Minutes-PC 1966/08/29~.
City Hall
Anaheim, California
August 29, 1966
A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - A regular meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission was called
to order by Chairman ~amp at 2:00 o'clock P.M., a quorum being present.
PRESENT - CHAI~MAN: Camp.
- COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Farano, Gauer, Mungall, Rowland.
.^~~~:
ABSENT - COMMISSIONERS: Herbst.
f
~ ; PRESENT - Assistant Development Services Director: Robert D. Mickelson
i: Zoning Supervisor: Ronald L. Thompson
~ Deputy City Attorney: John Gallagher
~ Office Engineer:
Planning Commission Secretary Pro Tem ArtBurgess
INVOCATION - Reverend L. D. Webb, Minister oi the Church of Christ
Invocation. ~ gave the
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Farano led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
APPROVAL OF - The Minutes of the meeting of August 15, 1966, were a
TI-~ MINUTES as submitted. pproved
CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARING. DOYLE d SNIELDS REAL?Y COPJ~PANY, INCORPORATED, 1333 South
PERMIT N0. 873 Euclid Street, Anaheim, California, Uwner; TERRY TOGNAZZIPJI, 1518 North
Durant, Santa Ana, California, Agent; requestin9 permission to ESTABLISH
AN OIJ-SALE LIQUOR ESTABLISHMENT WITH WAIVERS OF (1) FREE-STFJdDING SIGlJ
LOCATION AND (2) ;~iUMBER UF FREE-STANDING SIGIJS on property described as:
A rectangularly shaped parcel of land with a frontage of approximately 340 feet on the east
side of Euclid Street and having a maximum depth of approximately 264 feet, the southerly
boundary of subject pruperty being approximately 200 feet north of the centerline of Ball
_ Road, and further described as 912 South Euclid Street. Property presently classified C-1,
GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ZONE.
~vir. Terry Tognazzini, President of Tog Enterprises, agent, apoeared before the Cornmission
to give detailed background on principles and operation of the "Fire Station", =s Roaring
20's type nightclub. He indicated that the proposed theme type nightclub will c,e the only
club of its type in Orange County and greater Los Rngeles area. He pointed out that there
will be seating capacity for 500 people; a six-piece band will play six nights a week from
8:30 P.M. to 1:30 A.M. The epplicant advised he had been unsuccess:ul in locating a build-
ing or vacant land in the Comi~~ercial-kecreation Area due to the tight money sittiation and
the high cost of vacant land. The agent advised the Commission ttiat the existing shopping
! center was an ideal location due to available parking after various shops in the center had
~ closed, indicating that within 300 feet of the proposed location of the club ~vere 340 park-
i ing spaces, 90 percent of which are vacant after 9:00 P.M. In the immediate vicinity were
171 spaces available for parking with two shopping centers in close proximity.
Mr. 'Iognazzini assured the Commission that there would be no topless entertainment, and the
i theme ty~e club should not be confused with a bee: bar or a"go-go" house; the custumes to
be worn by the bar qirls would be co~~ervative and in good taste. The "Fire Station" would
~ be a place for family entertainment. Mr. Tognazzini had contacted all people who live within
~ ore to one and one-half blocks of this location, circulated a
i signatures of people who had no objection to this t petition and gathered 154
ype operation.
Admi:~,sinn would be by membership, a?::.00 card paid one time only, allowing the member to
enter the club the:eafter f~-ee.
Discussion brought out that consideration was being given to opening at 4:30 P.M., with no
entertainment from 4:30 to 8:30 P.M. The petitioner indicated that, in his opinion, su~fi-
cient parking was available to accommodate patrons at this hour.
3162
*
~ex
~•:
I!
P
MINUTES, ~.IY PLANNING COMMISSION, August Z9, 1966 '
3163
CONDITIONAL USE - A representative of the Northern Orange Jazz Club of California, an
PERMIT N0. 873 organization for the preserv:,tion and furtherance of Dixieland Jazz,
(Contirnied) addressed the Commission and advised that jazz is fun - ha
entertainment, not rowdy. He invited the Commission to atpendithe
Elks Club on Sunday afternoons to witness Dixieland Ja~.z,
Mr. A~tred Klinzman, President of Allied World of Music, 912 South Euclid Street, Anaheim,
advised the Commission that this shopping center does not have any direct traffic by it-
self; most stores are small. Although his type of business would not be directly connected
wi+h the proposed operation, he felt perhaps it would aid his business, and had no objection.
Mr. John Jameson, representing the architect, advised that parking, air-conditioning, and
fire regulations will be brought up to meet the Code of the City.
No one appeared in opposition to subject petition.
Th~ 1-~ARING WAS CLOSED.
In discussion the Commission considered the possibility that should this "Fire Sta~ion"
not be successful, and another type business entered, would a problem arise as to enforce-
ment due to entertainment. Also considerable discussion was had regarding parking since
patrons could park not only in this particular shopping center, but down the street at a
service station (after it was closed) and also at a large shopping center at the northwest
corner of Ball and Euclid.
Commissioner Gauer addressed the audience and requested their opinions on permitting
business such as the proposed theme type nightclub being allowed in shopping centers.
He asked the audience to consider how they would vote, and advised that the Commissioners'
votes would in no way be affected by the outcome of audience participation, and that they
were not desirous of settin9 a precedent but were curious as to how the people present in
the ~hamber felt concerning such uses since the Planning Commission and City Council take
the brunt of criticism when uses of this nature are permitted.
A voie af the audience indicated a vast majority would vote for this type of operation
in Anah-ii;~.
:'~ ~
9
,~ _
~ *
F~ ~x
Commissioqer Allred offered Resolution No. PC66-58 and moved for its pass.age and adoption,
seconded by Commissioner Mungall, to grant Petition for Conditional-iJs`e Permit No. 873 to
~ permit establishment of on-sale liquor. Commissioner Rot~larrd advised he would vote against
E`t: the permit, indicating the shoPP1~9.center wa~~--rthe place for a nightclub, that its
location is 130 feet to R-1, One-Family-R~sidential, that it backs up to multiple-family
°~'~ dwellings in the rear, and t at i~s not the purpose for which a neighborhood shopping
~i~~enter is intended~Cor issioner Camp in voting "no" agreed with the foregoing and added
~,~LcLhaL; in his opinion, parking was not sufficient.
(See Resolution Book.)
On roll call the foregoin9 resolution was passed by the ;ollowing vote:
AYES: COMMISSIOiJERS: Allred, Far~no, uauer, 51unga1l.
NOES: COfuVv1ISSIUNERS: Rowland, Camp.
ABSENT: CONJ~',ISSIO;JEE?S: Herost.
Commissioner Allred offered an addition to Resolution iJo. PCob-58 and moved for its passage
and adoption, seconded by Commissioner t~lungall, to deny the requested sign variance due to
the fact that the Sign Ordinance would provide for sufficient signina of the prooosed ~:se.
On roll call the foregoing addi~ion to Resolution No. PC66-58 was passed by the followinc
vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Farano, Gauer, Munqall, Rowland, Camp.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
~ ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Herbst.
APPROVAL OF - The Minutes of the meeting of August 29, 1966, were approved with the
TI-~ MINUTcS foliowing correction: Page 3163, paregraph 9, should read --
~_ "Corranissioner A11red offered Resolution No. PCG6-58 and moved for `_ts
~<< passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Mungall, to grant Petition
~c for Conditional Use Permit No.. 873 to permit establisi~ment o; on-sele
~ S~` liquor (cocktail lounge) subject to conditions ana the stipulztion by the
~ ~,. etitioner that the theme-type niqhtclub would no- have topless or suqqes-
.~ ,~
tiv_e entertainment; and tFiat the costumes worn b~ the waitresses and women
~/ /`~_ . L employed would not be topless or sua4estive and would be in qood taste in
~~:_~ ~ x ~ accordance with the "Roarina 1'wenties'~theme. Commissioner Rowland advised
` 1~~~~~ he would vote against the permit indicatin the sho
4~, ~`_ the place for a nightclub, that its iocation is 13G feet9toeRtl, One-Family
~ Residential, that it backs up to multiple-family dwellings in the rear, and
that it is not the purpose for which a neighborhood shopping center is in-
tended. Commissioner Camp in voting "no" agreed with the foregoing and
added that, in his opinion, parking was not sufficient. (See Resolution Bookj
R--: . - _..~.__ ........... .. ,_.,._~.,-~ _.
A
MIt...TES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, August 29, 1966 3164
CONDITIOI4AL USE - PUBLIC I-~ARING. ELBERT SMITH, 12921 Wheeler Place, Santa Ana, California,
PERMIT N0. 874 Owner; HARVEY HIERS, 701 East Buffalo Avenue, Santa Ana, Cal~fornia, Agent;
requesting permission to ESTABLISH AN INDOOR THEATeR AND A RESTAURANT (TO
BE BUILT AT A LATER DATE) on property described as: An irregularly shaped
parcel of land lying south and east of a 120-foot by 150-foot parcel of land located at the
southeast corner of Harbor Boulevard and Manchester Avenue and having frontages of approxi-
mately 135 feet on Harbor Boulevard and approximately 460 feet on Manchester Avenue.
Property presentl~ classified R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE.
Mr. Harvey Hiers, agent for the petitioner, discussed the plans for the proposed theater,
advising it would be 19,305 square feet in area, with a seating capacity of 1,118 persons;
that plans would be submitted at a later date for the proposed restaurant to be constructed;
that parking at the site would be sufficient to meet City standards for the theater; and
that Mr. Pearson, the architect, was available for questioning by the Commission.
Mr. Albert Shupar, attorney for the lessee, advised the Commission the theater wou?d be an
affiliate of Fox West Coast Theaters, first run movies would be shown, and the theater would
be a {irst-class, high-type operation.
Commissioner Gauer offered Resolution No. PC66-59 and moved for its passage and adoption,
seconded by Commissioner Mungall, to grant Petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 874.
(See Resolution Book.)
the foreyoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
Allred, Farano, Gzuer, ~dungall, Rowland, Camp.
None.
Herbst.
CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARING. WARREN C. HODGES, 1642 Alomar Street, tinaheim, California,
PERMIT N0. 875 Owner; HAROLD HARTLEY, 918 West Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, California,
Agent; requesting permission to ESTABLISH A WALK-UP RESTAURANT WITH WAIVER
OF ~dINIMUM REQUIRED PARKING SPACES on property described as: A rectangu-
larly shaped parcel of land located at the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and I.llinois
Street and having frontages of approximately 55 feet on Lincoln Avenue and approximately
148 feet on Illinois Street, and further described as 922 West Lincoln Avenue. Property
presently classified C-2, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ZONE.
Mr. Harold Hartley, agent for the petitioner, app?ared before the Commission. He advised
that the original plan as submitted to the Development Services Department specified more
parking area, but after consultation with the Department, plans were modified to allow for
more plan:er area. Sufficient parking might have been available by setting the buil.ding
forward; however, the Taco Bell building is of unique architect~~re, and the planters them-
selves lend to the overall appearance. He further stated that the Dairy Freeze, two blocks
east, has a similar type operation and is operating with 16 parking spaces. Another Taco
Bell in the City is operatin9 successfully with 16 spaces.
Mr. 1Jick Knight aopeared in opposition. He advised he live~ next door to the carwash, and
it operates seven days a week, and the noise is very bad at night.
Mr. Gude, who owns property across the street from the location, appeared in opposition
and stated that if parking requirements were not met, his own business would suf:er by
pat*ons using parking spaces not allotted to the Taco Bell.
Mr. Milo D. Army, 115 South Illinois Street,;owner and operator of the A 3 W Drive-In,
appeared in opposition and stated he was familiar with the drive-in business and problems
ai`.sing from drive-in business; that he felt the area in question had parking problems;
that he was required to meet the parking requirements when his operztion started; and that
he felt others should do likewise~
Mr. Hartley advised the Taco Sell would be operated by a family, usiny their own ~ash funds,
and would no± be constructed by the Taco Be11 company.
Mr. Hartley, who is a tenant of the next-door office building, ayreed that parking was a
problem at the office buildir~g, but that it has now been alleviated.
F
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, Aug~st 29, 1966
3165
CONDITIONAL USE - Discussion was held by the Commission rega:ding the future development
PERMIT N0. 875 of the site, it being noted that the existing residential structure was
(Continued) being removed. Consideration was also given to the proposed use in
relation to the size and shape of the subject property, the propcsed
traffic circulation and parking requirements.
Commissioner Mungall offered Resolution No. PC66-60 and moved ior its passage and adoption,
seconded by Commissioner Allred, to grant Petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 875.
(See Resolution Booko)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
r~ AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Farar,o, Gauer, Mungall, Rowland, Camp.
NOF_S; COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Herbsto
CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARING. REUBEN TUCKER, ET AL, 701 North Helena Street, Anaheim,
~ PERMIT N0. 876 California, Owners; JACK MILLER, 2545 East Chapman Avenue, Suite 1-S,
Fullerton, California, Agent; .requesting permission to ESTABLISH ON-SALE
LIOUOR on property described as: An irregularly shaped parcel oi land
- having a frontage of approximately 315 feet on the east side of East Street and having a
maximum depth of approximately 220 feet, the southerly boundary being approximately 510 feet
north of the centerline of Belmont Avenue, and further described as 116G North East Street.
Property presently classiiied C-1, GENERAL COMh1ERCIAL, ZONE.
~4r. Jack Miller, agent for the property owner, was available to advise the Commission on
the proposed operation; that the propos=d operation would be primarily a Spanish-type
hofbrav with on-sale beer and no hard liquor would be served; that the hours of operation
would be from 10:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M.; and that all signs would be facino on East Street.
Mrs. Betty Tikker, 1225 Balsam, appeared before the Commission in opposition and presented
a petition with 351 signatures i.- opposition to the beer bar and indicated that the neigh-
borhood children walk to this shoppin9 center alone and would have to pass the beer bar.
She also noted that a school was located in close proximity; that Briarwood already carries
a large voiume of traffic and Balsam is residential; and that with a back door opening into
this operation, the noise would 'oe detrimental to the residential area.
-_ hir. R, N. Sanderson, 1326 tast Balsam, appeared before the Commission in opposition, noting
that directly across tne street frorn this proposed use is the Nishing uvell, originally
esiablished as a beer bar, but currently ope:ating as a"go-go" nouse; tnat t;e felt tnis
was not a suitable business for smalt neighborhood shopping centers in hnaheirn; ar.a that ne
is a reserve policeman with Garden Grove and has seen the trouble caused in beer bars.
Mrs. Laurette Seeger, 1`s27 Galsam, appaared Uefore the Commission in opposition and indicoteo
ti~at ~here are beautiful nomes in tnis area; that it would be detrimental for a beer bar to
go in this location; and tnat •°affic would be wors?.
hnother resident living on E~st Kenwood, appeared in opposition and indic~ted I-~e had purcnased
i a home in this area because of the nice neighnornood; that he has four daugnters and selected
i this area because of its convenience to schools a~d cnurches; and tnat he felt he would 'oe
I compelled to move due to traffic ar.d noise caused by a beer bar.
In rebuttal, P+ir. (;iiller advised tnis would not be a bar for sale of liquor - only beer;
that the location is in keeping with cast Street wnich is a secandary highway; t!:at traffic
would come and go from East Street; and that all signs would be posted on cast Street.
lhe Commission considered the development plans and noted that only eight percent of t~~e
space would be allotted to kitchen and preparation of food facilities. Consideration wss
also given to the land use in close proximity.
THE NEARIiJG WAS CLOSEU.
' 1~here h~ere 20 persons in the audience representing 351 residents and property owners in
the immediate area in opposition to the petition submitted.
The Commission noted that the proposed use with i~s lack of ;citchen and eating fa~ilities
~ was a typical beer bar and felt all vacant buildings of small neighborhood and commercial-
type shopping centess should not be taken up with beer bars, and was tyoical of applicants
, for vacant stores in small shopping centers.
~
.ax
- --- --~- ~"'i~":'°'"~w
-" ' -
_ ~ "~' ~'~~,i'4'i`. _
r.
~
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, Au9ust 29, 1966 3166
CONDITIONAL USE - Commissioner Gauer offered Resolution No. PC66-61 and moved for its
, PERMIT N0. 876 passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Rowland, to deny Petition
(Continued) for Conditional Use Permit No. 876. (See Resolution Book.)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Farano, Gauer, Mungall, Rowland, Camp.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Herbst.
E. r-~-~4
~?~ ,
~j ~
,`~ w
:. ~
CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARING. ROBERT W. CONN, 119 South Melrose Street, Anaheim,
PERMIT N0. 877 California, Owner; MARGARET WRIGHT, 924 North Euclid Street, Anaheim,
California, Agent; requesting permission to ESTABLISH A BOARDING HOUSE
FOR MOTf-~RS-TO-BE on property described as: A rectangularly shaped parcel
of land with a frontage of approximately 63 feet on the west side of Melrose Street and
having a maximum depth uf approximately 141 feet, the northerly boundary of subject property
being approximately 250 feet south of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue, and further described
as 119 South Melrose Street. Property presently classi;ied P-1, AUTOMOBILE PARKING, ZOVE.
Mr. John Von de: Heide, 924 North Euclid Street, representing the petitioner, appeared
before the Commi;sion and stated that the operation will be concerned mainly with mother~-
to-be and was not proposed as an establishment which harbors wayward girls or people not
acceptable to society; that the house is particularly well suited to this operation from
the standpoint of existing room arrangement and is a good, solid structure which represents
a sizable accumulztion of capital; that the zoning o: the property permits multiple-family
residence; that there does not appear to be a traffic problem; and that it would be close
to the commercial part of the City. Furthermore, the operation will not cause a retrogres-
s~on in the neighborhood; that the average ler.gth of stay for the occupants would be five
to six months; that there is abeolutely no ciement of charity or welfare connected with
this establishment; that an inquiry had aeen received from the State of California
inquiring if welfare cases would be accepted; and that applications are strictly private,
through various social agencies.
Mr. Frank Sesma, 120 Melrose Street, appeared before the Commission in opposition and
indicated that this is a residential and apartm~nt area; that the property, in the past,
had a variance for a rest home and had been allowed to deteriorate; and that this type
of operation would limit the choice of tenants.
A petition was read, noting 14 persons i.n opposition; there were 9 signatures ~ot in
opposition.
Mr. Von der Heide indicated plans wcre being made to develop the back yard for recreation
purposes, and landscaping would be carried out; thai. there were nice homes in the neighbor-
hood, and approximately ten or less occupants would be living in the home; that the home
would be managed by a house mother, who is not a rnedical person - however, she would live
o~ +~e nremises; and that the staff would be the applicart, who is a registered nurse,
and her husbard, a therapist, neitlier of whom would be in residence.
Discussior was held by the Commission as to a suitable type of development for this property.
THE HEARING WFS CLOSED.
Commissioner Gauer offe~ed Resolution No. PC66-62 and moved for its passage and adcption,
seconded by Commissioner Mungall, to 9rant Petition for Conditional Use Permit ~o. 877.
(See Resolution Book.)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Farano, Gauer, Mungall, Camp.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Rowland.
ABSENT: COMNiISSIONERS: Herbst.
g
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, August 29~ 1966
3167
CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARING. JANE H. BRIGHT, 331 North Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim,
PERMIT N0. 879 California, Owner; requeSting permission to EXPAND A PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTION TO INCLUDE PRIPdARY SCHOOL CHILDREN on property described as~
_ A rectangularly shaped parcel of land with a frontage of approximately
120 feet on the west side of Harbor Boulevard and having a maximum depth
of approximately 98 feet, the south line of subject property being approximately 350 feet
north of the centerline of Cypress Street, and further described as 331 North Harbor
Boulevard. Property presently classified R-3, MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL,. ZONE.
~
~
i ;-.
Mrs. Bright, the petitioner, appeared before the Commission to clarify the petition,
indicating that classes would be limited to 10 children per class; that the children would
be cared for until picked up by their parents; that traffic in the alley would be increased
during the early morning check-in time, but this would be taken care of by having a teacher
on duty to assist the children in the gate so as not to tie up access in the alley to other
users; ~~d then read a letter from the State Department of Welfare which gave praise and
encouragerner.t to the school, and also read excerpts from letters from parents in praise
of the school.
Due to the use of the alley for inyress and egress of parents, Mrs. 9right questioned the '
Commission regarding securing the marking of a curb in front of the premises for "loading
zone" and was advised that since she had made dedication, she should contact the City
Department of Public Works, En9ineering Division.
As to noise from the school childr=n, Mrs. Bright stated that there were two other schools
in close proximity, and noise from these schools is audible, and advised that in the future,
she will try to close school during the summer months.
The Commission questioned Mrs. Bright regarding the height of the ch3inlink fence,since it
was one of the conditions in the granting of the original conditional use permit, who
advised that the State Department of Education stipulates that there cannot be a solid wall;
however, she a9reed that it might be possible to plant shrubbery against the chainlink fence
to add to the appearance of the surroundings.
Mrs. Margaret Hall, 412 t~orth Pine, appearzd in opposit:on, stating she was a teacher and
was not opposed to the school being operated; however, she was in opposition to the use of
the alley since traffic and dust had created a serious problem.
The owner of the apartments next door to the school appeared in opoosition, noting that
if +wo rooms of the facility which were now used for living quarters were to be used for
school rooms, it would be difficult to retain renters in the apartments backing up to the
school rooms due to the ~toise.
t~1rs. Ruby Bimat, 415 North Harbor Boulevard, also appeared in opposition, stating the alley
was narrow and dusty and fu11 of chuck holes and would become worse with an increase in
traffic.
THE HEARIUG WAS CLOSED.
Discussion was held as to the use of the alley. The Commission agreed that the sct~ool
operation was an admirable one, but that school usage of the alley created a serious traffic,
dust, and hardship problem for other neighbors. Commissioner Camp ind.cated he would not
vote for this conditional use permit as long as the alley traffic wa.=, a problem.
A motion was made to continue Petition for Conditional Use Pei~~iii. !40. 879 to the meeting
of Septernber 26, 1906, in order to allow Mrs. Bright to work with City officials in an
effort to solve the traffic problem, seconded by Commissioner l+llred. MOTION CARRIED.
RECESS
RECONVENE
- A motion was made and seconded to recess the meetino for ten minutes.
MOTION CARRIED. The meeting recessed at 4:40 P.M.
- Chairman Camp reconvened the meeting at 4:50 P.N~., all Commissioners
with ti~e exception of Commissioner Herbst being present.
~
~ ~
.
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, August 29, 1966 3168
VARIANCE N0. 1822 - PUBLIC HEARING. W. H. JEWETT, 1141 East Ash Street, Fuilerton,
California, Owner; PBR COMPANY, 923 Arlee Place, Anaheim, California,
Agent; requesting WAIVERS OF: (1) MAXIMUM FREE-STANDING SIGN AREA,
(2) MAXIMUM NUMBER OF FREE-STANDING SIGNS, AND (3) MINIMUM DISTANCE
BEIWEEN FREE-STANDING SIGNS on property described as: An irregularly shaped parcel of
land located at r.he southeast corner of Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard and
having frontages of approximately 143 feet on Katella Avenue and approximately 150 feet
on State College Boulevard. Property presently classitied M-1, LI,HT INDUSTRIAL, AND
P-L, PARKING LANilSCAPING, ZONES.
Mr. Bill Winterberg appeared before the Commission and advised that the existing sign
~ would be removed; that the existing sign was not in keeping with Stai~dard Oil Company
signs in other parts of Anaheim; and that Standard Oil Company feels that more coverage
, could be obtained by the use of canopy signs.
Mr. Jim Ripley, engineer with Standard Oil Company, appeared before the Commission and
advised that when the sr.ation in question was originally built, it was the policy of the
company to install one diagonal sign on the corner.
The Commission advised the applicant that many applications had been received for sign
variances, and that the Commission, Staff, and members of the sign industry and the oil
and gas industry had met and spent many months working out an equitable sign ordinance
for the City of Anaheim; furtt~ermore, why, if the sign ordinance was not to the liking
of the sign industry and certain oil companies, had these people not so indicated prior
to adoption of the ordina~ce.
Mr. Winterberg advised the Commission that canopy si9ns were not taken into account at
the time of writing the siqn ordinance.
No one appeared in opposition to subject petition.
TiiE HEARING WRS CLOSED.
~
y~ ~
~, ~
_~ ~ '
9
i
,
,~ } `_
v
+ -- -- -
9iscussion was held by the Commission relative to the sign ordinance and the proposed
sign variance, noting that the Standard Oil Company station at the northeast corner of
Brookhurst and K~tella had only one free-standing, diagonally mounted sign, and that
station was one of the newest Standard Stations in Anaheim; that one free-standing sign
at thE above location gave exc~llent exposure; and that many oil companies, including
Richfield Oil Company utilized free-standing canopy signs similar to those employed by
5tandard Oil; however, the new Richfield station in the City of Anaheim had complied with
the ordinance,and the ordinance did provide for adequate signing of service stations.
Commissioner Mungall offered Resolution No. PC66-63 and moved•for its passage and adoption,
seconded by Commissioner Allred, to deny Petition for Variance No. 1822, since the provisions
of the sign ordinance were sufficient and should be adhered to. (See Resolution Book.)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMiSSIONERS: Allred, ~arano, Gauer, Mungall, Ro~land, Camp.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: CGMh1ISSIGNERS: Herbst.
VARIANCE N0. 1823 - PUBLIC HEARIAIG. I.EO FREEDtvIAN, 2018 Coldwater Canyon Drive, Beverly
Hills, California, Owner; PBR CUMPANY, 923 Arlee PlacP, Anaheim,
California, Agent; requesting WAIVERS OF: (1) MAXIMUM NUMBER OF
FREE-STANDING SIGNS, (2) MA;{IMUM FREE-STANDING SIGN AREA, (3) MItJIMUM DISTANCE BE7YJEEN
FREE-STANDING SIGNS, AND (4) FREE-STANDING SIGN LOCATION on property described as: A
rectangularly shaped parcel of land located at the northwest corner of Raymond Street and
Urangethorpe Avenue and haviny frontages of approximately 150 feet on Raymond Street and
approximately 150 feet on Orangethorpe Avenue. Property presently classified M-1, LIGHT
INDUSTRIAL, AND P-L, PARKIIJG-LANDSCAPING, ZGNES.
Mr. Bill Winterberg aqpeared to represent the petitioner, and advised the Commission that
Standard Oil Company proposed to re-orient the larger fin sign toward East Street, and the
Chevron signs toward Orangethorpe, and further noted that the existing service station
had basically the same two free-standing signs he was proposing; however, the signs need
re-orientation. He also indicated that the proposed variance, if ap,~roved, would allow
no additional free-standing signs on subject property. •
t
-,r ~
MINUTES, CI:Y PLANIdING COMMISSION, Au9ust 29, 1966 3169
'JARIANCE N0. 1823 - Discussion was held by the Commission concerning the validity of
(Continued) the request, and consideration was given to the fact that the applicant
already had cwo free-standing signs, and the ,:~ '.;~q of the proposed
variance would not z.llow an increase in s3,; ...
CoRanissioner Allred indicated that there was no hardship invc± ~~~~~ ;;rr aew sign
construction should be provided in accordance with the sign ~:. ... .,,
No one appeared in opposition to subject petition.
THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Mungall offered Resolution No. PC66-64 and moved for its passage and adoption,
seconded by Commissioner Farano, to grant Petition for Variance No. 1823. (See Resolution
Book.)
On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the followin9 vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Munaall, Rowland, Camp.
NOE~: COMMISSIONERS: Allred.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Herbst.
RECLASSIFICATIUN - PUBLIC HEARIIJG. BILL ASAWA, 720 South Beach Boulevard, Anaheim,
N0. 66-67-15 California, Owner; ROBERT ZADY, 1564 Sumac Lane, Anaheim, Cal'.fornia,
Agent; property described as: An irregularly shaped parcel of land
CONDITIONAL USE located at the northeast corner of Beach 3oulevard and Stonybroc~ :~~~•ive
PERMIT N0. 878 and having frontages of approxiraately 165 feet on Beach Bouleva:~ ,~nd
approximately 275 feet on Stonybrook Drive, and further described as
720 Soutll Beach Boulevard. Property presently classified R-A, AGRICULTURAL,
ZUNE.
REQUESTED ~LASSIFICATIUN: C-1, GENERAL COMM~RCIAL, ZOhIE.
REQUESTED C~:.~ITIUNAL USE: ESTABLISH MOTORCYCLE SALES AND SERVICE F.GENCY.
Mr. Asawa, the owner, appeared and advised the Commission o: the Council's action in
g:anting permiss?on to operate for 60 days; that the proposed use would be sales and parts
service only and would net in t;.e neighborhood of $6,000 to $7,000 to the City; that the
remainder of the property, whic^ is now vacant, would be used for expansion of the business;
that a glass front would be installed on the building; and that the building as it now existed
was nct complete, even though he had been given permission to operate for 60 days.
Assistant Development Services Director Robert Mickelson advised the Commission that after
the Council had given permission to operate for 60 days, Mr. Asawa was advised to li~nit
his expenditures or~ the building in the event a permit for reclassification and conditional
use pcrmit were denied him; further, that inspections could not be given for a commercial
structure until zoning was approved.
The Commission noted there was no curb break on Stonybrook Drive, and that the sigr,, as
existing, protruded about four feet into the driveNay.
Mr. Zady, 1564 Sumac Lane, the agent, indicated that the existin9 sign on the north side
of the driveway will be removed and an electrical sign installed; that all storage of cycles
would be inside; that they plan to work with the Anaheim Police Department in promo±ing
driver education and would furnish a man to the City schools to instruct in the proper use
of cycles; and that he was well aware of the danger of motorcycles, notiny that a person
need be 16 years old to have a permit to operate a motorcycle, but could not operate a motor
vehicle at this age.
No one appeared in opposition to subject petition.
THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Rowland offered Resolution No. PC66-65 and moved for its passage and adoption,
seconded by Commissioner Allred, to recommend to the City Council that Petition for Reclassi-
fication No. 66-67-15 be approved. (See Resolution Book.)
,~ On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
~
;_ AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Farano, Gauer, Mungall, Rowland, Camp.
,~ * ;; NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
l p ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Herbst.
i ~ Ia
r,
~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, Au9ust 29, 1966 3170
RECLASSIFICATION - Commissioner Mungall offered Resolution No. PC66-66 and moved for its
N0. 6~-67-15 passage and adoption, seconded by Commissioner Gauer, to grant Petition
for Conditional Use Permit No. 878. (See Resolution Book.)
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT N0. 878 On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
(Continued)
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Farano, Gauer, Mungall, Rowland, Camp.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Herbst.
RECLASSIFICATION - INITIATED BY Tf~ AAIAI-~IM CITY CGUNCIL, 204 East Lincoln ~venue, Hnaheim,
td0. 66-67-16 California, proposing that property described as: An irregularly shaped
parcel of land located at the southwest corner of Westmont Drive and
Euclid Street and having frontages of approximately 115 feet on Westmont
Drive and appreximately 110 feet on Euclid Street, and further described as 456 and 460
Mariposa Platie, be reclassified from the R-1, ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZONe to the C-1,
GENERAL COMh4ERCIAL, ZONE.
:drs. Margaret Walder, 459 Mariposa Place, addressed the Commission in opposition to subject
petition and read :rem the Declaration of Deed Restrictions,the terms and conditions of
which make it illegai without the consent of the other property owners in the tract to
change the use of the property. Mrs. Walder further noted that the City had secured the
property in question by condemnation proceedings, and then when it was no longer needed
by them, the City wishes to reclassify the property to a commercial zone in order to sell
the property at a profit; ~hat since the City is an owner, the City, too, is bound by the
deed •restrictions; that there have been changes in this tract; and that any use other than
C-1 migh.t meet with some approval, but with C-1 zoning, heavy commercial uses, such as a
service station or a walk-up restaurant, etc., could be permitted, and such uses would be
objectionable.
I The Commission advised Mrs. Walder as to the City`s position regardir.g private deed
restrictions.
Zonicg Supervisor Ronald 'Phompson advised the Commission that letters from h1r. Harold W.
_ Campbell (attaching a copy of the deed restrictions) and 1~1r. George L. VJalder, protesting
the reclassificatio~, were received.
.~ ' THc HEARIiJG PJAS C~GS[U.
`I '
~I The Commission,in discussion, indicated the City was in error in not considering the rights
'I of the other property owners in that they had not been contacted previously te oscertain
~ their desires in rezoni:;a, and furtner indicated that rezoning snould not be done until a
'(i purchaser was securecl ier tne property.
I ~~
Ti~~e Commission ;urtiier discussed deed restrictions, in thot such matters were not a p;rt of
~i the function of the ?lanr.ing Commission, and that the City oi hnuheim was the leg~l owner
and sho~ld 'oe bou~d by the deed restrictions.
~. ~
I John Roche, Administrative Analyst for the City i~Sanager's Ofii~e, advised the Commission
~ I that the location of the proposed fire station had been moved to Loara Street between
:~ortn Street and Catalpa Avenue.
~° The Commission further discussed tne potential and future uses for oronerii?s in thi~ are~,
= - ano consideration was ~iven to the feasibility of reclassifying the property t.o the C-U,
~ Commercial Office, Zone; tnat if C-U zoning were approved, a variance for the lot area
~ reouirement would be necessary.
j Cornmissioner Mungall offered Resolution Ido. PC65-o7 and moved for its passage and adoption,
i seconded by Commissioner Rowland, to recommend to the City Council denial of Petition for
Reclassification ido. 50-67-1b for C-1 zoning, and to recommend approval of the property in
i''~ question for C-U zoning, subject to the granting of an appropriate variance when a use is
established for the property. (See Resolution Book.)
On roll call the fore9oing resolution was passed by the followin9 vote:
, AYES: CUP~MAISSIONFRS: Allred, Farano, Gauer, ~J~ungall, Rowland, Camp.
~ ~ NOES: GOMMISSIO[JERS: None.
:~~ ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Herbst.
* k
~~
fi
C
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, August 29~ 1966
3171
REPORTS AND - ITEM N0. 1
RECOMMENDATIONS Orange County Use Variance No. 5782 (5642 Orchard Drive, Yorba Linda)
Establishment of a building site containing an accessory structure
having no main building, and to establish a building site having less
than the required width in the 100-E4-15,000 Small Estates District;
located on the east side of Orchard Drive approximately 163 feet south
of the right angle intersection of Mountain View Avenue, in the south-
east Yorba Linda area. Present use of prnperty: single-family dwelling
and attached garage and guest house.
Zoning Supervisor Ronald Thompson presented Orange County Use Variance 5782 to the
Commission, noting the request was for review of and recommendations on variances in
~ conjunction with a
~T proposed lot split for (a) front yard setback of an existing guest
house; (b) front yard setback of a proposed dwelling; and (c) lot width of one of the
~ parcels. Mr. Thompson indicated the proposed development is in conformance with the City
of Anaheim site development standards for a comparable development.
~ ;~
Commissioner Rowland offered a motion to recommend to the City Council that Orange County
Use Variance No. 5782 be approved. Commissioner Gauer seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM N0. 2
Garnet Street to Archer Street - Street name change.
Zoning Supervisor Ronald Thompson presented the following findings to the Commission:
1. Garnet Street, as it now exists, runs in a north-south direction, the
southerly terminus of Garnet Street being at its intersection with Broadway.
2. Archer Street runs south from Broadway and is directly south of the southerly
terminus of Garnet Street.
3. As Garnet Street is a logical extension of Archer Street, it would present
less confusion if Garnet Street were changed to Archer Street.
4. Mr. Charles Kelley of the Anaheim Post Office indicates that this would
not preser. any problem to their organization.
5. Only three homes presently have Garnet Street addresses.
Commissioner Mungall offered a motion that a public hearin9 be held on September 26, 1966,
to consider the name change from "Garnet Street" to "Archer Street". Commissioner Rowland
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM N0. 3
Permission to operate a Christian Day School (Magnolia Full Gospel Church)
Southwest corner of Orange Avenue and Velare Street.
Zoning Supervisor Ronald Thompson advised the Commission a request had been received for
permission to operate an elementary school having fewer than 20 children, in conjunction
with an existing church. He also advised that Conditional Use P,.rmit ivo. 23 was granted
by the Planning Commission on uctouer 10, 1958, to permit the construction of a church,
including main and secondary sanctuaries and Sunday School facilities. The proposed reyuest
to operate an elementary school requires a conditional use permit; nowever, the permit could
not be processed before the opening of the school year. Necessary petitions are being
submitted for the conditional use permit.
Commissioner Gauer offered a motion to recommend to the City Council that permission to
operate a Christian Day School by the Magnolia Full Gospel Church be approved, prior to
filing of a conditional use permit, due to opening of the school year, subject to the owners
assuming full responsibility and at their owr, risk. Further recommended that approval be
9ranted subject to filing and approval of a conditional use permit. Commissioner Mungall
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
!: ~ -
,~
~
f~ *
~~ ~
~~ I .
d
~
' NINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, August 29, 1966 3172
REPORTS AND - ITEM N0. 4
RECOMMENDATIONS Fullerton City Council - Pr~posal for the Realignment and
(Continued) ultimate widening of Lemon Street north of Crangethorpe
Avenue to Valencia Drive (west side).
Zoning Supervisor Ronald Thcmpson advised the Commission that noiification had been
received from the City of Fullerton that Lemon Street will be realigned and widened
between a point north cf Orangethorpe Avenue and Valencia Drive (west side only in the
City of Fullerton). The ultimate right-of-way of Lemon Street will be BO feet (64-feet
street section). This will match up with the City of Anaheim's present street section
for Lemon Street. Further, the City of Fullerton intends to initiate construction of
~ the widening of Lemon Street north of Orangethorpe Avenue in the Spring of 1967.
4 , The Notice of Public Hearing was received and filed.
~
,
ITEM i!0. 5
Conditional Use Permit No. 121 - Behnke
Request for removal of 90-day time limit on temporary trailers.
-. Zoning Supervisor Ronald Thompson advised the Commission of past actions in connection
with Conditional Use Permit No. 121:
1~ Request is for removal of Condition iJo. 3, Resolution No. 64R-149, Conditional
Use Permit No. 121, which stipulates "That no trailer shall be permitted to park
or stay in said park for a period exceeding ninety (90) days".
2. Location of subject property is on th~ east side of Harbor fioulevard, approximately
230 feet north of the centerline of Wilkin Way.
3. Conditional Use Permit No. 121 (to permit an overnight trailer park) was granted
by the City Council by Resolution No. 7006, on June 27, 1961. Condition iJo. 6 of
this resolution limited individual trailer tenure to one week. The conditional
use permit itself was limited to three years by Condition No. 1.
4. The petitioner was later granted a two-year extens~on of time for the conditional
use permit by the City Council, permitting continuance of the use to June 27, 1966
(Resolution No. 63R-262).
5. Subsequently, the City Council, by Resoiution No. 64R-149, dated March 10, 1964,
removed any time limits on the use of the property as an overnight trailer park,
and extended the individual trailer parking time from one week to ninety days.
6. The physical layout of the existin9 facility (overall size of the park and location
of utilities at each trailer site) would preclude conversion to a star.dard mobile
home park. The essential difference between an overn~qht trailer park and a mobile
home park is in the spacing required between the trailers, and between trailers and
property lines. There is no difference between the two in the water, sewerage, or
other uti'_ity requirements.
7. The len9th of time allowed in a travel trailer park would appear to be important
in the sense that a travel trailer park would permit a much higher population density
in what would amount to a substandard mobile home park. The developmen~ standards
for a travel trailer park are considerably more lenient than those of a mobile home
park, the theory being that travelers can get by with reduced living amenities for
a short period of time. Without a time limit, it would seem necessary to require
development to mobile home standards.
Commissioner Gauer offered a motion to recommend to the City ~ouncil that the request for
removal of the ninety-day time limit on temporary trailers be denied, due to the fact that
this would pernit a much higher population density in what would amount to a substandard
mobile home park, and in the Commission's opinion because of the inherent differences be-
tween mobile homes and travel trailer parks, a time limit on travel trailers is highly
desirable. Commissioner Farano seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
i
'~ ~ ~
~ ~
E
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING CviviMISSION, August 29, 1966 3173
REPORT5 AND - ITEM N0. 6
RECOMMENDATIONS Conditional Use Permit No. 799 (Webster)
(Continued)
Zoning Supervisor Ronald Thompson advised the Commission a request
had been received for an extension of time on Conditional Use Permit
No. 799, granted f~r a walk-up restaurant on the east side of East Street, 250 feet
north of Lincoln Avenue.
Conditional Use Permit No. 799 was granted by the Planning Commission on January 27, 1966,
to establish a walk-up restaurant (Taco Bell) with waiver of the required parkin9 spaces.
The petitioner states that he has been unable to obtain financing for the proposed
~ development.
Commissioner Rowland offered s motion to grant an extensio~~ of 180 days for Conditional
Use Permit No. 799. Commissioner Farano seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM N0. 7
Alignment of Gerda Drive.
The proposal for the alignment of Gerda Drive in the Santa Ana Canyon area was presented
by Assistant Dev~lopment Services Director Rebert Mickelson. He advised the Commission
this new local street would cross the school and park site ?asterly of the undeveloped
parcel adjacent to the school, and that Gerda Drive will eventually provide access to
the Yorba Woods tract and the undeveloped property west of the school. At that time
the access point adjacent to Taylor Street at Santa Ana Canyon Road can be eliminated to
provide better traffic safety. This alignment would tie into Tract No. 5487.
Commissioner Allred offered a motion to adopt the Alignment of ~~erda Drive. Commissioner
PJ~ungall seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM IJO. 8
Urange County Use Variance "!o. 5784 - Permit the establishment of
a trophy sales and machine engraving shop in addition to the
existing real estate office in the R-1 Zone - Property located
on the southwest corner of Brookhurst Street and Stonybrook Drive.
Loning Supervisor Ronald Thompson advised that a majority of proper~cies north and south
of subject property are zoned C-1 and located in the City of Anaheim. This particular
parcel is zoned R-1, One~Family Residential, Zone and has frontage on Stonybrook Drive
which serves as access to the single-family residential area west of Brookhurst Street.
The trophy shop would be located in the attached garage and adjacent two rooms which
are not being used as part of the present real estate office.
Orange County Use Variance No. 4714 for the establishment of a real estate office was
approved by the Board of Supervisors on April 26, 1961, and Use Variance No. 5725 was
conditionally approved May 11, 1966, ior the continued use of the real estate office.
Commissioner Gauer offered a motion to recommend to the City Council that Orange County
Use Variance No. 5784 be denied on the basis that the proposed use will be a further
encroachment on the residential character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Allred
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT - There being no further business, Commissioner Mungall offered a
r,:otior. to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Rowland seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
The meeting adjourned at 6:00 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
~;~1 ~
~
~
,J
.r n
A. BURGESS, Secretary Pro Tem
Anaheim City Planning Commission
~
" di I .
f~
~