Minutes-PC 1974/04/290 R C 0 MICROF{LMING SERV!CE, INC.
: ~. , . . ~ ~ ,..~ ,
, ,~„ . , . ,
~
~
~
Cit,y Hall
11n,~heim, Cali~ornia
Apzil 29, 1974
ttEGULAR N~~TING OF THF ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSTON
REGULAR - A r.egular maeting of the Anaheim Clt,y Planni1lg Commiael.on w~s
N1~ETING called to order by Chairman Gauer at 2:00 p.m., a quorum being
present.
PRE~ENT - CHAIRMAN: GauQr
- COMMISSIONERSs Compton, Farano, Her.bat, Jc,hnaon, King, Morley
ABSENT - None
ALSq FRE5~NT ~ Deputy City Attorney: Frank Lowry
Offi~e Engin~er: Jay T~tus
Zoning Supcarvisor: Charles Ruberts
Assi. tant Zoning Supe•rvisor: Phi.llip Schwartxe
Commission Secretary Pro Tempore: A. Burgess
PL~DGE dI' - Commiseioner. Farano led in L-he pledge of ~~1legiance to the
ALLEGI~INCE Flag of the ' ~it~d States of America.
EINVIRONI~NTAL IMPACT - CONTINLI~D PUBLI~ HEARING. ANAI~ETM HTZLS ~ TN~. AND
REPORT_N0. ~.11 TEXACO VENTURES, INC., c/o Horst J. Schor, 380 Anaheim
- Hills Road, l~nahoim, Ca. 92807, Owner. Property des-
~2ECLP.SSIFIi:ATI~+N cribed as: An irregularly-shaped parc~~ o~ land con-
NO. 73-74-28 sisting of approximately 24 acres having front.Rges of.
- appr.oximately 830 feet on the east side oP Hidden Canyon
VARIANCE NO. 2566 Road anc~ appraximately 2630 teet on the north side of
Avenida de Santiago, having a maximum depth of appraxi-
TENTATIVE MAP OF ina'tely 40j feet and being located approximate7.y 500 Eeet
TRACT N0. 8520 southeasterlX of thp intersection of Serrano Avenue and
-"'- - Hidden Canyon Road. Property presently clasaifi~d
COUNTY Al, GENERAL AGRTCULTiiRAL, DT57CRTCT .
REQUESTED CLASSIFICATI~~t~: R-Ii-22•000, SINGLE-FAMILY (C~NE-HAT,'F AGRE) ZONE.
p~QUESTED VARTAIVGE: WAtVE REQUIREMENT OF S~NGLE-FAMTLY LO~S FRONTTNa ON
AN ARTERIAL HIGH~VAY.
TENTATIVE TRACT REQUEST: 21 R-H-22,000 ZONED L(`i:
3ubject petitions have been con~inued from t}*e. meetings oE Aecember ~.U, 1973,
January 7~nd March 18, 197~- at the re~uest of the petitioner.
Assistant Zoning Supezvis~r Phillip Schwartze ~dvised the Cummisaion that a
rec~uest had been received from the petitianer to continue subject petitions
to the meeting of June 24, 1974.
Commissioner Y.ing offered a motion, seconded by Commiesior~:r Mori.ey, to con--
tinue Envi.ronmental Impact Report No. 111, Rec.la~sification No. 73-74-28,
Variance No. 2566, and Tentative Map of Tract No. 8520 to the meeting of
June 24, 1974. M~TION CARRIED.
In discussion th~ Commission noted that these petitions has~ been continued from
three previous me~etings; that should the petitioner request any further con-
tinuance from the June 24, 1974 meeting, the i~ems would be rer~oved from the
agen@a and be re-set for hearing at the petitioner's expense, and the petitioner
so advisecl.
74-232
..~
~
~
~
MINUTES, CITY PLANNINC COMMI55ION, April 29, ].974
7A-233
AREA DEVE~OPNIENT - CQNTiNUED PUBLiC HEARiNG, iNiTiATED BY THE ANI4HETM rZTY
PL77~1NN N0. 114 PLANNING COMMIS9ION, 204 Eaet ~,incoln Avenue, Ana~eim, Ca.
"-" ~ 92805= to coriaider vehicular circulaki~~n and aacesa for
r~pproximatel1 5Q scros qon~rally bounded by the nor~herly
oxtension of Grove Street to the wostr Mirdloma Avonuo to the northi Tuotin
~venue to the nor.thet~~tr tha Atchi.son, Topeka & Santa Fe Railrodd on thH
ac~uthea~t; and Ls~ Palma Avenue to th~ south.
Zoning Supervisor Charlea Robc~rts notecl that Area Develoomen~ Plan Nr~. 114 had
been continued fram tha meetinga of February 20, March 4, March 18, and April 1,
1974, to reaolve pYOblams ralat~*~ to circulation w:.~~~n the area. AuP No. 114
hmd baen initiated to dotermino the need for circu:l.at on on t~~~~ Nara~I~ in
queet-~n~ in the area bounded by Miralama Avenue, Tuat T~, tl;c~ Santd I'e Ra1.lr~ad
and L._ ~l.m~n Avenue. Tl~e Traff.ic Enginser had made N: ojec~ione For ADT aounka,
450d-5UOU trtpa per day for usere of the propert:Y wlic~n developed to ul~imal:e
uae.
As near as ca~n k,e determined, a 30-fo~t wide ~trip of land was dedicated for a
roadwa,y in 1l387, wh:lch strip runs a:long the entire south boundary of the Hurwitz
property; there is a nead far a street system *_o s~rve all the properties that
are axpertencing development at present.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
mr. Sam Hurwitz, 100 West Chapman Avsnue, Orange, owner of Parcel D, appeared
before the Commi~sion and indicated he had pr.otested against the full width
d~dication of the new proposed str.eet to be made from h~.s property and suggested
that he would c~edicate half if Dir. Webb, the adjacent prop~rty owner. on the
sc~ath, would alsa dedicate half. Mr. HuL-witz further indicated he had not k~c~en
able ~.o find any titl$ coiiveying the p.roperty to the City~ that thexe was a
aubdivision map indicating the lower portion as having been cledicated in 1887
for eaaement purposes from his proporty. Mr.. Hurwifz reiterated that h~ didn't
Peel he should now dedicate 30 feet unless the owner to the south also de~li-
cates 30 feet, since the owner to ths south would prof.it from it.
Mr. Dan Webb, 4620 East La Palma, Anahelm, owner of Parcel A, notified the
Commissian that a~ortion of tiis property had been sold and that he may have
indicatecl to the new owners that dedic~tion might be required; and that he
preferred Exhibit "A", but northerly of the property.
Mr. Earl Eddy, 3E~ DE~%elopment Company, owne.r af Parcel C, indicated his
company was anxious to see this matter settled since it was holding up devel-
opment of their portion.
In di~cus~ian the Commis3ion indicated the property owners should meet and
agree on a solutic+n to this problem; that th~ new property awner sk~ould perhaps
be contac~ed to protect hi~ i.nterest if he were the owner who would be r.e-
quested to make the c~edication; that sufficiAnt Cammission tina had been spent
on this matter and it was urgent that eittier Exhibit "A" Ar Exhibit "B10 be
adopted.
Mr. Webb indicated that a parcel of his prop~rty had been sold on March 7,
1974, ~co Winn Engineering Company in Anaheim, and he was nAw trying t~ nego-
tiate to purchase a portion of Mr. Hurwitz' property, which he indicated
Mr. Surwitz may not be aware of.
Commissioner Johnson offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner King, that
Area Development Plan No. 114 be continued for two weeks to the meeting of
Max 13, 1974; that the property owners understand this will be the last con-
tinuance, and if they are nnt aY~le to bring themselves in accord by May 13,
1974, the City will act to adopt or~e of ~ha exh~.bits. MOTION CARRIED.
~ ~
MINUT~S~ CITY PLAIJNTNG COMMISSTON, A~xi]. 29, 1574 74-2J4
~ONDITIONAL USF - CONTINUED PUBLTC fiEARItJG. WUOABINE CORP., 8:~83 Wilshire
PERMIT NO. 1465 Bou].evexd, BevArly Hills, Ca. 90211, Owner~ EI~I~ JOHN
GARCIA, 8383 Wilehir.o P~ulevard, Hovc~rly Hill~, Ca. 90211,
AgentJ requeeting permiasion to L9TAIiLIBN A 5-UNIT MC)DEL
HON~: CON~LEX on property clesaribed as: An irr~c~u].dr.ly-8haped pareel of land
located approximately 1600 foet northe~..3torly of the intereeat.ton ~t Nohl
Ranch Roacl and Sgrrdno Avenuo. Property presently c].aeaified R-A, AGP.ICUI~TURAL,
2QN~ .
Subject petiti.on was contir~ua2~ from the meei~ing of Apr11 15, 1974, fox sub-
mission af revis~d plane.
Na one appeared in op~osiCi.on to subjoct petition.
Althouyh the Staff Report to the Planning Comniisaion d~ted Apxil 29, 1974, waa
not read ~t the public hearing, it is referred to ~nd made a~art of tlic~
minute~.
Mr. John Garcia, agent for the petit•ioner, advised tha Commission he was avail-
able t.o answor any 9uPStione.
THF PUBLIC t~EARING WAS CLOSED.
The C~nuni.ssion noted that no application had been m~de for s~.gninq of subject
property, to which Mr. John Millick, representing Anaheim Hi11s, Inc.~ advised
that all 3evelopera af property in the Anaheim Hills must submit and receive
approval Eram Anaheim Hi11s, Tnc. for any on-site signs and that the signs muet
conEorm with their general plan af development. Mr. Millick further stated
that any sign would be in good taste, and also conform to tl~ City Code.
It was noted that the Direc~or of Development Servi.ces had determinecl that the
proposed activity fe].1 within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 1, o~ the
Cit~r of 1~1naY~eim Guidelines to the Req~.~i.rements for an Environmenta]. Impact
Report and is, tl:er~fore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an
EIR.
Commiss=oner King offered Resolution No. pC74-86 and moved for its pasattge arid
adogtion to grant PPtition f~r Conditional Use Qermit No. 1465 subject to
condition~ and additional~.y, that the Engir.eering Division has ind~ca~ted that
the grading •aill require inociificatien when the araa is converted to homP sites,
in or.der to conform tn the Grading Ordinance. (See Resqlution Book)
pn zoll call, the foregoing resoluL-ion passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISS~ONERS: CONII~TON, FAR,ANO, HERBST, JOHNSON, KING, MORLEY, G~IUER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSEN~: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
VARIANCr N0. 2591 - PUBLIC HEARTNC. CARLETON, F~ROWN & CO., INC., 1000 Wilshire
IIoulevard, Los 1ingelP~, Ca. 90017, Ownerj ROBERT BROWI~, Cox
Neon Co.rn., 1711 Bluff Rnad, Niontebello, Ca. 90b40, Agent;
requestin,q WATVER OF MAXIMt~~! PERMITT~;D FREE-STANDING SIGN HEIGHT WTTHIN 300
FEET OF RESIDF•NTIAL STRUCT~ ES an property described as: A reci:angularly-
shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.4 acres having a°rontage
~f approximately 227 feet on the east side of Euclid Stree~, having a maximum
depth of approximately 277 feet, and being lacat~d appraximately 242 feet south
of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue. Property pregently classified C-1, GENERAL
COMMERCIAL, ZUNE.
No one appeared in opposition to subject petition.
Although the Staff Report ta the Pl~nning Commission dated April 29, '1974, was
not read at the public hearing, it is referred to and made a part of the
minutes.
Mr. Robert Brown, 1711 Bluff Road, Monteballo, agPnt for the owner, indicated
he was available to anawer questi.ons of the Comm.'~ssion. In answer to a ques-
~ion from Commi~sioner King, Mr. 5rown indic;~ted the puxpoee in req~xesting the
w~iver was to be in competitzon with o~ther signs in the area.
~ ~
MINUTES~ C~TX PLANNING CON:MIBSION, Apx~l 29i 197ti ~4°23~
VARIANCE N0. 25~1 (Continued)
THT PU~3T~IC HEARING WAa C~OSI:O.
Mr. Jon C. Finch, 1000 Wilshi.re F~aulevarcl, Los Ange,lea, repre~c~~nting th~ owner
of the property~ ndvi~e~ that thE~ requeated sign would be far th9 use of
"Alphy's"j th~L othar tnnanta in tt~e commArcial cnnter would hevo bui].ding
signs and thA ueQ of en,y epece on the po].4 aign na~ r.equi.red for "Alphy'e".
The Commisaion painted out that tenante of ne8rby apartmdnts would be lookit~g
out their wiz~dows in~Lo the requesked signi that the ragueeted varianne wr~e
apparently to aACUre sufPlc:lont sign~.nq for othQr tenante in t-+e ~omplex aince
on~y one pole sigz~ wAa pormittedt and th~+t the pQtitianer waA ItO~ camplying
with the Sign Grdindnca.
It was noted that the Director of Development Services ha~ dotermi•~ecl that the
proposed activity fell with~n the defin~tion of Sec~ian 3.01, Claee : oE the
City of Anaheim Guid~lines to the RAquirements for an Envirnnmen~al lmpact
Report and is, therefore, categorically axenpt from the requirement to file
an EIR.
Commi~sioner Morley ~ffer6d Reaolut~.on No. PC74~87 and movod for i.ts passage
and adoption to deny Petition for Variance No. 2591, noting that the iequested
sign did not compl,y with the Anahoim Si.gn Ordinance, anc~ ~he petitioner had
not proved a hardship wua in~olved. (See Rasolution Book)
On roll call, the foregoiny resolution passed by the following vo~e:
AYES : COMMISSIONERS s COMPTON, FARANO, HERIIST, JQIiNSO~J, KTNG, MORLEY, GP.UER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: C~~iMISSIONERS: NONE
Commissioner Herbst~ in voting to c]eny subject petitiun, stated that the re-
qu~sted sign was within 300 feet of a residential area, and cited tha Pact
that signs across the street (west side of Euclid Street) as being taller did
not constitut.e a hurdship to the petitiotler.
RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEAI2YNG. JERRY B. NIT~SSON, 1720 Wes~ Ball Road,
N0, 73-74-51 Anaheim, Ca. 9280d, Owner; WARNIINGTON DEVELOPMENiT, INC.,
1752 Langely Avenue, Irvine, Ca. 92725, Agent. Property
VARIANCE NO. 2592 described a~: An irregul.arly-shaped paxcel of land con-
sisting of approximately 4 acres having a frontage of,
approximately 270 ~eet on the sc~uth side of Ba17. Road and
approxfmately 164 feet on the west side of Magnalia A~enue. Property presentl.~~
classified R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONF.
REQUESTED CLASSIFTCATION: R-3, MUL'rIPLE-FAMILY RESID~NTIAL, ZONE.
RP;QUFSTED VARIl~NC~: WAIVE:R UF' (A) MINIMUM FLOOR AREA~ (B) MP-XIMUM BUILDTNG
HEIGHT WITHIN 150 FEET OF A SINGLE-FAMIT~X RESZAENTT~IL
ZONE, AND (C1 REQUIREMENT THAi CAP.PORTS H~ ENCLOSED ON
THREE SIDES , TO ESTABLISH A 108-UNTT APA~tTMENT COMPLEX.
One person appeared in opposition to ~ubjECt petitions.
Assis~tant Zoning Supervisor Philli.p Schwartze read th~ Staff Ropoxt to the
Planning Commission dated April 29, 1974, and said Staff :tegcrt is referred to
as if set forth in full in the minu~e~.
Mr. Gared N. Smith, 2043 Westcliff Drive, Newport Beach, architect f~r the
petitioner, hriefed the Commissian an the proposed development, indica~.iag
that the petitionar had been requsst~d to c~nstriict an 6-foot wall along the
westerly boundary of subject property, and that the petition~r was in agreemen~.
Mrs. R. F. Anders~n, 931 South Verona, Ana2ieim, appeared in opposition and
noted that Ball Road and Magnolia are k~eavily travelled~ ttaat increas~ of
apartments would alsa increas~ the number of care parkec~ in the streets and
number of students from the areat and that the area should be developsd for
single-family residential.
~ ~
MINUTES~ CI.~~ FLANNING COMMtSgION, April 29, 1y74 74-236
RECLASSIFJCATTON N0. 73-•7A-51 AND ~'ARIANC~ NO. 2592 (Cantinuad)
apartment complex weat of thia propoe~d pro•ect
Commissioner King stated hc~ k~ad vi.ewed tha / on Su-iddy morn ng nnd there
were anly thrc~o car~ parkecl in the street.
M.r. Smi.th stated the pxoposed development was int;ended f~r ndult~ c~nly dnd
that parki.ng would be providecl in exces~s of ~he City' o rGquiremer~t~ and that
it would b~ more convenient for tenants to park in tlie area provided than an
the atreet.
Mr. Bernard B1ume, 2836 Weat Bal.l Road, 1~naheim, i.ndicnted hio prasenee in
r~gard to the 8-foot wa1Z rec~ueet, and that Mr. Smith had adviaed thia r.equest
wou~d be grAnted.
Mr. Roy 5harp, 1235 South Magno].ia Avenue, Anaheim, indicated ha wae the owner
of th~ house and proparty directly Lo tho south and rear o~ subject propeztyi
and that the vacant Iot had been undevelaped For 1.5 yoars and was unattractive.
Further, that hia home wa~ lacated on ~ho parael being prea~srved and he had
lived in the dwell.ing for 16 years and had np inton~:ions of living ~laewhere,
and he was aware dPdication would ha~-a to be made.
The Commissfon dis~cussed the fact that the parcel on which Mr. Sharp livPd
wou].d be a landlocked parcel, to which Offiae Cngineer Jay Titua indicated a
parcel split woulci be involved and a parcel map muat be approved.
zn answer to qu~estions from the Commission~ Mr. Smi.th ~t~rniahed ; nformatian
relative to other ctevelopments which he had de~i.gnecl for bachelor ul,its, and
atated there was not as grRat a~ turnovex in rental in baahelor unit~ as in
the two bedroom-twa bath units, since bache~or units were large enough Eor
ane person and not suitable for more than two at *_he most.
Commissioner HeYbst noted that an apartntent development study had b~en c~n-
ducted and it has been a policy that 25$ of a cievelopment was ample to tak.e
care of the need fcr bachelor units, and apparen+:ly a 700-squaxe foot apart-
ment was too large.
Commissioner Herbst offered a motiono secondPd by Commissionex Kiny and MOTION
CARRIED, that thp Planna.ng Commission rec~mmends to the City Council th~:'- ~he
subiect project be exempt from the requirement to prepare an Environmental
Impact Repart pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act.
Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC74-88 and moved for its passage
and ad.option to recommend to the City Council approval of Reclassification
No. 73-74-51, with the stipulation that the applicant construc~ an 8-foot wall
along the wester].y pr~perty line; and subjec~ to conditions. (See Resolution
Book)
On roll call, the foregoing resoluti~n was pa~sed by the following vote:
AYFS: COMMISSIONERS: COMPTON, FARANC~, HERBS`~, JOFiNSON, KING, MORI~EY, GAU~R
NOES: COMMISSIVNERS: NONE
ABSENT: COTIM~SSION::RS : NONE
Commi~sioner Herbst off_ered Resolution No. PC74-89 and m~ved for its passage
and adoption to grant Variance No. 2592 on th~ basis that the petitioner.
stipulatec~ to dedication and improvements on the R-A zoned praperty to ~.he
south which has frontage on Magnolia Avenue; that th~e petitioner clemonstrated
good space utilization and the p~r~entage of units for bachelox apartmenL•s was
not in excess ox that previously authorized by Commission polic~• permitting na
mare than 30$ of units smaller than 425 square feet; that the R-A zoned prop-
er.ty was shown on the General Plan as suitabl~ for multiple-family develapment,
and that single-family properties to the south ir the City of SL•anton were more
than 50 feet distant, whi.ch meets the Ci;.~ ^f ~~~:.con requirements regarding
two-story apartmPnt construction; and subject to condi•tion~. (See Resolution
Book)
~ ~
MT~NUTES, CxTY PLANNING COMMIiSTON~ April 29, 1974 74-237
RECI,A3SIFICATION N0. 73-74_-51 AIJA VARIANCE N0. 2592 (Continued)
-- ~.~ ._.~... - -
A~ roll, call, the foregoing reaalution passed by the fo~.low~.ng vutes
AYES s COMMiSSiONERS s COtdPTOr~, FARAN'O, ~i~RBS~r, JOHNSON, KxNG, MORLEY, GAtJ~R
NOES s ~MMISSIONERS s NONi~
ABh~NT: COMMZSS.T.ONERS : NONE
Commisaioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC74-90 and moved f~r its pas~age
azid udoption to zecAnun~nd to the f'ity Council tormination oP Rec~aseifiGation
No. 67-68-88 since none of the conditione of said petiti.or. hdd been mat.
(S~e Fesalution Book)
On roll call, the foregoing r~solution was passecl by the foll~wing vc.to:
AYES: COMNtISSIONERSs CUMPTOK, FARANO, HERBST, JOHNSON~ KING, MOF2LEY, GAUER
NOES: COMMISSIONERSs NONE
ABSENTs COMMISSIONERS: NONE
GommissionQr Herbst affered Reaolution No. PC74~9J. and mor~ed for i.ta pasaaga
and adc~ption ta terminaL•e Petitior for Vari.mnae t~o. 1985 s~.ncd none nf the
conditions of sai.d petition had been me~t. (See Reaolution Hook)
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the follow~ng vote:
AYES : COMMISiIQNER.`'i : COMPTON ~~ARANO ~ HERBST ~ JOHN:+ON ~ iCTNG, MORI,EY r QAUER
NOESs COMMTSSI:ONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMSSSIONERS: NONE
VARIANCE N0._2593 - PUBLIC HRARING. JoSEPHTNE MARKOWSKT, 1507 West Romney~a
Drive, Anahez~<<, Ca. 92801, Ownert 1~~~N M1~IRKOWSRI, 1507
West Romne,ya Urive, Anaheim, Ca. 9?801, Agent= reqize~ting
WAIVER OF RFQtJIRENJENT THAT TWO PARKING SPACES 8~; PROVIUED TN A GAFcAGE on prap-
erty describec] as: A rectangularly-shaped garcel ~f land hav~.ng a fr.ontage Af
approximately 61 feet on the north side of Romneya Drive, having a maximum
depth of appro„imately I00 feet, ancl being lacated approximately 265 feet east
of ~he centerline of Dresden P].ace. Pr.ogerty presently classified R-1, ONE-
FAMILY RESIbENTIW.~ , 'L~NE .
No one appeared in opposition to subjeat petition.
Althouqh the ~`aff Report to the P].anning Commission dated April 29, 1974, was
not read at the public hearing, it is referred to and made a parr of the
minutes.
Mrs. J~sephine Markowskie the petiti.oner, indicated her presence to answer
Commis~ ion questions.
TH~ PT ~LIC HEARING WAS CI,OSEL~.
In qusstioning Mrs. Markowski, the Commission l~arned that the propertX in
question had been converted from a garage to a living unit without benefi~ of
building permits; however, the petitioner indicated should the variance be
approved, permita would be obtained to bring the roam up to Code.
The Commission fu~th~r discussed thE fact that this was a non-standard dwell-
ing unit with no garage and that a precedeni. miqht be set in that other home
owners migh~ make alterations to their homes wi:hout permita with ~he kno~~ledge
it would be illegal, and if caught, place themselvee on the mercy of tlhe Commis-
sion; and that a time limit might be p].aced for use of this property, subject
t~ renewal.
Commissioz~er Farano noted that the Commission had spent many hours 3.n solving
p~oblems, and that the Commission should not grant carte blanche var3ances to
this type development.
Mrs. Mark~wski indicated, after questioning, that she would have no objeci;ions
ta a time limit such as five yeara, and that once the home w~s sold it would
be ~:onverted back into a single-family residence with ~arage.
~ •
MINUTES, CI~Y PLANNING COMMSSuTON, Aoril 29, 1g74 74-238
VARII~NCE NO 2593 (Coiitinued)
It wae noteii that tho Dir~ctor of Development Servicos had dQ~erminAd th~+t tho
proposed activity fall w~.thin the d~fi.nition of Section 3.01, Cl~+as 3, of the
Ci.ty of Aiiaheim Guidolii.es to tho Requiraments for r~n Envir.~nmental Tmpaat
Report and is, therofore, categari.ca~.ly exempt from the requirement to file dn
r~IR.
Conuni~sioner Compt~ii offered RQSOlution No. PC7~l-92 and moved f.or its passage
and adoptf.on to grant Petiti.oii for Variance No. 2593, wi1:h ths r~+qui.rementa
that the b~ailding be brought up to Code atandards and a time l~.mit of flve
yQars and sub~ect to renewal by the present ~wner/occupa~it unlyt and a~~bject
to candi~ions. (See Resolution Book)
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was pasaed by the following vota:
AYES : GOMMTSS IONERS : COMPZ'ON , HER13S'.[•, JOHNSON , KING ~ MORI~EX , GAUER
NOESs COMMISSIONERS: FARANO
ABSENTs COMMISSIO~VE~S: 13~~1E
In voting "no", C:ommissioner Farano i:~dicctted this ahould in no way o~fer
encouragement to otheYs to do the samet an3 that hQ wistied tc~ maintain a
positior~ a~+ far as th~ Commission was c~nc~rnec~ fox' future uses.
RECE55 - Commi.asicner Herbat moved for a~en~minute recess afi
_'r"'_' 4 • ~, . m .
RECON~JENE - Chairman Gauer reconvenecl the m~eting at 4:10 p.m.,
- all Commissioners being present.
VAttIANCE N0, 2595 - PUBLIC HEARING. COLLINS LTMITED PARTNERSHZP, David Collins,
Genera]. Partner, 1077 West IIall Road, Anaheim, Ca. 92802,
Owner; requesting QN-SAI,E BEER AND WIN~ TtJ CON~'UNCTTON WITH
F'~OA SALES on property described as: An irregu.larly-shag~d parcel of land
~onsi3tix~g of approrimately 1.05 acres ~ocated at the sou~heaat corner of
Bxoadway and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, having a~rontage of
apprcximately 40 Feet on the south side of Broa3way, havinc~ a maxim~~.m depth o~'
approximately 450 fe~t~ and being J.ocated approximately 160 feet west o~ the
centerline o~' Hessel Street. Property presently classified M-1, LTGHT INDUS-
TkIAL, ZON~.
One person appeared in opposition to subject petition.
Assistant 7,oning Supervisor Phil].ip Schwartze reau the Sta~f Report to the
Planning Comnission dated April 29, 1974, and said Staff Report is referred to
as i.f set f~rth in full in th~ minutes.
Mr. Dave Collins, owner and p~titioner, i.nformed the Comriission that tY:e re-~
quested variance was an oversight in the origxnal variance petition in not
having thi3 item li~sted; that he was operating a uni.que eenter for art3 and
crafts, and in conjunetion with the operation there was a small sandwi~h shop
where it was hoped to sell beer and wine, on~~, .Eor sale in conn~ction with
the ea~ing o~eration, He f.urther indicat~d 2'iat should such sale of beer and
wine become a problem, that it would be c~osed down, and the operation would
be similar to the Villa del Sol in F'ullerton.
Mr. Alvin H. Rohrs, owner of the petroleum plant adjacent to subject property,
appeared in apposition. H~e not~d i:hat the property had only recent~.y been
clear~ed up; it was being littered by the patronage of the Pepper Tree Faire~
He stated that the majority of daytime clients were people with children and
would not create the right environment. Mr. Rohrs did st~te that ai. present
the operation was a cl~an business and ahould remain that way without ~he
serving of beer and wine.
~
~
~
MxNUTES, C~TX PLANNING CQMMISSTOIV, Agril 29 , 19 !4 74-23q
VARIANCE NO. ?.595 (Contir~ued)
THE PUBLIC F~EARTNG WA3 CJ.,OSED.
[~r. Collins informed ~lte Commission trat the eandwich~~a wgra prept~xed on the
premises i~ha~ beer and w+ :e v~~uulcl onl~+ be eold to persone buying ~~n~lwicheE 1
anc9 ~hat th~ bavordgos cou. d no~. be ~arried c~utaide of ths dining room facili-
~iea, which Facilitiee wc~uld se~t. 38 people.
Mr. Colline indicated he had r~sad the Staff Rep~~rt which etaked the cond~.tione
af VAriunao No. 2349 had r-oL be~n comp:llod wir~~ ~ and h~ asaured the CommiAaion
tr~at the conditions w~uld be camplied with wit.hi.n 30 daye, regardleas of the
outcome of Varianca No. 1595.
Comr~~issioner Gaaer cnniplimonted Mr. Collins oz~ the operati~n c~f l?epper Tree
Fair~, indica~in5 tr~Are wera certaiti strxndaids for aeparat~on of bar and
dir~ing r.oom fACilities anci ex~r :esed concern th~t yourig adults wo~ild be buy-
ing bear and ~,ain~:, tn which Mr. Co111na replied that the Alcoholic Beverage
Control Buard was very vtgoraus in th3ir contral.
Commissi~ er. Herbst questtonecl that the City ~f Anati~i.m a7.lowed selling of
~e.er ln ar~d on stadium propPrty and at tre AnahPim Convention Center where
youngster~ and young aduli:s were pr~~~ent, and s ta : dd t-~at since this area in
qaestic,n was M-1, cli~ntele w~ul.a t~ut be any more exposeci to dri.nking than
at the ahove-mention~d fa:.ili.tia~s= and that Mr. Co].~.ins shGU1d s•tipul.atQ that
t,e~:r and wir~e would n~t lae sold unless congumc~d with food.
It was noted thal• the Director of Developmc~nt aerv~ices had dAtermined th~zt
th~ proposed a~tivity rel:~ wl~hin the definition ~E Sectic.l 3.01, Class 1,
of tha CiL•y of Anaheim ~u~. d~la.nes to the Reyuir~ments for an ~:nviror.mental
Imract RN~ort an..l is y th~.refore, ~atey~rica].ly exempt from tht requirement
i:a ~~ l.e an EIR. '
Conmiiss?.oner H~rbst offered a reaolut.ion to grant Petiti.on f~r Varianc~ No.
2595 wital the sti.r~alaticn that no beer or wine could be so~d that Y~as ~iot
consumed with .~r~~'~ t.hat the beer and wine must bF~ conaumed wlthin the restai~-
rant drea; and t.~.at hefore Variance No. 7595 could ~ecome effective, the
previous conditior~s ot Variance No. 2349 must bF com~pleted.
Co:~miss~..oner .E'ar.ano stated comparison o£ tr.e City i~icilities with Peppex Tree
Fai.re was no'~ possible si..~ce law enforcemen;: was avail~bl~ at Gitl- facilitiea
and there wa.s a different atmosph~r.e, differ~nt ciicun;3tances= and that the
major percentage of c~xstomers at Pepper Tree ^aire would be of the younger
group.
Mr. Co'llins again stated that !~he clientele was almost entirely adult; that
he likPd to encourage scouts and :.~her g.coups; and that the goods sold wer~
camplet.ed ~.rticles, not_ ~natera.als.
On ro! 1 ca].i, the f~regoing resolution fai~ ~d to carry by the fo1].owir,y vote:
AY~S: CUMMISSI 1NERS: HERBST
NO ~S ; COMMISSIc)NERS : COMP'?'ON ~ FAkANO r JOHNSON ~ KING„ MORLFY„ GAUER
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
Commisnianer J~hnsoc~ indicated his "no" vote was because conditions rec~uired
under Variance No. 2349 had not be~n complied witht ,~nfi chat the at*~iosphere
prevalent under ~ prPVious use might again be createa.
Commissioner k'arana o~f~red Resolution No. PC74-93 ~~nd move3 f.or its passaqE~
ar.d ado~ition to deny Petition for Varianre Nc~. 2555 for the ~bove-men~~aned
reasona~ ncting that this denial :~hauld in no way be a~nstrued as tinal
disposition c.f tlie suhject, indicating tha~. Pepper Tzee Faixe was ir the
earliest stagea of devF'.apment and a~ .Mr. Col~~nP had in~.icate:d, its character
was going to ~hange, tht operatlon ~~d client~le wer•~ going to chazage, and
wl;en tt-e o~eration was fally establishea ~hat the a~plicant return and the
Cor.unissi~nn review t:ie :perat~on aad if beer anc] wine wauld add fi.~ its opera-
tion withuut creating otlier pro5lema, such ~ae might be granted. (See
Resolut~on Bookl
...~
~
MINiJTES, CITY P~ANNIN~: COMMIE
~
~
)N, Apr.il 29, .1974
74-240
V~RI.AN~CE N0. ~595 (Cantinueci)
0~1 r.oll cal]., tho f~reaing ro~olution wae pas~ed by L•ha follawing vote:
AYESs COMMZSSIONERS s COMPTON, I'ARA,NO, JOHNSON, KINC, MORLEY, GAUF.R
NUE5 s COMMI~SIONERS s HERAST
ABSENTt COMMISSIQNERS: NON~
ThQ Commiesi~n atdteci ~hat conditions of Var .~ce No. 2a49 muat be complQted
within 30 days.
RECLASSI~'ZCATION - PUBLIC HEARING. A. H. STOVALL, JR., 1475 Santa I~argarita
NL~. 73-79-~3 Arive, Fallbrook, Ca. 92028 At~ID DOR~THY M. FULLER, '152
""--` ~ Skyview Terraee, '/entura, Ca. 93003, (hvnera= LARMbR
VARIANCE N0. 2594 DEVEI.OPMLNT CO., 1101 South urand A~enue, Suite K, Sa~nta
'""'~`~"-` Ana, Ca. 92705, Agent. Pi:operty desaribed as: A
ractangularly-shaped parcel of land conai~ting of a~proxi-
mdtely 1.95 acres having a frc~ntAge of approximt~taly 322 feet or. the r.outh
side of Linaaln .'~vcnL~e, having a maximum depth of approximtttely ::04 fes~, and
being located approximatel~r 340 feet west of the centerline or Western Ave.nue.
Propert.y presently claasi£ied R-A, AGRICULTURAL~,ZONE.
REQUESTED CLASSIF?:CATION: R-3, MiJLTIPLE-FP.MILX RESIDrNTTAL, ZON~.
REQi1~ST~A VARIANCE: WAIVER OF (A) REQUIRE~7ENT THAT VEtIICUL~R ACC!~SS B~ T11KEN
FROM HN AI.LE`1 AND (H) MzN1MUM l3UTLbTNG SITF AREA PER
DWELLING UNIT, TO CONSTRUCT I1 G6-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX.
~30 one appeared in ~pposi.tion to suY,joct p~ti,tior.s.
Althoi~gh the Staff Report to the Planning Commiesion datec~. Apri]. ~9~ 1974, was
not rPad at the public hearing, it is referred tc and n~ade a part oP the
m~nutes,
M~. E. ,T. Moore, President of Larmor llevetopmen~ Co., ag~nt for the develope.r,
advised the Commission that the number oF units pro~~sed had been re~3uced and,
therefore, the req~xested varia.nce was no longer a requirement.
C~mmissioner Compton offered .x motion, seconded by Co~YUnissfoner Johnaon and
MOTION CARRIEL, that 'the planning Commission re~ommends ~.o the Gity Cauncil
that the subject nroject be exempt from the r~quiremsnt te prep~re an ~nviran-
mental Impa~t Report pursuant to the pro~~ision~ of the Cas.ifoxnia Environmental
puality Act .
Mz. Moore advised the Cc~mmission he was awars uf a can~ition that the Firs
pegart:~ent had not~c~ a fire alarm system n, .ght be require i, and he was in
agreement ~o such candition.
C~mmissioner Compton uffered Resolution No. PC74-94 and. moved for its passage
and adoption to recommend to the ~'ity Ccuncil approval of keclassifi.catior-
No. 73-74-33, subject to conditions, ~aith the adc~~d conditions that street
lighting faciliti~s alony Lincoln Avrnue shal:~ be in~tallc~a as rec~uire~l and
a Y.~ona shall ~~ posted to gu~rantee ~nstiallation of same (an ampndment nf
Condition *io. 1 in thP Staff Report) , and 3Ub~P,C:~ to the condition relative
to posaible requiremPlt fnr a fire alarm system. (See Reaolut~on Book)
On roll call, the foJ.~ego'.ng resalt~.tion was passPd by the following vote:
RYES: C~:iMIS`'Ii'NERS : COMPTON, FAFtRNO, HER3ST ~TOHNSCN, F:ING, MURT2EY, GAUER
NOES: COMMISSION~RB: NONE
ABSENTe COMMISSTONr RS : NuN'E
Commissioner Comfitcn oFfered ~ moti.un, seconded l~y Commissienez Herbst and
MOTION CARRYED, to withdr.aw Jariance No. 2594, as stipu].a~ed by the applicant.
~
~
MINUxES, CTTY PLANNIVG COMMY83ION, Apr.il 29, 1974
~a-aa~.
RI;CLASSIFICA'rION - PULiLIC H~ARIN~;. CFiARLE:~ A. McLUEN AND DOYL~ W• HI~~ ~
N0. 73-74-52 r. 0. Hox 3045, Anahaim, Ca. ~2H03, Awnersl DOYLE W. FiI'LL,
~- - -~~~-~~ P. 0. Aox ~045, AnAheim, Ca. 92803, Agentt requosting that
property dee~c:cibed aa : An irregularly-shapoci parcel of
land conai~ting oE approxln-Ately '10,254 aquare fe~t loaat~d a-t tho northwest
corner of Short Street and Kallogg ~riva be :-~claseiEied Pxom ~h~ R-A,
AGRICULTURAL , ZON~ to the C-1, ^I:NERAL COMN~I;RCIAL, ZONE .
Aseiatant 2oning Supe-visor Phil~Lp Sohwartz~ advieod the Commi.~~j.on that the
petitione~~ hrd requested :~ two-wPek c:or~~inuance in order that- a petition for.
variance could be subm~.ttec3.
Mr. L'aonard Gutman, 6022 Short Stroet, Yorb~ Linda, appeared k~ePorA th~a
Commi~sion aiid indi.cated that property ownera in the ~rea had not hail suffi-
i.ent notice nor time ~o review tYie development. Ha further st~~t:ed h~ ownQd
he parcel immedi.a~-ely adj~cont to tlie property i.n question and hAd built an
$80,OOp h~~me an it which would overlook ti~is commerr,ial centQr. Mr. Gutman
indicat~d he had p~tition w~.th 60 siynatures in ~~:~nositic~n tu the devo].op-
men+: and rec~mmen~~e~; that the Commission considei th~ property ~:uitablp for
residpntial rather thar~ commercial.
Mr. ~7ohn 5~..~1y, 6061 Grandvlew, Yorba Linda, appeay~ed ir~ opposition and re-
quested that the peti.tiona be continued t~ May 13, 1974 , i,ndicating that the
area was unique, a~~y chanqes would be detrimental tp the value of pr~pertY
in the area, and access would bc on ShoLt Street. which was not a~ull width
street.
Mr. Sully wa3 advised tnat Short Street would be impraved to City standards.
Commiss~.oner Her:+~ ~ offereci a motion, ser.onded by Gommissionel King, to
continae Petition ~or Reclassificati~n N~. 73-74-52 for two weeks, to May 19,
1974, advising that ~roperty owners would receivc: a copy oP the legal notice
for thE petition for v~riance, and the combinerl petitions would be the first
item on the sch~duled agenda. MOTION C.ARRIFD.
REPORTS AND - IT~M N0, 1
I2EvOMMENDt1TI0NS Y R$A REGIONAL PARK ENV.T.RONMENTAL IMPI~CT i~''.,P0~2`,['
Assiatant Zoninq Supervisor Phillip S~ .iwartze advised the Comm3.asi.on that t!:e
Orange County Harbors , Beaches and Parks District proposed to develo~ a
regional park en a site af approximat~ly 1°0 acres located juat north of thP
Santa Ana River west of Weir Canyon Rnad within the Ci ty o~ ~lnahe~.m; that an
E:~vironmental Impact Report had been submitted caveri.ng sub ject pr.oposa7..
Further, on Fet,ruary 23, 1971, the Anah~im Ci.ty Counci'_. adopte.. General Plan
Amendmer,t No. 122 which de3ignates the area of concarn for a park site.
Commissioner King offered a motion, 3econd~d by Commission~r Herbst:, th.at the
Orange County Planiiing Commission be advis~d that the proposed Yorba Regional
Park i~ in conforrnance with the City ot Anaheim Genexal Plan. MOTTON ^ARRIED.
ITEM N0. 2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1347 - Property
located at. the southe._~;t corner. ~•f Mountain
View Avenue and Katella Way - RequesL for
clarification of use.
r~ir. WillieM Snelling, Vice President, Southwest Leasing Corp. , 330 East Katella
Way, Anaheim, advised the Commission th~t the Zoning Enforcpme-~t OfPicer did
make an inspectior. and t:~ere were ' for sale' signs in the windst-ields of ~xrs.
Mr. Sr.elling stated that some nf the cars sold had been returned £rom lease
and some had been rental cars ; that it was s tipulated on the original applica-
tion that vehicl.Ps would be wholesal~ only; that the c~mpany did aot have a
permit to sell except for wholesale; however, the firm was selliny to dea~ers
and to individuals, as well.
~ •
MINUTE3, CI~Y PI~ANNING G~MMJSSTON~ A~ril ~9, 1474 74-242
YTEM N0. 2 (C~ntinued)
Commiaeionar Farano que~tioned whethex S~uCtiwe+at Lea~in~ had a xesale~ pe~rmit,
einae r+.ich a;~ermit statea there wauld be no se1l~.ng ta the ~c:.ez+~1 pubJ.iat
that if selling t~ the g~+neral public, a ea~.e~s tdx muet be aQ1~.A0~1~~~ and it
then would become a used aar lot. Further, that ~he ~eci].i~y in queatian~
w~itld not bA used as a uaed car aalee 1ot, and if tht~ app~.icant wtahed to ~i~a
the praperty ae auch, he mu0t fi~.e nn appliaation.
tlr. Snelling adviBed tj:at tha ~n].y vehiclee suld were thoee which k~~sd baen on
lr~a~a or rental, na ~ther~ , and ~t a previoue mdeting at which the use~ was
approved, i.t wae hi~ intention t,o request permi.esic~n far ret~~~.iing.
CommissiAner F~ar.ano direated that. the petitioner be instructed tha~ the current
varianae shoul3 not be conatru~d to allow and parmit tha eale of cPre from
ti~e lot ta the public~ ~hat he was allowed only tt~ wholeeale Gare to otr~er car
deal~ara anc~ ttiat thia proport~ ehould not be usod to mak~ cars uvailabla for
inapoctian or anythinq olse Prom the propertyt and that one ot the conditian$
on the currant petition wae that sho~ ld any other ue~e be made, the pet .ti.oner
would submit another applicatian.
~ir. Snelli.ng adviaed he would make fur.ther applicatf.on.
ITEM NO. 3
FtM-'.~~SIDENTIAL ~ MUT~TIFI,E-I'AMIL't ZONE
Commissioner Kiny offered a moti~n, seconded by Commi~ss~.onex Mor7.ey, to clirect
Staff to e~±t May 13, I974, for ~.ublic hearin; on the RM-3600 cc,n8~min.ium
ardin~r.ce. MOTIAN C;ARRIED.
AD30URtvMENT - Commi~sioner King offered a motion, se~onded by Commissi.oner
Morley, ~o adjourn to May S, 197~, at 7:00 p.m., £nr a work
session in the Redeveloomant Diviaf.Un ofPices, At~nk of
A lerica annex. MOTION CARR7ED.
The meeting adjourned at ~:30 p.m.
Rea~ectfu~.iy submitted,
~
~~ ,..~.K~
~~~
A. Burgesa , ~ecretary Pro Tempore
3uiah~im ~ity Planning Cor~mission
ABshm