Minutes-PC 1981/06/29Civic ~~nte~
~nehetm, C~Ilfornt~
June 29. 1a81
REGUI.AR MEETI NG OF THE ANAIIE 1 M C ITY PLANNI NG COMM1 SS t ON
REGULAR -'~'he re~ular meetin g of the Anaheim Clty Planning Commisston
MEETING was called to orcle ~ by Chsirman Pra Tsmpnre Busharc at
1:30 p.m.~ June 2~ , 1981 tn the Councli Chember~ a querum being present.
PRESE:N7 - ChairmAn Pro Tempore ffusho~~
Commissloners: Sarnos~ ~ouaa~ Fry~ Ile~bst~ King
ABS~NT • Commissioner: Toiar
ALSO PRESEt~T - Annika Santalahtl Asslatant Dir~ctor for Zonin,q
JecE. 1~Ihite Assistant City Attorney
Jsck Judd Civil Cnctineering Associate
Dean Sherer Aaslstant Plenner
Editl~ Ilarris Piz~nning ConmissEon Sec~etary
PI.CUGE OF ALLEf,IANGE TO THE ~'LAG LEU UY - Commissioner Fry.
1 T~M N0. i: E I R NEGATI VE DECLARAT t 011~ NAI VER OF CODE REQUI REMf ttT ANG CONDI TI ONAL USE
PEf~MIT N0. 2209: ----
.~._
PUBLiC NEARING. OW~IER: ATLAt~TIL RtCIIFIEIU CO.~ 30~ West Gle~aaks Boulevard.
Gienclale. CA 912(12. ~1Glr~T: CIIARl~S V. I~I~KS. 3nQ uest Glenoaks Boulevard, Glendale.
CA q1202. Property cinscribed as a r~ctanc~ularly-shaped parcel ef land conststing of
epproxin~ately ~.31 acre~ lo~.:atocl at the southwest corner of 8a11 Road and Broakhurst
Street, 1201 5outh Brc~okhurst Stre~t, Property presently classified CL (COM.Mf:RCIAI~
IIMITEU) Zone,
CONUITION/1L USE RE:QUEST: 70 FtiRHiT A COt~VENIEtaCE Mna~:ET WITIi GASOLIt~E SALES 1~IT11
WAIVER OF MIt~IHUN IIWDSGAPEU SETEiACK.
SubJect pwtttion was contlnued fros~ the me etin~ of May 1S~ 1981 at the request of the
p~ti[loner.
I t a:+s notcd the pet t t i onc~r has r~ques ted th~t sub j Cct pet i t i on be wi thdrewn.
ACTION: Commisstoner Fry offerc:d a motton~ secanded by Cortr~issioner King and MOTIO~a
CA~RRIED (Ghoirman Tol~r being abs~nt)~ that Conditional Use Pennit fao. 22~9 be
withdrawn at [hc request of tt~e petltloner.
I TEM N0. 2: E I R NEf,ATI VE DECLARAT ION ANU VARI N~CE N0. 37.1 1:
._...__..
PUSLIC NEARING. OSlNER: NALURQN Ga55~ 7325 ~ast Alondra. Paramount~ CA 9~?23. A~EIIT:
RICNnRD TlilaoE, ta18 North E~ststdc, Santa Ana~ CA ~27~-1~ Propercy described as an
irregularly-shaQed parcel of land consisting of approximately 5~'1~ square feet,
located at the southeast cor~er o F RlvPrciale Avenu~ end Starling Way~ having a
frflntage of approximatcfy 92 feet on tlie south sidA of Rlverd~a0e Avenue ~~d a
f~ontage of 3h fcet on the east s id~ of S tarling Way. Property presently clesstfled
RS• 7~~0.
e~ -aos siz9ia~
~
MINUTES~ Af~AHE1M CITY PLANNING COMMISSIAN~ JUNE 29~ 1~81 81-406
VARIANCE REQUEST: WAIVERS OF; (~) MINIIIUN LOT AREA~ (b) MINIMU~1 lOT WIQT11 AND
FR4NTACE~ (c) MiNIMUM LANDSCAPEp SETDACK AND (d) PERMITTEb ORIENTATION TO CONSTRUCT A
SINGLE-FAHILY RCSIOENCE.
Subjett petltion waa cantlnued from the mecttng af June 1~ 1981 At the request of the
petittoner.
ThPre was one person indicating his presence In op~+ositton ta sub.iect ~equest~ and
althouyh the staff report wes not raAd. it is referred to a~d mAde n part of the
minut~s.
Olck Tlmboc~ agent~ expl~fned they would like to bulld a slnc~le~f'mnily dwell(ng oR
subJect pruperty; tl~at ham~s In the ~area are 1-~ to 1; years old a-id this house wt 1)
be very compatible and wll l be worth between 5140,~~0 and S1~~~~~~) when completed;
s~nd th~t homes ( n the ne f ghborhoc~d e+re se 1 I( n~~ f rom S 122 ~0~1~, Fle s tated the w~ ( ve rs
are n@cessary b ecause of the si~e flf the property.
A1 Hickrnan stated he 11ves next door ta the vacr~nt lot and there 1~; scxne q~~~~stion as
to the siz~ of tlie lot and I~c felt it would b~ im~~ossibla to butld o com~atlale houst
on thts lol bect~use the Int is less th~n 5~~00 square feet end there would n~t be
sufflclent room for landscaping and the eaves would b~ near his praoQrty Ilnes. He
stated he is al~c, concerneel about safety wtth the d~iv~!wey on River~ale be~au~e it is
dlrec~ly oppasi te the hc~spital and there is a tremendous artnunt of ,~phic~elar a~nd
pedestrlan tr~fflc in the arca because of the hospital. Ne stated t~5$ of the Craffic
for thc hospital utilizes the Riverdale cirlveway. Ne ~ointed out trafftc at
RlverdAle anJ t,Akeview r~quired ~, traffic signal and he felt thc d~ive~~ay should be
An Starl ing uay.
Mr. Nickman stated his lot is E~7(10 square feet and h~ has offered :c~ scil
approxlmately 1,G00 square feet to Mr, Timboe to allow him to build on that lot, but
not at this timr;, He stated that lot was cywned ~y CALTRAt~S and was sold for $a~0
because the Gity of Anahelm sald tt was no* buiideble; that speculatars and
developcrs bought (t and naw it (s worth SW~.OQO. lie felt if devclopment was gaing
to be permftte.i~ the City of Anaheim should havr allaw~d CALTRANS to sell (t as
res i den t i~~ 1 proper ty .
Ne stated che structure should be at lcast 30 fee` from the stdewalk ~n arder to have
lendscaping ane! this lot will have L f~et all the w ry around for landscaping and he
felt it is impossible to say this structur~ would be compatlble wlth the
~eighborhood.
Mr. Ttrt~oe stated his son contacted Mr. Flickman when he first became interested in
the lot and was edvised his children play on that l~t but he.mlght
be willing to let them have a piece of lt; that he tried to contact Mr. Nickman
several tlmes and around the 15th ~f M~y did spend ove~ an hour with him and
explained the pro,ject to him and asked what could be done to work this out and that
they ceme to a~ agreement and he went i nto escrow and the ~~lans were drawn for the
lot spllt. He stated finally after cnntacting Mr. Ntckmen agaln, he indicated
possibly the peopte who held the trust deeds, might not go along with the pr~posal
6/29/8y
MINUTES, AIiAIIEIM CItY PLANNINC COMHISSIQN~ JUNE 29~ 1~81 81-407
and after sl~owtng him the plans, with the lot split snd with the drtvavAy off the
frant~ Mr. tllckman tiatd they were not intarRated and he would not siqn the escrow
papera. Ne stated they had apent a lot of money and time on the plans~ a surveyor~
etc. Ne stated he later found o~~t the awner hAd hAd difftculty with him and the
people across the street are tryin,y to buy the prape~ty and that Mr. tlickmen w~s not
agalnst this p~oie~:t when he found out he could get S7.S0~ for his piece of property.
Ne skated thcy c:ontocted the Traffic Engincer and he said the turn-around ts ~dequ~te
anJ also that ~herc is a schaol whlc~i lets peoplc aff and on to that maln str ~t. IiQ
stated the neighborl~ood has both two-story and onP-story untts and thls structu~e
wilj be cnmp~ttble with shaka roof~ etc.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
CommissionPr King clartfted Mr. T~mboe understood that the Treffic Enc~tneer
recommencis a pAVed vehicular turn-around ~rea be prav(ded ad)acent to the proposed
d~ivewey gatning access fram RiverdalG Avenuc to the nc~rth. Mr. Ttmboe ~eplied he
w i 1 1 comply wl th thAt re:eommendat lon.
Chairman Pro Temporc Bushore noted the prope~rty was surveyed by a licensed surveyor
and h~s 5,2~0 square feeC and accurdiny to the plans, the eaves wll) be 3 to 4 feet
aaay from Mr. Hickman's p~operty Ilnc. He st~~ted evon though Lhls property may have
bcen deeme:d unbuildable et one time~ he would rather see It developed to bring in
some property taxes becausc a S1a0.00Q hame would b ring in a considcrable amount. Fie
stated he personally thinks thls residence would be An (mprovement to the area.
Commissioner King agreed.
Commissioner Barnes stated sl~e dld not ~naw of anything clse this property could be
used for end t nd i cf~ted she real I zes scxne~ne , prc~bab 1 y Mr. H i ckman ~ has been k~ep i ng
it mowe~i ancl she fclt sumething st~ould be done witli it so that it is sane:body's
responslbllity. She stated she Chought there was an unofficiai proposal some rtanths
ago for an office complex and she felt a resi~ence would be rrore beneficial~
especially in a residential neighborl~ood.
ACTION: Commissioncr King offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and
MOTION CARft1ED (Ghairman Tolar being absent) ~ tl~at the Anaheim City Pianning
Commission has revicwed the proposal to construct a single-family residence with
w aivers of mi~imum lot area, minimum lot width and frontage~ minimum ianciscaped
setback, and permitted orientation on an irragularly-shaped parcel of land consisting
of approxin•~ately 5,2~0 square feet located at the southeast corner of Riverdale
Avenue and Starling Way; and ~oes hereby apprave the Fkyattve Declaration from the
requlrement to p~epare an environa~enta) Ir~p~ct report on the basis that there would
b e nn siynificant individual or cumulativP adverse znvironmentai impact due to the
approvai of this Negative Declaration since the Anaheim General Plan designates the
subject property for hi l lsidc low density rESidential ta~d usts commensurate wtth the
proposal; th~t no sensitive environmenta) impacts are involved in thc proposal; that
the Initlal Study submitted by the petition~r indicates no stgnificant individual or
cumulative adverse environmenta) impacts; and that the Negatlve Declaratton
substantiating the foregoing findtngs is on file in the City of Anahetm Planning
Oepartment.
6/29/81
~w:
MINUTCS~ ANAt1El11 C11'Y Pt,IINNING COMMISSION, JUNE 2~~ 13H~ 81-~G08
Commiaaloner King off~red Rcxaiutian No~ PC81-1~+3 ~nd moved for its passage and
~dopttan thrt the Anahcim City Planning Commisston docs hereby grant Varlance No.
3217 on the basis thet a h~~dship exlac~ due tu the size~ ahape and locatlan of the
proporty end subJect to Interdepartmontnl Committee recommendations.
On rotl call~ the foregoing resolutlon was passed by the fallowing vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES~ DOUAS~ ~USi10RE~ FRY~ NEROST~ KiNr,
NOES : COMhI SS I Ot~ERS : NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; TOLAR
Jack uhite~ Assistant City Attorney~ presented thc written right to appeal the
Plannin~ Cortnntsston's declsion within 22 c1Ayg to the Clty Countll.
ITEM N0. : EIR NEGATIVE UECLAR_ ATIO~ij WA VER OF CODE RE~UIREMENT AND CONOITIONAL USC
RM{T N0. 219 ;
PUaIIC NEARING. OWNERS: MELOOYLAI~D SCHOOI. OF TIIEOLOGY~ 1730 South Clementine
Str+eec~ Anahcim~ Cl1 ~2~02. AGENT; DIVERSIFIED MANUFACTURING ANO ENGINEERING~ 1E191
Construction Circle West~ Irvino~ CA 92714. Pr~perty describoct es a rectangulerly-
shapQd parcel of land tonslstiny of approxtmately 0.72 acrr.~ 1732 South Clemen•ine
5treet (Melodyland Schoo) af Thcology). PrQperty presentty classifted ML
(tNQUS7RIAL, LIMITE:p) ZONE.
COtJUITIONAL U5E RCQUEST: TO PERNIT A GYMNASIUM IN CONJUNCTION wlTll A'~ EXIS7ING
PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTI(ltl wITH WAIVER OF HINIMUM Llt`IpSCAPEq SE'E3ACK.
SubJect petttlon wag continued from the ~+e~tln~ ~f May 1[i, 1~161 and June 1. 1981 at
the request of thc petittoner and continued f~om the rn~ctinq of June 15, 1~81 in
order for thc applica~t to be ~resont.
It was noted the petitianer has rec~uested that subJect petltlon be withdrawn.
ACTION: Commissianer Fry offered a rrbtion. sec.onded by Conmissioner Ktng and MOTION
CA- RRIEU {Chairn~an Tolar be(ny absent), that Condltianal Use Permit No. 2196 be
withdrawn at the request of tht petltioner.
ITEM N0. 4: fIR NEGATIVC DECLARATIQN WAiVER OF -.ODE RE~lU1REMENT ANO CONOITIONAL USE
PERMIT N0. 222 :
PUbLiC HEARING. OWNER: HERBERT E. AND EI,i'LABETN C. CIiR:STENSEN~ 730 Southern Avenue~
Qrange~ CA 92665. Property destribed as a rcctanguiarly-shaped parcrl of land
cons(sting of approximately 0.3 acre, lecated at the southwest c.arner of Ccrritos
Avenue and Wainut Street. 12f~0 West Cerritos Avenue. Property presently classified
RM-1200 ~RESIDENTiAL~ MULTIFLE-FAMILY) Z0~lE.
COIiDITIONAL USE REQUEST: TO PERPIIT A DRIVi•TIIROUGt1 RESTAURIIt~T wITH NAIVER QF
MlNIP1UM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES.
6/29/81
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING tOMMISSION, JUNE ~~~ 1981 81-4~A
SubJect pet(tton was canttnued frnm thc meetings of June 1~ and Junc 15. 19$i at the
ranuQSt of the petitionar.
tt was noted tlie petitioner has requestcd that subJect petttlan be wtthdrawn.
ACTION: Commisslaner Fry offered s motlon~ seconded by Commissionor• I:ing and MQTION
CARRICD (Chalrman Tol~r being abacnt)~ that Condttional Usc Permlt Mo. 2224 be
wtthdrewn et the requ~sst of ~he petitioner.
IT~~M~NO. 5; EIR NL•GATIVE OECLARATION WAIVER OF CODE RE UIaEMENT AND CONOITIONAL USE
PERMIT N0. 221 :
RE,~ovCRTISEO PuULIC NEAa1Nr. OwN~R; ROSA MARY CASELIn UIIVt ANU ANCELO CASEI.LA,
2124 East VA11ey Glen lane~ Orangc~ CA 92GG~. AGENT; PIITRICK J. AND JULIA R. DI-RR~
3~93 Easc Miraloma~ Anahaim~ CA 92II~6. Property descrlbecl es a recte~gul~rly-sheped
parce) of lanrl u-nsisttng of approxtmat~ly 0.6 ~crc~ located r~t the nortFnvest corner
of Miralonw Avenue and Kraemer BoulevarJ~ 30~3 East Miraloma Avenuo. Property
prescntly classified ML (INDUSTRIAL, LIMITEn) ZONE.
CONOITtUNAL USE R~t)UEST: 70 RETAIN !11! EXISTING AUTO UETAIL FACILITY ANO PERMIT AUT~
SALES At1U TRUCK STORAGE IN TIIE Ml, ZONE WI1'F1 WAtVER OF MINIMUN t.At~DSCAPED SETBACK.
SubJect petition was cantinue~i from the mceting of June 15~ 19$1 at the requ~st of
thc petitloncr.
It was nated tt~e appllcant was nat present and upon being cantacied~ ind(cated he
wau 1 d 11 kc a cwo-weck con t( n ua~ c~ .
ACTION: Cammissioner King offered a motton, seconded by Cc~rmilssianer Bouas and
MO~T 0 CARRIEO (Chairman Talar being absent), th~+t consicicratton of the above-
mentlaned It~m be cantinued to tl~e rec~ula~ly-schedulG~f ineettng of July 13~ 1961 at
thc request of the petitioner.
ITEN N4. 6: EIR CATEGORICAI. EXEMPTION-CLASS 8 AND CQNDITIO-~AL US~ PERMIT N0. 1419:
r._.~..~.._
PUf3LIC HEARIPiG. PETITIOI~ER: CITY OF ANANEIF!. Property described a~s a
~ectanqularly-shapnd parcol of land consisti~c~ of approximately 1.~ acr~, 305~32;
East ~roadway.
Unckr autharity of Code Section 1~.03.0~1. the Ctty proposed tp revoke CondittonP,l
Use Permit No. 1419 for faliure to comply with the zondittons of approval on prc~perty
Iac~Ced at 3~5-325 East Broadway (A~ahelm Baptfst Cfiurch).
There we~e five persons indicatiny thei~ pr~sence in favor of subJect ~evocatiun and
appraximat~ly 55 persons were present indicating their opposicion to the ~evACatton,
and although the staff repo~t was not read~ It is referred to and made a part of the
minutes.
6129I81
~
,(
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMI'~SION, JUNE 29, 1981
R1-410
JaGk Whlte, Assistant City Attorney, explatncd thls is a city-initiaced prc,posal to
revoke Canditional Use Permlt No. 1419 for fatlure to comply with th~ canditions of
approval of the original condition~~l use permit; that this action comes tc, the
Commission's attention as a result of an inspection made by the City Zuning
Enforcem~nt Officer~ Anthony Montoya.
Anthony Montoya, 21270 Pelamar~ Wildemar~ st~ted he works for the City nf Anaheim in
Z~ning Enfarcement; that this action is the result of complaints by locai ~esidents
upset wlth the dust and noise generated from the playground of this far;ility; that
upon inspection~ he observed approximately 200 children and upon reviewing the
conditionel use permit, found ar~ly 50 children were to be allowed in the school
activity; that the pastor was made aware of this condition and he~ sub:,equentiy,
discussed the sltuation with Annika Santalahti~ Assistr~nt Qirector fnr toning~ and
it was deeided that posslbly the two parties could meet on a comrnon ground and thc
mat~er could be resolved administrative~y; however~ anuther complai~~t was ~eceived.
Ne stated he talked wfch the pastor app~oximately five or six times and sent him two
l~tters and therc has b~cn no pcci[ton filed. He explained he first talked with
Pastor Davidson on October 23~ 1980; that Pastor Davidson met with Ms. Santalahti on
Octaber 27, 1980; tha[ a letter was received from the pas[or appr~ximatelY two months
laterexplaining the opcration and admitcing to having 192 chilJren involved in the
church school activities; that on January 5, 1981~ annther complaint was received
and a letter sent on the same day to the pastor; that a letter was received by the
city from the church's atlorney~ on March 13, 1981~ claiming separation of church and
state; and that since this is a lan~ use issue~ the City Attorr-ey felt an action
sl~ou 1 d be tak~n.
r~, ~,~~+~ Jack White clarified that Mr. Montoya's lett~r to Pastor Dav~ds~n was dated February
,~~ 9, 1 ~~Q ~ and Cf~e letter from Pastor Davidson setting forth titie nacure of the
ope~'atlon was dated October 29~ I?80~ wich a subsequent letter from the city deted
April 7, 1981. stating action would be taken if a condition,,l use permit petition was
not filed,
Chairman Pro Tempare Bushore stated he understands that ti~e city has corresponded
with Pastor Davidson~ both verbally and written~ making f.;m awa~e that the
conditional us~e permit should be modified or a new permi,: sought and the response
from legal representation has been that there is a separation of church and state
and, therefor~. no comp2tance is required on Lhe part o4 the thurch.
Jack White replied he thought that :estimdny wr>uld pro~ably be caming from the
church's legal counsel and the Commission dces not need ta make that representation
at thls time.
Jack White presented docurt~nts to be piaced in evider~ce before the Commission out of
the Planning Departmer.t files which are public records and noted copies have been
given to the ch~,rch's legal counsel; 1) R~esolution PC73-187 granting Conditional Use
Permit No. 141g; 2) letter f~~am Dr. Davidson to Annika Santalahti dated October 291
1980; 3) letter from F1r. Montoya dated February 9, 19$1; 4) letter with accompanying
legal memorandum from Chorles E, C~aze of the law firm of Gibbs b Craze, dated March
13, 1981; 5) letter dated April 7~ 1~81, from Mr. Montoya to Dr, Davidson relating Lo
Lhe fact that action would be taken if the petition was not filed ~ 6) letter dated
6/29/81
~ ~~ ' Y
Y
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PI,ANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 29, 1981 81•411
June 10~ 1981~ from Dean Shewer of the Planning Oepartment 4lving notification of
caday's hearing~ and 7) is a letter from the Dapartment of Social Servtces received
by the Planning pepartment dated Junc 12~ 19$1, He stat~d tliose documents are marked
for purposes of identlfication as Exhlbits A throu4h G respectively.
Mr. 8lankmeyer~ 403 East Broedway~ stated he hes lived right across the strcec from
the church for 40 years; that whr.n she preschool waY started~ thtre we~e 50 children
and the yard also harJ grass; but they have not watered anythiny dawn for the p~ast two
weeks and there is nothir~g ther~ but dust; that last Thurs~iay he wanted to paint the
instde of his hause and the childrGn were Chrowing dust ar~und which made it
inconvenient for him and he had to ask them to wet dc~wn tfe araa s~ he could have his
pbintcr do somo painting; that on ar~other occasion he was going dc~wn thc allcy about
8;45 a.m. and was reprimanded by one of xt.: parents And told he cauid not go down thc
alley in th~t direction bec~yuse on Phil~delphia Street~ ~here is a sign "entrance
only", and on Olive Stre~t~ thcr~ is ~ sign "exit only". He stated thc alley is a
publ(c alley s~ he called the Police Oe9~artmenc to see what could be done and they
came out and verified thet the signs wsare on private prc~perty a~d nothing could be
done~ but they dici cite a coupte af unetlended outomobiles.
Mrs, Blankmeyer stated the n=~~se thr.re has increased by volumes; that the children
are out in the yard 5CrCnm~i~s~ and yelling and playing kickball, and dust flies all
over and she cannnt keep '~°T~;~ ~wuse clean or ke:ep the noise down. She stated she has
to keep the windrn+s clos-- ~ause of th~ naise and dust; that wh~n Dr. Oavidson
came to visit them in ~~::-~~r, tre said the l~ws do not appiy and the chu~ch ancl
the Lord do not ab~de cr~ ~r*5, t~e~ that are being made, but that if the noiSe did not
quiet down, he woul d sa~e :, i r~ t,.~ weeks, but he has never been back to f f nd out i f
there has been any im~~°~~aen, y~ the noise and dust. She scated i~e~c are sick
peop l e i n the ne i ghb~~~°~<--~: ~#f+,~ the ne i ghbor next door i s i n the hosp i ta 1 r t ght now
and the wi fe i s wi tai f« ~, ;~P ,~,therwi se ~ she would be here to say that i t has botherr~
him and has rnade hinl ~~-1r~ ~~~,~nfortable and across the alley there is another woman
who i s very i l i. SRC -~,ss~,~i ;~e church and schoc>1 representat i ves just do not
consider the neighbr_+r- >r ~t,e sick and elderly i~ the neighborhood and go about their
business as though, rn~ =,~~•c~hrbors do not exist and just do thi~gs thc way th~y wa~t.
She stated she fcit ~-. ...+tit,en and taxpaper~ the neighbors a~e entitled to some
consideration. She ~,a.sc_re++~ she is not objecting ta the church, but there are over
100 cfiildren out there +~ic~cing up the dust slx days a week~ and on Sunday after
Bible ciass, and at ~i:~tl~t there are neighbors who play in the yard. She explained
they have a metal st+~w ~d are taking up a paper collection and the daor is down
~and no one is arou~ad t~ supervise, so the neighborhood children go in and play and
that is a fire Ma~ard ~nd she thought something should be dons about it. She stated
they are tired o# ccx~~ainin and asking and tired of pleading with the pastor to
keep the n~i se da»~7 arrs keec the ch i 1 dren f rar~ sc ream i ng and ye 1 1 i ng ; and that wi th
75 chil:dren in the yard at pne time screaming and yelling, it sounds like they are
trainin~ for the Ra+~s cheerleading class. She stated she is tired of it.
M~r. Keltey, 214 5. Olive~ staled originally, without being asked~ i~-e mowed the
grass ~i the cfiurch because it was high; that he did mow the gc-ass for a while
and tfiart the oifier pastor and his family left. He explained he doesn't
aelorrg to the church and the former pastor told him that he appreciated what
6/29i81
~ ~
~ ~ f~ 1
MINUTCS, ANAHEIM CITY PI.ANNING CnMM1S510N~ JUN~ 29, 1g8) 81•412
he had danc ancf had he 1 ped li ( m li i mse 1 f~ sa when tha naw pas to r came he wen t aheed w 1 t h
the wArk and there was always som~body goln~~ to halp~ but they never Jld; thet he
helped tham bu11J a fence ancl mowed All the yards; thnt for the Inst month or two
there hes been ~ lAdy gaing in and sninning t~er wheels and the dust goes about 7~
feet high And they duq dc~wn abaut ~~ tnches fn the pnrkway an~ said that would catch
the dust~ but It clor.sn't. ~le stated li~ h~is w~~rked ovar tt~ere cl~~se to 4 years and
they have put up with thts for about ~S years. Ile stat~ri on oi~e nccASi~n there was a
1lttle boy crying in the corner ~nd there was a y~ung f~ ~y su~~erv~sinq the chlldren
and the ch(ld crled for about 3G minute;s and one of thc neiqhbo~s got tired of
hearlnc~ him cry and checked to see what the t~roblem was and he told her one of the
youn~ boys supervtstn~3 told I~Im to stand in the cc~rnGr ancl it was one of the hattes't
days wa h.~vc had and after she went over, the young boy sent hfm ta anothcr c:orner to
cry. lie stated It would takc n wenk to tell tfie Conrnlsslan ibout cverything; that he
tried to help tt~em~ but couldn't; that I~e has told them AbOUL the dust a~d they hr~ve
probably watered o~bout 1~ times in the last E ycars and ttie whole orea where the
children play Is nearly ~l) dust. fle stated he has scen as m~ny az 200 children out
there at one ttme; and that he cJo~sn't have anytt~ing ac~alnst chi idrGn ancf that i~s why
he was working there, but tho uther pesople had to Icavc ~h{c gcA~cd~he~didenatdthtnk
16 haurs a de~y helpinc~ dlg up trees~ put a~ slnk in, etc.
he could talk l~nr~ ~enough to tell the Commisstoncrs about th~e whole problem.
Welter Ca~roil, 215 S. Ollve~ st~~ted hc Iives rtght behind the scfiool and his ~Fence
has been knacked down; tha[ at flrst f~c t'~ought it wes by wind~ but the part that is
down has toa many basties tn lt Lo havr becn donc: by thc wind and the part that. is up
has basl~es in it; that he has coe-e hame and bcen blockcd wherc he could not g~~
throunh t!~e a11ey and has had scx~+eane from the church kick hls car ancf it now has
a scretch. He stated i~e doe:s n~t kna+ about the dust, but he dtd not think F~eopl~
should act llke thAt and shoulu have some regarJ for property; and thaC the e;ntrance
and exit sign on cit}~cr sfde of the alley should nnt be there because it 15 ~mn alley
and is not the church's driveway.
Pas[or Qavtdsen, Anaheim aaptist Church~ 305 East Braadway, stated he beqan as pastar
of this churcl~ Ma~ch 1~ 1971~~ and has been there since that time; that he wr~s Youth
Pastor for 3 years at anothe~ church in Anahefr~; that the bullding began es blhite
Temple and was erected in 192b so tl~ere has been a church butldl~g an that property
for GO years. lie st~ted tl~ey have sought to be good nelghbors and they have a
nurrti er of neighbo~s who have, ~one by written t~sttmany, indicated haw they
appreciate the work the church (s doing; that Mr. Kelley has had ve ry ftne comments
to make in the past and so~r of the commcnts he has heard tafey are a surprise to
him; that the entrance and exit signs are on thetr private property for thc purpose
of their people only sa they can expedil.e the pick-up of the students after ~chool
ancf he, on a number of occasions~ has ok~served the pick-up of over 100 students
within 15 minutes withnut undue traffic congestion because they have a3ked their
peaple t~ gu through the west side of tt~e alley going east and that sign ls there as
a reminder to them so they would not have to black the alley; and that they deal with
their peopte for bl~cking the alley and arP glad that the Police Department is there
to deal with that because they, af course~ do not want to be a hindrance in anyway or
a bad te~timony in the neigborhood; tha[ gencrally most of the neiqhborhood and Che
6/2g/81
'~ ~ , ` ~
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 29~ 19a1 al•413
city know those signs read -"A~aheim Baptist Church drop-ofF and pick-up entranca
only"; and if they necd to cla~ify that somehnw~ they w{11 be happy to do it.
Pastnr Qevidson stated Nrs. Blankmeyer is evidently unawa~e of the occasion when he
did go back to speak to Mr. Blankmeyer to see hov+ things were going~ but could see
that they were going to hove a very difficuit time satisfying them. He stated they
have sought to be good ~efghbors; and have p~epared plans to build a block wall wi~ich
they would submit to thc Commisslon~ but stopped progress on that because It seemed
obvious that they were gning to get ~owhere with it with their neighbors; that they
have offered to plant trees there that might somehow deAden the noise a~d catch the
dust. He stated na matter what the outcomc nf this hearing~ they intend to do whetever
it takes ta satisfy their neighbors and a~e naw considr.ring tha possibility of
blacktopping or cementing th~t entlre area so khere would be no dust; end that chey
have imrr~diate plans to put in a basketball court whtch would take care of some of
the dust. Ne stated they have sought to increase the w~t.ering and wetting d~wn of
that property, but in [he last two weeks~ had a turnover in their custodial position
and the job has probabiy not been done as attentively as it should have been~ but they
are seeking tr~ deal vrith that problem and wlll co~tinue to deal with it. He referred
to the fence the neighbor behind mentlon~d and stated it has yone down gensrally
aftcr winds and he did not know what keeps it up and ce~tainly it is on the other side
of the church property and alley where the children are not allowed to be, and he did
not see ha+ they could be responsible; thet there are numbers of teenagers who walk
down that alley who live in r.he area who could knock the fence down~ if it needs any
aici. He stated if they can do anything to stop {t~ they will because they seck to be
g~o.yd neighbors. Ne statPd he has sought to speak to the neighbors and hoped after the
hcaring some of the neighbo~s wha have mentioned things he was not aware of will work
witt~ him.
Pastor Davidson stated the problem here is really based upon their belief that
education is a part of the church and is the church's basic responsibility; that
Anaheim 8aptist Lhurch has been in existence about 8 years; that they moved onto the
property in 1973 and it ts a"not-for-profit" organization and thei~ ministries are
for the benefit of the city and the community and the 13st thing they wa~t to do is
be at odds with their neighbors and with the City of M aheim. He stated they consider
themselves friends and a ve ry real part of Anaheim.
Pastor Davidson stated their staff requirPment is that they are all ac[ive membcrs of
the church and function tn the church whether they are in educational ministries,
fellowship ministries, evangelism ministries, 5unday School ministries, the Bible
School pragram or the church school program throughout the w~ek. Me stated they
believe they have a responsibility in their church to educate their children; that
there are some churches that have sought conditional use permits to expand or start a
;Chool and these requests have been denied for one reason ar another and thcy backed
off; t:hat he personally did not seek a conditional use pcrmit, as tr~e pastor of the
6/z9/8t
~~:
MINU'('E;~ ANAc1EIM CITY PLANNING CONMISSI~N, JUNE 29, 1981 a1-414
church; that the previous pastor wh~ sou~lht tl~e perml t ~if ~i not start a schoo) and the
school was stertod wlthin slx months after he becnn,e the pastor on the convictional
beliof thet they must provtdr. e place of ~ciucntion that Is Ulble-centered and God-
honuring; tt~at thcy consid~r thcir scha~l, AnAhelm be~tist Ghurch Schools. to be a
prtmary and tntegral part of the(r minlstry ~nd as much a part of their minlstry es
Sunday Schaol , Youth Depertment. musl c prograins, rescue m) ss lon wo~4 ~ Jai 1
ministries, Vacatton (ilblc Schools and other klnds c~f progrems thet thcy anc! other
churches do; a~ci that the probiem is basad upon a beltef that thelr ministry as a
church schcx~l (s vttal.
fle stated they h~vc no probl~m with sefety reyulatlons and they seek anxiously to
comply; th~t they ere not Just ~ churct~ on Sunday~ but they are en octive church
ove ryday and seck tv cooperotc os fully as thcy c~n with evcry kind of safety. fire
an~1 sAnitation rec~ulaLlan; thAt thc Commission hrs the Firc Ue~artment's re~ort and
there arc no b~slc vlol<ations and all the violati~ns that wcre found~ such as a ltght
bulb out tn an exit iic~ht~ etc.~ are being t~ken core of already, well wtthtn tl~e 21
days because they br.lieve tn that; t~~at they hnve a schor~l bus and tt meets all uf
~he safety coctes; that a Iot af churclies try to htde thel~ buses~ but they have the
Nlghway Patr~l check the bus~s; chat they believe they should tomply; that the state
and the c3ovcrnr.~ntal agencics are thc mintst~r of God to the pcople for good whlch
meeans there IS ~~ protective element that the st.~tc and governing bodics legltlmately
have and God says obey them; tl~At they are se~king to do that; however~ they d~
belleve that~ as is historic.illy helcf in this country, g~vernmancal agencies and
organizations do not h<~ve the ri~~ht to control church mtntstrtes and. thGrefore~ it
Is their belicf, regarding thelr posit(~~r+ witli aovernment, thet thcy cannot be
lic~nsecl tn wholc or in rart; that tli~ir scho~l is prlr,ary anci i~tegral to thGir
entire churcl~ mtnistry and it falls under thc norme) and regutar and legitimate
saf~ty~ fire~ sanititian and zoning I~~w+s for churches and they have sought to comply
in eve ryway they c~~n with thosG; that the conditi~ns for parktng spaces and provlsl4n
for the garbage disposat loc.~t(on cio not present a problem to ihem .~nd they would
most gladly comply~ but it is the condttiona) use permi~ which distin~ulshes the
school and separates these minlstrles whlch they cannot comply with.
He stated h~ stands before [he Commission in a strange situation because they are not
op~oged to the revocation; that they cannot exrand upon the conditional use permit
because thcy cannot recoc~nize th~ conditionai use permit beynnd that which already
exists for Chem as a church. He stated it is thefr convicttonal belief they must
have a schr~ol and that the church Is approved~ by the butlding beiny there for 60
yQars and they are cantinuing what was being done on th~t p~operty.
Pastor Davlds~n stateJ he read earlier t~day a newspaper article at the library
recording ~he htstory of White Terttple and the church that was on that location that
has now moveJ and one of the points in the article stated that one ~f the highligt~ts
of their church was thelr churcl~ sclioc~l ancl he did not know whcth~r it was a day
school or whether they are referring to thelr Sunday School. I~e stated he calls
their educatianal program their cliurch school and would say the same thing~that it is
one cf the highlights and most important parts of thetr minlstry end they cannot
separate it from their church and to seek a vari~nce or expand upon a conditlonal ust
permit would say *hat what they are doing is not integral and prirr~ry to thetr church
6/29/St
l
i
MINUTES~ ANNIkIN CITY PLANNINC COMMISSION, JUNE 2~, 19a1 81-415
ministry. Hc stat~d ttiey woutd ask the city to amend thc ltwv and this will be thetr
appeal; that the lew or cude mtght be amended to read thet churcti schools~ with a
convictionat bellef thet it must be ar integral and primary part of the minisC~y, aro
not requlred to seek e v~rlance.
Charles Craze, atto~ney from Clcvcland~ Ohia, refcrred ta a dncumnnt intr~duced as
City's Exhibit No. D as a letter from him acc~xnpanled by a mer~orandum of law.
Chairman Pro T~mrore Bushore asl~ced Mr. Craze if t~e is actine~ ~s the church's lena)
represantativc• ~nd Mr. Craze replled he is for purposesof this hesrtnq. Cheirmen
P ro Tnmpore ausho~e askcd tf Mr, Craze ~s licens~d to practice 1~~ In California.
Mr. Cra ze asked 1f -,e r,os ta be llcensed in front of a~ AdMinistrative board.
Jack Whitc, AssistAnt City llttorney~ stated he sees no prablem wi~h Mr. Craz~
rapresenting the church, but if he Is rnpresanting them as an attorney~ he would have
to be llcensed In the state to practice as an attorney~ but he ~aw na reas~n why he
can't stmply bn tt~cir represcntattve.
Mr. Craze stated this ci~urch wes bullt in 1920 by Methodtsts and w~s called thu
White TQ m~le and is one of the largest churches in Anehelm and 1!~ a pre-extstin~ use;
thr~t the oric~ina) auditorlum would seat 130~ peaple; that wh~:never an entity su~h ss
zoning comes into affect~ th~re is tfie grindfather's clause In wh(ch the us~ cannot
be changed later; that thls is talking about thc constitutional ric~ht~ the flrst
amenclment, free~ exercise ric~ht of~ a church or :hurch entity ta be able to practtce
their bcllef~ including all thelr ministries; and that the pastor tostifiod that they
have a day care~ a dAy scl~ool~ Wednesday evening services~ a bus mtnistry. a Jat)
ministry and all the things which arc traditlonally incorporAted tn a particular
church institutlan; that it is a church use~ one use.and ather ~articular incldentt'al
~r accesso ry uses whicFi usually accnmpany churches are included; tF~~t the memorandum
of law says that these particular ministries~ as the cases do demom;trate. including
Caltfornfa cases, are protected und~r tlie first amendment umbrella of thc U~ited
States Constitution; that if it ls a legitimate church~ which he did not think there
is any q uestio~ about and n~ted tl~e opposition said they have no problem with the
church~ but with the children play(nc~ nn the p1aY9round and the schoc~l, or day care
is a mtnistry of the ctiurch which they were comc~laining about and not the church
itself; that the memorandum says these particutar legitimate bonafide ministries
would bc included under the protection of the first amendment for pu~poses of zoning
certalniy. He stated tl~r_ pastor dtd not say they ere a church and are above the la-~r,
but he is sayi~~ they are a church and will comply with each and every rec~ufrement
that ts required of a church; hawever~ to separate tt~e particular roinistries would
violate their convictlonal beliefs; that once chcy scop betng a church and are
someth t ny ottie r than a ctiurch ~ i s when they have the d i f f i cul ty ; and that they
will camply witli lec~itimete regulations on ~ church.
Mr. Craze referrcd to the An,~heim Munlcipal Code~ Tttle tf~, an whtch the Gwnmission
sits as the 6oard, and factual background, qucstions or interpretati~ns by the
Co~~tssion or whocver represe~ts them as tc how to deal wich usFS and incidental
accessory uses. lie stated thls has been a church buildiny ancl church property since
1920, some 61 years, and it has ncver clianged; and that the purpose has always been
6/29/81
fa
i
MINUTES, ANAIIEIM C17Y PLANNIt~G COMH1S5101~~ JUNE 29~ 19~1 81•416
religlous in natu~e. Iie stated the activittes of the ~~rticular church era well
known ~nd it was a Methodist Church through 1973 And thelr activities Inc~uded such
thtngs es Vacaklon Bible School~ Sunday 5chools~ coverod dish suppers; end that there
is an adJacent accesso~y bullding in whicfi thoy held we.:~'ing ~eceptions, etc., which
is nnrmally adJoc~nt to churches. Ne ref~rred t~ S~c;tion if~.~t.1y~1 - referring to
pre-exi~ting uses and raad the follawing un~ier the definttionel ~ectton •"a bullding
or portion therQOf lowfully existing~ Ju1y 'l1~ 1~37~ ~ncf whtch is destgned. dtrected
or structurally altered f~r a use whicti does n~t conform with the zone in whlch it is
located~ or which docs not comply wlth any ~nd all h~lght area reguiatlons of that
sectton; and unde~ tlie same sectlon - a non-conforminy use. "A use whtch lawfully
occupiad buildinc~ nr land - July 27, 1')37~ and which cbes not conform wtth the use
regulatians af the r.on~ in whict~ it Is located". Ne stAted thls particular bullding
was bui l t i n 1920 and as of Ju 1y 27 ~ 1~337 ~ I t wAS a churcf~, a pre-exl st 1 ng use or a
non-conformin~ use. He stated he finds further (n tl,e deftnltlonAl sectian there can
only be one use to a prope~ty~ Sul~sectlon 1C.01.22~ which Is th~ deflnltlon of a use~
"The purrose for which l~nd or buildtng is orr~ngcd~ assigned or t~tended or for
which etther ts or may b~ occu~~t~d or mAlntalned". H~ stated he would submit that
the use of thts I;.~~,: and bullding hes been over since 192~~ up thraugh a~~d Includtng
~9ai~ rellgtous in nature. He c•.ontinued with one morc definitlonal sectton -
accessory use~ Section 1~.01.~20 -"A buildin~~ p•~rt of a bullding~ or structure or
use of whtch is suhordtnate to and the use af whicl~ ts Incidentfal te [hat maln
buildiny whether 50$ or more of the wall~ etc. Ne stated they are sayin9 the
acczsso ry uses of this builcling hovc been and always ~re relic~ious In nature.
He stated almost eve ry churcf~ genPrally has Sunday Schools~ Vacatlon Bible Schoois
and tn r,~any cases they liave cov~red dish suprers~ banquets or othe~ types of food
beinc~ serveo, and have bloo<lmobll~s cc~minq in takinn blood from persons for the Red
Cross anJ for that rJay that is tt~e use for thst partlcular build(ng; that churches
have pageants, plays~ movies mnd somr. churches have bazAars~ athletic events, btngo,
etc. Ne statr~, the pasto~ is asl:ing the Cc+mmisslon to recognize that churcf~es~
regardless of dernc~nination, are multi-purpoSC buildinc}~and if the ch~~rch decided Co
have a covered dtsh supper~ a recep[ion~ wedding ar banquet. would the City of
Anaheim, tn effAct, be able to cnme and say this nc~w has all the trappings of a
restai~rant and r~al:e sure i t is xoned pr~perly for a restaurant; or 1 f the church
decides to t~ave a reliyious fil~n every Saturday evening~ cAn the City of RnAhetm say
It now has al) thn trappings of a theatre ~nd regulate it as a theat~e; or if thc
ch urch decided to have a blood dunatior~ drive and the Red Cross truck showed i~ to
take biood in the church basement, cc~uld the City rec;uire thc chur~h to ~.~eet all the
requirements of a linspital. t~e st~~ted when a church becnmes a church~ they do other
things than just have services on Sunday marninc~ at f0:00 a.m.; that thls pertieular
church happens to have educati~n bs its accesso ry uses and tts princtpal use is a
church, and the accessary uses of thfs church dan't happen to be 51ngn or bloodmobile
or movles, but are educational in nature and that the care of children has been hrld
time and time again to be legitimate extensic:ns af church uses. Me stated this
church fits under the grandfather cl.3use p~rfectly. Ile stated In 1973, when this CUP
was granted, they were a church end didn't n~ed a conditionai use permit and if they
needcd a conditional use permit on tl~at date~ they were not a church and becar.ie a
school and the church r~as an accessory use.
6/29/81
~,
MINUTES~ AtrAriCIM CITY PLANNIUG COMMISSIO~~~ JUNE 29~ 19a1 81-417
Mr. Craze st++ted they did not get an entlre reco~d and referred to the Zontng Cocb
of thn City of Anel~elm snd h a+ it protects churche~s before 9etting to ihe constltutlonal
issues; thet ~ecords i~dicnt~ thrt tn 1973 If there waa e renuest for a condltlonel
use perml t mede. a publ tc heering wes held o~ behalf of a day cere. ~le ~efQrred to
•h~ minute~s of the Plenning Commiseton, Auguat 2~~ 1973~ whtch related to thet
~ontinued use of e chu~~cl~ faclllty •nd ststed eve~n •t thAt point they were
acknawledc~ing that It was a cnnetnued use rnd waa ot thet polnt a church and tha
1~eerlny pertoined to th~ establishment nf n pre•schaol activity for a nu~ximum of 50
puptls with w~lvor for mintmum number of parkinq; thet a pre-schoo) sctivlty~ even es
evidenco todny~ lias never exceecied ~0 pupila~ even tf the Commisslon were to
dtstin3ulsh be b+een what Is conmonly being callod a pre•seF~ool end a chu~ch sehool;
that the pestor hos admitted qulte candldly tl~at 193 stucfPnts attend the church
schoo) and hAS admitteci quitc cendirily In n letter to the ctty er~~li~r thls year that
the capac t ty of h i s cl~u rch b u i 1 d i n~,~ w i thout us I nq any o f the s 1 de b u i 1 d t n~s ( s 500
and he could sit ~00 In his auditortum; t~~et when the church was first bullt tn 1920~
tt was orlc~inel ly built to house 1300 pcrsons; t~~at the size of thc aud(torium has
bcen pnred down ~ver tl~e years and the request wes for 5Q pupils for a day care; a~d
i L;ias never been AI leged thttt thore are mnre then ;~ pupl ls In th~ day care and al l
the ev(dcsnce shc~ws that right naw they have 4~ or u) p~rsons in the day car~.
Na stated under tf~a law. as p~esently constituted undnr the st~tutG~ a conditionel
usc permlt is not required because th~rc can bc only nne use ofa property and the use
of that propcrty is a cl~urcl~ and inclde~ntal to thnt partlcular usc erc the mintstrles
as prevfously explalncJ. Hc stAted ~~s a motter of stetutory rl~ht. es well es
constitut(onal ~ignts whic~, wero not acJdressed tnd~y, but was addrrssesd tn a
merrpran~um s~~bmitied to the Commtssion earl l~r~ they are asktng tl~e Commisslon to
recogn i ze and w i thd r~-iw t!~a t conci 6 t i ona I use pc ri.~t t an~ to ~ecog~ 1 za tha t churches i n
anJ of them~selvr.s J~~ not r~r~ut rc condi tlqna) use perml ts; thot th~y nre sayinc~ th~t
Condttion~+l Usc Pcrmit F1o. it~t? is nc~t ^~ccss~ry tndaY and wAS not necc5sary In 1973
and i f t t were, i t sti l 1 h~s ~ot been vlalatad n~ shown to bc vt~lated.
Mr. Craze st~ted they ar~ re~uesti~g this Cor~mission t~ PxaminP their authority to
d~ what thc:y arc dof ng hr.rc to~lay and rQferr~d ta Saction lti.~3.n^i nf the code:
"Terminatlon or MaJifieation of Conditiona! Use Permlts ~nc! Verlances • Procedure -
Subseckion .010 -"~, ~~ubl{: t~caring be heid by che City Councli to determine (f
yrnunds exist for the ~~dificatl<,n or terminat(on of the condltional use pe~mtt or
v~riance..." tic stated this is not the Ctcy Councll and thc Cortrnission does not have
tl~c authority to do this parttcular thing and it has to be donc by thc Clty Council~
but they do have the Autharity to recognixe thc fott that this perticular church has
been and is taday a religiaus use and does noc nceci a conditional use permit for
bonaflde~ ieyitim.~te ministries of that church~ Just as the ott~e~ churches in thts
communlty dan't need a special permit ta have a bazaar~ covered dish supper~ bingo,
etc.
THE PUBI.IC ~IAS CLOSEO.
Chai rman Pro Tempare Busho~e as~cQd i f the pastor end lcga~ ~apresentati ve a~e
~aquestin~ that this canditlonel use pcrmlt be revoked.
6iz9ie,
MINUTES~ ANAfIE1M CITY PLANNlNfi COMMISSI~N, JUNE ~~~ 1981
81-418
Mr. Cra~e repiied hs did not thlnk the Gommisston haa the authority to revoke tt.
Jsck lahito~ Aesi~tent Ctty Attnrney, expi ained the Plenning Commisston~ as the
grantinc~ body of the origine) conditlonal use pe~mit~ I~es the autharlty to terminate
it under the provtstons of Subsectlon .0 ~ U oF the aectlon prevlously read by Mr.
Crsza ond thu Planning Comnlsslon's ueci slon can be eppealed to tho City Council.
Berntce Ge~~~dd, Ltcensing Evaluator for the Stete Department of Soclal Services~ 9 36
Azsia~ Costa Mesa, ref~rred to It~m 1~ a f thc staff report which says the Departmen t
af Saclal Services~ Community Care licensin~ Divislon~ indicaies thet the ct~urch
sche~o) facl lity Is operoting without A 1 i eensr in vlolat~on of Callfor~la's Health
and Safaty Code, Snctton iS~~ +~nd t~ls scems to b~ confused because the State
Departn~n t of Soc i a 1 Se rvi ces hes a I i c~nse for the MAhe I m Church for 1 ts pre-scheo 1
only~ but not its total church school facllity.
Chairman Fro Ternpnre Bushorc asked about nccredttatlan of th~ schc~ol rnd Ms. Galindo
replied she is talking about licensing for pre-schoc~l children~ ages 2 thraugh 5
whlch has nothinc~ to da w(th accredltAtion,
Comm(as loncr Fry clort f ieci that tl~ey do hAVe a 1 icense far a pre-school end asked Ms .
Galindo if, in her o~inian, they also necd e licensc to operate a sch~ol other than
pre-school end Ns.Gal(ndo r~piled the on ly thinc~ ~he can sperk to Is the pre-school
which ca~mes unckr the Fi~~lth and Safcty CoJe 150l~ which requires that any oe~son who
gives c~re to pre-schcx~) agr_cf chtldren b~ licensed. She steted it Is her
understandinr~ that a prlvate elcmc~tbry Schc~ol is sus~posed tn ga through the
Department of Educallon.
Mr. C~aa.e stated he wss not quite sure whether or not there Is a requirement today
and if thts church is in compltance wlth tf~at lfcense requ(r~ment; that ehe
Department of W~lfare has on the boc~ks e requ(rement that day care facilities In
excess of six childrer~ would bt requlred to have a license from th~ State Department
of Welfare anA after the children become klndergarten age~ they l~~st any ,jurlsdlction
and that juris~fictton the~ qoes to the S tate Depertment of Education. Ne stated~ nat
necessarily representing Pastor Davidson ,but thetr firm is invnlved right now with
thc Statc Department ~f Wetfara in Sacra~-~nto and have a bill whtch has passed the
Senate and is in the Nouse uf Repr~sent~ tives whicF, woulct exempt any church related
day care cente r~ not c~r i vat~ or carn~erc i al day c~tire ~ f rom a~y 1 1 censure
res~onsibi lity or requireme~~t from tt~e 5 tAte ~f Callfornla. tle ad~ed he was under
the Impression that this facillty is ane of 14 day care centers throughout
Celifarnia~ and he (s aw+are af sane 29 others, which are o~erattng without licensu~e
a~d he belleved~ in Pastor Davidson's c.ase~ they were licensed and turned their
ltcanse back in for re~~ons as earl(er s tated pertaining t~ seporatien of church and
stat~ and the first an-cnd~nent infringert~nt probtem they would ha~~e vrith the
Uepartmen! of Welfara: coming in and regulating a churcti-r~lated mOnistry such as
this. Ne stated again, they are not saying they arc above thc law as tn fire, health
and safety and noted the p~asCor has w~itten a lett~r to the city invtting th~m to
come over and inspect the facilitles and eee exactly wh~t is being done. He stated
they are seying wtth the st~it~ dnvoivcd as to the rcgul+ntion of thelr minist~tes,
thay wt I 1 resisf that. He sta'te~ they do want to bo a good neic~hbor; that the
6Iz9/8~
4:
,
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNINQ COMMISSION, Jl1NE 29~ 1961
81-~~19
ralatlonshtp tod~y wlth the Stete Dopsrtn~ent of Welfarc is that they belleve the
~epr~eantat i ve 1 s mi s i nformed as to the stetus of the I T censo; that they were
ltceneed up to and including aboui a year oga at whlch point they turned thelr
llce~se tn and seld thoy do not utsh to ba further licensod or to be Furthor
i nf r inged upon by the Stete Dep~rtment of We 1 fare; thet i f they have f t re
raqu) rements or hea) tl~ requt rements ~ they want to compl y wi th those and fnel they dre
legi tlmate areas of Interost and i f the~e is ~e fire they would not call the
con4rogation~ but w~uid call on the Ftre Dep~~tment, Me ~+dded they arc ~aying they
do~' t need the w~l ferc Department ta tel 1 them huw to make the chi 1 dren be~havv or
how to ~atse them.
Cha i rm~n Pro Tam~orc~ 9ushore stated the Commisslon SOCS people al I the t(me who have
mad~ addi tions to thein c~~mes and whe~ opproached and asked i f i t meets Code, thcy
rtspond theY it does, and when asked if they have a permit, they sav ~o- but it is
bui lt to Code. Ne stated ncn~ he hears the pastor seyir~g he wants to abidr by al l the
1 aws , such as the f I re insp~ct ior~ and wi 1 1 do anyth i ~~g to make the fac i 1 i t i es hea) thy
and safe and yet at thc same time, part of those requi rements and same laws require a
perrnit so the Commission can so r~qulate; and thot lhe pastar i s l icensed and trained
in preaching the word~ but is not licensed and trainwd in the total aspects of health
and safety whlch come under the Code.
Mr . Cra ze repl ieci they are say i ng lhat they bow to th~ expert i se of tk~~e s:ate i n ehe
areas of heal th and safety and wi 1 I comply wi th the Code as to hsa 1 t.ti and safety
and fi re, as they pertain to a church.
Cha i rman Pro Tempore Bushore cont i nu~d the pastor has a lso sa id he wi l l landscape or
do whatever he can co make good r+eighbors which rauld be normai requirements of the
conditional use permit end then there is the problem of not wanting to apply for the
co~ditional use permit because of the separation of church and state, but from everY
thi ng the past.or has said, he is perfectly wi lling to eampiy wi th .~11 the regulations
that would be so imposad, excepi the actual permit. H~ stated the ';ommission is not
an infailible body and is constanily putting forthwhat they think is Che milk of hum~~~
kindness and allows people to live and profess thelr own bel iefs. Chairman Pro Tempore
Bushore stated he is a church member and rlthough he has certain beliefs and would want
to followthcm and didn't know what a conditional use permit cnsts now but would ask,
why go to a 1 1 th i s expense i f they a~e goi ng to canp 1 y anyway . He asked whe re i s the
moral i ssueT
Mr. CraZe replied it is a question of con~iction~l belicfs in ch'a particular instance
and asked Chairman Pro Tempore Bushore if he would al lvw the State of California to
regulete his particular church if it has Sundry Schoot and the State of Californla said
th~y are going to regulate it by making sure the teachers are maybe high sctwol
graduates or maybe that they have to have ewo ynars of colleqe to teach in the Sunday
Sctwoi .
Cha(rman Pro Tempore 8ushore stated the {ssue here is the revocation of this particular
p ~eschoo 1 .
6/29l81
~
~~.
~
MINUTES~ ANAHF.iM CITY PLAlINING COMMISSION~ JUNE 29~ 1981 81-420
Mr, Cra ze siatad the dtf ficu;ty here today Is thet PAStor Davidson would not accept
1{censure~ ce~tificatlo~ or epproval of his church and his school.
Chairmsn Pro Tempore Bus hore asked lf thare is e mandatory fee involved with the pre-
school t~nd if he taok his child there, what the charge would be.
Pastor Davldson statad t here is a relmburseRent for the things involved but they are
not in it f~r profit an d the motivc is not t~: same and that if they take a trip to
Disnoyland or to the mountains, they heve tU pay a fee.
Cheirman P~o Tempore Bu s hore aaked the weekly charge to bring h(s 4•year old child to
thls school, if he shauld so desire. Pascor Davldson raplied he thought the cost
would be 523.50 for reimbursement~ but they a•e very lenient as far as the peyment
goes for th~se expenses and if people make an effort to moke the payment~ they do
whatever they can; and that chey have a number the~e on scholarships and they come
even though tt~ey are no t abie to pay~ and thet is documented.
Chairman Pro Tempore Bu s hore asked tf there ere preschoolers the~e on scholarships
and Pastor Davidson replied they do hAVC some bec.ause the parents indicate a desire
to hava their chlldren t hare rnd they are not p~iying full fers.
Chairman Pro Tem~ore Bu shore ask~d if they wilt accept children of people who are not
members af the church a n d Pastor Davidson replie~i they do, just the same as for Sunday
Schooi, etc.
Chairman Pro T~mpore 6~ shore asked if he could sp~-cify that his child~en just learn
the 3 R's and forget about the re) igion and Pas~tor Davidson rep) ied thcn he could n~t
put the chi ld in thei r school.
Commissioner Nerbst sta ted hc felt a def;nition of a Gondltlona! use permit is
rrquired; that it is no t just for the church but is also fpr the surrounding p~operty
owners and for the health~ safety, and welfare of everyone in the neighbo~hood and he
felt this is where the church is falling short because tFx y are only considering the
he~elth~ safety~ and welfare of the church; that a condltional us~ permit is required
for a new church becau se the city needs to examine what it will do to the nelghborhood
and n~ighbors and this is whet the past~r is forgttcl~,g and ts forgetting hts neighbor-
hoc>d; that the parking and traffic requirements ar~ ail invoived with review of the
conditional use permit and It is not Ju~t fo: the churc~'s pu~~nse~ but is for the
whole neighborhaod and this neighborhood ha~ bcen puttiny up ~~~th shese probtems
for 8 years and nothin g has been dor.e abo~~t the pro~fems; that the pastor Lalked
about the lack of gardening during the last two weeks, and asked what about the last
8 years the neighbors have been comRlr.in•ingaboutand Pastur Davidson inter,jected they
were doing sanething about Ik. Commissioner Herbst continued that something is now
being done, but it is only after all this has hrppened. He stated he was an the
Corm~ission whrn the origina) CUP was granted and there was na problem then in asking
for it a~d now all of a sudden they a~e changing their rules and don't think they
I~ave to apply~ but they did then~ end stated evidently the religion has changed sinGe
then. He stated basicalty there is a problom with the ~eighborhAOd and the church is
creating the probtem and this is what the Commiasion is always cAncerned about~ that
6/29/81
i
~~
MINUTES~ ANAMEIM CITV PLANNING COMMISSION~ JUNE 29. 1981 81-421 ,
there is noxhing wrong with the conditlonol use pe rn+it if he would apply for it~ •nJ
tha Ccmmisslon wauld sit down A~d let the neighborhood make thei~ statements and
conditions would be included such es paving. fencn, traffic controls, etc. He
stated thc Ca~mission has been very lo~lent to chu~chrs and vary seldan turned down
enythfng asked for by a chu~ch unless they were in the wrong zone, etc.~ but not
very often, He stated he thouyht if the pastor would just eva{uate hts positiun in
accordance wl'th An~heim law~ he w~uld apply for a pormit for the whole schooi system
dnd would find that there wauld nat bc a problem; that he said he would ilve w(th
th~ conditions~ but the Commission has to set those conditi~~~s efter they flnd out
what is needed. Ne stated thet is what a canditional use permit is all about; that
it Isn't to deny him his rights of relig{on, but is }ust for the health~ safety, ttnd
welfare of the communlty and not just the church.
Mr. Craze stated thls church has been hcre since 1920 ~nd if anybody came to the
church~ it has been the ncighbors~ and the oldest neighbor they have is only 48
years; that when a person moves next to glue factory~ they can't complain about the
smell of the glue because they muved to it; and a person who moves next to a church
or a school has to expect to have a certain amount of dust~ di~t~ and noise from the
chiidren.
Commissioner Herbst stated he doesn't care whether it is a church or a fa~tot'y~ but
if a use becomes a nuisance ~to those people it has ta be removed and he has seen
dairies in this community which were chere for a long time and had grandfather rlghts
but finally had to move because they proved a nuisance. and if there are dust and
problems created by the chitdren, without taking the neighborhood into consideration~
then it could be creati~g a nuisance and the grandfather rights don'e mean anything.
Mr. ~raze ~~ ~~~f the grandfather rights mean a lot in this particuiar case and the
issu~ ~f ' +nce has to be brought by lnforn-ation through the local prosecutor or
City At~..~~ .'~ffice and it is n~t the position of the Zoning Board to~ at s~me
~ter date a~~ ,.ermitCed use has been in use or a grandfather cl~use or a pre-
~,x. sting uae has been in effect~ say it is naw a nuisance or is going to change for
!ne good of thc neighborhood.
Comn(ssione~ Barnes stated this isn't a pre-existing use and she wantcd to set the
record st~aight by reading che conditional use permit which says Canditional Use
Permit No, 1419 is to establish a preschool and a Ch~istian day school facllity for
a maximum of 50 pupils; that it was dated 1973 and thac is when that school was
established so she did not want to talk about grandfathe~ rights; that ~a far as she
is cancerned that, is when it was established and chat tu ilst not 192 ithatnthisuld
deal with. Shc stated also it was established for SQ P P
really upsets her a 1ot because she can't believe that ti-ey are saying that a church
is exempt from the same laws which individuals are required to comply with; that all
of the Comrnissioners a~d pcople in the audience have to apply for a conditional use
permit fo~ i~xs of things because the Commission is supposed to guarantee the safety
and welfare of all the citizens~ not just the church members and not Just any
particular church. She stated she is a15o upset about the proposed law and if it
does pass and all religiously-affiliated preschoois are exempt~ she sees a great
dange~ beca~se even though this church is ftne and they have a good preschool and
6/2g/81
~: ~ ;~ ,~
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PI.ANNINC COMMISSION~ JUNE 29~ 1981 81-422
take goc~d care of the chlidren, she wo~ cancerned about the peaple who w~uld apply
as churches and are not reaily legitimate churches. She askad how to deal with that
situstion; that there haa been trouble with cults in various areas a~d asked how to
distinguish s church. She stateJ sha would rather seo some legislation that et least
guarantees the health and safQty of the chtldren.
Conmissloner Bnrnes stated she doas not flnd it e particularly Christien ettitude to
say that the church is not subJect to the same laws as individuals and the church
should havr the right to do whatever they like~ no metter who it hurts. She stated
she thought they should have a school and the Commission is not trying to deny that
but thay d~n't have the right to subJect the neighbors t~ this kind of abuse and it
is proven they haven't done anything about tryi~g to take ca~~ of the ncfyhbor's needs
for the last 8 years. She statad she does not think they hav~ really done a good Job
and asked why one of the members of the congregatlon is not watering the yard and
stat~d if a persan has weeds in their yard~ they wcwld have to cut them down and she
thought the pastor and church are lacking in thac responsibility and if they are
going to infringe on the neighbor's property by putting themselves above their
neighbors, that is a very unchristian att(tude.
Chairman Pro T~mpore: 8ushore stated the church is asking the Cormiission to accept
their beliefs and to give up thetr own beliefs by lelting then- get by without a
conditional use permit and h~ did not know where to gc at this time~ but tfiought
some action should be taken because this testimony could r~o back and fo~~h all day.
Commissioner Fry asked if the pastor has IRS tax exempL status 'For the church and
school and Pastor Davidson replied that tlu:y presently do and that the school's
exemption is under the church's exemption and that the schnol is the same co~porate
entity.
Ms. Galinda representative fran the StatQ Department of 4lelfare. stated she wanted to
cla~ify that she thouqht thc ~uestion to her previously was whether or not they had
license~ a preschool and r~: ~-~ad answered that they had and as Mr. Craze made clear
befare, at the prrse~t t irrx.~ ik~~ status t s un 1 i censed because i t i s t rue Pastor
Davidson had returned the licen§e.
Pastor Oavidson sta[ed he was sure the issues cannot be clearly made in Chis forum.
He responded to Commissioner Barnes by stating they do not believe that they can do
whatever thry want an~ hav~ made sincere atcempts to talk to their neighbors and have
on file written testimony from a num,~~r of their neighbnrs who have responded concern-
ing how hard they havr ,'~ed in cleaning up the property and ~epairing it. He stated
if they had known of •• ~jghbor across the alley~ their men would have gone over and
repaired that fence i~ ~.:_, felt they wcre being blart-ed for it being down and they
wouid help him without hesitation; that thcy have sought various ways to wet davn the
dust and it is a problem and that is why the~e A~p plans but they cannot waic~r it down
sufficiently to avertane the dust and have lea~ ~~. that by repairing tne sprinkler
Systems~ etc. He stated especfally with this heaC the last several w~eeks, it is ~ot
possible to dsal with it sufficiently~ but they are doing what they f•Ary aRd have spoken
with the neighbors end will continue to do what they can so as not tc t:s a bad testimony
and agreed it is a poor Christian spirit to not carP, but denied that they do not care
because thaY do and are crying and will continue to try no matter what they face as far
as the City is concerned.
6/29/81
~~
MINUTES~ AkAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 29, 1981 81-422
teka good care of the childron~ sho was cnncerned about the people who wculd apply
as churches and ~re not really legitimate churchas. She osked how to deal with that
situation; that there has been trouble with culta in various araas and asknd how to
d(stinguish a church. She stateJ she would rath~r sea some legis~etlon that at least
guerantees tha h~alth and saf~ty of the chtldren.
Commissioner Barnes stated ahe does not find it a particularly Chr(stian attttude to
~sy that the church is not sub~ect to the sam~ laws as indivlduals and the church
should have the right to do whatever they like~ no matter who it hurts. She stated
she thought they should have a school end the Commission is not trying to deny that
but they dcn't have the right tn subJect the neighbors to this kind of abuse and it
is proven they haven't done anything about trying to take care of the nelghbor's needs
for the lest 8 yrars. She stated she does not think they have really done a good ~ob
and asked why one of the members of the congregation is not wacering eho yard and
stated if a person has weeds in thelr yerd, they woutd have to cut them down And she
thaught the pastor end church are lacking in th~t respon!Ibility and if they are
going to infringe on the neighbor's praperty by putting themselves above their
neighbors, that is a very unchristian attitude.
Chairman P~~ Tempa~e Bushore stated the church is asklny the Commissian to accept
their beltefs and ~o give up their own beliefs by letting them get by .ith~ut a
conditional use permlt and he did not know whare to go at this time, but thought
some action should be taken because this testimony could go back and forth all day.
Commissioner Fry asked if the pastor has IRS tax exempt status for the church and
school and Nastor Davidson replied that they presently do and that the schoal's
exemption is under the church's exemption and that the school is the same corporate
entity,
Ms. Galindo, rcp~esentative from the Stata Department of Welfare, stated she wanted to
clarify that she thouyht the question to her previously was whether nr not they had
licensed a preschool and she had answered that they had and as Mr. C~a ze made clear
before~ at the present tir-e the status is unlicensed because it is true Pastor
Davidson had returned the license.
Pastor David~on stated he was sure the issues cannot be clearly made in thls forum.
Me responded ta Commissioner Barnes by stating they do not belicve that they can do
whatever they want and have made sincere attempts to talk to their neighbors and have
o~ fite written tPStim~ny from a number of their neighbors who have respanded concern-
ing how ha~d they have worked in cleaning up thr property and repairing it. Ne stated
if they had known of the neighbor acrass the alley~ their me~ would have gone over and
repalred that fence if they felt they wer~ being blamed for it being down and they
would help him without hesitation; that they havr sought various ways to wet down the
dust and it is a~roblem and thaC is why there are plans but they cannot water it down
sufficiently to overcom~ ~•he dust and have learned that by repairing the sp~inkler
systems~ etc. He stated especielly with this heat the last several weeks, it is not
possible to deal with it sufficiently, but they are doing what they can and have spoken
with the neighbors and will conti~ue to do what they can so as not to be a bad testin+ony
and agreed it is a poor Christian spiriC to not tare~ but denied that they do not care
because they do and are trying an~ will cantinue to try no matte~ what they face as far
as the City is concerned.
6/29/81
~
l ?
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PIANNiNG COMMISSION~ JUNE 29~ 1981 81-423
Mr. Cr~ ze stated Commissioner Barnes made a particuler point pertaining to the require-
me~t of licensure and haw they are obJecting to the state requtring licensure of the day
care centers and stated she missed the boat entlrely as to what they are sayln4; that
the particular bill they are tookira for in Sacramento was introduced by Jerry 8rawn
and ComNany because they wanted to get out of the licbnsura business entirely because
they say it is Just a waste of R+oney b~cause they pay Welfara mo~ey to ilcense private
or public or Christian or chur~n day care centers ~nd it was not doing any good ~nd~
In fact, the cult fie assumed she referred to was Jim J~nas was fully licensed by the
State of Celifornla and the state was paying thQ bill an half ths kids and they were
getting welfare mancy frcxn the State of Californla. He stetcd there is numerous
testimany that took piace in Sacramento supporting thetr position that licensure as
apposed to heving some type of relationshlp pertaininy to the quality of a day care
center when, in fact~ th~ oppasite is true and it seems the more the particular insti-
tution is licensed~ the iess the quality. He stat~d as to fire~ health, and safety~
their institutions will no[ ever say that thcy are above the law or that the
Commisslon does not have any author(ty to came in and tell them what is safe. He
stated the licansure of the Sunday Schc~oi or a Iegitimate ministry of that chur~h,
they feel Is a violation of that sep~ration and that wall and absent any compelling
inter~st~ they are opposed to that particular type of relationship. He stated they
are saying the state has the auth ority co come in for health, fire, and safety.
Conxni~sioner Barnes stated she agrecs with that portion and Chairman Pro Tempore
Bushore noted the law hasn't been ch~nged yet and we still havc to live within the
law.
Caanissloner Barncs stated thc slmple issue is that the Planni~g Commission has to look
at this fram a land i~se .tandpoint a~d they are not abiding by the ariginai conditlona)
use permit~ whether they turned it in or not and they arc causing a problem for the
n~ighbors; that they were grante, 50 students and now have 192+ and that is the issue.
Chairman Pro TemAOre Bushore asked if they would like a continuance in order to get the
conditionai ust permit back lnto shape.
Pastor Davidson replied they would respecttully deny the continuance; that the is~ue is
licensure and it will fiave to bc before a forum where the law can be amended.
Chairman Pro Tempore Bushqre ssked again iF the pastor is requesting that the permit be
revoked ~n order that the next step can bc tak~n.
Rastor Davidson replie~ the attorneys have found chat the Code says there is only one
use.
Mr. Cra ze suggeSt~d they would like the Cam~is~ion to make a finding of fact as tn
Nhether or npt they are a bn~afide church duly registered with the Stcretary of State.
Chairman Pro Temport Sushore replfed [hat is not an issue here; that Conditional Use
Permit No. 1419 is the issue And he stopped the debate and stated the Cartanission has
trird to be more t:ian fair, but this debate could go on and on.
6/29/~t
~~ ~
t j `
~ `.
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PIANNING COMMIISSION~ JUNE 29~ 1981
81-424
ACTION; Comn-Issioner Herbst offered Rsaolut{on No. QC81•14W and moved for its pa~sage
a~aaoption that the Ansheim igtLhat~when9the p~rmitnweseor ginallyag~ante~dn~i~t197'~,
Use Parmit No. 1419 on the bes
to estsblish a preschool and Christian day school f.ec.11R~1fY~i~h~andxthemchurch repres~`~~~~~fi~
ti"
ce~teln co~dltions wera imposed a~d are not being
sentative refused to apply far a new permit bocause of religious beliefs to allow for .~•~i
192 pupils as currently enrolled and th~ existing use does have a detrimental effect ~~
on the surrounding residnntin,the'unpaved,dunlandscapedelawnuareareated by the la~ge
numb~er of children playi g
On roll call~ the foregoing rnsolutlon was passed by the following vote:
AYES: BARNES, BOUAS~ BU5HORE~ FRY~ HERBST, KII~G
NOf5: NONE
ABSENT: TOLAR
Jack White, Assistant C1Cy Attorney~ present~d thc writte~ right to appeal the
Planning Commtsaion's decisio~ wlthin 22 days to the City C~uncil.
RECESS There was a ten-minute recess at 3:20 p.m.
._____._
RECONVENE The meeting was r~conv~ned at 3:34 P~m•
._._._---
Commissioner Fry left meeting at 3:20 p•m• and ;iid not return.
ITEM N0. 7: EIR NEGATIUE DECLARATION~ RECLA~SIFICATION N0. 80-81_3~
REQUESTED BY: CITY OF ANAHEIM.
north of Center Street extending
Cypress Streets.
Property descr(bed as approximately 6.4 acres located
northe~ly and southcrly on bo~h sides of Coffman and
RECLASSIFICATION REQUEST: RS-72~0 and PD-C to RM-2400
There wert four persons indicating their presence in oppnsition to subject reauest.
Dean Sherer, Assistant Planner~ presented the staff report to the Planning CommissiQn
dated June 29~ 1981 and noted this is a ~ity-inittated request for reclassifieation
for 6.4 acrex located north of C~nter Street extending northe~ly a~d southerly on both
sides of Coffman and Lypresa Str~ets. He expla3ned General Plen Amendment No. 160~
adopted Navember ~Zres9denti.alhlandtusesuwith densitynpermitted notptotexce d 15units
1ow medium density
per g~oss acre.
Ron Clenney, 193 Evelyn Drtve, stated he has lived there for 10 years and has certainly
enjoyed it although there are some drawbacks such as fast traffic. He stated they are
concerned that additionai apartments'wi11 increase the traffic even more and they would
like to go on record appealing to the Commission to keep the p~esent zoning for
condominiums and not aPeet~enfess`Streetmcul-de~sacedpatZEvelyn$Oriveato~preven~tated
he would elso like to s YP
traffic c{rculating Evelyn Orive.
6/29/81
~:7
~, ;
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 29~ 1381 8~"~+~5
Cheirman Pro Tempore Bushore pointed out the steff report clerlfies that cancerns
regarding Cypress StrRet end thn density have been mittgated.
Mr. Clanney explatned he had heard figures of 30 or 39 units per acre which was cause
fo~• alarm.
Margaret Ennis~ ownGr of property at 118 Cof'fman Strect, stated they heve bcen here
numerous times regarding thls same subJect; that she would like to sc~ the propcrty
left as single-family residential but it appears they have no choice but to settle
for condominiums ur apartmants and that she wc~uld prefer condomintums because
apartments are rented to a11 klnds of people. She stated the si~gle families who
scill live there are just being pushed out and she did not think that is feir. She
fslt i~ a~ything is dnne, there should be condominlums on all sides and not have
single houses, apartments~ junk yards~ etc. all in the same area. She stated thc
house next door is simply terrible and the awner who recently asked for a 4-unit
apartment has not taken care of the property and it is a Fire hazard and rat trep.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED,
Commissioner Herbst stated he was the Canmissioner who asked for chis reclassiffcation
primarily for the reasons j~st stated~ that he voted against the small apartment
complex recenkly because he thought it was spot xoning; that propercY owners don't
have to sell. but lf they do want to sell~ they will have the option r~f land assembly
to make somethin~ worthwhile arid if thc owners wi11 look at what's happening, they
will see it is far betcer co have it this way so that the properties can be developed
in acr.ordance with the Area General Plan and not developed piecemeal.
Chafrman Pro Tempore Bushore asked if an vwner could request reclassification [o
RM-3000 for condominiums and Oean Sf~erer replieci they could and, in fact, the Code
would allow the approval of a tract map for owner-accupied units; and that typically
the Iow medium density restdential Gene~al Plan designation is implemented either
by the RM-3000 or RM-2400 and if it is an apartment~ in no event could it exceed
15 units per acre and RM-3000 is about 14 u~its to the acre.
Chairman Pro Tempore Bushore explained chis will leave the decisian up to the property
awner and if they should so chose~ they could develop apartmants or condominiums ~nd
he understands her concerns but feels this provid~s much more leeway,
Cortmissioner Herbst pointed out the plan shews Cypress Strect to be closed and that
onty 15 units per acre wili be permitted.
ACT~pN; Commissioner King offered a motton, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and
MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Fry and Tolar absent) that the Anaheim (,ity Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal ea reclassify subJect property from the RS-7200
(R~sidential~ 5ingle°Familv) and PD-C (Parking Uistrict-Commercial) sones to the
RM-2400 (Residential, M~~ltiple-Family) zo~e on 6.4 acres located nArth of Center
Street extending nartherly and southeriy on bvth sides of Coffman and Cypress
St~eets~ and does hereby approve the Neqative De:ciaratian from the requircment to
prepare an ~:nvironmental impact report on the basis that there would be no significa~t
individual or cumulative adverse environmental in~pact due to the approval of this
Negative D~~claratton since the Anaheim Generai Plan designates the subject property
for,low-me-dium density r•esidential land uses commensurate with the proposal; that no
sensitive environmental impacts are involved in the praposal; that the initial Study
6/29/81
~` 4. - ~
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMlSS10N~ JUNE Z9~ 1981 81-426
; submitted by the petitioner indlc~tes no Significant indtvtduel or ~umulative adverse
; environmental impects; and that the Negatlve Declaratlon substantiating the foregoing
~; findtngs Is on file in the ~ity of Anaheim Planni~g Dopartment.
Canmissioner Ktng oftered Fcesolution No. PC81-145 and movad for its passage and
adoption that the Anaheim Clty Pl+enning Cpnnission does hereby grant Reclessification
No. 80•81-39 subJect to Interdepertmental Commictee recomnendatlons.
On roll call, the forec~oing resolutton was pass~d by the following vote:
AYES: CO~MMISSIONERS: BARNES, BOUAS, BUSHORE, HEaBST~ KING
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; FRY~ TOLAR
~ Jack White~ Assistant City Attorney~ presented the writtcn right ta eppeal the
Planntng Comm(ssion's dec(sion within 22 days to the City Council.
ITEM N0, 8: RECLASSIFICATION 80-51-40
REQUESTED BY; CITY OF ANAHEIM. Property described as approximately 14.8 acres~ having
a frontage of approximatety ti50 feet on the east side of West Street, appr~ximately
660 feet north of the centerline of Orangewood Avenue.
RECLASSIFICATION REQUEST: RS-A-43,000 to PR
There was no one indicating their presence in opposltion to subject request and Dean
Sherer~ Assiscant Planner, presented the staff report to the Planning Comrnission
dated June 29, 19$1.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CIOSED.
It was noted Enviranmental Impact Report No. 226 was previously approved and certified
an April 2~ 1979 by the Cortmunity Center Authority for subJezt property as a portion
of the Betterment II Convention Center expansion.
ACTION: Chairman Pro Tempore Bushore offe~ed Resolution No. PC81-146 and mAVed for its
passage and adoption thai the Maheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant
Retiassification No. PC 80-81-40 subJect to Interdepartmental Cortmittee recommendations.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following uote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES, BOUAS, HERBST, KING
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: C4MMISSIANERS: FRY~ TOLAR
6/z9/8l :'
~
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PIANNING COMMISSION~ JUNE 29, 1981
~TEM N0. : EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION~ TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 11400
)
81•427
PUBLIC MEARING. OWNERS: VERMONT 4-PLEX, 1263n Brookhurst Avenue~ Sulte "D",
Garden Grove~ CA 92640. AGENT: TRI STATE ENGINEERING CO., 615 South Raymond
Avenue, P. 0. 8ax 4214~ Fullerton, CA 92634. Property described is a rectengularly-
shapad parcei of lend consisting of approximetely 3.~1 acres, having a frontage of
approximately 467 feet on the north side of Vermcmt Avenue, approximately 130 feet
nast of the centerline of Citron Street and further described as 629 West Ver~nont
Avenue.
TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 11400: REQUESTS DELETION OF CONDITION N0. 5 OF TENTATIVE MAP pF
TRACT N0. 11400 PERTAINING TO NOISE INSUlAT10N STANDARDS.
There was no one indicating their presence in ~~position to subject request~ ~nd
although the staff report was nat r~ad~ it is referred to and made a part of the
minutes. ~
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
It was noted an EIR Negative Declaraeion was prevlously approved for Tentative Map
of Tract No. 11400 by the Planning Commiss(on on March 2~~ 19$1•
ACTION: Commissioner Nerbst offered a motion, secondcd by Cam~issioner Barnes and
MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Fry and Tolar being abscnt)~ that the ~+naheim City
Planning Commis~4on does hereby approve deletlon of Condition No. 5 pertaining to
Naise Insulation Standards of Tentative Tract N~. 11400.
Cammissioner He~bst a~ided the fees ch.3rged on this issue should be refunded because
this was st3ff's error.
ITEM N0. 10: EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION~ CONUITIONAL USE PERMIT M0. 2229
PUBLIC HEARING. Ob1NER5: LUGARO ENTcRPRISES, INC.* 510 North Magnolia, Anaheim, CA
92$O1. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of
3.8 acres, having a frontage of approximately 735 feet on the east side of Magnolia
Avenue, approximately 195 feet south of the centerline of Crescent P~~pe~ty ^presently
further described as 524 North Magnolia Avenue (The Tartan Drum).
zoned CL (COMM~RCIAL, LIMITED) ZONE.
CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST: TO PERMIT OM-SALE l1LCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN AN EXISTING
RESTAURANT.
It was noted the applicant was not present and Ce~mmissioner Herbst and King indicated
that there was no reason not to act o~ this request.
6/29/81
~
~ ?
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PIANNINC COMMISSION, JUNE 29~ lg8i
81-428
ACTION: Ca~missloner King offered a motion~ seconded by Commissioner Barnes and MOTION
~~`D (Commissianer Fry and Tolar bo(ng absent) that thn Anaheim City Planning
Committee has reviewed the proposel to permlt on-sale alcoholic beverages in an
exlsting restaurant In the CL (Carirnerciai, L(mited) 2one on a rrctangularly-shaped
parcel of land consisting of approximat.ely 3.8 acres~ hAVing ~ frontage uf approximately
735 feet on the east s~de of Msgnolia Avenue (524 North Magnolie Avenue); and does
hereby approve the Negative Declaratlon from the ~equirement ro p~epa~e an environmental
impact raport o~ the basis that there wauld be no slgnificant individual or• cumulative
adverse Gnvironmenta) (mpact due to the approvel of this Negative Declnretion since the
M aheim General Plan designates che subject property for general commercial land uses
carnnensurate with the proposal; that no spnsitive ~~v(ro~xnental impacts are invalved in
the proposal; that the Initial Study submitted by the petitioner indicates no significent
(ndividual or cumulatlve adverse environmencal Impacts; and that the Negattve Declarst(on
substantiating the foregoing findings i5 on file in the City of Analieim Planning
Dep~~[ment.
C~mriissioner King offered Rcsolution No. PC 81-147 and moved for its passage and
adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission doeshereby g~anc Conditianal Use
Permit No. 222y sut~Ject to Interdepartmental Carnnittee recommendations.
On roll call~ the fo~egning resalution was passed by the following vote: 4.~.
~ . ~,, ~.,t... v .
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES, BOUAS, HERBST, KING, i~~%'~~~'~ r 7~r~-t~/`S/
NOES; COMMISSIONERS: NONE ~~--
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: FRY~ 70LAR
17EM N0. li: Ela NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT~ AND CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT N0. 2200:
PU9LIC HEARING. OWNERS: TEXACO INC., 335p wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles~ CA
~0010. AGENT: K. H. DALE ENTERPRISES~ Ugly Duckling Rent-A-Car~ 725 South Anaheim
Boulevard~ Anaheim, CA 92805• Praperty desr.ribed as an irreqularly-shaped parcel
of land consisting of appraximately 0.3 acre located at the northwest corner of
La Palma Avenue and Harbor 6oulevard, 1001 North Harbor Bouleva~d. Prope~ty pr~sently
classified CL (Commercial, Limited) zc~ne.
CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST: TO PERMIT AN AUTO ANO TRUCK RENTAL FACILITY 1lITH WAIVER OF
MINIMUM LANDS~APED SETBACK.
There were three persons indicating their presenct in opposition to sub,ject request,
and although the staff report was not read~ it is refcrred to and made a part af the
minuces.
Ken Dale, 725 S. Anahefm Boulevard, Anahairti, stated he wishes to relocate his car
rental agency to this vacated Texeco service statPon at the corner of Harbor and
La Palma and wouid also like to rent t~ucks and trailers and intends to close
driveways on Harbor and La Palma.
6/29/8i
^
~ ~~; ~-~
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PIANNiNG COMMISSION~ JUNE 29~ 19s) 81-429
~. Paui Mittmen~ 811 Jade Wsy~ Anaheim~ stated he is opposed to the landscape wstver
~, because as e resident whn 1(ves two blocks away, almc~st eve~ywhere he drives is on
~` a freeway and he feit landscaping would help hide the use. He stated ho d~ove past
the patttioner's present locatio~ and tha lot was full of various cars and trucks~
some in various stages of dtsrepalr with missing body panels~ etc. and he became
immedlately alarmed about the lack af landscap(ng at this location.
Mr. Mlttman stated he c~wns the adJacent commercial property and provided extensive
setbaci• of more than 20 feet in order to provide Adequate landscaping at quite an
expense and still has to spend money to malntain that landscaping so It will
harmonize with the park across the street. He stated his le ssee~ Porta-Slope~also
opposed this request and was present~ but had to leave and wanted to remind the
Ccxm~ission that tF~ey did approve A conditionel use permic on that site For an
expansion uf their present use and this c~uld be setting a precedent. He stated he
does not think the City of Anaheim needs another street to I~aok like Anaheim
Boulevard with cars p~rked Juat a few feet frvm the sidewaik and did not feel it
would bc in tota) harmony with what tt~e city is striving to accomplish.
Ralph Millnick~ 710 N. Harbor~ stated he is really concsrned because that portion of
Harbar is like part of 'old Anaheim' and he would like ~co see it maintainec and he
wo~ld not like Cn see Harbor soulevard look like Anaheim Boulevard. He stated he
would like the cor•r~er developed with more landscaping to be more appealing.
Terry Jarmon~ 904 Gretcl~en Way~ stated he is npposed to [he walver nf minimum land-
scap(ng ~ecause he has lived in Anaheim for 29 years and the city has done a lot to
beautify downtoam and allowing a car lot on that corner would just be one more
eyesore. He stated Harbor Bhulevard is one of the heaviest c~~aveled streets in
Anaheim and that he would rather see that st~tion empty. He stated cars parked on
that corner wo~~ld obstruct the view for r.raffic and create a hazard and noted there
are a lot of accidents now at that corner.
M~. Dale stacecl he is aware of the previously dpproved conditional use permit for
that site but the holder of that permit has not worked out an arrangement with
Texaco to lease or buy the property. He referrtd to the tortments regarding hi~
pres~ent location and stated it is tr•ue there are cars with body panels missing~ but
they have since been moved out of sight. He stated he would like to see old Anaheim
retained, but if he canplies with the setback ~eyuiranents the property would not
be usable for this kind of use.
THE PUBIIC HEARING WAS ClOSEO.
Chairm3n Pro T~npore Bushore stated the plans a~e to retain the pump islands and
canopies and traffic heading east of La Palma would ha~~e their vision obstructed
by those and also by the three cars parked on each corner and he felt it would be
very difficult for a mntorist to see Lhe traffic coming youth on Harbor ~oulevArd.
Mr, Dale staCed it sits on an angle and he did not think the ~traffic vision witl
be affected.
6/29/81
+~ ~ ~~ .'
MINUTES, ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JUNE 29, 1981 81-430
Chairman Pro Tempore 8ushore stated he is very femlliar with thet corner and knows
many times cars go through thet intersectlon and impscting lt wlth all those cars
end inhibiting the view with trucks end trallers would bc hexsrdou'.
Mr. Dale explalned he proposes to breek the property inco two picces and heve the
t~ucks and tralier~s In he rear.
Chairman Pro Tempore Bushore esked f~ow anyone would know they heve trucks And
trallers for rent end Mr. Dale replied they can still be seen.
Chairman Pro Tempore Bushore esked if landscaping was rcquired on the pr~viously
approved conditianai use permit fnr the proposed ski sic~pe and Qean Sherer~ Assistant
Planner, replied wide landsceped setbacks were required adjacent to Harbor IsoulevArd
and La Palma Avenue.
N,r. Dale st~ted if the setbacks are required~ the sir.e of the lot would not be usefui
for this purpose.
Chairman Pro Tempore Bushore stated he does not like the t~+ea of a car~ truck,
and trailer rental ft~cility at that It~cation, but without landscaping he cauld not
support i t at al I.
Commissloner Herbst stated even with landscaNing hc wou{d be opposed to this use on
that corner right acro~s the street from a cicy park and it is also one of the mairti
e:ntrances into the City oF M aheim and there is a place for this type of use and he
did r~ut want ta break down Harbor 8oulevard with a used car or truck rental facility.
He stated he felt this is the wro~g use for this location and the property is too
small which is evldent brcause of the requirNd waivers. Ne stated he coutd not find
a hardship to justify thp Naiver.
ACTION: Commissloner He~bst offered a motlon secanded by Commissioner King and
MOTION CARiiIED (Commisstoner Fry and Tolar absent) thrat the Anaheim City Planning
Cam~issicn has reviewed the proposal to permit an automobilc and truck rental
facility in ths CL (Cunxnercial~ limited) zone with waiver of minimum landscaped
setback an an irregularly-shaped parcel of land co~sisti~g of approximately 0.3 acre
located at the norihwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Harbor Boulevard (1001 North
Harbor Baulevard)~ and does hereby approve the Negativc Oeclaration from the require~
ment to prepare an environmental impact report o~ the basis that there would be no
sign(ficant ind!vidual or cumulative adverse environmental impact due to the approval
nt~ this Negative Declaratton since the Anaheim General Plan designates the subject
property for general comrt-ercia) land uses cortmensurate with the pr~posal; that no
sensitive e~vironmental impacts are involved in the proposal; that the Initial Study
submitted by the p~titio~er indicates na significant individual o~ c~nulative adverse
environmental impacts; and that the Negative Declaration substantiating the f~regoing
findings is on file in khe City of Anaheim Planning pepa~tment.
Commissioner Ilerbsi offered a motion~ seconded by ~ammissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED
(Commissioners Fry and Tolar absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Ca~xs-isaion
does hereby deny the ~equest f~r waiver of minimum landscaped setback on the basis
that no hardship relating to the property's size, shape~topagraphy~ location, or
surroundings has been demonstrated and on the basis that the property is across the
street from a city park and is one of th~ main entrances to the city.
~/29/81
~ ~ +l
N 1 NUtES ~ ANANE i M C 1 T1- PLANN 1 NG COMM 1 SS I ON ~ JUNE ~9 ~ 1981
}, J
81-431
Cdnmisstoner Hs~bst off~r~d Resolution Ko. PC81-149 end naved fo~ itx passage a~d
adoptton that the Maheim Cfty Planninq Ccmmissio~ doea heraby deny Canditional
Usa Pennit No. 2200 on th~ basts thst th~ locatia+ across from a pa~k 1~ not
sutt~ble for the pr~posed use end thd use could heve e detrimentai effact o~
adjalning propertles.
On ~oll cail, the fora9oin9 resolution was passed by the foilowing vate:
AYES : COMM I SS I ONERS : BARNES ~ BOUAS ~ HEa85T . KI I~G~ I~ us I~ U"'6
NOES: COMMISSIONE{1S: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: FRY~ TOIAR
Jdck White~ Assistant City Attorney~ prasen~ted ~he wr(tten right to appaal the
Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council.
~
~~~~Q~r
6/29l8i
~} , . _
~_ ~
E ~~
~ ,:~ /
MINUTES~ ANANEiM CITY PLANHINf COMMISSI4N~ JUNE 2~~ 19a1 8t-~32
ITEM N0. 12
E'OR S ND RCCOMMCNDAT I ~NS
The follc,winy Reporta~ an~~ Rncanrnendations steff reports were prese~ted but not read;
A. CONUITIONAL USE ~~Ft~11T N0. 2~ 8- Request fnr one-year axtension nf time
raM ay er ow or property at 1~20 North Lemon Street.
ACTION: Commissloner Kiny affere~ a motlon secandeci by Commissloner Darnes
and MOTION CARRIED (Chel rn~an Talar being abscnt and Chairman Pro Tempore
~usl~o~e ~bstainina~ that tl~~ Anshalm Gity Plenning Commtsslon does hereby
g~ant e one-year axtension af tima far Condit{onA! Ute Permtt No. 2091i to
expire on July 2b~ 1y82 subject to the condition that a pa~king agree+nent
fo~ LC~~ spaces witt~ t~~e Northrup Corporrtlon for the 1~E3) season bc
submitt~d by thc prt(tiw~er for review and approval by the Clty Attorney
prior ta tl~e conxn~ncement of actlvity.
U. REi;LASSIFI~ATION N0. ~9-~i0•~~0 snd VARIAIICE N0. 2~'2 - Request for extenslon
o t~imc~ram Uou~~las w. Jensen ~~ p~operty locatcd at the nortlie~st corner
of Genter Screet anJ Coffm~n Strnet.
ACTIONs Conxnissioner Kiny offered a motlon~ seconded t~~v Cc+n~nissioner Bernes
anJ MOTION CARRIED (,r.hsirman Talar bei~c~ abscnt)~ that the Anahcim City
Planniny Coi~Y.~ission aocs tiereby grAnt a one-year extenslon of time for
Reclassification Ib. !9-n~J-4~ ond Va~lancc tb. 31;2 t~ txplr~ o~ June iG~
19;~2.
C. 7ENTIITIVC MAP OF TRACT NOS. iD~+~ ''' ~ou, ~h 10~9 4- Request fo~ extensions af
t c~e rom nahe m i s, n~c.~,~or "~~,perty located southwesterly of Noh)
Rench RoaJ bctae~en thz intersectinn of Nohl Ranch Road .-+~J Canyon alm Road
ancl Serr~no Avenue.
ACTION: Corvnissione~ Ktny offcred a mot(on~ seconcfed t~y Commisstoner B~srnes
an~ MOTION CARRIEO (Chairm.~n Talar bc(ny i+bsent). chat the City Planning
Ccxnmission does hereby grant extcnsions of tfine for Tentdtive !lap of Trect
Nos. 1~)~G7 tt~ruuyh lt)~7~ tc expi rc August 11 ~ 19~2.
D. AE~ANDO~IriC1~T N0. LO-i jA - F~equcsc tu abando~ a portio~ of C1eme~tinc Street.
artr.r.s trcet an a public alley by the Redevelopn-enc Agency.
ACTI ~N: Commi ss i~ne~ tierbst of fsrec! a m~t ion, s~conded by Comm(ss ton~r
Ber~nes end HOTIOf~ CARRIEO (Chalrmen Tolar being absemt, Chairman Pfo Tempare
Uust~~re and Commissione r Kiny abstaining), that the Anaheim Clty Fla~ning
Connission dors hereby recarmend to the City Council chat Abandonment No.
80-1}A be epproved.
AUJOURN~1EfIT There being no Eurther business~ Cor-r.~isslo~cr King offr~red a motlra~~
seconded by Cvnenissloner 1lerbst and MOTI011 CARRIED (Chatrmdn Tolar b
Comm. Fry beiny absent), that the rn~eting be adJourned.
The meeting was sdjourn~d at 4:00 p.m.
R~espectful iy submitted~
~~ •r-°~,1~.~~:,..
Edith L. N~rrts~ Secretary
An~helm City Plenning Commission
E Ui:lm 6/29/81