Loading...
PC 1984/03/05. REGUI.IIR i~3EETING UF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CqMMISSIQN REGULAR M6ETING The Cegula[ meeCin~ of the Anaheim City Planning Commisnion waA cnlled to order by Chairwoman Bouas at 10:00 a.m., March 5, 1984, in the Council Chamber, a quorum being present and tha Cummisaion reviewed plana of the itema on today's agenda. RECBSS: 11:30 a.m. RECONVENG: 1:30 ~.m. PRES~NT Chaicwoman: Bouas Commiaaioners: F3ushore, E'ry, Nerbat, King, I~a Claire AF3SEN7~ Commi.saionerss: McBurney ALSU PRESENT Annfka Santalahti Assistbnt• Director for Zoning Jack White Asaistant City Attorney Jay Titua Office Engineer Greg Hastings Assislant Planner Edith tiarri~ Planning Commission Seccetary ITEM NU. 1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT N0. 256 (PREV. APPROVEb), WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2541 PUBLIC HEARING. qWNF.RS: KAISER DEVELOPMENT CUMPANY, ATTN; CI.INTON DAVIS, P.O. Box 308, Carlsbnd, CA 9200R. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting ~f approximately 37.2 acres located at the aouthwest corner of Santa Ana Canyon Raad and Weir Canyon Road. To permit an 18-lot, planned commercial office and light industrial complex that includec a hotel, restaurant and drive-through Ei.nancial institution with waiver of maximum building height. Continued from the Plannin9 Comnission meeting of Febcuary 22, 1984. It was noted l•he petitioner has requested a two-week continuance. ACTION; Commissionec King offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fry and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner FicBUrney absent), that consideratio~ of the aforementioned matter be continued to the cegularly-bcheduled meeting of March 19, 1984, at the request of the petitioner. 84-115 3/5/84 MINUTES, ANAHE_IM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIUN ~MARCN 5, ~98_4_ __ 84-116 ITEM N0. 2. EIR N~G_AT_IVE DBCLARATION. WAIVEF. OP COUE RE UIREMBNT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMI'r N0. 2542 • PUBLIC HEARING. UWNERS; GRACE PEARL PRESTON, ET AL, P.O. Box 310, Santa Ynez, CA 9346U, MARC~u A. ~ tiEA'PRICE A. GARTNER, 34184 Coun~y I.ine, Yucaipa, CA 92399 and CARL KARCHER F.NT~RPRI5E5, INC., 1200 N. Harbar ~oulevard, Anaheim, CA 92601. Property doecribed ae A rectangulHrly-aheped parcQl of land coneisting of approximAtely 1.J acres located at the nortt~weaC corner oC Romneya UrivP nnd Nbrboc Bouleverd, 1221 North Hurbor BoulevArd (Subacu of' Anaheim). Ta expand an existing automc,~~f.le dealE~rahi~ with waiver of required sit.e screening. There was no one indicating the:r pre~~nce in oppoaition to aubject reque~t and although the ar.aff report wae not read, it i~ referred to and mr~de a part o[ the minutes. .lim Sutton, 35485 oeach Rpad, Capir~l:rano aeuct~, CaliCarniu, ~gent, explained they wo~~ld like to add 25 f~~et to their ahowcoam on the tront of the building and puir.~~d out th~y have been ~n thia locatlon for 24 years. THL•' PUB:~IC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Ac:TIGN: Commissionec King o£feced a motton, ~econded by Commissioner Fry and MUTION CARRIED (Commissionec Me[iucney absent), that the Anaheim City Planninq Commission has reviewed the pcaposal tn expand an exist.ing automobile deslership with waiver of required site screening ~n a rectangularly-shaped p~rcel of land consistiitg ot approximAtely 1.3 acres located r~t the northwest corner of Romne.ya Drive and tlarbor Baulevard and further described as .1221 North HArbor poulevard; and does hereby approve the NegaCive i~eclaration upon finding that it haa considered the Negative Declaration togpthPr wikh any comments received during ehe public ceview ~,roceas and f~r.ther finding on the basis of tlie Initial Study and any comments received that there ia no substantial evidenc~z that the pcoject will have a significant effect on the environment. Commiasioner King offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fry and MOTION CARHIEU tCommissioner McBUr.ney abaent), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant waiver of Code requirement on the basis that there are special circumskances opplicable to the propetty such as siae, shape, topography, location and aurroundings which do rrot spply to other identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict application of the 'Lonir.g Code deprives the pro~erty of pKivileges enjoyed by ~thec properties in the i.dentical zone and classificAtion in the vicinity end subject to interdepartmental Committee recummendations. Comniisaioner Kiny offered Reaolution No. PC84-44 and moved £or its passage and ~doption that the Anaheim City Planning Commissinn doeR hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2542 pursuant to A~aheim Muntcipal Code Sections 18.03.030.030 through 1.8.03.030.035 and subject to Zntecdepartmental Co~;mittee recommendations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the follnwinq vote: AYES: BOUAS, BUSNORE~ FRY~ HERBST, KING, LA CLAIRE NOES: NONE ABSENT; MCBURNEY 3/5/84 MINUTES. ANAN~IM CITY PLANNING COMMiSSION, MARCH 5, 1984 __ F34-.1.17 Commissioner LA Claire stated ahe vote~~ in favor of this weivec. bec~~uae oF the problem wirh graffiti in the Area and that normAlly she would not. vot.e for a reyuest ~;uch A6 this and that ahe would like this in thP recorda £or any future similar requests that aKe made. ITEM N0. 3. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WAI_V_ER OF CODE RE~UIREMENT ANA CONDITIONAL USC PERM1'1' N0. 2508 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: EpUITEC 8~ REAL ESTATE INVESTORS, P.O. aoX 1109, Lafayette, CA 94549. AGENT: I.AWR~NCE ~. BEI~LOMO, 18952 MacArthur ~oulevard, Suite 1U0, Irvine, CA 92715. [~roperty deocri.bed ~s a rectangulaKly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approxim~tely 18.9 acres located at the souttiwea~ cornec of pacifico Avenue an~ State College eoulevard; 1973 South State College Boulevard (Stadium Baseball Card Shoppe). To permit ~ retail basebal.l cacd ehop ir~ the ML Zone with waivec of minimum number of ~~arkiny apaces. Ther.e w~s no one indicating theic presence in opposition to subjcct request and althouqh the atafF report was not read, it ia referred to and made a part of the minukes. Lawrence eellomo, agent, referred to Pdragraph 3 of the staff re~ort• which indicates this buainess license was is~ued on March 8, 1983, prior to zoniny Division appxoval, and stated that was not intentional. He also referred to other paragraphs which indicate permits have been issued for retafl sales for other propertieE in the area and in the same zone. Mr. Bellomo atated this use is not a t)rpic~l retail place of business because basebali card collectors would walk in and look around and ask for a particular card and if it is not there, they would leave right away and not br.owse like a per~on would in a furniture store, etc. He atated if there would be four people in the store at any one ti.me, it would be a lot. He pointed out Chis is across from the Anaheim Stadium and thought it would certainly be compatible with and is similar to other uses in the area. He stated they do not think traffic congestion would be a problem and did not think any type of expansion would Gause any additional undue burden on the industrial zone. THE PU~LIC HEARING WAS CLOSEU. Commissioner ~ush~re pointed out Paragraph 6 refers to a conditional use permit to permit retail sales of furnituce at 1200 E. Katella Avenue and indicates it is within the same industcial cumplex but it i» a different street and indicated if that is on subject property, it should be terminated. I~ was later determined by staff that this was a mappiny error and that that conditional use permit should not be termfnated. The nature af the complaint wAS diacussed, with Greg Hastings noting the complaint was the result of an action taken by the Code Enforcement Officer after receiving a complaint and that the complaint pertained to retail salea in the industrial area. 3/5/84 MTNUTES, ANAHEIM ~ITY PLANNING CdMMISSION, MAKCH 5, 1984 a4-118 Mr. 6ellomo atated they were notifiad five mo~th~ Aft.er thPy leased the property that a pecmit waa necee~acy and they werE nat aware of any probleme prior to thet. Reapanding to Chaicwomnn ~ou~s, Mr. Ballomo stated in addition to the baaeball ca[de, they ~ell novelty it~m~ such ~s bannera, iihirta, etc. ACTIUN: C:ommiRaioner King oftered a m~tion, seconded by Commis~ioner Fry and MOTIUN CARRIED (Commis~ioner Mc~urney ab~ent), thnt the Anahelm City Planning Commiesion ha~ reviewea the pcor~osA1 to permit b reCail ba~eball cnrd ahop in khe ML (Induetrial, Limited) Zone with waiver of minimum num~er of ~arking apacea nn a cectangu'~~[ly-sh~ped pArcel oE land consisting af approximAtely 1d.9 <~c:ea located at the sou[hwest corner aE Pacitico Avenue and State College Bo~levacd and furl•Iier deacr.ibed as 1973 StaCe Callege Houlevardt and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has conaidered the Negar.ive Declatation together with any comments received during the public review pcocess and further finding on the basis af. the Initial Skudy and any commenCs received that there is no ~ubal•antial evidence that ths project will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner Kiny offered a mntion, seconded by Commissioner Ery and MOTION CARRI~U lCommissioner McBucney absei~t), tt~at the Anaheim City Planning Commission doea hereby grant waiver ot Code requirement on the basis that the parking waiver will no~ cauoe an increase in traffic congestion in the irnmediate vicinity nor adversely atfect any adjoininy land us~s and granting of thE parking waivec under the aonditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, hcalth, safety and ~enEral welfare c~f the citizeno of the City of Anaheim. Commiasioner King nifered Resolution P~n. PC84-~45 and moved for its passage ~nd adoptio~ that the Anaheim City Planning Commission daes hereby grant Conditfonal Use Permit No. 2508 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code 5ections 18.03.03U.030 ~hrough 18.03.030.035 and subject to Interdepartmental Committee rECOmmendations. On roll call, the Eoregoing resolution wa°: passed by the fnllowing vote: AYES: BOUAS, BUSHORE, FRY, HERBS'P, KING, LA CLAIRE NOES: NUNE ABSENT: MCBURNEY Mr. Dellomo re£erred to the conditions and asked if City ~aff would inspect the property again to make bure they have complied. Annika Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning- explained the only condition they would have to meet is Number 2 requiring payment of traffic signal assessment fees which are base~ on the aquare footage of the building and that the firs~t condition wi.ll nok apply unti2 interior ct~anges are made to the property. 3/5/84 'INUTES~ ~NANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMI3SI.ON, MARCN 5y .19a4 81-119 IT~M N0. 4. EIR C~TEGORiC~L ~XEMPTIQN-CG~SS 11 AND VARIAN(;E N0. 3383 PUB~IC HEARING. UWNBRS: KENT I~~ND COMPANY, 10801 National ~oulevard, LoA Angele~, CA 90064. AGENT: MOTxVATIUN~L SYSTEMS, INC.~ 823 Wpat 23rd ~treet, National City, C~ y2050. Property described as an irrogulerly-ahapad parcel ot land ~onaieting of appr~ximat~ly 14.4 acrea, having a fronteqe of appcoximately 454 Eeet on the weaC eide of Weir Cnnyon Road, ApproximAtely 75 Eeet north oE the centerline af Santa Ann Canyon Road. Wai~ers of maximum ~quUre Eootage and maximum height to permiC a temparary Ec~eeatanding sign. There was no one indicating th~ir presqnce in op~oait:on to subject reguest and although the staff report wa» not rQad, it is reEerred to and made a part of the minutes. Bob 8ennett, Mekivatiana.l SyRtems, agent, was present to answer any queationa. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CL05EU. CommissionPr Herbst ~sked if thia siyn would be i~~ violation of the Sceni.c Corridor Overloy Ordin~nce. Annika SAntalehti, Aasiatant Director for Zoning, reoponded it would not reblly be in violation because an oEf-site tract sign is permissible at this location And the veri~~nce ia required because of the height And equare fookage and it is not considered a bill.board and :.~ould bP there by riyht if it was smallec. Cotnmissioner Ciushare stated he would go along wilh this request for this sign in this particular location with the understanding that Any additional signs on th~ Bauer Ranch wou.ld have proper pecmits and that there would be no additional signo placed on that property as projects are sold and also it would be granted for a timc period of one year and if aomeone does come in and makes a similac request with the excuse that they want a sign l~ke thi~ one, this pe~mit will be terminated. He stated he could eupport it becauae it is not excessive for the size of the enti.re project. It was noted the Planning Director or hia authorized r.epresentative has determi,ned that thp propoeed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptiona, Class 11, as defined in the State Environmental Impact• Report GuidelineB and is, therefore, categorically exempt €rom the requirement to prep~re an EIR. ACTTOP:; Commissioner La Claire offeced Reeolution No. PC84-46 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commissi.on does hereby 9rant Variance No. 33b3 for ~ period of one year on the ba~is that it is tsmporary and that there are special circumstances applicable to the praperty such as size, shape, topography, locatior~ and surroundings which do not apply to othec identically zoned property in the same vicinityi and that atrict application of the 2oning Code deprives the property of privileges en;~yed by other pro.~erties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity and subject to Interdepattmental Committee recommendations. Jack White, Assistant City Attorney, explained Code Section 18.05.072 provides that extenaions of kime are to be approv~d by motion or reao].utions of the 3/5/84 MINUTES, AN~NEIM CITY pLANNING_ C~MMiS$IUN. MARCH 5~ 1984 84-120 City Council and auggeated the wocding of the propoaed condition of thia reaolution pcovide that subject tract sign shall be permitted on a temporary basis, not to exceed one yeAC from deto of conatruction, unleas an addition~l extension of time is upproved by the r.ity Council pureuant to Section 1~.05.072 oE ttie Anaheim Municipal Codet provided, however, that if the initial sale of all units or lote in the E~sl• Hilla Planned Comm~nity is c~mPlet~d ducing any of thQ permitted time peciods, subject tract eiqn shall be removed. Cott+missionQr Lr Claire stated thAt conditton nhould be included in the resolution. Oh roll call, th~ toregoing ceaolution was paBSed by the fo.ilowiny vote: AYES: pOUAS~ BUSHO~E, FRY, HER~ST, ~ING~ I.A CLAIkE NOES; NONE A95ENT: MCBURNEY ITEM N0. 5 ..~..._.-.___~. R~PORTS ANU RFCUMMENDATIOtiS: A. VARIANCE N0. 2194,- Request from Herbert Meyers, for a'retroactive" ex~ension of time Por Vaciance No. 2194, ~,roperty located at 1511 and 1521 ~lorth Miller Street. ACTION: Commisaioner Kii~g offered a motion, secondt~d by Commissioner Ga C:laire and MOTION CARRIED (~ommissioner McBurney abaEnt), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant a two-yec+r retroactive extension of time for Variance Nu. 2194 to expire August 20, 1986. B. ORANGE COUNZ'Y FLOOD CUNTROL DIS'TRICT - Reyuest from Orange County Flood C~ntrol Districk to determine conformity with the City of Anaheim General Plan, Parcel A: approximately 1.7 acres located on the souCt~ side of Frontera Street, appcoximately 820 feet west of the centerline of Glasse]1 Street, Paccel 9: approximately 2.2 acres located on the south side of Frontera Street, approximately 550 feet west of. the centerline of Gla5se11 Street. ACTIUN: Commissioner King offered a motior~, ~econded by Commissiunec La Claire and MOTION CARRIED lCommissioner McBurney Tbsent), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby adopt and transmit to the Orange County Flood Control District a finding that the disposi.tion and proposed use of the subject parcels is ia confocmance with the City of Anaheim General Plan. ADJOURNMEt~T: There Leing no further business, Commissioner Fry offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner King and MUTION CAP.RIED (Commissioner McBurney absent), that the meeting be adjourned. The meeting was adjourned at 1:50 p.m. Respectf~lly submitted, ; . ~ . G~~-~-- Er]ith L. Harris, Secretary Anaheim City Planning commissi~ ~LH:lm 0035m 3/5/84 ~ ,~ w ~