Loading...
Minutes-PC 2006/05/01~A~,EIn~ ~q CITY OF ANAHEIM ~ 4 ~ ~f.t~ . • ^ o ~ Pianning Commission ~ _ _ ~ _ Minutes U ~ ~a~ ' Mondav, Mav 1, 2006 . . _ 0 0~ ,t, ~ Council Chamber, City Hall O g~ 200 5outh Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California UND E D ~ CHAIRMAN: GAIL EASTMAN Commissioners Present: KELLY BUFFA, JOSEPH KARAKI, PANKY ROMERO, (ONE VACANCY) _ Commissioners Absent: CECILIA FLORES, PAT VELASQUEZ _ Staff Present: Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney Abel Avalos, Project Manager ll Greg Hastings, Planning Services Manager James Ling, Principal Civil Engineer Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner Kimberly Wong, Assistant Planner Judybadant, Senior Planner Marie Witkay, Senior'Secretary Dave See, Senior Planner Della Herrick, Associate Planner • Agenda Posting: A complete copy of the Planning Commission Agenda was posted at 4:00 p.m. on Friday, April 28, 2006, inside the display case located in the foyer of the Council Chambers, and also in the outside display kiosk. Published: Anaheim Bulletin Newspaper on Thursday, April 6, 2006 • Catl To Order Preliminary Plan Review 1:00 P.M. • STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISS(ON ON VARIOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES (AS REQUESTED BY PLANNING COMMISSION) • PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW FOR ITEMS ON THE MAY 1, 2006 AGENDA • Recess To Afternoon Public Hearing Session • Reconvene To Public Hearing 2:30 P.M. Attendance: 22 For record keepinq purposes if vou wish to make a statement reqardinp anv item on the . aqenda p/ease complete a speaker card in advance and submit it to fhe secreta-v • Pledge Of Allegiance: Commissioner Buffa • Public Comments • Consent Calendar • Public Hearing Items . • Adjournment You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following e-mail address: plannin~commissionCo)anaheim.net H`.\TOOLS\PCADMIN\PCMI NIACT12006MINUTESWC050106.DOC MAY 1, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • Anaheim Ptanning Commission Agenda - 2:30 P.M. Public Comments: None This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the ` Anaheim Pfanning Commission or pubiic comments on agenda items with the exception of pu6lic hearing items. Planning Commission Appointment: Requesf For Consideration Of Potential Appointment Of Planning Commission Alternate For The Following: • Utilities Underground' Conversion Subcommittee ACTION: Commissioner Romero offered a motion, seconded by Chairman Eastman and MOTION CARRIED (Commissianers Flores and Velasquez absent and w+th one Commission vacancy), that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby appoinf Commissioner Buffa to serve as the Planning Commission alternate representative for the Utilities Underground Conversion Subcommittee. Consent Calendar: • The items on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate , discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the Planning Commission, staff or the public request the item to be discussed and/or removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. ' Commissioner Karaki offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Buffa and MOTION CARRIED . (Commissioners Flores and Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy), for approval of Consent Calendar Item 1-A as recommended by staff. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED Renorts and Recommendations Min _ : 1A. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Approved Meeting of April 17, 2006. (Motion) Consent Calendar Approval VOTEc 4-0 Commissioners Flores and Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy. ' • 05-01-06 _ Page 2 MAY 1, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Pub • lic Hearina Items: 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0: 2005-05060 2d. DETERMINATION OF PUBUC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2005-00024 Owner: Pietro T. Trozzi, 9471 Gateshead Drive, Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Agent: Rick Solberg, Solberg & Associates, 201 East Center Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: ; 3242 West LincolnAvenue: Property is approximately 1:5 acres, located east and south of the southeast corner of Westchester Drive and Lincoln Avenue, having frontages of " 136 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue and 187 feet on the east side of Westchester Drive (Maria's Piueria and Billiards). ' Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-05060 - Request to permit a restaurant and billiard facility with the on-premises sale and consumption of beer and wine with waiver of minimum number of required parking spaces. Determination of Public Convenience and Necessity No. 2005-00024 - Request to permit sales of 6eer and wine for on-premises consumption ~ within a restaurant and billiard facility. Continued from the February 6, March 20, and April 17, 2006, Planning Commission meetings. Conditional Use Permit Resolution Na Public Convenience or NecessityResolution Na OPPOSITION: None DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. • Continued to May 15, 2006 Motion: RomeroBuffa VOTE: 4-0 Commissioners Flores and Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy. I Project Planner. (kwonp2la~anaheim.net) MAY 1, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 3b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 3c. CONDITIONALUSE PERMIT N0. 2006-05069 Owner: Public Storage Euro Partnership, 701 Western Avenue, Glendale, CA 91201 Agent: Dean Grobbelaar, Pacific Planning Group, INC.; 23412 Moulton Parkway, Suite 140, Laguna HiIIs, CA 92653 Continued to May 15, 2006 Motion: Karaki/Buffa . VOTE: 4-0 Commissioners Flores and Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy. Location: 4880 East La Palma Avenue: Property is approximately - 3.5 acres, havinga frontage of 340 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue and is located 115 feet west of the centerline of Manassero Street. Request to construct a five-story self storage building with building : heights exceeding 60 feet with waivers of (a) maximum floor area ratio and (b) maximum fence height. Continued from the March 20, and April 17, 2006, Planning Commission meetings. Project Planner: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. ' (inixon@ananeim.net) • OPPOSITION: None DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. ~ MAY 1, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ 4a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, CLASS 11 (READVERTISED) 4b. VARIANCE NO. 2006-04681 0wner: Karl A. Bergstrom, 1662 La Loma Drive, Santa Ana, CA 92705 Agent: Steve Sheldon, 901 Dove Street, Suite 140, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Location: 200 West Alro Wav: Property is approximately 1.5 acres, having a frontage of 100 feet on the south side of Alro Way and is located 115 feet east of the centerline of Manchester Avenue (Bergstroms). Continued to ` May 15, 2006 Motion: RomeroBuffa VOTE: 4-0 ' Commissioners Flores and Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy. ' Request waivers of (a) continuation and termination of legal non- conforming signs and (b) maximum letter height for wall signage to retain one non-conforming business idenfification pole sign with electronic message board and one non-conforming business identification wall sign. Continued from the April 3, 2006, Planning Commission meeting. ' Project Planner.• Variance Resolution Na (dnerrick@ananeim.net) ~ DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. r MAY 1, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Buffa/Romero Approved 5b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05077 Buffa Granted Owner: Southern California Edison, Robert Teran, 2244 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA 91770 1Kodified Coudition No.15 A ent: John Koos, Core Communications, 1509 All son Court, voTE: 4-0 g y Commissioners Flores and Brea, CA 92821 Velasquez absent and with' one Commission vacancy, Location: 2711 West Yale Avenue: Property is approximately 3.5 acres, having a frontage of 265 feet on the north side of Yale Avenue, and is located 139 feet west of the centerline of La Reina Street (Southern California Edison Easement). Request to permit a telecommunications facility on an existing Southern California;Edison lattice tower with accessory ground mounted - equipment: _ ; , Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2006-36 ProjectPlanner.• (dherrick@anaheim.net) Chairman Eastman opened #he public hearing. Della Herrick, Associate Planner, introduced this item providing both aerial and elevation views' of the property including landscaping requirements. , ~ ApplicanYs Statement: ' John Koos, applicant, spoke in favor of the project and agreed with the condition of approval to change the existing chain link fence to a wrought iron fence. However, he had a concern regarding the nursery which is a current Southern California Edison tenant surrounding the transmission tower structure and fhe 10-foot setback. Because the nursery can move their foliage to suit their needs, he did not want this to become a Code Enforcement violation issue if the landscape screen is temporarily modified. An agreement has been made with the existing nursery to provide trees/shrubs in containers to help screen ' the facility from public view. He does have a concern that in the future if the nursery is no longer there what the landscaping requirements would be. He is in accord with all conditions of approvaL THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Romero asked if the nursery is in agreement with providing trees/shrubs in containers for the project's landscaping requirements as stated in Condition No. 15. Judy Dadant, Senior Planner, replied that this is an issue between the applicant and the nursery to provide the necessary landscaping for the project. Mr. Koos said the nursery is agreeable to provide temporary landscaping in front of the 8-foot high decorative wrought iron fence to screen equipment from public view along Yale Avenue. Chairman Eastman asked if options have been discussed regarding having permanent landscaping around fhe wrought iron fence as opposed to temporary landscaping. Mr. Koos replied that Southern California Edison does not allow anything within 25-feet of the tower for safety and maintenance reasons. This includes permanent landscaping. • . 05-01-06 ' , Page 6 MAY 1, 2006 . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~~ ~ ~ • Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, said that there are two goals: one is to beautify the setback along the street and second to`help screen the facility. Because there is an existing franchise agreement between - Edison and the City, staff thought this would be an opportunity to achieve both goals. : He suggested with regards to'Condition No. 15.that the applicant use his best efforts to coordinate'with the existing tenant that Edison has; which is the nursery, to provide the landscaping along the first 10-feet of the property as stated, If the applicant does use their best efforts, the Planning Services Division will be willing to work with the nursery to pull their stock closer to Yale Avenue. Commissioner Buffa agreed that the applicant must use their best effort to provide temporary landscaping for the project now and in the future. She also agreed with Mr. McCafferty's proposed solution #o this issue. Commissioner Romero stated that he did not want apermanent condition added that the applicant may have no control over in the future. Mr. Koos stated that this is easier to resolve because it deals with the issue of temporary landscaping. Chairman Eastman re-opened the public hearing section ofthe meeting to accommodate Mr. Donavon - Knapp who wanted to.speak. Public Testimony: Donavon Knapp, 331 La Reina, Anaheim, CA, said that he was concerned about the big dishes being located at the subject site and how unsightly the structures are. Chairman Eastman closed the public hearing. Mr. Koos stated that 4-foot panels, which will be painted to match the tower, are the most viable and attractive solution for a wireless facility. Commissioner Romero clarified that these are not dishes as stated by Mr. Knapp. Mr. Koos explained that the structures are approximately 4'/rfeet tall, 1-foot wide and blend in very well with their surroundings. Mr. McCafferty said that staff concurs with Mr. Koos' statement and said that co-location is the most efficient way to locate these structures whenever possible and that is the DepartmenYs goaL Ms. Dadant clarified that the franchise agreement does state that when the lease comes up for renewal for Yale Avenue in 2008, it would be at that time that Edison and the lessee would work with the City to provide permanent landscaping along the setback. Therefore if the applicant agrees to use their best effort to provide interim landscaping t(~is is acceptable to staff. OPPOSITION: A person spoke in opposition to the subject request. Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 23, 2006. DISCUSSION TIME: 24 minutes (2:37-3:01) u5-u ~ -ub Page 7 MAY 1, 2006 ` PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Buffa/Romero • 6b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05080 Buffa ~ ~ ~~ Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Owner: Southern California Edison Company, 2131 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA 91770 Modified Condition Nos.1 and 15 Agent: John Koos, Core Communication,' 1509 Allyson Court; voTE: 4-0 Brea, CA 92821 Commissioners Flores and < Velasquez absent and with ' Location: 2719 West Ball Road: Property is approximately 7.77 one Commission vacancy. acres, having a frontage of 265 #eef on the north side of Ball Road, and is located 146 feef west of the centerline of ~ Sherrill Street. Request to permit a telecommunications facility on an existing Southern California Edison tower with accessory ground-mounted equipment. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2006-37 ProjectP~anner. (kwong2@anaheim.net) Kimberly Wong, Assistant Planner, introduced this item and showed an aerial view of the location and stated that the antennas will be painted to match the existing tower. The current plant nursery has agreed to provide temporary landscaping in order to help screen the facility from public view. She continued by listing modifications to the conditions of approval in the draftresolution. ApplicanYs Statement: John Koos, applicant, stated that he is in agreement with all conditions of approval. He said that it is Metro PCS' policy to utilize existing Edison towers in which to locate their facilities. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Romero asked what kind of maintenance this type of facility requires. Mr. Koos replied that a wireless facility has a one on site visit per month from a network operations technician in order to calibrate the computers. OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 23, 2006. DISCUSSION TIME: 7 minutes (3:02-3:09) MAY 1, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ` 7a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECtARATION : Romero/Eastman Approved ~ 7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05079 Romero Granted Owner: Idelfonso G. Marquez Jr. and Cheryl Y~ Marquez, 1835 vo'rE: 3-1 ' South Lewis Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 Commissioner Karaki voted no; Commissioners Flores , Agent: MVA Architects, 2151 Michelson Drive, Suite 140, INltle, and Velasquez absent and CA 92612 with one Commission vacancy. Location: 9835 South Lewis Street: Property is approximately,0.5 _ acre, having a frontage of 117 feet on the west side of Lewis`Street and is located 517 feet south of the centerline ofKatella Avenue. : Request to permit a mortuary to cremate and embalm human remains in an existing industrial building. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2006-38 Project P-anner. , (kwong2@anaheim. net) Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Kimberly Wong,Assistant Planner, introduced this item and stated that staff received one letter in requesting a continuance of the item or alternatively expressing their opposition. ' Applicant's Statement: ~ Robin Marquez, applicant, provided a brief history of his company and assured th e Commission that their business will run in a discrete and professional manner. John Daggett; representative from American Crematory, 9920 Jordan Circle, Santa Fe Springs, CA, said that the crematory is state of the art and is in compliance with all governmental agencies and their requirements. Public Testimony: Cathryn DeYoung, 1860 Lewis Street, Anaheim, CA, complimented the Commission on the future plans for the Platinum Triangle. She is dismayed however about the location of the crematorium in the Platinum Triangle because it does not fit in with the goals and ideas of the area. She stated that her prope~ty across the street is zoned for high office as well as the subject property that the crematorium wants to use. She stated that she is a council member for Laguna Niguel which has had issues with crematoriums before and that the public was not in favor of this kind of project. She is opposed to this item and takes issue that the business is consistent wifh the adjoining uses of surrounding properties. Commissioner Buffa asked Ms. DeYoung what evidence at other cities was put into the record pertaining to objectionable odors and smoke. She said that in her personal experience of living within one block of O'Conner Mortuary until recently she was unaware that there was a crematory at that location. This type of establishment does not generate odor or smoke. She wanted to know from Ms. DeYoung what kind of evidence she has that the Commission would be able to use to better understand her position on this project. Ms. DeYoung said that she will research the issue of smoke and odor with relationship to this type of business and get back to the Commission with her findings. • 05-01-06 Page 9 MAY 1, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, stated that he is sensitive to receiving meaningful input from Ms. : DeYoung regarding this issue. He commented that this is a heavily regulated industry by the Air Quality Management District. He noted that when the Council adopted the general plan designation for the area it was very specific in how staff was to approach the transition from industrial to office and mixed use. This location is out of the mixed use district and has an office-high land use designation but it is zoned industriaL lt was not the intention of the City Council orthe Planning Commission in approving the Platinum Triangle entitlements to deprive existing property owners of the full enjoyment of their property. CommissionerBuffa asked for clarification on the current zoning and the general plan designation. Y P 9 P p Y 9 P Juod Dads off ce h~ h.'The use thatishe tuested is a conditionalel~ ermted us~et nder the'ndun for the P p Y~ 9 q Y P strial zone. Applicant's Rebuttal: Mr. Marquez stated thatthis location is the only spot where his facility can operate. There is no other location available in Anaheim at this time. They have demonstrated pride of ownership by installing additional upgrades for the facility and it will be aesthetically pleasing. ; Mr. Daggett noted several locations he has worked on and stated that there have not been any complaints regarding these facilities. He offered to provide a(ist of these types of facilities for anyone who wanted to go see them. He said that even the smoke stacks will be concealed from the drivers on the upper portion of the adjacent freeway. THE PUBLIC HEARWG WAS CLOSED. ~ Commissioner Karaki wanted to know if this entire area is generally designated for offices. Commissioner Karaki wanted to know what the City's long range plan is for this area. Ms. Dadant stated that the general plan does allow for office-high land uses upon the finalization of the resolution of intent to re-zone the properties to an office high designation. An applicant could apply for an office building within that zone which would require an adoption of an ordinance by the City Council to ' finalize the re-zoning on the property. Mr. McCafferty stated that the long term plan from the City Council and the Planning Commission in the general plan would be for office buildings. But when the Council and Commission did that they put policies in the general plan that would not prevent industrially zoned properties in the area from retaining that zoning and operating under that zoning. Commissioner Karaki said that while he respects the business and the function that it serves, he does not agree that this type of business should be included in the long term plans for the Platinum Triangle. Not because of the odor or the emission which is controlled but for the usage as it is presented. He stated his concerns for the future plans for this area, in 10 - 20 years from now. Commissioner Romero expressed concern about the Lennar Company who is the builder adjacent to the facility and what disclosures they would have to make to potential home owners. • ' _ , 05-01-06 : , Page 10 MAY 1, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, said in response that according to California 1aw this is a case • where the seller of residential real property is required to the extent that they have actua! knowledge that the property is adjacenfto or zoned to allow an industrial use'is required in the disclosure. The requirement is that there is disclosure that the property is zoned for industrial use and/or is adjacent to property that is zoned for industrial use. The Code of Civil Procedure does qualify the requirement by indicating that it applies to uses that are expressly permitted and the crematorium is a conditionally permitted use.' It does appear under the structure of California law that it may not be required to disclose that there is a crematorium adjacent to an adjacent industrial zone. It would haVe to be disclosed that the zone is adjacent to a zone that is zoned for industrial uses and the kinds of permitted uses that are a matter of right for the zone. It.does appear that there are some disclosurerequirements but not ' necessarily to disclose the fact that there is an existing crematorium specifically. Commissioner Buffa stated that the iand owners have a right to use their land as they proposed. She indicated that if is zoned industrial and this is an allowed use in an industrial zone and until such time as the property owner wants to change the use they should be able to use their property as they want. She stated that she does not see how this use of the property over the next several years prevents anyone else in this part of the Platinum Triangle from using their property for high r'iSe OffIC2 d2VelOp171@t1t. Chairman Eastman said that she agreed with Commissioner Buffa's comments: Staff has provided . ' sufficient reasons to support this particular use for this specific location. She stated that there is no disclosure needed for the proposed office building across the street to know that there is a crematorium in the neighborhood, just that it is industrially zoned. Mr. Gordon reiterated that the disclosure does apply to the sale of residential property and there may be a requirement that there be a disclosure that they are adjacent to an industrial zone but not the kinds of uses that are in the zone. ~ Chairman Eastman said that she is convinced that because of the imposed regulations and equipment that there will not be odor or smoke coming from the building. She concurred with staff that this is the property owner's right to use the land for this purpose. Commissioner Romero said it was his concern that this might effect the growth and development of the Lennar Company's property. He would like the applicant to make a more thorough attempt to contact aA the surrounding property owners about what they want to do with the property. He is in support of a- continuance of this item. Commissioner Buffa expressed a concem about supporting a continuance for this purposebecause this business does not have a detrimental effect on the surrounding businesses. She does not think that it is their role (the adjacent property owners) to make this decision; it's the Commission's responsibility. Commissioner Karaki concurred with Commissioner Romero to give Lennar Company the opportunity to meet with the applicant. There was a general discussion befinreen the applicant and the Commission whether to proceed with a vote at this time with only four commissioners in attendance at the meeting. The applicant stated that he has personally approached all the property owners of the adjacent business to the best of his ability with the exception of tenants who are renting. He is agreeable to speaking with the Lennar Company regarding his property use. Mr. McCafferty stated that staff is not in favor of sending applicants to other property owners to have them agree to their proposal because this is the purpose of the Commission. If there are other property owners who want to bring to the Commission other evidence and facts that this use will have a detrimental effect on their property or business, this information should be brought before the Commission. • 05-01-06 Page 11 MAY 1, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • Commissioner Romero asked if the letter that Lennar Company sent in opposition was the extent that they responded. Mr. McCafferty stated that the Lennar Company is outside of the required notification range. They are : over 600-feet away. The notification range is within 300-feet. Mr. Gordon reiterated the required disclosure as previously stated and concurred with Mr. McCafferty that the Lennar Company is not within the legal mandatory notification area Commissioner Buffa pointed out that Katella Avenue by its width and the volume of traffic it carries provides a significant buffer between the Lennar property which is north of Katella and the industrial zone south of Katella. She stated that fhe Commission has an exhibit that shows the boundary of the ` commercial/industrial area. OPPOSITION: Aperson spoke in opposition to the subject request; and a letter was received in opposition. Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 23, 2006. : DISCUSSION TIME: 48 minutes (3:10-3:58) • MAY 1, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 8a. -' CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Buffa/Romero Approved 8b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2006-00176 Buffa ' Granted Agent: Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, 201 South Anaheim Vo'rE: 4-0 Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Commissioners Flores and - Velasquez absent and with Location: (No address): Parcel A:' Property is approximately 1.3 one Commission vacancy. acres located west of the terminus of Glenoaks Avenue at the intersection of Greenleaf Avenue and Glenoaks ' Avenue, with a frontage of 436 feet on the west side of Greenleaf Avenue (No address). Parcel 6: Property is approximately 2.6 acres located south of the terminus of Chippewa Avenue at the intersection of Crescent Avenue ' and Chippewa Avenue, with a frontage of 413 feet on the south side of Crescent Avenue (No address). Parcel C: ` Property is approximately 0.84 acre (ocated at the northeast corner of Wilshire Avenue and Pearl Street. City-initiated (Community Development Department) request to reclassify: (a) Parcel A from the RM-3 (Multiple-Family, Residential) zone to the RM- 4(Multiple-Family, Residential) zone, or a less intense zone, (b) Parcel B from the RS-3 (Single-Family, Residential) zone to the RM-3 (Multiple- Family, Residential) zone, or a less intense zone, and (c) Parcel C from the C-G (General Commercial) zone to the RM-4 (Multiple-Family, Residential) zone, or a less intense zone to allow for the future construction of three affordable housing projects. ~ ~ Reclassification Resolution No. PC2006-39 Project Pianner.• (dsee@anaheim.net) Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. David See, Senior Planner, introduced this item and provided a visual presentation of the project. Abel Avalos, Project Manager II, stated that these sites have been identified in the City CounciPs approved affordable housing strategic plan. The houses are consistent with the plan and with the underlying general plan. Public Testimony: Roberto Ramirez, 278 N. Wilshire Avenue, B-11, Anaheim, CA, spoke on behalf of his father, Jorge Ramirez, against this property being used as a rehabilitation center. Chairman Eastman explained that this property is a housing site and will not be a rehabilitation center. Richard Delgado, West Street, Anaheim, CA, spoke in opposition to the item due to overcrowding in the area. There was a general discussion between Mr. Delgado and the Commission pertaining to parking, classification of residents and landscaping. • 05-01-06 . Page 13 ~ MAY 1, 2006 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • Doris Walker, 278 N. Wilshire, PHA-1, Anaheim, CA, spoke about the limitetl parking in the general area where the project site islocated. She expressed her desire'to haVe the housing units used for tenants that do not have children or several cars. THE PUBGC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ' Commissioner Karaki asked if the Redevelopment Agency is considering providing any senior citizen housing at this location: ' Mr. Avalos replied that sites "A" and "8'' of this item areplanned for family housing. The type of housing for Site"C° has not been decided as'yet. It is being looked at as family housing, senior and/or special needs accommodations. No decision hasbeen made at this time; All options are being explored in keeping with the surrounding uses of the current neighborhood. Chairman Eastman wanted clarification on the specific meaning of a RM-4 zone. Mr. See stated that there are RM-4 areas zoned around this property and this is consistent wifh the existing area. RM-3 zoning is lower than'everything that is around this location. There was a general discussion between Chairman Eastman and Mr. See regarding the different classification of zones in the general area. Commissioner Buffa asked about Parcef "B" and who owns fhe small parcel'next to it. Mr. See stated that this area is a remnant piece from Crescent and is City owned. Mr. Avalos said that this is a City owned parcel that has yet been to be abandoned. -On going discussions ~ with the developer will focus on how or if this parcel can be incorporated into the project. OPPOSITION: A person spoke in opposition to the subject request. IN GENERAL: A person asked for clarification regarding the request and expressed his support: IN SUPPORT: A person spoke in favor of the request and pointed out some concerns pertaining to parking in the area. Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 23, 2006. DISCUSSION TIME: 22 minutes (3:59-4:21) , MAY 1, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 9a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVEDI ~ 9b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2003-04685 (TRACKING NO. CUP2006-05078) Owner: Carlo John Lugaro Trust, 1145 Glen View Drive, Fullerton, ' ' CA 92835-4032 ` Agent: Joseph Karaki, Western States Engineering, 4887 East La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807 Location: 590 North Maanolia Avenue:<Property is approximately 0.8 acre and is tocated at the southeast corner of Magnolia Avenue and Crescent Avenue. Request to modify exhibits and amend or delete conditions of approval to I d t b'I h f c'lit with accesso ~ ~ Continued to May 15, 2006 Motion: Buffa/Iiomero ' VOTE: 3-0 Commissioner Karaki abstained; Commissioners i Flores and Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy. modify a previous y-approve au omo i e car was a i y ry fast food restaurant and accessory retail sales to permit a self serve car wash facility. Project Planner.• " Conditionat Use Permit Resotution No. ~pramirez@anaheim.net) OPPOSITlON: None DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.