The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes-PC 1986/06/09REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING C0:(MISSION REGULAR MEETING Tl~e regular meeting of the Anahei.m Ci.ty Ylanning Commission was called to order by Chairwoman La Clatre ar. 10:00 a.m., June 9, 19$6, in the Counci.l Chamber, a quorum being present, and the Commisston reviewed plans of the items on today's agenda. RECESS: 11:30 a.m. RECONVENED: 1:35 p.m• PRESENT: Chatrwoman: La Claire Commisstuners: Bouas, Fry, Herbst, Lawi.cki. Messe, Mc Burney ABSENT: Commissioners: None ALSO PRESENT: Annika Santal.ahr.i, Assisranr. Di.rer_tor f.or Zoning Malcolm Slaughr.er, Deputy City Attorney II Jay Titus, Offire Engineer Dan Schiada, Assistant Trafftr_ Enginee:' Leonard McGhee, Associate Planner John Poole, Code Enforcement: Supervi.sor Edir.h L. Harris, Planning Commisston Secretary MINUTES FOR APPROVAL - Commissioner Herbst of.f.ered a motton, seconded by Commi.ss~oner MESSe and MOTION CARRIED that t.he Anaheim Cir.y Pl.ann~ng Commisston does hereby approve the minut:es of the meeting of May 28, 1986, as submitted. ITEM N0. 1. EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 1.1. and VARIANCE t70. 3544. PUSLIC HEARING. 0'aNERS: CITY OF ANAHEIM, 200 S. Anaheim Boul.evard, Anahei.~, CA 92805. AGENT: J.R.H. INC., 5101 E. Independence Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina 2821.2. Properr.y is an irregul.arl.y-shaped parr_el. of tand ronsi.sting of approximately 9.3 acres located at the northeasterly corner of La Palma Avenue and Weir Canyon Ruad. Watvers of maximum number and type of si.gns, maximum sign area andfreestandin surfaces, and limitation~ on sign lighting to construct three (3) g si.gns and r.hree (3) wa1.1. signs. Conr.inued from the meer.ings of March 1.7 and 31., April. t4 and 28 and May 12, 1.986 There was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and there were r.wo people indicar.t.ng the~T PiYSisrref.erred to andumaderarpartsof the alihough the staff report was not read, mi.nutes. Michael Gray, Superior El.ertrical Adverr.tsing, agenr, explained they have revised their plans since the last hearing and have al.so included a long-range plan, as well as the speci£ic plan for Canyon Honda. He explai-ned the Honda monument sign would be on the r_orner of Weir Canyon and La Palma; and that there is no sign proposed over six f.eer_ high. g6-377. 86-372 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 Mr. Gray stated the Honda dealership i.s located on the corner of Weir Canyon and La Palma and the one 6-foor hi.gh monumenr. si.gn on the r_orner inr_ludes the Canyon Auto Center logo, wi.th the word "Honda" ot~ two diEf.erent angles, with 13" high letters. He stated the a~ef~otthegshapeno£atheepropertydandetheadiffe~entrservices signs on each driveway, provided. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. Gray responded r.o Commissioner McBurney r.hat the signs will be ~.nr.ernally iltuminated. He explained rhe const;uction and materi.als of the sign and stated on.ly the r_opy i.tself will be illuminated. Mr. Gray replied to Commissioner Fry that event:ual.ly there will be other dealershtps, i.n add~tion r.o Honda, at: r.hi.s 1.or_arion and r.har. rhe used r_ar and Subaru dealerships are being developed ri.ght away. He pointed out the long-range plans show where rhey are proposing a freest:anding monuraenr sign, not ro exceed 6 Leet in het~ht, for each dealershtp, all having the samheccorneresisntat Weirlogo. He stated t:hey do nor. anrir_ipar.e changing t:he size ^ 8 Canyon Road and La Palma which is in front of the •.•~a dealershi.p and will only advertise Honda. Commissioner Herbsr. st:ated he fel.t rhere are r.oo many Honda signs, wir_h "Honda" on the driveways, and on all sides and the front of the building, and a large "Honda" sign tn f.ront:. He star.ed rhis is r.he Scenir Corridor and rhe Planning Commission has had to deny thi.s saae request to other businesses in the area, and they have only been a1.lowed one wal.l-mounr.ed sign. Mr. Gray stated r.hi.s is a corner location and the butlding is set back quite a distanr_e and is nor. direc1-l.y visible from a1.1. direr_r.ions, with r_urved roads from both di-rections, and signs on each side of the building are for identtftcation from each direcr.ion, and r.he mf.eelethesone in'frontaisanecessaryrfoontheicorporate i.dentification, and they identity. Commissioner Herbsr. pointed our. rhere wi1.1. be another idenr.ificatton sign on the front of the buitding and explained he was referring to stgns "B" and "F", as shown on the exhibtt, Bill Reur.emann, deal.er, stared rhe driveway signs are direr_tional. and are not advertising signs. He explained there will actually be three separate businesses on that corner and r_he word "Honda" i.s not adverti.sing, but ~s f.or dirertional_ purposes so a person going down the road can find the Honda service entrance, etc. He stated the purpose for r.he monumenr sign ~s real.l.y to make it look li.ke a nice corporate enti.L-y and an automobile park and it doesn't say "Honda" un the front, but "Canyon". He stated the monument s~gns ~n e~r,her s~de are "Honda" signs, and they give a view down La Palma and Weir Canyon Road, and the si.gn on the front of the building whirh reads, "Canyon Honda" ts direr_ted into the intersection and added he did not believe there are too many si.gns. Chatrwoman La Cla're stared she r_ould see r_he need for r.he disertional signs, "G" and "H" and asked if those would be iLluminated at night. Mr. Reutemann srated those are usual.ly on a rimer and shur. off about 2 hours after the business ts closed. He added he was not sure where staff got the informatton for the staff report that the signs w~ll be illuminated from dusk to dawn. 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 56-373 Chairwoman La Claire stated she is concerned about the predominance of the illumination with lights betng on all night i.n r.he lot whi.r_h r_oul.d be seen by the homeowners and suggested the direr_tional signs be turned off af.ter the business is closed. Mr. Gray srar.ed there wi.l.l. be displ.ay l.i.ghting in the l.ot whir_h would proba':~l.y overshadow any illumination given off by the lighting on the build.[ng or mo•xument si.gns, whir_h are nor exr_eeding 6 feer. i.n heighr, from ground l.evel.. He star.ed the overhead lighting will be on all night for security purposes and that r.heir busi.ness hours woul.d be until. 10:00 p,m. Commi.ssioner Heri~sr. stated Honda wil.l. have ar l.east 3 monument s~gns, and r.his will be an automobile r_enter with other dealerships and those other dealers will want the same signing privi.leges and r.here will be a big mess of signs in r.har. area. He suggested the monument si.gn out front shoutd include the rest of the agenctes, similar to what is done in a shopping center. fle st:ated he fel.r_ they are reque~ttng an 'overkill' of si.gnage £or Honda, and added he does not li.ke to be put on the spot and orher businesses in r.he Scen~c Corridor have unly been al.lowed ro have one stgn. He suggesr.ed they stay wtth~.n the guideltnes for signs in the Scenic Corr~.dor. Mr. Reutemann srated rhey have rri.ed to present a program r.har. will provi.de an idea of the t~tal outlook for tliis parr_el, includi.ng the northwest and northeast r_orner, and explained the northwest corner is yet undeveloped. Mr. Gray stated these dealershi.ps do need street i_den~ificati.on so the cusr.omers know which driveway to turn inr.o, and r.hey have r.ried to make them r.onform to ear_h other, su tltey will. look tdentir..al. He stated there was concern about the 40-foot hi.gh freesr.anding sign, so they have reduced al.l. r.he monument signs t:o no higher than b feet. He stated there will be six dealerships in taat locatton and they w311 all. have r.heir own individual. signs and the l.ighr.ing is very subdued. He stated the stgn out f.ront is not part of thi.s package and was submir.ted for i.nformaticr only and the "Auto Center" sign wir.h r.he franr_hi.ses oa r.he bottom was contemplar.ed as a directional sign on the northwest corner. He srated this request is for the Honda dealershi.p on the northeast corner and it inr_ludes the monument sign on the corner, the wall signs and the directional signs. Commissi.oner Herbsr. stared his r_oncern ~s rhar with r.he number of. signs being requested for the Honda dealership, the site will not be able to have any other signs. Mr. Reutemann stat:ed rhe onty signs for the fur.ure dealerships would be direr_tional signs, identir_al to these, with "Subaru" or "Ford", etc. instead of "Honda". Annika Santalahr.t, Assistant Direct_or Zoning, stated the current proposa]. is for signs no nigher than 6 feet. She pointed out the whole property !.s covered by thi.s variance, and if Commiss~or. does appro•~e th~s requesr. and the other deal.erships come in, they would have to work withi.n this variance and would probably review it and decide wher.her or not r.hey coul.d ltve with it, or wherher r_hey needed to request a change. Commissioner Herbst srat:ed r.his is one p~arc<:1., and they would not be entitled to any more f.ree~tanding signs, without anc~ther variance. fi/9/86 r MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 E6-374 Anni.ka Santalahti stated staff was concerned because this was not the type of use anticipated f.or this property when t:he Scenic Corridor Overl.ay Zone ~as adopted and the stgns allowed would be for r_ommercial uses with sma].1 shops. She stated i.n working with this peti.tioner, staff was conrerned wher_her or not r.hey were r_oming up with srandards that would be acceptab7.e and whether or not signs for the other two dealers on the same stte r_ould be accommodated. She stated the major change i.n t.he revi.sion is that the signs are lower. She statel there will be a constant negati.ve response from P1.anning Department: staff for any 4U-foot sign. Mr. Gray state•.d they are talking about r_he northeast corner today and there are three separar_e businesses on r.hi.s one parcel., *.he Honda deal.er on t:he corner, and a used car f.actli.ty whi.r_h i.s a smal.l bui.iding, and to the f.ar east wil7. be the Subaru dealership. He star.ed the used r.ar faril.iry is being cons±rur_ted now, along with Lhe Honda dealership. He asked if. the problem 1.s ber_ause of Lhe three businesses on one parr_el. Commiss~oner Herbsr_ st:ated r.his variance would be for al.l t:he si.gning permitted on this site and the orher agenr_i.es wi.ll not have any si.gns wit.hout f.urther variances. Mr. Gray st:ar.ed t:here is only one ent;it:y on *he northeast r_orner, and northwest r_orner has not been developed and those signs would probably be applted for under a separa~e requesr.. Chairwoman La Claire st:at:ed t:he Commission want:s to allow enough signing for t:he Honda dealer to be sucr_essf.ul whir_h w1.11 bring a lot of tax money to Analietm, bu* t:here are seven separaf.e s~gns for Honda. She st:at:ed Merrury Savings, Nurseryland and Car].'s Jr. and alt rhe other businesses i.n the Sr_eni.r_ Corridor were artually al.lowed one wrap-around s~gn. Commissioner Bouas point:ed out l.ooking at t:his s~t-e, a person woul.d not see more than one Honda sign at a time. Mr. Gray repli.ed looking to the right or northeast at the ~.nterser_tton of Wei.r Canyon and La Yalma, tihe buil.ding is on r.he rorner and ts a triangular building, and both signs are not vi_sible. He stated the stgns on the overhang; or enr.ranr_e ~:o r.he service area, are 1.8" lerters and lie did not rhi.nk they could be seen. Chai.rwoman La Cl.aire suggest:ed that: t:he wa1.1 stgns on r.he northwest side be combi.ned, simtlar t:o what Merr_ury Savings has done. Commi.ssi.oner Herbst st:ated a 1.2' monument sign, h feer. high, is ~roposed for Lhe used car dealer and that he realizes that i-s not part of. this request, but he fel.t the petitioner needs to consider a1.1. rhe signs for t:he entire parrel., Mr, Gray stated they have taken the whole site into consideratton and have come up wir.h a program where each business wi1.1. have a smal.l mcnumenr sign, and rhey understand t:hey will need more variances. Mr. Gray sr.ar.ed rhey wout.d l.ike ro get t:his approved and n~t hol.d up r.he opening for the Honda dealership. Commissioner Herbst stated they are just asking for too many signs and approval would set a prer.edent for al.l future businesses and they will ask f.or the same thing. Mr. Gray stat.ed they felt since these are three separate businesses, each one would be entir.l.ed ro one freestanding sign and each one needs separate identif±.cation. Annika Santalahtt stated there is ML zoning between t:he freeway and t:his property, and those properti.es do not have the same restricti.ons and staff was more willing to r_onsider some Code waivers and did nor. vtew this site the same as other 6/9/86 MZNUTPS, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-375 commerctal sites because in order to get to the property, you go through an area which will be allowing more signs. She added it takes some ti.me to r_hange the Code, and the petttiotter has come up wtrh a proposal that might be accepr.able to t~e City and *.he low profile was def.initely one of the big issues with the 'Jity and freestanding 40-foot high signs are not desired. Commissioner Herbst stated r.hey have submirted a l.ong-range pl.an and are under construction and will ~e back £or more vartanr_es. N~ star.ed he felt they r_ould present a plan f.ar more acceptabl.e and po~nr.ed our t:hey are proposing a l.arge freestanding sign for the used car dealer and he tl~ought it will set an undesi_rable precedent. He sugg~sr.ed maybe rhts properr.y shoutd be deleted from the Scenic Corridor. Annika Santalahti stated she di.d think it should be deleted, but perhaps some sorr. oi overl.ay or special r_onsidera*~on ul.rimatel.y in the Code r_oul.d be considered. Slle pointed out thts si.te has limi.ted ar_r_ess and there has been a general f.eel.ing wi`h staff r.har. when access ~s l.imited, signage at earh driveway i.s certainly not totally unacceptable. Commissioner He.rbst stated it is unfortunate that the property belongs r.o r.he Cir.y of Anaheim. Chairwoman La Claire stated each dealership that comes in wi.ll ask for seven si.gns and this wi.ll r_reate anorher Harbor poulavard s~r.uation. Mr. Reutemann sCated this is an unusual intersectiun due to several things, includi.ng tne shape of the property, and r.here has ~een a l.ot of effort, r.ime and money spent in order to devetop thts property ~nto a retai.l area and the si.gns are sr.rictly to a~tract people in *he area and direr_tions from t:he in~erser_tton and r.he monument signs will direct r_ustomers to the proper driveway. He stated there are separate driveways for the used car dealer and rhe Subaru dealer and t:iiey need separate signs and most of. the signs at stx feet are Eor i.nformatton and they are not tryin~ to attract people f.rom the f.reeway Chairwoman La Clatre stated there are three sl.gns on the butlding, one being 128 square f.eet, and thaf: she has no* objer_tion ro the id_ntifiratton s~gn and the directional signs. She stated standing at the corner of Weir Canyon and La Palma, a person shoul.d be able r.o see rhe word "Honda" at Least twice. She added she did not think the sign identif.i.ed as "B" is ner_essary. Mr. Reutemann star.ed sign "B" is tlie focal poi_nt and gives the "Canyon" identi.ty to the whole project. Chai.rwoman La Clai.re srated if rh~s business was going tnto Irvine, r.hey woul.d not be able to have any more than two signs and Anaheim does not want another proliferatton of si.gns l.ike on Harbor Boulevard. She added "more" or "bigger" i.s not necessarily bett2r, and the Commission wants this business to succeed but the si.gns to stay as limi.ted as possible. Mr. Reur.emann suggested el.iminar_i.ng eirher r.he Canyon 1.ogo or the "Honda" sign on the side of the building. Commissioner Bouas suggested eirher del.ertng r.he "Honda" identification from the monument sign or from the side of the building. She stated sign "B" certatnly identifies the area and it doesn't have *o say "Honda". Commissioner Messe suggested eliminating "lionda" from the sign identi.f.i.ed as "F". He stated only half the signs would be ~istble at one time. 6/9/86 86-376 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 9, 1986 Commisstoner Herbst stuted this is an 'overki.ll' of signs £or th~s one project and the plans are for the same number of. signs on r.he rest of. the projects and he thought the signs need to be combined because this is going to be an automotive shopping center. Anntka Santalahtt responded ro Chairwoman La C1.aire thar. they woul.d be all.owed to have a wall sign equaltng l0Y of the building wall involved. Chai.rwoman La Clai.re sugges?:ed approval. of all *.he signs, excepr. the one identi_fied as "B" which is the monument stgn and then the dealers can all get together and decide on a r_ombir.ed si.gn f.or t:he whol.e r_enter. Mr. Reutemann indicated that woutd be acr_eptable to him. It was noted the P1.ann~ng Direr_t:or or his au*:horized representative has determined that tlie proposed projert falls within the def.i.nitton of Chereforealcaregor~~all.y Class 11, as defined in r,he State EIR Guidel.ines and is, exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR. ACTION: Commissioner Fry offered Resol.u?:ion No. PC 8h-147 and moved for its passage and adopti.on that the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commtssion does hereby grant. Variance No. 3544, in parr, del.ering t:he monumen!. sign idenr.ified as "B" located on the corner of Weir Canyon and La Palma, on the basts that thereoaoeraphcialor_ati.on ci.rc:umstanr_es applicabl.e to the property such as s~ze, shape, p 8 P Y~ and surroundings which do not apply to other identically zoned property i.n the same vicinity; and that strict applicat.ton of ~he Zoning Code depri.ves !:he property of. privileges enjoyed by other properties i.n the tdenttral zone and r_Lassifir.atton in the vicinlty and subjer.t r.o Inr.erdepartment_al Committee recommendati.ons. Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, asked the intent of the Planning Commission regardi.ng rzstrir_t:tons on 1.1.luminaLi.on of the signs. It was cl.arifi.ed that tlluminatton of the directi.onal signs wuuld be restri.r_ted to businESS ho~rs, with no restriction on the wall stgns. Mr. Reutemann agreed that would be acceptable. Chairuoman La Clatre stated she did not think this wtil have an eff.er_t on the netghborhood, but: asked Mr. Reu*emann r.o agree thar i.f there are r_omplai.nts, to turn off whatever lights are f.ar_1ng the residences. Commi.ssi-oner Fry pointed out the resi.denr_es are quite a d~stan~e away. On roll call, t:he foregotng resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, NERBST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy C~ty Arrorney, presen*ed the writren right to appeal. the Planning Comai.ission's decision with~.n 22 days to the City Counci.l.. ITEM N0. 2. EIR NEGATTVE AECLARATION AND CONDITIONAL USE PGRMI'C N0. 2774. THE FOLLOWING ACTION WAS TAKEN AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. YUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: HOLLY WADE DAVIDSON, P. 0. Box 325, Hotualoa, Hawai.i 96725. AGENTS; ORANGE COUNTY STEEL SALVAGE,INC. 3200 E. Frontera Streer., Anaheim, CA 92806. ATTN: GEORGE AAMiS. Property described as an irre86/9/86-shaped 1986 86-377 MINUTES, ANAt1EIM CIT_Y PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, parcel of land consist-i.ng of approximately 6.4 acres, having a irontage of approximately 770 f.eet on the south side of Frontera Street, and f.urther described as 3200 East Frontera Street (Orange County Steel Salvage). Continued from *.he mee*•.ings of March 31 and May 12, 1986. It was noted the petiti.oner has requested a continuanr_e to the meeting of August 4, 1986. ACTION: Commissioner Bouas off.ered a mo*_ton, seconded by Commiss~oner Lawicki and ;10TION CARRIEll that the Anaheim City Planning Commisston does hereby conttnue consideratton of r_he aforementtoned mar.rer to the regularly-sr_heduled meettng of. August 4, 1986, at the request of the petiti.oner. ITEM N~. 3. E'IR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WAIVER OF CODE RE UIREMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2784. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: ADA I. HIGDON, WELLS FARGO BANK NA TP.USTEF.,9600 Santa Moni.ca Boulevard, Beverly i~ills, CA 90210. AGENTS: ANGELO'S, DENNIS WILLIAMS, pRESIDENT, 221 N. Bear_h Bou~avard, Anahe~m, CA 928~1. Properr.y described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisti.ng of approxi.mately 0.57 acres, having a fron~age of approx~ma.*.e1.y ~.5~ feet on *.he wes* s~de of Beach Boulevard, and further described as 2'L1 North Beach Boulevard (Angelo's). To permit on-sale beer and wine and an ou~:door eating area in conjunction with an existing restaurant. Wai.ver of. minimum distance of. a drive-through ].ane deleted. Continued from r.he meef:ings of April 1.4 and 28 and May 28, 1986. There were six persons indirating their presei~istrefer~redt*onand m2deeatpartuofr and al..*.hough rhe sr.aff reporr. was no- read, the minutes. tdi.chelle Reinglass, arr.orney, sta~.ed *his ma*_t:er was con~inued froa *he meeting of. May 28, 1986, to allow the petitioner to meet with t:he opposition to try and resolve dlfferen~~es. She s!:a':ed immediar.ely after ':he hearing, .*.he aPPandato posted signs to prohibi.t loitering and exhibinioheOparkin Sareasstand~to preven*_ prohib~ti ~onsumption of alrohol.ir beverages g rowdi.ness and loud music; and that they also established a chain across the acr.ess to the neighboring l.ot wh{~h is ro be leased r.o Ralph's Market. She s*_a*ed they also requested that r_hains be instal.led by RalPh s at their access. She stated they communir.a*.ed wirh represen?:a*.ives from S!eriks, and a represen*_a*_ive from Ralphs, and Mr. Strammtello attempted to communir_ate wi.th the residents of the neighboring re~rea*_~onal veh~r.l.e park. Ms. Reinglass s*.a*.ed .*.he s*.aff reporr refers *.o a neighboriag mobil.ehome park and distincttontbeingrtha*.tthe residentsrwould mosa likelytbentransienterather than the permanent. Ms. Reinglass continued that she met with MandMcommunicatedsbyttelephone andimet Company, lessor of the premises to Ralphs, prior to this hear9ng with Mr. Garcta of the Federated Group. She sta*ed she understands signs have been posted o~ Ralph's premises prohibttt6~9%nbawful. ~TM rTTV v7.nNNTNG COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-378 vehi.cles and that the law enforcement agencies have been enforcing *_hose stgns and the number of cars and loi.t.erers has der_reased subs*_antiall.y, especial.ly when the poli.ce offir_ers enforce the signs. She sta*.ed one of r_he reques*s made by Mr. Garcia was r_ha* if this CUP is granted, they would li.ke to have a wall and the petiti.oners have no difficulty wtth havi.ng a wal.l a*_ +:hat access poinr_, She stated also +:he petir.ioners have continued *_o hire ser_urity guards to monttor the preml.ses to Lry to prevent people from entering the premises nex': door, and *.he manager at Angel.o's has been asked on o~~asion by the Poltce of.f.i.r_ers to make an announcement over the P.A. system that persons parked uext door are unlawful.ly t:here and will. be rit:ed or towed away, and ±his has had a~ i.mmediate eff.ect of dtssipati.ng the crowd. She added sin~e *.heir las~. appearance before r.he P1.anning Comm~ss~on, *here has been qutte a substantial redur_t.ton i.n the number of. people there and the amount of noise, number of cars, loiterers, and all *.he o*_her probl.ems, and *.hat: her r.lient: i.s just as i.nterested i.n eliminati.ng those peopl.e as the surroundi_ng neighbors. She stated there is a rerommenda~ion ~n ~he s!:aff reporr that if the CUP is granted, a condi.iton be added that the petiti.oner has to obtai.n a condittonal use permi.t f.or a drive-in, drive-+:hrough restauran': ~n conjun~!:~on wit:h the exis'ing restaurant and they would objer_t to rhat condttion and feel that ts i.rrel.evant to this matrer and would have no bearing on a pa?:io or t:he sale of beer or wine, which is consumed on the premises and not sold thruugh the dri.ve-j.n wi.ndow. Ms. Kei.nglass presen*.ed a per~*.ion signed by 64~ pa.*_rons who desire approval of this cond~.tional use permi.t. She stated they have caken a subst:~.tia7. number of. step~ Lo eliminate the unrul.y rrowds and probl.ems and are seeing substan'~a1. results and the problems are conti.nutng to dwindle. She potnted out this past weekend was t:he "f.irs'. Friday" which would Ue expecr.ed t:o be the wors*_ Weekend and it was rather qutet. Tony Stramm~ello, pef.~~:~oner, stared ?:hey have had a luf: of improvemen*.s since the last meeting; that stgns were posted next door i.n Ralph's j~arki.ng lot whir_ti was extremely lielpfui. and f:he Anaheim Pol.ice Depar!:men.*. has been ex?:remel.y helpf.ul in citing people, and has requested the manager to make an announcement to move any cars parked nexr: door. He s*a*ed *.he stric*. enfor~emen*_ has been very heipful and the chatn across the parki.ng lot has helped and he thoubht the problems will only decrease, and has al.ready dropped by 45 ro 5~% sin~e *.he l.ast meet:ing, and he thought tiiis is samething Lhat r_an be worked out over a pertod of. ttme. Ray Meador, Sterik Company, 2525 Military, Los Angeles, fee owner of adjacent property, stated at the request of the Commisston, they met on May 30th with Ms. Reinblass to dis~uss r.he sir.c~a!:ion a*. Angel.o's, and discussed what parricular potnts of. resoluti.on might be achieved between the Sterik Company and Angelo's; and that they con*.~nued t:heir discussions with Mr. Art Garcia, representing Federa*_ed Depart:ment Stores, or owners of Italphs, and also met with the residents in the area. He stated Sterik Company does no*. view the residenrs of the Var_ationland park as bei.ng transtent individuals and many ei them are long-term residents and they trea*_ them the same as residents who own property in the area. Mr. Meador added they have continued to observe the situati.on in the area and dtd post signs saying that: unauthorized vefii~les would '~e towed away, and additional signs were posted on the property so there would be more enforce6/9/g6and they have 86-379 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLI~NNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 been in continual centact with representatives °froul.dPworkiwi~thnaheotndEviduals~nr sLa£f. to find our wha* *.he s~tuarion was so hey there. He stated they also researr_hed the suggestton to chain off. the entrances to the property and found ~ha*. that would be a der.rtmen* berause of tnsurance requirements, and there wo,eanbtheupremises, erordiandiRalph'slhas several they have people roming ~n o contractors coming to the premises. Mr. Meador s*ar.ed they made some observa?:fons and have drawn ~he ~onclusion +:ha~ they are not here to support the request and f.eel they di_d approach i.t wtth an open mi.nd that woul.d allow them t:o work ou* the problems and, hopeful.l.y, resolve *he problems. lie staied as a result of. thetr observations, they have f.ound there ~s continued loi*:ering ~n .*.he area and ron!:inual congrega*.ton of ind~viduals bzing found on their parking lots on the weekends. He stated they do acknowledge tha*. last weekend was less s*=renuous on all +.han in rhe past, He sta*-ed *.hey should no.*. have experted a bt~ Lurn-out last Friday siiice next Saturday n~ght is the ttme patrons will rof:are r.o rhis locaf:ion for t.he cruising. Mr. Meador stated they have found out that rhe situatton is now spilling over i.nto some of the adja~en*. areas and 1Y. is the1r unders*anding *.ha?: C~rcu~'- Ci*_y and some of. the other businesses in the area are observt.ng simi.lar problems. He stated they have r_ome to *.he r.on~lus~on +:hat really t:he emphasis of Angelo's is *o marke!: r.o the group whtr_h r_omes out through the car c1-ubs and wh9.le that is a valid marketing ~onreP'= on f:hei r par?. , i t: shoul d be acknowl edged ! ha.*. t:hat presen' s a d~ rer,r problem for Lhe adjacent Lenants and property owners. Mr. Meador read +.he sert:ion of the Code se'r.~ng ou.*. the findi.ngs required to be made by the Commi_ssi.on j.r i.t makes a determination r.hat a conditional use permit ts *_o be granted - 1) that the use is properly one for whi~h a rondi.tional use permi.t is authorized by the Zoning code, and they do not di.spute that; 2) ttiat the use wiU. nof. adversel.y affect: the adjoining 1.and uses and the growr.h and developmen* of. the area, and they f.eel it would be di-f.f.icul.t Yo make thhaf`f~hetsgzebanddshapehof evidenre before r.he Commission at *.he presen'. ime; 3) the stte of the proposed use is adequaLe to allow f.or the full development of the proposed use in a manner no* det.rimen*al ':o r_he particul.ar area or the peare, heatth, saf.ety and general welfare of the cttizens, and rhey would say that findi.ng could not be made; 4) that: the r.raffic genera?:ed must be considered, and rhey Wthad*. state there would be adverse traf.fic f.rom thts particular use, and fi.natly, 5) the conditions imposed wtll not be detri.menLal to the peare, health, safety and general welfare of the citi.zens of the City of Anahetm, and they do not think such a f.indi.ng can be made based un r.he evidenre before +:he Commission. Mr. Meador staied i.n conclusion, they would ask that the Commisston deny the request for the conditional use permit and r.ha'. rhe City r_ontinue to require r.hat the ortginal requirements relattve to the drive-through restaurant be adhered to by Angelo's. 1400GRiversidepDrive,iShermanr0aks,Dstatedethesattorneyaf.or*theIDappltcanRaishs, correr_t in sta*.ing tha* the siruation has been miriga•*_ed because Ralph's Security llepartment has inspected the area on several occasions at vartous hours on Friday and Saturday nigh*s, and r.here has been a decrease in activities. He sta*ed Ralph`s matn objer_tion is the additional security costs that they would have to incur tn miti.gating the stt~aLton. He explatned the same situati~~9/$~curred at 86-380 MINUTES, tiNAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 State College ai~~ Lincoln, where there is a Ralph's market and an Angelo's, and by the employment of addittonal security personnel, Ral.ph's was able to mi.ti.ga*_e the situation and consequently, the number of cars and persons whu were congregating in thetr parki.ng l.o* a* State Col.l.ege and L~nroln was subs*_antially redur_ed. Mr. Garcia s*_ated he was tol.d by *_l:e applicant that the f.irst Friday ntght i.s the major evening when r.he car cl.ubs meet:. He added he unders*ands tha*_ is an informal group, however, acr_ordi.ng to Ralph's Security llepart:ment, it is the first Saturday nigh* at Beach and L~ncoln and *.he firs* Fr~day night a* S*_a*_e Co1.l.ege and Linr_oln. Mur McShea, resi.dent of Anahei.m Vacation Park, 311 N. Beach Boulevard, stated to her knowl.edge absoiu*:ely no effort of a con~il_tarory na*.ure has been made by Angelo's towards its neighbors sinr_e the tntr_tal meeting; ~hat outdoor ar_tivities appear to have intensified with al.mos*. a flaun*_ing of loud music and yelting, and tires screer.hing, especially last Frid:iy, Saturday and Sunday and they were very obnoxtous. She s*a*.ed las*. night r.here were firecrarkers rtgh+: ou*sjde their walls during the hours Angelo's was open. She stated ber_ause Ralph's has posted their property, parking overflow of patrons of Angel.o's has moved a~ross Bearh Boulevard to Cirr_uit City and the patrons seem to dart. back and forth through the traffi.c, tliereby halting t:he ~raffir_ fl.ow orcas~onall-y. She s?=a*ed she and other res~dents feel that, all in all, Angelo's has demonstrat:ed itself. to be a very uncartng neibhbor. Mary Hamilton, Anaheim Vacatton Park, s*.a*.ed she has seen no improvement i.n the noi.ses, e*_c. althoubh, they have improved at times when the polire has been called and they have taken ~hem out of the Zody's parking 10?:, bu*_ they have gone arross the street and are running bac?c and forth. She stated also, '_here i.s almost a trafftr_ jam and sFie was concerned r_here wil.l be a very bad acr_iden.*.. She sta*ed she did not think there is enough roo~ ~.n the area to hold the crowd *_hat is trytng to get i.nto Angelo's; and *he paT.rons bring lawn r.hairs and ga*_her in groups and s3.t and talk. She stated some of the residents at Anaheim Var_atton Park stay there year i.n and year ou* and are no*: rrans~en~s, and the park does have r_ertain rules, and there are tourists in about one-half. of. the park but the other one-half has permanent residents. Sh~ s*_a*ed *.he !:ouris*.s who do r.ome in have reall.y compla~ned about the notse and crowds at Angelo's and they come in to sleep and rest and cannot do that with the noise. She s*_a~ed she *_houghr. all.owing something li.ke Angelo's there really does give Anaheim a bad name. She stated some peopte have moved to the other side of *.he park be~ause of r.he notse and that there has been no ef.f.ect on trying to solve tlie problem. Betty Lookabaugh, 311. N. Bear.h Boul.evard, s*_a*ed she real.l.y gers ronrerned when she hears the engines roaring and the tires squealing, and just waits Eor a crash while trying to sleep and i.t is real.ly hard on her, She added she really just wanted to back up what the neighbors have sai.d; and that Angeio's hasn't really kept the place very clean. She stated the patrons are parking across the street and tha* makes it more difftr_ult because they are crossing Beach Boulevard and there is a lot of traffir_ and r.here rould be a very bad acr_iden*. wir.h somehody being killed. She stated she could not see this use being continued. 1 Ms. Reinglass stated it just seems i.nherent here that the gran*_ing o£ the CUP witl ~ elimi.nate many of the problems in that a~cohot consumption would be contained within the premises; tliat rhey are already monitoring wi*_h at l.eas*_ two ser_urity 6/9/86 i r MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-381 guards on Friday and Saturday nights and on Sunday to make sure there is no alr_ohol. consumption in the park~ng 10* and in r.he ~aand thatathe tdo keepithe premtsesbit ` the playtng of radios or music in tiie cars, Y extremely clean. Ms. Reinglass srated .*.hey w~l.t con!:~.nue r_o bend over backwards *.o do anything that is requested of them, and to cooperate wtth Law enforcement and ai~COheerneedwtohdo reyuests of resi.denrs. She s.*.a*ed if there ~s a noise probl.em, Y is mention tt to somebody at Angelo's i.n a management r_apacity and explai.ned they have not had r_ompl.aints directed di_rertl.y to them and as far as *_hey were aware, it was relatively quiet because they have been monttoring those premises. Ms. Keinglass added she spoke with Mr. Garria jus*. prior to *.h~s hearing and he indicated on this past Fri.day ni.ght, at 9:30, they noted 30 cars and that i.s a substanttal redu~*~on from *.he 2~0 to 300 es*_imated previ.ously, so *_raf.f.ir_ has been dwindling and as time goes on, it will continue. She stated last weekend law enforcement was ar. the S*_a*_e College site on Priday n~ght, *he fi.rst Friday whirh is supposedly the most congested night, and the traff.i.c was substantially mi.tigated, more so berause of rhe presen~e of l.aw enforcement. She stated they are taking measures and those measures have reaped some progress and granting the CUP will probably elimi.nate most of the problems that are on-going at this ti.ae. Tki~ r'!IBLIC HEAItING WAS CLOSEU. Commiss'.-oner Fry s*.a*.ed he finds i*_ difficult to unders*and how he r.ould vo*.e for th1-s and not have any ef.fect on the i.ll.egal use and dtd not understand how thetr attorney ran say ~:his request is ~ompler.el.y removed from !:ha*. ar_tion ro obrain a condittonal use permit f.or a drive-in, dr9ve-through restaurant. He stated i.t would appear t.ha`_ approval of thts would be au*_oma?:i~ally giving tacit approval. to a non-conf.ormtng use; and then by Counsioval of. thissusenwould beapresentinge Department has Itad to be catled and app another burden on the Poltce Department, as i£ they didn't have enough already, and he thought they are being l.ousy neighbors; and r_o plare a burden of this nature on adjoining property owners hy asking them to do things to help wir.h the situati.on is ludtcrous. He stated there is no way he will vote f.or this reques*_. Commissioner Herbst agreed. f.~e asked if the petitioner would like to have a conti.nuance and reques*_ a r_onditional. use permir. berause *.hey have an il.legal operation there now andrhe could not vote Eo~ aWasXpurrhasedf unforrunatel.yeraYion, and even *.hough it was ..here when the prop° y lacks buildin~ permits, a conditi.onal use permit f.or a drive-through restaurant and does not meet the drive-through restaurant standards; therefore, the request is to aFprove something that is illegal now. He suggested they request a continuanr_e and brinK the restaurant up fo Code as a standard drive-through restaurant. Ms. Rei.nglass stated she did not thittk the use is illegal. Commissioner Herbsr. stated staf.f says rhe drive-through res.*.aurant never had a rondirtonal. use permi.t; and that the origi.nal CUP was for a walk-up restaurant and the Commission r_annot expand an illegal operation. Ms. Reinglass stated there is no CUP for a dr3-ve-tn, dri.ve-through, and *_hat has not been disputed by them, but what has been disputed is the iss6/9/86t it has JUNE 9, 1986 86-382 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, survived as a drive-in, drive-through tlirough f.our or five other owners over the past 10 to 20 years and there has never been any conr_ern. Comznissioner Herbst star.ed the operation was expanded wi.thout proper butlding permi.ts and, unf.ort:unar.el.y, Angelo's has purchased an i1.l.egal. opera*_i.on. He s*_ated he could not vote for thi.s expansion and is of.f.ering an opportuni.ty for the peti.tioner to bring it up to Code. Ms. Reinglass s*.ated r.hey woul.d object r.o having r.o obrain a r_onditional. use permit for that; however, tf it is the Commission's intent to deny thts Se~retaruncoul.da condttionat use perm~t is gran~ed, they would prefer to seek .. ~ Y not und~rstand remainder of comment). Chairwoman La Cl.ai re s*_at:ed rhe probl em ~ s+:ha+: there are a l ot of r_eenagers crutsing the area and she did not t:hink i.t i.s a1.1 Angelo's f.ault, and they will move on t:o another pl.are soon, bu*_ righ* now ?:hey are f-here. She stared *_he Commissi.on i.s r_harged with r_lie healt:h, saf.ety and welf.are of. the r_ttizens, and since there i.s a problem, shshe woul.d beVabl.eitofvooe f.orti.ty request:; however, when the problem r_lears up, Ms. Rei-nglass asked if r.ha?: would he for bo!:h, <he CUP f.or the pa'io, as well_ as the appli.r_3tion for t:l1e beer and wine. Chairwoman La Claire stated she probaUly would not vote for Lhe ~ond~t:~ona1. use permit at this t'me ber_ause she sees a business whir_h, if expanded, would be detrimental, and i:he expanston woutd probabl.y attract more people, and maybe an ou*.door area would inr_rease !he problem of lotter~.ng because people tend to hang around more i.n an outdoor eating area, esper_i.ally teenagers, and ir is easy for them t:o expand over in':o the parking to*_. Chairwoman LaClatre sugges*_ed the pettti.oner withdraw the appliratton and request a CUY for a drive-in res.*.aurant and added she ?:hough* t:hey probably woul.d be granted a CUP, once these problems r_lear up. She stated she thought all of. this is a temporary thing and is get.~:ing bl.own ou* of porLion and if they don't expand r.he operatton, and if the pressure is kept up, eventually, the patrons will go some other place. She s*a*.ed when a11 r.he probl_ems are cl.eared up, she would have no objectton to perhaps all the uses. Ms. Reinglass asked if t:he probtem ~s r.he *raffic and loiterers. Chairwoman La Claire responded yes and added she thoughe wa tie oseYithYnnt~W.expanded, it wi.1.l increase *he possi bi 1 i r.y of i r. stayi ng Y ~ Commi.ssioner IIouas stated the problem has not gone away on State College and that it has been noted that i.t takes 76 poli.ce officers t:o handl.e rhe situati.on on a Friday ni.ght, and then i.t is the same thing on rhe other side of town, and we need cf Angelo's.t11She~statedttheSpetittonosubmiL-ted indtcates thecpatronsgare note rare teenagers. Commiss:oner Lawickt stated he has diffir_ul.ty with any resrauranr, wh~ch requires ser_uri.ty and imposes upon its netghbors to hire security to protect themsel.ves, and r.hought the type of the operatton i.tself. should be looked at a little more tn depth. He added he could not support the request. 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COh41ISSI0N, JUNE 9, 1986 86-383 Commissioner Herbst stated he could not support the Negative Declaration because the health, safety and welfare oi the c9tizens is affecred. He asked if. the petitioner would like a continuance. Ms. Reinglass sta*_ed she ~itd no*_ know tha*. a r_ontinuaare is going *o assis*_ them with what they are seeking today. ACTION: Com~issioner Herbst off.ered a mo~ion, seronded by Commissioner Mr.Burney and MOTZON CARRIED that the Anahei.m Ctty Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit on-sa1.e beer and wine and an outdoor ear.ing area in r_onjunctton with an existing restaurant w9.th waiver of minimum distance of a dTOxi.matel.ugp,57ne deleted on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land ~onsi~±ing of app Y acre, having a frontage of approximately 150 feet on the west side of Beach Boulevard, approxi.matel.y 650 fee* north of. r.he r..en*.erline of Lincol.n Avenue, and further described as 221 North Beach Boulevard (Angelo's); and does hereby disapprove the Nega*_ive Declarati.on upon f.indtng that it has r_onsidered *_he Negative Der_laration toge±her with any comments received during the public review process and f.urther f.inding on the basis of *_he Initial S±udy and any r_omments recetved that tnere ts substanttal evtdenc.e that the project will have a significant effe~t on rhe environmen*. Commiss~oner Herbs* offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mr.. Burney and MOTIUN CARRIED that the Anahei.m Ctty Planning Commisston does hereby deny W~i~ablef*oothe requirement on the bas~s that there are no special circums.anr_es app property such as stze, shape, topography, location and surroundings whtch do not apply to other identi.catl.y zoned property ~n r.he same vicin{ty; and that s*_ri.ct appltr_ation of the Zoning Code will not depri.ve the property of. privileges enjoyed by other properti.es i.n the ~.den*ir_a1 zone and cl.ass~fira':~on in the viciniry, Commi-sstoner Her.bst off.ered Resolution No. PC86-148 and moved for its passage and adoption rha.*. the Anaheim C~ty Planning Commiss~on does hereby deny C~nditioaal Use Permit No. 2784 on the basis that the extsti.ng restaurant, without on-sale beer and wine and an outdoor eaCing area, ~s causing ~:raffic and notse problems tn the area, and adjacent property owners and taw enforcement agenr_tes are required r.o provide addttional security me2sures ?_o miY.igate parking and ~ongregat_ton of persons attracted to the area by the existenr_e of this restaurart on their parking lots. On roll cal.l., *he f.oregoing resolu*_1on was passed by the following vote: AYES: BUUAS, FRY, HERBST, LA CLAIFt~,, LAWICKI, MC BU RNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE AESENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Depury City Attorney, presenr.ed .*.he wrirr.en righr. to appeai the Planning Commission's deciston within 22 days to the City Council. 6/9/86 86-384 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 ITEM N0. 4. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION RECLASSIFICATION N0. 85-86-32 AND VARIANCE N0. 3556. THE FOLLOWING ACTION WAS TAKEN AT T1iE 9EGINNING OF THE MEETING. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: YUK T. LAU AND SO KUEN LAU, 314 N. Beach Boulevard, Anahetm, CA 92801. AGENT. DENNiS MARCI-IAND, 17362 Go*_hard St., Aunr.i.ngton Aeach, CA 92647. Proper*_y described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisttng of approxtmately ~.3 ar_res, having a fron*age of approximately 1.00 feet on the east side of Harding Drive, and f.urther descri.bed as 110-114 South Harding Drive. Rer.lasst`i.cati.on f.rom RS-72~~ *.o RM-1.20~• Waivers of maximum strur_tural height, minimum structural setbar_k and minimum dis*_ance between build~ngs r_o r_ons.*.rurt a 2-s*_ory, 8-unit aparrmen*_ complex. It was noted the petttioner has requested a continuanr_e to the July 7th meeting. ACTION: Commiss~oner Bouas of.fered a motion, ser_onded by Comm~ss~oner Lawickt and MOTION CARFtIED that the Anahei.m Ctty Planninb Commission does hereby continue considerati.on of t:he aforemen*.~oned matter to t_he regul.arl.y-s~heduled meeting of July 7, 1986, at the reques*_ of the petitioner tn order to submit revised plans. ITEM N0. 5 L'IR NEGATIVE UECLARATION, RECLASSIFICATION N0. 85-86-36 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMx.T N0. 2808. PUBLLC HEARING. OWNERS: RAMON 5 LILA C~LDERON, 1633 W. 218th Street, Torrance, CA 90501. AGENT: CORA B. LLERA, 127 N. Grand, Orange, CA 92666. Proaerty described as a rectang~l.arly-shaped parcel. of land rons~s±ing of approximately 0.2 acres, having a frontage of approximately 60 feet on the east side of Anaheim Boulevard, approximately 140 feet north of r_he cen*.erl.ine of. Vermon* Avenue, and further descFibed as 890 S. Anaheim Boulevard. Reclasstfi.cation from RM-1200 to CL. To permit a chiroprar_tic clinic in an existing residential strurture. There was no one indica~ing their presence in oppositton *-o subjecr request and although the sr.aE£ report was not read, tt is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Dr. Cora Llera, agent, was presen*_ to answer any questtons. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ACTION: Commissioner Fry off.ered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that r.he Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to rer_lassify subjer_t property from the RM-1200 (Residential, Muttiple-Family) Zone to the CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone to permit a chfropractic clinic i.n an existing 6/9/86 ; .. 1986 86-385 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, rasidential structure on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximatety C.2 ar_re haTOximatel n140efeetanorthiofttlie centerline of.eVermontida of Anaheim Boulevard, app Y rove Avenue, and further desr_ribed as 890 S. Anahe~m Boul.evard; and does hereby app the Negative Der_laration upon commen~tstreceiveddduri.ngiaheepubli.cNrevieweprocess Dectarar_i_on r_ogether wi th any and further finding on the basi.s of the Initial Study and any comments r.ecei.ve that there i.s no subs*_anti,al evidence that r.he projerr will. have a signifir_ant effert on the environment. Commissioner Fry offered Resolution No• CommissionndoesVhereby grynpassage and adoption that the Anaheim City Ptanning Rer_lassiftcatton No. 85-86-36, sub3err. t:o Interdeparr.men*al. Committee Aecommendattons. On ro11 ca U., the foregoing resolu.*.ion was passed by *_he following vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HERBST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NQNE Commissioner Fry of.Eered Resol.u*.~on No~ Commisst nndoesVhereoy granpaCondtti.onal adoption that the Anahei.m City Planning Use Permit No. 2808, pursuant L-o Anahetm Muni.cipal Code Secti.ons 15.03.030.030 through 18.030.030.035, uncondittonally. On roll calt, the f.oregoing resolurion was passed 'uy the foll.owing vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HERBST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy Ci.ty Attorney, presen*ed .*.he written r~ghY t_o appeal the Planning Commission's decision withi.n 22 days to the Ci.ty Councit. RECESS: 3:15 RECONVENE: 3:25 6/9/86 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: ANAHEIM HILLS RACQUET CLUB, 415 S. Anaheim Hills ftoad, Anaheim, CA 9280%. AGENTS: PHILLIPS BRANDT REDllICK, ATTN: PHILLiP R. SCH47ART'L, 18012 Sky Park Circle, Irv3ne, CA 92714 and AMEKICAN UIVERSIFlED CAPITAL CORP., 3250 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2000, Los Angeles, CA 90010. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting o~ approximately 5.31 acres located at the northwest corner of Nohl Ranch Koad and Anaheim Nills Koad, and f.urther desrribed as 415 Anaheim Hills Road. Reclassification from RS-A-43,000 to CR. Waivers of minimum structural setbar_k, required buildin~ location, required recreation-leisure area (deleted), required boundary screenin~, and required number of affordable units r.o permit a 2 and 3-story 125-unit senior citizen apartment project. There were six persons indtrar.inb Lheir presenr_e tn opposition r.o subject request and although the sr.af.f report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Phillip 5chwartz, Partner, Phillips Brandt Reddick, Irvine, explained it is their intention to request a two-week continuance a£ter presenting the project~in or.der to meer. with the neighbors to disr_uss the project. Ken Kyan, Projer.t Director, Phillips Brandt Reddick, referred to exhibits displayed f.or the Nohl Meadows Senior Citizens luxury project and explatnPd they have taken a photo~raph from the adjar_enr klillcrest area lookinb down on the project, with tt:e artist's rendering of the project from Anaheim Hi.lls Road. He stated the project is basir_ally proposed in response to the present void of any .luxury senier citizen housing opportuniti.es for the r_irizens and residents of Anaheim. He stated their extensive market research indicated that the identified age- restricted, non-subsidized rental projects orient~d to seniors are. presently at 100% rapar_ity, with long waiting lists, and the market for seniors is f.urther evidenced in the area o£ the proposed proje~t by the existence of the Noh1 Ranch Inn, a full-servi.ce senior citi2en projer_t to the east, and ~he recently approved rer.irement far_ility to the south. He stated Lhey be.lieve the proposed project .location, which is predominantly surrounded by small commercial services and an abundance of inedir_al services, is really an i.deal lor_ation f.or this luxury oriented high quality senior citizen project, to be built with nothing but the finest high qua.lity building materials. Mr. Ityan stated they would replace any specimen trees removed on a 2 to 1 ratio with mature specimen trees; that there wi.il be tto bachelor units, r.he 1-bedroom units wi11 be approxima`ely 100 square Eeet larger than requi.red by the senior citizen ordinance, and the 1-bedroom unit, with optional den and the 2-bedrooms will be over 200 square feet larKer than the required minimum; that a reading lounge, multi-purpose room, kitchen lounge, pool, barbecues, strollinb pathways, etc. are also included, and there is an additional 1200 square fect not sliown as 6/9/Sb MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNL' 9, i986 86-386 86-387 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANhING COMMISSIUN, JUNE 9, 1986 recreattonal-leisure area. He stated this project, combined with the adjacent Anaheim Hi.ll.s Racquet Club whi.ch i.nr_l.udes a res*auranr., will gi.ve the projer_t a country club type atmosphere. Mr. Ryan stated the project wil.l add r.o the er..onomir_s of. the area; *.hat they prepared a surruunding amenity study which indicates the required services are there, with a r_onveni.enre market, drug store and extensive medi.cat services in close proximity. He stated they belteve the project is compatib].e wtth surrounding land uses and with attrar_tive landsrdpi.ng and the archi*_ectural. design of the sentortciti.zensein theiAnaheimnareanlbutrwillealso adddeo thehaestheti.ch~haragte~r cf the area. Mary Di.nndorf, 1.31 La Paz, reTerred *.o petitions and l.etrers submitted and stated there was no notification. She stated a neighbor saw a public noti.ce stgn on Nohl Ranrh Road and r_hat she only heard abou*. i t l as!: Tuesday and ±hey had bee;: r.ol.d by the proponents that they were all notif.ied but no one recei.ved any notif.ication. Ms. llinndorE star.ed the projer_t looks very good in rhe pictures, bu*_ it would not look very good on site; that L-hey are proposing 125 uni.ts whtch means 125 cars, i.f esch unit only had one rar, and with vi.sitors and some staff peopl.e, that means quite a few cars at that intersecti.on. She stated, in addtti.on, on T.he other side of. the street, east. of this projert., *here is ano*_her 1.33-un~t project which means another .133 cars r_omtng out i.nto that area which from 5 to 7:30 p.m. is very congested. She sta*_ed she bel.ieved r.raff±c alone is reason enough Lo deny the projert: 3he stated the Sceiii.c Corridor Overlay Zone does nat allow 3 stories and a large portion of. this bui.lding wtll be 3 stortes. She ref.erred to the Senior Cttizen Ordinance and added she was not aware of tha* r_ategory in the City of. Anahei.m. She stated to ~he southwest, there is ano*her proposal for a reti.rement center, where a hospital was previously proposed, and added there is an agl.ng population there, bu*_ not that many and she would like those £acts r_onsidered and this project deni.ed. Jean Morse, 400 Torrey Pine Ctrcle, stated wi.th all the vari.anr_es requested, this is a very typical reque~t and the project woul.d be one oE the highest densities i.n tha*_ area, with the e:cception of the one across the street and ±hat is a dif.ferent catebory. She star.ed the original marketing survey projer.ted 120 uni.ts, not t25. She stated they are asking for a varianr_e of the ser.back which is typical and she felt 20 Eeet from Anaheim Hills Road is not enough distance because it ts very busy. She stated across the street there i.c a depressed area because the Alpha Beta market closed, but they clid nut feel this project will help that situation. She stated she drove aruund tha*_ area today and went into the project across the street and there is no one walktng in there asking for inEormation so she 3td not thi.nk there i.s a need for r.his '~ype facil.ity. She stated their market3.ng survey indicates the}• talked to real estate people and a manager of an apartment in Ar~aheim Nills, and r.here is on1.y apartment project in Anaheim Hills. She stated she does not want to see hi~h density at that intersec.tton. Ms. Morse stated she is glad the petttioners are requesting a continuance because she did no± have time to collect all the data she would like to present and would like to add it at a l.ater ttme. She referred to the watvers r.hey are requesting, 6/9/86 86-388 MINUTES, ANAHGIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSI~N, JUNL 9, 1986 including a waiver of the affordable housinK, and stated it is not unusual for builders to request waivers. She stated she is passing on her feelings and the fee.lings of those people who had just learned about the request and were shocked, and if there is a continuance, there will be more people attendinK. Ara Call, 6015 E. Hil~crest Circle, stated the view out of his bedroom window will be of this projer_t; that ~hey moved tv Anaheim Hills in October of 1985 and surveyed a lot of areas before moving here and moved here because the City had done a~ood job in meeting r_lieir needs. He srated they like the quiet neighborhood wi.th relatively low density, especially the number of trees and the extent of wildlife, and thar. they ha~•e enjoyed very mucn .Living here. He stated also they were not notified and are located within 300 f.eet of `he property. He stated they frequently walk in r.he area ar.d saw no signs, and after he heard about it, when he looked, there wa~ a sign posted on Anaheim Hi~ls Road and one on Nohl ltanch Koad and even though he walks past that area, he di.d not see those signs. Mr. Ca.il stated he is concerned about construction noise; that just after he moved iii on October 3, abuut 1 a.m• he was awakened and thoubht there was freeway traffic, but .learned it was the all-night pouring of the concrere for the f.oundations ~f the senio: citj.zens home Lhat is being construr_Led across the street. He asked that if somethin~ is constructed on this stte, construction times should be restrained. He sta~ed construrtion was r_arried on frequently on Saturday mornings at 6:30 and that does bother his family. Mr. Ca.ll referred to the beautiEul Eucalyptus trees .locar.ed on Analleim Htl:ls Road which were recently trl.mmed, and explained as a result of just the trimming, the noise level at his house has increased twu to three times greater than it was. He stated he does not like Lhe red roof on the other project and would like somethin~ tliat would blend witlt the surroundings. He added he left a relati.vely nice community that was spoiled by density and housing. Mr. Call referred to t:he variances being requested, and noted since this is to be a luxury project, probably most people wt.tl have at least two cars and ne did not think rhere would be adequare parking. He stated he feels tlie densi.ty is too great and rhe access to r.he street is not adequate, especially rhe access past the tennis courts which he £elr_ will be dangerous. Mr. Call stated the project incorporates covering the r.hannel and that concerned hi.m because rhat would disturb the bir.d nesting areas and he really enjoys seeing the different. birds in the area now. He stared he bouglit his home here because he liked the ambiance and would like to have a chance to read and study more and would like to have the Commission help preserve wha`_ attracted hi.m r.o Anaheim Hills. Melvin Hunt, 273 S. Hillcrest, stated he agrees with the opposition regarding the high deusity. He referred to the area along Nohl Ranch Road bordered by Hillcrest Street on the west and Anaheim Hills Road on the east and state3 that is an weed-filled, dry, uncared-for strip of .land which is really an eye sore aad a hazard to pedestrians with weeds growing over the sidewalks, etc. He asked thaz if this approved, r.he Commission should i.nclude a requt.rement r.o matntain a landscaped greenbelt alon~ the Nohl Ranr_h Koad portion, in keeping with the stanZards of Anaheim klil.ls. 6/9/86 86-389 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 19R6 Mr. Ryan stated they aould be happy to provtde *_he greenbett as suggested. He stated all senior apartment projects are devel.oped tn the RM-1.200 codas which does permit 36 units per acre and this projecr, could have been much more dense, but because of the type of market they were 1.ooking f.or, felr_ r_he 125-unit project which is at 23.5 units per acre, well below the 36 units per acre, would a7.low for the square footages of the uni.ts as proposed. He stated *_he projer_t across the street does not classify as a senior citizen ap~.rtment projer_t because it is an ~nstitution and the nature of tha*_ project ~.s a 1.0*_ more dense than this project. Mr. Ryan stated the access is the existing access and required parking for the project is l19 spar_es and r.hey are provid~ng 1.33 spar_es and fee? conf.tdent there would be adequate parking. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSEll. Commissi.oner Fry sta*_ed there i.s no way to r_ompare this projert to *_he one arross the street. He stated they are saytng it is a sentor cttizen operation, but i.t doesn't quali.fy as far as *_he inr_ome level. requ.iremen*.s, e*c., and *_here are no affordable units prcposed. He stated he wou'ld have a rough ±iae approvi.ng it. Commissioner Herbst agreed and sta*.ed he l.ooked at rhis sire several. r_imes las* we~k and looked at the amenittes and the setbacks. He stated they are trying to qualify th9.s as a sen~or ritizen's cumpl.ex, and r_he seniors Wllandetherelisoaygood moving around and wilt be aff.luent and probably have two cars, chance one or borh woul.d s~ill. be working and rhe spouse woul.d have a car. He stated he did not think the whole complex would meet the s*_andards regarding parki.ng. He added he rhought they are butiding deluxe apartments, and the ameniti.es are just not there for a sentor citi*~naP~vee2t~~~cmi~esarorohernearest or bank and ro even ~et f.ood, ±:hey would have store. };o stated Anahei~ Hil.l.s Road is rhe en*_ranre *o Anaheim Hitls and *_hese will be built right to the road. He sugges~ed eliminating one whole row and meeting *.he setbar_k requtrements, which woutd stitl provtde about 100 untts and also the units could be spread out a bit. He stated he recognizes *_his is a hardship parr_el to develop because of. the fl.ood con*_ro1. channel., bu* rha*_ doesn't mean r_he amentttes of Anahei~W Hills should be destroyed. He added there is just too much density and he thougtit there is a way thts coutd be developed. He stated there is a need Eor this type apar.tment complex in Anaheim Hills and there aren't any apartments for sentor cittzens, bur. thts i.s jus* too dense. He sta~ed the 50-f.oo*_ setback catt be met and more parking provided because he did not think the parking will be adequate. He sta.*_ed he fe1.t t:here coul.d be a r_ompromise. Chairwoman LaClaire stated there are other conrerns with that property; that if. thi.s property rematns f.or rerreattonal purposes, everyone should be aware of the uses that could go in by right such as healrh spas and physical fitness centers, not exreedi.ng 4~0~ square feer, ho*_el., mo*_el, enr_losed res*auran*_, skating rink, bowling alley, art g~lleries and bingo establishments. She stated at this time this parcel i.s zoned RS-A-WithOa~resoluttonsofnintentnforecommerciallarecreational., commerctsl, recreational, and it is r.urrently being utili.zed for that purpose. 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAHEIDi CITY PLANNING COM1~lISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-390 She stated she is concerned about will happen t~ .hat property in the future and would like to see something built on r.hat prope• ,/ that will be rhe leasr. detrimental to the neighbors; that she is no~ i..favor of the density on this projecr, bu' is trying to make sure that area is protected and wou.ld really prefer to see it stay just as it is. She suggested i.n their discuss3.ons with the petitioner, the neighbors should try to r_ome up with some pro-active planning and decide if they want things to sr.ay the same, or what would be r.he least impact on the whole area. She star.ed she does not like this being proposed as a senior citi.zen housing project wir_h no affordable units and according to the ordinance, Lhe Commission cannot approve it because i.t doesn't have '15% of the units in the affordable range, or 10% in %he very very low range, and also she is not in favor o£ the three srories. She stated the density and overall impact on t'ne whole property is just too hibh and she would not vote for rhe encroachment i.nto the 50-foor. setback. hir. Ryan star.ed they would be very happy to meet with r.he ci`izen~ and work out some sort of compromise and that is one reason they der_ided to request the continuance. He stated they did sent out a ma.tler to various prestdents of homeowner's associations. Responding `o Commissi.oner Bouas, Mr. Ryan stared renrs are r_urrently being considered at about $700 per month for the two-bedroom unit and about $685 for the one-bedroom, one den unir.. ACTION: Commi.ssioner H~rbst offered a morion, ser_onded by Commissioner McBurney and MOTION CAKRIEll tliat the Anaheim Ci`_y Planning Commission does hereby continue consideration of rhe aforementioned matrer to the regularly-scheduled meeti.ng of June 23, 1986, ar ~he request of the petitioner in order to meet with tlie property owners and present revi.sed plans. ITEM N0. 7. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATIUN, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT AND CONDIT?UNAL USE PEltMIT N0. 2798. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: CHA1tLES HA.NCE, 8'L8 W. Vermont Avenue, Anahetm, CA y2805. Properry described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting oP approximateiy 1.84 ar_res, having a f.rontage of approximately 335 ieet on the south side of Vermont Avenue, approximately 190 feet west of the centerline of Citron Streer, easterly of r.he Sanr.a Ana Freeway, and further described as 808-820 West Vermont Avenue. Waiver of. mi.nimum number of parking spaces to peTwit an automotive sales and service center facility and rer.atn an outdoor storage area. Chairwoman La Claire stared it is her understanding that the Ci.ty Council will be having a hearing regarding zoninb of this area on June 17th and suggested the petitioner request a continuance until after that hearing. Mr. Hance agreed to a continuance. ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motlon, seconded by Commissioner McL::rney and MOTION CAR1tIED that the Anaheim Ci.ty Planning Commission does hereby continue consideration of the aforementioned mar.ter to the regularly-scheduled meeting of June 23, 1986. 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986_ _ 86-391 Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy Ctty Ar_torney, stated the City Council has adopted an ordinance which prohibits tb.e City from issutng building permit~ and other entitlements to use property in that area, except under rather restrictive condi.ttons, which this particular appl.ica*ion woul.d no*_ meet, and rhe Ci±y Counr_i.l wil_1 be constdering an extension of that prohibttion at the meeting of the 17th and suggested Mr. Han~e be rhere. ITEM N0. 8. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2802. TFiE FOLLOWING ACTION WAS TAKEN AT THE BEGI~'NING UF THL MEETING. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: MUNKYO CHO AND HYON SUN CHO, 806 N. Brookhurst Street, Anaheim, CA 928~1., Proper*_y desr_ribed as an ~rregul.arly-shaped parcel. of. land consisti.ng of approxtmately 1.9 acres, having a f.rontage of approximately 250 feet on *_he east side of. Brookhursr. S.*_reet, and further described as 8~6 North Brookhurst Street. Watvers of s*ru~*.ural setback, permit_ted encroarhmen*.s and yard requiremen*.s, mi.nimum dtmensions of parking spaces, and mi.nimum number and type of parki.ng spaces to retai.n an auto towing, impound and repair f.acilir_y. It was noted the petitioner has requested that subjer_t per_itton be conttnued to the meeting of Jul.y 7, 1.986. ACTION: Comm~ssioner Bouas offered a mo+.~on, seronded by Commissioner Lawirki and MOTION CARRIED that the Anahei.m City Planning Commisston does hereby continue consi.dera•:ion of r.he aforemen*.ioned marrer to the regul.arly-scheduled meer_ing of Jul.y 7, 1986, at r_he request of. the petttioner i.n order to submtt an adequate parking demand study. ITEM N0. 9. EIR NEGATIVE UECLARATION, WAIVER Or CODE REQUIREMENT AND CONDITIONAI. USE PERMIT N0. 2805. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: RICHARD G. AND BARBARA L. SAYLOR, 804 W. Broadway S*_reer., Anahetm, CA 92805. Property descrtbed as a rectangul.arly-shaped parcel of land c~nsist.ing of approxi.mate?y ~.32 acres, lor.ated ar. rhe sourhwest corner of Broadway nnd Citron Street, and further described as 804 West Broadway. THE FOLLOWING ACTION W~S 'PAKEN AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. Wai.vers of minimum rear yard setback and required type of parking spaces to permi.t a bed and breakfast inn in the Rt~l-240~ zone. Zt was noted t_he petitioner has requesred a continuance to r_he meeting of June 23, -- 1986. ACTION: Commissjoner Souas of.fered a motion, ser_onded by Commissioner Lawicki and MOTIUN CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commissi.on does hereby c~ntinue consi.deration of the aforemenr_loned ma*.ter ro *he meeting of. June 23, 1986, a'. r_he request of the petitioner. 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNZNG COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-392 1TEM N0. 10. EIR NEGATIVE llECLARATION, WAIVER OF COllE REQUIREMENT AND CQNDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2806. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: P120PEKTIES LIMITED, 27405 Puerr.a Real, Ii300, Missi.on Viejo, CA 92691. AGENTS: LORAL ENTERPRISES, ATTN: ALBEKT SMITH, 1'14'L La Loma Circle, Anaheim, CA 92806. Property described as an i.rregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approxim:itely 1.44 acres, having a frontage of approxi.mately 385 feet on r.he sourh side of La Loma Cirr_le, approximarely 500•feet sour.h o£ the aenterline of Miraloma Avenue and £urther described as 1242 La Loma Circle. Waiver of mini.mum number of parking spaces to permit an automobile repatr facility in an exisring i.ndustrial complex in r_he ML 2one. There was no one indicating rheir presence in opposition ro subject request and alr.houbh the sraff report was nor. read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. A1 Smtth, agent, was preseat to answer any ques~ions. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSE9. Commissioner Herbst asked if this approval could be restrir_ted ro thi.s partir_ular operator. Plr. Smith responde~3 that wou.Ld be acceptable Lo fiim. Mr. Smith responded to Commissior.er Bouas thar. the work will all be done inside r.he far_ility. ACTION: Commissioner Nerbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner McBurney and MOTION CARKIEll ttiat the Anahei.m City Planning Commission has reviewed r.he proposa.l to permit an automobile repair facility in an existing industrtal complex in the tiL 'Lone with waiver of mir.imum number of parki.ng spar_es on an irregularly-shaped parr_el of land consisting of approximatel.y 1.44 acres, having a frontage of approxima~ely 385 feet on ~_he south side of La Loma Circle, approximately 500 feet sour.h of the centerline of Miraloma Street, and further described as 1242 La Loma Circle; and does hereby approve the Negar.i.ve Declaration upon ftnding that it has considered the Negative lleclaration together wir.h any comments received during rhe public review process and further finding on the basis of Lhe Initial Study and any r_omments received that there is no substantial evidence that the projec` will have a significant effect on r.he environment. Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner McBurney and MOTION CARRIEU that the Anahetm City Planning Commission does hereby grant watver of code requireRent on the basis r.hat the parking waiver will not cause an increase in traffic congestion in rhe immedia`e vir_inity ~:or adversely affect any adjoining land uses and branting of the parkinb waiver. under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, healtt~, safety and general welfare ef the citizens of the City of Anah.eim. Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC 86-151 and moved for its passage and adoptton that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permi.t No. 2806 pu:suanr. to Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 15.03.030,030 throubh 18.03.030.035 and subject to this permit being limited to the current operator, Loral Enr.erprises, Albert Smith, and subject to Inrerde~artmenta.l ::ommitree Recoinmendations. 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIUN, JUNE 9, 1986 86-393 On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HEKBST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE AIiS~NT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, lleputy City Attoruey, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ITEM N0. 11. EIR NEGATIVE llECLARATION, WAIV~K OF COLE 1tEQUIREMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 28U7. PUBLIC kiEARING. OWN~.KS: CUSBY WAY YAftTN~KS, 51U0 liirch Street, 2nd Floor, Newport Beach, CA 92660. AGENT: SHARON lt. BRUWNING, 2512 Chambers Road, Suite 206, Tusti.n, CA 92680. Property desr_ribed as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.5 acres, havin~ a£rontage of approximately 35 feet on r.he northwest side of the northerly terminus of Cosby l,'ay, approximately 580 feet northwest of the centerline of La Palma Avenue and further described as 1161 N. Cosby Way. Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to permit personal auro r.epairs and stora~e i.n an exisring multi-tenant industrial building. There was one person indicating his presence in oppositton r.o subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the mtnute~. Sharon Browning, agent, explained she is requesting a minimum of three units be allowed for personal automobile storage and repairs on personal automobiles rather than S as shoNn in r.he staff report. She explained they have had qui.te a few calls for r.his type use since some people are not allowed to repair automobiles in their area, and have requested ro rent a unit ro do personal work on the vehicles. Leonard McGhee, Assor_iate Planner, stated the applicant is requesting a permit for r.hree units as opposed to five as shown in rhe sr.aff report and witli only three units, no parking waiver woulc+ be necessary. Ms. Browning stated originally a possibility of ustng ten units was discussed with staff, but her goal is to allow a very minimal number of ~his type use at this facility. She noted tliere are r.hree units availabl~ for lease at the present time, and stated she is not trying to r.urn this complex into an automutive type business. Jeff Boatman, 1160 N. Cosby Way, 1Suilding E, stated he is speaking f.or the owner and or_r_upant of Building E and they are one of the original purchasers of one of the buildings . He stared recentty a new tenant moved into the middle building on the east side of Cosby wliich has broubht in a large number of employees and there is not adequate parking in the entire complex, and they feel any additional loss of parking spaces will pur more parking into the street which is already becoming congested. He statad thei.r metal c:istribution business is right at the end of the cul de sac and needs access from commercial carriers, and the carriers are having great difficulry bringing their trucks in now and turning around in the cul de sac. 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-394 Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, stated the list of uses provided by the applicant shows presently auto storage in Units, M, N, 6 T, and asked if she is proposing rhree additional auto storage/repair facflities, or if the permit is actua.lly to allow those three. Ms. Brownin~ responded the current automor.ivQ sturage was there when they purr_hased tlie property in November or llecemUer, and at the time the City inf.ormed them they would have to eitlier have those people move or obtatn a conditional use permit. 5he clarified the request is to allow the three that are there. Ms. Browni.nb sta~ed she was nor aware thar any of the tenants tn her complex are currently parking in the cul de sac atid poiar.ed out there is plenty of parking on subject property. It was clarified rhat r.he parkinb problem is being caused by all the industrial users in that immediate area. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSEll. Commissioner Fry stated with only three units affected, rhe parking waiver is not needed, and those three are already existing, so there is no change i.n the parking si.tuation. Ms. Browninb explatned r_he tenants of r_hose three units do not do any major repairs; that one gentleman uses it for his liobby shop to work on his car. Commissioner Messe suKgested r.ying the conditional use permi.t to tliose three units. Commissioner Herbst stated these units are fairly large and questioned that a person would rent one of these unir.s just to repatr his own automobile, and asked how long they lease rhe unit. Ms. Browning responded un~ tenant has been r.here for maybe two to three years. She stated one r.enanr repairs tiis trur_k and a small r_ar and she r.hought he was prubably restoring it and also does other odd jobs, similar ro a hobby shop and i.t is not a business, and the other two are basical.Ly the same. Ms. Browning responded to Commissioner Messe that one to two employees for each unit mQans, i.n general, there would be one or two people in 'he uriit at a time. She stated a person may want to restore an o.ld car and the wife says it cannot be done at thetr residenr_e, so the person then tries to find another place such as this to do rhe work. Leonard McGhee stated this really wasn't the origina:l request; and r.hat staff Gecame aware of thi.s as a part of a business license applir_atton f.or suto repair in one of the units and it was made known to the applicant that a conditional use permit was required. He stared the original request came in at 10 units and after staff discussed the project at r_he In'.erdepartmental Committee meet_ing, the applicant was asked to provide a list of the restrictions whicli vould be placed on the tenants and Lhat list of restrictions has not been provided. Ms. Brcwning explained the restrictious discussed pertained to what type of flammable products would be r.here, such as, will there be a large amounr. of gasoline, acid, etc. and explained her rules and regulations say there will be no storage of any flammable or combustible material. 6/9/86 JUNE 9, 1986 86-395 MINUTES, ANAxEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, Commissioner Herbst asked if sprinkler systems would be required. Leonard McGhee stated uni.ts over 6,~00 square f.eet are required ro be sprinkl.ered, and when .*.he request pertained to ten units with each unit being more than 1,000 square feet, sprinklers were required, bu.*_ now rhar the reques*_ has been redured to *hree, or 3,000 square feet, sprinklers would not be necessary. ao1,000isquazeefoot uniteda~tenanmmwouldnusuallyrexpectasomeusortlofereturnand with Commissioner Lawicki. asked how sur_h a use r..oul.d be pol.iced r_o make sure the renan* is not using it as a business to offset the r_ost of the unit and to augment his income. Ms. Brown~ng s*a*ed she is on *.he sir_e *.wo *.o ~hrPe *o~theatenantsnands aware of wha!_ i.s happening in every untt and goes in r_o talk sees what i.s go~ng on. Chairwoman La Claire s*_a*ed r.his is on1.y *_hree un~ts and she dtd no'_ think it matters if the tenant i.s making money and thts is certai-nly a better use for an allowedii.n industrialaareasedandathatrslepfelt thistuse belongshinganrindustri.abeen area. Commiss~oner Fry sra*.ed he bel.ieves Ms. Browning does know what t.s going on and he would be in favor of the use. Commisstoner Herbst stared he has no problem with it, except he wnutd like r.o see it lim~ted to a rerra~n *_ime period. Ms. Br~wning responded to Commissioner McBurney that she does have a lease with one tenant, and une is on a month ro monr.hesr.edea one-yearhtimeRlimtt,a one year lease. Commissioner McBurney sugg ACTION: Commiss~oner McBurney offeyed a mo~ioCo~issionahas revtewed the proposald MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim Cit Planning to permit personal. auro repa~rs and s.*.orage ~n an exis*_ing mul.*_i-r_enanr_ indus*rtal building wtth waiver of minimum number of parking spaces on a rer_tangularly-shaped parcel o£ land consis*_i.ng of. approximarely l.5 acres, having a frontage of approximately 35 feet on LI1P_ northwest side of the northerly terminus of Cosby Way, approximately 580 feet nortWaes~and does~herebyiapproveathe'NegativePDeclarati.onr described as 1161 N. Cosby Y~ upon findtng *hat it has r_onsidered the Negarive Derl.ararion togerher with any comments received during the pub.lic revtew process and further finding on the basis oE the Ini*iat Study and sny comments reretved tha* there is no substanti.al evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner Mr_Burney of.f.ered a~c'ion, ser_onded by Commi.ssioner Plesse and MOTION CARRIED that the waiver of code requi.rement is hereby deni.ed on the basis that the applir_an* s*_ipulated to redur_e .*.he number of un~ts .*.o three ar rhe publ.i.r_ hearing, thereby deleti.ng the need for sai.d waiver. Commissioner McBurney of.f.ered Resol.u~ion No. PC86-1.52 and moved =anttConditionaland adoptton that the Anaheim City Ptanning Commisston does hereby g Use Permi!: No. 28~7, ~n Part, pursuan* to Anahelm Munl.cipal Code Ser_ti.on 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035, for a period of one year, subject to the Uni±siMneN;s~ST,Pandrthat*aalisttoforestrtr_tionsapertaining toamatertalsited to 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-396 to be stored in the units shall be provided to the Planning llepartment, and subjecr, to Inrerdepartmental Committee Recommendations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the followinK vote: AYES: BUUAS, FRY, kit:R13ST, LA CLAiRE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MES5E NOE~: NUNE ABSENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy Ciry Atrorney, presenr.ed the written righr to appeal r.he Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ITEM N0. 12. EIR NEGATIVE llE(:LARATION AND CONDI'CIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2810. PUBL ING. OWNER: AllEL ATA ALI, 24825 Daphne West, Mission Viejo, CA 92691. AGENTS: TALAT RAllWAN/ABRAHAM ALI, 2718'L Soledad, Mission Viejo, CA 92692. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel o~ land r.ansisting of approximately 0.5 acres, located at the southeast corner of Bal.l lioad and Walnut Street, and 'Eurther described as 1198 West Ball Road (servir_e starion). To permi.t construction of a convenience market wir.h gasoline ~ales and off-sale beer and wine. There were four persons indicating thetr presence in opposition Lo subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of tiie minutes. Responding to Chairaomaa La Claire, Annika Santalahti, Assistant llirector for Zoning, explained this property is in the area to be considered by the Ctty Council on the 17th, but Commission can hear this matter r.~day because a convenience market with ~asoline sales and off-sale beer and wine is a permitted use wirh approval of a conditional use permit in rhe Cit, as well as other zones. Malcolm Slaughter, lleputy City Ati.orney, stated the modified moratorium to be considered by the City Council on June 17 precludes any use unle~s thar. use is permitted in the CR zone, conditionally permitted in the CK zone, or basically is the extenslon of an existing lawful use, so if the request would permit something that is permitted in the CR zone, it is not afEected by that particular moratorium. Ms. Leslie Kyle, 439 Via Lio Souid, Newport Beach, stated the application is for a convenience market in conjunction with continued gasoline sales, with a request for off-sale beer and wine. She stated the purpose of the CR Zone is to provide and encourage the development of rer_ail businesses directly related to the businesses of entertaining, housing or supplying services to the tourists, and this is precisely what r.hey are proposing to do at this location. 5he explained the facility is designed to serve the needs of the traveler, particularly those who utilize notorhomes and utilize the nearby recreational vehicle parks. She stated there is a substanrial number of people wlio travel this way and for one reason or another do not desire to eat all their meals in a restaurant, and there is always something needed from a market; and that some peop.le need to eat certain meals at certain times of the day and it is not always possible to find a restaurant and get service :n a timely manner, nor to find what is needed on r_he nenu; and r.hat some people do not want to take time from their busy vacation schedules to go out to a restaurant. 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAH~LM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIUN, JUN~ 9, 1986 Sb-397 She stated she feels this use proposed for this location definir.ely meets a need for the tourist in the area, and that it will be very benefi.cial ro the existing community because there is really no major food aarket in the area, with the closest they could find about 1-1/1 miles away, and i.t was not even a major food chain and was aot located on a major inzersection where it was readily visible. She stated the proposed faciliry is similar to another ~acility this applicant has at Katella and Brookhurst, approved about two yearc ago, and this facility is intended to be a very, very significant upgrade for the site. She stated ttie facility witl be concrete block construction along the property lines as indir_ated in rhe staff report, and that ts a Building Code requirement with consrruction on a property line; however, the other waLls would be of stucco and glass and in addition, they have added fountains, etc. She stated the applicant has the comounity's best .interest in mind and tha•`. has already been substantiated by the manner in whicR he has upbraded the axisti.n~ service station in `he interim. She presented a petition in support of r.he request containinb approximately 200 signatures, and explai.ned petiti.ons with approximately 1,000 addirional names including residents and people in tiie area in favor of r.he request will be delivered la`er. She read the petition as follows: "'Co the Mayor of Analieim. ~e, the people of Anaheim, sign this petiti.on and are in favor of ihe remodeling, building and upbrade of the gas station and proposed mint- marke` lor_ated at 1198 West Ball Road. At present, the sration is run down and is not as murh an asset to the community as it would be provided rhe remodeling, building and upgrade was done. We, the people of Anaheim, are in favor of havinb a msrket in the area since we have none within tliis area, and, we r.he people of Anaheim, are in f.avor of providing new jobs to the area, as well as lookin~ forward to having this beautiEul new station with mini-market to provide us wi.th r.his nice and wonderful convenience. Thank you for your r_ooperation.' Betty Ronconi, 1241 S. Walnut, sta~ed she wouid abree rtie physir_al appearance of rhe proposed facility would be an upgrade. She stated she also has a petition to present, and rhey did not put mur_h time inr.o thetr per.irton and from just the immediate area, have 18 signatures of neighburs and 35 si~natures from Walnut Manor. She stated they are also not plea~ed with the possibility of a gasoline station in conjunction with the sale of alcoholic beverages. Ms. Roncont sta`ed she is curious as to why the: .:~re nor contacted, pointing out no one approached Lhen with a petition and the, .. right there and she would question where the siKners of the applicant's pe' .tion live. She stated this site has residential uses on two sides and a post office on the other side and they are againsr the general concept of a far_ilir.y with the sale of alcoholic beveraKes and gasoline sales. Ms. Ronconi stated r.hey already have existing hardships from living ar_ross from the existing businesses and do not need this type facility across the street from their residences. She stated through the cooperation of the buslnesses, they have been able to maintain their residential area. Stie stated there is a hotel, restaurant, and Tennisland in 'har area, with he~vy traffic on Walnut, and they feel this type businass is not compatible with Lheir residential area. 6/9/80 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COPiMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-398 Ms. Ronconi stated this could become a meeting place for teenagers, or the same type thi.ng dis~ussed earller regardi.ng Angelo's, and there roul.d be addi.ttonal loiteri.ng and littering; and this type faciltty is vulnerable to crime, commonly referred *_o as a"stop and rob" market, and also *_heir residential area could be more vulnerable, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and tt seems intolerable to her. She sta*ed they object to thi.s fcr z1.1. of these reasons, and are reatty surprised by the petittan submi.tted by the applir_ant. Ms. Roncini. s*a*.ed *hey have seven r_onvenienre markers in rhe area, and three f.ull-servi.ce markets not very far away, one at the corner of Cerrttos and Walnut, and each trai.ler park has ir_s own convenlen~e store, and *here is a convenience store at Ball and West, and Euclid and Ball has two markets (one i.s Atbertsons which ts open 24 hours a day), and t:here are plen*yo uf far.ilittes to serve the tourists. Michael. Rizzu*.o, 1217 S. Wal.nut, sta*.ed his property is righ*. across from the service station, and he thought a 24-hour f.ar_i.ltty would be i.ntolerable; that rhey have rars squealing ou~ of rhat site now and a.*. nigh*. t_he 1.ights shine tn*_o thetr bedrooms. lie stated there are a lo* of young people wlto use the phones lor_ated there and r_ongrega~e attd sir and drink beer and *hen come arross the street and throw the r_ans on his lawn. He stated traffic is very heavy and there are a lot of tourists who s*.ay ar r_he Cones?:oga Inn and walk *o the gas s*arion and many ttmes there have been near acr_i.dents. Ne stated he opposes the sale of wine and beer. Ms. Kyle invir.ed the neighbors to v~sir. any of the applicanr.'s other lor_a*_i.ons to see how the business is run. She staLed these markets are not the same as an AM/Phi Market, and are mur_h berr.er run ?:han a 7-1.1. in mos*_ resper..r_s, and rhe appl.icanr_ has several stores and has experienced managers. She s*ar_ed ser_urity measures are exceptional wirhin ~he s*ores and a video sys*em is used ~o moni*or every aisl.e of the store and those tapes are saved for at Least two weeks. Ms. Kyle sta~ed she emphasizes wi.*.h rhe peoPle who l.ive across *he sr_reer. f.rom a recreational area and it i.s unfortunate that there is not more buff.ering be*_ween the residences and ~he recrea*_ional. area and ~hey are separated only by a s*_reet. She stated the petitioners reali.a.e there is a problem with the existing phones and that they woul.d be removed. She sra~ed the f.ariliries have an exr_el.lenr_ record of. being run in s manner whir_h i.s very complimentary to their locations and in other areas, *_he neighbors have approached rhem subsequen*_ to constructton of. the building to say how pleased they are with it and they are patronized by the surrounding communities. THE YUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSL•'D. Commissioner Lawi.cki sr_ated he has lived in r.he immediate area for the last 20 years and Less than 1/4 mile on Ball Road, near Anaheim Sheraton, rhere is a gas sta*ion sell.ing beer and wine and food, and *_here ~s a far.ility on Cerritos and Walnut, and severaL stores at the intersection of Walnut and Katella, wtth no less than 5 liquor stores in r_he i.mmediar_e area, 3 of which are on the corner of Eucli.d and Ball, about 1/4 mile away, and two large stores on the northeast and northwest stde of Ball and Eurli.d, in addition t.o the +_wo liquor s*_ores and a small. mini-market which is on the southeast corner of Ba.ll and Euclid. He stated probably wi.*_hin one mile of. this sir_e he r_oul.d count a*_remendous amoun*_ of 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-399 facilities to service the needs of the communi.ty and rhe r.ourists. He stated he encourages entrepreneurship, but questions if there is a need f.or the conversion or expansion of an existing business, and he personally could not see the need for that type faci.lity at that locatton. He stated r.he existing gas station could be remodeled to give it the look it requires for the area, but that he could not vote for or encourabe approval of this request. Ms. Kyle stated r.hey do fee~ the produr_t being offered is significantly different from r.he mini-markets in the area in that it i.s lar~er and provides a broader range o£ goods and avai.labi.lity. She stated the market at Cerritos and Walnut is, ia their estimation, a poor conversion and does nor. se11 gasoline, and added she dtd not see r.he Albertsons at Eur_lid and Ball. Commissioner Lawicki stated there are two large stores, one on `he northwest and one on r_he northeasr. corner of Euclid and Ba.ll, and they have a broad var~ety of items. Commissioner Herbst asked i.f Ms. Kyle is aware of pas~ Planni.ng Commi.ssion acttons rebarding r.he sale of. beer and wi.ne in conjuncr.ion wi.rh gasoline sales. Ms. Kyle responded r.he staff did our_line the pasr. liisr.ory of these requests in the report and rhat is always a r_oncern, and she was sure that is an on-goinb debare from jurisdir_r.ton r.o jurisdiction. Chairwoman La Claire stated r.his Commi.ssion iias never voted i.n favor of the sale of beer and wi.ne in conjuncti.on wir.h basoline sales. Malcolm ~laugti'er stated the Commission must make rhe findin~ thar the proposed use is properly one for whi.r_h a conditi.onal use permit is authorized by Code, and r.hat the property in questton is zoned CR which permi.ts, under Section 18.48.050, an automobile servir_e station, subject to r.he requirements of Chapter 1$.87, and an automobile servir_e staticn is defined i.n the Code as, "a retai.L place of business engaged primarily in the sale of motor fuels and inciden'ally supplyin~ boods and servir_es required by the operar.ion and maintenance of. auromobile vehicles and in fulfilling the needs of motorists." He stated f.urther, Chap'er 18.~7 says that a conditional u^Q permi.t i.s requi.red f.or a service sr.ar.ion if, in f.act, they plan to sell beer and wine, subject to numerous condittons set forth, which the Commission is well aware of, aud hi.s concern in readinb r.iie staff report and thought staEt wa: also concerned that this may not be a service sr.ation wir.h some minor incidenr.al sales, but is, in facr., a marker. with the inr_idental sale of gasoline and r.hat he was not sure it could be determined, 'i~ased on the evidence he has heaXd, that this is a use £or which a r_ondirional use permi.t is even authorized in this zone. Commissioner Herbst srated there is a residential area right across the street and res':lenr.i.al ar_ross Ball. Road, and he thought a 24-hour operation in this location would certainly be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and wel£are of the people livinK there. He stated r.har was hi.s feeling in 1967 wken he voted agatnst the gas station, and he hasn't changed his mind now, and felt the people who live there certatnly have r_heir righr.s and rhat this is an enr_roachmenr on their rights. Ne sLated the gas station is there, but he did not think additional uses should be al.lowed. He added he also felt having the sa.le of beer and wine would furtlter complicate the maLter. 6/9/86 MINUTE5, ANAHEIPI CITY PLANNING COMMISSZON, JUNE 9, 1986 86-400 Ms. Kyle reminded the Commissiott she did submit a petition containing names of. residents in the area who were in favor of the request. Commissioner Herbst stated signatures of people from Santa Ana and Garden Grove were also included on that list, and they were n~t from people ir. r.he netghborhood, bur. people the petirioner had solicited. Commissioner htesse stated they were probably customers at the gas station. Ms. Kyle responded they probably were and probaoly would have liked to have seen other conveniences avai.lable to them. Commissioner Herbst asked why they did not contact the people ar_ross r.he street. Ms. Kyle responded she was sure thar has also eccurred. Ms. Kyle stated on the original submittal of the application, rhe proposed land use was described as a self-serve servtr_e station wiLh the sale of automotive and recreational vehicle parts and accessories, as ~aell as sales of. convenience foods and sundries, incl.udi.ng off-sale beer and wine. Malr_olm Slaughter read f.rom r.he application thar. "the applir_ation is made f.or a conditional use permir. under 4ode Secrion 1~.87.023.020 of. the Anaheim Municipal Code to permit r.he £olloui.ng specific uses - gas station, convenience market." hls. Kyle stated staff was given a very comple`.e description of the use and that the sales of automotive arcessories, etc, would be i.n r_onjunction witli r.he other rer.ail sales. She stated some of those items are avatlable in most convenienr_e markets, and not just food items. She sr.ared addittonally, Section 18.87.OG3 of the Code authorizes this use in conjunction with rhe sale of beer and wine at service stations and requires rhat a minimum of $.10,000 in tnventory other than the beer and wine or automotive or f.uel products be provided, so they are tryinK to r_omply with other ser_tions of the code, as wel~. Chairwoman La Claire stated she has never voted f.or beer and wine or alcohol sa.les in conjunction with gasoline sales ber_ause she is familiar wit.h that issue and has looked at all the available statistics. She star.ed this is a time when r.here is a problem with drinking and driving, wi.r.n many dear.hs occurrinb on ttie highways every year, and this issue ts being recogni.zed in the State right now and has been recogni.zed by other c:i'=tes; and that the Planning Commission has recognized for a long time r.hat it doe>>n't make much sense to link drinking and driving when a lot of money is being spent tryi.n~ to unlink drinking and driving. 5he stated the ~lanning Commission has never voted in favor of the joint sale of alcoho.l and gasoline, and feel very strongly about it. Chairwoman La Claire stated it seems to her that according to Commissioner Lawicki who lives in the area and according to the testimony of the other people in the area, there are many convenience stores. She stated also there is a desperate need for service stations whir_li do repairs and it seems one of the biggest benefits for the tourists who come to area would be a place to have repairs done, and suggested, as a planner, she would like to see a positive approach taken to providing somethiny, that the community really needs. Ms. Kyle stated they do feel there is a need cf this type facility uased on their studies and review of the market area; that the RV parks indeed do t~ave very small convenience facilities for the purchase of emergency supplies, but nothin~ like the services they wou.Ld provide with this facility. She stated it is thei.r experience that the beer and wine sold in r_onjunction with gasoline sales is not consumed by the drivers on the premises, but is taken away and consumed at h6/9/86 some other MINUTGS, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COr1MISSIUN, JUNE 9, .198G 86-40:L place. She stated far beyond any statistics that come out of the accidents caused by concurren` sales of beer and wine would be fr~m drivi.ng af.r.er s~:opptng ar one of the local lounges which are permitr.ed uses in the CR Zone. ACTION: Com~issioner Fry offered a motion, seconded by Commissi.oner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Herb~~". and Lawicki voting no) '.hat the Anahelm City Planr.i.ng Commission has revteked r.he proposa7. *.o permi.r. r.h r_onstrur_tton of a cnnvenience market with gasoline sales and off-s~le beer and wine on a rer_tangularly-shaped parr_el of land consisr.ing of. approximar.ely 0.5 acre, locared at the southeast corner of Ba1Z Road and Walnut Road; and does hereby approve the Negar_ive Declara'{on upon f.indi.ng `har. ir. has r_onsi.dered the Negative Der_laration together with any comments received durin~ the public review process and further finding on r.he basis of. r.he In~r.tal Sr.udy and any commenrs recetved rhar. there is no subsr.antia.l evtdence that the project wi.ll have a si~niEir.ant effect on the environment. ~_:ommissioner Herbsr indi.ca`ed he vor.ed no on r.he negar.ive declarar,i.on because he fe3.~ there would definirely be an adverse impact on the health, safety and ~aneral <_.~-. :; r.he surrounding r_ommunjty and rhe use would have a neva'ive ~mpar_r. on Co>cu,is~i_c. • r Fry offered Resolu'~on Ido. PC86-153 and moved cor ir.~ ~,assage aad adeption `hat r_hat Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby deny Conditi.onal Use Permit No. 28.L0 on the basi.s rhar. the proposed use for a convenience m~,tket with gasoLine sales and off-sale beer an wine, pruposed to be open 'L4 hou:-~. a day, wouid be derrimenr.al r.o r.he parricular area and r.o the pear_e, healr.h, saEety and general weLfare of the citizens and particularly the nearby residents, and would increase r.raffir_ and ligh' ~ntrus~on i.n'o homes in th~ vir_inity. On roll call, '.he foregoing resolution was passed by 'he followin~ vote: AYES: BJUAS, FKY, HERI3ST, LA CLAIRE, LAidICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: tlONE A33SENT: NONE Malr_olm Slaughter, llepury Ciry Ar.torney, presenr.ed '.he wri.r.ten righr. to appeal r.he Planning Commission's decisiuz within 2'L days r.o the City Council. ITEM NU. 13. EIR CATEGORICAL EXEFiP~ION - CLASS 5 AND VARIANCE N0. 3567. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: DOUG WATKINS, 231 S. Nutwood Streer_, Anahe~m, CA 92804. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximarely 0.14 acre, havtng a f.ronr.age of. approximar.el~ 60 feer. on r.he wesr. side of Nutwood Street, and further described as 231 South Nutwood Street. Waiver of required rear yard ser.back r.o r_onsr.rur_r. a family-room addition to a si.ngle-family residence. There was no one indir_ating r.heir presence i.n opposi.ti.on ro subjec.t request and althouKh the staff report was not read, it is ref.erred to and made a part of the minutes. Boug Watkins, agenr., was presenr. r.o answer any quesrious. 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIrG COMIdISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-402 THE PLtBLIC HEARZNG WAS CLOSED. Mr. War.kins responded to Chairwoman La Cla•[re ~har. rhe netghbors have all been in favor of r.he requesr. Ir. was nor.ed ~he Planning Direc`or cr hi.s au`hori.zed representative has der.ermi.ned that the proposed project f.alls within the definition of Car.egorical Exemptions, Class S, as defined i.n `he State Environmenr.al Imparr. Report Gutdeltnes and is, thereforQ, car_egorically exempt from the requirement tu prcpare an EIR. ACTION: Chairwoman La Ctaire of.fered Resolur.i.on No. PC86-154 and moved for i.r.s passage and adoption that r.he Anaheim City Planning Commission dues hereby granted Variance No. 3567 on r.he basts r.har r.here are sper_ial cirr_umsr.ances ~~.ppltr_able r.o the ~roperty such as size, shape, topograpliy, lor_ation and surroundings whir_h do not apply r.o or.her idenrirally zoned properr.y in r.he same vi.cini.r.y; and that strict application of r~~e 'Loning !'~de deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties i.n r.he tden•:i_cal zone and r_lassiftr_ation in r.he vir_tni.ty and subjecr. r.o InterdeparLmental Commitree recommendations. On roll r_all, r.he forego'..ng resolur.i.on was passed by `he following vor.e: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HER1iST, LA CLPIKE, LAWICKL, MC BUKNEY, @1ESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Matcolm Slaughrer, Depur.y Ci r.y Ar.r.orney, presenr.ed ~he wri r.ten ri.ghr. r.o appeal rhe i'lanning Commission's decision withtn 22 days to the City Council. I'CEM NU. 14. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND VARIANCE N0. 3569. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: EUCLID SHOPPING CENTER, 2293 W. BA1l Road, Anahei.m, CA 92804. AG~NTS: INTEiiNATIONAL KING'S TABLE, INC., 14211 Yorba Street, Suite 105, Tusti.n, CA 92630, ATTN: TOM GREGG. Properr.y described as a recr.angularly-shaped parr.el of land consisting of approximately 17.42 acres located at the southeast corner of Katella Avenue and Euclid S`.reeY. Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to construct an enclosed restaurant. Tom Gregg, agenr., explained r.his res'.auranr. is abour. 4~ of. an exi.sr.ing 200,OU0-square foot shopping center, wir.h 68 parking spaces required for their use, and r.here are abour. 950 ror.al parki.ng spaces in r.he cenr.er, wirh 1053 required. T11E PUBLIC IiEARING WAS CLOSED. ACTION: Commissioner rIr_Burnay off.ered a mor.i.on, seconded by Commtcstoner Bouas and MOTIUN CARRIED that rhe Anaheim City Planni.ng Commission has reviewed the rroposal to ronsr.rucr, an enclosed rest.auranr. wirh watver of mi.nimum number of. parki;;;, spaces on a rer_rangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 17.~2 a~_res located at r.he southeast corner of Katella Avenue and Euclid Streer; and dc•.es hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considereri the Negati•/e Declaration togerher wirh any commenr.s rer_ei.ved duri.ng r.he publtr_ review pror_ess and further finding on the basis of r.he Initial Study and any comments recei.ved rt,ar. r_here is no subsr.anrial evidenr.e ~har. ~lie projecr will have a significant effer_t on the environmen~t. 6/9/86 86-403 MINUT~S, ANAHEIM CITY PLaIJNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 19$6 Commissioner McBurney offered Resoluti~n No. PC86-I55 and moved ~an«iVariance Noand adoption r.har. the Anaheim C~ty Planning Commisston does hereby g 3569 on the basis that the parking waiver will not cause an increase in traffic congestion in r_he immediare vicinir.y nor adversely af.f.QCt any adjoining la~llunot and granting of the parking waiver under the conditions imposed, if any, Ue detrimentat to rhe peace, healr.h, safer.y and generaL welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim, and subjer.t to Interdepartmental Commit*ee Recommendations. On roll call, r.he foregoi.ng resolu'i.on was passed by r.he f.ollowing vor.e: AYES: SOUAS, PRY, HERBST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Dan Schiada, Assistan` Tra£f.ic Engineer, asked rhar. Condir.ion No. 2 be modtf.i.ed r.o read: '~That the owner oi subject property shall irrevocably of~er to dedi.cate to the City of Anaheim a srrip of. lund 72 f.eet in widrh from r.he cent.erline of the street extending for a distance of 300 feet from the southeast corner of r.he inrersecrion, and r.ransi.r.ioni.ng back ~o r.he exi.s`i.ng righr. of. way f:or an additi.onal distance of 300 feet along KateLla Avenue and Euclid Street for street widening purposes.......' Mr. Gregg sr.ar.ed he would like a drawi-ng of. r.har. tn`ersecri.on because r.he owner has to take a look at ~t. He stated r_he owners are very coopeRaersetntAnahetm.t~He ries in rhi.s area, includi.ng a r_ouple of. orher shopping added he is planning to come ir. for permits and is confident this i.ssue can be addressed. and ansadditioln~thatYittshallt~beWCOmplied with to theesatisfactionrofttherCityur_ion Engineer. Mr. Schi.ada stated r.here is also a cor.~cern r.ha' r.he exi.sting driveways on Y.atel.la be reconstrucr.ed to meet current Driveway Standard No. 137 which provides for a 10-foot curb radtus. Mr. Gregg responded he needs r.o know whar. this means in terms of dollars, bur felt it is something they r_an resolve with the City. Responding to Commissioner Messe, Mr. Schiada star.ed ir appears there are five driveways involved. Commtssi.cner Fry sr.ated he could nor go along wi.th r,hose requests; that rhis petitioner wants to put a restaurant in this cenrer, and the City wants dedication and the f.ive driveways complerely reconstrur_r.ed. Mr. Gregg stated he has a li.trle probl~:m addressing a ri.ght of way dedication in the same breath he talks about quitesmake«sensehebut~heistillrfeltgthesesrtiatterswcan be satisfactorilydworkedeoutt with the City Engineer. Commi.ssioner Mr_Burney of.f.ered a mor.ion, ser_onded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that the conditions of approval be modified as recommended, and an addi.tional r_ondir_ton requir•i.ng rhar. rhe exisring driveways be re6/9/gb~cted to 86-404 MINUTES, ANAHEINI CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 provide 10-foot curb radi.us and including the wordi.ng that complisnce ~hall be to ~~ the sarisfaction of the City Engineer. Chairwoman La Claire agreed there is a problem with all those conditions, and would property maynbendedtcared,orhosestmprovementseshouldino nbenrequired,sincc the Malcolm Slaugh"er, lleputy Ci~ty Attorney, presented rhe written right to appeal the Planning Commisston's decision w9.r.hin 22 days ro 'he Ci.r.y Counr_i.l. ITEM~ 15• EIR CATEGORICAL EXEh1YTI0N-CLASS 5 AND VARIANCE N0. 3570. PUBLIC HEARSNG. OWNERS: DEBRA ROSE HUNTER, 1212 Opal Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805. AGENT: ALAN J. GUSSIN, 1841 "ll" Whir.e Star, Anaheim, CA 928g6• Prroximar.ely 0.14 descrtbed as a rer_~angularly-sh~P~ximatele199ffeetdon OpaltAvenue and located acres, having a frontage of app Y approximately 60 fee~ eas` of r.he r_enr.erli_ne of. East Sr.reet, and further described as 1212 Opal Avenue. Waiver of required rear yard setbark r.o consr.rur_r. a family-room addi.tion `o a single-f.amily residence. There was no one i.ndir_a`.ing `heir presence in opposi.r.ion `o subjer_t requesr. and atthough `he staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the wi nur.es. TH~ PUBI-Z(: LiEARING Wt~S CLUSED. Ir. was noted r.he Planning Di.rerr.or or his aur.horized represenr.ative has determined that r.he proposed project falls within rhe definition of Categorical Exemptions, thereforeascategoricallyhexemptefrom{'hemrequirementrtoep~repareian1ElRs and {.s, ACTION: Commi_ssi.oner Messe of.f.ered Resolur.i.on No. PC86-156 and moved f.or irs passage and adoption that the Anaheim Ci.ty Planning Commission does herlicaUlento Variance No. 3570 on r.he basCs thar. r.here are locationcandusurroundings which do the property such as size, shape, topography, not apply r.o other idenrically zoned properry in r.he same vi.r_tni~y; and r.har. strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in r.he i.den'fcal zoae and r_lass~.fi.catton in r.he vtcinity and subjecr. to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations. On roll ca11, the f.oregoing resotur.i.on was passed by the f.ollowi.ng vor.e: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HERKST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NGN~ ABS~NT: NONE Matr_olm Slaugh`er, Deputy Ci.r.y Ar.torney, presenred rhe written ri.ghr. to appeal the Planning Cowmission's decision wtthin 22 days to ehe City Council. The applicant entered the Counr_i.l Chamber just after the vote was tak.en a;. Variance No. 3570. 6/9/86 MINUTES, 4NAHEIM CITY PLANNING COTiMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-405 ITEM N0. 16. EIR NEGATIVE DECLAicATION, TENTATIVE 'PRACT OF MAP N0. 10982 (REVISION N0. 1) AND SPECIFIC PLAN APPROVAL. THE FOLLOWING ACTION WAS TAKEN A'f THE BEGINNING OF THE PIEETING. PUBLIC HEAltING. OWNESS: KAUFPiAN AND l3ROnD OF SOUTHEKN CALIFORNIA, 5500 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road, Analieim, CA 92807, ATTN: MA~tl: GOODMAN. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of. iand r_cnsi.sr.ing of. approxi.marely 6.9 acres generally locar.ed north and west of the intersection of Bauer Road and Monte Vista Road, and further descri.bed as Kendra Court, East Hilis (Bauer Ranch-Area 7). 'Co establish a 15-lot, RS-•500Q (SC) (Residential, Si.ngle-Family, Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone subdiv~si.on and approval of specif.i.c plans for Tenta'tve Tracr. No. 1098'1 (Revision No. 1) (Bauer Ranch-drea 7) previously reviewed under Variance No. 3563. Leonard McGhee, Associate Planner, explai_ned sr.aff has just rer_ei.ved a letter from rhe applicant requestin~ a continuance to rhe meeting of June 23, 1y86. AC'CION: Commissioner Bouas of.f.ered a mori.on, ser_onded by Commisstoner Herbsr. and MOTION CARRI~:U that r.he Anaheim City Y.lanni.ng Commisston does hereby co•.itinue constdera~ton of r_he aforemenr.ioned mar.ter r.o r.he regularly-scheduled meeting oE June 23, 1986, ar. r.he request of the peti.tioner. ITEM NU. 17. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND TENTATIVE TRACT UF MAP N0. 12665 (REVISION N0. 1) PUBLIC HEAF:ING. OWNERS: MOHLER FAMILY TRUST„ 4471 Lakevi.ew Avenue, Anahetm, CA 92806. e1CF~NTS: HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES, 3 Hugt~es, Irvine, CA 92718. Property des~ribed as an irregularly-shaped parcel of l.and r_onsisting of. approximate.ly 7.3 acres, having a fronrage of approximately 912 feet on the north side of Mohler Drive, approx~ma'ely 60 feer. easr. of r_he r_en`erltne of. Counrry Hill Road and further described as 270 S. Mohler Drive. To establi.sh an 11-lot, RS-HS-22,000(SC) subdivisi.on. There were four interested persons indicating their presence at the public hearing and alr.hough r.he staf.f reporr. was nor. read, ir. 3s rc~ferred r.o and made a part of the minutes. Stuart McPherson, agenr., explatned r.he origi.nal proposal was f.or an 8-lot, single-family detactied subdivision and the plans were revised because the Planning Commission i.mposed a candir.i.on on r.he owners of thts property to de responsible for tl~e installation of certain off-site drainage improvements which at that time, the applicanr. felt wac no' jusr.if.able r.o r.he exr.enr. thar. rhose improvemenr.s benef.i.ted r.he property, nor did r_hey feel the property r_ontributed to the run-off enough to jusr.i.f.y ~hose i.marovemen*s. He sr.a`ed r.hey di.~ nor. apaeal r_hat condition r.o the City Counr.i.1 ur disagre~ ~ith Commission's findings. Fle stated there was also a modification to ~e' a l as r.o the distance *o whir_h r.hey would have ro r_3ke that drainage fac{~.+.ty. : explained the~ are requesting consideration ::oday to increase the nu~n~c.~ of. lors from the originally approved 8 to 11. He stared they feel r.he three additional lots will help substantially in offsetting this additional burden whi.r_h has been plared on r.he property. 6/9/86 MINUTES, AtdAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-406 Mr. McPherson stated in r_he redesign oE r.he map, partir.ular care has been taken in attempting to infuse the additional lots; and that originally all eight lots fronted on Mohler Drive, and the redesign provides a 2o-foot private dri.ve with four lots fronting on thar. pri.vare drtve. He sr.ar.ed r.hey have r.aken care tn aligning the proposed privar.e drive almost precisely with Ycrkshire Circle, and have proposed wir.htn `he boundaries of proposed Lot No. 4, an easemenr. running along the comwon lot boundary between Lots 4 and 5 for the carry-off of water buildup in that privar.e dri.ve, r.hrough Lo` 4 and down rhe s~.ope 'o a r_onnection point where the storm drain improvements would be ins`alled. He sta'ed r.he eleven lor.s are wi.t.hin the gui.delines of r,he General Plan whtch permi.ts 1.5 units per acre. Srian llanker, represenr.i.ng his parenr.s, Mr. ~ Mrs. Ralph Danker, 198 S. Mohler Drive, star.ed they own the adjacent property; and rhat tliey are not opposed to the addirional rhree lots, but are roncerned whether the drai.nage i.s adequate and how it will affect rheir property, along with other properttes below thei.rs. He pointed our. their r_onr_erns on 'he map and sr.a'ed f.rom hi.s review of rhe plans, no indication has been made as to where ttie drainage far_tlities wi~l be located. He poi:.ted our. r.here ~.s a sr.eep stope and r.he water will run of.f. on'o his f.amily's property. He stated he reali.zes that staff has recommended in Conditton No. 5 that the developer '.s `o provide a hydrolugy study and provide drainage far_iliti.es and they are curious where those wtll be lor_ared. Jay Tir.us, Office Engj.neer, s*ated Cond~rion No. ~ requires the developer or property owner to conduct a hydrology study along Mohler llrive and to put in the drainage far_iliti.es, bur. rhe loryti.on of rt:e drainage facilir.tes will no~ be determined until that study has been conducted. Mr. Mr_Pherson star.ed r.hey are not oppos~ng Cond~.tion No. 5 and will r_omply, and feel the conditions with respect to the drainage issue can be resolved. THE PUBLI~ HEARING WAS CLOSED. Jay Titus asked r.har. Condir.ion No. 4 be modi.fied r.o show `har the owner shall pay only the sewer assesament fees, deleting the referenced to drainage assessmenr. fees; and thar Condi.~:i.on No. 5 should refler_r. r.he changes made ar. rhe previ.ous hearing to inli.cate that rhey would put in a storm drai.n from their norr.hwest r_orner to rhe i.nr.ersec'i.on of. Marrin Road and Marr.ella Lane; and thar. Condition No. 12 should be deleted. Commissioner Herbsr. sra`ed sr.aff recommended r.hat. r.he lor.s be desi.gned so rhat driveways wiil have adequate r.urn-around area so that people will not be backing into the street. Mr. Mr_Pherson stared rhe lor.s would probsbly provide a hammerhead or something similar to allow the v2hir.les to come out i.n a forward direction. Chairwoman La Clatre sr.ar.ed rhe PLanning Commission is aware rhar. two uf the lots are smaller rhan allowed by Code and the reason for allowing those reductions is because of the hi.gh r_osr of provtdtng rhe drainage far.i.li.r.ies. ACTION: Commissioner Fry offered a motton, seconded by Commissioner Mc Burney and MOTION CARRIED thar. the Anahetm C~r.y Planning Comm~ss~on has revtewed rhe proposal 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CUMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-407 to establish an 11-lot, RS-HS-2'1,000(SC) (Residential, Single-Family, Hiliside (Scenic Corridor Overlay)) zone subdi.vis~on on an irregularly-shaped parcel of Land consisting of approximately 7.3 acres, having a frontage of approximately 912 feet on the north side of Moh.ler Drive, approximately 60 f.eet east of the r..enr.erline of Country Hill Road and further described as 270 S. Mohler Drive; and does hereby approve the N~gar_i.ve Declararton upon Einding r.har. i_r. has r_onsi.dered the Nega'tve Declaration together wir.h any comments received durtng the public review process a.nd f.urther £inding on `he basis of. r.he In~r~al Srudy and any r_omments recetved that r.here 1s no substantial evidence r.hat r.he project wt.ll have a signifir_ant effect on rhe environment. Commissioner Fry of.f.ered a mo`ion, ser_onded by Commissioner Mr_Burney and MOTION CARRIED rhar_ the Anaheim City Planntng Commission does hereby find r_hat the proposed subdiviston, r.oge'her wt.th its design and improvement, is r_onsi.stent with the City of. Anahei.m General Plan, pursuant *o Government Code SEctton 66473.5; and does, therefore, approve Tenr.ar_i_ve Map of Tracr. No. 12665 (Revi.sion No. 1) for an 11-lot, RS-HS-22,000(SC) (Residenti.al, Single-Faaitly, Hillside (Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone subdivision, subjer.r. r.o r.he f.ollowing conditions: l. That prior to r.he prior to issuance of butlding permi.t, r.he approprtar.e fees due for pri~ary, ser_ondary and fire pror.er.r.i.on shall be pai.d r.o r.he Warer Utility lli.vision by riie Developer in ar_cordance wt'h Rules 15A and '20 of th2 Water Uti.li.r.y Rar.es, Rules and Regulations. 2. That prior ro issuanr_e oi a b~ilding oermit, appropriate park and recreation in-lieu f.ees shall be paid to the City of. Anahe~m in an amounr. as de'ermi_ned by r.he City Council. 3. Tha` prior r.o issuance of. a building permir., the approprtare r.raf.fic signal assessment fee shall be paid ro rhe City of Anaheim i.n an amount as determined by the City Counnit f.or ear_h new dwelling unir.. 4. ThaL prior to final tract map approval, r.he owner of subject property shall pay the appropriate sewer assessmenr. fees r.o '.he Ci.r.y of. Anahei_m i.n an amounr. as determined by rhe City Gngineer. 5. That d-atnage of subjecr, properry shall be dtsposed of in a manner satisfactory to rhe City F:ngineer and sliall inr_lude conszruction of a storm drain f.rom the norr.hwesr. corner of. subjec` properr.y r.o an exisri.ng storm drain to the intersection of. Martin Road and Martella Lane, as determined by the City Engi.neer. Also included shall be a storm drain f.rom rhe i.nr.erser_tion of Mohler llrive and Country Ntil Drive to a point in Mohler Dri.ve as determined r.o be necessary by r.he Ciry Engineer from a hydrology sr.udy r.o he ;,rovided by rhe owner/developer. 'Chat security in the form of a bond, ce~~ -r[cate of deposit, letter of credit, or cash, in an amounr. and form satisfac'ory to the City of Anaheim, shall ~e posted with the City to guarantee the szt'sf.actory r.ompletion of sai.d im'provemenr.s. Said security shall be posted :atth r.he Ctty prior to final tract ~ap approval, r.o guaranr.ee r.he installatton of the above-required i.mprovemer_r.s prior to or_r_upancy. 6. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subdivision, each subdivision thereof. shall be submir.r.ed in r.enr.ative f.orm Eor approval. 6/9/86 86-408 MINUTES, A,~AHEIM CITY PLANN=NG COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 198b 7, That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. g, Tha` prior to commencement of sr_ructurat f.rami.ng, fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department• 9, Tha` pri.or to f.inat r.rar_r. map approval, r.he peti.r.toner shall submir. final speci~ic floor plans and elevations to the Plannin~ Commisston for approval. 10. That any specimen rree removal shall be subjecr to r.he r.ree preservation regulations in Chapter 18.84 of rhe Anaheim Municipal Code, the "SC'~ Scenic Corridor Uverlay 'Lone. ll. Tha` subjer_r properr.y shall be developed substanr.ially in acr_ordance wi.r.h plans and specifications on f.ile with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit No. 1. 12, Thar. the properr.y owner shall furn~.sh to the City of Anahleteathegpublict in a form to be approved by the Citv Artorney agreeing to comp improvemenr.s required as conditions of th~s roap ar. rhe owner's expense. Said agreement shall be recorded concurrenrly wi.th r.he final tract map and is not to be subordina`e `o any rer.orded encumbran~e agatnsr r.he property. L3. Tliat prior to issuance of a bui.lding permit, r.he appropria~e major thoroughfare and bridge fee shall be paid ro ~he Ci.ty of Anameforithe~ amoun.t as specified in r.he Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee ProCiL Counr_tl Footliilt/Eastern Transportar.ton Corridor, as approved by Y Resolution No. 85R-423. 14. That prior to f.inal buildi.ng and zoning i.nspecr.ions, Condi.tion Nos. 7 and 11, above-mentioned, shall be complted with. Malcolm Slaughr.er, Depu`y Cir.y A`rorney, ,'resented r.he wri.tten right to appeat r.he Planning Commission's decision wir.hin 10 days to the City Councit. hAIVER OF ITEP1 N0. 18. ENVIRONMENTAL IMP~CT. REPORT N0. 256 (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED), COD L~.M~NT A~1ll CONDlTIUNAL USE PEKMIT N0. 2541 (READVEKTISED). PUBLIO$HEAR~lsbad,WCA~S920 8IS~PropertyPdescribeda s~anTirregDlarlyPshaped~parcel BOX 3 , of Land r_onsisting of approY7-mar.ely 37.2 acres, locar.ed at r.he sour.hwest corner o Santa Ana Canyon Road and Weir Canyon Road. Approval of a revtsed ptan r.o permi.t an t8-to', ptanned-commerciat office and ligh` industrial complex that includes a hotel, restaurants and drive-through financial institur.ions, to shift the approve~ alr.ernar.ive hotel use f.rom Lots l, 2 and 3 to Lot 5 and add a second alr.ernative to lot 5 that includes a freestanding restaurant and hotel. There was no one indtcating r.heir preseni~ is referred to~andumadetarpartsofathe although the staff report was not read, minutes. 6/9/86 1986 86-409 MINUTES, ANAH6IM CITY PLANNING COTf~IISSION, JUNE 9, Ed Fitzpatrick, agent, explained since approval oE the original plans which proposed a hor.el alrernar.i.ve on Lor.s l, 2 and 3, they have sotd Lots l, 2, 3 and 4 to McKeller Development for an office park, and would like to request an amendment to moossibly addeanaalternativeuforra combination restaurantmandLhotel.SaHe statede and p to what was approved before, and just 1.he locar.ion has the uses are not r_ontrary changed and probably it would have been better to have -~ad this use in th s location originall.y because all r.he ho`.el developers who l:ave di.sr_ussed development of a hotel have preferred that corner. THE PUBLIC ti~AKING WAS CLOSED. Responding r.o Chai.rwoman La Clatre regarding any proposal f.or sign variances, Mr. Fitzpatrick stated the situatton on signs is unclealicationtfor aumonum'Pntbsigniout on Lot 7 for corporate headquarters and made an app there are specific requiremlans front, and found out that in t.1e Scenic Corridor, ! and they will have to address r.he si~nage when ~r i.s ~eveloped; and that he p ' e of si n cri`.eria or ordinance that would be accep~able n bur. ri.ghr. now the only to come up with some typ ~ the near fur.ure and r.har. would become a part of r.heir CCSRs, sign permitted would have to be attached ro tlle bui.iding, an~ explained their CCSRs do no`. permit flashinb signs, er.r_. Chairwoman La Clajre st.ared when `he sign rrir.erta ~s esrabltshed, r.he homeowners t the robabl the only s;.gn r.ha~ wi.il be across the way shoutd bertr nFitzpaaricktstated pne ~an}see rhe sfsom tte homeowners. r people on the freeway. permitted will be the building sign which wi11 be oriented away is S~tll Responding to Commissioner 'rry, Mr. Fir.zparrirk star.ed r.he bu{iding proposed at four stories. ACTION: Ccmmissioner Fry off.ered Resolution IZo. PC86-157 and moved for tts passag Commission does he='eby approve revtsed and adoption that r.he Anaheim City Planning Z and 3`o Lor. No. 5, plans moving 'he previ.ously approved ho`.el f.rom LoY. Nos. t~ restaurant and adding a second alternative to Lot No. 5 to include a freestanding and hotel. On roll r_all, the foregoing resotu`~.on was ~assed by r.he following vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, tiER1iST, LA CLAI1tE, LAWICKl, MC BUKNEY, N.ESSE NOE5: NON~ ABSENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Ar.torney, presenr.ed the written righr. to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Couucil. i't~ri~. Lq, REPORTS AND RECOMMENllATI0N5. A, KECLASSIFICATION N0. 83-84-23 AND VARIANCE N0. 3384 - RWiYhst from Duane F. Peterse~ val onzpr perr.yflor_atedoat 3538 West the conditions of app Savanna Street due to delay of development of final design plans and r.ransfer of property ownership. 6/9(86 86-410 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 ACTION: Commissioner ~cSurney offered a motion, seconded by Commi.sstoner Messe and MOTION CARRIEDVehextensionshofIDtime for Planning Commission does hereby app Reclassification No. 8j-a1985,aandVtoiexpire~on3AUgust 6, 1y87• retroar_tive to August 6, g, TENTATIVti TKA.CT MAP N0. 10985 - Request f.rum Mi.chael A. Murph ct manager for Greiner E1ginezrlo atedronXthesion of time to record the Final map on prope~ox~mately 850 feet sour.h side of Santa Ana Canyon Road, aPP east of the Centerltne of Longwood Stree`. ACTION: Commissioner McBurney offered a mo~henAnahei.mdCirYy Commi.ssi.oner Messe and MOTION CARRI=pVehan extenston of time Planning Commission doesNOerL0985ppr.o expire on June l3 L987. for Tentarive Tract Map VARIANCE N0. 1539 - Request f.rom Callye Dee llouglas for C. r.o r_omply with conditions of termination of Variance No. i539 ro ert locate~ ar_ 1599 West approval of Variance No. 3500 on p P y Cerritos Avenue. ACTION: Commissioner MrBurney of.f.ered Resolur.i.on No. PC86-158 and moved for its passage and adoptton rhar_ the Anaheim ~itY Plannin~ Commission does hereby termina'e Variance No. 1539. Un roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vo~e: AYES: ~OUAS, FRY, HERBST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI MC BURNEY, ME~SE NOES: NONE ABSEN'C: NONE D, VARIANCE N0. 3358IneReYo=s`oTmination of Variance Notm3358 in Properttes West, roval of. Conditional Use coopLiance with condi.tions of app SantatAna•CaciyonoRoad andtWet~cCanyontRoad,northeast corner of ACTION: Commissioner McBurney offerjd~nRehaYUrhenAnahepmaCity9 and moved for i.ts passage and ad~e~~inate Variance No. 3358. Planninb Commission does hereby On ro.ll rall, r.he f.oregoing resolu`.ion was passed by rhe following vote: py~y; BOUAS, FKY, HEFLBST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI MC BURNEY, FIESS6 NOES: HONE e'~1SSENT : NONE 6/9/86 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 86-411 E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 6- Request from Claud F. Sympson, Treasurer for John Slack Oil Company, property owner, for termination of subject petition to comply with condir.ions of approval of Variance No. 3467 on property located at 501 South Olive Street. ACTION: Commissi.oner McBurney offereZ Resolutton No. PC86-160 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 6. On roll call, the foregoing resoluti.on was passed by t.he following vote; AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HEKf3ST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI MC BURNEY, :•iESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE F. CONllITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1~Oti - Request from John W. Elgert, Vice President, Gfeller Uevelopment C:ompany, Inc., `o terminate subject petition to comp.ly witli conditions of approval of Reclassificatton Ne. 82-83-4. ACTIUN: Commissioner Mr_Burney of.f.ered Resolur.ioa No. PC86-lb.l and moved for its passage and adoptton that the Auaheim City Planning Commissiou does hereby termina`e Conditiunal Use Permit No. 1008. On roll r_all, r.he foregoing resu.lut~on was passed by r.P~e fol2owing vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, LiEKBST, LA Ci9i12E:, LAWIChI MC BU1tNEY, ME~SE NOES: NONE A33SENT: NON~ G. CONllITIONAL USE PEItMIT N0. 1175 - Requesr from Jay Cowan, property owner, to terminate subject petition to comply with conditions cf approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2648 on property located at 270 West Lincoln Avenue (7-11 Motel and BV Park). ACTION: Commisstoner Mr.Burney of.fered Resolution No. PC86-162 and moved for its passage and adop?ion that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate Condition3l Use Permit No. 1175. On roll call, the foregoing resolutton was passed by r.Yie following vote: 6/4/86 8G-412 MINUTES, ANAHEIM ~iTY PLANNING CON.MISSION, ~~NE 9, 1986 AYES: BOUAS~ FRY, HERBST, LA C1,AIR~, LAWICKI MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: PiG"1E ABSENT: NONE H. CGNDITIONAL US~ PELtMIT ~:G. 1252 - Reques'. from Dzle P,ooms, property owner, to termin2~e subjec~ ~.~tition on prr~p~er'y .located at 2'15 r.nd 229 South Lcara Sti•eet to coc:p!', :z'~tit conditions of approval oc Recla._sificat:o.1 "'~. 84-85-1. ACTION: Commi.ssioner MrBurney off.ered Resolu'~.ton No. PC86-163 aad moved for its passage acid adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does `~ereby r.erminate Cond~r.?o~~:s1. Lse Permit No. 1'252. On ro11 call, the f.oregoing resolur.iun was passed by r.he fo.llowing vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HERBST, 'A ~LAIF~, LAWICKL MC BURNEY, MF.SS6 NOES: NONE AltSENT: NON~ I, CONDITIONAL USG P~RMIT N0. 1356 - Request from`Teand AnalBieim~ representing Kaiser Foundation Healr.h Ylan, Medical Arts Associ.ar.ion, r.o r.erminar.e subjer.r. pe`itio;. on property located at 1188 North Euclid. ACLION: Commissioner MrBrrney ::€f.ered Resolur.i.on No. PC86-164 and Wo~cd for its passag~. and adoprton 'thnt L~~e An3heirn City Planning Cominission does hereby r.ern~i.nar.e Cond'rional Use Permit No. 1356. On r.oll call, tbe foregoing resolurtor. was passed by r.h~~ following vote: AYES: BOUAS, FR.Y, HELtBST, LA CL.~IHI:, LA;JICKI MC BURIdEY, TIESSE NUES: NONE ABSENT: NONE J. CONllITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1482 - Requesr, f.rom Joseph T. Walthour, Business Properties, property owner, to terminate subject petir.ion ro r_omply wir.h condirions of approval of Reclassifir_atton No. 83-84-24 on property located itt 'L400 East Katella Avenue. ACTION: Commi.ssioner McBurney of.fered Resolurton N~.~~ P~86-165 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Ana~heim City Plarning Commission does hereby terminate Conditio~iat llse Permir. No. 1482. 6/9/86 MINU"LES, P.NAHGI.h:_.ITY PLANNING COTIMISSION, JUNE 9, 1986 _ 86-41s On roll call., the foregoin~ resoluti~n was passed by the foll.owir.g vote: AYES: BOUAS~ FRY~ HERSST.~ in CLAIRE~ LAWICKI MC BURNEY, Fl'r.~SE NOES: NCI~E ABSENT: NON.w'. K, `;t:i~IF+N'~E N0. 'L587 - Req~sesr. f.rom Rtchard L. Pterr_e, 1'ierco ile~el~~pment, Inc., to ~era:i:iar~ s!,biect petition as it no '.onber applies to s~ibjecr_ property loca".ed ar. 3614 Wast Ball Roa~i. A.'TLUN: Cowni.ssioner Mr&ur•ney of.fered Resolution No. PCBb-.Lbb and moved for its passage and adoption r.tx~~,t r.he Anaheim City Planning Com~isal~a does Yiereby terminate Variaace No. 2587. On rcll. ce.!.1, r.he f.orego'_ng resolutian was passtd by tlie follow3ng .ote: A'iE5: BOUA5, FKY, HERB~.°, i.A GLAIKE, LAWICKI b1C BUNNEY , Pl}::iSE Nt:l:~: NONE A731;!:''J'i : NONE L. CONllLTIUNAL USE PERMIT N~~. 22c'L - Requesr. £rom Jeannie Vance, Secretary to James P. Eumondson, pr~~perr.y owner, for an extension of time r.o cou~ply with r_ondir.ions of appru~al, propert~~ located at 1380 Sou.`.h Harbor Bou'~va:d, koward Johnson N.otor Lodge. ACTI'JN: Commissi.oner Mr_Burr.~y off.ered a mo'ton, seconded by Ce~wnissioner Messe and MOTION CARRL~D t!:::i the Anaheim City Planning Commission does he:eb; _n,rant an e:~tension of time for Conditional Use Pe.rmit No. 2~,3'L, retroactive Ln llecember 28, 19ti2, to expire on llecember 2t',, 1986. ADJOUi:N*lENT: Commissioner Herbst offered a morion, :~econded '.y Commissioner McBurney and M9TIUN CARRIEU that the meetiub be adjourned r.o a wc-k session on June 13, 1986, .'45 p.m., Anaheam Scadium. The meeting wa~; aajourned at 5:35 p.m Resp ctfially submi.t` ~~, ~d~~a~%C'~' ` " jI'~Q~L''2 Edith L. Harris, Secre.tary 410I 98m G/9/86