Minutes-PC 1981/07/27Civic Center
Mah~im~ Celifornls
July 27~ 1981
aCG~ ULAa_ MEETING OF TNE ANAHEIM GiTY PLANNINC COMMISSION
REGULAR - The regular meeting of the Anaheim Clty Planning Commlsslon
MEETING was called to orde~ by Chat~ma~ Bushore et 1:34 p.m.,
Juty 27, 1981~ in the Counc~l Chamber. a quc~rum befng present.
PRESCNT - Chat~man ~ushore
Commiasionnrs: Bp.•nas~ Bouas~ Fry~ Nerbst~ King~ Tolar
ABSENT - Cammisstoner: None
ALSO PRESENT - Annika Santalehti Assistant Dtrector for Zontng
Jack Idhite Assistant ~Ity Attorney
Jay Titus Offlce Engtnaer
Dean Sherer Assistart Planner
Edl~h Fl~rris Pla~ning Commission Secretary
PLf.OGE OF ALLEGIAMCE TO TNE FLAG LED k3Y - Conmissloner 7alar.
.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Cunmisstoner King offered a motton, seconded by Commlssfoner
uos an M I RalEO (Commissione~ T~lar abstaining)~ that the minutes of the
meettng ot July 13, 1~81~ be approved as submitted.
ITEM N0. 1: EIR CATEGORICAL ~XEMPTION-CLASS 8 ANO CONDITIONAL U5E PERMIT NG.
CONTiNUED PUBLIC IIEARING. PFTITIONER: CITf OF ANANEIIi. Und~~ authortty of Code
Seetion 18.03.09~~ the City proposed to revoka Condttlo~al Uae Permit Mo. 1535 for
failu~e to cc~mply with the conditlons of approval on property located at 1112 North
B~ookhurst Street (Chez Paree).
5ub]ect petitio~ was continued from the meeting of June 15~ 1951•
Chatrman Bushore expialned thts (s t~ co~tl~ued public hearing for the purpose of
~eceiving sddition~i informatlon or testinwny.
Comnisslone~ 7olar stated he wouid abaCein because he was not present at the previous
hea~ing and left the Council thamber at 1:36 p.m.
A~obert Von Esch, atto~neti~ reproae~ting the a+ner, axpiainad the av~r.r has placed two
signs on the pranlses to w~rn patron~ that any tllegal activity would not be
tole~ated in thes bar or (n the surrounding lot and a security guard has been hired to
check anyone susp~actPd to be a minor and to also check rx~yone suspected to be
carrying weapons or ntha nvise involved In something that could late~ cause a problem
for ths bs~; and that the security guard further check~ the park{ng lot periodically
to make sur~ thera is no one mllling around whA rnight be car~sidered "undesirabte".
He statad coples of the letters hsve been fo nvarded to the Polt~~e Department
requesting that if there are sny continwl problems o~ if they feel these measurea
mlght not be adaq wte to ptesse contact him and as af thts moment, he has ~ot had
any to~tact wiih snyo~e.
Mr. Von EsGh statod on July 21, t98~. four A~sheim Police Offlcers came into the bar
and thero were th~ee patro~s and the bsrtender present and the officers askrd each
~
s~-as3 ~i~~a~
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JULY ~~~ 1981 81-464
patron (each baing in thai~ late 30'a !~r early 40'a) to ahav thelr idnntificatlon and
also roque~tad the bartendar to shaw hi: identificatton. Ne stated he felt that typa
ectivtty is unuiual ~nd if it continues he thought It m~y~ In the futura~ craate some
addittonal strife. Nn statad on July 23~ 'Q81~ a gtrl was stoppod at the door by
the tecurtty guard end epparently the guard no~!cad nothing wrong a~d allowmd her (n
and the girl then went to the ba~~ but the b~rtender app~rently felt the glr) was o~
aomething a~d refused to serve her and asked her to leave. He stated when she went
out. the offtcers ntther srrested her o~ dexalned he~ because the securfty guard
noticed there were four patra) cars In tha park{ng lot from 12:30 a.m. to 1:45 a.m.
He stated he is not sware of nnythtng more M~. Campregher or any other bar owner
could have done to lessen ch~t problem.
Chatr~~an Buahore clarifled thst tha lettcrs mentloned earlier are the letters dated
July 13th and July 22, 1~81, and potnted out eve ryone has recetv~d copies of those
1 ette rs.
Chairman Bushare asked about tha operetion of thc kitchen.
Mr. Von Esch replied as far e~s F~ knows the kitchen {s Aperating end he has ro
knowiedya z~f any problems with the health authcrlttes.
TFIE PUBLIC fIEARING UAS CLOSEO.
Chalrman Uushore stated he hos given this use a lot of thought and referred to the
fact that a sig~ has been Dosted wsrning the patrons that no knives or other weapons,
~~~ugs or intoxicated persons will be permitted an tt-e p~emisea and cautioning thAt
drunk~nness~obscene acts, ftghts, carrying weapons~ use or deeling in drugs could be
grounds fo~ the city to close clawn this bar. He stated he knows of no other bar that
has ever had to posc those type signs end that puts this bar In a different category.
He referred to the hiring of a setu~ity guard except on Mundays and Tuesday~ because
of lack. of bustness and stated he d(d nc~t think that would solve any of chelr
problems.
ACTIbN: Chairman ~ushore offered a resolutian ta revoke Conditlanal Use Permtt No.
~ on the basis that satd permtt is being exercised 1~ a manner detrimental to the
publlc's health snd sefe~y and in a menner canstituttn; a nuisnnce for the following
reaso~s: the evidence indicates there hss baen a concinuous course of triminal
activity o~ or abAUt ine premtses during the pest 24 monthx. some betng homlctde.
assault wlth a deadly weapon~ p~ssesslon of ~leadly weapons~ possession and sale of
drugs~ aggravated assault~ oral wputation~ indecent sxposure and vartous ocher
nffenses; and on the~ basis that the owner has failed to exercise or implement
~easonable mnasu~es to prohibit~ curb or otherwlse discoura~e and v~ever~t crtminal
activities on or ebout the premtses; and explained that means the stgns and having
the s~ecurity guards there not on a fuli tiine basis and just havfng them thera at
ce rtaln times of the day and on certain days would not stop the acttvities and the
result tltiereof, Is that such business~ In his opinton, constitutes a detrirt~nt to the
public health ~d safety ~d is a nusiance, and~ therefore. he would offer Resolution
No. PCE1-158 and naved for its passage and adoptian to revoke CondiLtonal Use Permit
No. 1535•
7/21/81
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JUI.Y 2~~ 1981 81-465
Commis~ioner ~lerbst agreed snd steted he falt tE,is ares Is definit~ly a collection
area and is • problem for tha Poltce Oepartment with foui~ to fiva Natrol cars h~ving
to rospond. Ne stated thts should prob+~bly b~: a final deGislon befo~e the City
Council and this actton will get tl~e matter before them If the petitioner wishas to
appaal the Planning Commisslon's decislo~.
Jack White, Asslstent City Attorney~ explatned the l~etters referred to wtl) be a part
af the reco~d end are in the filas of the pls~ning Department.
Commtssloner ga~nes stat~d she felt the owner or his attorney shouid hava an
opportun i ty to respcx~d.
Chetrman Bushore statcd the haaring was closed afte~ 3 hours of testimony and that he
had gtven the owner and hts attorney an oppo~tunity to explein wh~t he cauld do to
resolve the problems. lie stated he felt tlie owne~ has falled miser~bly. He steted
it ts not up to the Planning Commission to say hvw this bustness Is gotng to be
conducteci; and it is up to the owner to came back ~Ith ways of handling th~ probl~ms.
Ne stated if Commtsslone~ 9ernos felt thes~ two slgns being posted and the security
guard betng hired wtl) take care of the problan~ then she can vote no on the
resalutton.
Commissloner Barnes stated sl~e was Just con^~rncd about the process and wo~de~ed tf
che City Attorney felt the petitioner should have an opportunity to discuss the
resol~tion.
Jack Whita stated he understands the resolutio~ is predlcated upon the avidence taken
et the public hearing and that if the Comr~ission wishes to reopen the publlc hesriny,
they have th~t ~ight; ha+evcr~ hG thought (f they wlsh to reopen the public hearing~
the mneting ~.~~+ld have to be renoticed because tl~e contlnuance was granted to get
edditlona) com~-:n:s from two partles ~nly. Ne stated~ however~ this ts the Planntng
Commissio~'s hearir~, and lf they feel they need additional testimony, then they can
proceed on whatever ,~dsts they desi~e.
' Chairma~ Bushore stat°d he felt he had given the awner the opportunity to expiatn
' what has been done an1 that thr letters hsve bee~n dlstrtbuted and there Is no new
~ evidence or testimony and that the Planning Commission has hed more than an ample
t
~ opportunity to study ttie proble:m and to gather the(r thoughts and he did not know
what purpose reopening ~he public hearing Hould scrve.
On roll call~ the faregoing resolution Nas passed by [he following vote:
AYE5: COMMISSIONERS: BOUAS. BUSNORE, FaY~ NERB5T~ KING
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSTAIN; COMlIISSIONER: BARNES
ABSEN7: COMMISSIONERS: TOIAR
,1ack 1fi ite~ Asaistant City Atto~noy~ presented the written right to nppeal the
P18nni~g Commlssion's decision withtn 22 days ta the City Gouncil.
Commissionar Tola~ ret~rned to the Counctl Chamber at 1:47 p.m.
7~27~81
MINUTES~ tiNANE1M CITIf PLANNING COMMISSION~ JULY 27, 19a~ 81•1~66
N
RE
PllBLIC HEARING. OWNER: RAGER C. AND ANH a. STUII~ 1801 West Penhal) Way~ Anahetm~
CA 92801. AGENT: JACK P. NORRIS. 160 South Centenniai W~y~ Sulte 3. Tuatin, CA
g2680. P~operty desc~lbed es a rectanguiarly-shsped parcel of lond consisting of
approximately 2.5~ a«a~~ 1776 West Penhall Way. Property presently claasifted ML
(INDUSTRIAI. LIMITED) 20NE.
CONDITIO-•AL USE REQUEST: TO PERNIT A 7-LOT~ 8-Ut~IT INDUSTRIAL CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX
WITN W~+VER OF REQUIP,ED LOT FRONTAGE.
Ther~: was no one indicating their prasence In opposition to subJect raquest, end
al~~ough the statf report was not read, it is referred to snd made a part of tha
minutes.
Jack Norrts~ agent~ presonted the archltect's ra~dering of the proje~t •~+~~ indic~ted
he wauld be happy to ans•~er any qucstlons.
THE PUBIIC NEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commtssloner tlerbst askad Mr. Norris if he understands ~o comnercial uses will be
allowed in this complex.
Mr. Norrls replled there will be no co~m~ercial uses except the limitad artwunt as
permitted by code.
Cummissioner Herbst was conce rned as to whethe~ or rwt t~~r tist of Endustrlalty
related uses shauld be made a part of this usc and Dean Sherer~ Assfstant Planno~~
replted he thought the applicant was ~tipu{ating that they would not have nommercial
sales in e xcess of the 1Q$ permitted by code.
Chairman Bushore suggested a condition be included requirln~ the owner to notify
~rospective buyers of this restriction concerning uses a~d OQan Sherer explainrd that
was a condition of the proJect at Co ronado and Jefferson and cuuld be added to thts
pro,ject.
ACTION: Commissloner King offered a mation. secon~ed by Commissio~er Bouas and
M Otl CAt~RIED~ that the Anaheim Clty Pla~niny Commisslon has reviewed the propc+sel
to permit a 7-lot, 8-unit industrial candomfnium complex with waivers of required lot
frontage on e rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 2.56
acres located at 1776 West Penhall Way; a~d doss hereby approvw the Negative
Deciaratton ffom the requirement to prepare an environmentat tmpact repor: on t~e
basts chet thare would be no significant tndividual or cumulative adverse
envi~onmentat impact due to the spproval of this Nega~~ve Declaratton since the
Anaheim General Plan desig~ates the subJect property or general ~ndustrtal land uses
commensurate witM the propasal; that na sensitlve environmental impacts are involved
in the praposal~ that the initial Study submit:ad by the petitloner indicates no
stgniftcant individual or cumulative adverse environn+entat impacts; and that the
7/z7/81
~
~
;
{
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLAHNING COMMISSION~ JUIY 27~ 1~81 61-p67
Negacive Declaratlon substantlating the forego,ng finding, Is or r~te In the City of
Anahein: i lanning Department.
Comml~sioner King offered e motlon~ seccnded by Commis~~o~er Nerbst and MOTION
CARRIEQ~ that the Anehelm City Pianning Commisslon does hereby grent walver of code~
requiroment on the basis that denial would ck priwe subJe~~ propnrty of a prlvllege
enJoyed by other propertiss In the same zone and vicinlty.
Commissioner King offerad Resolutlo~ No. PC81-159 and rtqve~i for lts p~ssage and
edoptton th~t the Anahe'm C{ty Planning Commisslo~ daes hereby gra~t ~ondltlonal Use
Pe~mlt Na. 223a subJect to the petitloner's stipulotion that ~o ret~~l seles will be
permittad and that future buyers alll ba notified of thls restrictio~ and purauant to
Sections 18.03.03~: .031; .03Z~ •~33i ~~3W ~~d .035~ Title 18 of the Anaheim
Muntcipsl Code And subJact to Interdepertmental Committee ~eca~endations.
On roll call~ the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vot~:
AY~S: CONMiSSIONERS: BARNEt~ BOUAS, 6USti0RE~ fRY~ NERBST~ 1~1G~ TOLAR
NOES: COMMI SS I ONERS : ~IONE
ABSE~~T: C~MMISSIONERS: NONE
ITEM N0. :~IR NEGATIVE DECLARA710N AND CO~iDITIONAI USE PERMIT N0. 22}~:
OWNER: M. E. AND ETI~YL iIULETT~ SZ00 Irvlne tlouleverd~ A';91. Irvine,
PU8L1 C IIEARING.
CA 92714. AGENT: ROBERT SHIFtLEY, 1600 North ~lain Street, Sante Ana~ CA 92701.
Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of
approximatelY 0.8 acre~ 1~20 11est Linaoln Avenue. Prope•ty presently classified ML
(INDUSTRIAL~ LIMITED) ZONE.
CGNDITIONAL USE REQUEST: TO PERNIT AN AUTO SERVICE CENTER IN TFIE ML ZONE.
There waS ^O staff~~a~ortnweshnot reade^it is refurred totandumadeta'partsof the
althou~h the P
minutes.
Robert Shirley, agent, wdY prPSCnt to answer any questions.
Commissio~er Ktng referred to the T~affic Engi~eer's recommendation that a single 40-
foot widc driveway~ ~athe~ thsn t~~~. 25-faot wide driveways be installed for vehicular
access to the site. Mr. Shi~ley respanded he had met wtth Mr. 5inge~ after the plans
w ere revised and Mr. Singer had indicated there was no p n,blem wit~~ the plar,s~
hawever~ he did point out the advantages of a single drtvewey; that he had left t..c
meatin~ thinking that the proposal was acceptable and was surprised to inarn of this
recannend~tion. Ne stated it ts thetr ferling that tne interior traffic flow would
be better wtth a 24-foot ingress drivewa; •- the westerly portlon and a 24-foot wtde
egress driveway or- the eesterly portion. Ne stated Mr. Singer had n!rntioned that if
some vehicle was parked or stalled in the middle of ths• 40-foot wide dr~eee pie~ned
traffic would he iess tmpeded than it would be wlth double driveways.
the coai,°f deo osed an40pfoottwtdepdrive+vaydbut foundithat therexis~aneexistin9
orig Y P P
7/27i 81
MINUTES~ ANIWEIM CITY PLMlNING COMMISSION~ JULY 27~ 1981 81-468
hydra~t In the center ~nd also that the state owns 12 feet of Ltncotn Avenua~ and
slso tha Qrimery lessee tn the cente~ hat rsquestad a 50-foot ateginy eraa for thoir
uae and a 40•toot driv~-ay w~uld restrict thst area.
Commtsaianer ning statnd he soes nothing wrong with two 25~f~t driveaays and
Wmnissioner Nerbat aq~eed.
ChairmaR Bu~hore eske~i what the stsging a~a would be used for end Mr. Shirley
replied that tt would ba art~ arca In front of the building; that they hava 3 servlce
bays in the bullding end could sccomnndAtn slx vehicles and ~ staging area would
merely be a landing erea for those vehicles waiti~g to be sorvtced.
Cheirman auahore asked what otttier automotive uscs are proposed and Mr. Shirley
replied there will be a ste~eo and service compA~y which also installs security
devicss in vehicles and recrestlo~al vehlcies and anothGr use would ~e a•r~nsmission
service companY (n the rra~ portion of the building.
Chatrman Uushare asked if ai~ storage of vehicles would be insiJe the butldings
indicating hts concern re<;~rdtng the parking spaces in fr~nt aiong Ltn~oln Avenue.
Mr. Shirley responded hc did not thlnk it is the intentio~ of any of the lessees to
store anything outside.
C-+alrman Bushara stat~d he would Ilke to make that one o~ the conditlona of approval
and Mr. Sht~lay respo~dad ho wauld havc no objection to that condltion unless the
devetoper of the pro~~rty has a negative reaccion and a gentlema~ in the audience
indicated Chat they wilt ba dedicating 10 feet across the front and the vehicles
would be htdden by landscaping.
Chairman bushore stated that is h(s prima ry concern and steted he would not want to
see a lot of vehicies (~arked behind the landscaped arna overnight and wanted that
made a condition uf approval.
..CTION: Conmissloner King offered a motton~ saconded by Cominissione~ Bouas and
M ON CARRI~~D. that che Anaheim f.~ty Planning Cc~nmisston has revlewed the proposal
to psrmit an auto service center In the Fil (I~idustrial~ Limtted) Zone on an
trregularly-shaped pa~cel of tand consisting of approxlmatety 0.8 acre~ having a
frontage of approxtmately 140 feet on the south side of Lincoln A~venue (1520 West
Lincoln Avenue); and dxs hereby a~p m~e the Negative Oeclaration from the
requirement to prppare an envaro:menta) impact repurt on the basts that there would
be r.~ signiflcanc .ndi~•idual or :umulative ad/erse environmental impact due to the
app~ov~i of thts Negative De~laration since the Anahelm Gsne~at Plan destgnates the
subject property for gen~r~l industrial lAnd uses corrwnensurate with the proposal;
that r~o sensitive ~^viro~mental impacts ar~, Invalved in the p~opossl; that the
Initia) Study submtcted by the patttioner tndtca~es no stgnificant individuai o~
cumulative advers~ environmental Impaces; and that the Negative Declaration
subsianti.~ting t. foregoing find(ngs ~s o~ fite in the Clty of Anaheim Plannl~g
Dep~rtment.
CommissionEr King offered R~solutlon No. PC81-160 and moved f~r its passaqe and
adoption that the knaheim Ctt;~ Planning Conmissio~ does hereby grant Conditional Usn
~i2~ie,
MINUTES~ ANAFIEIM CITY PLlWNIN6 COMlIISSION~ JULY 2~~ 1981 81•469
Permlt No. 2239 •ubJect to the stipulatton that ai) vehicles will be stared insida
the f~cill~y with no outdoor stora9e af vehiclea overnight and pursuan: to Ssctlons
18.03•0;0; .03~~ •~32; .o33i •03W a~d .035~ Tttle 18 of the Anahelm Municipal Code
and sub)ect to tnterdepa~tmental Conmittoe recommondations.
On roll call~ tha foregotng reaolutlon was passed by the followi~g vnte:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES. BOUAS~ BUSIIORE, FRY~ HERBST~ KING~ TOLAR
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ITEM N0. 4: EIR CATEGORICAL EXErP TION-LLASS 1 ANO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 22b0:
_...~._
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: ANANEIt. T AND ATIi~ETIC CLU6~ INC.~ 2640 Woodland
Orive~ Anaheim~ CA 92801. Proper~, scribed as an irregularly-shaped parce) of 1Rr.c'
constsCing of app roximately 0.9 acre~ 2640 Woodland D~ive. Property presently
classified CL (COMMERCIAL, LIMITEDj ZONE.
CONOITIONAL USE REQUEST: TO PERMIT ON•SALE BEER ANO WINE IN AN EXISTINC RECREATIONAL
FACI LiTY.
Th~re was no one indicating their presence in op~osition to subJect request, and
although the staff report wes not read~ tt 1s referrcd to a~~d mede a part of the
minutes.
Commissione~ King declared a conflict of inte~est as defined by Anahetm Ctty Planning
Commission Resolution No. PC76-157, adopting a Con~lict of Interest Code for the
Planning Gommlssion~ and Government Code SeGtion 3625 et seq.~ i~ that he oMms stock
in Paciflc Ltghttng who awns Dunn Properties and~ pursuant to tl~e provisions of the
above cndes, declared to the Ghalrman that he was Nith~rawtng from the hearing tn
cannectio~ with Conditional l~se Permit No. 2240 and wouid not take part In either the
discussion or thn voting thereon~ and has not discussed this matter with any membe~
of the Planning Cammission. TNEREUPON~ COt4MIS510NEa KING LEFT THE CQUNCIL CNAMBEa.
Brad Oavidson~ agent~ was p~ese~t to answe~ eny questlons.
TliE PUBLIC t1EARING IJAS CLOSED.
It was notod the Planntng nirector or hls authortzed ~epresentat~ve hes determined
that the proposed proJect falis withln the definttion of Catngorlcal Exempcions,
Class 1~ as defined in paragreph 2 of the City of M aheim Enviranmental Impact Raport
Gufdelines and fs~ t' :refore~ cat~gortcally zxempt fr4m the requtrement to prepare an
EIR.
ACTION: Commisaianer Herbst offered Resolution No. PC81-161 and moved for its
pes g and adoption that the Anahelm City P1anning Commisston does hereby grant
Conditianal Use Permtt No• 2240 tn compllance wtth Sections 18.~3.03Q; .031; .032;
.033; .03~i and .035, Title 18 of the Anahelm Municipal Code and subJeci to
interdepartmenta; Committee ~ec,~:nmendations.
~r2~is~
...,,. .,~,..a... .,~.,~n.e+hls,r~reb:NR~NHCaw~-:-,~~...-.., ~ _•
MINUTES, A4AHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISS~t~N~ JULY z~~ 1981 81-470
On roll call~ the foregoing resolutla~ wa~ passed by the fotlawing vote:
AYES: COMMISSfONERS: E3ARNES~ DOUAS~ BUSI~ORE, FRY, NERDST~ TOLAR
NOES: CON,MISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: KING
Commissioner King returned to the Counctl Chember.
17EM N0. : Ela NEGATIVE DfCLARATION. WAIVER OF CODE RE4UIREMEt~T AND CQNDITIONAL USE
~FtT'~"rT~' zi - - _ ._..._. .~ ..._._
:
PUBLIC t1EARING. OWNER: NATTi~EW T. AND CF1ER1 D. NUGENT~ 856 ~outh Walnut Street,
Anaheim~ CA 928Q2. AGENT: JAY VED~ 7096 East t)lackbtrd Lane~ M ahelm~ CA 92807.
Proparty dascrtbed as A rectangulA~ly-shaped parce) oF lan~ consisttng of
opproximately 0.7 acre, 356 South Walnut 5traet. Property presently classtfied RS-A-
43,OQ4 (RESIDENTIAL/AGRICULTURAL) ZONE.
CONDITIO~IAL USE REQUEST: TO PERMIT ll CNURCII IN THE RS-A-43~G00 tONE WIT~i WAIVERS OF
MINIMUM LANOSCAF'ED SETI3ACK.
There was no one indtcattng tiieir prascnce (n opposition to subject rrquest. howev~.r,
durtng the public testimony. approximatcly forty to fifr.y persons indicated thelr
p~esence In favor of the request and although tt~e staff repo~t was not read, it i~
referrcd to and made a part of the mtnutes.
Jay Ved, agent, stated the plans are ta use this property as a private church for khe
members of the Indtan community and they feel the use Is compattble because there ls
an extstinq church acro~s the strset and another church facilicy to the south and e
htgh school to the north; that the prope~ty is a A.7 acre parce) and the structure is
quite large (4200 square feet) and th~, ltving room and family room combined make a
tota) of apnroximately 600 square f~at. I~e stated they do not fee) this property is
idea) for a single-family hame b~cause of the upkeep cc~st ~nd that the tot ts
approximately fou~ timcs larger than oth~r lots in the area and the house is very old
and is twice as large as other houses in the area and the prop-rty waa used for the
past 25 years as a rest home.
Mr, Ved stated they plan to renovate the entire bullding and remove some of the
smaller structures which ar~e eyesores and provtde a lot oF landscaping. He stated
because the house has hlstorica) signlficance and Is registered wlth the Natio~al
HisCorical Society, they are working with the~ Neighborhood Preservation Oivision of
Anaheim Communtty Development Dspartmc~~t to get necessary funds to provide
preservati~n.
Ne stated they fee3 normal church attendance will be 12y people and the primary
services will be on 5undays w~th minor church activities durtng the weekday eveninga;
that 24 parking spaces will be provided with two separate 25-foot wide drivaways and
they dtd not feel there will be any traffic in~terfe~ence because mo3t of thelr
activittes will be on Sunday ~nd they dc~ not feel this use will be detrlmental to the
peac~, health~ s~faty a~d general welfare af the cttizens of M ahetm.
7/27/81
!
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSiON~ JULY 27~ 1981 81-4~1
~tr. Ved statad h~ met with the nelghbora on July 10~ 1981~ and expleined thnir plans
and thanked Mr~ and Mrs. Rogalia for hosting the meeting for 32 neighbors. 11e stated
thAy have e petition signed by 80 parsons supporti~~g the proJect which wes submitted
t~ th~ Plann{ng Oepartment last Friday.
Mr. Ved stAtcd they fee) the houae ts fal~ly safe~ elthough there rre a few things
thet need corroctlon; that the Ftre Department has approved the plans; that the
~roperty was Inspected by a private constructio~ inspector and fie gave a report
indicetiny that considertng the age of the structure which is 7S Years old~ it is in
fatrly good co~ditlon and thet he had ~hecked the electric~i~ mechanical~ roaf,
foundatfon~ wells ~tc.; hawever•~ he dtd p~ovide sane reconmendetlons for changes and
that they did plan to make those necessary changes to make the ~roparty safe. Ne
requested that Conditio~ No. 1 be amendQd because ttiis property Is very old and they
dtd plan to make it s~fe but may nat be able to ~onf~rrn to all these codes rlgidly.
Mr. V~cl steted this use is proper because it ts ~utliorized by the zoning code and tho
use wtll not adversely affect the adJoining land uses and the size and shape of the
parcel is adequate Co allow full use and is not detrimental to the areA. He stated
they feet the trafflc generated wli) not impose any undue burden on the street and
also the granting of the perm(t will not be deCrimental to the peace~ health, safety
and gcneral welfa~e of the communtty. He stated they request the a~+proval of this
use as well as Che watw:r of landscaped setback b~causa tf they pravide a 25-foot
setback~ there wtll be no way to provide tf~e parking and thc property Couid not b~
used as a church. He pointed out that the existing church across the street has only
a 3-fook wlde landscaped setba~k.
~inesh Parikh, 520 South Gordon Sky Lane~ Anaheim, CA 92807, stated he bzcame a
citizen of thts cauntry on July 7~ 1976~ and the Judge menttoned in his welcoming
speech that these new cltize~s should merge themsclvcs into the flow stream of
society and be good citizens and good neighbors and be law-abiding citlzens but keep
thetr culture and religion intact and pass it on to their children and that is what
they plan to do with this prope~ty. He st~ted there are about 35 to 40 famllies in
this area from india who have put their resources together and decided to buy thls
property end improve it according to the code. He stated they wilt be a good
neighbor and are peace-loving people a~d wtil improve the pr~perty so tf~at the Ctty
of Anaheim will be ~roud of it.
Dr. Hema Parekh~ 185A1 Rosevilie Drive~ Vit1a Park, CA 92667~ stated she and her
husband are bath physlcians in Bellflower and other members of tF~is church are
doctors~ college professors~ business awners, certifted public accountants, etc. and
most of th dn have beert in Chls country for 15 to ?.Q ysars and have been good citizens
and own thetr own homes and are trytng to pass on thelr culture and heritage to t'ieir
children.
Larry Rogalla, 118~~ Beacon Avenue, stated th~ petitio~ers did speak with
epproximately 40 neighbors and the neighbors have no rea) obJection to the use, but
are concerned that if fo~ some reason this church membership expands and moves to
another location~ that the canditional use percnit be terminated so that any other
user would have to file for a new conditinnal use permit and give the neighbors an
opportunity to discuss the use.
7/z7I8~
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JULY 27. 1981 91•W72
Jack Whlte~ Asstst~nt City Attorney~ exploined the conditl~el use permiL qoas wtth
the property end cannot be revoked b~sed on who the appilc+~nt mey be and the only
quastian i• whether or ~ot the use complies with the c~ndttlons of approve) and the
c;,de a~d the oniy limitetlons the Planning Commissio~ can place on the pe nntt ts a
time llmlt.
Mr. Rogaltb stated he finds that rather interesttng becausc there wes a previnus
problem with this same property and one of the comments by the Counci) wa¢ that they
could hawe had the permit stgned over to that perticuler Indivldual and if they were
to sall the property~ the permi: cnuld be revnked.
C',atrman Bushare expletned any oondltion+,) usa permit ean be revoked if the
conditions a~e not being complted with or the use has praven to be a nuisance or a
detrtment to the publtc healtt~~ safety and general welfa~e. t~e scated a tlrt~ limit
cauld be placed on a permit so th~t It is automatically revlawed.
Mr. Ragella stated if they have the assurance that the permit would be reviewed if
there is a problem, they would hov~ no problem witt~ the use.
Mr. Ved stated he u~derstands the nelghbor's con uerns but thGir members are al) lAw-
abiding~ pea~e-loving citizens and plan to conduct their church activitias in t~armony
with the nelghborhaod and want to be good neighbo~s. Ile stated~ however~ they are
investing a tremendous amou~t nf timc and money in this property snd a time ltmit
would h.:mper thcir efforts. Na did not think the~e should be a problam since the
Commtsston has the right to revoke the permtt.
TNE PUbLI C IIEARI NG WAS CLOSED.
Cnmmissloner Barnes stated the plans show
be used for parking and indtcated she was
proposed p~rking.
a large area behind the house ~whlch could
con ce rn ed about the locatlon o~` the
thairman aushore stated all the Commissianers are a little concnrned wtth only 24
parktng spuces proposed~ even though they meet the code~ beGeuse there w'ill be 40
famllies in this church which probebly means 40 vehiGles.
Mr. Ved explained thcy had conslderod the parking in thc rear~ but tt r+ould
compl~tely cut off the yard area whlch is appropriate for other outdoor activities
and the sfde yard !s not good for those activtties because ~t is exposed to the
st~eet. He stated they a~e requesting what the church across the street has been
allowed and that is pa~king c'ose to the p roperty lin~ with mintnwm landscaped
aetback whtch will aliow them to hawe a large backyard which would be good for their
summer activittes end explained all the gatherings outside wauld be peaceful and
qulet. He stated that would atso eliminate car noises for the nelghbors lmmedtat~ly
to the east ar-d north. He steted they talked to Paul Singer, Traffic Engirteer~ and
disc.ussed the proposed ordinsn ce for compact car parking spaces and explained t`~ey
could orovido 32 parktng spaces In the middle~ however. tl~at ordinance ts unofffcial.
Ne stated they fecl that instead of parktng on threa quarters of the lot Just tn
accon~date tha cars, th~y would like to be atlowed to have the 24 spaces to begin
wtth because their membership is lower and if they do grow, they would proviae the
7/27/81
;
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIN4 ~OMMISSION~ JULY 27~ tA8! 81-4~3
compact c~r spaces i f the ordlnance permi ts et that tim~s and i f thet r msmber~htp does
expand, they would consider e parking let (n the ~ear but right now they woul~i 1 ike
to have As much green arew as possible.
Cammisslona~ Herbst steted es long aa tha parking spaces provided meet code~ then
the addit~onal compact parking spaces could ba added with no obJectlons.
Mr. Ved replted they hed pinns to provide the compact parkl~g spaces because they hed
dona a:;urvey and found that one-half of thei r members I~ave compact cars.
Commissioner aarnes esked About the summer actlvitlas~explalntng the Planning
Commissla~ has recently had a problam wlth another church which has expanded thetr
pre-schoo) and created problems for the netghhors and that she is trying to forestell
eny similar situatton wlth thls church, She asked ~~h~t kind of summer acttvities are
planned and how long the childran would be outside and where they would play.
Mr. Ued repllcd thls chu~ch ls i~ It's infa~nt stage righ': now and that a mature
chu~ch has all ktnds of activl[ies, such as youth activttfes. pre-schools~ etc.; but
they are Just beginning and lieve some concerns about thztr own chlidren and what they
wtll be exposed ~o and explaln~d tl~ey get toc,Kthar o~ S~undays for prayer and serm~~
and they have about 8 to 1p young chf ldre~ who meet on Su~day afternoon. ~le stated
their gatherings a~e not lnrye and that he docs not realiy envislon this getting out
of hend but if it does becomn a problem and thls property becomes too smell, they
wou 1 d look for another property .
Commisslo~er Tolar steted he f~els tha neighbo~s have a Justi ftable concern and that
this use as presented for thls particutar group Is accepteble~ hoewever~ the permit
does goes wlth the prope~ty and if this group dec(ded to sel) the property and move,
the Commisslon needs to have a handlc on tt to prutect the neighbors tnterest. He
stated he did not think a time l imit would be detrlm^ntal and in 3 years, if
everything is being conductQd as Indicated~ the us~c would be revtewed under Reports
and Recommendations and would p robably be gra~ted for enother 3 years. H~ stated he
recogntzes the inv~estment of al 1 the people and 1s satistled the use would be an
asset to the communlty~ howove ~, he woutd not suppart the use without a time timlt.
Mr. Ved stated he is a little eonfused bacause o~ o~e hand the city and neighbors
have the right to ask for revoeatfon of the permit if they do not comply with all the
conditions whether it is traffic~ parking. numbo~ of people~ etc., yet they wa~t to
pyaco a time 1 imit on the use.
Commissio~er Tolar stated he is setisft~d this parttcular grQUp aill comply with ail
the conditions and will bc a good neighbor, but is not satisfied that tf they sell
the property, the new us~rs Hou 1 d be as consctentlous.
Mr. Ved was concerned that ave ry three years they would have to go through thls
process and Commissfone~ Tolar explained all they would have to do is request an
extensian of time in 3 years a~d It would automatica) ly come up under Reports and
Reconrr~ndations and tt would not be a publit hearing and the petitioner would not
have to appear befora the Comrs~i sslon.
7/27/81
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JULY 27~ 1981 81-474
Mr. Ved stated th~ny hsd sstd 125 people would attend snd that eppl tes to most of the
time, however. at Ch~istmas or Eastar there nwy be a la~ge~ gathe~ing. He statod
they will ba very carc.ful to park a~ the drlvewAy~ or maybe hsve speci~l permission
f ~cxn the ne 1 ghbors for thos e spe:. t al occas 1 ans and ha hoped those k 1 nds of th i ngs
wouid nat be construed as breaktn9 the candttio~s. Ne atated he waa concerned that
wtth a tln~ limit, that if during thosa speclal functlans they exceeded the capacity
of people ~nd a neighbor became disenchanted. he could tal) the Planntng Department
And say the co~dltl~ns were not being complied wlth and that is what he is ~eally
trying to avoid.
Commfssloner Tolar stated he dld not th1~k any one of the nelghbors would be
concerned abaut a parking problom two or three times a year and pointed out most
people have parties at one tin+e or anothcr which vlolate city ~rdinances concerning
parking. Na stated he wtll offe~ a resolutlon with a 3-year time ltmit becau~e he
fett the tlme limtt po(nts out the concerns a~d alerts the petitio~er that they
should be extremely cautious and not have the overflaw parking canditions o~ a
co~ttnuing basis. He stated mast churches have a parking problem pertadlcally and he
hoped the petitioner understood why he Is supporting the ttme 1 tmt t and clarifled i t
ts rrally to identify the use fo~ this group and tht~ church a~d not for anotheruse.
Chat~man Bushore clarified thet the peitione~ plans to previde th e 10 compact car
parking spaces and Mr. Ved r~plied that ts correct.
M~. Parikh responded to Commissloner Ifarnes' concern regardtng ~ ve~tng activity,
explaining their traFffc would primartly be on Sunday mornings an d afte rnoons. He
further Qxplatned the~r have 40 members but do not have 40 in attenda~ce becausa they
do not have 100~ attcndance and the ftgure is probably 75b.
Mr. Ved asked that the time limit be 5 years. ~ather than 3 yea ~s becaus~ of the
Investment they ere making tx~d Commissio~er Tola~ Indtcated he would go along with 5
years.
ACTION: Commissioner Toler offered a mr~tion~ seconded by Commissioner K(ng and
MO ION CARRIEO, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the propossl
to pe~mit a church in the RS-A-43~000 (Residenttal/Ag~tcuitural) Zone with a code
walver of minimun landscj~ped setback on a rectangula~ly-shaped parcel of land
consisting of approximat.:y 0.7 acre tacateci o~ the northeast co~ner of Beacon Avenue and
Walnut Street, having a frontage of approxtmat~ly 260 feet on the north side of
Beacon Avenue (856 South Nalnut Strtet); and do~s hcreby approvc the Negativn
Declaration trom the requirement to prepa~e an environmental impact report on the
basis that there would be no signiflca~t individual or cunulatiwe adverse
environmental tmpact due ta the approval nf this Negative Decla ration since the
A~aheim General Ptan designates the subJect property for low density resldantlal land
uses commensurate with the p roposal; that no sensitiwe envlronme~ntal impacts are
invoived in the proposal; that the Initial Study submitted by the petltloner
indicetes no signtficant individual or cumulative adverse envlronmental impacts; and
that the Negative Declaration substantiating the foregoing findi~sgs is on file in the
City of M~haim Planning Department.
7l27/81
MINUTES, ANAH~IM CITY PIANNING C4MMISSION. JULY 27. 1981
e~-q75
Commissloner Tolar offerod a motion~ eaco~d~ed by Co~m~isaloner Fry and MOTION CARRIED~
that the Anaheim CICy Planning Commission does he~eby grant the walver of code
requiren~nt on the baais thAt denla) would deprive aubJect property of a privilege
enJoyed by ~~th~~ properties in the s~me zone and vicinity and on the bssis thet du•
to the sizo and shape of tha property end the way the plan haa been presented, 1 t
would be an asset to the commur~ity.
Commlsston~r Toler offered ibsoluPlon No. PC81•1G2 and moved for Its passsge and
edoptlon that the Anah~im Ctty Planning Commtssio~ does hereby grant Conditional Usa
Permtt No. 2241 for a period of 5 ye~rs, subJect to revtew to determine whether or
not there haw:: been Any detrimenta) affocts on the surrou~dtng area pu~suant to
Sectians 1~.0;;.030; .031; •032; .o33i ~034 a~d .035~ Tttln 18 of the Anaheim
Municipa) Code~ and suf~jr~ct ta Interdepartmental Comm) ttee recommendatlons.
Chal~man liushore asked th~t the stipulation be i~lcludod that the 10 additional
compact parktn~7 spacas wi 11 be provlded and Commi sslo~er Tolar ag~eed Lhat should be
a pr~rt of the resol ~~tlon.
On rol l cal l~ the foregoing resolution was pesscd by the foi lawing vote:
AYES: COMMIS:iIONERS: BARNES~ 40UA5, EiUSNORE, Fi~Y, HERBST~ KING. TOLAR
NOES : COMMI S!; I ONERS : NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 'IONE
ITEM N0. 6: EIR I~EGATIVE i)ECLARATION AN~ CONOITIOt1A~ USE PERMIT N0. Z242:
___.-. .-.--..-~------
PUBLI C HEARI NG. 01aNER: N~NS J. AND FA1 GGA K. 4aE1~N ~ 2140 OGean Way, l~guna Beach,
CA 92G51. AGENT:. OERRICK NLIr'fON~ 1121~ Park Street~ Cerritos~ CA 90701. Property
described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land co~sisting of appr~ximately 1.4
acras, 3414 Wast Be11 Ftoad. Property presently classffied Cl (COMMERCfAL, LIMITEO)
zONE.
CONDITIONAL US~ R'~QUEST: TO PlRNIT A fOCKTAII LOUNGE IN TNE CL ZONE.
There was one person indicAti~g his presence 1-. oppositlon to subjact t'equest, and
although the staf~ report was not raad~ it l5 referred to and msde a part of the
minutes.
Darrick Nowton~ agent. was present to ~swer any questions.
Sam Naina~ 1271 Sauth Masters Lano, stated he ls opposed to the estabiishment of a
cocktail ber adJacent to a restdentia) tract wlth 2-story home~ and the bedrooms of
some af the homes ai 1 f~ca d i rect ly towards th i s propetcy and he fe 1 t hav i ng a bar
thero ls a detriment to khe peace~ hoal th and wtl) being of the neighbors. He stated
thern are al ready two cocktai 1 lounges or nightclubs located on the northwest corner
of Knott and Ball whicfi have proven to be a nuisance to the adJ~cent residents snd ta
the Police Department and that anothar one ts not needed. Ne stated it has been bad
wi th the lnud mus i c and thei r bedrooms fscing t ~ that dl rection. He presented a
petition with 20 sig~atures opposing this use. He requested that this per'mit be
de~i~d.
7/21/81
.~....~.~.~~.~~
MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JULY 27~ 1981 81-476
Mr. Newton stated the pro pertY Is zoned for thts type sctivtty a~d lhey sre also
plenntng u rostaurant and it ls not Just a bar and it is quite a dlatance from the
hanes to the parking lot s~d he did not think the restdents will be affected by the
noise.
TNE PUBLIC HEARtNG WAS Cl.OS~D.
Commisstoner 8ernes asked whst kind of notse would be cre~ted and Mr. Newton ~eplled
thera wo u1d be the ~pIBE of people closi~g car doors, engines sterting~ etc. and
~oted th ere Is an nxlsting re;teurant In the shopping center.
Commissioner aarnes asked 'f there will be 11vc nwsic and if thare are any other
establis hments in the shopN ~g center with liva music and M~. Newton ~epited the~o
would b e live music and t here are no other such establishments in thts center.
Commissioner Bushore aske d what age qroup wouid ba cetered to and Mr. Newton replied
the age group would prob~bly b~ between 25 to 45 yenrs old.
Mr. Nawt o~ cl~rifled that he does noc currentiy have )ive music ln his establishment
and the type of muslc planned Is popular; and thet tha facllity wlii be an Engtlsh
Pub and the name wiil be "Ilonest Lawyer".
Commissioner Uarnes indicated she fs concerned about the liv~ rnusic and referred to a
problem currentiy under s tudy at Knott end Ball where the residents have complained
ebout tfne nolse from a similar type operation.
Mr. New ton polnted out th erc arc three or four nightciub-type operations at that
location.
Commis sioner Bmrnes state d if Lhere is a prablem~ then the city will have to pay the
costs of a sound study an d ~oted that the conditional use permit for thst location
was de nicd because there is already e p roblem in the a~ea~ and she felt there shoutd
be a requiremc~t for a de clbal reading inside tn nrder to protcGt the residents in
the erea.
Mr. Newto~ stated he did not thlnic the neighbors would be able to hear the muslc in
their homes tf the doors of the establishmnnt are clos~d.
Commissio~er Nerbst stated he would support the request provided the petltioner will
have th e sound study perforn~ad on tho building wtth the music playing at the level it
will be pl~yed and that the sound decibel will not exceed 65 at the property ltne.
Ne sta ted at 2:00 a.m. when people are sleeping sound travels a tony distAnce a~d
withou t sound attenuating walls~ s~und wi11 go right th rough. Ne polnted out if
thara are any compiaints, the permit can be revoked after the proper flndtngs are
mada a t a pubiic hearing and he felt it would be beneft~iel to the petttioner to have
the sound study performad.
Commfs sloner Bar~es suggested the petitoner atlpulate to make the proper snund study
if th e re are any complai~ts about noise fram this operatlon.
7/2)/81
MINUTES~ ANAf1E1M CITIr PLANNINf, COMMIS51(NI~ JULY 27~ 1~81
81•4~)
Commtssicx~er Tola~ ststed P~~ Is nolt opposad to having a sound study, but that the
owner of tha bulldin9 Is present a~d he would like co suggast Ir- addition to the
sound study, thst the Interlor wslls be prope~iy inaulated or mndifled wlth
acoustical panels or whstever Is nncessary to ad~quately attenuate the noiqe. Ne
stated he recognixes e co~dition~l use permlt can be ravoked but he elso recagnites
the problems the city al~eedY has with cocktai) lounges located in shopptng centers
abuttfng residential propertles and he does not want to be tn a posltio~ of h~ving to
considar rovocation of this permit In the futura. Ne stated the petitloner has
indtcated tha music will be popular muslc but that music interests change dally snd
tho popular mustc tomo~~ow r.ouid be country and western o~ whatever. 11e stated he
dld not think tfie revocatio~ which wes acted on esrlier coday would hdve happened
pred(csted on sound problems.
Commissloner H~rbst stated tt~e sound attenuation on tntertor welis can be
accomplishnd wtthout a problem wlth acaustical panels~ etc.
ACTION: Commtssioner Totar offered a nqtlon. secondod by Commisstoner King and
M N CARRIED. that che Anaheim Clty Planning Commission has rcvlewed the proposal
to permtt a cocktail lounge in th~ CL (Cortn~ercial ~ Limited) zcme on an Irregularly-
shaped percel of land consisting of approximately 1.~+ acres, having a frontage of
approximately 107 feet on tha south stde of aol) Road (31+1k Nest Ba11 Road); and does
hereby approvc the Nagative Declaration from the requirement to prepare an
environmenta) Impact report on the hasis that ther~ would be no significant
indtvidual or tumulattv~ advcrse envlronmentat impact due to the appraval of thls
Negative Qeciaration since the Anahetm General Plan dcslynates thc sub~jcct property
for general cormx~rcial land uses comnensuratc with the proposal; that no sensitive
environmental impacts arc inv~olved In the proposal; thet the Inltlal Study submitted
by the F~tition~r indicates no significant Individual or cumulativc adverse
environrr~ntd) tmpacts; ~nd that the Ncgative Dacl~ration substantiating the foregoing
ftndings is 4n flte in tl~e City of M ahe(m Planniny D~partment.
Jack White~ Asxistant City Attorney~ explained two years ago the city adopted a sound
attenuation o~dinance (Sectfo~ b.72) which would apply In this sltuatlon.
Commissioner Tolar offered itesolution No, PC$l-1G3 and movcd for Its pessage and
adoption that the Anahetm City Plannin~ Conmission docs hereby grant Conditlonal U~e
Parmlt Na. 2242 subJect to the petitioner's st(pulation to cemply with Sectlon 6.72
of the Anahcim Municipat Code pertatning to sau~d attenuation of property located
wlthin 200 feet of a residential zone and pursusnt to Sectlons 18.03.030; .031; .032;
.033i ~03k and .035, Titie 18 eF the Anahelm Munlcipal Code and subject to
Interdepartmental Committee recommcndations.
Chalrn~an Bushore pointed out a lot of tlmes p robiems a~e created by the doors of
thase cstablishmcr~ts being left opcn because it has gotten hot inside and he would
recommend that Lhe doors be kept closed at all tirr~s.
O~n roll call~ the foregoing rrsolutlon was passed by t~+e foliowtng vote:
AYES: COMMil551QNERS: BARNES, BOUAS. BUSHORE, FRY~ HERBST. KING, TOLAR
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSEMT: CQMMISSIONERS: NONE
7/27/81
MINUTES, ~~-1,"HEIM CITY PLIWNIN~ COMMISSIQN~ JULY 27r 1981
8, -a ~e
Jack Wh1ta-~ Assistant City Attornay~ prnsented the w~ltten right to BppEAI the
Plan~ing Commission's decislon wtthln 22 days to Che City Council.
Commtssioner Barnes explalned ta M~. Haina that the Planning Cortmission did take hts
tastimany Into c~nstderaton a~d Is trying lo protect the natghbors with the
condltians which have been imposed.
1TEM N0. 7: EIR NEGATIVE DECIARATION AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 22~+3:
~..~.~..~ ---- ~
PUBLIC HEARING. nWNER: CITY OF ANANEIM~ 2Q0 Sauth Anahelm Boulevard, A~sheim~ CA
g280~. AGENT: STORER CABLE TV~ INC.~ 914 East Katella Avenue. Anehetm. CA 928Q5.
Prop~rty descrtbed as an irr~gularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of
approximatcly 2.0 acre~ heving a frontege of approxlmately 32Q feet on xhe southeast
side of Avenid~ De~Santiagq a~d bel~g located app roximately gQ0 feet northcast of
the centerline of Hidden Canyon ibad (Ctty of Anaheim East~idge Reservoir sito).
CONDITIONIIL USE REQ,UEST: TO PEaMIT A MICRbWAVE REC~IVING SITE.
There was no one indicating their p~esence (n o~posltlon to subJoct request~ and
although the staff report wes not rcad, ft is referred to a~d made a part of the
minutes.
WaynE House~, Gene~al Manager, ~rer Cabla TV~ stated they proposc to lease
apprqxima~tely 100 squa~e feet o: property withi~ the fenced enclosure of the
reservolr bahind the landscaped bnrm and to place a 20-foot high 36-inched faced
triangular towe~ wlth a 6-fc~ot microwave recelving dish placed on the tower a~d
stated it is approxtmatcly 30 feet behlnd the hilitop. He stated Anahetm Nllls, Inc.
has recelved notices of this praposal and M~. Doyle has advised that the ro is no
objaction from thelr company or the comnunity assoclations with whtch they a~e
affillaked as tong as the: instaliation is within the enclosu~e And there is
rnasonable requlrements and atte~tlon to the tandsGaping. Ne stated vis~al tmGact an
the surrou~di~g nelghbo~hood is really negative ~ d constderably less than 5~$ of thc
resTcients can actually see the site. Ne stated a more elaborat~ installation was
app~oved at the Civic Center sice and an Identical sitc hss been approved by the City
Councll in the Oltve 11111s Park adjaunt to 11nh1 Ranch Road and the Ca+missio~ and
the Councli approved a variance for instaliation of a 10-foot dish on Strade Pl~ace.
lie stated the significance of this installation Is to provtde tho best possiblc
television reception for those custo+ners +~ha wa~t c~ble tv and As~umtng the
Commisston approves thts requcst~ the C1ty Councit in the lease agreement holds a
canceilation clause fo~ slx months with edva~ce notlca.
THE PWBLIC NEARIHG WAS CLOSEO.
Chairman Bushore asked if th~e tower wili be hldden well enough so that others Ntll
not request the semc thing and raated Lhe one approved on Strada Piace wes requtred La
be eompletely hidden wlth lar~dstaping.
7/z7/81
81-479
MINUTES, ANANEIM CITY PUWNING COMMISSIOtI~ JULY 27~ 19~~
Mr. 1lauser stated this is s recelving site only and h~a did not think there would be A
probiem.
Commitsloner ~arn~s esked for ths benefit of those w~lktng tn the ArM~- ~{ouuerre is
any way ca landscape ~round the tawer portion uf the installation. •
oxplalned only the aix-foot dish wili be visible and meybe two or th~ee fee~ oF the
towe~ and anyane walktng In the araa wauld see the hlil. Ne stated thay hsve
p~oposed that tif ~tg~~~~easoneble,toQhavanpiantsnbehindCtheclnstallatlon~,ethcy will
camouflaga ~nd
be happy to comply.
Commissioner Barnes thounhshehwantedethetlandscaping@and~MrbYNousercreplied9theythe
trail which Is the reaso
would be heppy to camplY•
ACT pN: Commissio+~er Barnes offered e motion~ scconded by Con*nissioner King and
MOT10N CARRIEO, that the Anaheim City Planning Ccm~misslor, has revicw+ed the proposal
to permit a micrawave raceivtng station on an lrregularly-shaped Qarcel of land
consisting of approxim~tely 2.0 acrc~ haviny a frantagc of appraximately 32~ faet on
the southeast side of Avenida de Santlaga~ approxtmately 900 fert northeast of the
centerl ine of 111dden Canyon Road (Ci ty of Mahelm East~idge Reserval r St te) ; and does
hereby approv~ the Neyativc Decla~ation fron the requirem~nt to prepare an
environmental Imp~ct report on the l~asis that th~re would be no significant
indivldual or tumulatlvc advcrse environmental tmpact due t4 the appraval of thts
Negative Uacloratlo~ since the Anaheim General Plan desiqnates the subject property
for hlllslde estate denstty residentlal land uses canmensurate with the proposal;
that no sensitive environrt+entai impatts are In wlved in the pr~posat; that the
Initial Study submitted by the ~etitlo~cr indicaccs no significant lndlvidual or
cumulatlve adverhe forerol gnfindingscls~or-nfllaaf~tthe'Cltyiof AnahcimtPlanning
substanti ati ng t 9
Departmen~:.
CommiSSiw~c~ Barnes Offercd aesolutian No. PC81-16k and moved for tts passage and
adoption chat the Mah~im City Planning CortWnissio~ does he~Rby grant Conditlona) Use
Pe~mlt '~o. 2243 subJect to the petitione~'s stipulatio~ to provlde addtticx~al
tendsc+cptng around the 20-foot tower in compliance w{th Sections 18.03•03~; •~3~i
.032: ..033: •43~ and .~35. Tttle 18 of the llnahelm -lunicipal Code
On rc~l 1 cal l ~ the forego~ng ~esolution was passed a~r the fol lowin~ vote:
AYE'~ : CONN155 IONERS : 9AiittES. BOUAS ~ QUSNOaE, FRY, HERQST ~ KI MG, TOIAR
Npp=;: COMMISSIONERS: r~O~~E
A9'~ENT: COMMISSIG~IERS: NONE
7/2~/8l
MINUTES, AN/WEIM CITY PI.ANNIf~G C4MMISSION, JULY 27~ 1981 81-480
ITEM NO. 8s EIR CATEGORICAI EXEMPTION-CLASS 1. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMfNT AND
PUBLIC HEARiNG. OWNER: CANYON PI,AZA StiOPPING CENTER~ D. 0. Box 7250~ Newpo~t, CA
92663~ A~ENT: WILLIAM YAtICEY~ FOXFIi~E RE5TAURANT. 90u West Orangethorpe~ Fullerton,
CA 92632. Property described as an i~regularly-shapcd parcel of lend conststing of
approxlmately k.2 ecres~ 5717 Cast Santa Ane Canyon ~toad. P~operty presantly
clasaifted CL(SC) (COMMERCIAL~ LIMITEO~ 5CENIC CORRIJOR OVERLAY) 70NE.
CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST: TO PERMIT ON•SAIE ALCOHfiLIC BEVER/IGES IN AN EXISTiNG
RESTAURANT uiTH MIAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMUER Of PARKItIG SPACES.
1'here was no one indicettng their presente in opposltlon to subJect request, and
~lthough the sCeff report was not read~ It Is referred to end made a part of the
minutas.
Lon I~~egowan, 931 East 31st Strcet, Los M geles~ CA 90011~ steted the proposal is to
do extensive ranacieltng to conve~t the closed Grtswold's Restaurant to a dtnner house
(Fox.fire). Ne added there wil) be a pteno but no outslde mustc interference and they
are ~equesting a 2~ parking wa;v~er.
TNE PUBLIC HEA~RING WA5 CLOSED.
It was noted kfi e Planning D(rector ~r his authorized rep~esentetive has determtned
thet the propused p~oJact falls wtt~hin the definition of Cetegoricel Exemptions~
Class 1, as deFined in paragraph 2 of the Ctty of Anaheim Environmental Impact ReQort
Guidelines and Js, therefo~e, cacagoric~lly exsmpt from tht ~equirement to p n:pa~e an
EIR.
ACTION: Coimotssioner 6srnes offe rad a m~tian. seconded by Cortmissioner Nerbst and
MO Orl CARRIEO, that the Maheim City Planning Conmission has revle+~ved the proposa)
to permtt o~-sale atcohbl(c beverages 1~ an exlsting restaurant with waiver of
minimum n wnber of parkfng spaces an an trrQgutarly-shaped parcel of iand conststing
of approximately 4.2 acres, located at the northeast corner of Santa Canyon Road and
{mperia~ Highway (57i7 East 5~nta Ana Canyan Road).
Comm(sslo~er Barnes offered m motion, seconded by Cortmissioner Nerbst and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Clty Pl~nning Cormiission do~s hereby granc ~equest for
watv~er of codc requtrement on the basis thet it is minimal and subject property is
inoorporated in th~ cxtsting shopping center with adequat~ parking.
Cortn+issioner Bernes offered Resolutlon No. PC81-16~, and moved for its passagn s~d
adopcion that xhe Anahetm City Planning Cortmission does hereby g~ant Condit~onal Usa
Permit No. 2244 pursuant tA Sections 18.03.030; .031; .032; .033: .034 snd .035,
Title 18 nf the Anaheim Municipal Code and subJect to InterdcpartmentAl Committee
recanrnendat i ons .
pn roll cali. thc foregoing resolution wss passed by the followin~ vote:
AYES: COMMI SS IONERS: BARNES. BQUAS. BUSt~ORE. FRY ~ HEt16ST, KI NG, TOLAR
NOES: COMHISSIdNERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMNISSIONERS: NONE
7/27/81
MlNUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSiON~ JULY 27~ 1981 81-481
ITEM.,~N0~..9
~RTS l~ND RECOMhEN~ATIONS
The fo) icywtng Reporca end RecarNnendatlans staff reports were presentod but not re~d:
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2002 - Itequest for an extension of time from
0 omon an liarr et e n erg or property located at 2731 East Jackao~
St~eet.
ACTION: Commissi~~or Ktng oft'ered a motio~~ secanded by Commissloner Bouas
and 0 ION CARRIED~ that the Anahe(m City Pianning Commlnslon does hereby
c~rant a two-year extenslon of time for Conditlanal Use Permit No. 2002 to
oxpire Ju1y 30, 1983•
B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1~0. 1 6- Request for ext~anston of time from Edmund
. a o a or proporty acete at 862 South f~erbor Boulevard.
ACTION: Cammisstoner Ktny ~ffcred a motlon~ seconded by Commtsslone~ Bouaa
a~cn ~HOTION CARRIED~ that the Anahe(m Ctty Planni~g Commiss(on doea hereby
grant a two-yea~ extensicm of time fo~ Conditional Use Permit No. 1556 to
expt re on August 18, 1g$3.
C. A4ANDONMENT N0. $0-11A - Request froen Robert 0. Sukup~ HomQS by John Lyttle~
to an n s ope easaments for Tracc No, 8560~ no~th side af Falrnxmt
Boulsvard~ southaast of Sa~ta An~ Canyon Road.
Commissioner Herbst asked who wtll be responstble for metntdinir~g these
slopes and Jay Titus, pffice E~gineer, explAined they wtil becon~e the
res~onsibility of thc homeaaner's association and the CCbRs will be revtsed
to include them.
ACTIQN: Commissioner Tolar offercd a r~tlon. seco~ded by Cc~nenisstoner Fry
an MOTtON CARitIED~ that the Anaheim City Plannl~g Canmtssipn does hereby
recorm~end to the C! ty Caunci 1 that Absndonrt~snt No. 80-11l1 !se approved as
recortn+~~ded by the Ctty Engineer.
D. ABANDONt~NT N0. 80-~A - Request from Paul K. Goafis~ President of Kingslea
o*~mun t~s, to a anc n a publlc starm drain lateral easement back to
private ownership, l~ceted on the sc~uth side of Anahetm Hills Road~ east of
Stlvcrspur Trail.
ACTION: Conmissloner King offered a motlon~ seconded by Commtssic~e~• Bouas
and MOTi0t1 CARRIED~ that the M ahelm City Pianning Cammisslon does he~eby
r~comne~d to the Ctty Council that Aba~donment No. EO-9A be app~oved as
rncommended by the City Enginee~.
E. A6ANDONMENT N0. $Q~A - Requ~st f~om ~indborg/Dahi Invastors. Inc., to
a an on a ve- oot wide publtc uttlity easenent locnted south of lincoln
Avenue and west of WQStchester O~ive.
ACT10l~: Com~ntssioner King offGred a motlon, seco~ded by Commissto~er Bouas
an ION CARRiEO~ that the Anaheim C1ty Pianntng Commission does he~eby
recanne~d to the City Cou~ci) that Abandonme~t No. SA-7A be approvod as
r~comm~nded by the Ctty Engineer.
7/27/81
fi` ~
MINUTES. ANAFiE1M CITY PLANNING COMMISSIAN, JUIY 27• 1~41 81-W82
F. ABANDONMENT N0. 80-6A • Request fram Roge~ Liss. -~~11 6 Foraman~ inc., to
a en n a ten- oot w de unde ~g round et'cc~ical easement end a thlrtee~-foot
by twe~ty•foot elect~icol ea=ement for a trAnsf~rmer substatlon located on
the soutl~ side af Wi lken Wsy~ east of Narbor Elouleverd.
ACTIOFI: Commiss'aner King offered a mc~tion, seconded by Commissloner Bouas
an ION CARRIEp~ that the Anaheim City Pla~ning Commtssion daes herebv
recortrtnrend ta ~he Clty Cauncil that Aba~donment No. 8o-GA be approve~d as
recommended by the Ctty Engineer.
G. ABANDQNMENT N0. 80-1 A- Request from Willism R. Treder~ Vice P~esldent of
Co mun ty Dank~ to abandon a dedicated publtc street commonly known as
"~omnunity Clrcle" located at the east stde ~f State Callege Boulevard~ 2W0
feet north of Y.ate~la Avenue.
ACTfON: Comnlssioner Tolsr offered e mDtlOn~ secanded by Commisstaner Bouas
an TION CARRIEO (Commissioner King abstaining)~ that the ~nahetm City
Planning Comnission does heret~y recommend to the City Council that
Abandonment No. 80-15A be approvcd es recornmended by the City Engineer.
H~ TENTATiVE MAP OF TRACT N0. 11122 - Request from Robert 0. Sukup, Ilomes by
John Lyttle or an extens on o time for prope~ty located on the west side
of Cauntry Nills Road and on the east side of Old Bridge Road~ 670 f~et
south of the cnnteriine of Mohle~ ooulevard.
ACTION: Conwr-Issioner King ~ffcred a R~tlon, seconded by Commissloner Bouas
en TION CARRIED~ that the Anahelm Clty Planntng Ccxrimisslon dees he roby
grant a one-year extension of time Ror Tentative Map of Tract No. 11122 to
expire on Hovember ig. tg82.
I. VARIANCE N0. 11 -- Requc~t from ilobe~t Hall for termination of Varlence
No. 11 or property tocatcd at '<025 South Manehester Avenue.
ACTIOt~: Commissfo~er Herbst offered Resolution Ho. PC81-t66 and maved for
tT s passage and adoption that the M aheim City Planning Commission does
hareby Cerminate Variance Plo. 711.
On roll call. the foregoing resolutian was passed by the followir~g vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES, BOUAS~ gUSNORE, FRY~ FIERf3ST~ KiNG~ TO~AR
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSEMT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
J. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2212 - Request for sound study of cocktail lounge
operations ~t the northwest carner of Ball Road and Kr~ott St~eet.
AGTION: Chalrman Busho~e offer~d a motion, seconded by Commisstoner Bauas
an OTION CARRIED. that since Co~ditionel Use Permit No. 2212 wes d~+nted by
~he City Council at thetr July 21. 1981 meeting, the other condttional use
permit holders at this location shalt be notified by letter, w~ith a copy of
Section 6.72 of the Anaheim Muntclpal Code pertaining to sound atte~u~+tion
and that no sound study be cenducted at thts time A~ city expenses.
7l27/81
;
i
~
;
;
;
l '
~ ~
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CI~Y PLANNING CONMISSION~ JUl,Y Z~~ 1g81
e~ -ae3
K. ANIW EIM CITY PLIWNINO COMMISSION RESOlUT10N• - Ch~nging the tims for
•n~ ~~ ann ~~ on m~et Rg~ - J~ck te~ Aaslatant Clty Atto~nay~
•xplainad conc~~n th~t th~ 10:00 e.m. n-e~tin9 af the Cammisslcx~ to
preltminary reviwv plsn of th• a9onda are not propArly advertiaed a~d
e1'factive Augue~t 24~ 1~81, nottces should (nclude th~t the msetings will
begin ~t 10:00 a.m. tor prolimin~~y p1a~ r~vlaw~ with publtc testtmcny to be
hea~d et 1:30 p.m.
ACTIQN: Commtsstone~ He~bst offered aesoluilon No. PC81-167 and moved far
tT i p ssage and sdoptlon that the tim~e for Planning Cartmisslan meetings be
changed to 10:00 a.m. for preliminary pien revlew.
On roll cell, the foregotn9 resolution was passed by the following vate:
AYES; COMMISSIONERSt BARNES~ 80UAS, BUSNORE~ FRY~ HER85T~ KING~ TOLAR
NOES; COMMISSIONERS; NONE
A9SENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ADJOlJRNMENT Ther~ being no furthor bus~iness~ Comnissloner Herbst offered ~ nwtton,
aeconded by Cammtsslvne~ Bouas and MOTION CARRIEO~ that the meeting be
adJaurned.
The meeting wa~s adJourned at 3:15 p.m.
Respectfully subm(tted,
~~ ~ ~~~~-w
Edtth L. Narris~ Sec~atary
Anshetm City Planning Commission
ELH:Im
7/27/81
a