The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes-PC 1973/02/210 R ~ 0 MICROFILM{NG SERVICE, INC. .. ,, . . .. ~ ~ c:J.t.y tla.l'1 Anrsh~~lm, c.'~.~li fnrr~ia FP.L>>:UA"'y' ;?2, ].973 RGC;UI,AR MEF:TIFIG Pl2ESB'NT ARISENT PRGSENT YLEDGE OI' AZLEGZI-NCE A RLGUT.AR ?iF~'1'TNt: Ot~ 'i'Hr 1iQ~1i3LTH._i:l.'.'Y 1'LAh1NlNfa CC~lIMIS:;ION - A rogular meatin,q of tha~ Anah~im Cit:y ~~1Ann.i.nn r.omml~elUn wan cnlled to c+xdor by Chairmc~n S~~ymour ~1~ 2:G0 p.rr.., r~ c~ui~rum betng preacnt. - CHAIRMAN: Seymour. - COMMISSIONF3RS: Allteh, ~'arano, Gau~r, tl~r.bat:, Kapwood, Ftow.lancl. - COMMISSIONERSs None. - Auet:stant l~evelapment Sc~i•~~ic~+:ra Diroct.ars Dep~~ty C`ity AGtc,rncy: Offico Enginec,rs 2oninq Supervisar: I~lanning Supexvl.f,nr: A~~lstant Plannei~: Commisa~.on SecrFt.a~y ; •• Commi.t~sioner Allr.ed ].e~ Flag. an the 1~ 1 F~dgc of l~~nH:.d 7.'l~omi,ac~n I'r.anlc I,owry ~~ a~~ ~C 1. t 1.~ K ~nar.lo~~ :~obc~.rka Dt~ll MG~.1tAtl~U~. F~hi]_1i~~ ,,~~hw~.rtxe Arin Krz~bf~ A7]r~~.~.ianc~a tu thc« APFRQVAL OF - CommiReioner Kaywoad ~~f`fe,rcd a m<:,I:i:c>+i Y_o anpy:uve t.h~a tnfnutas of THE MTNUTE;S tha meetin~ of :Tununx.y 2::'., 1~- i~ ~~~.rr_c~x~ded by Cc~minl.~si~~:~r A11red and MUmION CARR7ED, laub_}e:ct •to tlie follow.'~na cor.rr~~:t.j.anr~: Pg. 73-39~ para, 6, si~;:~uld r.~e<ids "CommlmFioner K~ywor,d ;~ote~d r_har. ttic:rc^ u,Er•E^ 1_N4 'WS.C1F. doubl,~ po~ts tn the c~rp~~rt~ ln the r.:r.i_!i~.9n3 r•ar~r~.rt.ment clavpJ.oN;a~r.t, ~~n~ a1: the e~~tranct ++ra~9 or.+>. xnS.<iaray, wh.'~r.h cauld ir4t~.r..fa.t'e with openin<i tiic~ c: ~ r dnr:~r•„ She ~.ou3.d nut F>ar:k h~r car therc~ 1:~~:~ca~sc: ~•n l r .~~ very ~+ma l.l 4ar c~u l.~ ~ntar tha car.pox•t ~~i+:.hc,i~t. ,i. :~rQat dc~77. ~~f i~uneuv:aring. 'rher.~~- fozE, ~i. E G*.~me ~~~t.t:.r~in~t wer.p ;~ade `.:<> 4~HCiC~11 ~,:h~ ~ axking spac~as wi.clf~r s;~~ (~~~pJ.e could g~.in c~~~s•l.er acr.ess, t2sey woulcl i.ir~c: '_hc: esx:ist:ing parkinry." pg. 73-40, par.a~ 3, 1. in!~ ~i, ;~hould .read: "[~~:xved PAaadr..ata, 1.ong B~~z~ch. Ur.ar~ge. Ca~inty and Los Ang2~l.as I:~~t.c~z•rat:ionnl A1.x~.:a.r. ~s r anil thri. t" Yg. 73-48, parrx. Z1, ~..inr:: ?.: Commirssi~r~er. G~uer 'voced "no". Pg. 73-SU, Faz:,~, a, :.ir~rr~ :I. ar~d 4: dEletN Coz~un:iNSi.oner. ficsrbat in vc>tin~q "<ay~r." and ac~d CUrnmi: sian~r tic~rbat i.n be.iny abs~nt. VARIANCE N0. 2438 - CON7'7.NL''.'sD YUF.[.LC.. fiE;1~kING. R:~C.I~x~•DG DiJRAN, 301 No~kh Blue- - ~ rc~clc, Anai~~eim, C,~. 92RU6, Uwner; zPC;ue~k..i.n~~ WA.T.VFR OF (Fi) MIN 1:M[JM F7.,OOR APEA, (m) MTNIMUbi S.T.D~s" :~E'C'HA~t:'Y., (C) HIti]:MU24 NUM9ER OF ~ARKING SPACES, ~-ND (.D) M..N'L't4L'hl QYS'I'14NCr RET'WCEN 13t1'fLnI~lG5 TO CON- STRLCT A 3~UNIT A.PART1d~.NT F3:lIL )ING ,:N CONJUIJCTICN Wt7'H AU I~X7:~TING SINGJLk- FAMILX DW~LLIVG on pr~~:~~:rty desc_' ~ed as s A r~ctt~T~gu~.a:r'ly•~nhdped para~l ~C ].and havinq a f~ontr~ge c,f apF~ruximatel.y 47 fe•ek can. ~t11Q .suuMh s ide: of Sycz~mnze Stree;:, having a ma:ci.mun~ c7epth of appr.oximat~ly 1~7. fv~e+~, and bF~iny loc~tE~d approximately 74 feet ~r~~~ ~:. o~ tlze cFnter7.ine c~b 5uJ~f.na atreet, Property presenkly cla3sified R-•3, MUI~TIPL1e,~FAMILY FtFti'I:DENT'I:A:L', ~QPI~. Subject petition wrta c<~nt.~nu~~ri Erura the ffQ~Y:~~ti9 a~f ~.~cpcembe~i• 18, 19'i2, ior eubmission of reviEaa ~laniis f=om the me¢.t.:n~q of OctcbFr. ZH, ly 72. f.c~r t!-.e aubmiasion of an Lr.vi:c~nme-tit:al Tmpact Repor~.J and ~r~m *_he meetinqe ^f rtove:nber 27, 1972, J~nu~'.Y 8 and E'Qbzuary 5, 197~, f,~ar ~.-evi.sod plar.a. Chairman Se,ymour not~d that t.he pe~~ti~fo~:Er ha:f aga~.n raQuHqtecl a f.our-waek continu~nce in oz;i.gz t:~ c:ompy].ek~e the ::~vf.ec~cl plarc~. Cummisaioner kor~land aEf.~ar~~d a mation, s~cnnried by C.oa~mi~sianer Kaywood and MOTION C!\RRZED, to conti.n~~e+ considera:a~r~ ~a[ Vatiance N~. 2438 to the n~eetinq of Marcii 19, 1973, a$ requerCa~6 by tho petitAonaso ro 73-81 ~ ~ ~ MINI~'Cf~:Sr ('Z'CY ^1,~NNiNG COMMJ.^+S70N, F'ebruary 21, ls)73 73-1a2 1~ENTATIVk. MAi~ 0!" - OWN~.kt~ UPFGR "K" H.ANCN CORP~7RA'I~ION, P. O. Hox R, i~lacc~nti.ri, 'CRACT NOS, f~080, Ca. 9?670, k*NCINELk~ Millet, K.ing & A9BOC~8f:PQ, I~~c. , 80(~1, l,t.i) f30£32 _ 1335 Fteat l~alancia Drive, I'u11~r.L•on, Ca. 92G3~~ ~ropaeireg ~~ ~~~~ to eubdiv~do ~ruperty contein~ng npproxi.:~~etoly 37 ~croo locat.ed ori the aouth aide of t1~n ftivereir~e (~reeway, Appr.oxi- matoly 1600 feel east. ot Ym~nrittl Highway lnt~ 89 RS-5000 zonad lot•.s (Tract No. tiUti~) ~~~ R5~500(t zoned ~ota (Trn~,t No. 80A1) ~ and 54 RS•-~>000 .r.oned lota (mraCt NU. H0821. r_he~irmdn Seymc~~r note:r3 thnt tha d~v~Loper had not. r.osol.ved questLone regardi.ng »t.reet °:~l`ATIf3~Qi1 miid parkeite l~cst•ion potentially nf.C~cting nub;7ect I~roperty, and a roque:it had been su;.~mittAd Y>y the~ owner for an additi~nal two-w~gk continuan~~. Commisaiuner Kaywaod off_ered a moti~~n, soconded by c:om.niesianer Rawland nnd MUT'LUN CAKltik;l~, to continue rortsldo.rr~tian of 'P~ntativa Map c~Y '1'raCt ir'ue~. (308Q, 8081, and 9002 to tho meeL•.ing o£ [darch 5, 1973, t,~ ~~tlow time tu raeolve p'roblems r~ff«~ctinq sub jACt propert;~. AMENAMFNT TU TITI,E 18, - CONTINUEI) PUBT~IC HFARING. TNl'7`i.ATG!J BY TFIe. ANAHEIM ANAHLIM MUNICIPAL CODF CTTY PLAN:VIDIG COMMlS510N, 2U4 Isast Lincoln Avenue, - ~~ Anaha~m, Ca. ~ to conc+idc:r a~nen3menr,y to Titla ).B, Chapter 18.08, Definition; and estabJ.ish ser.vice stations by conditional use permit in Chaptert~ 18.3 , C-R, COMMERCIAL-R~CREA9'ION) 1@.40, C-1, GENERAL COMN~RC3AL; 14.44, C-2, GENERAL COMMER.CEAL~ 18.AU, C-3, HEAVY CGMMERCIALt 18.52, M-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAI., 'LOr1~S, and the adc'.iti~n of Chttptel' 19.Ei1, CRITFRIA AND DGVELOPMENT STANDAI2DS I'nR SERVICF. STATTONS tL the Anaheim Munici.pal Cade. Sub~ect amendments were continuad frum the meetinr~ of February 5, 1973, $~ the request oi the service ata~ion represen~atives and for a full Camr,isKion. Two persons indicated their presoncQ in rr~gard to the proposed amendments. Chairman Seymc~ur noted that tlie Commiesion had been ful.ly informed xa to the praposed changr,s and inq•~ized whether ttie i.nterested persons had received the recommended ch~nges. If so, then waiver of reading of ttie staff repart wosld be so recommended. aoth persons ir~dlcated they were fully informed as to the propoaed amendr..ents. Alth~ugh the Feport ro the Commissian wss not read at the pub'.~.c hearing, it it~ referred to and made a part of the minutPS. Mr, Frank Walke~, representing Western Oil & Gas Association, appeared before the Commi~sion and noted that their trade association repreaented 90'A of the petroleum industry ir, six wes~ern atatess that they had analyzed the staf•f repnrt, and wbile there w~re many things they took issue with; he would limit hia remarks to the more important aspect3: 1. The re~uirement of a conditional use permit ~ras somewhat dis~uxbinq sirice such a vehicle was traditionally ased for controllin3 very unusual typ~ of developmPnts in a city, and in the case of a aervice sta ion, which was a com~~-ercial retatl facil.i.ty, thay felt did not require the conditional use pPrmit procedure, aiid if i.t wexe required, it wou'ld be somewhat discriminatc~ry bacause it did not apply to likQ retail t~uaineases, such as dri.ve-in restaurants ancl supermar;cei;s, therefore, th~y would revuest that thls requirement be deleted. 2. Restt-lations as to locat~.on o~ a aervice station site - in referance tu xequiring ~00 fr~L betweex- sexvice ~tta*_f.on aites on the same side af the street - they were also oppoaed to that for a number ~£ reasons a~d would hesitate qoing into the legal aspects~ howe•ier, in the Syracusa Law ~7ournal, specifi~ rulings were set ~orth - these were then read by Mr. Wa~ker, who also read from a atate- ment of the State p7.anning officials. Mr. Walker then noted that if this reatriction was being done to restrict the numk~er and locati~n of sei•vice stetiona, he felt this was unfair in the country'a free enterprise econouiy because the 1aw of s~pply and demancl should qovern, and, therefore, he would recommenQ that ~his requirement also be deleted. ~ ~ ~ MINU'PrS, CI'fY PI,ANNLNG COMMTSSION, reUruary 21, 1Q73 73-~3 AMENUMENT '~O TITLE~IBL ANAH~III MuNTC11~AL CO~E (Gontinudd) 3. An nbandonmont procgdure in which two rltJ:~z~natives were prae~nte~ ~o Ct~e i~.lanninq Commiqelon - he woul.d li.ke to etate ~t had bc.cn thc~i.r p~sltion that evon though thiy knew there wore ~r~,bleme, the +~nROCiati~~n wae makinq overy ~~ffork to contact tbQ meniber oc.~mpanioa, nugyesting that they "fXat lot" the vacant eervice ~tnttori or do oomeh.hinq nbaut ir~ and tbey h~d obtaiiied cun- sl.derabl~ caopordtian ~rom these varioua ms,mber eompanie~, t~owever, moet ti.mes thc~ee member compnnie~ did not own thN property or impravem~nt:+ and hdd no control ov~r them, b~it the~+ 1~ad r-18o abtal.ned coaperation by tAlkinq with the owne:'s royaxding removel of tho~e aexvir~e mtati~nnt that tl»y rocognixed mie- takea had beon mado in the paet zogarding abarsdonlc-g ei.t:~~s, and they woul~f ~do Pveryttiing poseible to raz9 theee sites, but thcy wo~a' d pr.c~fer to havo the eam~ t.rer~tm~nt oth~r aommercial tacilittes wero a~forded~ and that th~ exisCing Go3e h~d condit.ions that woul.d require razing tho ~i•~ if it were detxim~ntal to the E~ubllc ~IdA~LIl, aarcty, ans gen~za: walEare. Mr. Ron WarderJ.L•sch, rapreeenY.inq U-![aul Company Induakrial Rolati.ona, a~~Fearod befozd the Comtnission ar.d stated th+at hie compdn.y wa~ primarily cor~cecned with th+~t port.'.on portaining L•o skorage of rer.t~l trailerej t.hst tF~e r.escriction of 10••f.oot hiqh by 22-•fout .lon~g, wue samewha~t uneloaz and inquir~d w1ieY.her the length aleo included the cab c~r v~aR it yuet t,he length of the boxt wh~roupon Plannir-g 5upervi.nor poa McDmnie.l noted that the overall dimeneion uf the vehic;lo wtes 22 foet, whi.ch would, of course, i~~clude the cal~ portion. Mr. We~:deritsch tlien stated they would recommend that r~ume other regulatioii be uaed~ that it appeared the City wanted to delete the 7.arqe trailer truckr~ anci semi-trailers £rom qervice atatior. sitess that they had rental t.rucke, ebme oE which caxceeded tha length ae~c forth in theso rAatri~tinn., and :ze would rsc~m- mend that coneideratton bH given to ~:ither ref.ore~nce ~o the nambe_ ~f axles pr the grnes vehicle wetght rat}~er thsr- the length and hyiqht oi the trailer ~inco this would be a me~.ns of rest.ricting trailers at: eervice atation sitea; that :.imitiinq Hervlce ataL•ians located wit-hin 75 feet of a ret~idential zone to only five travel treilare wc,uld bc a h~rdahip as could be noted in a let~er fram Mr. Tou~hey, International Vice President o£ tha 5ervice Station uealers Asaoci- a.tio~, in which he stated thnt service atationa in all areas of thQ Unitod State~ in all cornmercial zones sh~uld be allowed to rent tra~ilers, including two-axl~ trailer~i that the American As~tociation of PJ.anning Officials aIDU had a repor.~, and th~,n quoted from r.eF,ozt, concludiZg by statinq that the two pointa of concern he pzes~+nEed we~:s very important L•o thc r~ntal trailer business as well as to ~he des."lers handling these at the servi.:e stationsf a~nd ~hat he would auqgest u study aesaion with the Planning Commission to arrive at an alteri~ate conclusion. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commiasioner Herbs~ observed that Mr. Wal?cez had ststed he would like to be tr~atee ].ike ever.y other businesrs, and inquired ir L•hia w~re an; whexeupon Mr. walker stated thasc ~~ras r.atner a broad statement since gervice stulione in Anaheim had b~zn g~.ven special treatment as to Aetback exposure. Cammisaioner. Herbst the~i stated hc wou.ld be wilxing to w:ite rsn ordinance that sezvice s~ati~ns ba treated lihe any vther busines$ - then most of the CitX's problems would be solvedj whereupon Mr.. Walker stated that his organiantion would be wi.lling to aqree to such a gtatement, since h~ migh~ be forcinq him- self into an awkward situation, howevor, tY~e new aervica stations now being constructFd exceeded any reguirements the Citiy miqilt liave. Commiseione.r Kc~rbst noted that the oil companies had not used gooc~ judgmen~ - th~.s ~-as the rPason for overbuilding the sdrvice stacione in Anaheim, and if the ail companiea wanted to be tr~a~ed like othor busine9ses and still got preferentlal treat-nent, the 500•-foo~ proposal was not unzeason~bl~ from all ~f the atudiea he hac7. seen, and the City could only support a given number of aervice statinna per 1,000 pe.reons, and if this wera followed, that there would not be as many closed sexv3ce atatlons, however, ?~e hzd noteci that the newer aervice atati.ons were being constructe~, in recognitfon ~af certatn pr.ob2ema, an~i the atatl.ona were laraar and provided a larger area, therefore, in easence, they would be cumplying With the requiroments a., set forth in the amend~nents. ~ ~ ~ MIN[)'P:~:S, CI'PY Px.AP7NING C()MMISSION~ Ir(iIJY'llAY"y 21, 1973 73-84 AMT3NDML;N'P TO 'PITLC 1Hr ANAt1ETM MUNSCZPAL COf)1: (Contintiod) C:ommiasioner ~,auor observed thnt the ren~~on for. mauy s~x'vica atationa being pormltto<i ln Anaheim w+ae the fact thst they were pnrmittod by righC in tna C~-t'., C-•:., ^••2, C••3, M•••1, and M-'? 2unca, ~n~i iP thr; Codc would pc+r~nit only on~ c~e.rvice str~tion por 2~000 popuJ.~stion, thar.e wou13 be onl.y 9~ eozvice ot,~tione in AnNliAim, and he wculd nover vato aqain £or ac~other earvic:y nkr,ti.on ir- Analieim without u cor~ditional uea pe~zm.iti.. Furt:hermore, ~he c:itio~ of (~ree, Buena Park. Goeta Mesa, Cy~ress, Fullerton, esnd Fount~in Valley ull requir~d e cohdition~l ~uao ~ermit, end t~hat he telt therc~ were too mr~ny eo.cvico otati.one in exceax ~f ihat. non~od, nnd ~ao-ne af the inclividunle ~ould alsa get out of t.he s4s.~vi.ce ntat.lo~i bueinrb~ lf they saw tt-e numhar o~ vrtcant o~etiona in the CiLy of. Annt~aim. Cammiseioner Horbst noted that ha knew oY somo servl.ce atation contractR wh~n loase~ ran out, whe:n the oil company did not r~muve th~~ skructure f.rom the groperty, thNy }lnr!AfiA the propArty oP the owne•rs of the lnnd. Thus th~ oil ;:cmpanied were dumping theae atationa on citizen~ when ~ho oil companie~ them- eelvea ha3 brouql~t t•ho aituatian of amen~ing codea upon themaelvest that it was a vc~ry ~eri~ua problom, and thia was the reason why tlie Cammiesi~n was studyi.ng ;:he roal problAm. ]?ur.khermare, he would concur with Commiasioner Gauar in that he would not allow anoth~~r s~~+rvice staL•ion in Anahaim without e conc~itional use per~~it. in r~dcl±tioti, the induntrial zone sarvice etations hacl a 50~ vACanc.y, and those were permiL•~ed by right to be condtructod, so hQ fe~k tl-e oil companiaa had been mie-using thie privil~ga. Co~nmiasionar Gauer noted f:hat if tlio maps which hxd been presented to the P1ann'..~g Commisalon depictiny the numbe~ of ~~e.rvice etations, carwashe~ und vacRnt ~tervice stationa w~xe publi.ahed in the nawspaper, the peopln of Anahoim woulci vote to do av+~y with any morQ ser.vice stat~ans in Anaheim, Comm•1s91oner Farano inquirecl of Mro Walker whether his campany had made a s;:udy as to the number of servica ~tation~ and ~.he number of perKOna whi.ch es sar.vice skxtion could serve, and was h~ a~so aware of the fact that Anaheim ha3 one aerviae ytation for every 764 perscns, while the .rocomnondatior~ Nas one c~orvi~-e stati~r. for ~very 2,000 p~raone~ wher.eupon Mr. Walkor replied that hc di3 noL• hava a study, but he wus awaz'e of Anuheim'v f~.gures. Co:nmis3laner. Farano noted that Mr. Walkar had not uffered any solution as to the problema the Commission has t.rying to ov~rcotne, and wouldn't he agree that the ~ity of Anahelm did have problemst whareupan l~ir. Walker atated he would reluc- tantly agree that Rnah~im liad a problem. Commissi~nar Farano then inquired what vehicle wa~ild Mr, Walker s~iggest ii he did nat wa.i-t to have service s~.ationa appraved by conditiunal use permit, xnd Ghat was the reaeonabl.e approach £or diatances between service stations on one side of tha street, and what would he suggest to d•~ with a servic~ station when it beaame a blight at an intersection havi~ng been vacant f'ar one and one-half to more years~ anfl that ha u~ould like to have some recommendat.ions or alternatives since t;he Commiasion was not trying tc discourage service stat3.ons operationa but wanted to resolve tha problems that had been pzesented tu the Cit}~• where- upon Mr. Walker etated thst he woul.d recommPnd that the City uae their existir!g Code if these vacant service stations became a hazard to the publlc, which wuuld rormit the City to tear them dawn and bill the owners for the aost of said removal. Deputy City Attorney Frank Lowry advised thN Commis~ion that 2U service sta~ions had been demolished in Che City o£ Anahel.m becauae of buil.ding fire and other Code violationa, but the City could do nothinq about vacant aervice stations Nh~ch were only aeven to siqht yeara old and were boarded up, because they had compl~.e` wl.th the Code requiremc~nts wi.th slurry sand in the undergrouncl tanks. meeting the Fire Code, ant~ the~:. ~tatiana cc~uld not be kouched under any City Code, therefore, the City was forced to tha limit of their abillty~ and that t.his situa ion had remained for tktA past four ypRrs. ~ Mr. Lowry, 3n reaponae to queationing b~ CommiaslonaX Farano, state@ tha` eer~~ice s~tations coula nn:.y ~e removed i/~..thoy were a nuiaance, in violation of the Euilding Code, and other dsnger~~under t.he Uniform Houeing Code, thereforo, sQVeral methods of determining zemov~l of servi;,e stationa r~c:re uaed in the aban3onment procadure. ~ ~ MINUTF.S, CITY PI~ANNING COMMISSZUN, F'ebruAry 21, 1973 ~3-b~ AMENDMCN'f TU 'PITI,F 18, ANAtiETM MUNICIPAL CODF SC~ntinued) C~mm.taeionor I'ereno .inquir.ed of. Mx. w~]ker whethor he wnntod to wait unh.~.l. a bui.ldlnq w~~ d~clarod a pubZic nuieance and e denqer to tha ci.tizene o~ the City aY AnnhE~im betore it wae tor~i down, oincc~ that waa tho only mt-r~nor. i~i ahich Lh~ City hnd to dban~on thv HQi2'V.{.(:Ci etati.oni wlieraupon Mr. WA~ker ntatarl thnt~ they would pzef.et Co li~ve unc9~r tho ~.ci~tinq ordinance, r~nll he did not: fee~. he wante~ ecrvice oteCi.cn facili.t.iRp o!' his or.grniaati~~n to be aubject t~ thoae conditi~ns. Commi.eai~~r-er Farano ob~erved t.hat tho City wa~ trying to prevank. Lh~ r.ir:umetances facing th~m from arieing, and the repreee-~tativ:s of the oi.l con~~~an.ien had not o~fer~d any alte.rnativ~. INr. Walk~r noted ChaY. a£ter H'or1~9 NSr Ix, when qao wae plnn~if.ul mnd n yood profit wa~ zealized, aervice ~?tatione wero built prolili.cally, h~we~~r, now th~s ail compan~.o~ would not invAat in a sita bofore they h+~c9 checked tho oconom'_c wi.tue~tion of tha area which would take care of a proepective Rervica 8tetion if they ~7pened a vi<~hle eites an.i t.idt: even if thie amendment were~ approved, the axiating servi.ce sta~tions would be nanconforminy und would no't be rc~moved. CommieaionAr P'arano noCed that any vacant structures wfluld hava nin~ty daye in which to abate tha strucr,ur.a on the gi.te c~r z•e-aper. the service atation. Mr. r.owr.y alivi.add the Commisaion that tt~Pre were two elte~rnatives which the C~mmiesion would have to determino to r.ecommend to the City Coiincil, and the oecond alternaL•iv~ was the reaammonded pr.~ceclure as Par ae tho City d~t~orney waa concerned. :.ommissiuner Farano inquired whether it wou.id be pose~ble wk~en a company sub~ mi.ttea a reque~t to open up a new station for. the Commission t:o require that the exiatir~.g cloaed seatton be remav~d befo.r~ granting the naW 6tation raite. Mr. Walker ~tated th~t the American ~.~,sociatiun of P:Lanning OfEicials stated khat every man had a iight to go brokej whezeupon Comm~ssioc~er larano inquir~d whether it would hel}> to chou~e the location of a new service str~Cion eite rather than lar,ate them rather haphazardly~ whereuQon Mr. Wa:l.ker e~tated that thc~ haphazarc3 de~elopment of service stations in the 1940's wauld not be prevalent these da}%s; that t•he tire, battery ar~d accessory salas have n~t increased be- aauae depa~kmec~t a ~vres w~re no~; o; fariny tha~c itc:^s. =^d a? thnuah there were more service stations in CaliFornia, the TBA sales had decreased by 1~ at aervi.ce stations. Commi.ssioner Farano then inquired wh~ther Mr. Walker. folk a mo:c scientif.ic a.pproach would be better in the selection uf a bigger and better site whir,h w~uld atford more protectian; wher~upon Mr. Wal.k~ar stated that an}• retail. busi- noas did not want to be f.orced ir.to Lhe p~oition as to Aite l~cation and size, but free enterpriae should takc~ car~ o~ this selection. Commissioner Farano ths~n noted that tY-~ cond•ltionul use perfiit procedure did not prohibit anyone from applying for a earvice station, becau~e under L•he condi- tional uae permit, ono must present apecial ahovrings that thir. would not be detrimental to the cityr where~xpon Mr. i~alker stated that a grHat daal depended upon the makeup of a body, and he di~ noh feel a ~onditional use per~nit for eaat- aite was nPCessary, and th.e oil compantes were subject to polic.ing themselves because of economic.:. Commiasioner Farano inquf_rerl whether iic was within Mr. Walker.'s knuwledqe to etate ~hat vacant service stations more carefully selected would be more produc- tive and have good productlve salPs than siCes tha* ~~eYe not aara£ully selecY.eds whereupon Mr. Flalker stated that the oil com~ani~s munt sell a gtven number of qallons af g~soline, reqardleas of the convenience and/or ;~ocation of a service atation. Commissioner Gauer observed that Gul.f Oil Comganx had one big servico atation in Flo~ida snd an~thc~r Gu1f etation wms loca~ted in ResGon, Virginia, ~rhile Stxndard 011. had one in Columbia, and this wae by legislation of ~he citioe in which these single service stations Nere bui.ltt whereupon Mr. Walker s~t~ted he was somewhat surpri~.ed that tY~ese citie~ had not been taken into court by this ].imitati~n of aerWice atations. ~ ~ ~ MINU'PLS, CZTY PL,ANNTNC COMMI55.LON~ Fobr~.~ury 21, a-`)73 73-HG AMF:t(DMEN'I' TO TITI~L 10, ANAHEIM MUNICIPI~L CODF (,r,c~ntinu~c~) Cc~mmir~uionex Fterbst not4cl that moet drive••in rAetau.rant~ or ~irivo-in opAr.atianH in thc~ City of Annh~+im rcgardl.ess of .lur,at~.on wo.re ~equtrec9 L•o hav~ ~+ conditiona.l us~ pormit Appro~~rd, iind many other bueineesoe whir,h 9enlt wi~1: wnik-in trade he~3 no r.elatol probl.ema t:hnt drivc~-iti buttinFe~oe had, sacli ae location neaz R-1~ nee~i for.• better cantrol for voli~cular cirr,ulati~n, r~nd service at:ations and drf.ve-in raetr~urent.a cr~ated problame i.n given d1Ud8~ thor~fore, a r.onditional use pormit wae necoeaary U~cause i.n the seLVioa station pr~blem~ thQ uil. cornE~rni~a h~vQ .~ .- .-ti.~.- ~~.~., nrnhlnmw nnti thAV he~'1 Ahll74fc1 th~fl Dlv~.1c9P1. n~ver bean aL~iu i.~~ ~,.,~~c.. ... .- - .- . now the City had to stop in, part{.cularly wh~re service etetions had been cloead £ar a number of yeurs. Coramlesioner Kaywaorl noted th~-t: the mocit xecgnt Kiplinger Report indic:+~t~a tharo wroul.d be chronic f~iel shortayos in the United Stat•ee. [~uring tho nc+xt aiimmer l.t~~~ gasolir.e ~upply would h~~ so tight that servicc stati.ona r~iqht run ou~ of. fuel from time to time, which could aff~ct stutions in such a way that thore wuuld be more c.lnsed qervic:e ~t~tions in Anuhei.m than presontly exiete~lt thmt Mr. Walkor. had stated the oi]. cocnpattiies police L•heir own businQSa, hoaevar, one look aL• the map would indi.c:ate thi:~ was contz•ary to theac~ staternentc~ ~ and that ehe clid not fael oil. eompaniea ~houlcl be pc~rmi~ted to builcl a service statiun wh~rever L•hey war,r~d to. Mr. Lowry noted that the use uf a conditi.c,nal use pe:mit for ~ervice at.ations and other drive-in op~rations was a rcquiromeiit tu determine +rhPther thi~ war~ r~ auitable area, and althc~.tgh the la~v might be a~ stateci in the Syracuse Jo~irnal, however, this did riot apply to Cha Stxte of Calif.ornia; and thn~ pursuant to the Mammoth case in 1971 in which all eervice atation~ were re~uired to be a m~.nimum dir~tance of 1,G00 feet, this was uplield As an azbitrary business and was knawn to be z public nuisance. C~mmissioner Rowland obr~erved that it wc-a disce.rnible *hat the drivo-in aspects of a ~er'v~.ae station di.ffered sumewhat fzom the c2ri.ve-in asp~ cts of u i:estauran~ since a service station was an outdoor activit~ serving vehi.cles, while the oth~r wae servi.ng food, and the outdoor nature of a service atatiotz waa uniquo, and trsffic engineers had long recoqnized the L•raff?c con£lict points, and this wac~ one of ~he reasc~ns why many cammunities required a minimum size as wRll as spECifiG traffi.c-carrying capacii•y of a atr.eet befora a sezvice station wouicl be allowed at a qiven areas that one naw tne abt~se of the. Servic~e S*.ati.on `~~~;;~~~o A.,Pr~ ds,y. and he recngnizgd the distinct differenc4 between Eervice stat•.funs serving automobilas vcrsua drivo-in restzLrantr~, oirec~ most of Lhe work donF at sexvice stations w~as done outdours and, therefore, ~he c n3itionxl usQ permit was a realistic tool which *_he community stzould ?iave at its 31~posal in determining the appropria~eness of epecific uses. Commissioner Alzred concu red in the statements made Ly other CommisEioners that ct conditional use permit was the only met}~~d in which to ~ontrol aervice station development .in tlie City of Anaheim. Chaizman Seymour inqutred whether Mr. Walker wars familiar with the Int:ern.ational Service Station Dealers A~csuciati.on and then quoted from a lettFr bf Mr. Tauihey with the r.ecou~mended ordinance that ozganization had submitted; whereupore Mr. Wa1kPr replied a~Efirmatively. Chairman Seymour then aaked whethez or not Mr. Walker agreEd wlth the recommended ordinance whic:h was inuch stiffer and ha~d a qreater number of requirrmer-ts ta be met t2:an the Cicy of Anaheim's requirements~ whereupon rlr. Walker stated that he had nat read their report, but the International Service Station Dealera 'rlsaocia- tion was an organi~ation of self-operated stations and individuals, and obviously they dld not want any more bus:.ness in competition, therefore, this might bs the basis for Mr. Touahey'g requirements. Commisaioner Rowland inquireci what t•ha main ab~e~~ive was of tha Western Oil & Gas Associationj whereupon Mr. Walicer stated that the.ir association waa funded by the major oil companies pr~vidlnq sorvices o£ appearing at public hearings rather than hava each oil conpany represanted invidually, and that thPy qave publicity and economic advics ta the oil companies. Commissioner Rowlrnd tnen nated that this a~pQared to be a lobbying orqan9.zationj whereupon Mr. Walker xaplied that he was registered a~s a lobbyiat in the Ciky of Log knqalea but preferred nut to be called a"lobbyiat". r~ L' ~ ~ MINUTLS, CI'1'Y P;~ANPITNG CO[4MTa5ION, FQbxuniy 21, 7.97~ 73'~~ 71MFNUMENT TO Tx'J'LG 18~_ ANANEIM MUNIC~P%-L COUC (C:U1tt~ri0ed) Commienlonc+~ c:auAr. waa of tiie nPinian thet U-1~Inu1 b~in.inea~os ~-ere no difP~r~enC tha~- ec,zvicr: ~tat~.^n~, nn~t hP ~31d not Poe]. they r,rc~c~nl:ed A f~T19 appoazance, e~nd hn did noG want ~ne within 75 t~et of hiA home, althauGh in mome nlaces thoy eF+penr~id t.u b~ linod u~ in e proper manne+r~ that tha U~tiaul. treiler~a and trucke ut the so~~:hwost corne.r ot' Hall R~ac~ r~nd Anahp~~.rti Koulovard adjecent tu th~~ Markat t3mnkot did n~t praeent n var~y ^ice Zppparunae, and thoy ahoulcl nevor w•: .._~_ ~,-^4~:?:..,~+A~, nrAm; An~ t•h~r. hA ~ou1~3 aec~ nc Y'Ha8QT1 why Lhey ~I~oulcl n~t be requix9d to be apE~r.ovgc~ unclAx a condicional uae poxmil-. Ciieirman S~ymaux not-.ed Ch~t Mr.. 5~erd~ritxoi- wae n~~t o~,posed to a r.ondi~i.onn! t~~~c~ Qarmit b~.t: was appused to the hoight e~nd ler.gth uf the vehicl~. c'~mmiasionex• Gauer notc~d that whor~evnr e~ earvica Atation was propcar~ci befoze the City ~~ Anahoim rylanning Commisaion, he wonld fincl out i.f they pruposed any trAilc~r rentals ~~n ttie servicU ntation bo~ora he woulr] evc~n conaider it. Commiseionoz Kerh~~t natad L,.~iG vrh~n one d! ecu~aed the size of t~ruck vehiclea, ha knAw there wnre aomr trucke with ~0-Puot bads, r~nd with t;he ~+~b attached~ thi~s would be 3; f.eet in length, nnc] aince most ~Rer~~ice AkAti~0Yl8 wor9 only 150 bp 150--Poot l~ts ox 1~:so with the numbar af trailer~ and tiuck~ stored on thosa lots, i*_ r.ror~ted a problem of ].anillockiny a portion o£ the prc~perty, nnd the size of the pr.~~perty madc it difficult. fer pr.oner traffic flow arounrl tne oervico ytation, thF..afore, if U-H~ul Crailer.s r~nd trucke were pez~mitted on a s~rvic~s etaY.ion lot, the Commi~sion ahould have snme say about the aize and nv.mber on a lot. Mr. We~:cleritsch stated that ~his requirament could ~s under ihe cor-dition~l ~s~ permit ~sec~:ion, and tie wou3.d aqzee that tral.lars stioul~i be li~nited by canc]itinnal use permit as to location becauso there~ were many aervica statione in Anat~eim where they did not want t4 have trailers on khe aite because they created problems. ~ommissioner H~Y'b3t. noi:ed that sin~a trailera woulcl be o~ie ot• the thinqs that the City would have, then the scxe~ninq shouid Ue upgrade~l; whereupun Ftx, Werderitach stated thar most of the service statians had 6~foot wa11s, ttr~d the one aervice sta~ion where U-Haul trailers and truc':s were located, aa diacueaed bV Commissioner Gauer, had been built prior to the wall ordinance, and, c~~iso- quently, there was no wa11. Commissioner Elerbst inquired what the rental palicy wa:a o~ the U-Ha~xl ar to tt-e types of vehicle3 permitted on tl~e aervice atation site whezein aix ~:c~ geven were permitted, but there were not only carry-a11 trucks and mntior vehicl.es, but big van L-railers; whereupon Mr. Werderitsch stated tY~at they had three diff.erent cl~saif.icat•lot:s of dealers: Class A, AA, and AAA, the lattez handling all o~ their ec?uipment. Commissi~ner Herbst stated that if thesa trailers weze perm~tt~d by con3itional u~s~ pPrmit on a servicz station aite, then the Commission could tie the tyPe of equipment per.mittFd by thA cl:.ssific~tion set t•orth by U-Haul; Y.hat there were some atations in Anaheim wherein ten trailers t-ad been p?rmitted, however, th~ n~ext thing one knew there w~,s a cenglomer.at~ or di.f.ferent typea u~ trailere on the aite, which was not the intent of the Cummission i-. approving ten trailera. Commisaioner Itowland inquired what tho var3.~us classification~ A, AA, an~ AI+A meant in ra*.inq of dealers - was it bASed upon ~:c~z~cmics, sales abil~ty, or their facili.L•yj whereupon Mr. Werderitaoh t~tated that it ~vas b~ssad on both gize of the site and operating ab~lity, and if the site were large enough, t:,ey miq:~t pazmit har,dling ot trur.ks~ but at first they woul.3 star.t out with trailezs and then qradual2y get into the larger vehicles. C~mmissioner Rowlar~d ab~srved that it then was based both on econo~nic dbility to take care of his accounts if he hnd outstanding m~rchandiaingt wheroupon Mr. Werderitsch 9t3~PC7 that they hnd a traffic control center. in Oranqe Cour.ty, and all dealers weze liated un a boar~ and the equipment that aas lea~ed to their premises at the tim~ it was nsaigned to them and when it wae taken off o~ the property. ~ ~ ~ FiINUTI~:S, CT'1"i PLANNIPIC.; rc;rtMTSSiON, Nebxuary []., 1`:~"l:~ 7 3-8l1 AMEN~M[.NT 'f0 'PI.TL}'~ 1.H AP~AIiF.IM NUNZCIF}1L CG[)F (Coiittntteci) .~.._ _~.._.,_..._ ~___..~-•1-------.r.___. _. __._._ -°- -•-- C'~mmiyalonor. Rowl+~nd thF.n no~od that if a paxh..i.r_ular etat.to-i had abused hic~ 11cu~~af~, tt~~n thc City r.ould ~~+~11 an U-•Haul nnd Y~ av~ L-hem lo~~k into the. altua- t:i.on~ whereupon Mr. Worcicrlt.KCh atated this wern poeaible e~i.nc:~~ thay t~ad eav~n peopln hendling *ti.is pnr.ti ~~le~r phaso of th~3 bus i neNS. l'l+xnnir-g SuNorviB~r Uori McDnni~i noted i:h~t it: would appc~ar. to ba approprieto ~-,r~ o-h~ ~•~~mmle~aio~t off+~r ~<ime clarification at ~_his t•.im~ reqar~ing ronl•al trucke si.nc~ ~.h~y wor~ not ~ermitted on aArvice gtati~~n ditc~y ar. che k~~:etl~~~~~.• tim~, and only kon tYA:L1flX'P of any size wore permitt~d, oxcapt whet~ tha s~ation wae within 75 f.oet of' a roeidential zune, anly tiv~s lrailexe were por.mitted, and if an ~~a.t~ia~~n.i w~~ intorestad in renting trucks or *.rai].ore that wero not permic.t;od on a service st•Ation s~te, ha woul.d hat•o to dv tt-~.s withi.n n buildinq or a ac~nd~tic~nal ur~e pc~rmi.t to a11ow euch eCor.fn~ on the ouC~ide. ~'~mmi ~:eion~r t r.~rario r.equeat~d thnt Mr. '~,owry clarify tn~ Codc+ govarning etander..a fo.r sarvicd statione on paye 11-3-07. I,Angthy aiecuasion wa~ tl-en hold bAtw~en th~ ~ominiesi.on and ~•.r. MoDaniol nnd Mr. I~owry r.~9.~rding th~.~ inCcant of this s~ct~.ion ~~ t:-o Coae, and upon itA cp~- cl~zaion, Commi.~sluner Fnrano requeHf:ed ~:hnt anld oection h~ rc~worded so thut tliere would bo n~~ doubt na t~~ the ~ntenc of t.he Cor•'miseion o. ~t.afP a~ to whak was permittecl. Commfasionor. Gauer xeauested that the re~erence mada Lo pcrmltting~l-Haule adjac }: to ~ r.esidonti.al uz:e ria deiete,d R~~r.. A service statlon was onauyh oE a riuisanc~ not t~ compound the nuisance b/ permitting U-Hau.l trailorr~t wheze- upon Mr. McDsni.e]. ~tatod that this was par~t ~f t}~e present Code, and Ataff was oi-ly carrying ~t or into the naw si.L•F d~volapment ytandardc~. Commisa:toner ~:°r.l-,j1_ noted that if the ordinnnce waR pasr~ad a~ writtcn, then any servire stat:~on in ~own coulc~ ator.e trdi.ler~s and trucke, and they st~.il ~~i1d have fi.ve to ten t~.r.ucks ~r trai].ere, hor~~ver, L•hi~ 47dH not: the intant. o£ t.a Plr:nning Cummission, arici at thi~ point in t~ me, the Commi.a~iun should set ~tringe-~t rules arid regulations na to size of the lot, inauriny a succagsful serwice et.ation operation, and if t1~er.e was room, then they cov.ld go into the U-Nau1 rer~~al ~usiness, but; they iauat hbv~ r.nom to aupply ci~culation, and he wou~d ha'_e to seF ever~~ ~ervir,e statian in t r.wn t»rn i~:to a rental facillty, liowavr~r, trucks wou!.d anear. getting into a:2ry~r opec~ation. I1r. Werderir.sch nc,*.ed thak the ~i.ze of nome o£ ~hese vehicles would be undar iCC s;ulations, an.~ this would eliminate parkinq o£ the veh::cles at sQrvice atation a~.tes. Mr. Lo~rry noted that if the ordinance wae writter~ a~ pruposed, it would sti11 be ~ithin the permitted uses of sesvice stAtions at the ,resent time, and alI that was being added Co the propa~ed aite clevelopmer. t~tandards would be pormitti.ng trucks to bc i'enL-ed from a sPrvice station aite . Commissi.oner Her~st 9~'StP.CZ tha~ thi~ wbR not what the c:ommission wanted •- truckg ahoutd be llmited ~s to size of the lut for saiz truck ~tozage or r.ent.al, and pezhaps *he Cammission sho~ild mc~et at a work session with Mr, W~~rderiteah as ta wr,at the normal size of t.rucks would hF, and inquired whetY.er thia was an arbi- tx•ary fiyvre as set f~~rth by sta£.fF wt~ereupon ~lr. t•icDni~iel stated that th3s wae A:'1~171~AI ai.ze f~r two-axle trucks. Commisaioner Herbst noted that the length of beds va.ried, and one cculd liave a 20-faoE hed on a 1~-ton truckr whereuQon Mr. Wgrderitsch ~tated that their trucks were lb and 20 feet in size and had the same wYzeel baoe, howeve:, the differ.ence came al~out iri L•he bed of the truck. Commiasioner Flerbet inquired what ~aould hu~+pen if the Commiasion determined a more reotr~ctive measure ahouid be adde~f, einca if aorvice station~ waro beinq ~ermi.tted by conditiun~el u~e pezmit in r-n~f zone, w}int !f it c~uld be require9 to ha~e rantal equipment permitted by conditianal use permit an a aervic:e station sito~ whereupon Mr. Lowry stat~ed Chat conei.derable rosFazch r~ould have to be dane ro giv• that the proper. languagg. ~ ~ MINU'fF::, C'TTY 1'I.ANNING COMMISSION. I'~~bruary 7.1., .1973 73-89 AM~:NDMFiJ'C TO TITI~E 1~ ANAiI~,.tM Mi1N1:.IPAL COUG (CUntinued) Ccmt~~.nfl!onnr ti~rbnt Atated t;hat U11 now snzvic:~ etat~lon~ shaul~ be by concYikiunal ure pcrmlt~ Alld the okorage Knd r.ontal ~~f trail~:re on e~orvice~ stat:.ion nitom Br.~«ia be by cocidit +.<>,~al u~e pormitT rhat ho wae not oppos~~i r.o utf.lity trucke, bu~ ho Aid not W4Tlt: L'U neu t.rur.k trailore "or rAnt on a~arvico atnrion ~ito. Commieuioner Fa~rnno ~guin re~tazated khe f.act that he~ wantACl SE1Cf~.Uf1 18.fi1.02~ (.07) on Fag~ 11-3 t,u br further clr~rifiad ainca his .interpz~etati.c~n of it wno ihat iP all thr.eo cona.:~.icc: ~ ~r.i<.~r~ad, tl~on th~ sarvi.ce otnCi.c~n r.oulrl not etara trucka or. t..railErK on-~i.ta, buh !f xny one Wae Ab~aon*, t'ic~~ }lk! u~uld ~:.G-e !! trailex• ~ thi.e~ sL~~uld bc furthor. cla,.if~~+d me ta whet and how tliinge coulcl be stor.ed. Commiasioner Gnuar ~tated th~t ho could not• eee why enY of th~+ c'oniu-iseion wantFld to have etore~g4 of U-Hatil tra~iler~ adjecent to a residential uae b~cause poople connar,ted these a].1 tiin~s of the day anQ r~ight, and lt wt~s b~d enc.~uqh havinq gaeu].ine narvi.ce ~n~- fum~s coming Ex~am sArv.ice sication sitea nat ta hnvo to ba bather~cY by la•te arrival.s ~n~1 depaY•turee of travel trnilar.a. Cammiasioner k arar~o tlien rc~plied thai: the roae~n the dovelapment sC3nclarc~s we~re conei~ered aR pro,~ased wny bE.causo tha hoight ot' the wal.]. wae ndNquato t~ ahield rasi•~ontial uses, and tYiere would }~o no circumstdncea •r~hare they would bo 't'hat clase to reaid. ntial prupe.rty. Commiaeioner Faiano c~ffered a mot•ion ta ad•~~~t th.: new -sFrvice st:atiur~ ;me~ndmenta as depicted an e~:hibits p.rnsented, except that tY-e lsuguuge of PagA 11-3, Chaprer 1b.61.022 (.0'7) be further clarifiyd to convey the requiremer.k. that nc,ti maro than ten vah3cles m~y be etored on tha ~roporty~ thet tho overall hPi~ht be n~ hiqher !.ha.i 10 fe+eL- arid tiie length no more thun Zi .f.eet, which woul.d include the cab; and that the vehicles may nat be stor.ed ln the fron~ setback. Continued discuss~.oz~ was held by the Commiasion relative to t:he motion, with Com~r,i~aioner Gauer requesting that an addition~l ac'-'ti~n ba madc~ zn that no tra.tl.ers be allowed at a~ervice stt~tion sites wichin 75 Le~` of a xesid~ntial zone, and upon its conclu3i.on, Commi~csioner Farai~o withdrew lais motio~: F~r approval. Cantinued discuse~ion was held by the Cammission relative :.~ deleting reference to truc}cs in 18. ~i1.02.". (.0"/) so that they could not bp permitted by righ*., but only by conditional usc hermit, in order that n n~orQ definite ~ontrnl aould be exer- cised ~~-rer storage and rental. of tk!eae Lrucka on the service station sites. Mr. McDaniel, in response to a q~i~stion by Chairm~n Seymour, noted thdt the raas~n trucks we•re included in *.his rFCOmmendation wss because a number ~f atatians undor present cir.cuu-stances hnd illeqally etor~d truckE on the site for rent, and it was~ fe]t that since this was a necessary po=tiun of ~~e busir~ess, this was an attempt to accommodate the rental people. Commissioner Seymour noL'ed that it app~arefl the Commisyion was at a standstlll in what they ~a:zte~, and perh~.ps a cori;:~.nuar~ce would he in order. Commissioner Rowlar~d i~oteci that trucka wore naC permittad as an ancillary use in sezvice station operation4, but they were presently 1.11ega1 on some service station sites beii1g ofEered for rent, ancl if the rental of trucka was d~Zeted fru.n permitted uses, then they ~ao+ild t'IdV6 to apply for a cunditional use permit so that the Commission could determine whether the site was proper fox' the pro- poaed rental trucka. Commi.c~sioner Rowlafld oftPrsd Resolutio~i No. FC73-34 and niuved ~or its paseage and adopt.~an to adopt and recommend to the City Co;incil adoption of amendment~ to '.itle 18, Chapters 18.Ot3, Defin3tionJ 18.37, C-R, C~mmerr.ial-Recreation~ 18.40, C-1, G9neral Commercialf 18.44, C-2, General Commercialf 18.48, C-3, Heavy Commar• cialf and 18.52, M-1, Light industrial, 2onest amending the defi~ition of an r+utn~ mobile sazvice station, adding the de£init~on of a txuck aervice statior, r~squir- ing automobile service stations to be suL• jecL• to c~nditional u8e perm3t and ka th~ zeguirements of ~'hapter y8.61, and the addition of a naw chapt~sr. er~ti~tle.d 18.61, Critazia nnd DoveZopment StAndarda for Service Station~f and roquiring sarvice ata~ione to be auhject to thc•: approval of a can~itional ur~a permit, clarifying Section 18.61.022, Accessory Uaes, •07 - Re!~tal and stoxaqe of utility trailera by the deZetien of any reference to truak~i, eotting foxth that no more than ten ~ ~ ~ MI'NU9`FS, CITY PI,ANNTNG COMMISSION, FoUruc-ry 21, 19'!3 '13-90 AMENDl1~R1T TV, TITL~ _1 b~_ANAHF:].M MUNJCIPAL COf)E (Continue~d) r.reil~rr nze ge+z'nitted, *hat khn ovozall ~fimenaiuns at any trailers nut c~xcAe~ LO foot ~i~ heiqht and 22 leot t~i J.engtht that krailer~ nut bn etored wi.thin the requirod huild.'.ng uetbacka e-d,}acent Y.o etreeC ~rontmg~n nor oncroa~ch into ~.he requi rc+b oetbacke~ end that only five trallezs b~a pe:•mitted w~here a r~~srvice dtatian wae M~ithin '15 feet oF A b~undary ot r~ r~eidnnti3l zone ~r ~obilehomr p7rk. (:ae Rooulution P~ ~k) On roll call the fUre~i~.~in Xea~lut~on was paHSed by Lhe following vote: AYR°t COMMIJSxONE ~t t~ll~~eci, FAl"Rf10. Gau~•r, Nerbsl•, Kaywaoii, Rowland, ::eymour. NOC:~ c C~MMI5S20NF,l;::: *JOnA. ABSFNZ's CON.MIS~IONi~.~t~: Nono. Camr~~iseioner Gauer ~{~~r.liFic+c~ his "rya" voea t~y atating khat he agrecsd w~th tha rec~uf remant that A c:(1;1CI.LL~Of1d1 u~e permit bd requirAd for the Fet:nbl.iahm~nt of any aarvice statin~~, b~it had raservatiozs aa t~ pdrmiltir~q ran~al and storage ~i uCility trailo~~ adJacant t.a r~e~dant.ial zones, or permitting truck rente~l therato. ENVIRONMIE:NTAL IMPACT - CONTT!VUF.'D P;JAT~IC HEARxNG. ANAHEIM HILLS, INC. AIVT~ TEXl-C:0 REPURT c~0. 84 V~NTURE;S, INC., Attontion of Jumos IIarisic, 380 Anahcim ~~ ~ tlill¢ Roed, Anaheim, Ca. 92806. Property cnne+i.st~ of VARIANCE N0. 24'15 appzoximately 35 acroe located on the e~~uth side ot ~ ~ C~-nyon F.im F,oad, 210a foet• eaet of Noh1 Ranch Road. TENTIITIVF' MAP O~ TRACT NOS. 8215 RLQUES'fED VAT2IANCL: WA2VE (A1 M~NIIMUM F'RUNT S~;TBACK, AND $229 (B) MINIMUM LOT WIDZ'N, (L1 MItIYMUM - '-` L07 ARGA~ (D) REQf1IR~MENT THAT A LO~' SHALL l~UT SI~JE ONTO ADl ART~RIAI~ HZr,HWAY, AND (E) REQUiREMENT THAT A ~ LC?T StIALL NOT rRONT OIdTO AN ARTERIAL H I GHWAY . TF.N'fATIVE TRACT kEQ~JL;ST: E:NGINEER: Willdan Engineering, 125 South Claudina Street, Anahejm, Ca. y2005i proposing to subdivide Trac` No. 6215 into 36 R-1 zoned lots snd Tract No. 821? into 40 R~1 z.~necl lota. Subjac:t petiti~n an~3 krac~ mapa were continued from the moerinqs of January 22~ 1973, '' >r. an Envi ronme:-tal Impact RepaXt review and f.rr:~m FAbru~r.y 5, 197 3, for the submie8~on of revi~ed plant~. No ane aQpearnd in opposJ.'~un. Although the Ropoxt to the Commiaeion was not re~d at the public hearing, lt ia referred to and mada a pnrt of the minutea. Mr. Jamea Rodgeru, Pi~eol3enL• of Westfield DpvelopmQnt Company, appearQd b~f~_:re the Co~nmisei~i~ repzesent~ng C~-e developFr and noted tYcati befoxe he went in*_o any ahanges that ~.•ezo mad~ to thc~ g.lan, he would ? ixe to review the tentptiva t.rac.ts for the Commisai~nera who were not pre~er.t at t`-e laat hearingr that tli~y were }~xo~asing two tra.cts having 76 home~ :..-. cotal, locaCed ~.n the Northridge area of Anghe•lm Hi.ilaj that *_h~y woulci be the builclers at.d devolopers, puxchaAing the property from Anaho.t-n Hille and continuing the exiatfi~g pkoqram of Woodcre3t davelupment, which was lticated abo•at 1G00 yards to the wetst fro:n thase propc+sed tracts, and they propoaed to build ttip same types of homesj that the de,.-iaity ~~ould be ~ 2 c1we11ing units per acre insteacl af the projected 2.3 units per acre f.or this parceli th, t~he price raz-ge inciuded view lot premiums and woul~ ranqe in pxice from $45.~~~0 to $55,000~ that they planned ta build quality-type homes at this lacation• t.t~at at the last Plann:.nq Commfaaion meetinq the C~mm3.esion aske3 him to t~tndy an9 area ~n the west e.zd o£ Tract No. 8215 where some 6000- square foot lota were progosed~ that tkie aeason for theaQ lots and the r~~qs:aaced varis.ncee wsa because Af the terrain of the land end the ability to qet a reason- ablP yield or. tlte properGyr that they were nnw down tc, 2.2 unlte per acre; that thay had made a study of this area and pi~oposod ~cypos of homes that would t~e located on the weatern port~on of the trac~t and that r.heY were auggestinq thet they boald plan three-bedroom humea far the smaller lote, which would cut doKn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ MINU'PI.S, Cf.TY PLANN?NG CUMMISSTON, I'abrue+i•y 21, ].973 ~~"91 T:NV7RONMENTAL Lt4YACT RP:POEtT N0. 84~ VAiZ1AhC!'s N0. 24%5, AND TC:NTA'1'IVC MAP OI' 'rRT,CT NOS._ 8215 F,ND a~19 C~ntinued) ____,_ „ _._.._.._.__ ~ ori the numt,ar uf. peunle end vehlcloe in tl~ie antire nroa, and a»e of th~, plnns lor four bedr.oome would havn a Ctir~e-car. garayc - i:hiR co~~ld mean ona +~ddl.k~.onal spaca in the garlgo und one addit~lonal epncc~ in the drivawe-y~ that propoaing threa-bodr~om hc~mnH or- emal.]er ].ota wa~s n logi.c:al aolution t:o overcoma tho conuarn af the E~lanni.ng Co~nm:laeio~i~ tha~ ~riey had analyYed the numbor of pc+rking ~prc~~e c~vr~i.lable rrherR 20 i•iom~~o wore propo9ed and countiny th~ parkinq apaca ~n thc at:c;.~, •.:~ith lcg;l pax!;ir., °tsl?^ of !? ~; ~? fcet ar.d thc pazl:ir.g p=ctowed or available un ~lrivoweye af thF in~~iv.tdunl lota, ae we~1 re ~h0 c+ncloeaA gnx~;qa ~arking~ *.hor.e would bo 176 per.kir~~~ epacos for theao 2~ h~mon, anc5 to g~.ve ~a comY~+~r.ieon witt- a L•ypical 7200-s~~uare faot lot of en R-1 suhdiviaion with 70- fa~~t w~dc lotc~, taking Che a+~m~ standz~xd etreat rieL•b~cke, otc. , there would a~.au b~: 176 parking apace~i rhat. thu reaeon why th~,r~ would, b~ more p~rkinq waa be- caune of on~ eide stroot parking, pa.rticularly wh9ro twc.~ eideA of the atrc~~t hi~d flaq lots wtiich would hdvc- two tu f.oux parking saacc~s taqethor .~ith a tt~ree-~sr g~rayr•,~ that tiinre was mare room than thore at~peared, evc~n with GO- Aot wide .lotcj th~t ancther c~mpar~qon whic:- wss a c~n~~er.n of tho Plann.ing ~'ommisaion waB the fact t•.hit somo af tha lots weze lax•ga, hawever, c gr~at donl ~f thi.s was in olope area, and the axh•lbit on the Wall had the c3~rk coloring which in~jicated the c~lopo araa and aleo indicnted. th~ pad area availabl~ for the 76 lot~, thare•- f.ore, dlviding th~ number of late and the avAilablo pad ar~a, thErc waul~! be '1320 ~quare fe.~t for eac}- lot, exceeding the l~.vable pad ~rea of the typic~l flatland subdivisicn, whicli would i.ndicate ~hat tt~~y no~ onl.y t~acl th~ ~ame tctal pad area, they also had additic+nal o~,~n qieenbelt orea, as well ~s one sidc~ pa,.~- ing lane ar~ th~ majnrity of the etreets, ~~hereforeo there w~r.a decided benQfita which woul d not be evail.abl~ tn r.he typ~.cal 7200-equare foot lats . Commiaeioner Kaywood reques~ed that the deve2o~er indicnte on the map the loca- tior~ of the galf caurae f'r~m these homes~ whereupon Mr. Rodqera i.r.dicated the greenR and fairways were lacated to the aouth of this tract. ~o~nmio~ioner I:aywood theti inouirecl whether L•he t~omes would be vi.sible fr~~m the golf coursej whez'eupon Mr. ~tadgei~~ stated that the homes c~uld be seen to a degree - that the homeg we:'e on top of a hill, but mar.y of the homes would l~dve a 41-foo*_ rear yard, although it was possible that they could be se9n from a ~iist .nce - ttiey would not ne seen if one stood dire~tly balaw the slope. Mr. Rodgexs, in r~sponse to questi~ning by Comm~.ssionera A21red and Kayw~od, noted that Lot No~. 34, 3S, and 36 af Tract No. 8215 were shallow lota that were widea' tb~n 70 feety tYiat because of the layout oP the land and the topography, this r~~sulted in a v~ry narrow "goos~neck" alignmes~t of Canyon Rim Ro~d, a~iding up with a ver,y narrow piece oF land with considerable slope, and it was the' - inteni. to have spec.ially c~es:lg;~ad hames for those three lots ~ whPreas L-i~~ ~ther lo..s would :~e developdd ~vith their ~tandard homex. Commissioner Rowland inqui'ced whether a model would be dev~loped on one of k:hese tract~ or would the rnodele in Woodcrest be used to aell the~e let~ s wher~upori Mr. Rodgers staL•~~d that they did not intend to develop a model on these i.~~~ -g, but there would be a pZot platt and perhaps a detail plan of one of the homes, Cummissi.oner Rowland then etated that hi~ concern ~•~as th : fact thaC L~t Nos. 34, 35, and 36 of Tract No. 8215 had most. of their rear yarG area iii alope, and it w~s the z.::~P~nsibility of the 3eveloper to advise piospective purchs~Aers of this proulem since they werA noL gnlf course vaeW l~ts, and he wan~ed anyone inter- est.ed i.n puraha~ing thQSe lots to be fully aware af the groblsm before pur.chasing th~m~ whereupon btr. k~dgers stated that the three lots in ques ~ion wauld ha-re to be handled i.n a very special a:anner; that a good poxtion ~£ the project was aiready graded, and the property wotild not be available for eale until later in the summer; and that most buyere we,nX out to view the oites beforo any purchase was 3ecided upon. Commissioner Rowl~nd observed that tbe parking study was very interesting and muot have ourprised tt~e developer. Mr. Rodgers~ in responae to queatiening r~garding t~hree-car qaraqea, stated that only Plan III would have three-car qaragES, and that Plan IV's arch:tecture did not lend i~sol~ to a three-car 3araqe. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. ~ ~ MINUTL~:S. CI`fX YLANN.[NG CAMMt~ytOh, P'ebrunry 21, 197 ~~ ~3'yZ 1:NVJRUNMI'NTA1, IMI~ACT R~PON'P NU. ~{4, VAR7ANCl: NO. 2475, AND TENTATTVE M~1P Ok' TRACT NU:i. d215,AND 8219 (~:ontir-u~~::~i.___"~____ _ _ ._~. --- r,ummiesio~~er Ge~uor. abouYVed that he had .-thonr]ed the opnn houPe aL the Woodcrest ,lev~lopmont r~nd t.haught. thny wera veLy a*_trsctivo homee ~hich ohoul8 bA succeao- tul~ tbat L-h~~ plan b~fe~ru the~ Commiaeian appeared tU be e go~d plar. r~von though tcrn of tha lota weX~ undor 7200 r~qua~e ~eel•, the o~verall glxe of tha lota w~e 730~1 equ~re foet and tlia deneit.y was v~ry lowo and tliat although C}Itj1~A ten Iatn wnr~ u~idoz 72U0 egunrn CooY., they were not that mu~~h lenA then Cude required. Commisaioner A].lrod n~tc~9 that t.he Pl~r~niny Commic~eior~ e luny time eqo hnd L•a1k.c~d about zequ.ix.ing 11UU+ square tu~t. :iu:.~. in th^ liill wnA nnnyon ~+zF:a, ancl alChouhh it might be L•ru~ tlieae ~~ke wc~r.e 7300+ equara fo~,t overall, they clid not eppear to be whgt t.he Commiseion origi.nnlly int.ended~ that tF-e d~v~lnp~rn were preeont- iny a package that ~eve khe app9dranc~s oi' loukinc~ good, but etill tF~e ee~thetica of k.ll~s hil]. ~nd c:anyon ar.~e reqiilra 7200-e~quaia t'oat. l~te plu~ ~U••faot wide lot frontac~es, and ha f.el.t the develope~r shoul.d abid: by `haae raquirem~nts a~nd L•ha Commi~sic~n ~hould nat. be granCing any chanc~es, accidental or ott~+erw.i.su~ thai: tt-e urchitects and buil.dera may foal di £forently ~ r~nd that he fel t there should be no 34v'iation frum Code roc~uirsmerxts. What heppened tu l:he R-H-10,000 :~~nnre foot lot~s which ~ha Commiseion had etatt:d were d~sirablo for this azea? Commiesloncjr Hor.•bst statud that he could undorstand reducing lot widthe on cul- C~P-6AC lote in the tiill and canyor. r~rQa when homes were n~t in a line, but }ie could not see any noed far a varianaa of t.he lot wid~~hi that al.though tha c~evel- ap~:r nad ahown a].ut of open tlpace f.ac:lny the golf course, he was el~~ px'~po~i.ng only 5-f.oot ~aide yard sotbac;:H, which would be i:he sama a~ fl~tland r~tandards~ which had becn d~veloped far a numbc~r of yeaxA, but tihe area under considaration waA a px•lme area of Lhe city, ar~3 Y.hQ ~9aveloE»r was propoeing flatl~~nd standr~rd~s, yet: he telt thet the daveloper. should ~ise more inyenuity and butld better thnn ~latLand-type homes for th±a aroa overlooki.r-g Che gfl1F courep; tha.t he cotiild see ~u~tiEicatiun o~ a har~4hip for r0-foat wid~ lota For only a few lots, and khe only hardship he coti~l~ eee woir.'.? be placing the hc~mea tov closa together eince the h:ll.side could nct he uaed for autcloor activityj that 60+6 af the lota were unr]ex '1'l00 ~quare f.eat j that he cou7.d >;°e ger.mitting lesa than 7U-foot wide 1otr~ other. than on cul~de-e~a~s, aud wheie there were loiig streets overlookinq ~he q~~lf courae , he could rtec: rio resson for g~anting this wai,~~er J and that he was concerned }hat the City was *.~ot qett.ing the stanc~ards needed, and whi.ch tha C~rnniiasion was looking for., be~auae if these were adhere3 tu, the ~'teveloper stil.l co•_xd develop a firie home. Then in response tc a staCement by Commisaioner I'~rano that there were only ten lcts iinder 7200 square feat, noted that the Comm•lssion should really look xt che pad area which would indicate G0~ were under 7?.00 square feot. Commfssiuner Allred noted that with only 5-£oot side yard setbacks, this diffcr- ence between 10 feet required and that prop~sed was taken from the requir~d lot widti~, making L•heae similar to row huases in flatland areas. Commi.ssioner Farano i.nquixed what the City had given deval~pcsrs for requirements if they were submitting ~latland standards nomes. Commissioncr Herbst noted that. tt~ey were not develeping homes in accordance to hillsi_de standards; whereupon Com~r,iasioner Farano stat;ed that the Planning Commission ciid not want flatland atianaards, but neither had thQ City given the developers any si.te devalopment standards since ~he City Attorney s~ated devel- opMant could r~ot be accomplished in the existing FC 'Lone. Continu°ci ~iscus~ion was held Uy Lhe Commission regar.d.ing: I) wt-.iver of the lat width ar.d irisufficlerit eide vard satbackst 2} developera could nat aubmik other than flatland standarr3e plany u~iti~l the C.ity establiahe4 hillside ~tandardss 3) L-he developers could submit plana whor~in Eewer or r~o waivere would b~ requestadj 4) no ev'ider,ce aubmitted to justify waive:r of 60$ to 70~ of the Ct~dea 5) the developers were t.rying to place t~o niiah emphasis on view lots cuerlocking the y_~lf course because they could 5et at least one-third mare f~r those lots, haw- ever, ~f the daveloper would try davalopiny r~i~hin Code requirements, ho cou13 at~ll dema;.~ the price of view loty, giving people the exclusive Lype l:lving the price and t;:~ area warrantedt f~) waivers of the fr~~nt setbeck were al~o be- ing rec?uestec~, and o,:d Commiesioner had received a call from a resident where 6-10 foo!: setbacks had bea^ permit~a8, and this resident waa ~omplaf.ning that the car~ wexe p~rked acr.oas tha yidewalks, making it impossible to walk on eaid sidewalks, even ihou~h tha c;amm~esi.o;. had advised the ' 'ouncil that 6-10 I foot s~tbacks did no~. Work, end th~ complninant was in to pr~sent hez' pr~oblem to the City Counc:il who hac3 adopted the 5-10 fe ..cb~eke. ~ ~ ~ MINI' , """ k'I,ANNZt' ": CUM:'lI5SIUN~ Feb;'uAry 11., ].973 77-93 F.NVIRONMtiN1'AL IMF''t\CT kEPORT 1J0. 04, `'~kIANCL NU. ').4'/5, A.NU 'fP~NTAII:VF MAP OF TRAC7C Nc)S._ E1215 ANU ~219 _ (.Con_t.inued') __.~..`__._- .` ._------- --._ ~~___ C:omro.inc~ionc~r Kr-ywood i.nquiro~! ns to the r.eneon for thc~ cii~feronce in pric:e ranga uetwoen tha Wc~odcront homee end the honee 1.n thie pr.o~~ogad devalapm~ntt wi~er.u- upon Mr. Radgexs atnted r.hi.a wda becauer~ khe~y w~.r~~ v~.ew lotA whlle thoea at: Woudcze~t wore flatlanQ .oCe, and many oP tha loL•s h++d promiume of 55~000 ur morF attacheci L-a eacti. l~t t~n~auee they wc.:e mora expenal.v~i to devc~lap, togethei wit•h tlie fxct. th~t the homns wa~ild bm deva.Laped Iatoz and t.l~ct cac:t o~ lumber and ot-hor moterlala would heve gone u~ in pric~. Mr. Rodqcr~, in reapona~, to queBt:lonn Y~y Commiseior-er would bg a cl.raati~: rerurtion i.n tho numbQr of homafl i xquare foet and 70~f-,ot wido lots wero deve.lopes~. In Wnuld be, rcducud tc below 2 unite per dcre, and .~inca on acreac~e and not lot:s, thA pz'1cs would be the same, lota had I~oen reduced. H~rhet, e~ated Lhat ther~ f. Code requir~m~rit of 72U0 addition, t;~o d~naity th~ Ci.ty baaed tP~eir. feeo even though ~he numUnr of C~mmis~iontr Herbst ~otd11 that even L•hauyh tho developar wae etating hc+ prop4sed viow l.ots ov~;r.lookinq the golf: courae, the~~ poople would also l~e lookinq into tiieir naigtibora' bedroam~ recause ol the CLOfl9tlE'.Afl of the homoe wikh only 5••foot aet~ackst wh~rpupon Mr. Fadgere atated thnre wan no nodd far the aido yar.d since the most impressive vi.ew waa to the front nr. L•lie r~ar~ n»d that most of the r~treeks would bo sin3lo--load etreeta, glvi.ng more upon S~dCP_ appoar~nce. Commi~aioneL Allred atate3 he would prefer t}ia* aubject pra~~erty be dc~velopecl t~ hillsidc~ standardo rethar then Elatland standarde, gi.ving the roeidents more open space and g3vinc~ thtsm sam~thing for their money sinco fr~m expe~:-i~nee, hr+ving liveci in the Nohl Ranch aren on R-H-10,000 lots, tl~ere was a 20-f.oot setback bet~~epn biii.ldinga along eide yards, and hQ could see no rea~s~n why tlie deve].oper could not bu.ild in n similar mannerT khereupon Mr. Rodgers atatod that many of the side yard setbacka w~re simtlar tr what we+a being propuaed under oubject tracts in the Nohl Rar~ch area, and t.hey };ad triQd to 1a•y out the tracts to hlllsidc ~tan3arde, but becau~P th:~s waR an irregular piACe of ~rop- orty, they were unable to do so without same waiverst and f_hat he felt they w~:re deaigning to hil.lside etati~dards. Commi~sioner AI1rEd inquired whethor thQ dpvelo~er could cleaign t.hes~ tracta withuut any waivers and received a negative resp~nse. Commiseioner Harbst aqain inqui.rad a,s to the numbar of lots that would be eliminated i.f the developer provi9ed 70-fo~t wide lots, although he racognized tha~ cul-de~sac lota would have 4S-foat fr~ntages, tli~ fact zemained thac the peCitioner had not prover a h~~xdshi.p zxisted to gra~it the waivera be.ing re- queateds whereupon Mr. Rodgezs stated that he did not t-ave the ~tnsw~r readi.l~~ available, but he would like to m~ntion th9 fact that these lots flared out at the rear from GO fee~ - the w~.dth at the fror.t nortion in m~,st of the lots to where the lot width at the .location of the striacture it~e1F was closer ~0 70 feet, and the majority of the lots in both tracts flared out ev~n it appeared they were only 60 feet at front, therefore, although it appear•~ thn3e werQ narraw tats, in ~ceality tl~ey were almoat standard at the building line. Commissianar Herb~t inquired whether the developer could de~ign tho lots so that there would be a minimur~ of 70-faot lots at th~ ~zouae line; whereupon Mr. Rodgers state3 that in most instances the wid~h of the l~ta would bo mnre than 7U feet at tho hou~ae line. Commissioner Herbat observed tihat from his calculati~ns there appeared to be lots which ilaxed from narrow to wide bo~h at frant and rear. Mr. James Barisic, Vice President of Anahe~.m Hills, appeared hefore thA Commission and atated that the laat time the Commissian was talkinq abaut pro~ects in the Anaiieim Hills area; discussion was held reqarding tha PC Zone which everyune thauqht would be the best zone, ho~•~ever, it clid not turn ouL- that way, and it had been quite a i~umber c+f manthe of appear~ng both befoxe the Planning Ccmmiasian and Ci.ty Cnuncil to try to work. aut eamethiny with flexibility, and the R-H~-l0,Q00 Zane permitted averaqe lot sizes of H500 aquare feet, however, Westridge hau alope ~reas, and one could not get aNay from the alopes, however, the view lota could be planted with greenery and irriqated, ~ ~ ~ MINUT~S, C:[TY Yi~ANNING C:OMMTSSION, F~br.unr.y 7.1, 197:{ 73-94 ~NV1RnNM[;I~TAL 'lMPACT RF.PORT N0. 8A, VAt2TRNC.I's NU. 2Q75, ANll TENTA'P1VE MAP C)C' TRAC'1~ N05 _ (i215_AND _8219 _(Continue~y~ __~__._ ___~_,+,__,___._._ ~,___~_.. whieh would ~ne-kr~ them very ~tt.zactive, and nlt:hough Cht~ :]ommisetun quoetic~nec7 lote htiv.lny 45 l•0 55-foot wid".hn, thwy f.elt. th~sy woi•o piopo~.l.~~y vory rt.tructive+ homea en~ wc~rE+ charging more f.or th~+ la-nu UOCAl18H uf the viow patent'_al wl-i ch peo~~lc~ ~~ant~d bad?.}r~ tl~at veri~n~oe appeared tu be re~{uired ~fter the,r fo~xr:. out they could no~ devel.a~~ within thc+ conf.ine~ o~ th~ 1'C ~I,OI1Q~ howevr~. ; th~ use of vnriances waA ~nno~ er mothod of cie~elo~iny in i:h~ hil.laidu erea~ whicl~ thAy used after the PC Zn~~e became inaffectivei tl-at gtat~ments meda by thr Comm~esi.on reqar.ding deve].opn;ant in accordanc:o Mith flatland q~andards in the hi1191dc~, but they di~i not want the vari.ances llil~.~3b ~hey wero nocoasaxyt that. the Commiqaian r~ ~so talked t~bcut laxqmr lot~, and the lots chc~v propo~~-d woro fairly laryej L•hat the pz•ime con~ern of Gomroieeionor Herbst we-a tho lot widtn, howavor, this pro~act could bo gr+~c~ed flat, but the Commi~oion r~nd ~~nahaim ttil:~e did r.ot ~v~tnt to ~l~stroy th~ae hills~ that they prapeE~:3 varl3tione betwoen pade which woul.d y~.ve a b~tLdr apper~ranr.o to the commur.itys that ~they were all sinyle- 1~ad, curv~d yt-zflet~, a daaign thnt wos~ ~u!.te unlque, and in order to give these h~mes ~on-e uf the requirom~nts had to bo compromise~. zn addi.tion, whi.le the Commi.saton w~s diacue~ein,y those tracte, liQ had takan a tract ma~~ +~n~i had plotted eo~ae of the distancr~s camputin,y roughly tha ~ocal number of l~te un~xer 64 f~ot, and oi tY~ose that w~re under - 45 0£ the 76 lots wore on Cl1TVflD .~nd wher9 the buildin.g lines w~re drawn, thexa was c~ig:~ificantLy greatc~r wid~h of ~he lote than at the sL•reet sida; that thera ware grade Aepar~tions cn tha oasterly tract~ and l•hen pc~inted out the varioua grade levels, stati.ng tliat there was 1lttle in this tract tYiat woul~a claesify the homea r~s row hausest and t.hat the lot widths that w~r.o propose~i had a groat deal more open sp~ce because of the large rPar yards, ~vhile pr~spective purchasera wanL-ed thi.r~ open space wlth the golE' co~~rse to the xear or ~ront of nany of. theAQ homes. Mr, Barisic chen reviewed tha v~.riuu~a lot widtha, notiny tl~e dif!'erence between the width at the front af the lot and tY~e width at the rear, indicat•iny ttiat a 9•reater percenta9E of the lote had mar~ than 60-foot widtha ak the building litiei Ghat when r_he Commission tecogni.zod tl~at the PC 'I.nne w~u1d have limitatlcns, Anaheim Hills had presentad a cie~w Iiillside zoniny or.dtnance tn the City af Anaheim for corisideration, but th<>y wero unguc:cesaful i.n l;aving it adoptedr thac the Commisaion liad talkea about uniq~:e standard~, und in these ~lana they had tr3ed t~ develap unique :~t:ar~dAZdat that perk~aps J.ater some o£ these problams could be workpd out at work sessions~ that the tract maps preaented were about half the density permitted in flatla~id areae, even though some o[ the lots had 5-foot aids yard :~etbackst and that they wotild like to develoo one-acre e~tates in Anaheim Hills, but many pc!ople did not war~t lar.ge lots, although he imaqir~~d that the larger flag l~ts havir.y 15-foot ~aide acces3ways would be ths first to b~ sold, even though the average pere~n would not be purchaqing these lote. Commissioner Herbst noted that the horties adjaaent to the qo1P courso in Fullerton which had lot wi.dths were of more than 60 feet, people were having their lot~ fericed because oE tihe animals, and he aid not ~tant to ~ee the slo~~~s of these lnts fenced i.n where they could be viewed fr~m the gol~ course. Mr. Barisic noted that ther~ w~s additional slupe in the dark green araa of tt-~ map whiah was noL• the goli cour~e, and the lots flared to more than 100 feet i.n many instances. Commissioner Herbst wa.e of the opiniun tl:at the developex could redesign the tracts ao that there would not be so many waivers from the standardo becaiiae he was asking for 60$ to 70+t of the majority af the lots rut.hPr tnan 25~ to 30+h, and no hardship had been proven or demonstr.ated, and i;o approve thia would be destroying thQ City's standazda. Mr. Rarisic noted ~hat Anaheim Hilla had tried to come up with concrete ordi- nancea, but ~hey had not been accepted. Commisaioner Kaywood inquired ~~hether Mr. Barisi.c wuuld like a deferment to later in the meeting in order to try to resolve aum~~ of. the co; c~rno eacpresaed. by tihe Commisaian, nRking soiea rev~lsions that would be ~ccepr.ai ie. Commissioner He~bst inquired how a~any of tha lot.s eould be redesiqned to maet the 70-foot width~ wh~areupon Mr. B3riaic rcpliod that he dicl r.,t know beca~~ae af L•ti~ curvilinear str~et and becauae of the topography of the lAnd. - - -- -- ._J ~ ~ MI*~~J'~'FS, ,^,.T.Tr PLANNIN~ CnMNiSSTON, k'eUruary 2?, 1~73 73-95 FAVIROrMf:NTAT. 7MFAC'1' R?PORT N0. 84, VARYANCE N(), 247ti, ANn TEN~rATIVE M?~P Ot~' T F A C~P N u S A 215_ A N D 8 219 ( C o n t t n u e d~_____~ ~~ ~_ ~______,___. ~~____ _ ._..- Commi.a~~loneY ,:erbst Rtntc~d he aee conaerned a}~out the cma.ll side yard a~+pe~rarion UetNeen thea~ SSq,000 humae since tf~o dovelope~ wae propot~ing unly 5-Coot elda matbacke, nnd ,ie did not fael the puzchaeern c~i theac hart~oe e~hauld he~e thlo Q xposure, th~ereford, it tha d~vc~~.op~r couln ir~dicate the lote L•hat had o minimum ,~t n~ ~en:it 10 f9et nt the houea lince, ho wou.lci bo mor~ recept.ive to npQrovaJ.. commiee~laner Allred gtaked ho aould rathc~r see a 30-foot wi~la hcme ine~tond og i,~r.rnasin~ t!~e, lot aizc+ t~ 70 feot. Commiseioner Ruwland inquirc~d wt;athez it wAS tha or.her Commineluner~' concer.n regazdiny ti-e reductian oP. pr.ivacy as it pertein~d to tho ai.etance bat~-een bui18in9a - if. s~, he woa]i1 l.i.ke to ofr~r an ~ltw~rnativn point of view - i! rhe concern wae pzivacy, thon 10 fe~t r~ae adeq~:at~ deaardtton if sound in+aulation pYOVieiond wore made b~two~sn ik~e 1~ames and thesa r+oula i,n nc~ outoic~a nponin,ye facing a~ach oLher. Commidsioner Allrecl nuted t.hat privacy cou~.d be accampliet~ed by cloeing doara and win~9oMe, but l;e felt th~ eptb~ck ~ffnctod th~ aegthflti~:e a~nd should bo aonai :ered, Commiae~onPr HerbAt noted that no yrac3~ eoparationa weres pruposod -• thia w~uld appear likd row houaea si.milUr to homes in the RS-50or) Zone wher.e a~ 5-foot setbaak was parmi'_ted, h~we~er, the petitioner had ~+~.+~ s~ebm'tted evldence of hardshiQ t~ warrant waivere requeatecl oiz many of the Iote, and since this was supposEd to be one of the tinesr. ~sreaA in Ariah~::im overlookiny the qo)f couree, thi.s would appear like row houses zrom the a,l£ couraE. Commisaioner Kaywood stated she was more cnncsrned about tlle view from Yhe golf course looking up ° one could get the impression of nne lonq roofline. Mr. Baxisic nottd that when a truct map had bePn prasented previour., y o~i aubaect property, it had been laid out com~~LeL•ely diffArent than was now prasesnted as to setb~acks~, etc., but because of the engine~ring of the property, design of the eeweca and water fl~w, it was not passible tn lay out the stzeetd exc«:pt along the propoaed 1lnest that the propoasl was functional and aesthetically pleasings that there was a grade separa~ion~ and that only somts of thg tope of the homas wou1C be seen. Commieaioner HerbsC inq~iired how loriq it would take the 3evelopar to r~viaw the layout on the wall tc~ determine exactly what th~ bui.lding separati.cn wae on khe lots whsre the front of thF lot had onZy a 5-f~ot side yard setback, and wouln thera be a gahled roof having a 35 to 40~inch o~erhang, ar what? Commiasioner Farano 3tated that as long as the developeY waA going to revicw his plana~ he wou7.d like tu knaw what the building pads wer.e on Lot Nos. 34, 35, and 36 be.cause a building pad size of only 3610 to 3640 ~quaze feet was a 1.ittle difF3cuit to a~cepty whereupon Mr. Rodgers etated that they propoAed epacial homea with one atory on the flat portfon and Lhe second gtory woula be part of a slone at the reaz oP the ons-s~tory partiont and that tliese l~ts were 80 to 90 feet wide. ' ~ocnmisa:oner Farar~o noted he was not conc9rned wlth Yhe distance be~ween ro~.f- lines on thec~e three lota, but haw much of tho flat pzd area would ~hese homes take up ns to ground aoverag2, and a~sked tt-at thia in£ormation be made avail- able after the Commiasion r9considered this l:~°r ir- the meetinq. Chairman Sey~nour then stated that sub~±;::t petiti.on and ~racts would be c:c.nsidered later after the devel~per had calculated the informetion requested by the Planning Commisaion. (5ee paqe 73-104) g,Er~~~ - Chairman Seymour declarQ~° u ten-min:•*e r°c~:.s ~.~ y:35 P.~-. RL~OtJVE~IE - Chaixman Seymour reconver~ed the meetinq a*_ 4:45 g.m. , tl ~~w Commissioners heing pzesent. ~ L~ MTNUTRS, C.i~fY PLANN.1hG COMMI~;S'It~t3, Fobrurry 7.1., 1y73 73"9C~ RECLASrIP'ICATION -'')NTINUEI+ PUBI~7.:: HEAR:[NG. L'.[NI:RTY T~EASIN(;, INC. , 1'. 0. IIUX 72-73-3?. N0 314, Y'orbn L,inda, C+~. °.26Ab, Own~rt =eq-ao~ting tliat pro~~e.rty . -'- ~~~ ~~r deHCriUad au: nn .i.rregularl.y-sha~ed ~~urc:Ul oE lend c0~18~At' ing of r~~~proxinatol.y i.? mcre9 Itavinq a fronta~o of appr~~xi- mately 4.14 fnet c, n tho narth eid~ uP R±verdal.o Ave~r-u~; hnving a maximum do~th of nFp.roximatc+'ly 280 .°e~ec, 8nd being lo:r~t~d ot thc~ n~:~rthwHet ~.:ornor of the Rl.ver- eide FrReway and Riverda:~~ Avc~nuo be roclaer~itiied Pr~m th~ R-A, Ac;RZ~'UI.TUI~AL, 7.ONE to the C-1 ~ GENERAL ~:OMM~:RCIA1~, .'.^NF , Sub~eci: petitton waK cant.inued from th~~ m~-eting of Fotaruary 5, i973, for tha nubml.saion of deve2opment nlans. No .~no r~ppenracl i.n oppoPition. AJ.c:hc~uqh ~~he Report to the Commi~eion wae not re~1d ut the public hearing, it ie re£erred to and made ~ part of tha minutea. Commiesior~er Allred ~nquir.ed whe*_her the E~ekition:~r had checked with the E~igi- nec~ring Diviaion regarding the Rivor.da].e Avc~nue accea~. Mr. Oscar. Whitebook, SFCretar.y of Liberty I,easing, Inc., appeared b~fore the Commioai.on and nuted thmt tie had sp~Y,ci~ with the Zon.~nq Div~.sian sta£f ::egard- ing dCl.~BII o~£ Riv~.rdale and Tuatin Av9nuc~~. C~mmiasioner Allred ttien inquired of at~f.f ~••h~ther the developer had been noti- fied ab~ut the ac~:ess tc, Riverdale and Tu~tin Avenuea. Offi~o Enyineer .7ay Titus adviaed r.he Couimir~sian that the memorandum from the Tr~ffic Sngi.neer ~t~ted that z~ccesa would be diff.ia~a) r, bc~•ause of the bridgs on `PUStin Avenue and the ona on ~tiverdale c~eriouely impaired clesr vision from rhe private drivewa}~a from thi~ progoaeil commErc-ial projectr that the driveway on Riverdale should be 3U feet wicie with curb re~urnA~ that the drivsways ~n Tust~.n Av~nue should be reduced from two to one a;~d placed tn the «pgrox.tm~3ta c4nter Qf Y.he rzoperty und be constructed in the same mar-ner as thal: on River.dale; tha. B~.ilding 1 could be reloca±e~i on the pro~erty J and i:hat a serv~.ce s tatioa at thia location would not be desirak~le due to the ne~essary driveway locationa for siir.h an oper.ation. Tn addit3.cii to comment~ by the 'Px'afflc Engineer, his persoa,al feeling was that access to Ri.verdAle Avwnua f.rom this property would be ex.tremely hazardous, and thE i.CCnq5 on Tur~tin Avenue wo~lld also be dangeious, but it would be more desiraY,le than nny that would be propa9ed on Riverdale Avenue becaus~ of the fast trafFic from the freeway overpass. Mr. Whitebook atated that at the timE tY-e State had ~urject proper.ty 321C~ w9r~ planning to sell it to ~ buyer, the q~Yes~ion of access tco the property came up, and thQ State specifi.cally asked the question o£ a~cess af the Ci?:y of Anaheim. - and there was a copy of the letter in which the City assured the StaL•e there wou'!d be no objection to ~~n accer~s width of 25 foet to tlie ~roperty ovEr the old right-of-way or utility easement wnir.h had acc~~ss to J~fferoon Street; that they had accepted that statement in good faith and purcY~ased the property with that understand~.ng in mind, and his company hsd suggested that another access ne added aside from that offered in order to make the propzrty acaepeable; and that in merqing the two properties they did not do away with acceas but provided additional acc~ss off Tustin Avenue from the r~ar of tlioir property. Further- more, there presently was a servi.ce stati~n wliich had two entrances e:ach onLo Tustin and Riverdale Avenues~ and if one looked at the plot plan and the eleva- tion submitted, they were not requ~sting that there be a gas statior. since their plan did nut raEer to a service station= that they proposed a"Stop and Go" m~rket sincF that concern appease~ ta be interested in this property in one r~eparate building, and they were working thraugh an agency and had persono inter- estea in a reataurant, interior decvrating shop, and~or a L~ank; *_hat the main commercial atore would be the food maxkat, xnd the building would be lengthwise so thak it could be seen from the freeway or down the streetsj that the faci.lity ~_ ~._.._.. could be saen in sufficient time =ar peapie cv CIILCY it~.~~~ ~~~C ~..~t~~ of the bu 1- inga or. either T~xstin or Riverdale Avenuesj and L•hat it did not appear to be any more hazazdoua to enter this property xhan it would to enter the s~rvice station property acrona the street. Mr. Titue noted that although it woulci be dangerouo tc en~er or exit ~rom th2 property an Tuafiin Avenue, it would be vezy hazazdous on Riverdale Avenue bg- cause of the restr~cted r~ight distance on Riverdale Aven~e far several hundred feet because of the xate of speed croastnq over the crest of the freeway. ~J ~ MINU'PP:;i, C1'PY I'I,ANNING COMMTSSIU[3~ i'c`~~ruaXy 'll, 1.973 ~3°`~~ RFICI.ASSIP'ICA7.'i~rl NO. 72-73•32 (~ont:i~;uud} t~lr.. Whit~ebook noto~l L•hifl wuuld bc~ a matCar of. )uclgment ~aP tho people ap~+ed~nq dowrihi.ll, and ther~ roula b~+ a etop uign c~r.~~ctad for enyane oxiting from the commcrci.al proporty Qo that pea~le wa~J.ti havc~ to bA moro ca~rc+Pul going into tf~e prop~~rty anci <:~~itin,y to Ttivardelo Ave~nue, ~r th4y could Uo dlr.ncted to g~ in Riv••rdal~ Av~~nu~ Arid Hxik out ~Cur~tin Avonue. Mr. Whit•ehook , in rc~sponse t~ yuoet.toniny by CY-airm~en Seymoux•, r~oted l•.here wae v1 rtual.l,+ vury l.ittlr. diffFyrnnc¢ in tha acce~e sor~aration hncsugn thc~ gra-de was rai.sed an Tuati.n Ave,~~ue to get. tho st.reat ovar the river, nnd Lhe L~ridge was raised 1G Poet, reKUlting in An ert.i.ficiol hill -.lf ~nc~ loaked at it, it would appe~r that siib;}ecC prope;rty was down tct n v~11Ay, but thir~ ~vay an artificially crc~atod hill, and th~y intended to fil~ this araa in eo tliat iL wou~d bo l.evel with the ~~treet, eliminating tl.~ eharg decli.net thut from th~ point af the drive•~ way er ti•ancc~, hhe pxope~:r.y vcoul i b9 vi~:c-.ually 'lc~vel and thc~ro wnuld be a diet.nnce of 1~0 ~~ lOQ ~e~t ~n Rivordale ~vanue~ that the driveway e~.~rted befor9 the r~lope startod~ but the e~ni:lre ~I.CC~j~AKI:~/ would be r.ai~seii up to tho i: •p::, ~z nbout 8 f.eet, and i£ +hi~ were filled, this woulcl reduc:e the sons~ of h~ight of ~:~ia so-called hole; that ttie hoie woi~ld be i:illed from 4 to 10 Pae+t tviYh 10 fe~t ~f 'Puetin Avenua to briny lt to atreet ~~vel, but at the fro~way sida, only 4 fQet of fil.l wou. d be noedFd~ ai d khat the Ci.t:y e~atimated tlint in arder to level the oppositc~ corne.r, 650C` fa~t ~f fill. wn~ n~e~1Ar~, ~nd frnm tticir o:~tima~ tion, 15,000 cubic yarde wuuld c~e ~eeded to fi].1 the enti~,.: area. Commissianer Rowland obscrved t~.l~at the fi11 would cost about $40,G00. Commissionei Herbst ir-quir.~~d as to tihe typa of tre~tment that was propased f~r the rear oE th2se buildiiiga since L•hay wQUld be baeking onto the freow~y; whereupon Mr. Whitebook staL•ed thst the landscapiny would be bermed to halp :hield from view the rear of the build:nc;s. M~. Whitebaok then commented on the ecoz~umics, staking that tha ~tichfzeld ataticn required b500 c:u-~ir. yarr3~ of fill, and they had a deal with tl~e W~ter ~ontrol peopl~ because thay bad to scoup ~p the silt and sand from the charinel wt-ich they would depc~sit oti subjec:t property, and the cost of the fill wou13 be one- half the narmal coat because there would be no delfvery charge, howevc:r~ if this ar.ranR~~iaent had not- been made, the coat af th~ fill would be between $35,000 aiici $40,000, and by using the Qrsnge Caunty Water Dtstrict ~il.t Ancl sand, it would cost about $20,000. Mr. Whitebook, in response to questioning by Commisaianer Ruwland, stated that originally they had one parcel and the ruadway~ tllat they had worked with the City and had 3edicated that pertion bptween Tuctin and R.tverdal~~ Avenuea - if the bridue was widened to 100 feet, this dedication would taY.e care of the u2t3mate. width; that the stzeeL• had been im~xoved wi.th curbs p'_aced there~ and that they h~d posted a bor.d to insure that the sid~walks and other improvements would be provlded, hawever, si.nce that time, nothinq else had taken place. Commissioner Gauer expressed concern that granting blanke,t C--1 zozing without ~ny idea of what ~vas proposed for L•he entire parcel could present a problem. Chairman Seymour nuted that this appeared to be an engineering problem~ and if the Planning Commission aFproved subject petition, it ahcu].d be subject tn approval and satisfactioii of the City Engineer, ho~~rever, the remaining question was whether this was the ~raper pZaca f.or commercial developm~nt. Commi.ssi.oner Seymaur offered a motion, seconded by CommissioneY• Farano and M04'1'ON CARRIED, that thE Planning Commission, in conn~ction with an ~xemprion declaration atatus requeat, finds and det~rmines that the proposal would ha~ve no significant environmental impact, ana, thersfore, r~commends to the City Council that no Environmenta]. Impact Statement is necessary. Commissioner Seymour offere3 Resolution No. PC73-36 and m~red for its passaqe and adopkion to .recommend to the City Counril that Petition £or Reclassification No, 72-73-32 be approvad, subject to conditicna and sub;~ect to access to Tustin and Riverdale Avenues being approved by the City Engineer. (See Reaolution Sook) On ro21 call the foxegoing r~~solurion was paesed ~y the folZowinq vate: ~ ~ ~ M1NUTh:,, CT'PX k'[.AIJNI[~G CUMMISu'ION, Fobruary 21, 1'J73 73~'~0 RF.CLASS'tl''lCAT?ON_NC). 72-7:f-J2 (c'antJnu~d) AXF:S: C'OMMISSIUNF,RS~ AlJ.rnd, N'aXt~no, Gn~ior, -ic~r.bst, Key~~ood, RoWland, Soymour. NnESi COMMISSIONERSt Dlone. AflSENT: COMMISSI~NEttS~ Non~. VARTANCL Nt~. 2A70 - C~NTTNUF.D PpDLIC liCAI~~NG. KERM!1DA CORPO~N'CTC1N, c/~~ Atldntic "'-~ ~'~~~+ ItichPi~ld Con any, 17H6 Wont Lincoln Avanue, An~heim, Ce. 92~04, O~ner~ PAR COMPANY, 1020 1:aet Vc~rmonC Avonuo, Anat-uim, ~,a, 926Q5, 7#gontj r.ec~anet.ing WAIVL~RS UF (A) MAXIMUM NUMRCK OF f"RF~-9TRNDI;JG SIGNS, (8) MTN]'MUt~ D].STANCE BETWEEN F'R:G-STANDING SIGNS, (C) MINiMUM DTS4'ANCE OF ['REE- STA~IDING SIGNS FROM ABU'PTZNG PROP~RTY LINC, AND (D) MAXIMUM ARE~A OF A FREL-`~'~'ANf?- iNG SIGN IN PARICING-LANDSCA~'E RRFA x0 E1tECT FIVE SIGNS IN CUNJUNL"I'TON WI7'N A PROPOS~A Sl~RV1'.CE STATION oti psoperty cioACribed ae: A rectanyu.lerly-ehaped ~aercal o!' lnnd conaiaCing oi +~oproximat~ly .5 K~rQS ~.ocxted at the eouthwe~t c~rn~r of Kntalla Avenuc und State Co11~gA Boul~vaz•d, hr.ivin~~ fron~uges of approx~mately 150 fPet on 5tate Colleg~ Dasilavard and Ka~alla Avenu~ rc~~~c:ctively. PropArty prersently cla~sifipd M-1, I,IC~Ii'C INDUS'PRIAL, 20Nk:. SubjecL- petition waa continued fr~m tlie meetin~ Q~ ~7c~nuar.y z2~ i9%?, f.or allow tfine for. ataff to readvc~zti~+e waivArs • f thc canopy sigy~s. No one appe~.red in o~go~ition. Although ~he ReFort t~ thd C~~mmias~on wa3 not reIId at the puk~lic heazinq, i~ ~s ref~rr.ed to and ^~T~~ a part of the minuter~. Mr. T~d Cox, r~presentinq tho petit.ioner, Ftichfield 011 Company, incli.catecl his pr~aenr,E> to anawer quesCions. THE 11EAR1:NG WA5 CLO5F.D. Chairman Seymour obaer~ved that although thc~ Plarininy c;ommiseiun hac? been ~pposecl to the proposed txpe aigns, *.t~•c C~ty Council in ~hs past had approve~3 enid signs. Mr. Cox, in answer to Commissioner Kaywood's questior-, stated that the prapoEed siyning was the standard Arco aign measuring 46 square feet, ancl althouqh wal.ver of tt-e maximuin area of a free-standiny sign was being raquesttd, i£ one measured the actual sign dimensione, Chere would be only 154 feet, bu~ becauae there was open space between the sign capy, Che s:lze was consi3ered to k+e considerably more. Commissioner Kaywood inquired whether Arr,o made smal.ler signs than ~~ss baing proposed; whereupon Mr. Cax s`.ated that the aompany did have amaller ~igna but thQy could not hava them in Anaheim. Chairman Seymour inquir.z~l whether a monument si.gn cou].d be p~aced ~n the carnerj whareupo;. t:z. Ccx no*e~ ~_hA± tt,a si.te was wronq £or that typ~ of sign, and frcn the st•andpoint of k,lockiri~ ~he view of oncoming cars, a monu:,~ent siqn waa n~t desi.:able, and ne cou:d not eee how they could be appra~:edt that the proposeci sigi~ had been approved ry the plan cYieck engineer, but the cannpy eiqns had been forgotter~, therefore, the need for a vaziance; that they required the canopy signs because they illuminated the service :~tation; and that they were eliminat- ing smaJ.l2x• ser.vice stat:lons and pxoviding larger service stations with better signing. CAmmi~sioner Se~~mour offered a motion, seconded by Commiasioner Ka,ywood and MO~TON CARRZED, that the Planning ComR~ission, in connection with an exemption declaration status request, finda and determines that the proposal would have no signi~ican•t er.vironmental impact. and, trerefore, recommends to the City Council i:ha*. r~o Envizonmental Impact Statement is necessary. Commission.:r Seymoux~ offsred Resolution No. PC73-37 and moved for its pa~sage and adoption to grant P~i:iL•ion for Variance No. 2470, subject ~o conditions. (See Reaolution Book) On rolt csll the fazegoinq re~olu*ion was pa~eed by the followf.ng vote: AYES; COMMISSION~RS: Gauer., Herbat, Kaywood, Rowlaiid, Seymour. NOES: COMMISSZON~RS: Allred, ~arar~o. ABSE!VT: COMMISSIONERS: None. 1 '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ MIN~.~TL,S, Ct'~'Y 1'1:ANNING ~:OMMI`.'~1 ;Pi, )~~bruxry 21, 197J 73-99 VARIANtI~. NU. 2477 - 1'UULTC fi$ARxNG. r~AIJI, J. MC GI1CIiLY, L401 M~.ll.e.t F~traet, ~+ ~~ ~~ ~ Annhalm, Ca. '37.fl06, Own~i 7 MAH'TIN ~. RTPPf~.Ny, .1.P,19S Caat. Gal.at:inn, [V~. ~, R~wle~nd fieighr.A, Cn. 91745, Aqc~ntt r.aquqt,tiny WA'L'VCF2 ~~l' (A) REQUIRG9 5-F00'P `~OIazD ~11150NRX WAI.L 1:NCLOS~WG UUTL~CQR STORAGr". AI'tEn AND (B) MINiMUM FRON'T SETEACK TQ T.R~CT A CtIAT.NLINK P'1?NCE W7't'H RP:D- WGOI) SL~ATS INS'l~rnn OI' 'PHE: REuUIRFD MASONRY WA[~I, AND UTILI7L AN E?(ISTING STRUC- TURi: WtTHI[3 THE SI,'Ct1ACK an propart•y descriUdd us: 1~ racxengulerly-ehapod Farcc•1 of land conei.ating of approx~.mate].y ~..1 having 1~f ~+ fr.ont~go of apprc~ximately 1G5 fc~e' ~~~~ +he we;~+t ~ide oP Miller Str.oe4:, haviny s maximiim d~pCh of approxi- ~rtat~ly _110 fo~3t, and beiny loct~tod opproximaL-a1y 91~ foet south of t.he c~ntor- linc uf Oranqethorpa Avenuc~. Pro~ert•~+• prc~o~--t'.ly cl.as~ifi.ed It-A, AGRICUI.'fURAi,, ZON~. No ono appeared in op~,oc~ition. Although the Rcport to the Commlesior~ wae not road ~t: Y.he publ.ic hF.nrinq, it is reforred to and madr a p~rt of t:he minut~s. Mr. Martin Itippens, agent fur tho p~titioner, indir,ated h~.s prPaence ko ariewer c~ucationa. 2oning 5upervi~sox Ck-arZes RcUerta, i.n rasponse tc~ Comminflion qucstianinq, notod th~t the oxi;~ting home war~ loaated 35 Eeet Erom the riqht~-of-aay line~ Chat the petitioner prapo~ed a chainlink f.encc~ w.ith redwood slai:s along the noxth, weat, t-nd south property lines inst~ed of d G-f~ut mar~onry wall to scr.eer~ the outdovx' etoraqe from viFw. -~r~wev~r, a 6-foor ma9onry wa.ll wan propoeed at the 50-f.oot setbacY. liiie r~long the east property 11ne. Mr. Rippens, in response to Cummisaiun questioni»g regarding th~~ lenqth af L•ime it waa inten~9ed to mai.ntain tha ticuse for of'fice purp~ses, state3 that Y.h~y hacl purchased ~he proprrty witYi the intention o£ buildiny a new of.Fice facility in the future. CommlA~ioner Herbst inqu:ired whether l•.he petitioner would stipulate to a time limitationt whezeupon Mr, i;ippens statad that tYiiR was supposed to be a land- scapfng contractor's office, anci. they were spending considerable men~y to re- model the home, therefore, thoy woul~] like at Zaast thre~ years ta uso the hcmo for office purpose~t. Commissianer tiezbst notECl that the pe~itianez wa~ requesting a variance, nnd whenever a varia~i~;e was approved it wenr with the lan~~, hawever, this was not the intent of ~he CommiR~ion in granting tempora.ry waivers of the setback, and if tt~e petitioner would stipulate to what he c~n~~.dered a reasonable time, th.is '- ~' •. ~• i tC ~g1 nr~4'inn. ,~~iy-~,~ .,e ~a..en n ~a.. d„ . Chaix~man Seymour noted that tiie Clt~r of. Anaheim had very string~nt setback requirements ln the M-~1 2onej thaY. sc~metlmes the Commiesion gran~ed temporary waive-' of this seCback requiremex~t where isolatad parcels we~-e be~rig deve].oped xnd adjacent parcels were sti.ll beina used for r.esidentia7, pur.poaeat and tha:: at sur.h time as the remainder of the area developed for induatrial purpoaes, then this setback ~hould bp m~intained, *herefore, 3 maximum of t;~ro years should bQ grant.e~ for w~ai.ver of the zequirPd setback, howevPr. , at. the end of the two y~ears, the petiti~nPr could requ~st an additior-al exter.s~.on of timer anc', if th~ Commission d.eter.m.ined that the area was not dPvelopir.a fcr inc3ustrial pur- poaea, then an additional extension of tirne might be c,ranted. Comm:eaioner Herb~~ noted that the Cammission'a reason for not granting tch~ pezma~ient use was thPy d~.d not war:t to oerpetuate the use of t-omes for indus- trial puzposea in the indu~~r~.al ~,rea. THE H£ARING WAS CLUSLD. Mr. Rippens stated that althouqh they would like to have the ~i~e of the .iome Por khrae y~ars, he wou]d stip late to a two-year time limitation .3ubj~sct to ze vi ew . Commiasionor Farano offered a motion, eeconded by Commi~sioner Rowland and MOTIUN CARR:LEU, ~hat the Planning Commi.seion, in connection with an exosnption $ecleratian status .rpqusst, f.i.t:do and determin~r~ that the proposal would have no s~.anificant environment~l impact and, therefare, reccmm~nds to the City Cauncil that no Envizonme~ital Tmpact Sta~ement ia necess~~ ~•~ ~ ~ ~ M]Nil'C1;~, GI7'Y I'I,ANNING C~biM:CSSION, I'~Uruur.y 1.1, 1~173 73-100 VAKIAlIC~ NO. :!477 (Continuod) C.ummi~sion~r flHr.b~t vfferr~d Resulutic~r- Nr~. PC73-38 anfl m<~v~ci for ite peetiay~+ dnd ado~'-ion to qr.ant Pc~ttkion f~r. Verl.a~~~o No, 2477 For. a p~~riod of t~+u yeaa~r,, oubjbr,C t.o waivor of th~ mitiimuni Eront s~4bt-ck J.n order ht-At utilization nf thu oxieting rztructure m.lght bc+ madg and to deteor~n:lne at tl~u ond of Aaid kime pori~d whather c~ther roperti.ee in thie y0nc~r.a2 ~rea :~ed d~v~-loped for induel.rinl purposee wh,er~..~n thc~ 5<1-@u~:+t aetbe~ck ws» zequ~red, ar.~l i£ no developmont had o~ ciixi•R~t, th~n th~ petic.ioner Miqht euUmit a roquenr. ta the r'lu~ining r'o:aml8sfon fAr a~- ac~~iitio~al perl.oc~ o" kim~ for util ~ ~Ati~n of tho axiating srructure, ag eti.pulatod to by ~hc~ patitionorT that waiv~r uE tho raquired ~,••i'oot: maaonry wall wue qta~nte~l or~ ~ha bndie that ei.milur ~urepning tochni:~uas ~n the in~lue~riAl aree had bee~ nppr.oved i.~~ ~iie pr~at~ and subject ta condi~.ione, with tlia addod cohdition thbC L•h~ uec bo grant~d for r~ p~riod oE twu y~.: ~-s aub ject L•o roviow upon writt.en r.equent by tha patitionor. (~ae Reso].ution Book) On roll ca].1 the fore~~7oing re~olut_ion war~ pas~ed by the fo2.lowtnn vatc~: AYE.~'is C0~7M]::iSIUNLRSt Allred, Farano, G.YUCY~ HeY'b13tr Kdy'v~VOd~ ROW1811d~ Sc~ymc,ur. NOESs GOMMTSSION~RS: None. AF~9ENT: COMMISSION"RS; None. CONh7TIONA:. USG - PUDI~IC NE]1RING. I~OU~S AND SHARON MYER5, 533 North Dale YLRMIT N0. 1?7G Avenuc~, Anaheim, Ca. 9290~., Uwrsers~ IIRAILLE IPISTITDTE OF ~T ~ AM~ItICA, 52 % North Dalc~ AvQnue, Anaheim, Ca. 9280'l, Agent~ r~qucr~t~.ng pez~n~.saion to ES'PAE~LISH A PRIVATi, EUUCATION}1L TNSTITUTION TN Ar] EXT_~TIN(a R~STDti;NCc. WATVING MINZMUM SI1~E SETt1Al;K on ~r.operty dQSC.ribed aa: A~ectangularl•y-•ahaped p3rcel of lxnd conr~'~.sting of approximAtely .4 acres having a.:rontag~ of approximately 83 feeC on th west aide of Aala Avenue, havioy a maximum ciepth of a~pzoximrstely 234 feeL•, and being located approximatQly 1G51. teet so~th ot thc centerline of CrescQnt Avenue. Property p.resently claeaifJ.ed R-A, AGRICUI.TURRI~, ZONL. No one appeared in opposition. Altb;~ugh L•~~e Report to ttie Camnt~.ssion was not read ~~t the public hearinq, it ts referred to and maue a part. of t:he mi~tute~. Mze. Shirley Grove, Manay~.r of Braille in3titute in Anahoim, indicated her ~resence to answex~ questionr~. Commissioner Kaywood inquired whethPr thP petitioner was planni:~g Co extand th~ parkin,q co the rear acid was it intended to have pedestr.ian ar,cess through the rear. rather than going tl~XO~igh the frontj whereupon hira. Grove rapliec3 tltat that was their plan, and they proposed to enclose the frant gortion su t!.,,t the children woul.d not walk to tne Front ~f the street; that on the pr~~'ous cund~.- tional use permit qranting L-he exishing facili'y, they had agreed to a maximzim of 5Q atudents, s.nd they now intendad to increase this to 70 st~identc~ with the 20 additiona7. gtudents in the new addition~ ar.d that they prop~sed to have trai,ning in home management in the new area. 2oning Supervisor Charles Roberts noted that there ap~eared to be a mfx-up in the informat!on as ~et forth in the Report r.o th° Comn~.~3ion since a staff represeiitativ~a had talked with Mr. Neil, wh~ had infor~ned staff thst there would be a maximum ef 50 students since there weze on7.y 20 in tt~e gresent ir~cility . Commisoioner ~arano inquired whether thexe ~rere ade,uat~. parkin7 faci.]..itiea b~ing praposedj whereupon Mrs. Gr~ve atateZ tt~at they plarined to increaas their parking in the rear with agproximately 14 a3ditional spaces, which would rnean approximately 30 parking spaces, and as many of the spacea wouic~ be placed in ~he rexr as they cauld obtain. TFiE HEARTt:G WAS CLOSED. Cummi.ssioner Kaywood offerad a motion, se~or-da~d by Commissianer 1412rad und MO'~ION CARRIED, that the Pl.anning Commisa~on, in connection with a~ exemption deolara~ioa atatu~ request, finds ar,d determines that the propocsal would t~ave no s~g~lificant envir~nmental impact and, tharefore, rocommends to Lhe City Council thtt no Enviror.mental Impact Statement is necassary. Commit+sioner r,auer offesed Resolution No. PC73-39 and moved for ita pJ1808Cj3 and a~'option to grant Petition for Conditional Usa Permit No. 1376, subject to the ~tipulatian and condition that a maximum of 20 Rddi.tional atude~±s wuu111 bg permitted f~r the proposad addit~onr ar.d tha~ a minimur~ c~f 14 addi~tional park^ inq scpace~s would be provided immodiately to tho reux of the proper~y, aa st~.ipu- la~ed to by~ the petitianer~ and rxubje~t to cozditions. (See KASOlution Sook) ~ ~ ~ MTNU`.CI:S, ~'~.'1'1' I'tJ~rINING CUMMt55ION, I'uhruaiy 21., 1973 '13-101 CONpT7'I~NAi~_ U:i(: I'I;RMi'C Nc)._ .137G (Contln~t~~1) On roll <:u11 t;~o f..r.ceyoing xa:~ol~c.ion wAa pn~dc~d hy thA full.~w~ng vote: AY~St C:Ut+SMI:~aIl1N[FtSs A].lYOil, C'arano, Gauc+r, Hez'Usl:~ Kaywc~od~ Ro`v1N~.c~~ ~;eymour. Npi~;;;; COMMI~STC~N1:TiSs None. ni35ENT i C(7MMT.~:i10NL RS : None . CONDTT.Ct!NAL I1SE - l~UdL,TC ~~rARING. NYR05FIl I~'U3'lSHIG~ ,' 8` A:=,outh Hei'h~.,a PERMIT N~. 1377 I)o~?A~~ard, Andh~im, :.a. ~26U7., Cwnc~rt .70HN A. G° cAI~Cc ~. _.r---•-•- -_._-. pSSU~..I.1,'CG5 , 172U-D Wee t La P alma Hventio, Anahuim, Cn. `~''DO1. , Agc~nt+ rec~ueetiny pormiasion t~~• esk~blieh u 7'RP,V~L TRA7L~R PAItK WAIVING MZNIMUM e 2rV~i' SFTDACK on pruperty doscz~ibdd ae: A r~ctnnqularly- Shnpa~ pax•c:c~l af l~nd consi~ting a: approxlmntc~ly 17 acro3, havinq a f'ror,t•ago of app.roxim~tt~ly 475 feet. on t:hP ~aat•. ai~9e aP I~arbnr Aoulevaid, havii~q a m~~ximum dc~pth ~£ eppxox9niately 14:i0 font, nr~d bol,ng lccat•o~ nk ~lie nurtll~aot r.orner ~E t:azbr~z Doul~vard and Conv~ntion Way. Nroperty proHently clacsiFied R-A, AGRICULTURAx~, :ONi:. c.)nR person indicaL•e~d }ito pr~sc~nce in uppositlnn. 7ani ng 5u~ervisor. Churien Fobert3 rev.~.ewed ~ lie location of aub~iect. l.~r.oporty, ua~s est~bl.ished in ~~i~~se proximity, pi-evi.oue rc,ninq action on similar rQqueste in the Commer.cial-Ne~ :ation ?~r.ea, un:l t.he prc~Pos11 to estAbliah e- 344-epace travel trailc~r park cuntai.ning °2 puil-thiough traveJ. L-railer spc-ces, 39 back- in tr.avel trail.~x ~p~ces, .zn3 213 cnnper bac}c-in spaces~ thac entrttncea wt~re propus~d to this tra~r~~l tr.atler park from Nazbor Boulc:vard dT1C3 the futuro ext-o.r~- sior. of Convention Way~ that each -~nt•runce wauld be 46 i~..:f. WiLIG a~nd c:or~tnin an 8-fc~ot- wide p1ar~Y.a~1 medi~n; '~hat the street system would consist uf. 20-foot wide 3treets thraug?iout tl-ie proposed park t~er.vitig as acces~s *o the trailer apacen~ that one ~~nargane~r acce~es point was pr~~idtd tc Clementine St.reetj and tnat a F- faot masonry wall wa:i pr.oposed along the nosth boundary to the rear of the pro-• posed 20-i'oot. setback a].ong Flarbor Boule~vdrd an.d to th<. reat o~ the proposod .l5~fc~at set~~cks alony Conven~i~n Wfly and C].emsntine Street. Mr. Roberta, in reviezwing ~he evaluation, noted that tlier.e +~erp throP otheY travel trailer rarks ,pproved within ttiw Comieer.cial-,tecrezt~on Zonc~, however, all were located oi; Wevt Streat ~outh ~f Aall Roaa and lnoz'th oC Cerrilos Aven~~et that t~ti~ ~roposed dovelopment s~an~iards for tr2~ve1 tra.iler parks suggest u st.ructural set!~ack along ar.Cerial hi.ghways of 2Q feet, such as L-he s~-ructuraJ. satback a.lung Clementine Streat ar~d Convention Way, and L-he proposed development meets o•r e ceeds t'.esp st~ndards us ei:umeruted i.n the derelopment stan.:ar.ds for trnv~.~ trailer park~, however~ along hztb~r Poulevard CodQ required a 50- Eout setback wi.th an average of 20 feet, but n~~t less than 15 fcet of said setback landscRped~ or ~ getback of 35 feet ful.ly landscapedJ a~i3 that thc three travel trailer parka ttzat had already oeen app:~oved within the Commcrcial°Rc>creation Area on Wc~at Street were deemed tu be interim uses of Chn ].and. an~l a ti~,ie 1lmA- *.atic.:~ ~~f 15 yeare for the u:;e was establisl~ec~ on Pach of theae proposals. Mr. John D~ Falco, agent for the p~•t.itior~er., aopeared before the commi:~sion and indict-ted tt~al• the Report Co the Commi~sion ad~quately cov~red the development plans ~ that ~hey were propo~iny 20-•foot setbacks atonq Coal~~en..ion Way ~ind Clementine SL•reet and wanted i:o extend tliis 20-foat setback alonq Harbor Eottle+vas~. Gomm~~Afoner Allrad inqt;ired what specific hardship did t`~e petil:i.on~r have to wdrrant graYi~inq aucb. a waiver. Chair.man Seymour n~te@ that Code reqvired conf.~rmai~ce with ~he ~~equi red setbacks along Narbor Boulevard and inquired whether the p~titioner coul.u comply with the 50-fuot setback~ whezeupon Mr. De F~lco replied affirmativc~ly. Mr. ~l:illiam Arn~stron-i. ~a~at Coast M3naaer of Quality Inns, app~ar6c1 before. the Commiaeion ix~ opp ~i~i~n, notinq khat aubjact propsrty wae a. prime corner ln the Cammercial-I.~creation Areat that conaideratLon should be qiven to other ~.and uve» far that propesFy ~irice Harbor Bnulev~ard was the maiiti entrancQ to I ttie Convention Centerr that they had spent fiva m3.11i~n dollare on their ~ .~. ~ ~ ~ Mi.NUTF.S, CI7'Y F~I~ANNTNC; c'uMM13SION, P'ebx'uery ~1, l.5)73 73-102 CONDJ'tIUNAL, USE PGRMT'I' NO. 1377 (Co~.r.in~~Ad) ~~evelc~pment o-i th~ :,nt~oc+ite cornor.r en~' that n Lravel tr..~f.:er. ~:ar.k wa~ nal. the type <~f lnnd uao the• would b~a conciucive to or b~ne~iciaY to lhlA are+~. Mr. Dc~ F'nlco, in r~~t~utte~, noted ~hnt. khe davelapmont wr~e ~up~oe+~8 ~o be con- eiQered n-+ inrerim uee, ar~d tf.u ~~oeign Uf tho park wea auoh th~,t Cho ::lubhouae E'aail~t.iee war~ l.ucatd~ ln thr cdnt~z of th~i devolok~m^nL, whez'eAS ~noet ei.mi:lar r.y~,~ une,rat..Lonfl hed t.heir r.lubhouee~ et th9 ~sntrancet that f.hey had 3Q~iyneh the ~zoject. ~+ith two ontrancea ror futura cla~v~l.o~mc~nt ten ~oare t°rom now~ tF:nt t:ho prop9rt:y at Che proeont tima wao too v-iilueble t,o grow farm pr.•oduct~ a-nd .I.t wae i n the etate of ,limbo~ thdt the pc~titi~nar had hnd va.r~ous offern, bur. L•}:aee wc~uld not br.fng in euffioiont :l•i~•cn~~ ta ~uetity the taxeo on tho p~~p~aitY~ thnt a-n interim u3a wnH d~terminod whl.ch would oxtand Por abou~ twanty ,yoare e.ince th~-t wab the financial. .rogulat.lc.,n ueuall.y attachod !:o quch a develapment~ ~.hat tt-Ay pr.oposed a ben~it.+.f~el lnndscc.ped ar.ea nlong Harbor Bou.levard, and the entire pxop~sal was for futurc~ develupTOent wl, ich wo~ild Le retainad in thp aetback when the pro~oct fox• pormt~nent d9vrelopment of the property wae ProPooadt and Lhnt there wes evon b poasJ.bility thuC ttio rECreetionel velticle pKrk would not. ba ~ocated on the property within ~en years. Tr~~ HEARZNC~ wt~s cLOSrr~. Commioeianer. Gauez i~nqu.irad of th~ petiti.andr whethor or not hi~ 2~and was being held in the ugricul.tural proaer.ve for tl~e pder. yoar ancl r.eceivc~d a n~gaL•ive rep ly . Commiosioner Gauer then inqulred wheth~r the ~At~.kianer ha.d attempt~d to arxang~ t~ h.zve atii agricultural pre~erve limltation plac:ed on t~iP property. Mr.. Pujis~hige atatad t;iat ha had fa.rmed the yr~und an~ h.~d tried evezything to get a reduc.*.ion in ta~.e3. Comm±:.si.on~r Gauei- ~tated that it was his op ~.nion Chat if the pr.cp~rty owner ha ~ agreed to leave tt~c property in an aqricultural ~':vSE~xve for t.en ,years, then the ag~icultural taa: rate would apply~ whereunan Mr. Fujist~tge stated that if i~. were not kept i.u the agricultur.al preverve for tc:n years, then a pEnaJ.ty would be asses~ed. Mi. Armstrong advised the Commis~ion that he had ztte:n~te3 to gst the managez of the Holiday Inn, as well as the Roy~al Inn, ho~:ever, the Holiday Inn manag~r. receatly suffered a heart attack and wa., in th~ hos~~ital, and the ma~ager uf tha Royal Inn wa~ nut ln ~Lown. Chnirman Seymour noted that thp Pl~nninq Commiasion in the paat had approved recreational vehicle p~rk.s but never thia :loee ~n hot:el complexes. Commissioner A11red observed trat for a lon~ t:_me the City hu~l been plaqued with aervice str.tion requests all o•re. thQ ci.ty, And now f.t seemed that the trend was gaing tn travel trailex parks until they would be "coming out of our ear.s", wi~h the claim that thia was an interim use, however, he di.d not feel the usF ~hould be approved fa.r subjec~ property. Chairm~n Seymour noted that it ~..aa ; is understanding that Lhese parks YJP.Y'~ filled to capacity during the peak ~~asur±, even t}ie one at Beach Bou].evard north of Liticoln AvPnne whic:h was a con~iderable diatance from ti:e C~mmerci~~l-Rscraation Area, all prijoyed extzeme succe~s. Commissioner Rowiand noted tl:at he had boen involved in desi3:iing a travel trai ler park run by KOA, anc3 tney ~.~ere in a. di f~erec~t s ituation in Anaheim because they were a referral ~er~ice and they were an instant success, ho~rever, tlne develogment in Anaheim was their first recreational ^ehi.cle park. ~.sa~.._i Comm±ssioner Farano observed that tt-e reareational vehic]e salea ~e~en vsry suc- cess£ul last year, having s~ld over three million of the~~. MX. Dnnald Inch~ representir.g Y.he owner of property to the south of. subject pr~perty, appeareci be `ora the Commission and notec~ they were in the procesr~ of developin~ a~.13n similar to 'h~t being l~zaposed by ths petitioner anci would like to reinfarce ~he atate:nent of the neeci for thi~ type of faci.].j ty in a report done by the Bank of AmericR which stated that zecreatfonal vehicle ~ ~ ~ MLN4'1'L~3, CI'CY YLANNIN~ COMMISS'~ON, Fobrunr.y 21, 1973 73-103 CUNDITIONAL U~E PL•'RMI~: NO.. 1377 (Cont3.nu~,d) BA1A8 ~,~ou1d c~o~ihle t.~y 1475 - ,ven thr~ r'4rd Motor Cc~mpc+ny wne going in~o tt,ey rocruat~onal vohi.clm m~:~u!'...~ut:{.r~g bu:~ineae~ thnt Anr~holm anjoyod G very unique anoition becet-~~ of a.t~ kou.cl.cst-carientAd ueA, nnd re~cx'eational vahicla parl.~ would b~ ec+rviny c~ r~eg11, ~s w~ll ae pxoviding un innome gz•om piu~~arty~ ±i; +t t.hair prupaHed park would bu an interim ur~e becaueo it ~uould be morH v~luat,.le letor, hawever, Lhe,y could us~a the money nuw f.~r t.ax pur~>osee t nnd that they h+~A b~~a~ naying the taxee tor n long timo an the prope.rty ~r~~! ~-iould like Cn u~e tho prapezty. Commie~eionar. Farano notacl tlidx•e wes no clueation thnt the ua~ wouJ.~' bo an in9tant suaca~e, but ~~ow could t~-ie be juc~tiFied ds tho Nxoper lend ur+o at Chis location ninr.A thig w'e~a in the mainRtr.eam ta tho Anmhc~i.m rticre~t.ion axea, and ~+ith thc project.iona of oxporte on ecology, with the thr~~at of g+seo7.•lr.e ra~:ioninq to •reduc~e the amog ~robloms in 3outhern CaliEornia, therc~ wr~3 a poReib.tlity that thu l'i.ty mi9ht finc? tha~o purke vacant ~.n two yonre, ~ar':icularlyr if c~a~ r.~tion- ing came about , and .i! all ~ehiclc~s r.ould k~e c~nvorted to natur.al yae, this w~~uld be at a coet• oi $].5~~ ko $1E300 per c~ight-r.ylindc~r cart that with the in- cre~Re in prop~rty cax4q and tl-a four-~~ay worl• week, peop.le would be tr~kinq longar w~ckend Vacatio»:ie ho~~e~~er, t-o fel.t tliat the dco?.oyy wou'ld hhdvr~ no ot'f,ect uPon thc ~i_rizons of ~.1» country ~1ncc+ th~ cii.iz~r~e had thc~ amAZing atiility to meet the problemJ and that a wQll-lanSscanod recraetional vahic.le park Wou1.d be botter for AnntieJ.m thAn a dxi~-e- in. Commisaioner Krywood n~~ted that ther.e waa alraady ~ sharCage of propane gaa, and i.t was becaminy quit~ crit•ieal. Mr. Inch n~ted that the pruduct~on uf propane gay wo~~lci n~ about tha ~amo for twenty ~az-rs with an i-icr~asinq possibility af cor,verr~ion, and tlse gas company wae switchi.ng to this typo oi fual for t}~.:ix~ vahiclea wiCh some flUCC@98i and indua~ry would p.rob~bly auffer because the lack of supply, bi~t he felt thare wuu3d be yom~ conversion ~f power by indus~ry whan this lack of nupply came aUout. C~mmissioner A17.red noted he was not oppoaed ta recreational vehicle parks in Anaheim since the City needed all they could yet, b'it the locaCion wae o'c the mast d~sirable since it wauld be a blight on the City oP Anaheim to per: t. such a facilit•/ at this l.ucatio~•,. Commisai.onex Gauer notad ~hat Che C:ity already had thr~e of these in ope~ation in Anaheim :•,d wondered whether o~- not inFOrmati~n cnuld be obtained as to their f~es an~ L•hc: avera~e stay of vi3itors to theae parks and whether tl2ey N@T'r'- trai.l~r.. os campera. Commissioner Farano noted tt~at the rates r_harqed in the Comn:ercial-Recz'eation Area ~~-er.e ~rom SS.00 to $7.00 p~r night, and no one was permitted to resfde in thesE parka perm~nently t~pcause the charges were a lictle exorb~tant. M.r. Roberts rsdvised the Commission 'chat the City did not. obtain bed tax from tr.avel trailer parks eq they did from motels and `iotels. Commi:~sioner rarano noted that dur.i.ng the busy sea~on ~ne must have adwance reaArvationa £or these tr3vei t.railer parks, and th~ey did not all~w anyone to r~tay in them indEfinit.ely, however., he was more concernad with the land uae proposed for subject property. C~mmissioner Herbst expressed concern of the exposure o£ a txavel trttiler p~srk to the high•-rioe hotels since they would k,e ovazlooking this park, thcsc. being the Holiday Tnn, Royal Inn, and ~uaZity Inn, sinco the expesure would k~e most undeaizable-unlese the developers proposed instant landscaping with fully qr.awn trees, this parDc would 'ne a rea~ bliqht for tao to three years until the land- scapinq grew and hi.d from view the stark ap~aazance of an ~zsphalted areat tha*. the d~nsiY.y of these vehiclas per acr.e miqht be d~trimental to the entir.d area, inclu~ing the Convention Center, and when the new addi'tion ta ~che Convenkion Center was compl.etea, there r~oul3 ~e a need far more hotex zsnd motel roomai tk~at statnmonts made by re~, ee,t..`.at~~~es cf matels was the fack t.hat les8 parking wae needed because most of the people came kay ~+lane, ther~3by plucinq thie area , in s. convrntion-~oriented facility tha~ atrictly tA Dianeyland~orientscl usesr w~F ~ ~ ~ MxN-JTES, CI'PY FLANNING COMMISSION ,~'ebrunry 2.1, 1973 7a-104 CONDITIONAT. U31E P~RMIT N0. 1377 (Continued) t.hat ho woulf not evan con~ider approviriq a fifteen-yeer tlmu 1lmicatiun ~t thtm locatinri ae an i.nterim uev, an~i it would ~ppuar that with th0 typa ~f cl.ubhouee th~ey proposdd~ rrhicti wne a var~ oxpensive buil.clin~, thoy woald intond to atay longez than ~ift:ec~n yoarH. Chairman Seymour noted theC alr.hou.yh the propoe~ed de~roloprtienL• wae ver,y we11 9one and met mobt of thr~ req+airemonts of the Travol mr.aiJlor Urd~lnanco which provided adoqunte landacAping, h~ waa morra concexcsod that ;.hie~ wou~d b~ in the wrong ~ocntiaci ainae lt. was pzoposad adjacent t.u hi~t:-riee st-.ructurc~~>> and L•hut it.' the trt~vel trdiler park w~re~ placad BGL1tIl of Oranqawo~~~1 A~ ~nu~ , Chic~ ~ri1 qht• be bett~r than the propoaed locAt~.on. Ccmmieai~onor. Allr~cf off~tred a motion, aoaonded by ~ummf.eeion~r FarRno and M~J2lCN CARkTCD (Comm.issiondr ~tow:land abs4ained) thaC ".a ~lanning Commisn~.an, in conner.Cion w.ith an exeaiption declardt~.on statu~s requost, firidc~ anc~ deter- mines that t.ha pra~~osal wuu.ld have a~1.gn.i.fiCant environmontal impact., and, ther~f.or~, racommEr-ds to tha Ci.ty ~ouncil that an Environmental [mpacr. Report ba requirod ~rior to cons~dAxnti an of an~/ aation on sub~ect proporty l y tha City Counc:il. Cc~mm~ASioner Seymour offered Reso].cition No. PC'73~4Q and moved f~r l.te paseage anci ad~pti.r~tl ko dany Petition fa r~onditlonal Uae Permit No. ].377 un the baeie that t~ne proposed usa would bo a bligt~k in thir~ arou of high-rise 2-otels and othor hiqh-guality commorc~.al-recr4at-icn developmentJ that the view a.f th,o pro- pna~d uae from adjoining hntels wou2d be unde~irab'!es Lha~ thia ~arti.aular part of khe Commercial-Rdr,reation Area did not lonci itself L•o tho propased tupo of use; that. althouqh tha prop~sal was a desirablo onH, it was pr.oposod ta be located in l•ha wrong ar.aar that ~he praposed use v~ould t~c~veraely affect the ad~oinir.q land uRes and th~ yrowtt- ~snd dt •olopment of the a~rea in whic.lz it was nropasec! ta be locatPd. (See Fen~~lution ,~ook) On ro11 call tlle foregoing rnsoluti.on was passed by tli~ following votc:: AYES: COMMIISSIONERS: Allred, NOES s COMMISS:[ONE RS : None . ABSEi~IT: C,OMMISSIONERS: Nono. ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Rowland, E'arano, Gauer, F~erbst, Kaywood, Seymoi:r. Commisaiuner RoHl.and indica~ed hi.s abstanti~n was based upon the posaibility uf oonfllc~. of l.nterest. Chairman Seymour left the Council c;hamber o~ :~:~'% Y•~• Chairmar~ pro ~... Ka~~aa@ assumed tl:e chair. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT k2EPORT NO. 04r VARIAxVCE NO. 2975, ANA TEhTATIVE: MAP OF TR21CT NOS. 8215 AND 8"l19 (Continued From ~age 13-95) _ Chairme~n pro t~,m KAyr~ood inquired whether tr-e petitioner ar.•i developer we.re roady tc, preaent the answers to the Commiasion reqa ~:.~; t:he concerns expresaEd previous ly . Mr. Ftodqers not~d tha~ they had tried to compile statistica and meaeured the distance bet~~een homes, ar~d in their calculationn, 60 of. the 76 1ots, or 79~, had a distancs greaL•er than 11 feet aiid the remalning ].6 of the homes wezs 10 or 11 £eet aepazatinn~ that measurement waa made between foundati.on to founda- tion~ and that an impo•:tant itQm t~ aonsic'.er was that of the 16 homes that had a 10 to 11-foot separat'.on, 1l. of them had qarage-to-qarage satbacks, which was very siqni~icant because th3.s side setback w~s not near the li vtng area. Commisaioner Faranc, lnqui~zed wYie~her the atatiatics cornpiled in di.~cussing the 60 homes waes the alignmor,t of the homes with frontagex on linet whereupon Mr. Rodgers atated theg meaeured the distance at tre front and at th~ rQar, kn~wing that the md~ority would fl:ze out at the rear. Commi.se:.oaer Faro:~~ tren inqui red whether the buildings ran parallel t~ aach other~ whereupon Mr. Rodgexs s tAted that they ware nQt par~llel. ~ ~ MINUTFS, I;ITY 1~LANNING C:>MM7:~SION, F'~hr.i~nry 'l..l., ].9'7~ ~P ~ ~:~-105 f;IVVIROt~MLN'PAL IMPACT :tEPURT Nn. R4, ~.t:.LHN<<' N0. 2Q75, ANU TF.NTA7'!V~ MAP OF 'PRACT Nc?S. ~215 AND E32I9 ~(Conf.~n~~~ u) ___~_____ ._„_. ~. .... - - Commi~aioner l~drana thon inqi,+a:~cl ~hc~liler. tha lin~a lr~m th~ aetbach wara fairly well stegqor~~d, and how di.c~ ~1~e buildir.q Aty'lee vnryt wlaero~ipon !4r. Rodyora eceCeQ th~ra would b, a complel•c varietS.on betw~o:: one nn~9 two-mtory cl~xetera of. thc~ e.t:reect tl~nt thare would k~a d vtnuel variation - eome ~~P thom wo~~lci h~ve garayes in tlno fro~t and enme on L•ha eicla, w'hich w~ixlcf chenga th~ up~e~rance conRideraLly. Mr. Rc~gexR thon n~'c~d thnt 44 aP ~hs 75 lotR, or 5E~•, lin~ a diHtdnce bath at rc~ar r.nd frc ~rc~ater than 1S tuett thnt 3b af Ghe 76 lotd, ur 479~, ha~:l di&- :.ancc~e of 2U f.ect ar morc~, t}ieretor.a, i t wr v no~ ;ust enouqh to aay that GOw of tha lot~ worr~ over 10 fAett that 15 ot tho 3t; lnta that ware more t.hnn 20 feet, some of th~m ranqed up to 90 teotr that there were fleg lots and pia-shaped loto ~n cul-~~-~acut nn~1 thon in an~wer to queet~ioninq by Commi~sionar ~.~srano, stated that I,ot• Non. ]4, 35, +~nd 36 uf Tract No. ~~;5 had ~t arexs ranyir~q fram 950U t:o 1a,f00 ~qu~rc foet w~zh pad ero~e and widtha of 5~ fOp~, 36 foet, anf! 34 ~e~t. C~mmisaianer Far.ano thc:n inguirad how much ~f the pad area j~iat m~nti.oned wauld b~ ur,a~2 ar cover~ad by tha homat wharaugcn Mr. Rodgerq e~ACed that aesuming two- stozy constiucL•ion would bo ~~roposoc3, end which was the m~at logic,al i-~proa~ch, thQ r.overage on the flnt pad area wot~ld be abr,ut ~320 squaxe feot, l~av~ng Lot No, 34 witli 400Q square: foc~t of open area~ I~ot t~o. 35 woulcY have 2300 squarc~ fe+et~ and ?et Nr. J6 wc+uld hava '1140 square feet of open araa - thaL he waa certrsin Cn~rmissionor RowLa:~d, as a~ architecL•, wao famil.lar with the ~ype of construction wheze bi-level homes were propoead for these 2ote, hut th~y were getting a number of :.equests ~rom poople who did not want. a big '_ot. but want•ec~ a ni.ce patio and detached home and d1d not want large rea.r lota~ and that Lot Nos. 34~ 35, and 36 were very wicle Z6tE to allow for sid~-yard living, end one of the three lots also had adequate anACe for rerir-yard living. Commission~r Rowland notad that half oE the ~rnject had site deveJ.opment ~tand- arda akin to F--EI~10,000 zoned lota, and it might be significant t~ not~ that whero t.here were 11 feet between structurer~, these were garage-to~garaye, and the distance would be more than that for the house which would be offset; and thaL- if one measuzed the house-to-houae, those 11 lotr~ would be part of another percentile. Mr. Rudgers noted tbat L-hase homes that wese closeflt to each other And the loca- tion of th~ garages, upon looki.ng at a floor plan the living area-to ].iv'ng area would be cunsi~erably grea.ter than 11 feet. C~mmissioner Farano ~baervv_d that Commiasioner Herbst had menL-ioned that r~ome-- thing might bp di~tresaing, such as happnned in ciie Fu2idr~ca :112~ whe:'e geopl~ atarted building fences d~wi~ the slopes, and ine would hope that at least therF wuuld be a pleasa:~l- view f±-om the go~f courae instead of fenci:~g down the alo~es. Mr. Rodger5 noted they plaiined lnndscaping and a aprinkler system wl-~ich aovld be part of the CC&Ft's. Commissioner Farano noted that. the CC&R's did not make lilin want to stand ~xp and cheer - haw cou~d one qet tne CC&R's enforced since +:here wou]d be no homeownarr~ asaociation. Mr. Barisi~ noted that any fencing constructi~a~ would have t~ meet the~.r atand•- ard which were quite er.t~nsive, and they would enforce thie tenr.iny; and that al.though Ana~+eim I~ills would not be there fifty year.s, they wou:Ld be thera at leas~ ten ta twelve years. Commissioner Farano ~hen inquired whethor the developer was willing to place ~gatricti~ns on the proparty tn prohibit fencing on the slopest whereupon Mr. Rodgera stAted he woulc~ be willing to do this since that would b~e f~r tha over- all continuity of thc prop~rty. Con~miasioner Allred noted that thia had happened in thd N~hl Rnnch area, and after ebout eight yeara, rasic3enLq wanted a doq and then they would er~ct a chainlink fence ^ thia had happened to quite a number of lots there. Mr, Rodgera noted that in the CC&R's khey would m~,ke a statement whlch would be racnrded that the ~hadc~d arens on the exhibi.t, which were tho alopee on which fenceA GO111(3 not be built - thls would a17.ow them to hav~ the fences on the Livabl.e arQas only. ~ ~ MINUTFS, C~'PY PLANNING COMMIS:iiON, CUbYUAry 21., 197:f 7~'~Ub ENVTItONMGN'fAi, IMPAC'1' REPORT N0. Fl4, VARIANCE Nn. 2C75, AND TEN'TATIVG MAP QF TRACT NOS. 0215 ANU E12:19 ~(Con~inued) __~__ ,__^ __._,. _~_. M.r. Dc~ri~ic notod t.hat thoas RLOppB wora vc~rti~ ~t~+e~~, SQing 1~:I, nnd h~ wouJ.d like L•o soe~ somouna tzy to get dawn thooe a.Lapea~ that many oP thooe were mrnu- factur.ed nlopos and terrocod down !`ar dz•ainnye nrnaA. Furttier.mc~r~, they cou).~I nat conetruct aozoee thc~ SouL•1i: ~~~ ~al.tfornin Edieon ectsement li.ne, and thak few soula would 11.ke t~ gc~ down t'~e c+lopas - th~y wero nat. like the gentl5 alopoG in t~ohl Ranah. Commi.se ior.er. I'arana 1 nquirAd wt~at ~ri~~ planned to bo d~n~ ta not;. fy or educ~L-6 tho patential buyors of the pxo~orty againet impropor landeca~~i.nq or exceesivo irr.ig$cion bocauar the biyyed~ pr.ablem sinca ho lived in Nohl itnnch wi+s tMaa landsct~ping ~nd im~,roper irrlyaL•ion, antl ha had ta hirc~ an eng.tnoor to tell. him how to lundscape and irric~ate in ordar not ta cxc~atc a a.lide ~on~ition, t:hard- for~, thQ ho•r,~~ownera should be made aw+sre of thE fact that unlasa the landec~~- ing and irrigution wPrr ~roperly dono, ovnn ~hough the land ha.~ baon propexly onginc~re~, or. tha ownez diaturbed ~he nat•ural attribul•e~, end the land or irr.iq~tion was l~Gf1P. iniproperly, thera woulcl b~ a putenii~~1 dRnger of landr~lidae. Mr. Rodgers stated that thiy was an important point, and he would do wha-tover was reagonab~~, howovez, Hamc;tfine,a people cl:angad the graAinq of tho lota, and t:hib happpned many timos eve,n with r~ome k~uildera~ tl~at th:ey had not ae yet turned over any homas to the buyers, but tho bui.lders had printed brochures which c~ave a numbar of rulec~ se to watering of tlie faciliry ~ven though the infortr.a~.ion mi.ght be pu.lled off of where lt was posted. Commiasicnez• Farat~o inquired whethar it would k~e wit}~i.n the province cf the Commission to requir.e aa a cr~ndition of approv~~l that thE devalorer pravide the purchasers with info.rmat•ion reyarding chanc~i.ng of the engineering and grad-- ing and landaca~ing= whereupon Mr. Lot~zy sta'tc+d thaC the devel.oper had agrec~d to do this. Mr. Rndgers noted t1:at he would agree to prepare a bullekin for move-ins, and part of the book would be regarding the do's and donot's oi~ living on slopet~, wliich would talk about land~caping, wa~ering, installation of pools, engineerinq of the ground, and this woulci be po~ted in tha garage. Cou~mi~sioner Allred noted that when he had purchased his hAme, he found that after the sPCOnd yea.r of moving in when there was 1?. tu 14 inches of rain, that he had to put gutters araund the housE and iriquired whather these homes would be guttereds whereu~on Mr. Rod,qNrs stated that th~y were riot anly building accard- ing to the Anaheim Building Code but FHA and VA r.eg~:lations, but to his knowledq~, gutters were not requlred in this locale. Ccmmissioner K.aywood notE.d that in the do's and dor-'t's, why cauldn't t,he 3eve1- oper post the bulletin in the kitchen cabinat a5 wel~. s~ ~n the qarag~ so that these instructions cou].d not be mieplaced. Mr. Barisic stated that they would agree to prepazing this inf.ormatiun regarding proper maintenance and waterir~g. Commi~aioner Gauer. ~£fered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Farano and MOTIUN CARRIED (Commiss~ioner Kaywood abstair,ing and Commiesfoner Seymosr absent) that the petitioner. has submitt:d Environmental Zm~act Report No. 88 in conjunc- tion with Varianca No. 2475, said EIR having been r.eviawed hy the EIR Review Committee as set forth in their repo.rtr therefore, the Anaheim Planning Commis- sion recommends t~ the City C~uncil that Enviro~imental Impact Report Na. 88 be adopted as ttie C'_ty CoLncil's Envfranm~ntal Im~act Statement. Co-nmiseiur.er Fa.rano offered Ros~lution N~. PC73-~35 and moved for its passage anc: adopti:,n to grant Potition £or VariancR No. 2475, denying Wzeivtr la on the basie that the petiticner atipu2ated to complying witYi setback~ presently being revised by the City Council wherein garage setbacka sh~uld b~ either 25 feet or 6-10 fe~~, pr.oviding that qarages on tihe 6-10-foot aetbacka :~ac] aut~matic garage ~oor openera1 that WaivQrs lb, lc and ld were granted on the b+teie thaC the hilleide topoqraphy justifiPd deviationa from f.latland aite development a•tand- ards ~-s de1'_neated in the R-1 2one~ that Waiver le ~rae qrareted on the bas3.s that homes frontinq or siding-~n Canyon Rim Road weze either at a a3gnificantlp differsnt ~rade elevati~n or a private drive aepaxato3 the actua.l livable area nf the loty from the arterisl highwnyi that the petiticner et~ipulatod to prepa- ratiozi of ar. inatruation booket x'egardinv grading and muiritenar.ce uf 2ariddca~ing ~ ~ MI.NUTE5, C];TX k'T.ANNiNG CQMMIS:;ION, Fobr.uary "l.l, 1.973 ~-~"'~~~ FNVIRONMr;N'CAL IMPAC:T REPOF"i'C NO. 84, VARIriNCF; N0. 1.47~5, AND TGNTAT7Vf~ MAP UF 'I' R A C'P N c~ 5. 81 15 F.N D E3 2]. 9`( C o n k ~. n u o~_.,,,,_ _.. _______ _.._.~ ~. -_..- ne well ae co-~t.rulled watering of the el~pes~ thnt th~.+ p4titi.onor l~tl[)111AtAl~ to providing ApocSal hause plan~ iur. Lot N~a. 3A, 35, and 36 of 7`:act No. 0215 in ordar thdt adequate eetbacke are pxovidod by Cr~ki~g adv~xntage uf the tezrain, bull.d,ing one-alory on Che f.let pad end two-~t~ry to the renr on the elop~r r_1;nt the~ petit~oner etipulated to incliadlnc~ ln tt~e covenante, rest•.rictiona nnd r..ondi- tions oi Tract ~los. 8215 and t1219 t}~.o proviaion thnt no f.et~cee aha11 bo con~ stxucred on tha alopos nf th~ lots fncing Rnah~im FiilA~ Goli' Cc.~ursei and eubject to coai3i.Clone, with th~ added c:onditio~~ thn~C the ntructures t.o be cleveloged on aub~acr_ proporty eha].1 cumply wit.h the required 2S-Eoot fronL• se~back, provi.ded, however, C}ldY. AHtL~dCIGH for garag~3s mey bo reducnd to 6-t0 Peat if a+~tomatic garage d~or apnnoie were inskallad with said gnrugag~ that pzior to ~he sale of Lot No. 40 of Trxct No. 8219 or any streeL improvemAnt proposect, eaid lot ehall bo annaxed ta th4 City cf Anr~heimi •.:hat apocial brochur.es ehall. be pregared for L•ho pu. oso oP instruct:~~~q prospective purchna~tc~ of thas~ homea an tlie pr~~}~~r maintenanoe and watezing of laridacaped r~.lupoa, as ~tipulate~ to by the peti.t•1onQr~ ar~d th~t covenRntz~, conditione and ,-eatriction~ for Tract Nos. a215 and 8219 prohibiting fQnces to be conat.rucL-ed cn the alopas ot the l.ots FHCiny An$heim Hillt~ G~if Cuurae shall be r.acor.d~d. (Sefl Reso].ution B~ak) On roll ca11 tha f~ req~.ing rosoluhion wae passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMTSSIOLJ:RS: Farano, Gauer, Herbst, K~ywood, Rowland. NOES; COMMISSIONERS: Allred. AF35ENT: CdMMISSI0NLR5: S~ mour. Commi~s~..anar RUwland offer.od a motion, seconded by Commi~siuner Farano and hl~~'lUN CARRI~D (Commissioner Allr~d voting "na" and Commiesioner :'cymovr being absent) , to approve Tent:~tive Map o£ Tract No. 8215, Fub jecr_ to ,i~+ £ollowing conditions: (1) That the approval of Tentative Mr,~ of Tract No. 87.].5 is granted subject to the approval of Rer.lassificutian No. 71-72-44 and Variance t~o. 2475. (2) T~Zat ahould this sut~division be devzloped as more th~n one sub- divicion, each subdivi3lon thereoF ahall be submiCted in tenta- tive form £or approval. (3) That a 6-f~o~, deco.rative, openwork wall sha11 be oon3tructed at the top ~-£ slope aci~acent to Canyon Rim Road on Lot Nos. 1, ~, 3, q, 5, 28, 29, and 30, and a 6-foot, dacorativa masonry wsll shall. be cons+-ructed on the property .line aepgrating 'Lut Nos. 31 through 36 fror~. Canyon Rim ltoad. Reasonabl~ landscaping, inc.lufling irrigati~n facilities, shal]. be installed within the slope areas oE each lot adjacent to t'~e roadways an3 ',~ the strezt parkways. Plans for said Zaniiecaping shall be •~bn:~rted to and eubject to the approval of the Parkway Mainten31~ce SoperintKndent. rollow- ing installation and acceptance, th~ proF~rty owner sha.ll assune responsibility for muintena~:ce of. sai,~ '°.ndscaping to t.he Iot lines, regardtess of the l~cation of ~.he walls. The City of Anaheim shall assume responsibility for maintenanc;e of landscap- ing in the Canydn Rim Road right-of-waf. (4) That all loza within thzs traat shall be served by underground uti.likiea . (5) That a fina]. tract map of subject property shalZ bc~ subniitted to a.nd approvsd by the City Council and then be recorded in the offica of the Orange Coiiaty kecorder. (6) That anX proposec~ cou~nants, condi.tions, and restrictions shall be submitted to and approved by Clie Cf.ty Attorney's Office prior to Cii:y Council approval of the final tract map, ax-d, further, 1:hat the approvod ~ovenr~nts, conditione, and reatx'ictions shall be recorde~ concurrently with the flr~a~ tract meg. (7) That etreet namea shall be a~proved by the Ci*y of Anaheim prior tu appreval. of a final tzact map. C~ C~ ~N*NUmES, CITY PLANNxNa COMMZSS:fON~ R'abrunly ~:1.~ 19~3 ~~.-~oo EI~VIRONMENT!-L IMPAC'P REPORT NO. 84, VARIANCE NO. 2475, AND TENTATIVE MAP OP' TRAC'~' NOa. 0215 ANQ d229 (CUntlnuec~) _~ w,~ i._.....~ - (p) Thet the ownot (s) of. flub~oct pxopar.Cy ehal] pay L•o tiic+ City of Anehoim tha eppropriaLe pazk end roorostion in-lieu ~eac~ aa deterr.~lnec9 ta bee approprinte by the Ciky Counci.l, eaid Feaa to be paid et klie t.i.mo tt~e b~il.lding pnrmit ie loa~uaA. (5) mhat dreinnqe of eaid prnperty ehnll ba dispneed ~f in a mannnr batiAPactary L-o thQ Cit.y E:,~gineer ant] ehal~ ~ncludo conetruction of ~ir.ainago tar,il.itie~ oP a ai.ao and ~ype uutf •ieiir. to ca.rry runof t wAtare uriginatin~i from liigher prop~ ' t as r~uuth o~ :~~~l~a Ana Cenycn Roed throt~yh eaid prnpexty to ul.t ,+L-e din+ ~~• <.i ao p~x~ved by the+ City Enqinoer. Reimbure~men: ~ ~:~.~uwnke may bo add eavailable to t.he dQVelop~ra oE eaid pr~~,, Yty +.~~on their raques~t•, (1~)) That yr~di.ng, ~:x~:avatian, and all oth+~r conetruction activitiea shall be condu~ted i.n such a mnnner e~o se to minimixe tt~n poani- bi~.ity of any ~ilt oriqinnting Erom thia project being ~.nrried into tbe Santa Ana Rivex Ly atorm watez origindting Prom or tlaw+ng *tirough this pro j9ct. (llj That Northrtdg~ I~ctr-e shall be oonetru.tod in accordanc~ with tha City of Anaheim standar.d for Hi.ll.eide Cu1lQCtor Stroets. (12) 'Phat prior to approval of the f.inal ti•act map, final specific planx ahall be aubmittod an3 ap~roved in accordance with th~ provis~on~ of the PC, Plarined Community, Zone. (13) That epa~cia~l brocl:ures shall be propar.ad for the purpose of instru::ting prof~pactive piirchasaro of these hamrse on tlie proFor. maint~rnance an~ watering of landscaped ~lopes, as atipulat.od ta by the developt~r. (14) 'Phat the dove2oper of the tract shall inalude in the recordec~ covanant~, conditians and restrictians a provi.sion that no f~~ncer~ sha11 be cor~structed on thN slopea facing ~he Anaheim Hills Golf Course, as atipulated to by khe develc~per. Commissioner Ro~land offered a motion, :~econdPd by Commisaio--er Faruno and MOTION CARRIED (Commisai.oner Allred vot~.ng "no" and Commissioner Seymour being absent), t-o approve Tenta*_ive Map of Tract No. 8219, subject to the followinq condltiona: (1) Tnat the appr~val o.f Tentativz Map o~ Tract No. 8219 it~ grantgd subiect to the appr.oval of RQalassification No. 71-72-44 and Variance NA. 2~7~. (2) That should this subdivision be ~eveloped se more than une sub- divis3on, 9ach sub3ivision thereof shall be s~:~mitted in tenta- tive form foz a.pproval. (3) That a G-foot, decorative, openwork wall shall be con~tructed at thc~ top o£ elope adj~.cent to Canyon Rim 'toad on Lot Nos. 7, 11, 12, 13, 1~4, 15, 16~/ 17, 36, 37, 38, 39, ar.~3 4a, and a 6-foot, dec~rative masonry walcdc. shall re constr~cted on the property li.ne separatinq Lot Nce. 1 ai~ci 6 from Canyon Rim Road. Reasonable lazd- aca~ing, incltidinq izrigation facilitiea, shall be inatalled within the slope r~reas of each lot e.djacent to the ro~dways and in the atreet parS~ways. Plans for said landsc$ping shall be suhmittea ta and ttub~ect to the appz•oval af tt~o Parkway Main- tensnce 3uper~ntendent. Following inatallation and acceptance, the property own9r shall assume reaponsibility for maintenttnce of sai~i lan3scAping to the lot lineg, regarc5lesa of the locati~n of thQ wa11s. The Ci*X of Anahetm shall aaeume responeibility for muintenance of lanclscaping in the Ca~nyon Rin~ Road right~of- way. (4) That all loto within this tract ahal~ be served by underqround uti].ities. .~.. ~ ~ ~ MI:NU'PES, CITY PLANN:CN(~ COMMI:;.iION, I~'oi~x~tH7:y 21~ 1973 73-?0`3 ~NVIRUNM.ENTAL IMPAC'Y' R~PORT NU. 1~4, VAR7ANCC N0. :475, AND TENTATIVF. MAP QF '~RACT tJO~, 8215 AND_8219 _.~Cot~tinued ~,~,_,~„ ~._._~ ~.._. __ - (5) Thet a!inel tnc~k map of aub~ect praperty nhe11 be eubmittec~ ta mnd a~~provo~l by th~ City ~~~uncil nnd then ba zdr,or.c~ed in thQ office o! the Or.engo County t~ecorder. (6) 'Phc~i any proposbd covennnt.e, condit.Lo~in, and rowtrictione eha)_1 be eubm~tr.ed to and approve~l by the City At:Cornwy'ea Otficd prior to City C'ounc~l. approvnl of th~ finxl tract m~p, and, f.urth~r, thet thn approved covenanta, condition~, a~n~9 re~tricti.one at~~~ll. Lo rucorded concurrently wit-h the ~ina~. tract map. (7) That stret~L• ~~ames shall be npproved by tha Ci.ty of Aual~eim prior to approval aP a final tract map. (f3) 'Phat the owr~er(s) o£ subjact property shall pay to the City of Anahefm the apprc~priat-.e ~ark and r.ecreation in-liou foes as dot:erminad to be appr~~priate by r_he City ~~ouncil, said fees to bt~ pai:d nt the ti~no the buildinq ~~rn~it 1A issued. (9) That dzainaqo af ni~id property shall be diAposed of in d manne~r satiafactory to tt-a Ciky Englneer. and ehall include canatruction of drainage facilities of a size and tyne sufficient to carry xut-of.f wa•~e~ru or:iginAting tr~m higher Fropertl.es oouth of. Saitta Ana Canyon Road through sald property to ultimatQ diaposr~l as approvdd b•y the City Cnqineer. Keimbursen~nnt agraements may be n~ade eva:.lable to the davelopars of said property ~~pan tiiei.r zequeat. (1G) That gradin.g, excavation, and pll c,ther ~onatructior. activi.~.ica ~hall be conducted in such a mant~ex ao as ta minimize the poaei- bility of. any silt originating from thie project being caL•ri~d into the Santa Ana River by storm watar origi~na~ting from or flowing througti this project, (].1~ That Northridge Lane be constructed in accor.dt~nce wii:h the City of Anaheim atandard for Hillside Co1lECtor Str.ecta. (12) That a 30Wfoot wide easement far public ut.il.itcy purposes shall be provided across Lot No. 36 and/or Lot No. 37 as requ~.red by I:he City Engineer. (13) That prior to approvai of tiie final cract ~ua~.~, Li~~al spacifi:: plana aY~all be submittied and approved in accoz3ance with the p.roviaions of the Pr, Planne3 C~~mmunity, Zone. (14) Tha.t special brochures 3ha11 be prep~red for the purpoae af instructing prospecti~e purchasers of. tt:~se homes on the proper mainc3nance and w::teriny of landscaped sJ.opFS, as sti~.ulated to by thd c~eveloper. (15j That priUr to th sale af L~~t No. 40 o.f Tract No. 8219 or any sY.reet improvomei~ ~, st-id Iot shall be annexpd to tha City of Anaheim. (16) 7Chat the devaloper of the tract ak-all include in ihe record.ed covenants, con3itions and restr~.ctions a proviaion that na fencea sha11 be constructed on the sl~ as facinq the Anaheim Hi11s G~lf CoursA, an sti.pulatEd to by the developer. ~ ~ ~ Mr.NUTf:S~ CI'PY I'LANNINC CUMMISSTON~ Ft~br.uary Z1~ 1473 7=i-.110 CUNDITTONAL 1)SE - PIIHLTC HEARJNG. JEL'P'ERSUN INV~,57`MEN'1' AF~'ILIATI:5, A I~INT'fED P~RMIT NO, t378 PARTNE1tSHiP, 441 Nor.t.h I~akoview Avenue, Ant~t~oim, Ca. 929~6, ^~ ~~^ Owner; UANIEI. ~l. NINB~RG, N.D. , 1440 South S~af.e Collagy goi~luverd, Anaheim, Cn. 9:806, Aqenti raqueeting pexmier~ion to b:S'PABLISI{ 1- 1~RTVATk? Ef1UCATIONAI, 1NS'~'ITiJT10N WAYVING MINIMUM ltL(~q.LREC~ ~'A1tK1NG on proper.ty deecribe~3 ae~ ~ An i.rrr~gularl.y-ehapad perc~l of land constst:ing c~f appruximAtc~.ly ~.'3 8cres hev.ing u f.rontaga oP a~pcoximat9ly 382 teet on tti~ w~st eide ot LAkOV~ttW Avenue, having a maximum depth of approximn~tel}~ 530 fnot, txnd b~irig lucatNd approx.imately 370 ~eoC n~rth of. the aanterlin~ ~f Ri.verdalo Avonue. Property prosentl.y CId9H.l.P~9d R-A, AGRICt1LTUR~~L, ZO!~G. No one appe~aretl in appobitlon~ Altltouc~h LhA FtAport to the C~mmiqsion wa~ noL- roacl aC tha puLlic heariny, it. i.o r.eferzed to and mada a part oE thc minutos. Mr.. Leonard Schuqrsrmann, 1781 Ramn~ya Urive, repr~eenting the ac~ent: ~ l•ha potiticner, appoared botor.a th9 C~mmiseion a~d noted that the ei:at.en:~:,~Ca made in the Rex~~>r.t to the Commission wore c~uite completa, and th~y ware basiaally ~n agreemenc with the»e st~ntemAnt^; ~hat the~~ w~re interested in the ~xpancsion of t:heir capabilitie~ of ~rovidiriq par.~smedic. claosen, d progrrim tihat wae noaded in Ananeim and khe County~ LhaL• they were quita faztunate in n-ae~ing with *_he Ctty ~nd Feder.al officiala familiar with gavernment programe wt-.ich suppc~rtod returnin~i vetersns arid minoritX etudentA who w~xe not equipped For colleqe entrnnct ta obra.lu a mare s~ecialiced educaL•ion in thin particular field. Commi.aaioner ::ayw~od ~nquired how L•he ho,spital f~cility would b~ able to handle pxrki.ny for thaae atudents eince there appeared. to bo a reducti~n in tho number oF parlcing spaces prav:~ded~ whereupon Mr. Schugarman.n stuted *.-at the haepital norma:lly bad in--trsining facili.ties for the doctora, employa~s, and nurses an L•h~ staff ~~hdt they were r.equirFd by ].aw to have in-3erv~.ce training lo.r n~.rsea in the hospitalr that up to 30 ~eople would be atitending C~.d9IICt3 an a half-•day basis, while cY.herP o;ould be r~iyht sY.udenta who would be sponsored by various prag.ram~j that tw~-th:.rdo of theia ~o~-u1.d be ~ri-the-~ob trztning where they woul3 Le Qmployees of tlio ho::pital~ and th~ hospita.l sssigned thent a given numUez o£ hours in schoo~ to upgrade their skillb~ and that. the maximum number of ~tudents *_har. would not be membera ef the ho;~pital s~aff would never exceed more than nine to ten because the hospital was desiroua of training th~ir st~ff for use within the hospital itself. Mr. Schugar.mann, in rasponae to questioning by CommiLsionex Gauer regarding whether or. no~ the students that weie not on ttie hoapital staff wat~ld b~ simil.ar to the medics in the aervice, stated that theirs was also a progrsm for. returntnc~ veterans sponsorec2 by t.1e qover;~maat utidcr tY:e GZ Bill; and these students would h~ve the guarantee that upon completion or their cours~e, a j~b wc+uld he avail- able to them within one yea.r. Mr. Schugarmann then stateQ that they were negotiattnq gor add3tional propPrty for paxking ~urpoaes, and it was in escrow, however, the f.in~1 arxangements were beir~g handled by t.he attorneys, as ttiey were attempting to get the proper.ty at the northwest cozner of Riverdale and Lakeviaw AvenuAS~ that L•he7 were making every effor.t to ohtain the property and wanted to have ~.~equate parking, parti- cularly for the hospita'_ ~~inco it was fe~k that additional parkinq was not neces- sa•=y= and that they had additional property on the east side oi Lakevi~w Avenue whi.c~. could be uned for amergency parking purpos~ea. Mr. Schiagarmann, in respanse to questioning by C~mmisaioner Kaywood, noted that they schedulec~ complet3on of the hospilal for September, azd ~~'.Ze doora would op~n between 30 and 45 days later, and class for trainir~q medicki would f~llow ntter that scl.edulP. THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Gauer notad that some dust retardar,t material, such as sodium cteloride~ would have to be agplied to the property on the east side of L•akeview Aver.ue propused for parkinq puzposes, if the gr.ound was not paved= whereupon Mr. Schuga:mann stated that asphalt.would b~ more practioal., bu4. ~hey were hope- ful of usinq the property imme~iately adjoining if it could be obtained, and the propcarty acrose tt~e atr0et was back-up parking. ~ ~ M7NU'i'l:S~ CLTY PT,ANNINC; COMMI5SION, F~br.unry 2J., 1973 73-].11 CpNUI'PIONAL, 115~ PGRMTT NO. 137d (Cont.inu~~d) CummieatonR.r Allrud offnrad a motiun, yc~coi~ded by Commiae.l.~ner Fic~rbgt ar,d MOTION CAI2RILD (CommisnionQr Soymour. bci.ng abaont) , that the P~anning Commi.~;~ion, in connc~ct.ion wl~th an oxemF~tion deelarAtion ~~:-atue reque~t, iin~la and detar-nines t.hAt the: ~~~Upnqm.l would havo no s:tg-iiticnnC envirt,nmentsl. i~~pMCt, and, thhreinre, recommondH to I.hc: City CuUnc~i.1 th~-~t no ~nvironmantc~l .l'm~act .~~t~tomai~t ie noceasa:r~C Comm:issioner -i.:rbst offc+red Rosolut±.or~ No. PC73-41 and moved f.or its pdAS~ge and adoption to grant P~~titioii for Conditional Ugc~ Parmit No. 13"lb ~rith thu Pin~ing that khe patiL•ion~r s~:i~uZatec9 to ~ruviding adaquato parking dt bllC:tl timo a~ tho hoepital was in opcrationt end 9ub~ect t~ condations. (Seo Resalutiun Baok) On roll ca11 t11e fUxegainy .reP~1 ut3.un was pansed by the fol?.uwing vo~~: }1YE;S: COMMTSSIOtJGA.S: Allred, F'ax~Ano, Gauer, HarLt~t, Kaywood, Rowlan~3. NOES: COMMISSIONI;FtS: Nono. AI3SI;NT: COMMI>SIONrRS: Seyrapur.. RECJ~7155IP'ICATIUN ~ PUIILIf: tiFARir~G. UUUG BROWNI3, 967 Rmbridge Avonue, Arahoim, Np. •~Z_~3_g5 ra, g2gpC,, Ownar~ ~roperty described as: P. roctangularly- ~ M~~~ sl-apecl parcel ~f land consic~t~ng of approxirnately .28 acrea CUNDI'1'IONAL USL tiaving a fr.oritage of. appx'oxim~tely 126 feet on the c~~~L aid= PERMTT P10. 1379 of Stata College Aou:.evard, havir~g a maximum de~th of approximately 97 feet, and baing locat~d apPr.oximately 400 f.eet n~rth of the center.in~ af South Street. ProE~~rty presently claeQifie~ R-1, ONr-FAMII.Y RE~IDGNTIAL, ZJNr. X2EQUE3TED CLASSIFtCATTON: C-1, GGNERAL COMMLRCIAL, ?.ONI:. K~QUF.STF.r~ CbNUITIONAL US~: PERMLT USE OI' TWO EXI.~'iTING RESIDL~NTTAL aTRUCTURHS FOR RI?TAIL~ SALES AND RGPAIR OF MUSICAT. IN:~'rRUMEN'tS AND FOR A STUDiO TO GIVF. MUSIC LL:SSONS, WAIVTNG (A) IIUILDING SETBACK P'ROM A RFSIDEN'iIAI~ 7~ONE, AND (B) MAXIMtiM S'PRUCTURAI, HEIGHT IN PROXIMITY TO A RESIDENTIAL ZONE, One person indi.cated his pr.esence in apposition. Assi~tant Planner Fhillip Schwartze reviewed the location of subject: p.roperty, use3 established in close praximity, ~he request for. C-1 zoning, waiver af minimum side setback, and maxi.mum building height, and the propo~al to utilize two existing sinyle-family homes for. retail sales and rPpair ot musical instru•- ments and for the establishment of a studiu to give music lessons; that the side setback from the adjacenc R-1 Zone was 7 feet on the southerly parcel and 10 feet on the nortnerly g~rcel, whereae a 10-foot minimum was reqvire3; that both buil.dings were 10~i feet hiqho ttihich would requirN a minimua~ setback ~~f 21 tept from the abutting R-1 2o~~e, based on tlle C-1 Zone building t,eight which could not exceeu more th~n one•-half the aistance from the building to an abutting R-1 'Lone; that the dk~elli_ng un:Ets wer.e set back Z7~ feet from the ixl.timate right-of- way of State College Boulevard, a 53-foot half-width primazy azterial higY~a~ay; that 6 parking spaces, including 2 in a yaraqe, would be provided La the rear of each parcel, thus meeting applicabl~ C-1 standArds of tt4e 5 spaces p~r 1000 gro3s square feetT L•hat 6-Faot masonry walla were proposed ~~~ljacent to the R-1 znned pruperties to *_he north and southt that landscaping woLld b•~ provided in the frcYat setback by ths r~e~ention of the existin5 1awn~ trees, 3nd shrubsj that the petitioner had no1: subnitted plana .for. signs, h~wever, he i.ndicated Yie intended to compZy with the C-1 ~one standarfls= that in discu~~ions between the p~titioner and staff, a standxrd refuse storage enclosure would be rro~vided on each parrel and would be ].ocated adjacent to each garaye at the alley - these Enclosure locations would require minor reducti~~n of the widtha of the parking spaces from 10 feet, as proposed, to the standard 8-°oot, 6-inch wide apaces; and that the petitioner had indicated a varie~y ~: F:.ture options for subject parcels, includinq eithex acquiritig adjscent. properties ar.d aubsequQnt major redevelopmen't, or squaring-off and/or joining tha present buildings an subject pazcels orly. Mr. Doug Browne, the petitioner, indicated his presence to anaWer qves~ions. ~ ~ M]NUTES, CI7'Y PLANNT.N(~ CUMMl.SS+TON, P'Abruary Z1, 1~)73 73-1.12 [1f.CLASSIT'TCA'1'ION NO. 72`73-35 AND CONQITlONAL USE PI:RMiT NU. 13%9 (Cont' nuQd) Mr, }11Piod Raymcrnd, 603 :outh PooodA 5txeot, appourc~d bdPorc+ tho Commi~eion in oppoeitlon, dtat.i.ng h.l~ prupar~y rnnr~~Y onto ~ubject propHrtys that the uso of ,~ubjecr.. pruperty wc~d ari eyaanra~ wit~~ ~vary tyZ~o of oPera~tion gniny ~~~~ in th~, garA~er that they had dl.re~nc~y pevec9 Che '~azd, r~r-d whc~n {,~eo~le bnckod cut of the pttrkiny aren, thuy dama,y~d hie fancAt tha~t tlia use ha~ b~en in o~or.atlon foL tl ~ p~ot. f.our ~r five manthet tt~At a largo buf.fir-g maahine waa lncatc~ct in thn ~~ci.~.a~~~~ on which th~:y buf.led the mu~tca] inatrumont~, causing a lot of duat~ that he had a petition ~siqned by livo or ei~; a:f. tF-e oChar proparty ownord, areo ~rera alrto in opposit.ion, 3r~d en~~e oL the raiiC.erR x1HO indicate~d ihoiz op~os~.tion but f~rlt th~y Qic] nat h~vo n riqht to complain~ tt~ak ono of tho reaic9ents on Re:3edn Str :c+k had her houac~ up for ~ale e~nd had x proepect:ive pur.ctia~er, bul: be- ce-use ot the pr.obl~m of commor~ial usa of sub ject propex•ty, the+ sn].e~ was nAt con~ummated~ ttia~ ktter~ alrflady ax_lated a commercial biiitding nt Virginin Avei~ua and 8tate~ Col.le~3e Bou.levar.d which wau?.3 be adequa.te f~~r the~ typa of us~e~ the peL-itioner was maki~ir; of tho oxist.ing residencer and that the 7,oning Eiiforcement O~ficer h~1d bec+n callod by his neighbor regarding si~ning on thr• px•an r.ty. c:ommi.asiorier Gauer ~-otod that t}~oae sdmQ houaea had b~aan consi.dored t~r reclaeai- f.{.cation ln 196d and had boon denied by the Placuiing CommiDaion and c i t.y Caur~cil. Commi~sioner Farano raqua~ted that hA and the Commis~ion be mad~ privy ~~" any fuc*s or ~nformation regt~rding com~~tain*9 made on any yiven piece uf ~>roporty that would lator be conyidered by the Pl.anning Commi.ssion. Mr. Ftaymond then indicated ttiat not only was thare no13e polJ.u*ion, which was ter.rible, but: there was also a di rt polltttion becauye~ ~f the refurbi.shinq of the instruments. Commissia;~er Rowland inquired of the ~~ppos.ition whett,er he could offer an~~ alternatC use for the propertyT where.ipon Mr. Raymond stated that if the exist- ing str•uctures were rem~ved and a atandard c~mmerr.ial biiildtny were c~nstruckad pruvidi.ng adequate parlcing in accordance with Code an~' not in a garage, he wculd no~ be opposed to it, and then presented pictures ic~dicating ~he caanr~er in which the cars weae parked. Mr. Browne, iri ~ebuttai. noted he hud ourchased the ~roperty last summer, and at the time the Yrope•rty w~y gurchased he was in th~ ~~roce~as of mo~ring from his Via Burton Street faciZity whore he r~paired icrstruments; that he had been told that if he owned the pr~perty, he would be allowed to do ~~rhtatevar he plea~ed with the p=o~ertyj that the 7.onir.g Lnforcement Officer advised 'ni~n to the contrary, thei..=ore, he had been storing instruments ~n the rear of th~ property; that they were no iongez' buffing the inst.ruments in thca gaz•age: that the odd structure located on tl~e pro!~erty was a bvoth which wAS blown do~an into the alley; that they had not been conducting commercial actxvit.ie~ on the property; that when he purchased the property he thought all he had te do was make the i.mprovement.s to obtain the zoniny but found tri.s to be ir~ err.or; that the Zaning Enforcement Of£icer made a continaous check to be assur.ed that no commex'cial uses were beiny made o~ sublect prc;perty; that they would be q.lad tc Qrovide any sound-attenuation devices if subject petitioi- were approvedT and that tlie instruments that were being stored in the yarage was an overflcw fxc~m hia busi.ness an Br.oukhu.rst Street. Mr. Browne further noted that Mr. Raymond or qther neighbo~~s had not complained to him regarding damage to their fences, and most o; the peep].e in the ar.e~ kne~~ lie was very cooi~erati.v~ and had done whatever sche -~eiqhbors had suqgQStedi that when he had planned to purchase aubject property, .~e had investigated Y.o deter- mine that the Genezal Plan indicated commercial uses for the property and whic;Y~ indicated C-I zoning fos the property, and the size and the shape of tho property was such that he could establish hia business on f.tJ that after acquiring l•he psoperty, he had ta2ked with ~he Zoning Department as ':o tt-e nscPSSary st~~.~~+ needed for reclassifying the pra~.erY.y, at which time the reqaired parking w~~a calculated; that he ha3 discontinLed any aommercial use cf ti~e progarty and t~as only usinq it for storaye ~urpaeas, and that if he dtc, noL oktain the conimerc'al zoninc~ for the property, he intendod ta r~iit the struc:tures °~r homes. Commission~r Farano expxessed surprlse that ttie petitioner did not Y.now wY.at was require~ oP him as ta obtaining tha zoning for the proparty aince he had been in busines~, in Anat,eim before anc] must have known he required proper zoning on the proporty; that he did not like having oeople purchasiny propezty and moving ~ ~ "13-]].3 MTNU'S~S, CI'PY PLANN7:NG r_cft4Mx[SZUN, CeY~r.u~xzy 21, 1973 1tL:CLAa5IlICATTOI NG._%2_~1?•-35 AND CONDITIONAL U,'.+E P1:~?MI'~'_NO„ 1:~79 (i•C~c~~lnu~d) c~mm~+x'cial. usen into thom an~ only aeer+.i.nq kh~ opar~~tion t-fLux: the Zoning I:nfarcc~m~+nt off.i~:or. in~ox'med thtim of their. viul8t.ion. i Con,miesion~ar Gauor statec~ khat thc Fr.ont-0.. ~tudy adupted by thc~ City o~ Annhoim hdd revl.ewed tni.e antire SYEA, nnd at that. tim~ it waK deCeY~aiz~c~d thr~t tt-aV I rhould rnmain for roaidentiu? uee. ~.ummic~sionor Plrano ubser.vecl that 50w ot the prcparty i.n tlie bloc:k wae alr.eddy ~ C-1. ' i Cornmiesion~r Cauer th~n read f~:um CTie R~~or.t to thv Commi.eHion zelative to fhe ~ Frant-On Scudy. c;ommisaioncr I'nzano ~iot.~d that tho eCaf£ AIAG inalcated the ar~a hod been ot~oned '' up for co-nme•rcial useE, knowingly ar unknc~w~ng:Ly, r~nd pooFle lookir.g a~ the General Plan wc~~.~ld axqume that comme,rcial. purposer~ wus .intend2d. Mr. Bl~wne, in reAponse to questioning tiy Commis~sianer. Herb~t~ ~~ataa th~L• hie operatian on Via Burtun Str.~et was th~- rapair oF n~unacal inatrumente~ thrt the onl.y repairir~g they did t~ the ingtxuments wa9 L•o bt~~~f. them. ~nhethai.aaro~air . y lacquer th~; brass insL•ruments - these wers ae~~~ ou+ , h~~w~~ver, wuadwind i.ns~ruments. Mr. HrownP then asked wheL•hex' it wa~ i.llegal for him to store Anything in Lt~e hovse so lonq aK he di~3 not use itt wh~r.pupen*CoWaBS~~ at~rermittednwit.hinhthe the only use that ::auld b ade of the proper_y P zoning on f:h~ pr~pert~~~ and nc C-1 uses were permitted. Mr. IIrowne ttien asked wi-ei•her he could ~JOrk on the in3truments i~t his garaget whereupon Commissloner Kaywood stated that if thi~ wex~.~ ~ hobby, tihen repair of. ~.he insL•ruments c~uld he done, and there wa:~ a possibili.L'y Lhat ~his c~ul~ be con3idered a hone occupation. Mr. 3rowne noted that the property on which he was requestiny rcclassif.taat~.on and the plans subrnitted with the request was to determine whethAr the requesY.ed zoning would comply wi,th tYie General Plan. Mr, ~rowne, in response to questioni.r.g by Commissioner r'arano aa to when the 7.oning ~nrorcement Officer contacted him on the comp].air~t, stated that this was in Uec.ember, ~na he had applied for. reclassification uf the propecty six w~eks ~gu; that he had ai~ option for the ~ruperty Y.o th31x~housesnalongcStaterColJ.ege tenden,;y for this area to be cammercial and only Boulec~ard remained ~f all thos` in th~ block between Virginia Av9nue and SAUth Streel-., he thought. the reclassification rPques~. would be appropria~.et and that i the six homps alung Stat~ College 1BOUl.evard were now an eyesore and were not q~ucl for residential purpose$. Commissivner Allred noted that he waa not nece~sariJ.; in disagreemen~ with the i' requesced zoning but was oppused to usin~ existiny home:s L•or commerciaY purpose3. ~ Commissioner Farano noted that he did not like people purchasing l~omes and using thetn for commercial pur.poses before zoni.ng was approved on t.he property. t~r. Brown~ stated that if ~e had tried to gene~:~ ~ commercial customers, then h9 wou~.d agree with the statements by the CommissP~it~oaer~who hadha~~revinusundex- atnod the information he was qivenr that the p- Was too reclassif.ication had not su:~mitted plang of development and the Fria~g~for comme=- small for commercial uses; ~~zat it was impossible oo ~hep`YO ert Fahould be cial use, and he thought tbe queetion of rezoring P P Y wi~~ resolved before any pJ.ans were submitteds that it was his ii~tent to comply ~ that tY-e property in £uture development of the proparty for commercial uses; this nrea would not be propasad for commercial use until someonQ took the first stept that only two of ~.he c-~idences were owned and lived in by their owners, while tt-e other homes were rentedj and ~hat ~her~ ~pPesre~l tp b~ a Eootnold fur commercial and C-1 uses ~ince b~th tha preperty at Virginia Avenua and State Colle9~ BOranteddcommercialezoningzand tere~developeun~ State Coll~ge Houlavard had t~een g ~ ~ MINUT~.S, ~ T'PY l'L2~MNTNc; :;~)MMISSJ~N, ~'Ubruary 2.1, ).973 ]3••]14 Kl•;CLAS5II~1Ci " IC:V ~Vf,~. 72_73-35_AND ^.l)NJI'I'IUNA1, USE i".;Ft~IIT N0. 1379 (Cciut:inu~-id) Com~nieeionor. Ga~ver not:~d that tt~c~ huu:en on th~ eaet side oY 5tr~t.e C~~11age Fluul~vard north af Ce~ntar st:r~set had ha~u conv<izcn~ ~o coMmerr.ial ve~+e, t~owF~ver, when t•.hc~ F'ront-On 5tudy wae can~icYez'~d, ir. w~e~ dErt~rmin~~d "~at t}~~ hameA bel•ween Viig~nln Av~~nuA +~nd Sauth 5treot: on t.he~ owoi: eide oE Srako Col.l.mge BoulAVard ehoiil~ iomai.i~ r.oo.ide~~t.i.al bc.cnu~o tha Commi.eeiu;. d.td not •~ent L•o R.llow alr homes aloiig arterialr~ to h~i convertAd :~r cc~mmerr,i.al aeo~, nor dici Chey Mrant at:rip commorc.ial :~~c~r~ rr•t.abll^}ir.d. Mr.~. C~s-owna nU~ +d that tl~~ax~ woro unl.y r~ix homes leff in L-hin t>loc~k .hat hnG not been zoned t:o comm~r.•cial u~~~s. i;u~~~~~1 ~Fii.~n~ec tlark,~t. waa of tho upinion t-.hnt. a1). ~~f thes~ 1r+Ce ehciuld be zon~d ~-)_, Lownvex, thm zo~iny ~hc~u13 not ae t~pprnvr.d w~r.i.l thn. hon~ee wer~ r.emovud nnd regulai: comtaorcial bui.lcli.t;ge wc~re erc,cte~(j ~Il accordanr.~a witit ttte eitn ddvel~• opmaiit Rtandard4 of t.~~e C-1 'I.ono. Mr- Rc~f~t,rt•s not~d t.hat. when thn~o homeH wcar.e r.~naidcr~a3 in 1964, not a].I of the poople in the dCuriy nr~a had prns~ntad ~l.arin, thc~rcforc~, 4:tio zon~.ng was noC appruve~. ,r,ommi:~~ i.c~~ier Rowl.and at+~t:.r~d 1~1s m~ai.n concern wao tho ~ac that thgro v-~ uld be ba2.h r~~identiAl ~nd c.ommc,rrial uae of Che a] ley tu :.l~e ~:r~st, an4 an ar.an c9e-ro~opment plar, ahotlld Ue prepared whicti wauld ~ ndic-ato aecondasy a~cr~es fxom Lh~ a].ley t~~ Stat•e CoS.)~ye IIoulevard. Commieaionor Rowland ofiered a mot.ion, secondec~ !.~~~ Cominlgsi~ner Fnrano etnd MO'PtON CARRLEI) (Commias~oner Seymour beina abs~ ~t) , t~ con~inua caneid- Xation af Recl.a~si~i.catiGn 10. 72-73-35 and Conditian l Use Permit: No. 1379 to tho meeting of March 1'3, 19 ~~, i.n ordec t.ha~ htafi mi~ht a~tvortise the remainin9 parcels on th~~ east sicl~: ~+" State~ College Boul.~uard k~etwaen Vlrglnia Avenue rsnd South St.reek. and t_a px~pare: ~ri ; ren devsloptnent plar~, indicatinq ~s~,d.itionul acc~:ts fr.om the elley througb L•o StaL•e Colleg~ Boulevarc'1. Mr. Rohn_rts noted that• the 7~ra=fi.~: E:~ ~ee~, in all ].ikeli.hood, w~ulcl recommend r~nly ona accFSSw~y between tha alle~~ ~.a State C~~llf~ye Boalevard throuqh these p.r~pertits. Mr~ Roberta, in re~pons~ to r,uestior~itig py Mr. Rrowne regnrding rjtori~y :~is :~tock in ttie struc~:ures, adviHed him tl~,.t onll reaidanL•ial u:3e ~ould b~ made oi t~ e pro~er~y since s' orage wauld be : comme~cia3. ~ise, and ::he zoni.ng ~~n t!~e pr,.~~crty w~,i' ~ not pt.:mi±• such NL-orsge. REPORTS AND TtECOMMENI)1.'Lr7ONS •• ITEM N0. .l CONDITInNt,L US~ PL•'4MIT t3~~. J.].8J (Carrie McClure--~.eonaxd Smith) - Roc,uest for teru,inat.ion -• Pro~erty loca~ted on the soiith side ai I inc.oln ,'~venue, approximxtely 45U feet west o. Cli.ffros~ St.reet. Zanir~y Supervisor Char.les Robert~ notF that a requast had bee rec~ived .fza~~ tkie agent. for tlie petitioner regarding Con~~i.tional (Jse Permit iJc. ].187, i_~z3icat- iny that they did n~t inten~ tn Exerc~.: ;= .e ua e Lo ea a'v' iph a plant nursez •f wa_th related usQs ~n sub ject prupercy; ~nJ that ~z vetexinary lzospitul had been ap~roved on ~h.~ propert}• an January 8, i: 73, by Con3ltionai Usc Permlt No. 1364. Commj ssionar I'arano offered Reaolutian No. PC73-42 ~snd movod for its pxssaqe and adopti~n to ter.minat•e a.Zl proceedinge cf Conditional Usa PeLmit No. 17~A7 on the basis tha~ the petitioner atatsd he did not inY.end ha exerci.ae the rights qrranted under Conditi~nal Use Permit No. J.187. (5ee 12eso1uCia,i Sook) Un ra.l.l call the foreqoing rasA1~-ti^n was prsased by the fcllowi.ng vote: A7ES: CnbiMISSIONERS: Allred, P'azano, Cau.~r, :IP.Y'})9t~ ,~ywoucl, Rowland• [3C~GS ; ~ODIMISSIOPIERS : None . ~3GENT: CC;MMI°S10NF.RS: 59ymour. --- ---a~~..~~a~~'i~wcE'J~e.~ ~ ~ ~ MXNU'rC.S , CL7'Y I:'LAIJNIt~:~; COMM1 :a51UN , T~'ttbtUlt , y 2 7, i J 7:1° 115 7'1'!;N N~. 2 VAkxANCC CJO. 2'J.27 (Ur~11' Oi.l Cc~r}~ozatlon c~f CAlifornie) -- Rc~~uosC fox tc~rmi.nnt.lan - Pr~p~oiCy locata:i or Lhe west ~id~~ or 9ench fioi~l,~nvnrc9, appzoxtmatc~l.}• 200 Peet routh ~E ~~all (io~d. 7nning supezvieo~: Ch.~r.inc~ Robcrtfl noted tY~at tha putiricn~r had r~quyete~ tormin~,tion ui Varlence No. 2227 grantod I~Y tho Plunning c'ummiae+ on J+~nuary 1:, 1~J71, i.n RAso].uCiot~ Na. ~~C:.L-6, ~uXr~itt.ing m^btlohomn ~nlas •_1, weivc~r of t;he zPqui.r~d t,--foot maeonr.,y wall~ L•he-t the 2~Atitioner now had d.-~e.r bax~ approvod on Jnn uar~y 8, 1S)73, under. Conditic~nal U~o Permit Na. 1363, and did n~t intNnd to ~s xorciea hd variAnca. Commieaiun~r Ete rbtat of;~~~ ~~~~t Resolution N~~. PC73••43 And movod for .LCn pasn~ge xnd Aduption ta termin,-te ull proca~ed~nqa o' Vr~riancc N4. 2227 on the bt-aJ.e that th~ ~~titionet no lony~r iritendod t~ ~xercise the variance eince a bePx har had be~c~n appr~ved ,~~~ the property. (Sc>.~ Rasalution Dook) Ur. roll call t~t+ for~9oinq rasolutiun was pase~~d by L•he foll.owing vo*_e~ AXES: COMMISSIONLRS: A11r~c1, rarano, (~at-e~', HQrbst, M.aywood, Rowland. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: N<~no. ARSENT: C'OMMISSIONERS: 3~ymour. ~TE91 NO~ 3 CONI)ITIO~~'AL USF.. YERMIT NO. 1301 (J~nahei.tin Tuna~i~+ Center and Arena) ~~t~?quea~ ~or. an oxtr~nsion of. t~me ~ Propert.y locaked at tl~e northwest cornar of Katella and H~.well Avenuea and un thc~ north side of Howo~l Avenue appxoximately 935 feht wer~t of Katel.la Avenuc. ?.aning Sr.per.vi ~or Charl.es Rebe.rt:~ not ^d tha~:. the 1~lanninq Commi:anior, on ,April 1%, 1972, grante~9 Cunditional Use '~r~;iir No. ~.01, ir. part, Cu c~tabli.sh a private recrc~:itl.anal facllit,y ar.d i:ennis club with waiver of r.iinicnu~n r.nquLred landr~cape set:buckr that the g:°oposed ue~:~ r~ursuant to Con~iition rlo. 10 of ResoluLi.~~n No. PC72-•71 were approved by '~he 1°lant,ing C~mmi~ssion on May 15, 1972; and that the petitionPr wa~ raquesting an extensiun nf time Y~r r.om-• pletion ot candi.tions. Furthe~rmo.re, nu prev.ious ar.tesc.nions ~F time havo been grunted, and staff. would recommer~d an ext-eneion of tiMe of one yeai•, t~ expire Oe~obEr 17, :1.973~ be grantnd Commissi~nei• ~eri~at offexec3. a motio-i, seconded by Commi.saioner Farar.o and D1UT'!UV CARRIED, t~ 7r-~nt an ext.ensi~n of time for the complet.i.or. of coc di- t_ons in Resoluti~.. No. PC'12-71; ea!d t-ime 6xtension to exp:ire Oatober ~7, 1973. ITEt9 NO. 4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMF.'NT - REC:.ASSI~ TCATT~~N Nd. %2-73-?.P Zo;~ing Su~2rviaor Charley Fobert . noted that ir~ the act~ n taken by *.he Planr.inc~ Comm+_asion at t'~e e^et~ruary 5, 19'73 m~ettr.g, the P].annin~~ ::omm~asinn f~.il.ed to affer a a~otion regsrd~.ng the rnvironmen~ a.. Impacr Report and inqui• ~d whethex ~he Commisslon had uny speGial re~om~nend;itior~, or couli it b~ conaidered tra.vial. Langrhy discusaion was hel~ by ~`~e Cnmmisa~v~~ relative Cu th~ terminology the Cor~mission us ed ia th~ir morior.s of E i•~~ ~onmental Impact Statements xnd Rep~rte e :.s istan~ De-.elnpment Ser~-ir.3s Director Runald TY~omppan no~ed th~xt D~~CC the State of Californi~s had .EClxred a mar~torium on EIR's and r.ince gui.deline:s wer~ now bexsaq eBCablish~d by the StaY.e, tha Ctty ACtor.nPy and staPf were att~mptinq to correlate ar u study the propo~ed guidel:ines and inc~rporate them ir~tu the City'~s present ~Lidelines, hor~o~rQr, it• wae posaible the r~taff. wou2d ha~-e t:+ present to the Plannic~g Comtr.:ss.icn a~teratf.ons and recoma~er:~ations to the L'eclaration of ~xamption nnd Standard GLide;.ines, and it may be nHCSSSary to have thi. at ~. w~rk eessian. ~ ~ ~ ~ MiNUT[~S, CI'fY 1'I~ANNING COMNI5SZON, ''E~bYUBry i i, .1973 73`1~~' i'PEM NU. 4 (Cu~~l.nu~dl Comm~~elun~~r l'n:lino of'f.~z~ed a moi.~un, xecondvd by Cot~m~nRion~r rai.ier enci M~TI~ ~~ CARRZE;~, to racc~mmc~~~~t t c~ th~ Ci.ty Coun:;il. Lhat ~l~o P1..--nnl.ny C'ornm~ esi.on, in ~•~nnor,ti~~n wi,th en ~sempCion ~PC1er.r~tion atatue r~squeet, f.l,nde hnd Qoter- min~N th;~L t~io propc~et+l w~ulcl I~uva e.ic~nificant on~~l.zonm~ntal impe t eend, Cher~- r<~rc, r~~commonde to kho City Council thr~t tha p~r.ition~,•- ~houla oubmit•. nn EIIt ; ,r c~ir~ CuUnci.l coneicit~ration. Comm.iasiunar ~auer loft hhe Councl? ~.hamber aC 7s?.`'i p.m. WORK SGSSTON -- 7~rii nn Supor.vi.sor ChArla:s Robarta noY.od foz ~ha Comi.~i~s.~.an `r ~~~~ that. ~a work sossion had bec~n schNdv~.~d w~.th the San! tatiun ~iv! 'on ,~nci the Planninq Commic~Aian f.~~r t~arch 1, 1913, at 7.~ .m. PC PLANMED COMFIUNI'fY 'LGNL: - Doputy Ci~-y A tcr~nay ~'rank Lowry noted tt~r~t a .__..l~.~~--..._----- ° pzublem wae f•cinq khe Flanniiig Cc>mmi~~+lon o nr.o thF am~~ndments to kl~e ~'C 'I.ur ~ had been consider.ec~ ar~ e~rly as Augu»t 7, 197i, nn3 contitiued tor a n~zmbe of inectingr~ for Ch~ devr.lopmenY. of hill~ide t.oningJ th+~t ~i.nc:E the C~r.y of Anaheim had be~en grAnting condit:lon~l uz~e~ permitK Lor devalo~,mc~~~t in tha Antiiioim u.ills aren, ea.id co~di.- ti.onal u~e permits bei--g conditioned u}~on r,oning which could not zke [llE1QH, therefore, they could not build any thing. Coiami.s,ianer Carnno notod thnt none af L•he Commic~::icn was e;at.iyfied with the flmendmente to the PC Zone ao submitted by ~taff, arad t71P, PJ.anni ny Commisaion, in response to AtL-ornoy Jae Geisl~.r that the exiotin3 nC 7.one could not be applied to clevel.opmNnt, suggested ~hat new zone3 be aclopt.ed for t'~e hillside as altarnr.tives ~~ver tiie establishment of a~oninq Elemer~t, and Lhat he did not want: to xpprove a Code amc.ndment ~Jhen he ~id n~C know what he ~a:~ doing . Mr. Lowry noted that a recommendatzon from the Planning Corr.m~ssi.~~n was necessary L-o be submi~ted to the City Councll whether it waa in fr.vor cr .~ot. Con;-uisafoner harario noted that he was hopefui that the Planning Commissi.on could submit alternatives to tlie City Council, and if t.his .recommendati.on went u~ ta the City Cuuncil about. a~.ternatives, then the Counc.il mighL- ad~~~t ft. Assistant Development Sarvices Director Ronald Thompson noted that .73.m IIaris'c hacl allli~~~_~1 to the zories crhich Anaheim ti~.l!a had cleveloped, tiowever, he was the c~nly c~,e of tlie llevelopmant Serv~.cES llepartment stafL wt~o }~ad reviewed these pro~os~d zo~ies; r.Y~ar. when ~'~~mmisaioner Ro~vland and the othex Cem~~~i.ssioner3 recom- mended ii:tllside zonir.~.a ~~ _th standards, Mr. Barisic and thc Commi~. ion were tallcing about the same tti.inc7, but their idea~ were Y80 degzees apart since An~hei.m Hill~ zones l:ad no s t c~i~<in t cl~ . Commis~fcner P'arano stzted t~tiat he would like to see some solid I illside zones go 1:o the City C~~uncil. hir. Thompson noted that tracts i-~ S:he canyon could not be developNd since tkiey cculd not de~elo,~ in accard~nce ~~ith the utandards without waivers from sxid ~tandards. ~:nmmi5~ioner Far~~no in~ic~ated he did not object ta waivers, but it was techni- caliy wrong te recomme:id den!.al of the PC Zone to the City ~ouncil wi.thout any hillside zones as ~lternat:ves bc. Zuse completion of thase :~nes might takP t.wo years, and yeaxa ir m r~.~~~U the City woul.3 look rt each otheL• and want to know what had happeiied in tt~e t-ill an3 canyon area~ that L•he City was in a po~iL•i~n where developments whi~:h had bec approved n,y the Plannin~ Gomm•lssion could nc~t t,e daveloped because of tha con~ition.~ that werF ~ttached. Af~er lenythy di~cussion was held b~r the ~omniasion and stafr reqarding the hi.llaide standa~~ls o- xones and the I?C 'Lone, Commis3loner Rowlar.d offered Resulution No. PC73-44 and moved for its passave an3 adop~ion to ecammend to the City Councia that umendmentB to thP PC, Pl~nn~d C~mmunity, 'Lone as d~q~meda on ' xhibit ' A" nat ~e ndopted on t.tiE hasi.s tiat the Planning Commisaion _ tt .,acessary to have hillsi3e zoneo for d~v~~lopm~nt of trte property in the lJ ~ ~ MINUTIES, CiT1 PLAC~NINI, COMMTS5I~N, P'ebruery 21, 1'`73 ~~'~1~ p~~LANNED c~OMMU.7YT~y roNE, (r,antinuod) ~:iaheim Hille~ tl~at ~h• h111:~iQe aone~ wa~ra pr.~ ac+.itly hain~~ drnfY.c~d fc+: lutura coneideration +~t publl~o haaring by Lhm Planni~ig Comminsio~~~ and tt~at tha Plnnninq Commiesi~n Nde .reluctant t~ t.a-ke any rs crion ~n tt.e RC ?,ona awid would thue rocom~~~~.:nd to the ~ity ~'o»ncll thak no e-cti on be 1:akon, hovraver, i~ t.ha City Counui~. detarmi.ned Cha~c action al-ou~d be ta~en, ssl.d m•~tion •hou.l!! be on an inteiim i,~~ ic- so th+~t the hillside znne9 now beinq dre~fL•~d would ber.o~~. • etPe~ctivn upo~~ r~Gaption ~nA which wauld comple.~i~nt the FC 2~~na, mek.in~ ir ~ mor~ e,ffnctl~,~~ xone in which to ~nv~lc~p. 'Soe Roaolukion Bor,-kl On roll cnl.l the fur~guing rerolution wap ~~H~ed by the fullowing v~tei nyEg; f;uiiMxSSIONI:A5: l~llrad, lierbet, Kaywo~~d~ Rc,wlanrl. NOES t CO14M.~~:, 1.)NERS s r'areno. 11EiSFNT: COMMTSSIONEktS t Uauez, 9eymour. ADJOURNMFNT - Thex•e being no further bus 3ne.ss to disc~sc3, Commiaeiondr '-~~- ~ }ler.be~t ofEareQ a mo~ion to adjourn tt~o mr_eting to Merch 1, ],a'; 3, at 7:00 p.~~. for a wnrk eansiUn wit'ri the Sanitation Givigion. CoMmi~aeioner Ka~ywood eocanded the mo~i~n. MOTION CARRIEP. The mewtiny adJo~arned at 7:52 p•m• ker~pectf ul~y subm~t~ed, ~: ~~r ,,,~,~ ,/ ~~.~,~~ ANN KRE~ S, 5e~~ratary Anahei.m Ci.ty Planning Commi_ssior. AKshm