Minutes-PC 1973/03/050' C 0 MICR~FILMING SER1iiCE, !NC
.. ,, . ~ ..
,, ~~,
I,
L'
^~I
~
,^ity Flall
nnnhai.n-,. CeIlP.or.ni~+
Ma~ch !'i~ 1~'13
A R~GUI,AR Mt~[~'1'IAIG OL'' '1'llli: ANAHEZM GI7'Y P]'aANNING COMMISSION
R~GUi,Aft •• A ragular meetiny of the Anah~~itin r_.it:y P1.a~ininc;~ C'~rr,mi.s+sloi~ w~ae
ML~~TING celled Co order by Chuircr.en Se,ymou: at 2:U3 p.m. n quor.vm
being r~resent,
PItE3ENT - CHAIRMANs S~~yniout.
- COMMI:SSIONERS: ~llrod, Farnr~a, Gauer, Ilerbst, Kaywc~o:l, Etow~nr~d.
ABSENT - C'UMM7SStONF.R5: Noa~e.
PRaSENT ~ Assiatant Develapment Servicos Dira~tor: Ronu1C~ Tnompson
DPput; City Attnrney : i'r~nk La~-r.y
pfficH Enginoers Jay Titus
Planning '~pervlaor: llon McDaniol
Zonin~7 Su~~?~rvieorr rharlc~s Ltober.ta
Commie~iun Secxata.ry: Ann Kr.nba
PLEDGE OF - Commi~sioner Carano led in th~ Pledge of 1!llegianc~ to t~-e
ALLEGlANCE Fl.ay.
A~FROVAT. OF - Commisaioner Kaywood off<+red a motion tu approv4 thm minutes
THE MINUTES of the meetinc~ af 1February 5, 1973, 3econded by C~mmisei~ner
Allred ana MOTION ~'ARF{TEA, subje~t to the follrwing c~xrectiona:
I~g. 7~-61, para. 4, 1Lne 4, should read: "the~nselvea, ahe l~ad
se+:n +..wo kide suppork beams inaida each car-
part, and it woul~l be very diffi-"
pg. 73-64, para. 7, lin~ 2, chanqe word: "represenC" to
"repr•e senting"
l.~ne 5, cYiange word: "mobile" ico "mobile-
home" .
rg. 7~-65, paxa. 4, line 2, add t.o end of line~ ", 15 to 20
gal~.on si~e."
pg. "T3-66, para. 7, lines 8-23, ~h~uld read: "would be ~viewed
for cor~..~.deraticn af an additiona', periud of
time, and permanent office fac:ilities 9hould
be provided, and if parking prob.lem~ are not
created by the re:.ucY.ion in the required
parking apaac:s~ and subject t:o conditiona,
amend~ng Condi~.ion No. 2 to require that l.anc.
acap£na with a minimum of 15-g~llon trt~e b~3
Frovids3 1.1 accur.danc~~ with landscaping l l.xns
prssented~ that thE variance i.s qranted for a
period o£ one ypaxs that the offi.ce traiZer
shell ba connucted to apprapriata utilities
and ahall comply with •- 1.7. other a~pllcable
regulations ~£ the Cit~, ~f ~naheim nnd State
of CAl~for.niai and that ii the u~+e granted
under tt~is var.i.anae is for any r~oson dis-
continued, the site shall be restored to ita
or9.qinal c~nditian and the var:ance termi~
nnted."
WORK SE5SION - Chairman Seymour advfeed the Commissiun that the work aosaion
- s~hedule3 for Maa•ch ~5, 1973, was oriqinally propos~c3 =or the
review of parking requiret~snts ~~f multipl.e-family reai3ontial
zones, l~aw.~vc -, ~~eceaeary inf~rmation was nut yet availabl.e, ~herefo.r~, the
Commiseinn ~hould conai~er th~ propased chanqes to t;~e ::~ign Ordi~ance ins::eaci
in accordAnca with the recommenaatic~na by staff at ti~e March 15, 197.. 7:00 p.m.
meetinq.
73-118
~
~
MZNUTrS, C:ITY. PT,ANN]:N~ COMMI95J~,N, Mnrch 5, 197;i
7~-119
Diacuaei.on wa~ hc~ld ns s.c, tho mo~" ap~~ropr.ia*e time t.c> huld n worY. ~^R'~io» on
tha pet'kinq standai-ds L'~~~ r.~ul~ir~.le-famil.y resl.dentia] 3evelopmanti~, and upo<<
it~ ccnclusion, Chnlrmr,n Seymaur e~;tablinhnd April 1'l, 19'7:~, aC 7:Q0 p.m. as
th~ dar_~ F.02' 3ll~(1 work des9lcn.
GENEP.AL PI,AN -• ~'roperty un~'.er conair3oration in tlie Srzntu An.~ Ca~iy~n Area
AFIGNDMF.N'1 NU. 125 bounQc~d ~~~z ~.he c~aet by Mohler Ui~vo, ~~n c:~e uuth by Canyc
~~ ~~~~ ~~ Eti m Roac7, an the wc~et by Andl~olm liills Read, ~tnd ~~n Che
noxLh by I~a Palma Avenuet to coneldor extenai~l: ~~f' CniLmonC
I~oulava,r.d south f.rom L~a Pa1ma Avenue to CAnYQtI Rim R~o
ralocatlun of A^cess Point Nc~. 9i ~~~rbl.isl~fncnk of a new A::~ Fq~.rit No, 9e~~
an~i provisi~n of a)oc~l streot circulr _ion pat.Cern.
plan~iing Suporvic~or Uon l4cUanlel reviewed ihe propoeal under. Generat Plan Amdnd•-
ment N~. 125, noting that ono of the tra^te ~~ be con~trlered latt+r in the h.tr~
ing would ba primarily ~ffact~d by thc ~r,ta~ ,, .n of Fairmunt Boulevt~rcl which
waa project~d throuqh the~ tra~.:k by th~ County koad D~~E~~rtmant~ that there
~pgear.~d to be ~ need ta havo a etudy t the total ar~~~ ta consid~r aevor~al
d~,rf'are:~t facets regar.ding .icced~ to Santa Ana Canyon Road and to conaid~r
lou:s~ circulation Y.hrouyhuuC i:h~~ 3Ludy area, there£ore, ataf.f woulcl recommend
Fetting Gener.al P1an Amendment. ho. 125 fur public hearing.
Commissi~~ner A11red of.~'ered a motior~, aecoitdad by Commiyvinner Gauer anc] MOTION
CAF.RI~:D, L•o c~ir~~ct sL•~+ff to aet fur. public hearirig consider.ation of Goneiul
Plan Atn~ndmeiit No. 125 for the me~ting of March 19, 1973.
IIIGII 9CHe~OL ~'R(irEF7 I,ocate:i at the northwcst corner of. La Palrt~a Avenuo ar-~
5tate College ..,~xleva;:~? Extending tc~ RomneXa Drive.
CommisaioneX Herbst noted that the 40-acra An~heim High s.hoc~l lli~tiict proper.ty
locatad west of State College ~ulevaru between La Palma Avenue and P.omncya
Drive where strawberries were being grown appeared to have cardLic.~ard interlaced
in the barbed-wire f.ence and ~3ave a ver,y poor appearance to the people living
across the st.,:eet on Romneya ~rive, thcre~ore, he felt the Catnmission shauld
recommenn to ~:he Ci.ty Council tnat they r^eeL with the ~cho~l dfstrict t.u reaolve
thia tinsialitly situa:.ion.
Discuasion was held by the Commisaton on wh~ther or not ther.A was a specific
agricultural reason for placi~g the cardbosrd on the barbed-wire fence since a
number of other ~trawberzy fiblda had a similar appenz~~nce, ar whether this
w~s done to pt~vent r~chool children from enterinq the sirawberry fields.
Zoning Supervisor Charles Ruberts advised the Com~nission that staff would ha~~e
th~ Zoriing Enf.orcement Offir.er check into the matter.
Commissioner Herbs:. offered a motion, scsconded by Co-rmiss~.~~r~er Rowland and
M'JTICN CARRIE~, to recommend to tha City Ccuncil thaY. ste~s bp taken to remove
the cardb~ar3 in tk-e barbed-wire fence surrnundi.ng rhe strawberry field weest
of SLate C~llege Roulevard between La ralma Avenue and Romneya Urive.
~:UMMUrLTY REDEVELOPMEN: - S~ecial resolutions for. i~eview and recommenc'ati.on
COMMISSION by *he Anbhoim City Flanning Comml:s~lor-.
Deputy City Ai•torn~y Frank Lowry ad~ ii~acl r.he Can~i~ission that. a saries ~~.f
rasolu+~ions ~~icorporating recommendations to the City Cocncil were psseeo by
t~.e Commiinity Redevelcpment Commiss:.~n and had been su~mitted ~o the Commisc~ion
for their periisal; th~t the City Attorney'a Office, therefore, recomm.:nds that
the Plai~ning Commiss:on ga on record tn recommend to tk:e City ~~~uncii (Anaheim
RedQVelopmen.. Ag~nc:y) approval of ~aid resoluti.uns~ and that tt:e Commission
cou.ld tAke act~.on by mot3.on expreasing th~ Co-nmisaion's approvRl or dis.pproval.
Commieaioner Farano offered a motion, seconded by Commiasi~ner Kayw~-~.~u ai~d
MATIOI~ CARFIED, to recommend tu the City Cour il of the City of Analieim ac~ej~t-
ance o~:
"A Reaolution of the City Cour.cil of the City of a••sheim A~+pro~~inq
thR Appropri3tian of Funds as a Loan to the Ana} n Red~veic?ment
Aqency Thr~uqh the Redovelopment Agen~y A~mini~ ~tive Fund from
the Ganerdl Fund."
~wr ~^^~^w~
~ ~
MINUTES, CITY PLANNIhG COM6tISJION, Marcli 5, 1973 73-.120
COMMUNZTY RF.QEVCGOPMGN'P COMMI:S1~'7t~ (Continued)
"~4 Rpoolution Adopt:inq By-Lewe f~r the Anah~~i~m RedevelopmFnt ARAncy''
and "E;chibit 'A' Ay-Lawn Eox' Anaheim RedAValopm9nt Agoncy."
"A Resolukion Accepti.ng khe~ 'Perme nnd Cond.itions of the Lou~~ ~~`fere: ~
by the C~.ty~ of Anahoim and Dir.ecting t.ho Bxecutive U1r.act~r to RQyUt'9t
C:ertain Funda be Pnid co tho AgencX."
"A Reuolut~.on Adok~~ing th,~ An~-hoim Ro~ovelopn~ent Aqcncy qudgoL for the
1972-7:3 L'~n,.~l Yc~ar."
"~ Renolukion of ~-~~e 1-nah~im Redevelopmeni: A~~c,u~;y Approving City-Ag~ncy
FtQlationehipa" a, "Agraement."
"A Redal~~tion oP the City Cuunc~.l of the City af Annheim Approving the
Anahoim Re~lev~lopmen~ Agen~y Budg~t for the 1972-73 T'iscal Ybar."
"A Reeolution of the City Coun~il ~f thd C{t;~ oP. Anaheim Approving an
AgrpemQnk Establiehi.ng City-Aqency Itolatianehipe."
"; Rosolut:lon af the City Counci.l oi tha City of Analieim selec~iny the
Doundariea of the Alpha RedevAl.opment Pro~ect with~.n th~ Redevalopm~nt
5urvey Area an~ Appruving a Preliminary Plun for the Redavelopment af
the Px~ject Area."
ENVIRCNMENTAL IMPACT - PUBLTC HEAItING. LUSY. CORP'JRATTC~N, P. 0. ~ox 21~ ,
REPORT N0. 8fl Newpork seach, Ca. 92663, Owneri HAkOI.D K. FIEDT ND, 3030
~ ~;~~ak M~~ i n Street, Alhambra, Ca. 91801, Agent= : aque4~ir.g
VAP.IANCE N0. 2478 WATVFk UF (A) R'::QUIkEMGNT THAT SINGLF.-I'AMILY ~TRUCTURES
FtF.Att ON ARTrRIF~L FIIGHWAYS AND (P) MINIMUM LOT ~~IZE 1'O
TENTATIVE MAP UF PF:RMIT ESTABLI~HMENT 0~ A 45-LOT, R-H-10,000 SUAllZVISION
TRACT iVO. 8153 on praperty deacribed as: An irregularly-:+haped parcol
~ -'~~ ~f 11nc~ ~onsistinq of appr.oximately ].7.7 acr~s, hsvinq a
fron~age of approximately 1,2UC1 feet on t.h~ north side of
Noiil Ranch Ruad, having 4 maximum depth of appro~cima~ely 750 feet, and being
located approximately 40 feet weat of the centerline of Villnreal Drive.
Property presently clasaified R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE.
TENTATIVE TRACT RLQUEST: ENGIt3~ER: Hop~-n, Hedlund & Darby, inc., 3030 West
Main Str.eet, Alhambra, Ca. 918Qt; proposirAg to sub-
divide a 17.%-acze prrcel into A5 R-H-lo,0U0 zc,a~d
1~t2.
Chairman Seymour noted that tk-e developer }xad rec~ue3ted a two-week contin~iance
and inquired whether anyone wa~ preBent in oppoaition.
Mr. F.oland Y.rueger, S61 Pernlta tiills Drive, representing the Pc~ralta Hills
Property Ownera Aasociation, appeaxed before the Comm~saion and atatcd that
although thei.r organization tiad a new ; reaident, ho was iinab:le to be preaent=
that the groposed devclopment by Luak ~orporatian rai: d some cri~~cal problams,
s~nce t~c~ralta Hills adjoins subiect property tA tha north and c2own khe n~11~
that the~se problemg were not only ~ertinen+t to t~ is arr .a Uut ~o the entire a.rea
between Nohl Canyon Road and Royal O~k RoeQ~ that Chera were two areas of cr;ti-
cal conc~sn: 1) wat~:r runoff control and 2) lnnd instabilit5 caused by ~inn,tural
cut and itlli that t` ~~~~ were som yraphic illustrations during tho recent ~ains
aever•.1 weeke aqo whe~~ .:he dra' ~aae from the nek~ development of Anaheim H111s by
Grant Corpoxation dumped water ~nto the gulley on the Lu~k property and ca-m~
d~wnhill in auch volume i*_ endangered the home of ore of the residents, ena ~ha*
home he9 to be sandbaggec: that this problem zeaull•ed when devE'opment cccurred
on the hills, plac•lnq homes on the hills, asphalting for driveways, pa*_ios, pools,
and avan drainlga where formerly th~ natuxal terrain ard qround provided greas
toC :he ac~optanco anc~ ahsorution of water running trom these hille, reeulting in
removing the natural drainage and increasing the velocity of the water. crea*_ing
probleana do~anhillt that Mr. Harnes, the resident primarily affect~d by this
problem, wi te s letter to the C~ty Enginee~ with copies submitt~~d to the ylan-
ning Co~nmiaeion 1n which i~ was hoped ~he le~•ter would be reafl a~ ~uhlic hear~»n
~
~
MINUTE:~, Cx'TY PLANNIN(.+ COtRMISSTI~N, Mttrc'~~ `i, .1973
73-•121
ENVIRONt1f~NTAL IMYAC'I' R~:POYT t~~'. -38, V}~l2IANC~ N0. 2470, ANII TENTATIVL MAP OI'
TRACT Nf,_ 8153 ~,continuc~dl__....__._._.,____ ------_._ ~ _._.___~_..._~_____..~..
pric~r t~~ a~ty furthor conaldcrrtion vf. th~: propoad~i I,nR'c d~±velopmant~ that hl~ .
Hernea' +~tter diecuased in c~nbi.d~3r~ble ~letail *~~~nt ~onr i Ac~1onH wtiloh p1RCNd
the rc~sF~,, ~eibi:lY.y for damaqo to t?-'~~~s:rtiee i~i ~awnh.ill l~~r_ntiun~ not only ori tho
davelog4r., l~ui elt~u on the govo~~~ing t~ody wr-ich had glvan .^.~nrova~ to a 3t~~~lop-
mant wherQin thesn proU.leme ~-e~;eul.tad~ thar. t}~e City would be faced w.tth :%t~~~t
acti.~n whonev •• thore wae an increbse in v~lacity anci voltiu~m af water; _liaY:
anorher. c~nA ratiott wou]d have Co be AAnd aCabi].iL•y, ueinq qraphir .ill~ +L•ra-
tions of ;.hi~ ~ru~lem at *he north ond af Noh1 Ranch RUad - n prablrcn which tt~e
r..ommlesi.~~n wa~- Pully awarQ of. In addi tion, 3-4 yea~xs agu a,~ume l,cate~ a mile
~aster].y h~d elid oncu Santa. Ana Canyoi~ I@011d - t11~Ad two exump]lee w~.~ul.d illue-~
Crate that the hi].le waro not slable~ *hat wh~n the Newport Freeway was firt~t
doveloped, the S~ate firat ct~t or~ tha eide of Nohl Ranch ltoad, and ih~: t-ad to
be cut thrcA times bbcuuse of sliding oC the hill - naw aftar severa: ~~~~~re yQ~~re
hAd pasead, t2ie hill was yli.dinq aqa~n, which waa furthor evidence of nn un-
atable area~ ti~nY. it wos very impurtant for the City and ~he davelopaz to con--
ei.cler ut thie ti.mg solutioiia L•u these problems preoented which wuu.id benefit
e~~ezyone since raa~dontu uf Paralta H111s wrnted tc, pr.ot~ct ~'~~lr fami.lies and
propertqt c-nd chat it was up ko the clovel~per and ttie c~ity r do ever;~t•F.ina
~ossik~l~ to minir~~i~s tho possibilit.y of landelida~.
Mr. Kru~ger then AtdfC~C~ i:hat. they had three posai.. .c eonsidexat.ions ro; the City
sta~f tn review, a1l:hnugh i.f furthez atudy wdg qivn;~ by otuff., they might come
up with better alternatives - these~ were: l; that ~hc City r~quire a concrete
~9rainaq~ plan for t;~e entire area behind Peralta Hil ].s ancl the faciliti.es so
deeiyneci to decr~ase and prevent ar~y increase 1n volume an~] v~locity o£ water
r,amin~.~ down into that ar~>> aince a number of qulleya in Peralt~ Hi.l.ls had taken
care af the natural drai~.:•~e for years when the uphill land was agricultural,
but the~se gulluys aould .iot handle the drainage when ttiere were h~mes and
3t~eeta on tlie hills, and tliat they would suggest thie be given considerat:ion in
an overall plan. 2) xhat consideration be g~.ven to lowar lenaity devc~l.opmenh in
tha~ area ~ no~ necessarily one-acre estates - biit some sort of buffer r.one be-
tween tha R-fi-10,000 square foot .lots and the one-acre lota o~ Peralta tii!_ls -
thfy would he~.p give a more aonservative gradinq plan with less steep sZ~pey,
and t' at the resi.dents oi Peral.t~3 Hi].is had moved into that area beca~~se kl•eey
like~ +:he ope:i apace but wer.p suddenly faced with hiqher denelty behind them,
ti.erefor.e, some considaration should Y~e ~iven to this auqgeati.on. 3; :hat con-
siderati.on ahould be given to placing a x~ ~ce be~ween Nchl Ranc:~ an<l P~ral.ta
!tillg which wc~uld have some cap~city of. witha~~~nding land alippa9e - not large
sllppage, but ama11 onos b~cause of the lot cut. ..nd fill placing higher density
prnblems onto lower density on Peralta Hi~ls.
Conmissioy~or Gauer inquired whether Mr. K~ueger wanted ac:L•aon held up on chis
propertys wheraupan Mr. KruPger .;tated hc: did not kn~w what Lusk had in their
~ngineering plin, but he would like to suggest that the City work with Lu:~k to
ar_ticipate whst c^~ild hagpen.
Chairman Saymoux stated the procedure in nandlinq e»bject petitl.on an~ tzact
was ~omewhat different oince the C.ommission uauatly granted continuance~ z~e-
quested by a petition~r withUUt consi~ering any evi~snce, howaver, the developer
was nut present, and he juqt wanted t~ move thia project along so trat these
ctuestions need not l,e raised at a la~:er hearinq, reaultinq in further continu-
ar.ces, therefore, st~£f 3hould apprise the develaper And his engineez of the
coi.ranta of ~:.he letter aubmitted by the president of Peralta H~lia Property
Ow~~ers Association and Mr. Barnes.
Commiasionez Farano aske~ tkiat the infurmatioa or r~ co~y of Mr. Fiarnes' 1~ te~
be submitted to the deve~oper so that ho could be~ prep+~red to answer any q,ues-
t~oiis at the ~text public hearingJ and thYt thera 9~roblemr~ regardfnn theulegal
raquired .~eca-uee thera coulcl be extremcl eerioun , 9
asL~ect which he did not want to go in.to naw.
Chairman Seymour etuted he was hopeful that theae quoet~.ona could be answe~ ~
by tho next public: hearing.
~ ~
MINUTIaS, C'[~'Y Pi,hclt~!ING ('~~MMCSS70N, March 5, 1973 73-•122
ENV7RONt4ENTAL IMF`C'1' R::FOR'T NO. E~B, VAR:I.ANt;i: NV. 24?~3, 74ND TFNTATIVE r~AP 0T'
TRACT NO. 8153 (Continued __.~ ._._ -_-_-•- •--
oP; ice Engineer. Jey 'Pit~~~ adviR~~~~ ~~~•~ ~'~mm~.arii.on tl~~~tt the i'ity palicy on dr•ttJ:~•-
r,~ w.~s tht~t the dAVeloper ie ?aquireci to tsk~ ws~.~.~ ~~~ ~.Cn ultimat•e point ~~t
d_~ ~p~ .el and to ^Ame type ~f. druinr~yo fACiliti.eat thnt 4.!~c~ particuldr ~_ncidasit
re~~~rred to in Mx'. I3A`'i1q8' 1+~ttnr was fr~.n a very emal ~. ,~rtin of' drein++gs li:om
the Gr+~~it praperty whlch wo~~t throuqti tho 9ar.ries' Qrope~~"!:Y and w~s no dl.voz~s~.on
oi wator, b~it. thore aao ..~ ~ light i.ncrcase iii ~rar.er ~luf+ ~to tt-e davelopment ~o
~lie extent in the nnturat i?.ow oP water in tY~i~a reqion wliich haA a~lo~ of 250
c~ibic feet pox pe.:~~nd (CFS) ,•~hile the water. fTC~lrt thd Grant developmont wae
~; Gf~s ~ q2. ~9E)~ICxlrnoi:ely 2e in:•rea~e, ~.ich n+. c11d noe feal dddad maL•erially
to the ~roblam, an.~ t:r.. IIax•nes would ki .~~ had ~he prc~bl~+m xegarflless of ti~~
liills dV(iVA having boet~ davaloFa9d o~ : otr and that the City xocognixQC1 th.i.a
problem nnd the eolution waa t.~ tako tht drain~gQ to ita u~timake die(~~sal ao
that the rop~rtice dc~wnatroam wouJ.d not ~•°r~e~i.c~nce flo~ding probloms.
Commissioner Kaywood offered z- motion, secondad by Commier~ioner Geuer an.~ MOTION
CARAIED, to continua consid3ratian .~f. ETR No. 88, Variance No. 2Q78, and Tract
No. 8153 to the mneting ~~f March 19, 1~73• as reRuestad by the developer.
T~NT]1TJV~ MAF OF - 0 NERc UFPh,R "K" RANC1i CQItI'ORN.T:ON, P. 0. Box R, Placentia,
Z'kACT NOG. 80H0, Ci. 926"lu. EN~iNEER: Millo~, Kinc, & AsaociaCeu, Inc.,
80H1, AND 8082 1~35 WeAt Valenci~. ~r~iva, rullerton, Ca. 92b33~ proposing
! to subdivide Zarogerty containiny xpproximately 37 ucrea
locatad on the south side of tha River.side Freoway, appror.i-•
mai:ely 1~600 feet eaet of Tmpor.ial Hi.ghway i.nto 87 RS-5~~00 zongd lots (Tract No.
8080) t 63 12S-50U0 zn:~ecl lots (Tract No. H081) ~ and 54 P,S-5000 zoned :.ots (Tract
Na. 8082).
Sub~ecC acts were continu~d from the January 'l2, ].973 meeti.ng to resolve zoning
problems and from the Febr.uary 5 and 21, ].973 meEtings a.t the request of the
engine.r.
Mr. JeEf Millet, repx'e~enLing the er gineer, tappc~ared. befor.e ~.hQ Commisoion and
stated he ale~o ~oprasented tho F~ronorLy own8r; that they had wor.ked wi~h staff
for about a montri and a hal.f an~i had made r~11 of tY~e revisiona reccmmen~ac~ by
staffs and that he wa~ available to answei questions.
Chairman Seymour requested that Mr. Mi.llet direct some comment to remarks ~s ~et
forth in tl:e Report to the Commission.
Mr. Ptillet then notad that an Environmental Imp~ct R~port ha~i not been submitted
w•lth the tract mAps, but. b fO.C~ the tracty would ~e recorded, thty r~ould file an
EIR.
Commissioner Gauer noted that the Commission waa ytven a soun3 evaluatinn Gtudy
by the Orange Cau:.t}• EtQ~lth Department (UCHD) , and then zead the recommendations
ot that atuciy (cop;~ on fil~) , and thex- sta¢ it woul.d be his aasumr~tion it would
be neces3ary to havE sound-attenuation d :es pr~vided in the homes~ ~uch as
double w~il].s and windowy, lancia3caping, ~ •.
h•Y. Millet repliec3 that on a].l of their devel~p ~ents they had a 5C-foot setb~ck
toqet2ier with a E-faot earthan rermJ that c.he De~artment ~f Highways wo~:ld nat
let them aPt in to aurvey the prc_~rty even "rom theii uwn prorar.ty so Liiat t.hey
could determine haw ta provide this sous~.: athenuatior., let alone from the free-
way pxo~:.rty= ar-d Chat the 6-foot high mound would ~ake caze of tre sound
Fzoblems.
The Commi.as~on inquired whether. the 5tate recogni~cPd the need fur berma where
resident:al us~e r~era proposed or est~bli3hed next to a.f•re-~way; whsreupon
Zoning Supervisor Charlea Robarts stated that thc: Division aP Highways had
provided sour-3-attenuatinq devicea ~r~hether ln caoperntioa with the dev~lopera
or from the Stat~s budqet, but thare were some alonn the Pom~~,a .rree~ay near
•'~ntebel~oj that the Stara had indicated tt~ey would be willina ~to ~ low a
dE ve=oper to place ltr lf tha width ~f the berm an the freeway ri.ght-of-way,
however, at thia locnt~.~n 7n sL~j~ct proper.ty there was an open drainag~ channel
whicn would prac:lude placing half nf che berm on 5tate pro~erty unlese a drairi-
age pioo were iratellad.
~
~
MIN'JTI:S, CiTI' PLANNING CQMINI6.^,Ti~.J , hi~~rr.h 5, 1~1 % 3 73-1'J.3
TI:~:TATIVI3 MAP OF 'I'RACT N03. ~(lk)(>1 8091r ANI) f308'l (Cunt.inu~d)
Mr. Mil.lc~t eteked that i;. was hia o~irion th~ c:c~ndlti~r. ot~ould req~iire thq b~3rm
to bu r.ansCructnd ~n aubjact pr~perty and no•. ~~artially on SCat~ ~rohert.,y ~ince
it would havo to be placed thNro anyway, at~d that thoy propaA~d ta heve L•lie
humns loaatod 50 feot from the tr~eway.
Mr.. Mill~t, : n rcaponse ta r~mn.iaei.on qua~~tioniny roarrding Ct~~ di.Pf.orance 1r.
elevation batween eubjecC propQrty and the freeway, dtato'. thui~. they would h~-ve
ro Fill c~ubject ~+roporty wfth aC leac~t 4 feet Qf Fill in orc~ei to naer khc
royuirement af Cha~ Gzango County Floo,~ c'onLzol. Diatrict fcr a li )-;~enr et~rm,
and most of thic~ prope~ t.y wnfl below ttiat: I,r~veli th t~tho)~ wo~~7 r.ry to yflt ubove
the high wgter line, en~: th~ c~CFCD aAkod t.hat thla be on~~ foot ~bovfl thnh lovel.
Mr. Millet, in referancu Co th~ ropurt from the OCHU, s~~:.ed th-,t a condition
of approval wauld requiro construction of a ber.m which ~tiould bc~ no pzoblom,
an3 th~n inq.~ized wliethar. thit~ woul.d meot the JCfiD requiremenL.
Gommissloc-er HeY:l~et• n~L•ed thal•. acc~~rding to tiUD and fHn, the roadit~~~ wou;.d have
to be 45 dBA's in che hadraoms, thexefor~, it miyh*_ bc necflesAry to suund-Qroof
the wa11~ oF the h~mes ACI~LICellt to tho fz•eeway.
Co[nmi~yioner P'a.rano inquired hr.,w nur.h soll was taken downstream duririg the 1968-
1969 floodr wher.eupan Mr. Milla~ star.od ha did not know how ~n±YCh, but there was
no river channel at t:~e~ ti:na as presently existed.
Commissianer Kaywuad inquired wnethNr the pr.of~erty ~vould s t 11 be below the
freeway level if thc proFerty were filled 4£eet, and wh~re~ was L•lie b~ir.m ta be
locatedj whereupon Mr. M~.1J.et stated Lhat Y_hey would stlll be 'aelow the ireeway
since the channP' was also below the freeway, und Y.hat the be~~m would be located
6 feek. above th.; travel l.arie of the freeway,
Mr, Roberts noted t.hat tlse Subdivi~.~u~i Oi~ ~in _nc~ did aot re~~uire a wal~. if a
ber:n were ~tov? 3ed, h~weve.r, if the Comm~a~ion fel'.: ddditinna.l sQUr~d-attenuat9.on
measure: should be ~.ken, ic wou1~1 be ~,ithin the au*_hority of ~ha Commi~sion to
~nake auch a require[nznt.
Mr. Roberts, in respon9e to questi~ni.nq by th~ Com~~~ission regardi*~q the OCHD
sound. study, stated th~t the requESt for the sour.d study wa~ made lay the City
but not as the reaiilt ~f a aubmi.sslon of these tract maps, but was in r~sponae
to a requesi. for a stud~~ of scund along aeveral mi.le3 of the freeway~ that the
.report did not •titate ~ha b~rm or wall ~hould bc• on subject pr~pexty Lut as near
the travel lane as posoib].a, theref , this w~~ulu i;~3i~~tc the be-rri.ar ehould
h; on StUte pron-:T~*_y, and thF clos iie barr'~er c~uld be. the bPtter deflecting
ter.hniques t~: ^ wc~u].d ha•:e.
Commissi~ner :tc~-lanc~ then stated that because of the dra~nage channel which wa~
su~acenc to L-ha freeway right-of^VY3j~ this would preclude hav!ng half ~f the
~erm o.r. State property in the amount the Stat.e was willing to permit as ari
encroachment.
Commissioner Gauer again c{uo~ed fr~m statemer'~s in the OCHD letter to the
Pl~n~:i.ng Corr,mission regc~rding noise pollution.
Comm,issioner A.11rPd oba~rved ttiat the rQport did not include a.ir polliition of
the area, which could be sigr,.'_f:icant fxom ].ar.ge trucks using the froeway.
Conmissioner Gauer axpresaed regre*_ that subiect properr.y was ever zoned £or
resid-:~~tia1 puipases And was of the opinion it should have rer,~ained for agri-
cultural uses or a use that would not ~ermi.t huma,ti tiabitation.
C'ommisaioner Ro~~and tated thaL- ~n~~ opposition to the zoning was no longar
a~pli~able.
Commissioner Gauer then scated that the Oc`HD sta*ed they dici not recommend
residential use fo~~ th~.s pr~pei•ty unleas sound-atten~iation devicea ware pLO-
videii, and this sh~ulci ~e underllnPd and brought out to the attention of
everyone in sucli a way th~t the developer would ~lan a barrier s+~tficiently
high to L•ake care ~f thies, ari3 whon plans f~r hon~es were pr.esented, they sticuld
aJ.so de~ign theae homeg sa that acaustir. materials would be uyed, ..nd tihe noise
problems th3n could bg minfmizad.
CJ
~
MIN(ITLS, C.L'l'Y PT~IINNTNG COMMIStiTON, MaYCh 5, 1973 7~-12'~
TEN'l~n'1'7:VIs MAP OF 'T N~JB. 808C, 8081~ANA 9082 (~OX1l:~IlUO:I)
CommisAionflr All.rod ~.n~luirHd whnt.her the C.ommi.R~ion cvuld roquiXe ad11t~.~na1
landac.upi:~c7~ wliareupon Mr. Robc~ta dtat.nd that the Svbdiviaian Ordi~nnnce reyu~a-
tiona gov~:rnc+~9 lnncl~+caping.
Commisaioner ftdrbrat r.otad ther. tha dc~ve:lo~,~~t• ~hould ptovide a berm ta i~i,U~ a the
noi&o to thes~ l-racto.
C,ommisei~n~r I?arano inc~uirtrd what etandur.da would tho Commi9r+i.on pl.an to dmp3uy
to Qetermine if an adc• ~uate gound butfe~r wae provi.r]ec9.
Cummissionor Gauer. ataL•ed thtst kha City -~n~1 orig.inesi-A who could detox'mi.ne thr.
s~and~+rdn, while Commiesioner Nor~~st atated ':.tiat the County must h+~ve samd
guidelinea when tha~~ prasentod n r.hart that wo~iid in~iicuto tha rnading.
Commissioner Farxno k.hen inqu.iro3 whaY.hHr thia r.epa,:t from the OCdD could bu
i.nco.:poratad into the vari.oue atu~iiea wtilah t~oth t'~g County anc~ t:he: State
Divi9ion ~f ttighways made to comc~ up wit2~ a sQt of atandards and ko requlre a
developer. to meet ~hose etandar8a.
Comm:~sioner tterb9t notAd that EIC~D h:~u a sound lavel requiremealt ~~t 45 dt3A's
tn tho bedroo-tis, utid before any financing c:~uld ' e uhtained, thie ~equiremeni:
would have to be met if tiie cievaloper planned any iinancing ut tlie homes.
Mr.. Millet st,lted they woul.d comp:~X with whatever conditio~ls wero oet forth iu
the oCHA letter and any conditions the Commi.ssioi- might wi~h r.o add.
Cottimissioner F~~ ano inquired whether the dove:l~per wuuld omploy practices and
~:onstruction techniques reyardir~g the buildings thQmaelve~ to 5ring the souiid
•readings dowi, to th~ acce~tabl~ limit, and 3hould the Commissl.vn ~dnpt the
decibel rea~ling of 60 3~. ~ibels at the property line, whir,h, ~cc.or.d~ •g to the
report, was the read~^; wh~r9 only u f~w campla3nts woul,d be reaeiv~d, or the
55 dDA wh ~.:h was recomn~enaed.
;.or,-.miasioner Gauer was of ~he opinion that tl:e Commi_ssion 3hould e3tabliah a
maximum of 55 dBA's at. the property line and ~15 dBA's in r:~e bedroame witll the
windows o~eii.
Commissicn~r Herbst statdd the~ 5a dEA li.mitatiei~ could not be met ar. ttta
property line of many homes in the city whPre there was a-iy traffic, UacauAe
the tr~:cks go:: ~ by would raiso tl~is reading to 7~ t~ 80 decibels, and then in
furth~sr clarificarion to wha~ he t~ad suggested, stated he woul~~ rocommend tha
OChD Standards Table Izi, where3.n 68 dHA's was conaidered, woulci be norma]. in
thE rear yard of anyone in any placo in town w~sere there was <~ heuvily-traveled
street.
Commissianer Seym~ur noted ±llat thie reading wou).d *~e intern~_ ttent on buc-y
~t~eet ~, but these hom;:s were face3 with a 24-hour••a-day baai~, auch a~ people
ad jacent tc~ the freeway , and nat to att i.ntermi ~t i ncrea.se . n the d~A' a.
Commi.s~i~npr Hez.s+ stated this was his reason for ~ sting a ccndition that
the material of the hom~s regarc3ing aGOUStics be in Formance with HUC
standards as to the de;;ibal readin5.
Commiss~oner Kt-ywood was of the opi.nion •that 68 dBA's was nat ~ livable envixon-
men*:, and she •~ould never vote for that.
Cor,~missioner Hez'bst aoted tnat opcra~tinq a la~anmower would raise the readinq
abQVe 68 dBA'sf whereupon Commiseioner Kaywoo~l atated that lawn~-owera r~ere not
run day and niG,t as the eound traffic on the freeway would be sub~ectfng tneae
xesiuenCs Co this objectional~].E noise, anc~ the next thinq one wauld know, t.he
c3eveloper wauld be requearing complete waiver of the roar y~ird.
Commission~er Rowland noted t.hat normallX whe~re a reading in axct~ee pf ~~ dbP.'s
over 8 hdurs Qf a 24-hour peri~d was eapc+rienced, thi~s ~rou2d be u*~acceptaY~le
to a living environmant snd would b~ ur~ ii hibiti've eit~ation, theref.ore, eound~
aLtr~nuation measures should ~e ta'en.
r~ ~
L
~
M7NU'PL5, C~TY x'LANNTNG COMMLS3IUfi, March 5, J.973 '13-125
T2:'NTATIV?u M/1t~ OF' 7RT.C'r NOS.__808U, d081~ANU 80Fi2 (COritinuod)
Commiesionc+z F~ran~ not~~ ~haL nc~iee communir,at.l.t~ri a~ 30 to 95 fdet AilyW}lA[b
~sbc-ve 5F to 65 dociU~ld would raquira peopla ta ~hout~ ~nd i£ L•he AAUncl levol
out.d~~r~ was fi8, sa e~tggeeteci, phoplo woul.d bo conatantly ahou'.:iuy at ~istancee
of 3U ~~e~, ~+nd n~~e could nevex ta1.. ! n An c.rdinary con~e ra~tion c~vsn nt aZoec+s
dibe.ance~.
Chairmen Snymour etatHd that h.ho C~.mmi~asion ' '~. n~~t dincu~~ed tt•~n other el.c~e o.f
tho q~eskion, namely, daneity, +sr.d it waa hi~ un~ar.st:e~nding tt~at ti,e Commi~aion
waa nn -•e~ord tu t;~~ exkent o! diHal.l~~wing ~r c~onying evecy pr~~,};~+,~ ' h~re th^.
dendity was greater th~n ft-1, Aii~ che Commie~lon had }ield to thst. u~ai~ ~c~,
however, nnw the Cc~mm.lseioi~ wae boing aek~d t~ approva RS-50~'~ trac:t~~, thexe-
foz•u, if the Commiar~i~r~ app.roved thASe: trrxate~, then th~v cot . nc~ ~~ny mara
intnnse zonix~y i.n tlia futuro of pro~arty in +-.hia general dXtl4.
Cotnmisaiont~r Fnran~ ncL•od thdt the Ci.t.y Cl7'1I1C{1 haci ostak~liehed the ~oninq and
no furthr~r act~on rould bc t.akon by the Ccmmis~'on aa it at'~cto3 d~~nsity, how-
av~r, r.he Commiasion cauld try `~ c~iitrol khe devdlopmont in oraer to give c:h~.+
gr.oop3ctiv~ pur~~haserg soma prot~ction f.or the.ir propertiy.
Cha~.rman SPymo~i~' stated he cjibagreod wit•h that statement a:~1 che phllo~ophy
behind it, an3 to conslder appr.ov;nq these tract maps with *ti~j inf~rmation
~ubmi.tted would b~ app.roviny i-.stant s1a~n conditione.
Commiaaioner AlJ.red n~ted that even though t}~e Pla~ning Commiosion was ;~: ~~-
em~>ted as to zc,~~ing f`or the }~roperty and he had vot:ed for R-1~ 1,~ now '. ~• l• that:
th~e ~ropextp shou]d not be dev~loparl wiL•k• anything, and he w~uld vote '~..o" on
any prcposed 3ppro~al.
Commiseioner Horbst then atat~~d that sirice the property ha~3 a r9solui:i~n of
intent to RS~5000 and the p.r.opmrty ~.wner :i~d ttie riqht to develop witYiin thc~
Cod.~ requlrements of yaiQ z~ne, i'_ w.is up to 4:he T.'lannirtg Commi.s33.on - knowing
the zoni^g of the property - to h?ve the best c.ond±ttors possi?ile for people to
].ive und~r, reqardlesa of the zoning on the p.raporty.
Chairman Seymour then stated that it Nae poss.iLle thc~ City Cu~ii~~il ith this I
new information might liave t~ken a new ?ook at tiie prapezty s;t,c~e '.ie City
Counci'1 had xiot read this sound .report at the tj.rr~e they approved r•-5000 zoning.
Con~missioner Rllred was of. rha opi.nion that home~ ehould be place t] 50 feet from
the freeway insteac of providing a b~rm and sgttinc~ back onZy 54 te~t.
Commisstoner. Faranu :~,tat~d :;hat if the Commissz~n were dealing orly with ordinar;-
c-ircumstanc~s, thc~n perhape the Commission coulc~ estdblish guidelines, }~o•aever,
when something like the atudy which wa~ preseiitec7 was consid~rEd, 1:hen it ahoixld
be u.p to the d:.~veloper to take the initiative to ~!ive the residen..s the ~est
possi'ule development, therefore, he would suggest that the condition~ be very
preci,se and viable guidelino~ he drafted, even thougi~ he ~aou~.d a3mit he was not
capable to do so becau~e he did not have the technical knowledqe to establlsh
guidelines as to the height and type of berm, as well aa lands~apicig, that should
be require'.
Commissionex e~llred wau of thc opfnion that tt~e d~veloper ~hould pre~ont some kinc
of guideJ.inec for the Commissian L•o review and approve or dany beforp c~nsidera-
tion of the propnsed tracts.
C~m~nissioner Kaywo~d noted that tk~e Report to the Commi3aion indicateci that Tzact
No. 8082 had been withdrawn from conr~i3erut:.on~ whereupan Mr. Mi11et stated tha~t
this tract was withdrawz~ because of the p~asible alignment of Fai.rmont Poulevaxd
over the freeway throogh subject trart, affecting the 1ot layout.
Co~rinis~ionex F'arano noted tha:. the pet;itioner alrettdy *-~s AS-5000 zoniny, bLt 1~
a Commissi~ner he felt thi.s propert~f ahould be d~veloped with th~ 3?rineiple that
thQ City ~ould not have the problem tliat had been expresaed an~l inquired whether
~,he developer ar~d engl.neer wanted to tr~ke tinis back and ~trv ta aesign ~. tract. map
ncorporating the principles ae sot forth !n thA OCiiD repnrt.
~ ~ ~
MINU'~ES, C1'i'1! PI.ANNING COMMISSION, M~srch 5, 1~-73 ~~3"'~~~'
TEN'1'A'II~_C MA(' OE'_ `PRACT iJO5. t30A0~AUH.I~_ ANO BOt~l2 (C:ontinuad)
i:ommi~ael.onc~r. A11red wtatod t.hat eomc~ oE Ch~+ r~r.~~mmendpCxonr~ of thu Go~inty wa~'o
nut qufficient.
Mr.. Mi.llet nated 1.het Commieuic~ncr Far.ano t'o1t•. ho wna not qunli Eied ko mnkae rheoe
gui.3el inoe, Lut ur..~ulc] the '~ommise~ion £eel tt~e Co~utty w4e Ao ,~ual~.fied.
Comm±.eeionnr Farino tl-An :~tated t:liaic i~' the de~elope:^ cou~d dreiyn aomai:ltl.rtq ~hat
woulli pr.gvont t.~4e pzobl.umn, Aa1d clr~ei.yn havinq ~~ood co..~m~n aane~ ar~ t•.o livi~g
onvizar~me~~~, thiH ahoulcl br~ dc.ne oin:e it. wa~ -~ot incumbant. upnn tha Commisslon
to do so.
Mr. R~l~~~xkn notod I:hat in t-.he rAport from *_he.. c)CHC~, pdyc+ 2, t.~ero •~e,r.e recommoncla-
tione a~- to the l.lmit.+~tion of noiae values, and a bar.riur ehould ba Fravidad
dooiyn~d and ~:onatruc~ed ta .limik tho Hxtorior peak i.nt:ruA:i.ng nofso levalR to
ler~s ttian '"1 ~E~A'o and mod~. vmluaK to leao t}tian 55 driA's when mAaauraA aJ.~ny the
raar r~side~r.tia7, prope~t:y 1..lneR neareat the tre~w~yt that ~tnff mi.gltt bo ab:Lo to
go~ same as~~ietanc:e from rhb Div~.pion of Highwayr~ who had do..., L•hie etu~~yt where-
upon Mr. ~tillet s1~.at.ed they wculd comply wit.h thnt, and they tn.ight hav~ tu gat
av,per?:s t.o toll fF,em how to dr.~ thie.
Commiasiunez H~rb~t uffered a metion, ~econded ~y Comm.i.N6ianer GeuQr t~ approva
Tetitat.ive Map o.f. 'i'ra.ct Nos. 8U8~ and 808' 3ab~oct to coil~i.tiuns and the rsquire-
inentr3 af the Orange Count~/ Nealth Depr~x'tment as it pertainod to 'fable Ii7. ~nd to
pravide soun 1-arL~naat.ion davices tc~ reduce ~he sound l~:vel to 68 dBA's at the
~xoperty line Znd to aloo pr~vide u~oustic:ll ~iatcr.i3la w3.t~h thA homas bnckinq to
the Riverside t'.~e~way to r~duc:e the s~und l;;ae.l. to 45 dBA's within the hedrooms,
as ~tipuJ.AtQd by t.he ~ievelopar, that tt~Pre wa~ already a fenc:e ~djacent tu th.e
drninage chanr-~1 a~ a protc4~:ic~n to cnildren; ai~d that Y.he berra should be r.on~
atructed on ::ubject ~.r~perty.
Mr. [:oUerta note~3 th :t he wau.ld like to sugge~t ari ad3iti.onal condit•ioii whtch
wr.3 omittQd in Che F.eport to the ('ommiseilon, which would be, "Th~fi. a favor.able
flouc. hazard letter be obt.ained from k:ie Or.ange Gaunty F'lood Control Diatrict.
prior ta aporaval of ~.`~e final ~.ract maps" .
Commissioner P'srano was ~f the ~~pinian that he would rather that ~he clata br.
presPn':°~d to the Planning Co~nmi:~sion befor.e the Commiae~i~n cauld considPr approval
o£ the tract maps.
Cammi :~loner lterbst noL-ed *_ltst t' ~!:ommtssion had appx'ove~ m~t~H in the pa~t
subject to conditians, such us requiring a favorr~bl.e flood hazarcl lPrter, th~are-
fore, h~ could not see any rec~oon why theae tr~cts cauld r.ot be approved subject
to the coiiditicn ot meeting ~he requirements ~f the OCHD reqarding noi.:~e att~nua-
ti~~n which wouid r.equire the de~~elopar to hirP expeits i~ tYie field of sound t~
resolve thi.~a condition
Mr. M.illet n,nted tr~at a fznal ~.:ract map approval could not be obt~ined until
apecific cor•iitians had ueer. me~.
Chairn~an ~~yl:...ur inc~uired wYiether zhare was further aiacus~iax~ an the motion.
Commi~~ioner I~aywood ~~u4~'d that one could not pick up a daily newspaper witheut
some articlP un loud noises on expr.QASway~t with ear-drum dam~ge and pl~,ys7ological
damaae, and she juxt could not see bullding homes adjacer.L• ta fzeeways; that. there
was an ar.ti le recently stating the State was going to ~uilcl ~arriers against the
freeway noi.;.:e on th~ Riverside-Arte~la Fre~way between tt~e City of Cerritos and
tht Santa Ana L'reeway, and t«e~ noted that th~ cost would be more than three
hundred milli.o:z 3ollars, *.he expsnse to be shoulder.ed ontirel~~ by the State,
which meant all of the ta.tpayer•9, and sha just cou].d not s~e if a developer
cauld not come ~ip with a livable environment, w;if all of the taxpayers of the
State ht~d t.o pay for this problem.
that ~:he tenta-
Mr. Raberts noted, in x~espuzise to Commissior,er Farano's ~u~stion, *h~ ~~,t
tive tract map wuu~d be consiciered ;~y tha Planning C~mmi:~s~.nn and then Y
Council, while the final tract map k~ould be con~idersd b}- xhe City Councj.l on1y,
howeveY, the Commission might be intare$ted in knowing ~rhat the develaper woul~
~r.opose in ~~aras of buffaring devices in order to meet the xecommendatione o£
the OCH1D, th~r.efore, the Commission could add rs c;undition that priar co approval
~ ~
M2NUTL;S, CT.'IY YiANN1Nr: COMMI5SF.ON, M~rcl1 ~i, 1~73 ')3-127
'PENTT.TIVF MAP ~'~i' 'PRACT rioS. HOA~__OOt)1,_ NND 80Ci'J. (Cot~tlnued)
c~.E the fin~al 'trect ~nap,^ thnt th~~+ devolo~~z eubmit inf!~:cinat7.on t.o tha t~lanning
Cc>mniaaion and Ci.ty Council. of. the~ -neth~d of and davice,e pro~~o~sed L•o be~ ue~c+d
to at:tun~~aCe+ nol.aoe fs~m lhe :treryw~xy and c~rtc+l~~ juetlflcatic~ns £rnm eni.d
Di•~l.Ai~~n of tiighwayK wh~ woulcl be t'he rec~Fu~eiblr~ ~yoncy tu rarti fy thin
i;i fc~rma r,ion .
Ueputy City A.tornay Frenk i.owr.y inquizo~l of t.h~ c?e'velop~r. whe~.har a oondit.ton
na eut tr~r.th by ~ho Zonir.g SuperviR~r regt+tdi.n~) oc~i~n3-a~tr~r,;a~tl~.ion r~ou1~9 t~e h+~rm-•
ful L•o the cl~avuLopox', and i Y not, woul~l thc+ developor ~tipulnte to complyiny ti+J `h
t.hia cundition~ whaxoupon Mr. Mil.let eo atip~ilated.
Mr. I~owry t:t-~n notod th3t ~inco t;he devolopdr ~S:i~ulated to pruvid~.ng thla in-•
f.ormAtiati. thie wuuld olimina~.e a legal. prab.lc~;n.
Commi~sion~X Far.~no inquirc~~l whet woul~! heppgn ~.f the Commiet~iun d±d not la.;:n
~hat wRA pr.esc~nt:.e<i, or. woul.d thJ.s l~o i~~for~na~ti.on un).y~ whezeupon Mr. Lowry
etated that :-i.nco l•he tontativa tr~r,t map w~s t~efure thn Flanning Cummisaioti,
thi.s woul.d on3y ba infurmatian for Cho Planning Commi.raaifln.
Mr. Robort~ inquirod of Mr. Lc~wxy ~~het:hFr. the Commie~ion could be in a positiort
to muke ar~ a part of tha condition thaL• ~.f t:he sound-attenuution dovict~~t dicl
not mee1: wit:h Cha approval of the PJ.a~luing Cor!rn;ni.aaion and City COl1L4C}..L ~ that
tha £inal tract mnp not be approvad~ whercu!;~on Mr. LowXy ntated thzit tha Con~mts-
aion wae onl~r takino Acti~n thia dnto on tho tentaL•ive L•ract ma~~e.
Commisaionez• Rov-land nc,ted that at. that point in ~.i.me it would be academir.
because the Planning Comm.is~ion would nut, within tlle ncxt mor~th, acqutre ttie
akills to ~val~•.ata whatever was ~rosented i.n the first. places and th~ C~mmissi~ri
would onl.y l~ok At iT from Lh~~ cucc;9Y.ic. stiindpoint - the salution ~haul.d b~
accomnlished by an authority recogni•r,od :~y th~ City of Anahc:im in acoustic~l
engi~ieering, ceztifying the c•~nditions se•.: forth.
Mr. hlillet 3tated thia informatior, cou13 be prosQnted when an EYR wao tiieft.
Mr. I,owry noted. f.Y~at. the acti.on b~~ing taken aii Y.he teritative tract map at this
particular pcint in time and the informati.on furc~i.shed by agreement of the
developers would ba 3n ~onnection with thc filing of an l:nviror-mental. Ympact
Report, anii this would be only to advis~ the Cocnmission of the action thaL would
be taken s~nce the Coux~c.il would ta)ce the acticn on tne EIR.
Commissioner Gguer noted that tne Orange C:o~:nty Heal.th Departm~nt recummendations
were very specific s~atement~ in which th~y st.ated thaC tY~e tr~cts ;~ot he ~3pp~oved
fur rFaidentlal u~es unleas the tneasures set torth ln thei.r .report were t;aY.e-~ to
reduce freeway noi~e intr.usion iand then read the stat•ements as coatained i.n tnis
Xecommencla*_ion) , therefore, the developer ehauld design an~: L-uild accordiiig to
that program; whezeupan Chairman Seytnour noted that the getitioner had already
stipula~e3 to meetinq that.
On roll cal l the foregoing motion fa.iled by ttie faLlow~.ng vote :
i,YES : COMMISSIONER° : Eierb~t, Gausr, Rowland.
NO~S: COMMTSSIONE1tS; Allred, Farano, Kaywood, Seymour.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None.
Chairnian Seymour then noted ttiat a motion for deni.al was in order.
Comniasioner Allreci offerecl a mution, szcos~ded riy Commtasioner Farano to deny
Tentative Map uf Tract No3. fl080 and 8081 until t'rie applicant could ~omp.ly with
the racomm~ndation o£ the Orange County Health Aepartme:.t.
Commiseioner rareno notad tht~t in sec~ndinq the motion for denial, it was predi-
c~,ted upon the fact that it ehould be denied unt.il such time as the applicant
undert~ok to co;np~.y witti the recommenaations uf the report from ~he OCHD pri.or
to the time the track:~ wer3 again submittod to tlze Ylanning Commioeion, but ~s
it now stood, he woulc] hava to dany the entire trac"
Commissione~ Herbst noL•ed this action wou2d mean denying tracta and s•abmitting
them to th~ City Councll wit}~out any conditions; whaseupon Comtciasiar:er Farano
atatad that what had b~en discussed before wac~ so vngue or r:a~•-.cive that one
couZd not recommend any conditionb anyway.
~ ~
147NUTES, r'I'P[ PI~ANN1idG ~OMM7SS3UN, fler~th 5, 1~~73 73-1~H
T~NTAT7V1: ~1AP OF.TRAC'f N09.__Ei0f30~k30F~T1~ ANU ~OA2 (~onL~n~a~d)
c.i,~ x•o~l ca11 th~~ foregoing mc~ti~~n ~aea~:d hy t.hc, fc.llowir~y v~7ta,
}~yp°f,= COMMISS.fONF:RSs Al~r.ed, i'arano, KdyH00~1, :t~aymour.
NU.:S c ~'~MMT ~SI()IVE;R~ t Gau~r, kt~~ rb9Y., itawldnd.
AF SEN'P: (.'.OMMIS5IONGR3: Nor~e .
Mc, rtoborte noted th3t the nctiur~ o!' donial by kh N 1'lAni~ing Commieeion whould
}isve aome per.r.inent reaeon» sinr.~ thn zoning ~n tT~~ Nz~~p.~zty ha3 c~'lrcendy b~e~n
~sstabliehed for RS-50U0, and the Commiesion ol~viouely hnc4 certein rnea~ne for
deniel, thus the mo~iors nhould epocify th~~s xaasc,ns, su that th~ City Council
would have t.he ben~f.i.t oP the Planniny Comminc~lon 's thinkinq ~.n ~.hig ra(aexd,
and einc~ Zh~o !dAfl di~feront ttiam m~,~r. txa~~s, th e Cit~ CC~unCS..I ~yec~decl L•ha full
reac~~r,a.
Chairinan S~yinour nota~ tha~ Lho minuteg ~hould '~adr this out, and ull ~he con-
varsatio~n th at touk place .~n subjHCt tracts.
AftRZ isxthr~ x c~ncarn expreasod by Mr.. RohRrta, Chairma.n SeXmour ~aeked that
Commiaaionn_r Allrad .inc;].uae somc raacr,na and findinqe in ]tle mor_ir,n.
Commisetoner Allxad then inquiro~t whathe.r thc~ develop~x would rat.her conr~ider a
continuance in order that he CoUia rr.viee the t.ract maps snd proaent the aolu-
tionr~ to alI o~ tha concexne expras9~~d by thd Planning Commiseiot~.
Raberts
Mr i.nquirod whethe~r tho Comrc~i.asion wnnt~d 1;he revieions ~o in~::Lude a
,
xe~ort from an aaouylical AngLneer as tca the barr.ier that would -nEQt ~he st:andw
ur~s of the Orange Count.y Health n~partment.
Commi~s~ioner ~arano noted that he wnuld like to see the tra.cL maps drssigrted by
someone who had oxpertise and knawl.edge of t:heae p~.'obl~ms, whv woul@ say with
all ttse certai.nty that an exper.t can, these trac~ ~~~aps wou].3 msintain the r.ecor~°
manded noise levsl set fortl: by the OCHU rer~ort _
Commisaioner Rowl.and then stated Y.hat the tract znape vaould ahow no dwelling unite
within 500 feet uf l-.he t.ruuelwayr that thia wa9 i:he only sur~ way of ineeting thi~
requizament.
Commissioner P'a.rano stated ha was nct at a11 s~ire oE tkii.3, and i.his could be true.
Assistant Deve].opment Sorv~.oes Director Ronald '?`hom~son noted that onE of the
re+~sons tl~e Co~nmission had ths tentative tract mape Uefore them waa so th~t the
Cammiasi_on COU.'.C~ get int~~ finding out what the g roblems were a::d sen whr_ther the
Commission cov.ld overcome them, therafore, he was not at a].1 ~uze w•hethQr the
Plannit~g Comi:iissiori had resolved the problems.
Chairman Sefmour noted that apparen~ly what the motion ir~dicrited was that at
this partictiilar time the Commission was unable to solve these problems and was
the reason why it was de:cied; that C~mmissionez Farano wa~ not certain of what
he w~uld see after it was clone; that Comrnission~r Allred ~iid not appear that he
was s$ti~fied either, while Conimissioner Kaywood thought ~th.ts was a hole in thQ
ground which the taxpayer9 shou].d not pay forj and th at h~s personally felt it
would bh an instant slum.
K~r. T;lompso:~ noted that between L•he time the tentative tr~~ct r~up was ccnsidered
anc' :he final t•ract map was app.roved wa~ _'^~ •. a11y 1:h e tiinP ~hen onP really
determinpd haw t~ reaolve these pr.oblQ+~.. J whe~; •non Chairman Seym.aur. nutad that
the only way to solve th~ problem to:ay was~~a ... ld, and perhapa Commi~sioi~er
Far.ano woul.d feel differently if he saw something.
Comuiifsionrr Faran~ statec~. he di.3 x~ot feel the .~mbudimpr~t of tne entiry re~oxt,
and al~ the Ye:~ommendations set forth ir. the matierial sub~nitted were cezt~in
enough for the dev3lopar to be able to redo tha tract r.sap~a, but the mape wauld
probably not rome within the ~pprov~d levels, arid if the Commission wanted some-
th~nq to be~ dune apecifically, the C~mmission should ask ur xequi.re the developer
to bP speci.fic, but it was thE potitioner's r~~punelbility to tal~:e the tzact aia~a,
look at them, znd redeaiqn tk-em, brinqing in sotne testimo~iy that these ~racte wi.ll
do what the GCHD report required.
~ ~
MINUTGS~ I:ITY Y1.ANNING (;QMMIr~+TON~ MAL'Ch S~ 1^73 73~129
x~NTAT7V[s MAP_Of'_TRACT NOS._80H0., 8001~ AND_8082 (Con*,.inuec9)
Commission~r Hc,r.be~ in~uired whethor t.hiw wnr~ e.imil,er to tha raport ti~aL Anahhim
~iilln prodentad, ..nd i.~ so, he wou1Q ~iko to knuw whdtt~er tha Cr~mmi.s~cion wou.lcl
bs ii~tax~o~'_e~d .tn rasc+_ndi~g ti~oir mutian ~f denial and nekinc~ th~t dovela~ar ta
cama ba~r.k wi.*.h a d~ffe~ronx tr,~t~t m~~~ ro look at again.
Mr. C+tJ. Kraome~r~ rc~pr~aant.ing Uppor "K" Ranch~ AF`~~Q[+::R~ beCora- L•hc+ Commiaaion nnd
atatecY r.hat th~y would lik~~ to +~tudy t.hle m~~ ~r, howover, they had not hired en
hcouwticnl onqineer. r_o make A.~y recomniun9a~ions si.nce thoir c4ncezn wee whnre
wure t:ha grcund zuloe, an.d .lf r.hM OCHD report w~c~ tho graund rulee, theri perhnpe
theX r.uald catart .rom L•hare.
C~mmi~:~ion~r Allrc+d ottcred a mution, saconded by Commissi~ner Far.ano ~.nd MU'TION
CARR'Lfu (''ammie~i.o~inr Saymc~ur vc,~ti.ng "no") to rAecind tho Pl~n~ing i,~~n-nieeinn'a
actio~n oi ~3eni~1 0~ TQntatj.ve M~~ of Tract Nos. HO80 ancl 8~81.
Commissic~~~E~~ [l~rbst offt3zad A mo~i~,n, secondod by Coma~ins~~ner ~'aranq mnd MOTIQN
CAItRIE~ (Commir+sioner ~c+ymau= vot:ing "no") to cantinu~ cons~~uration ~f 'I`ex~te-
tive Map of '.Cracr_ Nos. BQSU ancl f,~001 tn the meet.ing o£ Max•ch 19, 1973, in nrde~
to all~w tim~~ for tha devel.opere to revl.se their rroct mapn, indicatxny the
lac~ation and haight nf the barm and sound i°ccommendations in accordanco ~vith the
Oxange County Iieulth Department and for thQ eubmias~.on oi a rapoi:t from an
acUUatical ongineer c~f ~orne roputc s9;ating that. the no~.rte~-~ettenuatinq meesaur.oH
being takan could ac~omplish racon~mendatioris aK oet fort•h in t,h~ rapor.t a# ttxe
QC:HD.
VARIANCE NO. 2479 - PUDLIC EiEA~t7NG. JOYAL R. FIOf3S~N, SR. , 93~12 C~nY,ral Aveiiua,
Gxrden G.rov~, C'a. 92641, Owner; requesting WATVI,R GF (A)
PERMITTED i15F;S, (B) YERIdI7'TED SIGN IN COVJUNCTION W71'H
CGMMERCIAI~ USE OF A REaIDFNTTT~.L S'd'RUCTUR~ ~ AND (C) MTNIMUM NUMBFR OF PARKITIG
SPACES TO F~FtMI'P TFiE CQNTINUED ~1SE JF A BUSINESS pT'FICE IN AN EXI3TxNG FOUR-
iJNTT APAkTMENT BUTL~LNG on prooc~rCy de~cribed as: A rectangularly-shaped parceJ.
of land having a frontage of approx:' matel.y 50 feet on the eaet• sside af Olivo
Street, having a r~iaximum d~pr.h of• a~-proximatel.y 190 fr:et, and l~eing located
approximately 25U feet noz•th o£ the c~~t~rll~ie ~f Broad+ray. Property presently
clas~i£ied R-3: MC'LTIPL~:-FAMILY RF.SIDI:NTIAL, ZON~.
No or,e appPxred to repxesent thc petitioner.
Chairman Seymour atated this would t~~: deferz•ed until later in the heazing and
reque~ted that a ntember of the ataff coT~tact the pet.itioner to determine whether
he would bca pregent for the Commissiun to ask ques~ions. (See page 73-Z1U)
VARIAN~3: NO. 2980 ^ PUBT.~IC H~ARIfIG. KP:iNETH J. KREFF'P, 840 North Clement.i.ne
~~ S treet, Anahr-.i~r, Ga. 92805, Ov~nerj request+_nq WA?.~1ER OF (1~)
MAXIyUM ACCE~~SORY BUILDING COVLRAGE WTTHIN R~QUIRED REA'R
YARA, ~~) :~INZMI)M UIST.ANC~ ~ETWEEN ACCESSCRY AND MAIR BJILUING, ANL~ (C; MINIMUM
5IDE YARD SE'I'BACK T.U PE12N3IT Tt1E CONTIIVUED U5~ OI' NONCbNFORMTNG ACCT.S~ORY BI7IL0••
INGS on pro~erty des~ribed as: A rpctangularly-•shaped parcel of :ai-d t-avin,q a
~rontaye af appr~xima•tely 49 f.Pet on ~tlie eaat Side o.f Clementirie Str.eet, havinq
a maximum depth ~f a}~proximately 109 :Feet, a~id being located approxi.mately 525
feet north of the centerline of North Street. Property preaently classifiec.
R-1, GNE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL~ ZUWE.
No one appearFd in appoaition.
Althaugh the Report to the Commie~sion was not r~ad at the p~!blic hearing, i.t ie
referred to and mada a part of tY~e mir~utea.
Mr. Kenneth Kreg£t, the petitionar, iz,~.lcated his presence to anse~er questione.
Mr. Kr.ef'ft, in response to Commi:aaiener ~au~r's quest~.on rogarding t~e rentaon
why ~he situati~n occarred on a~abject prop~rty, stated that when he had obtained
x bui].dir.g permit to construcC a p~~l, at that time he tho~ught the building
permit covered the additions that he r~ar3 placed on the property, however,
recently when he wanted to sell 1:h~ pi~operty, he had foucxd out l~e did not hav~
tihie pormit, there~°ore~ }1',,' r.9qt3B8t b~:foze tho Commia$ion wss to leqali~e the
exiating nonconfor~;ing ~~~• ~sory huiliiings~ that he had talked w~th the fc~rmer
~
~
~
MYNU'PN:S, CI'TY F'1.~AN~1NG C(iMMIS:~lON, t4ar,r.h `~, ~~a73 7.3-13U
VARIANCF Nq. 24E~0 (Cant•in~~e~l)
Chi~+! Uui,lding Lnsspocter Nomer WN11nce, who tit~d aelviOUQ him L•hnt whet he hxd wa~
corrNCt, and ono of the~ ln~~>o~toxr ahn l.ived neax•Uy had Ar.~p~ed Co ct~eck t•o mak~
rurd t.hat everyti~Lriq waH pr.aperly rUnMtructad~ and t.hat ha h++d nag].er.t.ed to qet
2he buil,li~tg pt+rmit :,ov~ring Chis por.ti.on at the coneCructiur-.
The Commioeion tt~on r~zvi~wc~d tt~e ~.~lan wiCh t:lib ~~~.titi~nc~r, and tho putit:ioiiar
not.n:~ that the~ haune wae pi~~an~ly in oecr~~wo snd tho proe~pr.cti.vo p~~rchaoc~rP
had reque~Y.~d thn* LhQSe udditfune remnin.
Commi~aiurier I'arr~no n~ted theC a Pt~ot~9raph he hred vie~wF,d indicatod that n
m~tore~5a srae had what ap~OaxaA t.a be doorn and inqiiirec whel•her eomo farm oP
operatlon or kind cf bu~inase wro b~i:~~~ opc~r~l:~+d~ whnr~_u~.on Mr. Kre~~t ntdtocl
thhk th~s~ ~+~re mer.~r.1.al.e !ot his home ln the mounta.ins whar.e ho inte~-docl tu
~iave .
Commi.reion~r Gauer inq~ai.rec! ~e to thE~ IlU11l}JE1L' o~ r~ei7hb~ry Mr•. Ki-etift had con-
tacCOA to det.erminu whethex ar nat ~.hpro w~s eny r,ppc~s~tiani whc~roupon Mr.
KrafYt atated Chak he h~d cor~tacto~ tl:c r:osi.dentR on b~th aicles af h#.m, ae we.ll
ae Acxoan th~ etr~c~t, ~nd ha8 r+acoivod no opposition from them.
Commissioner Fi~rbst .iny~itr.od wheChei or not the wbll ad~ac~anc to thc~ fenc~a was
parl of the: ~ctunl •<a?.l. ^R ~ne ~f ::~o ~trur.tures nnd recei~•nd un aff3.rmati.ve
re~+]y.
A woman in t}-c~ e+udience inaicated ghe wa.~ tr.e prospectivn pur.~:ha~ser und r~ot~d
thuti. her hu~+band liked on~ of l•tae ema21 a~cc~~~sory buildings, calli~g it his
"dog huuse" becau5e sh~ hnd a very larqe orgar~, and when slie ~l.ayed mus.ic on
i.t, her liuaband warited to get a.wny from it a11.
THF HEARING {4AS CLOSED.
Commission~r Rowland offer.e3d a mozion, ~eccnded by Commisaianer A1].red and NiOTTOt3
CARRIED, Y.hat the Flanninq Cammi~si.on, in conn~cL•ion wlth an exemption declnra-
tio;~ status request, Einds at.^.d doterminee thai: the proQ~sul would hava no aiqr~i-
ficant environmental ~.mpact, and, therefore, rr.~.commendr~ to the City Council that
no Envlronmer.tal xmpact Stnte,T~ent is necesalry,
Commiasioner Gauer offered Reaolution No. PC73-45 and moved far itr~ paosage and
udopti~n to gran*_ l~e*_ition tor Vartai~ce No. 2~88U, subjact to condit~on~, and
subject to the ~:Lop~sal. af ineot~ng a11 Building Code requiremonte. (S~:e
Reaolution Book)
pn .rol.1 ca11 the furegoing resnluti3on w~as p~ssed b,y the followi~ng vote:
ASiES : COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Fr~z~ann, Gauer, Herbst., Seymc~ur.
NOESi COMMIS5IONERS: Kay~road, Rowland.
AaSE47Ts COMMISSION~R~: None.
VRRIANCE NO. 2479 (CotiL•inued Lrom page 73-129)
Zoning Supervisor Charles xobezts adviac:d th•a Commi.ssion thrat h4 had contached
`ho pQtitioner's qecre~.a~cy, ~~ho hnd advi4ed him tha~. the ~etitioner was out of
town, although h~ had been nware of h.ha fact th~s was corninq befara the public
hearinq and maq have fnrgutton i.t.
Comtnias~.oner Rnwland offa.red a motion, ee~o:~ded by Commzssionex Fa.r~n.~ a-nd
~IOTION CARRIED (Comminaioner Harbet abetr.+ininq), to c.~ntinue con~id~ration of
pe'cition tor Vr~riance No. 2473 to tht~ meeting of March 19, I973, is~ c>rder to
all~w time fc~X the pc+titioner ta be prasc~nt to anewes quostione.
~ ~. ~1~A
~
M1Ni1TE:~, CIT7i [~GhNidING C:OMMIS.iTON, MRXGh 5 r J 973 ~ ~'1 ~~'
VARIANCf; Nl). 24HJ. - PUT~I~TC lirARING. HRRT,AN F'. SODE[i, 623 5out'hi Uh1.G :itzca~t,
~.______.__., .---._-- Anaheiro, Ca~. 428Q~, Uwneza rey«e~~ing WAIVI:~l OF (~'~) NUMA7:R
Og FR;;E-STRNDING SIGA~~ ~ l~) D7~TANCE DETWEEN P'Rxr1~~SZ'31NDING
S1GNS, AI3~ lC) P~}tM'I'fTE,D ~IGN LOCATION TO FE'YiM2T R~'fENTI~N UI' TWO EXTBTINGi
FItF..G-S'PANDING 5IC;NS on prnperty descriLod ns~ R rectangularly-et~aF~~d ~~mrr.el of.
land .^.onAi.stinq of approsimntoly . H~ acXC+e linving a fronL•ar,e o~ ap!?roxinat:N~.y
3:?9 fc~et on th~ w~est 31.d~~ ox L~m~n : tz'eot, hevir~y A max'_mum d~~t~l1 oP aUproxi~
matel; 11S f~ot, hnc~ being Lac:ated appr.~xlmnt~aly 160 f~~~t e~uth of `ho cu~~C~r~
lina of F.omnaya prive~. P:~A~arCy pre~at7tly cl•as~elfied C-2, G}:NEFcA'~ COMM~~?c:Y.AI.,
ZON~.
Nu one app~ara.rl xn oppasi~ion.
Al.thauyh th~ Ruport C~ the Commieuion wes not ra~ad nt rha riublic; hec~rinc~, i.t i~
roforred t.o And m~cde a part of ~hc~ minu~.ee.
The eon of Mr.. Harlan Sod4n, tl,e petiCionnr, indicntad lii~s pracience 'to nnower
quee+tionR.
CommiNe.iocinr lierbe~t no~ec] that cane of kha aie~ne hacl par~elr~• h~wever, no ~igniny
:denti£iration was ::u it•y whereupon Mr. Soden atated thak t'ne paint~ers of th~
uign had nc~C auUmit.t~~d thebn eigns t.u tham ae ~yetf and that. '~'haza 'wero Rlc~t-A on
bo~h eides of the bixild.ing.
Commiasior~e~c• Her.k~:3t. riotad that hA dreva by 6ub;`ect pz~opert.y ~v~ry day, nnd ho
fElt thn~ the pzc~pocecl siqnir~q wae nut. the typee that woul~~ bo the bost for. khe~
property, however, fnscxa stgn9 waulel Ue CPriO~.CI~Xdbl'y battr:rt whereupon Mr. SoBen
replied th+~t ma.iiy p~o~~l.e did not Curn to r~3ad f'ab~..ia c~i.qris ,
Cammi~sic~ner i~ezbat nuted thst one aign wae not r~ven viaible until afzez one hr.d
pnsed~i by ~h~ bui..idi.ng, whereu~on Mx. Soden statr~d that the ~igi~5 would be
iciont9,ca1 on e.'.ther eide of tt~e building.
pin;:usaion wa:~ held between ~he ~ommissian and the peti.tioner rega.~-ding the moxt
e~ppropr.iare type of siqn~ - Whc:ther ~ne or mor.e e~.gns r~hould be u9ed - cr whether
a ag~~acial ~rnamental sigr., such as cau].d bQ se~e~: in sora~ ahoppinc~ ctntera whetein
~nc siyn would have panel~ and woul~t be mores appzoprlr~te to icien~ify evaryone in
~he shuppl.nc, cent~r, wlt.h fascia yign~ f.ox each individua]. shop; and that the
qizF~ of the bui.'.aing was too small to poxm~t moi-e than one e!gn Eor identification
Qurpoaes.
THE F~F'.)1RING 47AS CLUSED.
Commis~io~ier se~•mcur. offered a inotion, secanded by Commissioner Farano and
hiOTION CAF.RZED, that the P7.anning Cnmmiesion, in cannection with an exemption
declaxatior. status reque~+t, finda ~nd dECerminea thai: the proposfll would have
no siynificant en~~ironmental. impact., a~n~, thorefore, recommends to the City
Council that na ~nvironmental Im~~act Sta:.ement i.s necessa.ry.
Comm~~sioner Herbst offered Re~olutior Na. F•C73-46 and moved fc+r ite passage and.
adope ion tu gr~ant Petition for Varianr.e~ No. 24t31, ln pazt, yranttng waiver of
r_he lucati~n o~ a f.ree-stanaing a~gn and clenying the r~Queat for an r~dditional
Pree~standing sign and distanc~ between :~:ree-akanding signa on ~he basis that
,subject pr~perty was readily ldentif.lAbl~a wlthin ttie aantent.a ~f the 5ign
Ord3nance wh9r~in ;~ne ~ree-•staz~~ing s:lqn would be adQquate aince the size and
ahape nf the ~arcel was too small to parmit more than one free--stancling signt
that it any addltionnl signing wat~ r-eae~a~azy, these ahould be L-ascitt signs,
wl~ich shou~.d be m~re tran adequateJ and nu~ojecr. to conditiona. (°ee Fe~so:lutinn
F~ook)
On roll call the foregoinq re~olution wae passed by the ~~llowing vote:
AYES~ COhiMISSIONERS: A'llred, Farmno, Gauez, H~r.bst, Kaywoo~i, Row~and,
Seymour.
NUES: C~MMISSIOhF:kS: None.
AF358N4': COMMISSIONERS: Nune.
~
~
MINU'I'F:S, CJTX !'IaA.NNINI', CC~MM1,;Sip~J, Maxat~ 5, 15~73
'73-13'l
VARYANC~ NU. 2497. ~[~UHI,IC i~uARTN~. WUGpF~LNC C'UP.QUKA'1`JUN, N3A~ Wil:~ihirr: Efc~ulo-
_.~.___._._....-----...._._.__ var.~~ Nu. 7Q0, E~evorly li.ill~, Ca. 9Q2.1'.~ Uwn~arr GAKEK MC CUri~,
7.1.5U '(^er~wick., Na. ?24, W~^+tmi.nM~er, c'n. 92G(!3, Aq~nty rnquc+et.-
1C1q WAIV[:R (1F (74) PP:FIMI'fT1:U '"C~~~iORY [9UILDING~i ANU (}7) M:(NIMU!1 T'I+.GN'P YARG Sf«R'~
BACK TO EaTAk1LTSN :~ `CAAII,FR . 11~RS OF'I~.l'CE: o~- [aropart.Y ti9~oscr.ll,cid ua r A r~~:.ta~nc)u1~r••
ly-y};ap~,i~ p~z;.e~, oP lnnd cot.:~ rotin<~ aP ak~l~xox.matc+l.y fi.F~ acr.aty at Che!~ nr~~xGhc~aek
COJ"iIHX ot Wac~nar. Avfrn~.-a a~id St.c~Ca C'Gl.legc~ ~3ti~u].evni:il, h~vi.ny ~;t.r~nt~~,~e~ os.' rp~r~xi-
mekely at;~ Pc~et an the noz-th s.idc, o~ Wrgne~•. Avc~nu~a ar~d 68~. :c~r.~i: c~n tn~~ ~~Mt eidm
O~ StAt~ l;Olle~~ 3~1111hVY~T.'C~. 1','~porty [.~IO?..: t:1y i:1AlB,Ll.1pd ~t-~ll~ AC;R:ICUI,~rnrinz~~
zcwE .
No on~ +~p~ea~rsd in c~ppoeition.
Althauc~h ~hc~ Rnport to the Commi~sion wan not r~ad et the ~ublic hearing, Lt 1e
refo:rQd to and r^ade a~rarr. of the ml.nutAe.
Mr. ~~aran ~tcCunP, agent f~~r tho pe~iti~n~r, 1nc~icr~tod his Fr~a~ilcc to ani~w~~a'
qu~etions
CommiBaionor tte~r.b~t inc~iiired wtieS:her iha potiti.oiiez felt L•h~~y wauld t~ce at~l.e. 40
conclu<ie :~a].e~ of the c;ai~dominlums from th~ t.r.ailar within ~ix n~ontli~ l.ram the
dete oP Expirut.:lon of the previaus~ t•hree-monLh poziaut whc+reupon M.r, Mr~'una
c~tat.ed th+~t. normal.J.y th$y would ba bui131ng tha condUmf nit~a~+s an ~hr~:+c~i~, ho~uv~:r',
~n thie arop~~ed duvNlopmer,t ttiey woul.d be building t.ho At~tirc: d~~;el.op~ir~nl: :t.
one time, and it was hopad that wh~n construction was cumplet~~ e~t th~ ~~ci~. of
the t?~me at,stecl ~~r usP ~f° r.he, tra~.~e~r for ~a].~.~s, they WOLIL~ h~e ~xb1.~ to i•s-
locat~s in ~ne of thF co~~ominium unit~s to aample4e 9a1Qt1 of. the con!iorn.i.nj.umn.
TFiE; HEARTN(~ WAS CLQSER.
Comtni.saeionar Farano of Eere~l a motiu~i, se conclc~d ty Cummi.as.Loner Kaywood an~3
MO'fIqN CARI2IED, thr~.t ttie Pl.anninq Commissian, in connectian with an e.xero.~t.i.c~~~.
CIHC~.AZ'd1:~0).1 status rF•qu~st., finds and detes~uines thnt the pi•u~:osal wo~al.d ha~re:
no significar.t environmsntAl impact, and, eherefore, rocomme.nds to t:he City
Council t.}:at no Enviror~mental Zmpact statement is necQs~a~.Y •
Commiseioner Farano ofFered Resolutiun Nc>. PC73-47 c~nd rnovsd for. its pas:~.a,e
an,c! adopt:lon t~ grant Petition fox ~"uri~nce No. 24~3? t~~r. u period of time to
eup:l.r~ September 24, 1973, and that the v~~:i.ance wa~ yranted fox use of t~
t~:ailer for a azlas office, and ~t i:h~ expir.ation of said time l~.m'.t, t2~e
p~3titi~nvr had sti.pulated t.hat he ~aou'Ld bc: utiliz:lnq one cf the unita fr.r. tY~e
snlea of}:i~e tor the condaminiums of this developsnont. (See Resolution. Baok)
On soil <:all the foregoing rr3oluti.o;ti wae pas,ed by ~he Followiny vot~_:
AYES: COMM2SSIONERS: Allzed, rarano, ~o.uer, Eferb~t, Rowland, Seymcur.
N'OE8 : COMM.LSSIONERS : KAywaod.
A.ESENT: GOMMISSIONERS: NonP.
C~mmissic>ner Rowland iiiciicat.ed he was lea•,~ing ths Coun~il Charnber because c~f
a poanibl.e conflict of int.erESt siuce his firm ~as th~, archi.tec;: of tihe
~zroposed c~ev~~.^+pment.
Commiaaianer ltowland left th~ Cauncil Ch~m~iex' ~'t 3:45 p.m.
ENVIROPIMP~NTAL IMPACT - PUBT,TC H~AP.ING. ALVA~IEI(d MEMOI2IAL HOSF'ITAL ASS~7CIATION,
REPORT NC). 89 Attention of 3amer~ W. !lcAlvin, 1111 West I.a Palma Avenue,
- Anaheim, Ca. 92801, ow;~ert p.ropor'ty descr.ibed sa: F-r
RECLASSIIrICPT~ON irregu~~rly-:+he~ped parce.l of land ccnsisting of ap~r.~~x.i-
N0. 72-73-34 mat~ly 11..3 ar.~re3 dt the northwest corner ~~ Lrs Palma
'- Avenue and Weat Straet, hav;ny arprox~.mate frontages of
CONDIT701~AL USE 910 feet on tho north side o.~ La Palma ~1v~r.ue and ~1Q0
PERMI7C Nt). 1375 feet on the we~t side of Wos~. Street, and further dos~
r cribed as ~.111 Weat La Palma Aven~ae. Properky pr~asently
cls~esiEied R-A, RGRICUI~TURAL, ZONE (PORTION A) and
R°1, ONE-FAMILI' FtESIDENTIAL, 70N~ (POR'SION B? .
~
~ ~
~
MfN~.I'1'~%`-;, C1TY i'X,AyPI.(NG COMMiSSi.~~N, March ~, 19%3 73-17 ~
l;1~VIkONNEN'L`AL 1MPACT Rl?k'ORT Nl). E;9, RE:CLASSIF'J.CA'k10N NJ. 72-7s-3A, AND
C:ONI)T'CThNAJ. U51~ S'EitM~T NO. _A~ 15_ _(C~~ntinued)___ ------__~__~._.,__._.-r._ .__
NhQUF.5'I`?:C) CLAfiSII''LCA'f?OTI: I~UIt7'IUNS A ANp fl •. C•-O, CoMMr1Rl:IAI. UPFTCE, 'LONE.
EtGQC7h5iTF:D COND'I'l'IONAL~ 'iSE: PCRMIT TNf; 1sXi'ANiSION C'F' AN LXT ~TI~~r HOSFbTAI, AND
TO T..~,'PAHL'LSfi SP'~.C'LAL~'^Y 5HOP:i WAZVTNC (A) i~tk:QUIREU
LANDSCAPING, (2,? MAXI.MUM [1(III.DIN~~ tIFI~HT W't'THIN
300 T'N;LT UF A'SIt1GI,E-f'AMII.X RE`~'IDFNTIAL ZONF, (C)
S~GRMI'1TED SIGt:7, ANU (D) MA?(IML1M WAT~L HEICMT.
.~;J'.+~•[.~ ~{'~.( 1.'~~.~~'~ ~.~~7 ~~t`~ t~~'y.
~;~,~.o.L.u.~ n<~rc{unn,~ 9.ndi.cated thei~` prcr~encc in O;~p1~8~C~OT1.
Ui~,c~ as ion wais fic:ld by th~ Commiranion an whethAx or noh :subjeck ~u~~.tion shoulCl
ba Ci)118~~f3Kf:c~ ainr.e the Envir.onm~ank~l YrnF~nr_t Renor.t ttevluw Committoo hai i.ncii-
caLed that th~ LIR ei: ~u1d not br, r~ccep~3d unt•il rl~ternattvos were preaAnted ae
aet forth.
Mr.. R~bart I,ew.in~• Att.o:~:nvy wi.t~"~~~~n 7.~cakodrorizLo~mburclkDrlve,~napnearod~hef•ore
43 and 4~4 0~' Truct No. 1691, ~ P Y
th~: Commi~saion and z'~c;ue~tad a rontirLnC1GE of au~;joct r~etiCions to an cv4ning
~If!3S~Ot1 on be!~~lf oi' rrome of the pro~~~rry ~wnexs in the aroa eo Chat a bel:tFlr
repr~sanC~tit~n c~~ t.hc~ concErned Pro~er~.y av+nar'.~ conld br presont, and th~~t thi.~
r~,queat war~ rnr~da on the bayi.s t:ltat ~,:h~ City in the p,+st }.ad granked coatinuanc~~r~
to t•he p~titi.on~iz ur~:n his requ~:sc .
Commiseic~taas' Faranc~ i.nqaix•~:d as~ to the [~~a:ua of the two ].ots which Mr. l,ewxn
repreaente~~ whF:rourpn Mr. Lewi.n s.tar.~d they 41f:T'C negotiating wi~h the hos~ital
reprc+oent•~ti.ve aa t.o the sala of the prop4rt~.c:~, but they hud not bE+~n abl~+ to
com~,lete th~i3o negctiiition~ sincF, one si.gnature wuuld ht-ve ro be obtaa.nc:d t.>efore
the escrow cau3rl ba ~ntere~d int.ot thar, th~r esr.row harl not been cl.osedt khat ha
thoughti t.he ftez~1 had bPEin camplF:ted last vree'c, but t11ie fell throi~yh Thursday
oz Friday r~nd tino':her deal was ~till being negotiaL-ed, and one: paxty liad agread
while tk~e cat.he:° was sti ll. r.onsi.derlny the proposalt an~i that kl~ey liad nat had an
opportunity to ak•~tain a cooy of the Env~ror..~ien*ai I~.npact Repoit R~'-view Commit°
tee's rr~por.t in ~suffir,i~:nt tin~e to prepare anp commentary.
Mr. Tc~m U~~aw, 1 W.i.lsh:ir.~~ boulevard, Los Angeles, repreeen~ing the hospita].,
;~p,~eai~ed l~r~fnre tiie Cammissi~~n and sta~ed that the ETR was tilr.d b}• them when
the rc:cl~ssil`ication petiticn wat+ Liled, ther•efore; tie had x3~umed it would
have bean avai'~able to tYie ~~pPOSitior.~ thut his underrstandLng a~ to ~Yia status
of th~3 tMro l.ot:s under cens.' deration wao that the two lots werr the propertie~
of th~e h«spi'~«1 s:.nce he had t:~e signed offer and counter-offer, as w~11 as the
Ej.nal acceptance hy bath rarti.es as of February 12, h~wever, there was aume
diff.iculty in Cha escrow nst.rur_tions since they d.i~ not f.ollow the contract
)~etweer~ t1~e ':wo I~art:ie9, 3nd this had been cor.rectad fr~~n c:iscu~sion with the
i~ank h:xridlir~g tne escrow ar~d this was siqnecl by bc~th Mr. ar.d Mrs. Anderson and
Sunset 3iuilrlers; and tn~-'.: thc: siyned contrz~ct of purchase and ~ale wuuld be
accekt~3'~].e in any c~u~:t e~en thouyti the esczaw i_nstxur.:tioris ha3 not been
~omplet~.d. rurthermore, the request b~~ the ai:torney for the ~pposition f~r a
conti.n•~ance woul~ prej .dice the hospital's finanain~3 of thir3 praje~~t because of
the co , le.xtr.y involved in good financing procedures neceasar.y erit~~ finance
com~ar~ias because as t pr.esently existed, L•hcx•e ~vas an aqxeement wlth the bank
t:hat i.t` :~zLject petit~ons were not approved now, t.~ey w~~ulc~ r.ovo3~e th~ financing
and th~:~ liospital wou].d have to J.ook e1se~,~he.r.e for Lhe sam~e financing.
Chai:rm;~r- Seymour not ed that the only i'eason ~he petitions were continued pre-
viou~l~° c~as aY. thca 1~etitioner's request;. whareupon Mr. firew stmted that thiy
was nec:essary ao that they could try to aa~3~~ire all uf the proportias, th~reby
malc~ng it eaaier fuz the Commiseion t~ ~cAke action.
Mr. J~~lius Jikutz, 1135 Lomita Place~ appeared Uefor.e the Commission and sL-ated
he ha3 beyn s resldent in the ar~a for nine yeurs~ and that he had a peti.hion,
signed by :i5 persona in opposition, although ho had litL•le ~ime to contac_
neighburr~ bacausa he worked s"x~•y hours a weok a~icl was unable to ob'cain more
+hich tie w~as eure he coixld have done.
Chairman Seym4ur 1.nquired whether Dir. JikuL•z svould prefer an evenin~.; R~e~, " g~
Lhat mor.e Qereans could be preeenti whereupor. Mr. Jikutz atated that: i~e ~~~ ~..1.~
grefar un oveninq moeting, a~lthr.uqh he had taken time off from worl: ta k~e
present thie dnte because he felt it was impt~rtant enough to take time off so
that he could be hec+.rd.
~
~
MINUTFS ~ CI'CY PI,ANNTNG Cl1MMT5SI~)N ~ Mr~rr..h ~~ ~ t9~~:~
'l3••L3~
ENVIR(1NMF';NI'AT. i.M1.~A~,7. T2E1'?URT DIU. 8'a, i1N;CI.~A~:i`';IC1C11'f:IC)N N(). "/~-7'~-34, AN[)
CON[1IfTONAI, U~E I'I~,RMST NU. 1375 (CC~~:tlnuec.ll_._____.___.__.._.__.__.__.___._._.._..._.--_--.---
CummiyA:~~ner F'e-x•anc~ inqu.tr.•ed what:l•~er i~r. I,owin had )~e~en uwuro of Cha varioue
.r,~ntinut-n~ee Lhnt hu~ boei~ qrn.itod ainc~a t.ho notir.~onur lihd fil~d nubj9r.fi.
pet:l.tiona~ whssr.~up~~ti~ Mr. Lt~wir c~t.dted thaC t.he~y w~are awnro of th.f.n, anc5 1 K hbcf
Ueon re~~ro~vnnt.in~~ tho Ar~der9arie and Sixne~t. H~~ildoYS flir~ce Jr.nunzy, l~~owevor..
a~7me of t:ho propc~rty r,>~rnexs ~c~aenL L~dAy hac~ ++rikad th~at ha~ prare~oc-~ tI1Hi.l.
peC1Y.~.c~n far. a conklnuranca Gr an r~v '~i.ny meotin~~.
Cam~ni.ssioner P1rAnr~ atr~tc3d h~* d1d r~ot: f~•al, th.r. C:ammiac~ion ahnuld c~nbAdez u
c:one.inua~~c~ ,-)uF+L to b~:roac~en ~_hcj r~pxase~~tatiU~ und lnquirr.d wh~t gQe~.tian wou.ld
be t.~k.~r t-.wo w~~c.!ca Prar~ nnw t•.hat: ccluld suut have boea resulvc~d ainc~ ,7dnuax•yt
f.ucti,o.rrnor.o, h~ ,aid nut want the Comrni~n~rian t.o Le u~gd ns a barte,rl.ng tool.
CY~ai r•mnn Seymc>>ir notd~i L•.hm': t!` tl~e Co~n.m.ii~si.oia wic~hod to conaider i'. twn-we~k
~~ant.inuance, thnh a niyht. m~~rC.itlg h~ou.ld Y,c :ir~ urder.
Commi_:<~i.onc~~: Al..lred obaer•~~~jd t1•~at ozdinaf:i~.y th~ p~titioner requesto~ n contir.u-
ance, no* ~h.~ <;pposition..
CoTnmissi~~n~z ~aran~~ elat ed hc~ tc~lt tiie aamc~ wsy ~bout the appiica~nt uei.n~ th~
t~lc•~nni:~g C~:n~,~;f~S~.~~T- Ay a bart~:.ing tool ae he cii.ci tlla opponi.',:ion L~y ce~ntinu-
anc~s, k~ut r.on*.inu~xnr.~=s had been grant~d tri the Z~a~;t, and th~re wa9 eufflcie~~t
*imr. for boti~ sider~ to l,ave amas~ed tlac~ir intoru~ation and ~.et their ~:osiY.ion to
nr~sent thi.fs item to che C~mmia:ilc.~n now.
~_~t~airm,s,; :;r_ymuur noted thaL• a numbor of a~r~gle-family property ownaze h~d x'e-
que~teri a night m~eting, and he did not knaw of the Com~nic~s9.on evc~.r dc~nying a
eenuess fur ;:ont.i.n~in*:re in the paa1:) whereuF~on Commirasianer Farano noted khat
tt~e Cc~r~mi39~.oT1 had n=•~e.r affurdc,ii bot1i partie~ as much ti.me as had bQan con-
sid~r~~~, or. t;~ese pe~itions.
Chairman Seymoix~c notad that th~ continLF.nce would uot have been requeated by
thr~ c~ppositi~n if thi_~ had been schedulod for z.n avening gession rath~:z than an
a,' ~~_ rnoon a es ~ ior.. .
~~ •mmiss.~~ner Gauer ti~teci that th~ oppos3tion ,ti.ll could present their oppoaition
the City Council since the roclassification wa~~ a.lso under conaideratton, and
~ Commissiors could onl~ recomme~.' ~n rhe recla~sificationJ whereupon Chairman
.ymour atatQd that the Pl~nning Commisa~on ~hould take care of the details be-
ore a petition was considered by 4he City Council.
Chairman Seymour then stated that th.e request beior~ the Comm~.ssion was onl,y ta
achedule tl~ia hearing at an evening session, and he d~.d not feel thc~se ~eople
wera, trying to barter wi.th the Commisalon. Furthermc,re, he had nevet known the
Commis~ion to de!-y a night meeting to the property owners who would he affected
by thi3 very larg~ proje4t who would like t~ appeaz before the Comm:tesion.
Commtss :oner Elerbst abserved thig pro ject had been ad~,~ertiseci very com~lately .in
th£• .~ewspaper for tr~e past aeveral weeks, aiid if thls were ~o important, people
er ald be present:; that everyone was aware the Planning Commf.ssion ararted their
m stings at 2:00 p.m., and to set an Pvening mc~etinq wae asking both staff and
the C~mmissi.on to schedule a special eveninq meeting when it could have been
taken care o.f duririg the afternoon sQSS:lon.
Cha.irman S~ymour iioted that the continuancos of subject petittons by the Commis-
sion were ir~rado pric~c to scheduling it for public hearing before tha P].anni.ng
Commission anc7 were not cont.inued at the re~ueat af the petitionar before '.*-e
P1~-i~nir.g Commiesion~ and that he wae RIOiB concerned with the 35 pzoperty ~~-ners
requer~ting tho evening meeting, ~iot th~aP who N:r. Lewin indicated he represented.
The consensus of oninian of the Commiseion was that eubject petition~ be c7n-
sidered thia date unlesa both the o~noeition and the applicant would agree t~ a
continuance.
Mr. Drew atated tha hoc~p~tal raprc~ser.tative wart.ec~ subjeoti patiCione considered
thia date because uf deveLopment financing, pgrticularZy sfnce hd was very
familiar with the pro~:lome asaociatad witti financing, and even a twa-weeh con-
tinuance could brinq soma delQteri.oua resvlts~ thst he f~lt• the Commise!_on
~ ~
MTNUTr" , CI'CY I'LANNING CO~IlITSSTON, MaT'ch 5, 19%1 '13-.135
~NVIRUNl4I?NTAI~ 1~4PACT RL~POR'P NO. N9, RGCLASSTFICA~P[ON NO. 7:--73-34, ANU
C:O:`1DI'1'IONAL USL PERMTT NO ~ .L:i7~!_ (C~ntinnoca) _,_ __~~._,.+....__..._~_
wc~uld b~ ublo ho d~termine tlza eftect of whet• thla ua~ would hava on the +~~joii~-
i-~c~ pzuporL•ie~ an~l act or ro+~ct uccording].y~ ync~ that it• would not derve any
useFu.l purpos~ to cnnti.nue eutijor_t ~otitione.
Clhairrndn Seymour stott~d he would aRreo Mrith sc,mc! of the stat~mente madu by tho
Commission, but i.n Ghe r.h~~e yeard he hwcf been ~n t.he .^,om-nie~ion, the Cnmmi~sion
h~d never doniod ~~ to 45 prop~zCy aw-~ors the righe. to be hear.d, and a two-weak
cuntiriuanccj wauld not hur.t enyane that mur,h.
Commi~ai~~ner Farano notad rhat thp pstiti~ner'R r.aprc~sentat•ivo d~.d not preeant
aryumE~nt:s iit the F~r.•ape~r pntrt~pecttvy regardiny the flnanciny of th~.ir pra~ec~:~
r.hat ha wau~d furthe~• like+ to Point ouY that vinca the oppouition waw fu1~y
awara af what was planned l~y thc tlU9~~td1, l:hAy coulcl havo requo~tad an evoninq
publ.ic hearing aomo tim:: aq~, however, hia primN conc~rn wae the Lo~uoat by Mr.
I,e~~in Fincc: he ~ apresented buth prospective tsellers of ~ha proparty, which would
become part of sub~ect•. pr~~~.~erty, rar~ wall ae the ~ppooit~an.
Commi~sioner Ka,ywu~d inquired whethax' the signsturea on ~r~o petitio~i oP oppoaJ.•-
tiort wore propFrty ~wners on the s~utll ~id.Q of r.a Palma Avenue and roaeivad an
az'f i rnati~~e resp~n~ie .
Gne ludy ln the Council Chamber adv.ised tho Commieafon that she had assumed the
Commisrzior. would cantlnue thi~ to a niqht mt~eting, otherwisr. there would have
baen moro oeople present duzing the afternoon oenaion.
Commi~sioner seymour offared a motion, aeconded by Commise.oner Farano, to
co~it~.nue conr~ideration of Environment.al Impact Report No. i39, Reclase;i.fir,ation
No, 72-73-39, and Con3itional Use Permit No. ].375 to ~n Fvening mcetlnq on
March L9, L973. The foregoing mction failQd by a vot-e of S to 1.
RECLSS - Chai-rman :~e.yuioi~r decl.ared a ten-minute recess at 4:G7 p.m.
RECONVEI~E - Chairman S~ay~our rec:~nven~~ the meetir.y at 4:17 p.m. ,
- CommissionE~r Rawlana b~ing abaet-t.
Mx. Drew, in reviewing F.nvironm~~ntal Zmp~ct Report N~. B9, sta~:ed that if the
Commission considered the rpasor~s f.or opposiri~n expressed by the Reviow
Commi.ttee, they were basicalJ.y relared to the two properties that had :sot bean
acquized b~t wera beinq negotiat~~d far and were in encrow, and as f'ar as he was
concerned, the EIR wa3 no l~nger applicab'.e to those two purcels since the
hoapital had signed a sales agreement for these two homeat ~s ~ matt:er of fact,
the City A*.torney's repzesentativ~ advisad the repzesentattve of Coldwell,
Banker th~~~: his presentation coulc? be mada and include these twn parcc~ls because
~f these cc+mmitm~nts.
Deputy City Attorney Frank Lowry noted for tn~ Commiesicn that the City's
urdine~ncE~ reqtiire3 thRt before anyone could spe3k as a represeni:ative of
parcels, he must hawe a s~.gned statt~ment that he was spea}:ing for someone who
owned the propezty, ar~d havir-g the ~~roperty ~n escrow did nat enter. ir.to this
local law ~vhich raquirod, as a iegai requirement, that a Pi~gned docunont lndi-
cated a specific peraon represented them.
Mr. I~rew then stated lie was nat speaking for. owner~ of these two parcela ae it
pert~:~ine3 tu zoning but as tt a£f.acted the EIR, ainr.e the hospital wafl in the
proc~:as of acquizing the3e t~o lot~ and had afgned offers and final eignatures
of a:~.l of the other properties that Y-ad bean acquired.
Mr. l..ewir, st~ted ho r$presentod the two Erc+perties, nnd hP would dis~ ~~~d as to
t},e :intention of the propertiea in thir~ particul~ar instance, having aubmi ~toc~ a
cont;caat~ therefure, ha would state he waa the legal repreaentative of theee
prop~~rti~es and wished the EIR to refler.t ~~.he problems facing thase two proper-
ties fro.~ thia pxnp~sal.
Co:~mi.u~~oner Farano inquiiQd how the petitioner propoaed to t-~ndle the two
pnrcEls preeer.tly not• within L•h~ir ~urisdlction if thay acquired these parcels
After~ action was take~n by the e~lanning Commiesions whareupon Mr. Drew etated
t1:ey wauld have to fixe a aeparate reclaesif.ication peti~ion.
~
~
MINi)TF:S, C'TTX P1,ANN'CNG COMMTS5TON, MArch 5, 1h73
73-13G
ENVTRONMENTAL SI4PAC'1` kP~PU:~'P N~. 09, RLrCLASST.FICa'1'ION NU. 72-')3-3d, AND
CUNDITiONAL USF._ PERMI'^ NU. 1375 (Continuad) _`~ ,_ _.~_~._._._____.
Zuning Supezvienr ('hr~r~en Ro'ae~rra nated he~ liud di~cuaoe~i Chia pi-rt.icul~+r pr.ob.tem
wi.r.h t~ha City Attorney laet wHek, ~.vho tiad eCated that ii an ag.reement w~re
reached betweon the partiee, th~ Pla~nning Commi~eaian H~u).d be Kbla to t.ske
ar.tion sir,,cu t.he leqnl d~r~crip•~i.or~ t~ae~ gAnerel end bae nufficientty bror~d
anough so that thR Cummis~ai~n couJ.d take actian withouC havinq 4:o reedvertias
sub~act. proporty.
Chairmat~ Seymour sc:atc~cY hr~ was sti11 of tfie opiniun thbr c+ubjeat p~ti.tiona
should be continued so that n].1 of the ~roblomt~ uou1~1 be e~osolvo~i and ayruemonts
reachad by +~1~ p~rti~~ c~r~coz:~~~d, which woul~ Chen zemove ~l.l of tl-e insufti-
ci~rnciee of thc~ EIR.
CommisAioner Fai :ero notsd thsC until. th4 escrow wan r.losu~'. anu Ci.tla of th~
property p~aHed, he did not think thc~re was anythi.r,q thv Commisaion could do but
e~ccept the+ £IK wi.tnout takinW into cuneiderntion thc+ two par::ele mentian.~d by
the Rev.tew Commiktea, .»nc5 perhapn thar.e mi.qht bo nn agraa~-i~ent or unc~er.standing,
e~ven thauqh the aCtorney far t:t~e oppoait~.on had an opposinq vi9w, wherein the
ahtorn9y p~r~ont+lly L•elt the CIR eho~ild be in conloxmnnc.e with th~, r~q-airementa.
Mr.. Lowry atate~d that an alternative could bo of~ered hocause it wAS poesiblo
thxl•. eacrow could be entersd irito nnd not closed, and the Cotamiae.ion coul~i
coi~aider thia as su£fici6nt ac7rc~ament, even though sn +~~~~~ement war~ not finalizsd.
Commiasionor Her.bet n~ted that ±he Cammiseion cculd aPpravN t:ho GIR t:hia dato
aubjoct to smending or presenttnq an aadendum bwfore oui~joct p~3titions reached
the Cl.hy Council.
Commiasioner Hprbst cff~~red n motiun, seconded by Commisaioner Allrsd and
MOTION CARRIED (Commias.~oner Seymour vuting "no" and Com~niasioner Rowland being
ubsent? that. the Planni»g Commiesi~:an, in connection with the filii~g of Environ-
mental Impact Repo.rt N~. 89, finda and determ±neH that trie impact ~~pori thr
environment of the two s:.ng3.e-L•amily homes on Lombard Dri.ve could be ~i~nificxntt
and L•hat the Cammisr~ion would recommend thnt the City Counc:il adopt En~-ironniental
Impact Report No. B9 3~ib ject to the pet:iti.oner amendiny t.he report• to offer
alternati.ve methods of i.mpleme:iiting the project ~rhich wuuld mitiyato the advexa~
effacta of location and height oE the proposed structure, as recommendad by ~he
EIR Revie~t C~mmlttee.
Zoning Supervisor Charles Rober~s reviewNd thQ location of subject proparty,
uses established cn aubject property and the properties in close proximity, and
the requeat to recla~ssify the property to the C-O Zone and petabliah a 7-story
addi~ion to the existing hospltal as we1]. as to permit apecialty ahopa ora the
groiind floor of the primury use Atructure having three or ~~~re storiea in height.
Mr. Roberta, in reviewing the dev~].opmer-t proposal, ~ta~ed that che petitioner
propooed t~ zenove or dernollah a number of the axisting single-family homes on
I,ombard Y~rive, Hermosa Drive, and La Palma Circle, and portions of the three
stxoeta would be e.bandaned i:~ ur~er to canAtruct the 7-atory office and adm~-Zi-
strative buil.ding w~.th related 3pc~cialty ahopa and otY~er office-related u~es
and related garking~ that the toCal gzase floor area wws appraximat9ly lOQ,873
squa.re fcet, ~vith ~he basement having 12,980 aqu~sre f~:e:t, the f3rat floor 'having
12,353 square feet, anci floors 2 through 7 conY.aininq 12,7A0 s~uare feet each~
~ha~. the total number of parking ap+~ces pro~~oaed wou2~ be 653, or 70 apr~ces more
than required~ and that the plana also indicated con.~truction of three adciitional
free-standing aigna simil~ar to thoae preaently 'located on the hospiY.al property,
and only one of the propased siqns woul~ be locatod in a position to be vie~wed
from the streot, wh11e the otl~er two would be 7_ocated ~~thin the parki.ng lats.
Mr. Roberts, i:~ rnviewing the evaluation, noted that ~he petitioi~er indicate~l
by the submitted plans that "all sncillary apace on the firet floor would be
ledaec] or ueed for k~oapital-orier~ted zetail eales, euch as a pharmacy, med~cal-
aurg~.cal eupply service, coffee ah~p, brace and orthapedic ~upply shop, etc."r
nnd that the site dev~lopment atandards ~f the C-0 Zone xequirad that n].0-foot
wida, landscape8 aetbsck be provided adjacent to all interior boundary line9,
however, there weze ebv~eral iocationa on the proposed plan where no landecaping
wAe proposed adjaaent to the boundar}~ line ?r whare len8roapir~g was less than
10 feat in width.
~
~
MINUTP:S~ C1'PY ~~[~ANNTNG COIdh41.~aION~ M8T'c1t 5~ 1973 73-•13%
C•.NVIRbNMI~:NTA:. I~IPACT Rf,P~IcT Nn. dy, REC~.^SSIF'T~:ATION NU. 72-73-iQ, AND
CONU~TIOTIAY.,USL PLRMIT ~~v._ 1375 (Contir~u~d) __, __, __..._._..._._.
Mi. Draw ~yalr~ y~~penrad bel'ar~ tho Commlrsni~n and etatod thnt thc~ ~zopopnd
bullc~ing wae ~r~poAOd t~~ be l,ocntod 274 ~c~c~t north ~.C tha t~cuth pzoperty line,
~00 feat ecu~h af. the north prororCy linc~, and 240 Tuet a~et oF, ttto woc+t
pr~perty 11nej thnt he undor.otood t.hdt almoet evejry buildS.ng in Anaheim with
Rny height wae within 300 fAet ~f. a rc,r~lAentisl zone oxc;ept for thos~ in the
Gi~snoy.l~n~ t-r~ai --het 24t~ faor wae acieq~iat~a d.iytanco~ tnnt Che titaff's commenr_s
±~, I~'in~ing Na. 9 rogardinq voY~iculrsr. c+cce8a clid not. ~ndicato th+~t snrao of rhe
acceec p~int~ werN a~rea3y in E:M~.P,ti@1'1CC', and ot tho fuu~ on I,te Pal.ma Avenue,
onlv nna nuw one wae propoeodt that he wauld liku to ar.evre tl~c Commiss.i~~n and
~steff that t:h~ ambulancea would not be uAing all fous eca~.ie~ p•~' nts but wou13
be usiny th~ onn rhat nl roady exi.sted bec+~uae thi.w lad to tho ambu:l.mn~o fe.~•il-
itiee er-d wot-].d bo con~inued to ba usod regazn~.~so a! ~he Qll{:CG`ItEf oL c~ubj~ct
p~ .iti~~nyt that thc~re wera 70 mora par.king ~par.ae propoancl than Cad~ reqn.ired
becauac~ L•hey !'~~und City et.csndarda we.ro aom~wha,t l~w, and thoy had found a ne~ed
tor mo:re~ parkiny spacer thnt in referc~nc¢+ to bign~, ona muet keen in mind thak
.nly one additionnl aign vra.~ j~ropo~ead for La Pnlma Avenue, whilc ~he others
wes~ dire:ti~nal eigne not advert.lein~, ~sign~ aince they unci4retood the C-0 Zone
limited the number of r3lgna for advertir+ing kur.•ponaa along ntrent frc>ntages s and
that these dlrecti.otial ~iyn~ warQ important to people ontering tho pr.c~m~sen ~.n
order to knaw whera tho ~nmerqency ar-d other ~acll.ir.tes wory J.ocated ao that ~h~y
would not l~a~~e to l8av~ another dCCQ~99 poinL• to f.t.n~9 tho proper 'loca~icn of the
facility they were lockinq for.
Mr, Drew, in revi.ewinc~ the reeommencir~tions, noted that CondiL•ion No. 4 r.egaxdinq
reverei~n to ~c;°eage should Le a requiremenr und~r the aonc3i.tional use ~~ermit
and ~huulc] be su~, ject ro final buil~ing inepect.l.on bacause this woul~ ca~use an
unusual delay in tho entir~ projectT ~nat Cund~.tinn No. 7 might conflict wi.th
the waivers being reSuested, and t,his mi.;ht create r'est_ricted inatances where
walls were not already set back that way, ha~revr~r, this might bo a ataff recom-
menc3ation and might bp a t~chnical problcmJ that the reason why thc setback area~
werp no~.: preci~e was that the number of. £eeY. requirect by Code for cul-de~yacs
wk~er9 walls w~ere -equired wauld m,~ke it difFicult ta have J.ariclscapinq and have
the wallo goir-g in a straight llne.
Mr Lewin again appeu.re~ befar•Q the Co~:i~~ission and Atated 4:tld~ if ~ubieet peti-
tioii were approved, CY,en this would be approving something differeht than what
was owned by the hospitalr tl~at letters had been oubmitted to t.he Pl.anning
Commtssi~n regarding oddil:ional opposit:Lon~ that he wanted the Commission to be
aware of the background as~zoeiatod witk~ the ncquieition ot the prap~rL•y; and
t.hen in roaponse to Commi~aioner Faxano's statPment th~t he did not wan•t xnyone
using L•re Planning Commiasion £or personal or pri.vate gaine, stated that some
time xgo the haspital had st4rted condemnation action with reapec4 to the entire
portion of the tr~ct on the mapt that as z~ result of th~~ action, pro~,srty
owr.ers had contacted thair Sta!:e re~resentatives regardinq the intent of con-
demnation procedures of the State Code, and Resolutio:~ No. 138 adopte3 unani-
mously by the S~ate Asaembly atated that the cond~mnation started by the hoapi-
~a1 had no nerit and was beselese, a:id the condemnation action was used as a
club ko coe+:ce tho properf.y owner:: to sell tiieir ~r~pezt.iem to the ho~pital,
howeveY•, owners af Lot N~s. 43 and 44 refused to sell. their properties at bargain
basement gricea; that as backyround i.n£ormatlon, he alau wanted to point out to
thc Co~nmiasion that the reclassifioation and conditiuael uae permit eubmittec~
b}~ the hoepital were false in materia~l and substanc;e ai:.ce one of the csu~33tions
in the petition requires the petttion.zr tc indicate all deed or tract restric-
tions pertaining to usaga of the pzoperty= that there wpre CC&R'.~ at~ached to
that tract, however, the pat•ltions filed by the p~t~tioner stated tlisre wer.e
no deed zesY.riction~, but h~ had praof s~s to these CC6R'a wh~.ch were attached to
the tract aince they were or. the title r~~portt that thie same hospital requested
that the Planning Comml~sion qive th~m permiesion for n pr-rki~iq lot earlier, anci
at that t~ma they also s:.ated there were r~a deed restrictionea that he c~uld nnt
Ree how a hoepital director could aiqn a pe.t~tion with theee ~tatements when ths
~ titlo repnrt indicated the~se de~ad reatricti~~ns limitinq the usa ~f the rrapertfes
to reaidential purpo~ee, which would be enforc~able by members of ~ho tract.
Then Mr. Lewin reAd 'the Anaheim Munic3.pa1 ~oce, Saction 18.04.13U, Interpseta-
tion of Title, notinq that t:he Commission cou~c~ not rezono the property be~auae
it would be an ic~lo action bince the Codd so atatad.
~ ~
MTNUTt;5, Cx4`Y I'LANNTN:, CUMCIISSION, hlarch 5, 1973 13-138
f:NVTRUNMGNTAL LME~AC'f REP~JRT NO. 8'), k1E:rLA5SIx'ICA'CTON N0. 72-73- 34, AND
CONDI7'InNAL C1S1:iP~AMIT NQ. ~13:/5 (Cont].nue~d2.__~~„__ _~,__, _ _._
Commis~ioner. He~rbr~t roquQeto~'. f:h~l ~tr. Lowry ~xpld~.'n t1~~e 3?lannin,y !'or mieaion ~
Ana C~.ty'S ~os:Lti~n rvyardinc~ CC&R't;t wiit~reupon Mr. Lowry etate~d ttint CC'&R'si
war~ private ac~renment~a k,r~twnen ~wo F~r+.vnte propar'cy ow~iaie+, c+n~~ t•ho C1',:y wae
not bounc' by tt~e CC6R'n~ tY,at tho eta;;c:ment mad~a t•y Mr. l.c+win Ll~-ot any'~~~~~ ~wn-
iny ~r.op~zty M~ittiS.n the tract- covorcid !iy t;3ic~ CC.&F'a war or~ligaC~d unc~ar ~hem
on.ly ~hrough court actinn k>y ~tia i.ndividual.sr thr.t. .li: h'~:lfi unf~rtunc;t~ t:hac thca
oourts did not pArmit tho City i:o c~nf~ •ce Chase CC&R's an to zone~ri propert;y~
e,nd that tlti~ Ci.t.y of Anaheim wAS a churCex cit:y and it ~.~s~ wit~.hin itn jurin-
di.ction to do no f~r goud c~iuse »hown only.
Mr. Lew~.n noted that tiecCion 18.04.130 re~;u~.r«~d :liet zoni~~g cauld noc ebrogat~s
ti.*,le of. tlio property wt~ath~r or not the CC6It's wera on thi~ pxopezty, end thfe
uection aho~rld b~ c~oneic~ered by the Planning ;;ommi~e~.~n tsACaun~i it was very i
in~po~:tant - why would the Ci~Y e~ek whether~ there wore dny r~st•r.icti~no 1.f: tl~ey i
did no~ .intand to mc~an a;nything alee - thGre Eoxc, he f.e•lt the zec].rsaifi.cr ~
petition was falas, and :lf Che rer.lau~ification ~etit•io~ wKa approved, it
bc.~ a falsc~ paY.iL-ion~ ~nc3 thAt i»rhaps th~ C~~mmission rou.ld not inte~r•Perc~ ~~. ~
CC6Ft's, bv'c ~ha Co~migaion mast ccnsider wb.ethar the petition wat~ P.elt~o or not.
Mr. Lewin thc~n etntad the.t thc hoight limitation wi~hin 300 faet requoetod .o
be~ waived wculd pl.~ca thc+ h~m~e he x'epreu~~nted in A'ver.y ~~f fficult Pah~~irac~kion
Y,~cause thcly would ba completely surround~fl by hiqh-rise buildi.ngst
1~3.68.010 se~a ~orth when ~1',e Planning Cur~-miasiun could qrant ~vazia~lr.eH and was
fur the sole pur.pase ro prPVCnt diflcrimination aR~llnat th~ Fetitioner because A
use wua granted to adjoi.n!.nq propert9.es, thPrefnze, ho felt the hns~rital nhonld
nut be gz'Anted sQecial pzi.viieqes not enjoyed by prop~rtios in i:he same vir.inity
a.nd 2c~ne .
l1r. Lew~n then noted that Mr. Drew, represr-ntirig the hoapitel, etated tliat P.'JCI:y
lliyh-r.iae in Anahc~im vlolaCed this l~e'ight reatri~ti.ati, howevez, ho had livc*d in
Anaheim ten yeara and did iiot know ot any hiuh-ri~e b~iiLdinga whcrei.n thi.s type
of. waive:c was granted, thEi'efoz•c, thr~ petitioner was requesting he be granted a
special privilege nok en~oyed by othors in ~he ea~ne vicinit;~ and zone, and he
did not. knuw o~ any buiiding wikh that height thaG wafl hhat cloge to reaidential
useD t t:hat the publ.ic atrae t had be~en dedicated to the City of Anataeimr and th~t
anathe:c public hearing woulci havc~ to be hel.3 to deter.mine if tho etrPets should
be abandoned.
Mr. Lowry stated that hg clid not u~~ant to get into legal dobc+te with Mr.. Lewin
regarding the fact that the c:ity ~ould not a~~andon the strsets other than to
the under.lyi~ig fc;e owner, bct that tua~ not an i3au~ be:foze thc~ Commiesion but
w~uld be a considerhtion before Che City Council when aban3onmen't was requested.
Mz. Lewin stated it was his c.lients' poaition that the City c~uld not abandon
the s~reets without a public Y,e:aring, and that Lct Nos. 43 and 44 had a right
to access to near.by street~, 2~owever., by cul~de-sar.i.ng the atresta, L•h9.s wauld
be cuttiag off this acces~. thE:refore, his cli~nts should be compen~al:ed far
acce~s denied them. It~ a3di.ti~.?n, there were al.:,o public utility °agements that
would have to be resolvad befoa•e the PUC, and, finally, the haepi~al facilitien
could iiot be approved if, in !'.act, they were an expansion of the hospital until
appr~val was obtaineQ frum tt~e Ozange County Health Ylanning Counci].~ which
probably would not be forthcc•ming.
Mr. Jikutz again appeared before the Ccu~mi~aion and sta~ed that the exiati:~g
hospital was an ey~sure to him n~w, and the hospital. was propo~ed to sxpand
with the same type of uqly 'faci~lity; that hQ had been a residen•t ir. hig pr~sent
home for nin.: yeare, ar~d the hoapital ac~ it presently existed w~uZd mean he
would have to pay m~re tmxes with leaA amenities if thg propot~ed addition were
approvedj that the propert,y owners who had siynod the peti:lti.on cf opposition
stated they were: unable to taks time off to be ~resent peroonally, and although
ha was losing eome of his wages by hia preaence at the hearinq, he knew he coul~i
not move to anoti-ez nrea r3lr.ce h~ could not g~t the return needed td purckiase a
home eleewheret that hae hAd fine~lly become ad~usted ta the eirena blowinq day
and night, howavere hia dog never had bec~me adju~ted to them~ thrat he had aeked
the rE:aidents not t~ eigt~ the petit•:.on if they were in favor, end BHg of those
he hacl cQntacted indicat~ad ~ne:y were against the pro~oeed ~`~ansion~ ~rhils la
indicated ~hey v~ere in favor ~f thA expansion, and 11E indicatQd no cancern one
vra~ oz~ the uther, howeve~r, he wanted to state thia would still be hie rnsidence
~ ~
MLNl1Tl'sS, CI'PY PLANNIfJG C(?MMI.:;5ION, Klaruli 5, 197:1 13-139
CNViRONMCN'fAG YMkAC'C R}s'170R'P NU. 89, RL'CI,A:i~:]FZCA'fXON t2U. 72-7:1-34, AND
CCINUY'P10NAI, ~!SE P~;RMI'P_ Nu~1375_.__(CuncinuAd) ___~_,~,.,._,~..M_____.,__._._~___
und Itc r+antad to mAin~ain it. an his hom~y h.~CRU89 tha~ lnt~rent rakne for homeA
n~~w L~einy purcliaee~ii were too c7reak and hti could not atPord th~r~• thaG he vrould
uo afCe~~t<,d by ttia inc:riadao in trafxic Lo tiils n~w .°acility, RT~~4 :vo~ though tie
wae in n ronidontlal nr.oa und it nh~u.td not uffoct tclm, thiR incroa~o dic] nPtoct
himt ttint }tc~ had accepr_~d tho mr~dtcr~.l bull.d.i.ny nt the oauthwe~k cornnc of West
S~.!'@klt a~.a I.~i ra:lma Avonun, n~~ woll ns the~ Hmall r.unvalascenf. h~spienl to the
oest ~.: hin propert~, hauo~~ar, he d.id not faUl the propaeod sxpansicr, would be
n deHir.r>.,..e ane~~t•. to t;h~ camm~inity.
Mrr~. M~i•y a n~er~on, i.115 Lumbard Drive, appearect bafar.u the Commieoion a~d etated
t;hti an~3 her huHband awnod I,ot No. 43 •,nd w~iild be 1l.vinq ne~xt door to this larqa
building, bein.~ anly nbout 25 reet from th~ proporL•y liner thaC t.ho ~etitioner
ytat~d they px'~po9~•cl a 1~os~i.t,~1, but~ from p7.nna it would appa~ar 't.his would be
For doctor~' c:fi'iao$~ that. rel~ie did not tool thie wauld k~n a prcper atmoephore
for. her childr~n wi.th A17. tY1P. Unilding 9csing on next door. lo her honio~ ~hat t~hr.
hr~d li.v~d uC this placa t.wo y~~are, anc~ notie of the ad~oininq r~ingl~--~atnily humes
had oeeri acqu.i.red at t.hn ti.m~ z~he~ purch.a8ed har hemet end that. the five acree ~~
lancl m~y I~av<.• br_er~ th~rc, but there wera homQS on the lnnd.
Commi.ssionei• P.11r.ad ii~quirad wneLhei: r.he AuderKUns had checked with neighbare to
ae~ what.i~er there wou19 T:c~ any expar~sion ~~i the tio$pi.tal faci~iti~st wheroupon
Mrs. Anderson repli.ed negativc~ly.
Mr. Lowry i~oted Chat the cundition of reversion to r~cr.et~ne ~equirod by tlie Ci;y
waa r~~~L•er.re~~ to by Mr. UzFw, wh~ had request~3 that thP condition be uubject to
final buildir~g in:~pe.ction, however, if thia werc done, thi.~ woixld cr.~ ~te a
eerious probl~~m in ~he fact Y.hat L-he streets were dedicated etrAe~ts run~ing
chrauqh this conversion to z~r.eage, and if. it ware not conv~rtocl to acr.eKge
before zoniiig Y.ook place, Code would require all progerty to front onL•a a dedi-
cated ~~:rEet, therefure, the an1.y thing he co~ild aee th+st woul.d r.e~olve thie
wou1.3 be to have che streete abandoned prior to zoning takiny place,.
Mr. Drew tioteci t}iat hc ha3 filed a requsst far abandonmont of porti.~ns of tihe
~treets with.iri the Ci~y, and chey werp fully aware that the aband.~i.ment wuulc~
have to be at a public heating~ howovez, tha oHnors of the homcs Mr. Lewin
represen~ed would still have ~ccesa zo LomUard Drive and La ?alma AvenuA, just
as they did bef~re.
M.r. Luwry n~te3 that the lota were existinq luts of reaord, ~ven thouqh owned
by the petiticner, thereforA, these lots, acco.rding to the City's ordinance,
would requir~, public stree*~, however, as lunq as +' 9 p°titione~r pursued the
abandonn~c~nt, then there woL1d be no probl.emj whereupon Mr, Dro~ s~ated that
the aband~nment was cnnt.ingent upon obtaining the zon~rg ~hange and approva~
of the conditional use permit.
Commissioner Allr.~~] inquir~d what action could the Gommisai.on Lake witt~ all of
t.hese allegations made, and cahy si~ould the Commi.saion be listsninq co thia wben
they woul~ be unable tc makc a decision thi~ dute,
Ch~i.rr.ian Seymour nr'..ed that tne .~etitioner requcated that Condi~ion No, 4 r.egard-
ing reversion to a~reage be required prior to final build~ng inspection, however,
Mr. Lowry stated th:..z would not be leqal, and after nll Che allegatiorr~ made by
Mr. Lewirt, c.,~,id ch Plannir.g Cummi~s{on be assured that after pruceec:ing wi.th
the hearing the Ci.ty i~ no way would be jeopardi~ed by a law suit.
IAr. Lc~ry stated that the Pls~~nir.g Commi~vaion ac~ion waa not binding ~n the City
nor b;nding cin thP C.ity Coui 1~ but he cou3.d not assure the Cort~miesiox~ that a
law suit would not be tiled .ayainet the C' ~y, however, oince t~ a~'la~nning
Comri~sion action was only udvie:or~r ta the Citf r~'.~urcil acv it partain~d to the
recla~sificatian, ariu since thd conditi.onal uEe permit was tied in witt~ the
reclassf.fic~~*_ion, ther~ technically the action of ths Planning Commiesion wauld
also be an advasory rec4u~mendation.
Cliuirman 5eymouz~ requested that this l~as clariEied for the City Counci.l. if ~..~
Commi.aeion took action an the request t:eforo them thia date.
~
w~
~~
~
MiNUT1;S, CI~cY PLANNINC; c;c)MMi ;S.tON, ~Inrch 5, 1~17j ~ ~~~ ~
GNVIRONMENTAL IMPACT N.f:i?ORT NU. N9~ ki:CI..ASSIP'lCA'CZON NU, 72•°73-34, Afip
CUPIDITIONAL USF; ~'~RMT.I' N0. 1375` (C.~nt_inu~d)w^ „~,..^___,_____ __._,_
Mx. Drew, in e•+~buttal, ste~~d c.hnro w~re !,~umher of :ltenio t'nat he ti~~d nat
brouc3ht uE~ bac~uec~ hc~ fe~t thay ahoulc9 n~t bi! nirod in ntAblic eiilco tie d~d not
fo~l ch~y would hav~ .~ banT•inct on C:hv Planning C~~mmlesion'a decisia~ , but h~
did noL• w;-~t. to s.it idly by and henr a1l~~yaY.l.on9 m~do r~gerdi.nq the fnoepitAl
that- wei•e not tru~~~ CYIPL'~IOY~3, ho w~~uld l.iko to otata t.llnt 16 u~ the parce,l8
tho ,~oepital ncq~iir.ed w~rN by r-agotiationt that four at khe paruela r+ero Ar-
quirQd by condomnnt.ic~n prac~edings which prc~caeded to ~udgment, rnd r.wo wore
dinmiaeed from tho condamnatian t-ctiorie, which werc~ thh kwo ~r~eentl~~ in eecr~w,
but they also hnd ei~ned cu-1trr,cta~ th~t thn c+uqq~aetion n~a~ao hhnt the~ hoepiCal
cl ubbed thei~e poople ov~*r l.ho hoad into salli ng thei r~rop~rty wds not trus eince
each propexl.y owRer wae pa.id more than t:ha feir. marke~t value ae defiric~d by the
California Suprem~ Courtl Ll;wf Mrs. Ancle~rnon atatod she had nu knowlc~dqe of the
expaneion of thc~ t~o~Ui.tnl, huwevor, Lhe Andersons ~urchaKed their prc~E~~~rty u
liCtle ~vor a y~~r. agc~ for 52:~, 500 witti a$.l ,000 clown paymenY., and thio was
durinq tha time the hosp.ital ~.~as :ln Che proce~r~ of ~cqui.rinR propori_.;.ed in chi°
krdct, and while the Andex~uns woro in ~ncrow, th~ hospital offered ~hom $S00 I
juet to termin~t.e th~ir o~crow becaus~~ tt~a hongital wanted to p~irchas~ tlte
propor.ty, dnd wh~.le the pr.operty wa.s in condctmnat.ion, the ttospital o f t<,r9d thom I
g~~,750 , and r~ow whil.c~ thay ware in escrow, th~y had been offer.ec~ S 3°i,~ 00, theze-
fore, ~~l~ici.nq 51,000 dowr~, tha Andezsona wer~ yettina a.L30Q~ r.eturn, and if
they felt Cney wern given unfair tYet+t.mant, he woitld like to knuw what waH theiz
treatment when or~e considered wt~aL• the hospital had offereci the 1~ndernonat that
in his ~expcri~:nce, having spocializecl ir: this field for 15 year.a, tie could ~~ :
conceivs of anythinq mora f.air then wha.t t•he ho~pital off~rec] to both *he
Andersone and Sunaet Huilders, ownars of the other reaidc~nce whlch Sunaot
Builders purchased ~~'~ile the hospital wae in the proc:eas o~ purchasing their
propert;+ And had paid $31,000, however, they wEZe now in recruw for $35,500~
that camments regardi.ng c:or~demnation ~cti.on p~nding before the Superior Court
ware macie, howevar, no Grial .~ad he~en s:et, nor would there bcs one i f rhis legal
action w~ . ~ resolved as it pertained to the Anderson's and Sunset Huilder's
propert..es; tt-at he had advised tt~e~ h~~apital t.o take tlie act.i.on they did, and
he would stake :~is reputation ~~ti that ~acti~n~ that althoiayh commentary vaaa made
rayazding the fac~ tnat the application indicate3 t.here were no deeci restzict.tons,
this still was negatc:d by th~ fact tt~at the tit ' e ~^"~` attachQd to the applica-
tion-pe~.iti~n indicated thero were CCc~R's ~*haC if t}ic~ City Att:orney's repre-
senCative would review the number c~f homes or parcele naw owned by the hor~p~.tal
(petitloner within the tract and tt;:oae still rematning) he could see th~-t the
majority of the pazcels in the tract wQre owned by the hospital , and khe majority
rule would be in effoct as it pertx~in~d to the CC&R's in tne tre~t, however, if
the Commi~Eio~i wanted th~eae CC&R's ren-oved frem the parcels undor. the hac~pitPl's
juriadic~ ion, tk~is would ~e dune v~:ry shorkly so tliat th~re wauld be no violacion
and ~~ould not be a matter for the ~oui~ts to determine~ that Mr. Lowry had indi -
cated thiy wae not a aonce.rn of th~e Pl.annina Commi.,sion, but he wanted to set
the recora strai~Pubt that as to vacat~.on of the streets, there was an application
pend~.ny and this would be held at publ.ic hc~aring a~ to said vacation but should
no± affect the Planning Cosnmission's c:onaidoration of the zonin5 actions thaY.
th~re would be nu liabilt*.y on the ~a~:t of the City as to the streets sinae they
wPr~ cul-de-saced ir~ the manner prc~poi3ed, nor woulcl therc~ be any li kalihood ~f
recovery fur access be~ng dsniad s:lnce the accesa to La Palma Avenue and L•ombard
Urive would be the same as before, Pven though Mr. Lewin had r~fer=ed to i.t,
and in all of his years of uxperierice in specializi.n4 i.n this fiel.d, he had never
known that vucation of a strAet co•uld only take place after the City had been
comper.sated for it; thflt ai-nil~• s ituatlons existed in citiae all of tha ~in~a
~•here stroets were vacated a~.d t.ew etreets werP ~reated to prov~.ds RCC@9~) that
the purpuse of vacating these streeta was tc ~ amove the poasibility of streets
qoinq tnro~igh tlie :~ospital' 3 park~ ng lot or cven t.hQ bailding or huildingA which
were Z~raoosed on eomQ of *_'.::. °~reets~ tha~ he wna sure the Commiasion recognized
this war~ done all of, the time and compensatien waa never paid tu ar.yone elser
that if they had acquir all of ths r~maininq propartiea and ht~d askbd for aaid
atreet abandonment, the ~ity would only ~e devoting that prcperty to the praper
use in the proper zanet and that s.ince the R-1 properties n~eded access to eacti
lot, ha could ses no landlock9d parcela in tr~e pioposed ~evslopment.
THE IiF.-RING WAS CLOS~D.
~
~
~
MINUT~F;, C1'CY FLANNING ::OMM:fSEiON, March 5, 1973 73-141
F.NVxRONMt;NT;AL TMPAG'P FtEPOP.'f N0. 09, RECLASSIFICA'fTON N0. 7:-73-3A, AND
CUNDT'~IONAI. USF.: PL~TiMTT MOi 1.375_(Cuntinued) ~ T__~,,,~ .,~r,_,
Comm!.estoner Gauer obeerved Chet tho Pl.anning Commie~~ion had Cc~ cl~e1 a~i.th 1 anc!
u~o~ that tho propoeal had beo~ publi.a~aad itt tt-e n~wapnp~er ma~ny timee, anc5-
thu ho~spital hnd procuoded with acquirl.ng the+ pr.opax•ty for ~liel~ oxpnnoj.on ~
L•hat iE t}-e pr~pe~:t~ had been purchaded, l~n wa~e eurd it t-ad buon done~ ie,ya~ J.y:
L•ha~. the l.en~] uee proposad For edditi~nsl perkinq .in a11d.~.t.ion to tho oxr,ana lnn
of the huilding ~ ~:d ho a~r.opnr l+~nd uea eince h~ t-ad oc,cam~on to viait the
or.•asant f~cil~tl.an end f.ourid n nae~d f.or more parking, howe+var, hg would recommenci
that tl~e C1ty ~auncil hold a public heazing at n~.gl~t, and thoce wa~ r~4 rear3 on
for holding r.h ia up bRCnuso mo~t of tha problamo presc~i~t~c1 wr~uld t~ave ~o be r.a-
sclved b,y t.he City Council, t•hore~~re, he would reco~nmend that khe pet.ii.lon be
coneiacred at a nic~b,t m~Atinq b~fore tho Clty Caunci.l. c~o r_hAt all. in~exeate~ d
poraonR ~ould bo ~~resent to pxe~sent their arqumants.
tialrman Seymaur noted his roaeon f.or. de~iring a con~i:~ua:nce was ~iok because
tiA wae +n o~posit.ton co thr~ propoeal but thouyht per.t~ ~p:+ a:ll ut tha 1.oose endn
could be takon cu~e ot und a clean pack r~ could be considered l~y t.he P.lanr~in.~
C~~mmission in add.ltiun to nllowing tlie Jikutz' n~!,ytibar to caxpr.~e~ their cpirioas
L•hat if Mr. Drew felt L•he hvr~pl.tal ha~ e right ~o con:lemn the ~~ropertiea, why
didn't h~ proceed with tho r.emaining ~nrcele nov~ holding o~;. ~acher then sub-
joctinq thc, C^mm~4~vion to thi4 itaranyu.~ng when a claan case o~ la~d ue~ co~ald
havc U~r~n pre~onted.
Mr, Dr.e++ r.epliea r.hat the st•atemc:nk ,~y tha ho~pit:al boarc:~ of director~ i.nwt~~rh ;he
board ;tated they folt thsy could proceed witk~ the prc~pert:y 3lready acquired to
build _he facility, but i.£ they had pruaeed~a with t;h.e candemnation procaedi.ny~,
this could 1~ave gone to trial to determina neceasity of ~~iiblic usay t:hat t2~ey
w~r.e r.:asona} ~y ~.s5uzed that this would yo up on nppeal, and caseo in th~ 3pp~llate
coiart would not b~ t~~ard until 1975, and i.n the moa-itim~e~ i f it were canti i qent
upon their. acquiring all af the pzoperty •• they httd tr'_c~<3 v~ry hard to do t,hip -
so t.hat the Commiseion would not be in t~~e positlon they were proaantly pl aced,
this would mean thc~y woul.d not aommenae pi'o~eeding~ befo:re the~ CommiNSion until
1975, but t te board of ~irect~rs felt thiF wa3 nc~e.ded in ].973 rather tnan in
i975 or ~976, and since there as sut•tici~ant land acquirefl to meeL• Code-rE qulred
parking, they proceeded accordinqlyj that even tY~ough L•he hoapitul ha3 prc c~eded
with the petition, tliey dld not give ~xp i.~i thelr effort~ to purchase theae two
propertie~sr that he nad signed documents by ~11 parti.PS, altho~igh the escrow
inatructions were not aigned by Mr. And~rson, M•ho w~ pre~;ant in the Coiir~c il
Chamber~ the purchase offer had been a~yned Y>y ail : parties and they ha~i
comple~od their contract, ther~fore, he feJ.t th:Ls, w-> s~;ifficient pzoof of ~urc'.asa
of the property.
Mr. Drew, in response to questioni:~g by Commissionor Faz•ano, stated of the 18
parcels acquired, 16 were acquired and sacrot,r wa$ co~apleted, t:herefor~, t2-aey
~vere i~ot included in thw condemnat.ion proceedj.ngs, but t:wo of .".he parcels were
in esc,row when the nondemnatior~ Froceedings were init:ia4:ed by himself, but he was
asked tu include those t~vo juat in case sor-ething hspper~ed in e-zcrow, hawevex, tha
~wners of those t~ro parcela were n~ver served with cc~nd<:mna*_ion pa~ers, tYaere-
fore, iaa fact, the 1>3 parce~s we:~e acquired prior to cundeT~~nation 1~~:oceedinqs.
in add.ition, he wouZd lik:~ to add rhat based upon hi;3 pa~t ex.pex~ence of 15 years
working with t.he Divie~.on of Highways o.r an}one elae, tli~t his recard was r.athar
har~' to beat.
Commis~ioner Gaaer offered Resolutior. No. PC%3-48 an3 moved fo.r ita pdseage and
adogtion to reaom~end to the ~ity C~uncil that Petition far Reelasaificat ~on No,
72-73-34 be appr.oved, subject to conditj.ons, with th~3 added conditionr~ r.equir'_ny
Chat CC&R"s applicable to gll R-1 parcels acquized b~r the hospital ~hAl~ ~a
amendeci tc, the satir~ faction of tl~e Ci ~y At*orney' ~ o:Efice, and svch amendrnent
ahall be r~carded iri th~ oPfica of the drange County Recarder= and that p zior to
t;~e introduction of an ord~nance rezoning Lot t7o. 5~ o;' Tract No. 1b91 to the
C-0 Zone, written evidence »hall be submitted to th~ City of Anaheim indi cating
that thR Anahe9.m M.~morial Hospital. is, in fact, the ler.~al owner of said lat.
(Se3 Reaolntion Book)
On zoll call the foregoinq resolution was pdos~d by the ~ollowinq vote:
AYES: COMMI:SIONk:RS: Allrec:, Faxan~, Ga~uor, HQrbst, Kaywood, Saymour_
r10ES: COMMZSSIONEKS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSTONERS: Rowland.
~
~
~
M.[NUTE5, (;I7'X YLANNINC: COMMI33IGt3 , Mr~rch 5, 1~77 %3-142
I:NVIkONMENTAT. IMPACT REPORT NO. 89, RFCI~A5S'F~.^ATTGN N0. 7%'.-73-34, ANU
CONDITIONAL USE PF.RI~I~A' N(). ].375w (Cnntinu~d)_.~^_,_,__~~~^ _____.,
Cuntinumd di~auseion wer t~n].d by tha Commieeion snd the pot~.tionez'e rap~r~eenta-
tive r~oqa.rding ti~e wuivorr rm~u..~a ted und~r tho conditl.~~nel uRe permit, eummariM~d
es f.ollo~rns 1) waive.r o! tl~u heiql-C limitstiun, propaei.nq a 7~ator•y etr.uctura
r~nly 25 fuet frum R-I E~ru~,~~rtiev -- pxoporCiea alro~dy ~tat~d ~c bc, tr~ es~crow~
2) ntudien m~da hy r.h~~ a~rcl•~i~sct, ongineor., and ho~pit+~l ota~'t tndi.cut.i.ng e ciraed
for rhe hoiyht Frop~W~~d, a~ well ae locnt~.lon o! t.h8 ntructure to p~uvide pr~per
util.ts:at.ton of ttic+ buiiu~nqa~ end pr.c~vide adr.qaete circulati.ui~ tluw ~i.a~:•~ it wxe
prupused to connoct tha pro~>~ased structura with rhH ~~xiutinu Cromer~ Tower bu1IA-
inyr 3) regnrdleae of th~ locr~tion of the etiucturv, it would ePf.ec:t xasid~T~kia1
u~+oe since tt would be~ wi.thin the+ mini~rum 30U-fooh conei~lorat~on~ ~3) a medical
a~ntez woul.d be a cieelrable addition for the City ~f Ar~~heitn, and th~ pruposoc3
].ucr~tian would be 1cYe+al Usceuea of t1~Q exfatenc~+ of the hc~epital nnd ~~ther
enci.llery uc~es 1n CLODB ~~roximity ~ 5) the eoLAblishmonC of. th,~ c::-c) lone ~~~! tho
G~roperty would bo more proper than L-ho oxi.etin~ R- ~ Zane~ G) thnt tho r.w~,
parcels affected by the hiyh-rise were r~ot a~c.quirQd, ther~~fnre, i..i' Chey were
acquired lste they wou,d hav4s to be ~roc~seed under n~aeNarate reclassi~ic-u-
kion petiti.on, but 1.£ thn~y had been acquixed eube~q~i~snt to the legnl aclverti~e-
ment, the Ci.ty Attornay had ru].pd that ~ha locaal n~dvert3.eamAnt wns gener.•al
enough ro all.ow thr C~mirtission to considar l.ha lote ~-s part of t~iis p~tition.
Cammiesionor Gauer lett the Council Chamber nt 6~00 p.ni.
Chairman Seymour notod that sinc~ th~ Flanning Commies:~~n h:d. r~comtaerifled C-•0
zoniny Tor the proparty, the las t k~ 3gn to croas tiaoula rq +~r.ti.c,n on the cond.i-
tional use permit, and tb~n inquir.~... .zow far Mr. LeNin wae in his neqoti~ntions
to a final ciecisian on the hoapi ta1's purchara of tha two :lata he rnpresentr~d
ao 1:hat this iaeue would r-ot bc: cloudinq th~ Commisi„on's acCion, and then
Kuggeflted that th ~~wo reprer~entatives furth.-r disc~i~s this ia the hall whlle
the C~mmisylon conaidered another_ item sti11 bef~re them for public hearing.
(Sen page 73-144)
Commi3aioner Ft~r.ano 1ef't rhe Cuuncil ~liam!~er at 6:0: p.m.
CONDITIONAL USG - PTJI3LIC HEAIZING. EiGNRY AND ALIC11 .~A~THRLIM, 134? Uana Pla.r,e,
PERMIT NO. 1380 Fu:llerton, Ca. 92631, Ownere t B- ~• ~y11 ~r~~ ~~NSTRUCTTQN
CO:RPORATI01~ , 2152 Dupont Drive, N~wp~r~. Ne:sch, Cn. 9~~64,
Agent; requesY.ing pez'mi~aion tc E~7'AFL:CSH R UR'_VE-TFIROUGFI
RESTAURANT on property 3es~ribed as: A rectang~ila~~ly-sh~.;~e~ ~~uz-_ol of la-zd
cunsisting of approximately .4 a~res h~via~g a£rontat~e or ~.l~pr~xima~:e].y 102
feet on the ea~t side of Stata Calloge Boulevard. Piav~~aq a maximuan ~',~ptb. of
approximately i30 feeF, and bei*ag locar.ed approxx~.na'~.r.ly 6E~- Y~et r~ut:h oi' ~he
centerline of Ball Road. Property presEntly claesi:ied i~: ., Lzt~H'I' ~NU~:7:fRxAL,
ZONE .
No one appeaxed in oF~poaition.
Although thP ~ep~rr ~o t.he Commission waH n~t read at the public hearin:~~ ~t: is
referred ..o and mr.~~ ~~ F~rt ~ c ':he minutes.
Commi:,sioner Y.a}~NOOC. 7.~~t t}~~: ~'~~.incil Chamber at G:03 p.m.
Deputy City Attorney Fra:~:~ ,Lowry adviaed Chairman Seymour *hat ther~~ was not a
quarum of the Cou~misei.on present, therefore, a publzc heax3nl~ could not be held
on sub ject petitton ur~til a quo rum wae present.
RECESS - Chairman Seymour de~l.ared a Eive-minute recess at 6:03 p.m.
RECONY~NE ~- Chairman Seymour reconve~ed the meeting at 6:OR p.m.,
~ Gommisaione rs Gauar and Rawland beinq abs~~nt.
Mp• i,ee ~'helps, a4~nt for the petitioner, indicated his presence to anawer
questiona and stated B. H. Mil~er. was building an induatrial park arou;~d it.
'THE HEARING WAS GLOSk~D.
r1
l~
~w
~
M1:NU'PE;S, CiTY Y'J~ANNYNG CbMMISSION, M~x'ch '.i, 197~
CONI)ITIONAL USl:_~'trFMIT N0.~138U (Contihucd)
73-143
Mr. Phel.-~.>, in raqpan~d to Commiseion queetioning, indicat:tn~i thnt thie wouZd bo
e u~l 'rsco R~Rt,eurant.
Commieoioner Allre@ inc~u.ized rrhethor this would be fi l~X~.VR-t:hrouqh enQ walk-up
res*_aur.ent ~nd recelveA nn etPirmativa roaponse.
Cornmieaioner Nerbat f.nqu7.re3 whether i.t wae pla~nned ta P-avr ar~ it~duetrixl pa.r)c
aznund thi.e propoaed rey~aurant eince aubject proportiy was a:onaii M-1 ~ whereu~on
Mr. ~'•1~~1.F>y eknted the+t ~he lndu~trial ~urk would b~ b-a1lt lyy C:~em ernund tha
propuned reatauYant a~ .indicar.ed on tlio plane marked with a dnrk lingt L•hat tho
r~asun thoy had chaeen Aal Taco wae because tiiey F.ound tha-C th!• trenr.t;i~ro wns
excellent i.n o~her indu~tria~l tracta they h~d developod in 9hnG+~ ~1na erad Newport
i~Aachi and thar. tha:•e wore t~o taw facilitiee for oorvin9 of ~'~~ad in r.hie
genera]. aroa !or induetri~e already locatec~ beai~c their pzop~~aed pe-rk, eince
they £o~and e~•ezy walk-up r.oataurant in the vici.niey already lilledt nnd thaL•
rhey pr.oposed ta provade a sidewalk eo thac ~~e~pl~ could walk lra~n the vbr~.ous
~r~duetrial butldinge C~ t.ha raeta.urrnt rather than using thoir Qutomobiles,
however, he felt thia xeakauzant would be pXi.marily sezvi.ny the i.ndue~.ria]. park
rathor tlian 3ttract business~ from outaido af the induarrial park.
Commiosir,ner Herbst inquired when the aqent planned t~~ start conetruction of
L•ha ~arkt whereupon Mr. Phelps RtAtQC~ they ware al.rcady grading the proporty
~or cons*~~uct±on.
Commiesioner Allred affezcd n motion, s~condec7 by Commiseiorier Herbst dnd
MOTION CARRIGD, that. the Planntr-g ~ommiasion, in connection wi~h the exemptioti
dec~aratian :~tatus request, Llndc~ and determin~K.~ rhat tha prap~gel would ha+!e
no aiqnifie:e~nt environmantal ircpACt, and, thQrefurc, recommendo to the Citiy
Council that an Environmental Impact Sta~emant .ts t~ot necessary.
Commissiener Faran~ offered kesolutj.on N~. PC73-•~19 +~nd movod for its p+~asage
and a3option to grant F~etition for. Conditional :lse Permit Nu. 13H0 eub joct to
conditiona. (See Resolution Book.)
On rn11 cu11 the foragoiny resolution was past~ed by tha following vote:
AY~S: COMMISSIONERS: Allred,
NI~ES: Ct)MM'CSSIONERS: None.
AASENT: COMMZSSIONERS: Cauer.,
REPORTS AN~
RECOh1MENDATIONS
Farano, Herbst, Kaywood, Seymour.
Rowle~nd.
- I'fEM NO. 1
VAFIANCE NO. 1790 (Edward J. Corwin) - Request for
an extenaian of time - Property located on Cha west
side of Orange Averiue between Adele and Cypreae
Stro~ts.
Zoning Superviaor Charlea Roberts noteci the location cf subject property, uses
~yr_abllshed in c1~aQ proximity, the previous extension of time; qranted, and
the proposed request for a three-yeur er..tenr~ion of time for contfnued use ~af
the property granted under Vi~r.iance No. 1790 in addition *_a the previous
extensiun of tfine gr~nted by thQ Planning Commission in 1970, at ~~hich time
it was require3 that the chainlink fence be improved with s.lats and that
landscaping be prnvide~i alang Cypr.ess arid Adelo Streeta, however~ only the
chainlink fence was impr.ovea and was in ro~sanably good repair, whiS.e little
~r. no landscapinq was notod on either ~treet, thereiore, staff Nould recom-
mend that if an extension of time weze granted, it be subject tn continued
ma:i-r.enance of the requir9d l~r~dscaped arPas.
Diacussion was t~e1d bX the Commisoion regardiny improvement of landscaping
anci whether approval sk-ould be c?ranted becaiiee the pe~itioner had nok met
the previous req+iire~nents of the extenai~n of L•ime.
Mr. Rober~.a noted thak the landscsping had been i.nstallea, ho~eve: , it l~iacl
not been maintai.ned.
Cammixsioner Farano offered a motion, aeconded by Commissioner Allred and
MCTIQN C~IRRIED, to gran~ a three-year extenai.on ~f time for the vse o£ ~ubject
prnperty for the atoraq~ of old and w.recked automobiles subjec~ to continuous
mainter~~xnce of the landecaped area, r~aid L•ime exter.aion to expire Aprii 25,
1976.
~
~
MID;U't'f~;S, CITY l'I.ANNJNG COMMTSS[UN, Mnrch 5, 1973
ITEM N0. 2
DRI\'G~.LN DA7RIr'.S
'7 3 -• 14 4
Zan.ing :~upezvisor Charle~s Robere~ inqiyirad uF the Cn~r;mi.asion what the Commin-
eion'e int~nt w~a roqarding drive-in dui.rioe einco thie queation had baen
r~iead by som~on~e pr~~poair,c~ ano in tho c1ty.
Co[nmi~aionQr t~larbsL• oEferad a moti.on, serondeci by C:ammier-toner icaywoo~? and
MoTioN CARR.Lt,D (CummJ.RSiane::e Cmuer a~id Rc~wl.anc3 abe~ent) , thnt nll driv~e•~in
dairioy or ottiar dri.vo-in buaina4eos ehall. hQ sixbiec,: to the [~ling Mnd
ap~roval of a concittione.'. ur~c, por.mit.
CNVIRO~JMCNTAL IMPACT RL"PUR'P NU. 89, RECI,ASSIC7CITTUN N0. 72-73-34, AN~
COND:TIaNAI,_ USis_PIERMIT NO. 1375 ~(Conti.nu~d_ from_~aGe 73:_ 12)Y~„_~~__
Chairman Seymour inquir~~d whc~ther anyLh.`_ng had be~on accomplished dnring •:he
sh~rt del.ay in c~nsic~eri.nq aubject p~t.it.tons.
Mr. Lawin advi.aed t;he Plmnning Commission ttxat thoy could not. resolve ~:heir.
problamrt ut tt~i.s time ~ince he did not feel ther.e was n contrar,t 'betwean tiis
clients and the hoapi.tal ns he interpreted it,
The Commiasion than asked that oomethiny be discussed reyardtnq tho saCback and
land~captng rPqutred un the cul-de-sac; whereupon Mr. Drow atat•ed ha wauld lik~
the repre~ant~~tive af. the s.rchitect ~o disr.uss thls because he wds mozv ~ami!iaz
with it.
Mr.. Koberts r.oted that the plans were marked so that the C~mmission co~ild indi-
cake where *he waivars appl.ied.
Mr. Rarzdy Eosch, repre,enting Dxn Rowland & Asaociates, appearod before the
C;ommisaion and ~tated that it would be difficult to provide rha landscaping
adjaaent to t}ie wall becauso it would mean building a circulAr wa11 und they
would have appreciably mcre landscaning at the end of thut ur.ea r.ather than a
small strip along the ontire ntreet~ ar.3 that where parkin,y was proposed, the7
int.ended to conform witti the Cit~'s land~caping requirem~:nts ir~ the parking
area~.
The Commission indicated they were ccn.~erned with tha minimal l~indscaping pro-
poaed adaacent ta the R-1 propercies, since in the pas*_ the Co:nmi~eion hed
zequired a landscaped buffer area whtre commerciat uses, par~icu]arly tne park-
ing zLe~s, wexe located imm.~d~ately ad~acent to thE R-1 propertiea ~ince these
~+eople would still be living in ~these homee, using their rear yards for outdoor
recseation, however, w}iere parking was propased adiacent to carl~orts of the
upar.tment devel.opment, this landscape buffer would not be necessary.
Mr. Basch stated that they coulci compl~ w.ith whatever xandsc.apinq requiz~ement
the Commi~sion requested adjacent to R.-Z, but, of courae, there was a cul.-de-
sac near there alsof where~:~por~ Commissioner Herbst stated that he was not con-
cex'ned about the cul-de-sac: but ~he homes - an~ thei~ indicated on the plans the
exact location.
Mr. Bosch then stated they would cnmply with lar~dscaping ~s tha Commission re-
Rueo ted adj acent to ~he R-]. honies .
Commissioner Herbst Purthez' noted that the landscaping requ~red outside of tlie
wall on the cul-de-sac was for b2autificati~n purpo3es; that iti waa Yifs opinfon
that the are-. 3 suitabie for the xoning requested; that tihe plans pze3ented
did z~ot give _ people owr~irig the adjacent propertiPS a ~hance to us~ them ior
homes, and whetheL theae tH~o homFS were pur.chased or not, they were still R-1
hames since the zoning befurs t'a Commission did not ~ncompa$s those lotig, and
~nquired whether. the archit:ect }. • any al ~ernative plaiis for r.elocating the
hiqh-risP strucL-urer '~lY~ere~apon r~r. »oach st«L•~d th.at if th~ buil.ding weze re-
l~catecl, it would be so far remove~~ from the }iospital buildings themselves as
to be unworkable.
Commissioner Herbst wa3 of th~ opi.nion that ~he ~~etitioner should meet Code
requirement^s as to set~acks fnr the highrise bui.lding propos~d since he ~~id not
feel thia was desirahle ta have sach a high stru~~ure so close to ainglp-~amily
~
~
~
MTNU'fF:Sr CITY 1'IsANN2NG C:OMMI~iS7UN~ MeIICh 5~ 19":1 `i:)••145
~NVTRUNMCN2•AL IMPACT Rf:FOkT NO. 89, F~CLASS'[P'1CA'P~ON NO. 72^•73~:~4r A~ID
CnN~ITIUNAJ.. U~F: PERMI'r N0. 1:~7!"i~(Cont.~nued) `~___~__ ______,_,_.~,._._,,,.
homeet and then inqu~r.~n~ ho~- far awny the Cr~mer. ~rowor. waa from thc~ Riny.l~;-f.~m'lly
homee.
Mr. Roberta nat;c~d thak Che Cromor Towor wa~n 16Q Poet cliat~ncc, whllo the p~'o1?ae~d
L•aw~r would b~ only 17 f.oeC P.rom tliQ eingle-faniily hemae.
commiseioner HerbeL- At.dtRd thnt the eingle-P~mi.ly homes, re~.an~~~IleAr~ of Che'.r
intant of Relliny the homeg to the haepital - thors~ wtiich tha ~~r~r.itie,nez we~r~
unnble to acquire - nhou].d ba adoquatoly proCACter3 rt thie pair~t in t.imn, t:here-
fore, ~h~ higt~~riae ytructttro ahould be rNlocatad~ whereupon Mr.~. E~or;c:h 9t:t'I~AC~
tr~at they had nu sltornat.<_ve plnn sinr,e thoy found the site they propc~sed t:o bu
thu moat ~lesiraa~].e far financial roasons.
CommiAeioner Herbet noted that the hoepital atill did n~t O~Vh 'tflEf t:wc~ ~i'.1~11.~'--
family homee, and if. the ownere clid not deeire to eell th41..r ham~~N, the home!~
weuld be Che ~awnc~rs' castlea, and thie wnuld thon bo the pi:al~lecn ok the hos~~i.t:,~:l
to• rc~solve ~:Lnce he knew if he had hin home locyted there ~~nd r~om~oilE ~~vdr.tei! t.~7
build a 7-st~ry buil.ding, he would "fight 1' ka mad" ulso h~cxuse hVGII t4 :at.r~~c•-
ture did not crc:ai;e a go~d 1:Lving environment, thereEora, he wou~d. nr,r~~~~nt t.}~r~'~
if the twc homas were not acqui.r~d, that the building be roduced ln he.i.ght aincc~
i.t WA8 the oUli.ga~.ion of tha Pxann.Lng Cummissi~n to protect ~ir-gle-'~amil.y
properties.
lNr. Drov~ n::tod hie personal prefe.rence would be to have the huildl.nq rath~~r t:hun
pdrkinq udjacent to his t~ome because ~f the adors and riaise.
Chairman 5oymour noted that i.f parking wa.s proi~osed t.o abut rhe R••1 h~am~3c3, th~y
would have to pro~~ide the proper landsr,aping buffering te.chnigueA, ~nd ther~
inguired whethar th~ petitioner would consider a two-week cont.:inu.:-nc~* tc~ re~o~.v'.3
~or~e of the px'ohle~ns presented~ whereupon Mr. Dr~w stated *_hey ~i~ci C1C"_ w~nt e~
continuanc~ since the building co d b~ moved elsewhere, and th~~~~ re~vi.~~~~.+=~:t the
vari.ous distances the btiildi.ng coulc~ be movGd, whiah then would be w:.th ~ ~•~ "'~~~~
feet of the res~aEnces, and che locatiotx khey proposed would aP'Ercl-. thr. ~~''': r•
number of people.
Commiesioner Faranc noted that the Commission had reached thE p<aint tl,r~~~. I f
subject petitirn w~ere continuQd for two weeka it was to give t};,~ pcst.ic.:i.cr.sr:x an
oppor~.ur.ity to resolve the r~.roblems of relocating the buileling or acq:ii~::it;~.~ the
homea and it would not hurt them financislly since they ha~l ~h~~ z~iTiny :_~t>r;r~m-
manded for approva2.
Mr. Drew stated it would be fmpossible to r~locate the bui'Ldin~~ sc~ th~at: it woul~i
be 174 feet away f.rom the ad;oj.ning pr.operties, althouyh i.t wr~:z paS9j.!;l~.f' '~O huild
the structure in the centez with park:.ng all aroun~ it.
Continued discussion was held by the C~mmission and the agen': t:o~~ the.•petitionex
regarding a continuance~ what the petitioner should do to ~p~'e~~c.nL al.l:eznativec,
etc.
Commissioner Elerbst offsred a motiar~ to grant Peti'tian :[ax Co, v:r.io,i~+'l. ~tae F'e,:mit
No. 1375 subject to conditions, appr.oving all wai.ver<< ex~;~:~rt 13r:~ ca~ing ~d}~cr_e.
adjacent to R-1, said landscaping to be 15-gallon trt?ea on ~~-fc.~t centPra, ~nd
that the heigh' of the building shall be in accordance wiC.h t~ode req~iiramr-.n~.':a.
On roll call the foregoing motion failed, with Comrnissic~r~~rr; Al?_~:ed and herL~t
voting "a5~e" and Commissioners Seymour and Farano vc:~t.i.~c; "ric", wJ.th Coiami~sa.or~er.
Kaywood abstaini.ng, st~tin~ she could not vote fo1- dc~CT.y~lig ~•~aiver o~ the h~~a•qt~t
beca~isa of the two homes holding out, howeve:, she waq iii i~~vor of` the pra~~<:~~s~d
3evelopment.
Commiscianer Seymour offered a motion, secundad by Commi~3aonPr I'aiano and
MOTTON CARRIED (Commiesi~nere Allred and Herbs~ ~~ok.tny "no") ta cot~t.in+~Q COLl-
eic~eration uf Conditional Use Pezmit rlo. 137~ to the m~aeting of. t~larch L9, '~17'3.
to b~ schedu]ed as an ovening item at 7:30 p.m., i.n ordc~r that tha petition~~r
could reaolve acquisition ~~f two groper.tiea prim~rily af£ecL-er]. by the h41c~t~t af
the etrurture or to preeant alternative dcvel~~~mant plana E~~r the .LO~"r~Qra Q~
the high-rise in the event ttio Lwo r~maining R-I hornes wert: no~ acquired, nnd
to allow the oppoaition to be abie to ~resent further e~vidence.
~ ~
MTNUT~S, CITY PI,ANNING COMId1SSIl1N, MnL'oh 5 r 197 F! 73-14fi
L~N~IIRQNYIF~N'~A1, tMI%AC'~' RL~?AR'~ N0. 1~9, RECLA9:iIt'ICI~TION Nn. 72-73-3Q, AND
CON~7TIOr1AT~ i1S~; _PL~FtMI'I' NA. 1375 (Contir~uad) ,,w, _„~,,,,,_,.
C-~.OCl~41Q~On w~a¢ iiold r~y t:he Ccmmi.meion rolativa ta the pousi?~~.11ty o~ .raopening
the hpuring to conaid~r evi.danoa trom the oppoAition, and iP new plani w~re
^ubmi.tte+d, Cho hearing would alau be reopa~n~d.
a~Quty Ci.ty Attornoy Frank ~oNry, in re~pon4e t~ Cammiaaion quadtiuni»y, ddviaed
kher that Lh~y coultl oontinua aubJect Fotition t'ar a maxirnum of £our waeks' tim~,
~:har a de~ciAinn ~rou18 have to be mada ii~ tha event tha Commiseion did not take
actl n a~t Cho nnx~ ~ubtic hearing.
AUJOt~~:NMGNT - There beinq no furt•hor bupi.na~~s to diecues, Commieeianar
~` ~~ ~~ M~r.bst offerad a motion lo temporar..tl.~ ad~ouxit Ch~ mee,tiuq
ta March 15, 1973, rt 7~30 p.m., fnr ~ work aeeai~n.
Cvmmiee~on~r Allr.ed e~condod the mot~.an. MOZ'ION CARRIEU.
The nieeting adjut~rnad a~ fi:55 p.m.
R~sapeat~ully eubrnl.~ted,
C/l/j'7/.i1i ~~.~'-~a_.."
ANN KRE85, Socretary
Anahoi.m Ciky Plar.ning Commi.~ei.on
Al;chm