The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes-PC 1980/12/15~. ,; . v~ Civic Center Anahelm, Califorhla December 15, 19t30 REGULAR ME~TING PRESENT AUSENT. itEGULAft MEETING QF TNE ANAHEIM i.ITY PLANNING COMMISSION - The regular meeti~g of the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commiasion was celled to order by Chal~man Tolar at 1s3~ p.m.~ D~cenber ly~ 1980 tn the Council Ch~mber~ a quorum being present. - Chairman Tolar Comml ss loners : Barnes ~ i,ouas ~~ushc+re ~ Fry ~~;) ng • Commissioner: tie~bat AL.SO PRESENT - R,on~ld Thompson Annika Santalehti Jsck white Jey Ti tus Shtrley Meredith Pam Kats~r Oean Shcrer Edtth Narris Plannfng Olrecf r Assistent Dir~ ~r f~r Zo,~ing Assistant City ~~ttorney Office Enqineer Traffic Engtneering Assistant Nousing and Net~hborhood Pres~rvotion As•istant Ptanner Plnnnin~; Commisston Secr~;ary PLEDGE OF - Thc Pled~e of Allegiance to the Flag wes lcd by Commissloner B~sho~e. AILEGIANCE ITEM N0. lt EIR NEGATiVE ~ECLARATION~ WAIVER OF CODE RE UIREMENT AND CONOITIOHAI USE R~H~T NO Z1~5i PUdLIC HEARII~G. OwNERS: R. H. AND TNEODORA R. SIEGELE~ 5Q0 South Atchison Street~ Anahetm~ CA ~280y. AGC.NT: E. E. ROUNDS, I,ERQY D. OWEN COMPANV~ 50~ 5outh Main Strset. O~a~ge, CA q2Gf,p. Property describad as a rectengula~ly-shaped parcel of lend conststing of a~roxlmately b.5 s~sre. located on the northwest corner of South Street and Rose Street, 91~ East South Street. Present classificatlan Ml (INDUSTRIAL~ I.IMITEO) ZON~. CONUITIONAL '~SE PERMIT REQUEST: TO PERMIT AN AUTOMQ8ILE REPAIR FACILITY IN THE NL ZONE uITN W AIVERS OF (m) MINIMUM LANDSCNPED SETBACK Al10 (b) REQUIREQ SITE SCREENiHG. Subj~ct pe~tition was conClnued fron- the mectings of November 3 and 17. 1g8d at the request of the petittoncr. it was noted the petitioner has rec••~ested that subJect petitio~ br withdraw~. ACTION: Com~ntssioner King ofifered a rrotlon~ scconded by Co~wnission~r Fry and MOTIOtJ ~ft~p (Commlssioner Herbst betng absent). that Petitian for Condtt'.onal Use Permit ~bo. 2125 be wtth6rewn ac the ~equest of the petitia~er. 80- 744 12/15/~ ,~ ~ MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNIHG CONMISSION, DECEMBER ty. 1~8Q 80-745 ITEM N0. 2: ENVIRpNHENTAL IMPACT REPO~'T N0. 113 ~PQEVIQUSLY APPRAVEDL WAIVER OF '~'6'~'1~T~EM E"ai~i f Aa"~'i + .'~ - - -• PUDLI C IIEARING. ONNERS: M. J. BROCl; AND SONS, IN(.. ~ G767 Forest Lawn ~rivn~ Los Angeles~ CA 90~68 and T11E CIIURCH Of JESUS CIiRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS~ REAI ESTATE DIVISIQ~~~ ~0 East Templn~ Salt Lake City~ Utah 04150. AfENTS: M. J. BAOCK AND SONS~ i':C.~ iG9~ Greonbriar, Sulto 22~i~ Brea, CA g2621. Property descrlbed as an irregularly-shaped pa~ce) of lartd consisting of approximetely 19.3 acres~ heving app mximate frantegea of 30~ feet on the north side of Falmouth Avenue and 9~A feet on the south side oF Coronet Avenue. having e nu~xlmum depth of approximately 1500 feex anci betng located approximately Gy~ fe@t west of the centerllne of Romneya Ortve. Property prese~tly classified RS-A-4;~Of1Q (RE510ENTIAL/AGRICUITURAL) ZONE. CONDITIONAL USE PERM11' REQUEST: TO PERMIT A 126-UNIT DE'ACHED CANDOMINIUM COMPLEX WITH WAIVERS OF; (a) MAXIMUM STRUCTURAL HEIGHT AND (b) MINIMUM LNNUSCAPED SETBACK. SubJect petitlon waa cont(nued from the meettng ~f November 1y, 19An ~t thc~ ~equest af the pctiti~ner. It was nated that the petitioner has requested that sub)ect petitlon be continued to the January 12~ 1~30~ m~ettng in vrder for a tentative map to b~ hea~d conJunctively. ACTIQN: Commiss(oner King off~~c~ a motlon~ seconded by Commlsstoner Fry and MOTION tA D(Commissloner Herbst being abscnt) ~ tt~et thc ~neheim City Planning CarMnisston does hereby grant continua~ce ~f the aforementionec! item to the meeting of January 12~ 1981~ at the request of t,~c pctlt~onc~. ITE~` N~O~~: EIR N~GATIVE DrGLARl1T1011. RECLASSIFICATIA!~ N0. Q(1•81-17 AFID VARIA~ICE N0. ~`. - ~,,•~: PUDLIC i;k~RIP~G. 01JNER5: BILL J. NICKEI~ ET AL~ 8151 Ketella Avenue. Stanton~ CA 90Gn0. Pro,~erty described as A rectan~ularly-shaped parcel oP land constsCtng of approximate~y 0.4 acre. located at 1217 5outh liutwood Street. Property pres~ntly classlfied AS•A-43~000 (REStOENTIAI/AGRiCULTURAI) ZOtlE. RECLASS I FI CA' t ON REf~uEST : RM-12n0 VAiiIANCE RCQU~'ST: HAIVERS OF: (a) MINihUM LOT AREA PER DNELLING UNIT~ (bj M.4XIMUM STRUCTURAL Ntl~"T. (c) Mi111MUM RECREATIO~IIIL•LEISURE AR~A~ AND (d) M~NINUM DISTANCE ~ETWEEN BUILDtNGS r~,^POSEU TO CONSTRUCT A 16-UNtT APARTMENT COMPLEX. Subject pe[ition was cantinued from the n+eeting of Noven+brr 17. 198~ at tt~e request of thC pttittoner. There wes one person indicating hcr presence tn oppositton to subJect request, and although the steff report was not riad~ it is ref~rred to and madc a pert of the mtnutes. Bill Nickel~ ewner~ explainad r~vised plans were submttted roduci~ig Che number of units to 14~ and increasing the s~xe of the units providing additional two•bedroom untts. He stated h~ still foels [his is a good proJect. ~z/~5/80 MINUTES, ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. nECEMBER 15~ 19~ 80-746 Rits Rayes, 1927 Chateau~ statad sl~e is st111 concerned ~bout the density tn the entire arca becsuse of the exlsting traffic and psrking problems. She reed n portton af the RM-12~~ zoning ordinance which explsined tho pu~po~e of thc zone and notnd the verlance procodurc is to prevent discrtminetion •nd is not to g~~nt specls) prtvilagas end noted tha property next door to the north Is also prapoaed for simtler development a~d thet there ls enother property ac~oss the street whtch cauld be similarlly devnlaped and Trident Junior Hiqh School is availeble for development. Sh~ qu~ationed the net density es indiceted tn the statf report of thc ortqinal r~~ upo4al . ~ean Sher~r~ Asalstant Plannar~ stated the November 17th staff repart was celculated on tha g ross area, rt~ther tha~ thc net aree, end the December 15th st+~ff r~p~rt ts correct. Ms. Reyes asked if the recreattonal srea is still propoaed fur the ge~ege roof. Dean Sherar explained it is still in that lacetion~ but ht+s been enlarged. Ms. Rcyes stated since the~e wtll be Mo-badroom units~ they wil) probebly be occupied by f~mtlies and ~,t~e did not think the grrage ruof recreatiQn ar~~f ~rQducedc thetnumber~of fami ly recre+,t~on. She felt evon tP~ough the nur-~er of units - people living the~c wlll be Increased. Ma. Reyes stated she is concerned beceuse the Cortmtsslon cannot deny e similar request In the futurt end there ara defl~Itely rarking problems tn the arca. pointing out other developers in the ~rea have I~ed to tnstall gates ~nd issue cards to tenants. She referred to a church dcvel~ped In the srea whicr~ was grdnted a speclal privlieg~ and constructed without ;~n~n~~~~Gallaw this requast~.te p~rki~g. She stated she felt it would be poo p 9 Mr. Nickei statcd epartments are not bGf~r theearea~anddmak.eeltuSCanef ut~fi~sncielly that he is trYing to meke a good project for him. THE PUBLIC NEARING 11AS CLOSED. Commissioners King and Bushore stated they ~o~id not lustify the herdships. Mr. Nickel statcd the hardship is on the property bccause it ts located next to a day care center; that subJect p~operty and the single-famlly d.r11fn9 to the south are suttable for this Cypr development '~eceuse of the commerclal and multi-fsmliy developments in the area; and thst he proposns t~ bulid the same typa bullding for the area. He stated he did not think ht should be penalized becausc of the existing traffic in t-~e erea and bect+use the property does not have a m~+)or freeway through it. Ghatrman Tolar stated the Commtsslon has granted simllar watvers. snd the code relates to a different tifestyle; th~t apartments are nteded i~ this citr and state and obviously are nat beinq canstructed~ b~ ~ he is not in favor of simply ignoring the extsting cod~as. Nowever~ h~e stated he did not think this revised project would cause some of the adverse effacts that couid be caused by some other type development; that Ball Road and Nutr+ood are v~ ry busy, but hn did not thi~k ty untts next tc+ a day car~ center would create that much m~re of a problem and r+tll bnswer most of the cnnce~ns of apartu+ent development; end that this Commtssion has approved .M 12/15/80 ~- `~ -^+'~'~ _ ~. MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANN~NG COMMISSION~ DECEMBER 15, 1~360 ~0•747 proJectt with more v~rlances th~n ~-~Is en the b+~sts o' the unusua) sht~p~~ stze ar topogrephy af the la~d. 11e stet~0 he felt thts ~ioul ' be a comprttble use. Commisstoner King ~nd Commissioner Bushore stAted they favor the praJact but still could not Justify tl,e requested harclshlp, Chatrr.~sn Tolar st~ted the Commis~i~n h~ns granted many simi lar v+~ivers. Cpnmisstone~ Qarnos stited the wa(ver fo~ the mtnlmum lot err~a is minlmel; thac the waiver of maximum structurAl helghk h,.<, d hardst~l~; the wn~ver of minimum recreatl~nal~-leisure~ arc~i has bcen deleted; and tf~c wa(v~- of minimum distanca betwaen bulldings is an interlor problem. She stated she felt the only real concern is the minimun lot area~ but since state low encaurac~es t~~e city t~ try to provide apartments and lcrw cost u~its, that the herdship c~uld pronably be Justtfled on that basts. ACTION: Commissiancr l~arnes offered a motian~ seconded by Commissioner iCing ond ~~N CARRIED ((.~~rtm(ssioner Herbst belnq absent). t~. t tho Anaholm Lity Planning Commtssion f~ns revi ~wed the proposel to rec ~ issi fy s:,b}ett property fror~ thm RS-A- 43~00(1 (Resldential/Ayricultural) z~ne to ti~c RN•11~~ (aesidentlal~ Multlple-Family) zone to permit a 14-unit apartrta~nt compicx with r+aivers of mtnlmum lot srea per dwelltng unit~ maximum structural hnt~t~t and mi~imum distance between buildtngs on a rectanyulariy-shaped parcel of land conststing of a~proximatnly 115 feet on the west side of NutwooJ Strcet~ tiaving a rt-eximum depth o~ apt~raximetely 17~ feet, bcing located approxtmately 2y0 feet sauth ~f the centerline of Ball Road; and does herQby approve the Negative neclaraclon from thr. requlrPme~t to prcparc an anvtronr~ental impect report on thc basis that thcrc wouid be no sianific~+nt indivldual or cumuletlve adverse anvironmental tmpacC due to tf~e epprova) uf thts Negatlve Declaration since the Anehelm Generrl Plen designaces the subJect propcrty for medium density land us~es cormiens~rate wttl~ the pro~osal; t~at na sens(tlve envtronmental impatts are involvEd in the proposAl; that the Initial Studv subm(ttcd by thc petltloner lndtcates no sfgnificant irtdividual o~ cumulative adverse envl~enmental trtq~acts; and that th~ Nec~atlve Declara~'lon substantiattny the foregoing findinga Is on f(le in tl~e City of A~Ahelm Planning Department. Commtsstuner 3ar~es offersd Resolution Na. PCB~-226 and movcd for its passage and adoption that ~the Anaheim City Planning Commissia~ docs hercby grant Reciasslfi~- ~on No. IIO-ai-17, subJect to Int~rdepartment~l Committce recoi+w~endations. On roll call, the fore:,olnr, resolution was pBSSed by ti,e ~ollvwtng vote: AYES: COMMISSiONEaS: DARNES~ BOUAS. BUSNORE, FRY~ KING, TOLAR NOES : COMMI SS I Ot~ERS : NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: lIERDST Commissioner Barncs offered Fte lution No. PCBQ-227~ in pArt, end movcd for ics passage and adoptton that th~ Anaheim City P1a~ning Commlssian does hereby gr~nt Vari~nce Na. ;17~ on the basis chat v+aiver ~e) is minlma! and watvers (b) and (d) on the basis that denia! would deprive subJect p~aperty of privilegcs enJoyed by other prope~tles in the same zone and viclnity and de~r~t~g waivGr (c) on thc basis thac the nced for sA(ci waiver was delnted by r~evfsed plAns and ~uh;ect to Interdepartmer.*al Committee recommcndet~ans. ,z~~s~8o ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY ~LANNING COMNISSION~ DE~t~!BER 15~ 1980 80•7W8 On ~oll ca11~ the foregotng resolution w~s passed by the followtng votes AYES; COMMISSiQt7ERS: DARNES~ BOUAS~ BUSf10RE~ FRY~ KINC~ TQIAR NOESs COMMISSIqt~ERS: NONC A85f..NT: COMMI SS I~NEaS ; MERdST Jack Nhite~ Assistant City Attorney~ presented rhe written right to app~al the Plennfng f,-~mtsslon's deciaton within 2? days to the City Council. ITEM N0. 4: EIR NEGATIVE DEGLARATI011 RECLASSIFICATION N0. 8f1-81-1 WAIVER OF CODE ~'T _ ~1 ~ l! _ M . N . : PUaLIC HEARIt~G. OWNERS: MARY 5. NELSOt~, ApMIt~157RAT4R FOR IDA M. RANN(ri/ ESTATE~ c/o WEtNFELU t MIXON. ATTORN~VS AT LAW, 6A1 North Parkcenter Drive, Suitc 203~ Santa Ana~ C~~ 92701 . AGEN7: L I NbRORG-DA11L I NVESTORS ~ 172f1 Pac i f i c Coast N) c~hw~~y ~ 11unt i ngton Bea~,l~~ CA 9Zf~~~a. Property ~iescribed as an Irreguldrly-shaped narcel of iand consfsting of appraximt,tely 12.3 acres located at thr. gouthwes; corn~r of C~erritos Avanue a~rl Euclid Street~ having epproxtmate front~ges af ~30 fect on the 3outh sid~ of Cerritos Avenue~ and 4?.5 fect o~ the wc:st sidc of Euciid Street. Ptoperty presently classif;~d RS-A-4~,~0~ (RESIDENTIAL/AGRICUITURAL) ZOPIE. ~~.~..~:+:. ~(~ ( ~n i 1 vi+ nG~uC, 1 t Kht~SUUU CONDITIONAI USE PERMIT RE^~UEST: TO PEt~MIT N 22J-UNtT C~ '~.,MINIU~; COMPLEX (2y;, affordablel ,IITiI WAIVERS OF; (a) MINIMUFt I.OT AREA PER OWELLINf, UN17~ (b) MAXIMUM STRUCTUf~AI HEIGHT~ (c) MINIMUM F~OOR ARE^~ (d) MINIMUM RECREATIONAL•LEISt)RE AREA AND (e~ MINIMU~1 NUMBER ANO TYPE OF PAaKI~IG SPACES. TENTATIVE MAP REQUEST: TO ESTABLISM A 5~L07~ 220•UNIT C4NGJMINIUM SUBDIVISION (25b affordeble) . Subject petition wAS continued from the meett~g of December 1~ 1980 et th~ quest of tha petltiane~. 1'hert wer~e ttiree pers~ns indicating thelr presencr, in opposltion to subJect request. and alth~ugh the staff rcpart was nof read, tt is referred to and made e part of th~ mi~utes. Bri~n Norkaitis. agcnt~ William Lyon t:ompany, stated he has reviewed staff's condiCions and they are ac~aptable; that tt~ey have msde s concentrated effort to contact the reside:~is to thp s~uth ana have revlewed fhe plans with mast of them and they seemrd satisfEed Niih the proposal. H~ stated the netghbors were conce~ned about the affordal.'.e aspects of the p~o)ect~ but wcre sattsPted after thr exnlanAtion Lhat crnly 2y$ of the 220 unics proposed would be cissslfled as affordable as defined by the C.ty cf A~ahelm using Hl guideline. Mr. N- .attis exulalned the or~Ject's street loop system e~ebied them to maintain an adoq~..~te distance from existing aS•7?~0 zoning to the ~outh. He pointed out the tnteriar parking wlth garages close to untts~ tt~e lsndsc~e ~ berms~ etc. He stated there are three dtfferent fic~or plens canststing of r«ro and th~ae-bedroom townhouse units wteh basic 1lving quarters downstairs; that :~~e main access is off Euclid; and that basicaily from ~_he reer, the units will appear to be one-scory single-Family res i dences . ~ ~z~~S~~o i MiNU~ES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ DEC6M8ER 15, 1980 80-749 Rlte Reyes~ ig27 u~st Chate++u, asksd why a nngative cleclaratl~n wes recommended for a pro)ect this large rather than an envtronmantal irnpact report and ~eferred to Conditi~nal Usa Permlt No. 214~ wherein a full report was requi~ed for a 126-unit condominl~xn compleron Romneya Drive. Jack White~ Assistant City Attarnay~ explai~ed the environment~l process ts pursuant to th~ State Envira~mrntal puality Act and guldelines adopted by the Ctty of Aneheim; ond th~t the flrat step ts a two-page cnvlronmentel asaessment submitt~cl by the petitioner of any possible envi~onrr~ ntal Ir-~bcts; then the E~vironn+ental Revtew Cammi ttees~ compose~d of representsct ves oF seve~al departrt+ents ~ reviews the ~ro.ject and determines whether or n~t the p~o.ject c.c~uld conceivably h~ve adversc impacts; and if tt ia felt~ as a result of that Initl~l assessn+ent~ thrt the proJect wouid not rcasonably have an adv~~~ ' ~t on the envlronment~ a nag~tive declsracion Is prepared and postcd at ~~n days befor~e the hearing. tle stated the uttlm~te declsfon is made by the ~~ in;,~ Commisslon or City Council ancf thts woula b~ the proper time to voice any obje~tlon. Chairman Tolar stated an environmental impect rcport ~- ala atth the flo~a~ fauna, topo9rapl~y~ traffic, etc. of the proJcct area end In many ca~es such as this~ the Commission cioes ~ot feel a~~11 repc~rt is rcqulred and only certain srees of conce~n are discusscd. Ms. Rnyes statcd thcy dc~ not liave a homeowne~'s assoctation and maybe they should because Anaheim N111- has them and there are no affordable houses betng bullt there; that she (s not objecCing to conclc~m.lniums~ but to the denslty ~nd parktng. She referred ta the 25~ affordable housing requlren~nt and a~tked if it ts true the Ctty of Anaheim wtll loose their grant monics from the fe~e~al governne~t tf affordable hous(ny Is not provided. She felt there are ways of providing efPordeble housing~ other than tenants. Ms. Reyes ytated she has lived on Wes; Avenue 23 Yeers and does not like seeing single-family residcnccs being removed ta rt+eke room for apart~nents; that she was not sure wheCher other apartments (n the area meet codn requtren~nts }or ps~king, but all a~partment pro}ects she I~as seen doas have parking probiens and pointed out a single- family residence is requtred to have flve pa~king spaces. She pointed out this proJect request is for a 43$ density bonus Ni~h 25~ affordable units; and that the pArkiig sp~ces are 271 short accarding to code and code does not require adequate space; and that there (s no ~arking eliowed on Ce~ritos durtng s choo 1 hou rs . Anrtike Sant ahti, Assistant Dlrector for Zo~tng~ explatned th~ states law mandates a 25$ density bonus or such other bonuses rs the ctty may d~em appropriate~ so the 25$ denslty may nc>t be what the Gity accepts in the end and ts Just one of the possibilitles. She stated all develope~s have always requ~st*d tt~e density bonus specificaliy but could ask for another kind of bonus whtch couid be ecceptable to the clty. Dean 5herer, Assist++nt ~'lanner~ ~xplalned in response to Ms. Reyes' question that an envi~onmen~al impact report was ~equtred for the entire Anaheim Shares Planned Communlty and the Lommisslon will hear Candittonsl Use Permit Na. 2{43 which is on a po~tion of that area. Sharon Elie~rs, 1407 Nutwood, stated she agrees with everything Ms. R~yes ~a~d; that C~r~itos floads ~11 the wsy ac~oss the street everytime tt rains au~d she felt thatr shauld be revicwed very cermfully. She stated it is almast impossible to get In and t2/1S/8o ` , . ; MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING :OMMISSION~ DECEHBER 15~ 198~ 80•750 out of the high schnol ~nd ~he understands the e~trance to the htgh schoo) perking lot and the entrance to tl~ls pro,J ct will be ex.;ctly opposite each other. Cl~rirmen Toler stated the City Traffic Engineer recomnends to the Commiaslon thet streots always be allgned. Ms. Elians felt a signal should b~ i.~stalled bec~use at 8:00 a.m. the school traffic ts heovy. Sh~ axplAlned there is discusston ~eg~rding closing K~ey School bec+~usa of l~ck of enrollme~t and Trident ~unior Nigh School has been closed so if thc-e sre Junlor high achoo) aged chlldren tn thts proJect~ th~v would attend 8~11 and ti~ll is overcrowded; and that James Madis~n Elementery 5choo) fa not fuil, but this woui: put a load on the schnol. She stated she is not against the nro,;ect but wanCs these concerns revlewed ve ry cerefully. gH~ stated thcre n~c acctdents on Ccr~tt~s ~nd Nutwood ten ttmes a week and felt thcre should be some way to control the tre~Fflc f{~y. Another ~ers~n prosent In the audlence indtcate~d her conc~rns were the sbme as thost voiced. Mr. Norkeitts stated tha project was redesic~ned ta mc~ve the pcx~l to the ir~tde of the p~oJect because of the ccr.~er. Ne dld not have a,~v conr+~nts to n-ake relating to parking and traffic. TIiE PUE3LIC HEARItdG WAS CLOSED. Chairman Tolar statNd he agrees West M ahetm is an outstrnding area~ but realtty dtctatea tt~at lifestyles have cl~ang~d end ~ lat less square footage ts required for living araas and that is bor~,e out by the fact that the schnols ere closing due to iack of enrollment becausc households do not hev~ as many peapie tn them toda~; that whe.n the RM-3000 cc+de for condominiums was orlg!n~lly wrttten three years ac , itving areas were required to be a gre~t d~al larg,er than they need to b' today; that the city will gain some beneflts from the developrt~nt of thts property; and thet he is aware of the floading and traffic prabl~ms, but felt this developrttnt wtll cause Imp~ovements tn ~elattonship to thosa problems. Jay Titus, Office Engi~~eer, explained there is an extstinq undersized ~torm drsin on Cerritos, wec~ of this property~ and cannot accept ~deiitional~aater; that the nearest drain on Euclid to the south is about 3/4 of a mile uwsy and there is a proposed drain in th~ Master Plan of Storm O~ains far a larger pTpe. (102" i~ diameter) to be put (n Euclld, but this is probably beyond the res~onsibilPty af this development. He stated after much discussion on drsinage Qroblanrs in theC a~ea, i~ wa~s recanmanded that thts d~veloper construct ~ storm drain laterat in Eucltd which wi11 be a dry line at this time until the ultimate faclli[y is constructed in Euctid; and then ft wili takt all of the storm water from this developmont back to Euclid; hawever. in the me~+nttne it is not going to inQrove the exfsting situatton. He stated nane of tho existi~g probtems wiil be corrected with thls development ~nd they w111 not be corrected untli tl~e master facility is constructed in Euciid. Ha explained the city tiad a storm d~aln bond issue on thc last ballot which waa passed; and that this fa~cility was ~ne proposed for co~struction under thet bond tssue~ but i'ropositton 13 prevented the ctty from selling those bonds, and there is ~o other money available tv build faciltties like this. 12/ 15/8~ ~ ' NINU7ES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ DECEMBER IS~ 1g8A 80•~$1 Chai~nK+n Totar askad the impact on the flandinq sltuation tf thls ~~.,Ject t~ co~structed. Mr. Titus ststed the tmpact ts going t~ m~ke thc flaodtng slightly worse in Cerritos~ but he dIA not think it would be te such a degree thet tt wtt) make e gr~at deel of difforence at thls ttme; that probably one travel lane and the pa~king lene would be floodad on Cer~itos and thls proJect moy r~ise the wster leve) two inches. Chalrman Tolar explained Corritos would be widened to tw~ ful~ cravel lones tf the pro.Ject is constructed. Mr. Titus stated tl~e largest problan- Is caused by water fic~wlnn dawn Cerritos from e~st of Euclid, crossing Euclld and going on dawn Cerritos; And th~t this pro)ect will add ~ome to that~ but it will not b~ of such a mnqnitude thet It wtll be nottceable; thAt when this proJect ;~uts in the strQet Improvements on Carritos~ the exlsting sltuatton will bc Im~roved and th~re will still be one travei land availeble during ttmes when the street )s flooded. Ms. Eliens steted larqe ptpes were rccently put tn CQrritos. She statcd shz did not kr-ow if thls took: car~ of tha situatiAn and asked who is respansible for that dralnaye. Mr. Titus statad the elty put in some asphalt bernn along thbt property~ but he was not aware af any underyrounJ plpec. Ne statc:d that ~~ea does noC have curb and gutter at this time and when thfs developrt~cnt ts done~ that situAtlan wtll be improved with tt~e curb and ~utters. Chelrman Tolar statcd until the actual 1~2" storm draln pi~e is construtte~l in Euclid there will be woter at that Intersectton. Commissioner Barnes as~:ed if the fncilttles are ulttmately planned to take care of the watcr in Carritos and Euclid ~nd M~. Tttus replled they are ultimately pl~nned~ but the city does not have the money right naw. Ne ~xplatned this cieveloper will put in a lateral to take the water bac~. to Euclld and ssttmated that would cost aboiit $SO~Q00 nnd $6U.000. Chatrrrwri Tolar noted a private canaultant +vas ~ont-acted to review the t~afftc which was one of the rcasons t!~is wes recommcnded for a negative declaration. He steted he recognizes ther~ is a probiQm w(th ingress and ~gress, but felt the Improv~nts and addtng the traffic lane wfll help the trafffc situatlon. Ne was concerned a5out the inqress and cgress on Euclid opproxlmaCely 4~Q feci from Cerritos end felt it should be right-turn only er.iting the proJect patnting out that access is not very far from a left~turn pocket. Mr. Norkattis stated he shares that concern and will be giad to work with the Traffic Engineer and have thair traffic c~ns~ltant work wtCh him ta try and mitigete that problem; and Chat the actually polnt of ingress and egress wrs pre-established to align with the other street. Chairman Tolar stated traffic studles have shown it is i~aortant that s;r~~ets align far safety, but he wa~ concerned about ~reffic going straight across Euclid St~aet. He asksd the petitioner to sttpuiate to a right turn only or mttigation measures as appr~vod by the Traffic Engineer. Mr. No~kaitis egre~d. 12/15~80 t~ ~ ~ MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PIANNING COMMISSION, DECCMBER 15~ 1980 84-752 Commtssionar B~rnc,s st~ted she did not think the Commissian has c.ome to grips with what they ~re pc~in~ to do ~bout the tremendou~ density bon~~ee~ being reque~ted~ snd she wat noi sur~ this is what ~a :;r~ted In the cttyt tht~t ~ of these unit~ ere at QO$ of the medle-~ tnccxnn but ret~l i:ing tho kind of monies involved in this pro.ject and !he kind of denstty bonu~es snd w~iv~ra being ~equested~ she was concerned that the Commisston is just thrawing sway ou~ codes and glving sway too much on this klnd of proJact. She was not sur~ the citl~ens wtl) get enough fram this proJect to warrant A 43~ density bonus. Chairman Toler egreed ~nd polnted out affordable housinc~ does not rr~~n government- subsidtzed houstn~; thst the Commission should come to c~rips wit~~ hav fer they are going to go grantinq thes~ denstty bonuses; that he can deal wttli gran~ing e 2~~ denslty bonua far e 25~ affordebie proJect. ~le agreed the RM-30~~ code was antiyuated beforo it was completed and needs to be flextble; but that these parking walvers~ atc. would not be necessary if the developer w~s not asking for auch e big bonus ~nd th~ density is more tf~an he woulcl like to s~e on thls project. Ccmmlasioner Barnes ~ompercd thts ProJact to A converslon epproved p~eviously on Brookhurst for a cotel nurber of units of 22:~ ~nd the percenta~e affordable wes G~?$; that thls proJGCt is 2?~ units ~nd tt~e perce~~tage Affordable ts 2~$. and neted that project on Br~okh~urst was ~ conversion And this is A ncw building. She stated ahe fett thc Commis~ton would be going ovcrboard appravinq this porttcular proJeet. Mr. Pk~rkaitis stated they did review thls chart prepared by staff and uscd (t as a reference polnt and pcyintad out other ncw praJects epproved by the planning Cammission~ one wtth ~i~ affordable units witl~ a density bonus of 68$~ another one 2yZ afforciable witli a E:OZ bonus and he did not feel they have asked for anythl~g that has rn~t been approved previously. Commisslone~ Dushore r~ferred to the proJect approved on Lcmon Strect and stated that property was ve ry uniquely shapcd. Canmissioner Bernes stated sa~ of the ath~r pro)ects wh~ch were apprave~i were able to ~rovide more p~rking~ etc., but Lhet she just felt this rcquest for a 43$ ~ensity bonus is too hiqh. Commissioner King polnted out the density bonus in this application Is next to the lowest and Commissioner tiarnes pointcd out the number of affordabie units is next to tfie lowcst also and this is a much bi~gger project. She felt if more affordable units were prov!~1ed or a higher perc~ntage of the ~+ffordable units were for a0$ of inediu~, she would be more Favorable ta+ards this pro~ect. Cammissioner aushore stated m4st of these proJects ere providtng affordable units for the 100 to 120$ of inedisn and the real need for housin~ i~ at the 8!1$ ar loa-er of median. Chalrman Tolar asked the proJected pric.:s of the ma~ket r~te units and Mr. trorkattis repliod he would estimate the prtces at S7~~000 to $9~,Q00. Ne ~xplained this estimate is based on tt~eir reseerch and the actua) prices weuld not be set unttl much further along o~~ the praJect. He stated the whole project could be looked at as affordable ~~tth nnv house prices tn Orenge County. Conrnissioner Bushore asked how it aas dctermined that 25~ would be designated as affardeble And Mr. Norkaitis explainod that was worked out by Zommunity Housing Oepartsnent. 12/15~80 ~ ` ~ Mfi~~fES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ DECEMBER 15~ 1980 80~753 Pom Katser~ Hausin9 and Nel~hborhood P~osArvetlaR, •:<plel~od 25~ ts the mintmum state law requlrea; and that the devclopar canes to thc~n and the aftorciabie houstng po~tton Is worked aut~ then he works with ths Pl~nning ORparl•mcnt on the dsn~ity. Annika Santala~hti expldlned tha ~eneral Plrn ciestgnetes the area for tow-medtum density whlch does permlt a nwxtmum ~~3$ dAnslty bonua wtthou~ e Genert~l Plan Amendment boing processed. Comml~sioner Bushore stated three Conmissloners would like to sec a 1lttle more aff~ruabilltv and sug!~ested more untts at the lower cnd of the affordeblitty ~ange.Cammissioner 9arnes noCed tl~e aver~+ge ncrcenta~e of eff~rdable units approved has been ;t$ on o~her proJects. Chat rma~~ Tolnr stated thcse affordable unl cs wi 11 scl l tor SG1~!1Q0 ancl e person would have to earn In cxcess of S2~~OOQ a ycar to qualify. He stnted if the Commission rcally belleves they arc trying to crcet~ housln9 the public can affc~rJ, they must ~aok at ~ffo~dabt~ hausing from another standpoint bcscausa all the c~sts of providing parking~ etc. will be pas~ed on to the buye~s. CommisstonCr Barnes stat~d she (s not opposed to tl~e density bonus ~nd she has nothtng agetnst thts projeGx~ but would 1tE:e to sec more effordabie unlts in the 80~ or iower renge a~d would not vate in favor of this proJect as it stends. Commisstoner Bushore stated there is a neecS to creatc housing and the Commission has not refused to approvc affordable housing proJects a~d It hes worked with oehcr devNlopers with greater density which are muct~ mare affordnble; tf~at no one has questloneu the 4~f ~a~king spaces and the Commtsston probahiy feels the parktnq is adequate; and that no one has obJected to the two-sto ry units within 15A feet of single-famlly xo~ing and thes~ are the things that create affordabilitv and he wanted to be ure the tradenffs are equal. Chairman Tolar st~ted affordablc in Southern Celifornla or this ma~keting area is between $70~Q00 and S~rO~OOf1. Commissioner Barnes statcd she is only interested tn the ~ercentage of affordable unlts and felt it should bc higher and noted this is ona of the largent projects and is tied for the second lawest percentag~ of affordable units comparing it again with the conversio~ proJect on 9rookhurst. Chalnnan Tolar stated anyone looking fc+r tyis ktnd of condominium lifestyle would raC`ier live in one af these units. He stated the problem is the oost of the land and the builder has ta build thts high number of units in order to make a profit. 12/15/80 ~ ~ .a MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING CQMNISSION~ OECEMBER 15~ ig$0 80-754 Conxnissioner Bushore stated he has ~o objectton to the walvers~ but felt wlth this density thane should be more ~ffordsble units; that there is no herdshtp an the land; that only 55 units are consldored affordeble and only 5 of those are going to be offe~ad at 80~ of ths median IncoMa; that young famlilas who redlly ~eed the affordabla housing a~e in that ranqe or lawer and cannot qualify; and that gover~ment s Ceps i n when these p rob l ems ~re not so 1 ved wh 1 ch i s wi~y the s tet~e has •! I awed th 1 s den'ity bonus. Commisaloner Barnes steted she woulcl bo In favor of thls pro,Ject If the developer woulc! put 10 mo~~ ~f the units in tho 00$ r~nge or lower. M~. Norkaltis eskcd if rhe distrfbutlon In the affordable renge Is the bigges L p rob 1 em. Commtssio~or Bush~re stited Orange County has ane of the highest per captta incomes but there are a lot of people wha cfc~ not make 52ct,~f1~1 e year. Commiss~oner Barncs suggcsted > units bc r~ddcc+ in tha ~1$ or lawer rAnc~e a~d Commissioner Eiushore suggested 10 addittonal untts nc Q~$ or below the medtan and did not thtn~ w(th the density bonus requQSted that thet would be too much to as k. Shirley hkredith. A~sistant Trr~fflc Engineer~ responded to Co~m~issioner Busho re's question regarciing havinc~ left turns going north on Euclld out of the proJect and explatned that the strepts have be~sn eltg~ed whicl~ would allow a safe move and the siy~als should provtdc thc spacing~ but ric~ht turn from a drivewey Is hard to enforce. Cammi ss loner Elushore s tated he i s request ( nc~ a med 1 en and added he does not want to see this proJect b~comN a problem in the futur~; Lhat there Is heAVy tr~ffic the re now and the developer should take care of the problem. Chairn~an Tolar skatec! the appllcant has stipulAted to a right turn only subJe ct t~ approval of the City Trafflc E~gineer. Ms. Meredith stated a median would prol,tbit left turns ~For Mells Lsne. Commissioner Bushore stated he felt it is worth !t if one Iife (s save~, if the doveloper works it out to the Traffic Englneer's sAtisfaciton~ he wili accept th at. buC wanted it known the CortmisSion is concer~ed. tle suc~gested lhe no parkin g restrictlon be extcnded to the south side of thc street. Ms. Meredith sta ., parktng couid be restricted~ Lut it is e h~rdshtp to any a ~k a; that in this k(nd of area that could be beneflctal because the c~ars would no t be out on the street and site dtstancc would also be Improvcd. Commts~inner 9ushore stated there was a concern on Orange Avenue where there was a nursing school across from an elementary school and perking problertis were created. Chai~man Tolar state;~ he did not think tt wou1J be feasible to add cen units to the 60~ ~ange and suggested redlstribu~!ng the untts ar-bng the 80$~ t00d and 120$ ranges. 12/15/~ ~ I> ( MINUTES, ANANEIM tl'rY PLANNING COMMISSION, DECEMER 15, 1°8~ 80•755 M~~ Norkeitis ststed he wo~sld be wil ltng to redi4trtbute the ten units within the $0$ and lti^`'. distributlan groups~ but not to incre~s the totel n~m~ber of effordable untts. •no ~uggested redistrlbuting thosa snme 55 unlts for a total of 1Q In the 8~1Z or batow rengc., 1~ tn the ! OOb a~ below ~ange end the bal~nce in the 12~Z ranqe. C~rtxnl s s i oner dushor.~ s tat~d he wan ted 6> af ford+~b 1 e un I t s~ w 1 th th~ 10 add I t 1 ona 1 untt~ in the b0`~ ar b~lar irange~ ChAirman Tolar falt cor~ccrn~cl that tl~e Commlssion is dict~ting p~ices. C~mmtasi oner Be~nes felt ttsis is a falr offer to the people of A~ahelm and the people who would llve here and CoRanlssloner Fry stated he takes a dtm view of th~ Commission getting involved i~ ecor~omi cs and felt this discussto~, Is completely out of Itne and the Commisslon Is dicteting prices to the •fe~veloper; and thst It Is all rlght to be opposcd to the r~3$ donsity bonus~ versus th~ 2r$ denslty bonus. I~e stated percentages ere probably ona of the most dangerous fo~ms ot methmatlcs to deal wi th; thet thi s probabl~~ fs one of the last chances for ncw construction to provtde low eost ho+~s(ng and within six months tlierr wi 11 be no such thtng as affordable hous tng. Commiss i oner K( ng stated 1~~ 1 i kes thc proJect. Goinnlss ionPr Uarnes statec she ls votctnc~ hcr optnion so thc developer wll 1 know whAt she thin~:s is wronc~ wlth t'~e proJect. Commiss ioner Dushore statecl the Comntssian Is becoming more sophlsticAted tn approvi ng affordable proJeets, but st) 11 havs nat discussed the mrin problem and are trytng to reach a falr c~rr~romise; tl~at 1~ edditional units in the IIO$ range is far better than an additiona! ln~ or 26 units. fle f~lt thc Gormisslon is being re~sonable and is denling i~ land use~ not economlcs. Mr. Norkaitis statecl thei~ c:o~any would be comfort~ble in having a distributlon of the ~f fardab 1 e un 1 ts w( th 1~ un I ts i n tt~c T.~~ r~nge , 11 1 ~ the 10~~ rane~e and 34 ; n the 120$ rangc fo~ a tota 1 of 5; un 1 ts . ACTION: Commisslancr Uarn~s offered a rrotion~ seconded by Gonrnissioncr King and MO^TIpN CARRI~O (Cor~missi~ne~r Nert~st being absent), tfiot the A~aneim City Plenning Comr+~i ss tun has reviewed th~ prAposal ta reclass i fy subJect pro~erty from the RS-A- ~3,400 (Residenttal/Agri~u ltural) Zone to tf~e RM-30~A (Residential. Multiple-Fami lyj Zone to permit a 5-lot~ 22~0-unit condominium subdiviston (2;$ affordable) wfth walvers of minimum lot area per dwelling unlt~ maximum structural height~ mtnimum f)oor a~ea~ minimum recreatlernal-ielsure area~ and minimum number of parking spaces nn an i rregul~rly-shaped parc.el of iand conslsting of approximately 12.3 acres located at the southwgst carner of Cerritos Avenue and Eucltd Street~ havln~ ap~roximete frontages of 930 feet on the south side of Cerrltos Avenue and 425 feet on the west slde of Eucltd Street; and does hereby apprave the Negattve ~eclaration from the requlrement to prepare an environmentai impact rep~rt on the basis thaL thert vrauld be no signifieant individual or cumulative adverse environmental impact due ta the approval of thi s Nr_gatlve Declaration since the Anaheim Genera) Plan designates the subJect prvperty fnr law-medium density land uses commansurate with tha proposal; that no sensiti~ve environmente) imp~cts are involved i~ thc proposal; that the Initial Study submltted by the petitloner tndic+~tes no signiflcant individuai or cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and that the Negative Declaratlon substantiating the fore~oing findings is on file in the Ctty of Anahefm Planning Department. ~2i~ siao ANANEIM CITY PLIWNING COMWISSION, Commissloner 9a~nes otfared Reaolut~~n No. PC80-228 snd m~ved fo~ its pass+~go snd edo~-tlon thst the An~hetm City Planning Commisslc,n does hereby grant Recl~sslficatlo~ No. 80-~1-13. subJact to the Interdepartmi:ntal Comn+ittee reconmendatlons. rasolution was passed by the follawing COMMISSIONERS: CONMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: Commissione~ Barnes offered u motion. seconded by Commissloner Fry and MOTION CARRIED (Commissiuner lierbst being absent), that the Anah~im Ctty Planninct Commission does hercby grant weivcr of cock roquiren~nts on the besis that the developer has stlpulated to provide no less then 25~ of the praJect for sfford~ble h~using~ with lf1 units design~ted at th~ a0L of mcdlsn income range, 11 units deslgnated at the IOQ~ of ined i an t ncome rangs and 3~i un i ts a t tF~e 120$ of inect i an t ncc~me range. Commisslaner Barnes offcred Rnsolution No. PCB~-22~ in pr~rt, bnd moved for Ics passege and aduptlon that thc Anehelr+ City Planning Coi+mission does hereby grent Condi t tonol Use Permi t No. ?.119. I n ~art ~ granti ng wa( vers (a) ~(b) ,(c) and (e) on the bas(s that thc devcloper hes ayrecd to entcr into an agreement with the City of Anahaim~ pu~3 uant co Govcrnmcnt Code Section G591y to p~ovide no less than 2y$ of the unlts for affordable i~ousing~ in accordance wit~~ ~;uidelines establ ished by the Ctty af Anaheim, and to pr~vide 1~ unlts at 8~~, or lcss af inedlan income~ 11 unlts at 100~ or less of inedian income and 34 units at 12~$ or less of inedtan inc~xne and denying walve r(d) on khe basis that said w~iver was delrted by revised plans ancl subJact to Interdepertmental Committce rec~mmendations. the farcgoing resolution was COMMISSIUNLRS; COMMISSIOIIERS: COhMISSI0NER5: Commissione. Barnes offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fry and MOTION CARRIEO (Commissioner Herbst being absent), that the Anaheim City Planning Cnmmtssion does hereby find that the praposed subdlviston. together wlth tts design and trnprovement, is co~sistent with the City uf Anaheim Gencral Plan. pursuant t~ Government Code Section 66473•5; and does, therefore~ approve T'entative Map of Tract No. 110y3 for a 5-lot, 220-unlt condomtnium subdiv(sion (2;4 affordable) subJect to the following conuitions. the approvai of Tentative Map of of Reclasstficatton tdo. 80-81-13• 2. Th at should this subdiviston be developed as more than o~e subdivlsion, subdivision thereof shail be submitted in tentative form for approval. 3. That the original do:uments of the covenants~ conditio~s, and restrictlons~ and a letter acidressed ta developer's title compAny authorizing recardation thereof, shall be submitted to the City Attorney's office and approved by the City AttornCy's Office, Publtc Uttlities Dept.. Building DivisloR~ and the Engineering Diviston prior to final tract map approval. Said documents~ as approved~ shall be filed and reco~ded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. ~. ; MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLI'~NNING COMMIS510N, DECEMBER 1~~ 1980 80•757 4. Th at st~eet names shsll bo approvad by the City Plenning De~artment prlor to epprovel of a final tri~ct map. 5. Th at drelnega of subJ~ct property shall be dtsposed of In e n-anner satisfacto ry to the City Engino~r. (A storm drain latcral shall be constructed In Cerritos Avenue so that ultimatcly ell dralnafle from subJect praperty will be taken back to the proposed dra) n i n Euci id Stree! . 6. That tha owner of subJect property sfiatl pay to the City of Anahei~~ the apprpprl~te (~ark and recreetion ln-lteu faes as determined to bo approprlate by the City Counr.ll~ said fae~ to be paid at the tin~ tha bulldtng permtt Is isaued. 7. That al) prlva~e streets shall be ck ve.loped tn eccordence with the Clty of Aneha(m~s St~ndard Detail No. 122 for prtvate streets~ including Instslletlo~ of straet nnme stc~ns. Rlarts fo~ the privAce street Ilqhting~ as requlred by the standard detail~ shetl be submittcd to tho Bullding Otvtsion for approv~) and (ncluslon with thc building pinns prior to the tssuancc of bullding permits. (Private stre~ts are those whlch provlde prtma~ry eccess and/or circulation wlthin the proJect. $. If permanent street namc signs havc not bcen (nstalled~ temporary st~aeR nama sTgns shall be tnstallcd prlor to any occunt~ncy. 9. That Che owner(s) of subJect propcrty shal i pay che tr.~ffic signal assessment fee (Ordlnance No. 3G9G) in an nmount as determtned by the Clty Council~ fnr eacfi new dwelling urit prior ta the Issu~nce of a buildtng nermit. 10. Prior to the se1N or final bullding and r.oning lnspection of any residrntial candominium untt~ the a-ner(s) of subJect troct shAll preaent evidence s~tisf~ctary to the Chief Bullding Inspector that the unit Is in confarmancr with the Noise insulAtian Standflrds spcctfied tn the Galifornt~ Adminlst~ettve Codc. Title 25, Chapter 1~ Subchapter 1~ Artlcie -+. il. The seller shall provide the purchaser of each condomintum unlt wtth wrltten i~formation cc~ncern(ng Anahelm Municlp,~l Code 14.32.~~^, ~ertaining to "perking restricted ta facilltate str~et sweeptng". Such written (nformatlon will cl,early fndicate when on-strect p~irking is ~rohtbited end the penalty for vfolatian. 12. "No parking for street sweaptn~" stgns shail tse installeci prior [o fina) street insp~ction as rec~uired by the Public Works Cxetuttve Qirectnr i~ eccordance with spatificdtions on file witfi the Street Malntenarsce Division. 13. 1'hat al! on-sfte sanitary s~w+crs sheli be prtvatc. 14. Th~t the p~tittos~er shall presen~ evide~ce th~at the ~roposad aondorntntum complex conforn~ ta Council Poltcy I~o. 5G2 •"Sound AttenueCion in aesidential Projecta" prior to issuance of building parmits. 15. That pri~r to approval af t~e final Trect M~p No. 11053 the developer shall ~nter Into sn agreeme~t with the City of Anaheim pursuant to Governrt+ent Code Sectton 6y915 agreeing to maxTmum sales p~icas ss epproved by the Clty Qf Anahetm for a minimum of 25$ of the units t~ be law and moderete cost housPng as defined by sald Government Cvak Sectlon, wi~h no leas than 1~ units destgneted f~r sale ta householda at 60$ or lc9wer of inesdian incr~me, 11 untts at 100~ or iower of the medlan incoma and 3~ units at 120$ or loaer o~ tha median lncon~, together wtth such edditional covensnts and r.onditiorn includtng rosale controis as„by; be requirod by the Ctty of Mahei~. ~2/15/80 ~ ~, ~ MINUTES, ANAH~IM CITY PLANNINO COMMISSION, DECEMBER 15~ 1980 8Q-~58 Commis~innsr Bushore asked tf the 5~~ot subdtvi~ton is ~ecasssry to~ finenclnq ~nd Mr. Norksttis ropllad that Is Just the way thetr develope~ pisnned tho proJect and ho wss not sura of tha reason. "ommissio~er Bush4ro asked if the stfo~deble untts w111 be stretched out through the v~rious pheaos of the proJect noting the aft~rdability ts tted to e o~e year tima limit~ ond Mr. Nor4celtis replied It would not be destrable to heve all affordable units in one phase of the proJect end they wt1) be wo~king wtth the Cortnw~ity Housing Depa~tment. Jack White~ Asststant Ctty Attorney, presented the wrttten right tu appeal the planning Commisaton's d~cision witt~ln 22 d~ys to the Ctty Counctl on the Reclasstficatton and CondltiAnai Use Permlt and 15 days for the Tantattve Tract Map. iiE_CESS The~~ wes a fl fteen minute rece~s At 3:15 P•m• REC~ ON_ VENE The meeking was reconvenod at 3:34 p.m. 12/1S~80 ~..` MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ DECEMBER 15~ 1980 80•7~9 _IT__~M. ~N_0._. ~~s EIR NEGATIVE UECLARATIOM, WAIVER OF CODE RfQUIREMEN'f AND CONDITIONAL USE e'~ar i'f A3: z ~'~ : -__---.._. , PUBLlC NEARINC. OWNER: CAI.IFORIaIA CASTLES~ INC.~ &l6 South ~each Boulevwrd~ An~heim~ CA 92COt+. AGENT: KEYSTQME DESICII ASSOCIATED, 7~7 West No~th Street~ Anahelm~ CA 92305. Prope~ty descrihed as rn Irreg~~lariy•shaped ~erc~l of land consisting of approximatc0y 1.QG acres~ locetr,d at u,16 South Qeach Uoulavard. P~operty presently cl~ssiffed CL (COMMCRCIAI. lIMlTCD) ZOtIE. CONDITIONl1L USE PERMIT RCQUEST: TO CDf~STRUCT A 73-IiNIT MO7EL W1T11 WAIVERS OF; (a~ MAXIMUM STRUCTURIIL IiE1G1~T AND (b) MI!~IMUM l.A~lO5CAPED SETUACK. Sub,ject ~ctition was c~~tlnur.d from th~ meetf~y nf December 1. 19a0 et the request of tlin petl tloner. There was onr person indicniing hcr ~+resence in appositlon ta sub)ect reque.st~ and alth~u~h th~e st~ff repc~rt was not read~ it is referr~d to and madc a pArt of the mtnates. Deveriy Jeckson~ ayent. expleined the pro~oxal ls a 3•story, 72-unit mote) wlth e two-aedronm managcr's unit; that the ravised plans show a 10-fo~t widc landscaped area adJaccnt to ttse stngle-fteml ly restdence to the north end thc wali has wlnciows nvw becausc it was felt that would give A bett~r appr.arancc thAn a blank wall. She statcd guests on the flrst and second floors can sce the 10-foot gardcn area from thet r w 1 nck~ws . Rick Covay, awner of the adjacent single-family ciwclling to the north~ stated he b~sically has the san~e cnn~crns hc t~Ad two weeks aho r~garding thf 32-foot high structu~e very closr to hls property. Ile stated hts is a~~-b~droem~ two-bAthroom home with a swtrtminy poo) th re~ feet fram the south property itnc and the 32-foot high structure along th~ prope~rty line will eliminet~ the sun from thc back ya~d; that he felt this ~~ill definitely t~arm hls t+rnprrty; that to the easc ther~ is an apartn~nt complex~ but i t hes e iR-feot setbacl. w1 th ct+~~orts and drt veways between the campi~x and hi~ propcrty. 11e stated he felt the w(ndows wfll probably be wo~se than Just a blan{. wAll because pea~le In the mot~l ere qotng to be able to look right da+n into his back yard and there wlt) be ev~en less privacy. Ch~olrme~ Tolar :asked if the petitione~ and Mr. L~vey have discussed the possibility of the tao pro~•~~erties being dcvcloped together. Mr. Covey stated hc spoke with Ms. Jackson and she had tndicated she ha~ talked with s~meone in th~ ctty and wt~s lnformed that even lf she owns the property~ she woulci nat be allowed to hav~ the structure on ~he prape~ty line~ so she did not want to purchase his p~operty and would try thls destg~ and if it did not worG. out~ would contact hIm ~ga1n. Ms. Jac.kson explained Hr. Covey's {~roperty is actualiy not 1t•i, snd evo~tually should be dlVElOpCr) os canmerclal and she dld ~at think thts developrt~nt kill hurt the vaiue of that p roperty at ail because right naw it is next door to a gasoltne station~ across the street fram a commercial store~ and there Is a large apartment devalopment to the e~st with a large sign 10 feet from the property 1(ne. TE1E PUBII C HfARI ~IG WAS CLOSEO. 12/15/80 - -- _..n.:~,_ ~.~ ..~._ ._.~ .......~..__._ u.~ ~..........,LL,_,-,,..,,.,.~~»„~....,.-3...~...........R._a...~__.._..~. . _- .. ~U, ' MINUTES~ ANAHEIM C11'Y PIANNING COMMiSS1QN~ QECEM9ER 15, tg80 80-760 Jahn SNi~t~ ~07 West Narth Street~ answe~ed Commissianer Bushore thet he has de:igned 13A nwtols. Commlssioner 6u~hare statad thts la e large p~r ul of u~operty. and asked why the mot~) wrs not deslg~ed in the cente~ of the property wtth perking on tf~e periphcry Mr. Swint ~eplled r+lth singi~-loa~ied driveweys~ 2~, feet of p~aperty Is wasted and with the motel t'n the middte, two stngle-load~d driveways would be requlred. Ms. Jacks~n explalncd there is a sln{~le-famlly zoned p~opcrty ta the south and the motol had to be locnted 1;0 feet from that area. Mr. Swint explainea the wtncluows wero locatcd an the north b~~cause tl~at would be more enerrgy efflcient a~~d woulci loak better than a blank well; that If the Commisslon does not want any wincfaws there, I~e would stl 1! 1 i ke the windo~+s on the f i rst f loor beceuse thr.rc Is r~ six-faot hic~, wall at the ~roperty line and anyone In the gueat ~ooma could not s,ee the nelghbnr's property and the winck~ws could be reloceited to the south sidc an the setond and third flcars. Mr. Swtnt stated if the swinuning pa~i on Mr. Covey's property is onfy three feet fram thc property Ilne~ it Is tilegal because accordlnn to code marG th~n a 3-foot deck is requi red. Chairman Talar stAted hc dld not think just moving tha rrotel bACk ten feet accompllshed what needs to b~ accomplished; And that he recoc~nizns the property Is unlque with thet ~~e residr..nce~ but it is ciiffi~alt not to protect that property beceuse thc Lommission norn,elly prot~cts the R-i x~ncs and a Ilfes~yle that peopie ~re enjaying, whether it ls a rent~l property or their awn homc~ and he feels that obligaCton h~ero; tfiet thia is ccxrrnerclAl oroperty a~d he has nc~ problem with the use and R two story resldcntiel structure cnuld be bullt adjacent to thc single-famlly home with no oppositlo~. Ne st~~ted he agrccs !t lc~aks better with windows. Ha felt maybG a tr~dr. off cUUld bc two stories along that back proNcrty line and noted thet four unlts would be lost and he falt that would mak~ it ~ r+~ore pi+latable situ~tion. Mr. Swint asked Abnut the three-story units to the east~ ~nd Cha~irmsn Totar stated with three storics to the east th(s house wlll be dawn in a well and hr. f~lt a little rx~re open spacc is necrssary. Ms. Ja~kson stated the best and htghest use of sub}cct property would b~e a 3~story unit; that she bought thts p~npctty G or 7 yeers agc~ and has suffer~d through the years keeping up the payme~ts and really thinks she is tntttled to usG the properCy to its best and fullcst use. Chairman 7olar stated a lot of peopic wouid lik~ to take a residential propcrty and develop a high• rise ~part~ent bullding on it; that he has no problem wlth a motel on this p~op~rty, but did nat see any lmmediate change in tfie property co thc north and it is the Commission's obligstlon to protect it es they wo~ld [he ones to the south. Ms. Jackson asked tl-e Gommisston's oplnlon of a three-sto~y~ unlt in the middle and Chairman To{ar exptained tf~e Con~missioR can only discuss what ts before them today; that anather vartance Mould heve to be r..lvertised, etc. He steted t~e wc~uld support the request with four less ursits~ with only Md siarles tn the area of M~. Covey's proparty. 12/15/80 ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ DECEMBER 15~ 1980 80-7G1 Commtsstaner F~y stated twc- weekt ago it was suggested thst the mate) be moved back 10 feet and the pAtit~oner has canpitnd and thst nothing was mentioned two weeks sflo ebout elimtnating four units; that there i: ~~ervice stati~n edj~cent to thst singie-family dwelling and commerct~i use and ~ecr~atlonrl vehtcle storage loceted nearby and cor~nan s~nRe dictates wh~t is gotn~ tn happen to thAt property in the future; and that he would be in fevor of the pro)ect the way tt is p~oposed. ACTIO~J: Commissianer Fry offered e motlon~ s~c~nd~d hy Commissloner pouas end MOTION CARRIED (Comm(ssione~r lierbst being absent) ~ that the Mahetm City Planning Commtsslo~ hes rdvluwed the proposel to permlt a 73-untt motel wtth watvers of maxtmum ~tructural h~ight And minimum landscAped sethacl: on a~n irregularly-shnped pe~tel of lancl consls[iny of approxlm~tely 1.06 acres~ having a frontage of ep~roxtmatety 17y feet on the oast slde of Beach Boulavard, having a m~ximum depth of approxfmately ?.75 feet and being locat~d ap~roxlmstoly 115~ feet nort-i of tha centerline of l3a11 R~ad (aQG South Bea~ch 8oulevA~d); and does hercl~y epprove th~ Negetive Declar~tion from the requlrement to prepn re an environn~ ntA1 tmpact re~rt an the basis thrt there wauld be no significant ind~vfdual or cumulative adverse envir~nmenta) irr~ect due to the approval of tlils Neyative Declarattan since tl~e ~naheim Genera) Plan designates th~ subJect property for generel ccxnmercial land uses commenxur~te wtth the pr~posal; tf~at no sensittve ~nvirorrr~ nta) impacts are Involved in the proposal; that the Initta) Study submttted by th~ pet~tfoner inditates no signlftcant (ndividu~l or cu~ul~t(vc adverse e~vtronmental Im~acts; and that thc Negatlve Declaratlon substantiatinn the foregoiny ftndings is on flle tn the City of Anahelm Planning Department. Commissioner fry affcred a motton~ secnndc~J by Corxnissioner 8~rnes and MOTION CAR~IF.D (Commissioner lierbst belhg absent)~ that tlie Anaheim Clty P1Anning Cormiisslon does hereby granC request for w~ivers of code r~qufrement on tho basts that denia) ~oulsi deprive subJect p ropcrty of n privilege being ~nJoyad by other othar proparties in the same zone And vicinity. Commissloner Fry offercd Resalutton -1~. PCt~~-23~ r+nd mnv~d for its passac~e end adoption that the Anahctrn Clty Planning Conmtssion dc,es hereby grant ~Conditlonal Use Permit Ho. 21~i2~ subJect to Int.erdepartmental Comntttee recom~ndattons. On r~lf call, the foregoing resalution wes passed by the following vnte: AYES: COMMISSIQ~IF.RS: BARl~E5. ElOUAS, kiHGligiK, FRY, KI«G, ~9t~tft NOCS: COMMISSIAi~ERS: 11W~1~- ~j?oS~raR„f ~''Ci...,t~~ AOSENT; tOt~NiS51Ut~ERS ; NER45T ~ Jack i~htte, Assistant Ctty Attorncy~ presented the written right to appeal the Planning Cammissfon's dectslon wlthin 22 days to the City Council, , _._.*_,:.~~~.T:. ~ ~~: ~~ : ~ zi~siso ~. MINUT~S~ ANAHEIM CITY PlAN111NG COMMISSION~ DECEMBER 15~ 1)80 80•762 G: EIR NEGATIVE QECIARAT1oNt NAIVER OF CODE REp,uIREMErIT AND CoNDiTiONAL USE - . 21+ : PUIiLIC HEARING. OWNER: ATLANTfC RICNFIEI.Q COMPANY~ 178G West Lincoln Avenue~ Anaheim, CA 92F101. AGENT: P. D. LiPPERT~ 17$~: West Lincoln Avenue~ Anehelm, CA 92~Q1. ''rope~ty descrlbed as on trregulerly-shaped p~rccl of lend conststing of approximntely 0.5 acre~ loceted at the sauthoast corner at La Palma Avenue and Imperlal Nighvay~ and further descrtbed as ;7~1~ Eaat La Palms Avenue. Rroperty presently classified CL(SC) (COMMEi~CIAL~ LIMITFD SCENIC C4RRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONC. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUtST: TO PERMIT A CONVCNIENCE MARKET WITf~ GA50LINE SALES IN TNE CL(SC) ZON~. SubJect petltlon was continued Fram the mee~ing af December 1~ 1980 +~t the request of the pctltloncr. At the beginning of the meeting, there wes e request for a contlnuance from a repr~santattve of Atianttc Rlchfietd Company. Commlss~on~er Kinq offered a motion~ saconded by Commissto~ar Fry end MOTION CARRI~D (Corrmissianer flerbst being ,~bsent)~ that the aforemcntionad item bc conttnued to t1~e meeting of Jsnua ry 12~ 19@1. Following consideration of ttem No. 3~ Tom Goodman, agent. staCed he also represents Atlantic Richfleld Company and there was n leck of conmunic.atlon b~tweGn their offices and he would like this item heerd today. Commissioncr To{ar offcred a rn~tlan~ secondcd by Cammissioner 6ushore and MOTION CARRI~D (Cortimissioner 1lerbst b~tng absent)~ that the prevlaus continuance actlon be res c t nded. i'homas Goodman, agent, stated t t I s Arcn's dest rr to c~r~nvert three se~vt ce statton sltes to mini-marts in M ohelm and one has elready been approved o~ 6a11 Road; that this request is vastly different than the other two where the naln tssue is the rlght of the property owner to use I~is propcrty so iong as it docs not unnecessarlly Infringe upon legttimate municipal inte~est; but that tF~is epplication should be approved nat becausa of bencfits to the property a+ner, b~t it rvould be a tremendous benefit to the i~unicipality bec~use it ts in the scenlc corridor end the grease and grime of a service station with butane tank~~ taw trucks, etc. is net the best use in that a~ea. plus that area has a tren~ ndous traffic problcm on La Palma at the present time and a~s that area graws. the traffic wtll increase; that they feel the conversion of this servicc station to a minl-mart improvc the tr~ffic problcm; that when Arco selects a station they wish to convert. it is required to have a ce~tain ameunt of gasoline volume becausc they know it wTll lose epRroximately 3S to ~~Ox of (ts volume because It becomes 10~$ se1F-service and 14ses those cu~tomers who do not ~ish to pump their own gesollne. He stated as A result by converting trdfflc is, in fact, r~duced. 11e felt the rec~uest shouid be granted for those two reasons. Mr. Goodrnan referred to the waivers req uested and stated they are willing to withdraw the slgn variance and wtll comply with code except where required by state law to heve price sigrts of a cnrtain slze. t~~ steted tt-ey wouid also be willing to comply with staff~s recommendations tn itam ~~o. Zj~ except they seP no reason for closing the m~st westerly drivaway and that if the landsca~cd plsnters to be widened are along impe~ial Nighway~ they wAUld not object to that~ but felt closing the drivaway would create tremendous internel trafflc probl~nn. TH~ PUOLIC NE/1RING WAS CLQSED. 12/iS/80 ~ ~ r MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY P~ANNING COMMISSiON~ DECEMBER IS~ 1980 80-763 Chetrman To1ar stated convarstons of gasoll~a service stettons to mtnt-marts creete a cortbined use on the praperty and thts is a new concept to Anehelm; that he telt from hts observation of that corner, he wauld ~gree closing the westerly d~ivewey would be ridlculous; however~ the petitioner had c~tven him al) the valid roasons whY thts sliauld not be granted; (1) thst there is a Just about every maJor market chain wtthin abaut a ono-mile radtus; (2) that there are tow trucks and every type of ingress and egrt~ss poaslble for a~as station to cloud th~t carner worse; (3) th~t Arco anJoys o~e r~f the two gss stetions anywhere in the Anaheim Hills area and the primary functl~n on that corn~r should only be gas, If even tha~ bPCause th~t ts one of the worst ~arners in thts ctty; and that enather use would cloud that carner worse and he woulcJ never su~port it and cannot sea compounding the problem with e double use. Mr. Goadman stated the volun-e at that statlon and the traffic wt-1 not be (ncreesed, but decreased. ChA(rman Tola~ stated he dld not agrce with that argur.~ent; that there is al~eady a loadtnq problem there and when cars beck u~ because thcre are very few gas statio~s in that vicinity~ the bacE-up zone is out into La Palrrws Just fo~ gesoline and he felt when it takes l~ngcr for the custamer t~ go in and out to buy things, there would not bc holding Zonc. Mr. Goodrtx~n siated the sarne custome~s woul~! not bc coming there and would noi spend as mucli ttme there; that the back-~.:~ of cars and conyestion and t~r~ffic Is extsting and the only way to ~liminate it is with this convarsian; th,~t the benefit~ to the clty, in his oplnion~ autweigh the beneflts to thc ~roperty awner; that the operator w111 profit by not having ta spcnd as mu~h t(me at the station. end with less overhe~d and only sfx employees in a 2~~-hour period~ but his income wil~ be reduced. Cortmissioner Bar~cs sta[~~d shc frequents that corner, but because it is difficult t~~ get in because of the traffic. one of the nast succ~ssfut Arco stations and that. she did mart wi11 stop al) those peaple from getting c~as there a~d because of increased development. She staced there is not p ropcr ty . ioes not buy gasoltnt there She sxoted It ls probablY not thtnk havtng a mint- the traffic will get worse cnouqh parK(ng nqw on thot Mr. Goodman stated parking does meet code rec~u~rements; that wlth the convarston the service bays will bn el(minated~ the cars rrill not bc ltnzd up on the side, the butan~ tank will be ellminated and the two toa+ t~utks wlll be gone; that the ingress and egress problem is ~xisting a~d (f some actian is nut taken, ic will not ge+t any better and he feic this convarsion wlll imp~ove the situatlon. Commisstoner Barn~s asked if the Knotts-Berry Farm sign which Is suppose:d to be portabic can be remr~vcd. Mr. Goodman stated they wlil be happy to remove it. Mr. Goodman stated the problem is that ~ustomers coming out of the stattan have to go up Le °alma and make a turn into the sho{~pi~g ~enter parking lot to turn around. He stated the conv~rslan will solve that proUlem tn a ccrtain extent because there will be less traffic volume. Cammtssioner Fry steted he has seen several servlce station/mini-marts in his travels throughout Califo~nta and has tried ko frequant tho!s~e stations necause of the price differantia~~ but tha parking sit~atlon areund the faclliti~s has been so bad that he has driven past them. !2/iS/80 % MiNUTES, ANAt1EIM CtTY PIANNING COMNISSION~ OECEMBER 15~ 1980 SO-764 Commissloner Bushore ciarifled the patitloner sttpulated to eltminate th~ tow trucks and illegal slgns~ except the price aigns. Ha stated Itie seQS thls es rn Improvement on that cornar. ACTION: Commissioner 9ushore offered a mc~tion, seconded by Commisstoner King and ~~l CARRIED (Commissloner Herbat being absent), that the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commisslon has reviaved tha propesAl to permit a convenience market with gasoltne sales tn the Cl.(y!,l Zone with waivers of maximum size of price signs~ proh~bitad free-standing signs and maximum number of wall stgns on an i~reqularlyshaped parcel of land conststing of ~pproximately 0.5 acre located at the southaast corne~ of La Palma Avonue And Imperla) Nighway (570~ East La Palmn Avenue); and does hereby apprnve the tlegat(ve Declaratlc,n from the rec~uirert~nt to pr~pare an environmental impact report on the bssis ~het there whuld be no signlficant Indtvidua) o~ cumulativc advcrse envlronmenta) impACt duc to the opproval o~ thts Negatlve Declaratian stnce tt~e Ana~hetm Go~eral Plan designetes thc subJect property for generAl comrtierct~~l land uses commensurAte with the propo~~l; that ~o sensittve environmental Impacts t~re Involved in the pr~posal; that the In(ttal ~tudy submitted by the petttloner indlcaces no siqnificant indivldua) or cumulative advers~ envi ronrr~nta) Impaces; and that tlie Negatlve Decl~ratlon substent(ating the foregofng findtngs Is on ftlc in the City of Anahelm Planntng Departr-x:nt. The necd far a sic~n wai~er was briefly discussad wtt-~ ARniE:A S~ntalnhtl ~ Asslstant Dtrector for Zonin~. e xplainlnc~ if this is converted to self-service only~ the number of price stgns needed will bc reduced and the regulattons are that a stgn is requtred for eve ry grade of gasol~ne~ plus tha self-service and futl-servicc signs and that other scrvic.e ststions liave be~n able ta comply wftl~ thc stnte re~ulat(ons under the sign ordtnancC~ even thouc~h admittedly the scr.nic corridor re,+uletions rre more restrictive. Mr. Gondman ~tated he could stiputate to cc~mply with all sign reyuir•.nents under the Anahelm codes~ except the price: signs required for meeting state rec~ulattons. ACT10~1: Commiasioncr Bu~hare affered a mQtton~ ser.onded by Commlssione~ King And 0~1 CARRIEp (Cornr~is~ione~ 11erEst bcing Absent) ~ that che Anahc{m Clty Planning Commission does hcreby deny the request for waivers of codr. rr_qui rement on the basis that the p~titioner stipuiated to mcet the sign ordinencc requirement thereby eliminatin!~ the necd ~or the waivers. Cc~mmtssfonEr 8ushore offered Rtsolutlon No. PCAO-231 and moved for its pass~ge end adoption thdi the Anafieim City Ptanning Commis~ien does hereby'grant Conditlonal Use Permit No. 21b8, subject to stipulatians and Inte~dcpa~tme~tal Committee recortmrndetions. Commissioner King asked if ltquor would b~e sold at this facility And Mr. Goodman explained generally Arco docs not allow any hard liquor to be sold. Jack White, Assistant Clxy Attor~ey, explained the staff recommendstions on Qage 6•e~ Item 24~ should be a nart of the approvel~ deleting thc rcquiremant far closure of the mast w esterly driveway. Ue.:n Sherer responded to Mr. Goodmen that the landscape pl~nter to be w{der+~d is alo~g Imperial flighway. ~z/i5~ao ~~ ~ f L ~~~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PI.ANNING COMMISSI4N~ QECEMBER 15, 1980 &,1•y~,g Chairman Toler st~tod he felt this wili causa drastic changes In treffic and would conipound the extstin~ problem~. He •tatnd he ~oes not belleve thts operation wtll changa a~a oP th~ n~o~t IucraRive gas •tations to hsve ~+ les~e~ business and felt this w111 tncrease tha busineas by addinp another source. On rol) call~ the foregoing ~esolutlon FAItED TO CARRY by the follaving vote: AYESs CQMNISSIONERS: OUSNORE~ KING NpES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES, BQUAS~ FRY~ TOLAR a~SCNTs CQMMISSIONEaS: HERt3SY Commissioner 9arnes offored Rasolutton No. PC80-231 ~nd moved for its passage and edoption that the Anahetm Clty Planning Commtsslon does hereby deny Condltiona) Use Pe rmlt No. 2148 on tha basis that the commercial use wt11 cause Increased traffic problems at the intersection end create an undesirable precede~t In the Scenlc Corridor Ovcrlay 2one. On roll call~ the foregotng resolution wes passad by the foliowtnq vate: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: QARNES~ 80UAS, BuSHnR~~ sRY, TO~AR NOES: COMMISSIONERS; KINi, ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; HERBST Jeck Whita~ Assistant Ctty Att4rney~ presented the written right to ~+ppeal th~ Planning Comm(ssion's decislon wtthln 22 derys to the City Cauncll. 12/15/80 ~ MINUTES~ AN/W~IM CITY PLANI~ING COMMISSION~ DECEMBER 15r 19~ 80-~66 !Tk_ M_NO_„Z: Ela NEGATIVE OECLARATI011 ANO COt~01TI0NAL USE PERMIT N0. 21,~i5t PUDIIC HEARIt~G. dWNER: IIARRY S. RINKER~ TRUSTEE~ 3~a8 P~~lmen Street. Co~tn Mese, CA 92626. AGEI~T: RAYMO-~U SAIMI ASSOC111TES~ INC.~ 11+8 Wesc M~in Street. Tustl~~ CA 92680. Property descrihed es an I~regule~rly•shaped percel ot lend co~ststing of approxlmat~ly 12.?. acres. lacatsJ at 5401 East La Palme Avenue. P~ope~tY presentlY classified ML (INpUSTR1Al, LIMITEO) IONE. CONOITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST: TO PERMiT A CHURCII IN TIIE M4 ZONE. It (s noted Item No. a was heard prior to this Itam. There was no one Indicating their presence in opposltia~ to subJect request, ar.d although the staff report was not read~ It Is referred to rnd mede a part of the mtnutes. Roymc~nd Salmi~ agent~ stated they need a place to meet while the chureh is bel~g constructed and are asking for a permit to use the f~ctlitles at 5~+~1 East La Palms Avanue; ihat parlcing is adequate and thelr traffic Is bastco) ly on Su~day from 9s3~ to 11:00 a.m. and in the evenings from G:00 to A:00 p.m. and :here wi 11 be veryr little dally trafflc; that they cantacttd all the tenents and deternined therc are 43 vehicles ustng che parking lot t~nd they do n~t work on waekends or Surid~ys end only occasinnally on Saturdays. Ile steted they are requesting this use ~o~ three yeers end have an option on thls leasc for the fourth yeer lf needed. TtiE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chairman Tolar asked ha+ iong it would tAke to com~+lete the ~anctuary oF the new church. M~. Saim) repl ied i t wi 11 probably tAke 1F, months to qet sta~ted on construction and about 2-1/2 years to completa construction. He stated they heve a aub~tentfal engineerinq probtem to deel with. Commissloner 6ushore stated he Is concer~ed that maybe the pro~ect ti+ill not get off the ground; that many chu~ches have tried to locete in the industrtai area and the Commtsslon is st~ongly oppos~d. -1e stetcd the present Cammtsaion would be very reluctant to oppmve this request beyond the origlnal term. ACTION: Commlssloner Ki ng offered a mction, seco~ded by Commiss ioner Fry and MOTt ON R EO (Comrr+isstoner Herbst being ab'~nt). that the Ansheim City Ptenning Cammlsston has revlewed the proposal to permit a church In the ML(SC) (Industrial. Limtted- Scenic Corrldur Overlay) Zone on an irregularl~r-shaped parcei of land consisting of approximately 12.2 acres, having a frontage of spproximetely 5~0 feet on the narth sid~ of La Palma Avenue, having a maxlmum depth of spproxtrnately 1.325 feet and being located approximately 2,020 fee~c west of the centerline of lmperisl Hlghway (SG~~ Eas t La Pa I ma Avenue) ; and does hereby approve the NegAt i ve tkc t ara t L on f rom the requi remc~t to prepare an envi ronments) impsct report on the basis that there would be no slgnifieant (~dlvidual or cumula^ive adverse environment ~1 tmpact due to the approval of this Negativc~ Declaration since the Anaheim Genmrai Plan designates tha sub}ect property fo~ generai industr:sl land uses cc~mmensurete with the proposal; that no sensitive environmentel impacts are invalved tn the proposal; that the Inltial Study s~mltxed by the petittoner indicates no slgnificani individual or cumulative adverse environmental impscts; and Lhat the Negative f•eclart+tion ~zl~s/8o ~ MlNUtES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIQN~ DECEMBEa 15, 1980 80•769 Ch~ir-nen Tolar thought tho wording sugyasted Por thn conditlon Is ebout as strong at~ the Commtasian cen c~at to imposa thl~ obllgation on A~ehalm Illlis~ Inc. Mr. Titus •tated the Engin~ering Olvlslon w111 work wlth the developer and AnaMelm H111s~ I~c. to qot this do~e at the proper ttme, Mr. Salm) stated they wanted to bring the sltuatlon to everyonr's ette~tlon. Chslrmain Tolar stated I~e has no ~+roblem with the holght 1 imitatlnn and thought this would be a good use and la delighted that Anaheim Ilills Cortmunlty Church hes found s place. ACTIQN: Chairman Tolar offcred a mc-tfon~ sec~nded by Commissfoner King and MOTION ~0 (Commissinner Fierbst boing absent)~ tl~~t the M~h~tm City Planninq Commisslon has revicwed the pro~osal to p~rmit a church and prtvete ~ducatlc-n~~l fnc(llt' i wtth welvar of maxlmum structurrl hcight on an irrcgularly-shaped porccl of land cansisting of approxim~+tely 10.$ ocres heving a frontage of approxlmately ~+00 feet on the southeast side ~f Senta Ana Canyon Road~ having a maximum depth of ahproximately 1100 feet and being located sp-~roxlmete~ly 50A feet east af the centerl tne of Eucelyptus Road; and doess hereby approve tl~e Negative Qecleration from the re~ulrement to prep~re an environmental Impact repart ors the bASls th~t thnre would be no stynlfica~t Indivldua) or cumulatlv~ adverse envtronmental Impact due to the opprova) of tf~ls IJegattve Declarattnn since tt,e R~ahelm Goneral Plan desic~n~tes the a~b]ect property for residcnttal hi~ls(de density land uses con~r~nsurate wi~kh the proposal; ti~et no senslt(ve anvirone~nta~ Imp~cts ere lnvolved in the proposal; thet the Initlal Study submitted by the pet{tlon~r Indicates nn slc~niflcAnt Individual o~ cumuletivc advcrse envi ronmenta) imt~ects; and that the Negative Decla~attan s~bstantlating the forogoing findings ls on file in the Clcy oF Annheim Pl~nnfng Uepartment. Chatrmon Tolar offered a motlon~ seconded by Commlssl~ner Fry ~nd MQTION CARRI~D (Commisstoner Nerbst being absent), that the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commission does hereby grant request for walver of cade rcqulrement nn the basts af the hillsidd topography of s~bject prc~erty~ wtth the structuro proposed In a Canyon and would not adversely affect or abstruct the vissbility nr llnes of sight from ad]acent and nearby p~operties. Chairman Tolar offe~ed Resolution No. PCBf!-232 and moved for its pa~sege and adoptton that the Anaheim City Planning Commlsslon does hercby grant Cond(tlona~ Use Permit No. 2156~ sub~ect to Interdepartmental Conmittee recommendatfons. Cheirman Tolar noted another conditlon Mas bean requested by the Traffic Engineer that the access deceleration lano and median island on Santa Ana Canyon Roi+d confor'~;~ to clty standards as appravod by the Clty Traffic Englnee~. H~ stated this is a normal requlrernent and should be e part of the resolution. On roll call. the foregoing resolution was ~assed by the follawing vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES~ BOUAS, BUStIORE~ FRY. KING. TOLAR NOES: COHMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMiSS10NERS: NER85T 12/15/80 ~~ ~~ MINUtES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNINC COMMISSION~ DECENBER ly~ 1980 80•7G8 Mr. S~Imt refer~ed to Conditton No. 14 pertelning to dralnaqQ. ~nd stated there wes an •greemant on May 2~~ 1975r indicattng that it Is the ~eap~nstbillty of A~eheim Hilis~ Inc. to provide tha dratnage Irtprovements for thls property; snd that he racoynlzes tho petltloner is ~ospontlble for tl~e dnsl~n of the dralnage fec111tles and there wss e sttpulation for relmbursen~ nt. II~ steted they would itke the requtremont (ncluded that when they a~e ready to butl~~~ these dratnage faciitttes wtl) be Installed. F1a referred to Conditton No. 1f~ AnJ st•~t~d they wiil provl~o an e~semert to ths Water Distrtct p~operty If It Is r~ssibic. TNE PUl3Ll C IIE~RI NG WAS CL~SED. A~ntk~ Sontalahtl, Assistant Uir~ctor for Z~ning~ steted the petltioner recommended sonw additions to Condltlon No. 1G that primarily mekes a reference to a lettar ta Ana~~elm Hllls~ InG. thet discusses thet.• responsibilities tn canstructinn the storm drain after th~ de~slgn has beesn prep~red and the conditton wlll lnclude that a relmburserro nt agreern~nt will be m~de available to the dcveloper for the engtneering and deslgn fees; that the praperty awners in thQ drainage basin as they develop wil) be requlred to reirtb urso tliis d~veloper ond the ctty wouid not be lnvolved. Chairman Tolar furtf~er explain~d thare Is an a9reament that Anahetm Fillls Inc. has ayreed to build a storm d~ain end if tt~ey had not butit It by the ttrr,~ a property awner further dnvn ck velopeci their ~roperty, the perso~ below would clesign the storm drAln and Anahaim Hltls. Inc. would subsequently develop lt. Commissioner aushore pointnd out the petttioner wanted sort~ assurancr that the sto~m dratn ~ould be finished by lhs timc he Is reedy to butld and Mr. Salm1 stAted they want the co~peratton of the city to sce thet the improvements wtlt b~ available to them when they are ready. Chairman Tol~r clerlfied that the condition es s~. ~ested would allow Anaheim Htlls to go ahead and develop the storm drain fr~m their sautherly property li~e south whlch would satisfy the watcr runoff from ahovc. Jay Titus, Office Engineer~ stated thfs condition would permlt Anahetm Hlils~ Inc. to phase const~uct thst draln fmm the proposed develapmnnt on the south property line to the ultimate dis~sal. Ne stated the City Engineering Department will work with the devr.loner and Anaheim Flllls, Inc. to see that the storm draln is constructrd by thP tl rr~ they need i t. Jack Irhite~ Assistant :ity Attorney~ stated he ~iid rat want to see the city in the positton of guaranteeing a proJect that would be constructed by Anaheim Hills, Inc. Jay Titus explained Anaheim Hills~ inc. was involved in Drainage Dtstrict 41 at the upper end of Chts drainage basi~; that whcn they did some davelopn+~nt one of the requirements was for them to construct this storm drain and tt~ey declded at that time that thcy would rather postpone this constructlon and asked the City Council for a waiver and Co uncil approved the postponement of that requiren+ent subject to certain co~ditfons; thet ane of thc condittons requires that if Anaheim tiills, inc. doas any further developmcnt within Diatrict 41~ they will wn~truct the storm drain and it further states that if any downstream property develops~ that downstream property o+-ner will d~sign the drain ~nd Anahetm Hills~ Inc, w(11 construct it. ~2/iSl80 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ DEC EMBER 1~• 1~80 80-y6~ •ubttsntiating the foregoing findt~gs Is on fi le In the City of AnAh~im Pienning Oepertment. Commissioner King offernd Reiolutlon Na. PC80- ~23 and moved for Its pessege and adoption that the Anaheim f,ity Planning Commtssl~n daes hereby grant Condirional Use Permit No. 2155 for a period nf 3 years~ sub)ect to review for possible extenslons of time upon wrltten request f~om tha petitioner. And suw}act to Interdepertmantal Committee ~econr~nd~tions. On rol t cal l~ Cha foregoing resolutton ~-as passed by thn fol lawing vote: AYCS: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES. pOUAS~ BUSNOR E~ FRY~ KING. TOLAR NOES: COMMISSIONCRS: NONE ApSEt1T: COMNISS10fJER5: NERBST ITEM N0. ~: EIR NEGA1~1 P~RM- IT N0. 215~- DECLARATION. WAIVEP, Of CODE REQUIREMENT AND CONDI AUBLIC HEARING. OWNCR; ANAHEIM COMMUNITY CNU RCH~ 52n7 East Northrop Avenue, Anahet-,~~ CA 92807. AGCNT: RAYMOtID SALMI ASSOCIATES, 1 NC.. 14$ West Msin Street~ Tustin, CN 92Ga0. Property is descrihed as en lr~egula~ty•ahaped of irnci consisting of approxlmately 1~.fi acres~ having ~ frontage of approxinwtely 400 Peet on the southcast sidr. of Santa Ana Canyon Road. having a maximum de~th of approximately 1100 feet and being l~cated approximately ~0~ feet cast of the centerllne of Eucalyptus Road. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT aEQUCST: t0 PERNIT A CHURGH Af~D PRIVAT~ E;IUCATIONAL fACILITIES WITII WAIVER OF MAXiI~UM STRUCTUR/-L HEIGMT. I t was notcd I tem fdo. S shou 1 d be heard beforc I tem -In. 7. There was n~ one 1 ndi cati ng the 1 r presence i n op~si t Inn ta sut~J~ct r~r,uest ~ a~d although th~ staff report was not read, it is referr~d t~ +y~~d made ~: Farr. ~~f thr mtnutes. Raymond Sa lmi ~ aqent, stated he egrees w) th s Zaff's recammendation; t~ :c t~~e~ aroperty ls in a valley aff Santa Ara Canyon Road and that they liave designed the p~~~Jetk to be integrated tn:~ trre site; that thetr goal is ta ultlmatcly cfevelap a sa~ct~uary and educ.. t i on:, I f~~ i 1 i ty ~+i th t,~e 100~ seat s+anct s~~ry be i ng the f i rs t ph,~se af development; that the educario~~l faciiities r+ould ba the secor~d nha,e of development an~1 thr: thi rd ph.,se woulel br. en txtenston af the recreational f~ct 1 ities and athlett c field; [hat tn desi_yning tht facillty, they wauld have to appreciably change the gra-Jing of the stte ta produce the play field which would be shared with tfie community; and that the church is very strong Into the youCh programs. Ne stated they hope ta start construction of phase on~ within 18 rtanths and thc rest In the tliree years. Mr. Salmi stated the helght waivcr ls requested because of th~ terraln ancl thetr desira to preservG the hillstde and also it I s an econantc sltuation; and that the height of the building ts ~+ or 5 fcet hiqhe~r than the slope. ~ 12/15/80 ~ ~., .~' MIhUTES~ ANIIHEIM CITY PLANNING CQMMISSION~ DECEHBER 15~ 1960 • 7~~ I TEM N0. 9 t E I R NEGAT I VE DE~LARAT I QNa R~f C_L~SS i F 1 CAT I ON N0. 8A-81 2--. VAR 1 ANCE N0. PURLIC HEARING. OWNERS: GER.ARD F. AND JQYCE M. WAaDE~ ~~33~+ East La Palmo Avenue~ Mahetm~ CA ~2df17. P~pPerty dascribed as e rectangularly-shaped parcei af Iand cansisting of apProxim~tety O.G~+ ecre located at the northeast corner of Katella Avanue end Dalles Drive~ and further descrtbed as 2035 West Katelle llve~ue. Property presently clessified RS•7200 (RESIpENTIAI~ SINGLE•FAMILV) ZONE. aECL~S51 F 1 CATI ON REQUEST : RM-3~M VARIN~CE aEQUFST: WAIVERS AF; (a) MINIMU~/ LOT l1REA PER Ot~ELI.ING Ut~IT~ (b) MAXI~IUM STRUCTUftAt H~AT~10-~AL(1.E15UREMAND (f) M~INIMUI~~tENUMHERMOF'FARKINGpSPACES TOTESTA6LISt1 A MINIMUM RECRE 0-~E LOT~ il-UNIT COIIDOMINIUM COMPLEX. TENTATIVE MAP aEQUEST: TO COt~STaur.T A oNE LoT, 11-UI~IT CO~ID~MII~IUM SUBDIVISION, Thero v~e re th ree persons 1 ndl cat 1 ng the 1 r rresence i n o~nos ~ t t ~~ to sub}cct request ~ anJ althouyh the stnff retwrt was not read~ It la referred to and made a part of tha minutcs. Gerard Mlarde, owner~ was present to answer Any quostions. Gordon flastings~ 1771 Soutl~ Oallas Driv~~ stated his propercy ts across the street from the proposed access; tt~at saveral nei~hbo~s wanted to attend~ but could not; that they do not want to stand In the way af prog~c~s~ but felt six walvers woul~i have an aAvcrse tmpsct on the nelghborhood; that they are asking for 157$ af the allowable de~sity and no afforJAble units are proposed; t~~et Dall~s Drive (s a cul de sac with three branching streets and t~++ffic travels fasr. on thrse streets; that th~ parking waiver cuuld creatc qulte A p~~blem for th~efer9to~parkdonnthe streetththat people who would hevc p~rking spaces on site may p Chls report addresses a lot of pcrcentages and tho wet vers seem to be lerga beGause they wa~t to construcC eleven two-story untts on this property and there are no other two-story units on chis property and there are no other twa-st~ry units in this area; that they are also concerned about traff i c and there are sma) l chi 1 dren in the ncighbo~haad end tt is difficult t~ kc~p tl~~m off the stre~ts snd driveways where potential u-turns wiil be madc; thac his property faces directly Into the access for the project; and that thare is a potenti~) problem for parking on street sweeping deys. Margare t Geal l~ 1775 South pa 1 I as . s ta ted she has 1 f v~d there 2~- yea~s and agrees with Mr. Hastings; that the traffic is bad alre~dy a~nd this ts a smril area~ but felt 11 two-story units in a one-story area is Just too much. LelAnd Woods stated he avns p~operty bdJace~t to the northern boundary and ls obJecting to the two-story structures 12 feet from his property line and the whole structure will be o~e massive wail be~ind thelr throe p~operties; that there is already en atr p~ablem because of the trees and dur(ng the sumner he feli this structure wiil tompletely block his air clrcute~tlon; that there is a single-story cort~lex to the esst and he s~w no reason for this massive structure; and that he agrees t~ct aimost do~bles allbthe code requi eme~tsess to Katella Avenue. He ststed the pr+a j 12/15/~ c ~..~ i~ ~ MINUTES~ A-;:~HEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, OECEMgER 15~ 1980 80-771 TH~ PUBLIt NEARING WAS CLOS~D. Chalrman Tolar pointed out a~ earller roquest fo~ 14 units on 1/?. Acre h~d had a difficult time gotting ~pprov~l end thts request Is far 11 unl~s on s p~rcel 2/3 thot siset th~t (t is up to the patitioner to Justlfy the hardshtps for granting the w~ivsrs becsuse stete law dlctatos the hArdsht~ must be due to the size~ shape or lopogr~phy at the lAnd itseif; end that the Commtssio~ cannet conslder the cast of l~nd and cons~ruction sa a hardship. Mr. Werde steted the property ts srn~li and ho did not think singlc-famlly ~esldence would be feasible. Chairmsn Tolar stat~d this proporty ts roughly 7200 shuere feat and abuts th ~~e resldenttal propertlos and he could ~ot ~upport this mnny units and coulc! not envis lon even wanti ng to put uni ts an th~t corner. Mr. 4larde atated he thinks thet area noeds rt+ore housing wtth the Conventlon tenter there~ etc. • Chairn~an Tol~~ stated fhe whole city needa hou3ing~ but nat at a cost Co eve ryone els~e; that e lot of property awners would love to put eleven u~its on their single- fami ly lot. but that would create big problems. Commlss(oner Barnes agreed that oleven units wou;~l be ,just tao meny units; that she is not particularly opposed to the reclassificatl~n~ but Is opposed ta the number of untt~ because of the two-story units and Increased traffic. She stated reducing the nur-~er of units would eltminate those prc~blems. M~. Warde stated with the cost of the land~ (t Is ~ot fe~sible to put less unita on the property. Commissioner Bushore st~:~d he would su~port a maxtmum of stx units. Chairman Tolar stated he ts also conce~ned about the reclassificstion. Commisstoner Bushore stated this proposal wouid ovtrbuild the property and the Commlsston can either vote o~ these plans or the petitloner can redeslgn them. He stated he would want to se~ stx one-story units; and that this proposel 1~ short on pa~king spaces. Ne pointed out a letter was sent to the pettttoner informing him of wh:,t he needed to do. Mr. Warde stAted he had talked to Communtty Housi~g and there ts no way this praJect wouid be feasfble ustng thelr criteria. Comnissioner E~hare stated he could r,ot ~upport this proJect. He explatr.~d even thaugh the s! 'f report indicates tF~e p~ope~ty would suppc~rt 7 units, the Cortmission could not vote on that today and su~~gested a six-week continuance. He stated he realixes the c'*y needs housing an<< the Cammission does try to be reasanable. Mr. Wsrde stated ha would like a vot~~ on thts proJect as submitted. ACTION: Conmissioner Bushure offered a motion. seconded by Commissioner King and MOTION CARRIED (Comnissloner Nerbst b~eing absent), that the An~heim City Planning 12/15/80 r , \ ~l ~ MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ DECEMBER 15~ 1980 ~~ ~~~ Commiasion h~s rovlawed th~ proposal tc+ recl~ssify subjecc property f~om RS•7200 (R~eaidential, Singia-F~mily) Xoncon~minium subdtvtstonewith~watverapof mtntmYum lot to construct a one-lot~ 11'unit g m~~~mum sroa per dwelling unit~ msximum structural hei ht~ maxtmwr site coverage~ land:ceped s~tb~cl.~ minimum recreatlon~l•lelsure area snd minimum number of pe~~ia~ra ~paces on a recten9h,esty corna~dofaKatetla llvenue ands Da1~~sfD~Iveoxh~vingYaAf~o~ta9e locatad at the nort e of opl~~oximataly 1~A faat on the north slde of Kate11~ Avenue and 17~ feet o~ t a a~st aide of Oallas (2~35 West K+itella Avenue~; and does hareby approve the NegAtiva Declar~tion from the requiren~ent to prep~ra en environmental tn~act report on the basis th~t there would be no slgnificant individual or cumulative adverse environmental Ir~ act due to the approval of thla Neg~+tivc Dec~ArAtlon sinte the Anahalm General Pl~n deslgnotes the subJcct prnperty f~r low-n~edium denalty land uses conxr~ensurate wl th the t~roposai ; that no senst tl ve envi ronrr~ental impacts ~+re involvad in the propossl; that tt~e lnittal Study submlCtcd by th~ petitloner indicAtes no slgnificant Individnasubstantlating thevforegoingrfi dings tsnontfi~~ndnt~hc City of Negativn Ueclarati~ Anahelm Planning Department. Comnlssionar Bustx~re offered a resolutlon rpproving Recl~sslficatian No. B~-R1-:.p. Jaek uhtte~ Assistant City Attorney~ tilained sev~ral of th~ staff conctitions ~a1Ate to the vari ance and tract ePi rLoeanerove~thecrecl ass 1 f t cat ionsubm) t ted ~rnd su99es~ted thc Commisslon mi~ht not wls P Annika Santalahti explalned that ln che past t~~e Corm~lssion has denlccf Simll~ar requests wt~hout preJudice. Conmtssloner Bushore °fimrCitReplanning Cortmissian3doesdhereby deny~Reclassiflcation adoptian that the Anahe Y No. 8-51-20~ without prc)udice. On roll call. the fore9o~~9 resolution was passed by tf~e following vot~: AYES : GOMM I SS I ONERS : B ARl~ES ~ NOES: COMMISSI0NER5: NONE A85Ef~T ; COMMI SS I Ot~ERS : NERDST SOIlAS ~ BUSNORE, FRY ~ KI NC ~ TOIAa Gammissloner 9ushore offered ReP~enntng Commlsslon~d~esdhereby de~y'YariancepNo.nd adaption that the Anmheim C tY 3~oz. On rall call, the faregoing rGSOlution was passed by the fol{owEng v~ote: AYES: COMM15510NER5: BARNES~ BOUAS~ BUSNOaE, PRY, KING. T4LAR NOES: COMMISSIONERS: t10NE ABSENT: COMMISS IOIIERS : HERBST ACTION: Commissio~er Bushore offered a motion, second~d bY Co'R"~qsi°~°~ p~annin ~ CARRIED (Ccmn+bssfi drafL~rsrevld+ingbthetp~oPosedtaubdlviSion~itogether wlth Conmission does here y lts design and i+riprovama~t~ th~t the site is not physically suitable !o~ the -,roposa t 2/ 15/~ ~~ MINU~ES~ ANAHEiM CITY PLANNING GOIiMiSS10N~ DECEM{BER 15, 1g80 80'77W Mr. Jah~son stated the avner Is in fevor of free enterprise~ but want~ to make sure the city h~s rutea and ragulatt~ns so tt~ero wil) not ba a~y conflicts. ~h~irman Toler statad the Commis~ton can revake the permft of eny w a thst vlolates the health~ or ssfety of the public. Mr. Butter statad he thought the Commisslon waa on his stde and pointed out that ha has promised the awn~r qulte a is~ge runt Incranae if thte (s qrantad. Responding to Commissioner ~v~ho~~~ Mr. Dutler ex~lained the tsctlity will hendle 127 p~opi~; that thQ musie is coantry and v+sst~r'n N-d thst'~ har~ `~ ne~ P~~~~9 P~~~ b~c.aw~ ch~ •ncert~in~wnc ssara •t 9:00 '.~. i M+d t~c h~ hts a 1tv.-~roa~ 1Mt~. t t w~s not~d th~ ~ 1 a~nt n9 ot nato~ or h Is autho~l s~+l rap~wnt~t iw has ~Mt~n~l r-sd tMrc !M~ propos~d pro~~ct falls witl+In tM dsfinitioe~ 01 Cat~ari~1 E~NII~tIOR~~ Class 1, as Geftnerd in pa~~p+'~ph 2 ot th~ City of Anaheln- Envl~e~-w~ntal Impsct Raport fuidelinas and is~ therefore~ categoricelly exempt Prom the requirement to prepa~e an EIR. ACTION: Cammisstoner Dushare offered ~~ motion~ seconded by Comm{ssloner Fry and M OH CARRIED (C~mmissloncr Ilerbst being absent)~ that the Anehelm Ctty Planni~g Comnlssion does hereby grant the request for watve:r of mintmum number of parking ~paces on the basis that the exlsttng use has not created any parkinq problems slnce tho ma}o~ity of patrons are thtre after 9:0~ p.m. when o~her businesscs ln the center arc closed. Conmissioner Bushore offered Resnlution Na. PC80-23~ end rrbved for its passage and aJaption that the Anahcim Clty Planning Commisslon does hercby grant Condtttenal Use Permtt No. 2138 for a period of ; ye~rs. subJect to revicw for posstble extenstons of time upon written requcst of tl~e petitioner~ a~d subJcct to Interdepertmental tomni t tee rQCamnendat ions . 9n rull call, the foregoing resolutia~ was passed by the following vote: AYES : COMMI SS I ONE RS : QARNES, aOUAS , DUSIIORE ~ FRY, K 1 NG ~ TOLAR NCES: COMM15510NER5: NONE A6SENT: COMMI SS ~O~~ERS : NERBST RECfi55 There was a ~ecess at 5:15 p.m. _....._ RECONVEi~E The meeting was reconvened at 7:0~ p.m. _._.__..~ ~Zi~siao ;;: t _~ ~ 4 MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ D~CEMBER 15~ 1g80 80•7~3 dansity of development end~ tharefore~ the Plenning Commission doas hereby deny Tentattve M~p of Tract No. 11030 for e o~~s-lot~ 11•untt candomintum subdtvislon. Jack White~ At~sistant City Attorney~ presented the wrttten right to sppeal the Pianning Commisslo~'s declslon pe~telning to the Reclassificatlon or Vartance wlthin 22 days to the City Council~ and the Thnt~tive Map af Tract No. 11~;0 within 15 days. TEM N0. 10: Ela CATEGORICAL E:XENPTION CLASS 1. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT AND ~'~i' us~'"!~'fFATT~'~T . ~,..r._.. PUgLiC HEARING. OWN~RS: EWALD F. DARGATZ~ CT AL~ 1A4;~ West Almond~ Orange~ C~ 92668. AGENT: SY•ROY~ INC.~ JONN ~UTLER, PRESIDEt~T, 324~~ West llncoln Avenue~ AnAheim~ CA 92G~1. Property descrlbed as en trregularly-shaped parcei of land conststing of approxtmat~ly 1.; e~r~s located south and eest of the southeast corn~r of ~tncoln Avenue a~d Westchester Urive~ and further described as 32~~~~ West Llncotn Avenue (Trails West). Propcrty presently clessifted CL (COMMERCIAL~ LIMIT~O) Z~NE. COWDITIOt~l1L USE REQUEST; TO PERMIT A Pl1DLIC DANCC NALL I11 TIIE CL ZONE ~'1T~t uAfVER OF MINIMIIM NUME3ER OF PNRKI~IG SPACES. There was one intrrested person lndic~ting his presence .~nc! atthouah the sta~`f report was not rcad~ it ts referrecl to and madr, a ~art of the minutcs. JoFin Buticr~ c~wner of T~at Is 41est Cocktat i Luunge~ stnted thts is a requsst for a publtc dAnce permit because they have been operatln~ u~der a c~inner dance permlt. but have discontinued the fcx~d service. Woody .lohnson s tated he rtwnages th 1 s cenLe r for an out-of- t~swn ow~rr; that the un i t was leased as a restaurant opc~ration w(th cocktails~ hut t~e dWi1C~ h~~s a questton about discontinuing the food service and wondered if people gol~g there for drtnks would have a de[rimental affecc ta tlie overall usc of thr cantar; and that the owner does not went the permit granted indeftnltely. TNE PUBLIC HEARII~G iJAS CLOSEO. Chalrman ~olar stated most requests of this nature are granted for a certain time perlod ~o if there is a probiem~ the use can be reyfewed. Ne felt since the operator has had a goo~ operatlon for stx years that it wlll continue. Mr. Butler stated therc are vacant parktng spACes at the present time~ but the kenants interested in this center seem to be those uses which would use the parking at night such as karate~ exotic exercises~ etc. Chairman Tolar stated the owner will have to control tha on-slte parking; that the owner sic,~ ed this applicettan and is now saying he wants It co~trolled, buL the clty cannat co~t~ol the parking on private property. 12/15/80 } ~ -. MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSI~N~ QECEMBER 15~ 19~ M N0. 11s EIR NEGATIYC OECLAMTION WAIVER E M N0. 1 : Bo-775 :I~T ANO CONQI' PUBIIC NEARING. OWNER: MOBIL OIL CORPORATION~ G12 South Flower Street~ Los Angeies~ CA 90017. AGENT: TAIT At~D ASSOCIATES~ iNC.~ P. 0. Box b~+25, Anahetm~ CA 9T.8~3. P~operty described as en irregulariy~shaped parcei of lend conslsttng of approximately 7.70 acres~ having a frantage of approxlmetely 313 feet o~ tho west aldo of Jeffenon Street~ hevtng a maxtmum dopth oF Appr~xirtwtely £~h0 feet and being tocated e~proxlmately 3Gh feet south of the centerllne of O~anQethorpe Avenuc. C4NDITIO~~AL USE PERMIT REQUCST: TO EXPA~ID Atl EXISTIMG FUEL TERMINAL (AT1J000 MARKETING TERMINAI,) wITH WAIVERS OF; (a) F1INIMUM LAHDSCAPEO PRONT SETBACK~ (b) MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGfiT~ (c) REQUIRED ENCLOSURE OF OUTDOOR USES AND (d) MINIMUM t~UM9ER OF P/-RKING SPACES. There was no one I~dicatl~g their presence in opposttton to subJect request~ and although tho staff roport was not read~ it is referred tv and mnde a part of the minutes. Vincont 7ait. agent~ stated there Is a 50-foot setback of tha existing building of which 1Q fcet is l~ndscaped. Denn 5harcr~ Assistant Planncr, statcd cod~ ~equires etther a fully landscaped 5Q- foot area ad~acent to Jeffers~n Street which is en arterlal liighway o~ a minlmum 10- foot wide landscaped strtp with pArktng in that front area and the parkinq is not located in that 50-foot landscaped setbaclc area, theref~re~ the entire width has to bo landscaped but if there is publlc or ert~loyee pa~king adJacent to Jefferson, less than >0-feet would be pe nnttted. Coiranissionc~ Bushore gtated he reviewed the site and the 1~-feet of tandscaping eonsists of 4 or 5 trees and wes approved for annexation In 1~71; ehat since this property is coming into the city~ the Conmisston should consider It in relattonshtp to what they are trying to da In the Canyon Industria) Arca; and that he realizes there Is an existing hardshin since the office and warehouse platform are riqht next to the 50-foot rtqht-of-way and it ts necessa ry for vehic'ies to pull in there. tle felt somethtng could be donn to improve the landscaping; and he felt there should be stte screening on the frant and probably on the northern portion of the property. Mr. Tatt stated Englneering is requiring street tmprovements up to the channel and he would sttpulate to providing site screening between the northern driveway and the channel. Comnlssioner Bushore explained approval wtll be condltioned on the landscaping being provided with irriaation faciltttes~ with slatted site screenin~~ along the eniire easterly portton and that portion of the graveled parking area on the north for approximately 5~ feet. ACTION: Commissloner Bushore offered a motion, seconded by Commisstoner King and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Nerbst being absent), that the Anahetm City Planning Commission has rcviewed the proposal to expand an existing fuel tarminal with minimum iandscaped front setback, maximum fence helght, requlred enclosure of outdoo~ uses and minimum number of prking spaces on an irregularly-shaped parcet of land 12/15/~ .. ~ ~ ~ ( } MINUTES~ ANIWEIM ClTY PLANNING CONMISSION~ DECEM9ER 15~ 1980 i 80-7~6 the west side of Jafforsrx~ Street~ heving e maximum depth of ~pp~oxinMtely 840 feet ~nd bei~g locatsd ep~roximately 36~ feet ~outh of the centa~line ot O~engethorpe Avenue; a~d does hereby approve tha Nagative Oaclar~tlon from the requlrement to p~eper~ an ~nvironment~) impact report on the ba'is th~t thera would be no significeu~t indlvidual or cumulsttva adver~e environmental Impact due to the approv~,l of this Negative Declsr~tlon slnce tha Anah~lm Genera) Plen destgnates the subJect p ropa~ty for general induatrial l~nd uses con-men~urete with the proposal; that no sensitlve environmentel impacts are Inv~lved 1~ the proposel; that the Initiel Study submlttad by the petitioner indicatas no significsnt tndividual o~ cumuletlve adverse envtranmenta) Impacts; end that the Negattve Declaratton subat~ntleting the foregaing findings ts on filc in the Clty of Anahalm Planninq t~partrnent. Commtssto~e~ Bushore offered a n+ettnn~ seconded by Commissioner Fry dnd MOTION CARRIED (Cortrnissioner Horbst being absent)~ thet tho Anahetm City Planning Commtsalon does hereby gr~~t requested walvers af code requi~en~nt on the bssis that the petitloner stipulated ta p rovide sita screentng snd landscaping with irrigation facilitles along tl~e easte rn property line and SO feet of the northern property ltno (n the area of tha g~aveled parking lot ond on the basls that the use is exixting and has had no adversn effect on the cnvtronment. Commisstonc~ 8ushorR offered Reaolution Na. PCBA•231 and mc~ved for its passage and adoption that the Anahetm Clty Planning Commisslon doe~ hereby gront Condition.~i Use Permit No. 2147~ subJect to Interdepartmentdl Committee recorm~endatlons. On roll call, the foregoln4 resoluttan was passed by cha following vote: AYES: COMh11SSI0NERS: BARN~S~ 80UA5~ BUSHORE~ FRY~ KING~ TOLAR NOES: CGMMISSIONERS: NOtIE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 11ERBST 1~/15/SO ~ 1 MINUTES, ANAN~IM C!Tr PLANNING COMMISSION~ DECEMBEa 15~ 198p IER OF CADE RE~ 80-778 ITIONAL PUtfIIC NEARItIG. OWN~R; A9El ANp CAROL A. MEND~Z~ 10A4 North ~em~n~ Anaheim, CA 92t30y. AGENTs IIUMBEaTO VILLASENOR~ 713 West Fourth St~eet~ La Habra~ CA 90631. Praperty dcscrtbed as An Irragularly-shapad parce) of land canststtnq of approximately 0.14 sc~e loceted at the southaaat carner o4' l~n~helm 9ouleverd and Lemon Streat, ond further deacribmd as 10;~ Morth Anaheim Boul~vard. Prnperty presontly classifted CG (COHMCRCIAL~ GENER~L) zQNE. CONOITIO~~AL USE PCRMIT REQUEST; TO PERMIT A USED AUTOMbt31LE SALES LOT wIT1~ WAIVER OF MININU~t NUMBER OF PARKIF~G SPIICES. James Rucker~ attorney, 172~ Nest Ball Roed~ AnAheim~ was present to answor any q ucsttnns. THE PUIlL1C 1iCARING WAS CLOSFD. Comnissloner King felt more than t~•+o par~.ing spaces can bQ provtded. Mr. Rucher stoted they da not fac) tt~Qre woutd ever b~ more than two customers there at any one tlme; that they anticipate havirx~ 13 to 15 cars ta show; that there is one ertploy~!e now and they antlc(pate having two; and thet ther~ is some street parking on Anaheim aouievnrd. Cornmissloner Bushore askcd if any work will b~ dane outsidc and Mr. Rucker ex~latned the repalr w~r~, wtll be cbn~e instdc the bullding; that thare is a canopy on the side usad for detalitng; that the mote) (s on the east sid~ of the property and the d$tailing wark wlll nat disturb thet proparty. Gommissia~er Bushore asked thc tcrm of the leas~ and Mr. Rucker responded five years. Commissioner Bushore feit the use should be tted to a limtcr.d number of ahow cars and a time ilmit. Commisstonar Fry asked that the hours of deteiltng operatlon be llmited And Mr. Rucker responded $:00 a.m. ta y:00 p.m. wduld be acc~ptable. ACTION: Commtssioner l;i~g offerad a motlon, scconded by Commissioner Fry end MOTION Cl,RRiED (Conmfssioner Ilerbst beinq absent), that the Anahelm City Planning Comnission has reviewed the p roposal to pe~mit a used automobtle salcs facility tn the CL (Commercial ~ Limi ted) 2one with waiver of mi~imum nuurrrber of parking spaces on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of eppraximately 0.14 acre located at the southeast carnar af Anal~eim 6oulevard and Lemon Street~ having approximat~ f rontages of t33 feet on the south side of M ahalm Bouleverd and 75 foet on the east side of Lerron Street (1039 North Anahelm Bouteve~d); end does hera~y approve the Negative Declaretton fFOm the requirement to prepa~e dn environmentai Impact ~eport on the basis that tl~ere would be no slgnificant Individual a~ cumulative adverse envlronn~ental tir~,act duo to the spproval of thts Neqativ~ Dectaration stnce the R~aheim Gnnerai Plan dasl4natea the subJect praperty for general commerciai land usea con~menaurate with the proposal; that r.o sensitlve~ envtrenmentel impacts ~re involved tn the propasal; that the Initia) Study submitted by the petitioner tndicates no signiftcent individual or cumulative adv~rse envtronn~ntal impacts; and ehat the 12/t5l8o ~ MINUT~S~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ OECEMBER 15~ 1980 $p~~~g Negative Deciaratlo~ substAntlAting the foreqoing findinqs fs an }ite In the Ctty af Anaholm Plenning I~ pertment. Commisslane~ King offerod s motlon~ acconded by Commta~i~n~r Fry and wOTl~~I CARRIED (Ccxnmisaloner Horbst bein~ absent)• that the Anahaim City Pl~~ninc~ Ca+imission does hareby grent the wal~~er af coae requlrome~t ~n tl~e besis ef the unusua) stze end shape ~f ~ubJact p~operty. Commiasionor F:ing ofPered Resolution No. PGO~-2~C end nx~~~ed For its c+assage and Adoptton tF~at th~ Anehetm Clty Plennlnc~ Comml~sian does hcreby ~rent Condttlonal Use Permit No. 21;1 for e periocl of ~ ycnrs~ subject to revirw for possiblc extenatons of time~ an~ subJett to tho petttioner's sti~ulntion tt~At th~e Ix-urs of detallin~ operatlon tn thc outcJoor canopy area shnl) h~ limit~d to the hours betNeen E;~~ ~f.m. and !;:Otl p.m. and thet tha nurnber of cars slial 1 be 1 iml ted to 1; and sub.ject to Interda~artment~l Gommittce reco~xnanJatlon~ Concernin~a the nur~ber of show c~rs~ Commissioner I3us~~ore stnt~d he does not went an ovcrflc~w of vel~iclcA into tt~c straet and Commissfnner BA~nes st+~ted the Commission wil) be wntchiny this usc and daes not want t~ sea eny park{nn problems in th~t oros. She explainecl the perritt c~n be revoked tP there ~re pr~blems. On roll call~ tlie furegoing resulutton was passe~ t~y thc follawinc~ vote: AYLS: COHMIS5IUNCRS: ~ARNES, BOUA,S~ BLSIIORE, FRY~ KINr.~ TOLAR NOES : COMMI SS I ~t,ERS: NOt~E ABSENT: COMMISSIONER: NERBST 12/15/80 ~_,_ i ~ ~ MINUTES, ANANEIM ~ITY PLANNING COMMISSION, DECEM6CR 1~~ 1980 ~'78~ . 13: Ela CATECORICAL EXEMPT10~1-CLA55 1 WAIVER OF COUE RE UIaEMENT ANO rii~7~T' us R . ~ i PU1fLIC 11EARING. ONt~~R: LOUIS At~D NANUEL WAL7Efi C~. ~ ET AL~ 93r~~ W~ lshirc Bouleverd~ 3uite 212, Bevorly 11111s~ CA ~0212. A~ENT: JAMES STAVAII~ 111~1 West Ketella Avenue, Anahetm, CA h3lic~2. Proporty described as an Irregulerly•shA~eci parccl of land cansisting of appr~ximately 3•~~~~ Acres located aoutl~ and west of the southwest corner of Y.atella AvunuQ and W~st Street~ and further described as 111Q West Katella Avenue (Inn of Tomorrcaw). ~rnpe~ty presently classiFied CR (COMMERCt11L, RECREATtON) ZONE. CONDITIOt1l1L USE PCRMIT RL2UEST; TO PERMIT 0~+-Sl-LE OF ALC011(1LIC ~EVERAGES IN AN EXISTING MOTk.L WITfI WAI!lEli OF MINIMUN NUMBER Oi' PARKIN~ SPACES. There was no one tndicat(n~ thelr ~rNSence in c~ppositi~n to sub~cct roquest. and althauyh thc staff rcporc was not rcad~ tt is r~ferred to and ma~ic e part of the minutes. Jt~mes SC~voll~ 1110 West Katelia~ statect he w~uld Itkp a lounhc at the Inn of Tortwrrow; that oriyinall~~ therc were 17E~ ~Rrt:ing spnces~ but further revtew Indicates additionol parkiny for a CocA1 of 222 spar,~s. 71iC Pl,liLlG IiEARIt~G WAS CLOSCD. Commissioner Fry pointed out the staff rr.nc~rt Sh~uld be c~rrected to shc~w the hours of o~crAt(on frc~m 10:0~ e.m. to 2:d~ n.m. !t was noted thc Planning Direct~r or his ruthorizPd re~rescntative has dete nninr.d that the praposed proJect f~lls withln the defint;ton of Cate~orical Exemptions, Class 1, as defincd in paragraph Z of the Ctty of An~heim Environnantal Impact Report Guluclf~es and is~ tl,ercfore~ categorically exempt from the requir~ment to prepare an EIK. ACTtON: Cammissioner King otfer~ed a motion~ soconded by Cortmissloner Fry and hSOT1~N CARFtIEU (Commissloner Herbst be(nc~ abse~t) ~ that the Anahelm City P1Annlnc~ Cammlss~on dce~ hereby grant tlie waiver af ca~e re~uircment on ttu basis thet the re4uest is minimal and a~crtain percentayc of g~ests arr~ve by t~ansportrtion modes other than private autcmiobllc. Commissioner Kinc~ affercd Resolutlon Mo. PCa'1-239 and moved f~r Its passege and adoption th~t thc Anaheim City Planning Conemission clocs herzby g~ant Conditional Use Permit No. ~152~ subjeCt to Interdcp~rtmental Committce recommendatl~ns. 0~ roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the followin~ vote: AYES: COMMI SS I ONf.P,S: E~AR~~ES. BOU~S ~ I3U5HQRC, FRY, KI ~~G, TOLAR NOES: COMF1155101~ER5: NQNE AdSEfIT: COMh1155IONCRS: tiERISST 12/ 15/8~t) 1l ., r MINUTES. ANANEIM CITY P U1NNiNG COMM1S510N, DECEMBER 15~ 1980 dA-]81 ITEM N0. 1~~: EIR NEGATIVE DECLAMTIAt~ AND CONOITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. Z153t .._._ ~....~ .._._._~ .._..,.~...~ ..-•---- -- PUBLIC NEARINC. OWNER: NORTIIWEST KENDALI PROpERTIES~ 73fA Narth Kand~lt Qrive~ Miami ~ Fin~tda ;315f~. AGENT: F. T. C. INC. ~ ATTN: G~ER BOTICII~ 1~~26 East Katel la ~ anue~ Anahetm, CA 92805. Property desc~ibed as an Irraqularly-sheped percei of land constating nf e~proximetely ~.G~ acre~ loc~tad at ;1~ Sauth Euclict Street (Burgor I:Iny Resteurant)~ Pro~erty presently claes(ftud CL (COMMERCIAL~ LIMITEO) ZONE. COI~DITIOIIAI USE PERMIT REQUEST: 70 PCRMIT A DRIVk-TNRQURFi RESTAURANT IN T11E CL ZOt1E. Thorc wss no one Indlcating th~lr presence In ~~nostc~on tc+ sub)ect request~ end although the steff repo~t wes not reac~, tt Is rcf~rr~d to end nx~de a part of the minutes. 3~rey Elc-tlch~ Agr.nt. was present to enswar eny qucstlans. Tt1~ PUULIC lIE11RIHC, WAS CLOSLD. ACTfON: Commissioncr K.tng offered a rtx~tion~ secundcd by Conxnlssloner Bouaa and MO ION CAkR1EU (Commtssioner Nerbst betng absent)~ thet the Anaheim City Ptanntng ~ommissicm has revlewnd the proposal to p~err~it a drive-through restaurant in the Cl (Commercial. ~~nited) Zane on an Irregularly-shaned ~Arcel oi lend conslsting of epproximately O.f,g acre. having a frontagc of bp(r~oXimAtcly 1;0 feet on the ea~t side of Euclid Streat And having A n~axtmum dcpth of approxlmately 22~ feet and beinq located approxir~~tely 340 fect ~outh of the ~enterl tnc of 1~edn+nr Avenue (51~ South Euclid Street); snd docs hcrcby ap~rove the Negative Declerattun from thc requiremen~ to prepare ~n environmenta) impact report on tht besis th~t there r~c~Uld t~ no significnnt tndividusl or cumulat.ive advcrse envlronmcntal tmpACt ~iue to the approval of this Negat(ve ~^claratiai sincr the AnahelM ~eneral Plrn designetes the sub)ect property for gener~l commercial lahd uses ccxnrne~surate with the proposai; that no sensitive envlronmental Impacts arc i~volved in thc proposal; thrt the Inltfal Study sub mttted by tt~~ petittc~nar Indicntes no st~nificant Individual Qr cumularive adverse envircx~montal impacts; and that the Negacive Declaratto~ substAnttating :he foregoing findin.ys is cn filc tn the City of A~alirim Planning Uepa~tment. Cortimissioner Ktng offered Resolution No. PC8f1-2~-~ and movcd for Its psssege and adoptl~ that tl~e Anaheim City Planning Ccxrrn+++lssio~ does hercby ~rant Condtt(ona) Use Permit ~lo. 2153~ subjcct to Inte~dEpartmental Committoe retr~mmendations. On roli call~ the foregciny resolutioi~ Nas passed by the followinn vote: AYES ; COn~~I S5I Or~ERS: BARNCS ~ BOUAS. BUSNORE ~ FR1r ~ KI NG, t4LAR N9E$: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSI~NERS: HER85T 12/15/50 ~. ~ , ~ . MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNiNG CONMISSION. OECEMBER 15~ 198A 80•782 ITEM N0. 15 WA5 HEARG AFTER ITEM N0. 18. ITEM N0. 15e EIR CAtEGQRICAL 6XEMPt10N-CLASS,.~y AN.O CONDITIOkAI USE PERMIT N0. 2_1~~~: ~....~~ - PUpLIC NEARING. OWNER: ROBERT EU6ENE AND 511AItON LYNN aENTLEY~ h33 wost Llncaln Avenue~ Anahelm~ CA 92805. AGENT: GARY SCHRdCDER~ giA North Lemon~ Orango~ C~ 92~G7. P~operty described es an irre~ulariy-sl-eped parcml of land consisting pf spproxin-etaly 2.1 acres~ located ~t the northeesL c~rnar of Lincoln Avenu~ and Narbor Bouleverd~ and further described es l~l~ North Flarbor Boulevard ~E) Camfno 6usiness Center). Property presently ciessified CO (COMMER~ti1l~ 4FFICE ANQ PROFESSIONAL) za~e. CONDIT14~~111 U5E PCRMIT ftEQUEST: TO PCRMIT TkA FREE-STANDING SIGNS IN TIIE CO ZONE. it wea nntea tl~a p~titlonnr was not present end Chairmen Tolar felt in all feirness, the mattar should bc contlnued. A~TION: Comr,~issionor ~ushore offered a mation~ aeccx~ded by Conmtssioner King and M ON CARRIED (Conmissloner Merbst belnq ebsent), thAt cc~natderatian of the afo~ementloned itcm be cor+tlnued to thc rec~ularly-scheduled mreting of J~nuary 26~ 1g131 eince che petit~oner was not preaent. 12/15/80 -~ y _ _.. __~ ~ __.. . __ . ._ _,_ - - --.- - - - -- ~ ; .d.z ,. ., . ._,. .. .. _ _ _. ~ -- , -- -- ~ i ~ MINUTES~ ANNiE1M CITY PL.ANNING COMMiSSION~ DECFNBER 1S. 19~~ ITEM N0. 1G: EIR NEGATIVE DECIARATIdN M~tD CONDITIANAL USE PERMIT ~• . 2157t ~~~ ~~~ ~~ r r~.~~ w~~r~~.~~~ ~~ 80- 783 PUDIIC HEARING. OWNERt ROVI PACIFIG REAITY COaPOiiAT1AN~ 1t101 Century Perk E+~st~ p I 111 ~ Los Ange 1 e~ . CA 9A~67• p,GE N? s NESTOR M. aUQDY , 7573 Ees t Ca I I e C~a~nada ~ Anahelm~ CA ~12807. P~~p~rty doscrtbed ~s a rectAngularly-sha~+ed parcal of land conalsttnc~ of approxirrMtely 3.n ecres locatud at th~e northoaet corner of Se~rano Avenue and Nohl Ranch aoad~ and furtF*~r descrtbed es h~~~ Sarr~no Avenue. ProAe~tv presently classified CL-IIS(SC) (COMME~tf.IAL, IIMITf:D-NILISIDE SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) tONE. CONDITIONl1L USE PERM17 REQUEST: TO P~RMIT A VETERINARY CLI!IIC IN TNE Cl-NS(SC) ZONE. There wes nu one Indicating thelr presence in o~positic~n to sub)ect request~ and although tl~e staff rep~rt was not rcad, (t Is roferred to and rtu~de A pa~t of the mt~utes. It was nated thAt this requ~st for o taet cllnlc general ly stems from the study prevtously submlttt~d by Dr. Buddy rcg~rdinc~ the ratto of housinh units~ pet populatlon~ etc. TIIE PUOLIC iIEARING WAS CLOSED. Chalrrt~an 'folar clArified that this t~raperty Is loca~ted an Nohi Ranch Road and Serrano anci thet th4re wi I 1 be minimum ~vtrni c~ltit care~ snd al 1 aperetlons are inside the feciitty. ~~~:T''`~: Commisst~ner Barnes offered a~~+otion, seconded by Commissioner King and 1~i~~~°i ;ARRIED (Commissir~ner Hcrbst being absent)~ thbt the Anaheln~ City Planning Commission has review~d tF~e proposal tn permlt a veterint+ry cltnlc in the CI.-HS-(SC) (Gommnrciai~ Limited-tltlislde/Scenic Co~rid~r Overlay) 2o~e on a rectangularly•shaped parcel of land consisting of rpproxirrsately 3.n acres. iocated at the nertheast cornor of Serranp Avenue and Noh) Ranch Roac~ ~ having ~approxin~te. fronteges of ~~85 fQet on the north slcie of Sarrano Avc~ue and 2r~n fe~t on thc east side of Nohl Ranch Road (650~ East Serrane Avenue); snd does 1~e~eby epprove the. Negattve Decirratton from the requirement to prepare an e~v(ronmen zal Impact rcport on the basis that there would be no signlficant individual or cumulative advcrse environmental impact due to the approve) of this Negattve Deciarottors sTnce the Anaheim General Plan designates the sub)ect property for gencral cortrurci dl land uscs co~nsutete wtth the proposai; that no sensitivic environmenta) Imp~~ ets are involve~ Tn the proposal; that the I~i;lal Study submitted by the petitioner indtcates r-a stgnlfSca~t indlvidual or cumulative adverse envtronmrntai tmp ac[s; end that th e Neqetive Declaretlon aubstentioting the forc,qoing finding s(s on file tn th e Ctty of Anaheim Planning Oepartrtr.r, L. Commisstoner t)a~rnr4 offerCd Resolutton No. PCBA-2G1 and moved for lts passage and ed~ption that the Anaheim Gity ~la~niny Commtsslen d~s heret+y gr~nt Condittonal Use Permlt No. 2157~ s~bject to Interdcpartmental Committ~e ~ecommendati~ns. On roi l c~l l. the foreqoing r~salutivn rrss passed by +the fol laving vote; AYES: COMMISSIQt~ERS: BARHES, 60UAS, BUSNORE, FRY, KING. '1'OLAR NUkS: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABS~tIT: COM~IISSIONERS: NERBST 12/15/80 ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, DECEMRER 15~ 1~~ 80-784 ITEM NOY17; EIR NEGATIV~ DECLARATION AND VARIANCE N0. 31~33t PUaIIC HEARiNG. OWNERt RODERT C. AND FRMlT.A R. VELTRI~ 227 Nilic~e~t St~eet~ Anaheim, C A~2a0~. Property descrlb ad aa an Irre~ulariy•shaped ~rrcel of land conslating of approximntely ~.35 ac~e~ lecated at 227 Nt Ilcrest Str~et~ Property preacntly clasalficd RS•7?~~ (RESIDENTIA~., SINGLE-F~MILY) ZONE. VARIMICE REQUEST; WAIVERS OF; (a) PERMITTED PRIMARY USES~ (b) MINIMUM FLOOR ARCA~ (c) MININUM FRONT YARO SET~AG K, (d) MINIMUM REAR YARQ SETDACK~ (e) MAXIMUM FENCE HEICHT AND (~) MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARY~ING SPACES TO RETAIN TWO D4IELLINC UNITS. There wore twn persone i nd 1 ca t i ng the i r prr.sencG I n oppos i t 1 on to sub )ect request ~ and elthough the staff report wos not rcad~ it Is rcferrcd to and mede a part of the minutes. Robert Veltri~ 227 Illllcrest. Anal~elm Hilla~ stated he Is re~~~esting this variance ber.ause lie li~s to care Fpr hi s clderly ~arents who are beth very t I i and he does not wAnt tn put his them Into a eonvalesent home; thr+t he built thts S51.0~~ structure which c~nnot be seen frnm tl~e street; bccause there ere Italian Cypress trees al) around It; that this Is an unusual 1/2 acre flot lot In Mahctm liills rnd that he origint~lly had no intention of doinh this ond I~nd plented fru(t t~ecs~ etc.~ but thts is someChing that has to bc aona. I i~ne Myl~ro~ 225 ~~111~rest. stated hcrs ts the adJacent lot; end that w-~en constructton began o ttic s eeond structurP at 227 Nillcrest Strcet~ she wes told by Mr. Veltri that a tx~ol or rcereatlon hause was being constructed. She stated it was not unti 1 much later tllen shc was inforr~eA t~~At a s~cond home Nas betnq constructed for Mr. Vcl[rl's elderly perc nts wha necded nursing care; that she spoke w(th the builder~ Robert Deer~ who said that ttiis couid be done (f the ~.(tchcn was put in after inspcctton and that this -~as thc incr.ntlon nf the Veltris. She stated she wes shocl.ed that tl~oy would be yetttn9 away with havin~ a second fomi ty hane on one lot In this nciyhborhood and that shc dld attr.m~+t at that timc to find ~ut if anythinq could be c:one. She st~ted n~evious construction I~as i:-tcrf~red with the p~op~r drainage p,ittern wt~ich has a dlrect effect an her nroperty; and that Mr. Velt~l has indicated this past week tf~at (f this is not ~ppraved~ additionel constructioR would be done Jaining the twa tiomes which would constitute a single-fnn-ily I~ome. Ms. Myhro stated sl~c would 1 ik~ to sce that additional co~stru~tion d~es nat occur and that tf~e existing structurc is ncver us~d t+s a rcnt~l to family members or otherwise and thr~t if the praperty (s sold that the natu~e of the sccond buitding be chenged or the structure rer~oved entirely. She stated tfie strucure was not butlt to be acsthetlcally in line with ocher homes in the area and obstructs views of other neighbors and changes thc ge ncral atn~snhcre and nature of the stngle•family home neighborhood and could possibly changc the valuG of other homes. She stated the inguiries she made in the p ast did not glve her any clear directions to fallow to oppasc the construction and usc of this struc,turc and sh~ is nleased she now has the Ghance to ask that condittc~r~s be placed on the future use ~nd nature ef this building. She stated she is in cnmpltte~ sympathy wich M~. Veltrll taking te~e of his parents; that the structure is there and xhc cloes not mtnd that it stays the~e for now as 1 ong es tl~ese cond i t i c~ns a ~e p 1~,ced on i t. Charles Malmtstcr, 23~ Franciscc, Piace~ dlrectiy bet~ind the Yeltr~ property~ stated when this constructlon stArted he canplained bitterly to the Bullding Depa~trnent s~d 12/15/80 ~ _' ? MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNINQ COMMISSION~ CECEMBER 15~ 19 ~.- ~'7~5 was told Mr. Veltri hed permits; that the Valtrl tot is approximately 8 feet hiqher ~hAn ~djacent proparty and the sCructure ii 1~ feet hiqh end ht~s no windows so 1t is a tarriblo looking structure overhanginc~ their bocky~rd; thet he ~aid extra for the vlaw and now hAS no view; that oll the requests he hes heard tontqht havo bee~ othe r peopla asking to do things~ but this ~ottttoner has already done th~se thinqs end now is ~skinc~ permission to ledve them end he did not understand haw this heppen~d. Ile stated the housn is located ciase to the prUperty Itnes ~nd Mr. Veltrt ca11s it e canvorted bath house~ but it nove r wes a b~th house. Mr. Veltr) stated he had politely gone ~ver and talked to Mr. Malmister's son; that Mrs. Malmister has a nervous condition and the ctty representatives had asked htm to tall: with them and that he has ncvcr had eny troubi~ wlth his ncighbor~. tle stated ttiis structure wAS planned as a b ath house and no stove or garbege dtsposAl was pl~nned and he wanted to build a nlce structure; that the gentlemen behind them can only see the top of the raof; tt~at he anreed t~ plent whatever the nelghbors wanted and they were h~pry at thet time; that tl~e Itc~ltan Cypr~ss t~ees wll) grow fest and cover the whole slde; thot L~~e nefghbor on the othe~ slde cannot eNen see the house; end that the drainage yoes out the driveway and h~s nothinc~ to do wlth Ms. Mtyhro's property; and th~~t she is talking about his pool which floods when it ratns; that hc told h~r she could have har contractor dic~ un hfs sldc~ buc he Is not going to pay for it boc~usQ (L I~as nothing to da with him; that the pool house Is completely ncstled in thc bac~; and everything was done eccording to plans anc! the only thing he did was mov~ ~~is folks in. Nc stated his parents have a ib-hour nurs~ who stays all day. Ne statcd in the past he cbneted property tn eve ry onc of his neiqhbors all ttie way up to corrcct ~ problen-. Tt1E PUE3LIC NEARI~~f, WAS GLOSED. Chairman Tolar steted the petitloner contractcd co huild r S5~.~~~ bnth house in hTs backyard and asked if Mr. Vel[ri was Aware of ttie zoning ~equirtmencs that only one 1lving unit is permitt~*d on tlia ~ropcrtY. Mr. Velt~t stated he was toid tt~at if he h~d the structure attac~ed to hts house~ there would nc~t bc a problem. Dean Sherer, Asslstant Planner~ stated essentiaily if thc petitt~n~r wanted to attach a rnom to hls hausc, he would not bc allc~red to excecd lot wveragc and other code requirements; that this was originally approved as an accesso~y structure and it met code requirements~ but as soon as the k(tchen w~s install~d~ a varlanct was required to rctatn ft as a dwelitng unit and these wafvers bec~me necessary. Ile stated the bullcSin9 perr~its were for a bath h~use but nav the kitchen unit has been added. Mr. Veltri stated they werc originally told by city representatives th~t blood relatlves could live i~ tha structure, but later informed htm he could not do (t; that he then toAk the inftiativc on hfs own to construGc e bath house without a kitchen a~d the intcntion vr~s not to havc a kitchen and his wife w~a going to bring th~ food co his folks, but they got so bAd they had to havc a full-tin+e nurse and she ts ther~ from Fa:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. and has to do everything for them and that is why thc kitchcn w~s installed. Commissianer Bushore stated the ~srnblem is there end the only thing ta do is work ~ut an amicabie solution to abate rhe problem. Ne asked i'` thare is any way to motle~ that the problem be abeted in two years. 12/15/80 . _ ~ ~ MINUtES~ ANAMEIM CI?Y PLANNING COMMISSION, DECEMBER 15~ 1980 84•76f~ Jack White, Assist~~t CftY Attorney, ~tatsd the situation currently constitutes a zaning vlolatlon which constltutes ++ crime and anyone cAn place an ~ctlon agatnst the petitl~n~r~ Ne ~dded the Commisslan cannat set a two-ye~r period to correct an tllogal usQ of the property~ Ne stated if this we~~ a condittonel u~e permtt~ tt could be granted for a time perl~d~ but a ve~l~nce is fo~ devl~tions of the reyulatla~s thst are goinq to remaln permanent and cannot bo qranted for a llmtted period of time. Chalrman Tolar ssked w-~y this is a rcquest for a veriance rather than a condltlona) us~ permit and Dean Sherer explolned staff felt A vs~tence was logical becduse of the waivers required; and in the past chet a simtlar request fo~ a duplex on Thorntan Avanuc wes advcrtised as a conditional use permtt~ but the Commi~slon wented it advertiscd as a varlance and based on that fact and the fact this 1s ~ land related type usa. it was declded a verlance would be approprlate. Responding to Chairman Tolar's questlon as to hc~w n structure was allowed with a 3' foot setback, Doan Shorer explained the plans were originAlly appraved as a detached accessory butlding and the setback requirements are different. Jock White explatned the deterr.~ination whether to edvertise a variance or conditional use permtt is not a mattcr of staEf discretlon; thet thcrQ arc legal guideltnes to follow; that tf the request (s ~or a use not authorixed In the zone, then a cond(tional use permit Is necessary~ t~ut thts is a restdsnti+~l use in a residenttal zo~e and is perrnitted; encl that thts re~uest pertains to the number of resiclenttal units on tl~e property. Commtssioner Bushore questioned the comroents t!iat these structures could be ,Jalned without any p~oblrm. Mr. Velt~l stated hG was told by city staff that he could have added an nddltion to his residence wtthout any probier~. Ne stated he would not ~ent this st~ucture and it is for his parents And not his ct,ilelren. Chairman Tolar stated he has a lot of emr~thy and c~rcern for what Mr. Vcltri is trying to cio with his parents, but was concerned that realistically this would be enather strutture permitted by approvai of tt~e variance wh(ch would be an Ideal second residence on the ~roperty for his children or anyone else. tle stated he uncierstands the hardstiip and would support it far a given period of time~ but the varia~ce process does not perrnit time ltmits. Cammissloner Bushore stat~d the onty alternative he sees is deniai oP :hc request and allowing a re~sonabte plan to abate the problem. Commissianer Bouas asked if the kitchc~n can be removed or if the nurse can use the Veltri's kitche~. She also asked who stays with the parents at night. Mr. Veltri replied his residence is S~ feet from the second structufe; that khe nurse is there f~om E:00 a.n. to 7:3o p.m.; and that there is an emergency bell which his father can use if they need anything at night. Commissianer Qushore asked why the declslon was made to call this a bath house since it was placed so far away from the poot and stated the ideal locatlon for a bath hous~ probebly wauld have been north of the existtng slab. 12/15/~ ( I ~! ~ MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITV PLANNING COMMISSION~ OECEMBER 15~ 1980 8A•787 Mr. Veltrl replt~d this wat the bs~t lvc~tlon on the prope~ty becausc it cannot be see~. Commissianer K1ng steted Mo opponents say it can be se~n. Chairman Tolar stated ~he structu~e ia alroady located where it is and the problam has to be de~it with; th~t Jack Whtte t~as suggestad iF the Commtsslon wishes to Arant this requea~t. that stipulatlons be made by the petitioner thot the strueture only be uaod as ~n accessary guest house for a maxtn+um of two yeArs with no rent~al or sale of the sec~nd unit~ or lot spiit~ and that tt be rcvtewed in two years; that this is really the "milk of human kindness" and the kitchen r+ust be removeci at the end of the two years. lie statad he has a problem esking som~one to remov~: a SS~,Q~O structu~e encl alsa he has a problom deating with th~ reason for the construction of this strucCuro and understands; but that it does not neclete the fact that in this city there are probabiy thousands ~f structures which c~uld be used in the same ma~ne~ and the reasoning ln thfs sttuntion does not valtdate bullding A second structure on a single-family lot. He stated the use docs affect the nelghborhood in an adverac way and is a vtolation o` the tr~tent of thQ cude, He stated~ hawevcr~ he would support lt for two yer+rs, assuming ~11 the other conditlons and stlputatlans mentloned a~e mnt. Mr. Veltri stated hc would yo along wlth the condttions and stlpulatlons, but asked whot he would do et the cnd of two years if hc sttll needs this structure for hts parents. Chairman Tolar replled hc u~uld request a~ extenslon. He steted if cveryane works tagather~ they can keep this~ an extremely nice ncighbo~hood~ brt if something lika this causes an 111 effect on thc neighbors. the structure should not be there, regardiess of the reasons. Mr. Veltri stated la netghbc~rs offered to come and soeak (n favor, but he did nat thlnk it Nould be necessory~ Commissioner Fry asked abou~ the orainege p~oblem. Hr. Veltrt rrplied tha drainsge comes from above and out his drivaNey and tt has not chang~d. Commissio~er ~ry asked Ms. Myhro to explatn the drainage n~oblem. Ns. Myhro atated her property ~s 5 fcet lowCr than Mr. Veltri's and with thc sidewaik~ patio~ bath house, pool, decking. ter.nis court~ shuffleboard~ etc.~ there is no place for the rain to go and that sl~c had tt~e drainage problem uefore the secand structure was buiit and (t is Just increasing. Chalrman 'toi~r asked if there is anythtng Mr. Velir! can do to ~Iteviate the drainaga problem~ such as instal 1 ing dratns~ etc. Mr. Velirl stateJ the new st~ucture hed nothing to do wlth Ms. Myhro's prablem and the problem is the paol since her property is lawer and the wall was not watarpraafed~ so wster does ga onto her property when the pool overflows. Ms. Nyhro stated she shauld not have water in her yard bacause Mr. Veltri's pool overflows and they have tried to weter proof th~ir side of th~ wall to prevent seepege. 12/15/$0 ~ ; MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNINC COMMISSION~ O~CEMBER 15~ 1980 80-788 Nr. Valtri statod hc h~s info~rt~d Ms. Myhro th~t ~t,e could hir~ a centractor and he wtil allow them to dig up his side and waterproof the wall and hr thought thet wouid allevleto th~ problem. Cha~lrman Tolar statcd he ts suggesting stncc Ms. Myhro understands tho s(tusti~n, and is w111tng to acc~pt It and wants ce~teln time limit end oondttions, which have been egreocl to~ that e trade-aff might be to ~e~elvc tha w~ter problem. Commlss{oner Fry agreed and stated Mr. Veltrl W.nc~-s tt-ere ts a+ prablem now end it Is up ta htm to carrect it. Mr. Veltri stated he wi11 do his best tn t+~1:e care of the dreinaqe prc~blem. Commisst~ner Bushore asked Ma. Myhro if thQre (s ~ parking probl~m on th~t :traet~ polnttng out iie hAJ notlced a IAt of ca~s whe~ he was therc. Ms. Myhro ex~lalned there Is adQquatc room on Mr. Veltri's~ pro~crty f~r ail his vehicles. Mr. Veltrl stAted they ha~ve four vehlcles end hAVC 25Q fect far parkfng but no one excopt the nursc parks on the st~cet. Cortmissianer Fry ctarifled he does want the petitloner to try t~ take care of the drainage problem, but wants it takcn c~rc of end did not feel Mr. Veltrt has a cholce. Mr. Veltri stated he would bring th~ waterpraofing of the wall ~bove the ground lcvel because It couid be cav~red by l~ndscapinq~ but he cannot stop the problem of raln water runoff. Commissioner Bushore stated he knaws of one r.ase wherP two ncighbors had a dratnage problem and could not comc to an agr~eement a~d the casa endrd up (n court and the neighbor obave was found Ilablc. ~ie pointed out the petitioner (s asktrg his ~aighbor to tolerate thc water problem and the prnblem of the second strutture and it does nat appear he is Lrying to work wtth his n~ighbors. Mr. Melmi~ter stated he has no obJection to Mr. Veltri kee~+ing his parents, but was cancerned what wouid happen if the property is sold. Chairman Tolar explained if the propcrty is sold~ the second structure cennot be used as a residcnce ~nd it cannot be sold or rented a~d the 4:Itchen has to be rert~ved and the use would be revlewcd in two years. Jacic White clarified thr variante would not be granted for a tNa-year period. but that the ~,itchen would havt to be rertavr.d in two years. Ne scaCed the petitioner should exetute a covenant ta be rec~rded on the prop~erty to the effect that in the event af sal~ any purchaser would have constructivG notlce thet the second structure is not a sep~rate dwPlling untt. Cortmisslaner King suggested a time limit to correct tt~e drainage problem and Jack 4ThiCe suggested a condition to that effect. M~. Veitri sCated iie wil! pay fc~r a cantr+~ctor tn taG:e cere of the dratnage problem. AC710N: Chairmen Tolar offered a motion, seconded by Canmissloner Kirtg ar-cl MATIQN CARRIEO (Commissiane~ Herbst bei~g nbse~t~~ that the Anahetm Clty Planntng Comrt+~ssion i has reviaved the praposal to retaln tao dwelling units on an R5•72A~1 (Residential, ~: Sinqle-Famtly ) Zoned lot with waivers of permitted prtrt-s ryr uses. minimum floor area, ; , ti r i t2/15/80 ;.,: _ .~ ~ ; ~ NINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIQt~~ DECEMBER 1S~ 198A 80-789 minimum rear yard setback, maximum fence height, mi~imum number of perktng s~eces on an ir~egularly-sh~ped of land consistin~ of approximately ~.;5 acre~ havinq a frantage of ~~~proxlmetely z~~9 f~ct on the northwostarly slde of I~Illcrest Street~ having a maxlmum depth nf spproximetely 151 feet and being I,~cated a~p~oximately 190 feet west af the centerline ~f L~ Paz Street and further described as 227 t1111crest Straet; and daes hereby approve th~ Negative Deciaration from thc requirement to prepare an environmont~l Impact rcpc~rt on the basis t-~at there wauld bc ~o significan~ Indivldual or cumulntive ndvcrse envfronrnent~l Im~~ct due to the epproval of this Negative Declarattc~n since the Anehelm Gencrel Plan desiqn~tes thc sub,~ect property far hillside low-dcnsity residenttel I~nd uses cor+mensurate with the proposal; that no sansttivic e~vironmental Impacts ere lnvolved in tl~~ proposal; thot the I~itlal Study submitted by tt~e petitianer indlcates no si~ntficant lndlvldudl or cumulatlve advarse e~~v) ronn+ental Impacts; and tl~t~t the Neelative Declaratton substAnttottnn thc f~regotng ftndings is on flie In the City of Anahelm Plenning Departr.~ent. Chairman Toler offered Resolutton I~o. PC80-242 .~nd movcd for tts passege rnd adoptlo~ that the Anai-etm City Planntng Conmtsslon do~s hereby grant Varl~nce No. 3183~ subJect to the petitloner's stipuldt(on thAi the soc~nd structu~e shall only be used aa an accessory guest house; that there shall be no sale or rentel of the second unit; that thc kltchen shall bc removed and thc structurc conve~t~d to a bAth house at tho cnd of two years or upon sale of tf~e propcrty whithev~r comes first; and that the property awner shall execute t~ cov~nant to be recorded ~n the tttle so that it will ylve constructive nottce to Any purchaser that this is not separate living quarters; that mltlgatton measures st~all be tal;en tc~ s~lve the dr~tnag~ problems cAUSed by the ~oal, etc, wtth~In sixty (GO) days, and sub)ect to Interdepartmental Commlttee reccrtnxsndettons. On roli call~ tha foregoing resclution was pnssed by the fallowinq vote: AYES: COMMISSIONER5: DARNES, BOUAS, BUSHORE, fRY~ KING~ TQLAR NOES: COMMISSIOt~ERS: NONE ABSCNT: COMMISSIOtiERS; NERE35T J~ck 4lhitc, Assistant City Attorney~ pres~ntcd the wrltten rlght to appeal the Planniny CoRrntssion's dccision within 22 days to the City Cou~cil. Cammtsstoner Bushore stat~cl he wauld like staff to revlew the definltlon of bath housc. lie felt a structure this targe !s more than a bath house~ and maybe the stze should be itmited. 12/i5/8A MINUTE5~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ DECEnsER 15, 1980 80-7q0 ITEM N0. las EIR NECAt1VE ~ECIARATI~N AND VARIANCE N0. 318~~: ------- - - PUaLIC HEARINC. OWNER: RAFAEL ~NO ESTNER fERHAN0E7~ 1S3W Camdan Place~ Fullerton, CA 92G33. Prope~ty descrtbed as ~ r~,Gtengularly-shapcd parcel of lend tonatsting of approxtmataly ~73l~ sc~uare f~at~ loc.~tcd at 911 North Sabtna Stre~t. P~ope~ty presently clossifiod RM-Za~O (RESIDEyTiAI~ MULTIPLE-FAHILY) ZO~IE. VARIIINCE REQUEST: 41AIVERS OF: (a) MINIMUM BUILDINf, SITE AREl1 (b) MINIMUM FLOOR AR~~, (c) MININUN aEAR YARQ AND (d) MI~~IMUM NUMiIER OF PARKItI.r, SPACES To CONSTRUCT A DETACIIED SI~IGt,E-F/U11LY OWELLi11G. There was no one i nc~ i c.it i ng the i r pr~sencc i n o~~+os i t i on to subJ ect request ~ and alCl~ouah the staff report wAS not reaJ~ it Is referred to and made a port of the minutos. Refae) Fernandez~ owner~ was pres~nt to answer any questluns. THC PuaLIC NEARINr, WAS CIOSED. Commissioner Bushore asked if thcrc Is a cc~~dltian rcquiring that the extsttng restdence be braught up to code requirements. Dean Sherer~ Assistant Planner, rep) i ed that that ts not a recc~+imenciecl cond i t ton ~ but can be added. Commi ss toner Bushore stated thAt is the only way he cuuld vote for approval of two sepsrate untts on tliAt lot. lie stated he was concerned and felt mure pnrl:tng should be provided because there Is already a p~rkinn ~roblem on that strcet and this will ~dd to tt. M~. Fern~nde: statcd the er.lsting garage will be remc~ved and he did not think there witl be t~ny parking probtems be~cause there will be a 12' x 5~' driveway with a two- car garage. plus the space in frant af the c~arage. He steted the parking p~~blem ts not caused by hls property. ~1r. Fern~~ndez ~esponded to Gommissloner Bushore that there will not bs any plumbt~g i n t~~e garage. Commissioner Bouas referred to the minimum rear yard setback and the requirement to dedicate 10 feet from the center of th~ alley. Dean Sherer expiained that will not present a probtem because it is an existinc~ setback and he thought that alley has been i~rovcd. Mr. Fernandez stat~d the existing structur~ is 54 years old and he was concerned about brinying It up to code standards. Commissloner Bushore stateJ he had looked at the h~use and tt is substandard and that is thc only wa~ he wil) suppc-rt the request. Mr. Fernandex steted he is not requesting a~ything for the rear house and is mostly concer~ad with building a front house; that he and the person who drew the ptans misinterpreted the r.oning and thought all that was needed was 700 square feet and provided 850 square feet and later found that 12QA squ~rc feet is required. Ron Thompson, Planning Director, statnd the rcar house would be brought up to the Hausing Code and not the 8uildinq Code~ whtch would make it safe. 12/15/80 ~ , . ~ MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ DECEMBER 1S, 1980 ~•791 ACTION: Commis~loner King offerad ~ motton~ seconded by Commissloner Fry and MOTION R Ep (Gommissioner liarbst betng absent)~ that the An~helm City Planning Ccmmtsaton haa ~evlewed the proposal to eonstruct n detached stngle-tnmtly dwellinq wtth wt~ivers of mintmum building site area, mintmum floor ~~ea~ mintmum reHr yard and mintmum n~imber of pn~king spaces on a rectengularly-shapcd pa~cel of I~nd consisting of approxtmat~ly 5~73G squarc feot~ heving a nx+ximum depth of approxlmately 115 feet a~d baln~ icaceted apnroximately 1~-0 feet south of the centeri Inc of l.e Palmr~ Avenue (~11 Nartt~ Sebina); and does t~ereby approve the Negative Declaratton from the requlreme~t to p~epare an environmentel Impact rcport on thc basls thAt there would he no significant Individual or cumulntive aciverse envlronmental tmp~ct dur to the approval of thls Negat(ve Declaration since tl~e An~helm Genern) Plon d~signAtes the sub_ject propcrty for med i ur~~ dens i ty i and uses commensurnte wl tt~ thc proposAl ; that no sensitlvic environmentt~l impacts are involved In the prorasal; that the Initia) Study submttted ~y tlie ~etitloner indlcatcs ~o si~~nificant Ind(vldual or cumuletive rdverse environmental tmpacts; and thbt the Negative Declaratton substanttating the foregotng findings ts on file in thc City of Anahetm Plannin9 Uepartment. Commisslcmer King offereJ Resolutlon No. PC80-2G3 and rn~ved for its passage and edoptlo~ thr+t tt,c Anahcim C(ty Plannln~ Commission does hereby yrant Varlance No. 31~31~ on ttir. basis that denial would cieprive subJect property of privlleges e~Joyed by otlier property owners In the Same zc~nc: and vicinity anel subJect to the existing reer structure beiny brou9ht up C~ the Housing Code~ aryd subJect to Interdepartmenta) Commi ttee recor-xnendations. On roll c~~ll, the foregoing resolution w~s p~~ssed by thc following votc: AYES; COMMISSIC,~~eP,S: DARNES, NOCS: COMMISSIONERS: TIONC AdSENT: COMMISSIOtIt:RS: NERE~ST I TEM N0. 1 REPO t~D REC011MC~i~ATI0P~5 BOUAS~ auSr~ORE, FRY~ KINr,~ TOLA°, The following Ret~orts and Recommendations staff reports werc presented but not read: A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 12~3G - Request for terminatian from Mlchael G, Mack~ Orange Caunty rans t D strict for property at 17l7 East Via Burton Street. ACTION: Commissioner King affered Resolution No. PC$0-244 and moved for its pa- ss~ge and adopti~n that the Anaheim City Plannfng Comnission does hereby terminate all proceedings i~ connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 12~6. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMI SS I ONERS : BARNES ~ BOUAS, BUSHO~tE ~ FRY ~ KI NG ~ TOLAR NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: HERBST 6. CONDITlONAL USE PE_RMI_T N0. 1359 - Request for extensian of time from leo r~ eedman~ owner o~ Hyatt ouse Notel~ for property at 1700 South Harbor 6oulzvard (Nyatt Hous~ Notel). ACTION: Comn(ssioner King offered a motion~ seconded by Coromissioner fry ana'F~T~`TION CARRIED (Cammissio~er Herbst being absent)~ that the AneheTm City Planning Commission does hercby grant ~equest for extension of time to Conditional Use PermtC No. 1359 to expire o~ December 27~ 1981. 12/15/~ t ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ OECEMQER 15, 1900 8b-792 17~M N0. 20s EIR CATkGORiGAI EXEMPTIOt~-CI.ASS 1 WAIVER Of CQDE RE~UIREME_T1 ~iDj'~bf~C US . , ~ • t PUBLIC HEARING. OHNER: ZLAK~t~ JENSEN AN~ QUIS1', 2081 Business Center Drive~ Suite 1y4~ Irvine~ CA 9271;. AGENT; ROaERT 0. MiCKELSpN, 1~~+ South Gla:sell Strect~ Orange~ CA 92GG6. Prope:rty described es u rectanguta~l~•shap~d pArcnl of land consisting of approximately 2.'-4 acros loceted at the so~~thwest corner of Cypress Street and EASi Street, 201 North East Street. Pro~e~ty I.~estntly classified RM-1204 (RES I UENTI AL~ MUI.TI Pl.E-FAMI l.Y) ZQNE. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RCQI~EST; TO PERMIT A ONE-L~T, (~3-Ur11T , 257 AFFOROABI.E CONUOMINIUM CONVCRSION WITN WAiVCRS OF; (a) MINIMUM LOT AREA PCR OWELLINC, UNIT~ (b) MAXIMUM SITE COVEaAGE~ (c) MINIMUM FLOOR ARE~, (d) MINiMUM LANDSCIIPED SETBACK, (~) -tINIMUM RECRE~TIONAL-LEISURE AREA~ (f) PERMITTED ORIENTn,TIUN 0~' sUILDINGS IW D(gl NINIMUII NUMk;ER A-t0 TYPC OF PARM,INR SPAGES. There were approximatcly ten persans indicAting their presence in oppositian to subJect request~ and ~lthou~h the staff ret~ort was n~t raacl, it Is referrad to end made a part of tl~e minuces. Bob M) cl:e) san ~ acicnt ~ stateef they h~ave worked wi th thc ~~^~~~~ i n~ Derartment and have agreed to seil 2!;:; of thc unlt5 in tl~e afforciAblc range a~d ferl the~e untts wlll appeal to th~ first time buycr, hnpcfully~ Co rt~+ny of tl~e current tenants. E~e expla(ned they hac' two mcetings with the tennnts in an atteMpt to inform them of the proposal and liad reiatively sMall attendance at boti~~ and only those opposed to the proJect were at tiie second me~ting. Mr. MicKelson ex~+lained thts is a new praJect Just recently fully rcnted and the reaso~~ for tt~is request ~s ecanomics because the owner is stlll und~r ti~t• constructlon loan process rnd tl~e interest rates have rtsen drastically and the proJect is ~unning in a serious neg~tlve co~h flow. Ne stated since this is a new ~ro)ect~ nonc of tl~e tenants have est~blished a long- tern+ resl~tency tlir.re; and that. they have subm(Lted n prop~isal to assist the tenants to c:ither buy or ~elocate. Ne referred to tl~e Conrnu~ i ty Ibus I ng ~cport ~peg~c 2f1 i of the s taf f repo~t) recorm~ending tf~at eight units rPmain as rPntal units for one ye~r~ four units ~t ~3~3~700~ 6 uhits at 547,10~ and (~ units at S5~+,7~0. Ne stated b~cause the~e are new units and because of the current ecnnor~ic ptcture~ they do no~ fe~) they can Gnm~ly with staff's recommendation~ but would retain 12 units Eor ~entals for one year and provi~l~ 10 one-bed~oam units at SW7~ »~. Patricia Clancy~ stated s-~e owns and lives at the apartment complex at 3~1 North Bush; that she basicaliy has no obJecti~ns to condominlums, but feit sure this was the awner's intention when the units were oriyinally co~structed; thot if ~onuiaminiums haci been ~rtginal{y proposed~ this many units would not have been allvwed; that single-family residents directly tp the west ob,jectcd to these apartments and wented condominiums because there is quite a difference with "pride of ownership". She s:ated there have been raeny problems wtth this proJect. She referred to tfie recenely approved apartrnent pr~Ject at East and la Palma a~d stated she feels stronc~ty ~hat if tl~is project is approved for condominiums~ there wiil be other similar requests. She stated she does not like the wry these developers are pulliny th~ wooi ove~• the eycs of Anaheim. 12/t5/~ ~. : MiNUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ DfCEMaER 15, 198Q 80-793 Mary Ellen Ma~olf~ 21~ Narth Rosa~ stated thesc apartn-ents are right in he~ bsck ya~d and are still ceusing dratnagc probleme. She stated she fett If these unlts are cc~nvc~rte~d to condominiums, thnre NI11 be prhblems wtth the number of people llvtng in thc units; tl~ac cu~rently it is cantrolled by mnn~+~ement. She rr,ferred to ep~rtments on Cypress where two or tl~ree fI1Rf~) IeS i lve in one unit and v+~s concerned the seme thinq wtll hap~-cn here. She statcd she aisc+ Pelt this was the awner's o~iginel (ntont ond that is really wh~t si~c :.bJects tc?. Pat Clanccy rcFarred ta tti~ PAC cortmittce's recervncndatlon that thls requcst be denied anJ it was n~ted tf~e Canmisslon did re!celve thAt fnformAtton. Inez Shellc~ 2on r~orci~ Rose~ st~tod ti~ey I~~ve notse~~ distu~bence, gnrbage and trash ov~r tl~e fence now and she was cnncern;d t1~at converting these units Co condominiums wi ll r~el:e tl~e situation worsc. Len~le Green, tcnnnt in l1p~~rtrnent 1~~, stated he ~attendPd both tenent meetings; that g0 Jays aFtcr f«11 accu~aney nottcc w~s given of Chis plan t~ convc~t; that Inf~rm~7tian of thc rnr~#~a inc~nx ~f the tenents in ch{s cc~mplex was presented at the meetlnr~ ~nc1 he wAS co~cerned tl~et tfie dPVelopc:~ hecf this personal~ confidentl~l information, lie stated as nffordable un{ts ot SS~~~~'1~~ with~ a~t1-year note far S~0~00~ at a Cun~.erv~~t~vc• interc5t r~tc of 15$~ tt~r. prlnc.ip.71 rnd Inter~st payment alone woul~l be $G32.~~ p~r r+~anth~ ~+lu~ t~~xes. insurnnc~ and r+~intr.nnnee assoeintlon fees. 11e stntca lie is xorry t-~c nwner of t~~e c.on~lex does nnt feel it is in his best intcrest to ~.cc~ thcse units at this ttmc~ U~,t dtJ nc~t thin~. A rcc~uest t~ canvert 9~ deys after full nccupancy should be ~allaweA and fclt if there ts na ardinance prohibiting it, onc shoul~i t>e oclopt~d, Mr. Green referred to [I~e prorosed rrlocation fre af twn ~onth's rent and statecl tt Is not aclequat~ fc~r rcloc~~+tic~n; conalc)r_rinq first and last month's rent. sccurity d~rosits~ utllitir.s, etc. t+~ot they will be ~ivrn t-~e first righc of ;~efusel for units rru~nage~ by Satclitt.e Manage.r~r.~t Conmany and they on~y ha~~e 1~7 units in Anaheim~ wi[h a long waltlnq list fnr o~r-bedre+or~ units and ane avallable two-bedroom uni t at tl~e prescnt ttrnc. Mr. Graen stated it scems unusual that the c~wner wants to convcrt these units due ta cconomics. yct has indicatcd a willing~ess to carry a second trust deed for the tenants. Mr. Grcen presented slgnatures af otherS who could not be presr.nt and obJect to thts cdnverslo~. Mr. 111ckelson referred to comr-~nts of the op~sition that they dicf not ltke the w~y this is bcing handied and explained hc has discusscd thts witli the owner and they intended to buiid an aparcment project and malntr~ln it as nn (ncome source, but economic thAnyes have happened quicl~ly recently. Ne stated he felt the term "condominiu~' is a form of ownershln and not design and iP thts proJact had been developed to Che condominium standerds~ the units would sell for y1S0~On0 to $200.OA0 i nsteed of thc propascd $75 ~OQO to S~4,OQf1. Mr. Mickelson stat~d the, dr~7inaye is a problem and it has been discussed wtth Engineering and te was t~ieir recommendation that the nuisance water be pun+Qecf to East Street and that salution Is acceptable to them. He expleined Chere is a sump and storm water is pumped out and is ciea~ water~ but the problem is during the dry 12/1S/80 ^ ~.~. MINUTES~ ANANEIM CIIY PIANNING COMMISSION~ DECEMOEit 15~ 1980 80'79W seaaa~s ~vF~en landsceptny is sprinkled~ atc. ~nd silt Is pumpe:d into the gutte~ e~d settle~. ~!a stated thGy will change thac situatton by putting ~+ lerqer pipe ever to Edst Stroct. Mr. Mtc~:eison steted h~ belleved Individurl ownership of cnnAc,miniums wtth e hamaowner's esaociation is a better situatton beceuse t1~e rasidents are permanent snd the turn-over rete Is much lowcr. Fie stated they heve essured the Housin~ Dapartment thet no one would h~vr. to relo~ate until August 1961 bacausc it Is im~osstble to prnccss the ~roJect eny faster and they enttcipAte it will teF:e longer. T11E PUI3LIC HEAR1~~~ WAS CLOSED. Commtssioner dushore refcrred to prcvtously-approvGd Affo~dable heusing units and polnted out thls request is far a density bonus af 11~+~~ and only ?.r~3, of the units ere oFfr:red as affnrd~~bi~ units and in other situatlons as much as 1~t12 of the units was oP f er~~! as af ford.~b 1 e and I n~anr s I t unt i ons , thc un 1 ts arc new and not converslons. Mr. ~ltckels~n explained tt~e ~5~ figure wAS tt~c guidclines cltwen h(m by the Nousing Qe{~artmeni and a~reed that tl~esy ar~ only offerin~ wt~at is Absolutely nccessary. 11e stated they are in a ftnancial situation of rwt being able to offcr more units ~s eff~rddblc. Commisstoner B~shore stated hc ~ioes not llke conversi~ns, but would rather sse a newer building converte.i. fie clarlfled il~at the mar~ket prEce for this proJect as an apartn~ent is ap~+roxin~ately $3-~~~~nno a~d SLAL~ci I1C falt the entire proJect could be offere~ as affordable units. and a ccrtaln ;~ercentage at the L0~ or betc~w of inedtan incorn~s and th~ owner could make thc necessary profit. Jack Wh~te, Assistant City Attc,rney~ explained provisihns of CovernmentCt3de Section 65915 pertaining to density bonuses f~r affo~dAble hnusinc~ is n~t ap~llcable to conve rs i ons ~ and app 1 i es to ncti+ -ious i ng ; ha~reve r~ tt~e Comm 1 s: i on may f f nJ tha t a certatn amount of low or mc,derate incon~e ls nece~sary but still must make the findings for approval of these waivers unc.~er existing zoninc~ codes. Chairn~an Tolar statcd these are the same owners who develflpcd the property as ~n apartment cortiplex; that the current candominiuin ordinance is outd~ted and it is possible morc than 15 u~its would have bcen p~ermitted if it had been developed as a canck,minium con~plex. Ne stated hs did not be:lieve the owners had built 63 units without having dnne a marketing survey (n that area and thought they receg~ized then what their cash flcwv wouid be and the apartmcnc complex was their determ{natto~. Ne stated the Planninc~ Commissfon is gotng to have to ccxne to grtps with the p~oblam of creatinet afforJable housing; that approva) of these canversions for affordable hausiny is e{iminattng rental units; that the Cornnisston has been pretty liberal in their attitude toward condominium canve~sions~ but ayreecl that the new apartment p~o,Ject on La Palma wlll be the next converston request and stated he dld not think the owners could iive with making the proJect 100~ affordable. Commissioner Tolar stat~d he would take a hard look at any futurc conversions in this city~ end does not a~ree that new rental untts shoutd be c~nverted and felt the older structures built under Rreviou^ co~~s could be braught up to existing codes 4~y 12/15/80 i ` MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY rLANNINC COMMISSION~ QECEM9~R 15~ 1~80 8~1~795 canversinn He stated he could nat su{~port i condominium conversi~n on thls praperty and doos not think it would be tn the beat interust ~f the city. Ne feit rentsl untts will make a corneback. He stated rueii~tic~lly he cannc+t support an~thcr condominium convRnton under thr guise c.' affo~dnhle housing end felt this city hes done tts fatr shere tciwards creAting affo~dable houstng as mandated by th~ state and felt convarting e good rental project (s far and ebove whet tt requlred. Chotrn~an Tolar com~lirn~nted Mr, Mic~clson and stated he felt he had done a ntce Job by talking to the t~nants~ etc. Ne stated. f~owcver, he cauld n~t support the pr~Jcct, even If It werr. 10~? aff~rJt~bin. Lomr~isstoner Fry .~greed with Chafrmen Totar. tie statad he Iikes t~ kQep government anJ bur~ ucrac:y out of privat~~ enterprise~ but thnre are tlme~ such as thts when furtt~cr review st~~ula be ylven because he cAn foresec trouble wtth Jevelopers buil~inr; apartments and subseyuently within 9~ c~flYS requestinq conversion. Ile asked staff ta lorak intn thc edvisabllity ur feasibility of a regul~ition to ~rohibit the c~nverslon ~f new unirs for 1 ye~r after Notiee a( Com~letian is filed, or something simllar. ~ir. Mickclson respanc~d to Cormtssinner dA~nc4 thAc with the prime interest r~te ~+t 2'1~~ it 1s almost 1rt~ussible to 9et a tAke aut lonn; anJ th.~t thc owner currently h~s a construction loari wlth a flaattng Interest rate ~t 3-1/2a n-~ove {~rlme. He stated that was onty niven as a rc:-sun os Lo why th~ oamr.r Is rsquesting a converslon. Mr. Mickelsnn stated mast builclers of apartments nre ex~cting e short-term negative cash flow anct are looktng for inflation or low interest lonns to bail them ou~. lie stateci he sh~res the cancern that rrntal sLoc4: is being ~educed~ but after consulti~g on over ?~0~~ proJccts in th~: last twa yer+rs. hes fnund ~Oo of the buyers come from apartn~ent 1 iving; anc! that many pcopte arc only Iivin~ tn r+partments unti 1 they can afforcl to buy thcir own unil. Mr. Mlckelson s[atc~d they are wi ~ l ing to w~rE: wlth staff to try and provTde more affardablr. units. Commisstoner Darnes felt thc:se units couid be canvcrted very ea;ily to make good living untts; bu~ that sl~e is concerned about elirninotin~ apartments. She felt some cr i teri a l s needed to s tart denyi ng these requests . She stated she 1 s concerned about ~roviding more affordable untts. but was also concerned that somet tng may ha~~pen and these unl ts wi 11 "~o d~rnhi t 1." Chairman Tolar stated he felt tiic units wili ~otbe neglected and will be maintained to protect 'he avners investmrnt and he fel t this p~oJect is far ~emoved fron a-,y rr~ i ~~ e 1 se tt~at has been ~pproved. He stated he is not oppnsed to ylving the petjtloner additionai timc to try and provide more ~ffordabie units, but that he ~rould not sunnort this condominium conversion even if it is 100$ affordable. He felt these conversions under the guise of "affordable housing" havc to stop somewhere and poinced out in arder for a purchascr ta qua) ify for on~ of tt~ese $4~+,~40 units, he wrouid have to earn in excess of $2~~n0U. Ne stated a lot of people need rental units who cannot afford those kind of payments. 12/15/80 ~~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CiTY PLANNING CONMISSION~ DECEMBEa 15~ 19$0 80-79b Commitsloner Barnes atated the Ctty of Orenge aska dev~lopcrs to •ubmtt lists of avetlsble resntal un~ts and felt thst would be helpful ~n the t~nents who live In these untts would knvw where they cAn relocete. M~. Mtckelsan stntad he would be ht~p~+y to submlt this type Informatton~ Commissioner Bushore st~t~d ona month ego the Conxniss ian henrcf e renuest for a 12- ye~r o1J apartmont c~nvr.rsion on Le Palma and he had volced the seme concerns on that projoct that Chnirmen Toler and Commi~stoner Fry hnve volced on this ~ro)act; that he d I d not wan t a pA 1 nt-up ~ f i x- up condom) n t um conve rs t on and wan ted to see n q tui 1 I ty eo~vorsion, but went along wtth thet for affordable housing; d~d that he loaks At this as beinc~ a good converttbla proJcct b~c~use It fs new. He falt Lhe pr~~Ject can be 1A0$ affordabl~e ~ncf would ylve the Commissfon the tool to prevont thls In the futurc and tf they ar~ 1~~1; effordable~ the g~nora) publ ic wi) l berreftt. He sceted tie felt a conttnuance to January 2G~ 1981, woulcl be only falr to allow the dcsvel~per an op~rtun(ty to revise th~ nlans~ ~le encourAg~d Mr~ Mickelson ta work furtt~er wtth Housing and try to providc 10~~ affordrbt t ity end to ~rovlde sort+~ unlts below the H(l;; medtan. Mr. Green eskeci thet the c~ntinuance be lon~~cr in orcler th~t Mr. Mlckelson ean e~ntinuc to notify the tenonts nf the ~lans. Conxnlssioner Qernc~s expiained no ncw notices wi 1 I be sent out Ca tenants end askad tl-ose prescnt to n~tl fy other tenants. Comm(sstoner E3ushcire su~gesttd cene~ts cal 1 the Planning Dep~rtnent on the day af the hearinc~ to make sure the develaper has not roquo5ted anntl~er co~tlnuarsce. Mr~ Mick~lson asked that the mattcr be continued unti i February q~ 1q81 because he plans to be out of town on January 2Gth. ACT10t~: Conr~lssioner 6ushore offered a m~tion~ seconded by Commtssioner B~rnes and MOTION CAaRIf.D (CommlSS(oner Nerhst being absent) ~ that eonsicierat(c~n of Condltlona) Use Ne ~mi t Ilo. 21 ~~~ and 7entat 1 vc Map of Tr~ct Na. 1 1 313 be cont I nued to the ~egulnrly-scl~eduled meeting of F~bruary ~t~ 19~1 at the request cf the petitioner~ AUJOURNMfNT Thare being no further busine~s~ Coramiss ion~r King affered a m~tlon~ seconcled by Comnissioner 8arnes and MOTION CARRIED (Commissiener i~erbst being absent), that the Planning Commiss ten does hereby cancel its regularly-scheduled rtweting oP December 29~ 19R~, and adJaurn this meeCing to the next regulariy-schcdulyd meeting of January 12, 1~81~ The mceting was adJourned at 9:20 p.m. Respectfully s~mttted~ ~~ ~ . Edi th L. Har~is , Secretary Anaheim City Planning Cortmission E~H:Im 12/15/80 ~ ..~