Minutes-PC 1987/07/20d
REGULAR MF.E'PING UE'_ THE ANAfILIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MINU'I'F5 - Ju lY 20, 1987
The regular. meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission was called to
order by Chairman Messe at 10:00 a. m., July 20, 1987, in the Council
Chamber., a quorum tieing present, and the Commission reviewed plans of the
items on ~x9ay' :~ agenda.
RECESS: 11:30 a.m.
RF.C~iNVENED: 1:30 p. m.
PRESEN'P:
Af3S1;NT:
AI,5O NI2E5ENT:
Chairman: Messe
Commissioners: Bouas,
Herbst,
Commissioners: none
Ann~ka Santalahti
Malcolm Slaughter
Jay Titus
Paul Singer
Greg Hastings
Edith Harcis
evyds~un, Carusillo, Fr_ldhaus,
McI3u rney
'L oning Administc~tor
Deputy City Attorney
Office Engineer
Traffic Engineer
Senior Planner
Planning Commission Secretary
`]`he Planning Commission meeting of ,July ~, 1987, was adjourned to .3:00 p. m.,
July 7th at the Celebrity Theatre, 42nd and Broadway, in order for the
Commission to be present at the City Council public hearing on the Y,at.ella
Re,~evelopment Project in the event the Plan was modified and Planning
Commission action was required. Commissioners Bouac, Herbs t,Me~ae ana
McBurney were present at that July 7, 1987, meeting; however, no action by the
Planning Commission wa; required and the Commission did not convene.
LWEARING IN CEREMONY: Chairman Messe ~nt,roduced tha three new Planning
Commissioners to take office today: Frank E. Feldhau?, Jr., John J. Carusillo
and Phyllis R. Boydstun. Lee Sohl, City Clerk, presented the Oath of Office
and each Commissioner signed the State of California Affirmation of Allegiance
for Public Officials anr3 Employees.
AGENDA POSTING - A complete copy of the Planning Commission agenda was posted
at 8:45 a. m., J~ily 17, 1987, inside the foyer windows and in the display case
located in the lobby of the Council Chamber.
MINUTES FOR APPROVAL - Commissioner McBurney offered a motion, seconded by
Commissioner Bouas and MUTION CARRIED (Commissioners Boydstun, Carusillo and
Feldhaus abstaining) that the mir~_'.es of the meeting of June 22, 1987, be
approved as submitted.
PUBLIC INPUT - Chairman Messe explained at
the public would be allowed to discuss any
jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, or
the end of the agenda any member of.
matter of interest within the
any agenda item.
-489-
M..NU'tES, ANAHEIM C~'CY PLANNING COMMISSION, Jr!T~Y 20, 1987 87-490
I T'EM N0. 1 EIR CA'T'EGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 11 ANU VARIANCE: N0. 3670
PUE3LIC HEARING. OF~FNFRS: STATE COLLEGE MEDICATE CENTER, INC., 215-8 N. State
College Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805, A'tTN: HERBERT D. TARLOW, M.D. AGENT:
SUNSE`t DESIGN ASSOCIATES, 317 Walnut. Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92627, ATTN:
HEATHER KEIR-PERRAS. Property described a:: an irregularly-shaped parcel of
land consisting of approximately U.9 acre, 215 North State Collt;ge Boulevard.
Waiver of permitted business sign to con~~Lruct a freestanc:ing sign.
Cont inued E rpm t ~+ meet my of July 6 , 1987 .
IL was noted the petitioner has requested a continuance in order to r:ansider a
monument sign rather than the proposed pole sign.
ACTION: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, Seconded by Commissioner
McBUrney and MOTION CARRIED that consideration oC the aforementioned matter be
continued to the regularly-s~h~~duled meeting of August 3, 1987, at the request
of the petitioner in order to consider submit:ti.ng revised plans.
ITEM N0. 2 FIR NEGATIVE DECF.ARATION AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2922
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: SANTA FE LAND IMPROVEMENT CO., :220 E. Imperial
Highway, Brea, CA 92G.~, ATTN: RICK DE;L CARLO. Property described as a
rectangu.tarly-~hap~d parcel of: land consisting of approximately 10 acres
located at thr~ northwest corner of La Pa l.rna Avenue and Manassero Street.
To permit industrially-related office uses.
Continued Erom the meeting of July 6, 1987.
It was noted the petitioner has requested a continuance in order to Ue present.
ACTIGt7: Commissioner FZOUas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner FEerbst
and MOTION CARRIED that cons ideation of the aforementioned matter be
contin:aer] to the regularly-scheduled meeting of August 3, 1987, in order for
the Uetitioner to be present.
ITEM N0. 3 E_IR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WAIVER OP COUE REQUIREMENT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2925
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: LARRY R. SMITH AND JUDITH I. SMITH, 17046 Marina Bay
Drive, E}unLington Beach, CA 92649. AGENTS: SHELDON L. POLLACK CORP., 3938
Wi.l^hire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90010 ATTN: ALVIN Y. LEE. Property
described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately
3.56 acre located r,o.rth and west: of the northwest corner of Ball Road and
Knott Street, 919-959 Knott Street.
To permit a drive-through, walk-up restaurant with outdoor sealing in
conjunction with a commercial center expansion with waivers of (a) minimum
number of parking spaces, (b) minimum drive-through lane dimensions, (c)
minimum distance between buildings and (d) required site screening.
7/20/87
87-491
MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PhANNING COMMISSION, ~TULY 20i 1987 -^_
There were three personcs indicating their presence in opposition l.o :subject
request and although the staff report was not read, it is refereed to and made
a part of the minutes.
Alvin Lee, agent, explained there is a racquetball. facility and cocktail
1oun~le on the property which is in a state of disrepair and they are proposing
to remodel the existing commercial building and also add an independent
fast-Food restaurant.. He stated the existing cocktail lounge has a long term
lease and the owner has indicated when that lease expires, he doe3 not intend
to renew it, but that they would like to keep the racquetball facility.
Mr. Lee slated they agree to all the conditions, except ttse one regarding the
dual window and that issue was discussed at the Interdepartmental Committee
meeting, but he did not realize a condition would be included requiring that
one window be eliminated.
h1r. Lee Stated he did submit an addendum to the LrafEic study which shows
sufficient back-up area to meet the rec;uirements.
Francisco Reed, IP5 Management, preaent~~~l a letter signerl by 40 residents of
the Del Amo apartments, 909 Sou'.h Knott, opposing this request and indicating
they do have deep concerns 'uec~iuse of the pasC anri present problems with
noise, lcitering, fire hazard and parking. He read the lett~~~r an6 a copy is
in the Planninn Department Files.
.Joyce Keefer, owner of the adjacent. property where Lhe service c;tation is
located, stated when she received ti: ..: notice, she came to the City Planning
Office and reviewed the plans. She pro:°nted a copy of a Declaration of Deed
Restrictions signed on April 27, 1964, t;e~.ween her mother. and father and the
purchaser of the property, Max Provisor, aid explained this document is
effective until April 20, 1989, and may be extended for another 20 years. She
stated her concern is that they are blocking her ingress and egress with the
fence an the west ride and there is not encugh room Eor a drive-in restaurant..
Ms. Keefer dated ~artoon:~ and Capers Cockt,nil Lounge ut ilizes 52 to 70
parking spaces and 2" of those arr. being el>.,: ~natc~d with the construct.ion of
the restaurant. She stated this owner has used ~^~ violated that neighborhoad
for a number of year:- and ha:° caused vandalism to her property and a lot of
discomfort to all the residents in the neighborhood.
Charles tlohl, owner of Pay and Play Racquetball Courts, 23165 Vista Way, E1
Toro, stated he is in favor of Mr. Smith developing the shopping center; that
he has been there 6 years and has gone through a lot of situations referred to
by Ms. Keeter. He stated he has been working with the property owner for
several years regarding remodeling of the complex along with remodeling of his
building. He stated he realizes the owner wants to maximize the use of the
property; however, he did not receive any notice from Mr. Smith that he was
planning to submit these plans anc9 that he had asked Lhe Planning
Der.irtment to contact him if there were any proposals and no notice was
r-. eived. He explained he owns the building and Mr. Smith owns the land and
h~ has a 55-year ground lease and felt he should have some rights.
7/20/87
MINUTES, ANAHEIM Cl'TY PLANNING CUMMISSION, JULY 20, 1987 87-492
He ^tated in April 1981 when hp cnme Lo Anaheim for permi.rrslun Lo build a
second far:ili.Ly, he suggested Lhe i.den of constructing a 2-story huildiny and
Lhe Planning Department staff asked what would happen if Lhey decided Lo
convert Lhe building Lo Fome other use in the EuLure. Ilc~~ stated he proposed a
plan with 80 parking spaces whi.~~. would allow Lhem Lo convert Lhe downstairs
portion of Lhe building Loa Lail use, and the building was constructed with
proper footings Lo he conver'•~d. Hr. stated now Lhe owner has proposed a plan
which he LhoughL Lakes awa~• Lhe r.ighls he LhoughL he had with the permit
granted in 1981; and Lhat. re LhouclhL he had 80 parking spaces. He staled he
has been ready Lo convey the buildirn3 and he did not Lhis his conversion is
not being considered i~ this proposal. fie stated the Lra[Eic study is
inc:ompleLe because th s Pay and play facility is not a full racquetball club
with Lhe health elute, bar, restaurant, etc. and Lhis far.i.liLy just hrr:~
racquetball courts and Lwo restroams and people rome tJierc~ dressed Lo play and
then Lhey leave; t.heref ore, there i:; not, v~ ~ •~ much play dur i.ng Lhe day and
their prime Lime is Sunday through '1'hur:~day, approximately 4:00 to 10:00 p. m.
and Lhe rest of Lhe hours are non-prime time. He staled Lh~~ Lraffis study
did not include any counts during their prime time and was Laken during the
slower part of: the year since Lhe it business is ha:~ Teal ly December Lhrouyh
At~ril. He stated he would like to just have Lhe rights LhaL were granted in
1981 when he got a cond it. Tonal use perrniL and Lhat is Lhe right to tti~ park inq
spaces and the right Lo convert his building. He stated he hay Lhe right in
his lease Lo convert or remodel Lhe buildi.ny downs Lairs Lo r+:•tail.
Mr. Hotel slated he was concerned about Lhe access Eor fire equipment also and
explained the Fire Department. has Bern Lo his building sevF~ral Limes to
practice fire drills because Lhi.s building is not, a typical 2 story (10 courts
on Lop of 10 courts) and Lhe emergency lane: would be closed with this proposal
and he would like Lo keep that onQ lane open in front of. his building.
Mr. Hotel stated Lhe City allows 2S8 compact spaces and Lhe plans shows
approximately 26 stalls in front of his building which means approximately G08
of all his parking is for compact cars. Ele stated there is a trash dumps ter
being put right in front of his building and people will be able to walk by
and look riglrL c]~~wn into that con;,ainer. He stated there is a block wall
ordinance which he had Lo follow when he constructed his building and along
Lhe 20-fool driveway there is Lhe cequirement: Eor Lhe block wall and none i.s
shown on the plans.
Larry Smith, 1704 Marina gay Drive, Huntington Beach, owner, staled he is
surprised Lo hear these comments of opposition. He staled t:he racquetball
Facility lease does not allow ~nnversion of the building Lo any other use. ile
staled he is not saying he would not be agreeable Loa conversion, but
currently Lhe lease 13 restricted to racquetball use. He slated he suppled
the gross monthly income s':aLements of Lhe racquetball facility Lo the traffic
consultant s~ he thought they were well. advised and those statements covered
the last 6 months. Ele stated the lease does allow ttre proper owner the right
to change his driveway. He stated Mr. Hptrl had concerns about the tt.ash
enclosure being in front of his building and he also had the same concerns
with the trash bins in Front of his building and Lhey would prefer to have
them closer Lo Lhe ~ t, but this i~ the location required by the City anc-
he would be wil.lir, ,cove them if approved by the City.
7/20/67
MINU'PES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 20 1987 _ 87-49"
Regarding Ms. Keeter's concern about blocking her ingress and eyreas, he
Mated they would not be blocking the access and he hoped the fast-Food
restaurant would be an asset to the neighborhood. He stated he thought the
noise complaints had been coming from the apartments behind his property and
was about the noise that was being generated when they had three night cl:tbs
on the proper.tys however, two of those night clubs are no longer there. H~~
added one night club is still existing and they do have a long-t.errr. ;ease, and
that he would be willing to do what is necessary to taRe care of the noise
problems.
Mr. Lei stated they did have a traffic study conducted which indicated they do
have adequate parking and the traffic study did compare parking of similar
uses and they did take t:he City TraEEic Engineer's concerns into consideration
when they began designing the project.
Mr. Smith stated he believed Ms. Keeter was concerned about: parking on h~~
service station property and he thought. the parking problems were when they
had those three night clubs on the property, but now with onlf one, that
should be resolved and they also would be increasing the parklny by paving an
additional area and there would be regular retail uses in these Facilities
wh ich would require less parking.
TFIB PUBLIC HEARING WAS Ci.,OSF:D.
~ornmissioner. Herbst stated it appears the new construction will isolate the
racquetball facility Erom the rest of the parking lot. Fie Mated
approximately 40 parking stalls are shown and asked how the parking Has
calculated. Fie noted people would have to walk around the building.
Paul Singer, City Traffic Engineer, stated there is access through the
building along the :~~dewalk, and that he did not believe these racquet~,all
courts would be in peak operation at tY~~• sa^e time the retail uses would be
open. He stated the building does create a wall betwcQn the racquetball
facility and Lhe other complex, but there is a pass-through or corridor for
access. He stared there was mention made about the peak hours of thc~
racquetball club not being included in this study and '.e was under the
impression that the hours shown were the peak hours and if they are not,
rerhaps the study should be re-evaluated.
Commissioner Herbst stand he got that same impression and would agree.
It was noted the traffic study was :submitted to the Plannin 'ommission today.
Commissioner Herbst stated maybe the building could be rearranged so the
parking lot could service both a lot better, and suggested the building be
moved closei to the railrur~rl tracks.
Responding to Commissioner Bouas, h; r.. Smith stated he did not meet with the
neighbors t-o review the plans. He stated he had met with Mr. Hoh? in the past
and the lease was amended and has an addendum and Mr. Hohl did approve this
building with this parking configuration. He stated also there is a
walk-through next to the racquetball facility which wa:: not required, but he
thought it could make the situation better.
~/2o/s~
M'LNUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JULY 2f1, 1987 87-494
Commissioner Herbst stated people like to park as close as possible to where
.aey are going and Lhe racyuetball facility had access to 80 parking spaces
previously and now, they would have 40 spaces in front of their property.
Mr. Smith stated they will I~rave immediatr access to the spaces right in front
of the facility, but through Lhe walk-way the spaces in Lhe other area are
much closer. than the ones in front.
Commissioner Herbst stated there will be retail stores in this complex and
some stores do stay open until 9:00 p. m. and he thought Lhe property owner
should ye;: together with the owner of the racy~aetball facility and Lhe service
station owner to work out a plan to best serve everyone.
Mr. Smith responded he does have Mr. Hohl's approval in writing to put that
building in that location. Commissioner Elerbst stated Mr. Hohl is here today
because he is concerned how this use will affect his business.
Commissioner 13ouas agreed they should get together. She asked about the deed
restrictions regarding the wall and Mr. Smith stated they have not affected
ingress and egress a'. a11.Commissioner R~~uas stated t}-e plans show a low
raised wall and the easement reyuir.es Lh whole area to be level. She stated
she would like to see the center remode.l•~d, but it strould be done jointly
since everyone is affected. She asked about the wall along the railroad
tracks.
Mr. Smith stated Mr. llohl requested that the requirement f. or -_he block wall be
eliminated when he got approval of his racquetball facility and he is
surprised that he wants a wall now. He stated there is large hed~~e alo:g that
fence which blocks the view fr.o,~ the railroad tracks to the shopping center
and is willing to ~~ whatever the City sees fit to imprOVe tha situation.
Commissioner Herbst asked what the Code Enforcement complaints have been from
the citizens regarding noise, trash, loitering, eL~. He asked when the other
two night clubs were closed and when the one remaining would be gone. Mr.
Smith stated the first nigh club, "Woode'.:ock", los' r:he~c lease over a year
and half ago and Radio City lost their lease about .;rre year ago. tie Mated
theiE was also a practicing stu~3y or _ecordiny stuoio on the property and it
appears that that might have been a large part rf the problem, and they he.ve
just recently moved from tt~e property.
Commissioner Elerbst stated there have been previous reports and sou-rd
attenuation measures were supposed ~ have been Laken.
Mr. Smith stated he believed the rrolse was from the studio, and they have
moved but: they are willing t. do whatever is necessary to solve ti~.at problem.
He respond~.d ,:o Commissioner >;ouas that there are about 6 or 7 years left
before the night c;.l.ub lease terminates.
Commissioner Herbst asked what the petitioner is prepared to do if some of the
noise is coming from the existing night club. Mr. S-nith stated he understood
that is not the source of the noise and, in Eact, they have spent over one
quarter of a million dollars remodeling the .inside of that night club and one
of the reasons for the remodeling was to mitigate the noise. He stated he
7/20/87
NINUTFS~ A,NAIII;IM C1TY PLANNING CoMMIS510N, JULY 20, 19D7 87-495
believed t.ho noise was wally generated by the recording studio which is now
gone. Hr, stat':~d the night club owner ir; required by law to nut make a
nuisance with noise, etc. tle stated if the night club was not these, he would
not lea:ze that Ca(:il.r.ty to another night club, but iL would be leaar_d to a
retail store, but he does have a lea:ze with this tenant and the tnnant wishes
+.o rem,:iin theca and he was sure they would br. willing to do whatever is
reyuirr_d by the City to (:amply with the noise requ;rnmrnts. Cornmifisinner
Herbst stated there are ways to handle r10131' probiem~ and it can be done, but
from looking aL the staEC report whirh indirateti L`~ t,een 12 complaints
of exce:r:iivn noise since January 1, 19t1G, he Lhouc~~. i? a problem asst
added he ~l id not know who was eau,,-i ir-g the problem, I, . ,erc~ have been
complaints from tare neighbor: at,out the uses on t.h.i:; pruperl.y for rseveral
years.
Commi~sionec Fc~ldhauf; ,asked if the recording studio had a conditronal use
permit. to operate in that location. Mr. Smith stated they were licen::~~d in
the bur;; inesn for 3 or 4 years, anc9 thi:i location was ufiecl as ,~ glace of
practice. Commissioner Feldhaus stated the (:ompla intf; probably inv~alved th~~
Pal ire Department if they were called regar~l>.ny any loud noises asst asked i. f. .,
c:onditi.onal permits was uar_d required for a recording studio. Mr. Smith
:stated probably a conditional ufre permi+. was required and that. he is not
requesting any permit on this propoual for. a night club.
t3ruce Freeman, Code F.nforrement officer for t.hA weal part of Anaheim, stated
in the last 7 or 8 mcmths, all rornpl.,, ants haves been regarding Cartoons asst
Capers; that the moc•;t recent, monitor,ng w,:~a ,i•,ne May 22nd by the orange County
Health Departent from 9:00 p. m. to m.~~inight an~i acccrd.ny to the Health
Department, there were no violations at Lhat tr.me. Hr stated in the past two
years, the complaint have depended on the type of group playing in the night
club, And responded to Chairman Messc that the sound deer intrude into the
neighborhood to the north.
Responding to Commissioner f3ouas, Mr. Freeman stated the operators have been
trying to keep the doors closed for the past 7 months and are encouraging
their employees to use the front entrance and also, they are trying to keep
the front door closed at all times. tie stated the building is constructed of
concrete with Lhi.: walls and the noise does go through the roof and air
conditioning vents.
Responding to Commissioner Herbst, Mr. Creeman stated the average decibel
reading tak(in has been about 54. Commissioner Herbst stated once the reading
is over 65 decibels, tt;ere is a problem. Mr. hreeman stated the operator of
the night club has indicated he is willing t-, do anything ~~ solve the
problems including constructing a block wall on the north pro;~erty line.
Commissioner Herbst stated at onp time, Jahn Van Houton, sound engineer,
conducted a study and suggested the operator should contact a sound engineer.
tte stated a block wall will cause noise to bounce around, so they do need
absorption material and they could do that inside the building.
Mr. Freeman staled he has informed the owner and thQ operator that they must
solve the problem and do whatever is necessary, but he does not tell them how
to solve the problem. tie stated he had a problem with this pcoposal when he
7/20/87
MINUTES, ANAHEIM (:ITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JULY 20, 1987 87-4y6
saw the plans because it proposes moving the building clo~rer. to the north
property line and it seems the establishments in the end unitF 'ave caused the
most problems and moving it ern closer to the north property line would increase
those problems.
Malcolm Slaughter respondu~9 to Commissioner Fel~hacs's question that it
appears a broadcasting studio for either radio oc television would be
permitted by right in this zone and no conditional use permit would r.~e
required; however, that does not mean they do not need a business license.
Ps~.tl Singer responded to Chairmen n;esse'ra earlier question that if the
northerly drive-through lane ~~as eliminated, waiver (b) would be eliminated.
He :Mated also Condition No. 2 requiring the mec9ian crhoul.d be eliminated with
the proposal of a single lane drive-through. [le stated the problem with a
dual drive-throu~~h lane is that there would be too many cars trying to force a
left turn and would back up into the street.
Chairman '4es.:~e asked if the Traffic Engineer wants an addendum to the traffic
study. Paul Singer stated due to the t~sLimony heard today, he did not feel
as comfortable with the submitted traffic study as he did before. He stated
obviously, some peak hours may have been omitted.
Commissioner Herbst stated in looking at the locat.ior of the structure as it
rotates to the parking for. ttre racyuetball Facility, he ~~ould like to know how
rnrny spaces are required and how the calculations were done. Mr. Hotel stated
the prime time is 5 to 9:00 p. m., Monday through '"hursday and it peaks during
December, .Jan :ary, February, March and April and none of: those dates were
shown in the study. Fie stated they have been operat.>_ng that center Eor 5
years with 80 parking spaces and that they built their buildiny based on the
City of Anaheim's recommendation for 80 parking spaces and also, they built
the building to be converted.
Commissioner Herbst stated the whole complex is included in the parking
calculations and the racquetball facility may ha~~~~ access Co 80 spaces
throughout the Center. Mr. Hohl stated the study allocated 30 spaces to the
racquetball Facility. Fle stated he understands reciprocal parking because he
has lead the same situation in other shopping centers and stated 608 of the
spa-:n4 in Pr.ont of his building will be for compact cars. Fle stated he did
agree that it would be great to remodel the shopping center, b(:t did not know
his access would be blocked, and also he is concerned about the Fire Codes.
lie stated he would like t.o see the driveway remain where it is.
Commissioner Flerbst stated 126 parking spaces are required for racquetball
facilities. Greg Hastings explained the requirement is 6.3 spaces per court
for a racquetball facility and ttre Code has separate requirements for a health
club.
Paul Sinner stated the type of racquetball court described in the ordinance
considers those which have showers and other related activities and this
facility does not have those activities and it is purely a racquetball court
and no ono comes in for any other activity.
7/20/97
JUDY 20, 1987 87"497
MINUTES, ANAHf;IM CITY PL,~NNING C~M,IISSION. ^~"_,__,___ ~.--
Chairman Messe stated he thouyht the 6.~ Erpace requirement was t':ar too high
for this tape o~ court. Commissioner Herbst stated 80 spaces are required and
46 are proposed and he Eelt the properly owner and lease holder should review
the plans. He staled also he Ec•1t the property is being overbuilt and that
the traffic study should be re-evaluated. ate stated the drive-through
restaurant should also he reviewed carefully.
Mr. Hohl stated he can provide the City with a copy of a computerised program
shc,,ing th~~ hourb of play of a Ear,ility which does the Name business as this
facility and that would show the peak hours.
Commissiortier Herbst asked if the petitioner would like to reyuest a
continuance in order to review the parking study and the plans since thE:
request for waiver Erom 350 spaces required to 108 proposed is quite large.
He stated the City 'traffic Engineer it; not as comfortable with the park ing
study due to the information presented today and before he would he prepared
to vote in Favor. of the drive-through .lane, LL 9t1OUld be reviewed. He stated
sir.:e the Codes Pave been adopted, a drive-through lane has not been allowed
without adequate back-up space. Mr. Smith stated the LraEEic study indicated
there would be adequate back-up area Eor both lanes and cars would not back up
into Che street.
Paul Singer stated 6U feet of lane is required before reaching the order
window and tha order window services both lanes in this instance and there
would be another oU Eeet between the order window and the service window.
Chairman Messe asked if having one ordering windo~d would speed up the service
and keep the line moving. Mr. Singer slated there was a reyuest Eor an
existing drive-through on Lincoln and Dale which had the service window on the
passenger. side vehicle which was approved without too much concern by the
Planning Commission; ho~~PVer, there wat3 a lot of concern by the City Council,
even though it was ultimately approved due to its existing condition, but the
Council did indicate they would not be willing to consider other similar.
proposals.
Commissioner Bouas pointed out the in-N-Out Burger Facilities use that concept
and seems t-o work for them.
Commissioner Herbst suggested again that the petitioner request a continuance
and a get together with the other owners and work out their concerns and also,
that the restriction should be reviewed so it dues not become a legal. battle
before the Planning Commission. He asked iE a 30-day continuance would allow
enough time. Mr. Smith responded it would.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas
and MOTION CARRIED that consideration of the abovementioned matter be
continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of August 17~ 1987, in order for
the petitioner to meet with adjacent property owners and resolve deed
restrictions issues and park.iny study concerns.
Commissioner Herbst suggested the petitioner consult with a sound engineer and
provide adequate sound attenuation measures or ~ahatever is necessary to
eliminate the noise and complaints presently being made by adjacent property
owners regarding the noise.
7/20/87
MINUPES, ANAHEIM CITY_PLANNING COMMISSION, .IDLY 20, 1987 ~87-498
Chairman Messe mated even though it woul!i appear there are quite a few
problems with this reyuest, he felt the owner was on the right tract with the
remodeling of this center.
ITEM N0. 4 EIS NEGA'fiVE DECLARATION AND CONDITIONAL USE PERI~II'f N0. 2926
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNE1tS: MJU PROPERTIES, ET AL, 22617 S. Vermont, Torrance, CA
90'_'•02. AGENTS: DANIEL F. GRAY, 112 S. western Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92804.
Property described as an irregularly-shaped par.ccl of land consisting of
approximately 5.74 acres located aoutti and ea:,t o[ the southeast corner of
Linrol.n Avenue an~3 Western Avenue, 112 South Western Avenue (Nobu Japanese
ReUtaur.ant).
To permit on-sale beer and wine in an existing restaurant.
There aras no one indica..inq their presence in opposition to c~rbject reyuest
and although the staEE report was not read, it is referred to and mr:~de a part
of the minutes.
Daniel Gras, agent, was present to answer questions anti explained the staEE
report. indicates the building is a:cupied by Winche.ll's, but iL Ls a Separate
building.
THI: PUBLIC HF,ARING WAS CLOSED.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a :nation, seconded by Commissioner
Mc6urney and t40'fION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning r,ommis~ion has
reviewed the proposal !o permit or sale beer and wine in an existing
restaurant on approximately 5.74 acres located soilth and east of the southeast
corner of Lincoln Avenue and Western Avenue and further described as 112 South
Western Avenue; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding
that it has considered the Negative Declaration torether with any comments
received during tt-e public review process and Eurther. finding on the basis of
the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial
evidence that the project will have a ~ignifica~,:. eEEect on the environment.
Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC87-140 and moved far its passage
and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant
Conditional Use Permit No. 2926 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Section
18.U3.030.03C through 18.03.030.035 and subje~~. to interdepartmental Committee
recommendations.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARt1SILL0, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NON F.
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Planning Commission's decision within 'l2 days to the City Council.
7/20/87
MINU'J'F:S, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION .JULY 20 1987 87-499
I`fEM N0. 5 ETR NEGATIVE DECLARA`CiriiJ ANll CONDI'CIONAI. USF:_PERMI'f N(>~. 2928
PUBLIC IiRARING. OWNERS: LA QUI'fA J. 'LYNDA, 3603 Savanna Street, Anaheim, CA
92804. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land connistiny
of approximately 0.78 acre, 3603 Savanna Street (F;.Z Pickin's K.V. Storage).
To retain a 54-space recreational vehicle etorage yard.
There was no one indicating their pre:)ence in opposition to subject reyuest
and although the staff reporr. was not read, it it; referred to and made a part
of the minutes.
Steve 2ynda, agent, explained this recreational vehicle storage yard waa
started by his father. in 1977 and tt~e vehicles for sale were owned by the
family and are being sold as a result of the father's death and that they are
not running an RV dealership. He ref. erred to the ~:argo containers and
explained they are not used for storage by Lenants, but helong to his Family
and are used for Storage of this personal belongings and are the came size as
garden storage sheds which can be purchased and they would request that
Condition No. .ll be eliminated. He referred to Condition No. '1 regarding the
knox box and indicated he did net think that is a requirement and that.
condition should be eliminated. A'li;o, Condition No. 8 regarding trash storage
should he eliminated because he did not have any trash and do not use any
private pick-up service or dumpster•s.
Concerning Condition t~to. 6, he Mated he understood from the Utilities
Department that they can use the existing pole and that condition should be
eliminated.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Herbst asked about the cargo containers. Greg Hastings, Senior
Planner, explained that condition refers Lo the removal of the containers
because staff was concerned that the R.V. storage yard could became an
industrial storage yard. Concerning the trash container condition, he
explained that is a standard condition and the petitioner can work with the
Sanitation Division to Eind out what is appropriate, and also, he can work
with the Fire Marshall regarding i:he knox box condition,
Jay Titus, Office Engineer, explained the street light condition is a
Utllltle9 Department requirement and he thought the representatives from the
Utilities Division, at the interdepartmental Committee meeting trad indicated
if L-here was a wooden pole existing, then the light could be installed on that
pole, but if not, they would be required to put in a standard street light
pole and the condition, as written, requires the street light to be installed
as required by the Utilities Department and suggested leaving it in.
Chairman Messe clarified the petitioner should work with the Utilities
Department, Fire Marshall and Sanitation Division on those conditions and
further stated the Planning Commission does not have the authority to delete
those conditions since they are Code requirements. Malcolm Slaughter
suggested adding wording to Condition Nom. 7 that the knox box be installed if
required by the Fire Department.
7/20/87
1987 87-500
MTNU'rES, ANAHEIM_CITY PLANNING COMMISSION .JULY 20,
Responding to Commissioner eouas, Mr. Zynda agreed not to add any mare
containers on the site. Commissioner Ftouas indicated the conta.inetn are a
concern because iE they were rented t.o other peaple, this could become
something other than a storage yard for recreational vehicles. Mr. 7,ynda
r.esL~unded he anticipated having these containers f: or about 5 or 6 years. He
responded to Commissioner Feldhaus that the containers are 8 feet high and 20
feet long and are standard shipping containers. Commissioner Herbst stated
some shipping containers are 40 feet long and some are 20 feet long.
Commissioner Bouas stated a concern would be that people would want to rent
them to use Eor housing and Mr. Zynda stated there are no util.iti~s to these
containers and stipulated that he would not rent them to anyone and they would
not add any r~ore containers and they would not be used as living quarters.
ACTION: Cammissioner McBurney offered a mation, seconded by Commissioner
Herbst and hi0TI0N CARRIED that Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed
the proposal to retain a 54-apace recreational. vehicle storage yard on a
irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.78 acres,
having a frontage of approximately 90 feet on the north sidF: of Savanna Street
and further described as 3603 Savanna Street; and doer hereby approve the
Ne3ative Declaration upon finding that it has corsid~~red the Negative
Declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process and further finding on the basis of tine Initial Study and any comments
received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a
significant effect on the environment.
Commissioner McBurney offered Resolution No. PC87-141 and moved Eor its
passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2928 f.or a period of Live years, subject to
the petitioner's stipulation that no additional cargo containers will be added
to the site and that they will not be rented to anyone and will not be used as
living quarters and sut,ject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was pss3ed by t-re following vote:
AXES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BUkNEY, MESSE
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appea 1
the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to t-he City Council.
Malcolm Slaughter explained he had spoken with the Chief Building Inspector
and he had indicated a storage unit such as this which is there Eor a long
period of time, could require a building permit, so that could be a problem
for the petitioner.
ITEM N0. 6 EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION LWAIVER_OF CODE REQUIREMENT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2929
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: CHEZ GRAND'MERE, 1239 N. Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim,
CA 92801. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land
consisting of approximately 0.27 acre, 1239 North Harbor Boulevard (Chez
Grand' Mere). 7/20/87
87-5~1
MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION JULY~~987-- -
To permit. the expansion of a private pre-school and day carp center Eor a
maximum of 84 students with waivers of (a) minimum number of parking spacea
and (b) required loading and unloading area.
'There was no one i.ndicat ing their presence in opposition to subject'` reques~•
and although the staff report was not read, it i.s referred to and made a pert
of the minutes.
Donovan Floriani, agent, president of Chet Grand'Mere, explained tt~cy were
granted a con~iit Tonal use permit Ear 56 student9 in Sept.emher. 1986 and have
since purchased the property. He stated one condition requires the dedication
of 15 feet to the City for widening Harbor and would put the publ.i~^.
right-of-way adjacent to the building and would have severe impacts on the
neighbors . He s tat.ed they do not want to ask Eor any spec is 1 f avo rs and wan'.
to do their fair share and live within the Codes, but do not want to be
penalized Eor operating a preschool. tie stated they need to expand and the
driveway on Harbor ic+ within the right-of-way for the future widFSning oC
2 e.limirrat~d requiring Ltierr;
Harbor, and they would like to have Condition No.
to pay for the imp r.ovements for wirlen Harbor now. He stated when they
originally got the conditional use permit for 56, they anticipated expanding
the building and provided 7 parking spaces for. staff. He explained staff
arrives prior tc_ the student's arrival and leaves after the students are gone,
so the!-e is no traEE is congest ion. He stated they are willing to gamble that
the City will not widening Harbor in the near future and then when it is
widened, they will address the problQms. He stated tht~y have des igned the
building so a portion could be rerrioued and they would still have a prPsctiaol.
Mr. Flor Tani stated the condition requiring the knox tiox is a concern because
they are very cautious and very security-minded and do not want any devices on
any gate access that could be opened by anyone otlie.. than their staff. He
stated they would be very happy to allow the fire Department to cut a lock,
tear down a L•ence, etc., but security is a prime concern. He stated he would
also like t-he requirement to pay a traffic signal assessment fee deleted and
they did pay a fee in 1986 of 246. He stated they would want to be allowed
to have signs on the building. He asked if the underground ut it hies
requirement would apply only to the addition and noted they would like to have
an option of putting them underground if it is economically Peas ible, but not
be tied down. He stated when the street is widened, relocating underground
utilities would be very expensive.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSET.
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorincludedtin thiststaEf4repo=tlto•~makemthe
fee is required by Code and is only to any new construction
petitioner aware of the requirement and wotuo thepstreet improvements required
and alsor those same comments would apply
on Harbor.
Greg Hastings explained the underground utilities apply to the new
construction and Condition No. 11 requires that the applicant complies with
the Code for signs unless a variance is approved. arentlylisnagboxethatx ibox
condition is a Fire Department requirement and app
placed beside the gate with a key inside which opens the gate and Fire
7/20/87
87-502
MINU'PE;5 ANAHEIM CI`PY PLANNI~X3 COMMISSION JULY 20 1987
Department personnel ar.e tt~e only people who Have keys to that t~c)x. Mr.
Floriani stated he understands that is a box similar to that placed on harnen
that are far sale by realtors and a lot of people have a common ke,et~tated
box anc9 they would not want. anyone to have a key to their doors.
the State of California places great restrictions on their staff regarding not
having a criminal record and having an adequate education to handle young
children and they would not want anyone to have access to any key and be able
to just walk in. He added he was sure he could wank this out with the Fire
Department.
Chairman MessN asked if the State had inspected the plans, especially the
.ingress and egress and if they looked at the present facilities and location
of ttre driveway.
Mr. Floriani. stated the State inspects the facility regularly and they are
aware of. the plans to expand, taut do not wish to review the l:lans until
approval is received Pram the City. He stated the State has requirements for
syuare footage per child, et r_. and their customers are happy with the driveway
lay out and he LS aware if Harbor 1s widened, changes will have to be made.
Chairman Messe stated his only concern would be the effect on the circular
driveway by increasing the capacity by 508 and the effect it would have on the
safety of getting in and out. Mr. Floriani stated they presently have 56
students and many of. thorn are two or three per family and he would estimate
that perhaps 50 vehicles use that driveway between 6:30 and 9:30 a. m. and
again in the afternoon and even with an increase of 3'). more students with that
many more vehicles, there would not be a problem.
commissioner Feldhaus stated he understands that they have to increase in
increments of 12. Mr. Floriani explained the requirement is one teacher for
every 12 students, so it is economically wise to increase by 12. He explained
to C omm.issioner Bouas that most of the students do arrive by private
automobile.
Commissioner Carusillo stated there is a concern that if there are more than 5
veh icles in the driveway, they would have to back out onto Harbor Boulevard
and create a dangerous situation. Mr. Floriani sta~.ed that is a possibi.lit.y
in most of the businesses in Anaheim, and they have ~ capacity for 12 vehicles
and many of the vehicles are only these for 1 or 2 minutes, although some
parents do park in front and go inside, but he has not witnessed any
congestion. He explained the students ace greeted by a staff person in the
lobby or parking lot. He stated the success of this business is dependent on
the parent's feeling comfortable about the safety and security ot• the school
and if the driveway was congested, the parents would let him know.
He stated he i~ satisfied with the explanations regarding conditions, except
for Number 2. He stated they plan to be in this location for a long time and
want to be treated like every other property owner along Harbor Boulevard; and
that he has heard that ether people get paid when their land is taken, but
they have been asked to dedicate their property and do not think it is fair
that they are also being assessed a fee for improvements on which no estimate
has been provided and it could be very high especially if the underground
facilities have to be moved. He stated he is not prepared to pay those costs
7/20/87
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, ,JULY 20, 1`)87 _ 87-503
up front. He stated he has pasted a bond for street lights and pa>.d foes for
trees, but has not seen them.
Commi,~sioner Herbst stated Harbor will be widened in the t'.utur.e and when that
happens it appears the circular driveway will not be possible and asked how
that would affect the preschool and the numtaer of students. Mr. Floriani
stated he hoped it would be 3 or 4 years before harbor is widened and when it
does happen they would have to make changes Eor accessing the property and he
does not know yet how that would be done. Fie stated there is a new motel
which has tae en built just north of their property in the last few years and
their office was built in the right-of-way and that would have to be torn down
and the used car lot to the south would loose 15 to 2UB of their parking
spaces and the Karcher property across the street would br_ affected. He added
they do not know what will happen, but wauJ.d like to Lake the gamble and would
like for the City to trust in them and statec9 they would be happy to pay the
assessments when required. Commissioner Herbst. stated the widening of Harbor
would create hardship on the school and they would have to acquire more
property to have tl~e increased enrollment and added he did not want to approve
something t.o bc? improved which would be affected in the wideniny and then have
the petitioner say that Lhe City had created a hardship.
Mr. Floriani stated he understands and suggested a condition be added that he
is willing to guarantee that he would have no recourse against tine City when
Harbor is widened and that tie was fully aware of the potential negative effect
on his property.
Commissioner Feldhaus responded he dick neat think the Planning Commission has
the autt•,ority to take such an action, but these conditions are a requirement
by the Code and asked when the property was purchased. Mr. Floriani stated it
was purchased in December 1985 anc9 Commissioner Feldhaus pointed out it was
just one rnanth before the ordinance went into effect.
Mr. Floriani stated when he got the original conditional use permit, he saw
many maps which ind icated the right-of -way 65 feet f rom the center 1 ine.
Commissioner .eldhaus stated he would agree with the petitioner and abstain on
this request and added he did not think the Planning Commission has the
authority to nullify the ordinance.
Malcolm Slaughter stated if the Planning Commission deleted Lhat condition,
the ordinance legally imposes i.t as a condition of the building permit
process, and assuming the petitioner yoes ahead with his plans, he would be
required to comply when he sought building permits. Mr. Slaughter suggested
wording be added to Condition No. 7 that: that the knox box be installed if
required by the Fire Department.
Concerning the street lights, Malcolm Slaughter stated to install the street
lights was a condition of the original resolution, prior to occupancy and that
the petitioner posted a bond to guarantee that installation and he did not
know why it was not installed, but that is an obligation on the applicant and
not the City and the City is possibly in a position to call that bond iE they
so desire.Cornmissioner Herbst- stated because of the widening of the street,
they may not know where to put the street light.
7/20/87
P7-504
MINU'I'F,S, .4NAH~M CI'hY_t'LANNING CQMMISS'(QN, JULY 20~ 1987 _ _
Commissioner. Boydstun asked if. a bond could be posted Ear the street
improvements. Malcolm Slaughter stated iE it is known when a street is going
to be widened and it is a safe Condit ion l.o have the property owner w.idPn the
street, it would be an obligation on the property owner to widen it at that
time, but since it in not known exactly when the wider~iny would occur, and
just putting in a short strip of improvements in front. of his property could
create a public hazard, the City E;n~~ineer has determined that they should be
required to pay tar the improvements now in an amount equal to what they worsld
have to pay at the pre~ient time to install the improvements and that would
resolve him in the future of any o~~ligation of putting in the improvements
when it does happen.
Commissioner Herbst stated h~ is ~,aoing to request the Planning Commission to
make a recommendation to the City Council rey, and ing that ordinance and ktrougtrt
it works a real hardship on the r. mall businesseR to of ask them to pay for a
road and widen it hefore it is even determined when it would be widened and to
ask the property owners to put ~.p that money because they want to expand an
existing business he thought wars just plain "blackmail" and the ordinance
needs to be reviewed.
Malcolm Slaughter stated the Commission can make a recommendation Lo Council,
but the City Engineer has just prepared a lengthy report to the City Council
t-o do just that, but the Commission should understand that the present
ordinance enables the City to defer the requirement and if it had not been
adopted, the property owner would have to put in the i;rrpr.ovements now, without
exception.
Commissioner Herbst stated the applicant will have to make a decision as to
how much profit he will make with the increase of students and whether it will
pay because the expense of widening Harbor t3oulevard, which across the 100
Eeet of property will be substantial.
Chairman Messe stated the City Council will be reviewing that ordinance
tomorrow and suggested the petitioner request a continuance until that
decision is made .
Mr. Floriani stated he would be happy to attend that meeting. ,Tay 'Titus
offered t-o provide a copy of that report to the Planning Commission before
L-hey make a recommendation. He stated obviously if businesses are not
required to provide necessary infrastructure to handle development °f.or those
expansion, he did not know where the City will get the money to pay
improvements and it will become a burden on the City's general taxpayers. He
stated this is not adding an additional burden, but providing an additional
alternative to installing the improvements right now.
Commissioner Feldhaus stated before the petitioner can get building permits, a
cash payment has be made and the petitioner could be doing something that
would really not affect the infrastructure. Mr. Titus stated previously the
only alternative would be to have the property owner install the improvements
and many times that created hazardous situations.
Commissioner Herbst stated piecemeal widening does become dangerous and asked
what the estimate is for these improvements. He stated there could be
7/20/87
MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, ,JULY 2L, 1987 87-505
ex i.st ing ut it itie:.~ which would have to be relocated and tho:;«~ are be ing used
by the wY-ole black ~~nd al:.~o the street i:~ used by the whole City.
Jay Titus stated the c'ngineerin9 pPpartmFrnt. has prepared an estimate of costs
for this project and it i:~ approximately $9,500. Mr. Feldhaus stated that is
for a future widening that may or may not occur or %t could occur in 10 to 20
years. Jay Titus stated the widening of Harbor will occur and is part of the
General Plan and will probably be 5 to '1 years.
Commissioner t3oydstun asked where that money is held and if it earns interest
and can it be used some other place in the City. Jay Titus stated the money
is placed in a special fund used exclusively for street w.id~ming, not
necessarily here, and the interest earned on this money will, hopefully, k~aep
up with inflation. He statedr.osts in five years Erom now will be more than
today. Commissioner Feldhaus stated this issue was brought up before khe City
Council about one and one half months ago acid that portion of the ordinance
was waived by the City Council at that time and a report was requested which
he a:3surnes is the result of the report going before Council tomorrow and
suggested the decision be held up on this matter until the Commission finds
out what the City Council is going to do.
Chairman Messe stated the matl.er ran be acted on today and the pet iti~aner has
the right of appeal. Malcolm Slaughter stated the fight seerrU to be betweren
the applicant and the City ordinance and he saw no problem wit1~ the ~~ommission
deleting the cond it ion and then if the petitioner applies for a bu i?.d irg
permits and the or~9inance remains in effect, the owner will be in the samEr
position at tha` time.
Jay Titus explained in the matter before the City Council which C~ammi.ssioner
Feldhaus referred to, the condition was deleted and the matter rE~verted back
to the ordinance and the property owner was required tc .install +:he
improvements at this time. Commissioner Feldhaus stated that w~.-s also vacant
property and not improvements to an existing structure. Commis:ioner McBurney
stated the driveway and parking spaces will be lost with the w~.dening of
Harbor.
Malcolm Slaughter stated two separate issues are being discus red, one is the
problem of the improvements and wno was roing to pay for them and now the
issue of w!-en they are going to bE done. Chairman Messe stated the applicant
has agreed to take than chance.
Commissioner Feldhaus stated his only concern is the loading and unloading of
students for 84 Families in and out of that driveway and the Traffic Engineer
is also concerned and t~-is is a 5013 increase and he did nc.t understand h~~w a
traffic problem would not be creatsd but asked ii• t;~e State has any
restrictions regarding t:he loading ar~d unloading area.
Mr. Floriani stated the State does not r.ontrol the access to the property and
the increase in traffic would be acceptable becau:~e it would be over a period
of 2 ar 3 hours. Commissioner Feldhaus stated !~e was concerned about the
children's safety, but realizes there is a definite need for day care
centers. Malcolm Slaughter stateu Condition No. 3 restricts the enrollment to
84 students and asked if that means enrollment or attendance. Chairman Messe
stated he felt it should be the number of students on the site at any one time.
7/20/87
MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY Pf~ANNING COMMISSIONS ~IUGY 20, 1987 87-506
Mr. Floriani stated the State does not control the acres to the property and
the increase in LrafEir. would be acceptable because it would be over a period
of 2 or 3 hours.
Commissioner Feldhaus stated he was concernec] about the children's safety, but
realizes there is a definite need for day care centers.
Malcolm Slauyliter. stated Condition No. 3 restricts the enrollment to 84
students and asked if that means enrollment or attendance. Chairman Messe
stated ho felt it should be the number of students on the slt.e at any one time.
Mr. F.lor Tani stated they schedule their proyrarr>3 so them are no more than the
licensed number of children present: at any on~~ t.ime.
ACTION: Commissioner Bouas o[fer~~d .:, motion, seconded by Comrni:~sionet
Feldhaus and MOTION CARRIED that the ?~naheim City Planning Commission has
reviewed the proposal to permit the -~xpansi~~n of a private preschool and day
care center For a maximum of. 84 :>t dents Edith waiver of minimum number of
parking spaces and required 1oa~i r• and unload my ar~ya on a
rectangularly-shaped parcel of .' con.,lstiny of approximately 0.27 acres,
having a frontage of approxim~= ~ 100 l set on the west side of Harbor
Boulevard and being located :-a!.~~ly 450 f~:et north of the centerline oF.
Romneya Drive and further de: ~ - <.; 1.239 N. Harbor Boulevard; and does
hereby approve the Negative ~•- :~- <<,~r upon finding that it has considered
the Negative Declaration t.o~•- ~ - -_ _' any comments received during the public
review proce,s and furt.h+~: ~~; ~n the basis of the Initial Study and any
comments received that th ~- >. substantial evidence that the pro)ect will
have a signif. icant et: fec' - >>vlronment.
Commissioner BouaF off~>r~~~:; -ion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and
MOTION CARRIED (Commi:~~.Lr,~},; titc-gurney voting no) that the Anaheim City
Planning Commission dohs -- ~ ]rant waivers (a and b) on the basis that the
parking waiver will not ~~.=..;~~ -a~n increase in traffic congestion in the
immediate vicinity nor ad?~?~~.~--1,1' affect any adjoining land uses and granting
of the park ins wa lver under ~~ conditions imposed, if any, will not be
detrimental to the peace, '^-~~;1t.h, safety and general welfare of the citizens
of the City of: Anaheim.
Commissioner Bouas oft-erec ~~solu{:on No. PC87-142 and moved for its passage
and adoption that the anar~,~rm Cit, Planning Commission does hereby grant
Conditional Use ~errnit No. 2929 ;pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Section
18.03.030.030 through ]8.3.030.035 and subject to Interdepartmental Committee
recommendations-, delat irry Cvnd it ions No. 'l and includ :ng an add it- Tonal
condition that ;.he property owner shall record a covanant to indemnify and
1rald the City Harmless for any damages resulting from the widening of Harbor
i?aulevard and fur"per that the maximum number of students to be permitted
on-site at any one time shall be limited to 84 and that Condition Nos. 7 and 3
~~hal.l be modified to include the wording "if required by the Fire Department".
On roll call, Lhe foregoing resolution was passed by the following vota:
AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, HERBST, MESSE
NOES: McBURNEY
ABSENT: FELDHAUS
7/20/til
v
..l ,
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIONL JULY 20~ 1987 87-507
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Planning Commission's deci:~ion within 22 days to the City Council..
Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Feldhaus and
MUTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does ht+reby recommend
that the City Counc.ll re-evaluate the City Ordinance pertaining to street
improvements and street widening dedication so a hardship ~:~ not placed on the
small business owner.
RECESSED: 3:45 p. m.
F2ECONVENED: 3:50 p.m.
I'PEM N0. 7 EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WAIVER Oh CODE RF'.QUIREMF;NT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2930
PUF3LIC H[:ARING. OWNERS: MELVIN It. BENNE'P ANU JOYCE M. BENNE'1', 509 N. Dale,
Anaheim, CA 92801. AGENT: FFUGO VAZQUEZ, 2240 W. Lincoln, Anaheim, CA 92801.
Property is described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of
approximately 0.43 acre, 509 North Dale Avenue.
To permit a 1 and 2-story, 12-unit senior citizens' affordable apartment
project with maximum structural heiyht.
There were appeoximaF:ely sixty-five persons indicating t}~eir presence in
opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read, it:
is referred to and made a part of the minutes.
Hugo Vazquez, agent, presented colored renderings of the proposed 12-unit,
senior citizen project located at 5U9 North Dale with a 25$ affordable
agreement with units to be rented at 388 for a 1-bedroom unit and ~4G6 for a
2-bedroom unit and explained those rents were set by the Ftousing Authority.
[[e stated they first proposed an apartment complex on this property, but after
analyzing it, withdrew that request and submitted re~~ised plans for this
senior citizen project because there is an intense need for senior citizen
housing. He stated they could have developed up to 15 units on the site, but
are proposing only 12 which is equal Co 27 units per acre and that they meet
all Code requirements, except one, and that no waivers are requested that
would affect properties on the west. He stated Dale Manor is a 3-story
project for ser-ior citizens down the street and also the church is well over
30-feet high and explained the church is irrtecested in purchasing other lots
adjacent Co this property for additional parking overflow, wtrich is always a
problem for a :successful church. He referred to the Braille Institute which
is close to 3-::tones high, which interfaces with sinyle-family homes and
stated he hope~l the Commission would see the true picture of this project and
what it will ~f`fer the City.
Mr. Vazquez sorted there were some very sensitive issues in connection with
this project grid they understand that the other properties in this location
will eventuall;~ be developed. He stated of ttre 23 projects referred to in the
staff report, this project 15 one of the top three to providF the lowest
density.
7/20/8?
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, .JULY 20, 1987 ___ 87-508
Mr. Vazquez referred to Lhe conditions recommended and stated Lhey will he
making the proper dedications Eor street improvements and pointed out there
are no curbs and gutters at Lhe prevent Lime on Uale and they will be
installing those improvements and will be posting a bond. tle stated Lhey will
be installing a new street light: ar:3 there will be Eire sprinklers in every
unit.
Kdward J. Whitney, 8G12 Kendor nrivN, Duena Park, stated he has owned his home
since 1.954 and is present Lo help reprc:~r.,nt over 400 citi,,ens who are opposed
Lo this senior citizen's apartment project. He stated earlier this year, this
developer proposed a similar. complex which would have required a zone change,
which did upset the neighbors and petitions were prepared.
Hf. stated they arc: opr~osed Lo any propor;al Eor mu 1L iple-Family units on this
property or any other properL.ies between Lhe Greek Church and the Draille
Institute. fte presented copies of Lhe petition to the P.lanniny Commission.
Mr. Whitney stated the developer realized their resisLence to the zone change
previously mentioned and is now taking a different approach with a senior
citizen project which only requires a conditional use permit. He stared the
citizenry a.till oppose these apartments. tie stated they bought their homes in
a single-family community because that is the kind of community they wanted Lo
llv~~ in. He stated many of. the original logy were approximately half acre
s lte$ ,-~,nd th is is a yu iet neighborhood, low in crime and ideal for raising
children or just living and to increase the density would change this tranquil
neighborhood. He stated this project being considered is poorly located; Lhat
the traffic on Dale accelerates from Crescent south and from Lincoln north.
He stated the project is in Lhe middle of 7 lots and that Lhe street will not
have .sidewalks leading north and south Erom the project which will cause these
elderly people to have to walk on uneven yards or in the traffic lane or try
Co cross Dale Avenue, which is extremely dangerous. He stated if this complex
is allowed, they would like Lo know what the Commission would allow on either
side of it and felt that will probably be additional apartments and the
development of this lot will determine the fate of the 7 lots and, in effect,
they consider this Lo be "spot" zoning. He staled the Draille Institute wants
the lot Lo the north for parking, the next lot south is controlled by Lhe
Greek Church, the next lot is owned by a man who has stated publicly that he
purchased t:he property far speculation and wishes Lo develop it himself, the
Fourth lot is owned by an absentee owner interested in selling for the best
price, the fifth lot is Lhe one before the Planning commission today, the
sixth lot is controlled by the Greek Church and the seventh lot is owned by a
person living there and she has not made a committment.
Mr. Whitney stated the present owners are primarily interested in the profit
to be made and if this is granted, requests for zone changes and other changes
would be forthcoming and the present owners would take their profits and leave
and the developer would take his profit and leave and the people who wanted a
sinyle-family quiet community would be left with what is left and they are the
only ones inLer.ested in the community long term. He appealed to the Planning
Commission to reject this project and wait for a more compatible use more in
keeping wi-:h the single-family community surrounding .it. He stated eaci~
Commissioner was given a copy of the petition submitted, a neighborhood map
7/20/87
M]'NUTLS ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JULY 20 L,1987 _~87-509
showi~l the properties from which the signatures were drawn, a copy of the
protest: letter from the City of Buena Parlc and other letters of. importance and
prior to the meeting pictures of the property in question to show the quality
and condition of those }comes and photographs of typical Homes in the v is in ity
were presented and are displayed on the wall.
Lou Valenzuela, 8674 Kendrr Drive, Buena Park, stated this is proposed as a
senior citizen project ~,nd they would 1 ike Co know what a::surance they would
have that this complex would always remain a senior citizen project because he
has heard that sometimes the use changes and only one or rwo people being
senior citizens in the project.
George Stevens, 426 N. Syracruse, Anaheim, stated he is a father of a small
child and is very worried about the traffic because Dale has heavy traffic no~.~
and that in the City of Buena Park of[ La Palma there wilt be a large shopping
center constructed and he did no-. feel the added traffic is something he wants
and he moved to I:his area because of the family atmosphere. -}e stated the
people present are from the community and not from the church, after asking
anyone from the church to raise r.heir hands. He enouraged '.he Planning
Commission not to approve this project because the traffic is already bad. He
stated at least two days a week share i~ a traffic officer aL the intersection
where he come onto Dale, which would indicate that the Pol. ice Department also
thinks there is a traffic 1~ro1 lem on this street.
Nancy Brown, 324 Cooledge, stated they purchased their home in 1957 and knew
what the neighborhood around for 3 or 4 blocks was like and that there were
custom domes fronting on Dale which are tl~e ones in question now and when
those properties became available, she and her husband attended many Planning
Commission and City Council meetings as various proposals L•or use of those
properties were made and until t}ie church made their proposal, the requests
were denied beca~~se they were not cc,,npatible with the area. She stated these
are well maintained homes in that area and asked the Planning Commission to
please allow them to keep their single-family neighborhood and deny
multiple-family dwellings because they feel this would b~ a foot in the door
for other multiple-family units.
Lou Valenzuela stated they feel if this is to be for senior citizens, the
noise is too high and would not be a place of rest. He stated the traffic is
fast on Kendor, the first street west of Dale; and just last week there was
additional traffic on their sL-reet because of construction .in the area and it
gave them an idea of what an increased traffic load on Dale would be like for
them. He added they have :mall c}cildren and are concerned for their safety.
Hugo Vazquez stated if this project is approved For senior citizens, they have
signed an agreement guaranteeing occupants to be a minimum age of 62 wit.tr any
additional person Living in the unit to be 45 years old and that would provide
the insurance desired that the units would be occupied by senior citizens. He
stated Dale is a major route from Buena Park to Anaheim; however, the Buena
Park mall is within walking distance. He stated the parking requirement i~
about one half for senior citizen units as it is for apartments and that any
other residential project would have more parking and add more traffic than a
senior citizen's project. He stated the Braille Institute and Greek Church
impact the neighborhood with traffic more than a senior citizen's project. He
7/20/87
,.,
t4INU'PES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COhiM1.SSIUN, .JULY 20, 1987 87•-`'i10
st:taLed every Sunday, there is an overflow of parking because oC the church and
the Braille Institute is very successful and is a large structure. He stated
Dale Avenur, is rat a single-farni.ly homer street and is a mrjor LhoroughEare
and a senior citizen's complex would probably reduce the traffic ldvel. Fie
stated he Eelt the criteria set here with no variances serves notice Lo any
future developer of the other properties that there will be no variances
granted on that side of. l.h~> street.
'PHE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
'Phere was no repre:~entaL ive present f: torn the Braille institute.
Responding Lo Commissioner Flerbst, Greg klast ings, Senior Planner, .inci icaLed
the General Plan designates this property for Low-Density Residential uses.
Commissioner. Herbst stated the low-density designation is F.or single--t'amily
homes and the loth adjacent to this property appear Lo tae approximately
one-ha 1[ acre lo1,s; and LhaL some areas are being converted Lo apartment
complexes anti even though a senior citizen's complex would be allowed in this
zone, it is still multiple-family use and there can only be so many senior
ciLzen's projects approved and the oLt;er property owner would be looking Eor
regular apartment complexes on those lot3 and he would not want them to break
down the single-family character in this area, even f.or senior C1L1'l.P,R3. He
stated he did not think this is Lhe right place Eor ,enior ciL.izens taectiuse
some rE the necessac,, services are not ~9ithin walking distance and he EE+lt
this is really "spot" zoning and would open the door and is Lhe wrong place aL
the wrung Lime. Commi;~sioner Bouas agreed.
Commissioner Feldhaus stated he would agree with Lhe 400 property owners who
presented Lhe petitions in opposition.
Chairman Messe stated this is a reyuesL for approval of an island of apartment
units in the middle of single-family residences and he would not.. go along with
it.
Commissioner Boydstun asked if it is true the church wants the two lots north
between this property and the church for parking. Mr. Vazquez stated he has
been told they have already purchased two lots for parking even though they
are not together and added they have p~rrchased one for sure. Commissioner
Boydstun asked if the Braille Institute has a commitment on the lot to the
south of their property. Mr. Vazquez responded that is his understanding and
clarified that the church has entered into an agreement with the property
owner fcr a parking lot. Comrt~issioner FlerbsL stated any changes in the use of
those lots would have to cone before the Planning Commission and if the people
are opposed, it_ may not happen.
Victor Vazquez, 1302 W. Center, Anaheim, stated hey is a real estate agent and
negotiated the sale of the property in question and the Bennztts are selling
the property because it is on a busy street and is too big for their needs and
they feel the house has lost its value and the value now is in the land and
the neighbors are also aware of that. He stated St. John's Greek Orthodox
Church has an eye on this property and that he has been Cold by a
representative of the church that if this developer does not buy these lots,
the church will purchase it and either develop it as a senior citizen's
7/20/87
8'1-511
t~~iTES, ANAIiEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 2U 1987
project, day care center or a t3chool. He stated at. one time they tried to yet
t:he church to support. them Eor awantedatopaee whatdwould happetnewhendLhls want
to give permission becau,3e h_y
tt~, stated t:hP church has
developer name before the Planning Commission.
offered the Bennetta a lower price for their property and ao he felt they are
waiting to come Eorth and purchase these loLn al a 1^we: price and gave
already purchased two loLa. He slated the property 'owners in Duena Park
should read the staff report Lo the Planning Commission which would
mitigaLetheir concerns about the guarantee that thAtPKOjt~~Lg~aLed theain for
senior r. itizens and regarding sidewalks, privacy,
developer will have Lo pay for Lhe sidewalks and improvements. He alga read
the paragraph regarding the negative impact. which indicates Lhe staff finds no
significant environmental impact and recommends apnr.oval of the negative
declaration. Mr. Vazquez stated if tl-ie does not get approval, eventually
another institution will come in and Lake over.
Commissioner Fterbst stated Mr. Vazquez juat made his point that othzr people
will be corning in and making requests Eor changes and that is why he thought
the properly should remain for aingle-family residences.
Commi:~sioner Caruaillo asked if the church has already purchased the two
adjacent lots. Victor Vazquez responded the properly at 431 and 59l North
Dale are owned by the St. John Greek Orthodox Church; however, the one at 591
Norl.h Dale is in the name a church repre•^.•er-tative who intends to donate it to
the church. He stated those loLa are on both sides of subject properLY.
Chairman Messe stated those two properties are currently developed and toned
for single-family residences and the Commission does not know anything about
the church's intentions. Victor Vazquez responded he has just informed the
Commission of the church's intentions.
Commissioner Mct3urr-ey stated this area is definitely not suitable for this use
and it should remain single-family residential and he did not think the church
will purchase those L'~r ee lots for just a park ing lot. He stated he has been
to that church and t,ey appe2r to have adequate parking aL this time.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, Secoommissionohassreviewedothe
and MOTION CARE2IED that L-he Anaheim City Planning
proposal to permit a 1 and 2-story- 12-unit senior citizen's affordable
apartment complex with waiver of maximum structural height on a
rectangularly-shaped parcel of: land consisting of approximatel;~ 0.43 acre,
having a frontage of approxi-nat-ely 87 feet on the west side of Dale Avenue,
approximately 750 feth DalehAvenue~ andtdoesnheorebyrapproveAtheuNegativerlher
described as 509 Nor
Declaration upon finding that it has co:,~idered the Negative Declaration
together with any comments received during the public review process and
further finding on the basis of- the Initial Study and any comments received
that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant
effect on the environment.
Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and
MOTION CARRIED that: the Anaheim City panning Commission does hereby deny
waiver of Code requirement on t-he basis that there are no special
7/2U/87
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMI:iSIgN,_ JULY 20, 19u'/ 87-512
cirru instances applicable to the property such as six e, shape, topoyraphy,
location and surroundings which do not apply to other identically xoned
property in the same vicinity= and that strict application of: the Zoning Code
dogs not deprive the property of privileges en joyect by other properties in the
identical zone and classification in the vicinity.
Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC87-143 and moved Eor its passage
and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby deny
Conditional Use Permit No. 2930 on the basis that approval of. a senior citixen
complex could set an undesirable precedent for multiple-family units and
chanye the single family character of the entire area, and he deft iment.s the
peace, health, safety and general welfare of the cif ix ens.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, F'EI,DHAUS, HERl3ST, MC [3URNEY, MESSE
NOES: BOYDSTUN, CARUSIt.1.O
ABSEN'P: NONE
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to ttie City Counr.il.
RECESSED: 4:30 p.m.
RECONVENED: 4:35 p. m.
Immediately following the recess, Commissioner Carusillo indicated he had
intended to vote yes on the previous resolution for denial on Conditional Use
Permit No. 2930 and asked his vote be changed in the resolution.
ITEM N0. 8 EIR NEGA'PIVE DECLARATION, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT AND
CONDITIONAL USR PERMIT' N0. 2931
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: RICHARD C. HUNSAKER, P.O. Box 2423, Santa Ana, CA
92')11. AGENT: PHILIP KOENEN, 2785 Regal Park Drive, Anaheim, CA 92806.
Property described as an irregu tarty-shaped parcel of land consisting of
approximately 1.5 acres, 2785 Regal Park Drive (Grand Touring).
To retain an automobile restoration facility with waiver of minimum number of
parking spaces.
Thece was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject request
and although the staff report waa not read, it is referred to and made apart
of the minutes.
Philip Koenen, agent, explained he has been in business at this location for
4-1/2 years and previously had a limousine service and automobile restoration
service and about one year ago, sold the limousine service and now has just
tt~p automobile restoration business and this need for a conditional use permit
came to light when he applied for the new business license.
'PHE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLGSED.
7/20/87
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CUMMISSIUN, ,JULY 20, 198'1 87-513
Responding to Chnitman Mesc,e, Mc. Koenen explained this is a unique husincas
in that they work on only two to [our vehiules at one time and each one Lakes
between 6 months and 1 year to complete and they are all show cars and they do
not do any painting or chrominy in this Eaci.lity. I1N Stated atl work is done
inside.
Responding to Commissioner Feldhaus, he explained he had a bu^,iness J.ic:en:~e
Eor the two businesses Eoc 4-1/2 years under the name of Grand Touring which
was the limousine service. He pointed out that service was done with antique
vehicles and as time went, interest. in .limousines fell oEE and the restaration
business outw~i.ghed the limousine service. He stated they always had a
hus iness license, but the chanye was the reason Eor this request. fie stated
he has never received any citations.
Greg Haslingn, Senior Planner, explained the Tcaf.Eic Engineer has indicated he
had reviewed the parking study and has no problem with of parking that is
ex ir3C ing on the property.
Comissi~ner Feldhaus referred to the condition that. there shall be no outdoor
storage or workiny on vehicles or parts. Mr. Koenen stated he has never had
outdoor storage or worked on vehicles outside, so would have no problem
romply ing.
ACTION: Commissioner Bouas o[Eered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst
and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planniny Commission has reviewed the
proposal to retain an automobile restoration facility with waiver of minimum
number of park ing spaces on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consist ing of
approximately 1.5 acres, having a frontage of approximately 380 teet on the
north side of Regal Park Drive, approximately 240 feel west of the centerline
of Hlue Gum Street and further described as 2785 Regal Park Drive (Grand
Tourning); and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon Eroding that
it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received
during the public review process and Further Finding on the basis of Lhe
Initial Sl.udy and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence
that the project will have a significant effect on Che environment.
Commissioner Bouas oEf.ered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and
MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant
~.~aiver of Code requirement on the basis that the parking waiver will not cause
an increase in traffic congestion in the immediate vicinity nor adversely
affect any adjoining land uses grid granting ot: the parking waiver under the
condition r, imposed, if arty, will not be detrimental to the peace, health,
safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
Commissioner Bouas offered Resolution No. PC87-144 and moved for its passage
and adoption that the Anaheim r_ity Planning Commission does hereby grant
Conditional UsE Permit No. 2931 pursuant to Anaheim ~;unicipal Code Sections
18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035 and subject to interdepartmental Committee
recommendations.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by L-he following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUt7, CARUSILLO, FELUHAUS, HERBST, MC J3URNEY, MESSE
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
MINUTES, ANAfIEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JUDY 20, 1987 87-5'14
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council.
ITEM N0. 9 EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND I:ONDITIONAL USE PERt4I`C N0. 2933
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: HOWARD ENGF.LMAN, E:T AL, 111 N. Glenray Avenue, Los
Angeles, CA 90049. AGENT: ALPHA BETA COMPANY, 777 S. Harbor Boulevard, La
Habra, CA 90631 A'CTN: Et.I7,ABETH R. BURREt,L. Property described as an
irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 2.4 acres
located south and east of the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Euclid
Street 1020 North Euclid Street (Alpha Beta).
To retain a temporary trailer Eor Supermarket storage use.
There was one person indicating her presence in opposition to subject cequest
and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part
of the minutes.
Larry Johnson, store manager, Alpha Beta, stated they ace requesting a
conditonal use permit to retain a temporary trailer at the rear ~~f the
building between the delivery docks. He stated because of the high volume ~~f
the store and the limited back room space, they need addir.ional space to keep
pallets, cardboard bales and delivery racks to maintain a high level of
efficiency and to keep inside storage Eor food products.
Mary ticDOnnell, 1005 Dresden Street, stated she does not really object to the
trailer, but does object to the trucks going past her back yard and parking
and leaving their engines runn.inq with the fume: coming into her house and
yard.
Ms. McDonnell responded to Commissioner Carusillo that she has not had a
problem with odors from the trash or garbage. S'~e stated the fumes are a
problem because trucks sit next to her wall with their enginees running. She
pointed out the trucks are from all tl~e stores in chat complex and the alley
is ner,t to her backyard.
Mr. Johnson stated this request only pertains to the trailer use for storage
and it is not motorized, so would not contribute to that problem. He stated
they do abide by the 7:00 a.tn. to 10:00 p.m. delivery schedule and do not
deliver at night, Responding to Chairman Messe, he stated he would ask the
people who receive at- the dock to ask the drivers not to park or leave their
enginees running next to that wall.
Commissioner Carusillo stated he was by the site on Saturday about- 6:00 p.m.
and the smell Erom the garbage was quite overpowering and maybe it is not an
outgoing problem, and apparently the block wall does block the smell from
going over to the neighbors property, but it should be taken care of.
ACTION: Commissioner McBurney offered a motion, seconded by Commissione:
Aouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has
reviewed the proposal to retain a termporary trailer for supermarket storage
use on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 2.4
acres, located south and east of the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and
7/20/87
MINIJ'CESr ANAIIE:IM CITY NLANNIM; COMMISSION, JULY__2U~_19f37 87••515
>auclid Street and further doscribed as 1020 N. Euclid (Alpha Bela?; and does
hereby appr.uve the Neyat i.ve Declaration upon f. ind ing that it has cons iderod
the Negative DeclaraL ion t_ ogether with any comments received dur my the publ is
review process and further finding on the ban is of the Init. ial Study and any
comments received ghat th~ro in no substantial evidence th. ' the project will
gave a signif icant of Eect nn l.hc environment:.
Commissioner McBurney ofEarnd Resolution No. PC87-.1A5 and moved for its
passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Plana my Commi:~s ion does hereby
yrant Conditional Use Permit No. 2933 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code
section 18.03.030.030 through 18.U3.U3U.035 and subject to interdepartmental
Committee recommAndations .
Chairman Messe stated the Fire Department indicated a fire hazard concern and
asked if tt~e trailer can be sprinklered. Mr. .Johnson stated he did not think
the trailer could be sprir.t;lered, but they could put Eire extinguishers in the
trailer. Ile explained th is trailer sits them all the time and after delivery
trucks Erom the distribut ion canter ace unloaded, the equipment is
transferred, but the traile[ is a permanent. storage area.
Commissioner. Ijerbst asked why the trailer could not he :aprinklered since it is
there permanently. Mr. ,Johnson stated he did not think a sprinkler system
could be extended Erom the building s•icessfully. He stated from his
expetience in the marketing business, there are situations where open
cardboard bale:a are stored on rear cocks and somet Imes are set f. ire, but this
trailer is licked and he thought it would be safer. Commissioner Herbst
stated the Fire Department recommends denial because of the fire hazard oL
having a non-aprinklered combustible storage area in close proximity to tt,e
market structure. He stated he would be more in favor iE there was some type
of sprinkler system provided and thought it could be done.
Commissioner McBurney stater) he thought fire er.tinguishers would he adequate
because the trailer has a metal exterior with a one-hour Eire wall ~,nd thought
the Fire Department would look favorably on some type of fire e~i. ~~,7ui•sher.
Commissioner Feldhaus suggested a fire hose on the outside of thz building ,~t~l
thought the decision should be up to the Fire Marshall to satisfy their
concerns. Commissioner t~cQurney stated if that is a concern, every tra.h
container in the City could be a potential fire hazard, but because of the
metal exterior, there is a certain amount of protection. He stated he would
add fire extinguishers to the resolution and also, a one year time limit.
Commissioner Bouas stated ahe hoped Alpha Beta would be able to purchase more
property or at least another unit to be used for storage in the near future.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by tt-,e following vote:
AYES; BOURa, BOYDSTUPJ~ CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC GURNEY, MESSE
NOES: NONL•'
ABSENT: NONE
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Planning Commission' s decision within 22 days to tl~e City Council.
7/20/87
MINUTES ANAHF,IM CI'PY PLANNING COMMISSION .JUDY 20 1987 87-516
ITEM NU. 10 EIR NEGATIVE l)gCLARA'1`iON ANb VARIANCE N0. 3673
PUR[,It: HEP.RING. OWNERS: JOHN R. 'COWtJSEND, 8310 Cerritos Avenue, Stanton, CA
5+0680. AGENT: HAL KING, CIRCLE K. CONVENIENCE S'rORL'S, 17781 Cowan Avenue,
irvine, CA 92714. Property described as a rectangularly-shaper] parcel of. land
consisting of approximately 0.34 acre located at the southeast corner of Ball
Road and Western Avenue, 3174 West t3a11 Road.
Waivers of (a) maximum structural height and (b) minimum structural setback to
construct a 24-hour convenience market.
Thera was one person .indicating his presence in opposition t.o subject reyuest
and although l.he staff report. was not read, it is referred to and made apart
of the minutes.
Rick k3lake, 27U Norl `-~ Main, Su ite 850, Santa Ana, stated because of the size
of this property, it can't be developed for this company's purposes witt;out
the waivers For height and structural setback. He stated a previous
application was submitted Eur a much larger similar facility, but they have
down-graded Lhe Sl'l.P. of this facility, and the property owner has indicated an
inability to market thin property for any use other. than what is presently
he my used for .
M.ic:hael I,ee, 3200 W. Ball. xoad, Anaheim, Stated he i:3 opposing this request
bP^aus~ there arm already sev~rrl r_onvonlance stores in that area along E;all
Road, at tn~ inter ~t.ionr• ''nett, Western and E3each. He stated there is
one 24-hour convenient at the corner of. Knott and E3a11 with a night
club across thr' street am ~ ~ght building another convenience store would
cr.~,._A more no. a and dru+,k .. ..,g problems. tle stated the premises used to
be an aut;c~mati~,+r repair Facility with about a 6,000 square feet structure and
'~ did not thirrK there is room on this property Eor a convenience store with
adequate park ing.
Mr.. Blake stated the purpose of this request is for a waiver of setbacks and
height. He stated the company does maintain a '.raining program Eor its
employees and they do not promote noise or loitering and they are there to
make sales. He stated they frequently are thought of as a beer and wine
store, but that is only a small portion of their t~:siness anct they have over
3000 products that they sell and they feel this will be a service to the
community.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSEU.
Commissioner t~erbst asked if any of their stores have the sale of gasoline,
Mr. Blake responded some of them do and responding to Commissioner Feldhaus,
he stated they do not anticipate coming back to request the sale of gasoline
at this location because t-he site is too small.
Commissioner Meese asked if the building could be moved to the north, away
from the single-family residential area. Mr. Blake eta+.er't they could not
provide the minimum number of parking spaces and would ~ Uri a landscaping
waiver.
7/20/87
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIONS .JULY 20, 1987 87-517
Greg Hastings stated they have about 5 feet, but moviny the buildiny could
create an area between the building and property line which could become a
trash area. Commissioner Boydsturt stated she thought it would be better to
have the bui~ding there than to have a 'no-man's land".
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst ofF.ered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
McBurney and MO`PION CARRIED that: the Anaheim City Planning Commission has
reviewd the proposal to construct a 24-hour convenience market with waivers of
maximum structural height and minimum structural setback on an
irregularly-Shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.34 acre
located at the southeast corner of Ball Road and Western Avenue and further
described as 3174 1V. Ball Road; and does t:ereby approve the Negative
Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Neyative Declaration
together witYr any comments received during the public review process and
further finding on the basis of the initial Study and any comments received
that there is no substant ial evic9ence that the project will 'nave a signif icant.
eft•ect on the environment.
Commissioner Herbst oEEered Resolution No. PC87-145 and moved for. its passage
and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant
Variances No. 3673 on the basis that there ace special circumstances applicable
to the property such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings
which do not- apply to other identically zone~3 property in the same vicinity;
and that strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of
privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and
cJ.assification in the vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Committee
recommendations.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution w,~ gassed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, BOYUSTUN, CARUSILLO, FF.LU:{.1US, fiEF.BST, MC BURNEY, MESSE
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council.
ITEM N0. 11 EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATI~~' VARIANCE_NO._3674
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: DON R. PRIEST ArvD VALERIE D. PRIEST, 1216 E. La Palma
Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805. AGENT: MASSOUD MON5HIZADEH, 1524 Victoria Way,
Placentia, CA 92670. Property described as an irregularly-sh-~, ~~ parcel of
land consisting of approximately 0.38 acre, 1216 East: La Pal~ ;,venue.
Waivers (a) required type of parking spaces, (b) maximum structural height,
(c) minimum front yard setback and (d) minimum side yard setback to construct
a 9-snit apartment complex.
There was one person indicating his presence in opposition to subject request
and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part
of the minutes.
7/20/u?
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 20 1987 87-518
.~~
Jesse James, 12G2 E. La ['alma, stated the properties are irregularly-Shaped
because of the direction of [.a Palma and for that reason, t}ie northeast corner
of this building is approximately 10 feet from the property line and the
northwest corner is approximately 25 feet from the property line and that is
the reason For the setback waivers requested.
Don Szot, 727 JunipLer, stated he is not opposed to the apartment project, but
with the development of the last project mentioned which was approved with
Variance No. 3482, t}ie developer never Look care of the lights shining into
his property and the riled balcony. He stated ~.he lights do shine into his
living room and kitchen and it took 10 months to develop that project. Eie
presented pictures of the balcony showing Ll~at it was not raised and the light
shining into his home. Fie stated on Thursday, a new light was placed nn the
carport that also shines into his property. He stated he has talked to Lhe
Building Department several times about the raised balcony and the fence and
pointed out Lhe wall was just recently finished. He stated they also had a
lot of loud rnusic coming From the construction site and his wife called the
Building Department numerous times.
Chairman Messe stated the Building Department and Code Enforcement Officers
should check into the problems he is having with the previous construction.
Mr. Szot stated tre does not have a concern about: this project, but did not
want the light shining into his property and pointed o~1L thls is t:he same
developer.
Mr. James stated he is really sorry about the problems they have had in the
past and recognizec9 t}~ey do have problems with building crews, etc.; however,
there are no balconies facing Mr. Szot's property in this new proposal. He
stated the street will be improved and they have an estimate of 30,000. to
relocate some of the phone company equipment.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Bouas stated she is concerned about the problems that have
occurred on the previous project; although she realizes it doesn't apply to
this project. She asked for assurance that they will take care of things that
should have been taken care of with that project and to make sure the lights
are not shining into anyone's property.
Massoud Monshizadeh stated they have an 8-foot clearance from t}ie ground to
the top of the garage, and the light is about 1 foot lower than the ceiling of
the garage and there is a 7-foot high wall next Lo Ftr. Szot's property and
they raised the ground level by .1 or 2 °:et because it slopes from t:he south
to the north and he did not see how the light could be shining into the front
of F-is house. He stated he did review the pictures a couple of hours ago and
did not know from what angle they were taken. He stated he did ask Mr. Szot
to call him and gave him the phone number and assured him he would take a look
at the situation. He stated they had a problem with the other carpenters and
hoped they would not have that problem Lhis time and will construct this
project much faster.
7/20/87
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PhANNING COMMISSION L JULY 20, 1987_ _ 87-519
Iie stated the distance from the balcony to Mr. Szot's home icy from 130 to 150
feet and the Planning Commiar~ian and City Council approved it with one raised
balcony and one not raised. Commi.saioner Herbst stated the developer should
meet with Mr. 5zot and work out the problems. Mr. Monshizadeh stated he would
take a look at the project E~om time to time and look at the light and the
distance and would discuss this with Mr. Szot.
ACTION: Commissioner Mcl3ur.ney oF.fered a motian, seconded by Commissioner
Bouas and MO'PION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has
reviewed the proposal to canstruct a 9-un.~t apartment building with waivers of
required type of parking spaces, maximum structural height, minimum front yard
setback, min~~num side yard setback on a irregularly-shaped parcel of land
consi.eting of approximately 0.38 acre, having a Frontage of approximately 88
feet on the south ride of. La Palma Avenur_ and furtn~~r df*scri.ba:d an 216 E. La
Palma; and does hereby approve the Negative Uecla..atiun upon finding that it
has considered the Negat ive D~:clarat ion +_ogether with any comments received
c9uring the public review process and further Finding on the basis of the
Initial Study and any r.omments received that there is no substantial evidence
that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
Commissioner. ldct3urney offered Resolution No. PC87-14~ and moved far its
passage rand adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
grant Variance No. 3674, waiver on the basis that the parking waiver will not
cause an increase in traffic congestion in the immediate vicinity nor
adversely affect any adjoin ing land use : and grant ing of the park ing waiver
ur-aer the conditian.~ imposed, lE any, will not be detrimental to the peace,
health, safety and general welfare of the citi2.ens of the City of Anaheim; and
granting waivers (b, c and d) on the basis that there are special
circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography,
location and surroundings which do not apply to other identically zoned
property in the same vicinity; ar~d that strict application of t-he Zoning Code
deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the
identical zone and class if ication in the vicinity and subject, to
Interdepartmental Committee recommendations.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the f.ollo~ring vote:
AYES: BOUAS, BOXDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, IiERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONt•;
Malcolm Slaughter, veputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Planning Cammi.~sion's decision within 22 days to the City Council.
Commissioner iierbst n~~nted out this is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land
which justifies approval of the waivers.
7/20/87
MINU'PES, ANAHI'sIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JULY 20, 1987 _ 87-520
ITEM NU. 12 EIR NEGA'PIVE DECLARATION ANU VARIANCE NU. 3675
PUE3LIC HE:AI?ING. OWNERS: AL[,YN H. SCHEV AND ROSEMARY B. SCHEV, P. 4. Box 250,
Upland, CA 91785. AGLNT: MART LOU FLUWFItS, P.O. E3ox 250, Upland, CA 91785 AND
COLDWELL HANKER, 1800 Studebaker, N10U, Cerritos, CA 9070.1 A'P'CN: DIANE:
HAMLIN. Property described as a re tangularly-shaped parcel o£ land
consisting of approximately 0.8 acre located at the northwest rorner of
Francis Drive and Euclid Street, 1001 to 1011 North Euclid Street.
Waiver of minimum nu-nber of parking spares to permit a restaurant in an
existing commercial center.
There was one hereon indicating his presence in oppo::ition to subject request
and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part
of: the minutes.
Buck Jones, 2300 W. Orangewood, Orange, stated they have a 12,OOU-square foot
building on Euclid and have spent about 250,000 nn a major renovation. Ito
stated a hermit wacz taken out about 3 or 4 months ago and the work i3 all
completed; and that this ~eyuest is to give them the right to get tenants
which would be compaL-ihle with thc~ quality oL- the project. He stated they
have a variance that was granted for loll Eucltc9 Avenue for a 42,082-square
foot restaurant/bar, but want to have a small sandwich snap and donut shop
instead. He stated the donut chop opens early in the morning and closes
around 1.1:00 p. m. and the sandwich shop conducts business at noon and in the
evening and the traffic report has indicated there will be more than adequate
parking to accommodate these u:~es.
He staged it would not be economical or fea~ihle to comply with tl~e conditions
of approval just to yet a parking variance. tie stated they want to substitute
the variance which was granted for tl~e restaurant and bar facility far these
Lwo smaller uses and utilize about 3500 square Eeet rather than the 42,082
square feet. He added a lot of the concitions have already beep done.
Ray Spehar, 693% Avenida de Santia~3o, asked i£ this mee~~. the requirements of
the commercial zoning. Chairman Messe explained they do not meet the parking
requirements if both the donut and sandwich shop are considered as restaurant
uses, but the utilization comes at different times and there are 62 spaces
existing and 140 would be required if both are counted as restaurants.
Mr. Spehar stated parking is a problem and explained he owns buildings on both
sides and the parking areas in the rear is not used and is always vacant. Eie
stated he I~ad a problem about a month ago with people parking in the front and
that the owners Even refuse to park in the rear.
Mr. Jones stated there were tenants on the property who were living there and
it is their desire to bring in a better quality tenant and they have moved
those previous tenants out and t-he improved building will bring in better
customers and with the rents they will be charged, the tenants will not be
able to allow their employees to park in the front. He stated also there is a
statement in the lease which requires 25.00 per day for employees parking in
the customers spaces, so he felt that would prevent that problem. He stated
he has several shopping renters and if tenants pay decent rents, they do not
park in the prime parking spaces in front of the shopping center.
7/20/87
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~JULY 20, 1947 __87-521
THE PUEiLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
[responding to Commissioner Fcldhaus, Mr. Jones stated he cannot answer the
specific hours of operation, but a donut chop does open early, but they could
stay open until early afternoon, but thought by mid-•afternoon, they are always
closed and the sandwich Whop opens about 10:00 a. m. and is open to around 7;00
p. m.. He stated about 508 of their parking was used previously.
Chairman Messe stated tt~e meat market is selling ;sandwiches and asked if that
means there are three restaurants in this location. Mr. Jones stated thev
sell deli-type sandwiches. tie pointed out the meat market has been remodeled
and the liquor store has been reduced in size. t!e stated the ErunL of all the
stores really look attractive. Chairman Messe stated it is a great
impravr, m~~nt..
Commissioner Herbst asked if the previous conditional use permil.s for
retaurants will be terminal.ed and Chairman Messe stated tt~o~e are conditions
of a,~proval. Commissioner Herbst asked iE this permit. could be restrir_ted to
thfase spec if is types of restaurants.
Greg Hastings stated this was advertised under the code section Eor fast food
restaurants and if they wanted to change t.o a reyular restaurant, the parking
requirement would be no problem. iie stated if it was a sit-down restaurant,
the parking requirement would not !>e as high as Eor this proposal and this is
an extreme case.
Annika Santalahti stated Condition No. 14 could be modified to restrict the
uses to a sandwich shop and donut shop. Commissioner Herbst stated he would
like to see l:hak restriction added. Chairman Messe stated he would agree and
did not have a problem with the user as a sandwich and donut shop, but would
have a problem with a sit down restaurant. He asked the petitioner to
stipulate to those restrictions. Mr. Jones stated they would make that
stipulation and added the parking code should be reviewed because a sandwich
and donuC shop do not require as much parking as a reyular restaurant.
Mr. Jones stated they cannot adhere to all the conditions. Commissioner
Herbst stated the conditions are part of every action and if they had been
done, they will not be required again. Mr. Jones referred to the tree fee
condition and explained they have put 24-inch box trees in already. He
responded to Malcolm Slaughter that t:he trees are on the property and not the
right-of-way. Malcolm Slaughter stated this condition refers to trees in the
right-of-way. Greg Hastings stated as of July lst, the fee for street trees
is 1.60 per lineal Eoot frontage. Mr. Jones stated they could live with that
condition.
Mr. Jones stated one condition requires reconstruction of the driveway and
they have just finished putting in the driveway, curb, gut;.urs and landscaping.
Malcolm Slaughter asked what type of radius was insta.11~,3 on the driveways and
Mr. Jones noted the permit was approved by the City. Commissioner Bouas
stated if the driveways were approved by L-he City, he should not be required
to change them. Jay Titus, UEfice Engineer stated the plans show a 10-foot
radius on the driveways and that is the requirement.
7/20/87
MINUTES ANAL{EIM CI'PY PLANNING COMMISSION ~JULX 20 1987 87'522
----.._-
Mr. Jones referred to the Condition requiring Euclid Street lighting and
explained they have jaut installed three lights on their property to light the
parking lot which would also light: the sidewalk. Jay Titus stated that
condition requires installation, not a fee. tie stated the condition
indicates, "as required by the Ut.ilit:ie's Department", and the petition could
work with them. Mr. Jones asked why they were not required to do that when
1:hey had just remodeled the building. Malcolm Slaughter statec9 either they
have already done it anal three is no problem, or probably should have been
required to do it. Mr. Jones stat~..J it seems to he a compo~ nding problem.
Commissioner Feldhaus ::rated maybe these conditions should ba clarified with
staff. Chairman Messe stated these items should have been discussed in the
Interdepartmental Committee me~:Cing. ,Jay Titus stated a.ll these item were
reviewed at the meeting and Mr. Jones indicated he was present aL that
meeting. He stated the condition requiring sidewalks is nat clear and
sidewalks have been installed and any changes would mean the sidewalks would
not align with what is there. Jay Titus this condition is talking about the
existing sidewalk to the new property line and before the property line was at
50 feet and the standard is 53 feet. Commissioner Herbst stated he would
rather see additional .landscaping than a new sidewalk. Mr. Jones stated
closing Francis Street exit would be detrimental and would cause a major
impact.
Commissioners McBurney and eouas agreed the Francis Street e~:it should not be
closed.
Mr. Jones referred to the 12-fool dedication of Euclid Street and stated that
would eliminate 15 parking stalls, landscaping, signs and 3 new lights. Jay
Titus stated that is the critical intersection condition and Chairman Messe
stated if the City Council passes tY~at ordinance, that would become a
requirement.
Mr.. Jones stated they gave 3 feet r~revi~usly and now the City is asking them
to move the sidewalks, curb and gutter. Jay Titus stated -:he City is not
asking them to move the sidewalks, curb and gutter because thEy are at their
ultimate location. Mr. Jones stated the trash enclosure ha:, been recently
remodeled and Chairman Messe stated as .long as it has been appr~~-ed by the
Sanitation Division, there is no problem. Mr. Junes referred to the
requirement of the wall along the west property line. Greg Hastings explained
Code does require a 6-foot high wall l:o separate residential from commercial
property and this property was probably developed before that ordinance became
effective. Chairman Messe stated that wall would probably be a requirement.
Mr. Jones stated they could probably live with that. He referred L-o the
parking light requirement. Chairman Messe stated if the lights were designed
to be down-lighting and not shine into the adjacent property, there is no
problem. Mr. Jones stated there are two conditions which he needs to comply
with and that is the street tree fees and the ne+~~ wall in the rear.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas
and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the
proposal to permit a restaurant in an existing commercial center with waiver
of minimum number of parking spaces en a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land
consisting of appror.imately 0.8 acre located at the northwest corner of
Francis Drive and Eu^..Iid Street, having approximate frontages of 230 feet on
7/20/87
8~7-5_23
MINUTES ANAHEIM CT'rY t'LANNING COMMISSION JULY 2U 19$7
the north side of Francis Street and 152 Eeet on ttie west side ~f: Fucl.id
Street and C•urther described as 1001 to 1011 North Euclid Street; and does
hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it teas considered
the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during t:he public
review process and further Finding on the basis of. the Initial Study and any
comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a s ign iE icant effect on the environment.
Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. pC87-148 and moved for its pa3:~age
and adoption that the Anaheim City 1'lann~ny Commission does hereby yrant
Variance No. 3675 on the basis that the parking waiver will not cause an
increase in traffic congestion in the immediate vicinity nor adversely affect
any adjoining land uses and granting of the parking waiver under the
conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health,
safety and general welfare of the citizens of. the City of Anaheim and subject
to an additional stipulation that the use shall be restricted to a sandwich
shop any? donut shop and deleting Conditions 5 and 6.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES; BOUAS, BOYDSTIJN, CARUSILLO, FEI,DHAUS, HE:RBS'P, t4C BURNEY, MESSE
NOES: NONr.:
ABSENT: NONE
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City C~iuncil.
THIS ITEM WAS HEARD FOLLOWING 'fHE BREAK.
ITEM N0. 13 E',IR NEGA`['IVE DECLARA'PION AND VARIANCE N0. 3676
PUB~1C HEARING. OWNERS: PERALTA L.T.D., 3150 E. Birch, Brea, CA 92621 ATTN:
VIC PF.LOQUIN. AGENT: VIC PF.LOQUIN, 3150 E. Birch, Brea, CA 92621. Property
described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of. land consisting of approximately
40 acres on the north side of Nohl Ranch Road, approximately 300 ft. northeast
of the centerline of Old Bucket Lane.
Waiver of maximum structural height to construct 41 single-family residences
at a height not to exceed 39 feet.
Following the break, CYOairman Messe indicated the applicant had just requested
a continuance on Item No. l3, Commissioner McBurney asked iE the property
owners would be re-notified. Greg Hastings responded typically they are nct
renotified unless requested by the Planning Commission. Chairman Messe
apologized to the people present in opposition and stated he would like to see
the matter readvertised.
ACTION: Commissioner McBurney offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that consideration of the aforementioned item be
continued Lo the regularly-scheduled meeting of September 14, 1987, at the
request- of the petitioner and this matter be readvertised.
7/20/87
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING C0MMI5SIUN JULY 20 1987 87-524
ITEM N0. 12 Ellt NEGATIVE DFCLARATIUN AND VARIANCE_NU. 3(75
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNEttS: ALL'' H. SCHEV ANU ROSEMARY H. SCHEV, P. 0. dox 25U,
Upland, CA 91785. AGENT: MAitY LOU FLOWERS, P.O. Box 250, Upland, CA 91785 AND
COLDWELL BANKER, 1800 Studebaker, ~1U0, Cerritos, CA 90701 AT'PN: DIANE
HAMLIN. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land
consisting of approximately 0.8 acre located at the northwest corner of
Francis Drive and Euclid Street, 1001 to 1011 North Euclid Street.
Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to permit a restaurant in an
existing commercial center.
There was one person .indicating his presence in opposition to subject request
and although the staff report was noL read, it is reE.erred to and made a part
of the minutes.
Suck Jones, 2300 W. Orangewood, Orange, stated they have a 12,000-square Heot
building on Euclid and have Spent about 250,000 on a major renovation.
stated a permit was Laken out about 3 or 4 monthr; ago and tl~e work is all
completed; and that this request is tv give them c.he right to get tenants
which would be compatible with the quality of the project. He stated they
have a variance that was yranted for 1011 Euclid t,venue [o r. a 4;:,082-square
foot restaurant/bar, but. want to have a small sandwich shoo and donut strop
instead. ale stated the donut shop opens early in t}~e morning and closes
around 11:00 p. m. and the sandwich st;>p conducts business at noon and in the
evening and the traffic report has indicated there will be more than .rdeyuate
parking to accommodate these uses.
He stated it would not be economical or Feasible to comply with the conditions
of. approval just to get a parking variance. Ha stated they want to substitute
the variance which was granted for the ;estaurant and bar Facility Ear these
two smaller uses and utilize about 3500 square feet rather than the 42,082
square feet. He added a lot of the conditions have already been done.
Ray Spehar, 6937 Avenida de Santiago, asked if this meets the requirements of
the cc~armercial zoning. Chairman Messe explained they do not meet the parking
requirements if both the donut and sandwich shop are considered as restaurant
uses, but the utilization comes at different Limes and there are G2 spaces
existing and 140 would be required if both are counted as restaurants.
Mr. Spehar stated parking is a problem and explained he owns buildings on both
sides and the parking areas in the rear is not used and is always vacant. !le
stated he had a problem about a monttr ago with people parking in the front and
that the owners even refuse t.o park in the rear.
Mr. Jones stated there were tenants on the property who were living Lhere and
it is their desire to bring in a better quality tenant and they have moved
those previous tenants out- and the improved building will bring in better
customers and with the rents they will be charged, the tenants will not be
able to allow their employees to park in t-he front. He stated also there is a
statement in the lease which requires 2.5.00 per day for employees parking in
the customers spaces, so he felt that would prevent that problem. He stated
he has several shopping centers and if tenants pay decent rents, they do not
park in the prime parking spaces in front of the shopping center. /20/87
MINtITF;5~ANAHEIM CI'PY NLANNING C:UMMISSIUN, JULY 20, 19137 H7-525
TIJ[: PUBLIC HFARTNG WAS CLUSF.b.
Responding to Commissioner Fe.idhaus, Mr.. ,Jones staled ho cannot answer Lhe
spec if is hours of: operaL.ion, but a donut shop does open early. t.,uL Lhey could
stay open until early afternoon, but LhoughL by mid-aELernoon, they are always
closed and Lhe sandwich shop o[>ens about 10;00 a. m. and is open Lo around 7:00
p. m.. He stated about 508 of their parking was used previously.
Chairman Messe staled Lhe meat market is selling sandwiches and asked iE Lhat
means there are three restaurants in Lhis location. Mr. ,lone, slated Lhey
sell deli-type sandwiches. fie poinLc~d out the meat market has been rNrnodeled
and Lhe liquor store has been reduced in size. Ile sLatecJ the EronL ol: all Lhe
stores really look attractive. Chairman Messe sLatr_d iL i:~ a great
improvement.
Commissioner Herbst asked if Lhe previous conditional use permits for
r, es Laur.anLs will be terminaL~~d arxl Chairmen Messe staled those are conditions
of approval. Commissioner Herbal asked if Lhis permit, could be rer3Lricted Lo
these specific types of restaurants.
Greg Hastings slated this was advertised under Lhe code sreLion for East f.aod
restaurants and iE Lhey wanted to chango Lo a regular r.estauranL, the parking
requirement would be no problem. He staled if iL was a sit-down restaurant,
Lhe parking requir.crnent. would not. be as high as Eor Lhis proposal and Lhis is
an sxtremo case.
Annika Santalahti slated Condition No. 14 could be modified Lo restrict Lhe
uses Loa sandwich shop and donut shop. Curnmis:~ioner Flerbst stated he would
like to see that restriction added. Chairnan Messe stated ire ,could agree and
did not have a problem with Lhe user as a sandwich and donut shot, but would
have a probJ.em with a sit dawn restaucanL. He asked Ltie petitioner to
stipulate Lo those restrictions. Mr. Jones stated Lhey would make that
stipulation and added the parking code should be reviewed because a sandwich
and donut shop do not require as much parking as a regular restaurant.
Mr. Jones sLatecJ Lhey cannot adhere Lo all Lt~e conditions. Commissioner
Herbst staled the conditions are part of every action and if Lhey had been
done, they will not be required ayain. Mr. ,Jones referred to the tree fee
condition and explained Lhey have put 24-inch box trees in already. lie
responded Lo Malcolm Slaughter that the -.rees are ~n Lhe properly and not the
right-of-way. Malcolm Slaughter slated this condition refers Lo trees in the
right-of-way. Greg Hastings staled as of July 1st, the fee Eor street trees
is ~1.G0 per lineal foot frontage. Mr. Jones staled Lhey could live with that
condition.
Mr. Jones stated one condition requires reconstruct. ion of Lhe driveway and
they have just finished putting in the driveway, curb, yu,.Lers and landscaping.
Malcolm Siasighter asked what type of radius was installed on Lhe driveways and
Mr. Jones noted the perrr'.t was approved by Lhe City. Commissioner t3ouas
stated if the driveways were approved by t~.~~ amity, he should not be required
to change them. Jay Titus, Office Engineer staled the plans show a 10-fool
radius on t-he driveways and Lhat is the requirement.
7/20/87
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JULY 20, 1987 _ _87_-526
Mr. Jonos ref: erred to the Condition requiring F:ucli~' St.roet lighting and
explained Lhey have just installed three liyhtR on sit property to light the
parking lot which would also light. the sidewalk. Jay Titus stated that
condition requires installation, ,got, a f.eo. tie stated the condition
indicates, "as required by the Utilitie's Department', and the petition could
work with thorn. Mr. Jones asked why they were not required to do that when
they had just remodeled the building. Malcolm Slaughter stated either they
have already done it and there is no problem, or probably should have been
required to do it. Mr. .Jones stat~~cl it seems Lo be a compounding problem.
Commissioner E`eldhaus stated maybe these conditions should be clarified with
staff. Chairman Messe stated these items should h eve boon discussed ~~r the
Interdepartmental Committee meet ing. Jay Titus stated all these iten>~ were
reviewed at the meeting and Mr. Jones indicated he was present aL that
meeting. He stated the condition requiring sidewalks is not clear and
sidewalks have been installe4 and any changes would mean the sidewalks would
not align with wtrat is them. Jay Titus this condition i3 talking abour. Lhe
existing sidewalk to the new property line and before ~.he property line was at
50 feel and the standard is 53 feet. Commissioner Herbst statec a would
rather see additional landscaping than a new :sidewalk. Mr, Jones stated
~.lostng Francis SLreeC exit would be detrimental and would cause a major
impact.
Commissioners McBr~rney and Bouas agreed the Francis Street a:;il. st~uuld not be
closed.
Mr. Jones referred Lo the 12-foot dedication of Euclid Street and st, cod that
would eliminate 15 parking stalls, landscaping, :signs and 3 new lights. Jay
Titus stated that is the critical intersection condition and Chairman tAesse
stated if the City Council passes that ordinance, that would become a
requirement.
Mr. Jones stated they ,gave 3 Eeet previously and now Lhe City is asking them
to move the sidewalks, curb and gutter. Jay Titus stated the City is not
asking thcr;, to move the sidewalks, curb and gutter because they are at their
ultimate location. Mr. Jones stated the trash enclosure has been recently
remodeled and Chairman !4esse slated as long as it has been approved by the
Sanitation Division, there is no problem. Mr. Jones referred to the
requirement of the wall along the west property line. ;reg Hastings explained
Code does require a 6-foot high wall to separate residential Ecom commercial
property and this property was probably developed b~.:fore that ordinance became
effective. Chairman Messe stated that wall would probably be a requirement.
Mr. Jones atatsd they could probably live with that . He ref erred to the
parking light requirement. Chairman Messe stated if the li4ht_s were designed
to be down-lighting and not st:ine into the adjacent property, there is no
problem. Mr. Jones stated there are two conditions which he needs Lo comply
with and that is the street tree fees and the new wall in the rear.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas
and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the
proposal to permit a restaurant in an existing commercial center with waiver
of minimum number of parking spaces on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land
consisting of approximately 0.8 acre located at the northwest corner of
Francis Drive and Euclid Street, having approximate frontages of 230 feet on
7/20/87
MTNUTF.S, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISS ION, JUDY 2u, 1987 87-527
the north side of Francis Street and 1S'l feet on the west side of Euclid
Street and furl.her described as 1001 to 1011 North Euclid Streets and does
hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered
the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public
review process and L•urther finding on the basin of the Initial study and any
comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the pro jars will
have a s ign if ica nt effect on the environment.
commissioner Herbst offered Resol rtion No. PC87-14A and moved Coc its passage
and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant
Variance No. 3675 orr the basis that the parking waiver will not cause an
increase in traffic congestion in the immediate vicinity nor adversely affect
any ad join ing land uses and grant ing of the park ing waiver under the
conditions imposed, if any, will r,ot be detrimental to tl~e peace, health,
safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim and sub jars
to an additional stipulation that thc~ use shall be restricted to a sandwich
shop and donut shop and deleting Cond i.tions 5 and 6.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: 30UrS, BOYDS'PUN, CARI)SILL4, FE;GUHAUS, NERB`a"T, MC BUEtNEY, MESSF
NOES: NONE
ABSEN'P: NONE
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to tf~e City ~auncil.
THIS ITEtd WAS HEARD FOLLOWINU THE aREAK.
ITE~4 N0. 13 EIR NEGATIVE DECLARA'PION ANU VARIANCE N~. 3676
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: PERAI,TA L.T. D,, 33.50 E. Birch, Brea, CA 92621 ATTN:
VIC PELOQUIN. AGENT: VIC PELOQUIN, 3 150 E. Birch, Brea, CA 92621. Property
described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately
40 acres on the north side of Nohl Ranch Road, approximately 300 ft, northeast
of tye centerline of Old Bucket Lane.
Waiver of maximum structural height to construct 41 single-family residences
at a height. not to exceed 39 Eeet.
Following the break, Chairman Messe indicated the applicant had just requested
a continuance on Item No. 13. Commissioner McBurney asked if the property
owners would be re-not if ied. Greg Hastings responded typically they are not
renotified unless requested by the Planning Commission. Chairman Messe
apologized to the people present in apposition and stated he would like to see
the matter readvertised.
ACTION: Commissioner McBUrne•, _~ffered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Bouas and ttOTION CARRIED that consideration of the aforementioned item be
continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of September 14, 1987, at the
request of the petitioner and this matt^r be readvertised.
7/20/87
w.
a
MINU'PF'S, ANANE;IM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, ~lUi~Y 1~L1_987 87'528
ITEM N0. 14 REPORTS ANU RECOMMENUA'.T'IUN3;
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2809 - RecluesL Erom Phillip R. Schwartz e,
Phillips Brandt, Radrl.ick) fur an extension of time to comply with
conditions, property is located at 415 Anaheim Hills Road.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby grant a one-year extension of time in order to comply with the
conditions of approval for Conditionnl Use Permit No. .a09, to expire July
21, 1988.
p. Joint study session of the Planning Commission and Redevelopment
Commission to review the proposed Katella Redevelopment Project Plan.
Chairrnan Messe asked the Redeve.l~~pment Cornmiasion to ;.ake their seats
before mombers of the public spoke because he dial not know if those people
would speak regardlrg this redevelopment project.
Malcolm Slaughter stated for the record, the Redevelopment Commission and
Planning Comrission are going to involved in a study session and i:~ not
intended for public input and public input would not be appropriate and
would not be a part of the public rerord reyardin~ the adoption of the
project area. He stated he underat.ands the F~~~niny Commission will hear.
Pram the general public on any matter they wisp ~.~scuss before that
work session.
Lou Herz, 2081 Maryie Lane, stated he heard that same dialogue by the City
Attorney, at the City Council me etiny and the public had no opportunity to
speak a~ that treating; and that they lrave talked to their attorney and
they think they have something to say and they should be heard. He added
he is Happy the Planning Commission will allow them to speak.
PUBLIC INPU'P:
A. Maryaret Carter, 124 W. Pearl, r~resented copies of her speech and a
petition signed by aver 50 people who are concerned. She read the
petition requesting a permanent reduction in density from Medium to Low
Density on the General Plan of the RM-2400 Zone section of Peacl Street as
shown on the exhibit. She stated one Comrissioner commented at the June
22nd meeting when the decision was madE to deny the request of an outside
developer Eor a change in zoning from Rld-2400 to RM-1200 to permit a
2-story, 24-unit complex they feel a down-grading in density ~~. the
General Plan represents the hest means of insuring that whatever change
may come will not have a negative impact- an their neighborhood ~+nd the
residential character of their neighborhood will be preserved.
B. Lou Herz stated he wanted to present his thinking and the thinking of
hundreds of people and that i.s they do not agree with the concept of
includiny in the Katella Redevelopment Project area, residential areas
that maybe in a technical sense or could be labeled "blighted", but in
reality are not blighted, or to include their homes wtrich they are in the
process of improving and rr neighborhood that looks good. He stated if the
7/20/87
MIND„ TEB. ANAHt:IM CI'PY PLANNING c•OMMISSION, JULY i0, 1987_ 8~_ 1_i529
purpose, as statr~d uy the mayor, is simply to extract Erom those areas a
property tax increase increment which can be pr~~duced under. the
Redevelopment proces~t, it really isn't Eair to their neighborhood Lo prtt a
cloud over it as tieing t~lightec3 when the Hole purpose (which they really
don't believe) is simply I:o extract the tax increment. He stated their
request is that those residential areas be excluded Erom the Redevelopment
Plan because they c]o not belong there. [le added he has been involved in
redevelopment in other cities For 10 years and hart never seen such a
blatant type of Inclusion of arhas that c]o not belong.
Helen Payne, 1406 Cbstle Avenue, presented petitions signed by people in
the area bounded by Colonial Avenue to the north, Hampstead on the west,
feather on the east and Chalet on the south. She stated they understand
the need of arterial street improvements and updating the public utilities
in those streets and eliminating blight and crime; howevec, their tract
does not fit into any of these categories and it, is a secluded, quiet area
of well-kept homes with no thoroughfares, therefore, they Eail to see what
benefit. it would be t.o the citizens of Anaheim to include their homey in
the Kat:ella Redevelopment pr.ojer.t and on the contrary, it would cost them
grave distress and be detr irnenta 1 to their peace and secur i! y and probably
loss of value in their propert ies r that many have lived there and paid
taxes Eor over 30 years and are now in the position of. having their
property included in a plan and having their properties under control of
the Agency and wish to pet it ian to be removed from the Katella
Redevelopment: Plan.
chairman Messe asked what percentage of people involved signed the
petition. Ms. Payne responded there are ever 217 signatures and she was
not able to reach ?.1 of the homeowners.
Betty Roncini, 1241 S. Walnut, stated it is their understanding the
Redevelopment Commission is considering eliminating the words "eminent
domain" Erom the project language and they understand that will not change
the power of the Redevelopment Agency Erom Lhe use of any condemnation
proceedings wince the necessary critecia for any Redevelopment project is
that the area be declared blighted and this area is not blighted under the
legal criteria. She stated this eliminates any necessity Eor individual
review Eor eminent domain proceedings and iE they are declared "bliyhted",
they remain "blighted" for 35 years. She stated every home, business or
church in that area will have been declared a blight to this community and
that stigma will remain Ear 35 years. She stated they are aware that one
aim is to extract. tax dollars from the County of Orange far tt~e
redevelopment of Anaheim. She asked what the County of Orange will do
since we use their services also. She stated their homes could be
sacr iE iced in the interest of any agency members who wil.1 inherit this
power over the next 35 years. She stated they may not he able Lo stop
this, but want to make it clear that they do understand that the simple
removal of Lhe words "eminent domain" does not make a difference in the
power. She stated they believe the project needs many revisions and they
are not against progress and she was very proud of having something to do
with appearing before the Planning Commission and City Council to keep
Walnut Street from being Lhe backyard of Disneyland the way is is south of
Cerritos.
7/20/87
MINU'PES~ ANAHEIM CITY_PLANNING COMMISSION, ,1ULY 20, 1987 87-53U
Mr. Bassett, 1225 Kimberly Place, read h letter he had jur3t written to the
City Council and Mayor and stated his r.oncern is the gross inaccuracies of
the Katz Hollis Report and stated he did not think Lhe Council or
Commission had a chance to look at this entire program and investi.yate all
the alleged discrepancies: (1) the quality on the condition of the Kamen
in this area and explained he is speaking of Area 7 just south of I.tie
Lynn/Jef[rey area and most of the homes are in extremely good condition
and tt~e rra jor ity on Kimberly Place and Heather Lane have been improved and
over one quarter a million dollars tras been spent. to improve these homes
and those neighborhoods should not be included. He stated there are some
homes that need to be improved and in talking with the people who owned
I:hNm, he found they are planning to fix up their homes. He presented the
letter and an article from the Anaheim Elulletin showing his house. He
b;,ated they do not want to be a part ~~f the project area and be considered
a dangerous place to be with blight or disease.
Redevelopment Cornmior~i.on Chairman Doty called the Redevelopment Cornmisslon
to order at 5:00 p. m. and explained this is a continuation of their last
Wednesday's meeting. Commissioners Doty, Berry, Martinez and Rhoades were
present.
Norman Priest, Executive Director, Community Development/Planning, stated
at t:he July 7th public hearing and for a week to ten days prior to that
date, Redevelopment staff became aware that the re.idential neighborhoods
had not been reached with this information. Ite stated they have listened
carefully to the re:~ident_ial property owners comments and have put their
questions anc9 answers in writing whtct+ will be available on Wednesday at
the libraries.
Mr. Priest stated on July 14th he appeared before the City Council
recommending that they recormnend that the Redevelopment Commission and
Planning Commission meet in a Joint Study Session to discuss findings or
recommendations and furthec to schedule meetings in the areas of the
project ident if ied as Areas 1 through 12 on the map and that City Council
did direct staff to proceed with that plan. He stated following the
hearing, staff gave considerable I:houghC to this and asY.ed themselves whey
they would reccmmend any given area of the project and what the basis is
or that ctroice and looked at the information from a housing standpoint, as
to where the good housing conditions are and where bad housing conditions
are and from the standpoint of public facilities, tt+e infrastructure of
streets, sewers, water, power, utilities and that Utilities, F.ngineer:ing
and Maintenance Department have reviewed the plan. He stated they are
bringing recommendations to the Commissions today which they believe will
to a large degree will help respond to the comments made by the
residents. He stated originally when they looked at the areas, they
reviewed a rather productive development cycle, particularly in the
Stadium area and it was their in+tent to bring to these neighborhoods some
additional funding because this City is not well-heeled in terms of its
own infrastructure maintena nce and secondly tea brim to those areas that
they knew had pride of ownership, oppoKtuniti~~s to enhance the programs
that are already underway. He stated Mr. Hertz has very effectively
pointed out the point of view of a number of people indicating that is
7/20/87
tAT.NUTCS, ANAHT;IM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JULY 20, lga7 a7-531
not their desire or point of view. Eie stated without that partnership,
staff believes in a number uC areas, the program does not have one of the
essential components they view as necessary and they are suggesting
several recommendations and iF. they -nake sense, he would like the
Commission's recommendation or concurrence and when they go t.o the
residents a,rd discuss the plan, if the residents conr.ur with thin
proposal, they would come back to the Commission for appropriate Formal
action to take to the City Council at the next public hearing on September
8th.
Mr. Priest stated one suggested alternate use was residential with an
alternate to commercial and there are three ~r Eour areas with that
designation which indicatA~ it is a residential use, but with an amendment
to the General Plan after a put)lic hearing, the Redevelopment Plan could
accept a commercial use in those areas. He Stated in some area3, there is
a mixed use and a potential for a change in use and they wanted to clarify
that position and all they have done is add uncertainty. He stated the
first recommendation where there are residentlal uses with a commercial
alternate, they would propose to eliminate that use and call it strictly
residential and if, in Eact, in the Future, there was a General Plan
Amendment, Redevelopment plan would require an amendment as well and Lhey
believe that simply states what the General Plan provides. He stated it
would Lake two separate actions and the Re~ieveloprnenl. Plan action takes a
little longer than the General Plan Amendment.
Commissioner Herbst po oiled out a General Plan Amendment would take three
months, but there will be public hearings and the people in the area would
have an opportunity to give their. input. tte stated that is exactly what
is done now by the Planning Commissicn.
Mr. Priest stated the second proposal deals with those commercial parcels
with residential alternate and for Chose people along Katella, they are
suggesting ChaC they are nut to be called commercial with a residential
alternate. He stated khe third proposal deals with the Citron
neighborhood. Lisa St;ipkovi.ch pointed out Areas 1, 2 and 3 on the map
bounded on the north by the i-5 Freeway, and explained the infrastructure
in thaC area is From 40 to 7~ years old and Chey would hope Co continue to
use t-he Redevelopment process in thaC area, buL do iC in terms of
upgrading the infrastructure and exclude the use of eminent domain by Che
Agency in that area.
Mr. Priest stated Che Fourth recommendation would be t.o exclude Area 4,
except the small Criangular industrial section from the project; Area 5
would be removed, Area 6 would remain in the project and that is the area
commonly known as the Lynn/Jeffrey area; Area 7 to be removed and Area 8
which includes Sherwood Village would be removed. He referred to Areas 9
and 10 and stated they would propose substanCial portions of those areas
b 'd and a s:Hall portion remain is in the project, and Area 12 to be
r~
T.isa Stlpkovich pointed out- the amended boundaries o~ the map as they are
being proposed. Mr. PriesC explained the outside boundaries are reflected
by streets for study purposes, starting at the northwesterly corner on
~/zo/a~
MINUTEST A*IAHEIM CI'PY PLANNING ('OMMISSION, JULY 20, 1987 _87-532
Elderwood, proceeding to Manchester west, Flora to Ball Road, Walnut to
Cecritos and into the Lynn/Jeffrey, area southerly on the Southern Pacific
right-of-way and an Edison casernenL which also goes through the Disneyland
parking lot to Walnut and southerly on Walnut to south of Katella,
basically to Casa Grande, to West and coming around to the southerly line
of the Convention Center, excluding Sherwood Village and the resident~.al
in that arFa, and down basically to a point which is about half-way
between Malloy and Harbor, and the sign if.icance at this point is where
they would propose to inclu~le tt~re commercial areas along Harbor and
exclude the apartments and residential uses, to the Garden Grove boundary,
and then down to the City boundary, and easterly to Harbor and to includ e
the Harbor comrnerc.ial development:, to Orangewood, Orangewood to Haster
and into an area of great concern, the Ponderosa Park, southerly on tlast.er
to slightly south of Wilken Way and east to Mountain View, back up to
Orangewood, over to Lewis Street, down to the City boundary, to the Santa
Ana River, northerly to the 57 Freeway, anc9 then back along the freeway
ramp to the railroad easement right-of-way to Sunkist, and Omega down to
State College. fie stated at State College there was an alternate use
proposed which would be eliminated and State College back to Ball and
along Ball to the Southern Pacific right-of-way to Santa Ana Street and
back to Walnut, the original point of beginning. tte stated these changes
reflFCL thy: comments of the residents and is ttre most effective way to
carry out the project. He stated they would propose to t;ake this proposal
to the neighborhood and discuss it with the residents and if they concur,
they would bring it back to the Commissions and take it to the City
Council for the appropriate actions on September 8, 1987.
hir. Priest stated he thought they had reduced the area by about 400 acres
and originally there were about 12,000 residences included, and about
6,000 woul~] be deleted with these chanyes.
Chairman htesse asked if the money could be used from the Community Block
Grant for those areas eliminated where they have old irttrastructure. Mr.
Priest responded that money could be used if those areas are identified as
Target Areas in the Planning Report and the only thing that would not
occur is that they not work with the owners. He stated it would appear
that the infrastructures, except in those areas discussed, are in a
condition that would not need major work for at least 5 years and in many
cases, much longer.
Commissioner Herbst stated 35 years is a lorry time and naturally, over the
years, there will be some deterioration .in all the buildings and those
homes will need sewers and water lines and asked if the actual conditions
of those Facilities are known and what would be the impact on the
Redevelopment money coming in. He asked if the people really understood
that there are some areas that really might need some replacement in 10
years. Mr. Priest stated he thought the residents were informed and
stated they started this because they did not Lhink it would appropriate
to overlook something that badly needed to be done because they were in
disagreement with the residents. He stated the Engineering Department did
look at the infrastructure in those areas. He stated the Citron area
7/20/87
~.
87-533
MZNIITES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIgN ~JUi~Y 2U 1987
is one of the older residential neighborhoods in Anaheim and does need
infcastructure upgrading, not because of what the neighbors have done, but
because of what the C.iLy has not done because the Maintenance Department
is regularly stretching their budget to maintain those facilities. He
stated the areas to be removed a m not in immediate or critical need at
t:his time, but in 35 years clearly will need to be replaced or upgraded.
Commissioner McE3urney asked if it is possible to amend the plan over the
years, and could those areas be added as they get older and they might
want to be included in the Future. Mr. Priest stated certainly he wo~~ld
riot include any area without going Lo the neighbors first, but that it ih
possible Lo include them later and it. is something staff would look at.
He slated redevelopment is one of the mor«~ Flexible tools we have for
maintaining oar community, but untorLunately, he felt staEE got oEf Lo a
bad foot on this pro ject- but certainly if something is warranted in the
Future, iL can be done.
Chairman Messe referred to the comments that elimination of the words
"eminent domain" does not take away the power From the Agency take their
property. Mr. Priest stated if the Agency gives up the power of eminent
domain, it loses that power and there is no reserve power of eminent
domain if they have given it up. fIe stated the Agency could acquire
property and buy it like any citizen; however, Eor all properties within
the project area where the Agency had given up eminent domain power, they
would not have that power and the only way to yet it would be going
through a process, not unlike auoption of the Plan.
Malcolm Slaughter agreed with that statement and stated if the agency does
not have eminent domain power, then it would not be available in the
Future.
Commissioner BoydsLun asked why the area between Elarbor and Lemon and
Santa Ana and Broadway was left out of the project area because she
thought that seems to be a natural area to be included.
Mr. Priest stated development activities are bey inning to occur in that
area and that staff tried Lo leave areas out because there is a certain
amount aE spillover eEEect.
Commissioner Feldhaus stated now Redevelopment seems to be making a
complete 180 degree turn and are saying that they are going to delete the
words "eminent domain" and in very isolated cases, eminent domain may be
the only alternative.
Mr. Priest stated they are saying that in certain areas of the project,
they would limit that use and in the Citron neighborhood, they would waive
or exclude the power, but retain the Redevelopment authority to do public
improvements, but would have eminent c9omain powers in other areas of the
project, and apply the eminent domain process in residential areas only
for ctureceithr=ovhasnma3or structuralLdefectscorriswalcandidatetfor
stru
7/20/87
MINU'CEB, ANAHEIM CI`PY PLANNING CUMMISSIUN, JULY 20, 1987 ___ _ 87-534
demolition. He staged in that case they would go to that owner and ask
h.im to do the improvements and if he has not done anything, they would
apply the power of: eminent domain. tle stated they particularly would nut
give up that power in major areas where khey might be dealing with public
facilities, street widening, fly-ovens, grade separations, etc.
Commissioner Feldhaus stated the word dilapidated is vague and needs to be
clarified because many people came Forward and were actually upset because
of that word being applied to their particular properties. HP stated the
att.it.ude of: a lot of people is that if works don't £ix it, anc9 he felt
that i.s part of the education process, and what staff perceives as
dilapidated in many cases may not be dilapidated to the property owners.
Chairman Messe stated he would concur with the boundaries; For Areas 1
through 8; t;owever, was not :pure of the 7 boundaries of. the Areas 8, 9, 10
and ll and there wa,~ no doubt in his mind that this is the right decision
regarding the other areas; however, he would like to :.ee the southern
boundaries, but woulcj otherwise agree wilt; this proposal,
Mr. Priest stated Area 8 includes thr, single-family residential area as
well as Sherwood Village, and in Area 4 there are apar~_ments and
residential developmen+:s along the Garden Grove City boundary. He
explained they propose to regain the commercial along Harbor and exclude
tt,e residential development easterly and include Ponderosa Park anal
multiple-units immec9iately around that park. Chairman Messe clarified
that the area just west of Hasler is included. Mr. Priest, stated
questions were asked about Lynn/Jeffrey and the Ponderosa Park and what
will be done about those areas and they hope, in working with Community
Services, Police Department and Parka ,zed Recreation Department, they can
help solve problems in those areas.
Redevelopment Commission Chairman Doty asked if anything will be done that
will impact the east/west traffic Elow pattern below 13x11. Mr. Priest
stated a common misunderstanding is that Redevelopment is going to bring
to bear an almost new traffic infrastructure; however, they are looking
within the existing General Plan and the engineering forecast and capital
improvement program. tie stated he has been telling a lvt of people to
talk to the Engineering Department regarding the plans for the streets.
Commissioner tterbst referred to ttce September 8th meeting and stated this
is probably one of the highest vacation periods of the year and thought it
could be a severe hardship on some people who planned their vacations
during this Lime. He stated he felt the meeting should be held at times
more convenient for the people, and that he hoped those people will have
their questions answered, and that he was very disturbed that some
people's questions were not ans:ered at: that public hearing. He added he
realized there were a lot of people present, but people
like to have some answers, and people are told to go to the library and
look up the answers and he thought that was one of the most stupid things
he has heard in a long time. He stated he has been on the Planning
Commission for 22 years and has nev r sees a public hearing held in that
7/20/87
MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 20 1987 87-535
manner and that people wtro have come to a meeting and spent the time
sitting there in a hearing, deserve answers and should not have to go to a
library .ind look it up. tfe stated he Doped Redevelopment staff. will have
answers right there at Lhe next meeting. He stated tnose information
meetings should have been held prior t.o the public hearing. Mr. Priest
stated that was a City Council hearing and the timing way their decision.
He stated he was prepared to respond to questions that evening and felt if
people had the courtesy and patience to sit, that Lhey deserved answers,
even iE the answers were not complete or maybe a little disjointed.
Commissioner Herbst stated it in too late to get this year's Lax increment
increment and asked why the hearing is set Eor September 8th since there
is plenty uL lime. Mr. Priest responded they are seeking to deal. with the
issues anal they want to get together with the Planning Commission anc] with
the neighborhoods and talk to the people and get a sense of direction at
.least one month ahead of that hearing and it them seems to he a major
problem, there is time to d°al with it. He stated they feel they have
coped with every comment with the changes E~roposed today.
Commissioner McBUrney stated it is possih~e that 6U-day continued hearing
may be continued even further until they have all the input necessary.
Commissioner Herbst stated he felt it should be continued until everybody
is satisfied. Chairman Messe stated the date itself is not good in that
it is the day after Labor Day.
Redevelopment Commissioner Berry stated she would like to have a little
more information about what is available f.or the Homeowners at the
libraries and asked if they can obtain copies of. the answers or .if they
have t:o sit and read it at the libraries,
Lisa Stipkovich, Assistant Executive Director Redevelopment, stated they
plan to have 5000 copies made of the Redevelopment Plan with the proposed
amendment as read and 5000 copies of the questions and answers and any
other information available at that time. She stated they would have
staff people there to distribute the material and they can take that
material home. She stated, in addition, copies of the large books which
are the Plan itself and the environmental impact report will. be available
to the public to check out as well and a reference copy will be
available. She added she thought all the bases are covered and the
material will be available at the four library branches and that the
letter sent to the property owners indicated the dates and times the
libraries are open.
Redevelopment Commission Chairman asked if the information regarding the
scheduled meetings was sent out by area. Ms. Stipkovich stated the people
listed on the tax assessor's roles as property owners in the entire
project area received a copy of the letter indicating their area and time
and place of their meeting and it just wen L- out Friday evening and maybe a
few people have just- not received them yet.
?/20/67
87-53b
MINUTES ANAIiEIM CITY PLANNING CQMMISSION .IUL,Y 20 1987
Chairman UoLy asked if a complete schedule was provided so Lhey could
attend another meeting it they could not attend the one in their area.
Ms. Stipkovich stated the letter indicated LhaL they were welcome Lo come
Lo any of the meet inga - hilt was pref erred iE they came Lo the meet my
regarding their area because Lhey could discuss specific details, but they
are welcome Lo attend all the meetings.
Commissioner ~r~rbst stated he thought a sl.aLement was made aL the rneeLing
that the people should take :i look aL the northeast. industrial area Lo see
what Redevelopment monAY can do and LhaL is a good example of what the
City I~as been able Lo accomplish with building t:he sewers, water lines,
et.c. and Lhat might not have happened without Redevelopment money.
Mr. Priest staled he also used Colonel Rhoades neighl~orh~od Eor an example
oL• where redevelopment has put in curb cuts, street. lights, etc. and Lhat
the rest was up Lo the property owners. fle stated the waiver of. eminent
domain does not mean they cannot work with Ll~e property owners if Lhey
want Lo improve their properties. He stated they Lry Lo meet the needs of
the neighborhoods and those are all different. Commissioner Herbst stated
in the downtown area, the Chamber of Commerce tried Lo bring all the
property owners in to get the development in the area started, but i,t did
not happen and it kept, deteriorating and finally redevelopment was the
only way left.
Commissioner >!eldhaus slated he was at the public hearing Eor 3-1/'l hours
and asked if the questions will be cal.egori.zed and grouped and asked what
the main emphasis was in Lhe questions, other Lhan eminent domain. Mr.
Priest stated they could not completely cal;egorize Lhe questions, but some
areas of concern were eminent domain and would this increase !:axes and, of
course, it does not, which is a unique feature of tax increment financing
unlike an aGsessment district. He stated the Redevelopment Agency is not
a taxing agency and can operate only off a portion of Lax coming from any
new developments and any increase would come as PropradesvandastaLed
increase. He stated another concern was traffic upy.
Redevelopment is not planning anything new or different and Lf~e plans have
been for. upgrading or maintaining Che area with street widening,
maintenance, left-turn lanes, etc. He stated some questions were specific
as to how iL would affect their particular property a~~d in those cases,
staE.f will attempt to talk to those owners individually. He stated
basically, those were the types of yuestions asked and another question
was whether or not ttlere is a specific plan for this 35 years of work and
the answer Lo that is that L-his is a process being discussed and it
doesn't just happen as a single product, but is dealing with hundreds of
owners, including many commercial property owners. tie stated staff will
seek to work with commercial property owners and will work within their
time frames and it is not known what all their plans are and it is
difficult to see that certain things are done wiL-hin certain time periods.
Mr. Priest stated they do not plan Lo purchase large pieces of property
and that people will not be moved out of residential neighborhoods. He
stated some questions were asked about a "People t4over" and iHerstatedtthe
neighborhoods would be taken and used for the people mover.
People Mover is massively expensive and estimated costs are $450,000,000
7/20/87
MINUTN:S, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, .IDLY 2U, 1987 87-537
and the Redevelopment would pay 3-1/2B of that cost. He said it would not
be economical to try and use a peoEle mover without the high circulation
such as in the bisnr.,yland, Convention Center and Stadium areas.
Mr. Priest stated they were asked if they ware purchasin~,~ property Eor
Disneyland and the answer is, "no"; that Disneyland has land of its awn
Eor expansion and they have their own plans Eor expansion. NP stated they
were asked iE they were acquiring land for tdrather and the answer. was no;
land Eor the jail and the answer is "no".
Commissioner Feldhaus stated most of the questions was directed towards
eminent domain and increase taxes. Chairman Messe asked iE the tax
increment financing program will be explained at those meetings because
there is a lot misinformation about the program.
Mr. Priest stated when it is described as a business operation, it makes
sense, but when it is described as a government program, it does not. He
stated he would like a motion Erom the Commi:~sions concurring with the
recommendations and subject to the input Erom the neighborhoods and they
would then request a Final action before going to the City Council.
Commissioner Herbst asked what ttr~~ impact would be nn the environmental
impact report. Mr.. Priest stated they have looked at that and do not
think the changes would be a major impact.
Commissioner Herbst stated there are major changes and he would no! want
to .gee the City in the position of having the EIR contested. Mr. Priest
stated the residential portion will change, but in terms of significant
traffic generat~an, it does not change and he believed iE this proposal is
accepted, there will not be a drastic change.
Commissioner. Herbst stated he did not read anything in the environmental
impact report about the street widening and added one day it is going to
havE to happen and that he is a member of the Vision 2000 Committee and
knave: these things will happen and as~;~ed what effect street widening will
have on the neighborhoods and asked how much land would t~P Laken. He
stated the questions that come up need to be answered,
Mr. Priest stated the Engineering Department representative is present and
one of his points is that you don't widen ttre streets until specific
studies are done. tie stated widening Lincoln dawntown was a painstaking
process and planned to do the the least amount of harm.
Commissioner Eterbst stated gridlock is a major problem in Southern
California and he would want to know Lhe impact, how much property wi.il be
taken, and what the costs would be.
Mr. Priest stated they would be looking at both the Planning Report and
the Environmental Impact Report and would supplement them if necessary and
thought it is important to point out that whether Redevelopment is here or
not, gridlock is a problem and redevelopment could offer money to help
resolve the problems.
7/20/87
.~
MINUTE ANAHN~IM_CITY PhANNING COMMISSION, .JULY 2G~ 1987 __ _87-5at3
Commissioner Celdhaus asked wt~y they dig] not finish titre downtown
redevelopment project before starting on another one. Mr. Priest stated
they do not necessarily get one job finished before starting another and
that he would like to have the downtown finitahedt and that several years
ago they set about pursuing a new office market and before Anaheim was an
older downtown Southern California city. Fie stated they 'rope to move
forward and were adviRed today try the developer that he is ready to bring
in some things. Fle stated he feels they are rocking progress and in
comparison, more ha3 been developed than hair not been developed, but that
does ,got negate the fact that there is work to be done, and there is a job
to be done in the commercial area and they are twn dif.Eerent jobs.
Commissioner Flerbst stated the Planning Commission was basically ignored
as Ear a:~ this project was concerned and was only asked if i.t conformed to
the General Plan and he thought it would be very helpful to the Planning
Commission, since they are the one:~ who will be considering the zone
changes, etc. after it is done, to be included in tl;e meetings and he felt
a meeting like this is very important and thought it will provide
something better.
Mr. Priest stated when the Planning Cornrni.ssion considered conformance wil.h
the General Plan, the plans were made available. FIe stated one thing is a
little different about this project than many other. redevelopment projects
ar~d that is they are attempting to work within the system we now have and
not suddenly clear land and build new buildings and the system we now have
unfortunately, is not wockiny very well and basically, that is land use
and traffic and there is a lot of work to be done.
ACTION: Commissioner Mes~e offered a motion, seconded by Commiss~onpr
McBUrney and MOTION CAFiRiED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby concur with the proposed changf~s to the Katella Redevelopment
Project.
Before the vote was taken, Commissioner Bouas clarified that this action
does not put Lhe boundaries in concrete. Mr. Priest stated this meeting
with both Comrnisaions and the proposal today was to see iE what staff is
proposing makes •onse and then to bring that information to the
neighborhoods to see if it makes sense to them and then they will come
back to both Commissions for their approval.
Chairman Masse asked if. the boundary could still be discussed and Mated
he drives that southern boundary and feels something should be changed.
Commissioner Herbst asked what would happen if after the explanations are
made, they are so good th°' some of the property owners decide they want
to stay in the project area and some do not want to go in.
Redevelopment Chairman Doty offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Martinez and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Anthony absent) that the
Redevelopment Commission concurs with the proposed changes to the proposed
Katella Redevelopment Project.
~/zo/a7
~ ~.
,~,, ~"
_~
MINU'fES~ ANAHSIM CYTY PLANNING COMMISSION, JULY 20, lna7 ,_,,,,_„ a~
Roger Davies, 1179 W. Vermont, stated one statement was made pertaining to
the aging of the homes for the next 35 years and one of the things they
ace looking at as residents is the Eact Disneyland was built in 1953 or 5A
and was not included in the eminent domain project area. Chairman Meese
stated Disneyland ie included within the boundaries and also the Anaheim
Stadium is in the area. He stated there has been a lot of misinformation
and it should be all cleared up with the neighborhood meetings. Mr.
Davies stated they have more questions, but will ask them at those
meetings .
Chairman Messe thanked the people for coming and stated they were a well
behaved auc~ fence.
ADJOUttNMENT:
Redevelopment Commissioner Berry offered a notion, seconded by
Commissioner Martinez and MOTION CARRIED that the Redevelopment Commission
meeting be adjourned.
Chairman Messe offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner McBurney and
MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission be adjourned.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
4
~~ ~`
Edith L. Harris, Secretary
Anaheim City Planning Commission
0006m
,,/a7