Loading...
Minutes-PC 1960/11/21~ . ~~---- -- . - ~` ;~ - ~ : . ~ ~ City Ha.ll j Anaheim, California November 21, 1960 ~ REGULAR b~ETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION.. ' REGULAR MEETING ' 2:0090'Ciock~PiM99~Novembert21P11960nbyCChairman Gauer,aalquorum be3ngat pre~ent. PRESEN? - CHAIRMAh GAUERs GOMMISSIONERS: Allred, Marcoux, Morris, Mungall, and . Sum~aers. Commissioner Hapgood entered the meeting at 2=45 P.M. ABSENT - COMMISSIONERS: None. MINIJTES - The Minutes of the Meeting oP Novemb~r 7, 1960 were approved as submitted. PRESEN? - Acting Plannir.g Director - Rich3rd Reese # Planning Technician - Martin Kreidt ~ Assistant City Attorney - Joe Geisler ~ Planning Department Secretary - Jean Page i # SPECIAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING. PETITION submitted by TBD E. HUDSON, 425 North Magno- ~ N0. 87 lia Avenue, Anaheim, California, Authorized Agent, for permission to CONSTRpCf A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR MUL'fIPLE HOUSING on the pro- ~ . perty described as= A parcel 146 feet by 595 fe~t lying approximately ~ 220 feet south of Orange Avenue; its westerly epd being the northerly prolongation of the centerline of Veiare Street and ad3oining thereto, and further described as 622 Velare Street. ~ Sub~ect petition was continued from :he meeting of November 7, 1960 in order to determine whether the propo'sed density would conform to ~ the provisions of Code, Section 18..64.020.(1-e). ~ ~ ~, ,.. ; Mr. ?ed Hudson, the petitioner, appeared before the Coam-ission and F stated h~3s intention to install the curb and 9utter along the east side of Velare Avenue'from the southern boundary of the sur~ect ~roperty to 4 Orange Avenue, and he further described the proposed development. ~ 1 The Planning Department report and study of the surrounding area was 1 . reviewed. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission faund and determined the following facts regarding the requested special use~permits 1. Petitioner requests a Special Use Permit for which provisinn is made in Code, Section 18.64.020(1) for a planned unit d~ultiple housing development. 2. Proposed development will constitute a significant improvement of subject proper'ty, although in excess of the density proposed on the General Plan. 3. No one ap~~ared in opposition to the petition. Commissioner Mungall offered Resolution 'a~. 122, SeriB~ 1960-61, and moved for its passage and adoption, seco~_.ed by Commissioner Morris, to grant Special Use Permit No. 87, subject to the following cond3'.ionss 1. Provision of six (6) foot masonry wall on the north and ~outh pro- perty lines of sub~ect property. 2. Dedication of fifty-four (54) feet from centerline of Velare Avenue. 3. Preparation of street improvement plans and installation of all im- provements in accordance with the approved standard p.lans on file in the office of the City Engineer. . 4. Payment of $2.00 per front Foot for street lighting purposes. (Continued next page) -1- ~~ °---~ -- ~- ~~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, November 21, 1960, Continued: SPECIAL USE PERMIT - 5. Development in accordance with plans submitted to the Planning N0. 87 - Continued Commission. ' The foregoing conditionus wt~:: recited at the meeting and were found to be a necessary pTereq!r:.site to the use of the property in order to pra- sexve the safety and welfare of the citizens of Maheimo On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votei P,llred, Gauer, Marcoux, Morris, Mungall'and Summers. None. CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARING. PETITION submitted by BENNIE C. and BLANCHE E. REGAN, PERMIT N0. 91 787C1 3aysinger Street, Downey, Califorr.ia, Owners; GLENN GRIGGS, 2429 Bryan Street, Venice, California, Lessee, for permission to OPERATE A RETAIL DRY CLEANING SHOP, on the property described ass. A parcel with a frontage of 117 feet on LaPalma Avenue and an average depth of 141 feet more or less, located on the south side of La Palma Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and Citron Street; its northwesterly corner being approximately 347 feet east of the southeasterly corner of Citron Street • and La Palma Avenue, aad further desc~ibed as 624 West La Palma Avenue. ihe property is presently classified C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. Mr. John Randolph, equipment supplier for the lessee, appeared before the Commission and described the safety factors of the equipment to be installed, the proposed floor plan of the building, and the configura- ti.on of the sub3ect property. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission found and determined the following facts regarding the requested Conditional Use Permits Petitioner requests a Conditional Use Permit for which provision is made in Code, Section 18.64.020(5) in order to establish a dry clean- ing shop. Sub3ect property has been developed and is integrated with other buildings in the center located at La Palma Avenue and Citron Street. Proposed use appears to be compatibie with the present development of the shopping center. No one appeared in opposi~ion to the petition. Commissioner Morris offered Resolution No. 123, Series 15~60-61, and a~oved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commiss:oner Allred, to grant Conditional Use Permit No. 91, subject to the foliawing condi- tionss i)tilization of non-inflamnable cleaning solvents and compliance with all Fire Department regulations. The foregoing conditions were recited at the meeting and were found to be a necessary prerequisite to the use of the property in order to pre- serve the ;.afety and welfare of the citizens of Anaheim. On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votes Allred, Gauer~ Marcoux, Morris, Nfungall, and SZimmers. None. ~ ~ i ~ ~ \ ~ ~ i MINUTES, CI7'y pLAMdING COMMISSION, November 21, 1960, Continueds , Mr. Dave D.elano, representative of the lessee, appeared before the Commissi0n, described the proposed.development for the subject proper- ty, and reviewed the success of his company with similar installations in Southern California and Arizona. Mr..Peter Schwartz, 207 East Florence Avenue, appeared before the Com- mission a~ the representative of residents in the vicinity of the sub- ~ect property~ submitted a petition of. apposition containing 21 signa- tures, and stated that the proposed use would not conform to existing commercial development along Los Mgeles Street and would constitute a nuisance to the neighborhood. Mr. Delano, in rebuttal, stated that the property would be carefully maintained and that nearby business es:ablishments would benefit from the proposed developmant. TtIE HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission found and determinc~d the following facts regarding the requested Conditional Use Permit= ~ 1. Petitioner requests a Conditional Use Permit for which provision is made in Code, Section 18,64.020(5) in order to construct a drive-through restaurant. 2. Sub~ect property abuts C-1 to the south, R-i to the east, C-1 to the north across Lorraine Drive and P-L and C-1 to the west across Los Angeles Street. 3. Proposed parking access and space is substandard. 4. Petitioner estimates that approximately 800 cars per day would use the proposed development. This would result in heavy use of the existing alley, abutting the rear of subJect property~ and of Lor- raine Drive, which would tend to blight the ad~oininy residPntial area. ~ 5. A petition of opposition, containing 21 signatures of residents and businessmen in the area, in additicn to verbal opposition, were re- ~istered with the Commission. Commissioner Mungall offered Resolution No. 124, Series 1960-61, and move'a for its paseage and adoption, eeconded by Commiosioner Morris, to deny Conditional Use Permit No. 92 request to construct and operate a drive-through restaurant on the property located at 1000 South Los Mgeles Street. On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votei AYESs COMMISSIONERSs Allred, Gauer, Morris, Mungall, and Summera. NOESs COb1~lISSIONERSe Marcowc. ABSENTe COMMISSIONERSs Hapgood.. CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARING. PETITION submitted by A. A. SHAAiALEY, 316 E1 Paso PERMIT N0. 92 Street, E1 Paso, Texas, Owner; FOODMAKER COMPANY, 3233 Kurtz Street, San Diego, California, Lessee, for permission to CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A DRIVE THROUGH RE$TAURANT on proper~ty described as: A parcel 80 feet by 143 feet with a frontage of 80 ieet on South Los Mgeles Street and located on the southeast corner of South Los Angeles Street and Lor- raine.Drive, and further described as 1000 South Los Angeles Street. The property is presently classified as C-1, NEIGHBORHa1D CONWfERCIAL. CONDITI~NAL USE - PUBLIC HEI,RING. PETITI~V submitted by PROVIDENCE FARMING COMPANY~ PERINIT N0. 93 1741 South Euclid Avenue, Anaheim, California, Owner, for permission to N'.AIVE MINIMUM HEIGIiT AEQUIFtENI~NTS TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF iHREE STOR1 APARTMENT BUILDINGS AND TO WAIVE G~ARAGE REQUIREI~NTS TO ALLOW CARPORTS on the property described as= A parcel 736 feet by 805 feet on Ba11 Road and located on the south side of Ball Road; its north- east corner being approximately 580.feet west of the interse~ction of - 3 - ~.- : T _: - -~-T i _ ~- ~ ~ ~ MINU?'ES, GIiY PIANNING CQ19dISSIpd, November 21, i9b0, Continved: CONDITYONAL USE - Ball Road and the Southern Pacific Railz~oad spur; excepting a parcel PERAIIT N0. 93 284 feet by 429 feet rith a frontage of 284 feet on Ball Road and lo- (Continued) cated on the south'side of Ball Road; its northeast corner being approx- imately 1030 feet ~vest of the intersection of Ball Road and the Southern Pacific Railroad spur. The property is presently classified as R-A, RE- SIDENrIAL AGRICULtURAL. ~ l~r. John Rothman, authorized agent for the recorded owner, appeared be- ~ fore the Cc~ission, explained his position regarding the desirability ;l of the proposed carports and multi-story construct3on, and described ; the proposed development. THE HEARING YiAS CLOSED. <_ ~ The Commission found and determined the following facts regarding the requested Conditional Use Permits 1. Petitioner requests a Conditional Use Permit for which provision is made in Code, Section 18.68.02~(1-e) in order to construct a plan- ned unit development, and requests that exceptions be granted by - resolution for ahich provis3on is made in Code, Section 18.64.070 as followss exception to Code, Section 18.32.060 which 13mits height of construction t~~ 2.5 stories in order to permit construc- t-on of three story buiYding; and exception to Code, Section 18.32. 120 which requires tha'c parking be provided in garages in order to permit consiruction o.'i carports. 2. Subject Froperiy was granted a Resolution of Intent to reclassify zone from R-A to R-3 on November 1, 1960. 3. Subject property abirts R-3 on the north across Ball Road, the Ball Road Junior High School on the east and the south, a neighborhoad park on the south, and the Palm Lane Elementary Schoo]., R-3, a church, and R-A on the west. ° 4. Proposed development with multi-story and carport construction would appear to constitute a desirable and compatible improvement o£ the area. 5. No one appeared in opposition to the petition. Commissio.er lfarcowc offered Resolution No. 125, Series 1960-61, aud ~ moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Allred, to grant Conditional Use Permit No. 93, sub3ect to the follawing condi- tions: 1. Development substantially in accordance with plans presented. . 2. Dedication of fifty-three (53) feet from the centerline of Ball Road. 3. Preparation of street improvement plans and installation of all im- - provements in accordance with the approved standard plans on file in the office of the City Engineer. .. 4. Payment of 52.00 per front foot for street lighting purposes. 5. Payment of 525.00 per dwelling unit Fark and Reereation fee as part of Building Permit. 6. 180 day time limftation on Items 2, 3, 4 and 5. The foregoing conditions were recited at the meeting and were found to be a necessary prerequisite t~ the use of the property in order to pre- serve the safety and welfare of the citizens of Maheim. On roll call the foregoing resolutiori was passed by the following vote: , AYES: OOI~ISSIONERS: Allred, Gauer, Hapgood, Marcoux, Mungall, Sutmaers. NOESs CCYuW[TSSIONERS: IIIl~orris.. pBSQVI': Cp~INIISSIONERSs None. - 4 - ~ _.. _-- - . _ _. .. ~ . ---------------~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, Noverober 21, 1960, Continuad= RECLASSIFICATION N0. 60-61-43 _ PUBLIC HEARING. PETITION submitted hy ~~ K• ?~~+ F~K E. TOI~LIN and GERALD K. TOMLIN, 1517 West Canton Street, Long Beach, California, Owners; VOORF~IS, TRINDLE, IJELS~N, 13794 i?untington Beach Boulevard, Westminster, ~alifornia, Agent, requesting that the property described as: Ar~ irxegular shaped parcel with a front.:~ of 152 feet on Orange Avenue and a frontage of 150 feet +sn ~Izstern r~venue and its rear pro- perty line abuts the northeasterly boundary of the Orange Cowty Flood Control Channel; also described as the southrrest corner of Orange and Western Avenues.and further deseri~ed as 3200 West Orange Avenue be reclassified from R-A, RESID~iTIAI- AGRIClJL'fURAL to C-3, I~AVY CON~R' CIAL. Mr. James Lyons, authorized.agent for the recorded avner, aQpeared be- fore the Commission, and state.d that the sub3ect property would be adequate for a service statioa while inadeq~ate for residential use. Mr. Bob Cecil, spokesman for the Lutheran ~-urch located south of the subject property, appeared before the Commission and stated that the proposed use would be detrimental to existing land uses in the area and that ample service station facilities presently exist within a one- half mile radius. Mr. R. 0. Stone, a nearby resident on Orange Avenue, appea~tid before the Commission and stated that the proposed use r+ould complicate the existing high school traffic problem and xould endanger the residen- tial value of his property. Mr. Grover GlaSSman, 3216 West Orange Aveaue, appeared before the Com- mission and stated that the proposed use would have a detrimental effect upon his property. Mr, N,, A. Martin, a resident of the adjoining property on the west, appeared before the Commission, and stated that he had no objection to the proposed use. Mr. Lyons, in rebuttal, stated that the proposed use would not down- secondary streetshathatstheniighnschool trafficAproblem presentlyd exists, and that the proposed use v+ould merely serve the existing traf- fic in the area. Mr. Stone, in rebuttal, requested that the Commission give careful con- sideration to the danger of introducing a heavy commercial use, thereby encouraging the invasion of additional commercial uses inte ths area. THH HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission found and derermined the follaaing facts regarding the requested Reclassificationt . 1. Petitioner requests a re^??ssification of subject property from R-A to C-3 in order to constr+~ct a service station. . 2. Sub~ect property is located on the southr+est corner of ~eandrabuts nue and Orange Avenue, both proposed secondary highxays, R-A across Western Avenue on the east, the Orange County Flood Con- trol Channel on the south, R-A on the xest, and M~estern High School across Orange Avenue on the north. 3. Proposed development would constitute a hea ate t~heerexisting high relatively undeveloped area and would aggr school irarfic problem. 4. Verbal opposition was regi~tered rrith the Commission. Commissioner Allred offered Resolution No. 12b, Series 196Q-61, and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Hapgood, to deny Reclassification No. 60-61-43 reqaest for G3, HEAVY COMMERCIAL, for the property located at 32~ ~C nt~inued next page) - 5 - ~ ~ ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING CONVNISSION, November 21, 196G, Conti.nued: RECLASSIFICATION - On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votee N0. 60-61-43 (Continued) AYESi COIW~IISSIONERSe Allred, Gauer, Hapqood, Marcowc, Morris, • Mungall and Summers. , NOESe COMMISSIONERSi None. ABSENT• COMMISSIONERSe None. WAGNER-SUNKIST - The Commission discussed the original Wagner-Sunkist An;.exation action ANNBXATION together with the revised anneXat~on, a& rEferred to the Commission by the City Council. The deletions an the revised annaxation map were discussed. Assistant City Attorney Joe. Gsisler discusaed t'~~e legal natu*e of the proposed annexation proceedings. A motion was offered by Go~cnissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Marcoux and carried, that the Wagner-Sunkist Annexation, as revised, be recommended to the City Cpuncil for approval. . CORRESPONDENCE - ORANGE COUN?Y STREET NAMING CONWIITTEE request for recommendations re- lative to the nomenclature for Lincoln Avenue. A letter foxwarded by the City Cauncil from the Orange Gounty Street Naming Committee was read to the Commission. The Commission discussed the advisahi.lity, th~ procedure, and the Qx- tent of the proposed name change. A motion was offered by Com~aissioner Marcoux, seconded by Commissioner } Allred and carried, with Commissioner Summers voting °No", recommending to the City Council that the name of Center Stieet be changed to I.i~t- coln Avenue from its ~unction with West Street easterly to its junc~ion ~ with Anaheim-Olive Road, that the name of Anaheim-Olive Road be changed i to Lincoln Avenue from its junction with Center Street easterly tu the i Anaheim city limiis, and that said streets bear the existing and pro- I. posed names for a period of three years. ~ ~ } ACTING PLANNING - Item No. 1: REQUEST FRQM McDANIEL ENGINEERING TO REVIEW PROPGSED DIRECTOR'S RHPORTS ORANGE COUNTY.TRACT N0. 4030: AND RECOMMENDATIONS Letters received from the McDaniel Engineering Company and the Orange County Planning Commission were read to the Cormaission each contain- ing request for review and recommendations by the Commission on the Tentative Map of Tract No. 4030 to be located on the south sldg,of Wagner Road easterly of Sunkist Street in County territory. ' Mr. McDaniel was present and discussed the proposed tract with ~he Commission. A motion was offered by ~ommissioner Mungall, seconded by Commissioner Hapgood and carried, that the Planning Department transmit to the Orange County Planning Commission a recommendation that Tentative Map of Tract No. 4030 be approved. • ITEM No. 2. ~I.ANNING CQ.UfMISSION APPOTNTNIENT TO PARK AND RECREATION COMMITTEEs ~ Discussion was held relative to the app~intment of a member of the Commission to serve on the Park and Recreation Commission 3.n acror- dance with the request forwarded from the City Council. A motion was offered by ~ommissioner Morris, second~d by Commissioner Allred and carried, that Commissioner Albert A. Marcoux be appointed as representative of the Planning Commission to serve on the Park and Recreation Commission. -6- ~ ~ `~ l..f ~ ~ w,~~ ',\ i MINUI'ES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, November 21, 1960, Continued~ ~ ACTING pLANNING - Item No. 3. REVIEW OF VARIAN~E N0. 1056i ~ DIREC70R'S REPORTS AND RECOb9~AHNDATIONS Petition for 2aning Variance No. 1056, which was granted by ~he Plan- , Continued) ning Commission on November 17, 1958, was reviewed by the Commission. E J Condition No. 2 of Resolut~on No. 102, Sexies 1958-59, required that $2.00 per front foot for street ligh~ing purposes be paid to the ~ City. The sub~ect property is.located at 1233-51 Lincoln Avenue on the north side heiween Carleion Avenue and Villa Place~and ornamental street ligtits preserttly exist on this portion of Linco~n Avenue. Commissioner Hapgood.offered Resoiu~ion No. 127, Series 1960-61, and moved'for.its'passage and`adQption, .seconded by Commissioner Mungall that Resolution No. 102 be amended deleting the following condition: ?.. The payment of $2.00 per front foot for street lighting purposes. On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votes AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Gauer, Hapgood, Marcoux, Morris, Mungall, and Summers. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERSe None. It@m N0. 4. PETITIONS FOR VARIANCE AND RECLASSIFICATION FORMS: The proposed variance and reclassification petition forms submitted by the Planning Department at the meeting of Noveraber 21, 1960 were discussed by the Commission. Commissioner Allred offered Resolution No, 128, Series 1960-61, and moved for its passage and adoptlon9 seconded by Commissioner Summers and carried, that the "Petition for Variar~ce" and the "Petition for Reclassification" forms be adopted es submitted. Item No. 5. LANA USE STUDY OF IW07T AVENUE BETWEEN LINCOLN AND ORANGE AVENUES~ ~ The s~udy of the area surrounding the sub~ect property of Reclasaifi- cPtion No. 60-61-18, as prepared by the Planning Department in accor- dance with the request from the City Council, ~aias reviewed. The Coromiseion considered that adequate provision nad been made for plan- ned commercis2 centers at the intersection of Knott and Lincoln Ave- nues and that strip comm~rcial elong Knott Avenue ehould not be per- mitted. A re~t~ion was offered by Commiasioner Mungall, seconded by Commisaioner Hapgood and carried, that the Planning staff amend the Preliminary General Plan proposals to indicate the planned cortuaercial development at :he inters~ection ar Knqtt and Lincoln Avenues and that the erea from Lincoln to Orange Avenues~be proposed for medium density resi- dential development9as indicated on the special study~ for consi- deration by the City Gouncil. Item No. 6. REVIEW - SPECIAL USE PERMI7 N0. 88e A request for.clarification was submitted in respect to the intent of Condition No. 1 of Resolution No. 115, Series 1960-61, adopted by the Commiss~on on November 7, 1960, which granted approval of Special Use Permit No. 88 request to establish a nursery school on the property located at 1597 Katella~Avenue. Commissioner Ailred confirmed the intent of the condition as stipu- lated in Resolution No. 115, Series 1Q60-61, requiring the constr.uc- tion of a 6 foot masonry wall on the west property line oi subject pro-. perty to within 25 feet of the front property line. _ ~ _ i i l - _ .... - ---~-- ~ . . . y . ' . , . . +' ' . 7 , i . ~ ~ Y MINUfES, CITY PLANNING COMRIISSION, Nove:~ber 21, 1960, Continued~ ACTING PLANNING - Item No.7.TRAILER PARK ORDINANCEt DIRECfOR'S REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Discussion was held in xespect to the proposed Trai;er Park Ordi~ '~l^~ntinued) nance. Assistant City Attorney Joe Geisler reviewad for the Com- mission that the proposed Trailer Park Oru~~~ance had been consi- dered at previens meatings, that necessa~ry r~vfs3ons had been in- cerpors~e~ into,the propQSed ardinance, and that a public hearing was neceasary in oz~er to rBcommend adoption by tha City Covncil. '~ C~mmissioner d~orris offered a mation, seconded by Commissioner _ ~ Summers and carried, that thB Planning Departmen4 set a public ~, hearin.g for DacembEr 5, 1960 to consider the proposed Trailar ' Park Ordinance. DISCUSSION - A discussion was hsld in respect ta the appointment of two members to fill the existi~g vacsnc~.es on the :'lanning Commission. Commissioner Morris offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Allred and carried, that any su9g~stions for' appointments to i _ serve as commfssioner be filed with the City Clerk Dene Williams. ~ g ~ ADJOURN1NHNT Thn meeting was adjourned at 4~10,0'clock P.M. Resppctfully submitted, (/~~ ~ PAGE, Secretar . a - 8 - ;;~n,• ~-----------------__. _.__-- ,-•----. -_,- _.,..~__~ .,,.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tl.