Loading...
Minutes-PC 2004/04/05• • . APRIL 05, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL DE7AILED MINUTES • PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-00417 2c. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004-00115 2d. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMEN7 2e. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-04831 2f. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16650 OWNER: Kurt Slingsby, Stonybrook LLC, P.O. Box 4304, Carson, CA 90749 AGENT: John Ward, Stonybrook LLC, P.O. Box 4304, Carson, CA 90749 LOCATION: 736 South Beach Boulevard and 2966 West Stonvbrook Drive. Property is approximately 0.64-acre, located at the southeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Stonybrook Drive. General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00417 - Request to amend the Land Use Element Map of the General Plan redesignating the property from the General Commercial and Medium Density Residential land use designations to the Low-Medium Density Residential designation. Reclassification No. 2004-00115 - Request reclassification of the • property from the RS-A-43,000 (Residentia!/Agricultural) and RM-1200 (Residential, Multiple-Family) zones to the RM-3000 (Residential, Multiple-Family) zone or less intense zone. Conditionat Use Permit No. 2004-04831 - Request to construct a 7-unit detached one-family residential airspace condominium subdivision with waivers of: (a) minimum structural setback adjacent to a local street, (b) minimum structural setback adjacent to an interior lot line, (c) minimum required recreational leisure area, and (d) minimum distance between buildings. Tentative Tract Map No. 16650 - Request to establish a 1-lot, 7-unit detached residential airspace condominium subdivision. Continued from the March 22, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting. GENERAL PLAW AMENDMENT RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-34 RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-35 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-36 Chairperson Vanderbilt opened the public hearing. Approved Recommended adoption of Exhibit "A" to City Council Granted Approved Granted Approved sr3064ey.doc ~ Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 2 as General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00417, Reclassification No. 2004-00115, Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04831 with waivers, and Tentative Tract Map No. 166, for property located at 736 South Beach Boulevard and 2966 West Stonybrook Drive. 05-05-04 Page 2 of 5 APRIL 05, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL DETAILED MINUTES • Public Testimony: Lucille Kring, a representative for the project, 1619 W. Lorane, Anaheim, CA, stated that the project is a seven (7) house infill and because of the limited space, only a 0.64 acre property, they really need to have the waivers approved. The project either meets or exceeds the standards. For example, where 40% maximum lot coverage is required the project only has 31 %. The structural height standard is 35 feet and the proposed project is only 23 feet. The project will have 30 parking spaces (14 covered spaces) and 14 spaces is the standard. Setback a4ong Beach Boulevard - code requires a minimum of 20 feet setback and one (1) tree for each linear foot; the proposed project is 20 foot setback and includes a six (6) trees. Setback adjacent to Stonybrook Drive - code requires a minimum of 15 feet setback and one (1) tree per each linear foot; the proposed project has ten (10) feet for units 1 through 4, and twenty (20) feet for units 5 through 7, and a total of fourteen (14) trees. The landscaping plan will come back for approval as we11 as the fencing and the bermed areas. Initially the project started out as an RM-5000, but because of the tightness of the property it was reduced to RM-3000 and made into a detached condominium project. Because of the project and the need, usually 20 feet between properties, but in this case because of the tightness Zoning staff is recommending approval of 10 feet between properties. Waiver (c) pertains to the recreational/leisure area. Usually there is a minimum of 1,200 square feet per each unit, equaling 8,400 square feet per 7 unit property. However, the project does not have that much room, but each house will have a patio and a balcony. The 388 square foot of private recreationaUleisure area provided for each unit nearly doubles the amount of private area required so staff feels the private courtyards more than allows for additional common areas. Additional off-street parking is available and the parking exceeds what the code allows. The sewer capacity is being finalized and the applicant wil{ pay for the sewer hookup. John Ward, applicant for the Stonybrook Villas, LLC project, stated that he and his business partners have done numerous projects in other cities but from the very beginning their experience in working with the City of Anaheim has been very pleasurable. He feels very strongly that this project is going to be in • accordance with the general plan of the City of Anaheim and will help to improve the neighborhood and fit in with the City plans. Commissioner Eastman wished to clarify if there was a difference in the house on the corner facing Beach Boulevard and the house on the right, because the plot map showed the patio on the corner of Beach Boulevard but the house on the right looked to be opposite. George Bingham, the architect of the project stated that the elevations were a mirror image of some of the elevations but they were going to give the Planning Department the precise elevations before they signed the plans off. Commissioner Eastman stated that she was glad to see that they had gotten the garages off the street and parking located in the rear but was concerned about the long wall, which potentially could be a great graffiti canvas. She asked if there were plans to do clinging vines. George Bingham stated that a copy of the landscape plans located in the files showed there would be ivy growing on the wall to prevent graffiti and at the same time they could have it painted with an anti-graffiti paint and that would mitigate it too. Commissioner Eastman suggested they do something to address the "sterile" look; otherwise they would have a big driveway and wall with no breaks in it. Greg McCafferty clarified that Condition No. 1(c), in addition to having the requirement for the final landscape plan, also had the requirement for clinging vines on boundary walls. Linda Johnson stated that the City identified different types of trees, ground cover and vines that the applicant agreed to do and there would be an elaborate landscape plan going back to the Planning ~ Department. And the applicants were responsible for removing any type of graffiti within 24 hours. 05-05-04 Page 3 of 5 APRIL 05, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL DETAILED MINUTES . Chairperson Vanderbilt stated that he met with the applicant to discuss the project and appreciated the fact that there was an effort to align the properties so that parking in the rear and the front of the homes did not face the large wall of the hotel. Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, Commissioner Eastman seconded and MOTION CARRIED. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Approved CEQA Negative Declaration Recommended City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00417 (to redesignate this property from the General Commercial and Medium Density Residential designations to the Low-Medium Density Residential designation) by adopting Exhibit "A". Granted Reclassification No. 2004-00115 (to reclassify this property from the RS-A- 43,000 and RM-1200 zones to the RM-3000 zone), subject to the conditions of approval as stated in the staff report dated April 5, 2004. Approved Waiver of Code Requirement Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04831 (to construct a residential 7-unit • detached one-family residential condominium subdivision), subject to the conditions of approval as stated in the staff report dated April 5, 2004, with the following modifications: Modified Condition No. 15 to read as follows: 15. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, the property owner shall be required to implement appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) as specified in the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) A~pex~d+x-6; and as required by the Public Works Department, Development Services Division. The selected BMPs shal! be implemented and maintained to minimize the introduction of pollutants from entering the City of Anaheim stormwater drainage system. Approved Tentative Tract Map No. 16650 (to establish a 1-lot, 7-unit detached residential airspace condominium subdivision), subject to the conditions of approval as stated in the staff report dated April 5, 2004, with the following modifications: Modified and Renumbered Condition No. 10; Renumbered Condition No. 11 to read as follows: 11. That prior to final tract map approval, Condition Nos.1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. 12. That approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal ~ regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. 05-05-04 Page 4 of 5 APRIL 05, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL DETAILED MINUTES • Added the following condition of approval to read as follows: 10. That the developer shall pay the sewer capacity mitigation fee for the combined West Anaheim Area, Zone A Area. The mitigation fee is currently $199 per unit for single-family developments. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Buffa and Flores absent) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 10-day appeal rights for the Tentative Tract Map ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, April 15, 2004; and the 22-day appeal rights for the Reclassification, Waiver of Code Requirement and Conditional Use Permit ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 2004; and stated the General Plan Amendment would be set for a public hearing before the City Council. DISCUSSfON TIME: 20 minutes (2:09-2:29) MEETING ADJOURNED AT 3:50 P.M. TO MONDAY, APRIL 19, 2004 AT 9:00 A.M. FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW. • Res ectfully submitted: ~ ~~1.~'~t/~e,~~ Pat Chandler Senior Secretary Received and approved by the Planning Commission on , 2004 . ~ J 05-05-04 Page 5 of 5