record map. The following roll call vote
was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
R~.Q~S~..FOR .R~.LEA~E OF BONDS, CE~ITQ.~ ANR VALLEY VIEW~ P~A. XMOND SEEkeR: A report
dated November 5, 1964, was presented from the City Manager, stating that
~r. Raymond Spehar has requested that the City Council give consideration of masonry
wall on the south side of the property, and the construction of a bridge from the
rear of the property on Valley View, all of which were required as a part of
Variance No. V-161 for the commercial development at the southwest corner of
Cerritos and Valley View. Mr. Spehar~s request is based on the fact that
conditions have changed since the initial requirements were established in 1961.
The City Manager pointed out that the sewer bond is no longer necessary due to the
8-inch sewer frDm Cerritos nerthly along Valley View; the bridge construction
bond is no longer necessary since ~he parking area is not large enough to ~arrant
an additional access from Valley View; and the masonry wall bond is no longer
necessary because the City has zoned th~ area to the south for Commercial purposes
and a wall to serve as a buffer is no longer needed.
It was moved by Councilman Kanel, seconded by Councilman McCarney, and
unanimously carried, to authorize the release of the following bonds subject
to Hr. Spehar signing a release, holding the City harmless for the sewer service
now being provided:
Bond ~o. B-109037 $3,500.00
Sewer Extension
Bond No. B-109039 $1,500.00
Masonry Wall Construction
Bond No. B-109340 $5,000.00
The following roll call vote was taken:
Bridge Construction
AYES: 5 COUNCIL~N:
~40ES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUnCILmEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, >IcCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
November 9, 1964
ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENT DEED FROM PRESTON K. ALLEN FOR NORTHEAST CORNER OF
VALLEY VIEW AND ORANGE: A report d'ated November 5, 19641 was 'p'r'e'~'ehted from
the City Manager, stating that the City has received an Easement Deed for
street widening on Valley View and Orange Avenue, the northeast cornerl as
required in Small Subdivision Permit No. 7, from Mr. Preston K. Allen, et al.
It was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by Councilman Gorzeman, and unanimously
carried, to accept the Easement Deed from Mr. Preston K. Allen, et al, and
authorize the City Clerk to submit the deed to the County for recordation. The
following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 CO[~CILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT:O COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wri~.ht ~ and Noe
None
None
JANITORIAL SERVICE FOR CITY HALL AND POLICE STATION: A report dated November 5~
1964, wan presented from the City Manager~ stating that the j anitorial service
provided by Thorough Maintenance Company was recently discontinued due to problems
encountered with the Janitorial Service. The report further stated that members
of the City street crew have indicated a desire to provide the j anitorial services
on their own time,
If the Street Maintenance Crew does this workl the City would have to purchase
the required supplies and equipment, which would include the purchase of a floor
waxing machine.
Following a brief discussion, it was moved by Councilman Wright and seconded by
Councilman ~cCarney, to authorize the City Manager to utilize members of the
=kree~ !~nintenance Division to provide janitorla! service for the City Hall and
Police facilities on tbeir own time at regular overtime pay, and further to
authorize the purchase of a floor waxing machine andother necessary maintenance
supply items for building maintenance.
In answer to an inquiry from Councilman Gorzeman, the City Manager stated that the
City would maintain a record of the time ~volved in providing this janitorial
service.
Councilman Kanel stated that he feels if a private organization could do the
work he would rather it be done by the private group, consequently he wished to
abstain from voting on Councilman McCarney's motion. The following roll call
vote was taken on Councilman McCarney's motion;
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEN: Oorzeman, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
~JOES: 0 COUNCILMEN: NOne
ABSENT: 0 COUNCIl. MEN: None
ABSTAINED: 1 COUNCILMEN: Kanel
AUTOMOTIVE GAS SUPPLIES AND MAINTENANCE BIDS: A report dated November 5, 1964,
was presented from the City Manager, stating that a bid was requested from all
service stations within the City for supplying the City with the annual supply
of gasoline~ tires, and maintenance. The bids were based upon the total con-
sumption of 24,000 gallons of gas and the purchase of 100 tires on a one-year
basis. The following is a summary of the gas and tire bid, which is a major
portion of the cost to the City.
NAME OF BIDDER GASOLINE TIRES TOTAL BID
Nancock $ 7,416 $ 1,915 $ 9,331
Kusion 7,896 2,275 10,171
Van Kampen 7,896 2,450 10,346
March 7,8~6 2,800 10,696
It was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman Gorzeman, and
unanimously carried~ to continue purchase of gasoline, tires~ maintenance, and
supplies from the Hancock Service Station, 4662 Lincoln Avenue, Cypress.
The following roll call vote was taken:
November 9, 1964
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, NcCarney, Wright, and NOe
None
None
SECOND READING ORDINANCE AMENDING BUILDING CODE BY ADDING SECTION1714: It
was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman Wright, and unanimously
carried, the following Ordinance be adopted, title as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 223
AN ORDINANCE OF TNE CITY OF CYPRESS AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 126
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING TNE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, 1961 EDITION,
BY ADDING THERETO, SECTION 1714, WHICH RELATES TO SHOWER WALLS
AND WALLS SURROUNDING BATH TUBS, AND MATERIALS AND APPLICATION.
The following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Corzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wrlght~ and NOe
None
None
SECOND RE~DING ORDINANCE REQUIRING PERMITS FOR LIVE ENTERTAINMENT: The City
Manager presented an Ordinance which had its first reading at the Council meeting
of October 26~ 1964, said Ordinance pertaining to permits for live entertainment.
Discussion was held concerning Section 4, with reference to applicants having
been arrested.
Considerable discussion was held concerning this Ordinance as it would apply
to live entertainment for childPens groups, church groups,and other charitable
organizations.
Following a review of the proposed Ordinance, the Police Chief indicated that
he feeIs the Ordinance would not create a hardship on the groups oP organizations
previously mentioned.
Following discussion, it was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by Councilman
McCarney, and unanimously carried, the following Ordinance be adopted, title
as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 224
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS REQUIRING
PERMITS FOR LIVE ENTERTAINMENT, PRESCRIBING THE PROCEDURES FOR
THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS AND IMPOSING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS.
The following rolt call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, NcCarney, Wright, and NOe
NOne
None
RESOLUTION ALLOWING CLAIMS AND DEMANDS NOS. 10031 THRU 10078 (PAYROLL): It
was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman Gorzeman, and
unanimously carried, the following Resolution b~ adopted, title as follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 529
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS
AND DEHANDS NOS. 10031 THRU 10078
The following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel~ McCaPney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
November 9~ 1964
RESOLUTION 4~L~W~NG CLAIMS AND D~MANDS NpS. 10079 THRU 19129 {,~OMMERCIAL W~R,P~TS):
It was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman Gorzeman, and
unanimously carried, the following Resolution be adopted, title as follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 530
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS
~YD DEMANDS NOS. 10079 THRU 10129
The follow~n~ roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILS~N:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, >~cCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
URGENCY ORDINA~9~ CONCER~.ING LOCATION OF CI]~ COUNCIL MEETINGS: The City
~tanager informed the Council that the rehabilitated building on the Civic Center
land would be ready for City Council meetings as of December 1, 1964, and it would
be necessary m adopt an Ordinance establishing the new location for the City
Council Chambers.
It was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman Uri~ht, and unanimously
carried, to read in full and Urgency Ordinance designating the place of the
meetings of the City Council. The following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCIUIEN:
ABSENT: 0 CO~qCILMEN:
Oorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
The City ~anaRer read in full the Urgency Ordinance, title of which is as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 225
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS
AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 134 ~\ND 79, I~rHICH AMENDED ORDINANCE
NOS. 1 AND 6, I~IICtl DESIGNATED TIlE TI.~ AND PLACE OF THE
MEETINGS OF TttE CITY COUNCIL.
It was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by Councilman Gorzeman, and
unanimously carried, this Ordinance be adopted. The following roll call vote
was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
OP~,L COmmUnICaTIONS:
Fir, Preston K. Allen, 2704 West Ball Road, Anaheim, California, addressed the
Council, asking if it is customary ~en developing a piece of property, for the
peroperty owner to have to install street improvements adjacent to the development.
The City Manager and Public Works Director explained the City's policy concerning
this ma~ter.
Mr. Lee Goldin, representing the Larwin Company, addressed the Council, suggesting
that when the City receives reimbursement from the State for Street Improvement
Projects, that the City ~ turn reimbnrse the developers who installed the s~reet
improvement. The City Manager explained th~ the City is not directly reimbursed
for the costs of such construction.
Councilman Kanel inquried of the City Attorney concerning the status of the suit
for delinquent business licenses. The City Attorney presented a preliminary
report concerning the law suit, stating thatover one-half of the individuals
involved have been served, and defaults are in the process of being entered
against the remaining individuals.
~ir, Preston K. Allen, 2704 West Ball Road, Anaheim, again addressed the Council
concerning his Small Subdivision Permit approved at the last City Council
meeting, stating that an error had been made in a communication sent to him
concerning the required bonds. Mr. Allen was informed that this error would be
corrected.
November 9, 1964
Mr. Carl de Pietro~ 10301 Sande Street, Cypress, addressed the Council, asking
when information concerning the delinquent business license suit will be made
public. The City Attorney stated that this matter would probably be public
information in approximately 30 d~ys.
!!r..lnmes Duncan, 9582 South Walker fltreet, (iDT}ess, ruhTressed tile Council,
requesting that after mowing the parkway grass and weeds, the City Street Crew
haul away the pile of grass clippings. He pointed out ti~at the clippings wash
down into his yard and plul] up the drainage. The Public Works Director advised
Hr. Duncan that he wonld check into this request.
ADJOU}INr~NT:
There being no further business to come before the Council, the Hayor declared
the meeting adjourned at 9:47 p.m.
r ]AYO}~ "/
ATTE ST:
CIT~ CLERK
November 9, 1964