Minutes-PC 1977/03/14C.~ty II~~11
n~,t,r,~~ im, C~:1 1 ~~rn i,~
tlArcl~ f ~~ , 1 `1 . .
RL'~~il ~~~^Mf ! T I+r. ~r_T;~E_ 1111/',_I( I'1 C I1 Y F'I i~~Cl I'~('~ (,~iri~~ I~~~ ~~~IJ
KLGUI_llft - A r~•~~~~lrir r~.,r~ti„~ c~f ~t.,~ !`v~irih~•ir~ Cil~~ I'l.tnnir„ ~.c~uiis~;ir~n w~}ti c~ill~•~I
MLI.I~IN(; tc~ c,rclr~r I~y Chrti r i.~~i Jr>~~n~,un :~t. l: j' ,>.~~, ~~>n f1z+r~ li {1 , 1'~/;', ir, tl,~•
------•-- C')un<.i! Ch.lnhi r, ,~ ~iii~rt.ii ~~~ I;•i~; ~~~-~•'.~~t~~.
PRE.~LIi, _. (.~~,111tr'~~li; Jnliii~,t~i~
r.i1N-~;`,'~,ir~~li ",` : H,~rn~~~,, t~~vi~l, Ilcr!,~,t. ''in~i, h,.>rl~•y, Tul„r
f~lt` !T - C'~f 1" I`. '., I~ ' i ,: I10+~~•
1LiU f'f L:;f (~ ~- F~r;.~r~~ l.cw,~
~'.~y C~niii~,i ~.int.,il;jliti
~ ~c_4 ~Jl~ i t<.
I~~ U ~ ~~ I I1 I(: f.
J:~y T i c u~,
Jc~cl i"i~.i.
F'~~~~~~~I,t ~<int ~l,i
I'~~,~,i',i,iiil CI[y ~~.:'~~fn~'V
~\~,~~i ;t•int Nl;~~~i~iii~~ Uir~•~ tc;r-~'i>iiin~,
~~~~,~u:y (, i t y ,1t. t~~rn~•~;
Tr;~i i i~ Er~,in~•~ r
~1} ~ I l.l` ~I1~~ 1 I1~'~.' I~
l1~,ti i''~ C~~n t{' I,inni r
Ccr~i~ii5~,ic>n '~~ c.rrt,~ry ~'ri~ Tc•^~~,~,~•
Ilot~r: lt~es~r ininut!•s wc~r~~ ;~r~ ~:~-~r~•~~ l~y p~~, r ~ ii. `.ic.~~,lrar•, ;~~~r~~i„ry t~~ r~i,, r'IZnninc~
(,nfTllll! SS I~)fl ~ ~fl) ~(rW I I1~1 il f'('V I~ •4J l~~ (`~•.' :,I('~' r~•' '' I fS~, ~~f (t~~' I~Y'l ! 111~~ .
1'!~L-r( ~F - C~xnr~~i;~~i~,iicr i),-r'.~i,i li~~~.l in t`~ ''~ .~~~~~~ ~~1 ~ ~i,ir~~.:~~ tn tl,c Fla~~ c;f th~~
AI.LL(~I,~II(.t_ Unitcc; St:~t~~~, ~t !~rnrri,.i.
~~PP-'.OV/1L UF - i,a~,n i~, s i r,n~~ i t: i ~,~ c, , ~,,,; .-~ ~ t i~_,~ .~,~•c r,i,~1~~,~ I>y C~~~,~, ~~~„ i~~n~~ r T 1.-+r ~n~
T~~~. ~~~~~~i~~.~i Mn~ ~~)F~ L11~~N~j ~„ ~ frl:il 1.1~~ ~„'~li~.'. r ifli' I~~l!lf:lfl'~ (.Ulr~'1jS';In(1 I~k' .~III~;S
h~,~ ~„n f'el~rur~ ry i~~ rincl Fei~ru ~ry _. , 1` ~ i~ f~~~ ~n'. h~~i~crf~y ~re :: Prove~l,
~~> ~>u~ ~, i t t~~~~.
EI{', t~E.GNTib'L DE.I,i.P~Ri~' ~~i~i - PUuLIt: tif ~,tif'JG. PE.A' ~ J. _i . f'(LPP,~., 7RUST~[ , u1w 'Icctor J.
._._..._ _ ~._._._._ ;t. Pi~~rrc.~ 1G1~ ti~ th f_ucli,t StrF,~~t~ S;,i~c f., Antisicir,, CA
RECLl~SSIFil,i, 71c`II ±2 ~~~~ (~»rt~~~r); '~1l~t rf_i l i~ f~~P!.t ,'~'~~'~' ~l~rrwc~c~rf, C•~~,r,~ss, CA
t~U. 7f~-j;~-3; `1';t;;'; an,! fti~tll;Y ~"~~N/ft~~lrl;U Br,l(',f";, ln~r' '.lcst La Palma
.. - Avenue, A~,~~h~•ir,~ Ll; ')~:~^1 (,1qer~ts} , ~•o~~erty ci~~5c.ribeci as a
CO~IUI7101JA1. USt. rr•;.t~~n~~ul,~r! ,' r~nr~ci ,~~rr.cl <>~ I.snr+. consis'_in~~ uf :,^nroxi-
~E.R;11 f;It;. 1 6~1
~
m~~t !y 1.:' „_r~~s 1<<~vin~.~ a frontac;e~ of a~E~roximc~tely ~:' , eet
or~ th,~ nort~~ si~~e of Lincoin Avenue., ~~riving ~ i~axi~ium depcfi
of .in~,ro~cir~at~~ly 3'1~ fcec, bc~n~~ loc~tr~j a{,~~rox.im~tely `~i(:j
fect wes~ r;f tl~~ c~rnt~~rl in~• c~f Westurn Avenu~:~ ~n~l tur'`icr <Je,cril~ecl as 3311 WE:st Linc.oln
A.ven, ~. Prc~perty ~>res~~nt~y cla:,~~.ific~u RS-~->>i.0:~;i iRf`l',)E:t;~Tl(',l_/~1GRIC~.iLTUF.AL) Z(~~~E .
fcE~U~STL~ C~1ISSIF!c./1TIU;~: CL (~~~~~r~LRCIl~L~ L~MITCJ) :nr+f .
nE(~JLSTED CONUITIO'JAL I~Sl: TU °i.RM1T A f11N1-4111Rf.H0US~ WITH WAIVER OF (A) t11P~INUt~ N1~11G'ER OF
PARKI`~G SP;,CCS, (B) MA~IMUM BUILbItJ~~ IfE1GHT, ANU {C1 MIi~IM~l1
(iU I LU I VG SCTt3F~ClC.
17-1)6 3/t4/77
r~INU1~.s~ CiTY Pi.r\PJt~INf, c.c~;~nl~~sic~id, ~ti~,r~_i, i~~, t~i1/ I1-~77
.L(:l.hS'~li I~.Ai IOtI M'~. JG->>-37 nr~o C~)IiUI i IONIIL USf P( I~MIT N, i(~'fl (C<~ntinu~~-1)
I t w.ls no[~+il Ih,tt thc Sub jc~~.l i l~~~n5 w~~lr ~r~nt i nu~~~.1 frrvn tli~~ f'Innn in~~ f.~xni~ii .~, i~~n n~c~t in~~ ~~f
F~i•hru.~rv ';, l~)11~ ,~t tl~~. r~^r,uc~~l ~,f th~ t~ciitiuni•r,
Nci i~n~~ ini1;.~~t~~~i thcir ~,r~~5~~nc.c• in cil~~~~~`,flic~n (ci thr ~;;ihj~•r..t it~~m;.
/1lthuu~~h t.hc~ SYa1~f It~~~~iir ;c> th~ ~I,~rininy L<i~~n;i•.~,ini~ ~1,~1~~~1 M.irtl; 1~~, 1')/;'~ wn~: n~it re,id ,il.
~~I ' ~)U~ ~ I C. ~it•.~"~1" ~ I1l) ~ 1 l , f'(`~ ~.1 Yri.'~I 1.~~ ~if~il Il1AiIC l ~~ lf ( r~f Lh~' i'~ 1 Ilit; i,<~ .
~ii~. v. ~i i~tiiJiuii, i~{. ,.~1. r„~ ~ I~r~r ~1~~~ ~il"r-in~~:~';~ ;11"OII'l ~ . ~)I~~'~~•~lfi:.~ 1:1 ~l)' ~ !I11` F~~,inninca
i~ ~ , ,
Conu»f551'in ~~n:1 ri~Vl~~at~ , If~r r~"/i',r~l Ul,~ti~,, ~,~;tl.iiic~ !h~ii thr~ ;,rr,~~r~5~'c1 ~~ ~r~.i>>c! hncl h~•rn
~~
inc.rc.~stl~ rI't)Ili ~,' i!)J(. ' 1~1 ~ 1 5~~:'~l~", ~1l~~~ !~ ~}~ ~!l~l f!"IUC.1~ 1 t~ll ~G'ir)ilil~. tli ~iUi ~,iiii•~ "~~ ,~... ,
ihnt. tt~r,y ~.n r~,. . r,r~~~~n~,in~i ~{: ni~ ili~~ ri~;,iir~~l ~~t~rlin~i ;n;tcr~, fnr thi~, lti'~;c f.icilit)'~
~:c~riparcu t~~ ,~ ~ii~~h ~~f ',~~.~ f~.,r ~~.ii~il,ir ~~~~~';c~.t~, in th~~ (;ity.
TII(. Plitil.l i~ 11El~f'.' ''' ',J~'~'., ! LO',L',~.
CUrrnis5 ~ r F:in~~ ~>f1i•r<~~i ,~ nui i~~n, ~,i <<~nii~ ~! I~v C~r~u~ii ;. ivf~(~1' Hf`rh~~t ;~r~,{ ",i IO'! f',r~,RILi,~ LF~,~I.
tht~ !tn ~!i<~ i i~ t: i i}~ F' l.?r~n i ri~, (.~n u~i i~, , i„i~, li:i•, rr,, i, ~ i~ ,. ~h~• ,~~I~ i~~c l~>rnnut,n 1~~n ~~rr~~~ ~ t y
GOI"151' ~.1111~ f.i1 ~1(~(lrOXIIJri(~'~y' ~.. ~ICI'~'ti U11 ~~U~ Ill~l-(fl Sll;l~ cl~ ~.I11(.i~)~fl ~1Vl~!I'I~` Illi h('ll~~~ ~UL.lIUI~
appioxint;-[i.~y t t ft~c~C w~~<,! ~~} Ui~ c~.~~l~rli~:r cif Wt.•:trrn ~l.v~nu~~, ;:n~! cln~~~. ~~t~r~~!~y rr~CCx~nten~l
~U ~~IC` L11.~~ CUUfV~..l~ ~>f (.~11 ~.I(`J (1~ nfl~l'~i`I1~ [~1,-it .l ~Irr~f;~vl• i)t'~~~lt',i~lt>h ~Y~~(~~~ thr ,~,.~.~uirc.~f'k'fl~~~
tc~ F~rt~parc rir cnv~rr,nr,~nl,il ~r ~~,~~.t r~~~~~~rt b~ ,i~;{~~~~v~~~1 f~ur t}~~ ~„i!,j~~: t ~,r~.ic~cl r~n thc~ baSiS
Cli:+i LhcrC~ wr~u I~i f>c n~~ i n~l i v i;u,i i or ~_u+r~u 1.t t i v~~ ~i~lvc~ r~,~• i rit~,ic. t t~r, thc ~•r~v i r~~riru~nt ~lur~ ti-~ thr.
F]~)Ofi)V<1, Of ~~115 ~~l'.~~i1~IV~° ~J!'(:~.11'~1~1~~1~ '~I~I~,~' ~Ilf' ~(l~l~lf.j!'l ~"f~t•f~l~ f~lal~l ~1~•SI~~IIaI~C`i ~~lf, 511~)~C(;t
property f~~l" _~<`I1~1Paj i.:O1'1~~11~C1.1~ ~llfl~] U'~'S Cf)n7'1r~I15U1'il~l' WI(~l ~.f11' Ofl)~)O°i7~~ ,I~lt~ t{~~ ~•;i~Ic~1)
Stucly ti11~71111~t.1'l~ ~ly tfi~' ~)~'Yl~ lf~~l('I~ Il~~ill.~l~i`ti flli `~I~~f',I~ Il;llli ~1l~Vf'~~i~ (.'1Vlr(~fl(11(`I:i~il IfllP<1(.T~ , 11(1
[11.~[ ~.f1C: (~I.:~;cl~ 1~:~' ~~Ll.~. f~)( I~!Il r~lll'~~.i!?~t~l~lfl~~ (~It.~ j(~~t.:lll,lli~~ ~ I~~~l.~ifl~.1~: I~, C)~1 f i Ic• in ~fll~ Off ic~.'
of C~~~ ~' 1.inn i n~i U~~~~~~r;;•~~~n l,~ C C~~ y ii~~ 1 ~.
~.(iIT11•~5•.~IUIIUf ~~If1U 1)fftff~l•t~ K!'1 ~~lltl(!I1 i~0. E~~.%~~~~~ ~111'~ (~~~Vt'~; f!)f I'~, fl~l'iti~r]•, ~1f1'~ ,,~J~~ciO(1~
tfldi ~~lt• nfl~'1~' li~~, ~. 1 tY ~~ ~<~f~i~l l f1:; (.Uf 1"11 5S IUl1 ~~;.!l"-, ~lt`( ~'~~'r f'i'(.:f~~~'lt'ii~; (O 1.~1(• ~. I;•, C!~~unc i ~ U~ ~.fl(.'
C i ty ~,f ~naiiu i ~; Lht~t F'~ t~ t i~.,n f~~r Rr_~ I~is.~ i f ~:;~ L i~,n tl~~. Jf,- j J-'; iu• <~Ei~~rr~v~~c', sut~j t~ci t.o thc
Intcrde~~r[rncnc~ll Co~~iii r t~ , rr~~.<~;r,~:r~i.~C i~in~„ (`~~~rt Rt~~,~~lut.i~~n d~~c~l. )
Qfl r0~ ~(.cl~ ~~ (~~{1 fO~t'~;U111~~ fl`~V~Ul,lt)f'~ Wi!i
11YES: C(1Ht11 ;'.~nyF.'~. . f3P~(`.rlE.~~, 11~1'ti I;~, 1!i_iil;`,i
~OES : 1:0~+.I~11 SS l ~lll f;':~ : (~Q'i~
ADSkr~T: Cnitrt 1;~; I J~;L~~,S: ~~~n~il.
~~~; h~ th~~ full~.~winr~ vc~(.c:
~: ~~i ~ M~li?1.~~, T(~~l_^,ft, JO~II~SON
Ccxnml;::l . I;iny c.~f(er~~,! Re~~r~luli~~ri IJi~. P+'.'.7:'•~,J ~~uc! niove~.1 f~~r its I~aSS.~c;e ~n~± ~c1o{?Cir~n~ that
[t~r. ~'{n~hc ir•~ L i Cy P I;~rin i r,~; C.c~~~ir,i ;s i~~u ~c,~~~. iivrr~f~y ~;r~~nt. PeC i C i~:ri f~ir Cc„~~~ i t ion~~ I Usc rcrmi t
i~U. ~fl~~~~ ~~rani.lfl~~ t~l:' f-^(~U~.,'i<<'~~ rr'.]iVCI' Vj t~~t' f11111111U"1 flUf~~,',f)~'1"~ Uf (~~l~~lfl~: 5~)ili;CS Qfl tf1C ~1dS15
ili~it th~r f• ! an,i i nc~ i:ornmi ;r, i c>n re~o ~~ i:~es th~it t raf f i c: t~~ tli~r 5 i t~~ ,~s ~irup~~se~l tc~ t~e
d~vc-lopec:~ wi11 b~' infrnc~~ir~r~t, ~,~u~~ily of sl,c~rt ~luriiLlr;n~ ~3r~~1 w~, ,~ often invuive ,~ick-u~~=>
..lfl(~ i.~C~ IVt3flF'S t'{~'~li:i:~ ~Y II1 frc~nt Uf thc~ sCOf~?~,N. Ui11~5 ~fT'~~ LhrrcfUr~~ ~~OCS LCtf'rrnin. that
Chc' Of'OOO5~'~~ t;UfI1~:Cr Uf t~i..Sl~jfli3Ll'U (:,1fS:lf:c~ 5~~~?C~ S I; a{~nr~~~ri~"?it~ f~'^ T C(~~ ~~~St.i~ USC~
Of~3(ltlil<i i~;~' I~~•(Jt~CSLCII 'v~IIYCi"S C~` t~1L n13>.I''lili'~I ~ J1~t~lfl~J fl!'itlflC ~11C~ IIIIf11f111IfT~ II~C~If1C) ~1C1(~f}[ :JPI
.f1C: tleJ515 tfldt ~l'~~1!)U(;~1 t~1C if:.~jc3Ct'(lt {~rO(l~,riV ill t.fl(' f1U1't~l cl(1~.~ Cc?5~ IS ZU('~'U f^S~denii~llYr
it is uevoiop~ci ~~itl~ a schc:~;l; suf~' ~ct 'o tti~- Iritcr'~icn~-rtn;c:ntal Cc>r~r,it~ec rr_ccx~u~~c~~Sations.
(See P^:olution Ut~ok)
}/14/I7
~~I-~iiTf ~, r ITY -~L~~WN!NG ~:U1IHISS101~. Nar~h 14~ 1')l, !/-11}~
ftk.Cl.lI:,SIFII:~T101~ -~Q. J6-I)-j] A~~U CQtJp1Tl:)Nlll U~,f. PCft1111 NU. 1(,')~ ((. r. ir•~u~•~1)
Or~ rol l c.il I, th~• f~~rc•u~~li r~•~,c,l~.it ic~n w~~, ('~.~s :~•~I t,y t!i~: fol I~.~.,in-; vct, .
/1Yf.:,: (,U~t!11~:,1~'~I~f R~,: 1:r11t~l1 `.,, UP~1,",~, HLf~!~`.,i , h:lll(~, r~r,IcLE'~, T~l~tict., ..'~ "l;~t!
~JUL`. : i:(111H~';', I ~;~li '~'~ : tjrl'Ji
~1tiSE.IJ1 : (;i)tIM I'.,:, 10~~l.~' ; : NO~~f.
f_ I f; ~IF. (;/1'f I VE (~l CII~F;,~ ( ~`~i -• f'i,Nl. I 1, ill E~i( I I~~' , i:i~L I~(`~~!1 I/1 l!~~~. I i.`,1 I i. ,1$`;O(: I l\710'~ ~ I tiC .,
._.-.._.__..._._~..._`__._._.______ 1:'1 tilt~~,~ Cy~,re~~,~. ;tr~•~ s, !1n<~~~~•ir~~ l,' `},~u~)'~ (~)wn~•r); f4LTIlAt1Y
VA1:1l1'1f'( IJO. "11 1 C~li!ft~ , ~ :'1 W~~t l tiy~,r~ ,~, '.,.rcct , nnr~l~ ir ~ C.r, '~~:'~ ~l, (P~,ir_nt ) ;
'---. r ~ ~ ,nrii~~c iiT~ ,~IT(~ R{ (`Illkl (1
~'f~i .~i ' 1 I l~i~ 1~/~, I'; t.~~ I ~r ~ i i i;i ~ i T ~ i ~i i_.~~., . _ ,
yr~~;~~., i~ 1~~i~i; ~~.r~ (;.~II ~~I~t~ ;I~~E ,1P~ ^ t~l ~ 1141( LI_I~lf U~~11 ~(Ci
MI'1111U~1 {~i.l~ll;? NI?'t_.~~ ~i~~ NI~;I";;'1 l~l`~.'I~V'~~~,I 'tjL~f~~,lEl~i l~ II lil'!~,`~~ ~1!lf; ~i !',;'~II'UI" NUNfIi~' OF~ ~'i~!?Y.-
~~~~ ~~{~1,~.~ 7~1 l.l~~l~l!,.11. ~ ~~i~. ~iT;'i /'h,1171~1'~.'I (;f~~~~j ~ , "~ jll~ ~~~l~~il~~/ (1f1 `1"Ol~~~~~~
, a , ~ i~ii 1 ;liii, T Y.~ T f L ~- 1
ljf`SCrI~~'l~ ,]`.'• ~'1 rr~:.l,lf~ ~Il~.jl'~y'" ~~~.~~~~~~I ~)~lf-l."~ !i~ ~~~I1~1 (.l)t!~ i`~~ Iliri il~ ~l~)~~f- ~Xll~lll(`~`~ ~.J dCfl
flclVlllr~ ,'1 frc,nc~l~~~• ~if ,li~i~l'G,`(II'.lil•~Y i•'1 (~~~•I ~~I~ L~It' '~UULIi '.I~II' (.ir f~tS~`~~ ~.itl'~'~'' ~ ~1lVIIlCj iJ
f'1dXI~~IUt'1 ~C(~1.11 ~'~f ~i~~~~f'Uy:lliillt`~V ~~~, iCt'I_~ ~~(•I~l'~ ~l)!~it[~~'~ ~1~1111'l)hll~l<I~r•~~, '1~~ t~,f tV'~(•'~t C)T ~I1C
c;t~nir~lin~• ~•f i~nt~h+~i~,~ L•c~ul,~v,-,r-1, ~~n' fi~rti~~~r ~I~•,crii~t•~i ,i~, 11, ',Jc~,t ~cirl~ ;ti~~tct. F'rc~F~~crt~
E~r~~5cntly i.l,~~,~~i ~ i~.~i~ (Zh-1Z'), (~',~.`~i,~E J-i I , ,~til.i If'I ~ _Fr,'r~I'.Y'j ;'.Glli .
It ~i~is n"*~.•ci lh~it !hr ~i' ~~~~t ~~~iis ~,cr~r c.<~nti~~~.,i~, frc>i~ t.ht f'1„nnii~~, Cc~r•~~ii•,Si~~n ~~iecCin'I c~(
F~cbru~~ry ...~ 1'% i~ `ur r~ ~, j•,r• 1 ~~Inii~. ±.r~ rw; .i fy i~i~~ ~~ni -'i.r~
~~O ~)fl!' If1~.~lt.iltl' ~~~li 11' OYe~'~~'llc~.~` I11 fJ~~(~~.i~ill.l!,fl l.C~ tfl~ ;i ~~~•t:t. If.l'I'~S.
~lith~.iu~~li tht~ ilt~ff i;r~n~,r! tv th: F'l~~r,ni~i~~ C<~~,~i~,~,i~;n ~it~•~i 11~7rc.li l~i, 1'~;'~, t~,~5 nc;t rc~iu .it
fhc ~~ut~lic. h~~r~rii~~•~ if i~> ~~fc~~~'~~~; i~i ,~t~;l !~~1f~ ~~ ;>>r' ~` t!i~, •~~Irut~•S.
f~f . S~eVP ~~(:fllifl, 1Cfle.' I' ~ ~i'(~I-~"~r~t,~ 1 f~~i tfl~~ ~ I~~fl~ i" ~ ~(~t',f~'~ ~ ~lC'f~~rc ~fl(` ~ ~ lflll I f1~1 ~~)f!~Illl SS ~Ufl
~'''C~ PCJI(~W~ . [fll' i~~~. ~,~~~~ ~i~J~l',~ ,l:lllr ,~,iL (Wti (_lf L~i~~ (ifl~;lfi~)~~'~' f,.~(;,ir~,, : WIIVC~S f1~lU
i~ern :lt:•Icte,i, ,<:~.,'~in~; t_hr~~~~ w•iivr~rs; th,~t t!,~ ii;~~.; in~.rr•:t~,~~ i tl~~• i,~i; ~~ ,ii~ bui I~Ilnc~ 5ite dre~~
F)Cr Uf11L {1'Oil .+~~'; ~,i~~i;]r~~ fr~i•[ t:~ ~l~'~ Sc;,i~ll'~~ ~r~i•l: .1~~: L~~,li 11•~.v w~ f'~~ ~ifU1~O5ifiU ~~ 78f'~:ln~)
SF)A~'('_S.
TiIE_ PUESLII, !iL/1RIPIG '.l~~; ~_~O`~i i~.
i il f'C~i~'Of15(' t0 C1UC5 t t~)fl I h;; ~,?v Cli~ p{)Ilfl l(1~~ C(1I If' 1~~5 ,(1 ~ ~'~1' , ~iCf.ilf'~i:iCfll`f s Catec~ [fli••~ Y!t!i'C
pro~:;~Sin~~ ~ tot•:tl uf li) c.t~~r~~llii~, ur~i:s c 1,~ rc~_r~• ;.i;,n rr,rx~, wf.ich hrj~! bcc•n Su.~rji~tcci by
~:ity s2afF.
U i Scus , i on cnsuccf cc~n;_crn i n~; [h ~-•:~~: ~~f th~~ tF~n.~n t i n thc ~,rop~,5c:1 1 ow- +;icome hous i^~7 ~
ci~~rin~, wl~lch tl~c Pian~iii,; Co~-~~~~`;~~i,~n jr~„ict~tc~~t tf•..,' thc ~~rojcc? 5h~uld ~,~~ l~r~ite~1 to senior
cit~zens, c~r ner~~~ns ~r) yet~r~, ~,I ;-~~ ~~r ul~lrr. Mr. Sch~.irn~~cl~~-r sli~i,! ~Ceci to the ~,C~-year ~~ae
!ir,~~t, ~s disr.uss~•~1. Cun~mi~>si~~ncr Tolar rcyut~~.ted th~~ ~~ecor~Js to i,~,Jic.atc that hc diJ ruk
inte+~d to sup{~o~t th~~ ~len;ity ~~'on~se~l, c~ccePt fo~ seric~; ,:i;ircn [y~~e hc~u5inu and woulcl not
leuk fa~~or~~b~y t~iw~r,l ~~i ~>rojc~~.t. cc>min~~ in uni~i-r the ~~ui~;~~ ~f seninr c.itizc:n hc~us(nq ~nd
l~.ter ~i havin~~ in~-~~~,t.,_,~ ta4.r: _~vrr thc prejc~c.t ~ncl cievi, .,~ from Co~~c reauirements.
i L wa5 nuteci tha[ ~~ nr~~.~ orci i n ince w~s r~e i nn p; r,~~r<<1 tn uovern Sen ior c i t i zen hou5 i nc~ .
In res{wnse tu yu~.~:t ior~in~~ ~~y fornriissioner Nerb,t, Mr. Schurnacher sti ulated that the
rccrnation roo+~~ w~~uld nr>t b~~ . ~~ ~~rtcd [o a dw~ll inc, un~t in thc futui•~~,
31t4/77
MIiIUTI.;. C11'Y ('L/~t~~~IN(', C(~~1ril ;~10'~, M,~rch Ih, ~'J
VI1R1~1NCE tl0, z~~1 ~ (Cor~c inuc~i)
7i-17~~
(:c~inmis;ioncr Horlry r~ft~,i'r„J ,i nHit i~,ii, S~~~on~;~•~ ~~; l~onr~i•.;ionr~r U~~vi~! ,in~i 11i~1"It~~~ C11RR~C:~,
lh.il the l1n,~!icir,~ (;ity I'lannin~; C~~r•~mi,~,i;ni h~~, rrvitrw~~~' th~ ~uhjrrt ~rojcct, ~:~~ntiititinr~ ~~f a
10-ut~ft~ lh'o-~,iury ,i~>.~rt~~i~~nt cl~~v~•lc~-~~irnt f~-c>~itiii~ un ~li~~ ,niit~~ ~,i~f~~ ~~f Atl~~l;~ `_~tr~~el,
8F)(~f0)(~11:1(.c:~Y .'~1~) f~~rt l~l~`}1 (1F ~.~i~• ('~`nt~~rl lll~• [1~ ~Ililil(•II~ EfnU{f`V.11"~~~ ~1f1c~ ~1nCfi ~lc'~'!`{~y
i~~~~.>irr~~en~i tu lhi~ C i t'~ Cr,unc. i I ~~f ; h~• f, i~ ti~ nl llnnhi• i i ~ t hn t i I~~~r,ri t i vc• lirc 1:irn t i c~n f ron, thc
'"CC~U11'Cf'1(`fIL ~i) F~f'i'~1~1~1' ~h ~`;1V~1'Uf~flt`fl[~1~ ~1I(i~l(( ff(!~C~ ~~~' ~lnf`t'~~V/`i~ fnf ~.~1(' SUf)i~~('.( j)r<)~f•~~. ~)Il
~fl~ ~~iS14 l~~l~ l~l<`~i.' W~~u~') ~~~' ilu °il~~f`Irl(.~IfIL I','~~`:I ~i~:!~ ~)f Cl~"lil{:111~ir• .Ii~VCfS~• ~`nvir~~nmcnt.3~
i rn~~ric t~J~ii~ [c> lh!• ,~~~~~ ro~~~~ I~~( th i; t~c.i;~ t i v~• Uec I.~ ~, r i nr~ ~, i n~ ,~ t.h~~ i1n,~h~• i n, f,cnr r~ I ~ I an
l~t"~I~~flcl~f.", 1.flr• '.U~t~~'(.t ~'1"U!~(~!-:V ~~lf~ ~'1~'~IIU ~~~~II',1!y f~i••~l.ll'~I~I~I~ ~~~Il~~ tl`~:~„i .7!l~i 1~1!` ~fl~(~:1~
' Cu~iy S~ib,iillrJ I,~r~ li~~ ri~i~~li~+tnt in~li~at.~~; nn ;i ;ni(ic it iu~fivi lu,~l .~r ~.uniul~tivi~ ~clvcr,e.
(~t1Vlt'p~llU~'~it~~) lii~);IC(!~. •'~fl~ Cii~~ll lfl~' ~~C~Ji1LIV~` ~)('C~;1r~l1~U11 'ilf)`~I..1~1~1,1'I~ti~ l~lt' fu~!~Ot)~I1(~
f(hl~lll~~5 I'. UII 11 ~~: I~1 Ihi 11111L1' ~~I ll.~' I~i~.liiiiii~~~ ~:~'~,~~i'~~ .~,. .~. ('r <<~~~~
Gcmr~ijtislc>n~•r 11c~r1~ / uff~ r~•~' i',.,,,c~l~ilinn Nc~. F'(./i-. ~,ii~~; i~x~~~~•~I f:~r it~, ,~r~5:,~~~i~• an~1 ,~;IC~~>tic~n~
Cfi~~l Llii~ i~u~it~~ii i.~ y~~~~i~l~ i~~~ (,U~„ ,,.i ~~i ~I~~ ~~,~~~h ~~r;~r~t I'~~ti11c~1 1iil' ~7f'I~InC ~(~. ~'11~
.
in p~tt"t~ ~ur n I~~ nll ~~~~~rl;v•i~l cu~~~,lr~r !nr .~•ni~,r ri(i •~~~i~,, ~~~it!~ ,l rt•c.ri•,ttiun t"n~r'~~~ ttic
~.,~I~~ir~~lly r~~c~i.i~~~,L~~t w,ii~i~•i~, c~~ lh~• {~~~!~~i:t~~~.l i~n~.ru.!c.i;i~~nt~, inl~~ i~~~~,~ii'~•~.1 yr~r~15 .1n~1 minlci~.~n~~
(jIS(.a'jlfCl: UL~1'JC(f~ U111~:~ i~.1V~ll,~ ~)1.'l.fl l~l`~C(l'~~~ ~~y~ (fli` I"r•`/I'~t~~ ~~~~111~.~ '~r.l(lf Iflt! (~Il' 'rl~l~V1:f5 (1~
-,iinimuin `~ui l~lin•~ ~;11~• ,~r:•c~ ,~cr ~Iw~ l I iu~; uni t~in~! ~'~iiii~~u~~ 1 1~,~~r ,ir~~r~ c~n tfic• ;~~~si5 thnl fhe,
prc~~~usal I-~ '.~)1'Clfl~.l~~l~ L') j~fUVIC~(' (IC~U'..ill~l III (~~)~i~~ ~?~'l~:tjlli(Y (~1 1"~' i~ll~NI1~l1W(1 i7ft'~ ~~C)r
5l`(11U~ ll ~I..t..~l~~ ti1.1~ t~ii'il.' I`, Ill) Ut~l~ ~ S~JI ~.~~~~r~ ~.1 (V c)~ f~ll~l~ll I~ Ir~ti~~,1"lf Icl~ if)fl(` (~f~0`.~ICilfl(~
fo- th~: ur~lcrl~ ~~CVI:~f~~)11(`I1~ ~ll (~11', S~1C~,1~1~ i'~/~~~• ~~f fl~)U`~11!:, Lfi~i( '~~11'fni,'l~~lll~l ~liIYCC~S Of
[Ili, 5~'1111C :.1.'1' ~111~~ 111 (fl~. `,~lf'~i(' .'ilfll' f1,1V1' ~)111h ~~!'V^~(~it~(`.~ 1~ll~il SI~'~Il~~r ~~CII`~I~II'S~ l~ll~ ~.~11~ ~hC.
{~~.)Ililifli~ COf~IP]I'i51f111 (1~'IS 'if~:lfl~.l~ J Sil l i.;f' b/~ll :t'~S If~ t~!(• (l<1~iI f!iI' t~l~ ,~(`Vt'~C)1'~'~M'1~ C~f if`(llflr
C. ~ f. I: E'I~ flOUS I tlc~ ; ; 1~.')fl I I II , L~?l' Mlil ~ Vi' ~ U 1 i ~lu f'~i n i!~~u ~ nUml~~~r ~~f (~,1~~. I nr~ Sf~<'+CP' U~ C~11_ ~~115 1 S
(~1JL LfIC 4il'Llti'~irl(`f ',Il,~u~~i?~'~1 C~1~1( Ifl~ rl."il.lr•t~t5 L~;t,:~ ~!~~• S'.~Ilci~ ~.lil;~tn~i ('1 y'~'..~1'S Or 7~J+,
C)~~ O~t~l,l'~ '~~f~~.) WI ~ ~ ~~vC ~I('IiC'f'fltt.' l~l~' `~:il'h` r~lf.l'~ t)f i1~IT~i1'1(1~11 ~~•'~ Ol'( l:lll( i1S t~/{)IC~i) :]O~J~~R1C~It
I'CSldent5; 5uhj, ~ i~~ (li~_~ Sti~iulr~~.ivn ~li~ii th~• ;~r~>;,c~•:r~' I"c~~~;~ritit~ii r'~u~r~~ .~Ill noi be
CC'11VCt'l~:c.i Cc, ft~SiuCntiE~~ Ilvlr~~~ ~;u,-~rt~•r~, .ti ,-sny tiiit~ in thr• 1~uLurr~; ,]n~' ~if;i~~Cf. t~~ th~~
Ini~~!c1Cp,lft!iCnt~t~ Curi~~il tt~~~~ rr•r,r~trt!irii~l,tt i~;n5. ~`.,rtc, Pc ,vliiS icrn ;fr)rir)
OIl f(1~ ~(,~j~ 1~ (~ll' fl)f'(_`~;OIfl~) ~~1'~UIUif"fl 6Y?~, ~1,i59,••,f .~`/ '~l~' fl~l I(7',dlfi~j V~11~~ .
li~rLS: r ~~~ . ~v ~~.~: ' '~~ ' ~! ii , ~.
CGt11"I~~liliil.!. ~~.~• E~, ;~r1Vl~~, il[i.i,.,T KI':G, ~f._iY~, Ol.!'~F., ')hl' _,11N
NQ[ S: C011~11 ;S ~C~~i_'r'._ : N~„Jf
/~uS:tlT . ~0'~"' I'» I `lii ~,,, . '~(~'!E.
EIR C~ITLGQP,1(.ALI.Y LX.I!1~'' - kE.,",f~','i_i,l I'~L;~ F'uliLll.. IIf.AP,I'+~'., i:E'~'~LY ;nLF E~";-rrRFP.iSE::~, It~C.
_~ 1;,'~. ~n,l,.rby Wtiy, Sunny~;.~lc, Cn `~~~~'J'l~; (Ownrr); D'1!J!\l.U
COt~(;ITIQt~A~_ USL 1~1VLS~ItE~.? CQI~P~'~Y~ 1:}cl3 .Avn_i,.ic~ Avcnuc, ~uit<~ ~:, tJew~ort
Pf f?~111 ~a~ . 1%~~;;5 l•~~,~c.h ~ Li1 '.1;'~,~,~ (Ayc~n t); rec;uc~~~ t i n~; ;~~. rm i ~~ i ~,n t~~ tSTAi.iL I S~i
---- ~. A E3 I I_Ll~OA?~ W{ TN ldA I VE.It 0~ i;~) 111 i~ I ~1~:;P! 5 I Ri~CTIiRAI_ if.TBACK,
(Eij HII~i'~;i;: :.IGN7, P,~l~' ,,..) RE~~_UI~;~:(~ SiEE:I. ;UPPORTS cm
Fropcrty cJcscrib~:~' ~` a rcc:t~~ncularly-rh~i~ccl c~.~~'ce1 r,f It~r~ci corisistinci of ~~(~prox~i^iately
j.'_~ acres locate~J .~t tiie s~~uti~uast corncr ~~f La {'al~ a Avenuc ~~~~! Stur~~,~rc1 `.~Lreet~ haviny
apNruxii~u~Ct~. front~~qcs of Zi~6 ~e~'t un ti,~~ sc>uth Si~Je c~f L~~ P~1~~~~ Avenue ancJ ;_'4 feet un
th<~ ~:as~ sidc of ;he~~~rcl Str~~c:t. Frr_E~.,rty G~r'e,ent~y C~a3S~iifir.,~i '"L (II,DI~~"T'Rl~l, ~ i"11 D~1
ZUt~E..
~ t W~5 noCeJ ttia t Lhe sub j^c [ i t.~i ~S r~i~ re cc~n i i nu~d f rc,m Lhe ~' I.snr. ~ ric~ Cornm t,s i on rn~et i nq Gf
Fcbruary :~, '•917, to ad~~ertise a-;ditic~n;~l ~IdIVCrS.
~~~~~~~
t11t~UT~:~~ f,ITY P Ll1M~~ING COMHISSIOtJ, Plarc:h il~, I'-?/ ,~7-If~~)
~~nu~ i ~~~wi~i u:.l 'r~n'r~ii i ~iu, iC~~f~ (;.,,~~: ~~~, :, ,f;
Nt~ c.~nc incllc~~t~~cl th~•~r ~~rr~i•n~~• i~~ ~>;,~~~i+,iti~~n tc; lhi• Sul,j<•c.t it~•ri,
Altfip~c~h thc~ ~t:~ff Re~pc~rt t~~ t~~~~ f'lnnnir~, C~~n•;~,i~,~.iun ~Ir~t~•~I 11arcl~ ~1~, 1",'?~ ~.a,~~~ nut r~•r~~i n~
:hc pub 1 i:: ,icar i~ ,~ i t i~, r~~ f~~-r~~~l tc~ .in,l ~ ~~i~!~~ ,~ ~,r~r t~~f t I,~• ~.~i i~~~ ~.~s..
~'~f. N01~JiLf~~ TIi~Hn~~sun~ f/`~'I~l."~Cl~~If1i~ T~l(' ~le`11~IUflr~f ~;1~)~u•~lft'~~ I~i•~~rl'r ,ii~. r~~~~'.iti~lt{~7 ~,l;l~`..'~'I'~'.~r~fl
~ncf St..~te~1 hc w;is rr~>~~nn5il,lr fur t~i~ uv<•r,311 ~~I~~nriinr~ fc~r tl,~~ ;~.,hj~~~,i ~,r~~~~~rty; 1!~,it tlic~
~11 V~)~)S~'~I S I~ I1 i.15 ~l fl I~ ~ 1)(.l~il'C1 L~Y (~l` ~ I fl ~ C I(Ili c)I1 ~~/ ~ rlfic~ IJ~l~~ C(1f1S ~ I"11( 1 r~~l ,~1 5 C~ I ni~c~ ti~c ~~.~~i ~.~ ~: ~I •1
;U~)t.~t~~ ~CWJ ~i.~;1i~f'., .
lllL. f'Ufil_I~ HLl1~,l!I(~- 41n', C1.~.1`,l.'. .
Ili S~.us~ 1on un5ui~~l r~~~jtlr~l i ~~cl tf~~~ {~rt~~,us~l1 , clur i n~, w'~i i~ li Crr ~,•~i ~..<. i r,ncr ,i~~r-I,~~ t i.~~l~ir
oLs~~rv~~tiun tf~~ic h~• ~,rc~,~~,s,~i r~~„r~•,~nti~~ ~~i(-.~t., ,~,I,.rt ,,,,, ,,,,, ,, ,, !. •! ~, i,~~ir:,'~It•
~,rece~ient •~ncl ~~~ n~~t.~•,I [h.-~t :it lh~ ~,uh li~. h.•..-ii~~i ~~n t~,~• l.r~n~~~l~~t f"~~,I' Co~~r<,u, th~~ F>r•tit.i~~i~~~r
incfic~terf t~~~~rr vc~ul~~ I~r n~ ir.~5~~n tc,r ~~ ~,i-~n .~1 ~r~v ~ ii~i . i:~;rn~i~,~,i~~i~ ~•i u.,i~~~,, ~~~~t;~;; t.hr~i
C~~r,~elc~t ~~olf G~,~~r~„ ~•+ris, vi~ ~t~l~• fr~.,n tl ~~~ fr~~~~w,+~- .,irl~u~~t ~,i~~nin~;. Hr, Thc~~,~~,5<,n ~~t~~tc•~f th~~t
ini{ustri<~1 !,uil~!in~~t; ~r„il~i !,~ huiit. cc~ ~~~,;truc' t~,~• ~,~irw, c>f Cn~,~fnt. fr c,ri La Palr~a llveiiuc.
Conimi<<,ic~ncr Tr~lar nut.~°~i, i n !ii~, o~~i~ii~ ~~~, t.l~,~t tli~• ;,r~~~~~ , ;~1 !~rily rc~4~rc ~,cn:c~l ~•cvrr~!~~ tc~r tlti;
~roc, rty ~.,r,nr•r; ~~hc~r;~~i~,~,n~ Nr. ~f~vr,~>~,~, n st,~~~~.,f nc> r~~vF,r~u~~ wr~; i~~v~,1v~~J ,-,~, th~~y wc•r~c
proviciiny :h. !c,~:~+ti;~n ,i, ~ l,incJn~•,~,.
In res,~~~,nsc ti~ ~~~~r5tic.~nin~~ I,y tii,~ Plannin~~ Ccrir~~i~~~,i~~n~ ttr, Tl~~~~n~.~,~;n ~t,,~~~~~1 ~cir h,~r~l5hi~~
w~-5 br i nr~ ~reat~~c1 hy th~„ n~~~~ i~i~i~.~~, li~ i.; I i,ui I~1 i r~~;~; w; ~rr <.~~n~ ! r~i~,. ion. ;~~~r~~ ~ C i'y !'~t tornc~Y
Jack. WI,iCc <ld'JISr.~J lh~~t ~~ `i,~r~!~,lii~~ ii ~.c~nnc•c!ion v~ilh lhr w~fiv~ r5 ~~~u~;( rr~l tr tO ti;i~ciei
elrGUm,tanr_ec, invc~lvin~; thr~ ;,ro~~c~rty i[s~~lf,
Ch~i rr~l;lrl Johnsc~n R!clC~•' l,'I C,)f?SCrVilt IO11 t~lil~ ~.f~~' ' i;fl ~;'~1~ ~l~ ~ ~1C ~ I'/1' ~ flOWI'VI ~~}(' Y/i)S U(lrl~~f? t0
su(~p~rt lhu c;ff- i t.c ,-;Iv~~r+. ~. i ~: wiii~_}, w~~ul~i ,~•c ti ;,r<~~.c:1,~nt.
(,<~Rlr~i~;5i~~nri ~'.Inr; c~uttri~ I Mr. Thc,i~~~,5~?n rr;..lrclin, rc•~c~c~,it ic~n ci'~ [hc ;tr,n :,~1 fe~::i 8wny,
IL ~•~a5 notcci Chat thc' bir~~ct~~r uf Lh~. ('I~~r;nin~ (Jc~~,~rt~~~•nt n;+c; ;Ir•tc~rminc,i th~~t Lhe prc>priscd
~icClviCy fcll witF,ii~ thc ~+~~f initiun ~~f St~~.tion ,.);, (,-as5 ', <;f t~ic Cit.y nf l~n:~heitn
Guidcl ines tu tfie Rec~ui r~i,•~~~ritti fc~r ai; E_nvi rc~nrnr~nt~l ITi{~tic_L i?e~~urt. ,in~i i5, thcrefore~
ca tec~ar i c~~ 1 ly ~:xc~i.~~~t f ror~ th~• rc~~~i i r~~r~cn t tc f i 1 c~ ~~n ! I i' .
Cexnrniss{cmcr ~Icrb~.t e~(fe•re~~; Rr_s~~lut~c;r~ tdu. PC7;-~' ,i~~ i~x~v:~.1 for ;r; ~~,~55ir~e~ anci ~~di>ptic~n,
tha[ thc 4nah~•i~~ C i t~; P 1~3rini r~-, l,or~~~i Ss'tc>n u~:,; h~~r~ ;-~, drrriy Pet i t ir~r, for Con~li c ional Usr
Fcrml [ Nu. 16u'; c,r~ ti,!• b~~c, i s, tii,~t t'r~~~ ~~ec i t. i~~ncrr di-~ nc~t ~i~~~x~ns[ra[~ that ~~ harJsh ~ i, a~c~uld
bc creatc~~ if th~, w~~i~~crs vr~~rc~ riot ,r~~nte:i; th~~t the petit~~~;~er c;i~l i;~~t cl~munstr~~tc~ tha[ the~
p~opoSerJ signin~~ w~ul~~ enh;inr.e th~~ exi~tin~; busii~c~ss activi[y; lh;+t ~~i+~ ~~cti~_loner inclie~ted
[O [flt' ~~clfifllfl~) l,Q~~tt1155!Ufl .9: ~)fCVlf)L15 ~)l~f)~1t. h(`;1fjf~~~15 ~.~llt tflt' O~f~CI~(` f~lt(11<]tl:rr l~O~f
CourSC for wl~ieh Ll~c: ~~rc~p~,s~~;l ~.~sr Is h~sin, sou~~hc. ~e~~ulci 5~•rve a5 i[, ~n+n aciverii~,lnc~ ~vl;houC
,~yniny; -~n~, furthcrr~~r~~, ,~pE;rov~~l of thc ~~ro~~~s~~l wc~u~d sct an ~~n~fe~~ir~hl-~ ~>r~~cedcnt fot'
futur-, requcs[s f:~r off~sitc r~~ivi~~tisin~~. (Se~, Rr_st~l~~tiun E3ook)
~+~ r~ l i ca l i, t.he forec~o i iiy resul ut i~r, ~:,3~ ~e~i hy thc~ f~l lc~~•ri n~; vote:
AYCS : COt~!•i I ~S I OIIE_ RS : fiAf rlf S~ UA~I I~J, HE EtEST ~ I~.I tdr, ~ MORLE Y. Tnl ~+P ~ JQII~IS~r~
~~OEti; COfIMIS;lOi~LRS; NOtiE.
ALSLNT ~ COMA11 ~;, I OI~CF;S ; NO~dl
3r~~~%,~~
~tII~IJi'CS, CIT` PL11;I'I~IIr, CUMNISSION, tlarch 1~~, i'f7/
77-~s~t
L I f~ NLGl1T I V(: ULI.L.l1Rf,,T ~ nt~ - f'~.;kSL I C til! 11R I'I(~ . M I l.H/1t L. f. A'IU ~1~1f~.Y II . D~!~E.(~ , 11; JG w'r.~, t.
.___..~._..~_.---•- ~ Uf~'lfl~l~~ 1~V1.'h~.lf'~ 1~~~~ifiii.~~~~ :,n ~~~>'~~rll~ (f\~.~n~•r~:~~ ~1~~Rni_~) ~.~~GINE_E:R-
I~LCI.l1.`,SIFIC/1"1'I01~ illi'~~ ~i1J Maii~ Strr.et, Il~antit~ctl~~i} Uc,~r:l~, f!1 ~I:'(~hf; (!1<~~~nt).
1~O. J~~- ) J- ~t P r~.i~~~ rt y~ic ,c r i 1,~~,1 r~ ,~ rcc.i ~ny~~ ~,~r l y-~~h,i~~~~.c1 {,~~ rcc l~~ti f an~l
___ ~r,n~i~,tini~ ~~f ~~~~rr,xin:~t~~ly ~).t~ ~~c.r~~ Ic,cn~c~~+ r~t thn suutli-
Vl~RIl~~1(.f. ~JO. ;")1: c~.~51 ~:c~rnrr c~f C'': f1c~~~ ~vriiu~• .~n~i !iut.wc~~~i Sir~~rt., I~~~vin~~
--~------ ---- a~~~~rc~xi~it~tc frc~nt;~~~~~~, c,f 11'~ f~~ct. ;~n Clic snutF~ ~i;i~~ r~f
~~f~'1f1~~1` 1~1'JCflil(` illl~~ ~ i~~ ~!'t'1 C+II lfl^ i'~IS1 +I~li` (~~ ~:ll~'~'n~0(~
St~~~•t~ .in~i furt.h~~r ~li•~,~.rit,~•~l ~s ~,j( Wcsl Or,ir~~~~• ~\vr~iu~~, i'r<~~~~~rt.}~ ~~i~•ti~,ntly c~~:,sil ie~l
~~`.;-I',-~i3~~)!;') (i~,!_'_,I~f~;Tll',1/Af,RItUL.l~,lilf~l.1 .'t)Nk..
Rf~~U~51E U C~ l'1;',If~ I~.I~TIU;7: f~5-Ji`,~' ~R;~Sfi~llif I;;l , ~' ~fl.t -F;1i11LY1 Z~1t~L.
RL~ZUl.`,'~~~U V/1K1/'~I!(.I : l~l,~,l'JL!. Jf~ ~,'•.) ~1lt:Itll;Fl Lf~l 111i~T1~, (t'~i tli~ll~l~l~1 F~;r~~~~i~-GI~ ('•~.~tl~Gl i! Tl4PCl;,
n,~~ Ir ~, ,~i ~~;;r~ ~~i ~i~ T;~l+i AI l. LGI~~ -iE,1~t-n'i !\r~ ~\f~:;' I~\I_ I~I~1IIIY~;'~'i ~ T~!
f`~T~EiI_15~i f',!~ I_')1:~ ~1'~'~ CU;~~~T~IiCi ~\ `:,;'if':I i-I~;;'11LY ~'F ;Ii~L~!(,E .
i:Ci U;1:' 1 n~) I l: , t r~~ f!~i• 1 I' I~Y~",~~I~C~• I I1 OC)~H)!~, I~ I~IfI (U l~il~~ i~,~~, jl'f, I 1!.t'I'1~
,'~ltl~~~uc~i, tl~~• ::l.iff ki~~,~~r~ ~:~~ n~,t r,~,~,) .,r tl~~• ;~~' li~_ ~,~~,~~rin-,, it i•; rcf,~rrr.~~l t.c, ,~nc1 m,-,c1c• t~
~art ~,f th;~ ~nin~.,t~,~~ .
11r. Uc~n L'~~r.rr, rri~r r~t~ci~tin~, t.h -~ ~i~;r:i' ~~~r t`i~: {~r;iti~~r~i~r, ,~~~~~~~,~r ,~: h~~1c~~•~• tf,~~ i'l;~nninci
C:~^,r~ i~;. i c~n tc, nn•,.~~ • r~~u~ ti i i r,i,~, r~•~;,~ ri~ ~,, t h:• ~; rc,t~c~s,i l,
TIiI f'U[tI.IL ftL~~~;l~~r, ~,~~t; CI.!~~! i~.
Ir res4x;ns~~ t~, ~~ur. .iunin~; I,y cii~ f'Itiri~in; (,~~~,~.,i~~,i,n, ~1r. i;~~lcr ~>ti~r.,l~itc~;l t~, ;?r~~vi~Jinc~ ~tn
c{,crablc ~utc~n,~~tir_ yar.~~;c ,i~wr u;,~ n~~r.
Ct~rtmi°~~~Ir.;n~rr !<Irin ~~ff~tr~~., .a ~,K~tinn~ ~;~~~.or~J~~J ;~y':~~~~~ri•,~~i~~i~<•r ~i~.r}~;t --ir~,i HOiI~I~J CC,R.(',II.U, tfi~t
L~11' ~~l~Jflt`I'.` C1~~' F~~a~flllll~~~ ~Of~.-11'~',I~ 1 hJi 1'~.'VIl'~/~•~1 Lfit: St,~)~1'(? ~`ff~~['i_[.~ l'~1f1115L1f1r~ ~~~f
approxin~.~tcly 'l,l, . ~ri• I",,.:iti~,l .~t thc ~s~~ulli~ ,isc c.~~rnc~~ nf (lran~ir• l1v~~~i~~~ r~n~1 IJu[wc~Ud Sircet,
~inJ fur'ti~er irscrif;rcl .i; '.~(; yle~;t Ur;in~~,~ rlvcnu~, in! ~;c~~.,, lit~r~•t~y r~cr,,r,r~n,' tc~ th~, City
~.UUIIC'. .` ~.fll• C t tY ~)f nn.l~:~' Ir'~ [~lali ~l ~it`I~i~i 1 VC i)[.'1:~~?f~ji lt)fl 1 fl)Ill t~l(.' f'Pf~U1 f1'I1C!lT i C(J PfC~lclfC
an envirur~~ncr~lt~l ir~~.~ct rc~~~~rt ;;c ~~~~~rr, ~~.1 (ur l.hE~ tiu;,j~•~t {~ri,j~~ct or th~ h,~si5 tf>>C thcrr.
wc~ulJ b4 n-~ si~~ni`i~[~r~t ir,~.liviciutil o; c.u ~It;t_iv~~ tl;ivc•r~,~~ eiivircininLnt:~l ie;~act since similar
SIf1:,~C'f~iltll~Y rt'.Sl,~l'IILI(1~ t:t'V1,•~'~~if'k,'lt ti~lt'f1:UI1~~S C~~~Iti ;)i~C7~Cl"t;~ tC7 Lfll' ~l(~f'L~l i'~:YOSS nt"3ill~~.
Aven~.ie ~nd t~~ t.~,u ra5t, s;iutii, ~ii~r tn ifi~• wc~~;t ~~rus~; Nutwr,o~.~ `.;trec~t; th3t th~~f~> wi 11 be no
inclividu~l ~,r curiul~tiv~ ~~.ivrrs~-- i~,p~ic; c>r, i'i~~ ~~nvir~,rii,rnt ~fuc to thr a~,proval cif this
~~Cl~~itlVf: U~'C,~d~<~tl(ill ilfll.!` ~'lt, nfl,.lflf'll~l l~Cfl!.f'1~ ~~lil ~~C51t:(1.?tt'S :{1~, <~U:)ji'('.[ (11"OK)Pfty fOr ~UN'~
denSiLy rc',iilcn;:i~il l~in.f ~.15,'°; Cnrn,~,i~.~'i;i;r~~[c: ti•~ilit C~lr~• ~)t'O7(~5~i1, ~,r~<1 th~~ In?[i~~i `.itudy
suhmitted f~y lhe r~etitionur in,;i~ate; ~~c> 'sic,nillcant a~lvet`~,~~ ir~E~~~ct; an~~ Ch~at th~~ Nec~~~tive
Ur:~l~ratio~; 5ubt,t~nti.~tin,~ tl~e for~:.,c~ir~~ fin~fiu;s i5 on fiie ir [he Office c~f Lhe Planninq
Departmcn[ at C:ty liall.
Cc,mr i„1~;ncr P:i nc~ uff~rc~.; Rct,~~lu' i~,n N~. PC.IJ-(.~ .~!iu i~x~v~~d f~>r i[5 ~as<,aqc an;i a~lopt iun,
tha L thc /1n;~hc: i r~~ C i' P 1 ~nn i n~~ Co~nr, ;~~ i~~n ~ioc ~ h~.: rchy rc~urr•~ n~l to th<~ C i t y Counc i 1 t~f the
City c~f llnaheiin th~it Pe:ici~~n f~r Re l.~ssification !~~, jC-7I-3'• ~>c approve~', sut~;rct to tf:e
~ntercle~artu~ent,~l Lanrnitt~:e reccxn~,ir•n-.f~ ;~~ns. (;ee I?esoluCiun i~c~<~kl
3/14/7;~
P11NlITV_S~ CITY f'Ll11~P~ING CQI1MISSION~ P'orch 1~~, 1')17 %7"1~~2
RLCLnS51f IGI171QIJ NU. J(,-J7~j8 /11~D VARIANCI. N~). 2')12 (Cc~ntin~~~~f)
Ori rc~l i cr,) I, thc f~~re~~~r~iny r~su1 ut i~>n w~~s {~ns'~c~~1 hy thc• fo) I~winc; v~tc;
l1YE`'~: (.U1111~;'~IONf.Ri: fll~ftN1_5, L'/1uli~, iII~REI;T, h;lll~;~ N~f'LfY, 7~L/1f., ,l(?HtJSQIa
r~~~E.s : ~r~-v~ i 5`~ i(1Nf. f;S : ~J;l;lf
1~i~5-_'J1: C~-~~11551(l~~kJiS: NOr~f.
(,Ofil~ill SS I Of1C !' h.l I1~~ (ff f/` 1'!'i~ F~~l"i(' ~ II~ I ~ifl ~~(~ . ~'~, ~/~l~r ~ :Illt~ ~.Y)VC,~ ~f>1 1 1`~ 41~~5',~1t)1• ~llll~ i]l~cl~l L 1 Jfl ~
ih~~t inc /1n~ihcir~ L(ty f'I:innin~~ Lo,~u~~i~,~,i:,r~ Jci,,•, lie•re~(~y ~~r,~nt f'rtitir,r f~~r ~l,~ri;incc N<~. !'.~1%,
yr~~niiriy tt~c~ r~:q~.ic~,tc~l w~iivrr ~,t lh~• cniiiirnun~ lr~t ~~i,i(h ~~i~ Ih~~ b~~~,i~, tl~,,t llu ~•,r;~pt~sc~1 lc~t.
wicl!h~ ar~~ c.urnp;~r,ihlc t~~ ~ xistin~, ftS-J;'~~ lut ~~i~lths in thc' SUI~~~'~:t. , ~!"PA ..ilc~n~~ Orr~n~~c
/1vt~nuc; uranl in'~ tf~,~. r;~yuc~„c~~1 i.~~ilv~~r r~f tiic i.iinir~~.~m fr'nnt-<~n <~~~: ~i~~~~ ;~~tl~~~cb c~n ti~c basis
that thr.~ ;,ro~~<~s~~~i ~inr;,~,~~ i~; lnc,~tr~l un ,~ c.orn~•r l~~t h,ivin,~ (ivr• Gx~t~nti,~l ~>n-t,trr~ct {,,~rkin!1
c~,:~r~~~, in ,~~luiti~,n tc, th~• rr~>t~~~;r~J ~,;~r~~~~c ~;~,+~cr.s r~n,~ , th~•rcfcirr, twu c~n-~,~t~~ s~~<~c~~s ,i5 are
Cypi:ally ~~ruvl~t~~c; ii~ h~• -;~r~~~~~ ~,~~th~i~l. (dri~,~~a~,+~:! ,~r~~ ~~nnr~.~~tis,~ry; ,in,1 t1~,~C t'~• {~clitirrn<~r
St~~111~c1~(!t; ~~) ()CUVII.IIII'_) ~Ifl 114'1•1~1t1~1 •I~ll~~i~~ .-lii~. ~jrii.... ,::,.~ ;~~.,..'r; ~r Yr~t~li~~ f~l~` f!'1~111••. l~
w,~ivcr i~f thc• rcc~uir~~m~~nt t!~,~t. ,~I! l~~[~ r ~~,ir-<,n ,~r~ ,y rt~ ri,~l hi•ihvr;ry ~,r~ tl~r h.itii5 t.li<~l
in~~ RS-j?~1U lnt~. trc~nt-un Or.in;~~ Avt~
r
.rist nur ,~n.1 t~,~ ~~ro~~~~~.~_~I r~r~,i ~~~ n~_~• w„ul,f ;,~~ „ri~t~tc~f
.
.
townrd Nut~+r~~::~1 ;,lr~rt, th~•rr,f~y ~I~ ~r~~,~~,~n~; ~,c,~~~nti,~l n~~~;,~t.ivc• i~,,p~~t~, f~rr~~, ~„~i l artrrial
hi~~l~w;iy; s~~l,j~•ct tr~ th~• Intr•r~'~~;,,~rlnu~ct,i! L!N~~r~ittr~~ r~~~_~m~~~~n~f;~;i~~r,,:. (`.;~~e~ ';c~,~~lu[i~~n liooE.)
~~fl f0) ~ C.cl~ ~ ~ ifl~' fU(F'.~~~1~1~. ((•'.Ui I1~ I~~fl ~~/;l~i ji~'S'.~U~~ ~~`~ t~~iC <<~~ I~14/Illc; VO~~':
AYCS : C01~1111 ;`.~ I Otlf.';`., : i±~,K;l;_:> ~ U~'~V I i, , rt~ rll;:, i, F; ~'l(~ ~ t.t~~;tl.l Y, TUL~f; ,,li)"!!l~~''IJ
NOE.> : :.OMti I S`., I OrJf. f~.; : i~U!If_
~1(~Sk ~i1 . CUJ1til'., ~ IulJf.f~,~ . 'aii ;[
:/11~/77
~
i ;
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ Merch 14, 19~7 17•Ia2
RECLASSI FICAT ION N0. 16-7j-38 ANO VAAIANCE N0. 2912 (Contt nued)
.....~.._.....,.~._. ~...~....._~.~.._~.~
On roll call~ the foregotng resalution was passed by the followtng vote;
AYES: COMMIS510NERS: BARNES~ DAVID~ HERBST~ KING~ MORLEY, TOLAR~ JOIINSON
NAES : CC1MM I SS I ONE RS : NO~IE
AB~~NTt CUMMISSIONERS: NONE
Commfssioner Kiny at`fered Resolutio~ No. PC17•61 and .noved for its pASSagn and adoptian,
that the A~ehoim City Planning Cammisslon doos hereby grant P etitlan forVa ~lance No. 2912~
granting the requeated waiver of the minimum lut width on th e bas(s th~t the p~oposed lot
widths rre camparable to existing RS-7200 lot widths (n tha s ubject areealang Orange
Avenue; granting the raquested wa(var of the minimum frant-on garage setbec k on tlie bASts
that the proposed garage Is 1~cated on a corner lot having five p~tentiel on-streat parktn~
spaces in add(tlon to thc proposed yarag~ spoces and~ therefo re~ two on-51ke spaces as are
typically provlcfed in the gerage setback (driveway) are unneeessary; and thet the pe~titioner
stipulated t~ prnv(ding an opereLlr uutanatic garage door opcncr; granting the rpques~~ d
walvor of the requ(rement that all lots ~ear-an an a~terial hlghway on tl~e basis thet
nxisti~g RS-7201) lots fronC•on Orange Avenue and thc proposed resl~lence would be oricnted
toward Nuhvood Str~eet~ thereby decroasing pocentia) ne,yatlve impncts from sald arterta)
highwey; subject to tt~e ~nterdepartmontal Committee recumnendations. (See Rasolution Book)
On roll call ~ the foreyoing resolutlon was paSSed by tiie fol lowiny vote;
AYES: COMMISSIONER5: BARNES, DAVID~ fiERBST~ KIt~G~ MORl.EY, TOLAR~ JOHNSON
NOES: COMNISSIONERS: NONE
AE3SENT: COMMISS IONERS : NONC
3! 14/ 77
,f.~~
MIt~UTES, CITY PIANNING COMMISSION~ March 14~ 1977
ENVIRONMEN7AL IMPACT
REPOR'i N0. 1 ~
RECIASSIFICAT ION
N0. 76-77-40
VARIANCE N0. 2918
TENTATIVE MAP OF
TRAGT NOS . y % ~4 ~
974~ AND ~GO1
r~•~83
- PUUI.IC NEl1RING. DEV:.~JPER: ANAHEIM NILLS~ INC., 384 Anaheim Nilla
RoaJ~ Anet,~i~~~, CA g2;I0L. Ci~CIt~CCRs I.INp L UILlCRUO ~ i~~C. ~~;1;
Hunt(nglon Drivc~ San Marino~ CA 91106. Property d~scribed ea an
irreyulerly-shap~d parcel af land conststing of app~oxlmately 3U
acres loceted at the northeast corner of Canyon Rim Road and
Fairmont Boulevard~ having approximate frantages of 995 feet an
the noreh side of Canyon Rtm Road and 200 feet on t he eas t gide nf
Felrmont Boulevard. Property presently classifled RS-A-43~0~0(SC)
(RES I I~CIdT I Ill/AGR I GULTURAI, - SCEN I C COP,R I DOR OVERLAY ) ZONE .
RE(~UESTCU CLASSIFICATION; RS-NS-2'1~00~(SC) (RESIDENTIAI, SINGLE-
F/1M I LY N 1 L1.5 I UE - 5CEN I C C6RR I OOR
OVERLAY) ZQNE.
REQUESTEU VAR tANGE: WAIV~R OF REQl11REMEt~T TNAT ALL LOTS REA,R-ON AN ARTERIAL 111GHNAY~ TO
ESTABLISIi A 30-LOT SUBuIV15~ON.
TEI~TATIVE TRAC1' REQUESTS: TRACT 1~0. 97~44 - 11 RS-11S-22,Q00(SC) lots
1'ftACT N0. ~J45 - 10 RS-115-22,000(Sl:) lats
TftACT N0, y601 - `.~ RS-HS-22~~00(SC) lots
~~o one appeared in opposition to subjec[ petitlons.
Although the Staff Rcport t~ the Planning Comm(ssion dated Ma~ch 14~ 19J7~ was not read At
the publlc h e ariny~ it is refcrred t~ and made a part of ~he minutes,
Mr. Phillip Bettoncou~t~ Vlce President of Puhllc ATfairs~ Anaheim Hills~ I~c.~ the
petitioner~ ap~eared before the Rlanning Commission .~nc1 revicwed the exhlbits displayed on
t;~e wall~ not ~ny the proposed planting of an avocAdo urchard with(n the Southern Californta
Cdison Conpa~y casement to the north. He described the pr~posed proJect~ stating that the
property was i~ounded t~y ~ Southern California Edison easement to the no~thvu~st; that one
access point was propose~. ~eing on Canyon Rim Road; that they anticipated an averagP dai ly
traffic (ADTj of N0; cars to bu generated by the sub.ject three tracts; that during tne
dasign stages of this project~ the minimum lot frontage requfren~ent was 15 feet. however,
the C i ty Counc(1 had j ust chanyec' sa i d r~qu i remer~ t to 2Q feet and they Nou 1 d st i pu 1 ate to
maki ng that ad,justment on the pl ans for the four pro,~osed f 1 ag lots; that regard i ng the
perimeter fence requi ren~ent, I~e suggested that a more appropriate Incatfon for the fence
would be a[ the top of slope and they would stipulate to constructing the fence as an open
wall at the top of the slope in questian; that regarding the recommendatiore af the Traffic
Engineer fo: traffic signal(zation~ they would stipulate to their fair sha~e, or 25$ of the
total cost of the traffic siynal ization at Fa(rmont Boulevard and Canyon Rirn Raad; and that
tl~;s project represcnted tf~eir ft~st adventu-e toward preserving agrtcult~rt.
THE PUBLI C KEARING WAS CLQSEU.
Cortmi ss i o~e r Horbs t i nci i cated that i t was h i s unde rs tand i ng that the ag r t cu 1 tura 1 preserve
under the Ed i son easement had al ready been ded i catecl to the County i n perpe tui ty; whereupon ~
Mr. Bettencourt stated that under the ortginal Nohl Ra~ch Agricultu~al Preservs Cancellation
Ayreeinent wi th the County. there was a simultaneous dedication of 450 ~cres wlthln the
easement area as publ ic open space; that they had presented to the County and EMA
(Environmental Management Agency) a request to relinquish the ease~nent claimover 13 acres~
substituting an easement ~~rhich would clearly permit the planting of the avoeado trees which
3/ t 4/77
..
~A ,
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNiNG COMMISSION~ M:~rch 14~ 1~J7
,t
r~-~aa
EIR N0. 196, RECLASSIFICATION t~0. 76-77~40~ VARIANCE N0. 291$~ AND TENTATIVE MAP Of TRACT
~~OS. 97~+~~, 97~~ A_~bo~ (Continued~ ,"_,_____,_,.__,_
he felt they could do In any avant unde~ their ~pen space eaaement rights; hov+ever~ they
wanted to insur•e thetr access to the groves slnce security of tlie ,roves was at Is~ue; that
their request befor~ the Board of Supervisors wvuld be considerecJ in one wee k and, although
they were nc+t su~e of the outcome~ they had received some preliminary endors eenent from
County staff n~embers whc, feit the request was conslstont with thc County's in terest In
preserving agriculture wherover possible and without the responsibiltties of m~intenance.
In response to questinntnn by Commissioner Nerbst~ Mr. Beetencourt state~ that the proposal
was not to allow the keeping of animals In the subject tract~ and they would contro) this
throu~h tlielr own CC~H's. Comnissi~nc:r flerbst. then noted tnHt thc Z~ning Code permitted
harses tn the RS-?.Z,000 Zone; hc yuestioned the tntc~rnittent trait system th r ough the
proposed proJect~ which the people (n the Mohler Drtve area would want to uti lize, end he
noted that it was not approprtate to have the pt~vcd strcet serve as thc conn e cting trall;
anJ that he would suggest thaC eascr~enis far thc tra(ls bc provtded adJacent t~~ the street
ln th~ proJect~ especlally since the Codc would allow anirnals.
In response to further yuestioning by Lom~-issioner Herbst, Mr. Bettencourt s t ated that ehe
irall~ as proposed through the proJect~ would serv~ as iinkage between the tr ail system to
the east and the Four Gorners Trail until such tirne as there werc additional grading and
development opttans that w~uld allow a development 1(nk to the narth; that th e tralls were
not a part of their marketlny program for thc proposed tracts and the avocad o o~chard itse.lF
was a signiflcant financial risk for the proJect; and that to make the sort of investment
being sugyested by Commissioncr Herbst would be for nothing more than a temparary
convenlence trail bctween two regional tralls, unt(1 development of the terr aln to the ~orth
would permit a further 1(nkage to the nortl~ acroas thc Ed(son easement area.
Camissioner Herbst indicatecl that sidewalks~ or walkways without concrete~ on one side o~
the street only might be consicJered since thcre would be no children in the area who would
need a place to ride their skateboards~ etc., if they were not allowed to ha ve hors~!s; a~d
that the proJect should provide fo~ the necessities of life.
Commissioner Totar dlsayreed witf~ chc suygested walkway noting that, if a wa lkway was
provided adJecent tu the street. resicients would have to drive over it to pu E their cars in
the garages; and that he did n~t feel tl~at the proposec! t~ails lfnk was necessary through
the subject property sincc the affected residents wouid not be using it. Cds~missioner
He~bst noted that he disagreeJ with the proposa) to disallow horses on the s ubject property
since it would ~ie surrounded by horse property in the hill and canyon area.
Ccxmsissioner Tolar then sugge~.ted that the trai Is 1 ink abut the subJect property on the
periphery~ not(ng that he disagreed that i[ shouid bc through the proposed develoament; and
he questioned why some type of easement fcr the traiis link was not conside ~ed originelly
a~ong the outer edge of the property ~ather than going th~ough it.
Mr. l3ettencourt explained that the terrain might n~t permit implementation of Ctx!miss(~~ner
Tolar's suggestion; that the convenience linkage was proposed in order to r~ assure the
Trails Ccxnmlttee that the development would not preclude access between the two reglonal
tralls; that he did not feel that anyone could find fault with Anaheim Hills , Inc., for the
Investment they had made in the interest of the equestrians since there was ~o other
property oMrner in the Canyon ar~a tF~at had a complete pubiic riding trail sysCem throughout
thefr entire ranch; that they had even construcCed an equestrian center whic h was being
expanded; that it was thei~ marketing Judgment that there was sufflcient eq u estrian estate
housing opportunities in the Santa Ana Canyon and~ while horses would be pe rrnitted by the
3/ t 4/71
~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING C4MMISSION~ Msrch 14~ 1y77
71•185
EIR N0. 196~ RECLASSIFICATION N0. 76-77-40~ VARIANCE N0. 2918~ AND TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT
NOS. 97WW. 9745 AND 9601 (Continue_d)
~~
zoning an the property~ t~re keeping of I~orses was not Included In their plans for the
subJect property.
Cortmissivn~r Tola~ no ted that he would ayree in concept wtth what Cammissionpr Herbst was
trylny to proJect~ tn that Mr. florst Schor~ Presidant of the Rid(ng and Htktng TrAils
''~x~mittee~ had recommended to this bc~dy tliat it look toward al) tract developments in the
hiil ond csnyon erea to obtain dedlcated easements far trails, especially where the tracts
abutted a reyian.,l ur convenience tra() snd sald ~ecomnx~ndation was certainly appropriate in
the sub,je~C proposed development; that lt would seem arpropriate tnet~ at ths time of
grading~ the b to 10- foot wide trails could be prov(ded around the proJect~ rather than
through (t~ if posstb le f rnm an enyineerlr.g standpoint; and that he dlsagreed that provlding
the co~ventence tratl lln k would be a gre~t e xpcn se; whereu~an~ hr,. ~uesti~ned who wauld
mpintafn the treils.
Mr. I~rttencourl slateJ that tI~C C1ty's ca~r~il[~~~ent c~ ,~ceriiin~ malntenance of the trails was
uncertein and that th ere was probably o legitimate difference of opinlon between the Council
Members regarding th e level of interest involviny the Parks And Recreation ~ivision that the
thrust of hls own comments regarded whether or nat they w~re going to pe nnit horses o~ the
proporty; that the Commission could have no quarrel with the fact that they were proposing
linkage between the reylo nal ~rails~ howevcr, the Comm(ssion was suggesting that~ from a
design sxandpoint~ t h e linkage shuuld be on the outside of the proJect unless it would be
used by the proJect i tsetf; that. in his opinton~ the change in grade to provide the trails
outs(de the proJect wc~uld creat~ a mor~ massive c ut of the slopes which the developer would
like to evoid; that a trail at the back of the slape adJacent to the avocedo grove might
hove possibllities~ however~ the Trails Canmittee had submitted a letter which was lncluded
in the EIR indicatin g their endo~sement of !hc trails linkage as proposed -- good~ bad or
indlfferent; that the pro~osed linkage did not c.onstitutt a backbone or crucla) tra(1 ~nd
thera was another way of connectiny the two regional trai ls whereby a more elaborate deslgn
for the linkage miyh t be cailed for.
Car,rn(ssioner Tolar indicated that it appeared~ without thc ~tnkage~ that the equestrians
weuld have to yo all the way to weir Canyon to connect the two re<~ional trails.
Mr. Dettencourt further stated that they had not ruled out the pr~ssibility that the County~
in granting the avoc a do easemenc~might ask that there be a trail crossing beyond the purv(ew
of the tract and thro ugh the avocado grove taking approximately 3A0 squrre feet away frpn
the tree planting are a; and th~t hc was defending thc judgment of ihe Trails Cortmittee in
their letter endors(ng thc Fropased [rail linkage.
Cammissloner Tolar inquired if the Trails CoRmittee was awa~e that thE proJ~ct would
restrict the keeping of harses by CCbR's; whereupon~ Mr. Bettencourt stated ',e could not
answer that point.
Commissioner Herbst noted tliat since the Zoning Code wou'.d permit th~ keeping of horses by
right on the subJect property. the maJority of the people could change th~ CCbR's.
Discusslon ensued cancerning the enforcement of the proposed CCbR's, during which Depucy
Clty Attorney Jack 1~lhite stat~d that sai~1 document woulJ be in effect a~d enfo~ceable f~r a
certain number of years~ following which tirn~ anci by a vote of approximately 7~ti of the
property owners in f avor. the CCER's could be voted out.
Commissioner Barnes note d that the project Nas very close to what eve ryone wanted for the
area. except for th~ trails linkage which would require that the horses travel in the
3/ 14/ 77
}.
:~.
M I NUTES . C 1 TY PLANN I NG COMM I SS I ON ~ Marcl~ 1~i ~ 1 y7!
77-186
E 1 R NO. 196 ~ RECLASS I F I CAT I ON NO. 76-77-~+0 ~ VAR 1 ANCE N0. 291 £!, A,ND TENTAT { VE hlAP OF TRACT
NOS, 9744. ~745 ANp 9601 ~Cont l ~ued)
~ ~.... .~
st~eat; that th~ pavement wes not good for horses and~ alttio~~gh there would not be much
au tomob 1 lc traf f 1 c~ she fe 1 t some prov ( s lans for ~n easemen t of f the pavcment shou 1 d be made
alongatde the street. Mr. Bettencourt took exceptlon~ stat~ng that such an easement would
~~strict the ablltty of the homeowners to plant their yards next to the streets and~
addittonally, the tralls through these tracts would be seldom used, Commissloner Tolar
i nditated that the easPment alongslde the street would not look good tn the tracts;
whdreupon~ Commissioner Barnes noted that such condltions ex(sted in Nic,den Nills and had a
good appearance; and sha conceded that tlie appearance of sueh trails might depe~~d on the
p~ice of the homes. Nr. Bettencourt stated that (f the peaple in the subJect traccs were
ab 1 e to keep ho rses of the I r rnvn tliey wou 1 d be more than w i 1 1 I ng to I( ve w i th the
eondittons; f~owever~ to sEe only four or five horses a week on the treils would be a maJor
eompramise for the subJect tracts tu ma{:e; and tt~at it would not be too much to expect the
cqucstrtans in thts arca to walk the horsF:s through Ilummingbird Circle.
In response to yuestioning by Cortmissloner Barnes~ Mr, ~ettencourt scated that in his
eo~versati~ns wtth ;he County r~yardiny the avocado yrove the Co~~-~ty s[aff had ind(cated the
possibi lity that thc Board of Supervisors would requlre the cralls linkage ovar the g~ovg;
and that ~n easement wos prop~sed wi th the subJect tracts to provide access for the t~ai ls
through two of the lots. Commissloner Herbst noted that the easement might have more
appropriatel~i been proposed al~ng tlie lot lines to avoid bisectiny any Uf the lots; and he
sugyested th~t the easement ~inE: yo alnng the lot lines separating 7ract P~os. 9~01 and 9745;
whereupon. Mr, Bettencourt stated that, in n~der to put a bench on th~e downslape there would
have to b~ a ~nore sev~re cut tha~ prc~pos~d on the sida of the slope; and tt~at li. appeared
there should be some cumpromisiny to minimize the gradiny far the t~acts. Commissioner King
added that if changes were made to the trails linkage~ said rev(slons would nced to be
eleared through the Ridiny and Hikiny Trai Is Comm(ttee. M~. Settencourt clarified that his
i nabi 1 i ty to speak concerniny the Commt t tee's review and ap~~roval of the propostd tre! 1
1 inkage was due to tfie facc that he was not present durlny satd review; and~ ti~eref~ore~ he
did not wtsh to uwke any clalms to represent the Committee's fcel ings In the matter.
Ghairman Joh~son noted that tl~e horse trai Is should not completely design p~o}ects in the
Santa Ana Canyon; wherrupon, Commissioner Tolar inc~uired whether Anaheim 1ltlls, Inc.~ wnuld
be grading the subject prope~ty and establ ishing the pad areas and then the property sold to
a deveioper. Mr. ~ettenr.ourt answcred in the affirmar.ive, scatiny tl~at there had been only
o~e sa 1 e of raw 1 and i n Anahe i m H i 1 1 s-~ to the ea 1 dwi n Cornpany -~ and they had subsequent 1 y
determined that Anal~eim Hills~ Inc.~ was unable Co adeyuately control the performance of the
homebui lders~ compared to when Anaheim Ni lls, Inc., did the bulk grading; that the City of
A~aa~e(m was doiny the bulk yradiny for the proposed tracts which wer•e serving as a borrow
site for the fill for Fairmoret Boulevard; that their policy would be to continu~e to sell
property witl~ an appruved tentative mep ther~on; and that the only landscaping they would be
doing would b~ as required and necessary under the Grading Ardinance for eroslon concrol.
Gommissioner Tolar noted that he wanced to be able to look t~ a certain individual if the
praposed tracts were nut develope~i as represented~ especial ly with respect to the contour
g~ading; that~ although the Grading Ordinance was a vast improvement over p~evious
requirements~ it stlll needed improvement; however~ Mr. Hors~ Schor had ~ece~tly taken the
P 1 ann i ng Co~nn i ss i oners on a tour i n Anahe i m H f 1 1 s to rev ( ew the con tour g rad i ng be i ng done
a~d the addit(onal steps being taken over and above the ordina~ce requirements to 9eave the
hills and canyon in a more natu~al-looking state. Thereupon, he questioned whether the
p~oposed tracts wou 1 d b~ bu 1 1 dozed or 1 ef t most 1 y natu~a 1.
3/14/77
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ M~rch 1N, 1977
77~1$7
EiR N0. 1~6~ RECLASSIFICATION N0. 76~77-40~ VARIANCE N0. 2g18~ AND TENTA7IVE MAP OF TRACT
Nos. 9744, q74y ANn g~o~ ~r,onctnu~~~
...._..:........ _._._. ~
in response~ Mr. Baktencnurt stoted that the proposed grading would be in accordancc with
tha ordinence and a yradlny plan submitte~J; and that hls representations were obvloualy tied
to the conditlons established for the t~act maps. Ne further sta~ted thot to mttiyat~ the
Conmission's concerns regardiny the r(Jing tralls through the proJect~ he would sttpulate ta
Includl~y a provision in the CCbR's prohib(ting th~ keaping of horses fn the sub,Ject tracts~
and In the event that tht actual developer of th~s tracCs allows the kceping of F,orses~ then
revised plans would bc submttce~l sl~o~eing a more substanttal tratl system than proposed.
Comniastoner Tolar furti~er ~ot~d that Anahelm Ntlls, Inc., had suggested a couple of years
ago thet topograph(c dtsplays for proposed developments would be made to show the grad(ng
wh(ch would occur~ since the scaie drawings presented (n the praposals were more d(fficult
ta rel~te t~ An~l visualtxe thP nnd ~PSUIts of the gradin~, Thcre4~~+on~ Mr, Bettencourt
stated tl~at a topoyraphic d(splay would be presented wlxh the next (tems to be co~sidered on
tliis ayencle, and that the grading i~ connection with the subject tracts was not considered
slgnOflca~t; that du•iny the yeAr that he had bcen associated w(th Anaheim Hills~ Inc.~
there h~d been many othen c~xne developers tn the area wt~o had not submitted topographic
dlsplays and I~~ felt sometin~es that Anaheim Hills, Inc.~ was t~eated more "equally" than
other developers. Corm~issioner 1'olar notcd that he had no quPlms w(th the proposed density
and felt from the representations being made that the propos~l would be a very n(ce pro}ect~
however~ hc was stlll concerned chat the end product would be as he was able to envision from
the maps and representatior~s.
Thereupon~ Mr. ~ettencourt statecl tt~at if the Gortmission was not satisfted with the Gradiny
Ordinance~ all he ~ou1d repr~sent was that tt~e Enc~(ne:ering Dlvision yave the submitted
enyineered drawlnys r~~eticulous scutiny~ said drawinys having been prepared in accordante
with the ordlnance; that there were soine additiona) subtleties which they had added to
further enhance tfie yrading of the proJec,t~ as indicated in the Unit XV Groding Plan
presentcd by Mr. Norst Schor at an e~rlier date~ said subtleties being aver and above the
requirements; that in the proposed tracts they would be providing some small landscaped
nodes ~n top of the lots to make the lots less angular; and a curvll(near ~iJewalk would be
provided ad~acent to Canyon Rirn Road at the toe of the slope. to match the existing
sidewalks in the are~.
Discusston of pad elevations ensued, duriny which Mr, Bettencou~t stated that the Canyon Rim
Road Intersection was at approximately 73y fect.
In response to questioning by Chairman Johns~n~ Mr. Bettencourt confirmed that the maJorlty
of the yrades in the tr~cts would be fabrtcated by a bulldoxer. Thereupon~ Commissioner
Nerbst indicated tl~a[ the fabrtcation should allow the proJect to have the rtding trails
connecte~, noting that the clisconnected link~ge bothered him stnce the rr.sidents would not
be ~!!:,wed to have horses but would have them coming down in front of their homes on the
street. which did not make sense,in hls opinion; that he would venture to say that the
aiding and Hiking Trails Committee was ~ot aware that tt~e tracts wnuld not be allawed to
keep horses and/or that tlse Planning Cortmission did not know for sure tl~at the Cortmittee
c~nsidered that point. Commissioner U~rnes noted that she did not feel the Committee cared
about the areas whlch kept or did not keep horses~ as lonc~ as there was a connecting link
for tfie tra i 1 s sys tem.
Commisstoner Herbst reviewed the Environmental Impact Report, notiny that there was a ve~y
long dissertation included, with pictures~ on the horae trails and how gacd they we~e in the
area~ and yet the proposal was bastcally disJoining the t~ails; and that the schools were
3/14/17
,
,~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, March 14~ 1~77
77•lab
EtR N0. 1~6~ RECLASSIFICATION N0. 7G-7/-40~ VARIANCE N0. 2918, AND TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT
NOS. 9744~ y~4~ AND ~601 ~Continued~
_~..._
discussed in tiie ~eport with a notat(on that thn hl~h school tn the eree wns saturated to
the ultimate, howevcr~ no alternatives to che I~ck of sthaal facilities were discussesd.
I~ response to the forego(ny~ Mr. Bettenc~urt statGd they hrJ yiven the school sttuatl~n the
"offiGe" ("yave at thc offiG~") sinGe thcy had donated three elementary schoal sites~ one of
whlch they had urlginally given to thc Gity and the Clty tt~tn yave to the Urange Unified
Schos~l District~ with Anahelm Hil's~ Inc.~ thpn p~ovidiny replacert-ent park acreage; that the
lanyu~ige cancAined tn the EIR was nat unlikc what would bc received frcxn any bullder o~
~.~oject in the subject are~a as far as irnpact was concerned~ and the School District had the
mor~l and legal obliyatiun tU ~ravide schools for thc students coming from Anahcim tlills
heca~st uf the donations which had alrc:ady been rnade by them to the Uistrlct; and that ho
knew r.f no further demands b~in~ mAde ~n thi< <I~vE~ln~,er ~nd ~~ss~^n~~i that th~ students would
be accomrtadatecJ.
(n ~esponse to questioning by Comm(ssiuner Ileri~st~ Mr. aettencourt stated that other
developers had not contr(buted t~~warcl the schoal facilities the same as Anaheim Hills, Inc.~
haJ; tiiat the Ulstrict had implen~:ntcd ~n a~zsessment in the City of Orange on e volunteer
basts in which they neyotiated ar a~~rcement with the developcr to provlde for the impact on
the schuols~ but he diei not feel that sucf~ an assessment wc~uld be rele.vant tc~ the proposed
tracts since Anaheim Nills~ Inc „ had already 9iven substantially.
C~nmissioner Tolar nated tfiat apprnximate:ly two-tt~irds of the property taxes in the Caunty
went toward SCIlU0I5 anJ lie ~iisagrecd tl~at any additional taxes or assessmants should be
required uf tl~e consumers or developer~ for scho~l faclli[ies; an~i, furthermore~ he wanted
the re wrd to show that hc felt. thc County should havc thc deut tu provide schools.
Coom(ssioner Herbst in~ticate~i that he wante.d the rec~rd to reflect thet the school
f3ei 1 i ties werc discusseJ in tliis ~~ubl ic hcarfi~y.
~ffice Englneer Jay Titus adviseci that thc `~late.r Div(sion had s.ubmitted a letter toa late
for i~clusion in the staff report~ said letter requestinry ti~at a cc~ndition be included for
~~
the subject tracts~ That tlie Jeveloper of the subj~:ct tract shall enter into a Special
Facilities Agreement with the ~ity for water facilities in the High Elevation System, as
required by Rule 15B of the 4later Utility Rates, Rules ancl aegulations," Mr. Detxencour~
stipul~ted to tl~c fore,yoinc; condition, provicled that it was a r~qui~ement prior t~ the
issuance of a bulld(n~ permit.
Assistart Planner Joel Fick sugyeste~ a further sondiiSon for Tract Mo, 31~+4, "Tt~at lrs
accorda~ce with Counctl Policy No. 53u, Lot No. 1 in Trac! No. ~374h shall provide for a 40-
foot minimum buildiny se[back untess otherwise ~~aived by the City Council." Nir. Bettencourt
indicated ac~reement with said conJition~ if the lot depth as measured from Canyon Rirtiftoad
was less than 120 feet.
Commissioner Morley offered a motion~ sec.onded by Comnission~r T~la~ and MOTION CAR.RIED~
that Envtronn~ental Impact Report No. 196 (Supplementir,y Master EIR Na. ~0) for the propased
development of 30 residential I~ts on the 22.~-acre site generally boui~ded by Canyon Rim
Raad~ the Southern California Edison casement (at Fairrtiant eoulevard) and the CitylCounty
bour~dary~ havlr~c~ been considered this date by the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commisston and
evide~ce, both wrltcen and aral~ having been presented to supplement said Draft EIR No, 19b,
the Planning Commission finds that (a) p~;entfal proJect-generated tndivtdual and cumulative
adverse impacts have been reduced to an insignificant level due to tht estate-type low-
density and open space buffering proposed and (b) the sub~ett Dtaft EtR No. 196 co~forms to
3/14/77
~
~~.
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING CQMMISSION~ Marci~ 14. 1~77
77-18g
EIR 1~0. 196~ RECIASSIFICATION N0. 76-77-40, VARIANCE N0. 2918~ AND TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT
NOS. 9~44. 9145 At~O ~GOI (Canttnucd) ,
~ w ir ~
the City and State Guideltnes and the Stata of Catifornia Envlronrnental Queltty A~t; and~
based upon thc foregoing informa~ion. thc Plenntng Commisslon does hereby recommend to the
Clty Counctl of the City of Anoheim that tl:ey certify safd E4R No. 19G ta in compitance with
sald ~nviro~mental Quality Act. Coples of EIR No. 1y6 are on flle (n the Planntng
Departm~ent at City Hall.
Commissloner Morley offered Resalution N~. PC77-62 and moved for Its passage and adoptton~
that the ~nahelm City planniny Commission does hereby reca^mend to the Glty Gouncil of the
City of Anahei~n that Petttlon far Reclassif(cati~n No. 1~-17•40 be approved~ subJer,t to the
Int~rdepartmental Committee recammc~~dations. (5ee Resolution Boak)
On roll ca~tl~ thc forcgoing .-esolution was passe~~ hy the fnllc~wing v~te:
AYES : COf1H I S S I QNERS : BARNtS ~ uAV I U~ ~iERBS'~, K f NG ~ MGRI.EY ~ TOLAfi ~ JQHt~SON
NOES: COMMISSIQNERS: NUNE
A~SENT; GQMMISSIONERS: NONE
Commissloner Morley offered ResoluCion No. PC77-63 and move:d for Its passage ancl adopt(on~
that the Anahelm C(ty Planning Cammissi~n does hc:reby yrant Petition For Varlance No. 2918~
grant(ng the raquested watver of th~ rcquirement lhat all lots rear on an arterial highway,
on the basis that the petitioner demonstrated that a hardship would be crcated if said
waiver was nct granted~ due to tl~e configuration and topagraphy ~f the property; tt~at the:
same waiver has been granted in simila~ circumstances~ a+nd that tl~e petltioner has Indicated
a mtnimum 40-foot struct~ral setbatk along Canyon Rim P,mad w~uld be maintalned if the lat
depth measured from Ganyon Rim Raad is less than 120 fe~et; and subJect to the
Interdepartmental Committee recommendatlons. (Se~e Resolutlon Book}
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES~ DNVID, tiERBST, KI~~G, MORLEY, TOLAR, J011NSON
NOES: COMMISSIQNE:RS: NONE
A6SENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
Cortmissioner Herbst furtlier questioneJ tl~e intent of tt~e developer wlth regard to tche
keeping of h~rscs and the inadequacies of tl~e prapose~l trait linkage; whereupan. ~0r.
BEttencourt stlpulated that~ if the intent of the developer was not to permit the keeping Qf
horses within the proposed tracts~ a deed restrtction would be so inciuded in thE: CC6R's and
recorded concurrencly with the final t~act map; however. if the intent of the de~veloper was
to permit the keeping c~f horses. revlsed plans would be submitted prior to apprc,val of the
final tract nwp modifying the access and design for the proposed riding and hiking trail
through the tracts sa that said trail would not 5isect lots or utilize street r~ight-of-way.
Cammissioner Herbst indicated that the forsyoing stipulatian was acceptable to give the City
a"ha~dle" on the trails aspect of the proposal.
Canml~sion-er Mariey offered a motion. seconded by Cvmmissioner Tolar and MOTIAN CARRIEG,
that the Anaheim City Planniny Commtssion does hereby find that th~e praposed subdir~ision~
togetl~er wlth tts design and improvement~ is consistent vrith the City of Anaheim's General
Plan. pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5; and does, therefore~ approv~ TGntativc
Map of Tract No. 9744 for eleven (11) RS-F1S•22,000(SC) lots. subject to the following
conditions:
3/14/77
Ms
~
MINU7E5~ CITY ?LANNING COMMISSION~ March 14~ 1977
77-1g0
EIR N0. 196~ R~CLASSIFICATION N0. 76-77•40~ VARIANCE N0. 2918~ AND TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT
NOS. 9744~_ 974~ AND 9601 (Continued~
- - - ....-,.....
1. That the approvel of Tantetlve Map of TracC No. 9744 is grantecl subJect to th~
approv~) of Reclassificatton No. 76-7~-40.
2. Thst shoulci this subdivlslon be developed as more thfln one subcllv(slon~ each
subdivtsion ther~of shall be submltteJ ln tentAtive form fo~ approval.
3. That in accordance with Clty C~uncll pollcy~ a 6-foat opnn decorative wal) shel)
be canst~ucted on the top of the slope alony the sauth propcrty line separeting Lot !Jos. 1~
and 5 throuyh 9 from Canyon R(m Road an~ along the west propcrty llnc separatiny Lot Nos. 10
and f 1 f rom Fa 1 rrmn t Iiou I evard. except that for corner Lot No. 1~ sa i d wat 1 sha I 1 tx•: s tepped
down to a helyht uf thlrty (3~) inches in the ~equired front yard setback and excep: that
pedestrian open(nys shall be p~aviJed In satd wall(s) wherc cul-dn-sACS abut the planned
h(ghway right-of-way line of th~ erterial h(yhway. Reasonablc landscapfng, includ',ng
irrigatlon faciltties~ shall be tnstalled in the unc~mente.cl portion af the arter(ai highway
parkway the full dEstance of said wall; plans for said lancfscapin-; to be submittec to and
subject to the approval of the Superintendent of Parkway M~intenancp, Followtng
installaCiun anJ ar:ceptence~ tl~e C1 cy of llnaheim shal l as~sume th~• respansibi 1 ity For
malntenance of salcl landscapiny.
4. That all lats within this tract shall be ~ervP<. by undcryraund utilities.
5. That a final tract map of sub~ect property sh I be submitted to and approved by
the City Council and then be recorded in the Office ~he Orange County Recnrder.
6. That the covenants, conditions~ and restr~ ~-~~s (t:;F,R's) shall be submttted ta and
approved by the City Attorney's Office priur to C? ~~.:~ci! opprc.~al of the final tract map
and, further, that the approveJ covenants~ c~ndic • a~+.~ ~~~c~strictions shall be recorded
concurrently with tfie final tract map.
That, if the intent of the dav~~loper is ~~~. ,~ ~,-~nft the kPeping of horses within
this tract, a dceeJ restriction shall be s.o in~' .~~ ~~~r CCEH's and recorded concurrently
with the final tract map; however~ if the int~ ~^~- ueveloper is to oermlt the keeping
of horses. rev(sed plans shall be submltte~ ~~~ -~~ a;,proval of the final tract map
modifying the access and desiyn for the prop~~s~-~• -~+~~, ~nd hiking trail through this tract
so that said trail does not bisect lots or ut~ -~•y~e-~t ri~ht•af-way~ as stipufated to by
the petltioner.
7. That prior to filiny the final tract ~~•, ~n~ applicant shall submit to the City
Attorney for approval ~r denial a complete sy~~r~,:~ ur the proposed functioning of the
operat(ng corparation includiny~ but not limitr~ "~~. the articles of incorporation, bylaws,
proposed methods of managemen[~ bondiny to insurti ~~~aintenance of cortmon property and
buildings. and such other lnf~rn-ation as the Ci~•~ Aitorney may desire to pr4tect the City~
its citizens~ and the purchasers of the project.
8. That street names shall be approveW '~~ •~e City Pi .~niny Departmen[ prior to
approval of a final tract map.
9. That the ~rner(s) nf subjec,t p~operty s~all pay to the City of A~aheim the
approprlate park ~nd recreation in-lieu fees as Jetermined to be appropriate by the City
Council~ sald fees to be pai~i ac ttie time the building permit is issued.
10. That dra1-,~,~e of saic! property 3he+11 ue disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the
City Engineer. If, in the nreparat~~n cf the site~ sufficient grading is ~eyuired to
necessitate a yrading ~ermit, no work an grading will be permitted between October 15th and
April 1Sth unless all ~equired off-site draEnage factlities have been installed and are
operative. Positive .~s,surance shali be ~rovided tt~e City that such dralnage facilittes wiil
be completed pric~r to Octo~e.' l:~tt~. Necessa~y rtyht-of-way for off~site drainage facilities
shall be dedicateu to the City, ar the City Councii shall have initiated condemnation
proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall be borne by the developer) prior ~o the
commence-nent of grading operations. The requlred Jrainage facillties shall be of a sixe and
type sufficient to carry runoff waters ortyinatiny from hlyher properties through said
p~operty to ultimate disposal as appruved by the City Eng(neer. Said drainage fgcitlties
3/t~/77
~, • ,
MINU'I'ES~ CITY F'LAN~.:,'~ ''^".MISSION~ MarCh 1~1. 1977 77-191
EIR N0. 196~ RFCIASSIFICATION N0. 76-77"40~ YARIANCE N0. 2918~ AND TENTATIVE MAP OF TRAC'T
NOS .~ ~~ ANd~ ~,..~Can t i nued
shall be t.ha first item ~f c~nstruct(an and shall bc completed and be functtonal throughout
the tract and fram thc downstream bouiidary of the property t~ the ultimate polnt of dt~rosal
prtu~ to the issuance of any final bullding inspections or occupancy permtts. Orainage
district reimbursement agrecmonts moy be maJe avallable to the devolopers of said proparl:y
upon tS~ei r request.
11. Thet grading~ exeavatian~ and all othe~ construction activities shall be conducte
in such a manner so he Santar~A'nazRiver bysstorm'water originatinglfro tor9flowinghthroughect
betng carrted into t
this proJect.
12. ~f permanent street narnP signs havc not been installed~ temporary street name s c~ns
shall be installed ~rlor to any ~ccupancy.
13. Tliat ft~e hydrants shall be installed and charged a~: reyuired and dctcrmined to be
necessary by tl~e ~f~af ~otshshallehaveAatminimumilottwidthmofC20 feetf asrstipulatedatonby
14, That any g
thc petitioner.
15. That the property vwner(s) of subJect trACt and Tract Nos. 97k5 and 9601 shal
jointly particlpate in ttie paynx nt for the installation of traff(c signals at the
intersection of Fairmont Boufevard and Canyon Rim Road~ the amount o~ said jolnt
partlcipation to consist of 2~~ of the total cost for sald signalizatio~ (the total eost
being approximately S40~000 a~d the joint parttcipation bcing approximaCely $10,000); and
that sald payment sf~all be macle pr•ior to the issuance of a building permit or at such
further t(me as ttie City Cauncil may grant~ as stipulated to by the property awner. The
exact cost of tt~e signalization upon which to bese tt~e prnp~rty owner(s) dollar ~nit of
participetton shall be de[ermine~l by the Clty Traffic Enylneer at the tirtiie of pay
16. In accordance witt~ ttic r~quirements of Sectian 1$.02.~~~7 pertaining to the initia)
sale af residential homes in the Gicy of Anaheim Planning Area "'B", the seller shall provide
eath buyer witli written inforrnatlon concer~ing the Anaheim General Plan and the existing
z~ning wittiln 3Q0 feet of the boundaries of subject trACt.
1%. That the developer ~f the subject tract shall e~ter into a Speclal Facilities
A~~reeme~' with the City of Anaheim for water facilities in the Hiyh Flevati~n Systemroval of
required by Rule 15a of thc Water Utility Rates~ Rules and Regulations prior to app
the flnal tract map, as stipulatP~ to by the petitioner,
Comrnissloner Morlcy offered a mo~ion~ second~ed by Commissioner Tolar and MOTION CARRIED,
that the Anahetrn City Plan~iny Commission cloes hereby find that the proposed subdivislon~
together witt~ its desiyn and improvement~ is c:onsistent with the City of Anaheim's Generel
Plan. pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5~ and does, therefore~ approve Tentative
Map of Traet C~o. 97~'S for ten (10) RS-HS-~.2~OOU(SC) lots, subjec..t to the follawing
conditions:
1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract I~o. 9745 is granted subject to the
app~oval of Reclassification No. 76-77-40.
x, That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subd(vision~ eaGh
subdivision thereof shall be submitte~i in tentative form for approval.
3. That all lots within this tract shali be serv~d by underground utilities.
4. That a final tract rtwp of subject property shall be submicted to arnj approved hy
the City Counc(i and thrn be recordeci in tfie Office of the Orange Cou~ty Recorder.
5. 7hat thc covenants, conditions~ and restrictions (CCbR's) shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to City Council approval of the final tract map
and. further~ that the appro•:ed cov~r~ants, conditions~ and restrictions shall be recorded
cnncur~ently with ehe final t.•act map.
3/14/i7
., ~
MiNUTES~ CITY PLANNI~~~~ COMMISSION~ Merch tk~ 1977
77-192
EIR N0. 1y6~ RECI.ASSIFICATION N0. 76-77-40~ VARIANCE N0. 2918~ ANU TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT
NOS. 91k4. 9745 AND 9601 (Conttnued)
- ~~.. . ... ..~._._
That~ If the intent. of the develaper (s not to pe~•mit the keeping af h,~rses within
this tract~ a deed restrtctinn shall be so included in the CCbR's end recorded concurrentty
with the flnal trect map; however. if the Intent of the developer ls to pe~mit the keepln9
of horSes~ revised plans shall be subrnltted prior to approva) of the final tract map
modifying the access and desiyn for the proposed flding and hik(ng trail through this trect
so that said trall does not bisect lots or utllize street right-of-way~ as stipulatcd to by
the petittoner.
6. That prlo~ ko flltng the flnAl tract map. the appllcant shall submit to the City
Attorney for approval or denlal a complete synopsis of th~ pr~pased 1'unctlontng of the
operating corparation includtng~ but not limited to. the a~ticles of incorporatton~ bylaws~
proposed methods of management~ bonding to insure matntenance ~f common property and
butidings~ and such other informatlon as the Ctry Att~rney may ciPRir~ to p~otect the City~
its ciliaens, and the pu~chasers of the praJect.
7. That street n~mes sti~ll bc approved by the C{ty Planr~iny Depar[ment priar to
approval of a ftnb) tract n~ p.
8. That the owner(s) of subjecc prop~rty shall pay to the Ctty of Anahetm the
approprlaCe pa~k and recreation in-lieu fecs as determined to be appropriate by ths City
Counctl. said fees tn be pald at tt~e time the buildtng permit is issued.
9. That dratnnge of satd property shall be disposed of in a rnanner satisfactory to ehe
C(ty Engineer. If~ in the preparation of the stt~, sufficien[ gredinq is requlred to
necess(tate a grad(ng permtt~ no work on grading will be permitt~d between Qctober 15th and
Apri) 15th unless all required off-slte drainage facilities have been installed and are
operative. Pos(tive Assurance shall be provided the Cfiy that such drainage facilities wlll
be corr~leted prior tu October l~ih. Necessary right-of-wav for off-site drainage facilittes
shall be de~icated to the Ciiy~ o~ the City Council sh.~sll have tnit(ated condemnat(on
proceedings cherefor (the costs of which shall be borne by the deve~oFer) prior to the
commencement of grading operations. Thc requi~ed drainage factlities shall be of A size and
type sufficient to carry runoff waters oriyinating from higher ~roperttes through said
property to ultlmate disposal as approved by the City Engineer. Said drainage facilities
shal) be the first item of construction anci sl~all be completed and be functional throughout
the tract and from the downstrear~ bouncfary of the prope~ty to the ultimate polnt of disposal
prtor to the issuance of any final build3ng inspections or occupancy permits. Drainage
district reimbursement agreements n~ay be made available to the developers of said property
upon thetr reyuest.
tU. That grading~ excavation~ and all other construction activ(ties shall be conducted
in such a manner so as to minimizP the possibiltty of any si1C originating from thts project
being carried into the Santa Ana River by storm water oriyinating from or flowing through
this project.
11. If permanent street name siyns have not been installed, temporary street name signs
shall be installed prior t~ any occupancy.
12. That flag lots shall have a minimum lot width of 20 feet~ as stipulated to by the
petitioner.
13. That fire hydrarsts shall be installed and charged as required and determfned to be
necessary by th~ Chief of the Fire Departm~nt prior to commencement of structurai framing.
14. That the property owner(s) of subJect tract ~~d 7ract Nos. 9744 and 9601 shall
jof~tly partiGipate in the payment for the installation of trafftc sig~als at the
Intersec*_ion of Fairmont BoulPVard and Canyon Rim Road~ the amount of said ~olnt
particlpation to consist of 25$ of the total cost fo~ said signalizati~n (the total c:ost
being approximately $40~000 and the joint parcicipation being approximately $10~000); and
that said payment shall be mad~ prior to the issuance of a building permit or at such
further time as the City Councl' mey grant~ as stipulated to by the property owner. The
3Jt4/77
~~
MINUTES~ CI1'Y PLANNING C~MMISSIpN~ March 14~ 1gJi
J,
77•193
EIR N0. 196~ RECLASSIFICATION k0. 76-77-~0~ VARIANCE N0. 2918~ ANp TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT
NOS~ 9rh4 `~45 AND g~~Contlnued)
exatt cost af the slgnallzatlon upon which to bese the property owner(s) doller amount of
parttcipatlon shall be determined by th~ (,Ity Trefflc Enginc~r at thc tlme of payment.
15. In accordance with the requlrements of Section 1Ei.02.047 pertaining to the 1~~(tlal
sale of residentlal homes In the City of Anaheim Planning Area "fi"~ the seller shall provtde
each buyer with wr(tten (nform~tion concerning thc Anahcim Generol Plan and the cxistfng
zoniny within 300 fecst of the boundaries of subject tract.
16. That the develaper af the subject ttac~ shall enter into a Speclal Fecilities
Agre~ment with the City of Anahein- for water faciitties In the Nlg~i Elevati~n System. as
required by Rule 158 of lhe Weter Ut11Ety Rates. Rules and Regulations, prior to approval of
the final tract map~ as stlpulated to by the petitioner.
Cornnissioner Morley offered a n~ation, seconded by Cortanlssloner 7olar and MOTlON CAP.P,IED~
that the Anaheim City Planning Comm(ssion does hereby find t~-.[ the prnpoaed subdivision,
togetlier wiCh Its desiyn and improvemcnt. is consistent with the Gity of Anaheim's General
Plan, ~ursuanc ta Government Code Sectlon ~G473.5; and c~~es. thereforP~ approve Tentative
Map of Tract No. 9601 for i~lne (9) aS-NS-2?.~OOC+(SC) lots~ subjec[ to the followinq
conditlons:
1. That Che approval of Tentative Map of Tratt No. 9f,~J1 (s granted subJccC ta tFie
approval of Reclassi!'IcAtion No. J6-71-40.
2. That should this subdivlsion be cieveloped as more chan one subdivls(an, each
subdivision thereof shall bc submittecJ in tentative forr~ for app~oval.
3. That all iots withi~ this trac[ shall be served by uncierground utilisies.
4. That a final tract map of subject property sf~~ll be submitted to and approved by
the Ciiy Council and then be record~ef in the Office of tt~e Qranye County Recarder.
5. That the covenanls~ conditions~ and restrictians (CC~R's) shall be subrnitted to and
approv~~ci by the City Attorney's Office prior co City Council appraval of the final tract map
and, further~ that the approve~J covenants~ condition5~ and restrictions shall be recorded
cc;+~currently with the flnal tract r,~ap.
That. if the intent of the de:eloper is not to permit the keep(ng of hors~~~s within
this tract, a deed restr(ction shall be so included in the CCEk's and recorded concurrently
with the final tract map; hr-wevere if the intent of the developer is to permit the keeping
of horses~ revised plans shall be suSmitGed prior to approval oN the final tract map
modtfyiny the access and design for the pr~posed rtding ar.d hiking traEl through this tract
so that satd trail does not bisect lots ar uti112e screet right-of-way~ as stipulated to by
thie petitioner.
6. That prior to filing the final tract map~ the applica~t shall submit ta the City
Attorney for a-+rroval or denial a complete synopsts of the p~op~sed fu~cttoning of the
operating corporation including, but ~ot limited ta~ the articles of incarporati~,n~ bylaws,
proposP:; rnethods of management, boncling to insure maintsnance of comr~n property and
bui~~ings~ and such other information as the Gity Atkorney may desire t~~ protect the Gtty,
its citizens~ and the purchasers of the praJect.
7. That street names shall 5e approved by the City Plan~iny Department prior to
approval of a final tract map.
8. That the owner(sj of subJect property shall pay to the City of llnaheim the
appropriate park and recreatton in-lieu fees as determined Lo be apprapriate by the City
Council~ said fees to be ~aid at the time the building permit is issued.
9. 1'hat dratnage of sai:~ property sha11 be disposed of in a manner s~tisfactory to the
City Engi~eer. If~ In the prep~ration of the si:e, sufficient grad(ng is requtred to
necessitate a gr~~dir~g permit, no work on gradiny will be nPrmitted between October 15th and
April 15th unless all required off-site draina~e facilities have bcen ;~stalled and are
operative. Positive assurance shall be provided the City that such drainage facilities will
3/14/71
~.
MINUTES, CITY PLANNING COMMIS510N~ March 14~ 1~77
7)-194
EIR N0. 196. RECLASSIFICATION N0. j6-77-4A~ VARIAMCE N0. 3918~ AND TEN~ATIVE MtAP OF TRRCT
NOS. 974~~~ 9745 AND_9601 Cantinutld~ ~_
be completeJ prior to Octobe~ 1~th. Necessary rlght-uf-way for off-site drainage facilitles
shall be dediceted to the City~ or the City Council shall have inltiated condemnatlon
proceedtngs therefor (thc costs uf whtch s1~a11 be borne by the developer) prior to the
commencement of graciing operations. The required dr~inage faciltties shali be of a siz~ and
type sufflclent to carry runoff waters originot(ng from h15he~ propertics through said
property to uitimate d(sposel as approved by the City Engineer. Sa(d dralnage facilitie:s
shall be the first item of construction and shall be completed and be functior~al :hrouc,h~~ut
the tract and from tl~e downstream boundary of the propcrty to tf~e ulttnete pc~lnt of disposal
prior to the (ssuance of any final buildinq insnecttons or occuponcy p~rmits. Dralnage
district ~eirr~bursement agreem~nts may be made available to the developers of said propcrty
upon the(r request.
10. That grading~ exc~va~tion~ and all athcr const~uction activities shall be tonductad
In such a manner so as [o minimize the possibility of any silt originating from this proJect
being tarrted tnto the Santa Ana River by storm water originating from or flowing through
thls proJcct.
11. If permanent s[reet name signs have n~t bcen installed, tcmporary strcet name signs
shall be installed prlor to any occupancy.
12. That Flag lots shali have a min(mum lot wtdth of 2Q fcct, as stipuiated ta by the
petitiorser.
13. That fire hydrants shall be tnstalled and charg~ed as reyutred and determined to be
necessary by the Chicf of the Fire DepartmenL prior to commencement of str~ctural f~aming.
14. That the property ervner(s) of subJect tracc and Tract Nos. 9744 and 9745 shall
jo(ntly partictpate in che payr~-ent for the lnstallation of traffic signals at the
intersectlon of Fairmcmt Boulevard and Canyon Rim Road, the amo~nt of sa(d Joi~t
parkictpatlon to consist of 2~$ of the total cost for said s(gnalization (the total cost
being approximately $40,000 and tlie join; participation beiny appruxirtiacely 510~000); and
that said payment shall be made ~riar to the iss~ance of a building permit or at such
further time ss the City Counci) may grant~ as stipulated to by the property owne~. 7he
exact cost ofi the stgnal{zatl~n upon which to base the property oevner(s) dollar amount of
particlpation shall be determined by the City Traffic Engineer at the time of payment.
15. In accord~nce ~.~ith the requirements of S~ction 18.02.047 pertain(ng to the inttial
sale of residentia) homes in the City of Analieim P1anRing Area "B"~ the seller shall provide
each buyer with written information concerning the Anaheim Ge~eral Plan an~ the existing
zon(ng wfthin 300 feet of the boundaries of subJect tract.
16. That the develon~er of the subject tract shali enter into a Specia) Faclllties
Agreement w3th the Gity of Anaheim for water facilities in the Nigh Elevatton System~ as
required by Rule 1;B of the water Utility Rates. Rules and Regulations, prior to approval of
the final tract map, as stipulated to by the p~titioner.
3! 1 r-177
~ .~
MINUTES~ CITY PIANNING COMMISSION~ Merch 14~ i977 77-195
RE~ CESS: - At 3:Oy p.m.. Chairmen Johnsan declareci a r~ce~s.
R_ECONVEI~IE - At 3:15 p.m.. Cheirman J~hr~son reconvencd the mectini~
w(th al) Planniny Canuntssion^rs being present.
CUVIRONMEt~TAL iM('ACT - PUBLIG NEl1RINf,. DEVELOPcR: ANAIiIIH IIILLS~ INC.~ 3~0 Ana~~clm Hills
REPORT N0, 197 Road~ A~eheirn~ f.A 9.'-i30G. E~~GINEER; VTN CONSALIU.41'ED, iNC., 2301
Cem~us Urive~ Irvine~ C!1 y2GG~~. Pr~pert~y ciescrlbc:d a~ an
RECLASSIFIGATIO-J irregul~rly-shapeci porcel of land consisting of ~pproximately 100
N0. JG•77-41 acres locate~ becwren Imperial Nighway anJ Anah~im Nills Road~
hav(ng a FrontAgr. ~f approximately 109y feec on c-ie east side of
Tk~~TATIVE: MAP OF Imper`iol Hi~t~way~ ~~a bcinq locnted ~pproxirne~tel~ ~2; feet south of
TkAGT N~S. ;)/4y~ tlie centerline of Nohl Ranch Road. Property present.ly classified
9Jy0~ )J51 AND RS-A-i~i~~(1~(SC) (RFSif-ENTIAL/ACP.ICULTUPAL - SCE"!IC CQRRIDOR OVERLAY)
9152 ZOciE .
REQUESIED CLI1551FICl1T101~: R5-HS-10~0~)0(SC) (ZCSIUEt~TIAL, SINGLE-
FAM I LY tl I 1.151 DE - SCE'~ I C CORR I DOR
OUERLAY) ZONC.
TENTATIVE TRAC7 REc~UkSTS; 7RACT N0. ~ji~~3 - ~~ (t5-11S-tU,n~~Q(SL) lots
TRACT N0. ~~J>~ - 7~ RS-HS-1(?~Q00(SC) lots
Tftl1CT N~. yi~l - 4~ RS-NS-10~0~0(SC) )ots
TRnCT IrO. 9J:i? - a2 RS-NS-tn~non(SC) lots
No one indicated their presen~e in apposition to the subJecc items. (t~ote: One person
appea red I a tc r on i n the me:e t i nr~ i n oppos i t i on .)
A1 though the Staf f P,eport ta tl~c P lann i ny Comrrt ss ion ~fated Ma~cli 14, 1977, was not read at
tt~e public tieartng~ ic is rcferre~ to and made a part of the minutcs.
Mr. Phillip aettencourt~ Vice President of Publis. AfFairs, Anaheim liills, Inc,~ the
petitloner~ appeared before thc Planning Commission and revicwed thc proposal~ noting that a
topographic model was being pres~ntr_d for cc~nsideratl~n in view of the fact that i.51S~000
cubic yards of earth was proposed to be yraded on the sitG; that ap~roximately 80,°', of the
site was outside thP Anaheim city limits. Fendiny approval for annexation by the City
Council~ however~ all uf che sitc was within tlie City's sphere of influence and the pendiny
ani~exation had been approved unanirnously by lAFGO in October, 1976; that the proposed tracts
were in ful) conformance and then son~e with the Nillsioe GraJing Ordinance~ the addltional
features including the use of a minimum of split-level pads in ordar to reduce the grading
and also to give a more natural form to the siope top, and thc smali mini-parks or ra~nd
landscaped areas wlthin t'he r4adways. to add variety and green space to the p~oject; that the
proposal was in co~formance with Genera) Pian Amendment No. 142, AREA Ili~ Exhibit 2-b
modffied, and was consistent wttf~ lhe interests and desires of the r~taht;orhood; that the
three specimen r.~ees proposed to be removed in thP proJect would be rpplaced on a 2:1 ratio
as in previous projects by this Jeveloper; that the najority af the common or open space
wculd be n~alntained by the community associatiun, however~ the median (sl,nds were proposed
to the City Parkway Maintenance Division far maintenance by the City in accn~dance with its
maintenance standards; that tliere were s~veral flag lots in the proJect~ which they wculd
stipulate to providing with a minimum lot width of 20 feet~ r~ther than 15 feet as indicated
on the submitted plans~ in accordance with the revised lot fruntgge standards; that he
believec. ~he deveioper's only objections to the conditions outlined in the Staff Report
3/14/77
~
fiINUT~S~ LI~'Y PLANNING COMMISSION, MAfCfI 1~~ 1977
)7-i9G
EIR N0. 197~ aECLASSIFICATION NQ. 76•77-W1. AND TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NOS. 9749. ~75~~
~751 AND 9752 ~Contl~uedl
relatnd t~ the traffic sfgnal participation~ for the intersectlons of Imperlal Highway/ Nahl
Ranch Road and An~hcim Nllls Road/Nohl Ranch Road~ becnuse thay felt tl~at 50'L of the total
cost for the slg~aliz~tio~ woa excasstve for one developer and was not aupported by the EIR
dacument; th~t the proposeci proJect aould not take eccess from Imperlel Highwey~ however.
they knew of no assessrnent which had baen levled nn the adJacent development which ws' befng
ent(~e1y served by seid intersection; that~ noting the public uae of the 1n~tersectlons, some
attentlon should be patc~ to public street facilitles. and constder~tio~ far 254
particlpation by the cleveloper; tl~at the intersectlon of Anaheim Nills Road end Nohl R~nch
Kaad pro5ented a ~Ifferent set af clrtumstances ct~an the imperi~) inte:rscctiuii~ since
presently the daveloper would be present(nq plans for the proposed comrnercia) site end
multiple-famlly site alonc~ Nohl Rencl~ Roed~ grad%~g plans having already be~n epp~oved for
seld dcvelopmenc~~ and that the intersectlun stgnalizatian for Ant~l~~im Nills ancl Nohl Ranch
Roeds shuuld be a condi tlon of the tw~i future developnrents mcntioncd to rnare approprlately
balance thc development costs and e~uities involved.
Assistant Planner Joel Flc.k noted a torrection ta thr, Staff Repc~rt~ page G-c~ paragraph 2-b~
and indicated that thc petit.toner was proposing to establish a"228-1ot" rather than a"227-
lot" subdlvlsion; and that the unit count af ?ti~ remained the same. Mr. Fick recapped the
breakdown on the proposed trACts~ as fol~ows~ noting tliat tf~e numbcrs differed from thosr
advertised:
Tract No, y7k3 ~~ 1ots. including 4 camx~n lots
Trect No. y/5~ G9 ~ots~ Inclu~tr~g 2 cammon lots
Tract No. y751 41 lots~ including 1 conman lot
Tract N0. 9152 6'l lots~ Inctudinq 3 co~man lots
Totals 228 lots~ including 10 comrtxm lots
Nrs. Jan Hall. 545 Tumbl~wecd Road~ Prrsident of Westridye Noe~cowners Assoc(ation. app~ared
before the Planning Comnission ancl statecf that, althouyh st~e did not ht~ve any qua~rel with
Anahelm Hills~ Inc.~ per se~ she dld want to cali attention to the menncr tn w~iich the
schoo) populatton was counted f~r the subject tracts; that the hcxneowners were concern~ed
about the impacting of the schools~ as the proposed proJect woulcl generate 53 more students
for the high school which was already crowded; that there werc no calculations made as to
the cumulative impacts on the schools~ taking into consideration that at {east 1~000 homes
were already approved for construction in the subject area and were in some stage of
development to be accupled soo~er than the subJect proposed tracts; that~ by the tlme the
proposed tracts wPre constructed, the p~o~ect would be far more impacting than ;he subject
EIR indicated; that at some time development might have to be slowed down until the school
sltuatlon was attenJed to; that tl~e Orange Unifted School District was extremely vague in
terms of mitlyating measures, and only alluded to boundary changes and busing~ with no firm
solutions to the problems; that thP ~:~menwners ob)ected ta not having more information ir
the EtR docume~t about Hhere and rri~en the stude~ts would be accortmodated; and tt~at she w~~ld
urge the Planning Commission to pay more attention to the impacting of schools.
In rebu[tal, Mr. bettencourt stated that ttie comnents from the Schoo) District reflected a
ty~ical answer~ whether the development was in Anaheim liills or in 3ome other portion of th~
Santa Ana Canyon; that he would only reiterate that he bel'~ved Anahelm Hills~ Inc.. had
made their share of financing and/or contributions io the :~chool ~istrict's needs and were
satisfied that the mit(yating measures available to the D[~trict were adequate; and thae the
Oistrict had officially supported the recent General Plan Amendment for the Canyon area and
the subJect proposal was in acrordance with that land use pla~.
3/14/7~
~
MINUfkS, GITIr NLANNING CUMMIS510N~ Merch 14, 1977
71-197
Elk N0. 197, RECLASSIFICATION N0. 76-77-41~ ANQ TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NO S. g]49~ g150~
~7~1 AND~752 (Conttnu~ _ _
TFi~ PU9L 1 C IIEAR I NG WAS CLQSkU.
Commi ss ioner Bernes notc~! that sF~c ayrecd tl~at thc Or,~nge Uni f(ed '>chool O lstr) ct had b~an
vo~y much remiss by not deal ing wi lf~ the proJectecl sch~x'~1 enr~) lment probl ems and the
horneowners (n the area should yet toyether and ga to the Distrlct ta have somethlny don~
about the s(tuatto~; ~nd that it dld not appear that thc Dtstr(ct had been Interested i~
either the problems or the solutions.
l:ommissioner Merbst revlewed thc F'linnlnc~ Commisslon pulfcy to permit no moro than five
hauses on a cul-cfe-sac~ noting that In ~c lenst two Inscr~nces tn th~ proposed trdcts th~re
wer~ up to 1Q houses on the curves. Mr. kiettencourt responded by stating that to cvnsid~~ a
par t ~f the p rop~sa 1~ one s hc~u 1 d rev i ew tlie. ove ra 1! dcv~; l opa~e n t p 1 an ; wt~c ~eupon ~
Commlgsioner N~rbst took exce~~t(on~ na;ing that th^ policy was established for a r~ason and
the p~oposal took full advantaye of thc zoniny and ~very minimum~ when so mnny lots wer~ not
neaded; that thc round landscaped areas tn the streets enabled the ~roJect to create quite a
FQw adJitional lots; that thc intent of thc RS-10,000 Zone was to cr~ate large lots; that
the propoaed 2. 7 DU/~ dens i ty was 1 nd i ca t i ve of thc ove ra I 1 Canyon area dens i ty ~ i nc 1 ud i ng
condominlum developrner~ts~ etc.~ end had been reACheci by the ty~+c of desiqn proposed whieh
was not the intent of the RS-10,000 Zone which strictly stated that a maximumof 3.~
dwell(ng unlts may be conscructed pcr acre~ and the proposal appeared to offet approximately
10 dwel l fngs per acre in some areas; and that, in hts apinl~n~ the Ordinance had bee~
twisted around to real ly ochieve ~i h(g{~ dens(ty proyram not Intended for the !li 1) and Canyon
area. He furthcr notcd that i f the proJact fiad been proposed under the tt5-7200 Zane ~ the
developer could n~at have achieved thc number of lots proposed.
Mr. Dettencourt explained that they were struy,yling to find ;~ develo(~ment plan that would
st~y within the marketplace; that none nf the homes wc~uld be production hc~rnes; and that the
p~oposal was in conformance with tt~e underlying zone.
Crxnmissiuner Herbst further noteJ [hat larger lots ~~nd l~rger living a~eas were the intent
of thc RS-10~00~ Zone~ and the developcr was proposing lots 6(1 feet wide and 175 feet deap;
and ihat the developn~ent would have more smal l front~~gc lots than any other development
p~eviously p~oposed by Anaheim Nills~ Inc.~ ~nd said density was due tu the Implanted eul-
de-sacs.
Cammissioner Morley noted that thc landscaped pads or clrcle; in the streets were beinc,
proposed for n-aintenance by the City and h~ suggested that the streets tse straightened to
eliminate the ertendeJ curve areas. on the basis that he envisioned traffic problems which
would endanger tl~e residents; anJ that he fel t that che ci rcles were un~ecessary except to
increase thc density and overbuild the property.
Mr. 8ettencourt explained that the curves provided additianal lot area at the pad ber,ause oT
the drt vrway access that would be avat lable, and thereby they would not havc a star~ ~sphalt
cul-de-sac to serve legally what could be Che same number of drivewey lotatfons at t~~at
polnt; that rather than ~ookiny out aver an open cul-de-sac~ the residents vrould look ou[ on
the landscaped ce~ters of the curves ar cul-d--sacs; a~d that this type eul-de-sac was
fairly common practics.
Comnisslortar tlerbst then noted that before hc would vote in favor of the proposal ~ he would
want to see plans shrnving the placement of tttie hon~es and provisian for the number of parkir~g
spaces requtred with this zoning; that one parking spact per house on the street would not
suffice; that the grading plan went hand-in-hand with the plot plan; that the develope~ was
3/i 4/77
"~L .
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ M~rch 14, 1~77
77-1g8
EIR N0. 197~ RECLASSIFICATION N0. 76-]7-41~ ANO TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NOS. 9749~ 9750~
~7}1 AND 975Z (Cunt(nued)
apperently unly considerfny pad sizes In the design of the proJect and (t was cleerly not
the Intent of the zona to permit the proposad typr.. dnve:l pm~;nt.
Mr. Dettencourt toak exception~ stactnq that he felt the sarr~ standerd ~f land use had co
epply co the subJ~ct developcr that applled to the othcr devGiopers in the Canyon; and that
they were develuping in accor~lsnce v.lth tl~e GenerA) Plan. the Planned Cammuntty concept~ and
the development standards of the zone.
Discusston e~used concerniny thc traffic signnlization at the intersect(on of Nohl Ranch and
Analiei~n !li lls Rued~~ ~+~~ring which Mr. bettencourt retterated that thei~ partictpation in the
costs of sa(d signel ~acion wuuld rnorc~ appropriately relate to thelr future praposed
commercial anJ multiple-family developments whlch were cont(gu ~~s to the n~rth~ ta more
clearly identify cost benefits; ancl he stateci that CAbrillo ana Solomon Ways would proJPCt
through the two future developments; and that the multiple-faml!y 7P~J~ect would be for about
d to 10 units per ocre, Cort~.m(ssionr.r T~lar indtcated that the fore~olnq fnformation
perta(ning to the future developn~ents wes pertlnent to the proposal undcr consideration
since it polnted out che impactiny of density (n the enttre area~ r,nd densities affected
circulation, traff(c~ et~.
Mr. ~ettencourt then uutl(neJ acrcayes involved !n the overdli develo~+ent ~f the Anahe(m
Hills plonne~l comnunity, being that the Un(t XV Planning Area involved appr~ximately 121
acres. of which 29 gross acres w.:re designated far RS-1Q.0~0~ 51~ gross acres fo~ low-mediurn,
20 gross acres for mediurn~ and i$ for conn~erctal office; and that there turned out to be 69
pad acres out of the 121 yross acres. (Mr. Bettencourt thanked Mrs. Jan tlall for providing
him witt~ the foreyofn~ data,) M~, Eie[tencourt continued by stating t.hat Ville Park used the
school fac(lities issuc to stop yrowtf~ and maintain thcir rural way o~' lifc; that a group of
home builders and land developers, led by a former Orange mayor and z School District
ufflcial iiad pledged approxirnately S40~40U towards a schao) band campaign which many felt
was the sort of ultlmate solution which the Gi~trict ffnances would requtre; that prasently
the Uistrict was collectiny, on a voluntary basls~ in-lieu building fees of S500 For
impacted students per p~oJect~ which could be done legally under the Subdivtsion Nap Act if
the City would have adopte~ an ordinance to that effect and th~ Qistrict was planning to
come to the City with such a proposal shortly, he understood, however~ Anaheim Hills~ Inc.~
was way out front of every other iand developer with respect to assisttnq the school ayency;
that upon build-out~ the praposed tracts would represent about ;4Q mlllion i~ neN
co~struction~ yieiding about 51 milliun per year in property tax revenue, tw~o-thirds of
whtch would go toward local education; and that they were willing to do their fair sha~e as
a developer.
Commissioner Tolar reiterated that he would be as vocal as he cquld in opposition to any
add(tional in-lieu ct~arges to the developer which were passed on to the consumer~ and the
hort~eowners (n the area siiould protest to thetr County Supervisor regard(ny the school
facflities; that~ furtt~ermore~ he agreed with Camiissioner Herbst that, while the prc~posed
density complied with tt~e leCter of the orclinance~ the intent was belny violated~ i.e.~ if
ane acre of tlie land w~s isolate~i for a density count it would not compiy with Che RS-10~000
Zone standards; that he belicvr:d that the mass yrading w~s being caused by tl~e proFosed
density~ and thft it ~Nas not the fntent of the ordinance to put a house on every 10~000
square feet of space in the hillslde areas.
In response to ques,tioning by Commissioner ~arnes~ Traffic Engineer Paul Singer advised that
the City was questioniny the 3bility of Nohl Ranch RoAd to carry future treffic loads based
on the proJects to th~e south of said road which had not yct be~n developed; and that Noh!
3/t4/77
~
MIIivTES, CITY PLANWIWG COf~FI{SSIOt~~ ftarch 14~ 1~77
,~
7 7-19'3
EIR N0. 19'i~ RECLASSIFICATION N0. 7G-77-41~ ANO TEI~TqTIVE MAP 0~ TkACT NOS. 97~+9~ 9750.
~z7~1 AND 9752 (Continued) _,~,
Ra~ch aoad cr, rr i ed bot te r than 1~ 7ct0 co rs at peak hour and prov i ded "D" l eva l of serv l ca.
Mr. Singer expla!nad that most roaus throughout th~ country were destgned to carry losd
levei "C" -- a condltion where t~afflc is stop-and-c-?o crying to get through a particular
bot tlenack; ~~d that level "D" was almost to the pa's nt of failu~e~ since the traffic had to
ws i t through several s f gnal cyc I es i n order ta ge t througl~ , end yet the E ~ s ta ted tha t Noh 1
Ra~ ch Road would serve the trafflc et load level "D'•; that he would not conside~ the
p~oposal ta be a c~ood leval of s~rvlce and~ th~refa~e~ th~e Englneertng Dlvision was
reeommending that trafflc signal systems be install~d alony Nohl aanch Road to help mitigate
th~ pro)~cted impaGt.
Upot~ further questinniny by Conmissioner Barncs~ I~r _ Stnger a~+•iise~ thnt the Enyineerinq
Divislon t~ad made studies of tt~e proposed and previously ap~roved proJects in Anaholm Hills
whith indicated that Nohl Ranc:h Road would be severely impacted and th~t some mttlgating
messures were necessary to handle the traffic load; and tliat they had examined the propused
EI R document and were saClsfled that it covered all nf the cumulative effects on traffic.
Gcx~miss(oner Tolar ir~(tiated dlscussion concerniny the Warmington proj~ct an the west slde
of (mperia) Highway~ south of Nah) Ranch RQOd~ whic h Hr. f3ettencourt had implicd was not
co~ditioned tn partlcipate in the trafflc slynalizatl~n~ and hc qurst(oned why they had not
been requfred to parCtcipnte. Mr. Stnger replied that he d(d not have the spec(fic reas~n~~
ha~aver~ tl~e preliminary plans for sald proJect we~ e approved a long time ago. Canmissloner
To1ar• then noted that tfie total cost of the siyna) i.~ation should not be the burdcn of the
subJect devcloper~ just becausc the previaus developr,r was not requcstcd to partitipate.
Mr_ Sing~r advEsed that chcre we~c certain Inequiti es In requesting a devetoper to
pa ~tlclpate in traffic slynalization bec~use there was not, at the present time~ a uniform
requlrement for partlcipation in such improvements. Commissioner Tolar made an observation
that it appeared that the I~omcawnc~s wauld be paying an ~ddltiona) $400 to S500 per dwelling
in order to have the s(,ynalization whlch would also be used by the referenced develoqnent to
the northwest. Commissioner 8arnes noted that she seen~ed to recall that a conditlon had
been imposed on the rtferanced development regarding participation in signal izatlon at such
tiene as rnore development took plac:e in the area. Mr, Singer advised that such a condition
had been imposed to reaulre signal izati~n when warranted, howeve~~ such a condit~on or fee
was difficuit to levy; and that the signalization in question was very nscessary v~hether
pa id for by the developer or by the Ci ty.
Cotm~issianer King questioned the oth~er Comnissionee^s as to wtiy the 2, ly~ 2.7~ 2.0 and 'l.9
dwel l ing uni ts per acre proposed for the subject four tracts was ~~nsidered too high
density. In response~ Commissioner Ilerb~t n~ted ttiat the proposed density was conside~•ed
ve ry hi ~h i n the RS-10 ~000 7_one, and thc on 1 y way the dens i ty was ach i evad was through the
use of the circles in the streets and diamnnd-shap~d lots; and that he would not vote on the
proJect without ths ber~eflt of a plan showing ~he ~ayour. of the houses on ehe lots; and
tt+at, additionaliy, about 2y~s af the lots were dias~cmd-shaped with minimum !ot frontages of
1 S or 20 feet~ produciny lots which were basically smaller than found in the RS-720p Zone.
Comni ss i oner Tolar re I terated that the i sol at ion o f one acre i r. the proposed development
could stiaw at least 6 houses in some cases and tha t~ras hi s ma)or cancern.
1 n response to questioniny by Cortmissioner Mo~ley. Mr. Bettencourt stated that the Cortmuni ty
P~ssoclation would maintain ihe landscaped circles in ttie cul-de-sacs. Mr. Bettencourt then
questioned whether the PlanRtng Commission was c~ua ~reling wtth the preposed project or wlth
the RS-10~000 Zone standards, stating that he felt the City staff shuutd ~espond that either
the project was (n conformance wi th the Code or not, as he did ~ot wish to mtsreprese~t the
3/14/77
~
FII i~U?C~ ~ C ITY PL,Atl~!! ilC COMMI SS I ON, March 14 ~ 1977
77•20A
EIR N0. 1~7~ RECLA~SIFiCATION N0. 76-77•41~ AND TEN'TATIVE MAP OF TRACT NOS. 9749, 9750~
97,~ 1 AN_D 9~75 ,2~ (Con t t_ d) .
p~ojact In any w~y; a~d that If the proJec+t w~s not In conformance~ he wlshed ta have the
varlances called our, and advcrttsed~ etc.
Assistont Planning Director•Ioning Annika Ss~tolahtt ~ead from the Zoning Code-Buildt~g Site
Requlramants~ snd noted that the Increment spoken af (n the Code wes always the tract or tha
subJtvislon~ with eacli tract hovtng to average 10~000 square feet per lot; and ttiat there
was no rtwentian that any adjacr_nt lots or a~y groupings ahauld necesserlly consist of a
certsin denslry within on acre.
In response to questtunin~ by Gonxnissi~ner tiar~es. Miss Santelahti advisa~l ll~at everaging
wes nat Nermitte~ in the R5-~12~0 Zonc~ an:.+ the lots could n~t hP lets than 7xOb svuare fuat
in any cas~; but that the R5-10,Q00 Zon~ permittc~l the lots co be e min(mum of 8000 ~quare
feet as lon~,~ as che averagc was 1:~~OOQ square ~CCC~ ~VCAUSf of thc hiitside nature of the
~ 8f1d.
Commissloner Davld nated tl~at one of the basic goals of the City of Anehelm~ (n his opinlon~
~~as to provi~le opportunity for all segrnents of thc populatian with emphasis on low-Incoma
minority yroups and the elderly to obtain d~cent housing and a sutGable living environment
4ilhin each of the reyion's ma,jor c~POyraE,hical suh-units, and hc questioned what handle
l.nahelm Nills, Inc.~ ha~1 on the refPrenced yual as far as the proposed development was
concerned.
In respons~~ t1r, ffettencourt stated thac at th~ rate the subJect projett was going it would
not be affordabfe to even 5$ of the house-b~yinq publi~ that it r~ight have been priced for
in Ch,: be~~~in~ng; that the develo~^~ent c in thc hillside werc cxtreme. Fx~wever~ there
wa~ a high desir~ to Ilve in [he ~~ea che approach of Anai~eim Hills~ Inc.~ to the
builders Hha ,~~rchased the Ia~J was r,.,, ••~ ~ate the prices that would be charged for the
hc~rw.,; thac ~."-: ~p~~ortunitie~ Co lower th~ .ction-type house price for the builder were
yenerally associ~~te~ with hig ~_ denslty and smalier lot size~ wnich would clash wlth the
nelgh,bars in the subjec;. are.• who were already there; and that presently the builders were
jusc trying t~ . tay in the marketplace.
Cvmmissioner Dav{d nottd that lf all the developers felt that way, there wc~uid be no !ow or
m~derate incr.~rie tsousir.y an,n+f~ere; ond he questianed whether thcre were some federal subsidy
programs ~rhi~-h could be app~ied f~r~ to reduce the cost of land~ interest~ etc.
Mr. Betcencourt responded that even the mortgaye subsidies would ~iot be avAilable in the
sub,~ect t~~ustr~g market because I~ was already beyond the VA and FHA proJect limits, and
wuuld be in the $100~QQ~J price rany«s. 1ie explai~ed that the proposed development would be
to thc City's ti(yhest development sta~~•~ards~ beiny in tlie h111side area, and thry had to pay
the hi_yhest water facilities installati~n charges of any land d~veloper in the City because
they requireJ a pressure elevation system wlti~ water pumped from a reservoir; Lhat~
additionally~ they were askud tc ~rnluntarily ~ ntribute to the costs of trafftc
signalization~ wt~ather they wanted to or not, and the Pianning Commission would be
conditloning approval of the tract maps acco~dtngly; that they were also reyuir~d to present
topographic displays~ and he had nnt witi~essed any other developer doing the same; that he
had not seen any other developer in the Santa ~.:~a Canyon give a dime towards the Orange
Unified School District's fac9lities~ whereaa they had donated a 23.8-acre parcel of land~
valued at $1,2 mi~ltan for construction of Anaheim Hills Elementary SchcMl~ presently ~ender
constructinn; that after all their contributions~ the bulk graded lot ~~ice this year was
$30,000 -- wholesale price for a lot without ~ house on it; that~ if ~'~uiider c~uld
construct a house at 53U per square foot for a 1~00-square foot house, chat would mean
3/14/17
~
MINIItFS~ GITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ March 14~ 1977
77•201
EIR N0. 197~ RCCLASSIFICATION N0. 76-77-41~ AND TENTATfYE MAP OF TRACT NOS. 9'749~ 9750.
SJ~ ANn 9152 (Conti~ued) _.
SW5,000 for the house~ $30~000 for the lat~ plus 15~ p~ofit~ plus ~~ rt-erketing And ovorhead
expanse, adding up to ~100~00U ~ather qulckly.
Commissfonar King noted that subsidizing thc proposed hanes would be simllar to subsidizing
nnw tiomes on Lido Isle or in aeverly Hills which were tn the same category.
Commissioner Nerbst questione<1 the timing for the future extenslon of Soloman Drive to Noh)
Ranch Road; whereupon~ Mr. BeLteiicuurt stated that the tentatlve trACt maps for the adjacent
proposad developments to tl~e norti~ would be presentcd to the Planning Cortmtssion wlthfn the
next 3U to ~0 c~ays, ~in~e ttiey wcrc presently gr3~ling ~he propcrty anci the tract maps and
EIR docume~t w~r~ also ln process; that by the tim~ th~ sub,ject proposed tracts we~e opened
up~ Solomon Drive would be constructed al) the Nay to Nohl Ranch RaaJ; ~~~J that the only
reason the develo~iment to the north was delayed was beceuse of the recent dls~pproval of the
annexatlon (No. 18).
Mr. Bettencourt relterateJ his request tc know wliether or not the praposed developrt~ ~t was
in conformance with thc RS-10~000 Zone~ as ~~~ d1d not want anyone to Chink that they wr.re
tryiny to mislead the Planning Commissl~n with some sort of subtle vart~nce whtch was not
shawing on tt~e face of the pra}ect. In response~ Mlss Santalah~I fu;ther reviewed the
Zoning Code~ nntfng that although the building site rcquiremr.i-ts for this ~articular zone
stated that lO~OQD square feet was the mtnlmum lut area~ "...provided~ howev~r, that whcre
the Interdapartmental Commlttee for the Prc~erwatian of Health, Safety and General Welfare
of the CIt~ of Anohetm determines that the ter~atn is such that the enforcement of the
minlmum lot area ~f ten thau5and squarc feet set forth I~erein is imprac~lcal. said Committee
may recommend~ and the Planning Comrnission may approve, a subdivision contalning lots heving
an area of less than ten thausand squarc feet~ pr~vided ttiat the average arGa of ~il lots
within any subdlvision shal) be ten thousand squarc feet, and no lAts within any subdivlsion
shall have an area of less than eiyht thuusand square fe~~ "; and that t~~e requircments were
not straight-forward and staff would requirc 10~000 sq~a, ~ feet~ but tf a parcel map were
filed~ in her upinian~ the decis~on would requ~rc Pla~n~r:~~ Ca~.nissinn or City Counci)
action.
CommiSSioner Morley then noted that he would like th~ proposal rr~uch better if the two
thrauyh cul-de-sacs were eltminate~.
Chairman Johnson noted tliac althaugh, ideologically~ the little p.~rks in tt~e middle of the
cul-de~sacs were nice and pretty~ they braught alor• affic prublems with cars using them
for small raceways; that he would not support the ~•y ~~sd praJect~ as submitted, slnce he
felt it was tc~o dense; ti~3t. follcywing the review ~: .,.: ordinance* it appeared that the
projecx was ta Zhe very 1'a+ic of the c~rdinance; that hc did not see why the lc~ts should be
allowed to be ta the minimum jusc because another lot in chc same tract h~d ~~ acres of
wasted land and t~e wc~uld like to see less impact on the area; that he did n~ (ke khe
impact on the traffic. whe~ the prop~sed si~nalization at best would not handle the traffic;
however, he agreed with tiie developer concerning the s(tuation with the School District,
etc.; that he would probably support the EIR dacurt~nt, and his non-support of the proJect
was mer~ly a token of what portends for future projects -- that there would be greater and
greater resistance to compiete cc~mpactic~n of the hills with houses and this may be a
starting pofnt.
Assistant City Atto~ney Frank Low ry clarified that Commissioncr Herbst's reference to the
number of lots and homes on a cul-de-sac waS a Planning Comnission poltcy and not a part of
the ordinance; and that the Parkway Maintenance Division had indicated an unwillingness to
3 ~' '7
~'
MlNUTE~~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ March 14~ 1977
7~-202
EIR N0. 197~ RECLASSIFICATION N0. 76-77-~1~ AMD TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NOS. 9749, 9750~
''1 AND q~2 (COn~IfluOd~ _ _
rr~lntaln the two long IslanJs shown in the streets~ because of the costs and exponse
Involved.
Chatrmen Johnson recogn(zed the great servlce over the past w~lch Anahaim Hflls, Inc.~ had
dona for Anahelm~ which was something the Cit.y could be p~oud of ovar thr. United States.
Mr. Bottancourt stated thet it appeared that the Planning Commission was dlsappolnted wtth
the propusals, and he rcquestcJ the Commission to idcnttfy the speclfics In dealgn
considerations~ such as the cul-de-sac question~ etc.~ whlch they could ~edesig~ to make the
proJoct marc polatable t~ the Co~nnission.
Mr. Lowry indlcated that he would hesitatc lu permit thc Planning Commisaion to pursun
suggesttons for redestg~iny the p~o,ject~ fo~ reasonx thet he dicl not wish the Cnmmisslun to
be in the positton of makiny prcdisposition on a propasel n~t bcing conslder~d at thls time.
Comm(ssloner Be~nes not~d that~ in the futurc~ ail developers shouid be required to provide
eq itably for traffic siynals, topQgraphic displeys~ otc. Sho further noted~ however~ xhat
very few develapers moved as much dirt as this project would.
The~eupon. Mr, lsettencourt requestcd a two-week cor.'fnuance for rcvised plan~.
Commissioner King offered a motion~ s::canded by Commissioner Herbst end hSOT10N CARRIED~ that
the Anaheim Cicy Plannlny Commisston does hereby reopen the public hear(ng and conttnue
conside~ation af the subJect items to the Planning Commission meetin~ of March 28~ 1977. for•
rnvised plans~ as requesteJ by the pe:titioner; provided~ that if said revis~d plans are not
prepared in time to give the Planni~g Department adequate tlme for revtew~ en addtttonal
two-v+eek continuance zhall be granted to the petitianer.
3/14/7?
~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMNISSION~ Ms~ch 1~~~ 1977
77-203
EIR NEGATIVE DECIARATION - PUDLiC NEARING. CAL-AlIERICAN INCOMf PROPFRTY~ E' AL~ 4015-8
No~th 16th Strset~ Phoentx Arizona ay016 ~Ownor~; G. D.
VARIANCE N0. 2913 GARpINER b ASSOCIATkS, 24U~-9 North Glassell~ Orenga, CA
926G!; (Agent); requcsttng WAIVER OF PERMITTED USES TO ESTABLISH
AN AUTO ANQ DO~T REPAIR FACILIYY on proparty described as en
irregularly-shrped parc~l of land c~•~sist(~g of approximately 25.8 acre~ located at the
southeest corner of Lincoln Avenue and 5tate Co~lego 8aulevard, tiaviny approxlmate f~ont-
agcs of 1470 feat nn thP soutl~ sid~ of llncoln Ave~ue and ~25 cet on th~ east side of
Stote College ~aulevard. Property presently classifled CL (COMM~RCfAI. L~NITED) 20NE.
Commissioner pavld noted that he f~a~ a conflict of Interest~ as deflncd by Anahcim City
Pla~ning Commission Resalutlon No, PC76-157 adaptiny e Conflict of Interest Code for the
Pla~ning Canmission and Govo~nmcnc G~de Secclan 3G25~ et seq., in that he 1IvGd wlthin 300
faet or so of the sitc loc~tion; that~ pursuant t~ tl~e provisiens of the above Codes~ he was
hereby declaring cn thc Cl~~irr,-an t-iat hc was withdrawing from th~ hFrring in connectlo~ with
Vartance No. 2q13 (Itpm No, 7 on tne aqenJa) and would not take part in either the
dlscusslon ar the voting thereon; ar-J that he had ~ot discussed this metter with any member
of the Plan~ing Conxnission. Th~rrupnn. COMMISSIONF.R DAVID IEFT TFIE COUNCIL CHAM^ER A7 ~~:35
P.M.
COMMISSIdNF.R f~FflBST LEF7 TFIf: COUNCIL ClIAMHER TEMP~Rl+RILY AT A:36 P.M.
Two persons Indt~catec! thrir presenc~s in cpCo~ition tn tl~e subJect i¢ems and fortlnvith waived
th~ full readi~g ~af tMe S[aff Reparc to th+c Planninn Cwnmission ciateG March 14~ 1977.
Although the s~taff rcport w~s not read at thc public heariny~ it i:, refcrrcd to and made a
part of the minutes.
Mr. Gerry Gard~ner, the ayent fo~ thc: p«~titic~ncr~ appeared bef~re che Planning Commission and
stated that Che r,tdff report was in error sincp the.y werr. proposiny two bays rather than
three; that~ additlanally, the squa~e f~oata~e of t~~e buildinc~ was actually 1964 anJ not 2520
as indicated ln the s'taff ~eport; and that t~~e problem r~i th thc. crrars was probably due to
thelr previous pro~osal far [hree batis~ c:tc. Mr. Gardner continued by stating that the
pr~vious ~~oposal wos For tf~is s~-me p~aperty at the s~mc iacation, but for ~ smaller area.
Followtng a revieN ~f the proposed p1anS~ Assistant Planner Joel ftck noted for the Planning
Coamalssion that the subject variance was adWertised carrectly and no additlona) advertising
appeared to be necessary; and, therefore~ it was ia~ order for the Planning Commisslo~ to
proceed with the public hcariny at this time.
~OMHf 55IONER NERBSi' RETUR~~LU TU 'TriE CouNC I~ CHnME~ER Af 4:40 P,M.
Mr. Gardner further stated that the proposed buitding was appraximately 62 feet from the
present aper~tlon of l•he autornotlve and baat repair fiacility; that the proposal was the same
kind of business and typc of work that was c~oing ~i~ presently; and tf~at they were li u nsed
to be in business at this 14catian.
CommissEoner Morley too1: exceptlon~ nating that although the aperdtion had a ltcense, they
were operating illegally un~ier thP Zoni~,g Code.
Nr. ~ick requested Lne petition~er to outline th~ differences betwee~ the plans being
submitted at this meetin~~ ancf those submltted and reviewed by the Planntng Departme~t~ etc.~
and r~ftrred to in the staff repart. Mr. Gardner replied tliat the actual slze of the
3/14/77
,~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ Ma~ch 14~ 1977
VARIANCE N~~ . 2913 (Continued)
77-204
building was 19G4 squa~e feet~ tnstead af 25ZU~ or approximately 5G0 square feet less than
or(glnally proposed; tl~at the wo~king a~ea was 1J04 squ~re feet rather than 2162 squere feet
and~ consequently~ the~e couid not t~e aa much work golny on as ortginally proposed or
exiating; that he did not feel that any differencea in tl~a seatlnc~ araa In the office or
restroom arees would matter; that the propaaed storage area wauld be less than exlsttnq; and
that he had no knowlcedge that ttic business was opcreting (ilec~aliy.
Mr. Flck questloned whether the p~t(c(oner was still p~oposing the outdoor storage area for
the automobiles. Mr. Gardner repli~~d that the seorage arce was not ltke a sto~age lot, but
was simply to store the boat and au..xnobile chassis whilc the eng(nes werc being repa(red~
which would not be for more thnn two or tiiree days.
Mrs. Jocqueline Chambcrs, 23~;~ Psradise Raad, Anaheim~ appeared before the Planntng
Commission tn oppo5itlon to thc sut~Ject ttems and st.ated that sf~e iiveJ adjacent to the
subJect buildiny; that she was not sure thac shc was opposeJ [u [he operat(on~ s(ncc she did
not know rnuch ab~ut It. M~s. Chambers (nyuired wl~ether the oparation would be noisy ar
unattractlve~ as tt would be loc~ted beslde the Eest Anaheim Post Offlc:e Brancli, and also
whether th~ appcarance of the chainltnk fence would be detrtmental to the area.
Mrs. Wayne Morris~ 401 South Colt Street. A~aheim~ appeareci b~efore the Planniny Conmission
in op~osltlon and stated she had sent a letter (in opposition) to the Cortmisston's
attent(on; thereup~•n~ Mrs. Morrls ~evlewed the contents af her yetter~ as follows:
"401 South Colt Street
Anaheim~ California 92E06
MArch 14, 1977
Dear Mernbers of the Piannin~ Coninissio~:
Varianc~ No. 2313
We are opposeci to the rezoniny of the 28,3 acres at the southeast corner
of Lincoln Avenue and State College E3oulevard requested by Cal-American
Income Property for the purposs of relocating an -•xistbng auto and boat
enyine repair facility.
7he reason for our oppositian is because of the noise factor. Since the
auto and boai repair moved into tl~e old Grant's building, occaslonally we
have heard loud n~ises of engines beiny revved up late in the evening~
(around 9:00 p.m.).
The staff report reads that the "petitioner has indicated that not more
than two or three engines would be repatred s~mu tantous y~" but what
assurance do we have as a homeowner that twa or +three englnes will not
cause a noise problem.
Also, the staff report indicates that the petittoner antici ates hours of
operatio~ from 8:00 a.m. to G:Q~ p.m., Monday through atur ay.
However, we have alreadY heard noises af engines past 6:00 p.m. (around
9:00 p.m. or 10:00 p.m.).
3/14/77
~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ March 14, 1977
VARIANCE N0. 291j (Co~tinued)
___
W~ liv~ ln tltc r~sident~•l sectlon east cf thc shapping ccntcr, and wc
feel to allow an ~uto and boat engtne repatr to conttnue to operate in
the Esst-Anaheim Shopptn~ Cente~ would deprecletc our property value.
Respectfully~
/s/Mr. ond Mrs. W~yne E. Morris"
Mr. Fick alao read the following letter In opposiclon;
"March 14 ~ 1g77
Dcer Planning Commission Members:
Development Proposal. Varlancc No. 2913
We are stronyly opppscd to the euto and boat facility loceted In the
East~Anaheim Shopping Centcr. Ne feel it will deprectatc ou~ praperty
value beceuse of the notse tnvolved.
As a homeowner in the area~ we ask that ynu decline tlie request Lo
relocate the auto and bost factlity in the East/AnahQim Shopping Center.
Vartanc~ N~o. 2313.
Yours truly~
/s/ Mr. and Mrs. Gulland
2~21 Po~Hhatan
Aneheim"
77-205
In rebuttal~ Mr. Gardner stated tt~ere was a certain amount of noise that would heve to be
made in conne~tion with the proposed use~ having to do wlth repair and tuning-up of engines;
that. normally~ they tried to shut daw~ [he facilities around 5:30 p.m. and clean up for the
next day~ and he could not answer concerning the alleged ~oise after 6:OG p.m.; that the
operation dicf involve the revving up of engines in connect(on with the tune-ups and thc:re
was no doubt about that, as well as there was na doubt that there were people in the
residential neighborhood who were building ca~s and revving up engine~; that the notse
referred to by the oppositlon may havc been from some sourGe ather than the subJect
aperatlon; and that he would ~eiterate that he wc~uld not say there would not be revving nf
enylnes or any other noise up untll f,:00 p.m.
TIiE PUBLIC i~EARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Mo~lsy noted that the philosophy of putting en industrial use in the heart of a
commercial centPr~ which was completely surrounded by residCntial land use~ would set a
precedent tt~at the City could not live with~ in his opinion.
Commissianer Tolar noted that the proposal was unique in that usually it was the ccmm~ercial
user wanting to locate in an industrial zone fo~ econcxnic reaxons~ sirrce industrial sites
were generally cheaper; anJ lie questioned what the determ;ning factor was for selecting thcs
sub,ject site versus an industrial site.
3~14/77
~
MINUTES~ CITY PIANNING COMMISSION~ Nerch 14~ 19y7 77~206
VARIANCE h0. 2913 (Continued)
Mr. ~ardner responded that the derermining factor was ma(~ly 1i~a ~sxNar~se ~f nwving from the
site~ ~I~ce thetr proposed move of ~0 to 7~ feet f'rom thetr ex(sttng business would involve
a small expensr.; and that Auto Crew did nnt own the bulld(ng but would bc laasing It.
Comm(ssloner Tolar inJicated thal• he could not flnd a harcishtp for granttng the prapossl~ or
a reason to support ~n industrEal-type use In s commercial zone~ espec(aliy with the sita
being completely sur~ounJecl by resldentia) lend uses; thAt~ altf~ou~h the Commission mlght
set the hours of oper~tion~ the hours miyht be uncontrolied with the doors cl~sed; and this
wes very definitely the wrong locatic~n fo~ the proposed use.
Mr. GArdner questlone~ haw the pe[ltioner was able to be licensed for the operat(on in the
first p13ce; wliereupon~ ASSistant City Attorney Frank Lowry advfsed that the business
Iicense was a revenue tax an~i was nol a~ermission to cJo bus(ness in a certaln zone. etc.
Cc~nmissioner Tolar offered a motion, seconded by Commi~sioner K(ng end MOTION CARRIED
(Comm(ssloner David being temporarily absent)~ that the Anaheim City Planning Commisalon has
reviewcd thc subJect proJect~ consistin~ of a pro~sal to establish an automotive and be~at
repair facillty in an existiny commercial shopping center on approxlmately 28.8 acres
located at the sauti~east carner of Lincoln Avenua and State College ~oulevard~ and does
hereby recommenJ to the Clty Council of the City of Anbh~im that a N~gatlve Declaratlon from
the requirement to prepare an enviror-mental impACt report be approved for thls proJect on
the basis that there would be no si~nificant individual or cumulaeive adverse impacts on the
environment due Co appr~v~l of this Negative Oeclarati~~n~ as indicated in tF.e Initia) Study
subm(tted by the applicant; and that the Negative Decl~ration substantiating the foregoing
findinys is on fil~ in the Office of the Planning Uepartment at C(ty Flall.
Commissioner 7olar offered Resolution No. PC77•64 and moved for its passage and adoption.
that the Anaheim C~ty Plannin,y Commission does hereby deny Petition for Varisnco No. 2913 on
the basis that the proposed industrial use is not cor~atible with th~ extsting coim~ercial
uses at the subject location and the sur~oundin~~ residential area due ta noise, traffic and
other patential unde~irable impacts ye+ieraced by the proposed business; and that the
petitioner did not demonstrate that a hardship would be created if said watver was not
grented. (See ReSOlution l3ook)
Commissioner Herbs[ noted that he would abstain from voting un the resolution on the basis
that he liad not neard all of the evidence presented.
an roll call~ ttie foregoing resolution w~s passed by the following vote:
A'iES: COMMISSIONEKS: BARNES~ KING~ MORLEY~ TOLAR, JOHt~SON
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSiv"Pi~RS: OAVIU
ABSTAIN: COMMISSlONERC; kiERBST
CONMISSIONER DAVID RETUaNEO TO TNL COUNCIL CHAMBER AT 5:06 P.M..
3/ 1 ~+/ 77
,~ ~
~ 4
MINUTES~ CITY PI.ANNING COMMISSION~ March 14, 1977
71-207
EIR CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT - PU9LIC NL'IIRING. ANAFIEIM NA1'ION~I BANK~ ?. 0. 8ox 6377~
Anahe Im ~ CA 92~1OG (Owne~) ; TI1E METZ CORPORAT I~N ~ 250 Br i ggs
VARIANCE N0. 2914 Strect~ Costa Mesa~ Cl1 92G26 (Agent); requesting 41AIVCR OF
,A) MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS~ (Ef) MII~IMUM UISIANCE 6ETWEEN
SIGNS~ ANU (C) PCRMIT7ED SIGN IOCATION, TO CONSiRUCT FOUR
FREE-STAPIDING SIGNS on property descrIbed as a rectanqularly•shaped pa~cel of land consist~
ing nf approxlmately 1.A acre luGated at the southwest corner of La Palma Avenue and State
Colleye Boulevard, havt-~g approxlrnete frontsges of 300 feet on th~ south side of La Palma
Avenue and 147 feet on the wesc si~le of State College Boulevard~ and further descrlbed as
555 Narth State Collec~e doulevard. Property presently classifled CL (CONMERCIAL, LIMITEU)
ANU RS-A-4j,U00 (R~SIUf:NTIAL/AGRICULTU W1l) I.QNES (wtth e resalution of Intent to CL).
Mr. .lohn Dailcy, ~'resident of Anahelm National Bank~ appcored before thc Planntng Commi3sion
and requested that the public heartng on subJect petltfon b~ continued to March 28, 1977~ on
the basls that he nad not realixed it would take sa long to get to his p~oposal oti this
agGnda and that he could not stay any longer at this n-eeting.
Commisslon~r Tolar uffered a motion~ seconded by Conn~issioner Kinq and MOTION CAaRIEO, that
the Anahe i m C( ty P I ani~ i~. ~,~ Commi ss i on does hc rcby con t i nue tr~c pub 1 i c he~-r i ng and
consl~eratian of Petitlon for Varlance No. 2yl~i to tt~e Planning Garimiss(on meeting of M~rch
2d~ 1~77. es requested by tf~e petitioner.
(NOTE: Thls item was considered followiny Item 5 on the agenda~ fotlowing the recess.)
E 1 R C;TEGOR I CALLY CXEMPT - PUaI ! C HEAR I I~G. NE:t~RY I. AND BETTY LOU ESCt1ElL ~ 630 Sou th
Euclid Street, Anaheim~ CA 92R02 (Owners); RAY Q. NICHOLS,
VARIAN;E N0. 2y15 630 South Euclid 5trcet, Anahefm, C~ 92802 (Agent); requesc-
ing WAIVER OF ~Aj F'FRMITTED StGNS. ((l) MAXlMUN NUMI3ER OF SIGNS,
(C) hi!iI~tUM UISTANCE sETWEEl~ SIGNS~ (D) PEaHIT'i'ED SIGN LOCATION~
Af~U (E) PaOHiBITEp a00F S1GN ILLUMINATION~ TO PERNIT EXISTING ILLEGAL SIGNS on property
described as a rectancularly-shaped parcel of land consistinca of approxtmately 6400 square
feet located at the northeast corner of Alomar Avenue and Euclid Street~ havinc~ approxi-
mate frontages of ')I feet on the north Side ~f Alomar Avenue and b6 feet on the cast side
of Euclid Street. and further described as 63U South Euc1iJ Strcet. Pro~erty presently
classified GO (COli~1l:RCIAL~ OFFIGE At~U PROFESSIOFIAL) ~UNE.
No one indicated their ~resence in oppositton to the sub)ect petition.
Althouyh the Staff Report to the Planniny Commission dated March 14~ 1977~ was not read at
the public hearing~ it is referred ta and made a part oF the minutes.
Mr. Ray IJichols~ the agent for tt~e p~:titioner, appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated he i~ad been cited for havtng a post sign in the Commerctal-Office Zone; that they
wanted to keep the post sign ad}ace~t to E:uclid StreCt at iCs present location c+n the basis
thAt okher existing signs and buildings, etc.~ alnng said street blocked the view of the
subject business for identtffcation purposes and the customers would c~enerally drive past
the business and have to turn around and come back to it; that the siyn conformed to othe~
signiny in the area; that the loss of the post sign wouid create a hardship; that the
subJect business was in a commercial retail zone, or located adJacent to such a zone and
there had bcen veriances granted for post signs in the area in che CO Zone; and that one of
9/14/77
~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ March 14~ 1977
VARIANCE N0. 2 ~15 (Continued)
/~'2~8
the main reesons thcy did not havc ubJnctions tran lheir nefyitbo~s was that the post slgn
had a mellow light (n tho ev~niny and lt~~htad up the carncr for the people wl~o walked to the
Burger King~ etc.
THE PUdLIG NEARING WAS CLOSEp.
In rasponse to quastioning by Commiss(c.;ner Morley, Mr. Ntchols stnted th~ zoning cttatlon he
rece(ved was only for the post si,yn and d1d not mentian the othEr two signs on kt~e proparty;
however, if he had to g(ve up any of the siyning, he preferred to kecp the post slgn.
Commissloner Nerbst iiotecl that tf-ere was not a way to justtfy approva) of a free-standing
slgn in the GO Zone; t'iat. althougl~ similar signs existed (n ttie araa, said s(gns were
grented and/or coristructed prfor to 1977~ wi-en the new leyal requircments for the granting
ef variances came into effect; chot onc of thc reasons tl~~ sui,je~~ arca end residential
stru~tures h~d been zoned CO was to protect the: adJacent residentfal land uses which wer~
actually servfny as residences, and not to allow the area to bccom~e commercial; that CO dtd
nol need larye siyns And the Code was~ very explicit reger~ling gi~ning; that if the proposed
type signing was necess~ry~ then the business should go elsewhere since one of the
conclltions of the zoning on the Rroperty was to abide by the CO Ordinance; that the subJect
property had been e thorn (ii the side of the Planning Commisslon each time lt changed
ownershlp or occupancy~ anef the problems had related to tf~e types of uses. signing~ ctc.;
that the ordinance did not allow 4~re~-st~nd(ng signs, however~ wall sions were perm(ttcd;
and that no ha~dshlp was evictent far the subJecC apFlicntion.
In response~ Nr. Nichols stateJ chat at one time the suuJect property wes used as a
restdence; that two houses down tlie sereet were presenkly bein~ used for residences a~d we~e
beginning to look like ",junk heaps" because everything arounci ti~em was commercial-reta(l;
that they would not like to fall into the same trap [hat people werc in before them~ who
could not operate because of noC beinca able to advertise their business or tel) people where
they Nere. He added that trees also blocked the visibility of the signing.
Commissloner Ilerbst noted tl~at he was very familiar with che subJect property and realixed
that tfie problsms were not a laughing mdtter~ however, the proposed siyning was an overkiil
for chat particular property.
Ic~ response to questioniny by Chairman Johnson, Assistant Planner Joel Fick advised that the
CO Zone perrnitted one roof sign provided that the locatio~ was in accordance with Code and
was not lighted within so rnany feet of a rESidential land use; and l•hat 2 square feet of
wall signing per lineal fooY of frontage was also permitced.
Mr. Nichols rediewed the past locations and siyni~g for the subJect business~ stating that
they tiad purchased che subJec~. prnperty thtnkin~ it was an ideal place since everything
across the street was commerc(al-retall and s~veral post siqns existed in the surrounding CO
Zone~ one having been constructed under a variance.
Cortmissioner Morley complimented the applicant for keeping up the subject pro~erty.
Chairman Johnson ~xplained that some of the existing signs werc nor~confo~ming~ having been
in existence prior to the Cod~ revisions~ and the Planning Commission would be powerless to
remove them.
y~:
3/14/7%
~
MINUTES~ ~ITY PLANNING COMh11SSI0N~ Ma~ch 14, 1977
YARIANGE N0. 2915 (Contlnuad)
_~ ~ ~~
77-209
Comnissi~ii~sr T~1«r yuastloi~~J t-uw the subJect raaf stgn added to the convenience of letttng
tl~a people know wliere the subJect business was~ whe~ th~ big~ double-faced f~ee-standing
slgn was out front; and he notad that a resl estate business was also advertised on the
roof. Mr. Nicl~ois answered that tt~e roof stgn was constructed fi~st~ but no o~e could see
tt because of the ftnanclal bu~lness next door. and they ectually did not need the roof sign
wttl~ the ~thcr sign; and that the sub,ject property was owned by his slster who was leasing
only the houso portion of the structure~ and e real estiate bu~iness was being operated in
thc garagn portion.
Conmissinner Tolar tt~en indtceted that he disagrccd with Commissioner Herbst regarding the
signing~ slnce he felt that the free-stand(ng sign was much better than msny of the roof
slgns in the area; however~ he was oprosed to the other slqning on the property on the basls
that even in commercial tones the Plannlny Commission had asked for consolidation of signs
where lhern was i~pre [han one tenant; and th.,t he fclt thc kotai slgntng on the subJect
property was too much.
Mr. ~~(chols then staie~ that he was willing to take down some of the sic~ning but wanted the
veriance approved to allow them to heve some signing; that he had been ln the tax business
for about 35 ycars~ and at one lacatlon ir~ Lynwood for 27 years; that dur(ng thc past 35
years he had never had the results from a sign that he had received from the subJ~ct free-
stand(ng sign, and also I~e had receiveci more comments about thts beautiful sign~ and thet he
considered the subJect business to be very successful in tt~e ~City of A~aheim.
Commissioner Y.ing inquired if the petitioner wo~+ld be happy with o~ly thP free•standing
sign, unllghted. Nr. PJichols replied that they wAUld probably be happy with it but it was
not a yood plan to have it unlfyhted.
In respr~nse to questloning by the Planning Comr-eisslon~ Mr, 1~i~hols stated that the free-
standiny sign was not OR a timer but was on e sensor and stayed lit all night; that they
would be more than happy to instail a timer to si~ut the liyht off at about y:00 p.m.,
hawever, he belteved that thc: si9n was holding down pilferage and vandalism tn the subject
area tremendously; a~d that the liyhting ot the signing only lit up thP ground are~ ~round
it.
Mr. Kelemen~ 74~ South Euclid Street~ Anahelm, appe•,red in favor of the proposal and stated
he was located across the street frorr- the subject propercy; that the lighted signing did
give light to the netGhborhood; that a business could not exist without adequate signing;
and that he wanted similar siyning for his business.
Commissioner King noted that no one was present from the adJacent residential neighborhood
to complain abaut tlie illuminated signing.
Chairman Johnson noted th~t~ in his opinion, the siyniny would do the same amount of damage
whether the property Nas zoned CO or GL.
Comnissioner Herbst further reviewed the history of the CO zoning on the subject proparty~
noting thai there had been much oppositEon a~d thdt the opposition had fina~ly agreed to a
l~ght comnerctal or commercial-office usP for c~rtain types of uses; that the CL Zones in
the area were not backed up to homes~ as the CO Zones wers; that if one of the houses in the
CO Zone was allowed to havc free-standtng signs, al) of those in the CO Znne would be
requesting such signing; and that if the CO Zone was wron~ ~~~ this area and the Planning
Commission felt that free-standing sig~s should be permttted~ then the zone should be
3/t~+/77
~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ Merch 14~ 19~7
VARIANCE N0. Z915 ~Conti~~l~d)
.~.._ ......-
71-210
cha~ged~ but vsriances for siyning sli~ulci noC tn qranted. He fu~thcr note~d thet the subJact
slgns ware wtth(n jUA fnat of residentta) land uses and would be " nhted.
Commissloner Tolar then noted that the gentlem ~ speAking In favor• of the subJect ~iyning
had caused tilm to ct~ange hls ml~d about even feroring the one frec-stsnding slgn~ on the
bosts of what Commissloner ficrbst had polntod out with respect to a precedent in the CO
Zone~ witli everyone else wantlny free•3ta~cling signs~ etc. Chairmnn Johnson concurred.
Mr. Ntchols inqulred about the new laws (n effect As of January 1317~ concerning the flnding
of ~~ardships in connectlon wlth vartances; whe~eu~~on~ Assistant Lity Attorney Frank Lowry
reviewcd the requtrements of thc new State laws.
Mr. Nichols then (nqulrod whether tha fact thet thnr~ w~ro fn~~~ r.r fivP pPOple fn the area
struggling to n~ake a l iving repre~~:nted a I~ardshi~; whcreupon~ Mr. Lowry indicated in tho
neyatlve~ aclvising that such a hardsh(p was one of econc~mics ~nJ wuiJ ~~ot t,e consideresd.
Commissianer Tolar discuss~d thc posslbility of rezonin,y thc subject property and
surroundtny CU praperties to thc CL Zonr to rectif~y any ~roblems (n reletlanshtp to slgnin~~
rescognizing tliat Euc) id Street was one of the i,~ost: henvf ly traveled ~treets In Anaheirn.
Mr. Fick advised that a conditional use permit was r~qufred to convert a residentlal
struct~ire ta a CL use~ but not for a CO use.
Assistant Planning Ulrector-Z~ning Annika Santalahti advised that the CL Zone primarlly
permitted retall uses. ~-hereas the CO Zone permicted comn~ercial-office ty~e functions; and
that 'L square feet of sign area per Itneal foot qf frontage, to a rnaximum of 350 square feet
plus a free-standl~g sign~ wauld be legal in thP CL Zonc.
Mr. Fick further advised tliat even if the zon~ w~~s CI., a variance for the free-standing slyn
locat(on would still be required si~~ce the sign would be required to be located a minlmum of
26 feet from the north {~roperty 1(ne.
In response to questtoniny by Caamissioner Tolar rega~diny possibie oppc~slt(on to e
reclassiffcation of zoning on the sub,ject property. Commissioner Nerbst noted cht+t the
adjacent sinale•famlly residences would oppo~e it because it was possible Chat a row of
three or fou~ existing structures cc~uid be torn down and cormiercial-retall st~uctures built,
if the zone was changed~ resuiting in a tremendous amount af traff(c being genereted in the
adJacent alley.
Thereupon~ Cortmissioner Toiar noted that he would have no qualms about such an eventuality
since a ne~r cummercial structure would look better than a converted house, rtc.; a~d he
furthp~ noted that he would vote agatnst the prop~sed free-standing stgn in the CO Zone but
v.o~ld probably support a change of zoning to CL. He questioned the filing fees for
reGlassif(cations of zoning versus variances; and Comnissioner Mo~ley suggested that It
might be possible not to vote on the variance and give credit to kt~e petltio~er toward a
reclassification application; whereupon~ Miss Santalahti advised that the Planning
Uepartment was in the process of budget considerations and the fees charged were based on
the amount of staff time tnvolved.
Canmfssioner Herbst nated that~ hav(ng been involved in the prevtous public hearing for the
CO zoning on the subjecC praperty, this property was almost identical to the property on the
narth side of Lincoln Avenue~ aesc of Su~kJst Street~ with ar. alley dividing the property
3/ t 4/77
~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, March 14~ 1977 77-211
VARIANCE N0. 2915 (Contlnued)
.~_
from ~estdentla) land usas~ a~d treffic would be dumpeci onto tha alley ancl the adJscent
reaidential streets from a comm~rclel-retall use of the suh)ect property.
Commissloner Tolar nnted that. in his opinion~ it would not be e:conantc~ily feasible to take
down aeveral of the ~roperti~s to comb~nc than for redevelopmunt for Cl uscs.
It was noted that tha Uirector of the Planniny Departm~nt had determin~d that the proposed
actl~~ity fell within the defi~itlon of Sect(on 3.01~ Ciass 11~ of the City of Anahetm
6uldeltnes to the Requlrements for an Envir-,nmental Impact Repart end was~ therzfore~
categorlcally exempt from the requ(rement to file an EtR.
Ccxnmissioner Morley offered Resolution No. PC77-6~ and moved for (ts passage and adoptio~~
thet the Anahefm ~Ity Pianning Commisslon does hereby deny Petit~on for Varlance No. 291y on
thcs basis that the petitluner dld not demonst~ate that a hardship wc~uld be creatod tf the
waivera wr.res not c~rant~d; and that approval of aa(d var(ance would set a~n undesirable
prccedent for I`uture sir~llar ~equcsts in tlie subJcct arc~ which Is AdJ+~cant to single-family
resldentla) lend uses. (See Resolutlon Book)
Ors rol) call, the fo~egoing rosolution was passed ~y t~e following vote:
RYES : CON11) SS I ONE RS : aARNES ~ DA,V 1 D~ HER45T, K I NG ~ NORLF.Y ~ TOLAR, JOIINSON
NOES: COHMISSIONEr~S: NONC
ABSENT ; CAMMI SS I ONEfiS: tdONE
~ I R t1EGAT I YE DECLARAT I ON - PUEil1 C IiEAR 1 tJG. WARM 1 NG?ON VENTURES ~ i 7880 Skyparlc C i rcle ~
Irvine, CA ~2707 (Owner); A.S.A.W.A. CORPORATION~ 540 North
VARIANCE N0. 2916 Golden Clrcle Drive~ Suite 114, Sant~ Ana~ CA 9270; (AgEnt);
requcsting WAIVEF OF MINiNUl1 STRUCTURAI SETOACK, TO EST~BLlSH
A CONVENiE:NCE CENTER on property described as a rectangularly-
shaped p~rcel of land conslsting ofi approxirnately 0.5 acre located at the northwest corner
of Orang~thorpe Avenue and Kraeii~er E3oulevard~ having approxi~rw~te frontages of 143 feet on
the north side of Orangethorpe Avenue and 149 feet on ihe west side of Kraemer Boulevard~
and further descr:bed as 1701 North Kraemer 8~ulevarc;. P~operty presentty classified Cti
(CQMMERCIAL~ HEAVY) ZONE.
It was noted tl~at the petitl~ner was request~ng that the sub}ect Items be cor. inued fo~ two
weeks f~r the submissio~ of revtged plans.
Commissioner Y.inq offered a motion~ seconded b~~ Ccxnmissioner Tolar and M0710N CARRI~D~ that
the Anaheim Gdty Planning Commis;ion does heret~y continue the public hearing and
consideration of Petltion f~r V-sriance No. 29~6 to the Planning Commisston meeti~g of March
28~ 1977, as requested by the: ;~etitioner.
3/14/77
~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMIS510r~~ Ma~ch 14~ 1q7~ ~~"212
EIR CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT • PUBLIC HCARt~IG. WILLIAM C. STOOKEY~ 125 Soutt~ Glaudina 5treat~
Ant+heim~ cn 92~0~- (Owner); PACIFIC OUTOOOa ADVERTISING COMPANY~
1J44 Narva Street~ los Angeles~ CA 90031 (Agant); reguestfng
CONDITIONAL USE CQNTI~~UEU USE OF TW;~ EXS~INf; DILLEiOARDS WtTH WAIVER OF Pf.RMITTEO
PERMIT N0. 16g2 LOCATION on prorerty desGrfbed as a~ rectan~ularly•shaped parcel
" of lend canslstlny of approximatety O.A4 acre located at the
~orth~ast carncr of Bro~dwey anJ Anahelni Boulevard~ having
approx(mate frontages of 15~ feet on the narth slde of B~oadwAy and 126 feet on the east side
of Anahatm Boulevard~ and further descrlbed as 2a~i Soutl~ Anahelm Baulevard. Property presently
claasified CG (COMMERCIAL~ GENERAL) ZONE.
EIR CAik:GORICALLY EXE~IPT - PUBLIC FIkARING. MARY ALICE GRiM511AW~ 1112 East E1 Camtno Lane~
Santa Ana~ CA 9270y (Owner); PACIFIC OU~UOnR ADVERTISING
CONQITIONAL USE COMPANY. 17~+0 Narvo Straet~ Los Angeles~ CA 90032 (Agent);
PERMIT N0. 1G9; requcsting C~NT111~!Ef~ USF QF AN EY.ISTINf, BILLBOARD WITN WAIVER
OF (A) PERMITTf:D LOCATION ANU (t~) MAXIMUM HEIGNT on property
descrlbeJ as a rectanc~ularly-st~oped parr.el nf land conststing
of approximately 0.~2 acre located at the soutlrivest corner of Broadway and Anahelm Bouldverd.
haviny approximate frontagrs of 131 Feet on thn sauth side of Sroadway end 176 f3et on the
west slde of Anahetm Boulevard. and further descrtbed as 301 South Anahetm Boulavard.
P~operty presently classified CG (GOMMERCIAL~ GENCRAL) 20NE.
No one indicated thelr presence in opposition to the subJect item.
Altliough the Staff Report to the P1Anninc~ Commission dated Merch li-, 1977~ was not read et
thr publ(c hearing~ it ls referr~d t~ ancJ made r part ot' che mi,~ r~ -.
Mr. Jay Kingry, represci~tiny the agent f4r thc petittoner~ appeared baforc the Planning
Cortmission and stated this was the fourth hcaring on the subject b(llboar~s and there hed
bee~ no o,~nosi•ion yet; tl~at he felt the slgns werc ccM+patihle with the ar•ea and it wes
proven so b~~ t~eir very existence with n~ canplalntY to I~is knowledge; that similar signs
existed within two blocks ~f th~ subJett properties; that the signs genereted income for th~
p~operty owner as en intrrim ~se uniil such ttme as the properties were put to thcir highest
and best use; ~hAt the propert~~ on the northeast corner of 9roadway and Anaheim Boulsva~d
was withtn the Gommunity rndevclopment area and t~e had a letter sign~d by the SRntor Vice
President of the Pacific Outdoor Advertising Company walving all rights to severance damages
in the ~vent of acquisition by the Corrmunity Rtdevelopment Agtncy prior to the expiration of
the conditiont~l use permit; Lhat~ usually, they received compsnsation when the slgns were
caused to be removed by a public agency; that the slgRS were erected subsequent to bu(tding
permits which were tssued in error and, although he was aware that the subJect erea
restrictd billbna•ds~ he had failed to view the site and make that analysis prior to their
erecCion.
TNE PUBLIC HEARlN3 WAS CLOSED.
It was noted that one letter I~ad been received tn opposition to the subJeci biliboards~ as
follows;
3/t~+/77
.~a
; {
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ MarLh 14~ 1977
CONOITIONAI JSE PERNIT NOS. 1592 AND 1693 (Continuad)
_._....... _.....~ ~
"March i0, 197~
Anahelm City Planntng Cortimisslo~:
Re: Pub11c Heartng on March 14~ 1977 at 1:3Q P.M. to consider:
Conditiona) Use Permit No. lE~y2 and tG~3
An extension of the c~nilnuecJ use of the tw~ extsting billboar d s on the
property approx. 0.414 acre at che northeast corner of Broadway and
Anahelm Boulevard~ os wel) as tha existtng b(Ilboard on propert y approx.
0.52 acre at the southwest corner of Broadway and Anehelm Boule va~d, Is
herewith protested.
RE11SOt! :
According ~;o Zoning Code, Tltle 1~~ Chapcer 1fi.0y.111.020~ and .021~
billboerds are nut permitted in the specified aroas.
The blllboards we~e erected because an Anahelm tity Off(cial is sued a
permit in error. To enable the owner ~f the btllboards ~o ge t back the
cost of the billboards and their erect(on~ permtssion was ~ran~.ed t~ use
the billboards for a rcasonablc t(mc.
Issuance of a permit for concinued use of thr, exlsting billboa rds would
mast c~rtainly be a violation agetnst the ~stabltshed anci exis ting zoning
codes of the City of A~aheim.
17-213
/s1Ad~lf P. Mlller
5859 w• Random Drlve
Anaheim~ CA 928~4"
:ortmissioner Morley noted that he had obJected to the subJect bii~boerd s from the first
public hearfng on same; that at the original public hearing, the statemencwas mede by the
petitioner that it took two ycars to reGOUp the money spent in erectin g a billboard; that
four years had passed sfnce the billboarcis were first erecced; therefo re~ the subJeci
propos+~ls should be drnted.
Commissio~er Tolar note~ that~ in his opinion, thc billbaar~-~ ac the na rtheast corner of
6rue~iway and Anahetm Bouievard were not doing any ha~m at thts par:icular time and it would
be only a shart Neriod of time before the prop~rty would be acquired fo ~ redevelopn-ent and
he remtmbered the statements regarding costs, t~nd knew that the owner was being well
ct~mpens a t e d.
Gommissio~er Nerbst agreed with Commissioner Tolar regard(ng the on~ sign location~ that it
had mare appeal than the sidc of the old brick buildtng it abutted; :ha t he had gone along
with tl~e billboards originally since the City had made a mistake. etc,; and ehat the one
sign lo:ation was nat hurttng the City until such time as the property was atqutred for
redevelo;~ment~ since the petitioner had stipulated to waiving any comp~nsatlon (n connection
with the removal.
It was noted that the Director of the Planning Department had determin~d that the proposed
activlties fell within the definition of Section 3.01~ Class 3~ of th e City of Anahelm
3/14/71
~
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ March 14, 1977
COND IT I ONAL USE PERM I T NOS . 1692 ANO 16~13 (Cant i nucd)
- -- ..~~._.
Guldelines to the Requtrements for an Environmental Impact Report wa~ wes. therefore~
catogortcolly exnmpt from the requlrements to file en EIR.
77-214
Ca+xnisslonor Toler offera~ Resolution No. PC77-~6 and moved for tta pessage and ddoption~
ti~et the Anaheim City Planning Commiss~~n d~es hesreby grant Petttton fo~ Conditl~na~l Use
Permlt No. 1692 to pe rm(t the conttnued use af two cxlst(~g blllboerds In the Cnntra) Ctty
Area for a maximum of vne year~ fullowing whtch tlme the billboards shall be remaved at the
petitloner's expnnse; provided~ hc~wever~ that If the Commu~ity Rdevelopment Agency shall
acqulre the subJoct p ~operty prior to tt~e expiratl~n of safd one•year per(od, the subJnct
btllboards sl~all be rrmovsd inrnecJ(atcly at tlee petit(oner's expense •- as stipuleted to by
tho petittoner; that tl~e petltioner shall subm(t ~ lntter speclfying that~ (n the event the
Cammunity Rcdcvclopr~c nt llgcncy shsl) acquirc thc subJcct propcrty fo~ rcdcvclopment prlor to
thcs expiret(on of tl~e above-n~entloned ona•year periud c~f time, all rlghts to severance
damages for removal ot the billboerJs shell bc h~r~by wiived~ as stipulated to by thQ
pctittoner. (See Resolutinn I3ook)
On roll call~ thc foreyoing resolut(~n was passed by the following vote:
AYES: CONMISSIO~IERS: BARNES~ DAVIU, NERaST~ KII~G~ TOLAR
NOES : CQMM I SS IO~~CRS : JOFIMSON ~ MORLEY
ABSENT: COMMISSIO~~ERS; NO~IE
Commissioner 7olar offcred Resalution No. PC77-61 and mo~red for its passage Ancl adoptlon,
that thc Aneheim City Plenning Commissfon does f~ereby der~y Petitian for Conditiana) Use
Pertn(t No. 16~3 on the basis that the petitioner did not demonstratc that a hardship would
bc created if [he waivers were not yrntecl to perrnlt th~ continued use af an exlsting
billboard in the Cent ral Gity A~ea; that~ furthermore~ the proposal is dented on the bssis
that prevtous approv a) for the billboard allowed tl~e petitioner to recover th~ expenses
involved in the Initial canstruction of the bYllboarJ for wt~ich a building permit was issued
in er~or~ the petitio ner having reauested two ycers for Lhe recavery of safd exp~enses and a
totsl of thre~ years haviny been previously granted; tl~at tt~p subJect billboard (s existing
within the Center C-ty Area which is specifically excluded by the Zoning Code as a
permissible locatton for billboards; and~ thercfore, the Planning Commission does hereby
determine that the subJect location is inapp~aF~iate for billboards. (See Resol~tfon 8oak)
On ~ol l cal l~ the fore<~oing resolution was passed by the fol lowing vote:
AYES: CO~~MlSSIONE RS: BARNES~ DAVIQ. HERBST. KIt~G. MORLEY~ TOLAR~ JQHNSON
NOES: COMMISSIONE RS: NONE
ABSENT; COMNISSIO~JEP,S; NONE
3/14/17
.~.
~.v
MINUTES~ CITY PIANNING COMMISSION, March 1W~ 1977
71-215
EIR NEGATIVE OECLARATION - PUBLIC HCARING. nUNN BUSINESS PARKS~ 28 B~ooktiollow Orive~
xants AnA, CA 92/0~ (Owner); ~equnsting permission to ESTAALISN
CONDITIONAL USE A MOTEI on property descrtbed as a rectangularly•~shaped psrce)
PERNIT N0. 1694 of land conaisting of approximetely 1.2 ocras havl~g a frontage
~ of approximetQly 2ap feet on thc north side of Le Palma Avenue~
hevtng a maximum depth of approximately 270 feat~ t+nd belny
lacated epproximatoly la0 feet wesC of the cence~line of Woodl~+nd Orive. Property presently
clsssiflesd MIL (INDUSTRIAL~ LIMITED) (with a resolutton of intant to CL).
Cc~+n~nissloner King notsd that he had a conflict of incerest os deftned by Anahelm City
Ptanning Commisston Resalution No. PC7G-15'J adopting ~ Co~flict of Interest Code for the
Planning Commisston and Government Code Sectio~ 3b~5~ et seq.~ in that he owned Pactfic
lighting Corporation common stock~ and Dunn Properties was Assoclatnd with Peclftc Ltghting;
that pursuant to the provisions of the above Codcs~ he wes hcreby de~laring to the Chetrman
that he was wlthd~Awing frcxn the hearing In connection Nlth Condttional Use Permlt Ne. 169~~
(Itnm No. 13 of the Pla~ning Canm(sslon agcndb) end would not take part In Che discusslo~ o~
the voting the~eon; and that he tiad not discussed this metke~ with any member of the
P18nnirig Commission. Th1EREUPON~ COtIM155t0~~1"R KING LEFT THE COUNCIL CNAMBER AT 5:4a P.M.
No cx~e Indt.atad their presence tn opposition to the sub)r.ct petltlon,
Although •he Steff Report tc~ the Plann(ny Cwr~misston datcd March 14~ 1977~ wes not read at
the public t~earing~ sald staff report (s refc~red to and made a part of the minutes.
Mr. Ray ~h~rmak, representing the petitioner, appcared befq~e the Planning Gommisslon and
stated the proposed motel wouid be located adJaccnt to la Palma Avenue~ north of Woodland
Drive; that the motel use would be compatible with the incfustr(o) and commercial uses ln tha
area; and that he would st(pulate that the intent of the propasal did not tnctude a coffee
shop or restauront in cAnnectian with th~ matel units.
TNE PUBLIC NEARING WAS CLOSED.
In respons~ to quest(oning by Commiss(oner Herbst~ M~. Chermak stated tha[ although Dunn
Properties had a subsiJy organization known as Sandman Motels~ said orgrnization was
presentiy inacttve; th~t the s~ibject property would be sold to a developer who intended to
construct a motel f~r a user in accordance with the preclse plans submltted~ with the
txceptlon that the client had deciJed to expand thc: motel by six units~ and the submitted
plans were designed in such a wey that the expansion from 44 to 50 unlts~ plus a manage~'s
unit. wlth 55 avallable parking spaces~ could be facilitated. He further stated that he did
not knnw the reasons for the expansion.
In response to quest(~ning by Commissioner Ba~nes~ Mr. Chermak stated tha[ the percentage of
kitchenettes would drop from 14$ to 12b. as thr,y were not propasing to increasG the nurober
of units wfth kitthenettes.
In response Lo qusstloninc~ by Chairman Johnson~ Mr. Chermak stated they were p~oposing the
trash area to be in the ~c~ol areo and with complete circular access.
M~. Chermak added to his presentation that Dunn P~operties re:alized their obligatlons with
respect to traffic signalizatlon; that at the reheering on Condttional Use Permit No. 1642
befors the City Counr.ll~ t~A ~tynalixation was discussed i~ considerable detall and Dunn
Properties was put on nc meet and negotiate with staff tn that regard; that the Mayor
hac~ clarified that the m ~~uld be relativa to the shar(ng of costs for traffic signals
when needed; anJ that at t~ `ime th~re was considerab~e discussion as to whether Dunn
Propertie~ would participate. Thereupon~ Mr. Chermak stipulated that they would
participate, bu[ wanted to knaw to what exte~t the participatton would be. He stated that
3/t4/77
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ March 14, 1977
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 16~4 (Continued)
77-z ~ 6
50/50 partlctpation betweon the pe~ittoner and tho Clty was offered at the City Councll
hea~infl but the matcer was not resolved on eithe~ side; that e meeting was ~resently
scheduled ta dlscuss the metter wtth Traffic Fngineer Paul Singer; that tt was )ust a matter
of determt~ing w{iet th~ correct p~oratto~n of coats batween the devaloper and the Ctty wes;
and that if there wes a problem with th~ fundtng of the Clty's shere~ tt was posstble tt.at
Dunn Properties could stcp ln and fund thc total rether thAn havinq the Ci~y approprlote Its
share.
Commissioner Flerbst noted ttiat inasrnuch as Ounn Propertles was creating Che totel need for
traffic stgnals at th(s locati~n~ they should be totnlly responstble for tl~e signalixetton;
that the :nstbi'A*tun of craffic signals by develape~s was now Counctl ~+olicy; thac he did
not feel that the taxpayers of Anahe(m st~ould be obllyated ta puc in treffic slgnals when an
industrlel sub~lvislon was creatirtiy the t~tai prot,lern.
Commissto~er ~arnes suggested that thc Planntng Commtssfon recommond that the developar pay
the total costs for the traffic signals and if there was a problem~ the petitloner could
appnal to the City Council; whereupon~ Mr. Ghermak so stipulated.
Cammissloner Tolar noteu that the area was already in need of the trafflc s(gnal.
Commissioner Barnes offered a motion~ seconded by Commissianer Morley end MOTION CARRiED~
that the Anahelm Ctty Nlanntng Cortmission has reviewed ttie subject proposal consl5ting of a
50-unit rrbte) and manager's untt on epptoximately 1.7 acres located on the north side of La
Palma Avenue~ approx(mately 180 feet west of the centerline of Woodland Orive~ and does
hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of Anahe:(m that a Negative Declaration from
the requlrement to prepare an environmental impact report be apprcved for said proJect o~
the basls that there would be no signiftcant individual or ci~mulative adverse ImpaCts on the
environment due ta the approval of thts Negattve O~claration as evidenced by prlor
envlronmental impact reports ~nd r•elated info~mation previously considered by thls body for
the subJect property and~ additionaily, the Initial Study of Environmental Impact submitted
by the applicant Indicates no siyn(flcant adverse environmental impacts; and that the
Negattve Declaration substantiating the foregotng findtn~s is o~ file in the Offlce of the
Planning Departrt-ent at City Ilall.
Comnl~sioner Barnes offered Resolution No. PC77-68 and rnoved for tts passage and adoptlon,
that the Anahelm Citv Planning Cortunission does hereby grant Petition for Conditional Use
Permit No. 1694 to permit a 50-unit motel ~nd a manager's unit~ subJect to the submission of
revlsed plans in confor•mance with CoJe standards to the Planning Department for ~eview and
approval pr~or to the issuance of a bu~ldtng permit; that there shall be a maximum of 6
rental units (12~ of thc total number of motel rental units) with kitchenettes~ as
stipulated to by the petitioner; that the prope~ty owner(s) shall pay for the installation
of Lrefflc sfgnaiization at the intersectian of Woodland Drive and La Palma Avenue, said
pa~rment estimated to be $4p,000, the exact amo~~nt to be determined by the Traffic Engineer
at the time of payment; that, if other properti~s in the surroundtng commetctal-industrial
complex develop in connection w{tli approved zoning petitions (conditional us~ permits or
varianGes) the cc~st of siynalization may be apportioned as determtned to be appropriate by
the Traffic Engineer ancl charged to said petittoners wich reimbursement to the subject
petitioner; and subJect to the Interdepartmental Committee recomrnendations. (See Resolutton
Book)
On rol) call, the foregoiny resolut!Qn was passed 6y the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES, DAVID~ HERBST, MORLEY~ TOLAR~ JOHNSON
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSEK CaMMI5SI0NERS: KING
COf4MISSiONER KING RETURWED TO THE COUNCIL ~HAMBER AT 5:56 P.M.
3/14/77
MINUTES~ ~iT~ PLANNING COMMISSION~'Morch 14, 19'I7 ~~'2 »
EIR CATEGORICAL EXENPTION - Request to ahanJ~n an extsting publ(c utiltty easement
loceted at the west slde of Wastern Avcnue~ north of
ABANOONMENT N0. 76-13A Teranimbr Urive.
It wa~ noted that Mr. Jan~s L. Barisic hed submitted ~ requesc fo~ abando~rrK nt of the
subJect exlsting ~ublic utllity easement; tF~at the sub]ect ~asement was originally acqut~ed
'~y the Southarn Californla Edisun Compa~y anJ~ subsequcntly~ assiyneJ to the Ctty at the
time the Ctty Acqulred tl~e Edis~n Gompdny's facilic(e~ in the gubJect area; thAt the
applicant had granted new easements to the City to occomrtbdate the proposed developme~t of
adJecent property anJ~ tl~~refare~ the Eleccrical Dlvision I~ad indicated no obJection to
relnasing the subJec[ ease~,~nt; tI~~C a-i environmental review of the proposed aba~dnnment
indlcated this proJect to be cntegorlcelly exempt from the fifing of an environmental Impact
undcr thc provisions of Secc(on 3.01~ Class 5, of tii~. City Guldelfncs; that the subJect
request hed been revlewed anJ approved by the necessary departments of the City and affected
outside agencies~ and the City ~nglnecr was~ therefore, recommendtng approvA) of the
requested abandonment.
Cortanissloner Marley offered a motion~ seconded by Comnissiuner• Oavid and MOTION CARRIED~
that the Anahe(m Clty Planniny Commisston does hereby recvmmend eo the City Council of the
C(ty of Anahelm that the request ta abandon an exlsting public utlltty easement located at
the west side of WesCern Avenue, north of Teranimor Drive and separating l.ot Nos. 1 and 2 of
T~act No. 28~y~ be approved. as recommended by thc City En9lneer and based on the foregoing
findtngs, a legal description of said easement bcing on file at the City.
REPOFtTS ANU - ITEM A
RECOMMENUATIOHS ~1~`f FOR EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION - For Gradtng Plan No. 589
at the ~southeast corner of Cerro Vista Driv~ and Gnrro Vista Way.
It was noted that an application had been filed for Gradtng Plan Nn. Sa9~ to grade
approximately 1~200 cubic yards of dirt (no impo~t. no export) for one reside~tial lot at
the southeast corner of Cerro Vista Drive and Cerro Vtsca Wsy; and that a study of the
proposed grading plan by the Planning Department and the Engineering Division indlcsted that
there would be no significant individual or cumulative adverse impact as a result of this
project.
Conmissloner Morley offered a mc~tion~ seconded by Commissioner David and MOTION CARRIED~
that the Anahetm City Planning Commisslon does hereby find that~ pursuant to the p~ovisio~s
of the Gal(for~ia Environmcntal Quality Act, the propased grading plan for one single-family
lnt at Cerro Vista Drive and Cerro Vista 'day wauld not have a significant individua~ or
cumulative adverse envlronmental (mpact because the Inltial SGudy indicates the project will
involve only minor grading as mitigated by conformance with City sten~iards and pollcies and~
therefvr~e~ recommcnds to the City Council that a Negative Declaration f~om the ~equirement
to pr~pa~s an Environmentat Impa~t Report bc approved; and that the Negative Declaration
substantiating the foregning findings is on ftle in the office of the Planning Departmnnt at
City Hall.
3/ 14/77
~
~
NINUIES, CITY PI.ANNING COMMISSION~ Marcl~ 14, 1977 77-2~R
ITEM 8
~,~~'~ONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1570 - Request for terminatlon -
Property consistt~g of appraximately 1.04 ecras on the north
side of ~Incoln llvenue~ appraximately 271 feet west of Magnolia
Avenuo.
It was notAd that Candittona) Use Permit No. 1~70 was approvcd co~dltionally by the Plsnning
Cnmmtssion on Octob~r 29~ 1975~ tc permtt a bus clepot on the subject property; that the use
of a traller as a tomporary office structure in c~nnection with the use was ltmited to a
per•tod of onn yaar~ subJect to ruview end consideratlon for an extenslon of time upon
~equest by tl~e apptlcant; cl~at on January 3~ 1977~ the Planniny Commission granted a 60-day
extenston of ttme for use of the tratler, subJect to the requiren~ant that all conditlons of
~pp~ova) bc met~ after whfch the applicent could request an addttional extenslon of ttme;
and that the applicant I~ad submltted a letter r~questing tcrminatton of Condttional Use
Permtt No. 1570 because Star-Dust Charters~ Inc. was no longer in buslnes5 In Anaheim and
tha property was be(ng off~rtd for sale.
Commtssioner King offercd a motton~ secondeci by Canmissloner Bernes and MOTION CAaR1EQ, that
the Anaheim City Planning Comm(sston du~s he~eby recomm~nd to the City Council of the City
of Anahetm thac P11 proceedtnys in connectton with Cond(tianal Use Permit No. 1570 be
termtnatad, as requested by the appltcant.
ITEM C
P1~17~ACE N0. 2705 - Request fo~ an excension of t(me for outdc~or sto~age
of trucks and equipment - P~operty consisting of approximately one acrG
located on the side ef Cypress Strect~ approxtmately lb5 feet west of Vine
Strcet.
The Staff Report to the Planntng Commission dated March 14~ 1977~ was presentcd an~ made a
part of the mtnutes.
It was noted that the applicant (Mr. Fred J. Barbour, Proper~ty Manager for the Curc(-Turne~
Company) had submitted a request for an extension of time for VariAnce No. 2705~ ~etrosctive
to Warch 4~ t977~ to perm(t the outdoor storage ~f trucks and equipment on the subJect
property; that the subject vartance was granted by the Planning Commission cm June 9~ 1975,
fo~ a pe~tod of one year~ subject to all conditions of apprnval being completed withtn 60
days; that there was substantlal appositian fr~m the adJaGent prop~~ty owners and residents
at the public hearing on this variance~ and the pettttoner had indicated at that time that
the contractor who would be using the property would be there for only a few months; xhat
the petttior~er hACi not ca;.plled with the conditions outlined in the resolution of approval~
with the exceptton of tt~e clos~re of the gate to ~e east at the alley leading to Vine
Street, and was bastcally requesting that the conditions be walved to allow the conttnued
present use of the property until such tirr~e as the property was acquired by the
Redevelopment Agency. It was further noted that on January 4~ 1977, the Plenning Commission
granted a 60-day extension of time to expire on March 4~ 1971, du~ing which time the
applicant was to have met alt of the c.ondttions of approval; that~ although the use of the
property had been restricted to the storege of trucks and equipment not in excess of one and
one-half tons or 5~500 pounds capacity~ inspection af the pr~perty on three differer,t
occasions indicated th~t semi-tractors a~d traiters were also being stored on th~ property
3/14/77
MINUTES~ CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ Ma~ch ~~~.~1977
77-Lty
ITEM C (Continund)
_.._..._
and tha prope~ty wes being poorly matntalned; and that the petit~oner had not enclosed the
use~ aa required by the resolution.
Mr. Fred Ha~bour appoared before the Planning Conmission t~ support hls request to be
ellowed to continue the present use of the property until such ttme as 1t wa~ ecquired by
the Redevelnpment Agency.
Cornmtssioner King noted th~t the conditions af approval should have been rnrt for the
prot~ction of the ariJacent resiclcntlal nelghbarhood.
Chai.rman Jolinson noted that thc petitioner hacl been given an upp~rtunity [o use the prope~ty
but I~ad made no effort to meet the conditions of approval to prevent the use from being
detrimental ta the area.
Cortimissloner Morley offercd a maCion~ seconded by Commissioner Bar~es and the NOTION CARRIED
BY UI~ANIMOUS VOTE, that thc Anshe(m City Plenning Cortmisslan does hereby deny the request
for an extension of time for Varlance No. 2~05 on the basis of the fo~egoing ftndings and
does~ furthermore~ recommend to the City CAUncil of the City of A~ahelm that al) proceedings
in connectlon with Petition for Variance No. 2705 be terminated.
ADJOURNMENT • There being no further business to d(scuss, Commissioner King offered a
mation~ aecondPd by Commissio~er Morley and MOTION CARaIED~ that the
meeting be adjourned.
The mc~etiny adjourned at 6:Ob p.m.
Respectfully submitted~
. • ~ Q'/~I-~
PaCricia 8. Scanlan~ Secretary
Anahefm City Planning Commisston
PS:hm
3/14/77