Loading...
Minutes-PC 1982/01/11~; ~, ~ Civic Conter A~aheim~ California Jenuary 11 , 19$2 RECULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIN~~ CQMMISSION REGUTAR MEETING The regular r-Me;ing of the Anaheim City Planning Conmission wes cailed to order by Chetrman Bushore ai 10:10 s,m., January 11, 1982~ in the Council Chambsr, a quorum being present, and the Commission revlev+ed ~1ans of .he Items on today's agenda. Recess: 11:20 a.m. Reconvene: 1:30 p.m, for public testimc~ny PRESENT: Chairmen: Bushare Comnissioners: Barnes, Bouas, Fry~ Nerbst, King, McBurney A65ENT: Commissioners: None AL50 PRESENT; Annika Santaleht( Assistant Director for 2oning Jack l~lhite Assistant City Akta~ney Paul in er T a ~i E nine r Jack ud~ C~v 1~ng~~eer~ng Associate Dean Sherer Assistant Planner Edith Harris Planning Commission Secretary P~EOGE OF AILEGIANCE TO THE FLAG LED BY - Commissioner Houas Af'PROYAL OF M{NUTES: Comnission~r K.tng offered a motlon, seconded by Commissioner c urney an CARRIED (Chairman Bushore abstaining on the December 28th minutes) that the minutcs of the meetings of December 14 and 28~ 1981, be approved az submitted. PRESE~ITA710N: walter J. Smith, rcpresenting the Board of Directors of the Anaheim co~nom~c Zlevelapment Corporation, presented the ComprehensivePlan whtch was previousty prCSentcd to the Anaheim City Council, notinq the pla~ is the result of eight compre- hensive reports and that it focuses on industrial detielopment. Chairman Bushore stated he had read the report submitted and realized a lat of time and study was spenc on it and notad ho felt the Plenning Commission app~eciates those efforts. I~e also stated traditionally the Planning Commisslon tries to be very suppprtive af industry in this city. ITEM ~~0. 1. E{R NEGATlVE DECLARATION AND RECLASSiFICATIO'~ N0. 81-82-10. PUBLIC HEARING. ONNER: BRIAN J. 0'NEIL, et~l~ 1014 North Pa~ker, Orange. CA 92667. Proper•ty described as an irregularly-shaped parce) of land consistis,g ~f approximately 1.1 ac~es lo~ated at the nortl~east corner of the Riverside Freeway and Lemon Street (1420 North L.emnn Strer.). RECLASSIFICATION REQUEST: RS-A-43~OQ0 to ML There was no ane indicating their presence in opposition to subJect request and although th~e steff report to the Pianning Commissian date~d January 11, 1982 was not read at the public heari~g, it is referred to and n~ade a part of the minutes. Subject pptitio~ was continued from the meetings of kovember 30 and December 14, 1981, at the request of the petitFone r. 82-1 1/11/82 ~~, MINUTES~ ANAHEfM C1TY PIANNiNG COMMISSION~ January !1~ 1982 ~~. 82-2 9~lan 0'Neil~ owner~ explatned they curr~ntly have s diepar service located In Orangc snd purchased subject property with pl~ns to relocate. THC PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner King referr~d to th-a Traffic ~ngineer's recommendetion thet s traffic signal ba inskalled at the inter~ec':lon of Leman Street and the Riverside Freewsy at the owne~'i expen~n when And it treffic vol~ane exceeds 200 vehicle trips par work day. Mr. 0'Netl replied he was aw+~re of that ~econ~ndation and would stipulate to comply. Mr. 0'Neil referred to Co~dttlon No. irequiring that che owner deed to the Clty of Anaheim a strip of land 38 feet in widch from the cente~line of the srreet along eastbaund freewai access street f~~r sidewalk purposas and asked lf thAt property would have to be dedicated riqht away sir~ce it rr~ay not over bo needed. JacH. White~ Asslstant Cl~y Attorney~ explai~~ed the G-ty is asking for dedication prlor to the adoptlan of an ordinance razoning the pr~pcrty. Jack Judd~ Civii Engineering Associete, stated this is a general condltiun and the dedication is necessary for sidewalk pu~poses and noted there 13 er.isting curb, gutter and paving. Mr. 0'Neil stated there is a vacant st~ip of land faclnc~ Lemon Street owned by the city and asked if it would be posstble to trads his property for that property. Jeck White explalned the condltion is a requi~ement of the reclass~fication and does not pravide for a tr•ad~. Commissloner Fry stated he did not think that area wauld ever require sidewalks. Paul Singer~ Traffic Engineer, expluined thls access road was deslgned to conttnue easterly on Lemo~ 5treet to serve propertie5 to the east if and when they are developed. Jack Judd expleined the owner can request e sid~walk waiver from the City Engineer which wo~~ld probably be granted; hrrwever~ when the prop~rty to the north and east develops~ thesidewalk would be required so the dedic~tion is ne~aded for that contingency. Mr. 0'Neii clarified that he shQUld not have brought up khis matter now~ but it had Just occurred to him that if the city is not going to use that land on Lemon, he wouid ue the only property owner to buy it and since he i~ required to give ather property. Just thought maybe there could be a trade. Conmissioner 9arnes stated she did not think the Conmiss+on can answer the petitioner's qutstion and Commissivner Herbst stated if the property Is retoned for industrial uses, there could be other uses permitte~d 'f it is sold in the future so tha sidewalk could become necessary. He expleinad the petitioner would probably not be required to construct the sidewalk at this time. M~. 0'Neil stated he would ttke ta request a two wieek continuance in order to pursue this matter. /1CTION: Commissioner Barnes offered a motion, seconded hy Commisstoner Herbst and M4T10~1 CAttRtEU that considerattoro of the afo rementianed metter be continudd to the fegularly-schedulzd meeting of January 25- 19$2~ at the request of the petittoner. 1/ll/82 _~ i ' ~ MINUTeS~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, January 11, i982 82-3 Chairman Bushore ssked if the petitioner had lnvestigeted tho sewer capabllitles, Mr, 0'Nell raplled thoy would h~ve ta put a sewer in Lemon Street. Chairman 9ushore asked why this is a request for a reciassification ~a thcr than a conditlonul uses permtt. Dean Sherer, Assistent Planner, stated the ~urrent zoning on this property is resident(al/~qr~cultural which would not pe~mit an in d uetrial laundry facility; tharefore~ the petitioner Is requesting the rezoninq ta indust ~lal which by rlght does permit the industrlal laundry facility. He staCed these conditions would have been requi red i f' the request hed been for a condl t ion+~l use permi t. Chalrman Bushore asked if the plans did m~!et the cnde end Mr. Sherer rc plied they did. Mr. 0'Nell stated his l~wyer had thought they were requesting a reclas sificatfon end a condltionel use permit and that there should be np conditions on the rezoning and when the buliding Is built~ these conditfons would be tied to chat pe rmit. Mr. Sherer explained in order to buiid this facility on this site, th e property requires the appropriate zoning which is ML (Industrfal Limited) and oncr. the re zon{ng ordinance Is adopted, this use would be allowed or any other industrial use. He stated the potitloner could have taken the option of sinply requestfnq a conctitional use permit, however, he would be tied to specific plens and faced with these same conditions. Jack Whtte~ Assistant City Actorney, stated the applicant and enginee ring staff should explore Gondition No. 9 pertaining to en ag~eement between the city an d owner for rt-aintenance of a strtp of land along Lemon Street and Che 3qreement sho uld spell out the conditions such as whether the city is to be indemnified and held harmless for thet property and whether the~e is to be an ir~surance requirement~ an d whether thG agreement is to be recorded~ etc. Chairmen 6ushore explained if the petiti~ner needs additional time, he should request an additional continuante from staff. ITEM N0. 2. EIR NEGATIVE DECI.ARATfON. WAIV~R pF GODE REQUIREMENT AN D CONDI710NAL USE PERMIT N0. 22 . PUBLIC HEl~RING. OI~MER: JOSEPH 01 RUGGIERO, et al, 4803 Spencer Street, Torrance~ CA 90503. property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approxin-ately 0.9 acre located at the southeast corner of Colthescer D rive and Colony Street (223~ West Colchester Drive). Pro~erty zoned Cl. CONOITIONAl. USE REQUEST: To permit a cocktail lounge in the CL tone with waiver ~f minimum number of parking spacea. SubJect petition wes cantinued fror+ the meecing of December 28, 1981, so thet the applicant could be present at the public heartng. There was no one indicating their presence in oppnsttion to subject request ac the public hearing and although.he ataff reporc wes nat ~ead~ i; is r•.ferred ta and made a part of the minuces. Chris Di RuggiQro~ 4$03 Spencer~ Torrance~ explained the request is fo r a cocktail lounge with waiWer r~f number of parktng spaces on the basis that the hours of operation do not require the sdditiona~l parking spaces. 'fHE PU6LiC HEARilIG WAS ClOSEO. 1/11/8Z ~` MINUTES. ANANEIM CITY PLANNING CQMMISSION, J~nuary il~ 1982 82-4 Commission~r King asked {f the petitionar Is ewere of the requirement th~t deed restrtcttons limlting uses on subJec.~ ~~operty have to be roscinded by the fity Council, M~. Oi Ru49iero stated he wiss Just ma~de aware of that co~ditinn, Chairmen Bushore stet~+d there is anotner bar end a black jack schoo) operattnn in this area and he felt there would be a lot ~f business ther~e at night. Mr. D) Ruggiero stated the black Jack ~classes are hc+ld in homes and only 10 to 207 af tle black Jeck buslness Is conducted at th`s loc+~tion. Chsi rman Bushore asked i f any bl~ck Jeck classes are conducted at thi s loca~tlon at n(ght and Mr. DI Ruc~giera repl led they a re . Cammi ss i one r Boues asked why the s f gn rrads "c I ub house"for the bl ack j ack 1 ocat I on and the petitioner replied this IocAtior~ is just a set-u~ far the business where the owner tak~s tclephone cal 1 s~ sct i s tobles, etc . Cornmissioner Boues asked if the htaose l~~ige is being used at the present time w~th the c~wner replying thac it is still being use+d. Hc also n,xplained this tenant plans that this wi 11 bc a neighborhood type cocktail loun~e. Cortnniss ioner Herbst stated the staff report saYs tf~e hours wi 11 vary, but thet the faci 1 i ty wi 11 be open from 10 a.m, to 2 a.,m. ,'J days a week. Mr. Oi Ruggiero cxplained three units in this complex arc used for warehouses and storage and there is also a weight reducing doctar whns~e hours are from 8 a.m. tn 1 p.m, by ap~ointmenc anly and also there is a no~elty shop wtiich setls 90~ whales~le with del iveries from this uni t. He explalned tl~ere ls an /1?cohol ic Anonyrr-~us operation 1 ~ anothe r un I t whe re peop 1 ~ n+ee t. Judy Vaughn. tenent , repl +ed to Cortmissioner Herbst thac very little entertainment is p lanned . She exp 1 a i ned th i s w( I 1 be a ne 1 qhborhood type aperat i rn and she d 1 d not think there w) I1 be a park i ng problem bec~usc people do nnt want to dri ve and thcre are a lot of apartments in the a~Pa and she felt most peop~e wi l i walk r.u the cocktail lounge. She explained i f thcre wi 11 ba any ~ntertainmer~, it wi 11 be )ust e piano bar and there wvuld be no bands. She stated tfie:rc Is an existing dancR floar, Dean Sherer explained ther~ is an existing bar in the center~ tl~e "Atibi". Chai rman Bushore stated he i s concerned bacause there i s an existinq bar in the tent~er and the AA fac i I i ty an~ a b) ack Jack schoo 1; and th~t hc real i zes the re i s a Moose Lodge operating at the p~esent time, but that it cate~s to a closed cl ientele. Judy Vaughn stated a tot of p~ople in the ar~a joined the Moose Lodge because they did ndt want to drive to bars in other locations and after the other neighborhood bar was closed, a lot of those patrons Jolned th~ Moose Lodge. Commissio~er Bernes stated she is not conce~~ed about thc parking since the Moose Lodg~ is still cperating and maybe there isn't a p~rking problem and it is poss161e the cllentelr who frequent the 1laose Lodge will ~:ome to this cockteil lounge a~d the number of vehttles would probably be equal to those coming to the Moose Lodge now. Respondt~q to ~ommissioner Bouas~ Ms. Vaughn explained khe capacity of thts lounge is 130 persons, 1/ii/82 ~. MtINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY P~/WNING COMM15510N~ January I1, 1982 $Z-5 CQmmissioner Herbst indicated concern that twn bars competinc~ wlth eech othar would have discos~ etc. Ms. Veughn explatned the other bsr in the area Is a beer bar and Is completely d(f(erent. Commissioner Nerbat steted hc feit approval shc~uld be limited to a trial basis. ACTION: Commissianer Ktng offe~ad a motlon, seconded by Cammisslone~ Herbst and MOTION CTIRRIED that thr.. Anahelm City Planning Commission has r¢vlewed the proposa) t~ permlt a cacktall lounge {n the CL (Commerclal~ l(mited) zone with wat~er of minimum number of p~erking spaces on e rectangularly-~haped parcel of land consisting c-f approxtmately 0.9 acre located at the svutheast corner of Coichest~r Drive and Colony Straet (2230 Wast Colchester Orlve); and doeshereby approve the Nogattve Qacla~ation from the requi ren-ent to prepare an envi rc~n~~~c~l impact report on the basis that there would be no siynificant individual or cumulative adverse env(rann-ental Impact due to the appr•oval of this Negattve Declaration since the Anaheim General Plan designates the subJect property for medium-d~nsity residential iand uses commensurate with the ~roposal; that no sensttive nnvironmental impacts a~e involved in the proposal; and that the Inltial Study submitttd by the petitioner indicates no signif(cant individual or cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and that the Nagative Declaratian substanciat(ng the foregoing finding5 is on file in the City of Anahelm Plann(ny Departn~enC . Commissloner Ktng offered a motiun~ seconded by Commtssloner Barnes and MOTION CARRIED (Commi ss ioners Bushare ~ He rbst and ~1cBurney vot i ng no) that the wa i ver of cade requi re~ ment is hereby granted on the basis that it was indicated a majority af the customers are expected to walk fram the surrounding neicthborhood and on the basis of the location and surroundings of subJect property. Commissioner Kinq offered Resolutian f~o. PC42-1 and moved far its passage and adaption that tha Aneheim C(ty Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditior+a) Use !'ermit No. ~284 in compliance with Sections 18.03.030; .031: .032: .033; .034 and .035. Title 18 of the Anaheim Municlpal Code, for a period of ane year and subjtct to the stipulation that entertalnment shall belimitedto a piano bar and ~ubject to ~nterdepartmental Commi t tee Recomnenda t i ons . Commissioner Bouas ask~d if there will be danctng and Ms. Vaughn replled there is an existing dance fioor, but dancing would not be a pro~lem, Commissioner Bou.~s clarified that thc petitioner agrees to having a plano bar only, with Ms. Vaughn stattng a piano bar consists of one er two players. She stated the operators of the Moose Lodge have indicated they heve never had any gonQlatnts and that they did ha~e a big band fpr pne event. There was a brief discussion as to the meaning of a"piano bar", wlth Jack 1fi ite suggesting the stipulation should bm that any live cntertainment shali b e limited to a pianist only. Ms. Vaughn stat•sd there will not be any bar.d5. but e piano ba~ usuelly consists of one ar two players because the piantst likes to have someone accampa~y for a beat to the music. Conmissioner Fry indicated he would wanti the music iimited to a piana playsr oniy and Commissioner Bcuas agreed. Ms. Yaughn indicated she would be concerned about such a restrictien prohibiting radio o~ stereo music and did not think she could make any money without some music. Commissioner Barnes noted even restaurants hava recorded music and explained the Commission is really concerned about the bar itsalf~ and about noise. !/it/62 ; MINUTES. ANANEiM C17Y PLANNiNG COMMISSIQN. Janu~ry 11, 1982 82•6 Ms. Vaughn stated th~re wlll nut be a p~obiem with nc,ise~ but did not thtnk ahe could live with the~e r~strictt~ns. She steted usually d cocktail lounge wauid h~ve a Jukebox and it was net~d thare ta s Jukel~ax at the Moose Lod9e. Conmissloner Barne~ folt e stipulstion would be Adequate thet there would be no bands. She stated she was not conte rned baceuse the conditlonal use permit could be revlewed et eny time {f the~e is a p robiem or compleint. She thought the resolutlonshould be worded that Iive muslc would be iimited to a planist. On mll call, the foregoing resolut(un was passed by lhe following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES~ BOUAS, FRY~ HERBST, Y~ING, MC BURNEY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BUSHOFtE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE Jack White presented the writtcn right of nppeai. ITEM N0. 3. EIR I~EGATIVE DECLARATION AND CONDITIONAL USE pERItIT N0. 2285. PUBLIC HEAR{NG. OWNEk: TNE SOUTHLANp CORPORATiOM~ P. 0. Box 719~ Dalias~ Texas 75221. AGENT: GLENN 5. WASIIEN~ 1240 5, StatQ Collegs Boulev~rd, An~heim~ CA g2806. Property described as a rectangula.-!y-shaped parc4l of tand consisting of opproximately .46 acre located at the northwest corner of Ball R~ad and Gilbert Street (2403 west 9a11 Road (7-Eteven)). Property zoned CL. CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST: To ptrmic a convenfenee market with gasoline sales. It was noted subject petition was continued 'rom the Planni~ng Commisston meeting of Decembar 28, 1981, due to a tie vate. Chairman Bushore explaineu this matter was continued bec~use of a tie vote at the previous ~neeting due to his absQnce and that he has read the minutes and reviewed the site a~d is prepared to vote. Commissioner MtBurney clarifled that the size of the site wes incorrectly raported at the previous meeting and the actual size is 150' x ly0'. (It is notcd the staff report (ndicates the si:e to be 135' x 135', excluding corner radit). The negative declaration was approved at the Decer-ber 28~ 1981 meeting. ACTION: Commissioner King offered t~ resolution and moved for its passage and ado~tlon that the Anahelm Gity Planning Commission does hereby grant Cond'tkionai Use Permit No. 2285, subJect to Interdepartmentel Committee Recortmendations. pn roli call, the foregoing resolutton FAILEQ TO CARRY by the followtng vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: King, Fry, hkBurney NOES: COMMISStONERS: Barnes. Bouas. Bushore, Herbst ABSENT: CQW11S5lONERS: Nane Chair~an 6ushore offered Resolution No. PC82-Z and nroved for its passage and adoption that the Anahelm City Planning Cortrsisston does hercby deny Conditional Use Permit Ha. 2285 on the basis that mpproval would set an undesirable prtcedent for convenience markets to request gasoline sales and gasoline service stations to request convenienca markets. i/11/82 ~..: 11 I NUTES , ANAHE I M C I TY PLANN 1 NG Ct1N~i I SS I ON , Jen ua ry 11 ~ 1982 On ratl cail~ the forec~oinq resotution was passed by the following vot~: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: B~rnes~ Rouas, Bushore. Herbst NOES: COMMSISSIONER~: Fry~ King, McBurncy ABSENT: COMMISSIOt1ERS: None Jack White, Assistant City Attarney, p~esented the written right of appeal. ITEt~ NQ. 4, ElR NEGATIVE DECLARATIfIti ANO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 22$7, R2-7 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: HOUSE OF HAR~TOPS~ INC., P, 0. Bc~x 3600, 5an Ramo~, CA 94583. AGENT: CAMPIt~G WORLO OF CAIIFORNIA, II~C.~ 24901 W. Pica Canyon Road, Valencia, CA 91355~ Attention: Staven Snodgrass. Property describcd as ar~ irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximat~ly 3.0 acres, having a frontage of approximately 700 feet on the east side of West Street. approximetely 320 fe~t south of the centertine of South Street (866 Sauth West Street). Property zoned ML, CQNDITIONAL USE REQUFST: To pmrmit recrea-tional vehicle accessories sales and service fatility. There was~ no one indicating thelr presence in opposition t~ sub,ject request and although the staff report to the Planninq Commission doted January 11,1982~ was nat read at the public hearing. it is referred ta And made a part of the minutes. John Sherrell, Latham b Watkins, Attorneys. 555 South Flower~ Los Angeles, stated this is primarily an accessory sales operation~ but his client wouid iike the right to sell and rent recreational vehictes and also ta service thase vehicles. Ha reterred to Co~dition No. 4 referring to Exhibtt Na. 1 through 5 and clarifled with Dean Sherer, Assistant Planner~ that those are the plans submitted in connec~ton with the application. Nr refe~red to Condition No, 2 pertaining to parkfng area lighting and noted there are existing lights which are higner than 12 feet andstAted the peticioner wauld like to have the right to use 4 tv 6 of those lights as they exist and that they would be directed away from resick ntial propertiea to the west. Dtan Sherer, explained this cundition would apply to any ~aw ~ig~,ting and as long as the existing lights are directed away from the residential pr~perties, they wili ~Se acceptable. THE PUBL.IC HEARlNG WAS ClOSEO. Commi~sioner Nerbst asked the petitioner to stipulate that if there are con~lalnts regarding the Ilghts~ they wi11 be lowered to 12 feet and Mr. Sherretl indicated that would be agreeable. Chairman Bushore asked about the public address system and Mr. Sherrell replied the limitation set forth in the staff report is acceptable. Chairm~en Bushore askmd the petitianer to stipulate that all employees will park on site {n marked spaces and that ail signing will meet curr~nt city codes and Mr. Sherreil i~dlcated botfi sttpuiations are accepLabie. Cam~issioner Herbst asked if any ma~~factu~in~ would be dane on site and Mr. Sherrell replied thtre wili be no n~anufacturingt ,just sales and service. ~i~ ~iaz ~, _ ~~ ~. v ~ MINUTES~ AN1,4HEIM CiTY PLANNING COMMiSSIQN~ January 11~ 19$2 8~-8 ACTION: ~~ammisstoner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissloner Bouas and MOTION A RI D that ,!he Anahelm Cfty Plenning Cortimission has reviewed the ~roposel ta permlt a recrentional vehicle accessorir.s sdiQS and service facility on a~n Irregularly-shaped parcel o~ land consisting of approxin-ately ~.0 r~cres~ havtng a frontaqe of approximstely ~00 feat on the east side of West Street, appro.ximetely 32Q feet south of the c~nteriine of South Street (866 South weat Street); and d~~es hereby approve the Negative Declaration from tl~c~ requirement to prepare an cnvironmental impact report on thc basis that thore would bn no slgnificent individual or cumulative adverse cnvironmental impects du~ to the ap~roval of thls Negative Decleratlan since the Anehelm General Plan Qestgnates the subJec, property ~`or cortrnercial recreatlon land us~s comnensurate wi th the proposal ; that nu sansitive enviranmantal ir~ acts are involved in the proposal; that the Initial Study submitted by the petitioner• indicates na slgniFicent individual or cumulatlve adverse environment~~l impacts: and that the Negattve Daclaretion substantiating the foregoing findings i:: on file in the City r~f Anaheim Planning Departrr~ nt. Conn+issioner Herbst offered Resolutian No. PC82-3 and moved for it5 passage and adoption that the Mahtim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Canditional Use Permit No. 2287~ in compliance with Section 18.03,030; .031: .032; .033; .034 and .035, Tltle 18 of Anahalm Municipal Code~ subJect to the petitioner's stipulation that if existing park- inr area lighting creates a problem for residents to the WGSt~ they will be lowered to a maximum li~ight of 12 feet; and that all ernployces will ~ark on site in marked spsces and that all signtng will meet current c(ty codes and that no public eddress system intended to amplity muS(c or ve~rbal communication~ outside the builclings shall be permitted~ and subJect to Interdapartmental Comriittee aecommendatlons. On roll call~ the foregoing resolution w~s passed hy the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIQNERS: Barnes~ Pouas. Bushore. Fry~ Herbst, King, Mc Hurney NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None ITEM N0. 5• EIR CATEfqRICAI EXE'~PTION-CLASS 1»nd CONDITIONAL t~SE PERMIT N0. 2289. PUBI.IC HEARING. OWNER: itOBERT L. AND ETNEL WET2lEa, 9596 Garden Grove Blvd.~ Ste. /1212~ Garden Grove:, CA 92644. AGEN7: GREGG SAVAIA~ 2952 W. Ball Road~ Anaheim, CA 92804. Property described as an irreg~ilarly-shaped parccl of land consisting of approximately 2.1 acres located south and et~st of the ~outheast corner of B~il Road and 8each Boulevard~ 2952 West Bail Road (Littie C~,~boose). Property =oned CL. CONdiTIpNAI USE REQUEST: Yo permit on-sele beer and wina in an existing restaurant. It was noted the petitianer has requested a two-week continuance. AGTION; Cormissioner King offcred a motion~ seconded by Commissioncr Bou~s and MOTION CaRRiED that consideration of the aforementioned matter be continued to the reqularly- schCduled meeting of Janus~ry 25- 19$2, at the request of the petitioner. 1/11/82 ~ . ~' ~r.At . ~ MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNiNC COMMISSION, ,1ar,~~ary 11~ 1982 82'9 ITEM h0_,~~ 6. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CONUITIONAL U5E PERMIT N0. 2190. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: B1LI.Y C~ ANU CECELIA M. WRiGNT~ 1195 Pomona R~ad, Corona, CA q172~. AGENT: OORIS J. PEAK, 10~4 E. OrangQfalr~ Anaheln~, CA 92801. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisttng of a~proximately 0.25 acre~ havi~g a frontege of approximetely 70 feat on the snuth side of Orangefair LAne, appraximately 56U fect west of the centerli~a af Raymond Avanue (1004 ~ast Orangefatr Lane ~Blue Goose Charter)~. Property zoned ML. CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST: To retr+in a bus charter and maintenance facflity in the Ml zone. There wes no one indicating their presence in oppositlan to subJect request and although the stAff report to the Planning Co~nission dated January I1, 19$2, was not read at the public hearing~ it is referred to and rtwde a part of the minutes. poris Peak~ agent, wa~present t+~ answer any questlons and explaincd surrounding land useg are industrial with rallrcad tracks directly behind subJect prc~per•ty, THE PU9lIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commi~Sioner McBurney asked if the pecitianer nlans to replace the pavement at the rear of ~-±~e property and Mg. Qeak replted t.hey do intend to replace ~t. ¢~w.~~ma~ 8ushore asked if there are ~ny engineering spectficati~ns for the pavement. !~ Jud;l~ Civil Engineering Associate~replied pavement on sice is up to the petitioner. ^~i r,~ 8ushore asked f f any members of the publ ic would be cominc~ to the faci 1 ity. ~. ~_ re~iled the tours are bc~oked and pfcked up at other lacations, wtth no one e,c~i~a ~o this faeility. ,~:"rn~an 8ushore asked if there arc any plans f~r exp~nsio~ and if there is ample room fr~~~- parking the buses. Ms, Peak replied khey wauld not liGc to be limited to four ~s and Chat if additional buses are adde:d~ they would be parked cm the property. -~'t+airman Bushore 3tated the Commission needs to insure that there is a parking space ~~r every bus and for every employee. Dean Shere~, Assistant Planner, explained "t~ petition advertisement did not mention the nUmber of buses. ~Dean Sherer suggested a time limit fnr replacing the pavement and it wa~ suggested 90 days would be ~ppropriate. ACTION: Commissioner Mc9urney affered a motion, seconded by Commissioner H~rbst and MOTION CARRIED, that che Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to rec~in a bus charter and m~intenance facility in the ML (Induszrial, Limited) Zont on a ectangularly-shapad parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.25 acre, having a f.ontac~e of app~oximattly 70 feet on the sauth side of Orangefair Lane, approximately 560 feet west of the centerline of Rayrtwx-d Avcnue (1004 Esst Qrangefair 1,ane (Blue Gc~ose Charter)); and cioes her~by approve the Negative Deciarat3o~ from the requirerr~nt xo prepare an envtronmental impact report on the basis that there would be no signiflcant individual or cumulative adverse environmental impacts due ta the approval of this Negattve Declaration since the Anahetm General Plan designates Che subject property for general industria~ land uses commensur~ce wdth the proposal; tf~at no sensttive environ+nental i~atts are invoived in tMe proposal; that the Initial Study submitted by the petitionar indicates no sigr~ificant individusl ur cumulative adve~se environme~tal impacts; and that t'~e Negativa Decia~ation substantiAttng the faregoing findings is on file in the City flf Anahaim Planning Qep~rtment. 1/11/82 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ MINUTES, ANAHE111 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ Jenuary 11, 1982 82-10 Commiasioner McBurney offered Resolution No. PC62-4 and moved for Its passage and adoption khat the A~ahaim City Planning Commission does h~+reby qrant Conditlonai Use Permit No. 2290 in compliance wlth Se;.iiors 18.03.030; .031; .032; .033; .0~4 and .035~ Tttle 18 of the Anahelm Mu~ic;tpel Code~ end subJect to the petttioner's stipulAtlon ta replace the pavement at the rear of the subJec~ property within 90 days and sub~ect to Interdapartmental ~Commict'e Recommendat(ons. On roll call~ the foregoing resolution was passed by the follow(ng vote: AYES: COMMiSSIONERS: earnes, 9ouas, Bushore, Fry~ Herbst~ King~ Mc Burney NQES: CONIIISSIGNERS: None ABSENT; COMMISSIpNERS: None ITEM N0, ~. EIR NEGA7IVE DECt,ARATION ANO VARIANCE N0. 324$. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: LOARA STREET 1'ARTNERSNIP~ 17781 Beach Blvd,~ Huntington Beach~ CA 92647. AGENT: G. MICHAEL LYON, 594~: S. Avalon Blvd., Los Angele~~ CA g0003. Proparty describad as an irregulorly•shaped par~el of land consisting ~~f appr~ximately 0.5 acre located at the southeast corner of Wilshire Avenue and Loare .Street, 351 I~orth Wi lst~i re Avenue, Property zanGd CG. VARIANCE REQ~EST: Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to permit a medical office building, There were three interested persons indicating their presence ai the public hearing and although the staff report to the Planning Canmission dated JaRUary 11, 1982, was not read at the public hearing, it is re~'erred to and m~de p~art of the minutes. Mich3el t~brfl, S94W S. Avalon Boulevard, Lus Angel~s, agent~ stntcd the parking was calculatsd o~ the net square footage of the building which excludes the hallways~ physical therapy rooms and storage roams. He explain~d this operat(on is quite a bit different than other medical facilities v+here there ~uld be stveral doctors with a lot af patients coming in requlring more pa~rking s~aces end this facility will have ane doctur and the patient's appaintmcnt~ are rec~ulated because they witl require more tlme for therapy and treatment. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CL05ED. Mr. hbnJi reptiect to Chat~man Bushore that this will be an industrial therapy group which will prov(d~ prirt-aril~y secondary ca~e where patients would come if they need additional care above and beyond their initial visit; that this facility wiil have whirlpoots, nragnithern-x~ etc. whlch takes more time. He stated they feel 20 spaces wili be mnre than sufficient. Commi~sioner Bouas asked how many employecs there wouid be other than the one doctor end Mir. hbnji replied thc number :would vary and in the beginntng~ there would probebly be 3or4. Commissioner Herbst stated ho is bothered by this request for approva) of a medical office building with a parking wafver and uniess it can be tied down specifically as to tl~e ~umber of doctors and employees, he couid not vc~te fa r it because medical facilities hava parking problems. Mr. NonJt stated there would be no more than o~e physician and no more than iQ employaes on duty at any one time. He responded to Commissioner Boues thdt they co41d p robably handle 10 or ~2 patients at on~ time. 1/11/82 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNiNG COMMISSION, Jenuary I1~ 1982 81-11 Canmissioner Herbst asked why this Is r~ request for a vAriance rather than ~! Cqnd{t~~~Al use permit. Oesn Sherer~ Asststant Planner, r~plled the xoning on the ~roperty is commercie) general which would by right allaw medical effice bulldings as well as general office butldings. Jack White, Assistant City Attorney~ stated the only thing the petttioner needs is tha parking waiver and a conditional use permit is not required, and the difficulty In granting a variance is that it is cast In concrete bet~use once the building is built end this business moves ar the property Is sold, it becomes difficult to solve the problem, He st~ted the Commissinn can t~+chnicaliy and legally limlt the varlance to this type ope:~atfon~ but he did not think(t would bc practical because if the property was sold, the new buyer rr~y noc be aware of the restriction~or n-ayb~ the ~eller w~uld not realixc the extent of the operatinn. Commissloner K(ng asked if the number of employees wAS calculated in the~ parking wAiver. Ernest Gay, Architect, 705 W. La Vita~ Orange, explatned th~e parking calcuiations werP b~sed on code requirements of 6 spaces per 1~000 square feet and the net cl(nic floor area is 3~319 square feet which would require 20 spaces. Responding to Chairman Bushore, Mr. MonJi explalned the local recovery area is wher~e patients recover after therapy and thet the dead storage area is an unoccupled area and that the storage area will be used to store medical ~nd office supplies. Chairman Bushore asked why they would not war.t to be located in the industrial area. Mr. Monji replied this is a little bit different than an industrial clinic where a person receives inltial care afcer an accident or illness and the patients would be referred here for secondary treatment. Commissioner Herbst stated In 1978 when this proJect was initially proposed. there were several publlc hearings and because the applfcant stated the use would be warehouse facilitles with an apartment above it~ the COrt1tII55I0~ did allow a relief i~~ parking because af the size and shape of the property~ b~t the Commission never considered anything for medical uses and now after the bullding is canscructed, the request is for a parking waiver. He referre~ to thc comment in the. siaff report that th~ petitioner has indfcat~d there is surplus parking available to the northeask and the owner has indicated a willingness to enter into a parking agreement lf needed. He stated he would not be in favor of allowing a variance for parking ~n a medical cent~r of any Cype. Mr, Monji stated again this is not an average medical facility and is not like a doctor's ~ffice. Commissioner Herbst stated it could become like a regular doctor's office b~cause the variance stays with the property. Chairman Bushore discussed the plans and size of waiting and examina[ion rooms and stated if this is not a regular medicai clinic~ he felt there will be a lot of employees and a lot of patients scheduled in order for this operation to succeed. Mr. MonJi stated most rnedical facilities ere in cramped quarters and this will be a different approach with a patient halding area where a pa*ient would go after dress-i~; end that if the operation is efficiently run~ a lot ~f er.iployees would not be needed. He stated he realizes it is hard to visualize this because it is not a normal medical facility or an initial i~dustrlal treatment area. 1/il/82 ~,~` ~ € ~'~ M~INUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, January I1~ 198z 82-12 Commissioner 8arnes stated she ~s not too concern~d abc~ut this partlcular oparatlon~ but the Commission Is concerned about the parking arrangements and she thought this oepration probebly would not need aa many ~arking spaces, but the vartance does stay with the ?roperty and ahe did not want this appraved as a medical office building. Dean Sherer stated the approval can be tied down in the conditions requlring that the property be develop~d substantially in conformAnce with the pians submitted which Indicate thts is a three-story building with porking on th~ ground floor and generAi offices on the third floor and the medical office uses would be limited to the socond floor. He explained ataff can make certaln that wfiat permits would have to be issued would pertain only to tl~at fl~or and that no additional medical uses would be permitl•ed on ~he propnrty. He oxplained the zoning maps can be tagged to make certein that no business licens~s far medlcal o'Ffice uses are issued on thet property. Mr, MonJi stated there is %,000 square feet of office space ~~hich wo~+ld not be medical office and he thought it was possiblG the application was fllled out incorrectly and should have read~ "a medical office use in a portion of the bu(lding." Cammissioner Barnes asked if the c~de allows that a cor~dltional use permit could be used in a situatlon like this ta alluw a medfcal facility in ~.he industrial xone. Jack White explained the commercit~l henerAl zone permits medical and dentel affices and this request is for a parkinc~ waivE~r. He stated the Commission could restrict this variance to a particular form of inec11ca1 office~ such as industrial~ and limit it to a certain number of doctors and employees. but he was not sure that would be practical in givinc~ notice to subsequt~nt tenants or purchasers. He stated there is no way to restrict the llfe of the variance since it stays with the property. He: stated the code cautd be changed to rCquire a ~.onditlona! use permit for all medical offices or the Commisstor~ could deny this reques; ~ or if it is granted, the Commlssion could limit it to Chis type of use that is bein~7 proposed~ but that would not guarantee there will not be a problem in the `uturt if the pr~perty is sold or the usr. changes, Chairman Bushore asked why this site was selrcted and whether this clinic will be part of a group of clinics ard suggested thet this matter be continued in order for the Commission to taok at some o~ the other clinics. Commisstoner Nerbst asked that his question regarding the proposed parking agreement with a neighbor be answered. Dean Sherer answered that the petitioner had initially indicated to staff that there was a posslbility of an off-sitc parking agreernent. Michae) Peters~ Corpt~rate Realty, stated he was the real estate agent involve~~ in this situation and cxptained the parking agreement was mentioned b~cause th~re is a property owner in the area who has mor~ parking spaces than he needs and wCUld be willing to icase a portion to this operation. Chairman Bushore explained the agr~.~ment wc~uld have to br a reciprocal parking egreement which would be recorded and it could not be a lease u~less it is a realiy long term lease. Mr. Monj) axplained he is the Assistant pdmi~istrato~ with Avalon-Slauson Industrial Medtcai Grvup. Ne explained freeway visibtlity probabiy had a bearing on the selection of the site. He stated they have a cli~ic in Los Angeles an Stauson and in Fresno. Chairman Bushore suggested a continuance. Cammtssioner Barnes stated she is stili concerned about the variance and did not feel all the questions have been a~swered. She asked tf mnre information such es brochures could be provided. 1/11/82 . . . . . . .. . _.~..,.....LL'S.G.4w..A«i.M:.mw..ra.s. :~m~aar ~~tl1..dNM..w...N....H:.~.,W........»,.~~ ~ r ~~ ~, ~ ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, Janua ry 11, ig82 82-1~ Mr. MonJt repiled brochures could be obtatned~ but their other clinics are initial industrial clinics so it would not be the aame. He stated this use would not require as meny parking spacss as a doctor's offlce because they woul~ not have control over the number of pat(ents coming in~ but with this facility, the number af p~tien~s ts detrrmrned because it Is known how long the therapy takes. Commisstoner ~ouas stated the problam is not whether or noc this operation is dlfferent~ but what other uses coulci be allawed if this business moves. Mr. MonJl sCated expansion has beentaken into consideration and thc~ space ellocated for this fa~ility will handle whattver patient load they need. He explalned their lease is proposed for five years with an option for renewal. Commissioner Bouas scated the prnblesm is that the Cc,mnisslon cannot control whatever uses would follow, Mr. MonJl stated he doubted they would ever need to move. Comm(ssioner Herbst stated there are other uses in the building entitled to use tha parking spaces and he felt if the~ parking spaGes are all being u~ed~ ~attcnts would probably park at Anahelm Plaza, Chairman Bushore stated he was not surc anything would satisfy the Commission at this point trecause of the overriding variance and maybe th~s is Just the wrong location for this use. Commissioner Barnes stated the Commission probably agrees that this operation would n~t hurt the area or thls praperty~ but they are worried about future ope~ations. She felt the only handle wr~uld be to ins:ludc in the variance that this use would be llmited to this fioor of the buildiny with only one doctar and 10 employees. She sugge~ted the petitioner's attorneys finr! e way to limit this with CC6R's~ deed restrictions, etc. Chairman Bushore stated he is still not si~tisfied that this particular clinic is any different than any ~the~ operati~n and he felt if that conce^n is satisfied and it is proven the use will not generate a lat of traffic~ the Conmission will probably find a way to approve it. Commissioner Barnes suggested a two-week continuance ~o the petitianer can provide traffic and parking studies from their Qther clinics and aiso maybe ~ solution could be found for limiting the variance. Mr. tqonji stated they had hoped to get started on this proJect much sooner. He stated he understands the Commission concerns and noted this is a prototype clinic and in order for any new tdea to get off the grr~und, someone has to put it together and there has been ~ great expen,e in gctting this far. Chairman Bushore suggested coming up with a way to grant this with a conditional use permit. Jack White explained th~ code allows this use by right and ~he petitioner has the right to proceed if they can provide the parkireg sp .~; required, He stated the only way to require a,-.~ndltional use ~ermit is ta mak~ it a requirement that all medical offices, whether they are industrial, physicai therapy~ etc, must have a permtt and everytime there is a cha~ge~a new permit would be necessary. Ne explained ~'~e parking spaces required relate to the entdre facility and the steff report tndicates 36 sQaces are ~equired far the medical clinic, so ths ~ariance is from 36 to 24 spaces, and S3 spacss a~e existing. He stated the Commissic,n can specifically limit the variance to an in.ustrial medical ar-d therapy facility, with one doctor and a certain 1/rl/82 ~, ~ ~ ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, January 11~ 1982 82-14 number of employees. Qean Sherer stated the Plan~lnq Depa~rtn~ent staff can tag this property on the zoning maps so that any future business llcenses would not be approved for any other medicdt use~ Responding to Commissi~ner Herbst~ Mr. MonJi replled there is 7,000 square feet still empty. Commiasloner Hcrbst staced if this usr. is allawed~ future tenants could be limited. He stat~d he is bot~iered because this whole building wes origin~lly mis- represented t~ the Coinmissiu~ as a warehouse with an ep~rtment, Dean Shererexpiatned in 1978 thR Commission revtewed a commercial retail type butlding with a residence on top~ ond a varlance was granttd, but that permit was never used and a new petittone~ has submitted plans which were approved and thc butiding constructed for a general office buildin~7. Mr. Gay, architect~ xtated according ta his tabulation~ the medical ciinic would require 2Q spaces, not 36~ because of the amount of storag~ and hallways not generally consistent ~•+ith a medical office use. Dean Sherer stated the parking was caiculated on the groas floor area of one space for evcry 167 square feet of the building. Commissioner Barnes st~ted there are several Commissioners who are very co~cerned ebout the operation itself and e bett~r description is needed in writing~ such as how many parking spaces are needed~ huw many empioyees there w{11 be at ona time~ etc. She suggested the attorneys ceme up wlth a solution to the varianc3 problem. She stated in the past variences have been granted and then the buildings sold wtth the new nwner thinking he has something which he doesn't have. ACTION: Commissioner 8arnes offered a motio~~ seconded by Cammissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that considerst(on of the aforen+rntio~ed matter be continued tn the reqularty scheduled mecting of January 25~ 15`82. RECESS: 3:20 p.m. RECONVENE: 3:30 p.m. ITEM N0. $. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AtJO VARIAPICE N~. 3~5~. FUBLIC H~ARING. OWN~R: MANFaED H. LAMERS~ 230 East Florence Avcnue, ~lrnheim~ CA. 92805• AGENT: DENNIS M~ CLAYTON, 3911 E. La Paima Avenue~ Anaheim, CA 92807. Property des¢ribed as a rects~qularly-sheped parcel of land conststing of approximately 6000 square feet, having a frontage of approximately 61 feet on the south side of Flo~ence Avenue, approxtmately 210 feet wesc of the centerline oF Philadelphia Street (230 ~ast Florence Avenue). Property zoned RS-7200. VARIANCE REQUEST: Waiver of min'mum humber and type of parking spaces to retain a room addition to an existing single-family dwellino. There was no o~e indicating Cheir presence in opposittan to sub,ject request and aithough the staff report to the Planning Commission dated Janue ry I1~ 19$2, was not read at tfie public hea ring, it is refer~ed to and made a part of the minutes. ~i~~ia2 ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CGMMISSION~ Janusry il~ 1982 82-1:, Oennis Clayton~ Controctor~ 3911 E. LaPeln-~ Av~nue~ Ste. Q~ explalned this residence was c~r~~t~~~~•ted with A single-car gerage before the RS-72d0 Zona wss adopted snd tha garsge wds con~..;: 'N~ith permits being issued for the conversion and fcr a c~rport. He stated there is ampiQ room for parking two veh(ctas insida the carport and there is elso room for pArking behind t~ie garage ~o that four spaces are providad off str~et~ He expl~ined the plans originrlly proposad the gsrage tn the re~r rather than the work• shop~ but due to en oversight on his pert~ an exlsting fireplace was not teken into consideraeion and there Is no way for vehicles to pass throuqh to the re~r. He sta t ed the neighbor was n~t interested in sharing a common drivewey because a fence would h ave to be removed endangering his security. THE PUBIIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissloner Herbst ~sked how the mistekc was mede in detormining the distance between the fireplace and the property line, Mr, Clayton replied they Just did not notice t he fireplace and explained actually a sn-~il car could ~ass throu~h the area. He expleined thcre fs onl~~.ibout 6} feet of snace between the fence and fireplace. Chairman Bushore asked if the owne~ has small cars so that he could use part of the garage . Mr. Clayton st~ted in order ta use that area as a g~raq~, a tree would ha ve to be rerraved and it does prov(de quite a bit of shade and has some wlldlife ln it. He expla(ned origlnally they planned to remove the tree or p~ssibly would havG had enough turning radlus to go around the tre~, but the whole purpose was to provlde thc ownEr with a workshop area l~ecause he had converted the original garage and the garage aspect can-e into existence after the Building Departr-~nt was approached and the original plan was to have a workshup only. but after findtng out about the zoning~ thoy trie d to work out a poss i b ic way to make a two-car garage . Chair~nan Eiushore asked if it would be beneficlal to remove the tree and have the ga ~age, and the owner could use it as a workshop and extending the front parking area, He referred to a small closet area under the carport by the bACk door which he thought could be rerr,oved and the driveway moved to provide room for two smal ~ cars. He stated he had pulted his car into the area and not much rocxn was left for evan a smal) ca r. Mr. Clayton stated L.here is ample room and noted the lumber whlch is stacked there would be removed. ACTION: Cammissloner 8arnes offered a mation, seco~ded by Comnissioner Bouas and MJTION CARRIEp thaC the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to retain a ~oom addition to an existing single-family dwelling with waiver of minimum numbe r and type of parking spaces on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of ap~roxl- matefy 6000 square feet, having a frontage of approxi~natelv 61 Feet on the south side of Florence Aven~:e, approximately ^.10 feet west o` the centerline of Phitadelphia Strest, 230 East Florence Avenue; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report on the basis that there would be no significant tndividual or cumuiative adverse environmental impacts due to the app~oval of this Negative Declaration since the Anaheim General Plan designates the subject property for rr~ dium density residential land uses commensurate with the praposal; that no sensitive environmental impacts are involved in the proposal; tha t the Initiai Study submitted by Che petitioner indtcates no significant individual o ~ cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and that the Negative Declaration substan tiating the foregoing findings is on file in the City of AnahEim Ptanning Oepartment. 1/11182 ~:, ,~ ; ~ ~ f~ ~1 S M i NU7ES ~ ANAHE I M C I TY PLANN I NG COMM 1 SS I ON , Jan w ry 11 ~ 198z 82 -16 Commissioner B~rnes offered Ro.~olutian No. PC81-5 and moved for its passage and adoption thst thm Anoheim City P1~nnin9 Commission dcaes hereby grent Variance No, ;251 on the basls that the .xisting structure was bullt wtth a single-car g~rage and on the basis that th~re are two spaces existi~g tn tha csrport for smeller vehicles and diso two spaces provided behind the carport providing as meny on-site parking ~paces ds existtng properties in the surrounding a~ea and ~ubJect to Interdepartmental Committee Recammenda- tions. Chairmon Bushore polnted out the existing structure wes converted prior to being purchased by the prasent o-~mer, Commisstoner Nerbst askad lf thare is any conce rn that the workshop aroa could be converted to iiving quarters. Commissloner Barnes stated she did not think that alters the property and nated the code does not permit renting it to anyone else. On roll calt, the foregoing resolution was passed by thc fallowing vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Barnes, 8ouas, Bushore, Fry, Nerbst, King~ Mc Burney NOES: COMMISSIONEaS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None ITEM~NO. 9_. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARNTION AND TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT N0. 11707. PUBLIC H~ARING. OWNER: CALOK, A LIMITED PARYNERSHIP~ 867i Temarisk Circte, Westminster~ CA 92683. AGENT: FELICIDAD APARTMENTS, 1263n Br~okhurst Ave., Suite D, Garden Grove, CA 92640 and TRI STATE ENGINEERINf; COMPANY~ 615 S, Raymond Avenue, Fullerton~ CA 92631. Property descrtfx d es an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 2 acres, having a frontagC of approicimately 582 f~et on the north and south side of Feliclded Circle, approximately 1000 feet north of the centerline of Greenleaf Avenue, (.2G19 Felicidad Circle). Property zoned RM-12Q0. TEN7ATIVE TRACT REQUEST: To establish a I-lot, 10-building, aM-1200 subdivisio~. Walter Moose, Tri St~te Engincering was present to answer any questions. TNE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CIOSED. Mr. Moose clarified that these buildings will be rehabilitated and sold as buildings, but the units will not be sold individually. ACTION: Commissioner King offered a motlon, seconded by Commissioner Bauas and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Corrmission has reviewed the proposal to establish a one-lot~ 10-building, RM-i200 subdivisian o~ en irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisttng of approximately 2 acres, having a frantage of approximately 582 feet on the north and south sides of Felicidad Circle, approximatety 1,000 feet north of the centerline af ~reenleaF Avenue(2619 Felictdad Circle); and dces her~by app~nve the Negative Decl3ra:ion f~om the requireme~t to prepare an environmental impact report on the basis that the~e would be no sigfnficiant individual or cumulattve adverse environmental impact due to the approval of thts Negative Declaration since the A~aheim Genera) Plan designates the subJect property for medium dsnsity residentiat land uses cammensurate wtth the proposal; that no sensitive environmental impacts are involved in the proposal; that the tniti~al Study submitted by the Qetitir,ner indic~tes np significant individual or cumulativ~ adverse environmental impscts; and that the Negative Declaration substantiating the foregcing findings is on file inthe City of Anaheim Planning Department. 1/il/82 ~r ~~I~ ~~ MiNUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. January 11, 1982 ~7~17 Commissioner King offered a motton, sacanded by Commissioner McBurney and MOTION CARRIEQ~ thst the Anaheim City Planning Commisslan d~ae~ hereby find that the proposed subdivision~ tagather with its design rnd Imp~ovement. is consistent with the Clty of An~heim General Plan~ pursua~it to Governmsnt Code S~+ction 66473.5; and does~ therefore~ approve Tentative Mep of Tract No. 11707 f~r a o~e -lot, 10-building, RM-1200 subdivtsic+n~ subJect to the following conditions: 1. Thet shauld this ~ubdlvfsion be de vel~ped as more than one subdtvision, each subdivision thereof shall be s ubmitted in tancrtive form for approval. 2. That the original dacuments of the covenants~ condittons, and restrlcttons~ and a I~tt~r eddressc~d to develope~'s title company authorizing ~ecordation thereof~ s hall be submitted to the City Atto~ney's Off)ce and approved by the City Attorney's Office, Public Utilities Qepa~tment~ Duild(ng Divis~on, and the ~n~lneering Dtvision prior to finet tract map approval. S,,id docurr~nts, as approved, shall be filad and recarded in the Office of the Orange County Rccorder. 3. That indlvidual units in this subdlvision shatl not be sold, This tract map allows for the sale of complete buildinqs only. ITEM N0. 10. EI REQUIR MENT. CON TIVE DECLARATION~ RECLASS_If_ICATION N0. 81-82-I~, WAIVER Of CODE PU9LIC HEARING. OWNER: ERWIN H. W, AI~D WE RA P. KERSTEN~ 1097 Ino Obrero Avenue, P, 0. Box 5-736, GuadalaJara~ JAL~ Mexico and ARANGE C~UNTY FL000 CONTROL DISTRICT, c/o County of Or~nge Envi~onmental Management Agency. Divislon of Regulatian, P. 0. Bax 4048~ Santa Ana, CA 92702. ACEN7: StATE-WID"c DEVELOPERS~ 5182 Kstell~~ Suite 106~ Los Alami•os~ CA 90720. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consi~ting of ap~roximately 1.9 acre, havin g a frontage of aporoximately 260 feet on the so~th side of Crescent Avenue. approximatety 3;0 feet west of the centerline of B~ookhurs*_ Street. Pr~~perty xaned RS-A-4 3,000. ftECtA55IFICATION REQUEST: 1t5-A-43.000 to ati-3000. CONDiT10NAL USE REQUEST: To permit a 1-lo t, 39-unit~ 45-foot high cA~Oominium subdivision with waivers of minimum building site area, rt-aximum structural height, minimum landscaped setback~ minimu~~ sidey ard setback, minimun- recreatiGn-letaure area and resquir~d type ot parking speCes. 7ENTA7IYE TRACT REQUEST: To establish a 1-lot, 39•unit, 45-foot high condominium subdivision. It was nated the petitioner had requ~sted a two-week continuanGe. ACTION: Commissioner King affered a motion~ seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MQTION CAaRIED tt~at consfderation of the aforemen tioned matter be continued to thr regularly- scheduled meeting of January 25. 19R2, at the recuest af tl~e petittoner. 1/il/82 ~~ ,~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PIANNING COMMISSION~ January 11, 1982 A1-18 ITEM N0. I1. REPORTS ANO RECOMMENDATIONS, ?he Following Reports and Recommendatlans staff reports were presented but not reed: A. TENtATIVE MAP OF TRACT N0. 110 - Request f~r extension o~ time from Edwin J. aratt n or prope rty ocated at 36 33 west Bail aoed. ACTION; Commissioner Nerbst oFfGred a motton~ soconded by Cammissioner Berne and MOTION CARRIED~ r.hat the Anaheim City Planninq Commisston does hereby grant a one-year extenston Qf tin~ for Tentetive Map of Tract No. 11079 to expire on D~cember 30, 1962, B. ABANDONMENT N Q. 81-19A - Request from Narmen PrleSt~ Anahelm Rede volopment gency to a an on a portion of dedicated right-of-way of Claudina Street~ Lincoln Aven ue and a portion of dedicated a11ey ail located approximately At the northeast corn~er of Old Lincoln Avenue and Claudina Street. ACTION: Commission~~ Herbst offered a motian, seconded by Commissionar Barnes and MOTION CARRIEO~ that the Anahei~ City Ptanning Commission does hereby recorm~nd to the C(ty C~uncil that Abandonment No. 81-1gA be approved as recomnended by th~ City Englneer. OTHER DISCUSSION; Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seco~dad by Commissioner Barnes and MOTION CAftRIEO that the Anah~im City Planning Commisston does hcreby direct staff to review alternatives such as requlring th at medical clinics or facilities be pormitted sub}ect to approval of a conditional use permit due to past parking problems. Prior to voting~ Annika Santalahti. AssistanC Director for 2oning, explained the parking study has been completed by the consultant and it probabiy suggests an increase of parking requirerr~nts fpr nxdical facilities and suggested the Commission weit to make any decisio~s until afte r they have seen the cansultant's presentation. CommisYloner Herbst stat~d requlring a conditional use prrmtt wi1S give the Commisston some contral of ihe use. Annike Santalahti stated typlcai ly the situ+~tion is cos~troi led throuy', th~e bui ~ding permit pror;ess when modificatior~ are m~de to a buzlding to perm~t a medic~! facillty~ but certainly staff will prepare a code amendment (f the Cammissi~n desires. Commissi~ner 8arnes noted all medical uses are not the same: that a psychiat~ist can anly see one or Lwo patients an hour and a regular dactor can see 8 or 9 patients an hour. Daan Sherer. Assistant Planne r~ st3ted the~e are literally hund~eds of inedical affice uses in thc comnerciai zone where they are sllowed by right and tf the code is amended requiring a conditional use permit~ eve ry one of them would have to go before the Commission. He suggested waiting to make a~y changes unCil after review of the consultant's parking study because it could includ~ changes in the parking requirements and there may be ather alternatives such as tagging the propRrky onthe zo~iRg maps which weuld be less time consuming and less expensive than tMe conditional use permit process. 1/11/82 t y { "~ MiNUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMM1S510N~ January I1, 1gA2 ~ 1' a~-~9 Mnik+~ Sant~t~hti stete d the psrking con~uitant looked st increastng tha pa~king raqutremtnti for genersi c~rctal usea because changas in uses ~ccur over the yesrs •nd spacas ehould be increased to accommedete those ch~ngas whtch csnnot be ide~tifled today, Mnika Santalahti state d restaurants~ bers and cocktatl lounges ere the most Intense uses (n t~rms af p~rkin g requtrementa. Chairm~n Buaho~e suggested a prov(ston in the Code to require a conditionsi use permit (n certain sltuations such es today and asked if the problem (sn't usually because of the amount of space. Annike Santaldhti replied the locatton ar~d emount of space a~e the developer's cholc~ and in the sttuat(on on tadey's age~da~ the developer was aware that the building was designed for certeln uses and the Commission shouldn't have to argue tha sicuation. Commis3ioner Barnes referred to a requirement In the Anahlbm Hills area Chat CC6R's require a for~n slgnad by prospective buyers and explained her concern wlth this proposed medical clinic was with sameone buying che property. Annike Santalahti clarified that devalopers in the hiilside area were required to submi~t a G~neral Plan to the first time buyers. She stated staff wi11 present alternativas. PARKING STUDY r'RESFNTATION: Anntka Santalahtt explAine~l the ~e,king ~tudy consultant has completed his study and ~s prepared to make a ~c.sentation to the City Counci 1 and Pianning Commission, How~ver~ the Radevel~~ •nt ~,~ ;ion hetped fund the study and is interested in seeing the presentation. 5~ , t•d a joint wnrk session between the R~development Commisslon and Planr ng Commiss. ~;, held after the Jenuary 25th meoting~ p~ssibly in thc Uti 11 ties " nferenc : Rc,c~m. The Commisston agreed. ADJOURNMENT: There beinq no further business, Commissioner Kinq offered a motion~ seconded by Commissione r Herbst and MOTION CARRIEO. that the meeting be adjourned. The meetfng was adJourned at 3:55 p.m. Resp tfully submitted, ~ ~ ~ Ed1th L. Harris, Secretary Anaheim City Planning Commission