Minutes-PC 1973/02/050 R C 0 MIrFcOf~~MING SfRVICE, IML'.
. ,, ~ .+..
~ ~' ~
l:lly flnl.l
Ar~ahoim, Cali l"orni~
Fe~Uxuary 5, 1973
i1 RF,GULAR M~ETItJG 0~ THI:_ ANAkIFIM CI'CY PLAi+1NING COMMI:~SZON
REGULAR - A r~aguJ.nr. moe~r.inq uf t.1ie Anaheim .ity [~lanning Comn~i.~A±on wae
MELTING cal.lod to ordor by Chairmar- Sr*ymr~ur at 2s00 p.m., ~ quoXUm
be'.~i~~ presont.
PP.E:SF.N'~ - C1iAIRMAN: Soymoui.
- COMMtSSI(3NC1tS: Al1rAC.i, Gaucz, H~srbeL, Ky~~wo~
ABSENT - CON:MISSIOt1ERS: I'arnno, Rowlan 1.
I'RF:SENT ° A~n~stant: Developmflnt SE` V~.C33 Director: Rc,n ThompHOn
De. ~ut~~ City Attc:rneyr Fr~nk Lowry
Otl'ice Enqineors JAy Tit_us
Plar~ninq suparvieor.: Don Mcf~aniel
?.,oni.ng ~u~~rvinors Charlofl Rob~r~:9
Com~iilssion SPCL~:t:nry: Ann Kre~a
PI.CGG~ AJF - Commissionor Kt~ywuod led {.t: thc~ t'ledce of i~llegiar.ce L•o ~.ne
ALLECIANCE Flag.
APPROVAL C)P' - Commisaionez Kaywood of fer.ed a~ tiun to approve the ni-.utes
THE M7CNU'~ES of ::he mdQtinq of Januar.y 8, 1° , se condcacl hy ('ommis ~ioner.
Allzed an~ MOTIOh CARkIF.D, sub~ ~t to th~ following ~~.~z'r~c~.ion~s:
Py, 73-i4, par.a. 5, li.nes 5& 6, inse rt: b~~~•ause it "enhanc~s
~
their huildinq as well as_
y ~~elete:
the. ~~ntire area. c
"was th~ only tree or its kir~ .in the city.
pg. 73-15, para. E~, .'ine 1, i~i~~ert: reviewed the "exce~ ~-~~
existing signs" t d< ] c~te : "bill.boazds"
"
)
pg. 73-2Ei, last line: yr~nt.~d "p~rmi:~siun" (not "permitt~.d
VAR:'ANCT•: N0. 2~~38 - CJNTINUEU PUBLIC HEARING. RZCAItDO DURAtJ, 301 Nor.th Blue-
^ rock, Anai~eim, Ca. 92006, Owner; request.ia? WAIVEP. O~' (A)
MItIIMCM FLOOR AR~A, (B` MINTMUM SIDF SE'~BACK, (C) MINIMUM
NUMBER OF F'ARKING SPACES, A~iD (D} MINZMUM UISTANCI: DF.'PWEEt~ BUI:I.DIN~S 'PO CON-
STRU~T A 3-UNIT PIPARTMENT AG'ILDING IN CONJUNCTIQN WT".'f( AN ~XI~;TZNG SINCLE^
FAMII~Y DW~LLING on property described as: A rectangularly-s1:3ped parcel of
land having a frontage of approximately 47 feet on the s~~uth :~de of Sycamore
Stre~*, hav:.nq a maximum depL-h uf a~proximatply 171 fee~, and ueinq loca~ed
a~~rc. .imately 74 ~eet west ~~f =he ce~tgrl.ine of sabin:~ StrpFt. Pruperty
presetitly classifted R-•3, MLLT-PLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, 7.ONE.
Subject peti.tien was continued from the meeting of ~eptQmbez 18, I972, :Eor
submission of rpvi4e<1 plans; from the meeting cf October la, 1972, for thF
submxasioi of an Envi.ronmental Impgct ReportF and i_om the meet.ings of Novem-
ber 27, t972 and .7anuazy 8, 1973 £ar revioed p:.ans.
Cltairman `~eymour noted that the petitioner had again request~d a two-wnek
cont•inuance ta com~?lete r.evise3 pians.
Commisgionsr Kaywooc] offered a motion, seconded by Con~. ~ seioner All.r d a~nd
MOTION CAR?tIED, to continue conaideration o~ Variance -~. 2438 to tt•~e meetin?
af February 21, 7073, au zequsated by the petitioner.
RECLASSIFI~ATION - ChRirman Seyruvr noted that
NOe 72-73-2F3 whereupc Zoni„g Supervisor
agsnt foa *he petitioner, M
VARIANL'E N0. 2462 in tha day that he would be
~' tl~erafore, he would sugget~t
later in the meeting.
the pe*_~.tionez wae not p~:esentr
Charlea Roberts noted that tt:e
c. P~-elpa, had advie~d htm earller
pr~sent at the 1~ubl+.c hearing,
tha~ thig item be deferred unti.J.
Chairmen Seymour then stated that su~ject petltiona would be leferred u,~ti.l later ~
in the meeting. (See page 73-°'~~)
~3-54
~
~
MlNUTES, C]:TY L'LANNING COMMISSLC~N~ Pahru~ry ~, 197~ 73-a5
ENVI[27NMksNTAL IMPAC'1' - CONT7N'(1LD PUaLIC 1iEARING, ANA:iFIAi NILLB, INC. ANU T~XACO
REPORT NO. ~4 V:~NTURE5, TNC. , Attont.ion of .7amen~ narinic, 3~U Ane-heir
-~~~~'~~~~ ~ ^ i ~ Hille Itosd, Anahoim, C~. 92r~U6, t~~ap~rty co~aiat.~ ot
VARIAN<`C Np. 2A75 nppzoxitt~ntely 35 ncrea '.<~catec' ~n ch~ aouGh 9idr. ~f
'~' ~' ~~~ ~~~ Cnnyun Rim Rodd, 7lqU f: at eaat oE Nohl Rr~ncli Rc~ad.
TENTA'T'IV[S MAP QI'
TRACT N~~~. t1215 Rr•,paES~PG.~ VAHt?~NrCt WA.VE iA) MT!~iMOM t~RONT aETBArK,
AND 6~1~ (B} MIl~7MUt~i LU'P WIDTiI, (('.) M.LtdIMUM
_~_.____...____._._~_._. 1.,OT AR~:A~ (D) RL~~jCIR~MI:N'1' THAT A
LOT u11AT.~, NOT aIbE ON'.^U 7~' ART[:RIAL
HIGHWRY, AND (E) RF.QUIREh:~.NT '1'IiAT R
LOT SHHLL NOT i'~20NT ON'f0 AN Ak`rLRIAL
H i Gli WAY .
TL'NTATTVE ~rRACT RFQULS7': F.N6LNE~K: Willdar. Engineering, 25 5outh C.I.Rllc'I~fid
Street, Anah~eim, Ca. 9:.fi05; pror ~}in,y to dubdivlde
Tract No. 8215 into 36 R-1 zone~ late nnd 'lldCt No.
8219 lnt~ 40 R-1 zaned lot~.
Subject. ~ c~titian r+nd tractg were cantinuac3 from tY~e Januury 22, 1.973 meeting tc
allow t,1.me for l.lie ~'nvironmentni Impar.t Roport Review Committee to submit ~heir
comm~nts regar3ing ETR No. 84.
No one appenrod in appoettion.
Althuuyh the Report to the Comn:ission wae nat read nt the public hearinq, it 1A
reF~rred to and m,~de o part of the minutes.
Chairmt~n Seymour noted that pez•haps th~ Commission ahould 'tako action on the
EIR.
Commi.seianer Kaywood, in referriny to ttie L1R reyarcling erosion, s'~~ted that
she ~Yuu].d like to see that pre-vrtnted iiistrut:r_ionC were qiven to p.rospectiee
pur~ha~ers oP these homea regar.ding Che ar~sion, and thu~t timery b~ attach~d
to the aQrinklers ior the slupe areas to prevent over-saturation, which could
create further ~rosion.
Fir. Horst ScP-or, re~resenting Hn xhoim Hil].s, ap~eared befor.e the Cotnmisaton
and st.iputateC to corc~pl.yir.g with the rEqueet made !?y Commiysioner Kaywood
rQ~~arding inatructiona and timers ~n the sprink'l~x-s used for watering th•~
sl~pes.
Commissionei Gauer offcxed a moti.on, seconde3 by Cammiasioner All.red and MOTION
CARRIED, to recommend to the City Council that Environmental tmpxct Report No.
84 be adop~ed as the City Council's Environmental Im~acic : a~ement.
Mr. 5chor. furthe= notc d that the tentative traat ~naar~ were a part of Parcel 3
in the Northridge axeU, ~+hich was set aside for R-1 development of 80 units,
or a density of 2.3 u: its per anre, howev~er, tl.c: pr.opooe~ tr.arto had 72 lr~ts,
rasultin,y .in a slight rec~uction in density to 2.2 iinits per acret that thsy
32nerally concL~rred wirh tne recummen3ad conditiona, but discusston an the wails
zoquired along arterial highways wo»ld be cov?r~d by Lhe repr~s~ntative of the
d~veiogerf that a 30-foot eas~ment was a r.equiremer~t of Tr.ac~ ;~~~. II219 (Condi-
ti.on No. 12) which would hQlp reduce vehi.cular traf,fic in Analze -~ Hi11st thak
there were bot:h h.iking and riding trails in the area, which ~rould also grovide
access to t;~eae tr~cts; that they felt thia proposal would be a veiy fine
developrnent sinae the build~>r~ Weatfield Developu-ent Comp~ny, regie~~~nted by
,7ames RngeXa, proposed to build hamea in the $50,04d pri,ce ranget th~.` the
rec7uested waive;:s ~~: °-^-ecessary bacause uf the a.rregvtgr configurat.iu of the
parcel and the yolf courses and that hQ and Mr. Rog~rs wer~ available t~: rnswer.
ques ti.ans .
Mx. James Rq~er.s, reprssent:ng Weetfie~d Development Company, 17802 Sky ~•~-k
Drive, Irvine, appearcd befora ths Commissior. and pTasentod brochures of Tract
No. 673~ which the~~ were presently daveloping, ki ~w~~ as Woodcr:st located
approximately 10~0 yards from subjert property where 66 home? wexe befnq built,
stating that thP proposecl developmEnt wot~ld be quite similar; tYiat the prc;>oaed
davelopment would have houaea r~nqinq in slze from 1600 'to 26a0 squ+~re feet,
with 75$ to 80t af the lote beina_ pr~smium viow lotst that ttir~ price of t}iesa
r~
L
~
MiNUTY;3, CI'I'Y L'LA~JNINC; ::C~MMTSSION, l~r~bruaxy 5. 1~)73
73~-56
ENVIRONMI:NTAL IMPAC'T kEPUS'<T NO. t~4, VARIA~CE N0. 2475, T~:NTATIV}: MAP (~~' 4'RR^'I'
NOS. G21~ AND f1219 _.(Conki.r~u,•,.1? _._._..~.r_._~ - •---- ------•_-•. ..--
hum~9 w~uld rnnge froin the h.tyh 540,000 co over S5Q,000~ and that tho render-
ingH of the humdg worci uvnilablo iP thT CoMmieslon wi~shed to oQO th~m.
Thc~ Commic~ion inquirec~ as to the ~~ L~ o;f homoa propoeed f~~r the amul le~r 60Q0-
oquare £ont lutn nnd p~dH~ wher«ai~~~~ Mr.. Rq~er.~e otAted thoy p.''~~^eR~' i 1G~)0
ar~d an 1.000-bque~.ro f.oot Y~oma on thene lotr~ n.inr,e thay kenc~ed ta pla- em~ller
~izo homea on chuea omr~ll~~~ H1ZP lota dA thia wc,uld b~ logical plannin~~, however,
trer.a were not many lote in lheno tracta of ti~e gmAller eizc~, and accordiny
~o the tract mbpe tho majority of thesH lot~~ w~.ro in ar~ iylanti ~ wh~re thA
,~~,r.eot went araundi that mast of. tho homee ',~d v:ew l.~ts, vvhich ~~uF due to thct
!opcqrHphy o~ tt-e land, howevor, m~st ~f t~~c~ ot•her late wuuld re, ~n exceea ot
720Q et~uazu feeCt and that thc~ae lot.a wera pl~t*ed so tttat ther~ 'would be the
,~axi~num yerd apace. Furt•h~rmur~, the~+e small,er omes had thre~ bedro~me in
E~lan 1, nnr~ in P1ar. 2, threc or ~our, t~~dkou~na, t n'ti~~o tourth bedroom beinq
~ptional ana r.ould bQ ueQd for ei tl~er a dan or. ~- b~~droumr that i~i the brochurA
rho firet two homes werr~ ar~a-sto~:y, an~i th•• aecond two hom 9 wer~ two-storyr
that :hp h<~mee indi~ated .i.n the brochure woro offered L•<>r salc L•liroe weeke~~da
agu ancl were no~ °~en i'~xr~iished mod~l fl, ar-d the buyera had to climb ov~r ditchde
a,nd snpaved roade ta reuc:l~ tho hamea coriekxucted~ ~nd that thay hbd a].ready
dold 15 homes wlth very littJ~r advc~riaing of the p~~>ductt thnt they prld per-
ticular ntte~tion to the e?evations and ptogns~d to have a"woodoy" app~araace
wi.th no s!u~c~ p.lanned for the front.s that "woodey" coYare~ were al.so used~ c+~~d
that the pr~aepec:t.ive purcY ssers l.ikod the floUr pluns.
Commisaior;;r Allred inq~~~red aa to the location of the 15 homes that w~rp soldr
wt-ereu~~~~~ Mr. Rc~jern st ~d they wera located approximutely 500 Feet weAt aY
Anaheim Hills and Noh1 ur.h Roadsj t;~at '~'~e proiect br~for~ L.~IF~ Comrnisaton w~n~
on the hill to tt~e east~ and tlien indicated ~n Che nictp t'~~ exac~ locations ancl
that th~y proposec: ta sell these identical par.Y.agae aa indicated in the brochure
preaented to the Commission.
Commissioner ~llred then inouired how many of the smaller homer~ were purcht-sed
.in their QrAsent :evelopmentp wh~.reupor, Mr. Rogers stated ther.p was no ono p~~n
that aeemed prec~.~minant since they had two to Chree galea Eor each pl~-nJ 'het
they should really merchandise the yazd area of the smaller lots, and the way
this ~ould be done was for ~w~-story homas tu g~t n~ore yard epace, but tho.t
wou~~a mean more bedroom~.
Commiasioner Allred further nrted that at least 10 lots were le~s than 7200
gquare feet, a~id 9nm~ only 6000 square feetr wher~upon Mr. Rc~ers stated that
because tl~ey were locked in with Canyon Rim Road and the sldping of the property
to the golf couree, in order to uY.ilize the pr~perty, tl•~ey proposed a circular
drive so that lots could have viev: 1otE overlookinq th~ go;f course or lonking
wf:~~ toward the ci.ty - this, then, brought ..bout six of these lots.
Comminsioner Allred then stated that the developer co~-~l.d .iave proposed four
loLts instead of =~ix on the p:l~n, whi.ch woulc5 hav~e been betterj whereupon Mr.
Rogers st~tod th~~y had complet~d their. flour plans, ancl th~ houses t.hey rro-
posc~d would fit on th . 60-foot wide lots. Furl•t-ermore, a a'.~:ilar situatior~ as
to i~~t wir'.ths wss in the Woodcrest develonment.
Commiasloner Allred then voiced t~~e upinio~- that anythir.g propcse~7 in the E~1~11
and Canyon Area ahould have no Iese than 7200-aquare foot lots, and he wo~ild
not vote for ar.ything less because thie was an area yhere th~ City ahould re-
quire said 7200 squaze feet niinimum because an attempt should be made to devciop
thle area ag a prestige araa.
Mr. Ro~ers noted thati they had a markot £or what they called ~he 'empty neoters"
who stil'1 Wante~ to live in a detached h~me but did n~~ wunt a larye yard, ai~d
many of theae people came into the 3ale° office asking if any of. thQ lors h.c~
~ma].ler yarda, theYefuxe, they triouqht they r•ould plan a balance of smallP lots
so that thoee pe~ple whn did not want large lots nny more tfl take cRre of could
find a mxrket~ and rhat they found thero was a yr~at demand for this tyF~ of
lot.
C~mmiasioners Herbat and Allred observad that 2G of the f.rr ot~ed 76 1~t3 had
'~t widths o! less thAn '10 feet, which then reduce3 the size 2:0 ~'9A tlian
70 to 1Q0 aquara fodt, ~r~d if he lat width were inc.rea~ , then i;he lot aize
would 'ce met~ whe~reupon Mr. Ro~SerA mtated that ma~ny ef. thP lots were up to
1~,UOG ~uare fpet.
_ _~I
- - ~r~~~ -
~
w ~ ~
MINUTl:S, CITY PI.~ANNIN~, COMMJSSION, Fobruary '~, 197:1 7-3-5~~
GNVIftONMRNTA[, IMI~~C'P REPORT ld~!. 64, 'lARTANCE NO. 2475, ThN7'A7`IVE MAP c)r TRAC'P
N O 5. fl 215 A N p 8 2 7. ~ ((: ~ n t i n u e d) ._... ~_... _,_____.__~.- ---- .__-____--...___
Camm ~e.ionor Hezbst nuted thrnt 6UN of tt~oc,e lota wero in elope.e whir.h wt~rc~ nok
buildebl.a.
Commf.esioner Al~rc+d then commentad that th^ devaloper proposod on1X 1U- EooL-
setbeck~ bA1.w~er- buildinyA, an~i fia should ir~spect lol•e wha~e 20-f.o~t Aapa:e.tao,~e
had br~ n dav~:lopud lo observo L•tic iu~~ra compnti.b~e ohen space F,ffsct; wh~ireuk~~n
t1r. R~~r~ etated h~t ha:~ir,ally thF•~~u Y.iacte had only xinqle lot~ on one eido
oP the atrget exaept for rh~ one circ~rlar drive wherc~ tho 600U-~c~~a~c~ i.oc~t lot~e
w~are pro~oHOd, therofure, he ~ol.t thiu would ~:!.vo tt~e upen apace xealir.y, c~~~n
if tho ~o ~,p were se}•arnted by only 10 f.eet.
Comm:lbr+:Lonar nllred obsex~ thar. the cl~valopar wdntoc~ tnoro yield, ar~d tia, ao a
p].ann~•.r woul.d ~~r.ofe~ more open space~.
Mr• R~ars dtated th~x~= Unly ono lr.~o,~ etreet had ho~.te~e orz i~oth eidgs, and !ie folt
undar these cizcumotnnces that this would not be a tight, crampe~ f.Aeli.nq,
paxticularly ainca they W@LC deAling with a leng, na.rraw pareslr thar the h~mea
would be on a slope facinq ano:~.her s~reeti that thero would be ha~f tho traffic
on s~tYeetu btr,ausN Y_he homea were not spaced on b~th eide~+t and that the vietae
atarted ou,: by avezl~oking the golf couree, dnd tt~ae~e nlopes would be sprin3cler.ed
Commieaione• A?ired noted that he 1lved in the Hill anQ ~anyon Area, und there
wer~ 20-foot spaces b~tween his home an3 hi.s neiqhbore' homee, and if more op~
space woro provldbd, then tr° developer could commeiid a greater pri.ce for
prest.ige lots ~ but with only a 6000-nque+re fooL pad, this 3id not gi.ve the el~
ini of apac.tauaneae or open area.
CcmmisalonQr Kaywood noted tr.at i.-~ viewiny the brochur.o subn~itta~, Model
appeared to be convQrtiu~e to ~ flve-bPr~room homet whoreupon Mr. Rog~rs not.ed
in the Woodcrest developm~~nt lhree of ~hes~ models ha~ been sold, but no ~ane
had taken t}~e option t~ have the fif`h bsd.room.
Commiesioner Nexbst observed thai: one lot had an 80-foot drop which was sapposed
to be the rear ya~d, ho~aever, this wt~s not accessib~c~ apa~. , maki.ng this unly a
600G•-aquas•e foot pscl.
.ummissioner Allrad noted. that the pads prt~Posed by the developer wera le~s tt~mn
tha size permittRd in thA flatland area, and, if ttiis wero the RS-5000 zone, f~t
would mesn a four-bedroom home would require ~lmost 6000 squar.e feet, while a
five-bedroom home would require 6800 squa~re feet, and ~er.haps people wou.ld
purchase thnse homee, but he was s~are if mor.e open apace wQre provided, a:nore
:~elect group would be purchasinq theae i~omea.
Commisaioner Gauer noted that nnly 10 of L-he lotx hed less t~han 7200 square
feet= whereupan Commisaior.er Allred atatec~ t}iat many more had 6p00-aquar~ foot
pads, and if one weze to look at this from a~~e~hnicai staxidpoint, these lots
did not have 70-foot frontaget~, therefore, he did not want to favorably r.onsider
thxt waiver request s1nc8 it wae hLs opinion t:hat 70-fo~t £rontaqas shauld be
provided for thesa lota.
Commiasior.ex' Herbst noted that the majority of tl~e lot~ were unly GG f~:et wi~iF
inatead ot 70 feet, therefore, it would appear the d~ve].op~r wanted ~o nave
more lotR, ~~~iting t;~is was for the view potential, t~~at thie w3s not s~ufficient
justification Eor qranting the walver a~.nca thexA aQ~eared ~o be no l~~a~rdship.
t9r. Ra.~er~ noted ~hat he wuuld wan tr have more vierr lote, and as a result,
this creat:ed the interior lots of bu00 aquare f•aet, but maet of the home3 had
nu otlier home acx~a° tha stzeet becausp they propoeed hc~t~es on one eide of the
street only - Y.hia sho~ild be ~Pay~i~ enough t~ g~ant th~+ waiver of t.'tie distai.ce
bettveen etructurosr Putherurore, there wauld be no ndighbara ncross khe street
or to t;iA rear as ~as prevalent in f~a*_land aroaq.
Chairman Soymour ti~an atate9 that perhape the developer could indicate ema2ler
homes for the s~+aller pada, an~ iE thia wera acca~tak+le, ~exhaps the Commisaian
woulci have a be..ter perspective when they we~nt to tk~fl t~oodcrest oo~n house a.t
the end of the week, c.herefar~, he would c~uggdst a two~week continua:~cq so ~hat
ttiie~ de~~eluper cou~8 b~iny in moxe precis~ plasns of what wae pr~posed for the
smallFr lota.
~ ~ ~
MJ.NU'PFS~ C:I1'Y VLANNTNC ~OMMY~SION~ T'~:bruar~, 5~ ]973
73-58
RNVIRUNDIJ:NTAL IMI~ACT RFPORT NU. '?•4, VAl2IANCL N0. 2475, TEN'1'ATIVIfi MAP OF 7'RACT
NOS , ~215 ANU 0219^ (Continued) __~ ___,_,.__, ~~, __ __~
Mr, RQ,~Rrn thAn AtdINC~ thRt if 1:ha Commie~ion ~a de~aire:l and warite~l no mor~ t.ria~~
three-b~dzo~ ~ hon~ee on the emaller lots, they cauld ~.~en vary ~.~~~ alevet ~.u-:~
r~ufficient:lti
Commienionnr N~zbet riptod t.hnt wt<<•r~ th~re, ~~+ere mars bscir~ome~, t:hie~ w~uld ~ r~n
moro vnhicler~, An' per.hmpx th~re e~hould b~ 1~ryRr lutd if mor~ bsdroomt~ wc~~~:
propoeed i.netea~~ c tho numLer of amal.l lc,.., pro~~~~ea.
Gumm~ma~~nc~r Kaywon~9 inguirAd se to the ty~e of garage~ a~ec«~ ~h+a_ ~ane F-1.nnna~
for thoae I:umed r w'hereuput- Mr. Rusere st.atr~d thet on three of Che plan:• they
prc,pospd rathex larga, tNO-r.aL garage~, whil~ on ch~ ottigr Flt~n they p~~p~~jed
s ~hree-c~sr gernge.
Mr. Rq~ere thr~n commencen on kiie reKuir.emet~t of the 6-faat wall wh9rc lota wore
adjacent to ark~ri+~l hiqhways ~.+nd stated if ~thn Commisalon continued subject
petiCion anc~ tracts, ha r:ould pro~Far L•hat the Commiseic~n permit waiyer. of the
r6quixod eolid maaa~~ry wdll for Lot Nos. 26, 29, and 30 oF Trac'~ No. 8215 nnd
Lat Nus. 11 throuqh l7 of Tract No. E321S, ~er.mitY.inq, in~tead, -~ 3ecor.etive,
o~enwork wal.l so tYi~t tha view cou.ld ~till be vislble, parti~u~.,rly 9ince tt-ese
lotr~ wert cn the crest of the ri.dge, anrl the xrontage uf t~~s3;~e aomas hact
auparb viek~ ~1]. the wa.y to Catalina on a clodr day ~~lce the slopae were lower,
while tha rear of the hamec~ woulci overl.aak the ~,olf c~~urse, r~oting that F~e hac~
taken pi.ctuxee of the viaw tk~at wo»ld be rloc:ked if tk~~ ~~~1~ ~°'~1:. e:='=° =~:;`=±=°'-',
CommiaslonAr Kaywood inquired whether the pet~.tioner was planning any ad~'iti~nal
i.naulaticn ~o conBQrve Eue]; whflreupan Mr. R~erc~ steted that they ware now
providing thia in thn Woodc~... .. hc~moe and would cantinue this inselation for
Lhe propor~ed trncta.
t•~r. Yto,dera further n~ted 't.~13t there wa~ ~~X011tdCJH rnr~d, and the lots dic~ not
actur~lly front or :cide-on Canyon Rim Road, an artari.alJ whereupon 2or.inq Super-
visor Charles Roberts confirmed that there waa a 45-faot road ~eparation bekwce~n
the frorts of these homea and the arterisl.
Mr~ Roberl.s adviue: the Commission that the purgase of. the roc*uired aolid waZl
was ta reduc~ the sound of uehicular traff:ic from the sL•reet, partiaularly where
ti c~ homes were on the same grade 7.eve1 as th~- ~~treet.
Tk-e Commiseion ~.nquired as to the number of homec ~... ~t liacl 6 to 10--foot garsge
setbacksr whereupon Mr~ Roberts stated it would appear ~-:~At four to ffve lots
had '20-footc setbacks.
The Commisaion Secretary inqulred whether th~. Comm9.saion wished to x~escind their
rec~~mmenc)ation of EIR No. 84 and continue it with the tracte and the variance
sincs th.is wo~:ld aave considerable ~1Qr.ical time ir, preparing tlie Council agen~a.
(;ommiasinner Kaywood offered a motion, seconaed by Commiasioner Allred and
MOTION CARRIED, to Y98C~ild .:I'1P_ zecommendation made an EIR No. 84 ao that it
miqht be cantinued to be canaidered in co:ijunction with the variance and tracta.
r_ammiseiangr Allred off.~red a motior,, seconded by Comm:sefaner Kaywood and
MOTIGN CARRIED, to cont:inue ~cnsideration of Envirunmental Impdct Report No.
84, V~+-i.ance No. 2475, and Tentative Map of Tx~act NoA. 821~ and 8219 to the
meetin3 0~ February 21, 19')3, to allow time for tha developer to acesent floor
plans and revisiona to the tra~t m~ps in ac~ordancc. with auqqestior.s made by
the Planninq Commisaiun.
'~ENTATYVE MR. OI' ~ OWNERti UPpER "K" RANCH CORPORATIOAI, P. 0. BOX R, PlacentiaP
TRACT NOS. 808~, Ca. 92fi7~. E;NGINEER: M~11et, Kinq & Hssoaiat~3, Znc.,
8081, AND 8~82 1335 West Valencia Lrive, Fullerton, ^a. 92633i propoainy
~~ ta aubdivide oroperty containing approxi~nately 3~ aarea
located on the snuth sido of the Rivexaide Freeway, a~proxi-
mataly 1500 faet eaet of. Imperi.al Highway into 89 ~~.5-5000 soned lote (Tract N~.
8Q80it 63 RS-5000 zoned iota (Tract No. 8081,t and 54 RS-5000 zoned lo~s (Tract
t~o. 8u02) .
~ ~ ~
MTNUTFS, CITY 1`T~ANNI"1G Ct)Di[4I~SION, CobruAry 5, 1973 ~'-`~`}
~p1:tJ'PATIVE MA~ C~F TRHC.T NOS. ~080~ f1061~ AND tliiHl (~ontinu~d)
Su1~1~ct tractn kera aontinueci fzom t.he .Tenuary 22, '973 mootiny o~llow tiw.
for the dcevalo~>~~r ko rasoL~~~ Tanina }~~nhlr.me.
Chai, .~+~: ~~ymour noteci that the p~+tf tionor wa~ a~7ain requeh i i.ng ar~ ndc91t1onnl
two-w, c+k cUntinuanco in order t~~ rt+s~~lvcs quee+tio~~s of otreet ~ xtenpl.on and
pdr.keita locstian potan*.ia]_7.y etfcati..y subjecl- pronetty.
Co~n-: ~ Sai.oner Kaywood utfF,ro~ ~ mot-lon, aocandod hy C~mmi~si~nar Allr~d end
MOTI(~t~ CARRTE7D, to con~inu«: conaidoration of 'Pentat; vo Mnp of Tract Noca . 0080,
608 ~ ar~d enfl2 to th~:~ ,Letiny of Febru~~ry 2'.. 19:'? to ~llow thc: ~etitioner
time ~.o .reeolvo quc~at. uno af Atroet extena .~n and parkai.te ]~ocation.
RGCI,ASSIF'ICA" i:ON - CONT.iNl7rD PUt3L7.C HLARING. HENRY WE5SFLN, 1717 WeeC I.incoln
[J4. 72-73- 2 Avanue, Ana}ieim, Ca. `328U1, ~wnez•; EiII,L~ PHELPS, 1095 North
~ ~~ ~'- ~ Ma.in Street, Oranye, Ca. 92667r Ay9nt~ prope~rty cle~cri.k+cd
VARIANCE NU. 2462 da: A~~c~anyul.arJy-ehap~a ~acc~l having a i'ror.tage of.
~ a~proxim.~taly 192 ~aet on tha west• side of Velas~+ Street,
havinq a meximum d~pth oL nppr~~.imate:.y 2tib feet and bei.ng
locuted appraxl.makaly 6G0 L•eat south of tho centeriino ~i Orange Aver-uc~.
Proparty pra~~~ntly class' -i~c R-3, MULTIFZEWFAMILY RE~lq'~NTIAL, 20t~E (PARC~LS
1 ANU 2) AND R-r~r AGRICU 'PURAL, 7,nNE (PARCEL 3) .
REt!UEST~D CLASSIFI~'ATION: PARCEL J ONLY - R-3, MULTIPLF-F\MII~Y RF.SID~NTYAL, 20NF..
REQCIBSiED VARIANCE: '~1A~1~FR OP' MAXIMUM BU:LLUING ilE7GIiT WITI:IN 1.5U FF.L°T OF.' RN
R-A Z(?N~ TO ERRGT A 33-UNIT APARTMEi7T COMPLEX ON FpRCEL~
, 2, ANU 3.
Sub;}ect pet ons were contir-ued from th~ ~.~eeting of Decumber 27, 1972, at thE
r.eaueDY. of the petition~r, and from khe January 22., 1973 meetiing for th~
Planning C~mmisaion to visit the pruperty to observe parking prnbl.ems.
E:~ght persons indicated their presencP tn opposition.
2oning ~upervinor Charles Roberts reviewed t•ha locat?.on of subjec.~ prdperty,
uaea eatablished in clobe proxlmity, pr.~vious zoning actic~n on the property,
and the requea' ku permit establ9.shment• of a:3-unit, one and two-atary apart-
ment contplex on both portiona with reclassification of Portion 1 to the R-3
Zona, noting tk-at the item was conkinv.ed from the DQCemio~r ~7, 1972 meeting at
the reque~t of t~,e ,~etitioner in order. to allow the C~~mmiASion to hnve a work
qession ~egarding turning radius for tra~h vehicle~+, and from the ~reA*_ing of
January 22, 1973, to all~w the Pl.inning Cc,mt~ission :~c-o r^ p~taonai~y examine
the parl~ing probla~~ i.n the arQa.
Mr. RobErts notAd *_hat the proposal to construct a 33-unit, or.e and twa-story
apartm~:.~ r,omplex co~,:orise~l of 7.5 two-badro~~m units and 'lr~ one-bed.rcom un.i~s
arranyed in two bu:ilding~ aroLnd ar, oFen centr~~ court.ya~:d containing zccrea-
tional facilitiPs, etc.t that the front pvrt' ~ ~f the buildings were con~grised
o: one-storX units within 150 £eat of the s ~~e~£amily ~ract to Lhe east acrose
Velare Street, with two-story unit:s to be s cked over the firat fl or units
beyond tlte 150 feet and uver carport~ at the w•~st c~~d of the bui.lding: that
tw~-~tory unit~ would b~ loaated wit~i>>. 7.5 fe+~t oE t`~e adjoa ,~ing :~outherly ~'-A
2aned parcel approved for church pur,~ses and 4?-45 fa~at from tho west pro~~~~r.y
line adjacQnt to R-A zoned properties us~oc f~~r ain~3le-family reaidential and a
child nuraerv for the churcht that the maxim~m height of ;:he two-s~tory portion5
` the buildings was 24 fe~.t abo~o ctrade, with 4£eet k~elow grade for one-half
~ h~.ight of the carports located below the livinq uni!:~ss that the ~enaity was
., dwellinq units pez net acr~ on a 42,872-3quare foot parc:el, and thia was
achi.~ve3 bec~:•~se oP the unique deslgn, howev9r, thiR was great~r than i~ormally
g~ant~d for mulGiple-tamily ~eai.dential deve~opment~ thac. v~>hi~u].ax access and
pgrking was pr.ovi.le+d by means of a 25-foot wide drive ad;,3ce~nt t.o the eouth
property lina, whiah wae depressed approximately 4 feat br:low g~d_ t~} provide
en'~r~~ to ~l:c~ sc~mi~e~ubt.ar_anean garking i~cated undQr the l.iv:'.ng ~anite 4~d ~ ex-
tent~ed. jnto a 25-E~ot wi3~ driv9 at the reez of l•ha proper~.y, wit:~ e:~ti-f~ot
diametex turninq mrea pr~vided :~t "e ir.tereection of the r.~,vo dr.ives, although
the peti.t.foner had tndicated }~e cculd pr~vide a 65-foot diar.~e~:er rurn-aroundf
~
\1
~ ~ ~
MINUTk.S, C[TY FI,ANMTNC CbMMiSS.LON, l.~ ~ruazy 5, 1973 ~3~~~~
R~<'I,AS:._.'i~ir_.A'!'ION~N0.~72-73~10 hND VFIRIANCE NO. 24G2_ (Cc~nCinued)
iha• a oi.milar weiv~r had bc~e~n grantsd ta othar. npar~tmRntm iiovolopc~d on the
wc.,~ sido oC. V~l.are Strootr and thet u tutal of 15 parking epaceB wRe ~~r.c~poe~d,
me~ting n+in.lmui~~ pnrking atander.ds, viith 33 curp~rrs ~nd 17 op~~i st~~ ~a et the
zear. oE Che eit.e.
Mr. Rcbazte, in reviewing tha evaluatiun, noted khat thc+ c;er~o•r.a1 P~an iridic+~t.od
I~w-medium dk~neity ros+.dential tand uae for tl~i.a eres, R~~.•ever, ott er prorartiee
in tna immtdinte viai.nity, includ3.ag Partio~ 2 of eubject propert~, Y.ad I;,oen
n~pproved for R-3 zon.ing, therafore, the req~~detdd zot~e chango wo~~ld app~a~ to bo
appropriate~ t~:hat wniv~ar ox the maximum builc'.i.r~g height had ~ra~viou ;.y bpen
permi~ted, not ~nly on Portion 2 of subjecL• pro~arky b+~. ;:he parr.3.1 ad~~ining
the norY.herly property line -~f' Pc+rt~~n 1 a-djAC.ent to K-A zon~~d pco~~E~•ties to
the sc~uth and went, and the { c~r.l:ioner'~ requee~l: ~or ~h~+ a~mn waiv~r while
still maintai.nir~g r ~na-gL•ory holght within 150 feet oP th~ R-1 tr~.~:~ to the
9aet, would appusr connlstent with previoud aE~provals~ and that p~enc. had not
been chang~d t~ provido a lurgoz turn-around araa ta tl~e renr. ~f. the propexty
for muneuvcri.ng r~om for tirash and fire vohi.~lea.
~:r. Willimm ~he3pn, agAnt for thA patitioner, r.ppeared bgfc~° the C~mmiasion
and atatod. he was aomewhat concernad becauau whcin th~ Cit!~ ~:%+-~ibliohed certain
aito development otandardc~ it wr~a ctif~:icult for i~~im to deaiya a p1.3n which met
_hrAe ytandurda and having the C~mmi;aiun expreRa con~ern thnt t•.hena otandaxds
~•~re not adequaret that h~ was nc+t~ sskir~q .or nny WR~VP1 othr_r tt~a~ what. had
been grauted fur the R-3 pr,i-~txea on et.th~r aide of the parc~l prapoaed fur
reclaasifico'.ionJ that staff had i.ndtcat;ed the L•urni.r~q .radius w~.uld b~ clari-
fied, however, his plans tndicated he wae 8 feet ovc:r thF mix~im~~~~ standard of
the City of 59 fEeet, huwevax~, the Sani*aLion Depart.ment i.ndicated t-iis was
insdequate, and thoy waiited a la.rgez tt~rn-around ~rea; that hP ha~i ~tip~ilat~d
to Commisstoner Rowla.nd that he would re].o~aY.a the trash areas fu.~ard= that
there was no lue~her stored ~n the lot, from an investigation m~de by r~i.m, that
staff had reviewecl the r.^•_vi5ed plans and 'ia3 rRjected them, tlier~fore, the
original pl~ns w~~re before ~he Commission tor cc..siderati~ n; and that the park-
~ny proposed was stil.l. w+t` in thc requirQmen'.s ~•t the City of Anaheim, there •
f_ore, he hnd n~thing e1s.. t.~ say regt~rdin; this.
Comtniasicner A1~.red cbserved Y.a^.t an~;;;;~imes the Co..~~issicn had a consci~nce,
and he wan sure that the agent far the petitio~.er alsr nsd one, but just bec:aune
there were certa:in ordi;~ancea on the bocica today ~icl ~iot mean the Cammission
felt they were adequa~e; *.i~at perhapa the C:ommission felt the c3ensity shoulu be
less than wa.s being ,ropose~ since the higher the densi.ty the more cars wo~ald
be projectec3 ont~ ~r,is narrow residentia] tre~'.t t':at the habit of people was
that they did zot want. to walk one ~luct go to a store, and people parked
thei.z cars as c).ose a.s possible to th~~ -~identi ~.l unitsY and that it would
appear with this ,~iy~n derisitc~ the developer was p.roposing to have ~~op~p on ~op
o:`. people, an,d there Was r,nly one anawer to that, and that was a reduction ir.
density
N.r. Phe3ps noted that he wae unable to Yeduce the der.sity since his cl~.P~it had
aaked £or a given density ~or ihe pro~erty, and he had to plr.~^e this ~:lieiit,
howaver, he did not Yeel ~t sltould be the concern of the Planning Comm.tseion
since t:~e ordiriance required cPr.t.ain crite::ia, an~ ~he only ~hing the Planning
c;ommission could do if the Comm~~sion t~~t this a~ea cou7.d not support additional
mul.tiple-family developm~:nt, even though the Gene~a7 Plan inc..catud this~, wao to
deny subject petitions and perm.it him tc: go to the b~dy who Would be abie to
c::termine thls.
Commigsioner Gauer noted that thP c3eveloper could meet all Code r.~quir.ements
and deva?.o~ the R-3 property in accordance ~~ith said Co~:et wh~reuYun Mr.. Phelps
sta.ted that the Yt-A Zane waa onl,y a holdi*:~ zone, and :.':~ General i~lan indic~ttad
the R-r~ properties to the west as being a~propriate £or c~mmercial zoning, how-
ever, they had m~t the rc ;irem~nt~t ct s~~tbacka of the p-'.. Zone ar.d were onll
asking fo• waivor from the R-.A (holding zon~).
c:liairmaa Seymour no~,ed th~t it has his opinion t:ttat thP Commission and the agent
wore qettirig fas sfield wic~ their philosophy, and t~ denf r~u~~ec~ oetiti.one an.A
let the City Council grent 1;: wnuld not be accomp].:ehing anything i.n tzyinq to
r~salve the real problem why '.'~:lrers Streot was ~o filled with parkinq. Th1s was
alsc txue on Webater S*_reat whexQ the par.king 4~rd~x i~umper-ta-oumper - haw could
w~q
~ ~ ~
M1NU2•ES, CZTY Y~~nNNTNG CciMMTSSION, Febcuary 5, 1.5~73 73-61
R~CLASSIFiCAT1uN NO._ "~ _•2~.ANU VAIt'fANCL~ N4. 2452 (Canti7i~er1)
thie ~rob].om bv r.e~eolve~l, and deninl w~>uld nat be ~:eeol~~in~a lt - oz e:noul~l the
City +~ccept t.h~• ~'act that wherover e-parttnenC develo~~ment occ:urr.ua, to expect
bumpar-tQ~bumT~c i~ park~.nq on the etro ~t.
Mr. phal~~s ri~teci that l~e did not hav~ tlie answ~~~ , ena he F~racticscl in 27 .:nm
munities in the County, ~nd C.he parlciny establis~h~:c7 i.n Anahe.im was dnual to or
bett.er. thnn aGher communltaca.
CYaairman Saymour no'..~d that he h+~d dr.ivan t`~r~~ugh tho devel~pmbnt and tound
nlenty o:f pa.xking spe~r,e in he carporte, but all of the aera wez~~ parked or~ the
etroet~ th~t parkl.ng wes not the eam~, 1..~ tho R-: 7,one wtiere devolopmFnt wne ~~nly
four t.o the ecxe, ~rhilo the proposed davelap~rent wa~ 34 unita per IIC~U.
Cummissi.uner ~aywood obeerved tllor she had ~ixiven thro»qh thA a.re:a ct~ 5unday
anu found 21 r.ars on the streat anci 3d caze parked in the carpvrte, in~iicatiag
that poople wore* u~ing th~~.r carForteJ xurth~rmora, upon ubWerving the car~orte
themr~elves, et-o had eeQn be3ms ineide th9 ~drporta, and ~t would bo vexy 131Pfi-
cult to attempt tu g~t her cur in there, and hnre wae not as large ae Chnir~an
Seymour's - t}iese boams alQO indicaCr~d ha~vins~ bc~+n bashed in, which wou].d mean
poopie who atteampted tio p~nrk in r.hoye carp rta were also having the eane ProUlert~
of pArking, th~ref~•re, i': wauld a.ppear the park~.ng wraQ tao tiyht and n~ uno
alcl flttemp~ to get. into ths ~~arking apaaes that wer~.. difY~cult to maneuver
ir.to.
Cb+~irman Seymnur nutod that per2iape moat peopl.e l.iving in the fr.unt, uni.tc~ would
be parking an t.hQ D~~.~ets, and if he were carryi.ng qrocaxies, he wr~uld zar_her
walk 50 feet instean ~f 150 teet - the loca~:ior~ of moet of tha carp~rts.
D]r. Ralph Lewis, 702 South Valare S~reet, Appeare3 beforo the ~ommissi~n in
oppo~si*ion and skated that a~though Mr. Pholpa t-ad indicated xhere wae no lurnber
th~:_e, it was eti.ll located on the pr~uerty, although ac~me of it had bee re-
movedj S.hat ttie traffic p.rablem had been well aovexcd k+y t:~o P1ar,nirg Commfssion~
that he was f~ced with 32 mul~iple-famil,y clwelling unita across zhe stroet from
hia property, and the neighborhood did not neod any more a~ax~tmer,tg~ ~:hat subject
~,r~perty could be deve~c~ped with :ive or aix single-famil.y homes~ and the entir~±
area was overcz~owded with apartnent developrnents, particulurly if one looked on
Webater 5treet where nothinc~ but apartm~+nta were deveinped, and he felt ~hia was
unfair to the Aingle-famil,y reei~9er.ta ~o aantinuou~ly appro~~e apartment develap-
mentt~ .
Comm3waioner Allr.ed inquired of M••. ~,ewis ;:hat if aingl~-fa~ily hom~s wera
develcped, did he feel peaple would gurchase these hc~mest whereu~an Mr, Lewis
stated that he ha8 resided !.n the area lonq bQfore the apartments kexe permi~ted
to qo in, and ~ie was st.ill residing there. Furthermor~, in listenil ~ to the
puLlic heariny on Anaheim Hills whPzein the Commission wrsr~ asking f~~s more open
apace, resid~nts in his fltreet were also desirous of hav~ng moze ~~>>ace with
which to li~~e.
Mrs. Joseph~.ne Morreti, 2500 Keys Lanc~, apPeared before the ~'ommission ~.n oppo-
si*_ion and nated thRt tt the pzevio~xs public hearing Mr. PhAlps had t:~alkc~d about
the sat:ellite dispasai sfatem, however, no eLtah system existed in the Gity of
Anaheim, and L-he Jaycox ~ti:p~'r~liitendei~t had inrormed hEr tho,y hacl the franchise
and did not hflve the sa~ei~.ite e,,y3tem but they did hsvs it in Palm Springs t
tt-at she 'had also called various organ~.zatioas regarding the vacancy factor of
apartments in Ozange County, and the vacan~y was from 9$ to 22a, arld theae
Eiqur.ea were obtaiaed irom tY~a p~st affice since she could not reach the exact
~ource of informationi tlir= the concern regarding lumber being stured on the
propert~y was a ma~ter of pzinciple ninca the proparty owner had kept it there,
and althouqh the rea dents had not compla~ned ak,uut tt, she had asked someone
in khe Development Servi.ces Department about whGther or not *_n~.s was pErmitr.~d
in the zone, however, the 7,on~ny ~nforcamenr O~ficar had not cited the m~n, nnd
when sbe h~d questiondd h~.m, he hnd stated that she shculd wait until the
Planning Commisgion determis~ed tha zonin~r that i*. would appear that the de ~lona
could re~uce tl:e numbe~ oP units on the property aince the s~.ng1Q-family resi-
dents werE human beinga a.lao dacl aubject ta the ~ame pieeaure~t that a n~mber cf
thg ain~le-fami7y reai.dan~s were t.he pr'i~11rta1 o~nera of thFir homes 7 and that it
reould appear they would have to move o.t of the azea i£ ~hiP encroachMent of
multiple-family re~i~en~ia]. uses r~as continued, however, Chey liY.ed ttie area.
~ ~ ~
MTN[-7.'L~S ~ C:TY. T'LAtvN ING COMMIS5ICIN, Fc~h, r.u~ry .`i, 19'13 73-G2
itECLASc;IrICATI~N NO. _77,-77-2f3 AND VARII~N(;F: NO. 2462 (Cur~tinued)
Com~ni.ssionax Gauor.' n~~kcd that ma~t of eub;ject Urooerty wab al.rendp zoned R-~3,
~nc1 th~i~ l1re. Mor.i•oti inquir~d ~ahat pai:t hnd tho zor~i.ng on .1tr whereupon
Co:n+niebionax~ G~uer explsino:i tho AIHfi tt~at had h~en aonei! in ~9G4.
Mi~. Mc,rroti ~tatnd thAt e}io wiiahe~ t.he Cammiaainn would take iRto c~~nr~.ideration
what wan hap[~oning i.n i:he webt Anahel.ni arn~, end Mre. Mar.tnn o£ L•hP Aneha:r~
Aenuti.tul. ntated t:hio Zrt~n wae a Rlum AI'OA, a,ad ir woiyld app~~az tnsi if one
v~eite0 this, one could see that i.t. wa~. kurn~.ng • ,.o a elum aran L~y th~~ numbr~r
~" a,~artmon~e tfi.st were b~i~ig aprro~~~d.
TFIE f•II:ARIl7G WAS CLOS'F.D.
~otinmie~ioner Kayw~od nat~~c' thr*_ ~he would liko to comment c,n Mr• -'hox:~ sta'.:o'
me•~' L-y stuting t:~at. whan Y.ho Cotnmisaion ~ea.l ized ~omathiny wa~ wro~~g with an
rdi.nance, it: wa~ i.,cumbent upon the Planning C~~mmiesion to mak~^ racommondati,~no
f.o the City Council ~Zn3 not go on re~pet~t•ing arrora. Evcry time whan c~+rs werr
par.ke~~ on tha strEet, none ~f the ntreets wexc~ cle~:.ed, nnd the Htr.~eL•s•.~reApor
wu:i prc~hib.ited from cleaniny tlie sLreeta on ~he dr..ys aseigne4~ that Chairman
Se••;nc,uX huc~ eheekec~ the ar~a, botY- ut `~ : n0 a. m. r+nd lU :00 p. m. , and earo w~.re
the•:~ a?'. of the t_.n,e, and tho ca -r~ ware genor.ated by ~:hA R-3 not Lt~e R-l; t.f~<~+t.
r_he double bhame and tn~* t~t+sh ma.r:~s and. the fact that thc~ curportc wer.o not
at~ecl m~.yht mean tt-~t t.r~e unitr. wer~ not r.c.nted ar~d theae ~~arpor' ~ were n~~t used,
but from the appeuranc~ of thc~ ~iumber of v~:.icles on the street, it wo~aid seer+
th:~t i.f th~ requlr.~ment of the width of ~arpart.s was cr~anq~c~ to prov:.de fo.L
batter Accesr~ to th^ carp~rts, thia might r~emo•/e ~~7~ne of khe cars fr.•om t.he t eat,
and ahd, for ono, co~l~l nut gat into thoae carpoxt araas whtre the doi~ble t:, ~ms
warA located, and her .:ar was r:ot larqe ~ ChaC al thoa7h thH apartmFnte or~ Web,ster
5treet were vex~y ni.ce apartments, carr upre a~so parkod hump~r-to-bumper on both
aides oP th3 atxeet, and if one~ want-~d ta ~ee s slum stree~: building u~, this
waa a start. Furthezmor.e, it wou~ci ap~>Far l•h iC most developmenta preaenteG t:o
the Commiasion met the barest m~.nimlim uf th~e ^.od~:~ r~ever above the minimum, and
:t woulu appear that these r,~ir,imurns w^xe ~~~t .~ufficient.
Ueputy City Att~ cney I'rank Low•ry, in resnunse co C.o~misaior. quentianing, note3
that there were cert.ain areas in t:he city wherP no parking was permitted during
eerta.in L•imes of the day, but it was no~ a City law and the City d:1d nc have any
basir reguirer.~ent. such Ke the City of Fuller'ton dicl.
Commiasioner '.:aywa~~d noted tha~ sY~e had been questioned as ta why she ~.nsw the
parking of tl~ese veh~cl.es was nc~t f.rom tho single-fnmily homee t tha.~ he h~..d
visit.ed the area ~~nd noted that; where thPre ~vei:e only single-famil.y 1~mes, there
were only one or ~wo cars parked an the atreet, ard thia was slso trL~~~ on Webster
Street - whP~e '•here wer~~ si.ngle-family homes, there was no apprecia5le amount of.
street parkxr~g, huwever, 14 ~aas bumper-to-bumper iii f.ront of the apartments.
Chairman Saymour noted he was not full~~ cor-vi.nced t}:er~ was insufficier-t parkxngt
th~t he tiad visited the area both at 10:U0 p.m. ~at~~rday n.ight and ac: 7:0~) a.m.
this dat.e, there~ore, he d; d not feel the people wro parked on tt~e street ~aex~e
aZ7. guests at both of these hours. In additior,, he ha3 drivezi through the ~rojecC
intn the ~arking area t~ see it the carports were filte~ b•:t the;y were not, and
what Commissiot.er Kaywoad said was true, that the wid.th of the cazpoxts was auc2i
that it was difficult to pull a car into the a~+ace; that perh~ps th.is was part of
the problem, but it ~~as not th~~ entire ~roble~n; ~h~*. this problem was really the
ter.ant's pa.rking ~•heraver it was clos~st tn hia unit - the ahortea~ distance be-
tween two pol.nts - this, then, would mean ~arki~lc; on tl~e street~ L•hat the Ciry of
RnaAeim orai.nance required parking to be within 2C0 feet of the Lnit, ~nd perhr~~s
it i.~ in these areas which C~mm~.seioner Kayr~ood had spoken of t;it~t would need
more stringent scrutiny by the Commission to detezxnine whether the Code ~as ade-
quato for. ~he parkiny r.eq~.iremsrits - thia wauid be short of poating th~ ~treet
for n~~ parking, whtch he did not believP ghould be done, and he, toa, did not
like the idea nf cara parke3 bumper-to-bumppr t~ince this made a very undesi.rable
ait~iation .
Mr. Luwry notP.c1 that the requi•.•aments of the Ci'~ of Anaheim wexe tlie minimum
requxrFments, and only the min:G~al which must be mot.
~ ~ ~
rtr•~o'PI:S, (•I~P`; ['1.ANNI~IG CC)MM1S :;TQM, r~ , S. 1)73 73-63
RTCX~A~iSIPZCA'I`ION NO. ?2-73-:?E~ ANd VARI:NNC[; NO , 24G2 (Conh~ n~ie~'l)
Co-nmioeio~aer Knywc,od aaer~x•~rzd that moro ar-d mc~ro devulapmente ~hat appnaroc3
boYor~ thv Commie0lon weco the barpst. mini~num, ana Kh~ liaa yat. to fi.nd Anything
above the min•mum, but raquente far ~oaLvars from tl~e minimum u~r.~ mar.a E~revr~lont,
Coreini~aionei Horbat, in referenca tc the r.~diug dinma~tor n~t. ::he rEa_ L'or t.urn~-
arouncl nurp~ne~, noted Mr.. Phc+lpe~ ehoLld b;•~ ~p~riyod af tha ract t:.hat the Pl.Hn-
niny CUmmiguion had boen meetl.ng with tho traet~ people, hnv..ng domondtrationa
with their ~qu~pmcn*: which indicatacl thr,t kh.~ 5~4~foot diamot~r turn-araund waK
totnlly i.nad~r~uatu, evpn Chouyh the ordinanco stated thnC 54 feet. wuq nllowab?.ot
~hat. lt b9hoov0d t.he ~evelopHr to rer.ogni•r.e thie p~:oblam, end ~ur~t bocaue~g tho
ordinanc~ n4:akeP thie wao a Code r~quirement, ~he bu.tldcc would be lony gone,
rxnd thc~ poop].e .l~.vi~y in thaaa uni *.e waiild hmva to ctutfar far ~::his int+doquacy.
P'uzthermo~~o, it took severnl monttid to gat an ardlnance chr~ngod, en~, thoretora,
rt e ~omrnlseion was te~linq tha L~uilder. to work w~th h.he Cammisaian in trying to
~raw planr+ that woulcl rc~ctify th~.e l>i'obl~m, thcti'efore, ha would }1dVf; ko deny
Chia b~ceuse this waie A minimu~ ctpar.tmant d~veloE~mos~t with 34 dw411i.ng units ~er
net acre r~~•opused, and kha mr••'.mum permitted wan 36, whorea9 th¢+ C.'ommie~r~ian in
tre fJA9t had ruzely grnr~ted this deriaity.
Commisei.onor Horb~at aif.c~r~d Ft~~r~oliition N~~. YC73-26 and muv'ed f.ot i~s pr19R99C+ and
adopti.on r_o recommend to tne City Council tt~at Petitior~ for Recla~rii.~icAtion
No. 72-7?-28 ba disa~pro~~ed on the b~eia that 'r.he propoAed r.NClraesification wae
not in co<<Porma~~~e with the land use d~ei.gn~-tion of th~ An~+heim Gena.r~l Pluni I
thak oppasitio:l ro~~etered by thQ ssingle-family homaowners noar thie propoRed
apartment pr.oject and the eomplainte r.eceived frotn e.1.n~~le-family restdent:c+ liv-
inq near aparLmonts 61~eWhere in L•he c:ity, demongtxated the ne9d fur re~ova:luati.onl
~f the R-2 and Ft-3 2one site developmtnt etandarast that althouqh R-3 zoning hai9
been appro~pd in thie qeneral a.rea, it would appc~ar tkiat the araa is overbuild-
ing with multi.ple-family deve~Lopment, and the raquostt~d rec2u~~ification should
not bf~ approved until such time aa the l':ity cmn study the pzoblema inhar~nk in
thia area and other similar areas throughout th~ c;ity and amer_d the R-: and R-3
~orie sit.e davalopment ~tandards, par.ticularly relatiny to the number of parking
spaces, distances between the dwelli~g unit and tho pnrlcir.g a:ea, and decrcasing
tt:e maximum dene;ty p~rmltted per ret acre~ t•hat cont~ideration should be gi.ven to
declar.ing a moru~orium for any more multip' ~-family roaidontfa:i developmente where
aci~iaeent to single-•family uaea until tha aforemQntion~d prob]emH can bc resolvod~
and tt~at the prapasec3 re~classification ~f subject praperty was not necQSSary ar-cl/
or d~strable for the orderly and propar development of t.he c~~mmunity. (See
Reauliition Bcok)
On roll caZl the foregoing resolntion waa ~ADABfI by the follac!ing vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONEP.S: Allred,
NOESt COMMZ~~IONERa: None.
ABSENT: ~OMNiSSSI(?N~'RS: Fazano,
Gauer, HerY~sY., Kaywaocl, 5eym~ur.
P,ow].and.
;;~~mmissioner Kzywood noted tnat since M~. Phelp~ had asked fcr Planning Commis~ion
denial of subject peti.tio-t insteac] of a car,tinuance to res lve ~roblema so that he
could go directl;r to the Council for their approval, it gave one the impre~~ion
that the Council. was a"Qushaver" .
Commir~c~iUner AiiLtd af~_re~ RNeol.ution No. PC73-27 and movod fur its passaq~ and
adoption to dany PeCition for ~~s.riance No. 1d62 on the b~sie that s~he Planni.ng
Commis~ion rscommended disapproval of thR reclsesif.i.cation of a portion of sub-
ject prop~~rty~ and developm~n* p~ans filed in cnnjunctior. w9.th the petitinn could
not be cle~~eloped, thereiore, the variance cauld ~nt b~ !'::zrcisad. (See Resolution
Baok)
On rnll eall tlle foregoing ~esolution was pasa~d by the ~'ollowing vote:
AYES : COMM2SSIONERS : Allred, Gauer, He rbA~, Kaywood, Seymour .
NOCS: (:OMMISSIONERS: None.
AgSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, F.o~~land.
~ ~ ~
MINIITE;,, CI~I~Y PLANNING COMMISSIf.1N, P'ebxu+~ry `'a, ],a7:3 7 3-•64
WORK SF: ~STUN - C;h~n! zman Seymo~ur noted tYinC with all ~f th~ c:once rn ex~r.oaend
`~-~~ ~~~~~ ~ b~ tha ~lna~nirig Cammte~eion, pez~hepn +~ work aesAi.o:~ was in
~,r~isr and inquir.4~l wh~+t tha mont conuesnlent t,i.me wnr~ Fox
thc~no Cnm~rieAi.onAC~ pregc~nt.
A£ter diAC:unnlon, 1.t wan~ drrtermined ChaL• 1^ebx~ary 15, 19'l.i, eti 7,00 p.m. would
be o~tebliaheu for thu ~rork tioaelon.
'Laninq Supar.vinor Char.lc~s H~~b~erkn inc;ui.~ed a~ to tha lnforme-t~un the Pl.nnnj-~g
Comml.neion woul~ noecl for thiA woL•k ~~er~r~i.~ny where~xpon Chei.rar~an Seym~ ~r noted
thr~t the~re would bd verbal diaaurisi~n on tllf5 P:~If?O~ o~ changoe rhaC m: qht be
c;onsidereci, therefor~, unl.oes etaff hnd any specifi.c infur.mation Re t~ poaeiblo
alternativos, che Plani-iny Cc~mmf.er~ion eh~uld tak~, un~ar atudy th~ l.t~mqdiat•~~
areaa oP ki-3 d~vel~pmont wit[i Cho ide~ af pr~poei.ng a m~ratorium of R-3 in
r.A x-Ca,tn ar.~,~s unti 1~n orciinanc~ cauld bn r.eviewad Por paac~ible adopt i~~n by
L•h~ C:.ity Cuunr.il wher~ aress of controll.ed parki.~zg at•ound anurtmdnt cc~mplexQe~
could ba a poaoibiliCy, auch a:+ ~h~3tlttr~ rh.~ er.e:a to romove cara from tho stz•eet
for glver. daXs in oa•der L•a maintain heal.th rrid fsanitation by permitti nc~ the
otraetswQUpei to aloxr~ tha etr~3ots.
VARIANCG N0. 2476 - YUBI,iC }tEARII~G. THI~ FRANIC MULLER REVOCABI.E TRUST, c/o Larl
'~~~~ ~w ~ Mi.l.ler, RCA Sui iding, Suitc~ 700, 6363 Sunnet Doulovtsxd,
t[ollywr~od, Ca. 90Q28, Ownmrt GREAT AME1tTCAN MOBILGHOME SAI~E~S,
INC. , 4250 Pac;i.fic Hi<~ha~~y, ~uit~ 201, 5an Diego, Cr-. 92110, Agont~ rc~quosting
WAIVI:R OF (A) PLRMI'PTED USF:S AND (Ii) MiNIMCiM PJUMBI;R OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACP:~ Tn
ESTAI3I,ISfi AN GUTUOQk I,OT FOFt 'PHE ~ISPI,AY ANb SAI.,ES UF MOBILEHOMES IN CONJUNCTION
WITtT AN k.XIS'rING SFtOPpING CENTER or~ property de3cribed as : A rectaiigularly-
shape3 parcel o£ approx.imately l~) acra~ ot land located at the northwo3t r.nrnar
o~ Lincoln Avenue and Cresconl Way and having ep~~rc:~cimate fzontages ox 800 feet
on ~ ie north s~.c~e of Linc~ln Avenue and 560 feet ue~ the wedt yf.de of. C~.eccent~
Way. F'roperty preaently clK:.~~if.i~cl C-2, GENY~RAL COMMCRCIAL, ZONE.
No one appear.ed in oppooitian.
Alt:hough the Repart to the Commission was nct read at tl~e public hearinq, it ia
referred to and made a part of the minutes.
Mr. Chria Blaisdell, 1250 Sixth Street, San Diego, attorney repLeaent Gr~at
American Motlle Hame S~J.s3, Inc. ,~ppearod Aefore t}ie Cor~mission and stated that
L-.heir pz•o~oaal ~,~as depic;ted on the renderi.ngs ~osted on ttie ~aallj tki~t they had
entered intc~ ne,yoti.ation for lease of 14,000 squar.e feat of surr,lus Fed Nart
parking loe: to conduc± retail mubi.la saies there~ thar the factnry war, located
in Chinot that *_hey t~ad anoY.her disp2.ay lot on Fed Mart pro;~erty in San Diega,
and thr_y contemplated ~~.hcr salea lots in San Diega, Lc~ng Aeach, Ve n ice, and
'Tempe, Arizonas and ~hat he was available to ar~swer questfons.
THE HEAKING WAS CLQSED.
The Commis~icn requestPd an explanation a~ to h~~w the pet~ L-~oz~er p~~cposed to
landscape this fac~.Yitf since the pictures ~f the San Diego infltal3. -ation left
a lut ta be desized, a~id al.thouqh ttie rendtti.or~ lnaked b~autiful~ th~~ en~ reault
d~d not turn aut that way.
Mr. Rick O~~ren, vi~c pr.eside:it of GreaY, American Mobile Home Sr~les, Znc., appeazed
hef~re the Conmission and noted Y.hat the man ~-ho set up ti-ege !'aci~ i~:i_es had
advised hlm that he should rely upon the Planning Commission at~ ~" the r.ype of
lxndscap3ng the Commissiun preferreajand thnt the photoqraph of the SRn Diego loca
tion whi.ch wss ~ust opened did not :.ndicate the to¢ul amount of landec:aping that
wao now on th~ premi.aes.
C~mmi:ssionz.~x' Herb~t observed t.hat it app6ared me; ~hough they had moved the
mobil~~homea i:1to the ~arking lnt without botheriay to take the stripeR out.
N1r. Blaisdell stated thnt they liad certain contingencies, and they ~aere paying
rent anc~ wanted to qet the l~t opened as soon as pc~saible ~ince ths renf. wre
be~.ng paid, and they aant~d an apportunity to conduc~ butrlness nn the preu~ises.
~ ~ ~
'13-fi5
M~ N~J'Pl::;, C'1TY ~'I,ANNING CUMI4ISS1c)N, i'tbrunry `.i, ].97:1
VARI:At7CF. NU. 247G (Gontinuad)
(;ommiea.ioner tlerbwt ~tutpCt that th~+ Ciry of Annc~+im did riot want• thrt: t~ hnpp~n
in Anahplm 31nC~ thr. petiti.on~ar w~ti roqu!e~ting a C••3 u»ea iti ~ C-2 ~~ne•
Mr_ Blai~del..l x~c~pl.lc~d thzet. l•he z~ent wa~+ ~~ot running on Ct~P propor.t:y, h~at thoy
did want t.o be go~~d neiyhbor~a, and !i-Qy woul.d lilce to tiava Che Cum:n.isei.on t:e.ll
kh~.~m whethdr or nok L•his we-w a.n Uc~:c~l>1:xbla p.rc~j~at.
Commisei<~nar C.tiuer obasr.vud thnL ~he l+~naneapiriy p1~1119 '_ndtcated urtif.laial ~:.urf
wi L•h b~~xed tr~c~r~, e.nd Iie saw r~athiric~ wrong w.1.th tl~at typ~ uf. lnndocapinq !or th~r
nropo~al .
Mr. . Hlaiadell atated L•hat the.y di~ not p~~n to havg boxeci tze~s with only one-
gr.;:.on treoe but thoy w~uld be goc~ri-H1: ~d trees, ir.~~l.~~~-«~-n~~~<.'
Conmiasiur~er Al.lr.c~l obecrved that• tho poti.t..iuner shou].d wor.k with ataff durin~
the next t.wo weekn r~~gardin9 lr~nc~ar.api.nq eincc th~y were rt:ore expor.ionc7d in
the f.ype of lrs»~3scapiny the Cc~mmi~s.i.an would like to hcve~ ~~n~l whaf: YA~ w~ts not
oppos9~ to the typc~ oi ~irte at thifc l~~c~tion.
('.ontmissiunc~r li9rb~at ob3r..rveci that tlle petitioner coulcl cont•act: a lzn.dscnpc~
architeck ~R to th~ ty~e o£ la.nd~cap~.ng that ~hould be ~1ar..ed on the property
rathAr than c~xpe~ctiny t:he Commi.Nnion to indicaCo thoir e~p~si.roe~ .
Mz. Owon no~ed that thr; plan as depicte~d on the waJ.~. indicata<l ~vhat they pr.a-
gosed for the a.rea, and thay felt tt-i3 ws~s the mogt bPautiful. typ~~ of moblle-
homA a~~ailabl~ today.
Commissiuner Herl~st noted that the City of Anahe~.m did nat wAnC to nave a
similar situation ar~ cou.ld l.~e f~und on Harbor Avule•~arfl driving ~outh to Santa
AnA, wher.e on9 co:ild go through "mobilehorne country" with lot aPker lot of
mohilehome~ being displayAd.
Mr. Blaiadt:ll noted thut if th~ L'ommiseior~ were £ami.liar with Fer~ ~;art an~ tiad
ar~y c1ea7 i.ngs with t;hem, thelr ope~zuticn~ were alwaye very tasteful'ly done, ttnd
h3e company was in consL•ant cor,~munication with Fed Mart, i:hc~refor.e, they did not
want t.o do anythicig t:.at wauld dostroy this relationship.
Commissioner Herbst not~d that approval cf sub ject Qetition woul~ t•:a*abli.ah a
precedent, allovring a use o~ a shopping center lot, because there were maily
3h~pping centers in Anaheim, and hE cou].d se~ the posstbil:lty of opaning the
~oor for other similar uses on other garking lots, and he did not like t4~a~ id~a
of taking some of the aur.plua parking since Code required 600 npaces, whlle the
er.iating facility had 609 apacbs, hawevar, this proposed far_ility would ~ake 54
c~f these par.king apacos, making this sh~ppftig cPnter in v~olation o£ Codc;
requi.rement~; and that al.thou~;h the agenl for the petitioner stated ~hie pro-
p~sal would tnke suxplus p+~rking, there were only 9 aiiditional spaces in excea~
o P ~~de requi rement .
~hairm~ ~yxnour ~nquixed wh+ethar the mobilehome of.F.ice had restroom faci:l.~tle~si
whereu .4x. Blaisdell et.aC~d thnt i.t was proposed L•o u3p the exisLinq Fe~3 Ma:rt
facil:lt, ~; thAt they wuulci have a staff of five to iaix persons - tt~ree sales
people, a manager, a aorviae man, and hos*ess or two on the weekends, and if
traffic warranted it on the Aite, they wo,xl~ have a ~:leaning person t~ mAi!zr.ain
the mobilehomPSt that ~hey wera $gprosch:xig thi.s in ~3 dii•ferent mar~n~er than be-
fore and were planning i.o have~ factory-direct sorvic~~ pQrsannel who had been
trained a~ "h~ factory; that thcsy px'opoaed to 3e11 oiily ~nd type of mobilehome„
and if a.iyone .~ any emsrqency problem, the service man could take care oi it
immerdibtelyr tha. ~he aerviae mnn was~ hi.red evPn be°c~re or~e sale wae made so
that th~y would not have to pl~y "catch up" ; and that: they were dec~icati.ng them-
eelves to full aer.vica.
Mr. Owor-, ln reeponee to Commission questioniny, stat:~3 that the contracts wnu].d
be signud on the mobilehomo lat~ whereupun Deputy Cit:y Attorney Frank Lowry
adt~ised tlie Commisalon tchmt i£ thia were so, then the~ Building Divisi~n woul3
require elactirical, gas, and c~owor connections.
~ ~ ~'
MINUTE`a~ CI'Py pI~ANNITIt; (,•OMF1I:iSIUN, P'ebruAry S, 1973 73"~~~~
VARxANCF N0. 2~37G (~.onl:inuod)
7.oning Sup~rvi~or <'har.lo~~ Rabert~x ~iotod it was yLaff's unclerstand.lny L•t-a} no
dal.r~e wuu~d be conAUmmat~af7 in the nio*~ilE~home but in the Fc+3 Mnxt buildin.~o end
r.he office in Chc mobilohome wea juat kc~ dhow pE~onlo through Che vari~~u~ modalaa.
M:r. Owon RtAY.B~ t.hie was an d1~f3Y'RAt~V~3, end 1!: rh~ C..Cy requir•e~:i ~.t, t.hny would
hxvQ had apac~ availablc~ in the i~c~d Mart bui.ldlily ior ~ffic~e e~ac;F.
Mr.. Roberts note~d t•.hnt althc~ugh hP wda not p.rebr~nt during di~sc:u~ie~ione~ l,y Cltio
roning utaff and th~ ~uilding D.iviaion, the c.~ncc.rn wao expr~~~s~rcl about usinq
tho mok~ilahomo Por ~heir o~tice, an~l thet the City hrd ne~ver. p~rmltted ~his in
che [?RAt and had re~quirQd per.in+~neiit• faciliti~~.
Mr. Blaj.~dell stateci khxt C.I~c Auildi •,,q Division war~ of the o~~i.~iton it would bo
icceptablc to a11ow the use for aduut ~ yeax, wh:ich would be time ko give Ct~o
c~perat.ion a r,h~nca- nnd that. thay wt~nted eam~ flaxibility tc~ ]e.avA thn offico
tFiore, howevar, iL• wa~i.ld t~e hooked up to electrici~y, and tbey had included tlia
~awor conn~action in rhe budget, t:t-erafore, if tha Commit~sinn r.rqu~.red 4hat, it
c~uld be accotnplished.
Mr. Roberts, in re9~onse to Commiseion queatiar~ing, etated that the requeet wns
nct parmi.tted in thc C-2 Zon~, thezeforo, the variance wr~e neca3nary, and that
a time limit cou.ld be eatabliahAd under a varlance as wae dc~ne in a conditional.
u~e permit.
Cot~mias.i.onr:r A11red off.~:r9d a motion, a~r_onded by Commis:~ianer K3ywood and
~4Q7IOtd CARRI~Q, that tt~e P.Lanning Commi3oion, in cc~nnectlon with an eaFmp*1o7n
declaration etatus rrquest, finds and detexminea that the propasal would lidvF
r~o aignificant onviranmental impact, And, therefore, zec;omm~ndg to the City
Cou~ci.l th~t no Envi:or.m~ntal Impact Stal-oment is nECQSSary.
Comr.issianer Allre~ ~ffered Re3o].uti.on No. PC73-28 and mored for i.ts passage
and adopt:ion to q Petition for Vz~x'iance N~. '1476 ora the ba~is that the usP
and the waiver o~ :.nimum required parking spaces appenrad t~ not have an adver~e
effe•:;t upon the or.tsting shoppiny center ~r surrounding uses, i~.oweve.•, a time
licai ~ of one year shuuld be establist-e~3 ror. the appro~al of tt:is variance to
determi.ne w':ether ay~y adverae Offecto would be c~xpertencad, and at ~he end of
the ~~ne-year period and upon written requeot by the applicznt, the variance
wou1~1 be revie~ved f~r consideration of an additi.onal period of time and a cleter-
m.ination would be made as to whethQr permAnen~ of.fice facilities -OC`
v1dFd,~o~~ ~' +-_~_ ~~~L11, -. _~ and subject
to conditions, amending Conditian tio. 'l to sequir.e tk~at landacaF>ing with 3 mini-
muir, of 15-gailon i.reeb be pzotiided in accor.dancc w:l~h land~caping plana p.resontedi
that the var.iance i.s gra.ntn_ci for a pario~ a: c~ne year, and at the end of that
pe•r~od and upon written requESt by the petttioner, th~ vaziance may be reviewed
for c~~ns~.deraticn of an additional poriod of time t.~ the une is not hav:ing
aclvPr.,~e efYects upon the area, and if parkiag pzobleme are not created by the
rcduc+:.ion in the r.equired park.tng spaces. A determ:ina'.:ion should also be made
at that time ~~ to whether ~r not parnrnent of~ice facilities should be providod
~~,~ . , _~g,~~• ¢_,,,~„.~-~_-+.~_ j th a t *_h e o f f i c e
trrx'~ lE~r shall be car,n~cted to appzopriate utilities ana aha~.l coinply with a11
~thez applicable regulAtioi~~ of the City of Anah~im and the state of Californiat
and th.at if the ::9~ '*ranted und~r thia variance ie for n a$on ~,s~,,,corit~ ed,
the s~ te shall be resto:ed to its original condition~°`~~See esolut-ion~~`ook)
On r.oll call the foregoi.ng resol~~tia~~ wae passed by the following vote:
AYES: CUMMISSIONERSs Allr~d, Gauer, Herb3t, Kaywood.
N~ES: COMMISSION~RSs Seymaur..
AHSE23T: GOMMISSIONERS~ Farano, RnwldncY.
RECESS - Chairman SoymAUr declared a ten-a+inute roceas at 3:55 p.m.
TtECONVENE - Chai.rma~n Seymour recanvenad the meer.ing at 4:05 p.m. ,
Commit~sioners Furano end Rowland being abaent.
~
~
~
~
ltINU`xES, C1'Pa' YLANNIN~; GOMMISSIC)M, Fnbr.unxy ti, 1973 ~~"~'~
CONDLTTONAL U;'aL~ - PUll1.TC F+FARING. DUNN PROI~E:P7'2F:S CORPUKATxON, 'J.OU9 I~d~t
FERNixT NO. ].371 Edinyer Avenue, Santx Rnr~, Ca. 92702, Qwner7 WILLIAM D.
~`"-~"~ ''^ ~URK'~;, c:/c~ Ashwill-~urkc~ r~ C.ompnny, E11U0 Ga~~den G~ove
Ht~ul~v~rd, Gerd~n (~rove, Cv.. 9~6A4, AyeriCi requaatinq
pArmiuriac. t.o LS~PADLISI~I A REl-L FS'1'ATE OFN'!C~ SLRVIN~ b'RIMARILY CqlAMERCI: 1lNri
IiJUUSmRY or, l~roperty clea~cri.b~d es t A rea~nngularty-ahnped parc9l o:F J.zrnd
cuc~a+iat+n~~ nt up~rox~mat~3ly .H aczoe hnvirig a f:rontago ot appr.oximately 165
fueL• on ::h~a ~,re+nt e~do oP Str~te Coll.bg~e noulavar•d~ hav.i.ng a mnxlmum ~9opth o!
appr.oximat.Qly 7.Q~J Paei:, a~ic~ beinq ].ocated e~pproxlmnt.ely 310 kcLe,t auuth ot the
r,Nnt~rl.in++ of I:aCella Avenuta. }'ru}~exty pre~~nt]y claasi.Pied M-1, L7.GHT
INBUSTRIaI., ZONH'.
No une appea.red in oppo~tL•ion.
Al.t•houyh tho Roporr, to t-.ho (:omminr.+ir~n wa:.~ not raad at th~ pub'lic tauariny, it
fe referrod t~~ ~anc~ mac]ch a part. of tho mtnu~es.
Mr. Will.ium ~3urke, c~yent for t:he petiti~nor, indioa.ted h~s presonco to answor
~u~e ti.ona .
TNE HGAkING WAS CL~Q5.P..D.
Chairmun Seym~ur note3 ther~s ag~eared to be somu conccarn aUouL• k.h~ pot•,..~t.ial
oxpn,nr~ion of r~orporatcs }zeadq~aart.or~ to tha deyree this uual@ cre~to a ahart.ay~a
in parking, th~rePore, if th~ ngent for. the pQtitioner wou1~ stipulate th~+t• af
it was proposed to ~u~rsnd tlte aorpor,ate haad~uartera, thc~ aqont For ttie peti.-
tl.oner. w~nld ~ubmit ~ r~qucet to L•he Planninq C<~mmission for appr,~val. af the
ex~ansi.on; w~•~~roupon Mr. eurka s~ipulate~l that this would be donr:.
Cummissiuner Kaywooci offerod U m~ti.on, aaconded by Commissio~~~r Herbst an~.
MOTION CARRIED, that th~ Plt~nreir~g Cornmission, in connection wit.h an enempt.ian
declaration statu~ requerst, finds and detormines that. the propoeal would lzave
no significaat anvironmental i.mpact, anii, therofor.e, recommenc~~ to tha Cita~
Council thur no ~nviranme~ztal Impact Srai:enent ia neceseary.
C~mmissionor herbst ~ff.ered Resolutlor. No. PC73-~?.9 and moved for a.cs pa`~:~A9e
and adopti.on t~~ grant Fetition for Co~nditional Use ~ermit No. 1371, sub jecr.
~o conditiong and tt:e stipulat.ion trat i.n the even'c the coi-porate heaic~v,artei~s
were expanded, that the agesiL• foz the petitioner would aubmit the pr.~apReced
expansion r~qLi~Ft t~ the Plt+nninq Cammi.esion fox approval. tSeo ReBOl.u•tio~i
Book)
On ro1]. cal~. the ~foregainy resolution waa pasaed by t!~e followinc~ vote:
AYT'S: COMMISSIONERS: Rllred,
*tOES: COMI~ISSTONERS: NonP.
ABSLNT: ~OMNfx9STONERS: Fxrano,
Gau~r, Iiorbst, 1Kaywood, Seymouz•.
Row la,id .
CONUITIOtrAL USE - PUBLIC H~ARIIVG. JOAN T. ANll KF,N G. UOI, 313 Kamona Court,
PEZiMIT NO. 137? Anaheim. Ca. 92804, Ownex~ M. N7SHIGUCti7, c/u Chlck~meri
"" ! International, Inr.., 17671 Ixvine Boulevuzd. No. 201,
Tuetin, Ca, 9?.680, pgentl request~.ng ~ermi~eion to ESTABLTSH
p PULLY Ex1CLOSED DRTVE~IN/ARIVE;-THR~UGH RES~`AURA~iT on pzap~rty descr.lbe~ as :
~n irregula.rly~ahaped parcc~l af iand consiating n~ appr.~ximately 1.2 a~~zey,
hav~ng a frontiPge af approximately 149 f~et on the aouth s~de of Llnculn Avenue,
raving a maximum depth ~f appzoximat.ely 275 f~+et, and beinq locat~d a~~~roxima~.ely
340 f.eet eaet of the centerlin~ ~f Be~ch Boulevara. Property preeent.?.y classi~
fied (;-1, GEI3ERAL COMMER~.IAL, 20NE.
No one appeared in oppoaition.
AlLhougti the RFp~1t tc, the Commisai-.n was not .read at the public hoaring, it
ia+ refeired to ai~a made e~ part of ~he minutea.
Mr. Uan Ev$na, 3333 Nosth IIroadway, Sentt~ 1-na, a~~peared befure the Cammieeio.~
xepreaentinq the agent foX th~ petitio:iez, statinq that a representati~~e of
Chick-~'~xi Tnt~rnational and tho arohitece were ~resent tf ~he Comm~esion
wiehc+d tr.o ask quextione.
i~ ~ ~
M7NU1't`a, C'CTY PT~ANNING Cot~tMIS5~ON, !'eb)'udr,y ~~ 1~J73 '73•-~'~
CUNDI'rIONAI~_US~_AERMI7~_NU. ].372 (Cottt.inuud)
Commier~ianc~r Kaywa~d i.nquired what:he.r [hern were dny ~sxls~t:iny rciAtdurants of
th.i~ type> >ohez.eupon Mr. Fv~ne Ftatad that thiu r.oataui~anf. w~A pro~oaed to
ac*.rve~ .Je~pan~+ae Poad witli Cer.iyaf:i eeuce+ chicl;c,n~ t.h~t r.hi.~ wes the only chatn
o°. r.cs~taurri~ty expnndiw.c~ into Oranya Co~,Rtyr that th~,y wa,r~ preneni:ly zemodel-
ing the~ ~exi~~ting rastAU`:~nt ~n C~~r~Ca Mu~n, hav.ing clos~ed en ~~crc~w •ln Ordnya.:
~orat.od on 7'~.~stln 14ven+~e far onothor an~er khe~t ariather a.ocetion wua b~l.ny
co~t~mplat_~el i.n Ma..Azthur Squere+ i.n tur,wpor.t k~~~ch~ and chat tl~e o"h~r etatc:
that hnd a aimilar opor~+tion w~:~ N~:+~•r Xox~k, r~nd it wao vE~ry euoce+s~aful.
Chairmen SRymour r~ot~d that thf, 6-f'~et mneonry wall. wa~s in a ak.te of diBrepai.r
and ~n<;ul r411 whether the pehA.ti~ner pr.apo~ed to ropair tho walll whereupon Mx.
Gvnna repliec3 affirmatively.
THE HEARINC WAS CL05l:i~.
Con~ml~s~.on~r Kaywoad offcrE:d ~ tnotion, sacundc~d by Commisaianer Al.l.red and
MoTIAN CARR2I.D, thaL- th~ P1a,~~ning Commismi.c~n, in r.onnnc~tian with nn axc~mption
der.lara~ion EItAt:UB re~quest, x'f.nds ar~d determinQS that the F~rop~+e++1 wnuld have
no s:1.9nifiaant envirnnmen~_a1 imprxct, ancl, ~horefore, zt~commettC!o t~ the City
Council that no Gnvi.roriment;~~l Impact Statement ix necessary.
Commi.asi.~ner Seymour ofi~erod Fesalution Na. PC71-30 and mnved for it.a pas~age
and adaption to grant Poti.tion fc~~ Conditiona.l tlso P»rmit No. 1372, aubject
f.u condit•iona an~I thc c+t:i~~t~lation by tho pet.itio~ner L•hut t:hE exiating wa11
wrould be repa~,ze~1. (Se~e Resolution Bc+ok)
On roll. ca11 ihe ioroqaing renoiution was pa~Re~ by the folZowing vote:
11XFS: COMM:taS.LON~RS: Allred, Gauer, Herbst, KaytaoocY, Seymour.
NOES : t:OMMYSSIONLRE~ ~ None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: P'arurxo, Rowland.
ZJNUZTIONAL USE -~UBLIC HEARING. ROYAL COACH UF ANAHEIM, INC.r 490 Ld
I~bRM7.'P NO. 1373 E'ayette Raaa, klampt~n, New Eiampohire 03842, Owners DAI.E L,
~~~ ~ ~NG12AM, P. U. Bux 229, E1 Mon~e, Ca. 91734, Aqenti request-
l:ng pexmi~sion to ESTAIILISH RECREATIUNAL SALES ~ND SEF~~ICE
WAIVIhG (A) MINTM_UM FRONT SETBA~:~C, (B) MINCMUM L~RONT LANDSCAPII'vG, (C} MAXiMUM
Eil'.IGHT QF A FR.EE°S`I'APTDiNG SIGN, 1~ND (D) MT~XZMUM ?1Et~A C'c A F'FIEE-STANDYNG SIGN
on ~ro~~erty descri~eri as: I1n i.rregularly-shaped parcel. of approximately 3 acree
of land having a frontage oi` app:oximately 700 feet ~n the east side of WesL•
Sta^eot, heving t~ max3mum depth o£ approximately 390 feet: ann being located
a~proximately 3~0 feet ~outt~ oE the co~itarli~ie of South Street. Property
pr~~seni:ly claesif~.ed M-1, 2~IGHT INDUSTRIAL, ZONE.
'Pwo person,s indicated theiz presence in oppositioz~.
Zoning Supervisor CharlRO I~oberts rev:ler-ed the location of y~ibject property,
t~aes e~tabll.shed in cluse proximity, previous zoning action ~n the property,
and the propossl to establ~sh a recreational vehicle sale~, •rental and aervice~
facility owned and operater: U}~ a ma}~r manufacturer - Apen Rc,ads ~hx* in or.dex
tu get thc: facilit.y into oper3f.ion be~ore the ~oming sum~rer :•eason, the proparty
Would b~ ~ev~loped in two phases, Phase T being anly temporary, while the main
e~:owroo:~n and servl~ce building were bei.ng c:onsfiructed as part of Phase ITt that
Phase z wou.iu bQ in the northerly nalf of the proper.ty and would be develo~ed,
1ttr.3scaped, ancl paved in preparaE:i~n ~:~z the sumIIier salea seasonr that the
aa].es ofEice would be located in a tr.ailer, and the permanent sign requested
taould be par.t of ~haae Ij tk-at Phase II would be located :n the southerly '~alf
of t:~e property and wouZd be perma~~n~ly developAd and include the ah~wroom and
uex'vice buil3ing and contain approximntely 17,000 square feets Lhat the sign
p=oposec~ in conjunction with thir~ ~acility would be 70 feet high t-nd have 561
square feet, bei.ng d freevaay-oriented sign locate8 at appraximately the middle
of tha freewey fr.ontages th.at ~aiver o! the maximum siqn hei.qht wae k~eing re-
qusated becauee thE petitianer propoeed a 70-foot hl.gh siyn 220 feet fz~m the
R••1 homes on t}~e eaat aide of the freoway arid 270 feet from the R-1 t:om~:s on
the west side of Wrzst Str.eet; that the Siqn Ordinan~e r~~trictad aigr. heighte
to 25 feet where ~he sign wae within 300 feet of a eingxe-family zoner tY-at in
~ ~ ~
MZNU'f'LS, CI~1.'Y PLANNXI~G !'UM" ~~SION, FPb.ruxry 5, 1973 73~-70
c';l)NDITI~7NAx. USE PFRMI'.C. ~10. 1373 lC~nri.n~~edl
thet for ~~c~curir.y pur~~oene, it: waa p~opoec8 to hav~ t:-,a NAlI~IH of~ice in thA
middlc~ ot tho pr.operty ratt~or than wheri~ ;.he conotructior- of~icn wou7ld be
locatodi that thu tempore-ry odlee oCfice would Uo remaved whan the ma~.n build-
:ings were com~>leteU, whiah wou.ld be ~p'pr.oxi.mdtal,y eix monl•nA, howev~r, in the
ev~nt F>YOk,].eme accurrnd, thmy wuuld ~ref.er that they b+~ gr+~nted n c~r~e-yAar
t~.me 1lrnitation f~r tlti.tA teu-por~ry o~'fi.co uocn~ that the ~r.opuaed uR~ woul.8 bW
nor.e cump,n~ible than an M-.l uc~e and wAU ]ocn+.~.a~d k~etween ttno ~-R 7.on~s M~ti~~ t.hr
indu<<t~c•i.al prc~purt~es J~ocmtsd Co thti nor.tht t.hnt the propUewd develr~son~
uaald bP u~oze cum}~].e~r~ont!-ry to khe arca thnn M-1, enc3 t.ho wa;lvera e~p[~a+~xud ta
be rerisunab.l~ ber.auec~ the property wnrs Adjacunt tc tha tre~wQy and thie~ w~ul.~
help buifr~r. tha fr~eway no'e~o f.rom the ainqle~family home^~ that dodicet:l.un
~nd :i.mpzovom~nt of Wc~et atreet would canstit:u~c~ ra gra.at improvammnt ~o tho
are~n and. woulc9 mava tr~fff.r. khrough tlio nr~a~and that thi3 would bring to Anah,a~m
a ma~jo.r Y.railer. manu~actuber, br.tnying ~ l~rye .Lncr~nue in L•ux snleA becauaN
~h~3 coet~ of ari averaae~ vahi.cle~ wae~ nppru~cimutHly 59,000.
~lr.. r~,c~ram th~.~ suUmitLeici pictu.rer~ re~)ardi~c~ tho landncapiny in thu ~ra~i~:,
i~:~ting t.h~t dir~ctly Rcro~o tho etreet t:ha c~i.nqle-f~ioily n~~c~~n h4d w~ll~r
ar~ur.~ei.n~ We~i- Strae+c, a!id thia represa.nted L•he .r~ar yaxd~ oP. Chc~ bingla-fram:Lly
h~me9~ that ther.~ wao ~io planting batwoen ~hose musnnry w+°.l'c nnd tha c~idawal.~c;
r.na th+at thr~ir. ar+les office woulc9 be vieibie to W~:st Str.est ancl the freeway.
Furt.hermore, thAir company hr~d ver.y uttr3ctive ~RC~I~.~:S.BR ~11. ov4r ~t~e: Unitr.,d
S tE~Y.eB .
Mr. Borwin Love].y, R72 South l-,spon Street, appeared before t.h~n Camminei.or~ 1Ti
oppoei~t9.on, stati.nq he ].ived in a Aingle-fdmily rc~aidence acr.o:~~ the ~atref:t
from th3.s p~:oposed facility; that he hud several queat~c,~i~ tc~ ~ask, aEter having
tal.ked with neighbors s what sound would be gc~nerat~a by tha r~ervl.ce ar~a aTid
whero was the storaqa araa proposed, and would it be pr~ved. ~~1.11CE'. thio w~~s ~~ot
mentioned by Mr. 7ngram in h:e prosent~t-lunr that l:e was Klmost willinc~ t~ soe:
anytliing there than what was pr.~e~dntJ.y exir~tinc„ and dur:ln3 the time S~r~ :: An~
w3~nd~ were bl.owing, his pool t~a:~ til~.ed wiL•h all type~ of del~r~is from ~• jc:c:t
property; th~t hi9 purpose E~z' being presPnt was that he vaanted to k~nr~ !Zetht r
this proposed use woald enhance thP areaj that he was not ~aure L•hia ~~ `SA.l
~,~ould be beneficiaa ~o the C~ty of Anaheim, t-nd he wns ~omewhz~t ~~P~' t' "
~act that this would be a rc~paiz facility - if so, this wou.ld add t •~>> ~~~'
already created by the freewzly with possible ma jor tune•-up uf engi:- •~ .' , 3~
he was opposed to anything ;.hat would decrea.se the value ef the ei '_e"
homes.
Mr. FI. Et. Gaines, 899 South West Srreet, appeared before th~ ~'or •~ ~•
noted that he was not ~.articular.ly in oppoait~.on to the use, hc <<~a
talked with the n~lnagEr of the 8heraton Anaheim r~gar.ding the r - ~:hat
the pe~it-ioner had not mensianed ~~nythi.ng about lanas^aping sl ~ ~~~ r.h
sido, Cheretor~;, hr wa~ inquiring whett~er ther~ wa~ any lands~ ~. .:~t~ied
sincF •-his proposed use cauJ.d affect the v~.ew of the motel lo~ k , ~~n the
f~.cilfty.
Mr~. Nettie Ferr~, 876 South Aspeti :;treet, appeared before rhe i=m~~ s~~•ion in
oppositioia and i.ngu~.red hc~w her pr~p~Xty value wou.'_cl be aff.rc~-~>3 t'ne land-
scaping wer~ ~~a.~ved sin:e the; had double gates op~ning onr.,~ t~ •s~ •~:-eet,
which waulc~ be vlewing ttita prc~nerty if landscaping we.re no~ pr~~ =-'~-d.
The C..mmi~si.on noted that thE cans~.ruction of tha.s developme-~ ~~-~ d buffex
the noise fxom tre 5anta Ana 1Fraeway.
Mr. Sngr~,m, ln rebutta~, noted ~hat the concern of Ft.., Lovely re.arding the
type of deve~.opment, elevati.ona had neen revf.ewnd~ t):c rsnotedlo;. the~~xhiblt the
tion of the bu~lding cl.ose~t ko his property;
Wa$t Stre~t frontage, stating that ~ 24-fo~t Ft:rip w~u.l,i be dedicated tG the
City for stre~zt wi3ening purposes and inatjilation of aurb, qutter, and aide-
walka wae resquired~ that aa office b~aildir.l ~t the point would b~ rea~oved,
and that poin~ would be ful.Zy landacapcd ~~nce the~~ woul~ be unable to uso it
fo~ anything elaer that ~hey planned ta l.~ndsc~pe ::long ~~ast Street but not
down to Ve.rmont Avenue since L•harE would ae a vacant pazcel be~ween their
prop~r*_y line and the motel parcel.
~ ~
~1 ~ ~
MxDIU'['I~:i, ,r.z7Y F~L~A~NNINf.~ C:(~MM~SSION~ FOb:CitAry 5~ .15f7:' 73~-71.
COI~pI'A'7.OIJ;RX,^T]:iC P1?;RMIT_NU._].373 (l:~v.tinuocll
Mr. In~aram, rwferrf.nc; to Mre. Fqrry'e cc'ncHr.n, r~t,at~d that they wuu].d noC be
cuttix~q c~c~wn her a<:o~esn bocnu~ca the strnert wculc9 b.~ wl.dv,nod ~n the oast ~idc+,
dnd thm L~ii.lc~i-~q wr~~ ~~rnpoaaa to b~ lo~.e~.eA 30 2~a~t k,~hi..id ths prrp«rty .lino -
thia would placa the buildin~a nparc-a~.1m.Nf.~IY 3.5n f~set trom the ~'ex•ry homnt that
f.h~e woulil ~~nk~rovo Chc~ prnpsrty ve~.aga oP the enCir.~ Ax'DY~ and xouJ.d be a gaod
u~^l.apm~nt. s~.ncu t:here waK ~~~ly d g.'oup at ald buil~i~igp ~-ncl v~~ecla ar~ri ci;lrt
~~h~ch now had es mor•e decrimenta,l o~.~at.t thar~ the~ pr.op~~ed ~evelopment would
heve.
Cc~mmiyr•~ir.nc~r A.ilred weN Q!_` the api.n3oti ~.tiat: r,he ~ign pr~~ueod wae entir.a~y t.oo
hiyh r-r~u that the p+~t.tianez ~-hot~lA pzovi3e l0 .fp~-t of lxnd~aca-ping a~o~~g the
~raawu•y fruntage.
~;r.. Znqram ~tate~ *_hat i f t:hey caulf! Qbtain that pxoperCy now pxmsontl~ uedd
as an ~.r.c~Fia raad tv th~ ai~ory property fi~om t:he~ Cit,y, then thexo would be
na problc+u- :I.n ~xt~vld~.ng tho landeoapinqj thaY. hi.s cll.ent•a ha~l SL7fA~Ay aekeci
hir,~ to fllb r~ requast wf.th t},e CiLy for eaid pr4~i~rtys ~snd then~ in X~epons~e
to quaiuticani ng by C~mmiac~ior.er KaywooA, sta+.:ed t:,~at it was plmnn~ed tA ~iae the
t.ca~lex for ~fiicp purposeu fox upproaciiratoly eiy months, but thoy dicl noL-
went t•o be ].im.i.~tod to a aiu-mon`h Cime, hc~wevar, h~+ was suze that thay would
nc~t ~YSe t:he. trail.er. lonyex than a year. r tl~At ther~ woul.d be a aubehantie.l
impzovm~nt• of gradin~. anri plantinq~ etc~. uutside ~f the bui1111nq constru~'tj.0I1
itsclf, ~~rid a11 of tt la would bc~ aono in the firet sta~e.
Off.ica Fngi:~eer .7ay Txtus a8vtead the Commiasion that thes old street which thc+
Cit.y ownc~d had befln acRuired by the Divieian o£ Highways when th9 S~nte Hnr,
Fraeuay was c~nsta~i<;c:c~cl and latier was xsli-Zquis:ied t~ th~ C~ty af. Anaheim as
exceas pxoperty, a,~~i ~rhen it roao relir~quishod ta the City, it wae bY f6a~
there.foxe, i.t: cvuld not be 3~ aba-ndonment but woulcl be a matter o£ purchase if
the City det~rminect t~ rel .. ~;ulah lt.
Mr.. JncTr~lm n~ct~:1 that by law ttte City could nut aell thie prnparty to any other
party but the adjoininc~ property owner.
Commissioner. T~ier.bst innuir.ed whak type of landscaping wae proposed since tYti'~
nlan indi.cated only three ~r four treeR and som~ graset whsr~upon Mr. InqrAm
':3ted th~,t he wauld atipulate to landacaping according ta etaff anprovhl.
Commiasioner Herbst then inc~uirAd about the si:orage area and tha wall wher.•e
no landsc~-pina wae proposedJ whereupon Mr. ?c~gram stated ~hat this wouYd also
be uded as a display area.
CommissionQr HerbEt :.hen not~d that. the plane also indicated re~ital trailers
and inquirEd whather or not thia was goinq to b: blpcked aff from qennral viewj
w`~~raupon Mr. ~nqx''•m stated that. the rEntal equipment w~,uld be put. back into
t~ie sPrvice azea.
Commiasioner. A11red inqu red whether :dr. Inqram woc'_3 stipulate to locuting the
rental equipmc~nt in the flervice rsr~a~ whe=~»g~: ::r. I,~9ram so szi~,u?.s~ted.
Cotnmiesioner Kaywood inquirdd whether thero was a posaibility oF uaing the
trailera for overnlcht ~'~eepinqt whereupon Mr. Tnqram stuted this wo~xld not
hxppen.
Mr. Lovely again appeared be~cre the Commiasion and notpd that Mr. Inqran• had
atated that_ West Stre~t wr~uld be widened to 9~ fe~t and inquired whetl•~er thia
Would alac ir.cl~ide that property all the way to ~khe Royal Coach Inni whereupon
Mr. Ingra.m ~tat~~ that he was aure a condition of approval o= thc parcel map
would include dedicatic.n nnd improv~mant of other than .:.e port~on proposed for
the travol trail8r ealee.
Mr. Titus atRted that ae a condition of approval of the parcol map, the City
E~c?ineer would requira dr~d~cAtion an~l imgrovement ot the enti.re parcal.
Mx. Gainea inquir~d whethoz or noti it was intended tp grage dnd clenn up ~h•
entire area aince nnly a poztion o! ~ha property was ~oinq ta be used~ where-
upon Mr. Inqrae~ stated ~hat ur.dor the ourchaee agreerae~nt theq were raquixed to
xemove the buildings an~d claan up the ganaral a~xee, however, t1-ia could also bm
e cnnditior- of appr~vol nf th~ ~.arcel m::~p.
~ ~ ~
MTNU'fisS, CITY PI~~NNTNG COMM1'r~GION, Febru3ry 5, 1973 ~~~'7~
CU~DIrI'I{~NAI, USE PI:RMIT N0. 1373 (~OntinUed)
Ue~~uCy City Att~~cnuy Frank Lc~v~ry noted t.hat t:t~e City uould not lmpo~e condit:ion~
on px'oper.ty ttiat was not und~wr thm juriRdicti~xi ~P the petitioner. sunh ae ma.l.nten-
en~e o! the unuac+d pazcel conld nat b• mAd9 a candition o! approNal. uttAer nub~hct
potiti~n, however~, undsz tho City'A ordinence requirementa under Need e~batomanC,
tilie waodn ~~raul.d be tahan car~ pt.
TH~ HEAR7NG WAS CLnSE`.').
Chair.man S~aymovr exproesed concern theC thm pr~tip~eed ueo woul.d i+~~~c~ h~.~nvy
commer.clal une i.nta a lic~ht a~mmeroidl aroA, and tliie particuler unA ha~1 greatar
imparC because it was a heavy C-:~ ueo aince~ i.~ providod servieing o! vot~ic~leo.
and hd c.~utd not ~oe where thie c~uld provide ~+ gGOd environmeht with recree-
tional vet~icl~ saa.~s adjacent to commarciel-recr.eati.on ueam, and thig type ot
ube should be movod aauth of Y,atell.a Avanu~ whore more compnr.able uses were
gro•aent.l•~ bei.nq iievelopeui that ~n his opir.~on, thie would be no dilPezent thetn
an aut:nmobi~le ayency, a1L•ho~igh i.t wa~ a good projsct f~r Anaheim, it aae in tha
wrong locations that t1-e ~ommerc,iel-ltecreation Area had pr~imari.ly uaes p~rmitted
in Lt-e C-F 'Lone ar.d tho~e few uaes that had been permi tted wozo the miniature
gol~ cou~•:~e ar ~ther liqilt commercia~ us0s mor.e approrriatet ~nd that the
commerclrl-recreeti.~n use~ extc:naed al~. ~he way f.rom ~ubject pzoperty tn youth
of Katc~ile X+venue.
Commi~e~ior~er Gauer notc+d thar, "autamobile ci.ty" had locate!~ on ~outt~ Ar~ahAim
B~ulevards whereupon Chairman Seymoux stated that this wac, all ~oca~ed in the
industrial araa, and that alCtiough aubject: property wad ~oned M-1, he wuul~l bo
tha fi.rst to agrea that it shrulcl bQ comrnerciAl-recr.ention.
Cammisaioner Gauar notAd tt-at the t:ommission tiad already a~provod threA travel
trail.er ~arks just acuth of subj6ct pz•operzy along Weat Sr_xeet between 8a11
Road and Carritos Avenuc+.
Chairman Seymo~r noted that he wo~il.d not be opposed to over~ight travcl trailers
pe~rked ~n thia property, but khe proposed uae wou.ld in~'olve the sa~lea and
servicing uf vehicl~s, and it was his opinion thie would bE a logical continua-
tion oP ths commercial-recreation use adjacont to the Sheraton Anaheim Mo~or
Hotel..
~otnmieeionar Herbst noted that thia was a problem p~rcel and a rather unusual
type o~ use waula h~~~e to be plnced on ~ha propertyj and t~hat the uae proposQ3
would nct require a large bufldi.ng or many par'~.ing stalla.
Mr. Roberta ~ioted that beaauso thie was wfthin the Commercial-Recreation Area
c~n the Anai~eim General Plan, even +tt~ough ~;he zoning was M-1, if conditiona
establlahec: in the Commercial-Recreation Overlay Lone were met, then the C-R
'Lone could lie applied to the pzoperty.
Ch~+trman Seymour wa~ of the opinion that thls ~as a matter of housekeppfng, and
the City shou].c1 have zonc~d this propez~ty C-X a lanq tima aga.
Commissionex• H~.rbst waa oE the opini~n that the pro~o~ed use would be mora
cumpatib].e withiz~ the M-1 ;~on~ than with the C-R Zane, and ii the uee were
apprave~, thsn the M-1 Zone should be retain~d and the site development
ntanda.rcie of said zone should bg met.
Chttirznan Seymour stated he would rather have the property zoned C-R than hove
this t~esvy C-3 use permittec] on the oroperty.
Comas~,seioner Kaywood ~nquired wheth~ : ~r ~i~t the Open Road people wnuld take
en a~ito~robll~ in trade for a campor~ wher.eupon Mr. Ingram otated that iY tihia
vere dond, these vehic'lea would be ~on~racted out i:o a+asod car salas company,
nnd would not bo sold oz stored an thr, praperty.
Commieaio~~ex Kaywood offered a motion, sacanded by Cammis~iouer Gauer a~nd
MOTION CAI~RIED, that the P~..nning Commission, in connection L:iklx an Axamption
d~al.axa4.ion stat~is reqaeat, finae and determines that the praposa2 would have
no eiqnificant environme~atal imgact, and, therefore, rscommends to thd City
Council that no Environmenttel IAIpACt 5tatement ia necessary.
~ ~ v ~
MINUTrS, CITY P~AtJtiING COMMIS5ION, ~ebrunry 5, 1971 ~j'73
CONDYTIONAL US~~FER11I'l' N~. ~I_373 (Conti,YUed)
Cor~tinuoc] diacusoi.an vrr~a hold by tho Commi.~aion zolative 'to relai.ning th~x M• l.
Zan~ if dub;)ect potition wqr~ npG~r.o~~~~1, recomma~nding to i:ho City Council thnt
subjoct. proper2~.y be dolatad fr~m the C-F~ boundariea~ t:hat a wall nhould bo
requixod a].ony the ec>uth pcopc~xt;y line, end the petition~r. atio~ild etipulnte to
Lhat~ that no ueed pnaeenger ~ehicles ehoul.d be gtoced ori the px'c~pertY, and the
petiti~ner shoulcl also e~ti.p~alata t.o thatt un~! upon itd aonr,lueion, Mr. Inqi'ert,
noted thmt .~nah~im's commexcial ~ea~c+ation area brc~uc~ht man,y tou~tats t~ the l:i.ty,
and Ch.ie use would bs advorti.sed tn ewery Opon Itoad vohiale maqe.~•ine, ~eo that
theue Qon~le w~ul~ he Able to corne i» far h.heir re~aira i nrid that y~ai~s ago tho
countxy did not have as many r~cra+stiona) vehi.clAO on the xoad ao they proBen~ly
had~
Mre. F~erxy advioed the Commi.esion L•hat it wae her undc~rs~anding that the north•~
erly boundary o.£ the Commercia].-Recr.e+~tic+n Ax•ea wes Broadwoy arid not t:he narth-
erJ.y boundary c~f nubjoct property.
Commiss~.ionc~r Kaywood i.nquir.p:i whethez or not the rtpair. facil~.tie~ would be
onclqaed; wherc~noan Mr, xnqram st:,teii tliey woulci b~ completel.y c~ncloaed and
noL visible to the atreet.
t;ommiesioner. Kaywood ;hei~ inquired about u~i~iyhtly-looking zecreational vehiclea
thar. wouid be tukan in trude for new vehicles - would these b~ stored in the
rear area where they cou]d be seen fcom b~th Weet Street and Yhe Santa Ana
Freeway~ whHroupon Mr, Ingxarn stdked that L•haee wauld be wholoeal~d out becauae
these wHre the type:~ of vehicles ttiey did not. want to huve uieib].e j and that sinc~
~ c~n~idecY'le amount of mor.ey wes beinq ex~onded~ thoy praferred tn mbintai.n an
attractive appearing facility.
Mr. Ingram then stipulu~cecl to conotructi~n o:N a 6-foot masonry wall along th~
south property line and that no passenger car:: would be store;i on the propertyjand
that he would furttier stipu~atQ tha~ t.he entire area would ba cleaned up as
psrt of thts petition.
CommisHior.er Herbst offered Resolution No. PC73-31 and moved for ita passage
and adop_iun to grant Petiti~n for Canditional Use :'ermit Na. 1373, granting
Waiver la, minimum ~ronfi aetbar.k on the basis that only a smal:l ~ortion of ttis
propoaed st-riicturQ ;~~uld protrude into the required setback~ that Waivers lh,
le, and lci were denied on tha basis that ~.andgcapinq could be providad in
accordAnce with Code requirementsj that siyning of the property could be
accampliehed adequatel}• within the confines of the 5ign Crdinanca; that
the petitioner had not ~emonstrated R har3ship wou].d Exist if theae waivers
were z~ot yrantedr that the ~etitioner stipulated to constr.uccion of a wa11
along the south property lin~j that the entire propezty, both that u~on which
tlne ~ropose3 use was Z,l.anned ard the area to the south, would be r.leaned up
and debris removed; that there w~>>>ld he no storage or s~le of used pasaenger
cars traded in for campers and mator homes on the property; that rhere would
be no overnight camping or ale~ping per~;itted on the propertyJ tr.a~ xental
L•railers would be dlspluyed and storeii in the serv3ce storage area at the acuth
end of the property; }hat landscapinq would be installec3 along the Santa Ana
FreewayJ tha,. .:he trailer to be used for otfice purposes would be used for a
maximum o£ one year; arid that the Planning Commiasion deternined that the
property should r.emair in the M-1 Zone so that a precedent would not be estab-
l~.shed for allowinq this type of use iti the C-R 2one~ and subject t~ conditione,
requizing a 6-foot masonry watl along the south property ltne as stiipulated by
the petitioner; that 15-qallon tree~+ on 20-foot centers be planted along the
south property line adjacent to the raquired 6-foot w~all~ and that nlA~e for l~nnd~
ecapinq along the freeway frontage~ shall be bubmitted to the P1•~nniny Coinmis-
ainn for appraval. (See Resolution Rook)
Prior t4 roll call, Mr. Titue advised the Cammisaion ttiat Condition No. 1
should be amended to require a strip of land 60 feet in width from the centez-
lin~e o.f. the atreet along West Street from the south praperty ~.i~e to e point
~22 fe~t north or the centerllne Uf Hampehire .Avenue and a strip of land 57
feet in w~dth from that point nor~herly for gtreet widening purpoeea eirsce an
araa development plan regarding the a~iqnmAnt oE West Street had benn adopted,
chanqing it from a primary to d majar arterial, would require said 60-foot right-
of-ways whereu~on Commissioner Hert~st ~~onded his moticn to incl.ude the amgnde3
rl.yht-of-way ciedication requirel~ents ae sot forth by l~z. Tit~as.
~ ~ ~
MIiVUTF ~, C"[;Y PLRNNING C~MM7.39ZUN, ~'~ebruaxy 5, 1.973 »`74
CONplC7'IONAL UyE P~.RMI9` NO. 1:373 (Continuod)
~1n roll call thu foregning reA~lution We~ (~~wwor~d by khs Poll~~r+in~~ voto:
AY~Ss COMMxS~IC~NEftS~ Allre~l, Gxuor. Horbrt., Kaywnas.
NQF:3 c C~)MMi:~S.LON~RS t Seymo~r.
A6SE~1Tt ~OMMI3~IONF.4t.Ss Farar~o, Rowlsnd.
Commioc~ianc+x Seymoux ofler~d a motinn, osa~osiQeA by Commi.eeioner Kaywood ancl
;4o4'IOt1 CARI:ICD, tu r.occmmend to the CiCy Council th~t proper_ty con~idered under
~onditi.onal Usc~ Permit No. .1373 ba axcludsQ tx~m ths boundary dePir~itaone of
th~ Commorriel-Recr.eat.ion Ar~A oJ.nce t.he us• propoa~d undar eaid cor~ditionnl.
uyr_ pc~rmit w~auld be mor~ apprapr.int.a i.n the Mwl Zone than Cho Commerr.ial~
itecre~tf~n Zone.
CONDITIONAI, USE - Pi)~LIC NE.4RT!!G. FRA~iK DI1RN5, INC. , c/o James A. Hurns.
FERMIT N~. 1:~74 Preaident, 13~0 South Ar~eheim F~oulever.•d, Annhei:n, C+~. 92t305,
~~~~ Owner~ HAFtRY I. SCHUFlACFIF.R, Real ProporL•y Mr-nag~mentp ~,td. ,
1360 South Anaheim B~ilevard, Anaheim, Ca. 92805, Ac~~n~~
requestiny permisaian ~o havo A NON~-INDUSTRIAL TRAINING CF,IVTER AND R.F,TAII, DIS-
TRIRUTING AND SERV]'CE AU5TNE3S FIRMS PRIMARILY SFRV7NG COMMERCls AND TNAU5THX Iti
CONJUNCTYON WITFi A PROP031:D H[3DITIQN OF A TWO-STORY OFk'ICE AUTLDING TU AN FXIST-
ING COMME~CIAT~ 0}''rTCE CQMPl~EX IN AN M-1 INDUSTRIAL 7.Oti1~:, WP,ZVING (A) PERMITTF:U
USrS AND (B) MINIMVM NUMBER QF REQUIFtED PARKING SAACF.S on pr~p~rty dsscribad so:
An i.rreqularly-~ahcar~4c3 parcel of land hnving e grontag~ o~ approximat~ly 279 teet~
on t:~e Aast side. of Aneheim Boulevard, having e mdxi.mum depth of a~proxim~taly
3.11 EP.ESt~ and being locntod approximately 130 leet north of the centcrline u~'
Pal~i.a Road. Property preeently claaaitled M•-l, LIGNT INDUSTRIAL, 7UNE.
No one appegrecl in opposition.
Hlthoug:~ thu Report to rhe Cammiesion waR not re+~d at ~.he public hearing, it .is
zeferred to and m~de a part of the minute~a.
Mr. Harry Schumacher, ac~snt for the petitioner, rs~peared before tne CommiSSion
and r~ted t:hep proposed to havm an idenCical ex~ar~sion to the rear of the exist-
ing builclirig.
Chairman ~eymour noted that the unly problem ~hat might be of con~ern was the
red~xat.ion of Ccde packing requir~emenl:e~ wherHU~on Mr. Schumact~er noted tnut t.he
origi.nal buj.l~!~.ng in the fronL alonq Anaheim Bot~?evar3 had been buil.r urder the
Nl~l Zone r~:qt~irements and hsd excese~ive parkinq tsaeed on the or.iginal struct.ureJ
that they had added an~ther structure, and ~hen submitted colored picturea of the
parkirig lot which indicated thero was more ~h~+n ampl~ parking availaUle, snd
stated that most of the time the ma~ority of the parking spaces were empty; that
they had only taken the parkinq awry whore the addition wrts to be located; that
they had also added par.king wnich ~~ceASr~tl~- did not exist, and one of the rea~ons
for aCding the building w~ia r.hat taxes on the exieting buildinqs ~aade it economi-
cnlly unfeasible to leave ].and n~t use~i for aven p~srking purposes~ anct that the
increassd space would pzovide a reasonabl~ prafit.
'1HE t:EARTNG W.AS CL05LD.
Co:nmissioner Gauer of£ered ~ motion, asco:tided Uy Commtse;ioner Herbst and MOTION
CAkRIEn, that the Pla~nning Commiasion, ~n connectton with an e~camption declarr~-
tioi: eta*.ua requeat, f~nde ~xr.ci deter.~i.nea t1~at tho grcposal would have no aiyni-
fica,lt environmental imp~ct, and, therafore, recummends r.o the City Council that
no Env~ranmental Impact Statement is necesaary.
Co~miesioner Gauer of£erecl Rc~~nlutic~n No. PC73-32 a-z~c moved for ito passage and
adoptio» to grant Petiti.on for Conditional Cee Parroit No. 137~1, auhject to the
followin? findinga: That the Planninq Commiasio:~ hae cietermirzed that the pro-
pased expP.~-~ lon and the pxaposec~ tyFee ~~ ueee would be con~fs~tent with ~he
commercia!, charactei o~ thia areA ciaapite the fact thet thc property ia in the
M-1 Zone, i~owever, the Gommisai~n nleo hae determined ..hat care should be exer-
cised ~.n ~~u~3ging wt~other ~peaitic uRas quslify ee rPtail distributing firms and/
or service business firms, including busines~e and profeseional afficea, primaxily
serving ~omme~rce encl induetry, with oniy incidantal service to the general publlc,
thereEore, any propos~d use echa~ll be rmviawed by the Develepmet~t Services
~ ~ ~
INZN~I'i'FS, CI'1'Y PLAUNINC COMMIS510N, P'obruar.y ~, ?.f~7:1 »"~~
CUNDI'fIUNAT. USG '~RRM[T NO. 1.374 (~:ont3nu~d)
Departm~sr. t!r~ nxQer thet n;~udgmenC m~y be ma~le~ aA to ~whe+*_he~r na.id uae cjur~l.i £ie~
wi~hln thn P1.~nninq Conm~.~r~~~n's l.nkenk i.n s~provtn~ t:t-ie con~lii:i~nal uae pormiY. -
thir ravieW wi.'ll n1Ra pr.~vifl~ the okNurtunity to detoKmine whnthor eu~Ylciont
~r~ckinq is prc,viQeQ nn ths site to accomm~dat3 nny ~-Qd~tionel par.kina aem~ncl
created by ruch n ue~ or usas~ f.het ~oaiver of r.ho ~erm~t~ed uoe,o is yrantec9 on
t•l~e basiY that thaae typoc of uyoe 1hc~vc~ been oo~au~cAa en the propezty si.nce
a~pr.axirnat~l'~- l~rbl whaen n,~ch u~ee were porn-.itt~~3 uee~ ln tt~o M•-1 ^onc~, o.n2l :i.t.
apponrs tho~r +~0eq havn n~t. cre'tad proUtema for the arex~ r.har. thc~ petitionor
submittoQ phot~~yr+~p-yic ati•iAanco thaC tho uxietinq parkiiig ehc.~uld b9 ~sdequato Par
the~ parYi.nc, n~ed~ of the exietit~q uxee locat•dd in t:he: ~x; atinq st:~-uc~Urea as wel.?.
aN the pro~~osab n~sw AGL'UCtUI'IY and, t:t~erotare, wulver :~P rhe mi.ni~r~um r:equir~d I,srk-
ing epaceu. .ie qr~~ikeQ~ that in ordar to provld~ gu~.delit-ea far staf.' ~etAx•mS.nd-•
tion~, th~a Yl~nninp ('ommi~aaion dee+ies that m~~ic~l and dent;el r~`ficao are spacifi-
ca11y ex~lu~ied, +a~td Che u~es that mry Uo per.mit~~d are non-induntrisl tra~.ning
conter~ •insaranc~ claime o!l.ic~~• anaployment ager~ay, inaurnnr.e a:~ent'R offic~,
corporAto 1-eadquarkera~ o~tieo AquiFmdn~ ealaA ancl aervice, qenere]. r.ontrac~:~r
o~ftaA, indudtz~ial txainir-q aontor, aou-mercial of.ficee, an~1 cai~s~:ltnttt, sub;~e~:t ,
to a wxit•ten roqu~nt by Che petitianax' +~nd roviow and a}~pr.nval by ti~YA t)e~,eic~prr•dr~~, ,
Ser•/icr~~ Dopettmsnt~ and ~ub~ect t~ conditionA ns s~+t forth in the Rep~r.t 1.~ :.nE:
Commiey~on with Ch• kdclltional contfiCxon that eac:h use ~r~poaed Co Y~a eacabl;.~bu9
on suF~jec~ pxoperty Nhir,h is int~ndc~d to qunlify under ,~ecti.~n 18.52.A5G(2r~ ur.ct
2b) , Seo~i.on 18,5~t.0.°,0(h) ehell bA eubmitta~i in writter~ fo:m to tlia ~oval.o~me:-~.
Services Departaaont tar. revi~w an~9 approval. in ~rder that A clc~terminatian mey ba
mads ea to ahbther th~ propused ua~, wouid be apprcpriate for the uit~ and s+h~thez'
Huff.i~l.ant pr.rking is pr~v:ldod on tha prop ~rty t~ accommodate an ad~~i~i~~nal psxk-
ing demand cr~nat:rod by ~uc~~ a ~ae, and in order ~o pr~vid9 gu~.dAltnos Lor std~~
det.erminaZion, thce t'ollawing usoe are pexmitted subjpc.t Y.o t}ia wLitren raqua~t
a~nci zoview ~z~or.adure outlingd abave: non••ind~.ietzial traininc7 center, i.neurane•
claime ot~ice, employment aqmncy, ia~aura~~ce agent'~ off~ce, corporate headquart~rr
of.f.~co equipment salen ancl service, g~ener~l contractor office, industri.al krain~
ing center, comm~ercial offices, ~,nd co~isulta-nts~ th~t if a y,ueRtian ~rises a~ to
~;he judgment mad~ by the Levolo~m~nt Servicea Department conc~rni.izg a particulaz
requeet, L•he matter ~h~sll be s•~bmittad to the Planniny Commission at its ~exC
regu'lar me~ting for +~ dotc,rmination, and the applicant may appeal. ar,y Devdlo~Ztaent
Servic~~ Departmenl: or Planning Commios~'.o~1 clQCision to the Cit.y Cotiinai.lt and that
R.edical and dental o£fices aro specifica:lv excluded from these uAer~ that may bn
germitted an aubject Qrapertyo (See RoaoXukton Aook)
On ro11. ca11 ahe ~oreyoing resolv.tton was passed by the following vote:
A1r.S: COMMISSIONE;RS: Ailred, Gauar, Her.b4t, K~ywood, Seymour.
NQFS: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSEN'T: (;OMMrSStON~RS: Farano, Ror~lanc3.
RECLASSIF~CATION - PUBLIC EiEARIN~. LIA~`RTY I~EASING, INC., P. 0. Box 314, YOSbei
NO. 72-73-32 Liz~da, C~. 92686, Ownerj requesting tha't property dwecribed
-- ae: An izregulazly-ahaped parcel of land cansiatirig o~
approxi.m~tely 1.7 acres havirig a£rontage of approxi.mat~ly
4.14 feet on the noz•th sidA of H.iverdule Avei:ue, having a maximum dopth of approxl-
mataly 280 f~pt, and being located st the nozthweat corner uf tha River~lde ~'ree--
way and Ri~~er3ale Avenue be reclasaii~.ed fxom the R-A, AGRICULTLIRAI,, ZONE to khe
C-1, G~N~:RAL COMM~RCSA~., ?,OTIE.
No one appeared in opposition.
Although the RAport to the Cammiseion was not read at the n~iblic heaxinq, it is
referred to and made a part: c,f the minutee.
Mz'. Oscar WhiY.ebook, 50E2 Lakewo~d, Yorb~s Linda, appeared befor.e the Comm~eeion
Cepree~enting the petitianer and noted that tw~ yeara ag~ they ha~ meent to aubmit
the entire parcel, but the 3tate at thut time was workinc~ on the frAeway, and
they hnd qiven roadway to the State and dedicate9 a 100-~oot wi@e atreet through
their property for the bridqe~, at which ti.me tha Planninq Comminaion an~ City
Council had asked why aub~ect property had nnt been includad. however, he~Ina6
ststed then +~h~st they 1'~ no aontzol over the property b$cause the State ha8 no~
zel~ased it until they ..eze sati8fi.ed with. wY~at they neede~l, haarevmr, noa th•
pr<~perty wae declared ourplun, and ~khe~ only a~ccee~s et~~Y would hdvQ would be
.~
~ ~ ~
MLNU'Pl;a, CT'`i1' ~~1,11NIJLNG ~:OMM75STQN, IrebXU~~ry ti, 1973
RF:CTaASSIFTCATI~JN__N0.~7'l._73-32 (Continuwd)
7:.~-76
tl~ru~xgh tho oxt.atl.i~9 ~~roparty ~~n Tuetin Avflnu~~ airict~~ the overpaea oP tho fxeeway
nnd kha r•IVe~ ~rielo~6d th~ ptopdrty.
rommisai~ner !(c~t~bet ex~ree~ed i:h~ op.tniun Y.hat hh aould ~.ike to set. wome ~evelap-
ment E~1ans Por. tho prop~r.ty hac~ii~e+ of tt~~ l~mi tecl accesa to th~ ~ropyrty,
elthoi~c~l~ hc~ hau no apl~oy.iClon ta th~ C-•1 7,ono but. hb~ected to b;anke~. a~~proval
f.or. C-1.
Mr. trhitc~book, in responsd, oke~h.Ad that thAy wou.ld r~ti;~alnte th~re w:uld bo
-.dgquata -~~,c~ag approved by the Ci.ty, and they wuula expor.t th~+re would be eome
a~cUr~r of, r,Ti+a nur.th aida from Tue~tin Aveni~e, ho~tevez, th~ro would ~ie no ncce4s
ta Rlvc.~r t~le Avc~nuet thnt they did ~not have .tii~y spacific henanta 1~~ mir~3, a~•-
t:houqh they had u Sto~+ ~nd C,u t~larkat intereeted in the~ pla~~~, and they uaually
hAC~ oL•hor tenant.a th~t came alunq wiCh them, lic~wovc~r, lhey would ~rant to see i`
tho r.ro~erty wa~ us~bla bA~'~~r~ ~hc~'l pieFient-ed plans an~3 apecif.icatlonar and t:liat
he unders C~otl thc~ CommieF io•.i ~ s ~~uncvzn .
Commieaionar ti~z•b~t then Atntod that ttie petitioner 9houi.d prost~nt a Fl,~n of
what was pi'oposed f'or `.:he pXC~pe~r.k;,~ since he would not. vote Por +- servi cc etatian
at that .i.nternec~ion, hut a conveniencs mark~t miyht be aceept•abl~~ an.d rhxt
specific plana werc »o~c requir:ed oth~r than n simple p2ot pl~n, whiah c.ould be
preparad wilhin two wec~k~.
Mz. WhiLebuok atAted tttat the only firm that app~arad to be lrit~xestdd at the
rime was L•he Stop and Ga Mazket, and a~ it had previously been statc~d, t~.hcy hac~
othe~Y• types ot busineseos tliat usually came along witl~ them, howevor, he ~uld
not specifically stat~ w,at other. ty~ea ~~f capa would be appr.opriata.
Commissioner HErbst notec: tl~at thH petitior,er wgs fully awarc of the size of the
parc:el a~d the par.king rc:quir.ementu or thQ C-1 Zone a9 well as the accessibility
to !:he property, therezar~, the plat p].1n should ra lect thesQ itFina.
Commissi_oner. Allred obser~~ed thr.t a. quart:er of a*nil.e up Tuatin Avenue Prom this
property there already euistad 'two cor- ~enience ahoppi~g center~~, and to conaicler
a thi.rd one on px~operty where it wa~. ~ot as easi.ly acceaeible a~s the other two,
L•hie could cneRri the opQratian would not be success~ul, and aft~r parssing by Chie
area two or three times z week, it was hia opinion. t:-ut thls was not a r_onvenient
location f.ar a cor.<<enienco market.
Mr. Whitebook noted that th~ Stop ar~ci Go Company also ~ad one at Santa Ana Canyon
ko~d And Tusci,~ Ascr.u~, ~ncl tr-ey had made a sur~•ey of tha area, and it was the
canasnsus of opinion ~'~at a small market Kould be the a~,propri~~tP thing for this
l~catiun, a~ was mentiuned by one of tlie Commissioners that people did n~t go
more than a few ateps out o the way far qroceriesi and that the~ Stop and Go
people felt t}iat s.ince th~ onZy way in and ~ut of tlle area was c>ver the over~ass,
t:hc.y c~ould qEt b~.~inASS from people hoth cuming and going.
Commissioner Al1rFd noted that plans • ould have tn sl:ow ad.equat:a ingress ~nd
eyress Lecau~a o£ ttt~ sl~p~ levzl of the freeway .
Zoning Super~~isor ~~harles Roberts •:~ted that in connectinn with apecific devolap-
menL plans, if thF Commissic~n felt the property wus eui~able f.o:r C-Z but. wanted
r.~ see development plans, thoy could r~q~iire developxnent pl.an9 ..o ba submi ~tie~
prior to readina of an o:dinance, these ~lans to b~ submitted t~o the P].unning
Comm~s~ i~.*.~ and City Counr,il for approval.
*~o~h Gommiasionere Fierbst and All.red nated that t~7ey did not want to grant tYie
'-1 zonir~q unle~s p1anA w~re submitted prior to any further cor.sidoration.
Mr. Roberts noted ~khat his rebeon for u~akinq ±hi:. suggestion wix~ becauae Mr.
Whitebook d3d nat kn~w what types of tenants they coul~ an~.ici4~ate,
t~r. Whitebook then stated thet they could specify as to th9 wicith f the access,
such as 30 feet un the r.artli and for i nqresa and egreas on Rtver.d: ~a Avenue i.f
there was a 100-foot flat az°a hafore cominc ~ the bank of the overpasa where
thc: r~adway was raieed 10 feet to meet the roadway of the br:~igA, and even thouqh
it left a hole, this would be l~vel.ed.
~ ~ ~
MTNU'!'~S, CITY PLAIJNIN~' COMMiS3ION, February 5, 1973 ~~~-''%~
kECLA.uS!!*ICATTUN NU. _72.•,7z-32 (Con'Linuo~9)
ptg;c~e ~ngineer 7ay Titue ,~~a~ta~ th~C he woitld quost•.ion the fout+~blla,ty of tz•ntfic
o~f c~f. Riverda~ ~ ninca he ?iad wa~tched trnFfic c~~mu Crom the treewuy ott thnL• ~~rade
nncl t:he ~::~in~rc+rinq etatf eroulQ hevo to a~udy thie e~n3 e~ek the 'Pxntgic Enginoer
quAet:ionn l~of<~r~ hA ca-~.lci meko any auqqs~tion:~.
Comm:l.seianUr Hoi:bAt ~f.foreA a mutinn, cwconded by Commieaicanor Allred end MOTYUN
CARP]:FO, to c~niin~:a co~i~a~dcre~•ior, oP petit~.nn £or Rer.las~ification Ne. 72••7l-32
lo tt~a meet.inq of Febraery 21, 1973, in ordler tA t-llow the petitioner ~,I.me tc
submi.t davelo~mnr~t pln»e ohowing eccara+, pdrkinq~ and gen~ral layaut of the ~.ypee
of buildin~~e that were pr~poaed.
A~CL7155TFICATION - PUBLiC HEARING. 3H~RWOOD PRQFESSIONAL PARTNGRSIiIP, c/o ,7am~a
NO, '72- 73-33 A. Allen, 2221 Co.lches ter Drive, Annc~~im, Ca. 9?(~04, O~~ner~
~~~ r~ T RxC1jARD W. .^~MOCK~ c`a 'W,~lkez & Lee, Znc., 2U50 Bollf'lowar
b~ulevard, Lonq Beach, Ca. 9087.5, Agent~ requeakir.g thd:
proparty deacri.bod a~: A rectan~3ularlyenl~nped parcal ~.:!` e~pproximately .3 acre~.
uf land lacated at tho ~outheaet corner o£ E1ro~okhurat S~:.re~et and Niobe Ave~nue
ar~d having frantaqes uf a~prox=mately 100 feet on tha east ~ide af Hrookl-uret
Street ond 145 feet on tY~o sarath aide ef Ni~.obe F~venue hH Z'~t:~ •9II~L~.@(1 fram th~
R-1, JNE-FAMILY RLSTD~NTZAL, ZUNE ro the C-1., GEN~RAL COMMF:~tCLAL, ZOH~.
Six pereone indicatad their presence iu o~posi*ion.
zor.ing Supsrvieor Chnxled Roberts reviewod tha c.~tion af' eubjar,t praporty, usee
estubllAhed in clode praximit,y, F~revious zoning a~.:ion on thF pc~cF,er~y ln which
the petit~oner in 7.966 aAkgd for the eame reclanaitication of. the property and
to be usc~d for thn oame purpase, that being ndiiitional parking far the adjacent
medical center~ and in r.evlewing the Avaluztion, noted that khA medic~l center
~~v jucQnt to the aourh dee.~.rad t~ increase tt-c: number of off-a~:reor. parking spacee
availr~bl.a ta thpm aince their Exi~ting parkix~g on-sitc included 5i epucea, ar~fl
this propoAal would add 28 spar_es ucr.orc~ing t~ the plana skbmittedp that Lhe
Code presently requiresl 123 r~paces to ~Nrva the phar•aaay and ~he doctors' affices
in the exiating medical. center; that the Traffic ~ngin~:er had .re•~iewed thia p.ro-
posal a~id hnd stat•e~i t'.iat *he use af two driveways on ;srnokhurst Street f~r a
sit9 of this size w.s i,.,t con~idered t.o be good traffic enginbering practice,
and ~he bost traffic pract•iae would ha.ve the Y.raffic exit from the parking lot to
t~i.obe Aven»e as it would be more desirable and aafar +o have traffir, ze-en*er
Brookhurst ~treet f.roa~ anather attF~t rather than fr.om a driveway, howover, thie
arranqement w~uld encouraqe commezc? il tra£f.ic to use a re3:dential st•redt~ and
that if the Planning Commisaion felt that such traffic shoutd no~ ex~t ~o a
residential street, then the next besL• alternaciy : would be a centrally located,
two-w~y, 30-foot drlveway on Brookhurot S treet~ hawever, Chie design would re-
duce tlte number of par.;fnq spaces.
Mr. Roberta further r_.,ted that ataff Y-ad drawn a2ternative parki.nq prapasals ~or
thie p.roperty in tkie event the Conia~issian determtned thE: requect wa-~ appropriate.
M~•. Richard Smock, ager~t for the petitioner, .~ppeared before the Commission and
not~d th~t he repxeaent~ed the partnership of aeventeen physician~ hzving offices
in this medical facili'-.y, and the only proposal wa~ to add additional parking
spaceL sf.nce the 3xisting 52 spaces were g.rosaly inadequate, and thraug;iout~ the
day traffi~ backe~ up in the F~rkina lot s that the partnera}~ig had acquired thege
propertiefl aevoxal y4ars ago and would like tu use them because it waa more con~
.l,,r' ent for their patients; «;.d ~hat they wnuld aqree to any requirements the
C~mmission might w,.3h to establiah.
Mr. Lester ~lanz, 2172 Niobe Place, appearEd before tl~e Commission in oppo3ition
and st3ted that t:~ia r~queat was aimilar to a five to ten-yuar-old mavie ra-run
becauea in 196o this same r.equeat was h~tore the Commiasiont that when khe medical
buildir-g was first construated, it wae stt~ted there wouZd be no other t3-pe nf
"weaseling" to acquire parking area, but tnoy i~ave /)CCII ~r7~:.; ~?:a° ±hA Fecond
ttme, that there wsre 21 offices ~ln this medical center and a drug store= that
this was too amall an area and had ~oo ma; y doctors P.or tiie arRn, tlherefore, the
par!cing wae not inadequate, it was that just to~ many ph.yaiciana were uaing one
small medical center, and by calculatian, if there were 21 physicians and each
had one nurse, this w~uld take sp 44 of tha S2 parking spaces, leaving only 8
BpdCeB for patients~ that Western Law Univeraity was preeently using Niob~ Plaae
~ ~ ~
MINU'PE~, CITY PI,ANNING C.~IMMISSION, Fel?ruar.y y, 1973 73••7H
RECLAESIFYCA'fIUN N0. 72-73-3:~ (Gontlnue~l)
tar ovoxflow parkinq, And he wae aleo oppnsse~l C.o k.hnt, howovor, he w ~s Yurther
oppnrud tu eny con~iderati~n of c- c~ommercial sa~e l~~r e~f~b~act ~ro~oz :y elnco iP
iC woru recla~~itied, thia~ wrauld pla~e hie praport:y batween two commerr.ial unear
~nd th~t. if the ent;ire tr.ect WNYR takun up tor commerr.ial. u«es, then pert-a~e thu
~in9le-F.emily' homeawnere wou.ld not be eo i~t ~.~E~o~itton.
T1-o Com~nisii.on not.~Q thaL• if khe xsinyle-family ~~roperty c~wnere wanted C-1 zoni.n,y,
~11 they hud to da waa epply foe• ~.l• ~anc'i at. loast Ynake their roqueet.
Mr. Cleon Lemon, 2125 Niobe P].ucN, aNpeazed !>~fore the Cummiaeien in cpppuitian,
etating h~n wne oppoeed Co any chanqc of zone t~ C-1 f.or commer~ial unxdt thnt he
heA lived at thia location f'or ten yc~+xrg, and thet he wauld be fac~ng thie pe~rk-
ing l~t 24 houre r~ day; thnt he preser-`.ly welk~~d from hic~ hom«~ to tho ah~P~inc~
C!liltp2 and }~ad a di.tfict~.l~ ~~imn gott~ng acr~es ~rnoki,»r»t ~t.r.~~eC bACause ther~
waa no traffic li,qht b~stwee~~ Uall. Aoad end ()rang~ T~:onueT that w~-~rt hk7 had {~ur-
chaeed his homa, it wr~ wlth ttza underetanding that rhie woul3 te a Hinyls•-
~a~nily trnct, and if t~:ia recln~sification wera pgrmittec~, thie would bre~k down
t:ho eingla fam~ly clneaificaticn rnd wau].d o~en up thQ door f•or Purthor commc,r-
cla~a sncroachmont i~i'to t~,v renidentixl are~a~ ~hnt the type of pgople who would be
r.oming to thia parking lot after h~uxn wou.ld be cletrimentul. L•o the neighborhood
nnd ~.ao.:_ l not benefit tho L•ractr that the trt~ct hac~ very nlce 1-omeA, and if
eub~ec~t ~eti.t:ion werA approvod wc+u3 d moan knockinq down the black wall at the
Antrat,ce from Hookhuret Streatj an~. that if parkin~ were permitted or~ ttie lot.s,
thid wo~ !d cisstzoy tt.e reaidential enviranment c~~ this ar~a.
Mr. Robez•t Alm, 3177 Niobe Plnce, appeared before the CommieAion in oppoaition
and statod that h~s ptoperty would be direct].y acrosa the atrcet from the pr~-
poaed parking lot~ thest when 4hey haci beon loaking .for a home tliey had t,:.~!ced
witi~ the peaple prior ~o moving i.n and ha~ .. ~en assurPd thi.e w~uld remain aingle•-
familyt that they had only resided ot tiheir home f~r one and a half years~ ~nd
that he wEa unal.terabiy oppoaed to commurcial zoning f.or aub.lect prop~arty.
Eur~hermore, he ~rould also auqgest tha*_ no parking bo permittsd on ~he str~et at
tiight; and :hat Lhe proposed pnrk~ng lot would he a hazard and detrimt~ntal to the
~hildren who would be walking to and irom school.
Mrs. Margaret Connelly, 2173 Niobe F1ace, appeared be£cre the Cnmmission in
oppos~t.ion and stated that ahe had been throuqh thie bof.ore; th~t shs had ch~.J.dr~n
and had conatructed an -ddition L•o har home and planned to stay tnere for the
rest of hez lifer th~ 3he dld r~ot want a parking iot acrose the street fr.om her
homa and did nat wan ~ommercial FSCC89A to Niobe Placet tha~ sYi~ had been ap--
pr.aached to sel.l the rear pnrtian of her ].~± Fer commPrrial. usea~ and if this
coraer were appr.oved for commercial uaes, then it would be Mr. ,7nnas' property,
then Mr. Lemon's ~,xoperty, and eventually the entire arc~a would be conves•ted
to commercial uaes.
Mz. Aob .7ones, 21E33 Niobe P1ace, appeared befoxe the Commisaion, notl«y t.tiat hia
property was dizectly scsoss the straet oz- Niobe 3nd that he was not o~posed to
thc: pruposed reclassificatfon.
Mx. Smock, in rebuttal, noted that Brookhur.st ~treet was proposed to be wiaened
to 1_4 feot from Ball Roa' nort}~, ~nnd this, then, would take a portion of the
lots where the two house~ were located, and the hUUSe on the co.rner would be in
,,QOpardy becaues of the exiating alignment, making the homes very undesirable Y.o
zeslde in with the street i.~:mediate~l;~ behind, whereas a parking lot would not
generate any additional traffic but would ~ake ear~• of the averfl.ow medical
center parking neods, and they ~vere tryinq to lessen the parking on Ni.obe Place,
and that although concern was axpressed ragar.:ii.n~ un~av~ry people who would Le
usinc~ the parkinq lot at nfght, the doctors' offices wou~d be closed, and thN
or.ly thi:ig t:nat woald be open would bE the pharmacy.
Mr. :,emon aaked ta be h9ard again and stated ~hat if they Nere goinq to widen
.. g~~~^.. ~~o.. ...^,!t ~ 81ao take a oorti~n of one of the o:fices, as wall
8~~~;+hurs~ ~.., ,
as parL aE the druq store which ware in line witti thc neareat house to tho IIrook-
hure~ Street frontage.
Office Ercqineex Jay Z~itue, in re~+ponse to Commiasion questioninc~, izated that the
aornez house on Niobe Place wa~ located 5a feet fxom centerline, and rhe curb an~
qutter would nr~rmally be at 32 f~et, but the aurb arid quttor could be moved and
no parkway planned, which would placa the curb a-nd gutter at 43 feet.
• ~ ~ ~
MINU'-'~:+, ~x'~'X PI.A[VNtNC CUMM][SSXON, Februdry 5, 1973 ~~1~~»
R~I:I.A~J5IIr~C11TTOi~ [d0. .72•-73-33 (Continucdl
Ct~ai.rmen Seymour r~okoA that ~ha reqn4ic. betore the Commi~eeion hRCt beon pre+viou~ly
o~noidorecl in 1966t that l~e wae t'ully awn~~e tho moAic;al centex ne~de~ rnliK~ lrom
th~i.x~ exiat:ng parkinc~, +~nc9 tt~is wao a~ Nrl.me exam~le u!. tlia Plann~.i~~ c:nmmiosian
-iot recoqnizir~g z~~gr.a{fing the utanctsr.cY~ Roon enauqt~, thsri tho Cj.ty war~ feced wieh
a m~.ni.mum d~vel~pn~ent~ an8 thet. iF c~~~ai~er.t• petlklon wex'n qrer~tead for ~uxking
purn~,PO~+, tt~ta w~c~u.1~9 o~en *,he dac>r. ~or. Eur~thrr encr.~achment o!' commercinl uoen
to tl~e north and at~r~.
Comm.iaeionor Hor.bet .~f'fered n motian, ouc~nJ~Ad by Commi~qi~~er Ke~ywood ana
MATT~JN C~RR.LED, to rec:ommond to k1~e cir.y C;ounci.l Cha~ s de<:laration exemption
s'c.att~s n~~t 'oe grar~teA and L•Y-at C`~e Ci.t:}~ Cc,uncil requiro thnC an FnviromRnral
7mpact Ropc.rt be filnd in c~naun:i:~l.an w1:.h Potltion taz Rsclnssification Nin•.
72-73-33,
Commisaioner Seymour Z~tiTf~rod Ra~Halution No. PCi3-~3 ~nd mov9d for ito pnesuqe
and adupti~r~ to r.auommbnd to tti~s Cir_y c:~uncil th+~t Pet9.tic~r. t4r Reclaseificati.;::
No. 72~73-33 be dieapprov~d on Che ba~a~s tha*_ the propoRed recleeeificali.or. wa~
not in r.o•.-formance wi~ti tha lancl use+s desagnated nn the Genorar Plr~ni t:het no
land uso chaxiqee had t:ak~n p.lac» in Criis immodt+~te aren ta wdrrant favoreble
conuider.eti~n Por t.ho prGposa~ recla~ns.ifir,mtiian ol.nce it wao pz•eviouely doni.ed
by the ~i.ty G~unail in DecPmbur, a.966~ r.hat Apa~oval ot sub jecG zeclasr~ifioatson
would establlsh ~nunde~i.rable r~rec:e~dcnt for atri.p cAmmezeial u~e~~ aiong both
Br~okhur.~t Sr.raot• nnd Nio~e Avenuo tu Che east~ Chat the pxogosed re~lasaifice-
tion of 411I~j0Ct praparty wa~+ not neca~eary and/ux doeizc~bla~ far ~h~3 orderly and
pzoper '.ve~op~oar~t of the cummunity~ and thst the pr.opoged xeclas~;ifica+-ion of
aubject coperty cloes not praperly relate ta the zonea and thrtr ~+ermitt.:~cZ usos
locally eetablia: ad in close pr.oximity t~ sub~ect propexty. (Sce Rec~olui.3.on
Bork)
On ro11 ca11 khe ~oz~guing ~~:nol.ut~~n was pdr~aed by the Following vote:
AYES: COl9M79SIUNEP.Sm All..red, Ga.uex~, H~rbdt, KAywood, Seymour.
I~OES : GOMMtSSION~FS s None.
ABaENT: CGMMYSSIOINERS: F~~r.ana, Rowl.nnd.
RECESS - Chairmr~n Sey~nour. declared a five-minut~. recess at 5:57 p.m.
RECONVENE - ~haLrman S~ylnpLiY. reconvonFd the meeting nL G:G2 ~.m.,
Co~r.missi~~r.e3.s I'r~r.~anc r~n~l Rowland bcir" abse~
AM~:NDMENT TO TITZE 18, - P~ElI~:'~: HEAR11 :. ZNITIATED B 4'HF ANAH:. ~FLANNING
ANAHEIM MUtrICIPAL CODE COKDi1.~5xUN, 2U4 Fast Li.ncoln enus, '.nat.c~im, Ca. s to
_ "' -- ' consld+:t an9n~ri~en~a to '"itlA LH, Chapter ifS.OII,
C~~finitiu~~~~ a• egtabl~ishinq service stations by
condii.iona'l use psrn~it in .^.hapter.a 18.~„ lp.µ4. 18.4d, 18.~48, dI1C~ 18.52; and
adding Chapl•er 18.61, Criterta xnd 1~~vF:1o~~m~•;it Standards for Servi.ce 5tations.
~c;;,r,re~~.ttativet~ of Western ~il u Gas A.~soc'.~tian an~i the x'exxc~ service flt~tion
~e..~~b2'H indicated their pr4aence an.'. r~yqueated that subject amend.ment L•Q Title
1~ l~e continued bec~use of thE~ lato h~ur.
The Comm~.asiun also indi.catod =hey would prefer having a~ull Com:nisaion tn
ccnsider thls particular amencln~e.rlt.
Con-misalAner ~A21red offered a mution, saconded by Cflmmigeiane: tterbat and
MO?•ION CARRIED, to aontinue consideration of amendmen't td Tit:.e 18, Anaheim
Municipai Code, encompaseinq amondmenta to rervice station standard~ Lo the
meeting of February 21, ].973, for :. lu21 Comraiea~ion and to achedu~e '~e i~~m
as the firet item on the aqenda.
~
~ ~
MINU'~~5, C'I7'Y PLANtJI'NG CUMMZ;3T.~N, [^ubr~iary 5~ 1`~•;3 73-BU
RP:FORT$ AND - x7'RM N0. ].
R1:C~MMI:NUATIUN~ Ix~1Y.~tinq 7,ane Chanpe (Anahs.im Memc~rial Hc~npl~al? -
-'"' ` r~ Nroperry 1~Cnt'.ed an thw n~rtl~ ~ifle o! L~e~ Ynlma Circln,
a Mmall c:~.il.-dR~eac etroet north ar ?.er ~ I~Zmd Av~nue
~,ant o~ P.~oxnt~,ard [~riva.
Zaning Sup~rviwc,x Charlao ttobeXt~.~ ~r.aaont~ed to tho Plnnninq Commiae~.an d
pxopoNal ~o .incl~~Qo LoL Ne. ~~- of '~racx No. 1691 lntA *he petitioi~a aubmi.Ctad
by the Anah~ia+ Men~oz~al H~epit.a.l. for tl~a exp~n~icn o! thoi.z fac3li.tide. Tha
F-oepi~ml ha• indica~toQ thu.ro ~.q t~a~onable ~rob~biliCy o! the hoaPita,t aaquir.-
~nq 9:ho pxoPerty prior ~o the c.:umFloti~+n o! the proca~~inq of a xaclaxsitir.e-
tion patitic~n and cun~9iClonal uee perinit ta Tin ~ort~i~l~rraci by the~ planning
Commion7.on at the M~rah 5, 1973 ~.~ublic hoazing.
Mr. P.obert~ noted tt~nt in orcler Lo eltminete the r~mud !or a~opdxc+te petitiort
and sdditian~l sxpe~ae ~o t.h~ City at a later dato tn incl.udo tihis loC into
tho Qropo~ed sxpwnsian, tha De,velopn~nt 3ervicea Usp+~rtment r:e~omr.~enda to th~
Planning Com~~i~dion ~hat thsx~ buthorizo the incZ~aaiara a! Lat Na. 50 of Tzact
No. 1691 i.nto ttio petitione for rvclasaificaL•ion and condJ,tion~l uoe perm~,t
for the expxnaion of. R~n~heim MAmarial HospitAl, and thdt any appr~ve'1 of zon-
inq on thie parcel U~ coa~tinyent ugon acquieition oP tl~e lot by the hoepi~al.
Fur.thermara, thie mat:Cez had baen d.iscuened witt~ tho Ciky 1lttornoy, and thiR
pro~adura wae aug,qes~ed by him.
Dlecusaion wsr+ he~ld by tiie Commir~sion zega::ding th~ roq•~e~t ~tnd Che fact the+t
oroperiiee in thie ur~a had bean ~ tupic of discusa~Son :ln the neaepapera ar~
wol.l ~s par~ uf l~g~xl action extending to SacrAmentaJ r+nd that any tinie the
Ccmmior~ion proFosa~d to intpose a chany~s in soning on a piece of psopertY, the
propezty owner ahouAd have the right to cc,nsa~it to impoaiti~.i uf eaid zoning.
Ar~siatant ~eveloy~m~ant Services Director Ronalc~ Thompeon notu~ t.h~.t some af
ttie concexn of th~ reaiden~s uf the area which wae prenented tc~ ~he Ciry
~ounGil stommNd fr~m the fact that a numbar o1~ the exieting reei.dences ia
thia subdiviei,on woxe oi~ blockr~ awa.iti.ny remove~l, end thia had r"F"~~nted
nossible danqera to small children ~~lay~ing arQUnd t.hese lots.
Commissioner 5eymour offered a motior~, aeor.nded by Commisatoner Allred an~,i
MOTIOI~ CARRTED unanimoualy, rttating that the Anahaim City Planning Commi.s9ion
would n~t initiaCe ~ zone chango on proporty unti.l thair body had receivod
tlie written conaent ~f the propert~y orrn~r requeating said zone ch~nge.
APJOUF.NMENT - ThQZ~a bainq n~ furthes buefneas to discue3, Commis~aianez
~~ ?~erbst o€fered a motion ta adjourn ~ha mpetin9 t~ a wnrk
seseion or- Februars~ 15, 1973, at 7:00 p.m. ~ommis~inne:
Kaywood aeconded tha motion. MOTION CARRIED.
The mee~ing adjourned at 6s08 p.m.
Rdepectfully aubmi.tted,
~~~~~ ~~c~
ANN KREA5, Secretary
Anaheim City planninc~ C~ommi~sion
A1Cshm