PC 1984/06/11RF•GULAR MEETING OF TNE ANAH~IM C ITY PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING The ce9ul.ar. maeting of t he Anahe~m City P1.anning
Commisgton w~s called tc7 ocdfr. by Chatr woman Bouae at
1.0:0~ a.m., June l.l- I984r in the Counctl Chamb~r., a
quor~m b~{.ng preaent a nd the Commieatan r.PVtewed pl.ans oF
the ttems on today's ag ~nda.
RECESS: 11:30 a.m.
FtECONVGNE: ].:30 p.m.
PRESBN'1'
ABSL•'NT
ALSO PRESEN'~
Chairwoman: Bouas
Commissionc~rs: Buaho~ e, Fr.y, Her.bst, Kingr Mc eurneyr
Commisatonera: La Cla ir.e
Anni.ka Santal.ahti
.:ack Whtte
Joel Fick
Paul Singec
Jay Ttt~s
Jay Tashiro
Grey Hastings
Edtth Hacris
As~tstant Di.~~ctor. ~oc 7,oning
Assistant Ct ty Attor.ney
AsaLSta~t Di cectoc for. Planning
T~~f. ftc Engf neer.
Oftice Eng~neer
pssoctate Planner
Assistant P1 enner
Plann{.n~d Commtasion Seccatar.y
ITEM NOS. 1~ 2 AND 3 W~RE CQNSIDBRED TOG E THER.
:L~M Nv. 1. EIR N~GATT
(RFADVERTISED~
AND GENERAL PLAN A
. 1.9 3
PUBLIC HE1+kING. OWNERS: WC5 INTERNATIONAL, Ais~N~escrObed a~At~s~ 3200 E.
Pc~nteru Stceet, Anaheim, CA 92806. PzopeKtY af appro ximately 2.8 acKes
rectanqularly-shaped parcel of land cons i.~ting
(Patcel A? U.9 acre8 ~ theYcenterline} of~Glasse~luStr.e~tthan rV (parcel~B~e;a9
and l.OpO feet east of
acce (nwner initi.ated) ~f~GlasselltStreethe Ri.vec~ide Fteeway and 2000 fee
easr oE the centerli~ne
To change the current Gen~~aeLOPeoWnercto expandtthe exi8ting$C':~ouccerfal.~
It {8 the intent of the A P7• yi~ ~y tk~e City's inten tion to brtng the l.and
r.~cover.y and recycling c.nC
~.,-~ ~.,~; ~~ tiF•~~ Etudy ar.ea inro confo~mance w~.th the
use destyn+atfnn ~;t a 1, •-~.
exist3.ng zoning and land use.
~:~:~~c.i;~ued from Apcil 16 and 30, 1984, and May 1~, 1.984.
-333- 6-11-04
MINU7'ES ANAHEIM CITY FI.ANNING COMMISSION, June 1l~_ 1904 84~334
1TEM N0. Z. ~IR NEGATIV6 QECLARATION, 12ECLASSIFICATION NQ. 83^84-15
(ItEAllVERTISED) ANU CITY COUNCIL R~VIE;W OP' ltECt~A&SI~ICATION
PUIi4IC HEARING. OW~~RS: WCS INTF.Rt3ATIONAG~ ATTN: GEARGE ADAMS~ 3200 E.
Franc~ra Slr.eet, Anah~im, CA 92806. Proper.ty descr.ibecl As a
r.ectonyutar.ly-ahaped parcel. of ].and consl.;tiny of approxi.ma~ely ].85 acces,
6tr.eet, beir~g located approximately 2,000 feet eAat of the centerltne of
G1aB~el.l. Skr.eeC.
RS-A-43,ODU (Resid~ntial, Agr.icultur.al) Zone to the ML (IndustrtHl, L{mited)
2one to expand a recour.ce recover.y and cecycling operatlon includ{ng an
automobile diamantling businer~a witt~ wholesale and c~h.~i.l sa~es of auto parts.
Continued fcorn Apri1 1G and 30, 1984, and May l4, ]984.
1'PE:M NU. 3. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WAIVE^ OF CUDE REQUIftEM~NT AND
CUNDITIONAL USE PERMIT NU. 2525 (READVERTISEU) AND CITY COUNCII. REVIEW OF CUP
PUBLIC IiEARING. OWNERS: tiULLY W. DAVIDSUN, P.O. Box 325, Eiolua]oa, HI 96725
and WC5 IN'PERNATIUNAL, 31U0 E. Frontera Str.eek, An~~he~.m, CA 92806. AGENT:
ORANGE~ CUUN7'Y STEEL/SALVAGE, INC., 3"l0(1 Fronter.a .~r.eet, Anaheim, CA 92806 end
GEORGE AUAMS, 3200 E. Fronter.a Str.eet, Anaheim, CA 928U6. Pr.oper.ty descxibed
as ai~ i.cregular.?.y-shaped ~~~:.rcel of land corisisttny of approximately 8.2 acces,
32U0 East E~'r.~nte~a Str.eet (Orange ~:o~inty Steel Salv~ge).
Continued fram Aprtl l.6 and 3Q, 198A, and May 14, 1984.
Ther.e war~ no one tndtcating their. pr.esenc~ in oppo~ition tu subject r.equests
and although the r:taff r.Nports wer.e not read, they are r.efer.red to and made a
par.t of the minutes.
Jael Etck, Assistant Di.rector tor Zoning, explatned this matter. was continued
ftom the May 14th meeting tr~ order for. the applicant to submit a aotls repart
and also to comment on th~~ perculattur~; and chose studies have bccn ~ubmitted.
Phfl.ip Anl•.hony, 15842 Mil.lanova Circle, Westminstec, CA., explatned the aotls
and septic tank system tests requested by thP Cammission wer.e completed and
the reports have been submitted; that the tests were con~~cted by
ptofeB.~tnnal~ and it is clear that there is an old, but pcobably very
over-s.ized septfc system in place whtch, i.n the expeck's assessmenk, is in
Eine wockir-g conditton; and that the soil teats were done by t*enching .tn
several. l.ocations, as the map shows, an.] after going through the firct foot or.
ta~ of fill d~rt brought tn for level'- ~ purposes, they reached natucal. sand
at about the 2-Foot leyel. He added this conftcros moce objecti.vely perhaps
that the tests the petitioner conducted himseii before actually purchasing the
ptoperty were adequate and proves tt~at there is tndeed natur.dl soil the~e, and
even thougt: the property is nhxt to the ol.d county landitll, it does not
appea~ to be a pazt of thr l.andfill.
THE PUBLIC HEAFcING W'='; CLOSED.
Commissioner Herbst stated I~e h~.d no qucsti~ns and thought rhe appltcant had
complied with w1~dt the Co,~unission asked for. He stated he thought the t.ests
6/11/84
MIN_UTF.5 _ ANAH~IM_ CI7'Y _P__Ln_NNING_ C_~~MMISSION, June l l., 1984 84-335
wece satisEactoKy for thi~ type use, but if there i.s any type oi bi~ilding or
permanent structuce:~ pcopoaed tn the future, he would want Co see fucther.
testct.
Mr. Anthony stated ti~e applirant wauld ahr~ol.utel.y agr.ee ~ond Lhese testa wece
simply to pr.ove the abae.ico of ]aniEill mat~r.i.al and obvioualy for. any
building activity, they wnuld expect ku go through the normal soils tests
cQqutced of A builc]ing.
Commiestonec McFiurney stateJ I~ic mai.n cuncer.n also was that if ther.e are any
structures to b~ put on the property tn the future, he would want to be auce
more expanded sotls tests wece done.
Mc. Anthony atated thte aFplication did tnclude these two new lots a~ part of
the present operation Eor aurface use only, and thcre ta iio requesC at this
t~me for. any pecmanent str.uctuces ~n the new tota.
Commisst~~n~r tierbst stated the app.licant is awar.e Qf what the Planning
Comtn.~saton thinks of a per.aon who goes ahead and does tt~e wor.k ~nd then comes
in for approval and added he would not want to see t.hts hap~en ac~atn. tie
stated tf the soils tests had not come out the way they dtd, the applicant
could have found himself tn ver.y a~ci.ous tr.ouble.
Mr.. Anthony sCated they woul.d ayr.ee and expl~ined they have been working wi.th
the Planning Deparrment staff v~ry har.d f.or. over a year to try to submtt the
application in a completed form ~efor.e anythiny ~tgniftcant was done on the
pr.operty.
Chatrwoman Bouas re-~pened t'-~ public hear.ing~ for Ic:ms 2 and 3.
Mc. Anthony expl.ained ttie second appl.ication ta far a zone change to zone the
pr~perty for industr.ial uses consi.~tent witt~ the existing zoning wher.e the
current oper.atton is in progr.ess. He stated they feel. thts proper.ty is vecy
logically pact of the industria~. acea. He stated any speciftc permanent kype
structures would be ttie subject of another appl.tcati.on.
h{c. Antt~ony expl.ained r.he third applicatton is tur a use ~.~e~mtt basical.ly to
expand the existing aperation onto these two l.ots. He stated these two new
lol-s have been purchased for. two years and will be used to .lay out the
opecation more efficiently which will help control the efficiency and
appear.ance of the operation and provide a moce well.-designed, -`f-str.eet
parking area.
THE PUBLIC HEARINGS WERE CLOSED EOR ITEMS 2 AND 3.
Commissioner Herbst stated members uE the Commis.,ion have noticed wrecked cars
packed on Fcontera; that he unaerstands there ar.e people who drive theic
vehic:les there and leave ~hem; howNVer, the Poli.ce can remove them tn 72 hours
and he und~•rstands the applicant has been doing that, but some of the cars
have been there for quite some time and this p~operty is ~ight off the freeway.
Mr. Anthony stated the appli.cant cannot ever touch the cars until after they
have been throuqh the Po~.ice Department, and they do txy to immedtately infozr,,
6/11/64
MINUTES ANAHEIM CiTY PGANt~iNG COMMIS~IO~ June 11, 1984 84-336
the Police becauae it in a~cobl.em for. the ~ppltrAnt, a~ well aa Eor the
Ctty. Fie stuted in moat case~ ttioae caca cotne back to khe facility And Are
ev~ntually cecycl.ed, hut there s a problem because peopl.e da abandor cAr.a
ther.e and unfortunately many times they appear to be stolen vehictes. He
atated the applicant i.s very anxioua to work with the City to impr.ove thtA
situation And, in ~act, the apE~licant has sev~r.al timea sugyesked mAking that
loc~tion an imp-und yard for. the City's convcnience »o thAt cars could be
brnught thece on a~ne-tr.ip situatton. He Added he t~elieved the Po1i.r.e haa to
st~cc, the vehiclea foc 30 daya befor.e they can autho~ize them to be y~lvaged.
Commissioner Herbsr aLated ther.e has been a~roblem in ather wr.eckiny yacds
wher.e the vehicles are stacked higl~er Chan the f.ence and stnce thta tocatton
is coneideced an entcance to the City o~ Anatieim, he thouyht that would be
delrimental.. He stated the appl.icant ha3 done a fine job to date, t~ut they
are reAChin,y the top now.
Mr.. Anthony stated ~hey r.eal.ize the sttuation and in the past, parrtculArly
the ptle of shredded mater.fal, hac become a pr,oblem bec~u~e of the
over.crowding proul.em and irregular.ities with fi.ndtr~g the custom~r, to ship ko,
but ~hey a~e dedlcated l•o a pol.icy and pcocedur.e to tr.y and keen thAt down,
and Y.e thouyhl• the additional space wilt make tt ir~uch more feasible for the
applicant to do that on a moce conststenC basts.
ACTIUN UN ~TEM NU. 1~ ~ommisstoner Herbst offer.ed a mutio~, seconded by
commisstoner Ktng and MOTIUN CARRIED (Commisatoner. Ga Claire absent) that the
Anaheim City Pl.anning Commissi~n has r.eviEwed t~,e proposal to change the
cutr.ent Genecal Open Space designation of the General Plan ~o Genera]
'ndustcial un a r.ectangul.arl.y-st~apeU parce.l of ]and consiating of.
approxi.matel.y 'l.ti acres (Por.ticn A) .9 acres (City inittated) ]ocated south of
the R~vecside Freeway and appcoximately 10U0 feet east of the centerl.ine of
Glassel.l St~eet and (Portion B) 7..9 acr.es (Owner. initiated) Iocated south of
the River.side Freeway and approxima~ely 2~00 feet east of the centerli.ne of
Glassel.l. Stceet; and does hereby appcove the Negative Dec:laration upon findi.ng
that it has conEidered the Negative '~ecl.ar.ation togett~er. wi.th anj cort;ments
ceceived during the publtc Gevtew proceas and fuKther. ftnding on the basis ~f
khe Initial Study and any comments c~ceived that thece fs no substantial
Nvidence that the project will. have a significant effect on the envir.onment.
Commissioner Herbst offered Resolut.ion No. YC84-1~04 and moved for its passage
and adoption th%+t the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council adoption of Genezal Pl.an Amendment No. 193, Exhtbit A, for
gener.al. industrial designation.
Un xoll call., the f.oregoing resolution was passed by the fol.lowi.ng vote:
AY~S: BAUAS, BUSHORE, FRY, HER95T, KING, MC BURNEY
NUES: NONE
AIIS~NT: LA CLAIRE
Greg Hasting~, Assistant Plannec, recommended chanyes to Item No. 2,
Conditions 1 and 2, Line 8 of ~ondition No. 1 and Line 11 of Cond~tion No. 2
to read: 'Said security shall be posted with the City of Anahem withtn a
peziod of 30 days from the date of this resolution'.
6/11/84
MiNUTES ANAHEIM CI~fY PLANNING COMMISSIUN, June 11.. ].9R4 84-337
iL was noted that the 30 da,yy would be from the date of the firal r.esoluCion,
wh~tt~er il• ta by the Plannin~ Commission ~r the City Council. Jack Whit~
stated Aa part of this pcoce~s, the Planninb Commisaion te gotng to r.ecammend
thAt the City Council. considec thie ceclnsetfi~~tion in conjunctton wtth the
Gener.Al. Plan Amendment.
ACTION uN ITEM N0. 2: Commisatoner Fier.bst offer.ed a motion, seconded by
Commiasioner King and MOTION CARRIEU (Commiasion~x La Clatce Abflent) that the
Anaheim City Flanning Commtsaion haR r.eviewed tl~e propossl to rect~ssify
subject pcoperty from the RS-A-43,000 (Residet~tial, Agr.icul.t~r.al) ~one to the
ML (Industr.i.al, Limited) Zone to c~xpand a ret~ource r.ecovery und r.ecy~li.ng
operatton, i.ncluding an autornob~le dismantitng busi.neES with wholesale and
cc~tail. salea of aut~•~~ ~ile pazts on a r.ecLanyul.acly-shaped parcel of land
consisttiig oE approxtmately 1.85 ac~es hr~ving a[rontage of approximately 476
feet on the soutt~ side a£ Fronter.a Stceet and being ~.ocated approxlmately 2000
Eeet east ~f the center.l.ine of Glassell Stceet; and does hereby App vz the
Negattve necl.arattor~ upon finding that it has con~tdered the Negat~
Declr~ratton togethec with any comm+~nts r.ecetved dur.tng ~he public cevi.ew
procecs and Lurtt~er ftndtny ~n tt~e basin of the Initia] Study and any comtnent;s
cecetved that tt~ere is no sub~tanttal evidence ~hat the p~o~ect wi.ll have a
significant effect on the envir.onment.
Commisstoner. tierbst of.fered ttesol.ution No. PC84-I.05 and moved f~r i.ta passage
and adoption that tt~e Anaheim City Pl.anriing Commtesion does her.~by grant
Reclas$ificakion No. 83-84-15 subjecl to Interdepactmental Committee
Recommen~Ations.
~,~ col.l call, the foreyoing re3olution was paased by the folluwing vote:
AYE5: BOUAS, BU5HORB, FRY, Fi~:RBST, KING, MC BURNEY
NUES: NUNE
ABSENT: LA i:!.AIRF,'
Commissioner hecbs*_ offered a motion, secanded by Commissioner King and MOTION
CARRIE~ (Commi~sior.er LaClaire absent) l:hat tt~e Anaheim Ctty Planning
Commission does hereby zecommend that the City Council consider.
Reclassification No. 83-84-15 .in conjunct'ton with Ger-ezal Plan Anendment No.
193.
ACTION ON ITEM NU. :i: Commissionec He*.'bst offered a motion, secon~9ed by
Commi.ssioner K:ing and MOT:ON CARRIED (Commissionee La Clair.e absent) that the
Anaheim city Pl.annir.g Commission has reviewed the proposal to expand a
resource recovery operatton and to include an automobtle dismantltng husiness
with wholesale and retail sal.es of automobilc pacts, with waiver ~r ..:~uired
tmprovement ot packiny areas on an irregular.ly-shaped parcel ~f land
consisting of approximatel.y g.2 acres having a frontage of ~pproxtmatel.y 1170
feet on the south side uf E'rontera Street and being located 1300 feet east of
the centerline of Glasseil street, and fucther desccibed as 3200 Er~t Frontera
(Orange County Steel Salvage); and does heceby approve the Negative
reclacaCion upon finding 1:hat it has considered the Neqative Decl.arati.on
together with any comments receiveu during the public: r.eview process and
furthec finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received
khat there is no substantial evidence that the project wil.l have a sxgniftcant
effect on the env3.ronment. 6/11/84
MINUTES ANANGIM CI'PY PLANNING COMMISSION, Jurte ll, a9H4 84^338
Commissioner Her,bet oEfer.ed a m~tion, secondQd by .:ou•~issioner. King and MOTION
CARRI~D (Commiasionec La Cl.alre abbent) ~hat the Anat~etm City Planni~.;
Commteaton does t~ereby gr.ant waiver of cfldQ reyu+rement on the basie of. the
nature of the use and on the i:s~te th~C the parki.ng waiver wi.:l not cause an
incr,ease in traEfic congeetion ir~ the immedtate vicinity nor adver.aely affsct
any adjotning l.and uses and grantiny af the per.ktng wotver under, the
conditi~~~ impoaed, if any, will not be detri.mental to the peace, hea:th,
safety and general welfar.e of the citizens oE the Ctty of Anaheim.
Commissioner. Herb$t affer.ed itesolutton Na. PC84-106 and moved for. its passAge
and ~doptian that the Anahein~ City Plr~nning Commission does her.eby grant
Conditional Use Permit No. 25'l5, pucsuant to Anaheim '!un+.cipal Co.~e sect{ons
1a.03.03U.03U thr.ough 18.03.U3U.035, and subject Co Inter.depactmental.
Committee Recommendations.
On roll call., the Eoregoing reaol.ution was pasaed by the [al.l.owing vote:
AYF.S: BUUAS, BUSNORE, N'KY, HERHST, KING, MC BURNEY
NUES: NONE
ABSENT: LA CLI~IRE
Commissionec Herbst offered a motion, ar•_conder+ by Commissioner. K{ng and MOTION
CARRIED (COmmissionex ~.a Claice ab3ent) that the Anahetm Gity Planning
Comm~ast~n dues her.eby recommend that the Ci.ty Council consider Condttional
Use Permit No. 2525 in conjunction with ?~~~cl.asst£icat{on No. 83-84-15 and
Genecal Plan Amendment No. 193~
Jack WhitE expl~ained the Gener.a] Plan Amendment wil.l automatically be heard by
the City Counci, .:•~d the notice of date of the hear.ing wtll be given in the
same ttianner. as todo;'s hearing and the ReclassiftcaCton and Condttional Use
Permtt are subject to . 22-day appeal period, however, the P.lanning Commtsston
is recommending to the :ity CounciJ that they be reviewed tn conjunctton with
the Gener.al Plan Ameridm~~nt, and r,ouncil may, but i.s not obltgated to, set
public t~ear.ings on tt~e~c two matters, and anyone wishinq to appea] ttems 2 or
3 has 22 d~ys within whtah to file a wrttten appeal. to the Ci.ty Cler.k's
Office, in the event suc~ items ace not set for. public near.tng by the City
~ouncil.
ITEM N0. 4. EIR NEGATIVE DEC,,."~ATION AND VARIANCE N0. 3386
PUBLIC HEARItJG. OWNERS: BERNARD J. STAHL AND BILL J. NICKEL, 815). Xatell.a
Avenue, Stanton, CA 90680. AGENT; J. WF-RD DAWSON, 2$08 E. Katel~a ~~nue,
~201, Orange, CA 92667. Propecty described as a r.ectangularly-shaped paz~cei
of l.and consistinc~ of appr~ximately 1.0 acre, 1668 South Nutwood Stceet.
Waivers of maximum stru^tural height and minimum str.uctural setback to
constcuct a 26~unit apactment complex.
Continued from April 'L, 30, and May .14, 30, 19a4.
It was noted that staif had cequested that subject petit.i..~ be continued.
ACTION: Comm~ssxoner King offered a motion, seconded by Commiestoner McBurney
and MOTION CAFtRiED (C~mmissionec ~a Cl.a~re absent) that considerAtion of the
6/ll./84
MINUTES___ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIONi June 11,__1984 84-339
afocemonttonad mattex be conttnued to the cegul.ar~y-~cheduled meettng of June
25, 1984, at the request oE the ataff in order fo~ the appl.icant to eubmit
cevisPd plana.
ITE~S. EIk NEGATIVE DECLAP,ATION R~CLASSIFICATION N0. 83-84-23 ~ND
VARIAN(;E N0. J3$4
PUBLIC NEARINC, UWNh;RS: DON C. ANU TAMIRIS DUhB, 3538 W. Savanna Street,
Anaheim, CA 9:~U4 and DUANE ~RED~RICK AND SALLY ANN PETERSEN, 6Q0 S. Nutwood,
Anahetm, CA "t8U4. AGENT: JOHN KING, 19522 Independence, Lane, Nunti.ngton
Deach, CA °•.646. b'r.oper.ty is deaccibed as a rectangularl.y-shaped parcel. of
land cons :;ting oE approximatel.y 0.78 acre, 353H W. Savanna Street.
RS-A-4_,UUO to the FtNi-1200
Waivecs of: (a) maximum stcuctur.al hetght, (bl minimum floor area, (c)
mtnimum ~.andscaped setback, ~d) permitted enccoachment into fronk yar.d And ;~:;
permi.tted location of fi.andem ~ar.ktng spacea to conatr.uct a 28-uni.t apartme-.c
complex.
Cantinued from Apri..l 2, 1G and 30, 1.984, and May .l4 and 30, 1484.
ACTIqN: Commissioner King offered a motion, seconded by Commtsstaner
Mc 8urney and MGTZUN CARRIED (COmmisstoner. LaCiai,re absent), that
considecation oE the above-mentioned malter be conttnued to tt:^
regularly-scheduled meeting ~f June 25, 1984, ~t the request of the staff in
order for the appl.icant to submi.t rE~::ae~ plans.
ITEM N0. 6. EIR NEGATIVE UECLARATION AND 'JARIANCE N0. 3399 (READVERTISEDI
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: PACIFIC BELL 6 A. 'T. T. ('OMMUNICAPIONS OE CALIFORNIA
CORP~, 733~ Trade Street, Room 41A0, San Dtego, CA 921'Ll.. ATTN: P.L.
HAMILTON. Property described as an irc~egular.ly-shaped paccel. of ].and
consisting of appcox.imately 2.4 a~:res l.ocated at thF southwes*_ cor.r^~ o£
Cypress Street and Lemon Stceet, and Eurther described as 217 Nocth Lemon
Stceet (Pac:ific Bell Telephone}.
Waiver of maxinum structur.al heigiit to permit two 23.5-foot ht~h r.oof-mo~anted
antennas.
Continued icom Apzil 30, 1984 (previously advectised ~s Condttional Use Permit
No. 2563) and May 14, 1984.
AC'rION: Commissioner. King affered a motiun, seconded by C,mm.tsAionec
Mc Buraey and MOTION CARRIED (Commissionex LaClaire absent), that
cnnsideration of the above-ment~oned mattec be conttnued o the
regul.acly-scheduled meeting of .Iune 25, 7.984, at the request of thQ petttioner.
6/11/84
MINUTES ANAH~IM CITY PLANNTNG COMMISSION, June 11_~ 1984 84-340
I'1'EM N0. 7. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION. WAIVEft OF COUE REQUIRE;MENT AN..
CONDITIONAG,,,_,_USE PERMIT NO• 2551
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: k1AROLU K. AND KAREN L. OERTLE, c u Ctspiko]
Industr.ia]. Pr~perties, 3~0 W. Orangethor.pe, P~~centia, CA 9?67G. AGh~NT: JEPF
J1LKA, 244 Brtacdale, 0[anye~ CA 92665. Property described as a
r.ectangularl.y-oh~,ped parcel of land consisting of approxim~°~ely 0.62 acres
located at the northwest cocner. oE La Creata Avenue and Red Gum Rtreet, anc?
further deacxibed as 1.251 North Red Gum 8treet ('Mi]G l~a Wi.)d').
Request to retain an automobile customi.zing shop tn the ML (Industr.tnl,
Limited) Zone wich waiver of minimum number of parkiny apaces.
Conttnued from the meettng of Aprll 30, ]964.
ACx'IUN: c:ommissioner King ofPer.~:d a motion, aecanded by CommLasiAn~r.
Mc t3urney and MOTIUN CARRIED (Comm`~atoner I~aClai.r.e absent), that
consideration of the above-menttaneu matter. be continued t!:he
regulacly-scheduled meetiny of June 25, 198A, at the ceyuest of the staff tn
or.der for. the tenant sharing subject pccper.hy to submi.t an appitcatton for a
condi~'tonal. use permit Eor. autnmobtle rPpair.
ITEM NU. 8. EIR NEGATIVE UECLARATIUN AND CUNDITIONAL USF ['~FMTT N0. 1280
(REAUVER:iSED)
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: SAM AND V~RA MENLO, 507. S. Fatr.£ax, Suite 201, Los
Angeles, CA 90U36. AGENT: SHIRLE7 C. GWIN, 4720 N. Willtams, La Verne, CA
91750. Pr.o~erty desc~tbed as an icregular.ly-ahaped paccel of land constating
of approximatel.y ].3.8 acres locat~:d at tt~e northwest and northeast corner.s of
Orangethor.pe Avenue and 'Pemple St~eet.
RequesL- for amendment to cer.tain condittons of Planntr.~ Commiss~an Resolutton
No. PC71.-239 pe~taining to a chjld day car~ center aer.mt.tted in conjunction
with an existing apartmen. c...mp':ex, with watver.s of mintmum number. of empl~yee
packing apaces and vehicle loading and u.^.l.oadtng a-'ea Loc childrpn.
Continued from the meeting of May 30, 1.984.
Ther.e was one person indicating her pce~ence in op;~osition to subject ~equest
and althougt~ the staff repoct was not cead, it ts referred to and made ~r part
of the minutes.
Tammy Gwin, 472U ti. ~ViJ.liams, La Verne, CA 91750, agant, rxpl.atned they are
proposing a day care center and do not see an ~r.obtem wtth the l.oading and
unl.oadin~ acea for the chil.dren because the ce:.~er will. be closed to the
publ.ic and will be stcictly for residents of the complex, ar,9 tt wtll be a
low-key day care centec for a maximum of 24 chil.dr.en. She stated they have
petitxons s~~3ned from the 3U aFartments surzounding the cen:er a::d there ts
only one tenant opposed to a dooc which will not bQ used foe access, but will
be an emecgency access onl.y. She explained parkin~ for the staff has be~n mtt
an~ theze will only be three qualfEted teachecs emg:o~~ed, witt, two prese~-t at
any one time.
6; 11/84
MiNUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, June ll.. 1984 __ 84-34__1_____
Tammy Stevenson, 1730 Nor.th Temple, Apartment No. 207, explained s-~e te
concer,ned about une of the daors tn ~he day c~r.e center. becauae it is exactly
oppoatte her dooc and she has beAn burglar~~ed twice in the last year and
w~uld l.ike tu be sur.e that thut door. will. be uaed f~r omecgency access on]y
because she would not want pPOple to t~e loitering acound hec apar.tmenr
watching her cominge and go~~~gs.
Jeffry Goodman, 1700 Nor.th 'I~empl~_, Manager. uC che apartments, atated the dooc
in queskion has been used in the past as acce~s to the ]aundry r.oom, ~nd this
day car.e cent.ez will eliminate a]1 L•he people in that hallw~y, so he rhought
the situatton wtlt. be gr.ez~kly iniproved.
Ms. Gwin alated te~ants ~f r.he a~~ar.tments surcounding the day car.e center. have
been ofEered the opportunity L•o move to a new l.ocation Er.ee of coat . 5he
stated when they ticst ~etittaned to h~~ve the day care center, the complex was
for ~oth adults and children, but at thia time, the plan ts tu have a]J famtly
unit~. She stated there was more ~~affic comi.ng tn and out ~f thE la~lnr3ry
facil.ittes than there would evc- be with a day car.e center.. She st~ted the
door th~~t wtl.l be used for. ac~=~ss to the day car.e ceritex ts completely on the
other side and does not face any apar.tments.
THE PUF`~IC HEARING WAS CLOSEA.
Commisstonez Her.bst clarif ed th.1t the door. will have access fr-om the inside
to the outside only, wi~h Ms. Gwin exolain.tng that is a r.equtr.ement of Lhe
state.
Res~onding to Commissionec Bushoce, Ms. Gwin staked the employees wi:l have
assigned parking areas on the stte very close to the day car.e fac~-ity. Paul
Singec, Traffic Enginerc, stated there is adequate par.ktt.~ foc e^~ployee~, and
the waive~ t:; actual~.y for the drop-off ar.ea. Comtnissioner Rushor.~ poi.nted
out 4 waiver is cequested for employee par.king ~paces. Gr.eg Hastings,
.Assistant Pl.anner, explained currently ~he complex does not meet ~.o~ay's
pazkiny standards and any addition tr, terms of the packtng requt~ement woul.d
cequire a waiver.
Annika Santalahtt, Asstatar: Dicectoc f~r Z~ntng, expl.ained on Page 8-b there
arQ twr~ ~revious condi':ion$ listed ~n_ if the Commissxon looks favorably on
this req~.est, they may ,~ish to r~~odiE~ No. i, to rP3d: "That the numb~r o£
children which ~hal.l be per.mitted in the praposed chtid day care centec sha~l
be a maximum of 24, and that al~ such children shall be r.esidents oP the
existing apartment com~:l~xes, as addcessed on T•~mple St~eet and Kensinqton
Avenue.'
Commission~r NicBurne: -larified tnat the ma~imum numbec ~f chtldcen permitted
on Che premises i~s bEing ceduced from 40 ta 24.
ACTION: Comm~suionec King offered ~ motion, seconded by Commisston~r Elerbst
an~ MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner La ~'laire absEnt) that the Anaheim City
Pl.anning Commission has reviewed the propobal to amend conditiona of Planning
Commission Resolution No. 71-239 pertaining to ~ Ghild day care center
pecmitr.ed in conjunction wirh an existing apPrtment complex with waiver. of
minimum number of em~luyee parking spaces and vehicle loading and unl.oading
acea fcr chil.dren on an irregu~arl.y-shaped parcel of land consisting oE
6/1J./84
NINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CuMMISSION, June ll., J9d4 84-342
appr.oxtmately 13.8 acr.es located at the nurthweat and nor.theast cor.ner,a of
Orangethorpe Av~nue and TemC~le Stceet, and further. deacr.ibed as 1730 Nor.th
Templ.e Stceetj and does heceby appr,ove the Negati.ve Decl.AZbtion upon finding
that it has consldered the Negativ~ Declar.atton together. with any aommenta
ceceived durtng the pubJ.ic r~vfew process and fur.Cher ftnding on the basi~ of
the Inikial. Study an~ any comments ~eceived that ther.e te no substanttal
evidence that the pro~ect will have a stgnificant eff~ct on the envir.onment.
Commissioner King offeced a motion, seconded by Commisstoner. lary and MOTION
CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Comm'lhr,ton does h~reby gr.ant waiv~:ra
(a) and (b) on the basis that the loa~' ~ is not necessar.y becaus~ the
day cAre center. wtll be cloaed to the , and all childr.en permttted shall
ue residents of the c;ur.rounding apartmei~~ .,mplexes and ~,lso on the basie that
the parking watvec will not cause r~n incr.eafie in traffic congestton in the
immediate vicinity nur. adversely af•fect any ad~otntng l.and l19@3 and qranttng
of the packing waiver. u~~der the condttions tmpose9, if any, wil]. nat ue
d~ttimen~Al. to the peace, het~lth, safetv and g~nez•at we].far.e af the citizens
of the Ctty of Anahetm.
Commi.ssioner King oEfeced Resolution No. PC 84-107 and moved f~~ i.ts passage
and adoptton that the Anahe;lm City Pl~nning Commisston doe~ her.eby amend
Planning Commisston Etesolutton No. 71-239, subject t~ Inter.departmental
Comm:ttee Recommenda:tons, includtng the condtti.un that all childr.en shall be
restdents of the apar.tment complexes.
Jack White, As~istant City AttoKney, expl.atned the finding of fact for
approval of this modificatton mu~t be that it is to permit r,easonable uae of
the permit. He stated sraff ts al.~o ~equesktng an uddittonal condl~ion as
shown on page 8-d af the stafE rep~ct requiriny the terminatton of Condiki.ona]
Use Permit No. 1.2U, and additional.ly, Comrnissi.on may wtst~ to considez a
fucthe' condttion based upon the stipulattons thar the one door in questfon
would be :~sed only for emecgency access with pro~er emergency access har.dwar.e
betng in~tal].ed.
Commxssioner. King stated he would l.ike those changes and additions made to the
resol.ution.
On ~,:~11 call, the foregoing resolutton was passed Uy the followtng vote:
AYES: BOUAS, BUSHORE, F i, HERI3ST, KING, MC 9URNEY
NOES: NQN6
ABSGNT: LA CLAIRt
Jack Whi.te, Assistant City Attorney, presented the wr.itten cight to appeal. the
Planning Commiasion's decision ~~ith.in 22 daya to the City Counctl.
6/11/84
MINU'rES ANAHEIM CITY ~LANNING COMMISSION,.June il., J984 64-343
IT~M NQ. 9 EIK NFGATIVE DECLARATION, WAIVER OF CODE KEQUIRF:Mh:NT AND
CONDITIUNAL USG PERMIT N0. 2562
PUBLIC NEARING. OWNERS: ~~UITEC 80 REAL ESTATE ?NVESTORS, 1550 Enat Katel.l.a
Avenue, Anahei.m, CA 92805. AG~NT: SHAWN COMMC',, 18022 Cowan, f204, Irvtne,
CA 92714. Property de3cr~bed ae a r.ectangularl.y-ahaped parcel. of l~nd
consisttng oE approxirtetely 18.9 dGC@A lacated at the southwest corner oE
~acifico .4venue an~ State Col.lege Poulevar.d~ 1.971 and 1979/8l. Soukh State
Colleye aoulevarr~ (Home and Busineas Computer Cencer. and Offtce 2000).
'lo per.mit r.etail salea of computecs and offtce furnituce trr the ML ~one with
waiver ot mtnimum nun~ber of packl~g spaces.
Continued fr.orti mPeting3 of May lA and 30, I984.
AC7'20N: Commisstonec King offeced a mo~ton, oecondea by Commtss-.onec M~
6urney and MOTION CARRIED (Commisstoner LaClatre absent), that considecatton
of the above-rnenttoned matter. be continued to the r.egu]ar.ly-schedul.ed meeting
of June 25, ].984, at thE cequest of the petittoi~ec.
ITEM NO. 10. F.II2 NEGATIVE DBCLARATION ANll CONDITION4G USE PERMIT N0. 2580
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: ECONO-LUgE, INC., ATTN; RIiSSEL[. PERKINS, 4911.
Flirch Stceet, NewpocL• Beach, CA 92660. Pr.oper.ty described as an
i~reyu.larly-shaped parcel of ].an~] conststing of approximately 0.35 acre
located at the northwest corner of Linculn Avenue and Weste~n Avenue, and
furthec det~cribed as 3201 West Linc~?.r~ Avenue (Econo-Lube N''I'une).
^equest to expand an autoniob~le tune-up cer~ter.
7-~ere was no one indicaking thetc pre:~ence in opposition to suaj:~ct r.equest
and although the ~taff repoct was nut read, it is ref~r.r.ed to and made a part
of the minuf:es.
Russell Pe~'kins, c.~nec, explained they have been ak thts location since 1975
and would like to expand fcom four. ro six ser.vtce bays; th,~t tt t3 a
drive-through ~perattan and thRt parking ~s no pcoblem. He steted they are
going to cemodel. the facility and make tt mor.e efficient and it will be a
facility the City can be proud of.
THE PUBLIC HEAFtING WA5 CLOSED.
Responding to Chatrwaman Bouas, Mr. Pe~kins stated this facility wtll be just
like the one on State College which looks much bettec.
ACTION: Commissioner King offered a motion, seconded by Commissionet He~bst
arid MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner La Claire absent) that the Anaheim City
Pl.anning Comm:~ssion hds reviewed the proposal to expand an automcbile tune-up
center located an an irr.eyul.arl.y-shaped parcel ef land coneisting of
approximately 0.35 acce located at the northwest corner of Ltncoln Avenue and
Western Avenue, and f~rther described as 3201 West Lincoln Aven~etand doe~
hereby approve ~he Negative Declaratton upon finding that tt has considered
the Negative ~s:cl.aration together with Any comments received during the ~ublic
6/l.l/84
MINUT'.S ANAHE'M_CITY PLANWING COMMiSSION, June ll., 1984 _ 84-344
review procoas and f•ucthtr finding on the ba8ta of the Ini.tial Study and any
comn::_„ts ~ecei.ved that ther.e te no ~ubotantt~l evidence that the pr.oject wlll
nave a signlficAnt effect on the environment.
Commtsaioner King offer.ed Re~olutton N~. PCBA-lQH and moved foc ita pi...,sage
a-id adopti.an th~t the Anaheim Ctty Planning ~ommtaeion does her.eby grant
ConditionAl Use Pecmit No. '1580, pursuanC tr~ Anahetm Munictpal Code Sections
18.U3.03Q.03U through 18.030.03U.0~5 and subject to :nterdepar.tmentAl
Committee Recommendattons.
On r.ol.] call, the foregoing reaolutton was passt~d by L•he foll.owing vote:
AYES: E3CUAS, BUSHURE, ERY, HERBST, KING, MC BURN~Y
NOES; NUN~
Af35ENT: LA CLAIRE
Jack White, Assistant City Attocney, pxesented the wri.kten rtght to aPpeal the
PlAnnin~ Commission's deciaton withtn 22 days to the Cit.y Cuuncil.
ITBM N0. ].1.. EIR NEGATiV~ DECLARATION, WAIVER t~F CODC RI'QUTREMENT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2577.
PUBLiC HEARING. UWNERS: LA JOLLA ASSOCIATBS, 1436 N. Hundley Str.eet,
~+naheim, CA 92806. AGEN2': AUTOMOTIVF. PE:RCORMANCE SYSTEMS, INC., A'fTN:
GAFETH W. NEUMAN, 620 S. Flowec Str.eet, B~~r.bank, CA 9.1502. Proper.ty
de:~cribed as an tcregul.acly-stiaped par.cel. of land consisttng of approxtmately
U.31 ac~e, havi~ny a frontage of appcoxtmately 70 feet on the west side of
Hundley Stceet, and fu~ther descrtbed as 1464 North Fiu~;dley Street.
Request to pecmit an aukomobile repaic facility with tncidental r.etatl salea
cf automobile parts and acr,essor.ies with waivec of minimum number. of parkt,~g
s~aces.
ACTION: Commissioner King ~ffeced a moti.ori~ seconded by Commissfoner
Mc Buxney and MOTION CARRIED (Commtssioner LaClaire absent), that
considecation of the above-mentioned matter be continued to the
regular.ly-scheduled meettng ~f. June 25, 1984, at the request of the staff in
order. for the appl.zcant to submtt revised flooc pl.ans.
ITEM NO 1"l IEIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREM~NT AND
CONBITIONAL USE PERMIT NU. 2584.
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: WAL'IER Eo BLAIR, iNC., 1100 E. Fairhaven, Apt. 149,
Santa Ana, CA 92701. AGENT: DONALD SIMMONS, 947 S~uth East Stcpet, Anaheim,
CA 92802. Pzopecty desc~ibec! as a rectangulacly-~haped par.cel of land
conststing of apptoxima~.ely 0.3 acre, located at the southwest cocner of Ar~.ee
Place and East Stree*_, and further described as 947 South East Street.
Request to per.mit an automobile repatr facility in the ML (Industri.al,
Limited) zone with wa~vers of m~nimum number of par.king spaces and minimum
landscaped fro;st setback.
5/].1/84
MINUTE5 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CO_M_MISSIUN, June l.l, 1.9d4 84-345
Ther,e was no one indicating thetr pr.eaenca tn oppoait~lon ko aubjeck KequoRt
And although Che stafE r.epor.t was not cead, it i.s ce~er.r.ed to And made e par.t
of r.he minutea.
WAlter Blair etated in the past the building hax been r.entod for who7esal.e
assembly and he ia requeating pcr.mission for a dashboard ~epai~ Eacility wh~ce
they would work on apeedometers, etc. and they woul.d not he takiny A car.
apact, but would r.emove an instcument fr~m thQ daehboard in ord~r. to check
it. Ne added thie woul.d be a clean oper.atian.
THE PUBLIC IlEARING WAS CLOSEll.
Reapondtng to Cammissioner. tlerbst, Jack White, AASiskunt City Attor.ney,
ex~lained by condttior. the Cammtsston could limtt the use to dashhoar.d type
repa~cs.
Greg Hasttngs, Asr.istant Flan~~er, stated ctaff woul.d r.ecommend a cundttion
thal ther.e aha]] be no outdoor. sCor.age or, work on automobiie~ or thetr pAr.ts.
Mr.. Nla~r responded that would be satisfactocy.
ACTIUN: Commiseioner. K~ng ofEered a motton, seconded by Commisatoner. Fr.y and
MUTION CARRIED (Commtasioner La Cl.aire ab~ent) that the Anaheim City Pl.anntng
Commi~sior, has reviewed the pcoposal to pe~mik an automobile r.epatr Fact~tty
in the ML (Industrial, Ltmited) Zone with waivF~cs of minimum number of ~arking
~paces and minimum landscaped fr.ont selback on a Kectangularly-shaped parcel
of land consteting of appr.~xtmately 0.3 acre, ].ocated at the oouthwest cor.ner.
of A~lee Pl.ace and East Street, and further described ~s 947 South East
Street;and does nereby approve tt~~ Negative Declaration upon ftnding that i.t
has considered the Negative DPclaration together with any comments r.eceived
during the public review process and fucthec finding on the basts of the
Intttal Study and any cammer-.:s recei.ved that ther.e is no substantial evidence
that the project wtll. have a stgnificank effect on the environment.
Commissionec King affer.ed a mokton, aeconded by Commissioner Fry and MOTION
CARRIED (Commissioner La Claire abaent) tt~at the Anahetm City Pl.anning
Commisston does hereby grant waiver (a) on the basis that khe parking w~iver
will. not cause an tnccease in traffic congcstion in the immed{ate v~cintty nor
adversely affect any adjoining land uses ancl granttng of the parking waiver
under the conditions i~ipoaed, if any, wil.l. not be detr.tmental ~o the peace,
health, sa£ety c-nd general welfare of the cittzens of the Ctty of Anaheim; and
gcanting waiver (b) on the basis that there are special circum~tances
applicable to the pcoper.ty such as size, shape, topogr.aFhy, locatton and
surcoundings which do not apply to other identically zoned property in the
same vicinity; and ~hat stcict applicatton of the Zontng Code deprives the
pzopecty oE privileges enjoyed by otheK properttes in thr tdentical zone and
classification in the vicinity and subject to In~er.departmental Committee
recommendations.
Comm~ssionec King offered Fcesolution No. PC84-109 and moved Eoc its passage
and adoption that the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commission does hereby arant
Cond~tional Use Permit No. 2584, pursuant to Anahetm Municipal Code Secttons
18.03.030.030 thcouqh 1.8.0i.030.035~ subjecti to Interdepartmental Cor.unittee
6/11/f34
MINUT~S_ ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, June ll.~_1984 __ 84-346
Recammendati~ns, incl.udi.ng the conditton that Lhe uae wtll be lim~ted to
dashboaGd type r.epnirs such as speedometers, etc., and that alJ wor.k and
storage shall be condu:ted inaide the faciliL•y.
Un coll call, the forQgoing resolution was paaoed by th~ fo]l.owing vote:
AYES: BUUAS~ BUSNORF~ FRY~ tIERBST, KING~ MC BURNEY
hOES: NONE
ABSENT: LA CLA.TRE
Jack Whtte, As~istant City Attorney~ preuented the wci.tten r.iqht to appeal tf~e
Planning Commiasion's decision withtn 22 days to the City Counci.l.
IT~M N0. 13. EIR NEGATIVE DECG_ARATION, WAIVER OF CODE RELUIR~M~N`i ANp
CONDITIUNAL USE PERMIT N0. 2579.
PUaLIC HEARING. OWN~RS. ANAHEIM DOCTORS INVESTMENT COMPANY, c/o ~.LEN
CLARKE, ~44U N. kiarbor Bl.vd., [?uller.tan, CA 97.635 AND BERTHA OMANSKY, ET AL,
245 N. Almont, Beverly Hitls, CA 9U212. AGENT: M. AAVID GEWIS, 6421.
Coldwatec Canyon, North Hol.lywood, CA y1606 AND iNA BLISS, 4646 S~er.r.a Tcee
Lane, Icvine, CA 92715. Property described as an iccegular.ly-shAped parcel
of ]and consi ting of ~pp~oximately 2.5 acrea, having a frontwge vE
apptoximately 80 feet on the south side of Broadway, and fucthec descr.ibed as
166U and 1664 Weat Broadway,
Feq~est to pertnit a 49-bed psychi~tcic hospital Eor adolescent chemtcal
clependenciec with waiver of mtnimum number of par.king spaces.
ACTION: Commissionec King oEfered a motia~i, seconded by Commis~tonec
Mc Bucney and MOTION CARRIED (Commisstoner. LaCl.ai.re absent), that
consideration of the above-:nenttoned matter. be continuec] to the
reqularly-scheduled meetirig of Junr 25, 1984, at the r.equest of the peti.tionec
so that a r.evised packi.ng demand study can be ~ubmttted.
ITEM N0. J.4. EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 3 AF1D VARIANCE t3^. 3404
w
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: CRESCENT ASSOCIATES, 242 Heliotrope Avenue, Co~ona
De? Mdr, CA 92625, ATTN: PAUL REYNOLDS. Property described as a
re.:tangul.a~ly-shaped parcpl of land consinting of approxtmatel~y 2.6 acces
having a Frontage of approximately 320 feet on the west side of Crescent Way,
and further described as 241, and 301 Nor.th Crescent Way.
Request to construct a slatt~d chain itnk ferice wtth waiver of. cequired stte
screening.
Thece was ao one indicating their presence in oppositton to subject request
and although the staf~ report was not read, it is referred to and made a part
of the minutes.
F~aul. Reynolds, agent, explained thes are requesting permission for a chain
].ink fence along a residenti.al boundacy adjacent to an all.ey whtch hacks up to
somc garages.
6/11/84
MINUTES ANAH~IM CI'rY PLANNING COMMI5SION. June 1~, 198 4 84-347
THE PUBL~C NEARTNG W~S CLOSED.
It wao noted the Pl.qnning Director, or his authorized re preaentative has
determined that the pcoposed pr.oject falls wtthin the d efiniti.on of
Categorical Exemptions, Clusa 3, as deCined tn the Stat e Envir.o~mental Impact
Repor,t Guide]inea and is, theretor.e, categocica~ly exempt from the cequirement
to prepare an FIK.
ACTIOti: Comm~asionec Ki.ng offeced Resolution No. PC84 -]]U And moved for. its
passage and adoption th~t the Anaheim Ci.ty ~`lanntn~ Comm~aeton does her.eby
gcant Varic~nce No. 34U4 on the baata that ther.e are specta.l ciccumstancpa
applicaUle to the pcoperty auch as size, shape, topoyr.aphy, lor.atton and
surroundings -ahich do not apply to ~ther identically z o ned pr.operty in the
same vicini.tys and that strict applicatton of the Zontng Code depr.tves the
~roperty of pKivt2eges en~oyed by othec pcoperttes in t he identical. zone And
cl.~ssificatton in the vicintty and aubject to Intecdepar~m~ental. Commtttee
r.ecommendations.
Commi.astonec King explain~d a requtcemsnt of the resulutlon wi.1l ae ttiat At
].e~st 2U feet of the westerly pr.oper.ty ].ine shtall be impcoved wi.th concrete,
asphalt oc landecaping, fur.ther. expl~ining the pcoposed Condi.tion No. 3
indicates that appcoximately 20 feet wtll be impr.ovr.d and he wrantc the word
"approximately• changed to 'at least."
Mr.. Perkins s~ated they intent to ~ave the entire unpa ved area to zem~ve the
unsightl.y weeds.
Commisstoner. King stated thece will be conditton inGlu ded also thaL• ther.e
shall. be nu st~cage in the area ceserved for. parking.
On Koll ca].1, the foregotng r.esolutton was passed b,~ the followfng vote:
AYES: BUUAS, BUSHORE, FRY, HERBST, KING, MC P.~RNEY
NUES: NUNE
ABSENT: LA CLAIRE
Jack White, Assistant City Attocney, pr.esented the wc ttten r,ight to appeal the
Pl.anning Commiseion's decision within 2~ days to the C ity Council.
ITEM N0. 15. EIR NEGATIVE D~CLl,RATION AND VARIANCE NO. 3406
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: STEPHEN C. AND BARBARA A, WALKER, 855 Swallow Way,
Anaheim, CA 928U7. Proper.ty desccibed as an irregul a rly-shaped parcel of
land consisting of approximat.ely 1G,000 square feet, h aving a frontage o~
approx:lmately 62 feet an the northwest side of Swal.low Way, and further.
described as 855 Swallow Way.
Request for waivers of minimum number of parking spac es and minimum gar.age
setback to constcuct an additian to a singl~-family r e gidence.
There wece four persons indicattng their presenae tn opposition tca subject
request and although the staff report was not cead, i t ia refer~ed to and made
a part of the :nxnutes.
6/l.l/84
MINU~ TC~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, June 11, 1.984 84-3y8
Stev~e Walker., owner., exp.lr~.tned he is pr.oposing the additton of a bedcoom, batl~
and e~lar.gement to a famil.y coom r.equiring a new yaxage. Ne stataad otl~er
houses in the neighbor.ho~d have fivo bedcooms. He c~tA~ed tl~e var.iance i.s
nQCessary becAUae the driveway wtll. b~ in the 25-foot aetback. He stated he
had gone to tl~e local homeowner,~' asaociation and the reyuest was ~9enied
because o ne of the cequiraments ie that the addition cannot be aga~.nst any
Ctty code s. Ne btated the Committee had aatd that the architectur.al pl.an met
wtth the ir approvAl. Ne stated al]. hie netghbor.s in the cul de sac had signed
a letter of approval for tliis cequest, but atnce then, the neighbor.3 to the
south changed thetr minds.
Ger.aldine DeJuliq, 865 Swallow, Anahei.m, stated the hc~meuwner.'s assoctati.on
d.tsappcoved the r.equest on another matker stating that this is a pla,~ned
communtty and thr.re shal.l not be any exc~~vation or. constructton or, alker.atton
wl~ich in any way afferts the extecior. appear.ance of any improvemenrs f.r.~~m the
public :;treet or. from uny othec ].ot oE the ~lanned clevelopmen~. She stated
she objec ts because this is a planned communlty and wh~n ahe bought hec home,
they signed ~apers sel:ting for_th the r.ules and everyone agreed. She ,stAted
she op~o ses because the addit ton would be blocking the view of the fr.ont
entrance to her. h~me.
Joel Go 1 dber.g ctated he lives two doors down fr.om the petttioner. and is an
architectur.al designer. by trade. He pr.esented a~hotogr.aph of the hou ae to
the righ~ of subject propert.y witti a protruston of appr.oxtmatel.y 35 fe~~t and
stated a rchitECtucal]y, the a ddition w~uld ~nhance the beau~y of that
pacticular. locati.ar~. He stated he was al.so at a meeting oF the homeowriers'
associa tion in the acea and t he prestdent and vi.ce pr.esident approved the
design as Ear the t~•~auty of the desi9n was concecned on tts architect~ral
mErit$, but d.'td not ap~rove t he zequast because of. the vaciance r.equice~~. He
stakPd w hen he cames out of his dciveway and looks at that azua, he ~ee:s a
stACk p 1 asteced wal.l of the homc to the Ktght, and the propo3ed addttion would
mean he would be oeetng the garage with shingles and brtc'c which would t:ake
away Er.om the stacknec~s of khat wAll and would not pcotrude nearly as fc~C as
that wall and he believed it would be a pl.us to the neighbor.hood.
Wil.fred Griveau, 845 Sw~J,l,ow Way, stated he has no objectton to l•he cequest
and would say tl{~t---iyt':'k~Ker has done everything in a very professi.onal. way
and he bel.teved this woul.d enhance the pcoperty.
~.
Mc. Wal ker stated he has a copy of the Feathechill's Homeowners As~ociattor.
CC&Rs w hich Mrs. DeJul.i4 read and it ~ust says that there cannot be any
improvements wi.thout the prio~ appro~. 1 of the Architectur.al Control Com~nittee
sv-~c~--ESa~s ~ put tmprovements in-- a Planned Cammunity,..-but • thay- h~va--to-be• ,~
ap~acs-~ed~. He p:asented photographs of the vtew from his neighbor's a~fer.ted
windows which look all the way across his yacd.
Mr. Wal ker stated the aecond pact of the request is foc a waivez of the
proposed pnrkiny spaces fcom 4 to 3; that on ~ne stde of his loL• khere i~ a
21-Eoot wide open~ng and that hfs cadil.lac will. easily fit inta that openi.ng,
anc~ they woul.d put in a roll-up garage door to make more room.
6/l.l/84
~
MINU'PES ANAHEIM CZTY PLANNING COMMISSION June J1 196A 84-349
THF PUHLIC NEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commisstoner. Bushore clar.iEted that L•he Asaoctation could not appr.ove the
ceguest because it vtoi.ated a City Codet and stated tt woul.d only vialate City
Code tf the petitioner had built ~lt without the pcoper pecmits whtch would
t~ave incl.udod a vr~r.iance, but iE the variance is appcoved And the pelittoner.
gets the praper. perm~ta and pays the Appropri.Ate f ees, tt would not be in
violatton. he stated the City is not in a posttton of tnterpceting the CC&Rs,
but if there is, in fact, a aet of restrictions which would requir.e a
homeowi7er's ~saor:tAClon appcoval, that woul.d have to be enfor.ced independently.
Commissioner eushore ~ef err,ed to a l~tt~er. from 7allas Margrave of the Anc+heim
H.ills Planned Comnunity Assoctation and Mr. Wal.ke~ skated he has not aeen that
pacticul.ac lf~tter., but has wtiat they sent to hi,m. Commisstoner Bushore
pcesented the lettec ko Mx. Wal.ker so thet he could r.ead tt and stated the
as~ociakion -~aa p~e~ented a strong ].etter asking the Commission to deny the
request. Ne :~tated the letter, is cigned on behal.f oE the Boar.d of D{KP.CtOK8
of the Anaheim Hille Planned Commu~ity, and he would be int.er.ested to know 1.f
the committee even acted on it.
Mr.. Walke[ ~tated he cealtzes he wtl.] have to go through the other steps of
getti.ng the associatton's approval., but unttl he goes to them for. a~pcoval, he
did not thtnk they ~hould send such a letter,. Commisstoner eushor.e agr.eed.
ACTION: Commissioner E3ushore ofLer.ed a motton, seconded by Commiss~oner King
and MOTION CAFtRIED (Gommisstoner. I.a Clatce absent) that the Andheim Ctty
Flanntng Commission has cevtewed the pcoposal to conrtruct an add~tton Lo a
singl.e-family residence with waivers of minirnum numbec of parking spaces and
minxmum garage setback on an irceguZarl.y-shaped parcel of land consisttng of
appcaximately 16,000 aquare feet, having a frontage o£ approximate].y 62 feet
on the nocthwest s:de of Swal.low Way, and further describec~ as 855 Swal.low
Way; and doe~ hereby approve the Negattve Declaiatton upon f.inding that it has
considered the Negative Declaration togethec with any comments r.ecexved during
the public revtew procesa and further ftnding an the basts af the Initial
Study and any comments received that there i.a no substant~al evidence that the
project Will have a signiftcanC effect o~ the Envtconment.
Cammtssioner Bu~har.e ofEeced Resoluti~on N~. PC84-11' and moved for tts passage
and adoption thyt the Anahetm City Planning Commtsston does hereby grant
Vnziance No. 3406, waiver (a) on the basis that the par.k3.ng waiver wtll. not
cause an increase in traffic congestion in the tmmed~ate v:tcinity nor
adversely affect any adjoxntng land uses and granting of the par,king waiver
under the condittons imposed, if any, wi2l. not be detrtmental to the peace,
health, safety and genera 1 wel.~acp of the citizens of the Ctty of Anaheimt and
granted waiver (b} on the bas:ls of the topagraphy of subject property and on
the basis that there a~ce special circumstances appltcabl.e to the property such
as size, shape, tapoyraphy, l.ocation and surcoundings wh~ch do not ~pply to
other identic311y zoned propectx tn the same vi.cinity; and that stric~
application of tha Zoning Code deprives the propesty of privileges enjoyed by
other properties in the identical zone and classtfica~ion in the victnity and
subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendatio~s.
6/1.J./84
MINUT~S ANAHEIM CI~Y PLANNING COMMISSION, June 11. ].984 A4-350 _
On Kall call, the foregoing r.eaol.ution was passed by the fol.lawing vote:
AYES: BOUAS, BUSNOR~, ~RX, HERBST, KINr,, MC BURNEY
N0~5: NONE
ADSENT: LA CLAIRE
Jack White, Aasistant Cit,y Attorney, p~esented the wrttten r.tght to appeal the
Planning Con-mio~ion's decision wtthtn 'l2 days to the Ctty Counctl.
ITEM NU. l6. EIR CATEGORICAL ~X~MPTION-CLASS 22 AND VARIANCE N0. 3389.
PUBLIC FIEARING. OWNERS: PACESE'rTER HOMES~ INC.~ ATTN: JOHN W. KLUG~ J~.~ F.
U. 8UX P, Newport 8oach, CA 92660. Propecty deacrtbed 83 an
ir.regul.arly-shape~ t~arcel of l.and consisting oL approxim~tely 6.1 acr.e~
loc~ted snuth And east of the so~theast corner, oE Lincol.n Avenue and Cttr.on
Street, and Fu~thec de3cribed as l00 S~uth Seneca Cir.cle (Wat.er.scape
Condomtntums).
Request to dicplay Elags for a new residenttAl subdivir~i.on wttl~ watver of
per.mitGed days oE display Cor tem~orary ~lags.
Ther.e was n~ one indtcattng th~ir ~resen~:e ir- appoattion to subject r.equest
and although the staff xepoct waH nct c~~~+d, it ~s referr.ed to and made a par.t
oE the mi.nutes.
Elsina Wil.sun, Pacesetter. Hom~e~;:, ~'~4U Campus Drive, Newport Heach, explained
they ace cequesting a~~roval to keep thetr flaga up seven days a week to
assist in theiK sale~ and mar.kei:ing ~~:ogram And help identify the pcoject.
`PHE PUBLI~ HEARING W:~S CL.USED.
Com~nis~ion~r F3ushore ~f:feKred to the ~igns and tcail.er.~ that are parked on
weekends and asked tf t~osE would noG be adequate to identify the project. He
stated also those signs are not allowed on telephone poles ~c in the publ.tc
righ't~of-way.
Commissioner Bushor.e stated he wau].d nppoae the r.equest because tf they ace
permitted fot one kxact, they will have Co be allowed fcr others and he
L•hought the ocdinance pertatning to signs is fully adequate. He stated th~is
is a good look.ing project and it Adds to the are~ and fs an asoet to the
downtown, but flt~gs don't sell condomtniums. Ms. Wtlson resp~nded they need
all the aESistance they can get to bring traffic in, and explatned the other
~ signs ceEerr~d to by Commi.sstoner ~3usho~e are only out on weekends.
Commtssioner Herbst asked how long they would need to have these flags,
indicating he thought they had a permit fot six monthr~. He disagreed with
Commissioner Bushoce and stated he thought this type of flag woul.d be
acceptable to attract attention to the project because it is tempocary, and he
thought they wil.l need all the h~l.p they can gQt to attract attention to thP
project. He added there :is a project tn his acea where they are flying f.lags
and he did not see anythtng objectionabl.e about thern.
6/11/84
MINU7~ES ANAHEIM CITY ~LANNING COMMISSIUN June 1l. 1984 ~~L-351
Commiaetonet Buat~oce added he thought ap~roval would aet a real precedent and
thia haa not been a~lowed ~or any other devel.oper.a in the city And it ahould
not be approved now.
It was noted the Planning pirector or his autl~orizod r.eprenentative has
doCermine~ that the propased pr.oject f~lls within the deftnttton of
Categorical ~xemptions, Class ll., as deftned in the State Enviconmenta]. Impact
Report G~idelines and is, thezefor.e, categorlcall.y exempt fcom the r.eyutr.ement•
ko prepar.e an EIR.
ACTI~N; Commis&ioner. Herbst offer.ed Resolution No. PC84-1.12 and moved Ear. its
passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commtesion does hereby
gr.ant Var.iance No. 3389 for a E>ec~od of appcoximately s1.x (6) manths to
cotncide with Ctty Council approvbl for flaga ~nd banners dur.ing the week on
the basts that thece ace apecial cir.cumstanaes applicable to khe properCy such
as size, ~hape, topogr.aphy, locatton and ~urcoundtngs which do nok apply to
other identtcally zoned propezky in the samc vicinityt And lhat str.ict
appl.ication o£ the Zontny Code depr.iveu the pcoperty of priv~lec~ea enjoyed by
other pr.opecties in the i.denttcal zone and claa~if~catt~n in the vi.ci.nity and
sub3ect t~ Interdepar.tmental CommittUe recommendations.
Greg Hastings, Asslst~nt Pl.annec, asked that a conditton be added that subject
pc~pecty shall be developed substanti.ally tn ~ecor.dance wi.th p~ans ~~nd
specifications on file wit.h the City of Anahetm marked ExhiUtt Nos. l and 2.
Commtssioner Hecbst expl.ained ttaiy approval would be for. a maxirtium of etqht
(8) smAll taper.ed flags ay shown i.n the ptiok~gr.aphs submttted.
Ms. Wilson explained ther.e ar.e Eouc fl.ags on each si.d~ of the entr.y and that
the sales m~del complex wt1.1. cemain whe~e it is when the othec units are
devel.oped.
Jack Whtte, Ass.istant Ctty Attocney, suggested that the wording shall be,
"That the vaciance shal.l be of a term eotecmious with thQ existtng pecmit
issued pursuant to Section 1.8.05.085 ~r any extenston thereof appr.oved by the
City Cauncil." He stated they have an ex{sting permit which could be extended
by the City Council., but could not be for flying fl.ags othe~ than on weekends
and k-olidays without this variance.
U~~ coll call, th~ foregoing r.esolution was passed by the foliowing vote:
AYES: BOUAS, BC~SHURE, FRY~ HERBST, KING, MC EiURNEY
NOh:S : BUSHORE
ARSENT: LA C~AIRE
Jack White, Assistant City Attorney, pret~ented the wcitten xight to appeal the
Planning Commission's decision within 2'L days to the City Council.
RECESS: 3:18 p.m.
RECONVENE: 3:30 ~.m.
6/l.l/84
a4-352
MI~UT~S ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION June 11 1984
ITEM N0. ~7. BIR NEGATIVE DECI.ARATION AIJD RGLU~ST r'OR REMOVnL_Q~ SPECIMEN
TREES.
~~
Cr.escent Driv~,
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNF.ItS: PARAMJEET S. '~)11RGAN, 5040 S.
Anaheim, CA 92807. Pr~p~r.ty descr.ibed as an irr.ogular.l,y-shnped pe~~~ximately
l.and canaisting of. approxim~tely 1..2 ac:res, having a fr.or~tage of app.
20Q feet on the south cide of Crescent Grive, and fur.thec descr.tbed as 5040
Bast Cr.e~cent Dcive.
Request fpr approv~l. oE the r.emoval c~f twel.ve (l2) apec~men tceea. Ten (10)
of the tr.ees requeRted to be ~enaved wer.e pceviousl.y cut down by thc
petitioner on May 1.4, 1984, wtthout khe b~nefit of a permtt.
1t was nor.ed th~ appl.icant was not pr.eser.t. Comm~a8toner Bushor.e ~ndtcot.ed he
dtd nok feel it wuul.d be fair. to hear, r,ne op~asition without the applicAnt
betng pr.esent.
Thece wer.e approximately ~ix l6) per.son~ t,dtcaring thei.r. presence tn
op~o~i.tlon to subjecL requeat and although the ataff repor.t was not re:~d, tt
15 reLecr.ed to and mAde a pact of lhe mtnutes.
Jack White, A3sistank City Atkor.ney, expl~l.ned the Pl.anning Commi~sion is not
l~ega~ly obl.igated to have th~e ~~pplicant present to hold the heacing.
It was pointed out the applt~ant tiad indi.cated he would be present ak 3:00
p.m. and it is now 3:30 p.ni.
Cammissioner Hecbst stated he felt a~nce the oppositi.on had b;~c.antedoes not
afternoon, he woul.ci ltke t.o tieac theic r.emar.ks and if the app
show up, he k~ould cecommend continuin5 the hearing.
Hecbert Chcisterisen, 5108 Cr.eccenC Drive, Anahei.m, stated sevf~~~al years ago
beEore the city had any kind of tzee removal ordinance aiid abc:,ut the time
Anaheim Hills star.ted devetoping, the developers immed~.ately atarted cutting
down the trees as ti~ey stood in theiz way, so sevecal commit::ees wer.e formed
ko devel~p a tree cemoval. o~dinance in ocder to save tha~t a~'ea from becominy
totall.y leveled. He stated he wor.ked on those committees a~.id i.s quite
familiar with the or.dinance anr~ the ceasons it was dev~lop~~d. He stated a
pecmit is now requir.ed to cut d~wn trees and the only wa;~ to get a per.mi~. ~.s
to prove that the tree ts endangectng life or. property nn:i in this inst~nce,
the tr.ees were not endangecing anythi.ng: ~hat. none were l.eaning ovEr the
petitioner°s house or endanger~ng his driveway and they ~aecp propectY ~'iHe
trees and were all healthyr so the~e is no ceal r.eason f.or a variance.
stated they do not want the trees cut down because it is fllegal and they
enhance the Pecal.ta Hi.l.ls and Cmnyon areas. He stated peopl.e butlt out there
because it is a tu~:al area and +they have tried very dil.igently to maintain it
as a rucal arna ~~ig~~ngean~detheyshav~atriedntocmaintatnrthe tceesslhorse[oads
ar.e winding a
rid~ng priv:lleges, etc.
Mr. Chri.stensen stated ther~e are other areas cat dowrsieallothp trees~real~yant
the rur.al atmospt,ere and t~ indiscciminatel.y
destcoys what beauty is l.eft on the petitioner's pazktcular property. He
6/11/8 +
M1NUZ'~S AN~HEIM CITY PL~NNING CUNMISSION, June_]1, 1984 a-353
explained the appl.~ca~t ha~ already cut d~wn name of the trees wtthout
permta~i~n and, for.tunately, it wae stopped heforn he cut khem all down, but
~het haa already made it ugly nnd cutC~ng down more wili nat he~p the
attuatton.
Mr. Chriatensen stated he cannot apeak for the o~sociatton 5ut thought all. the
hnmeowneca in l•he ar.ea would be oppo3ed tu thi~ r.equeat and st,~ted ther.e Are
altecnates such as trimming thc tcees, mainCaini~g them, topping Chem, etc.
Tom McMullen, 5041. East Cr.e~cent, Ana1~~~~m, stated he is a n~~ighbor ~nd ttietr
easement is directly ncr.ues Che str.eet and they have the same Eucal.yptur tree
1{ne and they have 40 oK 50 of thesP specimen Eucalyptus trres up their.
easement and onto their pr,opnr.ty and they house a tr.emend~us amount of
birdlife, hawks, owls, etc. !Ic stdted they understood that perminston had to
be obtatned to cut the~e trees and h~ did ror. un~ecskand h!+w the applicant was
ablP to cut so many al.ceady. He state~ he be].ieved it the rest ot the tr.ees
ar.e cut, they woul.d l.one thet~ bicd neat a~ea along t~iia ensement= thak l•he
wildlife in khe asea (o'possums, raccoon:) seem to favoc these tr.ees and Lhey
would hate to see it al.l l.ost Eoi no real reasan; that the applicant's
~raperty has been on the r~~arket z~r s~le t~r ulmost two years and he did not
know why he had cut these tree: ~hen he is obviourl.y gotng to be moving when
the ~rop~rty ie sold. He ste~r-<, he believ~~d tf there is a law and r.egulatfon,
ever.yone shunld abide by xt •i~• 3tar_ed he fett someChing shoul.d be done in
the way ot penalties for c~ ~~: the trees.
Jim Mar.tin, 260 Cr.isalta, •.- :~~+p, ,.,~~Jatned theic street is dtce;~~y to the
east oti the row of t~ees ~, . w~,~ c_-,~c down; that there is no r.eason to cut
tr.ees down in Peralta t{i n~:.<.. :;,,ey can ba tr.i,mmed and if khere is any
danqer. o£ them falliny ~~~ -~> t~eetopping avatlable and ther~ ts no beneftt
served in curtiny doWr ~--~~__; --,at thta ta one oE the f.ew aceas in Orange
County were the neight~~a •-~,~•~ :~~ich a pcokective attitude toward the trees;
and potnted our. we arf, .: :: t~ ~,-,g parks to Fz,ve the sycamoces and aaks in the
Anaheim Hil.ls ar.ea. H~- -. --_•--r~ the trees ar~e a public resource and he would
ask that the Pl.anning _~~~r~:~~~ian deny the cuttins down of the trees and also
thaL the Cit}~ Att.orney ~*~«. :~ see nf penaltter~ can be enforced against the
homeowner to replace t-~~ ;^•-w~s with equa~. specimens, even thouqh he real~zed
the 14" diameter tr.ees ~:ar~+~~~r. be replaced.
Macy War.ren, 245 Chri.sa'ra way, Anahetm, stated she is a neighbor. of the
appl;..:ant and she re~17.y ;:~.,~+esn't have anykhtng different to add, but wanted to
go on record saying ~hr ;~~s not app~ove of what is betng done and she thought
th;~ beauty af the area i._: tota? y chan9ed and her whole view has been changed
by the cuttiny of t^t~~.~ uees.
Deanna McMUll.en~ 5U41 Sast Crescent, Anahei.m, stated these t~ees had been
p,lanted in the pasC to form wi.ndbreaks because this used to be an orange grove
acea, so dziving dnwn Crescent, there iF a full line of trees, and thts
applicant has cut a portion of these tr.ees, so now th~t fu.il. line has been
totall.y interrupte~l.
Sco~tt McCUrdy, 5850 E. Trapper Tra~l., Anaheim, stated he just enter.ed escrow a
couple o~f weeks ayo on the pcopecty directly next dooc to subject property and
that he has faaved ~noney foc most of his J.ifet.~me to be able to move to Peralka
6/11/84
MINUTES ANANBIM CITY PLAN~ING CUMMISSION, June_]l~_19~4 __ ___84-3ti4
Hi].ls and wea very sucpriaod to dcive paet the lot th~t he has tn escrow and
see aevecal of the trees cut down nnd was horribl.y disappoinGed that the
continuity of the area hos beQ~ damag~d and he would real.ly ltke to know if
there ~s eome way that aome additinnal tr.eea can b~ put b~ck tnto pl~ce.
TFIE PUBLIC H~AR.LNG WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Hecbst ~stAted he ib r.eview{.ng the drawtny And it api~eara that
Reven (7) oE Ch~ trees are on the inter.tor. par,t of the ]ot and that ther~ ara
ftve (5) al.ong the bqrder.ltne, a~d only two are teft sii~ce he has cut down 1.0
of the l2 requested. Ne stated the ~only thiny the Commissi.on can do is deny
the ceqiipat for remova] of anlmore oE the LKeea and r.eplacE t1~e tr.ee~ cut
down, par.ti~cular.].y alonq the bor.der. He Etated he did not know what the ctty
can do ~ince he has !~een tn vtolatton ~f the ocdinance by cutting the trees
down wi.thout a per.mit.
Jack White, Aasiatant Ctty Attor.ney, stated the vtolatton ta a misdemeanor and
a cttatton has already been tssued. He staled ttie nl.anning Commisaion has
befoce tt a zequest to pecmi.t the removal o£ the tr.ee~ that have alr.eady been
removedi And, of course, he can plant treeF to ceplace them, but onc~e they are
cut down, those particular. tr.ees ar.e gone.
Mr. Christensen r.eviewed the map wtlF~ Comtni.sstonez Her.bst, potnting out whi.ch
trees have been cut already.
Responding to C;,mmisatoner McBurney, Mr. Chr.isten~en stated the pettkioner. had
a t~ee service cut th~ tr.ees. He explained he had dr.iven by there at t.he ttme
the City Code Enfotcement Officer was ther.e citing him, but they had al.r.eady
cut the trce~ by then. He staCed fortunately they cut tl~e stumps r.ather. high
and there is a good possibility that those trees wtll xespcout.
Commissionec Herbst stzted he thuught any trees cut along the border. should be
replaced. Mr.. Christensen stated if Commisston r.equi,r.es him to reQlace those
~.n the border, ~t ma; g~lve him permi.sston to pu31 the stumps out and put tn a
5-gallon sttck and it i~ posstbl.e the S or 6-foot t~igh stumps may grow back.
He stated he was not a tcee expert and was not suze at what point they dte,
Commissioner Herb~t suggested wording the action so that the trees that have
been cut alony the border t~ave to be inspected by a tree expert, and tf they
will grow a9ain, they should be left., ~ut if they wou3.d not respcout, new
trees would have to be pl.anted.
Commisaioner Bushore asked if A citattan was tssued to the property owner and
the tree service. Greg Hastin~s, Assistt~nt Planner, responded tn this case,
both were cited. He expl~ined the cecocc]s were checked and the tr.ee service
did noc have a business l.i.cen3e and was c:tted fo~ that also. He al.sa
expla~ned the t~:ee replacement ordin.~nce does not apecify a size of
replacement trees.
Chaitwoman Bnuas stated she thought the anes taken down i.n the ~nterior should
be replaced with some type of tceQ. Greg Hastings responded that the
ordinance requires that trees be replaced on a~ne by one basis.
6/7.1~/84
MINUT~S A~AHEIM ~ITY PLANNING CGMMISSION, June 11, 1984 84-355
ACTION: CommissioneL ti~r.bst off~3red n mution, aeconded by Commiaetoner King
and MOTION CARRIED (CommLsatoner La Claice absent) thAt the AnAnetm City
Plar-ning Cammisaton hA~ r~viewed tt~e propoael to remov~ twel.ve (l.2) apecimen
tr.ees on en t~r.eyulor.ly-shaped p~ccel. of land con~isting oi approximately l.2
acres, havtng a fr.ontage of upproximately 200 Eeet ~n ttie ~outh side of
Creacent Drive, and fucther. deacctbed as 5040 East Ceescent DriveJ ~nd doea
heceby appr.ove Che Negat~ve DE~C1$Kat~O~ up~n finding thak tt has constder.ed
the Neqattve Dec].ar.ation toqether. with any comments received ducing the publi.c
ceview proceas and tur.khec finding on the basis uL the Inittal Study and any
commente ceceived that there 4s no aubstantial evi.dence that the pr.oject wil]
have a si.gnificant effect on tt~e er,~:~+Kanment.
Commisst~ner Herbst 4LferPd a motion Eor. dental oE the r.equest Eor. oppr.oval
for the cemoval uf twelve (12) apecimen trees, and fucther thet thP appltcant
has il.legal. cut ap~roxima~el.y ten ( 10) ~~ectmen tr.eer~, and :`~3t he wit 1 have a
certtfted t~ee surgeon tnspect the stumps of the t~ees removed on the pcoperl•y
l.ine to determine i[ they can be rejuvenatec3 to grow and if they carnot, that
he wil.l be rer~uir~d to repl.ace them with l5-gall.on ~pecimen trc~es as appr.oved
by the Ctty of Anahetm in ~he same l.~catton, and that the ather. tr.ees already
~emoved i.n other ].ora~xons on the pr.o~ecty at~a]] be r.eplaced aomewher.e on the
property.
Commisyi.oner. Bushor.e potnt•ed out tf the ceyuest is denied, t.he City wtl] not
be ak,te to make him repl.ace the trees that have been ~emoved.
JacD. White explained the only 3bi.lity the Ctty has to have the petitioner.
re{~lant the trees is in con~unction with the appr.ovaJ. of the per.mit; and that
tr~F: City is in court right now For. the un'Lawful cutttng of the trees.
Commiasioner Hezbst suggested approvtng the permtt for only ten (].0) trees
which have already been r.emoved, contingent upen the zeplanting tn the manner.
set forth, and denying the tequest fnr r.emoval of the othec two t2) trees.
Jack White stared he would futther Ruggest that the Commisston might want to
r.etain jurisd~ctton and only tndicate that the permit wt].l. be granted
c~ntinyent upon the action of cepl.acement and not appcove tt today.
Commissioner liecbst sugqested zewor.ding his motion requiring that a certffi.ed
tree ~urgeon examine the tree stumps alonq the border and lf the exper.t says
they will not gr.ow, he will have to r.epl.ant them.
Ct~airwoman Bouas stated there would be no guarantee that they would grow, even
if the tree surgEOn says they will., especially if the pettti.one~ se].ects the
tcee expett.
Commissianer eushore stated many times when a person goes to court, the judye
says they have to go through the proper legal r.emedtes prior to the heartng
and asked if that is the situation in this case. He sta~e~ i.f the Commisston
approves the cequest wttl~ these contingencies, the ~udge may dismiss the case.
Jack Whi.te repl.fed that is the Keason h? sugge~ted the Commission ~~~ain
contcol and not lssue the permit until. the tcees ar.e ~eplanted; that the
matler should be continued and it should be indicated by motlon that the
Pl.anning Commisaion wil..l issue a permit upon compllance wtth the conditions.
6/11/84
t1.LNUTES ANAH~IM CTTY PLANNING COMMIS5:ON, June ll, 1984 84-356
Ne stated he dic'• not belie~~e ~his case hae g~,~~en to the tci.Al atag~. Ne
stuted the matter. wo~~ld have t~ be conttnaed to a opectti.c date asking the
petittoner to come back wtth pr.oof that he has compl.ied w1.th ~he reotrictions.
ll• wae noted thE pet.itioner. had just arrived e~t the meeCinq.
Chatcwoman B~uac~ reopenr.d the publ.ic hesrtng.
Commisstoner Fry left the meeting at 4:00 p.m. and dtd not retur.n.
Pbrajmeet Uargan, owner, stated he was not awAr.e that he could not cut the
L•reea and asaunied aince they wer.e on hts ~roper.~y Lhat he c~uld cut themT that
he bouyht the houae lwo ye~rs ago and at that rtme l~e waA noe told; that when
the trees were removed, the neighbors told him that he could not• ~emove them
and he called the City and told r.t~em that the tcees w~~r.e hazar.daus to his
property becauae the brdnche~ ware on the r.oof of hi.s i~ouse and thece ore ver.y
ol.d trees and asked it he coul.a cut them and was tol.d t.hey did know and to
just go at~ead ur~d do it, so even at that ~oint, he dtd n~~t know whether. ar. not
he could remove them. Fle stated when he found out, he stopped l•he wor.k and
all the trees wece not r.emoved yEt, and he c+'~e in and applted Eor the per.mi.t;
that there ar.e about AO tree~ on hts property, l.7 of them specimen tr.ees, and
he ~til.l has 9 oak treea and l'1 cypreas trees, and sev:~n (7i specimen trees,
sa he would still. be matntain?ng ti0 tr.ee~ on hts pr.operLy.
He stated his bi.ygest co~cern ts th~t khece ar.e two trees with the bcanches
right on his roof and when the winds came l.aat time~ the branches fel]. on hts
coof and ai.r condittoning untt and rhe back yar.d was a me~s and ~hey had
snakes, gophers ~nd rats and the back yacd was just a forest. He stated the
distance between th~ ~ak trees and the ~pecimen tcees ts not ver.y btg bec~use
the oak tr.ees were planted Eor the r~urposes of removing the~e tr.ees later. on;
that they ace : hazacd to the health and *.;~e kids were afratd to pla~~ out baek
becaut~e of the snakes. He explained they did find A or 5 snakes tn the l.ast
two years. Ne stated he wanted to r~move the treer~ which were su~roun~9inc, his
pKOperty, and cemove t;;~ middle two tcees so he cauld cl.ean the whole area and
~lo h~s l.ands~3ping. He stated h~ would r.equest appcoval to zemove at ].east
two more trees, and that he wil.l still maintatn 7 specimen tr.ees and 33 orher
tcees.
Chairwaman eouas explained the Planning Comm;[ssi.on has heard from the
opposition and asked that a spokesman for the gcoup come back and e~•;latn
their opposition to Mr.. Dargan.
Mc. Christensen stated he thoughk the biggest concern the opposttion has ts
the cutting of the tr.ees immediately in front of the house on Crescent Dr.ive;
that ttiey were very l.ar.yP tceea; that the furtF~est was pcobablX l.5 to 20 feet
Erom his house and the rest are Lar.thec ~way; that almost every house in
Pecal.ta Hills has Eucalyptus trees s~mewher.e on thetr propert;y and many have
them very close to their ho~ses and they ar~ t.~e kind of tree that once tn
awhile has to be tr.immed because ~he M~tnd Mill break off long limbs. He
stated none of rhe trees on ~he applicant's pKOperty have the s~~ghtest tilt
to thern, however, ~here ace small branches which do fal.l which are only twigs,
but they do have to be cl.eaned up, but none a~e endangering hts hause. He
stated occasionally there are animals o~ rodents in the area and that ts to be
expected i.n the ru~al area, and having snakei~ there I~as nothing to do wttt~ the
tcees being the~e. He added when the petitioner moved into the house, the
6/11/84
MINUTES ANAHEI~ CITY PLANNING COMMI__S5_ION, June 11, 196a 84-357
tr.eea wer.e tnere and if he did not l~ke them, he shoul.d not heve moved ther.e.
He etated it just irk~ tt~e rest of the people in the ar.ea wh~~n people move in
a~,d want to etar.t changing th~ area to muke it l.ook l.ike aomewhere else and if
tFiey want to live aomowhece else, then somewher.e el.se ia where they shoul.d
live and not try to totally change the landscaping thc~r.e. HE~ atated they
still do not see any reason to cut the tcees down becauae ther.e is absolutely
no danger i~f thEy ace properly trimmed, and refe~red to ranother neighbor wh~
h~~ juet apent a lot oL money rr.imminq his L•r.ees.
Mr. Uargan etated he was ~~ot totally awar.e thAt the t~ees rouxd not be cut and
as soon as he found out, he came to the City affices and askecf them Cor A
permft, and completely skoppe~i the wock, and still ther.e are seven apecimen
trees and 33 other. tr.ees on the property which ia much mor.e than any oE ht~
neighbar.a. He stated the tcees which were cut wer.e surcoundtrn~ h+..° house and
propeKty and two Limes when the Santd Ana winds came, hig brane:hes came down
on his roof and that was the r,eason for. cutting khe tcees, and also they were
ju3t cl.enning up the property. He stated ther.e are two more tr.eea which need
to be cut. Hp skated he spent the money to clean up the pro~er.ty and is not
tryiny ko destroy i.t.
Commissir~ner Bushore stated before Mr.. paryan showed up, ther.e was a)ot of
di,scussfon as to whether or not the stumps would, tn fact, ~tart growtng ~gatn
and, in hi~ optnton, there ts nothing any uglier than a dead Euctilyptus stump
or a aprouted stump becauae it takea on a dtfferent character. He stated he
woul.d agree it deser.ves some type of scudy to see whtch ones would come bc~ck
becauae in r.rying ta maintain the beauL-y in the area, the Commi.ss:lon may be
creattng a bi,gye~ eyesore than intended. He stated the Comm~fisi.on wants to
matntain the natural beauty up thece and ten tree stumps can look pcetty bad
for. a l.~ng peciod oE time.
Commissioner Herbst sta~ed he wou~d offer a motion for conttnuance, nottfying
the appltaant that the Comrtiission is not gotng to give approval for these
Kemovals until he can abide by the ocdinance which means he is gotnc~ to have
to replant the 10 tcees he has cemoved with some type of l.5-ga]lon speei.men
t~ee and that if it is possible, that the stumps on the fronk psrt of the
property al.ong the pKOperty line be salvaged, upon the cecommendatior from a
tree suryeon or tree expert, and if not, they are to be replaced tn ~:hat
particular locati.on an the propecty line and the othec trees can be planted
some pl.ace else on the property and they would have to be specimen tzees on
the Ctty's list.
Commissioner He~bst stated a pcaperty owner or developer can secure a permtt
to cemove specimen tcees on the propecty because they may interfere with the
development of the Propecty, but they have to be replaced one for one on the
propecty, so Mr. Dacgan will have to do the same time. He stated this heartng
wi~l~ be continued until such time as the obligation is fuiftlled.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, second~d by Commtssioner King
and MOTION CARRIED iConun~ssioner La Cl.aire absent) that considecation of. the
aforementtoned mattec be continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of
6/l~/84
MINUT~S ANAHEIM CITY PL~NNING COMMISSTON~ June 11, ]984 64-358
Auguet 6, 1984, in or.der toc the pettttoner to replant the ten (]0) trees
which have alr.eady been illegally r.emoved, Keplacing the ci:es o~ the propor.ty
].ine with 15-gallcn apecimen tr.~ea in the sAme location u~le~s a reppr.t fcom a
certified tr.~e surgeon ~nd~.cates that th~ r.emaining stump8 can be rejuvenated
to res~,rout, nnd replaatng those removed on the tnterfo~ of the lot some p.l~ce
on the property.
Mr. DAZgan staCed he undArstoud that he ~c~~ld b~ allowed to cemove five treea
without a~ecmit and stated he would be ~~il.ling ta cepl.ant five of the t~ees.
Commtasioner kierbat stated the petitioner ha~ to replace the ten trees which
were ~emoved with ten trees fcom khe appcove~9 Speci.men Tree L~at.
Tom Mr.Mullen stated the petittonec's h~use is "foc sale' and aeked if thto
actton coul.d be ~ted to hi.m specifical.ly becauae he coul.d sel.l the home within
the bU days anci never, come back Fuc' the pertntt and Che tc~ees wtll. never. be
Kep].ac:ed.
Commissioner Bushor~ sugyested the neighbor.s shuuid tnfocm the r.eal eatate
agent l.isted an the siqn of what is happeniny so that tht~y wtll. have to ceveat
tha~ to anyone who would Ue inter.ested in purchasing khe pr.operty, and the
agent st~ould be duty-bound Co reveal any advecse conditions ko any .^.ltents.
ITEM N0. 18. REi~ORTS AND RECOMMENDATIUNS:
A. CONDITIUNAL USE P~RMIT NU. 2408 - Requested by Planntng Depactment staff
foc cl.actfication of per.mitted u~es under Pl.anhing Commission Resal.ution
PC83•-1.3, ~,3~+proviny Condittonal Use Pecmit Na. 2408. Pcoper.ty located at
the nor.th~est cor.ner of La Palma Avenue and Lakevtew Avenue.
ACTION; Commissioner. King of:ered a motton, seconded by Commfssioner
McBucney and MOTZUN CARRIED (Commissiuner LaClaic~ absent), that subject
request is hereby withd~awn by Rtaff aZnce the property owner ts
prnposing to occupy subject prupecty wtth uaes ~er.rt~itted in the Canyor~
Industrial Area.
~. CONDIZ'IONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2040 - Requeated by John T. Hacdy, Agent Eor.
6urnett-Ehline Yro,per.ttes Inc., for terminatio~ of Condi~tional Use Permtt
No. 2040. Proper.ty located at the northwect cocner of Orangewood Avenue
and State Coll.ege Boulevard.
ACTION: Commisaioner King offer.ed Resolutton No. PC84-1.13 and moved for
its passage and ad~ption that the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commi.ssion does
k~eceby terminat~ C~ndttl.onal Use Permtt No. 2040.
On roll cal.lt the fcrego~~~ resolutior~ was passsd by the fol~.owin~ vote:
AYES: BOUAS, BUSHORE, FRa, HERBST, KING, MC BURNEY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT; LA CLAIRE
6/11/84
MINUTES ~N~N~IM CITY ~LANNING COMMISSION, Juno 11. 1984 84-~54
C. CONDITiUNAL UdE PERMIT N0. 1838 - Requeated bx Mtke I,in, Chao, Inc., for.
a one-y~ec retruactive extenston of ttme for Conditional. Uae rermit Nu.
~83~. PropectX l.acated al• 333 and 475 Wesk ~al.l Road.
ACTIUN; Commisatonec Herbst off~lr.e~ p rnotion, aeconded by Cammiseioner.
King anci MOTIqN CARRIEp (Commissioner ~a Cl.eir,e absent and Commisetoner
Bushoce af~ataintng), that the Anah~tm City Pl.anning Commiaston doea
hereby gr~nt a r.etcoacttve one-yeac extension of ttme for Conditionel. Uae
Per.mit No. ~838, ta expir.e un May 22, 1.985.
U. CUNDITIUNAL U&~ PERMIT N0. 2265 - Kequeated by John T. HArdy, P.y~nt foc
BurnettwEh]ine Pcoperti.es Inc., to terminate Condittpnal Use Permt~ No.
2265. F~coperty located at the norkhwesr cornec oE Ocangewood Avenue And
State Cc~l].ege eouleva~d.
ACTION: Commtssioner. K~ng offered Resolukion No. PC84-114 and moved for.
ttE pas~age <s~~d adoption khAt the Anaheim City Pl.orining Commisai.on daes
h~reby terminate Condttional Use Pecmtt. No. 2265.
On co~l call, Che foregoing r.esolution was pas8ed by the fo7.lowing vote;
AYES: QOUAS, BU5t10R6, FRY, HER85'i'~ KING~ MC BURNEY
NO~S: NONE
A9SENT; LA CLAIRE
E. VARIANCE NU. 148 - Rzquested by Norman J. Priet~t, An~hetm Redevelo~ment
Aqency, lo terminate Vartance No. 1.48. Property l.ocated at the northet~at
corner. of Broadway and Herbor Boulevacd.
AC7ION: Commtssioner King offeced Resolutton No. PC84-115 and moved fo~
its pa~sage and adoption that the Anahetm City Planntng Commission ~'~es
hereby ter.minate Va~~tance No. 148.
On roll call, the fo~egoing cesolutian was passed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS~ FRY, HERBST, KING, MC BURIJEY
NOES: NONB
ABSENT: LA CLAIRE
ABSTAIN: BUSHORE
F. TENTATIVE MAP AF 'PRACT N0. 1.0981 - Requested by Fieldstone ~~mpany for
r.evtew and approval of final specific p~ans. Prapec*_y located south and
west of the intecsection of Santa Ana Canyon Road and the proposed
southerly extension of Weic Canyon Road.
Andy Ducham, Fieldstone Company, was prese~it to answer any questtons.
AC'PION: Commissioner Herbsk offered a motion, seconded by Commtss.toner
King and MOxiON CARRZED (Commissioner La Clatce absent), that the Anahetm
City Planning Commission doea her~by approve final. specific plans
submitted in conjunct~an with Tentative Map of Tract No. 10981..
6/~1/84
MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PJ.ANNING COMMISSION, June ].1, 1984 84-360
G. CUNDITIONAL U5E PERM't~i' N0. 2458 -~equeated Dy Nea1 G. Singer., CA~mn~k
~evel.opment Cocp., for a one-yeac exten~ton oE time for. Canditionnl Uae
Permit No. 2458. Property located at 950 S~uth Gilbec~ Street.
ACTION: CommisetonPC He~bat offer.ed a motion, seconded by Commisatonec
King and MOTION CARRIED (Commis~i.o~er I.a Clair.e abaent), that tho Anaheim
CttX Pla~tining Commtasion does heceby gcant a one-year exten~ion oE ti.me
Eor Condit~ona.l Une pecmit No. 2458, to expice June 27, 19~5.
H. CONDJTIONAL USB PERMIT N0. 2377 (Revtaton No. ~- Requested by Floyd F.
~ac~na, Attorney, for ~ppsoval by the Ci.ty Council of r.evioed plans.
Pr~,perty l.ocated rit the northeast corner. oE ~a Pal.ma Avenue and arasher.
Stceet.
Floyd L. Farano, Attor.ney, ]00 South Anahetm Boulevard, AnahE~im,
expl.atned the last sentence in Per.~~gr.c~ph 7 of the staff r.epo~t indicates
that a maxtmum of 10 new c:ars wtil ae displayed in the ~howcoom and they
are seek~ng to display and sell new and used car.s and the facility on the
northweat coKnec oE er~sheac Street and La Pal.mn wLll. be for used car.s
only aC thts timE. HE stated they would a~]EO l.ikP to dis~lay 5 car.s in
the iront of the butlding on tt~e east side and more than 5 cacs on the
west stde and thece will be no ~igns, banner.s, or. advectistng of any ktnd
on th«: vehicl.e~ themsel.ves.
Mr.. Facano descr.ibed the proposed signage nnd explained they are only
requesting a totA1 of 60 additional square feet of si~nage, excl.udtny the
three flags, and one of the additions is a 12-squaKe foot dealecshtp stgn
indicated ~n the staE£ ceport as a wa?.1 sign, which is nat a wal.l si.gn,
but ts a wt~ite granite monument dealer.ship aign which wil] have the name
of the owner. and tf~e addcesc on it, and it will not be attached to the
fr.ont of the building, but will be out about ~ix feet from the southwest
cor.nec of the butlding. Ne added the 45-foot high, 9-square foot sign
and the three flags on engineeced polPs are addittonal.
Responding to Commissiunec Bushore, Jack White, Assistant Ctty Attorney,
expl.ained the r.equest before the Planntn~ Commisston is to make s
cecotnmendation to the Ciky Counci.l on the proposed expansion of Lhe
Mercedes Benz deal.ecship and t~-e~r request r.egacding thetr signing
program; that the use of the pcoperty as an automobile 6ealership was
previousl.y app~oved by the City Council on appeal following denial by the
Planning Commission under Cunditional '~se Pexmit 2377; that in lookfng at
the Cnde, that use does not appear an the list of condittonal uses in the
Canyon lndustrtal Area; however, the fact that the permit and the use of
the prope~ty have been approved by the Council is not the tssue before
the Plannxng Commiesios~ and the ie~sue is whether or not the dealershtp
should expand and Cha signing prog~am shoul.d be approved; that tf the
planning Commission wants tu take the posttion that thece shg.ll be no
expan~ion because it is their belief that this is not an appropriate use
under the Code as a conditional uae, they can take that action; howevec,
Council has already approved it and i.t ~is i.n, and he was noC suce what
can be done about it now.
6/l.l/84
~
~;
MINUT~S ANANh:IM CITY PLANNING COMMISBION June ll ].984 84-361
Mc. Far.ano stated or,iginelly aftar some discussion with staff aa to the
mannor. ~n which this should be handl.ed, tt was decided thnt it ahould b~
aubmttted in the for.m of a aepa r.eLe condittonal ube permit Application,
however, on r.econstd~ration, tt was decided thi.a could be handled in the
f.or.m of a mo~iiftcation of an exi.eting CUP aince is was part of. a p]anned
unit devel.opment. He sleted the Corunission is betng aAked to [PVI,RW tt
before it goea to the City Council fo~ a publ tc hearing for any comments
or suggesttons toc ways it ean be made bettec.
Commiesioner Hush~r.e stated ori.ginally the Commisaton voted to deny t he
Mer.cedea Benz dealer.ship; thr~t he has seen the dealerahip und knowa t he
neople who aKe involved and th e y are r.unntng a fine oper.ation and he
real~,y doeu nnt have any pcoblern with the pxpanston. He AtAted, howe ver,
he would recomm~nc~ th~t c,ity Counctl amend the Code aomehow to al.low the
a~~~ .~nobile Agency in that zone because r.ight now it ls nor. on thc~
appcoved liet of condittonal. usPe in Chat ar.ea, even with a condittona]
use per.m[t. Ne stuted ther.e a r.e ot.her. use~ a~,.lch wer.e allowed which
should not have been anprove:d and he woulr3 compace thta to ths same
procedure as a peraon sending in Eor a bustner~s ltcen~e by mail when a
condittonal. use per.mtt itz reall_y needed. He atuted tn this
instance, the peti.tioner has L•h e condltiona~ ur~e pecmtt in his hand, but
the Code is qoing l;o have to be amended to allow the use, and it c~houl.d
probabl.y be ampnded to al.low al.l of the other usea which have ~l.ceady
been appcoved. Ne stated tt is not hia intent to take uses away Lrom
people ufter they have been yr~nted, but if a mtst.ake t~ras made, it should
be corrected. He added those uses a]..lowed incor.rectly wi,l1 now have the
advantage c~E bei~g the~e and ~ince then the dooc has been shut on all
others and he did not thtnk tha t ts qutte fr~ir.
Mr. ~arano stated he thought th p cir.cumstances for this application a re
subst. ~itially differ.ent than anythinq else that exists in that acea and
when the matter was bcought bef ore the City, they tried nat to offer.' ~n
'open door.• thcough whtch anyon e else coul.d star.k a used c~r lot; an d
that th.is ts part of a PUD whict~ is slightly moce than ei.ght acres and
this one use compci.ses 4.6 ac~es.
Commissioner Bushore statec~ an o ther applicant wtthdr.ew hts cequest
because he wanted a list of. us e s added to an officP but]dtn4 that wa s
alreaay constructed which wece not allowed by the Code, but a cond{ticn~l
use permtt had been issued for the office building and they have to now
l.ive by the Code; and in this c a~e, the appl~cant is asking Eor an
expansion of t.he uae whtch shou ld not even be allowed. He stated again
he has no p~obl.em at aJl with t he expansion, but when the r,ecommendation
is made thaC if the Ctty Counci 2 does pprove the expa~ston, he woul.d
suggest recommendtng tF,at they amend khe Code i.n whatevar. manner.
necessary to make it a l.egally confocming use.
Commissioner Hecbst stated he d isagreed; that this pa~ticular unit was
controlled differently; that he did not wish to see the i.ndustr.ta.l area
deluged with appl~cattons for a utomob.tl.e agencies; that tt is up to the
Commission to make its recommendattons for. and against th~: parlicul.ac
use, and because this is a pla nned area, he does not agree wtrh the
expanston and this is what he w3s afratd of tn the beginn~ng, and hts
6~11/84
MINUTES ANANEIM CITY ~LANNING COMMISSION, June .11._1984 84-362
cecommenddtton to the City C ouncil, tf they want to go ~head with the
expanaion, would be lhAt the y do not allow any car.s expoAOd to the 8~C@@t
and al.l. muak be inside the building which would el.iminate the po8aibility
of expansion o[ aomo ott~er, u~es in the aKeA. He atated he doea not agree
with the 45-faot high rotati ng Aign and thought the na:,e oC thR
automobil.e agency could be i r~c~rpor.ated with the Meccedes sign on the
alr.eet. Ne stated an indust rial user would ~ot be a1 lowP~l to have thAt
muny aigns, so he did not th 3.nk an autamobile agency ahould b2 all.owed to
h~ve them either.. He added he would have no opp~oition to the entranc~
sign.
Commiastonec guahore at~ted if the Council appr.ovea this, ft should be
done tn a proper. manner. whic h may be a special planned aectton allowing
thts type use. He added he has been pro-industr.y tn that acea, along
with Commisatonex Hecbat.
Cummisotoner Herbst etated h e oppooed the Mercedea Benz dealership in the
ficst pl.ace, but the Cuuncil decided o~herwtse, so, thecefore, he thought
the Commisston should make a suggestton thAt if they do appcove this
ex~ansion, Che signs not be all.owed. He el•ated this ts a beautiful
agency and he did not think th~y shoul.d r.uin it with car.s parked out
fcont, particular.ly ~iaed cacs, Ne stated a 45-foot hi.gh sign could
probably be seen f com t:he f r eeway because tt~ere is no butlding acrass the
way, but if they have a pro 5 lem with identtfication ther.e, it i.s a
problem oE their awn moking because they picked the induatrtal. locatton.
Re~sponding to Commtasioner 3 ut~hor.e, Mr. P~r.ano stated he woul.d asoume
they want the 4ti-foot higl~ s tgn ao it can be seen from the Eceeway.
Commissionec Bushoce sCated he remember.s Mr. Farano stated origtnally
that signs wece not needed b ecause the cuetom~r~ would be comi~g thece
esp~cially anc] would know h o w to get thece without et~ns and it was not
the tntent to c1Kaw peoplp i.n off the street.
Mr. Farano stated the sign t hey are p~oposiny does not exceed the
cequirements ot the ordinan c e and they are not requesting a wai.ve~. He
added the r.equest is necessary because the City CounCtl specifte~' ~.n ti~~
CUP thak thex could have a f reestanding sign out frant wh;.~1~ tr, one ~E
the ones they are talking a bout, and the Mercedes symboi whicl~ ta
appcoxtmately 3 feet tn diameter and the Me~cedes sign as a dtce^_ttonal
~ign.
Gr.eg Hastings, Assi.atant Planner, stated since the 12-squar~e foot wall.
sign i~ now interpceted as a fceestanding monument sign, the only waiver
would be the d~stance requi r ement of 3U0 feet between the two monument
signs, as well as a combtne d ErontAge of at least 600 feet to accommodate
two signs. He stated he thought the waiver could be advectised for the
City CAUnctl. publi.c heacing..
Responding ko Commisaione: i3erbst, Mr. Farano stated Che Counctl did not
prohibft the 45-foot high Mercedes sign; that as a inatter of r.ight, he
undecstands that a flag pol e could be 2rected to display the Untted
States and State of Ca~ifoc ni.a flags; that th~ 45-foot htgh rotating sign
is a new consideration and i n his opinion, that sign could be installed
5/ll/84
MINUTES ANAHkIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION,__Jun_e ll, 1.964 84-363
ae a mat~er of right, exce~t fo~ the ~act ~f th4t condit.ion. Mr.. Far.ai~o
atated he thought the concecn was ~hAt they did not want aigna on the new
cer.e ar banners, or. cura wtth prtces disp~ayed ~n the windowa, etc. and
they wanted the signs to be tightl.y contr.ol.led and the signing plAn juot
cemc~ ~ut and it was not a mattec oF a apecific cequeat being r~fuaed, as
much as it was Eome kind of conr,GOl on what could be done.
Mr. ?arano stated the dealerehip sign could be tncocpor.ated on tha
gran:tte monumc~nt sign. He stAted he wanted the Commission to understond
that they are not asking foc Any wai.vere for the aigna.
Commissioner Hecbst stated the car. agency in tha~ zone is not a permttted
use and that is the i$aue and the ~etitioner is Cr.ying to put thts use in
the a~~me category as the industrtal. u~eca. He stated khia would violate
sevt~c~l tpcros of the stgn or.dinance because they can't get 300 feet
between the stgns, ekc.
Commiasi~ner Fr.y stated he bel.ieved original.ly the petiti.oner.s tndicated
theKe wou.ld be no automobtles dtepl.~yed outside at all.
Commisstaner. McBur.npy stated he voted against this or.iginal.l.y and that he
could nc>t aee this as an expanston to the ext~ting faci.ltty. He aeked if
~t was ~wned at the same kime the fi.cst applicat~lon was submitted. Mr.
Farano stated tt was not owned by the Mer.cedes deal.er ac that ttme.
Commissioner. McBucney stated he felt a defintte encroachment tnto the
integr.ity oE the indur~trial area by 41.l.owing this continuation of this
Eactlity riqt~t c~uwn th- ..eet and he cou]_d not vote Eor tt.
Comminsioner. 9usha. ,. '^hanytng the uriytnal PUD includes deletton
~f th~ cea~ zch and de~ ~~ Eacility on the one lot to expand the
~::i~ttng dt.:~.rship a;.c~ss the stceet and noth.ing is said about the RV
conve~~si.on ..nd manufacturing which w~s part of the ortgtnal planned untt
development. He stated again he has no problem with the expansion but
the only way to yet this approval now is with modificatton because a new
conditional use permit could not even be applied for, and his
recommendatian would be th~t if the expansfon is approved, the Code
should be amended to allow uthers to request the condittonal use permit
uc *o come up with an ordinance allowing them to change tt and make the
original conditional use pp~mit right.
ACTION: Commi.sstonec Herbst offe~ed a motton, seconded by Commissioner
Fry and MO't'ION CARRIED (Commisstoner La Claice absent3 that the Anaheim
City Planning Commisaton does hereby recommend to the City Counctl that
Revision No. ~ to Conditional. Use Permtt No. 2377 be dented on the basis
that the Planning Commission does not feel the use is permitted under the
curcent Code; and :Lf the Council sees f.it to allow L•his use, they should
not all.ow any vehicles to be displayed in fr~nt of the butldings, and
that the 45-f~ot high ~otating ~ign should n~t be all.owed and that the
existing monument stgn should tncorporare the dealership sign, and that
the three flags be allowed as requested.
Cha:lrwoman Bouas stated sh~ would not see anything w..nq with the
revolv~.ng sign, if the Council. approves the expansis~:~..
6/11/84
MINUTES AN~HEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ June ll, 1984 84-364
OTHER UISCUSSION;
Commiesioner Ruahore atatPd he would like to make a motion to the City Council
r.egarding per.mi.tted uses in the Canyon Induetrial Areas and that ~l). of the
uses that have been allowed, under what was thought was the pcoper pcocedures
at the li.me, shou].d be revtewedt and that they adopt aome type oE or.dtnance
allowing thoae uses to cemain. He stated mistakes have been made on aome of
the usee And now it ehoul.d b~ coctiected. EIP added t~e thought lhece shou.l.d be
some way to corcect it without cauaing anyone out Cher.e any kur.moit.
Commissioner Nerbnt stated he would agcee, except Eor the Automobile usNn
because the Planntng Co~nl~sion denied thooe anyways and that the ~ounctl will.
pcobAbly ask whaC was appcoved which was not a par.t of the or.dinance. He
stated he thouyht resear.ch wil.l have ko be done to ahow what use~ have been
appr.oved.
Commissioner Hushore ataked hP w:~s t~oping lt r.ould be accompl.ished without a
list.
Annika Santa].Ahti, Assistant Dire~t.oc for 2ontn~, suggested r.hat stafE bcing
che Commtssion a repor.t basicalxy addr.easing thQ list of uaes thAt ar.e
pecrnitte~ conditionally in the r.ematnder oE the indu~tctal. areas, plus the
ones Al.lowed only in thi.s zone and then the Cornmission r_an take u look at
those and deter.mine which ones they feel have a rattonal tukure in the Canyon
Industrtal Areas and that she waul.d assume any such u~es, other than the
chur~h Commisstoner Bushor.e r.efecred to, woul.d probably he in the natur.e of
retatl or office type~ of operations. She stated the Cummisaion could
determine what criter.ia should be used lo determine whether the uscs are
pecmitted oc not. She stat~d it ~ould be quite a task tn go thr.ough and make
a list of all the allowed uses; that he~ per.aona~ feeling would be that the
areas where we have difficulties are the of[ice and retail type usea, wher.e
somebody says they ace going to ser.ve the ~=..;ustrial area and staff and
Commisafon says maybe they do and they ar¢ .~-rmitted; and that th~se would
on.ly be back for about four years. She stated Commission approves close to
30U zoniny appl.ications ever.y yeat. She stated she would be moce ~oncer~ed
about any futuce activity and not about what has already been approved.
Commissioner BuEhor.e stated he just wants to make tt cight Eor the people who
ace ther.e now. He stated he ts concerned b~cause pe~~ple have gotten business
licenses and thought they had a licenre -•~ do business, and found out they
didn't, or. they thought they had a bu .; per.mit and faund ~ut the permit
was isaued in erroc. He added he di~ ~' ~.ntnk thts problem shoul.d be left to
resolve its~lf oc to see if it causes any problems because that cnuld, in
fact, be use.i against the petittoners.
Annika Santalahti stated in ~cacttce, thcoughout the Citx, thetr ure variances
and th~ngs like that which, tf they were reviewed with a very careful eye,
would nat be appr.aved and she di.d not think the~e is any benefft to tcy and go
back and corcect something nobody is complaining about. She atated it would
be mo~e benefLcial tu look at the futuce and if these type uses tend to be of
interest in the area to make a conscious decision to allaw them conditiona~ly.
6/11/84
MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, June ll., 1984 R4-365
~ommieotonec Bu~ho~e sruted, for.gAtting the Mercedea Benz dealecahip, a pecson
could r.equeat the ~i~ht to sell automobtlea, and r.efer.red to a Ferrar.i. deAJer
ci~l~t acr~se frum AuConetics who has u conditional. uoe permit. He stAted if a
new per~on ~aks perTiasion to ftle an applicaCion to sell. Volkawagena, or even
~all Royce~ and was told thaC denl.er. got in with a conditionat uae pecmiC, but
it should not havs been yiveri, an~ now we have to d~ny thi~ requ~at, he
t.hou7ht ther.e would be probl.ems.
Anntku 5antalahtt staked ther.e are non-conforming u~es a1l over the canyon
which wece ].egal.l.y established in the County.
Commisetoner Her.bst stated the Farreri deale~ehip condtttonal. use permit was
approv~d for repai~ and ttien they askPd for ator.age foc one or twc~ vEhicl~s
and olso the r.ight to sell them and it wasn't the same type oE use as the
M~rcedes Benz deal.ecship bec;ause they were actuelly r.epalring and rebut]dtn~
MASecati and Feccart~.
Anni.ka Santa.lahkf staked to go back to a petittoner. of a uae tl~at was approved
tw~ or. thKee yeats ago and interpret that we don't tt~ink ttiey shoul.d be ther,
today would be a pcobl.em. She stated the Canyon industr.t~] Acea zon~ng is
very cestcictive and she did not know whether tt to thp rent being ]ow
compared to commercial that is causing the p~oblem. She ex~lained the Cany~n
Industrial AreA is the entice acea that i.s north of the Rivecside Ereeway,
east ot the Orange (ti7) Freeway, o~ the bl.ue area on the wall map.
Commtasioner Bushor.e stated he would l.ike L•o accnmplir~h this without pointing
fingers at anyone and would make a motion to Ctty Council and let them r.equest
a liat iF they want one. He stated tf the Anahei.m Hills Church comes back tn
and cequests an extenston and Cammisston says they cannot approve it, they
will. say that they have received two tn the past and he dtd not khtnk that is
fatr.
Annika Santalahti stated the Cortur~ission has every rtght to den~~ a conditionaJ.
uae permik that has been given for a certai.n period of time and ttaere is
nothing to guacantee that what ++as acceptable two years ago is accentable
Coday.
Comtnissioner eushore asked if thece Ss a way to do this without maktng a]i.st
si.gnaliny people out. Jack White responded that there ts nothing to compel
the City io do anything against any particulac user of prupQrty.
Commissioner Hecbst stated he could see othec ~roblems where tslands were
created when Counc~l was favorably l.ooking upon them £or quasi-cammercial
uses~ yet they w~ce still indus.:r:lal.l.y zoned. He stated he would agree it is
a",:an of worms', but it is not of the Commission's making. He stated he
fought agatnst practicall.y every commezc al use in the Canyon industr~al Area.
He stated he felt to come up with a list different than the one we already
have wi].7. cceate ptoblems. He stated he did not think leaving it as is will
c:zeate any more problems than now exists.
6/~7./84
MINU'PBS ANAi1EIM CITY PLANNING CpMMI~STON, .iune 11, 1984 84-3G6
Commissioner Bushore stat~d Comm~sot~n and
take e cloaer. lpok at thts, but 5e Eelt if
and knew chis, it would bothec him to know
know that. aomeday it cuuld be uaed againat
his business And the new owner finda out t1
conditi.onal use per.m~t tn the Etr.st p]ace,
ataff ar~
he wAS H
Chnt was
him. He
iat tt~tr.e
i.t could
e c~ctainly awar.e now ta
buatnesEman in the ar.en
hanging over hi~ head and
atated A person could aell
ehould never. have been e
cre~tP A bAC1 si.tuation.
Commi.asi.on~~c Nerbat sCated to do Aomething ]tke this would mean being more
opectftc.
c:ommissioner. Bushor.e a~ated he doec not want lo add anything to the ltst, but
to have som~ way of saying, "from ~t~is day for.war.d the u~es that ar.e there now
are ther.e by right, o~ whatr~ver." He ,~kaked a previ.oua request (Item l8 - A)
was withdrawn today becaune the a~pli;cank dtd nok came up wi.th a 1ti;t. He
stated tha~ p~:t{t:tone~ was h~ving trouble ~enting the units and w~nted to have
A]tst appcove~~ and on the list thEre wpre U30II .+hieh ar~ p~ohtbtted such t~s
clvi.c ur.yaniziittona. He atat~d a uUer. down the htreet. may h~vE a list of
approve~ us~~s and this pettttoner cou~d not even ap~ly 1[oc ane and that ts not
ri.ght.
The uses per.aiitted in the zorie were ce~. i.c~wer~ as indicated in the Code.
Commtr~stoner Bucho~e ~tated all. oE thase ltsts which wer.e approved on other
aE~ice buil.dings should not have been appr.~vec:. Jack White stated the uses
per.m~itted in the Canyon Industrfal Area aH those uses per.miCted tn the ML
z~n~s, p~us tho3e condittonal. usea ]tated in Sections 1d.61..050.600 through
.b~2, aauko repair, botlers and tanks, bAnks, butldin9e in excesa of ].00 feet
in height~ commerciai sal.es busainesses which pcimar.tly aerve and are
co~n~atible with the i.ndustrtal cuatome~s, health spaa, Explosives i.n excess of
2~(i pou~cis, manuEactur.ing oper.ations not o~.herwtae permEtte~9 in r.he zone,
incluui.ng A lony .list, metal. smel.ttn~a, motels or hotels, r.e~Caur.ants, and
r4cycAi.r~y, r.esource r.Ncovery stattons).
Commiss.i.oner Hkrbst asked about thN office b~ildings appr.oved ~ust down the
atreet and to the nar.th wikli ~p~ciftc uses approved which woulci prtmar.j].y
serve the tndustr.ial areas.
Jack Wh.ite stated i.f the f,indtng was that those were permitted under. 5ection
1.8.61..O5Q.600 because they w~re ~o~runercial uses servtng oc compatible wtti~ the
industrial a~ea, then they a~e appropr.iate.
Commissioner Sushore stated L•hat is the list the petitioner submittpd and
staff helped h.tm with it and he submitted tt thi.nking that was what everyborly
else had, and those were tfie uaes he wanted, and whether they were approved or.
it, they were not on the lfat and ahould not have been appcoved.
Commissi.aner Bu~hor.e Nithdrew his mot~on for a recommendAtion to the Ctky
Counc.i.l .
Ann~ka Santal.ahkt atated h~r suggeation would still be khat staff come to the
Commts;ion wi~h a re~o~tt w~ith aome kind of liat compartng the two situatfons
and then xdentifying such us~s in retrospect that appear. ko be appropriate.
6/11/84
MINUTES _ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. June 11, 1.984 84-367
Commissioner Bushore stated he wanta confacmtCy £~om this day Eor.war.d end in
the pask, ther.e have been somo mistakeo made and indicated he woul.d go Along
with the auggeation made by Annika Santalahti. He atated he woul.d cecommend
that an ocdinance be adopted all.owing thoae uaes, whatever they may be, that
have gone in in the last fnur years to rematn.
Ann~ka SAntal.ahti ntated ortginally when thts wt~ol.e iesue oE non-induatrtal
uses came up, it was baRtcally commercial kypes of activity that typical]y
yenecated a signiny sttuation wit~~ a r.etat] opeKatton in an industrtal. Ar.ea
and the t~pplicanl• Eound out that the peopl.e they wanted as cuatomers wer.e not
there.
Cammi~sioner. Herbst stated, in hia o~tnion, ~f they are the~e with un eppr.~ved
cundittonal use per.mit, they ar.e ther.e by r.ight.
Jack White stated he understands that Commisai.on~c Bushoce wants an ar.dtnance
adopted that any conditional use ~ermtts appcoved pri.oc to a cectatn date in
the Canyon industctal Ar.ea woul.d be dekermtned to be a lawful use of prnperty,
notwithstanding any oth~r. pcovis~on or. .:eguirement of this code. Ele stated
that is one way to accompli.sh it.
Commisst~ner Bushoce stated he remembers when the ordinance was adopted,
Cotsmission discussed whether or not a person coul.d make appltcatton under the
general. cha~ter and everybody was under, the impze3ston that they coul.d, and
that ~s how it has been done to date, but that is not cocrect.
Annika Santalahti stated one of the mieunder.standtnys on condi.tional uses is
that just because one person gets it, another persor, is entitled to get one,
but unless the next app.ltcant has 3n identica] r,ir.cumstance, Commts~toner does
not have to gcant tt.
Commi.ssionec Hecbst ].eft the meettng at 4:46 and did not r.eturn.
CotnmiESione~ McBucney suggested that staff make a recommendation.
Commissione! eushore used an example of a ct~urch that is in the azea under. A
val.id condi.tional use permit and another church gr~u~ makes a request to appl.y
for a conditional. use per.mit and is told that they cannot apply~. He stated
the church he ref~rred to _h~ul.d not have been allowed in the first place and
ft was a mistake but asked how the City can deny the other church.
Annika Santalahti stated anyone has the ~ight to ask fo~ a Code change, even
though seaff doesn't typically encoucage it. She explained business licer~ses
are not gotten through the matl. and ace hel.d unttl they are checked and
cleaced, unl.ess it is mf~stakenl.y mail.ed.
Commissioner Bushare stated he thought it would be a miskake not to corcect
the problem and his recommendation would be to go along with wh~t Jack Whtte
suggested. Hz stated he does not what to change the Code.
Jack White stated staff is suggesting doing nothxng anc3 go~ng fo~ward by
advising future appl.icants according to what the Code says and not take action
with regard to past perm~ts.
6/ll./84
MINUTES AN~H~IM CITY PLANNING_COM_MISSION, June ll.~ 1964 84-368
Gommisa~oner 8ushoce ~teted he wants the miatnke cocxected. ~-nnika San~~lahtt
steted people don't look at the ~eeolutions dnd point out L•ho wron~ code
number was uaed oc sorneth~ng was said incorrect~y because they do not
underatand. Shs added ahe real.ly did not think it te a problem.
ADJOURNMGNT;
There being no further busineas, Gommisainnez euehar.e ufEered a motton,
seconded by Comm.isaioner Ktng and MOTION CARRIED (Comm~ssionars Pry,
~erbst and La Claire ~bsent) that tl~e meeting be adjourned.
The meeting was adjournad at 4:S1. p,m.
Respectful~y submitted,
~
~ ~~- -~ ~'~-
~dith L. Harrts, Seccetacy
Anaheim City P.lann~ng Commisaion
~(1G4~m
6/11/84