Minutes-PC 1990/12/17''~ .
ACTION AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1990 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, HENNINGER
MESSR, 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 his case unless additional time is requested and the
complexity of the matter warrants. The Commission's considerations are not
determined by the length of time a participant speaks, but rather by what
he says.
3. Sta~f 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 Commission 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 '~
4
to speak on items of interest which are within the jurisdiction of the 1
Planning Commission, and or agenda items. Each speaker will be allotted a
maximum of five (5) minutes to speak. ~.
CA1O11OE
12/17/90
Page 1
'~
tF~:r... .. ..., ..... _
la. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 304
lb. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 90-91-17
lc. WAIVER OF CODE REOUZREMENT
ld. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3356
le. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 90-02
Zf. REQUEST CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF lb lc & ld
?:OWNER:''yi'' RAR ANAF3~IM, L.P.,~FOUR EMBARCADERO CENTER STE. _2600, SAN
' I'RANCISCO. CA 94111
LOCATION: 1750 SOUTF! STATE COLLEGF. BOULEVARD• Property is
approximately 11.79 acres located at the northeast corner-
of State College Blvd. and Katella Ave.
Petitioner requests certification of Environmental Impact Report
ML to CO
Conditional. Uee Permit to permit and govern two, 200-foot high,
13-story office towers, (289,000 square feet each), one, 3-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 RESOLUTIONd 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 provision should
be included ae a condition of 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: Requested Modifications to Condition Nos. 9, 12, 13, 22,
48 & 75.
12J17/90
Page 2
Rec. Cert:ifi
cation
Granted
.Approval
r'~
~ ~,
ACTION: A. Recommended cei _fication of EIR No. 304, at. adoption of
Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation
Monitoring Program.
B. Granted Reclassification
C. Approved waiver of minimum number of parking spaces, with
modification to Condition No. 22.
D. Granted Conditional Uee Permit, with modification to Condition
Nos. 9, 12, 13, 22, 48 & 75 and an additional condition
pertaining to child care facilities being provided, as required
i.n the Development Agreement.
E. Recommended approval of Development Agreement
Requested City Council review of EIR, Reclassification, Parking
Waiver and Conditional Use Permit in conjunction with
Development Agreement.
At the end of the Meeting, Commissioner Meese offered a motion, seconded
by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED to clarify that it was the
Commission's intent to include the following condition pertaining to child
care provisions in the conditional use permit, as well as the Development
Agreement.
"That prior to final building and zoning inspections for a cumulative
total of greater than 300,000 square feet of gross floor area of the
project, excluding the hotel, the property owner shall make available or
cause to be made available space for a child care facility on subject
property or within a one-mile radius of subject property to serve the
child care needs of the tenants of the project, excluding the hotel".
VOTE: 7 yes votes
12/17/90
Page 3
-`~ ,~ ~
2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
2b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3358
OWNERe`~ MOBIL OIL CORPORATION, 3800 W. Alameda, #2000, Burbank, CA
91505
AGENT: GREER & COMPANY, 2323 W. Lincoln Ave., #127, Anaheim, CA
C --• 92801
LOCATION: 1680 'hest Broadway Property is approximately 0.49 acre
located at the southeast corner of Broadway and Euclid
Street.
To permit a convenience market within an existing service station.
Continued from November 5, 19, and December 3, 1990, Planning
Commission meetings.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC 90-278
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMAkY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TG BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Requested modification to condition No. 4, with
driveway on Broadway only being closed, but not the one on Euclid.
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Agreed caith existing arrangement of pump islands,
clc~ing driveway on Euclid Should be deleted.
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
Granted CUP, with modification co Condition No. 4, with only
most westerly driveway on Broadway being removed
VOTE: 7 yea votes
Instructed staff to initiate reclassification proceedings from GC to CL.
12/].7/90
Pagf; 4
~ .~
3a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
3h. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 90-91-14
3C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3354
,'~°O"rINER:' ' HASSAN AND DIXJ. MOHAGHEGH, 3305 MONTEREY DRIVE, SAN
MARINO, CA 91108
~AGENTS;P' A. R. ~dOHAGHEGH, 12652 HUSTON ST., NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CA
91607
LOCATION: 1242 West Lincoln Ave. Subject property consists of two
parcels with the following descriptions: Parcel (A1 is 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 feet on the north side of Center Street and
140 feet on the west side of Villa Place. Parcel u is a
rectangularly shaped parcel of land consisting of
approximately O.f,7 acre located on the southeast corner of
Lincoln Avenue and Villa Place having approximate
frontages of 103 feet on the south side Lincoln }?ve. and
285 feet on the east side 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, 1!}90 and
Planning Commission meetings.
RECLASSIFICATION PF 'MIT NO. PC 90-279
CONDITIOi~AL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. 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 expansion and that he had contacted Caltrana about
purchasing the property affected by the freeway widening and they have not
made any commitment. Agreed 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, but that he had not)
12/17/90
Page 5
Approved
Granted
Granted
~:,
--~ .--
Hellyer referred to the pa: _ng lot across the street from _a offices and
it was noted that is also to be taken by Caltrana.
Henninger - Felt dedication along Lincoln ie necessary since it is a
heavily-traveled street.
STAFF COMMENTS: Waiver of dedication requirement would have to be
advertised. Explained Caltrana has an EIR ready to be certified; and that
they have a preferred alternative which does include this property; have
stated they will not pay for additional costa for property improvements
done after a property owner is notified; Caltrana ie budgeting money for
next 10 years for right of way acquisition, and will work from the south
to the north {Garden Grove Freeway to the 91 freeway).
Engineering staff explained irrevocable offer to dedicate would not
require removal of building until actual widening of Lincoln takes place
and that is planned in conjunction with the Anaheim Plaza improvements
which is currently being reviewed by Redevelopment.
Explained the Commission could grant the request, subject to the
dedication and the applicant could request a separate waiver if he did not
want to make the offer of dedication.
Attorneys office explained the City holds title to public streets as
trustee for the public, and if Caltraiie 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)
Bouas, Feldhaus, Henninger, Mease voted yes.
Boydatun, Hellyer, Peraza voted no
12/17/90
Page 6
4a. CEGA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CT,ASS 11
4b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3369
o
~iOWNERe .' ANAHEIM LAND ASSOCIATES LIMITED PART.~iERSHIP, 450 Newport
Center Drive, ,#304, Newport Beach, CA 92660
.CATION: 2420 E. Katella Ave. Property is approximately 13.9 acres
and approximately 665 feet on the sough side of Katella
Ave. and approximately 1,470 feet east of the centerline
of State College Blvd.
To permit two freestanding monument signs in the CO (Commercial
Office) Zone.
Continued from the December 3, 1990 Planning Commission meeting.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-281
------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Need conditional use permit to allow monument
signs.
STdFF 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)
12/17/50
Page 7
r~t:axh,e4.c ~:~:
~.
5a. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 273 (Prev. Certified)
5b. AMENDMENT NO. 3 to the Hiahlande at Anaheim Hills (SP87-1)
aH
't~OWNER PRESLEY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, attn: Steven Riggs, 19
Corporate Plaza, Newport Beach, CA 92660
LOCATION: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 273 (Previously
Certified) and Amendment No. 3 to the Hiahlande at
Anaheim Hills (SP87-11: Property is approximately 29.1
acres generally bounded by open space to the north, the
Sycamore Canyon Specific Plan Development Area 3 to the
northeast, The Summit of Anaheim Hills Development Areas
7 and 8 to the south and The Highlands at Anaheim Hills
Development Area 3 to the west and further described as
Development Area 6 of the Highlands at Anaheim Hills
Specific Plan (SP87-1).
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 (Section 18.70,760.040 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code) in order to develop a 276-unit condominium complex.
RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-282
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
r.ONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITTON: Nore
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 specific plan to increase or
decrease number of units 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 150 feet 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 tnat is acceptable to them fer
Planning Commission approval; drawings not what they were proposing, but
similar, fairly drastic downslope, and there is quite a bit of distance and
with proper planting materials, is could be done.
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Henninger - Concerned about setback; felt landscape
buffer would block their own views; and that it would not provide the
adequate screening necessary; suggested bringing tentative tract map along
with final map; asked if this change affects only Development Area 6, anc?
noted nothing is said about landscaping
Feldhaus - suggested more than 5-gallon trees (Applicant agreed
landscape plans would be brought back for review and approval by PZanningl
Commission)
12/17/90
Page 8
~. ~
Meese - standards have already been worked out, and developer is now that
they be changed. (Applicant stated ordinance as written is to cover
general circumstances, and zn this situation because of the height of the
slopes, ZO .'.eet to the property Zzne, and if property line was at the
bottom instead of the top of the slope, it would be 150 feet away, and Code
requires property line to be at top of the slope.)
Bouas - suggested a:, agreement or letter 4.o required that Baldwin Company
is satisfied with the portion of the landscape plan which affects their
property;
STAFF COMMENTS: Concerned about eastern boundary next to the Summit,
2-story condominiums adjacent to single-family zones, within 150 feet.
Aqreed applicant has to prove there is no intrusion and that the drawings
do not meet the criteria without a solid row of trees. Have encounterrsd
problems with trees blocking views for privacy and actually blocking the
view for he whole area. Explained when site plans are submit`ed, they will
include a landscape plan; that Commission could include that in the
development standards.
ACTION; Approved , with added condition that prior to the density transfer
to Development Area 6, there will be a reduction in the number of units i.n
Development Area 4 either through approval of a final map with fewer units,
or withdrawal of the tentative tract map.
VOTE: 7 yea votes
12/17/90
Page 9
`~~
6a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION'
6b. RECLASSIFICATION N0. 90-91-19
OWNER: CITY INITIATED, 200 S. ANAHEIM BLVD., ANAHEIM, CA 92805
LOCATION: 2625 West Lincoln Ave. Property is approximately 1.04
acres approximately 30 feet on the north aide of Lincolni
Avenue and approximately 270 feet west of the centerline
of Magnolia Ave.
To reclassify from RM-1200 To RM-3000.
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION NO.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: 2 people present in opposition and 1 person present in favor
of request.
OPPOSITION CONCERNS: Property owner opposed downzoning, purchased property
in 1971 e:i~h 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 is 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 lesser density and
to resolve traffic and other issues; and has come down substantially from
the i6 units per rcre, but feat reclassification will strangle development;
that this downzo;~ing is not in best interest of the property owner, the
City or owners to the north; land is at a large intersectior. and is
effectively landlocked on three sides; access ie from Lincoln which is
commercial with high traffic; there is a 10-foot wide buffer (bike trail)
between condominium 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 there
now.
'ontinued
1-J,4-90
;eadvertise
.t RM-2400
~r less in-
ense zone
12(17/90
Page 10
~ ~.
COMMISSION aMMENTS: Henni..~er - asked if homeowner's assoc.~ation had ever
discussed access through their property to Magnolia for a condominium
developme~L. (Opposition responded that was not considered due to heavy
traffic in area already.) Commission has seen plans for apartments at 36
units per acre and did not approve them; density is maximum allowed,
provided they meet all the other requirements, and should not expect to
develop at maximum density; nunber of unite will not work on this site, and
not sure if RM-3000 or RM-2400 is right zoning, but knew that RM-1200 is
not the right designation.
tiellyer - explained this is law-medium density• t}uat there are a lot of
apartments located on Magnolia. Commissioner was not happy with first
plane and are concerned about traffic. Wa±~ted to reclassify property and
then owner could request waivers of that zone, rather than take a risk of
someone being allowed to develop at 36 units per acre by right. Felt
ownership unite could be marketed and there would be a tremendous demand
for ownership unite.
Messe - suggested the developer/owner negotiate with homeowner's
association to the north regarding access onto Magnolia;
Suggested continuance in order for owner to review alternatives.
STAFF COMMENTS: Explained this was initiated at request of homeowner's
association for condominium complex to the north to limit de•,elopment to
RM-3000, and there are no plane associated with the request.
Attorney - explained RM-3000 Zone does not guarantee single-family homes or
condominiums, would allow apartments with required square footage per unit.
As long as property is zoned RM-1200, owner could get building permits for
apartments, as long as there are no waivers required. Suggested since
RM-2400 zoning has been mentioned, readvertiaement should ~e for RM-2400,
or a less intense zone, to give the Commission an alternative to RM-3000.
Engineering - there ie an existing easement for ~i riding and bike trail,
and even though it is 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 1-14-40
To be readvertised for RM-2400, or a less intense zone
VOTE: 7 yea votes.
12/17/90
Page 11
--. r`
7a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved
7b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT No action
7c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3370 Tie Vote
OWNER; HENRY WESSELN, 650 s. Webster Ave., Anaheim, CA 92804
AGENT: ROBERT CASE, 1249A East Imperial Hwy., Placentia, CA
92670
LOCATION: 650 South Webster Ave. Property is approximately 0.94
acre with a frontage of approximately 120 feet on the east
side of Webster Ave. and located approximately 730 feet
south of the centerline of Orange Ave.
To permit a 26-unit "Deck-Type Housing" apartment complex with
waivers of minimum landscaped setback and maximum structural height.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: 1 person present
OPPOSITION CONCERNS: Density - Webster known as Divorced Daddie's Street,
students would have to be bussed, City Council has ignored pleas of
neighborhood; neighborhood not as safe as 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 floors; currently have
6-foot high wall, but it is 4-feet on their aide and easy for children to
j~.xmp over and suggested an 8-foot high fence on both side.
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Requested 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 deck; trying to give single-family residences an
8-foot high wall; subterranean parking structure would protrude out of the
ground for more than 5 feet, except on the property line. 2-story
structures are 50 feet from single-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, no intrusion. Area rezoned for
apartments in 1964 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.
12/17J90
Page 12
COMMISSION COMMENTS: 8-foe high wall on east property line. ~aould require
waiver, 8 feet should be measured from the new finished grade.
Henninger - asked if the wall would be 4 feet on toy? of the 5-foot high
parking structure, or actually a 9-foot high wall) (Applicant responded
he could lower it to the height of the hand rail.) Did not think
neighbors would like looking at 8 or 9 foot high wall, and it will be a
massive structure and will diminish their sunlight, etc., setbacks were
maintained on the rest of tho street; requesting waivers to increase
density, and it could be set back another 10 feet and have less units and
fewer parking spaces.
Boydstun - has seen this developer's projects and they look good. Asked
if parking structure could be lowered about 2 feet. (Applicant- agreed
to lower planters to 36 inches; ~~u:d have problem going from street Zeve1
into parking structure)
Hellyer - that area is really tight with people, apartments and parking,
wrong place for this many unite, density outrageous on Webster; considers
neighbors to the east; would welcome opportunity for ownership units;
neighbors have requested wall, so waiver is acceptable. Neighbors not
happy about the project, but willing to work it out; street never intended
for the number of apartments being proposed and built. Setback not
landscaped and has parking in it, appears higher fence on the other side
and appears there is less than a 10-foot setback.
STAFF COMMENTS: Wording of waiver could be modified to read: (6 feet
permitted; 8 feet proposed). Building to the east was approved with a
50-foot fully landscaped; that plans show windows facing single-family to
the east.
ACTION: ~pYroved Negativ+a Declaration
First vote on +-pproval of waivers, with the requirement to
lower parking structure by 2 feet and planter by 1 foot, back
wall to be 8 feet high, measured fro<i~ both aides, failed to
carry due to tie vote. (Commissioners Bouas, Hoydstun and
Meese voting yea, and Hellyer, Henninger and Peraza voting no)
First resolution to grant Conditional Use Permit was adopted,
(4-2) (but since waivers were not granted, a new 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 explained with a 8-foot high wall, there
is a 12" wide block on the bottom, with 8" wide bJ.ocks 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 side. Could put
structure so it is only 3 feet out of the ground, and then the
planter starts.)
12/17/90
Page 13
Second motion .. .a adopted to approve the wa_.er with the
parking structure lowered with 3 feet out of the ground and the
planter starting on top of that.
Vote: Yes: Bouae, Boydstun, Feldhaus, Meese
Nos: Hellyer, Henninger
Resolution for approval of conditional use permit FAILED TO
CARRY DUE TO A TIE VOTE.
YES: Boydstun, Bouae, Meese
N0; HELLYER, HENNINGER, PERAZA
(Feldhaus - conflict of interest)
Further discussion was held with regard to revising the plans,
providing a percentage of tandem parking spaces, continuing the
matter for further Commission review and action, reduction iri
number of units, etc.
Forwarded to City Council without recommendat?.an due to tie vote.
Ba. CEOA NEGATIVE llECLARATION
8b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3371
.'i?,OWNERs CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT, 3230 E. Imperial, #100, Brea,
92621
•AGENT: KAMRAN AKHAVAN, P. O. BOX 2302, Laguna Hills, CA 92654
LOCATION: Santa Fe Pacific Plaza. To permit a 1,335 square f
pizza restaurant with on-sale alcohol. Property
approximately 26 acres located at the southwest corner
La Palma Ave. and Tustin Ave.
Ta permit a 1,335 square foot pizza restaurant with on-sale alcohol.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ILSOLUTION NO. PC 90-283
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OP' THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
STAFF COMMENTS:
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
Granted (limited to sale of beer and wine only)
VOTE: 7 yes votes
12/17/90
Page 14
--. ,-.
9a. CATEGORICAL EXEMPT-CLASS 11
9b. VARIANCE N0.4103
~~~~OWNERo CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 3230 E. Imperial Hwy.,
#100, Brea, CA 92621
'AGENT: GARY UNDERWOOD-DESIGN 2, 3411 Lake Center Dr., Santa Ana,
CA 92704
LOCATION: SANTA FE PACIFIC PLAZA. Property is approximately 26 acres
located at the southwest corner of La Palma Ave. and
Tustin Ave.
Waivers of maximum number of freestanding signs (Approved)
permitted location of freestanding signs and (Approved)
minimum distance between signs (Denied)
to construct 3 new freestanding signs.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-284
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
STAFF COMMENTS: Engineering - requested Condition No. 1 be deleted.
ACTION: Granted ,in part
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 Planning
Commission authority to review Parcel Maps which have
conjunctive zoning actions, rather the City Engineer.
part
in
12/17/90
Page 15
i
10a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved
lOb. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved
lOc. CONDITIONAL LTSE PERMIT N0.3372 Granted
;~"OWNERt " C. V. TAORMINA TRUST AND ARLENE TAORMINA, BOB BABJIAN,
LILIAN BABAJIAN, 1231 N. Blue Gum St., Anaheim, CA 92806
`~AGENTS'``+ GARY UNDERWOOD-DESIGN 2, 3411 Lake Center Dr., Santa Ana,
'~ CA 92704
LOCATION: 1231-1235 North Blue Gum Street. Property ie
approximately 8.87 acres located at the northwest corner
of Coronado Street and Blue Gum Street.
To permit truck parking with maintenance and fueling with waiver of
minimum front setback.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-285
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
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 Caltrans and a property that faces the 91
freeway; thought properties were already merged.)
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Hellyer - asked that water be recycled; Boydstun -
landscaping 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
~~
lla. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
llb. VARIANCE NO. 4102
;;:;OWNER:;' ROGER and BONNIE WILLIAMSON, 3450 E. La Palma Ave.,,
`~-'^' : Anaheim, 92806
.".rAGENT:` S.ALKIN ENGINEERING CORP., 1215 E. Chapman Ave., Orange
LOCATION: Tract Man No. 13760 Lot No. 6. Property is approximately
6.1 acres with a frontage of approximately 31 feet on the
southern terminus of Pointe Premier and located
approximately 600 feet south of the centerline of Avenida
De Santiago.
Waiver of minimum lot width to create two parcels.
VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-286
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWZNG IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO B
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL HINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Granted
VOTE: 7-0
12a. CEOA NEGn':IVE DECLARATION
12b. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11780-REVISIOIT 1
OWNER: BORTIS ET AL, C/0 Stefan Wamback, 1482 E. Lincoln Ave.,
Anaheim, CA
LOCATION: Property is approximately 4.47 acres with a frontage o
approximately 85 feet on the south aide of Rio Grand
Drive and located approximately 306 feet east of th
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.
Approved
Granted
ontinued to
-14-91
o be read-
tised.
12/17/90
Page 17
~ r.
13. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. DRAFT MIXED LAND USE ORDINANCE
B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2861 - EXTENSION
OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Bashmi Desai, requests for one-year extension of
time for Conditional Use Permit No. 2861. Property
is located at 2242 W. Lincoln Ave.
C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3318 - EXTENSION OF
TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Tue Van Tonq, requests one-year extension of time
for Conditional Use Permit No. 3318. Property is
located at 3203 W. Ball Rd.
D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 350 - REQUEST FOR
TERMINATION: Meltone Tesar, requests 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
F. CONDITIONAL USE PER*SIT NO. 1400 AND VARIANCE NO. 3058 -
REOUEST FOR TERMINATION: James M. Righeimer, requests
termination of Conditional Use Perinit No. 1400 and
Variance 3058. Property is located at 3601 W. Ball Rd.
RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-289
G. ORANGE COUNTY GENERAL SERVICES AGENCY - REQUEST TO
DETERMINE CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN - PROPERTY
IS LOCATED AT 2190 TOWNE CENTER DRIVE.
H. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3142 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION:
John F. Tavaglione, requests termination of Conditional
'!se Permit no. 3142. Property is located at 310, 316, and
320 ~. Katella Way.
RESOLUTION NO. PC 90-290
Staff to add
revisions.
Approved to
6-19-91
Approved
4 mos.
4-91
Approved
Approved
Approved
12/17/90
Page 18
'-
rj`~.-
~,~-....
~.!;,:
r~ :'
,.
~~
~1,
I. REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION
DEFINITION OF "WHOLESP.LE" -TRAVELLER'S EXPRESS
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST
None
ADJOL'RNMENT• 5:55 p.m.
Approved
12/17/90
Page 19