Loading...
Minutes-PC 1972/02/07~ -~ ~ City Hall Anaheim, California February 7, 1972 A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEZM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR - A regular meetinq of the Anaheim City Planninq Commission MEETING was called to order by Chairman Fazanc at 2:00 P.M., a quorum beinq present. PRESENT - CHAIRMAN: Farano - COMMZSSIONERS: Gauer, Herbst, Kaywood, Rowland, Seymour. ASSENT - COMMISSIONERS: Alired. PRESENT - Assistant Development Services Director: Ronald Thompson Deputy City Attorney: Frank Lowry Office Engineer: Jay Titus Zoning Supervisor: Charles Roberts Assistant 2oning Supervisor: Don:McDaniel Commission Secretary Pro Tem: Lee Burgess PLEDGE OF - Commissioner Rowland led in the Pledge of Allegiance to the ALLEGIANCE Flag. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES - Commissioner Kaywood offered a motion to appL~vq.the`minutes of the January 24, 1972, meeting, seconded by ~ommissioner Rowland, and MOTION C~RRiED, subjact to the following .. corrections: pq, 72-21, para. 9, line 2: "twelve" week continuance (not osix") . pq, 72-23, para. 5, line 4: following "request", insert: ; "and that used car sales are to be dis- - continued as of today." pq, 72-29, para. 13, line 2: following "landlocked parcel" insert: "that..could then ask for a third access point under a hardship," and requested.... pq, 72-30, para. 2, line 4: following years, add:,yearsL[ "be£ore developing. Option has_less than a year to run.° Commissioner Rowland left the Council Chamber at 2:05 P.M. Chairman Farano stated that at the January 24, i972 meeting, the Commission had discussed Rules of Procedure to be followed for the purpose of shortening the.hearing time and alleviating the necessity for lonq hours. Deputy City Attorney Lowry researched the procedure and suggested the Commission forward a resolution to the City Council with a request that it be adopted. Chairman Farano read the,RUles of Procedure which follow: PROCEDURE TO_EXPEDITE PLANNING COMMISSION PUSLIC AEARINGS It is our intention to expedite the proceedings conducted before this Commis- eion. It is now and will continue to be oux desire to provide applicants and opponent.s alike the opportunity for a fair hearing. We do not believe, however, that a long, repetitive preeantation by any participant providea or ;:constitutes a fair hearing. Therefore, the following rules will prevail at this hearing: 1. The preponents in applications which are not contested will have five minutes to pre3ent their evidehce. Additional time will be granted upon reguest if, in the opinion of the Commission, such additional time will pro- duce evidence important to the Commisaion's consideration. 2. The Staff Reparts need not be read in non-contestad applications. They will, however, be made a part of the minutes of the meetinq. _ 72-46 ~ ~ MINUTES, CI7•Y PLANNING COMMISSZON, February 7, 1972 ~Z-4~ PROCEDURE TO EXPEDITE PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) 3. In contested applications, the proponent and opponent wi].1 each h.e given ten minutes to present his case unless additional time is requested and the complexity of the matter warrants. Each participant will be given equal time provided that additional time is necessar}. The Commission's considerations are not determined by the length of time a participant speaks, but rather by vshat he says. 4. The Commission will withhold questions until the public hearing is closed. 5. The Commission reserves the riqht to deviate from the foregoing if, in its opinion, the ends of faitness to all concerned will be served. Commissioner Gauer offered a motion to adopt the new Rules of Procedure, seconded by Commissioner Kaywood, and MOTION CARRIED. VARIANCE NO. 2319 - CONTINUED PUBLIC AEARING. EDWARD F. ROSS, 924 North Euclid Street, Anaheim, California, Owner; requesting WAIVER OF THE PARKING SPACE LOCAT70N AND MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES TO PERMIT OPERATION OF A CHIROPRACTIC OFFICE on property described as: A rectangularly-shaped parcel of land located at the northeast corner of Euclid Street and Catherine Drive, having approximate frontages of 100 feet on Euclid Street and 55 feet on Catherine Drive, and further described as 924 North Euclid Street. Property presently classified C-l, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ZONE. Subject petition was continuad from the meeting of December 29, 1971, for further study and for the petitioner to submit revised plans. Chairman Farano inquired whether or not there was anyone present in opposition and whether or not the petitioner was present. No one appeared in opposition, and since the petiti.oner was not ~_resent, Chairman Farano suggested the applicant be contacted. The surrounding land uses of subject property include a shopping center to the north; single-family residential tract to the eastt an approved day nursery and single-family residential tract to the south across Catherine Drive; and various commercial uses to the west across Euclid Street. Reclassification No. 66-67-8 rezoned the property from R-1 to C-1 and Variance 'No. 1818 requested waiver of thp minimum required front setback and masimum building height requirement of the C-1 Zone. Mr. Edward Ross, 924 North Euclid Stre.et, the petitioner, advised the Commission that changes had been made in the plans and they now indicate the parkir.g facilities available are sufficient; that the structure would be usel to accom- modate his chiropractic practice only, and no other persons woul.d occupy the premises. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission discussed this residential structure for C-1 uses, noting that there was not sufficient parking a~~'~.ble to meet the C-1 Code. They were advised by the applicant that his ~~•-range plan~ included changing of the roof line of the building and a gen. al upgrading of the property. Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC72-14 and moved for its passage and adoption to grant Petition for Variance No. 2319, subject to conditiona with the stipulation that only one doctor use the structure; and subject to plans as submitted, and that the variance be reviewed in thres years. (See Resolution Book) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed b} the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer. Herbst, Kaywood, Seymour. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT: COMMISS~IONERS: Allred, Rowland. ~ , . . • MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 ~2'48 CONDITIONAL USE - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING. HENRY AND JOSEPHINE SCHINHOFEN, PERMIT NO. 1283 2900 East Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim. California, Owners; MICHAEL J. AND JERI J. GARAN, 435 North State College Boulevard, Anaheim, California, Agents, requesting permis- sion to ESTASLISx A SASEBA.LL BATTIYG FACILITY WITH INCIDENTAL RENTAL OF SICYCLES AND SALE OF FOOD WITH WAIVER OF THE MAXSMUM PERMITTED STRUCTURAL HEIGHT on property described as: A rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately one acre, hav~ng a frontage of approximately 160 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, having a maximum depth of approximately 308 feet, and being located approximately 1,340 feet east of the centerline of Rio Vista Street, and further described as 2900 East Lincoln Avenue. Property presently classified R-A, AGRICC7LTURAL, 20NE. Subject petition was continued from the meeting of January 10, 1972, to allow the petitioner time to revise plans incorporatinq suggestions made by the Commission. Chairman Farano inquired whether anyone was present in opposition; whereupon one person indicated his presence in opposition. Assistant Zoning Supervisor pon McDaniel reviewed the location of subject property. uses established in close proximity, and the proposed use for the property, stating tha.t there had been no previous zoning actions on the property. He further indicated that revised plans had been submitted with 31 parking.stalls and a 5-foot landscaped buffer, with a 6-foot hi.gh concrete block wall alon.g the westerly property line separating the proposed parking area from the single-family residential propertyt that a 20-foot landscaped buffer strip was provided separating the batting cage and patio area from the single-family units. Mr. Michael J. Garan, 2427 Level Avenue, agent, advised the Commission, that he had met with both the Planning and Street Department staffs in an effort to work out the ingress and egress. He also noted that in conversation with the Anaheim Parks Department that there is a master plan showing 512 car parking spaces in the area adjacent to the petitioner's proposal, which would back up to the property and to the parking lot. He advised the Commission that the City's plans do not indicate a 20-foot green area, and he believed that if the applicant had to conform to required code, the City should also conform. He indicated that the lighting would be of no potential nuisance value since it would not project beyond the cages and could be revised downward. Mr. Garan advised the Commission that the owner of the property had been approached on two different occasions by representatives of the City of Anaheim reqarding purchase of the property for park purposes. Mr. Norman Cromie, 516 South Westgate, appeared in opposition, stating he lived adjacent to the area of the proposed batting cage and that the surrounding residential area consiste3 of family people with nice homes. He presented two photographs of'batting cages now in operation in Anaheim, and that from viewing and listening to these operations, the noise of the machines working and the balls being batted would be a detriment to the area. Mr. Cromie further advised the Commission that property owners in that area had received a letter from the City Parks Department that the City was to invest $640,000 in the Anaheim Lake project, which is adjacent to the area in question. in rebuttal, Mr. Garan stated that plans submitted indicated the cages would be set back 55 feet from the back fence line, and a masonry wall would be installed to deflect the sound from the adjoining property, and that zhe lights would be reflected downward. TFiE HEARING WAS CLOSED. In answer to a question from Commissioner Seymour, Mr. Garan advised that the owner wished to develop the psoperty himself rather than sell it to the City of Anaheim. Mr. Dick Kamphefner, Park Superintendent for the City of Anaheim, advised the Commission that an application has been made to the Federal ~Government for funding, but to date they have not heard of its acceptance; however, the park- ing area, if developed by the City, would be turf and trees, and the only paved portion would be ~he drive itself, similar to Knott's 9erry Farm. • ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1283 (Continued) 72-49 CommiasioT;~r Gauer indicated the proposed use uid not beiong in this reaidential area surrounding the R-1 developmentt that the proposed development by the City of "Anaheim Beach" would enhance the entire area. The Commiasion further discussed the type of compatible development for this area, noting that the owner has a right to develop his property, and this body should be in a poaition tu offer a constructive alternative to him; that some type of landscaping to shield the batting cages and act as a sound barrier should ba provided. Commiasionex Gauer offered Resolution No. PC72-15 and moved for its passage and adoption to deny Petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 1283, noting that the development was not compstible to the R-1 area due to the noise factor if operated until 9:00 P.M.'or 10:00 P.M., and the traffic congestion on Lincoln Avenue. (See Resolution Book) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kaywood, Farano, Gauer. NOES: COMMISSSONERS: Seymour, Yerbst. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Rowland. Commissioner Seymour in voting indicated he was opposed to the development in its specific form but not to the devel~_'~ent in conceptj he felt that a different treatment could be given the batting cages. Commissioner Rowland returned to the Council Chamber at 2:50 P.M. RECLASSIFICATIGN - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING. CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF NO. 70-71-56 LATTER DAY SAZNTS, 10 South Main, Room 214, Salt Lake City, Utah, Owner; SHOWCASE HOMES, 14482 Seach Boulevard, CONDITIONAL USE Suite W, Westminster, California, Agent; property des- PERMIT NO. 1244 crihed as: An irregularly-shaped parcel of land consiat- ing of approximately 4.4 acres having a frontage of TENTATIVE MAP OF approximately 245 f:et on the east side of Euclid Street, TRACT NO. 7439, having a maximum dapth of approximately 491 feet, and REVISION NO. 1 being located approximately 660 feet south o£ the center- line of Orangewood Avenue. Property presently classified R-A, AGRICULTURAL~ ZUNE. R~QUESTED CLASSIFICATION: R-3~ MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL~ ZONE. REQUESTED CONDITIONAL USE: ESTABLISH A 47-UNIT PLANNED RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT WITH WAIVER3 OF (1) MINIMUM LOT SI2E~ (2) MINIMUM LOT WIDTH~ (3) REQUIREMENT THAT A LOT HAVE STREET FRONTAGE~ ANll (4) MAXIMUM PERMITTED BUILDING HEIGHT WITHIN 150 FEET OF AN R-A ZONE. TENTATIVE TRACT REQUEST: DEVELOPER: WM. J. KRUEGER, 14482 Reach Boulevard, Suite K, Westminster, California. ENGINEER: RAAB & BOYER ENGINEERING COMPAl7Y, 14482 Beach Boulevard, Suite I. Westmfnster, California. Subject tract is proposed for subdivision into 49 R-3 zoned lots. Subject petitions were continued from the June 14, July 12 and 26, August 23, October 18, and November 15, 1971, and January 1J, 1972, meetings to allow the petitionez time to resolve problems with the owner of the adjoining R-A parcel, as requested by the Commission, and for revised pZans. The su.rrounding land uses include existing multiple-family development to the northt existing single-family tracts to the east and southi and sinqle-family homes on the west side of Euclid Stxeet in the City of Garden Grove. Mr. Harry Knisely, agent for the petitioner, was available to answer questions from the Commission. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. ~ ~ MINUTES, CxTY RLANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 72-50 RECLASSIFICATION N0. 70-71-56, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1294, AND TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT N0. 7439, REVISION NO. 1(Continued) Commisaioner Herbst stated that apparently the app2icant was~";aot willing to protect the R-1 property to the south as required from all r:~cent R-3 devel- opersj that there was only 3 feet of planting between the d'iv;~ay and existin~ R-1 homea; the density is 4 units per acre higher than botti-.cYA and City codv; allows; that the development submitted was not for the good of Anaheim, did not protect the interests of the people adjoining the propertyJ and suggested that the petitions be continued if the applicant required more time. Mr. Knisely advised that the owner had several developmenta of a similar nature and did not request a continuance, and suggested that perhaps the Code should be changed. It was pointed out by Commissioner Rowland th4t the developer should develop a superior living environment; that no law nesded changin3s that the Commission can request any reasonable development standarda appliad to a propertyt and that three waivers had been requested, and the petitioner's plans did not create any living environment, the project had too much density. Cammissioner Herbat o£Eered Resolution No. PC72-16 and moved for its passage and adoption to recommend to the City Council disapproval of Petition fox Reclassi£ication No. 70-71-56. (See Resolution Book) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Gauer, Herbst, Kaywood, Seymour, Rowland. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred. Commissioner Herrst offered Resolution No. PC72-17 and moved for its passage and adoption to deny Petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 1244. (See Resolution Book) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbst, Kaywood, Seymour, Rowland. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT: COMMIS~IONERS: Allred. Commissioner Herbst offered a motion to den~ Tentative Map of Tract No. 7439, . Revision No. 1, seconded by Commissioner Gauer, and MOTION CARRIED, based on the fact that the tract map does ~~ot create a qood living environment, it is overcrowded, it does not protect tha neighborhood, and 1s not as good as a typical apartment development. VARIANCE NO. 2329 - PUBLIC AEARING. CHURCH OF CH,^,T:ST, 1590 West Ball Road, V Anaheim, California, Ownerr requesting WAiVER OF MAXIMUM SIGN AREA TO CONSTRUCT A 48-SQUARE FOOT SIGN on property described as: A rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approxi- mately 1.5 acres having a frontaqe of approximately 164 feet on t:.e south side of Ball Road, having a maximum depth of approximately 400 feet, and being located approximately 175 feet east of the centerline of Loara Street and further described as 1590 West Ball Road. Property presently clsssified R-A, AGRICULTURAL~ ZONE. Chairman Farano inquired if there was anyone in opposition and received no response. The subject property is located on the south side ~f Ball Road, approximately 175 feet east of Loara Street and is currently zoned R-A; Conditlonal Use P_rmit No. 45 approved the construction of a church on the property in 1959. No other zoninq actiona have been initiated on the property. The applicant. Mr. B±11 Fix, 2924 Oakmont, Orange, indicated he was available to answer any questions of the Commiasion. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. ~ ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 72-51 VARIANCE NO. 2329 (Contilued) Mr. Fix notEd that the church does fit into the R-3 development rather wells however, people have a tendency to pass it by because of the surrounding developmenti that the proposal was for a double-faced, liyhted sign to be situated in front of the church on the block wall planterr and that the size of the sign wauld be 6 x 8 feet. However, the actual size of the letterir3 was unknown by Mr. Pix. Zonin3 Supervisor Charlea Roberts advised the Commission that there are restrictions in the Siqn Ordinance that limit the intensity of lightj that residents immediately to the east of the sign might be aware of the lighted siqn. Commissioner Gauer offered Resolution No. PC72-18 and moved for its passage and adoption to grant Petition for Variance tv'o. 2329. (S~se Resolution Book) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIOI~ERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbst, Rowland, Seymour. NOES: COMM:SSIONERS: Kaywood. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred. VARI?1NCE NO. 2325 - PUBLIC HEARING. LOREN E. SMITH, P. O. Eox 42, Silverado, Califozn3a, Ownerf requesting FIAIVER OF PERMITTED USES TO ESTABLISH STORAGE YARD FOR VRCATION T*_iAILERS~ CAMPERS AND BOA'PS on ~roperty described as: A rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consist- ing of approxi~nately .55 acres, having a frontage o£ approxlmately 67 feet on the west s=.de of Mountain View Avenue,. having a maximum depth of approximately 36J feet, and being located approximately ''S0 feet south of the centerline of Katella Way, an3 further described as 1843 Mount~in View Avenue. Property presently classified R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE. Chairman Farano inquired if there was anyone in opposition and rgceived no response. Subject property is bounfied on the north by a contraator's storage yard on a large k-A parcel; on the east and south by single-family units cn large R-A parcels; and on the wesr by a mobilehome park. No other zoning actions have been initiated on this property, and the applicant is proposing to remove three of the four existing buildings on the property and establish a storaqe gaid for vacation trailers, c:ampers, and boats. Mr. Loren Smith, 14989 Anderson Way, Silverado, applicant, adv;sed the Commis- sion that subject property would be in keeping with the adjacent property and would be developed to City codes; that since tiie adjacent property was fenced with chainlink, he felt it would also be appropriate for subject property. In reply to a question from Commissioner Herbst, Zoning Supervisor Charles Roberts advised that ':he General Plan designates this property as appropriate for C-R land uses, however, the resolution for C-R z~ninq does not extend to cover this propertp_ Mr. Smith advieed the praperty would be used for storage of campers, boats, and trailers,•and a dump station would not be necessary. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. Zoning Supervisor Robetts advised the Commis~ion that prevfous trailer storage lots approved by the Commission have been required to install dump stations~ that the property is in the R-A ~one, which 3oes not ~:ermit the requested development by right. The front setback that is requir.ed by the R-A 2one would be 25 feet, all fuliy landscaped. The applicant advised he would stipulate to installation of chainlink fencing with slats and posting of a bond for inetallation of a sidewalk when the adjacent property is developed. ~ ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 ~2'S2 VARIANCE NO. 2325 (Continued) Commissioner Kaywood offered Reaolution No. PC72-19 and moved for ita passage and adoption to grant Petitioa for Variance No. 2325, subject to all conditions, including the stipulation that chainlink fence with slata be installed; a dump station; landscaping as required by Code~ and posting of a bond for a sidewalk. (See Resolution Book) On roll call the foregoing reaolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbat, Kaywood, Aowland;-Seymour. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ASSENT: COMM25SiONERS: Allred. CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARING. NATIONAL DIVERSIFIED INVESTORS, 13i6 PERMIT NO. 1266 Balsam Avenue, Anaheim, California, Owner= R. V. NATION, P. 0. Box 5033, Anaheim, California, Agentt requesting permission to ESTABLISH A TRAVEL TRAILER AND CAMPER STORAGE SUPPLY AND REPAIR FACILITY ANP A"T.B.A." ~TIRES~ BATTERIES~ AND ACCESSORIES) TYPE RETAIL SALES AND SERVICE BUSINESS WITH WAIVERS OF (1) PERMITTED USES AND (2) MINIMUM REQUIRED FRONT SETBACK on property deacribed as: A rectanqularly- shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.9 acrea, having a frontage of approximately 279 feet on the west side of State Colleqe Boulevard, having a maximum depth of approximately 300 feet, and beina located approximately 267 feet north of the centerline of Via Burton Street. Property presently classi- fied M-l, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, ZONE. Chairman Farano inquired if there was anyone in oppoaitian and received no response. Surrounding land usea include building supply storage across the flood control channel to the norths vacant industrial property across State College,Boulevard to the east; an auto parts store and industrial buildings to the south; and an industrial firm to the west. Subjecti property was rezoned to M-1 in 1955, and the applicant proposes to establish a storage yard for campers and travel trailars on the rear portion of subject property, esrablishing a retail sales and service building. , Mr. Ron Nation, 2011 Katella Avenue, applicant, advised the Commiasion he was available for anawers. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission discussed the applicant's intended uses on the rear portion of the property and intended retail sales. The applicant stated that the sales would be automobile-oriented - tires, batteries, and accessories, and a recreation vehicles accessories store ,~ Relative to providing larger spaces to accommodate a'vehicle and trailer, the applicant noted that there should be sufficient space available shouid a vehicle be attached to a t.railer and left for repair, however, in moct cases only the trailer would be left, and the owner detaching ±he vehicle from the trailer <nd driving away; that all repair work would be performed inside a building. Commissioner. Gauer offered Resolution No. PC72-20 and moved for its passage and adoption to gran` Petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 1286, subject to recommend~tions wi::h the stipulation and condition that the applicant would confine the retail sales area to the tirea, batteries, and acceasoriea and recreation vehicle acce9sories only, and all repair worcJ~w ild ~e o me 7~-t, ~`~+~r inside a building; that servicinq would be of recreation veh c e ~ any other retail sales use would have to hav2 approval. (See Resolution Book) On roll call the foreqoing resolution was passeci by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbat, Kaywood, Rowland, Seymour. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT: COMMISSIONSRS: Allre:i ~ ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 72-53 CONDITIONAL USE - Pi1BLIC HEARING. A. L. AND M. E. RIST, 11621 Montecito, PERMIT NO. 1288 Los Alamito~s, California, Owners; DALE L. TNGRAM, P. O. Hox 229. El Monte, California, Agent; requeating permission, to CONSTRUCT A 219-UNIT, THREE-STORY MOTEL on property descrlbad as: A rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 2.8 acres, having a frontage of approximately 198 feet on the south side of Orangethorpe Avenue, havinq a maximum depth of approximately 607 feet, and being located approximately 885 feet west of the centerline of Raymond Avenue. Property presently classified M-1, LZGHT INDUSTRIAI~~ 20NE. Assistant Zoning Supervisor pon McDaniel noted :~urroundfng land uses and that the petitioner was requesting a conditional use permit to eatablish a 219-unit, three-stor.y motel in an M-1 Zone, which included 62 covered parking spaces and 157 open parking spacea, and that the plans submitted indicated the unita to be 312 square feet ia area and each to be composed of an efficizncy kitchen unit which would include a sink, refrigerator, and cook top wlth no oven. Mr. DaZe Ingram, P. 0. Box 229, E1 Monte, agent for the petitioner, was preaent. He indicated the property had been zoned M~-1 for ninetEen years and had no development on it. He further indicated this was an existing motel area since there was a motel to the east, commercial useu to tl:e north and east of subject property. The develoner had constructed three other similar motels at 2638 Lincoln, 2738 Lincoln and 34C0 Lincoln. The units would not be apartment but rather motel units; the motels to be built for Ambassador Inns of Ameriaa. Mr. Robert Borden, Bryan Investment Company, Anaheim, appeared in opposition, indicating that his company leases and owns proaerty surrounding the subject property; that the integrity of the industrial area should be maintained; and that there was a certain amount of noise to be expected fram industries as employees go to and come from work on swing shifts anci would be disturbing to motel tenants. Mr. Jim Mayes, own~r of property where Hyer Manufacturing Company is estab- lished (immediately to the west of subject property), appeared in opposition. indicating he was opposed to motel or apartment units next to industrial plants. THE HEARZNG WieS CLOSED. The Commission advised Mr. Inqram that the motels noted above on Lincoln Avenue which had been built by the owner of subject prope:z~ were now advertisinq as apartments; that the Commission had aeen assured hy Mr. Zngram at the time of the presentation that they would not be rented as apa.rtments. Mr. Ingram indicated tk:e units Niad now been sold and were nc lo*iger the property of his client. The Commission further indicated that kitchen units should not exceed 10$ of the facilities for a motel, whereas the petitioner was proposing kitchen facilities in all units, which would classify them as small type apartmenta. Commissioner Seymour noted that although the applicant's intentions were to create a motel site, experience has demonstrated that id~~ntical complexes previously constructed by the applicant have not been operated aa motels but as apartments. Commissioner Seymour offered Resolution No. PC72-21 and moved for its passage and adoption to deny Petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 1288 based on experience of previous type development and to request the City Council in their review of thr, project to investigate the existing, supposedly motels on Lincoin Avenue, and after investigatior. that they can see it is not a motel but an apartment, and the developer here intends to develop an apartment and the development should be approached as an apartment, not a motel. This is an M-1 area and there would be created a substandard apartment house; it wauld be damaging not only to the industrial area but industrial people who are present in the Council Chambers today. (See Resolution Sook) Commissioner Aerbst statad that a conditional use permit should be to service the industrial area. He noted he had traveled enough throughout the country for the past few years, and salesmen are not interested in kitchens i.n motels in industrial areas. To provide kitcheas as the applicant proposes would be catering tu the commercial-recreation business that is carried over from the Disneyland area. • s MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 ~2'S9 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1288 (Continued) Commissioner Rowland stated that it should he made a part of the record for the Council that why would anyone want to pay 6$ bed tax on an apartment; it is really a good investment if you look at it on the ground. The applicant proposes to develop 70 units per acre compared to multiple-family zoning which allows 36 units p~r acres also parking.space of 508 of required needed for apartments; ~rovides no park and recreation•fees and providea no opportunity for the long-range motel dweller to participate in recreation facili:ies in the city because we have no recreation facilities provided in the M-1 Zone. Commissioner Seymour stated that one of the previous arguments px.eser.ted by , the same developer was, economically they could not rent these motels as a' t- ments; however, today Casa Monterey was advertiaing at $29.75 per week. 'r_.a proposed development is nothing more than a substandard aFartment. On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbst, Kapwood, Rowland, Seymour. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred. RECESS - Co~,nissioner Herbst offered a motion to recess the meeting for ten minutes. The meeting recessed at 4:10 P.M. RECONVENE - Chairman Farano reconvened the meetinq at 4:20 P.M., all Commissioners present with the exception of Commissioner Allred. VARIANCE NO. 2328 - PUBLIC AEARING. ALICE E. SIMPSON, 2441 Riverside Drive, Santa Ana, California, and 'i~ERA W. MYERS, 1016 North Towner, Santa Ana, California, Ownersj JERRY BURNS, Covington Bros., 2451 East Orangethorpe Avenue, Fullerton, California, Agent; requesting WAIVER OF MINIMUM REQUIRED LANDSCAPED SETBACK TO ESTABLISH AN R-3~ MULTIPLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISION on property described as: A rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consistinq of approximately 10 acres, having a frontage of approximately 650 feet on the south side of Ball Road, having a maximum depth of approximately 660 feet, and being located approximately 300 feet east of the centerline of Selhaven Street, Property presently classified R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZGNE. Subject property is bounded on thE: north across Ball Road by multiple-family development; on the east by vacanl: pro1erty: on the south by vacant property; and on the west by multiple-fami;,y development. The property was zoned R-3 in 1971, and che applicant propoaes to ARVelop a fourplex subdivision on the property. Mr. Jerry Burns, 2451 East Orangethorpe Avenue, Fullerton, agent, was present. He advised that on Lots 23, 24, 7 and 8 the side yard would be reduced to allow for the F.ncroachment of a parkinq space. Lots 23 and 7 have a 16-foot side yardf Lots 24 and 8 have a 19-foot side yard. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. In discussion the Commission noted that there was not sufficient open area in this development, and it would be reduced further by the subject petition. Commissioner Kaywood oPfered Resolution No. PC72-22 and moved for its passage and adoption to deny Petition for Variance No. 2328, noting that there was not sufficient open space in the project and the requested variance would further reduce it. O~i roll call the foregoing motion was passed by the f~llowing vot;: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Herb= Kaytvood, Rowland, Seym~ur. NOES: COMMISSIONEkS: None. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred. ~ ~ ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 72-55 CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLIC HEARING. WESTERN AVENUE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CHURCH OF PERMZT NO. 1289 ANAHEIM, 219 South Western Avenue, Anaheim, California, OwnerJ DONALD J. FSARS, 1477 South Mancheater Avenue, Suite 360, Anaheim, California, Aqent; requesting permission to DEVELOP A 179-UNIT, THREE-STORY APARTMEN~P COMPLEX FOR ELDERLY PEOPLE WITH WAIVER OF (1) MINIMUM FLOOR AREA, (2) MAXIMUM SUILDING HEIGHT, (3) MAXIMUM PROJECTIOI3 INTO REQUIRED YARD, (3) MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING, (5) REQUIRED STORAGE CABINETS IN EACH CARPORT, (6) MINIMUM BUILDING SITE AREA PER UNIT~ AND (7) VEHICULAR ACCESS REQUIREMENT on property described as: A rectangularly- shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately four acres, having a frontage of approximately 285 feet cn the west side of Western Avenue, having a maximum depth of approximately tl7 feet, and being located approximately 1,030 feet south of the center.line of Lincoln Avenue and further described as 219 South Western Avenue. Property presently classified R-3, MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZONE. Chairman Farano inquired if there was anyone in opposition and indicated there was one person in attendance. Surroanding land uses include an existing two-story apartment complex to the north; single-fami.ly residential units across Western Avenue to the east; Western High School to the southj and apartment development to the west. Conditional Use Permit No. 1140 granted permisaion to expan3 the existing ahurch and construct a five-story apartment development for the elderly on subject property. The applicant proposes to construct a 179-unit, three-story apartment complex for the elderly. Mr. Don Fears, architect, 1477 South Manchester Avenue, representing the applicant, was present. He noted for the Commission that several of the requested waivers were considered on the previous approval; that the applicant had spent considerable time qoing into a market study and feasibility study and need for such a developmentj that all documents had been completed for FHA approval, building permits, etc., however, FHA had requeated a garden style apartment; that i¢provements have been made on the open space, the number of square feet of land per unit has doubled; the land area has almost doubled; originally plans indicated five stories, now indicate threet ~11 buildings would have elevators, cedar sidinq, cedar shingles, and there would be two balconies per building unit for the use of the occupantsi that the reclassi- fication to R-3 had now been completed; fees and assessments have been paid; and apartments now include 100 cubic fEet of storage in each apartment. Mr. Charles Christian, 2020 West Lincoln, partner of the Security Development Company (owner of the property on the north), appeared in opposiEion and directed the Commission's attention to the covered parking on the north lot line, indicating that this covered area together with the adjoining area on property would provide a"tunnel" effect. He was not in opposition to the total development, only to the parking located on the adjacent line. Mr. Fears noted th.at previous proposed plans had 44 covered parking spaces and present plans showed 53 coveredf however, it would be satisfactory with him to uncover some of these garages and move the work shop so as not to create a "tunnel" effect. Mr. Christian indicated this would be satisfactory. 7HE HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissic,nes Seymour offered Resolution No. PC72-23 and moved for its F ~sage and adoption to grant Petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 1289 with the stipulation by the applicant that the parking stalls on the north and the work ~hop building wculd be moved. (See Resolution Book) On roll call the foregoing resolution wa~ passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMI3SIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbst, Kaywood, Rowland, Seymour. NOES: COMMISSIONEFS: None. ABSE2vT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred. 0 0 MINUTES, CZTY PLANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 19',2 72-56 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1289 (Continue3) Coma~issioner Seymour offerad Resclution No. PC72-24 and moved for ita passage and adoption to terminate all proceedings on Petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 1140. (See Reaolution Book) On roll call the foregoing resolution was pasaed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSiONERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbst, Kaywood, Rowland, Seymour. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred. CONDITIONAL USE - PUBLI~~ HEARING. DE F1ITT R. LEE, ET AL, P. O. S~x 158, PERMIT NO. 1290 Downey, California, Owners: MOBIL OIL CORPORATION, 9901 South Paramount Boule~ard, Suite 101, Downey, California, Agents requesting permission ta ESTABLISH A SETtVICE STATION WI'fHZN 75 FEET OF A RESIDENTIAL ZONE on property described as: A rectangularly-Rhaped parcel of land being the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Magnolia Avenue with approximate frontaqes of 177 feet and 188 feet respectively and further described as 2580 West Lincoln Avenue. Property presently classified C-1, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ZONE. Surrounding lanc: uses include a aervice station to the north acrosa Lincoln Avenue; a single-f°mily unit on a large R-A parcel to the eastt a single- family unit on an R-A parcel to the south; and a service station acroas Magnolia Avenue to the west. A portion of subject property was rezoned in 1956 to C-1, the remainder to C-1 in 1963r the applicanc proposes to establish an automobile service station. Mr. Bob Isaacson, P. O. Box 158, Downey, representing Mobil oil Corporation, applicant, advised that all conditions cf the C-1 Zone would be complied with. Commissioner Kaywood indicated that there was a total of 33 stations in the area af one mile to either side of the proposed station, 5 of which are closec or abandoned stations, one th'..t belongs to Mobil Oil on Oranqe and Brookhurst. Mr, Isaacson advised that Mobil Oi1 does not have one closed station in the City of Anaheimj that the company had moved the station at Orange and Brookhurst across the 3treet because they felt it to be a better loca*ton,,provided better` facilities. Commissioner Seymour read from a reaearch study by the International Service Station Dealers to indicate a population of 3,500 people was needad to justify the existence of one stationr that Anaheim nas a population of 702 persons per station; further that the study indicated rt present a 15$ vacancy factor in the City of Anahei~. In answer *.o a question by Commissioner Seymour re.lative to leveling closed stations within six months of non-operation, Mr. Isaacson stated that Mobil Oil Company deals with individual businessmenj that a dealer may terminate his lease. Mobil Oil Company ia interested in open atationa, compatible with the community and so far as taking over an abandoned station is concerned, Mobil oil Company has ~:ade a survey, and this proposed location was chosen due to surrounding land use, traffic, type of residences, etc. Approximately a quarter of a million dollars would be apent at this location by Mobil oil Company. He further indicated that if Mobil Oil Company could ofEer superior service,.it is possible stationre'in the area might not be able to compete. _~ The Commission discussed the advisabil3ty of amending the service station ~ ordinance whereby ahould a station cloae and be abandoned for a p~riod of six ~ months, the owner would have to level the structure and advised staff to aet up a work seasion regarding amending the ordinance. They further euggested that all oil companies be invited to go over the procedure and new ordinance prior to adoption. The Commisaion dtscussed the possibility of limiting the number of service stations at any one intersection. The c:ommission noted that the location of subject request was on a large parcel and, no doubt, cou].d accommodate a use other than a service station. ~ ~ ~' MINUTES, CITY PLANNTNG ~OMMISSION, February 7, 1972 ~2'S~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2290 (Continued) .Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PCi2-25 and moved for ita passage and adoption to grant Petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 1290. (Sae Resolution Book) On roll call the foregoinq resolution was passe~ by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Herbst, Kaywood, Gauer. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Rowland, Seymour. ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred. RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARING. MICHAEL ROBERT KRAL, 1102 Bungalow Place, , NO. 71-72-25 Arcadia, California, Ownerj FRED w. VEIGA, 15351 Touraine Way, Santa Ana, California, Agents prnperty describe3 as: VARIANCE NO. 2326 A rectangularly-shaped parcel of land conaiatinq of approxi- mately .78 acres, having a frontage of apg~oximately 119 feet on the north side of Savanna Street, ha~inq a maximum depth of appxoximately 287 feet, and being located approximately 320 feet west of the centerline of Knott Avenue and further described as 3521 Savanna Street. Property presently classified R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE. REQUESTF,D CLASSIEICATION: R-3~ MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESZDENTIAL~ ZQNE. REQUESTED VARIANCE: WAIVER OF (1) MINIMUM NET LAND AREA PER UNIT, (2) MAXZMUM HEIGHT OF BUZLDING WITHIN 150 FEET OF R-A 20NE~ (3) MINIMUM SIDE YARL~ DEPTH~ AND (4) MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS TO ESTABLISH A 23-UNIT~ TWO-STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX. Sarrounding land uses include single-family homes on large.R-A parcelst the applicant propeses to reclassify the property to R-3 to a11ow the conatruction of a 23-unit, two-story apartment camplexi and plans indicate one building o£ two-story units, while the other two-story building is indicated as being units above with parkiag below. Mr. Ray Patscheck, 1733 Irvine Soulevar.d, Tustin, agent foz the owner, advised the Commission that they wiahed to withdraw requests for waivers 1, 3 and 4 and request only waiver No. 2 to allow for the two-story heiqht within 150 , feet of the R-A 2one; also that the applicant wishes to eliminate one unit to comply~with the density of the R-3 2ona. Mr. Patscheck presented a petition with nine signatures, all in favor of the. proposed development. THE HEAItING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Rowland offered Resolution,'o. PC72-26 and moved for its passage and adoption to recommend to the City Council approval of Petition for Reclassi- fication No. 71-72-25, provided the densitp shall conform to the R-3 Zone and all required setbacks of the R-3 Zone shall be adhered to. (See Resolution Hook) On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbst, Kaywood, Rowland, Seymour. NOES: COM[dISSIONERS; None. ~e,_ A. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: '~$- L~:G~/~L.~J . C~mmissioner Rowland offered Resolution No. PC72-27 and moved for its passage and adoption to grant, in part, Petition for Variance No. 2326, with waiver of Section 18.28.050(5-b) only. (See Resolution Book) On roll call the foregoing reaolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Far3no, Gauer, Herbst, Kaywuod, Rowland, Seymour. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ~a.~.L~/~.e~.~~ ..~ ~ .~., ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 72-58 RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HEARING. SEVENTA AND OLIVE CORPORATION, 645 South NO. 71-72-29 Olive Street, Suite 808, Los Angeles, California, owner; CHRISTESOt::COMPANY, 2100 East 4th Street, Suite 103, Santa Ana, California, Agenti requesting that property described as: An irregularly-shaped parcel of land having a frontage of approximately 187 feet on tne west side of Manchester Avenue, having a maximum depth of approximately 251 feet, and being located approximately 210 feet aoutheast of the centerline of Orangewood Avenue be reclassified from the R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE to the C-l, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ZONE. Surroundino land uses include vacant R-A property on the west and northt.the Santa Ana Freeway on the eastt and Melrose Abbey Cemetery on the south. Conditional use Permit No. 1136 approved construction of a mortuary as an addition to an e:cisting mausoleum and aemetery on this property in 1969t no other zoning acti.ons have been initiated on subject property. The petitioner is proposing to z•eclassify the property from the R-A tu C-1 Zone to allow the construction of an insurance adjuatment centerr the 1230-aquare foct building and 1110-square fout porte-cochere which is attached are located near the front of the proper*_y, with the maiority of the parking being located along the southerly boundary to the rear of the proposed building; and one drive approach t~ Manchester Avenue has been proposed to service the property. The applicant has indicated that any siqna will conform with the C-1 Zone. Mr. Donald B. Christeson, President, Christeson Development Company, appeared to answer any questions of the Commission and to advise the Commissior. that a ma~ter plan of development was being prepared for the entire parcel af propertys that it was their desire to post a bond for insta~lation of the 6-foot masonry wall until such time as plans for development were completed fox the entire property. Mr. Christeson also requested permission to install a aeptic tank on an interim basis until the balance of the property is developed since to install a sewer at this time without knowing the type of building to be served might subject the owner to considerab2e expense. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. Dir. Jay Titus, Engineering Division, advised xhe Commission that to his know- ledge, there were no septic tanks permitted in the city with the exception of areas in the Peralta Hills area where sewer was not avaiJlable. However, he would have an answer available on this matter when it was preaented to the City Council. Chairman Farano inquired if Mr. Christeson was aware of the overpass to be con- structed whiah might close off some of tb.e property; whereupon Mr. Cliristeaon indicated that according to plans of boih the State Highway Department and City Engineer's office, ManchestPZ Avenue would remain opan. Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC72-28 and moved for its passage and adoption to recommend to the City Council approval of Petition for Reclassi- fication No. 71-72-29, subject to the applicant posting a bond for completion of the block wall and establishing a time limit £or the completion of Itema 3. 4, 5, 6, 7. 8, and 9 to be complied with prior to final building inspection. On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbst, Kaywood, Rowland, Seymour. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Alired. CONDITIONAL USE ° PUBLIC HEARING. CANYON TERRACE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY~ P. O. PERMIT NO. 1267 Box 2156, Cypress, California, Owner= BERNARD F. CARSONARO, P. O. Box 5411, Buena Park, California, Agent; requesting permi~sion to HAVE ON-SALE BEER AND WINE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PROPOSED ITALIAN DELICATESSEN AND RESTAURANT WITH WAIVER OF THE MINIMUM NUMHER OF REQUTRED PARKING STALLS on property described as: An irregularly- shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately .6 acre, having a frontage of approximately 150 feet on the east side of Tustin Avenue, having a maximum depth of approximataly 185 =eat, and being located approximately 100 feet north of the centerline of Santa Ana Cany~n Road, and further describeR as 118 North Tustin Avenue. Property pre~sently classified C^1, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ZONE. ~ ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 ~2'S9 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 12B7 (Continued) Surrounding land uses of subject property include multiple-family development on the north, east and westJ and vacant C-1 property to the south. The property was zoned C-1 in 1962. The applicant is proposing to establish an Italian restaurant in a portion of the esisting shopping center on the property, with on-sale beer and wine. Mr. Bernard F. Carbonaro, 8522 San Antonio Drive, Buena Park, advised the Commission that the requested operation would not be a beer parlor; that there were 43 parking stalls in the shopping center available and 10 addtiional park- ing stalls on the corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road, approximately 50 to 60 yards from the place of business; and that tha use would be a family-type reataurant only. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. in answer to a question from the Commission, Mr. Carbonaro advised that the parking area was never filled to capacity, and sufficient parkinq would be available. The hours of operation would be from 9:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. Commissioner Seymour offered Resolution No. PC72-29 and moved for its passage and adoption to gran~ Petition for Conditional Use Permi.t No. 1287, with the applicant stipulating that 10 parkinq spaces at the nor•;;heast corner of Santa Ana Canyon Rcad would be developed in accordance with *:ne Anaheim Municipal Code. On roll call the foregoinq resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbst, Rowland. Seymour. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Kaywood. ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred. TENTATIVE MAP OF - DF.VELOPER: WESTFIELD DEVELOPMENT CO.. 6151 West Century TRACT NOS. 673A Boulevard, Suite 928, Lc^ Angeles, California 90045. AND 6772r ENGINEER: V.T.N., 2301 Campus Drive, Irvine, California REVISION NO. 1 92664. Subject tracts, located on the west side of Waliiut Canyon Road, approximately 1,030 feet south of the center- line of Santa Ana Canyon Road and consistinq of part of a 20.1-acre parcel, is proposed for subdivision into 24 R-1 zoned lots (Tract No. 6734, Revision No. l; and 42 R-1 zoned lots (Tract No. 6772, Revision No. 1). Tentative Map of Tract No. 6734. Revision No. l, proposes to subdivide a portion of the property into 24 R-1 zoned lots. Tentative Map of Tract No. 6772, Revision No. 1, proposes to subdivide a portion of the property into 42 R••1 zoned lots. The surrounding land uses include single-family residential development to the north and vacant R-A property to the easL, south and west. Walnut Canyon Road, which borders the east bour.dary of the property, ia pro- posed to serve as the primary entrance to Anaheim Hills development to the south. Tentative Tract Nos. 6734 and 6772 were originally approved in 1968. The Commission discussed removal o£ the row of eucalyptus trees on the easterly boundary, noting provisions of the Scenic Corridor Zone relative to tree removal. Mr. James Rogers, 6151 West Century Boulevard. Los Angeles, agent for the developer, indicated that if at all possibl~ to preserve these trees during fill and construction, they would remain. Howeder, some of the trees on the I property wo;,ld be removed during the course af construct.ion. Assistant Development Services Director Ronald Thompson advised the Commission that staff would like to add two more conditions, one relative to maintenance of landscaping, the other relative to submission of final elevation and floo . plans prior to issuance of the building permit. Mr. Rogers stipulated to these conditions. LJ ~ • MiNUTES, CITY PI,ANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 72-60 TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NOS 6734 AND 6772. REVISION NO. 1(Continued) Comm3ssioner Gauer offered a motion to approve Tentative Map of Tract No. 6734, Revision No. 1, seconded by Commissioner Herbst, subject to the following conditions and the stipulation that the eucalyptus trees along the easterly boundary be preserved if at all possible. MOTION CARRTEll. (1) That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 6734 is granted subject to the approva.l of R::classification No. 68-69-40. (2) That shoul%. this subdivision be developed as more than one subdiviaion, each subdivision thereof shall be sutmitted in tentative form for agoroval. (3) That all lots within this tract shall be served by u~derground utilities. (4) That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City ~ouncil and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. (5) That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. (6) That drainage of Tract No. 6734 shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. The applicant shall be responsible for the transmission of drainage from Tract No. 6734 to its ultimate disposal. (7) That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the app.ropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. (B) That a 6-foot masonry wall.. shall be constructed along the east property line. Reasonable landscaping, ir_cluding irrigation facilities, shall be installed between said Gall and the Anaheim f?.ood channel, plans for said landscaping to be sub- mitted to and subject to the approval oi the Superintendent of Parkway Maintenance. Following installation and acceptance, the City of Anaheim sha11 assume the responsibility for main- tenance of said landscaping. (9) That the City Council reserves the right to amend or delete the assumption oE Jandscaping maintenance if Council policy changes. !10) That all streets in Tract No. 6734 shall be constructed in accordance with current City of Anaheim St~ndard Details for hillside st.reets. (11) beaapprovedebyVCit:nCouncillpriorltosissuanceeofuaA~buildin7 permit. Commissioner Gauer offered a motion to approve Tentative Map of Tract No. 6772, Revision No. 1, seconded by Commissioner Herbst, subject to the following conditions and the stipulat±on tk;at the eucalyptus trees along the easterly i,oundary be preserved i£ at all possible. MOTION CARRIED. (1) That approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 6772 is gr~.nted subject to the approval of Reclassification No. 68-59-40. (2) That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subdivision, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted ~n tentative form for approval. (3) That all lots within this tract shall be served by undergro4nd utilities. ~ ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 72-61 TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NOS. 6734 AND 6772, REVISION N0..1 (Continued) (4) That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Cc~+.:.cil and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. (5) That streat names shall ~e approved by t.he City of a.naheim prior to approval of a final tract map. (6) That drainage of Tract No. 6772 ahall he d.isposad of in a manner satiafactory to the City Engineer: The applicant shall be responsible f~r the transmission of drainage from Tract No. 6772 to its ultimate disposal. (7) That the owner(s) of subject property sh;;ll pay to the City ~f Anaheim the appropriate parY and zecreatinn in-lieu fees as determined to be appr~priate by the City Co~~ncil, said fees to be paid at the time: the building permit is issue'r:. (8) That a 6-foot masonry wall shal~. be constructec?`along t:~e east property line or top of slope bank, whi^hever is tY~e higher elevation. Reasonable land.sc~gi.nq, includinq ~e~:xar.tion facilities, shall be installed between.sai~ wall anfi tYie Anaheim flood channel, plans for sai: landscap:r.g ;o be`sub- mitted to and subject to the approval of the SuFei~ntendent of Parkway Maintenance. Following ins;:allation and acceptance, the City of Anaheim shall assume the responsibility for.ma;a- ~ tenance of said landscaping. (9) That the City Council reser•ves the right to amend or de]~.;.e the assumption of landscaping maintenance if Council policy changes. (10) That all streets in Tract No. 6772 shall be constructed in accordance with current City of AnahPim Standard Details for hillside streets. (11) That drainage facilities and easements ahall be constructed and dedicated, as required by the City Enyineer, to drain the southerly portion of Tract No. 6772 into the Walnut Canyon channel. (12) That final elevations and floor plans shall'be submitted to and be approved by City Council prior to issuance of a building permit. ~ ~~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSIO2~, February 7, 1972 7="`~2 RECLASSIFICATION - PUBLIC HE~RJNG. EP.NEST DANKER, ET AL, 5132 South :'.:j.o t~0. 71-72-30 Street, Yor4a Linda, California, Ownera; CLASSIC 1~EVh'L'vP- MENT CORP., 5.?700 Knott Av:anue, Garden Grove, CP7.ifornia, VARIANCE N0. 2327 Agentt propes.~ desciibed ab; An iY:::egularly-~shaped parcel of land cu.~R;°'_'.?=g of approximate~~ 125 acres, havtng TENTATIVE MAP OF Ercak~!'b3 es ap^~roximately 4,610 feet on the south si~~ TRACT NOS. 76'!.~ of the. t.y v«r~aide Freeway and 4,760 °_eet on the north side AND 7730 TdRJUL': of batit'1 Ana.~anyon Road, and being located approximaieiy 773g l~ ~iJ(1 7:P2C east of the intersection of Walnut Canyon l~oad anc~ Santa Ana Cai~yon Road. Pzoperty presently classified R-F.. .AisRICULTURAI~~ 20NE. REQUESTED CLASSIF7CATZON: PORTION A- R^2-SOOG~,. ONE-FAMILY ZONE; PORTION B- C-1~ GEN.!RAL CO1~IMERCIALi. 20'VE. REQUESTED VARIANCE: 4tAIVE THE REQUIREMENT THAT RESIDENTIn'• ".C'_'S 1'~''~.R ON 1~RTERIAL H~ ^oHWAYS Tf1 PERMIT THE CONG^ :'C::TIJN Or 'i93 LUT R-2-5060 SUBDIVISIi)NS ON POR':'.'-Gi~ "A". TENTATIVE TRAwT REQUE°;TS: NOS. 7617 - 38 lots~ 773~ - 64 lof_g; ^%3; - 49 lots; 7732 - 53 lots; 7733 - 67 lots; 7~34 - 69 '~otsr 7735 - 56~ luts; 7^,"s6 - 47 lots; 7'z7 - 41 lrts; 7738 - 51 lots; '7739 - 48 lots. Subj~et prop~_r~y, consisting of appra:~imately 12a acres, is lvcated o.n the south ai~~ of L•he 'Ltiverside Freeway on the north side oP Santa Ana Ca::yon Roa:. approximateiy 1,'740 feet east of the ::ntersecti~n af Walnut Canyon Roa3 and Santa Ana Canyon Road and extending et~sterly to the intersection of Santa Ana Canyon Road a:±d the Riverside Freeway, and is cuxreiatly in the County ot Orange. The e~~tire 125-acre sit'e is proposed tu be subdivided into 593 R-2-5000 zoned lots. Mr. Ronald W. Martin, e;.qineer fcr t'.ie developer, 2212.Dup.nt Drivc. 3uite A, Izvine, w:as available t answer quest:~n~ of th.: Commissian. Mt. N.art~n adv.sed that the applican c was desirous of c:t:anging ~.ie access so th, t t1iF narrowesi parcel aould be ~t the strer_t, and •th~t staff had requested a t~sli of similar' design as app •oved for the Po^der~~sa hbtne development, _r,nd his clisnt wa3 agreeable to thia. Mr. Bo'o McQuee:., r.~presenting the Santa '~na Canyon Imp::ovement Association, aFpeared ir. oppositioi~, *?oting that t:he ar~a as indicated on the General Plan was R-•1 and Council had denied dwellinys acroRS the ~treet on larqer lotss that he ha%l gon~ over the proposed development ~lans, and aome homes would have rock roofs, some composition shinglest ani he felt that the dEVeloger should u~ide by General Plan Amendment No. 122. Zn rebuttal, Mr. Ma.•tin stated that all soofs wonld h~a of tk,e shake shingle or tile type; that denial by Council of 7ots of 1.*ss than 7Z00 square feet was on property located north of Santa Ana Canyon Roac~.. :n discussion, the Commissian noted that both the Planning C:o:r.mission and City Council have approved General P=an Amen~ment No. 122 for low density u~~~Plop- ment; ~hat a grc~~t deal cf time and effort had been sper.~ by both propert}• own~rs an~i the Commission in the study of this are>. Commissioner Seymou.±- referred to City Counril minutes of Jae:uary 23, i??1, Resolutioa 71R-72. '_n whi:>h General Pls~n fl*.~~ .~mer.` No. '122, Exhibit "C'~ , was app_'oved, reaffirming the Cc.uncil's detarmination that thia area was apgropri- ate for low density re=iuential. development. Comn:issioner Gauer indica*ed that the P.-2-5000 2one was oriqin~slly esta.bJ.iahed £or t•.he Butler home de~•elopment ss a substitute for R~: to encourage s~ng3.e- fdmiiy de~vel~pment oz zmal=er lcts; that the p.resent use of the zone was not ~ credit to the c ty - hometi were c-owding the lots. r~~m,aissioner ated that the number of automobiles in a development as pruposed by the peti.tioner would mean more traffic, more amoq, damage to +:r~et, and plants, more utilitiea, which is costly to the City, congestion in 'che sc:iools, and more people. ~ ~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNI.IG COMMISSION, February 7, 1972 72-63 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 71-72-30, VARIANCE NO. 2327, AND TENTATI~~E MAP OF TRACT NOS. 7617 AND 7730 THROUGH 7739 (Continued) Mr. Msrtin indicated that the size of the homes would comply wif:h the City's mi.nimum size - 1225 square feet; the bulk of the models would be over 1400 square feet, 3 aad 4 be3rooms, 2 and 3 baths. Mr. Martin was asked if he wished a continuance of this petition to submit revised plans indicating rear-on lats rather than side-on, and he at~ted L•hat apparently a redesign of elans would not change the Commission's mind that they could not reconcile ttse development to the goal~ o£ the Planning Commission. Commis~ioner Seymour offered Resulution t3o. PC72-30 and moved for its passage and adoption to recommend to the City Council denial of Petition for Re:lassi- fication No. 71-72-30, with the statement that in the event the City Coui~cil chooses to over-rule the Planning Commission, that that body at least stronqly considec the implications of the precedent that will be set if apgroval is given to side-on lots as Mr. Martin designated in his presentation. On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the fo,llowing vote: AYES; COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbst, Kaywood, Rowland, Seymour. NC`3S: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred. Commisgioner Herbst offered a motion to recommend appruval of R-1 zoning so tY.at thQ applicant would not haye fia,return to the Commission. MOTION CFIRRIED. (Commissioner Rowland o~stained) Commissioner Seymour offered Resolution No. PC72-31 an3 moved for its passage an3 adoption to deny petition for Variance No. 2327, stating that the variance with ~he side-on lots would create an extremely dangero; s custom as far as devel~pment of the canyon. On roll cal~ i:he foregoinq resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COPiMTSSIOt3ERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbst, Kaywood, Rowland, Seymour. NOES: CUMMISSIONERS: Nona. ABSENT: COMMZSSIONERS: Allre3. Commissioner Seymour offered a motion to c:eny Tentative Map of Tract r:os. 7617, 7730, 7Z31, 7732, 77,~3, 7i34, 7735, 7736, 7737, 7738, and 7739, eeconded by Commissioner Herbst, and 140TiON CA2RT_ED, based on the agproval of General Plan Amendmen~ No. 122, ~xhibit "C", which recommended low density reaidential dev~lo~ment for the area in questioni and fur.ther based on the proposal for fou: si3~-ot~ lots alona ~anta Ana Canyoa road where rear-on lots are required. In dis~ns,~on, the Com:nissi~~n noted i 3t the R-2-5000 zoning should be reviewed to intergxet its e.ppzupriz~teness beaanse oi Lhe manner in whicn it had been used over the past yearss that the Ccm~;ission refresh their attitude and reason~ for enact~eni:~%f the zonet that the ?evelopment ~tandards should be reviewed; and that thece is a need and jusrific.3tion for this size lot in the community. Staff was instructed "v set up a Wor;c sessior:, to look at other projects in other cit3.es where su:.: ~. ~i°7uPmer:ts ha~_ takan p'.ace, and go over the develop- ment standards and R-2••5400 Zone. ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ' MINUTSS, CITY PLANNING COMMZ~SZON, February 7.:1972 72-64 REPORTS AND~; - ITEM`.NO. 1 . ` RECOM.lENDATIONS STATE COLLEGE BOULE~'ARD STORM DReIIN\;L~XTENSION. ~-ssistant Development-;Services Director`Ranald Thompson ad~cised the Commission ~` a communication had lieen received from the Oranqe County'FZ~od Contro': District ^ reqnesting a determination by the Anaheim ?lanning Cemmiasinn as to..'Ehe con-< formity,o~ the plans for the proposed,State Colls.ge atorm drain extension`with .`~ the adopted General Pl,an of the City o£ Anaheim: Mr:::Thompson atated that the Engineerinq Division and Davelopment Servicea Departmenjt staff have reviewed`; the a@oPted General Rlan and have found the proposed sti:arm drain extension to` be in c~nformity with;,the City's propoaed`storm drain faciY~~ies. : - 3 Commisa~oner Gauer offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Seymour,_,that the Orange County r'loo6 Control'District,be advised triat tiie,proposed'storm d_ai.n extansion "in. State College Boulevard (E.12P01).: from VR'rmont.Avenue to ' SilLth Street is in ,;::onformity with the adopted Gene.ial Plan of the' City, of : Anaheim. 'MOTION CAR~IED. ADJOURNMENT - The~re being n`o further businesa to di.scuss, Commissioner'; _. - = Gauer offered a,moti~n toradj"ourn the'meetinq, seconded by Commissioner~Seymour and.:MOTION CARRIED. - ;`. _ , : The meeting adiourned at 6e30 P..M. _ - - i,.'-t .: Respectfully submitted, ~ - ~~.t.C~ ~ ~ ~;~ ~ Lee'.9ur9ess, Sec: tary pro.tea: Anaheim Ci,tiy Planninq.Commission; LB:.hm ; r. -.;c' ~~ . . ~ ~ ,~. . ~ . . . ~~_~. ~ - .,~. .. ~ . . `~' ~ ,, . ~ :~~ a , _>~ ~ - :;, ;, . _ ;: .._ . - - - - - - __. - - . _ _ .. _ _~_ ._ _ - ~ _ _ ___ . _ _:_ ., _ _ _ . _ _~ _ i~-- . i.: . _ , " . . . . ~ .. ' .. 0 R C 0 MICROFILM~NG SERVICE,INC. 1010 LacY A;e. 7'o-3:za Anahc~m, rel~forma