The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes-PC 1988/08/29 MIN(LT~& AN~~IM CITY PL_~-?-?ING COMMISSION Date: AUGUST 29, 1988 The regular meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission was called to order at 10:00 a.m., August 29, 1988, by the Chairwoman is the Council Chambers, a quorum being present, and the Commission reviewed plans of the items on today's agenda. RECESS: 11:30 A.M. RECONVENED: I:35 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: AGENDA POSTING - A complete copy of the Planning Commission agenda was posted at 9:00 a.m. August 26, 1988, inside the display case located in the foyer of the Council Chambers, and also in tha outside display kiosk. Published: Anaheim Bulletin - August 19, 1988. PUBLIC INPUT: Chairwoman Houas eaplained at the end of the scheduled hearings, members of the public xill be allowed to speak oa items of interest which are within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission and/or agenda items. Chairwoman Bouas Boydstun, Carusillo, Feldhaus, Berbst Mc Huraey, Messe Joel Fick Mary McCloskey Joseph W. Fletcher Arthur L. Daw Paul Siaqer Debbie Vagts Greg Hastings Linda Rios Edith Harris Planning Director Senior Planner Deputy City Attorney Deputy City Engineer Traffic Bnqiaeer Housing Operations Coordinator Senior Planner Assistant Planner Planning Commission Secretary VAL: Commission Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners McHurney and Messe absent) that the minutes of the meeting of May 23, 1988, be approved as submitted. 0143m -1- 8/29/88 1 ``~ +s ~t ~=. MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, AUGUST 29. ?oag Paqe 2 EM NO 1 CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: THIRFTY OIL COMPANY, 10000 Lakewood Boulevard, Downey, CA 90240. AGENT: TAIT AHD ASSOCIATES, P.O. SOX 4439. Orange, CA 92613. Property is approzimately 0.48 acre, located at the southwest corner of Ball Road and Dale Avenue, further described as 2800 West Ball Road. Request: Convenience market with gasoline sales. There was no one indicating their presence is opposition to subject request; and although the staff report was not read at the public hearing, it is referred to sad made a part of the minutes. Steve Tarkoff, Tait and Associates, explained the revised plans, pointing out they have added three parking spaces. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Herbst stated the applicant has complied with the Commission's requests and Commissioner Boydstun asked the mazimum number of employees per shift. Mr. Tarkoff :espoaded there would be a masimum of two employees, with only one there on the vory late sight shift. gCTIO~i;. Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst, and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioaess McSurney and Messe absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a convenience market with gasoline sales oa a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approzimately 0.48 acre, located at the southwest corner of Ball Road and Dale Avenue, and further described as 2800 Weat 8a11 Road; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration on the basis that it has considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on t•- basis of the initial Study and any comments received that there is no substa....ial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner Boydstun offered Resolution Nom. PC 88-233 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 3033, pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.03.030.030 through 18.030.030.035, subject to Interdepartmental Committee Recommendations. Oa roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MC SURNEY, i~SSE Joseph W. Fletcher, Deputy City Attorney, presented the right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. 8/29/88 MINU'T'ES. ANAHEIM Crory ar.~nrxrrrr. COMMI ION AU['ttcT 29. 1988 Paae 3 ITEM N0. 2. CEOA CaTFrnurrnr. F~rcrrvrrnp CLASS 3 AND 5 WAIVER OF COgg REQUIREMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3043. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: LIB„A DOMINQUE2, 1223 S. Walnut Street, Anaheim, CA 92F{"2. Property is approximately 7,956 square feet located at 1223 S. Walnut Street. Request to permit a 504-square feet "granny unit" with xaiver of minimum side yard setback, minimum rear yard setback and minimum number and type of parking spaces. Continued from meeting of August 15, 1988. It was noted the petitioner has requested a continuance to the me t~q of September 12, 1988, in order to submit a parking study to the City Traffic Engineer. ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, neconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners McBurney and Masse absent) that cansideraticn of the aforementior+~•-; Matter be continued to the meeting of September 12, 1988, at the requPt' ?:: the petitioner in order to submit a parking study to the City Traffi, :::gineez. ITEM li0. 3 CEOA NEGATIVE nFCr.au~Tr N AND VARIANCE N0. 3823 (READVEETISED) PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: ANAHEIM VILLAGE 1'iiitEE OWNERS ASSOCIATION, 1900 Von Karman Ave., Suite 8200, Irvine, CA, 2082 Michelson, M212, lrvine, CA 92715. AGENT: Brent Nerguizian, 2082 Michelson, 8212, Irvine, CA 92715. Property is approximately 1.67 acres located on th~~ west side of Greenleaf Avenue, and further described as 2050 W. Greenleaf Avenue. Continued from the meeting of August 1, 1988, is order for the petitionar to submit revised plans showing a reduction is density and height and to readvertise a waiver of maximum fence height. There were approximately 25 persons present in oppor~ition and although the staff report to the Planning Commission was not read at the public hearing, it is made a part of the minutes. Brent Nerquizian, agent, explained he had asked for a one-month continuance in orr3er to submit revised plans more fitting with the site, but did not submit them in time to process the item through the proper procedures and presented the revised landscape plans to the Commission. He explained he plans to keep as many existing trees as possible, however the site is actually overgrown at this time. He stated they play to plant Austrialian Willow trees and Silver Dollar Eucalyptus trees and that he will stipulate that there will be no visual intrusion with the landscape barrier. He stated they have dropped the structure that faces single family to the north four feet and a portion of the units which was 49 feet away, is now 50 feet away and the line of sight exhibit shows ao visual intrusion. 8/29: 88 ~- ,,,.. ~.._ ,. Y MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 29 1988 Page 4 He stated they are putting 47 units oa 1.66 acres and since the Code takes away the land for the driveway areas, it reduced the usable square footage. He stated there is no subterranean parking and he felt that is a benefit to the area. He stated they did try to contact CALTRANS, but they had no comments. Donald Moore, 1900 W. Gleaoaks, Unit C, stated their development, Anaheim Village II, is bordered by Glenoaks and Greenleaf and their concern is traffic and last night he counted over 300 parked cars on the streets and is the same area today, there were 100 parked cars. He stated traffic is heavy with parking on both sides of the street anr, it has a narrow access and there are frequent accidents and adding another 100 vehiclos will only add to the risk of further accidents. He added there will also be increased foot traffic and during the last several years they have been plagued by increasing vandalism such as sprinklers being broken, etc. Mr. Moore stated another concern is that the I-5 freeway is scheduled for widening and lies immediately to the west and he thought the City of Anaheim should be coordinating development with the State and County and possibly acquire the property before it is developed. Paul Melanson, 503 N. Hardcourt, north of the project, stated this would affect the property values in the area and that they would loss privacy; especially if existing trees are removed; that there is a 70" high block wall and when he looked over, he saw subject property is 3 feet higher than his property. He added the owner has the right to develop his property, but the neighbors also have the right to their privacy. Ae stated several homes in the area are for sale now. Ruth Bradley, owner/resident, 1748 W. Greenleaf, stated their street will be affected and they already have a number of apartments at the end of Greenleaf on Chippewa and this will add traffic. She stated they already have problems with vandalism and noise and this project would just add to all these problems. Mr. Nerquizian stated this area has been designated for medium density residential on the Gsneral Plan and they have RM-1200 zoning and they are requesting a waiver, based on the shape of the property and due to the adjacent single family residences. He added be has addressed the visual intrusion through landscaping and when the landscaping is planted in conjunction with the ezisting landscaping, there will be no visual intrusion. Mr. Nerquizian stated they will charging 5700 to 5800 per month for these units, and the tenants will have to earn 524,000 a year in order to qualify, and they will have to have references and there will be an on-site manager; and that this groject will not be a detriment `o the neighborhood. He added he did not think the homes for sale in the arse are a result of this proposed project. TBE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. 8/29/88 Ar' ^! ~iU'~'ES ANA_REIM CITX PLAh~ING COMMISSION AUGUST 29 1988 Pave 5 Greg Hastings, Senior Planner, responded that the City did contact CALTRANS, and they came down and reviewed the plans and Mr. Nerguizian added they did not have any objections. Mr. Hastings stated there are no funds available at this time for that proposed widening and the City doesn't have the funds available either. Commissioner Herbst stated he thought this project would certainly be an intrusion on the neighborhood and he would not be in favor of 3 stories within 50 feet of single-family residences; however, 2 stories would be fine, and also he thought approving three stories would set a precedent. He added he realized this is a hardship parcel and pointed out the Commission asked the developer to reduce the density and height. Commissioner Carusillo stated he did not see density as the issue and that he thought the developer had done a lot to mitigate the concerns and make the project work with the setbacks and the landscaping. He stated the roof height is 27 feet from the grade and the developer not only cut into the grade, but reduced the roof height and increased the setback frcm 50 feet to 93 feet and the property is an eyesore at the present time and that he would like to see this property developed. Commissioner Feldhaus stated on August 1st the Commission asked the developer to revise the plans and reduce the density and height and the revised plans reduced the height, but did nothing about the density. Mr. Nerguizian stated that property is zoned RM-1200 and explained he had used this design to avoid subterranean parking. Commissioner Herbst stated even though this is a hardship the property, at least it could be developed without a variance. He stated the project encroaches on the single-family neighborhood and the Corimissioa has never granted a 3-story project this close to single-family. Mr. Nerguizian stated there is a 3-story, 106-unit project at 1780 W. Lincoln, with 2 stories and is the identical density at 50 feet from single-family residential. Commissioner Carusillo stated he does not like to see the density violated because open space is almost gene, but he did not think the three stories is a violation on this project, but 3 stories within 50 feet of single-family residential would be a violation; and that he did not see that there would be a visual intrusion which was a main concern of the neighbors. (There was a response from the audience that i..:eir concern was also traffic). Commissioner Carusillo continued that the parking is adequate. Responding to Chairwoman 8ouas, Mr. Moore (one of the opposing neighbors) stated they have two parking spaces per unit at their complex and that there is very little quest parking available on the site, off the street, and that the traffic is the most serious problem. 8!29/88 ~- ~, MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLt~tttarxr ~n~rccti nx A_()~ST 29 1988 Paye 6 ACTION: Commissioner Carusillo offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Feldhaus, and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Herbst sad McBurney absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to construct a 3-story, 47-unit apartment complex with waivers of maximum structural height and maximum fence height on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.67 acres having a frontage of approzimately 98 feet on the west side of Greenleaf Avenue, and further described as 2050 W. Greenleaf Avenue; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration oa the basis that it has considered the proposed 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 wi:l have a significant effect on the environment. Commission Carusillo offered Resolution 270. PC 88-234 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Variance No. 3823 on the basis that there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in identical zoning classification in the vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Committee Recommendations. On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOUAS, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BOYDSTUN, HERBST ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS: MC BURNEY, MESSE Joseph W. Fletcher, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's dacision within 22 days to the City Council. Commissioner Carusillo stated he wanted to go along with this project because this is a hardship parcel and the agent had no other alternatives and that he did keep the neighborhood concerns in mind. ITEM N0. 4. CEOA NgrnTrvv nvrr,au~Trnx CONDITION t :cF pSI7MIT N0. 3011 PUBLIC REARING: OWNERS: MADHUBALA RAMESHBHAI PATEL AND ROMESH NAROTTAMSHAI PATEL, ET AL, ATTENTION: RAMESA N. PATEL, 1914 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805. Property is approzimately 1.6 acres having a frontage of approximately 120 feet on the northeast side of Anaheim Boulevard, approximately 450 feet northwest of the centerline of Pacifico Avenue and further descrihad as 1914 South Anaheim Boulevard. Requost: To permit a 64-unit motel. Continued from the meetings of June 6, June 20 and July 18, 1988. 8/29/88 l MINUTES ANAHEIM Czj~SC PLANNING COMMISernu arT['[JST 29 1988 P~ae 7 Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Carusillo and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Herbst, Mc Burney and Messe absent) that consideration of the Aforementioned mattor be continued to the meeting of September 11, 1988 at the request of the applicant. ITEM NO 5 CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION RECLASSIFm~TTON NO 88-89-04_~ vA1tIANCE N0. 3834. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: NEWPORT PACIFIC REALTY AND INVESTMENT. 4000 MacArthur Blvd., #680, Newport Beach, CA 92660. Property is approzimately 1 acre having a frontage of approzimately 217 feet on the north side of Ba.l Road, approximately 138 feet west of the centerline of Agate Street, and further described as 2011 and 2017 West Ball Road. Request: RS-A-43,000 to RM-1200 and waiver of maximum structural height to construct a 3-story, 22-unit apartment ccaplex. There were approximately seven persons indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read at the public hearing, it is referred to and make a part of the minutes. Al Marshall, 4400 MacArthur, Newport Beach, agent, stated they feel this revised plan for 22 units is a good solution to the neighborhoods concerns and they feel this is a good project. Don Haiker, 939 S. Agate, stated they have been coming to several hearings for about a year regarding this property and the developers are still requesting a high density development. He stated the neighbors have asked that the zoning be changed to RM-2400 and the City Council granted rezoning on the adjacent church property to RM-2400 as protection to the homeowners and at one meeting this Commission recommended to the developer that they consider RM-2400 zoning. He stated there were over 50 people in attendance before the City Council and they recommended RM-2400 zoning and that he took vacation time from his job to attend today and that he presented the Council with petitions of over 200 signatures opposing RM-1200 zoning and 3-story units. Mr. Haiker referred to Paragraph 16 of the staff report regarding the justification for granting the waivers and noted there are no special circumstances relating to this property and asked that this request be denied and that the property be rezoned to RM-2400. He stated these are no 3-story projects next to single-family homes on Sall Road. He stated the homeowners were there first and the zoning is to protect them. Pham Tran, 955 E. Agate, stated most of the concerns have been presented and she is present to sizow their concern and worry; that they are happy with their neighborhood and that they worry every day about what will be done with this property and asked that the Commission deny this request because there would be too many people around and three stories are too high and parking will be a problem. He asked that the property he rezoned to RM2400, and asked that any future hearings on this property be held in the evenings. 8/29/88 ~{ Ms. Tran, 951 S. Agate stated they have been here before and thought it was important to continue to attend and noted their houses are 20 years old and they do not have a way to move away from this area, and that they do not want three stories and the developers have been told that before and pointed out there are a lot of senior citizens and children in the area who walk in the neighborhood. She asked that this request be denied. Mrs. Ware, 922 S. Agate, stated she has been to all these hearings and tY.ey have all invested a lot of money in their homes and they have no money to move and live in fear of having 3 stories there. Ilene Haiker, 939 S. Agate, stated most of her concerns have been presented, but that she is concerned about the tandem parking and thought the tenants would be parking on their residential streets and on Ball Road. Magdy Hanna, owner, stated they have 51 parking spaces and that is more than adequate and that this is an ezcellent project and has all the amenities a project like this needs. He stated he purchased the property with the understanding that it was zoned RM-1200 and that he could not develop it as RM-2400 because it is not economically feasible. Al Marshall stated reclassification of the church property to RM-2400 wars requested but he did not thick that has been finalized. Greg Hastings stated it was finalized since there were no conditions of approval. Mr. Marshall stated there is no intrusion on the single-family area. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Boydstun stated the bachelor unit plans show a bathroom opening onto the kitchen and that bothered her. Mr. Marshall stated they can make that correction. Commissioner Boydstun stated there are 22 units and 20 tandem parking spaces and 2 quest spaces would be lost to the units because they cannot park one car behind another. She asked about guest parking also. Mr. Hanna responded they can eliminate t;~e tandem spaces, and not reduce the number of spaces and asked that the request be approved subject to the parking layout being approved by tho staff. He responded to Commissioner Carusillo that the tandem spaces would be assigned to the same unit. Responding to Commissioner Carusillo, Mr. Marshall stated there is a 20-foot stripe and a large patio and cabana arena and explained the docks on the second floor vary in size but the minimum width is 5 feet. He stated there was a re;Yesign of the bachelor units and there is a wall right to the end of the kitchen counters which creates a hallway where the door opens. 8/29/88 .~. `~_ MIht'SES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 29 1988 Page 9 Mr. Hanna stated the problems with the interior walls can be resolved and they will make the changes discussed. Commissioner Herbst stated the Commission has reviewed this property several times and he would recommend that it be rezoned to RM-2400. He stated the Commission wanted RM-2400 zoning, and the City Council agreed, and now this developer has brought all the neighbors out again and the developer is looking at the economics and not planning and zoning and that he still felt it should be RM-2900 and pointed out the property is still zoned RS-A-43000. Mr. Hanna stated again that he could not develop at those standards and asked if Commission would like to see a commercial project on that site. Greg Hastings ezplained approzimately 12 units could be constructed in the RM-2400 zone. Commissioner Feldhaus stated when he first came oa the Commission be kept being told that considering economics is not good judgment in planning and he wanted to be absolutely fai: and has listened to all the arguments to convince him that there are special circumstances other than economics to approve this variance, but that he has not heard one. Mr. Hanna stated there are three-story projects oa both sides of Ball Road and he has built 3 ;ferias as close as 49 feet to single-family oa Hall Road. Commissioner Feldhaus stated in November 1987, the Commission approved RM-1200 and the City Council wanted RM-2400 and there seems to be an impasse. Commissioner Carusillo stated this property has been reviewed several times recently and the neighbors were concerned about privacy and visual intrusion and this project sets back the building 150 feet from the east property line and except for parking, the developer has done a good job mitigating the neighbors' concerns. He stated if the parking could be settled and the neighbors could be assured that further development would not spill over onto Agate Street, he thought the project could work. Commissioner Hoydstun stated it would be spot zoning surrounded by RM-2400 and RS-7200. Mr. Marshall stated they met with neighbors many times and one of their concerns was svbtrerramean parking and they did eliminate that and the designation was for RM-1200. He stated at one time it looked like Ball Road would be developed at much higher density, but that hasn't happened. He stated the structure is only 34 feet 1.~SLa and is no different than two stories and reducing it to two stories, wc~u18 :nean losing two mores units. Commissioner Feldhaus stated the residents in that RS-7200 area have added rooms in their attics which are higher than this proposed project. Commissioner Carusillo asked if the neighbors yould accapt the reduction of one story and an increase in parking. 8/29/88 i ~Mi M ~ i ~ avaaotL rTmv vra-.:tiN(' COMMISSION AUGUST 29 1988 Paoe 10 Mr. Haiker stated that would be better, but they have all along strived for RM-2400 zoning and they are concerned about the density. He stated if this is approved, he thought the single-story units on Juno Place would be demolished and redeveloped with higher density. He stated the church property was rezoned to provide them with socne protection. Commissioner Feldhaus stated this is set back 100 feet from the homes on Agate Street which are most affected and he did not see any visual intrusion. Commission Carusillo stated the visual intrusion was the biggest concern and hoped since that has been mitigated, that it fs a feasible project. Mr. Haiker stated it is better, but they are worried about the precedent it would set and he thought there should be a buffer to single-family homes sad added he did not see any hardship oa this property. He stated when this developer purchased this property, he knew the problems with getting RM-1200 on this property. Chairwoman Bouas asked what guarantee the Commission has that iE this rezoning is approved, that they wouldn't come back with another RM-1200 project which would be more dense. Mr. Hanna responded that if this is approved, this project would be built. Chairwoman Bouas stated any project could be built under RM-1200 since there is no way to tie the approval to these plans. Greg Hastings stated most likely a RM-1200 project witbout waivers would be less dense than this project and any waiver would require a public hearing. Mr. Hanna stated it would not be feasible to construct; 18 to 20 units by reducing the structure by one story. Mr. Hanna stated other 3-story projects have been approved on Ball &oad within 50 feet of single-family. Mr. Marshall stated this project has 10 one-bedroom units and 4 bachelor units which have two parking spaces each and that reduces the number of occupants and the proposed parking is adequate for 20 two-bedroom units. Mr. Hanna stated they can correct their plans tc provide all of the bachelor units with one parking space and if this matter was continued, he could bring in a revised plan. Commissioner Carusillo, Feldhaus and Bouas stated they would not want to continue this again. Commissioner Herbst stated this Commission and the City Council recommended that property be rezoned to RM-2400; and that this developer has reduced the project, but not down to something acceptable to the community. He stated he thought it is time for the Commission to stick by what they recommend. 8/29/88 __ ....._.,.,_......,... ~ .... ~,.~.~....-„a+rrn..w...+w+r<a-rs,~ ~a.auas:sl+~~e.:: r~:. ~~a.;!.r~iviYta~2,x::.sT~'i.:}~:.er,~:~a"3 r._ 4.~ MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. AUGUST 29, 1988 Pagg 11 Mr. Fianna stated this Co:rJnissioa approved 34-units on this property. Chairwoman Bouas stated the Council denied the 34 units. ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion seconded by Commissioner Feldhaus and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Messe and Mc Burney absent) that the Anaheim City P1annlnq Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassify subject property from the ;•5-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) zone to the RM-1200 (Residential, Multiple-Family) and to construct a 3-story, 22-unit apartment complex with waiver of maximum structural height on a rectanqularly- shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1 acre having a frontage of approximately 217 feet oa the north side of Ball Road, approximately 138 feet west of the centerline of Agate Street, and further descrihsd as 211 and 2017 West Ball Road; 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 ao substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner Herbst offered a resolution to deny Reclassification No. 88-89-09. On roll call, tha foregoing resolution was FAILED TO CARRY by the following vote: AYES: BOYDSTUN, HERBST NOES: BOUAS, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS ASSENT: MC BURNEY, MESSE Mr. Hanna stated he would submit a revised parking plan eliminating the tandan spaces for the bachelor units without changing the number of spaces. ACTION: Commissioner Feldhaus offered Resolution No. PC 88-235 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does herely grant Reclassification No. 88-89-09 to RM-1200 subject to Interdepartmental Committee Recommendations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NOES: BOYDSTUN, HERBST ABSENT: MC BURNEY, MESSE Commission Feldhaus offered Resolution No. PCSS-236 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does herely grant Variance No. 3834, 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 zone3 property in the same vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoniaq Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification is the vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations, including an additional condition that a revised parking 8/29/88 - .....---...,,..,....s....,:.«~:~.zY€~•R5^;.rs'>.~rx,.~arpse'•'ca .?T.f','~.RSr'.~',lA'-c"55'L'vy'~!pw;~"_`r";°a4,"~~a'~sk.. _ , m y '~° ~_A~ r ~: ~/ INUTES, ANAHEIM CIa'Y PLANNING COMMISSION A Cii T 2a 1988 page 12 layout plan be approved by the City Traffic Engineer to eliminate the tandan parking spaces for the bachelor units; avid that the plans be revised to eliminate the door opening into the kitchen. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NOES: BOYDSTUN, HERBST ABSENT: MC BURNEY, MESSE Joseph Fletcher, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ITEM NO. 6 Fns uFGATIVE DECr.aaAT10N RES~.ASSIFICATION NO 88-89-IO Nn V~tIANCE N0. 38 S, OWNERS: DAQRELL PHILLIPS AND BARBARA PHILLIPS AND STEPHEN D. SHIRLEY ET AL, 1591 W. Tedntar Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92802. AGENT: DENNIS FLYlRi, 4831 Aliano Plaza, Yorba Linda, CA 92802. Property Location: 1811, 1817 and 1821 W. Cypress Street. To construct an 11-unit, 1 and 2-story coadomiaium complez with waivers of (a) minimum building site width, (b) mazimum structural height, (c) permitted encroachment into required yards and (d) mazimum fence height. There was one interested person indicating her presence at the public hearing; and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Dennis Flynn, agent, 24632 San Juan Avenue, Suite 170, Dana Point, presented Lhe 11-unit condominium/townhouse project and pointed out it will b® a quality project with private patios for each unit; and that they have been sensitive to the RS-7200 that surrounds the property and have given thr project a single-family look to transition from the RS-7200. Mr. Flynn asked if Condition No. 7 requiring relocation of the median, refers to a prorated assessment for the reconstruction of the median. Greg Hastings, Zoniaq Division Manager, explained on previous projects in this particular block, the conditions required the first project developer to pay for the improvements and then it would be up to that developer to ask tb.e City to set ;:~ a reimbursement program so that the remaining property owners would pay their share. He explained that is also true with Condition No. 8 pertaining to the sewer line. Mr. Flynn stated they have committed to redevelop the area and provide a quality project and asked if there is a way, if this is approved, that they can concurrently file the tentative tract map for the coadomiaium, while under construction and hold it as a requirement of occupanr_y in order to expedite the project. 8/29/88 MINUTE~~, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIN(L~Q1.4+IISSION. AUGUST 29, 1988 Page I3 Ruth Motley, 203 Evelyn Drive, Anaheim, stated she was concerned about the fence height and also that the staff report indicates the xall will extend to within 4 feet of Cypress Street and the neighbors would like it to eztend all the way across Cypress Street. (Greg Hastings responded that reference is to the easterly terminus of Cypress adjacent to Coffman on the east side.) Chairwoman Bouas stated it should be to the center of ~ypreas Street and Commissioner Carusillo stated it would bR best to block the entire street, rather than stopping halfway and Greg Hastings stated it is proposed to be all the xay across to the south side of Cypress Street. Mrs. Motley stated they would request an 8-foot high wall on the western boundary across Cypress instead of 7 feet; and that one of the neighbors has 5 swimming pool and there have been two police incidents and people have jumped the fence running away from the police. Commissioner Bc,ydstun asked if the developer would be willing to stipulate to the 8-foot high wall on the western boundary all the way across Cypress Street. Mr. Flynn responded they studied that issue and wanted to be sensitive to the RS-7200 single-family area and the 7-foot high fence was a compromise, especially since each, unit has a private back yard; however he thought they could work out as 8-€oot high fence with the neighbors. Chairwoman Bouas suggested maybe the wall could be stepped up, and xould only need to be 8 feet high is some locations; and Mr. Flynn statod it could go to 8 feet oa Cypress. Commissioner Carusillo stated he did not like that configuration and thought it would sac have continuity, and if the neighbors want the wall to keep people Gut of L•T:eir yards, maybe it should be 8 feet adjacent to their yards. Darrell Phillips, 1281 Marada Drive, Orange, statod an B-foot high wall would be like a prison wall and not very aesthetically pleasing to the Evelyn Street residents;, however, he is not objecting and they will build it, but it is very high and gives a feeling of oppression. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mrs. Motley responded to Commissioner Carusillo that she lives on the southeast corner of Cyprslss and Evelyn and that <he had spoken to her neighbors oa the northeast corner and that they would also like to have an 8-foot high wall, and that neighbor has a swimming pool, and *..hat they did discuss lanhscapinq. Commissioner Carusillo suggested a 7-foot high wall, with perhaps one foot of redwood lattice, etc. because 8 feet is very high and it might give a feel of confinement and thought it would diminish the aesthetics of the neighborhood, in general, and he felt 7 feet would be adequate. 8/29/88 4~ ~_ MINUTES. ASIA_f?EIM CITY PLA~'TNItio :'OFS.•lISSION, AUGU$~29. 1988 ~ ,_EsILq.~.4 Commissioner Feldha~as asked who is responsible for mai.acx+iaing the wall especially when it is hit and blocks knocked out., c.smmissioner Herbst stated nay wall over sis feet tall has to be str;scturAl.?y d~~3igned with more footin~~s and support. Joe Fletc:.sr, D~p~it;; City Attorney, stated the oGn~~r ni 'uh~ property oa which thfl wsll is constrzcksd xill be responsible for main*.e~uance. He stated normally a wall is c~astructed on only one property and if it straddles the profi~erty line, they would share the resyoasibility. Camtnissioner Carusillo sugC~....ta3 a condition of approval requiring the CCSRs to require maintenance of the wall across Cypress, and Mr. Fletcher stated that would be a reasonable condition to ado. Commissioner Carusillo stated he thought there should be a 7-foot high wall solidly constructed across Cypress and a 7-foot high wall on the west side to thn n~~theast property, with an additional 1-foot decorative feature oz: top. COMMISS3UNER HERBST LEFT THE MEETING Ai' 3:30 p.m. Chairwoman Bouas stated the developer would construct the wall, but: the property owners r!+uld maintain it because it is going to be across theic~ yards on private property, +±n_d the abandoned property becomes their property, ~±itte 1./2 of Cypress Street becoming bra. Motley's property. Sb.e stated tun r.~•:~:-a". of the wall depends a for on the grade of the property. She suggested approval ~or an B-moot high wall, unless an agreement for a 7-foot hig}~ wall is reacht~d between the property owners sad the developer. Mrs. Motley stated t;ir,. ,najoricy of the nEighbors wanted the 8-foot high xall. Cortanissioaer Carusillo stated he sees a problem with splitting t2ae maintenance of the wall and Mrs. Motley stated tLexa will be a lat more actizi':y oa the other side of the wall, and the ccLdpreinium association would maintain their side. Joe Fletcher ~t:ated asuuming upon the abaadoamea.t of Cypress Street, that the property line is right uown the middle of tae street, the conditions would requirs the condominium association to acquire an easement across the neighbor's property to maintain the wall and if the adjoining p~:operty l.aner will not grant the easement, Che City cannot impose that obliga?.ioa oa the association; and the condition reads .hat the street will be abandoned bsfore the building is constructed. Commissioner Carusillo stated Mrs. Motley and her neighbor wauld thba give the association an easement. Chairwoman Souas ezplained, Cypres:t Street will bu abandoned and Evelyn Drive will make a circle and Co.mnissio~sr Feldhaus stated he is trying tr,, eliminate the need for them to maintain the call. 8/29/88 4 `~ ~. MINUTES. ANA'.:EItc CITY PbANNI~Ir~~~;,;~kSION. .AUGUST 29, 1988 _. Page 15 Commissioner Ceirusillo st~_o~:: a could agree with 3n tl-fo~~t high wall where it ab~s!s private single tamilg property and to working oulr. an agreement with the property owners on Cypress Street and creating an easemeLt gxanzi:~? the right to them, but wa.a concerned about an 8-:oot high wall across Cy-pr6as. Mr. Flynn propc~sed a compromi..e by building a 6-'•oot high b1ocY. wall, with a vent; de_~re~ive but open two-foot top on it whir. would stop ps~•ple from co,¢.ing into kheir yards and will look attra,ct?ve; however, he •rould build to 8 feet if necessr.r}•. Joe Fletcher stated he thought the abandrnment was only for the portion of Cypress Street abul:ting the subject property and it ~*r1s noted t..s abandonment is all the way to Evelyn Drive. Mr. Fletcher continued the condition now rpn~ds only that abaa:•oned portion adjacent to subject pcnperty sad added :.hat orea> the street is abando_ed, the asphalt will have to bu re::noved and new curt~s an3 gut.ers installed scruss 'd~•el;~a Ari~~, and Mrs. .Motley explained she taught khe issue o£ r.~'sp^nsabilitg for payin.~ for the improvements has been wor~;.ed out. She stated their ct••.rages are oa the rear of t'e property and Lhey woul~E still have to ho~:'a that street to get into their garages. Mr. Fletcher stated if there was g!~ing *_:, bn major street removal and replanting, the dece:cper should have t. pay far it and suggested those issues be left for the hearzn~a ca the abandonment. Commissioner Feldhaua stated it wiii be an 8-foot. w§il unless adjacent: property owners ngree to some~Y:ing lower. Mr. Fletcher sra*_ed ~.ne condition should react that if ihe:e are appravad plans in the Eng:neesing D~spartment, the developer sk;ould submit necessary applicc:tions and' feos for processing the abandonment of Lwelyn Drive. Commiss_onr,z Carus.illo stated the concern regarding t;.a tentative tract r..ap should be addressed. Mr. FletcbEr stated he thought t}:. concern from staff's point of view is that if nothing is done until occupanr_l, there will be times wh:nn there will bee a great prassura cv issue the he:ildiaq rermit, and the discussion earlier was whekher or not there xis some way to po;ct some security to protect the city and to complete `.:he processing if the dawRloper doesn't. Mr. Fletcher stated the condition could read that ~ te:ztati~~e meo be approved by the City prior to issuance a£ the buiiding permit, which is fuather down the read, and the dev<.•oper waald not hove to have the entire process done because actually a lot of the time that the devc7_oper is facing is with processing through the Department of &eal Es~cate rather than through the subdivision process here at the City, and at least he can get his tentative map approved. He stated he thought the sta£€ still feels that it would not be in the City's best interest to let the project be constructed when there has been absolutely no work done on the subdivision. 8/29/88 .._. _..... ,_.__...._.,... ~. ..: :.. n:. ~ -.. _ ,.; :i _t -. i.i ._ le'.. d ~. ; .,v .x:7:'4Gb512'~+,'21nen:STY;ii~ HirZF„s~.~".~`Irv~- k Ip~ t;: .. ~. M_ TEES, ANAHEIM CITX_2LANNING COMMIS~I_ON, AITGUST 29,1988 P$ge 16 Mr. Fletcher clarified the tentative approval wou13 be thraugh the Planning Cammission or the City Engineer, depending who the hearing cfficer is; and that that is one proposal and is not the only way to resolve it, but thought it would be the best way so the City knows that the developer's work through the City has been done and that be has made a significant .investr..ant towards the subdivision. He stated after that point, the conditions can still be that the final subdivision be completed prior to occupancy and the City still runs the risk that there is going to be pressure if for some reason the thing is held up in the Department of Real Estate, or their final CC&RS are not appro~~ed, etc. Chairwoman Bouas and Commissioner Feldhaus agreed that is what they understood. ACTION: Commissioner Feldhaus offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Herbst, Messe and Mc Burney absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassify subject property from the RS-7200 (Residential, Single-•Family) Zone to the RM-3000 (Residential, Multiple Family) to construct a 1 and 2-story, 11-unit condominium complex with waivers of minimum building site width, maximum structural height, permitted encroachment into required yards and maximum fence height on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.8 acre, having approximate frontages of 171 feet on the north side of Cy~.,cess Street, approximately 70 feet west of the centerline of Coffman Street and €urther described as 1811, 1818 and 1821 Cypress 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. Co:rsnissi.oa2r Feldhaus offered Resolution No. PC 88-237 and moved for its passage Pnc' adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve Reclassification No. 88-89-10 subject to Interdepartmental Committee Recommendiitions, subject to an additional condition that the property owner/develope.r apply for and pay the necessary fees for the abandonment of Evelyn Street, froci the intersection of Evelyn Drive, eastward to the eastern boundary of the project. On roll call, the foregoing resolution wt:s passed by the following vote: AYES: SODAS, SOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NOES: NONE ABSENT: HERBST, MC BURNFY, MESSE Commissioner Feldhaus offered Resolution No. PC 88-238 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Variance No. 3835 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 is the 8/29/88 s ~° ~'~ ~ '. f MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIN: roevnrtSrnN AUGUST 29 1988 Page 17 same vicinity; and that strict application of the Zaaiag Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations including a condition that an eight-foot high wall will be provided unless written approval by the adjoining property owners for a lower height is submitted to the Planning Department. Prior to the vote oa the above resolution, Mr. Hastings asked for clarification regarding the height of the wall. Mr. Fletcher suggested the condition could read ti.at the wall on the north property line is to be built at eight (8) feet unless writfea approval of the adjoining property owners for a lower height is submitted to the Planning Department. Chairwoman Bouas asked if tho applicant was willing to make that stipulation. Mr. Flynn responded that is agreeable and that he would like to know about filing of the tentative tract map for a condominium. Mr. Fletcher suggested the condition be revised to read that the tentative tract map be submitted and approved by the City of Anaheim, and Condition No. 3 modified to be based upon the certificate of occupancy. On roll calY, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: SOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, NOES: VOKE ABSEtiT: HERBST, MC SURVEY, MESSE Joseph Fletcher, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City CounciY. ITEM 1N0. 7. CEOA NEGATIVE DFCLA_RATION A2iD CONDITIONAL L-cF PFRMTT xn 3048. PUHLIC HEARING. OWNER: DOMINION PROPERTY COMPANY, 2811 Wilshire Boulevard, X1660, Santa Monica, CA 90403. AGENT: PAILIP R. SCHWARTZE, 14891 8orba Street, 8100, Tustin, CA 92680. PROPERTY LOCATION: 3320 East La Palma Avenue REQUEST: To permit industrially-related office uses in a:~ ezisting industrial building. There was n9 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. 8/29/88 A vTtarrrrc ANA_T~IM ITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 29 1988 Pagg 18 Philip Schwartze, agent, stated they are requesting a conditional use permit to permit those uses presently in the building, in addition to uses which are normally permitted to serve the industrial area. He stated Page 2 of the staff report includes a list of industrially related office uses and some are identified which are not typical for the industrial area. He stated the computer analysis and quality control analysis use3 are ezactly what are going on in the building now and that it is the intent to continue the ezact uses which may have been there for some time as part of the Rockwell operation. THE PUBIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. g~TION Commissioner Messe offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Herbst, McBuraey and Messe absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit industrially related office uses in an existing industrial building on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approzimately 6.31 acres having a .frontage of approximately 520 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue approzimately 320 feet east of the centerline of Shepherd Street and further described as 3320 East La Palma Avenue (Rockwell International); and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration te3other 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 oa the environment. Commissioner Carusillo offered Resolution No. PC 88-239 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 3048 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035 and subject to Interdepartmenta~ Committee Recommendations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NOES: NONE ABSENT: HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE Joseph Fletcher, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ITEM NO 8 C°OA NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3055 PUBLIC HEARING: OWNERS: FRED W. MORGENTHALER, 24541 Saturna Drive, Mission Viejo, CA 92691, AGENT: ALI R. SAJJADI AND NEMATOLLAH SAJJADI, 12152 E. Chapman p9, Garden Grove, CA 9264,;1. Property location: 513 W. Chapman Avenue To permit a 1,446 square foot convenience market in an existing commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. 8/29/88 There were one person indicating her 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. Ali Sajjadi, agent, explained this is a request for a minimarket selling dry goods and beverages with off sale beer and wine; that the property is developed with a commercial shopping center and has been there for 10 years and the property seems to be suitable for this type of use. Judy Harris, 2321 S. Myra Court, stated she owned a unit is the Smoketree complex which is directly to the north and has some questions and concerns regarding this request. She stated the staff report does not say what they will be selling and asked if they have applied for a liquor license and what their hours of operation will be. She pointed out right now there are no stores that are open late at night and it is quiet at night. She stated some of their units have windows facing the parking lots behind these streets and they are concerned if this market sells beer and xine that there will be a trash disposal area near their lots and there will be noise. Mr. Sajjadi stated the hours of operation will be 7:00 a.m. to no later than 10:30 p.m. and that they will be selling dry goods and there rill not be any hot foods or hard liquor for aale and they will only be selling beer and vine and that no one will be allowed to drink on the premises. Concerning the trash, he stated there will be a property management company is charge of those types of things. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Feldhaus asked if the agent undorstands what is meant by "prepared" or "hot" foods and asked if they intend to have a microwave oven. Mr. Sajjadi responded that this is not going to be a restaurant and is only a minimarket and there will be prepackaged foods that could be put into a small microwave which would not take very long and then the customer would leave right axay. Commissioner Feldhaus stated if a microwave oven is installed, it would be considered as "prepared" or "hot" food and also things like the hot dog machine which rotates. He explained that sandwiches which are prepared some other place and taken off the premises "cold" would not be considered "prepared" or •'hot" food, but warming any food will trigger the requirement to provide additional parking spaces. Mr. Sajjadi stated if the Commission does not want them to have a microwave oven, then they will not have one. He stated they have a store in Santa Ana which does sell hot foods and the City of Santa Ana did not object to them having a microwave. 8/29/88 A ,v MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COtA•tISSY<,,{~;. AUGUST 29, 1988 Paae 20 Commissioner Feldhaus stated if they have a microwave oven, five additional parking spaces would be required. He asked if the Mezicaa restaurant to the west is still in operation. lyir. Sajjadi responded that it is still operating and that they sell beer and wine there. Commissioner Carusillo stated, responding to the questions by the opposition, that there was a comment that they do not need to have off sale beer and wine in this area because there are other facilities available where those items are sold, but he wanted to remind the opposition that they were also opposed to a multi-story senior citizen complez is this area because there was a lack of convenient shoppi,rq in the area. He pointed out the request is for xaiver of only two parking spaces. He stated he does believe, however, that a microwave oven does encourage fast foods, and he would not rant to see that in this facility, but other than that, he would not have any problem with this use. Besponding to Commissioner Carusillo, Mr. Sajjadi stated they would be closed by 11:00 p.m. but would start to close at 10:30 p.m. Miss Harris stated 11:00 p.m. is ao problem, as long as they do not try to qo to a 24-hour a day operation. Commissioner Carusillo stated since the agent has stipulated to the hours of 10:30 p.m., seven days a reek and that no fast food would be sold there, he would support the rec?uost. Commissioner Feldhaus pointed out that those would be included as conditions of approval, and if they want to make any changes, they would have to come back before the Commission. Mr. Sajjadi asked that the hours of operation be changed to from 6130 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., seven days per week. ACTION: Commissioner Carusillo offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Feldhaus and MOTION CABSIED (Commissioners Aerbat, Mc Burney and Messe absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a 1,446 square-foot convenience market in an ezistiaq commercial retail center with waiver of minimum ar~mber of parking spaces oa a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approzimately 1.7 acres having a frontage of approzimately 372 feet on the north aide of Chapman Avenue sad being located approzimately 290 feat east of the centerline of Harbor Boulevard ,sad further described as 513 West Chapman Avenue; and does hereby approve the Pegative Declaration upon findiaq that it has considered the Negative Declaration C^?ether with any comments received during the public review process sad further findiaq on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is ao substantial ovidence that the project will have a significant effect oa the environment. Commissioner Carusillo offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CAERIED (Commissioners Herbst, Mc Burney and Messe absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant a waiver of Code requirement oa the basis th~et the parking xaiver will not cause an iacraase 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, rill not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 8/29/88 ~~ ^k c Commissioner Carusillo offered Resolution No. PC88-240 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 3055 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035, subject to interdepartmental Committee recommendations and further subject to the bourn of operation being limited to 6:30 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. seven days a week and subject to the stipulation that there will be ao microwave oven where customers could heat food. Oa roll call, the foregoing resolution vas passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, NOES: NONE ABSENT: HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE Joe Fletcher, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the Ci(;y Council. ITEF, NO 9 CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATI^" ~`f1Tin7T20NAi i1CF PFRM7T NO 3056 PUBLIC HEARING: OWNER: ANNF. PAULUS, P.O. Soz 4349, Anaheim, CA 92803, AGENT: CARL RARCHER ENTERPRISES, 1200 N. Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92803. Property location: ~R~O E incoln Avenue (Carl's Jr.) To permit a drive-through addition to an ezistiaq fast-food restaurant. There were two people indicating their presence is opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. The agent for Carl Karcher Enterprises explained that they would be facing the facility away from the residential area and that there will be volume control on the speakers which can be lowered at night to accommodate different noise levels. He asked about Condition Ho. 7 pertaining to signs in the CL cone and asked if that would pertain to directional signs for ingress and egress. Greg Hastings, 2aninq Livision Manager, responded that would apply only to any new signs and the applicant can pick up a copy of the sign ordinance showing that directional signs crm be three square feet. The agent stated they would also want to have a menu board and Mr. Hastings responded the ordinance does not cover that type of signage. The agent responded in that case they would have no problem concurring with the proposed conditions. Darlene Petersen, 5025 Ciada, referred to the area betxeen her house and the eight-foot high fence and asked who would maintain the area along the alley xhich is located behind Carl's Jr. abutting the block wall. She presented photographs showing what is ezistiaq now and stated she has lived there for 15 8/29/88 i~ Y years and until the last siz months they have not had any problems with graffiti and that the pictures show only a small amount. She stated she has had to call Fire Prevention to clean out the alley and stated the trash is the alley is an ongoing problem and with a drive-through window she did not know what would prevent the customers from leaving through the alley. She stated she is concerned about additional traffic in the alley also. She stated there are large semi-trucks goiaq through there now and she did not know xhere they are coming from. She stated in the last few months Carl's Jr. has been cleaning the alley, possibly in anticipation of this request. Betty Miller, 2857 Gerald Circle, stated her complaint is not really with Carl's Jr. She has lived there since 1961 and never had a problem but is worried about the circle they are making and the impact it will have on the alley. She stated she sees 18-wheel trucks goiaq through the alley like they were on the freeway. The agent stated t•.heir proposal will facilitate slow onsite/offaite traffic flow and explained they are proposing a truck flow from the east driveway. He stated Carl's Jr. has a market for food to qo and this proposal is going to be addressing that market end this proposal will facilitate customers coming on site and immediately leaving. Ae stated the alley will be blocked with an eight-foot high wall and noted the alley is behind that block wall. Grey Aastiags stated that is not a public alley and is an easement for adjacent properties. Commissioner Boydstun clarified that there is ao access from this property to the alley. The agent stated they rill take care of the trash and will do everything they can to keep the site clean, however, the alley is behind the fence and that is not their property and they have ao authority to do anything about it. Commissioner Boydstun stated customers will not be able to park in the alley and come into the restaurant. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Carusillo stated there is no ability to traverse from this property to the back alley and Chairroman Bouas asked xhere the traffic would eater that alley now. Ms. Miller explained they are coming from Rio Vista, possibly from the Mobil Station. She stated the big trucks park by the tire store and that cars and trucks are both parking in the alley and that it is not a public alley. Chairwoman Bouas stated that it is possibly a Code Enforcement problem sad Ms. Miller responded that they have contacted Code Enforcement sad Commissioner Bouas stated maybe with the Planning Commission contacting Code Enforcement, they would solve the problem. She stated regarding graffiti, that every property owner is responsible for cleaning the graffiti from their own property. B/29/88 MINU'-'FS ANA~IM CITY PL1~N?IING COMMISSION AUGUST 29 1988 Paoe 23 Ms. Petersen stated there is to be an eight-foot high wall along the alley and the graffiti is the problem oa their side facing the alley and not the side facing Carl's. The area is starting to look like a ghetto and it is bringing down property values. Cha?,rwoman Bouas stated the Commission would like to get the area cleaned up arQ was sure that Carl's Jr. would stipulate to keep their part of the alley clean. Greg Hastings stated he was not sure whether or not the alley could be posted for no parking but that Code Enforcement could inform the owner of the problems. Commissioner Feldhaus stated the opposition's concerns are certainly real, but he did not think Carl's Jr. should be challenged for something that is occurring now. Ms. Petersen stated she did not know where the traffic is coming from but that the owner of the tire store has told people they cannot park there. She added she has seen a lot of trash thrown onto her property from windows and that she realizes that Carl's Jr. is not responsible for the whole area, but was concerned about additional debris being thrown and also traffic and pointed out thak ao one is cleaning the trash up now. Commissioner Feldhaus stated he could envision cars coming in off Lincoln and going through that alley and Chairwoman Bouas clarified that it will be blocked off. Commissioner Carusillo stated he thought this would help the ezistinq situation because it will close off the ability for traffic to go into that alley from this property. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, stated the problem has nothing to do with the Carl's Jr. site. He stated he believed the property owner of the pie-shaped parcel permits trucks to park there. He stated the trucks can eater the pie-shaped parcel from Lincoln and that trucks are not permitted to park oa City streets overnight, and they will try anything unless the property is posted with a sign and enforced for "ao parking", and that they are free to do that, especially if the owner of the property does not discourage it. ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Feldhaus and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Herbst, Mc Burney and Messe absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a drive-through addition to an existing fast-food restaurant on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approzimately 0.52 acres having a frontage of approzimately 141 feet oa the south side of Lincoln Avenue and being located approzimately 195 feet east of the centerline of Rio Vista Street and further described as 2820 E. Lincoln Avenue (Carl's Jr.); and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon fiadinq that it has considered the Negative Leclaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further fiadinq 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. 8/29/88 >' ~~. ~~ ab MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 29 1988 Paqe 24 Commissioner Boydstun offered Resolution No. PC88-241 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 3056 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035, subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations and subject to the stipulation that Carl`s Jr. will maintain the wall and keep the alley clean behind their property and the area clean oa the alley side of the wall. Oa roll call, the foregoing resolution xas passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDBAUS, NOES: NONE ABSENT: HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE Joe Fletcher, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ITEM N0. 10 - CEOA NEGATIVE DErrsRZTtox_ WAIVER OF CODE REnttru~rrr CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3057 PUBLIC,HEARING: OWNER: BR PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, 450 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660. Property location: Property is $pproximately 3 6 acres on the ~~*rt,nwer e•nrn..r of Santa *+r raTiY~a Road and Riverview Drive. To construct a 3-story, 45-foot high office building with waiver of minimum structural setback adjacent to freeway and scenic ezpresaway. There was one person indicating her presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to sad made a part of the minutes. Tom Lynch, agent, ezplained they are is agreement with all the proposed conditions, except Nos. 5, 10 and 13 sad that they need to clarify their intent. He added it makes sense to use the roof for the air conditioning equipment sad that they xould like to have t2:e Code amended to allow roof-mounted equipment with the appropriate screening as they did oa their first building which xas just finished two months ago. 8e presented photographs to show what they accomplished with that building. He stated the photographs show the building directly west of subject property and explained the groposed building xill have a similar appearance although constructed with different materials. 8e stated the proposed building will have reflective green glass and the proposed screening is not above seven feet high and would be made out of the same material with the same texture. Responding to Commissioner Carusillo, he stated a three-story building is being constructed oa the southwest corner, and unfortunately that building is higher than this proposed structure (Riverview and Santa Ana Canyon Road). 8/29/88 .per A :fir #~ MINU'T'ES ANAI~IM CITY PL_a~ING C0~lISSION AUGUST 29 1988 Paae 25 Ursula Smith, ?resident of the East Hills Homeowners Association, stated she was the listing real estate egent in East Hills and that the PBS Building shown in the photograph totally destroyed the view properties which the builders had charged premium prices for, and if this building goes in higher, it will destroy the view of 25 homes. She explained this tract has 31 homes and all these people will have an economic hardship because of the proposed buildiaq. Ms. Smith stated the developer said something about the configuration of the land, and she felt surely '.:hey knew about that before they purchased the property. She stated they really da object to any variances; that the builder sold them their properties and they believed him, and at that time she thought he really meant that there would be nothing built above the site. Now these buildings are just going up and she feels that if there are rules, the Commission should stick to them. Mr. Lynch stated the building is three feet lover than the PBS Building is the picture and this rill be the development of the last four remaining lots is that development. He stated they did site studies for that building and discovered that really none of the houses were affected and no views xere blocked. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chairwoman Bouas clarified that the developer is saying that this proposed buildiaq rill not block any viexs, but the previously constructed building does. Mr. Lynch stated they knox it is oa higher ground than botb. of their buildings. Chairwoman Bouas asked if the pads for this building are there and if more fill will be required. Mr. Lynch stated their building will start on the existing grade. Chairwoman Bouas stated she would have to see a study from those houses to determine if their views are going to be blocked. Mr. Lynch stated the pictures submitted were taken from the roof of the PSS Building. Commissioner Feldhaus stated he went up there and saw that the height limit was to be exceeded and from Amberxood this proposed building xould definitely block the viexs, and he xould need to knox the elevation of the site where the building will be located and what the final height will be. He stated there are ao elevation drawings to review. Mr. Lynch stated he has elevation drawings here and that the elevator at the first floor would be 451 feet and the overall height to the roof is 45 feet plus 7 feet for the air conditioning equipment. He stated the elevation of Santa Ana Canyon Road at that point is approximately 460 feet. He added the variance is justified because Santa Ana Canyon Road is higher than Riverdale and then drops off to the east and basically the first floor of the buildiaq will be lower than the Santa Ana Canyon Road elevation. 8/29/88 MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING~QMMISSION AUGUST 29. 1988 Page 26 Mr. Lynch stated maybe they should request a continuance and do some line-of-sight studies. Commissioner Feldhaus stated standing on Amberwood there is no way he could look out without having the viex obstructed. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, stated he has concerns about on-site circulation, and at times it would be difficult to provide adequate circulation on-site and recommended that the developer redesign the site. He stated the entry driveway that coincides with the lobby of the building would block the access if someone was parking their vehicle or dropping off a passenger. He stated he thought the design is poor and will conflict with the property owners and he did not think the developer wou.'~d be happy with the on-site circulation because they will not be able to exchange vehicles at a high volume. Commissioner Feldhaus asked if Mr. Singer is suggesting redesigning the building or the way the building sits oa the property or just the parking layout as it relates to the access. Mr. Singer stated there are a number of ways to improve it, and if it is not done, there will be serious internal circulation problems is the future. Tom Lynch stated there is an ezisting driveway on the west which serves the esistiaq building and that driveway will interconnect. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated since they are proposing roof- mounted equipment it might be appropriate to readvertise thin matter to include that waiver. He added, to his knowledge, that waiver has never been granted and the Code is very ezplicit is prohibiting roof-mounted equipment. Tom Weston stated the previous conditional use permit addressed that issue and that is why the building is like it ia. Commissioner Carusillo stated he would be concerned about the views, and if thin is one that slipped through the cracks that doesn't mean it should happen again and he felt the Commission should give some thought to the circulation problems and what can be done to the north side. Mr. Hastings added, in addition, the plan does not shox any type of block wall adjacent to t:he freeway which is required, sad it may be a good time +.o advertise that also. ACTION: Com:nisaioner Feldhaus offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner 13ouas and MO'.fION CAE&IED (Commissioners Herbst, Mc Burney and Messe absent) that consideration of the aforementioned matter be continued to the regularly scheduled metetinq of September 26, 1988 in order for line-of-site studies to be submitted and in order to readvertise additional waivers. 8/29/86 y i N'INUiES ANAHEIAS CITY PLANNIIIG COMMISSION AUGUST 29 1988 PAGE 7] ITEM N0. 11 - CE ~i NEGATIVE DECLAF,ATION• RECLASSIFICATION NO 87 88 50 (REVISION NO ~)• VARIANCE N0._ 3794. PUBLIC HEARING: OWNER: JOSEPH H. AL, 3333, 3335 and 3335-1/'t West AGENT: MAGDY HANNA 4000 MacArthur Newport Beach, CA 92660; LOCATION: West Ball Road. MAKABI AND JALEH J. MAKABI, ET Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92803; Boulevard, ~t680, 3333, 3335, and 3335-1/2 Request: To construct a 1 and 2 story, 12-unit ,"affordable" condominium complex (formerly a 1 and 2 stoa-y, 16-unit "affordable" condominium comple}: (Revision No. 1) and a 2 and 3 story, 24-unit apartment compley:) with waivers of (a) minimum building site area per dwelling unit, (b) maximum structural height, (c) minimum floor area of 3 bedroom dwelling units, (d) minimum structural setback and (e) minimum recreational/leisure area. Continued from the May 23, 1988, July 6, 1988 and August 15, 1988 Planning Commission meetings. There were 9 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. Al Marshall, 4400 MacArthur Boulevard, Newport Beach. He stated the project he was bringing before the Commission, Anaheim West, has been greatly modified since the last meeting; it has been modified in the direction of the request of the Commission; the specific requests were that we reduce the density from 12-units to 16-units; that we present a proposal for a modified cul-de-sac off of the Deerwood Street and that those units that are on Deerwood Street, on the modified cul-de-sac, be 1-story and that they be residential. He explained this will be a condominium project in that the land ownership is shared. but the individual ownership is by the sole proprietor. He stated in this situation it was also requested that these condominiums on the cul-de-sac looked like single-family homes; we are very pleased to bring this presentation to the Commission; we feel we have accomplished this very successfully. He stated the condominiums off of the modified cul-de-sac on Deerwood are 1-story and there are 2-units connected which look like a very nice single-family home. Hz stated the 2-story units are a great deal away from single-fa~.ily homes; they are 52 feet away from the nearest single-family home which is the southwest side on Deerwood and 147 feet from the single-family adjacent in the back. He stated they were much closer to Mr. Hatanaka's MINUTES ANAIi£IM CITY PLANNTIdG CON~+2ISSION. AUGUST 29, 1988 PAGE 7Q property, which is the nursery to the east, and they are in total agreement with what they are proposing; they are very pleased and also were very concerned about the possibility of Deerwood cutting up their property and making it impossible to work with. He stated of the 12-units that they are proposing, 2 of the units will be offered "affordable", thus under the RM-3000 they are raquesting a 20~ bonus for those 2 additional units. He stated the i-st.ory and the 2-story are within the basic guidelines except for Mr..Hatanaka's property. He stated they are within 55 square feet on 4 of the units, othez-wise they would be in total compliance of the minimum square-footage; those 4 units are on the cul-de-sac and we feel it would impair the design if we were o enlarge that at :.his time. Mr. Marshall stated the structural setbacks are affected only on Mr. Hatanaka's side and on the carport on the west side; the carport is within 3 feet, it has no back wall, it is an open structure; there is a 6-foot property wall shielding it from the neighbor's view; the roofs have a slight pitch to them so that they block any view from the Z-story. Mr. Marshall stated the minimum recx°e~itional-leisure area required is 1,000 square feet per unit; they were 359K shy of that figure, however, they have made excellent use of the area; the patios for each unit are quite large and will serve as a very lpvely home ownership project; this is the best looking design we have done to this date. OPPOSITION: Anita Roberts, 3332 West Glen Holiy Drive, Anaheim, 92804. She stated she had 2 questions regarding the staff report, 1) on page 1 of the staff report, waiver (D) regarding setbacks and on page 4; on the setback as far as the north, it says 20 feet, what is to be on that 20 feet? She stated another concern she had was about the fence; it is referred to on page 9 of the staff report; a 6-foot block wall will be built; around the area on the north side, the property being developed is 2 feet lower than the property on the north side; if the fence is only 6 feet it is going Lo be 2 feet lower than the private fences that are already there; she would like an 8-foot fence, not only for privacy, but there are also several pools in the area and with the minimum recreational space which is already allotted in the proposal, she was concerned about the children and the number of pools they could have access to. ~...' MINLiTES ATIAHFIN' CIT`~ Pr ANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 29. 1988 PAGE Willa Cornett, 3347 Deerwood, Anaheim. She stated there are 5 to 7 waivers; she wants to know why these developers are privileged to keep bringing this back and not cut down the number of wai•.•~_: - this affects their properties and will start a precedent; they have put in sizeable investments; is there same way they can design the property to yst more within the guidelines that have been set. Ms. Cornett• stated she was concerned about the opening on Deez-wood, they get the undersized places and she did not see any place for them to park; there are not enough parking spaces on Deerwood now and she was very concerned. Thomas Peck, 3341 Deerwood Drive, Anaheim. He stated he resided directly on the west side of the project. He stated when they were here the last time, the proposal was to build a 6-foot fence across the west side; we were told at the time that there would have to be a cul-de-sac put in there; we came to the City and I got a proposal of the cul-de-sac that would be put in if the wall were to go straight across. He stated at the time he was told that their driveways would have to be realigned; if you r°align where we are and with the cul-de-sac we are not going to have any on street parking except for perhaps 1 car. Mr. Beck stated he had a petition with signatures from people who live on Deerwood; they now have approximately 20 automobiles on the street; they are concerned because it is almost impossible to park on Deerwood as it is now. Mr•. Beck stated they were concerned about the limited recreational space; there is no room for the children to play; they will go out in the middle of the street and play. Mr. Beck stated he was opposed to the trash pickup; according to the proposal it looks like one trash can on the end; people are rot going to walk from the back of the property to Ball Road, they will stack their trash against the fence and have it picked up at the end of Deerwood when the trash collectors come around. He added that they were not opposed to having the property developed; but why can it r_ot be done according to the guidelines. MINUTES ANAHEild CZTY PLANNING COP4AiISSION. AUGUST 2?, 1908 PAGE Henry Ledesma, 3342 ?~eei-wood Drive. Anaheim. He stated regarding the traffic, it is loaded; he agrees with Mr. Peck. He stated whenever- Mr. Peck is having company, he lets him park in front of his house and he does the same thing for him. He stated his concerns about opening Deerwood Drive and he hoped the Commission would consider this. REBUTTAL: Mr. Marshall stated to answer Ms. Robert's question on the 20-foot setback on the north side, that is the landscape setback and is designed and maintained as such. Mr. Marshall stated regarding the 6-foot blc~.~k wall being lower than the 2 feet on their side, whatever the Commission suggests is what they will work with, but they are 2 feet higher. He stated there has been concern that someone could jump the 6-foot fence, then jump 2 more feet over the other fence and get into the back yard. He added there is some serious concern of one of the neighbors who has had a tragedy in one of the pools and they will certainly abide by the Commission's decision; and as to the concern of the nLx+.ber of children there are a lot less children in this proposal than what they had come in with before; as far as the oper. space and play area, this is a lot more open space and a lot more recreational area than they had previously proposed or than what apartments would allow, so under RM-2400 there would be more units, less area and less space. He stated in terms of the number of waivers, the bulk of these waivers have been generated by Mr. Hatinaka's property in terms of our relationship to him not him to us; we are quite clear at some future point there should be some changes and at that time it should come into conformance with whatever will be proposed. He added as offending or being too close to a tree nursery, we do not think this is of serious consequence; it is in the qualitu of the waivers that we are most concerned; we feel we have done a responsible job of selecting so that our waivers are something that are of good conscience. He stated we have provided the required 2-1/2 cars per unit for the guest parking, plus there is a lot more parking available, for example, the R,odified col-de-sac provides room for parking of additional cars in front of the individual homeowners garage; we are not taking away any parking; the modified col-de-sac is a greatly reduced col-de-sac versus what the City would normally 1- S Z_,' MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY FLANNING CUbSMISSION, AUGUST 29 . 1988 PAGE'~1 2-e quire for a deadend; if Deerwood would not have been put through and had been put as a cul-de-sac, the 2 homes at the end of Deerwood would have been severely impaired by a much larger cul-de-sac, this is modified within the street right-of-way; this does not encroach into the their yards, it would encroach into the right-of-way they maintain. Mr. Marshall stated as to Mr. Feck's concern regarding the trash bias, the situation is similar to a single-family home, the trash would be picked up as the ii- trash is now; their association dues pay for the trash to be picked up; there would be no large containers sitting on Deerwood oz- being collected off of Deerwood. He stated regarding Mr. Ledesma's concern about the cul-de-sac, we have not had any usage on Deerwood in any of our proposals and we have respected the communities wishes repeatedly, however, when the Commission proposed that it be studied that the street go all the way through, we felt that this is a much better solution; this is also an excellent finish to that street. He added that Commissioner Herbst, at the last meeting, indicated that would be a request from him to us to study this; we have done our best. Magdy Hanna, 4400 MacArthur Boulevard, Newport Beach. He stated the property is a hardship property with single-family homes and we tried to do cur best with the property. He stated they have come a long way from 16-units to 12-units and they have been very sensitive to the community in addressing their needs. He stated the block wall will be actually 6 feet from their property; there is a difference in grade of 2 feet; on their side it is actually 8 feet so it will be 6 feet all around the property. Commissioner Boydstun asked, is their property higher- than yours? There was dialogue from the audience, however, it was not officially recorded. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated the way the Code is worded it requires a 6-foot wall measured from the highest grade. ;~ MINUTES ANAHEIM CIT`! PLANi1ING CUNiMISSION. AUGUST 29, 1988 PAGE Chairwoman Bouas commented it would be equivalent oi- higher than their fence. Mr. Hanna stated it could be even higher because of the fact that they have to drain the properties to Ball Road; it is 332 feet long and the surface drainage is to Ball Road, so it has to be a little bit higher. Chairwoman Bouas stated you have to take the highest point whether it is .the highest point on your side ar their side. lr~r. Hanna stated it would be 6-foot all the way across from the highest point. Mr. Hanna stated the property is very difficult to plan; they have had numerous meetings with the homeowners and they have tried ~o work with everybody to come up with what they have presented today. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED: Commissioner Carusillo stated he would like some clarification as to the parking for the 4-units that would be accessing Deerwood; the garages and the spaces in front of the garages. Mr. Hanna responded this is like a single-family home with a 2 car garage with an area in the front. Mr. Marshall stated the parking in front of the garages was not counted to their 2-1/2 cars; on the total property they have provided for guest parking off of Ball Road; they have more than ample parking; they have more than what the Code requires; they have designated spaces for exactly what is required by Code and additional parking on the driveways in front of 2 of the back units so there is room for an additional 4 cars. Mr. Hanna stated in the rendering ycu can see that there is parking for 2 cars, but only 1 is parked in the driveway. Commissioner Boydstun stated according to the plans the. garage is set back 25 feet which is more than enough room to park. She asked if they could specify rollup doors on the four units so that they could pull up next to them? Mr. Marshall responded yes. MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLZaNNING CO?iMISSION. AUGUST 29, 1988 PAGE jj Paul Singer, City Traffic Engineer, asked would that portion where the vehicle is parked be a public right-of-way? Mr. Hanna stated it was on private property. Commissioner Carusillo stated you have a separation that discourages people in the front 8-units from going on Deerwood to get their houses; you also have some guest parking and he wanted to make sure that the parking on Deerwood would not spill over into the street. Mi-. Marshall stated it would not because the separation is vehicular separation but the pedestrian access is quite accessible, so if you are visiting someone on the Deerwood sine, then they can park in the guest parking off of Ball and walk right to their unit; it is more desirable then coming back down Deerwood. Chairwoman Bouas asked Mr. Peck if he understood about the height of the fence? Mr. Peck stated what he was concerned about was the parking of the 4 garages in front of their house; when they got the modified cul-de-sac, what they have is much smaller; this one is a 25-foot modified cul-de-sac; what the City gave him was 24.5 feet and that is smaller than 25 feet. He stated when they back out of the driveways, they are going to be backing dawn Deerwood Drive; if they have 2 cars parked, they are not going to be able to turn the cars around and drive back out Deerwood Drive. Commissioner Boydstun stated they have 25 feet from the property line to their ga:-age which is plenty of room to back into. Commissioner F~eldhaus stated the Code requires 25 feet for backup. Mr. Peck asked if they were going to reposition his driveways where the cul-de-sac is? Mr. Marshall stated they will do whatever the City requires; they are asking us to reposition their driveways. Chairwoman Bouas asked Mr. Peck if the was concerned if he would lose parking space when they reposition the driveway? ldINUTrS ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST ~9 1988 FAGS ~,lA Mr. Peck stated they would lose parking space no matter what they do; his concern is the people who are an Deerwood right now who have no place to park except in their driveways: if you have 4 cars on the end of that street. people ar-e not going to come in off of Ball Road and walk half way across the property when they can pull up to the back end and park. Mr. Peck stated another one of his concerns was the spa and how were the children going to be protected; will it have a fence around it or will it be guarded? Commissioner Carusillo stated that the Code requires that the spa not be accessible to children; there must be a 6-foot fence. Mr. Marshall explained there is a 6-foot fence and their development will be like any of the others; it will be a key lock entity . Commissioner Carusillo stated he would like Traffic to elaborate as far as the repositioning of the driveways and the necessity for that; should it be required of the developer? Paul Singer, City Traffic Engineer, responded that the developer has to do it; if he is going to put the modified cul-de-sac in they must relocate the curbs and therefore leas got to relocate the curb cut: all work will be confined to the public right-of- way. He added that no parking is permitted across the sidewalk anyway, so it does not shorten the parking area for the private residences ad]acent to the cul-de-sac. Chairwoman Bouas asked Ms. Roberts if she understood about the 20-foot space and that it was landscaped? Ms. Roberts stated she did understand. however, she would like clarification about the fence; she understands there is a 6-foot fence as to the highest point of the surrounding property; does that mean that if her fence is over 6 feet or at fa feet, that their fence would be above that level, with that level, or below that level? Chairwoman Bouas explained that it would be the same as yours because yours has been built from the highest point. MII7UTES ANAHEIN. CITY PLANNING COI~L^~fISSION AUGUST 29 ? 988 PAGE Co:a*nissioner Boydstun stated this was one of the best projects that the developer has brought in since she has been on the Com*nissio;,; they have made a lot of changes to meet the needs of the people in the area; the parcel could have easily been cut into 4-lots and had 4 separate houses there; basically that is what the neighborhood is getting; it is a nice loo)cing project if you look at the renderings. ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Carusillo and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassify subject property from the RS-A-43.000 (Residential, Agricultural) zone to the RM-3000 (Residential, Multiple-Family) to construct a i and 2 story, 12-unit "affordable" condominium complex with waivers of (a) minimum building site area per dwelling unit, (b) maximum structural height, (c) minimum floor area of 3 bedroom dwelling units, (d) minimum structural setback and (e) minimum recreational/le,_'sure area on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.73 acre, having a frontage of approximately 100 feet on the north side of Ball Road, having a maximum depth of approximately 323 feet and being located approximately 250 feet east of the centerline of Westvale Drive and further described 3333, 3335 and 335-1/2 W. Ball Road; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that is 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 Boydstun offered Resolution No. PC88-242 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Reclassification No. 87-88-50 (readvertised), subject to Interdepartmental Committee Recommendations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NOES: NONE ABSENT: HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE VACANT: NONE f \ - MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CONA;ISSIO?7 AUGUST 29 1988 PAGE Commissioner Carusillo stated before they get to the variance, he noticed that no landscape plans had been submitted; he would like an elaboration of what the landscaping is going to consist of. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated that there is a plan that has been submitted which shows the general location of plant materials but does not indicate there sire oz' type and that would be on the site plan. Commissioner Boydstun asked if they could specify that they have the landscape clan in and approved before any pe2-mits are issued? Mr. Marshall indicated that would be fine. Mr. Hast.•.ings stated it would be submitted and reviewed by the Planning Department. Commissioner Carusillo stated the rendering shows some nice foliage where it abuts Deerwood, however he did not Halite anything on the plan that shows any landscaping in that area. Mr. Marshall stated they apparently were to submit a landscape drawing with the condominiums: it slipped by them, but they will submit for approval. Commissioner Carusillo stated taking into account the esthetics as you look down Deerwood, it should soften the overall objection if it is taken care of and done nicely rather than to leave it bare. Mr. Marshall stated these are for sale and they will treat them with the utmost care. Commissioner Carusillo asked if they had an idea of what the price range will be? Mr. Hanna stated they did not .study the market but they will be in the $130,000 to $150,000 range; they will try to get as much as they can for the units. Debbie Vagts, Community Development, stated they have agreed to 2 "affordable" units; the sale prices on the "affordables" will be 5100.000 for the 2 bedrooms, and $109,000 for the 3 bedroom. Mr. Hanna stated the most expensive unit that will be sold is on the cut-de-sac; it is a 3 bedroom unit. MINUTES ANAHEIM CIiY PLAIv'NING COMMISSION AUGUST 29 1988 PAGE 3] ACTION CONTINUED: Commissioner Boydstun offered Resolution No. PC88-243 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Variance No. 3794 (readvertised) on the basis that thez-e are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to othez- identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by the other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations including an additions: condition that the 4-units off of Dee:-wood will have rollup doors. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: ]AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSiLLO, FELDHAUS 1~OES : NONE ABSENT: HERBST, MC BURP:EY, MESSE 1)ACANT: NONE Joseph W. Fletcher, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision with 22 days to the City Council. ITEM NO. ].2 - r_EOA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION (STATUTORY EXEMPTION). VARIANCE NO. 2194 (READVERTISED) PUBLIC HEARING: OWNER: ALLEN R. LOISELLE, P.O. BOX 4161, Garden Grove, CA 92642. Property location: 1551 North Miller Street Petitioner requests approval of a 2-year (retroactive to 8-20-86) eztensioa of time under authority of Code Section 18.03.093 and delotion of Condition No. 6 of Resolution No. 70-144 pertaining to required eztensions of time to retain outdoor storage for a pallet repair service. Continued from the meetings of July 18 and August 15, 1988. Hill Dimick, 1231 W. Hill, Fullerton, CA, stated they are requesting a retroactive eztensioa of time to August 20, 1986, to ezpire August 20, 1989, is order to enable them to continue operating their business at this site. He stated he has been with this company for 3-1/2 years and during that time they have had ao problems with Code Enforcement. He referred to paragraph 7 of the staff report which indicates Code Enforcement has received no complaints about this use, but that they have inspected this site and have been cited for pallets being stacked too high above the fence. He ezplaiaed the irony of this is that the pallets do not belong to them, and they were allowing someone else to store them there. He stated as of August 22, 23 and 24th, inspections show that pallets are down below the fence line and in fact, there are no pallets allowed along the fence wh3.ch fronts North Street. He stated they have always tried to conform to the City's codes and have never had any problems, and this eztensioa is very important because they do not want to move ouk of the area because it would be a hardship oa them and on their customers. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Feldhaus stated he thought thoy should go back through the entire process and request a new conditional use permit and pointed out that the petitioner has not even shoxed up to these meetings twice, and he did not write or call ia. He stated he went to the property a couple of times and the stacks of pallets did go dons, but they were aittiaq on a flat bed truck on the street. Mr. Dimick stated it would be difficult to keep them below the fence line and sometimes they do get stacked above the fence but that they will keep them below the fence. ACTION: Commissioner Bouas offered Resolution No. PC88-244 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve a 4-year retroactive extension of time for Variance No. 2194 to ezpire on August 20, 1990, oa the basis that the variance is being ezercised in a manner not detrimental to that particular area and surrounding land uses nor to the public's peace, health, safety and general welfare. Commissioner Boydstun pointed out, if the pallets are stacked above the fence line, this variance can be reviewed for revocation. 8/29/88 ~"';. Greg Hastings stated the Commission may wish to have Code Enforcement monitor this use. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, SOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO HOES: FELDHAUS ABSENT: HF.RBST, MC GURNEY, MESSE Joseph Fletcher, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. 13'EM NO 1~ CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (pRFVTniTCT.Y t~pROVED) WAIVER OF CODE RFnt~IREF,nh, (PREVIOUSLY A_pPROVED) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2995 (READVERTISED) PUBLIC HEARING: OWNERS: STEVEN I. AND OLGA PACZRO, 6281 Newbury Drive, Huntington Beach, CA 92647, CHEVY CHASE A2JAHEIM PARTNERS, ATTN: JACK MC COSH, 200 North Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805. Property location: proverty is aoo~gzima elv 15 acres Located south of the 91 (Riversid~l Freeway, nortZa of Romneya Drive. wost of Manzagj,sa Park and east of Patriq]S. Henrv ElemeatarK School. Petitioner requests amendment to previously approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2995 to add one (1) lot (1227 N. Robin Street) to a previously approved "Planned Residential Development" which consists of approximately 15 acres of existing apartments to be rehabilitated, with waivers of (a) type, size and screening of carports and (b) minimum setback adjacent to streets. 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. Olga Paczko, owner, stated the agenda listed an incorrect address and it is 6281 Newbury Drive in Huntington Beach rather than Newport Beach. She added one sentence should be added to read "that they would not be allowed to demolish any building." THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. gCTI0t7: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion seconded by Commissioner Caruaillo, and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Herbst, Mc Harney and Messe absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find that previously approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this amendment to the previously approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2995. 8/29/88 .t MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST Z9 1988 Paqe 40 Commissioner Boydstun offered Resolution No. PC88-245 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby amend previously approved Conditional Use Permit Na. 2995 to add one lot to the previously approved planned residential development subject to the additional language that ao buildings would be demolished and subject to all previously approved conditions, and further finding that the previously approved waiver is adequate to serve this amendment. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, NOES: NONE ASSENT: HERHST, MC BURNEY, MESSE Joseph Fletcher, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. T'rFM NO 14 REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2845 AND VARIANCE NO 3603 REQUEST FOR ,~pPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLANS: APFLICANT: (Ron Contreras, E1 Pollo Loco) requests approval of Specific Plans for a drive-through restaurant. Greg Hasstiags, Zoning Division Manager, ezplaiaed the Commission has not approved any other fast food drive-through restaurants on this site but will proba'hly be seeing Carl's Jr. at a future meeting. He stated this request meets all the City Code requirements. ~Q;_i: Commissioner Caruaillo offered a motion seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Herbst, Mc Burney and Messe absent) that the Anaheim City Planniuq Commission does hereby approve Specific Plans for a drive-through restaurant which was conceptually approved by the City Council under Conditional Use Permit No. 2844 and Variance No. 3603. g, rn-rnrTTnx~r._tt. E PERMIT N0. 2550 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION: Robert V. Newry (Anaheim Land Company) requests termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2550. ACTION: Commissioner Carusillo offered Resolution No. PC88-246 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2550. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, SOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NOES: NONE ASSERT: HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE 8/29/88 j - e~ ~\ ,3 ~"'' C. VARIANCE NO 1611 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2928 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION• Magdy Hanna of Newport Pacific Realty and Investment Company, requests terminations of Variance No. 1611 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2928. ACTION: Commissioner Carusillo offered Resolution No. PC88-247 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings is connection with Variance No. 1611 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2928. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NOES: NONE ABSENT: HERBST, MC GURNEY, MESSE D. VARIANCE NO 698 - REOUEST FOR TERMINATION: Steven Rosenfield requests termiaatioa of Variance No. 698. ACTION: Commissioner Carusillo offered Resolution No. PC88-248 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings is connection with Variance No. 698. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NOES: NONE ABSENT: HERBST, MC GURNEY, MESSE E. VARIANCE NO 1813 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION: Magdy Hanna (Diewport Pacific Development Corporation) requests termiaatioa of Variance No. 1813. ACTION: Commissioner Carusillo offered Reaolution No. PC88-249 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Variance No. 1813. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: SODAS, SOXDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NOES: NONE ABSENT: HERBST, MC GURNEY, MESSE S/29/88 a i,_ ~- IhJTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 29 1988 Paae 42 F. Vaora~rrr un ~n~p REQUEST FOR TERMINATION: Ruo-Chi Chang (property owner's representative) requests termination of Variance No. 2038. ACTION: Commissioner Carusillo offered Resolution No. PC88-250 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Variance No. 2038. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NOES: NONE ASSENT: HERBST, MC GURNEY, MESSE ABSTAIN: BOYDSTUN G. CONDITIONAL USF PERMIT NO 255 REQUEST FOR TERMINATION: R. Dickson Miles of Dandl Limited I, requests termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 255. Commissioner Carusillo offered Resolution No. PC88-251 and moved fer its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings is connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 255. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS NOES: NONE ABSENT: HERBST, MC GURNEY, MESSE g, s~•~*^° u^ °" ~ REQUEST FOR R°TROACTIVE Try w.rraNStoN TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: W. Earl Carl Jr. (Saga Motor Hotel) requests a one-year retroactive time eztension for Variance No. 3630. Commissioner Boydstun asked why they have needed this many time eztensioas. Greg Hastings ezplained that Building permits are being held up for this to occur. ACTION: Commissioner Carusillo offered a motion seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve a one year time eztension (retroactive to January 19, 1988) for Variance No. 3630, to ezpire on January 19, 1989. I. TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS~F APPROVAL: Yuji E. Naito, Vice President, SBD Group, requests approval of a one-year time eztension (retroactive to January 9, 1988) to ezpire on January 9, 1989, to comply with conditions of approval. 8/29/88 •~ ~~ ACTION: Commissioner Caruaillo offered a motion seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve a one year time extension (retroactive to January 9, 1988) for Conditional Use Permit No. 2595, to ezpire on January 9, 1989. OTHER DISCUSSION• A. Joseph Fletcher, Deputy City Attorney, announced that he has accepted a position in Pasadena. B. Commissioner Carusillo requested that the Planning Commission take a tour of one of the Newport Pacific projects. Greg Hastings respoade•9 he could attempt to arrange a tour for the Planning Commission meeting in four weeks. the meeting was adjourned at 6:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Edith L. Harris, Secretary Anaheim City Planning Commission 8/29/88