Loading...
Minutes-PC 1988/12/05MI REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Date: December 5, 1988 The regular meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission was called to order at 10:00 a.m., December 5, 1988, by the Chairwoman in the Council Chamber, a quorum being present and the Commission reviewed plans of the items on today's agenda. RECESS: 12:00 RECONVENE: 1:30 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairwoman Bouas Boydstun, Carusillo, Fcldhaus, Herbst, McBurncy, Mcssc COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Greg Hastings Arthur L. Daw Paul Singer Mary McCloskey Malcolm Slaughter Brad Hobson Rob Jones Linda Johnson Edith Harris Zoning Division Manager Deputy City Engineer Traffic Engineer Planning Division Manager Deputy City Attorney Community Dcvclopment Project Coodinator-Community Dcvclopment Senior Planner Planning Commiccion Sccrclary AGENDA POSTING. A complete campy of the Planning Commission agenda was posted at 10:00 a.m., December 2, 1985, inside the display case located in the foyer of the Council Chambers, and also in the outside display kiosk. Published: Anaheim Bulletin - November 5, 1985 P(,JBLIC INPUT: Chairwoman Bouas explained at the end of the scheduled hearings, members of the public will be allowed to speak on items of interest which arc within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission and/or agenda items. MINUTES FOR APPROVAL: Commissioner Mcsse o[fcrcd a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED, that the minutes of the meeting of August 15, 1985, be approved as submitted. CM1051PL 12/5/88 MINUTcS ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION December 5 7988 Paec No.2 ITEM No 1 CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAIVER OF CODE REOL3IREMENT. CONDITIONAL RISE PERMIT NO '~4 (READVERTISED) PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: METTLER ELECTRONICS CORP., ATTN: Stephen Metllcr, 1430 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92801. AGENT: FAR WEST BANK, 2825 Walnut Avcnuc, Suite "R", Tustin, CA 92G80. LOCATION 7430 South Anaheim Blvd. To rclain an automobile sloragc lot with waivers o[ (a) minimum front setback and (b) rcquircd scrccning and cnclosurc of outdoor uses. Continued from September 2G, October 10 and October 24, 1983, and November 7, 1988, Planning Commission Meetings. Thcrc 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. Tom Prcnobcst, Attorney, was present to answer any questions. T}iE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Fcldhaus stated it appears they have complied with the Commission's requests. ACTION: Commissioner Fcldhaus offcrcd a moti~_;, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim Cily Planning Commission has rc~icwcd the proposal to rclain an automobile sloragc lot with waivers of minimum front sctbacl: and rcquircd scrccning and cnclosurc o[ outdoor uses on property located at ]430 South Anaheim Boulevard; and dots hcrcby approve the Ncgativc Declaration on the basis that it has considered the proposed Ncgativc: Declaration together with any wmmcnts rcccivcd during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments rcccivcd that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect an the environment. Commissioner Fcldhaus offcrcd a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hcrcby grant waivers (a) and (d) on the basis that there arc 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 oC the Zoning Cade deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other propt:rtics in identical zoning classification in the vicinity and denying waiver (b) on the basis that reviud plans deleted the need for said waiver. Commissioner Fcldhaus offcrcd Rccolution No. PC 83-3?8 and moved for its passage and adoption that [hc Anaheim City Planning Commission does hcrcby grant Conditional Usc Permit No. 2064, in part, pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035, subject to Interdepartmental Committee Recommendations. On roll call the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote; AYES; COMMISSIONERS: Bouas, Boydstun, Carusillo, Fcld'aus, Herbst, ,~Icssc, McBurncy NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the riCht to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ]2/5/88 ,~'` ~. Pa c No. MIN TE.S ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION December S. 7988 ITEM No. 2. ENVIP. NMEir'TAL IMPACT REPORT NO 280 AND ADDENDUM REDEVELOPIv1ENT PLAN AMENDMENTS NO 4 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO 243 SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 88 3 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 88-04 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: SANTA FE LAND IMPROVEMENT COMPANY, 3230 E. Impcria! Highway, Suite 100, Brca, CA 92621. AGENT: PFIILLIPS BRANDY REDDICK, 18012 Sly Park Circle, Irvine, CA 92714. LOCATION: Property is approximately 2G3 acres located at the southwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Tustin Avcnuc. Petitioner requests adoption ofr Specific Plan (including Zoning and Dcvclopmcnt Standard:), a Rcdcvclopmcnt Plan Amcndmcnt (to consider an amcndmcnt from a designation of Industrial to Industrial with ar. alternative of Commercial, subject to a General Plan Amcndmcnt pro~~ding for such use), a Gcncral Plan Amendment (to consider an amcndmcnt :o the Land Usc Elcmcnt of the General Plan to redesignate the site from Gcncral Industrial to Commercial Professional), and a Dcvclopmcnt Agreement for the proposed Santa Fc Pacific PIaTa project to provide for the development of 500,.000 square feet of otlicc arcs, 24,000 square feet of retail commercial shops, a 4,000-square foot fast-Coai restaurant, an 8,000-square foot restaurant, a150-room hotel and two parking structures. Continued from the October 10, 1988, and November 21, 1988, Planning Commission meetings. Chuck Christcnscn, agent, explained this project would generate less peak hour traffic than a project dcvclopcd under the existing zoning. He stated comparing this project with a project that would be dcvclopcd under current zoning and the di(fcrcnccs in the offsets improvcmcnts to Tustin and La Palma to the designation on the Gcncral Plan, that their costs will be tremendous. He referred to the staff report which indicates that if this project is dcvclopcd, a median would have to be constructed in Tustin and La Palma and stated that would restrict any -eft turn access onto this site and that would not be acceptable. He stated they realize left turn access is an important issue but they felt closing the access is not the answer. Mr. Christcnscn stated a full traffic study was included in the EIR which means they considered cxis:ing traffic and the added traffic that would be gcncrited by other projects and added the annual growth rate, plus the traffic that would be generated by this project. He read from the EIR that between La Palma and the 91 Frccway, the impact could be mitigated to a Level of Service B and that they and staff have agreed that Icft turn access from Tustin works when this project is fully built out. He stated the conditions include improvcmcnts that will be done by the Rcdcvclopmcnt Agency; and that the vast majority arc required to resolve existing traffic problems not really related to this project. He slated they would like to reserve the right to negotiate those conditions with the Rcdcvclopmcnt Agency and added they arc also concerned about the timing of some of the conditions and would like to have approval of this project before they spend the money aad time worrying about the conditions. Lyle Parks, 1004 N. Tustin Avcnuc, stated he spoke to the Commission sevcra- months ago; that the off-peak hour traffic concerns arc important as well as the peak hour traffic concerns; that he owns property across the street which includes Phil and Jim's and that his office is located there and it is very difficult to get in and out oC the property. He stated he is opposed to closing the median and felt that would jeopardirc the properties because the comme+a:ial businesses need to have people be abler to come onto their property and that between 7:30 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and between 3:30 p.m. and 5:00 p.m., it is impossible to make a U-turn. He stated an industrial complex built under the current zoning ww~uld impact the property more than the proposed project. He stated Rockwell has a lot oC people coming and going and there is more planned to the cast of the building on Tustin and asked the 12/S/88 r ~i Y '~. MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. December 5. 19&4 PaGc Nn•4 possibility of another ramp to the Gccway, enabling people to go into those areas and relieve the Tustin and La Palma area. He added they felt that should be considered az another altcrnativc. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Carusillo stated he has heard that the City is visualiting a lot oC revenue if this project is approved and added bazically everyone agrees that it is a good project and would like to see it developed, but the main problem is left turns from La Palma, and the Traffic Engineering Department feels it will back up the traffic and cause clogging not only in peak hours, but all during the day. Commissioner Mcssc stated he felt the traffic situation is important, but he thought it is solvable. He added he though[ the Commission should bt: really be considering the results o[ allowing this commercial use in that arcs and added he was concerned this use would change the industrial nature of that area which he did not agree with and he wac in favor of keeping that an industrial site. Commissioner Herbst agreed to a point and added he thought there arc some uses which could go in there which would be a service to the industrial users. He stated everything but the commercial could be done by a conditional use permit. Commissioner Hcrbsl stated there arc some corporate offices which would service the area and should be allowed, but it should be limited to nvo or three which would utilize about 5,000 square feet of office space, and that would help solve the traffic problem as well. He stated he fcl[ a Icft turn sigtnl could be installed with special computerized usage; that he goes by there at 5 p.m. and it is bad, tspccially the traffic from Hughes and traffic making Icft turns toward the freeway. He stated a signal would have to be controlled and he thought a compromise could be worked out, but it has to be reduced so the impact on traffic would not be so great. Commissioner Carusillo stated he discussed an all industrial development on that property with the Traffic Enginccr and whether that signal concern would be allc~iatcd; and that he hears that a signal causes clogs and asked about the possibility of an overpass or underpass. He stated the industries could work dif(crcnt hours and work around the closures. Paul Singer, Traffic Enginccr, stated the ~Vildan study that was conducted, subsequent to the information they have, indicates that by the year 2000, the intersection of Tustin and La Palma would be at Lcvcl of Scrvicc E, and is not mitigatablc. Commissioner Herbst suggested a green signal mid-block, but added he did not believe a traffic signal during major demand times would be oC any value to the applicant. Paul Singer stated the applicant has indicated there will be seven lanes, with four Icft turns into the property and to La Palma, with three through lanes and an additional right turn lane in the future; and pointed out that the driver hac to make his choice within 50 fc;cl and he would be wrtccrncd about traffic safety. He stated the applicant suggested a single Ic(t turn lane into the property. Mr. Singer stated he also recommended another altcrnativc to the applicant and that was a roadway through the center of the property, connected to the eastbound on-ramp to the 91 Frccway. He added he realizes the time constraints to get approval by Caltrans, but that could be achieved in two or three years. He stated another alternative was r. grade-separated Icft turn. He staled properties to the cazt oC Tustin Avcnuc between La Palma and the 91 Frccway will have a single left turn ingress and egress. Commissioner Carusillo asked Mr. Christensen hie view of an underpass. 12/5/S3 y3 1 . 1 MINUTES ANAHEII\f ('ITY PLANNIN(C COMMISSION nrrrmbcr 5. 1988 P No. Mr. Christenccn stated obviously they havc talked about that issue at great length and have had plans showing different options and those showed that the overpass and underpass did not improve anything because they havc distance problems. He added they addressed Icft turn access and found a way to provide left turn access. Commissioner Carusillo scatcd one oC the Commission's problems is that the City Tra[fic Engineer does not agree with their analysis. Commissioner Bouas staled the Wildan study did not address IcCt turns. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, responded that is correct, but that it did indicate the demand, and showed that the intersection oC Tustin and La Palma would become dcticicnt as ucll as the freeway ramp. He stated he understands the study that was conducted assumed free (]ow on the 91 freeway and in practice that dots not happen. Commissioner Mcssc asked the conscqucnces of shutting of( two lanes, and explained at the present time he sits through several signals. Mr. Singer stated improvements arc going to be needed to widen Tustin and added the freeway cannot absorb all the cars. Commissioner Bouas stated the Commission should pay attention to the traffic study and added she is concerned that this puts a cap on any other projects. Commissioner Fcldhaus stated it seems the traffic experts need to get together. Commissioner Herbst stated the Commission hat to consider whether this is too much de~•clopment for that property. Paul Singer scatcd the problem is not so much the volumes generated by this project, and unless volumes arc drastically reduced, it will make no diCfercncc. He stated the number of people making Icft turns is not the problem, but tht: problem is the disruption to people going straight through. Commissioner Herbst scatcd this is probably the first time the City has tricJ to project 10 years to total build out of the area and sure there will be problems, but the Commission must also look at today. He scatcd problems in the Cuturc will be trcntcndous and solutions will havc to be found, but he did not think a project should be denied today bt:causc there may be problems in the future. Mr. Singer explained he is not recommending denial. He assured the Commission that Itc has worked with Larry Greer cxteasively, bttt dots not agree with Itim on how to pravidc aaess to this property in a safe manner and in a way that cattscs as little disruption to the Northeast Indtutrial Arca as possible. Commissioner Messe scatcd the developer seems to be wnccrned about the cost and the solutions offered; and that the Commission knows Rcdcvclopment money is going to be spent to mitigate some oC the arcawide problems. He asked iC Rcdcvclopment money could be earmarked for the overpass or underpass. Commiccioner Carusillo stated one problem is the developer's concern about the costs and he understood that, but if the Commission allows the project to be developed, against the Traffic Engineer's recommendation, the City would have to live with the result. He added he thought everyone wants the project, and it is just a matter o[ everybody getting on track and working out the solutions. He added he thought the neighbors to the east Should be indudcd. Brad Hobson, Redevelopment, stated the overpass is beyond the scope of what they havc already worked out and at this time an improvement such as an overcrossing would not be funded by Rcdcvclopment. He stated there arc 12/5/88 ;a L~ MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COh1MISSION. December 5. 19R~ PaEc Na.Ci other improvement projects that arc already in the plans and that he could give the Planning Commission a -ist of the improvcmcnts they arc funding. He stated some improvcmcnts arc adjacent to the site and that they will fund arcawidc traffic improvcmcnts, including North Tustin Avcnuc, north of LaPalma, eastbound La Palma, cast oC Tustin, signalization at 91 Freeway, westbound to Tustin, widen the bridge on Tustin, 91 freeway overpass at Tustin, widening of overpass, Tustin Avcnuc improvcmcnts south of the 91 freeway, partial funding of critical intcrscction at Tustin and La Palma, etc He explained the items Rcdcvclopmcnt will be funding will appear in the Capita! Improvcmcnt Appropriation Program. Commissioner Carusillo stated the overpass/underpass project is more unique to the project itself. Commissioner Herbst referred to the improvements to the intcrscction prior to issuance of the first building permit and asked if those will be funded by Rcdcvclopmcnt or the property owner. Mr. Singer stated he did not know but that Rcdcvclopmcnt has obligated to the critical intcrscction improvcmcnts at ICracmcr, Tuslin, Lakeview and La Palma. Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, stated Rcdcvclopmcnt has indicated their intention to participate in these (undings, but there is no legal obligation for the Agency to participate in the future. He stated the aeivisc of staff vs to condition this project so that improvcmcnts arc in and done as a condition of the project. He stated who pays for the improvcmcnts is not included in the conditions. Commissioner Herbst stated Condition No. 1G requires significant improvcmcnts to several intcrscctions and tying all of these improvcmcnts to this project makes it look like we arc impacting the dcvclopmcnt so that it will never be built. Mr. Slaughter stated all the intcrscctions on the list arc, in fact, related to and can mitigate problems created by this particular project. He added if Rcdcvclopmcnt doesn't have the money to pay for thasc improvcmcnts, the question is who pays for the Improvcmcnt needs generated by this project, and the conditions should be imposed on this project. Commissioner Herbst stated some of these intcrscctions will not be impacted by the dcvclopmcnt oC this project. Paul Singer stated all the items contained on Pagc 41, Condition No. 1G, have been idcntificd by the developer's EIR and those arc mitigation measures required by the EIR. He stated that report does not identify who pays, and the projccl depends upon the improvcmcnts. Chuck Christensen stated they do have some concerns and they arc outlined; however, the EIR idcntificd the intersections that need to be improved to solve existing problems. He stated while this project will ultimately have an impact on those improvements, once these problems arc solved, the projccl would not have an impact great enough to move that intcrscction to an unacceptable Ievcl o[ service. He added they were concerned about the percentage of their contribution. He stated they can discus ~ the timing of these issues, but they do have a problem with the wording of the condition. Mr. Christensen stated they were hoping to talk about the projccl and maybe later come back with a different list of conditions. Commissioner Fcldhaus asked about Redevelopment's pariicipalion. Brad Hobson stated the majority arc considered as areavride issues and Rcdcvclopmcnt has initiated an Arcawide Public improvcmcnts program and most of these improvcmcnts are scheduled in the current plan. 12/5/88 ~~.~ MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. December 5. I93£3 Pagc Nn.7 Paul Singer stated the external mitigation measures will take care of themselves and they could also be scheduled and that could be resolved as they go along, as part oC a phasing plan. Commissioner Herbst stated he thought their concern is including the wording, 'prior to issuance oC building permits subject to the Traffic Engineer's approval.' Commissioner Carusillo stated he thought iC the !ra(<c issue was resolved, everything else would Call into place relatively easy and suggested a continuance until a traffic solution is found. Commissioner Feldhaus stated the Commission is being asked to approve the EIR and addendum and it addresses the current traffic situation and asked if they arc going to try and predict what it will be in 5 or l0 years. Commissioner Mcssc slated t.::; EIR suggests that the traffic issues be sohcd. Commissioner Herbst stated the EIR just gives mitigation measures on how to do it. Commissioner Carusillo stated the applicant's traffic consultant has implied that the traffic flow as proposed is acceptable and asked if in approving the EIR, the Commission is agreeing that thn traffic flow is acceptable. Chairwoman Bouas stated the traffic is acct:ptablc up to a point with the mitigation measures. She stated according to the applicant's traffic consultant, who says he aced the \Vildan traffic study figures, the traffic flow will work ac proposed. Cotnmissioncr Mcssc noted one mitigation measure was a mid block signal. Paul Singer stated that is a short term mitigation measure. He stated the recommendation is that the Planning Commission look at the Wildan study and at the future implications because the EIR merely states Ihcrc may be a signal at mid-block and it does not indicate that it has considered any concerns beyond that. Mr. Singer stated as far as he knows the i .lR is certifiable, but it is not necessary that the projcu be approved as presented. Mary McC;loskcy, Planning Division Manager, stated i( the Planning Commission certifies the E1R, she would recommend the mitigation measures be included in order for the projcM impacts to be mitigated and that a Statement oC Ovcrrding Considerations lx included. Commissioner Mcsse stated even on a short term basis, he h;:d a difficulty with the rnid•block signal. Mr. Singer stated the Commission could approve it subject to an alternative to the signal. Commissioner Fsldha:s asked why that would be necessary; that the City has spent a lot oC money to conduct a traffic study and that study is not completed. Chairwoman Bouas stated that report will not tx: that specific, and Commissioner Feldhaus stated he understands the Wildan study has figure differences. Chairwoman Bnuas stated in certifying the EIR, the Commission is saying the E1R is adequate and that the mitigation mcasurrs arc necessary. Commissioner Mcsse offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst to certify EIR No. 230. Commissioner Carusillo asked when the \Vildan traffic study will be completed. 12/5/33 d yl MINUTES. ANAHEIM C1TY_PIANNING COMMISSION. December 5. ]')88 P N . Brad Hobson stated Rcdcvclopmcnt received comments back and has reviewed them and will be mccting with City Public Works-Engineering in about three weeks. Commiuioncr Mcssc stated that is not related to this discussion. (Commissioners Carusillo and Fcldhaus agreed it is, and Commissioner Fcldhaus stated he did not understand the rush to certify the EIR.) Commissioner Carusillo stated he was hoping to discuss the matter further. Commissioner Herbst stated he thought it is important to certify the EIR because it discusses some of the problems that nccd to be mitigated. Commissioner Carusillo stated the Wildan study may discuss some of the istucs. Mr. Singer stated he has the Wildan study under consideration and his rccommcndations arc based on that study and they will be mccting with Rcdcvclopmcnt to discuss mitigation mcasures for the entire arcs. Commis~ioncr Fcldhaus asked if the developer agreed with the mitigation mcasures in the report. Mary McCloskey stated the EIR lists mitigation mcasures that nccd to be implemented with this project, that some arc areawidc and Rcdcvclopmcnt has said they arc on their list, but they can not say when they will have the money. Shc stated if the Commission is considering taking particular mitigation mcasures out, and mitigating the project specifically to their site, a Statement of Overriding Considerations should be included. Shc stated she thought Mr. Singer was saying there probably could be an improvement phasing plan worked out; however, currently as the conditions arc a•riltcn, they require mitigation prior to building permits. Chairwoman Bouas cxplaincd the Commission has not deleted any of the mitigation mcasures. Commissioner Herbst stated he understood Mr. Singer to say that some conditionsa could be worked out and Chairwoman Bouas added if they arc not worked out, the projcU could not go forward. Commissioner McBurncy stated some c~dsting problems nccd to be mitigated with the first building. Commissioner Fcldhaus stated the mitigation mcasures really nccd to be installed and the Rcdcvclopmcnt Agency agrees all improw•cmcnts nccd to be done and the only question is when it happens. Malcolm Slaughter staled the EIR dots not address funding or who pays for the improvcmcnls, but it discusses when they have to be done. He explained the conditions that may be cneironmcntal requirements arc set forth to mitigate the problems. ACI'fON: Commissioner Messc offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIHD (Commissioner Fcldhaus voting no) that after considering Draft Environmental ]mpact Report No. 28U for the proposed Santa Fc Pacific Playa and reviewing evidence, both written and oral, presented for Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 280 and its Addendum, the Planning Commission finds that EIR No. 280 and its addendum arc in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act and State and City Guidelines, and that the project described in E1R No. 280 and its Addendum will not result in any impacts which arc considered unavoidable, adverse in nature and not fully mi[igatible to a level of insignificance; and therefore, the Planning Commission dots hereby recommend to the City Council certification of EIR No. 280 and its Addendum. Commissioner Mcssc stated he did not want to approve the Gcncral Plan Amendment until the Commission sees some specific plans which they can agree to, and added he did not think any action should be taken today with regard to the Gcncral Plan Amendment. 12/5/88 ~~ ~ ~ ,~ MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISS]ON. December 5. 1983 Pic No•9 Phillip Schwartzc stated he prepared the Specific Plan document when the petitions were submitted. He staled it was determined about two months ago that the ideal way to accommodate the various uses proposed was to give maximum flcadbility to the Commission, and not by having muliiplc conditional use permits. He stated all the uses shown arc applicable in the industrial zone, except the commercial uses. He stated the document is actually for 5 to ]0 CUPS, and added the Commission has the option of making deletions, additions, etc. to the list. M~. Slaughter stated it will permit streamlining the actions; that the oldest application filed is approximately scvt:n months old. Mr. Schwartzc stated he thought some actually date back probably more than a year ago. Commissioner Herbst stated he has a problem with changing the zoning from industrial to commercial. He stated he thought Rcdcvclopmcnt actually feels it needs to be changed to conform to the existing Redevelopment Plan. Mr. Slaughter stated at the present the Rcdcvclopmcnt Plan cmisions [his property for industrial land uses and that governs. Mary McCloskey staled the Specific Plan needs [o be consistent with the Gcncral Plan and that this is industrial and it would rcquirc a Conditional Usc Permit for industrially rclatcd office uses. Commissioner htcssc stated that type of use is currently permitted by a conditional use permit. Commissioner Herbst added that is what he thought also. He explained he has no problem w7th the hotel or commercial office use, but did have a problem with commercial. He stated there are other areas where this might fit, but in this arcs, they should be industrially-rclatcd offices. He stated he would consider a change to industrially-rclatcd offices wishout commercial. Mary McCloskey stated if the Commission eliminates the commercial and the general business office designations, a Spcci(ic Plan would not be needed. Shc stated there was discussion whether the 5000 sq. ft. office was industrially rclatcd. ~;ommissioncr Mcsse stated he thought it would be detrimental to that arcs to change the Gcncral Plan and a loss of a lot of industrial limited land. Commissioner Herbst agreed and asked if the Spedtic Plan could be modified. Commissioner Mcssc stated the Specific Plan helps the developers with timing and phasing. Mary McCloskey stated there could be a different kind of development and the SpcciGc Plan would need to be in conformance with ;he industrial designation of the Gcncral Plan and that would rcquirc eliminating some retail. Chairwoman Bouas agreed that is what she thought should happen. Commissioner h4csse offered Resolution No. PC 88-330 and moved for its passage and adoption that tlec Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby deny Genera! Plan Amendment No. 243. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, HERBST, MC BURNEY, hIESSE NOES: FELDHAUS ABSENT: NONE 12/5/88 ~. ' ` MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. December 5. 1988 Pam No.l0 Mary McCloskey stated with the GPA being denied, the Spedfic Plan would not be in conformance with the Gcncral Plan and the developer would have to dcdde whether they want to pursue the project. Shc stated the commercial uses would have to be eliminated and the Spcdfic Plan amended. Phil Schwarue suggested that the Commission approve the Specific Plan, as modified, to meet the rcquircmcnta of the industrial zone and that would require them to modify the Spccitic Plan and resubmit it. Malcolm Slaughter slated that seems vague. He suggcslcd the applicant rcqucst a continuance and amend the Specific Plan. htr. Schwartzc rcqucalcd a two-wet:k continuance. Greg Hastings stated staff may need additional lime to rc~~cw revised plans. AC7'IC)N: Commiasioncr Mcssc offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and A1OTION CARRIED thal considcralion of the Specific Plan No. SS-3 be continued to the regularly-scheduled mccting oC January 1G, ]989, at the rcqucst of the petitioner. RECESS: 3:30 P.M. RECONVENED: 3:45 P.M. ITEM NO 4 CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION GENERAI. PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 248 fREADVER- TISED~, RECLASSIFICATION NO. 88-89-14• WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3077. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: VICTORIA SOTELO, 3107 1V. Lincoln Avcnuc, Anaheim, CA 92801; FRANKLIN EUGENE KRAATZ AND JOYCE LA VAUN KRAATZ, 3111 \V. Lincoln, Anaheim, CA 928171; DAVID NEGRON AND DIANA NEGRON, 3115 W. Lincoln Avcnuc, Anaheim, CA 92801. AGENT: NE\VPORT PACIFIC REALTY AND INVESTMENT, 4400 MacArthur 61vd., 9th Floor, Newport Beach, CA 9?GGO. LOCATION: 3107, 311] and 3115 West Lincoln Avcnuc G}'A study will include ;dl properties fronting N/S Lincoln between Wcctcrn and Grand. (Commission initiated). RS-7200 to CL. Petitioner rcqucsls an amendment to the Land Usc Elcmcnt of the Gcncral Plan to redesignate subject property from Low Density Residential to Gcncral Commercial. Planning Commission has requested that redcsignalion of all propc:rlics fronting on the north side of Lincoln Avcnuc between Wcstcrn Avcnuc and Grand Avenue from Low Density Residential to Gcncral Commercial also be considered. To permit a 9-unit, commercial retail center with waivers of (a) maximum structural height and (b) minimum open landscaped setback abutting residential zone boundary. Continued from November 7, 1988 Planning Commission mccting. Thcrc were two people indicating their presence in opposition to subject rcqucst and although the staff rcpori was not read, it is rrfcrrcd to and made a part of the minutes. AI Marshall, agent, Newport Pacific, 4400 MacArthur Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA, explained the proposal is for a retail center, that after the last mccting, they reviewed the site plan to include the entire block; that stall' had requested a Gcncral Plan Am^.ndment for the entire block to redesignate it for commercial uses. He staled them arc 1G lots to assemble and that wi0 'take a long time to accomplish and their request today i( for a waiver oC maximum structural height and minimum setback abutting single-family residential boundary. 12/5/88 MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. December 5. 1988 Pagc Noll He staled the real issue with the waiver of mapmum structural height is the 12 feet permitted along the northern boundary for a commercial structure and explained it is along the alley and they arc requesting 18 Ccct. He stated iC the GPA is approved, the properties to the cast and west would become commercial and they would be allowed the height at '0' lot line. He added that same issue applies to the waiver oC the landscape setback and the 10-Coot setback would not be rcgttircd if the GPA is approved. He added the only real waiver is the height. Mr. Marshall stated one of the conditions rcqui:cs a raised median in Lincoln Avcnuc prohibiting Ic(t turns into the property and they would request to be allowed to comply with that rcquircmcnt when the cntirc ccntcr is completed or some portion of it. He stated it would be a tremendous cost to do the cntirc block with Phase I. He refcrrcd to the condition requiring striping of the 3rd westbound lane along Lincoln Avcnuc and stated they would like to reach a compromise on that condition or an alternative because that is a costly matter. Mr. Marshall refcrrcd to Condition No. 13 requiring a G-foot high masonry wall to be constructed along the north, cast and west property lines and questioned the rcquircmcnt for a wall on the north because that is the alley and the rear of the building and they thought the building wall would be the rear wall. Mr. Marshall yucstioncd Condition No. ]G regarding a single access point and stated they understand that for the cntirc ccntcr there would ln: a single access across from Topanga, but prior to that, they would need another access and they would be willing to have one access for ingress and one for exiting. Willa Cornett, 3347 Darwoal, stated she is concerned about the general area and pointed out there is a new shopping ccntcr right across the street (formerly Toy City) and that there arc only three buildings occupied and it has been completed six months. Shc added she did not sec any reason Cor another new shopping ccntcr when there i~ one sitting there empty. Shc added she was also conccrncd about faking out the median in Lincoln because the traffic is rcaliy bad and the median has helped and made it safer. Chairwoman Bouas stated the existing median would not Ix: removed, but that this developer would have to continue it. Ernest Scott, 3L38 W. Polk, Anaheim, agreed that another shopping ccntcr is not needed since there is one there now which is vacant nn the southeast corner of Lincoln and Weslcrn. Concerning the block wall, he stated he thought there should be an 8dool high wall rather than six feet in order to shield those properties directly behind this shopping ccntcr. Chairwoman Bouas pointed out there would be a lG-foot high building there and it is on the alley and there would be no access. Mr. Scott stated they have trouble now on Polk with people making U turns missing Western and if they miss the shopping ccntcr, there would be more U turns. Al Marshall stated they were conccrncd and did have market studies conducted and this ccntcr will be diffcrcnt because it is a strip ccntcr and is narrow and will have easy access and will attract a diffcrcnt clientele such as a dry cleaning est..^blichment and se:rvicc organisations which arc the smaller business oµmcrs. He stated this would not be a large shopping ccntcr and explained the land assembly will take awhile to accomplish and added they do not anticipate (nc ccntcr being vacant for very long. Mr. Marshall stated they arc conccrncd about getting the first phase started because there is a burned out house on the property now which has been there for G or 8 months. Mr. Marshall responded to Commissioner Boydstun that there would not be any back doors and that there would be a solid 18'G" high wail in the rear. He stated there arc some breaks in the building Curthcr down, however, and 12/3/88 __ _ ... I $~y, ` . MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMM1SSlON. December 5. ]9$$ Paec No.l2 those areas will be landscaped and there will be parking, but there is no access for scnices or customers and the alley will be for the total use o[ the residents. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Herbst stated he recognizes that the developer is starting out with three lots and flocs nccd access and asked iC the developer agrees that when they develop further, some of the existing driveways would be modified or dosed, subject to the Traffic Engineer's approval. He staled he would be concerned [hat in the future if this developer is not able to acquire all the properticc, someone else could acquire 3, Q and S of the lots and there is a nccd for sonic kind of control to guarantee dcvclopmcnt of this particular plan. He asked iC the rcdassification of this property could be tied to the limited number of accesses for that the entire strip when it is totally developed. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, explained there was going to be a central accts point Cor left turn access and two additional driveways on the extreme cods for right in and right out access only and [hat is the plan proposed by the developer and approved by him. Commissioner Herbst asked if the City would hrvc any control in the future i( sonic other developer purchased 3 or 4 of the lots and wanted to dcvclop a separate center with another access. Mr. Marshall stated Mr. Singer had made it very clear how the traffic should be handled and they have no problem with reciprocal casements whether they own the property next door or not. He added they will have their reciprocal casements in place and all the new owner needs to do is copy those casements and they would be under the City's jurisdiction. Mr. Marshall staled it was recommended that they dcvclop five lots at a time and they cannot get the other two lots immediately anti their modular is set up Cor three loll in Phase 1. Mr. Singer stated he h,ts no problem with dcvclopmcnt of three lots, but would not want to sec Irss than three developed. Chairwoman Bouas referred to the developer's request not to construct the median and added she understood there is a median there now. Commissioner Mecsc stated the plans show the median opposite this dcvclopmcnt ~• acoln and the request is for construction of the median Curthcr west. Mr. Marshall stated they arc concerned that they would have to construct the median for the ~:ntire block. Mr. Singer stated the main polo[ in this particular dcvclopmcnt is that the two driveways should be right turn in and right turn out only because there is a median there now, and with the first phase, median modifications will not be necessary, but with any subsequent developments, median modification would be ncccss:try. Mr. Marshall responded that is acceptable. Mr. Singer stated whoever builds on that property would have those same conditions and that these properties are in different ownerships and he is trying to anticipate one continuous dcvclopmcnt regardless of the ownership in order to provide sonic sort of uniformity. ~er-On': Commissioner Herbst ollcrcd a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim Cily Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to amend the Gcncral Plan designation on all properticc fronting t6c north side of Lincoln Avenue between Western and Grand from Low Density Residential to General Commercial and to redasaify subject property from RS-7200 (Residential, Single-Family) to 12/5/88 «.i 1~.,. ~ ;'~.~ MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMM1S.4tnN. December 5. 1988 Paec No.l,~ CL (Conmcrcial Limited) and to permit a 9-unit, commcraal retail center with waivers oC maximum structural height and minimum open landscaped setback abutting residential zoned boundary on property located at 3107, 3111 and 3115 West Lincoln Avenue; and dots hcrcby approve the Ncgativc Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Ncgativc Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the bay%s of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner Herbst oi.,crcd Raaolulion No. PC 88-331 and moved (or its passage a~~d adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission dots hcrcby recommend approval of General Plan Amendment No. 248, Exhibit B, to include the 17 properties (the entire block). On roll rail, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following volt: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Commissioner Herbst asked if the rcclassiticatior, should cover only the three properties involved. Greg Hasl'engs, Zoning Divisior. °'.~ :.3gcr, stated only those three propcrtiu were advertised and the Planning Commission would have to ini;~- :.::a~lassificatioa of the other properties if desired. Commissioner Herbst cffercd Kcsofution :~io. PC88-332 and moved for its p:usagc and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hcrcby grant Rsx.lassification No. 58-89-]4, subject to Interdcpar[mcntal Committee Rccommendatiuns. On roll call, tho foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CAi-:USILLO, FELDFiAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOFS: NONE ABSENT: NONE Commissioner Herbst offcrcd a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED that the \nahcim City Planning Commission does hcrcby grant waivers of Codc rcyuiremcnl on the basis that tyerc arc special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to other identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning Ccx1c deprives the property of pri~tileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and clsssifica[ion in the ~7cinily. Commissioner Carusillo asked if the City Traffic Engineer was satisfied with the vehicular access rights for the corner lot at Lincoln and Grand if they decided not to become part of this land assembly. Mr. Singer staled that property owner is required to provide access to their circulation. Commissioner Herbst offcrcd Resolution No. PC 88-333 and moved Cor its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hcrcby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 3077, pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.03.030.030 through 18.030.030.035, and subjeu to Interdepartmental Committee Recommcnda- tians. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following votn: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELUHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSL: NOES: NONE 12/5/88 ,: MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Dccrmbcr 5. 1988 Paec No.14 ABSENT: NONE Commissioner Herbst o(Ccred a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mcssc and MOTIUN CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby rcqucst that [hc City Council review Reclassification No. 83-89-74 and Conditional Usc Permit No. 3077 in conjunction with Gcncral Plan Amendment no. 248. ITEM N0. 4,_OE~A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS ll VARIANCE NO. 3lRfi3. PUBLIC HEARING. O\yNERS: MELVYN LANE HENKIN AND FAITH HENKIN, 10951 W. Pico Blvd., #201, Los Angclcs, CA 900Cr3, AGENT: SPESCO C/O MARK FRANK, 735 Lakmc Avcnuc, WILLMINGTON, CA 90744. LOCATION: SG40 East La Palma Avcnuc To construct a frccstanding and two-wall signs with waivers of (a) permitted wall signs and (b) permitted frccstanding sign. Continued from November 7, 1988 Planning Commission meeting. Thcrc was no one indicating their presence: in opposition to subject rcyucst and although the staff report w•as not read, it is rc(crrcd to and made a part of the minutes. Phil Schw•artzc, 14841 Yorba Street, Suite 100, Tustin, .Agent, stated the rcqucst is for a variance Cor a sign at a shopping ccntcr located at the southwest corner of La Palma Avcnuc and Imperial Highway which has been there for about ten years and has sirugglcd because it has only one access point. He explained one sign would be frccstanding and that this is not an unusual rcqucst because there arc similar signs in the arcs; that the property does have some uniyuc charactcristicc such as a limited access and the signagc is ncedcd tx:causc there is no access on Imperial. Mr. Schwartzc stated they arc requesting the variance on the basis of the location and the topography and explained normally a site like this would have two driveways. Mr. Schwartze stated Condition No. 2 requires dedication of improvements along Imperial and stated lhcy do not own that property and that he has discussed that with the staff. THE PUBLIC HEARING \YAS CLOSED. Commissioner McBurncy stated it appears the rcqucst iacludts signs on properties other than subject property and Mr. Schwaruc responded the signs would be located on subject property. Paul Singer, City Traffic Engineer, stated they ha~x been working diligently with Caltrans trying [o get access from Imperial I~lighway. He recommended that the three property owners involved in this particular shopping ccntcr work tabethcr because that access may come into reality and some improvements w~l!. be required along Imperial. He added he should hear Crom Caltrans in February or March and he hoped to have a positive response. He stated a dcccleration lane would have to be constructed as well as a driveway. He stated he thought all the property owners should get together because they will share the access and the improvements would have to be installed at that time. Commissioner Fcldhaus stated the staff report sk<rvs two different sacs for the sign and asked if the sign would be 75 square feet or 112 square feet. Greg Hastings explained the coerect sire is 112 square feet and that Paragraph No. 2 oC the staff would be corrected to read 112 square feet. , 12/5/88 ~._ _ ~ MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. December 5. 1938 Pacc No.]5 Chairwoman Bouas asked iC any pole signs have been permitted in the Scenic Corridor. Commissioner Herbst stated there is one just down the strcct which is very similar to this one and Grcg Hastings stated he was not aware of any that had been approved but had not researched that issue. He stated pole signs would be allowed in the industrial •ronc in the Scenic Corridor. Chairwoman Bouas asked if they could possibly do a monument sign and Mr. Schwartzc responded there is a frccstanding sign right across the strcct and also there will be one at the hotel which is going Io be located there and cxplaincd because of the improvements and dedication required on La Palma, a monument sign would be too close to the building and would not work. Commissioner Carusillo stated he recalled that a monument sign was approved for the hotel. Mr. Schwartzc pointed out the stall report says it is a frccstanding sign and Grcg Hastings cxplaincd it was called a frccstanding sign. Commissioner McBurncy stated he would not want to allow a 20-Coot high, 112-square foot commercial frccstanding sign in that arcs because there arc a lot of proposals that will be coming before the Planning Commission for the commercial area and it would be difficult to deny those requests. He stated he realizes this site does not have good risibility anJ that is unfortunate but that he could not support this request. Commissioner h4cscc asked about the additional access on Imperial and stated it could be 1-1/2 years before that is built and suggested a condition being added to this approval. Commictioncr McBurncy stated it is the same issue whether a sign is on La Palma or 4mpcrial and it is still a frccstanding sign which has been dcnicd to everyone else. Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, stated the map prepared by staff is incorrect. because the person seeking the variance does not own the entire shopping center and that owner just owns approximately the western half of the site and the variance rcyucs! is only for that portion of the property and the advertising to be placed on this sign would be for uses located on the wcstcrly half of the site and the Commission could probably expect a variance request from the owner of the eastern half in the future; that normally access rights run to the abutting property and no further and that is not something the Commission can addrecs today. Commisioner McBurncy stated if a frccstanding sign was allowed on the wcstcrly portion, he thought the Commission would be seeing an application for a frccstanding sign on the easterly half imr::cdiatcly a(tcr tltc access is allowed on Imperial. Chairwoman Bouas stated she thought a monument sign would have to be designed for this property and that she would not be against it being a little larger. Commissioner Carusillo ;;i:!tcd he was concerned that would block traffic crying to exit onto LaPalma. Grcg Hastings cxpluincd a 30' high decorative wall would be allowed on which there coulJ be a 20-square foot sign in the Scenic Corridor. Commissioner Herbst stated this corner is •roned commercial and right across the street where the theater is going, was zoned industrial in the past and they wcrc allowed a frccstanding sign. He stated Mercury Savings and Loan and Carl's wcrc both dcnicd signs and stated if a pole sign is allowed here, there arc possibly 3 or 4 other property owners who would want the same privilege. He added he has no problem with the requested wall signs because this is a hardship parcel. He slated the industrially-zoned property right across the strcct would be allowed a pole sign. 12/5/88 ~: .f ~f MINUTES ANAHE]M CITY PLA'~TNING COMMISSION December 5. ]93Fi Paec No.1G Commissioner Carusillo staled Cvery'me agrees that this is a hardship parcel and that the Commission would not have to grant other waivers unless the property has a definite hardship. Commissioner Mcssc stated the property on the corner could have the same hardship. Commissioner Fcldhaus asked the reasons the Rcdcvclopmcnt Commission recommended denial. Greg Hastings stated he did not personally attend the Rcdcvclopmcnt Commission nrccting, but thought their reasons probably wcrc because they did not want to set a precedent in that arcs. Commissioner Herbst asked if there is anyway they could possibly make this a monument sign, rather than a pole sign. He pointed out others wcrc denied pole signs; however, he agrccd they do nccd identification. Mr. Schwartzc staled he would agree to a monument sign rather than having no sign at all. He stated this property really has nn exposure, plus it only has one access. Commissioner Herbst stated he would be in favor of granting wall signs in addition to a monument sign on l.a Palma, rccogniring that building has been closed for Duct a year. Chairwoman Bouas asked if the Commission wanLS to sec plans for a monument sign and whether the applicant would like a continuance in order to submit revised plans. Greg Hastings stated the Codc would allow 20 square feet. Mr. Schwarizc requested that the Commission approve this in two separate actions and just have them bring back revised plans. Mr. Slaughter stated the Commission should act on the whole matter or continue the whole maucr today. Responding to Commissioner F-lcrbst, Grcg Hastings stated if the Planning Commission gives an exact footage, they could approve it today and request that the applicant bring in a specific plan for approval under Reports and Recommendations. Mr. Schwartzc requested that the Commission take action on the three signs and e;xplaincd the entire leasing arrangement for Aaron Brothers is pending and their signs arc very important. He referred to a drawing which the Commission has and which could be used. Grcg Hastings stated the monument sign could only be 30" high to conform to Codc. Mr. Schwarizc stated that sign is six feet tall Cor a total oC 52 square Ccct. Mr. Hastings stated the Traffic Engineer should also rc~~cw the plans to sec if there arc any visibility probicros. It was noted the Planning Director or his authorized representative has dctcnnincd that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 11, :u defined in the State Environmental Impact Report Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt Crom the requirement to prepare an EIR. Commissioner Messc stated he was concerned because he felt this site dots nccd identification since it is a ptvblcm property. Commissioners Carusillo and Bouas agrccd and Commissioner Carusillo added if they arc going to provide a monument sign, it could be larger. ]2/5/&4 MINUTES. ANAHELM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. December 5. 19&4 Pagc No.l7 Phil Schwartzc statcd a 42-square foot sign would probably be acceptable. Greg Hastings statcd the Commission could approve the rcqucst with a reduction to 42 square feet and suggested that it be approved by the City Tralrc Engineer. A N: Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC 88-334 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Variance No. 3.4li3 granting waiver (a) in part. to permit a 42-square Coot sign on tht: basis that there arc special dreumy~ances applicable to the properly such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to other identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict application of [he Loning Codc deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity and denying waiver (b) on the basis that similar requests have been denied in the same vicinity, and subject to the City Traffic Engineer's app: oval, and subject to Intcrdcpartmcntal Committee Recommendations. On roll call, the fomgoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLU, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MESSE, NOES: MCBURNEY ABSENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ITEM NO. 5. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION RECIASSIFI TInN NO 4R-89-22 (READVERTISFDI AND VARIANCE N0. 3.RCi7 (READVERTISED) PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: DURFEE GARDENS, PARTNERSHIP, 7700 Raintrce Road, Fullerton, Ca 92G35. AGENT: DR. RONALD CROWLEY, 1700 Raintrec Road, Fullerton, CA 92G35. LOCATION: 74 -75 Nor h East SIrCCt RS-7200 to RM-3000 To construct a 21-unit 'affordable" condominium complex with waivers of (a) minimum site arcs per dwelling unit (b) minimum front yard setback, (c) minimum rear yard setback and (d} minimum recreation leisure area (c) maximum structural height. Continued from Planning Commission meeting of Novcmtx:r 21, 193S This item was trailed until the end of the meeting at the rcqucst of the applicant. Dr. Ron Crowley, agent, statcd Condition No. 6 requires walls and they would rcqucst a modification allowing the walls to be constructed prior to final approval oC the project. Mr. Linehan statcd his property is probably the closest property to this site and that he has no objection to the projcci and thought it would enhance the area. He statcd that arcs seems to be going Curthcr and Curthcr downhill and this property certainly needs help. John Jacgcr statcd he visits the immediate area on a weekly basis and felt the improvements these developers have made on La Palma significantly upgrade the appearance and the general health and safety oC the arcs. Frank Guercera, 753 N. Bush, preuntcd a petition and statcd they arc opposed to this because they feel their property values would decrease. He statcd they have submitted signatures oC people who are opposed every time there is a request for inucascd density in this area. 12/5/S3 ~ ''.~ MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION December 5. 19Rt3 Pacc No.18 Mr. Gucrrera stated the Planning staff is currently reviewing the Gcncral Plan fur the City because oC the recent dowmm~ing and they feel granting these waivers would be a step backwards. Kathy Lynch, 7L5 North Bush, stated she did not feel apartments or condominiums would be compatible with their single-family dwellings. Shc stated the land is caned Cor single-family homes. Thomas Gclkcr, 1025 E. North, directly across the strcct, stated he totally agrees with what has been said and added this project would add to the congestion. He referred to a proposed wall along North Strcct and stated he could guarantee it will be covered with graffiti. Roland Davcs, ?25 N. Bush, stated he did not know how this proposal would be an upgrade to this area. He added his concern is the number of pcoplc living in one unit and he thought this project would have 40 pcoplc li~7ng there and he did not think it would be a sicp in the right direction. Eli~abcth East, 734 E. Rose, explained she tries to do something good for the surrounding area by picking up trash cvcry day, taking grocery carts back to the markets, etc. Shc stated there arc probably 12 pcoplc living in the house next dour and they park cars on the lawn and all over the strcct Shc stated they have fights in the neighborhood and other problems. Shc stated they do not riccd more waivers granted to allow more building and that dcvc;lopcrs who live in Fullerton do not care about this neighborhood. Shc stated she has lived there for 2G years and that .Anaheim will have the same blight ac Los Angeles and pcoplc will be moping away because of the graffiti, trash, etc. Shc asked why the neighbors have to keep coming back hcrc cvcry month to oppose these developments and added the developer should be told 'No' and the City should stick to the Codes they have. Dr. Crowley stated he hoped to sell one of these: homes to hie son and he thought it would be a pleasant place to live. THE PUBLIC HEARING VAS CLOSED. Chairwoman Bouas asked that Code Enforcement staC( check into the situation to find out how many pcoplc arc living in that corner house and Commissioner Boydstun added there arc some houses an Rose Strcct which should also be investigated because they arc definitely a problem. Commissioner Herbst stated he is concerned about the affordable units in this particular project because it is adding to the number of units in that area. lac stated North Strcct and LaPalma Avcnuc is one of the worst corners in Anaheim and the access to this project is too close to that intersection. Commissioner Herbst state) he recognizes that we need affordable housing units, but not when they create problems. He staled he thought the project could be developed in accordance with Code, eliminating the waivers. Commissioner Herbst stated the Planning Commission is hcrc to hold public hearings so that everyone has the opportunity to be heard and cvcry property ow•ncr has the right to request waivers, but that doesn't mean the Planning Commission has to approve it. He stated cvcry project seems to have the same problem being too dense, with too many waivers. He stated with condominiums, there has to be CCR~Rs and tlicy have to maintain the property and condominiums would be better for the arcs than apartments, but this project is just too dense. He added he could not agree with the affordable for five years ciL`t~r. Massoud Monshidc~ah, owner, responded to Chairwoman Bu~as that he had a dcnsit' ~;:uc Cor the project on La Palma for 5 units for low income households. 12/5/S3 ' ..l~ MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. December ] Paec No.19 Commissioner Herbst stated he would suggest reducing the number of units to IS because of the health, safety and welfare of the cit'vens and that the project would affect the neighborhood due to congestion. Commissioner Carusillo stated he knows there is a need for affordable housing units; howcvcr, after listening to the homeowners and people who live in the area, in addition to the number of people signing the petitions submitted, he would agree this project is not the proper location. He addcci he hoped tha dcvcloper could redesign the project in conformance with Codc and eliminate the affordable in that arcs. Massoud Monshidczah stated this plan has been before the Commission a few times and when they came in with a condominium project, the Commission denied it because the neighbors complained about the traffic. He stated they worked closely with Planning Department staff and after talking to some Commissioners, [hey have presented this project and the Commission is now saying they should dcvclop 18 units in conformance with Codes, which they could do, but they wanted to take advantage oC the 25% density bonus. Mr. Monshide~ah stated the City Council wants more condominiums which has not been happening in Anaheim. He stated he could dcvclop 18 units without coming before the Commission. He added there is a nccd for housing in Anaheim. Commissioner Herbst stated the Commission has no problem with condominiums, just the size and it is too dense. He stated the Commission could vote on this project as proposed, and the dcvcloper could appeal that decision to the City Council. 1\Ir. Crowley stated they have already lost one escrow on another property to the south and will lose the escrow on this one i( they cannot get enough units due to the price of the land. Choi.+~oman Bouas stated if the Commi~tion stops allowing the inueascd density, the owners will not be able to sell those properties al the price they arc asking. Commissioner Mcssc stated this project is much better than apartments; and that the City would prefer condominiums and they arc more conducive to the neighborhood. He stated, howcvcr, he objects to all the waivers and just felt it is rnerbuilt. Commissioner Carusillo stated he wanted to sec I$ units developed with no affordable units. Dr. Crowley stated [hat would not be going along with the Stales mandate to allow density bonuses for affordable housing. He asked for a few minutts to discuss the situation with the owner. RECESS 7:OS P.M RECONVENED: 7:10 P.M. Charwoman Bouas asked if they could climinatc two units and Dr. Crowley responded they would still like to have some affordable units. He stated they could climinatc two units but would nccd to review the plans to sec how to climinatc three parking spans on the en6. Commissioner Herbst stated the Commissit.n should not be trying to redesil,n the project. He stated the dcvcloper knows what the Commission is looking for and if~at is a project with no more than l3 units and with no affordable units. Commissioner Fcldhaus pointed out the dcvcloper eau always appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council. Mr. Monshidczlh stated they do not like to appeal !o the City Council unless it is necessary. 12/5/SS .. __...~ ~....~ w.~ ~., f,-. MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PIANIVING COMMISSION. December 5. 1968 Pagc No.2~ He stated they do their homework bctorc they conic to the Commission and they talk to the Commissioners and try to bring in a plan that is acceptable. He statcd they would rather resolve it bctorc the Commission. Commissioner Mcssc pointed out there is a 22 day appeal period of any Cormission actions. Commissioner Carusillo statcd he is willing to discuss an 18-unit projcct and vote on that, but that he does not wish to rc-negotiate. Commissioner Messe statcd a change has been recommended to the ordinance: and he thought he would be in Cavor oC waivers a and b. Commissioner Herbst statcd he has a problem with approving 21 units. Commissioner Carusillo suggested approval of ]8 units, and approval of waivers and b, but denial of waivers c, d and c. Greg Hastings suggested approval of the reclassification and denial of the variance. Ron Crowley asked what they nccd to do if the reclassification is approved and the variance denied. Mr. Hastings statcd iC the revised projcct meets the Codes, they would not have to conic back bctorc the Planning Commission. Dr. Crowley statcd a lot of space is used because of the 50-foot requirement and that they would have more open space if they could build two stories. Commissioner Mcssc statcd the Commission could approve the reclassification and deny the variance or grant another continuance so the applicant can revise these plans. Dr. Crowley asked about 14 units and Mr. Monshidc~ah statcd it is still very contusing and it wilt require redesign and asked about the possibility of one waivt:r and Dr. Crowley asked about the possibility of building two stories, adding he thought they would be more aesthetically pleay~ng. Mr. Hastings responded that two stories would nccd to be fifty feet from the property lint. Mr. Monshidezah statcd they would not have to come back in if they can eliminate three units. Mr. Hastings statcd staff would request a 4weck continuance in order to have adequate time to review revised plans. Commissioner Carusillo statcd he would not make a decision tonight on a two story projcct and needs more information and suggactcd a continuance to January 4, 1989. Mr. Monshiderah asked for a decision on the reclassifcation tonight. Chairwoman Bouas asked if staff could handle the review if revised plans arc submitted by Friday. Mr. Hastings responded the lntcrdcpartmental Committee meeting is on Monday and other departments send members of their staff out to review the sites. ACTION: Commissioner Atcsse offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Carusillo and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassify subject properly from the RS- 12/5/88 ~, i .J MIN> DES ANAHEiht CITY PLANNING COMMISSION December 5 l9SS Pagc No.2l 7200 (Residential, Single-Family) Zone to the RM-3000 (Residential, Multiple-Family) Zonc and to construe a 1 and 2 story, 21-unit, "affordable" condominium complex with waivers oC minimum building site arcs per dwelling unit, maximum structural height, minimum front yard setback, minimum rear yard setback, and minimum recreational/leisure area on an irregularly-shaped parcel oC land consisting of approximately 1.28 acres, located southwest oC the southwest corner oC North and East Strccts, and further described as 747-755 North East Strcct; and does hereby approve the Ncgati~•e Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments rcccivcd during the public review process and further (finding on the basis oC the Initial Study and any comments rcccivcd that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the cntnronmcnt. Commissioner Mcssc offcrcd Resolution No. PC88-335 and moved Cor its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Reclassification 88-89-22 subjccl to Interdepartmental Committee Rccommcndations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, IIOYUSTUN, CA'RUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, htESSE NOES: NONE ABSEiv'T: NONE Comrniscioncr Mcssc offcrcd a motion, seconded by Commissioner Carusillo and M07'ION CARRIED that consideration oC Variance No. 3367 be continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of January 4, 1989. Chairwoman Bouas stated that item will be the last item on the agenda. Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy C'sty Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's dccicion within 22 days to the City Council. ITEM NO G CEOA NEGATIVE DCCLARATION RECLASSIFICATION NO._ -T+`>-7- PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: JENNIFER BJORGEN and KRIS BJORGEN, ]IC~G W. North, Anaheim, CA 92801. PROPERTY LOCATION: 852 South Rio Vista Sty reel RS-A-43,000 TO RS-7200 To establish a 2-lot subdi~~sion and construction of a new Singlc-family house. There was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subjccl request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Kris Bjorgcn, owner, slated this is a corner lot and prupcrtics to the north, west and cast arc r)ncd RS-i200. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Feldhaus asked about plans for Parcel 2. Mr. Bjorgcn responded that plans for that parcel have been submitted [or plan check to the Planning Department. Commissioner McBurncy asked if the petitioner bad reviewed the conditions of approval. htr. Bjorgcn responded the traffic signal and sidewalks arc existing and asked why they have to pay for them. 12/5/88 I ..... _.__..._._ ..,.. __......__..~~.,__.._......~.......N..cn,nuo,..~un.+~,.v.Q...n»;~Ns%~Yl~Yrta~i,,°'°592~ffi {.. ~~ MINUTES ANAHEIM ITY PLANNING nMMIS_SION Dcccmbc* S I9 4 ~Fc No.22 Greg Hastings explained the condition is for repair oC the sidcwalls, as needed; and that thr. Condition No. 2 pertains to strcct light installation which is required on Rio Vista and a fcc is required for strcct lighting on Burntwood for caasting lights. Commissioner Fcldhaus pointed out thi• a a residential use and Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, stated every developer of subdivisions pays for strcct lights. Commissioner McBurncy staled this is a parcel map, separating the lot into two lots. Greg Hastings stated the estimates range from S2000 to 54000 to install a strcct fight. Commissioner Fcldhaus apologized and stated he was thinking about a traffic signal, not strcct lights. Mr. Hastings explained the Electrical Engineers have determined there is a nccd far a light. Chairwoman Bouaz explained the applicant would nccd to talk to [hc Electrical Division since the Planning Commission cannot waive that requirement. A I N: Commissions: McBurncy offcrcd a motion, seconded by Commissioner iicrbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to establish a 2-lot subdivision and construct a new single-family residence at 852 South Rio Vista Slrcct; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments rcceivGl during the public review process and further finding on the bazis of the Ynitial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial c~tidcncc that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner McBurncy offcrcd Resolution No. PC-88-336 and moved for its passage and adoption that t!~c Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Reclassification No. 88-89-23, subject to Interdcpartmcntal Committee Rcwmmcndations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the follo~Ning vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ITEM NO. 7 CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION. RECLASSIFICATTON NO RS-89-24 VARIANCE NO. 3.477 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: HAROLD C. J. COYKENDALL, 2890 La Palma, Anaheim, CA 92806. AGENT: ANDREW HOMES, 440 MacArthur Blvd. #900, Newport Beach, CA 92660. PROPERTY LOCATION: 206 North Coffman Strcct. RS-7200 to RM-1200 To construct a 3-story, 20-unit aaartmcnt building with wnivcr of (a) minimum building site area per dwelling unit and (b) building and structural height lim: rations. There were two people 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. 12/5/88 ~E ~t MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMI4SION December 5. ~ Pape No.23 Greg Hastings, Zoning. Division Manager, staled page 5 of the staff repot, u incorrect and that the Planning Commission adually denied General Plan Amendment No. 230 and the City Council approved Exhibit B which allows 36 units to the acre on the east side of Coffman. George Behman, agent, explained he represents Andrew Homes, and that they have agreed to enter into an agreement with the Housing Department to provid^, two (2) affordable units. Evelyn Clark, 221 Evelyn Drive, stated they want to keep the density at a minimum and that the Codc states 1 story is permitted and they feel the waivers arc not necessary and City Codes should be followed. Mr. Behman stated this development is very similar to other developments in the arcs and they Ccd the three stories arc far enough away not be cause intrusion and that they feel the project is consistent with other developments. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Responding to Commissioner Carusillo, Mc Behman stated the hausc next doo: is 30-I/2 feet high and that they can reduce this one to 23-1/2 (cct high. Rt;srwnding to Chairwoman Bouas, Mr. Behman stated the garage is not underground, but they can lower it one fast into the ground. Chairwoman Bouas stated she thought 18 units would be as much density for that area as should be allowed. Commissioner Herbst stated this property should be zoned RM-2400, but the City Council did not agree. He asked iC a landscape plan was submitted. Mr. Behman responded he would submit a landscape plan. Commissloncr Herbst responded h;; would want to sec a landscape plan before voting on this request. He stated some apartments the Commission has seen have been just bare concrctc with no place for children to play, etc. and that type oC thing loa~crs the standards of living in Anaheim. Mr. Behman stated he did not sec that as a problem because they have an interior corridor between the buildings. Commissioner Herbst suggested atwo-week continuance in order Cor the applicant to revise the plans. Greg Hastings suggested they should bring in a revised dcvation and also mcd with the Housing Division bcferc presenting the revised plans to the Planning Commission. Debbie Vagts, Housing Coordinator, stated she did not know about this project before today. Commissioner Herbst stated those arc things that should be worked out bcCore coming to the Planning Commission meeting. He stated he was not so sure the Commission would be in favor oC that increased density in this area; and pointed out that there is one way in and one way out. He stated he is concerned about the health, safety and welfare oC the people who live there. Commissioner Carusillo stated a lot of damage has already been done on that street. He stated he is in favor of lower densities as well, but thought that arcs is probably 50% built out. He stated he was bothered with telling dcvclopcrs to provide affordable housing and then not be willing to approve a density bonus. He stated the whole reason for the bonus is to get dcvclopcrs to provide affordable units. 12/5/S8 ~'- ~:Y M1Nt~ 'E.S. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMI~'S10N. December 5. 19F8 P~gc No.24 Chairwoman Bouas a:'~cd :rb:~ut the affordable rents and Mr. Bchman responded they will have two units which will rent for 5550 per month for two bedrooms, ft+r 30 years. urcg }lastings stated the Planning Comm~t.,:ca has x rasher i~rgc agenda for the next meeting. ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offcrcd a moliery ~,urn~letl by Commissioner A1cBurncy and hfOT}ON ~'ARRIED that consideration of thr, aforcmentic~:ed ms;tcr be continued to the meeting of January 4, 1959. l~.LN,NO. 8. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATtO~~f,, 1V~TV};:R nF CODE REOUIREMENT N:)iT~,'~iAL USE PERMIT jJC). 3(139 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: AN.^.HEIM BUSINESS CENTER, 210 Wcst Cerritos P.vc., Anaheim, CA 92805. AGENT: LOYAL PRD~R OF h100SE, ATTN: NORM JIVIDEN, 914 S. F-Isrbor, Anaheim, CA 9?305. PROPERTY LO` A?'~4)N:317 ANU 321 West ~Ccrritos To permit "on-sale" :.t alcoholic bcvcrage~ -vith waiver oC minimum number of parking spaces for an existing Moose Lodge. Thcrc was no one indicating their presence in ,opposition t'~ subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Norman Ji:idcn, agent, explained this Moose Lodge is non open weekdays, and eznly r,~pcns in the evenings and on weekends and that this busincsa park is basically open from 3 a.m. to 5 p.m. kYc stated they have 170 mem~xrs, and about 25 to 30 arc active members. THE P~JBLIC HE.:RINCi WAS CLOSi.:D. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated Pagc ,i oC the staff report is mis ang and that a condition limiting the hours of operation to those shown should be added. ACTION; Coc~mistioner Boydslun offcrcd a motinn, seconded by Commis~ioncr Mcs.;c acd i.10TION C,4RRIED !hat the Anahcion City' Planning Commission h;u :cvicwcd the proposal to permit on-saSc of alcoholic be;veaagcs wi.h wai:•er of minimum r~umbct ttf parking snaccs for an existing Mena l.odgc located at 317 and 321 Nest Cerritos; and rocs hereby approve 4hc Ncgat:~",: Declaration upon finding twat it has considcrrd the Negative Dcc;arstion together with arty ~mmcnts rcceiw,~J during the public review process and 6: rher finding on the basis of the s.~iti:u Stndy and any comments received that Thcrc is no substantial evidence that the hrojcct will have a a;onificant effect on the cneironmcnt. Commissioner Boydstun offcrcd a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CAR.Rl%:D that the Anaheim ('ity Planning Commission dots hereby grant a ::'v:vcr of ~.od^, requires: .i on the basis that thr, parking wa:.per will not cause an increase in traffic congestion in the i~:.mediate +iciniiy nor adversely affect any adjoining land uses and granting of the parking waiver under the conditi~:u; i ~rosed, if nny, will not be dctris,±=aial to the peace, health, safety and general welfare oC the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Commissioner Boydstun ollercd Resolution No. PC 88-337 an,•1 moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission dor.,a hereby grant Condi:ioeal Use Pcr:nit No. 303°, pursuant to F~nahcim Alunicipal Codc Suxions 13 ~3.030.03i' throu^ph. 13.030.030.035, and subject to In;erdeprutmental Comm'ittec Recommcndatiom., and including an additional u~edition restricting hours of ope:.~tian to evenings and weekends as stipulated. On roll call, the foregoing resolutio.~ was passed b; the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, ~l.DHAUS, HERBST, I`1C BLIRNEY, h1ESS'F. 12/5/$8 -. ~ MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY ~LANNING'.:OMMISSION. December S. Lq$$ Pagc No.25 r~JES: NONE AIi~F.N'I': NONE Malcolm Slaug.~,icr, li;•au4~a City E1tto~ae„ pros:nted ;hc written right tc appeal the Planning Commission's decision within u. 4.es to th.' City Council. ITEN. NO. 9. CECA NEGATl~r1. DECLARATION. CONUITI,S,Iti~L j,i:;>i PEkMIT NO. 3100, PUBLIC HEAR1Nr. rJVVNERS:TUZNER FAMILY TRUST, L%O P:':rticr, Tyler, ~Vicner, Wclhclm, Waldrpn, 4600 MacArihur Blvd., Suite 1000, Newport Bc;. ti, CA 92'aCi0. AGI:'.NT: HARBOR PACiF1C DEVELOPb1ENT, .~4,1 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 314, Ncwpoct Bcacn, CA 92GGf). PROPT,tkTY LOCATION: 221 South Mab!,olia Av- .~~1 To pei mil a 9-unit, 12,420-syuare foot retail cs;ntcr. There was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject requea and although the staff report was not read, it :ts referred to and made a part of the minutes. Brent Ogden, agcst, exphincd the project is arproximate:y 9 unit,; that they purchased a pro•, crty from Carl Karcher about a year ~,go up the street anil' ,ill a retail bui'.iing and this building w7il be the ~amc dcaign any color. He referred :a Con3i!.~n No. ]0 rcyuinng fire sprinklers tr be installed as required by the Firc Dcpartmcnt and sta!a_t thry had agreed i.~~ put in two four-hour fire walls. 'r{c explained they have several tenants and have to estimate wb.,rc the wntL•, wi!! bc. Grc:g Hastirts, Zoning Division Manager, stated this condition allaws the F'irc Dcpartmcnt to approve whatever meets their satisfaction. THE PUBLIC HEARING 1VAS CLOSED. A~`ItLl: (.'ommisionrr Bo~dstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissiorr,•r hicBurncy and MOTION GARR1Ef~: that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a 9•unit, 12,4^.3 square foot retail center on a rectangularly-shapcc: parcel oC land consisting oC app:oximatcly one acre, loca!csi .;t the ,:orthwest corner of Broadway and Magnolia Avcnuc and Further described as 221 South h:a>~nolia; an~i dt,es hcrciry approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Ncs:~!.:~ Declaration together with any wmmcnts received during the public rct7cw process and fua' ,. Fi-,uing onihc basis of the Initial •5tudy and any commcas received that there is no substantial evidence [hat the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Cor?mi~sioncr Boydsiun oFr red Resolution No. PC 85-338 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Usc Permit No. 3100, pursuant [o Anaheim htu~icipal Codc Sections 18.03.030.030 through 18.030.030.1135, and subject to lntcrdcpartmcntal Committee Kecotnmcndations. Jn roll call, the foregoing resolution was pa:Ncd by the following vote: AYES: BOilA5, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FEI.DHAUS, HERBST, biC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSEC<T: NONE M.Jcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. 1TFh1 N(~. 10. CEC NEGATIVE DECLARATICN. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 1:i74S 12/5/88 . i ~< MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMM1SS10N December 5. 19$8 P ' N°• PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: MAGDY HANNA, 4400 MacArthur Blvd., 9th Moor, Newport Beach, CA 9?000. PROPERTY LOCATION: "333. 'x.35 AND 3'i35-1 /2 Wcst Ball Road To establish a 12-unit condominium subdivision. Thcrc was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject rcqucst and although the slat( report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Jim Pcck, 3341 W. Dcerwood, stated today w•as the fvst chance they had to sec this plan; that the Commission approved a 12-unit condominium project, but it is not the way it is shown on this plan; that the cu! de sac on the original plan w:es to start about 25 feet into the property and now it is back on the strcct. He stated along the west wall there was to be a covcrcd garage, but now all that is shown is storage areas. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated that is the plan that is on the wall; however, the only thing that was analy~.cd was the tract map itself which simply suhdividcs the air space for the condominium project and the design of the project is the reyuiremcnt of the previously approved variance. He explained the only item being considered is the subdivision of the air space so the condominium units can be sold. Mr. Pcck asked why the ^~ap on the wall is not the same as the one approved. Mr. Hastings stated that plan dots not show all the information simply because it was not being considcrcd in this rcqucst. Commissioner Carusillo stated the cul de sac a•i!1 penetrate into the property inucad of stopping at the strcct. Mr. Peck stated they all want to know if there is going to be covcrcd garages beca•.tsc olhcrwisc people would be able to drive onto the property and along the wall. Commiaioncr Mccsc stated there w711 be a wall there and Commissioner Carusillo stated only Cour units will be able to exit onto their strcct. Jcnrifcr ivy5tal, representing the property owner, stated Dccnvoal will be extended into the project and the storage areas arc covcrcd parking and cxplaincd according to the Planning Department staff, lhat it the way they R1:1 have to build it and cxplaincd she was also wnccrncd when she saw the plans and stated everything grill be developed as originally approve. Mr. Pcck stated as long as the development conforms to that approved exhibit, he would not to be opposed. fyrcg Hastings staled the plan which was approved was the cul do sac going onto the property; however, the public potion of thr.. strcct stops at the property line and that is what staff would be looking for in the plan. ACTI()i'J: Commissioner McBurncy offered a motion, secandcd by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission hat reviewed the proposal to establish a 1-lot, 12-unit, air space condominium subdivision on arectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.74 acres, having a frontage of approximately 100 [cct on the north side of Ball Road, and being located approximately 250 feet east of the ccntcrlinc of Wcstva]c Drive, and further described as 3333, 3335 and 3335-1/2 ~Vcst Ball Road; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considcrcd 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 cvidenrr that the project will have a significant cflcd on the environment. 12/5/83 ~~_ , MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNI'VG COMMISSION, December S. 198,5 Pagc No.27 Co:nmissioncr McEurncy offered a motion, sccondrd by Commissioner Bo~•dstun and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission dots hereby find that the proposed subdivision, together with its design and improvement, is consistent with the City oC Anaheim Gcncral Plan, pursuant to Government Code Section Gu473S; and does, therefore, approve Tcntativc Map oC Tract No. 13745 fora 1-lot, 12-unit cusjominium subdivision subject to the following conditions: 1. That a modified col do sac shall be provided at the terminus of Dccrwood Drive as rcquircd by the City Enginccr. 2. That the existing most easterly driveway on Ball Ruad shall be rcmovcd and replaced with a standard curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping. 3. That sidewalks shall be repaired along Ball Road as rcquircd by he City Enginccr and in accordance with standard pans and specifications on tilt in the Office of the City Enginccr. 4. Thal a faithful performance band in an amount approved by the City Enginccr shall be posted with the City of Anaheim to guarantcc completion of Item Nos. ], 2, and 3, noted above, prior to final building and :.Doing inspections. S. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subdivision, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. G. That the legal property ow•ncr shall furnish to the City of Anaheim an agrccmcnt in a form to be apprwcd by the City Attorney agreeing to complete the public improvcmcnts rcquircd as conditions of this map al the legal property oµrcr's expense. Said agrccmcnt shall :rc rccordcd concurrently with the final tract map and is not to be subordinate to any rccordcd encumbrance against the property. 7. That property to final tract map approval, the original documents oC the covenants, conditions, and restrictions, and a lcttcr addressed to the dcvclopcr's title company authorizing recordation thereof, shall be submitted to the City Attorney's Office and approved by the City Attorney's Ofticc, Public Utilities Department anti Engineering Division. Said documents, as approved, shall then be filed and rccordcd in the Office of the Orange County Recorder, 8. '!~ hai the : pproval oC the Tcntativc Map oC Tract No. 13745 is granted subject to the finalizrtion of Rcclassi"rc;rtion No. 87-SS-50. 9. That street lighting facilities along Dcrrwood Avcnuc and Ball Road shall be installed as rcquircd by the Utilities Gcncral Manger in accordance with specifications on tilt in the OfGcc of Utilities Gcncral Manager; or that security in the form oC a bond, ccrtiticatc o[ deposit, lcttcr of c:rcdit, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim, sl;all be posted with the City to guarantcc the satisfactory completion of the above-mentioned improvcmcnts. Said security shall be posted with the City oC Anaheim prior to final tract map spproval. The above-rcquircd improvcmcnts shall be installed prior to occupancy. I0. That subject property shall be ser.•cd by underground utilities. 11. That prior to final tract map approval, residential underground elcctrial fcrs shall be paid to the City of Anaheim, and a faithful performance bond shall be posted wit}t the City oC Anaheim in an amount ttpprovcd by the Public Utilities C=cneral hfanagcr. 12. That the existing water services shall be abandoned and the new scnicc shall be taken Crom Ball Road to the satisfaction of the City Water Engineering Division. 12/S/88 `:`~, MIN TES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION December 5. 1988 P~ ~ 4 13, Thal the vehicular access rights to the public alley to the west shall be dedicated to the City o[ Anaheim. 14. That prior to final tract map approval, street names shall be submitted to and approved by the Zoning Division. 15. That prior to any occupancy, temporary strcct name signs shat! be installed if permanent strcct name signs have not been installed. 1G. Thal prior to final tract map approval, the legal property ow•ncr, shall enter into a recorded agreement with the City of Anaheim pursuant to Government Codc Section 65915 to pro~tidc lhat ten percent (IO%) oC the pcrmiUCd number o[ rcaidcntial units shall be sold as 'cry low income Ssoasing as defined in Government Code Section 65915 and with appropriate resale controLc as app+ovapd b`v~ytPe City of Anaheim for a period of not less than twenty (?0) years from the date of issuance of occu an rmhts. 17. That prior to final tract map approval, Condition Nos. 4,6,7,8,9,11,13,14 and tG above-mentioned, shall be complied with. 18. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed rcqucst only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim hfunicipal Zoning Codc and any other applicable City regulations. Approval dots not include any action or [findings as to compliance or approval of the rcqucst regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. Malcolm Slaaghtcr, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commiccion's decision to the City Council witiriu 22 days. 1TEM NO ll CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVEDI. CONDITIONAL USE P_ERM(T NO 2978 (READVERTISED). PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: CANYON ACRES RESIDENTIAL !;ENTER is C''h OulintanaADrrvc Canyon OUAID, 233 S. Quintana, Anaheim, CA 92806. PROPERTY LOCATION: ( Acres Residential Center) To modify the conditions of approval. Thcrc was nu one indicating their prescrrcc in opposition to subject rcqucst and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Dan McQuaid, agent, explained they arc rcqursting a modification to their conditional use permit which was granted to allow them to expand their facility; that there was a condition for a turf block parking lot; however upon review, they have discovered that the fregricnt use with 22 vehicles parking there on a regular basis would no[ work for [his project and they would like to be able to provide an asphalt parking lot. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Herbst asked if they would be able to plant some irccs inside th= parking lot, with curbing, in addition to the trees around the perimeter of the lot. h1r. McQuaid staled they ha~•c a Eucalyptus sucen around the parking arcs and that they would propose planting some additional 24' box Eucaly'plus t:ces adjacent to the neighbor who was the most concerned about it on the north side. Commissioner Carusillo stated there was a concern from the west side (the Silvcrtrec tract) and also from the south and he recalled that the plans show the corners of the parking lot as being somewhat bare oC shrubs, etc. 12/5/88 f MIh^JTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION December 5. 1988 Pagc No.29 Mr. McQuaid stated he was not aware oC any other concerns and that he had talked to both neighbors who wcrc concerned. He stated he thought the concern originally had been that the expansion of the facility would have an adverse effect on the arcs. Commissioner Carusillo stated they wcrc also concerned about the appearance and now there would be asphalt there and suggested the applicant give some thought to landscaping t'ne west and south sides of the parking lot. Mr. McQuaid stated there are trees between this sift and the tract to the west. Commissioner Mcssc asked about planters inside the parking lot to break up the large blacktop area. Mr. McQuaid stated there arc two trees which arc already in the parking lot which they have saved (large pepper trees) and prescntcd a picture oC the parking area with the foundation t'illcd with base rock. Commissioner Fcldhaus pointed out the secretary did receive several calls from neighbors who wanted to know what the plans wcrc. Greg Hastings stated staff does not have a copy oC what they arc proposing but does have a copy of what was approved, except for the asphalt and trees adjacent to the property lines. Commissioner Carusillo suggested another tree at the southwest corner and then maybe something along the south side. He asked about one tree on the south side oC the stable being the same sire as the ones on the north side and then Cour more along the south. Mr. McQuaid asked if he could make those 15 gallon trees rather than 24' boz trees and Commissioner Carusillo responded that would be acceptable. AC('ION: Commissioner Carusillo offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required cnvtronmcntal documentation for this request. Commissioner Carusillo o[fcrcd Resolution No. PC 88-339 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby modify Conditional Usc Permit No. 2978, modifying Condition No. 19 to read as shown on Page 2 of the staff report, and subject to the condition that 5 additional trees shall be planted, one at the southwest corner of the parking lot and Cour along the southern boundary of the lot and that the trees shall be a minimum s'tzc of 15 gallon. On :oll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, h1ESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, prescntcd the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. Mr. McQuaid stated they have not yet built the two new cotta;es and expect to start construction within six months and asked if the Conditional Usc Permit could be extended. Greg Hastings stated that would not require a public hearing and would be reports and recommendation item on the agenda. 12/5/88 ~.~ ~ `•~ .,. P?5~=+!~1 MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING ,.`AM ySION December 5, 19 £R Mr. McQuaid rc[crrcd to an article in the LA 't"rm~:s regarding their project and regarding the City's support of their cYCorts and enabling them to work with ;:r;anuations and businesses to provide more room for the children. ITEM NO l2 REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIQP~S: A. ['ONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Nf?. 21G9 -Dick Rogers oC Safaris international Inc., (leaseholders) requests review o[ revised plans for rccommendaiion to City Council. Property is located at 4060 East La Palma. (Continued from the meetings of October 10, and November 7, 1988). forfthetlfat food pcration.aDick Rlogcrs agcntcrespondcdnth hoursrarc o G a~mhto aapp oximat ly'10 p.m. Commissioner tdcsse stated the staff report should be corrected to show that the hours arc from G a.m. on Pagc 3, Faragraph 12. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated Codc EnCorccmcnt has indicated that the sign on the building dots not meet the Codc which allows a 20-square Coot sign on the building and they could either remove the sign or come in for approval of a variance. He stated apparently the building has been there for quite some time and the sign is a new sign since the CUP was granted. Commissioner Bouas asked if there arc any signs on the modular building they arc proposing and )`1r. Rogers responded any signs would conform to the Codc. Mr. Rogers cxplaincd the sign on the building that is being discussed is the building that is out by the freeway and the signs were there when they purchased the property and this is the first the}' knew that it was not Icgal. Greg Hastings stated no permit is required when a sign ~ uarct f t sia bforthc sco tihc p opcrty and they knowledge of this sign. He cxplaincd Codc allows a 20-sq fin would have to request a variance in order to keep the sign on the building. Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, stated iC the Commission is recommending approval oC this rcquact, maybe they would with to condition the approval upon the removal of the sign or the filing of an application Cor a ~rariancc to approve the sign poor to commencement of the activities they arc socking the permit Cor. Commissioner Herbst asked if they have reviewed the conditions regarding the dedication of property, eta Mr. Rogers responded they have. A 'I'1 N: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner McBurncy and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the request subs^^! to the condition that they remove the existing illegal sign on the building or request approval of a variance. g, ONDITIONA' USE PERMIT NO 99Ci REQlttiit' FOR TERMINATI N Applicant, Leslie ~V. Gardner, requests termination of Conditional Usc Permit r~o. 99G. property is located at 400. W. Vermont Avenue. Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC 83-340 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Conditional Usc Permit No. 99G. 12/5/88 ^~ ~,` _ . Pa~c No.31 MINUTES ANAHEIM C1TX PLANNING COMMISSION December 5, 19 On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following volt: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CA.RUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE C. REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPR VAL F PR P SED E "ART ALLERY' IN R ZONE: Property is located at 231 Wcst Katclla Avcnuc. Nelson Brcwrct, agent, was present. Commissioner Herbst stated he has no problem with this type of uac in the CR zone, subject to the approval oC a conditional use permit. Commissioner Bouts asked if they arc planning to build a new building and Mr. Brcwrct responded the gas station wilt be rcmovcd and a new building constructed. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division, stated if the Commission feels this is in conformance with the art gallery definition, the Commission would not sec plans for the building; however, if a conditional use permit is required, they wauld be rcquircd to submit a plan Cor approval. Commissioner Herbst stated because oC the mixed uses that are possibly involved, he thought a conditional use permit should be rcquircd. He asked if the General Plan should be amcndcd to change the designation to CR. Greg Hastings stated the code could be; amcndcd or the art gallery definition could be rcmovcd Crom the permitted uses and put into the conditional uses designation. Commissioner Herbst stated it is really more than an art gallery and includes coins and stamps, and that they do sell coin jcwclry. Greg Hastings stated currently there is no provision in the Code to allow these types oC uses. Commissioner Fcldhaus stated the Commission should make a definition of an art gallery. Commissioner Herbst stated the: Commission would need to know whrt the uses arc to be and hfr. Brewrct stated primarily it would a coins, stamp and wildlife print art gallery. Commissioner Herbst added in essence i[ could be a jcwclry store. Commissioner Feldhaus stated Commission needs to help staff with a definition so they can go in under Code 18.OL020 in the future. Commissioner Carusillo stated this business has been operating one block away with no problems and he thought this would be an asset to the arcs. Greg Hastings stated the current location of this business has recently been rezoned to commercial rcucation so the uses that were there before are now considered non-conforming. He stated an art gallery is a permitted use; however, staff has no definition or direction and there is no precedent and staff is asking the Commission to interpret the Codc and determine whether this is an art gallery. 12/5/88 ~. MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, December 5. 1983 Pic No32 Responding to Commissioner Mcssc, Mr. Brcwrct stated approximately 53% of the space would be devoted to the wildlife prints. He stated he has prints Crom 43 different slates. Commissioner Feldhaus asked if they have plans for ;hc construction of a new building and Grcg Hastings responded he understood they have not submitted plans at this time. Commissioner Bouas stated she has no objection and thought it fts into that commercial recreation/tourist arcs of the city and it would have appeal. Commissioner Feldhaus stated the report says they intend to host events and have activities for special occ scions. Grcg Hastings stated he wanted to be sure the Commission realizes that the art gallery will occupy only a portion of this center and the remainder could be occupied with any accessory uses as listed under Item 8, so there may be a series of non-related uses, pro~idcd the major use is a pc;rmitted primary use. Commissioner Herbst suggested taking art gallery out oC the permitted use category and putting it in the conditional use permit category with a ICI of stipulations under which they could operate so the City could have control. Commisioncr Bouas suggested calling these collectibles. Commissioner Carnsillo felt an art gallery if defined properly is probably what the Commission is looking for. Bill Brcwcr stated he did not understand Mr. Hastings' objections to having an art gallery here on the west coast and this is probably a first for Anaheim in that they arc trying to get the National Wildlife Federation Art Gallery permit and presented a photograph of a print which is the 50th anniversary of the National Wildlife Duck stamp which is issued every year. He stated their primary purpose is to enlarge their facility by building a new building one block Crom their present location and that they have been there since 1975 and have had no problems. Mr. Brcwcr stated it doesn't matter whether it is baseball cards, Olympir. pins, etc, because they are all low attendance items. Commissioner Bouas sealed the Commissioners all seem to agree but arc trying to determine which category it is under so it is permitted because there is nothing in the Codc right now. Responding to Comm't.`siancr Messe, Mr. Brcwcr sated they have gotten tentative appec,val subject to g~tt~~~o ? ~~ -:,,,,, ,;~,•„ -,,. ^!siional ~Vildlifc Federation. :~>s.t7air::~~+~~* Herbst W:egtd ll±~ti ~~^ moving into a new building and the gallery would be allowed hue j;,c.+.• arc scqucsting permission to ha~•c :.ins, utc which are not permitted. h!;, E:f::.;~.j ":~:rd ihr CR Zane does allow rn~mcrdal rccrcalicn uses and that would include cvct}ihing they hail fUf safe nvw. Mal:~elm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, asked how the sale of collectibles or whatever that is determined to be relates to the business of entertaining housing or supplying tourists, as opposed to the general public in anon-tourist capacity. Mr. Slaughter stated the CR Zone is defined as giving specific sctvicc to the tourist and it seems collectibles would be something the general public would purchase. 12/5/88 ~i,.,j _..: ~ MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION December 5. 19RS Page No.33 Commissioner McBurncy asked about the print shop and what it prints. Greg Hastings stated staff would have to interpret that as a regular print shop and these arc actually accessory uses to the uses in Item No. 7 which arc permitted by right. He stated the intent oC this applicant is to Call under the definition of one of these uses and the closest is the art gallery. Commissioner Boydstun suggested approving it as an art gallery with the accessory as a souvenir shop. Mr. Brewer stated a lot oC tours come through this area and a lot of the people on those tours collect baseball cards, stamps or coins and would like the opportunity to purchase these items. Greg Hastings stated he wanted to be sure the Commission understands that this particular business will occupy 53% of a retail ccntcr and within that 53% there would be the art gallery and the remainder of the ccntcr would be accessory uses which could be individual businesses such as a bank, drug store, etc. Mr. Brewer slated that is incorrect and that they have changed the plans. He stated that lot is too small for a restaurant or a bowling alley and this business really fits Ihcre and it will bring a lot of happiness to a lot of people. Malcolm Slaughter stated the Commiaion is bcirg requested to intcrprel the Ccxlc and determine if there is an uncertainty or ambiguity and advise the City Council whether they Cccl that this does fall within the category as, a code permitted use. He stated if the Commission finds that it is an accessory use and the City Council agrees, then it coulJ be allowed. He stated that determination u911 govern all Cuturc similar requests. Commissioner Herbst asked iC stamps and coins could be added to that list of eight uses and Commissioner Bouas added stamps arc considered by sonic as a form of art and pointed out they arc all designed by an artist. Commissioner Messe stated according to the agent, the primary use is 53% art gallery and asked iC the stamps and coins could be added as an accessory use to art galleries only. Malcolm Slaughter stated the Commission could probably suggest that the City Council amend the list oC permitted uses incidental only to art galleries. ACTION: Commissioner Carusillo offered a motion, seconded by l:ommissioncr i•1cliurncy and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that they amend the Codc to permit stamps, coins, baseball cards sales as an accessory use to an art gallery. D. REQUEST FOR CODF AN'ENDMENT PERTAINING TO BOWLING ALLEYS IN THE 'M L' ZC)N'E. Michael Ray, applicant, 2699 White Road, Irvine, stated their company would be more concerned than the City staff, Planning Commission or City Council over something that might give (heir company a bad name or a use that might prove to be something the City would not like, so when they were first approached about the bowling ccntcr, they had extreme reservations and investigated the bowling industry and found in the City oC Anaheim there arc between 20,000 and SO,Q00 bowlers ;nd 20,000 regularly and they arc not being serviced because commercial land is more expensive than bowling can a[Cord. 12/5/&R t._ ~:: __ MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMM1SSlON Dcc~mber 5, ]988 Paec No34 Mr. Ray stated they would have CC&CRs and iC this tenant did something that would be adverse, their industrial tenant across the strcct would report it and their company would be more concerned about it than the City and they would terminated their Ieasc. Mr. Ray rcfcrrcd to the report submitted concerning the operation of a bowling ccntcr which shows what this company would do in the future. Chairwoman Bouas stated Commission's cone: rn was nat lack of confidence in the operator oC the bowling ccntcr, but has been our industrial area and that bowling ccnlcrs arc not allowed and the question is whcthcr to use the industrial land up with something like this or whcthcr it should be retained as industrial land. Mr. Ray stated the proposed operator went to Rockwell to sec if they have a problem and it was interesting that Rockwell, which has 10,(X)0 employees within 5 minutes of the silt, signed the (orm Icttcr and also gave a unique Icttcr supporting it as an amenity to the industrial base. Mr. Ray rcfcrrcd to a Icttcr from Kunrman's Associates, Traffic Consultants, which shows the traffic impact would be beneficial to the area. Mr. Ray stated another question is whcthcr alcohol sales would be detrimental and explained the center in Riverside has a great potential for alcohol sales and they sell about $100 a day. He added another concern is "hot roddcrs" and cxplaincd there is an casement from the strcct dovm to the bowling center and the CCScRs cover that casement and if there is trouble, they would have more power than the local police to enforce it. He stated a bowling ccntcr is not financiablc unless there arc alternative uses for the particular structure, so the building is designed so that if they were not there, they could always put an RStD tenant in. He cxplaincd again that this is not a request Cor approval of a specific site, but just to have the opportunity to submit an application. Commissioner Mcssc stated the report was very thorough and well received and there is no question that they would run a good business, and that bowling is something the general public enjoys, but that he has reservations about where it belongs in the industrial zone, and that he has not been convinced cvcn though bowling would be an auxiliary to some industries, but it would be bringing in seniors (or the leagues during the day and that is not in conCormancc with what we want in our industrial arcs. Commissioner McBurncy rcfcrrcd to the existing recreation ccntcr and asked if it is in the Canyon Industrial Arca and Grcg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager responded that was put in before we had the Canyon Industrial Arca. He explained that entire ccntcr was part of a master plan brought in before that Canyon Industrial Arca designation was adopted and that there is still actually another phase to be buih under the existing CUP Cor the property. Chairwoman Bouas slated she has no objection for this arcs, but would not went to sec bowling ccnlcrs all over the industrial area and did not know how to prevent it, cvcn though she rcal'izcd there would not be that many. She stated she certainly has no objection to them having the right to ask for a permit. Commissioner Carusillo stated he agreed and asked what would happen iC somebody wants to construct one out in the Canyon Industrial area. Mr. Ray responded he did not think that is anything to be concerned about and added the question is whether or not we want bowling ccnlcrs in Anaheim. Commissioner Carusillo stated the report stated that maybe 2 or 3 more bowling centers might be able to operate within that economic range. 12/5/88 !~ j ~' MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMh11SSION. December 5. 1983 P N Commissioner I' •rbst stated he was impressed with the number oC signatures the operator got from users in the industrial area and thought probably the bowling ccntcr actually services the industrial community better than Levitts and some oC the other uses that have been allowed end it is a recreational facility, however, he does have mixed feelings about allowing it. He added he recognizes that this is going to be in an industrial building that could be wnvcrted to an industrial use if the bowling ccntcr doesn't succeed. Commissioner Fcldhaus pointed out Commissioner Herbst requested that the operator bring in the letters. Commissioner Hcrbsl continued that he recognized that and felt probably they should be given the opportunity to submit an application for a conditional use permit and then a public hearing would be held. Commissioner Carusillo stated there is also a concern about the salt of beer and wine and Commissioner Herbst stated this is not approving anything today and approval would just give the applicant the right to ask and that doesn't mean it will be approved. Commissioner McBurncy agreed and stated he would like to lock it in on this particular arcs between Kraemer and Tustin and not any further into the canyon and i( there is a specific rcqucst, it should be in this arcs between Kraemer and Tustin. Greg Hastings stated there is no way to limit it until the Commission gets an actual rcqucst, and the Commission should dctcrriinc if they want this ucc permitted just in the Canyon Industrial Arca or in citywide industrial areas. He stated right now their rcqucst is for the Canyon Industrial Arca, however, Commission may wish to make it citywide. Commissioner Carusillo stated obviously if we permit it here, someone in the other industrial areas will say they should have the privilege. Commissioner Herbst stated there is a large property on Lemon which has been vacant for the last 50 years which would be suitable for a bowling ccntcr, but he did not know right now if all industrial arc:ss should be indudcd. Commissioner McBurncy stated the industrial arcs is the furthermost away from all residential areas, and sometimes commercial property backs up to residential property where there would be a severe impact. Commissioner Mcssc stated he did not think bowling centers would have tremendous impact, but that he was concerned about the loss of that land for industrial uses. Commissioner Herbst stated today the Commission discussed traCrc problems in the area, particularly off La Palma and added he felt this would have Icss impact than if the property was developed for industrial uses. Commissioner Carusillo asked about the issue o[ the integrity oC holding the property in the industrial area. Commissioner Herbst agreed and added that is why he would agree to having a public hearing to !ct the people in the area have an opportunity to give their input. Commissioner Mcliurney asked how long we can hold vacant property and i( it can be bringing in taxes, would it be better to Icavc it vacant than have it bringing in revenue. Commissioner Fcldhaus stated by requiring a public hearing and making sure all the industrialists arc notified, he thought everything that can be done, has been done. 12/5/83 ~F _./ MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION December S. ]9S8 P N A I N: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner McBurncy and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Mcsse voting no) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hcrcby direct staff to prepare a draft ordinance permitting bowling alleys in all ML Zones subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. Commissioner Herbst stated he wanted to be sure that when this goes to the City Council that this only gives the petitioner the right to ask for a permit. Commissioner Carusillo stated he vote in favor oC this on the basis that everyone has the right to ask, but wanted to be sure that once we forward something to the Council with our blessing, it gives the Council the impression that the Commission agrees with the request. He stated he has a concern with the pcnctratian of the integrity of the industrial area and had no doubt that they arc proposing a fine project shat will be high tech and probably enjoyed by all, but was concerned about the placement and opening the rest of the industrial area to this type use. Commissioner Fcldhaus pointed out that this goes to the City Council for action, but that the petitioner should understand that if i[ is approved, that doesn't mean they can go ahead and they will still have to come back and submit their application. E. RECLASSIFICATION NO RS-R9-O< - Nunc pro tune resolution to amend Icgal description contained in Resolution No. PC88-199. Commissioner McBurncy offered Resolution No. PC-8S-311 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission dons hcrcby amend the Icgal description contained in Resolution No. PC 88-199, nunc pro tune. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILLO, FELDHAUS, HERBST, h1C BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ITEM NO. S WAS HEARD AT THIS TIME ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:25 p.m. Res{x;etfully submitted, ~~~ ,~° ~ Edith L. Harris, Secretary Anaheim Ci[y Planning Commission CM10S1PL 12/5/88 t s t.: a