The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes-PC 1973/11/120 R C 0~iiCROFIIMiNG SERVICE, IIdC. . . , , . , ,.. . ~ ~ City He~.l Ans~h~im, Calilornia Novem6~r 12, I973 A REGUI,AR M~RTING OF THE 11N71NEIM GxTY PLl-NtiING CO1~WIISSION REGULAR - A rayular m~ukinq o! khe Anet~eim City Pldnni.ng Commission aaw MEETING oallcd to order by Chdirman Gduer at Zs00 p.m., a quorum bei.nq prosenC. PRESENT - ~~HAZRMAN: GauNr - ~~~MMISSIONERS~ Allred, Fernno, King, Rowl.and. AHSENT - COMMISSTCINER~: Hor.bah, Seymour. PRESENT - Aseiatant Aevelopment Sexvicea Director: W T Deputy City Attorney: Hopkine 1~,11nm Doputy City Attornoy: Malcolm SZau~ght~z Oftice Engineer~ •7ay ~ri4uQ 2rnl.nq Suporvisors Cha~rlee Roberts Aeaiatant 'Loning Suporv3sor: Phillip 3~haartxe PY.~nning Aide: Robert Keiley Comn~ission secretary: Ann Kreba patricia Scanlan Commiesion Secretary pro tem: PLEDGE OR' ~ Commissioner Faranu led in the Ptedg e o~ Allegiance to the ALLEGIANCE Flag. APPROVAL OF - Cammiaeioner King offered a moti~~ ~ner ~ ~ d ~ THE MINUTES ove the of minute~ the Farano and MUTION CAFtRIED, to ap~ meetings o~ October 15 and ~9, 1973, as submitted. ENVIRONMF,hTAL IMPACT - CONTINUEA PUBLIC HEARING. DUNN PROPERTSES CORP., P. 0• REbURT NO. ~.OG BoM ].439, ~anta Ana, Ca. 92701, Ownt~ri IIA'~ID C. P~:WELL, D~zector of Engzneerinq Servicese P. O. B~x 1439, Santa COt~DYTIONAL USE Ana, Ca. 92701, Aganti re~uesting pexmission to ~ST]~B- PERMIT N0. 1427 LISH TWO ~NCLOSED RESTAt;RANT5 WI'PH COCKTAIL LOUNGES, AN OF~ICE BUILDTNG A~ID BANK S7'xE, WAIVIN~ (A) PERMIT'rED USES, (B) MzNTMUM LOT SI2E„ ~C) DIAXIMUM PERMI'I'TiD HEICyHT OF ALOCK WALL IN SETBACK AR£A, ~D) Y~RMI'TTED SIGN LOCATION, ~E) MAXIMIUM aTGN AREA, AND (F) MINZMUM DISTANCE B~TWEEN S7GNS on pzoperty descrtbeci as: An irregularly-shaped parcel of land coneisting of approximately 7.3 acses, r.avinq frontaqea of app:oximately 684 P~et on the north side af. Katella Avenue and 590 feet on the weat aide of State College s~ulevasrd, having a maximum depth o~ approximately 590 f.eet and being locetad at the nurt}~east corner of Katella Avenue and State Colleqe Boulevard. PropertX ~res~ntly clasaifi~d M-J., LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, ZONE. Svbjeat petitior~ w~s ccnt~nued from the meeti~.g of Octobex 15, 1973, to allow Ci:ne for the petitioner to ~repare and aubmi~ an Environmental Ic~pact RepoYt and for the r~vision of plana. DeputY Ci~y Attorney William Hoplc:lns notad for the Commisaion that becauae of a poseible aonflict of i~nterest, Conimissionex Kinq would refrain from diecua- 01nn and vatinq of Candit3.onal Uee Fe1•mit No. 1427. Commissioner King lef.t the Council Chambez r~t 2r03 p.m. No one apgeared in vppoeition. Although the P.eport ta whe Commiesion was not r~ad at the public hearing, it ie referrod to ~and made a~art ot the minutee. 73-6a7 ~ ~ ~ MINUTRS, CI'lY PL,ANNING COMMISSION, Novembar 1~, 1973 73-G48 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT N0._ 106_AND CONDIT~~~NAL U8E P~~tMIT NO~la27 (Cont'Q Mr. David Powell, 2009 tCasC Edinger. etreet, Sn~-~.a Ana, ag~n~ #nr the petitionez. sppearall betare the Commi.s~ion and stated Chat tt~~v hed ct~mpll~ed wi.th tha ra- queet ~nado by rho Planninq Commission aC the time eubjeat patition was la~st coneidered bX preparinq and submitit~ing an ~avixonmental tmpact Roportt thet aPtor '.~a•~3nq met witk~ veriou~ City d~rpartmenta, they had r~vi~ed their plane ae depiotad on thb exhibite pre~el-ted to t1~~ Commissiont ~nd thak tha recom- monaed condi~tians wera acoaptabla ta tham. Mz. Pokmll then xeviewec3 tt-~ pro~o~el to e~atablieh two re~~aurants and an o!licb bu~ldinq, nating that plana mubmitked covere~! theeo pro~eotn, however, devel~p- ment plane had not boen submitted for the bank aite, but they would stipulata to eubmitti.nq ~lan~ at e~.etc~r datn ~ that they he-d further prepared plana !or tho balance o.". tk» Qrop~rty whi.ch they pruposod to duvelop for i.r~dustrial pur- poess ar+ euggeeted by Commiaeioner Hexbet~ that: tt~e of~ice building would be ~eparated trom the two raetaurante by landeaaping, and the two resteurents wnul~i k~e geparateci Ly a poolt Lnd thet the pazking and Sanitntion Diviaion requirAmente had been eatiefied. THE FiEARING WAS (:LOSEU. Thd Cumtniesion then reviewed the revieed plana, e~s wel~. ae tha plune eubmitted !or th~ proooaed developn~elit of th~ bdlanae of the i.ndus~.iial property. Asaistant Zoning Superv.i.eor Phillip sct~wartxe, in re~Nonae to Cammiasion quea- tioning, notod tht+t ~he wa.~ver for p~,rmitt~d uses waa neace~+eary becauae the bank nna office builu~nq proposed would have to be approvod unc.^r a conditional uee permit, and that the balance of the w~ivers wc~ra becduoe oF the siqn loca- t.ion eince tne M-1 zone eign loca`ions w~ze ra'.:hsr restric:Cive in the ~0~-foot aetback, howeuar, the sign~s could be greater if not ~laced ia tt~«~ requ~.red s~tbacks that althou~h two ~igns were within 300 feet of aach otlie.r, they were fi•onti~q on ~wo dlfferent etreetar and tlldti thP we.iver of the wa11 heiqht in th~s aetback araa was no longer required w~th the submiesi.on of r.evised plara. Furthermore, tho lot size waa necessary bACause two of the sites would be aeparate developments and would be Ze~ss than the req~iired S-a.cre parcel in the M-1 Zone. Commiaeioner Farano affered a mot~.on, secondod by Cammissioner Rowland a:-d MOT?ON CARRIED (Commission~:rs Iierbst, King, Seymour absent) , that the P1Ai~ning CommisPion, in conneetion with i:he tiiling of Environmental Impact Report No. 105, finds and determines that che EIR ReviNw Commi~toe cletermin~d that the report ia adequate as an inEormative d~cument and f..llows the City's establiahed guideline.~, and *hat t.here would be no signific~~nt adverse environmentaJ. impact. Therefore, the Plnnniny Cammission recommQnds to the City Council that sa.id repor:. be adopted as the Counci.l's Enviranmental impact St:atement. Commissio7er A11red offered ltesolution N~. Pc'73-240 and moved for its passaqe and adoptio~n to gi~r.t Petition for Conditional Uae Permit No. 1427, in part, granting wai~ars for permitted ~ses, mir.imum lat size, permitted sign locatian, maximum sign area, and minimum distance bQtwPen sigtis, and deleting the request fnr maximum permittrzd heiqht of a masonry w.lJ. in the setback area since the rgvised plr~P submitted by the petitfona•r raflected this waiver would no longer be necessaryj subiect to c~nditions and the proposed user~ as saL• forth in the Report to the Commission. 2oning Supexvisor Charlps Roberts inquired whether it was L•he Ccmmiseion's intent to appr~ve the use of eubjer.t pzoperty for a bank and whether the Commis- sion wanted any develoL~ment plans for the development af the bank to be sub- mitted to them for approval before tho building permit was ~flBUP_dj whereuFon ~ommisaionez~ Rowland stated tha~ that .ra~ the intent ot tkie Commiasion sinae the petiti.oner stipulRted to submis~ion of plans for the bank to tt~e Commission. Commiasioner A11red then amended h~.s motion to inclade that developmentKOVale far the bank si'te st-all be submit~ed to the PZanning Commissi.on for a~p prSor to the isauance of a buiiding permit. (See Resolution Book) On roll aall the foregainq resolution was pa3sed by the foZlowing vote: AYES : COMNIISSIONEF.S : All,red, F~rano, Gaue ~, Rowland. NOES; COMMISSIONERSs None. ~ AHSENT: GOMMISSIONE AS: Herbet, Ring, Seymour. ~ ~ ~ MINUTL~~- CxTY PLANNING GOMMXSSICIN, 2~avember 12, 1973 73»649 CONUITIONAL USL - READVERTI$ED pUHL~C HSARIKG. L~58LIE W. ]1ND VELVA I~. GARDNER~ PERMiT N0. ~96 2181 Woet Midwood L~-n~, An~aheim, Cs. 9180A, Own~ar~; raqu~et- ~ ing permisiion to EXPAND AN ~STJ-SLISHRD PRiVATE DAY 3CF100L IN A RESIDENCE ~n pro~azty d~scribed dai 1- rectar~qulsrly- ahaped pdreel oi land aonoi~ting a! +~~~raximataly .39 aor~, havinq a fr.onkage o~ dpproximately 75 leet on the soath side of Vexmant Av~nu•• having a m~ximLa~ depth o! approximataly Z24 leat, nnd baing located appraximately ~12 feet oeet of the ce~texline o! Harb~r Boulevard. Praperty pre~~nkly cx.aasit~ad R-1, ONE- FAMI~.X RL3IDEN'~IA~., ZON1:. Commi.ei.oner King r~~urna~ to the Council Chm~nber at 2s13 p•m• Na ane appenred in o~poai.tiun. Although the Repork. to the Cammieai.an waf~ no~. read ~st the public heering, it is reEerred to ai-d made A part of tha minutea. Mra. Velva Gardner, one of the getitionera, appea-rud bafoa•6 tt-e Commi.aei~n ar~d atate~l thsy proposeA to aonvert Che balance o! the hom~: and garnqe into c1aAS- rooms, kitchen, lounge, eick room, etc., for appr~ximataly 100 s~udunte in this exiati.ng privnte echool for grades fram klndorgarten througti sixth grade, and that sk~e hud kho eigne~uree of ad)oinir~g pzoperty ownerm indicati.ng no oyposi- ~ion to the propoaed expaneion, wh9.ch ehe then preaent~ed to tho Commisaion. TFiF HFARING WAS CLU.`"iED. Mra. Gdrdner further noted that one of the neighbors wag present to cspeak :.n fav~r of the pronoaed expanaion. Chaira~an Gauer inquized whether the St+~te t~o+~z•d of Eductttion ~+upArvised the pri.vate school facilitied ae it perta-ined to equare footdge per atuden~l where- upoi~ Mrs. Gardnor ~tated that the State only hsd juriaaiction over nursery achoo].sr that she had cont~cted tria Sta~e Board of Education and ~hey had ndvised har these was no regulation ae te the amount of space required per gtL1CJL`f~tT and that t.r 3 ~vould be faur toncher~ in the exis~iny and expanaion portion oz fhe scho~].. Mrs. Gurdner, in further respanae to Com:uiaeion questioning, ata-tec~ that nl- th~ugh ahe wou~d like 'to expand to lOQ etudents, if the Commiseton n~gproved. 80 atudents, this woula pzovide for four classrooma aud the sa~:e number nf teachers, and it would not b~ difficult to qair~ acceAS to the ~roperty ainco there was spaae for turnaround. Furthermore, although the teachers prH~sently parked on-atreet- they had blacktopped the rear yard, which would now be used for students' play and eati.n,~ area, and space betwern the buildings woul.d then ba usPd for teacher parking. In addition, she would stipulate that thc~ ~eachers wou]d not be parkfng on-streat, r.nc~ the circular drive would b9 a.ailable kor pick-up and dropping-off of students ~rith tio parking per~ritted. The :.:ommiscion then inquired whether tt was the intent of the pdtitioner to relocate the school if the school enrollment increased beyurid the poiilt of c~par,ityt whereupon Mrs. Cardner etated that it• wab her foeling that there was adequate ro~m for 100 atudents, howeve.r, th~y could not grow beyond that poiot and, in all likel~hoad, w~uld have !:o relocate at such time aa the enrollm~nt reacheJ capacity. Commissioner Faxan~ was of the opinion tha~ there was only enough room ~or 80 atudents, and although 4here miyht be room for '00 bodies, i.t did nat affor~ r. proper study environm9nt for the studente ar.d would be overcrow8e~l, particu- larly with ~tudsnta beinq dropped-off and picked-up by the parentR, as well as having bus tranepcrtat~an. Commfasioner King inquirsd whei:hei tha peti'• oner would quarantae that the teachera wauld nat park an-atreet so that a.y overflow ~f parent~s bringinq children to r~chool or pickir~g them up could be done from the cur~ p~rking areao whereupon Mrs. G~rdnar t~tipulnted that teachers would park ofP-stireet. Commi.ssioner King t:~er. inquired how i~ w~s pzopoaed to resolve trash pick-up since there appeared noti to be adeq~xate turnaround are~ for the *.rash truckgt whereupon Mra. Gardngr atated thnt at the preaent time they had traet- containers ~ ~ • MxNUTES, GTY PLANNINq CUMMI:BIAN, N~vember 12, 1973 73-65Q ~QNDT'i'ION11L__US3E PERMIT N0. 998 (C:onti:zued? such ae •inqlo-laa~ily h~m~a ~~~~d and ~lao~d them at th• aurb ahu:~ th~ ~rivat• txaeh colloatior- coa~peny pickad u~, thu ~rash tihra• ti~a~s a w~~k, +~nA kh~t they hec7 only tvrn rnaeptaol~~ at tha pr~s~nt• time, tl~er~tore, Ah~ ltlt Cheir pzse~nt m~thod o! handliny tra~h Piak-up 4~avtd be ndoquate, ever- wl,th tha incrs~ss in t~:a number of' ~~ud~nte. CommiASionex Rowlcnd inq~airod whethex th~rM had been sny l~nput i~am ~h• Quild- ing Pivi.eion zegarefinq thi.s propa~a~d expsneion s~.ncs this as~ s rathor maryinal facility r wha~,oupon Aaal~tnnr. 3on~nq 9uQ~rvicor Phil.lip 3chwaYtse advised t.1a~ Comnisr~ion that th~ ~'irs DepeLtmant woulQ control ti~e to~~l oaaupanay ~~zoait, and that e cnnditian o~ spprovr~l required khat the buiYding m~~t ell Duildinq end Fi.re r..odo requiremantw. Carr.mie~iotier Ro~ land, in xaspanse to a c~mme»~ made by Comu-is~ioner Fareno th~t the ster.a Boarcl o! Eduv+-ti.an did not appear to ba concern~ed about ths propoaad facility nnd perha~,e fhe c:ommieeion should alao nat ba c~oncern.~d, stiaCed t}iat there would b~ no con~ment lr.om the State ~ince thez•e wora no r~gulati~np in ~ho St~c~ Code rcgarding t~riv~xho echoalca, nn8, ir. addition, thd Cit,y did not ~lnn ch~ck +~ny of tha p~sblic ~sch~ol fac~.li.ti~e, whilo thie wae s privake ecl+ool, bur. hig primary cor~cdrn wes the dii•gerece in skend} rde - he felt the petitioner el-AUld b~ nppri.asd o: the po~eible imp].icai:ion o~ the conditio.~~ ot epproval and the, poseiblA innocuoue ri.nd~nge Ly statf a...~ce ehe aauld epend coneiderablv more money thar. was antic:.pated, such ne tho Firo uUpartmaait requlr.ir-q a~prinlc- le2• ayetem, r.ncl if L•he 13uilding Ui.vi.si~n req~sireci electric~2 anci plumhin~, to be brought up ~o C~de, thie c~uld amount to tive ta six dollare per equare faot to bring th.~e buildinq up to Ccde, and that sahoo.l childzon o~ th~.~ age propasod F.ar tYo acho~l ahould not be req~~irecl to look a~ter their own bafety. N.ra. Gardner inquirad whether the reouirem~,.nte ae aeL rorth :n r!~s _taport to the Ccmmiasioi~ were eimiler to thoae ~riginally z't+quired wlier~ C' ndir.ionel Use Permit No. 996 was approved iu 1968~ whe~eu~+on Mr.. Sct.•vartze a~~L-e~ thdt the~ conditiona bnt fortr~ were basically r~ima •r to thue~ p~ev~icuely required. Commieai.oz-er Ro~wland noted th+st the Uniform Builcling Code hrsd changed c:angider- ably einae that timcP and thiy wno hie raaeon far tryinq to alert :.Y,e petitiuner. Mr. Schwari:xa ohACrvr,d tt,nt ::hls i~~spection xequirAme could u-ean a complete r.+t~ange ir~ calectric~l wir.ing, plumbiny, ftro etandazds, etc., being required by Code. yrs. Gardner noted that when the school was flrst dpvolopea, they had com&~ied with C~de requirenflnts ~nd norhinq had c:tanged in tl~uir nperation except fcr the new expansf.on. The Commiasion ahui:ed ~hat tiney wantod to be sure the ~eticioner was fully awar~ of the ~osrsibla conipli.caC~on3 that could ax•ise by the recomman~led cor~ditiona - :~~ tho oroposed expans3.on were approved, it would be eubject ko thr~~s rc~aam^ mendec~ eonditiona. Zonin~ super~~ieor CharlAS Roberty noted fo~ the Commies~.on ~hat he would like to expand upon the eta~ement mnde by Mr. Schwartze, ~,n t~~et at the Interd4part- mental Cominitcee meeting review of 3ubjec~ petition th~ Fire Dnportment repre-- sentative stated that the rlans whic:h weze sv.b~nitted wt•:•e ~. *. in eufficit,nL• c~atrsil £or hi ^~ to make a judgmmnt, nnd ai2ice the uso was a].ready ssi:ab' i~hed, wnen :nore pr~ciae p1Rnd were submitted for the t~xpansion, then the Fire Depart- mrnt w~uld review them nnd at that tims eatablish th~ accupRncy load for tiie bu~.lding. Commias~oner Rowland observod thnt when hamea were projected fox uae as school~s or ~hu~ches, the City t~ckac~ ~r: wi~h some L•ensvolenca, while any~ new duvelap~ men~ wae zeviawe~ v~ry critiealZy ae it pertained te the c-rdir,anc~ requiran~c~atst tharafare, hn f.~,lt that a~]ouble dtandts~:d was bei.ng sstab:liahud throuqho..t thd comu~uni y w+~h th~eo mxz~in+sl Qrnjects - yet mAk+nq rn outetanding pro,iect sub~ect o~~ry thorough scrutinX, which he ~!f.d nat feel wne fair eince Cc•.:p r~qui.rementa should b~ made at~.ndard nnd applied un~ gor~ly tc a-11 pro jec: ~. ~ ~ ~ t~TNUTEB, CITY pLANNING C0.4MI35ICN, Novsmber ].Z, 1y73 73-651 CONnITIqNJ-L U8~1?MI7',r N~~ A48 (CAntinuod) CnMmi.~~ioaer Kinq ~tter~d a motion, ~~oond~(i by Comzniselon~r Rowla~nd ~nd MOTIGN C1-RRIdD. rhiL• tho Planning Commid~ion, in connoati~n aith an ex~mpti.on dool~ra- eion ~tstua rwqueet, tincl~ ~nd 3stsrmin~a th~C the pxopoeal would h+~v~ no riqaii'iaa-nt anvi.ranment~'_ impect and, ther~tc~ro, zoc:ommend~ to the City CounoiY th+~t no Gnvirunm~ntel impact 8t~~em~nt ia nACOSrary. Commisal.onar Kinq ottex.~~! Re~olution t~c~. PC73•~241 end moved tor ito par~aqe and aQoption to grant e+x~~n~i~n f.ur Condit~onnl Uee Aermit N~. 996, a~+t,jaat to canaitiono n~~d tb• Zimieetion cf th~ expaneior~ to 60 stud~ne~. (5eo R~e~oltiitian Book) On roll cell tl~a for0going ra~oluCian wa. E~aeea~ by t}ao foll.owinq vote i RYES~ COMMISS=ONER3s 1-llz~el, Farano, c:n~tier, King, k~Wland. NUESt COMMI5SIONERS~ NonA. l~HSENT: COMMZSS'lONER9 ~ Nexc.st~ S9ymouz~. CONDITiONAL USE - PUBLIC NEAr I:NG. C~ARENCr•. MEADOCK, 1731 Sout.h Etxcltd Stxaet, P~RMI~ NO. 1417 Suite F,• An~ho:lm, Cd. 9?.80i, Owneri VALEN PARKING MANAGEMENT ~ dba TH~ TOWN 1~'JR '~U5 COMPANX, 304 Katell~ ~rsy, Anehuim, Ca. 92803, ~-yentt ,.oqueai;inq permisa+ion to E:,TABI.ISH BU8 STORAG~ F.ICILITYES IN CONJUNCTION WITF~ AN ADJACENT 'TRAN9PORTATxON CSNTER or, propE:rty described :.s~ A rec~tangularly-shaped parcel nt Land conoi.ati.ng o~ aQpxoximetely ,4. acre, haviny e lrantnc~e oP appzoxin~ately 72 feet ~n the south •~ide of Katc~lla Wny, F-aving a maximua- depth of epproxi.mately 240 feet, and being looat9d approxi- mately 540 fea' oant of. the r.enterline c,E haeter S~r9et. Propezty presently claesifieri C-3, KEAVY ':OMMERCIAL, ZONE. The Commfeaiore SecretAry i•~ted that a letGer oxpreseing r,oncorn by the Oranqe Countv ~r~x'vicemen's CPntnz wab on ~ile. Mr. ~t.i.ke Valen, ager_t for. th~~ oeti.tion~x, i.ndicated Chat the Repo.t to tY~e Gommission outlined the pr.~~ost~l af i:he facility as khey planned it, and thet• t.he Y,u~~ et-.orag~ ~acility wuuld be lncr.t•ed i.m~~ai.a-*_•e~~~ eujacf,nt tc Choir preaer-t fac;il~ty and was used for. the storage of the ~rmnge Caunty Trnnsit Di.o*,rlct buees servicing Anahei^~. THE HEARIIJG WAS CLOSED. Gom~tiasioner Ki:~g noted that Mr. Ed ~lagle of the Ozange County Servicamen'e Center wne present And p~rhapa wanted to make oomment r.eqd:rding the letter. Co~misbioner Faran~ offerod s, mc ~.on ~to reopen the haar~nq. Commiaaione~ Kiz~g secar~ded the mot'lon. MOTION CAR,.~IED. Mr. Ed Slagle, ~reaident of th~ Orsnge CountJ SPt'Vj.CtlA1811~N :e,nker, ap~ea~:od be:ore t2~e Coinmiseion and noted that thE letter ~f oppae~tion on fil.e r.eqardi .~~ the proposed faaility ~ra not en officia,]. documcsnr :oecauae ~he baard of directora did nu+: act an it, buc. it did present a number ot ~uestiana wY~irh thm r.~~~r.or had had in the peat, s~me ot wtiich hac' basically been r.esulved, nnQ if he h~Q one com~,laint, i.t wnuld ba concerni~ig Che trr.£fic c~ busea throuql: thc cer.ttr's acceaR on wdakenda, and tha-t ;:he lptter fur.ther noted that th~ Sarvicemen'~ Center'~ parking axea was man5- tl.mes fi.tl.s~ ~ith p»~;.ed busea, which could cr~ate ~ fire hazard, with whicti he concurrad. t:i. ~ohn Fador~ 1021 Narth Acacia ~treet, aFpeared before t~ie Cammleaion, noting he wnr~ a voluntflBT. at the Sorviae-nen'e Center, at.d a~ a be~trd ~nember h~ad no ob~ec~tion ;o ti~e ~is:~ of the rear of ~he lot, but `he Sarvice~:c: 'a Centor ~Yiginelly hnd u~c~ ot the ent'.ra 14t~ ~rat he did ob~^c~~. to tha openinq of ths 3n*e w::ere t.hes.. bu~ses ware ~tored anc~ the buaee usiny tha accees to khe Servic:e- men's Cen ter, which rreated e<,~thar confusl,ag situatioar that Ghe Servicemdn's Cent~r had i~~an leaaed foz t.~e past• aeverr yeaze, bu~C now tl~ey aer~ jue~ paying rent and hmd no laeae, howev~r, ~.~-e ~~xiginn:. le~se ~nc?.uded a drivs+~ay ~7,4 six par~cinq spe~ js , and it wou'! Q be hi~s a~ou~.pti ~~~ that when a dri~r~awa,• k+.a p~st of ~ Yense Chnt it would not bc leaead out t:. anyor~o eleat thAt tt.eeR busee lett tho parking area a~t e~ considarubla ratA of speed k~afand sr «e+ty u~~eaearaa ~ ~ MINCITEB, CzTY pLANNIt~3 C~OMMi88~ON, November 12, 1973 73"'g~Z CQND;.TIONRL t18E PERMTx N0. 1417 (Continu~d) alony thia AQC~O~MdY Ca the ntroaL•, and ~inco th~ aca~ss~ray was ahl.~lded lrom viow lrom driv~r~ prUpo,~inq tc enter .into tho eccosr, EY. ~, epead o! eh~~s bu~~e^ someeime~ oreat~d a hazardou• situationi that a po~:ti.on ~! :.he drl.v~wey Mao ue~Q fur the ~>~rkiny of tha ~mplaye~~a o~ the r.ommnrcial lsoilit.y t~ the K.~~t~ and that iP the ovrner o! tho pcope,cty hnd given the bua oompany psrmi~eion k~., us• the aaaess•aay, ane could ~vt considar this s publia s~~~et or an alley, end thtln ~.n re~panse to que~tioninq by ~hs.irmen Gaaer, z~oted trie~t ~ha en~vico- m~n end thu volunt.-~re us~d that acoe+os and th~ parki.nq spae~ marely on w k- enne, 110MbV~Ax~ he t.ad on occa,sion gono thdzo dur~.nq the wnek to cleasn up aa ~ had lound busc+e parkedl ii~ the drivoway duxing the weok~ that the volunteeze hed ettempted to keep tha entire area ~lean, but whan he we „t to aloe,~ up tha pzemi~ee~ , he fa~and rt~brla atrewn a-11 ovez tlie parking area, e~vident•ly canning lrom the~~• buaos. Mr. Va1en, in reeponae to Coasmia~eion quest•' ~ni.n~, notet~ that the buseH were qene,rally away from the premisee by 6s30 .<<nd cl.i.d nat rer_urn unt.il 8:00 ~~.m.~ that the Servicomen'e Centex opexated ~nly ~~n weokanda, and . ioy had nqr.aed to keep tha qate cloqed during the weekend pcriud to 1~~~>~•d th~ ~~~rvlcemen an opportunit:y to er~tur a:id pnx'k their vohiclea. Mr. F'Ador nuted that hie observntion o~E' busea being a': the gervicgm.~n'e Co~ r.or eite was not during the night eincm he ueu+ally ~vent to cln~n up +~he pla~e be- tpeen 7i30 a.m. and at noon, anw he had deen a number of busee goin!~ khrough thet area and ptrked thero, as well~ that he was not an posed :o the pdrking at thA buaes, but he felt some form uf an a~tr.eemer.t ghould be arr.ivod c+t with tha board membera ao thAt accese w~u1d be unrea~rictod when board membdi~a e.nd volunteer pereonnel mat during ths week ta have clexr +~ccesa to i:he garkinq spaces, ag well ~ns making epacu e-vailable in the evenc of an emarqency, such as c~ fi.re in thP rear portion o! ~he building. Commfse~ioner ~'arano inqui.xed whether Mr. Valen wouid atipulate to not parki.rg eny of. t.he busea in •the Ar.ange County Sorvic~men's Center oree.i wheroupon Mr. V+~len so :~ ~ipulated but atated tl~at the taase it~dicated that other tenante caald hav~ access to tho driveway, howe,ver, they hr-d agreed not ta yo thr.oagh the driveway area on ~eek~nde be^ause of the Servicamer~'n Cantdr'4 trafficr anc7 th~t he~ wo~ild furthez xtipulatce he ~aould not par!c i n the drivewey of the ,n~vice}~~en's Center. THE HEAN7.NG WAS CLOSEA. t;ommioaioner P'arano noted that ir~ vieiting >.:he site he had observed the nervic- ing of k~usea, n~~t only in vreneinq, ~111nc~ and lubing, but ather re~pairs, as well, whes•eas the patitioil h~fore the Cammi~sion wae only for the storage o£ buaes in tha~ locati.onJ that he hmd further obsereed that a pum~ similer tu r~ diesAl f.uel T,ump had been 1.oca4,ed thexe, and apnarently tho petitioner wa~a fueling th~~ bLS~sj that he fur~her noticec. a number o~ buses wer~: Oranqe County TrAnsit bur~es, and a decal on the wfndow ~f the door indic~ked that this facility was a.ls~ Che offices of th~ Osange Counry Tiansft Diat rict as well rae the Fun Bus Companys whereu~on Mr. Valen stated that the Jranq~ Countiy Tran~it District di~ have officea in thxt faaility and :;hat he manaqed the Traneit Dietrict's faci).i.ties in Anaheim. Comm~.esioner Farano further noted that it was hia u~rle retandinq of the Anahe±m Municipal Code that it did not permit outdoor servicing of buses nr any othar type af eqLipmenti whereupon Aosistant Zoni:~g Supervisor Phillip Schrcurtae noted tha:, th{ s was correct, t.nd ir~ the conditional us A permit approved foz the progerty to tha east of the prooert~~ undor consideratian, the petitioncr had aci.~ulas~ed *.hc~re w~'sld be no repair wor.k on the property. Co~-;niasinner Farano obsexvad that whe.. he haid visited the proper+ty he h~d noted u mach~nic was doing some servicing ar,d repair work on one of the buses, th~re- fore, he felt there ahould 1~~ some kind of an undt etanding of N~d't was propoged to be done a*. this location, and if tha petitionF:r was nut now in viola~tion af. ctorage o~ bu_~ ~~s requeste3 under `.hie conditional use pexmit, he was verX cluae to it, ~-nd some coz~ditioz~ ehoul~. ba establishe~ as te whret covld ba dono and how far the petitior~er coula ~. in the servicir,g and repair of th~ bueng. ~ ~ MINUTEB, CI~.^Y P1~ANNINC COMN1285cY0N, Nav~mbAr 12, 1973 73-~653 CONAITIONIIL U!3E P~cRM]:T NO. 1417 (Continued) Mr. Val~n ropliad thet thay had nc+ ir~tont or dain~ e-ny mejor repAir work • but they v-auld hs~~e Bamo m3nor repai.r vrork Eor th~ bunee in Yuolinc~ tha buseo, ch~~t~in~ t:r.eu and lub jng the busMS, buC no n~ajor averheul. r.oa-m~~~ioner. P arAn~ ob ~or.vcd thAr ane aauld 3o quite e good oize job in ove~ minor adju:tmones ta b ueea, grin~i.nq v~Ives, eta., end if tha petiCion~r wa~ pruposing or w.za dC'tll8~ ll.y 6oinq duch wot'k, he woulQ be in violetion ot khs Ciry'~ ox~linan~e, and i! che pati~inner intanded to expend beyond tho lube~ ~i.l and gges.ing oE tha s~ bus~ee, tha : sroulA have ~.o be Rdvertisad, psrtiaularly ~ince repair. ot ~ax~ xetore ar~d r.1,ex repair ~orY, we~ ~ not perr lttea ae en outdoor u~o but mu~t. 1, e done o.~ti ely indoorn. Commi~.ion~r Ferdno further oba~ vecl that hs did not koel th~ t,~~tit~ociAr under- etood the painmetere c~£ Conditi~r~el CJse Parm~.t Nos. 1166 end ].417, dnd rather th~n havinq thie mi~ursdorstanding ae to what wne permitterl, the ue~e shvuld be c:le3rly definoci ae to what v-ee permiCtea, pnrtioularly ainco rognix work cauld ba c:v~~eiderec] e di:Eferant eituation than the AtO~tiqd of ~ius~y, and then inquirsd ~ohether tha oxistinq conditionel une permit, a-~e w~ll ae th~ proposod conditional u~se ~ermit, wou.ld allow mechanical work. on the pr~perty~ wher~upon Mr. 9ahwartze raad ~ram the minutea of the mc.et~ng o! Apzil 20, 1970, regarcAing bu~ repair work, nC which time CYze retitioner etipul+~tec~ that no rc~~uir work would be dans. Continuecl dir~cuesion was hel.d by t~h9 Cor,~miesion xelative t~o the uRea th~t woutd be permittad under th~ adverti.sed uea for aubje,ct pc:tition and the usae tha~ had been permitted on tho r~raperty to the east, and after lenqthy discueeion d9 Co what the petitic~ner ~rdp~ ed on Aub ject pz•~perty , Mr. valon suqgoetetl t.hat the intAnt of us jnq the Mt .d~r,k pr~perty wne for the starr.ge oF the buaes or~ly, and ir the Comm3A~ion we.ntgd to clear up the problem of usea on the ndjoin- ing propertX, thi~ c:ovl~' be done in a eubeequen*_ pu:~lic liearinq s.lr~~e i~ ~an~ hi~ intant only to ~a.rk ta veFa on aub j~ct prope~ty~ and that he wran~ed tha pras•~nt raqu,.st bef.o,•~ th~. Co:nm3osion regardin~7 the Oxnnge Count:y ~ervic~men's~ Center pro~erty straighten~~d out einae there were ~wo different petitions. Zaning Supervis~r Cha rlea RnhHrt3 adviaed tho CO1i111119A I.OR that accazdinq to Code and the use grant4d for th~ ~~roperty to the east, all repair work mtiiAt bs con- ducted wholly within a buil~ing ar:d no outd~or repair wnrk was permitted~ that Mr. Va..ten had indicat ed the only activi~y he was intereatad in far. aub~ect property wr,s the storage of busee at the~ rsar of the Orr.nge C'ounty Se~vi:emer.'~ ContPx, and i~: thp Commi~slon felt that the e was appropxiate, it wou'L~9 be appzepriate to t+ske zaction sinae the ~dti~iu:-er atipiilated that L•here woulci only bF ~tc,rage ot buaes on said propertyJ that witli reqard to the ad1acent properCy, the only activity ffillowe~. ii~ accordance with the e~istinq conditionr.l !~se permit wau also the storaqe of bu:;as, but maintenance a.id repair wae an zctivity that hae bean observEd by one of the ~ommissioner~ , which wae in viola- tian oF fhat conditional ~~se pormit, and if the petitioner wished to .;ontinue this repa' r. ana maintenance, then h~ would have to have Conditional Usa Permi.t Na. 1166 readverti.3ed at his own expenae. Co~mi.~sioner Allred observed ~.hat all:houqh the petitioner px~posed onlx to ator.e vehiales an the prop erty, there was nothin~ to s~op him fram performinq ~apair work on a bue that had beon parkod tharo and woul~ not start when they were ready ta movQ it in for sexvi.cing $nd, thgrefor~a, or.e could ~~ot disa8sociate aubjact prope:cty fro ~ the adjoining propsrty as to maintans.nce purpoass aince it would be done on 2~oth propertiae. Mr. Valan atated tha ~ mcst of the r~~air work they did were the alteznators and the startere • an d these coulu be remaved quite easily wi~thout any rep+~ir work invalved, and t=he actual repair work c~ul~ ba dona in thp garage end che part then zeplaced i n a vPrX ahort time. Commisaicner. Far~no offered a m~tion to qrara~c Conditional Uee Permi.ic No. ?417 aubje~t to clarification and conditioz~a and stipulation by the ~~'itioner that chere would be no other repair ~aork done othar than tire ehange- ~il chnnge and lubinq on any o~ thw buses atozed an the property, and that ny meahan~cal work intended fox• t2iesa propertiea would be aubject to a gusther canditional ,se permit. o ~ M7rtUT$A, CITY PLANNING CO~dM.T.SSIAN, N~vMmbaz 1Z, 1973 73-554 ~nNDITIONAL U8S 1t~RMIT N0. 1417 (Continuad) CantiauwA dinous~ion we-s h~id b~tw~an tha st~lP •r-Q the Commio~ion, and ~ipun it• oonclusion, Commia~ionex FarR.~o ~vithdr~v- hi~ mation. Com-r~f.pRioner All~od otfern~l a motion, r~o~nde-:1 b~l Commi.eaiorsar. King and MOTION CRRRI~SD, that the 1'aannln~ Commiesion, in ~ann~r~tion wi.th en axdmr~tion d.~~lara- *.ion statue requee~~ t1~~'q and da~armAne! th+-•t khe propoedl would hava n~ slqnifiaant envizonm~ntal impact and, tho~etor~.~, r~oommunfln ko Lhe Ci.ty C~~uncit ~hwt. nc~ E7nvironmencal zmpank Sr.~Ce~menk ia ~~ec~~rary. Cominis~ionsr Farano offored Roaolutton Ho. PC73-Z42 antl m~vad far its paaeage and wdoptlon t~ ~rant Potition for Conditionsl. 'Use Permi.t No. 1417 for the et~rage uP buaee~ on1y, as etipulnteQ b~r th• petltior +r, and w~ibjAUt to co~~di- ~ion~ . (Soe Reeolution Baok) ~n xoll c~nll the Toregoinq resolution wa,~ pe~sgsd by tho following VOr91 qyF.3 s COi~MISSICi~~tERS: Allred, P'areno, Gaua7c, Kinq, Rowland. NOLS s COMMlSSIONERSs None. AisSLNT: C~MM.T.S;.IONERS: Herbat, 3eymo~ar. The Gommisaion t:hon direct.9d that. Mr. Valen, the operatryr of the bus tranaporte- ~io.~ '~nail~.ty to tl;a east of eubje •~ Fropert~y, oontaot ata-ff. as to the ne~~eaary stepd to zeativ9rtise Gonditionel tiae Pormir Nq. 1166 to permi_t the repdfr and t3zs ch+snge and lubinq o: the bL~.eos nn the propexty undsr xai.d conditional u~e perm! t. Furt:~ermare, ttie C:~mmieeion wanted it alearly' underd~ood that the peti- ti .zor would o~.ly be stori:.q cbo buses on t.he property b9hind tho ga-*e~ and thet no park~.nc~ of bttsea in ~ha Orang• ~'~~~~t,'•.Y Servicamsn' e Center's asivewny ar park- in~ Apacea would be permitted. CONDxTIONAL USF. - PUI3LSC HEAR.LNG, ~RANGL*TH^RPE MINT COMrANY. 430 Foothill PERMIT N0. ].4~Q Boulevr~rd, I,a Canad~t, Ca. 91~?~1, OwnAr~ requestir~s~ pex'mis- r~ior- to ESTABLISH A R~CR~~~''1'IONAL VEHICLE STORAGE YARD IN AN Ja'XISTI.NG M-1 WARI?HUUSE SITE WATVING (A? REQUIRh~ '.ySASOtJRY WAx.L SURROUNDING 0[ITDOOR USE AND (8? M:CNI[~UM NUMDE[t OF RFQUTRED pARKII~IG SPACES on pxop~rty de~ocribQd as, A rectanyularly-ahaped parcel ~~f: land consiotinq of approximately 2.@ a~res havitig a fron~aqe of appz'exi.mately 198 fc~et oi~ the soukh side of Oiangethorpe Avenue, huving a+ maximum depth ~f appxoximsL~ly 6~~ geQr., and being locato~t appr~ximately 880 feet; west of th~ centezline of Raymund vEnu~. Property ~~resently alaeaified M-l, LIGtST INDUSTRIAL, ZOr'~. Nfo ane~ apoeared to represen~ t:ie petitianer. Agsi~..nat 7~ning 5u~axvisor Phillip Sct~wartze reque~ted that aubj..ct petition k+e continu9d until leter in the mee*ing in ozder Co contact the petiti.oner. (See pt~4~ ~3-564) EN~-ZRONMENTP.I, IMPACT - PUBLIC HEARING. ANAHElM HIL'LS, INC./TEXACO VcNTUftES REPORT N0. ~~5 INC., 380 Anaheim Hilla Road, Anahaim, Ca. 92807, Ownarst ` V'PN CQNSOt,IDATED, INC., 2302 Campus Drive, Irvine, Ca~. CONDITIC~NAI, USE 92064, Ager~t~ pragerty llesczibed as : 11r, irrAyularly- FBRMIT r10. 1430 shgped pasc~l of land consisting of appr~ximately 33.8 acres e hiaving d lronCage af nppraxi~nat.ely 362 feet on ~ENTA7CIVk. MAP OF the north eide o! Sar.rono Avan+~e, r~ving a maxi~r~am dapth TRACT 4JA5. a513, of apgroximeL•uly 1020 feet, and being ~acated norchweut- 8515, AND 8514 9rly of the intezsect;ion of Serr~no Avenwe r-r.d iiidden , 8516 " Canyc+n Road. Property pre~ently ciassifieci R-A, - A~~tICULTURAL, ZdNE. REQUES~ED CONDITION?~L USEs ES'~AaLISH A 157-I.OT FLAIdNEQ FESIDENTII-L AEVFLOPM~NT IN FOUR TR` ":S, W]~IVING (}~) REQUIT.LD FF.ONTAGE AF LOTS ON A DL~ICAT~A STRE~~, ~B~ MTNIMUM BUILDING SITE ,ARFA, (C) M3NIMUM BUILDING SIT1E WIDTH, (D) PIAXIMOM $L1II.~DIkG H~:IGHT WITEIiId 150 FEET OF A ftESiDLTNTIAL 20I3E, (EI MINIMUM SIDE YARU SET'8~1CK, ('e') REQUIREb MA80NRY IfALI, ABUTTINC A 3INGLE-FAM3LY ' N FtESIt~ENTZl-L xONL* SOUNDARY, AND (G) MINIMUtd SIG AREA. ~ ~ MINUTI~S, CITY PLANNING CUMMISSIOl1, Nav~mber 12, 1973 7~-655 ENVIRONMBNTAL INP11C'I' R~PUItT N0. 105, CONDT7~ION~1L UBE PRRMTT N0. 1430, AND TENTI-Z`iVL MJ1P__OF TR:ACT NOfi. 9513~ g514,__8515~ ~ND 9516 (Continuedl TENTl1TIV1E TR11CT ItEQUESTB~ DEVELOPERt SIR DEVELOPMENT CpMP11NX~ 11933 Hasah 6au~eva~~d, 8t~nton, Cs. 90b80. ENOIN~~R~ VTN CON80LIA.i1TED, lNC., ~301 Campue prive, ~rvin~, Ca. 92664. 3ub~eet tract~, Go~sisting of approximat~ely 33.A aazea looated nuzthweetarly o! tha serranp Avenue and !lidden ^.anyon RoeB int~raection, ar~ ~?ropooocl L~~r Aubdiviaian •8 followai Tre~cC ::~. Q513 ~~ ~.4 ncren - 32 R-2 ~oned lotar Tr,ec~ No. 85i4 - 10.6 UCXAN - 41 R-2 rongd lot.et T.r~ct No. 851' - 7.1 acr~e~ - 40 R-2 xAne~ lotst and 'Pract Na. 951b - 6.7 ecras - 37 R-2 zoned la`.~e. T~vo pereona indicnted tihoir preAenae in oppoui~i.on. Assistant Z niciy super.vi.oor Philli.p 3chwart~~+ rQViewod the locetion of s bjeot px~aperCy, previoub zoninq action~ on thm pro~erty, t~nd the rey,ueat tu est abliah s 150-1at, one and two-story planne~ reeidc+nttal d~eve+lopmant with wa~ive~ ~ t~e set for~.h i.~ the Roport to the Commiaeioa, sai.d unit~ aompriaed of indivldual ~wA3.Zing unita an aeparate "poatage st~mp" l~~te whicti would be l~ca'ted et tho top oP hillsic3e elo~ea ov~rlooktng the r~or~heaoterly end o! 'Walnut Cany~n Reservoirt thAt eech living unit dnd lot would ba under individiial ownership with aon.mon o••nership of the open spacu, cer ral recrdational fncil.itiee and common loC.ai and that individual lots would typi.cdlly conCein approximatAly 2992 square taet. Mr. Schwartze aleo n~kpd thai: t'~e groea Acreage of tlte propased dev~J.opmer-t would be 33.8 acres hAVing ++ nel• screage of 29.8 Acrea when dedicated and private etreetH wc~rQ exctu~ed~ that tha net den~ity of the project would be approximat~iy 5 dwo111ng units pCr ucre, with a nat coverage oP approximate],y lab, whezeas Codo would permit 45~ covsrage. The tabulation of he submitted plans indicatiny the t,ype Uf ixn~.t, number of units, syuare footaae of yround floor e~zaa per unit, squar.e footnge o~ livinq area as aet forth in the keport *_o the C~mmisaion wa~a then roviewed. Mz. Schwartze further noted that all vnita wo~~1d ~e tront3ng oxi private driv~+s, wheseae Coda would require frontaye on a dedic:~ted etreet, and the waivers o~ the size o~ l~t And ].ot width weza typicall}r ~hnt reRueated nnd grante8 where postaqe atam~.~ lot s hacl heen presented .in plar.ned residential devalopmentas i:har the pwtiti.oner did not k~lan to oon~truct tte required 6-foot ma~-anry k~all adjscea~t to R-A property to ;he south acrasa Serxano Avenue, n~r were Nalls proposed a3jac~:nt to othe, sxngle-f.~mil,y zone boundaries~ that a monuA,ai-t-type siqn wae propoaed as an iden:.ificati~n Big~n ati the entrance of the develogment on S~rrano Avenuo, whict, exr,eedea Code-~+brmitted s3.ze~ that vehicular a~ ~eas and circulatlon would be provlded bl private d~ivAr~ ~ti and 32 feet wi.de extendinq thxoughoat the site, takinc~ accsaA from 5errano A.vanuc~ and Morning Glory Lene which were both public atr~~ets= tY.at l.nflividaal trash cori*_af.ners were prop~~sed to be utili~:ed by each unit, wi~n trash collec`.ion along private 3rives, howevez, s~ver~~l of the uni~.s wou~d have inad~quate circulati.an for oaid trash co]tection vehicles, therefure, central traeh enclo~iirrs were k~eing provided f~r these ~anita, with the circulation and kuxn-around araas propoaryd f~sr trash vehiclea having ber~n review~,d by the Sanitation Divislon and d~et9z~- mined t:o be 1.n conformance with City etandt-rda= and that i:he Fi1•e Department ofFici..ls had aleo reviewed the cireulation and accgss to living units, nnd they had indicated a.dequate acceaa was provided Por gire protc~ction n~eds Rf the proje~:t. Mr. Schwartze~ in roviewing the eveluatian, zioted that the 7-naheim General P1an nder Ganeral. Plan A~nendment Na. 123A pro jectad sub~~ct property a~ part ~~f the PC Zone de~-elopment for R-2 and R-3 development etAnAdrels, anc3 while ~he R-2 Zone would pers,~it a mnximum of 18 a~rellinq unita per net Acre, the pa~itioner was proposin3 approximatialy 5 dwelling uni.ts par net ncre, t~nd th~ Commiaeion ir~ th~ peet had approvad pl~nned reeidantiel develapme~nta £or a maximum of ~no moro than 1'2 dw~+lling unita por acro, therelore, the proposed 'gv~~lo~ment would be in conformence with that poli~;y. ~ ~ ~ MID'JTE9, CZTY PLANNINQ COMMx89I0N, Nuvamher ].2, 1473 73-656 ~NVIRONMEN'.'AL ~MB.ilCT RERORT N0. 1U5, CANDITIONAL USE PERMIx N0. 143Q, AND TLNTATIVL M1~P_OF TR]ICT N03. 8513~ 8514, _8S1S~ ANO 8516 (Continued) Mr. S~hwartse aotsc~ ch~t th• tract map~ :lndicak~d pzoperty lina• lacat~ed elonq the laa~ o! •om• o! thn alopes, wh~roas the Subdivieon Ordl.nance r~qairad the prop~rty lin~~ to ba aithin one loot o! tha t~p or ~oe ot th~ dlopo~, an. that a s~mil~~r ~itiuation had oaaurrad raaently Por a propoaed epsrtmant pro~svt ir. Anahoin Hills, and the petitlaner wes required to obtnin City Counail ayproval o! an +~xooptiiun Co section~ 17.06.].].0 and 17.oG.120 to reta-in thu ~~opes in th~ propoasd lacation, or i! aaid appruv~l wam r.at obteina~d, than ~he lot 1l.nop !or tb~sso loCs would have to contorm with Coda. in A~tditi4n, Mr. sohwarfize nota~l eubject propRrty presently drainad into tha Wa nut C+~nyon Raservoir, and the Ci.~ty'e W~ter DeparL•ment, the U. 9. Army Corps of t:nginc~er~+, anC tho State Dc+pa~rtmeni of Puk~l~c Haalth re^om~nen6ed that all clr~inage ~rom eubjeat propaxt•y ba 9lverted rwr~y lrom t!~s reaei~oir. Mr. Scl~waztrce, ,i~ c~nclusion, noted that lettez~R w~re on ~ ile from the Oranqe Uriifiecl 9chool Dietrict indicating t1iAt no claueroom epaee was avat'lable Co ~ccomm~daCe the r~ra;c,ct.ed number of studon~s tz~m th~, prouoded •tovelopment, nn~1 the sahool ~~iatrict ~ppoeed approval oY tihe pio~}ec~ unti: : ources for new echoole becdme Availebl~r in addition, a letrer from Che ~ity of Orange had r~l.so been race:ved, objdcting to the development on tha baeie that th~ra was poox circulation and accees, llck of echoal sites, ona lack of acceas to school sites, and thnt they did not 1!ke to ae~ the h~.l.ls developAd in the groposed mdnner. Mr~. Mdry Dinndor.f, lal L~ Paz, appearod before the Commioei~n a-nd inquixed whether an Envizonmental i~np-ct Report hed b«aen Eiled aince the notias of public h~aring ahe had recE~ived did not e~~ indicate tha~~ one had been filadi whereupon tha~ Commigeion Sacretazy noted thnt the EIR had been adv~xtised i.n r.he Anaheim Bul]etin as ~~:quired by law, howevor, natification af the LYR had nat heen provid~d on thr legal notice the F~rcpezty awnars ira th:la qenert~l arex. Mr. ~7ahn Mil.lick, representing Anaheim Hills, thn petitioner, A~peared ~~fore the Cnmm:.eaion and stated he would like to give c~n overview of. t}:e projece a~ iG iQlat.ed to Arit~heim Hillas that the proporty wa locate~~ within the hound- ariea of the PC 2Ane, and as Mr. Schwart~we had indicakecl, it +~butted +the reser.~ voir~ that a tract had beon nppr~~ved on th~ Ea~~rridqe ~rent that vahic~ilar accesa was in conformanae with tlie Maat~_r Plan of Cir.culat3on, with c~evelopment and grading being accomplished beyon~i the boundari.es of subje+ct nr~perty, ~xtending approximately 300 Peet northeast, wit.h ~errano Aven,~e evenL-ua~1y connectina with the loop roa~l from the northt that whgn R-2 and A-3 d~velopment wexe pro- po~ed under the PC Zone °or this azea, it was projact~d to havo 75 R-2 zoned lotb and J.41. R-3 zoned lota for a gr~ss of 6.5 u~lts per acre, however, the proposed development projected only 150 unita in the pl.dnned residen~:ixl devel- opment, or a rsduction of 65 unit , or 35$ lesa than tliat which was appzovadt and thuk ~he dova~.oper and hi3 architQCt wou].d pz'asent ths tachnicat portian of t.hie development~ Mr. Robert Solomon, Proa~dent of SIR Development Company, ~.1933 Seach Bpulevard, St..nton, in~]icated thati he would be the 3eve~.oger of the project, howzver, thE~ architoct would explain the details of the project. Mr.. Emil Aenes, 192O East Ka~et? a Avenue, Orange, archit~ct of the pronosed development, appease3 before tY~e: Comniission ~nr.d etated he wo•u1d ].ike to or.ient the Pleenn9.ng Commisgion as it pertai~icu to tha Master Plmn of Parks and Traile~, and then revi~swed tne lo~atinn of the project ori s map displayed on the Cou cil Chamber waZl, noting that Oak Park, t~gether wiLh al1 the landacapinq, would be ratained aa part ot' the development and wa$ locat.ad to the wes t. o£ thie pro jec~ j that in addition, th~rr.a wr~s the MWD eAaement along the sputt~ ~oun3a~y af tho project which was propoaed for hiking and ridinq ~raiZa for beth bicycles and horses, havinq a 5~-iuot F~ide trail arem~ ~hat in the plan of de,siqn they were retaining one area i• ita nntural etate to ta.ke advant.:;e of the vistas t~ ~ha south and anett that they would have a sAriee of. neiqht~orhoa8s so that they cot~ld tuke advantac~e of a11 the attructi~e vie;as an~l vi~etas= that there w~uld ba amall mini-~arka within eacY~ ne~qhborhood which they folt wou].d pravide the focal poin~ for play ana activ~ty in theee neiqhDorhoo~i~~ with ~ach neighbox- hood comprieing approximately 35 dwellinq unitet and that ii- eddition to the mini-~~rke, they pr~posed a major recreational area wi.*.h a tennia court, ewimrning ~.ool, cabann, ar.d other qame activitioa. U ^^, ~ MxNUT1:S~ CTTY PLANNING COMMI33ION, Nov~mbmr 12, 1~73 7~-657 ~NVIRONMENTAL IMPIICT REPORT N0. 105, CQNDITIONAL U3E PERMIT N0. 1430, 11ND Tt~NTAT_iVE M1~. P O~„'PR7~„CT N~8• 8513, 0514~ 8515, AND BSId Continu~d) Mr. eenea Chsn not~d tt~~t thoy wers tryinq to LAku ed~-antaqe o! Cho bM~et lsatures a~ Rioth a townhauye And ~inqle-lamily developm~nt I~x proposinq s~ra oid~ ysrd lots an~! taking th~ ^ommon lAndnad~ed ~rea ~o tne •~'ront Aoor o! eacl~ unit ns part o! ~hi •tr~st~oape, whi.l~ tha ovara~ll dav~l.o~m~c~t wo~ild ba 1~-ndocapad by ~h~ davaloper and maintainod by t.he homeown~xq aeeociaticn ae pmrt o! the total fae, and that ths ~lope~ and reereation arcas would +~loo l~e maintairied by the homeownera eesoai~ation. Mr. Benas alen notod thak thore w re ~our floor plen Cyp<~~e Fra~ossdr thdt the gereges w~re Erom the Pront k~ut wuuld hav~e zero lot l~ne or bl~+nk wa~l eit,~ia.tior where u minimum ot 9 leeh, wae propoaed betwsen thm uniter thak ganeral'ly there wae ~ variation ot a ep~ :~~ dnd this would bo more than e fo~t, whi].e eome wuuld ba in oxcec~ or 12 feett rnd that tYio unit~ werA proposad to k~e one a~nci L-wo etories, howaver, tt~e secor~d ~tory ¢~xt~n~. from a givan point to ~he, rear ~f the lot rathex than ha~~lnq a:~Pcond story as part a~ thQ front af the unit. Mr. BenAe further noted one uf the advar~tagee of t'iis typo of townliouea cuncept was to yive more privacy~ ligh t, ancl ventilation whilo at•111 givinq a goo8 var.iation for L•he homo~~ that ~n the elev~tione they propoaed extan9ive use of wood aiding~ and all homes woulfl have woad ahake roofs~ tha~ tho waivere br~inq requec+ted regarding the ~?ne-otory height l~mi.tation ~ these homea would occur near the Tt-1 develapments alAng the MwD easement, howevar, most ot theee homea at tha south end would be a min!mum of ::0 to 50 ~ee~ abovo the pzoposed pxojactf that it a~+s hie PurthAr un~Hratanding that walls were required to.separate multipl.e-family from e~inqlA-family dovolopment, however, the concept of livf.nq they propose~ would r9 ainqle-family rather than h.igh density as wae yenerally aaaociated with R-2 and Ei-3 developmen~, therefoze, he did n~t feel. this re- qulreman~ would b~ applicable in this particulnr instancej that they had a minimum distnnce of 100 feet from two-stary to any othar home projr~cted to the southwest~ thaL- the amonnt ~f spnce pr~vid~~l betM~"en the unita an~3 thcas thAt would be ~n the south eide of the MWD .:wseme~t wa,~ approxlmately 100 feet and ~hould be cansidered in this instance~ tt,at the waiver re~ferrQd to as it per~ tAined to the lot line aloc~g tyie slope rather than at ~he top of the slopa wauld be no prot,lem eincA the enti-re sl.ope would be~ mdintained by the h~me~ ownars ass~ciatian, even though there wPre separate lot lines, however, the homeownezs asaociation requirem6nt wauld b~s to maintain all progerty ~ithin the boundaYies of the tracts, therefare~ any concern aa to maintenance wouls be minir:iized; that they did not feel the. req4tred maeonry v~all would serve the purpose or inL•c ~ of privacy because of the alevaClon chanqe of the homea, some af which would be almos~ 1U0 feet above the propooed unita and an arroyo eitux- tioii occurred between the two develoFmenta, ar~d the wall ao•~ld prevent aome people from having acces~ to the hf.king and ri8ing trailsi and that ~he sigr.tng they propoaed woulcl be aimilar to signinq pzesentip occurring in Andheim Hilla= and that iie w~ui d be glad to anav~pr a~~y questior~s tho Commiasion xnight have. Mrs. Dinndorf again appe+sred before the Commitssion and stated ahe was Presi.dent of the Santa Ana Canyor. Improvement Association, and her oryanization was opposed to tho 150 planr;ed r~sidencial ~3AVelopment lota in these four tractar that ahe ~lqht apgear d~nse, b•at she did not feel by approving this ~he City rould be tradinq 60 units iEor a mos.~e ciesirable davelopment, particularly when ~ne con~idered all. the waivera being requested and wonder••d what waivers the Feti~ioner would be requesting if this were actua~ly deve7.oged for R-2 0~ R-3~ t:~t h~r organizat.ian based thei.X oppoaiti~n on the requiremente as set fozth in ta.~ California Environmental Quality 14ct, and ther~ rEad excarpte Erom .~aid re~uirement which required that governmental aqencies mus~ coneider the quanti- tative factora on a Zon~-ter~~ benefit basis that might be deri~red against the s'~nrt-term benefits and coets~ that the •~vironmenta lmpact Report must also indicate the type ~f im~~ ct it would hav.; on tns 1v~ ronment, bu~ n~ statemen~.: was made in the EIR on the resul*-ant go~Iution to ~hd clean air as required in the clean air act of .1970; that ~shA wculd l~.k~ tio see moro aanenities i~tetead of higher and higher denaities aR waa bein;. psoposed f~r the crsnyon~ and that ehe waR tired of hear.irq the developers etate thaX waulcl have qunlit,y develap- ment since it was her ~pinion th~~ was hiqher densi~y with substandnrc7 d~~•elap- mPnt, and hillside re~~iiremsnte ~hould havo fire-retar~iant materiala as wall as ;uttera and doNneghuts. ~~ ~ ~ 73~658 MINUTI~B, CITY YLANNIN~ CUMMISt3i0N, Novcmber ~.2, 1973 ENVIACNMENTl1L IMHlACT REFORT NO. 105, CONDITIONAI,~ USE PL'RMIT NP. 1430~ ANA T1C~VTJ-TTVE MAP OF„TRACT NOS. 8513 85~4, 8315, AND 8516 (Cc~ntinu~d ,,,,I ~.~---~------~-__...._ Mr, Roqer Wilson, r~pr~pontinQ ths Orange Ur~i:1eQ Sahool DiAtrictr °~a°osition I batQro t.h»choc~l~c~is~ricta botea lewtPointo~in tha letterushoulddbsnbzaught to lrom the that th~ sch~ol d~otrict was unabl~ to th• Commisoion'~ att~ntion, nsmeYy. have bone electicns until Mfrch ~, 1974, in conlarmanaeowt~UOl$eiteAluntilhth~ the eaho~.1. distxi.ot hed no ~~~~~ney ~:o ecquire elamentary ba~~~g electl.on wae pao~all~ that. they ware baeic,ally o~posed bec~uae cP the numeruus appruvc~d tracCs betore the echcol r9l~trict had funde to prov~da achool ai.t:ee a W~~A A~ reraymoverci,ndedYOt+nd~ to i ermit thex~~ tructa~ko bm~deval- tt~~ge achavla Rchool facility provided by the echool opec7 and eald before thrre was nny diatri.at vras a conaern bec+~u~• it took ~he echna~ district 1.5 to 24 m~nthe to plan Po.r a cchool~ ~chool distriatrhadrbeenhtryinglto~etreas this~conce+rnVtor~ able i and that the development through~ut Santa Ana Canyon and Anahoim H11Za for same t s-e. Mr. Nlilliak, in~r~~bu~~~~he prange Unilied~Schoul~Distrfct~r~gardingtbu:~a~eler:s mad~ by tdr. Wil ti~~ss because it was his understandinq thet tho bond eloction had been p~d - poned and the peUnified~SchooltDiatrictdhad~knownrlor~nglonglitimenthnt~devrlop~- thnt the Oranqe ment w~ e being planned foz 9an~i:.a Ana Canyon since the CitY ef Ana~heim ha~t t' rs ; ~doptad the Hill anc~ Canyon General Plt+n in 1965, reaffixmed i~. in 1 Qnt ~J~ ir ci 19'10, when Anaheim H111a h.~d p•rasented their general plan of dewelo} what was formex'1'Y kanwAmendmant N~nc123twhi°htmBtabliehecl~di.fferentidenaitie~ appi•oved General Pl than had oriqiaansitiesnforJthetentire14200eAC~:elranoh eite~~~-nd this~was aga n reduced the;~A ~ in the past few approved in 35 ~: r that the achc+ol diatri~t h'~`'^aa~no moneytfor schoola and cou7.d ~nths - expreasea nny concern, atating h,.-, not rer~olve their problems, theresfore, i* .rr~s the petitioner's ~pinion that thr~ school district ahould have taken into account long-range planninq for gchools a long time ago. Comm~•~eioner FaxdfeeleQQliticstshould.enter~into~thstplanningmCommissionns use since he did n~ti p,n presanted to thert. oonsideration of the p Mr. Milliak thbl.ygas~was~poi.nted•outnin~accordanceewith G~. t}1a1 ~~aneAmendmPnt high density, roved, thi~ 3zca was project~d was ro ected and app acre - No. 123A, where PC zoninq k~ j for low-medium and medium density and would mean 30 to 40 uniteOB~ed !hat tYpe these were tre Eigure~+ a.lao used by :HA - but they had nwlt}r~i denaity ~~f. 30 of density on the zanch, nor wae it intended to develop to 40 un3ta per acret thaL Lhe propos9d development would be 4.4 unite per grosa acre, and alth~hehdenaity wouldibeequite similarn whict- Mra. DinndorE 13ved, he felt th. t Mr. Mi1~icY., in concluaion, no~ed l:hat the architect had presente~. the Land L~~e Eleinent, ope~n spdce, common arPas and qreen areas of tl:e project which w6re more than sat3sP~~~olwa~veraerequpgted~andagz'antedainpthe4past~w}ieree~n9 requested were simiJ.a planned residential do'~elopme:~tg were proPosed7 xnd that tha ~he~V~~W9 ~na wall was requestecl only because they ~xd not want kv ~e~troy vi.stas of the lak~ .~nd park for t~eae unite. THE HEARING G1AS CLOSED. ~ommissioner Allred obsarved that theze was approximatel~; R feet between the garage door and the~au~heTeupon~MrreMillickweta'todntht~ttthegarchitoct~hede pArking in that aze t failed to montion that es. `1ar~o~$i~ofd560vpsrking~e~paae~r$yoOdofX~~hich~woulcl and they weru also pz'ovidinq a~as per unit, be 9u~welldEkceadsd tries~oc~-gtzQ~t perkir.yar~quiramantpoikthe City. which ~ ~ MiNUTES, CI'PY PLhr!N:[NG COMMi3Si0N, Novmmbex 12, 1973 73-639 ENYIR~~NMENTAL TMPACT REPORT N0. 105, CONDITIONAL U8E PE:tMIT NO. ,L430, AND T~:~1T11TIVE MAP OF T_RACT_N09,~, 651~ 8514, 8515, AND 881._6 Continued) coma~iNSi.one~ King inquired whether the p~Gitioner could quAxantee thet no drainaqe from the proposed developmenk w~uld entor ~he City's wator eupply in Walnut ~:~nyon R~aervolr, whereupon Mr. Millick Ateted Chat they would heve to quarssitee it or ig anything would ent++r ~he reo~arvoii~, it would P.AlI. wi~:h- iri the State'A Pexmit e~j water flowt that wher- the la~de~aping wae plRntdd, toy~ethar with twrtili:ar and eprinkler .yetam ~nd potsibly inaeuticides, tha Wat~r Quality Control aoard appAarOd to be concernau that th~d cauld pollute *_he wuter, theretnre, thAy wnuld atipul.ete to prr~vi.ding a wolutlc+n which wnuld be aoo~ptable ta ttioRe concerned. Comatie~ionor. King th~ n inq~ire l as to '~hf~ px•lce ren~e proje~ *.sd fo~ thesa uniCar whoreupon Mr. Solomo atetecl C1~,ak Che unihs wauld range in ,'joA from S38,000 to $42,000. Chni.rmen Gnuer stated hia qreltest concorn wau the dzninage into the City'x drinking waL•er suppl.y, ther; ~ore, it would 1~ave to ba complet;aly directed awny Prom tho facility. Mr. Mi].lick stated L•h+~t perhap$ he had been too qeneral in his ota-~cemant raM garding drdinage, bc:t tha only Qr~inage th~ - h~ could s9c~ the ~ miqht affect thie would bQ down~Jlop~ .iear the accese r~sd, hewe+ver, the bulk ~P. ~he d~ain- aga w~uld flow bn~:k int~~ the City'e storm drain ay~tem, wt-ich woul.d ertux the mngter d•rainage syste~*, but t'he watcar wh. c!-. the Watrx Quelity Contro'. Doard might be talkinq ab~~ut wo~~)d be cominq from a narrow atrip which went to the lakdt that all the natural r~in wat~r was nat nov: being handJ.ed thr~uqh the drainage aystem but was r.unnin~ int~ the lake, while t~e W~Ler Qumlity Cantrol Hoard was concerne3 ah~ut dzainage when tt.e property was developed, landscaped, fertllized and maintainsd for that narro~: t•trip and war-teci to be ~ure nothing wouZd enter the water tc pollute the YAk~~ thnt aheck dama were con~tructed now i.n the Oak Park area, having w: ~r ~luwing eagkezly, end tha~ woulc] be far in advance of the gradi.nq o~' he areu. Chairman Ga~~se•r in~uired wh~• the petitiuner wan propoein9 twe-story constxuction within 150 fe~t ot F-1. Commissionez Allred observeci tho!'~~ wore 40 units that wcauld be adjaeent to R-A property which would be develaped for R-1~ wh~z•eupon Mr• Millick stat•ed that ae his c~mpan,y understood the orc3inanae, this requirement would be for apart~ ment house units and woutd provide the ~tatural lir.e-of-siqt-t ~uffPr botwden two different f•ypes af residencial uaes, however, ~heir proposal wae for sing].e-family uses er.cept tihst they were cluater-tiype housa.ng but were not ~ao dissimilar '~ single-family elev,~tions~ and there would be no vieual intrusion from the secord atory as was explained by the azc:~itecti thai: thase lots were an t1~e opposite side of serrano Avenue and oi~ the cther side of the ~iWD aase- ment= and that rhere was a distinct yrade chanye when buildiz~g thet~e pad areas - whiah would create thosF lots to k,e 3Q to 50 feet higher than the proposed unyr_s, as well as bei:iq sene,rated by an arroyo situation. „ommias~.oner Allred observed that theo+~ pu~ported sinqle-family homes or untts would be on <:oneiderably ama.ller lots ~han regula.r single•=fa~` liom~as where- upon Mr. Miiii~k Q~ated that these uni.to were placod eo as t_ak~ advantage aE all the ~~en apace surrounding them. Comm~.ssiuner A11red baerved that much of thi.a open apace could Le in slopea. not on flat land aa wae raquired for singi3-~amily h~mas7 whe.reupon Mr. Mill~.ck replied that the stre~~t dcene itself waa flat and ~~aa.ntaxnad by the asaociation, and the street ecene ~oul3 always be f].at '~and. Commisaioner All i erpressed the opinion tha~t the prvF~oee9 development yave the aPPearance o. ow houaing, and it w3s fal.t the developez. ~ou1d have pro- poaed something that• was more complamen~ary to ~lie lo~ation o~~rlooking ths reservoirJ that he kn~w of ar,othez condominium-type developmen~t *.hat was adjec~,~t to a resorvair, and theae units snld for over 5100,QQ0, and that ~:rea was in Newport Beach, and he falt that Anaheim ws~ as good, if not better L~an, the are•~+a aroun3 Newport Beach for a similar :yne of de~eio~mgnt~ that ho falt the n ~ ~ MINUTEB, CITY PLANNING COMMT'~:~ •~~+, Novembar: 12, 1973 73-660 P~IVVLKOIIMENTIIL TMPAC'L' REPnRT N0. 105; CQNDITIONAL U9E ~RMI^ N0. 143G, ANU ~PENT1-TIVS M11P c~t~ 'PRACT NOB. 8513, ~514, 0515r AND 8516~~y~,nri.RUOd) davalapar u--ould heve moxe f~rti.tufle ~nd go out snd huild ~omathing bettar r+~ther t:~en roa houeing whiah he Pelt waa substandnrc! developmant k~i.th ~uet an F3-la~~C well napar;4ting each d! th~se unite~ and tha~ if the d~v~lopar vicere E~ropc.yinq Co oarietruck 35 uriits per sore on tt~ia proparty, he did not l~el he couid vot• in lavor o! that eith~x, thazsPore, he woul.~ suggeot that a much hi~;tirr yuxlity clc,ve,lapment bv propo~sd nround the lako area. Comm9.s~ionor Faran~ .~nqu.~lred o! atat! whdther they hed ane,t,yzc,d tha 150-to~t, one-atary height limitation ae it relatad to tthe tcpagxaphi• ~or thesa homo~ ae oppoee~l to thoae acray~ tlle etreOC, ei.noe tdr. Mill~~ck ~r.ied t.a preeeiit mitl.gatinq meaeures to warrant fevorabla conaidaration that tji:e wae Ctue to topoqrapny, and ai.naa ~hP Commieaion waa wi.~thcut some~lting c~e~initiva .tr~ Lhttt regard- he would nat want ~o waive the xequixemant oE ony-story within 15~ faet for 40 ~10diAA without gcme aanurance that theru would bn mit~.gating ci.roumeCancos. '*oning S~~t~ervig~r Chazlea Robez4:e noted that thd terrain ee eteted on tl,e south- c~a-et si~e of Serz•an~ Avenue wao considerably hiqher than the pnc9 dx~a of subject ~,xpperty, however, when one trav~led f.arChe: to the noztheae~ portion of t:l~ie project, althr,ug~~ ytaff ha~ not gone into any 9Xti8A91Vlt ~valuation of the teY- rain, it wou13 i-ppear irom the tract mapa that the pad elevaLion of eubjec*. property would L>e abuut the same as that acrasu the ar~oyo to the aingle-family area. Commissioner ?arano noted that b~fore h9 c:oii~.~ ~e convinced that there v~era any mitiqt~ting circumatances, Y~e ~•rouZd wank :nore tnaii what was rresenteci, and he woulc: not go along with L•hat, therefor4, ho would reques~ trcat some type of a atu(ly be made by ataff and presented to the C~Nmiasion for L•hose areas. Mr. Miy~ick stated that hE would be gldd to presant study fiqurc~e on rhat par~.cular area. Ccmmi~aioner Farano offered a mot~on, secondad by Cummtasic.~ner ~t~~land ~nd M~~TIpN CARRIED, that the Planniny Ccnimieaior,, in ~unnection with tlie Fi'_inq of rr~vl.ronmentr,l Imp~+ct Report N~. 105, recc ..menda to the City Council ~hr~` said •-eport be adopted as t2+o C~uncil's Environmental Impact Statem~nt, w:'th th~ ;pecifir. findinq that the ~:.,.R is in c~mplete and *..ot~?_ ::c~u~pl.iance w'th the Gnvir.o:~mental Quality Act af the State of Californiat that the re~ort, ~n every way, follows t}ie City'~ Establiah::d Guide,line~ to the Require~nent~ for the F~i~.ing of an Environmental Impact RepoYtJ ai.d that the Flan»ing Cotnmi~:sion had read, analyzed, and assimilated EIR N~. 145 ~~nd, tlierefore, hae made the aforo- mPntionc+d fin31ny3 (Commiseioner Fa~4no 1a~er directe6 thar ~he fore1oing motion not te forwarded to the ~ity Council unti.l action bean ~~~cen by the P~annirig Co~ncaission on Con6iti.onal Uae : ermi.~ No. 1430 ~ entativ • Map of Tract Nos . 351~, [i514 , E3515 and E+4 l.~? . C:c+mmissione, i'aran~ Eurther explair~ea tha~ he hrad made this motion A11C1 totnlly and comolet~ily r~:~ect~d Mr3. Dinndor.•f's statements and raferer.ces 1:o the California Code ard the Environmentr~l Quality Act aince i~e felt sh~ may nut have nad an np~ortunity to Eully examine the report. Furthermozc, he was cog- nizant uf the : act that ~here ware "~ egal : hadown in the sky" as f~:~;: as the reaidonts rf the canyon aere co-~cerned regardinq t}ie ~i.ty oF Ana~he rn and build- ~+rs .in A.:~hein~ EI'ils, but ne war~ted the k~omeowners to kzioa tl3at the Anahei.m Dlar.r-ing Com-^.ission was not plann9.ng to concern itselfi. with the le_al aspects but w-e_e oyily concerned with the lancl v.sP and with fulfillment of t.he California Environ:aental Qua:!ty Act. Thareiore, as long as any applicant pred~ntsd and ftlf3].lod the City s G~~.idelines to the Requirements for the Filing of an Enviz'onmental Impact Regort as aet torth by the City Attorney's Gffice, tlie Planning Commission wou]o coc~sider. tn~ae report~ as having fi:lfilled the Ea~vironmental uuality A~tt and thet he arould suggest that r:.ything else .'.re hanc3led in the courta ~:~d not use the Planning ~o;~mi.saion to expound the theories or thoughta. l,~J ~ ~ MINUT~:S, CIT~' PLANNING COMMIS3I0~;, Novembes l~, 1973 73-661 ENVIRONMF:NTAL IMPIICT RICPORT N0. 105, CONDITTONAL U8~ PER~lIT N0. 143G• AND T1~NTl~TIVE MAP 0~' TR?-CT 'NOS._ 8513_~~ fi514, 851~ AND 8515 (Continued) „_, r.oa~mie~ion~x RaMland n~ted, 1n eeoond' lie motion, thAt th~ SIR aas •imilar to tho~• which thq Pla~nnfng Cummieri,o,. ,.ad reviewed in the pset, altt~ough Mrs. Dinndor! had prm~ent~d ao,..e intereat~ing po1x~C~t tha~ the Commi.~4lon fi11Dr re.ly on the lact that the Commiaeion had xmviRwad devaloQment o! ~snt~ Ar~+~ CanXon An n continuinq basie a»d what hea baan preeentod wa• not a e~ixpzi~• to the Comtai~r!iont that although th• Camm~.eai~n miqht b• dieappointod in the product ~~ree~nted, the pYanning o! tho property wse on an ongainy basis, and the Pormer Nohl Rmnch had ~be~sn in tha pl3nning staq~+ Pox the pa~t L•en yenra when the tormer awner, ~.ouie Nahl, lirst ha~! a slopa e-nelyoie wspared, long befo~:c ~he Envixonmental Quality Act wne paee~ed, at whiah time ha analy~ad the pro~+~rty to det~rmine whnt could be ~evelop~~t on the praperty, and aubdequent engindAring -~*udise were exteneions of that or.igina~l elaoe anal,wiat and that thi.e deve~npm~;~t of the ranch was not coming bofore th~ Commie.ic~n a~ a comp~eto surpri~~. like "a bolt out of thA bluo" bwCdll9A it was part o! the Oeuernl Plen adopted by the t'.ity gom~ time ago. Cam~:issianor Farano Purthez nutAd thnt wi.thout a queetinn the applicaat l.ad a rigl:t to develop wit,h d greater denaity than he cvae proposinq, in accoidance wich the do~ietty dppraved under Genaral Plan Amendment No. 123A which dsoignated subject property t~r low-medium and medium density end which would be ovbatan- tially hi~her than tha doneiLy on tiieee plans~ ~hat he kould ha~.~a to aqzee w3th CammiAeioner Allred thet the area in which thie rleve~opmen~ wea propos~ed should be able to c~mr~•}~ Nith the "Big l:anyun" deveolupm~nt ox some othar nr~~as i.~i Orar.ge C far aa incrc:aging t~he veluQ o£ ~ho~ proparties by proposing a beastlfua ~FmAnt~ thet th~ way buildin~p were propose3 to be etacked ae they were .• ~~ private street, he coul~ not viauali::d them as anything ather than "row hour~ea" , althougY. he could be wxonq, but f.rom viewi.ng the elevaY.iona which were presented to the Con~mieazoi: and displa.yad on the we7.1, he found it. diffi cul.t to seA nnlthing Chat wouli~ 9ncourege approvitig t,hem !ur tha property - wasn't it possit~le th~t thie area could suppurt development simi?ar to "IIig Caiiy~n" •• aoL~ething much better cuuld be projeote3 far the arPa, and a ~ery dsairdble and attra~,ti.ve develop-aent could b~ projec*_ed for the drea without presenting somethinq which wae not appealinq to th~ Commiesion - he would like to sec+ a~m~thit~q of a much bEtt:r quality than preaentinq an illuatra'tion of. rcw housea. Mr. Mil.lick replied thst the deve].oper's reason Por ~.~sing tlie conce~t of n zexo lot line was because the buyer re2ated this tyne of development to the einqle~ family regidenti.el concept and denaity, while th6 ~tree~ scena would be main- tained thr.ough a c~mmunity assoclation, thareh~~ maintaining a better appearana~ of t.ie entire comman area. ~ommi:aioner Farnno further noted thr~t as he viewed ttle plan - if he owned one o!- these unita and was ~riving down tha street - he did n~t feel he could f~.nd his way home at night because the buflding sethacks were alnioat iuentical and Lhe elevations werP not verp diasimi.lax. Furthermore, with the priae range propoaed, he did not feel anything elae could be done= that the block houae type approach had been seen in other areas by him and were similar L•o what was beiny propoaed~ that the~ d.d n,ot appear to be too undesirabl~ for k.he othex• areae in which they were loCgtndo but tney did not ;~el~ng in rhe Hfills are~i of AIiaheimi that somuthing bettPr ghould be proposed, even thouqh kh~s d~neit~ was not as3 high aa approvad for +_he area; ar,d that eveu th~uyh he was not t+n archi- tect, Y.s felt that somethi.ng better than r.ow nouses .:ould be provi~led with the sanie density now projected. Mr. Mil'_ick observed that per~apa the elevatic~n should h+~ve been pxasented in other than the aimenaion presentQd~ ~hat the aschiteec had pro~~idod a mix o£ bc+th one and two-story elevatians~ thereby pr~agentinc~ some varietyt thdt when ono addrea$ed himself to thQ pr.ice ran9~e ~aopoasd for these units, Anah~im Hille felt there shuuld be aome variation in the prica runge o! houoing eo th. al~ EACC~ts o~ the maxket could ~cs reachedi tha~ $60,000 and S70,OQ0 devel.- opments '•.ad heen ~roo~sed before, but from his recollection there was not more than one other development i.n the same price rttnge a$ was being propooedf d~S wt;at they could psovide t~ development aimilar ~n "Big Canpon", but he did not know if there wou]d be a market foz that price rRn,ge. ~J ~ L~ MINUTES, CITY PLANNING C~MMISSIUN, Novembar 12, 1y73 73-662 ENVIRONMEN~'AL IMFACT RE~'ORT N0. 105, CONDTTIONAL US~ P3:RMIT N0. 1430, l-ND T1tNTA~IVL MAF O1• ~RACT NQa. 8513, 8514, 0~'15, AND~ 8516 (Cantinue_d~,__ Commla+eionsr Faraiio obnsrved that h~ would like to review the tepco apsin on wiist had b~en propo~~d in thd p~~t- hawever, to hi^ r~collacti.~n, not one ~~ the condomi.niums had been oonsidored th~t wera in tha pxice ra~~ige ~sop~sed~ that he could nat rocsl.t thet there were any hiqh-quali~:y condominiumw propoaed, ani. h~ wae :alking At~aut tbe prico ~angd of trom 570,000 to S90,G00~ and that if his undoretenufng of tt-1a wee n~t tru~, -ie would like zo bb corxacted. Mr. M111ick repl,.ad thc~t the Perkviaw development wae in the SA0,000 to SSO,U00 prlce range, i~d Ameri~+~n Houeinq Guild, which wc,uld opan in two t, ".hxes~ weoke, waa i~ the S~U,000 Co S~U,000 pr.i.ce range, while anathAr r7 ~nned z..sidontia~l devel~pment w~~.-.ch ~a Flanning .;ommtsafon P,ad deniec~ and the C'_ty Cour.c::l had approved •.vas pxiaed belNaon $43,000 and $52,000, ard a~d~.Cional coet~+ wera assessed where premium late were involvad~ that tlie,y rd~ied on cha builde~ to determina w~hat pria~s range would bo pr~pased, that on the ~1estFiel6 dovelopm~nC theze waa an $£~7.,000 price range, and a11 t.te prica zangee aet were by the ~eveloper; and thA* t~..~e Unly o~ner d~vAlo~,inc~nt that. might ~nme cloee to the price r~nge of. thia ~r~poeal wexe those bei~3 built by 1~a17.craPt. Cammic~sioner Allzed inquired why tliat location wdy setected For the $38,000 to $42,UOG ccnduminl.umd eince lte felt the develop~r could hxve davelape.d and obtnined a much Letter qux-llty condo.~inium end cliert~ale, Mr, Millick, in reeponr~e to furkhar ~ommisaion ~i~estionin4, otated ~hat the waiver.c requeeted were to cret-te a commun wall $itua'_ion typical af ec~ndoa.~,-ium townh~uees, dnd it was anathor way in wlaich to have the zero lot 11r.e de'veloped, providing for. a variation of livin~~ etyloa for the buyers which would be r. marketable product snd in line wiLh uL•her buildeYS, it wAU1d br another life etyle provlding for a aide patio ar~ya~ an~ that they had been ':ry~ing ~o maintain A givgn priae range, but p~ir.es hau been qoing up beyond what wes originally anticipated. Cummissicner Kinc~ then stared it appeared to be the onini~n of :n,~nt ~~~ the Commissj.on tnat: this loc~stion wA~ coneiQered o~~e nf the pz'1mA areae for devel- opment and de3ex~ved a L,ettar q~xality development witn the vidw ~f the 1ake, and then i.nquired whether l.naheim H111s did not feel this was a prime view ].ocation~ whareupon Mr. Millick stated that tha v3~ew overiookir,q tho golf course oommanded the :ighaet value; that they placed a grenium on an~- property which had +~ vi6w, and a1tY~ough th~ laka was nn au-enity, it n~seded to have samething done to it ,:a n~ake iL• visually acaeptable, while the golf cou~:ae was a much rr.~~re plelisant appeaz•ance becausc~ it was develnpedJ that oven zhnugh eubject propexCy was overlookin~; the laku, there was no wall except a chainl.ink fer+ce and no lanciscapi.ng, a~,~i much mox~ had to be done. ta tr~e view ta make it m~re dPSir.ablei and that ~h~y wer9 trying to offe.r _~ product ~h~t would appeal ro ra br~ad ~x- ~ane~e of h~rers within *.ha parameters of the cost of the land while still pres~Qntinu anccher lif~,atyle. Comn-issaoner Ro~rland noted ther.e wer~ several prablems regarding this devalo~- ent: aii~ce he muet view thia development as being sinqle-fami~yt that the devel- pm~ei-t was distiinctive in sevarnl ways with wh~ch the developers wou~d have ta :ome "t~ qripa", c~ne being the 0-foot sepnration which diet.inguished itaelf from s~.,gle-~amily residential development by 20~, and coup~.ed with thr.t, with 100~, red~c'tion in lot width ssnd ~ 20V~ reductior~ ir- buildinq separat:on, theae were~ not to dimension, but a lay board, they presented a problem ++ric: he fe~t the deve].opeza coul8 overcamc~, however, i~ would nppeax tha~t the pQCitiuner/aqent ~rere~ not preaenting thair product to th~ Planning Commiesion i.n a way that the Comnniseion cou7.d be convinced it was an acceptable development, and he d,id not know whethor thie could be done when one considered both the 100a lot wldth red~iction and 20~ lot aoparation ciiffer9nce - thio wns not preaeiit~.ng a Pinqle- fAm:Lly resider,tiel concept~ but it woulcl tsppear the develo~er was preeenting n den~axty gresater th~n the development bctually had, therefore, he would eugqeet ~.hat the deve].oper make anothex aktompt at nosaiblo redesign or a differeat rnethod of preaentation before the Commiseion dstermin~d it waa not an aeceptable cie ve lapme,~ *_ . ~ ~ ~ MXNtJTLS ~ CITY PLi~NNINC COMt~ISBxON ~ Novemb~r 12, 19'13 7:~-663 SNVIRONMEN~AL tMPI-CT RaLPORT N0. 1Q5, CONDITIONI~L USIC i`BRMI'L' N0. 14~0, 11N~ TENTATIV~ MAP O~ ~T Np8~13, 8Sb4j 8515, AND__85J.~ ContlnusQ_~___,~, Mz. Mill.iok khen roqu~ote4 that ~ub3~ct petition and trautr bo oont.inu~d !ar ~ao weeke !or ~uxthor atuhy by tha develor~Pr. 2oning Supervi~or Gh~rle• Rob~rt• notad that i! rovlsed plen• v+ere propo~ed Co be submittad, tha~e plens would havo to ba in t~y Weclnf~day o! th4a weak in ar8er to ba praw~nt~A ta the Int~rdupa~rtm~nt~l. Cosnmittee Pox Pub11r, tlatety +~~d General W~1Paro boca~aee of ths Thankagiving halidAy, ~].tho~ayh norma2ly tha revi.ew c_ tha petitioni ~or the next me~r.ing would hav• bee~- on Monday. C~mmieoi.anwr Farano inquireG whether ~.he C~eVelO~AL' W'.tB aonaiderinc~ r~deRigninq thi.a dovoln~mentt wheroupon Mr. Ptillick s~dted khat L•l~ay wauld tako thu Commie~- rion'e stete~ments and analyae tham, but Chere wAa a poe~e~bilitk thet tho glana waal~d not bn ohnnq~ad sinae he felt it wae a matker of ea111.ng 4:ha product to the Commiaeion, however, thoy would look At all ~f the varl.abl~a in tha .tat~-~ mmntis made by the Gummisrion. Cammies~.oner Al1reA in~,ulz~~ whetha~r th~are wae d aimilar. developme+nt nlr~ady bui~t fn tP~1s c~eneral aL~a Nhic,h the Commiasi.~n aou~d v181t~ whareupon Mr. 8pl~mon eCsted thdt ti~~~• Mae on~• in ~ong Beach ~n Fieatminstmr 9ou~evard, east ~P Studabaker Road r~ear Ldioure Wr~rld ca~led Igland Vill+~qe, which oould ~a visitad ta viow what thny propo~e~i Lor An+~haim Hi].,.a. Mr. Millick alao no~~d th+~t th~ Commission c~uld viav: Turtl.e Roc:k at Ir~~tne and tY-• pzee~snt homes an the hillcide nt Hzoadmoor, which wnuld have ths samo llatlan~ apPearanc~ ao the propo9ad deuelapment. Commis~ioner FnrAno ofl~red a iaation to raopdn Che hearing and cont:.nu~ ~on~ic]- eretlon of Fnvironmen~al ImpacL• Ropork No. 105, Conditinna.t Uee Pc~rm~.t Na. 1430, and TAnta~ive Map of 'Pract Noa. 8513, 851A, 85].5, and 85Z6 to ~he meeting of November 26, 1973, in order to alluw time for the developer to present en alter- natm methr f their propaeal, r~e wel~ aa to allow khe CoTmiusion timo to viaw ather dev ~,mentg having eic~~~lar aritc~r.tu. Commissionor Kiny oeconded tha motion. tIUTION CARRI~D. pWC~:SS - Ch$irman .;auez decl+~red a ten-minute roaeee at 4:20 p.m, RECONVENE - Clsnirman Gauer ro~onvened the meeting aC 4s30 p.m., ~ Commis~i.onere Herbst and Seymuur bOitlq absent. C'ONDIT70NAlL USR -~~BL'IC HEARING. ANAHEiM HILLS, INC./TEXACO 'VENTURES, IN~., Y~RM2T 210. 14a1 36~ Aneheim Hl.lle Road, Anaheim, Ca. 92807, Ownc~r3 VTN ~ CONSOLIDATEU, INC., ~3~1. Campu~ Dzive, Izvlne, Ca. 92664, Ag~ent~ requeeting parmisaion to FSTABLISH A 5-U~IT PLANNEu R,:SIDENTIpL DEVELOPMENT TO ~E USED AS A MOD~L COMPLEX WITH SAL~:; OFFICR, WAIVItVG MA}~TMUM ~7GN AREA on propozLy desoribeci as: An irr~gularly-s:naped ~nrcel oE 7.And cor.ai.st3ng of A~YF1=OX~.CIdte117 2.8 Rcres loc~ted northwestexly of che inter- ~~c~~.~n of ~errano Aveaue +~:-d Hi~idan Canyon Raad. Property p~eeently clessl.- fit+d R-A ~ .~v~2ICL7LTL~RAL, ZONE . Aseistant 7,oning SuQe~-vieQr Phillip Schwartze noted for the~ Comtnisaion that aubject petitfon would be sub~ect ta C~~m~nis:ion action on the ~reviouo itnm or. F.nviror.mental Impack Rerort t~o. 1~75 and Conditional Uae Permit No. 1430, nnd guggemte " that eub ject potit~an +~lso be continr:ed to ~he c' -vem5er 26, ].973 meoting. Cammiac~i.onar Aowland o!lere9 a mot3nn to continue con~i.ddrrtion af Petition Por Condifcional Us~ Pe_mit No, 1431 ta the mc~etinc cf t7ovembar 2E,, 1973, in order to be 3~ear1 am ~art of Cond~tion~l Use Permit No. ].4?9. C~mn+isel.oner Faxano seco~ic~od the motion. M~JTIUN CARRTEU. ~ ~ MINUTL&, CITY PI.ANNING COMMI88ION, Novwmb~er 1~, 1973 73-•6b4 CONDITI~JNAI. U3E 1~F:RMIT N0. 14~9 lContinuad ~rom page 73-65A) Mr. sctrwarts~e advi~ad th~ Cummiwei~n tih~t a etaFf ine~mber hhd cor.~.ACtod the ropreMyntativ~ of tha+ petitionor unCez subiect peCilion end had baari a~ viond he w~a on hia way to b~ preae~~t to answez Commi~eiun quc~ation'. No ana eppearecl to repreaent r.he petitioner. No one ap~kxred in oppoeiti.on. Comm.isei.orier Rllred auggueteQ khnt •incu tho ue~ was dlx•c~ady t~er.ebii9riad, rhex kh~ ~ommiesion could he~r khir un~ceae thero wez'~s ver.y apeci.fic qc~vet.iur-~ whir.h th~e Cot~miasiun PaI.L tho peti~ti~nAr ohauld be r.c+quired t.o t~n~+Ker. 'PHE HGARxNG WAS CLOSED. Dincunsion wag held by the Gomm~eaion rr:iati.v~. t.o Che request ~nd wheth~r or not sletting ahould be+ pro~ided in the axietinq chai:ylink Pence and wh at prampted t:he petitiont whareupon Mz. SGt1WAYL'ZQ advioecl tl~e Commission tti~t Chci mini-wa~zehouse h~+d bee+n cons~z~cte~9 in accorda~nce with the Cods p~zking r9quiro- ment ot tho M-] 7an~, however, the Zoning EnYoscemant Gtf9.cez in ahec king ~viulA- tians throughout tha city had nated th~xt they had atsrted outdoor eto r agc oE tha Z'ACL"BBti~.ORa.L vehi.cleo and hnd advi~ed the Qetition~r to £ile Lor a cnndi•• tional use permit to leqaliee thia zoiiing violat~.on, ar,d thar upon fil.ing the r.equeeL•ed potition, it was deCarminud that the~ peti.tioner did not plan Lc con- st:ruct a 6-foot masonzy wa.il eiialosing outdoor e~toraye, ancl, therefor~, khe Comminsion would have to derermine whett~er or n~t th.ts+ waiver ~ra~ j~xetiNi.ybl.e. Commisaioner. King r.oted that he had viewed the property and haf3 noted tho atorage of these recreatic+nal v~hiclefl wds to tho rear of the propert y aiid waa not visi.blo f.rom thn atr4et, nor un~~ttxa~ctive. Commiseioner Rowlan3 inquired whethex or not the parking waivez r~ctue sted w~uld p1ac4 lhir~ mini-warQhouse in the same ca~ogo^:y aa other mini-wa Yehousee as it pertained to the amouiit of parking~ ahe+reupan ML•. Sc-hwar*ce sL•at~d that ono-half• uf Che parkinq a.rea wan prop~ee8 to bo ret.e a.~~ed far the mini-wazehauae and the balance waa propoaes~ for the recreational ve~~icl~ st~raye and more than mot parkinq which had b~~en re~vir.ed tn tt-~ pa.et of mini-warehuuse~. Commissioner King oEferc~d a mation, secanded by CammiQSianes RowlaTid and M~T1:ON C!-RRIED, that the Planning Commiasion, in connea~.ion with the exempti on declara- tion sta'tus request~ finds and determi.ne:~ that tha proposal would havR n<~ ~ignificant environmental inpact and, tchere£or~, recommenda to the C i ty Councll that na EnvlronmAntal 1mFact Statomc~nt i.s necessary. C~mmiasioner King offered keaolutS.cn No. PC7°-243 and moved f~r its p~ssage and adopticn to grant Petition for Conditional Uae Permit No. ].~129, s ub~ect tc conditions and the requirement that ~sdequate circulation shall be pr o vided tor traeh and fir.e vehicles to tt~a reAr where tha recreatianal vehi.cle staraqa waa located. (See Resoluti.on Book) 7uning Supervisc.r Charles Roberts inquired whether the Comsnissa.on propoer~d to ullow the petitioner to retairi rhe chainlink f.ence without providing elate in the chainlink fencej whc~reupon Commiasioner Xinq statea that the app ear.anc~ of: the chainlink fenGO witl~ tho vehi.cles was raor~ pleaaing to the eyF than when the chainlink fence would hqve s].atr~. On ~oll call thc: forng~inr, reaolution was paes~d by L-he fn~lowir.g vo te: AYES: CONlMIS5i0NEF.S: All.red, Farano, GauoX, King, Ro~~lnnd. NO~S : COMHiISSTONERS : None ~ ABSENT: COMMISSIOyERS: HeYbat, Seymour. r"' ' ~ ~ ~ NINUTES, C2TX YLANNtNG COMMIS3i0N, Nove~mb~r 1?, 1973 73-~65 CONDIT.i:ONAT. C18E - PUBLLC HEA}'1ING, DUNN PROPI:RZ'IE9 CURPORA'PION, 2Q09 Es~t ~CRM?;T NQ. 1432 Edinqar Av~nue, S+inte- Ana, Ca. 9~702, ~v~nert FARRIIR, ~~~ F!L'RRTCK & A880CI~12~~"8 ARVELOPMENT, ~53 Narth °0" 8trset, suite 408, Ssn 8srnurdino, Ca. 'J~401, Aqanti roqu~atinq ~~ra~i~sion tA C:ONSTRUCx~ A CQNFSRL"NCB Elo~~! !-ND l1 70-RCOM ADDxxYON TO J-N ~X78TYN~ MOTEL, WAI'~xNG REQUIRED NUMBFIt ON ~'71Rx.ING 8P11CE3 on pxqperty Qogc:ribed as~ J1 ractang~xl.arly-ohapod pur.acl o! lan!! oorpeirCinq or upp~oxima~Qly ]..04 ~or~• ha-vinq a frontage of apprcximately 180 Eest on the ~outh nlde ot Katells Avanua, huvinq e maxin~um depth uP approximately 250 leot, e~d beiny lacated appr~xi.- metsly 45q feet weok of ~he centerline o! Htate Collag~s Bou].evaxd. Prc~pe~rty pxesonra,y alaseifie8 M-A, LiGHT INDUSTkiAL, ZUNB. No one e~ppmarnd in oppoeition. Althnugri ".hA Repnrt to Che Cnmm.iQeiun wap r~ot raed et the puti~.ic h~azing, tt ie rePerzecY to and made A park o! th0 miaute~a. Cnmmieei,+ner King lef.t the Council Chamber at 4:39 p.m. Mx. Rand,y Hull, 255 North "D" 5treel, Suite 408, Sn:i d~rndrdi.no, reprasnr~k~r-y the agdnk ~ox the petitionex, appeared before thu C~~n111~.OH;L011 and explained that ~l~ey pr~po~od tn ex~and the exieting Smndmx~r. ~-~atel to the west o~ the ~reaent ~fxuctures, rQquirinq k~aivor of th~ pncking raquiremente XAld~ElC~ to the aon~e•rdnco roomr that tr~ey were propnred tu etlpul+~te, if ther~ were nbiec:•- tione from ~ho Commis4lon, thak ~hey wou),d not builcl Che confe•rnnce room an3 aonvur~ khat area to normal .r.oums ~ and that the con£eronce room would bo us~d by t;he guegte, and the1~ did not fsel eddit~onal park:lnq would`be required. x~~{~ ~($ARING WAS CLnSLI). Commig~sioner Al]red noted he had had accasiana to u~s9 lhid arrangement w~erein the confarence room wae uaed by the gue~te and inquir.ed whether the confer.ence xoom would be ronlad to otiher than ~he motsl guests, nnd if' not, would the petit.~nner ~ti~,ulate that t.he conference room wo:ld only be u~ed by queate of the mota7. if th~a c;oMmissi.vn cons:idered Cre r.equeat favorably. Furthermora, what 9tf.oct woLld this arrangemant have on the parking rer~uir.einenta. Aesistant Zoni~ig Supervisor Phillip Schwartze advl:~eu the parking z'equirementa wauld r.emain in effect whether ~ design.ated ~onferer.re roua~ wae used by queets oz r~thera, and the numbar o£ 9pAC@8 would b~ calculated accordi.ng t~ the ~quare faotage of the room. C~mmi.s~ioner Rowlrnd advir~ed one of his cliente was asecciated with the project under disr.ussion, L~ut that he himaelf had nu di.reat financial in*erest in it, therefoze, was he eligiblo to disausa and vote on the proposalt whe~-eupon Oeputy City Attorney Malcolm Slauqhter advised it wauld be p~rmissible £ox Commissioner Rowland to part.icipat~ in any discueaion and/or act.i.on nn this matz~r undsr thoaQ a3rcumstancea. Coa~miasioner Allred inquired ±f thg area could be reforred to aa a suite, and if ea, would that reduc~ the amount of x~quirea parkinq spacest whsreupon Mr. Schwr~rtze advisol that in thAt case the amount csf pdrkinq spaces would be much ]e~e, howevero the uae of the conference room might not be pe~,mi~tted. Commiesioner. ~llred further inquired if parkinq for the p~txons of the adjacent restaurant ~:r-der construction would ~verflow into the narking area being dis- cuesed. Mr. Ha'll acivised that aince the reatauxant was not compl~:te~i, he w~a unable to ma~ke tsny ~ommea~. ComQ~ia~ionc~r Farano pos~d a hyQcthetical rea•~.est for use of the proposod con- Perenc~ room by *-imaelf, as a local businessman, to hold a salne meeting fo~ 75 people !!nd inquired f f Mr. HalZ would rent to him. M~. Ha11 advised he would be willing to etipulatA Lhat he wauld not rent the conferonce soom tc oth~r than matel guest~ aince~ he preferred to ha~e the c~nfexence room and would nat be in the market for that type rental j that f~s~ he felt th~,y would want reatdurant oa -~anquet facilitiea which he cauld nnt nfferi and tha~ ha wvuld etipulat~, even t}~ough there ware many vacancie~ S,n th~ motel, he would not rent the conferenc~ room to othex than the questa. ~ ~ M'INUTEe, CITY PI,A~NIN~ COMM'tSBJ~N, Navember 12, 19'13 '-3-666 CONAITIONAL USE PEAMIT N0~_ 1432 (l:o~ttinuad) Commi~eioner R~w~.and nc~tec~ thAt there would b• no wey to tdil fr~m an admini- .eza~ive poiat of viaw to whAm •.uture ap~rat~rr~ aF the mutel might rsnt khe uonfazance rc~om, and h~~ P~:lt t:nit wae a ve.ry impcrtank i.tem to ooneider. Mr. Hn11 etateA a 25-year l~eaae Would be aignad mn~l reGOrdoA, and st.ipt•la~ed to wiehdrnwal a~ tha requo~t tox waiver ot required number at pmrki.ng epaaoA and to r.crnatruat..i~on of, thrne •tnndard-sis~ mo~el rooms in lieu o~ tho pzopoeed contezonce r.oom. Commieai~ner .~].lred o~fered a motiAn, seronded by t;omml.suionex~ Parano and MQTI~N CARRIED, ~h+~t t.he Pl.-nnin~ Can,mit~s~.~n, in connecrion wi~h an exemption ~inclaretion gtatua requea~, linde and dc~terminpe thet tl-~a propoenl. would have no t~igniPica,nt envizonmentdl impact r~nd, ~.hsref.orn, rucommends t~ the Ci'ty Council thut no ~nvironmental Impect rtatanient i.s aeaeeea,ry. Cammiegioner Fa~zano offexod l;eeolution No. PC73-24A end maveCi ~or its p~esage a~nd edoption to grant Petitiu-~ far Conditional Ua~e Permi.t No. 1432, in part, eince tha re~u~yt for waive~ of requir~~ p~~rking had been withdrawn ag er.i~u~ ~at9d by the a~ent P.or tho petitioner~ subjact ~o aone~iruct~.on of threa ~tandard••size ~no±el rooma in .lieu nf thg p.roposod c4nfc~rence r~om, a~ stipu-- lated by tha nqent f~r th~ pQt:itioner~ and eubject t~ ounditione . (5ee R~aeoluCion Aook) On roll ca11 the foreguinq rea~lutian wz-s pnc~c~ed by the followir~g vate: AYLS: COMMIS~IONERSs Allreci, Farano, Gauer, Row.l.and. NOk:S~ COMMISSIQN~~S: Nono. ABSENT: COMM7SSIONERS: Herbst, King, S~ymour. Commiesinner King returned to t`~o Council Chumber at 4:50 p.m_ CONQITIONAL USE - pUBLIC HEAR;NG. RAXM023U AND PAULINE '.CF.DFORA, 9071 Marchand PERMIT N0. 1433 Avenue, Garcen Grove, ca• 92641, OwnersJ M~tS, ROCHAN F.. - ~ ~ FORD, 121 Soutt~ L~ale Avenae, Anahe~m, Ca. 92804, Aqent; r.equosting n9rmie~eion for ON-SALE LYQUOR NOT INTEC,RATED WITH A RESTAURANi on property describes3 as: An irreg~ilarly-stia~ad parcol of land ooneistinq of approxim,qt~ly .9 acre and having frontages of approxim~+tely lI0 ~eet on the south side of Li;icoln Avenue and approxi.mately 105 fe~at rn the wesL• ai.de of Dale Aven~ie, havin~3 a depth of approximately 236 fee~, snd beiiig located west and south of t;ie sei'vice station site. Froperty pr~sently claseified C-1, GENF.RAL COMMrRC7A,L, ZONE. No one appear.ed in opposition. d~lthough the Report to the Commission was not read at the public hQaring, it ls re£erred ta and made a~art of t}:e minutes. Mre. Rochan Ford, agent for the pc~titioner, appearPd bsfore tho Cammiasiora and expJ.ainod. a problem ahe was havin~~ conceXn:.no, trash pickups tha~ her estab~- lishment had very little trash, ac~nsisting mostly of ciqarerta a~hes unc] paper napkines that sche felt the dumpet~~re sugqes~ed by the Sanita+:fon Uivision were a vraste o~ money in he.r particula~~ ~ituati.on~ that ahe had r.~nted one dumpster and it took about a month t.o fi11 iti t.hat she used amal]. contai.nero tAr aMhile, as,d xhe ~rnsh pickup emplc~yees x~fused to Zeave the truck and pick up the trashj and that ~he proadntly was taking the trash home ~ith hez and did not want to pay for a dump~ter. THE HEARZI3G WAS CLASED. Aeeistant Zoning Supervisor Phill.ip ;c3zaArtze advieed th~ s~sbject petition wae for e conditional use permit to e~tablish sn on-sale liquor ~~tablishment without a rebtaurant facility, an~l thati the petit~oner wauld "ahut the daax" on the foad facfliCy. ~ ~ M~N[)TES, CZTY ~'T,ANNxNG COMMISSION, Novembax 14, 1973 73-667 CbNDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 143a (Conti~iued) The Comn~i~~ionmra entered iato dio~ud~~,on ~vith Mr~. ~'ord concer.ni.ng the dppar- ent txash pic.kup prablem and upon ~nquiry if tha woulci be wilt.in~ to zdnolv~ tha~ traah ~~.oreqe eroa rsqulrem~nk to utiliza tti• txe.h ~torayn PeoilitiHO oP an ac9~acon~ commarctul eetebliahmarAt ~n thie ehopQiny aAntex, Mra. Ford eo seip~al.+~ted. Comm.i~oic,r~~sr Farano oP~er9c9 a m~tion, seconded by Commi~ei.oner Allred and MQTION C1~RRIED, that the Planning Co~axnioeion, in connection w.it.h sn oxemptioii declaretion atatus zequast, findo enc~ detorminee L•hat the propoael would F1dVA na eignificant envixonmenta~l impact and, therefor~, recommende to the CiLy Council thet a~ Environmantal ImFe-ct 5tat~ment is necoesary. Commi~eion4x E'arano offerod kesolution No. PC73-245 and moved Eor ite paeango and eAoptlon to gran~ Pett~ion L•or Conditionel Use Permit N~. ta33, sub je<<t to conditian~, and t:h+st tha conditian converi~inc~ trr~ah atornge ar~+~eu bo re- eolvod aa stipulated to by tho petiti~ner. (Sae P,t-9olut.3or~ Hook) On ro.ll call thc~ Foregoinq r9aeluG~on wae ~assed by th~ f.c~llowing vote: AYES; COMM7SSIONERSi FAran~, G~uer, King, Rowland. NOES: COMMiSSIONFR51 A11red. At~SF.NTi CONlMI3:~IONERS: Herbst, Seymour. RECLASSI~TCATION - PUBLTC HEA~tING. ALBERT AND HARUXU UMINO, 2420 Weat Brnadwa~y, N0. 73-74M24 Anaheim, Cn. 97.8Q4, Ownarsi FOLEY CONSTRUG'fION COMPANY, r ~ 1681 We~t Aroddway, Suike 7, Anahoim, Ca. 92$02, Agent. VA?:TANGE N0. 2562 Property deecribed asi A rectangul,nrly-aheoed pdtc.el of ~ land consioting of approximataly .57 acre, having a front- age of appruximately 316 foet on the west side of Mayflnwer S~reP~, he.ving ~ maximum depth of approximatRly 79 fpet and being loceted at the south~~est corner of Mayflower Straet and La Pa1ma~ Aveiiue. Pr.operty presently clrssaified R-A, AGRTCUI,'.CURAL, ZON~. FtEQUESTED CLAS5IFICATION: R~-5000, ONR-FAMILY, ZON~. REQUESTED VAR7APt~~: WAIVER OF' ~A1 MINI~9UM L~UILOING STTE AND (B) N~AXIMUM ~GT COVERAGE, Tt) SUHDIVIDE SUB:JECT PROP~RTY INTO FTVE LOT.`', FOR ~EVELOs"~MENT WITH SIN~Y,E-FAMILX HOK.ES. No one appa ared i n oppos ition . It wae noted for the Comm3ssion that a letter wa~ recefved from the property owner ta tYie west of aubject property in favor of the proposed reclassi.fiaacion. Althaugh the Report L•o the CommiaRion was not read at the public heoring, it is ref9rred to and ma~e ~:i part of the minutes. Mr. Edwnrd Foley, agant for the p~~titioner, ap~ea~ed betore the Commission and inquired concerning tha ti~ing for second rersding of the ordinnrer.e conaummatireg a reclassification anci ret'erred specifically to L•he Report to tha Planr.±n~ Commisa~.on, Con3itton No. 11, £or. a~p:oval o£ tl~e subject racleasification~ that he Eelt he would have a problem obt.aining uny band~ ba~ore tho final readinq o£ the or8lnunce approving the rezoniny. THE HCARING FIAS CLOSED. 2aning Suge rvisor Cherles Robex•~s advi~aed the conditiene , rsa pr~aenLed, ~were not uncommon in ~his City and that ~}~ose who have ne~ded bonde have aean able to take them ~ut prior to final read~,ng oY the ordinanca, And aa+~ured Mr. Folay it should be poasible f.or him ta obtsin bond~, also. Mr. Fol~y entered iz~ta diacuasic~n with the Commisaiane~e o durinq whiah he ad~rfaed ths homea were elready sma].l, nnd it wouZd be di~'Yieult. to buil~i th~m smallez iti 6rder ta conform to tl~e maximum lvt coverage s that ha hACl a~~iP.~i.cult tim~ deaigni.ng the gize lot batng presentedt nnd that ~ha three oxi~ting st~uc- tur.~e would be r.omFlotal,y ciemolishc~d and removed. ~ ~ • MINIITES~ CITY pLANNING COMMISBION, Novembsx 12, 1973 73-666 R~c:Y~ASBIFl'CATYON N0. 73-7A-24 AND_ V1IRTANCE N0. 2S61 (Contl.t~ued) Gommisei.onar King o!#~red a mo~ion, ~ecandaQ Dy Cummiemioner Ferano t~nc~ MO'I'ION CARtiIEU, r.ha~ the Planniny Commi~~ion, i.n ao»neotion with An sxemption dsclara•- tl.~n atatue raquest, finde nncf doturmi.~«e that tha prapoeal would hAVa no ^ignitir,Rnt onvlronmental impaot and, rherafora, xecommende~ to the City Council thet no Environmental impa~ct ~tetement i^ noceee+~ry. Commisr~ionor Kinq ~fYere~d Resolution Nc~. P~73-2A6 and moved !or iCs ~a~Raga and adop~i~n to racommend to th~ City Counc~il appzuval ot Potition tor_ Recl~seiti- cation No. 7J-74^24, oubject to conditi.ons. (Se+e Re~olutian Ac>c~k) Or~ roll ca11 the fozegoing reaol~iti.on Waa paAeed hy the fol.lowinq vnte: AYES: COMMISSIONLRS: Allred, Fnrano. Gauez, K~.ng, R~wlai-d. NOES~ ~OMMiSS~dNE1tS: None. ABSENT: COMMISS'LONERS: tiarbet, Sgymour. Commiaaioner Kinc~ offered Re~AOluL•i~n No. PC73-2~17 ancl m~ved fur its paaeaqe anrl adopti.on to grank Petition for Varirnn~e~ No. :e562 on th~ baeie that due t~ thQ unusual shallow flepth oE the percel, it w~uld be oxtr.omely difficult to sub•• divide aubject property and devel~~ it f.n a~ccordmnce with tlie sita develapment atande~rds a! the xequesta~3 zone, nnd that thN waivar.a rsquesL•ed wmre derormined not to be of auEficicant eignificance to affect ~he adjoining lbnd usee. (See Resolution D~ok) On ra11 aall the Porec~oin3 resolution was pmesed by the fnl.lowinq vote: AYL•'S: GOMMIS5101vERSs Allred, Farano, Gauez. King, Rowland. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSEt3T: COMMISSIONERSs :iFrbst, Seymour. E1~VTROriMENTAL IMPACT - PUBLIC HEARING. I:DNA G., JACK M. HND AF.RNEIRAU M. YORBA, 'R~PORT tv::. 1U4~ 54~1t~ Ea.t Sants Atia Canyan RUad, Anaheim, Ca. 92907~ ` ~ DC~NALD L. BREN COMPAKY~ 15233 Ven~.ura Buulevazd, Sherman RECLASSTFICAT.LON C)aks, C~;. 91403~ t-ND SAN''i',A 71NA VAL7aEY IRRICAT70N COMPANY, NO. 73-74-2~ 154 Nortli Gla~sell.~ Orarige, Ca. 92666, Owners; BERNARD "`~ ~~ M. YOkBA, 125 Sout.h Claud3.na Stxeet, Anaheim, Ca. 92g~~~ VARIANC~ ~IO. 2563 Agent. PraPC!rty dseur.~.bed ns: Az~ irregularl~-shaped ' ~ p~rcel of aand r.onsisting of a~pproxi.mately 5 acres at the nor.tt-west corner of Santa Ana Canyars Ro3~', an3 Imperial Highway, having approxiznate fzotitaq~~ o~ 520 feQt on the north si3c~ af Santa }~na Canyon Road and 754 £eet on tha wee~ aide of Impe.rial Hiqhwag•. Proparty presently clasuified R-A, AGP.7[CULTURAL, ZONE. REQUESTEA CLR58IFIC~~TION: C-1, GRNEAAL CQMMERCIAL, ZONE. REQUESTED VARIANCC: W}1IVER FROM THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF SCFNIC GORR~DOR (SC~ OVERLAV ?QNF. OF (A) BUII,DTNG SETBACK 1 RUM E7(PRESSWaY, (B) BliIZDING SE'I'SACK F'ROkt MAJG~R ARTE~IAL k1IGHWAY, ANs? ~r) LAt~OSCAPED S~TBAGK TO ES:'ABLTSH A PLANNED COMMERCIAL SHOPr^ING CEN'x'ER AND MOTEL. Nine persona indiaated their ~ros~~nc~e in apposition. Adsistant Zoni.ng S~apervisor Phi~.li.p 5chwdrtze reviewed the, location of subject prope=ty, land uses established i.ri r.2neo proximity, and the r~quaat to reclnasify a portion of sub~ect ~roperky with ~~raivers of thc: minimum bui7ding a~nd landscaped eetbacka from tha Rivereide Fzeewaye Sants Af-a Canyon Road (ar e~xpreseway) at~c~ Impe_iai Highwayr (a mujor arteriel.) ,~sid reclaasificatian to ~et~bli.sh the combined fi.vP-acre parcel into tha C-1 Z~ne fo~ ~levelopment purpoad~t thnt two ccncaptual p2ans wero submitted i.ndicatinq a commercial complex that aauld poBeibly include a restAUrant, xexal.l shop~, coffes sh4P ana a 60-uni~ motelt thr~t no in~erior layauts or ext.eri~~r elevntion~ werg eubmi*t.ad~ thnt tho gro- poaed motel would not be Farmi.CCe+i in thn C-1 Zone wi~hout e-pprovul of n condi- tioctal uae permit and submie~ion of detailed plans~ that th~ concep~uul plana were reviewed 1~y tha r~~° n~PBr~ment an~1 Sanitntion Divieion ~ad determinod MIINUT[r;9, l`ITX PLAN?:.T!!C CQMMTaS'[ON, Nuvembez .12, 1973 73-1669 ~NVIRONMENTIIL IMPACT ~i°. PORT N0. lOd, R1:CL~1SSxFYC~-TIQN NO. 7:i-'~~1~25 ANq V?1FtI~-[~CE N0. 2!i63 (Cor.~inued ~ ~ _~_.w unacceptsble far many r~• inono, includinq laak o! d~tal.l. snd inaAoque~te tur,n~.ng radii.~ thak lour ecceae ~~uinto wera prupoe~,d, b~aing the, proNoeed point an the noxth 0id~ o! ~anta rn~~ :anyon Roed, a~ two-way driva on~o tho propoesd futura ~rkreer ~t the w~ut pxc,perty 1!:.n, and t~~o poi.nt~+ lrom !~ld Santa 1-r.a Canyon Rut~d, wlth n~ ncces~t being ;aroporsed lrom Ic:~k~eriaa, t~iqhway ~ tha-r. a pox~tion a~ Old Sa~n".a Ana Ce-nyon Roed ha +ny acaene ~rom Impa,ri~~l H~.gF~way xnd ao~znoeCing the two percels would b~ u~i.lize•d as pnrt af tha azea to be cievelopetl, whl.~a rhe 41d 3entn~ An~s Canyon Roa~c] wo~tl.d br, deletAd txom the pres,~nC Ei~~e-w~y intc~zwoc- ~i~n in fa-vor of the pr.~aF~oset' A;:cos~a poi.nr, whic:h wae not par.t of rne approveA Acr~BA Pcink 3tur~yt tha,: r~ tziangult~rly-~snr~k~~d parcel oP .l.~nd approxiu:ut,ely 120x7SxlOQ feat locnted :at t}~e northwest ir~tersection ~f San~:a Ane Cenyon Roec~ and impexiel Highway ~aa n~t incluiiod o.K }»rt of thn proposa~ and no plans or uees wore proposer~ that th~ ~tubmitte+d r.anceptur-1 ~lanA pxovided an op~artuni.ty to annly~e sub ject: proparty as ~.o appzopriatnneae of commc~rctal deve].opmet~t ek th.ie loca~.ion, anci witr,au~ det~iled plane, no nnalyeis caul.ci be given L•o deter- mine sny conf'orma,nce to ~he ~'-1 Zono ~~QVa].opment ata»dax•ds~ tha~ the ~ubmitCQd plena wer.w riot in conf~~rmnncE~ w.ith the Sconi~: Cor.ridor. ~~veslay Zonet and Y.hat in view of the far,t a n~ore de~tailad plctn we~iJ -1 ~9rmi. = una).yt~l.s of ~os~.lbl~ tra~fic pr.ob'lema ~~n SBata Anr; Canyon Road, t~p~eA of U9fl8 re~~v~bted, ar~d Cttie eestheticq of a d~velopmont +it a pr.ime inter:aect•3on, the Commir~ei~n mi~ri;t :vi.c~h tu continue theso mattera t.o allaw the appllc:r~nt ta ~ubrn~t Adc~c~unte ~~1ui~s. Mr. B9rnarcio Yorbd, agent for the pror~ezty own~rs, 3~paar.w~3 b~!'.ore the Cammission and pxesonted the canceptual plane to ahnw tba intent of i.he de*velopment ats far as the aesthetica were concernod~ thut ts~o -,djaaant flhappiny r.~nrer to the ~outi~ acroas Santa Ana Canyr>n Road was unc~er r.~~nstxu~l:ton, and t•he pr.Uponec3 deve].np- ment wea one which evc~ryone aauld be equally p,roud oi:j ~that ~hey wc-re heat•i1y involved in the devc:topment of L-he entir.e intersection; and thak he fc1.t t:his int~rsectio.~ wae a ver.y import3xit one in the Caunty. Commi~sioner A.1l.red made an abs~rvation that the Commis33.on woul.d x~~3quire mor.r~ det:ail~d ?~lrxns in crc~er to c:c7ns9.de.r i;he :aubject propor~al= t:ha~ planc~ faz gx~ater than tt~ose praoanted wexe nE~E~dec3. Mr. Yorba replied that l:e a,~>preciated tha Con~miesioti's po~i~i.on, but that he desired their considerat.ion of li=s posi.tion with this particular landj thut he did not, for example~ ha~~e a te~iar~t £~r tho propo~ed. restaurant niid thought it was ~ssential ta have the resoluti~n af in.t~!nt for C-1 zoninq ~or tbe eom- bined parcels; that ha was not v~ery aptimis4~ic about mutel~;, but it was ~ikely; that he reeli.zed any speci~ic pxogasal would always be aub~ect Y.a aubmissl.an of site plansj that he vezy deFinitely wa~ }~roposing qammercial devQlopmenL• at Lhi~ ir~tereactiorit that the propa~al bc,ing made was to tie in w~.th t'~e five-point intersection~ that wtaff felt *he propoeal creaL-ad a txaffic hazard, and he had cur~sulted with the City AttornF+y'~ Office, the City Tratfic ~nyineer, and an indepenclent tr.affic engineer as he f~lt the proposal for alosure or abandonment oL• Uld Sant$ Ana Canyon Ftoad at zmper.fal Highwa~y was of valus to the health and we]_fare ai ~;:a communityi that he was propaainq en alternate source of ~ccess which woulci allow for the froe f:iow of traffi.c in the vicinityj t:hat tl~~ remain- der of Old Santa Ana Cnnyon Raad could rovert to loca]. roac? status, at the suggestion of Deputy City Attorney J~hn Dawson~ tha.t ue~idir.zg submi.ssion of. eatietactory precise g1~:n:~, they were see3cing 1:he abAndUnment nnd closure of. Old SantR Ar.a C~inyon i?ot~d at. the accesa ~oi.nt frum Imperial Eiighway, reversion of the zemaindsr ~f ~a? d roa~ tc loca]. .road star.ur~ and tt resolution a!' intent to C-1 z~ninq on the r,ombin~ cl parcel J tha~: he ~hought the only ch~iiqe to the Lraffic: flow was an improved access~ and that he hoped the Cummtasicn could agpreciate what was involved in trying to davel~p such a piece of propsrty. Mr. Chuck Anrunda, Past President of t2-e Santa An~n Canyon H~cneovrnera Assoctatian, appeazod before the Commission in oppositioii tU aubject peti.tiona and etatad the homeownera had overwh~lmingl,y disc~.~s5ed ob jectione to the eub ject pati.'r,ionat thati therp wore several reasona for their concern, ~hosa being cc~ngestion at ~he intersection, the effect fr~~m a fir.e sa£ety paint ~P view blo~~kir~q oFf the 52 homea thak had acceas from ~~~.d Santa Ana Carsyon RoaB to Impezial Kf.qhway, and the kiotel und restauran~ woul.d concentrate more cara in the vic3.nit•yt thnt the indiGation the flLlb~OCt prop~ertX consisted of fSvA ar,res was t~n exagqerationt • ~ ~ MINUTS8, CxTY PI~ANNING COMMISSTON, November 12, ].973 73~~~~ EN'lIl~ONMENT7IL IMPACT R~PC~~tT NO ~ 1Q4 , REC'4A~SIFICI-Z`I~N NO. 73-74-25 AND VARIIINCE N0. ~56~ (Continu0~, ,.,,,w tl at from tho qoenic c:orridor poi.nt o! view, th~y o~~eoted to L•hn plr-ceea~nt o~ tl~e ho~el. 100 ~4at =rom the t;roewayr t1~at u reotaur~nti et that particuler loca~ion w~,ild nat b• compatible to n netuzal soen9o oorridor~ th~t although thera would ap~aren+:l.y bo another exit lram their tra-ct, ~ha ham~owners =cit that iC would r~e hazasaaudt that mll of the pr.opo~ed Eaoiliti~i would be npposit!+ tho t0nc• rit ±he back a! the treot and conaeivubly one aoa).d iump over tha PenoF~ into the '~~sok ybrd oP the homee~ bnd that th~re ha~! be~n msny aevelopment propoea~le in the 1>A»t but never 1•iad one partio~rlr~r pr.o~.oeal drswn so muc'i at~ention nnd cun- t~~nipt a~ thie da~~elopment. Mry. Mar,y Dinndorf, 131 5outh La Paz, eppeaz~ed b~Faza th~ Commission :Ln oppoaition to aubject potitiona and stated ahe rnpzcsonted the 6dnta Ana ~anyon FropNrty Ownare As~ociationt that ahe had ~r~ad ~:h~ 3~snic Corridor OvorT.~y Zone and thouglht tlnare W~a a minimum of fiva dcrea required tor commsralal de~valr,pment in a acenio corridar~ and that the pz~oposed devulopment rrou'ld ba in violation to tho eaenic r_orri.dar ae tar ae the setbaaks rnd those zequirem~nte muat bo f.ulfilled. Mz. ~im Wallaoa, 5570 Fdgemar Avenue, a~ppearod boPore the Commission in opposition ta aubjeot potitiona and etate~'~ tT~a vel.ue at the homes within ~he a-djaac~nt tract avereged approxtmately 550,000, son~e being tuo^atory dwollinga, and thi~ import- ant factor had not been brougr.t o~~.c= that ha wAa ~+eking for the Commiasion's concern ov6r ~ha dreinage to che immediat~a south ot Old San~A Ane Ca~tyon Roadi that thera wn~r a,n appro~:imate 15-;oot drap from the leve]. of the ro~d to the level of th~ homee and wonde~ced what hind oY privacy hi~ family woul.d liave ae thoy would be in full view at all. timaet that prenently he en~oyed the Lreea anc~ ~.he fiald to ].ook at~ t}-at w~lls and conezetn would be an unpleasant view~ and that he waa impreeae~ with tlie devRlopmen~s in Aneheim Hills to date, buC wns very cot~cerned about tt~e large land drap t~hich ha feit woul.d crcata a problc~m, in hie opinion. Mr. Yozba again appaared '~efore the Cammiesiat- and stated with~ut a resolution of intent to C~1 on the eub~ect pareal, he could not put together. anything maaring±'ul~ thaC he did ~.1~t know whst the Commission ~nticipated fr~m him; that pending aul:misaion of ttse prec'.se plans on the totdl pzoperty, he would be aslc.in~ for approval of. abar~don~.nent af the 300 feet of Old Santa Ana Canyoi- Road and tl~e waivere, ~:rovided there was a sati~factory precise ptett submitted for Commiss~on consideacation. ~omu~isaioner Allrad a+sured Mr. Yo ba at thi~ tim9 the Commisaian could nc>k tell h~m hi.s precise plans woul3 be approvecl, and Mr. Yozba stated 3t would k~e almost impoasiblp to develo~ a precise plan undor those aonditions . Jpon inqu~_ry of Com•.~.is:.ianet Allr~ed, Mr. Yorbca ~~vl.aed h4 had not asked the p.roperty owners whzr: theX wov18 like to see developed on the aubject prapertyt th~t ha had done s~ iti the past, h~wevRr, but ixi th's case he saw no reaeont and he notod a r.er.~ant ~.ction on the part af 'cho City Couneil changing the zoninq status on a neigh!~ozing parcel wit}~ no pr~cise plsn for the development submitted, that it wa~ just s square bluck. Commissionex Far:.no incluired if t~he zizeL ate.p in the, nrocedure for the sub~ect develapment might bP an ap~lica*.ion for abandonment af the portion of 0].d Santra Ana Ctsnyon Road, and the preparation of preaise p1:7ns indicat.ing alignment of thg ro~d ~nd dedicatian of a new road at tha wesL end nf th~s subject prope~rty; anc~ made an obf~exvatlon that it seemed without the Comaniseion committing 3t~elt t~ loPS than a~recisP p.lan, some in~l:Lcatian of what might be exp~cted could be given ta Mr. Yoxba through thia step. Zoning Sup~rvfaor ~harlea Rober~s advi:sed the f.irat stop would be to qet an id~~a of how the p~:operty would be developed, thPn the conditionr~ concernlnq the aban3nnment of the road, access, etc., could be inalt~ded in any action. Commissianer Farano raoted 1-~e had tho feeling that th,e Commiesion ~id n~» .iiaagree wit'h th~s idea For t.ho dsvelopment but were xeluctant to adupt any ki.nd ~f plan that onl; ~eprsaented •,~hat might ba7 and in~uirod if the resolution of inte,nt w~s tha first atep. ~ ~ MINUTEg, CI'C1' PLANN'iNG COMMI ~all")N, Navemb~r l~, 1973 73-G7'. ENVIRONMFNTIIL 'J.MPAC.': R~P4R'T 1~C:. 104, RF.C:I~AS3]:FICATIpN N0. 73-74-25 AND VARI~NCE N0. ?56_____3__.~C~~ntinu~~d) ~.~~,,._~.,,,_, .,~.._~._....,_._..,. Mr. Roberts advieeA dw~ending upun tY,e degree of. dotail~~ the CommieeiA.i d~;sir~d ~or ~aclaaei.fioation of thF, propc~rty, b~~t that i! the preaiaa ~lene vrc,uld r~ot be A pnrt at tha coneideretion, i.C wou~~! bp within ~h+ purview ot thr. Plsnninq Comm.ieeion tc~ t~eaommdn~ that a r.~,so7.ution a! intant b~ sdoptad, with A~9equate safa~guerding con~i~k.i.ons b!einq added at A l.atsr dnte durl.nq tha ~~ac!.~ic devel- o~,m~~nt u! tho prupazty. Phe ot•I.,. _ ap~raacti y~uld be to g~ ahc+md Ard got more detai.led plans AO ~het ar., analysie ~a-:Lqht be mads ot pos~ibla ef~o~ca an adjoin-~ inq ~~rop~ectiee, the e-ccena to San*a Ana- Canyon Rond and e~l~a how c~1d Santm Ana Canyon Road a~uld be a.ftected, otc.r thst 4:her6 were m~sny qu~etiona in his mind roncorr~iny the c:~aauru oP the roadi ccnd th+at Mr. Yorbts h~sd indicatod he lolk he h+~d ~,rov.~c9e~.t all ths ner,esonry in~arme~ti.on, howove,r, the Develo•~ment Servicee ota~!'~ h~-d andicuted ver.y r.~enxly ta P~~. Yorba that the inPorn~ation wna i.nadaquata xnd t2-e Commieeion ~rould want t~ eefn rnore detai.l. ,r,ommic~ei.on~r Fera~no ao~npli.7~ntud F1r.. Yorbb ae to the Amount ~f aork alrendy dor.e un the praposa7., and inq~sirea o~ etaff wt~et informstion wag laakinq regardl.ng a trnf~ic r~tur3y and circ:ul~-t.ian so that f- tatal picturo could be ~resentad~ where- upon tRr. Roborte note~q tha~ there were a numb+~r of queetioi~~ to be raeolvod ae to accea~s and the status of Old 3anta Aitn Can~o~i Road, air.c:e the Development s~rvicc~a UApa~rCme~it t,ad very ].ittle input aac to tzat~ic circulAtion~ that al- thouqh Mr. ; orba rad etak.ed he had had discnr~eiona with the Tzaffic EnginOer and Aevel~pment survicos Dapurtment dieauaeinns with Mx. Yorba r.egaxc3in~ thQ Santa Ann Canyon ~cc.esa Potrits Study, thUre were atil7. many queations ~.n his mind ~-egardinq ari a~:cesn pa•lnt other thnn thoae which hnd beer~ ecloptedl mnd that Mr. Yorba had falt that. he had preaented ndequat.e information, bu~ ataff haL adviaPd him ~.hr~,t a inore d4tailed plan would hd roquf rsd, simil~-r to what tha Pienning Co:nmir:eion had required whes•e other develop9ra of properties xdja- cen~ to Sante Ana ~anyon ~toad had requested ad3lt~onal acceea pointa be approved~ Commisflioner Fbrar+o tihen no~ed tha:: becauee af tl;a complqxity of accese involvad, more informatiun would be n~ec~ed and ~han fnquir.•ed whathor Mr. Yorba would be willing tu anbwer ~he qaestions and provide adtaitianal informatiion i.nasmuch as Mr. X~rba ahould be well aware oE tha questiar.~o tha~t did exiat. Upon Mr. Yorba's inc~ication that he wau.ld be willing to work 2urther with the sta£f, Commissioner Farano requ~ated ataEf be directed to propound any and all questiona and re- quests foz i.nformmtion nocessary to bring the Commission more, definitive informa- tlon ana khat M=. Yorba be apprised of same at thA ear.llest posaible time. Ctia.irman Gaues noted that Che ho~nes on t~e north sic~e of the proposed develupment should be buffe•r.ad and the setvacks should very defini*_oly be in accordance with E.he Scenic Corridor O~~eslay Zone. Mr. Yorba atated one of the reasons they srere asking ta sncroach u~on the set- ;~acks was to htsve maximum distanae betwec~n tho developn~ent and tt~e re:~idential arEa. Upon questioning bl Commisaioner Rowland, Mr. Yorba advi.aed th~ property immedi- ately west of the subject property was owned by Mabel Yorbn. Cummissioner Rowlar,d stAted that in no way would he p<~ ~icl.pate in a c~.e~iqn discuasiAn at this pa~nt anc: timel that ~his was aensi~ive propc~rtyt t}iat the Commi.sai~n was a lay body and needed graphics to draw conclusions fromt that he did not feel L•he diRposition of Old Santa Ana Car.yon Rord iiad beon explored~ ,:hat once the developmen~ ~vas in and the ~ra~.fic patterr: ~stabliahed, iL• woulct be too later and that he wou].d iike to see a livable plxn qraphically diaplayed for cunaideration. Mr. Yorba stated he thought the motel prapoaed was no longer boing c~nsideredr that he thought a ahoppi.nq vil.lage to aupp~ement the aervicea and qoode pxo- vided aorusa ths stre~at w4ulcl be complemenr,.azyt and thet he wae lookinc fozward to an attrective developm~snt. ruLther, Mr. xorba re:lternted his interest in nbtaining a re~olution of intent to C-1 zoning fur the propertX, cont9.ngent upon submissiun ot acceptable prc~ci.se plune ~or tt~~ proposed development, tsnd that he would be wi.l.li.~zq to eubmit precise plund as eugqestad, Commiasioner Allresd no~.ed for Mr. Yorba that n4 shouYd provi~~a the adjoinina nomeownera all tha protecti~n he could posaibly give. Mr. Schwartze advia~d the Commiesion trat ataf! could work wikh Mr. Yorba to a-ppri~e him of the nMOUnt of detbil ~~equired for eubmiaeion af any plana fox their cansideration. ~ ~ ^^1~ ~ MINJTE6, CITX PLANNING COMM28SION, Novamrex 12, 19?3 ~3-672 ~-.~VIRONM~NTAC. IMPACT RffipQR9' N0. 504, RECI.Al3S2FICJ-TIUDI N0. 73-74-25 4ND uARiANCE N0. 2563 (Continuod) w, Commiseiuner Farano oPterod a motion, aecnnded b!~ Commis~ionas King end MOT7ON C1~RRIED, to reopen tha hs~ring and conti.nue eubj~eot petiCl.on~ to the maat~ng o~ ~ece:nber 10, 1973, fcr ~he eubmiesion of. pr~oise plans and detsiled inlorma-ti.on. In reply to e question !'rom Lh~ ~udi~ence, Mr. Yorbu q~.st~d he P.elt sure tt~e City of Anahaim nad mede provieio~tc far n~~quntd drsinn~e !or tha u~per proper- tiee or would m~ke it a condit•ian of +~ppLOVal. VARIANCE N0. 2564 - PUBLIC HEARTNG. GSRTRUDE M, EGGL~BTON, 1335 Miller StroAt, -~r~ Anehe~.m, Ce. 92805, Qwnerr nU~ J. C~-RSON, Oranco TndustriaJ. i~r~•~e.rti.es, 4;i32 Eadt La 1%lr~ma Av~nue, Anahcim, C~. 9Z8Q6, Agen~:; roquasting WAIVERS Oi' (A) MINIMUM I~0'_^ ARGA ANp (9) MINIMIIM :.OT ~IIDT[i TO SUB.DIVIDE AN EXISTiNG 5UF3STANAARD ~IZ~ R-A, AGRICULTURAL, 20NED LOT INTQ TWO FOR~'~IONS on r,roperty des-:.~rib~ad ae: A rectanyularl~r-eheped parcel ~f la-nd con- siating af. apC~roximately .9 acr~, hmving a Ernntaqe ~f approximdtely 33A feet ~n the wost aidc~ c~f Millr;r StxeAt, having a maxi.mum dopth of appzoximately 120 f.eet, and bain~~ ~-ocat~d aipproximat•ely 200 feet north of ~ho cent~srline oi` Miraloma Avenua. P~oP~srt.y preaently classified R-A, riGRICULTUHAL, 20N~: undar resolution a? intenY. to M-l. No one appe~axed in ~pposition. Although the Repo.rt to tha Commissi~n was not road at the publia hearing, it ie rQferr.ed to and made a part ~f the minutes. Mr. Don Cars~;n, aqent for tl~e peti.tioner, app~+nre3 befo• e tlie Commiseion ar-d atated thc~ subjo~t propert~7 ~vas a lony and nar.xow parcel and that ik was prime induetrial pruperty, preae»tly ir~ escruw sub~act tu ~~letinn of *_ho partion on wk~ich the peti.tioner's homp was lorated. TFiE H~ARING WAS CLO^aEO. Commiasioner Fsrana madc~ an abaer~rati~n Chat the Commission waB appreheneive about creatinq an 9400-ac~uara £oot lot that wou2d oe tabliah a preaedent. for future hardship requeats ior variancea~ thxt there were ways the petitioner could accomplish what she war.~ted withaut a lot aplitJ that he did not want to grant a lot eplit• and expreased hia ~oncarn over what wauld heppe» in the futurF with the sma7.Ier parcel creating many variances and hardehipsi and that he weuld agree tc M~3. Egglestun living there as Zonq as she wishod w~thout a lot split. Mr. Carson advie~ed the prapoaed buyer. of the lar.qer pcrtian of the property would have first r.igt-t of rpfue;al to purchase the hameaite at auch ti.me ae it would be offezed for xa1e, r~s atigulated in a letter by the petiti~ner; and that the biiyer praposed ta conutruct a smali, free-stnnding buildinq for manu- facturing purposes. Cl~airman Gs~uer ~uggested the entire parcel be zoned M-1 and that the pettL•ioner be al?owed to maintain her resid+~nce. Depu~y City Attarney Ma~l.colm Slaughtor advised that without the M-1 Zone, the petitioner would have mare righta, Mzs. Dorottiy Hngle, 1341 Miller St•reet, app~a.r~d before the Cor,imisaion in favor of subject potitiun and stated that she had lived in rhe ne-ghborhood since 19';0, and her propert~+ ~ae ~ust nor:th of L•he subject. pro~serty~ that Mrs. Eg~~leston could n~t afford the M-]. Zune tax ratu on thb entire parcel as she would no~ hP uti~.izing itr and that thero wsre no objections ix~ the neiqhbor- t~ood to the requet~ted variances. Asaistant Zoning SuperviPOx Phillip Schwartzo noted for th~ Commiasion that ~here were no minimum lut area requir.~mente in the hl-1 2anu. Mr. Carson rei~eratod thet the petitioner wanted to maintair- owner~hip in her own home~ tha~ ahe hnd lived thaxe ainc:e 1946 and ehe was elderlyt th+~t she real~zed ahe wou].d not be there very much longex, but that if tlie propuaed buyers did nat buy hex• poxtion o.f tYse pr.opert5•. Ahe could sti~,l disooae of it. Up~n questioninq by Commisbioner Far.ano, Mr. Gar~on adviaed the va~r.ioue elter- na".ivc~s had been presentad to the peti~iuner but wexer unaocaptabla to hc+r; and I •th+it this wns hgr propertk and her homo. ~ ~ MINUTF.S, CITY PLANNING COMMTSSION, November. 12, 1973 73-G73 VARIANCE N0. ~564 (Conti~ued) Commiasioner Al.lrod commen~ad thie was L•he way oldorly people laoked upon their homes, e-nd that they do not want to par~ with th~m. Tn r~ply ta c~uaetioninq by t.he Commiseion, Mr. 3chwactr~e t-dvised the requeet war to ep]..it an exieting R-A zonod parocl lnto tMio an~aller R•-A ~.oned parcola, e~d that the petitioner had atipulnted by letter tliet only e chainlink Penc~, gaparetinq ~he emetll. lot. on whicr~ her home wa~a pituated, would k~e adequa~to protection Prom anX ful:ure M-1 Aevel~pment on the ].aryer of thA pnr~ele~ beiny split. Coa~mis~iar~er Allred oPfered a motion, seco~ded by Coren~iesi~ner Kinq antl MOTION CA1tRiED, thn~ the Pl~.r~ning Cumm~esion, ir, connectian wi.th nn examptin Y declnra- tion et~xtus rF~que3t, findm And daher-nines tl-~et the propoeal wo~tld he~e no aigni~icnn~ environmental impect csnd, tkiarefore, reaammends tn tlie City Council that no Env_c~nmental Tmpact Statement ia neceasary. Commisaioner r.].l.red of~erod Resolution No. PC73-248 and moved far its peseege and adoption to grnnt Potition for. Vasrianca No. 2564, aubjec~ to condi~.ions. (Soe Reaolution Boak) ~n roll call the foregoing reaolution wag passod by the tollo~~ing vutes i1YES: COMMTSSIONF.RS: Allr~d, Farano, Gauer, King~ Rowlan3. NUEB: COMMISSIONI:RS: None+. AHSENT: COMMISSIONERS: l~arbat, SQymour. ,11MEHDMENT TO TITLE 18, - PUBLTC H~ARING. INITIATED BY THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANPIING ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL ('ODE COMMISSION, 204 Eaat Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, Ca. 92H05~ to consider amendmants ~o Tik.le 18, Chapter 18.08 - Definitione, and particularly Section 18.08.330 - Automobila Service ,~tation, Section 18.Q8.607 - Recr.edtional Voh~ele, and Section 18.08.750 -'I•ruck Se~rvicd 5tatian, and the addition of ChaptQr 1a.61. - Cz'it~ria and Develapment Standards for Service Stati~na. A.lthough the Report to the Commission was nut read at the public hearina, it is rE+ferred to arid made a part of the ~niniites. Mr. Ken Denny, representing the Western Oil and Ge~ Aaeociation, 609 .riOLlt}1 Grand Av~snuo, Los An^~les, appearad befo.re the Comni6»lon and otated he pr.esumed there we~°e problem$ ~.n the City af ;~naheim concernlnn tha subject ma~ter~ th•3t the proposed ordinance encompassed development operati,on standarda but lef't certain questions unanaweredJ hat the trond had been a 3$ reduction of service stations thrc~uqh~ut the countr~ in the past five years and e'10$ raduction in the City af Anahei.m; that in 1967 there waR ar~roximataly $1,200,U00 taxable inaome Lrom rxervice stations in this city and approximately $9,149,0~0 in 1972i that thrae questi.ons wore rai~e~ in the Aixtomobile Service 3tatic Stady circulatad by the rit}•'s Planning Department, howeve.r, he did n~t agree wit.h some suggeeti~ne made to provide for. rhe construr.tion of n~w service stations in numbera and lor_ations which wauld b~ reasonably consistent wi.th the requirements of tY.e community~ that the ordi.nance did not presum~ to answer to the question "wh~t could be done to improve Lhe appearunce o~ s~rvice stations", sinc~ from his observation there were apparont enforcement prcyblemsj that the solutAon to the questinn regarding a r~duction in the number of vacant servic~ static-:d was a ail~mma, eapecially in view of. the fuel sho.rtaget that Conti~ental 0'_1 Company, one of the oil comp~nies he tepresented, developed a lict ~f s5 alternatlve uses for close3 or abandoned sarvice st$tions, and such sound altexnatives to this city included churches, drive-in banks, florists, etc.t that tlie matter of enforcement dealt with individua'le rather than lanci use or type of lanrl u3e~ that in dealing with the reality of service atatio» cloeures, the City should atiR~ulate the idea of conversion~ that ha did not know the circumstancga leadinq t:o closures, whether it Was the businessman's ability or whatever, bu1: Lhat the City could benefit from the closures, and he wae auggesting these alterna~ivesr and thrat ho would requ~st ~he Commisaian to consider any new proposal8 from the standpoint of what would they do Sor the City in relation to existing aervi~;e statinns and how many net~ ~tation~a were renliatiaally coming into the city. Upon the raquost of Chairman G~+uer, Mr. Denny udviaed he wouLd provide the list• of 35 ,aJ.ternate uses for cloae~ or aband~ned aervice stations to tha City as sonn as he receivod a copy of it. ~ ~ h1INUTE:., CtTX PLANNiNG CUMMISBION, Novemher 12, 1973 73-674 AMENDM1:N~f TO_T7TLE ~8, l~NAHEIM MUNTf.^IP~-I~ C~DE (Continued) Commiesionot~ Fazano no1~~d Chat it n~w appenre9 the oil oompe~nics were ep~ndinq mona,y tz,ying to detar.mine what to do wlth tho vaa~nt aervioe dtat±on sitst~, howavhr, he would auggoat thc o;ll ~ompeni~ea attempt to help th~s~ peoplo to c~nti.nue thelr eorvtce etation buein~oa. In ree~onae to e quoation b,y Commiao3one~r Kinq concerning location oP trash atorage~ d2'AdB, Mr. Denny advieed that the looation oY the~ krasl~ stozage~ area would depend on the drehiteatura o! the particul~r fuaility, end that aetthett- anlly or f«nctionally the ~il compnnios wauld be i.n ffavor oE laaatinq it awny lram tha building. Commimeioner Fermno nated thar Mx. Ddnny wae preeent At thu Planning Commieeiorr work eaeatan Navsmber 12, 1973, wh~n the rentdl and etora~ge a! recreationsl vet`~CZQA was diacussed~ tY-at ha, himnelf, had epoken againgt permittiny the leatae, ran,ta~, aale or storaga vf autamoh~.les and recr~,ational vehi~le~ at $ervice statiuna~ and that othex Commir~sionere hnd indiaate~d these were not bad uses provid~9d there were aom.e addttional development r,ritoria. Thereu~on, he inquired whather the a'bili.ty for the aervice etati~n oporatoxe to }1dV9 recr~ee-- tiona7, vehl.cle eu1RS~ and storage wae desira~le, whathez ~.t wnuid be bad or he-rm- tu].~ an9 .tf ho would favar it with ot,her devel.opmenl:Al cx~lteria. l~r. Danr.;- advi~ed the Commisaion that ~he petraloum induatry ~ook no ata,nd on thia mattor. aince thoy were only intereated in tiie sale of potroyoum producta~ that from the aL•andpaint of an independent buaineasman, 1E he adherec3 to the City's Codc and operated a. good businega, the "nama af the qame" was to maka mor.ey~ that there wero enforcement ~roblems, and he had his own compleinte xbout aame sexvic~ et~ationst that h~ dia noL• feel the uses mentionod by Commie~eionar Fsrnno would t,e harmfult ~hat it was a~orential to benefit the busineneman and the City thzough the income and ta~^s derived from it~ that tt~ere woald be enforcement prab].ems for whatevor wna as±ebllahedJ that if th~r people couZd fleal with it realiatic~lly, it would .7E a beautlful item, even if it di8 areate more problemsr that the cumpante~s and operators oppose c~rdinances with Further reatrictiana= and that he aupporte the ordinance ae p.ropor~ed, howevex, he ques- tionad if it ~olve~d a11 the busic problems. In reply to Commiasioner Farano's reque~st for suqgestiona for solvinc7 ~ome of the problems, Mr. Dt~nay advised violations wor.e on an indi-~idual baeis, wh~tY.er company ar ir-dividua.lly ownedt that violations ~hould n.~t be t~1lowAd, and he sugqested that whatever maans was rEquire~ to enforce the ordinance was tha solution. Mr. Ron Wexderitsch, Community and Tnclustry Rslationa Representative of U°Haul Company, 2515 West P]insi.on Road, apFieared before t:~e Conmiasion an8 stated he was opposed to filing of a conditional use p~rmit to allow truak sentals at service statiot~s; that th~re were o~her methods for placing the naceasxry re- strictions othPr than by a conditional uae permit; that although the Plenntag Commis~ion and the City Council had been more than fair in grant:ing cunditional use permits, he fe~t that ir. the future ownex•s w~u] d not pay to ^-:a;,~ the cundi- tions for addi~ion~l landsca~~9ng, walls~ C~fffp~nnt ,-~~f;,, etc., to acoommodate the accessory uses. Mr. Werdaritsch advised he did not disaqree wi~h praposed Section 18.61.022 - faccessory Uses or Sectian 18.61.023 - Conditonal U3es, and theee could be combined. 2n respan~•e to ~hairman Gauer's statemen~ that bigger vehicies require more ro~m, Mr. Werderltsch stated service statians were presenL•ly reetricted to 1Q$ of ~heir lnt space for accossory ~ises~ that• the~~ were not allowed tn park any- thing in £ront of the front line of *_he buildina so that everything would be shfelded by the builc~ing ttaelf; hcwever, he did not object to thia. Commissioner P'arano stated this date he kiad noted a sezvice sta~tion with U-Haul trsilers lined up from the sidewalk to the huilding, enczoaching into tae pump area and the driveways into tl~e 3erviae station huildinc~~ wheraupon Mr. W~~Lder- itsch responded tha~ he did not feel ti~i~ was ri~,~ht, if i:he orclinsnce dieallcwed iti *_hat the trai].ers ahou).d hava been oarked behind the front lina-of-sightj that ~hia was the aituation they wanted to avoid but that there we~re contribut- in3 fnctora such as older, ~maller serviae etations, part-time help on weekends, ancl one-way rentals building up prior to iyeinq transferre~ ta oCher loaations. Cammiseioner Farano further inquired if Mr., Werderitsch felt ~he conditional uae permit items ahould be under acaessoxy uaea anci contxolled by the manner in which they migh~ be stored. ~ ~ ~ MIIJUTE9, GITY PLANNING CUMMIS3ION, Navember 1Z, y.973 73-675 ~i,N1~NQMENT TO TITkE_1~8 ,_11NAHE~M MUNICTPA CODE CC'urttinued) Mr. W~rdbrit~oh ~ugqaeted re-moval ot tlae word "stoxaye" lrom SecL•ion 18.61.11Z3 I o! the prc,poe~d ordiinana~~ e+l+d Eurther ALAGYd that thie pertnined ta tire~e, battari.ea, and othar oelebl~ it~me which ~r~re oaeily moved nA "ato~k in ~rade" iteme . Upon queet.ioning o!' Commi.eior~er Rowlana, th~s City ~ttornay adu~e~ed ha had not boon involved in th.e formulAtior~ o.f the~ prox~osed ardinanac~ verbiaqe end did not knaw tha precia• de~tini~ion oP storage. Plnnninq ai.ati RobRx•t Kel].ey ddvlsed thw woxd "etozr+ge" could be ~.aplaced with "di.ep],ay" in eaah inetanae and thie wo~ld aatiefy the intenC o! the pKOposo~l ordinanc:e~ and that any aiqni.nq for the rr.nt~l cf v~hi.clea would oorne und~~z' the Siqn Crdinance reqi~.irgmente. Mr. Wnr~9eritsch etated khe businagA ltce!,~ne cauld pr~vide for the numher of vehiclea to ?~~+ on e aervice atation lat, mnd renting vohicle~ witir-our. a licenee woultl be m violdtion. Chairman Gauer aCatad S~e thought the or.dinance ehould proi~i.bit renta~ of re~YAA- tion~l vehicZea from d R9XVice stntion lot. C~mmiseianer Allred etated ttiie then woul.d be ellow:ing rent:al uf trailera but not recrentional vehi.cles. 7n response tc Commi.a~siane~: Farano's commenta con~ernittg the legAlity of tI1P. number an~ ai:e af rer~tal ~railera ~FarmittAd, Mr. Worder~tsch etmte~ 14 feet h.tgh by 22 feet lonq was w~all within the sizo of the trailersy howovAr, if the Comi,~iaAion eo desired, the ler~gtti cuuld ~e reduced to 18 feet~ that the enforce- ment prablem would ba ~r3atly improved ii zeferenae tu tat~.l.ity traiJ.ers wao removed from the pro}~oec~d S~ction 1.8.61.023 and glaced under Section 18.61.022 ~ko permiY leaeing of the trai].ere ,~s a matter o.~ rtght ar-d cuntrolled through developmen~ AtandardE~~ that displa,y be li.mitod and be located behind the bu.ild- ing linet and that there had not been an urdinance roatr.icting this di~play. Mr. Werdoritach conti.nued, his ccmpany, a~ong wi.th U-Haul, RyAer and Fasy Haul, was just startirig truck r~3ntals cro~n service atations, nnd he waated t.o opera~e in the oommunity on aii equitable basis. Commissioner Farano nuted that 'che deve2opment standarda should be used as +~ critaria so that the serv.ice :~t•ation oparators would know the :Limitations. Mr. Kel]ey noted for t.'~,e Gomm~~~.~on that the standard~ oould be more flexible, but by citing specific sL•anda~rds~ the stand~rds appiicable for one loca~ion might be different fron. ~.nath~ar., i.e., rosiddntial, commercial or indu3trial areas~ and that by provi~ions of a conditional ~ase permi~, the Commission w~uld have more flexi.bility in dea].ing with the great variety of locationa at aervice stations. Commtasioner Farano otated he was not cancernc~d as to the locatian of gerviae stations but in terms of what the o~,erakors Mantad to c.o and taking tY.A un- cesY.ainty awa} so they w~uld know where they stood. Mz. Werderitsch suygegted •a sat of devolopment standards tha~ would be applic- ab].e ~.n a11 circumstancas. Commissioner Rowland stat~~d he would agr~a with Mr. Werderitsch's suggestiont that he believed in the coi-ditional use permit approach wh~n the uee was siqni- ficuntly different than t.h.e underlying zor~e; that the service s~ation problem was transitional, with klle obviaus factor being a~plicable primarily to new con~tructi~n~ that each application wou~d be in a different f.ormat; that he prefprzed to have car~trc,ls u:ider development standards as much as po~sible to el~minate gublic he~arings, however, when ta~ki.ng aaout placing trizcks at eervice etatinns in res~ideriti~,l areas, obstruatinq thA atreetscanee and viewa, tk~is was not a so2.ution for the communitj~; that ~heze was no partlcular solut:on for all ai.tesj and that he did not see how the City c~uld elimtnate khe co:~ditional use perm!.t approach for many problems. C'i~airman Gauer noted {cha prnb].em was protectian for the homeowner, ae wel.l a:~ giving the businessman a chance to muke moneyr that he could not relinquieh the Cammiasion's righta t.o protect tt~e homeownerat however, if there was gaing tio b~ a r~ervf ~:e si:ation next to a home, he would wan°.: to know whr~t merchandise and services would be offerec~ t}iere. ~ ~ MINUTFS, GITY PLANNINf~ COMMZS9IGN, Novambor 12, 197~ 73-676 AM~NDM~NT TO TIT~,B 1Q~1~11ItEIM MUNIC~„Pl1~I,~„OD~ (Con~it-uad) Commiesionez Rowla~d not~d !ur `.ho Commiba-ion th~t pr~o~nk].y thu ardireanc• required each now eit,~ to bd reviewed on the baaia that the ~it~ •hall bs appropriate !or khd u~st and Mr. Kelley ar~~-i-~ad. •~cietinp statianr woula ba reviewed wh~n they oamo ir~ under cond~.tioti~al ue~ peamlke~. Commi~~ioner RoM1anA ~uqgsptoQ Mz. Kelley work wi.th Mr. HorC~riteah ;ind Mr, Denny in r~viawinq th• thrae genarn]. oites in the co~-mun~ty ta ex~lo~:~ po~~ibl~ ctenor.~lizetiGn that migl~k esti~ly the whol~ commu~ity. Mr. Kellay advised thi• wss a diFtiault ~ob ee one bsqan wi,th tha thrae c~sneral oite,a • thmn loaations of tk~e atestiona within tha er.eao, arcl tla~n thbrt ws~ the~ deei.yn o! n~w ote~tions beir.g coneiderdbly di~terent. Cheirman Gbuer otated ho did not ur~~lereL•and why the condl,Cionel ~iaa perm~t agproech wae nos: bainy retaii~ed. Mr. Wez~Serit~ch udvined rie uould provi~e moakup mmtezittla ~oz Mr. X~llsy's ~ise in oetting up tho difEe~sant serv~ce station arrengr~m«~nks and eituetion~ for use in Y.is +~naly~ia. Ir. ra~+ponee to Commisatoner King'n queotion conac~sning the reneor- khe ~er.vica etation e~ SanL•a Ana Stroet an8 Sta~to College t~oulevard wae recantly be~oxe tho Commise~an, Zonfnq Sup~rvisor Charles Roberta adviegd that undor Reporta t»d Recommendatipr~~a staff pose~ the question aA to the esppropriateneae of tho cun- versian of t.he servics atation aite Eor Ail and lubo o~orriti.on, ~nd no zon~.ng wAS cona idored at thr.t L• lme . Chair~ran Gauor raiead the mattox of vendinq nachlnes at service etet:ione, nnd, thereupon, Cammiasioners r'arano and Rowland xtated they wished to withdraw their nb~+ectl~ns concerning this mntter as they h+~d reconeidexed since the work eesslon h~~ld November. 8, 1~73. Nir. Detiny sta~ed Mr. Ke~ley had b~en communicating with him cancerntng tlie pro- Fosa].s for the eervice otgtion ordinance, and that he and Mr. Warderitach would be qlad to review the whole mstter wtth Mr. Kal.ley; th~t hA wo~•ld be working with moro citles in trytng to solve the pxoblemsJ anc~ tihat thoy we~re in cunt.:t wiL-t~ about 10 to 20 cities H week witYi the sr~me type of Qxoblema AnaF~eim was ~71AV~21CJ. C~mmiasioner Rowland noted that with rare exceptiona, ~he pro!~oeed ardinAnce was a w~l'1-~arittan document in its pres~nt atate ~ that l~cating ~lisplmy and trash ytoreqe into iks propa~ context and havir~g induatry take e~other loc~k at it, he would personell~ ~eel the proposed ord~nance was t~ good one. Commissior~r Rawland offerec~ a motian, seaonded hy C~mmisai.oner King dnd MOTiON CARRTED, to reopen the hersring and r.ontinue aub3ect m~stter to the meeting of Decembex 30, 1973, for further study and addit.tonal input: from iriduetxy. ADJOURNMENT - TherS bainq no further bu~inesr t~ dis~:uas, Commisaioner Rowland offered a motion, secondec2 by Crmmisaionor Allred nnd MOTION CARRIED, t~ r~djourn the me~ting. TI~e meetinc z~djour~ied a' 6i55 p.m. Respectfully aubmitted, ~ ~~.~..~ 7~~ ~i ANN KitEBS, Secretary Anaheim Ci~ty Planning Gommiaei~n AK:hm