Loading...
Minutes-PC 1987/11/09-,. ~ M~NUT_f& N~~IlLAii__M~+.~.T.i~I~r_ 4.~ .~ti.~_AIiAN~3M.S.~~'`~_.kI,1~N~?T.N_Cr_~QML~I.S~>;R.N NQY~tn.~~x....~.,___~ 4 4~. The regultsr mec~ti.ng of the Anaheim City planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Messe at 10:00 a.m., November 9, 1987, in the Council Chamber, a quorum being present, and the Commission re~•iewed Plans of the items on today's agenda, RECESS: 11:30 a.r~. RECONVENED: 1t35 p.m, PRESENT: Chairman: Messe Commissioners: IIouas, eoydst:un, Carusillo, Feldhaus, Hert~st, McIIurne.y AF3SENT; Commissioners: None ALSO PRESEt~T: Joel Fictc Annika Santalahti Malcolm Slaughter ,Jay Titus Par.,l Singer Dr.t,hie Vayts Greg ltast_ings Edith Ht~rris Plannin~~ ?ireccor Zoning; :rni.nistrator Assi• City Attorney Offs '~•~inear L.e ~~,•,~.•:isor Sr• c, : ~::,~r~=• F?4STIN~ E1.1~A A~ - A complete copy of the Plan •: ^• -~•.r~ .scion agenda. was posted ._ _ at 9:30 a.rn, , November 6, 1987, inside the ~ i ~_~ac, located in the foyer. of the Council Chamber, and also in the outs;•~-° ~•;~la•~ Kiosk. 1T~M tJQt.__1 ~~.R NE~ATIV~:._D~~LAR_I~TI(1t? (PRt?'1.,_ :`''ter}~'[;.Dj_, WI~IVER_!~F_5~9~~ F?1~1iJIREMtrNT (.PREVi,_APPRQVFD~ AlID~S~rInITIC'N1~ ~'-a=. ''t=F?MIT_t7Q~2-~~...SREV`.t,Qs 1. _(RF~DV,)_ PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: THRT_FTY OIL C~J., Innn~~ ;..akeview Boulevard, Downey, CA 90240. ADEN:.: CIRCLE K CORPORATION, 177& :',wan Street, Irvine. CA 92714 and TAIT 6 ASSOCIATES, INC., 900 Orangeiair La••-~•, Anaheim, CA 92801. Property is a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land _ons •'~ing a` approximaL•ely 0.56 acre located at the northwest corner of Lincoln A,.<.,M;ue ar. Dale Avenue, 2801 West Lincoln Avenue. Request for approval of revised Plans (P.evi~~on No. 1) to permit a convenience market with gasoline sales anal oft-sale beer and wine. Continued from the r^wet.ings of August 31., September 14 and October 12, 1987. 87-836 F M~sl.~.~s..._n~??.~?~~~M_~t~rx ~~~~.try.~.~?~.sQC~.~~s.~a.~._~.o~.~~~~....~_~_~s~?._.___.______-__~__~~? There was no r,,no indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and a1L•hou~.lh the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the mi.~ut:es. Karl Ko~,:ailacfex, Tait and Associates, explained this revised plan is similar to the fi.rrt proposal, except for the modifications they have made after convers~~tiona with the City Traffic Engineer. He statoct a conditional use perm;.k was approved in 1905 to allow remodeling of the existing structure; howr•;ver, ~~£ter review, Circle K representatives determined they wanted a conveni+~nc:e store with accessory gasoline sales. He stated the plan reduces the number of pumps Pram 8 to 4 and increases the size of the convenience r,tore by' abouk 900 square feet and also, it will reduce the number of will dri~aeways and help make that corner safer for pedestrian traffic and they pzovidr 17 parking spaces and will have some facilities for serving hot feeds such as ho* dogs, etc. T'HE pUALIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Rasr,oncti-nq to Commissioner Boydatun, Mr. Korndoefer stated the tries will be plented iTi a box which will be just around the tree; however, Choy could put iTI ~+ c~~rb between this parking lot and the parking let next door i.f that is da~sir.ecl. Respo~iding to Commi~neererstatedttnosercouldtbe usedlbylemployeessandetheyaul &in~ler, Traffic Eng' will work. Responding to Commissioner McBurnay as to whether or not the parking is adequate since they will be serving hot foods, Mr. Singer stated the Planning Commission needs to maY.e a determination if the Code should be changed to reflect the hot food sales square footage in order to I~rovide more parking. He stated the City has experienced so-ne problems with the 7-11 at Ball and Anaheim Boulevard where they serve hot foods and parking regularly overflows. Mr. Korndoefer explained there will be a microwave oven where customary can heat sandwiches, hot dog:a, el•c. Ile explained to Commissioner Herbst that the landscaping will be low-<irowing shrubbery in a 3-foot plantar. Commissioner Herbst stated the parking is laid out legally, but it will not improve the looks on T.in~:oln Avenue to have parking in that area along the sidewalY.s. Mr. Korndoefer stated ha did not think those. spaces will be used very often. He explaine9 there will be a maximum of 2 employees on site and the pumps will be operated fT•om inside at the cashier's area and the cashier will have a complete view of the pump area and will turn them on from the inside and the Yiours of operation will be 24 hours a day. Commissioner McBurney asked if khey would still want the conditional use permit if it was approved without the sale of bear and wine. Mr. Korndoefer responded they had not Flanned to change the original conditional use pe*mit which was approved with the sale of beer and wine. 11/9/87 .. , ,. ^ _ ~il~-. ~11111t'~.~.S,~±N~1~ial.t~_C~~~...~'_[~~NN_I.NS~S:s2.~~.I.Qi;?,_NQ~.~~~Ii._2,__.~2@.'1 ____._.~___-.~._7_:~~@ Commissioner Feldhaus stated h~a thought the revised plans look goods tarkin guarantee prohibiting traffic between this property and the Shakey's p 9 lot next door would make the project more acceptable and asked Mr. Korndoefer to stipulate to prohibiting vehicles from going between tl~e two lots. Paul Singer stated tie thought it would be better to have on-site circulation rather than having the cars circulate on the street. Commissioner Feldhaus asked if they have a reciprocal agreement with the property owner next door and explained he has seen the vehicles going through that property and onto the street at fast speeds. Pnul Singer stated that is because the driveway is too close to the corner, but once that, driveway is removed, that situation will change dlpmfromaloinc through=~ateaehighaspeedhey co~•.ld put in speed bumps to keep peep g 7 Responding to Commissioner Feldhaus' concern regarding the reciprocal agreement, Commissioner McAurney stated a~~ one time both properties were owned by the same owner. Commissioner Houas stated the trees r.nd planters will slow the traffic some. Commissioner Carusillo asked if vehicles will be able to got through the planters on the west. Mr. Karndoefer responded they would because the trees would be planted 20 feet apart. Commissioner Carusillo stated he thought there should be something r.o block the vehicles from going onto Skakey's property. Paul Singer stated we have that same situation up and down many streets in Anaheim and cars traveling through adjacent properties and staying nn the property rather than going out onto the street and back into the adjacent driveway serves ~.raffic better and with direct access to properties on site, also keeps cars from making a lot of short trips on the pubic right-oi-way. tle stated there is a median island in that location and that access between properties and reduces the number of trips on an arterial street and he would prefer to keep it open so the internal circulation is better served. Malcolm Slaughter slsated a number of times the Commission has imposed conditions on property owners requiring that they not interfere with internal circulation between properties so traffic doesn't go out onto the street. Commis°.ioner Feldhaus asked what would happen if the adjacent property owner decided he did not want that traffic to have access on his property. Mr. Slaughter responded he would be in a position to prevent it unless 'there is a recorded document against the property. Chairman Messe stated he would not be opposed to a speed bump. Paul winger suggested the Commission review the properties on Eirookhssrst just south of Lincoln where property owners have installed curbs to prohibit access and the drivers are constantly circulating unsafely on the street, making unsafe obstructions. Commissioner Feldhaus stated this property already has a partia'_ guardrail which actually directs traffic onto the property next door. Chairman Messe stated he thought the plans look good and his only concern is the stile of beer and wine in conjunction with the sale of gasoline and he felt the two do not mix and he personally did not think that is a good situation when we are constantly sending the message to teenagers not to drink and drive. 11/9/87 . , :...,. ~""~, M.iI~~LTE.~.~~i.HAN..E~ M_~.~T?~.._E GANG.~.N~_~.2~I.S.S~9~.....~9Y.E~M~ ~.8._ ~.~.12~3__~__._~ ~-.4.Z_.8.3 Commissioner Herbst stated he did not think the Planning Commission had ever approved a convenience m~.rket with the sale of gasoline and beer and wine. Commissioner Bouas statau she feols the same way, but the City Council is permittiny the sale of beer and wine in convenience markets in Anaheim. It was note•1 the negative Declaration was previously approved. ~.~IQ~: Commissioner Feldhaus offered a resolution and moved far its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval revised plans to permit a convenience market with sale of gasoline and off-sale of beer and wine; and further subject to the stipulation that the petitioner will provide speed humps to slow the traffic bHtween subject property and the property next door and subject to Interdepartme:~t.al Commit.tee recommendations. On roll call, tho foregoing resolution FAILED TO CARRY by the following vote: AYES: CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NUES: BOIJAS, BOYDSTUN, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE ABSENT: NONF. Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution llo. PC87-224 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend denial of revised plans to permit a convenience market with the sale of gasoline and off-sale beer and wine on the basis that the petitioner did nat wish to delete the request for off-sale of beer and wine and the combination of the sale of beer and wine in conjunction •aith gasoline sales makes it too convenient to purchase beer and wine and dr.i.nk while driving and could be a hazard to the traveling public. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUt.S, BOYDSTUN, HERBST, MC SURNEY, MESSE NOES: CARUSILLO, FELDHAU6 ABSENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written: right to appeal the Planning Commissiion's decision wikhin 22 days to the City Council. ITEM fTQe~z FIR E I~TIVE DE~.IiAR~_I_QN AND~2.F~::LA~$I~ISATI N N~~Q.7~>3_=2~ PUBLIC HEARING. I2IITIATED BY THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, PLANNING COtRdIS~IOtI, 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805. Property is described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 14.8 acres, located at the northeast corneY• of Cerritos Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard. 333 East Cerritos Avenue. Greg Hastings, Senior Planner, stated staff was instructed by the Planning Commission at a previous hearing to reclassify subject property to `wing into conformance with the General Plan and that tt:ere are commercial uses on both sides of the street and staff has presented alternatives for the Commission's review. He briefly presented the alternatives proposed. 11/9/87 hi~3?Lf~&.~.A~IF.~4S.t~~~?L~-.~-OJTI.~Q~,_._N4Y~M~.F~i.~...._~.4 9.Z_.._ ~.Z~4-4 THE PUBLIC HEARING WA5 CLOS);D. Commissioner Herbst stated the only reason for this reclassification was to allow an application for binyo to be filed. He stated in evaluating the area, he felt if this property is rezoned, it would ba spot zoning and that entire section of Anaheim Boulevard should be changed ort the General Plan, but he would recomrnend leaving it as it is r.rnti.l a major development is proposed. He stated all the commercial uses are there by approval of a conditional use permit or variance and that is not going to change. Chairman Messe pointed out there could be problems created by rezoning this property because it is on the boundary of the Anaheim Stadium Business Center. Commissioner Feldhaus stated if the matter is ~:.o be readvertised it should include properties all the way to Ball Road. Malcolm Slaughter stated the Commission could approve their rezoning today and initiate rezoning on the balance. Chairman Messe stated h© feels it is desirable to deny this rezoning and wait for ri proposal of development. A^TIQN: Commissiorer F{erbst offered a moL•ion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassify subject property from ML (Industrial, Limited) to CL (Commercial, Limited) on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 14.8 acres, located at the northeast corner of Cerritos Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard a-.~ further descr..bed as 1490 S. Anaheim Boulevard anc' 333 E. Cerritos Avenue; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that iL• has considered the Negativs Declaration together with atry comments received during ttre public review process and further finding on L•he 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 Resolution No. PC87-225 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby deny Reclassification No. 87-88••20 on the basis iL• would be premature at this time and would be considered "spot" zoning. Commissioner Bouas suggested staff check to see how much property is involved as this is just one small portion of a larger parcel. She stated we :eed to study the whole area and the ramifications of rezcning and what could be built there that would take away from the Platinum Triangle. On roll call, the foregoinc; resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BO'JAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE IT_ ENO _3 EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 2~7_ ~)y,~~~AS~IFICATION NO_,~~-88-21 AND VARIAN~E_N0. 3719 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: FAIRMONT LTD., 13632 Hazel Street, Garden Grove, CA 92642. AGENT: LORREfi A. BELL, 2520 S. Fairview Road, NP, Santa Ana, CA 11/9/87 ,, ~i~.F.S.~-~dA.H1E.j.M_ C.~.Y....~+.A_i3~.3.dS ~.4.L~Mi~~3.4ti.__1S2Y..~~1~4~.91~$?~ ______~1:~9.~ 92704, Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 2.97 acres, having a frontage of approximately 843 foot on the northeast side '~f Fairmont Botlevard, approximately 1080 feet south of. to centerline of Santa Ana Canyon Roacl, and ftirrher described as 220-:26 South Fairmont Boulevard. GPA 232 - to consider an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan, redesignating the current Eillside Estate Density desiynation to Hillside Low-Medium Density Residentia] or Hillside Low-Density pesidential. RS-EIS-22,000(SC) L-o RS-5000(SC) or a less intense zone. Waivers of (a) required lot frontage, (b) minimum building aad area, (c) maximum number of bedrooms, (d) minimum garage setback and (e) minimum roar yard setback to establist- a 17-unit single-family subdivision. THF. FOLLOWING ACTION WAS TAKEN AT 'PI,E BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. it was noted the petitioner had requested a continuance in order to submit revised plans. A TI !?: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Elerbst and MOTION CARRIED that consideration of the aforementioned matter be continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of December 7, 1987, at the request of the petitioner in order to submit revised plans. JT~ NQ,,_, 4 FTR NEGAT.~VE DEC[,~RATIQ~1.,,~{ENER~[~. P.T~AN AMENDMENT N0, 2~.~ uFrr LCSTFTf'11,TTf1N N0, 87-88-22, W.~, V~FP._OF COD E_ Rk;.41L~.S~~T~D--~-NIA-~Q~I.~L~-~-E P M CEO 295 AND R~OttgsT FOR CITY CQ N L REVIEW 4c, 4d anS~ 4e PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: LINCOLN PROPERTY LTD., 19742 MacArthur Blvd., N240, Irvine, CA 92715. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately :i.6 acres, 1780-1786 West Lincoln Avenue. GPA - To consider an amendment to the land use element of the General Plait proposing a redesignation from the current Commercial Professional designation to General Commercial. RS-A-43,000 to CL or a less intense zone. To permit an aut~~mobile service and commercial canter in conjunction with an existing office structure with waivers of (a) minimum number of parking spaces, (b) maximum building height and (c) m}nimum structural setback. ITEM N0. 5. EIR NEGATIV~E~LARATIQN AND VARIAN .~ NQ. X721 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: LINCOLN PROPERTY LTD., 19742 MacArthur Blvd., 8240, Irvine, CA 92715. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 3.6 acres, 1780--1786 West Lincoln Avenue. Wa: .:r of required lot frontage to establish an B-lot comme~•cial subdivision. 11/9/87 "1 MI.NyT.~,S...~Nal3.S_~Ni~~.TX~4'._~ANN~N.~ CQI~S~.S.S.~.4N.~._,G~4'.1.k~MS~II~._.~9~.~._._~~...-~ @.3_:..~_4~ S.3_~M__.KO.,. ~ leifi._.~A~.~GQ~S~~X~MP.~4S3.-.~.kAS.S~~~N.A~~Et~_~N~~.K4~~?_~4. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: LINCOLN PROPERTY I,TD., 197~l2 MacArthur Blvd., 8240, Irvine, CA 92715. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 3.6 acres, ]7 80-186 West Lincoln Avenue. Waivers of (a) maximum area of freestand i ng sign, (b) permitted location of freestanding signs to permit, a freestanding sign. 'There was one person indicar.ing his presence in opposition to subject request and although the ataf:f report was not read, it is referred to anti made a part of the minutes. Dale Falasco, Lincoln Properties, stated they have owned this property for about 6 years and have no~iced during th at time with t};o rapid growth of other office space in the Stadium Area and the revitalization of downtown, that the pure office market on West [..incoln seems to have changed e+ncl they can no longer support the property. He stated .~f.ter 2 years of studying the property with staff and doing several marketing s Ludies, they have determined the most economical and realistic uses of the pro perty appear to be CL type uses because that property goes back 650 feet and does not have a lot of exposure on Lincoln and would never support a traditional retail use. He stated the long-term tenant has been on site for 22 ya ars and wants to remain and occupy the existing L-shaped building at the rear of the property; the existing 30-foot high trees will eff:ectivell~ screen the front portion of the property which will he redeveloped by tearing down 21,000 square feet of the existing office space and construr_t 3n¢ up a 31,000 square foot new structure. Mr. Fd1a5C0 stated a traffic study showed any increase in traffic will be negligible and redevelopment of the sit ~ allows him to greatly improve access to the site and they would retain the easterly entrance to the property and widen the driveways 10 feet as requeste cl by the City Traffic Engineer. He stated moving the front building will allow a full intersection with a median dividing incoming and outgoing traffic. He stated this ..rill solve most of the existing problems in that location and will provide a Smooth flow into the center. He stated the request for waiver of the setback is necessary because this is a narrow parcel and they wanted to have some visibility Erom the rear which restricts them from having a building perpendicular to the street. He stated the majority of the zero setback portion divides the area which is currently commercial, even though ttie zoning is RS-A-43,000 and pointed out there will be no windows on the aide of the build ing adjacent to the multiple-family residential properties. Ccncerning the automotive uses. He st sled they are basically clean automotive type uses and all work can be done ins 3de and the CCSRs include restrictions on noise anu other types of pollution and pointed out there will be mixed uses on the property and they will want to be sure that the automotive uses do not affect the other uses negatively. 11/9/87 s c~.».v~~,_...a~at~iri_.six..~~a~.iK~.~c~~.~t.._z>QU~bl~~s..~4.~.x_ Jaaeph Stadolka, 323 S. Florotte, stated he has spoken with the developer and reviewed the plans and is not against the redevelopment of this site, but was c onrerned about changing Clio zone to General Commercial because in the future a 6-story building could be built there as long as L•hey met the setbacks, and an environmental impact repor~~ would slot be required. He stated the traffic at Euclid and Lincoln is already congested and backs up in all directions and drivers going east on Lincoln are already using residential streets as a route to Broadway. Ne stated there are children in that. area and the increased traffic will be hazardouu,llo stated he is also concerned about run-off of oil from automotive uses and about. the noise. He stated the run-off from that area goes right by his house and they have had problems in the past. He stated he was not surd that t2~e largo sign was necessary and would actually be a detriment and the trees do Trot provide a complete buffer and soma of the homes have swimming poolcand it could be a problem with lighting from the signs. He stated thore isno•t much setback on that property now and he thor,rght the setback should be increased. Mr. Falasco stated concerning the zaninq, they feel the mechanisms are already in place with the City's rove ew process and the current General Plan and anything proposed in the t'ature would have to go through the process again and there would he more than enough time to adequately address any new project. He stated the signing would be less than permitted by the signing code and are smaller than the current sigz~ on the site. Chairman Messe stated thu issue of ttie sign is where it is located and not the size. Mr. Falasco sratecl the sign would be located on Lincoln, 650 feet away, and he did not think anyone could see it from their backyard at the height they are proposing. Concerning drainage, he stated they will abide by all City regulations ar,d any uses would Dave to meet standards of any government county, state and city offices to properly conduct their businesses and that is included in the CC&Rs; and that they would have even greater concern because they would be next door and that would affect Choir busines, on the rest of the parcels. He stated the setback is not a n issue except where the project abuts residential and that is only a smallpo r lion next to the multiple-family development. THE PUBLIC HEARIIaG WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Carusillo asked if left turns will be permitted from the easternmost exit. Mr. Singer stated currently there is a median cut to the Kettle Restaurant, but that is a very poor entrance because that is a very narrow site and with this new development, access will be greatly enhanced to the Kett .e Restaurant and i t will provide better circulation on the Kettle property and access to this project. Commissioner Carusillo asked f loft turns from that exit will impose a hazard. Mr. Singer stated a left turn could be done safely through a median opening. ka stated there is a reciprocal exit agreement. Commissioner Feldl~aus stated making a 'left turn out of the Kettle now is very difficult and the building is not the problem, but the traffic flow on Lincoln is bad row, but it will be greatly enhanced with this development. 11/9/87 Ml.t~liiT.F~S.._.~~~IF.~LS.~_T.X_.Pb~~~?G C.4M~iIS_5~..._ NO~M9~R?1.._.~.4.8Z.~.--....__~_.._.S?=.x-44 Commissioner Carusillo stated with traffic backed up and someone trying to make a left turn, it would be ever worse. Commissioner Feldhaus asMed how Singer many cars could be stacked in the left-turn lane into the Ke ttle. responded he did not -~avo an actual count, but the lane is R ~ feet and would hold 4 cars and that is a standard median opening. He added if it is the Planning Commission's desire, he is always in favor of closing loft turn lanes in the medians. Commissioner Carusillo stated that should by reviewed beca+iso during heavy traffic hours, he could se!~ someone trying to make a left turn and causing further problems. Mr. Singer stated he understands the problem, but it would bo very difficult at this point to close that rned.ian opening beca• ,e tl~e Kettle Restaurant has always had that opening for access. Commissioner Carusillo,staLed there would be less cars from the Kettle Restaurant than from this new cenL-er and possibly, consider 2sn on should be given to conditional approval of this request predicated o n review_ng the left turn lane and the volume that might be using it. Mr. Singer stated maybe the pocket could be extended. Commissioner Carusillo stated if traffic using residential streets becomes a problem, the neighbor:: should contact the City and request possibly speed bumps or something similar. Mr. Singer stated the City doss not put speed bumps on a public street because of liability and that wou 1d place a cleliberate obstruction in the travel way and the :'ity would be held liaLi~ for any collision or vehicle out of co~,trol. Chairman Messe stated people have used that route for a snort cut for many years. Commissioner Herbst referred to the computer train ing school and the parking study which ir:di~ites they would be using 12,926-s quare feet of space and the staff report says 565 spaces are required and they only have 240 students maximum. Greg Hastings stated the difference in square footage is that one is existing and the other is proposed and the current Code requires that any type school could be classroom intensive and requires 1 space for 10 square feet and the plan was based on classroom area and, in reality, the par king study showed quite a difference. Commissioner Herbst stated our Codes previously required 4 spaces per every 1000 square feet and now it is 1 space for 10 square feet and that is quite different. Mr. Singer stated the actual parking was eval uated by the parking study and the school is not changing its ratio and that i s the existing condition and adequate parking is present on site. Commissioner Herbst stated his concern is another developer looking at the figures, using this staff report as an example and asked for the same thing and it would be hard to explain the reason for approval of this waiver. Commissioner Bouas stated the school has been there for 20 years an.i the parking patterns are there. :~Sr. Singer stated there was a large variance granted for the school at Ball and the 57-Freeway becaus a of the computer classes allowing fewer students. 11/9/87 ;,,., ~. .f M~~1I.TF~,S_.._BNAti.~IM_C~~.X_P.~~~l~?~1GSS~L~LL~.S.I_4.N ~J~ Q~FM]l~.B:_.P..w12#.?._..__.._.. _...._~_~1~1~ Re sponding to Chairman Messe, Mr. Falasco stated the school would have 3 s}iifts, one from a:00 a.m. :lntil noon, and an afternoon shift and ar, evening shift which would be much sma:ler. He stato d they wanted to be sure they provided enough parking spaces and had the traffic consultant contact the school and he determined their enrollment and this is a computer training program, and they havo to have a computor avail able for each student, so the enrollment can not be increased. Commissioner Messe stated there is concorn with circulation and asked if the developer is willing to modify the median if the Traffic Engineer found it to be necessary. Mr. Falasco stated they would if it was necessary. Commissioner McBurney stated left-turn pocket is used from both ways to make U -turne. Mr. Falasco stated if the Traffic Enginoer determines that the lane should be extended another 20 feet or so, they would be willing to do whatever is necessary to provide safe access. Chairman Messe stated the setback on this property will. be improved with this d evelopment and explained the building on the et~st aide of the property will be demolisher]. C ommissioner Feldhaus asked if the owner of the Kettle Restaurant supports this request. Mr. Falasco stated they have a signed access agreement which has been provided to the Traffic Engineer and also a signed access map and b asically, this project was developed in concert with the Kettle Restaurant because they are affected and they are 100 behind the project. Comm35sio:ler Feldhaus asked thc~ length of the lease with Control Data. Mr. Falasco stated t}iey have another 6 years with the present lease and options and that they are very excited about. this plan and he understood they had submitted a letter to the City in support of this request. A~xxoN: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to amend the Land Use Eloment of the General Plan from the current designation of Commercial Professional to General Commercial on an xrreyularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 3.6 acres, having a frontage of 212 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue anal bt,ing located approximately 1005 feet west of the centerline of Euclid Strut and further described as 1786 Lincoln Avenue; 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 further finding on the basis f the Initia 1 Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will ;lave a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner IIouas offered Resolution No. PC87-226 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend City Council adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 233, Exhibit A, redesignating subject property to General Commercial. 11/9/67 «. l: M.~.I~I~~,.~.A~1.F~fiF~I~L~.~1'~ P.~~NN..~S~~QM~1~.~.S.I~N.,_~QY.~M~.~.~.,...~.4_8.~__ _~_______Q..7.-.~'~ On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votes AYESi BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARU5ILG0, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONF. ABSENT: NONE Commissioner Bouas offered Resolution No. PC87-227 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Reclassification No. 87-88-22, subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations, including an additional condition requiring the median island be extended, if. it is determined to be necessary by the City Traffic Engineer and the City. On roll call, the forogo.inq resolution was passed by the following voke: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUi7, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MUTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant waiver of Cade requirements on the basis that the parking waiver will not r.ause an ina:rease in traffic congestion in the immediate vicinity nor adversely affert any adjoining land uses; and granting of the parking waiver under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrim.ntal to the peace, health, safety r,,..r general welfare ~f the ~' ..e,rs of the City of Anaheim; and gran".lnq waivers fb and c) on the b~•..is ~ here are special circumstances applicable to the property such as siz.., r: Topography, location and surr,;~,~ndings ~~ '.i ch d~•~ not apply to other iu ~y zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict :~;Plicaticn of the Zoning Code deprives the proper•..y of privi:.nges en;cyed ~y other properties in the identical zone and classification the vicinity; a•nd further on the basis that the existing use has been in this location for several years and there has not been a parking problem and there is no intended change in the operation of that particular use. Commissioner Bouas offered Resolution No. PC87-228 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2956 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Cade 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 the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Counci]. review Reclassification No. 87-88-22 and Conditi^~nt~l Use Permit No. 2956 in conjunction with General Plan Amendment No. 233. 11/9/87 ~~ ~. M~t311T~F,~....~I~iF,~.IM.S.I~~._P~LB~I.XI~IS~C~4I~t~S~.4.~.~~4Y~d~~.~._2.._14.~~-____-._._...r_...~.Z=~.'~ A~.7~S.q~LQN_.].~f:LL.N~.~~ Commissioner Douas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to establish an 8-lot commercial subdivision with waiver of required lot frontage on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 3.6 acre, having a frontage of approximately 212 feet on t2;e south side of Lincoln .Avenue and being 7.ocated approximately 1005 feet west of the centerline of Euclid Str°eet and further described as 1780 and 1786 West Lincoln Avenue; and dons herr_by approve L•he Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Stucty and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on tho environment. Commissioner Bouas offered Resolution No. PC81-229 and moved for itsrantsage and adoption that tho Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby g Variance No. 3721 on the basis that there a~Q special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topogr~+phy, location and surroundings which do not apply to other identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning Code deprives tha property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity and subjecL• to interdepartmental CommitL-ee recommendations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FF,LDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissi.~~~~r Herbst and. MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission loos hereby recommend that tha City Council review Variance No. 3721 in conjunction with General Plan Amendment No. 233. ~~N~N ITEM ti0. 6 Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Com:~' ~.^ner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commis -:~ eras reviewed the proposal to construct a freestanding sign with waive: :naximum area of freestanding sign and permitted location of freestaroximateln 3n6aacre, havincr irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of app Y a frontage of approximately 212 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue and being located approximately 1005 feet west of the centerline of Euclid Street and further described as 1780 and 1786 West Lincoln Avenue; 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 further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is -:o substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. ll/9/87 .NIJTE3._.~AS~.IMS.ITY_F'3,~.i~.SL _C.~~&IS? Chairman frometheiresidential propertysand hotdid not thinkithe6reaidentshwild 250 Lent be able to see it. Commissioner Bouas offered Reso).ution No. PC87-230 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby granlicable Variance No. 3720 on the basis that there are special circumstances app to the property such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to others aEethecZoning Codepdeprivesithehpropertyiofnity; and that strict applicatio privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAU5, HERBST, MC BURNEY, ME5SE NOE5: NONE ABSENTS NONE Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council review Variance No. 3720 in conjunction with General Plan Amendment No. 233. N0. 87-80-~~. T,,~FM X70• 7 ~$.~`I~C~jIT~V~_DE~]~A~AT;~'N AND E~G.i~A~.~.~~-~-QE PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: BARBARA J. POLENTZ, 1537 E. Chapman, Orange, CA 92666. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.3 acre located at the northeast corner of La Palrna Avenue and Leisure Court. RS-A-43,000 to CL or a loss intense zone to construct a single-story, 4000-square foot medical building. There was no one indicating their 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. John Swint, 707 W. North Street, agent, was present to answer any questions. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ACTIQ.i1: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded *:y Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassify subject property from RS-A-43,000 (Residential. Agricultural) Zone to the CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.3 acres located at the east corner of La Palma Avenue and Leisure Courtt and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration +ipon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initia111/9a87and any ~'"5r N• ~.~&..~.N.~f3~.iM ~L'~.Y~.4AN~l.It3S._5.41:9~.~.5.&.~QL~,_~I~9~.F~.~-FL.~.....~.4.9.Z.___-~__.___._~~.L~.19 comments received that there is no substantial evidence that tho project will have a significant ®ffect on the environment. Commissioner Bouas offered Resolution No. PC87-231 and moved for '.ts passage and adoption t}cat the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Reclassification No. 87-88-23 subject to Intordepartmental ~' mmittee recommendations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was p.1ssed by thF1 fallowing vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILI.O, FELDF1AllS, NERBST, MC BURNEY, MF.SSE NOBS; NONE ABSENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Ueput,y City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planing Commission's decisfan within 22 clays to the City Council. BEM N.~_~. ~~?_.~E~AT.iV.~..PF~.i•!~gA~TQti_Aiio vAft.~AN~.~_..li_Q._..._~_?~~ PUBLIC HEARINI;. OWNERS: PERALTA LTD., 3150 E. Birch, urea, CA 97.621. AGENT: SOGAR CONSTRUCTIOit INC., 1650 N. Gle~ssell, Suite H, Urange, CA 92667. Property described as an i.rreyularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.5 arse, 509] Copa-De-Oro Uriv©. Waiver of maximum strucc+.cr.al height to construct a 30-foot high, 2-story single-fami]y residence. There werr_ four persons indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and althcugh t_he staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Chairman Masse declared a conflict of interest as definod by Anaheim City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC76-157 adcpting a Conflict of Interest Code for the planning] Commission and Government Cade Section 3b25, et seq., in that the developer of the trar,t is a customer of his firm and pursuant to the provisions of the above Odes, declared to the Chairman chat he was withdrawing from the hearing in connection with Variants No. 3718, and would not take part in either the discussion or the voting thereon and had not discussed this matter with any member of the Planning Commission. Thereupon Chairman Masse left the Council Chamber. Chairperson Pro Tempore Bauas assumed the chair. Milos Folsom, designer of the project, Explained this is a proposal f'or a single fami7.y residence in Peralt•.a FIills East and they are complying with all Code requirements, except the may~imum structural height, and the 30 foot portion applies to only a small pa~c;on of the, structure. He stated this is to be a custom home and will be very elegant and wilt be a benefit to the community. Ann 9ien, 6673 Paseo Del Norte, stated she is speaking on behalf of the Anaheim Hi].ls Citizen's Coalition, 6312 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road, and asked that this matter be continued until after the City Council hasll/g~87sed +~ ::' h4~.OJT.F~.,.~.t3F~H~.~MS~TX.~'.Lt1NNI_~t~.C01~SM.i&S.I9_N_~~.~10~~M@..~~~~983 __.-.______.___~7-~~Q staff's r•eviow of the height restrictions for Tract No. 12576 which is to be heard tomorrow. She addod they do not fool there is any jue'_ification far approval of a height waivart that the application indicates the variance is necessary to raise the value of the prnpPrty and if it is approved, the Planning Commission will bo seeing all the owners from Anaheim Hills requesting variances. Sho stated there is no hardship on this property since it is a flat parcel and reasonable use can be made of the property without a variance. Sho stated the homeowners nn Brook Lane are concerned about any addod height because it might obstruct their view and invade their privacy. She stated there is a 25-foot height restriction fn the Scenic Corridor and that variances must be granted based on special circumstances relating to the land itself. Jim Blackwood, 5434 Spyglass, stated he was here about. a month ago speaking for tiro homeownor~ in the area and it is hard to take off work and to be a concerned citizen and Cry to fight something they do not believe is rights and that tl~o maximum height allowed is 25 feet, and they foal the Cade should be enforced. He stated about 5 years ago a tract was approved un the other side of his property and when they started construction, there wore two-story homes and the homeowners in the area were very upset and talked to the contractor and ho agreed to lower certain homes to one story; and that from his kitchen window he had a beautiful view of the mountains, but when those homes wore constructed, he lost that view. HA stated he did not know if a 30-foot high structure block anyone's vir.w and if tiie Commission doesn't know whether any views would be affectecl, this should be approved. Dennis Cardoza, representing Peralta bills Bast, stated this property is approximately 26 feet below Kohl Ranch Road and 'he homes are approximately 30 foot above Nohl Ranch P,oad, so no views wou}d be obstructed. Robert 7.eme1, Chairman, Anaheim Hills Citizen's Coalikion, stated it has become apparent that every move this developer makes in this tract will require a public hearing; that City Council requested staff to prepare a report on this tract because it was their feeling that every lot will require a variance. He stated the opposition ~annr.,t attend 41 separate hearings and khis developer has a reputation for abusing the system and 41 separate variance hearings will simply wear down the opposition. He asked the PJ.anninq Commission to send a clear message to abolish the idea that the Scenic Corridor rules do not apply just because these homes are expected to be extremely expensive. He stated he has a signed affidavit from Mary Anderson that upon questioning Ms. Helyer, she was told those would be no problem in obtaining a variance for a higher home to provide more view. He stated they firmly feel the property should not be sold with the idea that they are entitled to a variance and asked what the hardship would be and asked the Commission to deny this variance and continue to stand by the Scenic Corridor and General Plan. Mary Anderson, 4643 Via Arboles, stated she would like to confirm her telephone conversaticn and addod many people in the area have almost wept because their views have been obstructed. Mr. Folsom stated this project does not obstruct anyone's view and added that 11/4/87 .~., b.~~._..~?~~rs~_s~~.~c..~e~~.H.~n~_c9~~~~Q~._z~~x~~t.~~a~_i.Q~ _-_____~~.-..sue linking this project to the concerns of the whole project of Peralta Hills East is not warranted and khat this height will not hurt anyone and the variance is necessary for Chis particular style of house. Mr. Folsom responded to Commissioner Carusillo that this lot is at the bottom and is one of the higl~Qr elevation lots and explained anyone standing on Nohl Ranch Road leaking L-hrough the gates would be able, to see over the structure. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. Folsom presented an exhibit showing the property which is Lot No. 29. Commissioner Carusillo stated t}le staff report implies that Lots 29 through 34 might impede the view cat thr people in the tract to the east, and that the purpose of the height restriction is not only to prevent views from being blocked, but there .i~; no t-ardship shown. Commissioner Feldh~'+us stated at last Tuesday's Council meeting, the Council did allude to the fact that they }:avR directed staff to do a study of the entire projeck rather on a lot by lot basis. He stated he would want to see what the Cil-y Council dons be[ore making r~ judgment that this structure may or may not impede the views. Commissioner Carusillo stated he thought the Commission should contin~.~f this matter until after the Council review of the tract. Commissioner Herbst agreed and pointed out at one time the developer submitted an application to have all. the lots reviewed but withdrew the application. He stated it is in the CC6Rs that the homeowners would be allowed to build to 35 feet, if they get approval from the city, but t2~ere is a lot of confusion and he thought the information the developer is telling the buyer of these lots should be straightened out. P~CTIO~: Commissioner Carusillo offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fe1~9haus and MOTION CARRIED that consideration of the aforementioned matter be continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of November 25, 1987, in order to determine City Council's direction regarding va•iances on this particular tract. Joel Fick, Planning Director, stated the City Council will be considering Variance No. 3695 which is Lot 10 of this tract and in conjunction with that, they will receive what information staff has been able to accumulate. Commissioner Herbst stated he thought staff is recommending that Mr. Peloquin, the developer, make a study and is suggesting some balloon tests be conducted to determine the visual intrusion, and that could take some time. Mr. Fick stated that could take some time and it is possible additional study will be necessary; and that staff understands that some of the data that was done in May might have to be confirmed and updated, and there may be studies that need to be done acid perhaps balloon tests. Commissioner Herbst stated he would like to see some on-site testing and thought it would behoove the Commissioners to see the demonstration and he did not think that could be accomplished by November 23rd. 11/9/87 .~. MI~.x~F~,S.._I.~I3~tI~.~M__C ~'~~_P3~~N.~.~~?~ __C~M1i..~S~ON..._.t?0_YF.~M@~_R... 4~.~..2~~Z._.__.____._.__Y.~1~.~_~.2 Jo91 Fick suggested a 4-week continuance, Malcolm Slaughter stated the public hearing has been closed so the moeion, in four weeks would not he a continuation of. the hearing and the Commission has 40 deys in which to make their decision. Commissioner Feldhaus asked if the public hearing can be reopened. Joel Fick stated staff's ability to bring back the report depends on the willingness of the property owner and uuil''.Ar to went to institute those studies and certainly within four wopks staff would have some information a.rd will got the Gity Council direction tomorrow. Commissioner Bouas stated this petitioner may want to go ahead with the balloon tests on this particular lot. Commissioner Herbst stated balloon tests are not new because that is the type of testing that has boon required in the Disneyland area to show if any views would be affected. Ho stated this is going to bo a "test case" and he thought it is important to have those tests. Mr, Folsom responded to Commissioner Bouas that the lower elevation section of the plans indicate the portions of the roof that projects above the height limits and thore is only one small section of the roof which projects up to 30 feet. Joel Fick stated staff will do whatever they can to get a report ready for the meeting in four weeks. ~,~Q~ Commissioner Carusillo amended his motion, seconded by Commissioner Feldhaus and MOTION CARRIED that consideration of the above-mentioned matter be continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of December 7, 1987, in order to for staff to present a study regarding khe heights in this tract. Mr. Blackwood stated it was a fizeplace that blocked his view and he wanted to be sure the Commission takes that into consideration. Commissioner Bouas stated the Commission does not want anyone's view blocked and also does not want to see everybody mad because L•hey don't like the wall acrd the Commissioners want to be serious and prevent views from being blocked. She pointed out no new notices will be sent and that anyone interested should call the Planning Department Office on that date to determine if the matter will be heard before coming to the meeting. RECESS: 3:05 p.m. RF,CONVENE: 3:15 p.m. ITEM N0. 9 EIR NEGATIVE DE~LARATI~N AND VARIA~I~E NQ~ 3722 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: YOLANDA MASCIAL AND RAYMOND A. MASCIEL, 1].27 W. North Street, Anaheim, c:A 92801. AGENT: GARY MASCIEL, P.O. Box 4241, Anaheim, CA 92802. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.32 acre located at the northeast corner of West Street and Autumr. Drive, 1010 North West Street. 11/9/87 ... M~~..~~~lL~BHEIM C.I_'~....~bA.N..~11NC.SS2~1~.~~~5)~,_~~M~~~~_L9.~7___ ~ _._$Z$.~~_ Waivers of (a) minimum lot arse, (b) minimum front yard setback, (c) required garage setback, (d) minimum side yard setback and (e) minimum rear yard setback to establish a 2-lot subdivision and to construct 2 single-family residences. There was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of L•he minutes. Gary Mascial, 420 S. Euclid, agent, was present to answec any questions. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. Mascial stated orre property owner to the east was concerned about drainage and pointed out there is a storm drain near the corner of West and Autumn and runoff from the east to the west does not properly drain and it is possible the trees in the parkway could be creating the problem. Chairman lQesse asked if the drainage is something the City staff could review. Jay Titus, Office Engineer, stated staff can take a look at the situation and it is something he is not familiar with at the moment, but it is possible some maintenance could be done. Mr. Mascial referred to the trees in the parkway between Autumn and West and pointed out there are 6 to 7 that might have to be removed because they are in the way of the approach and orre is creating a problem with drainage to the west. He explained they will be paying the tree fees and asked if it would be possible for them to remove the trees if desired. Mr. Titus stated the petitioner would have to contact the Parkway Maintenance Division which controls the trees in the parkway and they can not remove them without approval end added, he brought there is a permit procedure. ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and DSOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to establish a 2-lot subdivision and to construct 2 single-family residences with waivers of (a) minimum lot area, (b) minimum front yard setback, (c) required garage setback, (d) minimum side yard setback and (e) minimum rear yard setback on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.32 acres located at the northwest corner of West Street and Autumn Drive and further described as 1010 North West Street; 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 further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the groject will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC87-232 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Variance No. 3722 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; and that strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of 11/9/87 MZNLiT.~S._..BN..I~~i~.I.hf_C.~~Y--.~[~Al?N~~?G C.4IS~1.I&~.4H._._NS?~~.M~E.~_2.._..19_@.L__. ____@2.~~.;z4 privileges enjoyed by othor properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations. On roll call, the foregoing resoli:tion was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUA5, BOYDSTUII, CARUSILLO, FELD1iAi.15, HERBST, MC BIJRNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the writton right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ?~~M~4~~4 ~?~N~CI~'r~~~~.C41±K3T~4~? Ar~PS9.~~z~~.9r~A~. ~t~~~~.~M?~~? PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: ROBERT LOUIS CLARKA ND HELEN ALLGEYER CLARK, STANDARD OIL COMPANY, P. 0. Box 3495, San Francisco, CA 94119. AGENT: CHEVRON USA, P. 0. Box 2833, La H:+bra, CA 90631 and TAIT ANA ASSOCIATES, 900 Orangefafr Lane, Anaheim, CA 92801. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.34 acre located at the northeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Brookliurst STreet, 2175 W. La Palma Avenue (Chevron Service Stationj. To permit gasoline sales in conjunction with a proposed convenience market. There was no one i.ndicatfng their presence in opposition t.o subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is referre3 to and made a part of the minutes. Bob Gilbertson, agent, stated they propose to demolish the existing carwash and construct a new facility with a convenience store. He stated studies have shown that this would be the correct use for that property and it will bo an improvement; and that this is a critical intersection and it will handle the traffic that passes through that station everyday in a safe manner; and that two driveways will be eli^+inated closest to the intersection and it will place the facility diagonally into the intersection, so stacking will be done on-site rather than in the travel lane. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Bouas asked if it is correct they are willing to go into this without the sale of beer and wine. Mr. Gilbertson responded that is correct and Commissioner Bouas commended Standard Oil far that decision. Mr. Gilbertson stated their business i.s primarily the sale of gasoline and not a convenience store. He stated they would like to have the sell of beer and wine, but feel the store is properly stocked and the operator can make a living without having beer and wine sales. He stated they have the beer and wine sales in othFr cities. Responding to Commissioner Car~~sillo, Mr. Gilbertson stated there will be two employees on the premises. Commissioner McBurney asked if there will be the sale of hot food. Mr. Gilbertson responded there will be somell/9h87s hot C~il~.liT~fi,~B~IB~iE~.M...~.i~~_t'_f~bl~N.i~1.S~.9~~SS~.x?,._.~S?,Y..F~f@F•Ii_Q,_.~9_@Z ______@2-~~.~~ dogs which customers could purcf:ase on the premises and they would be in and out of the facility within 10 minutes and there is no sit down facilities. A~j,~: Commissioner Doydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commisaic,ner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit gasoline sales in conjunction with a proposed conve~iience market on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.34 acres located at ti:e northeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Brookhurst Street and furkt:or ctescribsd as 2175 West La Palma Avenue) and doss hereby appcove the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negative Der_laraL•ion together with any comments received during the public review process and f~:rther 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 Boydstun offered Resolution No. PC87-233 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2955 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035 and subject to Interdepartmental Committee Recommendations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTU?l, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, l4~SSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presorted tl~e written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ~~~M N0. 1~ EIR ?IEGAT.~Y~S`Ie.AR~T~QN~WAIVER Or S~E._Ei~.4173~~ME~~...._71~ ~Q~1p.ITIONAL U$F ~~MIT N0. ?25~ PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: F. J. HANSHAW ENTERPRISES, INC., ET AL, 10921 Westminster Avenue, Gardex: Grove, CA 92643. AGENT: RIC}IARD E. WANNENMACHF.R, PATRICK MEDIA, GROUP, INC., 1550 h'. Washington Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90015. Proparty described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.93 acre located north and east of the northeast corner of La Palma Avenue ad Brookhurst Street, 1112 North Brookhurst Street. To permit a 672-square foot billboard with waiver of maximum height. There was no one indicating their 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. Richard Wannemacher, agent, explained they are proposing a back-to-back outdoor adverkising structure and are requesting a height waiver and this is a standard 672-square foot sign, and stated he did not see it would impact residential properties. He referred to the conditions proposed, particularly No. 2 which is a requirement that. has to be met by the property cwners and they are just a tenant. He explained they have jusL• been mad^ aware of theses conditions and will speak to the property owner about complyi:,•~. He stated 11/9/87 r M~.~.v~~s.,~.t~t~.~r~..~.~~.N~z.N.a cQr~~.s~..a.~.~H~v.~~~._a~~.~7 ___. --.~z:~~.~ Condition No. 4 requires the structure to be located 12 feat easterly of the location shown in order to accommodate thiP proposed critical intersec'-ton dedication, so when the street is widened, it will not be in the publ: right-of-way, and they era certainly willing to cc~ply with that requirement when the street is widened. Mr. Wannemncher stateu with reforor~ce to Condition No. 1 require They roconatri~ct Cho driveway, that if they reconsL•ruct at thin time, it would have to bo removed when the street la widened and asked if the street. widening will happen in the near fut~ire. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Bouas asked what size sign which would be permitted without a permit. Greg Hastings responded ?00 square feet would be permitted et 31 feet high, but this request is for a he.tght of 36 feet. Responding to Commissioner Aouas, Mr. Wanr~emnchor stated given the trtiffic flow on that street, the ultimate sign would ire t1~e larger one at 675 square foot. Commissioner Herbst referred to the staff report, Paragraph 15, and stated the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2770 includes a condition that t.ho billboard shall not be visible from the Santa Ana Freeway; and that the conditional use permit shall expire in 5 years on December 1, 1986. Mr. Wannemncher responded the sign would not be visible from the freeway because there is a freeway overpass at BrookhursL• which obstru~:ts any view from the freeway. Commissioner Herbst asked what the hardship is for granting the variance to 3G feet. Mr. Wannemncher stated the irregularly-shape of the property is the hardship with minimum street frontage and there are other signs in the area at this height. Commissioner Herbst stated he would ba willing to go along with this request if all the conditions are met and if the sign is moved when the street is widened and added, the stL~et will be widened in the near future. He stated the driveway should be repaired and that there are other problems with the site, which has nothing to do with the sign, such as parking and the driveway which do not meet Code requirements and these ere matters which need to be discussed with the property owners. Chairman Messe pointed out they will certainly have to discuss the dedication with the property owner. Mr. Wannemncher asked if dedication would Y.eep the City from compensating the property owner when they accept the dedication and Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy Cit}• Attorney, responded that is correct. Commissioner Herbst stated this is a way of getting some of the problems on this property solved and if the property owner does not want to meet the conditions, the sign could not be built. Malcolm Slaughter stated he could understand why they would want the location for the sign at the present setbacks and that would be acceptable as long as they are willing to record a covenant against the property agreeing that when the City accepts the dedication, which assumes the critical intersection 11/9/87 M.X.NtiTF.,~~_~lNJ~:li~~:~t_~~TSL...I?J:~A~t?I~~1Cr---COMML~S~4N,. N9YFM~~6__4.__.~~9.$1____._..__-_._._.~Z-_@~~ criteria has been adopted, to relocate the sign to its ultimate setback and that they post a bond to guarantee that that would be undertaken. Chairman Messe asked if there would be a problem if the sign company was sold to Another sign company in the future. Mr. Slaughter responded that is why ho would want to l~avo a recorded covenant against the property. Chairman Messe pointed out that during a previous hearing on that co rner, the Standard Station wi.11 he abiding by the crib-cal. intArsection criteria and pointed out that this l~arl•icular corner is one of t:he heaviest traveled in the City. Ho stated he would bo willing to vote for approval as to zrg as the stipulation is made that a covenant will be recorded that the sign will be relocated cr removed wiion the City does take dedication. Commissioner Foldttaus asked what the setback roquirem~nt is for a 672-square foot billboard. Greg Hastings responded the billb~ar cl should be set back 10 feet from Brookhurst, regardless of size. Ne explain ~d the size differdnce only applies to the proximity of signs to a single-family residence. ~~~i_Q~r Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, second ed by Commissioner McBurney and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Pla nning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a 672-square foot dot,z.ble -faced billboard with waiver of maximum height. or. an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.93 acre located north and east of the northeast corner of i.a Palma Avenue and Brookhurst Street, having apprax i mate Frontaq~~s of 172 feet on the north side of La Palma Avenue and 83 feet on the east side of Brookhurst Street and f~~rther described as 1112 Nort2z Brookhurst Street; and does hereby approve t•he Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered 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 commerts received that there is no soh stantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the enviro nment. Commissioner Herbst o~fered a motion, seconded by CornmZssioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commis lion does hereby deny waiver of Code requirement on the basis that there are no special circtunstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to othe z identically zoned property in the same vicinity; ar~d that strict apply cation of the Zoning Code does not deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity. Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution lJo. PC87-234 and moved for its passage and adopkion that khe Anaheim City Planning Commissi on does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2953, in part, puxsuant t o~'*`naheim Municipal Code Section 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.635 and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations, including an additional c ondition that a covenant shall be recorded against the property to guarantee the relocation or removal of the sign when it is desired by the City. Malcolm Slaughter pointed out the Engineering Department doss not require a bond, so a covenant shall be sufficient. 11/9/87 '~ M~IIiTF.~.~.~~.Ati~.il'tWG~.~~ ~GA~?L~I.NG_ ~OMM.I.~S.i.4~?,-..KQ~M~F~ Q._~.4@? ._ ---_-.-.._.-.~@?_~@~ On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed try the following votes AYESi BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDNAUS, HER'iST, MC BURNEl', MESSE NOES s NONE ABSENTS NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Plar:ning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. S.~M...NQ,~~?. ~.~..R N.~GAT Iv>~ D~C~•A.R._A~~tQN,_W1-LY_>~ Q~.~9~.~_t3~.4~3RFM~~._~N_p ~Q.1~L3..T~~er_~L_ US~_~~6M.~~._NQ~ 29.4 PUBLIC HEARING. OWIJERSs MUN KYO CHO AND 1{YON SUN CHO, 8Os N. Brookhurst, Anaheim, CA 92HO1. AGENTS METROPOLITAN OUTDOOR ADV., INC., 101 E. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, CA 91006, ATTN: JAY KINGRY. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approxima~.:ely 2 acres, 806 North Brookhurst Street. To retain a 672-square foot billboard with waiver of permitted location. There was :~o ono indicating their 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. Jay Kingry, agent, explained they have been there Car years and Love not had any complaints. Fie stated the permit was issued for 5 years and ~. ~r, ~'~-~ automatically extended and when the property is improved, the sign wl: ' disappear. THE PUBLIC HEA ING WAS CLOSED. CFsairi~san Meese asked if the applicant is requesting the permit for another 5 years. Greg Hastings explained this is a new request for anew conditional use permit and the P1 anning Commission can place a time restriction on it if they so desire. Mr. Kingry stated he would be happy with approval with a stipulation that when the proper `.~~ is improved, thz sign would be removed. Chairman Meese stated that means the petitioner would have to have the conditional use permit terminated if the property is improved for another use and Mr. Kingry responded he doet~ raot want to have to come back for another permit in 5 years. ~~~QN: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to retain a 672-square foot billboard with waiver of permitted location on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 2 acres, having a frontage of approximately 250 feet on the east side of Brookhurst Street and further described as 806 North Brookhurst Street; 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 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. 11/9/87 i~~IT~S..~.Bt~ ti+IM_.G.I~X.-P.~~~iCi~~3.G_C~MM~.S~S2~.~NQY~ME#~B..3.~k28~__ ~.~.~9 Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eie rbat and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant waiver of Code requirement on the basis that there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as sizes, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to othe r identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict applic?+ti on of the Zoning Code deprives the r~r~narr!~ nr n•~t~~i Ir,cr~+•.; enjoyed by other properties i.n the identical zon© and classiffcat::on in the vicinity. Commissioner Boydstun offered Resolutio n No. PC87-235 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim C i ty Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2958 p ursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035 and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations, for a period of 5 years. Chairman Messe suggested a condition be included that the permit will be valid until the owner improves the property, which the petitioner has stipulated to and he did not sere any reason for the rime limit with that stipulation. Mr. Kingry responded ho would agree and exp 1 ained their agreement can b e ct,ncel].ed with a 30-da}• notice, but they would no t want a 5-year limit. Commissioner Boydstun agreed ko delete thq time limit. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following voter AYES: BOUAS, BUYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FE LDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEf, 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 then City Council. ~~~N_Q:_.~ ~~i NEC~ATI_v~_D~4.~~A.~I~.N.~ WA~r~F._5.4~~QLIR~M~~S~A~.~Q~AL IL~F E'~_BM~~.~S?1 ~~..4. AND wA~v~~~~SQ3LN~~k_P-9NS?~~9.~ PUBLIC HEARING. OWNEFS: DWYER J. BEES LEY AND SUSAN M. BEESLEY, P. 0. Box 5623, Orange, CA 92613. Property is described as a rectangu~arly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.21 acre, having a fro ntage of approximately 78 feet on the west side of Gilbert Street, and further described as 125 North Gilbert Street. Regriest - To permit a 2-story, 26-foot high, 9-unit senior citizens affordable apartment complex with waiver of minimum building site area per dwelling unit. Reque*st for waiver of Council Policy No. 543 pertaining to density bonuses. There was no one indicating their. presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not r Bad, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Dwyer Beasley, owner, explained they f eel this is a good location for senior citizen housing and that there are 2 s tort' buildings in the area and a 2-1/2 story apartment project which was recently approved about 150 fee t away on 11/9/87 MS.~~~.._~13AiiE.TMSI~ P.LL+.~~LN~. ~4.MM.~.&~.4.~?.._~S2Y~MaF~4_,~,2Q.?.__~-_ .___~.Z-~S+.Q Lincoln Avonue. He explained they are requesting an additionrl density bonus and stated tho larger 1-bedroom unit would bo renting for X388 per month. THE PUBLIC 1iEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Herbst asked whether or not they will have elevators because it looks like the seniors would have to walk up stairs. Mr. Beesley statod they would have larger protects with stairs and they have talked to some of the senior citizens and they are very capable of climbing stairs. Chairman Dtesse statod his question would be regarding parking and asked Mr. Beesley about the parking study. Paul Singer, Traffic isngineer, rosponded that staff is in the process of evaluating the parking for savior citizen's complexes and has tentatively established 1 25 spaces for a 1-bedroom unit and .75 spaces far any additional bedroom. He explained that. would be for projects with seniors al- 55 years of age and there is a difference because those are basically activo seniors versus a cony aloscent type senior citizen project on which parking was previously based. He stated the 55-,year old senior will obviously bo more active and have a tendency to own a car and in this project, .8 spaces per unit is proposed with 1 handicapped parking space for a total of 9 spacos and staff dons not feol that is enough parking. Chairman Messe stated at the last meeting, the Commission asked for a study relating to senior citizen projects because they Eelt requirements were not adequate to meet the demands of k}:e senior citizens and this request has been caught in the middle. Mr. Beesley stated he understands that is information relating to seniors at age 55 and explained he owns projects in Anaheim and has 3 residents over 70 years old and none of them have cars and he did not think these occupants would have cars and obviously studies can show things both ways. He stated he does not see a problem as lanq as the owners have control and added he would not wens: a lot of cars parked on the street and guessed that half of the occupants would not have cars. Chairman Messe stated there is .8 space proposed for 1-bedroom units and 1 space fog ~ 2-bedroom unit and asked if that is adequate. Mr. Singer responded there are 9 spaces proposed and that is conformance with present Codes. Commissioner Herbst stated he has visited several senior citizens projects and their parking requirements were really low; and when our Code was established, the Commission and staff did not realize the state would chan4e the rules and allow seniors at age 55 in projects with over 150 units; however, he did not think there would be many seniors with vehicles in these affordable units. Mr. Singer stated staff is doing an on-site study of a senior citizen project at Santa Ana and Citron. Commissioner Herbst stated he thought this project would have adequate parking and added he would agree our parking requirement is not adequate for projects where seniors are allowed at 55 years of age. Chairman Messe stated if there is no parking available on site, they would park on the commercial property next door to the south. Commissioner Carusillo asked where their guests would park. Mr. Beesley responded he firmly t.elieves there would be adequate parking because he has owned buildings for several years where people are 65 years old and a lot of them do not have cars. He 11/9/87 vd ~•~w iLSl.b..FdH.t..sl!]~.Uil.l1:L.Y~AA_._i~.~3!'~`.J.!_I!~.~-Y1:N:S~.fdY_kkA!.fV ~~7.lUl.ldM.1~3L~1~.aT ~l.1.____... ~--~ pointed out there are 4 open spaces where guests could park, plus parking on the street. Mr. Singer pointed out the time will come when parking will be prohibited on the atrnet. Mr. Beesley stated maybe once or twice a year, there might be a probl.om with an over abundance of people coming to the site and parking would be a problem, but on a daily basis, he did not see that- as a problem. Commissioner Herbst stated land today is very expensive and many senior citizens are on a limited income. He stated .8 space has been the requirement for units where seniors are 62 years of age or' older and he did not think that requirement has changed, but that mora study is needed regarding the 55 year old seniors. Paul Singer stated staff is making an area-wide survey and should be available iu 2 or 3 weeks. Chairman Meese stated he did not agree that 50~ of the occupants would not. have cars and that he knows people wha are still driving at 75 and 80 years of. ago; however, he would like t.o got additional information from the Traffic Engineer before maki-i4 a decision. Commissioner Herbst stated sevaral projects have been approved with .8 of a space per unit and there has not been any problem. Commissioner Bouas pointed out this request does not include a parking waiver and it is in conformance with the current codes and if they are wrung they should be changad, but this petitioner should be not penalized. Malcolm Slaughter stated if there is a Code change to increase the parking requirements and unless there is an exception granted to projects already approved, this project could be subject to the increased parking requirements should thb Codes be changed before building permits are issued for this project. He responded to Commissioner Feldhaus that approved projects could be "grandfathered" in and not have to meet increased requirements. Commissioner McBurney pointed out 2 of the units will be designated as affordable and the occupants of those units probably would not have a vehicle. ~TION: 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 2-story, 26-foot high, 9-•unit senior citizen affordable apartment complex with waivers of minimum building site area per dwelling unit on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.21 acre, having a frontage of approximately 78 feet on the west side of Gilbert Street, approximately 315 feet from the centerline of Lincoln Avenue and further described as 125 North Gilbert Street; 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 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 off, lotion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and :'.0iI0N CARRIED that the ~ City Planning Commission does hereby grant waiver of Code requirement 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 11/9/87 ,;~' y~ SIN sm A~~ANEIM CITY _P~AN~I1.N.~._CQ1~,~.~I9.~(~~YFe~f~~R~_.._~.~.'L_.--___~_~5~.~ same vicinitys and that strict agplication of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity. Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC87-236 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2954 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035 and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations. On roll call, the forego3.ng resolution was passed by the following votes AYESs BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner McBurney and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission daps hereby recommend approval of waiver of Council Policy No. 543 pertaining in density bonuses in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2954. Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ITCM N0. 14 E~~_~~T VE _FS.4A~.._A~QN~. W~.~~_•~---CQP~ -L~~-4UIREMENT, CONp3.~.4~ u5E Pf,,,RMIx N0. 2961 .AND WAIVER 0~..~Q~NS.~~~.4Se~1~~Q.~`~. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: B. W. WALTERS AND MARCELLA V. WALTERS, 1118 Highland Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660 and RANDEL J. MARTIN, 2003 W. Broadway, Anaheim, CA 92804. AGENT: MAGDY HANNA, ANDREW HOMES, INC., 4000 MacArthur Blvd., 8680, Newport Beach, CA 92660. Property is described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.5 acres located south and west of the southwest corner of Colchester Drive and Brookhurst Street (222 W. Colchester Drive and 835 S. Brookhurst Street. To permit an 80-unit affordable senior citizen's apartment complex with waiver of minimum site area per dwelling unit. Request for waiver of City Council Policy No. 543 pertaining to density bonuses. There were three persons indicating their 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. Magdy Hanna, agent, explained this project will be for active senior citizens and is located in an area where the necessary services are within walking distance. He stated they were vary concerned about the shopping center behind this project and have provided accessibility and visibility and that vehicles coming from Brookhurst can see the shopping center. Morgan Morganoff stated his business is in the rear and that hip view will definitely be blocked. He explained he has five of the 16 uniii~9~87he ~1.UTES_.~iA~H~.IM_S.7,T.Y..~'_(.+A~.~~LiCr ~4.N~,~~~.4!?. 1~.9~[~~8~_4.~._.)..9.~7____._._.,--____~Z-.~~. shopping center behind subject property, and that t_he+ address was to be 821 S. Brookhurst which the City took away about five years ago and it is now 2230 W. Colchester. Fie stated they havo a traffic problem there now and there was an accident three days ago at Colchester and Brookhurstt that the Alpha Beta has deliveries in the roar and they have speed bumps to slow the traffic. Fie stated he is also a property owner of 973]. Colchester which is the first house in the County area and because of the congestion fro. all the apartments on Colchester, people are parking in front of their homes and people are taking different routes for short cuts out to Gilbert, and explained he also owns property an Gilbert, La Palma and Brookhurst and those are a.ll heavy traffic areas. He stated he does Dave a lot of canr.erns ar~d has put nine years into that business and that could be destroyed very quickly by eliminating his view from Brookhurst. He stated tt~oy are proposing 64 parking spaces for this project which they think will bo sufficient because not all these people will hove cars, but then the developer is sayiriq that those will be active seniors, and those two things are contradictory. Ho stated he did not think 64 spaces for 80 units would be adegti+ate and also there is mention in the staff report of two-bedroom units and asked where those people will park. Ho stated he also owns a business called Serenity Hall and they havo dances with music and already have problems with the neighbors behind the complex complaining about thc~ noise. He referred to the Wounded Kneo Saloon in that same area which also makes noise and added he was concerned about putting a residential u::e in a co-nmercial area and then having the senior citizens complain about the noise which was there before their complex was constructed. FIe asked what effect this change would havo on his property and the church, explaining the church has a special kind of permit and that it is located in the first five units, and also there is a church in Unit 15. He referred to the Chir+e se restaurant and pointed out they do have their garbage in the containers outside in the rear next to this proposed project and sometimes it gets smelly, and it also creates flies, etc. until it is picked up, and also there is garbage from the Alpha T3eta market and another restaurant located there. He stated this is a throe-story complex and that he is very concerned. HP stated his mot'.+er is 85 years old and he takes care of her today and he is upset with people using the term "senior citizen" just to get building permits. Carl Honigmann, owner of the building directly west in the same center, stated the south tower of this project will be within 60 feet of his front door and that he has lights and signs on his business which would probably cause the senior citizens some irritation and that they have dancing also. He stated he was concerned about parking and there is already a parking problem at certain times of the day and they are proposing BO units with only 64 parking spaces. He referred to two churches in their development and the bar which has been there since 1967, and also the batting cages and Goodyear store in the area. He stated with the 3-story structure, there is no exposure and the view of their businesses will be blocked totally from Brookhurst. He stated Colchester and Brookhurst is a dangerous intersection and there have been a number of accidents in that location. He stated he is in favor of senior citizen housing as long as it is done right, but that the north 11/9/87 ~i ~M M~.~iT~~.~._~.dAE1.~IrL~.I.T~i.._.~GANNItiS~._C9.M~.i.~~.T9~_..~.4Y~iD~Ii._4.._Iti.Q.~~._..~...._. @3:44 structure of this project is proposed directly in front of his business which is about 60 feet away and he was sure the senior citizens will complain about the noise fxom his customers and pointed out that cars starting at 2 a,m. and people getL•ing into their vehicles will make noise. Responding to Commissioner Feldhaus, he explained his front door faces Brookhurst and would be facing right into this structure. Mr, l~onigmann referred to senior citizen parking and stated the staff report indicates people would be permitted there at age 45, and he thought that would create a parking problem and also that two people could reside in a bachelor unit and he did not think p-+rking proposed would be adequate. It was noted all the units would be use bedroom. Responding to Commissioner Carusillo, Mr. Honigmann stated his h+-siness has been there since '19G2. William Fleischman, 2223 W. Colchester, stated he owns the property directly across from the proposed development on Colchester and in very proud of his building which has twice been nominated for awards by Anaheim Beautiful. He stated he has been in business here for 20 years and thaL• the batting cages already in that area are less-than-desirable, in his opinion. He stated he is concerned about the mi.x of a residential use with these commercial uses. He stated the parking for the senior citizen project will basically be on Colchester with two 25-foot wide driveways and having been in this area for 20 years, realizes the traffic patterns that occur from the Brookhurst Shopping Center, and that many people use the alley from Colchester and the intersection of Colchester and Brookhurst is very busy and dangerous and his staff Haver makes a left turn when they leave and go the long way to Gilbert. Mr. Fleischman stated he would be in Favor of this project if he thought it would enhance the neighborhood and improve his property value, but thought this area has a dangerous traffic situation. Magdy Hanna stated the concerns were basically traffic in the area and a residential use in the area. He explained there will be no through traffic to Colchester. He staL•ed there are residential uses behind the shopping center now and he did not see a problem. He stated there are two churches in the same center and they have not complained about the other uses in the shopping center and he saw no reason for the seniors to complain. THE Pi)BLIC HEARING WA5 CLOSED. Responding to Commissioner Feldhaus, Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, stated he does not have specific traffic counts at this location, that Brookhurst is a major arterial throughout Orange County and this same intersection situation is repeated many times up and down Brookhurst and that as Orange County gets busier and busier and densities are being increased, congestion is a fact of life and people are going to have to get used to it because there is no way to have a traffic signal at every intersection. Responding to Chairman Messe, Mr. Singer sated a senior citizen complex would generate less traffic than a commercial development. 11/9/87 ~~,. .. ~; dINU' ~$.~ ANAHEIM C,j_TY_.~'I.A__Nt~INGSQ~SQY~iM~~i~.2a_.~..9~.Z QZ:~.~.~ Commissioner Herbst stated the batting cages were allowed as a L•emporary use and point9d out those businesses in the rear shopping cantor will be blocked from view of 8rookhursti however, this is a commercially zoned property and the property awner could develop a commercial building on the whole property which would be more of a disadvantage to those businesses than this project. He stated a senior citizen project would have less traffic than any other use. Paul Singer stated a senior citizen coming out on Colchester would have a serious problem getting out. He aclded obviously a senior citizen project would generate less traffic at 5 trips per unit, whereas, a commercial developmenL• would generate from 40 to 200 trips per 1,000 square feet. He added senior citizens at 62 years of age would add very little traffics unless they ac•e still working, and then they would abviously add to the a.m. and p.m. peak k.raffic hours. Commissioner Feldhaus stated he was not satisfied wit1~ the Traffic E.:gineer's comment that people will just have to get used to the traffic congestion and added he thought the CiL•y staff should review the number of accidents that have occurred at that location. Mr. Singer rospondad he definitely •,vill be taking a look at those statistics and will report back to the Commi~.sion on his findings. Chairman Masse stated he would like to have the parking study completed regarding senior citize:a projects before voting on this request. Responding to Commissioner Herbst, Debbie Vagts, Leasing Supervisor, stated 34 units will be affordable. Commissioner Feldhaus stated senior citizen projects are allowed in the CL Zone. Commissioner Herbst stated a comment was made that the developer could be using the term "senior citizen" in order to get approval of the project; however, the developer has to comply with a lot of rules and regulations and guarantee that the units will be considered as affordable to senior citizens for a period of 30 years. It was noted by Debbie Vagts that the Housing Department has a signed agreement for 32 units; 20 to be rented at $388 per month and 12 at $492 per month, which is the density bonus, and the senior citizen ordinance is far 30 years and the density bonus is for 10 years, unless changed by the Commission and Chairman Masse stated the Commission always wants a 20-year term. Conunissioner Herbst stated he thought this project would attract seniors without vehicles because it is within walking distance of necessary services and these services are probably better here than in any other place. Malcolm Slaughter s*.ated there has been indication that a parking study will be available within a certain timeframe and the Commission daes not have to make a decision for 40 days after closing the public hearing and can wait for the results of that study. Commissioner Feldhaus stated he would not like to put off the decision for 40 days and the only concern is with the parking. 11/9/87 MLL~Li~~._AN~~i~~.M_ 5~~..~4~N~~,N~ C9MM.I&~34L,_I~OY~hLA.~6_.~...~S~.T__.~ ___~?~5~. Commissioner Herbst stated some of the parking spaces are located a long ways from the unite and the seniors would havo to walk a long way to the elevators. Mr. Hanna stated this was a difficult property to develop because of the configuration of L•he property and the distance from both sides is no t• really very much, Chairman Messe asked if the pedestrian accessway would bo covered and Commissioner Herbst pointed out it locks to be about 150 feet from the edge ~f the buildiny to tho outside parking. Mr, Hanna responded they could provide a canopy and that could be included as a condition of approval and also that the distance would be no more than 150 feet to the nearest entrance o' the project. Responding to Commissioner Herbst, Mr. Hanna pointed out the location of the elevators in the middle of the project connecting both buildings. Commissioner Herbst stated he did not think the elevators are conveniently located and suggested they be located at the end of each building. Mr. Hanna pointed out it is about 150 feet to the center of the project and Commissioner Herbst indicated concern about units on the third floor. Commissioner Carusillo stated he thought this is a fine project, but was concerned bocause he thought the seniors would be sensitive to the noise from the other uses in the area and he could foresee problems with complaints in the future. He stated he would agree with the business operators who have been there for 20 yoars and thought theic• view from Brookhurst would be destroyed. He asked what ttre uses are in that center at the present time. Mr. Morganoff stated the first five units are being used for a church with the Serenity Hall next to that, which is an Alcoholics Anonymous Conter where they do have meetings and social affairs which include dances; that there is a storage unit, a diet doctor and a bar which also has dancing, a distributor has two units and another church and a gag or joke shop. He stated the Wounded Knee bar also creates noise which is directly across the street with live entertainment with Country & Western music and those patrons make a lot of noise, plus there is noise from the traffic on Brookhurst. He stated he would not object to another commercial use going on that property and thought that is the proper area for more commercial uses and he would not object to a two or three story commercial building because he can foresee future problems. He responded to Commissioner eouas that the residential houses existing are behind their businesses and the noise is generated towards Brookhurst. Commissioner Feldhaus asked Mr. Fleischman what type uses he would like to see there since he mentioned he would like to see the area improved. Mr. Fleischman stated the batting cages which are existing directly south leave a lot to be desired because the property has a small parking lot between the facility and the street and many times cars are parked there far days or weeks at a time and there are people living in their vehicles which detracts from the neighborhood. He stated he was pleased to see that the property was going to be developed when he received the notice of this hearing, but after 11/4/87 x' 'g MJ.[L1~~.~.~NAli~.ihLC_i~X_P~,BI?N_INC__CQMMi.SS~R.t?,_.L?QY.~M~R_.9,__ly 41.._..._.~....__~~.Z:.~4_T treeing the plan with the density proposed and the number of parking spaces proposed, he was not sure it would be good for the community or the people living there. Responding to Comrissioner Foldhaus, Mr. Fleischman stated he has 13 parking spaces behind his building. Ms. Patricia Palsey stated she lives in the motor home mentioned and that the offices mentioned are beautiful but the clientele that goes in anc~ out of that building are using the parking spaces of the other businesses and the customers coming out of the Wounded Knee are really noisy and ha~~e no regard for the neighborhood. Chairman Messe pointed out a 6-foot high block wall is proposed to help that situation. ~_I~il: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mceurney and MOTI017 CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a 80-snit affordable senior citizens apartment complex with waiver of minimum building site area per dwelling L,z+it on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of. approximately 1.5 acres located south and west of the southwest corner of Colchester Drive and Brookhurst Street and further described as 2222 W. Colchester Drive and 835 S. Brookhurst Street; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered the :tegative 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 Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Feldhaus and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant waiver of code requirement on the basis that there are specie]. circumstances applicable to the property suc`i as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not appl} to other identically zoned 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 classification in the vicinity. Commissioner Bouas offered Resolution No. PC87-237 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2961 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Gode Section 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035 and further on the finding that necessary services including grocery stores, transit stops, medical services and banks are readily accessible as shown in a report submitted dated October 14, 1987, and subject to Interdepartmental Committee Recommendations. Responding to a question whether or not the parking spaces would be assigned, Paul Singer stated the spaces cannot be assigned because there is not one space per unit and assigned spaces would mean reserved spaces and when they are not being used, nobody else could use them. 11/9/87 ~, MINUTES, ANAN.~I.~ C.~.TX.~'~.~1~.)'?V~9MU' ~$.5.~~.~.~ ~~~!~+~e~ Q.._~.4~_____ ~...~~.~~ Chairman Meese asked if the developer would be willing to wait until the parking study has been completed. Commissioner Feldhaus stated lie would not want to make the developer wait and added for seniors 62 years of age, he thought the parking would be adequate. Commissioner Bones stated all the units would be designated for senior r_itizon units for a period of 30 years and the affordable units would be considered affordable for a period of 20 years. Responding to a question fro. a person in the audience, the ordinance pertaining to persons residing in the units at 42 years of age was explained with the requirement that all occupants and residents who are not senior citizens other than the spouse or cohabitant of or a person who resides with and provides primary physical or economic support to the resident senior citizen shall be at least 45 years of age. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC Bi1RNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, pointed out in the event the parking code; are charged prior to issuance o: building permits, the project would have to comply with the new codes or come back before the Commission for a variance. He presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ITEM v~p' s_ 1~ F~~, NEGATIV~C~.ARA~ION, W~IVE~QF DE ~tEQUIREME"N~ AND ~Q, D T NAL USE pERMI~ N0. 2~~ PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: BURGER KING CORPORATION, 17330 Brookhurst Street, Suite 250, Fountain Valley, CA 92728, ATTN: RICHARD RENNA. AGENT: STEVE ROSENFIELD, 14772 Plaza Drive, a 202, Tustin, CA 92680 and ROBERT FRIEDMAN, 900 E. First St., X105, Las Angeles, 90012. Property is an irregular~.y-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.7 acre, having approximate frontage of 150 feet on the east side of Euclid Street, 510 S. Euclid Street (Burger King Restaurant). To expand a drive-through fast. food restaurant with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. There were four persons indica~:ing their presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minukes. Steve Rosenfield, manager of Burger King, explained he ha3 been operating the Burger King for nine years and this proposal is to enhance the facility and that he plans to exercise 2:is option to lease the facility for another 20 years. He stated his concern about renewing the lease is that sales have been decreasing and the facility has deteriorated and needs to be improved. He presented a copy of his annual sales figures for the Commission's review. 11/9/87 ,: ,. M~II.T.GS...A~I~#i~~I~SI,TY_~.L~U~~_~9t~lIS.S.~.4.N.__.~9Y~M@~Ei_~....~2@.~___ _____?T.~"~.4 Mr. Rosenfield referred to the condition requiring closure of the driveway and he thought closing the driveway would be counter productive. He stated the City Traffic Engineer would like one driveway closed on the south because it is near the walkway, but the problem with closing that driveway is that it will make ingress and eq:eas very difficult and khat driveway has not caused any problems and there have been no accidents because of it. He stated he would like to see something done about Euclid Street to make it a vibrant street again because a lot of the businesses are closing and he t}sought requiring closure of that driveway will hurt the sales further. Jay Strang, 60.1 S. Alvey, stated Iris house is immediately south of Burger King and he has owned it since 1979 and there were not. this many problems until he suddenly starting hearing everythincl being ordered through the drive-L•hrough speaker and they have been putting up with that for years not knowing what could be done about it. Ha stated they received this notice indicating that they want to maintain thr~ir 6-foot hig}~ fence, but that it is not really a 6-foot high fence because he can look right over it into the drive-tP.rough area and read the menu. He stated his is a single-story house and presented photographs of him on the other side of the fence. HQ stated they would like to have the fence built up higher so that they do not have to listen to the noise from the ordering device all night and stated it• also bothers the rest of the neighborhood. Nancy Hulse, 500 Alvey, stated she has lived there for 20 years and would like to see the fence higher. She stated trucks make deliveries and the neighbors can hear the employees outside talking. Bob Daniel, 602 Alvey, stated his }louse is almos`. directly behind the Buryer King and when the speaker system was installed, the neighbors did not receive a notice and also they have trucks which come in in the middle of the night and leave their engines running which is very noisy. He stated if they move the building seven feet closer to the rear, it will bring the drive-through seven feet closer and as it is now, he has to listen to the speaker all night which is very disturbing when he is trying to sleep. He stated he is opposed to bringing the noise any closer to his property and asked if the fence could be extended if this is approved which would probably help without removing the trees because the *rrds do help red~ice the noise. He presented a petition signed by most of the people who live in the neighborhood who could not come to today's meeting. Mr. Rosenfield stated he owns five Burger Kings and cannot be at all premises all the time and apologized for the problems, and stated he would be happy to do whatever is necessary to resolve :.hem and will raise the height of the wall oven if this request is not approved; and that he would talk to the truck drivers so that they do not deliver at night in the future. He stated he plans to enhance the landscaping which might help the noise and if this is approved, the drive-through lane will stay where it is so the noise will not be any closer than it is now. Chairman Messe suggested the speaker volume be turned down. Mr. Rosenfield responded he will look into that possibility and added he will contact the people listed on the petition. 11/9/87 "fit r, ,~;, M~t~E~..ICI.ati.~.~~.~T1LEk~SS~Q~M~~~.4t~.._l~QY.~N~~Rr J...~.9QZ,....J.. __.~1-~.ZQ Commissioner Feldhaua stated reducing the volume on the speakers of t1~n ordering devise could be made a condition of approved if this is approved, THE PUBLIC }{FARING h'AS CLOSET. Commissioner Herbst stated a 7-f oat high block wall would have to be readvortised for a waiver. Chairman Messe stated it appears the existing wall is leas than 6 feet high and Greg Hastings, Senior Planner, explained the wall would be measured from tt~e hi~~hest grade level. Commissioner peldhaus 4tated L•he applicant has agreed to raise the wall and plant trees. "'~mrnissioner Herbst stated trees do not help reduce noise very much and that he would like to see a 7 or 8-f oat high hloc.k wall to block the noise to the residents. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, responded to Curunissionor Bouas that he recommended the driveway be closed because there is a crosswalk almost adjacent to the driveway and that. Euclid is getting to be a very busy s~..reat and he is concerned about safety at that crosswalk. Commissioner Bouas pointed out the crosswalk has been there for a long time and that they have two driveways now and asked if it is the Traffic Engineer's intent that customers come in and out the same ~Sriveway. Mr. Singer responded that is his intent with the proper curb radius returns. He explained there are two driveways existing and that he would recommend they only have one driveway. bir. Rosenfield stated if that driveway is closed, the customers could not turn left into his restaurant. Chairman Messe explained the wa?.1 is not 6 feet high because the property was graded on that side. Malcolm Slaughter stated he is hearing from the neighborhood that they would be satisfied with a 6-foot high wall ors their side, not from the Burger Ring side and that could be approved today, but if they want a 7 or 8--foot high wall, a waiver would have Lu be advertised. He explained it seems the around level is higher on ttie Burger King side of the fence. Commissioner Carusillo stated he thought 16 inches added to the wall would satisfy the neighbors' concerns. Commissioner Herbst stated he would question whether or not a 6-foot nigh wall would block noise from the trucks and did not think it would. Chairman Messe stated the applicant has indicated he would request ghat the deliveries not be made at night in the future. Bob Daniel stated the existing wall is not very sturdy and has bean knocked down several times and there needs to be some reconstruction and reinforcement and he thought adding to it would not bo safe. Commissioner Herbst explained any wall over six feet high would have to be structurally designed and meet City codes. 11/9/87 M~HUTBS...._ANA~.~~S.~~~ _~G~~I~I.I..N_.Si. CS~IA'I.ISSIQN,~~N_4VFI~.B..FR~~_....~.9@7_...._.__.~.._._.~..~7-.~.Z.~, Commissioner Feldhaus stated there is a question whether or not a 6-foot high wall will satisfy the neighbor's concern an3 asked if it would come bark to the Commission if the 6-foot wall did not take carp of tha problem Fle stated tY-e matter could bo continued in order to find o~tt what is required to take cars of the problem. Mr. Rosenfield stated he would not be opposed to a B-foot high wall as long as it did not hurt the looks of the restaurant, but thought it would be unsightly for the neighbors to look at, but that he wo ul.d do whs,tever is necessary. Ne adde3 he would trope another public hearing would not be necessary. Chairman Messe stated a 8-foot high wall would have to be readvertised and Commissioner Feldhaus stated also the ordering devise is a problem for the neighbors and should bo reviewed before ttte continued public hearing. Chairman Messe explained the Commission could not approve rho conditional use permit witltotit the wall, Malcolm Slaughter stated he wanted the applicant to understand that if an 8-foot wall is constructed, it is possible the existing wall would have to be ro-noved because there would be a structural. problem with the 8-foot wall with additional footings required, etc. Commissioner Feldhaus stated a 6-foot high wall on the neighbors side might work. Mr, Rosenfield stated his concern is how to handle this expediously and that he would not like to w ai.t another two months to begin remodeling. Grey Hastings explained if the petitioner provides the necessary information, *_he matter could be readver t ised and heard in two weeks. Mr. Rosenfield responded that would be acceptable. Commissioner Bouas asY.ed if there is adequate space for additional landscaping. Mr. Rosenfield stated they w ill work to enhance the landscaping and added he could not understand the need for an eight-foot high wall, but will be happy to do it, but thought there could be another solution. Chairman Messe agreed he would not want a wall that high ne:ct to his property. Nancy Hulse stated kids can yo over the existing wall and it would be harder for them to go over an 8-foot high wall. She stated the neighbors would like to see the two driveways remain open and also feel the ~-foot wall is needed or there will be additional problems. Commissioner Feldhaus stated there is a request for a waiver of the number of handicapped spaces and Mr. Singer stated 1 ~ is adequate. Commissioner Boydstun stated she thought closing the one driveway would be more of a hazard because she has been to this site many times and did not think there is a problem now with the crosswalk. Mr, Singer stated he would suggest if this is going to be approved with both driveways to remain open, that the curb r adius returns be increased and the driveway should be far enough away not to interfere with the crosswalk. 11/9/87 "~. ~~ ~.N~I~~.S.~_A.N.AHFiIM~~_TX.._E~Ii~NI~.~S_4MM1,.~.r~~,I4~..~NQV~M$.~~_.Q~._~q_$..Z ._...._._QZ:$~ Commissioner Iierbst stated he thought the existing two driveways would be safer than closing one and Commissioner Feldhaus agreed. ~TIO,ZI: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commis stoner McBurney and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commi;.sion does hereby continue consideration of the aforementioned matter to the meeting of November 23,1987, in order to readvertiae for waiver of an 8-foot high wall. Mr. Rosenfield asked if the two driveways are to remain, could he just red line the existing plans. Greg Hastings responded he could change the plane and initia] the drawings. Ho asked if it is Commission's intent to just have the 8-Foot wall adjacent to the Alvey Street side. Chairman Me s se stated there is an area on the east side which is adjacent to residential homes which should also have the wall. ITEM .L]Q.L~1S2 ~_NEGATIVE i?~~T+AiiA.~~9.N_~ wAI~R .SZF._.~4~~~.QU.~~~'i~.-N?-~~ ~.~?N~~I.4L~ A~r~..P_F BML~..d9_~~~. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: CHI YANG LAN, CHEN LI SU LAN, 1538 E. L incoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805. AGENT: RICHARD CHANG, K-C b ASSOCIATES, INC., 300 S. Third Streek, Alhambra, CA 91801. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.45 acre, having a frontage of approximately 132 feet on the south side o f Lincoln Avenue, 1538 E. Lincoln Avenue (Anchor Motel). To construct a 9-unit addition to an existing 20-unit motel with waivers of (a) required type of parking spaces and (b) minimum dimensions of covered spaces. There was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made apart of the minutes. Richard Chang, agent, explained this request is to add 9 units to an existing 20-unit motel for a total of [9 units. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Responding to Commissioner Feldhaus, Mr. Chang stated they wil Z be removing the overhang across the driveway in order to provide emergency vehicle access. Chairman biesse asked if the gate on the south property line is for access into the residential area. Mr. Chang responded he did knot know about that gate. Mr. Chang referred to Condition No. 11 and asked if it affect s the existing signs, pointing out it is attached to the building and the orrner does not intend to change the sign. Chairman Messe stated he would assume that the sign is in conf ormance with Code and there is no problem. ACTION: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner McBurney acid MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commii~~87 has .. ,A,. ~Y ..~ MIJ~L'~FS• A~3HE.~MS~TY~3+.&I3HS.tiSLCS2t~M.L~.S.JC4~l._2iQ~.F~1E~.~.B~_~.29~_ -~? -~-'~ reviewed the proposal to construct a 9-unit addition to an existing 20-unit motel with waivers of required type of parking spaces a::d minimum dimensions of covered spaces on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.4 5 acre, having a frontage of approximately 1.32 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, approximately 1125 feet west of the centerline of Cliffrose Street and further described as 1538 E. Lincoln Avenue (Anchor Motel= 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 further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substankial evidence that L•he project will have a significant effect on the environment. COMMISSIONER HERB ST TEMPORARILY LEFT THE COUNCIL CHAMBER. Commissioner Bou as offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner McBurney and MOTION CARRIED (C ommissioner Herbst absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve waiver of Code regt:irement on the basis thak 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 '.o the place, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Commissioner Bo a as offered Resolution No. PC87-238 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2962 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035 and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations. On roll ca].1, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, ~ARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, MC GURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: HERBST Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. Commissioner Herbst returned to the meeting. James Taylor stated he had a question about the address shown on the notice which indicated the property is located 1,125 fee;: west of the centerline of Cliffrose and it is a lot further than that, to explained there is a lady also present who lives directly behind the Anchor Motel and he thought this card was very misleading. Chairman Messe stated staff would have to check the location and if i t is not correct, this matter would have to be readvertised and another public hearing held. Responding to Chairman Messe, there were two persons indicating their presence a:~d that they were interested in determining whether or not this was the proper locatia n. 11/9/87 ~~TES, ANA~,~.,~.~T~( PGR~INING COMMISSIOH.~~987 •@?r$14 During the hearing on Item No. 17, Greq Hastings and Malcolm Slaughter checked the maps and Malcolm Slaughter informed th4 Planning ~ommiss.ion that it appears the matter was properly advertised and Y.hat he has met with the opposition and explained the expansion is on tt-o Lincoln Street frontage and not the roar of the property and the architect has agreed to build a block wall where there is presently a wooden fence. He stated it appears the Planning Commission did have a public hearing and the 22-day appeal period is in effect. x T~i.~.4.~._~? F ~Ii..~~~~T I V E D E C LAR_A~~9~ ~. wA~~ ~.Rr9~'~4.D~i~.Q~J3.R.~M~LT_.~~.~ CONDITLQNAL USE PEEiMI.~NQ1~26~. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: SIGMUND J. SLIWOSKI AND GLORIA M. SLIWOSKI, 480 Canyon Ridge Drive, Anaheim, CA 92807. AGENT: CLAYTON PETERS, 3242 W. Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA 97.H01. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.5 acres, located south and east of the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Westchester Avenue, 3242 W. Lincoln Avenue (Games Plus). To permit on-sale beer in an eaistir.~ billiard parlour and amusement arcade with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. There was one person indicating his presence in opposition and two people indicating their presence in favor of subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Fudy Monte Ja:io, attorney representing Mr. and Mrs. Clay Peters, stated L•his is a new a_:~ication because they felt there are new circumstances which would warra~:t granting the conditional use permit. He stated there is a request for waiver of parking and there is no parking problem as indicated by the parking study. He explained the Peters have owned this billiard parlor for almost 5 years and it fs a family-owned operation. and the family's only source of income. Ho added when the original application was reviewed last year, the staff report indicated that almost all of the business owners in the shopping center were opposed to the request, but at this time 9 of the 11 owners in the shopping center approve of this application and that he has a letter from the owner of the property to that effect which shows what these owners have done to clean up that operation. He stated two businesses are missing un the list because they were not available when this letter was circulated. Mr. Jane stated last summer the Peters transferred the operation of this facility to a third party and prior to that, they had had no difficulties with the business, but that the third party had literally destroyed the business in 3 months and created many problems with loitering, narcotics, noise, etc., and that Mrs. Peters took back the operation in October 1987 and began cleaning up the operation inside the facility and in the immediate shopping cantor and they called the police when they felt there was a problem; however, when the police were called, those ~-ere labeled as incident reports and between October 1st and December 31, there were 25 to 30 incidents reports and that was eventually used against them in the denial of the permit to continue the operation. He stated the Peters cleaned up the area and have made it clear they will not tolerate any trouble and the number of incidents was reduced dramatically. He stated the permit was not approved last year and they could 11/9/87 [vl1,~j~CS..1~,I3AHESM C.L.A~3~~LG.~O.~QI~I~QYF~+MA.~R~_~,.Q.~Z__ ._._.~L.~Z~ no longer sell beQr and the argument could be used that the problems were reduced as a result of their not being able to sell beer on the premises, but liquor and beer are sold in the liquor store, convenience markets and a cocktail lounge in that center, and if liquor was the problem, those problems would still be there, the same as they were a year ago; and that he felt it is clear that the problems we:•e created by the bad mnnagement of this facility for a period of 3 months= and also tlto surrounding residentia]. area is highly concentrated with apartments. H© stated he believes thE+ Peters have done what they should h»ve done and deserve to run a business with the sale of beer they because this is a billiard parlour and without L•he sale of beer, they could probably not sustain the business, and in addition the customers want to be able to have beer when they play billiards. He stared this has caused an economic hardship on the Peters and he did not think, at this time, theiA wAa any serious opposition to this request. Joseph Rodriquez, 125 S. Westchester, stated he is concerned with this issue and has lived here 3 years and tree never seen any problems with the billiard parlour. tie stated it is being operated in a peaceful atmosphere which ob~~iously is a place for mature and responsible adults to spend a few hours of leisure time. Darcus Harrod, 2900 W. Lincoln, stated she is a customer at Games Plus and this is the only pace in that area where she feels safe to go. She stated she is disabled and there era vrry few things she can do for recreation, but this is one she can do and this is a place she can sit down and she has never seen any drug problems or fights in this establishment. She stated she feels this is an establishment the neighborhood needs and she would net mind if her 21-year old daughter went in there and that Mr. and Mrs. Peters make sure everyone obeys the rules. Sharon Jackson, Manager of Westchester Sc;uare Apartments, stated she has been before the City Council twice regarding various things she has seen such as children coming from school going into the Games Plus establishment, and particularly one teenage boy who came out of Games Plus totally drunk. She stated they have had problems with broken glass and from October to January of. 1986, she spent over $6,000 on broken glass, and in February and March of 1987, she spent 52,500 and since then about 5125 to 5250 per month. She stated a gentlemen was found sleeping in their garage and she followed him into Games Plus, etc. and there h;sve been other problems and there has been a tremendous amount of drug traffic in the shopping center and particularly at Games Plus. She stated she manages 424 units of which 60 are for senior citizens and they are mainly family units with a lot of small children. She stated there are 3 schools in close proximity and a lot of children go through their property and since the beer is not sold at Games Plus, she has not had a problem with the children drinking beer, etc. She stated she is asking the Planning Commission that no more alcohol be allowed in that shopping center. She explained she has watched children inside at Games Plus sneak around and drink other people's beer, but Sit1C@ they have not been allowed to sell beer, ttter.e+ has been a tremendous improvement in the situation. Mr. Jane stated the opposition has just indicated she has seen an improvement and that is a result of what the Peters have done and the other business owners, residents and customers will attest to the improvementli%9/87• Jackson MIS EL~S_._AI3AE~E.IM_S.~L.T.Y_p.~,e8~1`I.LI~.~C.4MM.~S,5~913,~LQYFiM~...~1...1.~4.Z ______@.Z: @.7~ has stated she has not seen any indication of any actual problems on the premises. He added this is a highly concentrated area with apartments, but thought there has been a real effort on the part of the PRtera ~-nd the City to clean up the area. TiiE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. John Poole, Cod© Enforcement Supervisor, stated the number of complaints have reduced since they were not allowed to sell beer and ho believes that is because there are too many businesses selling alcohol beverages in that small center and he thought approval ut this permit would bring the situation back to where it was and recommended denial, based on past experience. He added they have worked with the Peters and he has given testimony regarding that to the hearing officer who rendered the decision to take away their privilege of sailing beer and the request today is based on the fact there have been no recent problems. Chairman Masse stated in June 1987 the City Council denied the request for a rehearing and the Peters were operating their business at that time and Mr. Poole clarified they did have an on-site manager and i was his understanding they were the ownars and wez~ responsible. Chairman Masse clarified that when the righk to sell beer was taken away in June 1987 a erything seemed to clear up. Responding to Commissioner Boydstun, Ms. Peters stated there is no actual age limit, but no one under 18 is allowed in after 10:00 p.m. unless accompanied by a parent and school children are not allowed in until after school is closed at 3:00 p.m. She explained they could impose an age limit, but they do have 16 year olds who like to play billiards. Ms. Peters stated she understands that Ms. Jackson is not the manager of the apartments and asked why she allows her children to come in and play if she thinks this is a bad place. She added she could impose the age limit because they do not have many children coming into play. Malcolm Slaughter stated he assumed this age limit applies to the matter of admittance to the premises and not to the age of the person allowed to drink beer. Ms. PeL•ers responded if it would help, an age limit could be imposed for admittance to be limited to 21 years of age and the problem with that is that this is a billiard parlour and not a pool hall. Commissioner Carusillo stated his concern is with who plays the videos and Ms. Peters responded that adults play them. Commissioner Feldhaus asked who mould police the age limit and Ms. Peters stated she, her son and husband would be running the business. Chairman Masse asked John Poole if the minors who are causing the problems and. John Poole stated Code Enforcement has generally found with this type of use that mixing minors with adults where alcoholic beverages are sold creates a lot of problems. Fie stated limiting the age should minimize problems. 11/9/87 ~* a' ~: ~h t~.C~Ii.TF~...._~AH.~.i.1~~.T~..~[~A~t i.~S9M~I.S.~~.4I~~EM~~..2~.~.41-- -_.._~..~Z-.~.?3. Mr. Jano stated the, applicant did offer to allow only persons who are 21 years of age on tho premises. Commissioner Feldhaus stated that could bo a condition of approval on this permit. Commissioner Carusillo asked Ms. Peters what she plans to do to provent these problems from reoccurring. Ms. Peters stated stated she would impose tY~e ago limit and could taY.e out videos if necessary, but it is the adults who are playing the videos, but adults since there is a computer school across the street and those students come over to play the games. Commissioner Carusillo stated since she has agreed to limit the age for admittance to 21, he would not have a problem with giving them an opportunity to operate their business. Chairman Messe asked if they plan any other major changes to the operation of their business. Ms. Peters responded they are managing the business themselves and that is the reason there have been no complaints and they have had no problems since thoy took the business back. She explained they have removed the planters which wore there previously and the public telephones have been taken out and explained before there were 6 public telephones in this small shopping center which wero used by the people dueling in drugs. Commissioner Carusillo asked how they would manage a 21-year old who obviously had had too :much to drink. Ms. Peters responded trey would not serve him and would ask him to leave the premises and would not allow a person in if they knew they had already had too much to drink. Commissioner Carusillo stated his biggest concern was with mixing adults with the minors and he would be receptive to approval to give them a chance to show they can run the business without problems. Chairman Messe stated limiting the age to 21 means couples could trot bring their 10 year old children into the billiard parlour with them. Responding to Commissioner Carusillo, Ms. Peters responded they do serve hot foods such as burritos, sandwiches, snacks and candy. Chairman Messe referred to the parking study which is 5 years old and stated he would like to have more information about the parking. Malcolm Slaughter stated his concern would be regarding the age limit; that it appe~~rs to be legal except as it relates to the sale of alcoholic beverages and where the legal age is now 1fi years of age for everything except drinking which is still 21; and that it sounds like we are creating a situation where otherwise "qualified" adults would nct be able to enter the premises and he supposed it would be up to the petitioner to enforce the age limit and it could be tried for a short period of time. Mr. Jano s~.ated this does impose an interesting question; however, they would be willing t.o defend that because the condition would be administered by the Commission to only persons 21-years of age being admitted and they are willing to try to limit the age and if necessary, will reduce or eliminate the video games even though they do not think those are a problem. He stated they were selling beer after Jan~~ary 1st and the problems greatly dimensioned, but 11/9/$7 MI.NSI~'~~..,__..~N.1~~(~.1M. ~I?'X E'_I:.AN~?~.t?~__C4Mt~t~.~41?s_..NQY~M~~R__2,_~9.~? _~-_..._..___6.~..~1..4 because of their track record, people's opinions were clouded, but there has bean one experience with alcohol being sold when the problems were diminished or eliminated with proper. conditions and the neighbors, the business people and the owner, feel this is a stabilized situation now. Cormnisaionar Carusillo clarified the Peters wi]1 be on the promises L-o manage the facility and Mr. Jane responded it is a family-owned business and they previously hr~t hired outside management to run the place, but have taken control themselves. He stated it was difficult to toll someone else what to do. Commissioner Caz~usillo asked the City Attorney if there are any problems with the 21 year old age restriction. Mr. Slaughter responded preliminarily, he did not think so, but would like to take a look at it further a•~d if there is a problem, .it could he taken carp of at the appeal level, He stated the City has the ability to terminate the conditional use permit after a public hearing is held and findings are made, and that while the operation may run fine with this manager, it could be sold or under a new management next month and he would suggest a relatively short time limit on this permit if it is granted as an experiment to find out if the problems are going to continue. Chairman Messe stated he was going to suggest a 1-year time limit. Commissioner Herbst referred to the staff: report and Code Enforcement indications and noted that no complaints have been received since the sale of beer was eliminated and asked if that implies that this establishment was causing the bulk of the problems in that center. John Poole responded the incidences were ones that occurred on the premises of Games Plus. Commissioner Herbst stated if they start selling alcoholic beverages again, recognizing that the owners are now in control, if there are complaints it could be reviewed. He asked if the complaints, were about adults or teenagers previously. John Poole stated primarily the problems were with juveniles, but some adults were involved. Commissioner Carusillo asked if there i5 any validity to the comments that since the Peters have assumed control, the problems gave dimensioned. John Poole stated since the Feters took control, the problems did diminish, but that is not uncommon and many times when the City has gotten into the termination process, there is a dramatic improvement. He stated ho sees no problem with giving them an opportunity with a short time limit and that Code Enforcement can monitor the premises. He stated did not want to create a hardship, but wants what is best for the community and he would suggest a 1-year time limit based on the fact that if there are problems, Code Enforcement could bring the information back to the Commission for their review. ANTI N: Commissioner Carusillo offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed. the proposal to permit on-sale beer in an existing billiard parlour and amusement arcade with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces on an irregularly-shaped p~rchl of land consisting of approximately 1.5 acres located south and east of the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Westchester Drive and turther described as 3242 W. Lincoln Avenue (Games Plus); 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 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. 11/9/87 ~Z~.Q?.2 MI.I~1~~.~..-~~.MS.1~C_._P.L.A~3N~.~.~.SQ~.S-~.--tiQYF.~1~~_9 ,._..~.~.Z_____..~_____~ Commissioner Carusillo offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant waiver of Code requirement on the basis that the parking waiver will not cause an increase in kraffic congestion in the immediate vicinit}' nor adversely affect any adjoining land uses and granting of the parking waiver under the conditions ienorel,welfare,ofithencitizenstofmthoaCity oEeAnaheim,health, safety a g Commissioner Carusillo offered Resolution No. PC87-239 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2963 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Codes Section 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035 and subject to an additional condition including an age restriction that no ono under the age of 21 shall be admitted and the conditional use permit shall be for a period of one year and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations. Commissioner Herbst stated if there are complaints, he would be one of the first to call for revocation of this conditional use permit. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS. HERBST, MES5E NOE5: NONE ABSENT: MC BURNEY Malcolm Slaughter stated the 1-year time period will terminate after one year and if khey intend to seek additional time extension, they should apply at least two months prior to the termination. Chairman Meese stated if everything goes well, the next conditional use permit could be granted for a longer period of time. Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. T~$M N0. 18 REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATI_N A. V R A .E N~2 - Request from Signe Ferguson for a retroactive extension of time in order to comply with conditions of approval, property located at 836 South Philadelphia Street. ~CTIQN: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Feldhaus and N.OTIOit CARRIED that tine Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve a one-year extension of time (retroactive to October 13, 1987) for Variance No. 3604, to expire on October 13, 1988. B. CONDITIONAL USE_PERMIT N0, 73.4 - Request from Albert J. Marshall for termination for Conditional Use Permit No. 1720, property located at 2736-2740 West Lincoln. ACTIQN: Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC87-240 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 1720. 11/9/87 MS.~~_.~AH.S~L.C.I~.;C_P~l?ti3~?G ~9MMISS~4I~.,~~QY~t~.~._2._~.2@7._._.______ SZ:..@.@Q On roll c '1, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOLIAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELUHAUS, HER$ST, MC GURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE C. CONp~',~Q.~I$L~U~E~~~~~52~._.~9_~Qr(.S~VIStR_PbA.N_5.) - 1170 S. State College Boulevard, request for Planning Commission direction. Greg Hastings explained a conditional use permit was denied by the Planning Commission because of opposition from tho sfng]e-family residences to the west and that the property is zoned CL. He explained the applicant has submitted plans in conformance with Code and he would like to know whether the Planning Commission would like for staff to discontinue the study to reclassify subject property to CO. Chairman Messo explained the Planning Commission looked at the plans and noticed the block wall on the west and one entrance on Almont and one on State Collego and this will be a Circls K an~i some other retail use and that everything appears to be in conformance with Code and Greg Hastings responded it does conform to Code. He responded to Commissioner Boydstun that the matter was not readvertised because the conditional use permit was denied and staff i.s looking for direction whether or not to pursue the CO reclassification in view of the fact the plans have been submitted in conformance with the CL Zone. Commissioner Feldhaus responded he did not see anything with the plans previously and Chairman Messe explained the drivo-through restaurant was eliminated and circulation has been improved and he has no objections to these plans, ACTION: Chairman Messe offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has determined that submitted revised plans are sensitive to the issues that caused denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 2950, permitting plans to be submitted to the Building Division that would comply with the existing CL. Zone, thereby directing staff not to pursue a reclassification study on subject property. P~BL_ I~.~N_P~T_ t None Commissioner Feldhaus suggested the Planning Commission consider having one night meeting a month to allow people who have problems getting off work the opportunity to attend these meetings since the City Council has done it successfully. There was discussion concerning the Planning Commissions lack of ability to set the number of public hearings which means the meetings would last too long, but the matter could be investigated for further discussion in the future. 11/9/87 ~~$,. ANAHEIM ~:ITY PLA~1.Z1Q.~Q3S?N• NQVEM~,,~~.SLBZ r. 87-SB], ADJOURNMENTS The meeting was adjourned at bs45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~~~ .~~iGG-~ ~° Edith L. Harris, Secretary Anaheim City Planning Commission EI.H: lm 0036m 11/9/87