Loading...
Minutes-ZA 1988/06/16i ~. !- .., -~ A C T I O N AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR THURSDAY,c.JUNE 16,_ 1988 9:30 A.M. ,~ Procedure to Expedite Meeting: The proponents for conditional use permit and variance applications which are not contested will have 5 minutes to present their evidence. In contested applications, the proponents and opponent will each have 10 minutes to present their case unless additional time is requested and the complexity of the matter warrants. After the opponent(s) speak, the proponent will have 5 minutes for rebuttal. Before speaking, please give your name and address and spell your name. Staff Reports are part of the evidence received by the Zoning Administrator at each hearing. Copies are available to the public prior to and at the meeting. The Zoning Administrator reserves the right to deviate from the foregoing if, in the Administrator's opinion, the ends of fairness to all concerned will be served. . All documents presented to the Zoning Administrator for review in connection with any hearing, including photographs or other acceptable visual representations of non-documentary evidence, shall be retained by the City of Anaheim for the public record and shall be available for public inspection. The action taken by the Zoning Administrator on this date regarding conditional use permits and variances is final unless, within 15 days of the Zoning Administrator's written decision being placed in the U.S. Mail, an appeal is filed. Such appeal shall be made at any time following the public hearing and prior to the conclusion of the appeal period. An appeal shall be made in written form to the City Clerk, accompanied by an appeal fee equal to one-half the amount of the original filing fee. The City Clerk, upon filing of such an appeal, will set said conditional use permit or variance for public hearing before the City Council at the earliest possible date. You will be notified by the City Clerk of said hearing. After the scheduled public hearings, members of the public will be allowed to speak on items of interest under "Items of Public Interest". Such items must be within the jurisdiction of the Zoning Administrator. Each speaker will be allotted a maximum of 3 minutes to speak. Before speaking, please give your name and address and spell your last name. ~0501H~' Page 1 „~~ . '.i. June 16, 1988 la. CEOA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 3-A lb. VARIANCE N0. 3802 OWNER: CHANDER P. SHARMA AND VEND SHARMA, 3356 West Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92804 AGENT: DEVELOPERS' ENGINEERS, ATTN: GARY PERKINS, , 1401 N. Batavia, Suite 104, Orange, CA 92667 LOCATION: 5151 E. Crescent Drive To construct a 2-story, 31-foot high, single-family residence with waiver of maximum structural height. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION N0. ZA 88-36 __ 2a. CEOA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 3-A 2b. VARIANCE N0. 3803 OWNER: DEAN R. POREMBA AND KATHY D., POREMBA, 10571 Wulff Drive, Villa Park, CA 92667 LOCATION: 6924 E. Overlook Terrace To construct a 2-story, 35-foot high, single-family residence with waiver of maximum structural height. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION N0. ZA 88-37 3. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ADJUSTMENT ITEMS: None. 4. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: A. ARCADE PERMIT N0. 1003: A request by Seiyv Yogi (Yogi's Amusement Arcade Center) to permit a 65-machine amusement arcade. at 30 West Orangethorpe Suite 4 and 5. PUBLIC NOTICE PERIOD ENDS ON 6%16/88 @ 5:00 p.m'. ~~~;~,~„i~~allov~ed,b~~ric~ht~if_,letters in opposition do not exceed ' 50$. 5. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: LOCATIONS: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE (TIME) A E) AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK Approved Approved This is for informational & tracking purposes only. N:o~ Zoning Administrator Decision is made . None . SIGNE ~~L/~GJ t/ ~ Page 2 r .`' REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES - JUNE 16, 1988 The regular meeting of the Anaheim City Zoning Administrator was called to order by Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, at 9:40 a.m., June 16, 1988, in the Council Chamber. PRESENT• a Annika M. Santalahti, Zoning Administrator Lori Duca, Assistant Planner Pamela Starnes, Secretary Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, explained the procedures for the meeting and that anyone desiring to speak would have the opportunity to be heard at the end of the meeting. ITEM N0. 1. CEOA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 3-A, VARIANCE N0. 3802 PUBLIC HEARING: OWNER:CHANDER P. SHARMA AND VEND SHARMA, 3356 West Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92804. AGENT: DEVELOPERS' ENGINEERS, ATTN: GARY PERRINS, 1401 N. Batavia, Suite 104, Orange, CA 92667. Subject property is a irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1 acre, having a frontage of approximately 210 feet on the north side of Crescent Drive, having a maximum depth of approximately 235 feet and being located approximately 760 feet west of the centerline of Royal Oak Road and further described as 5151 East Crescent Drive. Waiver of maximum structural height to construct a 2-story, 31-foot high, single-family residence. No one indicated their presence in opposition, and no correspondence was received. Sal Serrico, 726 Deer Skin Lane, Walnut, said he was present representing the architect. He said since the original submittal of plans, the height had been reduced from 31 feet to 29 feet, so they were really only requesting a height variance for four feet. He said because of the slope of the roof, only a very . small portion exceeded the 25 feet or about 139, of the roof .area. Kamal Iskander, 14150 Vine Place #106, Cerritos, also representing the architect, said based on the report that was submitted to the City by their civil engineer doing the grading on the project, the way the house is situated on the property it is lower than the lines-of-sight for the neighbors surrounding the property. He said there were two neighbors .present earlier today for the hearing. He said when they showed the plans to the neighbors, the neighbors felt they had no reason to object to the proposal. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED a +~ • • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, JUNE 16, 1988 Page 2 Ms. Santalahti asked what kind of grading they were going to do relative to the existing grading. She noted the lot steadily sloped up from the east. Mr. Serrico said they needed to create a pad for the structure, and they were cutting the grade down to create the pad. He said it would be done in the form of slopes except for the retaining wall that would be around the garage area to create a flat surface for driveways. He said the slopes would be attractively landscaped. Ms. Santalahti asked if they knew the names and addresses of the neighbors they had spoken with this morning. He said he was sorry they did not. Ms. Santalahti asked if they had had any contact with the homeowners association, and he said not to his knowledge. Mr. Iskander said the neighbor that was here this morning had expected to see the president of the homeowners association; however, the president apparently had seen the plans and did not have any objections. Ms. Santalahti asked if where they were proposing to locate the house, was basically level to the private street, which borders the north and east sides of the property. Mr. Serrico said the pad sat slightly higher than the road. Ms. Santalahti asked if there were an existing structure on the property now and he said there were very low structures he thought had housed horses or other animals. He said they would like to retain those structures. Ms. Santalahti asked if there was about a 10 foot differential from Crescent Drive to where the house would be, and he said yes. She asked what he would estimate the drop would be east/west across the property, and he said 12 to 15 feet higher on the west side. Ms. Santalahti approved this Variance, as modified, for a maximum overall building height of •29 feet on the basis of the lot configuration relative to the adjacent streets, and that there is approximately a 10-foot drop to Crescent Drive so that the structure will be substantially above the street level, and the fact only about 17~ of the roof area will exceed the 25 foot height limitation, and the fact that there will be no windows above 25 feet as the higher portions will be a part of the roof design. Ms. Santalahti noted this item was Categorically Exempt. This` decision shall become final unless an appeal to the City Council, in writing, accompanied by an appeal fee, is filed with the City Clerk within 15 davs of the date of the signing of this decision or unless a member of the City Council shall request to review this decision within said 15 days. r" • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, JUNE 16, 1988 Page 3 ITEM N0. 2 CEOA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 3-A, VARIANCE N0. 3803 PUBLIC HEARING: OWNER: DEAN R. POREMBA AND KATHY D., POREMBA, 10571 Wulff Drive, Villa Park, CA 92667. Subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of 1 acre having a frontage of approximately 247 feet on the east side of Overlook Terrace, having a maximum depth of approximately 463 feet and being located approximately 50 feet south of the centerline of Tuckaway Circle and further described as 6924 E. Overlook Terrace. No one indicated their presence in opposition, and no correspondence was received. Waiver of maximum structural height to construct a 2-story, 35-foot high, single-family residence. Kathy Poremba, 10571 Wulff Dr., Villa Park, said because of their architectural design, and the fact the lot was irregularly-shaped with the widest part in the center, the roof of the house was pitched in the center in order to get most of the living area in the widest part, and leaving the roof ends as single story. She said she had spoken to most of the neighbors in the neighborhood, and all of the neighbors on her street, and explained what they were proposing. She stated none of the neighbors were opposed to their project. She noted that the neighbors on each side of their property, and two of the neighbors across the street, had gotten height variances. She said there was no one to the east of their property since they had purchased a view lot. She said the neighbors around them had their views oriented toward the backs of their houses. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED: Ms. Santalahti noted for the record, that the location map showed Lots Nos. 7, 8, 9, and 10, and the lot on the northerly corner of Overlook Terrace and Tuckaway Circle (Whitman's) as being vacant which is incorrect as they are developed with houses. Ms. Santalahti asked Lori Duca to check on the height of Variance No. 3582 granted on Lot 10 by the Planning Commission, since that lot was adjacent to this proposal. Lori Duca said that Variance No. 3582 was approved by the Planning Commission for a height of 35.5 feet. Ms. Santalahti asked if the staff report on that Variance indicated how much of the roof was over 30 feet high, and Ms. Duca said no. Ms. Santalahti said the only time she had approved a height. Variance of 35 feet was when the home actually sat below the street grade. She noted applicant's lot was basically level with the street. Mrs. Poremba said she felt they would not be blocking anyone's view, any more than a single-story house would block someone's view on this particular lot. She said only 79a of their roof would be over 30 feet. l' • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, JUNE 16, 1988 Page 4 Ms. Santalahti asked if the lot would essentially remain the same except for the grading for the foundation, and applicant said yes. Ms. Santalahti asked if applicant had shown the plans to her neighbors. Mrs. Poremba said she had not shown them all the plans, just the plans with the shaded areas depicting the roof height. Ms. Santalahti suggested applicant might wish to ask her neighbors to give her a letter or sign a document indicating they have no opposition to her plans, particularly the neighbor under construction and the two existing houses which are the lots most affected by the proposal, as this would be helpful in case this item were for City Council public hearing. Ms. Santalahti approved this Variance based on the fact the immediate neighbor to the south had a very similar height request of 35 feet approved two years ago, and probably more of the roof area was higher than 30 feet, as well as the fact that the part of the roof that exceeds 30 feet was"only about 7~, that the building pad to the north is about 10 feet lower,.that there will be no development to the east, and that the other neighbors' views are oriented away from subject property. Ms. Santalahti noted this item was Categorically Exempt. This decision shall become final unless an appeal to the City Council, in writing, accompanied by an appeal fee, is filed with the City Clerk within 15 davs of the date of the signing of this decision or unless a member of the City Council shall request to review this decision within said 15 days. ITEM N0. 3 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ADJUSTMENT ITEMS: None. ITEM N0. 4 INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: ARCADE PERMIT N0. 1003: A request by Seiyv Yogi (Yogi's Amusement Arcade Center) to permit a 65-machine amusement arcade at 30 West Orangethorpe Suite 4 and 5. 0 Ms. Santalahti said the 10-day period for written opposition would end at 5:00 p.m. this date. She noted in order for this to be denied, letters in opposition would have to exceed 50~ of the public notices mailed. She said it would not be known until 5:00 p.m. today if this item would. be approved or not. She stated the decision would have a 10-day appeal period to City Council. Ms. Santalahti noted the agenda was in error in that the Zoning Administrator does not make decisions regarding arcade permits and, therefore, the phase "Zoning Administrator Decision No. does not belong in Item 4. A. • ~ MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, JUNE 16, 1988 Page 5 ITEM N0. 5 ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: There was no one indicating a desire to speak. ADJOURNMENT• There being no further business, Ms. Santalahti.adjourned the meeting at 10:15 a.m. Minutes prepared by: Pamela H. Starnes, Secretary Minutes approved by: .. ~ _ Annika M. Santalahti Zoning Administrator 0054g