Minutes-PC 1990/12/17 (2)a ~- ti
a.
r
P art` x~x ~' ~[ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~, '! t jY~F' ~ a,'~~ ~~ ~ ~~° 1 r ~r y
e : ;
j ,~,,~~:~,a~i ~, ~ ACTION"AGENDA ~~' ~?"~`~kg~
f ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~i~pa 5~~
n~y ~~~r~~ ~~ .,;, rNr+ p a ( a ~ -M ~."t: *6~i prat- ~ r.~r ti ~ ~ ~ ~' _ q~j,..'dJ~~-
~~~ ~t~~$r~RE~ULAR MEETINGn OF~,~THE pANAHEIM ,,CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ~~~: ~ ~ ~,~,~~t~b.~'~s,~.
~,r~~,~,,,~„~~,y,, MONDhAY,:.DECEMBER 17~ '1990~;AT 10:00 A M. ~ ~ ' ~ 4~F~~q.~ '` r
4 n i ~h" ~~. ~ n
/~"
f r t ~.f' yu~rY ~ r~'~~~^
Kr y ~ n n a
~ < ''. ,.~, ~..e
:t; i r
,PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW r
~~~ PUBLIC HEARING
'vR
~., (PUBLIC TESTIMONY) -
~~~~ti; ,.
~; 4 - -„
ri ~; ;:
10:00 A.M. ,1:30 P.M ~ ';
F
1.~
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, FELDHAUS, HELLYER, HENNINGER = ~ ;.
~~ MESSE, PERAZA
~~
,; ^.
PROCEDURE TO EXPEDITE PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS
~..
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 hie case unless additional time is requested and the ;
complexity of the matter warrants. The Commission's considerations are not
detQrmined by the length of time a participant speaks, but rather by what
he says.
3. Staff Reports are part of the evidence deemed rE~ceived by the Commission in
each hearing. Copies are available to the public prior to the meeting.
4. The Commission will withhold question9 until the public hearing is closed.
5. The Commisefan 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 °" ~1
Planning Ccmmission, and or agenda items. Each speaker will be allotted a
maximum of five (5) minutes to speak.
~:,
CAl'O11OE ~~,
Y
"y+'fl.,, ..,..
~i:±,.:
,`?~; ,
12/17/90 ~'..
Page 1 ~ ~j'~~
~~~: .,: ;
_ r h~
•. ~ ~ r n :. ~ P ~ /~• T~ ti,
t4 J ~ Y,R~c}
,,',~
'f N0. '304 a ~.,,~.~
RS ~,'RAIt~AN~rIMk *L~~p~s ~=' FOUR EMBARCADERO "CENTER" ' STE r' ~ 2600 ''SAN ,-„~h,~
i~4~ t
'`~ ~ '~ ~ -FRANCISCO'S"''CA"~'"9411=1~ ~ '' ~ `~" ~`~
1,
' .
' ,~
wu~
~ ~ LOCATION: 1750' SOUTH STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD: Property is ~.-
~, ~: approximately 11.79 acres located at' the northeast corner t''~
~ of State College.Blvd and Katella Ave ,
xF' ..
~ ,
~,
,~
F'
, ,
Petitioner
'requests certification of Envir
t
l
m
t
, '
~
onmen
a
I
pact. Report ~
~
~
",ya
ML' t~ CO x
~
1r a
chw,
,
~~;~, Conditional Use Permit to permit and govern two, 200-foot high,
1
s
~~
~ 3-
tory office towers, (289,000 square feet each), one, ~-story,
-
~~ 134
room all-suites (full kitchen) hotel with on-sale alcohol in an
enclosed hotel restaurant and a cocktail lounge within a '~
~~ 10,000-square foot restaurant, and 6,000 square feet of specialty ~
service/retail uses including fast food, in conjunction with one
_
~ 7-level 'parking structure and with waiver of minimum number of
, parking spaces.
Petitioner requests approval of Development Agreement.
Continued from the December 3, 1990, Planning Commission meeting.
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-275
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-276
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RESOLUTION NG. PC 90-277
--------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Meese - Felt child care facilities aroviaion should
be included se a condition ~° approval of the conditional use permit, as
well as the Development Agreement, since the agreement would be
essentially obsolete after approximately 6 years.
STAFF COMMENTS:
48 & 75.
~,~~,~;ri~r?4t`~~ ....
Requested Modifications to Condition Nos. 9, 12, 13, 22,
12/17/90
Page 2
',•~
ii
x
+c ~ rr.. _
num number of ..parking
No 4122 i a' ~ x YF
rr„txtxxrt~~ ~ ~G ~~ ~x~~~~.+xn"~ ~..,+~,~~eas~cn~ r
',~ E : LRecommended~approval~of -Development'..Agreement .:
'
G
~ ~
•
,~
~4 n ~,~,xi-i ~y.l)`.xa`rckur i^.~*<P't~ro g i _. 'k r ~. -u. .a'st ~ ! .- ~i
J, f
'~~'" ~J''^~" Requested City Council{freviewti of EIR, Reclassification, Parking ~N~~`faz.~
`""'"A~~
~
"'fib' ~~~=rWaive~ a d~ 'Conditional Uee Permit in conjunction with
h~rr
~.
~
a
~~"
*
~
~
~ '
f ~~~{,.~
`
~
~
t`
;.
4
YR
r~ ,
1
~ ~, ;W Amt i~, J
~ ~~~ Development~Agreement.
~
c `~ ` ~ : i,
< <
i ~
~ , , .
~
i• a ~ ' :~
1 ; r ~ ~
{
~At .the end of the Meeting, Commissioner Mesee offered .a ,motion; seconded '~
~
~~+w... by !`Commissioner' Bouas and,; MOTION CARRIED to clarify .that it was ~ the ~'~-
.
Commission'e~intent to~-include the following; condition pertaining to child .
f
~~
..
care, provisione;an the conditional use permit, ae .well ae'the.Development
,., ,,,,
Agreement. _
~:~, u•,
_ ~ ~~y
~,
~~_ 'That. prior to final building and zoning inspections for a cumulative
total of`;'greater than 300;000 square feet of gross floor area' of ttie
project, excluding the hotel, the property owner shall make .available or~
cause to be made .available apace for a child care facility on subject
property or within a one-mil's radius of subject property to serve 'the
child care needs of the tenants of the project, excluding the hotel".
> VOTE: 7 yea votes
~v ~ X~'
rr~~~'~~-~~~Sa-~"~ r u"~'~~~r ~ .:.+ y a'PJ! ) r p"w+ sCS+'') P >" ~ y ~ s~
~ ~~§ } t
t
f ~°h~~r~yIYG' ~~d'n+~ ~f ~ rL ~ D ,
~.
'2a. 'CEOA NEGATiVE~DECLARATION r ~-_.
2b. ' .zCONDITIONAL~USEPERMIT' NO ~" 3358: ,} _ f ~; pproved•-
~f" ~ ' ,~y}q,.r
"~'~-~, w ,.~, w ~,, {~ . q ., ~.: ~ ' a ,w'~ ranted. r . -
•E~'L';Jr `'~ -~ ~E f irk xx .. f ~ ~ ~ - s ~ i-t~,4 ~.~"„'
__. ~ s ~~MOBI L' OLL CORPORATION; 3800 ;W. Alameda, ~ #2000, :,Burbank, CA ~~ ~~~~ ~ s:'
r -~ ,
~~91$705 y r ct ~ .c.s~~ ,~ ins
~ ~~ ~ ~~~
+, ~ ~~ GREER .& COMPANY;.: 23231 W Lincoln Ave:, #127, Anaheim, CA_ ,, `~.~
92801 `_' '
t~,~ ,~4 ur ~ y-~ - - ~~.~,~,„ •
~ r*~s~A,~,, ,LOCATION:' 1680~~Weet~~"Broadiaav Property ie~ approximately 0 49~; acre ~ ~ ,- ,~~
~~,~ ~~ ~, located , at° ~ ~~;r
~~~.~'~; a ~~ ,`, the southeast cornea of Broadway and Euclid - ,$~.
Street . r ~,;~;, ~.
~ _ ..
~~~~`. To permit a convenience market within an existing service station. u ~ 1r~
,, ,, n
Continued -from• November 5, 19, and December 3,1990, Planning ~~'
,~ ~' ~ Co~nmieai'an' meetings. `' ~ -
;.- ...
~~'
CONDITIONAL U
Y SE PERMIT RESOLUTION'NO. `PC-90-278
.. -,. ~ ~ y
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
rcr~:, CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. ~ n.
OPPOSITION: None -
4; .
` PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Requested modification to Condition No. 4, with
~, driveway on Broadway only being closed, but nat the one on Euclid.
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Agreed with existing. arrangement of pump islands,
closing driveway on Euclid should be deleted.
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
Granted CUP, with modification to Condition,No. 4, with only
moat westerly driveway on Broadway being removed
- VOTE: 7 yea votes
Instructed staff to initiate reclassification proceedings from GC to CL.
12/1%/90
Page 4
~~
• - -
S t y 1G
~ nc~ t y q ~( r-
a ~ ~ zet~~`vwyr„
3a~.'~,~°¢CEOA~ NEGATiVEbDECLARATION' '
3b ;, ~~RECLASSIFICATION`~`NO~~'%90 91 14
13 ~`CONDITIONAL~U$E'~PERMIT`NO J"3354
t ^'"" OWNBR ~ HASSAN ~AND',DIXIE MOHAGHEGH 3305 MONTEREY DRIVE,: SAN
y+k+~~'r~'`;";,m~' ~ { MARINO, CA' :_ 91108
": $NT:r A R. MOHAGHEGH, 12652 HUSTON ST., NORTH. HOLLYWOOD; CA
t..;. 4 , .: _ - 91607 ,..
1W,~t ,. v. _ ,:
.M,"' " 4
p LOCATION: 1242-West Lincoln Ave. Subjeot;proper£y consists of two-'
_ parcels with tihe £o1T'owing descriptions: Parcel (A1 a an,.
irregularly.-shaped parcel ' ;of land consisting of
...approximately 0.18 acre located on the northwest corner. of
Center:, Street `and Villa Place, having .approximate'
frontages of 6 felt on the north side of Center Street and i
140 'feet on,the west side of Villa Place. Parcel (B) is a
rectangularly shaped parcel of land consisting of
approximately .0.67 acre located on the southeast corner of
Lincoln Avenue and Villa Place having approximate
frontages of 103 feet on the south aide Lincoln Ave. and
285 feet on the east aide of Villa Place.
Portion A from CG to CL and Portion B from CG to CL.
To permit an 8,981-square foot commercial retail center.
Continued from the November 5, 1990 and November 19, 1990 and
Planning Commission meetings.
RECLASSIFICATION PERMIT NO. FC 90-279
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-280
---------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Requested waiver of requirement to make offer of
dedication of property on Lincoln. (Conditions' 2 and 3). Offices not
being rented because they do not have enough exposure. Explained area is
within the freeway expane.ion and that he had contacted Caltrans about
purchasing the property affected by the freeway widening and they have not
made any commitment. P.cJreed to continue with his plans and. if Caltrans
decides within the next month, he will withdraw his plans.
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Feldhaus- Asked if these buildings have asbestos;
(Applicant responded they do have asbestos) asked if the applicant
had asked the City to purchase Villa Place (Applicant responded he
thought previous owners had approached the City, brit that he had not)
12/17/90
Page 5
i .'~~S
Yi
~,.
f;
LL~;was' notes that"~'is ?also <to tie .taken ~}iy Caltrana =
l ,r'~,d
~~a
Y~' x ) i
Henninger Felt'~dedication along Lincoln _ia necessary since ,it.'is~'.a`"'
heavily-traveled'~street''%
5
'
~ ~, r
1~~i
in'n i iF r
BTAFF~ u 5."'
~~N
T~" kWaiver ;of dedication requirem nt ~t 4
ould
ave ~
o _r~
~
~'~~
advertised "'~ 8xpan d` Caltrana '.has, an"HEIR rea
dy toy be
~ ~ Y~1. L
rt
4
~~~~/ w
h
t
be
certifi
d
d
'' ='~
•
_
~
r .~.
~
.
they have+~nal preferred alternative which does include
Y~~~~+` ~ = r ~
_ ,4atated'the
ill"
a
'
~ e
, an
that
this ~7 `r, tz ' ..
property, have ti
~
,~
y w
=not p
y
.for additional coate
tfor pr
s
~x,=a~done
ft operty improvements iM,
,
, a
er a property owner is notified; Caltrana is
z ne
t
l
~
-
budgeting money fo'r ,
~~
~,,
~
x
0
yeara
.for right of way .acquisition, and will
r to '.the n
rth (Ga
d work from the south
o
r
en Grove Freeway to the 91 "freeway). „r
~kr - Engineering staff explained irrevocable offer ;"to dedicate would not
e
u
r
" ;~
ry r
q
ire
emoval of„ building. until actual widening of
and t
at
s Lincoln takes place '
h
i
planned in conjunction with the Anaheim
' Plaza im
e
n
~.:
which is currently being reviewed-by Redevelopment prov
me
ts
' „ ~.
Explained the Co-nmission could grant the request, subject to the
t~`~ - .dedication and the applicant could request a separate waiver if he did not
want~to make the offer of dedication.
Attorney's office explained the City holds title to public streets as
trustee for the public, and if Caltrana wants the city-owned property,
they do not have to pay for it.
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
Granted Reclassification (7 yes votes)
Granted Conditional Use Permit (4-3)
Souas, Feldhaus, Henninger, Messe voted yes.
Boydetun, Hellyer, Peraza voted no
12/17/90
Page 6
}~
i
,,
4a. CEGA ~~ ~ivt `i a,>a F~ ~'~,'~ -~~ „~-~~ ~ ~,,'; ~~X~r ' 4' ,!G '~ +e~+-Pj,SS~ '~ ~ ~ ~:
TEGORICAL ~+. ~ ~ "~ ~
EXEMPTION - CLASS'11 ~' ~ ~ '~'~'
4b..COND2TIONA'~"hiUS ~PERMIT~fPO '.3369" ~ ~~~' 'T"'"
ti
e ~ ~f
~ Er ~'• '~~,~~' ~' a
~~~ ~{~ ~r~ _
. ~.t'xt ~ a c `~'~S7sYv~t:i sv, ~ °~ '~ f S.f .~~-~'r~wr ~"'' d a~'." .
Oi~TER: ~AI~AH AIM LAND ASSOCIATES LIMITED P ~ ~ c U ~~t
r' ~ u _, ARTNERSHIP ~ 450 Nei a j ~ ~wi'~ +~°
~. 4 , m ~
~k' ~ "~~~•,y~,~`~Center~,Drive, #304 N ~ r wport
.c ~~. o b , ewport Beach I ;~ a ~
~~ ~ ~ , ;s z s. f , CA 92660 ~ }
~~~}' TION 32420'.E ~* Katella ~ ~~ ~ ` ~~' ' ~- = I .. ~ s cA
} ~~ `~'~' "and $ppro x , A re ~ Property. is _approxunately, _ ? '' 2i nM 4
13 9 acres
~,~,, "~4 , ~~, v ximately~.y665 feet :on the "`south',"'side of Kafella .r
,Ave ~an3 atio- ~
~~gt~'` ,~ ~ pproximately 1,'470 -feet east of the centerline. a?~~'a
<~~ ~,~ of "State College Blvd. ''~"~~`
' r
~' ~ • '~
ti_5 '?~
~"`~ ~ To .permit:: twa freestanding "monumen ~t'• - ~~
i,,, ~~ office) Zone. ~"_ _ t .signs.. in ,the,. CO .
- :, (Commercial
~ . ~ 1
~;, Continued: from"the December 3, 1990 Planning Commission meeting. c ,M~
~ _ ,~„
r, ; x
~~~ ~ :~ a
n`. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.., PC 9_ 0__281 ~"
~w.
,, ;,,
i ,. ~.. ,.
.
---------------- G
FOLLOWING IS A S ~ ---------.:-----
UMMARY OE THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.. NOT TO BE ~ ''~
.CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. ^`'
OPPOSITION: `None
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Need conditional use permit to allow monument
signs.
STAFF COMMENTS: Engineering requested modification to Condition, No. 1, to
Standard No. 137.
ACTION: Granted Conditional Use Permit
Modification to Condition No. 1.
VOTE: (6-0)
(Feldhaus -Conflict of Interest)
12/17/9,
Page 7
,~
~~ri ~` ` a. :, f , , ,, .. ,.
~~~~i~iv ~fvrif^ ~< X~* `f'~ :_ `r.' S ~ , > „r ~ g t ~ ~' Fes,-' r'~ .a~ n
k.( f 4h' lid .'~ d~/T~ '
1yJ ~d
A'I,~pxGS*^' wY~ ~ x~ c.L .il l ,i ~ ~ r '~ a
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v
~,~.J~,n~~~ 3y,' ~ it ~ ~ ~ ~ q r y.
x''~,F5~; ~ENVIRONMENTAlit. IMPACT" REFORT 'NO. , 27
~~F~wo~l~.+e .eu ~„ ,.> N 3 (Prev. 1Certified),;, ;,, ~ proved
p
~~~~' b~~..;~ AMENDMENTtiNO 3 fo the Hiohlaride at' Anaheim Hills (SP87-11 '''` ~ approved y;~~
~~ ~ F `" ~ ~
W "~' ~ ,
OWNER"~PRESLEY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, attn: Steven' Riggs,. 19 nom,'
- Corpo~ate,Plaza, Newport Beaoh,'CA' X92660 ~ ,. ~{'
~~ LOCA _, _ ;~
G v
° ~ TION ~ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - `REPORT J NO: 2.73 - •1Previousl,.y '
,,,;,
s :_- Certified)' and Amendment No. 3 to the Hiahlarids at 's
• ~ ,~
' n. Anaheim Hills-iSP87-11': ,Property is approximately 29.1 ~ '' `-j
~.~
~A '=~ J V ~ °`acree; generally bounded, by open space to~'ttie north, the;'-
~' Sl•camor`e Canyon Specific Plan Development Area 3 to the
northeast, The Summit of Anaheim Hills Developmer.E Areas '°
7 `'and 8 to -the south and The Highlands at Anaheim,;~Hills,
~' Development Area 3 to the west" and further described as
~~ J Development Area 6 of the Highlands at Anaheim Hills
'r.:,, c Specific Plan (SP87-1). `
is
1A ~~ Petitioner requests an amendment to' The Highlands,; at Anaheim Hills
- ~ Specific Plan (SP-87-1) Zone (adopted `per ordinance nos. 4860 and
- 4861) to transfer 24 dwelling units from Development `Areas 4 and 7 to
Development Area 6; and to amend Development Area 6 zoning and
development standards (Sect.ion 18.70.060.040 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code) in order to develop a 276-unit condominium complex.
RESOLUTION N0. PC 90-282
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BEI
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. -
OPPOSITION: None
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Type of units based on market, and some products
are not selling; revision of tentative map prior to recording map is
possible; have flexibility in original apscific plan to increase cr
decrease number of unite by 10$ and would like. to increase more than 10$ in
one area and also amendments to development standards; setback could only
be reduced from Y50 fact if there is additional plants, shrubs, etc.to
block the. views; that they are working with Baldwin Company and they are
amenable to providing a landscape plan that is acceptable to them for
Planning Commission approval; drawings not what they were proposing, but
similar, fairly drastic downalope, and there is quite a bit of distance and.
with proper planting materials, it could be done.,
COMMISSION. COMMENTS: Henninger - Concerned about setback;: ,felt landscape
buffer would block their own views; and that it would net provide the
adequate screening necessary; suggested bringing tentative tract map aging
with final map; asked if this change affects only Development Area 6, and
noted nothing is said about landscaping
Feldhaus - suggested more than 5-gallon trees (ppplicant agreed
Zandscape plans would be brought back for review ar_d approval by Planning
Commission).
12/17/90
Page 8
~~I~
'ui
~~~
~~
~\
u
,,~,p~ uci ua awt+~ a j,?
/-^•-.. ~~,14Y~'r~ ' ~ ~ !3'~i~ 1"fPr'~ j .hxSy.L'1 b ' '.A°x~'ii'*~ ~` ;R n,~'?~ +'R7"+4
do not ~*.oeet 'the criteria without a solid row of trees Eave ; enco nLered,
p~roblema ~w3th..tr~e. ~b1 o~k~in~~,~~ views 'or privacy and actually blocking kthe , ;
view •for he,~whole ~axea rEzplai'~d when' site plans !,are submitted, "tti"ey wi11;;;=°'
,,fir '~~~. ~°.,~: ~ ~:r-
include~~~l~ands~ pe;~ plan; ,; that" Commission could'F include" that yin the'' ~'~
~q" developme~.~t~~etandards. '`
C~,~~ACTION 'Approved with added condition that priflr to the density transfer
~' to''yDevelopment Area 6; there will bre a reslnction in the number otf r.unite in
~~ 1 Development Area 4either.-through`} approve ` of a final map.witli~ .fewer .units,
' ux.;withdrawal of the tentative tract .map. `'
~~
";% , ~;
C•:
VOTE ~ =7 ye8 votes -
~' _
r~. I~,~ y
' f_ `.
~:.
t, ~ -
.~ ~ -
j~'.. ~~
~' L'
h'.'~ ~.
12/17/90 °
- Pane 9. ~,~~
.. ~~
;~. _ .. ,
a ,`<
:,
I,~ ., _
.~~_ ~~~~..~ , s
., ~ ~.
~~,~~
~~~~
~~
~ ~ If
~Y S1 .tiYJ' r S~ r
~l
- ~
` r y'
!N
f
5
r
1}
, h ~
`
f
~ .
4l
~ ` dd''
~
~ p~
r
` ' c~ ~.~
~~ ~
4 - ,
h
t sContnued
X0'"91 19
~
~- ~ t
~ Phu ~ ~.
~ '~ p
,~
°31
14 90
~ ~ .-
_ ~.
'Readvertise
s esr •. r r ^~~~ ~ F ~ t, ~ ~iJ r , at RM-2400
! w ~,~ ~ , t ,oar' Tess in-
~+Yc~a~ 2 i ~ r
,tense zone
.Jrt~,Y.d ph h Tj 4~ t _ 1 _ / i. ~"r~i~L~~ u
rnF
k4' 1K ~ ~ v ,-
~~OWNER CITY INITIATED; 200 ~S. ANAHEIM BLVD. ; ANAHE~ZM~, CAS ~~92805~` ~ ~~~f~'*:',~;,'
L-
'~~I;OCPTION: ; 26?5' west Lin oln Ave. Property is apQroximately 1:04' ~ ;~:
- - ~-'~ acres a roximatel 30 feet on the north side
PP~•" ~ I ~ Y of Lincoln ~'
Avenue ana approximately 270 feet west of the'r,centerline ~ ~;•" L, •
of Magnolia Aver ~-- a ~. ~
,.
.~.
o
~~
'` _ ~ ,,To reclassify from RM-1200 To RM-3000. ~ ° ''- ~ _ ~
~~%
..
•
RECLASSIFICATION RE5vLUTION NO:
,'s
~~. --- ---- ~-- ---- ----- ----- ---~------------------~ ------w-~------- ~
~+",1~-. FOLIAWING IS: A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION` ACTION. NOT` TO BE
~.
~- ~ CONSIDERED OFFICIA«%MINUTES. "
OPPOSITION: 2 people present in opposition and l person present ;in .favor)
-`~~: of request.
OPPOSITION CONCERNS: Property owner opposed downzoning, purchased property
in 1971 with intention of_constructing quality apartment complex; obtained
reclassification to RM 1200 and withdrew application for 36-unit apartment:.
complex to consider reduced density complex; owner ie aware of .City's
~; desire to limit and improve the quality of units being_ developed; and to
have growth in an orderly fashion; willing to entertain leaser density and
to resolve traffic and other issues; and has come down substantially from
the 36 unite per acre, but felt reclassification will strangle development;
that this downzoning is not in beet interest of the property owner, the
City or owners to the north; land is at a large intersection and ~e
effectively landloc!ced on three sides; access ie from Lincoln which 'is
commercial with high traffic;' there is a 10-foot wide buffer (bike trail}
- between condanin,fum complex to the north and this property. Downzoning
~. ~ would .affect property values negatively. Could not market ownership units
with access on Lincoln through commerical; and„property is not conducive to
condominium .units. '`
:,
Person in favor of :downzoning indicated developer of subject property did
'not contact the homeowner's association; opposed to apartment development,
did not feel more apartments needed in that area due to heavy traffic these
;~ -now.
<~ _
;;
',
'' ~. , ~u ~ ' ~,
I
\::.
,'
~. _
12/17/90
Page 10
fi' iK 'v x, wiM~?a 8 r t-.n~ ~ •'t ~iJ rcJ d Ltia1, rt ~ln 43~atS,+~'y ..
ncerne out- traffic FF Wanted to reclassi'fy'`"pro~rty !ands '~ ~~i~<--"i ~ ~"
~,4x~k~1+~ ~r ~ " ~
then "owner could requeat~~°wai ere of that''zYone,,",rather than ,tak_eY a '`~~ ~~ ~`
s ~' 1 7y~~+S
someone~being:allowed to`" develop''at'~ 36 unite per acre by =right;riaF~i~ .r '~ µ
ownerahippp~ uni'ta cool"d" be 6 marketed _ and there would be a tremendous`. demand "
' '~>~x~fo o e ~~ip ~unita ~ ~ ~ ~i -:- .: :! ~~ ,
~ ~M@88@~' ~-S7 .naFnal~rs it S- r
G ~y
,r a,,,,.~,,,1 -, r~euggeated the`` developer/owner negotiate with . "homeowner!s' ~~
F ,`association to`the north'regardinq access onto Magnolia;
~~
if '~A'~p%'7~f ';R'.4 ~i
Suggested continuance`in order for owner"to review alternatives: `~'' ~''
;~
~° STAFF .COMMENTS. Explained this was, initiatedat request of homeowner's .~~ ~ ~~'
ae
~sociation for condominium complex to, the north to' limit. development to `" 3
-3000, and there are no plans sesociated'rwith the request.
c Lorne' - p ~ , ,~ ..
"~' At y "'ex lained RM-3000 Zone does not guarantee single-family homes or ~
_ ndoiainiume, would allow apartments with re ired s ,^
~ Ae; lon ` as ~ guars footage per unit
~, 9 property ie zoned RM-1200, owner could get buildin a
~ r.
apartments, as long ae there are no waivers required. Sugge~steditsince~,\ .
y'' RM-2400 zoning has been mentioned, readvertieement should be for RM-2400, {
or a lees intense zone, to give the Commission an alternative to RM-3000. 3
~;: Engineering - there ie an exisi%~g easement for a riding and bike 'trail,
and even though it ie not developed, the City hopes to develop it in the
'~!future< and any plane for access would have to be coordinated with the ~~",~
City's Traffic Engineer and Parks and Recreation Department.
` _, ACTION: Continued to 1-14-90
To be readvertiee: for RM-2400, or a lees intense zone
VOTE: 7 yes votes.
~ ,f )t
} ~
~
1~
V
~„y~.t c" -
nvc.,.
AVGA1 ]- Gt~i\VDLi\L ..f\u /- Y" l / - / r.
b ,, ,7~~~~92670~'`' 1 r'te'` "'~';'ry~
•~~a-~x~d LOCATION -+"650South-,'Web~ter"Ave .« Property :-is-,appraxunately 0' 94yr
.r`~` acre with afrontage of approximately 120 feet on the east'
side of Webster Ave. and located approximatelyy730 feet
south of the `centerline. of Orange_ Ave. ,, '
~.. To permit a 2ti=unit. _ "Deck-Type Housing" apartment`, complex wtki"
waivers of minimum landscaped setback and maximum structural height.
'. J. ..
' ~. G .:
"` CONDITIONAI-'CSE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
,; ._ ,
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE".PLIicQNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TG'BE
CONSIDERED,OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: 1 person present
OPPOSITION CONCERNS: Density - Webster knov~n as Divorced Daddie's Street,
etuderits would have to be bussed, City Council has ignored pleas of
neighborhood] neighborhood 'not as safe ae it was before and schools are
not safe, people are moving.. away from Anaheim because they are afraid;
project next door approved about a year ago and no windows are doors were
supposed to be facing east on the 2nd and 3rd rloord; currently have
6-foot high wall, but it is 4-feat on their :tide and easy for children to
jump over and suggested an 8-foot high fence on both sides.
r~wA
~*
~~
,.
fra£ 4:
~~
PETITIONER'S CONSENTS: Raqueated approval of 26-unit, deck-type apartment
complex,,, waiver of 20-foot setback from single-family to multiple-family;
proposing parking structure in 20-foot setback, and continue the
landscaping on top of the desk; trying to give single-family residences an
8-foot high wall] subterran@an parking structure would protrude out of the
ground for, more than 5 feet, except on the property lino. 2-story
structures are 50 feet from eingl~3-family with no windows on second story,
sliding glass window 30 feet from the property line to the east, but with
trees and development on the deck level, nogintrusion. Area rezoned for
\apartments iii 164 and this is last site to be developed; parking is
underneath. the `building, away from the living areas,. like a garden style
apartment complex. People enjoy security with parking below. Begin
development of Webster Street, complied with all RM-2400 :.requirements;
lower property in rear is for security purposes; no tandem parking
proposed.
Y
.
12/17/90
Page 12
~~,
~F~ •R"9~P^"~ AS~Wr~x y rr F k ., r -,~. ,, .. .F ~ `1't-~ 1r5~ _ry
into parking structure) ,~ '~ ~ - ~ ;~ ,r ~.r~k
Hellyer ~t~hatarea i~ 'really tight with people, apartments and piarking, ~ ~'., ,~„
~,~p~
wrong place ~for'this'many units,, density outrageous` on Webster,, considers," ~~ ,
,neighbors ~ tori•.the east, would "welcome' opportunity: for `` ownership un"its; P~~';'
Wxr~'fRk1MY:.o.1/r~ 7h.+y~r 1F'i F .j s`? - ^' 'r: t ~ .. •• ~ - R ~
neighbors- have requested wall, -eo waiver is acceptable. Neighbors" not ~~ ,
~~ r~r~~~~ ~ ~~- w ~~~'~
5~5~~z, happy' about the ';project, but willing to work "it out; street never' intended
s~"` for~the number, of apartments being'; proposed and; built. Setback 'not" ~ :,~,
~~ •; 1' ndecaped and`:has" parking; ;in it appears higher fence 4on the ,other `side ',';, 2
~,r and': appears there" fe lees' :than- a 10-foot eetbaok.
3' STAFF COMMENTSe Wording of waiver could be :modified to read:' (6 feet
~~. permitted;" 8 feet proposedj. Building to the east was a
pproved'~~with a
50-foot fully landscaped; that plane show windows facing single-family to
the east.
y ACTION: Approved~Negative Declaration
:+ Fireii vote on approval of waivers, with the requirement to
lower parking structure by 2 feet and glanter by 1 foot, back
wall to be 8 feet high, measured from both sides, failed to
carry due to tie vote. (Commissioners Bouas, Boydstun and
Meese voting yes, and Hellyer, Henninger and Peraza voting no)
First resolution to grant Conditional use Permit was adopted,
(4-2) (but since waivers were not granted, anew resolution was
offered and failed to carry, due to tie vote.)
Meese suggested tandem parking, & Traffic Engineering staff
explained 25$ tandem parking spaces would be permitted, but
plane would have to be revised.
Opposition explained concern about fence was that someone could
step over it because of slope, etc. and a step on the wall
itself. (Developer explair.9d with a 8-foot high wall, there
iB a 12" wide block on the bottom, with 8" wide blocks the rest
of the way up, that does create a sort of step at the bottom.
Could design so that step is on neighbor's aide. ,,Could put
structure so it is only 3 feet-out of the ground, and then the
planter starts.)
12/17/90
Page 13
`. ~
r
a -~ _
YES ~ Boydstun, BCUae, Mese@" ~ X r ~, `~ ~ ~ " ~ ~,~+~~, t ~ °:
• NO, x HELLYER, HENNINGER;~" PERAZA ~ s 4 4~,~ ~~~~~
v k ~hr x~r+~.m~++'.q~~. '~'kMx'tiriJrix"~na s,L- r ~ r i v, ~ •~ ~ x
~ ~ ~^'~t~~~~~~ ~,~ (Feldhaus conflict of interest) ~,.,~ ~ ~' :~'''~.~
{e(u+~ trr+b~y.K'~G~.} ,~ s a .T!~q~:x'r '~-i .". ~ tZt s ~~`F" ^f ~ t y "i d~ f 5 4N r
'~~c~s~:~.r.,,~# . j,r ,~ ~7~"y.~ ~t.r1 ;`ia~,~d -r~ ~ .3~ a r,~J' rx~ `s
~ ; " f~.;~,~~'~~her~~discu~asi~on~,~waae held with regard to rem icing the plane, ,'s;~f~~
}'~r,r,r "~~ ~Apr~oy~iding~a;percentage~~'of tandem parking spaces, continuing the -'~`~,
~~. ~' "-:pat•teT for. ~~fur}her Commission review and:.' action, reduction` in
e !a"`-..fd '-~ 'L41u^u'~xi'LM +"- ~ 4'4E .y;.. - 4
F +~~ number of unite, -etc: .~,~
a,
.._ •r~l'
J~~ ....
~~~~ Forwarded to city Council without recommendation due to tie vote.. >„
}~~ ~
r
~~,"' ,-
8a.; CEOA•NEGATIVE DECLARATION pproved'
~,,r• Sb. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3371 ranted.
~,
r' ~^`
sue` CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT, 3230 E. Imperial, #`100, Brea, CA
9262.1
;~. .+
~' ,~.~ KAMRAN AKHAVAN, P. O. BOX 2302, Laguna Hills, CA 92654
~ ~. i
.uU'• ,' j
~r:: ~ .
LOCATION: Santa Fe Pacific Plaza._ To permit a 1,335 square-foot __- -~
pizza restaurant witih on-sale alcohol. Property is
Q approximately 26 acres located at the southwest corner of
La Palma Ave. and Tustin Ave. ~ ,':'.
To permit a 1,335 square foot pizza restaurant with on-sale alcohol.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC 90-283 -
FOLLOWIN~'~, IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO E
CONSIDERP:D OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
STAFF COMMENTS:
ACTIONS Approved Negative Declaration
Granted (limited to sale of beer and wine only)
VOTE: 7 yes votes
12/17/90
Page 14
~~,
~,
" , .
n~
~~ G
T7NDERWOOD DESIGN 2; 3411' LakeCenter' Dr ',a'?Santa~4Ana;~'~
2
~' ~ ~ ~. ~~
~
~
+' =fix `i~~ v CA,Ma~9}
y704
,
°F
'CrK~~AG"}^
~R'-0 7R
kiy1~
f i1 ~
`
~ ~ ~ rr +
r ''
t ~,~~ yµ ~j
xr'~~ '
~
'
~
!
/
U
<
i+
.
+
.' ''fir .+F~ nk ~11tR~"~~6 ~ ~,+,' ~ {
~a
A"~"sr<.F ~g
C •a
~~nv~LOCATION ;yiSANTA ~FE~`PACIFIC'PLAZA ;Property is approximately 26 "'acres;1 ti
` `~~
~,
aka a located rat"' the southwest corner of
x ~ ' F~Y~ l~iy
L'a Palma Ave. and.-: ,
-',~
~, Tustin
Ave. - ; ~
i
r
,,
, . TM,
~ ;;
t': Waivers of
maxiSnum number of freestanding si
ns f?
d
g
w ~ ,P" rmitted`
' ' '' ~ "u~ ' ~' locati'on °of: freestandin si ns and
PB
9 9 spprove
)
A
p
d
'"+'~ minimum distance between signs p
(
rove
) .".
e
ied
y ~ ~, ' " to ednstruc~ 3 new freestanding signs'. (D
n
)
y
s,~ _
Y._ ~ ;A
%; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT-RESOLUTION N0. PC 90-284
G ~ J
~~r"
--°=------------------------------- ------
FOLLOWING' IS A SU
J.,. MMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION --r----------
ACTION. NOT TO BE
,ri. CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
~:, -
~w. OPPOSITION: None
n, ";.
'
~., ,,,
,
STAFF COMMENTS: Engineering -requested Condition No. 1 be de]eted. "~,
ACTIONS Granted ,in }dart
~ Waiver c denied
~~ Condition No. 1 deleted
VOTE: 7 YES VOTES
Applicant agreed to submit parcel map along with revisions.
Code amendment effective January 11th will give P?,anning
4•
'' Commission authority to review Parcel Mape which have
3`
conjunctive zoning actions, rather the City Engineer.
,.. ,
_, : '
12/17/90
Page 15
ti. .
". II
~ f~„ qJ+t a~+c!~_sx- 't - ~" ? ! ~ G ~i .bY'G"S,G \3'Y
704°e'~9 i r ~ ~. 5 ir1~.~j.~x~ t rra.~s*r.B.'j~'~,I~~ir
2
w r '~~.:CA~,~~9
Y
'~~ ~ ~ ~`4 IG
f
r
S
~ ~ f St~R4~"N'1`~~
~ +e~~ ' Y
r
~~
.
,~
},
1
~
~
~ ~ ~~ ~f__~~
A ~u~N
~i}~U
~~
r~
, ~a
y
~`~
t ''~
~
'
"
`F V
~{
A
~ ~`µ~", ~
;
4
.§
~r.P
~
`~'~'
~ a ~
~ w n cwbl
~
{
'f
~' ata~ ~~'ti '3' LOCATION ''1231'' 1235 ~ North Blue Gum; Street ~ Property V 4is ~ ~ a
~, ' .;~ , ~~;
~~~ ~''' 'approximately 8:87 acres located at the northwest corner '
,t
,
~-~' of: Coronado Street' and .Blue Gum Street. ''
~;
- ,
_ _
,~ ,;_ a
~
~ SA ~~,
`~.~~
o' To 'permit~
truck_~ parking with maintenance ~ and fueling with waiver of;~ `'~~"~
J,
minfmum ,front setback.
~~
. ,
_
~
~
,~ ; ;
~
_ -
r -
~:'.
.CONDITIONAL US >
E PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-285' .
`, ^k
FOLLOWING: IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE `
CONSIDERED OFFI~TAL MINUTES.`
,.
. -
~.
.:
~ .,
` OPPOSITION:, None -
1~ - v
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Agreed to comply with Condition No. 1 (lot line
adjustment, but did not want to comply prior to issuance of building '<<
`'° permits; have to deal -with Coltrane and a property that faces the 91 `"'~~
freeway; thought properties were already merged.) ,-
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Hellyer - asked that water be recycled; Boydstun -
land~caping on Coronado needs improving.
STAFF COMMENTS: Engineering, requests parcels be one where there are
buildings, no buildings should cross lot lines.
ACTION: Granted
Modification to Condition No.2, (80' instead of 58')
Water to be recycled; and improved landscaping along Coronado
VOTE: 6-0
Feldhaus (Conflict of Interest)
-.
12/17/90
Page 16
--~
i Yn
I.
P
t_ ~ ~
' `~~
~~
~.:,
.p~ iV' ~ _
~ ~ , ~ I, u ~ T ~e. v ~ ~ ~ f r~G 2 1, ~ ~
~t ~'
F{.,~ ~'L ~ N h f ~ ,~hn~
4
7
~l
~'L~ i.
1•la. CEQA~ NSGATI"VE "DECLpLRATI N : - ~~ ,. ~
~~4
f~
fy ~J~
1Sb. V~$IANCS N°~"'p4102~," ~
' ~ '; ~~~~
~ Approved
G
t
d
6 r, ~ :,
~
i ROGER
E
d
BO ;~,~ ., ;a ,,
~~ fig, r
ran
e
~~`,~
an
~~
NN
~WILLIAMSON,
Anaheim
~92806A 3450 E La Palma 'Ave ,'
~ u ~~
~`~
~
~ ~ '
„ ~,
~
s SALKI
_ N
GINEERING CORP.. , 1215E Chapman `Ave ~' Oran
e ° ~~ ~~ ~ fi~}
~
~
g
,~' ,LOCATIONTragt Mrrp ?Jo r 13760 Lots No ^6
Pro
ert
is a
a ,
,
p
y
pproxim
tel
r ,`'~~~~~~'~
6~1aciae with a frontage • of:'
approximatel
31 f
ont y ~
~ " y`
'y s' '~
,
,
•~ ' •4dl~LSf 94+SuT r ~ v
' y
eet
th e '
_
~t
' ~ ~ southern t zmin
ue of Pointe
.
.
P
~
~ Premier "and locate d ~"~
•~
~ ~ ,.
,. ~ . ...... •.
M3N
"y4'o,y. ;r
"yd,,k ~ (3 r
~~
approximately 600'feet south; of , it A ~ o- :„S "i ~
the centerline of Avenid i ~+.
a ;;
.~ De Santiagc .
,a,..: . ,
•
~ _ _ ,
~4f~"" ~ Waiver of minimum` lot width to create two parcels.
~; ~'~
!~ VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-286 - ~"
k !I
~~, --------------~--------------------------- -----------~'~-------------
" FOLLOWING CIS A SUMMARY OP` THE PLANNING COMMIS
°
SION ACTION. NOT TO BE n
`~
CONSIDERED Oi~FICIAL MINUTES: `~
+,
~"'" OPPOSITION: None
", ;, ~~
t` ACTION: Granted
VOTE: 7-D
12a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
,:°12b. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO 11780-REVISION #1 ontinued to
-14-91
o be zead-
tised.
OWNER: BORTIS ET AL, C/0 Stefan Wamback, 1482 E. Lincoln Ave.,
An~.heim, CA
LOCATION: Property ie approximately 4.47 acres with a frontage of
approximately 85 feet on the south Bide of ''Rio Grande
Drive and located approximately 306 feet east of the
centerline of Quintana;;Drive.
To re-establish an expired 7-lot (plus one lot for a private roadway)
RS-HS-22,000 (SC) Zone, single-family residential subdivision.
~~
12/17/90
Page 17
~~~~
~,~;~~; Bashmi~TDesai, ;requests +for; one year ei~tension of
~y'^"1c`Y' ktfJ'ti nc n~~++:'~ n ~ , ~ r- ~ : i~:. ; ,
~{ time for Conditional Use Permit'NO 2861. Property
"~ ~ is located at 2242 W Lincoln Ave. j
;:•, f
~;, ~ ,
C. CONDITIONAL `USE PERMIT`N0. 3318`- EXTENSION OF
„h:'~'' TIME KTO COMPLY WITH 'CONDITIONS OF-APPROVAL:
~,. _, Tue Van; Tong; xequests~ one-year extension of time ~~,
for Conditional Use Permit No. 3318:Property is
located tat 3203 W., Ball Rd. ~
` ~
T
~ ~`~ ° D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 350 - REQUEST FOR .,
~~~ TERMINATION: Meltone Tesar, requeata~',',termination of
Conditional Use.,Permit No. 350. Property is located at>
1769 W. Broadway. ~.
~~
RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-287
E. VARIANCE NO. 1821 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 853
2704. 3170:- REQUEST FOR TERMINATION
Lou Ornelas, ACW Partnership, requests termination of
`.' Variance No. 1821 and Conditional Use Permit No. 853,
2704, 3170. Property is located at 558 S. Anaheim Blvd.
RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-288 i
F. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1400 AND VARIANCE NO. 3058 -
REOUEST FOR TERMINATION• James M. Righ.eimer, requests
termination of Conditional Uae Permit No. 1400 and
Variance 3058. Property is located at 3601 W. Ball Rd.
RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-289
G. ORANGE COUNTY GENERAL SERVICES AGENCY -~REOUEST TO
DETERMINE CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN -PROPERTY
IS LOCATED AT 2190 TO9~NE CENTER DRIVE.
H. 'CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 3142 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION
John F. Tavaglione, requests termination of Conditional
Uee Permit no. 3142. Property is located at 310, 316, and
320 E. Xatella Way.
RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-290
12/17/90
Page 18
6 19 y,l'i~,,d~d,
~~.n
y">~°n
~g~
,~.
+ ~
Approved ",~ ~
r~
4 mos. _;,~
~a,D
4""-91 ~~
Approved
Approved
approved
approved
J
~.
y ~ ~.,,
i Fl 7 ~ r~
alp
"
`~ Y~Yi /3f ft ~~'~'~,~~x
S'~~~v~ ~
~
e' rod.. f ~ r..~c. d ro 1~/ / ~.i~ ~ a
~~t~y
~ 4 ,~r~~ ~~ ~
1 A
'-rr l
~
~~
r~'
, P
~~
4 c
fi
~ ~ ~
F
,
y : :
ITEMS OF'= PUBLYC nTEREST,-5~ ~~ ; . "' ~ c~, `~
s ~ ~rNore'~' 1' ~ ~ ~'"~ :"
S
F~
~ADJOURNMENT 5:55 p:m. ~ ~
4}~t t '114{ ~ _ ~'.~ ~
:-.~
~x tJ
''~•:
-
y
,_
i.i. ~tl ~ .,
q' ,7
,~
~ - ..
~~
*i f1~
~ ~
v
.. ,.
ii: -
„ '~
u U
.i; -
,~•
is ~. ~.
s~
~
:~
(,
1~
4
~~