anaheim-gazette 1959-03-26

LEGAL NOTICE (Pub. Anaheim Gazette Mar. 26, 1958.) (5) LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS, RELATIVE TO PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, in the City of Anaheim, on Tuesday, April 7, 1959, at the hour of 7:00 O'Clock P.M. to receive and consider all evidence and reports at these HEARINGS or obtain previously by the Council relevant to the VERIFIED PETITION submitted by the Owner of the following described property: RECLASSIFICATION NO. F-58-59-60 — PETITION submitted by HASKELL A. KELLEY, 532 North West Street, Anaheim, California, as Owner, requesting that the property described as being, PARCEL A, a portion of the Anaheim Extension described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Southerly line of Lot 33 and the Easterly right of Way Line of North West Street, thence Easterly to the Western boundary line of Tract No. 2184, City of Anaheim, 1927; thence Northerly along boundary line to the Southern Right of Way line of Autumn North Street, 154.37 more or less than Westery along said Right of Way line to the Easterly right of Way line of North West Street, 182.96 more or less; thence Southly along said Right of Way line to the point of beginning, 609.62 more or less, PARCEL B. A portion of Lot 28 of the Anaheim Extension described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Northerly line of Lot 28 and the Easterly right of Way line of North West Street; thence Easterly along the Northerly line of said lot, 295.47; thence southerly along the Western boundary of Tract No. 1464, City of Anaheim, 560 more or less; thence Westery parallel to the Northern line of Lot 28 of the Anaheim Extension in the Easterly right of Way line of Autumn North Street, 255.47; thence Northerly along said Right of Way line to the point of beginning, 960 more or less, and further described as East side of West Street between North and La Palma be reclassified from R-O. RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN, to R-3. MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. ALL INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to attend said HEARING and express opinions for or against the proposed RECLASSIFICATION as outlined above. FURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the office of the CITY CLERK of the City of Anaheim. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENE M. WILLIAMS, CITY OF ANAHEIM VARIANCE NO. 1101 — PETITION submitted by VALMONTE ENTERPRISES, 2021-31th Street, Manhattan Beach, California, requesting permission to Walve width requirement on Lots 9 and 18 and to waive area requirements on Lots 10 through 18; on the property described as Tenant Trace No. 1128, City of Anaheim, and further described as being on both sides of Catalpa Ave. between Nutwood and Wichita. The property is presently classified R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL. VARIANCE No. 1102 — PETITION submitted by ORANGEWOOD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, 6383 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, Calif., constructing AND OPERATING CAR WASH FACILITIES ON "Parcel A" AND CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE ON "Parcel B" SMALL COMMERCIAL STORES, on the property described as "Parcel A" 130 South of Katella on East side of Harbor. "Parcel B" on South side of Katella, 160 East of Harbor. The property is presently classified R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL. ALL INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to attend said HEARING and express opinions for or against the proposed RECLASSIFICATIONs as outlined above. FURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the office of the PLANNING DIRECTOR of the City of Anaheim. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY: MELBOURNE A.-GAUER, Chairman DATE: March 23, 1959 (Pub. Anaheim Gazette Mar. 26, 1959.) (7) LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO PETitions FOR RECLASSIFICATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, in the City of Anaheim, on Tuesday, April 7, 1959, at the hour of 7:00 O'Clock P.M., to receive and consider all evidence and reports at these HEARINGS or obtained previously by the Council relative to the VERIFIED PETition submitted by the Owners of the following described properties: RECLASSIFICATION NO. F-58-59-60 — PETITION submitted by DR. ROBERT G. ROBB, 1707 South Euclid Avenue, Anaheim, California, as Owner, requesting that the property described as being 1703 Sumac Lane be reclassified from R-I. SINGLE-family RESIDENTIAL to C-I. NEIGHBORHOOD-COMMERCIAL RECLASSIFICATION NO. F-58-59-62 — PETITION submitted by JOSEPH HUARTR, 1464 East North Street, Anaheim; California, as Owner and ARTHUR ALTHEIDE, 14231 Wagner, Anaheim, California, as Authorized Agent, requesting that the property described as being 856 South Placela be reclassified from R-M. Northerly along said Right of Way line to the point of beginning, 960 more or less, and further described as East side of West Street between North and La Palma be reclassified from R-O. RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. ALL INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to attend said HEARING and express opinions for or against the proposed RECLASSIFICATION as outlined above. FURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the office of the CITY CLERK of the City of Anaheim. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENE M. WILLIAMS, City Clerk DATED: March 23, 1959 (Pub. Anaheim Gazette Mar. 26, 1959.) (6) LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, in the City of Anaheim, on Tuesday, April 7, 1959, at the hour of 7:00 O'Clock P.M., to receive and consider all evidence and reports as these HEARINGS are obtained previously by the Council relative to the VERIFIED PETITIONS submitted by the Owners of the following described properties: RECLASSIFICATION NO. F-58-59-63 —PETITION submitted by GiACOMO LUGARO, 8512 Magnolia Avenue, Anaheim, California, as Owner and McDANIEL ENGINEERING COMPANY, 222 East Center Street, Anaheim, California, as Authorized Agent, requesting that the property described as being Lots 1 through 21 of Tentative Tract No. 3265 be reclassified from R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL to R-3, MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, and Lots 2 and 22 of Tentative Tract No. 3265 be reclassified from R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL to C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, and further described as the Southeast corner of Crescent and Magnolia avenues. RECLASSIFICATION NO. F-58-59-64 —PETITION submitted by DR. HENRY L. POUCHER, 8762 Walker Street Anaheim, Californië, as Owner and R.G. Witt, 8764 East Elm Place, Covina, California, as Authorized Agent, requesting that the property described as being 3226 Lincoln Avenue be reclassified from R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL to C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD - COMMERCIAL. ALL INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to attend said HEARINGS and express opinions for or against the proposed RECLASSIFICATION as outlined above. FURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the office of the CITY CLERK of the City of Anaheim. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENE M. WILLIAMS, City Clerk DATED: February 23, 1959 (Pub. Anaheim Gazette Mar. 26, 1959.) (10) LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CITY PLANNING COMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, in the City of Anaheim, on Monday, April 6, 1959, at the hour of 2:00 O'Clock P.M., to receive and consider all evidence and reports as these HEARINGS or obtained previously by the Commission relative to the VERIFIED PETITIONS submitted by the Owners of the following described properties: RECLASSIFICATION NO. F-58-59-77 —PETITION submitted by JOSEPH D. KOPSKI, JR., 1762 Crescent Avenue, Anaheim, California, as Owner, L.FREDERICK PACK, 149 West Baddillo Street, Covina, California, as Authorized Agent, requesting that the property described as being Tentative Tract No. 3372 from Euclid to Loora approximately 950 feet South of the center line of La Palma Avenue be reclassified from R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL to C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL and R-3, MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. ALL INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to attend said HEARINGS and express opinions for or against the proposed RECLASSIFICATION as outlined above. FURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the office of the PLANING DIRECTOR of the City of Anaheim. CITY PLANNING COMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY MELOBOURNE A. GAUER, Chairman DATED: March 24, 1959 (Pub. Anaheim Gazette Mar. 26, 1959.) LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, in the City of Anaheim, on Monday, April 6, 1959, at the hour of 2:00 O'Clock P.M. to receive and consider all evidence and reports at these HEARINGS or obtained previously by the Commission relative to the VERIFIED PETITIONS submitted by the Owners of the following described property: RECLASSIFICATION NO. F-58-59-76 PETITION submitted by GEORGE A. HENRY, et al., 2749 East Second Street, Long Beach 3, California, as Owner, Don L. Gesler, 866 Bridgeport Avenue, Anaheim, California, as Authorized Agent, requesting that the property described as being on the West side of Veltre from Orange to Conley and two parcels on the East side of Magnolia approximately 780 South of Orange be reclassified from R.A. RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL AL., to R.-3, MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. ALL INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to attend said HEARINGS and express opinions for or against the proposed RECLASSIFICATIONS as outlined above. FURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the office of the PLANNING DIRECTOR of the City of Anaheim. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY: MELBOURNE A. GAUER, DATED: March 22, 1959 (Pub. Anaheim Gazette Mar. 26, 1959.) LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS RELATIVE TO PETITIONS FOR RECLASSIFICATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, in the City of Anaheim, on Monday, April 6, 1959, at the hour of 2:00 O'Clock P.M. to receive and consider all evidence and reports at these HEARINGS or obtained previously by the Commission relative to the VERIFIED PETITIONS submitted by the Owners of the following described properties: VARIANCE NO. 3009 — PETITION submitted by J.T.J. CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, 1550 Knowles Avenue, Los Angeles 63, California, purchasing under contract, requesting permission to WAIVE 70 FRONTAGE REQUIREMENT ON LOTS 18 through 20 and 41 through 43, on the property described as Tentative Tract No. 3149 and further described as 660 North of Ball between Trident and Nutwood. The property is presently classified R-A. RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL. VARIANCE NO. 1100 — PETITION submitted by MR. & MRS. ELTON B. SAHR, 427 South Ohio Street, Anaheim, California, as Owners, requesting permission to BUILD A 700 SQUARE POOT SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AS A SECOND UNIT on the property described as Lot 17, Block 'P' of Tract No. 228 in the City of Anaheim and further described as 427 South Ohio Street. The property is presently classified R-1. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. ALL INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to attend said HEARINGS and express opinions for or against the VERIFIED PETITIONS outlined above. FURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the office of the PLANNING DIRECTOR of the City of Anaheim. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY MELBOURNE A. GAUER, Chairman DATED: March 24, 1959 obtained at the office of the PLANNING DIRECTOR of the City of Anaheim. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY: MELBOURNE A. GAUER, Chairman DATED: March 24, 1958 (Pub. Anaheim Gazette Mar. 26, 1958) (14) LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO PETITION FOR VARIANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, in the City of Anaheim on Wednesday, April 6, 1958, at the home of O'Clock P.M. to receive and consider all evidence and reports at these HEARINGS or obtained previously by the Commission relative to the VERIFIED PETITIONS submitted by the Owner of the following described property: VARIANCE NO. 1103 — PETITION submitted by JAMES A. LIBERIO, 616 West, Commonwealth, Fullerton, California, as Owner, requesting permission to Waive minimum lot size requirement, on the property described as being Tract No. 3116 and further described as 200 feet East of the center line of Magnolia Avenue on the South side of Broadway Street. The property is presently classified C.L.E. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. ALL INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to attend said HEARINGS and express opinions for or against the VERIFIED PETITIONS outlined above. PURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the Office of the PLANNING DIRECTOR of the City of Anaheim. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY: MELBOURNE A. GAUER, Chairman DATED: March 24, 1959 (Pub. Anaheim Gazette Mar. 26, 1958.) (8) LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, in the City of Anaheim, on April 6, 1958, at the house of O'Clock P.M. to receive all evidence and reports HEARINGS or obtained prior to this Commission relative to PETITION submitte Owner of the following property: RECLASSIFICATION NO. — PETITION submitted CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Gilbert Street, Garden Grove, as Owner, Harry 11900-Gilbert Street, Garland California, as Authorized requesting that the property as being Lots 1, 2, 4, 7, 8 Tract 3240 in the City of Anaheim be reclassified ASingle-FAMILY RESIDENT PASSENGER T We're in the business of running trains—both pass we expect to be running them for a long time to it very clear just how we feel about our passenger 1 We want to run passenger trains tha and use. We welcome passenger b we hope more people will ride our 2 We want our passenger trains to be We think our passenger service is a in the country...and we intend to ke 3 We feel, however, that it is only sen discontinue those trains which so fe that the trains obviously are no long ARE WE ACTING IN THE PU Yes! Say these Commission Last week, C. Lyn Fox, President of the California Public Utilities Commission, and Commissioner Matthew J. Dooley, who presided and heard all evidence at the hearings, took sharp issue with many opinions expressed in the March 10 decision of the other three Commissioners. In their dissenting statement Commissioners Fox and Dooley The dissenting they were keenly meet demands o nomic factor any must be subsidize shippers. They sa Last week, C. Lyn Fox, President of the California Public Utilities Commission, and Commissioner Matthew J. Dooley, who presided and heard all evidence at the hearings, took sharp issue with many opinions expressed in the March 10 decision of the other three Commissioners. In their dissenting statement Commissioners Fox and Dooley said that Southern Pacific "...is to be commended rather than condemned for initiating economies designed to reduce its out-of-pocket loss and thus enable it to continue on a reasonable basis a public passenger service which will meet the public need and convenience as demonstrated by present usage." They further said, "...Southern Pacific ...has met fully the burden of proof necessary to sustain its application..."" "In no instance does the daily average number of through revenue passengers carried between major termini by any one of these six trains equal one bus load. To require applicant to continue to provide railway passenger service for a single bus load of passengers is uneconomical in the extreme." the City of Anaheim, on Monday, April 6, 1959, at the hour of 2:00 O'Clock P.M. to receive and consider all evidence and reports at these HEARINGS or obtained previously by the Commission relative to the VERIFIED PETITION submitted by the Owner of the following described property: RECLASSIFICATION NO. F-86-56-68—PETITION submitted by TIETZ CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, 11900 Gilbert Street, Garden Grove, California, as Owner, Harry S. Hinker, 11900-Gilbert Street, Garden Grove, California, as Authorized Agent, requesting that the property described as being Lots 1, 2, 47, 48, & 49 of Tract 3240 in the City of Anaheim, further described in 1544 Kaplan Avenue, resumes specified from R-1-SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL to C-1. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIALALL INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to attend said HEARINGS and express opinions for or against the proposed RECLASSIFICATION as outlined above. FURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the office of the PLANNING DIRECTOR of the City of Anaheim. BY ORDER OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY: MELBOURNE A. GAUER, Chairman DATED: March 22, 1959 If some honeybees produce no honey, they are still valuable for pollination services. LONG BEACH — David G. Tucker, seaman, USN, son of Mr. and Mrs. Robert L. Tucker of 717 S. Bruce St., Anaheim, is serving aboard the anti-submarine support aircraft carrier USS Kearnsarge at the Naval Shipyard, Long Beach. The 41,000-ton carrier is expected to remain in the shipyard until June 1959. FOR GAZETTE WANT ADCALL KE 5-2208 Utilities Commission handed down a 3-to-2 applications to discontinue certain little-used station has caused some misunderstanding service. THE TRUTH IS... trains—both passenger and freight—and a long time to come. We want to make our passenger service. larger trains that you need passenger business and will ride our trains. r trains to be good trains. r service is as good as any intend to keep it that way. it is only sensible to which so few people use are no longer needed. THE PUBLIC INTEREST? Commissioners... The dissenting Commissioners pointed out that, although they were keenly aware that a utility incurs an obligation to meet demands of public convenience and necessity, as an economic factor any deficit suffered due to passenger train losses must be subsidized by agricultural, industrial and governmental shippers. They said that in the present case the majority deci- The dissenting Commissioners pointed out that, although they were keenly aware that a utility incurs an obligation to meet demands of public convenience and necessity, as an economic factor any deficit suffered due to passenger train losses must be subsidized by agricultural, industrial and governmental shippers. They said that in the present case the majority decision "ignores the economics of the situation in general and of California shippers...in particular." The two Commissioners further stated that they had "... been unable to find in the record any evidence indicating, in the slightest degree, any lack of integrity in applicant's presentation. In this connection it is significant that the presiding Commissioner...found no lack of integrity in their development and presentation." And they concluded, "There comes a time when those charged with the responsibility of regulating public utilities should face up to the facts of change and act with objectivity and reason. That time has arrived in the State of California."