Minutes-PC 1980/04/07. . . _ .. ._. , ,_~
~~
Clty Nell
Anaheim, Caltfo~nlo
APri l 7~ 19aA
REGULAR MEETING Of TFIE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNINC COMMISSION
REGULAR - Th~ reguler meettng of th~ Anaheim City Planntng Canmisston was celled
MEETING to ordrr by Chatrwoman 9a rnea at 1;3; p.m.~ Aprti 7~ 1~f~0 ln the
Counctl Chamber~ a quorum being present.
PRES~tIT - Chat rwama~: Barnes
Commisslone~rs; Bushore~ David~ Fry~ Nerbst~ Ktnc~
A85ENT - CONMISSIONERS: Toiar
ALSQ PRESE-IT - Jack White Asststani CitY Att~rney
Joy Titus Office Engineer
Annika Ssntalahst Nssistant D(rectnr for Zo~inc~
Dean Sherer Zoning Rep~escntattve
Edith Herrts Planning Cammisslo~ Secretary
PLEDGE OF - T'he Pledge of Allegiance tn thr. Fiaq was led by Commissioncr Herbst.
ALLEf1ANCE
APPROVAI OF - Cammisstoner king offered e mr~tion~ seconded by Cammfsslo-~er Qdvid
TNE MiNUTES and MOTIAN CARRIED (Conmtssioner Tolar being r~bsent and Cqmmi~s~aner
Barnes abstalnlny)~ th~t the minutr..s of the nieeting of March 24, tg~~
be approved as submi tted.
WOR_, K~SE~SS I~ E I R ~ANYQN AREA)
Chalry+omb~ 8arnes suc~gasted Rpril 21~ 19fi0~ following the pubilc hearinga of the~
regulA~ly-schnduled ttems, ~s the date f~r the public workshop to discuss General Plan
Arnen ~nent No. 1;5 relative to the Weir Canyon area. The Conmtssioners concurred with che
suqgested date.
RESPONSE TO LETTER FROM ARlO AuTB ELECTaIC. IrIC.
Chatn+aMan Barnes explained th~ Cornmiss(on haa received a t~tter fran Arlo Auto Electrtc~
Inc., req uesttng a meettng wtth th~ merchants tn the area to discuas the tratttc stgnal at
the caarner of B~oadway and Len~ and other probienK in th~ area. She noted thc Pianning
Commisston Is net involved tn the redevelopment of thi~ area end thls is a matter which
should be handlod b; the Redevelapment Agency.
She stated the Conimissio~ aould ltke to be Informed of the Redevelopment Agency's re~ponse
to this lette~.
A4Ti0N; Co~wmtaatoner Davt~d offcred a motion, secanded by Cementssioner King and MOTION
RR EO (Conraissioner Toler betng sbsent)~ thst the Anahetm City Planni~g Commisston does
her~by req uest that the Mahei~n Redevelopewnt Agency respond to Mr. R. A. Inabinette~
Praslder~t of Arlo Auto Elect~ic. Inc. ~ ~egarding a meetln~ snd i~forn+ the Cammis:lon nf
ssid re:ponae.
80-242 4/7/80
,,--•
~~
,
~l ' i ?
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CI'TY PI,AHNINO COMMIS510N~ APRIL 7~ 1980 80"2~3
ITEM N0. 1 PUOLIC HEARING, OWNERS: N~LLY Wf1Df. DAVIOS~N~ P. A~
~t f. s VC O~CLARAT I ~N Box 12 3~ Fiane 1 e I~ t~awal I.91~71 ~+. AGENTS ; Jl1MES
CL 1 ON N0. -84- 1 MOII~.ER At~b TIIAMAS PLCMAN ~ 1542-8 ~ Mou) ton Perkway ~
~(~'~"~;"'"~'iTa'r Tu~tin~ CA 91~8~. Property d~scribed es an
Irregularly-shaped ~ercel af lend consisting of
app roxinwtely ~.3~+ acres~ locoted et the southe~st cc~rner of Frontera Street end Gl~~sel)
Street~ hevtng Appraximt~te frontac~r~s of apprc~xlmately 1~n~ fect on the south slde ~f
Frontes~a S~reet and approxlmately 1;Q fcet on th~ eASt sld~ of Gtessel) Street. Property
presently clr~sstfled C~~UNTY OF Of~ANG~ Ai (GE-IF.RAI_ AGRIf.ULTI~RAL) ZONE.
REQUESTED CL~SSIFICATIQFl: ML (111UUSTRIAL~ LINITfD) 2011C.
Rfi2UESTED VARIANCE: uAIVERS OF (A~ REQUIRCD L~T FRO-+Tnr,~, (n) MI~IIMUM LANDSCAPED SETBACK~
TO CbNSTi~UCT AN INDUSTRIAL COMf'LEX.
There was nc~ one lndicating tt~etr prrsence In o~pasiti~n to sub.ject request~ and elthough
th~c staff report t~ the Plenntnq GommiSSlbn drtr.ct Aprt) ~~ 191~~ wrs not rer+d at th~ public
hearin~~ it Is rcferrcd to and madc a part of thc minutcs.
Dill Uhl, 2729 "A" Seturn Strcet, Drea~ ex~lninc~l tl~ey had review+ed scver•al schenks wlth
different street ley~u;s witf~ the Planning staff; th,nt th~- ~ro~erty Is irregularly-ahnped
with llmited access and hns en Edison tr~nsmisslon casen~ent throuc;h the south portlon of
the propcrty. Fle cxplni~ecl tl~ey are rcqu~stin~ a waiver to perm~t c~ bulldinc~ frontln~ on
a prlv~te st~eet and could havr. provided r~ n~mA) lnduxtrlel stre~t; hc~w~ver, thcre would
be a cul-de-sac on tP~e west~~rn po~tlon and felt that would be extremely (nconventent for
large truc~;3 to turn ~round; thAt tl,~y chose to Rrovide a rrivrte st~eet wlth a total loop
with lsrgc radtuses on tha corners. Ne cxp1A(ned they have ~rquest~d ~ w~iver of the
minimum landscapcd setback far thc buildi~g on the northwest c~ rn~~ alonc~ Glasscl) and
F~ontera on the western ~ortl~n where the grade cley~+tton is tw~lve fect t~elow grade~ end
tha bulldln~ aili he ~iown in a hple And ~ landscane SPCb6C~~ W~~~ ~~t be seen From FronterA
or Gla~sell.
Ne explalned dirt has been aumped on the site ~nd th~ elev~mtihn ckies not appear tc+ be
lvwer, but t~~e dirt NI11 be uscd to flll In en dren shown ~n the s~il's ~etsort as e large
hale In thc middle of thc slte. Ne stnted the building ned~ the cest~rly entrance ls
closer then the minimum to prdvicie a lar~r. turn{ng r~diux. ~riqinally atl buildin~s were
back away from Fronterr~ hut ( t was rrore advant.~gcous to plac~ tt~is one hui idi~ct at this
locatio~ t~ pr~vide a lar~c radius to pc mit revcrse turns into the site.
7HE PUBLI C HEARI IJG WAS CL05EU.
Conmisslo~er Herbst P~~nted ou[ the drawtngs are out of proportlon ~n~iltr. Uhl clarified
th~t they wli) have A F~alf-wlcith street wtth 32-foc~t right•of-way on the s~uth stde of
Frontera and thcre Is m~re lAnd where the building is locatecl an the westerly portion~ and
the s~lan shows an arca outside their property whtch thcy p~o~osc to tandsr_ape and malntaln
~nd matntenance will he a~art of thPfr butiJing association. t1e stated even th~u~h they
ara only fivt feet frcxn t~~eir property ltne, the tuildin9 ls twcive feet below grad~ and
there will be approximatcly b 15-font landscaped slope which tfiey r~ili maintain.
q/7/~
,~, ~~ ~ ~,
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNINC COMMISSIAN~ APRIL 7~ lg~ ~0-2W~+
Elit NEt3ATIVE DECLAaATION, aECLASSIFICATION N0. 7~80'31 ANQ VA~RIANCE NOi3141 ~CONTI~~UED)
..._.~~ _ .~
J+~y Tltus, Offtce Enginee~~ ~xplained sn encr~~chment cnn be requested from the City in
order to landscape and maintein the rigi~t-of-w~y.
Comml~atoner Herbst waa concerned ahout the 2y-foat driveweys bein~ toc+ short fer the ~+A-
foot lhnc~ scml-trucks and Hr. Uhl exrla~nr.d thcy Applted the s~~es turn{ng rAdiuses useA by
the t~ucks to el) thase lats. He expleined they plnn ~n loadin~ sid~+ays~ pointtnc~ out
this is prlvatF properiy end Is for Itmited fndustrlal uses and la~ge trucks will hlock
the drtveway wf~ile it's there.
Cammlssioner Flerbst asked about thc trash trucks ~nd Nr. Uh) st~ted tl~eir p1An hes been
approved by the Senitatfon Diviston e~nd they will ~rnvidr. dc+uhl~ roll-up doors wh~re the
trash dumpst~ers can br_ ralled out of the bullding on ptck-u~+ day. fle stateci the turninq
radluses have been reviewed with the Traffic ~~gin~er and orlglnally he Incr~ased them
wlthtn tl~c sttc because trucks moving et a reasonnbic rat~ of speed on the street, ne~d a
larc~er radi us.
Cortxnissioner Nerbst stated he is bothered bccaus~ thcsc bufldings are supposed to be for
lt~ht tndustrial uses and asked what type I~dustrtel uses are proposeJ. 11e felt eve ry
loadtng ancl unloading area is tot~lly unsuttablt fo~ industrial uaes.
Mr. Uhl steted tl~cy are llmitcd to tl~e type and size of businesses ellowr.d I,y the loning
Code dnd they had view~d other proJects and some werc worse because! ~f the cul-de-sac
streets~ but tn thts proJect a truck could k~ep clrclinc~ until lt flnds the prope~
locatlon and then Jeck-knif~ into the l~nding area.
Cnmmissioner Bushore asked why the bullcllnys wer~ sprPad out and placed sporadlct~liy nnd
asked if tt was because of the topography~ or (f it was to qet thc maxiMUm use.
Mr. Uhl steted they h~~d constdrred a scheme rrf th the bu) ldtnc~s together~ but thet r.rZetes
cammon driveways Invittng battie becween ~ropc~ty awne~s If drives are blocked. He stated
he had su!agested not ~uttin~ the bui lclings together b~ecause the c~wner wants to sell the
indivtdual parcels.
Commissianer Ktng felt this plAn makes the ~ roject more ~ttrrctive and Conimissioner
Bushore egreed.
Cnrtmissioner Nerbsc felt the laading prablems w(11 limit tht use of the buitdings.
Chain~+aman 8arnea agreed with CanmtsstAner lterbst and felt nccess to the 13~0~4 square
foot building would be cit`ficult for even an automohtl~. She brtefly rcvfewed th~ plan
wiih Mr. Uhl.
Commlssloner ilerbst suggested designAtlny the 13.~Q~ square foot building for wareh~use
uses which Is Alloaed by Code~ and felt the plan n~eds nnre work.
~ommissionar Fry tho~aght this ts a go~d p roJect ~+nd the marketplace wii) dictate Che
usage end felt the developrient is logicr+l for the ~rea and Commissioner King agreed and
stated the petlttoner has htred professionai architects a~d engineers and wants to pratett
his investment,
~/7/~ , . . ~ ~~~
c
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ APRII 7r 19~ ~w2~5
EIR NEGATIVE OEC_LARATION, RECI.ASSIFICATION NQ. 79-~•31 aN0 VARIP,NCE t~0._ 3141 (CONTINUED~
Commt~tsioner Bushore stated the concern~ ~+r~ valid tf the Indivld~al perccis a~e sold,
stattng the Conxnission ~nows whet the demand is ter some~ of thr.se huildinc~s. He polntod
aut th~~e Is a shorta,qe of these type butldtnys snd h~ Is n~t try ing to stifle
developm~nt~ but is trytng to protect the future.
Commlssloner King f~lt a purchaaer will invastlqAte every potnt b~fore buyinc~ the
propcrty.
ACTION: Commissloner Y.ing offered o motion~ s~can~ted by Commissioner bevid ~nd MQTIf111
C RRIED (Commissioner TolAr being ebsent)~ th.~t Che An~+helm Clty P1~nning Comnlsston has
revlawrd the ~roposol to r~clessify sub)ect ~r~perty frc~m the ~~~rnty of Orenge A-1
(General Agrl c~~l turol) Zone to the Cf ty of An~hetm ~1L ( Industri = i~ L(mi ted) T_one to
eonstruct en fndustrial c~m`lex wlth walvar~ of required lot fr~ntng~ and mintmum
landscaped satback on an i~regularly-sha~ed n~+rccl of lend consisting of approximately
6.3~~ Acres loc~ted et the southeast corn~r of Frontera Street an A Glassell Street~ havtng
a fr~ntage of a~pr~ximately 1c1~!~ feet on the south sicle of Fronte~rA Street ancl ~ f~ontaqe
of ~Aproximately 1;0 feet on the ebst sldc of f,lassel) Street; and d~es herehy a~prave the
NegAttvc Qeclaration from the requtrcment to prerare ~n env~ronn+cntal ImpACt report on the
basts that there would be no sl~nifican~ tndividual or cumulative adverse environn+ental
Impatt due to tF~e approval of this -legativ~ Decle~atlon since th ~ Anahelm ~~nerA) ~lan
designates thc subJect property for ncnerat industrirl land use s torxncnsuratc with the
proposal; that no se~sitlvic envlronment~l im~acts a~e involved i n thc propasal; thet the
Inltial Stucly submltteci by the prtltl~n~r incl~cntes no signlficant in~ltvldual or
cumulattve adverse envi ronr±~ental in~acts; end tt~at the tlegaciv~ Decleretlon subst~ntiettng
the fnregoing fincline~s Is on f(le in che Clty of ~naheim PlAnntng RepArtment.
CommissSoner Klny offered Rtsolutlon No. PCB~-f~~ and r~ov~d for i ts pessn~e and adoptton
that thc Anatieim Cf ty Planning Commissinn does herehy ~rant Petf tlc~n for Reclasstficatlo~
~1~. 79-~0-31 ~ s~Ject to Interdepartmental Ccxnml tte^ recommendat ton}.
On rot 1 cal l~ the foregoing r~solution r+as ~+assed by the fel lo~ri ng vote:
AYES: COMMISSI~!IERS: f3AR!~ES, f3USI1nRE~ DAVIO, FRY~ KI~IG
NOES: COMMISSIOtlERS: tSERBST
A6SE!IT: COMf~l55101JC~S: TOLI~R
Comrnlssioner Herbst explalned his oppesttion Is that this proJeet ts poorly arranged fo~
circulation. even though he has no ~bJectlo~ to reclassificatior-. He felt access for
largc trucl:s wi 11 be a prohicm depending on the type of busir,esses.
Canmissioner fry pointed out the same situetion exists o~ Anaheim ~soulevard a~d M~. Uhi
stated there are other similar situAtlons in Anahein+ and they did put a lot of thought
int~ th1s.
Commissioner King offered Resolutlon No. PCB~-h1 and moved fo ~ its passage and adoptio31~i
that the Anaheim CttY Planning Commisston does hereby ~~ndtsub~ ectot~flntardepartn+e~ta)
besed on the shape and topo~rt~pt~y of subJect prope~ty.
Committcc reeonen~ndations.
On roll call, the for~goTng resolutinn was passed by the fella~ing vote:
AYES: CAMMISSIONERS: BARNES~ DAVlD, FR1f~ KiNC
NOES: CONMISSIONERS: BtlSHORE, HERBST
ABSENT: COMWISSIONERS: TO~AR
. .w1__,... . ....1.~,_~,~~:
~~~~ .~
~. i
MINUT~S. ANAHEIM CITY PIANNIN~i CONMISSION~ APItIL 7~ 19gQ
PM•2i~6
ITEM N~J. 2 PU9LIC HCAftING. OuNERS; CENERAL AMEPICAN LIFE
.~ E DECLAMTION ItISURANCE C0~'ANY~ ET AL~ 163A Su~kist Street~
~ .gp_ Anshcim~ CA ~12~'~1f.. ACE11T: TIIOMl1S E. Ni:.MA~I,
"-""-` iG3A South Sunkisc Street. Anaheim~ CA ~i2A06.
Petittoner requeats th~t property descrlbed as an
(rregulerly-sheped parcel of la~d conststing of epproximat~ly ~.~(~ acres lecated et the
easterly terminus ~f Sinclolr Strcet~ havin~ A maxlmuro depth of approximately ~~75 feet,
end being located ~pproxtmately 250 feet nortl~ ~f the centerltne of Katetle Avanue be
reclassiftcd fram che RS•A-~~3~QA0(RESIDENTIAI,~ SINr,LE-FANILY) ZONF T~ TNE Ml (INDUSTRIAI~
LIMITED) ZOIIE.
Thrre wes no one indiceting thelr presence tn oppositio~ to sutsJect request, end althn~uc~h
the staff report to the Planning Comr.~ission datecf April 7. 1~R~ was not rend at the public
heering~ tt is rcfcrred to and mndc a pnrt of tl~e mtnutcs.
Tim Forhan~ 17~~ South Orangc Street. Orange~ was present to answcr any quest0ons.
Ti1E PUBLIC HEARINf WAS CLOSFD.
Commtssioner Flerbst askcd about reali9nmcnt of Sinclt~lr Strcet and esked if the prope~ty
1 s ownad by tlie samc c~wner.
Mr. Forhnn stated therc are pl.~ns to buy the adJoining pro~erty when it is released from
the egricultur~l prescrvc next year and a plan has b~en desi~ned fo~ che rer~ainder of the
p ro~erty .
AC710N: Commissionc~ King offc~cd a motion~ s~conded by Corm-issl~ner F ry and MOTI0~1
GARR~~D (Commissloner Tol~r bein~ absent)~ thaC the Anahetm Ctty Plannin~ Cammisslon has
~evicwed the proposel to reclassify subJect -~~op~rty from the P,S-A-A3~!100
(Residential/Agricultural) Zanc to the ML (Industrial. Limited) Zone to construct an
industrlal complex ~n an irr~gularly-shapcd parcel of land consisting of ~pproxtmately
4.66 acres loceted at the easterly terminus of Sinclair St~eet havtng a maximum depth of
approximately 475 feet and being locateJ eppraxin+stely 25'~ feet no~th of the cen.srline of
Katella Avenue; and cioes hereby approvt the Hegt+tlve Decleratlon f rom the requirement to
Qrepara an environmental Impact re~rr, o~ the basis that there wvuld t~e no significant
indtviduai or cumulative adverse environmental impact due to the approvel of thls Negative
Oectoraticx~ slnce the Anaheim GenPr~~l Pian dGSlgnates the sub~ect proherty for genera)
induatrla) land uses commensurate wlth the pr~posal; that no sensitive environmental
impacts are tnvolved i~ the proposal; ti~at the Inttial Study submitted by the petitione~
indicates no significa~t indivtdual or cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and thet
the t~tgative Deciaratton substantiating thc foregoing findings is on file tn the City of
Anahelm Planntng Department.
Commissioncr King offered Resolution No. PCBn-62 and maved for tts passege and adoption
that the Anahelr~ City Plannin~,~ Commisslon does hereby grant Petttion for Reclassification
flo. 79-~-:i3, s~~ect to Interdepertmental Cor.mittec reCa~ndatians.
Qn roll call, t~~e foregolnc~ resolutio~ was passed by the fotlaving vote:
AYES : COMMI SS I ONERS : BARNES, (3USt10P.E ~ DAV I 0~ f RY ~ t1ERt35T ~ KI tt~
NOES: COM~:15S10MER5: -~OHE
ABSEtlT: COhWi55l011ER5: TOL~1R
p,/7/SO
~;
HINUTES~ ANAt1~IM CITY PLANNIHG COMMISSION~ APRII 7~ 19~~ ~~24~
ITEM N0. PUBLIC fIEAR1~~G. INITIATEQ 9Y CITY OF A-~AHEIM
k~~ N~VE OECLARATION PLANNING COMMISSION, 20~~ Esst Ltncoln Avenue,
~ ~ _gp.3q Anahelm~ CA 9Z805. Petitloner requests that
-------~--~ property descrthed ~s an i ~regularly-shAped parcel
of land cenetsting of ~~proximately 5~g aeres havinc~
epproximat~ front~gus of approximetely ~2y fQOt on the west side ~f Eest Street, end
epproxim~tely 210 feet on th~ south s1Je of North Strcet~ 4nd ~00 feet an tha ~o~th side
of Nortl~ Streat be reclasslfled from thc RS-720^ IaESIDCN'i11~L~ SItIGLE-FAMILV) ZONC TO TFIE
Rt1~2~~00 (RESIDE~tTI AL. MULTIPLE-FAMILY) ZONE.
Thare were approximatoly thirty-two tnterested pa~sans indicattng thelr presence In
oppositloi'to s19~~Wds~no sreadnat~the~public heartng.citristr~ferredato~andCm desa'pa~t
dt~ted Aa 7,
of the mi nutcs.
not I n th i s pe t I t 1 on was
Doa~ Sherer~ Associete Planner, presonted the scnff re~ort~ 9
(nltiated by tt~e Planning Commissi~n fotlowing a~provat of Reclasslffc~tton No. 79'~~'33
et the southwest cornor of North Str~et rnci f_est Street to P,M-?.A~~ (Residential, Multiple-
Family) Zonewhich Is tn keeping with thc Gener~+l Ptan dcsignatt~n af inedie~m density
residential~ uhgn Reciasstfication No. 79-80 33 Was ~p~s~tf~red~ steff p~epered ~~ brlef
hlstory of the Gene~Al Plan for th(s area ancl cc~ples of the ra~ort have be~n distrlbuted.
Planning Commission fclt this publtc hcariny ahould be h~l~ to determin~ r+t~ethe~ ar not
thare is a wil t ingnesa on the part of thc property ciwners te rez~ne thc) r prope~tles to
multipie-f.~mlly use~.
Frenk Guavara~ 153 ~~~rtt~ Bush~ Anahelm~ pointed out thc report Inciicates tt~e staff
conductGd a telr.pho~e surv~y with property amers fronting on the west sid~ of East Street
end an the south side of North Street and werr. ~hble to contACt nine of th~ tNelve owners
and itve indlcated they felt th~ area shoulci remain sin~3le-famlly residential. Ne fett
that shows haw the poople feel and thay do opQose th. ~ reclassiflcatton: that thcy alreedy
l~ave some multiple famlly uses In the arca ~nd he I~as ha-' ta cont~ct the Police htmself
regarding drinkiny on the streets~ etc.; that they have livcd there 16 years and hts
deuqhter noes to Sycamore School ar~d tt~e schoels have drastica~nc~udin~et¢+enupkeepYof~the
alsc has changed wi th the mul ti-fA~i ly uses in thc ccx^munl ty. 9
grocery storas. He felt multi-family hcxnes niake a big difference in a cn~~mlty.
Mary Rapisarda, 7~~8 N~rth Vine, statecl thry dc~ not want ~eclassification and she, egrees
wi th everythi ng Mr. Guevare sai d. She esked how far the recl ess i f i catl on c~oes and the
~art washe~hr~seto clransthestrash f~om itsoff~herjpropErtyaand ndoes~not3r-~eed5lt~framhNorth
p Y~
end East Strcets.
Julius Nelson~ 71G Ilorth Rose Street. stated I~fs ho+ne backs inta the west aide of East
Street and at thc present timc the traffic and noise level on East Stree t Is unbearable
and tnvi~~d the tommisston to vtsit his home to lts[en to the traff!c noise from emergency
v~hicles~ etc. en East Street. He felt changing the zaning wili incre.as~ the traffic~
notsc and perking. tie referred to multl-family unlts o~ V1ne Street witt~ the parktnq
no(sa and tral'fic problems. Ile did nat understand why this is befng dlseusseci becaus3 it
was reviewao (,~ 19G7 and it was decid~d ta Just leave lt singie-~ami ty.
a~~~eo
~~
MINUTES~ ANAHEI M CITY PLANNING COMMISSIQN~ APRII 7~ 19~ &1-248
EIR NEGATIVE DEC LAMTION ANO RECLASSIFICATION N0. -80•34 (CONTINUEO)
- ._....~..~_. ~.._~..
Cls~~nce Trofho Iz~ G17 North East Streot~ pointed out the tretfic count on Ea~t Street at
the pre~e~t ttme Is approximately 2Q~OA0 vohicies per dsy and asked v+hat wi I1 be done
about the notse and if the street will be wider,.d. Ile felt ft would be wrong to edd more
paople to the aree.
Chatrwoman Bern~s e xplalned thls hearing is to help the Commiselon do what ts best for the
property awners and are heving this heert~g bec~use the~y heve not mede up thetr minds yat.
Rtchard Valask~ , 728 ~~orth 111n~j ~eferraci ta the multl-famtly housing on Dush to the north
snd tho deterto ~etlon that he felt has occurrad and stAted he is opposed to tht~
recl~ssificatton bc causc of thet dcterioratio~.
Y~aren Deesan~ 121~ East wllhelmina Street~ on the cast stde of East Stre~t~ stated thls
came up between the years af 1~6~ and 196; and she trdlcatecf at chat time that they had
mc~ved tnto the nelghborhood wlth the understAndine~ that It was to he a cless one
resident(al district and they do not want it reclnssified for multi•family use; that thelr
house ts the thi~d onc from Eest Strcot and if thc pmpcrties ov~r on Vtn~ enQ Rose are
reclassiflcd~ their portion would also be reclossified~ anci weuld Isolate he~ property.
Chelrwoman Barn~s polnte:d out the area being consldered for ~eclassificetion on the map.
Sho explained p roperty owners within 300 feet werc notified of thls hearing~ that the
proc~rty wes posted ond the hee~ing was noticed In the newspaper tn order to contact es
many people as possible.
Mrs. Baason sta teci she realized which area is being cnnstdered but was concerned if thls
reclassiflcativn ls permittcd, it wfll not be long bcfore their sldc of the street follows
sul t.
Thomas Gelker, 1025 East North, steted he built his house twenty-five year~ ag~ when the
area wes all re sldentlal and has seen the cncroachmcnt of apartmcnts; that the Pollce
DepArtment ts w~ll awa~e of Mavis Street; that the stgn wes posted for the hearing, but
wa5 only up sdout an ~~our hecause the kids tore it c1oKn. Ne st~ted h~ is personaliy
agatnst this becausc hc feels I t has detertarated and wi 11 further deteriorate the
commun i ty .
Mrs. Jack Nagel , y24 Fbrtn Vine~ stated they have been there 2f~ years~ before Disneyland;
that they have six gra~-n children and she is gratefu) they are out because of the mess on
Mavis and the apartments on tlorth Street h~~e mariJuana trees~ etc.; that seven bikes have
bee~ stolen in seven years in bac1: of the house. She aske~i the Gommissioners to identtfy
themseives~ whi th thcy did.
Paul Rt+pisarda, ]48 North Vine~ stated durinc~ the last six or seven months they have had
what hc though t wes onc indivtdusl wrlttng graffftt all over this section ("Ltttle Devid")
and nobody has done anytfiing to stop it Fle was concerned that r~orc apartments will bring
in more of this typ~ thing. He feit this Clty alll go down llke New York Nith more
apartments, be eause epartment dwellcrs do nnt own the property and do n~t care about
taking care of it and reforred to Mavis Street.
Commtssion~~ David stated he feels the apposition do~s not want to bring in "p~or people~"
explafntnq he ~derstends thnc epartments att~RCt low to mode~ate income people.
4/7/80
~~
MINUTES~ ANANEiM CITY PLAHNING COMMISSION~ APRII. 7~ 1980 80-249
E I R ~IEGATIVE DECLARATION AND itECLASS 1 FI CATI ~N N0. 79•80-34 (CON7 ~ NUED)
...~. __..~_..
A gentlem~n from the ~udienca reaponded that that would depend on the rents being cherg~d.
Tt~E PUBLI C HEl1al NG NAS ClOSEO.
Commissloner Herbst clartfted this publtc hearing Is being held because there have been
tnqutrles from people who own p roperty on East Street regerding posslble converslon to
apartments snd a faw h~ve been approved and this hearing ts to gtve the peaple an
opportunl ty to ~tve thei r tnput so tf~e Commisston and Councl l can make th~ proper
decislcx~. -ie st+~ted the Commisslon is nat trying to put anythtng over on the owners~ but
recognlzes thosc who own p rope~ty on East Street do have a prablen~ and the Commisston
wants to be sure thel~ probloms dn not tnterfere with other people's rights~ but the
houaes along arterla) highways becnrnc unliv~ble fo~ single-fam!ly and the owners t~n not
live there er rent them end those p~operttes downgrede the cammunity and that becomes a
logical ploce For conversion.
Commissloner Ilerbst f~lt at thts time, fron thP input, and due t~ t~e fact that no one In
the affncted area was interested enough t~ come to the r~eting~ reclassificatlon is
premature and should be denicd.
Chel rwoman ~arnes agreed, but addcd tt~at as timc~s change, the Commisslan can look ot
things in e dtfferent way a~,d w~ll continue to do that; that vwners on Easc Street wlil
conttnue to make ttiese requests and thls is not the end of thls. She suc~gested the owners
lc,ok around ot same of the other areas thAt have dcveloped. Shc did not fce) apartments
would be built bncause not many opA~tmcnts are befng built today and the devclop~ent would
p rob ably be condominlums an d other areas elong arte rlals have becn upgraded with
condominiums. She stated notse attentuatlon measures have to be takcn and the people
behind the p roJect have less noise. She fclt. however. reclassificat0on of thls area at
thls time Is premature.
Conmissioner Bushore asked how many people were present when the r~tlasstfication was
consldored dt the southwe3t corner of North and Ea~st Street t~bout one manth ago and
potnted out four unlts wer~ approvr.d with no opposition and the Commisstoners need their
input. pointTng out he had op,~osed that request because he wanted public Input and now the
neighbors are ready to lynch the Commission and the Commission is on their ~tde. Ne
stated there will be other ~equests for apartmcnts atong East Street~ and suggested the
oppositton e~pea~ befo~e the Commission to ob,ject. He stated there is a chalienge because
this is a degenerating netghborhood and the Commisston is trytng to save the netghborhood
8nd is qotting na tnput. lie suggested also they get together and make same suggestlo~s to
the Commission on some ways the neighborhood c~n b~ improved.
Chatrwoman Barnes suggested letters be written to the Conmission giving their ideas.
Commiss~.~ner David stated he is not ln favar of this reclassificatton~ not because it ts
for apartments because he has seen some apartments he would be happy to live next to and
does~ in fact, 11ve within 150 feet af apartments and they are beauti`ul and are built to
present Code, and his lifestyle is not disrupted, but enhanced; that hc 1s against this
becauso of East Strsec and the fact it ~ill not handle the additio~aS traffic. He felt
the oppositton is vts ually seeing a complex of apartments similar to Rose Street and
pointed out they c~~not be built that way because present Codes are ve ry strict. Also~
triere are probler with landlords allowing three, four or five familtes in one apartment,
4/7/60
~
~~;
~' '
F
MINUYfS~ ANAHEiM CITY PLANNING COMMISSI4N, APRIL 7~ 19~ 80-25Q
EIR NEGATIVE D~CLARATION ANO RECLASSIFICATION N0. 80~34 (CONTINUED)
but apertme~ts pe~ se a~a not the problem here~ but khe physica) aspects of the p rope~ty
are the prob lem.
ACTION: Commisstoner David offered a motion~ s~conded by Commissloner Nerbst and MOTION
~(Commissioner Toler being absent)~ that the Anahelm Clty Pl~nninq Commtsat~n h~s
ravlewad the p roposal to reclassify subJect property from RS-720~ (Residential, Singl~-
Family) Z~ne to RM-2~~(10 (aastdentlal. Multi•Family) Zone on ~+n Irregularly•sh~ped pa~ce)
ot land consistl~g of epproximately 5.8 ac~es having o frontege of approxlmstety 725 feet
on the west stde of Eost Street~ and approximetely 210 Feet on the snuth side of No~th
Streot, and approximately 900 fect o~ the north sic1P of North Street; And does hereby
disapprova the Negative Dc~claration from the ~equlrement to prapare an environmentel
impact report o~ the basis that there wnuld be stgnificant indivtduai o~ cumulatlve
sdve n e~nvironrr~ntai impact due !o the approvel of thi~ Negatlve Oecla~~tton; that
scnaltive environmontel impacts are Involved tn the proposal; and thet thc Initlel Study
s~mttted by thQ petitioner indicates sl~~•Ificent indivldual or cumul~tive adverse
environmental impacts.
Commtssioner Oavid offercd aesolution No. PC80-63 and moved far tts passage and adoption
that the llnaheim City Pl~nning Commissl~n does hereby deny Petltlon for Recla~stficetion
yo. 7g-F34-31~ on the basis thet besed on publtc Input presented at the public hearin~~~
reclosstficotian at this time would be pr~meture and would have a~~et~lrt~~tal impact on
the s urruundiny resldentlol neighborhood.
Commisstoner Herbst statad any property owners alo~g East Street sttll will have ihe rtght
to ~cquest s cf~ang~ or reclassificetion on their property ~nd future hearings will be
advcrtisad and the neighbors should bc aicrt ta that situatlon.
On rol) call~ the forcgoing resolutlon was pASSad by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES~ BUSIIORE. DAViD~ FRY~ HERUST, KING
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSl011ERS: 70LAR
4/7/80
(
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING CQMMISSION~ APRIL 7~ 19~
8~•251
ITEM N0. 4 PUDIIC II~ARING. ONNERS: ORANCE COUNTY EIUDDNIST
E DECLARATIOf~ Ct1URCH~ 909 South bsle Street~ Anoh~im~ CA 428~4.
~. 2AG7 AGENT: JUtIJI SARASNI~IA~ 71~1 Pelicen ~rlve. Bueno
""'-"""~'~"--"-' -"-'- P~rk~ CA ~Of,211. Petitloner renuests ~ermisslon to
EXPA-ID ~N EXISTI~~~ CHURCII on property described as
a rectangulerly-sh~ped psrcel of land con~isting oF approxim~tely 1.11 acres~ hevinc~ a
frontage of eppraximotety 17A fe;et on the weat alde ~f Dale Avenue, havinc~ a Mextmum de~th
of app roxlmat~ly 2tSII feet, and bel~g locateci rpproxlmatelY 225 feat north of the
conterllne of Ball Ro~d~ and further described as 70~1 South Qele llvanue. Property
presently classified RS-A•43~A00 (RESIDf.NTiAL~ SINGLE-FAMILY t11LLSIDE) zOt~E.
The~e wA~ no one indiceting thel~ presence in op~sttlon to subJect rr.quest, And although
thc steff repnrt to thc Plan~tng Commissl~n dated Apri) 7~ 1~lin wAS not reod et thc publi~
hearing~ tt is referred eo end madc ~ p~rt of the minutes.
Leo Da{cr~nano~ repres~nting the Orange County Quddhist Church~ was present to answer any
questions.
TI~E PUaLIC lIEARING WAS CLOS~D.
ACTION: Commiss(oner Y.ing offered a motian~ secondeci by Co~mtssioner Fry and MOTIAN
~D (Commissloner Tol~r being Ahsent), chac the Anahcim Ctcy Plannin~ Conmission has
revtewed the p roposa~ to ex~And ~n existing church on a rectangularly-shaped p~~ce) of
te~nd conslsting of ApproximAtely 1.11 acres~ t~aving a frontage of epproxirn~tely 17~ feet
on the west sidc af Dalc Avenuc, havin~ a mAxlmum dNpth of ep~roxlmtitely 28tl fect end
bein~ located a~proximately 225 feet nnrth of the centeritn~ of Ball Roed; a~d does hereby
approve the tlegative Declaratian fr~m~ ;he requirr_ment to pro~are an ~nvironme~ntal impact
raport ~n the basis that there would bc n~ sic~nificant Indtvidual or cumulrtlYe adverse
environmental impact due to the approval of tt-is Ilegative Decleratlon since the Anaheim
General Plan dcsic~nates the sut~]act property for nrcitum densi ty lAnd uses commensurate
wtth the p roposal; tt~at no sensitlve envtronmental tr~acts are involved in the proposal;
that the initial Stucty submittcd by the p~tltlon~r indicntcs no sic~nlficanr Indlvidua) or
cumulative adverse envtronmental irt~,acts; and tl~et the Negative Declaration s~~bstantiattng
the foregotng fincltngs is on file in the Ctcy of Anahelm Planning Department.
Commissioner Y,ing affcred Resolution Pio. PCB~-h~~ and moved for its passagc and adoption
that the Anahcim City Planning Commission docs herrby grant Petitlon for Conditional Use
Permit !!o. 20~7; subje:ct Co Intcrdepartmenta) Committee rec:o~mendations.
On roll call, the farr.going res~lution was passed by the following vote:
AYES : CQl~MISS I O~IERS : BARNES. BUSNOR~. DAVi D, FRY ~ NERElS7, KI NG
NQES: COMMl5StoNCRS: NOr~E
A9SENT: CQMMI SS I OFlERS : TOLAR
4/7/80
~. `t
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING LAMMISSION~ APRIL 7~ 1980
8n-252
17EM N0, pUdLl C HEl1al NG. 01JNER5 t CHESTER. ANO LAVEitA V. BARRY ~
~'1'~'~'~RiCAI EXEMPTIOf~-CLASS 13a South Gain ~tr~ ~t~ Anehetm, CA 928A4. Petltionar
~ N~ ~ requests WAIVGR ur ~tAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE TO CQNSTRUCT
A R0011 AODITION on prope~ty d~scrtbed as a
rectsngulnrly-shsped parcel of lend consieting of
approximatety ~000 squsre feet, having • frontage of approximncely 5A teet on the east
side of CAIn Stre~t~ havtng a maxlmum d~pth of aqproximately 1~0 feet, and being located
approximately 7AA fcat north of tha centerline of Broa dwary~ end Purther described as 138
South Gein Street. Property presc~tly classificd RS-;AAO (RESIDEIITIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY)
ZONE.
Thero wes no ona indlcating thelr presence in opposttlon to sub]ect request, and although
the staff report to the Planntn~ Commtsslon dated Aprll 7~ 1~i~0 was not read at the public
heartng, It is referrcJ to and made e pArt of the minutes.
It was notod the petitloner was nat prescnt.
THE PUBI) C IIEARI NG wAS CLOSED.
It was noted the Planning Qircctor or his euthortzcd representativ~ hAS determined that
the proposed proJect falls withtn the deflnitic~n af C~tagorical Exemptlons~ Class 3~ as
defined In perac~raph 2 of thc Ctty of Anahefm Enviranmental impact Report Gutdettnes and
is~ therafore, categorically exempt from the requtren~nt to prepere an EIP..
Commtssloner King offered Resolutton No. PCB~•E,5 end moved for ixs passage and adoption
that the Anahetm Clty Planning Commisslon does hereby grant the Petiticn for Varlante !lo.
31~+3 on the basis that denial deprlves subject property of s prtvilege being enJoyed by
ather properties in ti~c sanus zone arfd vtclnity, and subJ~~t to Interdepartmental Commtttee
recommendations.
On roll call~ the foregoing resolution was passed by thc following votc:
AYES : COHMI SS I ONERS : aARFJES, BUSNORE ~ DAVI 0, FRY ~ HERBST ~ KI ~~G
NOES: COMMlSSIONERS: ttONE
ADSf.NT: COMHISSIONERS: TOLAR
AOJOURNMENT There betng no further business, Comn-issioner Fry offered a motian, seconded
by Cornmissioncr David and MOTIOP! CARRIED that the meeting be adJourned.
The meeting was adJourned at 2:35 p•m•
Respectfutly submitted,
~,~ a~ ~4~,.
Edtth L. Narris~ S~cretary
Anahnim City Planning Commtssion
ElN:lm
4/7/80