The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes-PC 1982/03/22Ctvic Center Anahelm~ Californla Merch 22~ 19~2 REGULAR MEET I NG OF TIIE AMA11E I M C I TY PLAMNI HR Cf1MMl SS I ON RE~ULAa The regular meeting of the Anaheir~ Ctty Plannl~g Commission m ~~ A 1~ M~ETI~tG wrs c~lled to order by In the 1q02 8 .. . ; Cheirmen Qushore at Coun~il Chamber~ a quorum bning present~ , , March and the Commission rev lewed plans of the 1 tems or~ today's a~end~. Recess: 11:00 a.m. ReCOnv~ne: 1:3~ p•m• fOr pub11C te~tlrrony. PRESENT Chalrman: Bushore ~1erhst~ Y•tng~ McSurney Commiasioners: Barnes, Qouas~ Fry~ AdSENT Comrt-1 s s 1 one rs : ~lON E ALSO PRESk1~T Annika Santalaht~ ~sslstr~nt D1 recto~ for P enning Joe1 Fick Jack Whlte Assistant City Attorney Jay Tt tus Office Engineer Jay Tashiro Associate Pian~er Peul Singer Traffic Engineer Uean Sherer Assistant Planner Plenning C~mmission Secretary Edith Harris PIEDGE OF 11LLCGIANCE TO T-~E FLAG LED BY - Commissianer Bouas. APPROVAL OF F1INUTES - Conmissloner d.~rnes offared a motlon~ seccmdr.d by Commissioner McBurney and MOTIAN CARRIED, thAt the minutes of the n~eeting ef March 8~ 1982, be eppreved as cnrrected on Page 12~ to shvw Ken Flsht~ack r~presenting Redhill Development Corporation, rather than Ryder Truck Lines; and delecin~t the portton on Page 136 showing Chairn~ant~and didavatecinufavortof t e~m4tlonetoacons der2V~ridnce i nasmuch as he was pre No. 2515 at a p~lic hearing on Aprli 5. 1982. ITE_ M N0._1s EIR NEGA7IVE DECLARATiON AND REClASSIFiCATION N0. 81-82-10: p~B~~~ NEARING. O~MER: BaIAN J. 0'f~Ell. ET AL, 1014 N• Parker, Or~nge, CA 92667. Prope~ty described a~eelocateduatrthesnoptheastccorner,o`dthenRiversidefFreeway And approxi mete ly 1. t ac Lemon Street, 1420 North Lemon Street. RECLASSiFICATION REQUES7: RS-A-43~hh0 TO NL. Contlnued frum the meetings of NQVember 30, (3etert~ber 14~ 14~1, January 11, and 25th, 1982. Thero was nQ one tndica~tnw~she'~i~ `eaadn~ is °dferred~to and n+ajdetarpartsof the altfiough ths staff re~o mi nutes. St-139 3/22/82 ~ ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNINR COHMISSION~ March 22~ 1982 82-14A Tim 0'Noll~ owner~ wes prasent to answer any queattons. Jack Whita~ Asalstant Ctty Attor~ey~ asked that Conditton No. 8 an Ps~e 1•c be modtfied to ~e~d: "Thst the awner ah~lt prepa~e, execute and record a covenant against the proparty in a farm app~oveed by the C1tY Attorney a~d Clty Englneer~ whe reby~ ths avner wil) landsc~pe and meintain th~ City pre~erty back of the future curb along Lemon Street at na cost t the City". Mr. 0'Nel) asG.ed i f tt would be pc~ssible to have thet property deeded aver to tham an d then they wou I d ma I n ta i n i t. Jay Tttus~ Offlce Enytneer, siated that pro~e~ty Is owned by the City In fee as a relinqulshment from the Stete ~fter they co~structed the freewey r~mps and the property could not be give~ away~ but could be sold a~ n-erk~t valun. Jsck White furthGr explained if the CIYy does not need the prorerty for public purposes~ the applicant cQUld discuss acquisition witl~ the Real Property Divtsion of the City Enginaer's Office and tha rrerket value «ould he establlshGd with a sele proceec!Ing tn th~t menner. 11e ststed if the property was purchased by the appiicant~ there would be no need for an ec~reemnnt or covenant ~nd thts condttton woutd be deemed as hs~~ing been fulfllled. Mr. 0'~lei 1 s tated he and h is brother arn th is property and currently hAVe r~ laund. y faci 1 i ty I n the C i ty of Orange and i n the future w t sh to construct a new facl 1! ty on th is property because thel r present faci t i tY I s l i mi ted i n squ~r~ footage. -te referred to Conditlon No. 1 regarding Improvesments and street lights along Lemon Srreet and the eastbound freaway access street. He polnted out the preperty along the freeway ~ccess street is owned by Caltrans and he did not see any obltgatlo~ o~ thetr part to instal) street ltghts alonq thet street. tle stated he had spoken with a ~epresantative of the Utilities pepartment and was fnforrt~d tfiat portion of the condition should not have been inGluded bec~use the City has no Jurisdiction over Cai trans. Jack WI~ I te s tated th e cond i t i on requ t-e~ these 1 mprovements as requt red by the C i ty E ngineer and the Office of the Utilitles C~ nn~al Manager and if they mske the determinfltion thAt th~sc irt~roven~nts ere not required along that access street, then the appiicant would not be requtred to comply; but that this Commission c~nnat make that date~mination. tle ,uggssted the conditton remain as is. Mt. 0'Ne( 1 stated the Ctty of A~ahetm doesn't have legal Jurisdtctio~ over the north side of thts property and that is where they would be installtng sidewalks and street lights along Lemo~ Street frontage. ~:~ . 0'~lal l roferred to Condttion No. 5 requiring draina~e f~om subJect property co be dtsposed of in a menner satf s`actory to the City Enginecr. ~le notrd cur~ently there Is a~ulvert in the northwest corner which is o~ City p~operty and the wetGr dralns te the north, to the 5 acres which the drtv~-in wili be using for their swap meetx. 3/22/82 MINIJrES~ ANAHEIN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ March 22. 1~62 R2'~4~ Ne st~ted he dl d not wont ta agroe t~ aomethtng tod~y end then in the future find out it w~s not settsfactory tc+ the City Englnaer. Chal rn~an 9ushorv st~ted these are stsndard condl t io~s ~nd 1 f i t turns out that one or more of the ca~ditlons are not reasenebie, the pe~it{cme~ cen request a rtr~dificAtion to th• co~dt !ions. Jay Titus stet~ad at thls prRllminary polnt it is not r4elly knc~m what the requi rements might be and thet r+auid be det~rml~ed during the destgn phase of the pro)ect. 11r. 0'Nef 1 stated he thought engineering pla~s hed hean submitted and stated maybe he is unfal~• (n compartng thts wlth the re~ulren+ents of the swa^ meGt~ (nd{cating he had ~ttended the March 8th rtneting~ end noted th~+t thay wi l l be paving 5 ecres af vacant land whlch obviously will create rtar~ water run-off and thare was no cenditlon requi ring drainag~ e:~ that drlve•in theatre property. Mr. T) tus steted the drl v~- ln s t tuotion 1 s ent I re ly dt fferent hecr~use they wl l 1 not be doing any ~rading ar constructing ar~y atructures that would increas~ the run-off s~d the a~~a they would be paving is currently oi led and peving would not increase the run-~ff that much. THE PUt3LIC I~EARING 1~AS CLOSED. Chei rman Dushore pointad out subJ~ct property is much lc~wer thar~ tfie grade araund the area and the engineering problems a~e co+npletely dtfferent across the street and the drive•in wi11 h++v~e thair engineers working with the City Engineer's Office and that these requi rements wi ll be benefictal to all the propertias 1~ the area. Mr. 0'Nei 1 refer~ed to Landitions ~b. 7 and ~ rega~ding th~ trAffic slgnat wheretn tf they ge~e~ate 200 morc vchicle trlps entering and extting their property per day~ they will be obligatod te psy for the cost of s traffic sign~l at the tntersection of l.em~ and the frebway. Chelrmen ~ushore stated the trafftc signal wlll be rGquired becau~e of the lack of visibility and rlght naw therE ts no traffic signal and for the Cit~ to Install this signel far the benef(t of this ~~e property wo~~td not be falr and the Trafftc Engineer has said when the trip counts reach a~ eertaln lnvel. the traffic wtll become extromely hazardous. Mr. 0' Nei 1 stated t ~a!`f I c i s h~zsrdous ri qht no.: ~^r he fel t the swap meet generatt ng 3QQ0 more cars per ddy would be a def int te hazardous s i tuation. ~le stated he has no argument wtth the trdfflc sicanal +~ssessment feos but does s~ith the cost of the instailetion of the signal. Mr. 0'Nei l responded to Commi ssioner Barnes the t i t wi l l pr~bably be 1• 1/2 to ? or 3 yeers bnfore thia operation will generate 2A0 trtps per day. 3~zz/e2 \ MINU1'ES~ A~~ANCIM CITY PLANNING COMlIISS~ON, M~arch 22, 1A82 82-142 Commlasloner Barn~: atated she did net thtnk at that time the cost of the signel would seem axceastv~e, but ff the stgnol w~s ~equl~ed right now before the business is eat~blit~hed, It would bn hard to pay. She ststed she questlaned wheth~~ or not the driva•in ~hould participate in the si~nal~ since ~hey would onty he usi~g it on Saturdays and Su~days; hawever~ this operetlon wt 1 1 be using the siqnal during paak traffic hours with trucks In end out end that is the moJor difforence. Pau) Stnger clarifiod that tho 200 trips figure txr day p~rtains to tha total tripa whtch means 1AA trips tn and 1~0 trlps aut or ony combinat.ton thareof~ or s maxtmum 200 trips over the driv~eway. He cla~tfled that a traffic counter will be installed whe~~ the operatlon bogins ~ I~e stated the Ci ty is working with Cal trans to sec i f thay wtl) put In a st~na) and if they rlo, It wauld reiteve much of the burden of this epplicant. Commisa~lonor flerbst stated this type of thing really disturbs htm; that the Ctty wants to qet Industry In to tho Ci ty of Anaheim~ but to expect thc pro;~~rty owner ta pey the total ex~ense on o freeway o`f-ren+p signat is unreesonable. Hr. Singer stated he Is not advocating e traffic slgnel for this locatien; that in order to signritr.e that drivreway~ It w~uld have to be cou~led with a signal aC the intersection because 1 t I s a hazardous exi t and s teted the C) ty does not pay for Lhe signai ln any cas~ bnd it would be instsiled hy Calt~ans. Hn eu;.lalned (f m~ra than 100 tri pa exi t th is dri veway ln 24 haurs, I t co~as ti tutr.s a hazerd to the trave l ing publlc and they should be protected and the only w~y he krwrls to da th~t Is tc+ in~tatl a traffic signol. Commissioner Nerbst stated he would nnt vote far putting a stgn~l in at the appiicant's expense beceuse sme) l businesses cout d ~ot affnrd thls tyo~ requirement. t1e stated he can see the applicant peytr-g hls ~hare, but not 1'10$ if Caitrans daes no t put the s t gna 1 1 n. M~. Si~gei axplatned the City cennot install the signai bec~use it Is not tn the City and a portion of tha st~eet Is In Fullerta+. Ne stated the City has 12 faet from the rtght•of-way which consti tutes metnly the parkwsy end most of the street is tn Fullertan and the Juriadlctien is with Caltrans. Commissioner tlerb~t ststad he did not t~~ink it i~ fatr to put thts lar~e burden on the pmperty awner and noted the City is asking this property owner to put tn street lights on the freewsy access and he did nc~t aqre~ with that; that he could see requi ~ing him to provide street 1 ights aleng lemon Street but not the freeway access. I~e noted the petltiorter has aiso been ~equcsted to install sidewaiks, but that he can rec~uest a wai ver of that requi rement from the C i ty Engincer. Chei ~man tiuahore statad normal ly he would agrae, but tn this case the access of this p~operty fs not within the ,jurisdiction of the City and is beyond the City's respor.; ib t 11 ty and t+ie access to th is property i s the problem and i t i s necessary that tf-~ applicant put in a algnal to protect the people In and out of his place af business and the pcople who wark for him and also the traveling publ ie. Ile stated if 3/22/82 MINt1TfS, ANIIHEIM CITY PLANNING COHMfSSION~ Narch 22~ 1~a? 82~143 thero was a pro"~lem et thls loeatlo~~ the City would have petittoned Celtrans to install a signa'~ e long time sgo. Ne stated the~e Is a btq difference betv+een traffic getting off the f~eeway s~d the treffic ante~inq end leaving thla particular prore~ty due to the slope of the property and the slope of the freeway overpas~. Mr. 0'Nall statecl the treffic ~Ignal would beneflt ~nyone travelii~c~ on lem~n Street. tle atated there is no problam entering the property beceuse you ran o~ly entQr qoing ~~~thbound o~ ler~on. Hn stated thts property has been tn and eut of escrc~+ several times. Chatn+nin Bushore stated he ~ealizes this Is a difficult property to devetop and ~nyone developing tt will heve these snn+~ problems. Pau) Stnger responcled to Comnissionor Ilerbs~ that the cost of signalixatlon would ~rababiy be 595~~~~'. ~~~ stated he does not antictpate that this appllcant weuld ever fiave to pay for thet sign~l a~d he is ho~ing that within the noxt 1-1/2 Years CaltrAns will consent to pt,t this siqn~l on a prlority arrrngement so that withtn a reasonable time it ~~I11 be installed. ti~ statec~ he feeis quite certaln this can be acconiplished. fle at:etad m~st llkely there is a need far thts signai right naw without thts develoF~ment; however. he hes not mada e study. Ne stated there ts a need for a signai At the d~iver~ay and It hfls nothtng to do with the trafftc volurt~ At the driveway but with the tra~tic volume on Lemon Street becau~e northbound treffic csnnot see even e sl~~gle vehlclr.. exitlnc~ this property. 11e stated Celtrans ts cortmitttng to signal izing every offramp and i f they cen make this a ~rlari ty, then the applttant would roerely heve Co partlclpate and would havc to provide fer hls driveway in a separaPe phase. Commissioner tierbst stated he dtd ~ot think this spnllcant should be stuck with a condition which stat~s "whichever accurs fi~st" and this ap~licant is wtlling to parttcipate in his shorc when the stqnal duas go in. Cortmissloner Barnes stated the Cit~.• is respnnsihle for protectfng the ci ti zens and she would agroe this Is a lot of money for this appitcant to have to ~+~Y for the s i,ynal which would benefi t ~ot oniy the aeople of Anafieim buY people caming off the freeway; however. this bus iness ts causin5 a prohlem because of traffic coming out of this propa~ty and cannot ba seen by thos~ travel ing r~rth o~ Lemon Street and that is a~afety problcm and has to be taken care of and tfie City cannot s1t beck and let Cal Crans take ca~e of i t. Mr. Singer stated if this eanet tion ts deleted, h~e wouid suggest that no use be ~,ermitted on thts property unti 1 such time as Cettrana puts in the signal . Chairn~an Bushore stste~d there is a hazardous incline and exit o~to Lemon Streat and to realiy protect tha hest th and safety of th~ ciCizens~ the Commission w~ould have to requi~e that the signal be tn before this operation begins, but the Comn+isston is Cry ing to reach a r+easonable conclus io~ for both the Ci ty and the property avner for people trav~:ling in th~a area. 3/22/82 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PIANNiNG COMMISSIQN~ Merch 22~ 1982 82-14G Cnmmisstan~r Bernes stated ths Ideai situetlon would be ta have the stgn~l con~tructad now and the petl tioner ~eimburaed later. Commissloner Ilerbit steted if that corner Is bad enough th~t tt needs a signel now~ than Calt~ena should put It in and he can see mekinq thla property owne~r put in his stgnali~tation fo~ his property~ but to have to tie tt In with Caltrans end pay for the w hole thtng ts not falr. Respanding to Commissloner Barn~s~ Mr. 0'Netl ststed they do not have a d'ftnite ttme to stsrt buildtng bacause there are e lot of thtnqs involved such as the closest sewer and nat~,rA) gss are 45~ feet u~ Ler-bn Street. Commissianer Barnes suqgasted this prop~rty owner should get in touch :vtth Ceit~ans about the signalization. Mr. 0'Nei) stated they havt contected Caltrens to make ~ curb cut In the access road but have not discussed the stgnel. Ile stated the Int~rsectton Is exiremely dangtrous rlght r~a+- for treffic In ell directtons and tt shouid be signalized now and suggested tha City pctltlon Caltrans. Chalrnx~n Bushore asked if there hAVe been e lot of accidents in thts location. Mr. Stnge~ replled he couid itnA aut how many colilalons there have been, but in order to analyse the intersection~ a stwdy wc~uid havr ta he perforn~d and tt is a Caltrans locetton and has to conform to their standards and they will have to do the study. Chatrnron Bushore statad if Caltrans teArns ahout thts conditi~n requiring the prcQe~ty owner to put tF~e stgnal in, maybe they wouid not put it in. M~. Singer repl tad they heve never been t nfl uenced by such condi tic~s and referred to the Tustln and La Palmn Inters~ctlo~ and stated ~he cost of the signal has rx~t influenced Caltrans tn any way. Responding to Chat rman Bust~ore N~. ~ Inge~ stated thare is no alternatf v~ to e signal axcept no driv~eway. tle responded to Mr. 0'Weil that the City is ~etttioninq Celtrans to instatl the sig~al. Cammtssioner Barnes st~ted there Is a lot the petitto~~r can do by asking other people in the area ta cantact Caltrans. She stated if this is approved with this condition es is, the petitioner cen always come back to 9r.t the co~ditton revised if It cannot be warked out at a tate~ date. Cammissioner Nerbst stated i f thia petftioner agrees to his share of thc slgnat at the ttme Caltrans installs it. he would agrce. Chairman 9ushore stated the signai ls for tfie benefit of thts property and thls development is wnat ts ceustng the prohlem. Cortimtsslcner King state+d ~hts signel would also benefit meny people tn the area. ACTION: Canmtasioner Flerbst offered a matlo~~ secanded by Commissiane~ Ki~g and IF3~l~i CARRIED~ that the A-~aheim City Planning Commtssion has r~viewed the proposal 3/22/82 NII~UTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. March 2Z, 1982 82•1~i5 to rectatsify sub~ect property from tha RS-A-h3~004 (Residenttel ~ Agricultural) ~ to thc ML (Industrial~ Limited) Zona to construct ~n Industrlal laundry facllity ~n s~ I ~regularly•shepad parcel of tan~~ conslatinq af arpraxln+ately 1.1 acres located at tha northeast corner of the Riverside Freaway and l.emon St~eet, having approximete f rontage~ af 271 feet o~ the • :h side of thn Riverside Frea~ey end 1~+2 feet on thc eas! side of Lemon Street snd further descriheA as 1420 tk~rth Lemon 5traet; and d~es h~reby approve the Negativa Decle~~etton from the requirement to prepare an enviranrtental Impact report on thn basis that there wouid be no ~tignificant individu~l or cumulattve adverse environmental Impact due to the ~pproval of this Negatlve Dacisratton since the An~helm Generel Plon deaignates the sub,~ect property for general industrlal land usQS corxnensurato with the ~roposel; that no sensittve enviro~manta) impacts are in w lved in the proposal; that the Infttel Scudy submitted by the petitio~er indicates no siqniftcant individusl or curtnilntive adverse envtronmental impacts; end that the tlegative Decleratlon suhstantiattng th~ foreqaing findings is an ftle in the Ctty of Anphetm Planning Departrtr~nt. Commissioner lierbst off~red a resc~lutton And navedrant Reclasslfl~catt~naNoptg1n82h1~ the Anaheim City Planning Commission daes hereby g ~ subJect to Interdepartn+~nta) Cc+mmtttee recmrrnendattons with Co~dltt~n No~ 1 betng modified to delete the ~equtremant for sidewalks and street iighting along the freeway access road end also th~t Condition No. 9 he rrodifleci that the petltioner shall perticipate In his falr share af the signalization of t-~e freewey ~ff-ramp Inte n ectirn at the timo Galtrans installs the signal. On roll cail the foregoing resolutl~n FAILEO TO CARRY by the follawing vote. AY~S: COMMISS IONERS : FRY ~ 11ERE35T NOES : COMMI SS I QNERS : BARNES ~ BQUAS. DUSHORE, KI NG. McBURNEY AEiS~NT: CQMMISSI (~IERS : NQFIE ACTION: Comm4ssioner Barnes ~ffered Resolutian No. PC~2-41 end movcd for Its passage an a optlon that the Anaheim City Planning Cammisslo~ does hereby grant Reclessiftcation No. 81-82-10 sub]ect to Interdepaf*..i++ental Commlttee racommendattons~ with Condition No. ~ being modified as indtcated by Jeck White at tt~e beginntng of thc meeting. end fo~ Conditian No. 9 to rematn as Is because it ts nosstble for the petitioner to request a Gh~nge in the condition at a iater time if he is unable to acqu{~ Caltrans participation, but if the condltlon is d~leted~ ther+e is no Pressure on the applicant to try end cor+tact Cettrans to find when the signal would be instalied. On ~oll w 11~ the foregoing resoluttan was pASSed by the following v~c~te: AYES: COMMISSiONERS: DkRNES, BOUAS~ BUSHORE~ Y.ING~ 11cBURNEY NOES : COMMI SS 1 ~~~ERS : FRY. FtERBST A65ENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE 3/22/82 NINUTE5~ AMANEIM CITY PI.ANNt11f+ COMMISSI~N~ March 22~ 1~A? 8?.-ibl, Commtssloner Natbst ststed he egrees with the rocl~s~iftcatlon end use of thc prooe~ty but doa~ not agroe with the slg~allzeCton cost whlch Is tho reaso~ far his negative wtc on the resolution. Jack White. Asslatant City Attarney~ presentGd the written right to appee) (includinc~ any eo~ditiarn) the Plan~inq Lommisalon's decision within 22 days to the City Counci 1. Chelrman ~ushore asked how to proceed to flet Celtrans co do the study. Pau1 Singer tndicated he woutd wrlte s Intter to Caltrans requesting they proceed with the study to de te rmine whethar or not the s I gna 1 I tat 1 on I s requi red and i t woul d probab 1 y take s 1 x to at ght months to get an answer. ~~e~ stated i t wnuld not do any qood for th~ Ctty to do a st~dy because It Is Csltrena's obligation. Commissloner McBurney suggestad the City of Fullerton sh-ould he involved. Mr. 5inger r~plied the bcat they could do is to request a study from Caltrans end indicated ha would contact them. Mr. 0'Netl pointed out tht stop slgn fo~ cars coming off the freeway is Ctty of Anehntm property and stated h~s ma~ ahows It does belonq to the Ci ty and sugqested t f anyone woul d watch that ~ ntersectlon for e hal f a day ~ they would ser. 1 t cbes need ~ signa) and sug~ested the City do a trafFlc study. Commtssfcnar aernes stated the Cammlssloners ngree thQre ts n pmblcm and suggestad Mr. 0'Nei) work with Caltrans to seo what can be don~. ITEM I~O. 2: EIR NEGAYIVE DECLARAT101~ 11ND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Np. 2299: ._.__.._d_ __ .i.. ..~ ~ _..._...~ ~ ~._.__ _..~_ PUBLI C IIEARING. pWNER: tlATI ONAt DISTI LLERS PRQpUCTS CORP. ~ A9 Park Avenue, New York, ta.Y. 10016. AGENT; RYOER 7RUCK LINES, INC., J04~N MANGU~ JR. ~ P.O. 8ox 24~~~ Jocksanville, Fiorida 322~2. Proparty described as an irrequlerly-shaped parcel of land consisting uf epproxlmately 3.04 acres located et the n~rthwest corner Af LA Palrt~ Avenue end Kemp Street~ hevfng ap~mxtmate frontac,~s of 34~ feet on the north sida of La Pa1ma Avcnu~ and 374 feet on the -+est side of Y,emp Street snd further described as 2~11 East la Pelma Avenue. TO PERMIT A f RUCK 7ERMINAL. There wer~ stx persons indtcattng thelr presence in opposttion to subJect request. and al though the staff ret~art wes nat read~ I t 1 s referred to and mede a part of the mi nutes. Chairman Busho~e decla~ed a c,cnflict of interest as def(ned by Anaheim City Pl~~ning Ccx~misston Resolutlo~ No. PC%6-157. adopttng a ConflTct of Interast Code for the Plar~ning Cortmisslon, and Government Code Sectlor 3625 ei sec~.~ in that Electr~ ~~ ~'~'~'-• Notors and Ryder Motors are customers of his corpQration and, purs~ant to th~ provisions of the above codes. decla~ed thst he was withdrawing from the hea~tng ic~ connection with Conditionsl llse Permit No. 229q and would nat take part in eithe~ the 31z2/8z NINUTES~ IINAHElM CITY PIAtINING COMMISSION. March 22~ 1~82 8Z-147 dt~cussiun or the yoting the~eor-~ and ha~ not dt~cussed this nhtter wtth any nenber af the Planning Commi sslon. Ther~uF-o~. Chal rman 8ushore left the Caunc) l Chartber at 2: 17 p.m. Cha) rman Pro Tempore Fry ASSUMED TIIE C~IAI R. John Nengu~ agent, explalned Ryder Truck Lt~es would llke to hulld a motar f~elght tenni~a) and dtstrfhutlon cente~- for ~ranga County In this loc~tion; that it would be Anaheim's only nationwide ca~rter terminal and might ben~fit ~nahelm far those compantes who dellver fr~ight all over the country. -Ie stated the owner of the property has a perce) mr-p prnding and some ef the co~ditions requtred 1~ t~e staff report ~re I nc 1 uded i n the rec~u) ~ert~nts for the parce 1 map, such ax the ded I ca ti on requ) red i n Condi t ton Fio. 12 fa~ 12 fQet and wanted ~o he surc thet ts nc~t an addlttonal 12 feot. Jack 4lhite~ Assistant City ~ttorney~ stated if any of th~se conclitions a~e~ (n fact, met aa part of the prsrcQl map process~ nc~ edditional tmposition wtll ba made. Jay Ti~tus~ Office Cngineer~ clarified an additlanal 12 feet is not requtred and suggested this con~+ltion be madtfied to rcad that e d~dication to 53 fe~t to the centerllne of the st~cet be madc and noted the right-of-way now is ul f,eet and an addttional 12 feeC would brt~g It to 53 foet. Mr. Mangu stated there was a request that la Palme be widened 12 ~eet in front of thelr business. fmm Kemp Street tn Elcctra~ for s center left-turn lane and their question would r~e whether or not thay would be required to pay f~r thet lane, polntin9 out there {s a ~elattvety new storm dr~in fecllTty on ena std~ chat would h~ve to be moved. Jay Titus ste~ted lf there is an inict to ~ storm drain there~ it vrould heve to be reloceted at the owner's request. ~1e stated It Is his assumption that the turn lane would functtnn strictly for thls termtnal's henefit far 1r~gress and ec~~ess an~d the requirAme~t was strictty generated by the tcrminai end these operatars should be p~ylny the cost of the turn lane. Mr. Mangu ~Stated inttially they wouid hsv~ 1!1 to 1?. unlts in and aut pe~ day with 20 pius empl~ryees with thei r vehlclca in arsd out p~r dey. Concerning +the reference in the staff report to theTr 24-hau~' OpE~8LI1Df1~ MT. Mangu explaine:d primnri ly thei r termina) operatas from 6:30 ~.m. untl 1 about 9:n0 p.~n• ~IL"h the roa~,i trai ters b~ing brou~t in and unlosded snd re-loadcd a~bout 5:30 a.m. a~d then ccaming back In t~etween 3:00 and 4;0~ p.rn. tn the aftern~on and thetr acttvity 1s over by 9:00 p.m.~ but during the night ene or Mo over-the-roi+d vehtclas do Gome l~n and drop off thetr units and hoak up to a loaded unit to cklivery tn othe~ c~ties,. ~tev~ Valdes statad he livcs on Patt Street a~d presentnd a c~etTtion of ~rpp~onTmet~y 67 neighbors who appose this request becsuse of th~ 24-hou~ noise end ~llution From the trucks and r~aad ~he folla+tng statement from the peLitlon. 3/ 22182 MINU1'E5~ 111JANEIM C11Y PLANfit`1C COMMISSION, March 2~~ iqA2 ~~'148 "We ~ the unck ra 1 gned ~~es I dents of the ne t ghbo rhood knam ~+a the Patt Street Area and lts ~urrounding nelqhbors~ wish to t~ferm th~ members of the Planning Lorrmisato~ of Anahalm that v+e ere stronqly oppased to ths proposed truck Cermtna) which Is to be loceted at Kemp S treet and La Palma. The realdents of this nelghborhood have work~d la~g end hard with City o~'ficlals ss well as the surrounding indust~•y to ellminr~t~ truck trafftc through this residential area. s~scause the re are s~ meny Mery elderly and many small chlldren In thi~ neighborhood~ we ho~~sd th~+t th~n i mp roven~n t p 1 en prepa ~ed fo r nnd pa i d by the: C! ty of Anahetm (ECCOS "1ANAGEMfNT~ INC. 2/R1) would avoid tragedy of ane uf aur ~eside:nts getting hurt by these !ast moving trucks. Besides thc ob vlous hazard these trucks pr~sent, there Is also the questian of noise pollution. It Is our hope that you as mcr~hars of thc Planning Cc:mmission {ook fa4brably upon this requPSt b~ cit~xens af the CitY ynu re~resent ~nd Qlimin~te the posstbllity that thiy truck tcrmtnAl bccon~ a res 1 ty r~ ou~r nc i ghbc~rhood." ilc sRated thc Clty paid for a consultant to da a study In 19~1 to try and work out sorr~thing ~Nith the ~Gighbor, •nd tl~e Indu~ztry ln the area to avold ~truck trafftc and now this petitioner wants a truck terminal, wMich Is what they hrve been trying to avotd for many years. F~e stated in 197~ the City alsa paid fo~ another study to figure out how the Ar~a should be developed end thosc plans were for housing un{ts including apa~tmenks~ but that plan hss been ftled away and they have not heard t~nyn+~re about it. tle stetad he ts e trucE: dri~rer ~nd kna~s ~.,,hat is cping on and ?.4 hours a day means they wiil be having noise and paliution fr~m thls truck termtnal 24 hours a day; that (n the area of La Palma and Anaheim t3oulev~erd~ they alreedy have a 1ot ~f traffic coming from the aerospact oparatian on La Palma and It creates a trafffc jam at that signe) snd traFfiG becks up all the way ta Olive Str~et a~d peoole who live 1n the neighborhood cann~t get aut. fi~ stated this petitioner has stated the trucks will be cc~ming back in around 3 or 4 p.m. and that is when the traffic tn the arta Is heavtest. He stated there are a lot af truck te nntnals w~itch t~re already !~uilt and compa~ies have gor-e bankrupt and referred te Transcon and suggested the petltioner buy that pmpe~ty stnce it Is already deveioAed for a truck t~rminal. He also referred to System 99 which is gc~tng out of husine~s and sta~ted they hav~e tcrminals alreedy deMelop~d• N~ stated Anahelm ts trying to improve thls area and a truck terminal wiil ~at improve It. Cha) rn~ars Pro 7empor~ Fry pointed out there is nr- ingress or egress to the praperty f~om Kemp Straet and ail accesa would be off La Palme. Mr. Valdez stated they a1,'eady havr truck tra~ffic there now frnm 7~.m. ta ~- p.m. fr~ USI which consists of' i2 ta 15 60-foot long trucks carrying approximately 45,O~b 3~zz/82 MINUTES, ANANEIM CIT/ PLANNING CQMHISSI~N~ March x2. 1'~8~ 82•1N9 p~unds on a street whieh la not dosigned for trucka +~nd notGd Komp St~eet is ~ly 35 feet wtde with one inch of pavinq. M~. Valde= ateted in 1~74, they ~~ h~fore tl~e City Council snd hod the netghborhood ~ezonad to nesidenelal from industrial and {ntend to keep Ic as residenttal. Ne stated the s19ns hsv~ been postad whlch indicate no truck treffic is r~llowed; b~it they sttl) get truch trsffic and when the lrrge trucks go down tF~e street thelr hauses vlbrate. ~orraine Ra-d~iquez st~tad she lives a+ 411ve Street and ali the trucks come through OliMe Street to La Palma and they have~ boen fighttng truck trafftc tn this area for a long ttme and fee~ lf this ~s alla+cd~ the only way trucks can get to th~ f~eewey is by g~ing to Patt Stroet and havirg a truck terminel so close to the resid~ntial aree is ve ry hazardous and th~+re will b~ a lot of treffic. She azked if there wil) be any saund barrl a n ( ns ta 1 le~ F~ecause these t r~~cks N I 1 1 be very l~ud ard nated she ceu) d hear trucks comtng off tha frer.woy all night and h~r hausc 1s rMt as ~:lose as the others will bes. She stated she feels this is e MnrY Gad lacattori for a truck tarmtnel. Jim Post, Manager Etectre Mptors~ w~st of subJect propRrty, stated they are concerned about the traffic on Le Pe1ma and not~d Condttion No. 12 Indicates tha Imprevaments shal) run from the west side of the extsti~g driveway lesdtng to Electra Mot~rs te the west cur~re on Kemp Streat. 11e polnted out the map shc~ws It bztter because the extra lane comes beck Into I,a Palme before it gets to their drlvewey and they feAl running that easterly driveway all the w~y t~ their driveway would n~t be a~ad situatlon. D~an Sharer. Assistant Plonner~ stated the plans shows a 1~-foot wlda lanr. ac~jacent to the front of the property batween the two prppased dri vr.ways and the recomnendati on of the Troffi c Engi neGr 1 s that the proposed l~nr. be widertCd to 12 f@et rather than t0 feet and 1 t shat 1 bc extended beyond t~e existf ng drt Meway to run from the west side ~f the existing drtveway le~ding to Elecxra Mbtors to the west curb of Kem~ Street because it wes felt it was necessary to adequatety get trucks in and out of that p~operty wi thout creeti ng a sefety problem. Mr. Post stated if cars stay i~ chat traffic lane and then try and get Dack onto La Palma, lt wii) be diffic~lt ~nd suggested the Engineer take another look at thati. Responding to Cammlsxtoner NcBu rney. Jay Titus explained thcre is a project in preparatlon for rridening Kemp nnd cul-de-sacing it tn the vici~ity of the alley to the narth and it will no longcr be a through stre~t. Mr. Mangu stated this parcel is presently zoRed for induatrial and cc~mn+erclal uses and there wouid be less t~afftc with thts use than with other posslble uses such as residential. H~ ststed staff has recortmended that thev do rr~t use Kemp Street es acceas and the~ are willtng to comply witt~ that reaemmend~+tion even tf~wugh it would simplify their eperation to be able to use ~~n~. 3/ 22/ 82 az- ~ 5~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIri CITY PLANNING COMMISSIO~~~ Narch 22~ 1982 THE ~UBLIC HEARINR WAS CLOSED. Commissloner K~~9uc~fWenLdp~sttthe ent~ ancn~drivewey.tl re hustera, tndiu+ting conc~ rn I f the t r N~. Mengu responded that Nr. Singer hed felt the tire bustR~s would provide sbsolute co~trol over the entrance a~d axit. Respo~dl~g to Commie~'ries `andbst~ted theyudotoperatecwitlilnsthemlegal^11m1tsQht are tho big ove r the-~o 9 concerni~g r~otse. Commisalaner IlRrbst was co~cerned whether or not they wcwld axr.~ed the hy decibels at the prope rty l i ne or a~ sbove ai*b tent at ni ght and fe t t wi th a truck termi nal adJacent to a residentlal eree, there could be constderahie ratse because the big diesel tr~~cks do ~ ifsthe thAdreonsideredf sound~~,ar~lersthe City ordinance is very axpl icl t+~d aske Y Mr. Mangu rapl i ed i f there I s s prob lem i n thc future. they woul d heve t~ tAke care of (t. He steted he has lacated terminals next to rcaidentit+l e~eas in nther perts of the country and has not had a problem and he does not forese~ that as a problem. Commissiontr Herbst raferredl~kindsaof prahlemstwith surroundinc~rnelghbors~atnnight hours a day which has hsd a aven thc~ugh thay had a block wall. Respondi~q to Commissloner McUurney~ Dean She~er expialned hut~he.gwas~nottsureY the epplicant indtcated they had to obtain certaln licensing, whether the noisc iss~~e was addressed. He stated In the Industrial zone the Code provides thet when evcr a~earthernibermror blocHiwa111Youldtberrequired~~but in thisY adjotning rest~~antial. ~n instanca the esst property tine sbuts a public street, not residentlal, and all th~t i s raq~~ "ed i s a b-foot htgh chatn i lnk fenc~ interwoven wi th redwc~od or cedar slats; hawe~+e~, the Planning Commission ma; wish to ask the petit~oner to stip~late to providing a G-foot hign be~nt the applicantcwouldshave to1ah deiby~the~Cityfnotsehat point. Iio stated in a Y standard crt te~ia as set forth in the Cocie. Gommissione~ Ilerbst stated ~a~si~t b~ d~~sbec.ause~hefcltctherecwillsbef problemse1 trucks and he would suggest dY particularly Hith an all night operatiAn. Commissto~e~ King su99GS~~Cedh~psiherg~tuatlondand thai a 12pfootehiqhnmin mumssla~er tierbst f~alt that v+outd t eartharn berm snd wall would be rnqutred. Goim-issioner ~ernec Street areasand nowhthi~hlsEabrequestdfor aatrucktterminat ric,~-t traffic in tha Pat 3/ 22 / 82 !~ MiNU1'ES~ ANAfl~1M CITY P~/WNING COtIMISSIOfI~ M~~ch 22~ tg~? 82.151 ~ in the •roe whare th~ City i~ trying ta get rid of them. She stated she would llke to ses this business !n A~ahelm end noted there are probebly other fac~ llties which could be used. She stated she ceuld n~t vote for ~ truck termina) In thts ~re.~ when this la an aroa alre~dy deluged with truck trefflc. Cortmissiane~ Ilerb=t steted this pruperty has beer. roned fo~ heevy induatrte) for f( fty yean end he fe 1 t f f that ac~e+~qe i s an~ lysod ~ provl di ng the seund 1 s taken care of~ this would probably be e llghtcr use than cauid be put on thls aropert• ~nd there could be many industrlal uses the~o +,~y rlght end the Planntng Conrnisston would not even see the pisns. Commlsslonar MtBurnny steted th• truck traffic would be limited to La Palma Avenue and as long as the sound is ettenuated~ he feit it is ~cceptabie end noted the Conmisston always has the optlon of reviewing the usr tF ~here are a lot of complalnts. Conmiasioner Fry stated he woul~~ like to see somethinq done bofore the use even goes in regarding nalse and ho felt the Commission hAS the right to requtra that it be done. tl~ state~d he Is a g~eat champion of slatted ch~+in link fencing but dtd not think that wauld take ca~G of the prohlcm here and a 6-faot block wall would not take cAra of tha problem and hc fslt tf there is any Nay to impase a ti-foot berm on that site~ it would help the sttuation. Mr. Mangu stated the p~ope~ty becames usel~ss If a~erm thac high fs ~equtred because (t is not wide enaugh, nottng they would need 18~ f~et on one side fo~ parking and distence to beck up. Conmissloner 8oua~ asked what wouid be dane if the use gc~es tn and then there is a sound problem. Mr. Manc~u replied th~y would probably have to restrtct their operatlon but going by expa~lence~ since he has built near s lot of netghbarhoods~ ~e dtd not thfnk there will be a problem. 11e stated he would Agree that in the mtddle of the night~ trucks going down the road sound quite toud~ but they would be operating within the iega) limits. Commtssioner Eierbst stated he wi 11 not suppart the roquest wi~4out a sound ba~rler and thet (t would not tiav~c to be a be~m~ but could be a 12-foot high wali and h~ thought that would be necess~ ry to mske it amicable w(th the neighbars. Ne stated the property ts currentiy zonpd residential and the street wi l i nat stop the noise. t1e suggasted the pet!ilone r co~ld p rovide a certificatton from a seund enginee~ that a sound ba~rter Is not requtred. Car~missioner Kin~ stated the condttions require std~walks along tCemp and point~d out th~ peti tioner ca~ get a temporary• waiver from the CI ty Engineer because he dtd not thtnk sidewa~ks er~ needed (n that a~a. 3/22/82 MIl;UTES, ANAHEIM GI'TY PIANNING COMMISSIAtI~ Merch 22. 1982 82-~52 Mr. Mangu stated he underst~nds USI ts .rylving i~ fuot eddltlont+l ric~ht-of-w~y te thQ City and the City Ntll widen the street and i~stead of heving the ~11ey c,~o off to tha east, it wit) become a cul-de-sac~ so tssex and USI wil) havr. eccesa, end although the CitY wolls are loceted to the rear with lrrs~ water me~ins dawn Kemp Street end thet ts ell part of the parcel m~p situ~tten and In a-ldition to the 10-foot dedtcatien~ tha City Is qetttng e~-foot easement for thelr eiectrical and telephone linos~ etc. ACTION: Commission~r Nerbst affered a nation~ seconded ~y C~nmissl~ner 1Ctng and MO- TIO CARRIEO~ thet the Anuhelm City Plannln9 Commisslon hds reviewed the pro~osal to perrnit a truck tGrminal on an trregularly-shapcd parcel of land consisting of approximatoly 3•04 acres Icoatec! at the northwest corner of l,a Palma Avenue and Kemp 5treet (201 East La Pa1mo llvenue); and dees hcrnby apnrove the Neqativt Declaration from the requlre+menl to prepa ro an environmenta) Impact report on the bssts that there would bn no significa~t Individual or cumuletive udverse environmental tmpact due to the app ro val of this Negative Declaratlon sinc~ the Anaheim Ganera) Plan destgnates the subJect propertv for generAl Industrts~l land uses corm~nsurAte wlth the propos~l; thnt no sensltive envl~~nrt~nt~) Impacts a~e Invc~lved in thc proposal; that tha Initia~ Study sut>mitted hy thr p~tikioncr indicates ne stgniftcant indivtdual or cunwl~t~ve adverse e<<vironmentai Impacts; and that the Neg~tive DQCleratlon substantiating the forhgotng finding4 ls on ftle in the Clty of M aheim Planntng pepArtment. Cammlsslone~ Ilerbst asked a~out the condltlon rec~ulrin~ stre~t widening to Electrlc Motors property end stetod he did not thth„rthT(tusmexplalnedu~ferlmprovements would improvements on sameone else's property. be within the cxisxing ri9ht-of-way. Commissloner ~lerbst offcred Resolutlo~i No. PC82-42 and ~oved for its passage and adoption that the Anahelm Clty ~'tanning Gommission does nereby grant Ccm ditionat Use Permit Na. 2299 deit;tng Conditlon No. 10 and adding ~ new condttio~ rec~ulrin~ that a sound study be submltted by a certtfted sAUnd engineer and if the sound study indicates a~ound berrle~ ls necessa ry~ thet the sound barrler +~ilt be Insta~led as reconmended by the cc~ttfitd sound eng{neGr and in compliance with Sectlons 18.03•~30; .031; .A32; •033: .034 and .035. 71tie 1g of th~ Anahelm Munictp~l Code and s~isect to Interd~partmental Committee recam+~ndations. On roll tal l~ the foregc~(ng res~lution was pessed by the fol lowing vnte: AYES: COMNISSIONCRS; BOUAS. -IERBST~ Y.ING. Mc[~URNEY PlOES : CaMMI SS I ONERS : BARNES ~ FRY ABSENT: CONiMI SS I QMERS : BUSHQRE ~ommtssloner Fry ateted he had wted no on this rnsotution 5ecause he did not feel it is right to put tt-is in the backyard of the residents on Kemp S•reet, Jack White~ Assistant City Atto rney~ Dresent~d the written right to appeal the Planntng Commisslon's decisia. w''htn 22 days to the Ctty Council. ~/22/82 MII~UTES, ANANEIM CITY PLANNING CQMMISSION~ M~rch 22, 19a2 82-153 RECESS Th~re was e fifteen-minute recess at 3:~0 P.m. ..._,.._ RECONVENE The mec3ting wa~ recoriv¢ned at 3:15 p•m• ~....~.. ITEM N0, 3t EIR GATE~JRICAL EX~hiPTION-CLASS 11. WAIVER OF CADE REQUtRFMENT - ..~~..._ .~._..r.~ PUBLiC HEARING. OWNER: MLP11 B. AND BEVERLY J. CLAaK~ 16b8 W. Oranqe+wood Avenue~ Anaheim, ~A 928A2. ACENT: LYNDA SIIATTEE~1~ GANN~TT OUTDOOR ADVERTISING CO.~ 1731 Workrnen Street~ Los Angelea~ Cn 90a33• P~~~rty described as a rectangularly-shAp~d pArc~l of land consisting of approximatety .~-1 ac~r_ located at the southwest corner of la Pelrro Avenue and He~nolla~ Avcnue~ 260~~ uest La Palma Avenue. There was na on~ Indtcating their presence in opposition to subJect request, and although tfie staff rtpcrt wes r~ot read~ it is referred to and made n part af the minutcs. Lynde Shatteen~ agent. st•etod the~e fs ~ dlscr~puncy In the staff report reqardtng the diaplay area; that they are proposing to bulld a 672-s4uare f~~ot stngle faced pai~ted b ulletin wtth a 300-square foot postcr p~ne~ backup so th~re is not a double- faced 672-aquare foot st~3n. She stated they are not 1~ a ~osition to cc+n+ply wi*h the recommendations, specificlally the requlren+ent for st~eet 1lghts when a btliboard is me~ely being updeted. 7HE PUE3LIC IIEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissloner Kerbst explained the strcet light conditton is a stand~rd requtrement on al l prope~ties ar.d i f the fees have been paid, they wt 11 not be requl red agaln. Dean Shere~~ Assistant Planner~ explained any off-sit~e irr~ rovert-ents which have not been met on the property are Fickcd up in conJunctton wft~~ a vsrtance, condttional use permit o~ recles.sification request; that in this particui~r instar,ce, the co~ditions ere for dedicatlon o~ La Palma and Magnolia and the installatton of a st~eet li~t on La Paima and the payment of the sxr~et light fees along Mac~noiia; that none of these conditions have b,±an satisfied on this propertv and the City wouid like fo~ them ta be satisfted in conjunttlon alth this request shc~uld it be appmved by the P lan~i ng Commf ss ton. Commission~r Ilerbst asked what was meant by the reference to a 34~-square foat panel backup. Dean Sherer stated Section 18.05.114 of the Cade for biilboards in the commerctal limited zone says that the meximum size of the display area of any stngle- face slgn on any bi i lboard shal l not ~xceed 300 sauare feet; that tho plens submi tted indicate vne stde of the b111board measu~ed 672 square feet and th~ proposed 3~0 sq uare foct addition is Fo~ the ott~er side and that the waiver is needed. it was clarified there would be twc~ s~des to the sign. Responding to Conmissianer Nerbst as Co why they want a stgn so large, hts. Shattean stated Raintnd bullctins art the prime signs i~ their buginess and gcnerate a lot of 3/ 2 2/82 ~ MINUTES, Al~IWE1M C1TY PLIWNING CO,IMISSlQ11, M~rch 22~ 1Q8T 9Z'~5a revrnue snd that thls is s•tanda~d sixe far a pelnted bulletin In the ~utdoor ~dvertising Industry; that It Is a h~ndpalnted sign ~d ths exces:ive -~eight is for m~ximum visibility. She expl~i~~d tha oxisting sign 1~ t2 foot by 25 foot ~nd 1~ singte-faced snd th~~ corner could •ccortn+adete a pelnted bulletin frem industry s tanda rds . Commltsioner Nerbst ststed therc are otho~ sarvlue st~tion sltes t~ An~helm ~nd tho owners would ilke large~ signs for thos~ porcels~ but the P1~nninq Cann+isston has not yranted any v~rlances because tt Is herd to Justify hArds~ips. ~~e st~ted he ~ecognizos thot Counci) has grentQ~i e faw, t>ut if F7?-square foc~t signs are qolnq to be allawed~ hc folt tho Codc shouid be ar+~~ded ~nd tndicated he would recort~nend denla) of this roquest. It wa= noted the Pl~enning Dire~tor or his Autharlxed represn~tativo has deterr+tned thst the pro~sed proJect fAlts wlthin the definitlcx~ of Catec~orieAl Exemptions~ CIASS 11~ as deflned I~ the Steta Envimnsnentt+l Impact Report f~utciellnes and Is~ therefo~e, categorically exempt from the requirament to prepare an EIR. ACTION: Commisslonar -lerl~st offored a motion~ s~cended t,y CoRxnis'lo~e~ Bow~s end M ~ CARRIEO~ that the Anaheim City Planning Cammisslon doas he rehy deny the request for watver af code ~ectuirement on the basla that no hards~i~s oxist pertelnf ng to lthe s 1 zo. shape. topo4r~phy and surroundings of sub ~ect pmperty and denial would not deny sub)ect pr~perty of privile~s enJc~yed by ather pro~~rtles In the seme zon~ and vici~ity. Cnmmissioner He~bst offered Resolutton No. ~'C82-b3 and rtnved for its ~ASSege and adoption that the Anahelm Clty Planning Cor~mission daes hereby de-ny Ca-ditio~al Use~ Perml t No. 2301. On roll c~ll~ Lhe f~rr_going resolution was passed by the followir~g vc~te: AYES : COMMI SS I ONERS ; 9ARNE5 , QOUAS ~ FRY, tiERBST ~ KI HG~ McBURNEY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE l1BSENT: COMMI SS IONERS : DUStfORE .lack White~ llsslstant City Attorney~ p-esented the krltten ric,~t to at~c~eai the Planning Cnmmission's decision within 22 days to the City Counct 1, M ~~0. ~+: E!lVIP,ONF~FITAL IMtPACT REPORT N0. 2b (PREVIOUSLY APP~tOVE 1'7,~'~'i'LT~ ~ r - - ~ - - Sf. PERMIT NO PUBt~IC 1IEARING. 0-.~NER: ANAMEIM UNION iiIGH SCNOOL ~ISTRICT~ 5~~ Crescent Way~ Anahetm, CA 92803. AGENT: PACESE'RER NOMES, INC.~ ~~540 Campus Arive~~Npwport Beach, C~t 92660. Property describad ss a rectangularly-shape,d parcel sf l~nd consisting of ~pproximataly 9.6 acrea. bounded ~.n the north by 8road+a~ ~ e+est by the Library and Pol i ce Oepertment. south by Santa Ana S treet. and west by Ct tr'or* S trQet ~ and further described as the former Fren+ent Junlor High School plsyfteid. ~~2z/sz ~ t MINU'TES~ ANANEIM CIT1f PLANNING COMMISSION~ March 22~ 1A82 RECLASSI FI CATi ON REQUEST: RhF12~T4 to RM-3Q00. 82- t 55 CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST: TO PERMIT A~-LOT~ 16~1-UNIT COND~MI-IIUM SUODIVISI011 WITH DUILDING NEtGHTS 1N EXCESS OF 3S FEET WITH WAIVERS OF; (a) NINIMUM t,OT AREA PER 041EI.LING UNIT AtJp (b) REQUI RED IMPROVEMENT OF SETBACK AREAS. TENTATI VE TR/1CT REQUEST: AND: hN0.5; TO r.p~~STRUCT n 4-LOT, ibq-11~11T COIIDOMINIUM SUl1DIVISION. N0. _248 (PREVIOUSLY APP E PfRM PUBLIC I~EARING. Oti1NER: A~~iAIIEIH UNION 111GI1 SCNOOL OISTRICT~ 501 C~escent Way~ AnAhelm~ CA 42~3A3. l1GENT: PACESETTER t10MES~ IMC.~ 45h0 Campus Orive~ Newport Deach~ CA 92660. Property dascrit-ed a~ an irrcgularly-ahaped parcei of land consisttn9 of approxirru~tely 6.1 acres, ic>cated soutt- and east of tha southeast corner of Lincoln Ave~ue end Cf tron Street~ tha northerly portlon of the forn~r Frertont Junior Iltgh School site. RECLASS 1 FI CtiT10~1 REQUEST: RM-1200 end CG to RM-30~A. CO~~DITIONAL USE REQUEST: TO PEAMIT A Z-I.OT~ 97-UNIT CONDOMINIUM SUDDIVISIQ~I'dlTll ~UI LDI ~IG NEI GHTS 1 ~I EXCESS OF 3a FEET NITH WA1 VERS OF; (A) NI ~~I MUM LOT AR~A t'ER DKELLi NG UNI T AtlD (b) REQU 1 REp I MPROVEMENT OF SETBACK AREAS . TENTATIYE TRACT REQUEST: TO CO~ISTftUCT A 2-IOT. 97-UNIT CQN~OHINIUM SUBpIVISION. There wQ~ three pers~ns fndicating their presence in oppQSiCion to subJ~ct r~quest~ a~d atthouqh the staff ~eport was not reed. lt is rcfarred to and mede a pert of the minutes. It was noted that Chairman 8ushore had declered a conflict of interest on these matters at the previaus public hearing, Jack White~ Assistent City Attorney„ stated there Is no re~son why these two iten~ ca~not be heard at the same time but spaake-s should Identlfy whtch pa~cei thoy sre referri ng to. r~a asl;ed ths t Condi t tan No. 7 on page 4-f be reworded to road ss follaws: "Thac prior to approvel of a ftnal tract msp or introduction of an ordinence to rozone subJect prope~ty~ whfch~ver ~ccurs ft rst~ developer shell provide or enter into an agrnement with the City tio pr~vidc relocation assistance as appr~ved by the Ctty for rolocation of the Poltce tlellport and a heltpo~t permit for rolocatlon of the Polict ~epartment shsll be issued by th~ Cal Tfornia Department of Trans~o~tation of Aero~auti ee, Art HcCeul, Pecesetter Nnmes, statad there is on~ slig~ht than9e since the prevlous meeting and th~t i s the ent ranca on the notthern si te an Lincoln Avenue has been 3/22/ $2 MINUTES~ 11~IAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMNISSION~ Mareh 22~ 1~8x 82-156 movrd about 175 fe~t to the e~at. He pointed out ~he entrance en the meps dlsplAyed and axpl~insd the chanqe w~s neceisiteted by the Ci ty sewer line thrau~h the property which had to have acce:s. He ~tated the s~wer within the proJect wtll he private. Ite referred to the bulldlnq heiqht and stated for ~rchitecturel re+~sons he would like to be sble to vary the heights and r!ght now there are one or two but ldings in exce~ss of ths 35 feet by ~pproxim~taty 1 foot. Concerntnq encro~+chmen• Iroto the l~ndscoped areas, he explalned thero wi11 be hedW lendsceping ~~ound the perimeter end the parktn~ wi 11 not be seen. He sxplalned the dar~sT ty proposed fo~ the southern slte is i~.h unlts per acre and 15.9 un(ts per scre for the northern site which is wtthin the Generat Plan deslgnation. ~Ie explalned their consultant did work with the Poltce Depa~tment regardtng the hAltpo~t relocatton and a letter wes suhmitted te the City Manager indlu+ting they propose to bui ld th~t hel i~ort~ I1e th~nkad City Staff for their cooperetio~. Elizabath Ftschle~ stated she liv~a at Lake llrrawh~ad ond owns iand ~d)oining subJect property and that she had not recetved any lnfornytlon prior tn this rr~eting and hed not ~ecelved any nottces ot any prcvious hearlnqs and felt she st,ould of been given more infarmetlon. She explained she owns Parcal 13 c~ lin,:oln (formerly GA~~ Center) whlch is a two-atory brick bullding. She stated she did not knc~w prevtously where the entrance would be and she ts canccrned hecause she i s next door. She asked about the landacAptng end the block wall. Jtm Kulsted (Sccrctary could not vertfy name) stated he has llved In Anahelm for a long ttme and attended Fremont Scho~l and that he dc~es not oppose b~il ldtng an ~rc~party that has elready h~d somethtng built on it~ but that he Is opposed to butlding on this 9.6 acr~ vacant land without skinq the homeowners in th~ area. Ne asked tf the purposc of buliding 3S-foot i-I~` ui ldings on this vacant land is ber.ause Anaheim needs th~ rroney. Jack Whi te ~ Ass ista~t C1 ty Attorney, stated Anahei m dc~cs not own the property and has no financial interest In it; thAt tt t~ owned t>y the sch~ol dlstrtct artd if this development is approved, the sthool district proposes t~ sell the property to the cievaloper and that money c~oes to the scho~l di st r~ ct. Mr. Kutstad stated he felt the C1 ty should be responstble f~r wfiat goes in and he has roviwved the conditions and a lot of them say "~rtor to" but there Is no place which says tha people t~ th~ area had anythtng to sey 8bout tt. Chat rman Pro Tempo~e Fry stated that is the pu~pose of this publ ic hearing and r+oted p~blic hearings were prevtously heid on thls metter. Nr. Y.ulstad stated a maJo~ity o.` th~ people who live in the area are worktng and cannot attend thls meeting and suggested the n+eeting be hcid ~t a ttme when those people whn wili be affected cen attend. Joe White, 80~ West Droadway. stated he -s not opposed, but there are a lat of thtngs he wouid ltke to knaw such as hvw the weak water pressure and sewers tn the area will be affected and aisa they woutd like to know what the timetAble ts for co~st~uction 3/22/82 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PI,ANNING CAMMISSIQN, Narch ?.2~ 1~iA2 82-151 and whtch st !o would ba devoloped first snd hc~w they wi I1 keep thc dl rt dawn during constructio~. Ile stated he would llke to knav where the pum~s woutd be locat~d for the waterfal ls~ etc. beceuta his bedroom i s close, F~e stAted they want the heliport mowd as soo~ as possihle whethe~ this proJect i s d~v~elap~d or r+ot. Ile ~+sked how the dirtwill be controllad and hrno much const~uction wtll t~kc placc nt one t1rr~ and how the pr~perty witl be melntetned whlle they ~re w~itinc~ fo~ the units to he sold and asked i f tht wrouoht irun fvnce woulci he sl) the way oround end sald he did not care i f the bui 1 dings are 3G feet high instead of 3; feet hlgh. Mr. McCau) s tatad he had loaned Ms. F I~ch l e ~+ hoo~ on the pr~)ect end he i s ava i lable to answe~ a~y of her questl~ns. Ilc stated there wi t i he a wrou~ht iron fence around mo~t of the proJect because the ~esidents requasted i t so they wi l l he~ able to en,J4y the le~dscap Ing of this pro,Je~t; that there wi t l be a biock wal l along th~ eastern stdn of the souther~~ site ed~acent ta the Police DepArtment And Llbrary~ but wrouqht i ron fenci ng is proposnd along Bro~dway end Ci t~on; hawev~r~ they wauld l l~e to reserve th~ dacis ion along Santr Ana S t~e~t unt 1 I snuth s i t~ f~as been complated ber.ause ~f the raI 1 ~aad tracks~ etc. Ile polnted ou~ whe~e the wrought i ron fen;;ing is proposed, with a biock wa11 proposed next to the tire store~ ~nd also thnrc wiil be wrought i ron fQncing alony the a) ley. 11e stbteci they do not tfilnk there wi l l be very much ~olsc gcnerated by thc pumps or wotcr pr.rcolation. ~le statr.d he would ba wllltng to nresent thc audio-vtsual presentAttcx~ te the r~sidents In the area if they are interested. Responding to ~IS. FiSChle~ Mr. McCaul explalned th~err wlll t~ two entrances~ one from Citron and one from Llncoln~ And thPre wi il be ~ifBLUT~ land5caAlnq with berms around the entire perlmeter and pointed out the landscane~~ areas on tha plans. !!e ex~lained yenerally the residents will usc the entrances clos~st to t'heir unit ~nd nointed out vll~ich residants wi 11 pr~bably use whtch ~ntrance, Mr. McCaul stated the school district w~ni thra~gh a nu^~~er af r~~ ,; ic mr.etinc~s be' ~re disposing of tl~e p~operty end that a nurr~er ~f resident: in the ar~a d~c' show up ~ those mee ti ngs and expressed the t ~ conce rns, -~ e stated At o~e t i mer the llous Ing AuthoriCy eontnmplated developing the properCy as an nfforci.ible hr: ~ tnQ nroJect and en unce~tt fled EIR was pre~.~ared and various restdents did provlde yome input into that process. N= ~itltcd he parttctpated in th~ Citron F~eighhnrhood Carnntttee meetinq i~ Dec}nber of tast yeA~ and 4Q or 50 res idonts came to the meeting ~nd he has been contacting those p..rsons wha left their nan~es. Co~~cerning the water pressure, Mr. McCaul statcd that Issue wrs fais~ci at the City i:ounctl rt~eting anc+ Clty staff stated th~ v~ater p~essure wes adequate in that area and i t weul d not be adversnly aflected by this developn~nt. He noted i t i s nc~t unusual that houses of this age do requtre new pipes and that would increASe the water pressure. fie steted thc scwers have been addressed and they wi ll be ~roviding a p~ivate sewer and pla~s showtng where they wtil be picked up and thei~ capact~y wil) be presented. 11e stated right now they would lean towards dr.veloping the narthern s i te fl rst beceuse 1 t would provlde s baLte~ window of access and one c~f the residents in the area had actually indieated h~ would prefer tn see the norther~~ site cievcloped fi~st. Conarning the timing, he stated they would envtston rigi~t now 3/ 22/ 82 t ~ MINUTES~ Af1ANEIM GiTY PLANNING COMMISStON~ March 22~ 198: 82-158 possibly hsving four phases on the southern site and two phssea on tha northern site; that each phese F-as ~Kf to 6Q ur~t ;s ~nd i t cou) d be three to four years before finel build out~ depondtng on sales. Ne statad there ~re a numh~~ of w~te~ pumps throughout the proJect which are insul~~ed and t~ one pump does burn out~ there would be s backup hump so the~e wtll be no stegna~tl~n ef the water. Coc~cerning dtrt and du=t, he expl~tned they woul d confarm t~ CI ty o~dinnnces and wfien the schoc~l Is torn dawn, it wlil be to~~ dawn a11 et once and es quickly as possibin. TNE PUBLIC IIEARINC WAS CLASf.D. Commtsaloner I1~ rtst asked how much landscaped area will be left ~fter the ancroachmants are made. Bob Shechtman~ Spangler 5hachtman and Assoctetes~ 2240 Newpart 9each~ Nawport Beach~ CA ~2G63 exn181ned the encroachment In seme of the parking erees wi l l be a minlmun of 8 feet And ?.0 feet In sorro arees. Ne also explained Intense landscoping will tncludc lerge speclmen trees and shrub d and there will be a 2•to 3~foot high berm with wrought Iron f~netng around most of the prape~ty. Cort~missioner tlerbst atated he wcwid have ~o ob)ectton as tonq as there Is adequ~te room for berms ~ but t t eppears the encroachment i s doarn to ,~, fe~t in some areas. Mr. ShachtmAn stat~d on somr of the back partions the aress a~e 5 feet, but on a11 street sides~ the minimum fs 8 feet and tht~t probably tn thelr ftnal work on the maps~ any areas that loAk that small wlil be enlar~ed becsuse they w~u1d like to have as muth landscaped er~a as possible. Con+missioner Ilerbst stated he felt th~ walv~er has to he spectfic and thought 8 feat would be the minimum In order ta allow berms. Mr. McCaul steted the itheme of the pro]ect requl res the hoevy landscaping and they feol it is compatible in provtdin~ the parking kith mature lendscaping and does meet the intent of the Code from a p~actical stendpotnt and from a salns point~ they will pravide mature landscaptng. Commissionar Ilerbst asked about tht er+gress and ingress off Lincoln. Pau) Singer. Traffic Engtneor~ stated CondTtinn No. 1~- discusses that itzm; that it is the inte~t to ga hefo~ Councll approximately at the Same time as this metter is heaPd a~d ask for a parktng restrtction ordtnance on both sides of Lt~coln from east of Resh Street to tlarbo~ Boulevard to restrict pa~king and if that ordinance passas~ access can ba obtai~ed to Lincoln, but if it fatls to be appra~ed due to problems wt th tha ne) ghbors, than ai l access wl i l haMe to be taken from Ci tron. Ne e: alatned the parktng restriction woutd only be from Resh Street east and the fiower sh~~p wESt of Resh wou) d not ba af feeted. Mr. McCaul stated p~rtions of the par~tng havc already been eliminated from Lincoln a~d Mr. Singer stated that Is correct. -1e Glarified that if the ordinance passes~ 3/2z~8z ~ ~ MINUTfS ~ A~lAHE I M C 11'Y PLANNI NG COMMI S510N~ March 22 ~ 1~82 8:'~ 159 the street will be postad and It wlll be m~rked for ~ continuous left-turn lane ~t the develope~'s expensc. Commisslonar 9e rnes explalned the no perktng ~estriction on both sides o~ Lincoln to Ma. Fied~te~ notin~ chat her p~operty would be effecte~l. t1s. Fischle steted she wouid tak~ offense to that ordin~nce because the rental of the praperty Is pert of her Iivtiihood ~nd peeple do u~c those two parking spaces in front of the travei agency. Mr. Singer stated the parking issua (s nat reafly to be dtscusscd today; thet the City Counct l w) l i hnld a pu511c hesring end each property owner along the ~ffected area wil) be notifted. Jack White cl~rifted Ms. Fischle recelvrd a n~ttc~ of todey's hearing whlch wAs meilod ta a post affice box In Lake Arrvwhoad~ but appz~rently she dfd not receive notice of the hesring on the amendment to the Goneral Pian. Conmissioncr Darn~s stated she thought tt,is development will henefit the Gity of Anahetm and is one of the nicest de~elopments sh~ has teen and cAn only hope it wil) be deve loped. Commi ss tone r Boues agrocd. It was noted Envtronmental Impact Report No. 248 was previously ~pProved by the City Council on Merch 16~ 1982~ in conjunct0on with Gener~l Plan Amendment No. 16P. Commissioner tierbst offer~d Resolutlon Na. PC82-41- and mc>ved for 1 ts passage anc: adoption that the Anaheim Clty PlannTng Commission does herehy g~ant Raclassificatlon Ilo. $1•82-16 s~Ject to Inte~departmental Camnittoe rocor++mendatlons. On roll ~alt~ thc foregoing resa'~~tion was passed by ~hc following vote: AYES: COMMIS510fJE~tS: f~ARNES, dflU.45, FRY, RIERBST~ KING, McE~URNEY NOES : COItMi SS I ONERS : NOWE ABSENT: CONMISStONERS: DUSNORE Commissioner Nerbst offered a motio~ seco~ded by L~nr.ilssloner Nc[iurney and MOTION CARRIEO (Chalrman aushore being ebsent)~ that th~ An~+helm City Planning Cortmission does hereby 9rant watvcr (a), on the basis that denlal wauid deprive sub,ject property of a privilege enJayed by other p~opertlcs undcr identicai zontng classifiu+tion and granting waiver (b), far a minimum setbaGk of 8 feet on thn basis that dense ma~ure landscaping wi 11 be provided to adequatety screen the parktng are~. Comrnt ss lone r Nerbst of fereci Resol utl o~ -~ . PC82-b,r, ~nd rroved f~r 1 ts pass~ge and adoptlor ~';at the A~aheim City Flanning Cormission does hereby grant Co~ditio~a~ Use Permi t~,::. 2311 1 n compi iarce wi th Sectio~s 18.0~.030; .031 ;•~32: .~33; •~3~+ and .035, Title 18 of the Anahelm Munlctpal Code and sub,ject to Interdepsrtmental Commltten recornmendations. ;/22/ 82 MIHUTES~ A1tAF1EIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSI~N~ March 22, 1q82 62-1~iA On roll cetl~ tha foragoing ~nsolutlon was passed by ths Mllowing v~c~te: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: aARNES~ BOUAS ~ FRY~ FIEROST, KINC. Mc9UI~lEY NOES : COMMI SS I Ot1ERS : t~ONE ABSE~~T: COMMI SS I OIIERS ; RUSI~QRE ACTION: Commtssionar Ilerbst -~ '~~red a motton~ seco~ded by Cammissioner ~ouaa and M~~ CARRIED (Chairman 4ush..r~ batng absent). that the Anahaim Clty Planntng Conmisston daes hereby find thet thc praposed subdivision, together with its de~ig~ and improvenent. is cansistent with the City of Anshetm Renorel PIAn~ pursu~nt ta Gove~mm~nt Cocle Section 66~-83•5; and docs, therefore~ apnrove Tentative Mep of Tract No. 11425 for e 4-lot~ iG9-unit condominlum suhdlviston~ subJect to the followinq condl tions: 1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 11425 is g~Anted subJect t~ the appraval of Reclassificati~n No. 81-82-16 ~nd Conditi~nal Use Permit N~. 2311. 2. That ~rior to appro~ ~1 of a final tract map or Intraductl+on of an ordinance to rezone subJect p~aperty~ whichev~er occu~s flrst. dr~velc~pe~ shsil p~ovide or e~~ter tnto an agrcement with thc City ta provtd~ ralac~-tion assist+~nce as approv~ed by the Ctty for relocatton of the Poilce ~~esli~rt and a~+aitport permi t for che relocstion of the Pol ice Department ~lei iport sh~11 "~e i ssued by the Cal I forni ~ Departn+ent of Transportatio~ ~ Divtx lon af AercanAUt( cs. 3. That prior to approval of the finel tract map, the orinEr~~l cbcuments of the covenants, condtttons~ and restrtctlons~ snd a le!ter a~drexse~d to developer'S title company outhorizi~g recordation tfie~eof~ shall be- submitted to the Planntng Department for transmlttal to t'ne tc~llaring d~partments for approval: Ci ty Attorney's Offi ce~ Publ ic Utill ties Department~ duilding Dtviston, and the Englneering ~'ivlstnn . Said documents~ as approved~ shall he filed and recar~d tn the Office of the Qrange County Recorder. 4. Thet should thts subd(vtsian be devrlaped as more than one subdivision, each sc~dlvlsion theroof shal) be submttted in tcntative form for apprnval. 5. That ail lots w-thin thls tract shall be served by unde~qround utillttes. 6. That street names shall be approved by the City Planning (lepartment prfor to approval of a finat tr~ct n~o. 7. That trash storac3e areas sha~l be provided {n accoroance ~rtth appraved plans on file with tha Offlce of the Exarutl~re Oirectar of PuL tc works. 3/?2/82 \ MI ~~UTES ~ ANAHE I M C I r1f PLANN I NG COMMI SS I ON, Ma rch 22 ~ 1~8Z 62-161 8. That fi re hydr+~nts shal t be l~~tt~l led and ch~rged as ~Aqui red snd determtned to be necossary by the Chlef of the Fire Depart~++ent prlor to comn+encement of structur~l framing. g. That dratnage of subJect property shnll ba dtsposed of In A manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 70. Prtor to the issuanco of bul lding pe~ml ts, the developer m~y~ instead of payiny park and recreattone) in-lleu fees~ provide park end recreatlanal improven+ents such as public restraoms at local schools. The determination ++s to whcther in-lieu fec~t shall bo pAtd or whcther spccified improvements shall bc provided shel) be sub]ect to negotiatian with the Parks Otvision of the Parks~ Recreation and Camnunity Services Dapartment and shali be approved by satd department. 11. That ali private streets shall be deveiopcd in accordance wtth the City of Anaheim's Standard Detail ~~o. 122 for prlvrtG streets~ Inctudtng installation of ~treat name stgns. Plons for the private street ltghting, ~s requlr~d by thc standard detall~ shall be sut~mitted to the duilding ~I ~ision fo~ approval dnd tnclusion with the building plans prlo~ tv the issuance of bulldtng permits. (P~Ivete st~e~ts are those which provide primary access and/or clrtulation ~rlthin the pro,ject. 1z. If permenent strcet n~me sign~ heve not heen instailed, temparary street name signs shali be Installed ~rlor to any occup~ncy. ' 13. "t~o park-ng for streec sweeping" signs shell be installed prtar to final sxreet tnspection as rtquired by the Publ tc No~ks Executi ve Di rectar in accordance with s~peclftcatto~s on file with the Street Matntenance Dtvisio~. 14. That the awner(s) of s~bject propertv shall reconstruct the existi~g traffic slgnal at Broadway end Citwn Street to the satisfaction of the City 'fraffic Engineer prlor to final hul~dinq and Zoning tnspections. ~' 15. T'hat prior to final bullding a~d zon~ng inspections~ ali units lotated at ; the end of~ And beyond driveways tn excess of 154 feet in length (excluding , unf ts on driveways with turnaround areas) shall be sprlnklered as requlred by the Chief af th~ Fi re Department. 16. That prior to final b~eilding and zoning inspections for oecupaney of any dwelling unlt, excludtng the model hane units, tt~e Poiite Department ileliport shall be relocated and aperational. 17. Prior to issuAnce of bui 1ding permt ts~ the epRllcant sha11 p~es~nt evidence satlsfactor~ to tha Chlef 8uilding Inspector thex the proposed proJect is ~n confo rmance with Councll Policy NurN~er 542, Sound AttanuAtton In Residenttal ProJects. 3/22/82 MINUTES~ ANAHEIM G11Y PLANNING COMMISSION, M~rch Z2~ 1~82 82-162 18. Prior to Issuance of butldtng parr-Its~ thr applicant shnll present ovtdence aatisfact~ry to the Chtaf Building Inspector that the unttR wtll be In confo rmsnce with Nolse Insulntton Standards specifted tn the Californla Admi nl stratl ve Code, T1 tle 2y. 19. Thet prlor t~ thQ ~tart of Any oon~tructton activities including gredlnc~, the dev~eloper shal) obtatn the Police Qepartment's concurrence wltfi the phastng of the ccx~structton acttvitlea. Said con~tructlon ~ctivitles sha11 be caordinated with the Poltce De~artmant helicopter flt~hts. Jeck White~ Aaslstont City Attorney~ present~d the wrltten right to apneA) the Planning Commission's dreisto~ withln 10 days on the tr~ct n+an a~d 22 days o~ thP othe~ actio~s to the City C~uncil. Commis~loner Flerbst offe~ed itesolutton No. PC82-46 end rt+oved for It5 aasRa~ and adoptlon that the Ariahcim City Pinnning Cornmisston does herehy c~n~nt Recl~sslflcatlon No. 81•82-17 subJect to Interdopartmertel Comml ttee reconnx~ndatR~ns. On roll cell~ the for~cptng resolutlon wa~ passed by the f~11c~+1n~ v~,te: AYES : COMMI SS t~I~ERS : BARF~E~ ~ DUUAS, FRY ~ 11ERflST ~ Y I NC ~~+c3URhEY NOCS ; COMMI SS I ONERS : NONE ns~EriT: COMMISS I Ot~ERS : KUSNOR~ Commissloner N~erbst offered a rrbtion~ secanded by Cammtssianer Bauas and MOTION cAaRt[o~ that thc A~ehcim City Plsnning Coemtssian dc~es herct~y grant watver (a), on the basis that the request Is minimal and dPnial wauld de~rive sub]ect property of ~rivtleges en}oyed hy other prope~tles {n the sama clossiftcatlon and granttng watver (b)~ for a minimum of 8 foot setbacks on the bAStx tt~at cknse mature iandscaptng wtli be provided to adequatcly screen Cfif parkt~g. Commisstoncr Ilerbst offered Resolution t~o. PC~?-b7 an~i n+~vcd for lts Dassage and adoption that the Mahelm City Pl+~nning Commissln does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2312 in compliance wlth Sections 18.~3.030; •~31: .~32~ •~33: .034 and -~35, Title i$ of the Anaheim Munictpal Co~ae and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations. On roll call~ the foregoing resotutinn was ~rsse~ by the foltawing wte: AYf.S: COMMI SS i ~NERS : aARNES, BOUAS ~ FRY ~ NCRAST ~ KI NG~ MWURNEY NOES: COMt~I5510NER5: NONE A85ENT : COMMI SS I ONERS : BUSIIORE l1CTIOR ~ Co+nmissio~er lierbst offcrcd a moticn, seconded by Gommissioner Bouas and MOT1~01i CARRIED (Chatrmen Bushore being absent)~ that the Anaheln City Plenntng Commission daes hereby ftnd that the pr~posed subdivtston. togethr.r with its design end Inprov~ement~ is conststent with the City of Anahetm Generai Plan, pursuant to Government Code S~ction 66473•5; +~nd dxs, the~+efo~e~ approve Tentative -+ap of Trect 3i22ia2 ~ ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIN CITY PLANNlNG COMNISSION~ Ha~ch 22~ 1Q92 8x-163 ~o. 11hZG fo~ e 2-lat. 97-un! t cond~minlum subdtvislon. sub)ect to the fol lc~ring condi t1 ons : 1. Thet tha ~pproval of 7entotive Map of Trect No. 114?.6 is gr~nked subJec! to the a~proval of Reclas:Iflcatian No. 81-82•1] end Condttienal Uae Permit No. 1312. Z. The! should this subdivisia~ be devele~ped as m~~e than e~e subdtvlslon~ each subdi vt slon thtreof aha 11 be subml tted in tentati ve form for epprovsl . 3. That al) lots wlthtn thls trect sh~11 I~e ~erved by underground utilities. -+. That prlor to ftnal tract map epprovel~ the origin~l documents of the covensnts, co~dttlons~ and rest~icttons~ dnd a letter Addressed to developer's tltle comp~ny authortxing record~tlon thereof, sh~11 be s~6mitted to the Planning depa~trr~ent for transmittel to the follawtnq dopartments far approval: Ctty Attc~rnev's Office, Public Utilities Department~ Butldtng Dlvlslan~ an~i the Englneering Divlslon. Saici dacuments~ as apprevod~ sheli be f11ed and rncorde:d ln the Office of the Orange County Re~corder. 5. That street names sh~il be approv~d by the Ctty Planning Dapartn+ent prlor to app ro val of e final tract ma~. y. That trash storsge areas sl,all he ~mvlded in accordance with a~roved plans on fila with tha Office of the Executive Dfnectar of Public Works. /. That fire hydrants shall be instAlled and chorqed ~s requtred and determinad to be necesse ~~ by the Chlef of the Fire nepertn~ent prtor ta comme~cement af structu~al frr.ming. 8. That d~ainage of subJact prope~ty shaii be dtsposed of in a manner satisfectory to the City Engtnezr. 9. That prlor to the lssuancr_ of buiiding permits~ the dev~eloper rnay~ instead of paying perk and recreatlon tn-1 teu fees. provTde park and recreatlanal improv+or~nts such as pubi tc rost rooms at local schools. The determtnatton as to whether in-lteu fees shall be paid or whether specified Improvements shall be provlded sh~ll be subJect to ne gotiation with the Pa~ks Oivlston of ~he Parks, Recreatton and Community Services Dapartmant~ and shall be approv~d by said department. 10. That a modifted cui•de-sac shall be ~ rovided at the terminus of Chestnut Street subJect to the approval of the Cfty Engtne~r. 11. That al) p~ivate st~eets s~hall be developed in accordance with the Ctty of Anahoim's Standard Detail No. 122 for ~rivate streets, includfng instAilaticn of street nenx signs. Plans for the prlvate street tighting, 3/22/82 MINUTQS, ANAHEIM CITY P~ANNING COMMISSION~ M~rch 22~ 1982 82~161~ ~s req utred by the stnnd~rd detaii~ shall be submttted to the ~uilding Divislo~ fo~ epprovAl and incluslan with th~ buliding pl~ns prtor to the Issuance of buliding permits. (Prtvatc atreets are those whlch previde primsry access and/or circulation withi~ the proJect). 12. If permanent strect name stgns have not been inst+~lled, ton~o~ary street ndme signs shatl be tnslalled prlo~ to any occupancy. 1~. That th~ existtng publtc sanitary se~~rer on site shall be reloceted~ protected or reconstructed ~s apn m ved by the Street Malnt~rance and San) tation Superintendent. 14. That the existtng publlc sanlt~ry sewer eesement shA11 be widened as rtqulred t~y the Street Maintenance and 5anitatlon Superint~ndent. i5. That "No parking for street swe~pin~" signs shall be installcd prior to finel street inspection as r~qulred Uy the P~bitc works Executtve Directar In acco~danco wlth specifications on file wtth the Street Malncenance Oivtslon. 16. That prior to ftnal buitding a~d zoning inst1ectlons~ the devel~per sha1) pay en amount satisfacto ry to the City TrAffic Cngtneer for the ~e-striping ~f Lineoln Avanue to provtdc left-turn vchicular eccess to suhJe:ct pro~erty. 17. That na vehicular access to sut~(ect proparty shAli he teken fmm lincoin Avenue unti 1 after an ~rdinance beccxnes effectlve prohlbitinq on-street parking on Lincotn Avenu~ bestween aesh Street and Harbor Ooulevard r~nd untt) after stripin~ and signing on Lincoln Avenue has heen completed to establlsh a left~t-~rr. lane and tc~ prohibit on-stre~t parking. In th~ event thAt Access cennot be taken from lincoln Avenue, access shall be provided via a mtntmum of two (2) driv~ways from Citron Street tncludine~ an emergancY vehicular accegs polnt at the westeriy termtnus of Chestnut Street. lf~. That prlor to final bullding and zontng lnspections, traffic signals on Citron Street at l.incoln Avenue and Broadway shril be modified or reco~structed to the sattsfaction of the City Trafftc Engi~e~r. 19. That prior to fi--al bullding and zoninc~ (nspecticx~s. all dwelltng units located on dead end drlveways (driveways wtthout turneround areas) at a dlstance nr~re than 1~0 feet from the main l~~op privr~te driveway shall be s~rtnklered as rcquired by the Chief of the: ~;rc Department. 20. That prior t~ Issuence of bullding permits. the applicant shall prese~t evidence aatisfactary to the Chief Buliding lnspector that che proposed pro,ject ts in conformance wi th Counci t Po) tcy Number 5~+2, Sound Attenuatlon in Residential RroJects. 3/22/82 MINUTES~ ANAHEIH CITY PLANNING COMMISSIAN~ Merch 22~ 1~82 82-165 21. Thst prior to issuance of hutiding permita~ the eppltcant sh~lt p rosent evidence satisfactory to the Chtef Dulidtng Inspector thet the units will he Sn co~fo rn-ence with Holse Inaulatlan Standards specified In the Califarnia Admtnistrative Code~ Title 2S. Jeck White~ Assistant Clty /lttorney~ presented thv ~-ritt~n right to appe~l thR Plsnning Cnmmisston'a decislon within 1~ days on the tract n+Ap And 2~ days on the other acttons to the Ctty Council. Chatrmen 6ushore returned to the CQUnctl Chanber ~nd Jack White clarifled that he had prevloualy declared a conflict of tnterest At the ~revtous public hearing on Items 4 and 5 and Chatrman Bushor~ ex~~lained that he hed not parttcipated in Item No. 3 since he had returned fr~um the recess latc and dld nc~t hear thc entire t~stlmony. I TEP~1 N_ 0. G: E I R Cl1TEGORI CAI, EXEMPTI ON-CLASS 21 11N0 CONpI TI O-JAI. USE PERMI T NO` 2151: PUBLIC HEIIRING. ~'.INER: ABEL At~D CAROI R. MENOEZ~ 10n~~ North LAmon, Anahelm~ cn ~28c~5. AGENT: IiUt1DERT0 VILLASE~~OR, )~3 W. Fourth Street. ~4~ La I+~bra, CA 9Ah31. Property described as an irrcgularly-shapad percet of land consisting of ~ppmxtrtretaly A.14 acre located at the southeast corner Aneheim Raul~vard and lemran Street, and furthe~ described as iQ3~ North Anahetm Doulavard (Su Casa Auto Sales). Praperty presently classified CG (Commercfal~ General) Zone. TNE AIiAHCIM PLANIIING COMMlSSIO~J REQUE515 A PUBLIC NEARING TO CONSIDER REVACATION OF COr1DIT1oNAL USE PERNIT N0. 2151, It was nc~t~d the petlt9oner requested a bvo-week continuance. AC, TIOr~: Commissione r King offered a rm tion~ seconded by Commisstoner Bouas and NOTION CARRIED~ that ~onstderati~n of the aforementioned itAin be continued ta the regularly-scheduled meeting of April 5~ 19II2~ at the request of the petttt~ner. I TEM t~0. 7: E I R CATEG~Rt CAL EXEMPTt ON-CLA55 3 Ai~D VARAriCE N~. ~257: ~_.. PUBLI C IiEARI NG. OWr~ER: OHER G. BUR~~S ~ ET AI., 1239 North ~iarbor Boulevard, Anaheim, ~A ga8o~. Property described as a rectengularly-shaped parcel of land consisttng of approximately 0.3 acre, 123g North Harbor aoulevard. VARI ANCE REQUEST: WAI VERS OF: (a) PERMI TTEp OUTDOOR ~1pVERTI S I!IG Ar~O (b) PERMI TTEO LO~ATION QF FREESTANDING SIGNS Tb RETA111 OUTbO~R ~ISPLAY OF FL'ridE'tS AMD IUl EXISTING OF f REESTANDI NG 51 GN. There waa no one indicating their presence in opposition to subJect request~ and although the staff report was nat ~ead, it is referred to a~d rtw de a part of ~he minutes. Omer G. Durns, 7645 Danby ~venue, Whittier~ stated he feels they need the outdoor display of flowers for adverttsi~g. 3/22/82 MIHUTCS~ ANNiEIM CITY PLANNINC CONHISSION~ Merch 22~ 1'1~l2 R2-If,~ TNE PUBL~ C IIEARI ~IC WAS CLOSED. Chairn~n 9uahore stated he unde~~stands the frer.sta~dtn~ polr. sir~~~ cioes not hnve e perMit. Mr. (~urns stated the sign was there when hc~ pu~ch~sed the property a~d he wes rx~t twrrre thot i t dt d not h~+ve e perr+l t. Chairman f3ushore asked ff the petitioner w~uld be wlllinn t~ move the freestanding poie atgn to a conformtng dlstnnce from the proper~y Ine n~stlnc~ the sl~e of the slqn does not creatP a problem. Ueon 5herer~ Assistant Planner~ stAted the sic~n cnuld be loc~ted ~~n feet seuth of the north property line ar ~~0 fest nc~rth of the s~uth property line. Ctiairm~n Bu~hore referrecl to the 2f1-foot arca in th~ ccnter of the pr~perty where the siqn could be relocoted and C~misstonesr Fry suc~g~sted the sign be l~c.~ted hetween the two driveways. Chalrman Uushore stated he ~ersnn~lly hAS no obiections t~ the outcloor flc~wers as long es the vari.~nce Is ap~r~vad because ther~ is ~nother florist tn trnrn whtch does have out~loor displays. Uean Shere~ suggest~d grantln~ the walver in part~ J~nying watver h~ on tha bASis that the petitioner has stipulated to bring the freestn~ding stqn into conformBnGc w 1 th f.ode . Mr. liurns clarifted th~t the flowers Are brouc~ht Inside at night and thet the outdoor sCands will bc permanent. Chairman Dushare suggested that the vArlence be lintted to ~ certain display ar~a f~r the outclaor flawers such as no closer than 4~ fewt to the north and south property l ines and 10 feet frcxn the curh. It was notcd the Planning Director or f~ts authorized representative has determined that the proposed proJect falls within the definition af Categ~ricA1 Extmptions, Class 3~ as defined in the State Envirnnmental Impact Re{x~rt Guideilnes and is~ therGfore~ categorfcally exempt from the requirement to prePare an CIR. Commissioner King offered Res~lution No. PC8~-l+f~ and moved for its pass~ge and adoptiAn that the Anaheim City Planning Cormissi~n does hereby qrant Variance Nq. 32$7~ in Rart, granting walver (a)~ ~n the hasis that another leading Anaheim flerist does heve outcic~or displays of flowers and on the basl~ that the displ~y for fiowers would be located n~ clt~ser than 10 feet to the east pro~ertY tine a~d denial wouid deprive subJect property of a privtlege betng enJoyed by other propc~ties in the seme aone and classificatlon and denyireg (b) ~ on the basis thAt che ,p~.~i tion~r stip~lated at the pubiic hearing to move the freestanatng sic~n b~h.reen the two driveways to be in conformance ta Code requtrements thereby deletl~g the nec~ssity for said waiver and subject to Interdepartmental Canmittee recommr_ndations. 3l~~/82 ~ M I ~IUTES ~ ANNIE I M C I TY P I.ANN 1 N~ COMM I S S I ~N, Ma ~ch 2?, 1~182 ~32-167 ~ Desn Sherer askod the co~dttions he modifiod te include the requir~ment that they be ~' complicd with wtthin 6~ days. An roll call, the foregoing resolutlan wAS pass~d hy the f~llowinct v~te: AYCS : COt1N15S I ~NEHS : DARNES ~ aOUAS ~ EIUSFiORF ~~RY ~ HERDST, KI N~, McDURNEY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NAfI~ AgSENT: C~MM15510~l~RS: NONE Commiaston~r Uarnes su~~ested the petitloner should he sure nnd c~mply with thea~ conditic~ns withln the slxty days and not 1et the mAtter c~ntinue as in tl-e p+~st. ~ ~ ITEM NQ. 8: EIR CItTE~GRICAL EXEMPTI~N-CLASS 1 11N0 COUDITI~NAt USE P~P,MIT N0. 23~7: ~.~.~~ ~........~~ ...r ~...~~~ I ;~ >t PUIiLIC NEARING. OWNER: MAURICE PINTO. P. Q. Uox 3~iz1, llnahelm~ cn 42~3n3• Af;ENT: LUT ~ ELEI~A GARCIA. 1G!i7 ~rea Boulevard~ Fulicrton~ CA !i263y. Property descrihed as A rectAnc~ularly-sha~ed parcel of lend cnnsistin9 of r~pproxtmately ~1.3 ecrc~ ~-1h South Horbor poulevard (Mon Pctit Cafe). TO PERMIT ON-SAI.E UELP, A~I~ WINE IN AN EXtS71N~ RESTAIiRA~IT. There were four persons Indlceting their presence in op~sttf~n to subiect re~uest~ and althaugl~ thc staff r~port wAS not read~ it is refcrred t~ and made A part af the minutes. Luz Carcia, agent~ stated she wants tn provide beer and wine f~r her customers and increase her buslness. Louis Pollard~ stated hc owns the se~vice stdtton on the eorner and has no ob.i~ction to the beer an~i wine In this restaurant~ but ther~ Is a ptnbnil operatt~n in that center and with thls bcer and wine~ there ~~ill he a~~lttt~n~!1 probtems te wh~t ls < already existing. Ile ~re~~ente!d photographs of the area and polnted out the drlveways k to the parkine~ tot and the metai fente whtcfi haa been left ~pen and noted customers ~ have a tendency to park on his propert•• and obstruct his buslness and he would propose that they bring the metat fenc~ng eround to close off the drtveway. 11e potnted out the entran~c of subJect property which is right down his property 11ne. Revcrend Lesl(e Ga~dner, ~4!1~ U. Verm~nt. st~ted they received che~ir conditionet use permi t in i9G8 for the Com~ni ty Christi an Schcx~l an:i Ful i Gospel Co~xnun! ty f.hurch and strongly abJect to any klnd of liquor being sold in this area becRUSe they already h~ve trouble with young peapl! )urtq~ing over their f~nce, lumping the wall~ throwtng stuff aver thc wall. breaktng into their storage rac~ms, noting they have h~d 5~00 of church money~ and a tape recorder, snd an add(nc~ machine st~len. Hc stated he does not knaw if any of theze things are connected with thts pidce of bustn~ss~ but they would obj~ct ta any type of 0lquar betng sQid in this l~ocation because he did not thtnk it would help n-ettersa • 3~z2/82 ~ MINUTES~ A-iAHE1M CITY PLANNING Ct-MMItSIl1N~ N~.-~h ~2~ 1~A~ Az•~hA Dorls Smeltter, b13 W~~t Ve~mo~t. stat~rd she rosides ecr~ss th~ street from the subJoct p~opcrty and requests denlal of thle ~equest And hoth she ~n~i her• husband appo~e tha snle of beer end wl~e In such closa proxtmttv to thelr residential u~e ~nd fael it is undesir~ble. She stated two yeers ego Mr. Pint~~ the ownnr of sub.Ject pro~rty, ~enue~ted a perml t to ~) law ~ cecktell lounge tn th is s~-rt~e l~catlon ~nd they opposed the rec~uest et that time for the sem~ r~esons end th~! request w~s denled by the Pl~nning Commtsslon end one re~t~n wrs tht~t th~ tocatlon was tao nner the re~ioentlel ara~ enA this has r~t changed. ShQ stnted Cor,mtsstanc~r t~drnes p~intod out at that timc that this loc~tlan wAS ~Ight beslde thP Agricultural Extensl~n Centor where girl scouts and hoy ~couts hold meetings on week~nds And thet situ+ation sti l) exists, She stated thls restaurant i~ In front ~f the Video Pal~ce which has e young cli.~ntele end late hours end questloncd Nhether or not this restaurant weuld have thos~ same I.~te hours and stated thrl r ne~iqhhnnc~x~d dcxs not need env further detrir~~entel ndd(tions, Ms~ 5rr~ltztr steted she ~.~as up~et last ntght by aeveral squed cr~rs and the helicopte~ overhe~d searching for a men who had shot an~ther nr~n At the corn~r nf V~ernx~nt and Lemon and s tated th (s was nnt an ( seleted Incident and th (nqs 1 tke thls herpen ropeatedty and she did nat feei they need nny ~ddt ti~nrl uses that would encour~~te or parpatuntC ~~~ch Incidents ln thr_Ir r-elnhhorhoocf. Ms. Smeltxe r stnted thls property owner app) ied for a commerclal r.oning on s~.~ ject property last ycnr and i t was granted nnd thr~ nclqhbonc~~c~c! was assureJ the impravements th be made wnuld be mo~e attrnctive, but th~t thnse Improvemnnts heve nev~er beon mede, Ui I) Gabald4n stAt~d he 1 tves ~d~ecant to f1r. Gardner ond he did nc~t obJc~t when the owner asked far rer~(ssion to install the video estahllshment~ but fclt this oroper~ty shou~d havr nnre plonning. Ile stated there are na nnt~)s in the ar~a to c~ener~te business for the restaurAnt a~d thnt the video esteblishment hr~d heen maved to the rear of the property and the oa,ner is planning ta exoand thc vide~o estrf.l ishn~ent by addlnc~ 5~ ne~re machtnes which would bring mare ypung ~o~le t~ the Ar~A. Hp stet~d he has four renta) units In thc area and th~re have been prohlems. Ns. Garci.~ stated 1t seams tha n~ir~hhors are opposed to her re~uest because of her l~ndlord but she I~ leastng the property; that the ~~staurant is open from 7 a.m. to 2 p.m.; that she tricd to generate !~usiness from the video estnhi ishmens but her menu dtd not ~ppeal to the young pcopte or tha edults and her ltcense has nothiny to do with thc vi4eo estabil~hment. She stated her huslness is during the lunch hour and ghe is not open when the video establtshment Is busy. TNE PUtill C NEARIIIG iJAS CLOSEO. Chairman Bushore stated he realizes th(s rec~uest ts for the rext~urant ~nd same of the complaints relate Co the video establtshrnant. Ne stated he personally would qurstton why a restaurant serving bee~ and wine would be alla,-ed l~cated ~eact to an arcadC. Fie Aaked i f th~re has been s reques t to AxpArtd the ~rcade. 3/2z~82 MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIN~ COMMISSIAN~ March 22~ I~R2 82-16~ Deen She ror~ Assistant Pl~n~er, atated ths Vtdee Palace t~ cur~ent~Y o~rAting u~der a permtt gr~nted by the Ctty founctl ~nd they havR nat requested an a~plicntlon t~ expa~d but If en expen~ion Is renuasted, the owner would hrve ta compiy with the new ardinance end the tr.nants and residents withtn 3AA feet would be notifled end tf ~1$ o~ mcre of the peo~le oppaaa the request~ tt would he denied. ~espcx~din~ to Chalrman Bushpre~ Daan Sherar explained if th~ property c~wn~rs would like to let the City Council know the ercade is causing e prohlem~ they cAn eddre~s the City Counctl et any polnt or walt for the appiication for eYaansioi~ ~r r~ncewal ef the extsttng Itcense. Jack Whita~ Assistant City Attorniy~ strtecl permtts ~~re issued yaarly and the recently adopted ardinance states when tha permits are expirinq o~ when the applicant wishes ta incre~se the nurtber ef mrchtne!s, the ne-w procedure wil) br applied and the appl(cant has to come before the rlenntny tlepartment~ fil~ the a~plicatton and go through the ncw pr4cedure of notifying the owners er tenents withtn 3~n feeC And tf there is a rt4~Jorlty ob~ecting~ the Planning Directer has no alt~rna2tve but to deny the appllcation and the applicant then hbs the rtqht to appeal thAt deniAl to the City Council. Ila clArlfied the City Counctl's decisi~n ts hased on whether or not there would bo any detrtrnlnt to the health~ safety or welf~re of the citizens end nc~t strictly upon ~,rotest from the netc~hborhoocl. fle st~~ted in this casr_ the most 1lkeiy evont w111 be tf~at the ~wner will seek to add rmre machinAS ~r the exlsting t~!rmit wlll expire. Chelrmen Dusho~e referred to the previous re~uest fnr e tocktai) lounge and nc~ted tt was wlthdrawn because surroundin~ propnrty a~mers ohJected for these same reasons. He stated ev~n if the PlAnning Commission had nat heard thflt the arcade is causing a prob 1em, he pcrsonal ly would fiave bce~n vcry reluctant to grant the request. Ns. Carcia stated the ~~cade o~erators do nc~t permit any snnkin~ or soft drlnks in the establishment and she dtd mt see that there would b~± a prd IGm because they cfo have tight rules ~nd reguletians. Commisstoner 8ouas clarified the hc~urs of opPration are from 7 a.m. to 2 p.m.~ painting aut th~ staff report states 11 3.r~. to 1~ p.m. Jack White stated the limited hours of o~xration cauld he n+~de a part of the conditio~~ af approval of the permtt. Chairman eust~are stated I~e did not think the addttion of beer and wine wi11 make any signtficant difference and he thaught that the apt~tlcant will have ~ raugh time maktng a go of a r~staurant in this I~cacion no cr~tter what is served. Commissianer Ilerbst asked if the restaurant and arcade have adequate parking on-stte indicating he was referring to the map whtch shows six spaces and clartfied thAt the other two lots were n~t shawn as part of this hearing. 3/22/82 82-17A MINUTES~ ANAl1E1M CITY PI.AN~IING COMMISSIM~i. -larch 22, 1~18? Uean Sheror statod parking Is ndnq~~~stAC~s~h ~e~statedei t~n~sphle~unde+~~tandlnntthet thls n+ataur~nt would ~equfre ~' roved in coniunctlon with plens th~ psrking to the rear of th~ butldin~ has be+en ap~ submittod for commerclal tonin9• Commissian~r Flerbst st~tecf thst pro~nr~y with the drivewey along Vermant has rx~t b~een improved a~d Dean ~harer stetec) acccs~ is teken on 1larbor to the ~arking in the rear. Ms. Garcla st~tod the driveway from Vermont to the parking has been imp~oved. Chairman Dushore st+~ted slnc~ntLhlseG~ope~tycAtton has not been ftnAtizcd~ there Is not really adequata prrking P Oean Sherer stated the~EP~haredxfor el itdev~loprt~nt.~~d I t ts owned by tha sa~ ~~~r sr~d th~ perkiny would Commisstoner Ilarbst sCated they wouid be using the drivea~aY in conJunction wlth this use without impraving the h~+lAnce and he dfd not thlnk thet was rtqht ~nd that at 1a~st the lAnd~3capin~'°~nsteednofsthe,propertyVarner wh~ Is~causingithenproblemtghut th{s appllcant is he he did not tt~inl~. any further uses shouid bn pcrmitted until Mr. Pinto c~mplies w t the requi rements , Chalrman Bushore stetcd a variAnce is, ;+rohr~hly rr.nutred stnce th~ park.inq ls on the other propertY. ~~.~:~r•.~ssio~er tlerbst sug~lested a continuance unti) the applicant can discuss the metter w) th the proxrty avner t~ see i f a~ything can be done. Chelrmnn Bushore n~tad thP`mroQ QtLhe nel~hborhood andahasrnotcfollowed throuc~h~onake care oF certatn things tu p those promises and th~t ls the c~+use of the problem. Jack White suggested ine p te'L~nt~~tF~ daytoreMonclayctotdetermtneF'whetherp o~notY owners call th~e Plann g P the hearing wtll be held. NC_pp; Cortmissioner flerbsChelmtCid aPlanning Commissicx~ydoesmhereby continUeand M071(N~ CARRIED, that the Ana tY ~ II2. cons i de ratl on of the above-mGn tl oned i tr.m tc~ Apr t 1 5, 9 Commlssianer pouss askedhefttwe~~eatwtn~Y~ openedtb~thltedTddnotrhringit~ranyaurant a~d Ms. Garcia replled t addt t1onP1 bus iness, so i t wl I1 be closed. Chat rman Bushore asked about theb. awc~'~edto~u~hwi thrthe~ov~mertof the pr pertytbutEthatd that may be samething that tan e is not samething to be heard at thls public heartng. 3/22/82 ~ MINU7~S, ANNIEIM CITY FLANNING COMMISSION~ Harch 22~ 19~2 aZ'171 ~TEr~ No. 9t ~Ia NFGATIVE DECLARATION AND CnND~T'IaNAL USE PERMIT NO. 2313: _.._r..~_ PUDLIC IIEARINP. OWNER: 111LLVIEW ASSOCIATES~ 1&15 f.. Garry Street~ 011~~ 5anta An~ Ch ~2E1~2. AGENT: ~E4Rr,E E. ~~EIMAN~ 11-~ W. Corrmonwealth, Fullerton~ CA 42f~32. P~operty de~cribed an Irregularly-sh~ped parcel af land conatsting of approxim+~tely 1.9 acras loceted at th~ northwest corner of Orangethorpe Avenue and Imperta) 11 ighw+ry ~ 5hSA East O~angethorpe 1lvenur. TO PERMIT b~~-SALE I~EER 11ND WINC IN A PROPOSED Rf.STAUkAftT, Ttiere wes nc~ one Indtceting thelr presence In ap~sitlon to subiect request. and a 1 though the s tef f report wAS not read ~ 1 t I s re f~rred to +~nd n~de~ n parc of the mi nutes. George Nel man ~ aqent ~ wes present tc~ answer ony quest 1 a~s . TN~ PUt1LIC IiEARING tJAS CLA5E0. Respc~ding to Cortmissione~ Barnes, Mr. N~Imen expiafned this rest•~urant serves plzza and Ita) ian faod; that the oporattn~ hours wi l l be 11 e.m. to 1~ p.m.; that th~re will n~t be a bar in tho faclllty; that the restaurant would s~at -+2 p~ople; and th~t the ki tchen would be yb~ of the floor are:a. ACTIQK Commis~loner Barnes offered ~ rrotlon, secondad by Commissicner King and M V(~1 GARRICD~ that the Anahein City Pl~nning Commission ht~s revi~wed the proposal to permt t on-sale hcer and wine In a preposed restaurant ~n on i rrequlAr ly-sha~ed parcel of land consisting of epproxtm~tely 1.4 atres located at the n~rthwest corner of Orangethorpe Avenue and imperlal Iltghway (5~5'~ East Orangetherp~ Avenue) ; end does hereby approve the Negatt ve Declaratlon from tha renul ren~nt tn prepr~e an envl ronrr~ntai impect repo~t on the basis that there would be no significant lndividuel ~r tumulatTve adverse envlronmenta) lmpact due to the epproval of thls Negatlve Uectaration since the Anahelm Generel I'ian deslqnetes the subject property for medi um dens ity res identi al and general corm+~rclal land use~s conNnr.nsu~ate wi th the proposal; thst ~ sensittve environrnental Imprcts are invr,lved in the n~oposal; that the Inltlal Study subm(tted by the petitloner inAicates no signiffcant indlvtdual or cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and that the t~eqative Declaration subste~tiating thr. foregoing findtngs is on file in the City af Anahelm Planntng Department. Commisstoner Bar~es offered Resolution tta, PC82-49 and moved for Ita ~sssage and adoption that the Anaheim Ctty Planning CammiSSion docs hereby grant Co~ditio~al Use Permt t tto. 2313 in compl i ance wl th Sections 18,~3,~3~: •~31; •~32 ~•~33: .~3u and .~35~ Titte 1~3 of thc Anaheim Huntcipal Code and subject to Intcrdep~rtmental Commi ttee recortKnendaelons. On roll call, the forec~oing resolution was passed by the follc~wing wte: AYES: COMMISSIANERS: BA~tNES~ a0UA5~ DUSHORE~ FRY~ HERBST, Y.ING, McBURr~EY NOES: COMMISSIONER:: NONE IIBSEN'f: COMMISSIONERS: NONE 3/22/32 MINUI'ES~ AW111EIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIOfI~ March 22~ 19f32 8Z-172 M N0. 10~ EIR TI ON, WA1 VCR OF CODE REgtfl RE.HE~IT J1ND C(!HDI TI QNAL ..__._.. ..._.._ - - PU4LIC HEARING. ONNCR: PACIFICO PRQPERTIES~ 3868 W. Carscx~, Sutte 212~ TorrencR~ CA 9~5~3. AGENT: CL DEKAL TEMPLG~ ATT~MTION: RALPtI C. HRYSON~ 1?.~G E. -:nt~ll~ Avcnue~ AnAheim~ CA 42~;. Propercy describod es a rect++ngularly•shape~d ~arcel ~f innd consisting of dppr~xtmately .r~ ~cre~ 117~ East Pecifico 4venue. TO PERMI T A PRI VATE LODGE 1 N TIIE Ml. 20~IE W I TN WAi Vf R OF -11 N I!~UN tIUMBFR ~~ PARKI tlr, SPACES. There wrs no onc tndlcatlnq their presence In npp~sitlon to sub.)ect re~ue~st~ and althaugh the staff report ~ros not re~d~ it Is r~ferred to enA mi+de a part of the minutes. Cd C r~mtn~ re~resenttn~ the a~ent~ reforred to the parking ayreen~ents submtttad and explalned they had contacted the maJorlty of their n~ighbars ~~nd they welcome~d them Into the CommunltY. Ilr~ axplalned they have been in thr. Long [l~~ch Are~~ for many years and hava been In a leesed b ullding in Anahcim far thrse year3 but want to own thel r own bu( lding. lie pr+~sented photoyraphs of the area. He st~-ced they did have the grcetost cooper~tion from Ci ty stoff ~nd referred to t-~e st~~ff report whlch Indicotes 9; ptff~ln~ spaces are requfrad ~nd 2~- sp~c~s are exlscln~ end nnother pnrt of the staff report indic~tes ~8 s~aces are rc~qulred and refe~red to the letters of lntent concerning the parktng spaces. Ile ref~rrod to Para~raph y of tl~e staff report whteh indicates the bullJlnq is 26~136 s~tuare fect~ and explained that is the land arca and the buitdfng Is only ll~lt~ squAre feet. '~~ stat~d. unfurtunately, they dld not attcnd the InterdcpArtmental Commi tteo r+eetlnQ ~~nd refer~ed to Condt tton No. 1 requiring sldewall.s and st+~ted there orc no stdewal~:s exlsting in thts cornpl~x. I~e noted the photographs were taken on Saturday and will show that there we~e no cars parkad there and nlso wi 1) sha•r Lhe berm wherc the s Idewel~ tivould heve to be located. ~{Q roferreci to Condition I~o. 2 requlring wat~r assessnwnt fccs and stated t"~ey were not fami liar with that rcr~uiren+ent. THE PUBLIC IIEARING WA.S CLOSED. nea~ She ror~ Assistant Planner~ stated the correct nurtfi er of parking spaces requtred is 95• Concerning the requtrcment for sidewalks Mr. Sherer explain~~i that is a requtrerntnt of the Clty Engineer's Office and the pet(tioner may request. tn writing~ a waiver of that requtrement and t1~at could be handled administratively without a pub 1 tc hcart ng. tie stated apperently the water assessment fPe has never been pai d on this pr~perty and the petltloner shoutd ch~ck wit'~ the Utilitfes DeP~~rtment. Regardtny the d(fFerence between commercial and industrial siqnal as~essment~ fees ~Ir. Sherer explain~ed that is o standerd condition and thc property will oniy be asse,ssed for that area of the buitdiny being used for asxertbly purposes since a large maj ority of the b~(lding wii) be used for warehousing. Responding ta Chai~men 6ushore, Ralph Bryson stated they havr a total of 97 spaces fnciuding those in tha agreement. 3/22/62 MINUTES~ IINAWEIM CITY PLANNIHC COMNt~SI(hl~ F~arth 22~ i~A2 8?.•173 M~. Croni~ steted thay heve rtore urx~fficinl spaces from anc prancrtY owner who Intends to seil hls proporty and they te~el they can qet r-nre s~~ces 1f there is a need. Chalrman Eiusharo stated he knows thls organiT~ticx~ wili solvc any problems that rtr~y arise. ile clariflod that the parklnq aqreements w111 have to sntl~fy the Ctty Atto~ney's Office. tio asl:ed if perktng Is nllawed al~ng Peciftca and Hr. Cranin raplled parking ts allowd on both sldes of the street and r~f~rred to e parking l~t with an +addtttona) 15~ speces tmmediately t~ the west. tie stated they heve not had A parking prablem at their current locatt~n and he ~~~s sur~ there wmuld not he A problam at thts loc~~tlon. qesn Sherer resp~~ded to Cortr,issloner Darnes that the par-;Ing wr~~s colculated on the 11~110 foot bullding and expl~~ined the traffic slgna) assessrtrnt fee H~as calculated on 30Sb of the flcx~r area~ clarifytng It does hecome a problem when cicveiopers try to ~btatn bulldin~ permits and are r~qucsted to pay tho diff~rence be n~cen lndustrlai ~~d c~rnerctal fees and the Bu(Idlnq Departrr~nt doesn't know how to c~~tculat~ It. Ifa stated in thls instance the City 1s roqucsting the fee: be ~eld on that po~ticx~ of the bullding whe~e the lodqe activtties will actu~lly tal;e place stnce the remainder of the bultding is warehouse. After Conmissioner f3arnes indicated concern thet ~re arr.a c~uld he used in the future, 11r. Sherer explained th~ Commission could tle thtti nermit tn a condltton that they anly use 3~320 squarc fcet for lodye acttvit(es and if th~y wanted to usc more, a nov~ conditiona) Use permit would bG rec~uired and increased fecs could be charged. ACTIO~~ Commisstoncr Barnes offcrcd a motlon~ seco~ded by Co~tssloncr K.1ng a~d t~10 I N C11RalE0~ that th~ Anah~tm Ci ty Plannl~g Ccx~misslon has revtewcd the proposa) to pcrmi t a pri vate locige i n the -~L ?onc wl th ~ai ver ~f minimum number of parking spaces on a rectangularly•shaped p~rcel of lend consfsttng of ~p~roxirwtely .F acre, havtn~ e frontage oF approximately 14~ feet on the sauth side ef Pacificla Avenue (1170 East ~'aclftco Avenue); and does hcreby a~orove the Negative Qaclaration from the ~qui rement to ~repare an envl ronr+ental impact ref-ort on thc bas is that there would be no stgnific~nt indlvtdual or cumulative advcrse env(~onrt~ ntA1 impact due to the ap~roval of thls ~~egative Oeclaration since the An~helr~ ~eneral Plan desiqnates the s~bject prAparty for general IndustrtAl land uses co~m~ensurate wTth the pro~osal; that ra sensi t( ve cnvt rohmentel irnpacts are Inv~ived tn the propos~l; that the Initlal Study s~bmitted by the petitioner indicates no signtftcant indivldual or cumulative adverse environnental impacts; and that the Ne:gaCive Declaratton substantiating the foregoing findings is on ftle in the City of Anahe(m Plann(ng Uepartment. Commissioner Barnes offered a mation, seconded by Commissicx~e~ Ilerbst end Mt1T10N CARRIED~ Chat the Anahe(m City Planning Comnlsston does hereby grant waiver of code requirement on the basis that due to the ladge activltles of this pt~rticular user and parking egrAements s~b nitted with surr~unding nropcrty owners~ the parkinq r~eds will bc met. 3/2?,/82 C NINUTES~ ANAHEIN CITY P~ANNING CAMMISSIAN~ March 22, 1482 ~?-17l~ Commlaeloner Ba rnes offered Resolution No. PC8?.-5~ end noved far its pessdge and adoption that tha An~helm City Pl~~ning tommlssion does he~eby qrant Co~ditf~nal llse 1'armtt No. 23A5 sub)ect to the conditic-n that lodge ectivities for ~~sembly would nat exceed 3~32Q sque~e feat of the butlding srea end (n compliance wlth Sectlons 18.03.~3~1; .~31i •03Z; .033; •~3~ and .0);~ Tltle 18 0! the Anahelm Munlcl~al Code dnd subJect to Interdopartment~l Committee recs~mrtiendatlc~ns~ On rol) call~ the foregoing resolutlon wAS peasod by the followtnq vote: AYES: COMMISSlO~IERS: BARHES, DOUAS~ BUSIIORE~ FRY~ fIERE3ST, KING~ McIIURNF.Y f~AES: C~MMISSIONERS; NONE A4S~NT: COM-115StONERS: N~NE RE,~CESS There wAS e te~-minute recess et 5:05 p.m. RECO„_„ VEkE The meat(ng wes r~convened at 5:15 p.m. ITEM N0. 11: EIR NECATIVE DECI.ARATION AND CONDITIO~~AL USE PERNIT Ntl~ ?3~R; PUaL,IC -IEARItIG. OIdNER: IILBERT J. ETC1iANDY~ ET AL~ 57~ lavyer Orive~ Anaheim, CJ1 ~?.8Q1. AGCt~T: JOlit~ WIILETT~ 642 Catalina Rorid, Fullerton~ CA A263S. Property descrtbed as e rectangularly-shapcd parcei of land conststing of approxlmately 1.f~ acres located at the southeost cornar of Le Palr+-~ ~v~enue and Tustin Avenue, 3~'on Edst La Palma /lvenue. TO PERMI T A t3ANK 1 t~ TIIE ML ~0!~E. There was no onc indicating their presence tn opposition to sut~iect request. And althou~i the staff repnrt was ~t read, ic Is rcferred to and rr~d~ ,a part of the minu0es. John '~i llett~ agent~ explalned t'-ey t~re requestinq a can~fltional use permlt to allow a 6,5d0-square fcx~t ban~: withln a 3a.rlfya-square foot ltght Industrlal hullding whlch is cu~rentty under construction ~nd presented an architectural drawinq of the proposed proJect. TIIE PUDLIC I1EARi~JC WAS CLOS~O. Responding to Chal~man Oushore~ M~. Wiilett explAin~d that thc bank, locating in a~ industrtal bul lding dua ta cpst ~nd aval iaht l i ty of sp~+ce and they w111 primarf ty serva the locei businesses and wtll have no drlve-up facilities; ~nd that it is a wholesale bank strictiy for the buslnesses in the aree. ACTI(1N ; Cortm~s~ionzzr 8arnes offered a motlon~ seconded by Commissioner Ktnq and h0 IT~ON CARRIED, that the Aneheim City Pi~nninc~ Commission has reviewed ihe p~oposai to p~rmit a bank in the NL (Industrtal~ limited) 2one o~ a rectanguiarly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.6 acre~ locAted et the sautheask co~ner of La Pelma Avenu~s and Tustin Avonue (3800 East La Palrta~ Avenue); a~d does hereby 3~22~8z ~ ~' MINUTES~ ANAt1EIM CITY PL,qNNIr1G COMMISSIAN~ , Msrch 22~ 1~Q2 A2-175 approve the Neyative peclaretlon from the requlr~ment to prcpere en e~vironrrbntal tmpact report on the basis that there would be rw signfflcant indlvtduol or cumuletive adverse envtronmentai impect due to the epprovAl of this -~egative D~cleratian since the Anahelm Gene~~1 Plen dealgnotes the ~ubJect property for general i~dustrle) land uses commonsur~te wlth th6 propos~l; thax no sensitlve envlronmenta) Impacts a~e inv~olv~d in the proposal; that the I~Itial Study submttted by the petitioner tndtcatee rx~ st~niflcant indtvtdual or cumulAtive Adverse environrt~nta) impdcts; and thet khe Ne~attv~ Declar~tlon substnntieting the f~regoinq findtngs is on flle in the City of Anehetm ~lanntng Departmnnt. Comntsstoner aarnas offered Resolutlon No. PC8?.-y1 and rtaved for lts pas~age ~nd adoptlon that the Anehelm CItY Planning Conmission does her~by qrant Canditional Use Permit No. 2308 in compliance with SQCttans 18.A3.t1~1; .~31; .~32: .~33; .03t+ and •035, Title lQ of the Anahelm Municl~al Code And sub)ect to Interde~rtnr.nte) Committae recommendations. Jack white asked that Conditlon ~b. 6 he rrodlfird to deleste th~ r~fr.rence t~ the Apr( 1 22~ 19$2~ dAt~. C~mm(sstoner Ilert,st explainad banks arc ~ltowed In the indus~rto) area subJect to the aprrova) of the condltiana) use pcrn~it and that this is not opcning the do~r te allow other cortmercial uses in the erea. Commissioner Elarnes stet~d a bank has been talked ~hout for this location for about 7 years. On roll call~ the foregr~ing resniutton was ~asse~ by thc following vote: AYES: COMHISSIONERS; pARNES~ aOUAS, DtlSNORE, FRY~ FIERfiST~ KING~ McBUR~1EY NpES ; CANMI 55 I ONERS : NOt~E A4SEI~T: COf1M1 SS I oNERS ; rlON~ ITEM N0. 12: EIR NEGA7IVE U~CLARI~TION AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMiT N0. 231A; PUBIIC HEARING. 0'.lt1ER: 57AT~ COLLEGE ASSQCIATES* 35!1 Ssn Mtguel Drive~ f~304, tJewport daech. CA ~2GGp. ACENT; ORO'~lEAT F4nD5 COHPANY ~ ATTENTI ON: .lf~IN tiAKER, b80 South Vai) Avenue~ Montcbello~ CA 90G40. Property descrlbed as a rectangulariy-shaped parcel of land co~sisting of ap~roximatety 1.25 acres, 1310 Couth State Colle~e i3oulevard (Orc~weat) . TO PCRt11 T A RETA1 L E3AKERY I N TiIE ML ZONE. There was no ane indicatina thelr presence tn opposltion to ~ubje~t requast, and aithough tt~e staff ~eport wAS r~t reAd~ tt Is refcrr~d ta and made a part of the minutes. Cammissioner McBurney deciared a conflict of inte~est as defined by Anaheim Ctty Planning Conmissi~n Resalution fio. P~7(,-~57~ adopting a Confitct of interest C~de for 3/22/8?. MINUT'ES~ A~IAH~IN CITY PLANNING COMMISSIAN~ Nerch 22, 1^A2 g2.~~(, the Plenning Comnission~ end Gove~rnrr~nt Code Sectlon 3f~2a et seq., In thAt he hes a personal bta~ in regard t~ this item a~d, pursuant to the pravisinna of th~ above codes, declored to th~ Ch~irman thet hn wss wlthdrewing from the hearing tn connectian wlth Conditinnal Use Pcrmit 2310 and would not tAk~ part In either the cltscusslon ar the voting thRreon~ end has not dlscuss~d ttits mntter wtth any member of tha Planninc~ Cammission. Ther~upon~ Conxnisslon~r McOurnay ir.ft the Counci l Chartber ~t 5:21 p.m. Jahn Daker~ ac~ent~ was present to ans~~Qr any questl~ns. TIIE PUBLIG 11EARING NAS ClOSEO. Responding to Carmisstancr I;ing, Nr. Da~er stated thAt retoll sales weuld b~ limtted to Sa of thelr total s~~les. ACTION: Cormilssloncr F:Ing o~fereci ~~ mc~tton~ seconded by Commissioncr Qouas and HO- QN C/1aR1ED~ that Che Anahetm City P1Anning Cor+x~~issto~ hAS revfawed th~ proposa) to permi t a ratai 1 bakery in the NL ( Industrial ~ Liml ted) Tone on a rectangularly- shaped parcel of land consisting of epproxlnAtely i.?.5 Acres~ hAVin~ a frontag~ af approximately 2~~1~ feet on the east stde of State Colleyc Boulev~rd~ approxtmately 185 foet narth of the centcrllne of +~inston Road (131~ South Statr. Coitege Etoulevard); and does hereby approve the tlegat(ve Ueclaratlon from the re~ut remr.nt to prepare an environment~) imoact ~eport on the b~sis that there would he na signiftcent individu~l or cumulattve adverse environmental impact due to the approval of this Negt-tive Declaratlon stncQ the Anahcim General Plan designntes the subject property for gcneral iRdustrial land uses commensurate ~~-ith the proposal; that no sensltive envfranmentnl impacts are involved In the pr~posai; that the Inltial Study suhmitted by the petitloncr indicetes no stgniflc~nt individual o~ cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and that the tkgative Declaration substantlatiny the foregoing findings Is on fite in the City of Anaheim Planntng Department. Commissioner Y.ing offered Resslutlon No. PC82-52 and moved for its passage and adoption that the llnahetm Clty Planning Commlssion doe~s here5y grant CondTtional Use Permi t No. 231(1 on the bas i s that rctai 1 sa les shA 1 1 be 1 i ml ted to 87 of the tc~tal volume and i n compl ience wi th Sectlo~s 18.~3.~3~; ,n3t; .~3?.; •~33; .~31~ and .035~ Titte 18 of thc Anahetm Plunicipai Code ac~d subJect to Intcrdepartmental CommitCee ~e comne n d a t 1 ans . 0~ roll cali~ the fo~ecaotng resolution was passed by the followtng vote: AYES: COMMISSIDNERS: l1ARl~ES, [iOUAS, BUSNORC, FRY~ f1ERBST, Y.ING MQES: COMMI SS I ON~RS : ~~0lIE ABS£NT: COMMI SS IQNERS : McBURNEY Commissioner Fry left the meeting and did not rcturn. 3/22/82 ,~ MINUT[S~ AIUINEIM CiTY PLANIIINC COMMISSIAN~ March 22~ 1~82 R?-177 ITCM NQ. 13: EIR NEGATIVE pECIAMTION ANp CONOITIf1Nl1l USE PERMIT ~~0. 2~t~9: r .~~ ~~~r~w~~ ~ - ~.~~~~~r~~ ~~~~~^ ~~~ ~~~~ --~ pUg~IC FIEARIttG. 01~F~fR: ItICH I~~VESTMCN7S, ~~;~A MacArthur doul~v~rd. Sutte S~A~ Nowport Ueach~ CA ~2(,GA. AGENT: f.. JUARET., c/o GREYN~UHD LIMES, I-IC.~ 2~f'. f.est ~~th Straet~ Los ~ngolos, CA ~4~11i. Property ckscrthed es a rect~~+ngul~rly-shn~~d parcel of land canslsttn~ of eppraxtnately .('~5 ~crr_ locat~d at the nartheast cc~rner of prangewood Avenue and flArbor Qoulevard (2f1i~~ South ~Ic+rhor Boulevard) . TO f'ERt11 T A 8US STATI ON I tl TIIE CL 20N~. There werR twa persons indicatinq their presence in ~ppos~tl~n ta subJecc request, and althnugh the staff rQport was not read~ it ts referred to and made ~ part of the minutes. Carlos Juerez~ agent~ was present ta answer any questions. David Thomas stateci I,e lives tn tluntinqton Bcach and is emnloyed by Thrtftin-art IncorporateJ as llssistant D(ractor for Reel F.stete~ and has eppe~red bcforc the Comnission bcFore regardin~~ pa~king prot,lcros at thelr superm»rE:et locatlon at 11arb~r and Orangewc~od. I~~ stated he did not know whether or not e bus o~eration at thts locat(on would cnuse parking prot~lems on their property but thP staff ~eport indlcates they wtl) have 2Q parking spac~s and a maximum of four ~mployees. tIe stated the parking problert-~ at the Thrlfttnart park{ng lot have~ bean a~gc~ing dc~ily problems and they have had to takc ections to have unauthorixed parked vehtclas removed from thetr parking 1~; whlch is ext~nslve for th~ owners of the vehicles Ntth a car casting between SGy to ;1~0 and n truck costing beh~+een Sh~~ and ;A~~. tie state~ he wanted the opcrators of the Greyhaund Terminal to rCaltzc that the potcntial use of the Thrif~irr~rt p.~rlcing lot would creata prohlems for them and their passengers. Dale Dorman~ D b D Development Company~ SantA Fe Springs~ stated they own the property directly nnrth of subJect property and a 111-unit rrotel is ~resently under construction. tle stated they et~Ject to this termfna) ~tself ~nd would prefer to see a resteurant or some other business that would beneftt theslr huslness; however~ they wauld like to roquasc thet the y-foot wall or~ the north be txtended higher. Ne stated they have built a nice looking building whtch will aperate qutte efficiently in tfic ~roa~ but fecl the fumes and unsightlin~ss ~f the buses wtii be a poss~btlity they w) I) have to dea) w(th In the future nc~ting that bus fumcs do travr.l and the winds blaw mostly northeastcrly whlch is tawards their property and they fcel the fumes wil~ be trapped in thelr bullding complcx and they feel a walt of maybe A or 9 feet hic~ from ground tevel would Mssibly eliminate a ltttle nore of the fumes from the buses and also gtvC thelr guests rmra prtvecy. :le stated the buses witl be pulltng in fram 1!arbor ~Ight alonq their property lin~ and tt is near the pool area which they have tri~ad to develo~ with nnre ~riv~cy far their users and they feel with the 5-foot wAil, the bus riders wouid be able to look rtqht over the walt. Mr. Juarez stated the buses will be in and aut and most of their passengers wil) be dropped off ~nd with 20 parking spaces, thry feel parking will be adequate without any posstbllity of parking on the Thriftin~art parking lot; they estimatetF~~ lQ ta~i3 paople wtll be getting off the bus and r~any use p~llc norles of transpartatlon. t1e 3/22/8x MINUTES, ANJI~IEIM CI'fY PLANNING COMNISSION~ March 72~ 19A? R2-17A stated Or~ngMwood cbes have stroet narbing. but the bul~ of the pArkinq will be Go~fined to their deslgn~ted perking are~. Ile s~eted hR thouqht A bus terminal would be compatlble wlth a motol oporetion; tf~At the b wtes wlll be hringing mnre people to this are~ with tourist attrectlons and rtwny ~ople woul~i be seeking e rr~te) or hote) that 1 s ca~vent ont. f~~ steted the only t~ mr_ thet r c~ass~ngers woul d be lcwkln~ over th~ w~11 weuld be es tt~o bus~a are enterlne~ bou+us~ the lo~dinc~ encl unlaeding eree would be sway from thot Are~ end the priv+~cy ~f the guests usln~ the t~o~l would not be invaded. TI~E PUDLIC iiEARING WAS Cl05EQ. Chairrian Bushore agroed th,~+t a bus terminrl w~utd be cor~petible wlth the rmte) operatlon. Cnnmisstoner -I~rhst st~ted he w~s concorned ahout the od~r from the bus Fumes because they can be very off~nsive ond Ahf10XtAUS. Mr. Juaraz steted the buses probahly would be ~t tha facillty f~r ahout five minutes and then wlll t~e pulling aut a~ain and that ~1 huses w~uld bc schedule~ between G:Zf1 a.m. and midni~ht and du~ing b usy perlods there could be ~~S buseS in a day. Respcx~ding To Commissioner Nerbst, Mr. Juerez stt+ted the statl~n is closed ~t night and the buses stmr,ly drop off pessane~ers and pic1: up other psssengers and the last one ccxnes In at 12:~5 b.m. rft~r the station is closed at ~:AQ p.m, and there are oniy 2 or 3 buses sched~lad after the statlo~ Is closed. Commissioner Y.ing re`erred to th~ prectice of leaving the ~sngines runninq while they are stepped and Hr. Juarez repltcd thcy do thAt, hut thcy can ~ut a stap te tl~at practi ce. Conmisstone r Oarnes statad the buses will stap towards the front of their property on Orangew~od a~d there is an existing 5'foot hlgh walt and sugqestrd something could be worked out so thc r,a 11 coul d be h 1 Rher . Dea~ Sherer. Asststant Planncr~ stated thQ wall wAS inst~+lled at the time the benk bui ldi ng was bui i t on the prnperty. It was not~d the wall ~{i) probAbly have to be 8 feet hlgh to ~~event notse and fun+es f~Om gotng onto thc northern property, depcndinc~ on the wind. Cha) rman Dushare fel t the back portion of prablem and the motel woutd be from 75 to fa~t long. the praperty wAUld hrve the potential 100 feet ~waY and it was noted a hus is b0 Comr~issionar fierb~t s~ated this is a good usa for thts property but he is cancerned abaut tha b us fumes for the r•operty next doar. Cons ideretiAn of tfils mgtter was postponed unti i later in the rr~cstinq tn order that plans ¢o~ tha nbtet on tha r~orthern property~ Variance No. ~323~~ could b~ reviewed. 3/22/82 ~ MINUTES~ l-t~ANEIM CITY PLANNI-1C CAMMISSION~ M~rch 22~ tAR2 A2-179 Desn Shorer prasented tl~e epprUVed plans for V~rtance 32;4~ for the rmtel to the narth and the Commigaton raview~ed said plans. Chalrn~sn Duahoro state~cl the plans shaw ~arkl~~g enJ inndsceping with a solid wali for 3 or ~ units And a 6-foat high block wsll towards the ret~r end bss~d on theae plene~ ho dld not ~ee any need for a hlghar w~ll. Ile polnted out this ts a conditlonal use parmit and condttlons couid be added 1n the future if there {s a preblem. Mr. Dormen stated the plans call for a 6-foot hiqh block walt on the south property ilne o~ their stde end the w~ll on the bus termtnel side Is only 5 feet~ 9o there is e difference in elev~tion. Chairman Qushore stated based on where thc buses w11) be parked end bASed o~ the angle of the two properties~ a~y fumes creet~d would not come into the motel p rope rcy . Mr. D~rmr~n stated they were concerned ahout ths northeast cornrr where the two properties meet and those unlts do hnvc w(ndaw~ that o~~en ~nd alsa ihere is a corridor and ~ possthitity of fumes comtnq over the G-foot hlc~h watl ir,co that ++r~a. Commissioner Barnes stated I t a~pe.~rs the buses turn beforc they gat to the motel uni ts end there is vehiculnr ~arking oppast tr. those uni ts. ttr. Dorman stated t,he requcst fc~r a hicher wall wAS prirnartiy to provide rr~rc privacy for their guests because a y-foot wall would not be AdeQUate and th~re~~~ou1d be easy accnss ove r the wa l l and they fe l t a coup le more fee t added to t:e wa l t woul d hene f i t both the propertits. Chai rman aushore stated i f they do expe~Ience chls prohlem~ Nr. tk~rrn~n could come back in and request th~ concit ttons be revlewed and modl fl~~d. Commissto~er Mciiurney sug9ested the two arner5 n~a~;e nn agreemr.nt ta share In the cost of extending the height of the wall. M~. Juarez stated buses can~ around the bullding and he did not think the passe~gers cauld sta over the watl except for a brtef moment; however~ if there is a problem~ they wouid certalnly work out somcthin~ et a latcr date. t1e res~onded to Commissioner Nerbst that the nr~~perty is lcased fAf t~n years. ACTION: Conmissioner Nerbst offered a rtation~ seco~ded by Commtsstoner King and M ION CARRI~D~ that the Anahetm City Planning f,ommission has reviewtd the proposs) to permit a bus station in the CL (Commerctal. Limited) Zone o~ a rect~n9ularly- sh~ped parcel of lend consisting of approximately .65 acre locatcd at the nartheast corner of Orangewood Avenue and t~arbor t3oulevard (Z090 South tlarbor Boulevard); and does hereby approve the Negati ve Declaratlon from the requi rement to prepare an environmental Impact report on the hasis that there would be no signiffcant individual or cumulatTve adverse environmentai impact due to the approvai of this Negat) ve+ Declaratian since the Anah~e(m General P1~+~ ci~signates the sub)ect property 3/22/82 _r..~.,....~.~..~.~... ~ tll~lUTES~ ANAl1EIM CITY PLNJNING CQMMISSIAN~ Merch 22, 19g2 A2-1 At1 for generel conn~ercial land uses commensur~te with the proposel; that no ~ensitive envi ronmental impacts are involved in the propoaal ; tf~at the Ini tial Study submi tted by the petitioner indicates no slgnlficant indtvidual or cumulAttve adverse envtro~ment~) (mpacts; and that the Negetive DnclAretion substentlattng the forecptnq findings ts o~ flie in the City of Anahelm Planning Dep+~~tment. Commlasioner ~lerbst offered Resolutlon ~b. PC82-53 and maved for 1 ts p++ssac~e and adoptlon th~t the Anoheim City Planning Commisslon does he~hy grant Condttlonal Use Pa~mit Na. 2309 subject to th~ stlpuiAtl~~ that tf there if a futu:~e problem wtth notae or fumes from the buses. thn property owncrs witt cooperAtc to resdlve the problem and the hou~s of operatlon sh~i) be from h:30 a.m. to 7:~~ p.m., hbndey through Thunday~ and from G:3~ to 9:OQ p.m. on Fridays~ and from h:3n a.m. to 7;~~ p.m. an Saturdays a~d 6:3~ a.m. to ~:00 p.M. on ~undAy And in compliAnce with Secttons 18.t13.Q~+ ~~31- .~3=: .~33~ •~3~~ a~d •~35~ Title i£~ of the Anahefm Piunicipal Codc a~d s~bJect t~ Interdepartmenta) Cer+~mitte~ ~ecommend~tions. On rotl call, t-~c foregoing resolution was pass~d by the following vate: AYES: COMMISSIONER5; DAftNES~ aOUAS~ QtJSHCRC~ I~ERt~ST~ Kltir,, ~1c~URNE.Y NOES: COHMI SS I Ot1ERS ; N01lE ABSENT: C011MISSI~NERS; FRY Jack uh I tc ~ Ass i st~znt Ci ty Attorncy, presented the wrl tten rt gh t to a;x~ca) the Pianntng Lommtsslon's dectston within 22 dnys to the City Council. I TEM N0. 94: E I R NE~ATI VE DECLARATI Otl ~ND ~~ARI AfICE NQ. 32;~: PUBLIC 11EARING. 0',rllER: DAII TRAVEL~ INC., t~S7 West Boll Road, Anaheim, CA 928~2. Property descrlbed as an irregularly-Ahaped parcel of land consisting of apprpximately 1.~ ecres lncated north and west of the northwest corner of Qall Road and West Street~ 1~57 West f3a11 Ro~tid (Stardust aest Western Notel). VARIMICE REQUE5T: WAIVERS OF: (a) MINIMUM tiUMBER OF PARKI~l~ SPACES AND (b) MINIMUM LANI)SCAPCD SETBACY. TO EXPAND A!~ EXISTI~IG MOTEL. There were three perso~s indicating their presence in oppositlon to subject rPquest, and although the staff report was not read, it i~ referred to and rtiade a part of the minutes. U. D. Bower, architect, was present to answer any c~uestions. 11e st~ted the second waiver pert~ins ta landscaped setback area and the existing setback on Nest Street is 3 feet and th~y propose to tncresse that to 4 feet to better coincide with thetr perking. Ne referred to Item 13 in the staff report regardi~c~ thr. Parking Cc-de Revfsion Stucty and stated they have tabulated the parktng ratio ta guest room occupancy for May through September of tast year and he was complet~ly amaxed to realize that the ratio of autamobiles to the number of guest rc~om rentals was only 32.56. f~~ stated in recent yes~s some of the mAJur chains have allowed on-stte parkiny to be ?. aut~m~biles for every three units. t~e steted Condition N~~ 1b of th~ 3i~2~e2 MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ N~rch 22~ 19~2 82-181 staff report regarding a ratsed medi+~n striq In the center of oell Ro~d from Nest Straat on the east to West Straet on the west would place an extreme burden on thn prope~ty owner and they feel tt is unfair bacause this cltent accuples only a am~il parkton of that frontage. Ile stated they have investigated with the neiqhbors as to any ~ee=on they might see for a rsised medlan and they have indicat~:d there hrve been no acctdnnts axcept closer to West Street. Chrts Marcey, manegar of the Stardust Motol~ stat~d he Is speaking for Sam Fanc~~ owner of the Jack end Jiil Motel across the street. who feels thls proposal for the raised medlan wtlt really harm hls buslness hecause his mote) gets nost of tts business aff the street and they are not connr.cted with the freeway and he ts opposed to this medl~~n. Ttlt PUDLI C HLARI N~ WAS CLOSEO. Commisstoner Nc9urney stated he feeis chis requlre!ment for a ralsP~i median ts a bit severc. Jay Tltus, Office Engineer~ stated he thought M~. Sfnger's concern is strlctly for trafftc safety and prohihtting left-turns ;n and out of tt~e drlve+•-Ays to the motel because of congested traffic condttians In the areb. Chairrt~en aushore stated that is a prok~lem that is ~lready there And Is caused by all the uses in the arca. Mr. Eiower stated he ay rees medians do cont~ol trafftc and is an excellent design; howe ver~ there Is a center left•turn lane dcslgned tn the strect aireedy and towards West St~eet there is a left-turn pocket sa traf~lc gainy west can go through thls area very eastly. 11e stated this w111 n~t affect their business so much, but they are nare finr~ncially involved, and he felt Delaneys and Mr. Fong and M~. Stovall's~ who hdd representatives present earlier~ busin~sses would be affectad by thts median. Commissioner Fierl~st stated thts ts simtlar to the ~roblem which he abJected to previously whereby a large expense would be thrc~wn on the one property owner ~nd there are other businesses (nvolved and he did not f~~l it i; fatr. t1e stated if there is a need for a divider, it should be spread out artung all the property owners. 11e add~d the Commtssion wants to help businesses develo~e i~ Anaheim. Commissione~ Barnes asked what the setback ts on the propcrty to the north. Mr. 9awer repited it is tA feet Lo their butldinq. fle stated they are within the ordinanccs end codes for the building structure~ but are not withtn code for the parking and they wauld be tncreasi~r~ the existing sethack. Ile stated there is nc building wtthin 10 feet and the northerly huilding is about 15 to t$ feet away frcm the property 11ne. Chairman dushora stated he was also amezed at the 32.5$ I~arking figure ~~nd ssked how they separated the parking for the hotel and the restaurant. 3/22/$? MINUTES~ ANAl1Elt1 CITY PIANNIHt; COMHISSI(tN~ March 2Z~ 1Q~?. E~2-1~2 Mr. Bower statR~ they used the numhe~ of rcxH++s rentad tn e c11v~n rtanth ~nd counted tha nunber of autor-qbiles roqistered fo~ those roams ~nd celculattens hr~d r~thing to do w i th the re 1 ati onsh 1 p ort the park I ng ta the ref~ t~urant . Ile expl a i ned they have~ guests arriving hy bus~ text, or two couples per cer, etc. Ila •tated the ~staurant is separ~tad from tha mc-t~l end they have 5~ perkinc~ spmcns and the su~vey dld not inwlve the spaces used for th~ rest~urbnt. Ne stated th~re was an aAdttion misteke on thai r orl ~I na 1 use permi t for the rostaurant and only l~5 spaces ere roqui red. Commisstoner I~erbst atated 37 spACas arr requlred for the restaurant end 117 sp+aces for tF~e mate) ~nd the motel woulct have ahout 7~~ of th~ re~utred speces. Mr. Qower ststed the cor, ct~d fic~ure Is ahout 7~:~ ~f re~utred spec~s, Intluding the restaurant r,nd r~ntel. Ch~t rman Bushore stated ha has ~ver ex~rienc~d a perlcl~g problem on tnis ~roperty elthouc#i hc may hav+c had to r+olk. hut the spr~ces were always avat lable. Nr. Dowor responci~d to Chairman Qushore that they have 34 rooms at the present tima ~~d are renovi ng 12 and addi ng 2~ and a 1 r~ady hav~ ~e rmi ss lon far 57 uni ts s~ th~y wil) have a tntal of 77 nev~ unlts with 22 existin~j nnd one mana~er's unit for ~ tatal of 100 uni ts. Cheirman Dushore stat=d hc fe~ls thts is e reasonable re~uest for a reasanable size motet and thls proves nr~re statlstically thet pa~rking spat~s ~re edrquate and even at 1ts worst, there wouid sttil be a reasonable arrount of ~nrf:Ing spaces. M~. 6ower stated the restaurant hours of nperation are to 2:A0 a.m. wi th the rest~urant actually clasing at 10:0A p,m. and the bar at 1:~0 a,~. ACTION: Corxntsstonar McDurney offcrcd r mntin~. seconded by Cor~r~issioncr pouAS and MOTlON CARRIED, that the llnahelm City Planning Commtzslan h~s rev(ewed the proposAl to expand en existing rrotel wlth ~a~vers of minimum numher of p~rktng space~s and minimum landscaned setback on a~n ir~egulerly^shaped parcel of land conslsting of ap~roxlmately 1.~ acres laceted north and v+est of the northwest corner of Dall Road ~nd West S trcet ( 1t157 Ucst Del 1 r~oad) ; end does hereby spprove the Negati v~e D Iarati on f rom thc ~equi rerr~nt to prepare an es~vt ronmenca 1 t mpact reoort on the !~asls that there would be no signtficant Individ~a~l o~ cunwlatl~ adverse environmental impact due to the approval ~f thts N~gative Oe~laratlon stnce the+ Anaheim General Plan designates the s~bJect propcrty for general industrtat land uses commensurate wlth the proposal; th~t no senstttve envir~nmental Irr~ACts are involved in th~ proposal; that the Initlal Studv sub~ltted by the petttioner indicates no significant individual or c~+ulative adverse environnental Impacts; ared that the Wegative Dcclaratinn substantiating th~ fr,regoing ftndings is on file in the City of A~aheim Ptanning Department. Commissloner McBurney offered Resolu:ion Fla. PC82-5~+ and rroved for Its p~s~age and adapttan that the Anaheim Clty Planning Commisston does hereby grant Variance hb. 3258 0~ the basis ihat denia{ would deprtve sul~~ect property of privileges enjoyed by 3/22/82 MINUTES~ Al1ANE1M CIT1' PLANNING COMMISSION, March 22~ 1~A?. 82~~R3 oth~r propo~tieu In the sanr~ :one and vicinity a~d subJect to Interdetsaircmentai Committae recan~-~end~tlonl. Jack Whlte~ A~slsta~nt City Attorney~ asked ~vhether or not the Comml~ston Is rec~uirinq Conditi~n No. 1 for the rat~ed medlen In Osll Roed. Conmissloner McBurney stated that Conditir~n ~~o. 1 should be deleted. On rol) call. the for+eqoing rrs4lution was pass~d by the f~ilowl~g vote: AYES; CO-WISS I OIIERS : aARNES ~ aAUAS ~ 3USIIORE ~ 11ERBST~ KIIIG~ NcEfURNEII NQES : CAMMI SS I ONE RS : NONE ABSENT: COf4t11 SS I ONERS : FRY Jack Whita~ Assistant C(ty Attarney~ presented the written right to ap~x~) the Pl~nning Conun(sslon'~ declston within 22 days to the City Counctl. ITEM N0. i,r,: FIR NEfATIVE pECLARATIL~N AND CQNDtTIOHAL USF. PERMIT PIO. 23~1G: ...~_ _.~ ..__~..___. PUdLI C t1EARl NG. 0~,ltIER: MELVI N R. SCIIANT7 ~ 17~~ 1 KAte 11 a Avenue ~ ~nahe i m~ C4 92$04. Property described as a ~ectangularly-sha~ed percel af land ccx~sistinq af approximt~tely 7,390 square feet. 17~~~+ South Varna llvenue. TO RETA1 N TIIE COMMERC I AL USE OF A RES 1 DE~IT 1 AL S TRUCTURE . Thern was no one Indic~ting their presence in opposition to subject reques~~ and a 1 though the s tef f report was not read, i t i s rr_ ferrecf to And mnde a part of the minutes. Comml~sloner Y.ing deciared a confilct af 1nt~rest as def(ned by AnahGim C~ty Planning Commtssion Resolution Mo. PC76-157, edonting a Confllct of Interest Code for the Planning Commisslon~ and Government Code Sectlon 3F?S et seq., in that the propr:rty owner and h ts v~i fe are associated wt th Merri i l Lynch/Kste) la Real tr ~e~d~ pursuant to the provisions of the above codes, declared to the Chairman that he was withdrawtng f~om the hearing in connectton with Conditional Use Permtt No. 23~6 and wauld nat take part in either the discusslon or the wting thereon, and hes not discussed thts matter with any merfier of the P1Anning Commission. Thereupon. Commtssloner Ning left the C~unci l Ch~rtber at 6:04 p.m. Jack Whtte~ Asaistant City Attorney~ asked that Ccx~dltion No. b be madifted to delete "no later khan Apri 1 22~ 1q82". Mary~nn Foss, agent. explained they hav~a been us ing this dwal l ing for a nuRber af years for storage, of permanent records and stat~an~ry supplies. She ~xplain~d it looks Just iike a restdential dveliing a~nd there is not a great de~l of activity at the p roperty . THE PUdLIC NEARING WAS CLOSED. 3/22/82 ~ ~ ~~;,' MINUTES~ Al11WE1N CITY PLAIININ~ COMNISSION, M~rch 22~ 19$~ a~-lAW Chelrmsn Bu:ho n noted that the~e Is carpeting Itams stcred at t~is i~c~tl~n snd Ms. fos~ replted the vwner: wtf~ does awn a decoreting business end has stored carpet ther• tn the paat. Chai~ma~ puahorQ asked w~~at the con~l~int frc~m th~ nal~hhors weuld h~v~ been. Ms. Fot~ repiled they thlnl: tt w~~ l~ecause af psrl•.ing alnce tl~ey have hed mcetinc~s at the proAerty ~ hut now they have ch~an~ad th~) r ape~atl ~ns and have very smel l meettngs nnd do not have s pa~kfng problem sny l~n~er. Dean Sherer, bsistant Plan~er. oxplalned the complaint raceived wns. in fnct~ ~bo~~t the parking problem c~used by the existing real estate office cx~ the co~ner. Mg. Foss axpl~ined the resl estate ~°~ool has t,ecn closed f~r stx r+c~nths end there Is no langer ~ perkfng probtem, Commtssicx»r tierbst stat~~d if ~hey would r~nr~c to rertnv~ thr. car~t(ng from the structure and use thc garage for storage and the permit is Issued on a year-to-yeer bas i s~ he wou 1 d not s~e whe ra eny p rob 1 em woul d be ~Atise~1. Chairma~ Dushore Indtc~ted he wnuld agro~ As lon~q as !t (s on A year-ta-yeer besis. Hs. Foss asked lf th~y wil) be nottfted of the need to reouest an extenston ~nd Dean Sherer replted they would. Fire Alarm at 6:0~ p.m.-All Commtssio~sers le~t the Chanfier. The n~eeting wes reconvened by 5:2~ p.m. Comm~ssioner Barnes st~ted she sees nc~ rcason for the cart~t not to be st~red in the gart+ye uniess the~~c is a parking problem. Ms. Foss stated carpeting is only brought te the garage when Ns. Schantz mak~s a mtstake o~ the purchase~ changes th~ir mind ebe~ut the carqettnc~ and there are nnly three small rolls of carpeting there at the presc:nt time. ACTION: Commtssioner Barnes offered a m~tton~ s~conded hy Conmisslonen c~Burney and M4'~~ CARRIEO~ that the llnahelm City Plannine~ Cortimission has r~viewed the propasal to ~atain the co~rcial usa of a residentlt~l structu~+e on ~ ~ectangularly-s~aped parcel af land consisting of approxtrnetely 7.39~ squAre feet having s frontage of appraximately 7~+ feet on the east stde of Varna Avenun approxirt~tely 115 feet north of the centerl (ne of Kate! la Av~nue ( 1744 South Varne Avenu~) ; and does he~eby approve the Negsti ve Oeclaration f~om the r~equi rertrnt to prepare an environmental impact repo~t c>n the basis thet there wauld be no signi ficrnt individual or cumulati ve adverse envl ronmentat impact due to the approval of this tlegati ve Declaration since the Anaheim Ge~eral Pian dexignetes the subJect property for law density raside~tlat land usaa commens~rate with the proposai; that no sensitive envtronmenta) impActs are tnv~nived 1~ tha proposal; that the Initial Study submitted by the p~ti tioner indlcates no stgntftcant individuat or cumulative adverse 3/2 2/ 82 l MINUI'ES~ A~IAI~EIM CITY PLANNING Cf1MMISSIQN~ Herch 22, 1~Ax SZ'185 envl~vr+ment~l Impects; ~d that the Negatlve DeclAratian suhst~ntlattng the feregoing flndl~cp ta on ftle in the Clty ef Anahaim Pl~nninq Depnrtmesnt. Cartmisslo~~~ Barnes offerad Resolutton N~~ t'Ca7-55 and rtnved fer Its l+++ss++ge And adoption that the Anahelm CitY Planning Commission does hereby qrAnt Cc~ndltlenel Use Pe~mi t NA. 23~~ ~ n compl lance wi th Sections 18,rf3,~3~: •~31 ;•!~32; •~33; .'13~+ and .A35. Ti tln 18 af the Anaheim Municipal Code and subJect to Interdepnrtme~tal Cammi ttee recann+enda ti ons . On rot 1 call~ the foreQoing resolutlon was pesscd by the fotlowing wte: AYES: COMNISSIONERS: DAR~~ES. DOUAS~ DUSIIORC. IiERItST. rlct!UR~~EY ri4ES : COMr~I SS I o~lERS : ~IO~IE ABSENT: COMMI SS I ONERS : FRY, !:I NG M N0. 16: CN~II RONME'IT/-L I 11PACT REPORT H~. 113 ( PREV) nIfSLY APPRO~D) h"1D GCt1ERAL .~"~w -.~.~ nur uT -iTi' i~~ i~i US C l N: nr~ o : fl N0. 1: ENVI RONME~ITAL i ~'f'ACT RLPORT N0. 11'; (PREVI f1115LY !-PPRQVED) A-1D ATI . +- _~: PUBl.t C IIEARING5. (nltiated by the Ctty of Anaheim~ ~~~ South ~naheim aoutevard~ Anaheim. CA 92~0;. To cansider the aprrnvCd dcnsity and to r~view Resolution P~o. 74R-235 for a land a~e~ af ap~roxirr-~tcly 1J.8 acres and to considcr amendmsnt to the Land Use Elerxnt of the ~nahelm Sho~~s f'l~nned Corm~unity .".one o~ propcrty dcscribed as an i rregularly~shaprd parccl of land consisting of approxtmatclv ry~ acres genera) ly bounded by La Palme Avenue, Coronet 1lvcnue and Eucl ld Street and ~ ther referrod to ns AnAheim Shores PlAnned Conrwntty. Jay 7as;~iro~ Assoctate Planncr, presented staff reparis to the Planning Cortmission. Elar~or Day~ ztk8 W. Grayson~ Anahei~-, stated she has bee~ asked by the ~stdents of th~e ~wo tracts to the west of Anaheim Sh4res to represent them at tP,ls hearing; that at the City Gounct ! meeting of January 1~~ 1~82~ befor~ the fl~al vote was taken on the Fieldstone Developn+ent, concerns were cxprassed regardinc~ the impact such a deei sio~ would have on the western ~ectlon of the communi ty backtng up to R-1 where an vwne r ml ¢~ t sc 1 1 to a deve 1 ope r who wan te d to use the res t of the hous 1 ng count on that property and the resul tanc Impact to that whole area. She stated the vote was takcn shortly afCerward and was pASSed at 1~1 unt ts per acre on tltie Fieldstene bevelopment~ but aftar the v~te was takcn, Mayor Seyrrr~ur made b motion directing staff te prapr~re a GenerHt Plan Amendment tmpactine~ the property o~ the western b~undary to rnflect th~ exlsttng apnm~d density. She stated the rrotfon aras seconded, and before e vote was take~, one Counci lman stated he agreed wlth the motian but wanted to be certafn thnt the~y weuld nat only i i s ~ 3/22/82 ~ MINUTES. ANAl1EIM CITv PI,ANNING COMMISSIAN~ March 22~ 19A2 ~2'~~' hold to the density but also volu thalr intent t~ hold to some of the setb~cks and to the twcrstortes ag~ed xo when the plan ~,ent thrauqh the last process snd he w~s hopinq the fntent of the Council was to kee~ those as close to th~ ~lt+n as p~s~tble; and th+~t May~r Snymour stated he understands a tentetivo cr~ct mep h~d been approved and {f arry mc~ er or the puhlic wAnted to s~e on peper the intent of thls n+otlon, they merelY had to rnview thet map; and the motian rnrde hy Mayer Seymaur c$rrled unanimously (~ to 0). Ms. Bay stated thls Gene~~) Plan 1lmendment No. 175 ~ets all the requlrements for thet wnstern portion of the Sho~GS es they ~+ere esCabl lshed when the tract maD was a~roved by tF~e P lanrti nq Conrni ss lon and the C) ty Coun~i l; thet she epneared before the Commissian at two hoerings for this s~n+e sut~Ject cm the tentattve tract n+aps; and after m~etln~ with the develaper and the peopie i~ t~acts~ they cu+dc compromises end the doveloper also made compromises and all agr~ed as stated ta the Conr~lsslon. Sfie stated the staff rep~rt statcs Exhthtt l1 does reflcct exactlY what the City Caunci) dlrectod staff to do; ha~ever~ on Pag~ 17-c steff has Included a presentetton by th~s Brock Company wh(ch sf~e believod is r~ complete~ departure from everythtng the residents to thc ~aest agreed to ~nd if this GPA 175 is not approved~ then the zoning should stay as it is with s~mc stipul~tlons t~ ~rovld~ p~ut~~f°ihes~ c+~rcels areth~ west; that the Brock Company may pror+ise c.ertaln thln~s~ sold to anot.her develarcr, a,ho Is to say tl,at devcloncr c~n i~e he1J to prcx~ises by the Iirock Company. She stt+ted tl~e Anaheim 5hores PlAnn~d Cortm~nlty was proposed to bc a flrst class devoloprr~nt and naw they h~ve row-housing gaing in north of the l~ke and the dcnsity is 19.G, ~nd apporentlY bacause the Clty Council allow~d the htgh donsity in the Fieldstone Development~ Brock wants to increase the density over and above the density previously approved. She urged the Commiss(cx~ t~ supp~rt CPA 175 Exhiblt A as diretted by un~minnus v~ote of the City Councll ~nd deny thls increase in dansity as rropcsseJ by thc Hrock Comqany. Bob Dar~enals~ 1148 Eloats-~~in C) rcle~ Anahetm Shorehave.taskecfhhimsto e~resent them ~oard of Di rectors r~f the Anahetm Shor~., anc, they and hearti ly endorse rPn t75; and that tl~ey hav+ cpne through many battles trying to kecp thei r pl~nned cnmr-unt ty to the plan witf, natio homcs and slnc~le-famt ly residences wherever posslble and do have ennuc~h untts t4 su~port the greenbelts and lakes. Mike Conlin~ M. J. arock and Son, 1b98 Greenhrtar Lake~ 8rea~ statcd they want to go on recard o~osing thls GPA; that thcy are not totally o~osing an amcndmr:nt relating to ~enslty because thcy believe this is tho last !,aining parcel And there have been some cocnpromi ses made on both s i des end they woul d I i ke tc~ propose that the dens t ty ~e frozen at 11.3 uni ts ~r r~cre because going back fnto the history of the cammu~ity~ that nurrber comes ~p quite often. Ile ~tated they would be w(11ing to qo atong wtth the GPA if that is the density to be placed on the prop~rty; that they have m plan th~t nets approxi matelY 8.; uni ts per acre and do nat knaw 1 f theY wi 11 be able to pursue it beceuse of economics. Ne stated they would itke to retatn the flexibility to p~ovide a different type housin~ fc~r which there is a market. 3/22/82 ~. . ~ MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ March ?.2~ 19A2 62-1A7 Gil Merttnex~ Flortan Martinez Lsnd Plenners~ prasented a slide preaentetion shawing tha bdakground snd an ~lternstive approach to the GPA. ile st~+t~d th~ir piAn proposes 2.5 timaa the anount of required opon space and proposna two leas homes than tod~y's to~ing woul d a! law. ~~e ~tated tt~e f mpact to the area 1 s reel ly people ~nd nc~t the number of unt ta a~d thls plan proposes 1/2 persan per acre mare thAn the previous 12> unit plan; thet in terms of dcnslty along the weste rn edge~ the previous plan propc»es 8.5 units pcr ac~ and thta pian~ within th~: iS~-f~t area~ proposed 8.1 unlts per acro; that regarding the twa•story units tl~r_ prPviou9 pinn did not have two-story un) ts closc~ than 100 f~ct and thls plan has n~ two-stary uni ts wtthin the 150 feet. I~e st~ted they feel this v~ould be a vest Improvenxsnt nvc~r the previous plan and one of the maJor reasons they wt i l be able to go fon~rnrd wi th thia plan i s becauso af thc nunt~ar of unf ts. Jack White, Assistant City Attorncy, stated this slicie presentotinn was sllowed as opposition to the prop~sed ame~ndment~ but he dld noi thln~: i t ts app~oprlete to hAVe furthor dtscussian reg~~dtng the pricing of tha homes~ ctc. Ne stated the term "prevlous ~lan" wes uscd In thls preaentnticm and ex~+l~ined that Is not the prevtous plan and the currcnt plan for chis property (s for 125 units. E~a atote~i the questlon ts whother ar nnt the publ ic tnterest ~r welfare would dictote that the generAl plan ~e anended to iimi t the devslopment on the ~mperty to 12; uni ts as currently app rv v~e d. THE PUE3LIC I~CARING WAS CLOSED. Cammisstaner Iferbst clarifted the City C~~mctl has indicatec! thts 125 units would be the limi t on thc property bec,ause that ~ras thc number on the ptans as approved. Jack White stated the Counctl was tat:tng suh~equGnt actlons for other dovelapments based on the ultimate developmcnt of the cntire pmperty and they used the curre~tly app roved t ract m~p fo r th~se A~ro p~rc.e 1 s and the ques t f on wes s i nce thos~ were nnt built~ .+hether or not subsoqu~nt dcvelopments could transfcr denslties fmm o~c area to anotha r an d to aw i d tha t~ thc Counc f 1 wanted to 11 mi t the c)r.ns i ty . Annika Santalahti~ Assistant Director for Zoning, r~plled to Commissione~ Nerbst that she did not think the higt~er density on tha conKnr.rcirl corner was an issue in 197~+. Shc explatned the originai approval alla~ed for 11.3 units ner acre And lf the Commissl~n goes wlth thc Councl) directtve It would ~stablish the density at about a.G units overalt on t~,r. enti~e project. but ck~es ~ot include the property at the corner of Ramneya and La Palma. Commissioner t~erbst stated he undcrstands the propASal just presented allowed 8.1 units per ~cre ~nd Mr. Nartlnez stated the edcle along the western boundary wtthin 150 feet i, 8.1 units per acre and would hav~ S78 units overali which is 11.27 untts per acre and the approved denstty in 1974 was 11.3 u~its per ~cre~. Chairn'an aushore stated bealcally the Planning Commission today is following a Counci 1 directi vc that the dens ( ty i s not cwi nc~ ta be over 125 unt ts which means the brakes fo~ M. J. arock Company have been appl ted that he has expressed tha opinion 3/z2~~2 ~r~ MINUTES, ANAl1EIM CITY PLANNIl~G COMMISSION~ March 22~ 1962 82-18~ before that the devolopers could tat keep pleYing with tha deneity end the planned community was probably destrayed when tha patlclnq lot waa approved snd the developer haa~ been auccessful tn selling off the other pi~ca~ and ~ residentiel portl~n was made into < cortmerciet area a~d na commercial area was made Into a residantlel a~ea, etc. a~d nar becauso of changing times the 125 units ere not fr.~slble. -le stated with that sttuatlon~ the dev~lop3rs get wht~t they want. The singte-fAmily fesidences surrounding the lake do not get whet they want ~nd paid for end now the developer is faced wlth a polttical situation m d t~~a b~akes have been put on and the Councti has directed that t t sl~ould be lef t at 125 and the ckveloper cAn ei ther l i ve wi th that, markat and sell it~ or ~tt around unt(1 the pc-litical wlnds chAnge~ If ev~e~. Commissioner Nerbst statcd I~a will vote for ~pproval of thts qeneral plan amendment relucta~tly bec~use he ck~es not wAnt to ta~ka the Incentive and innovativen~ss ~w~Y from s developer. fie stated the devclopcr can fic~ht his battle regerding denstty with the City Council because they are the o~es who have set the denalty and he does nat agroe in t~tal because it does tte the devetoper dcwm to a spectftc number of uni ts end i t (s poss ible the pronerty coulcf be hetter develop~d. ~~. ~rniastoner ~lerbst otfered itesolution No. PCB2-5fi end mc~ved fo~ its passege and adoptlon that the Mahctm City Plannin~ Commissl~r. d~s hereby adopt and r~conxnend to the City Council adoption of General P1an Miendment N~. 17S F.xhlbit A. On rol) call, the for~going r~solution was ~~ssed t,y the followinc~ vr~te: AYES: CO~V~ISSIONEItS: BARr1ES, l30UAS~ t~USI~ORE~ !iERDST~ -:1-ir,, HGE3UR"!EY tiOLS : COMMI SS I O1dEP.S : tJONC AaSENT: COMt!ISSI~t1ERS: FRY Jack Wtii te expldined t~~ls matter wi 11 autc~matl cal lv be set for r-unt ie heari~g by the C 1 ty Counci 1. Conxnlssiot~er Barnes stated this is the first timo she couid rerrrrt6er ~utttng a unlt limit on the gene~al plan and th~ generai pfan is suppr~c: rn be ~.~s~~eral wtth c~~tain guidelines and in the future she would like to keep it that r~ay and lf the number of unlts needs to be llmtted~ it should be done when a tentattve tract map is apnroved and not witfi a general plsn. Annik~ Santalahti asked thl~t the staff report he corrected cx~ Item No. 17 with Condition tlo. 13 changed ta reed: "That the entire planned community denstty shal) not exceed 7.f~ ~lwelling units per acre excludin~ public strcets". Jack White stated thls is a direcxian frnm the City Councii; however~ Chey are lodctng from input from the Planntng Cort~misslon whether i t be ¢avorable ar unfavorsble and the Clty Council ts entttled to know exactly how the Commission feels and he would hope~ that tha d~cision is bascd on thcir best Judc~ement. Commis~icx~er Nerbst offdred 4tesolutton No. PC82-57 end m~v~ed for tts passAge and adoptirn that the Anaheim City Planning Commissian dces hen3by r~commend to the 3/ 22 / 82 ~ r ~ )Y MINIlTES. ANAH[IM CITY PLANNING COhMISS10N. March 2?~ IQ82 a~- ~ ~ Council ana ndment of the AnehelM Shares Resolutlon No. 1uR-235 `~ refiPCt the p~opos~d F+ev1 R(on No. 2 ta Exhib i t No. S and en amendn+ent to CcX <11 ti on No. 13 pmrtainlny ~~ exhibits and density. On rol) call, the foregotng res~lution was passed by the foilowing vr~te: AYES: COMMISSIOt~ERS: aARNES~ BOUAS~ DUSHORE. 1lERaST~ K~IIf,. hd3UR1~EY NOES : COMMI SS I QNERS : NONE ABSEMT: COWIISSI~NCRS: FRY Jack Whtte explalned thls item wftl be set fnr puF~llc hearing hy the C~ty Counci' and the tirt+~ end place ~~+t i l bd publ ishcd. ITEM N0. 18 ~O~T~ITO REC01~IEtJDATI ~N5 The folla+iny Raports and Recommendations steff rcports were pres~nted but not read: l1. CONAi TI ONAL USE PERMI T 1~0. 22~9 and RECLAS51 FI CATIO~! ~I~, 81-$2-5 - Request rom An~r cAn ~~at ona ropert es ~r urther rev ew and rec4mmendation on property located at 2111 South Manchester Avenue (Oranc~ewr~od Acres Mnbileh~mc Park). Joseph Tostl, attorney~ indlcnted I~e unde~stood the Planning Commissi~n la going to continue thts hcAring to A latcr d~te and stitcd thc~y w~nt to know when this n+~tter is gc~ing to he constdered. Annik~~ Santolahti, ~ssistant Oirector for 7.oning~ exnl~~fned the City Council had continued thelr hearing on thls matt~r t~ Mey 4, 1~~i2~ and she wnuld 11ke the Cor~mission to consider it 2?. days hefore it gncs to Counctl. ACTION: Comrntssloncr ~Ierhst offered i matlon, secandcd ~~y Con~nlssioncr King an~T10't CARRIED (Comr.~lssioner Fry betng ahsent) ~ that ccrosickratian af thc aforemc~tianed matt~r he continur. d to the mcetinn ~f Apri 1 1Q, 1~A2. Ei. CONDITIqNAL U5E PERMIT NQ. 1~1F,~ - Request from Car) Miller, Nenax Inc., for extenslon o t me ar Condit onal llse Permtt Ho. 1~F~ for property located at 1$32 Easc aall aoad. ACTION: Cor~misstaner Y,ing offerr.d a rmtion, seccx~dcd by Commissioner Ilerbst an- d FIQTION CARR9Eb (Carmissloncr Fry being absent)~ that the Anaheim City P lanni ng Commt ss 1on does hereby grant a cx~e-year ext~ns ion of t i me for Condt tional Usc Permi t No. 1A69 to expl re on Apri l~T, 1'1~3. C. RECLASSIFICATIt-N N0. 8b-~1-25 - Request from Alan Kabaker~ Gotdrich~ Kest .r. ssoc ates r extens on o tirt~ for Reclasstfication No. A~-R1-25 for property loc~ted narth and west ~f the northwest corner of Arangethor~ Avenue and Impcri~l tllgt-way. ACTiQtI: Gornmissioner I:ing uffered a motlca++. seconded hy Conr+iissianer Flerbst en MOTION CARRIED (Chairm,~n Bushore abstaining and Commissloner Fry being absent)~ that the Anaheim City Planntng Commtsston does her~by qrant a rst~oectf ve extensian af ti~e for Reclassi ficaticx~ No. 80-81-25 to expt re on Fcbruary 23, 1983. 3/22/82 MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING CONMISSION, Mrrch 2Z~ 1982 81-19A 0. TENTATIVE MAP QF TRACT NQ. I11 A- Request from C. J. Queyrt~l~ ~nacal Eng neer ng Company~ or extens en c+f ttme for Tentetive Ma~ of Tract No. 1115$ fa~ prc~erty located on the south stde ~f MortellA l.ene approxlmntely 720 feAt sautheast of tho cente~llne of Sante Ana Canyon RoAd. Jay Titus~ Office Engineer~ stoted Conditlan fdo. 17 of the Tantative hlap Tr~+ct e~proval needs to be c'arift~d; thet it currently re~ds: "That the constructlon of a11 etcass roads and starm drains shall he cem~icted prior to th~ Issuance of final occurency ~rmlts by the Aulldln~ Dlviston;" and that it wes Intended to refer to Nartella l.ane rnd Marttn Lane; and thet the conditlon should be clarifted to ~eed; "That the constructi~n of nii thn access roeds from SAnte Ana Cenyon Road to the tr~+ct end th~ough the ~rect and storm dralns shsi) be c4n+~leted ~rler te the issu~nce af fin.~) occupancy pernits by the 13utlding Divislon end that e hond~ certlftcAte af d~~oslt~ letter of credit or cash tn en Amc~unt and form sati~fACt~ry to the Ctty of Anahelm shall be posted prlar to final tract map a~nrav.~l to guArAntee the installatlon of the above-n+entlaned requircn,~nts." Chelrmnn Bushare stated that was thc orlginal fntcnt of r~pproval. t1CTIc1N: Carr~lssloner King offcred A rmtion~ scconded by Canmi~sloner IterbsC an t IOt~ CARRtEp (Cor+missioncr Fry betn~ absent) ~ thr~t the Anaheim CI ty Plannlnc~ Cammission does hereby c~rant o rctroacttve extcnslon of time f~r Tentntive Map oF Tract No. 111;~3 ta ex~lre ~n Narch t'~ 1~°3. E. RECIIVS i i' I C~TI hN N~. $~-F1-1~ ANO VARO ANCE ~~(1. 3171 - Requcst from Jess 8~urrour~hs~ ~lasonic (tul d ng Assoc ~t on~ or ext~nsions ~f ttm~ for Reclassiftcation ~lo. 8n-81-10 a~d Varianc~: No. ~171 for pro~criv located on the north side of Lincoln Avenue And south stde of Chartres, approxtm~tely 3SS feet east of thn centerlinc of 11~rhor poul~vard. ACT1f1N: Commissioner King affered a rrbtion~ secanded by Commissianer Herbst ani~~ATIQtI CARRIED (Chalrman dushore Abstaining and Commissioner Fry bein~ absent)~ that the Anahelm City Planning Commisston does hereby grant retroacttve extensions of tlme for Reclnssificatian No. 8~-~1-1(1 and Varit~nce Na. 317t tu expire an Septenber 8~ 19Q2. ADJOURNMENT There betng ~ furtr~er husiness, Cor~mi~sloncr 1lerhst ~ffered a motion~ second~d by Commiss' ~ner t~cIIurney and MOTt~~J CAP,RIEO (Commissioner Fry betng absent). thet the mrettng be adJour~ed. 7he meeting was adJourn~d et 7:1~ p.m. RQSpectful 1~ subml ttad, ~CaG ~ ~ ~ ~~~ Edith L. NArris~ Secretary An~heim Ctty Planninq Commisslon EH:Im 3/22/82