Minutes-PC 1989/11/06~:~~
.,
~~ ACTION AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1989, AT 10:00 A.M.
PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW
PUBLIC HEARING
(PUBLIC TESTIMONY)
10:00 A.M.
1:30 P.M.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, FELDHAUS, HELLYER, MESSE
MC BURNEY
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: HERBST
PRESENTATION OF SERVICE AWARD TO JOHN CARUSILLO - Continued to 11-20-89.
PROCEDURE TO EXPEDITE PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC BEARINGS
1. The proponents in applications which are not contested will have five
minutes to present their evidence. Additional time will be granted.
upon request if, in the opinion of the Commission, such additional
time will produce evidence important to the Commission's
consideration.
2. In contested applications, the proponents and opponent will each be
given ten minutes to present his case unless additional time is
:.~.A,,J
requested and the complexity of the matter warrants. The
Commission's considerations are not determined by the length of time
a participant spaaks, but rather by what he says.
3. Staff Reports are part of the evidence deemed received by the
Commission in each hearing. Copies are available to the public prior
to the meeting,
4. The Commission will withhold questions until the public hearing is
closed.
5. The Commissioi: reserves the right to deviate from the foregoing if,
in its opinion, the ends of fairness to all concerned will be served.
6. All documents are presented to the Planning Commission for review in
connection with any hearing, including photographs or other
acceptable visual representations of non-documentary evidence, shall
be retained by the Commission for the public record and shall be
available for public inspections.
7. At the end of the scheduled hearings, members of the public will be
allowed to speak on items of interest which are within the
jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, and/or agenda items. Each
speaker will be allotted a maximum of five (5) minutes to speak.
0628b
Page 1
~r--{~--,~~
la. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
y ~ lb. RECLASSIFICATION N0. 89-90-08
~.." lc. VARIANCE N0. 3990
ld. TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 14130
le. SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. 89-09
lf. RFCOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR DISTANCE
BETWEEN OIL WELL AND DWELLING UNITS.
OWNER: BLASH MOMENY, 2082 Business Center Drive, #185
Irvine, CA 92715
LOCATION: Proper is approximately 5 acres at the northwest terminus
of Garland Circle approximately 450 feet west of the
centerline of Boisseranc Wav.
RS-A-43,000 to RS-5000 or a less intense zone.
To establish an 18-lot single-family subdivision with waivers of
required lot frontage and minimum distance betweer. an oil drilling
site and residential units.
Continued from the September 25, 1989 Planning Commission meeting.
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION N0. PC 89-262
VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. PC 89-263
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
«~•~ FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
~` CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSZTION: 30 people present
OPPOSITION CONCERNS: Some neighbors did not receive notice of hearing,
300-foot radius not large enough; will impact traffic on Glenview;
exis4ing traffic past saturation point now; danger to children going to
schools in the area; suggested combining two parcels and providing
another access on Garland; speed of traffic; questioned when traffic
study was conducted, and whether it was during a school session;
submitted petition requesting speed bumps; day care facility at
Esperanza School with students who walk down Glen View to the school
during peak traffic hours; private road would eventually beco~~ the
City's responsibility; that is only access point for the citizens of
that area to get to the Lakeview lake bed which is in Yorba Linda right
on the other side of this land (developer indicated lake bed is not
public land and belongs to Orange County); concerned about parking;
900-foot long cul de sac; oil well maintenance trucks are long and need
about 100 feet to align with derrick and waiver is requested from the
150-foot requirement.
November 6, 1989 Page 2
Approved
Granted
Denied
Denied
Withdrawn
Denied
,V~.
;~
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Have determined sewers are adequate to
~, accommodate this project; soils study showed no real evidence of
contamination; gate could be eliminated; concerning traffic, service
trips are a part of calculations used in traffic study, total of 204
trips per day; impact on wildlife would be minimal.
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Did traffic study address impact of access through
Orchard? (response, not specifically addressed because that is an
existing condi~ion in neighborhood); questioned when traffic study was
done (traffic consultant responded on October 23, 24 & 25) McBurney -
felt traffic impact would be less than once thought; access for trucks
removed from public streets is a plus; Messe - private road not wide
enough for sidewalks, no guarantee access from Orchard is available for
any traffic other than trucks in case of emergency; 200 increase in
traffic.
STAFF COMMENTS: Traffic Engineer - Holbrook & Glenview have so:•~e unique
traffic problems, primarily because of high school and configuration of
streets and both streets as diversion of Orangethorpe & Kellogg; working
with neighborhood to find solution; other alternative would be traffic
diverter; traffic impact from this project is negligible, but would add
to existing problems; if access could be provided from Lakeview, traffic
would not be as big a problem for neighbors.
Fire Department - homes located just outside Lhe 100 feet would have to
have a deed restriction prohibiting any additions to the structures.
Fire Department did not require road improvements.
Public Works Engineering - Street from Orchard too long to meet private
~~,) street standards, grade not to excees 10~ n•.thout prior approval of Fire
Department & Engineering; required to ha~;Ze sidewalks on both sides.
(Developer responded that road will not 'L~e used by public and is only
for service access for oil well maintenance and has been used since 1926
and is not on his property; oil company has agreement with property
owners until land goes back to individual owners; that he has to give
them access, but not in this location)
ACTION: A, Reclassification - Granted
(4-2 (Hellyer & Feldhaus
voting no, Herbst absent)
B. Variance No. 3990 - Denied
(5-1) Bouas voting no,
A resolution was offered to approve the 3arianceesubjectct~t
a. Condition No. 13 being moved from the Tentative Tract to the
Variance
b. req~xiring improvement of the maintenance road to provide access for
emergency vehicles and emergency egress for residents of the tract
but not to be a public right of way and that access shall be
subject to the approval of the City Traffic Engineer.
November 6, 1989
Page 3
r
I ~i
c. requiring that a 100-foot wide easement and deed restrictions be
s`~ recorded on homes located within 100 feet of oil wells, prohibiting
-- additions to any structures; and said easement to remain in effect
until wells are abandoned.
(Commissioner Messe noted this would a single entrance with just
emergency access and egress to the stub street; and entry gate is very
close to the street.
THE RESOLUTION FAILED TO CARRY
(2-4) Bouas & Messe voting yes
Boydstun, Hellyer, Feldhaus & McBurney voting no)
Herbst absent
C. TT No. 14130 Denied
D. Specimen Tree Removal Permit 89-09 - Withdrawn
E. Rec. to CC for Distance Between Oil
Well and Dwelling Units - Denied (without prejudice)
Commission generally felt they would need to see the
project before recommending approval regarding distance
between oil well and dwelling units.
November 6, 1989
Page 4
~.
2a.
'~ 2b. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
VARIANCE N0. 3993
OWNER: LESLIE CROWELL AND ARLENE CROWELL, P.0. Box 1728,
Lucerne Valley, CA 92354
LOCATION: 1110. 1112 and 1114 West Pearl Street
Waivers of (a) minimum number of parking spaces, (b) minimum site
area per dwelling unit, (c) maximum structural height and (d) minimum
side yard to construct a 4-story, 12-unit apartment building.
Continued from the October 23, 1989 Planning Commission meeting.
VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. Continued to
11-20-89
3a. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT N0. 289 Continued to
3b. GENERAI~ PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 27i 11-20-89
3c. RECLASSIFICATION N0. 89-90-22
3d. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
3e. C,ONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3206 ~
3f. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT N0. 83-02 (READVERTISED ~
3g. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 89-02
OWNERS: SAVI RANCH ASSOCIATES, C/0 HILL,MAN ?ROPERTIES, 450 Newport
,,, Center Drive, Suite 304, Newport Beach, CA 92660
~,
, AGENT: CSF, 1717 S. State College Boulevard, Suite 100,
`"'~ Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: 1001 to 1100 Pullman Street
PORTION A: ML to CL and PORTION B: RS-A-43,000 to CL
Request for amendment to she Land Use Element of the General Plan
proposing a redesignation from the Existing General Industrial and
General Open Space designations to a General Commercial designation
to permit and govern the construction of a commercial retail center,
an automotive repa5r center, two freestanding restaurants with
on-sale and consumption of alcoholic heverages and entertainment, one
drive-thx•ough restaurant and a tb,eatre with building heights in
excess of 3.5 feet with waivers of minimum number of parking spaces,
required site screening and required landscaped setback. Request for
amendment and restatement of Development Agreement No. 83-02 between
SAVI Ranch Associates and the City of Anaheim; and approval of
Development Agreement No. 89-O.1 between Marketfaire Partners and the
City of Anaheim.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION N0.
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION Pl0.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0.
~~
November 6, 1989 Page 5
/: ~~
~?
4a. CEOA NEGt1TIVE DECLARATION
"~: 4b. VARIANCE .NO. 4006
OWNER: THE HAI,DWIN BUILDING COMPANY, ATTN: DAVID GRAF,
16811 Hale Avenue, Irvine, CA 92714
LOCATION: Subiect 591-acre property (The Summit of Anaheim Hills
Specific Plan SP88-2) is located approximately 1 1 miles
southeast of the Weir Canyon Road/Riverside Freeway
intersection and_is bounded on the north bx the Sycamore
Canyon Specific Plan development on the west by The
Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan development and on
the south and east by unincorporated Irvine Company
property within the County of Orange.
Waiver of required site screening to construct up to a 6-foot, 2-inch
high wall with up to a 6-foot, 9-inch high pilaster at minimum 7 - 14
foot setbacks from Weir Canyon Road, Oak Canyon Drive and Serrano
Avenue.
VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0.
5a. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT R,F;PORT N0. 273 (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED)
5b. VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT' MAP NOS. 12692 APID 12693 AND SITE PLANS
OWNER: PRESLEY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, ATTN: STEVE RIGGS,
22659 Old Canal Road, Yorba Linda, CA 92686
AGENT: ELFEND & ASSOCIATES, 4675 MacArthur Court, Suite 660,
N~,tport Beach, CA 92660
LOCATION: Subiect property is within the northeastern portion of the
816-afire The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan
SP87-1 Proiect Area and is further described as Development
Area 3. The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Development is
bounded on the north by the_5ast Hills Planned Community
on the east by Sycamore C~:won and The Summit of Anaheim
Hills Developments, on the west by the existing Anaheim
Hills Planned Community and the Mohler Drive Area and on
the south by the City of Orange and unincorporated land
within the County of Orange.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No 12692 and Site Plan:
To establish a 39.8 acre, 94-lot subdivision, including 92
single-family detached residential lots and two open space lots.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No•_].2693 and Site Plan:
To establish an 8.2-acre, 48-lot single-family detached residential
subdivision.
November 6, 1989 Page 6
11-20-89
r
Approved
Approved
1 i
~: %, ~~,,
/', , .
~"~.
~' ~ ~ a 9
~.:.:
q --------------------------------------------------------------------
~~`";~ FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
,_~ CONSIDERED QFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Approved
(6 yes votes, Herbst absent)
6a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATIGN
6b. GENERAL PLAN ~~MENDMENT N0. ?7i
6c. RECLASSIFICATION NO 89-9G-23
6d. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
6e. CONDITIONAI. E Pk~RMIT N0. 3214
6f. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL_REVIEW OF 6d AND Se
OWNER: JAFAR JAHANPANAH, 520 N. Rexford Drive,
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
AGENT: RONALD J. CROWLEY, 1700 Raintree Rd., Fullerton, CA 92635
LOCATION: 1585 West Katella Avenue
Portion A: RS-10,000 to CO
Portion B: RS-10,000 to RM-2400
Request for amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan
~~....~
proposing a redesignation from the existing Commercial Professional
'" designation to the General Commercial and the Low-Medium Density
Residential designation. To permit an 18-unit, RM-2400 condominium
complex on Portion B with waic'er3 of a maximum structural height,
minimum building setback and minimum recreational leisure area.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION N0.
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION N0.
CONDITIONAL L'SE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
PETITIONER'S COMDfl;NTS: Requested Commission input regarding staff
alternatives suggested. Will come back with modified plans.
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Messe, would consider condos, but not this project
with row housing and no recreational area. Single entrance off Katella.
Should show additional sensitivity to private single family residences
to the north. Boydstun -felt properties should be combined, no
recreational area.
i
~~..J
~'
Continued
to 12-4-89
(To be reac~-
vertised)
November 6, 1989 Page 7
~;,,
STAFF COMMENTS; Fire Department - developer met with Fire Marshal and
~/'~ was given choice of different type sprinklers or hydrant location, Fire
~,,) Dept. would not go against other Department's recommendation regarding
street size, 28-foot wide street.
Traffic Engineer - Concern is access, entering from Katella, there are
existing driveways and recommends one single driveway with joint access
for commercial use and residential use with adjacent property owners;
single access approximately in middle of property; Katella is designated
as a "super street" and will be recommended access points along Ratella
be eliminated as much as possible.
Public Works Engineering- recommended streets meet Standard Detail No.
122 for Private Streets; 28-foot wide travel lanes and sidewalks and
feel strongly about necessity for sidewalks.
Planning -.Additional waiver required for remainder Lot A, minimum
square footage of 20,000 sq.ft. unless it is eliminated or combined.
Commercial parcels required to 20,000 sq. ft.
ACTION: Cuntinued to 12-4-89 in order for developer %o consider staff
concerns and modify plans. To be readver*ised.
7a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
7b. RECLASSIFICATION NO 89-90-24
7c. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
7d. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 3210
~~~ GWNER: CLARENCE W. MAUERHAN, TRUST, ATTN: WILLIAM MAUERHAN,
" 210 Narcissus, Corona Del Mar, CA 92625
AGENT: J. WARD DAWSON, AIA, 24532 Leafwood DriV(`,
Murrieta, CA 92362
LOCATION: 1176 W. Katella Avenue (Space Age Lodge)
RM-1200 to CR for southerly portion of property.
To permit a 169-unit, four-story, 50-foot high, 94,180 square-foot
all-suite motel with haiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION N0.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.
----------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION :ACTION. NOT TO AE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: 2 people present
OPPOSITION CONCERNS: Property owner adjacent to west has had constant
problem with kids climbing over fence; trash bins on the west and they
were to plant greenery r'or motel which was never done; planters will be
used for kids to climb over the fence; has had burglaries and robberies;
a„y!'
November 6, 1989 Page d
'Continued
Ito 11-20-89
.:~
felt residential area has not been considered; property is eye sore; and
"~, property value has depreciated because of it; problems with drugs and
teenagers who congregate; adjacent prope~~y is about 1/2 block lower and
wall is supposed to be 6 feet high and height was added to at one time;
drain pool down Stella Lane; 10-foot distance 100 feet long between
adjacent Frcgerty and motel which is littered and not taken care of and
is viewed by apartment tenants; criminals jump wall and burglarize his
tenants; will landscaping and planters be maintained; parking is also a
concern.
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Family has owned property for over 50 years and
will be getting the lease back. Plans to develop an all suite motel.
Concerned about 12-foot dedication; property in middle of block between
Walnut and Casa Vista; does not control commercial property to the west
where there is a liquor store; eastbound on Katella, at the intersection
with Walnut, curb jogs out 8-1/2 feet, and he thought that was for a bus
stop area; and it goes that way for about 1000 feet to the east and at
West, it jogs back out in front of Stovalls, and questioned need for
another bus turnout; project just east recently completed, did not
trovide additional footage for buses; questiva~d condition pertaining to
sewer connection into the lateral in Stella Lune; Variance No. 784 was
obtained by his dad in 1957 to allow the Carle Restaurant and there is
still a lease and it is now a Millie's Restaurant and he could not
terminate that variance. City required stub street to provide access in
wall for children going to Katella School; does need repair; with new
wall and landscaping, would not be a problem. 6-foot high wall
proposed, 15 gallon trees and 20 foot centers; thought Stovall would
have resolves problems if they had been presented; existing building
presents blank wall to north and they have tried to enhance that
property. Subject property is unique with residential street behind it.
Restaurant has a 62 year lease and property cannot be dedicated; owns
other properties in Anaheim and City is now operating a hotel and large
parking structure. Was sure could redesign but would lose a lot of what
they want to accomplish; not aware of a parking problem. 4 spaces short
of requirement. Buses utilizing property now, 4 or 5 paz•ked there
today. 30 foot wide area for buses. Would not want to reduce nw~her of
units, but could reduce size of rooms. Stipulated if approved,
driveways would be adequate width as required by Fire Department &
Traffic Engineer. Sewer study requested from Euclid to State College
and from 9th to Ball for a 69-unit motel. Katella has 24" main
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Conditions require landscaping, walls & planters
to be maintained in conformance with Code. Major CR study going on in
tha area. Why is the space needed in front. Submitted plans show
small car spaces; and 25 foot wide driveway (e«::.ar indicated 30 feat
wide) tours by bus would reduce requirea ^~r;cirg as opposed to people
driving vehicles. Would like i:o °o~ YJan w°_'-;; :;;;-:oot wide driveway,
internal islands and eliminated compact ~paacs; asked if sewer
connection could be in Stella Lane?.
`»..~
November 6, 1989 Page 9
STAFF COhAlENTS: Property is in the study area for CR study; will
address existing codes and review the standards and appropriate land
.`~\
;~:', use, design guidelines and infrastructure needed. Staff is concerned
about variances to the current codes; parking waiver proposed Within
five months, study will be reviewed by PC and CC.
Traffic Engineer: Concerned about parking waiver, parking study
conducted for this particular motel shows a deficiency of parking
following construction under certain circumstances, obviously not
recommending approving parking waiver at this time. Also, concerned
about bus parking area since Ratella is scheduled to be super street;
ordinance prohibiting parking of buses or stopping of buses in travel
lanes, bus pullout area is required; area in front of motel could be
developed for that purposes as well as the restaurant, since both
properties are owned by same property owner; if bus bay on Ratella
cannot be provided, entry driveway would need to be a minimum of 42 feet
wide to accommodate buses on site; small car parking spaces not
permitted in the City, standard size .reduced to 8-1/2' by 18' (applicant
indicated moved building and eliminated most of the small car spaces).
Ratella will be redesigned and require curb to curb lanes so there will
be additional lanes provided and no buses could stop. Offered to work
with applicant. Not aware this particular facility was being serviced
by buses because no bus spaces are shown. and if they are going to be
serviced by buses, there should be an area for buses on the site.
Study addressed individual parking and if facility is served by travel
buses or tour buses, that is another issue, tour buses which serve the
area for local tours, do mat park there, but tours where driver stays at
"`'~ hotel. Felt bus bay up front could be worked out, but not the parking
«;°~ deficiency.
Fire Department: Have all drives on site been increased to 30 fee~c for
emergency vehicle access; plans submitted show 25 feet. Have found in
many instances where Fire Department could not get vehicles on the motel
sites because of illegal parking.
Public Works/Engineering: Relief sewer considered to be an areawide
mitigation measure and the developer can proceed with a study that would
prove otherwise. City sewer study would take 10 months to complete,
September 1990, and then another few months for any sewer assessment
fees and area to be defined.
ACTION: Continued to 11-20-$9, in order to work with Traffic Engineer.
November 6, 1989 Page 10
c~
,~ n~ u
I'
8a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Approved
:; ~ 8b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved
'a''.;,
:
i 8c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3212 I Granted
_ 8d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14169 Approved
OWNER: DONALD G. HUNT, 12844 Inglewood, Hawthorne, CA 90250
AGENT: WILLIAM PEARCE AND PHIL• SCHWARTZ, 14841 Yorba, #203
Tustin, CA 92680
LOCATION: 400 W. Wilken Wav
To permit the construction of a 1-lot, 64-unit, RM-2400 condominium
complex with waiver of maximum structural height..
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC 89-264
- -------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Design to leave fence exactly where it is.
Conditions required trees and they have worked with property owners on
Oertley so everyone is happy.
s~0~a COMMISSION COMMENTS: Fence on east is not on property line, bigger
~+s.,..~ planter than other side, no windows facing that way, wanted specimen
trees planted along that side.
STAFF COMMENTS: Requested Commission instruction regarding 20-foot
buffer adjacent to single-family for RM 2400 zone.
ACTION: Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration
Granted waiver of code requirement fro maximum building height.
Granted Conditional Use Permit
Approved Tentative Tract Map 14169.
VOTE: 6 yes votes
Herbst absent
November 6, 1989 Page 11
9a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 11
%~ 9b. VARIANCE N0. 3999 '
Granted
(Limited to
2 tenants}
O'r7NERS: DENNIS M. BERRYMAN AND CAROL p,~ BERRYMAN,
ARN R. YOUNGMAN AND PATRICIA A. YOUNGMAN,
C/0 PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT GRO-JP, One Corporate Plaza,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
AGENT: ADIART, INC, 5107 E. Telegraph Rd., Los Angeles, CA 90022
LOCATION: 430 South Anaheim Hil].S Road (Anaheim Hills Plaza)
Waiver of permitted signs to construct a freestanding monument sign
(existing sign to be removed).
VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. PC 89-265
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION, NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES,
OPPOSITION: None
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS; Rustic sign, background not illuminated. two
major tenants
~~~~~
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Questioned requirements regarding hours of
illumination. It was noted midnight to 6 a.m. are restricted. (Agent
agreed to comply with any conditions), Asked for stipulation limiting
sign to two tenants.
ACTION: Granted, subject to limited. of two major tenants and hours of
illumination not between midnight and 6 a.m.
VOTE: 6 yes votes
Herbst absent
;~~)
November 6, 1989
Page 12
10 a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
~''°~^+~ lOb. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
': ? lOc. CONDITIOn~1L USE PERMIT NO 3216
OWNER: VANDERBILT LIMITED, 27122B Paseo Espada, #1021,
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
AGENT: DAVE SCOTT, VANDERBILT LIMITED, 27122B Paseo Espada, #1021
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
LOCATION: 8285 East Santa Ana Canyon Road
~o permit the further division of a previously-approved commercial
retail building with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC 89-266
---------------------------------------
----------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSI','ION: 3 persona present
OPPOSITION CONCERNS: parking is problem now and rest of center is not
developed; circulation and traffic flow; originally designed to have
reciprocal parking and access agreements, but separate parcels do not
allow customer to have access to parking; requested staff to come out
and review the situation; developer sold off individual parcels; patrons
!`"~ are parking along street and if there was an emergency, there be a
._..~' problem
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Original intent has changed, prepared a master
site plan to get a better feeling of the situation; 3 years ago parking
variances was approved and more intense uses than anticipated have come
in, this is a sit-down Japanese restaurant; parking study for entire
development; ingress and egress approved by the City. Can tell
employees where to park. This site has 89'b of parking requirement.
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Did parking study review existing uses and the
existing problems. Problem has been indicated at certain hours and
applicant has requested parking waiver for those same times.
STAFF COMMENTS: When development is complete, 617 spaces which will be
used by everybody, but right now at certain times, there is a bit of a
parking problem. Sit down restaurant and medical use increased parking
needs.
Traffic Engineer - Looked at parking study, but did not go to site, but
did not see a cumulative problem; however, on-site survey concerns him
and there appears to be a cumulative problem. Suggested 7 spaces may
not be that bad, but the study does not address that and he did not
address the cumulative affect of additional parking variances in the
area. Study indicated adequate on-site parking, Cars are parking on
.~,,,%
November 6, 1989 Page 13
Approved
Granted
Granted
F;
~-i: '~;
l • c~ ~;~
entry roadway, but after center is developed that would be prohibited.
Reciprocal parking and access has been considered, but properties have
`;. ) been divided ~o to make adjacent parking areas inaccessible for
reciprocal use. Indicated he would have an aerial photograph taken by
the helicopter to give a graphic view of what is really happening.
Planning: Problem is because of land uses proposed and not because of
the walls.
ACTION: Granted variance.
Instructed Traffic Engineer to conduct study within two weeks
6 yes votes
Herbst absent
. lla. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT N0. 280 (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED) Approved
llb. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3215 Approved
OWNER: SANTA FE PACIFIC REALTY CORPORATION, 3230 E. Imperial Hwz.,
~~
#200, Brea, CA 92621 _~'
AGE27T: CHUCR CHRISTENSEN, 3230 E. Im erial H #200
P wy•.
Brea, CA 92621
LOCATION: Property is aonroximately 26 acres located at the southwest
corner of La Palma Avenue and Tustin Avenue and further
rte'"'~ described as Santa Fe Pacific t lava.
._
To permit industrially related commercial uses.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC 89-267
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIaI, MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Difficult position of having 24,000 square feet
approved and only 3 uses approved. Hotel will be coming in later.
Commission agreed in the size. Asked about a donut shop. Never planned
to try to attract people from the freeway and planned to generate
actively from people who are already there. Agreed to limit size of
parking intensive uct. to 500 square feet.
November 6, 1989 Page 14
~_~,`7
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Concerned originally that uses would serve the
~..~ industrial area, and retail uses. Bakery doesn't .serve industrial
:~~;°: area. Some of the uses listed could go into a hotel, but this is 24,000
,`~"~ square feet of retail space and not a hotel. Retailers would be
•promoting business from outside the are. Could have wholesale candy
operation. Working hours are a concern - wanted to see who tenants
would be.
STAFF COMMENTS: Approved under a Specific Plan, this uses require a CUP.
ACTION: Approved list submitted eliminating barber shop, confectionary
stores, delicatessen, sandwich shop, florist, magazine sales and those
uses would require a CUP.
VOTE: 4 - 1
(Feldhaus voting No; Herbst absent)
12a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED)
12b. VARIANCE N0. 3941 (READVERTI$ED)
OWNER: RODRIQUEZ, JONES AND COMPANY, ATTN: TOM ELSAESSOR,
204b South Haster Street, Suite 10, Anaheim, CA 92802
LOCATION: Property is approximately 2.83 acres and is bo-~aded
Santa Ana Street. Helena Street Tlm Street and Clementine
S reet.
~'ti
~.
'~..,:
Amend condition of approval pertaining to park land dedication.
VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0.
November 6, 1989
Page 15
Continued
to 11-20-89
/; (, - ~/
~4 ,
~. "~
13 a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED)
"~ 13b. VARIANCE N0. 1564 (READVERTISED)
a' .:-
OWNER: HUISH FAMILY FUN CENTERS, IPIC., ATTN: COiJRT HUISH,
33208 Paseo Cerveza, Suite C, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
LOCATION: 1041 North Shepard Street
To consider revised plans to include construction of a miniature golf
course and maze field and relocation of parking spaces for a
previously-approved amusement center.
VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MIN[iTES.
OPPOSITION: One person present.
OPPOSITION CONCERNS: Parking, not enough spaces for weekend use. Lot
of young people in industrial area, net enough spaces to increase use
and increase problems, traffic control officers have said the kids
actually intimidate them. Asked that additions not be allowed.
PF.TITI0NET2'S COMMENTS: Wanted to remodel and upgrade recreational
center, are aware of the problem; family oriented business, have
~~ security guards; have radio operator sit on top of buildings and they
bring in reserve police officers and do not affect City budget and they
report violations taking place and call police officers who write
tickets.
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Asked if traffic cantro~ officers still come there
on weekends, would like input from APD and Code ^cnforcement.
ACTION: Continued to 11-20-89. To get input from Police Department and
Code Enforcement.
~.J
November 6, 1989 Page 16
Continued
to 11-20-89
14. REPORTS AND RRCOMMENDATIONS:
~,,~
A. SUPPLEMENT TO EIR NO 281 (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED), THE SUMMIT
Ap rov c~
OF ANAHEIM HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN (SP88-2), REVISED AND FINAL SITE ~~~~~
PLAN FOR PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED RESIDEPITIAL SINGLE-FAMILY TENTATIVE f (y
TRACT MAP NOS 13460 (37 UNITS) 13461 (30 UNITS) AND 13267 (30
UNITS
B. VARIANCE NO 3189 •• REQUEST FOR RETROACTIVE EXTENSION OF TIME TO Approved
COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Frank J. Santangelo Jr.,
requests a retroactive extension of time for property located at
900 North West Street. ~I~
Continued from the October 23, 1989 Planning Commission meeting. /!/~~
• C. REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION OF OCTOBER 9, 1989 PLANNING Approved
COMMISSION MOTION APPROVING TRACT MAP N0. 12995 WALL PLAN
fSYC:+'RORE CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN) SHOWING TYPE AND PLACEMENT OF A
..--~..
`,~; WALL ADJACENT TO WEIR CANYON ROAD
1,
November 6, 1989 Page 17
%'•'' f,
ITEMS TO BE HEARD AFTER 6:OOP.M.
---~ 15a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 267-1, 2 AND 3
15c. RECLASSIFICATION N0. 89-90-20
15d. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL TO REVIEW 15C
OWNER: INITIATED BY THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, 200 S. Anaheim, Blvd.,
Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: GPA 267-1 - Approximately 3.6 acres generally bounded by
Cypress Street to the north, Resh Street to the east, the
alley north of Lincoln Avenue to the south and Citron
Street to the west; including those four properties on the
southeast corner of Chartress Street and Resh Street,
having combined approximate frontages of 125 feet on the
south side of Chartress Street and 176 feet on the east
side of Resh Street.
SPA 267-2 - Approximately 2,8 acres consisting of those 18
properties located on the north and south sides of Chestnut
Street, beginning approximately 165 feet west of the center
line of Harbor Boulevard and extending west approximately
420 feet to the westerly terminus of said street.
GPA 267-3 - Approximately 5.1 acres generally bounded by
Cypress Street to the north, Clementine Street to the east,
~`y~''~ Chartress Street to the south and the alley east of Harbor
°"~" Boulevard to the west.
RECLASSIFICATION N0. 89-90-20 - Consisting of the three
areas described above (excepting those six properties
beginning at the southeast corner of Cypress Street and
Citron Street extending south approximately 272 feet).
Please refer to the attached map for specific
reclassification information.
Reclassification of properties from the RM-1200 and RM-2400 Zones to
the RS-5000 or a less intense zone. Reclassification of properties
from the RM-1200 Zone to the RM-2400 or a less intense zone.
Reclassification of properties from the PD-C Zone to the PD-C/RM-2400
or a less intense zone.
November 6, 1989 Page 18
Approved
Approved
Granted
Approved
~~
~.
~'> .- n- /
GPA No. 267-1. 2 and 3. An amendment to the Land Use Element of the
;'~ Anaheim General Plan redesignating the above described areas from the
current Medium Density Residential designation to the Low-Medium
Density Residential designation.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 267-1 RESOLUTION N0. PC 89-268
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 267-2 RESOLUTION N0. PC 89-269
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 267-3 RESOLUTION N0. PC 89-270
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION N0. PC 89-271
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: 2 people present in opposition
12 people present in favor
OPPOSITION CONCERNS: Decrease in property value because could only
develop fewer units. Concerned about loss of PDC Zoning.
SUPPORT: Want property downzoned to keep density and traffic down, less
parking problems, want to keep single-family homes.
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Not taking parking away. Actions are result of
,,,~h\ survey and people wanted lower density.
f
~`,.,~)
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration.
Approved GPA No. 267-1, Exhibit A
Approved GPA No. 267-2, Exhibit A
Approved GPA No. 267-2, Exhibit A
Granted Reclassification No. 89-90-20
VOTE: 5 yes votes (Herbst absent)
f
f
i
i
I
Y
November 5, 1989 Page 19
16a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved
16b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 268-1 AIv"D 2
. Approved
~
'
w~
OWNER: INITIATED BY THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd.,
Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 268-1: Property consists of
approximately 5.6 acres generally bounded by Santa Ana
Street to the north, Janss Street to the east, Water Street
to the south and the alley west of Resh Street to the west.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 268-2: Property consists of
approximately 1.9 acres generally bounded by Santa Ana
Street to the north, the alley east of Citron Street to the
east, Water Street to the south and Citron Street to the
west
GENERAL PLAN AMENDiENT N0. 268-1: City initiated amendment to the
Land Use Element of the General Plan to consider redesignation from
Medium Density Residential to Low-Medium Density Residential.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 268-2: City initiated amendment to the
Land Use Element of the General Plan L•o consider redesignation from
Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 269-1 RESOLUTION N0. PC 89-272
~j GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 268-2 RESOLUTION N0. PC 89-273
t~.~~'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: 1
6 people present in favor.
OPPOSITION CONCERNS: Decrease in property value.
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
Approved GPA 268-1 and 2
VOTE: 6 yes votes (Herbst absent)
``~
November 6, 1989 Page 20
~J
17a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
;~, 17b. GENE°ar. pr.ap: AMENDMENT N0. 269-1 AND 2
17c. RECLASSIFICATION N0. 89-9~-21
OWNER: INITIATED BY THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd.,
Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION; GPA 269-1 - Approximately 2.88 acres generally bounded by
Cypress Street to the north, Emily Street to the east, the
alley north of Lincoln Avenue to the south and Claudina
Street to the west. Also including the area generally
bounded by Cypress Street to the north, Olive Street to the
east, Lincoln Avenue to the south and Philadelphia Street
to the west.
GPA 269-2 - Approximately 7.8 acres generally bounded by
the alley south of Center Street to the north, Atchison
Street to the east, Broadway to the south and Olive Street
to the west; excepting the easterly 125 feet.
RECLASSIFICATION N0. 89-90-21 - Consisting of the two areas
described above.
Reclassification of properties from the CG, PD-C and RM-1200 Zones to
the RS-5000 or a less intense zone and reclassification of properties
from the PD-C and RM-1200 Zones to the RM-2400 or a less intense zone.
An amendment to the Land Use Element of the Anaheim General Plan
redesignating the above described areas from the current Medium
Density Residential designation to the Low-Medium Density Residential
designation.
GENERAL PLAN N0. 269-1 RESOLUTION N0.
GENERAL PLAN N0. 269-2 RESOLUTION N0.
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION N0.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: 5
15 people in favor
November 6, 1989
Page 21
Continued
to 11-20-89
I~
1
`,
r
OPPOSITION CONCERNS: Historic house will become non-conforming use and
~'~, couldn't be rebuilt if destroyed. Decrease in property value, asked
~,;;~~' that his property be left as is. would CUP go with new property owner.
Properties with multiple units should not be changed and exceptions
made, financing is a problem is zoning is changed.
STAFF COI~dENTS: Historic house is in Neighborhood Preservation Area and
if destroyed would have to be replaced with another historic structure.
;.~
ACTION: Continued to the meeting of 11-20-89
VOTE:
ADJOURNMENT: 9:05 p.m.
November 6, 1989
Page 22
.. -
~' :.