Laserfiche WebLink
pUBLIC HEARINGS, APPEAL N05.324 ~ 333~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT <br />73~9' (CONTINUED) <br /> <br />Additional proponents who addressed Council included: <br /> <br />Mr. Ralph E. Butz, Mananger, Hyland, Division <br />Travenol Laboratories, 3300 Hyland Ave., Costa <br />Mesa; (Appeal No. 333) <br /> <br />Mr. Fred T. Katakara, representing Guerdon <br />Industries, Inc., 2524 Loyola Rd., Costa Mesa. <br /> <br />The proponents stated that the proposed CUP would endanger the <br />orderly development of hundreds of acres of industrially-zoned <br />land; that it would tend to discourage quality development; that <br />it would give a greater advantage to competitive nearby industrial <br />parks; that it would devaluate the surrounding industrial land; <br />that it would in no way serve or benefit the surrounding indus- <br />trial land users; that there is no public interest for the <br />~r~po~ed drive-in project; that the visual impact would be <br />· n3ur~ous to the area; that it would erode the General Plan <br />of the City; that it would result in an exodus by industrialists <br />who are concerned with maintaining a prestige address; and that <br />it would undermine the integrity of a prime area. <br /> <br />Proponents of the appeal who resided in the area stated that <br />adult movies could be seen by children from second-story windows; <br />that the debris common to drive-in movies would constantly <br />detract from the scenic bike trails in the immediate vicinity; <br />that the use would be incompatible with the Greenbelt Plan; <br />and that there were 21 theaters within a four-mile radius of <br />this site. <br /> <br />The proponents stated further that the Planning Commission <br />eliminated staff-suggested EIR mitigation measures without <br />comment prior to adopting the BIR; that these measures should <br />be considered and explanations for their elimination <br />given by Council; that there are serious adverse environmental <br />consequences; that the proposed theater would create traffic <br />problems; that the current energy crisis has a direct bearing <br />on the project which is a night time use, dependent upon the <br />automobile for its survival; and that the project is not <br />economically justifiable. <br /> <br />There were no additional proponents~and the Mayor invited the <br />opponents, those opposing the Appeals and in favor of granting <br />Conditional Use Permit 73-9, to present their testimony. <br /> <br />The following persons responded: <br /> <br />Mr. Charles Schlegel, Attorney, representing the <br />applicants for the CUP, who filed exhibits "Applicant <br /> 1 and Applicant -2" a "Summary of Factors" for con- <br />sideration in making a determination on the request <br />for the Permit, and a letter favoring the drive-in <br />from Indusco, Ltd., 1580 East Edinger Avenue, Santa <br />Ana, respectively; <br /> <br />Mr. Bill Frantz, Real Estate Broker, 635 East Chapman, <br />Orange; <br /> <br />Mr. John Valentine, 635 E. Chapman, Orange; <br /> <br />Mr. Vincent Raney, Architect, San Francisco; <br /> <br />Mr. W. F. Croddy, applicant, 201 South Broadway, <br />Santa Ana. <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL MINUTES <br /> <br />446 NOVEMBER 19, 1973 <br /> <br /> <br />