Loading...
Minutes-PC 1964/10/26 J ! ~ • I ~~. ~ t.:~~ ~ C ~ J~ ~ t'~ _ ~ . City Hall Anatreim, California October 26, 1964 A REGULAR N~ETING OF TE~ ANAi~ IM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR NiEETING - A regular meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Mungall at 2a05 o °clock P,1A,, a quorum being presento PRESENT - CHAIRMAN: Mungalla - COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Rowlando ABSENT.' - COMMISSIONERS: Perryo PRESENT ~ Associate Planner: Robert Mickelson Deputy City Attorney: Furman Roberts Office Engineer: Arthur Daw Planning Commission Secretary: Ann Krebs INVOCATION - Commissioner Melbourne A, Gauer gave the Invocationa PLEDGE. OF ALLEGLANCE - Commissioner Allred led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flaga APPROVAL OF .. . THE MINUTES - The Minutes of the evening meeting of July 8, 1964, covering the Commercial-Recreation Area Height Standards were approved as submittede RECLASSIFICATION - CONTINllED PUBLIC HEARINGo TOM H~ WEEDA, 2500 West Orangethorpe, NOo 64- 5-35 Fullerton, California, Owner: MIICE H~ OSCHIN, 2500 West Orangethorpe, Fullerton, Ca7.ifornia, Agent; property desc,ibed asa A rectangular VARIANCE NOo 1659 parcel of land with a frontage of 45 feet on the south side of Orange Avenue and a depth of approximately 235 feet, the eastern boundary of said property being approximately 330 feet west of the centerline of Western Avenue and said property bounded on the south by the Orange Couniy Flood Control channel, and further described as 3220 West Orange Avenueo Property presently classified R-A~ AGRICULTURAL, ZONH~ REQIJES:TED CLASSIFICATIONs R-3~ MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZONE. REQUESTED VARIANCEs WAIVER OF ONE-STORY HEIGNf LIMIT WITHIN 150 FEET OF R-A ZONHD PROPERTY AND WAIVER OF MINIMUM REQUIRED SIDE YARD~ Subject petitions were continued from the meeting of September 28, 1964, to a11ow time for the petitioner to contact adjacent property owners for a possible land assemblye Mr. Ernest Harris, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Commission and stated they had made attempts to combine additional property as suggested by the Commission, that the property to the west was not for sale under any circumstances, and the property to the east was for sale with two separate lots, a home being located on one lot, and the cost of the entire parcel would be considerably more than his client could afford to paya Therefore the plans submitted to the Commission originally were still under considerationo No one appeared in opposition to subject petitionso THE HEARING WAS CLOSHD. Discussion was held by the Commission relative to the waiver of the minimum side yards, noting that one was a waiver of from 7~ feet to 5 feet, and the other was from 11 feet _ to l0 feetj that no indication was given to the petitioner that the Commission opposed the plans that were submitted; that subject property abutted to the north of the Orange County Flood Control channel and caused a sioping effect which should be graded and land- scaped to discourage children from climbing the fence into the Orange County Flood Control channel; and inquired of the petitioner whether or not he intended to grade and landscape this area. . • - 2359 - - • ;. i ~ ; , . ' ~~ . ....._.. :. .._- ------~---------------__....__ .:_ ..__ ~. ~__..__.___.. ~. ~~ V ~ MINUTES, CITY PY.ANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 2360 RECLASSIFICATION - The architect for the ~etitioner stated he would stipulate to the grading NOo 64-6 -35L~5 ~ and landscaping of the portion of the property adjacent to the flood • control channelo VARIANCE N0. 1659 ~ (Continued) Commissioner Rowland offered Resolution Noe 1380, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Allred, to ' recommend to the City Council that Petition for Reclassification Noo 64-65-35 be approved, subject to tha grading of the reax portion of sub,ject property and the provision of landscapi~~g in said area as stipulated by the petitioner, and conditionso (See Resolution Book.) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONHRS: Allrad, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowlando • NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Noneo ABSEIyT: COMMISSIONERS: Perrya Commissioner Rowland offered Resolution Noo 1381, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Camp, tc~ grant Petition for Variance Noo 1659, subject to the provision that the rear portion of subject property shall be graded and landscaped as stipulated by the petitioner, and conditionso (See Resolution Booko) On.roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votei AYES: ~ COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowland~ NOESs COMMISSIONERS: Nonea ABSENTt COMMISSIONERS: Perrya RECI.ASSIFICATION - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGo Eo VAN CASTEREN, 2508 West Ball Road,.Anaheim, NO.o 64-65-37 California, Owners FREDRICKS DEVELOPBI~NT CORPORATION~ 524 West Coauaon- wealth, Fullerton~ California, Agentg property described as: A rectangu- VAP.IANCE NOe 1662 lar parcel of land with a frontage of 605 feet on the south side of Ball .• Road and a depth of approximately 304 feet, the western boundary of said proper+,y being approximately 572 feet east of the centerline of Magnolia Street snd further described as 2508 West Hall Roado Property classified R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE, REQUESTED CLASSIFICATION: R-3~ MULTIPLE~FAMILY RESIDENTIAL~ ZONE. REQUESTED VARIANCE: PERMIT TI-IE ESTABLISHN~NT OF A IWO-STORY APARTII~NT BUILDING WITH CARPORTS WITHIN 150 FEET OF R-1 AND R-A 20NED PROPERTY. Subject petitions were continued from the meeting of September 28~ 1964~ in order to allow time for the petitioner to submit revised plansa Mr. Lee Orr, representing the developer of subject property, appeared before the Commission and stated revised plans had been sunmitted showing a reduction of the number of units and also relocating the proposed units so that they would be a minimum of 150 feet from the R-1 property to the north of Ball Road, and that the waiver of the single-story height limita- tion now applied to the R-A property to the south which consisted of the high school propertyo No one appeared in opposition to subject petitionso THE HEARING WAS CLOSED~ It was noted for the Commission that subject property was proposed to be developed into two parcels, and ir this were a fact, it was suggested that there be a condition that a Record of Suxvey to record the approved division of subject property be recorded in the of•fica of the Orange County Recorder, if subject petitions were approvedo Commissioner Camp offered Resolution Noo 1382, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Allred~ to recommnnd to the City Council that Peti.tion for Reclassification No. 64-65-37 be approved, subject to conditions. (See Resolution Booko) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votes AYESs. COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer~ Mungall, Rowland. NOESs COMMISSIONERSs None. ABSEM: COMMISSIONERSs Perry. Commissioner Camp offered Recolution No. 1383, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Chavas, to grant Petition for Variance Noo 1662, subject to conditions. (See Resolution Booko) j ~ r _. _ _~ _.__-----_...---------. _ ,. . ~ -- - ' i I ~ . t;, '; .! . _... ~ ' ~ ~.J , ~ ~J MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 2361 RECLASSIFICATION - On roll call the foregoing resolution was passec3 by the following votes N0~_64-65-37 AYESs COMMISSIONERSs Allred~ Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowland. VARIANCE N0. 1662 NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Noneo (Continued) ABSE M': COMMISSIONERS: Perryo RECLASSIFICATION - COMINUED PUBLIC I-IEARING. FRED B. AND BLANCHE MORLEY, 501 North East N0. 64 65-39 Street, Ar.aheim, California, Owner; property described asc A rectangu- ' lar parcel of land at the northwest corner of Sycamore Street and East CONDITIONAL USE Street, with frontages of approximately 110 feet on Sycamore Street and PERMIT NOo 632 150 feet on East Street, and further described as 501 North East Street. Property presently classified R-1, ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZONEe GENERAL PLAN AMENDb~NT N0. 42 REQUESTED CLASSIFICATION: C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COAM~RCIAL~ ZONE. RHQUESTED CONDITIONAL USEs TO ESTABLISH A SERVICE STATION AT THE INTERSECTION OF A SECONDARY HIGHWAY AND A LOCAL STREET WITHIN 75 FEET OF R-1 'LONED PROPERTY. Subject petitions were carried over from the meeting of October 19, 1964, due to a tie vote on the motion presented to the Commissiono ? Discussion was held by the Commission relative to the possibility of reopening the hear- ~ ing, and it was determined this was unnecessaryo ! , Discussion was then held by the Cammission relative to the merits of the proposed service ` station in a residential area, noting that the petitioner proposed to relocate his home~ ; northerly to act as a buffer to the property to the north; that a 15-foot alley existed ~ to the west which could be utilized by both the single-family residential development and j the commercial use being proposed for subject property~ that the property immediately to ; the.west of the alley along the north side of Sycamore Street was vacant~ and adjacent to i that was a development with apartments over the existing garagee Commissioner Allred, who had been absent at the previous hearing, indicated that in his ' opinion the area was basically single-family development, and the proposed service station would not be a compatible use~ that he did not feel every corner in Anaheim available on a major street should be zoned for service stations; that although the City had approved service stations in areas where they should not have been permitted, it should not be taken as an approval for all service stationsg and that a transitional type of development could be placed on subject property which would be more compatible to the residential environment already establishede Commissioner Rowland offered a motion to recommend to the City Council that Petition for Reclassification No. 64-65-39 be approved, sub3ect to conditions and based on the fact that a service station presentl/ existed on the southeast corner of East and Sycamore Stxeets~ that to deny subject petition would be denying a privilege enjoyed by the property on the opposite corner~ that the owner of sub3ect property was sharing any xisk in propos- ing the relocation of his existing home northerly to act as a buffer to the proporty ta,.the northf and that the developer of the service station stipulated to incorporating a residen- tial-type service station for the areaa Commissioner Camp seconded the motiona On roll call the foregoing motion was declared a tie with Commissioners Allred, Chavos and Gauer voting-"no", Commissioners Camp, Mungall and Rowland voting "aye"o Commissioner Allred offered a motion to continue the voting of Petitions for Reclassification No. 64-65-39, Conditional Use Permit Noe 632, and General Plan Amendment Noo 42 to the meet- ing of November 9, 1964a Commissioner Camp seconded the motione MOTION CARRIED, . VA@IADGE N0. ~- PUBLIC HEARINGD FRED AND ALMA We BENTJEN, 1413 West Westmont Drive, Anaheim, California, lu'~ELVIN F. BENTJEN, 619 Buttonwood, Anaheim, REVISION N0. 2 OF California~ and ARTHUR E. BENTJEN, 439 Barkiey, Orange, California, THNTATII-E MAP OF Ownersf SAGA DEVELOPN~NT COMPANY, INCORPORATED, 616 Walnut Street, TRACT N~. 5427 Srea~ California, Agent~ requesting permission to waive minimum interior ~ lot width, minimum corner lot width, minimum reverse corner lot width, and minimum front yard setback on property described as: An irregular parcel of land having frontages on both North Street and Westmont Drive, with the North.Street frontage being approximately 568 feet and the Westmont Drive frontage being appro:cimatelY 1077 feet, the westernmost boundary of said property being approximately 357 feet east of the centerline of Loara Street, measured along the northerly boundary of Westmont Drive. Property classiiied R-0, OWE-FAMILY SUBURBAN, ZONE. i i ._~_~ ._.-_.-------~_--_____._..-_.~_~_ .. . .~. - '. ,, l.6B8 . , , ~_,.. . ,.. . _ .., . _ . , I • i 1 _ . . ,~ ~_..: ~ ~ ~ ~ MINIITES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 2362 ~ VARIANEE N0. 1665 - Subject tract, located between North Street and Westmont Drive, approximately 350 feet east of Loara Street, covering approximately i REVISION N0. 2 OF 21e8 acres is proposed for subdivision into 67 R-0, ONE-FAMILY RESI- ; TENTATIVE MAP OF DENfIAL SUBURBAN, ZONED lotso TRACT NOo 5427 Mr. Walter Milczewsky, representing the engineer for the proposed sub- ' division, appeared before the Commission and reviewed the requested waiver of certain lots in the tract, noting that the proposed development would consist of custom-type homes or ~; lots for sale~ that two models would be built in the next few weeks; and in response to Commission questioning, stated that because of the cost of the property for residential pusposes, it was proposed to have the seven lots fronting on north street in order that 1 fewer lots would be cut away for street purposes. . Mre Ted Hales,representing the Saga Development Company, appeared before the Commission and stated, in answer to Commission questioning, that Park Avenue had already established the street pattern for the area, and because of the width of the property, after numerous projected street layouts, it was determine~? that the proposed tract map was the most fea•sible method of subdividing subject property; that the price of the lots would be commensurate to their locationy that bv extending Park Avenue northerly would necessitate a quick jog north- erly and then almost immediately jogging southerly, which in his estimation was not practical; 'and in response to Commission questioning, stated it was not their intent to develop the lots fronting on North Street for other than R-0 purposes since he had control of the property, and he planned to build single~family homes and not multiple-family development since he was not interested in that type of development9 and if the Commission desired, he would stipulate to the recordation of loans on those properties fronting on North Street to assure that single-. family development would occur on the North Street lots~ ' The Commission inquired of Mra Hales whether or not it would be helpful if waiver of the minimum 10,000 square feet and 90-foot frontage for the lots were grar':ed in order that these lots could be designed as inside lotse Mr. Hales stated that after all the layouts, the proposed development was the only way he feLt it was feasible to subdivide the propertyo , Deputy City Attorney Furman Roberts advised the Commission that rather than making it a condition of approval, that recordation of the loans be placed on the lots as evidence that the developer proposed single-family subdivision on the Nor•th Street frontagey and that it be made a finding that the petitioner stipulated to this - that he furnish evidence to ' the Commission that at the time the recordation of the final tract map was made, that loans had been obtainedo Mrs. Chester Shirk, 533 ~>renthaven Drive, appeared before the Commission in conditional opposition, and stated that if the variance were allowed, would a three-story home be permissible since two-story was permissible in any R-1 Zoneo The Commission advised Mrso Shirk that any property owner had the inherent right to request a.change in zoning, and that the property owners had the right to oppose any request for a change in zoningo TI-lE ~ARING WAS CLOSED. Associate Planner Robert Mickelson advised the Commission that if subject variance were approved, and the tract map also, a waiver of the minimum required lot area would have to be made by the Commission for those lots fronting on North Street because of the request for additibnal dedication by the Interdepartmental Committeea CorAmissioner Allred offered Resolution Noo 1384, Series 1964-E.i, and moved for its passage j and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Camp, to grant Petition for Variance Noo 1665, sub- I ,ject to conditions and the additional waiver of the minimum required lot area for those lots ; fronting on North Street. (See Resolution Book.) . On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: j AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowland. ~ ~NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Nonea ~ ABSENTa COMMISSIONERSi Perrya Commissioner Chavos offered a motion to approve Revision No. 2 of Tentative Map of Tract Noa 5427, sub~ect to the following conditionss la That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subdivision, aach sub- division thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. 2. That the approval of Revision No. 2 of Tentative Map of Tract No. 5427 is granted sub~ect to the approval of Variance No. 16650 3. That North Street shall be dedicated to 32 feet from the centerlineo 4. That the north-south portion of Georgianna Place shall be renamed James Place. Commissioner Allred secanded the'motiono MOTION CARRIEU. , ~ .___._..~._....___._.....--•-----.-.___..__.,_~ , _ .^..__- ______..._---------------..._..__------ ~ , , . r . . , . . .. .. . ~ ` . . ~ ~ ; ,+~ . , ~ ~ . . ' ~ ' ~ . ' . . . ~ ~ ~ l.._,) ~ MINUfES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION9 October 26, 1964 ~ i 2363 RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARING. INITIATED BY Tt~ CITY PLANNING COMMI5SION, 204 East- N0. 64-65-43 Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, California~ JOHANNA DOMRIES, 808 North Brook- hurst Street, Parcel Noo 1~ SIEGLER CORPORATION, 714 North Brookhurst Street, Parcel Noe 2y JAMES Co JONES, 4563 Finley Avenue, Los Angeles, ' California, Parcel No. 3, Owners; proposing the reclassification of pr.operty described as: That certain property situated on the east side'of Brookhurst Street between Crescent Avenue and the Santa Ana Freeway and further described as Parcels 1, 2 and 3, ~ Parcel 1 being a rectangular parcel of land with a frontage of approximately 250 feet on Srookhurst Street and a maximum depth of approximately 375 feet, the southern bouridary of ' said parcel being approximately 816 feet north of the centerline of Crescent Avenue; Parcel 2 being an irregularly shaped parcel of land encompassing the aforementioned Parcel i on the north, east and south sides, the total area of said parcel being approximately 1706 acres, bounded on the north by the Santa Ana Freeway and SoP.RoR. rights-of-way and having a maxi- mum depth of approximately 1280 feet from Brookhurst Street, the southern boundary of said parcel being approximately 490 feet north of the centerline of Crescent Avenue; Parcel 3 being a rectangular parcel of land with a frontage of approximately 168 feet on the east side of Brookhurst Street and a depth of 178 feet, the southern boundary of said parcel being approximately 307 feet ~orth of the centerline of Crescent Avenue, be reclassified from the R-A, AGRICULTURAL. 20NE, to the M-1, LIGFTT INDUSTRIAL, and P-L, PARKING-LANDSCAPING~ 20NES, to place said properties in their appropriate zoning and to establish existing manu- facturing firms as a conforming useo Commissioner Chavos left the Council Chamber at 2e50 pam. Associate Planner Robert Mickelson reviewed the subject property, noting that subject petition was part of the program being initiated by the Commission to reclassify all properties to their most appropriate zoninga No one appeared in opposition to subject petition. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED~ Camiuissioner Camp offered Resolution Noo 1385, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption9 seconded by Commissioner Rowland, to recommend to the City Council that Petition for Reclassification Noo 64-65-43 .be approved with findings that the existing dedication for Brookhurst Street is not to ultimate width and no additional dedication is recommendedi that the additional dedication should be obtained at such time as the property is redeveloped or remodeled~ and that subject property does not have complete •street improvements a2ono Brookhurst Street at this timeo The improvements should be constructed at such time as existing facilities are remodeled or when the property is redevelopeda (See Resolution Hook~) On rall ca:l the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYESs COMMISSIONERSa Allred~ Camp, Gauer, Mungall, Rowlando NOESs.~ COMMISSIONERS~ None. ABSENf: COMMISSIONERS: Chavos, Perrya RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARING. INITIATED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, 204 East .., NOo.64-65-51 Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, Californiag TED Eo HUDSON, 425 North Magnolia Street~ Owners proposing the reclassification of property described as.: A rectangular parcel of land with a frontage of approximately 146 feet on the east side of Velare Stree± and a depth of approximately 594 feet, the northern boundary of said property being approximately 246 feet south of the centerline of Orange Avenue, and further described as 622 South Velare Street, from the R-.A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE, to the R-2, MULTIPLE-FAMILY RHSIDENTIAL~ ZONEy to place existing duplex apartments in the most appropriate zoningo It..was noted by the Commission that subject petition was part of the program of reclassi- fying all those properties in the City of Anaheim into their most appropriate zoninge No one appeared in opposition to subject petitione THE..I-IEARING WAS CLOSHD. Commissioner Gauer offered Resolution No. 1386, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissiorier Rowland, to recommend to the City Council that Petition for Reclassification No> 64-65-51 be approved, unconditionallyo (See Resolution Book.) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote~ AYESs COMMISSIONERSs Ailred, Camp~ Gauer, Mungall, Rowland. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Noneo ABSENf: QOM~~ISSIQNERSt Chdvos, A~rryo } i F ~, . . ~ . ~~ i . i;M1.: ~: ~_~ . ~' ~ MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 2364 VARIANCE N0. 166A - PUBLIC F~ARING. PARKS PROPERTIES~ INCORPORATED~ Attentions Mr. L. G. Robinson, 2975 Huntington Drive, San Marino, California, Owner; MCDANIEL ENGINHERING, P. 0, Box 3668, Anaheim, California, Agentf xaquesting permission to waive minimum required building setback on proper described as: A rectangular parcel of land at the southwest corner of Vermont Avenue and East Street, with frontages of approximately 703 feet on Vermont Rvenue and approximately 495 feet on East Streeto Property presently classified M-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL~ and P-L~ PARKING-LAND- SCAPING~ ZONESo Mra A. R. McDaniel, agent for the petitioner~ appeared before the Commission and stated he was available to answer questions and further stated the Interdepartmental Committee recommendations met with their approvalo ,No one appeared in opposition to subject petition. T1iE EIEARING WAS CLOSEDo Associate Planner Robert Mickelson presented the study of setbacks on Vermont Avenue for the Comm,ission's considerationo Cownissioner Chavos returned to the Council Chamber at 2s57 p.mo Mr. McDaniel, illustrating with photographs, noted for the Commission there was no intent to utilize the front of the structures for parkingf that the 20-foot setback would be fully landscapeds that the photographs did not indicate the precise setback being proposed'; that all parking would be projected for the rear of the property, and the alley located at the rear would be utilized for circulationa ' The.Commission noted that the setback study presented to them was the basic reason why a~naiver of the required setback was necessary, and the proposed development would be a consi,derable improvemento I'he Commission further recommended that 3'f subject petition was considered by the Council that the setback study be presented to them at that timeo Commissioner Gauer offered Resolution Noo 1387, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Allred, to grant Petition for Variance No. 1664, sub3ect to conditionso (See Resolution Hook.) On soll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votea AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Gauer, Mungall, Rowlande NOESe COMMISSIONERSs Nonee ABSENT.s. COMMTSSIONERS: Perryo ABSTAINi COMMISSIONERSs Chavos. VARIANCE NOa 1666 - PUBLIC tiEARINGe tIERMAN Eo NEAL~ 1661 South Pounders Lane, Anaheim, California, Owner' requesting permission to use a portion of the exist- ing required garage for access to room addition on property described ass A.rectangular parcel of land with a frontage of 72 feet on the west side of Pounders Lane and a depth of 100 feet, the southern boundary of said property being approxfmately 102 £eet north of the centerline of Sallie Lane, and further described as 1661 South Pounders Lane. Property presently classified R-1, ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZONE. ~ Mro Neal,father of the petitioner, appeared before the Commission and stated he would be I auailable to answer any questions the Commission might have since his son was unable to ~ attend the public hearing, being out of town. 1 i The Commission reviewed the proposed plans of development and noted the plans showed the i passageway open at one end, whexeas the Euilding ~ode requirement was that this passageway ~ be closed at both ends. i No one appeared in opposition to subject petitiona . ' TEIE }iEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Rowland offered Resolution Noa 1388, Series 1964-65~ and moved for its passage , and~adoption, seconded by Commissioner Allred, to grant Petition for Variance No. 1666, sub- 3ect ta conditionsa (See Resolution Book.) Ori roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votes ; AYESs COMMISSIONERS~ Allred, Camp~ Chavos, Gauer~ Mungall~ Rowland. NOES: . COMMISSIONHRSi None. ABSENT: CONNAISSIONERSi Perry. i _........__.___.__._._^ _,_.~v...,~___. __..... __...------..__ -- - -.~ ` ~ . ; I ~ ~ I ~ . .,~ ' . U C~ ~ yfINUfES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 2365 RECLASSIFICATION'- PUBLIC I-IEARING. BANK OF Ah~RICA NeTo 8 SaA., 801 Nbrth Main Stxeet~ N0.-.64-65-53 Santa Ana, California, Owner3 CHARLE5 Bo FRANK, 325 North Pine, Anaheim, California, Agents requesting that property described ass A rectangular ! GENERAL PLAN parcel of land at the southwest corner of Lincoin Avenue and Loara Street ANIENDNIENT N0. 44 ' and having frontages of approximately 304 feet on Lincoln Avenue and i ' approximately 630 feet on Lnara Street, be reclassified from th2 R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE, to the C-3, F~AVY COMMERCIAL, ZONE, to permit the establishment of an automobile sales and service agency on said propertye ~Mr. Harry Knisely, attorney for the petitioner, appeared before the Commission and stated that properties adjacent to subject property were developed for commercial and industrial ~ ' parposes, and the proposed land use was consistent with the existing development on Lincoin Avenue9 that although the petitioner was indicated as the Bank of America, in reality the petitioner was McCoy Nbtors who were proposing to spend between $300,000 and $400,000 for the..improvement of the proposed development~ that plans for this development would have to , 'be approved by the Ford Motor Company and also by the Planning Commission and City Council. Concern was again expressed by the Commission that petitions were being submitted without ~ plans of develupment; that it had been the policy of the Commission for a number of months ~ that plans of development be submitted with the petition in ox•der to be considered by the ~ Commission at the public hesringa ~ Mro Knisely stated that plans were in the process of being developed, and this would not i be the first time the City had indicated their intent of approval of reclassification of ~ propertye i . j i The Commission advised Mro Knisely that it was not the intent of the Commission to have ~ complete detailed plans of the proposed development, but a plot plan and elevations were ~ necessarye • ~ j Associate Planner Robert Mickelson advised the Commission that normally after the Commission '' has acted upon a reclassification, any submission of plans is made directly to the City ~ Council as they have requested, and that if subject petition is approved9 a stipulation be made that the plans be submitted to the Commis$ion for review, and that the land use was ~ proper for the areao ~ Deputy City Attorney Furman Roberts advised the Commission that recommended conditions to ~ the City Council must be complied with prior to the reading of an ordinance rezoning the lands that although normally the Commi.ssion's policy requires the submission of plans, it. ~ is possible to approve sub,ject petition subject to review.of the plans at a later dateo ~ Commissioner Rowland offered a motion to continue the hearing on Petition for Reciassifica- tion No~ 64-65-53 and General Plan Amendment Noo 44 to the meeting of November 9, and re- quested that elevations and setbacks and plot pian be submitted for the Commission's considera- tion of subject petitiono Commissioner Allred seconded the motion~ MOTION CARRIED, Commissioner Camp voted "no"a VA&IANCE ~Oe 1667 - PUBLIC E~ARING~ ORANGE AND 399 A Partnership, 3326 West Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, California, Owner; DR~ HENRY Lo FOUCHER, 3326 West Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, California, Agent; requesting permission to waive the• ' maximum~height limit on property described as: A rectangular parcel of land with a frontage ' of approximately 138 feet on the west side of Beach Boulevard and a depth of 150 feet, the ' southern boundary of said property being approximately 195 feet north of the centerline of Orange Avenue, and further described as 509 South Beach Boulevaxdo Property presently classified C-1, NEIGFIDORHOOD COMN~RCIAL, ZONEo Mro Don Griffin, architect for the proposed development, appeared before the Commission and reviewed the proposed 4~- story building and noted that the owners of subject property were also the owners of the hospftal directly to the west of subject property, further stating he did not feel the height waiver would be detrimental to ad3acent property owners since the ma~ority of the property along Beach Boulevard was conunercial in nature, and that although a 66-foot high, 4~ story structure was being proposed, there was a possibility this might be reducedo No one appeared in opposition to subject petitiona THE HEARING WAS CLOSEDo Associate Planner Robert Mickelson advised the Commission that the variance was necessary . because the proposed C-1 Zone was not an ordinance as of this date, and that the one-half story poxtion housing the mechanical equipment, such as air conditioning faciliti.es and • elevator shaft, was excluded from the height restrictions as this was permitted in Section 18004 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. . s ~ I ' ~ ~.) ~ ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 2366 VARIANCE NOo l(L7 - Mre Griffin then stated the one-half story was to provide the Continued' mechanical equipment, and the office space woulii be only four stories9 and that all conditions attached to the variance, if approved, were • ; acceptableo • Commissioner Rowland offered Resolution No. 1389, Series 1964-65, and moved for its , passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Chavos, to grant Petition for Variance ' Noe 1667, subject to conditionse (See Resnlution Booko) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votes ~ AYESe COMMISSIONERSs Allred~ Camp~ Chavos~ Gauer~ Mungall~ Rowlanda NOES+ COMMISSIONERS: Noneo ~ ABSENTi COMMISSIONERS: Perryo RECLASSIFICATION - PUBI.IC I-I~ARINGo INITIATED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, 204 East N0~.64-65-~~ iincoln Avenue, Anaheim, Californiag MRo PETER LEO,'2123 West Lincoln Avenue, Ownert proposing the reclassification ot property described as: CONDITIONAI. USE A rectangular parcel of land with a frontage of 96 feet on the north PERMIT NOo 636 side of Lincoln Avenue and a depth of 312 feet, the easter~~ boundary of said property being ~pproximately 423 feet west of the centerline of Aladdin Stre~t, and further described as 2123 West Lincoln Avenuee property presently classified R-A~ AGRICULTURAL, ZONE, PROPOSED CLASSIFICATIONt C-1, NEIGI-~ORHOOD COMA~¢RCIAL, ZONEo PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE: TO PERMIT OPERATION OF AN EXISTING MOTEL AS A CONFORMING USE. Mr. Peter Leo, owner of •=ubject psoperty9 appeared before the Commission and stated it was his intent to submit plans for the exFansion of the existing motel in the~ near future; that a pool would be installed eariy in 1965; and that on one side of the structure there was adequate access for fire and trash truckso The.Commission advised Mro Leo that any plans for expansion shouid be submitted for the Commission's considerationa No one appeared in opposition to subject petitionsa TI-~ I~ARING WAS CLOSEDa ;t was noted by the Commission that the Interdepartmental Committee has recommended that the concrete sidewalks and driveway approaches be required at the ti:ne the existing facili- ties were remodel4d, or when the property was to be redevelopedo Mre Leo then stated it was his desire to put in the improvements, but wanted these improve-.• ruants to be concurrent with the adjacent property owners and requested a temporary waiver be grantede Commissioner Allred offered Resolution Noo 1390, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Chavos, to recommend to the City Council that Petition i for Reclassification Noo 64-65-42 be approved, with the finding that sidewalks be installed at the time additional improvement was made on the property, ox such time as the City Council i grantedo (See Resolution Booka) ~ On rull call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYESs COMMISSIONERS~ Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowland. NOES: COMMISSIONERSs Nonee ABSENTs COMMISSIONERSi Perryo Commissioner Gauer offered Resolution Noo 1391, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Allred, to grant Petition fo•r Conditional Use Perm;t No. 636, unconditionallyo (See Resolution Booko) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votec AYES~ COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowlando NOES~ COMMISSIONHRS: Nonee ABSENf: CONWIISSIONERSs Perrye , ~ 1 i ' i 1 -~---- - ;~- -- --.• ~ - -- . . .. . . _. _t_ ~ . , i . i • . ~ ,:...~ ~,~~ ~ `_J MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 2367 RECLASSIFICATION"- PUBLIC HEARINGo INITIATED BY TI-IE CITY PLANNING COMIi7ISSI0N, 204 East N0...64-65-44 Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, Caiifornia~ Parcel 1: EUGE~ T~ &~TZ, 335 North i Brookhurst Street, Owner~ Parcel 2s JOHN MAZEPA~ 331 North Brookhurst CONDITIONAL USE Street, Anaheim, California, Owner; proposing that property described ~ PERMIT N0, 637 as= A rectangular parcel of land on the west side of Brookhurst Street '" between Woodly Avenue and Crescent Avenue, and further described as Parcels 1 and 2° Parcel 1: a rectangular parcel with a frontage of . 67.~feet on the wesi: side of Brookhurst Street and a depth of approximately 189 feet, the ~ southern boundary of said parcel being approximately 201 feet north of the centerline of ~ Woodly Avenue~ Parcel 2e an "L" shaped parcel lying immediately adjacent to the south and west boundaries of the aforementioned Parcel 1, said Parcel 2 having a frontage of approxi- mately 68 feet on the west side of Brookhurst Street with a maximum depth of approximately 270 feet and the southern boundary of said Parcel 2 being app:oximately 158 feet north of 1 the centerline of Woodly Avenue, and further described as 331 and 335 North Brookhurst Streeto Property presently classi:ied R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONEe PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION: C-1, NEIGFIDORHOOD COMN~RCIAL~ ZONEo PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE: TO PERMIT OPERATION OF EXISTING ANIMAL HOSPITAL ON PARCEL 1 AS A CONFORMING USH IN TF1E C-1 ZONEo Associate Planner Robert Mickelson advised the Commission that the conditional use permit ~ app2led to only Parcel I on which an existing hospital was established, while subject ; property.was under jurisdiction of the County< No one appeared in opposition to subject petitionsa T1~ FIEARING WAS CLQSEDa Commissioner Gauer offered Resolution Noo 1392, Series 1964-65' and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Camp, to recommend to the City Council that Petition for Reclassification Noo 64-65-44 be approved, unconditionallyo (See Resolution Book.) On ro!1 call the foregoing resolution was passed by the fcllowing votes AYtSs COMMISSIONERSs Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowlando NOES: COMMISSIONERSs Noneo ABSENfs COMMISSIONERSs Perryo Commissioner Chavos offered Resolution Noo I393, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption~ seconded by Commissioner Rowland, to grant Petition for Conditional Use °ermit Noa 637, unconditionally< (See Resolution Booko) Ou roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERSs Allred9 Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowland. ~'JOES: COMMISSIONERS: Noneo ABSENT: , COMMISSIONERSs Perryo RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC E~ARING~ INITIATED BY TFI~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, 204 East NOo 64-65-47 Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, California; WILTOWER PROPERTIES, INCORPORATEDS 1010 Wilshire Boulevard, Los.Angeles, California, Owner~ proposing the ,~, reclass3fication of property described as: A rectangular parcel of land' at the southwest corner of Orange Avenue and Brookhurst Street with frontages of 150 feet on Orange Avenue and 150 feet on Brookhurst Street, and further described as 601 South Brook- hurst Street, from the C-3, HEAVY COMN~RCIAL, ZONE, deed restricted to service station operation or any C-1 uses9 to the C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMN~RCIALy ZONE. Asscciaie Pianner Robert Mickelson advised the Commission that subject petition was part of the overall plan of reclassifying properties to their most appropriate zones. Na one appeared in opposition to subject petitiono THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Chavos offered Resolution Noo 1394, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and'adoption, seconded by Commissioner Camp, to recommend to the City Council that Petition for Reclassification Noo G4-65-47 be approved, unconditionallyo (See Resolution Book.) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votes AYESr COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowlando NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Nonee ABSEM e COMMISSIONERS~ Perryo ~~ , , i • -~ _ - -- - _. _ -------_._...._ ___ _ ____ , , ~ , ~, ) ~ ~ ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, Gctober 26, 1964 2368 k ~ RECLASSIFICATIQN'= P!1BLIC E~ARINGo INIiIATED BY TFIE C?TY PLANNING COMMISSION~ 204 East i NOa 64-65-48"' "" Zfncoln Avenue, Anaheim, California~ JOHN B. THORPE, 11721 Blue~ay Lane, ~ Garden Grove, California, Ownerf PAI.MER Co SANDENO, 9902 Orange Avenue, Anaheim~ California, Ownerf GLENN A~ BURCHETT, 627 South Brookhurst Street, Anaheim, California, Owner; and JOSEPH BIENSTFREY, 641 South Brookhurst Street, Anaheim, California, Ownp•r~ proposing the reclassification of property described as: A rectangular parcel of land on the west side of Brookhurst Street between Orange Avenue and Stoneybrook Drive, and further described as Parcels 1~ 2, 3, and 4- Parcel 1: a rectangular parcel with a frontage of 112 feet on the west side of Brookhurst Street and ~ a.depth of approximately 337 feet, the northern boundary of said parcel being approximately 33Q feet.south of the centerline of Orange Avenue~ Parcel 2: a rectangular parcel 112 feet ~ by approximately 264 feet in size, the eastern boundary of said Parcel 2 coinciding with the western boundary of thP aforeroentioned Parcel 1, the northern boundary of said Parcel 2 bei.ng approximately 330 :• ~ south of the centerline of Orange Avenue; Parcel 3s a rectangular parcel with a frontage of 100 feet on the west side of Brookhurst Street and a depth of approximately 605 feet, the northern buundary of said Parcel 3 being approxi- -. mately 412 feet south of the ceiiterline of Orange Avenues Parcel 4: a rectangular parcel with a frontage of approximately I18 feet on the west side of Brookhurst Street and a depth of approximately 600 feet, the northern boundary of said Parcel 4 being approximately 542 feet south of the centerline of Orange Avenue, be reclassified from the R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE to the C-1, NEIGFIDORHOOD COMMERCIAL, ZONE, Associate Planner Robert Mickelson reviewed the uses of Parcels 1, 3 and 4, noting that P,arcel 2 was vacanty that the walk-up restaurant was established on Parcel 1 under Condi- tzonal Use Permit Noo 109, and the motel was established on Parcel 4 under Variance Noo 18520 . It was further noted that subject property did not have concxete sidewalks or drive- way appioaches; that these item~ shou2d be required at the time the existing facilities are remodeled or when the property is develope9e Further,that the existing dedication for Brookhurst Street is not to ultimate width and no additional dedication was being recommended at this timeq but that additionai dedication should be obtained at such time as the present use of the property was changede No one appeared in opposition to subject petitiono THE FIEARING WAS CLOSEDo Commissioner Allred offered Resolution Noo 1395, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption~ seconded by Commissioner Chavos, to recommend to the City Council that Petition for Reslassification Noo 64-65-48 be approved, with the finding that concrete sidewaiks and , driveway approaches be required at the time the exis•~ir,g facilities were remodeled or the property was redeveloped, and that the ultimate dedicr~tion for Brookhurst Street be obtained at the time the present use of the property was changed~ (See Resolution Booko) .. Or~ r.oll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votes AYES~ COMMISSIONERSs Allred, Camp~ Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowlando NOES: COMMISSIONERSs Nonee ABSENTs COMMISSIONERS: Perryo RECLASSLFICATION - PUBLIC 1-~ARINGo INITIATED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, 204 East ~ N0. 64-6~-49 Lincoln Avenue~ l+naheim, California; MARY La FITZ, 1127 White Sails Way~ ~ Corona Del Mar~ California9 and LAND ESTATES, INCORPORAIED9 1100 East I CDNDITIUNAL USE Clark, Santa Maria, California, Ownerss proposing the reclassification -; PERMIT NOo ¢~,~ of property described as: A r.ectangular parcel of land at the southwest ~ corner of Lincoln Avenue and Rrookhurst Street~ and further described as ? Parcels 1 and 2- Parcel 1: a rectangular parcel at the southwest corner ; of Lincoln Avenue and Brookhurst Street with frontages of approximately 120 feet on Lincoln ~ 1 Avenue and approximately 150 feet on Brookhurst Street; Parcel 2~ a rectangular parcel lying ~ immediately west of and adjacent to Parcel 1, said Parcel 2 having a frontage of 70 feet on j the south side of Lincoln Avenue and a depth of 150 fe~.`.~ the eastern boundary of said Parcel i 2 being approximately 180 feet west of the centerline of Brookhurst Street. Property presently ; classified Parcel la R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE, and Parcel 2s C-3, HEAVY COMN~RCIAL, ZONEo ~ FROPOSED CLASSIFICATIONs Parcels 1 and 2a C-1, NEIGFIDORHOOD COMN~RCIAL, ZONE. P~20POSED CONDITIONAL USE: PERMIT OPERATION OF EXISTING MUFFLER SHOP AS A CONFORMING USE IN TI-lE C-1 ZONE. Associate Planner Robert Mickelson reviewed for the Commission the proposed reclassification, ~ noting that the existing muffler shop was established under Reclassification Noo 58-59-95 ; and was deed restricted to the muffler shop and accessories or any C-1 use, and that the ' sexvice station existing was apparently established while the property was under the juris- ~ diction of the County. ~ ~ ,.,.__.__~...___ _------....___ .----.------.._.___.__....------___....~._________, -----+~ ', . ~-- ---- _ _ . . . . ... , ~ • . ~ ~, ;.:`. . :l ~.? C~ ~ , MIPIIf['ES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 2369 ! RECLRSSIFICATION'- It was further noted by the Commission that the Interdepartmental i NOe 64-65-49' Committee recommended that street improvements along Lincoln Avenue be required when the existing facilities were remodeled or the property ; CONDITIGNAL USE redevelopeda °' ! PE&MIT N0,' ~ ` Continued" Deputy City Attorney Furman Robexts yuestioned the reasoning behind ; reclassification of the muffler shop, which was a permitted use in the C•-3 Zone and a conditional use in the C-1 Zoneo Mr, Mickelson advised the Commission that the conditional use permit was initiated under ~ Section 18.640020(5) which is known as the "ambiguity section" of the Codeo i Mro Roberts then stated the fallacy of usin9 Section (5) would require that the property '~ owner apply for a conditional use permit every time he had a chan9e in the use, and this might create some problems. , The Commission, Mro Roberts, and Mra Mickelson continued discussion as to the appropriate- j ness of classifying the existing muffler shop in the C-1 Zone, and the requirement that I sSdewalks be constructed since the bowling alley adjacent to sul~~ect property was required, ~ as a condition of approval, to install such sidewaikse i 3 Comnissioner Gauer offered a motion to reopen the hearing and continue Petitionsfor Reclas- ~ sification Noa 64-65-49 and Conditional Use Permit No. 639 to the meeting of November 23, '• 14b4, in order to allow the Planning Department and the Attorney's Office to resolve any legal problems which might be encountered in the proposed reclassification, and to contact • ; the..property owners of subject propertieso Commissioner Rowland seconded the motion. ~ MOTION•CARRIEDo ; i RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HFARINGo INITIATFJ BY THE CITY PLANNING c'OMMISSION, 204 East ~ NCIe 64-65-50 Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, California; EI.A~R MYI.AR, 10632 East Chapman y Avenue, Garden Grovey WILLIAM K. NXMAN, 813 Aurora Street, Anaheim~ ~ California; and FLORENCE BURROWS, 956 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, ; Califoxnia, Ownersy proposing the reclassification of property described ass A rectangular ' parcei of•land ~vith frontages of approximately 119 feet on Crescent Avenue and approximately 122 feet on Glencrest Avenue and the depth of sub~ect property being approximately 200 feet~ ~'~ the eastern boundary of subject property being approximately 127 feet west of.the centerline ~ of Cambria Street, from the R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE~ to the R-1~ ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, i ZONE9 to establish appropriate zoning for properties located within an R-1 developmente 1 Associate Planner Robert Mickelson reviewed the Report to the Commission~ noting that the existi~ng well site on one of the parcels of land was owned by the City, and that the Water Department had been contacted and had indicated no opposition to the change in zoningo No one appeared in opposition to subject petitiono TElE.HEARING WAS CLOSEDo Commissioner Gauer offered Resolution Noo 1396, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Camp, to recommend to the City Counci'1 that Petition for Reclassification No. 64-65-50 be approved, unconditionallye (See Resolution Booko) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYESe • COMMISSIONEF;Ss Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowland. NOESi COMMISSIONERS: IJone. RBSEIIT~ COMMISSIONERS: Perry. " RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARING. INITIATED BY THE CITY PLAP~NING COMMISSION, 204 East N0..64-65-45 Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, Californias ED4NIN Jo ERICKSON, S00 Pine Ridge Knoil, Fullerton, California, Owner) proposing the reclassification of CONDITIONAL USE property described ass A rectangular parcel of land at the northwest PERMIT NOo Ez40_ corner of Katella Avenue and Brookhurst Street with frontages of 125 feet on Katella Avenue and 125 feet on Brookhurst Street, from the R-A, „ AGRICULTURAL, ZONE, to the C-ls NEIGtIDORH00D COhM~RCIAL, ZONEe PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE: PERMIT TFlE OPERATION OF EXISTING SHRVICE STATION WITHIN ~ 75 FEET OF R-1 ZONED PROPHRTY IN THE C-1~ NEIGFBORHOOD j • COMM1~RCIAL~ ZONE. • i 'fhe owner of subjact property indicated his presence at the Commission hearingo ~ Associate Planner Robert Mickelson advised the Commission that the existing service tation ~ was established while subject property was under the jurisdiction of the Countyf tha~ the existing dedication for Brookhurst Street and Katella Avenue was not to ultimate width, ~ ' ~ __,.__.______._ _.__.__, _. __._ ---- , ,~. _ - ~ i ~ ---- ~~ ~ ~ MYIIUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 2370• RECLASSIF•ICATION - and no additional dedication was recommended at this time because of NOo 64-65-45 the possibility of creating a violation of the Fire Code in that the pump island would be closer than ten fee~~ from the property line) that CONDITTONAL USE additional dedication should be obtained at such time as the property PERMIT N0. 640 was redevelopedy furt?,er,that subject property did not have concrete sidewalks on the corner at this time, and the sidewalks should be constructed at the time the f.acilities were remodeled or the property was redevelopedo No one appeared in opposition to subject petitiona TEIE f~ARING WAS CLOSED. Cqaunissioner Camp offered Resolution No~ 13979 Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Allred, to recommend to the City Council that Petition for Reclassification Noo 64-65-45 be approved, unconditionallyo (See Resolution Book.) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYESs COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowlando NOES: COMMISSIONERSs Noneo ABSENT: • COMMISSIONERSs Perryo Commissioner Camp of£ered Resolution Noa 1398, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Chavos, to grant Petition for Conditionai Use Permit No. 640, unconditionallyo (See Resolution Booko) On roll cal't the foregoing resolution was pased by the following votes AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Munga119 Rowlando NOESs COMMISSIONERS: Noneo ABSENT.s ~ COMMISSIONERSs Perryo RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC FIEARINGa INITIATED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, 204 East NOo•64-6 -~46,~~ Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, Californiaf JOHN HANCOCK INSURANCE COMPANY, C~0 RTCkfr IELD OIL CORPORATION~ 555 South Flower Street, Los Angeles, CONDITIONAL USE California, Owner; property described asa That certain property situated PERMIT NOe 638 at the svuthwest corner of Ball Road and Brookhurst Street with frontages of approximately 115 feet on Ball Road and approximately 230 feet on . Brookhurst Streeta Property presently classified R-A9 AGRICULTURAL, ZONE. PROPOSED CLASSIFICATIONs C-19 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL~ ZONEa PROP0.SED CONDITTONAL USE: PERMIT OPERATION OF EXISTING S~RVICE STATION WITHIN . 75 FEET OF R-1 ZONED PROPERTYo Associate Planner Robert Mickelson called to the Commission's attention the Report to the Commission's finding No~ 3 and 4 relative to subject propertyo No one appeared in opposition to subject petitionso TF~ FiBARING WAS CLOSED. ' Commi85ioner Chavos offered Resp~.ution Noe 1399, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Allred, to recommend to the City Council that Petition for Reclassification Noa 64-•65•-46 be approved. (See Resolution Booko) On roll call the foregoin9 resolution was passed by the following vote: AYHS: COMhiISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowlande NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Noneo ABSENT: COMMISSIONERSs Perryo Commissioner Chavos offered Resolution No. 1400, Series 1964•-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Rowland, to grant Petition for ~onditional Use Permit Noe 638e (See Resolution Book.) On roll call the foregoing resolution was pass:d by the following votes AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred~ Camp, Chavos~ Gauer~ Mungall, Rowlando NOES: COMMISSIONHRS: Noneo ABSENT: COMMISSIONERSs Perryo ~ _ _ _ .. _ _ . .. _ .. ~-.~~_"_.__ _.~- . . -- ~ ~ -...... -~ ~ ~. . . . _ ;, , ~ i • . ,; U ~ ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 2371 RECESS - Commissioner `:+•wp offered a motion to recess the meeting for ten minutese Commissioner Rowland seconded the motiono MOTION CARRIED. The meeting recessed at 3s45 o'clock P.Ma RECONVENE - Chairman Mungall reconvened the meeting at 3:55 o'clock P,M., all Commissioners being present with the exception of Commissioner Perryo AN~NDIY~NT TO TF1E - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING. INITIATED BY THE ANAFIEIM CITY PLANNING ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL COMMISSION, 204 East Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, California, proposing CbDE the amendment to Section 18.52 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to provide for height standards in the Industrial Zoneo Planning Coordinator Allan Shoff reviewed for the Commission their previous recommendation at the hearing of October 19, 1964, relative to height standards in the M-1 Zone and presented the recommended revision in the wording of Section 18.520060(1) to read as follows: "(1) Building and Structural Height Limitations . (a) The height of any building or structure withi^ three hundred (300) feet of any residential zone boundary shall not exceed • one-third of the distance from said building or structure to the zone boundary; provided that the height of any building or structure within sixty (60) feet of any residential zone boundary shall not exceed twenty (20) feet, nor shall any building or structure be closer to the zone boundary than the height of the • wa11 or side of the structuree Streets or alleys may be included in calculating distanceo (b) The maximum height of all other buildings or structures shall be one hundred (100) feet." ~ Mr. Shoff:further reviewed Section 180520060(2-~') relative to the structural setback in the M-1 Zone and presented the recommended revision to that section of the Codeo A chart was further presented by Mro Shoff, indicating the heights of buildings as they pertained to any residentiai zone, noting that for the first twenty feet there would be a lsl ratia and beyand that the 3:1 ratio would applye No one appeared in oppositiono TI~ FIEARING WAS CLOSED~ Commissioner Rowland offered Resolution No. 1402, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Gauer, to recommend to the City Council that Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be amended as follows: "Section 180520060 (1) Building and Structural Height Limitations (a) The height of any building or structure within three hundred (300) feet of any residential zone boundary shall not exceed _ one-third of the distance from said building or structure to the zone boundary~ provided that the height of any building or structure within sixty (60) feet of any residential zone boundary shall not exceed twenty (20) feet, nor shall any building or structure be closer to the zone boundary than the height of the wal~ or side of the structuree Streets or alleys may be included in calculating distanceo (b) The maximum height of all other buildings or structures shall be one hundred (100) feeta" (See Resolution Book.) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERSs Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowlando NOESs COMMISSIONERSs idone. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Perry. ; .,ew.._~~_ _-r----_ ___.~.._.___._.---------__---._._.~.._-__-.---- , ~ -- --- - ,. _'_ ~. "- ~ ~, ~ REPdRTS AND - ITEM NOo 1 i RECOMA~NDATIONS Commercial-Recreation Area Height Study and ' consideration of a Height Standard Mapo i Plannirig Director Richard Reese reviewed for the Commission previous Commission~Council ~ j ; action taken on September 1, 1964, when a basic 75-foot height limitation was adopted for ~ the Commercial-Recreation Area and Exhibit Noa 5 was adopted as a guide. ' ~ Mr. Reese further noted that Exhibit Noa 5 was ~n incomplete document in that it only 9 's indicated height planes at certain points ahove mean sea levelo These height planes are '' ~ level, whereas the natural ground elevation is note In fact, a 20-foot differential exists in ground elevations from the Ball Road-Harbor Boulevard and the Walnut Street-Katella Avenue intersections, and in order that the Planning Commission and Staff might be able to utilize Exhibit Noe 5 data as an administrative tool,, it would be necessary to also know the approxi-. mate ground elevation at any particular building siteo A"Height Standard Map" was then prepared, Mro Reese continued, combining the data on Exhibit Noo ~5, together with the natural ground elevation contours, based on UoS>GoSe datume Thu's a"Anaheim Commercial-Recreation Area Height Standard Map" was prepared and explanator~y not'es~added~in the legendo The height plane elevations were now numbered in terms of their; height.above mean sea level, rather than above the Disneyland Plaza~elevation, so khat,,,t~Ye calculation of the approximate height of any structure was a simple matter of subtracting the ground elevation from the height plane elevationo In response to Comanission questioning, Mro Reese stated that the proposed height standard. map was a tool which the Commission and Staff needed to administer questions relative to height of structures, and that it contained all information necessary to reach a height determination in conjunction with a conditional use permit applicationo The Commission then complimented Mra Reese in having a document prepared which could be administered on a rather broad scale, but was stili a guide for development in the•C-R Apea, and that it was a considerable improvement over the original Exhibit Noo 5 adopted by the C.ommission and Council as a guidee Discussion was then held between the Commission, Mro Reese, and Deputy City Attorney Furman Roberts as to whether or not a public hearing should have been scheduled~ and it was•deter- mined that the proposed "Height Standard Map" in no way changed the Height Policy adopted by the Commission and Council, and was only intended to be a better guide for admirtistering the policy adopted on September 1, 1964e • Commissioner Rowland offered Resolution Noo 1401, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Chavos, to recommend to the City Council the adoption of "Anaheim Commercial-Recreation Area Height Standard Map" as a guide in the administration of tha Commission and Council policy for height standards in the Anaheim Commercial•-Recrea- tion Area. (See Resolution Book.) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votea A•YE~: COMMISSIONERSi Allred~ Camp9 Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowlando NOES~ COMMISSIONERS~ None. ABSEPii't COMMISSIONHRS: Perrya ITEM MOe 2 Variance Noe 1539 - Mrso Calleye Baumberger, 1593 West Cerritos Avenue~ requesting waiver of Condition Noo 4 of Resolution Noo 574, Series 1962-630 Associate Planner Robert Mickelson reviewed the request of the property owner to waive the requirement to reclassffy subject property to the R-1 Zone, and stated that the agent for Mrso Baumberger was present to answer the Commission's questionse . htr. Calvin Queyrel,from McDaniel Engineering Company, stated that he had taken therreques#, o£•Mrs. Baumherger for waiver of Condition No. 4 of Resolution Noo 574, Series 1962-63, approving the lot split of an R-A parcel of land when a Record of Survey was to be recorded in the County of Orange~ that the fees involved in the reclassification petition, together with an additional title report, was something she had not anticipated when the variance was approved; that it was her assumption that since a residence existed on the property that_R-1 Zoning was automatic~ and that it was her intention to sell the other lot created for Rrl purposes. ' Deputy City Attorney Furman Roberts advised the Commission of the various uses which could be applied to subject property if the existing R-A Zonfng were perm'ilted, and that a condi- tion of approval of the variance that the property be reclassified t~~ the R-1 Zone was their only means of assuring that the property would remai~ residential. ~~_._...,_..:.. _._~.____ ' ~ - ~_..._ `~ : _'T__ . . ~~.. _ .. _. .._ ._. . .. .. .. ; _ .._ .~'r.~ t,l; ~ • MINUI'ES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 REPORTS FND RECOMMENDATIONS - ITEM NOo 2 (Continued) 2373 Mre Queyrel asked whether or not the Commission would consider initiating reclassification proceedings themselves as part of the present program for reclassifying properties in the City to their most appropriate zoneo Discussion was held by the Commission as +.o amending Resolution Noo 574, and the initiatian of reclassification proceedings. ' Commissioner Rowland offered Resolution No. 1404, Series 196~-65, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Chavos, to amend Resolution Noo 574, Series 1962-63 which conditionally approved Variance Noa 1539 by the deletion of Condition Noo 40 (See Resolution Booko) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYESs COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall~ Rowlanda NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Noneo ABSEPFTa COMMISSIONERSe Perry~ Commissioner Rowland offered a motion to direct the Planning Department to initiate reclessification proceedings of property at 1593 West Cerrito~= Avenue from the R-A, • Agricultural, Zone to the R-1, One-Family Residential, Zone, as part of the overall rezoning program initiated by the Planning Commissiono Commissic~ar ~havos seconded the motiona MOTION CARRIEDo ITEM N0~ 3 Orange County precise alignment of Orangewood Avena2 easterly from its eastern terminus at Walnut Streeto Planning Coordinator Allan Shoff reviewed for the Commission information received from the ! Orange County Pianning Department relative to the precise alignment of Orangewood Avenue easterly from its present terminus at Walnut Street to the flood control channel in the City j of Orangea Mro Shoff further stated that the proposed alignment is one which was incorporated in the i General Plan and was almost identical, and that since this meeting was being held between the Planning and Road Departments to obtain information, no action need be taken byc the ~ Commission, since the Staff had already submitted the Commission's policy at a previous ~ ; hearing of the proposed alignmento ITEM NOe 4 Orange County Use Variance Noe 5437, proposing the establishment of a keypunch business on Lot 28, Tract Noe 2183, located on the west side of Brookhurst Street approximately 130 feet north of Cerritos Avenue. Associate Planner Robert Mickelson presented Oran9e County Use Variance No. 5437 to the Commission, noting for the Commission the location of subject property and presented a photograph of the existing residencc, noting the fact that a 3 by 4-foot sign was proposed to be constructed on the front part of a residence surrounded by single~-family homeso Discussion was held by the Commission as to the noise emitted by IBM equipment~ and said noise being detrimental to the health ar.d welfare of the adjoining residentse It was further noted by Mre Mickeison that the City Council recently received a complaint . regarding the use of IBM equipment in a recently purchased residence by the Keystone Savings and Loan Association, due to the fact that the noise of the operation kept them . awake until 2:00 AeM. '~ t Commissioner Rowland offered a motion to recommend to the City Council that the Orange ~ County Planning Commission be urged to consider the noise fa:tor of IBM keypunch equipment, and to take steps to alleviate any noise factor over and above the normal noise of the residential integrity of the areao Further, that consideration should be given to the heavier use of a structure primarily built for residential purposes, which was not intended for the proposed useo Commissioner Ghavos seconded the motiono MOTION CARRIED. _ : _~ig ---- _. _ _ -~_~ ...... ---___ ._._ _ __----------•-- ---- ~ ~ . . _. i I ,~ t~ ~ ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 P374 REPORTS ANIT' - ITHM NOo 5 RECOh9ulENDATI~NS Establishment of Cerritos Avenue and Douglas Street as secondary highwayso Associate Planner Robert Mickelson reviewed for the Cosunission the proposed change of • CerFftos Rvenue and Douglas Street between the intersectior. of Cerritos Avenue and Sunkist Street, ex~ended and Katella Avenue from their present designation of collector str@ets to secondary highways, due to fihe fact that the State Highway Department proposed an underpass tuider the proposed Orange Freeway, which would provide ultimate circulation to Katella Avenue, and further reviewed the projected traffic volumes for these streetso I~ was further noted that the projected traffic volumes did not take into consideration the possibility that this route.might serve as a bypass when traffic to baseball games became so heavy that this route could be used as an elternai:e routeo Discussion was then held by the Commission relative to recommEnding to the City Council that the Orange County Planning Commission clarify these streets as secondary highwayso Planning Director Richard Reese advised the Commission that undea the State Planning Act - the City could initiate a General P1an Amendment public hearing to consider the change of Cerritos Avenue and Douglas from collector streets to secondary streets, since these streets were under the general jurisdiction of the City and would eventually be annexed into the Cityo ' Planning Coordinator Allan Shoff stated that a precedent had heen set with the recent amend- • ment-to the General Plan when the general alignment of La Palma Avenue was recortur,ended for approva 10 Deputy City Attorney Fvrman Roberts then expressed concern that the City might be acting outside of their jurisdiction~ and could c~~ly x~ecommend to the County any changes,amd that. the City should not set for public hearing any changes prior to consideration by the County of a similar change. ~lro Reese then raquested that the Commission continue their consideration of the proposed change of Cerritos Avenue and Douglas Street from collector streets to secondary highways until the meeting of November 9, 19(i4, in order that the Planning Department and the City Attorney"s Office might resolve any differences relative to the proposed changeso Commissioner Gauer offered a motion to continue the consideration of the designation of Cerritos Avenue and Douglas Street as secondary highways, in order to allow the Planning Department and City Attorney's Office time to resolve any problems which might occure Canmissioner Chavos seconded the motiono MOTION CARRIED, TTEM NOo h O::~ge County Use Variance Noo 5433-Permit the enlargement and continued use of an auto repair business and automobile wrecking yard in the M-i(O) Light Industrial (Oil Production) District located at the northeast corner of Cherry and Van Buren Streets in Atwood~ Associate Planner Robert Mickelson presented Orange County L'~e Variance Noo 5433 anc} xe~fewed past County action on the existing useo Discussion was held by the Commission as to its compatibility to the extension of the industrial development in the Atwood Cone area, and it was noted that the existing auto- mobile wrecking yard was not visible from Orangewood Avenueo Commissioner Chavos offered a mation to receive and file Orange County Use Variance Noo 5433, with no comm~~tary being sent to the County, since the use was already established. Commissioner Gauer e~conded the motion. MOTION CARRIED, ITEM NOo 7 Conditional Use Permit No. 517 - Carpenter's Union - Request for extension of time to comply with conditions~ Associate Planner Robert Mickelson reviewed for the Commission their action on Conditional lfse Permit No. 517 and the subsequent request for a six months' extension of time to oomply with conditions in Resolution Noa 1002, Saries 1963-64. Commissioner Rowland offered a motion to grant a six months' extension of time with which to comply with conditions attached by the Commission in their approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 517, December 23, 1964, said extension to be retroactive to the original expira- tion of time, with said extension expiring January 24, 1965a Commissioner Camp seconded the motion. MOTIdN CARRI6D, _......_...______.-----.__, . ,. _~.__...- ----._...------....-----------._...._-----..._..-.__. -._~ , ~ i i ~ ~ .. . `,.,~ ~ ~_ .}. ~ ~ MINIA'ES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, October 26, 1964 2375 REPORTS AND - ITEM NO., 8 RECOMfu~NIIATIDNS Variance No. 1629 •- Pacific Electric Railroad and Sunshine ' Biscuits, Incorporated - Reyuest for termination of the varianceo ~~sociate Planner Robert Mickelson reviewed for the Commission a request from the Sunshine Biscuits, Incorporated, in which termination of Variance Noo 1629 was requested. C~~mmissioner Camp offered Resolution Noo 1403, Series 1964-65~ and moved for its passage and adoptiony seconded by Commissioner Allred to terminate Variance Noo 1629 as requested by the petitionere (See Resolution Booko) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votes AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Rowlando NOES: COMMISSIONERS: t~oneo ABSEAFT: COMMISSIONHRS: Perryo ITEM NO., 9 City of Fullerton - Reclassification of property located on the north side of Orangethorpe Avenue, between State College Boulevard and Placentia Avenue from the M-1, Light Manufacturing to the C~2, General Commercial, Zonea Associate Planner Robert Mickelson presented to the Commission the City of Fullerton notice of public hea.ring for the reclassification of property located on the north side of.Orangethorpe Avenue westerly of Placentia Avenue, noting that the property was located to the west of Michael's Restauranty that commercial uses already existed in the areaf that the industrial land use designation of this area on the Anaheim General Plan was indicated as such because the City of Fullerton indicated their preference for industrial designation$ and that because of the size of the parcel, the proposed non-industrial land use would not have a substantial effect upon the industrial potential of the Northeast Industrial Areao Commissioner Chavos offered a motfon to receive and file City of Fullerton reclassifica- tion proceedings from the M•-1, Light Menufacturing, to the C-2 General Commercial, Zone fox that property located on the north side of Orangethorpe Avenue westerly of Placentie Avenueo Commissioner Gauer seconded the motiono MOTION CARRIED, ITEM N0~10 Commercial-Recreation Area Setback Study. Associate Planner Robert Mickelson i,~uired of the Commission whethei or not any decision would be made by them on the study presented to them entitled "Commercial-Recreation Area Setback Study"o ••' The Commission indicated that insufficient time had transpired for them to make any decision on the study, and asked that it be scheduled for the meeting of November 9, 19640 ITEM NO_____~__ll Special Commendai,ion to Industries, Business Firrns, fltco, in the beautification of the Cityo Commissioner Rowland asked that the Planning Commission and Staff prepare some form of special commendation to industries~ business firms~ and others whc have made contributions • in their site development standards,such as Buzzo Cardozo and others, in the beautifi:cati~oR and its contribution to the community~ P],anning Director Richard Reese stated he thought it was an excellent suggestion; that he would contact'the City Manager for clarification of action which might be tak~;~ by the Council and/or Commission for special commendation, and that possibly the ChambEr of Commerce could 3oin in with the City in this commendatfono The Commission was of the opinion that the Chamber of Commerce make any commendations separate and apart from any City bodyo Commissioner Rowland offered a motion requesting that the Planning Director obtain clarifi- cation on the proper procedure to follow to make special commendations to industries, business firms, and others in their efforts toward the beautification of the City of Anaheime Commissioner Gauer seconded the motiono MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT •- There being no further business to discuss, Commissioner Rowland offeied`'' a motion to ad3ourn the meetingo Commissioner Gauer seconded the mo£ion. MOTION CARRIED. The meeting adjcurned at 5:0(1 o'clock P.Mo Resp~etfu~ b i ted !~ ~ SECRETARY ~~_.~-.. -. _ r ----- ~Axr ---- --------._____.__.----.._.---------_..______._._.___._ _______..~.