Minutes-PC 1960/08/01• \
City Hall
Anaheim, California
August 1, 1960
REGULAR MEETING
PRESyNT
ABSENT
MINUTES
REGULAR N~ETING OF THE~CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
- A Regular Meeting of the City Planning Commission was called to order at
2:05 0'Clock P.M. by Chairman Gauer, a quorum being present.
- CHAIRMAN GAUER, COMMISSIONERS: Allred, DuBois, Marcoux, Mauerhan, Mungall
and Summers.
- ~OMMISSIONERS: Hapgood and Morris.
- The Minutes of the Meeting of July 18, 1960 were approved, with the follow-
ing corrections: ~
Page 8, under Reclassification No. F-60-61-6, line 7s Replace "The property
is presenty classified R-A" with "be reclassified from R-A, RESIDEN?IAL
AGRICULTURAL, to C-•3. HEAVY COMh~RCIAL"~ irserting a comma in place of the
period preceding correction. Page 10, Reclassification No. F-60-61-B,
after last line, enter the following:
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYESs COMMISSIONERS: Allred, DuBois, Gauer, Hapgood, Marcoux, Mauerhan,
Morris, Mungall and Summers.
NOES: COMMISSIONERSs None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERSs None.
Page 11, replace with revised page 11.
PRESENI' - Acting Planning Director - Richard Reese
Planning Technician - Gordon Steen
Assistant City Attorney - Joe Geisler
P2anning Department Secretary - Shirley Taylor
RECLASSIFICATION - This reclassification was heard at the Meeting of July 18, 1960, at which
N0. F-60-61-3 time the vote by the Commissioners was tied; therefore it was necessary to
hold it over for forty days, taking a vote at each•meeting during that time
until a majority vote is reached, or until ihe time limit expires.
Planning Technician Gordon S•teen read a letter from the applicant's broker~
Mr. DuBois, requesting that the Commission give the utmost consideration to
this reclassification request. Chairman Gauer's letter of reply was also
read. Attorney Joe Geisler noted that the sub3ect property was included
in the original C-1 rezoning, but was handled independently at Mr. Car-
michael's request. About one year ago, Mr. Carmichael, the applicant, had
requested the restriction to medical, dental or professional offices, and
actually at that time the property was still Residential Agricultural.
Commissioner Marcoux offered Resolution No. 30, Series 1960-61, and moved
for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Mungall, recommend-
ing to the City Council that Reclassification No. F-60-61-3 for C-1,
Ne3ghborhood Commercial, Unrestricted, be approved.
The vote on the above resolution was as followss
AYESs COMMISSIONERSs DuBois, Marcoux, Mungall.
NOESs COMMISSIONERSs Allred, Gauer, Mauerhan and Swnmers.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Hapgood and Morris.
Mr. Geisler stated that on a Reclass?~" cation there must be a full majority
vote of the Planning Commission; therefore this application would again
have to be held over until the next meeting. Commissioner Ulanga'll-
commented that he would rather see a single story retail building than
a two story medical building.
-1- - 1
~
~ ~
.~
'
_
---- -- ~- ;~=._ .
-~
_ _ ...--
~ •
'},,~ ~w3 ~
VARIAN(~ N0. ]273 - ff~B~ ~m~+~m PEETFZOK submitted by IAUIS LARAMORE and WILBUR CLARK~
IlIlHIl ~emesgg Hm~nfle~rar~, ~Yhittier, California, requesting permission to
9~II~CII'~ ~ETE l4 REBTAURANT AND MOTEL/HOTEL on the property described
as: A~se~Il ~ feet by 6I0 feet with a frontage of 85 feet on Harbor
LFl~anPeev~ ~ flcsn~ aa t[~e east side of Harbor Boulevard between Midway
~ernvoe ~H 9Ca~eIlIla Avecir~; ~ts southwest corner being 1690 feet north of the
~aa~~as~ ~~cer o£ Efar6ar Boulevard and Katella Avenue. The property is
~s~ttIly ~flas~nfr~ R'-A, RESIDENfIAL AGRICULTURAL.
~~ ag~¢ease~ for ar against the granting of the Variance. THE HEARING
~ Q~4~'r77t~.
IIit mas an~itECg ~Eraf €Iae plans submitted called for 91 rooms, and that the
s~ac~ c~maavn ara=_ ca~rrect. Hawever, the plot plan showed portions of the
~-d"n~ hanrIlt~ tc~ tf~ praperty line on bnth sides. It was noted that
~~onnIld"n~s araen4cE E~ave to be made smal?er to conform to a five-foot
sn~a~ =e~Ea~ck. It xas moved by Cerrcnissioner Marcoux, seconded by Com-
rmnssn~a ~~uwrfa~, ~ccE vnanimously carried that the application for
~7asn~~e C~. Il2'~ 6e &eId over until the applicant could be present.
VARIANC£ N0. 72a4 -~LY~ ~m~~. P~FITFON suhmitted by iONY JULIAN, 2566 West Lincoln Ave-
¢m~, dPan~~enm,, raPiforetia, requesting permission t.. OPERATE A COCKTAIL BAR
m~m ~~~escribecf as: A parcel 100 feet by 124 feet with a fronta9e
arff Il~ ffee~ ~n L"nncmPn Avenue and located on the South side of Lincoln
Aor~ ~n ~gs~dIli~ end Gilbert Avenues; its northwest corner being
~m~itetg~ ~~.TC feet east of the southeast corner of Magnolia and Lincoln
66m~s, ~£estEser described as 2566 West Lincoln Avenue. The property
as ~semik8~ ~Il~ssifiecE R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL.
~ana~¢n ~a~s seacE ~ Tetter from Mro Richard Dear, owner of property next
~7~s ~~ itE~ ~yect property, appointing Mrs. Ca•therire Wise to represent
B~ ait t~ns C~'earing. Mrs. Wise appeared before the Cor,unission and said she
~~e~ite~ tto P~ite kaes~ and noise which would emanate f•rom a cocktail bar.
58~ aIls~ ~nm~e~ ~t ~ sc[~ool was proposed in the area and questioned the
a~nsaBnaPS~g afr ~ris tgpe of use so near a school. Mr. Julian appeared
~ff~ae ~6ne ~sssioce stating that his property was already zoned C-1, and
~ Ee~ frefl3 ~nsaqxes~ arauld allow such a use in the area. He also added
~*3aa~ ~~~ echoQl ww ld be more than the required 500 feet away from
3E~ ~ea~. L-Fe saicE he intended to make a nice looking cement block
~oanIld"nau~. 1~ E~INIC ~[AS CLOSED.
~assn~er ~4P~ecE noted that a school would be going in hack of the
sm~~e~it ~r~~r, ancE e Catholic Church owned property within 100 feet
~ff it~ s~ieeff iarop~y. Also, the proposed Savanna High School would be
aesmss it~ s~~t.
~m~nssn~s R~IlIlrecE offered Resolution No. 31, Series 1960-61, and moved
ff~ a~t.s ~ssage ~-cF acEoption, seconded by Commissioner Mauerhan, denying
~aan~~e 10~0. &~"A4. Etfter the vote was taken, the applicant asked for a
a~~~~5man fr~s ~ c£e~eial, and Chairman Gauer replied that the Commission felt
LLWCJZe a~e ~a~sg~ coc[ctail bars in P.naheim.
~m a~IlIl eaIlP ~e faregaing resolution vras passed by the following votes
A~S= Q~ELSSL~: Allred, DuBois, Gauer, Marcour, Mauerhan,
Mungall and Su.~nmers.
~= ~~fiOAfERS: None.
~[GII'e ~EONFRS: EIapgood and Morris.
VAAIANC~ N~. 32A~ -~II~ ~m~T~. PEEIrION submitted by ALLEN F. JONES, 931 South Velare
S~~s 69ana~e~, CaPifornia, requesting permission to WAIV MINIMUM SIDE-
H~ID ~eF~RfCR t~EQQFIR~ TO PERMIT 10 FOOT ENCROACHII~NT on the property
~scsnBa~aH as: ~4 FarceF 7I feet by 100 feet with a frontage of 100 feet
ma4 Ealfl E~ad acecB Pcscated an the northwest corner of Ball Road and Velaxe
5~, ~£c~tfier de~cr£bed as 931 South Velare Street. The property
ns ~sem~l~g ~fla~~sified R-I, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
-2-
~ ,_ ._~ ~ ._ .. ..,..
~ ~~I
~ MINUI'ES - CITY PLPNNING COMMISSION~ August 1, 1960, CotNtinued=
~, VARIANCE N0. 1275 - No one appeared in oppositio~s to the ganting of the Variance. Commis-
(Continued) sioner Allred asked the applicaM ifr the sub,ject property was a vacant
lot, and he replied there ~vas a hovse facing ~PeYare Street on the
propert.y. ?HE HEARING ~VAS ~.
Comm3ssioner Mungall offered ~solution No. 32, Series 1960-61, and moved
for its passage and adoptaon, seconded by Ca~iseioner DuHois,: granting
Variance No. 1275, subject to the follwnn~ can3itione:
Interdepartmental Coaeait#ee rerjuirements=
1. Dedication of 53 feet fra~ centerlane of Ball Road (5G feet exist.)
2. Installation of sidewalks on ~all Road and Velare Street.
The foregoing conditions are ~onnd to be a necessary prerequisite to the
use of the property in ordea to preserve the safety and welfare of the
Citizens of Anaheim.
On roll call the foregoing sesolution ~oas passed by the follawing vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: All~ed, Aa~~aas, Gauez, 4arcoux, Mauerhan,
ldunga 31 and S~m~ers .
NOES: COIuW1ISSI0NEi?S: NonQ>
AASENT: COMMISSI~IERS: ~p9~ a~ lfnssis.
VARIANCE N0. 1276 - PUBLIC HEARING. PETII'I~1 su3~matted ~~IESFA F~JC3LS, INCORPORATED, 1424
North Harbor Boulevard, ~u3lea~tan, Cali#ornim (e,}'o Ftaymond R. Ribai)9
requesiing per.nission to ESZABY.:~ai A PWL ~i:~Y ?~JSIHESS on the property
described as: An izregular shap-r3 pascel ~eith a f.r'Rtage of 150 feet on
Manchester Avenue and an average depth ofr 23~ feet, and located on the
west side of Manchester Avenue betaeeen KateYl~ and Orangearood Avenues;
its northeasterly corner being approxaaaatelg 142Q feet southeriy of the
southwest corner of Katella art~ lLanchestes Avenues. The property is
presently classified 3?-A, i?ESiD~3iY%AL At~tFQJY.'EURAF..
Mr. Raymond Ribal, En~ineer, apgeeared before ~he Co~ission and stated
that they had had sessions sei#h the plannan9 ~taff previous to the
Hearing. I'he applicant, ~Er. F?nbanson of F"sesta Fool.s, Inc., was also
present. No one appeared in o~pposit'son to tt~ granting of the Variance.
THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner DuBois affered Resolution II~o. 33, Series I960-61, and moved
for its passage and ado~tion, secoMed bp Com~issioner Allred, granting
Variance No. 1276, subject to the £ollaaoang conditions:
1. Move the building back tem m~se feet than shoam on plot plan, making
55 feet of setback, ancla~d'ang 5€eet of landscaping.
2. Interdepartmental Cflmmittee sequiae~ents=
a. Prepare street impmve~r~t p3aaes ~eed "snstall all improvements in
accordance with approved standard plans on file in the office of
City Engineer.
b. Construct draina5z structure.
c. Payment of $2.D0 per £sont foot fos street Iights.
The foregoing conditions are ffo~ #o lse a necessary prerequisite to the
use of the property in order to presexve the safety and welfare of the
Citizens of Anaheim.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passec~ by the following vote=
AYES: COMMISSIONF33S: Allred, D~a~is, Gauer, 6tarcoux, Mauerhan,
lamga3l and Sca~eas.
NOE&: COMMISSIO~IERS: None.
ABSENis COMMISSIt7Q1ERS: Hap~uad and i~nis.
-3-
I
i
f
j ~
F
i ~
'~ --- ~
----- _ _ _. . _ __ __ -- _-- -- - - ---- -
•~ ,~
-- _ ~ ' ~ ---.. _
~~ : 7
i ~ ~
~ '~.~ . ~-~ •
' MSNUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, August 1, 1960, Continued=
VARIANCE N0. 1277 - PUBLIC HEARING. PETITION submitted by E1)WARD A• and EFFZE SLAGLE, 1539 ~
East Center Street, Anaheim, California, requesting permission to ~~
MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEM ENT OF TAXICAB SERVICE on the property doscri~
ass A parcel 107 feet by 357 feet with a frontage of 107 feet on Ce~r
Street and located on the north side of Center Street betv-een Evergrs~n aad
Larch Streets; its southeast corner being approximately 230 feet ave~ a~ ~
northwest cnrner of Evergreen and Center Streets, and further descri~er3 as
1619 East Center Street. The property is presently classified C-1,
NEIGHBORHOOD COMN~RCIALo
No one appeared for or against the granting of the Variance. I3iE ~ING
WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Mauerhan noted that this taxicab service had been operatin8
at the sub~ect property for some time as a non-conforming use; and ~e
offered Resolution No. 34, Series 1960-61, and moved for its passage ar~d
ac3option, seconded by Commissioner Summers, denying Variance No. 12TJ.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the folloxring vat~=
AYES: COMMISSIONERSs Allred, DuBois, Gauer, Martonx, Mauerhan,
Mungall and Summers.
NOES: COI~IMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Hapgood and Morris.
VARIANCE NOo 1278 - PUBLIC HEARINGe PETITION submitted by DUFFY MOTOR HOTELS, INCOA~08AT.~D,
9412 Royal Palm Boulevard, Gar-den Grove, California, requesting permissamtn
to CONSTRUCf TWO MOTELS INCLUDING A RESTAURANT WIiH COCKfA3L IAUNC~,
SEAiJTY SALON, BARBER SHOP AND A TRAVHL AGENCY, on the property desari~ed
ass A parcel 310 feet by 615 feet with a rrontage of 310 feet on ~Iax3~ns
Boulevard and Katella Avenue, excepting a parcel 150 feet by 170 ~'~e~
with a frontage of 150 feet on Katella Avenue, and located on the san3.~s$
corner of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue. The property is pr~sQn339~
classified R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL.
Mr. Richard Duffy was present at the Hearing. No one appeared 'an ~pesi-
tion to the granting of the Variance. A letter from the applican~s aa~s
read to the Commission requesting approval of cedar shakes in 33~e ~caa~-
struction of the building, and Commissioner Mungall noted that only f.fie
City Council could approve that request since it is a building rern~~T~~-
Commissioner Mungall offered Resolution No. 35, Series 1960-61, and mov~s7
for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Marcoux, }xanii~g
Variance No. 1278, sub3ect to the following conditions=
Interdepartmental Committee requirements:
1. Dedicate 60 feet from centerline on Harbor 8 Katella Ava.
2. Prepare street improvement plans and inetall all imQrovQments au~
accordance with apQroved standard plans on file in office a~ L`i~
Engineer on both streets.
3. Payment of $2.00 per front foot for street lights on both stx~3s.
The foregoing conditions are.found t~ be a necessary prereq~isite ta ~
use of the property in order to preserve the safety and welfare of ~
Citizens of Maheim.
Gn roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the follo-ving va~~=
AYESs COMMISSIONERS: Allred, DuBois, G3uer, Marcoux, Mauerhan,
Mungall and Swnmers.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENTs COMMISSIONERS: Hapgood and Morris.
-4-
-------- _ ~ _ _ _ _ _. _ . . _ _ _ __ _ _ ------
~, _.._ _ __...
~ ~`_' _
~
~
~
's
i
~ ~
~ i
~
~l
~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, August 1, 1960, Continueda
VARIANCES, NOS. - PUBLIC HEARING. PETITION submitted by CAPITOL ESTATES N0. 1, INC., 11900
1279 and 1280 Gilbert Street, Garden Grove, California, requesting permission to CONSTRUC?
AND OPERATE TWO SERVICE STATIONS on the properties described as: (Variance
No. 1279) A parcel 150 feet by 150 feet with a frontage of 150 feet on
Katella Avenue, and located on the south side of Katella Avenue between
Harbor Boulevard and West Street; its northwest corner being approximately
1293 feet east of the southeast corner of Katella Avenue and West Street;
and, (Variance No. 1280) A parcel 150 feet by 150 feet with a frontage of
150 feet on Harbor Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Orangewood Avenue;
its northeast corner being approximately 825 feet south of the southwest
corner of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue. The properties are presently
classified R-A, RESIDEM'IAL AGRICULTURAL.
Mr. Dick Guthery, representing the applicants, appeared before the Commission
and stated that these service stations would augment facilities within the ,
development of property which included two motels granted by the Anaheim
Planning Commission at the July 18, 1960 Meeting. Mr. Guthery stated that
roadways and engineering requirements would be taken care of by the further
development of the balance of property. No one appeared in opposition
to the granting of the Variance. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner DuBois offered Resolutions, Nos. 36 and 37, Series 1960-61, and
for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Mungall, granting
Variances Numbe~s 1279 and 1280, subject to the following conditions:
1. Conform to overall plan as submitted.
2. Interdepartmental Committee requirements: (Variance No. 1279)
a. Dedicate 60 feet from centerline of Katella (40° exist.)
b. Prepare street improvement plans and install all improvements on
Katella Avenue in accordance with approved standard plans on file
in office of City Engineer.
c. Payment of $2.00 per front foot for street lights on Katella.
d. Proposed roadway on east si:~ be dedicated and improved as part of
overall development through recordation of Subdivision Map as
recommended for Variance No. 1271.
Interdepartmental Committee requirements: (Variance No. 1280)
a. Dedicate 60 feet from centerline of Harbor (50' exist.)
b. Prepare street improvements and install all improvements on Harbor
in accordance with approved standard plans on file in office of
City Engineer.
c. Payment of $2.00 per front foot for street lights on Harbor.
d. Proposed roadway on north side be dedicated and improved as part
of overall development through recordation of Sub. Map as
recommended for Variance No. 1271.
The foregoing conditions are found to be a necessary prerequisite to the
use of the property in order to preserve the safety and welfare of the
Ci'cizens of Ana!1eim.
On roll call tfie foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COM~iISSIONERS: Allred9 DuBois~ Gauer, Marcoux, Mauerhan,
Mungall and Summers.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Hapgood and Morris.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT- PUBLIC HEARING. PETITION submitted by BOARD OF MISSIONS AND CHURCH
No. 79 EXTION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA - ARJZONA ANNUAL CONFERENCH OF THE METHO-
DIS7 CHURCH, 5250 Santa Monica Boulevard, Los Angeles 29, California,
requesting permission to CONSTRUCT A CHURCH on the properLy described
asa A parcel 235 feet by 680 feet with a frontage of 235 feet on Orange
Avenue and located on the south side of Orange Avenue between Knott and
Holder Avenues; its northeast corner being approximately 615 feet west
of the southwest corner of Orange and Knott Avenues; and further described
as 3718 West Orange Avenue. The property is presently classified R-A,
RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL.
. -5-
i
~
__ _ _._.__ ___ ~^~..._.-... ..... ...__...... _.. _:
~. ~~
~ ~ ~
~ '~-/
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, August 1, 1960, Continued:
-:~ ____--_-- .
• ~
;
SPECIAL USE PERMIT- A representative of the applicants appeared before the Commission and
N0. 79 stated that two other Methodist Churches have been granted by the City
(Continued) fairly recently, and that this proposed church would serve people on the
west side of the City. Mr. Steen read,a letter from the District Superin-
tendent of the Methodist Church requesting appro~•al of the Special Use
Permit. No one appeared in opposition to the granting of the Special Use
Permit. Commissioner Mungall inquired when construction was to begin, and
he was advised that the existing buildings would be used for a time, but
that they hoped to build in ahout one yeai. A variance wruld be in effect
for only six months, with an opportunity to renew; therefore it was
included in the following motion that ttiis Special IIse Permit would be for
one year. THE HEARING WAS CLOSEDo
Commissioner Marcoux offered Resolution No. 38, Series 1960-61, and moved
for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Mauerhan, granting
Special Use Permit No. 79, sub3ect to the following conditionss
1. 1 year time limit for renewal instead of 6 months.
2. Interdepartmental Committee requirements:
a. Dedication of 45 feet from centerline of Orange Avenue (20' exist.).
b. Prepare street improvement plans and install all improvements in
accordance with approved standard plans on file in office of City
Engineer.
c. Payment of $2.00 per fz~ont foot for street lighting purposes.
The foregoiny conditions are found to be a necessary prerequisite to the
use of the property in order to preserve the safety and welfare of the
Citizens of Anaheimo
On ro11 call, the foregoing resolution was ;~assed by the follawing votes
AYES: COMMISSIONERSs Allred, DuBois, Gauer~ Marcoux, Mauerhan,
Mungall and Summers.
NOES: COMMISSIONERSs None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Hapgaod and Morris.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT- PUBLIC HEARINGs PETITION submitted by DUDLEY Bo FRANK, 433 West Center
YVO. 80 Street, Anaheim~ California, requesting permission to CONSI'RUCT AND OPERAT'E
A MODERN REST HON~ on the property described ass A parcel 178' by 408'
with a frontage of 178 feet on Orange Avenue and located on the south side
of Orange Avenue betwee~i Euclid Avenue and Fann Place; its northeast corner
being approximately 355 feet west of the southwest corner of Euclid and
Orange Avenues, also described as 1720 Orange Avenue. The property is
presently classified R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL.
Mr. Frank appeared before the Commission and statad that approximately one
year before that time, a Resolution of Intention to rezone to C-1, Neighbor-
hood Commercial, had been obtained; however, now a Rest Home use was no
longer covered by R-3 or C-1 Zoning. He added that there would be 36 k~eds,
and both ambulatory and bed patients would be cared for, which would be a
quieter use than the clinic originally proX+osed for the property. Mr.
Wayne B. Reedstrom appeared before the Commission, stating that he was
spo:;esman for the ma~ority of his neighborhood, and that they felt this
use would be superior to a clinic. No one appeared in opposition to
the granting of the Special Use Permit. Commissioner Allred asked Mr. Frank
when thE proposed professional offices would be developed~ Mr. Frank
replied that medical and dental offices would be constructed - possibly
within one year. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Allred offered Resolution No. 39, Series 1960-61, and moved
for its.passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Mauerhan, granting •
Special Use Permit No. 80, sub~ect to the following conditionss
1. Conform to plans as nresented.
2. Interdepartmental Committee requirementss
a. Dedication of 32 feet from centerline of Orange Ave. (20' exist.)
b. Prepare street improvement plans and install all improvements
in accordance with approved standard plans on file in office of
City Engineer.
c. Payment of $2.00 per front foot for street lighting purposes.
_6_
~
_ 3
-- __ _ - .. : . ..: .,
_ ---------
.
~ ~ ~ ~~.
i
MINUTES, CITY PIANNING COMMISSION, August l, 1960~ Continued:
RECIASSIFICATION - PUBLIC F~ARING. PETITION submitted by RAYMOND SPEHAR, 1F32 Beacon Avenue, ;
N0. F-50-61-9 Anaheim, California, requesting that the pruperty described as a parcel
100 feet by 136 feet with a frontage of 100 feet on Euclid Avenue and ~~
located on the southwest corner of Chalet and Euc?id Avenues, be reclassi-
fied from R-i, Single Family Residential, to C-1, Neighborhood Commercial :
!Restricted toiProfessional Offices). ~
~
Mr. Samuel Freedman, a resident on Chalet Street, appeared before the ?
Commission and stated that he came to live in Anaheim because it was "the ~
Queen residential city of Southerp Californiao" He said that he would like ~
to point.out a few truths to the Planning Commission, looking toward the
future problems v~ith which they would be concerned. This appeared to be a ~
routinP application, he s~id, but it would affe~t the fate of one of~the ~
most beautiful areas in wnich it was possible to live in Anaheim. If 'r,
granted, it would be the first o~ its nature; while the area was naturally ~
suited for residences, and as such, with future development it would bring ~
g•reat credit to Anaheimo. Mr. Freedman pointed out tha`t public interest was :
paramount, not private interest; and the hi~h school was to be built south ~
of the sub3ect property within a short time. he said every effort must be ~
made to prevent Euclid Avenue from becom3ng the "rat race" that Brookhurst ~
Avenue was, and that Euclid Avenue was a direct connection to Garden Grove ~
from the Santa Ana Freewaye He added that if too many businesses and too ~
many apartments are developed along Euclid Avenue, there would be one of the
great~st traffic hazards any~ruhere around; and eventually another Freeway ~
to Garden Grove would have to be constructed at tax-payers expense, in order
to handle the traffic. Mr. Freedman said many of t'he residents of the area +
believed there was an element of fraud.involved, since the developers of
the subdivision had assured purchasers of property that there would be no ;
rezoning attempted along Euclid Avenue. Property owners now believed that ;
the Euclid Avenue frontage was left vacant purposely. He asked the
Planning Commission to note that he had not mentioned the fact that the ~
residential property in the area would be considerably devaluated by the
proposed professional offices being developed on the adjoining property. ;
Mr. Freedman added that Anaheim was a fine residential town, and that ~
one of the things wrong w3th Lo~ Angeles was that slums were created by ~
indiscriminate mixing of property uses. Chairman Gauer invited Mr.
Freedman to attend City Council meeting and give the same speech.
Mr. Louis Sowensky appeared before the Co.~nmission and expressed his '
opposition to the granting of the reclassification, adding that the action
taken would set a precedent in the area. ,
The applicant, Ray Spehar, appeared before the Commission, stating that
Euclid Avenue was a business street~ and the request was for C-1, Res-
tricted to Business and Professional Offices Only. TF1~ HEARING WAS CLOSEDe i
' Commissioner DuBois stated he felt this request would result in spot
zoning; therefore, he offered Resolution No. 40, Series 1960-61, and moved
for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Allred, recommending
to the City Council that Reclassification No. F-60-61-9 for C-1, Neighbor-
hood Commercial Restricted, be denied.
On roll call the foregcing resolution was passed by the following votes
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, DuBois, Gauer., Marcoux, Mauerhan,
Mungall and Summers.
NOES: CAMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: CQMN:ISSIONERS: Hapgood and Morris.
RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARING. PETITION submitted by IATTIE R. SI-IEPARD9 1811 East Center
N0. F-60-61-10 Street, Anaheim, California, requesting that the property described as a
parcel 110 feet by 165 feet with a frontage of 110 feet on Center Street,
located on the north side of Center Street between Coffman Street and
Evelyn Drive; its southeast corner being 91 feet west of the northwest
corner of Genter and Coffman Streets, also describad as 1811 East Center
Street, be reclas~i€~ed f~om R-2, Two-Family Residential to C-2, General
Commerc;al.
-'1-
_ ._ _ _. _ _
_~ -r-- -~--- - ---•-•,
,
--~ . ._ _ . . . _ . _ __.
~,. ________~ ~ _.
~ . _._r~.~ ~ e
I MINUTES - CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, August 1, 1960, Continued=
~I
I RECLASSIFICATION -~'~r. Steen read a letter from Charles McLanahan, stating that the applicant
N0. F-60-61-10 did not have the legal right to request a zone change, as the estate was
(Continued) in probate; therefore he requested withdrawal of the application. Mr.
McLanahan then appeared before the Commission, stating that he had an
I agreement with ~Ylrs. Shepard to rent the sub~ect property. Mrs. Shepard,
i the applicant, appeared before the Commission and stated she would like
~ the property rezoned because others in the area have been and are being
rezoned. Mr. McLanahan said he intended to use the property as agreed,
~ and that Mrs. Shepard was administrix of the estate. He added that he
~ had paid the fee for this application.
Attorney Joe Geisler stated that the legal aspects of the case were not
the concern of the Planning Commission. ?HE HEARING WAS CLOSEDo
q No plans had been presented except a plot plan for the nursery by Mr.
. McLanahen. Commissioner Marcoux pointed out that the surrounding prop-
ert~es were R-2, Two-Family RPSidential.
Commissioner Mungail offered Resolution No. 41, Series 1960-61, and
moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Allred,
recommending to the City Council that Reclassification No. F-60-61-10
for C-2, General Commercial, be denied.
On roll call the foreg-ving resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONBRSs Allred, DuBois~ Gauer, Marcoux, Mauerhan,
Mungall and Summers.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
~ ABSENT: COMMiSSIONERS: HaP9ood and Morris.
RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC EIEARING. PETITION submitted by GEORGE SEHL, 1008 East Merced,
N0. F-60-61-11 West Covina, California, requesting that the property described as a
parcel 237 feet by 286 feet with a frontage of 237 feet on Magnolia Avenue
and located on the southwest corner of !!!agnolia Avenue and Orange Avenue,
also described as 9541 Magnolia Avenue, be reclassified from R-A, Residen-
tial Agriculturai, to C-1, Neighborhood Commercial.
Russell Roquet, as agent for the applicant, appeared before the Commission
and stated that they proposed to build a medical building with pharmacy,
including space for 104 automobiles to park. Mr. Horsefield,. of 2611 W.
Abram Drive, appeared before the Commission and said the surrounding
area was residential, and that there was a grammar school across the
street. He added that a large number of children ran across the street
even against the orders of the crossing guard, and many cars were known
to pass over the crosswalk without stopping. Mr.-Horsefield said it
would be a detriment to the community to put 104 cars into this develop-
ment, and the sur~ect property could be developed into 4 or 5 beautiful
residential lotso Mr. Roquet stated they were unable to diwide the
property into even four lots. Mr. Theo Hamm, a resident of the area,
appeared before the Commission and pointed out that a clinic already
existed as nearby as Ball Road, and he would rather see this property
remain residential. lNr. Roquet said it was not feasible ta put in
improvements, and that there should be a traffic signal at the corner.
Chairman Gauer inquired if Mr. Sehl was the original owner of the
property, and Mr. Roquet said that he was. Commissioner Mauerhan commented
that he believed this was another case of a developer retaining a corner
family home for future co~nercial use, a problem with which the Planning
Cortunission was presented at nsarly every meeting. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Mungall favored restricting any commercial development across
the street from a school. Commissianer Allred said C-3 Zoning at Broadway
and Magnolia was recently voted in, and the traffic on Magnolia Avenue
was qvite heavy; therefore he would like to aee a nice residential corner
on the sub~ect property.
-8-
I
I
i
~,-
-
____._.,. ~:. -._.~ . . .
f._
~
I
i
1
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, August 1, 1960, Continueu:
_ . ,`
RECLASSIFICATION - Commissioner Allred offered Resolution No. 42, Series 1960-61, and moved
N0. F-60-61-11 for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissinner Summers, recommending
(Continued) to the City Council that Reclassification No. F-60-61-11 for C-1, Neighbor-
hood Commercial, be denieda
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYESs COMMISSIONERS: Allred, DuBois, Gauer, Marcoux, Mauerhan,
Mungall and Summers.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENTs COMMISSIONERSs Hapgood and. Morriso
RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARING. PETITION submit'ced by MRS. LEROY H. WATSON, 701 North
N0. F-60-61-12 Elm Street, Beverly Hill~, California, requesting that the property des-
cribed as a parcel 92 feet by 245 feet with a frontage of 92 feet on
Lincoln Avenue and located on the southwest corner of Lincoln and Dale
Avenues, also described as 2800, 2802, 2804 West Lincoln Avenue, be
reclassified from R-A, Residential Agricultural, to C-1, Neighborhood
Commercial.
No one appeared for or against this reclassification. Commissioner Mauer-
han moved that this application.be held uver until the next meeting of the
Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Allred
and unanimously carried.
TENTATIVE MAP OF - A Tentative Map af Tract N~~. 3882 was presented to the Commission. The
TRAG7 N0. 3882 tract is located on the west side of Nutwood Avenue between Castle Avenue
(INCLUDING TENT. and Chanticleer Road, and contains 126 proposed R-1 lots. The subdivider
TRACT N0. 3923) is Harry Kelso, Inc., 3432 Via Oporto, Newport Beach, California.
Mr. Walter Kutscher, of Harry Kelso, Inc., appeared before the Commission
and referred to the fact that the sub~ect property was a proposed City Park
site. He stated that he was unaware that the site was still under considera-
tion for a park until the week prior to the Commission Meeting. He
reviewed the existing land uses 3n the general area and commented that he
felt that if a park were developed there would be inadequate access, as it
would only front on Nutwood Avenue. Mr. Kutscher added that if the park
were to be developed recognition should be given to the fact that there
were already playground areas at the Junior High School and the Elementary
School.
Mr. William Stronach, City Park and Recreation Director, appeared at the
Commission's request and pointed out the subject property in relation to
parks and schools on the General Plan mapo He noted that were this park
now in operation it would be serving approximately 30,000 existing popu-
lation, and that at ultimate development there would eventuall be 50,000
citizens within the park°s service radius. In recognition of the availa-
bility of school playgrounds, the original 40 acres proposed for this site
had now been reduced to 30 acres, and that any furthei reduction would
seriously impair the facilities and services which could be provided the
residents in this area. It was also noted that Empire Street was proposed
to be lengthened to connect with Dallas Drive, giving access to the park
from both Nutwood and Empire. A plan was presented to the Commission,
indicating the preliminary designs for the development of the park. Mr.
Stronach noted that he first became aware of the proposed Tract on Tuesday,
July 26, 1960, since it was scheduled to be reviewed by the Interdepart-
mental Committee on Wednesday, July 27, 1960, md that the conflict with
the proposed park was called to the Council's attention at their Tuesday,
July 26, 1960 meating. Thursday morning Mr. Reese, Acting Planning
Director, had called Mr. Kutschor and informed him of the possible
acquisition of the area for park purposes. Chairman Gauer stated that
the applicants apparently had knowledge of the City's Park Site proposal
when they began work on the Tract Map. Mr. Reese appeared before the
Commission and stated that the Stahleys had contacted the City to inquire
if the park was going to be developed, and were informed that the Park
-9-
~ ~ •
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, August 1, 19b0, Continueds
i TENTATIVE MAP OF - Bonds had failed by a slim margin, that there was no provision in the 1959
~ TRAC'T N0. 3882 budget for the acquisition of the park, and that no definite answer could
I (INCLUDING TENT. be given unti.l the 1960 budget was prepared.
TRACT N0. 3923)
' (Continued) Attorney Joe Geisler stated that the Planning Commission was allowed thirty
days in which to act on tract maps; therefore, they could continue the
~ matter, or they could deny the map on the basis that the City was committed
~ to go ahead with the park. Mr. Warren Nichols, associated with youth
organizations, appeared before the Commission and stated that the proposed
park would be suplementary to schools, and was a necessary facility in
~ the areao He noted that West Anaheim particularly needed such a facility.
Mrso Bornstein appeared before the Commission and stated that her teen-aged
children had no facilities in the western section of Anaheim, and that
the people in that area felt that something should be done for thema She
added that Western High School wa5 too far, as wa~ Pearson Park, and the
Junior High School wiil not provide all the facilities to properly serve
teen-age recreation needs.
Mr. Phil Davis, who resided on the east side of Anaheim appeared before
the Commission and gave his support to the plan for park sites being
located ad3acent to schools rather than a parcel or two away from schools.
He added that there was not enough space in the combined park facilities
to accomodate the current needs. Mrs. McGee appeared before the Commission
and gave her support to the parka Mrs. Richard LoWer, of the Sherwood
Forest Association, appeared b~fore the Commission statin:, that the
Association had voted their support for the acquisition of the 30 acre
Community Park site at their last meeting. She also noted that Pearson
Park and La Palma Park combined comprised only 41 acres and would ultimately
serve 50,000 residents, about the same as the proposed park at Nutwood and
Ball.
Chairman Gauer noted that he t.iad served on the Orange County Park and
Recreation Commission, and tha•;. Anaheim and Fullerton were the only cities
in the County providing a number nf parks for their citizens. He added
that he was sorry that conditions made it impossible to inform the sub-
dividers at an earlier date regarding the park site consideration on the
sub3ec~t propertyo Attorney Joe Geisler stated that should the City Council
not acquire the site for a park, the Tract Map could be resubmitted. Mr.
Steen pointed out that the ComTission was actually conside~ing two tracts,
numbers 3682 and 3923, having been divided after the original submission of
a tentative map.
Commissioner Mauerhan noted that this is one of the major park proposals
of the Parks Element of the Preliminary General Plan which is under
Commission consideration, and that the City had tried to keep parks in
close proximity to schoo.ls, which were the ideal locations for the benefit
of the citizens from botn a cost savings and use standpoint. Commissioner
Mauerhan moved that Tentative Map of Tracts Nos. 3882 and 3923 be denied;
seconded by Commissioner MarcoL::, and unanimously carried; and that the
subject Froperty be recommended to the City Council for acquisitiun for
public park purposese
ATTORNEY'S COMMENT- Mr. Geisler said it had come to his attention that a citizen has been told
to obtain a Variance for an R-2 use on an R-1 lot, or else cease the useo
It was learned that the present owner of the property purchased about six
to eight months ago, at which time the two-family use was in existance.
To the rear of the property is R-3 Zoning; across the street more R-3
Zoning, and it is R-1 on the side. Quite possibly, Mr. Geisler added,
there was no building permit issued; and he asked whetNer the Commission
wished to have the present owner make application for rezoning, or con-
sider the reclassification on their own motion. The opinion of the
Planning Commission was that the property owner would have to make appli-
cation for reclassificat3on.
ACJOURNI~NT - The Meeting adjourned at 5:00 0°Clock P.Me •
Respectfully submitted,
~~ ~~~~
i -10- ICHARD REESE, Secretary
i
I '
~
~
~ --__~..--._.~_._..----___.__ .__.___-- ._.__.... _..._._......._ _ .. _--._...._.---
~ ~'
'i
~
5
i
~ ~ `~J