The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes-PC 1982/11/01: ~ ~ r". • ~ R}DpUL~1R MuE'PING 0! THE 1W11H3IM CITY PL11Nt~ING COMMII88ION REffV1~1R t1E~TIN(3 Th~ requl~r. m~~tinq of th~ 1-nahsia~ Ciky ?lanning CcxamiNrion was call~d ta ~rder by Chairm~n Fry at 10i00 a.m., Nov~ab~r 1, 1987, in th~ Caunail Chaaibar, a quorum being pr~s~nt and ths Coma-iseion reviewsd plans o! thR it~ms on today'~ aq~nda. RSCa88t 11r30 e.m. RECONVENL-s 1 c 30 p.ta. PRESSNT ALSO pR~BBNT Chairman~ Fry Commiseioners~ Boues, Bushora, Hsrbst, King, La Claire, McBurney Ron Thomp.on 1-nniks 8entalehti Joel Fick Jack White Jay Titue Paul 9inqer 9hirley Land Jay Taehiro Oean l4herQr Sdith Harrie Plnnning Diractor 7-asi~tant Diractor !or Zoninq ~-esistant bir.ctor !or Plnnninq l~saiatant City Attornoy O!lice Snginaer Tra!!ic Enqineer Tra!!ic Bnqineerinq 1-asiatant Aaaocl.ata Planner 1-asocinte Planner Pldnning Commi~eion ffacretary APPROVl1L OF MINUTSB: Commissioner 1Cinq o!lered a motion, eeconded by Commieeionmr Bouns and MOTION CI~RRIED (Comvaiasioner McBazney abstaininq), that tha minutes o! the maeting o! October 18, 1982, be approved a• eubmitted. ITBM N0. l. EIR NSGATZVS DBCI.ARATION AND CONDITIONIIL US$ PSRMIT NO. 2386 PUBLxC HEARING. OWNBR: ROG~RS A. MID 811RHARA A. SSV~RSON, P. 0. Box 2058, Huntington Haach, Cll 92647. 1-GBfIPs GRSG STUI~F, 2831 White 3ter l~venua, "H", Ana~heim, Cl- 92806. Propertg described ae an irreqularly-shnped parcel o~ laad consistinq o! approximately 2•1 ecree located nt the northeast corner ot W"i~te Star J-venue and Blue Gum Street, 2831 White Star I~venue, Unit H(N88 eody and Peint). To retein t+n automobile bndy and paint shop in the ML (Industrial, Limited) Zone. Contiinued fr.~m the meeting o! October 18, 1982. It wse notad tha petitioner has requeeted a 4-week aontinuance. ACTZONs Com~ais~ioner Houas o!lered a motion, seconded by Comaniseioner McBurney and MOTION CI~RRIBD, that consideration of the abovecisntioned matter be continued to Novembar 29, 1982, at the requsst of the petitioner. 0207H 82-560 _..._:..~ ~ • ~ NINUTEB, 11N11Fi1lIM CITY PLANNItiI= CAldUl2$8ION~ t~OV1~M!lltR 1, 198Z 82-561 ITSM N0. 2. EIR tdIDGATIVa DECLJ\R1ITION, NJ-IVBR OF CQ~S REQUIRilMq~NT, 11ND CONDITIONIIL U8~ PBRMIT NO. 2387 PUBLIC H811RING. OWNER: EI~C~Y DEVBIAPMIl~iT COMlP11NY, xNC., P. 0. Sox 2390, Nswporti e~ach, C~- 9Z660. Prop~rty dsecribed n~ an irrsgularly-shaped paroel o!. land conaistinq o! e~proximately 0.59 Aara, located et tha southweat aornsr o! psciliao l~v~nue and 8nnta Crua Street. To pormit a canmarcial o!lice building in the ML (Inlfuetrial, LimiteC) Zone with waiver at minimum lendscaped netbeck. Continued lrom the meetinq of October 18, 1982. It was noted the applicant has withdrawn tha request. 1-CTION: Commiseianer Kinq atleraA e caotion, seconded by Commieeioner McBurney and MOTION CJ~RRI$D, that subject petition be wi.thdrawn et the requeet o! the petiti~ner. ITEM N0. 3. EIR CATEGORiCAL EXEMPTION CLASS 5 and VARIAAICE NO. 3296 PUBLIG HEARING. OWNER: GEOAGE BIRNHAUM, ET AL, 2900 S• Mnin 8tseet, Loe Anqelae, C1~ 90007. Property deacribed aa a zectenqularly-ehaped parcel of land coneiatinq ot approximately 1.34 arres, havinq fron~eges ot approximately 160 leet en the north eide of Romneya Drive, 310 laet on the weet side of Buclid Street nnd 150 leet on the south side of Medical Center Drive. Waivar o! minimum landecaped aetback to conatruct an addition to an existing cotnmercial buildinq. Continued lrom the meetinq of October 18, 198Z. There were two persona indicntinq thefr presence in opposition to aubject requeat and although the staft z•eport wae not rend, ft ia relerred to and made ~ a part of the minuCes. C. M. Thompson, 625 W. Kntelle, Oranqe, agent, explained they are requastinq perinission to conetruct en addition to an existing 14,175-aquare toot commercial building and wiah to trade ot~ excesaive lnndacepinq in the front for the required landscapinq on Roianeya Drive. Gaorqe Birnbnum, part owner, explainQd the existinq drivewdy on the corner of Euclid end Romneya can only be utilized for the benef.it oP one tenant end it is a very danqeroue eituation and thie addition would eliminate that driv~way and alao provide additional landscapinq. He presented a colored map which ehows that the propoaed lendacapinq for this project ia more than ather propertiee in tha area. He also preaented photoqrapha of the area. _ MxNU'TES, AN11H1L2M CITY PLIINNINO COMMI88ION, NONSM88R 1, 198Z 82-56Z Dr. Thamaa ~. Nriqht, 1737 Msdicsl Csnter Driv~, stat~d he el~o own~ the medical builQinq oooupi~d by Dr. Niseman nt 17Z0 Medieal Cant~r DriV~. Dr. ariqht pr~sentad a•ke~ah ~! the property and eteted the doctor~ at Mert~n Luthar Medical Cenler (in th~ quadrengle) are questioninq ths u~• and the i~tent of ths building, indicetinq it is their impr~s~ion Chat a multi-practice den~el clinic f~ qoing in on th~ corner whlah would increa~a the traflic load Aub~tnntiaslly. He added he did n~t think ther' ara edequate parkinq ~paaea to handle that kind o! proteselonal buildinq ~n thi~ commerciel busina~• arsat that tihera aze nine bueinessee on that property lrontinq on Euclidt and that the:a ara eiqhtoen doctor~ in the quadrangl.a who have providad tor end mainteined an adequate perking erea and lael thia profeseional uee in e commarciel zone would inlringe upon their parking arma. He steted thera ie a M+~rtin T.uther Meclical Center Associetion of which all doctore participete with tho ~xtre reaponeiLilitias for the parkinq ar~e, includinq linbility. Dr. Wright etnted they are also independent ownere o! e sewaqe ayetem which hee to be pumped and litted into the Euclid outllow end that it ie elreedy at capacity end they Foel thie propoaed use would increase that load. He stated Mr. Birnbaum has a wriLten eqreement and eharee in the cost a! the sewage systam. He added subject property ia hiqher nnd eny ovarload of the sewers would be a problem tor the doctora in the quadrenqle. He stated he aleo hee lettere ot oppoeition from Dr. Noaee and Dr. Metcalf. (LeCtars were not aubmltted fnr tha tile). Dr. Richard Hanaon, 1751 W. Roa~neye Driva, Suite D, Anaheim, stated almoat daily they he~ve vehiciee parkinq in their deeiqnated parkinq ar~~a and inadequate parkinq is e common compl.aint of patients and othc+re for the Martin Luther Madi~al Centez. He edded he aleo feels the eew~sqe eystem ehould reelly be inveetiqatadt that it is d unique+ syetem designed to lilt e~rerythinq up to the Euclid main tr~unk end with thia edditional loed, it may not be adequate. He ataked he hns estimated that the progoeed center wou]d reqi~irc parkinq Por sn additional forty cars and he did not think the parkinq would accommodate that tnany vehicles and this would infrinqe on the other bueineasea in thnt center. Mr. Birnbaum e nlained they have not yet decided who will leaee thie lecility= that there will be a profeasiAnal practice movinq in next doort and that they have more than edequato parkinq right now, as noted in the Qtaft reportt lhat the current parkinq problems are not trom their l~acilities, but lrom the Hest Store'a cuatomers and aleo many doctora and patients uae their parkinq lot at the pi~esent time. He etnted tF~e property used to be awned by onR owr~er and when it was split many years aqo, they eigned prarking croae easements and they were allowed to ehare each other's parkinqt and that the doctors have used their parking cwre than they have uaed the doctor'e pa~rkinq, hut even iqnorinq the cross eaaem~nte, they have more than adequnte parkinq apaces. He noted they have discusaed the poesibility of profesatonal practice tenants moving in next door, uainq thia portion o! the buildinq aleo, nnd atter checkinq with the City statl, lound they would etill have ndequate parkinq. He added he would queetion the awtivetion o! the doctors' oppo~ition to this requeet and whether or not they ase really concerned about the parkinq or the aompetition. h '.~ MxNUTaB~ 11N~HEIM CIT7f PI.7INNINfi COt4lISSION, NOVRt~IeBR l, 198~ 82-563 Conc~rninq tha e~waq~ ay~tsm, Mr. 191rnbsu~a added hs cfid not think this addikional 1950 squars leet vrould cr~at~ •ny overloa~d o! thet new~r ~ystam. He r~larr~d ko l~tt~rs from the medio~l c~nter'~ property n-an-~~mant compeny which lndicat~ th• s~waqe •ystem i• outd~ted and th~y wish to build a nsw ey~t~m end have 4tk~d thsm ~o particips.tsl and that he had indicsted ha would ba interestaa in payin9 his shara. H• addecl Mtr. Bravsnaan, who nunage~ the cotnpany !or tihe doctors' aoeaplsx, has sg14 he will bt~ trying to get the City ot' l~naheim to pay tor the neW sewer. He stated right noa tha aawer is on their proper~y end removal o! it would give th~em more parkinq r~pscee. TH8 PUBLIC HSIIRING WA$ CL03ED. Commiesioner Kinq pointed out the driveway ie d danqeroue eituetion ar.d that this pzoject would eliminnte that drivaway. He stated he had lrequented this eita when there wue a restaurant in thip location end there wne never a psrking problem. He eteted tie would like to aee the driveway eliminate~l and that he could eee e hardship for juatitication for the waiver. Reapondinq to Commiesionor Le Claire, Mr. Birnbaum expldinad the exietinq bueineasea consiste of n computer at4re, phar~acy, beauty ahop, emplayntent agency, optician, trnvel aqency, bookkeeping oftice for nn anestheei~loqist, a vacant spece which ie in the proceae ot beinq le+asad to a medicel laboratory and there will be a profesaional prectice (dental clinic) cominq in in about two wonths. Responding to Commiesioner La Cl~ire, Dean Sherer, 1-aeociete Flanner, explained the applicant indicated the 1950 additi.unal ec~uare :eet would he devoted to a ~aedical or dental cll.nic rec~uizing twelve parkinq apaces, with tha ramaindar af the eite requirinq aeventy-two parkinq spacee. Thara was a brief discusaion concerninq the pazkinq calculations and it wae determined that it is poseible the 3400-square foot nrea and this 1900-square foot area were not both calculated !or a dental or medical clinic and it ia probable that both areas will be utilized by the same practice. Mr. Birnbaum atated he di~ tell ataff that it ie posaible the profeasional prectice would occupy this additional apace. dean Sherer sugqested i! the Planning Cocimieaion wishea to approve this aetback request, it be approved sub~ect ta the condition that the P1$nning Department staf! ahall approve the parking plans, Laeo~' on the aalculations o! the lloor area to be used for eech individual uae and that it is possible a ~~arianae would be required tor parkinq, but that parkinq ia not a part of this request. Commiseioner Hcrbet etated he was concerned because approvel of this request could anean that the project could be built with inadeque~te parkinq and there rrould be no aay to provide edditional parkinq after it is conetructed. He added he ha• no objection to the enpansion ot the buildinq, as lonq as it doee not create a hardship for the neiqhbors. f ( ? ~ MINUTEg, ~1@11-H3IM CITY PLANNINQ COMMI8820N~ NQNSMB~A 1, 198Z 8Z-564 Mr. Birnbawa statsd the prole~~ional practics• mey n~t ~aov~ into tha 19S0-squar~ loot portion, but th~y would want Co continue with t:hs oon~truation anyv+ay and he b~lisv~d there i~ room !or additional parking •pac~s on th• lot and th~re aould b~ no need !or a p+~rking v-aiver. Coaenis~ioner King steL~d thi• addition will not el.iminat~pval orthi• r•quest. and that h~ aould like to qc~ ahead with a a-otion !ox app Cocamis~ion~r Bushore pointed out no other vsrianoas hsve b~sn approvad for 5 or 6-loot landscaped bultar~ snd that they are thare beceuse c~! the widening o! Raatneye, Eucli.d and Medical Csnter Driva. He etated he did not eae eny hardahip. Mr. Birnbawn eteted the hardet~ip would be that the existing driveway is ue~lr~e bacause it eervee only on~ tanant and it they are re~uired to provide e 10-loot lendscaped nrea, it wauld leeve a very nerrow spnce and aould not be precticsl to Duild nn addition. Ha added he leele this is s very small ditterence because most o! the premieas on tha block have only e 4-toot ~etback, includinq the doct~ra' ot!lcee preeent in oppoaition. Ha atated he ie requaeting a sero satback and pointed out they aill have far mora landeaepinq than enyone elae and far in exceas o! what is required. Comm~iesion~r La Claire stated ehe wanted to know i! the recipr~cal perkinq aqreement is now in etfect and what riqhte it permite becauae she hee been to thnt shoppinq center on verioua occasiona and has eoen patients parki.ng itt that parking lot. Mr. Birnbaum etated forcaerly thie property Nas ovmed by Forest Lawn and they have a parkinq lot directly behind the COdI[REL'C~dl center and another lot behind that surrounded on three aides by the raedical center, but when the property wae eplit, mutual croas easemente were provic]ed !or thie perkinq lot. Ha auqgeated the croee eaeements could be elimineted end each property could handla their own parkinq needs. Comwiasl.oner La Claire stated she does not kncw who haa the parkinq problem, but ehe ia concerned. 3he added ahe is also concerned ~bout tho sewer ayetem and ahe would not want the City of Maheim to have to pay for a naw syatem. Chairman Fry etated the sewer system is not the Commiasian'e problem or concern and thie hearing perteins to the 10-foot setback only. ~onaaissioner La Claire stated the Cownission is rharqed with the reeponeibility of the protection o! the he~ith, eafety and wellare ot the citizens of the City of Annheim end she would like intormation if there fa going to be a problem. Commissloner Herbst stated thia variance is to penait an expnnsion of the building and he could not vote to enlarqe it until he knowa there will be adequate parkinq and knowa what is qoing to be in the buildinq. He atated it ia known lrom past experience that medical facil.ities in a conaaercial area do create problamn. . ~ ~:n.,;~ F~ ~ t' ~ ! a .~ ~, MYtJUT88, AN11HfEIM CI~'Y PLANNINfl COMM288ION, NOVEMBBR 1, 1982 8~-565 Mr. Birnbe-um stated he aann~t lea~• ths pr~mi~~~ unla~o he c~n quarante. that th~ lesse~ will b~ abl• to mov~ in. Ne •teted tha meQicsl spec~ in t,he Martin LuCher Csnter is largsr then thi~ proj~oti and addad khere i• adequate parklnq ~vsn i! th~ 1950 ~quara l~st i~ u~sd tor a msdioal or dantel clinic. Cammission~r Herbit etated ha wao not •urs that the parking Mrould ba adequste and he could not vote !or itt Ehat i! th~ sntir~ area is u~ed tor caedical purposes, the perking r~quirecnents would be eubatantially hiqher. He stetsd the patitioner ia roque~ting a variance to axp+~nd th• building and thet hs aould not see the hardahip to approve the v~riance. Dean 8herer auqqeated the Pinnning Commission require the petitioner to provide ata!! with n precise plt~n ahowinq whet uaes are proposed so thet the parkinq raquiremente can k~~ properly calculated. Coaunissioner i,+~ Claira atnted ehe is not oppaeed to the expension and suggeeted that since Lhjn le e request ~~r a.etback wniver, and not a parkinq w~ivar, it could be epprovad auh~ect to the etioulation that the ata!! npprove the parking plana• It wae noted the Planninq Director or hie a~ithorizad repraeentetive haa ~etermined that the propoeed project falla within the deti.nition of Cateqorical Exemptione, Claee 5, as delined in the St~ste Environmental Impact Report Guidelines and ie, therefore, cntegorical2y ex~mpt lrom the requirement to prepare an EiR. ACT~ON: Commiasionez King ottered Reaolution No. FC82-201 and moved tor ite pa ge and adoption that tho Anahei.ia City Planniny r_o~~,,~gian does hezeby grant Variance No. 3296 on the baais that denial would depri.ve eubject property o! privilecXes enjoyed by other properties in the sarae zone ~nd vicinity and aubject to the petitioner'e atipuleti.on that preciae plans shall be submitted to the. Planninq Department tor ~pprovel ehowinq epecific usee proposed for the cnmplex in order that perkinq calculationa can be proporly made and subject to Interdepartmental Caaanittee racomraendatione. On roll call, the toreqoing reaolution wns gasaed by the follovrinq vote: .'-YE3 s BOUAS, BUBi{ORE, FRY, HBRH$T, ICING, I,A CLAIRE, MC Bt,fiRNEy N0- S: NONE ABSIti'NT: NQNE Coma:laaioner La Claire indicated ehe aas still concerned about the private eewar syatem +aith Jack Whi~a pointing out it ia a private system and it would not be eppropriate !or the Planning Conm~ission to make an~+ recommeadationa. Cotomiasioner Harbst clarified that hie atfirmative vate ~a subjeot to the condition that staff will reviaw and epprove the parkinq plan~. Jack White, 7~s~ietent C3ty 1~ttorney, pr@aented tha written riqht to appeal the Plsnninq Commission's deaieion aithin 22 days to the City Co~xncil. ?UBLIC H81-RING. OWNSR• 71LB3R'P SORCHl1RD & 1CENN8TH L. L11R8~N~ 5915 Surchar.d ]lvenua, Los W-qele~, Cl- 90034t ROY W• N11-HB~, 2651 Wast Lincoln 1-venue, 7~naheim, C7~ 928()1. AOENTt GFEJ.,LER DSV~LOPMBNT COMPl-NY, INC., 228 Wsst Msin Street, TuRti~-, CA 92680, Atts Sob Reesa. Propezty deraribed as e~ rectanqularly-ehaped parc~l o! land coneiRtinq o~ approximataly 19.57 ncras, 2925 W~at Lincoln Avanue (Lincoln Beach Mobile Manor Park). gEr• SSIFICATION RIDQ[1E8T= RM'1200, CL dnd til3-A-43,000 to RM-1000. VARIA.NCS REQUEBTi Waivers ot: a) required lot lrontage, b) maximum structural hniqht, c) minimum floor area, d) minimum landecaped setbnck, e) minimum recreational-leiaure area, t) rt-inimum dietnnce between buildinqa and q) ntiniatum number and type of parking spacas to construct a 639-unit condvminium oon~plox. ~ontinued lrom the meetinqs of Ju].y 26, Auqust 23, Beptember 20, nnd October 18, 1982. There were thirty-five pereons indicatinq their presence in favor of the requeet and two indicating their preaence in oppoeition to subject request and althouqh the etaff reporr was not read, it is reterred to and made a part of the minutes. Hob Reeee, Gfeller Development Company, prasented copiea of docutnente eiqned by moet tenants when they oxiqinally a~oved into the mobilehome park. Nlr. Reeae explnined they have takan tt:e paat 1-1/2 months to review the sHee plens after receiving several euqgeetions froa the Planninq Commission. pointed out the new aite plane on ths wall and noted thd number o! units has been reduced lrom 816 to 639. He pointed out the lour dilfehallvraro~uces (1) 2-atory condominiwas with tucked-under parkinq• 2) 3-atory, Y YP units, 3) 3-story units over underqround parkinq and 4) condaminiuma with e3ngle-aar qarnqee and tandnm parkinq spacea behind the qaraqe). He explained they feel the ditference with thia plan ~',e that it presents n much solter look from Lincoln Avenue. He pointed out pz~+.Wioualy there were 3 and 3-1/2 story uniLs propoaed alonq the resr property lino and now there nre 2-etory unita proposed, but they aze cloeer to the property line and the variance ie for landeeape setback et 0 to 12 fe+et. Concerninq the paxkinq, Mr• Reeee exPlained thay are requeatinq e waiver of 190 spaces leas than Code requirement which ia an improvement over their previous plans. ~1e explained they are obviously dealinq with a difficult aituaL•ion here by reducinq the height of the etructure lrom 4 stories. Mr. Reeae explaine.d the buildinqs will be stucco with wood trim. Mr. Reesn reterred ~o the condition requiring drainaq~ lees be paid and etated they have studiad t'r:e storm water run-off problem which is currently exietinq and they will be mox+e then hnppy to ehare in their fair aliare coet of putting in the drainnqe syet<~m, i! some arrnnqement could be made to share those cnets with some other pac-p7e in the ares. He explained they have other expc+nAes auch as relocatinq tha tenanta ana removinq the trash. . _,__-~_ _ ~_w~`~~.,,'VM"`"..~` ~ MYN~'P88, 11N11H3IM CY'!`Y pT~NNII~ ~~1is8I0N, NOV3~dHER 1, lyBZ 82-566 MINUTBS~ ~N~H~IM CITY P~~NNIN(i COMMIS$IONr N~~18SR 1, 1982 82-567 Cona~rninq the oondition raquirinq paya~ent o! park anQ recraation l~e~, Mr. Rsose statad they would like to b~ rsli~vad of that burdsn whioh is ~280,000 !or the 639 unlte. Den Farne, 8681 Bellaire 8treat, atatad ha lives juet autside 1lnaheim City limits but piil ba eeverely impacted by the weAta removel lrom thie aite bsceuee thay ere on tha down-wind side o! tihe park. He aeked what qusrantee they will hav~ that they will ba prntected lram the odors. Mr. Farne etated there ia an exietinq apartatent complex juet to the eaet on the cornar o! Bellnira and Lincaln whicl~ alraedy hae a suvare parkinq problem with cers alwaye parked on both eides,o! the street and in the industr.ial complex and that thie project ia requeetinq a ehortaqe of 190 parking spacea which would impoae 3 much more ssvera parking ~roblem in the nree. Rick Wnreinaki representinq the City o~ Buena Perk Planninq Department, gtated upon recaivinq notification thet this development was propoeed at this site, t1~ey were very excited becauae the Crescent Junior Hiqh School site was recently approved for 149 ainqle-lamily homes in their city and one of tha major concerna wae the development of the old dump site and the re~oval of the trash. He stated they were aleo happy becauee there is a lack of affordable housing in the project area. Mr. Wareinaki added the City ot 8uene Park !.s very familiar with the Gfeller Compdny and they have devel~ped some very succeeelul projects in their cityt however., attar reviewinq thie plan and the n•amber of waivere requeated, they are concernad. He reterred to the waiver requested tur the 20-foot lan~scaped setback adjacent to the north property line which abuts the sinqle-lamily development in their city end a 2-atory buildinq proposed 12 feet from the property line. He stated thia eubject property ie very reqular in confiquration and similar to other propertiea in the anme zone and vicinity and could be developed in complience with City Code requirements. He atated they leel the developer ie t~ying to build a ver~ denee develo~xaent and qet away lrom complyinq with City Codea. He atated the second item of concern is the utilization o! tandem parkinq spaces within the developmentt that they realize in today's cae~rket, with the hiqh cost of property and tt~e need for affordable housinq, the uae of tandem parkinq ie nn inqenious and goc~d idear however, the distance from the tandem parkinq spaces to the unite they will aerve in thie plan ie subetantial which will poae a functionnl proble~ and will be dif~icult for the people living in those unite. He referred to tihe requeatec~ waiver of ueable recreational-leisure area by 509 and ateted with the passaqe of propositiot- 13, citiee ere n~t able to provide recreational facilitiQa and with 639 new familiee in the area with limited recreational facilitiea, there will be problemsr and, in addition, the developer has requested th+~t the park-in-lieu fnes be waived. MINUT88, 11N11HEIM CITY PI.~INNING COMMI88ION r NOVBMBaR 1, 1982 BZ-S68 trt~c. ~lar~in~ki •tated thsy sro also cono~zne~d about ph~~inq o! ths traoh rw~aoval. H~ ~tatsd th~y had rsquirsd the proteotion o! an imp~rni~able m~eabr~na anvsrinq in t1~ei.r Ponderoaa Homea dsvsl~~snE end l~lt ren-ovai o! the tr~sh all ~st on~ tim~ wauld bs a burden upon th~ re~id~nt~• but rearc~vinq it in phs~e~ would a!lact ths psopts in the area .nd also the paopla buyinq the uait~ in khe praj~ot ovur a.Lonq~r p~rio4 0! tim~. H• stated thsy laal tho numbo.r o! varianc~a requASt.ed J.~ excessiva ana it srsma the nu~ab~r o! units could be reduced in or.•r to provids e~i edaquats livinq snrironment in thie aree~ Mr. Raesa respunded to the concarne reqerdinq odor and etated there are no yuarantees that the odora will not miqretet however, their comp~ny hns had experier-ce in handlinq trash r~moval, but thara will b~ odors. He ~tated they will have to meet ever increasing end much atitfor eteta requiren-ents !or the trash remov~l and thnt those requiraenentb ~re qottinq tiqhte: every yeer. HA etsted they will br+ doing wl~atever they can to lessen the o~tors and make it ae painle+as ae poe~ible. Co~cerninq the existinq parking problem cauaed by the apartmonte, Mr• Reeae etated they have plent~ o! roam to add parki.~g, but thnt is not a concarn o! thie project. He eteted they ere propoaing lesa than Code raquirement ~or perkinq but lelt !or the marke~ hey are idantityinq, there will be edequate parking. He noted they ere not propoaing thes• unite !or young facnilies. Concarninq the City o! Huena Park's concern~, Hr. Reess stated it must be remembered there will be eubstentiel coets !or remo;~ing the tiraeh (6 million dollsra) and al~o that they ~annot be everything for evwrybody and ~~-nnot eolve every problem. He stete~3 he would 'like to be able to qo to the county and qet approvai and permite for removal o~ the traah and fix thP fees becnuse they are constantly goinq up. Concerninq the 20-loot landecaped bulfer on the rear proporty line, Mr. Reese ~tated the butfers are nt 15 feet in some pYacee, but there are placea where people would have to bacic out of their parking speces end ons buildinq doee have a staircase whlch encroac~ee into that area. He noted the aide aeqment lett at the top of the plan ie to be their haul route tor removir.q t1~e trash. Concarninq the tanclem parking, he explained that iaeue vrsa reviewed with stat! and thase tandem epacea will be assiqned to tha owners o! the units. Mr. Reeae stated thie io not planned to bc a new lamily complex and they do not anticipate many children nn~ felt even thouqt~ the recreation areas do nnt meet Code, they will be adequate and they do not feet they should be require~ to pay the park and recreation fees. Concerninq trash removal, he etat~d the only way the project makes aenee ie to r.emove the trash in segmonts becauae they could nrt get a lender to tinance the removal tor the entire site. He etated they wi21 be startinq with e small phnse an8, hopetully, the citiaens buyinq there and the citizena livinq nr~und there v+ill see tne lonq term benefit of the ultimate removal a8*heptrashta the short term, 18-ta-22 workinq day perioda of etench ir removing aegmant et n time. MINI)T38, AN7INZTM CITY PI.JINNING CONlII88Iat~i, NCVEMBBR 1, 148Z 8Z-569 TH8 PUBLIC ~iEJ~AiNG NA8 CIAB~D. Commieaionsr Le Clair~ aeked whet th• landacapad bufler ~~tbaoks would be tor tha City o! Hu~na park. Riak Mer~inaki r~~ponded thst multipls-lsa~ily unit~ adjec~nt to sinqld-lamily unlts would requir• a 50-looL s~tbnck and the landac~p~d ~~tback requiramAnt would b~ 10 leet end the othsr area ceuld be utilitsd ~or 1-~tory builQinqs or parkinq. D~Rn 8h~r~r, 11~~oaiat~ Planner . sxplainsd 1-neheim' a ordinance providea thst ths 150-loot aetback can be reducad to 50 la~t es lo~q a~ there are no viauel intrusiona into the sinqle-tsiaily ar~a. Mr. Reese ~xpleined ell the buildinqs on th~ reer are side-on condition• ao that the livinq rooea and major window• ar~ not towarda the ~inqle-family re~identiei arae. He added th~y do have aduqunte apece to plent m~turo treea and ahrubs and thsza ere 4 uni*:e whi.ch have windowq lnaing the sinqle-laenily area. Coug Gleller ~tete~d both Buena Park nnd ]-neheim'e emtbeck requirament.e primsrily relata to the ~einqle-femily dvreller noh havinq a vaet xow o! buildinqe built at his backynrd wall looking inta his property and that with one minor exception, their plan turns ell the buildinqa ao that the width ot the bui181ngs that would be tacing the single family aree ie no wider than a 2-eto.ry family residence and t2~ey have not lined the etructuree up. He stated there wae one instanoe+ where three unita a~re 11ne9 up, but they do heve e qrenter eetbaak area with more r~m !or landaoapinq. He edded they hed ecquired the property a~nd were we11 into working with Anaheim stat! at the time tha Huena Park project caa+ae up and thnt they did ntter.' thoae hearinge c.o point out their coacerRe. Gommi.esioner L~ Cl~ire etated she le concerned dbout~ the ~arkinq and tt;at thia reque~st la !oz quit8 a~~arience. 8ha added ahe thouqht ~his pro ject would t~ benefic.ial to the City of Anaheim in that the tresh ~aould be removed and ehe reelizes the costs tor remoNal is grent and thet ~! all the projecte she eeeg, this c,~e sho~.ild have juatification for waivere, b~at thet she is concarned becausa there is alzeedy a parkinq problem in the neiqhborhood and ehe would not want to ~urther impact th~ neiqhbors. Chnirman Fry added be telt that is a cm jor concern of the v~hole Commission. Com~issioner Herbst ngreed and stated the parkinq o~dinancee for apnrtmenta +~nd condc~m.iniuma have bean conaiderad a~ varioue intervals throughout the yeara and requiremente havA ba~n lowered ar raieed whenever neceaaaryt hc+~.•~ver, he could n~t vote fo•- a lurther reduction becnuae he ICIfUN.: these pazkir.q spacea will be needed. He addad a lat ot guest parkinq ~rill also be needgfl nnd he lelt Secauae o! past problems Naiver fg) muet be eliminated. He stated he recoqn sea tha need ~or the waivere becnuse ot the tremier-dous costs oP renwving the trash and relocetion o~ the tenents. He stated the Cammie+sion cannot vc~te on thi~ as it is because of other requirements ot the new aabilehome park overlay zona ordina~ir,e p~~rtaininq to the relocatinn ot the tennnte anS the ~act tt~ey must be notitied in writinq, etc. Mr. Reeae stated thev became a•vnre ot that requirement today and would lika to reco~end that th ~iect be approved today, sub ject to thdt reportt however, the tantati ~e tract request will be coml.ng up in twc> •aeeks and he felt that would be an appropriate time to preeant t2se report. ~' ,~ ~ MINqTEB, 71NANSIM CITY pL~-NNING COMMlIBAION, NCVIQ+IBSR l, 1982 8Z-570 Commis~lon~r H~rb~t nat~d thi~ i,~ a 639-unit proi~at and th~ Cornni~eion do~s not aant to d~velr a 0ub~tandard ar~a whioh will a~usa probleco.~ !o~ th~ r~~t o! tha ar~a and i~t did not th.ink it sh~uld bs approv~d with l~~a parkinq. Mr. Re~ts ~tated the Cnmtais~lon hao approved projscts in the past whiah have had 901 0! th~ r~quirsment. It wa• not,ecl thoa• a~pproval~ wsrs i~r hotsl~ or motele beaau~a peopla arrive by plane or bus and th~ parking ii not r~quirad. Commiesionsr Herbs~ stet~d the Coaaaiseion ha~ lound thnt the nreae are beinq hurt with p~opla pezking on the ~treet: and pointed out ths~e will ba private atr~ate in thie proj~et. Com~aissioner La Claire auggeeted turninq the pro~ect ar.oun8, pointing out sho would not be oppoeed to more 3-story unite with more parking provided. Commisaioner Buehoro ateted he raalisae the deva~oper would like to hnve this pro3ect epproved ae eoon ae poasibldt however, he alwo realizes this ia a litt:e more complex than that~ tha~ ths City w.ill be~ qettinq n prolit lrom the ddvelopmant o! the prc~perty by qettinq rid ot the old dwnp site which will be envinq the taxpnyor money and, hopelully, the developer will ba ebl~ to derive a aertain protit ~rom the projeett howaver, tha Cammiasion will be lett with tha probleme ~~rented atter the project i~ eold and ths aeveloper ha$ moved on. Ha stated he sits on the Park and Recrsntion Commiesion and they are conetantly rvrestlinq aith the cutbe~ck of lunda and arR trying to maintain adequate park lavele and it would be hard for him to reduce choee pe-rk lees in queetion beaauae there are no reczeational areaa provided in the project and t.hie wlll have an impact on the exietiny recreationel areas vhich are already overused. Chairman A.'ry etated he thinks thia Commieeion wanta thia project devaloped worse then anything he has ever neen sinca he ha• been on the Comm~.ssion, but thouqht the developer has discovered how far the Camn-isaion ie willinq to qo and apparently are not willinq to band on some o! the issuee. He suqqeated the petitioner requeat a continuance. Con~iasioner I.e rlaire indicated ehe rniqht be willing to bend on the ~ark feea beeausa she would like to help the developer since he is willinq to clean up something !or the City of Anaheim. Jack White, 1-saistant City Attorney, pointed out the pe-rk and recreation feoa n:e a requireraent by ardinance and there fe no way the Commiasion can w+~ive the payment of thoee feee. Chairaen Fry expleined that the petitioner knew the Cocmaieeion's concnrna which boil down to the parktnq aituation and also a siqnad nott~ication that the e~cieting tenente muat be given. Mr. Reeae aaked if thexe is a way to ~ix the pask ~nd racreation teea becauee obviously they W117. be developinq thie property ~~ver a lonq period of time. Annika Santalahti, 1-aeistant Director for Zoning, stated normally the fees are collected at ~he time the building p~rmits ara issued and thay do qo up xcasionally. She etated tnere ia another nusthod which has bean used, wherein, it a deweloger ie able to proviAe improveaents o! a value equal to the feda to be paid, it is conceivable that L:~ey could neqotiate with the Parks and Reeommendation Depnrt~ent an8 the eondition could be amended to cover that contingency. ~ ~~, MINtJTES, ANAH3IM CITY PI.IINNING COMIA288IpNr NOVEMBBR 1, 1982 82-571 Mr. Raese r~qu~.ted a lour-wesk aontinuanct~. Jaak oihit~ statsd it is tih~ City'• porition thet th~ •xieting Conv.rsion Impect Rsport ne~ds r~vi~ion in order to comply wikh the ordinance ahiah haa be~n in ~!l~at !or ebout 10 dey~. H~ noted thi• will be tha lir~t davelopmsnt unlsr that new provisior~ and ~hat the oriqinal report ~ubmittsd aas bas~d upon the p:ior lavn and was pr~pared last Mayt and thst the nsw ordinancs doea require more inlarma~tion and al~o requirea that the tsnents bs notilied o! ths •vailaDility o! thi.s report st lsast 15 day bel.ore the hearinq on the report b°f the planninq Commi~sion. He eddod it i~ h~• opinion that in order to comply with th~ law, the Ralooation lteport and the benst~te that are goinq to be paii ba approved in connection with tha roaoninq rathar ths.n the tentative traat .xnp approval and tha psyment should be required pri.or to adoption a! the reioning ordinance. He added there i~ eloo a propose~i revision to Condition t~o. 24 of the reclnssiticetion, Mr. Reasa asked i! the actunl paymAnt of th~ benatite is required nt the ti.ma o! ths approval of the zoning, Mr• `ihita explained the ordinance expresaee three el~ernatives tha,t aould occur prior to the earlier o!s (1) the t~~•minati~n o! the tenancy by the park ~wnar, (2) the ndaption o! the ordinance or (3) the iseuance o! buildi~.q pe=m~ts !oz any portion ot the development which would rsquire the displacement o! ths mobilehome tAnant to which the payment was to be made. Com~aie~ioner Buehore etated it ie his underste-ndinq the intent o! the or.dinance is to qet ttae tenanta taken cnre of even if ~hie ie to be a phased development. Jack White further explained i! the development is ta be done in aeveral phaaes, thaee tennnta would be taken care of ae they were beinq diepliced, aa oppooed to dieplaainq part of tham now mnd payinq them later or requlring all ot them to be pnid when only a portion ara beinq diaplaced whiah qive. the developer the llexibility o! m3.nimisinq his paymenke. Commiaeioner Hushore asked i.f that givae the tenants the abil~ty to work r+ith the developez in n case ahere they wanted to leave the park now, even though th9y would not be displaced until d l.ater p3~aee ot the developnent. Jack Whi~e atated if the tenant choosea to leave noa, the prop~aed requirement would not compel the developer to pay tho tenant until s~ time as the ordinance was a8opted or the buildinq penaits lesuad, whic..ever occurred earlier, but i~ the landlord requirea the tenant to awve, payment would be required at that time. Doug Gteller stated they are askinq for rezoning on the total parcal, even thouqh it will be developed i.n phases, and asked it ~.hnt condition meana that ahenaver th~ resoninq is approved for the tor.el project, they ai11 be required to o-ake eny pgyments aqreed upon, with Jack White indicating that is correct. ` /~ , ~ MINUT~B~ ~~_~ ~i~ p~~I~ C~IB$ION, NOV3MB~R l~ 1982 8~-572 Gomotie~ion~.r Bu~hore stat~d he wa~ Chsira~an o! the K~ ll~home Task Forc~e and on~ o! their mujor aona~rn• wa~ !or th~ tenants beirig mi~placad b~caus• o! d~v~lop4amnt an4 th~ lnt~nt o! the ordinano~ wa~ that v-hen the propasty i~ goinq to bs aevslopsd, tha tenants b~ qiven th~ relocation b~nelit• a~p~cially in e park like tihis wh~r~ no ona should ba livinq anyway snd, hopelully, thi• will hatt~n th~ d~evalop~aen~ o! the prop~rty. Mr. aleller responded that nothing aill ha~ten the Qevslopment o! the property ~mleso paople buy the unita. He statad ~hsir lixet thrse phases ~,r~ on parcels that ere not curr~ntly ~oned !or n-obilehomest thet one in zoned oomm~rcially in lront o! the ~ark, and the oth~r i• commercially zoned property where the qo-cart ~scility is ~ocated, and the vacant land behind it and he assua-ed tl-osa thr~e phases would ba aliowed bocauee they are not beinq rezoned. Jack White responded i! ther9 i.s no raaoning, or reloc.ation o! mobilohomes, there would be no reloc ion benetits required at this time. Mr. Glaller responded thet th~• ia conaistent with what they believad regarding the ordinanae esnd thet they underetand thnt once they ara raquired to ramove any one o! the mobilahomes, they wau'~! be re~uired to pay i~ar any ane who wanted to move and that is consietent with what they intgnded. H~ stated they ~rould be allowed to do the lirst three phases without any relocation paymenta and if eoaieone did a-ove, they would incur thA liability, bu~ could delay the payment until the actual rezoning. Chairme~n Fry pointed out the petitianer h~a requested n foux'-week continuance. ACTION: Commiseioner Herbst otfered ~ motion, seconded by Co~leaioner Bouae and MOTION CARRIED, that consideretion of the eforementionea matter be continued to the regularly-acheduled meetinq ot November 29• 1982, at the requeet of the petitioner. RECE88: 3:10 p.m. RECONVENE: 3s20 p.m. CommiASioner McBurney left the meeting and did not return. . -~ MINUTEB~ ANAHSIM CITY pL11NNING COMMI88ION, NOVSMBRR l, 1982 82-573 x'P~M N0. 5. SIR CATEOORICIIL B:IaMPTION-CL1188 l, ~11IV]~F OF CODS R 8QU2R8MrNT 11ND PUSLIC H~1IRING. ONN8R8: EaPER11NZA VILL118, 14ZJ1 Chembsr~t Road, Tuttin, CA 92680. l~GENTe ROSBRT ~IIC1CaL80N, P.O. Bax 2303, Oran~s, Cl- 92669. Property dosaribed a~ an irrPqularly-ahaped parcel o! land consi~ting ot spproximetely 7 nore~ (21 lots), havinq approximate lrontagas o! 470 lset on Marl,ta Lane, 490 f~st on f:h~ An~t sid~ o! Kelloqq Drive, 570 le~t on ths north eide o! Oranqathorpa ~,venue nnA 520 ~eet on the wast sida o! Post Lane. To permit a 21 lot, 97-unit e!lordable condominium convereion with waiver ot minimum lot area per ~init, meximum eite coveraqe nnd minimum number nnd type o! parkinq ~pecea. There were two pereons indicating their preaence in oppoeition to subject requeet and although ~he stR!! report wae not rend, it ie referred to and iaade ~ pnrt o! the minutee. Bob Mickelson, 3823 Glneeell, Orange, atated they etarted thie pxoject over one year aqo nnd did meet with the te~nenta and have ettempted to keep them inlormed. H~e etated they heve tried to b~ aensitive to the passibii~ty that some of the tenenta may have to move and have tried to qive ~hem ample notice. t!r. Mickeleon etated this is a hiqh quality project and has the potential for hiqh quality condominitun project. He steted these are 21 aeparately recorded lote with 21 separnte buildinqa and the units rancJe fr~m juet under 1,000 aquare feet to juat aver 1,300 aquare feet and h~sve 1-]./2 bathe, two-caz encloeed qaraqea, laundry facilitiea end seperate water heeter~. Donna O'Brien, 5140 E. Marita "C", etated ahe is not ~pposed to the project but thnt ahe ha3 received a letter indicating 24 unita out o! 94 units would sell !or ~60,000 to ~90,000 nnd she would like to know who would qet tha chance to buy thoee unite. She also aaked about the 5t discount !or current reaidenta and the 5i for acceptinq the u*~it as ie and atated she did not think they planned to do much upqrading anyway. She stated theae placea do need a lot of work ins.idet that her 2-bedroaa, up-stairs, down-atairs unit has a~ beam and lloors the~ nre off-tilt end the diahwasher rieeds to be replaced and she lelt it is not fair ta the public to sell thasa unite at the market value without ceally upgrading them. 3he statod she is willinq to buy one of these units if they are willinq to !ix them. 3he ateted there fin enouqh parkinq if everyone uaea the garaqss, but th~re ie an alley to the rear of her apartment and thnre nre cnre always parked on tath sides and ahe felt if tho units are aold, there would have to be park±ng rulea. Mr. Mickelson stated the Housing stnf! can answer the queecions pertaininq to the atlordable unita. He stated the affordable unita will be spread throuqhout the project and the tenanta in the project wi.ll get the lirst chance to quaZify for the a~~ordnble ur~its, based on tneir incame and ability to aawrtize the loana, etc. He explained tr~e di.acounts amount to nbout ~8,000 to ~9,000 and there is a varyinq deqree of upqsndinq goinq on at this time ~nd that the units will be repainted, recarpeted end a12 repairs be mede. He added they were not aware of the tilting bsams or lloore and i! there ta anythinq that neede to be repaired of s atructural nature, it will be done. He stated the parking spac~s would be aseiqned in the qaraqe~ and would be controlled throuqh CC&Re of the ho~neoaner's aseoclation. ~.~~ .~ MINt1TR8, 11P111HEIM CITY PI.IINNING COMMISSION, NOVBM[HBR 1, 1982 82-574 TH8 PUBLIC HEIIRIN(3 fiAB CIABE. Commi~sioner Herb~t claritied that Marits I.a ~~ is a public strest. He aqreed Lhe p~rkinq can b~ controlled through tha CCiRa end s~ated h. thought this ie probably e• qood a projact na he has aesn !or conversion and eppear~ to be one o! the b~tter projact~ in 1lnaheimt th+st nor~aaliy when ons of theae complexae is to be converted- there ar• a lot of people pres~nt in oppositlon who aru qoing t~ ba diaplsced, but apperently the patitioner hn~ done hie hom~ework in this instanca. Tc~m Carruthere, Community Developa-ent Uapertment, stated the 24 unite which will be converted to aftordab].e unita will be allacetad baeicnlly to the people who liva there predicated on e tura-ula of pointe, takinq into consideration the+Y temily income, number o~ members in the la~aily, etc. and thnt it will be - dled by the Houainq Authority and thoee unite which ere not sol8 to the tenan~y will be, sold on t.a open market, Atill es atfordable unite lrom n liet the Houeinq Authority keap• on an on-qoing beais o! those people who qualify !or atlordnble unita. Ha expleinad those peopl~ who live there and wieh t~ epply f.or clualification, should make an application with the Houeinq Authozity and they will be evalua~ted for qualitication. He pointed aut there ~rill also be meet..nqa on sits. Conaniseioner La Claire clnrilied thet thb relacation benefite were adequately addressed in the intormetion preaented with Mlr. Mickelson clari.lyinq chenqes were made bacaube the Housing Department sta~! hed required the leeser two months or ~1,000 relocation ~xpenees, which they h+~d nqreed to end thet thAy had aqreed thet a relxntion specialiat vrould be on-site but not lull tim~ because this will be done in amaller pheeea and e full time apecialist would not be req~iired. He nxplained before a a~lea proqram etarts, tenants will be qiven 180 days notice of intent to commenca the eales proqram e~nd they will be able to qet copiea ot the Depertment of Reel Estnte Report and ths inlorma-tl.on will be Availeble in the Mandqez's office. It was not~d tha Planninq Director or hie authorized representative has determi~ed that the proposed project fa11a within the detinition ot Cateqorlcnl Facemptione, Claea 1, as detined in the State Environmentel Impact Report Guidelines nnd is, therePore, categorically exempt from the requii•ement to prepare an EIR. ACTIQN: Cocimisaloner Herbst offered a saotion, aeconded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTInN CA1tRIED (Commiesioner Mlc+-surney absent), that the Mahei~ City Planninq Commission does hereby qrnnt aaivers of Code requirement on the besie thnt denial would deprive subject property from privileqes enjoyed by other propertiee in the same zone anfl vi.cinity. Commisaionar Herbet otfered Ret+olution No. PC82-2U2 and n-oved for ita passage and adoption that the Anaheia~ Gity Planninq Commission doea hereby qrant Conditionnl U~e Fsrdiit No. 2391 eubject to Interdepertmental Co~mmittee zecowaendations. On roll call, the toreqoinq resolution was passed by the folla+ing vote: 71YE8 s HOUAB ~ BOSHOItE r FRY ~ HERSST, 1CING, LA CLl-IRE NOgB: NONE ~SSLNTs McBuxney MINl1'P38• 11N11H3IM CITY PI.ANNIN~i COMIMI88ION, NOV~MIb1~R l, 198Z . 6. BNVIF` . PRaVI0U8LY C=RTI! BZ-975 PUBL~C HEIIRING. ONN~RB: d1N1-HSIM UNION HICiN BCHOOL DIBTRICT, SO1 ~r~scent IPay, 71nah~im, C.11 9Z803. 1-ciENT~ p11CE8E'M'BR HOM38, INC., 45A0 Campu~ driva, Nswport D~ach, CA 92660. 11TTSNTIONt FRBD KZNCiDO'N• Prop~rty dsecrib~ud as sn irreqularly-sheped parcel o! ranA consisti,nq o! appraximstely 6.1 acre~, locattd snuCh and ea~t o! the south~a~t aorner o! Lincoln Avenue end Citron etre~t, havinq a lrontaqa o! approximately 269 teet on tha south aide o! Linooln ~-v~nue and ~ lrontaqe ot 402 l~et on th' east side of Citron 9tr~~t, ar~l lur.ther Aescribed ae tha northarly por~i~n ot the former Frentont Junior High School eite. RF.CLA38IFICATION RBQU88T: RM-1200 and CCi to RM-30Q0. VARIANCS RBQUSST~ Waivera of: a) minimum lot area per dwelling unit, bl minimum floor area, c) required improve~ent o! setback area~ and d) type ~c parking spaaes to conetruct a 96-unit condamintum complex. 11ND ITEM NO. 7. BNVIRONN~NTAL IMPACT REPOAT N0. 249 (PRF•VYOUSLY APPROVBA RECLAS$IFICATION N0. 81-82-16 (RE11AN!lRTI3ED) ]1ND V~IRIANCB N0. 3304 PLIBLIC HEARING. OWNBIt3a ~1NAHEIM UNION HIGH SCH~QL. DISTRICT, 501 Cresoeent wey, Aneheim, G 92803. AGSNTs P~CESETTER HOMES, INC., 4540 Campus Drive, Newport Beach, CA 02660. Property described es e rectanqulerly-~haped parcel of land consietinq of npproximately 9.6 acres, bounded on the north by 8roadway, anst by tha Librar; and Police Department, eouth by Sante Ana Street, and west by Citran Street, end lurther d~scribed ae the lormer Fremont Junior Hiqh Schoal piaylield. REGLASBZFICIITION REQUEST: 1i1~1'1200 to RM-3000 VARI1lNCE REQiJE3Ts Waivars of: n) minimum lot erea per dwelling unit, b) minimwa lloor aree, c) required improvement o! ^etback areas, d) type o! paxkinq spaces and e) raquired location o! parkinq epacea to constr~:ct a 168-unit condomi.niwa complax. There were three persone indicatinq their preaence in oppoeition to subject requeet nnd althn~iqh the statf report was not raad, it ia relerred to and made a part of t1:e minutea. Comiaisalonar Huehore declared n contlict of intereet on Item No. 6 as defined by 1-nahaim City Planninq Commission itesolution No. PC76-157 adoptinq a Contlict oP Interest Code tor th~ Planninq Commi~sion nnd Govern~aent Code Section 3625, et seq.~ in that he owne property at 702 W. Lincoln which is adjoininq property and pursuant to t1~e provieions of tha above Codes, declared to the Chairman that he vras v+ithdrawinq lrom the hearing in connaction with Tent~*+.vA M~ap o! Tract No. 11780, and would not take pazt in e3ther the discue,sion or the voting thereon and hdd not discuased this aiattor with any membAr ot the Plsnning Comu-isaion. ~ 8Z-576 MIpi1TE8, AliAl~~IM CITY PLI1NNIt~1G COMlMISSION, NOVBMASR 1, 1982 I.andon Exl~y, Psc~s~t~sr Homa~, •tal.sd thsy hav~ done ~~rious evaluation of pr~vioualy approved plans end tound th~t in Coday'e presant economic condition~, th~ project it not l~a~ible. He stated thsy hav~ pursued a r~vanu~ bond issu~e Nith Community Davslopme=~valdtoapr ~~ediwithbthe bondrt lrom them to go to the City Councll !or app iseus to linance this projset. He etate9 tha nea plan doesn't have e lot o! chnnges, but thay have beaically gona fran a hesvily watar-orientod pruject to a minin~ally water-orisnted r-oject nnd eliminated the row housing elt~ct nnd th~OVe$ta~oaectnwouldghave Ha explained a buyar o! a unit in thA pr°iveeshimdthe o~portunity to s~ll to a to e~rn l~~4,900 a yaar and the radasiqn 9 rices would be eround per~on earninq ~3~~000 a yeer and the basiG ealling p units that ~97,000 average. He noted there aill be eome eme-11 e!liciency type will sell !or nbout ~65,000. Mr. Exley etated they aubmitted Che ravised plan to the Citron Neiqhborhood Council and they did not eeem to have any probleme with itt thnt each buyl~dinq is nn 8-pl~x huilding but hea the appAarnnce o! d sinqle -lamily home. etated they have built aimila~r projects in two other Orange County locatione with qreat succeas and acceptebility. Mr. Exley stated the basic groblem is the ~oi~~eat~uldlttavelcost ~8r000gpor that the eubterraneen qareqes previouslY p Po unit and the carports and raduction o! th~ watar orisntation reduced the ,price o! the unite by l~15,000. He steted the bond iseuee are tied to incocae and with a 11-1/2• bc~nd rnte, they can make the unit3 more atfordable. Huqh Faulkner, 1631 E. Oak Place, Aneheim, stated he ia not totall.y oppoeed to thie request but waa concerned becnuae oriqinally there was to be an 8-foot hiqh wall (4 feet block and 4 feet wrought iron) and now the plans are !or in 12-foot carport wall adjacent to their property line and pointe8 out that, fact, the eavc- of the houae is hanqing over the property linc+s however, the petitioner h~s aqreed to put in a 6-foot wall but they fecl they need as much as thay can qet beca~~se of the winda from the weet. He etated the petitioner hae aqreed to cement that area and h~petully the cetnant wou)d be from the baae of the house to the carports and tied int~ the drnin so that the wat~sr would not accumulate. He atnted the petitioner has alao aqreed to chanqe the color Faulkner referred of the carporte to a lighter color to reflect the hent. blr• to the t~:ash ~rea to the rear ot the third carport and stated he w~•uld like to have that moved to the alley side 25 feet away because of odore and also he would like~ to have the wall at lenst 4 feet hig:- ~e~auaa Q~entBtoithee from the r~hiclee• He asked that the 5-foot erea prope j aul-ue-sac be increne~d to 7 feet. He indiceted he was aleo concerned about leav.,nq the area open and stated the petitioner hes indicated he would conaidez putting n fence acroes the front and rear to prevent people trom cuttinq throuqh the property• MiNUTE a, 11N11H1t. '1 CITY PLANpINGI COMMS8820N, N~7V~D+IB1tR 1, 1982 82-5~7 ~nniA Faulkner, 1585 fl. Chat~au, Meh~im, ~tet~d h~ reprssants his mothar Mho iiva~ at S40 ~1. Ch~sLnut, enQ Lhat th~y liked the oriqinal plnn but b~liave thi' revi~~d plan has chaapon~d tha quality ot th~ aev~lopmsnL, •ap•cially with the carport~. He added he hsr not heard o! any aonllon-inium d~wlopmsnt in An~heim with carpoxts. Ne raterred to thw pekitionar's coa~nan~ thaC the+y have davsloped two similar project~ in a~har nreao and indicated ha would s•uspect that aas thetr original intsnt enyway. Ne ~teted they are concerned about the cazporte on the •e~t property line anU did not think thet would be qood tor the at~~ole neiqhborliood. Jae White, 809 w. eroedway, 1lnaheim, stated the ~slides snd pictures o! the oriqinal propocal. were beeutitul, but now they will bo looking et cerporta, pzobarly with tin raofe end he th~uqht the project has junt qone downhillt thet this is n bue~utitul piece o! property snd he thouqht the property was et111 in eacrow. NE~ pointed out the interest rate~s aerm ~ven hiqher when oriqinal pl n~ wera submitted nnc7 npproved. He edded he did not r_hink this pro~•ct woutd be enything ho would t~e proud to llve acroae the street lrom. M,r. Exley atated he talt he hea a gooc~ lino of communicetion with Huqh Faulknez an8 they ere ainr.ere in their intent to xesolve his concerne. t~e etated he would not aqree that they have lower~ad the quality o! the project beceueA it ie still a tine projectt thRt timos are a little ditferent er~d if thay cnnnot qet a bond issue nnd Rome relie! on the projeat, t~ey ~-i.ll not t+e able to qo ahead aith it. THE PUSLIC HEARING WAS C'LOSED. Commiesioner Herbet etnted he thought the quelity of the project has been lowerad and the reer~on he voted for the verianceq in the first place was beCeuse it wa8 to be a high quality project end w~ta not encr~aching uPon tha neighbors as much as this and i! hR hnd aeen Lhie project, he would not heve alloaed variances. He steted the condoainitua ordinance does nllow ama'ter units, but he could not agree with the parkinq beceuea condominium ownere 80 have a tendenay to have more things to be stored nnd atated he felt tha pnrking could be controlled through the ~' •!ts• Renpondinq to Commissioner Bouas, 1~'!r• ~,cley pointed out that their other developmenta were Old Trabucn and Cedar Glen at E1 Toro and Trabuco. He stated both of t:nese projects +~+ere a succeae and had no i:apact upan ths echoole. Mr• ~xley clarlfied tor Commiesioner La Claire that there were no afPordeble units in the original approval and that there are no affordeble Lnits in thfa projectt ho~egver, they need the bond iseue ~n order to c;omplete the projectt and *hat the 16 emall efticiency-type unitg r+ould eell !or ~69,500. tie axplained the bond issue ia the State of Calitornia 1365, Mortqaqe-Backed Bondt tha*_ they xill be requestinq to qet on the alZocation list and there are 28 citiea already on the liat tor 1983 and that thia would be a:ice way for the City to provi:e hnusing aad it len't ck~eap ar a~ftordable, but it would be an opportunity for some people Co have a nice place to live. MINIlT88r ANIIKEIM CI7'Y PLIINNINQ COMlMII8810N. NOVEMBER 1. 198~ 8~'g~~ Coaanissionar La Clnir~ aqr~~d the projsct ha~ 1~~tK~ened sinrs she lirot saw it anc! eha rhook i• quit~ g='s~t• She ctated the Com~nissian wao really thrill.ed with the prevlou~ proj~ct which was luxurioua. Cummissioner Boua~ pointed out that housing is needed in 1-naheim, e~en it it is not luxuriou~. Chnirtasn FrY atatad he ta1L aurn the da~:eloper had etu~lied tlie market eev~rsl months ac,ro whan the orig~inal plen wae present~d~ Mr. Exley pQinted out thet a buyer ~roul~ hava to nu~ke in excesa o! ~44,000 in or8er to et~ord ona of the unite praviously approved. Chairmen Fry pointed out that discueeion hee been on Item N~. 6 and he would open the public hearinq now for d:scueelon on Itesn No. 7. Commise~.oner Buehore~ retu=ned to t1:e meetinq. Cocamiseic~er H~rb~t ateted the saaie thing ~pj+:ies to Item No. 7 aa to Item No. 6 and he would na~ d~ree witn the open pbrking tor ~ondominiutns becauee it wo~ild ~uat open t::~ door for luture conAominium .fa~~AloF+ere and woulci set a precedent. Comiaisei4ner Bushore a~ated he has no contliat on It~em No. 7 and indicated ha ui~dergtande with the revenun aonde~ the petiLioner would aek !or a certain percenteqe ~rom the Coanty and pny 4 to 6 pointe tor the money which ia non-retundnb~~, caer- in advance, and if the bonds eh~uld be iseued and are nllocated to thia developnent, the ~`~l°perle who qualitywbetween~80 and rhe cac.,iey at a cerr.ein percentage !or • ~e peoP 120t, but crly 16 of tha unitg are considered aftordable, which is r~ lonq way lrcm 100~. Mr. Exley explained they are neking for 22 million dollara for the whole projsct. Corocaissioner 8ushore stated the property to the north will be developed prior to the property behind the Librnry and the accesp for thia project is probably better then the previous pcojectt that even thouqh he realizes this is o,`ly a concept, he lelt it is downqradinq the areat that the downtown redevelopment ha$ not done very well, but this will not help it, eepecially with carports because ~arages oen be controlled with CC&Rs. He stated he felt the waivers were granted previously because of the quality of the ~roiect.• He addo` ha is concerned abc~ut the accasa on Broadway which ia u Aecondary etreet. Commiseioner Buahore contin~g~ that as a tnx,~a-yer he ia concerned how this has gonc~ on !or ovar a yo~r and n halY with the school diatrict se111nq the property. He atated there are achool aites for saiw riy developere who could not mak~e the projects and are noW tryinq to sell them to iaake a last buck. He did not teel leeae:~n4 thP pro~ect, when things are auppoead to be qettinq better, is i;'+e praper approach and the taxpayer is the o~e who euflers tha burden in the endi nnd that the next developer would come back and aay tha~ he paid t~ ~auch for the proparty and cann~t develop the pzoject. He etated he won't vote on Item No• 6 and cdn't vote on Itsm No. 7 che way it atands. KINIIT88, 11NJ1H3ZM CIZ"• PLIINNINO COMMI88ION, NOV}~MBER 1, 1982 82-579 !!r. mcley ~tetsd ho appreciated the Comeais~ion's tihouqhts, but thay 4houtd rsm~mbsr th~ axt~rior o! the buildinq~ har not bean ahanqad and tha proj~ct ie ~ good quality pr.ojt~ct. Cononiesioner Houa~ anked i! anythinq can be done about the carpc~rt situetl.on with Mr. 8xlsy replying they could probably encloee tham et a probable cnet of ~1500 per unit. Cheirman Fry atsted there seems to ba a qeneral coneeneus that t,he project is dovmqrnding !or this erea. Commisaioner Herbat st.ated he wou~d have a problam f~nding juetifiention !or the wnivera bacauee this ie a larqe rectanqularly-shaped niece of property with no herdehipe end they are n~t providing elfordable units which would meet the 8tate req~•Lraments. Commissianer bushore etated he did not understand v-hy th~y have not ~naked for the bonds on the unite ~s oriqinally propoaed rather than downgradinq the project. Mr. Exley explnir.ed it would take e~25,000 down payment to be abla to purchas~ one o! those previous units. Commlasioner Huehore atated that everyone ie tryinq to jump on the bandwnqon and the only plscee~ tht~t tl~ese aftordnble placea are qoinq is i.n the oldar sectione of town end that thie erea hae been going downhil.l and thie would be contributing to thet trand. Mr. Exley et~t~ed they would 11ke to requeet a 4-waek co~~tinuance to go back end work with atalf to eee what revistona cnn be made. ACTION: Caamtiesioner Herbet o!`fered a motion, seconded by Coaanieai~nor King and MOTION CARRIED (Commieeionet McBurney abeent3, thnt conaiderntion ot the aforementioned item be continued tc~ the regularly-acheduled meeting of Noveniber 29, 1982, at the requeat of the petitioner. ITEM NO. 8. EIR NEGATIVE pECLARATION, GENERAI~ PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 179, RECL]\83IFICATIOt• N0. 82-83-9 AND V~1RI11NCE NO. 3301 PUBLIC HRARING. OWNERS: CENTRAL CAPITAL CORP., P.O. B~x 81511, 3an Dieyo, CA 92318. AGBNT: G.C. PROPERTIES, INC., 2152 Dupont, Suite 200, Irvine, C7~ 92715. Property described as approximately 9.8 acres south r.n~ west of the southwest co~ner of Lincoln Avenue and Rio Vieta Street. RECL]l33IFICATION REQUESTs RS-J~-43,000 to RM-1200 VARIANCE RBQUESTs Waivere ofc a) maximum etructural height, b) minimum floor ~rea and c) required enclosure o~ carports tA construct a 274-unit apartment complex. There were approximately 18 peraons indicatinq their presence in oppoaition to subject requset and althouqh the sta~f report was not read, it ie referred to and made a part of the minuters. MiNt1TE8, Alil-HIli!! C~TY PT.ANNINCi COMMi:,8i0N~ NONEMHQR 1, 19~2 ~2-58r' Jon eu~s~, O.C. Properti~~, aq~nt, stated the request 1• to con~t ~t s 274-unit spartatent aomplax at Cfi~ corn~.r ot Lincoln and Rio Vist~ on ~ l~-acre sit~t that thsre will bs approximetsly 100 2-b~Aroom units and :74 1-bedrooen unit~, 78 0! which wil: be bach~lor unit~. Ha •tetad the Aetarn~inetian tio construct ~hi• sis• unit Mas nurd• attsr a suxvsy Naa conducted o.~ 10 canpareble apartmant prajset• in the 1lnahaim eres• l~tr, Busse exp~alned they are requesting e genaral plan rmendment *.~ chenga tF~e de~iqnetion to m»lti-lamily residential and re~latsiticatior, to ~llow this proj~ct, in addition to three wa~vers which they feal wi:'. not i. ~act the nrea or the quality o! the pro~ect. HQ Atated they era requeeting a waiver of minimum floor nrea to ellow them to be able to a!lord tc~ build the project and ~tter the units at a ccnnpetitive rent nnd they leel the size oi the units will be adequate and they ere deaigned to be~ open end pleaeant. Mr. BuRee stated they aie •slan re~{ueatinq ol+on carports as opposed to encloeed pnrkinq because they nre leee expensive tv ~uildr and thAt they did cisit a number vt projecte with encloAad c~verdd parking nnd with parkinq on both sides of the driv~, it cletinitely creates n ttu~nel eltect. He added with open oarports, people approachinq will be able to ese throuqh. He explnined each unit v+ill have a 4' x 8' atornge erea which will be mora uaable. He stnted they ace elso requestinq e waiver to build 2-atory unita ~rithin the 150-foot eetbeck of the ndjoininq sinqle-lamily area ao that they cen get more unite. He explain~:i all the two-etory unita will be facinq nway from *he eingle-family homes end there will be •:o windows• door$, balconfes, etc. encronch~na on their pr.ivacy. Pete Pitassi, Architect, Kiyotoki 1lssocintee, presented slides o! the propoeed projeat an8 explained the loop drive, with main eca~ess ~tt Lincnln and secon8ary access to Rio Viata, and other lenture+~ o! the project. Mr. Hussa etated they got n liet of eurroundinq pr.operty or+ners ne eoon aa it wae availnble and aent 50 lettera to etfected einqle-lemily propnrty owner~ tellinq them about the project and offerinq to meet wfth them. He etated they did meet with 12 neighbore at Ed Cnrson's rea~dence and reviewed the plans, end all aiqht o! the residents edjoining on the eouth were representedt that the re$idaT-ts expreesed all their concerns, but basically their main concern was that this ie an apartment complex. He explnined three previous requeete !or commarcial development wpse approved for this site (a rollez :•ink, a 8rive-through restaurant and an office c~ndominium projeat) but were never buil.t and they feel the hiqhest and beet uae !or the proparty would be mediwa denelty reeidential. MINUTaB, 11N71HEIM CITY PI+~12iNING COMMI88ION~ NOVEMHBR 1, 1982 BZ-581 Mt. sas~• ~t~tsd ths main concern o! the ra~ia~nt~ vras ths h~iqht of the walit that th~ra ie an exi~ting wall approxin~taly 6 lest hiqh which belongt to each reeidenc~t Lhat the ordinance requires a 6-toot wall, but they do not •ee snY need !or two wallri and that they would proviAA larqer, mora eaeture traes which would provid~ a t~u!!ar eoonor. He added the r~sirlents unenimouely Pelt a 6-loot wall rrc~uld not be aufficient and wnntec~ nn 8-foot wall. He etated thay ara willinq tc construct an 8-~c~t conti.nuous well an their property ~tartinq et the 57 Frseway and tereainating at tha church pr~perty. Regnrding the 2-etory Lmits closer thsn 150 !ee*_ to the aingls-temily hoa!ee, Mr. Buese stated he understendo ths RM-3000 Code was recently chanqed to permit 2-etory units within 50' o! ainqle~-family reeldential ne lonq ee there are no opPhinqs. He pointed out the moet recent commercinl development nppraved tor t~~at eite (the Riverview 0!lice Coc~plex) had two etoriea nnd windowe lacinq the sinqle-family homes within 75 leet. He pnseed ou* a brochuro ot that project. Frenk Bereznay, 529 Cardift~ stated he hed been eelected to sunnnarize the residents' c~~ncerns. He steted lie end three other ownera hAVe requeated n continudnce af thia public heering. He stnted the property ownere are oppoged to the rezoninq of the propartyt that their homea are 18~0 to 2000 e~quare feet in eize and are ell on large lota and the developer is prapoeing a munber o! 475-aqunre foot unite in thie comp?.ex and that eize unit edjacent to their larger homee would meke a aharp contraot. He etated the homeownera feel c~ndominiwns wAUlc2 be better because they would be larger, less denee, nnd blend in better with existing ho~aes. He referred to the elide displayed ehowing the propoaed project ~nd noted 222 of the 274 (or 80~) units are below minimum xequireaentt tiint 13 0! the units are within the 150-toot setbeck and are ver.y close to the residences and even th~ugh ther.e are no windows, the reaidente will be looki.nq et a solid wall; and that ti~ere will Y~e a patio facinq hie proprrty and the entrance ta his house• He pointed aut the etaFf repart did identify that situation even though the petitioner had indicated thet was not the caae and ho hae a~ letter ~zaon the develop9r indicatinq ther~ wauld be no window, daors or patioa facinq einqle-~emily hoc-es. Mr. Bereznay etated the reaidente feel there is no need for thie kind of 8ensity and they would lik~e to ::.ee thd eecand stary unite removed which would be 17 unita or n 6.2+~ reduction. He added the 8-foot wall which tlle petition~r aqreed to build ia very iwportant to the residentst that the existinq fence is 53" meesured from the higheet side and is very 9asy to jwnp over nnd d~es not offer any noiae nbetement, aecurity or privacy. Mr. Berezn~sy sknted they are concerned about Craffic becauae there is already a problem and also the fact that the traffic will not be able to make turns on Lincoln to qo to the 57 Freeway. He stated it ia possible all tra~fia from this complex w1L1 uae Rio Vista to qet to the intersection. He stated they are a18o conce.r.ne8 abo~.it rodants ahen the 89velopment begins an~ asked that the entire bree bg treated to prenent tha yophers and ground squirrels from migrntinq int4 the reaidential aree preaentinq a heal.th hazard. ,~ 82-58? M=N11T;8~ AA11-HELM CITY PIrAN1iINCi ~=dtMI88I0N, NO~MIHlR lr 1992 H~ ~tst~d Fh• r~sident~ er~ •l~o cona~rned at~out •tcurity and without Che e-loot l~nc~ ~nyons aould qo ov~r th• •xi~tinQ wallt and thet Chey er. oonoerned about t1~~ 13 bsohelor unit~ adjacant to th~ •inql~-laaily r~~ideno~• and the n~' -~ that could be qen~rated !or th~ elderly and retirnd p~opl~ in the n~ic, ..ood. He etat~d landsaapinq aould noi provida e bu~t~r. Ed Csr~on, 2723 Purikan,l-nsh~im, stated t.~e proposed rollsr rink onaQ:n~ ~Qte was not approved• He notwd petio• ers proposed in tl~• 20' ~pa~e •~~ thA ~iciql~• lemily residsnca~ xith larqe window~, etc. He steted they are opposed to the proposad d~neity. Hd rel~rr~d to e patition aiqnee by 50 residents aaroea Rio Vieta Nho are oppooecl. f9ecretery tsn't sure whather or not t.~e petition wRS nctually subesitted to Com~ais~io-i). He stat~d he lelt carj~ort^ are visibla littex p~aces whethar they ax~ ~or apertments or condomi n i uins . Mr. Ed Jibl ite, 2719 Puritan, ]~naheim, st~ted the letter trom the dev~lopex vreo recaived th~ iame dey thaY got the nutice trom the City enG they only had gour dnyr. to prepnr~ eny c~~nments. ConcRrninq ths landsca~inq, he stated the devalapes~ haQ originnlly propo~ad 8ucalyptus tr~es, wfiich the residanta objseted to, but Aid egree to provide whetever landsceping ~hroveditortthi.s denired. Concerning the reterence to the o!lice building epp aite, Mr. J iblits expleinec! that would }~ave been on2y one building oriented north and south . Mr. Jiblits ra~err~d to wall air conditioners Nhich would be in the 13 unit4 cloee to t~enoiee~an8 he did n t/think enrecfo~tttence would help~thet75 decibel~ o situeti~n very much. Mr. JibllteQTgae8lntOzangeeC untycisctheeapertmentr~ott-Plexes^eurroundinqgCelt crime rate State Ful lerton nnd those are bachelor apartmnnts. Dennia Brovm~ 525 Cerditt, atAted he supports the objections expres~ed, but his main concern ie the carparte that ad~oin thai~t;rwillncreatetattunn lould be enclosefl on three eides• QNle tuning theiravehicles, etc., would affact effect and the noiee trom pe p their tract. John Henn ig, 2707 B. Puritan, Anaheim etated even thauqh the two-atory units nre forty leet lraa~ the property line, the lov-er story is aithin 20 feet and there are patios and walkway~ pratruding into thAt 2~ leet and that doesn't pro~•{~s ~auch of a bulfert and ulso thexa are stairways on each enQ nnd sl~o a balcony wtsich looks ovRr inta theic Uack yarda. Reqard.tng the propoeed ot~ice building, Mr. Hanniq etat~d the clo~est building to his paroperty wae over 75 2eet, but that o!lices do clome at 5 p.m. 82-583 MINUT38~ ANAHSI4y CITY PL~INNINCi C01~9M[ISSION ~ N0~'J8M88R 1 r 1982 ~~ ~us~A etated they did not pur~u~ oondaniniuma bncaus~ th~sy w~uld not be linancislly l~asibls bsceus~ landar~ sre not o!lerinq :30-y~~r fixod rata uiortqeqea~ thet thsy wi.ll be addinq an epartmant compl~x to the An,~heim ccnnmunity which aill renuin a• apartment• beaeuse it could not meet oondaa~initun stendsrds and could not be oonv~rtadt snd thnt sa~allectuande aill be th~ way of reeidential unit~ in ths tuture, but they are compa provide more elticient spacet thet ever. tho~oved with emallartunl.t• thnn th~Y stendard, five other pr~ject• have been epp are propoeinqt thnt only 1/3 0! tha unit.~ proposed within 150 leet o! sinqla-lAmily homss are two~!ltOx~' unitat that thoy ar• ewara there are openinqs toward Mr. Bereznay'e property and ere working with the nrchitect to provida eo~cR acreeninq eo there will be no u~+e~nings fecing hie praperty. Concarning treftic, he explained the Tra!!ic Engineer did rsvlew the plan end had no problem wlth the plant that Lincol~- Yvenue is intended tc+ ~en~ woulA accees nnd riqht turn in and out ia the onl wsy the Tra!!ic Depa nllow the desiqn. Mr. Hueee eteted they will take cara of the rodent concern. Regnrding aecurity, he edded th~y were told by the Planning staff that they could not have a gated community. Concerning landsceping, he statad he hnd proposad t~etter landecapinq Rtrictly !or vieual purposes. trut they will put up the H-foot wall to contral noise• He stateunitsya dTeatiosein thetZO-Poot bu~ter~strip esclonqbas thehmainthe etorage P building wall was at 20 leet. He stated he thouqht the 8-!00! wall will teke care of noise from the nir cnnditionersi that they hav~ retainRd the lirm of JJ Vnn Haoten and Aseocintea, to do a eound study o!E the 57 Freeaay and Lincoln Avenue and they will have the~a address the einqle-family residencee elea. He atnted they intend to retain ownershipt thet their c~mpany ie a wholly-owneai~u~eference~sflromtthe Fenants andidonotLintendnto havewill require c undeeiYable persons livinq in thene units. Mr. Buese atated they will enclose the t•wo end walls of the carport on Puri.tan. THB PUBLIC HBARINt; WA$ CL088D. Com[aisaioner Herbst stated the previoue approvals far the reduced size of unita were permitted !or 25~ of the unita~ and their request fa for 28! of tha uni~ts. He stiated the design of thi8 project has not taken the sinqle-fan~i-lY reaidences into coneideration at all and would impact the area even with the driveweys and screeninqt and tne Q'to°t ~all wc~ul~ help, but the vehicles startinq and leavinq at 4 or 5 a.m• would be an annoyanc$. He addedr~icularly thouqht the projec~ could be redesiqned to protect the reaidents, pa the units backinq up to the exiating homes• Ho s?~~~d he thought there would be a considerable gradinq problem. ...~,..~.~.,... ..~r. _.,.. .w.._~_.~.,~.~,.,.~.~*'"~'~ - - --~-- -- - - ..,,r.~.~-~:x.~'.~' --^"._ MlTNUT88, 11N1WaIM CITY PLl-NNINO COMMI88ION, NdVIl~IBRR 1, 1982 82-58~ Ji~a Dalquist, ~ngineer, stetad th~re is no drainAqe problsm~ that khe praperty vrill drein eo tha Neat~rly portion o! th• •ita and d 1~charg• into sn underqrounA etorat arain in ths •tate riqht-ot-weyl and th4t the eit~ will bR essentia).ly th~ sam~ level as t?~e ~d joining reeidentiel eraa~. Mr. Bue~e r*.ated h~ beli~ved tl.~y have taken the eingla-lamily homes into con~iderstion xnd oo~aplied with ti~a 20-loot lnndeaaped dree requirement. Comnaiseioner Herbst stated there nre walkweya, etc~ i,n that 20-loot nrsa. Mr. Buaea responded thara will be a eubstent iel emount o~ lnndocapinq in that nrea and he hed underatood lroen etett that certein nctivities would b~ permitted within that area. Commisei~nar La Claire auqqested relocating the bachelor uni.ta on the lett to the treeway side o! the project. Mr~ Buaee reeponded there wae e problem oreatinq acceas for emerqency vehlcles with that deaign. Commiesi~ner lCing ateted he hoped the developer can make eome adjustmenta so the project aan be developed beceune young aouplee and ~he elderly on lixed income who cannot a!lord to purchaee a home need houeing and apartmente are definitely needed. Mr. Buase atated they hopo to be able to rent thounits et n lower rental rate, poaeibly l~335 for e bachelor unit, up to ~500 tor a 2-bedre,~m unit. Commissioner La Cleire asked i~ tho 8our~d Enginc+er had done any dtudiea to determine i! a 2-story unit would block any o! the noiBe troa~ the lreeway. Mr. Busee etated they do have 'ouna repo.rts and basically the 80 units at the intereection of Lincoln nnd the freewey will have to be conditioned for sound. He explained that ie a freewey of!-ramp and ie hiqnez and there ie not a noise problem. Coannissioner La Claire atated ehe un8eratande the neighbors' concerns abou~ havi~g apartmenta near thnir ho~nes but it hasn'tbeen tha experience that there ie a crime problem, especinlly when ~hey are located in the betcer nreas. Commissionar Herbet indiceted concern about the nua~ber o~ bachelor unita and stated he has not obligation ro apertments on thie aite, but doea object to the encrnachment on the neighbozat however, faltthat could be corrected. He etated he does not ob~ect to smeller units, but telt this could eet a precedent. Commissioner La Claire stated aha ha~ no objection to the roadway ~nd open carporta becnuse there ta a bufler and an 8°foot wall, but she rrould be concernen ab^~it the bachelor units on the left. Cormalaeioner Buehore etated there are alxernativee and they couid still qe~ the ~leneity. ~ F ~ ~ MIN~T1tB, liWAH3IM CITY PL71t~iNINfi COW~1I88ION, NOV1QlHSR 1, 1982 62-585 Comm~~aioner H~rbat ~tat~d open carport~ haw be~n alloa~d in npartmsnts all ov~r tha Clty and Ccx~i~~ion~r Le Clei.re ~t~ted it he• baen h~r expsrisnce thet c.axpnrt• e~r• b~ttsr than garaqat in s~,artment coa~pl~xss because th~re ia no aoc~aaulation o! tresh ~nd p~opl• do park in carport~. Mr. Husse rtatect they rrould beqin oonstrvation v~ry quickly atter epproval, ~robsbly sometirtce in th• middle o! D~caniber. Commissioner Bushore statad ha io concerned about all the dumping that is qoinq on on that prop~rty noM and euqgssted a conetruction l~nce b~ inatallec! immadiately. Mr. 8usae esked tl~at the Commission act on th~a pro ject sub ject t~ the reductien o! baahc~lor untts to 25t end Commisaioner Hsrbet stated he aould prslar to ~ea the revised plana belore they qo to Council, painting out the petitioner was mede aware ot the Plenninq Commieeion's policy. ACTION: Commisaior~er Herbnt o!lered e moLion, secar-ded by Coaimiseioner Boues and MOTION CARRIED (Commies~~.~nez McBurney abaent), thet consideretion of the aforsmmn~ioned mntt~r be~ coritinued to the regulnrly-scheduled maeting o!' Novemb~r 15, 1982, ,st tha reqt~eat o! the petitioner . REC888 : 5 s 30 p.nT. RECONVSN~: 5:~5 p.m. Commissioner Herbet :lett the meeting and did not return. IT~NI NO. 9. EIR NSGATIVE DECLARJ-T.LON AND VJ.RIANCE N0. 3300 PUBLIC HB~-RING. OWNERs WILLIAM J. CLl-R1C, 2751 W. : acilic Coast Hiqhway, Newport Beach, CA 92663. AGENT: DBNNIS BOI~SINGBR, 2025 W. Ccaaeonwealth Avenue "C", Fullerton, CA 92633. Proper.ty described as a rectangula~rly-ahaped paxcel of land consieL-inq of epproxirtu~tely 3.7 acrea locetod et the northweat corner of PaLa I.~ne and Palm Way, havinq ~ fzontaqe of approximately 430 feet on the north aide of Falm Lane and a fr~ntac,~e of 380 feet oa ~he weat side of Palm Way and further described ae 1231 Palm Way. Waivers o~s a) minimum buildinq aite area, b) n-aximum atructural heiqht, c) minimum number end type ot parkinq apnces to conetruct a 132-unit npartmont con-plex. There was no one indic~ting their presence in opposition to subject request and nl.though the eteff report wns not read, it is re~erred to and n~de a part of the minutes. Dennis Aolainger, aqenr, explained thie praperty was in the April 1982, lire and wi 11 be developed ~s a new pra ject with more moSern facilitiee t and that the requeated waivers ~re mini~aal. THE PLTBLIC ~RING WAS CL03ED. ez-sa6 MINII'1'EB, l1NAN3IM CITY PL1-NNIN~1 COMMZ88ION, NOVEMIB~R 1, 198Z Coanma~sionar La Clsirs •tat~d the Caaaission i~ concerned ebout parkinq. Mr. Bol~ing~r reopondad he 1• requ~stinq s 3• v-aiv~r and the only way to add moxe parkinq epaces v-ould ba to r~Quce the number o! units. CommisRioner Hu~hor• etated thera wes e tremendous parking problam belore tha lire in thnt ar~a and thia plan hae 16 more unite then was there betore, with e lese parkinq epacee and another pnrcel o~ property. Mr. Boleinqar •tat~d the proparty has been aubdividod nnd they will ba construatinq 132 units on 3.7 e~creat and thet there were lasa unit• on 7.9 ncr~s prsviouuly. Ha etated they woiild be willinq to develop a rever~e curve~ on Palm Lana and Balm Way to create parking erens in the right-ol-we~y and ad~ust kh~ cidewalks end curb to retlect parking adjacent to the street whiah would mea~n loeing aome landscaping• Commiesioner Buehore steted thnt would require a lendscapinq eetback waiver. Chnirman Fry stated the Coruniseian is concarnecl abo~it parking egpecially i~ this area. Annika Snntelahti axplained there ie no provision in thn ct~rrent Code for emall carat that the progosed perkinq ordinance reade that 'l5t small cer apaces !or the open ereas me+Y be ellowed by riqht and ehe anticipntes it will be approved. Mr. Bolninqer requeated a two-week conkinuance. ACTIONt Con~aissioner 5uahore offered e motion, seconded by Commiseloner Kinq nnd MOTION CARRIED (Coam-iesioners Herbst and McBurney ebsent), that coneideration of the aforementioned eanttar be continued to the regularly-echeduled meetinq of tvovember 15, 1982, at the r~sq+.~est o! the petitioner• ITEM N~• 10. EIR NEGATIVE DECI.ARIITION AND VARIANCE N0. 3302 PUBLIC HE!-RING. OWNERS: MICHA~L G~L1~ND~ 20221 Prsirie Strestr Chatsworth, CA 91311. AGENT: WILLIAM MFF. 20221 Prairie s~rcel,ofhland conaisting3uf• Property described es an irreqularly-aheped pn approximately 2.8 acres, having a frontaqe o! npproxin-ately 80 feet on the south e~de o! Armando Street and a frontnqe of 203 feet on the north eide ot La Mesa Avenue, havinq a au,ximum depth o~ approximately 512 leet and beinq lxated approximetely 600 leet south of the centerline ot La Paln-a Avenue and further described ae 1050 N. Armando 3treet. Waiver of minimum nwaber o! parkinq epaces to expnnd a selt-etorage facillty. There wae no ane indicatinq their preeence in opposition to aubjeot requeat and althouqh the etetf report wee not read~ it i~s referred to and ~aede a~+art o~ the minutes. William Raf!- agent, stated they are owners o! a eelf-storaqe faeility on eubject property nnd it presently has 6 parking spaces (62 required) under a variance qrdnted 5 or 6 yeare ago to a previous ormerJ and that they are pxoposinq tw~ addltional buildinqe and 69 perkinq epaces woulcl be required and 12 are proposed. MINVT~S~ 11NAHR~M CITY PL~NNINCd COMMISSI~~ NOVISl~(ASR 1, 1982 82~587 THR PUBLIC HEP-RIN(i W118 CL08ED. Dsan 9har~r, Assaclat~e Planner, esked that e aondition be added r~quirinq that ths ovm~r dsed to tha City o! Aneheim a ZO-loot Nid• wateriine saaem~nt throuqh th~ property ta the eatieteation o! tho Wat~r 8nqineerinq Department prior to ia~uance ~,t building permits. !ia noted th~ waterline i~ existinq end Mr. ftn!! agread wi.th ehat conditlon. Mr. Re!! r~lsrred to Condition No. 2 and stated they diocusaad this with (iarth Menqsa in tha Fir• Dapartm~nt and ha indiceted it they constructed e 4-hour fira wall with no openinga in that on~e lonq buildinq, divi8ing it into two buildings o! lese then 5900 equare leet each, thet would teke care of the eprinkliny requirement. Jack White, A~aietent City Attorney, ^uqqeated adding the followinq to Condition No. 2, "or otherwiee be approved by the Chiet o~ ths Fire Departimant". ACTION: Commisetoner Auahore offered a motion, suconded by Coauniesioner. King and MOTION CARRIED (Commissionera Herbet and McBurn~y ebaent), thet the A.nnhaim City Planninq Commiesion hae reviewed the proposn2 to expand a self-stor.aqe faci.lity with waiver of minimum numbnr of pnrkinq spaces on an irreqularly-ahaped parcel of land consietinq o! dppro:cimately 2.8 acreu, havl.nq a fz:atnqe o~ approximately 80 feet on the eouth side of Armnndo Street, nppraximately 600 feet eauth o! the centerline of La Palu~a Avenue, and further described as 1050 N. 1-rmnndo Streetr and does hereby approve the Neqntive Declarntion from the roquirement to prepare nn environmentel impact raport on the baeie that there would be no significant individuel or cua-ulative adverse environmental impnct due to the approval of this Neqative Decleration eince the Anaheim General Plan designatee the subjact property for general industri~l land uaea commansurnte with the propoaalt that no seneitive environmental impnctg are involved in the propuealt that the Initial Study submitted by the petitioner indicates no siqnit.icnnt individual or cumulatine adversa environmenta~l impactst and that the Neqntive Declbretion subetantiatinq the foreqaing findinqs ie on file in the City of Anaheim Planning Depnrtment. Comcais~ioner Huahore olfered Resolution No. PC82-203 and moved for it~a paseage end edoptian thnt the Anaheim City Planninq Commission does hereby ctrant variance No. 3302 on the basie that this is a reasonable uee for, thia property and the type of usa does not require very many parkinq epacea nncl subject to Interdepartmentnl Committee recammendationa. On roll call, the ~oreqoinq resolution wea passed by the following vote: AYSB: BOUAS, BU$HORB, FRX, KING~ LA ~LAIRE NOE6s NONE ASSSNT: HE1tBST, McBURNSY MINIITliB- 1W~IK CITY PT+dWNINd COM~MI88ION, NO~VlalBffiR 1. 198Z r ae. il. !I 5 . 3303 es-~ee p~=C ~~~ ~ ~g~ = J~~pH ~p gL1,~ pplit~ELLY, 815 Mlodena 9tr~st, Maheim, C~- 92801. Prop~rty ee~crLt~sd asare !e t~, 815rNorthaModenar8tx~et. land consistinq o! approxia~ately 6074 squ ~isiv~rs o! ta~ximwuNalllendiroomaaaditi~n.~ r~~r yard setback to construct a y-foot hiqh bloc Th~ro MA/ na Qhe stalf~reporthwas otk~read,~it ~s~relerr d t~ndC~dee•part and although t o~ tha ~inut~s. Ellan Ur~nnelly~ ownar, v+as preeent to enswar any queations. THS PUBLIC HSARING WA8 CL088D. It Nas noCed ths Planninq Directar or lile auth~rized repzeeentativa has deterniined that the proposed project la~ll~ within the datinition of Cateqorical ~~$tandeisCltheretore,dcateqoricelly exemptEtro~a th~nrequimement Report Guideline to prepare an EIR. PC82-204 and tnoved !or ACTION: Commi~eianer Buahore oftered R~~~olutiopl~nninq Connniesion does hereby its paesage nnd adoption that the AnaheSan Ci~y qrant Variance No. 3303 on theebao edtby~totheraproperties~in~thausametzone+ and proparty of a privileqe beinq j Y vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recomaaendationa. On roll call, the foreqoinq reaolution wns paesAd by the lollovring vote: ~YE8: BOCJAS~ BUSHOREr FRY, KING, LA CWIRE NOESs NONB ]188ENT: HBRBST r Mc8URN81! YTSM NO. 12. SIR Cl1T~('sORICa1L S~C~MPTYON-C:I+11SS 1, W?-IVER OF COOL Rfl7QUIR8ri~n'r l~Np CptIpZTIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2390 p~BLZC HEI~RING• ~g~~ p~'~I~ p~p$~~Igg~ Ip~•' 1517 North Fairviaw, Santa Ana, C1~ 92706. AGSNT: WAYN$ L. PSTBRSOt~. P.O. Box 1122, Yorba Linda, C1~ 9Z686. Froperty dascribad as an irreqularly-ehaped parcel of land consiatinq og a~pproxia-ately 2•9 aares~ 3456 Sast Oranqethorpe 1-venue (Tha Unqamblinq Ca~~no). To permit tlze on-wainarfobeminimdumwnnuaber of parkinggspaceel for qambling inatruction with It was noted thnt stat~ has recommended that eubject petition be continued in order that it can be readvertieed. ACTION: Comml.asioner La Clsire offared a motion, Beconded by Coauaiesioner lCinq and MOTION C1-RRxE~ tnu~toiLherregularlyaechedu ad meetinq o! November aubject petition be conti 15, 1982, in order tha~ it can be readnertised. ; ~ },~. ` .~ NINUT38~ 1W11HRIM CITY PLIINNYNQ COMMI88ZON, NOV~BR 1, 1982 8Z-589 I~ 13 REPOR'PS 11NU RECOMalSND11TI0N8 A. AmCL~188I!'IC7ITION N0. 80-81-18 1-ND CQNDITION111. USE PdRMIT NO. 2144 - Rwqu~eb lrom Dan L. ito~vland, for extan~lon ot tinN !or aYOperty looated at the northwest cornar o! BroaGwsy and Philadelphia Streete. 11CTION: Conuai~~ioner King o!lerad e~ation, seconded by Cotmai~~ion~r La Claire end MOTIqN C7~RRIED (Commis~ion~r Bu~hor~ ebsteininq, Comm~.~sion~rs Herk~t and McBurney absent), thet the 1-naheim Gity Plenning Coma-.i~tei.on d~~ss hnreby grant one-yeer extension~ ot time !or Reclaa~~.lication No. 80-81-18 and Conditiona]. Ua~ ParQ-it No. 2144 to expire on Now~a-b~ir 17, 1983. A. R8CL1188IE'ICIITION NO. 80-91-11 ANA CONDITIONIIL IISE PSRMIT NO. 2108 - Claritieation of uees permittad on praperty loceted et 627 Bouth Herbor Boulevard. No action n~ceseaxy. OTHER DISCUSSION A. Tha foint meatinq with City Council concerninq the propoeed pt-rkinq ardinance ~oae briePly diocuaeed, aith ~he dates of Decan~ber 6 nnd 7 b~eing ecceptabLe to the Commiseion. g. Annike 3antnlahti explsined Ran Svens o! the Anahaim City Fire Department haa eqre+~d to maka e vide+o presentatian pertaininq to the re~cent lires et the Coanriasion's morninq work aeseion on Noven~ber 15th and thnt the Cocnmise,.onera should be preeent by 9:d5 n.m. C. Chairn~d/.R Fry asked etalt to investtgate Murray'e Ticket 8ales otlic~ on Btate ~olleqe Houlavard, pointing out he did nat think any oP the work ha~ been ~iccoraplished. 71DJOURNMIt~iT: There beinq no further businese, Commi~sioner Buehore ~ ottere8 a motion seconQefl by Commissioner La Claire and MOTION CARRISD (Comtnissfonere Herbat nnd McBurney absent), that t~he n~eettnq be adjourned. The meetinq wae edjourned ~t 6:00 p.m. Rmspecttul~y submitted, ~ ~ . Edith ~,. Harri~, Secretary 1~naheim C1ty Plaaning Co~nission BLHclat 11/1/82