Minutes-PC 1962/12/27h~ j[.. ~ ~
, :,: - ~..r~~~.~:..~1;~IM~~'/~?_~. , ~...._w~.~s.....~..,~....~.~...~.•. ....I~AY,1M,'M1'!u/~~bb~FypOWIRW~,
.
.I~ .. ., . • , ~ • ~~~~~
Citq Hall
Anaheim, California
.. December 27, 1962
~ , RHGUTAR MBSTING OF THE ANAHBIM CITY PIANNING COMAlISSION
REGULAR MBBTING - A Regular meeting of the Anaheim City Pianning Commission was
called to order by Chairman Gauer at 2:00 0*Clock P.M,, a quorum
being present.
PRBSENT - CHAIRMAN: Gauer.
COhNiI3SI0N~tS: Chavos, arcoux, Mungali, Pebley~ Perry.
ABSSNT - COhAlIS3I0NBR3: Allred, Camp, Hapgood. ~'~
PRB3HN~ - 20NING COQRDINATOR: lMartin 1Creidt.
DBPUTY ASSISTANT CITY AT1'QRNHY: Puraan Roberts.
PIANNING CQi~UtISSION SSCRBTARY: Ann gzeba.
INVOCA'C:ON
~- - Reverend Arthur Hobaon, First Methodist Church, gave the
invocation.
PLBDGB OF - Commissiuner Perry led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Plag.
ALLBGIANCB
APP1i~AL nD - The Minutes of the meeting of December 10, 1962, were approved
MINUTBS ~s submitted.
AECLABSIFICR.TIqdV - CaNTINUED PUBLIC HBARING. ROBBRT G. ROBB, 1707 South BuClid
N0. 62-6~-?7 S'•eet, Anaheim, Califoraia, Owner; requeating that property
described as; A rectangular pazcel of land iocated on the north-
west corner of Buciid Street and Sumar. *,ane, said property having
_ an approximate frontage of 106 fee4 oa the west. aide qf Buciid
Street, and an approximate frontage of 49 feet on the north side of Sumac Lane, and
further described as 1703 3umac Lane, be reciassified from the R-1, Oi~iB FAMILY
RBSIDBNfIAL, 20NB to the C-1, NBIGFIDCYtH00D COM~lBRCIAL, 20NE.
8ub,ject petition was contiaued from the meetings of November 14 a~id November 26, 1962,
in order to allow the petitioner sufficient time to submit revised plot plans.
Dr. Robert G. Robb, the petitioner, appeared befor:e the Commission and stated that the
reviaed plot plans were before the Commission, an~i chat he would be glad to answer any
questions the Commissioa might have.
The Commission noted that the revised plot plaus 3ndicated exteasiee'revisions, and
that !he front of the structure was proposed with considerabie ~4ndscaping,
75iB f~HNRING 11AS CLOSHD.
Zonidg Coordinator Martin Kreidt, cailed the Commiasion~s attentioa to the fact that
"parting facili~ies were adequate for onlq oae profesaioaai office, and that this
should be conaidered a finding if the Commission coasidered aubject petiL3on favorably.
After Mr, Rreidt had read the proposed conditions impoaed on subject petition, Ds. Robb
asked that the Commiasion consider the waiver of the proposed aidewalk on $umac Lane,
since there were no other sidewalks oa 3umac Lane~ aad that if sidewalka were installed
by other property owneis, he would then install the sidewalks as required in the pro-
posed conditions. ~
- 1311 -
MINUTBB, CITY pLANNING CQFYNI3SION~ December 27~ 1962, Continded:
1312
RBCIA99IPIGTION - The Commisaion informed Dr. Robb that aiace aub3ect property was
N0. 62-63-37 to be reclasaified to C-1, Neighborhood Comnercial 2ouing, the
(Contiaued) aidewalts shouid be iastalled upon approval by the Citq Council.
Coaa~isaioner Mercoe+x offered Resolution No. 565~ Seriea 1962-63, and soved for its
passsage and adoption, secoaded by Coomisaioaer Mungaii~ to recommead to the City
Couacil that Petition for RecLasaification No, 62-63-37 be approved aub3ect to
coaditioas. (3ee ReaolutioA Book).
The coaditiona as atated in the Resolutiop Book were recited at the 4eetiag and
were found to be a neceesary prerequisite to the uae of the propertq ia order to
preaerve the eafety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of.Anaheim.
On roil csii the foregoing reaoiution xas pasaed bq the foilowiag vote:
AYB3: COl~fI93I0Nffit8: Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungaii, Pebleq, Persy.
NQ88: COI~dIS3I0NBR3: None.
ABBHNT: CQMMISSIO~ffitS: Alised~ Camp, Hapgood.
RBCLA93IPICATION - CONTINUBD PUBLIC F~ARING. ROY LB8 BURROUGH3, et al, 213 Rnott
N0. 62-63-35 Aveaue, Anaheim, California, Owners; SAL~tAPT BUILDBR3, INC.,
, 254 South Rosemead Houlevard, Pasadena, California~ Age~t;
~a~ requeatiag that propertq deacribed as: P. recteag~±~ar ps:cel oF
iand with a i3x..foot froatage on the west side of Snott Aveau~~ and a depth of 600 feet,
the aortheast corner of said propertq being approximatelq'8~.9 Peet south of the south-
west coraer of Liacoln and Bnott Avenues~ and further deacribed as 149, 201, 203, 209,
and 213 Snott Avenue (description iacludes two (2) parcela of laad), be reclassified
from the R-A, RESIDBNTIAL AQtiCULTURAL, ZOI~ffi to the R-3, MULTIPLB PAMILY RBSIDBNTIAL,
Za1S to construct a pleaned-unit development.
,Sub~ect petition was filed in coa3unction with Petition for Co~itional Uae Permit Na 313.
~.BnbJect petition was contiaued from the meetinga of October 29, Noveober 26, and
December 10, 1962, in order to allow the developer sufficieut time to incorporate
properties to the north.of sub3ect property into the revised plaas,
Mr. Howard D. Gewertz, 1744 State Street, Sou:n Pasadena, Califoraia, repreaenting the
developer, appeared before the Commission and stated that the desigaer had been
particularly carefu]. not to overcrowd the development; ta~t three different elevations
were proposed at various heights; and that single story was propoaed withiu 150 feet
of the aingle familq development to the weat of sub,~ect property.
The Commiasion reviewed the reviaed plot plana, and noted that the propoaed opea
recreational area was coneiderably leae than was deaired by the Commission; that with
92 dMeiling units propoaed~ the open area should be 9,200 aquare feet, but that the
maximum area, includiag the saimmiag pool was oniy 8,540 squa=e feetl that by ielocatiag
the pzopoaed carports at tLe westerly boundary of 'subject property ten feet further
rrest to abut the property line an sdditionaY 3,100 aqusre feet could be utilized to
relocate the aingie atory daelliag units aad the Tppe 2 and Type 3 atructurea, as weli
as the 28 carports oa the easLeriy aid~ of the rear driveway.
Zhe Comm.iasion Eur4h~r noted that five of the carports proposed along the northeriq
poriion of aub,~zct property wouid be viaible from gnott Avenue, ani it was the deaire
of the Ca:~miseion tha~'c garage doors be constructed for said five Carports.
7d:. Gerwertz atated that it was their original intention ta eacloae the front portion
of the dziveNay with a decorative biock wail, but that he did not have the drawings
with him to preaent them for the Commisaion~s coasideration.
,~ ~ ~.
MINOTBB~ CITY PIADIpING C(lI~OdIS3I0N, Decemiiez 27, 1962, Contiaued: 1313
RBCIAS3IPICATION - Mr. Gerwertz further atated that the proposed developmeat would
N0. 62-63-35 be a new design to Anabeiai, '
(Continued)
. THI3 HBARING WAS CLOSHD.
The Commisaion continued the dincuasion regardiag the opea carporta viaible from
Bnott Avenue~ and inquired of the agent if he had plans to tfesutify the froat eatraace
to the development.
Mr. GerMeriz stated that he intended to beautify the atreet approach with a porte co
chere approach to the tract which would beaefit the area ia geaeral and which would
also keep the appearaace of the tract in accordaace with the builders deaiga of
siagle stnry structurea on the street and a variety of roof liaes as well as
elevatioas,
Commisaioner perry offered Resolution No. 569, 3erieb 1962-63~ and moved for its paesage
and adoption, aeconded by Commissioner Chavos, ta recomnead to the Citq Council that
Petition €or Reelasaificatioa No. 62-63-35, be approved aub,~ect to coadi4iona.
(See Resolutioa Book).
The conditiana as atateG ia the Resolution Book were recited at ti;he meetiag and were
found to be a necessa=y prerequiaite to the uae of the property ic~ order to preaerve
the safety aad weifare of the CitizeA.~ of the City of Aaaheim.
On roll call the foregoiag reaolutioa was passed bq the foliowing vote:
AYBS: COMMTSSIONBRS: Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Muagall~ Pebleq~ Perry.
NQffi: CQAMISSIOI~ltS: None.
ABB~NT: COI~9~tI83701~RS: Alired, Camp~ Hapgood.
CONDITIONAL USS - CONTINUHD pUBLIC f~AF.ING. ROY L8E BURROUQiS, et a1, 213 Saott
PffitMIT N0. 313 Avenue, Anaheim, Califord a, Owners; SALSRAPx BUILDERS~ INC.,
'~~~ 2S4 Soutb Rosereal Boulevard, Pasadena, Califoraia, Agent;
requestiag permiasion to CONSIRUCT A PIANNBD-UNIT DBVBLOPI~ffiNT,
AND WAIVB 11tl0-STURY HSIGfiT LIMITATION on property described as; A rectangular parcel
of land with a 13z foot fronLage on the west side of Hnott Aveaue and a depth of
600 fee:, the northeast corner of said property being approxintately 810 feet south of
the southwest corner of Lincoln and Knott Avenues, and further deacribed as 149, 201,
203~ 209, aad 213 ~aott Avenue. Property presently clasaified R A, RBSID$NTIAL
AQtICULTURAL, 20N5.
3ubject petition was filed in coajunction with Petition for Reclnssification No. 62-62-35.
Sub3ect petition was continued from the meetings of October 29, November 26, aad
December 10, 1962, in order to allov~ the agent for the petitioners sufficient time to
aubmit revised plot plans.
M=. Howard D. Gerwertz, representing the developer appeaxed befoze the Commission
and stated ~hat all his comments regarding two story construction as stated in
Reclasaifcation No. 62-63-35 were applicable to sub3ect petition.
THfi HBARING WAS CI.03ED.
Commissioner Marcoux offered Reso2ution No. 570, 8eries 1962-63, and moved for ita
passage aad adaption, aeconded by Commissioner Pebley, to grant petition for
Conditioaal Use Permit No. 313, aub,~ect to conditions, (3ee ReReiutioa Book).
On roll call the foregoing resolution was pasaed by the followiag vote:
AX88: COMMI83I~R3: Ghavos, Gauer, Mascoux, Mungall, Pebley, Perry.
NOH3: COI~iI33I0NBRS: None. -
ABSffiVT: COMIdISSIONffitS: Allred, Camp, Hapgood.
~ 1r1INUTE3, CITY PIAHIdING COMMI33ICN, December 27, 1962~ Continued:
1314
CONIDITIONAL U38 - CONTINUHD PUBLIC F~ARING, SIGNAL OIL COMPANY, 1221 South Western,
PffitMIT N0. 325 I.os Angeles 6, California, Owner; requesting permission to
BSTABLISH A U3BD CAR LpT ANID ppggING LOT oa property described as;
A rectaagular parcel of land at the northwest corner of Cypress
Street and Los Angeles 3treet, having an approximate froatage of 190 feet on the north
side of Cypreas Street and Los Angeles Street. Property presently classified C-2,
GffiJffitAL COMI~ffiRCIAL, ZONH.
3ub,ject petition was continued from the meeting of December 27, 1962, in order to
readvertise subject petition.
Mr. Hubert Ka~afmaan, representing the petitioner, appeared before the Commission and
stated he would be glad to answer aay questions the Commissioa might have.
Chairman Gauer inquired if there was anqone in the Coqncil Chamber opposing subject
petition and received ao reply,
1HE HBARING MAS CLOSBD.
Commissioner Perry offered a mot3n a to grant petition for Coaditional Use Permit No. 325,
Commissioner Pebley seconded the motion.
Zoning Coordinator Martin $reidt, noted for the Commission's review that the petitiuaer
proposed to use the service station as the office for the used car lot; that it
would be possible that ,ised cars would be parked on the Los Angeles Street portion of
the service station, and that it might be assumed that the service station would
continue its operation using the car lot on Cypress Street oaly for the sale of used
cars to xfiich the petitioner might stipulate that the Los Angeles 3treet frontage
would remain as it was currentl; oeiag used,
Mr. gaufmaan stated that the petitioner was the owner of subject propertq~ aad it
was their intention to continue operation of the service sta;~ion; that the operators of
the service station would not be permitted to park cars on the driveway approachea of
the service station; and that the purpoae of s~bject petition was to utilize aa
unsightly area to the rear of the service atation and blacktop it.
After coasiderable discussion bq the Commissioa, the agent for the petitionerzaad
Mr, greidtJ reiative to the use proposed for sub3ect property~i ~as weli as the aervice
station being used as a sales office, Commissioaer Pebley w~thd=ew hia secoad of
Com~issioner~Perry~s motioa~ becauae ~he use would aot be improviag the sub,~ect
propertq bu:• dowagradiag it, The motion theA lost for want of a'second.
Comcvissioner Pebley offered a motion to reopen the heariag aad continue Petition for
Conditional Use Permit No. 325 to the meetiag of Pebruary 4, 1963, in order to allow
the petitioner sufficient time to present complete revised plans. Commissiuner Chavos
secoaded i~e motion. MOTION CARRIED.
GONDITIONAL USH - CONTINUED PUBLIC I~IDARING. Lb0 LIBBRIO, 1622 West Rickey, Anaheim,
PBRMIT N0. 327 Cs~lifornia, Owner; JAh~3 LIHBft%0, 1720 West La Palma, pnaheim~
California~ q,gent; requesti.ag permission to CONSIRUCT A RBSTAURANT
~ AND COCRTAIL BAR on property described as: A rectaagular parcel
of land having a frontt-ge of 136 feet on the south side of La palma Avenue, and a
depth of 280 feet, the eastern boundary of said property beiag approximately 330 feet
west of the centerline of luclid 3treet, aad further described as 1732 West La palma
Avenue, propertp presently classified C-1, NBI(~iBCRti00D COM~!ffitCIAL, ZONE.
Sub,~ect pe~tition was coatinued fm m the meetiag of December 10, 1962, in order to
allox the petitioner sufficient time to aubmit revised plans to indicate the
canntruction of a two-story building.
U1r. James Liberio, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Coamissioa and atated
he had nothing further to add for the Commisaion•s consideration, but that he would be
glad to answer any questions the Commiasion might have.
A letter of opposition was read to the Commission.
_,~
i
~
'•r
~. 1
~ ~~ - -
~
~ ~ O
MINUTH3, CITY PIANNING CQI~tISSION, December 27, 1962, Continued: 1315
CONDITTONAL USB - Chairman Gauer inquired of Mr. Liberio what was proposed of the
PffitMIT N0, 327 parking area, and suggested that all lights be reflected away
(Continued) from the apartment development to the south of subject pm perty.
THB HHARING WAS CLOSED.
Zoning Coordinator Martin Breidt, recited thp proposed conditions for the petitioner at
the request of the Commission.
Mr. Liberio stated that he oppased the requirement of the six (6) feet of landscaping
for La Palma Avenue as being incompatible with the property to the east of subject
propertv o~ which no landscaping was required.
The Commission discussed the proposed requirement of the six (6) foot of landscaping
strip for La Palma Avenue, and re,uested that this condition be stricken from the
suggested recommendations.
Commissioner Peb1E offered Resolution No. 571, Series 1962-63, and moved for its
passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Mungall, to grant Petition for
Co~itionai ti se Yermit No. 327, subject to conditions. (See Resolutioa Book).
On roll call the foregoing resolution wa,s passed by the following vote:
AYH3: COhAlISSIONBRS: C'n:tios, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall, Pebley, Perry.
NOB3: COhAlISSIONffitS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONBRS: Allred, Camp, Hapgood.
RBCLASSIFICA.TION - CONTINUBD PUBLIC tIDAItING. WILLIAM BRBGDER, 2135 West Ball Road,
N0. 62-63-48 Anaheim, California, Owner; LBROY R0.SB, 600 North B~~clid Street,
Anaheim, California, pgent; requeating that property described
as: A rectangi.ilar parcel of land having a froatage of 280 feet on
the west side of Hmpire Street, aad an approximate depth of 188 feet, the northerly
boundary of said property being approximately 200 feet south of the centerline of
Ball Road, ar.d further described as 1225 South 8mpire Stre~t be reclassified fro~ the
C-1, NBIGHBQitH00D COMMBItCIAL, ZONB to the R-3, MULTIPLB FAMILY RHSIDRNTIAL, ZONH, to
construct a planned-unit ~nultiple family .zsidential development with carports.
Subject petition w3s filed in conjunction with Conditional Use Peaait No. 304.
3ubject petition was continued from the meeting of December 10, 1962, in order that the
property might be properly advertiseQ.
Mr. LeRoy Rose, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Commission and stated
that subject reclassification was requn•ed to be filed at the time Conditional Use
Permit No. 304 had been approved~ and that because of an improper legai description bnth
the subject petition and the conditi.onal use permit had to be readvertised.
Chairman Gauer inquired if anyone opposed subject petition, and received no reply,
1HE HBARING WA.S CLOSHD.
2oning Cocrdinator Martin Itreidt, inforoed the Commission that plot plans submitted
with petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 304 proposed use of the northerly ten (10)
feet which had not been included in the original legal description of said petition, and
that subject petition also indicated this identical discrepancy.
,~
:
,
I
1
~
~ ~ ~
,.`,~
4
I
MINUTBS~ CITY PIANNING CQMFlISSION, December 27, 1962, Continued: 1316
RHCLASSIPICATION - Commissioner Mungall offered Resolution No. 572, Series 1962-63,
N0. 62-63-48 and moved for its passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner
(Continued) Perry, to recommend to the Citq Council that Petition for
Reciassification No. 62-63-48 be approved subject to conditions.
(See Resolution Book).
On roll call the foregoing resolutioa was pasaed by the foilowing vote:
AYH3: COM~dI3SI0NBRS: Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall, Pebley, Perry.
NO~B3: COhalI3SI~VBR3: None.
,~HSBNT: COMMI3SIOI~R3: Allred, Camp, I(apgood.
CONDITIQNAL USB ~ WILLIAM BRBGDHR, 2135 West Baii Road, Anaheim, California, Owner;
pffitMIT N0. 304 LBROY ROSB~ 600 North 8uclid 3treet, Anaheim, California, Ageat;
requeating permisaioa to CONSTAUCT A PIANNBD-UNIT DHVBLOPMBNT WITH
CpRpaRT3 on property described as; A rectangular parcel of land
having a frontage of 280 feet oa the weat eide of Bmpire Stseet, and an epproximate depth
of 188 feet, the northerly ttoundary af said property being approximateiy 200 £eet aouth
of the ceaterliae of Ball Road~ aad further deacribed as 1225 8outh 8mpire 8treet.
Property preaen#1y claaeified as C-1, NSIGFIDORHOOD CQ~tMHRCIAL, Z01~.
Mr. LeRoy Roae, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Commieeion snd atated he
hsd nothiag further to add for the Commisaioa~s coasideration.
2oning Coordinator Martin Kreidt, reviewed for the Commiaeion the original coaditioae
under which aub~ect petition was approved,aad recommeaded that the Commieaion conaider
the additiott of reaciading Resolution No. 302~ Seriea 1962-63~ and the approval of a new
resolution incorporating aii the original fiadiage and coaditione in said resolut:on,
as well ae including the additionai tea (10) feet ia the legal descriptioa.
Chairman Gauer ina,uired if anqone oppoaed aub,~ect petitioa, sad received no repiy.
Tf~ F~ARING NAS C,L09HD.
Commieeioner Muag-_L1 offered Reaolution No. 373~ Series 1962-63, and moved for ita
paeeage and adoptioa~ aeconded by Commiaeioner Perry~ to reaeiad Reiolution No. 50~~
Seriea 1962-63~ passed on October 1, 1962, for eub,~ect petit3on and approver aub,~eet
petition sub,ject to ^•onditiona, (See Reaolution Book).
On roll call the foregoing reaolution rras paseed by the following vote:
AYffi: COMAI39IONBRS: Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux~ Muagall, Pebiey, Perrp.
NpHS: COF9~lISSI0NBR3: None.
AHSHNT: CQhDiI~33I01~tS: Alired, Camp, Hapgoad.
TENTATIVS MAP OP - 3UBDIVIDBR: MHR4IN B. JOHI~T30N, 15012 Starboard Street, Gerdea
TRACT N0. 4427 Grove, California. BNGII~ffiffit: YOQtI~IS-TRINDLE-NBL30N. INC.,
13794 Heach Boulevard, N(estminster, California; aub3ect tract is
located south of the Santa Aaa River and north of the Riverside
Preeway, and contains 402 proposed R-1, One Pamil~+ Residential, lota.
Mr. Prank Aobertson, appeared before the Comraission as a repreaentative of the engineer,
and stated that he had nothing to add for the Commission's canaideratioa, but would be
glad to aaswer any queations the Commisaion might have.
The Comaisaion noted that sub,~ect tract was loeated immediateiy ad,~acent to Tentative
Tract No. 4476~ and that sub,ject property was located in the county.
.
___------.. _ _-----._...._---
... -----.•---r -- - --- '
~--_...._.,_.__--------._.__.. _.
. ---- ~
~
~ , .
~:-- --- -; -- .
. _ .
~ ~ ~
I
~
~ ,
~~ ,.~ ~
!
~''
MINUTBS, CITY PIANNING COi~41IS3I0N~ December 27~ 1962, Continued; 1317
TBNTATIVFt MAI~ OP - 2oning Coordinator Martia Sreidt, xeviewed for the Commission
1RACT N0. 4427 the lnterdepartmental Committee findings oa aubJect tract, aad
(Coatinued) stated that aiace the meeting, the City of Placeatia had filed
an in,~unction with precluded any immediate aaaexation of aub3ect
property into Lhe City of Anaheim, aad.that the subdivider
pianned to deveiop aii or part of the tract as gw t af a County Tract, but by
receiving the approval of the City Council and Pianning Commieaion of the City of
Annheim, if said traet were snnexed to the City of Aaaheim, ao further approval would
be zequired at the time of annexation.
Commieaioner Pebiey offered a motion to approve Tentative Map of Tract No. 4427~
aubject to the foilowing conditions:
1. Sub3ect to the aanexation of the City of Anaheim,
2, Requizement that ahould thia aubdiviaion be developed as more than one aubdiviaion~
each subdividion thereof ahall be aubmitted in teatative form for approv4l.
3, "8" and "C" 8treela between Alderdale Avenue and Batavia 64reet ahall be a
64-foot dedicatioa.
4. "L" Street from "g'~ $4reet to "G" 9treet ahall be a 64-foot dedieatioa.
5. q11 kauckles ahall conform to City of rlnahei~q atandsrds.
6. 'fie drainage atructure withia the 36-foot eaeemeAt shall be underg:ound, or •
coaerete iined channei which ahell be feaced with accea$ gatea. The diacharge
into the 3aata pna River ahall meet the approval of the Oraage Countq Mlater
Dietrict and (!-ange County P1ood Control Diatrict.
7. All drainage acroas Hatavia Street, a aecoadary highway~ ahall be by mesae of an
undergroand syatem with diacharge iato #he 8aata Aas River, aub,~ect to the epproval
of the Oraage Couatq Water Dietrict and OraAge Couaty Piood Control.
8. Iaetallatioa of a mediaa laadecapiag atrip betweeA Batavia Street aad the serviee
road; piane for said laadacapiag shali inciude adequate water,iag facilitiea, and
asid lendscap3ng ehs11 be aubieitte3 to aad aub,~ect to the appreval of the buper-
inteudent af Parkway Mainteaaace, and said laadaeaping ahall be instailed prior
to acceptattce of the trsct improvementa.
9. Dedication of seceas righta to Batavia 8treet from Lota 1~ 20 through 37, 156, 253~
254~ 302, 303, 312~ 313, 314, and 321.
10. Piasl deaiga ia croas aection to the aervice road ad3acent to Batavia 8treet~ and
Batavia Street itaeif~ ahall be aub,~ect to the City 8ngiaeer.
li. The temporary acceas road south of Addington Drive through I.ot No. 218, ahowu as
coanectiag to old Santa Ana Canyon Road, shail be uaed as a tempozary meana of
accesa, untii Addington Drive is extended easteriy as a public street.
12. The off-eite acceas road, the old 3anta Ana Canyon Road~ ahall be widened to
provide a twenty-four (24) foot travel way, with the approvai of the Orange Couaty
Roa3 Department.
13. Construction of a aix (~ FOOY masonry wali on the property linc aeparat3ng
Lot Nos. 254, 253, 1, 2i, through 37, 156~ 321, 314, 313~ 312, 3.'3, and 302 from
Batavia Street, except that on coraer Lot Nos, 254, 256, 1~ 156, aad 322~ said
walis ahall be stepped down to 24 inches ia the front one-half af the froat aet-
bact, and a height of 42 inchea in the bact one-haif of said aetback. Reasonable
landacaping iaciuding irrigation fac3lities ahail be iaetailed in the uncemented
port io n o~f the Batavia Street parkway, the fuli diataace of said wall, plans for
said landscapiag to be submitted to and sub3ect to the approval of the 5uperia-
tendent of paxicway Ma9:nteaance. (Pollowing the installation and acceptance~ the
City of Anaheim ehall asaume the respoasibility for maiatenance of said laad-
acapiag.)
.}~
i
I
- t.; : _ _ '; f6, -- ' ~ f -
~ ~ ~
MINUTBq, CIT3t pIpNNING COAAlISSI~1, December 27, 1962, Contiuued:
1318
TENTATIVB Mpp OP - 14. Construction of a six (6) foot masonry wa11 oa the property
17lNCT N0. 4427 line separatiag Lot Nos, 209 through 234 from the 8anta Ana
(Coatiaued) Valley Irrigation Conpaay Canai.
15. The proposed streets shall be named as followa:
G 8treet.......Brooklawn 3treet
H Street.......Barrqtnoll Street
g 8treet.......Bowmont Street
J and $ Sh~eets.. . Bar. ranca Street
M 3treet.......Alicia Avenue
N 3treet.......Ashdale Avenue
0 Street........Ardara pvenue
P Street.........Augusta Aveaue
Addingtoa Drive..Addingtoa Avenue
L Street.........Aneta Avenue
8 Circle.........Hlueridge Circle
P Circle.........8sinbridge Circle
A Circle.........Alicia Court
D Stseet.........Blueridge Street
Commisaioaer Chavos aeconded the motion. MOTIodV CARRIBD,
The Commisaioa further directed the Ccmmisaion Secretary to traasmit a copy of the
conditioas as stated to the Orange Couttty plaaning Commissioa for reference.
The Coseisaion further atipulated that in the letter of traaemittal to the Orange
Countq Planning Commisaion that the Anaheim Planniag Commisaioa ~ecommended that the
Oraage Countq Pianaing Commisaion conslder the advisabilitq of requiring perka and
recreationai facilitiea for aub,~ect tract when it was beiag heard bq the County
Planning Commission.
VARIANCB N0. 1539 - PUBLIC I~ARING. CALLYB R. BAUMSERGBR~ 254-A Cabrillo, Cos4a Mesa,
California, Owner; requestiag permiasion to QtBATg 1y(p (2) R A~
PARCBLS OP LSSS THAN ONE AC3t8, propertq deacribed as; p rectan-
guiar parcei of laad haviag a froatage of 120 feet oa the north aide of Cerritos Avenue,
aad a depth of 210 feet, the eastern boundary of said propertq beiag approximately
1,320 feet east of the centerline of Buciid Stseet, and further deacribed aa 1593 1Veat
Cerritos Avenue. Property preseatlq classified as R-A, RB3IDBNTIAL pGRIC[TLTVRpL, ZONH.
Chairman Gauer iaquired if the petitioner was in the Couacii Chamber aad received ao
respoase.
No opposition was present in the Couacil Ckamber.
TflB FffiARING WAS CLOSED.
2oning Coordinator Martin $reidt~ adviaed the Commission that a representative of the
1~cDaniel Bngineering Company rvas present at the Iaterdepartmental Committee meeting
who adviaed the City that only a lot spiit was anticipated at thia time and no
eonstruction was planned, therefore it ma~ have been presumed by the petitioner that
his presence at the hearing was not necese,ary.
Commisaioner Perry offered Resolution No. 574, 3eriea 1962-63, aad moved for ita
passage and adoption, seconded bq Commiasioaer Qsavos, to grant Petitioa for Variance
No. 5139, sub,~ect to conditions. (See Resolution Book).
On roil cail the foregoing resolutioa was pasaed by the following vote:
AYBB: CObAlISSIONBRS: ~havos, Gauer, Marcoux, Muagall~ Pebley, perry.
NQBS: CObAtIS3I0NHRS: None.
.~
AHBBNT: COMMISSION~tS: Ailred, Camp, }iapgood.
~ ~ ~
~
~
MINUTB3~ CITY pIAHIdING COAAlISSION, December 27, 1962~ Continued:
~,....,._ -~
~ ~
i
1319
VARIANCB N0. 1540 - PUBLIC FffiARING, PORIPIRA G. MATA, 520 Bast Adele Street, Anaheim,
' Cali€.oraia, Orvner; BZAS MARRON, 741 North Pauliae $treet, Anaheim,
Califoraia, Agent; requesting permission TO CONSIRUCT A v;:NGLB
DWBT.LING UNIT - WAIVH THB 1,225 SQUARR POOT MINIM[1M L.IVABLS PLOOR SPACS ARBA.RHQUIRBMBNT
on property deacribed as: A rectangular parcel of land having a frontage of 42 feet on
the south aide of Adele 8treet, and a depth of 144 feet, the eastern boundarq of said
property being approximately 68 feet weat o£ the centerline of Pauline Street, aad
further described as 520 Bast Adele Street. Property presentiy clasaified ae R-3,
MQLTIPLB PAMILY RBSIDBNTIAI., ZONB,
Mr. Bla~ Marroa, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Commisaion and atated
that aub,~ect property was a substandard lot, and prohibited the consi:ruci3on of a larger
home than was being proposed.
Chairmaa Gauer inquired whether there was anyoae in tkse Council Chamber oppoaing
aub,~ect petition, and received ao repiy.
Tf~ HBARING WAS CLOSBD.
Zoning Coordinator Martia %reidt, noted for the Comnieaion that the elevat3c na and piot
plana ae presented were not the baeically required plan~ aeceeaary for s true evaluation
of aub,~ect petition; and that tt might be assumed fhat the ex'_ating structurea and the
propoaed atructurea were too cloae for f3re proteetion~eipce g~ragea were only 8 feet
from the atxucture
Commisaioner Mungaii offered Reaolution No. 575, 9eries 1962-63, tad moved for its
paaeage and adoption~ aeconded by Commiaaioaer Pebley~ to graat Petition for Varianc:
No. 1340, aub,~ect to conditions. (3ee Aesolntion Hook),
S
On -011 caii the foregoing reaolutioa was paeaed bq the foliowipg vote:
AYBS: (~lI93IONBR3: Chavos, Gauer~ Marcoux, Mungail, pebley~ perry.
NOB3: COMII~lI83I0N8R8: Noae.
AB8ffiVT: C~AlI93IOI~IDR8; A~.i~ed, Casp, Hapgood.
VARIANCE N0. 1541 - PUBLIC FIDARING. ldARTHA S. SCHUMACI~R, 213 NorLh Heleas 9treet,
Anaheia~ Califoraia, Owner; RICHARD IAYNB TOM,A.I.A,1665 Weat
Bateila Aveaue, Anaheio, California, Ageat; requeating permiasion
to WAIVB 66-2/3~ PARBING RSQUIR8I~NT AND ONH SPACS P8R 200 SQUARB POOT GR033 PLOdt ARBA
TO PffitMIT THE RELOGITION OP TFID HXISTING AUTO AND TRUC& WHOI83ALB PARTS BUBII~SS oa
property described as: A rectaagular ahaped parcei of iaad having e froatage of 52 feet
on the eaet aide of Lo9 Aageles 3treet~ and a depth of 150 feet~ the northertt boundary
of said property being approximately 335 feet aonth of the ceaterline of North Street,
and further described as i34 North Los Angele~ 3treet. Propnrtq presentiy clasaified
as G2. Gffi~BRpL COFMBRCIAI., ZONB,
Mr. Richard L.' Tbm, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Commission, and
stated he had nothing further to add for the Commission*s consideration, but he would
be glad to answer any questioas the Commission might have.
Ci:sisman Gauer iaq¢ized if there was anyoae in the Council Chamber opposing aub3ect
petition, and receaved no reply,
1~i$ HHARING WAS CLOSBD.
The Commission reviewed the plot plana and noted that the requested variances reduced
parking spaces from 16 to 13 spaces~ and tk~at upon a field inspectioa trip, the Rrea
might be improved with the cementiag of that portion parkway not landscaped and
surrounding the treewells, so as not to have bare groucd and weeds fronting the
commercial development.
~
I
MINUTBS, CITY PIANNING CObYdI3SI0N, December 27, 1962, Continued:
132Q
,~
i
I
YARIANCB N0, 5141 - Commissaoner Marcoux offered Resolution No. 576~ Series 1962-63~
(Continued) and moved for its passage and adoption, aeconded by Commissioner
Perrq, to grant Petition for Variaace No. 5141, suhject to
conditioas. (8ee ReaoluYion Boot).
On roil cali the foregoing resolutioa was passpd by the foliowiag vote;
AYBS: CdhIN.T33I0NSR3: Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux~ Mungall~ Pebleq, Perry.
N083: C!~hAlI33IOd~BRB: None.
ABRHNT: CQhQlISSIOi~iBRB: Ailred, Camp, Hapgood.
VARIANCB N0. 1542 - PUBLIC F~ARING. LONG BHACH HANANA DISTAIBUTQtt3~ 1419 Magnolia
Avenue, Long Beach 13, Californis, Owner; JOHI~i H, IRWIN~ 1140 Beat
Carson Bouievard, Loag Heach 7~ California, Ageat; requeeting
permisaion to RBDUCH RBQUIRBD NUt~Et aP PARgING 9PAC88 AND RSQUIRBD PARHING ARBA on
propertq deacribed as: A rectaaguiar parcei of iand having a froatage of 759 feet on
the weat aide of 8uelid Avenue, having e frontage of 433 feet on the north aide of
Bali Road, aad having a frontage of 420 feet oa the aouth eide of Heacoa Street~ aad
further deacribed as 929 9outh 8uclid Street. Property preaently ciasaified ss C-l~
NBIG~~tH00D COMdBRCIAL~ 20NH.
Mr. Joha H. Irwin~ agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Comraieaion, and atated
he had aubmitted a letter which eubstantiate8 hia reasona for requeatiag sub,~eet
variance; that the trash atorage area at the rear of the Mayfair 3tore ia thia commer-
cial deveiopment wouid be enclosed aad unioadiag docta conetrueted to facilitate the
unloading of auppliea for the atore; that a more preaentabie appearaaee r,rould be
achieved bq #he installation of trash storage areas at the rear; aad tl~st the requeat
for a reductioa ia the required number of parking spacea wae needed to aiiow the
petitioner to enlarge individuai parkiag apa*._es for easier acceas to the loediag of
automobiles by cuatomers of the commercial development.
ChaiYmau Gauer inquired 3f anyone was ia the Council Chamber oppoaiag aub,~ect petition,
and received no reply.
Tf~ FffiARING WA3 CIASED.
2oning Coordiaator Martin greidt, reviewed for.the Commissioa a previous request granted
the petiti~ner for reduction of the parking requirement; and that the Planning Department
recommeaded fzvorable consideration of the requeat siace many desirable results would
be realized by the City and the residential development to the weat of sub,ject property~
said improvement couid be regulated by stipulsteil conditions by the Commission.
Commiesioner Mungall offered Resolution No. 577, Series 1962-63~ and moved for its
passage and adoption~ seconded by Commissioner Chavos, to grant Petition for Variance
No. 1542, sub,ject to conditions. (See Resolution Book),
On roll call the foregoing resolution was pasaed by the following vote:
AYE9: CMAII3SIONBRS: Chavos,- Gauer, Marcoux, Muagail, Pebiey, Perry.
NQH3: CqMlI33IONBRS: None.
ABSSNT: CQI~WIISSIONiBRS: Allred, Camp~ Hapgood. .
R&CH33 ~ Commissioner Pebley moved for a ten minute recesa. Commie~ioaer C7~avos
seconded the motion. MOT'~h CNRRIHD.
The meeting recesaed at 3:45 0•Clock P.M.
RHCONVHNS -Chairaan Gauer reconvened thC meeting at 3:55 0'C1ock P.M., Commisaioners
Alired, Camp, aad Hapgood beir~g abaent.
~
~
/
~t _ ~.~„-.,s
~ ~ ~
r. -
~'
MINUTB3, CITY PIANNII~RG COh~lI9SION, December 27, 1962~ Coatinued: 1321
CONDITIQ~IAL USB - PUBLIC F~ARING. HOMHIAND COMPANY, 887 South Los Angeles 3treet~
PSRMIT N0. 334 Anaheim, California, OMmers; Charles Richard Hand, 204 North Secoad
~treet, Alhambra, Caiifornia, Agent; requeating permiasion to
• CONSTRUCT A 1W0 STQtY COLONIAL TYPB OPPICB BUILDING on property
described as: An irreguiar parcei of land having a frontage of 183 feet on 4he east
side of Buclid Street, said property also having a frontage of SS feet on the aorth
side of Crone Avenue, and a frontage of 108 feet oa the south side of Niobe Place, and
further described as 1681 Crone Avenue, 1674 and 1680 Niobe Place. Property preaentiy
ciassified as R-1, OI~ PAMILY RBSIDBNTIAL, 20NE.
•~
i
Mr. Charles R. Hand, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Commissioa, aud i
stated that it was prohibitive to finance the conatruction of eingie famiiq homes on
sub,ject property; that the pzoposed commercisl atructure would be deaigned with a
Mount Vernon type of architecture; th~t ~}tr~would be limited to business aad
P-ofessioaal tqpe offices only; that^ae,.'`~-pa~eee-A-`-~~ property owuers~~.
Tract No, 3326 signed a petition approt-3ng the proposed development; and that Lot No , 9
aad il were purchased to act as a buffer to the R-1 tract ia which aubject property was '
located.
Chairman Gauer asked if there was aayone in the CounciY Chamber opposing sub,ject
petition, and received no reply.
TF~ HBARING WA3 CLOSEC.
It was noted by the Commission that T.ot Nos. 9, 10, aad 11 of 7'ract No, 3326 were the
only pascels not developed for singie family homes; that the propoaed uae would be
commercioi in natnre~ and it had been the policy of the Commisaion not to permit
commercial development and reaidences to be combined into one buiiding; that the
proposed use of sub3ect property was in conflict with the Preliminary Generai Plaa;
that the s~gr„atures on the petition of residents could not be verified and be taken
into coneideration as a basis for apgroval; that to approve sub,ject petitioa would be
setting a precedent for all of the single familq homes along 8uclid 8treet; and tYiat
subject property should ha~~e beea developed for siagle family uae at the time the tract
had been develope3,
Mr. ,john Griffith. one of the petitioners appear.ed before the Com~eission, ia answer to
a queation a3 to the reason for holding three lots for other than single fasily
development~ ~nd atated that at the tiwe the Tsact wae developed~ he had Leen advised
to hoid theae three lots for possible rezoning since the parcel on the west aide of
Hueiid StzEet had not been developed~ aad it was posaible that Buclid Stree2 m3ght be
claeaified as a commercial type street.
Mr. Griffith £urther stated that the agent for the petitioner came to hia unsolicited
aad offered to construct the proposed structure, which he felt would be a defiaite
asaet to the community~ and that many of the property ownera north of aub,ject property
on Buciid'Street had expressed a deaire to aeil their homea since it was felt that the
homes did not seem conducive to res3dential uses.
The Commission noted that no hardship had been proven by the petitioner in holdiag
subject pror~rty instead of developing it at Lhe time the Tract in which subject property
is located was deveioped; that two story construction would be iacompatible backing up
to aingie fawilq development; and that the single family tract was so developed as to
haar a six (6) foot masonry wall on the Buclid Street side of the lots to shield the
prop:.~ty from noiaes,
Com~issioner Chavos offered Resolution No. 578, Seriea 1962-63, and moved for its
passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Mercoux, to deny Petition for
Conditionai ilse Permit No. 334, based on findiags. (See Resolution Sook).
On ro11 ~all the foregoing resolution was pasaed bq the followiag vote:
AYBS: CM4iT3SI0NHRS: Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux~ Perry.
NQHS CfY.A~IIg3I0N8RS: Mtrngall, Pebleq.
~ ~ ~
~
~
~
1
f
I
I
I
~
~::., .
p ~ . ~ <:.•~.:. ~;i.,:.
MINUTB3. CITY PIANNING CCY~fA133I0N, December 27, 1962..Contin::ed; 1322
C(?~'"D'lTIONAL USB - PUBLl~ HB~:Tti~r'.~. J. p. TRUST, 444? Nor~::. Cnakr.al ffitgsess Waq,
p~tMIT N0. 335 Dailas, T~:ea., L'!9ner; H. M, GBYB~i, 1£~0:'.1. '~%~dQ;e Aveaue, 8~nta Ana,
- Califotnia~ .lgeat; requesting F:~tmis~sioo. •?u INSTALL AN AUT~IATIC
CAA WASH on propertq describeti as: An i~rE~.;ular parcei ~f isnd
having a froatage of 480 feet on the east aide of Los Aagelea ~ivreet, and a f*cntage
of 730 feet on the n~:.rtit side of Cerritos Avenue, aad further ds~cribed as 1440 South
"L,:~s Angelea Strre~, Property preseatiq classified as M-1, I,IC~11(iT MANUPACNRING, 20~IB
aatd fi~L~ PAFtICING IANDSCAPING~ ZONE.
:w„ir~:~an Gauer inqui=ed whethAr th2 petitioncr er ~is ag~:at was in the Couneii Chamber,
and ~~ceived no reaponse.
;~x. Anso~a McArthur, counael for the Buzza Curdozo Company, at 1500 3ov:tt Laai P.:igeles
3tirc:;~ appeared 'oefore the Coua±ss3en in oppos~.tio~x to subje^.t petitioa, e.nd atatec!
that the proposed use wouid not ',5e t~a asaet to ma.av~actusing facilitiea in ~lose
proximity to aub,ject property; •bhar. th.~ propoaeo car,vash would preaent aa ura~g:.~tq
appearance as aeen froR the Preeway~ aan :*_et the propciaed carwash wouid be located
immediateiy adlacent to tlie on and off ramp of aaid 1°~eeway~ which would preaent e
hazardoua traffic condition if aub~ect petition wa_e granted.
TH8 }~AARING WAS CLOSSD.
~uaia,g CoordiAator Martin Sreidt, reviewed for the Commiaeiea yr.:s area 3ra c~hi~:h the
gropated carwash was iocated~ aad noted that ~L would front ~~ portion of CM~,~'e parking-
isndscapimg 'strip which har: not beea developad aa apecifi~e,. :Ln the spproval nr ~,~
add.i!ioaal atructu-e for i:he discount atore; that tt~ pet:ltioner~a agent haa be~n
info:med that the iei;a; ~eecription preaen~ted w3t~ tne pr.t~tiba iras incorrect; and that
the agtnt for the Fetitionter had requeateli a conti..!.1~~anc~ in drder to aubmit tt~e correct
legai deacription.
The Coeamiasion disc-:ssp~ ta~' :-odAatit;iii~by oi t'ae propoce~ ~aee as it was pro3esxe~ ax,
the Pr~eliminary Genera.~ F~zn, aad noted that tf~~e ara:a wae pro,~ected for M-]., L3~ht
w,~ufaeturing, develcpm~ent.
G;;sniaiaioner Mungall off.~red °.er~oiution '~Vo. 5T9, Seriea 1932-63~ aM moved for iba
;+assage aad adoptioa, aecaadeG by Commiasioaer Chavos~ to denq Petition for Coaditiona~
Uae Perm34 No. 335, br.sed oa fin~tings. (See Reaolntioa Uook).
On roli call the foregoing resol.ution was paesed by thz follow3ag vote:
AYBS: COIWNdSSI0NBR8: Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungali, Pebley~ Perry.
NQH3: COh~MYQ~IONffitS: None.
pBSHNT; CaMlfISSIOI~AEt° : Allred, Ca.~p, Fiapgaod.
.,~
~
COIVDITIOtdAI. U3,B - PUBLIC F~!lRING. ~BIAIDS J. RUNNHL9~ 1307 West Castle~ Anaheim,
pBr.n;:T N0. °~6 Californi~~ Qwner; requestiag permisaion to ffiTABLISH A 1W8NTY-POUR
'-'"-- (24) HOUR NURSING PACILITY PtlR !~u?'ALLY RBTARDHD CHII.DRffiV on
property deac.:ibed as: A rectangalar parcel of land having a
fcontag~ of 58 z'eet on the eas: sidP of ~Ieatern,Avenue, aad a froah_;T of 49 fect on the
nor.tIs side of ~~c. ,lidge Avr...zue, and f-+r..her d~sc_ibed as 3i~_ Coc,lidge Ilvenue. Property
p:•esently classia~ed as R-L, ~'~ PADIILY RH9IDP_NTYAL~ ZONB.
Mrs. Adelaide J. Runnela, the petitione;., appeared before the Cammiasion~ and stated
that #he cniidren she proposed tu havP in•the nuraing facilitq would be bedriddea;
that there would be ne ne~essity ~~~ provi~ie outdoor recreat3.ona1 ~lay areas for the
patients who would be under. the a~e of 10 years; that the sta~e imposed restrlctions for
~he type of' operation ~he p~oposed to offer.; that the children would be former patients at
Valleyview• Sts+te Hospital; and that s?~e wa~ a qualif~ed nurse wi,th years of experience in
the care of iasntally retarde~ children.
i
, I
i~ ~' ._T . ~ .. ~IE.-_" ... ... .. ..:. "`~._ ._ "
~ ~ ~ ,.
d
~`
~
~.
~ ~ ~
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING OOMMISSION~ December 27, 1962, Continueds 1323
OOImITIONP.L USE - 1i[r. Wallace Frazier, 8741 Western Avenue, Buena Park, appeared in
PERMIT N0. 336 opposition to sub3ect petition and stated that he representod the
(Cohtinued) four persons seated in thp Council Chamber who opposed sub~ect
oetition; that he had a petition signed by 35 persons who lived in
the immediate vicinity of sub3ect property who also opposed sub~ect
~tition because the proposed use was not compatible to the residential integrity of the
~~~tire area surrounding subject property; that property values would be greatly decreased
with the granting of the proposed use; and that although the petitioner was doing a
genei~uc thing in proposing the care of unfortunate children, it would be incompatible
to the areao
uf.-s. Ba-bara Frazier, 8741 Western Avenue, Buena Park, Mrs. Hertha Thomas, 3169 West
Monioe, a~d Claudia Johnson, 3156 West Monroe also appeared before the Conenission and
stated that they concurred with Mr. Fraz~er in oppsoing sub3ect petition.
Mrso Runnels in rebuttal, stated that the children would be confined to their beds and
would not be ambulatoryo
The Cormnission note9 that the low roof on the structure would create an uncomfortable
condition for patients; that if sub3ect petition were allawed, sir-conditioning would
be a required condition; and that sewer facilities wer. ina8equate for sub3ect use since
cesspools were the means for disposal of sewage in the area.
Ti9E HFARING W,~S CLG'aID.
The Commifsion stated thc~+ admired the type of work and facilities which the petitioner
proposed to offer for handicapped chiidren, but t'sia area in which she proposed to offer
said facilities wou~d not be an area in which the Coimnission felt the use would be
compatible.
Conunissioner Chavos offered Resolution No. 580, Series 1962-63, and moved for its
passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Pebley, to deny Petition for Conditional
Use Permit No. 336, based on findingso (See Resolution Book}.
On roll call the foregoing resolUtion was pas;.ed by the following votei
AYESe OOMMISSIONE!'3s Chavos, Gauer, Marcciux, Mungall, Pebley, Perry.
Ir`:FSx ~MMIS£IOA'L•:Y.Ss Noneo
ABSENTs OOMMISSIONERSt Allred, Caaip, Hangood.
OOM?ITIONAL 'JSE - PUBLIC HEARING., B. I. C. •• BA11. AND MAGtd4LIA~ 1138 Eas{; 17th Street~
PERMIT N0. 337 Santa Ana, California, Jwners; BENNETT aQMiTRU^TION OObiPANY,
1138 East 17th Street; Sa~~ta Ana, California, Agent; rervesting per-
mission to ~NSTALI• Av AU'P(`MA!'IC CAR WASH FACILITY on proporty
described ass A rectangular parcel of t3~~d having a 345 i•. t fronta~.a on the east side
of Magnolia Avenue, and a depth o.f 520 :'ec~, th~~ ror±hern boundary of sai„ property
being approximately 442 feet sout]- ~f tr,e ~. ence*line of Ball Road, an~? further described
as•1240 South Magnolia ;,venue. P::oUe:tY prasently classif:ed as C-1, NQGHBDRHOOD
OOMMERCIAL~ 7ANE.
Mr. Edward Lindsk~~, r.epresenting the owner~ appeared before the Commission, and
stated that the petitioner Froposed a modern all-steel carwash facility at sub3ect
location, which was part of a shopping center; and that the parking requirments would be •
minimal because of the type of service being offered.
Chairmat: Gauer inquired whether there rras anyone in the Council Chamber opposing sub~ect
hetition, and f ive persons stood up in opnosition.
Mra. Ervin T. Graul, 8871 Kennel.ly Laner appeared befare the Cormnission to represent the
five persons opposing suliject petition, and stated that her property faced the shopping
cer~•~er, and to permit tt,e sub~ect use v~ould be detriment2l to the residential integrity
of t,tie area; that sub~ect use was incomt.~atible to the many nice small shops in the centerf
''t
~
i
~
I
.~
-." ~
l __ ~._.. ----~- __--._..---- - ._.._.
1_._._ _ ,...,..._.._-.._~~ . . .
~
~
ODNDITIONAL USE - that the Anaheim Police Depa~tment was aware of a juvenile problem
PERMIT N0. 337 in the area, and the proposed use would encourage youngsters to
(Continued) ga~cher around any operation whicn had automobiles being serviced; and
that lights and noises emanating from the proposed use would be
in3urious to the general health and welfare of the conmiunity.
Mr. Bernard Waxman, 8951 Kennelly Lane, appeareu before the Commission and stated he
would further like to add that the proposed use would be fronting 345 feet on Magnolia
Avenue9 that his property was also located directly across from the subject property, and
that the pxoposed use with its many noises operating a': all hours would be injurious to
the general heal•~h of his family and families in the neighborhood, as wQll as being
detrimeni:al to the high school immediately adjacent to subject property,
Chairman Gauer asked that all the other persons opposing subject petition give their
names and addresses which were as followss Mrs. Richard Anderson, 8972 iCennelly Lane,
Mrs. Jack Fulton, 2636 Winston Road, Mrs. Paul Jones, 8921 Kennelly Lane, Mrs. Bernard
Waxman, 8951 Kennelly Lanea
A letter of opposition was read to the Commission from Mr. 'Ermest Miller, 8872 Kennelly
Lane.
Mr. i::c:dskog in rebuttal, stated that only a 120 foot frontage would be utilized, and
that a masonry wall could be constructed to contain the noise. '
THE HEARING WAS CLOSID.
The Commission discussed the compatibility of the proposed use with thE surroundings to
be affected by said use, and that by approving subject petition the parking facilities
needed for the shopping centex would be greatly reduced.
Commissioner Perry offere3 Resolution No. 681, Series 1962-63, and moved for its passage
and adoptiony seconded by Cortunissioner Marcoux, to deny Petition for Conditional Use
Permit No. 337, based on findings~ (See Resolution Bookj.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votei
AYESa OOMMISSIONERSa Chavos, Gauer, Marco::::; Mungall, Pebley, Perry.
NDESa OOMMISSIONERSc None.
ABSENTa COMMISSIONF.RSa Allred, Camp, Hapgood.
ODNDITIONAL USE - PUSLIC HEARING. RICHARD and iUCY ANTFIDN.Y, 1200 West Ball Road,
PERMIT NOa 338 Anaheim, California, Owners; ROBERT W. MACMA}AN, 1695 West Crescent,
Anaheim, California, Agent; requesting permission to fANSTRUCT A
QDFFEE SHOP, RESTAURANT, AND OOCKTAIL IAUNGE on property described
asa A rectangular parcel of land having a frontage of 130 feet on the south side of
Ball Raad, and a depth of 160 feet, the western boundary of said property being approxi-
mately 200 feet east of the centerline of West Street, and further described as 1050 West
Ball Roado Property presently classi£ied.as R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL~ ~NE.
Mro Robert Wo MacMahon, agent for the petitioners, appeared berore the ComQnission and
stated that pians as submitted were identical to the plans approved under a variance
someti me ago; that the petitioners had made an error at the time of applying for
Variance No. 1168, by failing to meet all the conditions stated when said variance had
been approved; and that the time limitation had expired.
Chairman Gauer inc}uired whether anyone in the Council Chamber opposed suts3ect petition,
and received no reply.
THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
,.
~
s
i
i
3
;
3
~
i
i
F
~~-_......, ___..~--
~'~ :~' •
MINUTES, CITY PLAA!NING OONLMISSION, December 27, 1952, Continued: 1324
_ ~,`:
~
~
~
MINUT'E5y CITY PLANNING ~MMISSION, December 27, 1962, Continuede
1325
~NDITIONAL USE - Zoning Coordinator Martin Kreidt, advised the Co~nission that an
PERMIT N0. 338 investigation had been made on Variance No. 1168, which had been
(Con•Linued) filed previously on sub3ect property, and at that time the street
lighting fee had been paid.
Commissioner Marcoux offered Resolution No. 582, Series 1962-63, and moved for its
passage and adoption, seconded by Convnissioner Pebley, t~ grant Petition for Conditional
Use Permit No. 338, subject to conditions. (See Resolution Sook).
On rol: call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votee
AYES: ~MMISSIONERS~ Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall, Pebley, Perry.
NOESs OOMMISSIONEI?Ss None. .
ABSENT: Q~MMISSI~JNERSt Allred, Camp, Hapgood.
OONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARING. NICI~OL~S DOVALIS, 920 South Magnolia Avenue,
PERMIT ;:~;. 339 Anaheim, California, Owncr; AL ~RELIA, 2641 West Stonybrook Drive,
Araheim, California, Age~~t; requesting permission to ESTABLISH A
RETAIL S:TJRE FOR THE SALE OF REOORDS~ SH~ET MUSIC, MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS AND ACCESSORIES~
AMJ FOR ACOORDION AND GUITAR INSTRUCfION on property described ast A rectangular
parcel of land having a frontage of 144 feet on the east side of Magnolia Avenue, and a
depth of 244 feet, the southern boundary of said property being 286 feet north of the
centeriine of Ball Roads ar.ci filrthor d~scribed as 918-B South Magnolia Avenue. Property
presen+.ly classified as C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD OOMMERCIAL, ZONE.
Mr. A1 Morello, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Commission and stated he
was the proposed tenant for subject property, and proposed to operate said retail storef
and that he had obtained an interim business li~ense from Lhe City ~ouncil pending
a:tion by the Commission~
Chairman Gauer inquired if anyone was present in the Council Chamber who opposed
subject petition, and received no reply.
THE HEARTNG WAS CLOSID.
Commissioner Mungall off ered Resolution No. 583, 5eries 1962-63, and moved for its
passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Chavos, to grant Petition for Corc33tional
Use Permit Noo 339, subject to conditions. (See Resolution Book).
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votei
AYESs GUMFAISSIONERS: Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall, Pebley, Perry.
NAESs COMMISSIONERS: Nonao
ABSEN'ia ODMMISSIONERSt Allred, Camp, Hapgood.
QOPIDITIONAL USF - PUBLIC HFARING. DELOS G. PATTER90N, 1900 Ramona, Alto Loma, Cali-
PERMIT N0. 340 fornia, Own2r; JOHN D. VON DER HEIDE, 924 North Euclid Street,
Anaheim, California, Agent; requesting permission to ODNSTRUCT A
DRIVE-~IN ANn WALK-UP RESTAURANT FACILITY ~n property described ~.si
A rectangular parcel of lattd having a frontage of 96 feet on the south side of Lincoln
Avenue, and a frontaye of 222 feet on the east side of Dale Avenue, and further
described as 2790 West Lincoln Avenue. Property presently classified as R-A, RESIDENTIAL
AGR1GiJLTURAL, ?:ONI~,.
Mr. John D. Von der Heide, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Commission e::~
stated that plans as submitted were similar in design to other "Carl Jr." drive-ins;
that the pxoposed restaurant facility was a family type restaurant, and that sub3ect
property was an ideal use of sub3ect property.
~________~~..~._._._-~--~------_~_--- --- ---- ~__--
, • ~ ~,.'-_ _.-- ~ . - _"_.
-,r-----_.....,- --
~
I
i ' 1
.
.. ,. M:-:+~rr.~eun.~vs:..:.....,;,
_„
~
.
.,..........o...
..~«:.c~..-..-:~~....n..~:v-n ..•,a,..,~...m~m.n.~.Ka.,«..a.~..~..~.,..ro~. `.
,: ~;i
_ __
..~.,.:,. ----
.
1
_..._ _
, ~~~ ~ ,
' r+~
~
I
~.
~
~
~ 11i
i
~
~~ ~
i
-~
MINUT'ES, CITY PLANMING OOMMISSION~ December 27, 1962, Continueds
1326
WNDITIONAL USE -?he Commission inryuired whether ths proposed structure was to face
PERMIT ND. 340 Dale Avenue or. Lincoln Avenue, and Mr. Von der Heide repTied that
SContinued) the structure would face onto Lincoln Avenue.
Chairman Gauer inquired if anyone in the Council Chamber opposed subJect petition, and
received no reply.
THE HEARING WAS CLOSID.
The Co~nission discussed the proposed structure for the sub~ect property and its
compatibility to the surrounding property.
Cortcnissioner Pebley ofrered Resolution No. 584, Series 1962-63, and movtd fur its pessage
and adoption, seco~ded by Commissioner Marcoux~ to grant Petition for Conslitional Use
Permit No. 340, s~..bject to conditions. (See Resolution Book).
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votet
AYESe 001W,3SSIONERSe Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall~ Pebley, Perry.
NOESn WNWIISSIONERS~ Nonee
ABS~N?~ WMMISSIONERSt Allred, Camp~ Hapgood.
OONDIYIONAL USE - PUBLIC HFARING. RICHABD A. and LUCY ANTHONY, 1200 West Ball Road,
PERMI'i N0. 34L Anahoim, California, Ownera; EipBERT W. MACMAHON, 1695 West Crescent,
Anahelm, Califnrnia, Agent; requesting permission to aONSTRUCT A
1WENTY (20) UNIT NDTEL FACILITY on property deacribad aes A rectan-
gular parcel of land having a 75 foot frontage on the south eide of Katella Avenue, and
a depth of 205 feet, the wsstern boundary of said property being approximately 740 feet
east of the centerline of Harbor Boulevard. Property preaently claesified aa A-A~
RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL, ZANE.
M;• Robert MacMahon, agent for the petitioner, appeared before the Conunission and
s:~t.ed that there seeme~l to have been some misunderstanding regarding an easement filed
against the petitioners, that sub~ect petition should be considered as a land use
dete~mi~~?tionj and that any legal matter filed against the petitioners would be resolved
without sub~ect petition being delayed by the Commission for further consideration.
A letter r~as read to the Commission from Miller, Nisson, Kogler end Wenke, Attorneys,
2014 North Broadway~ Santa Ana, ~vhich informed the Commission that a Idotice of Lis
Pendens was recorded in the County Recorder's Office regarding a complaint filed in
Superior Cournt under Case No. 109198, regarding an easement for the easterly 18 feet
of sub~ect property.
Chairman Gauer inquired whether anyone was in the Council Chamber opposing sub~ect
~etition, and received no reply.
THE :iEARING WAS CLOSED.
The Commission reviewed the proposed plot plane and inquired whether air-conditioning
was proposed for the proposed motel and whether said air-conditioning would be located
on the roof of the structure.
Mr. MacMahon advised the Commission that there wou~d be individual air-conditioning
units for each motel unit attached to the outside of the rear wall~
The Comnission further stated that individual air-conditioning units could also be an
eyesore and requested that all units extend not more than'six (6) inches from the outside
wall, or ~ust enough roc~m for dra±nage clearance,end the vents be located on the outside.
~
i
~
~---•-- --._ _.---_
-, . ~
~
~
.
~Vff . ~ ~
~ ~
; - ,: ; ..-.'
~ ~` ~~.
._,
~
~\
~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING OD~INIISSION~ December 27, 1962~ Continuedt
. ~
~ ;
~
1327 I
I
CAP@ITIQNAL USE - Commissioner Mungall offered Resolution No. 585, Series 1962-63,
PERMIT N0. 341 and moved for its passage and adoption~ seconded by Cotmnissioner
(Continued) Marcoux, to grant Petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 341i
sub~ect to conditions. (See Resolution Book).
On roll cail the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votet
AYESe ODMMISSIONERS~ Chavosy Gauer, MarcouxY Mungall, Pebley, Perry.
NOESs Q01U~IISSIONERS~ None.
ABSENTe ODMUISSIONERSt Allred, Camp, Hapgood.
RECLASSTFtCATION - PUBLIC HFARING. CRIS MII~ZIE and DR. WILLIAM G 0'RIELLY~ 417 North
N0. 62-63-51 Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, California~ Owners; RICHARD LAYNE T'OM~
AoI.A.r 1665 West Katella Avernae, Anaheimr California, Agentf
requesting that property described ass A ractangular parcel of
land having a frontage of 163 feet on the aouth side of Santa Ana Street, and having a
frontage of 139 feet on the west side of Harbor Boulevard, and further deacribed as
503-507 tIarbor Boulevard, be reclassified from the R-3~ MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL~ ZDNE
to the C-2y GENE!tAL ODNUAERCIAL~ ZONE to pexmit tha WNSTRUCTION OF A THREE (3) STORY
PAOFESSIONAL OF'r'ICE BUILDING AND ADJOINING PAP:Iiru STRUCTURE on sub3ect proparty.
Mr. Richerd L. Toma agent for the petitio'nere appearad before the Cormnisaion end
submitted a col~~red rendering of the exterior elevatione of subject d~velopmant.
Ch~irman Gauer inquired if anyone in the Council Chambar oppoasd sub~act petition, end
receivad no reply.
THE HFARING WAS CIASEUo
Zoning Coordinator Martin Kreidt~ noted for the Com~~ission tha~t tho petitionere raquested
C-2, GENERAL COHa1ERCIAL, zoning in order to avoid the proceesing of a veriance for
waiver of the two-story height or 35 foot 1lmitation of a C-lt NEICiHBORFAOD QONCuIERCIAL~
Zone; that if sub~ect petition wara to be coneidered favorably by the Comniseion, aoms
coneidaration shou3d ba gi~ren to the fect that subfact property was adjacen~ to the new
police faciiities and the new library; and that although, no actuei Civic G~nter wae
fureseeable since Council action had not b~en determinad for th~ location of a new Civic
Center, the height limitation of any building b~ing propoeed for construction in closa
proximity to the new fecilities should bs controlled by the Coamiission to daveleo the
best possible architectural land use in the vicinity of said faciliti9eo-
Deputy Assistant City Attornep Furman Roberts, advised the Cotmniasion that G2~ zoning
would pezmit up to six (6) storiea or 75 feet.
The Co~issi..n expressed the hope t'hat the prc,.posed development would be as preaented in
the colored rendering~ that many questions had arisen which required an answar before
sub3ect petition could be resolved, that the C-2, zoning might not be a compatible zoning
for property iri close proximity to the City's nerrfacilities; that any land use in close
proximity should be considered for G-1~ Neighborhood Commercial, Zone lfmited to
business and professional offices only; and that the Co~nission co+ald t}ien plac~e controls
on height limitation by the requirement of a variance to waiva height limitations.
~'he Co~mnission further discussed the possibility of a study being made of the area in
close proximity to sub3ect property for the best possible land use.
The CoAanission also noted that C-2, General Commercialt zoning rras recently ~'enied for
property in close proximity to subject property, and that it woesld set a precedent for
f~ther development of adjacent properties if the area generally werG approved for
general commercial use.
;
,~
,.;
' ~r
~
I
i
~
MINUTES, CITY PL4NNING ODMMISSION9 December 27, 1962, Continuedt
1328
REGZ.ASSIFICATION - Idra Tom advised the Co~mnission that he would be glad to file a
N0, 62-63-51 variance~to waive the height limitation for C-1, Neighborhood
(Continued) Cotmnercial zaning, and would welcame the opportunity tn cooperate
with the City to develop the area into a desirable commercial area.
Commissioner Mungall affered a motion to reopen the hearing and continue Petition for
Reclaseification No. 62-63-51 to the meeting of January 21, 1963, in order to allow the
petitioners time to submit a variance and for the submission of elevations which would
be compatible with the Commission's consideration for the area. Comnissioner Chaws
seconded the motiono MOTION CARRIIDo
RECIASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARING. WAYNE HALDA, et al, 608 Maybury Street, Santa Ana,
~10. 62-63-52 California, Owners; W. R. MILLER, 6252 East Telegraph Road,
Los Angeles 22, California, Agent; requesting that property
described asx A rectangular parcel of land having a fronta~e of
72 feet on the south side of Katella Avenue, and a depth of 269 feet, the hrestern
boundary of said property being appxoximately 605 feet east of the centerline of Haster
Street, and further descrihed as 304 East Katella Avenue, be roclassif ied from the R-A,
RESIDEtTfIAL AGRICUI.TURAL, ~NF to the C-2, GENERAL OOMMERCIAL~ ~ONE to ESTABLISH A
PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING AND ANTIQUE SHOP.
Mr. W. R. Miller, agent for the petitioners, appeared before the Commission and stated
that they proposed to utilize the existing structure and remodel it for use by
Miller AssociatesT Management Consuitants as their offices; that the structure would
present an attractive commerc3al facade which would be an improvernent to the shabby
str.uctural appeareance of the building now on subject property; and that at a future
date, an antique :;hop would be opened on sub~ect property which would conrorm
architecturally with the proposed structural changes.
Chairman Gauer inquired if anyone was present in the Council Chamber who opposed sub3ect
petition, and received no reply.
THE HEARING WAS CLOSEUa
Co~mnissioner Perry offered Resolution No. 586, Series 1962-63, and moved for its
passaye and adoption, seconded by Co~mnissioner Chavos t~~ reco~mnend tn the City Council
that Petition for Reclassif ication Nu. 62-63-52 be approved, cubject to conditions.
(See Resolntion Book)o
The conditions as stated in the Resoluticn Boar vrere recited at the meeting and were
found to be a necessary prerequisite to the ~se o: rh$ ~rogarty in oader to preserve
the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anahe3m.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was oassed by t':e following wtet
AYESa ODNVaIISSIONERSa Chavosy Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall, Pebley, Perry.
NOESe OOMMISSIONERS~ None.
_ ABSENTs ODMHIISSIONERSa :+i!Ted~•Camp,.Iiapgood.
REPORTS AND - I:~IAA. 1- Conditional Use Permit Na< 322 - bhTEN M. and MAUDH ~..,,
REODMASEDIDATIONS DIZNEY, c% HARRY M. HALST:IID, 61~ South Olive Stree:,
Los Angeles, California, Owness; GHIP CHASIN~ 1801
Newport Boulevard,. Costa Mesa, California, Agentf
requesting permission to WNSTRUCf A ONE-S1~DRY "NUAS7lw
AND ODNVALESCINf HJME.
Zoning Coordinator Martin Kreidt, presented to the Commission a plot plan marked
Revision Noo 1s Exhibit No. 1 of Cond3tional Use Permit No. 322Y reviewed the
Commissionxs denial of the requestec! convalescent home and, explained that the City
Council requested: .
(1) The Coimnission's opinion on the compacibility of the proposed land use with the
existing and projected surrounding land uses, AND
. 4~
3
~
I
~
i
/1
d
~,
~ ~
~
.~
~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING ~MMISSION~ December 27, 1962, Continuedt :329
EtEPORTS AND - ITEIN NOo 1(Continued)
RBCOMMEI~IDA2tONS
(Continued) (2) The suitability of the proposed site development plan.
Commissioner Mungall explained that his vote for denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 322
was primarily based on inadequate circulation for the proposed development.
Commissioner Marcoux offered a motion to reco~end to the City Council that the proposed
convalescent hospital under Conditional Use Permit No. 322e
(1) Be approved, AND
(2) That the site plan proposed by the developer also be approved.
Cownissioner Mungall seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIID.
ITEM NOa 2- Reclassification No. 61-62-66 and Conditional Use
Permit No. 192 - located on Lincoln Avenue between
Dale Avenue and Beach Boulevard - revised plans.
Zoning Coordinator Martin Kreidt, presented to the Golmnission development plans marked
Revision No~ la Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Reclassification No. 61-62-66 and
Conditional Use Permit No. 192, previously recommended for approval by the Planning
Cortunission, described the proposed revisions as contained on the neW development plans,
and explained that the City Council requested the reaction of the Planning Commission to
the revised plans.
The Co~mnission discussed the previous action and development plans as compared to the
revised planso
Commissioner Ferry offered a motion to recommend to the City Council that plans marked
Revision No. le Exhibit No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 be approved under Reclassification
No. 61-62-66 and Conditional Use Permit No. 192., Commissioner Mungall seconded the
motiono NDTION CARRIIDo
TIME REVISION 0?I ITEM N0. 3
QJMMISSION POLICY FOR ~
REVISID PIAT PLANS Zoning Coordinator Martin Kreidt, reviewed for the Commission
the stated Cotmnission Policy regarding the submission of
revised plot plans whenever a petition was continued for sa3d
reason~ that adequate time was necessary to review and compare said revisions in order
to see that they had conformed to the City Code and had met all the requirements
suggested by the various departments on said petitions, that the original time limitation
had proven unsatisfactory to the Planning Department and to the Interdepartmental
Co~mnittee, and then suggest that the date be changed to the second Friday prior to the
Co~mnission meeting for revised plans to be submitted for Interdepartmental Committee and
Planning Department review and recommendations.
POLICYa . _ .
Commissioner Chavos offered a motion that the policy of the City Planning Commission
originally set on June 15, 1962 be revised to require that any request by the Commission
for revised plot plans be scheduled to reach the Planning Department not later than
5:00 0'Clock P.M., the second Friday prior to the Co~mnission meeting scheduled for said
reviewa Cortunissioner Perry seconded the motion. NpTION CARRIED.
_ ..__~ . ~
~
l~s
MING'TES, CITY PLANNING (X)MMISSION, December 27.~ 1962, Continued:
.,
~ ~
1330
REPORTS AI~ID - ITE7u1 Np. 4
RFODMA~IVDATIONS
(Continued) TERMINATION OF PETITIONS I~R WNDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE
NOT HAVING (AMPLIID WITH ALL CANDITIONS AS SET PORTH IN THE
RE9DLUTION PASSID BY THE ANAHEIM PLANNING WMMISSION.
Zoning Coordinator Martin Kreidt, reviewed for the Co~mnission all the research and
contacts made ons
Conditionai Use Permit Nos. 4-59, 16, 20, 73, 74y. and 238.
Variance Nos~ 877, 977, 1002, 1063, 1084, 1C~85, 1086, 1177, 1231, and 1383.
Mr. Kreidt furthe•r stated that, since the aforementioned petitions had not complied with
all conditions as stated in the resolutions approv~ir,g said petitions, and since the
time limitation had long since expired, it was r~commended that the Commission consider
terminating said petitions.
Commissioner Mungall offered Resolution No. 58':, Series 1962-63, and m~~ved for its
passage and adoption seconded hy Commissioner Marcoux, that Petitions for Conditional
Use Permit Nos. 4-59, 16, 20, 73, 74, and 238, and Petitions for Variance Nos. 877, 977,
1002, 1083, 1084, J085, 1086~ 1177, 1231~ and 1383 be terminated since the time
limitation as p*,,viaed in Sec•tions 18.64.040 and 18.68.040 had ~xpired.
IT,7~7 NDa 5
Proposed MINIMUM BUILDING SETBACKS to be established in Tract No. 3970
M-l, Zone Industrial Park Subdivision.
Zoning Coordinator Martin Kreidt, reviewed for the Commission the location of subject
tract, the munber of iots developed with setbacks on said lots, and advised the
Commission that subject tract would have to be considered as a separate entity from the
setbacks proposed in the new M-1, Light Manufacturing, Zone of Code: Section 18.52.
Mr. Kreidt further presented the Planning Department's study of the area, as well as, the
proposed setbacks for the development of the remainder of said industrial tract.
Commissioner Mungall offered Resolution No. 588, Series 1962-63, and moved for its passage
and adoption, seconded by Cor,miissioner Perry, to reco~nnend to the City Council that there
be specific mittimwn building setbacks established in Tract No. 3970. (5ee Resolution
Book).
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYPSs GtiAN~IISSIONERSa Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall, Pebley, Perry.
NOESi CA~Mi1ISSI0NERSa No~e.
1~BSENT4 OONUNISSIONERSa Allred, Camp, Hapgood.
PLANNING S'I'UDY - NO.. 1s Developmettt of both sides of Lincoln Avenue bounded on
REQUESTS 'PO THE the east by Magnolia Avenue, and on the vrest by Seach
PLANNING DEPARTMENT Boulevard - re-evaluation of the Pr2limihary General
Plan.
Cotmn3ssioner Ch~vos ofr'ered a motion to direct the Planning Department to make a study
to determine whether the Preliminary General Pian should be changed to indicate coromerclal
development for Lincoln Avenue, between Magnolia Avenue and Beach Boulevard, since the
Prel3minary General Pian pro3ects the south side of Lincoln Avenue for low-medium
residential developmettt, and the north side of Lincoln Avenue for sing?.e family residerrt ial
development. Commissioner ti;arcoux $econded the motion. bqTION CARRIID.
--:-~ ~
. ~
_ ~
i
~ ..,.~.,,.~.~.Uw..,.,,,.~._......~...~...,~.,....,.....~„ ._ _ -~`~.,.,......_~_ - --
~' ~ ~
i bIINUTES~ CITY PLAMVII~ WM~9ISSION~ December 27, 1962, Continued: 1331
~ '
' pLANNING STUDY N~- 2a Development of the area bounded on the north by Chestnut
R~~ ~ T~ Street, on the east by Lemon Street, on the south by
~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT Water Street, and on the west by Citron Street.
~ (Continued) ;
~
~
~ Commissioner Chavos offered a motion to direct the Planning Department to make a study '
~ of that area bounded on the north by Chestnut Street, on the east by Lemon Street, on '
,~ the south by Water Street, and on the west by Citron Street, recomnending the highest ~
i and best land use compatible and complimentary to the current civic building construction,
and the possibility of formul tin a Commission
~ said area in accordance with Section 65800 (d) of~the StaterPlanning Acte1oCownissioner
( Perry seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIID.
ADJDURNMENT - Th ere being no further busi.ness to dicuss, Comrcissioner Mungall offered
a motion to ad3ourn the meeting. Commissianer Pebley seconded the
motion. MOTION CARP.IID.
The meetina ad3ourned at 6c37 OxClock P.M,
'~
Respsctfully submitted,
,~v
ANN KREBS, Secretary
ANAHEIM PLANNING WMMISSION
/` .
--~ ----~-
. _, ,
~ _- - . . . . ,_ . •--