Minutes-PC 1978/01/04C1 ty -ial 1
Anaho(m, Callfornla
January 4~ 19IQ
REGULAR MF:cTINf OF TNE ANAItEiM CITY PLAN~~I~IG COMMISSIQN
RCGULAR - Thc re,yular meetin,y of tl~e Anatieim City Plan~ing Gammtssion was celled to
MEETING orcler by Chat rmAn Tc,;ar at 1: 3y ~,m. ~ January t+, 197u, In the Counc( 1
Chamber~ a quorum being present.
PRtSLNT - CFIAIRMAN: Tolar
COMMISSIOt1Ef'.5; Bsrnes. Oavid~ Nerbst~ John~on~ Kiny
Commissloner Lfnn arrived at 3:00 p.m.
AL50 PRESCNT - Jack 41h i te Ueputy C i ty 1lttorney
Annika Santalahti Assistant Director for Za~,~ng
Jay Tltus Offlce Engincer
J. J. Testiir~ A3sfstant Planner
Edith Harris Plann(ng Commissior, Secretary
PLE DfE OF •'h~ Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United Stotes of Amer(ca wes
ALLEG I ANCE IBd by Comrni ss 1 oner KI ng.
APPROVAL OF - Gomnissloner Klny offered a macion~ seconded by Commissioner Davld and
T11E MINUTES MOTION CARRIEU (Cammissioner Lf~n being ~bsont)~ that the minutes of the
meeting of December 5, 1917~ he approved as submitted.
I TEM N0.
~XEFR~TVC QECLARATION PUBLIC NEARINf. 04MER5: CI~ESTER PETCRSON IWD
GL S C I N N0. JJ-'~3-34 ~EVERLY ANN GOMPTON~ 221 North Naplewood Street,
N~ E MI~P OF~ RACT N0. 10115 Orange~ C~ 32GG6, AGENT: ~EAR BRAND MNCII
COMPAf~Y, 25~ Newport Center Dr(ve, Newport Bnach~
CA 92G6~. ENGINEER: NI}i~SAKER b ASSOCIATES. INC.~
3001 Red N111~ gullding VI~ Suitc 2;'L~ Costa M~sa, rq 92626. Property describcd as an
irregularly-shaped parcel of land conslsting of approximately 5.2 bcres located west ~nd
snuthwest of the southwest corner of Santa Ana Cany ~~ Road and Avenida Margarita~ hav{ng
approximate frontages of 231 feet on tf~c souti~ slda of Se~nta Ana Canyon Road and 528 ftet
on the north side of Avenida Margarita, and being lucated eppraximetely 478 feet west of
th~e centerltne of Avenida Margarita and 504 feet southwest of the centerline of Sar.ta Ana
Canyon Road.
RCCLASSIFIi,ATIQN REQUEST: RS-A-43,OQ0(SC) (RESIDtNTIAL/AGRICULTURIIL-SLENIC CORRlD4R
OVERLAY) ZOtJE TO RS-7200(SC) (RESIUENTIAL~ SINGLE-FAMILY-
SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) 20NE.
TENTATIVE TRACT REQU~ST; 21-lot. RS•7200(SC) SUBDIVISION.
Chairmen Tolar potnted out that the app~icant had requested a G.onttnuance (n order to
submtt revised plans.
ACTION: Cor+xniss(one~ King offered a mntion~ seconded by Commtssione~ Johnson and MOTIOl~
CAitRIEO (Commissfoner Linn be(n~ absent)~ that consideration of Item Mo. 1 be continued
to the meettny ~f Jsnuary 16. 1978.
~s-> >iai~a
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING CONMISSION, Janua~y 4. 1918
IT WAS NOTED T11E APPLICAIIT W/1S NOr PRESENT FOR ITEM N0. 2.
78-2
I TEM N0.
IR CA EGORICAI EXEMPTION-CLASS 11 PUtiLIC H~,ARIt~G. OWNER: MARif. R. W1~17~, 113 Via
V N. 3 Lldo Soud~ Newport Rcach~ CA 926E~n. AGENT: THE
-""' -"i'- MET2 CORPOMTION~ 25~ Brlggs Street~ Costa Mesa~
CA 92G26. Pet(t(oner requests WAIVER OF MAXIMUM
SIGN AREA TQ PERMIT ADU171QI~AL SIGN AREA T~ AN EXI5TING FRE:E-STANDING SICN on property
d~scrtbed as an irreyularly~sl.ped parcel of ~~nd conslsting of appraxlrnately 3.Q acres
having a frontage of approxtmatcly G~L fect on the east sidc of West Strcet~ heving a
maximum deptti c~f approximately 416 fect~ locnted appraxlmately ;~2Q fcct souCh of thA
ce~tariine of South Street~ and furtl~ar descr~bed As ~E~6 Suuth uest Str~et. Property
presently classifted ML (INOUSTRIAL~ LIMITEO) ZONE,
There was no one (ndicsting thelr presence in opposition to subJr:ct rer~uest~ and although
the staff report to th~ P1anning Co~nmisslon d.~ted Januery ~~~ 197~ was ~~ot raad at the
public hearing~ it is referred to and made a~Art of tl~e minutes.
Commissioner King noted that he had a conflict of int~rest as Aeflned 'oy Anaheim City
P1anning Commission finsolution No. pC7G-1~1~ ac~optinc~ a Conflict of Interest Codc for the
Pldnni~g Commisslon, and Covernmcnt Code Section 3625~ et seq.~ in thac h(s vote w~~uld be
biased; that pursu~nt to pr•ovislcros of the a4~ove cndes~ he was declsrir~g to the Chairmon
that he wes withdrawiny from tlie hearing in connection wltti It~m No. 3 of the Planning
Commission agenda anJ wou1J not ta~e pArt in cither the discusslon ur the votfng ihereon~
and thnt I~e had not discussed this mattcr witf~ any membcr of the Planning Commisslon.
TIIEREUPON~ COMHISSIONER KI~~G LEFT THE COUNCIL CNANDER AT 1:36 P.M.
Bill Jlles~ Me[z Sign Cort~any~ ayei~t for ttie p~tftio~er~ was present to answer any
questlons~ ~nd Merrill U~ebe, Vice Present of Jack Whltt Pontlac~ 86G Snu~h West Street,
Anahelm~ indicated that the requested waiver to permit aclditional sign area !s needed
because they rnoved to tt~is new locatiun in August~ 197J and obtalned a f'ranchise for
Pe~geot automobiles. t1e stated thcre is nn exlstiny sign in thc plante~ area which is
very et~e!~sible and 5afe~ dnd tlieY wanted to add tl~e new slc~n ta tl~e current sign whlch
will bP structurally safe anJ will support the new sfgn. Ne tndicatAd they need tfie
identlty for the ncw product at the front ~f their area.
TNE PUf~LIG HEARI ~; WAS CLOSEU.
Commissioner Nerbst indlcatcd the petitioner was addlny ;~ the existing si~~n and not
putCiny up a scparote siyn and the watver request is for on',y 17 square fect; that they
are adding a new llne of automobiles and need the recoqnicition and the Commission has
enc~uraged applicants to combine thetr siyns.
I[ was noted that che Director of the Plann(ny Department has determined that the proposed
activity falls within the definlti~~n of Section 3.Q1~ Ciass 11~ of the City of Anaheim
Guidelinas to thP Requirements fn~ an Environrnental impact Report and Is, cherefore,
categarically exempt from the requirement to file an EIR.
ACTI01~: Commissioner Herbst oft~red Resolution No. PC~$-2 and maved for its passage an~.i
a~opti~on, that thc Anaheim City Planning tommts!~ton does he~eby grant P~tition for
Variance No. 2984 on the basis that the sign ts needed ta advertise a new automoblle
distributo~ship and is being incorporaYed ~rith a~~ existing sign~ and sub,Ject tu
Inte~departmental Commlttee recommendations.
1/4/18
MINUTES~ ANAI~EIM CITY PLANNING COMM15510N~ ~anuary b~ 1978 7~~3
EIR CAT~GOa1CAL EXEMPTION-CLA55 I1 AND VARIANCE N0. 2984 (continued)
Commfsslonar Uarnes ind(cate~i she felt the location of tlic subaect site shoulJ be edded ~s
a conditlun.
Commisslonnr JQhnson asked if the sign was furnislied by Peugcot~ and Mr. ~eebe repllcd lt
wes a f~ctory identity s(gn; that they ha~ purchased It from the manufacturer.
Gommiss(oner Johnson indicated lie woulef Ilke the condit~:m adcled that che s(gn ls a
franchise sign for thc manufacturcr,
Cheirman Tolar (ndlc.eceJ lie wes going to support thP resolution but that he felt 350
square feet is quite adequate for signs and would hate to see tl~e Commission set a
precedent In relattonsiiip to establishing larger slyns~ but thot he would supr,ort this
rr.salut(on for the reasons indicoted by Commissio~~er flerbst. lie (ndicated tf tl~e
petiticm er were building a new sign, tl~en hc wauld have doubts about allowing ihc
addttlaral sign area.
Commissioner B~rnes indlcatec! she would like tt~e Commissfon to recGnslder the conditior~
rcgarding tl~e standard factory a(qn because she would not likc for sor-xone else to point
to tfiet and try to use (t as a hardship. She felt it should not be a reason for yronting
the varlance.
Commissioner Johnsan ind(cated lie understc~od what Commt~sioner liarnes was saying~ but that
Ci~is slyn was ve ry clase to meet(ng the requiren~ents and it would be Impassible for
companies to put out stAndard signs that would fit ali r.It~ requirements ac~oss the
country. He felt ttu petitioner needed this sign for identity cf the new product.
Chalrman 7ola~ indicated he p~:rsonally felt tl~is should be incluJed as one of the reasons
for granting tf~e vartance because the s(gn was an established siyn and is sa close to
~~~eeting ttie requtreme:nts; tt~at if the petitioner r~ere haviny the siyn built. then It could
be bullt to meet the requirements.
Commissio~er Barnes Indi~ated in thJs case slie did not have any obJectlons to the s~gn but
did not Ha~t to see people in the future usiny that as an txcuse for Nuttln~3 up larger
signs and did not want automobile compa~ies dictating what size signs we have In the City
of Anaheim,
Cha(~man Tolar indicated he felt there would b~ enough dialogue in the mtnutes to
estab)ish Chat this was not a~:tecedent•setting case.
On roll call, the foreyolnry resolution was passed by tne foilowing vote:
AY~S: C011M1SSIONERS: aARNES~ DAVIU~ HERBST~ JfNNSON, TOLAR
NO~S : COMMI SS I Ot1ERS: N011~
ABSENT: COMMI.ri.`'iln~!ERS: KING~ LINtI
CO~+MISSIONER KING RETURt~EU TO TItE COUt~CIL CIiAMBER AT 1:45 P~M.
1/4/78
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM GITY ~'LANNING COMMIS S ION, January 4~ 197~ 78'~
ITCM N0. 4
~~aRIGAL CXEMPTIAN-CLASS 1 PUULIC N~ARItIG. OWNER: CO'.LINS LIMITED PARTNERSIIIP~
~~''~''~'~~ . 9 ~O]7 West BaI1 aaad~ Analielm, CA ~)2~302. AGENT:
JUU I TN N. N( LL ~ P. 0. Box 3~~3, Anahe i m~ CA 92803.
Petit(~ner requcsts permission to ESTABIISH A
KINGSMEt~'S DRUM b BUGIE CORPS AUMI1~ISl~MTION OFFICE~ ACTIVITY ANO 81NG0 F~1CIlITY on property
described as an irre9ul+~rly-sl~aped parcel of land ~onsisttng of approximet~ety 1.1 ~cres
located at the southwest corner of 8roodway and Adams Street~ having ep~roxln++~te front~gas
of 40 feet on thc south si~e of B~oaJr.ay and 2?.0 feet on the west side of ~4dams Street~ end
further desc~lbed as 1514 West dr~aclway, P~oparty presently classifled ML ( INDUSTRIAL~
LIM11'ED) ZONE.
There were ten peopl~ indtcating thei r pre~.ence In opposition to subJect request~ and
althougf~ the staff report to [he Planning ~:ommtssion datad Jsnuery 4~ 1~Jft ~vas not read At
Chc; publl~ I~earlny~ it is rcferred to end -T-ede a oart of i.he mtnutes,
Judith Hill, represenlin,y tlie Yingsmes-~'s prum enJ Bug~^ ~~rps. ind(cated the•y are applying
for the conditlonal use Fermit to mov~ their fund-raisin.~ orgenizatien binc~o ta the old
Harrnony Park Uallroom; that the bui Id ing they Ara prese~tly occupytng is t,cii~g sald and
they need to relocatc.
Doug Ewiny~ 37~ Gilbuck priv~~ Anahei r,~, lndicated the restdents Here concerned bucause
only onc homeowncr received a notice af the liearing. He stated thsy were con,-.erneA about
nolse~ addittonal traffic~ ana pa~kir g pr~blems caused by ttis bingo acti~itie:,; that they
were afraid the spill-over perki~g would come over i~to their streecs~ espect+:lly Gilbuck;
that he understr~d the Orum ~nc1 Bugt~ Corps was being asked ta move from their present
loc~tlon because of the tr~ffic~ parlcing and noise problPms; and tfiat they would be
located wi thln 100 yards of thet r hU~es and thei r h~urs of ~~ractice on Monday, Wednesday,
Friday and Saturdey~ frnm G:00 p.m. ~0 10:30 p.m. woul~l be excessive and they ~ild noL want
thiis actlvi[y i~ this building,
J, J. Tashiro~ Assist~~nt Planner~ poi nted aut that the propcrty owners' notices had been
taken f~om the Orange County Assesso~'s books a~d that the property is Ilsted as sti il
being owned L•, Pacesetter Horties.
Mr. Ewing polnted out that t~e had coc~ta~<<d Pacesetter tlomes and that they indi„ated they
had not reca ived a not i ce of the he~ F-Ing.
Chairman Tolar asked thuse peop{e present i~ op~osition hc~w they had found out f~bout ehe
hearirsg~ and Betty Larson, 38~ South GI lbuck Drive~ indlcated she had recei•~ed ~i notice
but, because of the rain~ she I~ad no= had time to contact very many people and stated they
would I ikr tu have more time to gct ~ pe[i tion so that othe~ people who wi'i 1 be affected
by the acti~%ity will knaw about it.
Di ck Jepsen ~~~GO Sou~ h G i I buck, A~ah~Im ~ stated he 1 i ves across che tra~~ks `rom the
propose~i s~ te and ~ at ~ne tt mc he pu rchascd h i s home ~ t~e w~s to 1 d that the -'a I 1 roa~ tracks
were there and was zdvised tiie tracks were rarely us~d; chat the trair~s only go by ance or
*_wice a day and tf~ey would not i~ave ve~y much ofi a noise problem~ but that this
irformation was incorrect; I~owever, they were aware of '_ when Lhey bough[ their home. He
dld not feet they should be subject~ J to additional noise. as proposcd~ with thP practlce
*_imes untll 10:00 or 10:3~ p•~•
Stan Rohrs~ Ai Rahrs and Son, I~c., 1436 West Santa AnA Street, Anaheim~ stated their
property abuts thc ba~k parking iot and that they have been there for 13 ypars and hpve
had parking problems. He stated he had counted 61 parking spaces on tf~e proposed slte.
i/4/78
MINUTES. ANAHEIN CITY pLANNINf, COMMISSIUN~ J~nuery 4~ 1378 18-5
EIR CAY~G~RICAL EXEMPTION-GLASS 1 ANO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1~90 (continued)
Ha steted they liave trur.ks that usc Adams Street. and~ ayain, their concerns were the
parking and conyestion.
Ms. NI1) stated they have never received corn~~latnts abvut tl~e nolse t~t the(r present
locetlan; that th~ youn~sters prectice ind~ors; nnd th~~t Monday~ Wednesdoy~ Fridoy and
Saturdey nights ere binga niyhts~ not ret~earsAl niyhts; chet there will be a minimum af
rehoarsai time in khe butlding bccausc of ttie noise; tliat most of the practlcing fs donc
outside an tlie l~nehetm St~7dtum parking lat, Shc statcd the reason they ere moviny from
thelr pr~sent locat(on Is nat becausc of nolse ancl parking~ but becnuse the bu(ld(ng ts
being sold ancl they cannc~t ~-fforJ ta buy it. She felt they would h~~ve adequate parking;
that they havc an averoge of 2~0 pcople; and chat thcy toke gre~it crre to see that they do
not (nterfere wi tl~ anyonc elsc's ri yht.
TIIE PUIiL I C 11LAR1 tIG IlAS CLOSED~
Chairman Tolar polnted out to Ms. H(I1 t~iat the Planning Comn(sslon had granted a
condlllonbl use pcrr~~it for the ~:tngsmcn's Urum and Ouyle Corps to move to an tndustrial
locatlon on Stat~ Col leyc f3oulcvar~f ~ and Ms. I~i l I rep) led they had nevcr moved to that
locetlon betause of tlie co,i of bringing t~~t butiding up to the rcqulremcnts.
Chairman 7olar asked if tfii5 proposc~i facility liad been checked out and all improvements
made~ Ms. ti11) lndiu~ted tfiey would heve to put spr(nklers on the builcling. She was
concerned about the conditien iri [he staff report regordiny street lights. Chalrman
Tolar pointed ~ul that if ttie strect Iiyhcs arc i~~ and paid for, they would not have to
pay for them age i n.
Chairmen Tolar stated he nd~er~toud that the Kinysmen Drum and Dugle Corps is a non-profit
organ(z~t(~n and~ with ki<is invalvecl, r.~a vote ageirst it is likc voting ayatnst
"mothenc~~od an~i apple pie~" but that I:e did nut chink thls porticular location~ so close
to resi~Sential~ would be suitable. t1e indicated the Commission has yranted thi, type of
use~ buL it has generally been where it would not infringe up~n other peoples' rlghts;
that he felt there would bc a tremendous amount of prohlems witl~ th(s location; that this
locatlon already has a noise problem with the ratlroad tracks; that 2~0 people wcwld
congest Lf~e street~ and that lie did not thtink there would be sufficient parking,
Commissioner Johnson referred to the indication in the staff repo rt that the petltloner is
negotlating with the adJacent prop~rty c»~ner for pa~king, and stated the fact they are
negotlat(ng does not hold much wcight and he did not fecl tf~ey had adequate parking.
Ms, Hill inJ(cateJ she did not antlcipate any problems wIth adJt~cent property owners, but
that she could nat state that as a fact until she had concluded the negotiatlons,
Commissioner David asked how close the present location is to r~stdential, and Ms. Nill
replled they are located at Lincoln a~d Wilshire~ directly across the street from an
apartment complex.
Commissicx~er Nerbst referrec~ to the hours of practlce and asked what hours they would b~
pract(cing in the proposed location, a~d Ms. H111 pointed out the group practices on
Thursday evenings frcxn 7:00 to 10:00 p.m. inside the facility and again on SundAy cvenin g s
ir.side the buildiny.
Commlssloner Herbst poin[ed out this building is not a s~~.mdproof build(ng and that with
250 pcople playing bingo and with only 61 parking spaces available on-site. ~skcd how she
anticipated takiny care of that many people. Ms. Hill replied that she had run a survey
for one week and the most they have had was 100 cars; that ttiere are 90 parkl~g spaces on
1/4/78
MINUTES. ANAHEIM CIT Y PI.ANNING COMMISSION~ J~nusry 4~ 1978
78-6
Ela CATEGORICAL EXENPTION-ClASS 1 AND CONDITIOfU1L USE PEftMIT N0. 1790 (continued)
---~
tt~at a( te ~ and thay wou 1 d b~ mak I n~~ mare park i ng spaces 1 n tl~e rca r of tt~e Pepper Tree
Falre; that generally inore than on~~ person ar~ives in a cer and that sume pcoplo are
alderly and are drop ped aff for tl~e playing sesslon.
J. J. Tashlro rop~rted that there are i31 spaces on the site.
Cheirman Tolar poi~tecf uut ~ne problem f~e has is that since the bingo activitles totally
support the Anaheim Kinysmen Drum and Bugle Corps as thelr fund-~aising orc~anizatlon~ he
felt they would Ilke to incre8se the number of people who pln~y bingo. Ms. 1~111 rcplied
that 250 people Is a nlce number and is sort~ethtng t.hey can hondle; that it Is ell done on
e veluntsry basis an d thcy do nnt see goi~g t~~ e hlgger gamc in the ncar futura~ they ~re
c~uite satlsfieJ with the ex(sttng number. 5hc indicnted th~y have a certAin capacity for
a certaln crowd end that it Is cione on a first•con~e~ ftrst•serve bests.
Commissioner ~lerbst referred back to tt~e bellroom at this locaclon tn the pest end the
problen~s thay had with parkiny; that the customers werc parking on other people's
property ~ and ~~c fe 1 t~h i s i s tliat type of c,pcrat i on ~ aven tl~ough he raa 1 I zed th 1 s i s e
llttl~ different ty pe crowd, but automobiles arc the same. Fle fclt the use was good for
this site because it would have the least amount of noise~ but he could not Justify the
amount uf pcople with the numbcr of parking spaces.
Cheirman Tolar Indieated ttia[ even if they did not have the no(se fr~ctor~ r+t~ich he felt
would have an il) ~_ffect on the resiJential area~ he Nould still have to ag~•ee with
Commissfone~ Nerbst tl~at it is not a good locacicm~ predicated on the parking problem. iie
lndlcated the Comnisslon Is very sympathetic taverds the Ktngsmen ar~d [hat if they were
talking about mpv(n y Into An industrial site with large parki~g facillties for thelr night
activitles~ the Commission would probably look favorably upon It. 1!e polnted out t~i~t
peopte (n thls residential neiyhborhood deserve tl~e protectir~n of tl~e Commissla~.
Commissioner Barnes statcd she thouglit the Planr~ing Cortmissla~'s record of approval for
the KingSmen would shc~w tliat the Commission is very proucf to have: them In Aneheim~ but
they have den(ed other requests in the past and far tiie samc ~easons ~~f nolse and parking.
It was noted that the Director of ttie Planning Departr.-ent has dctermineJ that the proposed
actlv(ty falls within the definition uf Section 3.01, Class 1~ of the Gity of Anahelm
Guldelines to the Rcquirements for an Env(ronmental Impact Report and ls~ therefore~
categorlcally exempt fror~ the requirement to file an EIR.
ACTION: Comm(ssioner Barnes offered Resolution -~o. F'C73-3 and moved for its passage and
a~Ton~ that the Anahetm Cicy Planning Commiss(on doe~ hereby deny Petition for
Conditional Use Permit No. 1J90 on tt~e basis that the facilicy is locateo in close
proximity to a residentlal ar+~a to ttie west across the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks
and would possibly create a noise~ parkiny and traffic impact and be detrtmentai to that
resldentlal area; a~d that the number of available a~d proposed on-site parking spaces
would be insufficie nt.
On roll call~ the f oregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES~ DAYIa~ HERBST~ JOHNSOFI~ KIN;~ TOLAR
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
AgSENT: COMMISSIONERS: I.INN
Jack White. Deputy City Att~rney~ presented the petitioner with the written right to
appeai the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days.
1/4/78
MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PIANNING COMNISSIQt~~ ~anus~y 4~ 197~ 78•1
EIR ATEGORICAL ~XEMP7IQN-ClASS 1 AND GOND1710NAL USE PERMIT N0. 17~Q (contlnued)
Commisstonar Jut~nson polnted aut t~ the peapie in ~apositlon that the pr.tlrlon~r does have
the riyf~t t~ appeal the Planntng Gorrmisston's deciston~ and Ann(ka Santalahtl~ As~istent
DlrecCor for Zoniny~ stated the kax assessor's books ore a~ ~f March~ 1977. ~o that anyone
wh~se Jeeds were recurJed efter thal date ~ould not be in those books; that thc Planntng
Depas~tment would make every effort tc~ sec [hat the pe~ple are notif(~~ In the GASE of
appeal.
ITEM N0.
i NE A IVE DECLIIRATION PUaLIC NEAR!-Ir,, ~u~~rR~ Ru5TIC MATEL~ 916 South
~ N ~ E RMI 0. 1J9) 9each Boulev~rd~ Anahrim~ CA 92BQb, Patitloner
requests permissi~n to ESTI1pLISl1 A RECREATIONAL
VENICLC FAGILITY IN CONJUNCTION WITII ATJ EXISTING
MOTLL o~ property ciescribcci ss an irrcgularly-shapcd pArcel of l~nd consist(ng of
approximately y.i acres having a frantago of approximacely 9~~ feet on the east s(de of
Beech Boulevard~ having e maxtr~um depth of approximatcly 315 feet~ being locsted
epproximately 33$ fcet nortt~ of the cc~terlinc of Oal1 Road~ and further descr(bed as
91b South aeach Uoulevard. Pro~erty prese~~tly classificd RS-A-43~000 (RESIDEIITIAL/
AGRICULTURAL) ZONE.
Thcrc were twa perso~s (ndicating thetr preseRCa in opposltion to subJect request. and
although tlie staff report to ttie Planniny Canxn(~sion dated January ~i~ 197$ was not read at
the publlc hearing~ it is referreJ to and maJc a part ~f thc min~it~~s.
J. J. Ta~hiro~ Asslstant Planner~ rcad a pcti[ion contalning 30 signatures wh(ch had b~en
fi~ed fn upposition to subJect reyuest from che residents of tlu l.ynrose Manor apartment
tomp 1 e x .
Kuo•Wu-uen and Wen~Wei•Lee, chc petitioners and partncrs of the Ri~stic Matel. w~ere present
to answer any questions. Mr. lee pointea out that thcy propos~d ~to hutld a recrc~tional
vehicle psrkiny lot at the back of the motel because of the number ~f people who ~ome to
Anehelm to visi~ DisneylanJ and Kn~tL's Berry Farm, etc.~ and they would like to increase
thelr business and develop thc existing property and utllize [he E~atk lot to park eight
recreatfonal vehicles. He p~intecJ out chis cnotel wes bui It in 1~i:,0 and was ttie first
motel in this area.
B. A. Smith, ewner of the 72-unit apartment complex which ~buts subJect p~operty, stated
that five of their units would loolc dlrectly down on eop of this site and~ in his opinion~
this property is just tcso srt-all for what is proposed. He ind(cated hr_ woutd not obJect if
they Nanted to make another extension to the motel as previously done. He statrd his
tenants were upset ~h~sut ttie proposed use and that his block wall has bee~ knocked down
two or three different times by customers at the naotel before these gentlemen owned thc
mocel.
TNE Pl1BLIC NEARING WAS CIOSEC.
Commissianer Barnes asked if any of thos~ indivlduals who had signed the patltion were
present tn the audfence. Nr. and M~s. Smith indtcated their presence.
Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Smith to explain his reasons for abjecttng to the propr,sal.
Mr. Smith steted he has tenants who work. nights and~ in 1~act, has had a tenant rt~ove out
because of the general noise, stating he f~lt tha petitlone~s are crowding the property
too much; that the recreatio~al vehicle area proposed would be right up against the block
1/4/78
.,..,.,~,... ~
MINU7ES. ANP,IIEIM CIfY PLANNING C~MMISSION~ ~an~~ary 4~ 1;7$ 78-8
EI. R NEGATIV„~E, DECIsAi~`.TION ANU COND1710NA~ L USE P~RMIT N0. 1791 (GOntlnued)
wal) of hts apsrtment c~mplox And tharQ w.~uld be no wsY to control the no(se. N~ st~tad
it would be unsightly t~ locyk dayn an :op oP these recreatlonal vehtcles.
Commisstoner Jc~hnson asked if there wes a 24••foo! landscaped buffer between thts pr~p~rty
a~d the motr.l~ and M~. ;~(th rcpl~ed that th~~ers w~s. Mr. Smith stateci th~t the stefP
report indicetes there wou~~ r,~c be sufftctent perking speces a~d tl~at the rec~mma~ded
acreege is three acres far e recre:etionel vc:hicle park, and the petitloner has o~ly o~e-
half acre.
Commtssioner Johnsnn (ndicated he Just wan;ed to find ~ut what Mr. Smlth's obJections were
and s~atcd chet ne(ther thc Commf:,sicn nor anyone cisc co~ifd tell a~erson how +:o run his
bux~ness. Mr. Sm(tfi replied that this would cost hlm mc~ney becouse he would not be able
tn keep ten~nts.
Ghalrman 'folar (ncJicated he would f~ave no prohlem If the p~titloner wan~ed to mod(fy the
existiny ~nutel or acld an .ad~iition to (t, that he has cvery right to uttltze his pr~perty~
but hr. thoughc, in this case~ It would be Just too difficult to ,yet clght re~.reationa2
vehlclas In and out af there. Ile seated hc felt It would teke an experienced drfver to
get back in therc~ es~~ecially pulltng a trailer~ and potnted out all recreailons~l vehlcle
parks which have been allciwcd have accesslbillty and tre+ffic pattGrns~ and the Commisslon
has be~n ve ry stringent In relationship ta the circulation, fie stated he ~id not fee)
this use wo~1J be conducive to the mo[el bus(ness a[ all and would not enhance the value
of the propertv, anA he could not suppor[ thls petition.
Commissioner Barnes asked tlie petitioner if he plons to eventually build onto the motel
and wanted this as an interim~ incorne-producing use untfl the morel (s ~r.xpanded~ and Mr.
LeP replied that at the moment thcy cio not have any plans to build ontc the motel. tie
pointeJ out thcrc is a lot of competition on f3eechi Boulevard and other problems~ such a5
Reach (3oulevnrd bc~~nc~ a wide street. tie stat~d that Anaheim has very !aw rates. fle
st+~ted that careless persons parking cars in other lc,cati~ns still he•e colltsions.
Chairman 1'ol~ar stated that part of che prublern is that thc pecitloner keeps referring to
economics in relati<~nship to his ~rr,perty. He pnlntCd out thac mat~ls and hotels along
Be~th f3oulevard were existing when ttiis property was purchased~ tha~: neiLher the City nor
arry~~nc else has created a hareJship in the terms of the buslness; ar~d Chat economics ts nat
a reason for yr~~nt;ng a cnnditioral usc pc~mit. tle stated tt~at if they were expanding the
motel ta make tf~e motel nx~rP successful~ he would probably b~ ver~~ receptiYe to that
becsuse he feit they c:a~~ld do cf~at, but that to use the back acre fd- a recreational
vehicle park(r•~~~ l~,t w~s somett~ing hc could not agree wlth and di~~ not tl~tnk It was a good
use af th~ 1 and,
Mr. Lee askc~ i' ft was bAC~ause of the t~azards for parkl~g~ and Chairman Tolar repited
that i t was that ~ pl us ttie ef fect i t woul d tiave on otf~e r nei ghbors ~ the nul se ~ the
increasecl traff?c~ the ingress ai~d ~c~ress anJ turn-around area. He pointed out thAt in
every park thc Commission ha~ allcywed, they h~ve a t~emenJous amount af turniny radius;
tl~at if sor~eone pullcd a trailer into this motel~ he wo~ld ha~ie no way to ~et b~~k out.
Mr. Lee stat~d that~ speaking of turniny circies, the Commission had apt~roved the mote!
next daor to his with~~ut a turning circle. Mr. Lee referred to Mr. Smith's remarks about
tlie block wall and staced Lhac since they have taken aver tht mc~tel~ no accidents hdve
happened; that they have yood telations wiCh Che neighb~rho~d and the people in the
apartments. Concerning the naise, he ind(cated they do not comptain about the ~~oist made
by tenants of the apartmi:nts.
1I4I7V
~
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING GOMPIISSION~ Jenuary <<~ t978 78-9
EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION ANO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1791 (contlnued)
. _..,....._.. _.. ..`_ ..,. _..._.
Cammissioner Juhnson ask~d if a 20-fcx~t widc buffe~ is required~ anJ J. ~~. Taahiro pointed
~ut thet thc 20-foot IAndscaped buffer is requlred when adjacent to singie-femlly
residences.
Cummissloner Johnson pointed out that the plan shaws the vehicles goinq pnst all of the
units of the moCe) to che back parkiny ~rca~ and h~ did nut fael chls would be conducive
to tho matel business; Chat it wds rAtticr cl~msy.
Cortunissioner Nerbst stated the pr.titioner has some vacant lbnd ~nd hc wist~es ko use it,
but that he dons not ha~ve enou~h land for recreational vehicle fncilities; thet when you
ar~ pul l ing a 30-foot trai ler wi tli a 20-foc~t car~ you t~ave 5~ fect ~~d that Is why thc
Commission requires a minimum chrec-acre site f<~r ~ircul~tion cn pul~ uut ~,f Che stalls
wltl-out having to back in and out. sevcr~~l tlmcs. He stoted they hav2 tricd to Isolate r
recreatlonal vehiclc park to a r.one of fts ~~wn~ but th~t tt,is is a~url-tyoe use wtth a
motel in conjunctton with a recreatipnal vchicle p~r~., ~nd he did m:~t think tt would be
cU-r~at~ble with the ar~~. Nr at~t~~f h~~ did not fe:ri thc petitloner had taken (nto
conslderatlon the t~tal spectrum of rccre~t.ional vchicles that are ~n the road~ and h~ did
nut feel this erea has tna abllity to service th~ ~ecreacic~nal vehir.le~, esprci~+ily a 3~-
foot traller.
Mr. Lee stated they do not w~nt tu try ~ mane~rver large ve~iicles; that tt~is faclllty 15
for small recreational vehicles and ~~- ~ will not accept trailers.
Chalrma~i Tolar pointed aut that if ~-~. R-~ n~~iled 1 with a 3~-foot tra(lcr~ how would
they gnt thcm back out ontu Deach 4c~~ ,•~-,~ Mr. leE replied r.h~t they wouid put out a
sign for small recreational v~hic~.~ ~~~•. miting the length of the veh(cle.
ACTIO~~: Commissioner Johnson ~~"~-~ <- , Y~e,on~ seeonded by Commiss(oner King and NOTION
CARR~D (Commissioner ~inn bcir. A~ _.:~~•: . that the Anaheirn City Planning Commisslon hrs
revlewed the subJect proposal _~ -_-~-~•~ -.i recreatianal vehicle faci 1 ity in conJunction
with an existlny mote) on an ~-~~ ~~. ,i~ v-shaped parcel of lanJ co~sistinc~ of approximately
1.1 acres haviny a frantacae o+ R~~.~~-n~ rnntely 94 feet on the Qast side of Beach Boulevard~
having a maxtmum depth of apt~rc~ •~*.~;y 27y fe~t, betny located approxii~-ately 33R f~et
north of the centerl ine of E~ai ~.1, a~d does hereby approve tt~e Negative Declarat(on
from the requirement lo prepar.> .~r- --~ ~ ronmental impact rcport on the basis that the~e
would be nc signtficant indivf~ ~~ cumulative mdverse envtronmental lmpact due to the
approval of this Neyative Geciarz~~;u, sincr. the Anaheim General Plan designetes the
subject property for general r_o~rse•rc_~al and medium density residential land uses
corm~ensurate with the prop~sal: LM,~; no sensltive environmental impacts are involved in
the proposai; that the Initiai Sc,~r submitted by the petittoner indicates no significant
indtviduel or cumulacive ad~.erse _n viro~ ~ental impacts; and that the Negatlve Declaration
subst~ntieting the foregoinc fin~Rngs ~ on file in the City of Anaheim Planni~g
Uapartmcnt.
ACTIGt~: Cammissianer Johnson ~:~ffered Resolution No. PC78-4 and moved for Its passage and
ed-optTon~ [F-at thc R~aheim City Planning Cammission does hereby deny Petitlon for
Cond~ticanal tlse Permi t No. ~791 on the basia that ti~c size of subJect property does not
ps~rmit ~dequate on-site vehicular circulation and turn(ng space for the larger
recrea:~onal vr.hicles an.ci the possible adverse environmental irnpact to surroundtng
proper~ies cau~,e~j by tncreased nnise and traffic.
Cammissidner pavld stated he wes not going to supprr; this resolutian bPCause he could see
Lwo busi~ressme~ controlllny the type and length of !he vehicle that comes in and wonders
Nhat woulC happen If someone arbitrarily pulls a semi-diesel truck in; that he could see
t/4/78
1
111NUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMi1SSI0N~ January 4~ 1~78 78-10
EIK NEGA7iVE DECLARA710N AND CONDITIONAL US~ PERMIT NO_._ 17~1 (cantinued)
two businessmen trying to expand tlieir business and he thought the land was adequate to
accomrmd~te night vehicles.
On roll call~ the foreyoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: dAR-~ES~ NER~ST~ JOHNSON~ KING~ TOIAR
NOES: COMMISSIO~~ERS: DAVIO
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; Llt~~~
M~. Lee asked what would heppen if they wanted to build anacl~er motel~ dnd Chairmen Talar
polnted out they would hav~ to bring in plans end file a petttlan~ etc. Kr. Lee esked if
thay would have to have anothcr hearl~g~ and J. J. Tashfro palnted aut it w~uld be in
addltlon to an existing matel and would requl~e a condltlon~l use permlt.
Chairman Tolar pointed out thac the adJacent land owner Nas n~t abJectinc~ to an additlon
to thc motcl~ and M~. Smith~ fror~ the audience~ slate~J h~ wou~~i have no obJer.tlon to an
addition to thc matcl.
Jack White~ Deputy City Attorney~ presented tlie petitione:r wfth tt~c wrltter right to
appeal the Planning Commission dectslon within 22 days.
ITEM N0. 2
t EG VE DECLARATION PUBLIG HEARING. OwNERS: MARCIA SINGER ANU ARTHUR
~ p. ,~u-2J A. AND LORETTA S. UJiYC~ 277a 41est Dali Road~
llnaheim~ ~A ~2u0~~. AGENT: JERRY FELLOWS~ 24Ag
Bonnie~ Costa Mesa~ CA 92b2fi. Petlttoner requests
reclassification of property describe~i as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land cansisting
of app~oximately 1.5 acres haviny ~ frontage of approximately 165 feet an the east slde
of Dale ~treet. I~aving a maxir~um depth of approximately T~4 feet~ and be(ng located
approximately 330 feet south of the centerline of Ball Raad f~om the RS•A•4;~000
(RESIDENTIAL/AGRICUI.TURAL) AND CL (LOMMERCIAL~ LIM17E0) ZONES co th~ RM~1200 (R~SIL~E~~TIAL~
MULTIPIE-FAMILY) ZONE.
There was ne one indicating their presence In opposition t~ subJect reyuest~ and althpugh
th~ staff report to the Planniny Comrnission dated Janua ry 4, 1978 was not read at thr_
public hearlny~ lt is referred to and ma~e a part of the minutes,
Jerry Fel lows, ayen[ for the pe[i tionei ~ stated t!iey are proposiny to bu( ld 3~+
apartment units on two parcels of land, o~e zoned 'RM-1200 which has to be r~ciassified,
and the other p~rcel is zoned for co~~xnercial, and the way it is built on 8a11 Road tt (s
landlock~d for conmerc~al use; that it was not developed with the front port(on and~ if
used cortxnercielly, there would be additional traffic on Ball Road. He indicated they have
oriented the apartmcnc units off Dale Street and that the development conforms to all RM-
1200 requirements.
TIiE P~JBI.IC FIEARING WAS CLOSEQ.
ACTIOfI: Commissioner Ktn9 offered a motion, seconded by CoMmissioner David and MOTI0~1
C~R't~ED (Ccxnmissioner Linn being absent) ~ that the Anahoim City Planning Commtsslon has
revlewed the subJect proposal to reclassify the zoning fror.~ the RS-A-A3~000 (Resident(al/
Agrtculturai) rnd CL (Corm-ercial~ Limited) to RM-1;OQ (Residential~ Huitiple-Family) on an
irregulerly~shaped parcel of land consisting of apFraxin-ately 1.5 acres having a frontage
of approximately 165 fePt on the east side of Dale Street~ having a maximum depth of
1/4/78
i
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PIANNING COMMISSION~ Jsnuary 4~ 1978 78-11
EIR NCGATiVE aECLARATION AND aECLASSIFICATIOtJ N0. ~ 7-78-27 (continued)
r.,..... . ...
approximately 294 feet~ boing locatad spproximately 330 feet sauth of the centeritne of
liall Road; and doos hereby approve the Negetive Qecleratton from the requlrament to
prenara an envlronmantal impact ropo~t on the basis that there would be no signiflcant
individual ur cumulative aclverse environmental impact due to the approval oF th(s Negative
Daclaration since thn Anal~eim Ge~erat Plan desiynates Lhe subJect property for madlum
dens~ty residential l~nd uneS conn~nsurete wlth the proposal; that no sensitlve
envira~mental impacts are involved tn the praposal; tha~t the inittal Study submitted by
the petitloher Indlcates no slgnific~nt ind(vidual or cumuldtive adverse environmantal
Impacts; end that tl~e Negetiva Declaratlon substantlAting the foregaing ttndings is on
fllc~ in the City of An~heim Plon~~ing Oepertrnent.
Prior to votinh on the n~gative decl~retion, Chairmrn Tolar (ndicated he was going to
support th~ motlan bacause he feit the CL Zone would add rnore trafftc to th~ area tha~
this parttcular proJect as sl~c~wn,
Commisslonar Ncrbst Indicated his concern wlth parking abuttiny the block wall adJacent to
tf~e extsting RM-120U dAvclopment and asked how clasa they were to the exisctng building.
Hc wss conccrned with livfng quartcrs beiny adJacent to thc parkiny~ and M~. Fellows
potnted out garages arc located there.
AGTION: Commissioner Ktn~ offered Resolution t~o. PC7ti-1 and rraved for its passaqe and
a~tTon~ that the Anahelm Clty Plann(ny Cammission does hereby 9rant Petlcton for
Reclassif'catlan No. 77•7~'27. subJect to Inte~departmental Commlttee recornmendatto~s.
On roll c~ll~ ihe foregolny resolu:(on was passed by the follaw(~g vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES~ QAVID~ NERBST~ JOHNSON~ KING, TOLIIR
NOES: COMMISSI0NER5: HONE
AOSENT: COMMISSIONCRS: LINN
COMMISSIONER IINN ENTERED Tt1E COUNClL CIiANRER AT 3:00 P.M.
ITEM N0. G
E R R EG RICA~. EXEMPTION-CLASS 1 PUHLIC tEEARING. OWNCR: ~UCLID-ORANGEWOOD
ONDI'ION~ AL USE ERMI N0. 792 IkVESTMENT CO.. 505 North Tustin Avenuc~ Suite 150~
Santa Ana~ CA 92705. AGENTS: ALIL AND ~ASSOUL
DEMKHSHANIAN. 1125 Mayfai~~ a4~ Anaheim~ CA g2801.
Patttioner requests ON-SAIE aEER IW A PROPOSED BILLIARD CENTER on property described as a~
irregula~ly-shaped parcei of land consisting of approximately 2.0 ac~es located north and
east of the norcheast torner of Orangewood Avenue and Euclid Scr~et, having approximate
frontages of lfi7 feet on the north side of Or~ngewaod Avenue anci 220 feet on the east side
of Euclid Street~ being located approximately 170 feet north of the centertlne of Oranga-
wood Avenue and 1fi0 feet ~asc of the centerltne of Euclid Street~ and further described as
2060 SoutF~ Euclid Street, Suites C and D. Propertr presently clessified Cl (COMMERCIAL,
L9MITED) ZONE.
There wern five people i~dicating tt~eir presence in oppoaitton to subJect request~ and
although the staff report to the Planning Commission dated January 4~ 1~78 was not read at
the public hearing~ it is refcrred to and made a pa~rt of thc minutes.
J. J. Tashiro~ A:,sistant Planner, read a tetter which had baen received (n o^r,ositton
dated DECen~b~r 2$~ 1977~ containing 15 sig~atures (su~Ject leCter Is on file In the
Planning Department).
t/4l78
MiNUTE5~ ANANEIM CITY PIANNING COMMISSION~ January 4, 197a ~g_12
EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 1 ANO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1792 (cont(nued)
~~~~w~rr~
Alll Daraklishenlan~ agesnt for the petitioner~ atAtect he did not think there would b~ any
nolse yenerated that would irritate tha neiyhbors; tl-et this la a propased famlly billlard
center wh(ch would be for ell ages; that it would be very clean~ nice area~ and they would
do thelr best to keep it a clean anvlronment for ciilldren and p~ronts. Ne di~i not see any
re~asun for the permt t not be In~ I ssucd because of tlie b~~er~ s( nce thcre i s a law that they
cannot sell baer ta ~ny persans undcr 21 years of agc; and thet becr and hard lfquor are
served (n restaurants whera cl~ll~i~en sre present.
Mary Greyory E~igys~ 1(>J~+ Tonie Place~ Anal~eim~ Indicated sha hacl ~i petition wt~ich had been
s1~~naJ by a number of the immedfate property owners and ~res~~nteci it to the Commisslon.
She stated this nelghborhr~od I~a3 a pecultar noise problem alrr.~ady~ w(tti th~ noise from the
peo~.~le on the rides at DisneylanJ in the surmier and n~ise frcxn peoplc in thelr ,wirrming
pools~ but felt th~e voices of children raised ln laugi~ter and the play af adults tn a
swlmming pool ~~ere completcly dlffcrent from thc nolsc ynu would hear frc~m e billlard
parlor. Shc~ :~:ateJ the premises will be located in a resiclentlal area af abave-everaye
homes. She Indlr.atCJ the residents of thls ncighborhood were opposed to Che bullding ~f
the present shoppir~y ccntcr~ bu[ aftcr the thl~d or fourth try the p~titioner won out and
the center was c.onstrucLed and~ slnte that time~ they hav~. fiad problems with debris,
trash~ carbon coples from the servlcc station~ ~and junk being thrown or~er the wail into
tl~el r back yards, etc.
She stated tt~at as far as this partir.ular fac.ility witli on-sale beer IfcE•nce is concerned~
it would be located 2~ feet frorn the existiny fence:; and tf~at witl~ tt~e ad;iittonal traffic~
thcy would liave n~lse problems. Sht felt wiierever beer is served~ r.ventually there wlll
be drunks and ~oistrous p~:ople ouc~iJe and youny ppo~~le hang(ng arounc~. She stated they
already I~ave young pe~pte hangin~~ around [he liquor storr. and they have had prowlers
crawling over the(r back fences~ that thre Palice Dep~~tmc:nt is al-eady overtar.ed and
cann~t take care of the problem; and [t,at when they go away an vacation~ they r~re advtsed
ihe Police Uepartment does not havc facilitles to pacrol tfietr homes. In adUition, she
felt there wauld not be enough pa~king spaces and pointed out they olready have parking
problems with the condominiums or apartment-type homes whicli I~ave been built on tt~e ~ther
stde ~f Orangewood. She stateJ she dfd not think the billiard parlor should be al;owed to
stay open until 2:00 a.m. ~s peaple havc to sleep and get up early (n thc morning. SO~e
stated that tfiere are places that scll beer and f~od within one-half mtle of this
locatlon; and that there are po~i parlors within one mile af this l~cation and if a person
wanted to play pool, he could find a f~~ility. She steted this usc would be a publlc ~nd
private nuisance. She referred to Sectifln 37Q of the California Penal Code~ :~tating this
wauld be a detriment to the peaceful enjoyment of iheir property.
Je Von tiiggs~ 1674 Ton(a Place~ Anafieim~ stated Chey have probie~rts with chi~ aarticular
shopping center at the present t(me.; that the liquor store opens at 6:30 ;,,m. ~~nd closes
at 11:30 p.m, and they are there unt(1 12:Op rnidn(ght; th:,t there is n~ise at nigh[ and
they have had a ligtiting problem which has been taken c~re of by reducinc~ the height ~f
the Ilyht standards; and that they are having prc~blems with debrls. Ne stated that
normally araund 2:00 or 3:00 a.m.~ a sweeper comes in and sweeps the parking lot and ju~t
before dawrr they start making deliveries end plcking up the trash. fie s[ated these homes
are above-average homes and have suffered because of property at the corner of Orangewood
and Euclid befng developed with the shopping center whicfi, tn his Judgment~ has not been
utilized up to the present ttme since they liave had vacancies there. H~ did not see what
they are goiny to do wlth another establishment and was afraid that once they get rhe beer
ltcense a~d ths pool parlor does not do well Pconomically. they will make It into another
type of establishmcnt; and that most people (n that area already have pool tables (n thelr
homes and do not n~Pd a btlliard hall, and recommended that the Commission listen to their
pleas.
t/4/1$
HI;~UTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ Jenuary 4. 1978 78~13
E1R CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 1 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 17~2 (continued)
~ r~rr~w~~
Mr. Darakhshanlan statad~ concr,rning the nois~ from Olsneyland~ that was not his business;
thet if this permiC is approved and he Is presanted evidence they heve madc nolsc~ lits
bustness would bo cl~sed. He stat@d to get the liconse there (s e stlpulation there will
not be any drunks~ and i~ there were drunks on the premises he would hav~ to natlfy the
pollce end they would be taken core of. Iles stote~' he would only be open unti) 2:OQ a.m.
o~ Saturdeys and Sundays~ and closed at 10:34 or 11;0~ p.m. during the week. Ne stated he
wants to make this e nice business and a clean busin~ss.
TNE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Chatrman T~lar polnted out this shoppin~ center was c~nstr~~r.ced prior t~ thn tlme the
Planni~ig Comniss(on established th~ir p~licy requlrtng a 20-foot landscar.cd buffer between
commercial ~nd rosldential devnlopmesnt. Ne stated his concern was not so much that the
chlldrr,n wo~~ld be able to buy beer; that If they wanted to buy bcer they cau1J yet it. He
felt~ hewPver~ tl~is type of' use would incrcase tf~e problems af notse~ p~~rking~ treffic,
etc.~ in that a~ea, F'.e asked the petitioner what pc~centage of his busine!~s would be
representod by the number of pcople who ~rink bcer~ and the applicant rr.plled it would be
about 3;~.
Commissioner Ilerbst stated he fclt the prablem here ls that tti~ sho~ping centQr (s
existing and that It was built wlthout the buffer zone~ and the p~oblem is M~Ith thP owrcr
of the shopping center; that to have thls ty{~e use the proper buffer zone must be
provided. tie felt backin9 up to within 2Q fect of the residentia) homes In this area wlth
this type use Is goinc, to be detrimen:al to the neiyhhorhood. -~e stAted thi:~ petitloner
may run a very fine blil d parlor buc that (f I~e decides to scil it to someone else~
they m(ght not run It as well. He. s[ated that If iL is going to be within 20 f~et of
residentlal t~omes, tt is not the propcr place for this use.
Comm(ssionor 6ernes fell the location was too near a school and atated sh~ did not
remember the Planniny Commtssion approving the sale of beer in an area so clos~~ to a
school.
Chatrman Tolar stated the Cnmmission has recently denled slmilar uses with the same basic
problems.
It was noted that the Director of the Planning Department has determined that xhe proposed
activltN falls within the ciefinitlon of Seclion 3.01~ Class 1~ of the Ctty of Anahetm
Guideltnes to the Requlrements for an Environment~l Impact Report and is. therefore~
categorically exemFt from the requirrt~ent to file an EIR.
ACTION: Commissio~er ~ernes offered Resolution Nc. PC78-5 and moved for tts passage and
a~opLl~on~ that the Anaheim City Pianning Commission does hereby deny Petition for
Co~ditlonal Use Permit No. 1792 on thr basis that the existtng shopptng center was
developed prtor to the Planning Cammisslon establishe~ policy requiring a 20-foot wide
landscaped buffer between sinyle-family residenttal areas and cumnercial~ no provlsion was
made to adeq uateiy proter,t the nearby residences end, therefore, the proposal w(il
potentially create tncreased noise and tr~ffic and would be detrimental to the adJacent
resldential area.
On roll call~ the foregaing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYCS : COMM I SS I OWERS : BA~CNES. GAV I 0~ HEltBST ~ J011NSON, K I NG. L i NN, TOLAR
NOES: COMM~SSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: C~MhI5SI0NERS: NOHE
Jack White~ Deputy City Attorney~ presented the petittoner with the written right to
appeal the Planning Canmission's decision within 22 days.
1/4/78
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, J~nuary 4~ 1978 78-14
REC~SS A ten-m;nute recess was called at 3:15 p.m.
~_
RECO_ NVE` NE Tha meeting reconvened at 3:25 P.m. wtth all Comm+ssloners
~ present.
ITEM N0.
EIR ~~~G~1 VE DECLARATION PUaIIC NEARI!lu. (-WMERS: RICK AND DONNA LEE
, 1 0. 17~3 LICFITENWALTER AHD l1F.RNARD W. AND PHYLLIS E. MAXON~
-
53~0 ~a~st Quail aid~e Terrace, Anahelm~ CA 92807.
AGENTS: WILLIAM TREI~T AND CAR4L WILSON~ 6200 Palo
Altu Drtve~ Anahelm~ CA 92$07. Petitloner rNque~ts permission to ESTABLISII A PRIVATE
SC110QL WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM REAR YARD SETDACK on pr~pr.rty descrlbed as an trregula~ly-
sl~oped parcel of land c~nsistiny of approximately 0.7 acrc t~aving a frontage of approxl-
mately 237 fe,et on thc north side of North Strect, having a maxlmum depth of approxtrnately
150 feet~ befng located approxlmately 47~ foet west of the centerline of East Straet~ and
furthcr described as 925 end IOQi Egst North Street. Pruperty prese~tly classifled
RS-7200 (RESIDEf~TIAL, SING'.k-FAMILY) ZONE.
There was one person indlcatt:~ her presence in o{~positi~n to subJect request. and
although the s:aff report to the Planniny Commission deted January 4~ 197i: was not read at
the pub~lc hearing~ (t is referred to and made a part of thc minutes.
Commissioncr King noted [hat he had a conflict ~f interest as defined by Anaheim CiCy
Planning Commisston Resolution No. PC7G-157~ adopting a Canflict of Interest Code For the
Planning Ccxnmission~ and Governrr.ent Code Sec~ion 3625 et seq~ in that Kateila Realty is
thE agent fo~ the seller of tl~is praper[y an~i a member of his famtly is essociated Nith
Katalla Realty and that, p~~rs+~ant tv th~ provisions of the ahove codes~ he was declaring
to the ~halrman that he was witFidrewing frcmi the hea~ing In connec*.ion with Item No. 7 of
the Planning Commission agenda ~nd would not take part in either the dtscusslor~ or the
voting thereon~ and that he had not discussed this matter with any member of the Planning
Commisslon. T1IEREUPdt~~ COMMISSf01~ER KING I.EFT TNE COUIICIL C11AM~ER AT 3:25 P.M.
uilllam Wilson, ayent for thc petitloner~ Introduced his ~rife, Carol~ and stated they werc
proposing to acqufre two contiguous pr4perties at 925 and 1~01 North Street and were
asktng for a conditl~nal use per~~it to establisl~ an elementa ry pr(vate school in an
exlsting building, and thai they planned to have a maximum af 8y students;that thay hoped
to start the first semester ir~ S~pt~mber a~ 1973 but did iiot know exactly how many
scudents would be starting the first semester.
Jeante aac~lund, 10152 East North Streec~ ~natieim~ stated 'ncr concern was the possibility
of increased noise and traffic con~estion. She pointed out the railroad tracks on the
east, La Palma on the north~ and East St~ept on thc east which already gives them a htgh
level of noise and stated that wit~~ Nartt~ Street closed cff st the railroad tracks~ the
majority of the traffic mc~st likely would come back to East Street to go out~ and althaugh
they planned to have sr.aygered hours~ she felt there would be traffic ca~gestion in the
residentia) area. She referred ta the traffic sltuatton with people tryEng tu make a
left-hand turn onto East Street; that during rusf~ hours people ~.onsistently try to make a
right~hand turn off La Palma; that It is a vcry short dist~nce between t~e two streets and
she felt it is a hazard traffic-wlse and also will create aaditional no(sp for the
residential neigt~borhood.
Carol Wilso~ stated she could not say there is not ~Qiny to be traffic; that `rom aast
experience they know the parents uf the cl~il,~ren in this school will ba bringing them from
other areas and will travel by car, but that thcy have a heavy tendency to carpool, which
t/4/73
MINUTES~ At1ANEIM CITY PLANNINf, COMMISSION. Jenuary 4~ 1~7a 78-15
EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CONUITIONAI. USE PEaMIT N0. 1~~ (continuad)
reduces thn numb er of cars In tl~e are~; that from two to four nr flv~ students wlll arrive
per vahicln. Slie Indicated tl~ey wll I heve staggered opnratinc~ hours in the rrqrning and
sfternoon sesalons and thor•~ wl l l not be parents picking up i;~ cf~f ldren et 3:0~ p,m. Shc
stated thoy would cxpect that st thn maximum opcr~~tin,y load to I~~ve perents of 50
chlldron~ and div(dtr~y that by at least tw~ o ~ threc would glvc the number of cars to
expo~t et peak times. Concerning tl~c n~ise of the play yard~ shc stotcd they operatn a
heavy acadamlc sehool but thst tl~ey do heve ploy periods. She stated the children wlll be
dividad Into three agc grnups and thst ttiern would bc a maximum nf ?.5 or 3~ studnnta in
tlie pley y~rd at one tirr~; tl~at t1~cy are hiyhiy superviscd and wei l discipllned and those
twa fectors serve to mfti~,}ate thc noisc factor. She polnted out thcy do not 11ke a lot of
nolsc either; and that they felt this property in thts erea c:ould handle this operallon.
TNF. PutlL I C HF:ARI Nr, wAS C~OSEn.
Commissloner Linn painted out that ttic a~plicati~n (ndlcated the schoal had been locat~d
in Fullerton f~r three ycars and had mnved ta Vorba Lind~~, 11e asked why they ware leavin,q
thesc areas, Ms. Wilson replled that ~n Fullcrton tt~cy haci outgrown the locet(on end that
thay moved to a churcl~ tn Yorba Linda for three ycars and tfie school has under,yone some
~honges; that they had chanyed the method end sA,ne p~rsonal considerations ~~re fnvolvod;
that therG were srxne otiier ~rnblems (n tcrms af dtfferent points uf vtew~ and they felt it
was time they left that area.
Chairman Tolar asked (f (t was thelr plan to Iive In tlic structure at 1001 East North
Street an,; run the school at 925 East North Street~ and Ms. Wllson repllad thet It was.
Chairmen To1ar asked if the students werc problem children~ did thcy have hlgher IQ's~ or
whe~ prompted ~eople to send thelr chlldren ta a private school rather than a public
school. Ms. 4lilson stated they offered f~rm discipline and heevy academic courses ln the
school and that these students get e lot of indtvldual attentfon; that they do not han~.lle
problem Ghildren from the behavlar polnt of view. Shc sxateci r.hey are bas(cally operatin
a school for their avn children a~d were tcaching the way they wanted thetr chlldren to be
taught.
Chatrman Tolar ssked Ms. Wilson why they had chosen this parttcular site~ a~d she
explained that one raas~n was because there were twn buildings and they wo~~ld Iilce to Iive
close to the sch ool for operational reasons and for security~ and that affordabie ground
is hard to con~ by and this lacation I~ad a little more open space with the twa propertles
combined and (t shc~wcd more promise than the other propertles they had looktd at.
Chatrman Tolar stated it has been ve ry d(fficult for him; that hc looked at the property
a~d as he revfewed tt~ he had been v~ry negative towards it~ and this was the flrst time
the Planning Commisslon would have allowed a private schuol to infringt Into a residentlal
area, however~ he would agree this area 1~ dtfferent from the normal residential areas.
Ms. Wllson stated that was her first Impression of che property, hat it is on the edge of
a resldenttal netghborhood~ and the school would n~t oc going inc~ thc heart of the
residential arsa; that the very next property to thls property backs onto La Palmas ~nd
thet this was one of the conslderations far their cholce.
Chalrman Tolar pointed out that recently the+ Planning Commissfon had turned down a request
f~r a prlvbte school in the neighborhood alrrpst identical to this.
Commissioner David eskad what the qualificattons for admit~ance to this schc~l were and
haw dtd they reerui t the students. Ms. yi ison stated they advertised and that the
t/4/78
MiNUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLAN-~tNG COMMISSION~ Januery 4~ 1~78 78-1G
EIR NEGATIVE OECIARATION AND CONOITIONAI USE PERMIT N0. 1793 ~contlnuad)
students pald tut tlon end ~n enrol Iment fee and f 1 I led out ~n appl Icatlon~ but that thoy
do not give 1(~ tests.
Conmisslonor Davtd referred to the raference In tho staff report thet 50~ of th~tr
anrol lment would bo In a dey care pro~~am r~nd asked what that meant. Ms, Wi lson replled
that th~ mc~thers and fath~rs both work end noed care for the children before ~nd efter
school and~ In the pest~ this has bean e heavy s~urce of their enro!lment.
Cheirman Tolar stated that ttiis is not goiny to be ]ust a school. they a~e going to I~ave
baby-sitting services for parents who work. Ile stated that w~s one of the proble ms ho h~s
wlth this~ that they wlll be runntn~ a husineqs which is nhvlously ~ m~n~y-rt-~king
buslnasa~ that they arc c~ing to usc th~ property for a restdence~ and thpt they wtll be
usin~y (t for a school~ which is thrcc usos for thls prapcrty; thdt thc Planning Comnls~lon
does not allow dual uses in lhe City of An~heim and nc~w they are t.~lking ehout th~ee
diff~rent uses.
Ns. NI Ison stated ttiat she raal i zed tl~e residenc~ is another thlnq, but private sehools do
nffer day c~~re for thcl' students~ that is tl~e bac~~~one of their opcration; that it Isa
serv(ca to a considerable extent for parents who work and~ in f~~ct~ she would prefor It
were not that wey but that. economlcally, that's tha way it (s.
Commissl~ner Linn stated he has s~rious concerns about the area; tl~at he dld nht focl
there was aJequate pl~y area for that many clil idren; that norma) chi ldren are goi ng Co be
laud anci i f they ar~ yaing co gi v~ s~me sart of physl -al exercise for eiqhth grad~rs,
there is not enough room; that he fcit this was overbuilding the stt~ ln havtng chat many
ch i 1 dre~ i n one concentrated res t dc•nti a l area, he was concerned ahout that enc+ the noise
and elso the trafflc. 1~e referred tu the bat traffic sltuatlon and felt thls would be
compounding the problem and with parants picktng up tl~eir chlldr~n at 5:00 p.m would noL
help the ~etghborhood. Ile felt prlvete schools are fine b~:t did not think this Mas the
proper location, and he did not feel there was sufficlen; rscreatlonal area.
Camniss inner Herbst stated 'ho fe 1 t the land use woulc+ be edeyate fpr this type sehool Gut
was concer~ed about the ci rculat iun olement wt th East Street, North Street, and La Palma
corner beiny one of the worst corners in Anah~im tor ingrPSS and egress; that thts is a
major corner and ac peak nours i t Is heavily tr.~veled; and that with this a~nount of
trafflc injected Ento a residential area at one of tlie worst corners~ wlth p~eople trying
to make left-hand turns into the area because chey have nu other way ta get onCo la Palma
and East Street, would create te~rible traffic problems. He stated the propert~ appears
to be adequate~ but that when you tle in the circulation el~:rnent it is going to impatt the
area and ~eferred to the fact that th~re is no left-turn pocicet on Eest Street and that
would bloclc off the left lane and slow tr~ff(c cbwn to a standstlll and would create a
prabiem. He stated that is why North St~eet has been blocked off; that with the sch~oo)
and traffic go„~g into the area. f t was negating the blockage of Ncrth Street to stop the
traffic,
Chai~man Tolar stated he was concerned they wauld dump traffic onto other residsntial
streeis tn thc area.
Comnisslonsr Johnr n stated he had come to the same conclusions and ag~eed that the
trafflc situstlon was bad~ but dtd not agree tt~at the property wt,s proper for this use.
Ne felt this petitioner wes stncer~and that the c(ty does need day care ce~ters , schools,
and private schools~ but felt it would be leaning an the neighbors for tlits type actlv~ty.
He referred to a day care ce~te r wi th 12 s tudents wh i ch wanted to en 1 arge ~ and ab4ut 25 of
the neighbars hsd protestad saying It w~s unlivable around these students. He felt this
type operation is going to have to be in a buildiny that is des(gned for this type use and
1 /W/78
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PL MlNING COMMISSION~ JanuAry 4~ 1978 78-17
EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATIOh ANQ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 11g3 (conttnued)
for children~ with nn •rG~ ar~un~f Ic to handle them or there wil) be unhappy people in
tlils nelgl~bo~hood. He stoteJ he cnuld not support the request end felt the rnottvea are
noble end he hopad the petltior~er could find ~+ bnttar locatlon~ buc he cou1J not eupp~rt
thla porticular a~sa.
Ms. Milson sskeJ whet zonc would permit th(s usc~ and J. J. Tashlro pointed cwt thet the
condit(onal usa permit would be required whether (t be In a restdentle~ o~ c~nmerclal
zone.
Commissfaner David stated he could buy Just sbout everythlny axcept th~r traPfic sltustion;
that, unfortunatnly~ Eest Stre~t Is ve~y tnrcluc~uat~. He falt sorry f~,r thr, pPr4ons or thP
people Commisstoner Johnson had r~ferred to that the leughtcr of chil~ren annoyed~ thst
his buslness Is beh(nd a granmar sch~~i and he loves to heor ttie I~ucPub~r of the children.
He felt this property with izs setting (s Just beautiful~ but tht overriding concern he
has Is that East Street is Inadcqua~o end he could not support a fAVOroblc actlon.
Chetrman Tolar asked J. Titus, Officc Enjinecr~ lf anythiny was proposed for wtdening of
East StrQCt in the near future~ and Mr. Tltus repllcd that nothing is planned; that a few
y~ars aga the C12y had a proJect for thn w(dening of East Street but h~nd conslderable
problems getting the necessary r(ght-of~wey~ so reduc~d the widtli of the s-rGet~ but that
he was not aware of any proJect at this time.
Commtssioner Barnes referred tu thQ trafftc situstion coming down La Palma towards Eest
Street and suygested a"no rlght turn on red~' ~tgn~ and Indtcated she had vislted the
prope~ty and during the lunch hour it was ve ry dtfficult to makG a left-hand turn; that
there was already a traffic prublem there~ and it should be looked lnto.
Chalrman Tolar lndicated he was reminded aqatn of the request on Ashington Strect for
eiyht students wh~re the ncighbors liad a car count~ and with etght students~ the double-
{~arktng, coming and gofng of the parents, etc.~ and to compound that number eight or ten
times &t this partlcula~ location~ he felt !t would not be a suiLeble location.
Commissio~er 1larbst asl:ed Mr, Tltus if there had been any thought about improving the
circulation at North Street or if ths~e was any way to do it~ end Mr. Titus repl(ed he dld
not knav of any way; that it would havG to be studicd~ but to his knowledge no study had
been done.
Commissioner Herbst stated as far ~s the site for a school ct thi$ 1; :atio~~ he felt the
actual lot and thr: arrangement of the houses are sultable buc with 76 students and the
trafftc Involveci~ he did not feel the traffic circuletion was au..q w~te anci~ ~nless
somethtny coutd be done at that corner co improve the circulation he coujd not support a
favorable actlon.
ACTIO~J: Commissioner 8ernes offereci a motion~ seconded by Comn(ssioner Linn and MOTION
~ED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has revie~red the proposa) to permit a
private school with watve.r of minimum rear yard setback on an irr•egulariv-shaRed parcel of
land conslsting of approxtmately 0.7 acre heving a frontage of approximately 237 feet on
the north side of Nortii Street~ having a maximum depth ~f approximately 150 faet, betng
locbted approximately 478 feet west of the centerline of East Street; and does hereby
approve the Ne~ative Dectbration from the requi~ement to prepare an ~nvironmentat impact
report on the basts that there would be no significant indiv!dual or cumulAtive adverse
environmental impact due to the approval nf t~is Neyatiwe Declaration since the Anaheim
General Plan destgnates the 3ub)ect property for medium density residential la~d us~s
commensurate with the proposal; that ~o sensitive e~vironrr~ntai impacts are tnvolved in
the proposa'; that the Initlal Study submitted by the petitlone~ indicates no significant
t/4/7~
MI NUTES ~ ANAIiE 1 M C i TY PLAI~N 1 NG COMMI SS I ON. Jenua ry 4~ 19%8 7~' 18
EIR NEGATIVE DECIARATION AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1 (continued)
(ndividual or cumulative adverse enviro~menta) trnp~cts; and that the Negative Decleratlon
subst~ntlatf~y the foregoing findtngs is on file in tho Glty af Anaheim Planning
Oepnrtment,
Donna Lichtenwalter, 5300 Quail Itldye Terrece~ Anaheim~ asked if she could spe~~k and
statad her impression was that th~re would ba no more than -~Q studnnts at this locatlon
and askad if the traffic was ~o becf, why was th e 1~Eleve.n Market allowed on the corne~,
apartments behind on La Palma Avenue~ rnd a prc ~ school an East Street. Chelrmen Tolar
stated rlicu Are on meln boulevards; that tl~ts Gommissl~n was not herc when they were
allowed; tl~at all thes~ uses are arterial hl~~hwary uses~ ancl lie felt that even thls school
would prc+b,~bly be better suited on an artcrlal t~ighwsy rnther than in a residentlal ~ree.
Cornmissloncr aarnr.s stat~d tf~at the '-Eleven Narket was probahly allowed becauae that site
would not be sul Lable for the devc ~opmunt ot ~ home becausr. cf the nc~ise.
Commissioner Ilerbst steted there was a servicc station allowed by the Ci~y Gouncll nn thac
cnrner aftor thc Planniny Commissi~n had denicd it; that it Itiad been zonecl commertlal by
the Council; that ihe scrvice station ~~ent in a nd did nut makc it, and the 7-Eleven Market
cama tn by commercial right~ and the day care ee nter had been tl~ero for at laest 12 years~
~ong before East Street was backed up wich tra f fic the way It is t~day.
N~a. Wilson asked how many public scho~ls ere lc~eated on arter:al hlyhways and asked if
they were to have access from La Pa{ma by pu~c hase of another property, v+oui~ LhAi be
allowed. Chairman Tolar state~ tf~e only thiny the Gornnisslon cou~d act upon was the plan~
as befora them now; that i f tl~cy elected to do sorrw~thing <ii ffercnt they woul d have to fi le
a new applicat(on so that ttiP residcnts could be re-natifir.d, etc.
ACTION; Gornmissioner Uarnes offered Resolutio~ No. PC78-6 and moved for its pa~sagc and
a~~pt~on. that the AnahPtm City Planning Comm~s sion does herohy deny Pet~tion for
Condiilonal Usc Permit Mo. ~793 ~n lhe basis t h a[ this is a res~dsnt(al nel~hborhood wlth
single-famlly homes that have not bcen inundate d with busincsses and that the I~tegrity of
the resldentlal nei9hborhaod should be protec t e d.
Commissioner He~bst staGcd he would have to disagree wich tt~e finding that this is a
rasidential area; that most grartmar schools ar e iocatrd in a residential ar~~a and a~e
surrounded by homes. Ne stated he was conce~~ed that !,~p s:~~ooi needed circ,~latl~n and
the slte does not have the cir;,ulation req~`~ed for t'~is ty~c use
Commiss(oner Oavid stated he agreed wI th Gommi ssioner F'erbst and ti:at ts the reason he
would support the resolvtion~ because of tlie i nadequacy c~f East Street circulation.
Cortmissioner Linn statecJ he was concerned about traffic but also the play area. ~nd he did
not feel i t is adequatc fnr tfie numbGr of studznts proposed and there was nothing close
the students could go ta, and he felt ~t0 stude nts was tao many.
Commissioner Barnes polnted out that private s chools in residentlai homes are qulte
dlfferent from public schools which are desig~ ed with adequate play area, adequatr
classrooms~ etc.
On rull ce11, the foregoing resolutian was passed by the folloaring vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONER5: BARMES~ DAYID. IIERBST~ JOHNSON~ LINN, TOLAR
NOES: CQMNISSIONERS: NONE
ABSCNT: CQNMISS{ONERS: KING
Jack White~ Deputy City Attorney~ presented t he petitloner w!th the written right to
appeal the Planning Commission's decision wit hin 22 days. 1~~~78
~
MINU7ES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CbMMISSION~ Jenuary 4~ 1978 78-1g
COMM I SS I ONE R kl NG RETUANE D TO TIIE COUNC 1 L CHAMBE R.
TEM_N0. 8
EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIO-~-CLASSES 1 b S PUaLIC HEARII~G. OWNERS: ALIEN A. AND NILDA J.
OND IONA USE ERMIT N0. ~ NENORY~ 3361 Esst Miraloma Avenue~ Aneheim~ CA
92806. AGCNT: ELMER D. RAE. k30 East Matn
Street~ Tusttn. CA ~26f30. Petltioner requcsts
p~~rm(ssion to ESTADLISII A CONTtu1CTOR'S STORAGE YARD WITH WAIVER OF (A) MINIMUM FRONT YARD
SE1'DACK AND (B) Et~CLOSUAE OF OUTDOOR USES on property descr(bed as a rect.~ngularly-sheped
parcel of land c~nslstfng of approximately 0.8 acre haviny a frontage of approxim~tely
165 feet on thc norlh slJe of M) ralwna Avenue~ having A maximum dcpth of approxlmately
215 feet. being locote~d epproxlmately 165 feet west of the cnnterline of Miller Street~
and further described as 33~1 East Miral~ma Averue. Property presently clASSified
RS-A•43~000 (RESID~MTIAL!AGRICULTURAL) 20NC.
There was u~e person Indicatiny his presence In oppositlon to SubJect request~ and
although the staff rcpcrt to the Pla~ning Camm(ssion dr~ted January 4~ 1978 was not rend at
the publtc hcaring~ it is referred to a~d made a part of the minutes.
Elmer Ree. agent far che petttloner~ tndicated 1~e is requesting to put in b fence
Sontrector's storaga yard at 3361 East Mirelnme Avenuc.
Rubert Gould~ S34 West Strcet~ Fullertan~ representtng Rockwell Internationai, 3370
Mi~aloma Avenue~ Anahelm~ stated their bu(Idlnq is directly across the street frnm the
property in question. Ne Indirated his employer had not received notice of this hearing~
nor a coi~y af the egenda~ and he would 1 tke to have a continuance in arder for further
constderatlan or, (f no continuance~ t~e would 1 ik~ to give his reasons for oppc~sltton. fle
stated the premises they c~c~~Lpy is a six-sr,ory bullding looking cv-rn In[o this property
and that i t has b~~n zoneJ k-A and has ~ot been objeciionable~ but he felt a contractor's
storao~ vard ~ ~ could be se~n from the upper stories of the bullding would be unsightly
and wou~d ~~ in wlth thP zoning of that area.
Mr Rae state~ .. ,,resently he is located at ~+3~ East Maln Street~ Tust~n~ which (s the
so~.r, ~est eo,•ner 7f Main and Newport, di rectly ~crUSS the street from the new Tustin City
Ha'.i; that he has been ther~ for 11 yea~s end has had no complaints from the City Nall~
and he did ~ot see where a fence cont~dctor's bus~iness should be objectfoneble to anyone.
He indicated this propcrty is 3bout : feet ~bove the elevation of the regu~ar strect ~nd
that by putting a 6-foot fence on top of that from street level wo~ld make it 8 fcet htgh;
that !s no way 'o protect tt~~ sight from the six-story build(ng across the street. He
i,~dicated he Is on a ma(n thoroughfare in Tuslin an-J no complaints have been recelvad.
THE 'UFL I C HEARI NG WAS CLOSED.
Commtss i~ner ~tnn indicated he fel t the prohle~* was the request for waive~; that i f the
petittoner Ltd not ask for that~ he would be al lowed tn do what he wants. J. J. Tashiro~
Assistant Plr,nnc~. p~inted out that an outdoor cant~actor's storage yard does requlre a
condi t lona i usc pern~! t.
Mr. Rae indicated tliat the fence he is p~oposing along Miraloma Avenue and the east side
of the property is a supertor fence to the chainlink fence required by the City; that he
is proposi~y a 5oard-on-board~ pre-staTned fence because he Is in the wood buslness and
stated he did not know of anything unsightly about wood.
Cha I rman To 1 ar po I nted ou t he wou 1 d agree th,r type of fenee proposed for sc reen i ng i s
better than the requ(red screening and he d~. not have a problem wi th that~ but that thts
typo of industrial development and the money .:eing spent in this area~ a beautlfu)
industrtal park cauld be developed~ he did noc feel a~ outdoor storage ya~d would be
t/4/78
MINUTES~ A1iANEIN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ Jenue~y 4, 1970 78'20
EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASSES 1 6$ AND CONDITIO_ NAl USE PERMIT t10. 1794 (contfnuedj
ctinducive to the industrlal Area and would nat cncourage othar Industrial ~evelopers to
como In and spand tha maney to make the complete Industrial park the Gity would Ilke ta
have. Ne pointod out that ~thcr storagc yards whlch hav~~ been allowed in that area and
other areas sre etrocious. He stateci he realized there is ~ need f~r thls type of
facil(ty~ but that the ma,)ority tl~at hAVe been all~+ed are terrible; thAt they have met
the requiroments fo~ screentny and landscaping but as soon as they gat thelr condltlanel
uso permlt~ the landscaping wes dead and some of them moved thclr 5-gallon plants every
other day so that chey could comply witt~ the intont of the landscaping. He felt chis was
a p~or Incation for the outdc~or storaqe usa. He Indicated he did noc heve any problem
with the fence, just with this perticular area.
Commissloner Barnr,s stated she egreed that [his corner in the industr(al area is probably
the nicnst because of the landsc:apiny of R~ckwell and the Securlty Ban~:~ and sha fe~lt it
would attract other s!m(l~r busln~sses. Shc stated shc felt therc were other locatlons
which would be better for the pctitian~.r.
Mr. Rae polnted out that he liad beer. loo~:ing for industrial ~roperty in thls area~ in thc
City of Anaheim~ Orange~ Fullerton~ etc.~ and he indicated his crews only cnme in in the
morning ta load u~ th~ir trucks ~nd ,~re gone by 5:00 a.m, nr,~f return at ntqht; that there
is very litCle traffic through ttiere. He fndicateri he felt he probat~ly shauld have
brought pictures uf his present est~blishment in Tustin. He polnted out that they are
relocating because they had a raflroad lc:asz and tt~e railroad has sold tht property. I~e
stat~d he n~seds about an acre of land~ not five or six; that he has looked through
probably 25 pi~eces ~f property and they are problem pieces that are very low and would
need a half-mile ~f curb and yutter to be bullt up; that it (s hard to ca.~e up with
something which he could afford. He indicated he would be provlding the landscaping as
requlred. He felt the Commisslon thought of a contr~ctor's storaye yar~1 as a bunch of old
equipment sitting arouncl~ but tl~at this wauld be cedar or redwood lumber banded togethe~
and fs not something that would be seen from street Icvel after putting in an 8-foot
fence.
Commissioner King st-~ted he w;. sorry the petitio~er had not brought plctures of hls
prescnt operatlon; that perhaps ~t would bc easier if the Commisslon knew nare about it.
Chairman Tolar polnted out that the Codc restrtcts the height of the storage; that (t
cannot be above the fence~ and he understood what Mr. Rae was saytng, that it is difftcult
to find suitabla property~ and that we welcome bus(nesses in A~aheim but there was no way
he could agree with this outdour storag^, ~egardless whether it was neatly stacked~ it iz
sttll outdaor storage.
Commisstoner Barnes indi. •~ she was talking about a storage area at this particular
corner. She stated she had dr(ven pasi the Tustin Clty Hall and had not noticed h's
business and It was probably because it looked good; that she has nothing agains*_ :•;ood~
but in this area~ one of the nicest c~rners of th~ ~ustrial area~ should be a qateway or
selling point for other industria) properties. an~: ;r~e dld not feel it w~uld be good
planning to put outdoor storage at ttiis location and felt there has to Fe an acre of land
sc~mewhere else less expensive.
Mr. Rae indicated he has looked; that he h~s been o~ a month-to-monih leace snd was given
notices the first of October and has been looking s(nce then.
Commissioner King suggested that he ask the Chamber af Comr!~erce for assistance in locating
a site.
1/4/76
r.
MINUTES~ ANA4;cIM CITY PLANNING COMMISS~ON~ Ja~uary 4~ 197$ 78-21
EIR CATEGORICAI EXEMPTION-CIASSES 1 b S ANp CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1794 (continued)
Commissloner Johnso~ (nlicated he has e mental picture of what hls yard l~ks Ilke~ that
what he sees is ~+ood stackcd up and asked Ghatrm+~n Tolar if he thought p(ctures would
change his feel{ny. Chairman Tolar Indicoted he did n~t think It would~ that it was the
us~ of the land ho was talking ahout; that he has no doubt Mr, Rse's operati~n ts pr~bebly
exactly what he says it is~ but that t~e w~s talkiny •bout this industrial erea being
developed Into an indurtrtsl park and ha dld not mean another Rockwall; that an outdoor
storage yArd would not be conducive to good pl~nning for the type of industrir~l users
wanted for that industrlal zone.
Mr. Rae pointod ou~ that the usablc arca of this parcel would bc appr~ximately one~half
aere enJ InJic~teJ t~e JIJ not thinl. you could put another Rocl;well an top af one-hatf
acre.
Chalrman Tolar replled that he was not askiny for anotiier Rockwell. Ne stated that If the
other people I~ the area got together~ tf~ey cnuld fnrm a nice industrial park. He stated
that if someone who has only an acre got toyether with :~meone else who has another acre~
they could develop a gooci project; and that he is not agalnyt a small businessman. He
statnd he is a small businessman and had the sartx~ troublc when he had tried to find a
lncatlon for his affice~ and if he fiad yone into a residenclal area wlt~ his office~ he
would have had thc same problem.
Mr. Rac pointe•! out that he is in the proper zone and not yoiny inGo a resldentia) area;
thet the next property to this is an agricultural property. and the next one (s a bank,
the next a rescaurant which is now closed and then a service station which is now closed,
and he did nc~t understand what the Commission ~cas seying; that those closed businesses da
nnt look good; that this represents a larqe fnvestment in a piece of property which he is
proposing to buy; and that he was surc he would be trying ta protect hls investment and
not p~~t something ln that would deteriorate the area. He stated he could have gone to
Ch(no or somewhere else but tl~at he wished t~ stay in this area.
Commissioner Herbst polnted out ttiat the application submitted is for a contractor's
storage yarJ, and a contractor's storage yard allawed a mulc(tude of thtngs to be stored
besides lumber; that if tl~e petitioner decided not to stay there, then the condittonal use
permtt wnuld provide for other storage~ a~d asked if the permit could be restricted ta
lumber~ and Jack White~ Deputy City Attarney, potnted out that it could.
Commisstoner HerbsC stated that he felt if it could be restricted to a certain use, tt
probably wouid be compatible Hith tt~e area. He stated that looking out of a six-story
building onto an industrial building would be IooF:(nc~ at round, gray domes with atr-
condittoniny un(ts on top. He felt tl~is petltic~ner does have an industrial use and thls
is an industrial area; that he I~as done an exceptional job in Lrying to beautify the
property and was not ~~oing to store above the fence line; that if he could develop in
accordance with ti~e plans as shown and d~es not store anything other than lumber and wauld
not exceed the fence he(yht it would be compatible with the area.
Ccx~missloner Barnes sta[ed she felt if we are going to attract the type of businesses we
want in this area~ she did not think this development would be compattbic with the area.
She stated she felt if the outdoor sto~age yard had been there, then probably Secur(ty
Bank or Rockweil would not have bought che property.
Commissioner Herbst pointed out that. be~i,g an industrialist him~elf~ he would have no
obJections being next door to this typr. of use; it was probably as light as you couid get.
and from what he could see on the plars, he did not think it would be an objectior.able use
if he keeps the yard in g~od shepe~ etc. Ne recognized the gentldnan's hardshiN, that he
cannot go out and buy an acre of land in an ndustrial area, and stated he is going to
t/4/78
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM C1TY PLANNING CONMISSION~ Januory 4~ 1~78
7$-22
EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASSES 1 6 5 nNa CONDITI01lAL USE PERMIT N0. 1J~~~ (co~tl~ued)
~ -.-.-----
servlce the community as he secs tt; that w~ da ha-e en (ndust~lal are+~ ~nd thc petitioner
has met all the standards except the fence, which he ls trying to improve~ and hQ felt the
planti~d use would be c~rt~etible.
Concernin,y thQ exlsting structure on t.ha site~ Mr. Rae indicated they would tdke care of
that e~d c aan It up~ pruvidiny the 1:,~Jsc:apiny tn the front with some nice-size trees.
Ha~ indicaced they do a lot of contac~ •s' work but do not have mAny people cominq into the
office.
Commissioner Ilcrbst suggcsted thet ~.:~e house should bc upgraded ta mcet the requlrements
e~d the landscap(ng should be upyraded.
Commissioner King asked abou[ trucks and trellcrs in tha area~ and Mr. Rae replied that he
~'ld not have trucks c~r trail~rs Gut that thcy would be unloadtnq ~n occaaion; that he had
a Mo•ton flatbed truck.
Commiss(oncr Herbst po(nted aut ch~-e ar~ trucks and trailers in that area already end
this was why hc felt this use wauld bn corr~atible~ but ,t was probably as light as could
be expectt~l in this are~, and that anothcr typc af business c~uld be nx~re dccrimental.
1t r+as noted th~t thc Airector of the Planning D~~artmcsnt I~as determined that the proposed
activity falls within the dr_flnitlon of Settion 3.01~ Classcs 1 and 5~ of the City of
Anahelm Guid~lincs to ttic R~quirements for an Envtronment~l impact Raport and is~
therefore~ categor(cally excmpt frcxn the requirement *.o file an ~IR.
ACTION: Commtssioner FlerbsC offered Resolution No. PC7@-7 and moved for tts passage and
a~opt~on~ that the 1lnahetm ~fty PlAnning Commission do~s hereby grant Petltion for
Conditian~al Usc Pr.rmlc No. 1794~ granting wa(ver (a) on the baais that the buildi~g Is
exlsting and it wauld be a tiardship to rcl~~cate the build(ng; granting waiver (b) o~ the
basis that tiie propnsed fenc~ cr,nsistin9 of 6-foc~t high, 5/8" x 8" cedar boards and 4" x
~-" redwcwd posts alnng t!ie e~:~ and south property pcrlmeters wtil be a more effective
enctosu~e than chain'lnk fencing ~~:irely inte n~roven with redwood or cedar slats as
spectfled by tF-e Zoning Cnde; sub~ect ta petitloner's stipulations ~hat the proJect wil)
b~ devei~opnd exactly as shcxvn o~~ the plans and based o~ the pctitio~er's stipuletlon that
only banded redwood and cedar lumber and roli chalnlink fencing will be stored outs{de and
w{I) not exceed the fr,nce height; an~ sub,ject to Interdepart~ental Commlttee
recommandations.
On roli call, the foregoing resotution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: COl~M I 55 l ONERS : HERBST, DAV I D. KI NG, L I f~Fl
NOES: CQMNISSIOrIERS: TOLAR~ BARNES~ JONNSOK
AHSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
1/4/78
~
MINUTES~ ANAIIEtM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ Jenuory 4~ 1~7f3 78-2~
ITEN N0.
ND RECQMME~Ul1T I ONS
ITE11 A. CONDtTIONAL USE PkRMIT N0. 1063 ' a~quest for extenslon of time.
~.._ .,._~~._.
Thc staff roport to the P1An~iny Gommiss(on dated January 4~ 197~ was pr^sented~ noting
the subjsct pr~perty is t~n Irreqularly-shdped perce) of land consisting of approximately 5
acres located on the nnrth side of Katelle Avenue between Flaster Street and Manchester
Avenue; that the dpplicant ~C. M. McN~es) requests a retroactive extenslon of tirr~ for
CondltionAl Use Permit No, tOG3~ said cc~nditionbl use perr~it to establish a hall for
variety shows~ lectures~ meetli~qs~ dances~ etc.~ w(th an on-sele 1(quor estaulishment in
an existlny structure at 1721 Sout~~ Mancl~estcr Avenue was approved by the Planning
Cornrniss~~~ an Oclober I~ 1968; that the Zoning Enfnrcement Offtcer had indicated subject
use w~s ernployinc~ port~ble slyns and se~~chliylits (n vi~latlon of the Zoning Code~ but
thase problsms have been romedied; tl~~t no other deleter(ous effects have occurred and the
parking appears to be adequate; and that ninc previous ext~nsi~ns of time have been
gra~ted~ the last one expiriny on October 7~ 19J7.
AC_TIOt~; Canmiss(oner Ktn9 offered : rnotion, seconded by Corrmissioner Herbst and MOTION
CARRI~D~ thai the Anah~im City Plannfny Commission Joes hereby recommend to the City
Councll that a retroactive extenslon of time~ to expite October 7~ 197~s~ be grantad.
'fhere was a gentleman present wl~o cteted ht wished to present a plan he has whtch would
develop tt~is property int~ a beauti ful corner; that ~ie had presc:nteci Chis [o the Bui lding
Oivision~ Uisneyland, the Angels~ and City Gouncil and want~d the Planning Cortim(sslon to
gst befiind tt. Chairm~n Tolar pointed out tt~e (;wrmfssi~n could not take action on
anyth~ng that was nat before them~ tl~at this request vias mc:rely for an extenslon of time.
COMMISSIONERS JONMSO~~ A~~Q KING LEFT 711E MEETING A'T h:3~ P.M.
ITCM k3. BUILL~II~G PE:RMIT REVIEU itEPORT - 923 and S~O1 East Lincoln Avenue.
Coulter Ilooker from the aedevclopment Agency presented the tiuildinq Permi[ Review Report
w(tf~ comments that the Redevelopment Plan specifies t-esidentia) uses at the location af
subJect property~ ~owever~ Lhe Plan ~oe~ ailow comn~ercial uses along Lincoln Avenue where
compatlble with surroundinq use5; ti~at thc proposed development does not provide adequete
screening/buffe- between the parking area o~ the subJect property and adJacent restdential
uses to the north; that plans are not drawn sufffciently ta dctermine if the development
meets minimum parking requirements; thot the existiny building at ~29 East Lincoln Avenus
is located within the proposed right~of-way of realigned Lincoln Avenue; and that the
Redevelopment Agency has recommended the developer consider entering into a partf~ipation
agrcement with tl~e Agency provided the standards and other requirements set forth in the
Redevelopment Plan can be satisfied,
Chairman Tolar asked N~rman Priest. Executive Ufrector of tf~e Redevelopment Agency~ if
thts is scxnething the Planning Commission will be requested lo do frequently~ and Mr.
Priest pointed out they will be doing this on all building permlts requested in the
redevelopment area~ and he would like to keep this as routine as possible but that they
are fairly close to the end of the review period on this particular appllcetion.
Chalrman Tolar stated in ttie future he would like to get the report i, his packet in arder
to drive by and look at the property before voting or, it.
1/4/78
MINUTES~ AN~HEIM CITY PLANN4NG COMMISSION~ Jenuary 4~ Ig7~ 78'2~
ITEM G (cont(nu~d)
Mr. Prie t apolo~lzed r,nd sta~ed Chat normally it would be In oarlier a~d suggested that
mayba the Planning ConKnlsslan would wish to delegate someone ~n ~he Planning staff to have
the euthorlty to look at thesc reports and bring e report back to the Commission.
Chalrrna~ Tolar statcd hc was noC Intcrested in thbt. but that he was intcrasted in hrving
these reports earller.
Mr. Prlest apologized aga(n and steted the issue on this particular applicatlon Is that
the houses Aro lyiny (n the right.-of-way for the realiynmcnt of Lincoln Avenur.; that the
property owner Is aware of the situatlon; tt~nt the Redevelopment Agency wlll have to go
hack to hlm and te~l him they are appostng ttie parmit and will probebly offer to buy his
nropcrty unless he ancers into a partic(pation agr~ement wlth them~ under which he could
~novc the house back on the property and come up with a buildable parcel~ bnd th~ey were
williny to work wlth him on that besis~ but that thts permit opplicatlon spenks to the
house tn its prescnt location which lies In thc proposeci right•af-wey for thc realignrrant
r~f Lincoln Aver~ue.
Cha(rman 7olar osked Jack White~ Deputy Clty Attorney. if the Commission :ould lcgelly
vote on snmething so that pr~ple could not obtoln bu(Idinq fsermits~ and M~, White repllad
that this (s the Redevel~~pment Plan and that tl~e lanyuaye states thc Plenning Commission
must review the Executive Uirector's decision.
Commlsstoner Herbst asked if the pcople alony Lincoln Avenue had been notifled of the
realignrnent. Ne Indlcated this ge~tleman may havic entcred into i~is plans without
knowledge of what was yoing to happen. Nr. Priest rcplied that they were nottfled and~ in
add(tlon~ the Reclevelopment Agency talks wlth them regularly concern(ny th~ Impact and
that lack of knowled~~e would be a rare exception. 11e st~ted alternativc prelimtnary
alignrnents were propused fram the orig(nal alignm~nts, and this partlcular p~rce) was one
which wouid be directly impacted more than originally thauqht; that the Redevelopment
Agenty wnuld appraise the property and make him an offer~ or he could muve the house back
and have a trianyular parcel right beside the ric~ht-of-way. He pointed Qut this area is
designated for residential~ and thcre is some que~tion of land u~e.
Chalrmar~ Tolar asked the impact of the Commission's decision~ if it would be forcing hlm
to sell his land~ ~nd Jack White statPa he would not be getting t~is building permits to do
what he wants to do.
Commissianer He~bst askcd t~ow much f~otayc the Redevelopment Aqency would be taki~g. and
Mr. Pr(est rcplied it would (ncrc:ase about 30 feet~ anJ Cammissioner Herbst polnted out
that wculd rnake tt an w~buildable l~t. Ne stated that Lincoln Avenue would be a maJor
street with six lanes and witt~ residential fronting on Lincoln Avenue~ he did not thlnk it
would make a real res(dential piece of praperty. and a5ked what the Red~velopment Agency
intPnded to do with the rest of the property. Mr. Priest ~eplied tliat It looked as if it
would be a lan~fscaped buffcr area.
ACTION: Commissioner 1~erbst offered a motion~ seconded by Commtssioner Linn and MOTION
CARRIED (Commis~ioners Jolinson and Kiny being absent)~ that the Anaheim City Planning
Commisston does hereby concur with the Rcdevelopment Agency Executive Director tt~at the
sub.ject building permft not be approved.
~/ti/78
e
~ ~, /
MINUTES, ANAIIEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ Janua~y 4~ 1977 78-25
GCNCRAL DISCUSSIQN
_~
that Anahcim ha~
Commissioner Barnes IndicatCd sha wishod to discuss tlie Induatrial area:
the second best tndustriei area in Orange County end that they are rnaking a hadge-pAdge of
It bec~use they do not have a master plan for that arr.a end are puttiny In all types of
uses. Sha stated if we wish tn look fn n+ard ta a yoad Industrial area~ we should have e
mastar plan a~d asked if thcre was somc waY to get scxnething I~ the works~ a~d referred to
a complex 1{ke Ir~~~ne Industrial Park~ which is successful because they have a master plan
and do not a11a~~ storayc ya~Js to ba put in naxt eo biy builcti~gs.
Commisaioner Ilarbst indicated that Irvine ia a~ne-owne~shfp park a~d hc~e we have sever.~l
ownors wl~o wished to utillze their propc~ty. i1e indicated he had been an adAmant
protector of the ~~mi`t~so'thatethe~Planning Cornrts)sslan cantsee what goes~lny dt'~~d ~y
cond1Clona1 use p .
Commissloner ~a~~es Indicated she did not feel this Is adequatG.
Chalrman Tolar asked J. J. Tashiro to discuss this wlth the Planntng staff and Assistant
Director for Zoning. Annika Santalahti, and bring b~ck a report in relationship to what
can bE donc.
TENTATIVE WORK_SES510N
J. J. Tashiro~ Ass(st~nt Planner~ polnted out the date of Fcbruary 20, 197a, h~d baen
tentatively set for a work session regarJing the hillside resldential standards, 7:0~
p.m.~ In the Council Chambcr.
SOUTHERN C11L I FORN I A PLAtIH I NG CONGRESS ME~E.T ~_G
Mr. Tashiro also reported that the Southern Gallfornia Planning Congress will hold a
meeting on January 12~ ~97~~ and any~n~ interested shaulJ contact the Planning Comm~sslon
Secretary .
A~JUURNMEI~T S~ onded byrCommisslonerdBarnes'anrt1i0T10N~CARRIEU9(Commissioners
Johnson and King being absent).
The meeting adJourned at 4:55 p•m•
Respectfully submitted~
'~~ / , ,~ ~ ~ ~~'~L~ ~,~ „c~v
Qu,c,
Cdith L. Narrts, Secretary
M ahe3m C~ty Planning Commisslon
ELN:hm
t/4/78