Minutes-ZA 2006/09/28~J
•
ANAHEIM
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
ACTION AGENDA
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2006 9:30 A.M.
Plan-Check Conference Room, City Hall East
200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California
STAFF PRESENT: William Sell, Acting Zoning Administrator
David See, Senior Planner
Bryn M. Morley, Deputy City Attorney
Sandie-Budhia, Associate Engineer
Marie_ Newland, Planner
Jessica Nixon, Assistant Planner
Pat Chandler, Senior Secretary:
AGENDA POSTING: A complete copy of the Zoning °Administrator
Agenda was posted at 4:00 p.m. on September 22,' 2006 inside the
display case located in.the foyer of the Council Chambers, and also
in the outside display kiosk.
PUBLISHED: Orange County Register Newspaper on Thursday,
September 18, 2006
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
PUBLIC COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
H:
•
•
SEPTEMBER 28, 2006
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION AGENDA
REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS:
1a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 3
1b. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 2006-00291
Concurred with staff
Approved
OWNER: Michael B. Gilmore
6712 E. Swarthmore Drive
Anaheim, CA 92807 15 day appeal period
AGENT: Chris Francis
42009 Margarita #140
Temecula, CA 92591
LOCATION: 6712 E. Swarthmore Drive: Property is approximately 0.17-
acre, having a frontage of 54 feet on the southeast side of
Swarthmore Drive and a maximum depth of 125 feet, located 218
feet northeast of the centerline of Grinnel Street.
Waiver of maximum structural height (25 feet permitted; 27 feet
proposed) to construct a second story addition to an existing
single-family residence.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR RESOLUTION NO. ZA2006-21
Appeal period ended at 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Project Planner:
(kwong2 ~ anaheim.net)
SrADJ2006-00290kw.doc
William Sell, Acting Zoning Administrator, opened the public hearing.
David See, Senior Planner, introduced Item No. 1.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED.
No one wished to speak and no opposition was received regarding this item.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Mr. Sell concurred with staff's recommendations and approved Administrative Adjustment No. 2006-
00291 and stated the decision would be written and signed no later than 7 days from the date of the
meeting and the decision would be final after the appeal period expires 15 days following the date of the
decision.
Page 2
ACZA092806. DOC
• •
SEPTEMBER 28, 2006
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
2a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 11
2b. VARIANCE NO.2006-04694
OWNER: Commercial Family Limited
Partnership
P.O. Box 1266
Anaheim, CA 92815
Attn: Catherine Lewis
LOCATION: 711 East La Palma Avenue -Anaheim -Fullerton Self-
Storage: Property is approximately 1.68 acres, having a
frontage of 76 feet on the north side of La Palma Avenue a
maximum depth of 1,042 feet, located 268 feet east of the
centerline of Pauline Street.
Waiver of maximum letter height to construct wall signs for an existing self-
storagefacility.
Continued from the September 14, 2006 Zoning Administrator meeting.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR RESOLUTION NO. ZA2006-22
Concurred with staff
Approved
15 day appeal period
Project Planner:
Qnixon ~ anaheim.net)
SrVAR2006-04694jkn.doc
William Sell, Acting Zoning Administrator, opened the public hearing.
David See, Senior Planner, introduced Item No. 2.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED.
Applicant's Testimony:
Ilona Nanda, Coorg Corporation, P.O. Box 1266, Anaheim, CA, stated they requested a variance
because an easement in the favor of the City of Anaheim causes the building to be setback over 400 feet
from the street and the City of Anaheim Code only allows a 2 foot letter sign. Additionally, they are
concerned that people should be able to see their sign from La Palma Avenue and that a 2 foot letter sign
would almost be invisible from the street.
No one else wished to speak and no opposition was received regarding this item.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Mr. Sell stated concern with the letter size being too large since there is clear visibility from East Street to
La Palma Avenue and also because the building behind the subject property has temporary signage on
side of the building at scales which he believes is less than 4 feet high.
Ms. Nanda stated they wished to be seen from La Palma Avenue because that's where their clients would
come from. She stated other businesses which have their zoning are allowed a sign on the front, side,
and a monument sign, so they were asking for the same privileges however, with a variance for the sign
on the side of the building of 4 feet because the 2 foot lettering could not be seen from La Palma Avenue.
Page 3
ACZA092806.DOC
• •
SEPTEMBER 28, 2006
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION AGENDA
Mr. Sell asked if they had tried the 3 foot signs.
Ms. Nanda responded 3 foot signs were not very visible and the reason they opted for 4 foot signs is
because 4 foot signs are allowed in the city and they are intended for taller buildings. And like a very tall
building where there is a large distance from the sign to a car they have the same situation due to their
setback being 430 feet from the street.
Mr. See stated for buildings 1 to 3 stories high 24 inch letter size is permitted; for buildings 4 to 5 stories
high 36 inch letter size is permitted; and for buildings 6 stories high or more 48 inch letter size is
permitted.
Mr. Sell stated he understands that a 2 foot sign would be hard to see but he feels they have a clear view
from East Street and La Palma Avenue.
Ms. Nanda responded they were trying to appeal primarily to drivers right before the railroad track
however, there is a chain link fence inhibiting the view when the cars drive by.
Mr. Sell suggested reversing the order of the sign so that it would show 48 inch lettering on the top
portion for the self storage and 24 inch lettering for the name of the sign on the lower portion.
Mr. Sell concurred with staff's recommendations based upon the evidence submitted, including the
evidence presented in the staff report dated September 28, 2006, and oral and written evidence
presented at the meeting, and approved (a) CEQA Categorical Exemption, Class 11 (Accessory
Structures) and (b) Variance No. 2006-04694 with modifications as follows:
1. That the subject wall sign shall be permitted with forty-eight (48) inch high letters on the
top row and twenty-four (24) inch high letters on the bottom row only.
Page 4
ACZA092806. DOC
SEPTEMBER 28, 2006
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION AGENDA
3a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 15 Concurred with staff
3b. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2006-184 Approved
OWNER: Melville J. McLean, TR
3409 E. Miraloma Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92806
10 day appeal period
AGENT: Blue Peak Engineering
646 Sepulveda Place
Placentia, CA 92870
LOCATION: 1310 North Miller Street and 3411 East Miraloma Avenue:
Property is approximately 0.92-acre, having frontages of 135
feet on the north side of Miraloma Avenue and 70 feet on the
east side of Miller Street, located north and east of the
northeast corner of Miraloma Avenue and Miller Street.
To establish a 2-lot industrial subdivision for an existing industrial complex.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION NO. ZA2006-23 I Project Planner:
(mnewland ~ anaheim.net)
S U BTP M2006-184m n.doc
William Sell, Acting Zoning Administrator, opened the public hearing.
David See, Senior Planner, introduced Item No. 3 and stated it appeared the trash enclosure issue was
the only issue brought up in the staff report.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED.
Applicant's Testimony:
Rob DePrat, 646 Sepulveda Place, Placentia, CA, stated they have access to both buildings and each
building has its own separate driveway. Regarding the trash enclosure issue, they would provide an
easement to the sanitation district for access to the trash enclosure and to allow Parcel 2 to continue to use
the trash enclosure as its own. However, the basic reason behind the project is that they would like to split
the project up in order to sell one or both buildings separately.
No one else wished to speak and no opposition was received regarding this item.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Mr. Sell asked if there was ample parking on the property.
Page 5
ACZA092806. DOC
u
SEPTEMBER 28, 2006
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION AGENDA
Mr. See responded staff calculated the parking and feels the property can self-park, and Parcel 1 exceeds
parking requirements with one space surplus.
Mr. Sell referred to a photograph of a walkway and asked if it extended from the front to the rear.
Mr. See responded yes, but it would not be enough for a vehicle because it is 5 feet wide and gated and
closed off on both ends.
Mr. Sell asked if there was rear access on the building for delivery purposes.
Mr. DePrat responded that there is front and rear access.
Mr. Sell asked if deliveries would becoming from the rear of the building.
Melville Mclean, 39085 Northshore Drive, Fawnshin, CA, responded deliveries would go through the front
however, the previous tenants did not have a need for deliveries because they only had small quantities to
deal with.
Steve Bari, 31992 Via De Linda, San Jose CA, stated the building was built in the 1970's and has a front
ground level door and an entrance. They did not want to move the trash enclosures because it would take
away parking space. However, they plan to install another side door entrance for access to the bathroom
and there is a front ground level door which they plan to recommend to whoever buys the building that they
use it for loading and unloading.
Mr. Sell stated the only potential problem he could see with the parcels is that although they have a rear
entrance technically they did not have access to it. Therefore, he is concerned whether an easement
should be associated with delivery for the rear entrance.
Mr. Bari stated their plan is to close the rear entrance, provide a window in the rear, and install a van door
for access to the tracks.
Mr. See stated Planning staff would draft a condition to deal with the issue of delivery for the rear entrance
and also work with Public Works staff to add a condition pertaining to issues concerning the sidewalk.
Mr. Sell concurred with staff's recommendations and (a) determined that the project is Categorically
Exempt under Section 15315, Class 15 (Minor Land Divisions) of the CEQA Guidelines; and (b) approved
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2006-184 (to establish a 2-lot industrial subdivision for an existing industrial
complex) by adopting the attached excerpt including the findings and conditions contained therein, with
modifications as follows:
[Added at the public hearing] That the legal property owner shall execute an unsubordinated
restricted covenant concerning the existing trash enclosure for the building on Parcel 2.
The unsubordinated restricted covenant shall include provisions for an ingress/egress
easement through Parcel 1 to provide trash truck access for the benefit of Parcel 2. The
unsubordinated restricted covenant shall be in a form approved by the City Attorney's Office
and shall be recorded concurrently with the Parcel Map.
2. [Deleted after the public hearing]
Page 6
ACZA092806. DOC
•
SEPTEMBER 28, 2006
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION AGENDA
4. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: None
Page 7
ACZA092806. DOC