Minutes-PC 1974/09/300 R C Q MiCROFIIMING SERVICE, illC.
, ,. ,
•
~
~
City Null
Aiinheim~ Galltornia
Septerober 30, 1974
RRCUL~AR M~:ETIN~J OF TNE A.NAFII:IM CITY PLIWNING CUMMISSION
REGUT.AR - A regulat' meeCing uf the nnnheim City Plnnning CommisH~a~n wtlr~ cnl.l~d to
MEE?'1NG oYder by Chairman lierbNt rxC 2:00 p.m. ir~ the Council Charobrr, , qu,yr~.im
being present.
PltESENT -• Chairmi~n: Herbst
-- Com~ai~eioiiers: Far~tno, Caner~ Johneon~ Ki.ng~ rlorley
AB~GNT - Commi.aeionet•s: T~lar
AT.SO PRrSLNT • Ucputy City Altorney: Frnn~: Lowry
Off.i.ce Fngineer: Jay Citu~
Zoninq Superviecr: Chaz].ea Itobert~
Assietant Z.,ning Supervic+or: Anr.!k~ Sunt~ Q1-ti
Commiaeion Secretary Pr.o Ter.~: Aletha Burge..H
PLEDGIs OF - Commisaioner Gauer .led in the Pledge of Al~egiance to rhe Flag of th~
ALLEGIANCE lln'ted States of America.
CONDITiONAL USG - CONTLNUF.D PUBLI(: HEARING. Le~ PALMA STORAG~ PARTNERS, LTD., 22?.3
PE[tMTT t70. 1493 Avenida De 1.a Pley~, La .' ~lla, Cn. 92U37 (Owner) ; PUBLIC S7'ORA(:F:,
(READVERTIS~D) INC., 34~5 F1~•tchc~r Avence, Sulte 2, E1 Monte, Ca. 91731 (Agent);
req~esting perm+ssic~u ~o F.STABLISH UUTDOOR RECREATIONAL VGHICLE
STORAGE WTTH WAtVER OL' (A) 1tEQUIKT:D ENCLO..URE OF O~TSTDE USF.S, (B)
MII~IMUM Ol ~i-S'1REET PA1tKING, ,AND (C) MINTMUM S~'TA.~CI~ ON A FREIiWAY FRO;~TAGE ROAD on ~rop-
erty deacribc°d as: An irre~ulsrly-ahaped parcel of land conaiating of approximately
3.2 acrea located at the south-:rly terminu~ of Armando St.reet, having a fro~: age of
approximately 85 feet on t:~e souCh aide of Armandu Strect•, havins a m3ri.num ,iepth of
approximately SL3 faet and being loccted approximately 580 fePt r~outh of t1-~ centerline
of La Palma Avenue, and furCher described aa 1050 ,Armando ~tr~et. Pro~ert pr~sently
claseified M-1 (LtGHT LNDUSTP.IAI~I 'LON~.
Chairman Herbst adviaed tl~ae Conditional Use Permit No. 1493 had baen con~.inued frum the
meetit•g o` Septembet• 16, 1974, tu readvertiae for the dddit?~nal waiver of minimum 9et-
back ad~ac~t4t to freeway frontage road, Seci.iqn 18.5'2.06~(2-a-2); therefore, the St~ .`.f
Report 'to the Planning ~ommission dated September 30, L97[~, would n.ot be read.
One person indicated his presence in opposition to asb~ect petition.
Mr. Dwight Harper, 3415 Pletchar Avenue, Suite 2, E1 ~Sonte, California, represetiting Che
agent for the petitioner ar.d Vice Preaident of. Pub)ic Storage., Irc., appeared befor.: t;ie
Commiasiur, and noted the req~ested waivere, noting t~:~t the petitioner now proposes
chain].ink with redwood slat fence. Mr. Harper advise.d the Commi~sion that plana had
already been proces~ad through tha Building Divisioi.~ and conetruction waF underway on
the five mir.i-warehousas, and at rhe time of iasuance of building permir_~, the chalnlink
fence was included on the plans, and that loan r.u~mnitments had been -nade in accordance
with plan~ approved by L•hz City.
In regard to waiver (b), Section 1$.52.060(4), Mr, Harper noted tha[ there were very
rarely more than two or rhree people at the f.acillty at any one time; that the }~etitioner
proposes to leasa out the parking spacea to secure additional income, ~ince sufficient~
parkin~ was being propo~ed for tenants tu LGAd and uuload into the mini-warehuuee~ and
Che facility would be used for recYeational veiticle storage facility, mostly boats and
recreation,ll vehicles, and ama',il tr~il.ere,
Mr. 1?_cp~r indicated the petitioner wauld inatal~ chainlink fence with redwaod r~lats to
bl~~ck the vtsion from surrounding propertiea.
14-455
~
~
~
MLNUTL"S~ CI'PY 1'1.ANN'[N~ COr411SS].ON, Sgptemb4r 30, 1.974
i:ONDITIONAI, USB PI:RMIT NU. 149~ (Continue.l)
7G-4S
Mr, ArChur Hesket.l. i'reaidr~tit und Chninaa~i u!' the Bonrd o: St:nCc InduKCr~.es lucated Co
tl~e ec~eC o: eub~~ct propnrty~ uppc~~red in op~oeiC~Lon, Ntnt.ing Che c~verall upPe~irance was
oh~e.ctionHblc~. Mr. ~Ineknl] st~r.ed Chr~t too of~en r.raller.s, raor.or.homeK, eCc. rire ~llowed
Co become dlrty IIII(I unsightly~ which wue degrading to rh~ AC~A. Mr. Hnakell wae oE thc~
apin.lon an~ther b~iildicig should ba pl.nr.ed on [he we~[ eide so the vehiclar~ woul.d rn~t be
visible from the etr.aet.
THr PUUI.IC HFAItING WA;; CLOSED.
Commisaioner King inqui.red u; Mr. Haekell if. tr.eee were planted alon~ the fence, would that
meet with his upproval~ to which Mr. h~.kall t-ep3.ied Chul• aa long as the unite were nor.
vieible; that aince the tini~s were 12 feeC htgh, they cauld not be t~idden behind u 6•-foot
fence. Zoning SuperviFior. Chnrles Roberts stnCed Chat under. Che current provls~une of the
M-1 7.one~ therc~ w~e a requi.rement rhst treea be plunted on the etreet eidc~ af. ~ chainllnk
fence. whict~ would Apply to Ln Me~a Street.
Chc~irman I3erbKt etat.ed that the location of the facil.ity wae in Maheim's prime induaCrial
zrea~ thet khe City expects very high quality r_c~neCructlon nnd ube, the are~ wria "the fronr
do~~r to uur induatrial aren" ;~nd chat he was not in favor of outdoor ~tarage ut this
lOCa~ion.
In diacussion, the Commiasior~ noted varioua methods of Ncreening eucli as conotruction of
carporta, higher chalnli.nlc fence, curport rootfng, notiug that the facility and parking
would be visiLle frcm the Riveraide Fr:,~eway.
In regard to pmrking, Mr. Fiarper ag~in etated that the number required were in excese of
the needs of the faciliCy, Chat. tenante of the mini-warehouse k~ould noC be occupying the
spaces for any Iengtti of tine~ only to load and unlond which they would do at the door to
Cheir warehotise spaceD as~d iL was the desire ~f rhe petitioner to rent uut theae extra
parlc~ing spacea.
In viewLng plt~ns of the wnretiouse layout, Che Co~ission stated iC would be poseible for
Ctie owner L•o convert ttie sma!1er wacehouse spac~s ineo larger ones, by means oi mavable
wa.llc~, Lhat th1.s mRtter shoul3 h~ reaolved before approval was granted, that the plans
did not show doorways and it was t~ot poseible to determine location of the spacea. The
Commiasion also indicc~ted tke petleioner ahould be uware of the lo~~ati.on of the aecuri.t:y
liqhts si~ice they cou].d be hazardous to travelers along the freeway. The Co~niasion alao
requested Chat the petitioner locate the trash atornge arpa so as not to be viewable from
the freeway.
Commissioner .Iuhnson uff.ered a motion, seconded by Commiaeioner Farano and MOTION CARRIED
(Commissi.oner Tolar being absent), Co continue petition for Conditional. l)se Permit No.
1493 to the meeting o~ October 30, 1974.
ENVIRON:~NTAL IMPRCT - JOHN D. I.USK & SON, ;, 0. Box 214U, NPwpart 9oach, Ca. 92663
REPORT N0. 132 (De~veloper). HOPEN, HEDLUND & DARnY, INC., :i030 Weat Main StrePt,
-`~ Alhambra~ Ca. 91801 (.:ngineer). Subjece property, conaiaCing of
TENTATIVE MAP OF approximate].y 87 acres having a frontage of apptoximately 3209
TRACT NOS. 8418 feee on the north side o~ Nohl Ranch Road, hxving a maximum deptn
AND ~3647 of approxlmarely 1800 feery and being located ~approximately 1810
feet east of the centerline of Nohl. Raitch Road, is pruposed for
aubdivision ar followa:
Tract No. d418 - 40.6 acres - 10~ R-H-lO,QOQ lo1:s; and
Tract No. 8647 - 46 acres - 97 R-H-10,01)0 lots.
Subject tr.acto and F:nvironmentel Impact Report were continued from the meeting of August 1.9,
1974, at the reqvest of the petitioner.
Zoning Su~ervisor Charles RuberCa adviaed the C.~amission a requeat had been received from
the petit.ioner to conttnue conaidPration of t~ub~ect petltions until the u~eeting of
October 14, 1974, to meet with the Pec'alta Homeowners Assocation.
Commiaeionei Farano offered a motion~ seconded by Co~isaicnec Morley and MOTION CARRIED
(Commissinner Tol~r being absent), to further continue conaid~i•ation o~ Environmental
Impact Report No. 132 and Tentative Msp of Tract Nos. 8418 and 8647 to the meeting of
actobe.- 14, 19'/4.
...~
~
~
LJ
M1.NUTG~5, CT1'Y PLANNING COP4fI5SI0N, SeptemGar 30, 2974 74-457
FNVIRC~NMENTAI_ IMPACT •• CON'f INUL'D PU$LIC H'~ARINC. ANAHEIM l'IILLS, ~NC. /'fEXACO VFNiUlt~S, INC. ,
REPORT N0. 111. cl~ }{~rqt :. Schor~ 380 Anahoim Ftilis ltoaJ~ Anat-eicn, Ca. 928U7
~~ ~~ (Ownor). 1'raperty deecribed ae: An icregularly-etiaped parcel of
Rh:CLASSIF.[CA'r i0N land c.onelsting oE a~pror.imately 22 a~reB ha•~i.ng approxiatal•e tront-
N0. 73-7A-7.8 agee af 8"l0 feet on the eaat eidc+ of tlidden Cranyon R~ad and 1880
~~~ ~ faet on the iiorth side ~f hvori;~fa Ue Santiago, nr-rl Ueing locaCed
V~-RIANCk~, Na. 2566 approximately 500 (eeC southeaelerl;+ of Che inte+reecti~n of Serrano
~ + A~enue and lliddan C~nyon Road. Yrnpcer.ty proASnCly cl.uaeified R-A
TENTATZVF. MAP OT~ (AGkIGULTURAL) ?.ONC AtJD COUNTY UF UIIANCE A1 (GENERAL AGRIC11LTllRAL)
TKACT N0~ fi520 UlS1'RICT.
IiEQUESTI~:D GLAS5IFTCA'1'ION : R-H- 22 ~ 000 (RRSIDBNTIAL HILLSI,pE,
LAW~DF~+13I'CY, SINCLE-FAMILY) ZONE
REQUL~S'I'rD VAI2IANCC: WA[Vi3{t UF R1:QUIRCMEN'P 'PfIAT SIIVGLE-FAMII,Y RBSIDBNTIAI. STRUCTURES
R~AK ON ARiBRIAi, HIGHWAYS .
TEI3TATLVR TE2ACT ltEQUi:ST: ENGIN~~R: WT_..LDAN ASSOCTATES, 125 SouCh C1RUdina Streer,
Anxh~im~ Cri. 92805. SubJect praperty ie proposed for c~ub-
dlviai.on into 17 R-N-22,OOA lote.
Sub~ect Envirunmen':xl ImpACr Report, reclaKeificatiun, vnrinnc:e ancl ten[ative tracte were
continued from the meeCing~ oi 1~ecember 10, 1973, Janusry 7, March 18, April 29. .Tune 24,
at the requeat of the pnti.tione~; from August 5, 1974 £c~r rec~dvertiaement to inclucle
additional property, ~nd frc~m 5eptember 16, 1974, nt the raquEet of the pe*_ition~r.
2oning :>upervisnr Charlca Roberca udviaed the Commieaion that a~rrespot~dence liad been
re:ei.ved from both rhe C~ty of Orc~nge ancl Che petitioner reque9t.tiig that thes~a items be
conCinusd for an additional perlod ot time t~ restudy th~ aligcur,ent o£ propoa~ed Avenida
r:e Santiago ; f.urther, thal• AnaY.eim Hill.s, Inc. had requeated Che petiCione b~~ c~~itinued
ta the Febrtinrv 3~ 1975 meeting.
Cownissio~~ ~~hnson offered r~ motion, ae~onded by Commic~eioner. King and MOTION CARLt~ED
(Commisaivner Tolar being absen:.l, ta Further continue the publlc hearinge And condider:~-
tion of Ezvironmental Imp~ct Report Nu. 111, Reclnesification Nu. 73-7G-~28~ Variunce No.
2566, nnd Tentative Map of Tr.act No. 8520 to the meeting of F'ebruary 3, 1975.
RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARIhG. ROY M. SHARP, 1235 South Nlagnol.i.a Avenue~ Anaheim,
N0. 74--15--11 Ca~ 92804 (Owner); WII,LIAM L~. TACKARERY, 747 41eat Katella Avenue,
~ f1207e Oxange, Ca. 9'1667 (Agent); requestin6 that pr~perty deacribed
a~: A rectangularly-shaped parcel ~f land conaisting o~ approximately
.34 acre having a frontage o£ app:vximately 82 feeC an the weat side of Magnoli~ Avenue.
having a maximum depkh of approximately 182 f4e.t and being located approximRtely 496 feet
south of ~he centerline of Ball Road, and £urther described as .1235 So~ith Magnolia Avenue
be reclaesified from the R-A (AGRICULTUEtAL) ZONE to the R-3 (MULTIPLE-~'AMILY ILESIDE~ITIAL)
ZONE.
No one indicared their presence in opposi tion to subject petition.
Alkhougli tt-ze Staff Report to tt~e Planning Commission dated Sepr.emb~:r 30, 1974 was not read
at the public hearind, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes.
Tlie Commission nated tliat subject property ia part nf a larger parcel which was approved
for R-3 zoning on June 4, 1974, and is less than one acre in aize and does not meet the
minimum .lo~ areA of one acre in the R-A Zone. 'The Commis~i~n waa advised that the peti-
Cioner pro~used to retain the existing aingle-~~,-i.iy residence and no propoeal was offered
a~ thie time for mult•lple-family development.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commisaioner F~rano uffered a motion, seconded by Conanissioner Kin~ and MOT'i0N CARRI~D
(Commissioner Tolar being absent), that the Planning Commission recommenda to the City
Cnuncil that the sub~ect projecc be exempt from the requirement to prepare an ~:nvirun-
mental Impact Report puxeuattt to the ~roviaiona nf the California Environmental Quality
Act.
• ~
MINLJTL~S , GT1'Y PLANNINC CQMhfISST.nN, Septcmb-~r 3q, 1974 14-458
RECLASSIFICATION NU. 74-75-1]_ (ConCinuec;)
Comaii.seioner Furano offared ReHOlution No, PC74-196 and moved far ita passage and adoption
to re~cammend tu the CiCy Cuuncil approvnl of Reclessi.Eicatlon No. 74-75-11 Hubject t~
cond.ltionc~. (See Rc~solution B~:nk)
On roll cnll~ Che focegoing regol.utinn wae passed by Che following vate:
AYF.St COP4~SISSIdNEKS: FARANO~ GAUER~ ,10HNSUN~ KING, MORI,EY, i{ERHST
NO~S; COlMtISSI0NER5: NONE
ABS ENT : CONQIISSIONERS: 'fO1.flR
RECLASSII~ICATION - PUBGiC REARING. INI:T.IATED BY THF A~IAtiEIM CITY PLANNINf, COMr~LSSZON,
N0. 74-75-12 2O4 ~aHC Lincol.i~ Avi~nue~ Maheim, Ca. 92805; px'oposing that properCy
descri.bed ao: A re~:tangular]y-Phnped parcol o£ land coneiating of
appr.~xlmataly 2.19 Hcres having a frontuge of approxlmately 265 feet
on the aouth eide of Crtyec:c~nt Avenue, having rs maxlmum deptl~ of epproximately 315 feet,
and being located nppxoximat~ly 1065 Eeet eaet of t2~e canterli.ns af Dale Avenue be reclas-
aif ted from Cho GpUN'1'Y UN OEUNGI3 Rl (SINGLE--FAMILY RESIDLN~F) DISTRICT r.o the R-A
(AGl~ICULTURAL) ?.ON~.
No one indi.cated tl~cir presence in opposition to nubject petition.
Althougt~ tne Staff ReporC to the Planning Commiseion dated September. 30~ 1974 ~ras i~~t read
at the publi.c hAaring~ it ie refer.red to and made a pnrt o£ Ch4 mi.nuKes.
Th~ CommisKion noted that Aub~~ct petiti~n propoaed to rezone the property from the Cuunty
Rl lo the City of Anaheim It-A Zone, and Chat annexation of subject property to tt~e City of
Ansheim under Colorado-Crescent wae currently pending. Appr.ovll ot Ctiis reclassitication
wovl.d eatabl•lah R-A zoning on Che property as a h~lding zone pending finalization af. a
development zone aC a later date.
Tf= F. PUBLIC HL'ARING WAS CLOSL"D.
It was noted that the Director of Development Services had determine : Chat the proposed
activity fell wit;~in the definition of Section 3.a1, C1aes 1 uf the City o£ Anaheim
Guidelines to the Raquirementa for an Environmenta.l lmpact Report t-nd was, therefore,
cacegorically exempt from the requirement to file sn EIR.
C.ommissioner Farano offered Resolution No. PC74-I97 end moved for its passage and adoption
[o recommend to the City Council approval of Reclasaification No. 74-75-12. (See
R~solution Book)
Ori roll. call, the foregoing resolution was passed 1ry the following vot2:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FARANO, GAUER, JOHNSON, KING~ MORL~Y, HERAST
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COt41ISSI0NERS: TOLAR
RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARING. INITIATED BY THE ANAAELM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION,
NO, 74-75-13 204 East T~incoln Avenue, Ansheim, Ca. 92805: proposing Chat property
- described aa: Ac- irregularly-ehaped parcel of land coneiaCing o£
approximataiy 7.16 acrES located aoutheasterly of Santa Ana Canyon
Roed, having a maximum depth of appro:cimately 755 feet, and being located approximately
1960 feet east of the center2lne of Santa Ana Canyon Road and apPYOximatai,y 590 feet
norCh of the centerline of Mc~hler Drive be reclas~ified from tha COUNTY OF ORAN(:E
100-E4-20,000 (SMALL ESTATL~S) DISTRICT to the R-A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE.
No one indicated their preae~nce in ~pp~aition to aub~ect petltion.
E1lthough th, Staff Rnpart to the Plannir-g Commisaion dated September 3Q, 1974 was not r~ad
at tha publi.c hearing, it is referred to and mad~ a part of the minutes.
The Commiasion noted Chat t~eclasaification No. 74-75-13 proposed to rezane aub~ect property
from tha County 100-EG-20,000 District to the City of Anaheiw R-A Zone. and that annexatior.
to the City of Anal~eim under Mohler Drive No. 3 Annexation wae currently pending. Approval
- ~
•
^^~
~
MINII'fG~S~ CITY PLANNINC COh4lISS1UN. Septemb~r 30. L914 ~~''4`-i9
RECLASSICI.CATIUN N0. 74-75-13 (Cont inue~l)
of tMa reclaeRificnCion wauld establiah R-A zoning on the property a~ a holding z~ne
pendlr,g finaliz~~tion of n d~ ~elopmenC ~oiiQ nt ~ lr~ter datc.
THTs PUI~I'.IC H~AR.[NC WA, CLOSEU.
It wae noted thue the Direc.ec~r oE U~ve.lopmenC Servic:ea hAd det:ermined that Che proposed
actlvity fell wirhln the dofinition uf Sechlon 3.0.1, Clitea 1 of ehe (:ity of Anaheim
GuidelineR to th~~ Reyuire~aente for nn tsnvironmentnl Impacl• Repart and wae. thereEore,
caCegoracally exempt f.rom Chc rQquirem~snt to file an G~iR.
Commiaeioc-er King offered ResoluCi~n Na. PC74-198 rind moved for ite p~seoge c~nd adoptl.on
Co recommend to the City Co~ncil nppioval of Reclasetfication No. 7~~-15-].3. (See
Kesolution Book)
On roll call, the forngoing reaolution waa pa~sed by the £ollowing vote:
A,YGS: COMMISSIONERS: FAR11N0, GAU~R, JOHNSON, KINC, l;ORLEY, HERBST
N0~'S: COhO~iLSS10N~RS: NONG
At3SENT: r,OMMISSIONPRS: TOLAR
KECLASSIFICATION -~'U11LIC HEART?~G. INYTIATED AY THE MIAHEIM CITY PLANNING COYIMISSION,
N0~ 74-75-14 2QG Eaet Lincoln Aven~ie, Anaheim, Ca. 9?.805; propoaing that property
~ ~ described r-s: ~l.n irregul.arly~~haped parcel r~f land coneisting of.
approximately 7.16 n~res lacated aoutheasterly of Santa Me Canyon
Roe.d, hav~ng A maximum dapth of approximately 765 feet, and being locarpd approxim~ttely
1960 f~et enst of the centarline of Santa Ana Canyon Road Rnd approximately 590 feet
north of the centerline of. M~hler Dr.ive be reclaseified from the COUNTY UF ORAN;:E
100-E4-20,000 (SMALL GSTATES) DISTRICT to the R-t1-22,000 (RESIDENTIAI. HILLSIDE, LOW-
D~N:;ITY, SINGLE-FAMILX) ZONE.
A1tt,ougY~ the St~ff Report to the Planning Commission dated Sept~mb~r 30, 147w wnc~ nut r~ad
at t`ie public hearing, lt i.s ref.erred to and made a part of the minutea.
The ~~ommiss±on noted that Reclasaifi.cation No. 74-75-14 propoaed to rezone aubject property
from the County 100-E4-20,000 Di.strict to the City of Anaheim R-R-22,000 Zone~ and that
anne~.ation to the City of Anaheim under Mohler Drive No. 3 Annexr-tion wae currently pend-
ing, and that the proposed R-H-22,~00 Zone wae one that implemented the low-densiey
residentia 1 devPlopment. Sub~ect property was ~djacent (south and west) to Lhe Mohler
Drive Area which had ~ reaoliction of intent to the R-H-22,OU0 Zone.
Mr. Art P ryor of 206 Nortti ~uclid, Anaheim, requested information rclati~e to the reque~ted
recla~3eif icat3un, advising that he was speaking on be'half of other property owners in the
area~ speci~ically tt~e Voi.ce of Prophecy, Colortone, etc., and expressed concern regarding
the drainage pr.oblems.
The Cummi ssion advised thnt thi.s ~aaD an uninhabited annexation, did not require a vote of
Che pioperty owners in the area, only a request from the concerned property owner, and was
Ue.ing annexad uFon the requesr of the property owner.
CommiasionNr Morley offered a wotion, seconded by Commisaioner Farana and MO'f:ION CARitIT3D
(Co~issioner. Tol~r. being absent), tliat the Planning Commission recommende tu the City
Council that the subject proJect be sxemp[ £i'om the requireme~t to prepare an Cnviron-
mental Tmpact Rep~rt pursuunt to the proviaions of the California F.nvironmental Quality
Act.
Commisaioner Morley off~red (tasolution No. PC74-199 and moved for tr,s passsge and adopti.on
to recommend to the City Council approval of Reclasaificatton No. 74-75-14. (See
Reaolu~ion Book)
On roll call, the foragotng reeulutior~ was passed by the following voCe:
AYES: COP4II5SIONER.S: Fr1Rt'.NO, CAUER, JOHNSON, KINC, MORLEY, HERBS'I'
NOES: COt~IIyIISSIONERS: NONE
A.BSENT: C01~41ISSIONBR5: TQLAR
..~
~
.~
s
MINUTES~ CIT"f PLANNING COl~1ISSI0N, September 30~ 1974 74-4h0
RGPOK7'S AND - YTSM NQ. 1
R~COMM~NDATLUNS ORANGI; CUUNTY FLOOll CONTitOI, Dl STKLt:T -
~ ACQ1JISi.TION OF 1,AND
Zoning 5upexvisor Chnrle~a Raberte r~viewed the propoeal from Che Orango County Flou~!
Control Dietri.ct to acquirG un axcese parcal ot land £rom the Calif~rnin Department
of TraneportatLon~ wliich parcQl cansiete of. approximately ~wo Acrea locake~l norChet~Ht
of. the ~unction of Riv:~rdula Avenue and tha River~ide Frenway.
ThF UistricC i.ntende ~o retain the parcel for open space in ar.cordance with the SanL•a
Anr. Ri.v~r-Sont.lago Creek Gr.eenbelt Corridor. plan, ttnd ie bei.nq coneiderad for use ae
a recreAtional re,et stop. Mr. RuberCs stated the Dietrict had requeeted the Planntng
Commies•lon to report on the proposed projoc.t's conf~r.~annce with the City of Anahe~.,~
General Alan. and that i.n accordance with Che Cal.i.forni.a Br.vironmental Quality Aat,
the Diatrict hnd Elled ~ Negative Daclara~lon.
Commi.saloiier King offered Rcssolukion No. ?'C74-200 and moved for ite passage and adopl•lon
tliat the Planning CommiAeion finde nnd determines that thc propoeed sale of a two-acre
parcel of land norl•heast ~f the ~uncti~n ~f the Riverside Treew~xy and Riverd~le Avenue
by Lhe Galif~~rnia Department of TraneportaCion to the Orange County Flood Control
DiatricC ia in cunformance witl~ trie City of Anahelm General Plan. (See Reaoluti.on Book)
Un roll call, the foregoing rasolution waE paeaed by the following vote:
~~YES: COr4lIS3ION~RS: FARANO, GAUER, JOHNSON, KING. MORLEY, HERIiST
NOES: COhIhtISSLONERS: NONE
ABSGNT: COA4lLSSIONEKS: TO1.AR
IT~.T1 N0. 2
RE(~UES'f FOR EIR NEGA'fIVE DECLA1tATInN FOR A GRAAINC
PEFtMIT FOK THR~E S'LNGLE-FAMILX HOME SITES ON
PUSSUM ElOI.L~W
Zoning S~spervisor Chnr.les Roberts advised the Commisslon that application had bean made
for a gradin~ peru-it for three single-fnmily homes in the Mohler Drive No. 2 Annexation
area; that the property wao located within the Scenic Corridor and, therefore, cate-
gorical exempti.on from the requfr.emant to file an EIIt could not be granted.
After a review of Che grading plana, Or:fice Engineer Jay Titus aCated thaC the plan
indicated 250 y~rds of cut and 255 yards of embankment, ll~at the gr.ading plan had not
yet been checked, and the plnn did not ahow ttie prc~poaed contoura.
In discussion, Che Commission expreased concern that the concept o~ t1~e canyon areu was
being chan~ed due to exceasive grading, thnt some means should be arriv~ed nt whereby
grading plana ahould be aubmitted for review with the tract map.
1'lanning Siipervisor pon McAaniei noted that the proposed grading ordinance waa being
presented to the Commisaion in reviaed draft form, and auggested x work ~eseion by
the CommissionerA alone or with the City Council wuuld be in order tu go over poir~ts
which may aettle the isaue in queslion~ and that the EIR atatus of r.he particular
request was the r~asun it was before the Commission since th~ property was located in
the Scenic Corridor,
The Commisaion was furY.her sdvised that much of the contouring of the Anaheim Hilla was
based on gzadind permits iasued in 1972, that EIR's were now required on grading plans
and that was one tool with cahich ~the Commir~sion could control the amount of cut and fi~l
of canyan properry.
Commissioner Farano suggesr.ed the matCsr be c4ntinued in order that thQ Commission could
review t}ie gradinR plana, however, it was the consen4us of the Commissionera that thie
might work a hardehip on a small developer, and that appr.oximut~l~~ 80 yards of dirt per
lot w~s not an unuaual amount. Mr. Titus advised that any grading in exccsa of 100 yarda
per lot muet be approved by the Planning Commisaion.
Commissioner Morley offered a motion, aeconded by C~mmisaioner King and MO'TION CARRIED
(Commisaioners Farano and Johnson voting "no" and Gommiasioner Tolar being absent), to
find that the proposed project would have na significant environmontal impact and that
the Negative Declaration be recomner~ded for nppx'oval by the City Council.
~
~ ~
MINUTLS~ CI7'f PLANNING COMMISST.ON~ September 3Q, 197~~ 74•-461
REPORTS AND lt~i.OI~tENDATIONS (Ccnt~.nued)
ITEM N0. 3
TRACT NU. 51.62 - STREr'f NAMF:S
Assuciate P1,anner Phi111p R. SchwarCze advised the Cammiseion that r.eAidenre i.n TracC
No. 5162, wh'.lch wna ncar the northc~r~aC curn~r of Ball Rond und Br.ookliuret Street, have
requoated foi^malizati.on of r.heir c~xlEating privatc atreet names and the name cl~enge of
OilB s[reet £rum 5uuthnmpton I1r1ve be ~auAE~ uf n duplicntion o£ thc~t name in Ciky 9kY't~@CN.
Mc. Schwurtze~ ~tnted thaC the nam~ of. Southampton Urive wae.r@qweeCed to be chunged Co
CovenCry Drlve, and off:LciA1 etreot A'L~118 would be installed at Che intarRect:lon of
propoaed Coventry llrivo nnd Dall R~ad at tl~e property ownera' expen~e.
ComwiaP loner Johnaon of f erad a mation, scsconded by Coaoaniss:toner King nnd M(Y!'TON CAf~RI~D
(Commissioner 1b1nr being +~bsent), to recummend co l•hc City Co~mcil th~t the Ec,llowiiig
street names be approWed £or nami.ng or re-namii-g, aa raqueated by thc propcr.ty owners on
said streets;
1. Gasex Circla (private)
2, Cornwa~,l Drive "
3. York Circ14 ~~
/~. Well.ington Ci.rcle "
5. Avon Circle ~~
6. Churchill Circle "
7. Banbur,y Circle '~
8. Liverpo~l Lane ~~
9. CovenCry Drive (ex-Southampton)
IT~M N0. 4
ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT - PROPOSED
ACQULSITION Or RIG~ITS-OF-WAY AND CONSTRUCTIUN
OF AN UNDF:R~ROUND CUNDUIT
7.uninr~ Superv'i:~or Charles Roberte revi.ewed Che proposal from the Orange County Flood
Control DSaL•rict regardi.ng acquiaition of rights-o£-way and conetruction of an under-
gruund reinforced concreCe conduit frem Atwood Channel to Yorba Dam.
Mr. Roherts stated that the District had r.equested the Planning Commiosion to report
on the propoaed project's conformance with the City of Anaheim General Plan, noting
further that the Diatrict had filed a Negative Declaration in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act.
Commiar~ioner Kf.ng offered P.eaolution No. PC74-201 and moved far its paesage and adoption
that the Planning Commission finds and determines that the proposed construction of an
underground conduit from Atwood Channel to Yorba Dam is in conformance with khe City of
Anr~haim General Plan. (See Resolution Book)
On roll call, the foregoing reaolution was pasaed by the f.ollowing vote:
AYES: COMI~iISSIONERS: FARANO, GAUER~ JOHN50N, KiNG, MORLEY, HERBST
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
AISSFNT : COhII~IISS _ONERS : T.0?.AR
ITEM N0. S
SUGGESTED AM~NDMENT TO CIItCULATION ELEMENT
OF THE ANAHEIM GEN~;RAL PLAN
Aasociate Planner Philli.p Schwartze adviaed the Commission that the County cf Orunge
Master Ylan of ArCerial Highways does not conform to the Circulatior. Element af ~aheim'K
General Plan~ and it would be appropriate to Ruggeat some minor revislons to the Element
to synchronize the City's Element with the Urange County Master Plan. A General Plan
Amendment would be neceasary~ and would require a six ko eight-week study.
Commisaioner Farano off.ered a moCion, aeconded by Commisaioner Morley and D1UI'ION CARRIED
(Cnmmiaeioner Tolar being absent). to set £or public hearing on November 1', 1974, the
Amendment to Che Circulation Element of the Ceneral Plan in ti~e Anaheim Hills Area.
~ ~
Mli~ll'Tf:S, CI'l'Y PLAN~IN~ ~:OI~4SISSIUN, 3eptc~mber 3U~ .1974 %4-G62
RFPORTS ANU RECOMM~NDA'CI~)NS (Contl.nued)
L1'I:M NU . G
'I'~:N'1'A'fIVf: MAI' QF TRACT N0. ~466 -
RI'.SC1.ND PRF,VIOUS MO'TT.UN
The f'ommi.seion was udvi9ed tt-l~t; actiun t~kr.n ni~ Au~uer. 1.9, 1.')74 nn 'CeY~tnti.ve '.fcpct Noa.
8463, 6G6~, 8465 nnd t~4GG wr-e :Ln c~rror Ln t:hHt no bouncirac y changesa ltad bPen made to
Tr~ct N~. $4ti6. F~~rthar. that Clty Council approval ~~n Auguer. 27~ '197G. upproving
kevfai.on No. 1 tca 'Pen~n.tive Tract M+~p Nua. 8463, 846N ±~nd $465 did not i.nclude Any
actton teken on 'fcsntuCivr. Map of Trr~~:[ No. dGGb.
CommiaHioner King oEE~red n motion, c~econded by Goannisaioner Gouer nnd MOTION CARRIEU
(Curomiaeiqn~r Tolar being ubsent), tht~t the P'J.unning Commieaian rescind its Auguet 1~~
~.974 action on 'I'entativo Map oL• 'Pr.acC No. 846G.
1'CCM NU . 7
PKOYOSED ELF•MGNTAR'Y SCHOOL SI'fC AT
IMP~RIAL RIGHWAY ANp N(~1~L RIWCH ROAD
Zoni.ng Supervigor Charles Roberts advised the Cnmroisaiori that correspondenc.e had been
rec.eive:l from kt~e Or:~~lge I1nl.fied School Diatrict that atithorizat.iui- had been gr.anted
by tlie s~:h.ool boL~rd to acquire pr.operty for a new element~ry school site consiating of
approximaCely tet~ acres located at the iior.theast corner of the int~~rsection of Imper.ial
Nigh~.ay and N,~hl. Tt.an~h Foad. The proposed aite is one. that haio bec~n agrc:ed upon by khe
School Uiskrir.t, Anaheim llills, Inc. and the C~Cy of Anahaim ko be cleveloped na a
combii~ed publ.lc 1.ibrary-school facility.
Commi:~stoner Parano off2red a motion, secniided by Gommiaeioner. Mc~rley ~ind M(1TION CARRIEI3
(Commissionar Tolar being absent), to advi3e l-he Orange Uxiified Schoo]. nietrict that the
Anaheim Gener.al Plan currently lnclicates an elementary school i.s prolerted in the vicinity
of Nohl Runch Road and Imperial l~ighway nnd, Cherefore, the pi'opoe:A1 would be cousis*.ent
wi.rh the General Plan.
'iTEM NU. 8
REQUEST FOR INTFRPRETATIUN OF PERMITTEll
ACCESSORY USrS IN A SERVICE S'I'ATION
2oning 5upervfaor Charles RoberCa advi.sed the C~mmisaion that correspondence had been
received from Atl:intir. Richfield Company xequesting permission to estabJ.iah sn aut.omotive
accesqory display and sales facility in conn~ction with thei.r FervLce r~Cation operation
at Che southwee~ corner. oE i.uclid Street and La Palma Avenue. Mr. R~~heres furth~r noted
that Sectien 18.~57.022.01 of the Zuning Code lists as une of the permitted acceasory
uses in cor~j~.inction with a service ataCion the 'aale of tires, batteries and accessuries';
Atlantic Richfield Company had requested ~ dekermination as to whether this section en-
compasaey L-heir propoeiil to estAblislt a ahowronm and sales facil.ity for autonobile
a~cessories in conjuncl:ion with ~n extsCing serc~.ce station operation.
Mr. 'fed Carlton, Projec:t Manr~ger, Commercial DevelopmPnt Department, Atlantic Rfchfield
Company, advised that t:he pro~used op~ratioti wouid be oi~ n' cash and rarry' basis, that
the staCion operator would nat instal.l l~arr~ purcYi~-sed oi the premises, thnt if this u~e
is approved and succeasful at the suUject Iocacion, lt ~ould be put in nperation oniy in
'self-service' staticns; th~t at t}ie prec~ent time it was a tes~ oc~ly t:o nacertain if the
public w~nted [his type of servir.e.
The Commisston noted that i£ a11 service stations were to start such a pract3ce there
would be a`dir+count house on every corner.', since the concept of a service station was
beirig changed into a retail store. Further, that a retail Rtore such aa Pep Aoys was
requircd by ordiiiance to have a cerrain numb~r of parking facilitie9 on tr~e premises,
and ti-e Codc did not provide for »ufficient parking at aervice atations t~ sllc~w for a
rec.ail stor~ operation.
CommlasioneL~ Farano atated that the busineas operation would become product ra:.her thar~
Aervi.ce-oriented, and i.n all probzbil.ity a station could publish ads for saLe of eparlc
pluge, etc.
~ ~
MINU'T~5, CI7'Y PLANKT~IC COMMIt,SION~ Septcmbor 3U~ 1974 74-463
ITNM N0. B (C~ntinu~d)
Deputy C:iCy AtCor.ney Frunk Lowry notpd that many stationo ara lc-catc:d in the M-1 and R-3
2one9 ni~d r.etail eale of inercharidipe wae not permitted by l.aw~ and in Che CR60 of one of
thor~u ty~~e .~perntioitie~ ehould it over be propoat+d~ would be 'spoC zr~ning' and hnvc~ n diH~-
natroue affec~ on rhe eervice ot~tion ordinance..
In diecuaelon~ the C~miniyaion no~eJ thar sit~ devclopmc+nt etandarda~ aetback r~equ~rements,
purkin3. etc., tor a reeail ~toro outlet differed from a eervice etaCion; thuC lhere~ w~ru
twa n~sparate eales corcdpts~ queationing whether. this apert~tlon wou].d meet: the intNnt ol
the or.dinuncd a6 presently writxen. The Catrm~isRion furtl~er irlquired .into the type o!:
eign'~ttg tt»t would be r.equired for L•hie operaticn and Mr. Ca71Con advised they wnuld b~3
in confor.mr~nce wtCh the aign ordinunca. The CommisAion n~[ed ChBC thia may be precNdant-
set'cing, uiid mAny setvice staCions would bo andeavoring to mern!-andiRe in thie mannc,r.
The Commioeion inquired of Mr. Lowry if each t.lme a atati~n wiahed to add ~-~iH ~aetva.cs~
m~~,at a representative aprenr before the Cunnaiegiou. and he replied that wher~ the u~e
caaoe~ being an accesaoYy usc~ and bec.omee a pritnary uee~ the r~pplic+ant must b~: prpsant
r~nd a request ma-de `or a change in ues.
The Commission diecuased the advisabiliCy af granti.ng a six-month u.ptroval. for the uae at
this locution only~ with Arlantic Richf.ield Cumpany Co return to th~e Covunisaion at tYie
end oF that period with a report on ite use~ howev~r. th~y requeatod Mr. CarJ.ton to sub-
mit hie plona for wodiftcati~n oi• the building and property shuwi.ng t~arking for cuatamera
wi-o wuuld uKe the retail uperation as well as zhe gafl rump opera[ion, to deCermine whether
this would excesd the accessorial sales ar-d service fui~-ction of a aervice station.
Commiesioner Farano offered a motion, ser_onded by CommisAionPx Morle,y qnd MUTIUN CARRIED
(Commi~sioner Tolar being abeent), that Che service station ordinatice: be examined for
the purpoae of determining whather certain retai]. sales are permi.esive under the or~linxr~ce,
and if such retail salea are allowed, whethcsr it be automotlve or c~ther.wi.r~e~ as opposNC. to
u service-oriented b~sinese, the ordinance shotild be studied und amended to con£orm ~~h
the origi-;al intent of. the ordinance.
Mr. Car3.ton advised he would submit plana ta the ?.oning Diviaion for their revie~
which Mr. Robertn ~tated the plans would be reviewed and the Commi.s~iuii so advi:
the October 14, 19?4 meeting. and an intervretation requested uf Section 18.SJ'.~
of the Code r.eferr.ed tu.
kECF5S - Ct~aiY7uan Herbdt declared a receas at 4:20 p.m.
RECONV~NE - At 4:30 p.m., Chai.rman Herbst reconvened the me~ting ~:=
Commisaioner Tolar being absent•
ITEM N0. 9
PROPOSED HILLSID~ GRADING ORDINANCF.
The Pl.anning Comm:Lseion was furnished wi.th draft copies of the Hil.:lside Grc~d~nk ordlnance
which had been re£erred frum Che City Council ta the Commiasion for r~~rieo, an~ r~~commenda-
tion. T.he Commieaion was ad~vised tbat there had bEen no comments or recomme~:.~~~.'.:ona from
the Commission to the City Co~incil on this revised ordtnance ~nd that thz '~iz~ :ouncil
was available fora wor.k seasior. for such review.
Ca~tasioner KinA offered a motion, sec~nded by Commissi~ner Morley and "!J71t~y CARRILA
(Commiesioner Tolar bei.ng absent), to set a work sessior, for. Or_taber 9, 19i~~., 7:00 p.m.,
in the Council Chembers for the purpose of reviewi.ng the gradtng or.dinance.
~ ~
MIrIUTEi, CITY pI.A.NNIr1L' COMMY95I~N~ Seplc>mbc~r 30, 197~~ 74-464
[t~P0K.1'S AHII RECUDIIdENDATIONS (Continuod)
TTEM NA. 10
CQIiDITIOIVAL USF. PFRMtT N(1. 1468 ~-
RRQUf:3Z' YrOA EX.'Ci:NS1UN UF TIML+
'~µiatant zunittg Supervieor Annika 5ankala'~Ci t+dv~sed the Goaaainelan that a taquost had
bae-~ xeca3vad frorn the potitioner ~ur Con~iltiona], Uee Pormit NQ. 1468 f.or az- extene~ion
of t lru~ to comply witti ~:~ndit~ond of eub; act pe:iti~n which wae gcanted by Che Planni.n~
CominiReian on June 1Q, 1974. The petiti.onor vad curr~antly ir~ ri-e proceaa ~f wc+rking
wich the City I.ttorney's aEf~.ce relative tn A DealaraCion Gancerning Reetr~ctiahA and
I~npxove~nenka cunta:ln.ing provit~ione for tlt~ aare and maintennnce of commun areae. and
nrej~ac•.ing a parce]. naap~ which items ware ta be compliod wiCh within o period of uine~y
day c~ .
C;ondit-lonml Use Psrmit No. 1~e68 war~ appraved to permit ~onvcrBlon of an existing modical-
de:~Cai ~Efice complex inCo a planr,ed unil: commercial. dcve.l.apment on property aansisC•lnpt
o£ approximately eix Acrr..a w~et c,f the r..orthwest cornet af Romneya Drivc~ and Euclid
Stre~t.
Commi.sei.oner King afferod a motion, aeconded by Commiesioner Farano ~nd MOTION CARRIED
(Commisoi.onar Tolar being abaent)~ that Conditl.onal Uee Permit No. 1G68 be ~xtended £or
a period of. 12U days, retroactive to September 10, 1974, t~ expire January 10,1975.
ADJOURNMSNT - Thexe being no further bur~iness to discues, Commiaeion~r King
offPZed a motian~ e~sconded by Commisaione,r Johnson and MOTION
CAP.RIED (Comaaissiotear Tolar being abaent), to rece~e the meeting
t~~ 7:a0 p.n~. ~ Ocr.ober 9, 1974, for a Work SesAion.
The meeting receseed at 5:00 p.m.
Respectfully submlited,
~ . :/
; '~~ / i ~ ~~ `'`z'.e~
~f~'
f
AlethA Burgeas, Secratary Pro 'few
Anahein~ City Planning Commiesion
AB:hm