HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 65-01-11MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS
HELD
January 11, 1965
The Cypress City Council held a regular meeting on January 11, 1965, in the
City Council Chambers, 5311 Orange Avenue, Cypress, California, at 7~30 p.m.,
Mayor Frank P. Noe presiding.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, ~nd Noe
None
Also present were City Manager/City Clerk Darrell Essex; City Attorney
James Erickson; Secretary of the Planning Cormuission Dartell Dalton;
Public Works Director Harold Neu; Police Chief O.C. Foster, and Building
Superintendent Thomas Nudson.
MINUTES:
It was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by C~Jncilman Gorzeman, and
unanimously carried, to approve the December 28, 1964, City Council minutes
as mailed.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
Mr. Ward Wright, 3109 Volk Avenue, Long Jeach, addressed the Council, inquiring
as to the status of the second reading of the Ordinance granting Zone Change
No. Z-121. The City Manager advised that at the time the second reading was
scheduled, the City Council requested further studies to be made prior to
adopting the second reading of the Ordinance. He further stated that
although these studies are not complete at this time, this matter should be
ready for Council consideration at the January 25th meeting.
Mr. Ward Wright again addressed the Council, reading in full a letter
Agreement dated November 10, 1964, from Star Dust Lands, Inc. to Mr. and Mrs.
Pete Van Ruiten, concerning the Star Dust Lands (developer of land to the south
of Mr. Van Ruiten's property) accepting the drainage water from Mr. Van Ruiten's
property.
The City Manager emphasized that the drainage of the subject land would have
to be resolved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Mr. Ward Wright stated that he had some aerial surveys taken of the area in
question and requested that the Coudcil allow a Mr. Thompson, who had prepared
these surveys, to make a presentation to the City Council concerning the sub~ ct
property.
A motion was made by Councilman McCarney to consider this matter under the
New $usiness portion of the Agenda, however the motion died for lack of a
second.
Councilman Wright indicated that this matter had been referred to the staff for
further study at a previous meeting and he feels the Council should await
their studies prior to taking any action.
Mayor Noe advised Mr. Wright that the Council would hear the comments of
Mr. Thompson at this time.
Mr. Norman Thompson addressed the Council, stating that Mr. Ward Wright had
requested aerial photographic materials concerning the property owned by
Mr. Van Ruiten. Mr. Thompson displayed several aerial photographic maps and
a topographic grade map, indicating the various elevations of the property
in question. The topographic grade map indicated an elevation of ~3.80 feet
at the north property line and 31.00 feet at the south property line.
January 11, 1965
Mr. Ward Wright again addressed the Council, stating that a Mr. Nelson,
representing the Ballentine Company which constructs Drive-In Theaters, was
in the audience and requested th~ he be allowed to make a presentation to the
City Council. However, it was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by
Councilman Gorzeman, and unanimously carried, to consider this matter further
under the New Business portion of the Agenda. The following roll call vote
was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILME~ Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN: None
PUBLIC HEARING RE: LIVE ENTERTAIh~dENT PERMIT, THE BODY SHOP: The Mayor
announced this was the time and place for the Pu~ic Hearing to consider an
application for a Live Entertainment Permit to permit solo dancing by the
bar maids during the performance of their duties at the Body Shop, 4612 Lincoln
Avenue, Cypress, Calif6rnia, as requested by Billy J. Stovall.
Mayor Noe declared the Public tlearing opened. The City Manager presented a
report dated January 7, 1965, which stated that although the application
indicates there is no formal entertainment at the Body Shop, the definition
of "Live Entertainme~' as outlined in Ordinance No. 224 would indicate that
the solo dancing for which the permit was requested would be considered as
"Live Entertainmerf'.
The difference between the Body Shop and other beer bars in the community is
due to the following unique characteristics which relate to the entertainment:
The existence of an elevated platform or stage surrounded by mirrors,
which is used to serve patrons at the bar and for solo dancing of the
bar maids.
2. The abbreviated costumes worn by the bar maids.
3. The suggestive dancing which can be described as bumps and grinds of
the bar maids while serving patrons.
4. The solo performances including dancing and limbo exhibitions at time s
other than serving patrons.
The report from the City Manager further indicated that the City Council should
use the following criteria in the approval or denial of the subject permit
following the public hearing:
1. Whether or not the live entertainment comports with the peace, health,
~afety, convenience, good morals, and general welfare of the public.
2. ~ether or not the applicant ie fit to be trusted with the privileges
granted by such permit.
3. Whether or not the applic~n~ has a bad moral character, intemperate
habits, or a bad reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity.
Whether or not the applicant or any person in charge thereof violates
or permits any infraction of any law of the State or of any Ordinance
of the City.
5. ]~Pnether or not the permittee obtains permit by misrepresentation.
The following information submitted by the Police Department was presented for
City Council consideration is relation to ~he above criteria.
1. In regard to the peace, health, safety, convenience, good morals, and
general welfare of the public, the Police Departme~ indicates that 67 complaints
and disturbance calls have been ma~e over the last three months of operation.
Also, 72 parking citations were issued, 180 bar checks made, and 10 vice investi-
gations conducted. In addition, a record check of some of tile bar maids disclosed
that one has been convicted of prostitution in Long Beach· Based on the above-
mentioned experience, it is estimated that the City will incur an expense of
approximately $5,000 annually for police activities at the subject location.
January 11, 1965
In comparison, the other four beer bars operated in the City have only had 39
calls of complaints and disturbance, four vice investigations, and 260 ~ar
checks over the sane three-month period of time.
2. Relative to the character of the applicant, it should be noted that
the application form was misrepresented in that all of the criminal offenses
of the owner were not listed, ~nor was the correct residential address given for
the applicant and the Manager.
The applicant, within the past few months, has been convicted of resisting
arrest with Cypress Police Officers during domestic problems with his wife.
The incident with the Cypress Police Department resulted in two Police Officers
receiving minor injuries. The applicant has also previously been convicted of
a disorderly person charge, with bail forfeited.
A record check of the Manager indicates that he was arrested for drunk in 1957
with no disposition given.
Based on these facts, the Police Department recommended that the operation of the
Body Shop be limited in nature to that of other beer bars in the community and
that the City Council deny the application for live entertainment as requested
by Billy J. Stovall.
The Mayor asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak in favor of the
application for a Live Entertainment Permit at the Body Shop.
Mr. Billy J. Stovall, 4612 Lincoln Avenue, Cypress, owner of the Body Shop,
addressed the Council, reviewing the improvements installed on the property.
In relation to the report of the City Manager, Mr. Stovall explained that
although he did not reside at the address listed on the application, it was used
as a mailing address, He further stated that the charges referred to in Long
Beach had been dismissed by the Judge, and also reviewed the r~asons for ~is
conviction on resisting arrest with the Cypress Police Officers.
Mr. Stovall stated that the law enforcement problems were due to the fact that
the business had just opened and related that to his knowledge only one fight
had taken place inside the establishment, which had been haddled by the Secmri~y
Officer employed by the Body Shop. tie indicated that a request had been made
of the Police Department to run background checks on all of the bar maids in
order to remove those which ~re not satisfactory, He further added that the
City did receive substantial amounts of money in taxes from the operation of the
beer bar. He stated that he had no problem with the Alcoholic Beverage Control
Board, although he did have an "action" pending against the Police Department.
Mr. Jim MacDonald, 2545 East Chapman, Fullerton, Attorney representing Mr. Stovall,
addressed the Council, stating that the Entertainment Ordinance relates only to
people that do entertaining, not to the building. }ie advised the Council that the
limbo dancer had been discharged and that the numberous complaints were due to
the fact that the Body Shop do~s more business than any other beer bar in the
community.
Mr. MacDonald stated that he thought Mr. Stovall was wrong regarding his
statement about an "action" again st the Police Chief, however he contended
that since he had made a charge of an "attempted shakedown" by the Police
Department to the District Attorney's office, the Police Chief would be unable
to give an unbiased report on this live entertainment permit.
Mr. MacDonald further stated that the application need not be denied since the
Entertainment Ordinance contained mfficient restrictions to Control the
operation of the beer bar by conditions imposed on the permit, if granted, He
further stated that the Ordinance is subject to attack in that it does not
provide a definite guide for the City Council to follow to determine whether or
not an application should be granted, as did the Ordinance in the City of Los
Angeles in the case of Daniel vs, Board of Police Commissioners, City of Los
Angeles.
In answer to a question from Councilman McCarney regarding whether a denial of
this permit would be con~ldered as discrimination against the Body Shop
Mr. MacDonald re~lied that a denial would not be discrimination per se, but that
some due process is denied by allowing a report to be made by a person who has
been attacked by the applicant.
January 11, 1965
In answer to an inquiry, Mr, MacDonald explained that the attack was the
report made to the District Attorney's Office regarding ~the Police Chief.
City Attorney James Erickson explained that the Ordinance was prepared in a
manner specifically desi~nated to take advantage of the reported appellate
decision in the case mentioned by Mr. MacDonald, However, the "guides"
referred to by Mr. MacDonald were not the standards for action upon the permit,
but were basis of automatic dlsqualification.. Mr. Erickson stated the
standard, or criteria in the Los Angeles Ordinance, was exactly the s a~e as
that in Cypress Ordinance No. 224, and that the Ordinance is not subject to
attack upon a lack of adequate standards.
Mr. Stovall explained that his attorneys were not at liberty to speak regarding
the charges made to the District Attorney. However, he wished to inform the
Council that he felt he has been "pushed around". As a result he employed two
investigators and an attorney. Mr. Stovall charged that the Police Chief had
made seven different visits to the Body Shop Hansget, Mr. John De Porters
attempting a bribe in the ~ount of $500 for a member of the City Council. He
further disclosed that in talklag to one of the investigators at the District
Attorneyss Offices ha was informed that the matter will go to the Grand Jury and
somebody will be indicted.
Mr. Stova11 asked the Council whether or not they had information on this
matter.
City Manager, Darrell Essex, requested an opportunity to clarify the situation,
and ~eported that he had been aware of the charges made and the investigation
that had been conducted by the District Attorney*s office regarding thus matter.
He informed the Council tha't a complete inves tigation, which included lie
detector tests, had been conducted by the District Attorueyss office and in a
discussion with the District Attorney on this date, the Distri ct Attorney
informed him that the entire matter had been dosed, and no further disposition
of it would be made by the District Attorney*s office. He further informed the
Council that the District Attorney had indicated he would be available to
appear before the City Council to state that the charges were unfounded and that
the investigation of the Police Chief had been dosed.
Following a statement by Mr. Stovall concerning the unfair treatment he has
received from the City Managers Mayor Noe requested that the public hearing be
limi ted to discussions of the permit application.
Mr. ERickson further advised that further d~scussion regarding the charges by
the applicant against the Police Chief be limited in view of the information
available from the District Attorneyss office that the matter has been fully
investigated and closed and the immateriality of further discussion to the
criteria upon which the Council must make its determination whether or not to
issue the permit.
Mr. Jack Millers Attorney representing Hr. Stovall, addressed the Council,
stating that he had broughti~the District Attorney into this matter following
information that his client had provided him. He stated that he was not aware
that the matter had been closed, and that lie detector tests are inconclusive
at best,
Mr. Miller further informed the Council that Mr. Stnvall, early in October,
had requested his advise on what to do in case of an "attempted shakedown" and
at that time private investigators were employed and their information was
passed on to theDistrict Attorneyss office. He stated thathe certainly was
not accusing the Police Chief of doing anything wrong, but merely wanted to
relate the facts that have transpired.
City Attorney Erickson, restated that this further discussion did not relate to
the criteria provided in the Ordinance for the issuance or denial of the permit
requested by the application under consideration and that the discussion
should have been concluded.
Mr. Miller stated that the report of the City Manager that the District
Attorney*s office had closed the case and no action was going to be taken was
only hearsay information.
January 11, 1965
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the application.
Mr. Ted Coopman, 4711 Lincolns Cypress, addressed the Councils requesting
information as to the $5p000 per year cost for police enforcement, and whether
or not this money could be saved iffthe beer bar were not allowed to operate.
Chief Foster outlined the method used to determine the mount of cost for Zaw
enforcement at the Body Shop and explaiv~d that the manpower could be used in
other Zaw enforcement activities in the community.
Mr. Stovall requested information as to why there have heennoarrests for any of
the ten vice investigations made at the Body Shop. Chief Foster advised that
several of these were still pending investigation.
In answer to a question from Mayor Noes Mr. Stovall indicated that he is the
sole owner of the Body Shop,
The City Attorney advised that ~e denial of the application ~ould result in the
requi~enent that the Body Shop conform to the smne operation as the other
beer bars in the community, but that the City Council had the right to 8rant the
permit subject to any conditions that they may wish to impose to insure that
such entertainment would conform to the standards required by the entertair~nent
ordinance.
Councihnan Gorzeman indicated that during his visit to the Body Shop with
the former City Attorney, the problem seemed to be primarily with the solo
dancing and exhibitions.
In answer to an inquiry from Councilman Kanel, the City Attorney advised that
costumed of the waitresses could be considered as part of the live entertainment
request.
Councilman Wright indicated that he had also visited the Body Shop and
concurred in the statements of Councilman Oorzeman.
Mr. Stovall informed the Council that only one girl dances at a time due to an
existir~ State law. He further stated that it was not entertainment if only
one girl dances. In answer to a question from Councilman Oorzeman, Mr.
Stovall indicated that more than one girl has danced at one time upon occasion
at the Body Shop.
City Attorney Erickaon informed the Council that he knew of no S tare law
regulating live entertaioment in this manner and Mr. Miller, the attorr~y
for the applicant, also stated that he knew of no such State law.
Mr. Stovall indicated that in his opinion he complied with the five criteria
outlinedin the Ordinance, and that he has had local bridge clubd, the Fire
Department, bowling organizations, and others in attendance at the beer bar.
He agains reviewed the disposition of the Long Beach disorderly person charge
and indicated the Judge returned his money. He stated that'hehas never lied
to any person, and does not make a habit of drinking beer. He further
explained that his mailing address is still the s mne as indicated in the
application, although he no longer resides there.
Mayor Nce stated that on his visit at the Body Shop with Councilman McCarney
and City Manager Essex, he noticed nothing unusual.
Mr. Jack Miller briefly discussed the various opinions on suggestive dancing
and indicated that many television shows display more obscene dancing than
displayed at the Body Shop.
At ~his point a bar maid from the Body Shop in attendance displayed the type of
costume worn by the bar maids.
Mr. Bernard Cooneye! 11708 Walcroft, Lakewood, addressed the Council, indicating
that he previously was employed by N.B.C and during a recent upsetting
experience!i~his life he artended the Body Shop at the reconunendatton of a
friend and ha hag artended r~gula~iy'ever since. He further indicated he ~elt
nothing was wrong ~ith the operation at the beer bar,
There being no further oral protests and no written communications, the Mayor
declared the public hearing dosed,
January 11, 1965
The City Attorney suggested that if there were any further questions to be
asked, that the Council reopen the Public Hearing.
Discussion ensued regarding the type of conditions that could be established
if the permit were to be approved. The City Manager informed the Council that
the Police Chief had reconnnened continuation of this matter if the Council
wished to grant the permit in order to establish conditions of approval.
It was moved by Councilman McCarney and seconded by Councilman Wright to
continue consideration of the Live Entertainment Permit requested by Billy J.
Stovall until the next regular City Council meeting. Prior to voting
discuss ion was held on the merits of continuing this matter.
The City Attorney suggested that if the Council wished to continue the matter
for two weeks, that the public hearing should be reopened a~d also continued·
The following roll call vote was taken on Councilman McCarney's motion for
continuance:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 2 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
McCarney, Wright, and Noe
Gorzeman and Kanel
None
A motion was made by Councilman Kanel~to reconsider the former action, however
City Attorney Ertckson advised Mr. Kanel that since he did not vote with the
prevailing side on the subject motion, he could not make a motion to reconsider.
It was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman Wright, and
unanimously carried, to reconsider the action taken to continue consideration of
the Live Entertainment Permit until the next regular City Council meeting.
It was then moved by Councilman Kanel, seconded by Councilman Wright, and
unanimously carried, to rescind the action taken to continue consideration of the
Live Entertainment permit until the next regular City Council meeting.
Following a brief discussion, it was moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by
Councilman Wright, and unanimously carried, to approve the granting of a permit
to Billy J. Stowall, subject to the following conditions:
1. There be no suggestive dancing which can be described as bumps and grinds
of the bar maids while serving patrons, and
2. That there be no solo performances including dancing and limbo
exhibitions, and
That within three months from this date if there is no improvement
in the enforcement problems, that the matter be brought before the
City Council again for public hearing and possible revocation.
The following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
PUBLIC HEARING RE: LIVE ENTERTAIk~4ENT FR~. THE UNICORN RESTAURANT: The Mayor
announced this was the time and place to consider an application for a Live
Entertaiement Permit to permit an organist at the Unicorn Restaurant,
5960 Cerritos Avenue, Cypress, California, as requested by Allan Robert,.
The Mayor declared the Public Hearing opened. The City Manager presented a
report dated January 7, 1965, stating that the re,JeSt for an organist as live
entertairmaent is a normal operation for a coktail lounge and restaurant as
operated at the Unicorn Restaurant. The nature of the entertainment consists of
one person playing mus ic during the evening and early morning burs, and under
the terms of the definition of "Live Entertainment" outlined in Ordinance No.
224, the nature of this enter~ainment does Eall within the scope of Ordinance
No. 224.
The report outlined the following criteria which the City Council should use in
the approval or denial of the subject permit following the public hearing:
Whether or not the live entertainment comports with the peace~ health,
safety, convenience, good morals, and general welfare of the public.
Whether or not the applicant is f it to be trusted with the privileges
granted by such permit.
January 11, 1965
3, ~hether or not the applicant has a bad moral character, inter~erate
habits, or a bad reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity.
4. Whether or not the applicant or any person in charge thereof violates
or penmira any infraction of any law of the State or o f any Ordinance of the City.
5. Whether or not the permittee obtains permit by misrepresentation.
The following information submitted by the Police Department was presented for
City Council consideration in relation to the above criteria:
1. Police Departmment records indicate that five calls and complaints of
disturbances have been made during the past three months. In addition to these
calls and complaints, 12 bar checks were made and one vice investigation.
These calls are not an unusual mnount for an operation of this type.
2. The background check of the applicant indicates that he does not have
a prior record of convictions or problem with law enforcement agencies.
Mayor Non asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak for or against the
requested live entertainment permit. There being no written comunications and
no oral protests, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
It was moved by Councilman Corzeman, seconded by Councilman Wright, and
unanimously carried, to approve the Live Entertainment Permit for an Organist as
requested by Allan Roberrs, 3251 Main Way, Rossmoor, for a period of one year at
the Unicorn Restaurant, 5960 Cerritos Avenue, Cypress. The following roll call
vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
COMMUNICATION FROM STATE DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS RE: CALIFORNIA COUNTY ROAD AND
CITY STREET PROG,RE~S AND NEEDS REPORT: The City Manager presented a communica'
tion dated December 17, 1965, from the State Division of Highways, transmitting
a copy of the California County Road and City Street Progress and Needs Report
prepared by the Department of Public Works, Division of Highways, in accordance
with the provisions of Section 2156 of the Streets and Highways Code.
It was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by Councilman Kanel, and unanimously
carried, this communication be received a~ filed.
COMMUNICATION FROM MAYOR OF ~ITY OFALBANYa CALIFORN,IA RE: LEGISLATION TO
PREVENT DISRUPTION OF EDUCATIO~,AL PROCESSES AT STATE SUPPORTED UN,.IVERSITIES:
The City Manager presented a copy of resolution,adopted by t~ City Council
of Albany, California, recon~nending appropriate legislation to prevent
disruption of educational processes at State-supported universities.
Upon the request of Councilman Kanel, the City Manager read in full the
resolution from theCity of Albany, which outlined the recent problems
encountered at the University of Ca,lifornia, and recorenened legislation to
augment the existing rules a~regulations to effectuate the enforcement which
would prevent any future disturbances of this type,
Followipg a brief discussion, it was moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded
by Councilman Kanel, and unanimously carried, to support the resolution of the
City of Albany, and forward a letter indicating the City's support to the
City's State legislators.
CfNMENDATION OF GOVERNOR BROWN ON RECENT ACTION AT UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA:
Councilman Kanel stated that with reference to the previous action, he feels the
Council should go on record, cu~.ending Governor Brown for the action he took in
the recent University of California disturbances.
It was moved by Councilman Kanel, seconded by Councilman McCarney, and
unanimously carried, that an appropriate resolution be prepared, conmending
Governor Edmund G. Brown and the Board of Regents of the University of California,
for thief strong stand in bringing a peaceful solution to the recent problems at
the University. The following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, Mceakney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
January 11, 1965
COI'[MpNIC~T!ON ,FR9~ ,p,RANGE COUNTY PLanNiNG DI~,EC~OR TRANSM,I,TT,ING COyY, Oy, ORANp,E
COUNTY ~,IAS~ ,P~N O? REGIpN~L,,P~K,S,: The City Manager presented a cormmunica-
tion dated December 14, 1964, from the Orange County Planning Director,
transmitting.a copy of the Orange County Master Plan of Regional Parks. The
Master Plan indicates the nearest Regional Park to the City of Cypress is
located at the Nike site, south of Katella, east of Knott.
It was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by Councilman Gorzeman, and
unanimously carried, this communication be received and filed.
COMML~ICAT.Ip~..~ROM CITY OF GARDEN GROVe..Z~.A~IT~. ~p~UTIpN ~:, FORM~.IO.N
OF NEW MUNICIPAL..C~pB~' DI.S~.I~T: The City Manager presented a communication
dated December 31, 1964, from the City of Garden Grove, transmitting a resolution
requesting the formation of a new municipal court district comprising Garden
Grove, Stanton, Cypress, Los Alamitos, and contiguous County area. The resolution
further affirms the City of Garden Grove's position in obtaining a municipal
court facility within the corporate limits of Garden Grove.
Following a brief discussion, it was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by
Councilman Wright, and unanimously carried, to reaffirm the City Council action
of December 14, 1964, requesting a delay in any judicial district changes until
further studies have been completed, and request that consideration be given to
the City of Cypress as a possible municipal court location.
COP~IUNI~IQ~ f~OM,,,,,~,ITY OF GARDE~ GROV,~, TRANSM,!TTING R~SOL~TION ,E~,D,ORSING THE
AMERICAN HOST PROG..P~: The City Manager presented a communication dated
January 4, 1965, from the City of Garden Grove, transmitting a resolution
endorsing the American Host Program, a program which provides for the placement
of teachers from the free nations of Europe in homes of American families to
observe firstshand the American way of life.
Councilman Kanel stated that he is familiar with this program and strongly
supports it.
It was moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by Councilman Wright, and
unanimously carried, to express support of the American Host Program and request
the League of California Cities to also lend support to the Program.
PROCLAMATION OF JUNIOR CHAM.BER OF COMMERCE WEEK: The City Manager presented a
communication de'ted Ja'nuary 6, f~65,"from the Cypress Junior Chamber of Commerce,
requesting the proclamation of Jantmry 17 through January 23, 1965, as Jay-cee
Week in the City of Cypress.
It was moved by Councilman Kanel, seconded by Councilman Gorzeman, and
unanimously carried, to grant the request of the Cypress Junior Chamber of
Commerce, whereupon Mayor Noe proclaimed the week of January 17-23, 1965, as
Junior Chamber of Commerce Week in the City of Cypress.
CONSIDERAIION O~ FIpAL T..RACT MAP NO. 527.2.a ST~RDU.ST LA~.pS, .INC,: The City
Manager presented final Tract Map No. 5272, at the northeast and northwest
corner of Cerritos and Denni, 13.73 Acres, 60 R-1 lots, as requested by
Star Dust Lands, Inc., P. O. Box 2067, Anaheim, California. Although the final
check and engineering calculations have not been completed byte Engineering
Department, the Public Works Director has indicated that he has no objection to
approval of the map by the City Council subject to the completion of all
engineering calculations and final check by the Public Works~Department.
It was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by Councilman Manel, and
unanimously carried, to approve Final Tract Map No. 5272 subject to the completion
of final engineering checks and calculations by the Public Works Department and
further upon the posting of the required bonds, fees, and agream~nts; and to
authorize acceptance of the bonds and agreements and execution by the Mayor and
City Clerk; and further to 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:
Gorzaman, Kanel, McCarney, V~ ight, and Noe
None
None
January 11, 1965
CONSIDE~AyION 0F ~ONE CHANG.~ N,O. Z-1211, VAN...RUITEN| It was announced that the
matter of Zone Change No. Z-121 had been discussed during the Oral Communications
portion of the agenda and continued to this time.
City Attorney James Erickson suggested that if the Council wished to consider
additional information concerning this zone change, that an additiDnal public
hearing be called concerning the matter.
The City Manager stated that the City Council had continued the second reading
of Zone Change No. Z-121 until completion of the requested studies and
suggested that if any additional information concerning drainage or any other
matter is available, perhaps this could be presented to the staff for study.
Mr. Ward Wright, developer of the proposed drive-in to be located in the subject
area, addressed the Council, stating that a delay in the second reading of
the Ordinance granting Zone Change No. Z-121 could cause his firm to lose the
lease of the subject land. The City Attu~ney explained to Mr. Wright the
time period required to obtain a zone change.
In answer to a question from Councilman Wright concerning whether it would be
proper for the City Council to take action on the zone change since it was not
on the agenda, the City Attorney advised that the Counctl's previous decision on
the matter was to defer any action until receipt of a report from the staff
concerning various items, and to date this report has not been presented to the
Council. The city Attorney further advised the Council that the applicant's
lease arrangements should not enter into consideration of the zone change.
Mr. Pete Van R~4ten, 9432 South Bloomfield, Cypress, addressed the Council,
asking why the zone change was being continued because of drainage studies,
since the Grant Company had agreed to accept the drainage from his property
as set forth in the letter agreement read earlier in the meeting.
Mr. Richard Owen, representing the Robert t1. Grant Company, addressed the
Council, stating that a drainage easement referred to in the aforementioned
Letter Agreement between the Grant Company and Mr. Van Ruiten would not be
valid at this time due to denial of the final tract map in the area of the
subject easement.
The City Attorney stated that if the City Council desired an opinion on the
legality of the Letter Agreement between the Grant Company and Mr. Van Ruiten,
he would have to give it further study and report back at a future time.
It was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by Councilman Kanel, and
unanimously carried, to give this matter no further consideration at this
meeting.
Councilman Gorzeman suggested that if the applicants have further information
to present concerning the drainage problems in the area, that the information
be submitted to the City staff at the City Hall.
~CESS:
The Mayor declared a recess at 10:00 p.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 10:07 p.m., all City Councilmen being
present.
AU. TtIORIZA. T.IO.N TO ~DVERTISE FOR BIDS ON THBEE POLICE VEHICLES: A report dated
January 7, 1965, was presented from the City M'anager, stating that the City
Council has authorized the purchase of five police vehicles in the 1964-65
fiscal year. Tvo vehicles were purchased in October, and the remaining three
would be replacements of existing black and white vehicles, which will soon
exceed 60,O00m[les. The specifications will be the sane as Osed for the
purchase of the first two vehicles, and the Police Chief has requested that the
City Council authorize the advertisement of bids for three black and white cars,
said bids to be awarded at the City Council meeting, of February 8, 1965.
It was moved by Councilman Wright~ seconded by Councilman McCarney, and
unanimously carried, to approve the specifications and authorize the City Clerk
to advertise for bids on three police vehicles with trade-ins, said bids to be
received no later than 10:00 a.m. on ~londay, February 1, 1965.
January 11, 1965
~e following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NDES: 0 COUNCILLIEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
CERTIFICATION OF EMPLOYMENT LIST FOR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: A report dated
January 6, 1965, was presented from the City Manager, setting forth the
results of an examination for the position of Public Works Director.
It was moved by Councilman Gorzaman, seconded by Councilman Kanel, and
unanimously carried~ to certify the Public Works Director employment list as
submitted.
ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION REGARDING L~BOR RATES IN THE CITY OF CYPRESS: A report
da'ted' Jan~a'r~ 7,196'5','was p"~'s~'nted 'f'rom the Ci't'y Manag'er, s't'a'ting that Sections
1770 and 1773 of the State Labor Code require the publication of labor rates when
advertising Public Works projects and several cities in Orange County have adopted
a procedure in which the City Council, by resolution, declares and determines
current labor costs in the city, thus providing a savings in newspaper
publications costs when adver~ing public works projects.
It was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman Wright, and
unanimously carried, the f611owing Resolution be adopted, title as follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 542
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS
DETERMINING AND DECLARING THE GENERAL PREVAILING RATE OF WAGES
The following roll cell vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCII~EN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel~ McCarney~ Wright~ and Noe
None
None
REZONING S!UDY: A report dated January 7, 1965, was presented from the City
Manager~ stating that the City Council, at its regular meeting of Novamber 9,
1964, had requested that staff to review the effect of the location of the Junior
College in the City of Cypress upon the zoning and land use within theCity.
The following information from this study was submitted for Council consideration.
The action by the Junior College District to acquire approximately 112 acres in
the City removed 20 acres of R-4 zoning, 56 acres of R-1 zoning, and 21 acres of
C-2 zoning, resulting in a loss in density of 956 units, with a population of
2,755, and the loss of the propsed community shopping center.
The folloiwng recommendations were made as a result of the change in zone and land
use created by the location of the gunlot College in the City:
EXISTING AND PROPOSED ZONING
Zp.ne Lp~a.t.i.on Ac.~.eaB.e No. U.ni.ts Popp.~.a~.ion
Existing R-4 West of Valley View 10.6 265 663
Proposed to C-2 10.6 ......
Existing R-2 SW Corner of Orange & Holder 10.2 102 255
Proposed to R-3 10.2 204 510
Existing R-I East aide of Holder 4.75 23 87
Proposed to R-4 4.75 95 237
Existing M-1 West property line of existing 29.6 ......
Proposed to R-4 Mobile Home Mfg. Co.to Denni St. 29.6 739 1,845
Existing ~I-I LincOln - Denni to Drive-In 30.5 ......
Proposed to R-4 30.5 762 1,905
Existing M-1 Bloomfield 5.9
Proposed to H-C 5.9
ExistinF R-1 So. of Cerritos, E. of Walker 51.0 255 969
Proposed to P-M 5].0 ......
January 11, 1965
The proposed changes result in a net increase of 474 units, for an increase
in population of 1,094.
It was moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by Councilman Wright~ and
unanimously carried, to initiate the recommended zone changes outlined above.
The following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCIlKEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, %~cC arney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER: A report dated January 11, 1965, was presented from
the City Manager, stating that the most .significant impact on the cuf~u~nity as
a result of the location of the Junior College site in the City of Cypress is
tile loss of the proposed community shopping center located on the southeast
corner of Lincoln and Valley View. Consequently the City Manager's Office has
attempted to re-evaluate the need and location for a community shopping center.
TIle three major factors included in this analysis were:
A determination as to the size of the community shopping center,
including a basic decision as to whether the City could Justify more
than a community center and enlarge the projected plan to include a
regional-type shopping facility.
2. The need for community identity, which could include a community
center as a part of the over-all plan.
3. The relationship of the civic center development to potential
commercial development.
Since the original proposed commercial development is no longer possible, it
would seem advantageous to the City to expand the scope of the commercial
development and consider a regional-type center prior to the time when all of
the available land in consumed for residential development.
With reference to the second factor of the analysis, the lack of community
identity if often a direct result of a lack of planning the location of
governmental and business facilities within the community. Many cities have
attempted to combine civic center development plans with co~waercial and business
developments. Properly planned, a c~m,lercial shopping center, even regional in
nature, could be used as one means of community identity.
Concerning the relationship of the civic center development to potential
commcercial development, inasmuch as community identity relates closely to
both the commercial center of the City and the governmental center, it would
appear that a combination of these facilities would make maximum utilization of
both. At the present time there is a total of 105 acres of land in the vicinity
of the present Civic Center site, which could be coordinated into a ~ingle
commercial shopping area and civic center development site. The acreage is
divided as follows:
LOCATION
ZO~.ING .. L~ND US~ ........ ~OTA~ ACREAGE
Southwest Corner of Walker R-1
and Orange
Dairy 30
North of Orange from
Grindl~y to Walker
R-2 Civic Center - i0 Acres 40
Dairy - 10 Acres
Vacant - 10 Acres
Miscellaneous - 10 Acres
Northwest corner of
Grindlay and Orange
R-1 Dairy - 15 Acres 20
Vacant - 5 Acres
West side of Walker from
Chicken Ranch to Ball
C-2
Miscellaneous ,,,1,,5,
TOTAL 105
January 11, 1965
A change of this size would have a great impact upon the community and requires
a gremt deal more analysis than is presently available by members of the staff.
There are several consulting firms which specialize in economic surveys of this
nature and which would be in a position to complete an analysis as to the
validity of this entire proposal. It has been estimated that such an analysis,
including the economic impact of the Junior College on the community, should
not exceed $5,000.
In order to control the development of the land surrounding the Civic Center
site and allow further time to complete the necessary planning studies to
determine the feasibility of the regional commercial And governmental center
in this area, the City Manager recon~nended the adoption of an emergency zoning
Ordinance, changing the zone of the areas Outlined above, with the exception
of the land presently zoned C-2, to PD ~Planned Development).
A brief discussion was held concerning the time and costs involved for such an
economic study. Discussion was also held concerning development which could
occur if the Council were to adopt an emergency ordinance cha~glng the zone to
Planned Development. The City Attorney read in f611 Section 65806 of the
Government Code, concerning emergency zoning ordinances.
It was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by Councilman Gorzeman, and
unanimously carried, to read in full an Ordinacne changing the zone of the
above-mentioned properties to Planned Development for a six-month period to
allow for completion of further planning and economi~ studies to determine the
feasibility of a regional commercial and governmental center in this area. The
City Attorney read in full the proposed Ordinance, title of which is as follows:
ORDINANCE NO, 231
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS, AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. 90, ~E ZONING ORDINANCE, BY T~MPORARILY CHANGING TIlE ZONE OF
A CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND WI~tIN ~{E CITY OF CYPRESS FROM R-1
(ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) AND R-2 (TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) TO
P-D (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT)
It was moved by Councilman G0rzeman, seconded by Councilman Kanel, and
unanimously carried, to adopt Ordinance No. 231 as read in full by the
City Attorney. The following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel~ McCarney, Wright~ and Noe
None
None
It was further moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by Councilman Kanel, and
unanimously carried to authorize the City Manager to immediately secure
proposals from Economic Constultants for the completion of an economic study of
the commercial shopping center.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF CYPRESS ~2q~ BU, EN~,.PARK R.E:...I~STAL~A%ION OF..T.RA~.F.I.C
S.IGN.A~.S: A report 'da'ted January 7, 1965, was presented from the City Manager,
stating, that an Agreement has been prepared between the City of Cypress and the
City ~ Buena Park for the installation of the required traffic signals and
intersection lighting systems at the intersections of Valley View and Cerritos
and Valley View and Ball. The Agreement calls for both cities to assist in the
preparation and consent to the approval of the detailed plans and specifications
for tt~e projects, with the City of Buena Park acting as the construction agent
for both parties, including the advertising for bids, and awarding of contract.
Tl~e City of Cypress is to prepare maps and deeds for the right-of-way within the
City of Cypress.
As set forht in the agreement, the share of the costs has been determinedon
the basis of the number of legs of the intersection providing access to
abutting property located within the City, and the ratio is 3/4 City of Cypress
and 1/4 City of Buena Park.
January i1, 1965
It was moved by Councilman McCarney~ seconded by Councilman WRight~ and
unanimously carried, to approve the Agreement between the City of Cypress and
the City of Buena park for the installation of traffic signals and intersection
lighting systems at the intersections of Valley View and Cerritos and Valley
View and Ball as outlined above, and authorize the Mayor to sign and City (~rk
to attest the subject agreement upon approval as to form by the City Attorney.
Tbc following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILbIEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCIIJ~EN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCII2iEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel~ McCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
APprOVAL OF PLANS. ~ND SPECIFICATIONS F9R THE IN.STALLATION OF TRAFE.~ .S%~ALS AND
~I~.HWAY LIGHTING SYSTE~.S AT THE INT.~R.S.EqTIONS .OF yA~.LEY ~.IEW AND C~R~IT~S ~ND
VALLEY VI,EW AND BALL BO~D: The City Manager stated that the Plans and
Specifications for the Traffic Signals and Highway Lighting Systems f6r the
intersections of Valley View and Cerritos and Valley View and Ball had been
completed. The Public Works Director has reviewed the Plans and Specifications
as submitted by the City of Buena Park and recommends City Council approval.
It was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by Councilman McCarney, and
unanimously carried, to approve the Plans and S~ecifications for the Traffic
Signals and Highway Lighting Systems at the intersections of Valley View and
Corritos and Valley View and Ball.
~.ECOND READING ORDINANCE RE: ZONE CHANGE NO, Z-124 ~CITY OF ~ZPRE..SS): It was
moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by Councilman Kanel, and unanimously
carried, the following Ordinance be read by title only~ title as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 232
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 90, TIlE ZONING ORDINANCE, BY CHANGING ~tE ZONE OF A
C~RTAIN PARCEL OF LAND FROM R-3 (MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) TO
C-O (CO~IMERCIAL OFFICE) ZONE CHANGE NO. Z-124 (CITY OF CYPRESS)
It was moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by Councilman McCarney, and
unanimously carried, this Ordinance be adopted, The following roll call vote
was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCII~IEN:
Gorzeman~ Kanel, McCarney~ l~light,and Noe
None
None
SECOND READING ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 173 RE: ESTABLISHING A
W~R DEP~.TM,'~T: The City Manager stated that the second reading of an
Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 173, concerning establislment of a water
department, had been tontinued pending the sale of the water facilities to the
Southern California Water Company. He reported that this transaction has
now been comp~ted and it would be appropriate to adopt the second reading of the
Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 173.
It was moved by Councilman ~ight, seconded by Councilman Kanel, and
unanimously carried, the following Ordinance be read by title only~ title as
follows:
ORDINANCE NO, 233
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS REPEALING
ORDINANCE NO. 173 ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TI~
CITY OF CYPRESS ESTABLISHING A WATER DEPARTMENT"
It was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman Wright, and
unanimously carried, this Ordinance be adopted. The follo,ing roll call vote
was taken|
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
January 11, 1965
SECOND READING ORDINANC,E, A~MENDING ORDINANCE NOt 82. BUSINESS LICENS.E ORDINANC_E:
The City Manager stated that an Ordinance anending Ordinance No. 82 concerning
Business Licenses had passed its first reading at the last City Council meeting,
and since that time he has been contacted by the Pacific Telephone Company
District Manager indicating that the Pacific Telephone Company had no objection
to the Ordinance, however requesting consideration be given to delaying the
effective date of the portion of the Business License Ordinance regarding the
Telephone Company until July 1st for bookkkeeping reasons.
The City Manager further stated that the City Attorney has advised that if the
Council desired to make the section concerning the Telephone Company effective
on July 1st, it would be necessary to hold another first reading of the
Ordinance so that this change could be included.
A representative from the General Telephone Company addressed the Council,
stating that his Company has no objections to adoption of the Ordinance as
originally proposed.
Following discussion concerning the amount of revenues which could be
expected from the licensing of the telephone utilities in the City, it was
moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by Councilman Wright, and unanimously
carried, the following Ordinance be read by title only, title as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 234
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 82 OF
TttE CITY OF CYPRESS LICENSING THE TRANSACTIONS OF BUSINESSES, TRADES,
PROFESSIONS, OCCUPATIONS AND SERVICES IN THE CITY OF CYPRESS FOR TIlE
PURPOSE OF RAISING REVENUE AND PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATION
TttEREOF.
It was moved by Councilman Wright, seconded by
unanimously carried, this Ordinance be adopted.
was taken:
Councilman McCarney, and
~e following roll call vote
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN|
Go rzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright,
None
None
and Noe
FIRST READING ORDINANCEESTABLISHINGREINSPECTION FEES: The City Manager
presented an Ordinance prepared by the City Attorney concerning Building
Reinspection fees, as requested by the City Council at a previous meeting.
It was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman Wright, and
unanimously carried, the folloi~mg Ordinance be read by title only, title as
follows:
ORDINANCE NOo
AN ORDINANCE OF TIlE CITY OF CYPRESS AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 126, AS
AMENDED, AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE b~IFORM BUILDING CODE, 1961 EDITION,
BY ADDING THERETO SUBSECTION (C) TO SECTION 303, CNAPTER 3, PROVIDING
POR REINSPECTION FEES
It was moved by Councilman Kanel, seconded by Councilman McCarney, and
unanimously carried, this Ordinance pass its first reading. The following
roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN:
Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney, Wright, and Noe
None
None
FIRST ~EADING, O,~I.~ANC.E ,~E~.I~IN~ .SP.ECIAL PE~IITS ~9R .qE.RT~I~ ~U.S.IN,E.~S,~.:
T~e City Manager presented an Ordinance prepared by the City Attorney concerning
special permits required for certain businesses. The City Attorney reviewed
several corrections made to Section 7 concerning Public Hearings.
It was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman Wright, and
unanimously carried, the following Ordinance be read by tit~ only, title
as follows:
January 11, 1965
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF ~IE CITY COUNCIL OF ~]E CITY OF CYPRESS REQUIRING
SPECIAL PERMITS FOR THE CONDUCT, OPERATION OR MANAGLMENT OF CERTAIN
BUSINESSES WITHIN THE CITY OF CYPRESS
It was moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman Kanel, and
unanimously carried, this Ordinance pass its first reading. The folloiwng
roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCIL~EN:
Gorzeman, Kanel~ McCarney~ %~nRight,
None
None
and Noe
RESO.LU~I,QN ALL.O.I~NG' C.LAIMS..AND DEMAN. DS N.OS.., 10417 7~I 1046~ ,~P,AY~OLL): It ms
moved by Councilman McCarney, seconded by Councilman Gorzeman, and unanimously
carried, the following Resolution be adopted, title as follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 543
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS ~ND
DEMANDS NOS. 10417 TI1RU 10465
The following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN: Corzeman, Kanel~ McCarney, Wright, and Noe
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN: None
RESOLUF.ION ALLOWING CLAI~, AN~ ~,~MAND~, ~p~,,. 1,0466 ~{RU. ~,05,~, ~IME~C.I.AL
WAR,,P~N.T~: It was moved by Councilman Gorzeman, seconded by Councilman
McCarney, and unanimously carried, the following Resolution be adopted, title
as follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 544
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIr~S AND
I)~{AIN~S NOS. 10466 THRU 10521
The following roll call vote was taken:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEN: Gorzeman, Kanel, McCarney~ Wright, and. Noe
NOES: 0 C~INCII~EN: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEN: None
VO%~ ~r ~p~F, IDENC~ ~q .CHIEF pF POLIC.E p,.,,~,. FOSFER: It was moved by Councilman
McCarney, seconded by Mayor Noe, and unanimously carried, to give Chief of
Police O. C. Foster a vote of confidence in the discharge of his duties.
ADJOUR~{ENT:
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the Mayor
declared the meeting adjourned at the hour of 11:02 p.m.
MAYOR E ~
ATTEST:
January 11, 1965