Minutes-PC 2004/04/19 (2)C~
•
~J
CITY OF ANAHEIM
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MONDAY, APRIL 19, 2004
Council Chambers, City Hall
200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California
CHAIRPERSON: JAMES VANDERBILT-LINARES
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: KELLY BUFFA, GAIL EASTMAN, CECILIA FLORES,
JERRY O'CONNELL, DAVID ROMERO
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
~
STAFF PRESENT: ~,~-_
Joel Fick, Deputy City M ager
Selma Mann, Assista~~~~y
Sheri Vander Duss ~~ ~,~P ann~
Greg Hastings, Z ~g~~ "~~~isic~r~
Annika Santalat~~~ 'n~A~ ~~i
Greg McCaffe .~~~ nc' ~ I'' °. a~'
Linda Johnso ,~,~cting A~ anc
~
~r~. ~
AGENDAf
Thursday,'
the outside
PUBLISHE
CALL TO !
~ ~ DI~CI~S"~~,I`ON I~~G~RI~
• ~~STAFF~'lJ ATE~~O~` C
~~VELO~ N~~~ ND~
~. ~9ANNING~t~,~~ ~ ISSI!
• P' ~I:IMI_:[~PqRY~P~~N R
ing Commission Agend
nner
Planner
~
a.m. on
d also in
C~DF~`"~ PDATES
~~I EMS OI~T1~~~1?'1~4L' ~9, 2~0~"AGENDA
~~ ~ ~~ ~TM
~, ~
~~f~ ::~-`~
~~ ~
~~' ~ " ~ ~ ~~ ~~'~
RECESS TO AFTERNdq'IV~P~JBLI~` HE`ARI~V~r~
~~~~ ~ ~
RECONVENE TO PUBLIC HEi4~IN~a 1: ~,P. '.
For record keeping purposes, if~y ~~`~H~~~ e
complete a speaker card and submit if a h~s~c `.~,
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Flores
PUBLIC COMMENTS
CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
ADJOURNMENT
any item on the agenda, please
- - - - - - - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I
H:\DOCS~CLERICAUMINUTES~AC041904.DOC planninqcommission(a~anaheim.net
~~ ~
~. _~~. _,, ._.~ ~ :~.;
~ ~ ~~"
~er James Lin~~ Ass~
Elly Morris, Se~`i
Pat Chandler, Se
ning Manager Danielle Masciel,
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MtNUTES
• RECONVENE TO PUBLIC HEARING AT 1:30 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: NONE
This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the Anaheim
City Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing items.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Item 1-A through 1-C on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no
separate discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the
Planning Commission, staff or the public request the item to be discussed and/or removed from the
Consent Calendar for separate action.
Commissioner Eastman offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner O'Connell and MOTION CARRIED
(Commissioner Bostwick absent), for approval of Consent Calendar Items (1-A through 1-C) as
recommended by staff. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED
1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
~
u
A. (a} CEQA EXEMPTION-SECTION 15061(b)(3) GENERAL RULE Concurred with staff
(b) RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004-00118 Approved Initiation of
Reclassification proceedings
(c) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-04847 Approved Initiation of
City of Anaheim, Communiry Development Department, 201 South Anaheim Conditional Use Permit
Boulevard, Suite 1003, Anaheim, CA 92805, requests initiation of a proceedings
reclassification from the ML (Limited Industrial) Zone to the CL (Commercial,
Limited), or less intense zone and requests initiation of a conditional use
permit to permit the construction of an automobile sales dealership with (Vote: 6-0, Commissioner
automotive repairs. Property is located at 1501 West Lincoln Avenue BostwiCk absent)
(Anaheim Chevrolet).
ACTION: Commissioner Eastman offered a motion, seconded by
Commissioner O'Connelf and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner
Bostwick absent), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby concur with staff that the proposed project falls within the definition
of CEQA Exemption Section 15061(b)(3), as defined in the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt
from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation.
Commissioner Eastman offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
O'Connell and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Bostwick absent), that
the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the initiation
of Reclassification No. 2004-00118 to reclassify the properties from the ML
(Limited Industrial) Zone to the CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone, or less
intense zone.
Commissioner Eastman offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
O'Connell and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Bostwick absent), that
the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the initiafion
of Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04847 to permit the construction of an
automobile sales dealership with automotive repair. sr5092jr.doc
04-19-04
Page 2
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
B. Receiving and approving supplemental detailed Minutes for Item Approved
No. 2, Conditional Use Permit No. 3420 (Tracking No. CUP2004-
04829) and Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. (Vote: 6-0,
2004-00014, from the Planning Commission Meeting of March 22, Commissioner Bostwick
2004, scheduled to be heard as a public hearing item before City absent)
Council on Tuesday, Aprii 27, 2004. (Motion)
ACTlON: Commissioner Eastman offered a motion, seconded by
Commissioner O'Connell and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Bostwick
absent), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby receive and
approve the supplemental detailed Minutes for Item No. 2, Conditional Use
Permit No. 3420 (Tracking No. CUP2004-04829) and Determination of Public
Convenience or Necessity No. 2004-00014, from the Planning Commission
Meeting of March 22, 2004.
C. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Approved
Meeting of April 5, 2004. (Motion)
(Vote: 6-0,
ACTION: Commissioner Eastman offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick
. Commissioner O'Connell and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Bostwick absent)
absent), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby receive and
approve the minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of April 5, 2004.
\ J
04-19-04
Page 3
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to
2b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT May 17, 2004
2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-04811
OWNER: Larry Bedrosian, 710 East Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92802
AGENT: B.J. Mueller, P.O. Box 18085, Anaheim, CA 92817
LOCATION: 2920 East Whitestar Avenue. Property is approximately
1-acre, having a frontage of 233 feet on the southwesterly
side of White Star Avenue, located 725 feet southeast of
fhe centerline of La Palma Avenue.
Request to permit and retain a church within an existing industrial building
with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
Continued from the January 12 and March 8, 2004 Planning Commission
meetings.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. sr5090jr.doc
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares opened the public hearing.
• Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 2, stated staff continues to recommend denial of
the subject request based on the shortage of parking on site and the lack of securing agreements off site.
Applicant's Statement:
Ed Perez, 6765 E. Leafwood, Drive, Anaheim, CA, stated he is the consultant representing Way of Life
Church. He informed a letter dated April 16, 2004 was presented today and shows the progress they have
made in an attempt to secure any agreements. The owners of 2961 and 2971 E. Whitestar Avenue are
currently reviewing documentation to consider an agreement, which would provide an additional 197
parking spaces and he explained progress is being made on behalf of the applicant and business owners.
As of April 9, 2004 a landowner has agreed to enter into a parking lease agreement and he asked
Commission to work with the applicant as they are trying to resolve the parking issue and stated two
additional letters have been submitted to neighboring tenants to consider the matter.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner O'Connell referred to the parking lease agreement and asked what does it entail.
Mr. Perez responded it is to lease the parking location and to pay an insurance agreement with the owner,
and currently the same dialogue continues with some of the other neighboring tenants. The agreement
submitted today would provide an additional 39 spaces. There is also a second tenant in the process that
would provide an additional 197 parking spaces.
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares stated if they were to continue the item they would need an acceptance by
~ the applicant to waive the Streamlining Act.
04-19-04
Page 4
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• Commissioner Buffa referred to the parking lease agreement and indicated it states it's for a term through
April 2009, and the lease on the building expires in September 2005. She asked if they plan to stay at the
subject location beyond September 2005.
Mr. Perez stated if the applicant relocated the agreement would terminate, it is not designed to lock in either
party.
Commissioner Buffa asked if the applicant is willing to consider a waiver of the Permit-Streamlining Act,
because the Commission must take action by June 3~d. Therefore, if the applicant grants a waiver of the
Permit-Streamlining Act then the Commission could consider another continuance in order for the applicant
to continue working on obtaining necessary agreements to resolve the parking issue.
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, clarified it is not a waiver, but a 90-day continuance of the Permit
Streamlining Act Limit.
Commissioner Buffa asked staff if it would need to be in writing by the applicant.
Mr. McCafferty responded yes.
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, clarified if it is stipulated by the applicant at today's public hearing, it
would be satisfactory.
Mr. Perez was in agreement.
Commissioner Romero expressed concerns with the parking issue and he is not in support of another
continuance since he feels they are trying to force something that is not an appropriate use.
• Commissioner Eastman expressed her support of a continuance and she feels the applicant is making
some progress.
Commissioner O'Connell suggested continuing the item to May 17'h rather than 90 days since the item has
previously been continued several times.
Commissioner Buffa asked Selma Mann if the item is continued to May 17th would continuing the Permit
Streamlining Act today be necessary since Commission has until June 3'd to take action.
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, verified it wouldn't be necessary.
• • ~ ' - ~ ~ • • ~ •
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner O'Connell offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Flores and
MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Bostwick absent), to continue the subject request to
the May 17, 2004, Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to work on
obtaining necessary agreements to resolve the parking issue.
VOTE: 5-1 (Commissioner Romero voted no and Commissioner Bostwick absent)
DISCUSSION TIME: 28 minutes (1:37-2:05)
~
04-19-04
Page 5
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• 3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED)
3b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
3c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3876
(TRACKING NO. CUP2004-04836)
OWNER: Julio Vivas, Unitarian Church of Orange, 511 South Harbor
Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92905
AGENT: Susan Secoy, Secoy Architects, 112 East Chapman
Avenue, Suite E, Orange, CA 92866
LOCATION: 511 South Harbor Boulevard. Property is approximately
0.5-acre, located at the southwest corner of Santa Ana
Street and Harbor Boulevard (Unitarian Church of Orange
County).
Request to amend exhibits for a previously-approved church to construct
accessory Sunday school classroom building with waiver of minimum
number of parking spaces.
Continued from the April 5, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-40
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares opened the public hearing.
• Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 3.
Applicant's Statement:
Approved
Approved
Approved amendment
sr8719av.doc
Julio Vivas, President of the Board of Directors, Unitarian Church of Orange, he stated they have
experienced growth limitations at the subject location and have decided to add 670 square feet to their
facility which will include two bathrooms and two rooms. The addition reduces the number of parking
spaces from 24 to 22, but there has been an agreement for some time with adjacent Benjamin Franklin
School to use their lot as a playground and they recently have received permission to also use their parking
spaces which is empty on Sundays.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Mr. McCafferty explained that the Traffic and Transportation Manager reviewed the parking demand without
the assumption that the applicant would be able to use the adjacent school property, and it was determined
that the parking was adequate.
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Eastman offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Flores and
MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Bostwick absent), that the Anaheim City Planning
• Commission does hereby determine that the previously-approved Negative Declaration is
adequate to serve as the appropriate environmental documentation for this project.
Approved Waiver of Code Requirement
04-19-04
Page 6
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• Approved request to amend Conditional Use Permit No. 3876 (Tracking No. CUP2004-
04836) to amend exhibits for a previously-approved church to construct an accessory
Sunday school classroom building and adoption of the resolution attached to the staff
report dated April 19, 2004, including the findings and conditions contained therein.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Bostwick absent)
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal period.
DISCUSSION TIME: 6 minutes (2:06-2:12)
•
~
04-19-04
Page 7
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ 4a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to
4b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-00418 May 17, 2004
4c. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004-00116
4d. VARIANCE NO. 2004-04601
4e. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2004-127
OWNER: Frank T. Minissale, 111 South Mohier Drive, Anaheim, CA
92808
AGENT: Duane Stout, 1316 Candiewood Street, Anaheim, CA
92805
LOCATION: 111 Mohler Drive. Property is approximately 1.5 acres,
located at the southwest corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road
and Mohler Drive.
General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00418 - Request to amend the
Land Use Element Map of the General Plan redesignating the property
from the Hillside Estate Density Residential designation to the Hillside
Low Density Residential designation.
Reclassification No. 2004-00116 - Request reclassification of the
property from the RS-A-43,000 (SC) (Residential/Agricultural; Scenic
Corridor Overlay) zone to the RS-HS-22,000 (SC) (Residential, Single-
Family - Hillside; Scenic Corridor Overlay) or a less intense zone.
Variance No. 2004-04601 - Request waivers of: (a) minimum lot depth
•
adjacent to a scenic expressway, and (b) minimum lot area to construct 3
detached single-family homes.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-127 - Request to establish a 3-lot, 3-unit
detached single-family subdivision.
Continued from the April 5, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION NO.
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION NO.
VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO.
sr1148cw.doc
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares opened the public hearing.
Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 4.
ApplicanYs Statement:
Phillip Anthony, 14101 La Patt #10, Westminster, CA, stated they are asking for 3 half-acre lots and feels it
is compatible with the surrounding area. Because it is such a small piece, 3 parcels, it has to have its own
private streets consisting of cul-de-sacs. Therefore, the streets take up an unusually large part of the lots
for just 3 homes. Two of the lots meet the 19,000 square foot minimum size, minus the street; the third is a
little under. He feels it meets the basic requirements for 3 half-acre lots.
~
04-19-04
Page 8
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• Public Testimony:
Mitzy Ozaki, 340 S. Timken Road, Anaheim, she expressed her opposition to the subject request and
stated there is no hardship on the land and feels the motive is solely for financial gain. To approve the
request would compromise the entire integrity of the residential hillside 22,000 square foot estate zone.
Debbie O'Neal, 216 S. Mohler Drive, Anaheim, stated she is in support of the request and indicated she has
been working with Mr. Minissale for about 7 months on cleaning up his property, but he does not have the
money to do that. She also was working with the principal and another staff member at EI Rancho Jr. High
School, they were not able to provide a letter from the school because she contacted them too late, but
stated that the school is in favor of the subject request. She feels the homes would enhance the value of
the surrounding neighborhoods.
Phillip Joujon-Roche, 450 Via Vista, Anaheim, stated he represents the Santa Ana Canyon Property
Owner's Association as they were founded in 1971 to preserve the rural atmosphere of the Mohler Drive,
Eucalyptus area. Their area features an extensive system of hiking, riding trails, narrow and hilly roads, no
sidewalks or streetlights, and half-acre minimum lot sizes; he expressed support of the half-acre minimum
lot sizes to continue to remain for the area. Their association is concerned about the entrance to their
neighborhood, and stated if the subject request is granted it will establish a precedent for variances in the
northern part of Mohler Drive, and he asked Commission to deny the request.
Sonja Grewal, P.O. Box 17578, Anaheim, stated she is speaking on beha(f of the Anaheim Hills Citizens'
Coalition and they have submitted a letter to the Commission. She referred to the low-density resolution as
indicated in the staff report, and it does specifically establish a Council Policy to retain low-density
residential purposes. They are concerned about the waivers, but are very concerned about the general
plan amendment and the inconsistency of the underlying zoning. The primary goals and policies of the
Canyon Area General Plan have resulted in a semi-rural and non-congested community. They oppose the
• general plan amendment based on the fact that it presents an inconsistent designation and underlying
zoning and feels if the redesignation is approved then the zoning should also be low density. She cautions
if approved, there would be other similar requests in the area.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Applicant's Rebuttal:
Mr. Anthony stated the variances and area size is very minor and the property is already in three parcels,
the change would redesign those three parcels in order for them to be a reasonable and useable shape.
The combination of the general plan amendment, reclassification, variance and the tentative parcel map
does limit the property to three lots, and the owner can't take advantage of the extreme limits of the general
plan density range. He feels the request would be a tremendous improvement for the neighborhood and
the City.
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares stated at today's morning session there was a concern raised regarding the
potential of people using the turn-around to pick up and drop off students from EI Rancho Jr. High School.
There was discussion regarding a gated entrance to the subject property, and he asked Mr. Anthony if there
would be any objection.
Mr. Anthony responded the applicant hasn't planned on a gated entrance and doesn't believe there would
be any objection, but stated the school's main entrance is quite a ways from the proposed private cul-de-
sac, and directly behind the property there are school fences.
Commissioner Buffa stated it might be more appropriate to address the issue if a problem arises rather than
speculate. She feels if there is a problem regarding school traffic that the homeowners would address it to
the City.
~ Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares responded there was a question of egress onto the property and want to
ensure they are not engineering something that they cannot fix down the road.
04-19-04
Page 9
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• Commissioner Romero stated based on the current situation in the area, it is very practical that school
traffic would occur.
Mr. Anthony stated they could look into the matter, but at this time he is unaware if the gate would fit since it
has to be setback a certain distance from the street.
Commissioner Eastman stated at today's morning session that Principal Transportation Planner Alfred
Yalda indicated after construction that it would be problematic for the City to enforce because of it being a
private street.
Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner, stated the City doesn't require them to provide a full cul-de-
sac and the project could be redesigned in order to provide a 20-foot setback for the turn-around area and
he had previously offered that suggestion to the applicanYs civil engineer. Currently, the area is congested
as traffic does backup for approximately 15 minutes in the morning and in the afternoon.
Commissioner Eastman stated if there was room to do a different design with the street that it may alleviate
the need for a variance.
Mr. Anthony responded based on Mr. Yalda's comments, he feels that there must be room to do a different
street design in order to save space for the lots and also for the safety setback of the gate from Mohler
Drive.
Further discussion took place regarding decreasing the size of the cul-de-sac, and increasing the lot sizes.
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares asked Sonja Grewal if it would satisfy the concerns of the Anaheim Hills
Citizens' Coalition if the applicant were able to comply with the lot size requirements.
• Sonja Grewal responded no because her main concern was the proposed general plan amendment, as she
feels it is totally out of character for the hillside estate density area.
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. ~
OPPOSITION: 3 people spoke in opposition to the subject request (one person representing the Anaheim
Hills Citizens' Coalition); 3 letters of opposition was received.
IN SUPPORT: A person spoke in favor of the subject request.
ACTION: Commissioner Romero offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman and
MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Bostwick absent), to continue the subject request to
the May 17, 2004, Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to explore
reducing the width of the private street and increasing the lot sizes.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Bostwick absent)
DISCUSSION TIME: 41 minutes (2:13-2:54)
•
04-19-04
Page 10
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• 5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (READVERTISED)
5b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
5c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3262
(TRACKING NO. CUP2004-04838)
OWNER: Mahesh Vyas, NNRSVII Limited Partnership, 5005 Hidden
Glen Lane, Yorba Linda, CA 92887
AGENT: Neru Patel, 6220 Gossen Street, Simi Valley, CA 93063
LOCATION: 8245 and 8295 East Monte Vista Road. Property is
approximately 1.74 acres, bounded by Weir Canyon Road,
Monte Vista Road and Old Springs Road.
Request amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 3262 to construct a
four (4) unit commercial retail center and a two-story medical office
building, including roof-mounted equipment, with waivers of: (a) permitted
commercial identification in the Scenic Corridor Overlay zone, (b)
minimum setback adjacent to a scenic expressway and (c) required
improvement of setback areas.
Continued from the Aprif 5, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-41
~ Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares opened the public hearing.
Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 5.
Applicant's Statement:
Approved
Approved
Approved amendment
sr3066ey.doc
Dr. Mahesh Vyas, 21580 Yorba Linda Blvd., Suite 202, Yorba Linda, stated they have been working hard
with the Planning staff to meet their needs and stay within the Codes, and he agrees with the conditions
imposed.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Mr. McCafferty stated two issues were discussed at today's morning session regarding the reciprocal
access with the carwash and to possibly revise the architecture renderings to reflect the architectural "style"
of the area.
Mr. Vyas responded there is a landscape strip between the carwash and their retail center, Planning staff
had suggested they open one portion of that to make it easier for delivery trucks to turn for the loading
zone. They are willing to work with staff regarding the type of architecture. He stated there is no set tone to
the neighborhood and all the buildings are different.
Commissioner Romero asked the applicant what type of businesses does he anticipate and if they are
trying to attract any restaurant type uses.
Mr. Vyas responded there was discussion with Planning staff and it was mentioned that a restaurant use
would be preferred but was not necessary. He stated the current users that they are entertaining would not
• be using any serving type of food service.
Commissioner Romero asked if there was any interest of a bank at the facility.
04-19-04
Page 11
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• Mr. Vyas responded there have been some offers for a bank, but as of yet they haven't responded,
therefore, he doesn't believe there is any further interest for a bank.
Commissioner Eastman encouraged the applicant to explore a more detailed landscaping closer to the
building than what is currently shown on the pians.
Mr. Vyas responded a landscape plan has been submitted to the Planning Department, and they have
exceeded the minimum requirement for trees on the site.
Mr. McCaffierty stated they do have final elevation plans coming back to staff for review and approval, but
they could have them come back before the Planning Commission with staff's recommendation, and if
appropriate they could also include the final landscape plans.
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares was in agreement.
Further discussion amongst the Commission took place with support of additional landscaping.
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACT10N: Approved CEQA Negative Declaration
Approved Waiver of Code Requirement
• Approved request to amend Conditional Use Permit No. 3262 (Tracking No. CUP2004-
04838) to construct a four (4) unit commercial retail center and a two-story medical office
building including roof-mounted equipment in conjunction with an existing, previously-
approved carwash, and adoption of the resolution attached to the staff report dated
April 19, 2004, including the findings and conditions contained therein, with the following
modifications:
Modified Condition No. 3 to read as follows:
3. That final precise elevation and landscape plans shall be submitted to the Zoning
Division for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and
Recommendations item. Said plans shall indicate the specific colors and materials
of the proposed buildings; and that the landscape plan shall incorporate additional
landscaping adjacent to the office building.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Bostwick absent)
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal period.
DISCUSSION TIME: 23 minutes (2:55-3:18)
(Following the subject item, Item No. 7 was heard.)
~~
L~
04-19-04
Page 12
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNiNG COMMISSION MINUTES
6a.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 330 A roved a Motion recommending
pp
~
6b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-00419 that the City Council find EIR No. 330,
including the corrections and
6C. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2004-00029 omissions addressed in Attachment
13 to the staff report, adequate to
6d. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004-00117 serve as the required environmental
documentation for the proposed
actions
6e. SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO THE ANAHEIM
RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-2 Recommended City Council adoption
of General Plan Amendment including
(TRACKING NO. SPN2004-00023) the corrections in Attachment 2 to the
staff report and redesignating certain
6f. SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE NORTHEAST Parcels in the Platinum Triangle from
Office-Low land uses to Office-High
AREA SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 94-1 ~and uses
(TRACKING NO. SPN2004-00024) Recommended City Council adoption
of Zoning Code Amendment including
6g. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION the corrections in ,4ttacnment s to the
6h. TERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 staff report
(TRACKING NO. DAG2004-00001) Recommended City Council approval
of Reclassification
6i. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF 6d and 6q
Recommended City Council adoption
of Amendment No. 5 to SP92-2
• ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 330
The City has prepared Draft Environmental Report No. 330 (DEIR) in Recommended City Council adoption
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and of Amendment No. 2 to SP94-1
the state and City of Anaheim CEQA Guidelines. The DEIR has been Approved CEQA Negative Declaration
circulated for public/responsible agency review for a 45-day public
review and comment period beginning March 19, 2004 and ending Recommended City Council to
• May 3, 2004. It is anticipated that the City Council will be considering introduce and adopt an Ordinance
the DEIR at Its dul noted Ma 25 2004 meetin .
Y Y ~ 9 terminating by canceling Development
Agreement No. 91-01
• GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-00419 Recommended City Council review of
Item Nos. 6d and 6g
LOCATION: Citvwide. The City of Anaheim and its sphere-of-
influence are located in northeastern Orange County, approximately 35
miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and 7 miles north of Santa
Ana. The City of Anaheim is surrounded by the Cities of Fullerton,
Placentia, and Yorba Linda to the north; Riverside County to the east;
the Cities of Orange, Garden Grove, Stanton, and unincorporated
Orange County to the south; and, the Cities of Cypress and Buena Park
to the west. The City encompasses over 32,243 acres of land, including
approximately 2,460 acres of unincorporated land within its sphere-of-
influence.
REQUEST: City-initiated request to comprehensively update the City
of Anaheim General Plan, including revisions to the existing Land Use
Element (including new and re-named land use designations);
Redevelopment Element (now incorporated into the Economic
Development Element); Circulation Element (which would now contain
the existing Scenic Highways Element); Open Space and Conservation
Elements (incorporated into the Green Element); Growth Management
Element; Parks, Recreation and Community Services Element
(incorporated into the Green Element); Noise Element; and, Safety and
Seismic Safety Element (combined into one Safety Element); and
further, in addition to the topics addressed in the existing General Plan
~ Elements, to create new goals, policies and programs to address
community design, economic development, and public services and Sr2153jb.doc
facilities in the form of new elements for each topic.
04-19-04
Page 13
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• • ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2004-00029
LOCATION: Citvwide. See above description.
REQUEST: City-initiated request to comprehensively amend the City of Anaheim
Municipal Code, Title 18 (Zoning Code), including, but not limited to, the update of all
residential, commercial and industrial zone classifications, permitted uses, and
development standards; deletion of obsolete zoning classifications; and introduction of
new zoning classifications, including but not limited to, Mixed Use, to implement the
updated General Plan.
• RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004-00017
LOCATION: The subject property is an approximately 663-acre area known as the
Cypress Canyon Specific Plan No. 90-3 Area, generally bounded by the Cleveland
National Forest to the east, the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway to the north, unincorporated
open space within the City's Sphere-of-Influence to the south, and the Mountain Park
Specific Plan Area to the west (the western boundary of the Cypress Canyon Specific PI
area is approximately 5,712 feet east of the Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon
Road intersection).
REQUEST: City-initiated request to reclassify subject properties from the Cypress
Canyon Specific Plan (SP90-3) to the OS (Open Space) Zone to be consistent with the
Open Space land use designation proposed as part of the General Plan Update. One
approximately 15-acre parcel will retain its existing Low-Medium Density Residential
designation with up to 140 dwelling units in the proposed RM-3 Zone.
• • AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-2
(TRACKING NO. SPN2004-OQ023)
LOCATION: Propertv addresses include 2101-2207 South Harbor Boulevard, 2100-
2340 South Harbor Boulevard, 500-510, and 614 West Oranqewood, 450, 460, and
620 West Wilken Wav. and 421. 503, and 531 West Chapman Avenue. The Anaheim
Resort Specific Plan encompasses approximately 555 acres generally located adjacent to
and southwest of Interstate 5 between Ball Road and Orangewood Avenue within The
Anaheim Resort. The proposed amendment area is located immediately south of the
existing Specific Plan boundaries and encompasses approximately 26 acres along the
east and west sides of Harbor Boulevard between Orangewood Avenue and the southern
City limits including properties fronting along the following streets (all frontage numbers
are approximate): 1,363 feet adjacent to the west side and 2,641 feet adjacent to the east
side of Harbor Boulevard; 626 feet adjacent to the south side of Orangewood Avenue,
east and west of the centerline of Harbor Boulevard; 371 feet adjacent to the north and
south sides of Wilken Way, west of the centerline of Harbor Boulevard; 190 feet adjacent
to the north side and 608 feet adjacent to the south side of Wilken Way, east of the
centerline of Harbor Boulevard; and, 850 feet adjacent to the north side of Chapman
Avenue, east of the centerline of Harbor Boulevard.
REQUEST: City-initiated request to amend the boundaries of the Anaheim Resort
Specific Plan to incorporate subject properties, and reclassify these properties from the
CG (Commercial, General), CH (Commercial, Heavy), CL (Commercial, Limited), PLD-M
(Parking/Landscape District-Manufacturing), and RS-A-43,000 (Residential, Agricultural)
Zone to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Zone (including establishing zoning
and development standards for the expanded area) to be consistent with the Commercial
• Recreation land use designation proposed as part of the General Plan Update.
04-19-04
Page 14
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ • AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 94-1
(TRACKING NO. SPN2004-000241
LOCATION: The Northeast Area Specific Plan consists of approximately 2,645 acres
generally located in the Santa Ana Canyon, bounded by the City of Placentia to the
north, the Orange (SR-57) Freeway to the west, the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway and
Santa Ana River to the south, and Imperial Highway to the east. The proposed
amendment would encompass approximately 60 acres located within the Northeast Area
Specific Plan Area as follows (all acreage and frontage numbers are approximate):
(A) 1000-101 Q, 1040, 1021, 1050-1086, and 1041 North Kraemer Place: 2671,
3025-3035 East La Mesa Avenue: 2929-2931 East White Star Avenue;
1015, 1020, 1030-1045, and 1050 North Armando Street. Thirteen (13}
properties situated on 23.77 acres with frontages on White Star Avenue,
Armando Street, La Mesa Street, and Kraemer Place.
(B) 3210 East La Palma Avenue. One (1), 3.91-acre property located at the
southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Shepard Street, having frontages of
283 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue and 585 feet on the east side of
Shepard Street (request for deletion).
(C) 3362, 3364, and 3366-3370 East La Palma Avenue. Three (3) properties
situated on 16.99 acres located 1,698 feet east of the centerline of Shepard
Street, having a frontage of 461 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue and
a maximum depth of 1,180 feet.
• (D) 4506 4510 4520 4527 4530 4531 4545 4600 4601 and 4616-4618 East
La Palma Avenue. Eleven (11) properties situated on 4.42 acres located on
the north side of La Palma Avenue, east of Lakeview Avenue, and at the
southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Lakeview Avenue, including four (4)
properties located 276 feet east of the centerline of Lakeview Avenue and
having a frontage of 331 feet on the north side of La Palma Avenue, and seven
(7) properties located at the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and
Lakeview Avenue, having a frontage of 689 feet on the south side of La Palma
Avenue, and 197 feet on the east side of Lakeview Avenue.
(E) 5500, 5510, and 5620 East La Palma Avenue. Three (3) properties situated
on 15 acres located 578 feet west of the centerline of Imperial Highway, having
a frontage of 561 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue.
REQUEST: City-initiated request to amend the Northeast Area Specific Plan (SP94-1)
and its associated Development Area boundaries to be consistent with the revised
General Plan land use designations proposed as part of the General Plan Update, as
follows: (A) from DA 5(Commercial) to DA 2(Expanded Industrial); (B) from DA 5
(Commercial) to DA 2(Expanded Industrial) (request for deletion); (C) from DA 3(La
Palma Core) to DA 5(Commercial); (D) from DA 5(Commercial) to DA 2(Expanded
Industrial); and, (E) from DA 5(Commercial) to DA 2(Expanded Industrial).
~
04-19-04
Page 15
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• • CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND TERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 (TRACKING NO. 2004-00001)
LOCATION: Property encompasses approximately 3,179 acres (the Mountain Park
Specific Plan No. 90-4 area), including 2,339 acres which have been annexed to the City
of Anaheim and 840 acres of unincorporated land located within the County of Orange in
the City of Anaheim's sphere-of-influence (approximately 172 acres of the Mountain Park
site have been developed with the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-241) which
bisects the western portion of the site). The subject site is generally located in Gypsum
Canyon, bordered on the north by the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway and the Gypsum
Canyon Road interchange, on the west by The Summit of Anaheim Hills and Sycamore
Canyon developments, on the south by unincorporated property within the County of
Orange in the City of Orange's sphere-of-influence, and on the east by the 697-acre
Cypress Canyon Specific Plan area.
REQUEST: Request to terminate Development Agreement No. 91-01 between the
City of Anaheim and The Irvine Company relating to the development and
implementation of the Mountain Park Specific Plan (SP90-4).
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-45
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-46
RECLASSfFICATION RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-47
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 5 RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-48
. SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-49
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TERMINATION RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-50
Chairperson Vanderbilt opened the public hearing.
Joel Fick, Deputy City Manager, introduced Item No. 6, and thanked the Commissioners for their diligent
work, the citizens who participated in the process, the consultant team headed by Dick Famill and Brian
Chute, and last but not least, all of the staff inembers and Sheri Vander Dussen, as the Planning Director,
Jonathan Borrego, the Project Manager, and all other interdepartmental staffs working on the project, and
stated, all of you have been instrumental in providing guidance throughout the process and providing an
imprint on the policies and programs that are going to shape Anaheim's future for the next 20 years and
beyond.
Sheri Vander Dussen, Planning Director, thanked the Planning and Zoning staff, John Lower, Russ
Maguire, and Keith Linker from Public Works Department; Richard Mayer, from the Community Services
Department; Lisa Stipkovich, Brad Hobson and Mark Asturias from the Community Development
Department; Selma Mann, from the City Attorney's Office; David Alfen from the Water Engineering Section
of the Public Utilities Department; Wayne Alonzo from the Police Department, and Bob Logue from the Fire
Department, for all being instrumental in framing some of the policies and resolving issues. Ms. Vander
Dussen stated the General Plan includes a lot of significant and relevant policies and goals that are going to
serve us well for many years to come.
Jonathan Borrego, Principal Planner, stated they were very excited to be at this point in the process. He
~ opened his remarks by giving a quick recap of the order of the presentations: The Planning Center, Brian
Judd, Project Manager, making a presentation relative to some of the key points of the General Plan;
followed by a presentation by Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, who would discuss some of the key
04-19-04
Page 16
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• provisions of the Zoning Code; Steve Faessel who would making a presentation relative to the General Plan
Advisory Committee or GPACs review of the documents and their involvement in the process from the
beginning; and following Mr. Faessel, he would give a recap and answer some of the questions raised by
the Commission; and following that, Commission would open the hearing for public comments.
Brian Judd opened up his review of the planning process by highlighting some of the major milestones that
were accomplished and describing some of the major features and objectives of the plan and then finally
reviewing the scope and content of the General Planning elements.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, gave a history of the Zoning Code and presented highlights of the
more significant features of the Zoning Code update.
Judy Dadant responded to comments made by the Commission relating to the zoning code.
Public Testimony:
Surindra Vohra, 1639, 6th St., Manhattan Beach, CA, wished to know how the open space and density
calculations were done.
Manny Dutt, 222 S. Eucalyptus Dr., Anaheim, CA, stated concern that the City is taking open space to the
west and the County is taking all of his property to the east, and in the end he would not have any property
at all. He requested to move the open space to where the gnatcatcher area is so that he would have an
overlap, which is what the NCR requires. He also wished to find out what the net area is.
Mark Von Esch, Von Esch & Associates, 6103 East Morning View Drive, Anaheim, CA, wished to be
reassured that the General Plan, as proposed, would not change the calculation of the amount of open
space.
~ Ed Chuchla, 800 Ball Road, Anaheim, CA, Vice President of Pre-development for Walt Disney
Imagineering, applauded the City's desire to ensure that the parcels that are being added to the Anaheim
Resorts Specific Plan area will be subject to the same rigorous, physical planning and technical standards
that produce the high-quality tourisms serving zone that they all enjoy today. But stated supportive as they
may be of this change, they and their experts have reviewed the environmental review and after careful
review of the document and several meetings with City staff, they have come to the conclusion that the
Draft EIR and technical support documents do not contain enough information for them to validate that the
Disneyland Resorts entitled capacities or operational requirements have been adequately considered.
Catherine Deyoung, 31545 Sea Shadows Way, Anaheim, CA, requested that their parcel, which is
designated low office, be designated high office.
Leon Alexander, from the Law Offices of Briggs & Alexander, representing two parcel owners, stated he is
in support of the proposed change of the General Plan Amendment but his clients request that he propose
to Commission to allow for commercial and high office use in that area.
Rich Robertson, of Robertson's Ready Mix, 200 S. Main St., Corona, CA, wished to know how many
dwellings could be put there.
Cesar Corvarrubias, 23861 EI Toro Rd., Suite 401, Lake Forest, CA, of the Kennedy Commission, stated
that they submitted a written letter which incorporated their comments, and felt some of the comments that
they had specific questions on have been resolved through conversations with staff.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Buffa wished clarification on the listing of intersections on The Air Quality Table.
~ Bill Halligan, a Consultant with the Planning Center, responded that The Air Quality Table showed
intersections that would have the potential to operate at unacceptable levels of service.
04-19-04
Page 17
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMiSSION MINUTES
~ Commissioner Flores wished to clarify the issues of churches and missions in the City of Anaheim, and
asked if they were being addressed according to their use since they would not be entitled as churches, etc.
Ms. Santalahti responded they would be called Places of Assembly.
Mike Swan, with Psomas, responded to questions regarding the infracstructure issues; water, sewer, and
storm drain.
Linda Johnson, Principal Planner, responded to concerns of the property owners and stated that the City
was not proposing any changes to the permitted residential density in that area.
Mr. Borrego responded to questions raised relative to the issue of population and housing; questions that
had to do with making redesignations in the Platinum Triangle area; calculation of open space and
determining density over the years; issues on storm drains; comments relative to the reduction of the state
density designated land and the Hill and Canyon area; mapping techniques; the City's noise standards; and
specifically to the comments raised by Disney to clarify issues in the EIR.
Chairperson Vanderbilt stated that questions raised by the public and Commission, in terms of the broad
issues, were responded to.
PUBLIC
7ESTIMONY: 3 people expressed concern relative to permitted residential densities for certain
parcels located in proximity to the Deer Canyon area (a spokesperson on this issue
• represented 6 people who filled out speaker cards and he presented a PowerPoint
presentation relative to the subject). A petition pertaining to this subject (containing 89
signatures), along with a"hard cop~' of the PowerPoint Presentation, was received
prior to the meeting.
1 person represented Walt Disney World Company/Disneyland Resort relative to
environmental impact concerns pertaining to the proposed Resort Expansion Area.
4 people spoke in favor of the subject request, including a person representing The
Kennedy Commission.
ACTION: Commissioner Buffa offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Romero and
MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Bostwick and Eastman absent), that the
Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council
independently review and analyze Final EIR No. 330 and the Mitigation Monitoring
Programs assaciated with the project and determine that they are in compliance with
CEQA and the state and City CEQA Guidelines and determine that it is adequate to
serve as the required environmental documentation for the proposed actions, unless
additional or contrary information is received during the public review period or at the
City Council hearing.
Approved the adoption of a draft resolution (Attachment 14 - A to the staff report
dated April 19, 2004), recommending that the City Council adopt General Plan
Amendment No. 2004-00419 for the comprehensive General Plan Update based on
the findings contained in the draft resolution and including the corrections and
omissions addressed in Attachment 2 to the staff report, including the redesignation of
four parcels within the Platinum Triangle Area from the Office-Low land use
~ designation to the Office-High designation.
04-19-04
Page 18
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• Approved the adoption of a draft resolution (Attachment 14 - B to the staff report
dated April 19, 2004) recommending that the City Council adopt Code
Amendment No. 2004-00029 for the comprehensive Zoning Code update based on
the findings contained in the draft resolution, and including the corrections and
omissions addressed in Attachment 6(Refinements and Clarifications) to the staff
report.
Approved the adoption of a draft resolution (Attachment 14 - C to the staff report
dated April 19, 2004) recommending that the City Council approve
Reclassification No. 2004-00117 to reclassify Parcel A to the RM-3 (Multiple-Family
Residential) zone and Parcel B to the OS (Open Space) zone based upon the findings
contained in the attached draft resolution.
Approved the adoption of a draft resolution (Attachment 14 - D to the staff report
dated April 19, 2004) recommending that the City Council adopt Amendment
No. 5 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SPN 2004-00023) to amend the
boundaries of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan to incorporate certain properties
within the expansion area; to reflect the text, exhibit and zoning and development
standard changes described in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Addendum also
provided in Attachment 14 - D to the staff report; and, to reclassify those properties to
the SP 92-2 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan) zone, C-R District, with a Low Density
designation based upon the findings contained in the draft resolution, and including
the corrections and omissions addressed in Attachment 6(Zoning Code Refinements
and Clarifications) to the staff report.
Approved the adoption of a draft resolution (Attachment 14 - E to the staff report
dated April 19, 2004) recommending that the City Council adopt Amendment
• No. 2 to the Northeast Area Specific Plan (SPN 2004-00024) to amend certain
Development Area boundaries within the Northeast Area Specific Plan as described in
Section V, Paragraph No. 4 of the staff report, based upon the findings contained in
the draft resolution.
Commissioner Buffa offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Romero and
MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Bostwick and Eastman absent), that the
Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the CEQA Negative
Declaration and recommend that the City Council independently review and
analyze the Negative Declaration, the Initial Study and related documentation and
evidence and find that the Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of
the City Council, and unless additional or contrary information is presented, determine
that there is no substantial evidence that the project (cancellation of Development
Agreement No. 91-02) will have a significant effect on the environment, and that the
Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental
documentation for the project.
Approved the adoption of a draft resolution (Attachment 14 - F to the staff report
dated April 19, 2004) recommending that the City Council introduce and adopt an
Ordinance to terminate by cancellation Development Agreement No. 91-01 and
approve and enter into the written Agreement with The Irvine Company substantial{y in
the form provided in Exhibit 1 to the draft resolution to mutually agree to the
cancellation of Development Agreement No. 91-01 based upon the findings contained
in the draft resolution.
Commissioner Vanderbilt offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner O'Connell and
MOTfON CARRIED (Commissioners Bostwick and Eastman absent), that the
• Anaheim Gity Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council
consider the Reclassification No. 2004-00117 and the CEQA Negative Declaration
prepared in conjunction with the Termination of Development Agreement No. 91-01
04-19-04
Page 19
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMM{SSION MINUTES
• concurrent with its consideration of the balance of the items associated with this
request.
VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Bostwick and Eastman absent)
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, stated all items would be set for public hearing by City Council on
Tuesday, May 25, 200,4.
DISCUSSION TIME: 3 hours and 3 minutes
. .._ ....___. ______ ___.._.___..__ ~...._ ~~ __~_ ~. ---_ w ..~ .._.~ ... _.. ~ .~_...._ . ~._._ ~....
~ 1 hour and 43 minutes (4:17-6:00) 15-minute break
55 minutes (6:15-7:10) 10 minute break
25 minutes (7:20-7:45)
(The subject item was heard following Item No. 9.)
Commissioner Eastman left the Council Chambers {6:00 p.m.)
u
i
04-19-04
Page 20
APRiL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MIMUTES
~ 7a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED)
7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4097
(TRACKING NO. CUP2004-04841)
OWNER: Joel Saltzburg, 18022 Medley Drive, Encino, CA 91316
AGENT: Charles Perez, C& M Automotive, 420 South State College
Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: 420 South State Colleqe Boulevard. Property is
approximately 0.40-acre, located at the northeast corner of
State College Boulevard and Westport Drive (C & M
Automotive).
Requests reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a
condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on
December 2, 2002 to expire December 31, 2003) to retain an automotive
repair facility.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-42
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares opened the public hearing.
Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 7.
• ApplicanYs Statement:
Approved
Approved reinstatement
for 3 years (to expire on
December 31, 2006)
sr3067ey.doc
Charles Perez, 420 S. State College Boulevard, Anaheim, stated he is the owner of the subject property
and indicated that Code Enforcement has been inspecting his property every month for the past five years,
and he has been paying for those inspections every month. There have been no citations for the past five
years since he has been paying for the inspections, and asked to be relieved of the financial burden.
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares verified it is consistent with what the staff report states.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Mr. McCafferty referred to Condition No. 23 of the draft resolution as it states the inspections are quarterly
inspections, and he would support quarterly or bi-annual inspections in order to ensure that the business
continues to comply.
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares asked Mr. Perez if he understands that the inspections are quarterly and
not monthly.
Mr. Perez responded he was not aware of that, and stated he has been doing business for 29 years in
Anaheim and asked why is he chosen to have monthly inspections when other auto repair facilities do not.
Commissioner Eastman stated at today's morning session there was discussion regarding the landscaping
which needs to be maintained.
Mr. Perez stated he has a gardener who comes every month.
• Commissioner Flores asked him to work with his gardener because the landscaping does need additional
attention.
Commissioner O'Connell asked the applicant what is the cost of the inspections.
04-19-04
Page 21
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMM{SSION MINU7ES
~ Mr. Perez responded $68.
Commissioner O'Connell responded $68 every quarter.
Mr. Perez clarified he pays every month, not every quarter.
Commissioner Eastman asked staff to verify with Code Enforcement.
Mr. McCafferty verified with Code Enforcement, and stated Code Enforcement was going by an old
resolution.
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares indicated the applicant would possibly receive a refund for the inappropriate
charges, and based on Code Enforcement's memo it is consistent with Mr. Perez testimony that there have
been no violations or complaints on the property.
• • ~ ~- • ~ • • ~ •
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Eastman offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner O'Connell and
MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Bostwick absent), that the Anaheim City Planning
Commission does hereby determine that the previously-approved Negative Declaration is
adequate to serve as the appropriate environmental documentation for this project.
• Approved the request for reinstatement of Gonditional Use Permit No. 4097 (Tracking
No. CUP2004-04841) to retain an automotive repair facility for a period of three (3) years,
to expire on December 31, 2006, and adoption of the resolution attached to the staff report
dated April 19, 2004, including the findings and conditions contained therein, with the
following modifications:
Modified Condition No. 23 to read as follows:
23. That the subject facility shall be subject to ~ar~er~ bi-annual inspections by the
Code Enforcement Division. The cost of such inspection shall be borne by the
operator of the facility.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Bostwick absent)
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
DISCUSSION TIME: 11 minutes (3:19-3:30)
(The subject item was heard following ltem No. 5.)
•
04-19-04
Page 22
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• 8a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 3 Concurred with staff
8b. VARIANCE NO. 2004-04602 Granted, in part
OWNER: Frank Nunez, 623 North West Street, Anaheim, CA 92801
AGENT: Sam Bevacqua, 219 Royal Place, Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATtON: 623 North West Street. Property is approximately 0.32-
acre, having a frontage of 85 feet on the west side of West
Street, located 227 feet north of the centerline of Westmont
Drive.
Request waivers of: (a) maximum fence height, (b) minimum front yard
setback and (c) minimum side yard setback to expand an existing single-
family dwelling and to permit and retain an existing fence.
VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-43
sr8725gk.doc
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares opened the public hearing.
Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 8.
ApplicanYs Statement:
• Frank Nunez, 623 N. West Street, Anaheim, stated he recently purchased the property and wasn't aware of
the fence not having a permit.
THE PUBLIC HEAR{NG WAS CLOSED.
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares asked when he purchased the property.
Mr. Nunez responded about 7 months ago, and he informed that on the bottom of the fence the cement has
a stamped date, which states 1997.
Chairperson Var-derbilt-Linares stated the Commission would need to have a finding that the property is
somehow at a disadvantage than other properties in the area in order to approve the request of the fence
height. There have been previous property owners who were able to work with a 3-foot fence height
requirement by including some type of landscaping, "boxed" brush or rose plants to provide a wider barrier
versus a taller one, and often achieves the same kind of deterrent onto the property.
Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated the fence ordinance went into effect in 1999, and if there
would have been a building permit acquired for the fence and if it met the requirements at the time it would
have been approved, however, under certain circumstances there were no building permits required. The
wrought iron fence would not have required a building permit; it depends on the type of construction and
when it was built as to whether it was grand fathered.
Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares asked for the subject fence since it was erected in 1997, would a building
permit have been necessary.
Mr. Hastings responded yes, it would have been necessary for the legal construction of the fence and the
records indicate it did not occur; therefore it is an illegal-nonconforming fence because it did not have a
~ building permit.
04-19-04
Page 23
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares asked if the Commission acts favorable on the item today would the
applicant still need an inspection.
Mr. Hastings responded yes, a building permit is still required.
Mr. McCafferty stated the new Zoning Code would give applicants the opportunity to have a 3-foot high wall
and on top of that have a light fixture. Therefore after adoption of the Zoning Code there could be a
possibility that the subject wall could be modified to allow a 3-foot high fence and then a light fixture placed
on the lower pilasters as shown on page 2 of today's staff report, and the whole wall wouldn't have to come
down.
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Eastman offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner O'Connell and
MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Bostwick absent}, that the Anaheim City Planning
Commission does hereby concur with staff that the proposed project falls within the
definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 3(New Construction or Conversion of Small
Structures), as defined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and
is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare additional
environmental documentation.
Granted, in part, Variance No. 2004-04602 (to permit and retain an existing fence) by
• denying waiver (a) pertaining to maximum fence height; and approving waivers
pertaining to (b) minimum front yard setback and (c) minimum side yard setback, and
adoption of the resolution attached to the staff report dated April 19, 2004, including the
findings and conditions contained therein.
VOTE: 5-1 (Commissioner Flores voted no and Commissioner Bostwick absent)
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
DISCUSSION TIME: 16 minutes (3:31-3:47)
~
04-19-04
Page 24
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• 9a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
9b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
9c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-04842
OWNER: Steven Dunbar, 20429 East Yorba Linda Boulevard, Yorba
Linda, CA 92886
AGENT: Gregory M. Roseen, 27702 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite
316-D4, Ladera Ranch, CA 92694
LOCATION: 8290 East Crvstal Drive. Property is approximately 1.04
acres, located at the northwest corner of Weir Canyon
Road and Savi Ranch Parkway (East Hills Regional Animal
Hospital).
Request to construct a veterinary hospital and animal boarding facility
with roof-mounted equipment with waivers of: (a) maximum fence height,
(b) permitted commsrcial identification in the Scenic Corridor Overlay
Zone, (c) maximum number of wall signs, (d) required structural setback
adjacent to an arterial highway, and (e) required improvement of setback
areas.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-44
• Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares opened the public hearing.
Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 9.
Applicant's Statement:
Approved
Approved, in part
Granted
sr5091 jr.doc
Steve Dunbar, 20429 E. Yorba Linda Blvd., Yorba Linda, referred to the signage and stated he is requesting
a small sigr- about 15 square feet, to state "24-Hour Emergency' to be located on the front of the building
facing the eastside on Weir Canyon Road and he asked for clarification if there was a concern regarding the
number of animals.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Mr. McCafferty stated there is no concern regarding the number of animals because it is not adjacent to
residential and the facility is in an appropriate place for the type of use. He referred to the signage issue
and stated they are asking for five wall signs when the code only permits one. Staff feels what the applicant
is proposing is reasonable given the location and ability to find the hospita{. They already have clear
visibility of the freeway and the intent of the "24-Hour Emergenc~!' sign is to provide freeway visibility, and
he doesn't see the point of adding another sign to the east elevation.
He asked if it would be a combined sign on the east elevation, and if so perhaps it would be something
supported but if entirely separate it would be too cluttered with signs.
Mr. Dunbar stated the name of the hospital would be on the northeast corner and clarified as far as the 24-
Hour Emergency Service being on the south end of the building, it is not visible from the freeway because
of the Chevrolet building and the trees.
~ Mr. McCafferty agreed that it is very important for patrons to be aware that the facility is open 24 hours, but
if he is going to incorporate it into the east elevation that it be within the same general area as the proposed
sign copy for the East Hills Regional Animal Hospital.
04-19-04
Page 25
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• Chairperson Vanderbilt-Linares stated due to the nature of the business it might be appropriate to allow
more signage.
Commissioner Buffa suggested changing the words on the sign from "Pet ResorY' to "24-Hour Emergency"
which is an option in order to get the message out.
Mr. Hastings stated typically the solution has been to find a way to combine the messages so they appear
to be one sign and he suggested that to be done in order to help the applicant as well as keeping the
signage reasonable because other businesses in the area may consider requesting additional signage.
Mr. Dunbar agreed and stated they could combine the signage.
Commissioner O'Connell concurred with Commissioner Buffa regarding changing the words of the sign
from "Pet Resort" to "24-Hour Emergenc~'.
Mr. Dunbar was in agreement.
Mr. Hastings referred to Condition No. 6 in the draft resolution and stated a provision may need to be added
in order to allow the necessary signage to be lit to identify the "24-Hour Emergency".
Mr. McCafferty read into the record added conditions of approval.
• OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Approved CEQA Negative Declaration
Approved, in part, Waiver of Code Requirement, as follows:
Approved waivers pertaining to (a) maximum fence height within the front yard setback,
(b) permitted commercial identification in the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone, (c) maximum
number of wafl signs and (e) required improvement of setback areas.
Denied waiver (d) pertaining to required structural setback adjacent to an arterial highway
since it is not necessary and has been deleted.
Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04842 (to construct a veterinary hospital and
animal boarding facility with roof-mounted equipment), and adoption of the resolution
attached to the staff report dated April 19, 2004, including the findings and conditions
contained therein, with the following modifications:
Modified Condition Nos. 6 and 24 to read as follows:
6. That no sign shall be lighted between the hours of midnight and 6:30 a.m. or during
business hours.
~
04-19-04
Page 26
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• 24. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are
on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 7, and as
conditioned herein; except that the signs as indicated on Exhibit Nos. 1, 4, and 5
are hereby modified to delete the "Pet Resorts" wall sign from the east
elevation and replace it with "24-Hour Emergency Care Service".
Added the following conditions of approval to read as follows:
That the legal property owner shall submit an application for an Encroachment License to the
Public Works Department, Development Services Division for any structures, including retaining
wall, trees, light fixtures and an access ramp within the existing public utility easement as
reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
That all tree species to be planted within the public utility easement shall be approved by the
Public Works Department, Design Division.
That the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division
for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan, that:
• Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious
areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating
reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas.
• Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area
Management Plan.
• Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP.
• Describes the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment
~ Control BMPs.
• Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long-term operation and maintenance of the
Treatment Control BMPs, and
• Describes the mechanism for funding the long-term operation and maintenance of the
Treatment Control BMPs.
That prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant sha{I:
• Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP have been
constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications.
• Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non-structural BMPs described
in the Project WQMP.
• Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are
available on site.
• Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all
structural BMPs.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Bostwick absent)
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
DISCUSSION TIME: 17 minutes (3:48-4:05)
~
A 10-minute break was taken (4:06-4:16 p.m.)
(Following the break, Item No. 6 was heard.)
04-19-04
Page 27
APRIL 19, 2004
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~~
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:46 P.M.
TO MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 AT 11:00 A.M.
FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW.
(The meeting of May 3, 2004 was cancelled)
Respectfully submitted:
~ - ~~
Pat Chandler,
Senior Secretary
~
Received and approved by the Planning Commission on , 2004.
~
04-19-04
Page 28