Minutes-PC 1973/01/220 R C 0 MICROf ~LMING SERYICE, INC.
:, ,,, . ~•.,..~
~
~
~
Cit;~~ Ha~.l.
Ariahoim, Calitornib
.lanuary 22, 1~)73
A RF(:ULAR_ ME[:TItdG OP 'fNE I~NAHEIM CITY PLANNiNG COMMI~5~ON
REGU~,AR -~+ rAqulr~r. meeti~iy ot 4.he Anrshaim Ci ty Planninq ~om~niesi.on wt~w
MF.ETING cal.lod to nader by Chairman 3eymour nr 2alU p.m., n quorum
boinq prc+nent.
PRESENT - CHAIRMAyi Seymour.
- COMMISSIUNERS: 1~11r4~d, t~arano, Gauer., H~rUot (~ntored t.t~e
Ccaun^,i.1 Chambor at 4:1~ F.rn.) , Kayv~ood, Rowl.e+nd.
A98ENT - COMMTS3TON~RS: Nono.
Ptt~SENT - Anaiskant Developm~~nt 89rvicee Directar: Ronald Thr~n:a~an
Duputy CiCy Att.orncyt Fxr~nk Lowry
Office Enginaera Say Titua
zoni.~ q Su~ervia~r: C1:arLea Robarto
Planning s~ipervisor: Pon t4cDanit~l
C;ummlysio;i Secret.~ry . A ~ Kreba
PLLUGE OF - CummieaicnEr Kaywood led in L•he Pledgo of A.llegiance ko the
AI.LEGIANCk~ Flag.
APPROVAI~ OF - Commisaioner Kaywood offerod a motion to app.rove the min~i~e~s
TH~ MIt~UTES of the meeting of Uecembex' 27, 1972, seconded by Comminaioner
F~rano and MOT70N CARRIED, subjecL to 'the following cozrectione:
pg. 72-81'1, para. 7, line :: since "195.1, the origintti owner"
^
(nAt 1971)
pq, 72-Ei18, para. 6, line 5: took. approximately "2 hourd" to
qroom one doy (not ane hUUi~)
pg, 72-823, para. 1?., line 8, ineert: and "OCFCU ~~pproval of
drain~e to ~hanne l"
pg, 72~824, para 7, Iine 4: they "planned to have" t~elete
"did..not lan")
MPA('T -
ENVIRONMENTAL I PUBLIC HEAFtING. ANAFIE7M HILLS, INC. AND TEXAL'O VENTURES,
.
REPORT NO. 84 INC., AttenLion of Jam~s Barisic, 380 Anaheim Hill.a ROald~
"'~"'-' ~~ Ar~aheim, Ca. 9280G. Proparty consists of appr.oxi.mateAy
VARIl4NCF NO. 2475 35 acrea located an the south side ~f Canyori Rim Road,
" 2100 feet east of Nohl Ranch Road.
TENTATI~~E MAP OF
T NOS . 8215
TRAc'
REQULSTED VARIANCE : W~} V
T
NT
U
II
, MIt3IMUM
(C)
WIDTH
LOT
MINIMUM
aND 9219
LOT AR~A, (D) REQUIREMENT THAT A
LOT SHALL NOT SIGE 4NT0 AN ARTER7AL
HIGHS~AY, AND (F.) R~QUIREMENT THAT A
~,OT SHALL NOT FRON'T ON'PO AN ARTERIAL
HIGHIV~Y.
TENTATIV'E TRACT REQUE ST: ELIGTNkERs Willdan Engineering, 125 South C1AUdina
Anaheim, Ca. 92805~ pr~poaing ~.o aubdivide
Stxeet
,
Tract No. 6215 into 36 R-I zoned iota anct Tract No.
8219 lnto AQ R-1 zonad l.ots.
Ch~irman Se~mour noted that ~he Environmental Impact Report Review Committee
ra.d not reviewed EiR No. 84 concesrning *_hia proposel, and, therefore, thQ
petiti.oner had requea~ted that thia itom be continuad two weaks for that reporr.
Comcaiss~o~z~sr Farana affered s motion, seconded by Commiasioner lcaywood ~nd
MOTION CARItIED, to continue considerntion of k:nvironmentdl Ymp~ct Report N~.
8~4, Varianca N~. 2475, and Tentatiwe Map oP Trgct Nos. 8~15 and 8219 to the
meetinq o! Fabrua.ry 5, 1973, 3n order t'reat the EItt Iteview Committee coulc~
prceent their r~commei~~.ati.onA regarding EIR No. 84.
73-34
~
~
~
MINUTN~S, CITY PLANt7ING COMMI~SION, Jttlluf.X'y 'l2 r 7•973
73-35
TL-VTAT1vE MAP OP' - OWN~R: f.'PPE12 "K" RANCii CURPOHATION, F. ~~. ~lax R, Placantia,
TRACT N05. 8080, Ca. 92G70. L~NGTkFER: Mi.Llot, K~.nc~ & Aeaociatea, Lnc.,
8081 AND 8092 1335 Wf~et Valc~ncia Drivo, I~ullerton, Ca, 92633~ pr.o~oeing
_t.._____ _......_.!_._.._
to nubdivi~e prop~r.ty contaJ.~inq appruximatoly :3"1 acrA~
lncatgd on the flouth sida o~ thd River9~dc~ l'zA$wny, approxi.
m~tely 1~00 Ee~:t enet of imperial ttighwuy into 89 F.9--500~ ~oned lota (Tract
Mo. 80H0) J£ 3 RS-5000 zoned ]~te (Txact No. E~OAl.j ~ ~nd `~4 RS-"000 r.or-ed lute
(TrdaC Nn. 808~) .
Chnirinan Seymour noted that tha d~veloper liad r~quested eubject tracto ho
continuced for. t:wa waekr~, t~o the meeting of F~bruazy 5, 1973, t~~ al.low tima to
reaolve r.oni;~.y pr~blems on the propoxt.f.
Commis9loner 1Farano offpr~d a mution, sec~nd~~d by C~mml.ddlonAr Kaywo~ci ai~d
MdTIUN CARRIED, to continu~ coneideration of TantnCiva Map of. Tract t~os. 6080,
BO@1, and 80a2 to tho meetinq of Feb.uar.y 5, 1,973, i.n arder for the petitinner
to L~eaolve quantiona ~f zoninq, etroet ~xtoneiun, anci narksite l.ocntio~ potan~
tiall.y affoct.iny the p~-oporty.
AltENbMENT 't0 ~EI2VICF.
S4•ATION S1'ANUARUS
Chairman Seymc..xr noted thnt thc~ propoaed emendmen ~e to
thQ Aervi.c9 etati~,n et.andard3 aould be dic~cus~ud ].atar
in the m~eeti.ng, althauqh :~e would 9LtCfCJC+9t th~t the
amendment be eet for publi~ hearinq and a11 discueaion
defarred until th~~ ti.me.
Gommissi.onor Row;.and of~ered a motion, aeconded by Comir,iaeione.r rarar.o and
MOTIOt~ CARR~ED, to eet for public hoaring on F~bruary 5, 1973, conaideration
of amendmente to the~ service sta~tion standarda, rec;uest.ir~Q that r.epresentativeo
of tt~e independ~nt servicg akation awners and the variou~ oi~ compan.ias ba
advised and auggosting that t'~ey be present to ~ffer any augq~s~ions regarding
+_he proposed ameiidments.
F,ECLASSIFICATION - CONTINUED PUBLIC H~ARING. HEDIRY W~SSFLN, 1717 Weat Lincoln
NO. 72-73~2D rlvenue, Anahoim, ~~a. 9?.8U1, Ownerr ~sILL PF~ELPS, 1095 Narth
htain StrFet, Orange, Ca. 92667, Ayent; pruperty d~~;cribed
VARTI~NCE NG. 246?. aa: A rectangularly-shaped parccl heving a frontage ~t
-~' appr~xtmate].y 192 feet on the west side ~f. Velare StiEet,
having a maximum depth of approximately ~66 feet an~ being
located xpproximat~sly 660 feet south of the cent~rlinea of Orange 7~venu~.
Pzoperty presentl,y classi-fied R-3, MULTIPLE~FAMILY RFSIDEN•PIAL, ZUNE (PARCELS 1
;AND 2) BIId R-A~ 1liRIC1iI~^.'URAL~ 7.ONF. ~PARCEL 3) .
R~QUkS'I'ED CLASSIFTCATION: PARCEL 3 ONLY - R-3, MULTiPLE-FRidI"X RESIDE2iTIAL, ZONE.
REQUESTED VARI.'~NCE: WAIVER OF MA.'IMUM BUILDIrIG HEIGHT WTTHIN 150 EEET OF l4N
R~A ZONE TO ~!tECT A 33-LiNIT APARI'MENT COMPL~X ON PARC~LS
l, 2, ANU 3.
Subject petitions were continued from ~`~~ meeting of Uecember 27, 1972, at the
reque~t of the pe~titioner.
Six persons i.ndicated their presence fn oppoaitinn.
Zoning Supervlaor Clnarles P.oberts zeviowed the locat.ior~ of ~ub;~ect property,
usc,a astnblished in cleae proximity, previcus zoning action on the property,
and the proposal to establiah a 33•-unit, one and ~wo-sroz'y apartmc~r.t c~mplex
oa both ~ortion~s of the property, while reclassifyinq or.e ~+orki~n to the R-3
Zone sinca th~ othQZ portion already t~ad a resulutioa- of intent.to R-3~ tha•t
pl.an~ indice-4:ad the front portion of the uuil~inqa were comprised of one-story
unit+~ within 150 fatlt of the ainqle-~na~ily homes t~ the east acru~e Velare
Street- with two-etory prop~a~d beyond tha 150 ~eet ~xtenaing westerly and
being Within 25 Eeet of ~he R-A parc~l to the sou*_h approved for church pur-
posee~ that the deneity proposed would be 34 d~ae111ng units ger net acre, or
1299 square teot per dwelling nnit~ that vAh~cular access e~nd parkinq ~er6
prov~.ded by mdana of a 25-foet wide drive adjacent to the Houth property line,
which would be depressesd approximat~ell 4 feet below grade ko provids entry to
semi-subterranean pazking lcrcated under the living unita an~ extending lnto a
25-foot wide, drive at the rear ot the progerty, with e 54-foot dlaanater turning
~
~
~
raINU'PF.S, C[7't PLANNIN~ CUM~~i1 ~~I~~N, .7nnuary 22, ].973 '13-3G
kL~LA'~;~IFICATIO~i~NO. 72_73-28^AiVD VARIANCEANO. 2A62 (~.;oa•.:inued)
redlur~ c~t. the ~.nt.~re~cC.lon of thd two cirivest t+nd the~~ a kotal o° 5l) pei'kiny
epar..es was inc3i~~atecl on tho plar.u whlch met mi-~imum reyuirements - 3~ cRrpurte
waro pzo(~used w.ith 27 t)tj~.Ok' the unite~ anll G in a QaCr~ch~d building at tha
aonkhwest r_orncir. of the pruk~axty, while 17 G~P.17 atalla woro proponeA ec t;ho
r~ar of thc nito.
Mr. i~~~ ~::, in r~viPwl.ny tho e~valuation, atated that tho General ~1Rn indica~t~sd
low•-modium densiCy reaidential lend ueee Lur this area, t~~Wavor, ath~r ~x'oper-
t~x in t;he imme~'iate vir.inity hnd been ap~~roved Yor R-3 xonlnq, therefo~Q~ tY~e
re~u~etAd zoning wuuld appenr to be anproari.aker and Chn~. a further consic~ern-
t.i~n for the C~mmisdion t~ould bp ttia tt~r~~ing radiua et the reer of the sit.e
whdre~in tha petiticna.r. :ndicated a 54-foat turtzin~~ r:adiua wao proposed, whi.ch
was conaiderad .,.nad•aquate xo:- turning mar.euvar~ ~f emeryency ~xnd ~orvice I
vr3hic.les by tha interdeparkmential. Comm±tCoe, tt~~r~foXe, the C~mmier:l.on might
wi.sia to re~~uire a lnryer aree, c~uah as +a '16-fac~t turninq radlue that had beei-
ro~uired in px~vi.ous nc~ionn.
Comcniseloner R~wlund stated that aince the i.t~m before. the Comnist~i.an us it
portained ~o ths +~axi.ancp ha~ b~en yrr~nted in th~ past in thie immediete
wicinity, he would sugqet~t that the applicant confine ,~is remarks to tho ar..;an
of cuncFrn exprosaed by ataff in ozdex to aave time.
Chairman Seymour noted that there aer.e a rtumber o£ tieighbors preaent who may
r.ot have ha~: an c~pportunity to aee lhe plan~ pzi~r to tho t-anring ~nd should
bp affarded time l•o review these ~Zans.
Mr. Willia.m Phelpa, 1095 North Maira Street, Orange, agent for the pf.tl~ioner,
uppeared Uefore the Commiasian ana atak~d thez~e appeared to be an t~rror in the
reneon Eor the rec~uest £or. contir~uance to L•hie meeting, air-ce he had reyuasted
Gont.inuance bocauae tla understooc~ thst the Gammission was to have a work seasion
which would possibly clarify the tui~n-around area since he wou.ld then be able t~
c~ame back with a posaibl.e revisiont that th~ Fire Department had informed him
that a 54-£aot diameter turning radiua was aclequat~ r the~r equipment and
had sa informed the Commis~ion, howevor, Ataff apt .d. t.o hav~e a different
opinioni that they could provide a 65-foot LurnMai~u~d since the trash xrea~
Nere P~.exible an3 mavtsbles that trash tz•ucks 9erving the adjacerzt property
appearea to have a very easy time, but the s~anita.tion company stated thP dif.fi-
cul.tv came with different typea of vehicles anr3 differe~t types of dri~era~ that
the Anaheim Dtunicipal Code ~+resently raquired only a S4-fo~t wide turning radius,
cherePore, it waQ diffi.cult for him to understand why there appear~d to be this
concern, an3 until the standar~is v~ere changed, he could not see wl~y a gxeater
kurning radi~s st~ould be pravided; that they could pi•ovide tra~h compactors
which would alleviate the ~rast~ Pzohlem, but it appeared that the Sanitr.tion
Division did r-~k fe~l the~e ccap~ctors Nere adequate; that trash pick°up could
be provided at the front property line, which was also a solution; that he wauld
1:Lke the Commission to re~study the turn-around areas grevalant in the area;
and that if this increase in turn-ar.ound were required by Public: Works, wliat
would happen to a 100-foot l.ct for turn-ar~und.
Mr. PYie],ps fuzther noted ~hat he dPSigned qiiite a number of ~he €aoilities in
itiverside where they zequired snte111te trash pick-up becauxe thoy wuutd not
permit thc~:Lr large tr~sh trucka onto ~rivate pxoperty, and the satellite pick-
ups coulii pick up two tzash receptacles, bringing ~.hem to the trasYl :.rucY. dump
bucket standinq at street side, therefore, one could use as lazge a pioce nf
L-.•ash pick~up vEhlcle as tt~ey wanted. In e~ddition, they were unaware oF Che
fact that the cen~ar gortion of the property was not zar.ed R-3, and the entire
project had been deaigned long befor.e this wa~ ~isooveredJ and that he would
raquc~st that a condi~ion be a~tached ta the appr.avaZ that the tr~sh truck need
not go to the z'eaz for pick-up, but the tre~eh wo ld be delivered at tho front.
Commissio~er Rowland inquired wheth~r Mz. Phelps planned to rNVise the ~lane to
indic.ate where the t~:ash pi.:k~up area would bo placed so tY~at the trucks would
not have to enter the premisPb, und it was so ati.pulated.
Mr. Ralph :.ew~.e, 702 Suuth Velare Strest, appeared before the Commiasion in
oppaaition and atated thst all residents in the single~fan~lly tract were
concerned about the incr.ease in trafEic 1Erom additional Apartments on tha
e*.reett that it was noa di.Pficult to get out of one'e own driveway becauae
~
~
~
MINU'CF.;, c~I~`X PLANNZNG COMM1SSIC)N, Janu+iry 21, 197:3 73-37
I2ECI.ASSI1'IC:A'1'ION NO. 72-"1~-28 ANU y1~RTANC~ NU. 2d62 (C~•~ntinuad)
it was c~ften hlockdcl with ~arked vohicles~ end Ct~at ho l~ed a lot.ter Cor th~
~;ommiae.ion fr~m tha pr.iricl{~el of the- N~attio Lou :;axfro~ 1 Sciiool expr~oeir-g
cc~ncer.n abou~ the propoeed upertmant ctnvolopment and ataL•ementa ot tho impa~~t
aCudy for eu lect propa.rty.
~l~h~ C'ommi.a~fon inc,tuizPd aR to aherp the ~~~hicloa ~:am~ frum - were~ t.hoy from
th0 apartmonte or. the x~Ri.dente in the ainglo-family homeni w'~Ar.eu~an Mr. I.ewis
praA~nted phorogr.aphe oP. the p+arking :~lr~ny beth sidey oY Velaro Sk~c~et wt~ichhe
had tak5n ~usc r.t-nr. mornin•~, aotinq thnt in th~ A~~eni;~c; re$ider~Gs ~P Che ~p~szt-
menta par.kc~d tha.ir cara ~~~ bc~th sid~e o~ the yt~.raoc an ~~ven in front of the
ai: yle-fnm.i.ly r.ea~.dente' clriv~w~-ys, L•herefora, he fc~li that•. L•hd pdrking re~uizod
for npartttienta wae inadaqurita ae all. o~ th~~o ca.r~ nad l•o be parkod on th~a
str.eot.
C:~airman Seymo~lr notQd, i.n .renronse t~ the concern e~cpr.Qened by the princi;~+il
oP Mattie Lou Maxwell ~~hoo: regarding the impnc:.,reporC, that the peti.tiioc~er
had f.iled a r.eq~:~sat for Axemptlan fr.om :11ing an envi.rottm~rttg~ impact regort,
ana that the ~nv~.r.onmental Impac:t Ftepnrt Rev'_ew Comt~iCtoe rdviewed these
raque~t~s for ~xemptian to dc~tar~-ino if there k~~ ~ any si~nificdnt environment•al
impact. i'ti~y llad rocommend~d that the Plnnnir.g Comniissxc~n recomme~nd to hh~
City Counci'. th.at ~xempt:ion declnrat~.on stvtus be granL-uc3.
Ch~irman Seyenour further noted th+~ti it appeared the petitioner ha~i b~en operat-
in~~ a lum~er sr~~raqe ynrd for at ]east a yE:ar on a p~rtian of c~ubject ~roperty.
Commisaioner Gauer inquirPd of Mr. ~ewie whether ha had ~nvestiynt4d to aee if
ttxe a~artme:~t r.esidents we.ra using their garagey for pdrking or atorage or
other usE~r whereu~2on Mr. Lew~s atAted t.I1AC ~ome of the apartment reaidet2te
had ga~•ages but ciid not use tr~eir ~.seign~~d spaces, and mo~t of the reRidenta
of each apartment 2iad two c~r thre~ caYS~ and ~.laen inquired what tkie Code required
as t.o sY.andardg ::or parl~ing.
Chairman Seymo~ir. aoted th~t *_he Anaheim Municipal Code requirc~d l~i parking
spaces per. apartment un~t.
Dr. ~7ezry GL'OSS}~dY'(~i 648 South VF]are Street appeared before the Cummlesion
an opposition and staGed that his home was across the street f.rom t•he propoge~
developmeiit1 that he also reprenente•i other property ownors in the einqle-
fa.mily tract, ~n.1 he wishec~. to ec ncur with ata•temc~nts mads by Mr. Lewis reg~rd-
ing parking, and in a8dition, there ap~saared to be quite a btt ofc tzaff~c
confus~.on wlth cara parked on bo*.h sides nf the street, which made it: extremely
d~fficult to pull out of oiie's own drivewayt that they atso found ~hat the type
of. in~ividu:sl renting theso units did not have the eame senae ~f responsibility
that singl.e~family hom~owners had bec:aur~e triey taund trasl~ and other ur~sar~itary
situations on the sL•reett that the Commissicn wae well aware there were other
apartm~nt~, in the area, t~nd thi~ had aeen the rasiden~s' expcrience fs•om the~e
apartment ux~itai and that this type of building tencled to lower the prorerty
value~ of ~he si.ngle-family hnmes, sin::e mo5t of tha residents there had *_heir
li.fe savingr. inv:~sted in thRir homes.
IHrs. Josephine Moretti, 250a Weat Key~s Lane, appeared befor~ the Commiseion in
opp~sition and ~t.ated that the City R1hQUld be prott: ctir-q ttxe andividu.al rigl-ta
of people who were the majoxity of the sinqle-fanily homeownerz~ in the urea~
~chat the mnn ~aho purchased subject property made a bad businese judqmont becnuse
he w~uld loae monay only, however, the residents of L•he area would ~e 'oaing
~their naturaZ rightsT that even withou: having seen th~ plane ae to the manner
i.n which traff.ic conflicts wPre propoaed to be reaolved• with the exiatircg
apartment on~atreet parkinq on both gid~u of t`le ytreet, togsthex with the F,act
ther~ kere no sidewalke for thA childrea, th~s w~u1d mean a hazar9oue traffic:
problem with children walking in the atreet, coming from beCwAen p~rked vahicles~
that tk~~a exl.stinq development took away fzom tlte dignity o~f the aingle-fart:ily
character of the area~ and that sh~ would urgp ~hr City to take inka consiclera~-
tian the rights of the indivi.dual proper~y owner in tha ct:.y, and particularly
1n this arAZa•
Mr. Phelpa, in rebuttal, noted that having denigne,~i moet of the apar*_mente in
this genexal arc~^, he found it ~]if~icult to jus~i.~y t5e complafiit8 by Lhe
rorid~r~ts thnt the apaztmenCe in the axee caiased all of the traftiv problPms~
C~
C~
MINU'tt:S, C1TY nLANNJNG COMMISSI.ON, Jsnunry 27., 1S'73 ~-~' ~~3
FECI~ASS:[FICA'fiC.~N N~~. _72-'1.~-28._ANU VARIANCI~: NC1. ?.462 (CunCitiuRd)
that he Pelt. tt-at tl~u R-.l h~m~ownern wore juet an roaponsiblc for thie ~arking
pro~lomi tF-at. all of hia propoeale met the City'~ roc;uirementa for ~ar;cing~
thet .1.t w~~~ unPair for nny~aiae pur.;~haain~ t.hie prn~~c~rty ~i~t to bn abl.e tc~ dev~lap
the p~ ~~)~ert.y fur !j-J uece~ that t.he w.lc~th uf f:ho et.r~at wad a~dqunte anQ met~.
Lhc~ Cir.y E:ngin~e r's crit:~ria !ar utreet o idr.hi that Wdbst~r Strset frtrthar. to
Cho eaet wc~a narr~~wor, ~nd the somo t•.yp~ ~,E unita had boon developed th~ere, ar~'t
ther~ np~~nreCl T.O bo no probl~m with th~ f.loYi oi' t:xuCfici and thxt hn hnd boon on
' Arc~ Stroet: muny timee r~h.ilo he waR planning thi9 pro~oeed dovelapmenC ai~d
or fo~~nd th~~ tr.eP.fic or. ~azking eituat~ ~n +~ di ir ~.cult ana.
l:heli~matt Saymnur thon preaontod tha pici:uree ~ubmittec: by Mr. Lt+wis to M~ . Ph~alpn
and inquired whet.h~r. h~~ t`Qlt th~ r.are parkAd on the 9tr.c+ec wore fram Che eparC-
menta or from the sinq.le-Ynm~ly homr~, ~ r~'~ot~ur~on Mr. I~helpe etnto~ that 1 t wou?.~
~ppear CheAS vc:nicleg dld noG c^.,._ frarn ~•hc+ a~r~rtmer+te l3ut Prom tha ehurch
F cho~l loc ~t•ed it Orange nnd Velar.e St~.reet, and thc+n r~viawed tho oktier. pictures
eubmittyd, notfny iL• wen hie orin!.un thrtt ell of those cnra were t~nt 4rom L•ho
dpnrtmant compl.axee in th.ie ~arc~a.
Mr.~ ~he.lE» th~n atatad he c~uld no~ unc:ereCand why thi.r~ should be a major iusue
~iinc~ r.ht~ wiclth of thd at.reet mot. L'ity :~tandardr~ thexi in roopunse tu question-
ing by ~hairman Seymo~~r, n~ted that it was h3.e opin.ion that ~he vehiclag pnrked
or~ the gt.r~et did not con~~c L:~om th~~ npartmenta.
Mr. Phel~s £urther noterd th+at tho stack
collected for the proposea developmenG~
gtatecl t}~at the proporty uwner had beon
property £o•: over a yoar.
of ] umber on s~ib ject propert, was baing
whereupan somc~~~na from *.he nudiencn
haulinq lumh~:r to and from aubject
Mr. Phelpa, iri conclusian, atated t-e c~+.c~ not feel that th~ oppositlan of cara
rnrkinr~ on the strPet would l~ave any bearfng on the propased developmgntr that
+'e propase~ plans met all of tho requtre~men~s of the City of Annh3lmy nn~ that
th~~ :~ropos~d development would nat be •3etr~mantal to the trea becauee they had
de~elop~d similar proje;L-4 adjacc~nt t~~ s,ingl.e-family r.eaidential uee.
TliE HEAF.IiJG WAS CLOSEU.
Mr. Phelps, in response to Commission ~uestionin~, st:ated th~t the 11,~ber
storaqe on subject property wae thex6 bec:ause t.he petittone= wafl a cantractor
and uc~ed this as his stuck pile for the F~rapoPed development~ tl~at whan they
~irst atarted designir.g on the pr~pex'ty, i.t~ was founc~ there was a lot hetween
the t~o aite9, and the owner o_ oaid lo;. asked that her pr~perty br i~icluded
in tt-e proposed dove].opment.
7'hn Commis~fon then anquir~~d whether t.he lumber would be removed .if subje~:t
peti..ion were approvedJ whereupon Mr. Phelps stared that ~he own~r of tne
~umL• er lived on Wf'^ Y.er ~tr set where he had sereral oro jecta he wae constructix~g.
The Cammi..asi.on then inqi+ired how lorag Mz. We~seln hud been etoring lumber, ~inc:e
Mr. Phelps appeared to hrvQ knowledqa of itJ wnPrevFcn Mx. Phelps r~tnted N.r.
Wea9e).t: ha3 uaed lumber. from thia atoraqF ar.ea when hF wa~ conatructing apart-•
mentts on WehstPr Street.
~ort~mias:ioae•r Kaywc a inqulrra wheth~r Mr. Phelp_ £el~ the~e were no traffic
problens on Webgt.er Street, to ~+hich Mr. Phelps ;-eplied cegatlvely.
Comniasianer Kaywood then noted she had driven up and dow~i ::abst~ex :.trcet
wlten ahu viaited a friend livin~ in ono af the apartmenta on eatd stt~eet, And
parkii~q ~*ns almoat impossibla, and one oer~on she knew moved from that A:reet
becauae o£ t.he traffic problem, h~wever, this was possihle with renti.ng an
apa~rtment, but was moat di~fi.r.ult i~ ane owned his a~+r. home, auah ae the
reeidQnte on Vel.nz•e Street.
C~mmiebioner Gauer atat~ed that it would a~pear subject property w1o a lui'~ar
yard e-nd au~geated that atafP investigate thie to doterm3ne i! it wa~ +~ non-
cantarminy use.
~R°
~ ~
!yII.NU':'E.+~ CIxY k'1~J1,NN1N(~ COMMLSSTUN, Januery 22, ].973 ~~'"3~
(tECL~AS3IFICA'PION _NU. 'I'2-73~ 28 ANU VARIANCF._Nci,_?.4GL (~c,nt.inu~d)
Mr. Ph<slpn not-od thst WAbnrez StrenC
va'lu~ ln iontel Por ev+sry u~ttr ther_
vac~nciue ~hc~ro, however, h~ hnd boa
the pe~sr, yenz and hnd naver aec+n thu
nor he~d ho eeen any parkiny prrbl~am,
si.nco one pcsreon ~-ould feeL ~.~°o cAr.a
t4n ~'dY9 wor.e too meny.
wen w m~edium-~rnsity ar«~a r.nd had e hl,yh
ha doubt~~d i.f there wero ~norc~ thnn two
n in that etroet two hiindr~d t1mQa durinq
etroot with a continuouj Lruffic ilow,
but tt~ak wou1Q be haw c~ne 1.ntorproted it
pa.kmd wae t:oo ~oucb, while }:~~ did not f~el
Commiseiuncer Kaywc~od notod :ih~ had viei*ad :-n1arA ,°.treut on SUn~9ay nnd l~ed
cour.ted 35 carb pxrked thoro, and r.r~ie ++as af. nUout +3:OG p.m. whon no Sunday
school wue in aeaeion~ that ahe aleo hed drivon thro~~~l~ the c~partmant complox
parki.nq ar.ea ~n lwa d.{.Pf.erent ocoa.Aiona r-nd foun:i v~ry fnw carA parked inatao
the garngon, howaver., cn ~und~y tha gardyee wero fillad, but, thc~ro appeared
to be morE~ carr~ thr~n epacc~a for. p+~rki.ng, end tho caLS w~La parked bur.ipAr~k~~-
bumpor.
C;huirn,~~n Scymour. nated it ull of theso fz~c`.s were tr.uw, then c~ith~r the CiCy
iiad bad y.i.t.a devolopment ntnndr.rd9 for ~arl:ing or. Ch~ pr.ojFCt. w~e poorly ~31d
out since t;he tenanto wera -iot making Lhe apartment parkir,g availnble~ to tYiem-~
aelvea bacauso a].ar~7e number o!' thn automobile~ app~srpd to ba parke~l out on
tho str0at - either.• akandard~ of the C~.ty were wrong or ttie projoct was badly
dealgned.
Chairtasn Seymour of.for.od a mctton to r~open the hearing and uuntinua conaidera-
C.ion of Petitiona fvr R~c~ aRaif:lr.atic~n No. 72-73-28 and Varia:~co yo. 2062 to
the meeting oE Fabruary 5, 1973, ~o a].law timQ for ti im to peraonAJ.ly vieit ~h ~
area to aee Mhether tllaxe was a parking problem, because if therG was a parking
proble[r., aither the City's :~ite dev lopment standa•rds for parkinq wer.e i.ndde--
quate or dQVOlopment plana being preaentecl were not deaiyned praperly for the
ar.ea, even though the petitioner was prov•lding ~arki.nc~ in accordancc: witF~ Code,
the City may be permitting the develupez to create a baci environment for the
area, necesnitatxng t.he overfl.ow parking of a~artmenk unita to ~~ae public streets:
ar becauye par.king was not eac~i'.y acoasaibZe 'co tenants of the ap+-rtments.
Commis~lonEr. Farano second~d the motioli. MOTIOIV CARRZED.
Commissianer Fara~io n~teci he would like to advise the appositi.on that the area
had been designatsd for mult.ip].e-iamily reei.dc~ntial uae, and perhap~ khe
Commiaeion would find oomflthiny wronq in that the wrong kind of mu.~tiple-family
re~~.G~entisl ~:YplOplROat wa= b~ing per:aitt~a. .
Co~ai~~ion~r 1Kt~ywood no*_ed th+~t tti~era wezs 3 vide doubl~ poete in th• carports in
the existing apartment development, one at. the entrance ~nd one ~nidr+ay, Nhich
could inter.ipre with opening the car. docr , She could no°~ ~:ark her car therP be-
cause only a very small car could enter t~e carport without i qreat deal maneL~~er-
ing. Therefore, if some attem~i~: were mac.e t~ d~sign the park;.ng epaces wider ao
pe~pl• eould qain esaier accoap, thay wa~ild u~e ti~e ~xirting FMr.kin~.
~Cossmis~ionsr Faarana iuquir~d vrhat ~he Planninq ~^.o~eaiiomion planned to do e~iaut
the etorege of lumberr wh~reupon Dep~ity City Attorney Frank Lowry noted th.is
~ould Le a legal mahter, and the owner would be ~ub~ect. t~ requiremFnts set
forth in the Code.
Mr. ~hPlpa then gti~.ulated to thr. Commissi~n tiiat the lumber would be removecl
frem tt~e premiaes by the next Planning Commi.eeion meeting.
ENVIRONMENTAL xMPACT - PUBLIC HEARING. f'J.~YJ A. BLOW~R, 1~25 East Edfngez,
REPORT N0. 81 Santn Ana, Ca. 927,r,5, ~nd FDGAR E. PANI~EY, 320 West
Main Street~ Tustln, Ca. 92680, Ownerat DONALD W. BOYLES,
CONDITIONAL USE 1571 Weat Katslla Avenve, Anahel.it~, Ca. 92802, Agant~
PERMIT N0. 1369 roqueating permission to ~;STABLISH A BUS STQRA,GE, Ml iN-
(I~EADVERTISED) TENAI~CE. AND REk~AIR ?~ACILITY WITH WFIIVER OF 12EQUIRFD
ENCT~GSUP.E OF OU'.CDC~OR USES on property descri}~ed as : Ar.
irreqularly-shaped par~el of land conaieti•ia of approxi-
mately 6.87 acras having a frontage of approx~.mate'ly 258 feet on the north
oi~n of Cerritos Avenue, havir~q a maximum ~iepth nt a~;proximatoly '.200 feet, end
bRing located agprcximately 45 leet west uf tho centerline of Lewis Stree*..
Propert5• presently claaeitied M-1, LSGHT INDUSTRIAL, ZONE.
.ao one appedred in opoueition.
~ ~
MINUTh'S~ CITY PI,ANNING CqMMtSSTnN, .Ta,nuar.y 22, 1973 •1~'Qr~
~N~7i'tONMGNT7IJ~ I"1FACT RRPOR7` NO. Nl AND C(.1NDI'I'IONA1a USI: PI;RMIT N0. 13fi9
( RE ~ J V~ RT I~~ D ( C o n t 1. n u a d 1. ~__ _.__ ___,,_,M, ,_.r.. __....~ _... .--~-.
Althuuyh tha Report to Ciie Cammie~i.on war not roaQ At tho publia hc~aYing, iC ie~
r~in-rre~ to nnd madra u pnrt of tl~e mi»uto~.
Mr. Dor~ BoyleA, ].571 Woet KRLrI la A~~:..~~~ , aqant for. tho patitionar, i.nHi cnte~c~
hl.R ~~resesncu to a~rawer. auoetione .
The Commisei~n inquir9d ac~ to the number o! bueae thet Hould bo r~ervicad i~t:
titie fncilityi whereuQon Mr., Hoy10e str~tod tt-ey tia3 40 bueos at the pYeeank
time, howev~r, not al.l c.oach~ woulc~ e on tt~e premir~ep at one tim3r tiiat thay
aer.voci Paendena~, Lc+n~_~ [iaauh, r;Ar~c'~~os~O~rige~l'n Internatirnal .~ir~ortp end Chat
tlio mai~tenen~e facili.tie• ae well dA ttio qonezal oi~ioae~ af tt~A c~mpany would
b~ lor.nted on eut-,ject property.
THF. HEAI~[NC WAS GLUSN:Q.
Comminsi.c~nor R~wtand inquir~d whether the patitioner had recoivsd a Raport to
the Commfesi.on an~l if' so~ clid he cun~ur with the recommendmtions ma<'' ~ by staPt.
Mr. boyles replied that he wauldl eonr,~~c, a~d nfter having hnd a mec~ting vr.lth
the offiaers of the campany yesterday, it wa~s detormined that tho employeee'
parking acceea co~ild be reloce~ted from Cerritoe~ Avanae to Ldwie Stre~+ti althaugh
h~ did not have written apprvv~.l of tho r.~,cammendatton of the Ata:f1' r~gard~.ny
rel.ocatlon, t~~ would so ~stipuleta.
peputy City Attorney Frank Lowry advie ,d tho Commiasion that as a reault of
rECent a2~anyes to the Sdnate bi.7.1, the Comniesion did not hAVe to take formel
action by resolution for an En,~•ironmental Impact Report, but m~re~y had to
notify the (:ity Council of the Planni.ng (;~mmise:. : action.
Cou~mieaioner F wland offerod a moCion, seconciod by Commis~ione~: i•.aywood and
MOTION CRRRIEU, to find and determine that due to Lhe nature of the requeat
macie under Conditi.onal Use Parmit No. 1369, the impact upon the envizonment
w~ald nat be signif.lcant and that tho Anah~eim~ Planninu Commiasion recommencle
to the Anaheim City ~~uuncil that Envirunm9nt:a1 IOIE7dCt t•part t~o. 81 be adoptea
as the Council's Environmental 7mpacY. Statement.
Commisei.oner Gauer offered R~solution No. PC73••l9 end moved for its p~seage
and adoption to grRnt Petition for Condit3.ona1 Us~ PermiY. No. 1369, sub ject
to stipulai:ion by the agent for the pet.itioner that th4 inyres~-egresr~ proposed
ta the empluyee parking area would be relocatod from Cerrito$ Av~nue to Lewis
5treet, and subject tc conditions. (See Resolut;ion Hoo}.)
Gn roll call the forega..nq resolution was p~+~s~d by tte, f~llowing vote:
AYES: COME'IISSION~aZS: Allred, Farano, Gauer, Ka}•wood, Rowland, Scy-c~ur.
NOFS ; COMMISSIONFRS ~ N~~ne .
AASENT: COMMISSIONL'RS: Herbst.
AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18, -• Chaizman ~ey~aour noted tY~at Commissioner Herbst would
ANAHE2h~ N.'UNxCIPAL COLiE be pi a~sent l~ter +~t thA heariny, and, therefore, thm
'"'- ~ progoc~ed Amendm~at tc 'ritle 13 would be deferred u~til
later in L•he mdet, ng.
CONDITLONAL USE ~ PUBLIC H~ARING. SANDMRN MOTEL5, INC. , Attention of Ray
PERMIT N0. ].370 Chermak, 2082 Busine~s Center Dr~lye, No. 22:3, Irvine, Ca.
'~ 92664j requeatl~ng pezmiaeion to ESTABLISH A I~ULLY ENCLOS~n
RESTAURF.N~ ~iv AN M-1, LIGHT INAUSTRtAL, 20NE ~in propert~
described asi A rectangularly-sh+~pod p$rca= of land conaiatin~ of approxime+tc~y
.5 Acrea h~vinq a f.rontage of approximately 16U feet on the soutts ~ide ot
1Catella Avenue, hz+•sinq a maxi:aum depth ot appraximately 13U leet and being
located approximately 260 fe~t west of. tho cenkerline oi state ~oYleqe Boulevar~.
P.~oparty presently clas9lfie~ M-~., LIGHZ• INDUS"_'°.IAL, 20NL'.
No one anpeured in opposition.
~
~
73-41
M'INUT~S, ~ZTY T2I.ANNZNG COM'~T.SSION, Janua~ry 27., 1973
CrNDITIONAL U5E PLRMiT t~0_ 1370 (Continued)
Alkh~~ugh rhe Roport to thc Commi~uion wao ~~ak read ek Che puhllc hnariny ,1.C S.o
roterrdd to and n~ade R p+~..••'h~ ~~ the minutcs,.
Mr. Ray Chermek, 2002 Hucineos Center Uriva, Trvine, ropres~~itii~y thz owr~c+r,
epE~oared befaro the CommieAiun and cammanxad r~per.din~ Finciing No. 13 of thR
itopurt to t.he Comm~.uainn regercYing traAh pick•~up hondling, and ateetuc9 th~t Chey
wRrr aurrently neqotinting with Cl~e AtlAntic RiohPiQld Cam~rany for an nccaas
eqroemant acrooe tlia ~~er.vicc+ etar,i.on property ta the eawr to allow trdch plck-
up t:~i..:ke to nxit tn 5tr,tte C~llaqo Houlevard or Kntol.l~t Avenue, ~horoP.ore, ti~ia
wou3.d r~alve L•hi.e corcuzn preeented by etafP, and alChough thie ~aa preBQntly
only a varbal egroement, he w~~ulc~ etipulath to proviAing thia einae L•hero wae
~vnt tha md:.ter oP the Atlenti.c RichPiold Compeny atkorr~eys wur.king out L•ho
~A11CJl1AC,~O of the egreemenk bPCauae a portlon o! t7~e ws11 woatd hnt~e to bo ramove~i
t.o px'~vide thia accesa.
TNE IIEARZI~G W~.S CI,OSE~.
Mr. C:hermak, in roAponae t~ Comn~ioeicn queetl.on:.r~q, eta::ed that l-ho proposed
reel++urant M~ou~d bp a new chgin fr~m 9acremento known ae "Fikzyor.ald' o" ,~nd
thAy did not plen to aell l.iquor in this ~ecility.
Commiseioner Rawlend offered a motion, eecondad Y~y Commiee ionar xaywo~d and
WOTION CARRI~D, Ct~at tho PlAr.ning CommieAion in connection with nxemptian
d~elara-tl.on etatuo reciue9t ~'_~~da and duL•erminc+s that the prapoeal woul.d have
no p~.gnificant environmantal impgc~. and, thereforo, recommends to t.lie Ci~y
Coun~.i1 that nn ~:nvironmenta]. Impact 5t~temenk wa~ necessary.
Comn,i~sioner I:owland offer.ed Reaolution N~. 9C7~-19 and mav~d for its ~aesage
and adoptior. to qr.ant Fatiti~on for C.or.ditional Usa Permit~ No. 13'10 subject to
c~nditi~ne, and th~ stipulation by the petitioner that an accees aqrePm~nt ecroe~
khe e~erv.ice etation pro~erty to the ~ast would be °naeh`trucka todnnd~frome
agreement to be racordad in order that acceae for
aubject property c:ould be made over the service at;~ :ion property to the east
or north. (Sea Resolution Rook)
On roll call the foregoiny resol.utiun ~.var~ passed by the following vote:
AYESs COMMISSIUNERS: Allred, Farnnoe Gauer, Kaywood, Rowlanc~, Seymour.
NOfiS : CUMMISSIOtiE;RS: None .
ABSENT~ COMMISSION~RS: F:erbst.
VAP.IANCE NO. 2469 - PUBLIC HEARING. TITLE INSURANCF. AND TRUST COMPANY, Trustee
of t}~e Jahn D. Ardiaz Tastamentary Truat, Atten~ion of R. ~:e
Wallman, ~zust Officer, ?. 0. Box 88, 5anta Ana, C~. ry27~2i
(:ALVIN L. PEBLEY, 609 Tudar Plac:e, ~lnaheim, Ca. 920Q1~ PARKS PROPERT~ES, INC.,
Attention Of G. Birk Leflex, ~975 Huntingron Drive, San Marino, Ca. 91108~ and
L. GRANT ROBINSON, 'Prustee, 2975 Huntfnyton Drivea, 9nn Merino, Cu. 91108, O~rners~
PBR COMPANY, ~t.tention of Ho~rar~' J. Pendleton, :02~ Eaet Vermont Avenue, AnahAim,
Ca. 92805, Agbnti requesting FTAIVER UF (A) PEF.MITTED OUTT"~OR USES, (B) AEQUIRED
ENCLOSURB OF AN OUTDOQR U3F, AND (C) MINIMt1M NUMBER OF PARKING SPACFS TO PERMIT
OUTDOOYt FAElRICA'.'ION 71ND ASSEMBLY OF STG~JS on property descr.ibel ao: An irrequ-
larly~ehaped par:el o~ land conaisting of approximately 4.9 a~ ~es having a
frontage of appr~ xima : aly 700 feet on the south ei.de o! Vsrmon _ Avenue, heving
u maximum deptYi . F epproximxtely 490 feet an9 baing 7•oc~.te3 at the aouthkreat
caxner o~ VermonC Avenue and Ersat 3txeet. Property presently claseified M-1,
LIGH'P INDUS^`RZAY,, ZONE.
One p~raon india~.ted hie presen~e in appoeition.
2oni~g Sup~rvie:,r Charlea Rober*.s ravievred the 1ocA~l.on of. aubjer,t pcoperty, uoo~
eeta L~shed in close pzoximity, previoua sor-ing mr.tion on the properL•y ira wY~ieh
permis_t~n tio establish an exietinq ~iqn aesemblinq plant +~nd atorage yarci with
outdoor. ~a~k+ricat'on and assembly as d conforming uee in the M-1 ~one Nas qranCed
and aheze 55 parkinq spaces were locatud on th• •outh ~ide +~f Lncy Stre+et and
o:~ the north snd eidea o: Arlee Placej that a new induatrie,l bulldiny; Na~ sub-
e~q~ently con~*.ructmd on the Vermont Atrenue lrontaqe in i.972 ae pdrt of Lhe
indsstrl.al tira~ct, that the a ite plan submiCt~d in aon junction With build! ng
~ ~
MINUTM5, CI'fY YGANNING CO~lMI9~I0[v, ;Jonuary 22, 1973 73-42
'JAR:[ANCF. N0. 2469 (Cont.~ nued)
appraval fur thia buil8iny indi.cnCed a r~erkir~q sren of ].OG apacr~r~ which ~rould
be px'ov1.rlRd on tlic+ f't'ont ~or.tion o~ thc~ site, with Hd~d parkinq in~ludi.ng thode
in~ezi.~r parkir-g apRCOS ae indicated on tho pl~+~,a Appr~-vad under Conditionnl.
Ue~e PcrmiC No. 7A2 (55 e~ar.oa) .
Mr. Rol~~rte notE~d thare wo41d be no phy~~ical develupm~nt cheng~, propoc~ecl fn
conj~in~.tiu-~ wi.~h th,to application c~inue Che petit.i.~ner'~ rdquea* wan edecantial:y
e rectuest t.o pex.•mi,t o~utdo~r fnbx.tcac.io~i, aeeembl.y and et.ornqe of a~.gne i.n araae
deaignnted for perkiug, a~e well ae thoee pe~zmitte8 uncler eho origLn+-1 r.onc9lt.ional
uee p~rmit; and of tho 1G1 Apacea appruv~ed under the original conditional UHlD
pc~rmit, ao wnll aA tho new buildi;ig, L-herp wern on1~r 38 eFtces 1SVd~YUb7.3 t~~r
parking whicl~ wero ~o t-+N ea: a~~d w~st uf t~~e new buil8ir~g, while the rerndin-
iny 123 opncea would bg t~a.izc~d for sign manufact~re and storage. In ad~ti~ion,
.., a .... wnnr~xL-
t118 PeCii.iU(19r pta~~u..~ ~w~~ HZ'Ha8 W88C u~ wui.~jaui. ~tUp~l:t~/ ~v.~~r~.~...y
mataly 2 a:.roe an ~hoxt•-kerm rc~ntr~l agreement for uae e:, nn ouL•~oor a~.ozagce
yard aac'. employee and truck parkln~3~ and that tha p~+tikioner indic~ted he would
:~~ubmit ~? ctex• tc cne Plannir-c~ CommiAei.on stat~nq khaC aftex Februer.y 21, 1973,
^,:hi~ a3ditlor.al area wou.ld no longer ba used for etorage oE ai<, ~.
Mr.. Robe.rte, i.n reviHwing the Avaluat.ion, nutad that three field .1 riepectione
were macae ain~e receipt of e~:b;ject petiti.on, duri.ng d3ylight op~rational houre,
~.o determi.n~ the demand for parking in ~ho general. vicin~.ty af eub jpct uaa, e-nd
upon each o~ thoae occasions it was ohserved that na« o~sly wore all on-aite
parking areas almoat totally occupied, but that curb-side epacoa alang both
si~as of Vermont Avunuo, Lacy Street, and Arlee Y1nce wore +~Imo~t virtua].ly
aaturate.i, therefor.e, ~.t would appear that the exiating or~••ait~: parkinq areas
wera inadequate to moet the c'.emanda of omployeort a~nd cuetomere of thc~ ~.nduatrial
fscilitiea in thi9 area.
In cr~nclus~on, Mr. Roberts noted that ttiia eign manufactuzinq concern h~-3
expr,ndad consider~bly bayond the boundaries originally appr.oved undc~r the
pxevious ~o~~ing acti~n, and tho uutdoar atorage aepects of the operation had
draotically encroaahed upon the purki:ig areac~ required under previou~ zoning
actfon as roqui.reA in ~he M-1 Zone; and that in the event this r.eq~teat wa~ not
appzoved, staff would auggost tlie pe•citi.oner be advlse3 that those areas where
aiyn assembly and/~r storage activities had encroached into the required parkinq
areae vaould have t^ be .re--stripod and convested ta parking uee.
Mx. Howard Pendleton Appeared before tha Commiseiun zepresenL•ing the agent
for thA petitianer, noting that he was a PBR aorporate of;Eicer, being the
secretary-treasurer o.E the comganyt that when the variance wa~ filed, their
original rPquQat cvas to waive being required to atzipe r.os parking, convert the
65 spaces on the west, and he was not aware of the park.ing requirements since
Lhe builder of the buildtng gave them the parking requ~zemen*.s after the strua-
ture was buiit.
Mr. Jaines Alderson, 2018 South Luara 5treet, appeared before the Commission in
opp~sition, stat3ng he awned the property at trie northwest cornor af 'Lacy an3
East Street,ai that he haa just driven ~own Lacy Street and the,n back ont4
Vermnnt Avenua end failed to find any parking availnble on the streeti, there-
fore, he vns opposed to wa~ver of the required parking.
Chairman Seymour noted that the Planniny Commietsion had also tried to visit
the areo rsnd weze unable to lind pa.rking, and thie ;aas the reason for the
Commismion azritring late for the public hearinq.
Mr. Aldere~n atated the}~ had been told that the petitioner had plar~ne6 to uae
some o! the required parkinq area fcr atoraqe o~ s~.gr.e, and ha did nor: know
how that could be done ..nless they started pilinq upwards, since their entire
facility Nae now c:ot-erad witl: the siqna~ that parking was a najor problem on
thoae induotriAl atr.eetar and that the purQoee for appoaring was because hie
t~snant, "aak Corparati.on, had adviaed him they were having a difficult time
qatting into their own parking lot.
Mr. Pendleton, in rebuttr-1, noted that aver eince the ~~roperty had bcen
~leveloped for induet.rial pur~oaea in thi~ aroa~ parki~.q d].ong Lacp Street had
always been a prok,lom, and he would venture there wera many uther indus~triea
i,n that area ~rho were using their ~arkiny lots for other than p3rkingt t:~at
~ ~
MJTlU'i'ES, Ci:TY PLANNING C(~MMISL~ ~N, .T~nuary 22, 1973 73"~-~
VAkiAN(:1~ N0. 2~G~ (Cont~nued)
he recog-~i.zod tho wtraet wee ver..y crowded nnd Arleo Plece wes ~le~ c.rowdod !or
a number of yeerdi that they had mado [~rovinior,A !or sdditic>ne] pnrkinq by
acqu~lring ~n A ehort-term rental basia a onA-~+crw p,tace o~ land ~t eha end of
Arleo Place - tlie area ahnre theze wes no f•enciiig~ thaL tt» bul.k of the eigns
atored thore vrdw~ thu rcao~tlt af a chnnye in Numble Oil Compn-~y'n 4ha.nge in their.
eigna to Exxun, which meer~t rebulldiny 2,?86 eigna in a few woeke~, tinwever, it
was hopqd to t~~ve t.1ie Exxon gigne of'f uf th~ grnperty by the li.rat oP MAr.•ch
aince it wae ar-tic,ipated to hnve all oi' thc~ niqnA complated by the end of
~anuary~ howevar, Numblo Oil had not bacn Cakinq the eigna from L•lie pxoperty
whon tha,y weze availabla, crenting ator~~~~e problemai and khat hA coulA no1: tel'1
his emplo}/ees ~ot to pnrk on Lncy Street, however, t~e could tell them that there
would b~ avallt~bla parkinq eo~co on PDTt proper.ty.
CommSesionor Gauer noCed that hc tiad ob~~rvdd conetruation matorial sto~ed on
the property in A manner of disarray, whicn woui~l appear to him that the pati-
t.ton9r wr~s not making vQry good uea ~f ttie apace ~nd could be, takiny up part o!
thc~ roquirod parking, tharefor~, some of that material could br_ .in a traah area.
Mr. P~nclleL•on repli~d tha*. material for aign fabrir.ation was ntored there for
the exterior porti.one of the ~igns.
Commisei~ner Gauer obaerved that u~or~ visitit~q the area, it appeezed tkie eiqn
company wa3 occupying space thnt did not belong to them, and in certain ureaa
there r~Ppearod to be incomplet~ signs s~ored, with materials atAred alongaide,
and perhaps eome af t•his etoraye was tuki.ng up roquired par.kingt whersupon
Mr. Pe~ndleton replied that the ~nstorials on the I,acy Street cul-de-sac were
plAStic siqn taces, and some were reAdy Co be placed on the eigna, whil~ some
of. the ~toraqe was aluminv.m parta of the signo.
Mr. Pe~~cileton, iti responee to qunsti~ning by Commi~tsioner Kay~~ood .regarding the
number og parking ~gsc~v *h~+* would be available where material wa~s prec~ently
being stacked, st•ated there were about 100 spaces having 5 rows with 20 parkinq
spacda pex row.
Mr. Pandleton, jn responee to question;ng hy CommiselonEr Farano r~gardinq the
acre parking aite locatiori and .iumber of trucke that would be parked theze,
sL-ated it was at the end of Arlee PJ.ace, and thore would be 6 trucke for in~tal-
lation of the s1gnA, 2 p~ckup trucka, an3 2 delivery trucks.
Commisa~oner rarano then observed that was quite a number of ~rucks proposed to
be storec3 on one acre, and the parking situstion would not ba resolvedj wher~-
upon Mr. Pendletc,n atai:ed ~hat thc boom trucks were stored inside the fence
while 3elivery trucke were stored outside when they were in town.
Comm~.saioner Farano inquireci aB tu the r~umber of vet-iclee that could be parlced
on a one-ac:rr. site; whereupon Commissioner kawl.and stated tha~ this would depend
upon the shape af the parael, but it coiild range £rom lU0 to 130 automobilAS.
Mr. Roberts noted that atx.ff calculated 350 square feet of land for each space,
which would include driveways and turn-arourid are~s, or uFproxi.mr~tely 124 spaces.
Deputy City Att.orney 'Frank Lowry naCed tlzat as a matter of rQCOrd, ~ny vehicle
paricing pzopasecl on a short-term lease for otf-site Qarkinq would not meet thP
City'~ z'equirements for parkin~j that on-eite parking was conai~ered within 200
feet and must be owned or ded.cated for the ~ntize lifa of the use~ and refer.red
to two Qpecific developments where tt~is was reouired, or~e be±ng the ~ennis
facilit.y on Katella Avenue and a roataura*.t on Horth Beach Boulevard, therefore,
this pr~po3n]. of a ahort-term lAaee £or parking Qurposae d].d not eatiaFy the
City°s parktng requir~,menta.
iHE HEAItlNG WAS CLOS~D.
Comm~.~eiongr Allred inquired whother the agQnt for the petitioner could provido
adequate parking af~er February 21, 1973; whereupon Mr. Pec~dleton stated that
thAy could, although staff stated 196 apacea would be raquixed, and they did
not have tha~ numtser o! employeea on both ehifto to uee all parkinq sQaces aa
~taff indicated.
~ ~
NINU'PES, CITY F~LANNSN~:+ COMM7S5ION, Janu+-ry 22, 1973 ~a-aa
V11kTANCE ti0. 2469 (Continued)
Commiesioner Allrod wae o! tha opiniun that t.he e:lgn cornprny had nu'r.~rown the+ir
preear~t ~acilitioe, en~l at the ratA oP qz•owtt~, furth~r problcrn• could arieot
th~+t ~von attor th~ ~~dti tioner stetdd he c~u1d provide parking after P'ebruary
'~1, somethir~y st~otald bo dona to pYOV~Cqt~ covar.age for L•he Fsbrlc,~ting erea rnther
t:h~+n conetructiny~ compl ~tsly in the opan, ur. perhepe the pe+~itioner ehould f~ln(1
enA{hAr arees where complc~t•a eigna ohould be etoreci.
Mr. Pendleton •tr~tsd that they had aclequate ind~or fncllitie[s, but thc~y hnd zur~
in~ o problem~ of khe cumtamer nuk tnkirig dc~livaxy o~ completad e~qne, ar~d this
wss the reeean for vtorage of eiqnp bahind L•hc fencea end Yhat l•hey wore very
bulky blgno. P'urthermare, Gul~ Gil Comp~ny ha~a not aioNad theix eigng, ar~ we11
ae Union Oil Comoeny.
commisaioner Kdywoad i.nquired whether Mr. Pand].eton wn~a e member. c~ the company
at the time the new building was conatructed bQCauso park~ng for that buitding
wou].d t1AVQ roquirecl 16). apaceA, whi.le the p~titianor Naa providi ng onl.y 38
space~~ whar6upon Mr. Fendlaron stated he was wiL•h tiie c:omparey, however, lie or
hie r.epreaentativ~ dib noh. har~dXe L•he building o: tii~+ r.L•xu~ture either in 1970
or 1972, and he w~ not aware of thF: park.Lng requirement until the ~uildHr ~ub-
mittQd Ch~ figuroa for the required ~arking.
Commisaioner KAywoo3 obaerved th~t Che petitioner was i.n vlolr~tion oP ttzc~
oriqinal conditional uae permit aPprovAd since the reqcir9d parking epr.ces were
nat bej.ng provided, and ~he could not sea why the patiL•ion9r could not set a
higher 3tandardj and L•hak alt7 ~ixgh she liked to see a going buainesH continue,
it should not be at tha Axpen_~ of lack uf parking £or empioyeos or cuAtomers.
Chairman Saymour noted the very intenae use ~f the property and the varisnco
requerat before the Commission, and af+ r what. he had o~s~erveS in an inepection
~f the kroperty, he would have ta r~ftr bsck to what the respansibilitiets c~f the
Planning CommisRion wore ir~ grant:ing a variat~ce because th~ C~mmission must have
yome jastifi ~•ation for the requeated waiver unlesa tha petitioner r.as now b~ i~~.q
deprived of a riyht enjayed by others in this vicinity, :-owever, the peti.ti ~er
w~ul.d have to demon~trat~~ the reason for granting theae waivera of thie outdooz
use and intenae use o~ tt~u property far. exceedinq anythinq the Commissian had
seen in Anaheim.
Mz. ~ ndleton replied that the va.riance was startAd when the new buildinq was
canst ~cted at Vgxmont Avenue and East Street; tha~ they likod what rhey were
doing at this Iocation; that they were not there to work a haL•dship on the City,
and they did not want any favorr~ given thebu, but ttie variance came ub~ut. when
they tried to yet electricity rurned on, at which time he was unaware that the
builder was required to provide parking striping on the we~t side of the build-
ing, Chzrofore, the}~ were zow r~equestzng wa3ver of the striging on the west side
af the new buildings and th~t tt:ey understo~d thgir seRponsibi.lity but wanted
permisyion to waive this requirernent.
Commissioner Farano inquixed whether the agPnt fe.lt this would help becauae he
had looked at thi~ problem for ~lmost a year, at L-he time the lightAr .~oxes were
considered, and subject prop~rty wa3 overflowing; that thi ,'i.d n~t appear to b~
a temnorary problen~, and he, ton, felt the sign company ` d ~utgrown this P
facility sinr.e he di~ not feel the compar.y could satisf_. a~liven amount of
bus~.z~eag in a given amount of land.
Commissioner Gaaer suggested that the sig~i company rent aroraye £ac~lities away
from t.he manLfacturing area.
Commissioner Farano noted that the signa were very bulky and moving ar,d atoring
could be a very expensiva operati,onr whereupon Mr. Pendleton atatod rhe aiqna
were bulk~r but were not ditficult to move with the3.r equipment, but. ~hey would
have to have a very larye storage facility to store theae siqns, but if the
customera wou13 take their aiqns when they wr~re c~mpieted, thir~ atorage problem
would not exiat.
Commissioner Farano then suggested a atorage Pee should be ck-arged if signs were
~ot taken within a speclfie~ time, and then obtain additional acreags far the
storagQ of tho eigna not. picked ug nfter said given time= whereupon Mr. Pendleton
etated they already charged a storage feu.
~, o
MI'ALiTP'S~ CITY PLANNING COMM.ISSION, ,7anuary 22, 1973 73-45
V7IRIANCE NOy24G9 (COntinued)
Ct~nirman ~eymour inquixod aa
thio wnK only a te~nporsx-y ei
d~+cide on aign ahanges, thon
preaently ox3.eted~ wli~zeu~on
nok~ plannirtg ta cli+sny~ thair
let•.
to MZldt gunr.antea tho Cor~mioeinn could tiave tt~at
cuatian - what i! the othar oil compnni.ea aya.in
thie tPmpo.rary situntion aould be Gt~e dAmo ae
Mr. Pendletun eL•e-ted that Shel.1 Oil Compeny wee
eig~ne, howovor, to dar.e the contxau`t had nat been
~ommiesionQr Ksywo~~ noted ti~at when tt-e Cunim~aefor~ tind visitad sub jer.t proporty,
some of ttiA ei.gna wore etack9d up tc~ 12 fee~t hlqh on Vermont Avonua, enr~, of
cour.se, the 6-foot wall. did not boqin to shicld Fron~ viaw thie aturKget e-n~
thar. a vdrience gzante8 went wit~h the land, ~tnd i! ~ub ject p.-opep ' y wr~a eub-
eequently ueed for ~nothor M~1 use, thc~re n~lll would bd inad ;n;~co par3.ing.
Mr Roherte notr•d ~hat in reality the appliaation ~f parking at ~~~ ~7•. i.n tho
M-1 2one ae lt ~ iined to euh~ect propor~nl wore not e:itizoly ~cu~~at~ or fai~
slnr,a much of the c.pen eprce wae b~ing uRed for man~afactuz~in~; and etorbge f.az
th~g p+srticula~ us4, ~rhile tho parking area Por enother u~se woul.$ he convertee~l
to parici~ig if +znother induatzial u~e wera plannod ~~r the bui.ldiny, snd the 196
epac.es wna bae~d on borh outdnor uee and the builc3~ngJ that Mr. P~ndleton l~ad
indiaat~d thar~~ were about 65 employeed on the lar.ge~t ehift:, whi.le 38 si~acas
for parkinq we•=e proposed~ and thar. t:~~e stornqe and fabz•ic~tion erea wauld be
ttle parking ar.ea foz another manufxcturer.
Commissi~ner Rowland nated that tho hard~hip wliich thiy app].icant had could not.
be accepte~ as raasonable a~ `hie hearing, Rlthough u time timitr~t•3on could bc
plac~c3 or- t~ie vAriunce to re~olve tha~aa problemaj and that he did not feel the
applicdnt had pzesented hii r~:asons for requesting the v'ariarice to the Commiseion
to prove tt~at iL• would be L•o rhe beat intereRts of thc City to work on this
pro~l.em.
Commie~sian;er Allred noted that the petitioner indicated thta 91~uatton would be
rosolved within a few weeks.
Commission~~r Rowland noted that in the paAt hardahip variancea had been prac+ent~d
whict- indi.ated yranting them would be in the beyt intereate of the community,
an~ to grant a use for a give~i period of time~ that one of thP conditions usual]y
required waa a 5-fnat masonry wall, and it this wers not a r.equireme~t, the,ce
wauld bm no outdoor storage becouse ~he manufacturer would wanY to protect h3s
investment~ and tltat the chainlink fence at this .location now did not acccmplieh
whmt it was ~.ntended to d~ in the etorsqe area.
Commissioner Farano observed thn': if no h~alt were rec~uired, thie wauld "ki.ll" ~r
eliminate all outdoor uaes.
Commissioner Kaywood noted ahe had two points of concern: one, under the condi-
tional use permit far the now buil.ding, 161 parking apacea ~ser~e indicated, which
was not availabl~ now, therefore, they would ba in violatian of theiz conditional
use permitt seconctly, they now chargea a storage fee for the sig:~e that had not
been picked up, therefore, there was no excuse for not rentinq ~>r purchasing
land for overf~ow skorage.
Mz'~ Roberts nuted ~that the ~new buil3ing waa not appraved vnde~ a conditional uae
permit: but th~ 161 parking spaces Was s requlrement. of t~:e M-~ 2one eite devel.o~^
ment atandards. In addition, when Conliitional Us~ Fermit No. 742 wda approved,
the land included in said petition d~d not cover proparty all tt~e way to East
Str~et, and at thxt time only 5F pa~rking spaces were raqui.red, while Che 161
spaces for parkiaig were depicted on the building plana suhmitted for a buildiny
permit not a~ a part of the zoniny acti~n.
~or~mixsioner Seymour offsred a motion, eecor~ded by Comm~.saianer Allred and
MOTION CARRI~A, that tha Planninq Commiesion, in connection ~vith the exe~pkion
declaration status, finds and determin~a thac the proposal wouls9 have no signi-
Picant ~nvironmental impaat and, therafore, recommende to the Cf.ty Counail that
no Environmental Impact 5tatement 'e necemeary.
Commissioner Kaywood offezed Reaolu~ion No. PC73-20 aiid movec9 for l.ta pnseaqe
and adaption t~ c~eny Pe~iti~n ~or Variance No. 2+569 on ~he basie that the poti-
tioner ha~ nnt proven a hardship e:cisted in the uae of the property becauee o£
the unusual aize ar3 shape of, the parcol; that the parkinq aituation in thie a~rea
- -~ ,~ - -~ -
~ ~
MIAIUTES, CTTY ~~I,ANNING COMMIS~ION~ Ja~nuary 22, 1973 ~~-45
VAFtSANCL~ N0. 2469 (Contlnued)
waa crl.ticul., end to npprove e wel.vhr of. pArking for th3e~ usG would nnt bd i.m-
provinq thm si7aatian~ that kho ~~et~.itioner had beon in viaa.Ation ~f thA parhing
requ.iremanC eFecifie8 !n tho proviou^ zonin~ action (Con9ltional (~a~ Pc+rmlt Na.
7A7.) eppraved on t.hin prnperty sinco he haQ devotod h;ls enkire outdoor ~rc•~ to
mnsembly and etorage of. elgne rathur. than mdintaininc~ the required pn.rking araast
thnt the peti*i.on~,r heci bAOn charging r+toraga f.eae for 91gne left. on the premises
by their cusromAra, And eaid signe wera occupyf..~ thd requirmd perking specest
thaC. it tlte peti4i.oner wQrc+ gaing to pxov~de euc:h a Atorag4 necvi.ce, he should
ncqu:lre ddditione.l ~raperty for this activlty~ that if t'e putltianer wo~xld hAVe
com~lied with the requiremon~a of Condi*_ior~al Uee Permi.t No. 742 in whlch npeci-
fic arees w~re propoaed !or ~~~tdoar aoaemUly of eigne, the parkinq ~l.t:uakion
would be improvecl, however, autdoar aecembly of eigne had be,ei~ er.panded boyond
the~ boundar.iee o£ th~ uae ori.yinally approvod, th~ereby creaeting n doficionay of
pnricii~gi tha4: the petitioner was pr~viciing anly 38 parki.nc~ apacas, hnwev~~~, l~o
r~ad G;'i employeea on the lnrqoot yhift, therel~y requiring employeea to park on thc+
AtroOk or use othor indiiatxics' parkinq apacee when street parki.nq was not avail-
able dr-d depriving ad)oininq industriea of tfieir riqht ~o on-et~-eet p~rking .[or
r,uatomor.s~ and that granting waiv~er of BOe of tha roquired parkin~ to L•he }~ati-
tionar woulA be granting a prlvilege not en}oyed by udjoining industrial usEe,
(SQe Reeolution Book)
Un roll call tlie f.oregoing resoluGion wa~ pas»od by the followir~g vote:
AYS3t COMMISSTONERS: Allred, Facano, Gauer, Kaywood, Saymour, Itowlan~.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSkNTt COMMI3:,IONER5: HerbAt.
ChairmAn Seymour ~ted thnt in order that thR City Council would underetand
and be informed a~ t.o the actioti taker. on Variance No. 24~i9, h~ woul~ recommend
that if subject pet.itinn was appo~led that. staf!' take picturee af th~ parking
as it presently exibte and as the Flanning Com~nission had viewad it upon makiny
a field is~apec:tion, so that the City C~uncil could yot the full impact of thr
project in the event the Council waa unable to make a field tr.ip to oioser.va
first hand ~he serious prsrking prcblem in tt~ia i_nduatrial area.
Doput}• City Attorney Fr.ank Lo~ry arlvised the Commiseion that this cou18 be made
a separate recominendatian.
Commisaioner Gauer etatod it should be emph.asizad that the petiti~yner/agent w~s
charging stnrage aharges, tlxere£ore, there wae no reason why addltional spaee
couln nnt be rented faz atorege of theae signg.
Cammisaioner Seymour affered a motion, second~ed by Commisai,oner Allred and
MOTION CARRIED, to dir.sct staff to take. gictures or movies of ~.he parkiug
problem ao it exieted along Vermont Avenue, Lacy Street and Arlee P.lace, as well.
as the oukdoor storag6 nnd ~nanufacturing occurring on property cansidered ~.ri
Variance No. 2469 and prer~ent these to the City Caunc~.l for tk~eir considera~ian
in making tneir determination if Variance No. 24&9 was appealed, in c,rder to
emphasize the extremely serious parkinq problem that has resulted by the ex~an-
sior, o£ the outdaor anaembly and manufact.use of aigr,~.
VARIANCE N0. i470 - PUBLIC tIEARING. K~RMADA "'ORPORA?ION, c/o At].antic Richfie]d
Company, 1786 We t Lincoln AVeS~tLe~ Anaheim, Ca. 92804, Owners
PBR CODIP~NY, 10: ~ast Vermon+: Avenue, Anaheim, Ca. 928a5,
Agent~ requeetinq WAIVER 0~' MAXItnUM Ai~.CA OF A FRr.;E-~TANDZNG SIGN TO ERECT F.
152-SQUARE FOOT, FREL-STANDING SIGN IN A REQUIR~D J~ANDSCAPED SETBAGiC or~ property
c~eecribed ae: A rectangular.ly-ehnped parcel of land coneiating of approximately
.5 acres located at the southweat corner ~f Katella Avenua and Stiate College
Ro~ilc~vard, havl.ng fruntages of appr.oximataly 150 ff~ t on State College Boulevar~
ancl Kat911a Avdnue zeepectively. Property Qr~ec+nt~y c~*~sified M-l, LTGHT
INDUST1tiAL, ZONE.
No one appeared in oppoait~.an.
Althouqh the Report to the Cummiseian wae ~not rAad at ~he public nearinq, it is
referre~ to and mnde a par.t of the mir-utea.
~
~
~
M'[NUTEG, CI'PY. PLANNINy COMMtSSION, ;lanuary 7,2, 1973 73~-47
VARYANCE N0. 24^0 (Cantinu~d)
1Mr, Ted Cox, represhnting the uye.r~t. for tho petit_inne.r, Lndicnte!! hie ~,reeence
to anewor quc~stionH .
The ~om-niaeion inqair.ad wh~Ll~er the t~c~op~eed aiqn wae n rotating ur etotionary
eignt wh~r.eupon Mr.. Cox otated thi~; w~u~d ha e etntionar.,y e~ign.
The CommiRS.lon furthrx inqu~ re~:i wiiether ther.e woulfl bo an}r turther ~igninq
requanY.a fc:r additians S.t rubjact petiti~n wero epps~ovv~9~ whereuy~n Mr. Cax
atated he~ ~iid not kaow wh~thor plane inqYuded tho ce~opy aigne, but it wAS thAix
intent tc~ have tt~am.
he r^ !iew of the pl~no wes then mad~ l~y Mr. Cnx nnd Mr. Rcber.k~a, and upon its
_onclusion, Mr. Roberl•s noted thet eteff hr~d ta~led ta ~sae the cnnapy eigns,
and he would ~ugyeot that euUJect petition be r.on~inued in order *_ha*, thc pc~L•i-
ti~n could Uo .readvertteed to include the canapy s~qsie, and L•hat sinoo thie was
n ataff error, the ccat of readvert~.eing would bo borne by tha City.
Commiesic,nor Rowland oPfered a mutinn, secondod by Camcnisafoner Kaywoo~ and
MATIOt~ CARRIFA, to continue considorAtion ot Variltice No. 2470 to the moe~iiiy
of FebruRry 21, ].973, tc+ allow timo for rataft to readvertlso the peT.itioiti to
inr,lude waiver of the numbar of f.rae-etandlnR yiqna, slnce rhe petitioner pro-
poaed canopy signe•
~~ARTAN~E N0. 2472 - PUHLiC HEARiNG. MARIE VAN UUSEN, 700 aauth ~uclid StreEt,
~ ~ Anaheim, Ca. 92802, Owner~ RICIiARD RND SAND1tA MC KINNEY,
5132 ~oetori.a, Cudahy, Ca. 90201, Agentst requesting
WAIV~R OF PERMITTED USES IN A C-0 ZONE TC ESTADLISH A WTG SHOP ANU ABAUTY
P3D,RL(~R IN AN ~XtSTID~G RESIDENT7AL STRUCTURE on property described ac~: A rer.-
tangular:y-ehaped parcel of ~.RI1~ con~i~ting of approximately .20 acrea l.~catod
aL- the 9autheast corner cf EucYid Stree~ and Alomar Avenue, h~ving frontagee
of approximatel.y 62 feet on the aast side of Eur,lid SL•reot and 100 feQt on the
south si&e of Alomar Avenue, and further ~lescribRd as 700 South Eucli.d Street.
Pzoperty prQSent].y classifiacl C-U, COMMEJ~.C'IAL OFFICE, ZONE.
No one appeared in opposition.
AYthough t.he Report t~ the Co~rmission was not read gt #:he public hear~.ng, it is
rgferred to and mad~+ a part of. the: minu~es.
Mr. Ri.chard McKlnney, one of the aqen~s for the pQtit•i~ner, indicated his
presencc~ to answer questiona, and statad thut the adjoining prop3rty Uwnez had
indicatod r.o opposition to the prap~sal.
THE HEARIN~ WAS CLOSED.
The Gammisalon inquired how many operatorH wsre propoaed and 'now many customers
could ~ach operatox handle per h~ur; wh~reupon Mr. MoKinf:ey stated that they
propoded faur operatoro who could take care rf two or three Parsons per hour.
The Cammiss~on noted this would mean 12 custamera parking 3n ~ddition to ~Qera-
tora parking their cars, while the petitlonar was proposin~ only 7 purking
spacea.
Mr. McKinney stated that they prop~sed ~o have wig aales and atyl~.ng pr?maril~r,
witli the bet~uty shap later on whgre four ohAire wera p.roposed, and then in
respcnae ta further Commisbion questioninq, atated they planned one chair in
the m~n'o styling salor,, one in the wig shop, and twc~ to three in the ragular
styling room for womeni that it wau~d depend upon whether or not each cpsrator
wou1~ be Norking in a sepa-rate area, and perhaps three people could bc~ ,aoing
both etylinq rand wiga sinos he dld both~ ar~d tk~at he fe'i.t the number of parking
spaces propASed would ': au£~fici~nt since h,ia preeent operation was in Lawndal.e,
an~ he did not thi.nk ~~e would be, bringing any buelneeR with him.
Co~nmiesionez Aiir9a then inc~uirad whotkier th~s proposed use was intended to be
an inxerln+ use, +~nd if so, how Z~no did the petit~ioner plan it As an intarim
uae b~ceuae Y~e felt that 1f it waa a permanent uae, then ~thu atxucturr~ ahould
be ramddeZed to look like a commercial bu~.laing rather thr.n a resi8ence.
-~J
~
~
MINUTF:7, CiTY PI~ANNiN(, C'OMMISSION, Jnnuary :~2, 1973
~3-ad
VARIANCE N0. ~472 (Contlnue~)
Mr. MaKinnay r~eplia~9 t:hxk it wan hi~ i.ntent tn h~v• n ladiee' atyling sdlon in
the f.uture, and it wr~e intarsdad to rc~model th~ ~arilitiee now.
Tine Commieeian ir~quizacl vf Ata.Pf whet'her thi.s wna L•he only C••l. t~ueinure in thA
area~ whereupon Zoninq Supezvieor Char].nn Roi~erto notod thet in tho rbcent pe~t
the Commieeion had t+p~zoved a tnilor. Nho~ on t12e north o~.de of Alom~xr Avdnue
and to ~he+ aouth ware single-temily hameei ~nQ that ~'onditlonal U9o Permi.t No.
741 covax~c9 ~~.vo ~~f the lotA to ellow C-0 uao o! the 'xisti.ng stru ~turee wh~ct~
Were deaigned for rosi.dontinl purpnsPO, wlille V~rianc~ No. 2348 allow~d ~hA
tailar. dhop.
Chairman aeymour noted tha~ :he CammiRSion and atatg wero ;~imnrily cor~cwxnod
tt~at t:}ia proposed uso would Ue e mare intense uqe at the ].and than the C--O zonn
would pormit, r.nd arith the staCamerit u~Adu that four operc~tozs w~re proposac~,
with each ~perator being able Co work cn two peroone at one~ time, thiA woul3
indicnt~+ L•he ahorL•age ~f perking could ~e exper,t•c+d, thereEore, i! tha petitianer
wou13 s~ipulato +.u leHa t~han four operatorc~ a~id a time linitatlon for the u~-e,
at the and ~f which time the Commioeion could dokerm~ne if a parkina problem
exieted, and if one was prasent. it might be necpasary for tho peti.tioner ta
find orkier f.sc~.lities,
Mr. McKinr.ey stated this ws-s quite rea~onabla ~ anca he pla.nned to devotc~ m~st
of the faaility to wig6, and at h3a pre»ent f'ncillty he had only two pa.rkiny
r~paces available.
Chu~rman Seymour then ~n~uired whether the petitioner would etipulate to no mor~
than tsv~ operutors with a ti.rne ].itt~itatSon of th~:ee yeara to 11~atermina whetti~r
any pa.r.kin9 problem exi~tedj wh~roupon Mr. Mclcinney so Etipulated.
Commigsioner Kaywood observed that she formorl.y went to }a beauty ~hot~ in a homa,
~nd there were never leas than five persona bcsing served, and there wua only ane
operator at th.le ahop; and that there wa~ nc~ parking available, but khe ~perator
told the. cuatomers to park araund the corner so that the ne~ghbors would not
complain.
Commissioner Rowland noted that whatever the limitation was established, i£ it
was c3etermined that a parkiny pr.oblen- existed, tha ~e*_itioner could remov~ the
g~~r.age, which would provide adda.tional parki:ig apaae, making a tata'1 of 12 park-
ing 3pacea.
Commissi.enar Rowland offereif a motion, secondQd by Commissioner Farano and
MOTION CARRIIsA, that the Planninq Commission, in crnnecxion with an exemption
declur~+-ion status request, finds and deter~nines th3t the progosal would have
na sirfnificant environmental impaat and, therefozo, recommends *o *t~P Gity
Council thr~t a~ Envi.ronmental Impact Statement ia necessary.
Commiasion~r Seymour offerec7 Resalution No. ~C73-21. and moved for its passag~
and adogtion to gr~ant Petition fos Var~.ance No. 2~172, limStiiig the ~iumber o£
operator~ to no more than two, as stipulatad by tha pe~ti~ionez; that the peti-
tioner further aCipulated to a thrae~•ycar tiu~P li!nitetion of ~he proposed u_.c~
in th°_ exi.atiny etructure to dat.ermi.ne i`. any parking prable-ns might occur, ~nd
if at the end o~ the three yeara it appeared a Farking problem existed, beforo
the time limit c~ald be extended modific~tiona would have to b~ ma3e to thp
property to provide additional parkin3t and subject to conditions. (S~e
Resolution Book)
On roll call the foregoinq resolution waa passed by tha fol'lowinq ~ute:
AYES: COMMI~S~ONERS: Allred, I'urano, Keywood, Rowland, Seymour.
NO~,Ss COMMISSIONERS: '~4a^r~4u-[°~,
ABSENTe COMMISSIONER~: Herbst.
RECESS - Chairman Sevmour lAeclared a t.en-minute racess at 3:50 p.m.
F.ECONVENE - Cha,izr~an S~ymour reconven~d the mc~ni:.~.y at 4: 00 p.m. ,
Ca~m~eqion~z HArbst being nbsent.
~ ~
MIt~UTI~:S, CiTY PI.ANNTbIC~, CUM~II43ION, J'enuary 22, ].9'/3 73"4~
RECY.AS31~P'IGATJON - PUBl.2G IiEARYNG. WILLIAM '1`. 3ANl5JA1S, 1626 L~net ].7th Stroet:,
Np~72~73-3]. Snnra Ana, Ca. 927~1, Ow~ler.r pLOparty de~cxi.De~ ao+ ,A
~ ~~~ ract+~ngul~nrly~-shaped parcel oY ].c~nd consetatl~~q af aFproxi-
VARIANCI: N0. 2474 mete~ly .41 ecres he~ving a!'.ro~itnqe oP appr~ximat~.lY ].24
"~ +' ~ ~ ~oet on the~ wa6t side o~ Manchdt+tor Avernua, having a maxf-
mum depth ot ep~roxl.rnutel,y 1:19 faet, end b~einy locatNd
,n~groximntely 57t7 ~e~L eouth uf the c~ntarline of Katella Avicenue, and furtl:er
deeoxibt~d ne- 11i31 and 1833 South Ma~ichestor Avonucs. Praser~y present.ly claee~-
fiad R-A, AGRICUI.TURAL, ZONF; (PORTlUN A) an 't M-1, T•IGti'f INDUSTR7AI., ZONF.
(P6RTYON B).
itFQUESTEU ~LA9SiP'T(:F~TIOlis PORTION A•- M-1, LIGH'f INnti~TRIAI., Znr1F..
REuf`~':iTED VA,RIANCEs ~'XPAND, ON FORTIn^!Q i+ ANry (3, AN F'X~STING, NONI.f~NFO'RMING
WARI;HOUSL WAIVING (A) MINIMUM SI:'CBACh FRUM 71 S~CONDAFtY
3'fREE'P~ (&) MINIMUR4 SF.'PDAGK AAUTTING RFSXDL~TITiAL ZOTl~,
E-OUNDARY, RiaD (C) CONDJ.TIONS L'UR CON'!'INU~U IfSE OF A
NONCON['OkM'LId(~ 8U.LI.AING :[N fiN INDUSTRIAL ZONE.
Na une appQared in oppositiori.
Althougll tho Report ~.o tlie Gommie4ion war~ not
reforrad Y.o r~nd made a part of thA minut.os.
Mr. Willi.am Samw~ys, tiie petitionor, appeared
that the les9ee of the propcrty, G~etetner Co
otherwise they would move their f-acilitiea to
larqost copy~ng mnch.ine company in khe world.
raad +~t tha public h~aring, it is
he£ore the Comr.~ieeion and atat~~~]
rpozati~n, noede.9 additionat spuce,
zrvine, and t2~at th~Y ware the
THE '.iEARIN:; WA3 CLOSED.
Commiasiorior Rowland offexed a motion, secondPd Ly ~ommis~ioner A].lr~d nnd
Mb7ION CARRIEA, th~t the 1?lanning Commis&ion, in conna~tion ~r~th exEr:ptian
declaration atatus request, finds anc] d~terminea that the proposal wou.ld have
no aignifir.ant envir~nm~ntal in-pact, an8, ~herefol:, racommenda tc~ thc~ City
Coun^_il that no Environmental ~mpact Stateme~~ i.a nece~sary.
Commiasioner Rowlancl offered ResoJ.ution No. PC73-?.2 and moved f:~r i.ts paesage
and adoptiun to recommpnd to the City i:ouncil that petition f~r Reclassification
No. 72-73~31 be approved, sub~ect to conditionfl. l'See Resolu*_ion 8oulc)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by th~ foll~wing vote:
AYEu: COMMTSBIONERS: Allred, Farano, Gauer, Kaywood, R~~.~land, Seymour.
NOES~ CQMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONE~tS: Harbat.
Commis~lanEr Rowland offered Resalution No. PC73-23 and moved for its p~ssaye
and adoption to grant Pe~ition for Variance N~. 2474, subject tc canditions.
(5ee Reaotutic~n Hook)
Un roll call the foregolnq resalutian was passed 'y the foll~winq vote:
F+YES: COMMISSIONEk2S: A11red, Farr~no, Gauer, Kaywood, Rowlan.i, Seymoar.
NUES : COtdMI9SI0NERS : lVone.
ASSENT: COMMISF.IONERS: Herbs~.
AMENDMENT TO TITI~E 18, - CONTII3UED PUBLIC HEARING. INITIATED BY TF1E ANAHEIM
AI~AIiETM MIJNIC~PAL CODE CITY PLANNING CnMMISStQN, 204 East I+inr.oln Avenue,
~ Anahet.m, (:a. 92805~ to aonsider an AMENDMENT TO THE
ANAHEIM MUNICIP?-L ~ODE, CHAPTER ; f~.57, PC, PI.ANNED
COMMUNITY , 'LOt3E .
9ubject amendment to TitZe 1B was con~inued fxom the n~eetinqe of P.ugust 2j.
and Septemb~r 18, 1?72, for ~urthgr study anc~ from the meetin.v of Janua.ry 8,
1973, for a full Commisalan.
Commisgioner Harb~st entered the Council Chamber at 4a10 p.m.
~ ~
MT.NUTk:~~, CITY k'Y.ANNTNG COMMZSS70N, Jnnuary 22, 197J 73••50
AMENDMLNT TO 'PITL~. ].H~_1iN71N1::LM MUNICLPAL_CODk~ (Cont.inut,ui
Plenning S~~perv~rcor pon McQeniol prtsonto~i an~An~menL•9 to the Planned Co~m~inity
7.~nee, noting tha-t it w~~lcl appear t'~at both tho C~mmiaeiun and btatf wern
~greed thnt the PC 7.on~ ~hould include tho Zoning Elemq-~t, nn0 i~ thl.p wAn no*.
e carroct asc~umptic~n, he wou1Q liks ta reviev~ the Pleport ~o l•ha Comtni~sion.
Commi.anio~ie~z Rawle.r~d Atetod that ih. wma hie p~reonrel vi.uw t-iat tho City af
n~aY~eim non3ed 9pOC~E~C• ddvel~pmont xonAe Eor the pC 'LOno, and he did r~oL
Uelx.e,ve th,,.t the zones pze~ently availablo, othor than hillmi.de ~:oning, wt+re
npplicable ta tho PC Zone, n-~d on that basis, it wauld bo his op.inior. thaC the
ut;,i~f proceec9 wlth tho jrrepeeati.on ef hill.side zonerl, ae well eo ~ervalopment
e ~anciaz~3e .
Commis3ioner Rowland offerud n motiun to cuntinue consi.deretion o! an .~mondmant
tu Che Anahsim Muriicil~+~l Cocleo Chapt~ir 18.57, PC, Planned Community, Zon~, to
the maating of Apr.il 2, 19'73. Co ellow a~ttff time to prapure~ apeoific deve'lop-
mqnt zonee ~or hilY.side davoln~ment in the PC, Plannoci Cammunlt.y, zane.
Commissionnr Fnrano aeconded tho motian. Mr~T'~ON CA!2RIE~.
Comml.arsio~ier Farano notad he waA votinq f~r Che mo~ion because he felfi tliat ~he
C~ty neec7ed it, ~lthovgli he would ayr.eo wi.th City Attorno~y .7oe G~oieler that
f'rom a legal stsnd~ainL•, c-pecific z~nes would U~ required, and ~•lnc~ the City
ilid nat have specl.fic hillaide etandarcYa or ~ onPr~, dc-velopment within the PC
Zane would have to ba accompliahed ~viL•h thQ exioting ra~idential z<~nes.
KFPORTS AND - T'I'EM N0. 1
RE~UMM~NDATIONS CONDIT.LONAL USE YERMIT
'- PropArty J.c,catad on t•he
1~nroxima~tely 175 teet
for terminat.{ .
NO. 1305 (Sam and Tokiko *lakamura) •-
narth side of Lincnln Avonue,
west uf Maqnalla Avenuo - Reqxiest
2oninq 5upervisor Chariee Roberts neted the location of s~~bject propecty, uaes
establi.ahecl in cloae proximity, previous~ xoning action by the Planning Commis-
ai~n to permit eatablishm~:nt of a esmi-anc~.osed re3t•aurant, and the request o£
the new owner of the pro~,erty' to Cerminate Conditiona!. Use P~srmi~ t~o. 1305 for
the sstablf.ahmenk ~f a seini~enclosad restav.rant aince the pr~vi.ous awner had
nevet exezciaed the vse qranted, nnd the ne,w owner d~@ nat intnnd to exarci.se
said uae.
C.ommiasioner, Gauer offered Resolution No. P~73-24 and nioved for i~s paegage
and adoption to 'erminate all proceedings on C~nditional tJae Permit No. 13J5 oi~
the basis th3t tk:e petltioner no lonq~ar intended to exercise the uae grantad
under said petiti~i~. (Sed Reaolution Book)
Ors zall ctll the forr~gaing resolution was passeii by the followinq vate:
AXES: COMMI~SIONERS: Allred, Fararo, Cauer, ~A~t, Kaywo~d, Rowland,
Seymour.
NOES s COMMISSIONERS: ~ H~il~'~~T.
ABS~NT: COMMISSION~RS: None.
ITEM NO. 2
STx2EET NAMR CHANGE - WESTRIDGE CIRCLE
Zoning Su~ervisor Ch,sr7es Roberts noted that Tract Na. 7569 wa~ inadvertently
recorded at the County Recarder'• of~ice ~rith a street r~..:n of Weetridga Circle,
hcwever, this r~treet nams w~uld be ia another Tract No. 568, and sa:.d t.;eact
could not be zecorded ~.~ntil the etreQt name conflict wms xesolved, and ataff
would recommezid that tY.nt portion of Weatridg~ Cirr,le sou~h nf Nohl Ranch Road
be changod to Wf].lowick Circle.
Commiasione~r Farano offerad a R~otion, seconded by C~mmieaioner KayNOOd and
MOTIaN CA2tRI~D, to racommand ta tt~e City Council that a etr~et namas ok~anga fer
Westridge Circle in Trac'~ No. ~569 be maSe Ca 47illowick Circle.
~ ~
MINU'Pl~k,, l;.l'1'Y P!,AIJNLN:~ ~:~Mtdl:;:;JON, Jar•~-~ar~/ :.2, Y973 73-!'i1
]'TEM NO. 3
3TRI:L'C NAM'E; CHAN~,Ir -• f~EL;(,11 5TItF.~T
roni~;g Su~~r.vis~r Ct:arles Robe+rts notc+d thnt• t~~~ach Strd4t wne n dlaconlint~aus,
locnl rer~ident:ial at:r~eet extendiny n~rth; eouth e tutel c9ietanc< <~f ripproximet~:ly
i~10 fe~ct b~ta~e~n L.i.ncoln Avenua and Hroadwa~y~ t1~et r po.:ft.ton c~f.gnod by ~3 of
ll-0 18 rr~s:lde~icer+ ~~n thr. t~loclc regucetad tho n::ma chenqo in o"~er to r9duco
r_onPusion ~znd ert•c~tt~ ir, mail and uttiur Qvl.ivgry eorvicoa~ and tl~at a~lt.ho!i,~h thFl
peti.tion indicat~rl th~uo n].tornete namfd, Daochwood, Roeewood, c~r Ocangc~ ~ocl,
R~e~woocl a-~d u,,:~~~y~•waod wora alrunc9~~ heing util~.zed, thesefore~ BY.dP~ wr ~.id
rocom~nc~nd the num~ ~f. F3Fechwood be +~pliod if the pxopoeed namu c'~anqe ~s
appr~vocl.
C<~mmisca~ ~ncr. 1'-+runc~ uffored b motion, sar.on~ed by Cummieaior~er Kapw~ad and
MOTION CAI'tF1..D, to re~ornmend cu tha City Cauncil ~_hat the ~i:r.c~et name change
~~~r se~och st.raat be made ta F3e+oehwood S~re,et tu ruducc~ o~~nfus~lnn anA err~rs in
n~ail ar~d oChcr del.ivcry aer.vicer~,
7T~M ~~U. 4
S'1'Rr::T`ir'AM~; Cli lGF. - VERD~: VISTA i~ANE
?oniny Supervis~;r Char.lc!e Roberta noL•od £or thP Gommi:~eion t at verde Vieta Lano
w~p ~n N50••foot. c~l-dc~-•eac, locAl reKidonL-.ial ntraN+t oxtc~nding ac+utii from
Pernlta Hills Urive and wan ].oc~ntedl ~pproximately i,450 feet eaet uf the intor-
nection ..f Peralta t1111s uriva nnd Corza Vists Dr~ vet th~~.t liva ot the property
nwne:rg on Verda Vi~t,~ L~ne haci Rabinitted a petition ro~uest~.ng a srreet nAme
change to Per~slta Way in ozdex• tn baci9r loeate th~ s' eet anA ~l.iminat~ a
gramat.ical.ly incorrer,k nnmes nn@ thMt ~~~.es~r..tly t:~~ ~e F*ere no hauoee utilizinq
rre Verde Vi~ta Lane A(~CIIHA8A8.
C~mmissioner Seymour ofFer~d n~~ot-?on, ee~c~ndecl by ~omm±saioner ltowlnnd nnd
MO~'IUN CAR:tT~D~ to reccmmend to the :;ity Counc.il tha~ the stree,t name chgnga
for VQrde Vista L3ne ne m~de tu Ptralta Way, as reque~ted by ttie prop~r.ty owners
on said street.
ITEM IvO. 5
R-H-22,000, RES'tDEriTIAL H~LL5IDE, L04d DENSITY, SINGL~-
FAMILY, '30NE
Planning Sapervisor i~on McDan.tel pr.Paent3~~ the R-x-22,OdQ, Roaident.i.al Hi.t3.side,
Zone, z~. . iewing ck:p F.eport ~o the ~ornmi~:~:on, noting that anticipaL•ion ~ annexe-
tion o£ ~~ large raeidential aroa in the Santa Ana Canyon k,iown as the :~:~;~la:°
Dr1.ve ~sre~ c.nd c.ammen9urate with ~~lanniny Corimission desires to ctovelop nddi-
tional hillsicle zone~, staff hac: prepared the i-H-22,0~ ; Zon~~ ar~' while the
annexat~on rAmained to be va~ed apon by the vr~t.ir r reg~dentB i.n tha annexation
asea, thE ~iew zone would be a ue~eful too.l :in deve' oping hillaide areas zegard-
lesa of ttie el.PCtion results t' hat Anahelm ~:~srrentty provid~d twa sin4le-family
residential .:ones uf ed in hillsfde devslo~m~~~~t., r.lieae being the R-F., i.esiden-
~ial F.state, 7.ane asAd the R-H-10,000, Resi.-'enti~l Hills.ide, Low G°• ity, Zonet
that the minimum lot si•ae in the R-E Zon~ •=s ona Ucre, and the ~~i.~ir.sum i.n tti
P.-H••10,000 was 8500 ~square fe~L, wtth a r~inim• averagQ of 10,0U0 squar~e f~et,
and that i~ appearec~ ttpp~c~p=1~tF: to provide a minimum lo•t slae bc~tween the ty~o
existing zonas, therefaxe~ :.;:~: R-H•-22,000 20:~~~ was pro~osed whic' would eseen~•
tially he a onQ-half acro hi'.leide zcane. Fur*_hermore, since thie zono was
i.ntended to provido fUr sin~le-family low-d-rnsity estats davelopmcnt oF a
apacioua and sgml-rur:~l character. in hillaide ar.eas by sncouraginq davelopu~~nt
in keeoing w!.th th~± na~:ural amc~nit•ies of theae areas and by preservinq their
u~ique s~enic resources a~~ a cam^~unitX asset, the ex:l~tine~ R-E Zane was usAd ~m
a hPae, and excepting khe :ninimum lot a+.ze and th~ miniu~um :~~~tbackra, the :t-E
~one stan@ards wer9 a~pplicablR and we+re aimply referencec~ accorc~inqlp i:~ tne
R-~[.'~22,000 Zone. !n addi.tion fa the pr~~posefl zone and ~o accet ;t in the achieve-
mont of t.his atmoapnera, ataff wae alea propoein~ r~n amename.-t af two City
Counctl policies, namely- 2U6 and 2~', and would includQ refE.~ence ta the Mo:~1er
Drive area aa well far p~ivat~ raa~laa~s and stre~et improvpmen~a as aet forth in
thb P.eport. tu the Commi ~sion.
~
7
~ ~
MTNUT~B, (:1TY FLANNING CnMM1:~930~V, Jariuary 22, ~973 '3'•`~~
ITEM NO. 5 (~'~~nCinuau)
Mr. McDaninl, in r.~ovi.owiny the eveluetion, noted th~t t.1~A R-f1-22,UU0 Zone had
baen ~t~bml.lted and zaviowed and eqraed upon by tho Santa Ana Cc.~lyon Property
Ow~~er• AtNC~:~AY.~0I1~ and tho f;1ty Atturney'e o~tic~ ir~dicated that xince tT~io
WAN a.~ow zone to be con~ic~ared fur inclueion in tho Zun.ing ~rdinanc~ ani it
~ra~ nor appli~ci tc+ e~acific prcFoztiea at tt~1s timo, a public hu:-ring l•~ thd
Ylnnning Com~ni.eeian was nnt ~cequirad, th~.reforc~, th~ Planni.~ig Cummiaoi ine-X
wl.rh to oon~idc r it dpproprint~+ Co heve~ the eubmLCted nrdinonca ~reae , ~7 to
the Ci Cy Cour,ci.l fr.r tliE~ Pnr.ablist-ment o! s hearlnq dntc~ di~~ce L•he ~oY,a.esr Drivo
annc~xa-L•iun c+luation w~u1d be 11a1d N'ebruary l~, 1973, and it weul.u be cleni~sblc~
t~~ have the zono r.ee~dy for ai1~11~~+tion to the proper..ie~e immedietely f1tIb91lC~110t1C
to nnnexatlon.
c:ommior~ioner Row.land o£farc : Itae~iut.lo~ taa. PC73~25 a~nd mo.~od! Lor ite paaeage
and ad~Qt.ian to xecommenc) t~~ the+ Ctty Co unci l th,at the R-H-Z2,OU0, Raeldential
tiill~ide, Low-D~neity, ~ing1~~-F+smil.y ?,one ba added, tu Ctie Anaheim Municipal
C~de, Exhib~.t "A" , ilnd that a.~n4~~~lment9 to City l.:ouncil Polir.lor. 206 dn~S 2U7 to
rcfler.t inalueion ,~t tho Moh]or orl.va area, Fxhibit "B", b~ mado in order thdt
an ~cc~ptabl~ hil.l.s±dej zone could bo av~ilnble at rsuch t.imc as pxoper.ty kne~wn
as the Moh18r ~rive area wea ~nn~xed ir.ta the Gity oP Ane~heim. (See R~saluticn
Book)
On zo11. ca.ll thc fo•regoi.nq reyolution wa~ pessed by the fo].luwi»g vote:
P,YESr CQMMI5S1nNLR5: Al1rQd, E'erano, Gxuex, t[erb:-t., Kaywo~~d, Rowlnnd,
Seymoiir.
NOES: COMMTSSIUNEBSr None.
}-B3~:";Cs COMMI:~SIONERS: None.
IT~M NO. 6
COUt1TY OF ORANGE USE PEI2MIT N0. 3377(zA) - Rc~quest to
edtablish s comme.rciaJ. atak~le for maximum of 2C0 harsao
c~n pro}~nrty located apnroximately 132U feet east of.
State Col.lege Boolevar~:i haviny a frontage of approxi.-
matel~+ 29A f.~et on he suuth sid` of Winaton Roa3.
7oni.ng Suporvisor Charl~ss RobQrta prRSe~nted Co~,nty of Orange Use Parmit t~o.
3377 to the Planning CUmmissioc~, notir.y tho locat ~~~n oF s•abject pro~ ecty,
size, adjoin,iny land '1898, the fact that the property was a Coun~y "i.sland"
boundACl un all sides l~y CitX ~f Anaheim lirni.ts, Rnd ~~h requegt ta establian
a commercial sL-able f~r maximum of 20Q `-ior.aea i.n the A1, Ger~ara.l Agricultural
L~strict, having a traininc~ ziny ar~clos ed by a~-f~~ot high ~~nco; 180 fenced
har3e etalls; 2.0 ]larse, exercise encloaures, 5 of wllich wou.ld abut t~he west
property lina adjacent to tho Nevi.lle Chemica.l C~mF~anyr zetenti~n of th~a
exiatinq dwellirig and garage for a caEetaker's livi:-g unit; and the pavinq
of 9~,000 aquxre feet, c t a fxont 30U-foc:: depth af the propert}~ for park-
i.nq purposps.
Mr. Robarta fixrther n~tec~ that the ~~.ty Man~y:~r's office had advi~ed stafi
that na tacts Y~ad bpen received regsrding annexat!.on of the property tu
the City uf Anaheim, evEn thouqh it was entixely surrounde•. 1~y properties
in the City of Andhei~n.
Mr. '..~berts then r:;viewed the sta-ff's rocommerzdations ~n ~~rhich iL• wa~s recou,-
$nd~ ' Lhak t:he 2oni.ny Adm~ nisr.zator of t:.~ County of O.rsnge b~ ~ec;ueECed to
have thia matLAr withcirflwn ftom Co~ic~ty ~oneider.atio~z, and tha 1liF »etitione~
be advioed to initiate annexation proae a~]ings and appr.o>>xiate zoning pet~ -
tfonR to the Ci.L•y of Anaheim and d~:velc~p in ca:~formr~nce with City ordinances,
with a aecond alternac~ive to xequire spec~.ul. cond` t~ona :.n the ap~roval at~
set fortl~ ir, the Repor.t tc tho Cammisc~ion.
Com~iasinns.r Rowland orfered a~~tio:., sc ~o~a~Q by Commissioner Farano an,
MO~~ ~.UN CARRIED, ': o°ecommend to the Ci ty C~uncil ti~at the UrangP C~unty
2oninq Alministrat:,r be vrged t~ rgques~ Nith~rawal irom consideratian of
County ap~soval af. Ora;lae eoc .:y UAe Permit :i~. 3377 and adv~se t:~e peti.ti~ner
to i:~itiate annexation ~rocQeainga and appropriate zoninq petitione to tho
City of Anaheim and 6evelap in ~ ~nform~-~ce with City orainanc~~s, sincQ sub~ect
prUper.ty wa$ surrounded c~n all ~.ldes by the City o~ An~+h~im city limits.
~
~
~
~
MINUZ`BL~, CITY PI,ANN2NG CCMFlISAION , Janunr~ 2Z, ~973 73-53
710JOURNMENT - Tt-~ce k~ain~7 no rurr.r«x bugl.n~r~ l•v Di.scues, Gommi~nl.onel
"" :~ymou: ~tf~r~d t+ mr:.ion ~:~ ~Qiourn ths~ m~eotinq.
cammisnionox r"sr.eno deca~dad e.h~ motion. ~+^'TION CAkRIt~A.
'che :neoti.ng a+~ijourn~Q ar. 4~15 p.m.
Raspsc~ttu~ly ~nbmi.tt~d,
~,~~ ~'.~
ANN KR8B9, S~orOCary
!-naheim Ci.ty Plan~in~ Commi.rsio:~
AK~hrn