Minutes-PC 1965/01/04City Hall
Anaheim, California
January 4, 1965
A REGULAR Iv1EcTING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
~
REGULAR MEETING - A reqular meeting of the Anaheim City Planning ~.ommission was called
t~ order by Chairman Mungall at 2~00 o`clock pom., a quorum being
presento
PRESENT - CHAIRMAN: Mungalle
- COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Gauer, Perry, Rowiande
AASENT - COMMISSIONERS: Nonee
PRESEM - Zoning Coordinator: Robert Mickelson
DeFuty City Attorney: Furman Roberts
. Office Engineer: Arthur Daw
Planning Commission Secretary: Ann Krebs
Planning Department Stenographer: Carolyn Grogg
INVOCATION - Reverend Dan Jordan of the First Meth odist Church gave the Invocation.
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGLANCc - Commissioner Gaue.r led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flago
APPROVAL OF
THE MINUTES. -?he Minutes of the meeting of Decembe r 21, 1964, were approved with
the following correction: Correction to Minutes of December 7, 1964,
Page 2416, Paragraph 6, Linel- "Mr> R oy Pina ~ o"~
CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARING. Ro H. GRANT, Trustee, P, Oo Box 2067, Anaheim, California,
PERMIT N0~ 660 Owner; JOHN PRINS, P, Oo Box 2067, Anaheim, Ca;ifornia, Agent; requesting
permission to establ`.sh a training school for medical and dental assistants
on property described as~ A rectangular parcel of land at the :outhwest
corner of Brookhurst Street and Crestwood Lane with fronteges of approximately 465 feet on
Brookhurst Street and approximately 225 feet on Crestwood Lane, and further describe~, as
1717 South Rrookhurst Streeto Froperty pr?sently classified C-1, NEIGHBOR"OOD COMMER~'IAL,
ZONF. ,
Mro Jchn Prins, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Comrr~ission an. reviewed the
proposed use of the building now under construction on subject property and further stated
that the basic reason for filing the conditio~al use permit was because the new C-1 Ordinance
had not had final reading, and it would allow by right a training school for medical and
dental assistants without a conditional use permit, and that it was their desire to commence a
new semester February 15, 19650
Mro Harold Hicks, 1716 South Orme Street, appeared before the Commission in opposition to
subject petition, stating that the petitioner had advised them that a professional office
building would be constructed adjacent to their single-family tract; that the school would
create additional traffic hazards on Crestwood Lane, since only one access was provided to
Brookhurst Streete
In response to Commissian questioning, Mr~ Hicks advised a masonry wall was constructed
between the single-•family i~esidences to the west a~d subject property; that *he rear building
was constructed almost adjacent to the block wall, but that the main building was located
further easterlyo
Zoning Coordinator Robert Mickelson advised the opposition that the proposed use wouid be
p@rmitted in the new C-1 Zone which would become final within approximately thirty days,
and that the parking requirements for subject property were in accordance with Codeo
In respunse to Commission questioning, the aaent for the petitioner stated that presently
classes were being scheduled for the daytime hours, but it was anticipated that in the future,
evening classes miqht be scheduled; that approximately forty students at one time would be
attending classes, six hours a day, and tF,at the students wouid not be attending classes every
day.
-2441-
r,
~
MINUTES, CITY ?LANNI~G COMMISSION, January 4, 1965 24~2
CONDITIONAL USE - Mro Charles Biggs, 1702 South Orme Street, appeared before ±;~e Cornmission
PERMIT N0~ 660 in oppcsition to subject petition, stating that an additional parking
(Continued) problem would result along Crestwood Lane if subject petition were approved;
that workers in the office building parked their cars on the streets rather
than in the parking required for them - tl~is then prevented the streetsweeper
from keeping the streets clean, and necessitated his picking up all the trash in the street
rather than having it blow into his yard; that ~he petitioner had a moral respor,sibility to the
City and the residents a9jacent to his nroperty to maintain a reiatively clean area since he
had promised the property owners in the tract that only ligt~t commercial use would be made of
the property; that the plans of development did not indicate adequate bumper protection Tor
the masonry wall adjacent to subiect property to the west, and if subject petition were approved
the Commission should require some form of bumper protection; and that if tlle Sin91e-Family
Residential 7cnA was required to have a specific setback of structures from the property line,
this should aiso be a requirement of the C-1 Zone~
THE HEARING WAS CLOSFD~
The Commission discu.=.sed the requirement of bumper guards and the finding that the Traffic
Division investigatP the parking of cars in the residential area from the commercial develop-
ment to the east, thus preventino the Sanitation Division from cleaning the streets on their
scheduled datese
Mr~ Prins then s~ipulated to the instailation of bumper guards adjacent to the masonry walle
Co.mmissioner Gauer offered Resolution No~ 1476, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage and
adoption, seconded by Commissioner Allred, to grant Petition for Conditional Use Permit Noo
660, subject to conditions, and the requirement of installation of bumper guards adjecent to
the masonry wail on the west pzoperty line as stipuiated by the petitioner, and a finding that
the parking of cars on Crestwood Lane be reviewed by t.he Traffic Division in order that the
Sanitation Department might be able to ~naintain a street cleaning schedule for Crestwood Laneo
(See Resolution Book.)
On roll cali the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Ailred, Camp, Gauer, Mungall, Perry, Rowland.
NOES: COMA9ISSIUNERS: None,
A3SEM : COMMISSIONERS: None.
CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARING. IAJREfJCE W, AND ABILENE ALLEN, 525 South Gilbert Street,
PERMIT N0, 662 Anaheim, Califcrnia, Owners; DAVID S. CULLINS, 10~7 West Bal? Road, Anaheim,
California; Agent; reauesting permission to establish a semi-autcmatic car
wash on property described as: A rectangularly shaped parcel o` land with
a frontage of approximately 65 feet on the east side of Dale Street and a depth of approxi-
matel;~ 135 feet, the southern boundary of said property being approximateiy 188 feet north
of the cente-rline of Lincoin Avenue, Property presently classified C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMN~FRCIAL
ZONE,
Mr~ David ~ol~ins, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Commission and stated he was
avaiiable, to answer questions since he fslt the plans submitted with the petition represented
what was being proposed,
Mra Collins advised the Cornmission that they cbjected to the requirement of landscaping, but
since he felt there should be some flexib:lity inthe planning, it could be integrated within the area
,! without requiring the ten feet of landscaping on the front part of subject property,
No one appeared in opposition to subject petition~
THE HEARING WAS CL.OSED~
Commissioner Camp offered Resolution No~ 1477, Series 19E4-65, and moved for its passage and
adoption, seconded by Commissioner Perry, to grant Petition ior Condition~l Use F'ermit No.
662, subject to conditions~ (See Resolution Book~)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by th? following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Gauer, Mungall, Perry, Rowlando
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None~
ABSENT: COMMISSIUNERS: Noneo
•
x
_-,
~
6 .~~~
~'i d
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, January 4, 1965 2443
V4RIANCE N0. 1676 - PUBLIC HEARING. LEROY E. AND ELSIE SHULTZ, 214 North Olive Street,
Anaheim, California, Owners; CLIFFORD CD KENT, 1217~ South Anaheim
Boulevard, Anaheim, Califorr,ia, Agent; reeuesting permission to waive
1) minimum floor area of a dweiling unit; 2) minimum required side yards; 3) minimum distance
between buildings; and 4) minimum required parking spaces on property des~.riucd as: A rec-
tangularly shaped parcel of land with a frontage of 35 feet on the south side of Charires
Street and a depth of approximately 130 feet, the western boundary of subject property being
approximately 17~ feet east of the centerline of Topeka Street, and further described as
612 East Chartres Street~ Property presently classified P-1, AUTOMOBILE PARKING, ZONE,
Mr~ Cliiford Kent, agent for the petitionEr, appeared before the Commission and reviewed the
proposed developrnent, noting that the existing rear buildin~ woul~ be removed and a more
modern structure would take its place; that because of thc~ r rrowness of the lot, it was
proposed to have a snalier two~-bedroom home where the forR:r Caiifornia-style structure
exists, and that the home that was proposed to remain wa: only six years old and should
meet all b~ilding requirements for a habitable building~
No one 3ppeared in opposition to subject petition~
THE HEARING WAS CLOSED~
Comr.iissioner Alired offered Resolution No~ 1478, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage
and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Camp, to grant Petit~on for Variance Noo 1676, subject
to conditionso (See Resolution Book:)
On roll call t;~e foregoing i•esolution was passed by the foilowing vate:
AYES: COMI+tISSIONeP.S: Allred, Camp, Gauer, Munqail, Perry, Rowlando
NOES: COMMISS?Q(~~ERS: ~one.
ABSEM : COMMISSIONERS: None.
VAHIANCF NO_ 1677 •- PUBLIC HEARIPIG. OLIVER G~ BAKER, 147 South Beach Boulevard, Anaheim,
California, Owner; RUSSELL JAY OR BEN ROCHELLE, 8681 Katella Avenue,
REVISION NOo 3, Stanton, Caiifornia, Agents; requesting pez•mission to waive the minimum
TEA2ATIVE MAP OF required side yards on property described as: A rectangular parcel of
TRACT N0. 5141__ land approximateiy 406 feet ty 1,Oi2 feet in size located west of Beach
Roulevard and south of Lincoln %,~enue, the northern boun~ary of subject
property being approximately 330 feet ~outh of the centerline of Lincoln
Avenue, and th= eastern boundary being approximately 260 feet west of the centerlir.e of Beach
13ou1evard, and furtY-,er described as 147 South Beach Boulevard„ Property presently clas:>ified
R•-A, AGR7CULTURAI., ZONE (R-3, MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDErJ['IAI., ZONF psnding)o
DEVELOPER: Ri!SSELL JHY, 2966 West Lincoln :+venue, Anaheim, California, E~GINEER: Hal Raab
Surveying Company, i0568 Magnoiia Avenue, Sui'e i10, Anaheim, California: Subject tract,
located on the west side of Beach Boulevard approximately 327 feet south cf Lincoln Avenue
and containing approximately 9_7 acres, is proposed for subdivision into 21 R-3, MULTIPLE-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZONED lois:,
Mro ~ussell Jay, agent for the pP~itioner, appeared before the Commission and stated the only
problem involved in Revision IJo~ 3 of Tentative Map of Tract No~ 5141 was the requested waiver
of the side yards,.
Discussion was then held between the Commission, Zoning Coordinator Robert Mickeison, ard the
developer relative to the possibility of relc+cation of the structure to avoid grantir~g of the
waiver of the requirzd side yards:
The Commission expressed concern that with all the flexibility applied in the redra~tinq of
the R-3 Zone, that a request ior waiver of th~ requirement was already submitted, and if thiswas
to be a pattern, perhaps the Commission shoulo request a study of the requirements of the R-3
Code to determine whether they were too restrictive~
The agent then stated that, in his opinion, the new Code r.equirements were too restrictive in
the development of narrow lois by requiring the 15-foot side yards, and there would be con-
siderable possibility that a n~mber of variances would be requested if any narrow lots were
. propused for R-3 development.
No cne appeared in opposition to subject petition,
THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
~ Mr. Mickelson then reviewed for the Commission the proposed tentative tract, noting that it
~` met all other R-3 Code requirementso
~
~ :1
F
MINUTESy CITY PLAD'NIf7G COAM~~ISSION, January 4, 1965
2444
VARIANCE NO° 1677 - Commissioner Camp offered Resolution Noo 1479, Series 1964-65, and moved
for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Pex~ry, to grant
REVISION N0~ 3, Petition for Variance Noo 1677, subject to conditions, and the finding
TENTATIIIE MAP OF that the Commission would initiate a study relative to the R-3 side yard
TRACT N0. 5141 requirements to determine whether an amendment to the Ordinance was
(Continued) necessary in order to minimize the number of requests for variance from
Code requirements~ (See Resolution Booko)
On roll ca11 the foregoi.r.g resolution was passed by the follow~ng vote:
A~S: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Gauer, Mungall, Perry, Rowlando
NOESs COMMISSIONERS: None>
ABSEM : COMMISSIONERS: None,
r
Commissioner Gauer offered a motion to approve Revision No~ 3 of Tentative Map of Tract
Noo 5141 subject to the fo;lowing conditions:
(1) That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subdivision, each
subdivision thereof shail be submitted in tentative form for approval~
(2) That the approval of Revision No. 3 of Tentative M~p of Tract No< 5141 is granted
subject to the completion of Re:;lassification No, 62-63-108 and the approval of
Variance No~ i677~
(3) That an easement shal~ be dedicated and an underground off-site storm drain
shall be constructed to the Orange County Fiood Control Channel or the drainage
shall be discharged by other means to the satis°action of the City Engineero
(4) That a dedicated ailey be provided along the west tract boundary or access to
the proposed alley in Tract No= 4230 be obtained by acquiring Lot "C" of
Tract No~ 4230,
(5) That Beach Bouievard in front of the two "Not a Part" parcels be fully improvede
(6) That the one•-foot holding strip along the nartherly and southerly tract boundaries
be designated as Lot ''A" an,? Lot "B"; and that a predetermined price for Lot "A"
~ and Lot "r3" shall be cal.;ulated and an agreerent for dedication entered inta between
the Developer and the City of Anahaim prior ~o approvai of the final tract mapa The
cost of Lots "A' and "B" shall include land and a proportionate share of the under-
ground uti:ities and street improvem~~nts.
! Commissioner Allred seconded ~he mution~ MUTION CARRIED
~
DIRECTIVE TO THE - Discussion was heid by the Corcmission ielative to the present require-
PLANNING_DEPARTMENT mer~ts oi the side yard, and Zoning Coordinator Robert Mickelson advised
the Commission that the past theory of the zone was - the longer the
building was, the more yard z~equirement was necessary~ Thereupon the
Commission suggested that in :he study the Staff would make that a maximum~-foot waiver of
„ the side yards be incorForated in the Code.
Commissioner Row~and offered a motion to dizect the Pl~nning Department to begiri a study on
_ the requirements of the R•3, Multipie•Famiiy Reside:itial, Zone regarding side yard require-
ments, and to consider the possibility of setting a maximum deviation from the required side
yards, and upon comp~etion oi the study, schedule ~~ work see<ion for the Commis~sion to consider
the problems involved. Commissioner Camp seconded the rr~nt~on MOTION CARRIcD.
RECLASSIFICATION - PUP1_IC HEARIDIG. JAMES G. AND MADELIt~ . GP.NTES, 635 Flint, Long Beach,
.. N0~ 64•-65•-69 ~ C3lifornia, Owners; requesting that pr ;>.~arty described as: A rectan9ular
parcel of iand with a frontage of ~ppr~;;;imately 187 feet on the west side
of Beach Boulevard and a depth of apprc~cin~ately 300 feet, the southern
boundary of subject property being a~>roximately ~i37 fee± north of the centerline of Ball
Road and further ~iescribed as Parcels 1 and 2- Pa:rel i baing the southerly 92 feet of the
above described property, and Parcel 2 being the nortt;erl~ 95 feet of the above described
property, ard further described as 901-907 South Beacn Boulevard, be reclassified from the
C~2, GEtJERAL COMNERCIAL., Z014E on Parcel 1 and R~-A, pGkTCULTUR/iL, ZONE on Parcel 2, to the
C-3, HEAVY COMMERGIAL, ZONE ior subject property, to expand an existing restaurant and
construct a motel~
' Mro James Gantes, one of the owners, appeared before the Commission and reviewed the proposed
expansion of the restaurant facilities, noting that thi.s would be ahase one, and that phase
two would b~ the construction of a two-story motel since motels on either side of subject
property were also two-story-
R
~
MINU1'ES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSIO~, January 4, 1965 2445
RECLASSIFICATION - No one appeared in opposition to subjec~ netitiono
NOe 64-65•-69
(Continued) ~ THE I-~ARING VJAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Perry offered Resolution Noo 1480, Series 1964-65, and
moved for its passage and aduT~tion, seconded by Comnissioner Gauer, to recommend to the
City Councii that petition for Reciassification No, 64-65-69 be approved, subject to
conditiens~ (See Resolution Book.)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Gauer, Mungall, Ferry, Rowland>
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ~?one:
ARSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ~!one,
RECLASSIFICATION - PUBI.IC HEAkING BAI.i. INVESTMEh'T GROUP, 3,350 West Ball Road, Anaheim,
; NO.. 64-65-70____ Caiifornia, Gwner; I_EROY ROSE, 600 North Euclid Street, Ana;:eim,
Caiifornia, Agent; repuesting that propert.y u~escr=bed as: P.n irregu~arly
sh~ped p:~zcei of land with a frontage of apgroximately 416 feet on ttie
south side of Bali Ro,ad and a maximum depth cf approximately 1,I25 feet, the souihern boundary
of said property running p~ral.el with and coincidentai to the northeriy boundary of the
Pacific Electric R3ilway *_ight••of-way and the western bounda:y of said property being approxi-
mately 900 feet eas*_ of the centeriine of Knott Street, and further d?scribed as 3350 West
Ball Road, be reclassified from the R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE to tt-,e C-0, COMA~ RCIAL OFFICE,
ZONE, to estabiish -~ restaurant, office space, ~nd office reiated uses on the site of the
hospital and medicai cenier appzoved under Conditionai Use Permit No, 265~
Mr~ LeRov Rose, agent foi the petitioner, appeared before the Commission, stating that the
proposed use was an addition to the existing hospital 3nd medical facility, and that the
plan oresented to the Commissior~ wis the master plan of development for the building complex~
Mr, kose fuz±her stated that the Froperty had never been reclassified to its most appxopriate
zone~
Discussicn was heid by tt~e Commission and the agent for the petitioner :elative to the zone
being requested, the Corr,m;ssion noting that the C-0 Zone was proposed for highris= structures
and the uses p~esentiy being FzoFosec' should be ar integral part of tt~e structure itself
rai;her than separate structures if ihe C-0 Zone w3s to be proposed
Mro Rose stated that the b~sic TE35011 :or requesting C-0 Zoning was becaus~ the C-1 Zone did
not Fermit highrise, ~nd that the :eiated uses being proposed were i:~ conformance with the
C•-0 uses, although not a part of the main stiur_tu.e
No one 3pFeared in oFposit?or, io sub~ect petii:or,.
Tf-'.E 1-lEi,RINu WAS CLOSED
Ir, response to CortuTission ouestioning, Ceputy City Attorney Furman Roberts advised the
CortJni~•sion that a petitione: had re^uested a iesser zone., and it was not within !he power
of the Commission to grant C-i Zoning, a'thc~gh the new C-1 Zone wouid permit the proposed
stzvcture, and tF,at the Co.r,rrission, if sub,7ect petition were considered favorably, could
initiate C-1 Zoning, and a fi:~ding on the app;oved resoiution on subject petition could
indicate to tl~e Cour.ci: that C-: Zoning was being initiated:
Comrnissioner Fowland o.'fezed Reselution hb 148i, Series i964-65, and moved for its ~assage
2nd adoot:on, seconded .5y Cortmissioner G~uer, to recomrriend to the City Council that Petition
for Reclassification ~'c. 64~-65-7C be approved, subject *_o condition~ and the finding that the
Commission would initiate :eclassification proceedings for subject property to the C-1 Zone
since the new C~-i Zone permitted highrise structures. (See Resolution Book~.)
On roll call the foregoing iesolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Aiired, Camp, Gauer, Mungail, Perry, Rowlar,de
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Ivone:
ABSENT: COMMISSIOIdERS: None.,
•
F
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, January 4, i965 2qq6
~
RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARING. WILL'IAM J. N~SSECAR, 446 South Poplar Street, Brea,
N0. 64•-65~•72 _~ California, Owner; SAMUtL HUMPHREY, 1875 ?oinsettia, Long Beach,
California, Agent; property described as: A rectar.gularly snaped parcEl
VARIANCE N0~ 1~78 of land with a frontage of approximately :t32 feet on the south side of
Baii Road and a cepth of approximately 450 feet, the western boundary
of suhject prcperty being approxim3tely 454 feet east of the centerline
of Brookhurst Street~ Subject property is divid~d into Portions A and B: Portion A being
a rectangular parcel with a frontage of 132 feet on the south side of Ball Road anu a depth
of approximately 240 fe_t; Fortion 9 being approximately 132 fee*_ by 216 feet in size and
lying immediately south of and adjacent to Portion A, the northern boundary of Portion E
being approximately 270 feet south of the cente:line of Ball Roado Property presently
classified R•-A, AGRICULTURAi., ZONE.
REQUESTED C[.ASS7FZC.ATION: G 2, GENERAI CQMMERCIAL, ZOME ON PORTION A;
R•?, MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZONE ON PORTIGN B.
REQUESTED VARIANCE; WAIUcR ON PORTION B ONLY OF: (11 ONE-STORY HEIGHT LIMITATION
vUITF'IN i5G FEET OF R-A PROPERTY; (2) MI~IIMUM REQUIRED SIDE
Y.ARDS; (z) MINIMUM UISTAA'CL• BETWEEid TWO PARALLEL FACING WALLS
OF T!~~ SA~ BUILDING; AAIU (4) MI~IMUM WIDTH OF PEDESTRIAN
ACCESSWAY
to establish y 22-unit apartme~t deveiopment on Port:on 9 and a restaurant with on-sale
liquor and retail stores on Portion A.
Mro Samuei !'umphrey, agent for the petitioner, arpeaz•ed befoze Lhe Commission and stated
he was avaiiable to answer nuestion>, since i.n his opinion the plans presented were self-
explanatory.
Discussion was heid by the Corrmission ~e~~tive to aii of the waivers beinq requested; that
the p;ans couid be !e~ised to eiiminate tY,e accesswey which was in excess of 120 feet in
length; that ±he cover~ge was :n ercess of that aiiowed by the R-3 Code, and by meeting
the R-3 Code density .eaui:ement, tne on:y waiver necessar~- would be the height within
15U feet of ar R-A Zone3 an:9 th~t if tne plar,s of development were redesigned, the project
still couid have more ussbie -~rea ~h~n presently exists.
No one appeared in opposition to subject petitions
THE HEARING WAS CLOSEP
Zoning Coordinator Robe:t Mickeison 3dvised the Com,~~ission th~t app;oval of subject petition
would not constitute approval of eny lot sp!it if the petitioner was desirous of selling the
rear or front portion sir,ce this weu~d create a landlocked parcel
Commissioner Allred offered a motion to zeope~ the hearing and continue °etitions for
Reclassification No 64-•55-71 and Variance No. 1678 to the meeting of February 1, 1905,
in order to al?ow tt~e Fetitione: sufficient time to submit revised plans.: Commissioner
Rowland seconded the motion MOTION C.4RRIED,
RECLASSIFICATIO!v - FUBLIC HEARING. I~'ITIATED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMA9ISSION, 204 East
N0.~64-G5•-72_~ Lincoin Avenue, Anaheim, CaliforniaS George Smith, Jr,, 2415 Crescent
Avenue, Anaheim, California, Louis B,. Minter, 9808 Wilshire ~i204,
CONDITIONAL USE Beveriy Nil~s, Caiifornia, Paul J, Kna3k, 1751 S. Ee Skyline Drive,
PERMIT N0. 663~ Santa Ana, California, Stanley Krell, Lee Tower Building, 5455 Wilshire
Bou:evard, Suite ~009, Los Angeies, California; Virginia H~ Stevens,
1510 Hackett Avenue, Long P.each, California; and Donna R, Feldhaus,
8822 Prookhu:st Street, Anaheim, Galifornia, Owners.. Property described
as: All that certain p_operty ~t the northeast corner of Brookhurst Street and Lincoln
Avenue, bounded on the no:tr~ by the Anaheim City boundary and extending easterly approximately
675 feet from the centerline of Erookhurst Street, s3id property beirg further described as
Parcels 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6: •
Parcel 1•- A rectangular parcei with a frontage of 69 feet on the east side of Bruokhurst
Street and a depth of 10? feet, the southern boundary of said Parcel 1 being approximately
263 feet north of the centeriine of Lincoin Avenue,
Parcel_2 - A rectangular parcel with a frontage of 69 feet on the east side of Brookhurst
Street and a depth of i25 feet, the southern boundary of said Parcel 2 being approximately
194 feet. north of the centeriine of Lincotn Avenue.,
Parcel 3- A rectangular parcel at the northeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Brookhurst
Street with frontages of 125 feet on Lincoln Avenue and 154 feet on Brookhurst Streeto
Parcel 4- An irregula:ly shaped parcel with a frontage of 163 t~et on the north side of
Lincoln Avenue and a maximum depth of ap~roximateiy 292 feet, the eastern buundary of said
Parcel 4 being approximately 122 feet west of the centerline of Lindsay Street9 and further
described as 2171 West Lincoln Avenue,
i
MINUTES, CiT:' PLANNTNG COMMISSIOh, January 4, 1955 244~
RECLf~SSIFICATION - Parcel 5~- A rectanguiar parcel approximately 86 feet bv 170 feet in ~
NO< ~i4-bg_72~__ ~size and bounded on ~_he souch by Lincoin Avenue, on the east by Lindsay
Street, arid on the north by Lindsay Road, said norihern boundary also
CONDITIONAI. USE being the Anaiieim City Boundary:.
PERMIT N0._ 663 Parcei 6- A rectar.gular parcel at the northeast corner of Lincoln Avenue
(Continued) and Lindsay Str.eet with frontages of approximately 193 feet on Lincoln
Avenue 1nd approximately 170 feet on Lindsay Streeto Property presently
classified n^-A, AG~'~ICULTURAL, ZONE,
PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION: C-1, ~EIGHBORNOQD COMIJ~eRCI?L, ZONE.
, PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE: TO PERMIT f'PERATION OF AN EXISTING BAR ON PARCEL 4.
I:_, Zoning Coordina±or Robe.t Mickelson noted for the Commission that subject petitions and
the following four petitions were a part of the program for reclassifying properties into
thei: most appropriate zones~
~
No one 3ppeared in oppositic~~ to subject petitions:,
Tf-IE NPARING WAS CIOSED_
Commissionei Rowiand offered Resolution No., ?482. Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage
and adoption, seconded by Co~r.missioner G~uer, to recommend to the City Council that Petition
for Reciasszfication No 64-65-?2 be approved, unconditionaily, (See Resolution Book~)
On roll call the foregcing .esolution was passed by the foilow.ing vote:
AYES: CUMMISSIONERS: Alired, Can:p, Gauer, Islungyiii I'erry, Rowland.
NOES: COMMISSIO'~!ERS: None.
AB~ENT: COMMISSIO~'ERS: !~'one.:
Cortanissioner Rowi3nd offered Resoiution No i483, Se:ies 1964-65, and moved for its passage
and adoption, seconded by Co~r:missioner G3uer, to grant Petition for Conditional Use Permit
No~ 663~ (See Resolution Rook l
On roll cail the foregoing resol~cion was passed ty the foilowing vote:
_ AYES: COMMISSIOVERS: Allred, Cart;p, Geuez•, Mimgali, Perry, Rowland
_ NOES: COMMISSIONER5: ~'one
ABSEI~T: COMMISSIONERS: ~:one:
RECI.ASSIFICATION - PUBLIC NE.4RING. INITIATED BY TNE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, 204 East
~`~~~_~~_Q5_='____ Linco~n Avenue, Anaheim, Caiifornia; Ben Hur Oil Company, 102 Wr:st
Whitt?e. Bouleva:d, ~9hitt:er. California; Paul J„ Knaak, 1751 S. E,
Skyiine U;ive, Santa Ana, California, Dows Acreage, 1160 South Street,
Long 3eacn, Caiifoinia, Owneis; proposin9 the rec:lassification of property
described as: A rectanguiar parcei of land at the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and
: Hrookhurst Street witn frontages of approximately 610 feet on Lincoln Avenue and approximately
i 590 feet on Brookhurst 5treet from the R-.4, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE to the C•-1, PJEIGHBORHOOD
I COMMERCIAL, ZONE, to piace subject property in its most appropriate zone~
Zoning Coordinator Robert Micke.lson advised the Commission that dedication along Brookhurst
Street was obtained under Conditionai Use Permit No: 514, =nd that the State had acquired ail
dedication along Lincoln Avenue:
' No one appearnd in oppositio~ to subject petition.
T~ I-~AI3ING YJAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Periy offered Resol.ution Plo, ;484, Series 1964~-65, and moved for its passage and
adoption, seconded by Commissioner Ailred, to recommend to the City Council thai. Petition for
Reclassification No~ 64-55-?3 be appzoved, unconditionally. (See Resolution Book,)
On roll call the foregoing resoiution was passed by the foliowin9 vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Canip, Gauer, Mungall, Perry, Rowland.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ~one,
AE4SENT: COMMISSIONERS: None.
~~*~..
c
A
MINUTES, CITY PLANNI~'G COMM~SS:O~, January 4., 1965 2448
ReCLASSIFICATION •- FUi3LIC F,FAr7I~;G, dNITIATk:D AY THF CITY FLANNING COMMISSION, 204 East
NO_ 64-65•_74~_ Lincoin Avenue, 0.naheim, ~aliiornia; Gulf Oil Corporation of California,
Wi.ishire Oii Company ot Ca,liforr~ia, 727 West 7th Street, Los Angeles,.
Californi~, 9GOi7, Gvner; pro~esing the reclassification of property
described as: A rectangu?ar ?arcel ef ~and at the southeast corner of Brookhurst Street
and Broadway witn frc~tage~ af appzoxir~ateiy 150 feet on Brookh~~rst Street and approximately
150 feet on Bro3dw~y, frocn the C-3, F'EhVY ~OMR~'eRCIAL, ZONE, deed restricted to service station
or G-1 uses only, and ~he C-•:., NEr~F!RORHOOD COMMERCIAL, ZONE, to the C-1, PlEIGI-IBORHOOD COM-
N~RCIAL, ZG~E, to estac:ish the exisl:ing service stetio~ granted under Cenditional Use Permit
No~ 413, in its most aoczopziate zone..
y' No one appeared in o~position to subject pet:tion,
:~~
`~ THE F'~EARING WAS CL05ED
:~#
:~~ Commissioner Gaue: off>red Resolution No: 1485, Series 1964-65, and moved for its passage
and adoFtion, seconded by Con~missioner Rowland, to recommend to the City Councii that Petition
for Reclassification No 04•65 74 be approved, ~.~nconditionally.. (See Resolution Booko)
~
~ On roll cail the :oiegoing resciution was passed by the foiiowing vote:
i,YES: COMMISSIONERS: Aiiied, Camp, Gauer, Mungall, Perry, Rowland~
NUES: CUMMISSIOD!ERS: None~
ABSEM: COMMISSlOP~EAS: None
RECLASSIFICATION - PU?iIC NEARI^'G I~'ITIATEli BY THE CITY pLANNING COMMISSIQIJ, 204 East
~~0_ 64 65_?5____ lincoin .4~-enue, An~heim. Ce7ifornia; Moisey Matuchansky, 8440 De Longpre
A~~enue, Los 4ngetes, Ca!ifornia, 90069, Owne_*; pzoposing *_he
I reclassification of pzoper*.y descxibed 3s: A_ect3nguiar parcel of land at the northeast
corner of P.rooKn~rsc St~.eet ;r:d Grange Avenue with ,'rontage= of approximately 200 fe.: on
Brookhurst Street ~nd 3pproriiute;y 150 feet on Oranye Avenue, from the C-3, HEAVY CUMN~RCIpL,
t ZON[ to the C;, NEIGHPOEFUOD CC?'~,NEFCIAI, ZOn~E, to estabiish an existing service station and
i vacant property into i~s ~:ust ~pp:opri3te ~one
~ : No one 3ppe3red in oFposic:on to s~bject petition,
•~
~ ; TF~ HEARIIJG WAS CIOSED
I
.~ _j CoRmissioner C~mF offeied Reso~~tion ~~o :486, Sar.es i964-65, and moved for its passage
~ and adoption, seconded by Co~.irissionei A:1zed- to recommend to the City Council that Petition
~ for Reclassifica±ion IJo. E4 ~5-?5 be approved, unconditionally: (See Resolution Book,)
i
~i On roil cail the foi•egoing iesoiution was passed by the foiiowing vote:
~1
't~ AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Aiired, Camp, Gauer, Mungall, Perry, Rowland_
~ NOES: COMA9ISSZO~ERS: ~'one,
ABSEN"I': COMMISSIONERS: idone,
i' .
~,' ~
' RECLASSIFICATION - PI,BLIC NEARING. i~~ITINTED RY THE CITY PLAN;JItJG COMMISSION, 204 East
' ~ NO__64_65_?b____ Linccln .Avenue, Anaheim, California; Dorothy Homewood, 3612 California
~' ~ Avenue, L.ong Beach, Califo:nia, 90807, Owner; proposing that property
~ I described as: A rectanguiar p3rcel of land at the southeast corner of Brookhurst Stre?t
~ and Oranye Avenue with frontages of appzoximately i50 feet on Brookhurst Street and approxi-
; mately i50 feet on Orange .Avenue, be :eclassified from the R--A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE, to the
' ~ C-1, iVEIGE{BORHOOD COMMFRCIAL, ZGNE, io estabiish an existing service station in its most
~ appropriate zone,
~~ The existing service station was established under Variance No. 409,
i
j No one appeared in opposition to subje~t petition:
i
THE HEHRIWG WAS CLOSED.
,
I Commissioner Perry offered Resoiution No. i487, Series 1964•-65, aud moved for its passage
• and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Fllzed, to recommend to the City Council that Petition
for Reciassification Nc~ 64•-55~76 be approved, un~u~ditior.ally. (See Resolution Book.)
~~
On ro11 call the i~regoiny :esoiution was passed by the foltowing vote:
~` ~
:` AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Gauer, Mcngail, Perry, Rowland.
`. NOES: COMMISSIUNERS: ~done:
~' _ ABSE~T: COMMISSIONERS: Ncne!
1
;~ ~
~.~ ~
iv'
.. i
~
MINUTES, CITY PLAi4NING COMMISSTOtJ, ?anuary 4, 1965
REPORTS AND •• ITEM NO_ 1
RECOMM~NDATIONS Reclassification No, 62••63 .35 and Conditional Use Permit Noe 3130
209•-2i3 Knott Avenue (Roy L,. Burroughs, et al ~roperty).
' Considei•at:on of revised pians.
2449
Zoning Coordinator Robert Mickelson advised the Commission that a laws~~it had been filed recently
by the sin9le-family Froperty owners in Buen3 Park, adjz~ent to the property former2y known
as the "Roy L~ Buzroughs, et a: property", now known as the "Deiancey pzoperty", in wt;~ch
the City Coun~:il. had appzoved revised pians for two•-story construction adjacent to the R-1
property to the west, and ihat the judge considering the lawsuit had directed that the
revised plans be submit.ted to the Ciiy Planniny Commission in accordance with State law
~ for :eport and recommendation to the City Council.
Deputy City Attorney Furman Roberts advised the Commission that since the project was
under construction, the possibie sugges±ion the ~ommission might have would be for possible
shielding the R-1 hort!es fion~ the two-story construction~
Mr~ Dave Maddox, deve~oper of the rz,uetip~e famiiy development on subject property, appeared
before the Commission ano re~iewed tiie ;cYion taken ~rior to the City Council's consideration
of the revised pl~ns; t:~at or;e of ;ne s.*.eps taken by the buiider in alleviating possible
visual intrusion frort: the second stoiy wes ~o raise the dinette window area to thr~e f?et,
and since construction has a~ready taken place, this change had been accomplished, and the
only etherchange wouid be sczeening, wi:ich wouid be up to the ~ommission to decide; and that
from his observetion, since the buildings were in progress, they became less objectionable
all the time
De~uty City A±torney Fu:man Robeits tt;en :cviewed 311 ±he actions which had occurred in the
court proceedings on subject r-etitions and advised the Conur~ission their comment on the
revised plans was necessary bcfoiE the City Cour,cii could again consider these petitions,
~nd that the Com~~is~.ion might v.ish to conaider severai alternatives because it was difficult
to ask the deve~oF,: to :emove tne second stuzy now unde: construction~
Mr Mickelsen then erpanded on the his±ory of the original petitions submitted and the fact
that a planned :eaidential develoFrt:ent had been submitted with the request for the waiver of
the heiynt iiroitation edjarent to ±he R A, s3id pi~ns originaiiy proposed single•-story adja~ent
to ihe R•1, ;.:,. IrE ;:;;r~s were subse?uent:y changed to an R-3 tr3ct when plans ware
submitted to the Staff Eo: cor~rormance to the R 3 Code,due to technical wording of the
resolution of approvai, two ~te_y ad~~cent to R-1 was not considered~
Discussion was then t.e,d by c'r,e Comn~issicn not?ng tnat the original pians of the pianrted
residential deveiopment pioposed 92 ~nits, whereas revised plans proposed 82 units; that
tte:e w~,noway to effi:ient:~- screer. ihe sing:e-famiiy homes from the two-story construction
because the circuiation eiement wo.~id tner; be destioyed; and that everything that could be
done, had been done by the deve;~pe~ to piesent a les< objectionable development to the
singie-famiiy homes to the west
.~x
Comr.iissioner Gaue: offeied ~ motion to advise the Cit~ CounciJ iliat the Commission has
examined the revised p13n.=. of Reclassification No 62•-63 35 and have determined that the
remedisl action already taker; by !he developer is everything that can be done, given the
exis•ting circumstances. Conunissioner Camp seconded the motion, MOTION CARRIED~
ITEM NO 2,
~Jaturai Rescuzces and Conservation Z~ne~
Planning Coordinato: Al.~n Shoff advised the Commission that letters had been received
from various County agencies requesting that zeconsid?ration by the Commission of the
NRC Zone be continued to the meeting of January 18, 1965..
Commissioner Rowland offered a motion to continue consideration of the NRC, IJatural
Resources and Conservation, Zone to the meeting of January 18, 1965. Commissioner Camp
seconded the motion: MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM y0 3.
~ariance No: 142!. 2612 West Lincoln Avenue, Conversion of guest
house to living au3rters.
Zo~ing Coordinator Rober± Micke'_son 3dvised the Co~r~r~ission t.hat a field check had been
made of the property at 2612 West iincoln Avenue to determine whether all conditions of
the resolution were cumpiied witn, since the petitioner had requested that subject petition
be granted a permanent use or sub~ect property for the use originally requestedy that the
, petitioner was a bed-:idden patient and necessitated constant care and attention by a nurse;
that a practicai nurse :esided in the guest ho~se since 196i', and that all items required
_ of the petitioner had been confozmed with 3s noted by photographs taken of the property.
„ ~.
MINUTES, CITY FL.ANNING COMMISSIGN, January 4, 1965
2450
REPORTS AND •• ITE"+_RO_ ? (Continued)
RECOMME~DATIONS
~ ~~~ ~ Commissioner Gauer offered 3 Totion tc grent a three~year extension •
of time for tne use o: the guest house at 2612 West Lincoln Avenue
for living quarters, sai.d three•ye~r extensicn to date from January 4, 1965, thus mzking
expiration of the th:ee ye:~:s .January 4, i968, ar;d that upon expiiation of said time
extension, the petition and the property ag~in be reviewed by the Commission~ Ccmmissioner
Perry seconded the motion. MOTION CkRRIED,
ITEM N0. 4:
Or~nge Couniy Case No, 855 (Section District Mao 12-4-10 Exhibit E)
proposes to change fzom the .4•-: Gener3l Agricultural District to the
100-C'_ 10,000 Local Pusiness Districtr certain property located at
the southeast co:nex of l.a A3;~~ Avenue and Sunkzst Street in the
east Anaheim are3, oy I.~oyd Ber,son, the petitioner~.
Zoning Coordinator RoberY. Micke!son pzeser,ted Orange County Case No- 865 to the Commission,
ar.d reviewed the ]:3nd use of p:ope:ty to the north, south, east, and west of subject property~
Mr~ Mickeison fuxther• p:esented R-1 subdivision over;~y=_ foi subject property, and stated
that the uitimate width of La P,ima Avenue made R-1 suodivision exceptionally difficult~
The Corunission discussed V3I1JU5 me:.t:ods of dev?lopment of subject p:operty, and were of
the opinion that cemmerci~: zonir,g shou,d nct be projected for an area p:imarily residential;
and that as a possibie solution fc: development of the property to its highest and best use
without being detrimentai to tne :esidential uses aire~dy ~stablished, single•st~ry low•-
medium density deveiopR:er.t srould Ge recommended
Commissioner Ailzeri otie:ed a mntion to zecommerd te tie City Council that the Orange
Coun*y Pla;~ning Conur~ission b? encour~qed to disapprove any C-1 zoning for property under
considerat.ion in Oranye County C~se No 865, based on ±he fact tnat with the exception of
a schooi being iocated to the south, subject prope:ty is su_rounded by residential uses;
and that 3s an 3iteinative fo: possir:e deve~orment, tne Conanission be enceuraged to con-
sider iow medium densi±y deve,oFmeni for ~hat F:operty Con~missioaer Can;p seconded the
motion~ MOTION C.4RRIFD
' 1TEM Np 5.
Orsr.ye County Condition3i Pe:mit No i146, proposin9 to establish
~n e;ementary schoei in tte A: General ~+g:icuituraJ ois'trict by
, the ~: ange 'J~~i fied S,roo: District on the riorth side of Santa Ana
Canyon P.o:~d about 8GG feei westerly of the easteriy intersection
of C:escent Drive in Sar.t~ Ana C~nyon:
Zoning Coordinator Robert ~fickeison ptesented Or~nge County Conditional Po:mit No~ 1146
to the Coirmiss:on ano :eviewed tt~e ,ocatior; of the p:eposed schoo] noting that th= location
was in geneiai ~cco~d with the p:eiimine7••,• dr~i*_ of the Hii] 3nd Canyon General Plan~
Commissionez Gauer cffNred ~ motio~~ co _ecor..eend to the City Councii that the Orange
County P..3nning Comn;ission be encou-aged to appro~e Conditiona7 Permit No~ 1146 for
the estabiishu~ent oF en ele~nent~ry school in the 5ants Ana Canyon as proposed by the
Orange Unified Schooi Uist7ict Conn.issione:~ A.lred seconded the motion, MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM ~!0 h.
Corrunerciji •r~ecrearional Setback Area
Zoning Coozdin~i.or Robert hlickelson advised the Conuniesion that when the original Commercial-
Recreational Area Se*back Study had been initiated, Freedman Way and C1emFntine Street were
not extended, but th3t since that time, these stieets were extended, and 3evelopment occur-
ring adjacent to these st:eets, and requested that a f~:ther recommendation be mad2 to the
City Council relative to the Cummission's desires fci Freedman Way and Clementir.e Street-
Discussion was then heid by the Commiasion re:ative to the standa:d setbacks and landscaping
in the area, that Ciementine Street and Freedman '~Vay were nct secondary nighways, and that
other streets withir. the .~rea that we:e not considered secondary highways had landscaping
and p~rking of 20 feet>
Commissioner Rowland offered a motion to zecommend to the City Council that a~ the time the
Commerciai-Recreation Setback Aiea Resoiution was consioered by them, that Freedman tNay and
Clementine Street be incli~ded 3s part of the streets in this area, and that a 20•-foot set-
back was recommended with 10 feet of landscaping within the 20-foot setback~ Ccmmissioner
°erry s2conded the motion, hfOTION CARRIED.
,ax
A
~= ~ ..>
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, January 4, 1965 2451
' REPORTS AND ITEM N0~ 7,
RECOAM~TIDATIONS Southern Celifornia Planning Congresso
(Continued)
Commis~ioner Gauer advised the Corrariissioners that the Southern California
Planning Congress meeting on January 14, 1.~65, to be held in Burbank,
would include the installation of officers for the year 1965, and since he was elected
president, he was hoping ali ihe Commissioners wouid be presente
All Commissioners indicated their desire to attend said .meetingg further, Deputy City
Attorney Furman Roberts advised he would also attend>
A: `lRNMENT - There being no further business to discuss, Commissioner Gauer offered
a motion to adjourn the meetiny, Commissioner Rowland seconded the
motion~ MOTION CARRIED~
The meeting adjourned at 3:4~~ o'clock pomo
Respectt~lly submitted,
/
ANN KREBS, Secretary
Anaheim Planning Commiss4on
~ ~ ~
•"' L?S
~