Minutes-PC 1980/05/05~ `l 1 •
C 1 ty N+~ 11
Meheim~ Californle
M,~y 5- 19~
REGI;LAR MEET 1 NG OF THE ANAII~ 1 M C 17Y p~~N ~ NG C~MMI SS I ON
planninc~tComml~ssin^ h~s called
REGUTAR - The reg~~Ar ~'^Eet~~Q of che Anaheim Clty
MEETING to order by Chalrwa'^uo'g~~bEi~~tp~~acnt.m~' M~ry ~, 9
C~unci 1 f,hember, a 4
• Chal rwon-an: Barnes King~ Tol~+r
PRESENT Ilerbst -
Comn+issloners: Dav~d~ FrY~
(Cammissioner gushore erriveJ dt 3:50 P•m•)
ALSO P RLS ENT -
Ron~ld Tho~son
Jack White
~ay Tltus
Joel FI ck
Annika Santal~iht(
~ay Tashtro
pean Shorer
plsnninc~ Director
Asslstant City Attorney
dffice Enginae~
P,ssist+ent Dtrector for P1Annina
Assistent Olre.ctor ~or Zp^i^~
AssocirtP Plenner
Assistant Plenner
Pla~ninc~ Canr+ission Sec~etary
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGI At~CE
APPROVAL OF
T~{~ MINUTES
Edit1~ I~arris
hc Pledge of Allegience to the Flag was led by Comr+~ssloner Uavid.
-T
- Gor~xnlssione~ King offered L mot~on~usSeGO^ded by Commissionrr Dav
hore boing absent), that the
and MOTION GARRIE~ ~~~'^iss~°~~ ~~~~pprovcd as submitted.
minutes of the meeting af Apri1 21• 9
PUl1LIC HEARING. OwNERS: KARYNR~L~Cim~HCAN92~078AN5
ITEM N0. 1 K. SINGtI, 1737 ko~b~'O°k Streat,
'~~'~~"'j~TVE DECLARATION petitioner requests pe~'++~ission to ~'ERMIT A RESIOENTIAI
WAIVER OF CODE RE UIREMENT ~pRE FACIII'fY IN TNE aS-Sa~O ZOHC WITt1 WAIVER OF
p ~ U RMI N• 20 2 MqX~NUM LOT C~VERAGE on property described ss a
rectangula~~y-shaped percel oF land consisting
havi~g a
b00 feet north af
roxtmately 5023 square feet on thean~~b~n9t~o~~teddeppro ~mately Str~ k Street.
of app roxin,etelv 10~ feet Ilc1broo
maximum dcpth of app and further described as 1137
the centerline of Orengethorpe Avenue,
prp Q~ty p~esently classified RS-5000 (aESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMtLY) zON • sitton to
P
There were app~x~~tely thirt~en P~rf°~~~~iorttto`rcho Planni~gsCnominission dated Mlay 5~
sub)ect request- and although tho sta jt ~s rcferred to and made a part of the minutes.
~g$p v~as not read at the p~lic hearing~ this residentfal care
Kartar Singh, ~'ner, stated he and his wife have been ope~ating ~g oPer~ted according
fa..i l i ty fiav~ been encoureged by
~ for s i x adul ts for the C~nt~oF/ IumanrServi cest andi they tY
to the req~trer~~nts of the DePer f~~,, six to te~ adults. ~e5^O~~i~~offer~ntconwne~ts.
the ~p~r~~^t to expand the facility
from the DePartment and relatives of ~ume of their guests are p
5/5/~
So-z7~
, ~ r~
"~ ' , 8o-z72
ANAHEIM CITY PIANNING COhWISS10N, MAY 5~ t9~
MINUTES~
EIR 11EOA?~VE• ~ECLARA710N~ WAIVER OF CODE REQUIRE~tEi~T ANO CONDITION
USf PERMIT N~• 2~7~ ~CONTINUED~
rook presented a petition signed bY a9 adulta residing in
Robert L. Pojt~ ~~28 North Holb ~ H~ ~Qgerred to the etate~~t in tha
tha ~diate nelghborhood who oppose this royue~t. tif they had knuwn w~at
or; that no comP~aints have baen flled ~~faCheY~wb~ted~to~iity and stated t e
staif rep ~etghborhocd.
n~iyhburs would not have known wh~re to ~a^P~a ~~ose-knit~ but not ~sey which is a o~e-
was going on at this locetloni thet thcy ~.,~~a ~s s
th t there is nat a perking p~~~am whan someone has 20 ce~s for m pArty
t{me situatio~ but fouf ar five cars b kinkiproblem.idN astated the petitioin~e~^Lhr~ee
problem~ and there is definitalY a pa 9
hbors absolutely obJatt to the
laas: three houses a~~ is in th hisbb usinessendNr~stated~theRnelgch s type
hames, and naw v+a^ts to expand ~ven though they are ~ot ~ecessarily dan9e~o~g~ ~^
u~ far the nMntrt ly di sturbed pcrso~s ~
ntlal are~ wltl~ children because therc is a potentlal clang~r~~+hlch is much grue e
a .~es I de
tha~ it wouid be for normal paople. ~e~nts in the last
1132 North Flolbrook, statecl they havc not had anY CO"~ ~~ w as minimsl~
Martin MAgdalena.
couple of years because the ownern~reas~sthe~number todtene nNe~statedphepllves a~ross the
but now tho petl tloner wants to i are on
t end there ore no parks or recreati°ieMef'c~l ~~~ss theyrn+ea~n~Qth°rm andetheY iroa;go
stree
this facility stend outsid~ ancl stare; the hbors u~comfortablc. ~le stated e
fult~tlme medicatlon~ but tt does make ~o~~'~y9who could not aCtend the ~~~fortable wlth
speeking fo~ nci~hbors behtnd sub~ect p P
indiceted they ltke to get sun In their backyard and tt makes Lhesm very
idents looking over the fance. Ne statean89facil{tieseon thefp~oPcrty~~.al
the~e res 1ans do nat i~~~ude Y
facilttie~ nearbY and thesc p
,~~ 4 0 East Tsnglewood•'''~fe8da~delncr~se i~evalue~. W~th t e he RS-
l.e lioul 111 e~, 73 She prese~ted a
Berb houses in t
i~tention that it would remain a resident She felt lodging and ane;d~~~ urch~+sed. She
map of the area a~d a alan of the hor~es•
5000 Zone Is not what they had tn mind when their home was orlg Y P
etln could be held in th~ evening so those neighbors who work c~n attend.
asked if this mc 9
became a~+~re rece~tly that this was
Richa~d McLemore~ 17Z5 -~~th Nolbrook, stated he ~x+lY
facility; that he is conce rned when a~^~ ~d iheyd~ur~entlyUareanot allvwin9
e ~~ta1 health
epproaches fiis daughter and son and wants to p~~Y ba car.
ear old son to play out front unatteLdo e ofetheaoccupantseha~ihis'or+r-~ e
their seven y out front
meeting a couPle of week~ ago and stated Lhen th ~e in
and others feel uneesy and he cbes not see the children p Y 9
He felt uneasy d~d.
as much as they
rner 1736 North Holb~ook, a9~'Ne`~ w~ th mj ~ ies'withrchildren1 franigoingsto fine
Bob We + normal fa
houses, the petsttoner is depriving
schools and churches.
1 Halbrook~ steted lier children hafeG een confronted by one of the fema e
ilit who apparently wanted to play
Sharon Meek, » roximatelY 20•years old~ f rom this a Y
resi~ents ~epq were frightened. The neighb~ese~~~onfined~~t~o~tbut
and chased them to their door anden~~ hey do understand these peOP
their children ptay In thc ~r~a; ~r~ ~iving
what their problems are; that the piti~t~butsdrxshnotawantxanyut she has see
do not know wnre vis t 9,
more than si : and di d not knnv+ 1 f they
there.
5/5/80
~
MINUTES~ ANANE111 CITY PLANNING COMMISSIQN MAY 5~ 19~ 8a~73
EIR NEOATIVE DECLARATION~ WAIVER OF CODE ~EQUIREMENT AND CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT N0. 2C72 (CONTINUED)
Judy Muro, 1740 Holbrook~ was concerned ~bout the teanega gtris in tha neighborhoo6
boceuse nwst of the parents work snd they arn eione; that she hae on occe'fon seen some of
the n~n aatktnc~ around up and daam the street and sh~ is uncom/ortsble; that there ts one
male she sees cvery morning when shc leaves for work artd her chtld~en are stll) home alo~e
end he w alks up and dawn~ talking and motl~ning tn hlmseif and It is ve~y uncamfo~table;
tha~ they bought che housa wtth the feeling it is going to be a private residantial a~ea.
Mr. Singh~ petlttoner~ stated the fociltty has been functionin~ there for 3~1/2 years and
the nelghbo~s dld nat know sbout It which clearly proves It ~s a ve ry stable f~ciiity,
prope~ly adrniniste red ond ali thQ guests are prc~perly cared for so the~e Is no dtsturbance
tn tha nelyhborhoc~d. He statcd no residont In this factlity hes on automobil~; that ihey
a~e ail on Soclel Security and only get S47.~~ for their personal n~eds and cannot affo~d
o cer. Na did rwt thlnk his three homes or~ relevent to this Issue. Concerning the
obJoctton of somebody being a"peeping tar~'~ Mr. Stngh nated thc nelghbors on the right
and tha left havc both endorsecl this epplicatio~; thet ha hss lived therc and wtll bo
Itvtng the~e beceuse it is a famtly-run home anc! they heve no empl~yees so far end hts
w(fe tekes care of the yuests from 7:00 a.m. to latc at night and during the nlght his son
is alw~ys pre~ent; that the guardians and p~rents ve ry rarely visit; thAt thny do pick up the
gwsts uccasionally on weekends for a famlly sociel ar take them to church snd ti~e
parking is only for a few mi~utes at a tlme; thet there are naighbors (n the e~ea who have
four vohicles per fanlly and th4re Htll never b~ more than three cars in the driveway ~of
subJect property.
TI~E PUBL 1 C H EAa 1 NG WAS C LOS ED.
Commissioncr Tolar potnted out the single-fam'ly zonc does not a11ow the intruslon of
people, other than imnedlate family rnernbers anc! also does not pennlt a business to ba
operated. (It wes potnted out State lew permits slx pcrsons ~ithout a permtt.)
Commissioner Tolar cantinued hc aas not aven aware that slx persons are permitted~ but
that he wauld nat suppo~t any additiona~ persons unc~er any circumstences because he shared
the opposltlon's concer~s. Ne appreciated the fact the~~ Is e need for thts type
facility~ b ut he w as concerned about thc vtolatfon of che single-famfly res(dantiel area
and felt putting morc people in the area would be detri!nenea) and he p~rsonelly could not
support the request. Ne stated the neighbors have demonstrated Chere are no recreattona)
factlities for these people in the area~ othcr than on che property dnd adding more people
will put more pe~ple on the street.
Mr. Singh stated hls restdents are actively involved with the Departmcnt of llental Health
wh~re they are seen by the therapist; some of them sttend school; and some have Jobs; that
these are unfartunate society members who hav: not bFen able to live with thefr famtltes
a~d need to be cared for ~ndthat anyone can be affected today or tomorr~,w and if this care
in the residential zon~s (s denied~ he does not knoN where these peaple can go; that th~y
~~e members oP socfety like anyone eise and den(al would be dlscrimination.
Chairwom~~~ Barnes stated she knows there is a definite need fu~ plecas itke thts and the
Commission has approved other klnds of rehabilitatton centers~ but the tdeal situ~tlon is
s home tocated possibly away fron~ single•f~mily residences and these neighbors seam to be
ve ry upset and concerned. She asked if the guests are allowed to walk up end down the
street durtng the day.
5/5/80
~'
MINUTES~ ANIIHEIM CiTY PLANNING COMMISSION~ WIY 5• 1980 a0'21W
EIR NEQATIVE DECLARATION~ WAiVER OF CODE itE QUIREMENT AN D CONOITI4NAL
USE PERMIT M0. 2072 (CONTINUEO)
_...~~.~~--
Mr. Stngh st~t~d these p~ople are not stck enough to be in e haspital~ but r,c* wel) enough
ta be on their ow~ and thay ~ra cercd for and gtven rt~edication regularly end s~e invoived
in progr~ms such es the Y.M.C.A. ~ atc. lie stdted fou~ previous guests ere present who ere
now o~ their awn and cx~e former guest (s nc~r a Srnator at Fu) terton Cal lcgr: and her fathor
is present.
7hera were elght pers~ns present Indiceting they are In favor of the request~
Ju) ton Wo) fe ~ 271 Rob I n Hood Lane ~ Costs Mesa~ s tated h 1 s daughtc~r was a resi dent at Mr.
Singh's home for 2-1/2 years; that she had psychietric cou~seltng b~fore going to Mr.
Singh's hane without surccss; that ch(s facTlity Is e very nic~ home with a famtly-type
relatianship; that hia daughter is now in eollege; that there is e simllar type hamn two
blocks aw~y for retardad people and the neighbors were upset and nf~ald to walk on the
street~ but there hevc bean no Incidencs. Ne feit thts Is a murvcious facility anc thet
any trauble reportr.d to Mr. Singh woulci bc taken cere of and he felt these people have
every ricaht to go in the front or rear yards or on the strcets.
Edith Breist, 1;31 West Fer~ ~rlve~ futlerton~ ~ead a letter c~ncerning f~er siste~-In-law~
loul se~ who res i des at the S i ngh's facl 1 i ty ~ who had been t n f 1 ve di fferent homes prevloua
to go(ng to the Singh's; that tt~ls Is a superlo~ faclilty whtch fulfills the physical,
emotiona) and spirl;uel neoJs o~ the residents and shc hop~d legal restrlctions wouid not
i tml t these pet 1 t i cme rs f rom do i ng wh+~teve ~ they can for a:, many peop l e as they have tha
strength and desi re to accommodate. She read a l ist of spect fics pertaining to the
aperatton of the lwme Including tt~at each restdent Is carefully screened and chosen
bacause they are suit~ble for the whc~'esome fami ly llving envtranment~ etc. She felt the
child~en who were frightened in the ncighborhood, s(mply misunderstand these people snd
should srntle at them (nstead of runntng end noted the Singh's grandchildren sre not
frightened by thesc people.
Glenda B{ackber~ Orange Cou~ty Mental Heaith Assoclation, stated she has beQn involved
wt th these 1 ssues and prob lems for three yeers and peopic in the area are concerned about
prAperty velucs~ cmntionelly dlsturbed peos+le living in the aree, and potentia) crime; and
that she has been t~irough these hearings before and everyone is always concerned about these
same th i ngs; and esked whe re these peop 1 e shou 1 d go and what the oppas i t i on woul ~! wan t
for thelr wife~ husband or childrtn if they were in the same situation.
Andrew Batley~ Adult Contlnuing Cere Coordtnatar~ Orang~ County Social Services
Depa~tment, stated his Job is to monitor the board and care faclitttes and M~. Stngh's
faci 1( ty ts used as an example of hew a home should be run. The Orange County &ra~d Jury
and Laague of Woman Voters vtsited this home du~ing its Tnvestigation.
Daan MoralQS~ License Worker~ stated the Ceunty has a capacity rate of 95a artd this is
one of the best homes in the County. He stated it has been a pleasure working Nith Mr.
Singh because he takes e pe~sona) and tim~ediate Interest when ther~ ls a problem.
Commissionor Herbst stated the stat~ law permits up to six persons in a home such as thls;
that he has seen these same problems on previous requests where the neighbors a~e nervous,
end rlghtfully so. Ne questtonad how many persons shouid be permitted befare the facilicy
becomes unmanagable. Ne noted ap~roval of this request will atmost doublt the nwnber of
rea i den ts .
Mr. Morales expl ai ned the square foatage ~equi rpments per perso~ re:+nain the same and no
mo~e than two p~rsons are per~itted in eaeh beciroom. Ne explained he is only invatved
with homes for six o~ under because licensos for more than six are issuad by the state.
5/5/SO ~
~i
MIHUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLhNNIN4 COMMISSIQN~ MAY 5, 1980 80-2~5 s;
EIR NEGATIVE OECLARATiON~ WAIVEit OF COOE REQUIREMENT At~D CONOITIQNAL ?
USE PERMIT N0. 2072 (CONTINUED) i
._......
Commttslo~er Osvid asked if there are other homes In Orange County fnr 1Q or more persons~ ;
with Mr. Mlorales repiying thero are much lor~~er homes~ ~nd ten Is not an u~comr-~on number ;
of guests. Ne explalned the stste would llcense the homc for 1~ if this Is approv+ed~ and :
thei~ regulatlons are more stringent. Ho explalned as n Ilcnnse worker he visits !he home ;
unennnunced and has nnver found the Stngh's unp~epared and there have bcen no ;
irregulari tles. i
Mr. Si ngh stated the 1 icensc for 10 has al ready beon approved by thc State and th~ FI re
Marshal l f~r tha f~cl l i ty as i s; and that thF addi t ton i s to meke the faci 1 1 ty more
coMfortab le. Ha explained the facility has five bedroor+s~ plua o~e room utilized by the
supervlaar and thc addlclon wi I1 not be a bcdroom. fle Add~d that the house wAS ai ~
conditlonccf Just last year.
Respondfng [o Commissloner Tolar's question~ Nr. Singh st+~ted they hove no cnploy~es; thet
h~ or his ~t fe wl li be therc from morning unti 1 evening and a mertt~er of hts frmt ly wt 11 be
thore 24 hours a day, He stated I~e has a scparate restdence.
Coimitsslo~cr Tolar cort~lirnented Mr. Singh for running a n(ce home a~d st~ted he r~wgnlzes
there ts a nced and the testimony prQSented today is ce~teinly a c,omp) lment. Ne stated
the singl~-famlly zone (s lntended for a u rtaln number of persons with emenitles for
thosa ~eople so they wlll have something to do~ but rdditlona) peeple on the sub~ect
property r+ould compound the si tuation, tle statad he woulu nat. went to sea what i s
~bvlously a good cere fecillty extended to whcre it m(ght not bc as good and he h ad grave
r.nncerns about doubling the numt~er of residents wi th no outside prt~enitles snd fc1 t these
people wi 1) need to anJoy belnc~ autside.
Mr. Singh stated these residents wl ll not be instde all the tfrr~; that they are i nvolved
In other activities such as schooi, Jobs and Y,~t.C.k. and the elderly are mostly confined
and som~e take ca re of the house. Ne exp f a i ned they arc ve ry 1 ~va 1 ved ( n~rak i ~g tl~ese
paople useful n~ent~ers of soc{ety. tle invited the Commisstoners to vistt his f~ci lity
anytime unannounced and noted they wlli flnd elther he or Mrs. Singh always ther~.
Answrrl~g Commissloner lola~'s c:oncern regarding mcdicetion~ Mr. Singh exptained a
psychiartst vlsits thQ home ance a month and sees every patlent and prescrtbes the
medicaticx~ to keep the guests stable and ell medlcatlo~ is locked up and administered at
th~ ~ppt'a~priate time, I~e steted they elso have tounselors avatlabie; and that tliese
peopie do benefTt fram staying at this facility.
Carnmissi oner King asked tf the re5ldent mana~er accomp~nies the quests when they walk
outside and Mr. Singh replied that is not necessary; that these peoplz are free and Are
not dang~rous; that unfa~tunately the neighbors are afraid of the unknown. but w~ra not
even a-+are of this use unti 1 recently. Ne explained the residents at this faci 1~ty are
supervts~d all the tlmr. and that the nelghbors have teenagers on d~u~s, etc. and there a~e
other i 1 13 In the neighborhood. He stAt^.d i f there are any problems caus.ed by h+a
~esicknts~ the nefghbors ere a{ways welcome to discuss them witi. him and h~ did s~ot see
the fiarm of the young gf rl wanting to play wi th the cht ldren because ahe Is not dengtrous.
Chai rv+c~san 9arnes steted her on ly ob jection i s that thc faci l i ty is too smal l fo r ten
peapie; that this Is an emotio~al problem for the neighborhood end every neighbonc~~od does
hsve problems witfi teenayers an c+rugs~ otc. and there would probably be less pr'oblems frc~m
this faei l ity~ but she was conterned about the number of people.
5/S/8o
~y . ; ~
MINUTES~ ANIWEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ MAY §~ 1980 ~'ZT6
Eltt NEGATIVE DECLARATION~ WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMEt~T AI~Q CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT N0. 2072 (CONTINUED)
.._..~.. _._. ~._..._.
Commisstoner Harbst fe~lt the St~te has pre•~mpted the City by allawing slx pera~ns~ but
over six the primo concern of the ~eighbors is that It becomes a bstinesa snd thAt they
bought their home' tn e residenttal zone~ net a comnarclal zona. He felt these ~~eopte
deserve the rtght to be in e ~nsidential area~ but with i imltations. He ~ecognir.ed
subJect prope~ty Is a little larger thsn ~ormal. but did not thin': a watve~ of Code should
be granted.
Mr. Stngh explatned tha additlon~l coverage is not ~ requi~emnnt for thb state llc:ense;
that he Is doing that to make It more comfortabie; and that othcr resfdentt~l cere honas
In Anahnim have more tha~ ten residents in e residantl~l t~r~a.
Comnissioner Nerbst n~ted those cuuld be there illegally.
ACTION; Comniasioner Ktng offered a mot(on, seconded by Comm(ssioner David and Mt1TI0M
~7C1~T~p (Commtssloner Bushorc beinq absent). that the Mahetm City Planntng Commission haa
revlewod tha proposal to permit ~ resldenttal carc faciltty in the RS-S~~Q (Residential~
S i ngla-Fami ly) Znne wl th a wai ve~ of m~ximum lot covnr~+ge on a rectangutarly-shaped percnl
of 18nd consisting of npproximetely 50 fcet on the northvresterly side of Holbrook Street~
having a maximum dtpth of appmxlm~tely 100 feet e~d being located epproxinuately W00 feet
north of tho centtr) ine of Oranyethorpe Avenue; ar~d does hcrcby approve the Negat) ve
Decloratlon from thc ~cqul rement to preparc ~n envi ronmenta) lmpacc repor~, on the bs:sis
that there wauld be no slgnificant indlvlJual or cumulative edverse env(ronmental im~aact
due to the eppruval of thls Negative Daciaration since the Aneheim General Pl~+n desic~nates
the subJect property for lavr-medlum Jcnsity, residentlal l~nd uses corr~nsurate with the
proposel; thnt no scnsitive environr~~nta) impects ar~ involved tn the proposal; that the
Inltlal Study submttted by the petltioner indicates no signtficant Indivlduai or
cumulatlve edve~se environme~tal impacts; and that the Negettve Declaratton substantiating
the foregoing f(ndings is on f(le ir~ tha Gity of Analieim~ Planning Department.
Commissio~er King affe~ed a m~tion~ seconded by Commissloner David and MOTION FAILED 10
GARRY due to cie vote (Commtssloners Barnes, Herbst and To~ar voting na and Commissto~+er
Bushare abse~t) ~ that the Anshetm CttY Planning Cort~mission does hereby grant the rrquest
forwaivc~ of msxlmum lot coveraga on the bssis of the llmlted slze of the property snd
that the request Is minimal.
Commissio~er Herbst offered a motion~ seconded by Commissloner Fry and MOTION CARRIED
(Commissloner Dav(d and Kfng voting no and Commissioner 8ushore betng absent) ~ that tha
Anahetm Ci ty Ptanning Commisslon does hereby deny the request for watvcr ot nu~ximum lot
eoverege on the bas t s that the property wou i d be overbui 1 t and the addi t ian woul d reduce
the recreatlonel arca to sustaln t~e prescnt operetlon.
Commissloner Herbst offerad Resolutton Na. PC~O-74 and moved for Its passage and adoptaon
that the Anaheim City Planning Commtssion does he~eby d~eny Petiti~ f~r Conditianal Use
Permit No. 2012 on the basis that the itmtted size of subJect prope~ty does not permit
adequate recreatlonal faci 1 i ties.
tin rol) cell, the foregoing resolutton was passed by the fotlawing vote:
AYES: COMMISSION~RS: BARNES~ FRY~ HERBST~ 70LAR
NOES: COMMlS510NERS : DAVI 0~ KI NG
ABSE~~T: COMM! SS I ONERS : BUStiORE
5/S/~
;
s
s_
t
~
~
~ k
)
.~' ~ ~
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY FLAtdNIN6 COMMI5SION. MAY 5, 1980 ~~~77
EIR NEGATfVE DECLARATION~ WAIVER OF COOE REQUIREMENT ANQ CONOITIONAL
USE~ PEh IT N0. 20 2(CONTtNUEQ)
Jatk Wh{te~ Astist~nt City Att~rney~ presented the petittoner wtth the wrl~ten ~tght to
appsal the Planning Commisalon's dccision within x2 days to th~ City Council.
Gommi~slaner Herbst explafned tha petitlonar has the. right to conti~ue the operation for
six people~ end o~ly the expanslon has been dented.
ITEM NA. 2 PUBLIC NEARING. OuNERS: ALAN SEGAL~ ET Al~ P. 0.
~~~I~~RICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 1 9ox 193~ La Mlrada~ CA go637. AGENTt NUEN SHEIN
D 0 Al U E MI N0. 2 LIU~ S36 Soutl~ Sonya Street~ Anaheim~ cn 9z8o2.
"""""" Petitloner reqwests permission to PERMIT ON-SALE
BEER AND Wltlf IN Afl EXISTING RF.STAURANT IN TNE
CL. XOt~C on property described as a re ctangulerly-shaped parcel of land conaisttng of
approxlmately 1.1 ecres~ havtng a fro~tage of approxlmately 157 feet on the south side of
Orsnge Avenue. hAVlny a msxtmum dapth of app~oximately 298 feet end being l~cated
approxtmstely 21+0 f~et west of the centerli~e of Brcwkhurst StrGet~ and fu~ther descrtbed
as 2227 West Orange Avenue (Nestern S kles). Property presently classified as CL
(Commerclal~ limited) Zone.
Thcrc was no onQ Indicattn~~ their ~resencc in op~ositlon to subject rtquest~ and although
khe staff r~:port to the P 1~nni ny Commi ss t~n dated Nay 5~ 19~ Wes not read ~t the pub 1 1 c
hearing, it is referred tn anJ madc a part of the min~~tcs.
Nuan Shcsin Liu~ agent, was present to enswer any questions.
Chairwoman Ba rnes cl~rified that bee r and winc aill be serveJ only In conJunctio~ with
food.
THE PUBLIC HEARIt~G uA5 CLOSED.
It was noted thc Planniny Director o r his authorized representative has dete~mined that
the p~opo3ed project falls with(n the definition of Cstegorfcal Exempttons, Llass 1~ as
deftned in paragraph 2 of the City of Anahetm Environmc~tal Impact Report Guidelines and
(s~ therefore, categorically exen~pt from the requirement to prepere an EIR.
Commissioner King offered Kesolutio~ No. PC80-75 nnd moved for its passage snd adoptton
that the M ahelm City Planniny Commission cioes hereby grant the Petttion far Cond(tiona)
Use Permit No. 2Q73, subJect to Interdepartmental Committee reconn~ndattons.
On roll call~ the foregoing ~esolution was pessed by the follawi~g vote:
AYES : COMFiISS I Ot1ER5 t BARt~ES ~ DAV I D, FRY ~ FiERaST ~ K1 NG ~ TCIAR
NOES: C0~ "~SfdNERS: 1~OIIE
pASENT: C(-MMI SS f ONE RS : 6USNORE
5/S/80
x,' ~
MINUTES~ IWAHEIM CITY PIANNING COMMISSION~
l ~
3
MA1r S ~ 1980
80-278
ITEM N0. PUB~IC HEARINC, 01~IN~RSt RIC11AR0 C. NUNSAKER~ P. 0.
~~a~VE OEClAMT10N dox 2b23~ S~,nta Ana, CA 927~7. AGENT: MR. TRANS~
0. 2074 278; E~st P,agal Park Drf va. Maheim~ CA 92806.
Petitloner requests pPr;,~iaslo~ to aETAIN AN AUTO
~EPAIR SNOP IN TItE ~,~ 20NE on praperty descrlbed ss
an irregulsrly-shsped parcei of land consisttng of ap~ror.imetaty 1.5 acres~ havtng a
frontsge of approximately ~~0 feet on che north slde ot Rega) Psrk Orive~ having a mAximum
depth of •pproximately 154 feQt~ ~nd being located epproxir~tely 2~~0 feet west of the
centerline of Biue Gum Street~ and further described as 2785 Rooal Park Drive. Prupe~ty
preaently claasificd ML (INOUSTR~AL~ I.IMItE~) ZONE.
Thare wes no one indlcating thetr presence in ~ppo~itian Co subJect rQquest~ and although
tho staff report to the Planntng Commission dated May 5, 1g80 was not reed at the public
hearing~ It ii refPrred to and madc a part of thc minutas.
M~. S. Gurul~~ aperato~ of Mr. Trans~ was present to answer any questlons.
THE PUBLIC NEARI~~G 41A5 CLOSEb.
Respo~di~g to Commissioner Herbst's question, Mr. Gurule statcd he has been tn bustness
stnce No~~anber 19, 1979; thnt h~e yot a bustness lican~e~ but did not knav a condittonAl
use permlt was reyuired until thc Zoning Enforccment Offtcer gave him a natice. It was
clarified there we~e no complalnts and the Zoning Enforcement Offlcer wes conducting
routtne fleld Investigetinns.
Commissionar Hcrbst clarified that al) work end storage shel) be canducted inside the
structure.
Mr. Gurule steted thera would be four or flve vefiicles in the perking speces, i~cluding
the emplayees and indicatecJ mc~st vehtcles in far repatr~ are out the same day.
Commissioner Tolar felt tha us~a shouid be revlewed in threc years.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offared a motlon~ secc~ndtd by Camnlssioncr King and MOTION
CARRIED (Cot~misstor~er Busho~e being absent)~ that the M ahefm Ltty Plann(ng Gommisston has
revtewcd the propvsal to retotn en automobtle rcpalr facility In the Mt, (Industrtal,
Limit~d) Zone on a~ trregularly•shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.~
acres havtng a frontagc of app roximatcly 330 feet an thc north side of Regal Park Orive~
having a naxfmum depch of Approximatcly 150 feet and being located approximatety 240 feet
west of Chc centerllne of alue Gum Street; and does hereby approve the Negattve
Declaration from che requirement to prepare rn environmental impact report on the basis
thst there would ba no si~niFicant i~dividual o~ cun+ulative adverse environmental impact
due ta the app rova) of this Neqative Declaratton since the Anaheim Genera) Pla~ designates
the stbject p rop~rty for general industrtal lend uses comnansurate with the p roposal; that
no sensttivic envlro~mental Impacts are involved in the p roposal; that the Inlttal Study
submttted by the petitioner tndtcates no significant indtvidu~+l or cumulattve adverse
envlronmanta) (mpacts; and that the kegative Declaretlon substentiating the foregoing
flndings ls on file in khe Clty of Anehelm Ptanning Department.
Canmisstone~ Nerbst affe~ed Resotution No. PC84-76 and moved for 1ts pdssage and adopL(on
that tha Anaheim City Planning Commission docs hereby grant Petitlan fo~ Conditional 11se
Permit No. 2074~ for a;-year pe~iod~ subJect to revievr and aubJect to the petttto~er's
atipulet(a~ that all work shall be tonoucted instde the facility and there shalt b~ no
outdoor storage ove rntght a~d subject to Interd~partmental Commfttee reconKnendmttons.
On roll call~ the foregeing resotutton was passed by the fotiowing vote:
AYES: COHMiSSIONERS: BARNES~ DAVID, FRY~ HERl1ST, KING~ TOIAR
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
A~SENT: CQMMISSIOHEi~S: QUSNORE
,~„~,,..~....~<._--.,-~.. _. _ .
S/5/80
~`
~
MINUTES, ANIWEIM CITY PUINNING Ct1MMISSION~ MAY 5, 1980
,'
8o-Z79
ITEM NQ. 4 PUBLIC HEAP,INC. OI~INERS: ROBERT 0. ETCNIWOY~ ET AI.~
E~~~VE OECIlfiATION 31~ Vt~ Montanera, Anahaim~ CA 92807. AGENTs JOCK
0. 207~ SEWALI. 1130 South Figueroa Street~ Los Angeles, CA
'~- 90015. Petitloner requests pc nnisston to PERMIT A
9ANK iN THE Ml XONE on p roperty descrlbed as ~n
ir~egul~rly-shaped p~+rcel of land cAnsisting of A~proximately 1.~ acres locat~d at tha
southeest cornor of La Pa1ms Avenue end Tusti~ Avenue~ hevtng A frontag~ of app~oximately
3~+0 faat on the aouth side of La P~lme Avenuc end a frantage of spproximately 204 Feet on
the east sidc of Tuatln Avonue. Property presently cla~sifled ML (INDUSTRIAL~ IIMITEO)
20NE.
Thcre w as no one Indicatin~ thetr p~~sonce in apposltl~ to suAJect request, end alChough
the ataff report to the Planning Commisston datcd May ;~ 19^0 was not ~ead at the public
heartng~ it is referrcd to ond madc a part of the minutes.
Jerry Stern~ ag~nt~ was present to answer any questlons.
TNE PU~LIC NEARING WAS CLOSED.
Cammissioner Tolar cldrifled that the permit applies only to thr. bank.
Gommissloner Oavld poinied ouC th~ condttion requtrtny ~ medlan island and Dean ~he~er,
Assistant Planner~ clarlfled tt~at thc turrent bank plans do not shaw a drivc-th rough
fatllity and Mr. Stcrn stateci thcy havc~ n~ plans for a driv~-thr~u~h facility i~ the
futs~re and thc conditlon i5 acceptable.
ACTION: Cortxnlssioncr Kfny offerad a mc~tion~ seconded by Commissic~ner Davtd and MOT10N
CA~ R ED (Com+issloncr Dushor~ Dcing abscnt)~ that thc An~heim City Planning Commission has
revfewed the proposal to permit a bank in thG Ml (Industrial~ Limited) lone on an
irregularly-shaped parcel of tand con~isting of approximetely t.E acres located at the
southeast corncr of La Palma Avenue and Tustin Avenuc, havtnc~ a frontage of approxlmately
340 f~et o~ the south sidc af LA Palma and e frontaga of 2n~+ feet on the cast side of
Tustin Av~nue; and does hareby apprave the NegAtive Oeclaratlon from thc requirernent to
prepare an environmental Irtpact report o~ the basts that there would be no slgniftcant
indlvidual or cumulatlvc adverse envtronmr,ntal impact due to th~ apprnval of this Negative
~eclaratton since the Anaheim Generel Plan designates t~~e s~Ject prnperty for generel
industriat land usas zommensurate wlth the proposal; that no sens(tlve envl~onmenta)
irr~acts are involvcd in the proposal; thai the Initial Study submitted by the petlttoner
indicates no sigr~ificant individual or cumulatfve adve~se e~vironmental ir.,pates; and that
th~e Negative Ueclaration substa~tiating the foregoing f(ndings is on file in the City of
Anahelm Planning D'partrt~ent.
Commissioner Tolar clarif~ed that his suppvrt is oniy for the bank and not a future
~estaurant and Commisstonc:r Ilerbst Indtcated he is also conccrned about the proposed
restsursnt but felt the ba~nk wilt service the industrial area.
Chafn+oman Barnes ag~ecd e~nd pointed out there is already a parking problem in the area.
Commissioner King offered Resolution No. PC~O' 77 and r.wved for tts passage and adoptton
that the Anaheim City Pla~+ning Commlsston dcas hereby gre~t Petition for ConditiAnal Use
permit No. ?n7s, ;ubject ko interdepartmental Committee recommendaelons.
On roll ca11~ th= forec3oiny resotution wes passed by the following votes
AYES: GONMISS IONERS : 9AIt~tES ~ DAVI n. f RY ~ NEFtSST ~ KI NG, TOLAR
NOESt COMNISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: CQMM15510NERS: HUSNORE
5!5/80
_ ~,,~
~~
MINUTES~ ANANEIN CITY PLAN'NING CQMMISSION~ MAY 5~ 1980
80- 2 80
I TEM NQ. PUD1.1 C HE1tiRl fIG. OWNERS s RAYMOND K. SPEHAtI ~ 6937
~~~~RICAL EX~.ypTlqN-CLASS 1 Avenida D~a Ssntlego~ Anehetm~ CA 92ti~17. AGENT:
.~ ANTNONY H~ VALADE2~ a770 EAST LA P11LMA AVENUE~
ANAIIEiM~ CA 92807. Petltioner ~equests pennisslo~
to PERMI'V' ON•SALE ~EER ANO WINC IN AN EXISTING
RESTAURANT IN TIiE CL ZONE on pro~arty drscribed as an irregulerly•ahaped pa~cel of land
consiating of approximately 11.1 ac~es located at chm northe~st corner of la Palma Avenue
a~d (mporla) Highway~ having s frontoge of e~prroximataty 630 feet on the north side t~f La
Palma Avenuo and a frontege of approxtrnataly 372 feet on the eest sido of Imperial
Highway~ and being Iac~Ced epprox(mately 1~0 feet north of the centerline of La Pa1Ma
Avenue~ end furthar describe+d as 5771 East La Pelma Avenue (ANTONIO'S). Property
pres~ntly classlficd CL(SC) (COMMERCIAL~ L1111tED) ZONE.
There wss no one indtcattng thefr presence tn oppasltton to subJect request~ end rilthough
the ataff report to the Planning Commission dated May 5~ tAaO was not reed at the public
hearing~ it is raferred to and mada a pert of che minutes.
Anthany 1~aladez w~s present to enswer any quPStions.
THf PU8L1 C HEARIIIG WAS CLOSED.
~t was noted the Plonning Olrector or his t~utt~artzed representntive h~~, deterr~ined that
the proposc~i p roject falls wichin the ckfinition oF Catec~oricrl Exemptions~ Class 1, as
deftned in paregropt, 2 of the City of Anahetn Enviro~rr~ ntal Impoct Report Gutdeltnes and
is, therafore~ categorically excmpt from the r~quirement to prepere an EIR.
ACTiON; Comnisslone~ Tolar offered Resotution I~o. PC80- 76 and moved far Its paxsage and
a opt on that chc Araheim City Planning Commissian does h~reby grant the Pakitlon fo r
~ondition~l Usc PerMit Na. 2C77~ subject to lntcrd~spartmantal Commlttee rtcommendettons.
On roll cAll, the fo~egoing resoluttan was passed by the folltiwing vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES. DAV10~ FRY~ HER9ST~ KING~ TOIAR
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
AE1SEt~T: LaMMiSS I ONERS ; t3USliQRE
RECESS There was a ten-minutc recess at 2:50 p.m.
~...~~
RECO~ ENE The meeting was reco~vened at 3:04 p.m.
ITEM N0. 6 PU8L1~ HEARIttG. OWNERS: JAMES C. 9AKER, III AND
IR~ CA~EG~RICAL EXE:MPTION-CLASS JON MARIE SAKfR, 563 Paseo Ga~ado, Anaheim, CA 9280~.
ARI N0. ~ ~etittoner requests WAiVER ~DF PERMITTED LOCATION AND
..._.-..._ ._
ORI ENTATI O~t OF STRUCTURE T~ CQ~iSTRE1CT A S I NGLE-FAMI LY
D4~lELl.lNG on property descrtbed as an irregularty•shaped
parcal of land consisting of ~proxtn~ately 1.06 acres located at the southeast corner of
Ca~nyon Rim Read and Pasea Gsnado~ Mavtng approximate frontegas of 300 feet on cha south
side of Canyon Rim Road and &1 feet on the east side of Paseo Gar~ado~ and furthe~
daac~ibed a3 5b3 Paseo ~a~~!~. Property presently ciassift~d as~ RS-7200(SC) (RESIO~NTIAL,
SINGIE•FAMILY) ZONE.
~'
i ;
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PI.ANNING COMMISSiON~ MAY y~ 1~80 SO•281
EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 5 ANO VARIANCE NQ. 3144 (CONT~NUED)
.~.~.~...~ ~.,. ~
Th~ra w as one peraan Indiccting his ~resence in epposition ta ;ubJecc ~eque+it~ and
elthough tho staPf report to the Ple~nniny Lommisaton dated Phy S~ 1980 was not read at the
public heering, it Is reforred to and made ~ part of the minutas.
Jack Norris~ Clvtl Engl~aer~ stated when thts tract wss orlqlnal;y dPVelaped~ five similar
varianc.~s were granted and expleined becAUSe oF the contlgu~etton of the structures and
tha lot~ the Planning De~artmc~nt has determin~d the lot fronts an Pasao G~nedo a~d the
side yard is an an arteriai.
Ne asked ebout Condttion No. 3~ which re1`ers to Exhibit No. I and expiained that oxhtblt
wes intendod to show a poasible way of developin,~ the prope~ty and thay cb not wam t to be
restricted tn their p1Ans wiCh this condtCton ard could possibly develop s plan less
severe. Canditton No. 2 ~equlres that the Edtsc~n easer•~ent aren ond 15-~foot setbeck
adJacant to Canyen Rim Roacl shal) be placc-d in the M~ster Hon-eawner's .~ssoctation to
guerentRe slope matntcnance~ +~nci requested that that conditton be detet~d because it would
Iimtt the latltud~ of the buyer end he did not lc.now of a yood reason for that condltion.
Dan SsicedA~ rnpresenting Anaheim Nills~ Inc.~ 3tated he was nat particularly opposed to
this proJect~ but felt consl~tent with tha *esolution aclopted that any p ro)ect within the
Jurlsdlctton of the Planned Community o~ ~aheim Hlllf~ sh~ll be rcviewcd by the
Architectural Revtew Commtttee of An~hrlr ills, Inc. to insure Its compatibility and In
this instancc they h~v~ not had the op~~'~~~n1ty to rcvlew the plnn and would request a
twcrweek Continuance In ordcr t~ prov~ ~~ ~~::ir input.
Hr. IJo~rls ~t~teJ the exhibit pres~n~--° -.a5 irr~~ a concept to shc~w a~vay th~ praperty
could be developed anJ therc arc no -~r ~~~s~,~ c~'ans; that this Is a r~equest for s varlance
to perm i t a s i de yard on co Cany~n t~~ -~~.. ~:ausc of the con f i gurat I ~n of the 1 ot ; and
that thl5 Is a corner lot.
TtIE PUBLI C HEARIf~G WA5 CLOSED.
Cheirwoman Barnes wes disturbe~; t~r..~s: this is not th~ plan to be developed ~nd in order
to grant a variance~ the Cor~miss~~+~~ ~!~- to see ~+hat wlli be constructed. Sha felt this
requ~st !s ~remature.
Commisstoner Nerbst a~~eed and scst~c !~e had revlewed the stte tod~y r~nd It looked airt+ost
unbuildabla and ha would Nant to s~ t~ee engincering piens before vottng. He noted this
is one of the major roads gatng in~ a canyon And this aould possibly be cutting into e
hi il snc! he wanted ta r~view pa,sc t-~~scory to detcrmine whether this was one of the lots
that was to remain open space.
Comm(sston~r Tnl~r shsreJ thc s~e conce•, snd suggested the petitloner request a
continuance in arder to bring i~ s~ec~fic plans. He atso wanted staff to review what this
lot was 1 ntended for ori gl nal ly.
M~. Norris suggested the varianc~ be epproved aubJect to a conditlon requiring site plan
revic+v.
Chaf rwon~w~ aarnes w~nted mr~re background.
Dean ~krc~rer, ~saista~t Planner~ steted if the Commissl~n wishes~ they could aQprove a
va~isnce el~awing a structure to ~ide onr.o Cany~on Rim Road subJ~ct ta the condition that
re~oised plams be submitted latar for approval.
r ~r ~Qn
~~;
MINUTfS~ ANANEIM C1TY PLANNING COMMISSION MAY S 19~
CIR CATEGOa1CAL EXEMPt10N•CLASS 5 AND VARfANCE Na. 31 4(CONTINUED)
~~ ~~r~~i~~~~n~~~ww~~~r~~~~~ ~~ ~
, ~
80• 282
Anntka Santalahti~ Asaistant Director for Zoning~ statcd the lot shown tn the qrey e~rea is
cu~rently a portion of tha l~t to the immedlate we~t and ortc~inally came In es one lot for
ane house and thora were no Conditlans ~equlring that it be retained for open space. She
statad steff would check ~peciflc wording.
Conmlasioner ;lerbst stAted the Commisston has been ca~cerned about these large tots shown
ortginally as open sp~ce, belny devaloped later.
Cornmissloner Tol~r stated I~e wants to sea speclfic plans. anci if the home p ropoaed ts
comparable to others~ he would have no problem~ but deftnitcly wants to s~e sp~ciftc
plans.
Mr. Norrls stated tt~e Edison eesoment ts shnwn on the tentative parcel map which hes been
approved s~bject to the granting of this varianca. fle requested a onc-rn~nth continuance.
AC710!~: Cammisstoner Tolar offered a motion~ sec~nded by Cc~rtmtssioner flerbst and MOTION
~D (Commtsstaner D~sh~~~e being abs~nt~, that the Anahelm Ctty Planning Commtsston
dues hereby continue considerotlon of the eforementio~ed (tem tc~ the regula~ly-scheduled
meeting of Ju~~e 2~ iQgO t~t tha request of tt~e pcr.itioner in ordcr to submtt specific
p18ns.
ITCM N0. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: CNESTER PETER50N ANO
~~~RICAL EXCMPTIO~~-CLASS OEVERLY AflN COMPTON~ 221 North Maplewood~ Orangc~ C!1
N. 31 ~
~_
~2c,GG.
AGENT: MER~URY
SAVINGS AtID lOAN A.SSOCIATION~
F. Q. 9ox 1~10~ tluntin~ton 6esch, ca gzb47, Pettttoner
requests WAIVER OF ~tAXIMUM NUt18ER QF 41AL~ SIG-IS TQ
PERMIT 2 1JALL SIG'15 on praperty descrfbed a~. a rectanguta~ly-shaped pa~cel of lanci
conststing of app roximateiy 0.7 acre loca~ed et the northwest corner of la Palma Avenue
and impertal Highway~ !~aving r~pproximate frontages af 147 feCt on th~ north side of La
Palma Avonue and 1;0 fect on the west s(de of tmperlal HigFtiway~ and further descrtb~sd es
5b11 East Le Palma Avenur. (Me~cury Sav(ngs G Loen). Property presently classifted CL(SC)
(CO~tiMERC1A1.~ LIMITEO} ZOr~E,
There w~s no one indicating thelr prescnce (n opposfti~n to sub,ect request~ and althougfi
the s taf f revort to the P 1 ann i ny C~mmi ss i cx~ dated Mey 5~ i 9E30 wa~s not rcad at the pub 1 I c
hearing, tt is refQrreci to and made a part of tha minutcs.
Mei Kapson. Mercury Ssvings and Loan Associatia~~ stated Qn July 1A~ 19~9., Me~cury Sevings
purch3sed an flptian for a Iang-term lease~ submttted an appl(cation to th~ State
Cammissicx-er of Savings a~d Loen and rec~ived approv~al in OctobPr; that during September
and Octob~r three meetings wtre held betwean Rlennir,g staff and theTr representstivea and
their original oencept wax submitte~d and rev(sed M~te accordtng to guldancm from the
Plenntng staff; and thet the ariginal elev~cions pr~ygented to staff a~ci later to the
Pla~ning Comrntssla~ shcwed two well signs. Ac the I~ovember 5. 197g Planning Commissiort
m~.eting the revt4ed plans we~e approved and a re~ue;st ~ras mack that the petittansr s~mit
revlsed speclfic ~lans a~+d the anly questton was thc roof mou~ted equipment~tfiat revised
pisna af tha eievatian and colored rsndering were presented on Decembor 3. 1919 and
subsequent ta thet mtettng~ ~ lecter r~as recelved f rom the Planntng Conmission Sacretary
thet thG plans wer~ tn substantial conformence ~nd the revised plans were approved. He
read the fc~ita+ing comment from tho scaff report. "Submitted elavatio~s tndicate exte~lo~
building mate~tals consisting af plastQr, oatmeal cotared i~ighland stucoo. porceis~in
paneis, burgencly e~lorec! rr.ur~) wall ~nd two opproxtmately 1SQ squa~e foot ~ed wall signs
on khe east and south v+alls. Code permlts -vall sig~s of 215 a~d 2b6 square feet
raspectively." At that point they had purchased sn optton, had approvat from the Stata
5/5/80
~
MINU1'ES~ ANANEIM CITY PIANNIMG COt~11SS10N~ MAY 5~ 1g80 B4•283
EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION•ClASS 3 AND VARIANCE NQ. 3145_ (CONTINUED)
r ~r~ ^ri~~~.rr...ru.~..~.~..~~~~
Commiistoner end had what appeared to be epprova~i f~om the City~ ao executed a lease in
January tor 66 years and proceeded wlth oonstruction of the bullding valued in excess of
3/4 milllan dollars and et this potnt hsve over S300~Q00 invested. The first notice they
recaived about thc two wal) signs wss when the aign oompany camc In tA gnt permlts In
April. Ne felt they need the Mo well slgns because the buliding frants on two main
streets (Imperial and La Palma) and hea two meln entrances which wtll have maJor
utilizetton end the building h~a a public roam used heavtiy by others during the eveninys.
They feel it would be a safaty haza~d tf the sign facas Ls Palma bac~uso people driving
south on Impe~tel ~ouid have to turn a~ou~d to ses It.
He steted the prtmary pu~pose of the signs is building tdentification bec~use advertising
is not that crtticai. Ne stoted thetr property Is zoned commerctai~ Scenic Corridor~ and
has rostrlctlons regarding stgns end irtrn~diately ta the west of thQir property (s
Sutharland Lunt~cr which is zoned for manufacturing wtth cfifferent slqn criterla and across
the street a restauranc and service station have stgns on four stdcs.
tla felt many fectors should be considered by tl~e Commission which invalve what may be a
slzabin invest~nt by Mercury Sav(ngs.
TfiE PUaLI C t1EAf~11lG Wb5 LlOSEO.
Chatrwoman Barnes statcd thc Commlsslon tias r~ot granted any verlances in the Cd~yon area
because of tha Scentc Corridor oesignatlon and that the Carl's Jr. double sign was allowed
far the aame squa~~ footage es nne slgn. She did nut feel slnee other ~equests have been
denied, that this request should be grented.
Commissioner Tolar explained thc lexaco staclon p~eviously rr~ nttoncd was developed under
County ordinances and came into the CitY before the 5cenir Corridor destgnatton.
Cha(nvana~ garnes w as not Apposed to tdentification on both sides of tha building ~s long
es tho square footagc is kept within the Codc requiremcnt.
Mr. Kapson stated Mercury Savings has been placed in an "afker the fact" sttuation and
dese rvas consicieration in th~ rendari~g af the final dactsian.
Commissioncr tlerbst stated therc is a sign ardinance and thc Commission requi res that the
signs cort~ly with that ardinance and do not prove the point by looking at the rendering;
therefo~e, it is the responstbility of the architoct to review th~ sign ordinance. He
stated thc ~ign cwmpanies knav the ordi~ance and it took a lot cf years to get the Scenic
Corrldor dcsignetion and sign ordlnancc and approval of thts request would set an
undesi rabte precedent.
Commissioner Tolar suggested thc maximu+r, allowabie sic~n on the eastern exterior Qf the
butldtng which wouid havc a lot of exposure to Impertat and La Palma and a taw p rofile
monument type sign on La Patma for idanttfication.
Camnlssione~ Herbst polnCed out thes Ctty Council concu~red with the Plann{ng Cornmission's
decislon ~egardtng the Carl's Jr. slgn. He stated he would support st~ns similar to the
Carl's Jr. sign far this p roJact.
Mr. Kapson noted the staff report indicates 26b square feet p~rmttted and asked tf they
could be permitted the two aigns if the total of thc two is smaller than permitted for ~ne
f ~ ~ e
~~
MINU1'E5~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ MAY 5~ 1980 80-284
EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTtON-CLASS 3 AND VARIANCE N0. 31W9~ (CONTINUEO)
~.....~.~~~~.......~.
Cha) n~vumsn B~rnes noted the Carl's s tgn~ were requi r~~d to be )~ined at the carner wl th one
114h t source.
Annike S~ntalahtt~ As~istant Otrector far Zontng~ ststa~f the Code ellows a monument stgn
to speciPt u Ily idcnttfy a shopping conter so if tho mon~xnent stgn ts to specifically
Identify hb~cury S~vings~ it would not conform and s va~l~nce wnuld be necesaary. She
expl~lned tf tha dasign of the stgn was such that although 1t wrapped arou~d two walls~ it
it continuous with sn edgtng eround It, It would be legitimAte and e variance would not be
neaded and Mr. Kapson felt a border would dest~oy th~ eesthetics af the builcitng.
Commisstoner Tolar dtd not feel Mercury Ssvinga neads thts kin~f of stgn and felt rather
the~ the Commi3sion designing the sign~, the petitioner should ~aquest a contlnuance and
present a ravisod plan in accordanco with the suggestlons~ with no vsriance necessery.
M~. Kapson esked if the Commission would conslder the tdee of ~ne slyn withtn the square
footage ellowed which covers both si~s wtthout sanething to t~e them together bacause he
dtd not want ltnes around tha tarner of thc buildtng.
Cammlaatoners Tolar and 8srnes dtd n~t thtnk en opinlon rdn be given u~til thc pians a~e
prasented and Comrnissianer King polnted out that suggestlon would s~11) bc fo~ two signa
and Commisstoner Toler noted a veriance wouid stiil be necessary +~nd that is the problem.
ACTION: Commissloncr Tolar offered a motton, saoondad by Commissioner Davtd and MOTI~N
~7C~tT~O (Commisstaner Dushore beiny abaent)~ that constder~tian of the+ aforement~oned ttem
ba ~tinued to the regularly~scheduied meeting of May ig~ i9fi0 Tn order for the
petitioner to submit revised plans.
5/5/80
~~
MIHUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PIANNING COMMISSIOtI, MAY 5~ igBQ
80-285
ITEM f~0. $ PUDLI C NEARI NG. TO CONS ~~ER AME~IbNENT TO TI~E LANQ USE
~~AT'AL IMPACT RCPORT N0. 2 1 ELEM~~IT: A1tAr~ate rroposrls of ultimaLe la~d us~s
' . ~ includtng but not ltmi*.cd to Hillslde Eatat~s~ Hillslda
........_ ,_.._..~..
Low-Medtum~ Hillsido Medtum~ General Commerclal
and General Open SpacQ fo~ an area of approximately
9~0 acres gen~~ally locat~d south of thn t3auer Ranch~ west of the Wallace and Dougless
R~nches~ northwest and north of the Southc rn Californla Edison ~asement and eest of the
preaont Mahetm Ni l ls Planneci Comnunity and to CO~~SIDER AMEEIDME~IT TO TV~E CIRCULATION
ELCII~NT: Proposal to delete flonte Vlsta Rcmd betwe~n Santa Ane C~nyon Road and Neir
Canyan Road as a Illilside Artcria) hiyhway.
Sub,ject petttlon was cantl~ued from ti~e meetings of March 10 and Ma~ch 24~ 19 &? for
additional Informatton.
Joel Fick, Assistont Uirector for Plann(ny, stated therc has been considerable testimony
affered to the Planning Commisston both at the prev(ous public hearinc~ and che work
sassion on April 21~ tg8o; that the Planniny Conxnission directod staPf to present Exhlbtt
A at today's public hearing for consideratton foltowing the w~rk sesslan; that from the
discusston and revlew of thc prel(minary studics at the rn~eting~ the Consnlssion also
Getermined that there were no othcr feasible alternatives which should bc pursucd. In the
Interlm Staff has been mecting wtth Maheim Hills~ Inc. anc: t.he County regarding the issue
of the dedication of the 500 open spr~ce eas~mcnt ac:res~ a condition of appravat of remaval
from the agricultural prescrve. Il~e steted thc County hes indtcated in discus~s~ons and
corraspondence a des) re to loc~k for parcels perhaps In the Wei -• Canyon snd De+er Canyon
ereas; ancJ that led the pctitioner to requ~st consideratton of Exhib(t A as amended. Ne
polnted out Exhlblt A amended refiects the del~tion of open spact areas tn two prim~ry
location5 and reflects a ro~indfng out af a prcviously sort of Jagged rectangul:~r open
space area. Ile s[ated these parcels wcre previously c~oing to be offered by Anafietm I~tlls
Inc. to the County Fo~ apen space, buC as t~~e County has indicated an incllnatl~~n toward
accepttng parcels nerhaps ln the Weir Canyon and Ueer Canyon a~eas~ tt was generally felt
by Aneheim Hills, Inc. tt~at it is pren~ture ~nd not reslly app~opriate Co addrsss the
specific open space areas on the exl,ibit. tle pa(nted out this developrt~nt ~+lan ts more
closely allgned wlth the snccific development plan that ts addressed ln the E1R.
Thc rccommendattons that staff would hAVe prior to ftnal consideration of this General
Plan Amendment~ include first of all •he relocation of the park site symbol. Ne pointed
out an area that staff~ ~fter careful revlew of the density and perhaps locatlons of
roadways In the area~ thinks is a more favorable site which would more ciasely serve the
population. He stated staff would alsc requcst that the Commisslan consider obtaining t~
firm commitment from Anaheim Hilis~ Inc. regard(ng the intentton to provide the City with
a Publtc Facilities Element~ similar to thac which wlll be submitted on the Bauer Ranch.
Thirdly~ beceuse of the County's Inclination toward accepting open space tn the Deer
Canyon and Wetr Canyon areas~ St.~ff would ~ecorm~end to the Planning Commission that they~
in turn, recomrnend to the City Council that the County cansider securing open space
easements in the Oeer Canyon and ueir Canyon areas. He pointed out that the Exhibit A
am~ended plan wauld not pr~clude open space from being offered in any o~e of the tand use
cate9ories and itnelly~ if the Gounty does not accept ~n apen spece easement In the Deer
Canycn a~ea~ Stafif would request that Aneheim 1~111s. In:,. staff rrbke provisians in
subsequent planning submittals t~ malntain that area t!;rough the master horn~owners
associatlan. Ne explained there arc representatives present from Anahelm Nllls,lnc. and
5/S/~
i
6 ~
MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLAN~IING COMMISSION~ MAY 5, 13 ~1 80-28b
~NVIRONMENTAL IMF'ACT REPORT N0. 231 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENOMENT N4. 155 (CONTINUED)
~~....~... .~.,_ ~._.....-.
oppo~ting vlewpoints Hho wish to eddress the Plenning Commission and Planning Staff is
availabie to answer qu~stians.
Commisstonor Bushore ente~ed the Cou~ctl Chambcr at 3:50 ~.m.
Dan Salcede~ M ahelm Ililis, Inc.~ stated a General Plan is n vary viable living~ breathing
embodimont of Ctty p~itcl~s end goals and es such~ should clea~ly nat be taken lightly;
that a~l~ce 197~ they have benn recognlzinc~ that there is ~pproxtmate~ly 1~000 acres In the
eaat~ rn quartcr that would require a Gencral Pl~n Amendn~nt and most particularly becruse
In Janua ry 1~ ~~ pursuant to Anncxatlon No. 7~ certaln propcrttns were outside the scope
of the )u~tsdiction of the Clty of Anahetm; that .I~is particul~r General Plan Amendment
has be~n revlewed by many ~~gencics and many tndiviciuals~ by consultents~ by Mahelm Hflls,
Inc. staff and he fclt surc Mr. Ftck a~~! Mr. Thampson from thc City fcel it is tha oniy
thing they h~vc becn doing. Ile stated hc would llke to thlnk thot thc alternattve they
havc ftnally come u~ wlth aftcr all the Ytuclics and alternativcs that wero provided in the
EIR, i~ en errti adtment of all nf the issues~ pol(cies and goals Chat are already
erticulated (n the 1~177 Ganyon ~rea Genera) Pl~~n; that they have tried to address
topogrophy~ denglty~ gradtng~ balanccd houstng stock and accomrnodate the consurr~r demands
and particularly the env(ron„~:. ;ally sensitive arca. fle stAtcd thcy belteve that t~~ls
particular plan is a classic textbaok apprnoch to planning~ ne~~ntn~ the hlghest density is
most proxin~ate to thc :najor artertals,a~d ~s they sp~n out the least densc arcas arc those
areas wl~ich are adJacent to sensitive areas lik~ the b8sin of Neir Cenyon and also the
Mohler Drive area. Ilc stated only G~ of the r_ntire arca of Arcas i and 2 is c~olr~g t~ bc
encumbered by structures and G to 12 huuse rooftops may be seen fror,~ the 5astn of ueir
Ganyon; and in te~ms of grading~ for the entire General Pla~ Mtendment because they wtil
use the prlnciple of clustered housin9~ will b~ the lowest in all of Anaheim I~ills. The
two maJor conyons and the ewo anclllary canyons will be protected and the maJor rldgellne
will bc protec~ted. He cxplalned consuitants and experts~ who have most closely been
involved in responding affirmatively~ tnitlaliy at the EIR stage and subsequent as the
responses have come tn, are prtsent to answer any technical questlons.
Narold M. Thortws~ sCaff of the Audubon Society~ rcad thr. follaring letter to the Planntng
Commis~ion datc~i Apri 1 30, 1~80:
"We are wrt tt ng to empF~as i ze our a~rtarients presented ta you at the workshop
sessl~n of Aprll 21, 1980 pertainin~ to the proposed Ge~eral Plan Amendr~ent for
Plann(ng Units i~ II. a.,~' lil and EIR /231. At that mceting we presented to the
Commission an alte rnative land use configuration that woutd~ (f adopted, mitigate
the aciverse environmental tmpacts idr.~tified in EIR a231. This alternattve
involved the acceptance of 350 ~cres pf land owed to the people of Orange County
un~ier an agreement arising fro^ che early release of Anaheim Hills property from
agricuttural preserve in i~7G. Th(s land uedlcat.lon was in lieu of tax
obiigations Incurre~ during the time land wms secured by Wllliamson Act
c~ntrects. We feel this alternetive fs economically and socially viable and
should b~ reflecttd in the land us~ designation adopted during the Genere) Plan
Re vision.
A second alternatlv~ was presentcd du~ing the workshop by your staff and Study
Exhibit N1. Thls alternative was the result of our meeting with staff and prior
testimony before you (March 24~ 1~80) in which we proposcd land usc designations
5/5/80
~
, ;
MINUTES~ ANANEIM C1TY PLANNING COMMISSIqN~ MAY 5~ 1980 80•Z87
ENVIRONMENTAL Ih~l',CT REPORT N0. 231 AND QENERAL PL4M AMENOMENT N0. 155 (CONTINUED)
.~.......~~.~.~~....~~.~.~...~_
of higher density outsido of the cenyon p~ope~ and an open ~p~c4 configuratlon
intarior to the canyon w atorsh~d. This alternative idantifled tn ~taff prapa~ad
g~aphica is also economically and aociolly teastble and wlil~ In our optnlo~,
mttig~ta the edverae environmental inpact Ide~titied in the environmental revlew
p racess .
It fs our position that these alternativcs ere feaaible and should be examined ss
e part ~f the CEQA process. This potnt was made by your city etto~ney snd tha
Commiaston chose to overrule hls aJvice. Contrary to stateme~ts made durtng the
workshops the alternattves we and ~taff proposed are not adequatety covered In
EIR ~231 aa the EIR aite rnattve tttled Alternetive Land Use Mix discuased s
connx~clal comp~nent which ts not gC1'mAln. The alternetive~ tltled Iligh Denalty
anc! Lcrw Density ere overly generaiizeci end do not nddress our propesed land use
alte rnatlves presented to yau for consideratton.
We feel it would be an abuse af discretlon to certify the enviromm~ntal dotument
until thc tssues of alter~ative Isnd use configuratl~n5 nre odaressod adequately
In the environmentat documencetton. It is ou~ opinlon thet we have demonstrate~!
to the Corm~ission ecanomically e~nd sociAlly feaslble alternetives that should be
adopteJ.
For thc record~ w~ wtsh to nocc that the I~ational Reglgter numinatlon is prndtng
before the ke~per of tf-e Register In Washtngtan. The nor+inat(an ts currently
underyoing a 30-day review by the State Office of Ntstaric PrPSe~vatton due to
facts being contested by the Irvine Compony. This p~oceduro I~ e standard actlon
tn the event of dtsputc.
The Anahelm t~iils partcl un~er consickratlon Is apprnximat~ly 1/G of the entlre
acreage of Weir Canyon p roper. Urbanizatton of this parcel wtli re;..ilt in
primAry impacts of unml ttgatablc ~~rben water qual ity lmpacts, visuo) tntrusion~
inereasad uncontrolled human intruston, and loss of natural habltat. The
sccanciary adverse ir.~pacts wili ba greatcr vegctation modificatton Por ftre
protection~ potenttai disruptlon of archeoiogical sites in the cenyon bottom~ and
disruption of nesting sites for red-tatlcd hawks~ g~eat ho rned ewl and ravens.
We previously identifleJ thosc nesttng sites during the workshop process.
ke feet the trade off af a unique ct~nyon ecoaystem for S300~Q~~* ~esidantial
homes does not se~ve to mlxig~te the identified edverses Imry~cts. We aak that you
apprave proJect alternatives presented as Study item A'1 or tt~e proposal forwarded
to you by our agcncy."
Mr. Thomas added he feit the long ha~d of thc Irvine Company has beesn involved tn this all
along; and that he had thoughk the Irvine Company would be present. NQ ststed they feel
they ~eally did not heve the opportuntty to meet with the Commissfon and show them the
canyon and share thetr thoughts and that he understands some of the Commissioners took a
heiicopt~r rtde over the ca~yon bnd probably talked to the proJect proponents whOch he dld
~ot feel is ~ddr~ssing thc p roc~ess qulte squarely.
S/5/80
~
~'
MI NUTES ~ ANAHE I M C I TY PLANN I NG CONMI SS I ON ~ MAY S~ 1980 80-•188
ENVIRONNENTAL I1~ ACT REPORT N0. 231 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENOMENT NQ. 155 (CONTINUE D)
~,._...._.. _..._. -
Oan S~lceda steted this Is privete pro,~erty end M~. Thanes's group has n~t requested thet
thay be g( ven a tour oF the canyo~ or a tour of An~hei m H 111 s~ becAUSe even Anah~im 11t l ls ,
Inc. cenn~t enter the basin of the canyon without pormisaton.
Mr. Salceda felt tt would be unfalr to ex~act the developer or petltloner to tubmit a full
blawn EIR everytime a ncw Idea or proposs) is suggested by san~one oth~r tht~n th~
petittoner~ snd when an alternete is propoaed by the oppositlon~ the ball is in thelr
court.
Commt~stoner Tolar asked if the park problem has resolvcd Itsetf and Mr. 5alcods replied
he felt It has been resolved end Mr. Ruth stnteci nothtnq has changed since thts *+arning
and t~e was setisfied wlth tl~e designatton of the proposed locAtion shcywn this ma~ning.
R. !1. Be+nder~ atto~ney at lt~w~ 1615: Beach Boulevard, Su) te 279. Iluntington Bcaeh,
Caltfornla 92647~ stated he Is the attorney recently substltuted an this case r~ presenttng
th~ Audubon SoGt~ty; that tlie bs~ll Es naw tn the court of thc Appellatc Court and Inv~lves
E I R t~a. 7; howeve r a nu~r~bc r of the E I Rs hav~ bQen I ncorparat~d I nt~ th3t ease a~ d hr,
beltevQd ~IR t~o. 231 wlll be incorporated tnto that sart~e lttic~ation.
He raquested that any decislon for granting or approvtng the EIR be re~st~icted or stopped
unttl the courts can properly he~r the case and this should occur within the ne xt 30 days;
that they are naw walting for response from tCeufinen and Broad attorneys. t~e thought there
hes been an attempt to piccernea) togetl~er ~ scrics of EIRs~ as opposed to loaking at the
nvarall area and thts piecemaaltng is against certa(n regulati~ns set fort~~ in the Code
and verious envtranmental organlzatio~s. He fclt tt fs going to bQ dlsruptiv~ to tha
taxpayer, not only throuyh thc loss of a very prir.~e ptece of iand far a natural resource
area~ but felt it is going to be detrln~ntal to the peoptc of the county. f1e szated in
doln9 this in a plecemea) fashlo~~ the densitl~s are changed And he undorstands that
certat~ areas~ especl~lly in EIR tio. 7~ f~as ~n tncrease of 400$ In density.
Dan Salceda stated they ere fami118r with the referenced lawsult; that A~nexatl on No. 7
wa~ approved by the Local Agency Formation Commisslon in J~nuary 1979 and the lawguit was
f(led and was heard on lts merits in Superior Cau~t~ Orangr. County and the ,judg~ gave a
fav~orab le verdict to thc LAF~ anci th~ Kaufman and Aread attorneys; that the lawsuit was
ap{~aled to the Fo~~rth Appellate District and thia attorney and those he represGnts have
bean the ones continuing the cAse. He stated they want to get a falr, equitibte and
expedient resoluttnn of the matter. lie suggesteci thts GPA not be denied stnce the P1ann~d
CommuniCy Zoning sti 11 has to ba submltted; tentattve tract maps have io be subenltted and
final tract maps still have to be approved and thcre wlll be no irrepareble ha nadone
sheuld this amendment be heerd on its merits. He stated in January 1979 at the LAF~
hearing, thc County did act as to the adequacy of the EIR.
THE PUilLIC NEARING WAS CIOSE~.
Comnissioner Tolar asked that the proposed park site be potnted out on the exhibitend Jtm
Ruth painted out the park site tn the brown Area end stated that is as noted In the staff
report end added thay feel the Park should also teke care of peopic at the top of the hili
and it is in an a~ea with the greatest denslty.
5/5/80
1rw
MINUtES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNiNG COMMISSION~ M/.Y 5~ 19A0 ~•2a9
ENVIRONMENTAI, IMPACT REPORT N0. 2~1 ANO GENEIIAI PUN AMENDMENT N0. 155 (CONTINUFO)
_, ~~.~
Commtssiondr Tolar wa~t~d to Insura chat if this axhiblt ts epproved~ the park `ite ts
properly id~ntifled evan though he recognizes thts i~ a Generel Plan t~nd the ~Ite can move
e block o~ twa~ but he was ccmcerned if It mov~d a mlle o~ two, Ha wa~ted protection for
the loc~tton of the park sltc so a deve~~per c~nnot move it leter.
Joel Ftck s tated ~rlor to the Ctty Counctl vo nsideretton. steff would prepe~e an
eddlttonal amendment to the exhibit which would ~how tho ~ark sita symbe) (n thet
location. In eddit'on the wording can tho exhibit would rerd; "This is not en offlclal
zone map snd ts a guldeltne end does not Intend to imply speclflc locatlons of the lend
usas."
Con~ tsloncr Bushore ~s4:cd haw to guarnntee th aC those pcoplc buying thc homes will know
that tl,at area may or rru~y not be a~erk stte and Comr~lssto~er Toler stat~d there will not
be any homaa built prlo~ tn acceptancc of s prrk slte by the Clty.
Ct~a) rwoman Eiarne:s stated there is e gop betw~cn thc time r perk si te ts praposed and the
tin~e fi is accepteJ and tliat Is a problcm and shc falt tf thcre Is a staternfnt on tha
Gcn~ral Plan~ It would reolly he1p.
Juel Fick stated staff woutd p~opose that this be hnndled exactly thc same way the ~auer
Ranch was handled end that wss wtth a Publ Ic Fsclllties egroenw±nt so thet the ~~clfie
location~ tim(ng, cost~ etc. of thase facilit(es will bc datermined prlor to z~nl~g
finallzetlon. Fi~ st~nted Staff's recomxndatTon is tt~at the Public Factlittes Element be
submltted and approved by the City prior to chc finaltzetlon of zoning on eny one of the
parcels.
Commissiancr Oushare claritied that b~for~ o~e hhusc is bullt~ ihe park site wlil be
Jesig~ated and accepted by thc City as parc of the approvsl.
Chal rwuman Barnes as:ccd f f thn park s i te sy~bol wi I i actual ly be shown In Area~ No. 9 or
will it mcrely state that it wtl) be within Ar~es 9 and iQ.
Mr. Fick atated the csxhibl t wi l l actuai ly she-~ the park s i ta symbol and~ ln ~ddi tion~ the
pr,rase will be (ncluded that tha exact locacion of land uses could very and ~oted that i~
a standard phrase which actually appoara o~ the General Plen wall maps.
Chairwoman Barnes was worrled because it hk~s becn Cannission'~ pollcy in the p~st~ that if
the dot changes 1000 foet. the Commtsalon would revlew it and sfir did not want to see a
dot tn Araa 9 and tfi e park sit~ yo Into ArG a 1A.
Jo~1 Fi~.k expiained at the time zoning ts p mposed in the Pubtlc Faclities Element, the
Plann(ng Commisslon and City Gouncil would determine whether it is in conformance wtth th~
General Plen. Ne stated thst the Planning Commtsston is nat limfted to a fnotage
destgnation in determining General Plan consistency.
Jack Nhite~ Assistant City Attorney~ steted Anaheim~ as e Charter Ctty~ daes not have to
zone p roperty consistent with the General Plan; Chat m~st qene ral taw cities ln the state
are requlred to ~+pprove xoning only to the extent that it is compatible with the cu~re~t
Generel Plan. The Planning Commission ano Clty Council ~rould beoome Involved in thA perk
siCe and spprov~t af iater dcvelopment st~ges in the ~p~~rovei of the Rentative trect maps;
S/5/So
~
MINUTES~ ANIWEIM CITY PLAWNING COMMISSION~ MAY 5~ 1980 ~'Z9A
ENVIRONMEWTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 231 AND GENERAI. PLAN AMENOMENT H0. 1S5 ~CONTINUED~
~~r~~.~r~r~ ur~~~~ ~
wherein the Subd!vislon Map Act provtcfes thet no subdtvistan can be epprov~d excmpt where
it is co~sistent with tha City's Genorsl Plen~ as wall ~s n+e~ny other crite~le and et that
time~ the P1Anning Cammisston would have the opportuntty to det~rmtne whethor those maps
wera con: f stent. There 1 s no ~equi rement that any spect f 1 c fbotAge devt at ton f rom a dot
on a plan be deemod tnconsistent ar conslstent~ buc It is s(mp~y a fectual determtnatlon;
and t1~at ~ Ge~ere) Pian ts ganaral and dtffers from the pre~taeness of zoning.
Commisstoner Tola~ atated the Commission has heard a great deal of testlmony and spent a
yreat deel of ttme on thls ~roJect; thet hc recognizes the denstty is qutte a btt htgher
than tho current Genernt Plan~ but the plan ts ge~cral Tn nature and ts flexible end he
fe 1 t 1 t i s f~l r and equi tab 1 e to tt~e C I cy of Anahe im; thot I t has not been dnmonstretcd to
hlm that this develapment wi i l heve an adversc im~act on Wei~ Canyon if tt remalns a
regionai ~~ark and he has some quastton .~bout that possibl 1 ity. fle stAted he was reedy to
of fcr a nx~tto~ and noted th i s wi 1 1 actual ly bc a reoortrn~ndot lon to th~ Ci ty f,ounc) 1.
Chaltwoman Ba~ncs assurecJ those who hACJ wr(tten or spokcn to the Commiss(on that thei~
testtmony has not been Igno~cd end the Commission has rrally egonized over this requnst
and are 1 nterested In Wa i r Canyon ~ but cio not Fcel f 1 ve to ten housc roof 1 inas wl l l affect
It; tliat speciol palns wil l be taF;en to insurc there ts no probt~-n with eroslon ~nd that
Weir Canyon Is not affccted.
ACTIQ~I: Comm(ssioner Tola~ offered a motion~ tl~at the Anaheim City Planning Cortmission
rec~ommend to the C! ty Counci i ihat E1 R No. 231 be certi fiad.
Jack Whlte~ oxplained the Commission ls not legally requlrcd t~a take an actlon on the EIR
but could make a reconxnendation to the Clty Council and explalned the motion shnuld
1 ncl ude the wordt n~ i n accordance wi th pa es S-c thru 8-f of the staf f report. (1 t was
later determined that pagcs 8-c and 8-(d)~we~e ~eve~sed. Ne further explatned the
Planning CoRnnissian has received ond revtcwed the draft EIR and subsequent comments ~d in
order to fact 11 tate the Ci ty Counc) 1's decision~ cen make a reconr~ndatto~ as to thei r
fecltngs and Chalrwoman Bernes felt the Commisslon should lndicate thelr opinlon to the
Gity Council.
Jack White added the record should indicate that the Ptanning Conmissloner• have all re~+d
the staff report including the proposed recomnenclation to ~h~ ~?tY Gour~ct 1 on pages S-d, e
and f.
ACTIAN: Commissioncr Tolar offered a motion~ secanced by Cortimissi~ner David a~d MO?IOPI
~ E~ unanimously that the Maheim Clty Planning Commission does hernby recommand tha~
tl~e Ci ty Cou;~ci l adopt the fol lowing motton certt fying EI R No. 231 togett~er with the
Statement of Overriding Consideratftins:
That after considering EI R No. 231 for General Plan M~endment No. 155 and reviewing
evidence~ both writt~n and aral, tn supplement draft EIR No. 231~ the Pia~ning Commission
finds thet draft EIR No, 23~ ~s in cortpltanc~ with the Caltfornia Envtronmental Qual~ty
Act end with City and State EIR Guidelines; and that draft EIR No. 2~1 identifles the
follaving poterstial significant impacts which the praJect could have on the environment:
*There wtll be sn increase in automobile traffic which will generate congestion, notsa end
alr pollutio~ tn the area.
5/5/~
~
i i
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMIISSION~ MAY ~~ 1980 ~' Z91 -
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT N0. 2~1 AND GENERAL PLAN AMEN OMENT N0. 155 (CONTINUED)
~, ..~..~._......~~~ ....~. ,
*7hero will be •n increate in the nunber of students which will create an ~dditionsl
burdon an schaols whtch do not have adequete cA~actty for tham.
~tGrading will xcur on approximately 35~ of the proJect area with co~sequent alter~tion of
landfo ~nq~~ disruptlon to flora and fauna and destructlon of specimsn trees.
+-DevelQpment of the area couid hav~ An advcrse lmpact on the blological reaources af Weir
Canyan; however, such environmontal impacts wili be reduced by compltance M~ith Clty codes~
pollciea and procedures~ and the pra)QCt will brin~ subs tantla) beneflts to the eitlzens
of Meheim by providing er~loyme~t ond parr~ttttng thc developn~ent of A htyh quality
residentla) conmuriity to esslst I~ any meeting of the demand for {~ousing~ anu' eeonomic and
soclal conslderetlons neke It infensiDle ta r~ttigata ell af the impar.ts tdenttfied in ~he
EIR.
STATEMENT OF 0'iERRIpING_CQFISIOEMTIONS ENVIRONMEtiTAI. IMPACT REPQRT ND. 231. GEf~E
Whorcas~ the Anaheim Clty Councf 1 has revl~vecf EIR No. 231 for the proposed General Plan
Amendme~t for AnAhelm tt111s Planning Units I~ I1, 111~ IX, and X and has determined that
aaid report identifies the follawing potential sTgnificant impACts whtch sAid proJect
could havo an thc cnvironment:
*The ~e wtll be an ircrease In autom~bile traffic whlch wilt generete congestlon. noi~e and
a( r pol i utl on i n tha area.
~TMerc wt 11 be an ir~reaae ' :~-a nunber of students wh i ch wl 1 i create an addi t i ona)
b~rden vn schools w~.. ~l~ a~ have adequate capacity for the:m.
*Gra~'tng h!11 c:ur on appr~ °.y 35Z of the praJect area with consequent alteration of
{andtorr~s~ disr.,ti• .ion ta .lo~a and fauna and destructlon of specirt~en trees.
ev~lopment of the area could have ar~ adverse impact on th~ biolo91c~1 rasources of Wei~
Canyon.
Noweve r ~
(a) Such envlronmentel tmpacts will be reduced by compliance with City cndes. pollctes
and prncedures ~ a~d
(b) The proJsct wi11 brtng substantial benefits to the ctttzens of Anaheim by provtding
employn~nt and pcrmittir.g the development of a high quality residential communTty to
assist in meeting the dei~ar~~ for housing~ and
(c) Economic and soctal constderattons make it infeasible to mttigate all of the tmpacts
idtntified in the EIR.
Nvw, therefore~ th~ City Cuuncfl does adopt this Statement of Overriding Constderations in
approving General Plan Amendment tdo. 155•
~^
5/5/~
~
MtNUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING C~FWISSION~ MAY 5~ 19~ ~~~~
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT N0. 23~ ANO GEHEML PI.AN AMENDMf.~+f N0._ 1~ (CONTINUEO)
Jsck White explained tr+o motions should be offorod for the Land U:a Elec,ant t~nd the
Circulatlon Ela~nent which has been subsequently withdrawn by the petttlonar with one
resolution to Incarporate both rrqtions.
Commlasiono~ Tolar offored s motion that E~chieit 1~ Ame~ded be ~dopted in connection with
Gnneral Plan Amendment No. ly~, Land Us~ Ete~nt~ to tnclude a park stte ga~erally south
southwest of the commercial site as discussed in thu st++~`f roport.
Commisalaner Hhc GenernldPlantart+cndme~tyAnl~the dcnsityrwllltbe controltedhbyethep1elned
this la Just t
subsequant zon(ng.
Cammissloner Fry seconded the preceding motlan and MOTION CARRIED unantmousiy.
Comnfastaner Tolar offered e motion~ sec~ndeA by C~mmissloner Fry and MOTION CARRIED
unanimously that thc Anahelm Ci ty Planninc~ Commisslon does heret~y approve the ~equest for
amendment to the Clrculation Elament portion of General Plan Amendn+ent No. 155 bc
wl thdrawn.
Commissioner Tolar offered Resolution No. PCB~~-79 end movcd for its passage and adoption
tl~at the Anahnim Clty Planning Cormisslon cbes hereby recommend to the Ctty Co~ncil that
Exhibit A Amended to include a~ark sltt generally locoted south southwest of Che
Coranerclal sitc as noted in the staff report be ~cbpted in connectlo~ with Ge~eral Pl~n
Amendment No. 1y5~ lend Usc Ela+-ent~ subject to the petitloner's stipulatloR that the
maximum dens(ty shalt be 2~F,90 dw~lling unlts~ and d~lctir~g the Circulatton Elcment as
withdrawn.
On rol) call~ the fo~egoing resolution was passed by the follawing vote:
AYES : COt1M1 SS IONERS : 6ARt~GS ~ BUSIiORE .~a"i D, FRY, 11ER4ST, Y.I ~iG, TOLAR
NOES : COHMI SS I OflERS : NOtJE
~iBSE~IT: COMMI SS Id!icRS : NONE
Jack Whlte e~cp~ublic hearingtwillWbeischeduled~with noticesddist~ibuted intthe~sn~, and
an additi~nal p
ma~ner.
Joel Fick pointed out the addlttonal st~+ff recon~nertc.~tions on page 8-g a~d brlefly
revtewed them.
ACTIOt~: Co~~missioner Herbst offered ~~~..,~ion, seconded by Commissioner Totar and MOTION
CARRIED unar,fmously that tlie M ahcim Clty Planning Commission does hereby recomme~d to the
City Council that:
The City be p rovided wtth a publlc facilities element acceptab~e to alt City departme:nts
similer to that required as a condition of approvai of the Bauer Ranch which wtll identify
the p rovision en r t gzoninedbeing finalizedton~anytportionsdofuthlsnsubJect area~thl~
development prio 9
5/5/~0
r. ,r_, _,. . _.
~
~ ~
` ,.
MiNUTES~ AWAHEIM CITY PLANNINO COMMISSION, MAY 5~ 1980 ~'Z93
ENVIRONHEN~AL IMPACT REPORT N0. 231 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 155 (CONTINUEp)
w .~.i~^ ~
Th~t co~r.spondence be forw~rded to the Cau~ty roqussting that dedicated ~asements fa~
op~ space in the Oa~r C~nynn a~d Welr Ca~yon areas be secured a~ a provislon of
withdr~wal from the Agricuttura) Preserve status; if the County does not accept an ope~
space eatemcnt 1n th~ Deer Canyo~ a~oa that A~ehelm Hills~ inc. staff m+~ke provislon: in
thetr tubsequent planning submittals for the Oeer Canyon araa to be n+alntalned by th•
Anaheim itillf M~atsr Nomeawners Associetion ea h+~s been slmilarly ptanned for 1n Watr
Canyo~ on the BAUer Ranch.
Cortmtssioner I~erbst felt becausa of pest problems~ the Planntng Commissto~ should aee the
gradiny ptans b~fore chey are finally approved and Chalrwoman Darnes statad the Commission
has not ~aen certain pla~s that are ve ry important es~eclally In ehe htli and canyon •raa
and referred apecifictally to N111 Site No. 1 which new has s library~ a schoot and a
pertlal nark snd the Pianning Comm(ssian did not get a chance to sea it end she felt
there were certain thtngs that cauld have boen dane to utitite that p roperty in thn beat
Interest of the tittzens of Anahelm.
Conmtssioner David offnred a motion~ seconded by Canmissloner Herbst nnd MOT1011 CARaIED
unanlmausly khat the Anahelm City Planning Commission does hereby request that because of
previous problerns in tha hlll and canyon arrA, that grading plans br revlewed by the
P1Anning Commiaston prior to appravai far any area inctudod in General Plan M-endme~ No.
155 to insure that grading Is in conformanca with the General Plan.
S/S/80
~ ~
~ ' ~ ~C ~
MINUTES, ANAHBIM CITY PIANNiNG COMMISSION~ MAY 5~ 198A
ITEM N0.
ND R~COMh1~NDATIONS
8o-z9~4
Tha following Reports and Reco~mendatlons st~+ff reports were present~d but not read:
A. AE4ANDOtiMEtIT N0. '-12A • Request fram Mr. Donald I.. tlutchin. to eba~don a portion
o~t~e ETst n9 .- oot widc public u~illty easPmcnt lacr!ed +~t the north ltne
of tlarth Strest and Qxtending north 1y/.~? f~•et~ ~Aralle~ ~i th rmd approxtmately
155.fr4 feat aest of tl~c cc~tcrline of lenz Avcnua.
ACTION: Conxn(ssloner King afFe~ect o motton~ seGOndad by Gommissioner David and
M 10~! CARRtCD (Comnissinner Dushor~ being eb~cnt)~ that the Aneheim City
Planniny Cammisslon dc~cs hereby reoortrnGnd to the City Counci l thet Abandonment
No. ~9•12A be approved as reccmr-ended by t.he Ctty ~nglnacr.
D. ADAf~D01JMCt~ NQ. -1 A• Requ~s t f rom C( ty o'~ Anoh~ I m~ Canmun 1 ty Deve lopment
epartn+ent. to an~n a portton of Gleudina Strc~t tocat~d epproxtmeteiy 220
fcet + north of aroadway~ and a portian of a publlc alley located east of Anaheim
Boulevard~ south af Llnvoln Avfnue.
~4'CTIAN: Commisslancr King afFared a motion~ s~conded by Commlssloner Da~vid and
MQ~ TI(1N Cl1RRIE0 (Commixsloner Dushore being absenC~, that the Anahetm Clty
Plsnning Gortemission does hcreby recz~mrn~nd to the Cfty Council that Abandonment
tia. 19-13A be approvcd as reuxnn+endcd by thc C1Ly Engineer.
C. PP4POSED AME`iONENT TO TIiE 2-STf!RY liF.;Gtit LIMtTAt101~ IN MULTIPLE-FAMILY
The staff rcQort was ~presentcd but not reAd.
Commtssioner Tolar fetc thts mattct should ba contlnucd for furthcr study anci
Commisstoncr Iierbst fcl' therc may bc altcrnste ways af r.~odifying the Zoning
Codes to e~-courage thc a~nstructlon qf apertments (t.e. reduction ln stze of
apartmenKs~.
Commis~ioner Talar wanted to know tfie effect thaC thls woutd have on multi-f;,mily
dwellings, planned unit developmonts~ cu~daminlums, or townhauses abutting
singie-family residcnt~al uses. Cam-1~sioner Nerbst felt Canmisston maintatns a
hanEle on the pass(blc effccts rrlth thc vori~nce procedure.
AnnfkA Santatahti, Asststant Director for 2orsing~ stated that Variance No. 3137
h~d braught about this ~atucl~~ and would be coming back before the City ~Lounci 1 ~n
May 20~ 1~80 and she ++ould llke to have a general consensus by thc Comn:isslo~ on
ahether they t~+ink it is r.;~proprtate to laok at s possible redu~tion in che
mir~~mur.~ 1;~-fopt setback bctween 2-sto ry apartments and single-famtly restdences
or if thcy fe~l the 1-sto ry ep~rtment helght limttatlon shoutd remain.
tammissio~er Harb~t felt the aetback restrictlon should be maintatned but
modifatatian of permitted dcnsfties should be considered.
5/5/80
~f ~ .. ~ ~ ,~
~
~ ~" - eaz~s
MINUTES, 11NAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSfON~ M1~Y S~ ~9~
REPORTS AIIO RECOMMENDATIONS (CONTINUEO)
I~CTION: Commtasioner Ktng offered a motion~ saco~ded by Commisstoner Davld and
A'~'~ CARRIED (Comml~sioner Bushore being absent)~ that tha Anahaim City
Pl~nntn9 Commisslon doas hereby continue thts item to the rogularly•achMduled
meeting of June 2~ 1980 tn order to ailow further st~ff study of other possibla
Cod~ smendments whlch may encourege tha construction of multl•Psmtly reside~ces.
D. VAaIANCE N0. 1 14 - Request for apArovel of specific uso from Barry Manthe for a
stu o o~ t~e nstruction of che~s ~~d b~ckgammon et ~+01 Wast Ketella Avenue~ .AC
(Ten Oollar "N" Hour Studio).
Oean Shere~, .Assista~t Planner~ not~d the petltloner had requested a two-week
eonttnuAnce.
ACT10~~: Commissioner Ilerbst offered a n+otlon~ seconded by Canmissioner David and
't~'(Slj' CARRIED (Commisslo~er Bushore being ebsent) ~ that tf,e Anaheim Clty
Planning Commission does herQby grAnt A contlnuanc~ to the regularly-scheduled
meeting nf May 19 ~~~QO as requcstecl by peti tionc~.
ADJAUtttIME~IT Thnre being no fu~thsr business, CAmmissloner Talar offe~ed e motion~
seconded by CAmmi ss ioner Fry and MOTI O-t CARRI ED that the meeti ng be
ed]ourned.
Thc meeting wes ad}ou~ned at -+:25 p.m.
Respectfully submlttad~
~~ ~ a~~~
Ed1tFi L. Narris. Sacretary
Anaheim Clty Plsnning CQmnissio~
ELH:Im
5/5/~