Minutes-PC 1962/04/16~
City Hall
Anaheim, California
ppril 16, 1962
RBGULAR MHBTING OF THB ANAHBIM CITY PIANNING COhMISSION
RBGULAR MHS'fING - A Regular Meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission was
called to order by Chairman Gauer at 2:00 0'Clock P.M., a quorum
being present,
pggggpT - CHAIRMAN: Gauer.
COMMISSIONBRS: Camp, Chavos, Marcoux, Mungall, Pebley,
ABSBNT - COD9dISSIONBRS:• Allred, Hapgood, Perry.
P~~T _ gggi10R plp~g,R; Martin Rreidt.
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY; Joe Geisler.
COMMISSION SHCRBTARY: Ann Krebs
INVOCATION - Reverend Kenneth Fischer, Pastor Ma~nolia Baptist Church, gave
the invocation.
pLg~g pg - Commissioner Camp led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ALLBGIANCB
APPROVAL OP - The Minutes'of the meeting of :rnil 2, 1962 were agpzoved as sub-
MINUT&S mitted with the following correction:
Page 829, relative to Variance No. 1454;
"2. Provision of stucco interiors on the side and rear walls of
all garages on subject property with installation of cabinet
areas therein and installation of bumper guards at the rear
of each garage, prior to Pinal Building Inspection."
VARIANCH N0. 1451- CONTINUBD PUBLIC HHARING. Petition submitted by MR. and MR5
Jot~u~1,T, MURPEIY, 727 South Velare Street, Anaheim, California,
Owners; requesting permission to BSTABLISH A CHURCH PARKING LOT
on property described as: A parcel 146 feet by 268 feet with a
frontage of 146 feet located on the west side of Velare Street
between Orange and Conley Avenues; its southeast corner being
located at the intersection of Velare Street and Conley Avenue,
and further described as 727 South Velare Street. Property
presently classified in the R-A, RSSIDffiVTIAL AGRICULTURAL, Z~]NB.
Subject Variance was continued from the meeting of March 5, 1962,
in order that additional information might be submitted. Mr.
Steven Gallagher, Attorney, representing the Magnolia Baptist
Church, appeared before the Commission and stated that a pro-
posed solution had been submitted to the Planning Department
which gave three methods of handling the parking lot request.
Mr. Rreidt, Senior Planner, read the three proposals to the _
Commission, hirs. Louis nauiraaa, 803 3oath Ve2«.~ Street, ~
appeared before the Cowaission representing 18 persons, stated
their opposition to access to Velare Street because of children
having to use the street' as a wa~king area and that since no
~. ~ `, '. .';.,: t - 852 -
~: .
~ ' `-.:
i,
Y __ _____..._..,.,..._..~m,...,.._.__~._.~..__.._._._ ,,.._,..__.a.+.....~.o~..~.~.~.+~-.r
,.,,_ ___,.,__ __. _ --•. ~_._..~____..._-
, , .. , . .:... . _ .
~-----•- •
~ . ~ . , . ., : ~
~ ~ S
~ ~ ~
853
VARIANCB NO. 1451 - walks were in existance, a more serious hazard would be created,
(Continued) Mr. Gallagher stated that an easement was granted to this proper-
ty giving access to Velare Street. Mr. Geisler informed the
Commission that using the subject easement for the Church permit
wouid be a violation of the ordinance unless said easemen: was
incorporated ia an approved C.U,P. for church purposes.
Purther discussion between Mr. Gailagher and Mr. Geisler ~
resulted in an interpretation by Mr. Geisler that ingress and
egress to subject property for church purposes by way of ease- ~
ment would be prohibited unless snbject Variance No. 1451 were
approved as requested.
THB HBARING WAS CLOSHD.
The Commission found and determined the follow~ng facts regard-
ing subject petition:
1. That the petitioner requests a variance from the Anaheim
Municipai Code: Section 18.16.010 which stipulates per-
mitted uses in the R-~, Residentiai Agricultural, Zone, to
PBRMIT T4~B BSTABLISFAlHNT OF A FRRKING LOT on subject
property.
2. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
or conditions applicable to the property involved in part,
or to the intended use of the property that do not apply
generaliy to the property or class of use in the same
vicinity and zone.
3. That the requested variance is necessary in part, for the
preservation and-enjoyment of a substantial property right
possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone,
and denied to the property in question.
4. That the requested variance as approved, will not be
materially detrimentai to the public wefare or injurious to
the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in
which the property is located.
5. That the requested variance will not adversely affect the
Comprehensive General Plan,
6. That a petition containing 18 signatures was presented in
opposition to subject petition.
Coromissioner Chavos stated that he investigated the area and
feit that approval of a variance which would permit ingress
and egress to Velare Street would jeopardize the lives of the
children who were forced to use the street as sidewalks and
that the rights of vehicular ingress and egress to Velare
Street from subjett property in coru~eCtion with church park-
ing should be waived,
Commissioner Chavos o8kered~Resolution~No. 285, Series 1961~62,
and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner
Mungali, to grant petition for Variance No. 1451, subject to
the following ~onditions:
1, That the reauested petition be granted on the westerly 75
feet of subject property only.
2. Recordation of a record of survey indicating a split of
the westeriy 75 feet of subject property from the easterly
~ _:.. -.. . .~-- ..._._.~....
_~ ' ~ , °. ~c-.--
~ ~ ~ ~
854
VARIANCB N0. 1451 - 82.50 feet prior to Final Ruilding Inspection.
(Continued) t
3. Installation of six (6) foot masonry wall along the north, ~
east, and south bouridaries of the approved parking area,
where said wa11s do not exist.
4. Dedication of vehicular rights to Velare Street, prior to
Final Building Inspection, ~
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the follow- ,
ing vote:
AYSS: COMINISSIONffitS: Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall,
Pebley.
f
NQBS: CONA~tIS310NBRS: None, ~
ABSBNT: COMMISSIONBRS: Allred, Hapgood, Perry.
RHCLASSIPICATION - CONTINUBD PUBLIC HBARING. Petition submitted by RAYMOND SPBHAR,
N0. 61-62-88 1532 Beacon Avenue, Anaheim, California, Owner; requesting that
property described as: A parcel 100 feet by 136 feet with a
frontage of 100 feet on Buclid Avenue and located on the south~-
west corner of Buclid and Chalet Avenues be reclassified from
the R-3, MULTIPL& PAMILY RBSIDffiVTIAL, ZONE to the C-1, NHIGHBOR-
~ HOOD COMdBRCIAL, ZONE.
Subject Reclassification was continued from the meeting of
March 19, 1962 to permit the petitioner an opportunity to sub-
mit elevation plans for the proposed development. Mr, Raymond
Spehar, the petitioner, appeared before the Commission and
stated he had nothing further to offer as revised plans had
been submitted previous to the hearing.
THL HEARING WAS CLOSBD.
The Commission found and determined the following facts regard-
ing the subject petition;
1. That the petitioner proposes a reclassification of the above
described property from the R-3, MULTIPLB PAMILY RBSIDBNTIAL,
ZONB to the C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD CONMffitCIAL, ZONH,
2, That the proposed reclassification of subject property is
necessary or desirable for the orderly and proper develop-
ment of the community.
3, That the proposed reclassification of subject property
does properly relate to the zones and their permitted uses
locally established in close proximity to subject property
aad to the zones and their permitted uses genesaily
established throughout ciic community.
4. That the proposed reclassification of sulsject property does
require dedicatio n for and standard improvement of abutting
streets because said property aoes relate to and abut upon
streets and highways which are improved to carry the type
and quantity of traffic, which will be generated by the
germit±ed uses; in accordance with the circL•?~r4~~t~n element
of the General Plan,
5. That no one appeared in oppositipn to the petition.
~: ~°_.
~
~ `' _
~::
~ . .
ass
RBCTASSIPICATION - Commissioner Camp.offered 8esolution No, 286, Series 1961-62, and
N0, 61-62-88 moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commis sioner
(Continued) Pebley, to recocnm~d to the City Council that Petition for
Reclassification No. 61-62-88 be approved reclassifying subject
property from the R-3, MULTIPLB FAMILY RHSIDffi~iTIAL, ZONS to the
C-1, NBIQiBORH00D CONMffitCIAL,,ZONH (restricted to business and
professional offices only), subject to the following conditions:
1. That signs be unlighted and iimited to windows and doors
with one free standing sign for the purpose of identificatien
shingles not to exceed 6 inches by 30 inches, and that no
flags, banners, or rotating lights be erected subject to the
revised pla:is as submitted,
2. Dedicat~n n of 53 feet from the monumented centerline of
8aclid Street (50 feet existing).
3, Provision of trash storage areas as determined by the
Department of Public Works, Sanitation Division, which are
adequate in size, accessible to trash-truck pickup, and
adequately enclosed by a solid fence or wall, prior to Pinal
Bnilding Inspectioa.
4. Time limitation of one hundred eighty (180) days for the
accomplishment of Item No. 2.
5, Recordation of C-1 deed restrictions limiting the use of
subject ~iroperty to business offices and ,~rofessional offices
only. •
6. Installation of landscaping in the proposed planting areas
and the parkway areas, plans for said landscaping to be sub-
mitted to and subject to the approval of the Superintendent
of Parkway Maintenance, and said landscaping to be installed
Frior to Final Building Inspection.
The foregaing conditions were recited at the meeting and were
found to be a necessary prerequisite to the use of the property
in order to preserve the safety and welfare of the citizens of
the City of Anaheim.
~
On roil call the forego
vote:
AYSS: COhA9ISSI0NERS;
NOHS: COMMISSIONBRS:
ABSBNT: COMMISSIONBRS:
ing resolution was passed by the following
Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall,
Pebley.
None.
Alired, Hapgood, Perry.
CONDITIONAL USB - CONTINII~ PUBLIC F~ARING. MR, and MRS. P, M. DBL GIORGIO, 5371
PffitMIT N0. 220 Grand View, Yorba Linda, California, Owners; requesting per-
mission to construct a planned unit MULTIPLB PAMILY RBSIDSNTIAL,
ZONB development. Subject property located approximately 300
feet east of the southeast corner of Euclid Avenne and Broadway.
Property presently classified in the R-A, RBSIDffiVTIAL AGRICULTZAt-
AL, ZO*Ir.
Subject petition was continued from the meeting of April 2, 1962
to permit the petitioner to be present to discuss complete ~'~~~~
development plans.
.. ~..; . ~ .. , •
~ ~ ~.
~ .
~~Y :.
~
~
;~'
~ ,.., ;~"~_
~
8s~
CODIDITIONAL U3B - There was no one present to represent the petitioner~ although
PBRMIT N0. 220 plans had beea submitted just before the meeting,
(Continued)
1fffi HBARING WAS CLOSHD.
1t~e Commission found and determined the following facts regard-
ing the subject petition:
~ 1. T:;at the proposed use is not properly one for which a
Conditional Use Permit is autho~ized, to wit: to construct a
planned unit MULTIPLH FAMILY R~IDENTxAL, 20N$ development.
2, That the petttion has appeared twice before the Commission,
and that no one represented the petitioner so that the
Commission couid adequately determine from the petitioner any
pertinent information.
3, That plans were not received in time by the Planning Depart=
ment for an analysis by their technicians.
4. That information as presented was insufficient for the
Commission to d~termine properiy the granting of subject
petition.
5. That the proposed use will adversely affect the adjoining
land uses and the growth and development of the area in kSich
it is proposed to be located.
6. That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is
adequate to allow the fuli development of the proposed use in
a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the
peace, health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of
the City of Anaheim,
7. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will imoose an
undue burden upon the streets a~ highways designed and
improved to carry the traffic in the area. ~
8. That the granting of the Conditionai Use ~ermit under the
conditions imposed, if any, will be detrimental to the peace,
health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the
City of Anaheim.
9, That no one appeared in opposition to subject petition.
Commissioner Mungall offered Resolution No. 287, Series No. 1961-
62, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Com!-
missioner Chavos, to deny Petition for Conditional Use Yermit No.
220, MOTION CARRIBD.
On'roTl call the foregoing motion was passed by the following
vote;
AYHS: CQMMISSIONBRS: Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungali,
Pebley.
NQBS: CObAlISSIONffitS: None.
ABSBNT: COMMISSIONBRS: Alired, Hapgood, Perry.
TENTATIVH MAP OF - DBVSLOPffit: STANLBY H. RI7TBR INC., 1102 West 17th Street, Santa
TRACT N0. 4643 Ana, California; HNGINBBR: JOHN TOUPS, 1629 West 17th Street,
~`
ss~
TBNTATIVB MAP OP = Santa A~{a, California. .Sub3ect tract is located on the north side
TAACT N0, 4643 of Santa Aaa Canyon Road south of the Santa Ana River and contains
(Continued) 74 proposed R-1, SINGLH PAMILY RESIDHNTIAL, Lots.
Biil Nitz~ representative for the developer, appeared before the
Commission and stated that a revised map had been submitted. Tt~.e
Commission reviewed the revised #entative map.
Commissioner Mungall offered a motion to approve the revised Tenta-
tive Map of Tract No. 4643, revision No. 1, dated•April 12, 1962
subject to the following conditions:
1. Requirement that shoulri this subdivision be developed as more
than~:one;subdivision, each subdivision thereof shall be sub-
mitted in tentative form for approval.
2. Subject to the approval of plot and buiilding plans by the
Planning at.d the Building Departments.
3, That there be provisions of an adequate drainage plan, by
fliling the northerly end of the tra~ct to discharge into the
river at its present flowline, pumping to the river's present
flowline, discharging into the City of Orange or any other
method,which is to the satisfaction of the City Bngineer.
4. That tlie De~eioper shall participate in the cost of Santa Ana
River levee protection in proportion to:the area benefited by
said levee, based upon ffie a:ea of benefit and contract prices.
for said levee protection~ subject to review by the City
Hngineer and the tract 8ngineer, and approval thereof by the
Director of Public Works.
S. Provide full dedi.::ation of eighty (80) feet and complete
improvements thereof for the northerly Secondary Highway
(Strer.t "F"), except the center 24 feet of paving which shall
be completed by the C:ity of Anaheim.
6. Dedication of vehicular access rights to Jefferson Street and
Street "F", except at street ~opeaings.
Commissioner Marcoux seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIHD,
,I
r~; ~ ~~~'
TBNTATIVB MAP OP - DBVffiOPBR: STANLHY ~1. RITTER' INC,;1D2 West 17th Street, Santa Ana,
QRANGx COUNTY California; BNGINBBR: •JOFIIQ TOUPS, 1629 West 17th Street, 3anta
TRACT N0. 4644 Ana, California. Subject tract is located on the east side of
Jerrerson Street, approximately 3.67 acres north of the Santa Ana
Canyon Road;.aad' contains 33 proposed R-1, SINGLE•PAMILY RBSI-
DffiVTIAL, Lots.
Biil Nitz, representative for the developer, appeared before the
Commission to answer any questions on tkie proposed deveiopment.
Commissioner Marcoux offered a motion to approve subject revised
Tentative Map of Orange County Tract No. 4644, subject to the
foilowing conflitions:
1. Subject to annexation by the City of Anaheim,
2. Requirement that should this subdivision be developed as more
than one subdivision, each subdivision thereof shail be sub-
mitted in tentative form for approval.
~ . ~ ~
_ .. ,
_ .
;. ,. ~:.
: . .., ..... :, . . .. .. . _, ,
i; ~ , .
i ;~ .
. J ~ :~
~ ~.,
~;~ .
F:
__ -<~
C.~ C~ ' ~
$5$
TBNTATIVH MAP OP - 3, Subject to the approval of plot and building pians by the
~tAN~' COUNTY Planning and the Building Depaztments.
TRR. .. N0. 4644
(r,ntinued) 4. Maintain the nqrtherlq end of the tract at a sufficient
~~~ elevation to provide a drainage plan satisfactory to the City
Bngineer. ~
5. Dedication of vehicular access rights to Jefferson Street,
except at street openings.
6. Developer shall participate in the cost of Santa Ana River
levee protection in proportion to the area benefited by said
levee, based upon the area of benefit and contract prices for
said ievee protection~.subj~ct to,review by the•City Bngineer
and tract engineer, and approval thereof by the Director of
Public Works.
7. Dedication of forty-five (45) feet from centeriine of
Jefferson Street and the improvements installed in front of
the parcel "Not A Part".
8. 3ubject to the approvai of petition for Re~lassification No.
61-62-102 for reclassification of "Not A Part" to the R-1,
ONS PAMILY RHSIDHNTIAL, ZONH.
Commissioner Mungall seconded the motion. MOTION CA.RItIBD,
Commissioner Camp left the•Council Chambers at 2:55 P,M,
VARIANCB N0. 1463 - PUBLIC HEARING. SUPRffid8 INVSSIMHNT CQMPANY, 2180 South Harbor
Bouievard, Anaheim, California, Owner; RHNNBTH B, KIKBR or
ALBBRT M. BOSS, 2180 South Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, California,
Agent~ requesting a variance to PBRMIT TFffi MAINTHNANC$ OF THRBB
DRIVEWAYS HAVING ACCBSS TO PUBLIC S1RB8TS on property described
as: PARCBL N0. 1: Northwest corner of Mountasn View Avenue
and Orangewood Avenue; PARCffi N0. 2: Southwest coraer of
Pearson Avenue and Mountain View Avenue; PARCffi N0. 3; North-
east corner of Orangewood Avenue and Mountain View Avenue,
property presentiy classified in the R-3, MULTIPLH PAMILY RHSI-
DHNTIAL, ZONB.
Commissioner Camp returned to the Councii Chambers at 3;10 P.M.
Mr. Albert M. Boss, agent for the petitioner, appeared before
the Commission and stated that there was no satisfactory way to
remove the garages adjacent to Orangewood Avenue and Pearson
Avenue in order to provide access to the garages on Lot Nos. 1,
22, and 24, and that to shield garages from public view would
require removal of three existing garages.
THH HBARING WAS CLOSBD.
The Commission found and dete=mined the following facts_regard-
ing the subject petition:
1. That the petitioner requests a variance from the Anaheim
Municipal Code: Section 18.32,100 which provided that
ingress and egress to any garage will be from abutting alley
only and not from the street to PffitMIT VffiiICUTAR ACC5S5 FROM
THE S1ltEST.
,,^-~
~ '
~,
- :'~'
~ ~ ~
859
VARIANCE N0. 1463 - 2, That there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
(Continued) or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the
intended use of the property that do not apply generally to
the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone.
3, That the requested variance is not necessary for the preser-
vabion and enjoyment of a substantial property.right pos-
sessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and
denied to the property in question,
4. That the requested variance will be materially detrimental
to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property
~ is located.
5. That the existing code violation was indirectly created by
City Council approval of revised plans in conjunction with
the,petition by which subject property was reclassified and
that the illegal driveways should be removed or legalized by
the City Council if they ~o desire,
Commissioner Chavos offered Resolution No. 288, Series 1461-62~
and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner
Pebiey to deny Petition for Variance No. 1463 on the bases of
the aforementioned findings:
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the follow-
ing vote:
AYBS: COMMISSIONBRS: Chavos, Gauer, Pebley.
NQBS: COMhlISSIONBRS; Marcoux~ Mungall.
ABSHNT: COhAlISSIOIdBRS: Alired, Hapgood, Perry,
ABSTAINBB; COMMISSIONBRS: Camp.
VARIANCIi N0. 1464 - PUBLIC HBARING. h4t. and MRS. FORREST G. ALLBN~ 2238 Paimouth
Avenue, Anaheim, California, Owners; requesting permission to
BNCROACH INTO RBAR YARD SHTBACK on property described as; A
parcel 60 feet by 100 feet on the south side of Palmouth Street
585 feet west of the centerline of Hrookhurst Street with a
frontage of 60 feet on Falmouth Street and further described as
' Lot No. 139 of Tract No. 2201. Property presently classified in
the R-1, ONS FAMILY RHSIDBNTIAL, ZONB,
No one appeared before the Commission to represent the petitioner,
but the Commission was informed that the petitioner was out of
trNi1,
The Commission found and determ?ned the following facts regard-
ing the subject petition:
C 1. That the petitioner requests a variance from the Anaheim
F Municipal Code: Section 18.24.030 to permit an encroachment
of four (4) feet into :he required rear yard in order to
construct an addition •to an axisting siagle family residence.
2. That there are exceptional or eatraordinary circumstances or
ccadi+_~::s agg23~sb1~ to the propert~ in•ralv~d or ta ~h;.
, .. ~ I
~ intended use of the property that do not appiy generally to
~ the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone.
_ - I . .
,
~- 1,
,- "~ _ __ __ _ ;
860
VARIANCB NO, 1464 - 3, That the requested variance is necessary for the preserva~ion
(Continued) and enjoyment of a substantial property right pos~essed by
other property in the same vicini'ty and zone, and denied to
the property in question,
4. That the requested variance will not be materially detrimental
to the pubiic welfare or injurious to the property or amprove-
ments in such vicinity and zone in which the property i~
located.
5, That the requested variance will not adversely affect the
Comprehensive General Plan.
6. That no one appeared in opposition to the subject petition.
Commissioner Marcoux offered Resolut?on No. 289, Series 1961-62,
and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner
Pebley, to grant petition for yariance No. 1464, subject to the
following conditio:is;
1. Development substantially in accordance with Exhibit Nos. 1~
2, and 3.
On roli cai! the foregoing resolution was passed by the foliow-
ing vote:
AYHS: COIrA4ISSI0NffitS: Camp, Chavos, Gauei, Marcaxx, Mungall,
Pebley.
NOBS: COMMISSIONBRS: None.
ABSBNT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Hapgood, perry,
VARIANCB N0. 1465 - PUBLIC HEARING. FLORffiiC8 PIT2GBRALD JANBS, 311 West Kateila Ave-
nue, Anaheim, California, Owner; JOSEPH FRANKLIN, 1408 Bast Azel,
Ozange, California, Agent; requesting a variance in order to con-
struct a motel on property described as: A parcel 486 feet by
635 ~eet with a''rontage of 486 feet located on the north side of
Katella Avenue between Harbor Bouleva~d and Clementine northeast
corner of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue, except a parcel
150 feet by 320 feet with a frontage of 150 feet located on the
north side of Katella Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and
Clementine Street; its southwest corner being approximately 780
feet east of the northeast corner of Harbor Boulevard and
Katella Avenue. Property presently classified R-A, RBSIDffiVTIAL
AGRICV TURAL, ZONB.
Mr. Joseph Franklin, agent for the petitioner, appeared before
the Commission to answer any question. The Commission reviewed
the plans and noted that.parking areas show nine (9) feet by
twenty (20) feet andshoiild be ten (10) feet by twenty (20) feet,
and that plans apply onl~ to the westerly third of the subject
property.
Mr. Grant McDermott, 410 West Ratel.ia Avenue, Anaheim, appeared
in opposition to the petition, and stated that there were too
many motels, some of which were being used for cheap rental
rather than apartmen4s.
Mr, Geisler, City Attorney stated that the Commission could not
interfere with free enterprise, but are Simited to judgements
of the compatibility of land uses.
~ = '.'
'?: .
~ ~ ~
~ , *
. ~
~ ~
~~~
1 u' .
(.U ~3 0
861
VARIANCB N0. 1465 - TH8 HBARING WAS CLOSED.
(Continued)
The Commission found and determined the following facts regarding
the subject petition; ,
1. That the petitioner requests a variance from the Anaheim
Municipal Code: Section 18.16.010, to permit the establish-
ment of a motel,
2, That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the property involved or to the
intended use of the property that do not apply generally to
the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone.
3, That the requested variance is necessary for the preser-
vation and enjoyment of a substantial property right pos-
sessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and
denied to the property in question.
4. That the requested variance will not be materially detri-
mental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
impsovements in such vicinity and zone in which the property
is located.
5, That the request.ed variance will not adversely affect the
Comprehensive veneral Plan.
6. That one person appeared in opposition to subject petition.
Commissioner Marcoux offered Resolut•ion No. 290, Series 1961-62,
and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner
Mungall, to grant petition for Variance No, 1465, subject to the
fullowing conditions:
1, Development substantially in accordance with Bxhibit Nos. 1,
2, and 3, except as amended by the following conditions:
2, That the number of parking spaces be increased by the use of
an additional portion of subject property to a minimum of
thirty-five (35) feet in width, in accordance with code
parking requirements, and that all parking spaces be fuliy
improved and striped as ten (10) by twenty (20) foot spaces.
3, Dedication of sixty (60) feet from the monumented centerline
of Katelia Avenue (40 feet existing).
4. Preparation of street improvement plans and installation of
all improvements for Katella Avenue, subject to the approval
of the City Engineer and in accordance with the adopted
standa=d plans on file in the Office of the City 8ngineer,
5. Payment of $2.00 per front foot for street lighting purposes
on Kateila Avenue.
6, Provision of trash storage areas as determined by the
Department of Public Works, Sanitation Division, which are
adequate in size, a~cessible to trash-truck pir,K-up, and
adequately enclosed by a solid fence or wall, prior to Pinal
Building Inspection, '
7. Provision of a minimum vertical clearance of eleven feet.
~ .~-~ .,~.'l~ ,--~--. „ . .
~
VARIANGB N0. 1465 - 8. Provision of fire hydrants as required by the City of
(Continued) Anaheim Fire MarshalJ, prior to Pinal Building Inspection.
9. Time limitation of one hundred and eighty (180) days for the
accomplishment of Item Nos. 3, 4, and 5.
10. Posting of a one year bond to insure the construction of a
six (6) foot masonry wall along all boundaries where parking
is adjacent to abutting ur.developed property classified R-A,
RBSIDffiVTIAL-AGRICULTURAL, ZONE, in the event abutting property
is used for other than commercial purposes.
11, Provision of.landscaping in the required twenty (20) foot set-
back area, plai~s for said landscaping to be submitted to and
subject to the approval of the Superintendent of Parkway
Maintenance.
12, That the facade of the building be of masonry constrnction.
On roil cali the foregoing resolution was passed by the following
vote: ~
AYBS: COMMISSIONERS: Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Marcowc, Mungall,
Pebley.
NOBS: COdAlISSIONBRS: None.
ABSBNT: COhA1ISSI0NBRS: Alired, Hapgood,, Perry.
VpRIANCE N0. 1467 - PUBLIC t~ARING. IRVING L. NOVBMBER, 742 North Resh Street, Ana-
heim, California, Owner; requesting permission to WAIVE GARAGH ~
DOOR RBQUIRBMBNT on property described as: A parcel of land con-
sisting of the tier of Sots on the north and east side of
Glencrest Avenue; said parcel commencing 411.37 feet east of
centerline of Chippewa Stseet and running to and one-half way
around the cul-de-sac, and further described as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4,
and 5 of Tract No. 3398. Propezty presently classified as R-3,
MULTIPLB FAMILY RBSIDBNTIAL, ZONB.
Mr. November, the petitioner, appeared before the Commission and
stated that he planned to remove the wooden beams and replace
them with steel beams.
1H8 HBARING WAS CL03BD.
The Commission discussed at Sength the many requests for garage
door variances and the basic reqnirements necessary for a neat
appearing carport.
,
The Commission found and determined the foliowi.ng facts regard-
ing the subject petition:
1. That the petitioner r~quests a variance from the Anaheim Muni-
cipa! Code: Section 18.32.120 to permit the establishment of
carports.or garages, wit~.ont doors,
2, That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicatle to the property involved or to the in-
tended use~of the property that do not apply generally to the
property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone.
3, That the requested variance is necessary for the pzeservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by
other property in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to
• property in question.
4. That the requested variance wili not be materially detrimental
to the pubiic welfare or injurious to the property or improve-
ments in such vic3nity and zone in which the property is Socated,
~:~.~ ~_ : : __,, _" --- - ; .. . ., ----`-~_-: _~___- __ ._ ----._
~ L,~ ~ 862
,
~/
863
VARIANCB N0. 1467 - 5, That the requested variance will not adversely affect the
(Continued) Comprehensive General Pla~~.
6. That no one appeared in opposition to subject petition.
Commissioner Pebley left the Council Chambers at 3;45 P.M.
Commissioner Camp offered Resolution No. 291, Series 1961-62, and
moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner
Marcoux, to grant petition for Variance No, 1467, subject to the
Following conditions:
1, Provisic+n of stucco interiora on the side and rear walls of
all garwges on subject property with the installation of
enclosed cabinet storage space.
2. Provision of bumper guards at the rear of each garage to
protect the interior walls.
3. Provision for steel. posts to replact the present wooden posts
in order to obtain maximum clearance,
4. Provision of ten (10) by twenty (20) foot garage spaces with
a minimum clearance for vehicular access of eighteen•<18)
feet into a double garage and nine (9) feet into a single
garage.
On roll call the foregoing motion was passed by the following vote:
AYHS: COhA~tISSIONERS: Camp, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall,
NOBS: COMMISSIONHRS: Chavos.
ABSBNT: COMMISSIONERS: A11red, Hapgood, Pebley, Yerry.
VARIANCS NO. 1468 - PUBLIC HEARING. HBLEN J. HICK, 725 North Lemon, Anaheim, Cali-
fornia, Owner; J(~ BLBAKLEY, 12021 Westminster Avenue, Santa Ana,
California, Agent; requestin? permissioa to WAIVS MINIMUM PLOOR
ARBA RBQUIREMHNT on property described as: A parcei 157,50 feet
deep with a frontage of 50 feet on the west side of Lemon Street
approximately 315 feet north of the centerline of Wilheimina
Street, and further described as 725 North Lemon Street.
, Property presently classified in the R-3, MULTIPLB FAMILY RESI-
DBNTIAL, ZONE.
Mr. Joe Bleakley, Agent for the petitioner, appeared before the
Commission and reviewed his petition,
Commissioner Pebley returned to the Council Chambers at 4:10 P,M.
THB HBARING WAS CLOSBD.
The Commission found and determined the following facts regard-
ing the subject petition:
1. That the petitioner requests a variance from the Anaheim
Municipal Code: Section 18.80.080 to permit the establish-
ment of a single family dwelling on property presentJ.y
classified in the R-3, MULTIPLH FAMILY R&SIBBNTIAL, ZONE.
2. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions appiicable to the property involved or to the
• intended use of the property that do not apply generaily to
the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone,
-",
, ~' _-_ __ _ , . r- , ._._. ' , - - -- - --
, :.,.._.
'"`s4 :iN ._. _ ~ . , .. .
_.
~ ~
- ,;-`i+..y a .I .2:-rl: N '~~,. ~: ~a v y .: „. .
~t\i
~ . . . .
' . . . I ~~~^xx' .
I
~
. . . ~
.. .
. . . . ~ . ~ . . ' . ' .
. ':'
'
~~".L~ f. . .
~t
. . . . . ~ . ~ . . . -
., ~ .. ~~ J
. , . r;~ ~.
~ . . . ~ . . ~ ... ... ~
864
VARIANCB N0, 1468
(Continued) - 3, That the requested variaace is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by
other property in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to
the property in question.
4. That the requested variance will not be materially detri-
. mental to the pubiic welfare or injurious to the property or
i improvements in such vicinity snd zone in which the property
is located,
~ 5. That the requested variance will not adversely affect the
Comprehensive General P3an,
F. 6. That no one appeared in opposition to the subject petition,
~ Commissioner Marcoux offered Resolution No. 292, Series No. 1961-
62, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Com-
missioner Mungall, to grant Petition for Variance No. 1468, sub-
~ ject to the following conditions:
1. Development substantially in accordance with Hxhibit Nos. 1,
~ 2, and 3,
2. Repair of sidewalks and curbs on Lemon Street, in a^.cordance
with the adopted standard plans on File in the Office of the
City Engineer.
3. Provision of trash storage areas as determined by the Depart-
ment of Public Works, Sanitation Division, which are adequate
in size, accessible to trash-truck pick-up, and adequately
enclosed by a solid fence or wall, prior to Final Building
~ Inspection.
~ 4. Payment of a Park and Recreation Fee of $25.00 for the new
unit only, to be collected as part of the Building Permit,
~ 5, Time limitation of one hundred and eighty (180) days for
~. : the accomplishment of Item No, 2.
~
' On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the foilow-
; ing vote;
~,
~ AYBS: CObNlISSIONBRS: Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungali,
`
~ Pebley.
t NOBS: CObAlISSIONERS: None.
i-
~
AHSHNT: COMMISSIONBRS: Ailred, Hapgnod, Perry.
RBPaiT TO TH8 - It was reported to the Commission that word had been received
COAMISSION R8: from the Orange County Planaing Department that the proposed
TBNTATIVB MAP OP width of Jefferson Street south of the Santa Ana River had been
1RACT NU. 4643 AND altered since the filing of the City of Anaheim Interdepartmental
N0. 4644 recommendations relative to Tentative Map Nos, 4643 and 4644
' approved earlier in the meeting by the z~lanning Commission.
~!~ Commissioner Chavos offered a moti.on that the City Council be
informed of ~his revised proposai of the Orange County planning
~ Department in connection with their consideration of the Com-
mission~s action on.Tentative Map,Nos, 4643 and 4644, owing to
the fact that official uction already had beeli taken on both
%~ rX
~ ,~ .
1 :tn(..v::: ~
~: i~~^~ _ . ~ _
~
~ ' ,~ ~ .
~
~°~w~a_ a ~ ~
' ~1~}'~~Y. , ~ . . , . .
. . '• ,~ . ~ . ' .
~ . . ~ ~ . . . . ~ .
,\,; ~ , . . . . ' . .
~t~ '-...... 1 ' R ..' ~
...~M~.~I't...'. ~.... ~. , .. ..'~~, ~~ ~~... +4....., }~., ...'t^. ['. ..:~~{~1.1 .......:._.......
~
~i
,. ` ~,.~
ry'tU SS3.., r` a :7 , f~t~~ 11~ ~ ~ 7f'' `ine :~: 5 S~f ~~...,^'ar"7 ~~?~ ~'~~-.711.,:_~~.~:~~1° . ,:.~'y'e~'na' ~ W~+''3~!~T~`:~`. ..+~{~ .i~~ }, ,...; ~M
S~~F ~ . e y,: ,: ~.C~ >;. ~, i ~. f~ ..~ . ~ .
y.,: I '.J ~. .
) ~' ~ ~
t: '
~~ is :;7 iu'
~ ' : ~t; iTTi ~'ya , a ' If" ' .. ~1i.~. ~;' - ± ~ ~ ~ . . , ~
.~:..t.~. rd.~. ..f
. ~
... .. ,~,. . .. . .... . _
~ : . , , , . ;.~ .. ..~ . ,.~ . .
I:'(f ' . . ~.
~ ~ o ~~
. :
~ , ` ` 865 :.;
r
~ ~~T Ta ~ - tracts earlier in the meeting by the Planning ~ommission, The
~ CQhIlNISSION R8: motion was seconrsd by Commissioner Camp, .MOTION CARRgD,
TBNTATIVB MAP OP.
~ 3RACT644• 4643 AND i
1 •..
(Continued) .
~ VARIANCE NO 14 _ .
~ ~ 69 PUBLIC HBARiNG, MR, and MRS. JAMgS y, pRITY;HARp~ 11341 3kyline
'~ Drive, Santa Ana, California, Owners; CARLO GIANNBTTI and/or
,.~f ROBBRT CIAGBTT, 1077 West Ball Road, Anaheim, California, Agent,
,~,~y- re9uesting permission to CONSTRUCT AND OPBRATS RADIO AND TBLg-
~ VISION RBNTAL pND SqLES.WITH RBPAIRS o.. property described as:
ryr,, A parcel 221,32 feet oy 175 feet on the south side of Ball Road
~~~ 211,33 feet west of the centerline of Pern Avenue, and further
''~ described as 2920 West Bali Road, Property presently classified
"F '-, ia the R A, RHSIDBNTIAL AGRICULTURAL, ZONB.
~.. ~
~ y Robert C l a g e t t, a g e n t f o r # h e pe ti tioner, appeared before the
; Commission and stated that in the interest of good community
relations, they had made a duplicate of the application and -
shown it to residents in the community, and that said residents '
had signed the petition,,which was then notarized, shown their
approval of subject pe±:ition.
Mr, Hobie Johnson, 9571 1~older Road, Cypress, representing the
-~ Church property to the west, appeared in opposition to subject
petition, and stated that they would not be in opposition to the
subject petition if a six foot masonry wa11 were built between
the church property and any existing construction or future
construction, in order to protect the church property~ and that
the church representatives had tried to reach some rsgreement
with the petitioner in sharing the cost of building said masonry
wall, but were unable to do so.
Mr. ,john Brandt, 1215 South,Gaym~unt, Anaheim representing him-
self and a neighbor, Mrs, Nesley, appeared bef.ore #he Commission
and asked that some barrier be erected betwcen their properties
and the subject property to block from view ~~r,y objectionable
storage areas subject petitioner may have,
THS HBARING WAS CLOSBD.
The Commission found and determined the following facts regard-
~~. ' ing the subject petition:
1. That the petitioner requests a variance from the Anaheim
municipal Codee Section 18.16.010 to pern;it the establish-
ment of a.radio and television shop in an exigting twenty
~ C20) foot by'sixt~en (16) foot building on subject property.
~
~ 2. That #here are no exceptional or extraordinary circum ~'•
stances or conditions appiicable to the property involved or
` to the intended use of the pr.ot>ertv that do not an.,i..
,~ c~ ~~ ; A . -rr5x 'rs~aU''~~i'a:n``.~ : ~;~,~~±~:'~-f-7. as-t,s . ~. ~Ler~" ~~.~:~ ~~n ~!~r~:~ _
~,,
~~ t ~,
h ;~ ~
, ,
6 d ,'i
~ •.. '. ~ . ~ . . ... : :. ~,. .. ; ~ `~
r r.,^. ,: ~s.'~ 7~.,'. ~ i`'
. . .. . .. . .. .. '..': . .~~-~.
l .._ . ..~~ .. ~.. ~^" ~ ~~ ... ~ ... . ' ... ~ . - ~~'. ~ .
~ . .. . . . ~ ' . . ~ . . . .
~"; •' '.:. :
r;'
~`
~
4;<:, ..
q;..., _
i
866
VARIANCB N0. 1469 - 4. That the requested variance will be materially detrimental to
(Contiaued) the public welfare or injurious to the property or improve-
ments in such vicinity and zone in which the property is
located.
S. That there were two persons who appeared in opposition to
subject petition.
6. That the area is basically a residential agricultural area
for which multiple family residential development may best be
projected,
Commissioner Chavos offered Resolution No. 293, 3eries 1451-62,
and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Cormaissioner
Pebley, to denq Petition for Variance No, 1469 on the bases of
' the aforementioned findings.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following
vote:
AYBS: COhA~IISSIONHRS: Camp, Chavos, Gauer~ Marcoux, Mungall,
Pebley.
NOBS: COMMISSIONBRS: None.
ABSBNT: CONA~IISSIONBRS: Allred, Hapgood, Perry.
CONDITIONAL USB
YffitMIT N0. 221
- PUBLIC HBPIRING : CHURCH OF JBSUS CHRIST AND MICHABL B. PAMSON,
12311 Morrie Lane, Garden Grove~ Cali£ornia, Owners, ROTFAlAN-
STBBN and ASSOCIATBS; 617 South Harbor, Anaheim, Californi.a,
Agent; requesting permission to construct a SINGLB FAMILY PLANNHD
UNIT DBVBLOPhffiNT oa property described as; An "L" shaped parcel
with frontage of 135 feet on the south side of Orange Avenue 140
feet east of Webster Avenue and a frontage of 118 feet on the
east sYde of,Webster.Avenue approximately 230 feet south of Orange
Avenue and further described as Lot Nos. 20 and 22 of Tract No,
796. Property presently classified as R 6, RBSIDBNTIAL AGRI-
GULTURAL~ Z~IB.
Mr. Gordon Steea, agent for the petitioner, submittzd a revised
se± of plans~ and that the revised p2ans showed a lower density,
that theq planned for a 6~000 square foot unit with shingle roof,
row-type homes,.that thia was a park type housing development,
semi-detached with side and front yards setback in order to
' ' provide a pianned and common recreationai area, that the only
I alternative would'be to subdivide, but that proposed plan
I.
utilized land more effectively,
' . THS FffiARING WAS CL06BD.
The Commission found and determined the foliowing facts regarding
~
~ the subject petition:
~ _ 1, That the proposed use is properly one for which a Conditionai
Use Permit is authorized by this Code, to wit; to permit the
~ ,
. estabiishment of a SINGI.B PAMILY PIANNBD UNIT DEVBLOPMBNT.
s. ~ _
, 2. That the proposed use wili not adverseiy affect the adjoining
~ , land uses and the'.growth and development of the area in which
' ~~ it is proposed to be located:,
~ ,S
+ s`:-~ ~ - 3. That the size and §hape of the site proposed for the use is
,
( ~`(-~w~~ ` adequate to allow.the fuli development.of the proposed use in
~~~~ ^ .. :~
w .
a ~a,-,ae ~aat det.-i-cata2 .a ~hc.~zrticu2ar ~.e° nor thc .
~ ~
~s~lf ,
peace; health, safety, and generai welfare;of the citizens of
v
~
~
~ .vs~? •,
.,
~ . ~
Y.:
~'. ^~ . . .. .
. . . . . . . . . - .. , . ,
. ~ . .~ ~ ~ .. _ . . . . . . . . .
~
. _ ~ . . . . ~ ~ ~
A
f
~
' .. ~ , ~
~ ~ ~ - .
i~
ti ..
r~ ~ i
~`w' ~i~ ~~ ,
~ . . , .
I 1 ' N
r, ~rr ,
`
~
~
~ac,~iH` i`_ +A..._
~
~ .
. , ms..w .~ .... . .:
.w. r., .~..~-~t .~M .t.~ . ,_,. , ~, ~,,. .~., e ~~...y.. ... ,.~,~...... ..n.,.. R~, k,..~ ..,,a..,...~, n _ .
~
~ ~
867
1~: COrIDITYONAL• USB - the City of Anaheim. .
' pffitMIT N0.'221
(Continued) 4. That the granting of the Conditi,,nal Use Percait under the
conditions imposed,-if any, will not be detrimental to the
peace, health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of
the City of Anaheim.
5. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose
' h d ' d nd
~
~
€
~-
~
r~_
~
~ • ,
~,.
~
6;;
an uadue burden upon the streets and hig ways esigne a
improved to carry the traffic in the area.
6. That no one appeared in opposition to the subject petition,
Commissioner Marcoux offered Resolution No, 294, Series 1961-62,
and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner
Camp, to grant Petition for Conditional Use Permit No, 221, sub-
ject to the following conditions:
1. Substantially in accordance with revised plans submitted
ApriT 16, 1962 as Bxhibit Nos. 1 and 2.
2. Dedication of 32 feet from the monumented centerline of
Orange Avenue (30 feet existing).
3. Ps~°paration of street improvement plans and iastailati.on of
ail improvements for Orange Avenue and Webster Avenue, subject
ta the approvai of the City Bngineer and in accordance with
Che adopted standard plans on file in the Office of the City
Bngineer.
4. Payment of $2.00 per front foot for street lighting purposes
on Webster Avenue.
5. Payment of a Park and Recreation Pee of $25.00 per dwelling
unit, to be collected as part of the Suiiding Permit,
6. Provision of trash storage areas as determined by the Depart-
ment of Public Works~ Sanitation Division, which are adequate
in size, accessible to trash-truck pick-up~ and adequately
enclosed by a solid fence or wall, prior to Pinal Buiiding
Inspection.
7. Time iimitation of one hundred and eighty (180) days for the
accomplishment of Item Nos. 2, 3~ aad 4. .
8. Provision of a six (6) foot masonry wall along the easterly
boundary of subj~ct property prior to Final Huilding
. ~
, ~. i
~ Inspection, ~ ~
~ On ro11 ca11 the foregoing resolu~ion was passed by the following
vote;
r1YBS: COh¢~IISSIONBRS: Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall,
Yebley.
NO&S: COMMI3SIONBRS: None.
a~ P~SEN3T: COMMISSIONSRS: Allred, Hapgaod, Perry. .:
. . ! , .''. I
_
.
. . _ .
- !
k, ;
' >: ~ ,+.
~
' ~ ~
.
~
i .C-'~i'~ . t ; Y / .
.. . . ~i.f~ ...... _~..... .,,.. ~.,.i_. . ,~ . . ,i --
., ._..~.Z'l ..,i.".......,,:e!..... 7 .:L.;~i ~
^r- ~ F j . .----~M
~~,.~...~.~S,E! i:~+u,.<_2i?.?F.~..i~---r.-r.+--c^.-•' , . . • i
. .,.___. ___ ~_~ „n..~,:~
~~ '~ .. ' Y. ., ~~ . . . . ~' , ~~ FC~ W Y~iF
~ .)
~",~.::.~;
I
~~ ~' -'. ~. . ~ . , ' . ~ . ..
__ ._ ~ ' _ ~.'k~
..~ .. O . ..~ . ~',~~ "~~~. ~ . .
868
o-~~..: ~ ~ ~ ~
M CONDITIONAL U9fi - PUBLbC tffiA1tING. R. L, LUHCRE, 414 Plum Lane, Orange, Caiifornia,
~ PffitMIT NU. 228 Owner; requesting permission to CONSIRUCT A MOTSL on property
r. described as Lot Nos. 6 and 7, South Stseet Tsact No. i4, and
~. further described as 820 South Los Angeles 3treet, Property
presently classified in the R-A, RHSIDBNTIAL AGRICULTURAL, ZONH.
r.,
Mr. Robert L. Luecke, the petitioner, appeared before the Com-
mission to answer any questions.
~~; : ,
T!~ I~A1tING WAS CLOSBD.
The Commission reviewed the plot plan and noted that parking space
Nos. 7 and 8 were perpendicular to the lot line~ that the opposite
;' r,,,__,, side of the parking area indicated angular parking,;and that
,;;. consequently plans did not indicate proper ciearance to back out
of parking areas.
Mr. i{reidt~ Senior Pianner, informed the petitioner that the
departmeat had standard layouts for solving the parking area
problem.
Commissioner Pebley offered a motion to reopen the hearing and
continue it until April 30, 1962, in.order that the petitioner
might be able to submit revised plans to conform with the Standard
Open Air Parkiag Space Dimension on file in the Planning Depart-
ment .
Commissioner Camp seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIBD.
Commissioner Pebley left the Council Chambers at 4:40 p,m,
RHCIASSIPICATIO~i - PTJBLIC'2IDAlYING. RBAL IDTVBSTMBNT COMPANY, 10502 West Katella Avenue,
N0. 61-62-95 Anaheim, California, Owner; requesting reclassification to R-3,
MULTIPLH PAMILY RHSIDHNTIAL~ ZadVB on property described as; An
irregqla;ly "L" shaped-parcel with a frontage.of 90 fe~et on the
west side of Western Avenue approximateiy 130 feet north of
Stonybrook nriee (approximately 310 feet deep) and with a frontage
of 49 feet on the north side of Stonybrook Drive approximately 285
feet west of Western Avenue, Property presentiy classified as R-1,
ONH PAMILY RHSIDffiVT3AL, ZONB.
Mr. H. C. Knisely, attorney for the petitioner, appeared before the
Commission and asked for a coatinuance~,but Chairman Gauer noted
there were a number of objectors to subject petition~ and ruled the
request out of order.
T1wo letters were read to the Commission, one from an ad,joining .
property owner, approving the reciassification, and another with •
19 sigaatures of nearby property owners opposing the reclassificationr
Norman Johnson, 3302 GSen Holly Drive, appeared before the Commission ' '
and asked that the reclassification be explained to the neighbors
so Lhat they couid intelligently present aay opposition to sub3ect
reclassification.
Donald Brooks, 3210 Stoneybrook Drive, appeared before the Commission
and stated that the odd-shaped piece of land was originaily owned
by Mr, Thox~so~'and.Mr._Hin+z, that when the area was origiaally
developed~ Mr, Hintz was,aware of its existenc~, bu~L that as late es
1958, Mr. Hintz had planned to construct an apartment house on this
odd-shaped piece of land.
r.. ~ i .
. . - ~. . . ~ ~ : ~ .. . .
869 ~ -
~ .
RH~IASSIFICATION - Richard Wainwright~.646 Curson Drive, appeared before the Commissiaai
` N0. 61-62-95 ' and stated his.opposition to the subject reclassification because of
~ 1Continued) the svrrounding area has been developed for single famiiy residenti~
~ use, and that the proposed apartments would not be in keeping with
the over-all plan of a single family area, that the single family
nomes would depreciate in value, as statistics show that apartments
~ have a tendency to become rua down,
; John Simpson; 3309 West Deerwood Drive, a member of the Church
~ adjoining the subject property, stated a number of inembers of the
Church were opposed to the proposed developmeat, since the invest-
r ~ ment o£ the Church represented approximately $100,000, and that the
; proposed development would be a detriment to the value of the Church.
~
_ . THB HBARING WAS CLOSBD.
i~ ~; ~ ~ ~
r~=
!: ;.-
€ ~ RBCTASSIFICAT~ON
s N0. 61-62-97
The Commission found and determined the foilowing facts regarding
the subject petition:
1. That the petitioner proposes a reclassification of the above
described property from the R A. RBSIDBNTIAL AQtICULTURAL, ZON$,
to the R-3, MULTIPLE PAMILY RBSIDHNTIAL, ZOHB to permit the
establishment of an apartment development.
2. That the proposed reclassification of subject property is not
necessary or desirable for the orderly and proper development
of'the community.
3. That the proposed reclassification of subject pi•operty does not
properly relate to the zones and their permitterl uses locally
established in ciose proximity to subject propecty and to the
zones and their permitted uses generally established throughout
the community.
4. That there were four persons appearing before the Commissiot~,
one with a petition signed by 19 persons in opposition to the
subject petition.
5. That the proposed multipie family residential development would
be an encroachment in a single family residentiai area.
Commissioner Marcoux offered Resolution No. 295, Series No, 1961-62,
and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner
Chavos, to recommend tc+ the City Council that Reclassification
No. 61-62-95 be denied on the bases of the aforementioned findings.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following
vote: ~ •
AYBS: COMMISSIONBRS: Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall.
NGHS: COhAlISSIONHRS: None.
AHSBNT: COMMISSIOI~RS: Aiired, Hapgood, Peble7, Perry, '
- PUBLIC I~ARING. I~Ilt, and MRS. PINLBY LBWIS, 931 South Magnolia Avenue,
Anaheim, California, Owners; C, W, YOUNG or VIOLA B, MURRAY, Agents
requesting-that.prep~r#y described as; A parcel located at the
northwest corner of Ba11 Road and Magnolia Ayenue with a.frontage of . ~
192,8& feet on Magnolia Avenue and 124 feet on Hall Road, and further
described as 92a-931 South Magnolia Avenue, be reclassified from the ~'
R-1, ONB FAMILY RBSIDBNTIAL, ZONS to C-3, I~ffiAVY COhMffitCIAL, ZOI~,
~ -
::;; :;
;i;;
',,,":':
,. . , rr::
870
~. `:
{ :
~~~,~~~~.~~~ ~~. .
~=': ~
. ~
RECIASSIPICATTON - Mr, C. W, Young, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the
N0, 61-b2-97 Commission and stated that the land is not suitable for use as resi-
(Continued) dentiai property and that due to the heavy traffic subject pronerty
should be reclassified.
Mr. ICreidt, Senior Planner, presented a resume' of the action taken
by the Commission and the City Council on Petition for Reclassifi-
cation No, 60-61-4~}:,:
. Robert McCarter, property owner 4o the north of subjeci- property,
appeared before the Commission and stated that he was one of 18
property owners who filed Petition for Reclassification 60-61-44,
but that he was now of the opinion that the properties.,could not be
economically developed as proposed under that reclassification, and
that subject reclassification for a service station should be
approved and, if so, that he desired access from the rear of his
- property to the alley proposed under Reclassification No, 61-62-97.
THB HBARING WAS CLOSED.
Tne Commission found and determined the following facts regarding
. the subject petition:
1. That the petitioner proposes a reclassification of the above
' described property from the R-1~ 01~ FAMILY RHSIDRNTIAL, ZONB
to the C-3, HBpVY COHAfHRC3AL, 20NB, for the purpose of erecting
a service station,
2. That the proposed reclassificatio n of subject property is not
necessary or desirable for the orderly and proper deveiopment
of the community.
3. That the proposed reclassification does not conform to the
projected plan of diversion under Petition for Reclassification
No. 60-61-44.
4, That there was a petition with 18 signatures and a letter
presented in opposition to the subject petition,
The Commission discussed the merits of erecting another service
station at corner of subject property.
Commissioner Chavos offered a motion and moved for its passage and
adoption, seconde6 by Commissioner Mungall #o recommend to the City
Council that Petition for Reclassification No. 61-62-97 be denied
on the bases of the aforementioned findings.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was voted as follows;
AYBS: COMMISSIONBRS: Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungali.
NOBS: CObAfISSI0IVBRS: Marcoux,
ABSffiVT: COMMISSIONffitS: Allred, Hapgood, Pebiey, Perry,
Por want of a two-thirds majority voting for or against the fore-
goiag resolution, it was continued to the April 30, 1962 meeting,
at which ti~e another motior. for actioa w:ll..be in order.
RBCLASSIPICATION
' - PUBLIC HBARING. CALVIN L, PBBLBY, 824 South Ramblewood Road, Owner;
N0. 61-62-98 McDANIBL HNGINBHRING, 222 Bast Lincoln Avenue, Agent; iequesting; '
`
that property
described as:, pn irregulariy shaped parcel uf iand
a-m,:,•: .:,~_.,,,.... , __ .. ~ .. _.,. ._ . ....
-•---~-r,,,.; ;.;:c:
r, ,. _ .. !e --- -----
~
~~~~
`,` ~r'
s~i
~ .~ RHCLASSIPICATION - containing 9,5 acres, appror.imately 900 feet deep with a frontage
N0. 61-62-98 of 416 feet, on the south side of Ball Road, and located 133 feet
(Coatinued) west of the centerline of Oakhaven Drive, and further described
as Tentative Tract No. 4627, be reclassified from the R-A, R&SI.-
~"'• ~ DffiVTIAL AGRiCiII.T[tRAL. 20NB to the R-3_ MULTIPLS FAMILY RBSIDHNTIAL.
ZONB.
~'.` `~ ,~
Subject petition was filed in conjunction with Tentative Map of
Tract No. 4627.
Mr. A. R. McDaniel, engineer of the project, appeared before the
Commission and stated he would like to hear the reasons for
~ oppositi.an to the subject petition before he could intelligently
answer any pertinent questions,
Mr. John Simpson, 3309 Deerwood Drive, representing the Westridge
Home Owne;s Association, appeared be£ore the Commission and read a
letter which the association had sent to the Chamber of Cormnerce,
Mr. Jack Brown, 1220 South Oakhaven Drive, spoke for forty-three
adjoining property owners and submitted petitions with their
signatures indicating their opposition to subject petition,
Mr. Michael Zehra, 3406 Glen Holiy Drive, president of the West-
ridge Home Owners Association, read and submitted a letter of
protest to the Commission.
Mr. McDaniei, agent for the petitioner~ stated that the petitioaer
had been trying to develop subject properiy into an R-3, MULTIPLB
PAMILY development since 1960, that according to a Generai Plan
made in 1958~ the subjgct property does compiy with recommendations
of that study for Multiple Pamily deveiopment~ and that the units
were being planned in the higher rental bracket of $150 to $175
per month.
Mr. John 3impson, 3309 Deerwood Drive, stated that there seemed to
be inconsistancies in the Pianning Study approved by the Commission
for the subject property. ~
Mr. A. L. Wolfert, 3404 West Ball Road, s4ated that he had been a
resident in that area since 1923, and was heartily in favor of the
reclassification and was speaking for a number of other people in
the Chambers who favored the reclassification.
THH HSARING WAS CIASBD.
The Commission disc!issed with Mr. Zehra the letter he e:arlier
submitted to the Commission.
Commissioner Chavos of£ered a motion to continue the hearing in
order that interested parties could meet to resolve differences
amicably.
The motion lost for want of a second.
Coamissioner Mungall offered a motion and moved for its passage
and ad'option, seconded by Commissi6ser Camp; to recommend ~o the
City Council Lhat Petition.for Reclassification No. 61-62-98 be
approved, subject to conditions, ~
On roll call the foregoing motion was defeated by the following :.+
vote: ~::~~~ _
.
~ ~ _ '~1~:~?Ir~r ,., ,Ir~ ..: ~~.~. r.. .~:.. ~ cr„~: .~. ~..< <.., .,.~.~1 .4 '.:~.-~. -, r ~ -/ ~':'~ . _N. ~., i ~ :"::;.{:1.7&'k:-.,,v~
~
'' ,„;~ ~.. ~s, , - , +':
-q
~.;
~ i
. . ~ ~ . ~'~t ra v . ~ .
~ . .. . . •~~~~~ ~ ~ .~,
$72
RBCLASSIFICATION - AYBS: C06AlIS6IOidiBRS: Camp, Mungall.
N0, bl-b2-98
<Continue~l) NOES: ~Ob9dISSIONBRSa Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux.
~. . • ~
AHSffiVT: COMh1ISSI0NBRS: Aiired, Hapgood, Pebley, Perry,
i' . For lack of a sufficient vote to carry the motioa, the case was
~' ' continued until the April 30, 1962, at which time another mo'tion
{:': for action will• be in order.
TBNTATIVB MAP OP - DBVBLOPBR: L. FRSDRICR PACK, P, 0, Box 333~ Corona Dei Mar~ Cali-
TRACT.NO. 4527 fornia; E1~GGINHBR: McDANIBL ENGII~ffiHRING CO.. 222 8ast Lincoln Ave-
nue, Anaheim, Califorrn a.~ Subject traet is loaated on the south
side of Ball Road, approximately 133 feet west of the centerline
of Oakhaven Drive, and contains twenty-six (26) proposed R-3,
MULTIPLB FAMILY RBSIDBNTIAL, ZONB, Lots.
Subject tract map was filed in conjunction ivith Reclassification
No, 61-62-98.
The engineer reqqested that subject'tract be continued by the
Commission to be heard concurrently with Reclasaificatioi. No, 61-
62-98.
Commissioner Mungall offered a motion io continue review of sUb-
ject tract until meeting of April 30, 1962 in accordance with 4he
engineer~s request. Commissioner Chavos seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIBD.
P,HPCRTS AND (1) APPOINIMHNT OP PIANNING COM~lI3SION SBCRBTARY.
RHCOAAffiVDATIONS -
Commissioner Chavos offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Camp, that Ann Krebs be appointed to the positioa of Plannin~
Commission Secretary. MOTYON CARRIBD,
(2) PLANNING STUDY N0. 45-114-4
Study being made for the ultimate development of the area
bounded on the south by Ball Road, and on the east by the
proposed Orange Preewa}~ (Route 19), and that said Planaing
Study be presented at the mQeting of April 2, 1962, for
Planning Commission consideration. PROBLHM: 1b determine
the optimum development of a section of the City which is
experiencing rapid single family housing growth and which
lacks adequate planned shopping center facilities, The
determination of optimum development will act ~s a guide for
future levelopment petitions,
The Commission seheduled suhject Planning Study for a work session
on Apri1 26, 19~.i2 at 7:00 P,M,
(3) PROP06BD FUSL PIPHLINB LOCATION.
Proposed location is: at the west boundary of the City Limita
of Anaheim near the intersection of La Palma Aveaue and
Brookhurst Avenue, proceeds easteriy on La Pa~ma, southeriy
on West Street, easterly on North Street, southerly on Olive
Street, easterly on Vermoat Avenue, southerly aloAq the Santa
Pe Railroad right-of-way to the BasL City Limits.
The Commission decided subject location was not within their
jqrisdiction•and should be handled by the Public.Works Depar.tment.
Upon being informed that the Bngineering Department proposed that
the Commission recommend aubject iocation to the City Council.
the Commission acknowiedged their being informed, but felt the
,
,;
- -- - -*-~~
, ~
,,,
.. .. _ ,.
. . ~ . .. / .,,-.. ,
~ ;,;,.. ,, r.,; ;:, „., .. . . rz... .,~ , ,._ .,s
~ :;2s... ~4.~~.,,c~::.,... . .., i . , ... . . . -.. ., . - ~:, t-i:° ~ - . - ' .
!
,
~ '
~
~
~.J
~ ~ ~ ~`
873
~_,' RBPCRTS AND - Pubiic Works Department should make their recommendations to the
r. . .
~ RBCOMI~IVDATIONS City Council.
(Continued)
(4) RSVIHW OP CONDITIONAL USB PSRMIT N0. 97
Property of subject Conditional Use Permit is an established
temporary church site for the west side of Western Avenue
~': south of Lincoln Avenue immediately north of the Western High
~ School property.
p ,
°Mart3n K=eidt,'Senior Planner, explained that subject conditional~
K
~ use permit would require a six (6) month extension of time in
~,,:•• order to mermit the petitioners an opportunity to continue to use
an established temporary church site.
~
4; T:~^:~8.;;; Commissioner Mungall offer.~ed a motion, seconded by Commissioner
f Camp, to grant a six (6) month extension of time to subject
,: ,,, Conditional Use Permit. MOTION CARRIBD.
(5) Chairman Gauer directed that the use of two trailers at
.~ 2901 West Ball Road be investigated for compliance with the
zoning code.
CQitR&SPONDENCB - ORANGB COUNTY USB VARIANGB N0. 4957
DIX LBASING CORPORATION, 7217 Petterson Lane, Paramoant. Subject
property located on the east side of Douglas Street approximately
565 feet north of Katella Avenue, southeast of Anaheim, Purpose;
To permit the establishment of a truck storage and repair yard
in the A-1 General Agricniturai District.
ADJOURNMENT
Discussion was held and the Commission found that the development
as proposed to be incompatible and totally dissimilar to that being
developed in the Southeast Industriai Area, but that at this parti-
cular time, prior to the Orange Preeway construction and considering
devhlopm@nt`in this immediate area, it would seem to be improper to
recomme-:s total deniai. The Commission agreed with the use but not
with the property development and considered recommendation of a
three-year time limitation and the requirement that the buildings
be removed and the area be returned to its original condition or
developed in a manner consistent with the dev~lopment in the South-
east Induatrial Area at the end of that three-year time limitation,
unless an extension of time is granted by the appropriate jurisdictiat
Commissioner Marcoux offered a motion to recommend approval of subject
variance subject to the three-year time Simitation, and the require-
ment that tHe buildings be removed and the area be returned to its
originai condition or developed in a manner consistent with the devei-
opment in the Southeast Industrial Area. Commissioner Chavos seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIBD.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjonrned at 6:55 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
. ~
ANN RRBBS
P?a:.uing Commission Secr~etary
~
-kx~..i .. ~.... 1.::4.; . ~ ~~.~.~>>. .C ....._.. :~.5 . . .. .. ...1. ~.a...,..~ . r~. .~L 1 ... ...' ) ,1,.•, r:.kX! r. ,:~.r. T~ ...-.. . .. . .. . . ~
~
~
,,'~.
'~' .,