The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes-PC 1979/06/18.'l.• ~ GI•~ Nal1 Anah~,m, Callfornia June 18~ 1979 REGULAR MEETIti~ OF TNE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COHMISSIQN REGULAR - Tl~e regular meettng of the AnAhetm City Planning Cemaniss(on was called to MEETING ardcr by Ghalrman Nerbst et 1:30 p.m.~ June 1B, 1~79~ (n the Counctl Chambar~ a quorum bein~~ present. PRESENT - Cheirman: Herhst Comnlssiuners: Barnes~ Bushore~ Johnson~ K{n~~ Tolar Commissl~ner Devtd arrivcd at 2:05 p.m. ABSCNT - Commissioners; hb ne AL50 PRESCNT - Ronald Thanpson Jack Whitc Ar[ Uaw J ay T i t us Paul Singer Joe I F i ck Annika Santalahti Jay 7ashiro Robert Hcnninyer Edith Na~ris Plannlnq Olrecto~ Deputy City Attorney Clvll Engineer OFfice Engineer Traffic Engincer Assistent Di~rctor for Plenntng Assistant Dtrector f~f Ioning Associate PlAnncr Asslsta~t Plenner Planning Cornmission Secrecary PLEDGE OF - The Pledge of Alleglance to thc Flag Nas led by Conmissioner Johnson. ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF - Co~nnissioner Johnson affered a motfon~ seconded by Commissia~~r K(nc~ THE IiINUTES and M071UH CARRIED (Commissioner Davtd being absent)~ that tht minute5 of the mect(ngs of May 21 and June 4~ 1~7Q be approved as sut~rniLted. ITEM NU. 1 CONTINUEO PUBLIG HEARING. DEVELOPER: BURNETT EIR N G VE qECLARATION DEVELOPMENT CO., 1~i492 Nilicrest Avenue~ Villa TE11TA IVE MAP OF ftACT Park, CA 92667. ENGINEER: kO~RtS ENGINEERING~ N0. ya94 (REVISION FJQ. 1) 17291 Irvtne Boulevard~ Suite 312, Tustin~ CA. 92680. SubJect property~ dcscribad ~s an lrregularly•shaped parcel of lan~ canststing of approxirna~trly i1.9 acres havi~g a fro~tsge of approxfine2ely 590 feet on the esst side of Henning Way, having a maximum depth of app~oxirtbtely 1174 feet, and being located approxl- mately 350 feet south of che centcrline of A~boretusr Road~ is proposed as a 10-LOT~ RS-HS- 22~000(5C) (Pl~SID~NTIAL~ SINGLE-FAHII.Y HILLSIDC-SCENIC CORaIDOR OVERLAY) ZONE SUB~IVl510N. SubJect tract was co,ti~ued from the mcetings of -larch 26~ April 2~~ and Msy 21~ 1979, at the request of the pctt tioner. It was noted the petfttoner ha~ reque~ted a conttnua~ce for four weal,s~ to the meeting of July l6, 1g79. 79-443 6l18/79 w~ .,,` MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMNISSION~ JUNE 18~ 1979 79-444 EIR NEGA'~IVE DEGL.ARATION ANA TENTATIVE KAP OF T_RACT N0._~~94 (REYISiON N0. 1) (continued) ACTION: Commissloner Johnson offcred d motion~ aeconded by Conriisstoner King end MOT14N ~D (CommissionGr Davtd being absent). that conatderatton of Tentatfve Msp of Tract No. g5~4 (Revision No. 1) be contlnued to the ragularly•scheduled meettny of the Planninq Commisston on July 16~ 1919~ At the request of the petittoner. ITEM N0. 2 CONTINUED PU9LIC HEAkING. OWNE:R: JAVlD DEVELOPMENT E~~VE DEGLARATIO~~ CGRP.~ 98;(i Wilsh(re Qoulevard~ peverly Nills, CA VARIANCE NA. 30;~~ 9021~. AGENT: STEVEN C. THOMAS, 9~58 uilshire E'~Nt~A ~N~M~~F TRAGT N0. 10694 Boulevard, Beverly HI 1 Is ~ CA q0210. Property described as an irrec~ulariy-sha~ed parcel ot Innd consistin~ of approxim+~tely 10.3 ac~es havtny e frontsge of approxlm~~tcly 463 fect on thc easc s Id~r of Brcx~kt~urst Street. hAVtng a meximum depth of epproxlmately 12N2 feet~ bciny located appr~ximately 4p4 feet south of the centerline of Ball koad~ and further descrlhed as 1250 South (3rookhursc Street. Property presently classificd RM-1200 (RESIUENTiAI~ MULTIPLE-FAMILY) ~ONE. VARIANCE RE(~IJEST: WAIVER OF (A) MINIMUM BUILDING SITE AREA P~:R JWELLINf, UNIT~ (6) MAXiMUM HUIIUING HEIGNT~ (C) M/1XIMUM SITE COVERAGE~ (D) MINIMUM UNIT FLOOR AREA~ (E) MINIMUM 5~';eACK AHUTTING 5iNGl.E-fAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVCLOPMENTS~ (F) NINIMUM RECREATIONAL/LEISURE AREAS, (G) HININUM UISTANCE EI~~~NEEN E3UILOINGS~ (11j BU~t.01NGS FIICIFIG ARTERIAL NIGth111Y5~ (I) MINIMUM NUMfiER AND TYPE OF PARKING SPACE5~ ANU (J) MINIMU~~ DISTANCE TQ PARKIHG SPACES. TEI~TATIVE TRACT REQ~JEST: TO C`~,IVE:R1' AN EXISTING APARTME.NT GOMPLEX '0 A 20B-UNIT CONDOMI~~IUM SUflUIVISION. SubJect pctitl~n was co~tinued from thc meeting of May 21~ 1979~ at tl~e rr_quest of the petitioner. It was r~oted the petitioner has requesteA a sfx-aCek u~ntinuance~ to the mceting of July 30, 197g~ fn order to submit revised plans. ACTIO~~; Commissioner Johnson offered a motion~ secanded by Cam~issloner KOng end MOTION At D(Commissioner Davld being absent), thet considerrtton af Varience No, 3099 e~d Tontettv~e Nap of Tract No. 1OG94 bt continued to the regularly-schcduled r~ettng of the Piannl~g Con~mission on July 3~~ 197y~ at tt-c reauest of ~he petitfoner. ITEM NO. ~3 CUNTIr~UED PUk~LIC NEARING. 01rNEaS: ALFRED D. ANC ~T~lVE OCCl.ARATIUN JO~EPNtNE PAIN4~ 711 South Beach fk~ulevard~ A~shetm, RECLASSIFICATiOH N0. -79-4; CA 92804. AGEtIT: G. U. GAaDNER~ G. 0. Ga~dne~ ~ WAIVER OF CODE RE l:lREMENT Associates~ 2k~ti~e Glassel) Street~ Orenge~ CA I D N L~~'~~if~~. 1~72 ~26G~. Property described as °ortion A- a . rectangularly-shaped parcel af land con~isting of app~oxtmatcly 0.3 acre hav(ng a frontage of approxtmately 140 fnet an the east side of Hayward Stftet~ ha~ing a maxtmum dcpth of app roximately 100 •reet. and being located approximetely 1190 feet south of the centertine of Oren~e Avenue; and Pnrtic: .- e rectangularly-shapad partel of land consisting of appraximately i.0 ac~e havinQ a fr...itage of approxiraatety 140 feet on the west slde of Beach Boulevard, havi~g a maximu~n depth of approximately 302 feet~ being located approxtmateiy 1190 fQet south of the centerline of Orange kvenue~ and 6/t8/19 ~~ ~. MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMM~SSION. JUNE lf~~ 1!~79 79-44, EIFI NEGATIVE DECLAMTION~ Rin~A~SIFICATION NQ. 78•79'43, CONQITIONAL USE P~RMIT N0. 1972 ~ ANQ VARI ANCE t~0. 0.. cont a i further described es 711 South Beach 9oulevard. Property pre~sently cla'sified CL (COMMERCIAL~ LIMITEU) 20ML. REQUESTEO CLASSIFICATION: (PORTION A) RS•720q (RESIDENT111L~ SINf,LC-FAMILY) Z~, r.. REQUE~TED CONDiTIONAL USE: ~ITHTWAIVE.R Uf MAX1MUMnSTRUGTUMLaHE1GNT,RECREATIONAI COMPLEX REQUESTED VARIANCE: (PORTION A) WAIVER OF (A) MAXINUM WALL NF:IGIIT ANO (B) MINIMUM LOT ARCA TO E.STAIfIISH TWO itE51DE~ITIAL LOTS. Sub}ect petitions were continued from the meetings ~f May 7 and 21 ~ end June W~ 1979~ at. th~ requcst of the petlcloncr'. I t was note~l thc petl tl~nt~r hr~s rrqucstcd a tNo~wcek contlnuencc~ to the meetiny of July j~ 1~j9. In ordcr to suhmtt rcvised plans. ACTION: Coinmissloner Johnsan off~~red a motion~ ~et~n~fed by Comnlssloncr King and M~TIUN ARR ED (Gornmissloncr David b~;in~ absent)~ that con5i<ferati~,n of Recl~ssificatton No. 7~i- 79-43, Gondlclona) Usc °ermit I~o. 1~72 nnd Vsrianc~ No. 30:f1 bc contlnuGd to the rogularly-scheduted meeting of tf~e Planning Commisslon on July ~, 1979~ et th.r, rcyuest of the pttlt~oner. ItEM N0. ~+ PUUIiC NEARING. INITIRTEa 9`~ Ti1E ANAHEIM CIT~ EI'- R N~,G~I~VE pk.CLARATION PLP.Ni~ING COMMI5SION~ 2~4 Eost lincoln Avanue. . ~ y _1y.46 Anah~tm~ CA 92~i. Sub,ject propcrty~ c~nsisting af apprUxlmately 1238 acres l~ocrted sauthwest and southeAS t of tf~e Ri vc rs i de Freeway at ~le I r Canyon Raad~ is propHs~C~TYrOF~ANANEIMIRStA-43f~00(SC) (RESIOENI'IAL/Af,RiCUITUMI-~SCEN{CiCORRIDOa, OISTRICT TO T E OVERLAY) ZONE. Tliere was one persun indicating her presence ln opp~sltion t~ subJact ~eq~aest. end although tlie ataFf repor: to the Pla~ning Commixsion daced June ld~ 1979 was not r~ad ~t thc p~blic heariny~ it Is referrcd ta and made a part of Che minutes. Robe~t Hennlnyer. Assistar~t Planner~ e:xplained the propased reclaasification covers the entire area {nctudln~ thE~ rec+ently approved Ss~te Ma Canyo~ Annexatlon No. 7 and Is purely a holdi-~g zone un~:ll actual development of the property takes place. Kathy Nclso~. 4121 NorCh -iollYvsle Drive~ Fullerton. stated this request is for rezoning fram an agricultural to ~n urban lard use wteyory; that tha General Plan shoMes a 75'~~re~ reglona) shopping center~ hiliside, tow-to-n~dium denstty ~fire stacl~on"utllitys ~~ gross acra) elemantary a~r~d )unior high schools, a lib~ary, - facilities. and roads; that this is a large area and IF no erchaeologlcel. paleo~toloqtcal~ or bio-ogic~i studies hove been do~e, there is no way to knaw what development wi 11 destroy; end ~hat the Weir Canyon arns located Irmiedlately adJsunt tQ Sants Ana Canyon A~nexation t~o. 7 contains over a dozen racorded archaeological sites, ta • highlY stgnificani nesting area far California's protected b{rds of p~ey~ ~nay contatn four endangered piant spacies~ and functtons asan e9rly tra~le route between the rsnchos anc~ Mission San Juan Ca~~istrano. She feit with aii these irraplaceabla ~sources iocated la~wa~iiately sdJacsnt to Ssntt+ A~a Canyon l~nnexatton N~. 7. it seems Inconceivabl~ that a negativ~e decl~ration could bc gr9nted wtthout ~dequate surveya being canducted. 6/18/79 qrr it MINU'ES. ANANEIM CITY PLANMING COhWISSION, JUNE 18~ 1979 79- 44G EIR NEGATIVE DECI.ARATION AND RE:~LASSIFICJITION N0. 78•7~-46 (continued) Robert Henninger explsined with the present ++ttlon there la no devclopme~t proposed; that thls Is purely A holdine~ xo~e to RS~-A-43~00~ (aesidentlal/Agriculturel) whtch is the CI ty's least ~iense zone, Chalrman Nerbst ex~lelned an Qnvlronn+ental impact ~eport would b~ requi~e~i when development Is proposed for thls aroa end the concerns w~uld be answered et that tlme. Commissl~ner Johnson stated the Cammission sy mpathizes wlth Miss -lelson's cl~arly-ststed positlon; thi:t tha Clty does not hav~ an agricultural zone And the property is currently undtr County zontny; thst cht area has bet~ discussed at many public hearings and this actl~n Is merely to bring the zonin~ under the Jurlsd(ctlon of the City and it wi11 be shown on tlie Ge.iera 1 P 1 an as the RS-A-k 3~()00 Zone wh t ch is the neares t zonc tl'~c C 1 ty hns to ayrlculturel~ but It d~es not demand wh.~t will be ultima~ely developed on the property; and that a~y action taken on the prope~ty wi11 requiro an envlronmentAl tmpact report. ACTIRi~: Cammissioner Johnson offer~d o mc~tlon~ secon~fcd by Commissloner Kln~ an~ MOTION ~t D(Commisyloner bavid bot~y ~,bsCnt)~ that the Anahelm Clty Plenninq Commisslon has revlewed tha proc~osal to rccl~sslfy subJect property from the County of Orange A1 (General Agrlcultural) Olstri~t to the Clty of Anehclm RS~A-43~n0~(5) (aesidentiallAyricultur~l- Scenic Corrldor Overlay) 2one on an irregularly-sl~ar.~d parcel of land c.onsistin<~ of approximately 12}8 acres located so~thr~e5t and southeast of the Riversidc Freeway at Weir Canyon Road; and does hereby app rovc the Neqative Drclaratlon from thc requirement to p rapare an envl ronmenta! impect reper t on the bas 1 s chat tnere woul d be no s i<~nl f I cant i~dividual ar cumulat(ve advcrse environm~.^xal tmpact duc to the approval of this Negative peclaratlon slnce the l~nahelm G~neral Plan clesignates the subject pro^erty for open space~ cartMnerclal~ hillsl~k estate~ low and low-medEum den~ity reslde~ttal la~~d uses commensurate with the proPosal; that no sensltive e~vircmmentel fmpect~ are invc~lved in the proposel; that t.he Initlal StucJy subrnitted by the petftioner indicates no slgnificant individu~l or cumulatlve adverse environnre~tal Impacts; and that thc Negative Declaration substentiating the foregolny findtngs is o~ file in the Clcy of Anaheim Planning Oepertment. Comr,lsslor-er Johnson offered Resolutlon No. PC79-11!~ and mnv~ed fo~an~SFe~ition for ado~~tlon. that the Anaheim City Plannin~ Commisslon does hereby g Reclassiflcetton No. 7~-79°~+6 uncon d(tionally. On roll call~ the foregoing resolutlon was pa~ssed k~y the foliowing vote: AYES: COMNISSIONERS: BARt1E5, BUStiORE. HERBST. JONNSON~ KING. TOLAR NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSEN7: COMMISSIONERS: DAVID Conmissioner Barnes indicated to Mlss Nelso~ thattof recelveditnandnthacahe~coPmmentsnwill the:se environmenta) concerns, sl~e would be happy be keDt in min d by the Planning Commission at future hearings. RE:~OLUTION OF APPRECIATION ..._ _....,-- Chairman Herbst exptained that Commisslone r Glen L. Johnson wt11 not be accepting a ney+ te nn as Planning Commissioner and this is h{s last maeting. and w~shed to p~esent him with a resolutton of appreciation signed by the other six Commissioners. Commiss{oner Jc~h~son respo~ded that these six years an the Commlssion have been good yea~s and he has en,jAyed every meeting; that it has been an uplifting time of hls llfe; that he 6/18/79 _;~ "1~ MINUTES. ANANEIM CITY PUINNING COMMISSI~N~ JUIIE 18~ 1979 19`~47 RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION (conttnued) would miss the Commisslon and felt they h+eve perfo~med a fu-~ctlon that Is necessery to the urban lifestyles (n today's society; that lt has been a f~ilf~iling experience And he is resigning wl t~ regrets and wished to tha~k cech ot' the Commt:~s (~mero. lTtM N0. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNEIt: ANANEIM REDEVELOPMENT EN R NM NTAL IMPACT AGENCV~ 106 North Cleudine Street~ Suita 4~0~ REPORT N0. 18~.A Anahelm~ CA 9?ii05. Sub)ect property, consisting CLA SIFICATIpN N0. 7b-79~44 of approxlmetely 1.9 ecres hevlnq approxi~ate frontages of 3~; feet on the eest side of Narbor Boulcv~~d~ ?.~5 feet on the north stAe of Lincoln pvenue~ 29~1 feet on the west side of Nelena Strcct. and 291 fcet on th~a suuth sfde of Chortres Streei~ i~ pr~posed for recinssifitetlon from the CG (COMMERCIAL, GENERAL), CL (CQMMCRCIAI. LIMITEU) ANL PD-C {PARKiNG DISTRICT-~~MM~RCIAL) ZONES TO TNE GO (CO-~MF.RCIAL. OFFICE ANU PROFESSIONAL) 2QNE. There was one pers~n InJ(cating her presence (n opp~sitl~n to suhject request~ ancf altiiough th~ sta'ff renort to the Plrnni~y Commtsslon dr>ed .lune 1Y, 1979 wes not read at the public: hearing, it Is refer~ed to and made a part c~f ti~r minutes. Gortmtasioner eushare declared a confl f ct of Int~~~st as ,I~f Ined by An~hr. (m CI ty la~ni ng Commissian Resolutlan I~o. PC7f,-157, acsc~pting a Con~'1 ict of Int~rest Cock far the Planning C~nlssion~ anci Gvvernmr+~t Code Sec.tion ;f>25 ~t s~q., in thet hc hes n contract wtth the Rwd~velapment AgPr,ty ~s thel r ayent end~ ~ursuant to tht~ arovts ions of the abnv~ Godes ~ declared to the Chatrm,~n that he was wlthdrawing from ihe fiearinq in connection wlth Kecl~ssiffcotiun No. 7~.i-79'~+W and would not t~ke ~~+rt in eftf~er the dlscussion or the voting thereon, and has nc~t dlscussed this matt~r wi tf~ any member of the P1r+nr~(ng Gommi ss iun. TNEREUPOIt ~ COMMI SS I~~NF.!t BUSNOP,F. LE.FT THE GOU'IC ~~ CNAMNER AT 1:~ ' ~, N~rman ?rlest~ Exccuttvr_ UI rector of thc Anaheim Redevcl~pment Ag~ncy, steted t~-ls request ls for reclassificat~~n pursuant to an a~rr,cmcnt betwee~ the Agency and Robcrt Btntl~y for a cornmerclal offlc~ dev•;opn~unt, on tl~e corner c,F the rr_aliqned Ltncoln Avenue end Harbor Boulevard, and pulnted ~~,t the culared re.nderin~s of the proposed 36~000 square fpot development. ~ie stated the dr.vel~c~mr.nt wl' I be r~re restrictlve than normal ly al lowcd. Jacquel(nP Ta~rcll~ Ebel) Glul~ of Anal~eim~ 1;ti7 ~orth Jasminc Place, stated they A~e concerned about the east si~r. Nherr_ tt~e club~ ~use is located. pointing out it Is the al des t ct ubhouse I n tht c( ty ; t~at they have bee~, i ~farmcd s i nce the beginn i n~~ of the discussi~ns regardiny re~dcvelopment and the Alph.+ ~ro)c:~~ :~At their property would not be affected and that th~v h~d rurchased tt~e home a~ijacent to the cluhhouse with tne unders[a+idiny ;hac lf it (s p~~rchased~ thcy woulA be relmburscd for thc fuil valuc plus. and if It had ta be torn clo~an, that area would be ~~scd for extra parklnc~. Shm statad they wauld Ilke to havc some ass~ra7;.c, In writlny~ that thetr p~operty wlll not bc affected. Mr. Pr(est stated the Agencvhavrmade no offer~ fo~ acyuisitfon andhave not tak~en any ,teps fa~ re~icvelopment in tl~at area and are ~rl:ing on che area southerly of Chartres, but that he could not~ howaver, say far thc Aqency tha[ nothing wlll ever happa~ in that ar~a. He statcd they dra not envis ion that erea be i ng i nvol ved wl th thi s deve lopment and wil) protect the area ss a result c~F this developme~t. Ne statrd they do not anttcipate this development or any deve.lapment along Llncoln Avenue wou~d impact the reslckntlAl area between Chartre~ and Cypress; thst hc rccogni:es th~e Commisslon Is being asked that he furnish th~ Ebell Club the assurance o~ guarantee that nothing wlll ever happen. but he could not promise that and does not have the power to make that comm{tn+ent; that he could say. however~ that the residential use (n that a~ea ls r~cognized by the ~edevmlopmc~t plan a~~d thst the full market vatue based upon appraisels would be patd for eny p~operty to be acqul red. 6/18/7~ ~~ .~ t MINIiTES, ANA1iCIH GITY PLANNIiiG C(IMMISSION~ JUNE 14~ 19T9 79-448 EIR NO;,, 189 AHO RECLA;SIFIGATION N0. ~S•79-44 (contlnued) t~s. Tarhil ~tated chcy Just want some protactlun ~nd ~ki net foel verbs) pranis~s mean very mueh ~nd woul~ like somethiny 1~ wrlting~ even though (t ls merely to thc effect that, to thel r knvNledge at thts time, nothlnc~ wi l l change. Mr. Prlest stated ha would be happy t<~ provide somethinq 1~ v+r(ting aleng the lines hc has Just discusseJ and th~t he uncferstands the qucstian, hut cannot far an extenA~d p~rlod of li~+e quarAnte~ that nothl~y wil) heppen. TNE FUEiLIC IIEAftING WAS CLOSEU. Commissloner Johnson asked for clartFicati~n regerdlnq che lc~cntion of thc property mantloned~ and Mr. Prlest explatned t1~e propcrty ~!ferred to was northerly of Cha~tres~ and Ms. Terrel) ~xplalned the property is o~ the c~rner of Cypress and Nelena Streets. Comniss ioner Johnson clari f(ed tl,~t thc Ebe) 1 ~raperty is ins Id~ the Alpha proJeet. Ne st~ted he felt Mr. Prlest hed enswered the c:~~cerns t~~e best he coulc~. Ne asked Mr. Prieat Tf~ as the Ulrr.ctor af the Redevelopment Agency. he felt this is the hfghtst and best use of this pro~~crty. po~nting out it Is thc gatewey to the redevelopment project. Mr. Pr(es~t replted he fcl[ it Is the hiyhest and bcst use for this property bacause the Plannlny Commisslon~ City Counc(I ond Redcvelopment Comm(ssion speciflcally~ In amending thc plan~ providcd languAge to the effect that the dcvclopments o~ th(s ~(de of Lincoln would assist in bufFer(ng the traffic fro~n the ad.jacent residential areas eno would be compatiblc with the residr_ntlol areas. Ne stated the proposed developmen[ would be a Inwer cienstty and they believa it fits tl~c~ overall urbanscape of that intersectlon, Commiss i~ner Barnes asked i f the proposed bui Idings are s imi lar in constr.,ctlon to those In the area a~d tf a th~me wlll be kepk in this area. Mr. Prlcst replled that Xhey are not exactly the samr. as the other bulldings~ but that the theme for the la~rer-~Ise bulldings will be kept in that Int~rsecttun and the structures wi ll be essentlally two storles high; hawever, t.he structuras will h~~ve different exter(ors whtch he felt woutd adci varicty. ~le stated the strectscape thert+e wlll follaw the pattern set forth in tlZe guide provided and that they wt 11 lnsure signing and othe~ exterio~ facets of thls development dn meet the same standerds. Hr stated they would not be in absolute conformity. 4~ut would be ccxnpatible. Chalnna~ Herbst asked when the developme~t wi l l be start~d~ and Susan ~hick~ Rodevelo~ment Manager~ replied that the project would be started tn late fall of this year. Canmissiane~ Johnson stated occasf~nally elaborate developments are presented to the Planning Commissiun and ~pproved and lac~r are dropped because they cannot fly financtally or the concept is too far out~ and that he understands that ts the semant(cs of supply and demand of the democratic system, but felt this is different because the City has an (nterest in this proJect and asked if the Agency feels sure this proJect wi 1) be con9tructed. M~. P~1est repl(ed tf~ey are satisFied this proJect wlli be developed because they have worked wtth the developer for nearly iwr, years and unlike most sltuattons wherc the Planning Commission is the primary body dealing wlth the developer~ in this case the Agenry is the ewner and has a contract for developmQnt and as part of the contract they will officially '~prove the pians and modifications, and any modifications wili have to go through the sarne process. He stated. additionally~ should the p~o,ject not go~ it would not be dropped snd downgraded~ but they would start thc process agatn. bi~ai~9 ~~,_ MINUTES~ ANAtItIM CITV PLAHNING COMMISSI01~~ JUNE 18~ 1979 EIR N0. 189 AND REGLA_ SS~CAT~I~N Nd• 18'~"!+!+ ~contlnued) Comnisslo~a~ King polntr.d out the staf~ report reminda the Ccxnmlxslcx~ to protect the resid~ntial area to the north~ es expressod In prevtous heari~c~s~ the Planning Commissian maY wish to conditton the request o~ accordance w T th spac i f f c. plans . ~ ~ 19-449 thet due to thc need ~r.development devulopment In Mr. Prlest stated It Is equnllY thelr Intent to develop in accordance with specific p1Ans b4 the contractiny party~ end they do have s contract with the developer and he has a subst+~ntial depos i t ~n f i le w) th the Agenev to insure ti~ey dc~ deve lo~ alon~ thos~ l ines of tho plans p ~esente~~. Chal rman Ne ~rbs t s tacrd i f lhe p 1 bns were changed ~ they wau I d come before the Cammi ~s 1 on and steted thc Gnmmi ss icx~ woul d wi sh to sec any madi f I cat ions or chanyes. Mr, Priost stated he bclleved therc would be structural changes in tcrms af thc englneering of the buildings as they work with the t~uildinc~ Division~ etc.~ and lt has been their practice to <~o back. to their Commtsston only when the ~lan itself chan~es. Chalnnan Nerbst stated thr. Commisslon would ba cr~ncerrted about the traffic flow~ landscapinc~. etc.~ and would rely on thr. Bulldinq Uivlsian to take care of the structural changes. Brion J~annctte~ archltect, stated they have heen workinq with the Redevclopment Agency for two years and [hey havc be~n in clnse contact with the Clty staff in all aspects~ and tfiat they do agree wt th t-~c cunJltlons irr~osed; that thty havc been working closely with the bui Idi ng contractor crmcernlny bu) lding costs and analysis of the str•uctures and the contrattor's ck7cumen[s ~re constantly being ~apdated; and that they have held to the budget. Ne stated the plans belnq nresr.nted ~rc exar.tly what wlll be bullt~ other than minor mod3 fications. !t was noted Environrn~ntal Impact ReRort No. 18'a was previouslY approved. Commissianer Jehns~-n (ndic~t!-d he would rffer a resolution for approval of the reclassi fheeEbell~Cluh~with'wc-1[tentassurance~whichtis ava11ab1emtothAmeutYthis tlmeethat provldd t tliei r praperty wi 1 1 not be af fecte~l. ACTION: Commiasioner Johnson offered Resalutlon No. PC7q-115 art~cJ moved for (t~ passage anil adopti~n. that the Anaheim City Planning Cort*nisslon does he~cby grant Petition far Reclassificatlon No. 7~-19'4~. sub)cct to Interdepartmental Committee rec~mmendations. Un roll eall, the fore~oing resoiution was passed by the follawing vote: AYES : GQMMI SS I ONE RS : DARt~ES, •B~SIiAftf'~ HER6ST, JOHNSON ~ KI NG ~ TOLAR NOES: COI~MISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: CUMMISSIOWERS: DAVID~ ftUSHORE COMMISS 1ONER DAVI 0 ARRIVED AT 2;05 P.M. CONMISSIONER ~sUSNORE RETURNED TO THE COUNCIL CNAMBER AT 2:05 P.M. 6/18/79 MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 18~ 1979 79'~+50 (TEM N0. 6 PUBIIC H~ARING~ OI~MER; CMJYON PLAZA SHOPPING E~~T~RICA1. EXEMFTION-CLASS 1 CENYER~ P.O. BoY l250~ Newport Boech~ CA 92b63. CONUI ONA U~ CRMIT N0. 19 AGCNT: GRIS410LU'S~ ~55 West Foothill ~oulevard. ~ Claremont, (;A y1J11. Pe~tttloner requests ON-SALE EiEER ANU WINE IN AN EXI5TING REST/,URANT on proparty dcscribed as en trreqularly-sha~~d p~rce) of land consisttng of approximately 4.2 acres located at the nortt~eest cor~-er of Ssnte Anr~ C~nyon Road and Imperlal Nighw+~y~ hevinq approxtmAte frontages of jTc~ foct on the nurti~ side of Senta Ana Ceny~n Road end 2~:0 foet on the east side of Imperial NTghway~ ond furthcr cMscrlhed as 571J S~nta Ana Canyon RoAd. Propcrty prescntly classified CL(SG) (COMHERCIAL, LIMITED-SCENIG CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONE. There was no one indicatln~ thcir pres~ncr. In opposition to suhject request~ and alth~ough the steff r~~pc,rt tc~ the Piann(n, Commis5lon date~d Junc 1~3~ 1~7? w~s nc.~t reed at [he publlt heAring~ it Is referred to anJ ~nadc a part of thc. minutcs. Ray Sanford~ agent r~presentinq Griswc~lcl's, was ~~resent to answer ar~y ~uestlons. THE. PutiLIC IILnRING wA5 CLUSCU. It was note:d the Planning Dlr~ctor or his authorized renresr.ntr~tive has determincd that [he ~ropose~ p roject falls within the J~~i:~ition of Cateyorical Exempt.tons~ Class 1. as define~f {n parayr~ph Z ~f th~ Ci ty of An~l~~cim Envi ronme:ntot Impact Re~ort Guide) tnes and !s~ therefo~e, Cate!~orically 4xernpt frcxn chc r~quirernent to prerare an E:Ia. AGTIUN: Ccxnmissioner barnes offerc~d Resolutlon No. PC)~)-116 and mnvrd for Its passage and a~c~n, that the Anai~r.im Clty Plenninc~ Cortx~issi~n dnes herPAy grant Petitlon for Gondittunal ~se Permit No. 1'a~o~ subject to IntPrdenartmcntal Cornnittee recanmendAtions. On ro) l cal I~ thc foreuolny resolutfan was passed I~Y the fol lowing vc~te: AYES : COM~11 SS I OI~ERS : 6ARNES ~ BUSi10RE ~ DAV! U, HER~ST ~ JUIiNSQN ~ KI NG ~ TOLAR WOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NQNE ITEn NO. J pUBLIC HEARfNG. OWNER: SOUTf~wEST LEASING CORP., E R NE~ATIVE DECLAkATION 1?.312 41est Olympic (;ouleverd~ Los Angeles. CA 90064. COND IONAL U5E ERMIT N0. 198~ AGENT; WIILIAM L. SNELLING, 12;12 wcst Ulymplc 8oulevard~ Los ~ngelcs~ GA 90064. Petttloner requests permission to ESTABLIS1i AUT~MOBILE STORAGE !W D LEASING nr, property desGribed as a rectangularly-shep~d parcel af lnnd conststing of approximately 0.5 ~cre heving a frontage of approximately 62 fect on the west side of Mountatn Vi~rr Avanue~ having e max(mum depth of approximatuly 3G~ f~et, bein~ lncated approxtrtu+tcly 535 feet south of the centerline of Katella way~ anC further descrtbed as 1843 Mountatn Vfew Avenue. Property presently ciasslf(ecl RS-Aa43~000 (RESIDENTIAL/AGRICULTURAL) ZONE. There was one person indicating his p~esence ln opp~sttion to subJect request~ and although the staff report to the Plannl~g Commiss(u~ deted June ln~ 1979 Nas not read at the publlc hearing, it Is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Williem Snelliny~ agcnt~ refc~. he Interdepartmental Committee recortmendatlons and stated !;~ would like the Planni. . tssion to give thern some ra!tef in providing imp~ovements becausa thls lot ts ... 'ie end of a deadend street~ one lot away from a mooilehomn ~sark~ snd there is no vehicula~ ttaffit in the srea; that (t ~ill be a G/t$/79 ~ .. ., ~ MINUT~S. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JINI~ 18~ 1979 7g,.451 EIR K:GATIVE pECLARATION AWU CONDITIQNAL USE PERMIT N0. 198, (co~tlnued) contlnuing use of the use whlch h~s b~en there ~lnce 1972 ot recreattonel vehlcle storage~ excopt these vehicles w(il be eutum~btles~ and the lot was improved at thet tlme in accordance rvith the ordinances In existence. He stated~ tn the future~ If it ep~ears that Mountaln lilew Avenue will be redeveloped and if thls particular property be!comes of a vatue ta develop (n some manner other than a storage lot for vehlclcs. they would appeer bafore tha Plsnning Commission with development plans and the improvemcnts would be made at that time. lie stated tha property would be an lsland at the present time tf Improved~ and pelntcd aut a new offlcc b~llding was recently built rnd did not put In sldewelks becsuse they wouid not allgn wtth the street properly. Ne statcd he would like rellef at the present timc of Condlttan Nos, 1 and 2. Ne stated they would be w(iling to pay the foes fpr thc tree p~ant(ng, but would request thet L.he trees not be planted et this time boceuse they would not be properly malntatned~ pointing out again the lot Is strtctly a storage lot for vehicles. He explainrd the trash enclosu~es ~uld not be necessary because there would be no crash to d(spose of at thls lacation~ and to construct a block wall far the trast~ areas at t1ii~ time miqht not be in the proper locatton far future development. Chairman Herbst pointed out a waive~• uf tf~e sldcwAlk requlrement would have to be obtained frcxn the City Eng(neerlny DeparLment. Mr. Sncllin~ stated he wauld be happy to p~~st a bond insuri~g ~he impruvcments would b~ mede in the future when develoFmer:t occurs. Jay Titus~ Office Enyineer, exrlained tfie sldewalk reyulrement could bc waived b~r ~he Englneerlnq Oepartment, but It would be up to the Planninh Cortmission's discretlon tu weive the other improve:mr,nts. Ralph Sunderland~ Manager of Sate~ilte Mobilehorne Park, Indtcated he was representing the owner who could nat ba present and statPd che~e is oniy a chainlink fence ~ahtch sepa~ates about 200 feet of the prc:perty. NG explained the lot betwren the sub)ect property and the mobllehome park menttoned was the Plantation Nobile Escates. Ne staced the office butlding developed had constructeJ a G-f~x~t tiigh wall. Ne pointed out a lot of peopte In thc park have ill hcalth and are ccm c~rned about the fumes and notse. Ne str~ted tn 1976 when the bus storage lot was approved~ the Commission had required a fence and buffer zone with landscaping. He stated the owner of the park is not obJecting to the use~ but is r~questtng that a mason ry wail be constructed to protect ihe residents in the Satellite Mobilehome Park. Mr. Sunderland potnted out the ws)1 ~hould be along the west and south p~operty 1(nes and explatned there are about six caaches involved. He stated the wall constructed when the bus storage was approved was not qu(te 6 feet h~yh~ but that it does h~~lp wtth the fumes and noise. hSr. Snelling stated Mr. Sunde~land was referring to the west end of the property which has a frontage of approximateiy G2 feet and presently there is an existing wall approximately 15 feet long and the remainder is chainlink fence with plastic strips. He stated in the spirit of cooperation~ he would be wllling to conttnue that wall 62 feet. Chatrman Herbst referted ta (he south property line and the 129 feet to the existing butlding and stated a wail should be constructed in that area. ~ir. Snelll~g indtcated there is a possibility that that property will be awned by the game a+ner before it is developed in the futu~e and the wall might not be conducive ta future develop^~nt uf the property and would seperate the two properties. 6/18/79 ~~ ~, MINU7E5. ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JUNE 18~ 1979 79'452 EIR NEGATIVE DECIAFtATION AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT I~O. 1985 (continued) THE PUf1LIC NEARiNG NAS CIOSED. Mr. Snelling revivwod the map ~nd the IocaCion of the mobilchome nArk in conJunctlon wlth subJect property and agrced tc~ construct a(,~•fc~ot hlgh wall along opp~nximately 129 feet of the south property line in auditi~n to the G2 fer.t af the west pro~erty Ilne. Gcxnnissloner King commented that athe:r pr~~ertles rece~tly devetoped nortli of sub,ject p~operty are being ir+~proved with nice landscapln~~ in the front anJ asked Mr, Snelling if he would be wllliny to provlde simil~r landst~piny~ anci Mr, Snelflny replled he would be amenablc to providing landscapin~ ir~ tl~c front~ but w~uld want it to bc a descrt-typc plentlny so thot it would nat require constanY ~t~intenrnc~. Lor;untssiuner Klny Indlcatcd he dld n~t thlnl. tFiat would he very ettractive~, especiallv canpared w( th the others tn the area~ and Commissi~n~r Eiusliore ex-~lained the other properties In thc area arc being lmproved becausc thcy wcrc~ L~efore the Planninq Cc~mmission and these requirements were placed on them to u~grade their propertles~ end Mr, Sntllln~ indlcated the oth~rs had mcrely clcancc: up their proc~rrties. After a brief d(scussiun, Mr. Snellinn IndiGated h~ would b• w(lling to providc landscaplnq and tu put in chc drlvcw ay. f.~mmissloner Johnsnn sug,ested che petitloner renuest a sidewaik waivcr from the En~~ineering Ucpartment. Nc asked if Im~rovements arc planncci for curbs, guttcrs and pavin9 In the arca, and Jby Titus, Offic.e E:n~ineer~ explained the Ctty has no plans to Improve the area and that that conditlon has bnen placed on all ~r~pcrties and as they are developed it is ~p to the a~wncrs to provide thc (rKyruvemcr,ts. Commtssioner Johnson stated he would not be inciined to remove th~~ condition requiring improvemcnts, and Mr. Sn~llin~~ statPG when thc propcrty is developed they wouwhich i~~eing to provtde the improver~w~ts~ but right now it wlil hc used just for storaq~~ cantinuing use which lias beesn on Lh~ property since 1912~ and the only difference is the storage of late-model velilcles rathcr tlian recreational vel~icles. Commissianer 7olar stated the petitioner has indicated he wauld bc r~illtnq to plsce ~+ bond to guarantee irr~rovements ac a later datc~ wt~ict~ is tn campl lance wl th the condltion. AC710N: Gomm(ssioner Johnson offered a r~~ti~m~ seconded by Commissloner Kiny and NOTION CARZtIED, ~hat the A~~helm City Planning Commission has revlewed the propasal to p~ nniC autom~bile stora~e and leasing on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of ~and consisting of approxtmately Q.5 acre having a frontage of approximately E>2 feet ~n Chc west side of Mountain View Avenue, hawing a maxiMUm depth of ..rproxirnately 360 feet~ and being located epproxima[ely 535 feet south of the cente~li~e of Katella Uay; and does hereby approve the Negativ~ Oeclaratlon from the reqUiremcnt to prepare an environmental Impatt report on the basis that there would be no siynificant indlvldual or cu~+ulative adverse envlronmental impact due to the 3pproval of this Ne~ative Declara;ton since the M aheim Gene~al Plan designates the subJec[ property for low-density residential land uses commensur•ate with the proposal; that no sensitlve enviromm~ntal impacts are involvcd in the proposal; that thc Inttlal Study submltted by ttie petitlaner indicntes no significant indlvidual or cumulative adverse environmentel impacts; and that the Negative Declaration substantlating the forcgoing findings is o~ flle in the Clty of M ahelm Planninq Department. Canmissioner Johnson offered Resolution No. PC79~117 and rr~ved for its passage and ,ed~~ption, that the Aneheim City Planning Conx:,~ssio~ does hereby grant Petitton for f:onclitiona) Use Pennit No. 1~8~. subject tc~ che pptlPloner;s stipulatiOOxln+stetvi129afeet foot high mason ry wall along 62 feet of the Nesi ro erty fne and app Y 6/18/79 vm~o'nz.:.a~~,~:. ~,~ ;es.r.'e+ r~, "rt'^ ~ ' 4. ~i MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 18~ 1979 ~9-453 ~IR NEGATIVE UECLARATIOH ANO CONOITIONAI, US~ PERNIT N0. 1985 (contlnued) along the south property line Ad)~cent ~a the Satellite Mobliehcxne Perk ta protect the residents~ snd to pruvide en adeyuete sprinklar system and I~ndscaptnc~ In the 35-foot front setback ~lony ihe 6u-foot fr~nteye of Hountaln Vlaw Avenue~ and to provfde the 16- foot wtde asphalt drivaway on Mountatn Vlov Avenue, and subJect to Interdepartmental Commttte~ recomnx!ndattons. On roll call~ the~ foreyotng ~r.solution was passed by the following vote; AYE5: COMMIS510NER5: l3AkNES~ ~USNORC, OAYID~ NEREfST~ JOH~~S01.~ KING~ TOLAR NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE At3SEIJi: COMMISSIONERS: NONE I'EM N0. 3 PUEiLIC HEARiNG. OWNf.R: EUCLID SHOPPING CENTER, EIR~NC~GATIVE DECLARATION 11tt: James M. Feurstetn~ 2293 Wast Bal! RoAd~ ON 0 L R I N0. 19y4 Anaheim~ CA 92f~~4, AGENT: BERNAUETTE LULCI~ 17'i3T. Sunset Houlevard~ Pacific Pel(sades, CA 90272. Petit(oner requests QN-SALE BE~R AND WINf IN A PROPOSEU RISTAURANT on pr~perty descriheA as an irrec~ularly-sl~nped pArc~l of land consisting of approximately 4,~ ~~crPS havinq a frc~.ntagc of approxirtu~iely 425 feet on the south slde of Katella Avenuc, havtn~ a maxim~xn depth c~f anproxim+ntely 6~~ feet. be(ng locatad approximately 4d', f~ec east of the ccnterl(ne of Euclid Street. and further descrlbed as 161+G ~lest Y.rtella Avenue, Property pr~~sently classlfted Cl. (CQ~INERCIAL~ LIMITE~) ZONE. There was na one (ndicatin~ their presence in oppositic~n tc su~Ject re~s~st~ and ajthough the staff report to the Planninc~ Comniss(on datcd June 16~ 1!~7q was not raacl at the public hear(ng~ it (s refcrrcd to ~ind made a part of the m(nutes. Da~rell NI11~ the Fetitfoner~ was present to ans~r ~ny que~stions. THE PUEiII C HEAP,I NG WA5 ClpSEO. ACT10-~: Commissic~ncr Johnson offcred a m~tion~ seco~d~d by Cammtssioner King and MOTtON ~0, chat the Ana~eirn City Plannlnq Cammlssion has r~viewtd the propc~~) to pc Rnit an- sale of beer ~nd winc ln a proposco restaur~nt an an irreyularly-shaped parctl of land consistlnq af approxlmately 4,G acres heviny a frantac~e of appraximntely 425 feet on the south side of Katella Avenue, having a maximum depth of ~pproximately 600 fect. and be(ng loct~ted spp roximetely 4i3; feet east of the cent~rline of Euclid 5trer.t; ~nd does hereby app rove the Negative Declaration fram cFie rec~uirNment to rrepare an environmenta) lmpact report Qn thr basis ihae there would be no sfgniftcrnt (ndivldual r~r curnulative adverse envirunm,~~tal Impact dur. to the app~QVa) of this Neyatl~ae Declaratlo~ since the Anahelrn Genera) Plen designates the subJect propr.rty for general cortn~erctal land ~es cam~ensurete wiCh thc proposal; that no sensitive environmental impects arc involved ln the prepoaal; that the Initial Stuciy submltted by che petttioner indicates no significant individual or cumulat~ve adverse onvironrwnt~) impacts; and that the Neyative peclararto~ substantiating the foregoing ftndinys Is on filc In thc City of Anaheim Plsnnin~ Depa~trnc~t. Commissioncsr Johnson offcred Resolutiun No, P~C7,~j-116 and rnoved for j~s pagsage and adop;ton~ t1~at the M aheim Glty Planning Cc~mmission does hereby gran~ Petition fo~ Condltianal Use Permit No, tyyq, subJect co Inter~feparemental Commi~tee rec~+vr~ehdat(ons. On rol) call, th~ foregoing resolut(~n was passed by the foilc~wing v~~: r~YES: COMMISSIOIiERS: kfARNES~ BUSHO~E, DAVIQ, HEP.BST, JOH~iSON~ KING~ TOLAR NOES: COMM15510NEl1S: NOVE Ai35EN7: CONMISSIONERS: HONE 6~18~~9 ~.. ~~. ni MINUTES~ ANAHEIM (.ITY PLt1NNING COMMISSION~ JUNE 13~ 1979 79-454 ITEN N0. PUflLtC IIEARINf,. 01~MER5t ROBERT AND ESTMER J. €I~NEG IVE QEGIARATtU!~ CARLIN~ 3f,J2 Llggett Drtve~ Sen Diego~ CA 9?.106. CONpI ONAI. USk RMIT N0. ly~t AGEt~TS: DAVID M. GAON end P~UL J. NAMILTON~ 320 ~- 21st i'lace~ 11~nhattan desch, CA q0266. Petitloner reques ts pa~m( ss t nn t.~ E57AaL I S11 AN AUTOMOB 1 LE SALES LOT on property describod as an irregularly-sh++ped n~rcel af la~~d conststinq of approxirwtely 0.;~ ecre locaced at the northeast corner of Lincoln llvenue end iiest Street. having approxlmate front~~gr.s of 1~~) feet on the north sldc of LinGOln Avr.nue and 6~ feet on the eest slde of West Sir~~et~ ana further descrtbe4 as 102~> 41est l.ln~aln Avenue. Property p~esently classtfl~d CG (LOMMERCIAL~ GLNEML7 ZONE. Thcre wos no onc indicatirtig their presence in oppcsitlon to subJect rc~~uest~ and although thr staff rep~rt to the Plonnin~~ Ccmrnission ~oted June 1~.~ 1`)~~ wa~s not reed at [he public hearlny~ it Is rcfcrrecl t~ and r~t~C o ~art of thc~ mfnutes. Uavtd Gaon~ ayent, explalncd they arc propustnc~ a"sell-your-aw~" automoblle husiness whereby they would 1eASe space co indtviduals wishing to displ~y ~nd xrll their c~wn autor~iobi les on weel.ends o~ly and state~l they woul~l mekn cert~~in c.l~anqes to the property end would Improvc ic, '(HL PUGLI C NE:AkI I~f, WAS CLOSE.D. Cc+~nissfuner Johnsun askeJ if there wouicl be sumeeone on the premises dur(ny th~ weekends~ and Mr. Gaon repl (eci th~t hc and I~is R~rt-~cr would be prsscsnt, but that tt~e owners of the vehtcles would not necessarily have [o be pr~se~nt. Cortmissioncr Johnson askecl who aould keep the vehlcles clcan~ .~nd Mr, Ga~n replted that thc owner!, of the vehicl~:s would m~intain them. Cornm(ssioner Barnes osked haw long tiie owners would be allowed to lenvc their vehlcles on the sttr.~ and Mr. Gaon re~lied they would makc sure the o~mers removc the vehicles on Sunday evenings. t1e cxpl~incd they wish to m~+intaln b ~ood apnearonce to the property and wil) work ve ry carefully with the a+ne~s to make sure [hc cars are kept clea~. Commissloner King pointed ouc Et w( il be ner.essary to renbve the tr.o existing driveways on Lincol~ Avenue snd one existinci drive+~+ay on West Streec~ and N~. GAOn indtcatecl he understood that requi rement. Comnissioner Qarnes esked if ttierc are any plans to provida landscapinq, end Mr. Gaon replled there are no spectfic plans for landscaping. He explAined if landsc~ping is provideJ~ the property would not have ade~uate circulation to setlsfy City requlrements. He explained they plan to make significant chenges in improv(ng the app~arance of tl~e property an~ wi 1 i remove t~ie pump islands. Commisstoner Bush~re asked (f vehtcles would be left an the site If they were not runnlny or ccwld not bc piGked up a~ Sund~y evenings~ and Mr. Gaon replicd it r+as their intent(on to make sure the owners remove the vehicles and it wiil be a wndlcian nf the lease with tf~e vehicle owner. Comm(ssianer gushore asked whet the plens are for impruvtng and utllizing the existtng building. snd Nr. Gaon replicd they w(Il use the butlding for an office and st~ted they wlll patnt the building~ replace the wlndows, and qcner~elly fix 1; up. Commissioner Bushore aske0 if thsy plan t~ rern~ve khe gasalin~ tt~nk~ since the pumps wll) no longer be used~ and Mr. Gaon statad i~ was the Fire Department's recomrnendatton that bi~ai~9 ~~_ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING C(1MMISSION~ JUI~E 18~ 197~ 79'~+55 EIR 'JEGATIVE DECll1RATI0N ANO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1991 (conttnued) ------ they be yiven at leasc one ye+~r before they are required to removc the tanks~ and axplained they hAVa a st~ort-term lease and it would be very axp~nsivn to rcmove the tanks. He stated they would be wllliny to undertake that expenSe tf it appears the busi~ess Is gotng to wor~ out. Hr, stated the tanks are secure and will ~~t be dangerous. Commi ss ioner Busl~ore s tated he quest ions the fact that thr. tanks are st I 1 1 the~e and liave been th~ere tl~is l~ng when tlxrc Is no intention of using the property as a service station, and ~~e did not see any reason to allaw the tanks for anather year and felt even if they are ca,~ped~ thc~e could bc a potentl~l probicm. 11e esked if there are any plens to expa~d cl~~ business with additional days ~f opnratlon~ and Mr. Ga~n statcd t~~ere are no Immediate plans for cxpanslon; that this will he a weekend business only And both he and his partner have oth~r employmGnx. Commissiancr Bushore explainrJ if tl~e petitfoncr wish~~d to expand the numbe~ of doys of operation~ ht~ would need to appear before the Planning Comn+tsslon for mc~diflcailon of the conditional use perrntt. Jack 4lhite, Ueputy City Attornr.y~ explained the Comnlssion should includes thaC as a condttlon~ othe nvisc therc wlll be no limtt on the nurtber of deys. Commis5loner f3ushore statcd he did not havc anything ayainst the us~~ pEr se~ other than the fact thet he can see this developlnc~ into a used c~~r lot ~nd he did not Ilkc ta see Llncoln Avenue developed lnto anoth~er automablle rcwv, especlally bcc.~use oi the efforts golny on in the dc~wntown area far improvement, anci it 1~ the aateway ta the dc~wntown area. He did not fee) palntiny the building and puttin~ rmr~ automob(les on ehe pArking lot would be an imp~ovement to tl~e aree. Mr. Gaon stat~d the propcrty Is vacant now a~J !s an eyesa~e and it wi11 be Imp~oved and becon-e an act t ve s 1 te . Commissloner Bushore steted plans were appruved iR November whtct~ w~uld have dcfin(tely Improved the proprrty, but~ In hls o{~inion~ this use would be a Acn~nyrade to the property. Conx~issioner Tolar stated tt~is area is noc ext~emely nice at the prese.nt clme and he can apprectate the petttioRer's d~.•sirc to sfart a weel:and business~ but felt the problem is. this is the doantown area where millin~s of dollars are beiny spent for Improvement and allawing another automvblle establishment at this location wauld not permlt the opportunity uf upgrading the proper[y with a better use. Ne stated he couid not support the reguest b~cause all oth~r service stations conversions whlch have been allaved were requlred to not only close the drivea~+ays~ but to provide landscaping and brtng the bullding into conformance with comnercial codes, and this is not being done in this instanCe. He stated even If these th(ngs were being Aonc~ he would agree that approviny an on-site ca~ sales facility for weekends or evCry day r+ould be detrir~~tal Lo the area~ Ne stated there (s space avatlabl^ o~ A~ahelm Bouleva~d for this type of u~e~ and he has not heard anythinq to convlnce him this use woul~ be appropriate At this lucatton and allowing it would not improve the area. Commisslo~er Darnes stated there are some benefits to aliow this use o~ the propcrty end she had no ob}ection to the use of Che pro~erty~ but felt there are other uses which would be b~tter, but. o~viously. the property a~mer has not been ablc ~o fi~d anyone interested in the pr~pcrty. She felt this v+ould be an (nterim use and ts an opportunlty to get some be~utlficatiun on the corner. Shc asked the lcngth of the lease~ and Mr. Gaon replied the initlal lease is for six months and that he has a~ optio~ for rcnewal for longer periods. 6/18/79 ~ ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JUNE 1~, 1979 79•456 ~IR N~GATIVE OECLARATiON AND CONDiT10NAL USE PERMIT N0. 19~1 (~ontlnued) Commissloner Barnes asked M~. Gaon tf he hed heard from the property owner regarding development of the property in the futurc~ and M~. Gaon replled he w~s not sur~ of the owner's plans for th(s proprrty. Commisslon~r Uarnes stt~t~J from loo{:iny at the property~ she fclt there could be soir~e landacapiny all around the corn~r~ wtth the exception of the proposed drivewey~ ond f1r. Gaon stated thcy would luse a row of cars becausc they would lose some of the back-up ctrculeti~n space and tl~en it would not be profitable for them to use the praperty for the bustncss they have In mind. Cl~a(rman 1lerbst suygested land5capiny the area alon~ t~~e westerly side~ and also thnrc could ;;e s~~me lanclscapiny provlclcd near [t~e entryway~ and he felt they would probabiy loSe tl~ree park(ng stalls, Mr. Gaon stated it would be a cc~n::iderahle expc~nse to provicle landsca~ing and that they are planninc~ tc'~ SpenJ ,~ lot of moncy f~r paint(ny th~ huildiny~ replaciny the glass and having a nice slyn~ and the a~fditional expense of lan~iscapiny would probnbly m,~ke th~ proJecC prohibitivc, G~mm(ssloner K(ny su~gested the recauest be grantcd for a pc~riod of six mcnths~ and Commissiuner Tolar stated he fel[ tf~e propercy has nut been developed with anything nicer because the owner has nc>t been willfn,y ;o ncyotiatc witti a~y potential lessee, and is satisfled to let the propcrty stt until r,o~~xone c:omes along who is wliling to spend the money to make tl~e (mprovements, HC state~J the Commtssl+~n hes not al!c~wed any scrvice station convprs(ons with~ut the pro{~er I,~ndscai~Ing~ and h~ was concerned that a precedent would te sec if dpproval is granteJ. Ne also fr.lt thls would bp a permanent usc and the land woul~i not be used at Its P~ighc;st and best use. Ne felt the owner shuuld be wilitnq to work with a cfeveloper to m~~ke this corner u:able on a permanent basis And not on an intertm basis. Carmtssioner Bushore stated tl~e onerators wi 11 probably not havr ~:eys to the cars for insurance purposes. ile ttiauyht the spacNs w(11 bG ioased co the awne~s of the veh(cles and the vehicles will be Icft tF~ere, and asked if [hc owners rvould be ~llowed to park motorhomes at this site. Mr~ Gacx~ replir.d It woulA not be ecanomicaliy feasible to allow motorhomes because they woulA take up too much space, and Commissionr.r aushore po(nted out that he could charge for the num5er of speces used. Commisstnner Johnson potnted out the property has been vacant and ts of no use to anyon~ in its present condition~ and asked CommissionerS eushore an~i Tolar if they would object tu the use lf nlte landscaping wcre pruvided and the bu(ldii~y werc b~ought Into conformance with code and made t~ look like a nice office bu(ldiny rr~ther than .just a painted se rvlce statian. Gortmisstoner Tolar stated hc Nould still oppose the use because he did not feel it would be an interlm use ~d h~ c~id not want to see a used ca~ lot on one of ciowntaan Anaheim's maJor thorouyhfa~es, Commissioncr Bushore stated h~ was amazed that no~e of the surrounding p~operty vwners have appeared in opposition~ polnting out this is an ~bspntee awner who J~ust dc~es not cere about tha upkeca of the property a~d has alioaed the v+indows to be brake~ o~t~ eic. He did rwt feel this ts the type of buslness that shouid ba allowed because it wt11 compound th~ prablems~ even on an tntcrim basis. Cc~mmissloner Johnson stated he would not want the Commisslon to be irs che pASitlon of impeding p rogress and taking thc position of putting up roa~locks and wanted to be surn 6/18/79 ' „~ ~.- ..,~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PIANNING COMMISSION~ JUNE 1~~ 1979 79~457 EIR N[:GATIVE DECL9RATi0N AND CONDI_,TION L USE PEl~ttilT N0. 1991 (conttnued) not grenting the use woulci bn a benefit to A~aheim. Ne stated the request for o used car loc along Lincoln Avenue also leaves hlm a little lukewarm. Cha(rman Nerbst stated he felt the property in its present conditl~n (s A downgrade tn the nelyhbo fioad and he could not see eny relief In the near future because this erea Is not in the redevelopment erea. He felt Allowtng this use for e six--n~nth period with opttons fo~ renewal would gtve the Cornmtssion cont~al of the property. Ne stated he would nat suppart the use unless 3 or ~- fcet of landscaping is p~ovided and unless thc permlt is granted for a short perlod of time ln order for che Commission to revtew the use to determine whether o~ not (t has been compattblr with the area. Cc~mmtssloner Toler stateJ th~ City has only two Zoning Enfarcemrnt Offtcers and he f~lt tt would be Inpossible to pollce the number of days the cars ere beiny left on the slte. Chairman Nerbst st~ted if the use Is grantPd For a six-mnnth period~ the petitioner knows the stt~ulatlons he has madc rcyarding removal ~f the vchicles and he wlll h~ndl~ the situetion In order not to lose hls pcrmit. Commissloner Tolar stated he Is ~ot opposed to Mr, Gaon caning Into this city and opening a business and his remarks are net dtrectc~~ to him, but to the Ir-nd use, ond he did not feei thls would be a good use of this property. Commisslaner Bushore stated he lookcu at the remsininy yas tanks as a Potentially dangerous situation and a;wcd why thcry havc bcen allawecf t~ rcmaln, He felt there must be some ordinances w'th the fire codes to pratect cit(zens from fumes building up and caus°ng an exploslon. He s[ated abancloned servtce stetio~s have been a concern for a lonq time and he is disturbcd that this use could be granted without ~emovlnq the tanks. Robcrt Hen~~inycr. Assistant Planncr~ statpd the ~ir.r, htarshal has inspected the tanks and fcels it would be accrsptabic to lcave them in far another year and then have them removed. He stated servlce statlons were olla-~ed in sorne nf the cortmercial zones in the past as a matter of rlgF-t~ and rnore recently tliey heve been developcd under a condlilonal use permtt with a provision which says if a service station lies idle far one year~ then it has to be removed and the c~round returned to its raw condition~ but ihat some of the staCions were d~veloped under grandfatl~er ~ights. ACTION: Commtssioner Johnson offered a n~t;on~ seconded t~y Co~missloner King and MOTION CARRIE(~ that the Anaheim CitY Planning Commisston nas reviewed the proposal to pcrmit an autoriobile sales lot on an irregularly-snaped c~arc~l af land co~sisting of approxlmately 0.~ acre located ai the northe~st corner af Ltncoln Avenu~ ar~d Nest Streec, having approxir-ate f~ontages c+f 19~ feet on the north sidc of Lincvln Avenue ~a~d 65 feet on the east slde of Nest Strect; anJ does hereby approve the Negative Declaration from the requirtment to prepare en envlro~mental impacc ret~ort on the besis that there would bc no signif(cant indivldual or cumulat~~e adverse envtronme~~tel impact du~ to the epproval of this Negative Declar~~[ion since the Anat~~im General Plan dest~nates the subjr.ct propcrty for yenerai comrnercfai land uses comrnensuratC with Chc p~uposal; that no sensitlve envlronmental Impacts are invo3ved (n the proposal; thai the Initial Study submt[ted by the petltione~ indlcates no signtficant Individual ar c~mwlatt~e adverse environmenta) impacts; ana that the Neg~tive Geclaration subacantiating the foregoing findings ts on filc in the City of Anahetm Planning Department. Camritssioner Juh~son offered a resolution grenting Petition for Conditional Use Permlt 110. 19y1 for o pericd of six m~nths~ subJeci t~ review for posslble extenslons of time and subJect to [he GonJitions that a 3 to 4-foot wide~ sprinklered~ landscaped buffer would be provided alony 1~ast Street and at least one o` the isl,end:, along uest Street wouid be 6/18/79 ~- ,~ MINUTES~ ANANF.IM CITY PLANNINC COMMISSION~ JUNE 18~ 1979 19-45b EIR NEGATIVF OECIARATION ANU CO~~DITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 19~1 (c~ntinued) ~..~- _.._.__ __...~ .r____.._.__.. landscaped and thet two existlny drlveways on lincnln Avenuc and the o~e existinc~ drf~eway on West Strect would ba rcrnoved. Commtsslnner Tolar stated he diJ not think b feet oF landscepiny would accompltsh nnything on thet corner and reminded the Commission that th~y have not allow~d any cc~mmerclal devalopment fn service station converslr-ns unleSS they have been upgrt+ded tn commerclei standards~ end they have not baen Allawed wlth tar~ks remainlr~g In the ground. Ne statod he did not thtnk it would be feaslble For the retitloner tc~ ccxnply wl~h these stl~.uletions and~ if he docs, it wll) not be on a short-tcrm basis. Ne stated there are other places where thls usa could be lacated and nat wherc millions of dollars are beinq spent to upgrade the area. Commissionor Johnson stated he wes not argutng thet tl~cre is ano[her plece this business could be located, but hc did not belie~c it Is thc positian af the Planning Commisslon to tel) this petitloner where to put his business and the Commissi~n's Job ts to look at this parcel and to try and improve it. Gommissioner Tolar statcd It Is tl~e Planning Commis~lon's responsibllity as land planners tc. tblk about the types of busin~sses that should qa onto certaln praperties~ ~nd Ccxnm~ssioner Johnson stated the Comnission should constder only the request on thts parttcular parcct for thls parttcul,~r use. Commissloner Tolar stateS eve ryonc clse has baen required to corr~ly with these~ standards for servlce statlon conversir~ns~ and Comm(~sio~er Johnson felt requiring the landscaping and requtrlnc~ that thc butlding be brought up to commercial codes would be a.,compllshin~ that yoal. Commissloner Tolar did n~t think simply painting a Fu(ldir;y is brlnqlnc~ it up to sta~dards and hc felt [he ow~er of thr. pro;~rty is putting the Ctty In a bad posit(on because thc property currenciy does not lcx~k nicc~ and aranting th(s request would b, helping the owner by giving ~iim s4me (ncumc on the prape~ty~ and he felt letting him gct no income on the pr~perty unt(1 it is properly developed would be the answer, Lommissioner Busha~e stated he is l~cated in this area and if this use i, permitted with the petitioner stiputating to the days and hours of aperatton, he Nill be wetching the use and if the deys or hours are violated, he alll be celling the Zon(ng Enforcement Officer as a neic3hbor and not as a Commiss toner because hG is try(nq to irn~rove t~+~t ares. Mr. Gaan asked if sprtnklers waulci be necessary if ia~dscapln~ were provicled~ and C~mmissioner Johnson repl(cd the sprlnklers would be a ~a~t of his motion for approval oecause they would be necezsary in order to maintatn the landscaping. Robert Larl (n, property owner~ staced he had bought thc property approximately two ano one~half yeers ago and hss b~en atte~pting to leese the D~operty in O~dCP to get it re~velop~d; that they have !~ad three diffnrent ag~eeme~ts on th~ property; onr for an autanobile repatr faclllty whlr.h was denled by the Planning Commisslon on the basis that there wauld be t~ro uaes on the property; thr second request was for a Winchell's donut shop for a p~rtion of the property and they had changed their minds and I~Ad w~thdrawn the proposal; end the third requast was for a fast~-foad rastaurant and after approval was g rsnted by the Planning Cortmission, the company had encountered f(nancial difficultles and canceiled thelr plans. Ne steted they heve been (n negotiation wtth b Firestone tire sCore, but hava not come to terr+~s and they feel they havc been ve ry r~asonsblc; that they are nnt novices in the investme~c rentai buslness and have negotlated leases wtth Shel) Oil Cexnpany ~d hlidas Mufflers~ etc.~ who a~e tenants ln their facllities in San Diego County and [hey a~e very sattsfted and there are no problems an~ their developments arP 5/ 18! ~~ ~ ~ MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLAHNIH~G CQ MM15510N, JUNE 1R~ 1g7y 79-459 EIR NEGIITIVE DECIARAT,ION AND CON OITtONAI USE PERMIT N0. 1991 (cantlnued) beeutiful. Ne steted the unsi~h tly ~ppoaranca of this pr~perty Is not the fault ~f the property owner~ polntlny o~,t the chlldren frcxn th~ hlqh schoo) heve vendaliz°d thc property mnny tlmes; that trash has been durnped on thc prope~ty and th~y have reau~sted the polic.e r.o help them~ but they have not a~{~nred; thet these gentlemen want to st~rt an u~trled business of pcoplc sellin~~ thelr awn cars ~nd havc negottatcd a IG~se to try and utllir.e this corner for six manths anJ~ If thP buslness i, successful~ th~y have en optlon to renew the leasc for Mo~ fiv~-year pe~lods. Ne S~At.Pd the property (s zoned for this kind of busincss and the Fi re Marsl~ai I~es not objr.cted to thc und~r~round t~nks ~nd tl~at is~ thelr respnnsiblltty. Ile exolained the ta~{~s are capped end locked and werr. checke~i whcn hc bouc~ht thc properiy. Ne sug~aested tl~e COmmi SS IOn g~ant thc reques c for a s i x- month perl~d to permit Mr. Gaon to try the busincss and then if tt dc~~ti succeecf~ sugqested th~ Commtssic,n rcqulre th~t a 3-ta~t high rre1) bc bullt erc~und the prop~rtY whlch would conceal the vehiclas~ and th~at landsc~~ping coulci be put In at th~t tlmr., He stAted he would likc to have the property cor~~letr.ly reJevclo~c~f ~nd if the Pinnninc~ Commission denles t1~1 s r~q~~cst, SomconQ w' 1 1 con~e alang wf~o wl 1 I be wl ! 1 irq to ne~~ot latc and rcdevtlop thc property s(mi lor to what wes praposed by the fasC-f~ od restrur~nt, but t~~rt thet could takc tNO or tlir~c , e~rs. H~ stated if thc ust~ is ~renc~•~f for a slx-month pcriod~ thc propcrtv Ntll look better then ic dae~ nvw nnd at the end uf the six-mc>nth pcriod tt~e Cc~mnisslon will have the pc~wer to rPqulre thet it be u~~graded. Nt felk It woulc! be en abuse of the powcr of !he Commisslon, whlch is a police powrr to protr.ct the henith~ wclfrrr. .~nd yood wlll c>f the cltizens~ to deny thr use. Nc felt it would bt unfair an~ unr~asonabic ta de~y it~ In his o~~lnfon~ anJ the use shoul~l he al l~~+ed wl th certein re~s~nabl~ condltlUns so thbt the cam~unity ~nd the peti tton~r woulci benef I t. -~e st~tccf he hed bour~l~; the propcrty at market value and they havcs not receive:d a dirm f<~r ihetr (i~vcst~ent In the two and r~f1~-half ycers they have owned the ~~rupcrty and have l~een peying isxes un it. Ne stntcd if thcs City hed wented boords place~ ovc:r thc hr~~en winclcn.is, he ~~ou1~1 be yle~! io ci~ it~ but nobociy h~s ever suyges tr.~1 1 t ~nd he ~~as nc~vc• r y i v~~n i t ony part i cul r~r thouqht . Ne ~,tat~d thcy heve four ncighbors who are sharlnq on~ of th~ part.inq lots an ~ tem~r~ry basis. Chatrmen Herbst ~-x~lainecl, as far a~ thc~ zr~nin~~ is co~cerncd~ the propercy u~ulA be ut({ired for t-iis use with approv~~l nf a conditional use permit whlch pernlts certa(n Gonditiuns to t~e irinosed~ ~ncf explaineC thet,e conditions hrvc bcen irr~c~sed on other servlce station si ces al l c~ver thc clty. Gcxnrnissfone~ Tolar stated thc property owner's con+ments th~[ lhc pecl tioner has neqo' ~tc~ a lease for six rnc~nths with cwo. ~ivc~year o~itions maF.es his u~cositton more solid, bcca~se (f It is a yood busi~~~:ss, itw(11 bs locatec± at chis site on a I~n~-term basls; thai he woul ci nc,t a~~rEe e used ct~ ~ faci ! i cy at th I s s 1 tc t s a gc~od use and he woul d not agree a 3-foot hlc~n wall wuld be c~ns~~,ered converslai ~f a service statlon to a commerclal property; ard that landscaping i; usuaily required~ but what is ptopused and suggesteci here is not an tnter'im use and is belny su~gesteci on scxnewhat less than an ad~quate basl~ for c~~nversion. Ne state4 he can appreciate~ as the c~+n~r~ they have not been reteivinc~ rent~ but dtd noi believ~ thfs is the ~.:e that should bc allcywcd on this trrner. Ne fclt painting the buliding and edJing a 3-fc~ot high wall with 3 feet of ~andscaping wi11 not mi+ke a better-lookin~ property and nllawing the use for a five-yeer pericd with a five-year opttn*~ would dr_stroy the bcnefit of getting the kind of use des 1 red on thi s corner. M~. Carl i~ stated the 3~f~t h i gh wall was suggested because that Is a requi rement of other cltles end stated the zor~ing permits this use and Lhtse peoplc want to ~o into business and he feit they are sntitled to thac opportunity~ end stated he understands the exercise of the cand(t(onal use pcnnl; ls an exercise ~f po11Ge pa+~~s of the Ptanning Cammisslon to prevent b~tsinessps which mtyht be a trafftc hszard such as a restaurent wlth 6/ 18/79 ~ {J MINUTES~ ANAMEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JUNE 1(~~ 1~79 ]9-t~60 EIR NEGATIVE OE:LARATION AND CONOITIONAL USE P~RMIT N0. 19~1 (cont(nuad) a t~+ke-aut windvw b~csuse treffic ca~ld back up to the atreet~ and Lhat che conditlanal use perml; is not for beautificatlo~~ but to protect the heslth and safety of the peoplr. Coim~tssloner Busho~e statNd the property wr,nr hes just ssid cve rything that needs to be sald by the Commtssion .~ecause he hAS ~eiked sbout the health and safety of the publtc~ but hss tndlcated thet no one has ev~~ tald him to plac~ bosrds ~ver the broken windows~ a~d that the st~+nd+~rds are higl~er in the Gity af Anaheim than other titi~s a~d this wouid be a very poor standsrd. Commlesloner Johnson explalncd to Mr, Gaon that he would offer the resolutlon for approva) rcyulring 4 feet of sprinkir.~ed landscaping along West Street and a I~ndsceped (~land ncer the remalntng driveway encf racandit(oning of the butiding for a six-month perl4d. Ilc expla(r~ed when thc p~rmlt (s revicwed fcr the ftve-year perlocf~ th~rc wil) be a stronger voice Por remodeling of the bulldtnq. Ne stated the. proparty pwn~~~Y cormients ~egard(ng thc five-yeer leasc dld not helr thc situetian ~d probsbly cost the petttioner a vote~ end polntcd out the property avner fs w~lling for everyone else to r~pal~ hts propcrty and fix It up~ but hc Is ~ot willlnq to do i[ hlmsalf, Commissloner Johnson reoffered Resolutlon No. PC79~11~ And moved ~or Its pessAge and adoptlon, that the Anahelm City Planning Commtssion ~s hereby grent Pettttan for Condttlonel Use Perm~t No. 1991 for a perEod of six mn~ths~ subJect to revlew by thc Planning Commission to~ po~slble extensions af tlme, subJect to the candltians chat a 4- foot wide, sprinklered landscape strip be provlcied alonq the West Strcet frontaq~ end a landscaped island be provided ~ear th~ rernaininq drive~~~y and thet the bullding be recondit(onnd~ and subJect tu Interdeportmental Commltte~ recam~endattons. On roll cell, the foregoln~~ resolution was passed by the follca+ring vnte: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: E3ARNES~ NERHST~ JOHNSON, KING NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BUSNORE, DAVIU~ TOLAft AE SE~iT: GOMMI SS I ONE:RS : NQNC 6/18179 7~-4r, ~ ITEM N0. lq PUBLIC HEARINt;. OW~IER: A!tAHE1M UMITCD MF.THODIST ~ E DECLARIITION CI~URCF;~ 1~~~ Souf.h St~t~ Col iP~e doulcvard~ Anahclm~ 0. 1Q93 CA 92~Of , 11GE~IT; EPRL G. PETERS~N, 13IIA1 Prospect Ave~ue~ S~~r,t~ Ana. C11 ~27~~, Petltl~ner re!quests pcrmisslon t~ EST~BIISN A CNIL~ ~AY CAR~ CENTER IN tiN EXISTIIIR C~tl1RCIi on property de.acrihed as a rc~ctan~ularly-shap~ci pArce) of lrnd conslstlnq of approximately ~i.~ ncres loc~~tc~f at the sauthcast rorncr c~f Wagncr Avcnu~ ~nd State Collcgc Boulevard~ h~ivln~ ap~,roxlm~~te frontac;es of ~,t~7 fe~t ~n the soutF, sl~fe of Wt~~n~r Avenue ~nd ~~9R fect on the cast side of St~t~ Collcge doulPVnrd~ an~1 furth~r descrlhed as 10~~ South Stnte Col~eg~ Houltvard. Property prrscntly classifi~d RS-A-~~'~,~M (RESI~ENTIAL/AGRICULTURAL) '(1NE. Th~rc a~AS nne pers~n indtcatln~ her ~r~scnc~ ln ~pro~,iclc,n try suhject requcst, an~1 althou~h th~ staff r~~ort to the Plann(nc; Gc~misslon dnt~d Junn. 15, 1^7~ wAS not read nt th~ publlt h~~rin~1~ It ls refcrred t~ ~nct m~~1r a ~,irt ~f the minute~. Earl Peters~n~ ~nent, state~i the ~r.istlnc~ Sund.iv school hulldin~s wlll be utlllzed as classro~xns for tl•~e ~r<~-school; that thcrc ~,i l l I~r_ no r.xtcrlor chnnqes, but th,cre rx~uld F,t~ some ~od i f Ic~it lans tn Lhe inter lor r~nut reci In orc'cr to niePt State co~les. Mari~n Lillevlc~ 1~1~ Not'm.in Place~ Anahcim~ stnte:l shr. 1~ ~n~ of six ~rancrty ~wners to ChF so~tth an~l ad.jacent tc~ thc church ~+-,~ feel another chi l~' ~1ay care center is unnecessary In this ~~rca~ p~intinc~ out other f•icilities In thc ~rca. Shc stated tho~y feel the tr~nsportatlon ~f 1~~ chi 1drr.n to rin' frcr~ th~ sch~r.l t~+ic~ ~ d~iy a~~ulc1 Incre~~se the traffic connestlon whlch would result in ~n Increas~d nu~~her ~f ~~ccl~lent5~ requiring an increased dec-.3n<1 fc,r police ~crvices whic`~ shc undrrstoc~d the City coul:3 not afford. She stated they feel tt~is c~~~ercial end~avor wi I1 Icr~,er ttielr property values; th~~t they are also c~~neerned a!~out playyrr~un<i facilltirs fnr these~ 1~~ cFil~iren; and th~[ at ~res~~t they arr experlencing prol~lems with c~~urch rn~r+her5 ~l~iYin~n ~th!~ttc names ~n a st.'ip of grass im~e~lately behlnd their hlock walls an<+. hive ob)ects flying over thc walls into their yards, fotlowed imr~erlf~~t~~ly t~y .i p~~~son clinbinq over thc wall to ret~leve th~ frishee~ etc.~ whlch i~ detrimental Co their walls and lanuscaniny. Shc stated she has a swimming pool and is concerned iha[ it c~ulc+, he a hazard to thc~se 1 M children becaus~ some determined children -~roul+.i be c~pal~le of clirnbir~c th~• ~,.~11 if they ~re unsup~r~lsed. Mr. Peterson state~J thc cht lr.iren wi l l be s:~pervi sed. Hc ~ol nted ~~~t the locat ic~n of the playyround on the m~p~ explalning It is the large lawn area sc~~arating the main sanctuary butlding and the Sunday sr_hool hutidiny~ so tha[ the property ~dJacent to the church is scparatrc! frcxn the ciassr~nr~ t;uilc~lnas by th~ parking l~t. 11e explaincrci the only time the chllrlrcn would be ln that parttcular par!cinn iot wo~sld t~e when they are betng drappe~ off or picked ~~p, ffe r_x~lain-~c1 the(r policy wi1) not permit parents :a clrop the chlldren off or pick tt~~m up at the curb and they wlll have to bring ttiem tnto th~ classroc~ and deliver then to the tea~her, and ~lyn (n and follcyw the s~mr. procedure when thPy pick up the ch(ldren. 'i~c explalncd ht had discu~sed t'e south portlon of thc property with the Fire Narshal anc a cF~atnllnk fencc ~nd gatc will bc con,tructed along the parking lot so that a chl~d ca~n~[ wall; uut of the classroom~ into the par~.lnc~ lot~ p~inttng out thcir cancern h~d bcAn that the ch(Idren r~l11 hP .~hle t~ get out onto Statr C~11e~ae t3oulevard. He explainpd th~y had not bcen t~ncern~d ,~bout the chilc.ircn c~ctt9ng fnto ihc neighbors' p~operty hrc~us~ of the distancc. 'ie stated h,; d1J n~t beltevP there h~ulci be ~ notse factor and atthough there wll) be~ hopefully~ 1~!~ childr~n enrulled~ they would not all be an t4~e playqrvund at thc same tlme and the maximum H~culd be 3~~ children sharing the yard at any given time. t~e ~tated thty wlll urovtde a<iequete playgrnund facilttfes and w111 h/18/14 -~ ~ ..~ MINUTES~ l1NAHEIN CITY FLANNING COMMISSION~ JUNE lA~ 1~7~ ~~-~~` CONDITIOt~AL USE PERMIT N0. 1~193 (conttnued) -- have adequate climbtng fac~littes In the playground~ whlch sh~uld help with the Sunday operatton hocause lt will be bttter equlpp~d and will he used by th~ church. THE PUBLIC NEARING WAS CI.OSCO. Commissloner Johnson asked where the parents would park thcir vehlcl~s in order to bring thc chlldren Insidc the !~~cility~ ~n~f Mr. P~terson replled thPir plan Is k~ have thc parents pa~~. in the pa~k.in, lat and those who ~rc ~friving north on StotA College can come (nto the parking iot and thc children ~muld he unl~aded and loaded at the eest end of the Sun~ay schoo) huildings. Hr, dld not think tl~c perents would park on Statr. Colleqe Baulevard because tt would be closer to pull into thP parking lot. He ex~lained they are concerned about the safr.ty ~f thc chlld~en and stetecl t1~~ parents travelinr~ touth on State Colleye would have a Chrough acces5 from the parE;ln~ I~-t Co Wa~ner Av~nue, where they coulci makc a left turn at the trafflc signal. ~ommisslon~r Tolar ask~d ho~~ t~e tax-free stntus which thc churc~ enJoys would Apply to the prc-school~ and tlr. Peterson ~xpl~lnc<t thc tax ,isscssor's ~fficc had 1ndlcateA LI104C portion~ of Chc bullding .ind classroor+s~ thc grass arca used for thc playqround. an~l that portion of the Darking lot USCt~ for thc pre-school r+ould be t.~-~cn off thc tAx-frec oxemptlon and pl,iced on the tax roll an~i taxes wouid be pald on th~Se portlons used for thc prc-schaol. Chalrma~ Nerhst explalned the Tr.iffl Engine~r hacl heen c~nccrned ah~~ut h~~ving ~ turn-out for thc pare~ts t~ u5e for loa~linc ~nd unloa~inc~ thr_lr chtldren~ anr~ asked (f their enroliment appltcation and regtstratir~n fo~ms could include a stipulatlon by thr parents [haL they woulci use the t~~rking l~~t for thac purpAS~. Mr, Peterson replled that they ccauld lnclude that Stipulat~on as part of thPlr wrltten policy. Commissloner Johnson scated the State has a lot of r~strictlons ancl askcd tf the proJect had been approved hy the State for this number of chllclrr.n, anci Mr. Pr.t~rson replied khat he had had preliminary cllscussi~ns with the llc~nsln9 aqCr y and thcy hav~ measured the bulldin~ and ~:xplalned thc number of childr~n permltte~ is based on the square footage of thc facility. Commissioner aarnes asked lf the~e ls anythtng th~t con be donc abo~st thc problem wlth the church members pl~~ying ba1) ddJAGent to thAir nelghbors~ hlock. w~lls~ and Mr. Peterson expl~fned thc pre-school chfldren will not be playlny in that ar~a and that Nrs. Llllevtt was refcrring to prohl~ms occurring on weekends. Hc stated they will take care of the youn~ chlldren Monday thr~ugh Frlday~ but are n~t responsihlc for the weekrnds; howeve~, he f~lt If the probiem is befng caused hY little ch{Idren~ t-~P fully-v~ulpp~d playqro~~nd NI11 hclp solve the problem. Comm(sslor,er Herhst asked Mr. Petcrson tn t-~ve thr. ~hurch announcP to t elr mer~bers Yhat Lhzy a~c causi~g an nnnoyanc~ to the nelghF~ors~ an~1 `~r. Peterson stated he would be h~ppy io disc~ss thc probla!r. alth the church uFftclals, AC710N: Commissfoner Johnson offr_red a metton, secnnded by Commissioner Kinq and MOTION ~~EO, that the Annhelm City Planning Cr.~mission has revtewr~! the proposal to permtt a chilA day carP center tn an existinq church an a rectangularly-~haped p~~ce) of tand cons!sting of approximately E.9 acres lacated at the southeasc corner af Wagner Avenue and ~~at~ Lolicge Baulevard, having apprnxlmate f~ontages of ~~7 fe.r.t on thp south side of Wagner Avenue and 4~$ feet on tt~e east side ~f State College Oauleverd; and does hereby approve the Nc:gatlvr. Declart-2ion fram the requlrcment c~ prepare sn environmentbl impact b/18/79 4` ~r MINUTCS~ ANANEIN CITY PLAHNINP, COMMISSIAN~ J!INF. tA~ 1~7h ?~-4G3 CONDITIONAI. USE PERMIT t10. 1~~~3 (c~ntinued) report on the bas(s that there would be no s(gniflcsnt Individuel or cumulntlve adverse envlronr~ental (mpact due tu the a~rrovnl of thls Hegnt~ve peclaretton sinc~ he Anahelm General Pl.~n Ae~ignates thc subJect pr~perty for 1ow denstty resid~ntlal len~i us~s camiansu~at~ wlth the praposel; that na sensitlve ~nvlrnnr~~ntel Ir+pacts are Involved In the pr~posa 1; thAt the (nitla) Stuay s~ehml~tPd by the petltl~nor indicst~s no signiflcant I~dividual or cumulattve adverse cnvlronMental Impacts~; anci thet th~ N~~nt(v~ Decl~retlon sut~sttfntlat lnq tlie f~ragoing findln~as is on flle in thc Clty of Anehclm Pl~nnl^~ Depertment. Co~m~lssloner Johnson stated he vrould ~ffer th~ r!!solutlpn for apprnv~l ~n thc ht~sts that the pcCltloncr has agrend to r~ake en rffnrt ta allrvlat~ thc nc~g~avrtlon t~ the adj~~cent pr~perty owners caused hy church memf.~rs nn weekendg. Ne explnine:i :~ Mrs. Ll llev(c that the Conml~sion h~g not tot~lly I,ynorP~l hrr ccxnmentg and stat~d our wny of Ilte h~~s chz+nge~d over the years and therc Is a~reat ncr.d for chi1~1 dr~y c~rr. cAntPrs ~ncf ~lecing them In rc~ld~ntinl hames has causcd a lot ~f problems~ and hc fPlt thc church ccx~+inq forth and p~~posing t~~ u5e thelr fnclltcles as a child d~y care cr.nter could be ths ~~nswrr to the c xnmunlty. Gommissloner Jcahnson offcrcd Resolutton -~o. PC7`?-12~ and movecf f~r Its p~ssage ond edoptiUn, that the Anaheim Clty Plannfny Ccx~~+~issl~n da~~ he~~•hy grAnt Petitlon f~r Conditionai Use Permlt No, 1~~~?~ sut~Ject to the petitPoner's stipulatlon at th~ public hcariny to provtde in thcir wrTtten p~licles that t1~r parents of th~ chlldr~n wtll park un th~ facility par~iny lot ta load and unload thr chlldren~ an<I subJcct to InterdepArtmenta) Commlttee ~ecommend~tions. On rolt call, the forcgolnc~ resolutlon was passed by the f~llowinc~ vote: AYCS: C ONM 15510'Jk RS : BARNE 5, ""~'ORC ~ pl~V I D~ HER-~ST ~ JON'~SO-~ ~ KI NG ~ TOLAR NOES: C OMN I 5S I ONf RS : NO!VE AgSCNT: C OMM1551~NCR5: NONE 6/18/79 ~. ~~ . ! . 79-~14 ITEh N0. 15 PUBLIC NE~RINr,. 01~.~NERS: ALf~ERT SPENCER p~RTER ANo ~'R~1d~E D[CLARATION SU2~NNF FORTER~ 426 West TaPt Avenue~ Orange~ CA 92f~57. N N 0. 1~i9~~ AGENT: JOSEPi~ D~NALDSO~l~ ~SR~~ Jeronlmo Road~ 4100~ Mlsslan Vle)o~ CA ~1(,~1. Petltioner requests pcrmisslon to ESTARLISH A GY'1~IASTICS ACADEMY 11~ TFtE ML ZOIIE on property de,crlhed as a rectangui~rly-shaped pa~cel ~f land conslsting of appraximately ~.~ acre loca[eci at the nc~rthwest corner of Ceene Court anri KraPmer Boulevard~ having approximatc fr~ntac~es of 14f; f~~t on thc north side of CeenA Court nnd 147 fect an the west stdc of K~acmer poulevard~ and further descrlt+ect as 13P1 North Kraemer t~oulevard. Prop~rty presr_ntly cl~sslfled ML (1MD11STRI~L, LINITE~~) Z(~NE. ITEM N0. 12 PU9LIC HCARItJf,, OWNERS: DOMtNIC C, f.TCI•IANDY~ P, dEG TVC OECLARATION ET AL~ c/~ Elci~n U. Bainbrlc:c~e, 28^ South M~In C UI _ N L U C CaMI N0. 1^95 Strcet~ Unft K, Sanla Ana, C/1 ^?.707 and ELDF.N 41. BAINE?RIDGE~ 1.3~~ S~uth Matn Street~ Ur~ic M,~ Santa Ana ~ CA ~27~7 nnd J~~Sf PH Do~~n.t.nSnr~ ~ 25~'0~ Jeron Imo Road~ N~~n, Mlsslon VIeJ~~~ CA ~2G?1, PctittonPr r~qucsts pcrmission to ESTIt6LISM A GYMNASTICS AC'I~CMY I-I TNE '1L ZONE ~n praperty drscrthed ~s a rectargul~rly-shapr_d p~~rcel of land con~isting of apprc~xlmat~ly ?,3 ncres locatr.d a; t.he Rbu[h~dS~ c.orner of La Palma Avenue and Tustln Avenue~ I~avin~ ap~~roxim~te fronta~~es of 34~ fret on the south sidc ~f La Palr~a Avc~nue ~3nd 2~1 fer.t on the cast slde of tustln Av~nuc. Pr~prrty pr~sently classlfled ML (INDUSTRIAI.~ LIMITEn) T.ONE. Thcre w•~s no ane Indicating thpir presenc~ in o~~~~ict~~~ to suhJ~ct requests~ and although the st,~ff reports ta thP Planning Carr,lsslon datcd Jun~ 1p, 1'~?^ w~rc not read ~t the public he~rin9~ they are r~ferred to and rnadF a pnrt of thc r~inutcs. .Joseph Donoldson, »gent. explain~d thelr re~uPSt is f~r th~ use of t-~~ or~p~rty at 1381 North Kraener Boulevard as a tcmnorary factlity for a~~vmnastics acad~Ty for approximately one year until the pcrmanent facility nt the ~orn~r ~f La Palr+~ and Tustin Avcnues Is can;,leted; that the t~mp~rary fac.tlity ls ap~rnxl~at~ly )^^~1 squ~re fe~t and would be utiltzed frcxn t~:Q~ p,m, to ~:'i~ p.m.~ Monday throu9h Th~.~rsday, ~nd p~sslhly on Frid~ys~ and frnr~ A:O~ a.r+. t~ ~+:Qn p.m, ~n Saturd~y; ind that thelr nresent faclltty In H(sston Vle)o handle~ approxlmately 64 chtldren per class wlth t~ ee class~s per day wlth a one- h~lf hour hrcak betwccn scssians to relisve trrTffic c~~~~~~stion. He explalned thc ~ermanent facility at the corner af La Palma ~nd Tustln Avenucs will be 10~~"0 square feet a~d tt~~t ~hr_y would he operatiny hasfcally thC same hours; th:~t the facill[y would he built pr~ .,r(ly for yymn~stics with only one ve~tical post In the actual yym area; that they a~ould have an upstalrs ohservatlon arca where the parr.nts co~ild vlew th~ ~ctivities in the gym; that th~ reason for the temporary facll~ty is they wauld llkc t~ qet started as soon as possfble; chat tl~cy do have good potentlal in thcir present facility and scxnc of the students would ~c living In ihls arca and are on the competitive team; and that they are trytng to Ra~:e the t4A4 Olymplcs and a one-year heacf start would help that sttuation. TFIE P!~~LIC HCARtf~G uAS CLOSED. Commtssioner Barnes t-sked how many studtnts they woutd anticipate tn the permanent Pacility with the tncreased siz~~ and Mr. Donaldson replied they could probably handls up to a0 students, but right ~ow they ~iav~ no plans ta increase thr size of the operation which is bsse~i on the number of instructors with a ratlo c~f one co~ch per ten students. Chalrman Herr,st asked why an Industrtal area was chosen for th(s use~ and Mr. D~nalds~n st~ted b~cause they do havc young chlldren teking part tn the operation~ they would not 6/18/79 i ,. ~ M I t~UTES ~ AtIAl1E I H C I YY PL~NN I NG COtIM I SS I0t! ~ JiINC 1'' ~ 1^7~ 7n_1,r,5 CQNDITIONAL USC PCRMIT ~~05. 1994 and 19~a (continu~d) wani to be located at the rear of an lndustr(A1 complr.x and It is very dlfficult tn find a lncation that Is econcxntcally feasible for ~ gym o~e-atlon of this callher in an are~ near the strect; thpt thls locattan~ 2nQ feet er~st af Tustln r~nd La Palma Avenucs~ is alm~st idc;al becausc It dor.s havc r~ certaln omount of exposurr. and hos gcx~d acc~ss to th~ ~reeway~~ which rn~kcs it nice for p~ir~n[s clro~pinc~ ~ff the chlldren tor th~ sessions and p(cking th~m u~ latcr. Ne polnted out the stre~t In that nren 1s hning Impr~vcd and wldened. ChAirman Herhst stated thc trafflc nn the frec~a~ay :~t 3:3~ p.m. (s rrally hcavy and It is dlfficult to 9et In and out of thls industrlel ar~a. He dtd not fr.el th~ traffic for thl~ type aper<itlon would he c~xnpatlble wlth th~ industrlal area, Commissloner Johnson Sta[~d he was cc~ncerncd a15o ahout thc cr~ff)c ,~ncf ~greed that this ls ~n (deal loc~t(on for almost ai~y usP b.r.causc of the ~*xnosu~e sn~i woul~f b~ an IAen) locati~n for a dru~store or even a supcrn+;~rNet hecause It is a Maj~r intr..rcectlon close to the frc~way. He exalained that An~ihcin has trir~cl to k~er ttiis irca f~r 'ts (ndustrlal basc and the Ccxnmisslon has t~cen fightir~ a, battlc tc~ kecp tt.~ lnncl fi~r nda,gtrlal usc~,; th~~t ccrtainly a qymnasttcs cl~ss Is one nf the h~st thinas th~ city co~, -! hnvr.~ hut he has not heard nnythin~ to cc~nvince him that th~ use is ccxnratlhlr +•~Ith th~ Industrin) uses In this area; that he w~uld ltkc to Pnc~ur~r thls use ~in<f wo~.~lri I1M~ to h,SVe a nlce n~w buildln~ in ~ny other loc.itton in Anahe(r,, hut couid n~t su~nort It in li5 pr~sent lACatian. Ne stated thrr~ have heen ap~~lication, in that area fcr h,~ndhal) courts or something sim(1ar, wh~ch Is more~ comnatihl~ hecause the users nf chr (~dustrial area are abic to usc~ thc faci l ity~ but this gym would hc f~r [c~ichtn~ chi 1~1r~-n r(~',t In th~ mlddle of th~ Indu~tri~l centAr~ ond hc fclt tt ~~rc~ulci t;c c~xnpl~t~ly inc.cx~~natlhle. "Ir. Donz~l~lson stated most ~f the gymnistics oper,itions In exlstencr.. arr vPry small~ o•~e- man type operat i~ns usua 1!y he iny run by a n~nprof I t orqan i z:rt fon or Ufln ;~oach :~nd they arc [ryin~ to bulld fivc of thes,e ~yrn, In t~c L!>~ Anqcles basin arca~ ~~pDraxlm~tely ?2 ml les ap.irt ~ and then t,_i~~ one of thesc fac i ~ i t i<~s t~n~1 turn 1 t intc~ ~~n el 1 t~, nat lonal gymnastics club t~ handle natloni) and internatior~r~l l~vrl ccx~petithrs~ an~i (n nrder to he ab)c to flnancially handle this~ they v~uld hav~ t.o have som~~thlny to bact, it ,in~" have found tcachin~ thc children is profit,~blc anri ~ltin off~r5 thr_ onportunity [~ +ira:~ fron those chtldren to make up the natlona! team; that ~n a~eraClon ~ucti as thls v+r~uld r,rnys betw~en $lF~n~1~ to ;2f1~~~0 per month anc! leasin, ~ ccx*,mercial ptece of pro~e~rty wr~uld maka the proJect impraccical. Ne st~ted al~ *.he gyr+s ~,~ ts aw.~ra of~ tncludinc, thcir cwm clul~ at Nlssion VfcJo, are in an industriai zo~e. He sts~nd th~•y cansider this a great ~fecc of property hecause ttiey arc~ toncerned ~hout thc s~ifrty of th~: chi tdren an~ this praperty AfferS that ~afety~ ond that they arould not want ~:h!ldr~n !n ['~c rP<~r of the InduStrtal co~~plex a~l th the truck traff (c. ctc. Cornmtssioner fiushorc asked if stt+ff had tatd ihe pr.titir,ners ~houi thtie Planning Commission's conc~rns reyarding the lndustrial z~,ne~r,~ and !'r. Jnnalaion s~ated he had talked wtth the Planning Department s[aff anu It had h~~n c~~Sf.USSCd at length. ComnlsSioner Bushore Asked lf thls opcration r~auid t,c thr_ 5an~ ~~, tf~e one in ~ltssion VIeJo~ if the hours a~ould hr [he same~ and if th~ "!isalon `Jle,jn facility has an obServatlon area~ indicating hls concern regardin~ parking~ e~orcEaily 1f special rvents nre held where persons would he ahserving the events. Mr. Conaldson reptled the operatton wili be che same~ and rxplalned Che present facillty in Mtsston Viejo does have the obse~vatlon arca. He -xplalned a~ny ~vPnts to be held in the next year ~rould b~: held at the M{sslon VleJo factllty because t~-ey are cqUlpped to hendl~ them and they v~rould be held on -•~ekends w.~~en the l~usinessea in the area ~rs usually ctosed. ~/18/7'? ~. ~ MINUTES~ l1t~A~lEIM CITY PI.A~~NING C~MMISSI~N. Jl1NE 1",, lp7q ~~-1~/,/, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT t~05. 1Q94 and 1~~5 (continued) Commisslonesr Rushore asked if thcy hovc reciprocei parking aqrecments to supply edequbte perking, and Mr. Donaldson r~pit~d that they do have Anple r,irking and st~ted qymnastic meets would be hosted praf>ahly only once a year, ComnisslonP~ Rushore asked ahout plans regarciing the mtnl-gyr~~ refcrring to the brochurc submitte~i, and h,, Donaldson explaln~d It is nat in thrir plar~s at thc present tlme to have ~n minl-gym ac thr. •~mporary f~G111ty~ but th~y cnuid corsldr_r havln~a onr nt the p~rmanent faclllty. Hc cxpto!nnd thls means thPr~ arc 1? children In A mtnl-gyr~ class with a parent present for ~ach chi~d plus staff~ or approxlmatPly 2~ persons, Commissloncr P.ushore stated those r~inl•gym clr+sses wc~uld be hA1d durin~ the d~y during workiny hours -~~hich would confilct w(ch the wc~rkinq hours of xhe inrtustri.~l users. Commissl~ncr Tolar explained th~ Corxnlssion has tricd tn protect thc inciustrlal area~ but polnted out one of thr, ma]or ca~ crns of thls arca hns heen the traffic onto Tustln And f~lt this facility with thc pro~>o,ed hours af operatian would ~llevlate scx~e of the traffic conterns. Ne state~d he Is undr.cide~l rr.c~arding the nhilos~phy of protectinq the Ind~astrial zonc~ ,~nd wondered how had thls use~ ~rou1d he; th,~t h~ se~s it a~, r commercia) venture, but not a purr. cc~r~m~rclal endeav~r; and that he r~~lizrs this use woulci rc+t be feastblc ln n pure commPrcial zone. Ht frlt there Are some offsetting fact~~rs~not only frcxn the traffic; and felt if ~•~e do not provfde this type of activity and r,ake It posslble for these facilittes to ,yo into our c(ty~ the people in th?s area 4n~uld not be able to promote the typ~ of compctition wP wanc on a national scate~ and felt !t is an opportunity to h~vr a nice faciilty and a~~swer some of the traffic circula[ion problems in thts area, He stated there IS a questlon In his mind In rcl~~tionship to Tusttn Avenue and La Palma Avenue a~ea betn~~ a purely industr(al area because of thr_ ~ccess onto Tuntin and to the freew~y. Mr, Donaldson stated not only would this fac:ility bencflt the children~ hut also Cat~iy R1gby "iason is involved in the pro~ect and thcre wlil be a lot of television coverage whlch shr_ brinns, into thc are~ a~d tt Is a very positlve thing for thc~ community~ plus~ from time t~ ci~,:~ competitlve teams frcxn other countrles ar~ brcuqht into the~ area and she arrangrs fur those people t~ use these facilit(es for their practlce and workout. He stated they want Lo have a nice-looktny fac111ty and would not rrant to brtng internatlona~ tean.s to a~y~~, .~; the back of an industrla) can;%lex, which is the on)y type o` lncatlon they could afford if thts request ls denied. Chalrman Herbst askeJ thc pro~erty c~wner to explain the other th~+ proposed buildings on the propcrty~ and Mr. Elden Batnbridge~ ownr_r of the property at the corner of ~a Palma and Tusttn Avenues~ expl~lned that Building No. 3 shown on che plans (s for a fast-food restaurant and that they do have a signed lease for that pr~perty anci wtlt be applying for a conditional use permlt in the near future. He cxplalned they are looking for a bank for 4ui0ding No. 2. 11e statec~ thc traffic ~atccrns will be established and will not be changecf. Chairman Herbst stated he thought a fast-food restaurant and a bank wouid cPrtalnly sertously impact that corner trafficwtse, i1r. Balnbridge further expla(ned he does not yet have a lease for the bank~ but that they ere looking for a bank~ and stated thc driveways are fixed as shown on the plans and thbt no matter what goes into Bulldtng No. 2~ the traffic will be the sar~c. Commisstone~ Tolar potnted out banks have ber_n al',wed In thc past in ch~ industrial zone throughout the city. 6/t8/79 .~ ~ hINUTES~ At~AHEIM CITY PLAtItllNr, ~o-iMISSlntl~ J~~NE 18. 1Q7~ 7q-G(~ CONpIT 10'~AL USE PER' ! T ~~05. 1'~94 end 1 ~5 cc~nt ( iiuod Chairrran HerSst stated he has no opposttlon to a b~nic In the Industrtal zonc, but when h~e sees that they want to hnve a bnnk and a fost-fc~od restaurant In the snme area~ he c~n see a heavy Impact on the traffic at that corner and h~ wr~u1~1 h~v~ som~ r~servations grenting approval. Commtss(anc• Bushore felt It would be a good idea t~~ l004~ at the futurc of what may devclo~ on the corncr; thAt hc likes - Icica of this ~ymnastics ~vc~dFmy~ hut incorporating the id~a of a mini-gyr~ Into the ~l~n would prchably r~e.~n a rcquest for modiflc~~tlon of the conditlon~~l use permit in the future tn order for th~m to econo~ically survtve~ polnting out tlie Misslon Virl~ f~cllity operatns frcx+~ ~:0~ a,n. tn ?;~f1 p~m, for Chc mini-gym~ and Mr. ponaldson ex~lalned thr.y opr.r,~tr. the mini-gym only three d~ys e wcet and the (ncorre from that portlon af Lhe opcratlon Is only about S1~';~~ a n~nth. Conxr-Isston~r Bushore st~ted th~~ chi I~Ircn fram nc~es one to chreP or four years old wc~uld bc rc~ulr~d to have parents present at the CI:155~ ~nd that r~eulci creat~ ,~ dayttme par'r.in~ problem a+ith up to g~1 chi ldren In ,i CI154. Mr. Donoldson ex~lained there would b~ only 12 stucients In a n(nl-gy~, class at a time~ plus two staff rnembers~ for a tot~l of approxi^~atcly ?( people Includfn~ thr. chtldren and polnted out chi ldren r)u not drfvc so ~vot,ld not he needinr~ pnr~.InV pl~ices, Comr^issioner f3ushore staied hc had had a difftcult tt~,~ finding the r~~sst~n VfeJo factllty and he had talked wlth some ~f the neighhors In lhe area and the~ qymnastlcs academy has been a good nelgh~or. and hc felt 11~~ parG,iny sp~ic~s would bc .~dequate; haw~ver~ he felt therc woutd bc a problcm with hcavfcr uses latcr on. Ne expl.ilnfd the -~~isslon VfeJo facllity ts not located in a pure inJustrial zone; tt~ot there Is an automobile facility adJacent to it and a beauty college in the area; a~d that thc entlre area wouid be considered a ml~ed bustness anci industrial Zone and is not anythin~ iike the Clty of Anahcim's tndustrlal zonc. Commissioner David ~sked what thc fecs would bc for the students at the academy~ and Mr. Oonaidson replicd the fees are $20 a monch for the minl-gym and $34 a month for the regular academy. Ne stated he has not dezidcci whether or not the mini-gyr~ will be included in tnis op~rat(on and explained tt was stari~d by Cathy Righy Mason as an exp~riment and they have 5~ children ln the pro9ram at the present time. He explalned there are G4 chtlciren per class In the regular sesslon and they have two classes ~er day, Monday through Friday~ wlth three ses~tons on Saturday. Chatrr~an tferbst stated he felt thls is the wrong location for this fa~i1!ty; that thr Cort~mtsslon ha~ an obllgt~tion to the people rrho have spent m1111ons of dollars In the industrfal zone and hav~ ~sked for protection from the Cncroachment of commerclal uses lnto the industrlal zone. Ne stated people r~ant to .yo into th~ industrial area because tt is che~per~ and he felt the industrlal zonc has tts tntegrity and lt is up to the Commission to protect that Integrtty. Ne st~~ted thts area is a maln artery to the tndustrlal zone and thts type of business wouid cause addittonal traffic at 3:~~ p.m. whlch is strfctly the time when the indusertal uscrs are yetting off ~.~ork. Ne stated there are other areas in Anahelm and ln the near future thcre is a possibillty there will be Jun~or hlgh schoals avallable for this type of use~ but that a school for children in the industriai zone is strictly lncom~atible. Mr. Uonaldson stated he thought there were some gymnastics programs 1n the lndustrlal area, and Chalrman Herbst explained the~e are ccrtaln types of athletlc fatllitles allowed in the industrlal Zone to servlce the industrial area~ but thest facilltles will be servlcing the chtldren and not ihe edutts. 6/1$/79 ~r~ .~~ MINUTES~ A~~ANEI-1 CITY PLANNlNG COMMISSI~N~ JUNE 1A~ 1~7~ 1~w~+~~g COt~DITIONAL U5E PERMIT_ NOS. 1~~~~ and l~~a (c~ntlnuGd) Spence Porte~, owner of the property At 1381 ~Jorth Kraeme.r Boul~varci~ felt perheps these two requests should b~ discussed seperately sinc~ the temporary tacility rioe~ not have the same trafflc problems as t}~c pormenent feclllty. I1~ explalncd the t~mporary locatl~n borders Fullerton~ Placentia and Anahelm and has mor~ resldenclel tratfic anci Accesses other thnn the frePw~iy. Ne statPd on the ~orn~r of Kr~iemer +~n~i La Palme thare was fl gym facility colled Canyon Gymnestlcs whlc:h shnrcd thc Ind~.~strlal park wlth ther~ end hAS slnce move~d to t~noth~r Industrl~l slte in Annhelm. C~nisstoner aushar~ stat~d ihP Conmission hns not r~vi~v.~cd the tempc+rary fsctllty b~c:ause thPy look at it as an interlm usc hut fr.lt ther~ wauld he a ~arkin~ problen, with only lfi spacr.s~ nnd ~alnte~~ out scxn~ uf thc parcnts of the chl tdren in the prograr~ would want to stay ,3nd watch thelr chlld's progress ~~nd that some wc~ulr! be ccaming qulte .~ distance and would ~robably want to stay ~t th~ f.icility~ especially slnce th~ q~~soline cr(sis, and felt ther~ wlil he a parkln~ pr~~hlem. Mr. Porter statr_d Cer_ra Court can prnvlde on~sfrect pcirktng~ anr! Carmtsslone~ (tushore statr.d Cecna Court Is only 11+0 fcet long with horking s~.ic.~s f~r 1~+ vchiclcs~ and polnt~ed ou[ thcre nre no reclprocal p~rklnn aqrr.ements. Mr. Donalds~n stated a~hcn ihcir ~rogra~n ls qulte ncr~~ there ~~rc not that many childr~n; th~yt they starte~l with 1~~7 studr~nts In the Mlsslon 1'leJo fac(1(ty ancJ now have ~ver 46~ students tn thc e;ntirr_ gymnastics program. Commiss(oncr 8u5horr asked if this locatlon would h~ the sho~rcase qym refprred to~ wondering what wil) prompt the tclevision coveraqc rnentioned~ and Mr, Don.3ldson replled thai it would not bcc~usc ~ speclal gym IS necessary to ~~t~ndlc thn~c type mects. He explalned Anahclm will bc rec~tving the televislon covrrage ill the tlme because every three m~nths Cathy Rigliy 'lason Is lnvolved in an awards progra~+s inclu~iinn the parents of tha stu~lents whcrr av+ards are prr_Sented to tF~e partic(pants. Comnlssloncr t3ushare polnted aut to ~~r. Porter that h(ghcr fces would be requlred f~r the trafflc slgnal assessment fee since this us~ would be considered a commercli) use~ and explain~d the approva) would bc only for th~ term of thc leasc~ anA Robert Nenninger explaincd the ciifferencc between the lndustrlal and ccxnmerctal fces~ and Mr. Parter stated hc~ would be witling t~ go alony r~lth those fees. Corxnlssioncr Johnson stated he feels thls 9Ymn~stics academy would he a wonderful thing for the City of Anahcim and he would like to havr it in Anaheim scx~ewhere because It is right~ but he is faced wtth mtxed emotlons betwepn having this Installatlon which Is rtght and h~~ving it vlolate the land pl~~nning o~htcli ts his lob~ ~ncf it has been his Job tp protect the lndustrlal tntegrity whlch h~s been lald down by the City fathers many years ago an~. that ts t~ have a gaod Indu~strl~l basc. Ne stated he could not sce that this would t~e the r(ght use o~ th(s pr~perty althou~h tl,at partic~~lar property has been hurt already with srxne marglna) uses, which (s the only thing In favor of this request. Commlssioner Barnes stated she h.~s the same ftelin~gs and cannot think of anytfing ntcer ~or Anaheim~ plus th~cre are publlc relations benefits to thc City. She stated a dcfinltlve answer has not be~n ~stablishcd as to wfiere. If anywhere, we would w~nt this kind of commercial use or any klnd of ccxnmercial use in the industrial area~ and pointed out a~tudy is being prepared at the presen~ time. Rabert Henningcr~ Assistant Planncr~ stated stAff Is wvrking ~n some guideltnes and that report should be pr~sented in the ncar future. ~/18/7A M I ~1UTCS, A~IJIHE I N C I TY PLANN I NG COMM ( SS 10~~ ~ June 1~~ 197~ 7Q•1+~~ CO~~DITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 1~4 and 1~~5_(contlnued) Commissloner 9arnes stated the Commisston says they do n~t wAnt commrrclal uses In ~-~ (ndustrl~l area r~nd then allows hanks rc~us~ they servic~ the in~lustrl~l area, and she hds ag~eed with that ln the nASL. Sha reminded th~ Co~missl~n th~t .~t the last meeGing they had approved n restaurant wlth on-sale heer and ~rlnc In this are~H. She sta~ted there ar'e reports on the amount of industr(ai areA left end a r~p~rt Is being prcpnrcd regarding areas ~~hlch c~u1J be considcred for ccxm+~rclal uses In the in~lustrl~l ~reas which are fronting on busy streets, etc.; that she looks at tt~ls property whlch ls seoarated by the basln and two of the buslest strc~e[s in chc arca and wonders ~ihac Industry woul~i wr~nt to moye there. She stated her tendrncy ~t the present tir+c is t~ vote In favor of the requcst sincr. there (s considr_ration for a hanl• at that locatlon wlth tr:iffic at all hours of thc day~ which shc felt would not hr,nefit thc industrtal ~irc~i. Chairman Nerhst stated restaurants and banks h~~vr_ been approved In thc lncJustrlal Area because thcy Ao servicc the people who w~rk there and would hr. crn+p~tihle. Commissioner Tolar felt witf, a condittonal use pcrmlt the Ca~lsslon wlll be ablc to control wh~it gufs on that corner; howevcr~ thcre are ~ther fnctors to consicier and ~olnted out there are quasl-cornm~~rcial industrial ~rc~perties which CalTrans has h~d left over which m(ght be adaptahlc to thls use~ and ref~rrecf to thc pr~~rrty ~~t Lincoln ~~nd the 57 Frceway which cannot be cieveloped wtth ariy ty~c of he~vy corm~crcial use b~cause of the Ingress and egress. ar~d also referred to thc property behtncl the RinkPr devel~,pment. Chalrman Herbst ~tated therc are sites he f~•lt thc CommiSSlon c~~ul~i h~-~ i developer wtth, but he eoul~i not help with this sitc. Comm(ssloner `~arnes suggested this hearine~ bc c~ntinuecJ until the study is rec~lved because it woutd show varlous altcrn~~t(ves~ explainin~; st.~ff is doing a study based on lots cf testimony and it is suppos~d to In~icate which arras nre sultable for commerelal uses. She explained the c~~'titioner is riskin~ thc ch~nce of this hcinq turned down and she felt this is prohably one of t`~e prime areas that will hc~ desi9nated as a commerclal slte~ and wondered if the petltinner would like a contlnuancf;. Mr. Danalds~n stated he has t~~e signed leased for the tempor~ry property whlch includes the stipulatton regarding approval of this portion~ an~i he wilt he paying on the lease starting the 20th of this month. Commissloner Tolar asked t~+c petltianer If it would be accept~ble if the permlt were granted for ane year In order to giv~ hlm the opportunity to flnd anothcr suitable loGation~ and Mr. Donaldson st~ced he would be concerned about the aQprova) for one year becau5e it cculd take two months for negotiatl~n~ an~i isked that the permit b~e granted far lE3 months. Cnm~isstoner Barnes explalned thc petitloner could requcst an axtensloe~ of time and Judging on whether or not he had ~een looking fpr another faciltty, thc Commissior~ would be understandin9. ACTION: Commissloner Tolar offered a rnotion, seconded by Commissioncr David and MOTION ARalEO~ that the Anaheim Clty Planning Commisslon has revter~ed the proposal to pernlt a gymnastits academy In the ML (Industrial, Limit~d) Zons on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately Q.5 acre located at the northwest corner of Ce~na Court and Kraemer Boulevard, having approxlmate frontages of 140 fPet on the north side of Ceena Court ~nd 147 feet on the west slde of Yraemer Boulevard; And dor.s hereby approve the Negatlve Declaration from the requlrement to prepare an envtronmental impact report on the basts that there would be no stgnificani tndividual or cumulative adverse environmental impact due to the ap~roval of thts Wegative Qeclaration since the Anaheim 6/t8/79 ~ M I NlITES. ANA1if. I M C ITY PL11taN I NG C~MM I 55 I 0~~ ~ JUNE 18 ~ 197~ CONOITIO~~AL USE PERHIT NOS. 1 ~N and 1~'~~ ~continued) ~ 7^-G7~ Genera) Plan designates the subJect pr~perty fo~ general Industrlal land uses ccx+imensurate wlth the propasal; thet no ~ensitlve environmental Impacts arn Involved ln the proposal; that the Initlal Study suMnltted by the petitioner Indlcates no signi(IcAnt Indlvldual or cumutative adverse envirnr~~ental Impacts; anci tt~at the t~egatlve Declaratlon substantla~ing thc foregoiny findings Is on file In the Clty o( Anaheim Plann(ng Department. Cormilssioner 1'olar offere~ ~ resolutlon calling for aoproval of Condltlanal Use Permlt No. 1~~4 for a perlod aF 1P montl~s. to automatlcally cxpirr_ at the end o1' tho 1P, months. Chalrman Hcrbst Indicated hc would votc against the rptolutlon sincc this Is ln thc industrial area and he felt It would be an~ther fcx~t in the eloor for comnerclal uses in the lndustrlal zones ancl felt lt woulcf be ~hc trutch they neecl for hreaking down the incfustrial arca. Coruntssloner Darnes lndicat~d she would 11'r,e tl,r resolutl~n chanqed to r~a~.i for a period of o~e ye.~r because these things do have a tenc'ency to stretch an~ ~~d if tht petltianer Is ln the p~ocess ~f con.[ructlne~ ~ bu(lding, t~e coulJ !,e granted an extcnston at the end ot ane ye.~r. Cortimissloner Tolar lncficated h~ would not havc any problem with tfic resntution heing granted for one year, -•,hich vro ul~f probably force the petitioner to act Sooner. On roll call~ tt~e foreyoiny res~lution FAILFD TO Cl1R~Y with the ~ollowing vote AYES: CO-!M 15510~~CR5: BARflES, D~+V I D~ TOLAR NOES: COMMISSIONRES: B!1SNORE~ HERhST, JOHt,50-~, KI~~~, A~SEN7: COMMISSIONERS: N~NE C~nlssianer Johnson offered Resolutlon -~o. PC7U~121 and moved for its p~ssa9e and edoptlon~ Chat the Anahcim Clty Planning Commission docs hereby deny Petltlon for Condltional Use Permlt ~lo. 1994 on the basis that tl,e ust vroul~i n~t h~ comRatlble with the Industrial uses In the area. ~'rior to voting on the resolution~ Cormtissioner darnes ask.ed if it wou1J bc passible to grant a continuancc on this matter untll the study has been received. and it was the genera) co~sen~us of the Coc-r~ission that the petitioner wc~ulcl Itke to have a vote rather than a delay. Ti~e Conmiss(on discuss~d the report to be submitted, and Annika 52~~ _~lahtl~ Asslstant Di~ector for Zon(ng~ explained the repurt will be a staff-reccx-me~~~ed ordinance based on what has been done ~n the past by the Planning Cor-mission. On roll call~ the foregoing resolutlon was passed by the following vate: AYES: CUMMISSIONERS: BUSNORE~ HERBST~ JOHNSON~ KIN!; NQES: COMMISSi01JE"5: BARNES. Dl1VID, TOLAR AE3SENT: COMMlSSIONERS: tJONE Jack White~ Deputy Clty Attorney, presented the petttloner with the written right to appeal the Planninq Commisslon's deciston within 22 days to the City Council. Concerning Conditional Use Permit No. 1995. Commisslaner Barnes explalned xo the petitioner that the Commissio~ would be receiving the report in approxtmately two weeks, and Robert Henninger further explatned the Comnission may wlsh to discuss *.he ordinance prior to recrxnnending it for approval. 6/18/7~ ~ ~ NIt~UTES~ ANANEIM CITY ?LAN«ING f.ONMISSIOfJ~ JUNE lA~ 1^79 79-~71 CONDITIO~~AL USE PERNIT NOS. 199G and 1~~?~ (continued) Commissioner Barnes stated the Plonntng Commisslon has be~n charged ~~tth c.c,mtng up with recommend.~tlons for the Industrlal area~ and she felt the City Counctl wlll refer Any request~ back to the Plnnning Crx~misslon. Mr. Dalnbrldge stateA Chc rermanent fACillty (s not n~,irly as dec~~ ir,~c+ the Inriustrlal area AS thc temporary fncillty ~~nd thc hig trnffic flc~w w111 he bc~trrPen th~ flrst and second classes~ an~i stated there Is no trr~ffic ln the ~~eA ,~fter ~~;0~ p.m. and ~n wc~ekends. lie felk thrrc wc~ulci be mor~ trnff~~ ~,tth nn In~JUSf''tnl us~r, Annikn Santalaht~ stated the City Council has been contlnuing ather Itcros for commc-rclal uses in thr_ Industrlal zones untl) ~ftcr thcy havc rec~lvcd the Plannin~ Commisslon~s reco~mendatlons. ACTI01~: Comriissioner Johnson ~,ff~rc.c~ a motlor~~ seeondr. i hy CamniSSiancr Y,Ing and M(1TION /lfC~~2RIED~ that the Anahcim Clty Planninc~ f.omr~isston hos revlewed thr_ proposa) to permlt a gymn~~tics academy in thc -IL (Industrlal~ Limlted) Zanr. on a rectangularly-shaped p~ircel of land consistiny of approxlmat~ly 2.3 acrr_s located at thc ,nuthcast cornc~r ~f l.a Palma Avenue and Tustin Avenue, haviny approxlmatc fronCaqes ~f 3~~n feet on thc south sidc of La Palma Avenue and 2~1 fe~;t on the cast slde of Tustin Avenuc; .~nd docs hcreby approve the Negative Declaration frorn t~,e r~~uiren,ent ta prep;~re an rnvironmr,ntal trnn~ct report on the basts that therc would be no slc~nlftc,~n~ indlv(dual ~~r ,:ur,~ulative i~versc envir~nmental impact duc to tf~e appr~val of this tJegattve Declaratlor since thc~ Anahe~m General Plan Jesignates thc suhJect p~operty for general In~'ustrlal iand uses cor~rr,enxurate~ wtth the proposal; that no scnsltive envtronmental tmpacts ~re Involvecf in the proposal; thar, the Initiil Study submlti~d by the netl~ioner IndtcatPS no slgnific~int Indlvldual or curnulative a:~verse envlronmenta) tmpacts; ~ynd that t~e ~le~ativp ~eclaratlon substantlati~a the foregoing ftndings is on filc ln thp Clty of Anihelm Plannir~ ~ept~~tment. Comr-~issl~ncr Johnson otfcred Resolutlon No, PC7^-li? and movc~f f~r its passage and adoption~ that the Anaheim City Plannfng Commtssion dc,es hcre!>y deny PGtition for Con~litional Use Permlt tJo. 1°95 on thP basis that thc use w~uld not bc compatlble wlth the surrounding industrial uses. On roll call, tlie foregoing resolutton was passed by the fellowtng v~te: AYES: CON"IISSIO`lERS: BUSHORE, DAVID, NERRST~ JONNSON~ Klu~~ NOES: COMMt5510NER5: TOLAR ABSENT: COHMISSlONERS: t~ONE ADSTAI~~: CO!1MISSIQNER~: BARNES Jac{: White, Deputy Ctcy Attorney, presentPd the pet~ttoncr with the written right to appeal the Pianning Comm(sslon's dr.cision withln 22 days to the Cicy Councll. CHA 0 RMAN NERDST LEFT THE COUNC I L CHAM~ER AT b: 52 P.M. ~ AND Co-tir~ 1 SS I c!-~F.R BARNES ASSt1MED THE c~~a i a. 6ItgJ79 ~ MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ June 18, 1919 79'472 ITEM N0. 13 PU6LIC HEARING. To consider an amendmc~t to che EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION Circulation Element of the Anah~eim Gen~ral Plan GENER L LAN AM NDM~N N0. 15) cvaluating the following ~reas: 1- Via Cortez between Santa Ana Canynn Road and the Rlverside Freeway (loca) street to secnndary art~rial highwa~~); II - F~eedman Way between Narbor 8oulevarcf and Manchester Avcnue (collectar street ~o secondary arterlal hi9hw~y); and III - Clementine Strect betwecn Freedman W~y and Katclla Avenuc (collectnr street tc, secondary arterial hiyhway). There were two ~ers~~ns indicatin9 their presence in c~ppositlon to Area I nf the subject request and two per5ons indic~~ting theirpr~sence ln opposition tc~ Area III of subJec.t reques[ and although the staff repc~rt to the Planniny Corm~i5sion dated June 18, 1979. was n~t re.'~d at t.hc publ ic. h~•~irin~a, it is, rrf~~rrrrd tu ~~r~d ~n.idr ,a ~~.~rt ;,i the R~IIlU1C5. Jay Tashir~. Associate Planner, pointed out the are~as beiny discussed on the ~-i.~ll map and explained the Circulation Ele.ment ~f' the Gcneral Plan scts forth paramet~rs (roadway width and generalized location) of arlerial highways within the ultimate Sphere of Influc~ce (areas anticinated to be annexed to the City);thnt ~t is pr~~oSpd by thls amendment to change the current desicanation of thr, aforemPntioned existinc~ and ~roposed highways; that the Engineering Division has requested the subject arn~ndmr~~ts; and that the propr.sed changes arc based on future d~v~lopme~nt of the p roperties in the area and the current average daily traffic counts. Victor Miller, Attorney, repr~senting Hazel Maag, 175 N. ~olc~man C~~ive, Anaheim, stated portions of Mrs. Maag's pr~perty would be t~kcn if Are~~ I is aF{.~oved as submitted. Ne stated Mr. Tashiro had referred to thr wideniny of Vi7 Cortez and he felt that. was a mis- statement because they are proposiny an extctr;sion of Via Cortcz acrr~ss Mr~,. Maag's property. Ne pointed out the Canyon Plaza Shopping Center, ;hc existing rr~,~d and Mr.s. Maag's proper[y on thE. map and stated t~ place the rc~ad beyond the point of the end of the existing rc~~id would canstrain the methud by which Mrs. Maag will develop .~II of hcr property. Ne stated the extension as shown would cut off two acres of her ~•-,~perty. Ne pointed out Mr. Shantz's pr~per[y ~~nd st~~tcd it wa5 purch<iscd .~iti ,~ I~indl~~ck.c~d ~~,~rccl nnd hc f~lt no~N Mr. Sh~ntz is seekiny to unlock it at the expense uf Mrs. Maag. Nc stated for th~~se reasons they would oppose this request for an amendment to the General f~lan. He s:ated further that ;~~roxi- mately two weeks ago there was a local meeting to determine whether or not local ~.~pport could be obtained for the Via Cortez portion of the Gener,~l Plan and tha[ support was not given. He stated the property for thF widening or hxtens~io~ af 11'+a Cortez comes entirely from Mrs. Maag's propcrty and there is no other property affected. Jay Tashiro stater. _he in~tter had ber_n reviewed by the Hilf and Canyon Municipal Advisory Committee (HACMAC) and they had taken no action betause they did n~t have sufficie~t information. He stated rhe iine shown on the plan is a general location and is nnt a precisc alignment and could be either to the left or right. Hazel Maaq stated she is not ready to develop her proper[y ~t this time and it would be up to the developer of her property to put in the roads. She stated sl~e has been ilt for several months and she doesn't war,t to givc property away when it is gning to take a long time to develop plans fo-- c1PV~lopment; that she gets about 20 calls a month ~r rr~re and has ~ad 4 calls within the last twc~ weeks r•egarding che dpvelonment ~f a mobileh: e park ar~d stated she does not want mobitehomes below her pru~erty and she fP~t the land has a higher use than mobilehomes; that until she has definite plans~ sl,e did noc feel she should just give her land away for roads; [hat she has developeci the property he~'self arid nuw it is ~eing taken away for storm drains, electricity easements and sewers and sh~ did nat feel anyone in the canyor~ area has suffe~ed rnore than she has. 6118/79 r n .~ MINUTES, ~\NAHEIM CiTY PLANNING CU!'MISSION, lune 19, ~979 19-413 EIR NEGATIVE DEC~AkATI(1M AND GENERAI. PLAN AMENDMENT N0. lyl (continu~d) Joe1 Fick~ Astit. Direc!or for ~'1~~nning, stated this item is mercly ~ gPneral ptan amendment tonsi~eratian fc~r th~ ultimate street c.apacitY. based on the projectcd tr~,~fic in the area and it dc~es not anticip.~te designatinq prc~ise raadw~iys, hut is ~~ general designation and it Go~~ld be in ar ther location. Mr. Millcr stated he and Mrs. Maag .~re ~iw~~re thR~t this is not a condemnatiun, but are alsc- aware that a y^nee'o) plan ~nrndment must N~r.cr,de ~,ucn an nction; that th~y ~fo not want a gNneral plan amendmrnt ~rojectiny the road across her prc>perty ~ind Show+nca the wideninc~ of Via Cartez when they know in practicalitv the wid~ninq would h,ive to come from her property since the adjacr..nt pr~perty i5 develop~d up tc~ the curbline, He st~tPd hf, would respectfully r~~qucst that th~ qencral ulan ~imcrid~rn! nc~t bc ldC~pT^d. Cornriissior~er Tol%ar 5t~~ted he ~~pp~~'cis~ted Mrs. M~it~~7's conc.ern an~i ,iSked Mr. Miller if he and Mrs. M,»q are :,~r.~re thit ~hr «nly h~~ .~c.ccti5 on 5~~lr~m>n Drivc a~~d does not havc access onto Vi~ Cortet.. H~~ f~lt in th~ir c~~~c'~•~n with protectinq the intcqrity :~1 her pr;~perty, t.hey rn~~y be box~~g hcr (nsndrPlt thi5 wai~ld apen th~~ do<~r to developnxnt of f;er pr•opcrty rathcr than clus~ny thc ~c><~r• He felt thr.rr. may br SorTK~ cnnfusion a~id th~~t Sht: rca11Y did iiot understand the is~,uc and ~tated thi~, i~, ~~ ~~otentinl way Fc,r her to develap her property. Mr. Miller sr4ted Mrv. Maeq fully t~derstands hcr ~~ositiun with reyord to Sc7lnmc~n Orive ancl Via Cortez and thc constraiiit of futurc dcvr~lnpment r~f h~~r prr~;,~rty; tha1: thr widPninq anu extendinc~ ~~` Via Cortez whe[her it i5 a~~tr,.iiyht {~r~~j~•~tic~n tu thc freeway or curved will constr~~ the .~evelu~>ment of her 1u11 20 ,~;.res, plus it will cut off twa acres. Chairman Pro Temporc Barnes expl~~i~~~d thc ~str,~i~~ht lin~~ shrnvri is only an indicatian ond does nol h,~ve ic~ be in that precisr lucation and Mr. Milier Stated !hc paper as presented shaws Via Cartez i~ ;~ titraiqht iir~e tc~ the Riverside freeway and i[ do~s not have ~~~" bend~ .~s suyyested and it alsu ~,ay~ ''wa ;~rc yoinc~ to L.l{CP. Nazel Ha~U's prt~rer[y." Jack ~lhitc, Deputv City Attorney, stat~c~~ a yPneral plan designation is a yeneral designa- tivn of ihe general pl~~~ as to a~,trect ard it dc~FS noc say it is gning to be on a parti- rular pier.e of pmperty or of .~ ~~~~rtic~lar Lurvatu~e ~~r str,~iyht; that it is ~.how~ straiyht because the precise aliynment iti noi ~~nown and if' it wtre Shown as a c~rved line~ it would appear th3t it is precisr'~- ~~~-~nned fer that ~oc~~tion; and that ther~ i~, na propo~.a) at this tiine to acquire any pr,,~rty He ~tated ~cc~uisition at some timc in che future is noi before the Plann~ng Ce~mmis5ic~r: and is nut an ~tem for ciisc~,ssivr~ and thc~ decision should be whether or not the G~~ne~al Plan should be anrended to sP~ovr in that ~eneral vitinity that there shou!c1 be a~trcet de~iynated. CoRanissianer Bushore asked where th~ peiim:r Intertie wi11 be tc~cated ~n canjunction with this general plan amendment. floyd L. Fara~o, Att~rney, representing tne Shantzs, pointed out the Deimer Intertie wi1) fallc~ Via Cortez across ihe frecway. Mr. Miller stated it is locatEd approximatety down the first 1/3 of thP ~~•sst l/2 of tf~e existing Uia Cortez. and tt~e p~ermanen[ easert~ents extend 12 fee[ beyond the curbline; and that the outside diameter of the pipeline will be 1QA". Comm~ssioner Bushore asked if the Qeimer Intcrc~e lucation is the sart-e as the line shown an the exhibit and if anything cnuld be built over it. 6/18/19 ~. ~ ~ ~ MINUTES, ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COr,MISSION, June 18, 1979 "~'~'74 EIR NEGA7IVE DECLRaATION ANU GENERAL PLAN AMENONENT N0. 151 (contlnucd) It was n~ted the location is tF,~ ~,ame and that a raad could b e bullt ~~er the easemenl, dnd Mr, MIIIPr pointed aut that issue of the e~ascn~ nt has n ot yet beFn re5olved, Cc~mmissloncr Bushore suqgested wr~rding tht motinn so that it clearly states tha~ the~ ~lignment could go ~either way and M~. Millcr stated in thc re ~I world there iS no way anythin~ c~~n bP done to any rr~ad in ariy direction ati prapose d with~ut takinq Mrs. Maag's proper[y for thc benefit of Harry Rinker and Mr, Shantz. Commitisic~ncr Busharc: ~,skPd if th~cre is an altcrnativN which MrS, M~ag w~uld bc happy wilh other than te~vinry hcr ,~lone, .ind Mr. Miller replied when ~~he ha5 selected ~ devr.loper and he Fias r_on~ up wi th a pl~~n acc:eptablc to her an~ those p~<,n~, t-r~~ submi t ted to the GoR~~ission for aaproval would be Ihe prictic~l t~mc sh~ ~:ould soy that a pro~~ns,'~I wc~uld bc acceptaGic. Commis5~io~~~ r Bushore ~,tated Mr, Millcr i5 yivinr~ him tl,r impr~*ssinn that there i~ ~~ d~veloper coming alunq ~hortly and Mrs. M~~ag is s~ayinq s;~c is not ready tc.~ develup y°t; that hc can see her probl~m, but he ha5 tc~ think about thr_ t'uture of what ~s going to happen in that area and in tr•; iny to be a rer,ponsible Conxrii s:~ione~r cac~cs rot see the reality of her accept~nc.e c~f what i5 napprniny an~f what h~is ha~pened t~~ I~cr in [he past ,~~~~i what wi I1 n,,nn~~ in thcr futurc anci h~w shr can work i t c~ur to ~~:rr benef it; .~nd tha! ~i~e docsn't seem to want .anything and th.~t i; nc~t r~rnqress. CNAIRMAN HEKBST RETURNEG TO 1HE COUNLII Cf1AM4ER. Mrs. Maag sta!ed she ~~~d not fe~ I she .~:uu~ J hav~ tc~ d~ anyt ~~inq unt i f ~~he (s ready to develop; and pointed out thc~ tvw.~ acr~~~ that wi I 1 be landlc~ck~ed and asked ht~+ she woulc~ '~c ablc to d~vclc.~{~ that propcrty. Commissioner Bushore re~l~ed he has heartfelt Sy~~~pathy for her, but felt shr should rca) i ze th.3t SfIE~ has to t ry t~~ work, s~~me :n i ny out th~t she w i 1 I b~~ happy w i th because this is +~,e ~nly alternative he has to v~~te on. Mr~.. Maag asked why shc cuuldn' c have a road in thc middle of her fl80 feet and stated 5h~: ~oul d not make that dec i` on now because ~,he has no p) an s ~or development . She s aced the t~roper[y is zoned ayric.ultur3l and it takes ~ lo~g tin~e to make pians for 20 acrc~s. Cha~rrnan Prc~ Tempore Ba~nes stated che Commission co~ild cc~nsider a road at tha[ iocation when she submits her plans. Floyd Faran~ presented a~ aerial photogr~ph ~nd pointed out the Rinker de:velopment, as it was originally c.on5tituted and the por[ion added imme~fiately adioinir~ east of Imperial, che Shantz's propercy, the SAVI canal and the proposed Deimer Intertie that follows Via Cortei. He stated ~'.resently there is a cnr~lemn~--tion suit pending in the courts ond he bel ieved that the Countv of Ora~ge has been given possession ~f the property. Ne i~dlcated at least [hree property vwrers have filed objections to the condemnati~n suit. He stated the Shantz's propert~~ is n~t landlocked because they have a 40-foot wlde ~~sement. He stated when the Rinker property was develo~ed, there was co~cern regarding the driveway out ont:. Santa An~ ~anyon aoad and the traffic co~f{icts this development would crea[e, ~nd it was determined that th?s wauld be rPSOlved at some time in the futura when the craffic reached a cer;ain volume and he beliEVed that volume has been reached. He stated during the Rinker hearings there was discussion that additional access and circulation should be available to this ar•ea, inc!uding the prapertics co che east and traffic and circulation have been maJor issues dur~ng every hearing. He stated Mr. Shantz I~as a re- classtfic:ation pen~iing which has no[ been resolved because af clrculation. 5/18/79 ~ ~~ ~ MINU~ES, ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COHMISSION, Junc 18, 1979 79'~~~ EIR NEGATIVE DEGLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0, 151 (c-.~ntinued) Hr. felt approval of this gencral ~lan amendment would bc ihc beginning !owards providin9 the necessary circulation ~nd stated if t.he Deimer Intcrtie does prevAii along the li~es shown, there wi I I be a sevcrance or separation of the twc~ .~cr~5 di~acussed earl ler .ind f~lt in ord~r not to t ake any morc tand than necessary V(a Cortcz should follow thc same line. He stat~d thr.permanent easement is goiny tca be 50 feet and during construct.ion there wi l l be temporar y easement af 150 feet. Ne st~ited r,o St ructures c~~n be bui l t on the 50-fo~t pcrrr~nent .•as~ment. Conrnissic~ner Cushore asked for clirification rF~3ardiny thc immediate possession oF the easement and Mr. F.~rano expl~~incd i t enables thc d~vclt~per of the intcrt ~c~ to start construttior~ and the c.ondemnit~rm suits basically detc~rr~,ine the v~~lue o~ :he propercy taken ~nd the validity c~f th~ public takinry and in this CJSC the court has se~r_n fit to grant thc inxnedi<itc takiny, Ted F~nster,r~~rc~.ent~~~qBoyle Enyinecriny, Jesiqncrs of thr• Drimer Intertie for che MunlClpal Water Oistrlct af Orange Co~nty stated they du have the ri~~ht of icmiediate posse5sion ~nd th~,k the allgnm~nt is ,i5 dc5r.ribed, lie tit<~ted hf~ wished ta rel,~y the pos•sible con5c~qu~nces or eifrct t<~ the Deimer Intertie i f the a) ignrx~ne is changed; that thE: prrmanen[ easement throuyh thr ~~roperty, plus the ri~~ht o~ wa~ in Via Cortrz (addinq all the permanent riyht of way is in Yia Cortez) and thc ~~.~semcnt un Mrs. Maay's propcrty is a tem~~.~r~ry ea5ement For construction purposr.s only; however, a+. the intersection of Via Cc~rtez and Santa Ana Canyon Road there is ~ R-etcriny s[ructure ta serve the City of Anaheim ~~nd it ~~ on the ca5t~rly side of Vi~~ Cortet, northcrly of Santa Ana Ca~~yon Raad, and is a structure loeated on the ~urface whcre the w~ter wi 11 be taken t~~ scrvice the Ci[y of Rnaheim'~ needs; that the f~ycility was d~signed in accardancr with conditir~c~s that existcd during thc planning staqes of this particular pipeline; that he did not kn~w whether or not Lhe structure would be af~ec.t~ed by the widening, but if Via Lortez is wi en~~, this taci 1 ity coulc~ he within thc right-~~f-way nnd if additional right-of-way has t~~acquired, the f~~cility wnuid have 'o bc •-x~ved to tf~c east to `ai:ilitacc the wideniny and the i r r i ght-c~f -way reprc ~er~t.a: i ve has i nd i c. ted a mi n i mum of 90 days woul d be requ i red to ch~nge the condemration ;,roceedinns .3nd it vr ~Id alsc~ require r~ change by the c~ntractor to bui Id the faci I i tv . He stated thcse tr,in~;5 r^ay not be a problem, but i f Via Cortez is widen~d ic may r~~qu(rr the relocat ion of this facil ity. Chdirman Pro Tenpore BarncS asked what cculd b~ huil[ ove~ thc perman~nt easemen[, ~:5pecially referring to r,er~~anent fencps, and Mr. F'enster r~~:,lind no permanent struc.tures could be built ov~r i t a~ici ~..tated they w~l! have to have acc.ess for maintenance purposes and did nr~t belicve any permanent r~~~ces would ~e ~1lowed. Jack Whi[e, Ueputy Citv ActornEy, explain~ed the procedure in the pa5t has been to offcr a motior~ ~~~ ^~ch indivld;::~l ~irea of th~ amendrnent and ther~ offer one resolution recomnPnding ~dopt i ~n tc~ the C i t y Counc i I. Con~missioner King stated since Mr. Farano is rPpresenting Mr. Shantz and Mr. Shantz'S +s connrcted with K~cel !a Realty, he would abstain regarding Chis rnatfer since his wife is ~ssociated wi th Katr.lla Realty. COm~'ll 5°_ i one r Johr~~o~ stated i nasmuch as he woul d 1 i k~ to ya a lang wi th the G i ty , th i s i s one tirr~ he would ag~ee wi!h the property nwner; that he has known abaut Mrs.Ma; i's controversial pos~t ~on for some ye•s~s and when 5hf~ is ready tu drvel~~p h~r propcrty she ~~11'. ask for a generai pian an~.~ndmenc if it is requi~ed and he did not see why thls amendmer is needed at the y~rescnt t~me. Ne felt if more iniersecti~n is needed because of the Rinker dtvelopment. then it should bc stated and ~ot jus[ say that we are going to put a street (n to help Mrs. Maag. He s+~gg~sted that the line be draw~ curved to rn~ake it mor~ palatable for the proprrty awn~r. bi~ ar~9 _ __ .. .. _: . . _ .: . . . ° ; ~ . ~ ~ ~ . ' MINUTES~ ANRHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, June 18, 1979 79-47b ; EIR N~GATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 151 (continued) Chairman Herbst explalned it is the Planning Cartxnission's responsibi 1 i ty to general plan the city and An.3heim Hllls area has bcen gencral planned with streeis s hown in general locatfor ~ and I~c felt this is no different. H%• stated at the presenc t imc M~s. Maag has no acce° s onto Via Cortet and we kn~w that her prnperty wi 1 I I~P.VCIUG some day and the road wil[ not be bullt or w(den~d until she doe.s dc~~~•lop her pr~p~rty and ,he will have the f lex i bi 1 i ty in dcvelapment of her property because she wi I I know the road is there. He stat.ed [he traffic being 9enerated at this intersec[i~n is hcavy ancl t.here is ~ definite ne~d to irnprove it and it is bad because Vi~ Cortez is n.~rrow and the shopping center is doing rnore business~ th,~~~ ~~nticipated. Ne siated he did not think Mrs. Ma~'~g's property is yc,inc~ tn be atfected by this general plan amen~.i~nent unt i 1 shr. is ready to develop it. Ne stated She doe5n't have acces5 tc~ Via Cortez btcau5e Rinker c~wns a I-foat strip~ but this a~i I I givc her access and she wi 1 I have to have roads no n~atter what is develap~d in order to scrvice the prapert.y. Commissioner Johnson stated hr_ is ,~ware of the situationand the: background, bul did not sec why the ycnera) plan should be amrnded ~it. this timc rather than when Mrs . Maay is ready to develop her ~,rc~pcrty, unless thc-c i~~ an ultr_rior rtx~tivc. Ch~irrnan Hcrbst stated Mrs. M,~ag's p~oprr[y i5 not the only property affPCted hy this amendmenL and stated ather properties need to know wherP the road wi I! be in ord~r to develop. Commissioner Johnson stated if -~meone wantti anothrr pel'SOn~S property for a road, they should g~ and buy it and he d~~ not think the f,ity should be privy to somcc~~e getting someone else~~ pr-operty, ~hai rman Herbst stated th i~, i s n~~t ~a condc•mn~~t i[~n of Mrs. M,7ag's prope rt.y; that thi s i s just a 1 ine ~n the General Pl~~n ~,,,; in, this property is des~gna~ed for that purpose and un [ i 1 s he i s ready tu de ve I op h,~ r p rope r ty i t ~n' t happen . Commissioner Bushc~re staced he wc,uld .~yree wi[h Commissioncr John~on and whi Ic he couid see whcre some[hing nced~~ to bc dc,ne, he could also sec ~here this .~:outd benofit others and poss ibiy Mrs. Maag, but it cc~uld al~~.o be harmful to her and ~t was hls desire ta pr~tect her propErtv rights. Chai r•man Pro Tem~nr~ Barnes stated i f the ge~er.~l plan amendment is approved, it wi I 1 provide better c i rcul~~tion for thosP oeoplr usinq the Rinker develupment and i t wi 1 i open other land fur develnpment ar~d it will be saying to Mrs. Maag t.hat she doesn't have ta buy tt~at 1-foot strip of property anA she will haue more aiternatives for circulation on her own proper[y and that ehe two-acre par~el wi I 1 bc adjacen[ to commerc ~ il p~operty making i t valuable and she did not see how it would harm Mrs. Ma~~ in anyway, particularly since the Deimer Intertie easemPnt will be on her proper?y and she can't bui ld on it anyway. Sh~ stat~d she would vote in favor• of this request. Commissioncr Johnson asked for clarificatio~~ regarding the one-foot strlp being refer~ed ta and Gl~ai rman Herbst exp:ained when the road was constructed, Mr. Ri nker and Mrs. Maag did not agree a~d she dld not pay h~r share af the widening cost5 and he withheld that I-foot s trip and she wili h~ve to pay her share v+hen she develr ~s at a later date. Ne expiai~ed this i, not uncommon practice. 6/t6/79 ; MINUTES, ANAHEIM C~7Y PLANNING COMMI 5510N. Ju~e 18, 1979 79-~ » EIR NEGATIVE pECIARATION AND GENERAL PLAH AMENDME-t~ N0._151 (cc~ntinucd) Mrs. Maag referred to the lot behin d the sh~pping cent!~r ~nd St~ted she cauld not go over the "hate curb" f rom he r two ac res becAUSe i t i s a pr i v~te rc~ad ~«d was conce rned how she could qet to her prc~perty. point ~ng aut it. v~uld be lar7dlocked. Cortn~issione~ Johnson stated he di~i not think Mr~~. Maay will have th^ probie~ns ~tic ancf' cipates, but (f shc felt there is a problem, the m~-tter shc~ul~ n~t he ~~ppru~chcd riqht now. Mrs. Maay stated her concern is for the two acres which is now overqr~~wr~ with wecds and the kids use it for smokinq pot, an d Ghairman Flerbst pointrd out if Vin Cortez qoes ihrough Mrs. Maag wauld have fr~ntayc: on bo t h sidcs and Mrs. Maaq sta~ed she could noi cro5s the MWD property with heavy equipmrnt. C~mmissioner Jahnson asked why the line on the General Plan could not follow the outlines ~f her ~ropr.rty rather than cutting of' thc two acrr.s and Art Daw, Civil Enyincer, stated the staff is saying with this ~mend{ t~nt that there is 9oing t~~ t~c: ~ti ser.ondary highway essentially from Santa Ana C~nyon Road t~ the RiverSidc ~reew~y and in n~ way is attemping [u depiGt thc preCisc~ al ign-nent. ConwniSSi~ner Johnson stated he under5tand~ what is bciny said, but the proper[y owner and her attorr~ ~+ aresayinq th~t the 1 ines are ca5t in iron when ~howr. on the General Plan and indicated he has seen it happe ~ th~' ~~+ay a few timr.s while on ~he Comm+s5ion and askcd again if ~t couid be drawn to follvw t c~utline of her praper[y. Mr. Daw replied that it could b~~ d r awn that way and Mrs. Maa~~ asked if Vi~ Cortez would be continued acress the river ~nd Mr•. DaM: r~plied that it would not. Joel Fick, Assistant Directar af Ptanning, stated fron~ ~taff's view~oint i` the road had been curved initially, +t alnx~st ir-~plies some sort of specificity on thr General Plan, but tF~e Planning Commission has the Ic~rti~~~~y t<, chanye or mndify thc ~~xhinits if they see f i t. Ne 5i~ted t~~ere havN. been app 1 i cat ion5 for ~levelop~nent on the bac~ port ic.n of tt~e Rroperty and there ~ay bc so~~e com~~icatic~n~. ~e[ting dedie.at~qns if no action is taken on this, reyuest. Mr. Daw stated the City At[orney'S offi;a has ruled in the past that unless ihe Lircula[ion Element depicts a secordary highwa y and a development. plans com~es in, ihere is no w ay to require dedication to a secanda ry standard. Camnissioner Bushare felt since M r s. Maag doe5n't know what is ooing to happcn to her property behind the Rinker ~•~perty~-e couldsee r~o reason to show it as secondary if we don`t have a plan for wF+• is ~o(ng t~~ b4 developed. Mr. Daw stated ~ny development wo uld increase the volume on Via Cortez tc~ ihe exte nt that a secondary highway i~ r~eeded and it dozsn't mak~: r,~uch difference what type development is proposed. Cormiissioner D~. rid a5ked if the plan is general enouqh ta concr've that ~~ltimately che line could swiny 20 to 25° to the left or rigte and Jack iJhite, D~uty City Attorney, replied that it could. Gommissio ~ er David stated at one time tl~ert was a defini~ion of ~1hat the ge~~eral pianned boundaries are dzal ing w~ ti~ the top of the hi 11 , etc. ALTION - AREA I- Chairman Her~ st offered a motion, <<:c~nded by Commissioi~er Oavid and MOTION CARRIED (i.cxnmiss~one~s Jchnson and Bushore votEng no. and Commissioner King abstaining) that the Planning Comrnission rec~mmend ado~~tion of Exhiblt A with the stipulatian that the alignment o f Vi~~ Cortez swing if possible along the property lines of Mrs. Maag's property. 6/lA/7'' `~ M~NUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. J~me ~8, 1979 79-478 EIR NEGATIVE DECLARhTICN, C,ENERAI. FLAN AME~t~MENT N0. 151. (continued) AREA II ~ There was n~ o~ indicatinq their presence in opposition and J~~y T~shiro stated FretQman Nay betwr.en ~larbor Boulevard,~nJ Manche.tcr Avenue 15 currently des~qnated as a "pro~osed secondary arterial" (SO feet ~f right-of-w~~y) on [hc County Mastc~ F'~~n of Art~rial Highways and a c~ ector stre~t (64 feet of right-of-waY) on the City Master Plan of Arterial Streets an~' Nighways; th~t the proposcd secondary arterial high.~.iy designation will be ninety feet of right-~f-w~iy with a sixty-f~ur faot roadwaY; that the u~grading of subject street is considered ta be essential with the recon~•rructl~n uf the Anaheim Roulevard/Naster Street overcrossing ~~ ~ m~difi;.,tiAn ~f [hc fr~eway off-ramp; tha~ the existing triffic count on the strcet ~~~~~ic~ate•~~ ADT af 6100 vehicles and based un the existing volurne and an estimate of future tra' ~c ~;encr~~tion hy new develoPmc'~t ~tnd re~routing of traffic ~n the area, the traffic demand v~~lunxs are l~~ro.jectcd for an ADT~V 1c~r 10 years (~989) t~f 10~000 and ultimate ADTDV ~~f 1~,000 vehlcles; and that Freedman Way is presentlY construct~~~ as a fuur-lane facilitv and the chanye in classification will makr~ available additiona ' inancing f~r m~intena~~~.:c and/or rcc~nstructic~n. ACTION - AREl~ II - Ch~ir~nan Nerbsr offered a rmtior,, Seconded by Commiscioner David and MOTION CARRIED that the Planning C~~mn~ission recoim+~nd adoption af Exhibit A lr~ connection with Arc~a I!. AREA III - There werc two person~ indicating [heir presence ir• npp:>sitic>n to subject r~quest and .ilthough the staff report was not read at the~~ublic hearing, it is re~erred to and made a part of ihe minutes. kan Graichen, Dallar Cher- Cumpany, 1753 ~ ~755 Clementin~, stated theirs is a wholesal~ supply company and there are a lot of trucks in .~nd ou; of fhcir prop~rty ~~nd dur.~ t~~ the confi~auraeion ~~f the b~~ildin~a ~r', the property mcst a~ the tr•ucks ar•e serviced o~~t of the front of the building an~ if thc strcet is w~dened a~d the service arca in front is c:ut back, the trucks we~~ld be hazard to the tr.~ffic, plus there would be additi~nal craffic on the street if it is wi~~ ~ed . He pointed out there is a lot of t.raffic congestion in the area becau~e c~f Me~~:dyland ~t ,hr present timc, He felt tney ~ould be forced to relocate if the S~~eet is widened. He stated the waY the buildinq is constructed with easements on the sides, that most of these lar~e trucks would not be ~b1e to get in back of the builcfing. He did not fcel the strect should be widened because it would cause more traffic from the Di~neyl~.n~f area and suggested [he street be put back the waY it was ~reviously and that was strictly for access to the 1oc~1 b~asinesses. Norrnan Hasenyager, 2139 N. Grand, Santa A~a, ov~ner of the pr~~pcrty at t753 a~d ~1`-'~ Clementine, stated if this Street is wider~ed ~3s tihowr it would seriouslv impair his tenant's busines~ and he would be forced to rmve a;~d ~[ w~ ~,ld force him ~a have to rr~dify the building and find another typr of tenant which wc~uld b foreign to chis property and wc~uid be a financial burden u~ him. Ne stated he has enjoYed the occupancy of this tenant for about 2- years and they do have a good understanding and reiationship and he would l+ke to conti~ue rhat rela;~onship. Art Daw explained basically the conce~:e of this amendmene to cha~•~ge tt~e designat~on on Freedman Way and Clementine stemmed from thc~ Cal Trans proposal to reconstruct the Ha~ter/ An~~heim overcrossiny and in conjunctior~ with che reconstruction of tl~e overcrossing, the State is qoing ta be realigning Manchestsr Avenue. He s*.ated prior to ttie State recon- struction of Clementir.e, the Engineerinq Division i~ p-'op~sing to construct Clemeniine Str~et from Frecciman Way down to its present [~~'min~s as a four-lane facility, but within the existing right-of-way indicating they are not p~oposing any additional right-of-way to be taken in this are~. 6/18/79 ~r ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMIS510N, June lA. ~979 79~4~~ EIK NEG~TIVE DECLARATION, GENERAL PLAN AME~~DMENT N0. 151 (u~ntinued) Mr, Nasenyager stated thc proposal he has seen shows an existing road of 64 feet and it is proposed to increase tt~e right-of-way to 90 feet. Mr. Daw st~ted the standar~ se~:ondary hiqh~~ay iS 90-fcet wide and th~ City Fngine~r does have the autharity to modify that right-of-way when thc situation warrants and it wauld be their intent with the exi~ting 64 feet of dedication on Clementfne Street that a 52-foot wide roadway be construct~d within that 6~-foot d~dication with no additional right-of- way tak~n. He stated he believed the pr•esent roadway width is u0 feet and i[ would be widened to 52 feet~ with 6 feet to be caken frc~m each sidc~ of the street. Chairm~n Pra Tem~~ore Barnes asked the o~~~osition i' th~y woul :ill be opp~sed if no ac~ditional ric~ht-of-way is tak~~n and Mr. lasenyay~ ~~ replied th~s ~,~uld temper their objection. Mr. Daw Stated a signal would be installed at Clementinc and Katclla in cc.~njunction with the wideninq and it -vould gre~tly ~mprove the ingress and ~~<~ress. CUmfni5510n~r Johnson stated f~e initially Wr75 opposed to this amcendnx~nt, but after hearing the [esti-r~ny and in the intcrest ~~f prv~~res5 for thc ~c~tal area, especially since no additional riqht-of-way woul~~taken, he would support the request. ACTION: Are~~ III - Cc~nmissioner Johnson offered a motion, scconded by Cormiissioner David and MOTION CARRIED that thc Planniny Commissic~n recomrncn~i approval of Exhibit A in connection wilh Area I11. ACTION: Chairn,~~n Herbsi offered a rmtion, ~econded by Comrnissioner D.~vid and MCTION CARRIED that the Anahtim City Pianning Coimiissic~n has reviewed the propos~il tc~ amend the Anaheim General Plan irwlation Element [n change t'he current desiqnation of Via Cortez between Sar~i~ Ana Ganyon Poad and the Rivcrside Freeway f~om a~ocal street [o a secondary arteri~l hiyhway and Freedman Way between Nar' ~r Boulevard and Manchest.~r Avenue from a ~ollec[c,r street te a sec:ondary arte~ ial hiyhw~~y and C'~•mentine 5treet between Fre~~'~nan Way and Katella Avenue frc~m a col~ector street to a secondary arterial hiyhway and does hereby approve the Negative Oecla~ations fro~n the reauirement to prep~re enviranmenta) impact rPports nn the basis that thcrc wt~uld be no signific~nt individua! ~r cumulati ~e adverse environ~~~r~tal impar.ts due to [he~ approval c~f these Negative D~eclarations; that no sensiiEve envir~riment,+~ impa4t5 are involved in thr propos~l; that the IniCial Study submitted by the petitior~cr indicateti no significant indiviclual or cumula[ive adverse envi ron,nental irnpacts; and that thc• Negat i ve Declarat ion substant iat ing the forc~~toigg findings is Un file in th~ City of Aroheir~, Plan~~ing Department. AG1'ION: Chairman Herbst offered Resol~'ion No. PC7q-12.3 and moved for its passage and adoption recommending to the City Cc~urc.il cf the City of Anaheim adoption of General Plan Amendmr:nt No. 151•Circula[+on Element, recommending adoption of Exhibit A for Areas I~ II and Ili. On r~l l ca' 1 the f~?regoir.g n~solution was p~~ssed by ihe fol iowing vote: AYES: 6ARNE5, SUSNORE, DAVID, HERBST, .JOHNSON, TOLAR NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: KING ITEM 14 - REPGRTS b fiECOMMEMDATI0k5 Oue t~ hIs contractual arrangement with the Anaheirn Redevelo~,ment Agency, Commi~sioner Bushara abstair,~+ on Items A thruugh E of Reports and hecammendations. 6-18-79 ~ ~ ~ MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNiNG ~^MMISSION, June 18, 1979 79-480 ITEM Nu. 14 ~'E R~~AND RECOMMENDl1T I ONS A. .UNDITIONAI. USE PERMIT N0. 4~0 - Request for termination. The st.~ff report [o lhe ?l~nning Cammission dated June 18, 1q79 was presented noting the subJr.ct property ts a rectangularly-shaped parc~l ot iAnd consisting of approxima[ely 0.7 a~re located at the northwest cor•ner of Lincoln Avenue and Lemon Street, having appraximate frontages of 200 feet on the north side of Lincoln Avenue and 141 feet on the west side of l.emon Stre:et, and further described as 119 North Lemon Strcet; that the applicant (Anaheim Kedevelapment Agency) requr.sts Cermination of Condition~~l Use P~rmit No. ~30 which was granted by the Planning Commisson on June 10, 1963 t.b permit a trade schaei; that ~~n May 7, 1979 the Planning Commission appr~ved Reclassificalion No. 78-79-37 to r~•classify subject praperty from CG(Conmercial~ General) to CL(Corm-erc(al, Limi[ed) to perrnit a corm~ercial shoppiny center; that ane of the conditions of apprnval of sald recl~~Sification included [he requirement that the property owner requ~st termtnation of Conditional Use Permi- No. 430. AI,T ION : Con~ni ss i aner Johnson of fcred Resol ut ion No. ~C79-1 z4 and r*x~ved for i ts passage ~na adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Comnission doe5 hereby gr.int the tcrminati~~n of C~~ndir,iona) Use Permit No. 430. On roli ~ill the f<~regoin~ resolution was passed by the follv,~nq vate: AYES: BARNES, DAVID, NERBST, JONNSON. KING b TOLAR NOES~ NONE ABSENT: NONE ADSTAIN: BiISNOitE B. CONDITIQNAL USF PERMIT N0. 1441` Re uest for i;•~^~ination. The staff report to the Planning Comrnission dated June 18, 191': was presented noting the subiect property is a recianyutarly-sha~ecl parcel of land ~_onsisting of appr~ximately C.2 acr~ haviny a frcnta~;~ ai 43 fc~et on the south side of Lircoln \venue, h~ving a maximum dept:h of approximately {62 feet, bein;, loc.~tpd :~pproximately 26~~ feet west of the center- line of Anaheim Baulevard, and further d^~:ribed as 138 Mlest Lirc:uln Avenue; tha[ the applicant ~pnaheim Redevelopment Ayency) ~equests termination uf Conditianal Use Permit No. 1~+41 which was granted on D~~embet• 3. 1973, to permlt a churcr,, th~3t on May 7. 1979~ the Planning C~mmissi~n approved Recl;~ssification No, 78-19-31 to reci~~sify subject prc~~erty fram CG(Commcrcial. General) to Cl.(Commercial, Limi~ted) to perrr~i[ a commercial shapping cenier. One of the cunditions of aNproval of said reclassificat~on included [hp req~ircment that the property c~wner request termina,ion of Conditional Use Permit No. 1 ~+41 . ACTION: Cc~mmissioner Johnson offered Resolurion Nc~. PC79-125 and moved for its passage ~nd adoption that the Anaheim City Planr~in Commission does hereby grant the termination of Condit~onal Use Permit No. IG41. Cr, roll call tt~e foreyoing resolution was passed by the fallowing votr_: AY:S: BARNES, DAVID, HERBST, JOHNSON, KING 6 TOLAR NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: BUSHOR't 6/18/79 *. .* ~~~ ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, June 18, 19'I9 79-481 REPORTS b RECOMMENDATIANS (conlinued) C. VARIANCE N0. 176 - Raquest for termination. The staff repnrt c~ the Planni.ig C~~,^~ission dated June 18, 1919 WHS presented. noting subject property is a rectanyulariy-sfiaped parcel of l~~nd consisting of a~proxinately 0.3 ~3tre having a frontage af approximately $0 feet on thc n~rth sidc of Lincoln Avenue, having a maximum depth of approximately 150 feet, an~' ueing located approximat~ly 200 feet west of the centerline of Anaheim B~ulevard; it th~ applicant (Anaheirn Redevr•lop- ment Agency) requesls terminat~on of Variance No. 76 which was granted by the City Council on November 17, 1952, to pc~rmit thc m.-~r ,lacturing of clot.hing; [hat on May 7, 19?9~ thP Planning Commission approved Reclas~ ication No, 78~79-37 to reclassify subj~c~ property from CG(Comrnercial General) ta CL(C~ ~~erciGl, Limited) to permit a commerc:(al 5hoppinq center and one of the conditions o approval of saicl recl~issiflcation Included the requirement that the property owner rcc :es[ termination c~f V~~riance No. 176. ACTIOM: Commissioner Johnsan offcred a m~.tion, seconded by Ca~~issic~ner Tolar and MOTION CARRIE'J (Comni~sioner 9ushore abstaining), that the Anaheim Cit. ~'I:inning Commission does herebi recoRmiend to the City Council th~t 'Jariance Na. 116 br. termin,~ted. D. VARIANCE No. J43 - Re~c uest fc>r termin~it ion. The staff report to the Planniny Cc,mrnission dated June 18, 1979 was presenied, noting subject property is ~~ rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting i~f .~pproximately 0.2 ac~e haviny a frontaqc ~f approxirn~icely 80 feet on the we~st side of Anaheirn Bc~le~'ard, having a maximum depth of approximatcly 130 f~et, beinq locatc~d approxirnately 2S0 f~et north of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue, and fur;her desc~iLed .~s 129 North Anahcim 8oulevard; th~~t the applicant (Anahe~~n Redevel~~pfient Agency) reyue~,[s terminatian of Variance No. J43 which was granted by [he Planninq Commission on April 22, 195~, to permit installation of sc~~am baths; eh~t on May 7, ~979 the Plar ~ing Commission approved Reclassifica[ion Na. 78-79-31 to r~classify subject pr~perty from CG(Corm~ercial, GPneral) to CL(Commercial, Limited) t~~ permit. a ccmmercial shoppiny center. Anc af the condirions of approval of saiei Reclassification included the requirement that the pr~perty owner requPSt termination c~f Varianca No. 743. ACTION Cortvnissioner Jc+hnSC~n offered Resoluti~~n No. PC79-126 ~tnd mc~ved for its passage and adoption thal thc Anaheim City P~.nn+ng Commission does he~ret,y yr~~nt termination of Va r iance No. 7~+3. On roll call [he foregoing resolution was passed by the followiny vcte: AYES: aARNES, DAVID, HERBST, JOHNSOk, KING b TOLAR NOES: NONf ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: HUSNOR~ 6/18/79 ~~ ~ MINUTES, ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIQN, June 18, 1979 79-482 REPORT" b RECOMMENUATIONS (continue~) E. VARIANCE N0. 774 - Request for termination. The staff report to the Planning Comnlssion was presented, noting the subject property is ~ reckangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximr~tely 0,4 acre located at the northw~st corner of lincaln Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard, hiviny apprUximate fruntages of 133 feet on the nurth side of Lincoln Avenue and 147 feet on the west side of An~heim Boulevard, and further descri~ed a~ 129~ West Lincoln Avcnue; thac the applicant (An~heim Redev~lapment Agency) requests terminati~~n of Uarlance No. 774 wl,ich was approved by the Plan~iiny Commissiun on J~ly I, 1957 to permit a health club; that on May 7, 1~79 the Planning Commission approved Reclassificalion No. 78-79-37 to rec.lassify subJect property from CG(Commercial, Gener~al) to the CL(Corm,~rci,~l, Limi~ed) zc,ne to permit a commercial shoppinq center .~nd one of the conditinns uf approval of sald reclassification included the requirement [hat the property ovrnc~r request termination of Variance No. 774, AGTION: Commissio~cr Jahnson offered Resoiution N~. PC79-127 and movc.d for its passage and adoplion that fhe Anaheim City Plannin, Cc,mmission doas hcrct~y gra:~[ the terminatlon for Variance No. 77~. On roll call the foregoinq resolution was p~ssed by the fUllowinq vote: AYES: HARNES, DAVID, HCRB~,T, JONNSON, KING ~ TOLAR NOES: NONE ABSENT : N~)NE ABSTAiN: BU5t~ORE F. CONOITIONAL USE ~fRMIT N0. 1956 - R~cue~t_for ,~pproval ~f revised plans. The staff report to the Ptanning Corn~n~ssiar dared June IB, 1979 was presented, notinq subject prc~perty is a rec[angularty-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately I.I~. acres lotated at the northeast cerner of K~~tella Avenue and Marbor Bouelvard, ~,aving approximate ~rortages of 200 feet on the r'~orth sidc ~~f Katc:ll Avenue and 250 feet on the east side of Harbor Bo~levard; that the petiti~ner (Ralph McKinn ~~, Foocimakc~. ~nc.) reque~ts approval of revised plans for Conditional Use Permit ko. 1956 which was aranted by -.he Planning Commissian, in part, ~n March 26, i919, to cstablish a drive-th rouyh ,'estaurant with waiver ~f minimum numb~r of parking spac~s ond minimur~ drivr th rough lane length; that the {~lans originally submic.ted by the p~titioner sh~~wed an ex~siiny enclo ed restaurant and the proposed drive-thrnugh rest3uran[ with 76 on-sir.e parking spaces; that ~o separ,ite drive-through lane was prapased for the drive-through restaurant; that the Plannin~; Comniss~on approved subj~ct plans, pr~ v~CJPl~ [hat a m~nirnum of 71 parking spazes be provided ar~d that the drive-through lane lenythsh,~ll comply with xoning code requirements; that revised plans showing drive-through lar~es conforming with the ~r~g cade were required to be submitted to the Pl~nr.ing Commis-,ion f~r approval; a~d th~„ the petitioner has submi~ted revised plans shcnving 71 parkiny spac^s provided on-site to be used by the existi~g entlosed restaurant and pr~posed ~arive-through resiaurant and further indicate a separate drive-chraugh lane far the ~. ~~nosed drive-[hrouyh restaurant, said lane being 106 feet long measured from it5 start to the ordering devite and lOQ feet long between :he orderin-j device and the pick-up window, in conformance with code st3ndards AC'~IOti: Commis~~oner Johnson offered a motion~ seconded by Cor~missione~ Barnes and MOTION CARRI~D~ that the- Anaheim City Planning Conxnissior~ d~es hereby aparove tne revi-ed ptans as being in carFOrR~ance with the cenditions of a~pruval of Condltional Use P~•mit No. 1g56. 6/18/7? w 'l..' MINUT~S~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, June 1$, 1979 79-483 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business~ Commissloner Johnson affered a rtation, seconded by Commissloner David and MOTION CARRIED~ that the meeting be adjourned. The mecti~g was adJourned at 6:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~~~ ~ ~b~~~ Edirh L. Harris, Secr~tary Anaheim City Planr,ing Comnissir,n