Minutes-PC 1963/10/14c; , L~ ~~ '''~ ~
- J _.
City Hall
Anahe3m, California
October 14, 1963
A REGULAR MEE';ING OF THE ANAHETM CJ7Y PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR'MEETING •• A Regular Meeting of the Anahe_~~`"ity ''lanning Commission was called to order
by Chairman Mungall at 2:00 0'C1.ock YoM., a quorum.being-present.
% PRESENT - CHAIRMAN: Mungall
' COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Pebley, Perry, Rowland. •
i
ABSENT - COMMISSIONERS: Sides
PHESENT - Zoning Coordinator: Martin Kreidt
Deputy City Attorne„y: Furman Roberts
Office Hngineer: Art Daw
Planning Department Stenographer Jacqueline Mo Sullivan..
INVOCATION - Commissioner ~~auer gave the Invocation.
PLEDGE OF - Commissioner Pebley led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flage
Ai.,T,.EGTANCE
AFPRbVAL OF - Minutes of the meeting of September 30, 1963 were approved with the
'TI~~MINUTES / following corrections:
/ Page 1802, paragraph one should read: Commissioner Rowland wondered
whether the ioea of the iequirement of the 20-foot area designated as
landscaped zone, 30~ ~f this area must be in green growing materials;
however, this 30;96 need no•*. be c~,ntinuous acrass the front, and may be
/at the option of the property o.vners.
/ Page 1802, add the following at the end of the page:
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to discuss, Commissioner
Allred offered a motion to adjourn the meetingo
Commissioner Perry seconded the motiono MOTION CARRIED.
The meeting adjourned at 5:48 peme
CONTINUED
RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARING. JOSEPH GLEASON, M. D., 6189 La Palma Avenue, Buena Park,
N0. 63-64-28 and California, Owner; JACK J< STRICKLAND, AoI.A., 9012 Garden Grove Boulevard,
Garden Grove, California, Agent; property ~escribed as: A rectangular parcel
CONDITIONAL USE of land with a frontage of 220 feet cn the east .•~de of Magnolia Avenue and a
PERMIT N0, 468 deptr of 613 feet, the northerly boundary of sa,,: property being 366 feet
south of the centerline of La Palma Avenue, and further described as
1020 North Magnolia Avenueo Property presently classified as C-1, NEIGHBOR-
HOOD COMMERCIAL ZONE.
REQUESTED CLASSIFICATION: R-3 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL~ ZONH
. REQUESTED CONDITIONAL USE: CONSTRUCT A ONE AND TWO-STORY MULTIPLE EAMILY ._
. PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEI/HLOPMED':r WITH CARPORTS,
WAIVER OF THE ONE-STORY HEIGHT LIMITATIONe
Subject petitions were continued from the meeting of September 4, 1963, in order to allow the
petitioner time to submit plot plans incorporating single story construction with 150 feet of
single family development, reduction of the density to a maximum of 50 dwelling units, increasing
the building separation to 25 feet, and further to increase the recreation area to 2G0 square
feet per dwelling unit. ~
Mr. Ron Yeo, representing the owner, appeared before the Commission and stated the revised plans
were in accordance with the Commission's recommendations of the September 4 meeting.
The Commission reviewed the plans, and noted that a wall was indicated on the southerly property
line, and asked the reprESentative if he would be willing to stipulat_ to a wall on the northerly
and easterly property lines.
The representative was in agreement with this request, and so stipulated.
No one appeared in opposition to subject petition.
~ ; THE I-IEARING WAS CLOSED.
, ~ - 1803 -
i
;
~ _
_.. _ __-~_ __ ~ _ _ __._ ..... . __ _ . _. _ ___...
Q~!('. . HS .
- -.- T _ .
i
:
_ -.. ~
•
~._~ (~ ~.~ 't .~ ~...J
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 14, 1963, Contin~ed:
1804
RECLASSIFICATION - The petitioner left the Council Chamber befare reading of the recommended
N0..,63-64-28 and condztions, and Commissioner Chavos instructed the Secretary that the
CONDITIONAL USE Petitioner was to be advised regarding these conditionsa
FEH'irilT I~O. 468 Commissioner Rowland offered Resolution Noe 930, Series 1963-64, and
(Continued) _ moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner.Gauer to
recommend to the City Council that Petition for Reclassification
Noe 63-64•28 be approved subject to conditionso (See Resolution Book.)
On roll call the foregoing resolutian was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungail, Pebley, Perry, Rowland
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERSc Sides
C'ommissioner Allred offered Resolution No. 931, Series 1963-64, and moved for its passage
and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Rowland to grant Petition for Conditional llse Permit
No. 468, subject to conditions. (See Resolution Book.)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by thE fn71_!+w_Rg :.~~~:
AYES: COMMISSIONERSs Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Pebiey, Perry, Rowland
NOESs COMMISSIODIERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sides
VARIANCE N0. 1586 - CONfi.JUED PUBLIC HEARING. WILSHIRE OIL COMPANY, 727 West Seventh
Street, Los Angeles, California, Owner; GEORGE MURPHY, 9476 Pellet
A WALK-UP RESTAURAA,T ANDrWAIVER~OFeREQUIRED PARKING,eAND FRONTSYARD SETBACKlon propertyLISH
described as: An irregular portion of land having a frontage of 233 feet on the south side
of La Palma Avenue, and a frontage of 182 feet on the east side of West Street. Property
presently classified as R-0, ONE FAMILY SUBURBAN, ZONE.
Subject petition was continued from the meeting of September 4, 1963, in order to allow the
petitioner sufficient time to submit revised plans incorporating a masonry wall, adequate
parking facilities which mest Code requirement, and elevations incorporating other than
metal construction, and building setback plans in ac~:ordance with Code requirementsa
Zoning Coordinator, Martin Ktieidt, noted the petitiorner tiad submitted a written request for
withdrawal of subject peti.tiono
No one appeared in opposition ±u subja~t pP~~iiono
THE }iEARING WAS CLOSED. _
Commissioner Camp offered a moti~,ia te recommend to the City Councii that all action on
Petition for Variance No. 1586 be• te~rminated, since the petitioner had requested withdrawal
of said petition until such time ~~s pending reclassification of the area was approved to
Gl ~ NEIGFBG,?HOOD COMMERCIAL, ZrJPI];NG.
Commissioner Gauer seconded the ~no~ion. MOTION CARRIED>
CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEpRING. ARDMORE DEVELOPIu~M COMPANY, 1129 Westwood Boulevard,
PERMIT N0. 485 Los Angeles 24, California, Owners; RAYMOND ROUGH~ 741 North Euclid Street,
and Anaheim, California, Agent; .requestin
TENTATIVH MAP OF TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPIu~NT By N~A~i~ OF A RE-SUBDIVISIONtOFEAN EXISTINGpR.-3NTRACT.
TRACT N0. 5226 WAIVER OF THE (1) GARAGES TO CON~TRl1CT CARPORTS; (2) MINIMIIM SIDE YARD
REQUIREA~AII'g; (3) MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUIREN~PTI'S ON LOT NOS, 1
THROUGH 11; (4) MINIMUM LOT AREp pND WIDTH; and (5) ONE-STORY FiEIGHT
LIMITATION WITHIN 150 FEET OF R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL, ZONED PROPERTY, on property
described as Tract 2517, Lot Nose 1-11 and 15-52, and being located on the north and south side
af Glenoaks Avenue, on the north and south side of Greenleaf Avenue, and on the east and west
side of Fairhaven Streets The abovs desaribad property being westerly of Euclid Street, easterly
of Chippewa Avenue, and north of the Orange County Flood Controle Property presently classified
as R-3, MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENfIAL, ZONEa
~
-~
~
. ~ ~~ '
;;'.
l"~ t.~ ~ ~•--~ ~
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 14, 1963, Continued: 1805
CONDITIONAL USE - Subject tract map: DEVELOPER: ARDMORE DEVELOPMEM COMPANY, 1.129 Wes.twoad
PEAMIT N0. 485 Boulevard, Los Angeles 24, California~ ENGINEERs ENGINEERING SERVICE
and CORPORATION, 1127 West Washingto~ Boulevasd, Los Angeles 15,.Galiforniaj
TENTATIUE MAP OF proposes subject property for subdivision into 154 R-3, MULTIPLE.F.AMILY
TRACT NOo 5226 RESIDENTIAL, ZONE lots> - .-._
Continue ~„_,,,r
, Mro Robert Lesser, one of the owners of the Ardmore.Ge.velopment Company,
appeared before the Commission and stated.the revisrid.plans before..the
Commiesion incorporated the addition of firebreaks, adequate.distance between buildings,
proposed a reduction of units from 150 to a total of 142 dwelling•units, and further stated
their.purpose was to create a planned townhouse development.that would be an asset to the
communitye .
The City Attorney's office advised that a perpetual maintenance fund could be incorporated
into..the CCBRs which guaranteed the tenants9 who shared an "in common'.' maintenance.of..these
areas, at least a minimum level of maintenanceo Under this agreement, provision for separate
ownership of individual townhouse, patio, and carport area would be included>.
Mro Lesser further stated, after discussion with the planning staff, a 20-foot_ded3cated alley
was proposed, which would pr~vide adequate ingress and egress at the rear as well as the front,
and.was now indicated on the planso ...
Mro Ray Rough, agent for the petitioner, was also present and recounted the effort put forth
k~y th? Plannin; P?`+ar+inor+ 2,~,a thP ~o+iti~ne*; in his oninion,__z~esulied in a olan_which_would
be satisfactory to the Commission and an asset to the communityo
Mro Don L, Von Trotha, 1812 Wo Catalpa, was present and stated he had formerly signed a petitionj
opposing subject development, but at this time wished to withdraw his vote of opposition~ since !
reviewing the plans with Mro Rough several days prior to this meeting, found they represented ~
a.satisfactory developmente However, Mro Von Trotha further stated a 6-foot masonry wall shouldi
be constructed along the northerly property lineo ~
THE }iEARING WAS CLOSEDo ;
Commissioner Perry asked the petitioner, if he would be willing to agree to the addition of a ~
1~-foot s~;~.o of concrete to all existing curbs throughout the development to which the ~
petitioner did agree, and so stipulateda ~
Commissioner Chavos questioned the advisability of the requested waivers, and further stated
the zoning of the R•~3 was "in name only",as a conditional use permit is not intended to be a
substitute for zoningo
Zoning Coordinator Martin Kreidt noted the CC&Rs which had been reviewed by the City Attorney's
office, insured maintenance of tiie common area, and added it would be safe to waive the items
involved since a substitute safeguard was provided, and further stated it was his understanding
this had been resolved with the City Attorney's officeo
Commissioner Pebley initiated a discussion concerning fire protection and questioned what
provisions were made, if any, and also inquired how other tenants would be protected in such
a situationo
lieputy City Attorney Furman Roberts~advised this ~vas handled by making a provision in the CC&Rs
that one insurance policy be obtained by the association to cover all units, and that the
tenants were protected by '.he rebuilding rules governed by the State Laws>
The Commission agreed they would depend o~i the City Attorney's office to handle this problem,
and reque~ted that the City Attorney investigate the possibility of rental if a fire did occuro
The Commission further noted their duty was to decide whether the proposed development should
be constructed on the iand in questione
Commissioner Perry offered Resolution Noo 932, Series 1963-64, and moved for its passage and
adoption, and further qualified his motion with the statement, that although this proposed
development had low density, he felt this type of development would be desirable in this
particular area, and added the following condition, tha: 18 inches of concrete be installed
behind the existing curbs of subject property; Commissioner Camp seconded the motion, subject
to conditionse (See Resolution Booko)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Ailred, Camp, Gauer, Mungall, Perry
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Chavos, Pebley, Rowland
nuccnrr. r^lIAeMT$STONF.RS: ~iAaA . . .... .« ,.,.. . . ........... . .....
. . __ .~~ .__- .,._.,.e_~.__._. ~ - --_ __ _...._ . _ ._ .
--_ ~. _.
MINUTES, ClTY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 14, 1963, Cantinued: 1806
CONDITIONAL USE - In Voting "NO" Commissioners Chavos, Pebley, and .ROwland qual.i~ied_their
PF,.B~GIT iV0< 485 vote, with the statement that the proposed•-develop~n~ut.was.~~~°+~~.in Qne
and of the prime axeas of Anaheim~ lccated within 1~4 mile•af _the.Braadway.
TENTA.TIVE MAP OF shopping center, and its development was not in.the.bes~ in:texssts af the
TBI~Cf.NOo 5226 public health, safety and general welfare, that the advisah9.13ty..a£..the
(Caritinueci) ,_ requested waivers was questioned, that•the zoning of .the g-.3,..was. "in..name
-. only" as a conditional tise permit was not .intended-:to. be..a .substitute for
zoning, and that this was a sub-standard R-3, and does not meet the neces-
saz;y R-3 standardso
The:~Commission reviewed the Interdepartmental Committee and Planning Department recommendations
~ of..the tentative mapo . . . . ... . .... .
Commissioner Perry offered a motion to approve Tentative Map of..Trac~ Noo..522fi,..subj.ect to_.
th~.following conditions: (1) That should this subdivision he de.vEloped.as mese than one .
sesbdivision, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in t~nta.tivs-.foam..£ar. apprava],;....
(2)~that the approval of Revision Noo 1, Tentative Map.of Tr.ac•t.Noo 522li,.3s granted suhject
to.the approval of Conditional.Use Permit Noo 485; (3).that-i,he Condi:tions; Cdvena'nts, and
F,e~~tsictions shall be submitted to and approved by the City A.ttorne.y=s office.pxiar. to.City
Council approval of the final tract map, and further, that the approved Covenants, Conditions,
and• Restrictions shall be recorded concurrently.with the Final Tract. Map<.- .. ..... ......... ..
Commissioner Gauer seconded t~ie motione MOTION CARRIED with-Com~nissioners,Chavos, Pebley,
„_..., _._ ., ,._~, . _. ,~..,,~~ ! _. _ _
a-'u'u, nunra~u- vu~tUy irv o
CONDITIONAL USE - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGo FREDRICK Ca AND JEANNE HOWARD, 1.45 South Western ~
PERMIT NOe 467 Avenue, Anaheim, California, Owners; GAIL Se SIMS, Lincoln.West Profes- ~
and sional Mall, 1782 West Lincoln Avenue, Sui.te G, Apaheim,.Calif.arnia,..Agent; i
TENTATII/E.MAP OF requesting permission to CONSTRUCT A TWO-STORY MUI:TIPLE FAMILY PLANNED- ~
TRACT N0,~5299 RESIDENfIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH CARPORTS - WAIVE.ONE-STORY E~IGHT.LIIu4ITATION p
on property described asi An L-shaped parcel of la~d with a frontage af ;
99 feet on the west side of Western Avenue, and a maximum depth of 645 feet, ~
the northerly boundary of said property being 672 feet south of the centerline of Lincoln
Avenue, and further described as 145 South Western Avenuee Property presently classified as ~
R-3, MUI:TTPLE' FAMII.Y RESIDENfIAL, ZONE. ~
~
~•
SUBJECT TRACT: located on the west side of Western Avenue approximately 606 feet south of ~
the centerline of Linco2n Avenue, and covering approximately 205 acres, is '
proposed for subdivision into eleven R-3, MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZONE g
lotso ;
e
.. 3
Subject petition and Tentative Map Kere continued from the meeting of September 4, 1963, ~
3n order that the petitioners might submit revised plans and approved CCBRs to the City ~
Attorney's officeo ~
Mro Leo Sims, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Commission and stated there had ;
been liaison between the Planning Department and the petitionera However, the suggestion ;
made by the Planning Commission and the Planning Department for the installation of a street ~
to provide a primary access into the easterly portion of subject property from Western Avenue, ~
to eliminate the use of alleys for ingress and egress, was deemed undesirable Ly the petitionero ;
Therefore, the petitioner felt if the aforementioned solution was e requirement, the proposed ~
development would be abandoned. Consequently, neither revised plans nor CCBRs were submitted ~
for Commission consideratione
I
~
The agent also noted that the units as outlined on thc original plans met the approval of ~.
prospective tenants, since they had expressed an interest in the rental of the proposed develop- ~
mente The Commission stated it was possible these tenants would not have any specific opinion
concerning alley access since many do park their cars in an alley, but it is the Commission°s ~
duty to do u~hat they feel is best for the Cityo
No one appeared in opposition to subject petitione ;
THE HEARING WA~~ CI,OSEDa
Commissioner Chavos offered Resolution Noe 933, Series 1963-64, and moved for its passage and '
adoption, seconded by Commissioner Rowland to deny Petition for Conditional Use Permit Noo 467,
based on the facts that the Commission after reviewing the same set of plans a second time„
together with a field investigation of the area, determined the petitioner did not provide
adequate ingress and egress for pedestrians and vehicles, that tha proposed development does
not meet the necessary R-3 requirements and was inadequate from a planning standpoint, and
that the petitioner omitted the necessary CCBRso (See Resolution Booke)
'
. ,
'
;~
.
--~---~ - _ _, .._..---- -----
~,...T..,~,,.-..~_~ ----•~ _ .
~-' C~ ~ c;:> ~
i •
.. . . ;. . a
( -~ F ;.
_ ~ ~ ~~
- f; l +
~~
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 14, 1963, Continued 1807 ;
CONDITIONAL USE - On roll call the foregoing.resolution was passed by the following.vate:..
PERMIT NOo 467
artd AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Ailred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall,
TENfATIVE MAP OF Pebley, Perry, Rowland
TRACT NOo 5299
(Continued) NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENTs COMMISSIONERS: Sides
Mro Sims appeared before the Commission and requested withdrawal of the tract map at this
time, and inquired the possibility of the submission of a tract map at a later date, which
would.perhaps provide for subdivision of air spaceo The agent was advised this was possible,
but that no future commitments would be made at this time>
Comroissioner Allred o'fered a motion to recommend to the City Council that all action.an
Tentative Map of Tract Noo 5299 be terminated, because the petitioner had requested with-
drawal of said tracta Commissioner Camp seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED,
RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC 1-1~ARINGo LACNIL INCo, 7051 Monroe Avenue, Buena..P.ask, Califotaia,
N0. 63-64-46 Owners; WOODY JOHNSON, 224 West Fifth Stseet, Santa Ana, Califarnia.,
Agent; requesting that property described as:. A rectangular.parcel of
~land having a frontage of 33U feet on the soutn side or.iincoin nvenuE,
and.a depth of 252 feet, the eastern.boundary of said property being appr.oximately 365 feet_
west of the centerline of Westchester Drive be reclassified from the R-A, RBSIDENTIAL
AGRICULTURAL, ZONE to the C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, ZONE to construct.a.shopping.centero
Woody Johnson, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the eommission-and.discussion.folluwed
immediately concerning i:he possibility of Bella Vista being open to pxouide.adequate.ingress
and egresso The owner was present, and he stated he owned a.1•1 ten acres-or.iginally, but
dedicated and sold the rear 2~ acreso The owner further stated he did not feel it was his
resaonsibility to put the street ine
Zoning Coordinator Martin Kreidt noted when this development was approved, he understood at
some time that Bella Vista Street would become a through street, otherwise the westerly end
of the street would not have %aan stubbed, but would instead have been cul-de-saced.
Commissioner Gauer offered a motion to continue Petition for Reclassification No. 63-64-46
to the meeting of November 13, 1963, in order that the petitioner might be allowed the
opportunity of consulting with the Traffic Engineer and the Planning Department to attempt
to find a solution regarding ingress and egress from Bella Vista Street opening onto Lincoln,
that the parking layout as proposed be reviewed, and that the +.raffic problem also be
considered. Commissioner Allred seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIEDo
RECESS: Commissioner Pebley offered a motion to recess the meeting for ten minuteso
Co,nmissioner Allred seconded the motiono MOTION CARRIEDo
The meeting recessed at 4:12 pomo
RECONVENE: Chairman Mungall reconvened the meeting at 4:25 p~ma, all Commissioners
being present except Commissioner Sidese
_________._._.__--~ ----- -- ___._-..._--. _ ____ _ ---.----__..__
..._....._. ____._~_
~ ' _.: ~. ___ _ _
~ T- T
s
_ I
`~
.:,.,~ '
~ t ~'
', ~
} `...)
- ~ ~~
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 14, 1963, Continued 1308
RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARINGo AL ROBERTS PiYMOUTH, INCo, 10080 Garden Grove Boulevard,
N0. 63-64-33 Garden Grove, California, Owners; ALBERT Do ROBERTS, 10080 Garden Grove
Boulevard, Garden Grove, California, Agent; requesting that property
described as: Ar. "L" shaped parcel of land having a frontage of 170 feet
on the west side of Los Angeles Street and an averege depth of 150 feet, the south2astern cor~rer
of said p•roperty being approximately 195 feet north of the centerline of Sall Road, and further
described as 1125 South Los Angeles Street, be reciassified from the C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD
'COh~4~IERCIAL, ZONE to the C-3, HEAVY COMMERCIAL, ZONE to establish a used car agency as a
conforming useo
Mro A1 Roberts, owner of subject property, appeared before the Commission and stated the lot
had been improved considerably with landscaping, installation of a new sign, and tF~e painting
of the premisese Mr, Roberts further stated the original purpose was to create a new foreign
car agency at this location, but this idea had been reconsidered since the sales of foreign
cars had fallen offo Therefore, it would be a"used car lot" at present, and tAat three and
one-half years were left on ihe present lease on subject propertyo
The Commission in their review of subject petition felt that the present operation was a
satisfactory and successful operation, from the City's standpoint, and that the petitioner
would be iequired to appear before the Commission if he proposed any other use on subject
property, T(-IE HEARING WAS CLO5ED,
Commissioner Camp offered Resolution Noo 934, Series ]963-h4; and moved for it=_ ~assay„ ard
adoption, seconded by Commissioner Pebley, to recommend to the City Council that Petition for
Reclassification Noo 63-64-33 be approved on the original plans presented, restricting subject
property to a"used automobile agency only", that any repair or other servicing incidental
thereto would not be permitted, without priox approval of the City Council, and that a 6-foot
strip of land, proposed for reclassification to the P-L, PARKING LANDSCAPING, ZOIJE be land-
scaped in accordance with planse (See Resolution Booko)
On roll czll the foregoing resolution was passed by the follotiroing vote:
AYESs COMMISSIONERSs Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Pebley, Perry, Rowland
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSEM: COMMISSIQNERSs Sides
RECLASSIFICA7ION - PUBLIC 1~AkINGo HERMAN He BRUNS, 1102 South Los Angeles Street,
N0. 63-64-47 Anaheim, California, and JAMES La BERNIER 8 DAVID A KOHL, 2631 West
and Olympic Boulevard, Los Angeles 6, California, Owners; So Vo,HUNSAKER
CONDITIONAL USE 8 SONS, 15855 East Edna Place, Irwindale, California, Agente Property
PERMIT NOo 489 described as:~ A rectangular parcel of land approximately 816 feet ny
186 feet, having a frontage of 717 feet on the south side of Clifton
Avenue, the westerly boundary of said property being approximately
330 feet east of the centerline of Los Argeles Street, and further described as 11C? South
Los Angeles Streeta Property presently classified as M-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, ZONEo
REQLJESTED CLASSIFICATION: R-3~ MUi.TIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL~ ZONEe
REQUESTED CONDITIONAL USE: CONSTRUCT A MULTIPLE FAMILY PLANNED RESIDEM'IAL DEVELOPIWEM
WITH CARPORTS • WAIVE MINIMUM SPACE BETWEEN STRi1CTURESe
Mro Walter Nickel, representi.ng the agent for the petitioner, stated that the propoee9 develop-
ment would be an unusually attractiva compliment to an area which has been very well developed
and excellently maintainedo He staced they had entered inio discussion with the City Planning
Staff during the @esign stage, and had endeavored to incorporate into the desigrt those qualities
which the staff had considered most desirable with current studies of planned residential areas>
The distance between buildings rear to rear is planned at 15 feet, the distance required by the
City Ordinance if the buildings were separated by lot lineso These buildings would have patios
in the front and no doors at the rear of the buildings. These areas would be shielded by
landscape planting and access would be restricted to utility, service and emerge~cy personnei
onlyo Offset parking facilities being provided were slightly in excess of two per residential
unit, which exceeds the Ordinance requiremento An accessway through the center of the plan was
proposed which was not designated as an alley~ The proposed development would Tequire that
cars come into the parking area directly from the st.reet rather than going through the alleyo
Mr. Nickel further stated that if subject property were to remain as M-1~ LIGHT INDUSTRIAL~ ZONE~
tha± ;ndu~trial traffic :vould ba vsi~g str2ets naa being cansidered as residentiale
No one appe~r~d in opposition to subject petitiona
' ~THE HEP.RIiv!; ~YpS CLOSEDo
`s
i
I
7
r
i
~
r ----------
,
; _
. 'i ,
i •
: ;,~
. ~
~
l i
,' ,.
~
`. _)
`
\_~ ~
6
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 14, 1963, Continued
i809 ~
i
~
~
~
RECLASSIFICATION - The Commission reviewed the plans and discussed the possibili~y of access ~
N0. 63-64-47 from the street or alleyo The Commission determined any vehicular access ~
and to subject property must be from Clifton Avenue since the property was
CONDITIONAL USE bounded on the west by commercial zoning, on the east by a railroad, and ~
PERMIT N0~ 489 on the south by industrial property presently under development, thus i
(Ccntinued) preventing access to the subject propertyo The Commission further stated, !
dedication of the 20-fuot alley would be at the option of the developere ;
Commissioner Allred offered Resolution Noo 935, Series 1963-64, and moved for its passage and
adoption, seconded by Commissioner Camp, to recommend to the City Cuuncii that Pet£tion for ~
Reclassification Noe 63-64-47, be approved, subject to conditionso (See RQSOlution Bonk<)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Febley, Perry, Rowland
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None '
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sides i
~
Commissioner Camp offered Resolution Noo 936, Series 1963-64, and moved for its passage and
adoption, seconded by Commissioner Allred, to grant Petition for Conditional Use Permit Noe 489,
be approved su~ject to conditionsa (See Resolution Booko)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: ;
AYES: COMMISSTONERS: Allred Cam Chavos Gauer Mun all Peble Perr Rowland
e P~ r ~ 9 ~ Yr Y~ ~
i
,
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ~
~
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sides ~
CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC F~ARINGa CLEMENTINE PROPERTIES, 420 South Beverly Drive,
PERMIT NO,. 487 Beverly Hills, California, Owners; CARL Oa OLDENKOTT, 213 Evergreen Street~
Anaheim, California, Agent; reauesting permission to ESTABLISH A CLUBHOUSE,
BAR, RESTAURANT~ BEER GARDEN~ DANCING~ AND TFIE CONTINUOUS llSE OF OFFICE
SPACE on property described as: A rectanaular parcel of land having a frontage of 246 feet on
the east side of Clementine Strect and a dtpth of 254 feet, the southern boundary of said
property being approximately 420 feet north of the centerline of Katella Avenue, and further
described as 1742 South Clementine Streeto Pro~erty presently classified as M-1, LIGHT
INDUSTRIAL, ZONEo
Mre Carl Oldenkott, ?13 North Evergreen Street, Anaheim, agent for the petitioner, appeared
before the Commission and requested use of the existing building for a private club and their
guestso The club was a German-American associatiun, a non-profit orgarization, consisting of
410 members who paid $4e00 plus $1050 dues each monthe They would use the present building,
and the kitchen facilities would be newo The buildine~ would be open only Saturday nights and
one evening a month for meetings during the weeko The club was incorporated in 1960 and
consists of only local membErs, the members presently meeting at the Buena Park £lks Lodgeo
New members must be vc., hed for by the old~r members before active-membership was permitted
in the clubo
The Commission stated the M-1 use contemplated was not compatible with the Harticular develop-
ment at this locationo Melodyland Theater traffic flow, in and out of the parking lot and ~into
Katella Avenue, thereby creating a heavy flow of traffico
Deputy City Attorney Furman Roberts, in response to the Commission's questions advi:,ed that
all reasonable conditions can be attached to a conditional use permit which ~.:ould give suffi-
cient control on the proposed operation, and that there was not a great deal of difference in
a variance insafar as its practical application was cvncernedo
The Ccmmission noted when they were out in the field and had observed subject property, they ~
did not fully understand the scope of the proposed operationo However, since hearing the
explanation by the agent, they suggested continuing s»bject petition until the next Commission
meeting, at which time another field trip would be undertaken to the property. The Commission
directed the Planning Department to check with the Elks Club in Buena Park concerning past
activities of this club, and report findings at the next meeting. '
No one appeared in opposition to subject pei:ition~
€ THE E~ARING WAS CLOSEDo
,~
-_ .~ _~
~ ~.
___._ _..._ _ _ ._..___._.'"~/
~ . .. ._
_ . . . ' ' . .. . i
I '
~ . ~ ._._..---
~ _~ ~'~ ~ ~~ ~ ~
N(INUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSIUN, October 14, 1963, Continued 1810
CONDITIONAL USE - Commissioner Camp oifered a motion to reopen the hearing and continue
PERMIT NOo 487 Petition for Conditional Use Permit Noo 487 to the meeting.af.October..28,
~,Continued) 1963, in order that the Planning Department might have tirtu:.to..inuestigate
the Buena Park Elks Lodge concer.ni.ng past activities.of.the..cluh,..and to
provide the Coromission an additional opportunity fox a sacond.f.ield.;tsip
. to view subject propertya Commi.ss:oner Perry seconded the motiono .
MOTION CARRIED,
CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARINGe DOMINIC & YVONP.~ JANBON, 6722 Miller, Placentia,
PERMIT NOa 488 California, Owners; Co Lo PHARRIS, 117 Evelyn Drive, Anaheim, California,
Agesit; requesting permission to EXCAVATE AND REMOVE SAND AND G.~tA.VEL.on
p•roperty described as: A rectangular parcel of i.and having.a froi;tage;of
693 feet on the east side of Miller Street and a dept'~ of 629 feet, the southerly boundary of
said property being approximately 796 feet north of the centerline of Anaheim Road, ~.nd further
described as 6722 Mi?lero Property presently classified as R•A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICLiLTURAL, ZONEo
Mro Robert BD Holland, 7.33 West Chapman, Orange, attorney, representing Mro Ca L, Pharris, the
potential purchaser of this property, appeared before the Commission, and presented two petitions
in support of subject peLition with signatures of seven property owness.in close psoximity .to
subject propertye Mr> Pharris stated the development of this particular.lA.acre parcel is
compatible with the zonin9 and use of the remaining land in the.ar.eao.-N1a, Pharnis cnntemplated
that use of the property vrould be through the existing pit, and would. not ccune. out. onto Mil,lEr
Road, but would use the ingress and egress which he.now hada•.-Na adrii.tiona.l.tra£fic would:be.
qenerated other than what was presently cominq from the existinq send pite He furthex stated
the petitioner was in agreement w~th the recommendations of the staff; however,..regarding Inter-
departmental Committee and Planning llepartment Recommendation.Noo 11, he would.like to suggest
a~.change to a 2o1-foot slope on the east side only, and Recommendation Noo.20, shaul.d.be.amended
by the addition of the following: "That the applicant shall selease.bv a.document.satisfactorv
to the public aaencv involved. etco" Mro Pharris would post..a bond assuring the City that when
the east side of Miller Street was developed, he would pay for the 693 feet along this parcel,
as well as his acceptance of other recommendationso ,
Mre Howard Wo Crooke, Orange County Water District, appeared and discussed his concern with
the eventual refilling of the hole and percolation of the water into the holeo He suggested
that the pit be set back on the east line adjacent to the Water District property by 50 feet,
and the slope be 1-foot vertical to 2-feet horizontale Any residual material such as clay
and silt should go in the northerly hole and that the water will not go thrcugh ~lay and silt,
and solidifies and sets up, which he wished to avoido
Two letters from the Orange County Water District and the Orange County Flood Control District
were read at the meetingo These letters included recommended conditions in the event subject
petition was aaproved, and were inco2porated under the Interdepartmental Committee and Planning
Department recommendations~
Mre James Duncan, 6862 Miller Street, stated he did not th9nk the pit was compatible with the
industrial area of Autonetics, and that a heavy fiow of traffic already existed on Miller and
Anaheim Roadso
Mr~ Ea Co Finster, 6822 Miller Street, stated the dust would be a detrimento
Mre 3ames Sparks, 146 Annette, Placentia, stated he had been in the sand business over 20 years,
anc3 that sand operations fn Ozange County were diminishing and this operation was necessarye
Mro Tony Lopez, 15965 Eo Linda Vista, stated the noise and dust were undesirable~
Tu.E HEpRTNG WAS CLOSED.
The Commission held a discussion concerning the period of time required to complete the digging
of the sand pit improvements of Anaheim Road to Dowling, the problem of dust and noise, etca,
and stated the private roads would have to be wetted down when in use to keep the dust down, and
the pit must be completely fenced and screened by plantings~
Commissioner Rowland offered Resolution Noe 937, Series 1963-64, and moved fer its passage and
adoption, seconded by Commissioner Perry, to grant Petition for Conditional Use Permit Noe 488,
subject to conditions that have been read and reread, including recommendations ~s outlined by
the Orange County Flood ControJ. and also by the Orange County Water Department, subject to
Interdepartmental Committee and Planning Department recommendationse (See Resolution Booko)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
~ AYES:
NOES:
+ { ABSENT:
~
~
\
_~t
COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Pebley, Perry, Rowland
COMMISSIONERS: None
COMMISSIONERS: Sides
~
'~ ~ (~ ~~ ~ (~ ) ~
~ -~ -
MINt1TES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 14, 1963, Continued 1811
~ONDITTONAL USE - Commissin~ar Camp qualified his "AYE" vote on the basis this would.be
PERMIT N0~ 468 approximately a three-year operation, and further stated, if it were a
,~Continued~_ permanent operation, he would have been against ito
REGESS: Commissioner Camp offered a motion to recess the meeting for ten minutese
Commissioner Rowland seconded the Motiono MOTION CARRIEDo
The meeting recessed at 5:55 pomo
RECONVENE: Chairman Mungall reconvened the meeting at 6:05 pamo, all Commissioners
being present except Commissioner Sideso
kECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARING~ ALLEN 6o BARDWELL, c/~ Leonard Smith, 125-D South.
N0~ 63-64-42 Claudina Street, Anaheim, Ca:~:ornia, a~uner; LEONARD SMITEl, 125-D South
and Claudina Street, Anaheim, California, Agent; property described as:
VARIANCE NOa 1604 A rectangular parcel of land i~aving a frontage of 165 feet on the north
side of Ball Road and a depth of 219 feet, the easterly boundary of said
property being approximately 170 feet west of Webster StTeet, and further
described as 2501 West Ball Road~ Property presently classified as R-A, RESIDENTIAL
AGRICULTURAL~ ZONE.,
REQUESTED CLASSIFICATION: R-3; MUL~IPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAT.; 7_ONE:•
REQUESTED VARIANCE: CONSTRUCT A 27-UNIT APARTMEM BUILDING WITH WAIVER OF THE FOLLOWING:
(1) ONE-STORY HEIGHT LIMITATION, (2) SIDE YARD REQUIREMEIJT, AND (3)
1~ SPACES IN A GARAGE, TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF CARPORTS~
Mro Leonard Smith, 125 South Claudina Street, pnaheim, agent for the petitioner appeared before
the Commission and presented a petition with signatures of 27 property owners in support of the
proposed developmente
~dra Kenneth Jensen, 922 Webster Street,appeared before the Commission and opposed the two-story
construction on the basis that the proposed apartment house would be within 65 feet from his
patio window, and would therefore be an invasion of privacy, and further stated he was opposed
to the proposed carport locationso
Mro Jack DeVon, 918 South Texella Court, stated that the apartment building would lower property
value, and since the proposed development is within 150 feet of the R-1, ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL,
ZONE, the occupants would have full view through •the picture window into his home~
Mro Martin Royale, 906 South Texella Court, sta~ed he did not feel it was the right atmosphere
to rear children with an apartment house adjacent to the back yardo
Mrs. M, Wendell, 910 South Texella Court, stated she would lose her privacy, the use of her
yard and patio, and also objected to the noise which would result from the apartment tenantso
One letier with two signatures in opposition to subject petition was read at the meetingo
The Commission discussed the feasibility of reducing the.two•-story height limitation to one-
~tory, thereby meeting Code requirementse However, the petitionex stated, fo.r financial
reasons, single story construction would not be feasiblea
THE fiEARING WAS CLOSED,
Commis~ioner Chavos offered a motion to continue subject petition for four weeks to provide
the petitionertime to submit revised plans incorporating one-story construction; however, the
peti±ioner stated the two-story proposed was the only possible way of developing subject
property for economic reasons, particular.ly since the price of the land was so higho However,
Commissioner Chavos stated the price of the land should not determine whether a person met Code
requirement or not, and that the zoning code should apply to one and alle Thereupon, Commis-
sioner Chavos withdiew his motion for continuancea
Commissioner Rowland offered Resolution No. 938, Series 1963-64, and moved for its passage
and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Chavos, to recommend to the City Council that Petition
for Reclassification Noa 63-64-42 be disapprove(~ based on the facts that the property is
adjacent to single family homes on the west, ant3 that this is potential R-3 property, but the
petitioner had not met the necessary requirement regarding the height limitation within 150
~{ ieet of any R-A, RESIDEMIAL AGRYCUiTURNi, ZOIVE, or R-1, ONH FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZONE, and
z that the ~eitioner stated he could not construct one-story on this property for iinancial
~ reasonse (See Resolution Booko) ,
r~
~
i
i
i
,
_ _. _ . .~.. _.~.._.._...__..--
.. ~-----'------..~ -- --_-------. ~ _ _......,..._..._.._.- - --"--
-'`~ ;i , ~
%
~
~
~
~
~
t
~
~ i ~
. ~ry
. .. ....... . . : ~ ._ -.._ _, _ ..
1 j ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ •
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 14, 1963, Continued 1812
RECLASSIFICATION - On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following uote:
N0~ 63-64-42
and AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Car~p, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall,
VARIANCE NOo 1604 Pebley, Perry, Rowland
Continued) NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSEAR': COMMISSIONflRS: Sides
Commissioner Chavos offered Resolution No, 939, Series 1963-64, and moved for its passage
and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Gauer to deny Petition for Variance Noe 1604, hased
on the evidence presented before the Commission, neither a hardship nor any othe.x conditions
that comply with variance requirements were shown, and that opposition was presented concern-
ing the proposed carport locationa (See Resolution Booko)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Pebley, Perry, Rowland
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMI~SIONCRS: Si~es
__ REC..LASSJ_EIC9?'_LON-._~!~BT Tr. t~cornir c~y~ ~~TLcn~ _.il&' :925t Lii7C0itl Avenue, i+naneim, ~alirornia,
NOo 63~54-43 Owner; requesting that property described as: A rectangular parcel of.
land having a depth of 109 feet, the nortnern boundary of said property
being approximately 135 feet south of the centerline of Sycamore Street,
and further described as 417' North Harbor Boulevard be reclassified from the R•-3, MULTIPLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZOIJE to the C-1, NEIGFBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, ZONE to permit certain limited
commercial uses.
Mr. Harry Knisely, representing the petitioner, appeared before the Commission, and stated that
the present uses and architecture were compatible with the neighborhood, that the requested '
uses would also be compatible, that the proposed C-1 uses selected were compatible land uses
with the traffic problems being kept in mind, that the petitioner was of the opinion that
there wa:: no traffic problem at the present time, and that there would be no traffic problem
in the future if the proposed reclassification was approvede
Mra George Baxter, 412 North Harbor, presented a petition signed by 18 property owners oppos-
ing subject petition, and stated that the area in which subject property was located was
residential, and that commercial development such as stores would change the residential
environment by its architecture, which would be an undesirable effecto
Mr~ and Mrs. Harry Urbigrit, 415 North Harbor, stated that they were opposed to any additional
e~croachment of commercial uses in the aseae
Mrs. Emma Meger, 416 North Pine Street, stated that she had picked up trash cnntinually from
the beauty parlor, and that she opposed any additional commercial development in the area,
because the existing beauty parlor had insufficient parking facilities and any expansion of
these facilities would only create an additional problemo
Mrso Buchet't, 330 North Pine, stated that the proposed reclassification constituted an incom-
patible land use, and that commercial zoning would create a traffic hazard.
Mr. Knisely, in rebuttai, repeated that the proposed reclassification would be limited to
particular C~•1 uses only, and that these uses would not increase the traffic or interfere
with the character of the neighborhoodo
THE HEARING WAS CLOSED,
The Commission noted that in areas where similar development had taken place, such as South
Harbor Boulevard, the commerci3l developments which had removed the existing residential
structures and replacEd them with commercial structures were successful, that when the existing
residences had been remodeled, the type qf commercial development utilizing these structure=_
had a detrimental effect on the Citye
The Commission also felt that the proposed commercial development would be an incompatible
land use and not in the best interests of the City, and that sufficient office space was
available throughout the City for the proposed commercial uses, which would be more satisfactory~,
~ ,1
s
i
;
< <,
-.~: i
~
----- --- ,
~
i
~ ~
I .~ _. ."__._...
~-~ t ~ ~ ~~~~ •
.,.,
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 14, 1963, Continued 1813
RECLASSIFICATION - Coe,missioner Camp offered Resolution No. 940, Series 1963-64, and moved
N0:.63-64-43 for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner GaUer, to.recorts-
,~,Continued) mend to the City Council that Petition for Reclassification No..63-64-43
be disapproved, based on the findings-that the proposed land use v~ould
' be incompatible to the area, that the.proposed.use•wouLd..be-.considered
a further encroachment of commercial development into this residenti.al axea,...that.}zaxking
:acilities were inadequate, and that the heavy flow of traffic presently existing..on Harbor
Bou~levard would have a further traffic problem if the proposed uses were permitted. (See
Resolution Book,) ... . .
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following- vote:• ~-
AYESs COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungail, Pebley, Perry, Rowland
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sides
RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARINGo CLIFFORD J. LABORDE, et al, 478 West Robexta, Fullerton,
N0. 63-64-44 California, Owners; Jo Jo AUSILIO, 6022.San Larenzo Dri~e,. Buena.Park,
and California, Agent; property described as: A rectangular parcel of .land
VARIAI~E N0~ 1605 having a frontage of 211 feet on the west side of Harbor.B.o.ulevard-and
a uepti 'vi 23o ieet, tlte nvrinern ooundary oi said property being
approximately 685 feet south of the centerline of South Street, and
further described as 861 South Harbor Boulevardo Property presently classified as R-A,
RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL~ ZONEo
REQUESTED CLASSIFICATION: R-3 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDEMIAL, ZONHo
REQUESTED VARIANCE: WAIVE ONE-STORY HEIGHT LIMITATION AND SIDE YARD SET'BACK REQUIREMENT~
TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 35-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING WITH CARPORTSo
Mro John Ausilio, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Commission and stated a
35~-unit apartment building, as proposed, would be compatible to the area as there_are apari:-
ments to the west and south of subject property~
No one appeared in opposition to subject petitiono
THE HEARING WAS CLOSEDo
Discussion was held by the Commission concerning ingress and egress from Harbor Boulevard
and Bellewe Drive, access to a dedicated alley for only seven units, a wall on the west side
of the proposed 30-foot drive, off street guest parking spaces, and the traffic problem
existing on Harbor Boulevard, and the proposed two-story height limitation within 150 feet
of single family developmento
Commissioner Chavos offered a motion to continue subject petition to provide the petitioner
an opportunity to review the plans and perhaps revise them for a better development,
Commissioner Perry also made a motion at this time, whereupon Commissioner Chavos withdrew
his motiono
Commissioner Perry offered Resolution Noe 941, Series 1963•-64, and moved for ~.ts passage
and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Rowland, to reco:nmend to the City Council that
Petition for Reclassification Noo 63-64-44 be approved, subject to construction of a 6-foot
masonry wall at the westerly end of the proposed 30-foot drive, except for a walkway, prior
to final building inspection, as stipulated to by the petitioner, and that vehicular access
rights to Bellevue Drive from the proposed 30-foot drive shall be dedicated to the City of
Anaheim. (See Resolution Booko)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Pebley, Perry, Rowland
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sides
€
:.
~
,~
i
~
t
€
~
-,~
_. ....
----- -_____-.--- ~
i •
~ .~
~~, ~
,~ ~
MII3UTES, CITY PLANNING COMMIS~ON, October 14, 19b3, Continued 1814
RECLASSIFICATION - Com~nissioner CaRp offered Resolution Noo 942, Series 1963-64, and.moved
N0. 63-64-44 for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commiss.ioner Perry., to.gxant
and Petition for Variance Noe 1605, that the request for wai~er n£.tk~e.
VRRIANCE NOe 1605 structural height limitation of one•-story within 150 feet of R-A,.
,~ontinued) RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL, ZONED property be denied, based on the..f.ac_t..
that the proposed two-story construation was•within 150 .fee~t n£ single..
~-~ family development, that the vehicular access rights to Selle~rue Drive
from the proposed 30-foot drive be dedicated to the City of Anaheim, and .that a b-#aot.masanry
wall at the westerly end of the proposed 30-foot drive, except for a walkway, be constructed
as stipulated by the petitioner> (See Resolution Booko.)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: CCLMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Pebley,.Pexry, Rowland
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sides
REG'LASSIFICATION - PUBLIC FIEARINGo INITIATED BY THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION~
NOe 63-64-45 204 East Lincoln P,venue, Anaheim, California, proposing that nroperty
described as: i+n irregular parcei of iand covering approximaieiy
127 acres, said property being located.easterly of_Sunkist Street,
northerly of Lincoln Avenue and westerly of Lingsley Street, and further divided into
Portions "A, "B", and "C"e PORTION A being a rectangular shaped portion of land having
frontages of 480 feet on the east side of Rio Vista Street, and 410 feet on the north side
of.Lincoln Avenue. PORTION B being a rectangular portion of land having frontages of
165 feet on the north side of Lincoln Avenue and 180 feet on the west side of Rio Vista Streeto
PORTION C being described as the remainder of the property located within the boundaries of
the Riverview Annexation Noo 2 be reclassified from the R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL, and
C-1, NEIG[-IBORHOOD COMIu~RCIAL, ZONES, Fiy Interim Ordinance to the C-1, NEIGf~0RH00D COMMERCIAL,
ZONE on PORTIONS "A" and "B", and R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL, ZONE on PORTION "C"e
Zoning Coordinator Martin Kreidt reviewed for the Commission the location of subject'property, ;
further noting subject property had been annexed to the City of Anaheim under the Riverview
Annexation Noe 2, effective October 24, 1963, and that the most appropriate zones for the
newly annexed territory were identical to those zones applied through an Emergency Ordinance ~
~
by the City Councile ¢
,
,
Mrso Claudia Peters, 2645 Carnival Street, appeared before the Commission and stated that she i
felt that the corner of Lincoln Avenue and Rio Vista Street should be beautified with land- ~
scaping and trees, and inquired if it, was the Commission's responsibility to see that land- ~
scaping and treewells were placed on the service station site at this locationo
The Commission advised Mrso Peters that it was not their responsibility to require landscaping ~
and trees in this instance, because the commercial zoning on the aforementioned property had ;
been granted by the County. i
Mr> Walter Fa Waldren, 2020 North Broadway, Santa Ana, representing Earl Dahlman, 14611 East
Lincoln Avenue, appeared before the Commis~ion and stated that his client was the owner of
20 acres of land at Lincoln Avenue and Sunkist Street, that he was presently in the process
of preparing an application to file a petition for reclassification of the northeast corner
of Lincoln Avenue and Sunkist Street for C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, ZONE to be used as
a service station s3te, and that the property had been under an interim lease with Standard
Oil Company for approximately 2-~ years.
Mr. Co C> Neeley, 502 Stehley Street, stated that the homeowners, in reviewing the history of
the zoning of the asea, had moved to this location upon being informed that the area was
residential, that his own experience, between the time he had purchased his home and the
time he had moved into it, was to see a shopping center approved for the northeast corner of
Lincoln Avenue, and that he considered the R-A coning ambiguouso
Mr, Clark Winger, 8471 Rio Vista, stated he was aiso speaking in behalf of Mr. Dinklero
Mr. Winger further stated that he was the owner of 40 acres of land in the heart of the newly
annexed property, that it was his opinion that the land should be held in the agricultural
zone as long as possible, that Mr. Neeley and several other pressure groups werA quite
persuasive with the County concerning the rezoning of the property to R-1, ONE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL., ZONING, that he and Mro Dinkler had lived on their property for forty and fifty
years respectively, and were not anxious to move, that they were of the opinion that the City
should not arbitrarilyzone property in advance of any real need, and that last year his taxes
had been increased by 25~ as a direct result of the rezoning to R-le
I
___ _----,-._----~------------~-----._...._~__--_-______:- _---------~.. r
~: ~k _.. . __ _ _ -.. - _ -
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, Octooer 14, 1963, Continued
1815
RECLASSIFICATION - Mro D. Ca Hopp, 8551 Kings Street, Hr.aheim, stated he was in favor of
N0. 63-64-45 the R-A, RESIDENPIAL AGRICULTURAL, ZONE, and did not consider.it.fair
,~Continued) to have men like Mr. Winger and•Mr. Dinkler•,. being jsopaadized,by.heavy
taxes after they have lived on the same•~soperty fo* forty an3 f.ifty
years.
THE HEARING WAS CLOSEDa
The Commission held a discussion relative to the evidence presented to.them.and stated_they
were in accord with unfair taxes being assessed on property after the proparty.ownpr.had
lived on the property so many years, that they were in favor of.holding the.R-A,.RESIDE~TTIAL
AGRICULTURAL, ZONE, where it presently existed, and further cortunented if it.were. ta.be.
changed, it would be necessary for any property owner to appear before the Commission and
Council to request approval for a reclassification of his property..
Commissioner Camp offered Resolution Noo 943, Series 1963-64 and moved.for its passage.and
adoption, seconded by Commissioner Rowland, to recommend to the City Council that Petition
for Reclassification No. 63-64-45 be approved. (See Resolution Booko)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the follou~ing vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Pebley, Perry,.Rowland
NuES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sides
TENTATIVE MAP OF - DEVELOPER: STANLEY E. BELL, 2500 W. Orangethorpe, Suite G, Ful:erton,
I'RACT N0. 5345 California. ENGINEER: Hal Raab Surveying Company, 10568 Magnolia Avenue,
Suite i10, Anaheim, California. Subject tract, located on the east side
of Sunkist Street, approximately 296 feet south of South Street, and
covering approximately 208 acres, is proposed for subdivision into twelve (12) R-1, ONE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZONE lotse
Zoning Coordinator Martin Kreidt presented the tract map to the Commission, and reviewed the
location of subject tract, together with the previous zoning action on adjacent properties.
Mr. Ceci1 Ryals, 3325 Charlan Avenue, Santa Ana, representing the developer, appeared before
the Commission to answer questionso
Commissioner Camp offered a rc~otion to approve Tentative Map of Tract No> 5345 subject to
the following conditions:
lo That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subdivision,
each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for
approval.
2a That the vehicular access rights, except at street and~or alley .
openings to Sunkist Street, shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheimo
Commissioner Chavos seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
REPORTS AND - ITDUI NDo 1
REODMMENDATIONS
Reclassification Noa 63-64-17 and Revis2d Tentative Map of Tract Noso 5267,
5268, 52699 and 5270 - DEMLER FARMS~ INCo9 1400 North Acacia Street - Re-
consideration of Revision No< ~ of said Tracts, and plot plano
The Planning Commission received the Council minutes on subject petition during the morning
review sessione Commissioner Chavos offered a motion to continue subject petition to the
October 2R, 1963 meeting to provide adequate time to review the Council minutes and the
staff recommendations9 after which the Commission then would be able to render a decision.
Cotmnissioner Rowland seconded the motion~ No one iroted on this motiony therefore9 the
motion died~
--_ - _~---- ----~_---------.- ----------,
~t
f l ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING GOMMISSION, October 149 1963, Continued 1816
RF.PQRTS AND - ITFM FAo 1~continued)
REODMMENDIKTIONS
Ted Fish, agent for the petitioner, stated they had been before t he
Commission several times in the past, that the revised maps had been
submitted for the Commission's review, that the City Council had given
tentative approval, and that he was hopeful a decision could be made at this meeting.
Furman Roberts, Deputy City Attorney, explained when a substantial change in plans is made,
that the City Attorney's office recommends that such a revision should be referred to the
Planning Commission for a report to determine whether the proposed land use is proper.
Commissioner Gauer offered a motion to approve sub3ect petition. Commissioner Pebley
seconded the motion and qua7.if ied his action by stating he had seen the plans, was present
when City Council tentatively approved this petition, that Mre Demler agre~d to move the
hatchery, that the M-1 industrialists originaily against the reclassification ha~ withdrawn
their vote of opposition, with the exception of one or two, and that the R-1 residents were
in favor of subject petition.
The vote was as follows:
AYES: ODMMISSIONERSt Camp, Gauer, Pebleye
NDES= OODMIIISSIONERSa Allred, Mungall, Perry, Rowland.
njS'$inilvi wi.uiiiv.cilviiu5e - .~`L•iauV^v$. ~
ABSENT: ODNWIISSIONERSs Sides.
Commissioner Allred, Chavos, and Perry qualified their vote by stating they did not have
sufficient time to xead the Council minutes or review the Department recommendationse THE
MOTION DID NOT CARRYo
Coimnissioner Camp then offered a motion to continue sub3ect petition to the October 28, 1963,
meeting to allow adequate time for a review of the information they had received. Commissioner
Pebley seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIID>
ITFM NOo 2- VARIATION OF THE P-L~ PARKING LANDSCAPING~ ZONE ON
SOUTH LOS ANGELES STREETo
Zoning Coo•rdinator, Martin Kreidt, advised that Mr. Owne of the Owne Company, who controls
the northerly three parcelr; on the east side of Los Angeles Street, south of Bal! Road,
stated he would endorse re.:lassification of the property to C-1, Neighborhood Ccmmercial,
Zone, with appropriate conditional use permits as necessary, except for a 50-foot building
setback and a reclassif ication of the 50-foot P-L, Parking Landscaping, Zone to C-1, Neigh-
borhood Commercial, Zone, except for the front six feet of landscaping zone.
The Commission discussed the possibility of advertising and initiating hearings on this,
of exploring methods for resolving both the landscaping and the zoning problem, providing
greater flexibility of landscaping with a minimum six foot strip of landscaping.
Mr. Kreidt advised if no action were taken by the Commission at this meeting, the properties
would remain M-1, and a 50-foot P-L Zone.
Commissioner Rowland offered a motion to continue the Commissioner's discussion until the
meeting of October 28, 1963, at which time the aforementioned items.would be discussed in
detail. Commissioner Camp seconded the motion. NDTION CARRIID.
ITF1J1 NDo 3- VARIANCE NOo 1587 - 412 South Olive Street.
A requirement for approval af subject petition in Condition No. 3 of Resolution No. 817,
Series 1963-64, which stipulated that development plans when ready be submitted to the
Planning Commiss ~n for consideration and~or approvale
Commissioner Chavos inquired if these plans had been reviewed by the staff.
Zoning Coordinator, Martin Kreicit advised that plans had been reviewed and were in accordance '
with the Commission's recommendationso '.
Commissioner Camp offered a motion to approve Variance No. 1587~ Commissioner Pebley seconded '
the motion. MOTION CARRIID.
r
_ _ . . _. _.___ ____.
..-._.~..-------r----------~--- . . .yh~_._ . _ .._. . . . . .
~.-'_. . . . ~t . . . .
Yy{ ~ (((` ~
V ~
~~~ ~ ~ ~~)
~
MINUTES, CITY PLANNIIVG ODMMISSION, Octoher 14, 1963, Continued 1817
REPORTS AND
R=00MMENDATIONS - Continued
ITFM NOo 4- ODNDITIONAL USE PERMIT AAo 380 - ~nange County Buddist Templeo
Ball Road and Iia1e f+venue.
Zoning Coordinator, Martin Kreidt, advised that the parking, as shown, met Code requirements,
that the petitioner had met all other necessary provisions of the Code, and asked that the
Cormnission consider approval of t:is xevised planso
Commissioner Perry offered a motion to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 380. Commissioner
Rowland seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIID.
ITD~1 NJo 5- OONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AAa 401 - 3067 West Orange Avenue.
Zoning Coordinator, Martin Kreidt~ stated that the petitioner had requested a six-months
extension of time for the rest home on this property.
Commissionex Allred offered a motion to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 401. Commissioner
Gauer seconded the motiono MOTION CARRIIDo
____--- __._ _.__ .._ __
ITFM N0. 6- VARIANCE N0. 1559 - Pinkham Industrial property.
Zoning Coordinator, Martin Kreidt, stated that the developers of the industrial tract, located
at Orangethorpe and Lemon Street had requested a one-year extension of time for the completion
of conditions in Resolution No. 700, Series 1962-63. However, Mr. Kreidt advised that
according to Code, only a six months extension may be approved, and if any additional time
was required the petitioner must request this. Commissioner Gauer offered a motion to approve
Variance No. 1559 for a six months extension of time to April 23, 1964. Commissioner
Chavos seconded the motiode N~TION CARRIIDe
ADJOURNMENTt
There being no further bu'siness to discuss, Cormnissioner Perry offered a motion to ad~ourn
the meeting. Commissioner Pebley seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIID.
The meeting adjourned at 8=21 o!clock.pem.
RESPEGTFULLY SUBMITTID,
AOQU NE SULLIVAN '
PLANN DEPARTMENT STENOGRAPHER
~
i
/}
,
---.._.__ ----------
.. . ___-----~
y'
~
---•-- _ ----•--- _.~-.-~--,__---- _ __ ___-___-._, ,
.
_....__ _
;
_. _ _. . -