Laserfiche WebLink
Councilman Patterson referred to a letter from a citizen that had been <br />sent to The Register concerning bus route changes and suggested that a <br />copy of the letter be sent to the Orange County Transit District to <br />accompany any request made of them. <br /> <br />After voting, Councilman Patterson pointed out that there was no bus <br />route goiag to Fashion Square, and asked if a request had been made for <br />such a route. <br /> <br />The City Manager stated that the Orange County Transit District was <br />unable to duplicate an existing route of another bus llne, but could tie <br />in with it; that the County was currently Coordinating all of the routes <br />and suggestions could be forwarded to them, and if Council wished, Dr. <br />Pete Fielding, General Manager of the Orange County Transit District, <br />couId be invited to attend a Council meeting and answer questions. <br />(CA 84; CA 84.4) <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION Council considered the <br />IN-STATE CONFERENCES report from the Planning <br /> Director dated March Z, <br />1973, transmitting the request that Council appropriate the necessary <br />funds to allow the Planning Commission's attendance at any and all <br />pertinent conferences held within the State. <br /> <br />Councilman Herrin's motion to approve funding for the Chairman of the <br />Planning Commission and one other commission member to attend all <br />pertinent in-state conferences was seconded by Councilman Evans. <br /> <br />Councilman Vil-la's subsiitute motion, to approve funding for any member of <br />the Planning Commission who was able to take the time to attend any or <br />all pertinent in-state conferences was seconded by Mayor Griset, and <br />carried on the following roll call vote: <br /> <br />AYES: <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br /> <br />Villa, Griset, Yamamoto, Patterson <br />Evans, Herrin, Markel <br />None <br /> <br />(CA 78.1) <br /> <br />SUMMARY OF COUNCIL The Summary of Council <br />REFERRALS Referrals dated March 1Z, <br /> 1973, containing a list <br />of Pending action items referred to staff by Council was received and <br />ordered filed by informal unanimous approval, t CA 80.2) <br /> <br />ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE Council approved the pro- <br />CONTROL APPLICATIONS cedure set out in the report <br /> ' of th~ City Attorney dated <br />March 5, 1973, relating to the filing of protests with the Alcoholic <br />Beverage Control Office because the premises in question are within <br />300 feet of residential use, and/or other reasons such as "that the <br />licensing of the premises would create or increase an existing police <br />problem." Councilman Yarnamoto's unanimously approved motion was <br />seconded by Councilman Markel. The new procedure calls for the filing <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL MINUTES <br /> <br />73 <br /> <br />MARCH 12, 1973 <br /> <br /> <br />