Minutes-PC 1979/07/30City Hall
Anahelm~ Cal i }ornla
,1uly 30, 1979
REGULAR ME.ETING OF 'TNE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNI~tG COMMISSION
REGULAR - The regu) er n~e t I ng a f the An~hetm C I ty P 1 a~n I ng Commi ss ton was ct) led to
MEETIIIG order by Chalrman Ne~hst at 1;30 p.m.~ July 30~ 1979~ tn the Cuunci)
ChambQr~ e quorur~ being present.
PRESFNT - Chairman: licrbst
Commissloners: Barnes, 8ushore~ Davtd~ F~y ~ Ki~tg~ Toiar
ALSO PRESENT - flanr~ld 7hcxn~son
Jack White
Jay Titus
Paul Stny~r
Joe 1 FI ck
Annika SantalAhti
Robort Fienr I nger
Dean She re r
Edith Harris
Planning Dlrector
Oeputy Gt ty Attorney
Office Englneer
Trefflc Enqtneer
Asslstant Dlrector for Planning
Ass istant Dt rector far ?.on ing
Assistnnt Planner
Pla~ning Alde
Planninq Ccxnmission Secretary
PLEDGE OF - The Pledge of Allegia~ce to thc Flag was led by Commissloner Kfng,
ALLEGIANCE
ELCCTION OF 1~79-80 CHAIaMNN. CNAIRMAN PtIQ TEHPORE, ANn SECRETARY OF THE PLANNING
L`bi~Fi'f3~
..w._•
I t was noted the tenas of of f f cr. for Cha z rm~n~ Cha(rmen Pro Tumpore ~ anc: .,ecretary of the
Mahetm City Plsnning Gommission expi ~-ed ss af June 30. 1979 and. therefore. 1t was 1n
orde~ to ele~t a Temporary Chai rmar~ fc~r the election of ssi d off ic~ri for the flscal y~ar
197~-80.
Ter orar/ Ghairrsen - Cammtssloner Kfng offcred a motton seco~ded by Gommtsstoner Tolar and
~~~, t~int Commissioner Herb~t act as Temporary Chatnn+~n for the electlon.
Chairman - Temporary Chalrman Herbst c:allcd for nominations fo- Chatrman.
_...~
Cammissloner Y.tng nomtneted Commissto~er Bernes as ChAirwornan.
Wmmissioner Tola~r offer~d a motton~ seconded by Commtssior~~r Oavid and MOTION CARRIED,
ttiat the nominatlans be clo~ed.
Ganmisr-loner Kt~g offered a mation~ s~c~,nded by Conrntasioner D~vid snd MOTION CARRIED
UNANINOUSLY, that Cotnmtssionar 6ar~es be ~~d hereby is elaeted Chalnvoman of the An+~heim
Ctty Pienning Commtssiun far tl~e 1979-8b fiscal yeer.
Chairn~an Pro Tam ore • Go~+issloner King nomineted Cvmmissione~ Tolar as Chalrn~an Pro
~ore. ~~ere e ng no furthcr nomt ~et tons ~ Ten~norary Cha i r~nan Herbst deci sred the
nominations closed.
!9•543 7/30/79
MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANHING COMMISSIOr1~ JULY 30~ t979 79'~44
ELECTIQN OF 1979-80 CHAIRMNN~„ CIiAIP.M_AN PRO TEMPORE~ AND SECRETARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
Comnlsslor~er King offared e m~tlon~ second~ed by Comm(ssioner David and MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY, that Commisslone~ Tolsr be and hereby Is electeJ Chairman Pro Tempore of the
Anahelm City Planning Commissien for the t979-80 fiscal yea~,
Secretary - Commissioner King nomtnated Edith Fiarrls as 5ec~etary.
Commlssloner Tolar offerad a rnotion~ secondcd by Commissto~cr Qav(d and MOT~ON CARRIED~
that the norc~Inatlons bn closed _
Commissioner King offered e r-ption~ seco~ded by Commisslo~~r David and MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY~ that Edith Herrls be and hereby Is ~+ppolnted Secretary of the Anahetm City
Plann(ng Commission for the 19 7)-f10 fiscal year.
Thxreup~n ~ Cha I r~..'~man Barnes a ssurn~d th~ cha i r
Commissloner Nerbst explalned Corraniysloner aarnes is the f~ rst woman Cheirman of the
Mahelm City Planning Conrnissian~ and Gha(rrroman aernes thanked the Planning Commtsston
for bet ~g so b roadmi nded,
APPROVAL OF - Cortmissloner Kiny offcred a mocion~ second~d by Commiss7oner Toiar
T11E MINtITES and MOTION CARRIEU, th~t thr minutes of !h~ meet~ngs of July 2 and
July 16, 1979 be ap~+roved a~ s~~bmftted~
ITEM N0. 1
~~~ND RECOMMENDATIONS
The fo) lowiny Reports and Rtcomm~ndations staff rcports to the Plenning Commission dated
July 30. 1979 were presented. but no[ rc~~d:
A. RECOMMENDED COQE AMFttOMENTS - SECTION 1d,06,060 At~iO ~DDING WF'a SECfIONS
.,, , .,, ;.p .Q 0,2 - ark ng stan af s or recquet a 1-~~ci 1 ities
and cht ld dav-care c~ent~rs.
B. YARI ANCE N0. 1190 - R~quas t for cxtens I on of t i me . Denn 3 s W. Aase reques ts a
th~ree-year~ retroACt ive ext~nslon of ttmr ta expi re April 25~ 1982, on '/a~iance
No. 1790 to waiva th~ ~equtrement of a blockwal! enclosure of outdoor st~rage of
w~ecked dutumoGlles on proFerty located at 701 East Cypress Stre~et.
C. RECLASSIFiCATION H0. ]7-78- 7'~q~st for appro.ral of speclfl~ plans. Maso~ic
~u ny ssocT• ~-o ~a~eim requests apprnval of spectfic plans for a nine-
uni t apertment ~ ~ 1 tx 1 ncated at the ~ast t~rrni n us of P~ovent t al Drt ve.
D. RECOMME:NDED CODE A!1ENDMENTS - SECTIQ!iS 18.04,043. 102 18.'22.030.030
.?.3.0 0.03~ AND ADpING NE41 E TiONS 1.22,0 .1n0 NO 1.23. .100 - To allow
tenn~s courts an ps a courts as perm tce encroac ents nto requt red side
end raar ysrds In th~ RS-NS-43,000 and RS-NS-22~COQ Zones.
ACTION: Lommissioner Tolar offered a rnotlon~ seconded by Commi~ ionar Bushore a~~ MOTION
~D, that the Mahelm Z1 ty Planning Canmissio does hareby epprave tha requests for
Reporta and Recomcnr.~dacions i t~ns Nos. A, B, t and D,
7/ 3o/T9
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JULY ;0~ 1979 19-545
ITEM Np. 2 CONTINUEO PUBLIC NEARING, OWNER: JAVID DEVEIOPMENT
~-~VE DtCLARA' ~N CORP.~ 9858 Wilshire Boulev~~d~ Bave~ly Hills~ GA
~I~1CE~~110. 309Q" ~ 90210. AGENT: STEVEN C. TNOMAS. 9858 Wtlshtre
T~ I~AP OF TRAf.T N0. 1OG34 8oulevard~ Beverly HI lls. CA 90; 10. Property
described as an trreyularly-shaped parcel of land
consisting of app;ox(mat~ly 10.3 acres having a
frontage of ~pprox(mately 463 f~et on the east side of Brookhurst Strect~ heving e maxfmum
depth of app~oxtmately 121~2 feet~ being lota~ed eRproximately 480 fcet south of the
centa~llne of Ball Road~ and further described as 12~0 Sou~h Brookhurst Street. Prop~rty
presently classifled RM-1200 (RESInf'NTIAL, MULTIPLE-FANILY) ZONE.
VARIANCE RCQUEST: WAI ER OF(A) HINIMUM BUILDING SITE AREA PER OWELLINr, UN;T~ (E3)
MAXYMUM 9U~LDING fiE1Gf1T~ (C) MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE~ (D) MINIMUM
UNIT FLOOR AR~A~ ~E) MINIMVUM SETBACK ABUTTING SINGLE-FAMILY
RfSIDENTIAI OEVELOPMENTS~ (F) MINIHUM RECREATIONAL/LEISURE AREAS~
(G) MINIMU-' DISTNVCE BETWEEN BUILDtNGS~ (H) BUILOINGS FACING
ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS, (I) MINIMUM NUMOER ANU TYf'E OF PARKING SPACES~
ANU (J) MINIMt;M DISTANCC 1'0 PARKING SRACES.
TENTATIVE TRACT RCQI~ST: 70 CONVEltT AN EXI;TING APARTMENT COMPLEX TO A 208-UNIT
CONDOMIt~IUN SUND.' iSION.
SubJect petition was continue~ from [he mcet(ngs af May 21 and June 18~ 19~9~ at the
request of the petittoner.
There w~re six persons indicating thelr presence In opposltio~ to sub)ect request and
although thc staff report to the Planntng Commission dated July 30~ 1979 H~s n~c read at
the publlc herriny~ it is referred to and made a part of thc m~nutes.
Robert D. MIcF~~lson~ 3~S?.3 Cassel!e Avenu~, Orange~ stated he felt it a privilege ro bc thc
flrst pcrson to address the first Cha{nvoman of chc Anaheim City Pla~ning Commisslon.
Mr. M(ckclson ~nalogized for n~t having thc i~formation available for this hearing end
indicated they are stfil workiny on ~eviseo plans to t,e presented and would like to
request a 30-day continuance. He stated they have benn Nor4tny with thG Comr,.i~tty
Development staff ~ th~: Gal ifornia -iousin~ Finence Agency (CtIFA) ~ the Mahefm Savrngs snd
Loan, and she Planning L'epartment staff trying to re~tse thc pro,jett tn an effort t~ mak~
the units more afforJeble ta ti~c exlsting cenants and [hat perhaps some of the units will
be retalned as rentals~ and that own-your-awn units wlll be mare affordsbtc than flrat
presented. 11e stfiteu t.helr compa~iy will hold anothcr mecting with th~ tenan;s and explain
thei r proposal as soan as they heve the infonn~t i~~• , wh ~ ch should be wt thln e weelc or ten
days.
Chalrwcxnan Darn s explained to those prescnt in op~ositicx~ that nothlny new has been
presented fo~ th~ Com~rission t~~ considcr and thai the applicanr is rr.questfnq a 30-day
cor,tinuence.
Marilyn Parker~ 1250 Brookhurst St~eet~ Apartn~ent 1025~ prescnted A petttlon and indlcated
they feel thcy ere gett~ng the runaround.
Comnlssioner Nerbst felt the petit~on should be presented after the revlsed plans are
~evte++ed and potnted out the oppositlon mtght want to revise th~elr p~esentation after the
plans are ~evised~ and Commtssioner Bushore pointed out at thls point the oppositlon does
a-ot kna+ whai they are apposing.
7/ 30/ 79
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING c~MMISSION~ JUIY 30, 197q 79-5~6
EIR NEGATIVE DECLAttATION. VARIANCE N0. 30~9 AND TEMTATIVE MAP OF TitACT N0. 106~ (conttnued)
- -- ----- --------
Ma. Parker stAted th+ir apartments ar4 in bed shape and nothing Is bcinq done t.o mslnteln
them.
It was explalned that the petitlon could be Icft for thc Commisstoners to ~evt~ti,~ and would
become a port of th•• flle, Tho pGtltlon was styned by a~+proxlmately 124 nersons ard redds
as foliaws:
"i am a resick nt and/or operatc a business in thc area of 1250 Drookhurst, Anaheim~
Cal f fo~nf a 928A4. I have 6een I nformeci ttiet JAVI D C~EVELOPMCNT CORP. , 9a58 WI -shl re
doulevard~ Beverly Hllls~ Ca, 30210 (Owner} ~nd STi:VCN C. THOMAS~ y85R Wllshire
Doulevard~ Beverly Hllis, Ca. 90210 (Agent)~ are att~rrptlnq to convcrt thc ~xisting
apertment compiex known as Eirookhurst Villagc Aparcrn~nr~ lacatcd at 12~0
Drookhurst~ Anahetm~ Ca. 92804~ and morc rarttcularl ~scrtbrd as approx. 10.3
acres on the east side ~f Broo~ ~ar~t St., opprox. ~~30 ft. south of Ball Road~ tnto
condominlums ~nd are requesttnn a waiver of Vortdnce No, j0~9. This r+Aiver should
nc~t be yranted and the requirements under Var(ance No, 3~9q are set standards whith
should be mrt. Thcrc is not enaugh syuarefootage in th~se apertm~nts to meet
scandards of a cond~minlum; ihe carports are not attached tu the apartments end~
therefore~ I do not see how they can be atteched to the apartments as 9arag~s; the
distance bt Meen the buildin~s does not mr.et speciflcations; the maximum building
heiyht is tncorrect. Ii Is also rtry understanding that certaln wafvers werc qranted
(n rr~eting the /lpartment Buildiny Specificati~ns when these apartments were
canstructed~ and now they Are requiring more wai.~rs iri an ~ffort to convert these
apartments t~ condominiums,
( wuuld also like It to be ~oted that if converted to concbmtniums it wtll cause
grcat econor~ic~l problcros."
Lett~rs were also aiven to the Commission for thetr review fror+~ Colciwell Danker Property
Management Company~ +-ookhurst Investors~ and the notice from mana~r.ment of the
apartments~ S;c~ven C. Thomas~ with cooles of the Ten~3nt. PurchasH Pruqrem~ thr (nterlm
Tenancy Prograrn~ end che rr_ntat a9reement (~ubJcct 'ntters nre on file).
HarPicst Hazelton~ 1250 ~rookhurst Street, ~lparcment 1051~ asked how many times thc
petitfoner could requ~st and be granted a continuancr_. She steted 3he has lived in the
apartments for ei~lht years and they havc~ gone frorn 9ood apartments to (ntermedtate
apartments to the lawest ~narrments~ and are now ~etny consf<fered for conversion~ and
indlcated she has baen aske~.f if she would be (nterested in tt,e conversion and she had
replicd she was r-at interesicd,
Jack Whlte, Deputy City Attorney, explained the (:i[y does not have a limit for Lhe number
of times e matter could be contirur~ and explafned that would be up to the Planntng
Cornmisslon's dtscretion~ and expla~^ed the Commisslon wo~~ld have to act on the plans
submitted or grant the conti~,~runc~ reyuested sirce they do not have the prerogat(ve e'
t~rminatln9 an a~tion. He explaine: the only refarence to any time lim~t would be
concerniny tentative tract maps and the law requlres app~oval or deni~i be given within 50
days of the oate the applicatton is filed and~ in those insta~ccs~ the developer fs asked
to sig~ a stat~n+ent sttp.,lattng ta additional continuences as deemed necessary by the
Planning (.c.~rniss(on.
Con~misslo~er Tolar stated he felt the op~osicton needs La understrnd ihe CommTssion does
not have, nor wil) it ever have~ the righc to stop or curtail the righ[ of the p~operty
owner tr- ask for whatever he wsnts. He expleined to M~, li~ck~lson that he would support
one mo~e continuance, but~ h(storicaliy~ tf enough conttnuances are granted, the flre
lasca som~ of tts warn~th and people tn ~pposition dr~ not have tin+e to keep attending these
1/ 30/ 79
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY PIANNING CQMMISS{ON~ JUI~ 30~ 1979 79-54~
E I R NEGATI VE DECLAItAT ION. VA-' 1! ~ ~E N0. 3099 AND TENTAT I VE MAP OF 7RACT N0. 1_Q694 (cont I nued)
meetings. Fle wanted tha develaper to knaw ha would suppart thts continuence~ but that he
would not support any future continuances. Ne indicated he expects the plcns to be
revised ind iscusaed with the ~eYidents prlor co the meetl~g. Ne stated further that he
would not s~pport this type p~oposal wlth this meny vartances and wanted to sec a~~ettcr
plan presented.
Commissloner Bushore asked Mr, Mickelson if ~ 3~-day contlnuance would bc sdequete aince
no future contl~uances wautd be granted~ and Mr. Mtckelson replled he felt 30 days would
be adequate. He stated he felt thc con u.rns expressed by the tenants are le~ltimata snd
IndlcaYed they ara seek(ng new direction and promised they aould meet wt~h tf~e rostdents
to expleln the possihilltles~ one being a possible (ntcrest rete of Sx CtIFA financing
whtch v+ould make tremendous d(ffer~nce In the cost of h~using.
ACTI~N; Commtssloner tiusliore offercd a m~tton~ seconded by Commissioner Ktng and MOTfON
CARRIEQ~ th~~t r,~nsideratl~n of Varianc.~ No. 3~~9 and Tcntattve Mep of TrACt No. 10694 be
cont;'ued to the regularly-sct,eduled meecing af ;hc Planning Commisslon of Auqus[ 27,
1979. at the request ~~ the petitioner.
Cheirwoman Karnes explair~ed tl~ere will be no further n~tlces concern:ng thls meetl~g and
that It will bc held on Auyust ~7. 1919~ and (t is the Planning Commisslon's practice to
hear those Items whict~ have becn contlnucd at chc bey{nning of the rn~eting.
ITEM N0. 3 COI~TINUED PUBLIC HEARING. Df.VELOPER: BtI~NETS
~~VE DECLARR?ION UEVELOPMEI~T GO.. 1fi492 Nlllcrest Avenuc~ Villa
E~~ E y~ F ~ Park~ CR '-2GG7. ENGINEE~: NORRIS ENG~NEERING~
N0. 959~+ (REVISION N0. 2) 17291 Irvine Boulevard. Suite 312~ Tustln~ CA.
R L 92680. Subject oropercy. descrlbed as an
R~MOVAL OF SPECIMEN TREES irregulariy-shap~~ ^arcel of land cc,nsiscing of
appr~ximately 7.7 ac:•-S having a fro~tage of
approximately 590 ~eet on the ~cast side af Nenning
4lay~ haviny a maxir~um depth of approxlmately 1170 feet. and b~~ing located approximately
350 feet sauth of th~ c~nterline of A~boretum Road~ ig proposct as a 13-LOT, RS-HS-
22~000(SC) (RESIOEIJTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY HILLSIDE-SCENIC COaRIQO{ OVEkLAY) ZANE SUS0IVISI4N.
SubJect tract was continu~•d fran the me~~t~~-gs of March 26~ Apri1 23~ May 21~ June 18~ and
Ju{y 16~ at the request af the petitioner,
There wec'e faur pcrsons indlcatln~ thei~ presence in opposition to sjq79~~esenotgreadRat
al;.hough the scaff report to the Pianning Lommisslo~ dated July 30~
the public hearing~ It is referred to and madc a part of the minutes.
Jack Norris~ engineer~ tndicated they are proposing 13 iots on approximately 8 ac~es 3nd
will be taking access off Trnil L'rive rather thsn Nenning Way, and explain~d Nenning Way
would be used for emergency vthicles access only. He indicated the removal of 44
eucalypius trees wouid be necessary in or;~er to provide the access road end that trees
would be replaced on a ona-to-one basls.
dennts Gle~de~ 365 Henning Way~ M aheim, indicated he was not f3miliar wlth this na+
accessway. and Commissloner Nerbst revlewed the plan with Mr. Giende. He stated he had
been co~cerned about re•aining the t~tegr(ty of the surroundings and ~olnted out they had
had a p~ob lem ai th th: ;rade and wi th the exist(ng trees, but after revtewing the plan, he
felt it is e~tirely w~ nin r~:ason as far as he Is concernEd.
7/30/79
79-54$
MINUYES, ANANE~M CITY PLANNING COMMISS~ION~ JULY 3'~~ ~979
~~s .~C~~T~ur nccieaAT~oN AND TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT N0, 959~ ~REVISION N0. 2) (cortlnued)
(Othervnelghbors In the eudlence reviewed the p1An wlth the develo~e~.)
Vlrginla Wlnters~ 361 Henniny Way~ Anahelm~ stated after revlewi~g thc ple~~ shc is vory
much ir~ favor of what has been c'ane. She statod her prlma ry oppositlon hAd bee~ the grade
of the roed and fclt it wauld b~hatf~his,prnposalrwoulcihtak.escere9ofuthateproblcn~,da duld
~~denger thelr properties~ but
that they do not havc any oppos 1 t. i an ta the p 1 r+n .
Albert Cameron, 410 Paseo Estrella~ Anahelm~ indic~~ d he Is conce rnrcl about the trees
whlch havc been destroyed in the a~ca and pointed ~t there is a reyuest for removal 01`
trees {n this sjtbet~en,eGP~q~~n~~O~q~eatedhtf~,~ stron~,tconsldcrAt~io~s~bed~lvent[octhect~ee
though thcy w 1 I ~
removal.
Mr. Norrls stated he be-ieved ave ryone is i• agrcement with the configuretlon of the plen
a~d the only oppc~sition is ta thc remova~ ~f t-~e trecs~ which ts unfortunate~ but that
there is no othcr way to dcvclop tf~~ pro~~erty. He stated if the :~r.ces5r+ay ts shifted one
way ar the other~ o[her trees w~uld have to bc renx~vr.d. Ile tndic.atr>d thc trees will be
replanted and ic. wi11 just be a inatcrr of cime before they will be ~rown and will b~c~me
the same size as thc Gxisttn~; tr~es.
Dav!d Ward, 311 Nenninc~~~ay~ Anaheim. st~ted h~inttn5 out blyeconstructionh~ehlcles~wsuch
concerneJ about traffic du~in~~ construction~ ~. 9
as ceme~t trucka~ t~ave trouble makfnn the hill.
M~. Norris Indicate~! he cauld see n~ reason why the ca~siructic~r~ traffic would not use the
maln access raac! which is yet unnamed~ and d(4 not see any reason for them to use Henning
Way .
7NL PUk3LIC HL/,RING WAS CLO~E~.
ACT10lJ: Commissioner King offered a~notto~~ seco~dcd by Cortu~isfindechatvtheaEiRMFieg~Nive.
~~ED~ that the Anaheima~nvcdPf~rrnTcntatMVeSMeano~r~ctr~~oY 95°~+ sttll applles to the
Declaration prsviously apG
propasal as amended.
Robcrt Nenninyer. Assist.~nt Plann~r~ ~~ ~ked LhA~T~i~i} e~~o enantsf c'onditiorsscpand~ntal
Commi t tee rccosmnenda t i ons ~~c~ amended co rea~ ~
restrictton,..." rat~er than, "That a~y proaosed covenants, cc?nciitions~ and
restrictions..."
Cartmissioner Kiny offered a motion~ seconcied by Comrnissioner Uavid and MOTION CARRIED~
that the Anaheim City Planning Comnission does (IP~Cby Find that the proposed subdivision~
togethcr with its dcs~gn and improver+~ nt~ is cn.~sis[cnt wlth the Ci~YroveATentatlvenMap,of
Plan~ pursuani to Governmenc Codc Sect(on G(~473.~ and does hereby app
Tract I~o. 9y,°.4~ Revision I~o. 2~ for a 1:.-1ot. RS~NS'2-~0~0(SC) (Residenttal, Single~Family
Nillside°Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone subdivision~ sub}ect to the following conditions:
~, Thac the avprovai of TentAtiva Map of Tract No. ~594 (Revision No. 2) is granted
subJect to che ftnallzatlr,~~ of Reclastificatton No. 72`13'S1•
2. That st~ould this subdivisio~ be d~veloped as morE than one subdivlsion, each
subdtvislon thereof shall be submitt~~ in tentative form for appraval..
~. 7hat subJect prap~rty shall be srr~~Ad by underground utilitles~ ~oved b
4. That a final tract m~a of subJe~ '~perty sh~ll Le submitte.d ~~Recorder. Y
th~ City Counctl ~d then be recorded i oflice af the Oranqt Gounty
~i3~i~s
MINUTCS~ AN~HEIM CITY PLANNING COMMiSSION, JULY 3h~ 1~79 7q~5~9
~I,~,t~E~AT 1 VF. U,~CLARf-TI ON AND I Et~TAII VE MAP OF TRAGT N0. 9594_ REV 1 S 1 nN N0. 2~ (con f' nued)
5. Thot the covenants~ condtt~ons~ and restricttons shall be submit,ed ta and
Approv~d by the City Attorney's Office And the City Cngineer prior to City Counctl
approvai of the flnal tract map and, furtl~er~ t~~at the a~proved covenants, conditions~ and
restrlctlons sl~all be recordP~l prlor to tf~c final tract map A{~proval.
6. That street n~mes shall be approved by the City Plnn~ing Oepartment prior to
approval of a flnal tract map.
J. That dreln~~gc of saicJ propcrty shall b~: ~!tsp~seJ of in a innnner satlsFectory to
tne City F:nyineer. If~ in thc rreparAti~n of the slte~ sufficlent 9rr~din~ is requlr~cl to
necessitatc a yradiny permit~ no work on yrAJinc~ wlll ~e ~>crmitted betwcen Ottober l~th
and Aprtl 1~th unless all rnquired nff-slte drainae~c facilities have t~een tnstAlled and
are aperatlve. Posltlve assuran~e shall be provided thc City thot such ctrainaye
fact 11 t(es wi 11 be c.arnrleted prtor tu Uctaber l~,th, Nece:,sary rl~ht-of-way for off-st ~e
dtatna~e faci I 1 ti~s ,h~~l I t,e dedic.~tecl [c~ the Ci [y~ ur the Ci ty Councl 1 shal I have
Init(eteei condemna[(on praceeJin~~s tl~ercf~r (the costs of whtc.h shol) be born~ by the
dcvrloper) pr(or [n thc c~~m~x.nc;emc~nt of ~ir~id(ng apcratfons. Thc requtrc.d ~!rrtn~~~~e
facilities shall be of a size an~ type sufficient [o carry run~ff wAters originatlny from
hiyher propcrtics through said ~+ronerty to ul[imate disposal as ~p;rovcd by thr. City
Enyinee:r. Sald cJrai~ayc f~cllitiec; sh:~ll he thr_ first tter~ ~f const~'~ictton and shall be
conploted an;l ~c fun~tior~.~) thrr~uqhaut [hc trac:k nnd from [hc dc~-nstrcam baundary of the
prope-'ty to thc ultlmatc pc~int ~f dispas~~) nrior tc~ thc (ssuence of any fin~l t~uilding
inspectiuns or occu~ani.y permits. Ura;,ia~~ district reir~hur~ernent ayreenx~nts may be made
avellable [o thc developers of said pro~~erty u~on thrlr rr~juest.
$. Tha~ gradin~~~ excavatic~n, ~nd all othc~r cc~nstruc.ifon actfvitics shall be
con~lucted (n such ~+ manner so as to mininiz~ the possibllity of any silt originatin~ from
this pr~~iect beiny cz+rried (nti~ th~~ Santa Ari~i Rive~ by SLorrn NAter c~riqtnat(n~ fra~~ o~
flowlnc~ thru~,nh this projecL.
9. That ail nrivatc strcrts sh,~ll ~a devcloped in accordance hlth thc~ Ci~y of
Anaheim's StanJard~ `~~r priv~tr. streets f~r [hc Mohlrr Urive arca.
10. If perr~~nr.;it strr~t narr sl~~f't5 hriv~~ nut i~crn instailr.d, te~nrary StrPet nemc
slyns sh~~ll he installc~f ~~ri~~ tc, any occupancy.
il. Tl~:~t the c~+ner~S) of subject pr~~~~erty sha11 pay approprirte dr~lnaye assessment
f~es to the City of Anahelm as de[crmincd by ihe C(ty Engincer ~;riQr to issuance of a
buildin~~ pcrmlt.
1Z. That all requlrements of Fire ~.one ~~~ otherwis~ i•ntifle~S as Fire Administ~ative
Order No. 16-01 ~ wi 11 be ~T~et. Such rCqu( remr.nts inclu~e, t~ut ~rc not 1 iR•; r~d to~ chimney
spark arrestors~ p mtectr.d attic and un~er ficx;r c~peninys~ Class C or uetter roafing
material and c~ne-I,our fire reslsti~e constructian of horlxontai surfac~s if w(th~r~ 200
feet of adjac~~nc b~ushl.~n~f.
13. That firc hydrants shall h~ (i7stal l~~d an~ eharq~d as required anu uctcrmine :• [o
be necessary l.~y the Chicf uf thc ~ i re Uepartment pric>r to cc,rm-encer~ent af structural
framin~.
14. That ,~ative slopes ~dJacen[ te,~ ncwl -constructed hor*~es shal! he hydroseeded with
a law fuel cambustiblN seed mix. Such slope5 shall bc sprinklered and weeded as req~ircd
to establisti 10(1 feet separ~tion of flamnablc v~c~ttati~;~, from an1 structure.
1~. That Che awner(s) of subjeci property sha) l~t~ ~iic<itr .ind (mprc~ve rn eyuc~trian
and hiking trail as shawn on the Equcstrian and Nikin~ Trails Component and that
(inprvvement plar.s~ in acc~rdance with StandarJ planS inu specif(cations on flle in the
offit~ of tl~e Ci[y Enytnecr~ sh31) be submitt~-i in cor.Junction wi[h ths gradinq plan;
end/or that a hond In an amount and form satisfacto ry to the Ctty af Anaheirr shall be
p4sted wlth the C(ty ta guarentee the installAt{un of the ,~bove-mrntioned requlremen~s
prto~ io occupancy.
16. That all public utDlities snall be instalied in a p~blic or private roa~iway
edequate Co provid~ v-hiculor ~ccess fc~r rnatntenan.;e as approved by che Gity `.ngineer,
1/3~/79
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANt~ING COMMISSION~ JULY 30~ 1A79 i9-552
EIR N0. 203 (ADDENDUN N0. 2)~ RECLASSIFICATION N0. 79-30-5~ VARIAI~CE N0. 3105~ AND TENTATIVE
NAP OF TRACT ~~05. 8116 (REVISION N0. 4~ AND 8117 (REVISION N0. 4) (contlnued)
r r~~ ~.+ ~..~
tho orlginal MastPr Plan of Developmcnt for Anaheim Ntlls c~lled fo- 21,0~0 unfts and that
number has becn reduceci to 12~000 and are built-out ~n-newhere aroun~i 50'.~ ~f what has beGn
suy,qcsted today.
Regardiny utilitles~ he refprred co a onc blllion yallon watcr reservai-, a 15~Inc1~ sewer
trunk~ :eleptic+n: Juct work, ges matns~ KV's and substattons ~or electrical sPrvlcc~ etc..
an~ stat~d Anaheim H; Ils r~as predtcated c~n somewhere between 17~OUf) and 21~~0O untts and
are at 12~~00 uni~s rlght now, or less, for ultim~~te bulld•out. Regardlnq the EIR~ he
~xplai~ed they ~nust emc~nd the report for every pruJ~ct a~~f Lhe~ the arnrndment is an
upg~ade and shc.~ws what the cwnu) at i ve consequences are.
TNC PUEiLIC IIEARING WAS CLOSED.
Pau) Stnger~ T~affic Enginr..er, ex;,lnined hr. I~as recr.ived a c~py ~f che report prepared by
Weston Prinylc b Associ~tes ~~nd e5sentially t!~ey recorvnend thc same. thing thc City
rccon ~~nded et [r~e~ last meeting~ ~nd that is sicle-by•si~ic~ left-tur,. pockets. Ne stated
the reloeation uf Shannon Street is almost an in~p~asiblc task si~ce tf~e Four Corners Pipe
Line r~ns r1~3hx dc~wn Shonnon 5tre~t an~l ~,t,~trd base.i on the tr<~ific volumes ihc~t would be
gencratc~f~ this is a viable altcrnativc, In rr_spvnsc to CoRmissioncr Oushorc's qucstion~
Mr. Singer st~ee~i I,e always recornrrknds ayafnst hackin~ Into a aubl(c streer troe~ a{~arking
lot as oppc?sed to a ciri ~cway ~ and statc:; t,c bel iev~d the n~,t ~ nns would be thc s~me. He
seated It would be up ;o the Planniny Commissicm to cietermtr if therc is )ustfflcation
for the addlcional cnrs to bact: out ~nto g~ubllc street~ b•t thAt it is no different th~n
a prl vatc dri vew.,y.
Robcrt Hen~(n~~cr~ A35i5t~nt Plann~r~ ex4:laine~i~ in responsr_ to Corrnissioner Bushore's
question~ th~~t the ~onin~~ was the sdn~e on the trac[ approvrd six weel.s an~~ but that that
request h~~d been for a conditivnal use ,~ermit to allaw a cc~nd,~minium project in thr RS•HS-
1~~000 tone. NG stated staff has s~me probl^ms in processinc~ c~ndcxn(niums In that m~~ner
because in the futurc the :unlnq maps woul~ sl~vw ;hc zonlny still at RS-NS-1')~DO~ wtth a
conditional use perrnit number and thc~e becones a~:onflict of what regulati~ns aFply~ and
staff felt i[ would be best to re;.one these to [hc RM-3~OG ?~nc; hawcver~ becAuse the
Genera) P1, has dr_ns(ty ran~es listri on tl~e front. the proJcct must sttll conform to the
dens i ty ~gc a~ sf~own on ihe Gencra 1 P 1 an Pven tf~ough t~~e zon t ng I s f,,r ftN-300Q ~ and that
these ans do u~nform to thosc denslty rangcs.
Lortxnlssioner Bushore c~SkCd Mr. 5alc~d~i to clarify his cc,mment reyareiinn futi~re :imilar
req~ests, ar~d Hr, Salceda replieri th~: ar. ~>F to~fay~ acc~-dlny to inform~tion h~e haR~ thesr_
;wo tracts ~.re the only convers~ ~ns he is aware of .~nd in ;icated th ir ene~inee~s I~ave told
tliem tnat the,e two trar_[s arA the e~n~ier[it.le [rt~cts t~~ the RM-"y~~~ ~one.
Cvmmfssic,ner Tolar remind~d [t~e Cor+misslon of the prevlo ly-approved revise.d tracts and
of the faet tha~t to h1r. Salceda's knQwlede;e that was tF• mly tract at that time tha[ wns
golny to have afford~~ble c~n~~~minium Conver5~on5 in t' particular tract~ and ncK~ th(~ is
anather situation wher~ in t~~is part(cu~ar devclupmcnt there is another affUrdable
condoninium conversicx~. ~ie s;ot~e~f he is som~w~ha disR~ycd th~~ the (ntwyrity of the
Cornmisslon Is agsin being ch7;le~~g~d cy the fact that herc~ a~ain, we have just one tract
tliat cs~ bc developed intu condc~mini,~;s. Ne stated undr_r thn guise ~~f ,~ffor'dable f~ousing,
the~e is an addi tio~al '+5 or 1~6 u~i ts proposcd and fel t Mrs. Nal l h~c: brought ut~ very
valfd polncs and that (t is Lime the CGrm,ission tcx~k a stand a:id IookcJ at the sltuation.
He :eferred to Mr, Salceda's torn~ne~~ts re~arding upgrading ot the E~~v~ronmental Irr+pact
R~sport and read Che foll~r-ing staicment -"That the ?n~rcaxe in the student populat1an of
the araa would contrib~te t~ an existtn9 prc~blan ~f tnadequate c~pacity in thr Junior and
sen(or ht<~r~ schoo~s. The Orange UnifiCd S~thool Distrtct has not yet deter+nined whir.h af
nc~ several pass'.blc altcrrative a»itigation ~easur~s will be adopted." Ne stated the
7/3~/79
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMI~SIpN~ ~ULY 30~ 1973 79'S5~
EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION /~ND TENTATIVf. MAP QF TaALT N0. 34 REVISION N0. 2(continued)
~7. That the awner(s) ~~f subJect property shall pay t~ the City of Anohei~„ the
approprlAte park and recrcati~~n In-lieu fePS as dcterm(ned to be approprlate by the City
Council. said fees co be pald at the tlme the bulldinq permlt ts issued.
19. ThAt the owner(s) of subJect property shall pay thc traffic siynal assessment fee
(Ordtnance No, 369G)~ in an am~unt as determin~d by the Clty Council~ for each new
dwelll~g unlt prlor to tl,c lssuance of a bul1~ing permit.
19. In the P_VPnC that subJect property is to he dlvided fo~ the purpose ~af sale~
lease~ or financing~ a parccl r~np~ to record the apprnved divislon af subJect p~operty.
sl~all be submlttcd to anC approved by the Clty of Anaheim and then bc recorded ln the
office of the Oranye Couniy Rec~r~ier.
20. That the owner(s) of subject property shall submit appropriatc ~
agreranents for ac:ces~ enJ utilitles purposes betwec;n SubJec.t property a~c; n~~ Orive.
Sald agreements sl~al) be submitced to and approvcd bv borh the City Attarn~, ~ffice and
thP City Cng(neer nnd then shal) br recorded in the affice af tl~e Orenge County Recorder.
~ortmissioner Y.Ing offered a motlc, . seconded by CoMmiss ion..r Tolar and MOTION CARRIE.~~~
tt~at thc Ananel~n City Planrilny Cornmi:slon does here!~y flnd that a reasonahle ~nd practica)
devel~prt,~nt af the pr~perty on whlch the trrGS are located requires removal or the trnes
and dors here~~~~ gr~nt t'~~ requc~st for remov:~l of the spccimen tr~es ~ an~f that th~ tr-~es
shall be ~eplanted with the pl~nting on thc sar~e ~arcel of an equ~l n~imber of trees frorn
the speciflc~l 1(st.
CO~iTI~+UED F'UBLIt Nf:ARI~iG. OWr1ER; TExACO-At:Ai~CIM
~TEn N0. h
ENVI~E~jTq~ ~MPACT REPUR7 HILLS~ IPIC., 3~') AnPhelm Hills Rond, Anahelm~ CA
2~G5
INC
LEaUD
HI'
tlD F
NC. 2~` ADD~~~DUM N0. 2)
'
' .,
~
.
.
~)2807. EN~IN~E:R: l i
Iluntington Uriv~~ 5:~^ Marin< , Cn ~110~. Property
CI_ I G ION N. 9'~ -~
t~E described ~5 Portion A- an irrcgularly-shz~ped
VAk ~~~C N0. 31Ci~ parcel ~f land c~nslstin9 of approxir-,~[ely 11..7 acres
Et! M ~ TRA~T
ti116 (REV151011 N0. ~+)
N0 havin~~ t+ Frontage c~f a~proximatelY 2~3~ feet o~ the
xl mum depth
.
ENTI~T VE M/~P Or ~L4 T soutl~ s i de of -~oh 1 Ranch Road~ havt ng a ma
proximatr.ly ~EiO fect~ and being locF~te~i anProxl-
of a
N0. a11~1 (REVISI~N N0. 4)
U S R E M NA 10 F PRCVIOUSLY ~
mately 143 fpc; NeSt of ch' cr.nterline of Old Bucket
d
rcel
h
APPROVED NAPS A'ID REVi510'~S ~~)P. pa
ape
Ro.~d; and Portion B- an irregularly-s
of approximately 21.5 acres having
slsxin
d
f l
'TENTATIVE T M C~ ~~OS. i;116 ANU H11]
--~----'-- y
con
an
o
a frantr~e of apUroxima[elY 101h feet an the sc.uth
side af Nohl Ranch Road, having a maxirnum depth of
approxim~telY ~2° ~eet, and ~e(ng loca ted approxima[ely 3128 fcet west uf the centerline
~ (SC) (ZESIOE-iTIAL~ SI~IGLE-
5-~0
-
of Royal Oak Road, Property presently
a ~
H
classifled RS
A) ANU RS-A-43.~~~(SC) (RESIDENTIAL/
I
O
FAMILY FiILlS~!~~"+iE~~~~~R~IDOR~OVEP,VAY)
AGRICULTURAL~SCE C C g~.
(PORTION
ZONE
RECLASSIFICATIJN RE~i~~i.ST~
~ ~pE~~T1AL, MULTIPLE-FAMtIY-SCENIC CORRIUOa OYERLAY)
P
(PORTI
ZONE B)
O~
VARI NfLE RE(~'JEST : WA I Vt P. 0 F MAX 1 MUM STRUCTURAL NE 1 GHT (P~RT 1~N B) .
TENTATIVE TftAG7 RE~UESTS: NO. ~j~~ (REV. N0. 4) ~ 99'UNIT,aRMt,3000(SC)(COND M~Nl~rS~ON.
SUt101NIS10N.
Thare w~9s one person in~licating her presence in oppus(ttan ta subJecc request, and
a![hougt~ the st++if repc~r: to the Planntng Camnission dated July 30, ~~179 was nat read at
the publt;. hearfnr,~ i[ is refcrred [o and made a part of Lhe r+in ui~s.
7/30/79
MINUTES~ ANAtIEIM LITY PLANNING CQMMISSION. JULY 3~- 1979 7g'S5~
EIR N0. 2Q3 (ADDENpUM N0. 2)~ RECLI1551FICATION H0. 79-80-5~ VARIANCC N0. 3105~ ANL TENTATIVE
MAP 0_ F TRAGT ta05 . 81 16 (REV I S I ON N0~ 4) AND 81 17 (REV I S I ON N0. t-) (con t 1 nued)
Dan Salceda, repr~sonting Anahelm f~tlls. Inc.~ stated since tt~e meeting two weeks ago~
they and the Clty Fn~atneerin~a staff ha~1 rcvlewed tf~e offset Intersectlon at Shannon and
Nohi Ranch Road and h~~ve made s~me modific~tlons And have been t~ld in terms of 5•~ety
that the revtscd ~lan was adequ~te. lie statecf tl~cy had htrcd a traffic consultant, Weston
Pr(ngle L Ass~clatPS~ who came ~p with the alternatlve cleslgn which has been r~vlewed and
accepted by st,iff, Ne ex~lained the modification inc.ludes two left-hend turn pacl.cts o~
Sha~m~~~ and ~~oh) Ranch RoaJ f~~r appr~~xim~tc'.y 1~~ feet and it is the ~rtnlon of the
traffic cc~nsult.~nt th,~[ wtth the hlr~h~,r denslty~ the deslyn of th!s intersection is ~
safcr d~,t~,~n for t~~is project.
M;. Salceda pointed .~uc thc ~d~litf~nal 1~+ par~(ny spaces ~n the rna~ ~~n~ explalned the
plans provide 4 p.~rking s~~nces ~er unit with thls increase, which well exceeds
r~qul rernen ts .
A topo~raphi c rx.~de 1~~f the hw trac[s was p~csented an~l revi ~~wed hy thc~ Corrmi ss ion.
Jan Ifall~ ~~i; Tur~~lewced, Analicin, apologizea tliat the prr,vi~us rep~rt to the C~mriission
was not r~.vicweJ and statc~J th,it was no[ what :hey had intendcd. She statcc: tF~is (s the
seeond r~qucst tt~e Lorryniss(~~r~ I~as sr_en for an alrea~iy-aprroved tract to b~~ u~nvcrted to an
increasecf densfty~ conck~~~iniw~~ pr~~jrct surrouncled by sin~~le-family~ but that meinbers ~f
the Hi I1 and Cenyon Municipal Advisory Co^rnitt~~r (HACMl1C) liave heard of others and fesl
tlits is [he trend and rnore will be sr.en. She state~ they h~~vc !~ad ~eveloper5 tal4. with
them or rncnbcrs cf tl~e Lornmittce to detr.rRinc what Mroutd br, accc~t~ble. She stated they
cannot deny Lhcrc Is a nr_cu for lowe r tos[ housing and cluster-type housir,g~ hut tha[ the
problems they bring havc not been re5olved; tl~at n~any spr_nt a Inn~ timr, workir g on thc
General Plan fc~r the c~.,iyon; and that a recent study ~ruidr. hy Jltrnsyste~s ind~wtes that
of the lo-~~-med(un denslty rrsicient=al unlts 855ur~d t~ be. built whcn tt~e Gencr,i) Plan was
adoptecl, 1?1.; ~f Che medium ~~cnsiry ~k~elliny unlts wil! ~ctuilly be bullt ti~ there is
already an exc:ess of 71;, n,~re than .~ssumed. She f~~lt in addition Lo 1e{t-turn pockets in
Nohl P,anch Roa~i~ a lot ~~ rearrang~n~ will havP to be done and that the problem ofi the
sehocls wil) have to be solved; !'~ax thls is the secund request wherc they ind(cated only
2.~ r~ore stu~Jents would be attcnd~nc~ tnc schools. snd pointc~ out 23 stud~nt~ wou1J
constitute a classrrxx., and thr.Pe ~s not evcn one availabl~~ seat; that these r~ill nnt be
low or mcclf um-cost housin~i, Tnd they wi 11 br(nq in rx~re far~i I ies ~v( th chi l~iren, She felt
Anahelm Hi l ls~ Inc. sf~ould tcll che Commis~ion how r~any rTorc of thesr requ~sts are planned
and what the ultimate dr,nsity for the area wlll bc. Shc sta[ed tt~ere are alrzady problems
in the area wi th the electricitl+ and people are experiencin~ ";~~c~wn~~uts" and a loss of
elecLrlclty~ and that prohlem should 'c~e solveci. She stated the denslty sl~ould not t>e
increaseJ unti 1 thc pr~bleMS wi th thc scl~ools ~ traffic~ road desiqn~ j,c~wer~ water~ ai r
qual(ty~ etc.~ are solvrd, She feit it would be a maJor undcr[ak.ing to combine all the
Envlronnenta) lmract Reports anJ find o~.~t hc~w the overall denslty wi11 affect t~•~e canyon.
Mr. Salccda stated t!ie project Is tot.al'.y i~ ccmformance with che GenerAl Plan, Ne
explaln~d six weeks agr, he ha~7 prrsent~d a minor rcvlsion a~~id f, reques.(ng [hls revi,Ion
nuw~ but that he has nc~ knowledqe~ oF any plans f~r any other co~verslons ~nd stlpulated
the open spacN se~n ~n the two tracts w( I I rernain and ti~,e sinnie-fami ly abuttln; T~act No.
8~t7 wlll remai~ slnyl~;-fami ly. He statcd c,~i, mo~iel was nrovf~ie~t in orc~er to shaw the
f.~mmissio~ that there are only certain types of tract: whlch have tl~e convertlbillty~ and
polnted out the fivc~ unixs whlch were not co~verted because of et,e topography. He stated
ii is true that with the state of eh~ art~ a~~ythtnn can be cr~nvereed~ but the cost has to
b~ b~lenu~d and thc requ~est today for converslr•, is from sinyle-family deta~.hed units to
stngle-family attached units. Ne p~inte~ out less than 50 c~~bic yar~s of narth p~r lot
wf 11 b..: raovcd in this converslon ~t!d explaintd that wes a motlvatin~ factor al~ng wlth the
f+~t[ thAt they fec) they have a responslbi tity t~_~ the citizens to provtde ~ housing mix.
Ne refQrrrd to Nrs. Ilall's cor~ment tf~at the area is in excess by 713, o¢ hous~~g and stated
7l30l74
NINUiES~ ANAtiEIM CITY PI.ANNING CONMISSI~I~~ JULY 34, 1g79 ~g-~S3
E:R N0. 203 (ADOE:NOUM N0. 1)~ RFCLASSI~IGA1'ION N0. J9-6Q•>~ VARIANCF N0. 3105~ At~D TfNTATIVE
MAP 0~ TRAG'~ NOS. 8116 (REVIS~^''_N0. 4) I1ND 8117 REVISION N0. 4(c~ntinued)
reNo~t also ~efers to traffic ~nd noliic~•d out it Indlcates the cost to the Ctty will be
appruxln~ately S20~0~0 per annum for the~e acidtttona) unlts. He slated he could ap~reclate
An~hQlm fl( I ls~ Inc. wanting tr~ get th~c rnost mi lca~~r: out of thel r propcrty as any owner (s
entltlaJ to do~ but felt real ties rr_Inting tc, schoc~ls~ tr~iffic~ elec~rical problems~
etc.. should be f~ced and these ineyulties corr~~ctr.d beforr more untts are appravcd. He
fclt thls request prov~s what he said six weeE.s rl(~Q~ and that is when tf~c lots are groded
and flnlshed for RS-tiS•1~,~)()~~ ~c rnakos it simpler to ~Ick out or.e mnre tract In every one
of these four or five tracts aihlch are lumped to~;ether co convert to con,;ominiums. He
stAted he ~•~oul~.1 not s~~n~ort t' 's rr_vuest end had not supported the one six weeks ago~ and
felt a nettcrr, is betng set an,f felt i; must I~e ciealt wlkF~ and ptlier Inequities st~ou;d be
dealt with f~ry~, He stntcd Anoh~im Nills, Inc, rnay h~~vc only A f~w rmre proJects, but
that fhcy ~re nat the only dcvelopers thrau~;f:,~ut thr ~,,~nyon and thcrc. wll) be a lot morc;
developmr.nts all thc way out tc~ Che cc~unty linc~ an~i fclt hc would have to sGC how fuiure
deve~opmr.nt can b~~ su~ported In the canyon when ex(stlnc~ f.icllit~es cannot support
existing dcvclopmcnt.
Cortti,i5s(o-,~r Dav(c.' ~.tated [hose wcrc thc ~>c~lnts hc had :ricd to n4~ke during the Bauer
P~nc.l, hearinqs, an~1 Corrrnissioncr Tolar stated hP had support~d thc Baucr Ranch request
with th~ conceptual iJe.~ of a rec7ional shoppinq crnter c~r some a[her method so that tl~e
projeci c~u1J seand on i-.s c~wn without being a deficit to the City of Anaheim,
Comin(ssluner Davfc! statcd the City Cour~,il .~pproval of the E3ruer P.anch dev~looment w45 not
toupled t~~ the sho~t.in~ crnter, f:c a~~ed Mr, Salcc~J~t how thc additt~nal students w~ul~ be
accomrix~dateci in the school s(tu.7ti~~ .ith 2f,' n~re chliclren an~1 no roor~,
Mr, Salcedi stated he is nnt 8 CeJGh r nur the Superintcr,dent of Schools m~d would not be
the bcst ~~ers~n to answer, but his c~,~~jeccure wouleS be that wfien a schoo) syst~er~ is over
cap ~ty ~y 2')~ 2; or 3~ studr.nts. it dor:s not v~~lid~te or justlfy tF~e building of onc
~dd~ ~~•..nal scha~l; cha[ sch~ls are oul lt on an as-~~~ec1~d hasis; thaC Anahe(a, H(Ils, Inc.
~ias dedica[e~J prc~pfrrty to th~ Cfty of Qran~~rr f~r an adJition~il eiementary school at
Serrana ar~d Canyon R i ~~ Road; anc; that Anaiie i r~~ H i 1 1 s~ I nc. ~howed c~ooc! fa i th by Ge t ng the
first develaper (n che State of C,~;ifornia to frPCly dedicate schoo) ~itr_s because they
recayntze the~ nee:d af ~evelopers ta-.iny cercaln res~nslbfllty in t!~e e~iucational process.
Mr, Salceda stated !ie di~1 not knvw tt~at the record n~r th,e tape recordings would indicate
this, and hc ~id not know that he had ever said that the last Tentative Trart Map Nos.
1040~i and 1~;13 Nere th~ oniy or las[ converslons~ and~ in fact, he l.r~ew he did not say
thot bewuse he c1i~f ~.nc~~ at that time they were ~oinn to come in wt th Tract No. ~116 and
8117. He stated he did not think he cuule! be so natv~ as tc+ sugyest that this is
affordAble ttiousin~ and that what he had said in thac regard was that very p~ss(bly sinc~
Chey do hR~ve A report tron+ ho;ket a~se~nrch which indic~tes th~i people who mt>ve to Anaheir~
Hlils are possit,ly pcople who rtr~v~ from the very proximate car.~unity and very possibly
those peoplc who 1 ive in the S7n~'3~~~ ;~O~Onn~ and S9C~~on hc~nes in other parts of Maheim
might nnve to An,~heim Nt lls into a S115~!)'!~ unit~ but would ~iavr_ a very difficult time
moviny Into a$2~10~0~~';, Sl~~yi~~fami ly~ dttached home, and hy them rx~ving into a 5115~000
intNrim si~p hausing unit would allow~ unfrcr.ze or unclag a 570~QOp~ $$~~nr)~ and S9^,~Q~
uni[ in an~ther part of Anahclm.
He referred [a the 52~~U~)~) per annum cast to [hc~ Clty suggested by the ftscal (mpact
r~port and stated he f~it staff would back htm up thet t-~it Nas the first time this
parttcular equet(on had been used to sug~est whai the cos~ to the City would b~ for thts
particular development~ and ihetr company used th9t eguatton and camc up w~th this
"de~te". t~r statrd, however, they do npt beifeve (n the metl~odolog~ uscd. t1e stated if
chis ncwr forr~ula Nes used by ather devclaFcrs. he did not know whether or not a more
sl~~ntfice~t Caltb would be found or ~vhetf~er ~r nct it .~ould be found that thts is a irue
1/ 30/ 79
MINUTI:S~ ANANEIM CITY PLANf~ING COMMISSION~ JUIY 3(1~ 1979 19~55~
E I R N0. 203 (ADDENOUM N0. 2) ~ RECLA551 Ff CATI0~1 N0. 7'1-8Q-5 ~ VARIAt~CE NQ. 3105 ~ AND TENTATI VC
MAP UF TRACT NOS. ~l 1 G (RCV 1 S I ON N0. 4) ANp A1 I 7 ~RCV 1 S 10~~ N0. 4) (cont I nue~d)
~.
formula, lie sCated they have snme slyn(f(c~nt doubts as to the valtdity~ but have
accepte~d i t bacausc~ they were tol d to use 1 t.
Rec~ardtn9 thc traffic, h~ state~i Nohl RsnGh Roecl (s thc m,~~ur arterl~l .~nd the
Envl ronrrMntal Mun~~g~nr~nt Ag~ncy sa) s that Nohl Ranch Road is 50'<', undcr canaci ty and
p•oscnted a n~ap sh~~rlnn t~uh) Ranch Road an~f polntc:i o~~t onA oth~r property plus the
property bein~.~ discussAd and St3~c'd thnt Is thc bal~ncc c~f the populatlon bulld-out on
Noh) Rancl~ Road, wl~icf~ is currPntly a two-lan~ t~rt~riil and vcry shortly wtll bc A f~ur-
lA~~ arl'erlc+l. Rcr.~.~rdfny schr,c~ls, he st~[~~i I~e cioes •,ot k,na~ wt~at Ig d~ne. ln th~[
sltuatlcm and rr.f~rre~f ,o a new bil) (Ai{-3) which w(11 f,e lcgislation rather than thc good
fal th efforts ~f dev~lopers As to tl,ei r c~~mmi tm.~r~c to the schools when developments ocwr~
and ih~t hr, undrrstooc~ that bl ll will bc s1~Jn~~. hy ;he Gove:rnor vcry soon nnd that it (s
sup~or ~,~d by the hu i I~1; n~ I r~dus t ry assoc f at (.~i oi~d the c•ducaturs .
C~mraissic,ner Tolar clarif(c•d his corornents ~n,1 st~at~•~J hc he~1 not indicate~i Mr. Salced~~ had
sal~i hc did nut kna~ ~f any futurc convc.rslons, but th~it nls corrvnr.nt was thet thaL wes thc
anly po5siblc conv~~rsion 1n tiiosc tracts ~ind now~ aqain~ that thls is tl~e o~ly possiblc
eonvcrsl~n in this tracl. He stat~~~1 hc appre~iatc. thc faet that AnahciM Hills. Ine. has
deJieated l~~nd fur a school and he has nc~ qu,arrr_~1 wi th thnt~ `,ut [here are: no funds for a
scl~cx~l buildin~~, even thnu~~h thev have the lanJ, He st~te~i he c~uld apnrecl~te the Fact
that w•.: are only tal{.iny about 4~~ unfts~ bu[ tha; wc wcrr talkin~~ abou[ only an addltlonal
4G units thc+ last tlm^ and if we contlnur, to approve ~+5 or ~i(~ unlts in cech Jev~lopment~
the probl~m Is com{~oun~leJ, Ne statc~ ~~s a realtor he is d~ I!~~htcd with morc housin_y;
hr~wever, thcrc ~rc pmblcins whlc.h must I~e resolve~J b~fore plans are approve~J.
Chalrwoman Itarnes statcd she realizes cc>scs havc gone up~ t:ut thc GencrAl Plan was based
on the density ~nd plans liav~ becn made for thr. density in tf~c. ~rea and the C4rxnl~sion has
looked ahcad, an~ in~ilcateJ i. t~as always becn known th~t even if we cb ~~ot build one
house ln Che canyon arc:~~ it woul~i c~st thc C(ty r~oney~ and now it Is Just a matter of how
muc!~ money it wi 11 cost tl~e City. She statet! we d~ nred to provid~ hnuslny for our
industri~~) area whic~i i~~ one of chc best in thc stote, 5he acked Mr, Salceda to explaln
his objection to the cor~utatfun5 use~ f~,r casts t~ the Clty.
Mr. Salce~a stateci thc coc,puta[ion (s c.alted an "au[come ~etcrminatlve" and steff tclls
them the equat ion to use and they u.e Che 1 r nunters and say . yes ~ there wl 1! be `~`~ un i ts
and the uni ts wi 11 have appraxin,atcly Z.~+~+ persons per uni t and che c~mputatton says the
cost w111 be in excess of S19,9~?, but that they disagree wlth that because they think the
valuat(on ls a iittle lo~, and as pr4pertles are sold~ the valuatinns~ wlll increasc.; that
the L~s M9eles Times did a survey two months ago and fUUnd out the a;~~~reciatlon~ land
value and bui ldiny value in Anahcim t{I I ls were exc~eded by none in the: enti re county and
they fclt that ls thc trend tt;at will continue~ and~ therefore~ every time a hause is
valued at a signlficantly hiyher rat a~nd resold, it +ri-I provlde the City wlth an
ad~i(Lfonal bene`it~ and ttiought tfiuse numbCrs are vcry ~nodest and conservative by the
City; and that the City has placed a certaln numher f~r SAles tax c~enerated ~er person
withi~ [hc city and they know the av~erage salary of a household in Anahetm Nitls is in
excess of $45~~Oa~ whlch p-obably n~eans those peo~le livlny in those unlts will probably
buy more and~ therefore~ che sales tax ge~eration will b~ slgnificantly higher; Lherefore~
the increased revenue~ because of the greater dlscretianary income~ gives the Clcy an
addltional tax base whtch was nut incorparated into this particuiar equation.
Chalrwaman 8arnes asked staff to explain why a dl fferent equatlon was used.
Joel Flck~ AssiStanc Oi rector for Planniny~ txplain~d the ec~uations used in the Add~ +d~m
are those used hist~ricolly by the Clty in their cost/benefii mc~del. The first-run
submittal by the appllcant was reviewed ay the Ctty Budget ;;ers~nnel~ the C(ty Planning
7/30/19
MII~UTES~ ANNIE111 CITY PLA~~NIrIG GOMMISSION, JUIY 3n~ 197~ 79'S55
CIR NU. 203 (AODENDUM N0. 2) ~ RtGLASStFICl1TION N0. 79'~'S, VAFtIANCE N0. 3105~ AND TENTATIVE
11AP OF TRACT NOS. 8) 1~~REVISION NQ. ~i) Al~u ~I17 tREVI510t1 NU. ~~) (continucd)
stuff and lmpt~cted deparlrnent~-~ ancf it was the gener.~l cons~nsus In a number of ar~as that
thel r comnutatlons wer~ not correct an~l, as a r~sul t~ tt~e c~nsu) tant and t,he appl icant
workad wtt~~ the City and the calculAtlc~ns were revtscd. 11e referred to Mr, 5a1c~~1~'s
stetement regar~iin,y the vnlialty ~f thr. eyustion w(th re~~arct to the reseie of thr. homes
and ~wl ntcd out w i th thc passn~le of Prupos i t(on 13~ the C I ty I s 1 ic~l ted to 1;, of th~ s•31.:s
amount tc~ l,e gr.ncr~itr.d tn cax~ which ~~as ~~r~Atly Impactec! thc slqnlfica~c~ ~f th~ amount.
Secondly~ regarding S~Ir4 tex In llnah~im~ It is reco~anizeei !~y ti,c Ctty end ln~:luded In the
equ.itl~n for thc eost/bencfit ~~1c1 that a yrcAter prc~portir~n wl I) h~ sp~nt by the ~eople
in [he Anah~tm Ni lls area versus the balance cf the city. but a sic~nific~nt polnt is th~t
Just becausc the incomes arc hi gher (n the An.ihetm Hi l ls arca ~rs not necessarl ly rsren
th~~t al I tl~e tax do1 lars w( 11 bP s~~nt tn lln,ihefm, For rxnrnpl~~~ a targc pr~portlon of the
ineome is spent at thc Orar,g~ Mr~ll, etc.
In response to a question by Chairwoman Iiarncs as to whetlier or not infletlon flc7ures t~ave
beer~ Inclucied in the cost/bencfit r~o~.lcl~ M•. Flck explninr.d that the c.ost/~~enefit nadel
and the ealculations ~orG.ed o~t by the consultant dc, rrflect tnfla ~n fACte~rs fo~ both
costs ~nd revenues and expl~ined that the ov~r~i-1 situatio~ Irac chonyed si9nificantly b~th
ways as the valuations havr far excc~~dc~! the oriyinnl exncct~ition5 cnci~ obvlously~ the
costs h.ive bcen cscal~~t.c~l in cc:rt~in arcas ar~d propcrty t~~r.cs havc becn qrcAtly c.ut back.
rie explaine~ th~ Ci ty h~~+s not done a co~~plete city-widr study ~~5 ~~revi~uslY c~rnpleted when
the Canyon Arc~a Gencr~il Plan was unJert~k~n~ I,ut they ~+ntlcip~te clolnc~ th~s In thr, neAr
future.
C~~mrn1551oner ~av i d asf.~d the bc~ttnm l lnr '•~r salns tax ~acn~rat ion and cost to the Cl ty for
resid~ntt,~l devc iopment.
Mr. F'ick Cxplained that e.ich pr~Jr.ct has to he t~tally rv~iiuated and thz~t tf~e cost of
services to th~ Ci[y wo~:IJ Jepend u{~un r~any v,~riahles~ inciuriing thP [op~~raphy of th~
lrind, ~tc., ancl whett~er or ne~t the fnfra~tructu~r, is in~ a~d th~t the ~~e ~eral trend h:,s
br.er~ that In many instance5 tf~ere w~uld be somc tost t~ the Clty. NP ~.tate~i that thr
Pianniny Commis~ ion must loaE. ~t each ~+roject t~nd we(gh mAny othcr factors~ lnCludiny the
b~n~fit of h~using itself, whieh cannct be f,act~re~! int~ rqu~tions, Ne StAted the f(gcal
port~on is just cmc part of the [otal cvuluation.
Chairwcxnan Darnes as~:r.c1 hnw much the entire canyor area fiscal pi~ture has ch~ngecl~ and
Mr. Fic.k explair,ed nne af thr reesons for waitin~,~ to d~ [he stuch/ is thAt the City Council
h2s directed the Plonninc~ staff to considPr a General Pl~n amendment study For a reqional
shopping c~nter and a suhmictal (s expcct~d on that projecc in the very near fu!ure, and
such a study prior t~ that submittc~d w~uld proba5ly be remtss.
Comri~sioner Ner~st statecl since che City's incepclon~ every traci and every house has
eosc thc Ci ty rrr~ney and huusing does not ~upport i cscl f~ and that thl s i s no different,
and i f hous i r~g i s to ~e provi ded, se.rv i ces mus t be furn i sf~ed and taxes have neve r
supported the C i ty . I~e stated I~e was not so concerned ahaut th is part i cul ar port ion of
the project, but tt~at he Is concern~v abaut the clrcu1~1t1pr~ elrmen[ and fete traffic from
the houses ;~ b~ built an the RS-10~0~0 l~ts across -~eats Avenue wil! use Fsirfteld right
througf~ the con dumi n 1 un deve 1 o{~ment out ont~ -~oh 1 Ranch Road and i n tr ~cede wi th Shannon
Street. He stated ht real izes this Qarticular tract is an easy conversio~, bec~use the iot
widtfs were designe~l for RS-1~~~~~ and this is doubling the use An eacti lot without tak(ng
into corsid~rat +on tt~at the l~ts were desi9ned far single-fami ly dwel l ings. tie stated the
plan uses the s amc street dcsign, and Fairfield does not lend itsclf to condaminium
develapmen[. ii~ stated he could not support this type ckvelopment a~d did not Lhink this
is a good plan because of ti~e traffic patt~rns. Fle stated he agrees we must change some
of our rulet as far as dens(ty '~ concerned~ but felt the road patterns ~eed to be
redesigned.
7/30/19
MINUTES~ ANAl1El M CITY PLAN~~ING COMMISSION~ JULY 30~ 197~1 79'S5G
E I R N0. 203 (ADDENDUM N0. 2) ~ RECL~SS I F I CI1T I ON 1~0. 79-8Q-5 ~ VAR t ANCE t~0. 310y ~ AHU TENTAT 1 VC
MAP OF TFUICT NOS. 8116 (RLVISION i10, 4) AND 8117 ~REVISIOt~ N0. 4) _~anti Inued) ~_
Mr. Salceda poi r.ted out other devalopi~x nLs south and wr.st of Im=serial and Nohl Ranch Road
wl~ere trafftc fr~~m slnyle-fomlly ar~as Joes 9o throu~~h r~ultiple-family ~icveloped arcas.
He explained thPy havn had two developers rec~ucst to purchase tF-es~ two tracts~ and wlth
one developer purct~esiny both tracts co be s~l~i os a sl~yle traet, the d~veloper w(11 make
thc tw~ tracts eom~,atible.
Cpmmissluner Nerbs[ potnteJ oul there will be twlce as many houses unto Falrflelrl wlth
this proJect.
CpMMISSI011CR FkY LLFT T~IE MECTING AT 2:;0 P.M, AND DID NOT P,CTUP.fI.
Weston Prfnyle, 2(,;1 Last Chaprru~~, fullerton~ st.'+t~d he wnul~i bP more concerned if this
werc a revr.rsed sltuaii~n with attacl~ed l~ous(n~ throuyh a slnql•--famlly~ cletach~d area
becausr a mult+ple-far~ily clevclapmr.nt yener~tes rx~rr. traffic, He indtcated this layout is
e typical situatic>n wi[h e Ic~w denslty irea belny further :~vay fron~ [hr. major nrterfal and
the trt~f f 1 c ~~u i ny th rouyh the at tachecl huus tnq ~~rr~ i s 1 1 gnter and ( s bas I cal ly th~ same
as i[ wuul ~f lae i f detache~J ~n I ts wert~ deve lc~~~ecl; tl~ac thc re are r;~ore dr ( veways ~ but the
traffic volumt• ~~oin~t ~Inr~n the strc•e~ would be basi~rilly thc same bCCAUSP thr .ireo being
srrved is baslcally sinylc-f~in~i ly, dr.t,iche~i ur~its an~i st~te~f~ i ra hls opinfan, thcre would
bc iiu prnb Ic:n~s wf th thc ml xture of thr, two us~~s.
Commission~r Flerbst as~:c~f Nr. ('rinyle tf he had cons~~iered t.raffic out of th~ RS-1~~Q~~
trac[ throu~~h t~~is develo~n~ent, and Mr. Prin+~le st~~te<1 he ha~ not considered that ~ecause
he had bcen asked tc~ st~cly the intersectic~n of Nahl Ranch Roaei ancl Shannon, Ne stated
wi[h ~~ sin~~le-fart,ily unit5 or .ipurc~xiri,itcly r~^C vehicle [rips per dt~v~ appraximately One-
half ~f the traffic would use Shannon S[rcet~ whlch woula mean approxim~tcly 1.'i~ to 2:?~
trips per ~ay c.~~n Falrficlc.+, anJ st,~t~~J chat is a typic~l wlur~r. for a rrsldentia) ,treet
anywr~~ re .
Ccxrrnissioner Nerhst stated nor~rwlly traffir from a re~i~Jr~tial street (~ not directed
throuyh cnnciomi niurr u~vclopmrnts in Anaheim tli l ls .lnd rrK~S[ h,avc priv~~tc strrr.ts or cul-.~e-
sacs sa there is nu throu~h traffic,
Mr, P~•(nqle ..larifie~l that thc traffic would br. thc sarne tf thc ~evel~pment wPre for
singl~-fami ly attached or detached, and Ccm~nissicner Flerbst st~ted the trafflc volwne for
t~~is condomini um prajr.c[ wouid be tw(ce as much as a single-f~~mily proJecC.
Paul Sin~~er s[ated h~ would concur with Mr, Prinqlc and stated the nature of the traffic
generatod from the sinyle-famlly attache~i housing would be the same as the trafftc from a
condaminlum and that there ls no r~lxture of uses ln this situat ion; that a mlxture occurs
only when you mlx resir!entlal traffic with indugtrial traffic, tle stated the nature or
character of t`~e traffic would be the same except for tl~e vo?ume,
Commissioner Herbst su,gested thgt che street daes not have tc~ be a throu~~h street.
Cofxnissfoner King read portlons of ~ speccl~ made by a leadlnc~ builder t~ Oranqe County
regard(ny hig-~er densicy as fol iows:
"The Netional Planning ASSVCIskion f~as shown th~t there are lncreascs In the number
of one person househAlds~ a good p~rcentage of two and three person households and
dramatic cic-:llnes (n four+ person ~~c:~:seholds. Their study sees a continuation of
this tren~J up to 19~Q.
As He look to the future:~ affordable hausing can o~ly b~e achteved by smaller lot
devslopment wi th htgher denslty. Mle could be 1AOking at the SQ x 1~0 foat lot,
7/30/ 19
MSINUTES~ ANl11~EIM CITY PLANNINC COMMISSION, JULY 34~ 1~79 7~-557
~IR ~JO, xo3 (ADpf.fiDUM 1~0. 2)~ RECLASSIi'ICATION N0. 79~f30-r,~ VARIAilCE N0. 3105~ AND TENTATIVE
MAF' OF TMCT NOS ~Ilb SRCVISION N0. ~~) AND 8117 (REVISION N0. b) (contlnued)
which isn't as bad es it s~unds to r~ ic~t of pcopl~ to~iny. Thcre arr r~any ~~ x 10~
fcrot lots fn B~verly Ht lls (n an area whcre horr+~s c.ost over S3~~,~~~. W~th such a
cr(terla ynu co;,ld c~~~t fiv~ to six hornc. per acre~ reducinq ehc c~st of land and
publ(c utilltt~s co the fln~~l r.~nsur-~r. ~he other no~~,tt~il(ty coul~i be
c~ndominlums .~nd ~~-plr.xes at fift~~n untts p~r acre snc! ~ossll,ly As meny as thirty
to bring housinn int~~ tl~e S4;~~~0 to Sf;5,~0~i pricc rangr.
Thc c ls no yutstl~n es we look. ahead that thcr~ Is ~oing t~ be t~ deflnlte shortaye
of housiny fc~r Ic~w ~n~l mediu~ f ncorn~ fami 1 ics. The cnvf r~nmr.ntal fst•~ wf th th~ir
bemand for I~r~~rr l~~t develr,pmrnt are ~~oin~~ to facc An ~~xplnslv~ r.connmtc issut,
Eventual ly~ up t~ ~~ti of ~~on~ seckers wi I 1 hc unabl~ to .'ind :- hcHne du~ to thc
stiflin~a ~~f drvelopmen[ by rcnt contrnl and environ~nt~~lly n~idcd ~osts that must
bc pnsseci c>n t~ th~ younqcr ~ind low~ r i r~conc f.~rn( 1 ics, i'~~rc wi 1! bc an unan5wcred
dem.~rcl for 1~")~~-snuar.~ fuut hous i n~j cc~nce~~ts .~ f i t much thr sar.~e needs ~s those af
the return(n, ~~'s fr,~-~ ~lorlcf War I i. In such horrx~s, we r~lll bc doin~ ~,ay wfth
th~ f~ar~( ly ruo+~~, thc s~u~nd beth and thc rhi rc' bc~lrrx~m, i:ut th~ hous~s wl 1 I b~~
scale~f just ri~~ht [~~ fit the muc!, sm.~ilc~ (lOUSr.hAid slr~s of to~f~y anrt trxnc~rrnw."
Chalrw~r,~~n Barnes ~~s-e~1 Mr. Sinqer f! he felt traffic ~~oulri be e probl~r~ an Shannc~n,
polnt(ng out the c.xistin~~ prc,bler~~s alrca~fy ~~ F~oh) Ranc:li Road.
Mr, $(nr~~r 5tated h•~e I5 try(ny to cur~e ~~{~ ~~i[h thc best spiutir,i un~lcr thc yfvrn
cirwinstanu~s and~ oi,viously~ thc t~est soluti<~n is tc, align thc Jnt~~rsectirm; how~~vcr~ at
this late ~iatr~~ it woul.: re,711y nut b~ a vi,~blc alt:•rnativ~ bec,iusr it is unrcasonablc a~nd
the bes[ th~t can be ~l~r~e unck:r the circurnstanc~~s is to mitiq;~t~ the traff)c prnbler by
provid(ny the si~k-~y-sick, left cu~-ns whlch arr. two separatc Icft-turi~ lanes separaked t~y
thr. ccnterlinc and thP sr~uth sl:l~.• of [he str~~r.t will hAVr to bc .~(dened for at least 1~0
fect fror~ its ~resen[ el(qnmr.nt wherc Lhc curhs ~nd ~~utters ~~ave iust rcccntly ttieen
in~tall~d, Ife st~~te,i It is a campromis~ under thc yivc~ circun~seances. He statr.d,
hcwever~ ylv~.n his rathFrs~ the i-itersectiun shoul-i be linpd un.
Cornmissioner N~rhst refcrrc~d to his eor.xTx~nts reg~r~iinq t1~c isr~latlo~ of the Fmposed
develvpment so tt~at it would not dum~ ~ut onto Shann~m and com~ oui on Meats t~ Nohl Ranch
Road, and askec! if th,~t woulci relieve th~; congestion ~n Shannon.
Mr. Sin~er explained his concern is no[ co+igestion on Shann~n~ bur, confilcting turns on
Shannon and Old tlucket Road, and any separatiun r,r encauragemF:nt c~f traffic towards ~leats
and thr_ sl~nal would be an improven~ent. but wanted it clear that t:hP traffic volun~e on
Shannon i s not very great ~ wi th or w i t~~out ch i s deve 1 c~ment..
Mr. Salceda asked Mr, Singer which of tl~e prcap~sed devPloprnents is safer for thls
particulAr intr~seccion~ the ~ne proposeJ previou~ly rrith twp~ ~~4-unit, single-family,
detached t~acts (8116 and G117) wit~ the offset Incersectlon wlthout the left-turn
poGkets~ ur the on~ proposed now for the 35 and ?~-unlt dcvelopments with side-by-side~
left-turn nuck`ts.
Mr. Singer replied that thc side-by-sidc, left-curn pockets with C.~e affsct intcrsection
wouid have aeen a necessity s~o+ier ar latcr~ w(tl~ or without the added volume~ and stated
the added vc~l ume Is rea) ly not s tqn i f i cant because the strett has the c.~p,aci ty to handle
It~ and thak any unprotected turn mover~nts are gaing to give problems.
Chalrwoman Barnes stated she shares the same euncern as CortmiSSiunar Herbst regar~,ing the
singie-family trafftc flowing th~~~gh thc condomini~~m developrt-cnt s~nd did not think this
ts a good m(x~ and stated shie knows of very few places whcre this si tuatlon exists. She
stated there Is a lot mc~re t~affic in a condorr~in(um deveslapmcnt and referred to Singing
7/30/ 79
MINUTES~ ANAl1EIN CITY PLA~~NING CON1115SIOIJ, JULY 3~- ~919
19-558
EIR N0. 2Q3 (AUUENDUM FIO. 2) ~ RECLl1SSIFICATION N0. 79-~'S. ~ARIANCE N0. 31t,~, ANO TENTATIVE
MAP OF TRACT NOS. 8116 (REVISION IJO, 4~ AND f3117 (REUISION N0. 4~ (continued)
~1oad HI 11 and Fx~lnted out thnre are cars parked on the~ strr.et very close togeth~r Nht ~h
botl~crs tier~ esp~cial ly in hi i lsi d~ developmc~t.
Commis5lo~er Klny askeJ Cht~lrwom~~n Darnes (f she was concerned about the amc~unt of
traffic~ pointln~~ out Mahcim cann~t graa ~nc1 prc,~~rc~s without an Incrcase in trafflc~ ond
sh~~ expldineJ she was not cancerne~i about the volur,e~ hut was concerned ~bout ths trafflc
wh-ch cquld coim: fmm the tract acro~s the st rect and alsc th~ proximi ty of par~:ecl cars
an~1 the tlghtness in condom(nlum develc~~rtwnt wlth thrc~ugti traffic, Sl~c stated she citd n~t
fe~l the probl~ms caused hy t.fie location of thr. Four Corners Ptpe Ltne ~asement~ which Is
typiwlly the best Pl~~c~ to put a strc~t~ shoul~l be the pr~hlem of thr. Planning Commission
end the! Commissic~n shoula nc~t be worric~l ahout h~~v+ ~,wch land a develo~er k~tl1 have to give
up in ordcr t~ relocate a strer_t~ and that their c~nc~rn s!~ould be for the rest ~f the
citizcns of llnalicim.
ACTI0~1: COr1fnISSIcN~tt~- Hert,st offr_reu a ~mtion~ sec~ndr.d hy Commissic-ner King and M071f1-J
~R IED (Comm(ssic,ne~ Fry being ~-+bsent)~ that Ad~Sendum No. 2 to Cnviror~n~ntal lmp.~ct
Raport No. 2~~3 for T~nt~~tive Tract ~dos. ";11~~ (Revislon No. 1+) ~nd `;117 (Revision No. ~+) ~
having been consi~icre~f this cfatc by the CI[y ~f Anihefm Planninr~ Commission ~nJ evidence,
both wriiten and oral, h.~viny bcen presentcd to sun~~lrmc,nt Adden~iuro No. 1_ to EIR No. 2~3~
finds that pntential envi r~nricnta) irr~acts nf th~~ rroJ~:ct r~ay he re~iuce~l to an
insigni f icn~~t levcl l-,y confnrrnancc w( th Ci ty pl~ns~ ~ol icias and orc!inanccs ancl lldaendum
No. '1. to CIR I~o, 2~)3 Is iri e~rr~~llance with tl~e ra~ifornia Env(rannx~ntal Qu~ii(ty Aet and
with City and Stote E.IR Guidr.lines ~md, thercfnre, L-ase~1 upon the above informatlon~ the
City af Anaheim ~'Iannln~J Cornmi,sion cic~e~s I~c:ret~y ccrtify Adden~iurr IJo. .'_ to EIR Na. 203.
Comnlssior~cr tlerb~,t offF~r~:~; R~•.solution t~o. PC]^~-l~~u and mov~~i for lts passage and
adoptlon~ that thc Anaheim Clty I'lannir~y Comrzil5Sinn cic~cs hereby deny Pet~tl~n for
Reclasslficati~~n No. J'3-$0-5 on t'~c hasi5 that the prupcrty ts not conduclvc to
condomtnium cfeveloprnent~ particulariy with thc rc7ads ond streets as proposed,
On rol I cal l~ thc f~~rcc~,inc~ r~solution was E~asserJ by tt~e fo1 tcn~ring vote:
AYES : C ONMI SS 1 GtIE P,5 : DARt~C S~ OUSHORt. ~ tIE RUST, TOLAP,
NOES: COMMISSIOI~ERS; DAVID~ F:It~G
ADSE~~T: LOMNI SS 1 0!:ERS : FiZY
Commtssloner Hert~st stated he is (n favor of certafn typc~s of concSom(nfum developrr~nt in
the ca~yon~ but fel t a far better ~isv~lopment could be proposr_d for this property.
Corrrniss(oner Nerbst off~red Resolutlon No. PC7`.--l~i^ and R10VCC~ for its passage and
adoption, that the An~heim C1 ty Planni~g Corrx~ission daes hcr~t~y deny Pe[i t(on for Vartance
No. 310~ on the basi s that thcre are no uniguc ci rcumstances appl icab 1e to the property
inciuding si ~e, sh~ape~ to~ociraphy, lucation or surrnundir~gs which do n4t apply to other
properties under identical zaning classiFicatiun in tlie vitinity.
On roll call, the foreyniny re~olutlon was passed by the follc~wirtig vate:
AYCS: CurIt11SS~Q,JERS: E3ARNES~ $USIIOR,E~ HER6ST~ TOLAR
NOE5: CONMIS~IONCRS: DAVIO~ KING
AEiSE~JT: GOt1MISSI0NER5: FR~
After a brlef discussion with Jack Uhite~ Deputy City ACCorney, regarding the requir~ed
findings for denlal of the tentative tract maps, Gommissioner I~erbst offered a motion,
seconded by CQmmissioner Tolar and MOTI011 CARRIf:U (Comnissiuncrs David and King voting ~o
and Commissione~ F~y being abse~t), tl~at the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
7/ 30/ 79
MI NUTES ~ At1AlIE I M CI TY PIANN I t~G COMhII SS I ON ~ JUIY 30, 197~ 79-559
EIR 1~0. 203 (ADUENDUM N0. 2) ~ RECLASSIFICJITIUN t~Q. 7Q-f~0-S~ VARIANCE N0. 31~;, At10 TENTATIVE
MAP oF TRACT NOS. 811G (REVISION N0, 4) ANO II117 (REVISION rlo. 4) (continw~d)
..._. ~._.._ ,.,. ~._
deny tha reyucst for Tent~t(vc Map ~~f Tract Nos. ~3116 (Revision Mo. ~+) and 811J (Revlsta~
No. A) on the basis that tt~e sltc is not physic~lly suitable for tt~r h~oposr.d density of
the development.
(k was noted no action is ner.essary on the rryuest for termination of previously-approved
maps anci revislons for Tentative Map af Tract flos. s'il~~ and ~i117,
Jeck Whtte~ Ueputy CI ty Attorney, ex~,l.~ined che actions of the Planning Conr~isslan
regarding the rcclasslftcation and vir(anc~ will bre~>r~c final wich(n 2:? ciay~~ unless an
appcal Is fllc~f anci Chat thc actlons of tf~c Plannin~ Commission rc~arciing th~~ tentntivc
tract m,~ps ~~re subJ~ct to a l5-day apprii ~,criod .7ncl thet thc ap~ca) may bc fi led with the
City Glerk's Office, an~i that Adden:ium No, ^ tc~ Cnvironmenta) Ir~pact Report No. 2~3 wnuld
bc eanslcfcrcd by the Clty Gouncll if thF actions arc r~ppcalr.d.
Gomnissfon~r liushure explained he; ha~l listcnr.d carefully to nll rvidencc presented and was
not sure of his votr and would have becn the tie v~~te if hc had voted in fav<~r of the
pro)ect, but he I~Hd clecide~ to vot.e for denial c~n the basis that he fclt approving this
proJer_t woulcJ be irr,p~ctiny and c~r~ounding prohlems which already exist in tf•~e area~
e5pecinlly with the incrr.ase tr; the scho~~ls and traffic.
ITEM ri0. ; CONTIc~UE.U PUIiLI C fIEAAlI1G. OtJNEPS: FRAr~r. PAG~.IARI ~
EIR NEGI~TIVC DELLARATIOH ET AL~ 13~3!,° Russcll, Nhi~tir~, CA ~'1f~!?5. AC~!IT:
RECL S I LA I qN N~. 79-$~-2 Utl{ VERSAL LANU Dt.VE LOPNl:1~T ~ 1 741 We~ t L 1 ncol n
AR ANCE N0. 3~;37 Avcnue, f%A, Anahein, Cl1 '?2'?01. Praperty described
as an i~reuularl,v-shaped ~arcel of land c.onsisting
o` ap~.~roximate:ly 0,7 acre al the southeast corner
of Savanna ~trcet enci Marian uay~ having approximate front~ges of 1~+3 feet on the south
slcie of Savann~~ Strect and 17~ feet on the East sidc of Narl~n Way, Property presenil~r
classificd RS-~-~~3~~~0~ (RE:51UE~~T1~9L/AGRICL'LTURAL) IOt~E.
REqUCSTEU CLASSIFICATIC'~: RM-240~ (RESI ~E.ITIAL~ MIiLYIP~E-FAMILY) 7.ONE.
REQUESTED VA.RINICE: WAIVER, OF HAXIMUH 57RUCTUR!`.L NE:IGH7 TO CO-JST~~UCT At~
EtGtIT-UNIT APAP,TMEt:T.
Subject Petittot~ was continue~ from the me~tinr of July 2~ 1^7~, at the request of the
petitloner.
The~e were ten persons Indtcating thetr y~resr~ce in ~ppc~sltion to subJect request~ and
although the staff report to tt~c Pla~ininy Cornmiss(on dated July 30~ 1979 was not read at
the public hcaring~ it (s rcferred tn and made a part of the minutes.
G~eg Dudics~ 17~~1 West Ltnwln Ave~ue~ Anahr:im~ explained tf~is mat.ter hao br.en continued
in arder for hiin to rn~~et w( th the homec~.rners anJ pointed out ; aac:i tional parking spaces
had b~~n added on tlie eastern portion of the prnperty~ which provides 2.6 spaces per unit.
Ne stat.:d ~c~ur proper[y owners to ti~e e~st of subject propcrty are ente.rtaining offcrs
from The uarmington Company t~ sell their property for RM-~4eo development. He explalned
the maln proble~m Is with the o~e R-1 zonc~ property or~ the curn~r and that that owner fs
very concerned about her praperty value because it is not large enouyh to be valuable as
an RM-2400 property.
7/ 30I79
MI-~UTES~ ANAIiEIM CITY PLA~INING CUMMISSIAN~ JUIY 30~ 1979 79'Sf~p
EIR NEGATIVE DECLARl1TION. RECUISS! FICATIQN N0. ,79-80-2 AwD NnRIA~~CE N0. 3~ (continued)
Jo~n To~fd~ 3620 Savannri Street, An~helm~ stated a petition had been prescnted at the
prr.vlous heArtng end al l tf~c: pcrsons who I~ad s IynQd that ~~eti tlon are st( 1 I opposcd to the
proJect; that they had met wlth thu doveloper and lie ha.l polntr.d out the ~ addttlonel
pArkiny spaces and showed them the plans; that the resldcnts .~r•, not o~~o5ed to the
propcrty bet~y developed because it is An cyesorc and thcrc is a trofflc hazard, but all
a~~ opposed to a two-story pro.lect; thot thc surrr~un~llnc~ propcrty owners hav~ becn
con~actr.d by no less than four develupers and two of the devefoper5 h~ve indicated they do
not in[end to bu11:1 Lwo-story projects and would build conJominlums wlih the hlyher
dens i ty ta~+arcl the be~~ i nn i nr~ uf tl~c st rcet an+/ lower clcns i ty toa~ard thc end of thc s t reet ;
that the proprrty adj~cent ca subject pro~erty on ;he c~si has~ .i swtmming F~ool and that
property ownr_r is stranyly o{~poscef tc> > two-st~ry pr~jcct; that thcro .~rc tvro people who
have aceept~~~f offr.rs on thefr pr-~nerty; that tl~e ~roperty uwn~r next cioor has indicatcd
tttie outcome of this project will h~iv~ an ~ffect nn her ~ccept~nce of the btd; and that one
~f thc rocentia) clcvclc~pers of a con~ir~rniniur~ proJett on thet siclc of the str~ct has
indicated hc wuuld purchasc thc propefty and dGV~lop clcrvn ta tli(s lady's propcrty and
leave hcr pool an~l rno{c ti,~t the rrcreation~71 ~~rea, which would mran thc~re would !,e a two-
Story ape~t~~ent rl~ht ncxt ~fo<~r.
Mrs. ToJd stateJ th~ re~;idcrits knc~+ wh~~t thcy wcre ~fair,~ when thcy had requested a Gener~l
Plan amr.ndmcnt an~l l~rered chc Jensi ty on tiie street. She s,at~d thr_re t~re two, two-siary
campl~xes on thc strret and rinht naw tl~ey rre cither in trc~~,l,i~ or havc had proble~s In
thc past to a point wl~cre cc>nstrur_tion ha, been at a,tm~istill ancl the onc~ at the west
end of the street~ ~~hich is actu.~lly in Lu~~na Park, ;~as not ha~t an tns~ectlon s(nce Ma~ch
and therr. h~is bcer; a lot of vandaifsr^ antl thc dr~in~yc lias n~c been put in ~vhi~h is very
badly necac~J. Shu stoteu they rer,l i zc t.he strcct (s ~~c~in~~ to be ~1ev~l~pec: w( th mul tlple-
family projects, but thr~t a two-stc~~y co~~mlex would l,~ n~nconfnrmin~ with the other
developrnents which are r~ll onc-st~~ry, ShA ~tn,~~f thcy f~vc,r conJo;,iiniur~s or ~lu~~lexes~
ref~rriny to s~nyle^story ~l~plexes on Mnrian Nay~ and Chey fF.E' CwQ-story a~pproval at thls
tii~c would take away th2ir ~d~~e, ~~ointiry ~~ut c.urrcntly they have nc~ two-story unlis
extept th~s^ which werc nc~t (n~.luclecf in thr Gencral F'l.~n a+.rndmcnt ~nd (haC if this is
approveci~ othcr dcvr, I~~pers w) 11 rcquest M~o-stc,ry projects. Shc sta[ed thcy have no
ob ject ivn to the dens i[y re~ues tec~ ana that ~~~~.fi t ic~nal parki n~~ has been Rrovf ded as
rCCOr~~wndcd~ but [hat they stll l Ju not sec with 27'6 lot ~.uvcrnc;c why the two uniks
propoSe~J on thc scCOna story cou~cl no[ be brou~~ht dovrn to g-ound levcl.
Nrs. Tod~ read the fc~llawir~g 1r:tter frorn Mr. and Mrs. bon C. Duke, ~53`i Savanna Strec[,
Anaheim~ wl~lct~ is eas: c~f tt~e project:
"Ue fea:l that this projec[ an~J thc klnd of pc~ople wh~ are attractcd co aparcment
livir.r~ a~ill scriuusly alter our lifrstyte which makes use of our resldential-
agriculiural zonln~7. Ne strenuausly c~bjeet ta any zc~nin~~ variance which would
allow two-story constructlon an this property.
G~ncfominlurr~s and the horx:owner type chey attract Nould be a ~referable~ Cven
des i rab le adc:i t i un to our nc i ghbort,ood."
'r1r. Dudlcs explained Mrs. Duke haJ b~en in thc meeting and hc Fi„~ explained to her that
the twmstory units wauld not affect her privacy and tt~at she had had an offer at thnt
time frcxn Warrninyton. Ile fe{t it is early for thr. warmingtAn representative to (~cf(catr.
tao-story un(ts would nc~t be built because the p~oJects are not even in the planning
stages at thf~ [ime. Ne fe I t eventuat ly ~ rri th the zone ci~angeJ, Che whole arca wi 1 1 be
clevelaped RM-2lfQ~ anC there wi 11 be two-story projccts because the orly problem right now
is th~ adjnc~ent property. He explained tt~cy have pr~vtd~d the additional parkin9 because
the residents ~~ere concerned about che parkin9~ even ttwugti a large portian of the street
7/ 30 / 79
;
MINUTES. ANANEIM CITY PLAtIN1NG COM!.~11SSION~ JULY 30~ 1~79 79-561
EIR ~~EGl1TIVL DECIARATIUN. RECLASS_IFICA'f10N N0. J9~80-2 AND VAaIA~ICE t~0. 3~~ ~co~tinuud)
has not been Imp-rove~~ and curhs ~nd c~utters will make a blg cllffe~ren~e In thr parkine~
sicuatlon.
T-iE PUULIC IIL'ARI~IG WAS f.LOSED.
f,ommi ss i ~tir.r Y.i n~~ .~skr.d Mr . Uud ~ cs what hardsh i~ caul d t~e shc~m reqc~r~11 r~~ the n rophCtY -
and Mr. Uudics rcpiie~f In ardcr tu h:~ve ei~~ht units ~nd thc; proper trafftc flvw~
varlance would be neGess.~ry; t'~at i[ iS further than 1~~ fcet fr~m ch~~ ~~1 pmperty on the
corne; and thc adj~ccnt RS-A-4~~~~'1 zonad prrpcrty w~11 be chanqed to nultlple-family
eventually~ and~ even naw, th~~ pronerty owners nre Pntertafnl~~ thc~~~nhts ~~f chanqinq.
Lommissloner Tolar askc~~ If thc pricc ~f thr ~`~~~r scatccf~itc'i~stcis/, fo`rt1theROp~ sition ta
eonstructed in or~ler to bal~~rice ec.onom+c.~~~Y• Y
mal.e the cornrtrnt ttt~~t thcy ~~cuul~+ ~ikr, tn scc ~nr_-story drv~lc~pmcnc all ralong Savt+nna
Street; tfiat ~tl~c~r pr,t~ntial J~v~^lopcr5 h3vr. indir~trcl t~ thcr, t~.cy wou~d :fevhlo~~~ two-
StptY cor~plexe~~ but wan[~cJ thc ~,p{!osition ta unJcrrstand that ~m~lr.r the yuise ~f noble
eauses~ {~l.~ns c.~n fasc bc:eor~• rev(se~1. ~r~~1 f~~lt it would bc 7 I~:tlc n~ivc to hcl(cve that
WAnningtc~n ~r %-ny ~.~cl~r_~ ~f~vr.~lc~{,cr ls yc~ln+; to vc~rl~~lly tell thrr+ t~~ry wfl) dcvclop ora-
stpry uni ts ar~.1 act .ai ~y t~ui 1~.1 tticr,, aut thut ir~ al l~roh~b) 11 ,y wl l l corr~ back. I,iter
and ask fpr [wo-stary uni ts. ~te ret'crre.; to prc~vi~~us ~~e~rtn~,s where this samc sl:uattun
has occ~~rrc~f. i1e statc~ci ~cvclo-;cr~, wi11 iry tv y~t as ~~uci~ -f~velaprr~:ni on the propercy a~
thCy pt~SSiGIy G~~n. Nc cr.{~l.~in~.~d a Gener.il Plin .i~w•n~1iK~nt waT. recently pmcr.55cu fo~ th!s
arei~ nn Sav,~nna and it ~~~a3 ~~rt~~rn~i~icd at t.h~t tirK~ thc•rc o,as justificrtion for RH-2'~~~
develaprrxnt (n thi~ area .md he ~:id not believe thrr~ is cioinc~ tc be~ a11 ~~nc-Story
dcvcl~pr~ent, tic stnted if tf~c den5ity fs resducr.d to iust sin~~lc-stor~~ .i~velop~~ent i~ the
are~~~ econo~!tcally the -ieV,r,IA~~CfS w111 not naY as inucl~ f~r che ~ropr.rti~~s in the ~'+re~i ~5
they arc curr<yntly~ ~~f(er+nt+. Nc fclt.~ t:x~, any offt rs +on the pro~erty 4,ould bcycontiny~~nt
upon speei fic z~niny ~:~nd s~eci fic hut 1din~~s whl~h c~ule, e L~ui lt an tl~~c ~ropcrt
Chain~vman liarnes expl~iiocd tha[ a ~iar~ishi~ for approv~~ c~f [hc vari~~ncc is required hy
l~w and must relAte t~ thr. propr~riy ~t~elf~ incl~~inc~ t~c size~ 5hape, location,
tvp~r~~~phy, etC. ~ a~c1 statc~d she coul~f not tliin~, of .~n~;-.hi'~y d1 fferent ~hout a fl~~[ pier_e
of prop~rty~ and Cc:mrnl5sloner Ua~i(d mentioned the wat~~+' pur~pin~~ s[ati~n loc~te~i on the
p rope r ty .
CortmisslonAr Herbst a~Ke~! far clarification re~:-rdin ~, the ~n~leriylnc, zontng of t'he
property. and Robert Nenninger~ Assistant Planner~ cxpl~ineu the hardshi~ str.ns fra~ the
zonlny of the prop~rty directly to the c~st and tha':. is the .~rea thAt is ~aencral planned
for lvw~medium ~7en51 Cy residential uses~ but that ~~ sinyle-fami ly residence is current~y
developed on th~ ~~roperty a~d it will pr~bahly evcntua11y be zanecf for medium density.
Cosnmissioner F:ing sug~~estcd the hardship that alt~~ough the ~roQerty imnediately ~~dJ~cent
to the cast is runed RS~A-43,Q~~. it would eventoally be rezc~ned ~n~l devel~ped ~s r~edium
density residential ls~ncl uses~ and Jacl:'~hite~ Deputy Cicy Attorney, stated frorn the
evidence he has heard, he did not believe tt~ere is a leyal justlfication for thi5
vari ance.
Mr, Dudics referred ta the pumpiny station and stated they t~a~c t~ design aroun~i it and it
makes it ~ery difficult to Jevelop thc prop~rty.
Carnnission~r Bushore ask~~d him eo elarify that if the pumping st~tion wcr~e no~ locateci on
the property, he wou~d be able to providc aeir_quate traffic ci~cuiatlon and all single-
stary units, and Mr. Gudics stated he had not tried to cievelop the pra.ject without the
water pumpiny statian.
7/30/79
MI IJUTES ~ A`IAHE IM C 17Y PLANNI NG COMMI SS ION, JUI.ti' 3'~ ~ 137~ 7~'S~2
EIK NEGATIVE OCCIAFtAT10N. RELLASSIFICATIJN U0,__7'~-Ei0-2 AN'~ VAFtIANCE NQ, 3~37 (continued)
Cornr~issl..~rr Eiushc~re stated he :iid not bel ~~~w~ Wart~~in~tor or any other cievelope~r would
cortk in with or~e-story praj~~cts on th~se c~rc~~r~rties~ an~~ hrs, Todci respon~led th~t she had
indicatc~i Werminyton wuuld start wlth hl~il~c~r ~ir.nsity fror~ the existin9 tv~~-stary and wme
clawn~ and ha~f not indicat~•~i th~~y waul~f he all onr.-st~ry ~11 the way,
ComR,lssioncr Nerbst pointrd ou[ that plans suhmittc.~d wt-~tcl~ r,ntir~~ly mc~~t the code would
nok be revt ew~~~i by thc P 1 i~ri i ny C~r*vni ss i on ~ and Chai rwr,,n~n E~Arnr_s pol nted out a two-s tory ~
single~family resiJencc cou1J be c~.instructec! wf[hin 1; fer.t of thr prap~rty line without
any questlons~ and GonwnisSioncr Herhst ~olnt~d out th~~se untts ~erc. 37 feet frnm thc
p ropc r ty 1 1 ne .
Mrs. Todd In~iic.~trd thc:rr. woulJ bc ?l~ rx~r~ vcl,lt~es ~~n ihe Streei with tt~~r apartr•~ent
canplex ano th;~t it wauld hav~• c~t~en c. r;~ai ts.
Gaumissloner Hc~t~st st.~te:,; tl~e ~~ro~r~ t~ ets al l thc ~oniny requir~mcnts except the
minlmum distancr. uf t1~c t~~~~-stnry ~-nit~ fr'or, tli~ ~~Inglc-family home t-~At is on an RM-24~)0
lot, an~i If th~~t propcrty ~~r~~r ~,~ i ls that pr~~~crt~ ~ t~~o-stc~ry uni[s eauld be built c~n.1
denia) of thls req~~st wo I~'~N ncnalizin~~y the ;~ctitioncr, ilc statcd thls is one ~f the
brtter ~,l~ris thc Plor.ni~~ C~xn~,~i~.,•,iuii I•~as secn fur d~^velo~~rnent of [he pruperty.
Gonx,~issioncr ~:iny r~~` .! t~ t'~e ha~~ishiF, cftr:.l in thr appliea:ian (n ttiat othcr
prnperties in Che .;~ {v~.~ ~~~ceived t~~~~ sarne variances~ anef ~ske~ Mr. Du~ilca which
propPrtics ~•^ w,s ~ ~~~, '~, ~~~~~1 -Zr, pudics ri~~;l oerf that thr. ~roNerty at 3:~15 Savanna
had had a vari~znc~ ~ 1 el~erc is FS-A-43~~''~~!; zc>nc:~! ~ro~rrty .1~~ectly behind it.
Nrs. Ta~Jd scaiec .~ [he f~ruptrty Mr. U~.dits was rrferrint; to w~~s locatr.d
approxlriatcly ~"' th~~ curncr ~~f r:nott Strcet, an~~ that was the only lot. exemptr.d
from th~~ Gen~. r • +:-w~nt ~~~ 1s a two-s[:~rv ~-pnrtment projecc and the lot was
vacant ~~t th~• ~*_ was I~ft out bccausc the~~ f~,lt it would !>C unfair t~ ask that
property c~+n~~• ~~w+c.r d~_nsfty ~~rr,~r.c.t 5~[ween tr~o hi9her ciensity pr~jc.•ts. :.'ie
St3ted thc ~>r . ~ ~~ cu ta was th15 ~~~ntlcm~~'S , r~~ject also ~rd i`~at thcre have been
many prc~blc~~~ ~ , •~ t'iat prnject.
Commissiur,~ U~~ . ,~.' for clarlfltation r~.,~wi•~inc; [hc zonlny ~~s ~eing G~ISCUSSP(~ and t'~e
zoning as six.w, ^c rnap~ .ind Robert Henningcr ext~lafne~t t+~~ existin.~ zoning 1, RS-A-
43,40'~ wich ar, ~'~ ~:; that approximately six to erighi r~OnLhS a~~o the owncr asked for
reclassift~ari ~r • ~S-7"10~~ whlch wac; approve<! fur tf~r~r sl~gle-family homes~ and he
thouyht t'~~~ ~~~. ~'., to thc cast beir~y refcrrrd ta woul~! evi~n~uAlly be pl~nned for
multlplr-f,~r~i ~-, Nhich case this property ~rner ~~~~Id t.~e al lc~wed to bui Id aS proposed.
CUi~r~I55IOf~P~ ~tc~ st ci ified to Mrs. ToJd tF~~at if plans sub~ittcc: meet all the zoning
rec~uiremrrts, ''-~~ Gom~ ssion doe. not revirw thr_ plan~,,
~rs. T~~d clar~~ied hcr e~~+rlicr cc>~~~ents~ ex~~laining une t:~ersor; o~rns tNO parcels and they
,,r~, -~c~r sa:c~ buc that the oti~c:r prope~ty c~wryers hav~e Fc~en anproached ~ay the developers ~~
~ v~~untary basis.
AC~ 10~~: Ganx~~issioncr HerbsC officred a n~tio~~ sea~nd~e<z 5y Corrrnissioner Y,iny and MQZ'i0H
~~Ri~IJ ~Goc+xnissir~ner Fry beiny absr.ni)~ that the l~nttl~r.em Cfty Planning Caaxnlssion has
reviewed the propnsal to reclasslfy subject properi~~ fr~~ the RS-A-~:3,O~~C
(Res:~entint/Agricultural) io~ie to the RM~240U (ResiJe.nt~at, Multiple-Family) Zone to
cnnstruct an ei,yht~unit a~artment coms>lex with a waiver uf r~aximurn structural height on an
irreyularly-shap~d parcel ~f lan~i consistiny of approxim~tcly Q.7 acre l~cate~! at thc
s~uthcast carner of Savanna Street and Marian Way, haviT,g approximate frontages ~f 1~~3
feet on thc sout;~ s 1 de of 5avanna St r~c t and 17n f~et ~wi th~c east s i dc of 11ar i an Way ; and
1/30/79
,~r~ ,
MINUT~S~ ANAIIEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JUIY 30~ 1~79 7~-563
E1R NLGATIVE DECLl1RAT1QN~ RE_ClA55IFICATION_NO_._ J~-AO-2_ ANI)_ VARI_AN_CC N0. _3Qg7 (co~tlnued)
doos her~by approve thc Neg~~tive peclaratlon from the requtremrnt to p reparG an
snvtronmental lii~,act r~port on the bASis thrt there wou;d be no ~igniflc:ant tndivldual or
cumulatlve adverse environme~tal impact due to thc app rovel of tht5 Nec~at(ve Decleratlon
slnce the A~aheim Gene~al Plan deslnates the subjer.t prnperty for low•med(um resicientlel
1 and uses commensurat~> wl th tl~e proposal ; that no sr.ns 1 t ive anvi ronmental irnpects ere
Involvcd In chc proposal; that thc Initlal 5tu~1y submtttr.d by the petttlon~r indicates no
siynlftcant Indivi~lual or cu~nulattvc advr.rsc environmcntal (mpac[s; and that the Na~ativc
Declaratlon substantiattn~ the foregoiny fin~iln~as is on filr. In the Gity of Anahctm
Planntng Ucpartment.
Canmissioner Herbst offcred Resoluti~~n N~. PC7'1-15n ancl rrnved for its passaye~ and
adoptlon. th~t thF~ Analielm Gity Planning Comr~Ission wes hereby ~7rant Petitlc+n for
~tcclassif(catlon No, T.~-80-2~ subJect [o (ntcrJep.~rtmental Lo~,mitte~~ r~commendations.
On roll call, the forc~~olny r~:sulutton w~s passe~l by the fo1l~~vtng ~eote:
AYl:S: COf1M1~51'1NER5: BAf',tlLS, BUSNQR.(:~ DA~11D~ IIERGST~ KING~ TOl.Ak
Nc,~S ; Cq1~~~15s In~~t RS : r~p-i[
AOS~NT : COhV11 S51 UFlEP,; : FRY
Comm(ssioner Ilertsst offere~f Resolutlun No. PC7'?-1y1 ~~nd n~ved fpr Its passage and
aduptlon~ that thc Mahclm Ci[y Planniny Corxnis5fon dor;s hcre!~y yr~ni. Petition for
Varlancc No. 3~')7 ~~n tl,c basi; th~t a wa[cr pumpiny scation is locatcJ on t~~e pruperty end
prohlbfts full aecess and circulat(c~n and thac the ~;roperty adjnininy to ihe; easC~
although currently Jcvelo~c~ ~rlth a singlc-fa~fly resl~Scnce, fs ;aener~~l planned for law-
medium density resicie~tial It~iid use,~ and subJec~ to Intr.rdepartn~ntal Cas*r~ittee
rec~mmendations.
On roll call~ the f~~rrqoiny resolution was passcd hy the F~~Ilowinc~ ~ente:
AYE~: CO1iMI5510NfR;;
NOES : COhNI SS 1 ~~IC RS :
AQSEIIT: C01lMI SS IOt~C.RS:
J~ck Whit~, Geputy City
Commlss(on's decision w
decision.
EiARt~lS ~ dUS110RE_ ~ UA~li D~ IiEF357 ~ Y.I t~G ~ TOL~R
NO!~E
FP.Y
Att~rnc.y. presented tl~c writtcn rlght to app~~al the Pianning
ithin T.2 cf~ys to thc City Counci! to anyone ~gQrlcveC with that
REGESS Thc a-ceting recessed at 3:50 p.m.
_.._..~
QECOFiVENE Thc+ me~[ing recanvcneJ at 4:~t1 p.n.
._.~.......`_
ITtM N0. E> CONTI;IUED PUBLIC HEARING. OuNERS; BHIKHU !'ATEI
IR NEGATIVE JECLARATI~-i A1iU PUSHPR ~. P~+TEL~ KHUSfinL ~~. PATEL A-rD LALIVATt
N. 3 J K. PATEL, 17G~ ues: Street ~ Anat~eim~ CA 92i~C2.
Petition~r requests WAIVER OF M11~IMUM NUMDER OF
PARKI t~G SPACES TO COflSTQUC7 A TNREE:-5TORY ~ bd-UN 1 T
MQTEL o~ property descr(bed As a recta~igularly-shaped parcel of i~nd cansis[ing of
approxirnately 0.4 ocrE having ~ fra~tage of approxirtu~tely 70 faet on th~ south side of
Bail Road~ haviriy a maximun depth of aF~proximately 277 feet, and being locateA approxi-
a+ately 425 f~et east of fl~c centerl;nc: of West SI[reet wherc it fntErsects the south sidc
of E3a11 Road. Prc,~erty presenily cl~ssi fied C-R (COt1NERCiAL-RECREATION) ZO!~E.
1~3~/7~
MIIIUTES~ M~AI1EIr~ CITY f'LAI~I~ING COf1MISS10lI~ JUIY 30~ 1~79
Clit NEGATIVE DlGLARAT101~ ANO VARIAt~CE: "IQ. 31C3 (continucd)
~3-564
Subjett pQtitl~x~ was cuntinucd fror~~ the ~nectiny of •luly 1(~ 1~7~, for the subr,iss(on of
revised plans.
There was no one indicatln~a ihelr pr~sence in o~~praitlon to suhject request, .ind althc,ugh
thr. staff repor[ to the Pl~~nntny Conmission clatec! July 3^, 1~1~'1 vras not rc~c! at the Dublft
hcar(ny~ (t is ref~rrrcd to and rnado a p.~rt ~f the r~inutes.
John Sw(nt, agent~ was preser~[ and explaineJ tl~~~t the ~roject is for ~ GO-unlt inotel~
raduced by twc~ u~lts from thc previ~usly-SUhmitted ~,lans, And r.~,at the drivc,way has bPen
rclatatcd and thc lac~~tion appruv~~d by thr_ Traffic Cn~inecr,
TIfC PUDI I ~ HEAP,I~IC WAS CLO~ED.
Paul Siny~rr, Tr~ffic En~rfneer, cx.ploinc~ he ha~i worke~l with th~ Acvr.loper and t-~e drlv~way
h,35 been mc~ved westerly, and it has been rec~uested th~~t a ru~dian he construct~d.
ACTEON: Commissir,n~r Kinr~ ~ffere~! a rnor.ion~ seconded by Carrnissi~ner Uavid and MOTIqN
~tt~'D (Commissic~n~r i'ry bcing ahsent}, that thc Anahcim City Planninn Ccx~missian has
reviewe.~ the prc~p~,sal t~~ cunstruct a~hree-stury~ A~-unit motcl with watv~er of minimum
number of parking spacr.s on a rc•~tan~ul.irly-shapP~1 pnrccl ol` I~nd consistin~~ ~f
appror.imately 0.'~ acre haviny a frnnt~a~_ae c~f appr~xirn~itcly 70 fr_~t on thc south slde of
Ball Road~ havinq ~ rn~3xiMUm cJcpth of approxir~atcly 277 fect~ and bc~ing located
approx(mateiy 42~ feet east of thc centcrlin~~ c~f W~st Street where said street tntersects
the sUUth s i dc of Ba 1 1 Roid; anJ ~cs hereby approve thr: Nrqat i ve Deti arat 1 an f rom th~
requlrement to prepare an envfronm~rta) lmpact report on tt~e ba,ls ihat there would be no
sic~ntficant indivi~iu~l or c.umulative adverse enviror,~~x:nt~+l impact duF t~ the approval of
this Neyative Declar~l'ion sir~~c the Anahelr~f Gencral f'lan desi~nates the subJett property
for corunercial-rc~crc:c~tion land usc~s e.or~r„ensurate wlth thc ;~roposal; tt,a[ no sensitive
env(ronr~ental impacts arc involved ir~ thr~ proposal; chat [he Inlt~~l Study submitterd by
the petitloner ind1C<~te5 no siqnific,int individual or cumulativ~ adverse enviranriental
impacts; and that the Negative D~cl~ratiun sub~t~intiatiny the foreg~inc~ findings Is on
fi le in the CI ty of Maheim ?lanning Departrrk.nt.
Commtsstoner Y,lny offered Resolution Mo, PC73-152 and moved
that Chc Anaheim Ci[y Planniny Cummissiun does her~et:y yra~t
on the basts that a certain ~~ercenta~e of th~ guests arrlv~
than privatc autor~obile, and that denial would be depriving
being enjoyed by othcr ~>rr~pertic~s undc~ fdentical zoninG cl
and subject. to Interdepartrnental Cor~mittee recormx~ndations.
for its passage and adoptton,
Petltion for Vartance No. 3103
by a transportaticn mode other
the pra~crty of prtvileGes
:.ssification in the vicinity~
Un rol) cali~ the forc9olc.~3 resolutf~n was passed hy the following vote:
AYES : COMMI S51 ~NERS : DARNES, BUSF~Op,C, DAVI D, HER"~S"( ~ KI NG, TOLAR
NOES: COM1115S 1011Ef'S ~ NON~
Al3SLNT: C0~1111S5IONERS: FRY
C.omm(ssioi~er M.ing ~xplaincd hP had use~ a surv~y prescnted at a previous heariny as part
c~f his decisicsn f~r approval and referred to Variance N4. 3~~6 granted in O~tober of 1978
f'or the Tropicans~ Motel ~ and indi~~[c~d he had visi ~ed the parl:ing {ot at the Sheraton-
~~naheim across the street on Sursday~ July 2~th at 7:QS ~.m.~ and there wgre appraximatcly
116 vacant parki~g space5 on the south sid^ of the buildtnn ~~nd t~~ motel r~ext door east
of the proJect had i4 vacant parkir~g spaces.
7/30/79
MINUTf:5~ NIAHLIM GITY P~ANNING COMMISSIf1N~ JULY 30~ 1g19
79-565
ITEM N0, PUQLlC HEAa1NG. OWNER: At~At1E1M UNITCI) METIIOOIST
EIR NEGIITIVE DEG~ARATION CISURCN, 2~39 Ee}c aei i Roed~ Anahetm~ CA )2£~~fi.
~~ SI IG ON N0. ~-80- AGENT; NALL ~ Fc1Rf.MAN~ INC. ~ P.O. Box 1 ~G67~
~`~'~j~r, Santa Ane~ CA ~?.711. Propc~rty described ns a
"""-"~ rectan~~ulnrly-shapcd parccl of land cunsistiny
of ~pnrr~xint+tcly 2.1 Acres I~aving a frontage of
appraximately 1~y fcct oi~ tt~e s~uth side af Na~}ncr llvenue, haviny a m~-ximum dapth of
epproximataly 5~0 fcet~ and being locatQd ~pprnxlmatcly 472 fr.et e~+st of thc centerilne of
Stata Gollcyc Boulevard. Propcrly presantlY ~tasslflr.d R5-A-43,0~0 (RESIUENTIAL%
AGRI CULTI.~aAL) ZO~t~_.
RLQUESTEQ CLASSIFICATIQII: RM-3000 (RESIilE!~TIAI., MULTIPIL•FAMILY) ZONE.
7E1~7ATIVE TRI~CT RE:~ZULST: ONE-LOT~ 21-UNIT, RM-;~~~~ COI~DOMINII,H PROJECT.
Tt,ere wr.re three persons indicatin~~ thclr prc5erlGC in opposition t~~ ~'~t'~pW~Srnot~reaAaat
Althouyh the staff rr~~orc tc~ thc Pl~nniny Go~m~lssion dfltc.d July 3~~ 19J,
the puGlic he~arln~~ it is ref.n.rred tc~ and made ~~ t~art ~>f th~ minutes.
Ker~~,it Uorius, ar~hitect~ was ~~resent t~~ answer ary queStlons.
Micha~l llts~~~~~, 1~?31 ~lorr~an f'lacc~ Anahe(m~ referrc~i to the FIR Ney~tlve Ueclaration .gnd
indicate~t hr did nc~t a~~rec [hr~t tl~rrc Nould be n~~ siq~ificant environmental Impacts. He
statecf hc h.~s 1 ived at his propcrty fnr sMVCn ycar~ a~~d hnd rnove~i thCre assuming this
prupcrty woul~i be Jevelo~+c:~! as a church; that ~f~foot~hl~hdfencclrroul itbciacteq~~atc,han.f
tntire vir.w to thr rcar and hc cJi~l nut trcl a
as~l:ed that 1 t be h 1~~hcr t~~ r~a i nta 1 n t~ 1 s (~ r I vacy . Nt wag a 1 so cc~nct rned ,~t~out the
liyhtin~~ ~~ointiny ovt there is ~Iready a problern I~ec.ause of light.in~~ in the surrounulnq
arca. ~1e Jlu not feel P condo~~inium ~roject would fIt into the area~ ~ninttng out the
scliool tc t~te east, the churr.!~ to the west~ an~i single•fAmi ly regidences to the sou[h. HN
felt cpnduminiums would I~ecorr,~ r~ntal un(ts and woul<1 be occ.upied wlih tou~+lrs or sin~le
persons ~n~: this area is alcveloped with S1'!Q,~^~ hcxhex end~ tct tlie presen[ timP, there are
very few rr.nfal propcrties. F~t ~[ated hc has n~tlccd abo~'t ~ne-holf the narkin? ts c>ren
park~ny anr.l as~e~j whcr~. tne uPer~ par~.iny is !ocated in rclatlor,sl~in to the sinc~le-famf ly
homes and th.: iiiyh schoul ~ fcel inc~ that accessfti iity to chr, parG ing wc~uld creAte a
v~ndalis~~~ problem with thc stuJents. Ne stat~d he rec~ynlxes thr.re are only Mo
residential lots ~irectly irnpacted by thts develapm~nt and stated b~th of thos~ pro7eriy
owners are concerned at~out the setbacks, the type of' iundscapin~ ar~~osed, ~nd whether or
not their view to thc north woul<.i b~ blockr,d~ poin;inq out they hrv~~ a yood vlew of the
~oountains anu feit a condominium wlil b1ocF: that vie~. Ne was conterned Lhat the
drali~agc~ pointing out Wagn~r Avenue a1re:Ady has 0 floodiny ~rablem durEnct reli~y weather.
Ne statecl, ay~~~~ he had bbught the property 855urninc~ a church wuuiJ be developed thera
and nvw the intenc is ::hanylny, and stated he r+oulcl like to be able to h~vE an opportunitv
to provide his input t~ ttie developer.
Mr. Uorius state~ they would be willtny to i~crease ti~~ t~cl9ht of tFie fen~:.e by one foot~
but werr. cancerned about tl~e zoning requirements concerning Che height. He stated the
lighttng would be on cl~e other sidc pf the bull~ing ad}acent tu Mr. Bisbee'z property and
tt~ere wauid bc less of a pr~bl~m chan exists naw. tie stated he cfid noc thin~c there is eRy
wt+y n~w cons t ruct ~ on t~day cou I~~ be taU i nexpe~s ( ve anci he d i ci not tfi i n{~, anyone coul d
~fford to purchase thesr. units for rentals. Ne cxplained the ~ner~ parking is more ar less
In th~ middle of the proJect behind tl~e wall and It wnuleS not k~c very accessible to any
outsi~ers. He stated the landscaping will be cione in a wery beautlfu! manner; Fcowever~ it
is possiLl the tre~s w111 yraw up end block this ge~tleman's vieN.
~i3~r79
MINUTES~ ANAHEIH CITY P~ANNING COMMISSION~ JuLY 3n~ tg79 7g-;~6
EIR NEGATIVE DECLAMIIQN. REClAS51FICATION N0. 79-$0-7 ANO TEtIT4TiVE MAP OF TRACT N0. 1U794
-- - - -
Jim Kennedy, ;~6.;2 Strong PIacQ. Chairmen of tl~c Boercf of Truscccs for clie church~
(ndicateJ th4y havc been concQrncd fc~r Aort~ [ime abaut tl~fs property; thAt It is presently
being used by thc ~obGy Sox Playe~s of East Aneheim; thet the property h~+s n-~.~re or less
lnvit~d vandelism; and thmt pe~plc have drlve~~ tl~e:ir vet~lcles on thc property~ breakinq
sprtnklers~ etc. He sceted tf,~y have hoei a clifficult ttrrk nwlntatninq the property in the
fashion they woufd itke and fee) it would be bcst ta scli thc exccss property and f~el if
(t Is cfeveloped anci sul~l~ thc vandalism wlll stop end they hope tt wlll present a good
ncighbo~ to the surro~n~inc~ arca and f~el the devCl~pinent as p mnoscd wlil upgrs+de the
enti~t arc~.
Eiob Lansley~ 14~;~1 ALtboro P{ace, Tustin~ mi:mber of the church and real est~te broker
representing tl~e church~ Ir~dlcoted he 1ie~i talkeci wftl~ '~S pro~~erty r~wner~, Includtng Mrs.
Bisbee en~i Mrs. Pac~e~ and the oth~r 41 propercy owners wer~ in varytn~~ degrees of approval
nnd ycnerally fclc thiis Is e much bvtter alttsrnatlve t1~an Nhat exists ~~t thc present time.
THE PUI3l.iC HEARI~JG 41AS l.ltiSEU.
Comm(ssioner Kiny explained to Mr, l3ishee thnt thc two•~~corv huil~tnys nropased wll) be
150 `eet from hts lot line and nr~te~ hc has a two-story home,
Mr. f3tsUec st~ted he rea!izcs ttiat and k~~ows tt~c plan mc,~ts tfie codr.~ but he did npt know
hc~w a two-s[ory buildlny would aff~~cc hfs vie~w ?')0 feet ~~way and stated he N~uld likr to
go over the plans wicf~ th~ arcliltect [o seA what effect it wlll hove.
Cortomissi~ner Tolar scatecf there will hc somechiny bullt or, this p roperty evcntually and
t~io-story, sinyle-family reside~nces caulel be built 15 feet from clir~ property line~ which
would block thc vi~r cven R~re than thesr units. 11e askcci if M~. Bisbec had viewed the
plans. and h~ In~ilceted he I~~d not.
Chatrwcxnan fiarnes suspencled ctie discusston on Item No. 7 and ~sl~ed Hr. Bisber. and the
devclapers ta revie-v the plans. Follvwin~ thc -~earing ~n ICem No, 5~ th~ heering was
continued.
Mr. Dorlus state~ he had c~ISGUSSCd the plens with the neighburs immed(ately tp the rear
and they have a9recd co tr~e increased h~cight of thc wall,
aobert Henninger~ Assistant Pianner~ polnced out thc code allow~ a E~-foot hiyh wall end a
hiyh~r Hall wnuld requtre a variance and ~ public hearing dnd could not be approved today.
Mr. Dist~ee stated basicaily tt~e plans wlll improve the propcrty ~nd will eliminate
vandal(sm and treffic ~robl~rr~. He s[ated he had discussed the proJect wtth the developer
and with th~ st(pulAtion regarding the wall~ f~e felt most flf che problems havc bee~
solved. He added th~re is e problem with the adJacent prc+perty on Katella because it is
htgher and t~ie wall would have to be o or y feet hlgh in ~~~der to soive the probfam there.
M~. borlus state~J thelr proptrty fs about ont foot higher than the neighbors' praperty and
they ~auld like to submft a letter declaring their inten; of adding Qne foat to the Nall
and get their permisslon s{nce tne wall wil) be hlyh~r than G fACt o~ thelr side.
Chain~ort-an Barnes pointed out since the wall woulel be only f, ~e~t high on subJect
p~opertY, ~ veriance would not be required,
Caynlssivner 9ushcrr asked abouc the preschool recencly app~oveci vnd if this proJecl will
affe~ct that playground~ and it was replied lt would not be affected.
7/30079
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLAIdNING COMMISSIOtI~ JULY 3~~ 1~79 I9"5G7
EIR I~EGATIVE DECLARATION, R~ ECLASSIFiCAT10N N0. 7-~ 8~-7 ANO TCI~T~ ATIVE MAP OF 7RAGT N0. 107'~4
ACTION: Goinmissic~ner Y.Iny offerecl a nation~ seco~~dco by Commisslonr.r Devid and MOTI~N
C~LO (Commiss(oncr Fry be(ng absent)~ that tt~c Anai,~im City Plenning Cat~m(ssion has
rtvtewed tl~e proposal to racl~~ssify the pro~erty fro^~ ttie RS-A-43~~On (Rexldentlal/
Ayrlcultural) Zonc r.o the ~M-3()Q~ (ResiJcntial , Multl~.le-Fami ly} Zanr. to establ lsh a one-
I~t~ 21-unit~ condominium subdlvisl~~ ~n a rsctangularly-sl~epeu parcel of land consistfng
of approxln,ately 2.1 acres haviny a~ frantA~e o~ approximetely 1Y~5 feet on the ~outh s1dQ
of Wagncr Avenur~ havl~ig a maxim~~ ~ denth of appruximately 5~~) fect~ and being located
appr~ximately ~-'12 fcet east of thc ccntcrllne of Stntc Collagc Bo~ilevard; and doPS i~erPby
approve the Ueyafive Declaration fro~~~ tnc requirement to prepare an environmesntal Impact
repo~t on the basis that there would be no s(gntficanc individual or curnulative adverse
enviro~mental impacc Jue to tl;e approval uf thts Negnt(ve Ueclaration since the 14nahelm
General Plan deslgnates the subJ~~ct pr~perty for Ic~w density resldr.ntlal land usrs
commensuratc w(tl- the p roposal; thet no sensltlve envir~nmental Impacts ~re involved in
ttic proposal; tt~at the Initlal Stucty submitte.d 6y the petitioner indlcates no significenL
indlvi~ual or cumulotive A~Iverse environmental iinpacts; ancl that the Negatlve Ueclara[tc~n
substantiating the forr.yoln~,~ findings is an filc in t-ie City of Anohcim Planning
Uepartmr_nt.
Commissloi ~r Kiny offereJ ltesolu[ion Na. PC7~)-l~j and mc~ved fc~r (ts pass~~q~ and adoptton~
that thc P.n,~hcim Ci ty F'lannlny Cormission dacs hr,reby grant Pet~ tfon fc~r Recla~:alflcation
Na. 79-'~'/~ subj~ct tu the stiuulation of the applicent to pruvide a f~•foot hi,yh~ masonry
wall on the south property line, and subje~[ tu Intcrdepartmcntal Committee
recommenuatlons.
On roll call~ tl~e foregoin~ resoluti~n was passed by thc follawin,y votc:
AYE.S : COnMI SS I Otlf. RS : BARNL 5~ (~USi10RE ~ DAV I U~ tIERBST ~ KI ~+G ~ TOLAP.
NUcS: ~U~IMISSIQNERS: NO~~l
ABSEI~T: CUM-11SSIONERS: FRY
Commisslone:r -Ciny offered a mation~ seconcSed by Gornnissioner David and Nf~1~IC1~ GARRIEU
(Commis~cioner Fry being absent)~ tl~at tt~e An~~hcim City Planniny Commi~sion cloes hereby
find that the propose~i subdivislon, toyether with its design anci i~-provement~ is
conslstsnt with the Gity af Anahe(m Gene~al Plrn, pursuant to Governmr.~ii Cocie Section
6Fi73.5 and docs~ thereforc~ apprave Tentbtive ~1ap of Tract No. 107n4 f~r a one-lot, 21-
uni:~ Rhh3000 (Residential, Multiple°Fsrnily). coi~dominium subd(vtsi~~n~ sub)ect to the
follv.~iny condttions:
1. That 5f~c~ulJ this sub6iv(sion be developed as me~re than one subdiv~sion, e~+ch
sub~divfsion th~reof st~all be subm(tted in tentative forr~+ for approval,
2. That th~ covenants~ condttions. and restricttons shal) b~ submicted to a~d
appr•oved by thr. C;ty Attorney's Office prtor to City Council approval af thc fi~al tract
mAp and~ ~urther. that the epproved covenrnts~ conditio~s~ 3nd restrtctions shell be
recorded prior to the f(nal troct map approvat.
3. 1'hat street names shall be appro~rd by the City Planning De~artnent prfar to
app roval of a finA1 tracc map.
4. Thai sub ject property stral I be served by undcrground uti 1 tties.
5, In the event that su~~~act p~operty is to be divided for the purpose of sale~
1ea~e~ o~ financing~ a parce) map, co re~ord the approved div(ston of subJect property~
sha11 be submitted to and approved by the City of Anahe{m and then b~ recorded in the
office of the Oranye County Fecorder.
b. That the owne~(s) of subJect property shaii pay to the CtLy of Anaheirn the
•pproprt~ste park and rec~eation frs-lteu fees as dctermined to oe ap~roprlatc by the City
~ounc.ll~ sald fees to be pald at thQ ttmc the building permlt is issued.
7/30/79
~
MINUTES~ ANANEIM CITY P~ANNING CUMMISSION~ JULY 30~ 1')~~
79-;GA
EIa NEGATIVE ~:CLARATI~N. kECLAS5IFICATIOr~ N0, )~-80-7 ANa TENTATIVE MAF OF TRACT NO, 10 4
..._i.....~._ _..~._ -
7. That ell private ~treets shpll be cseveloped In ~ccordancr_ wlth the Clty of
Anahelm's Stencierd DctAil No. 122 far private str~ett. Plan• for thcs p~ivete strect
Il,yhting, ~x r~quired by the stanciard dtteil~ ah~ll be submltted tc~ oncl epp~oved by the
Electrical Gtvlsic~n. Approved private street Itghting plans shall then l,e sub~nttted to
thc bultding Uivision for inclusl~n with thc builCtnr~ plans prtor to tssuencc of bu(tding
pc rml ts .
E. If pPrmanent atrr.ct name slgns havc not bcen In~t+~iled~ temporery street neme
slyns shall b~ (nstallcd prior to any occu~sncy.
y. Thet tltie own~r(s) of sut~.ject pr~perty shall p~y the trnffic stqr~al assessmrnt fee
(~)~dlnance No. 3~S;~G) ~(n an am~unt as dete~rmined by thP CI ty Councl l~ f~r each new
dwclitny un(t prior to thc issuan4~ of ;~ bullqing prrmit,
Jack Whltr, Dr~~uty Gity Attorney~ presente~ the written rlyht to ~epp~el the Planntny
Comm(ssion's decision within ?.1 J~ys to the Ctcy Councll.
ITEM N0. 3 PUl3LIC NEARING. QNNERS: MAR;HAIL E. DUNN~ ET Al~
~~'~VE UCCL~RI~TIQN c./o l~rthur N, Gray, Jr, ~'l14 West lincoln Avenue~
" ~ 4~~ N• 7')-f}~~`~ Annhelr,~ GA 7?.~:s~5, AGCt~T: EUf,EIIE F. TUTT~ p.p.
9ox 4Fi1, Tust'tn~ CA y2Gii~. Petlt(on~~ request5
recless(fication of pru~~rty descrlbecf es a
rectAn~~ularly-shnpea parc~l <,f land consistl~g of approxlr-Ately 0.~ acre located at the
southe~st corr~er of Santa AnA Street anJ Ilarbor Boule~vard~ hevtng appr~ximate frontages of
to5 feet on th~ south sicJc of Santa Ana Str~et r~nJ 1~)5 fec*, on thc oast 3ide of 1larbor
fiouleyard~ anct further ~lescribad ss 5'~~ South H~rbor Boul~vard~ frum the RM-?.40~
(RESIUENTIAL~ ~1ULTIPI.~-FAMIIY) 7.ONE TO TIIC ~0 (CONMERCIl~I~ bFFICE A"ID PROFESSIONAL) 2QIIE.
There wcre two persons (nclir.at(ng ttieir presenc:e (n opposltion to sub.ject request, and
aithough thc staff report to the Planninr~ Canrnisston dated July 30, '_,7~ w~s not read at
thc public hear(ng~ it (s rcferrcd to and ma~e a part of the minutes.
Eugrne Tutt~ ag~n[~ statecf thc prnposed
tha p~-pNosr,d devclop-nent ~onforms to the
exis;iny on a portipn of thc p~~perty on
a eonsolf~iatlon of eccess righcs.
reclassification ce~nfurms to the Gener~t Plan and
LO zonir~g~ and tharc is a resolution of intent
thN Na~bor Boulevard frontage and this represc.nts
Eetty Ronconi ~ 12~+1 Soucti ua'nut Strcct, Anahe(m~ st~ted she owns the property ec Sl~i
Sauth Harb~r 9oulevarci, adJac~nt to subje~t property~ a~d that she Is not really opposed
to the pro j~~ct ~ but i s conce rned abrut the renta 1 res i dence ai 51 ~.~ 5outh Flarbor and s tated
they would ifke the block wall excended to give that house prlvacy and a buffer zone
betwcen the parking 1ot and t~ie re;sidence.
Jane Gook~ ;;~i1 Soutfi Helena Strcet, Anahelm~ stated her property is to the east and south
of ttils dsvclopment and that she is not oppased to tt~e proJtct, and commendecl the
devclopr.r on the plan, ;he stated shc: hoped the Pian~ing Commission anproves the request.
on the cond(efon ti~at the Inndscaped buffer xones be re[atned exactly as indicated on th~
plans. She felt this is what is needed Ir- this nciyhborhood to protect the restdenttal
quallty of [f-e t~orn~S on lielena Street and tliat she would lc~ok for the same standards when
the property to thn south is develnped. She was alsa concerned about th= high-speed
traffic thrvuyh the alley end suygested that spued bumps be (nstalled~ indicattng she
~eaiizes the Englneeriny Department Joes not recornrnend speed bumps because of the
potentlal I(ab(itty~ and asked that some pthec• solution be found to preve~t traffic~ other
ttian what belongs there in connection with the office buiiding.
7/30/7q
~ :~
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMI~~ION~ J~~Y 3Q~ 1979 ~9'~69
FIR NEGATIVE QECLARATION ANJ RECLASSIFICATION N0. 79•AO•9 (contlnued)
~ ~
Mr. Tutt stated tl~ey would hev~ no obJect(on to continuinc~ the wall on the southerly
property 1(no, but it woul~ have to he~ lawer~d conslstent wlth tha zontng rel~ting to
tnyress and ugress. He statod the l~ndscaping wil) be Installed exectiy as indicated on
tho plen.
THE PUtiLIC ~{tAR1~~C Nns ClOSLD.
Comml~sioner Ilnrbst asked if there would be eny obfection to blotking tl~e eccess tn ~he
alley~ 1nJlc~+tiny tils conccrn that this parklnq lot would be used for vehlcular access.
Hr. Tutt referrccl to Conditio~~ No. 11 rFquiriny rcalignmcnt of thc existinc~ rigt~t-of-way
to provlde for r.onCinuac~ public acr.ess ta the ~+Iley. Ne statrd thls has becn discussed
an~l they concur with the oplniun of the staff that t~cces. to the alley should be from and
to rlarbar rather th~~n Sanca Ana Street. Ilc st~+ted they wi 1 I havr. to Ai low unl imited use
of thP alley and that ic will br. a public easemcnt.
Jey Titus~ 4fficr Engineer. statcd ~t would be undesirable to block off the alley since
therr wc~uld bc ~~o access thraugh for thr. tr~~sh truc~.s~ ecc. Ne stated he did not thtnk
th(s wil) I~e~p or hindcr thc sptrd of thc trafflc down the ~licy and Indi~.ated snee bumps
dcfinitely wnuld not bc desirablr..
Mr. Tutt stateu if tt'~e reellyn~rd publfc casement we~c to yo out on Harbor and if the
t~ccess point cmto San[a Ann Street were secureci after f~ours~ It w~uld eilminatc thr.
straight shot as I t exist~ nc~v rnd ~niuht prohlbl t t~tie vo~ur~ of the trafflc.
Cc~nr,issiuncr Herbst rcfcrrcd to thc acGCSS to Narbor an~f pointr.c! aut It Is close to Santa
Mc~ Streec~ ~nd askn~ if t1~e exit could be right-turn-onty.
Robert i~enninyer~ /tssistant Plannr_r, statcd the Traffic En~tneer h~s vlewt~ the plans and
ftnds no problem wi th tf~c proposal al lc.wiing turns botli ways.
Jay Titus stated hc c11~f not think the armunt of tra(fic in tFie alley would be a problem,
and Comm(ssloner I~erbst stated he wes cor~cerned ab~ut the trafflc from xhe complex Itself
crASSiny liart,or s~~ clc~sc cu Santa A~a Strcet.
Comnissioner Bust~ore stated hc questionecl any inyress and cgress at al) on Narbor since it
is so clase to tt~is inccrsection.
Commissioner Tolar Jid not think in•;ress go(ng nurth would havc a problem~ but to tha
south the~r might be a problem. Ne stated if the acccss (s made rigF~t-turns-on1y~ it
would appear to alleviate most of the proble~rs and ttie majority of the trafflc going south
wvuld have to go out onto Sar~te M a St~ect to the slqnal.
Gommissioner Bushar? asked Ef there is access out onto Narbor et the project et Sauth
Street and Harb<~r, a^d the Commission brtafly Glscussed that proJect regardi~9 whether or
not there is a dividcr or left-tu rn pocke[s. and Chairwoman Harnes stated this proJect
would have ta be re~esiyned for rlght-turn-only so that the traffic could only ga ~ight.
Paul Singer. Traffic Enyineer~ stat~d tn the past wc have tricd to cambine driveways along
Harbor and sharing accesses wlch several parceis~ ond since this particular p roperty has
bcen carbtned, they did r-ot feel lt woulc! b~ (napproprtate to permit one driveway far the
three parcels and that anytir+~x a drivcw+ay is permitted on a heavfly-traveled street, there
is a canflict poi~t.
7/ 30/ 75
,.
4
MINUTES, Al1AfIEIM CITY PLANNINC COMMISSION, J~LY 30~ 1~)9
EIa NEGATIVE DECLAftATION AND RECLASSIFICATIOI~ NO. ~g-8(1-~ (contlnund)
,
~
79-570
Robert Nenninger explained tl~is issue is discussed In perayrapf~ (1~~) cf the staff report;
thet Lhere wes ~n Area Uevcl~pment Plan done on that yrou~+ oP percels wlifch fronts on
Ha~bor doulevorcJ and because of the proporttc~~ being develo~o~t es s tnyle-fam) ly
resicSential at the present tlme with a resolution of intant to commerciel afftce uses~
there wes conce~n that eac.h one of thes~ would be ellowe~i to develap as an offlce with Its
own p~ivatc ~Iri voway, en~f that Is thc reason for thls pro~osal ~ to 1 iml t the access ~nd
encourAge pcople Lo ~Iit-er use che A11ey nr combine tt~elr properLles.
Commisslonerliushor~.~ HskeJ if other propertles to the south would usc thc alley as they
develop~ an~1 Mr, 1lennlnqer stated if the parcels continuc co use the cxisting str~,ctur~s.
thcy would b~ f~rc~d tc~ ~isc th~: alley ancl to yc1 throuyh this yentl~men`s pro~erty.
Cor* sslonrr To1,3r suyyested sincc I~arbor is onc of thc matn ,trects Into Anihefm, a
Iandsca~~eJ mndian br. Installc~i.
f'au1 Sinycr sta[cd thc inhcrcnt problcm is that Narbar is at its minlmum w(dth nnd in
orJe~ to provlJr, a median~ ~arkin_y would hAVe [o be rerwver~ o~ the width of the travel
lanes wauld have t~~ be narrc~wa~, but tt~at It could be cione If that Is the Planning
Commisslon's recommPnditlon. He state~l if parklnq (s removed, a 1~~-fuot wlde~ Irndscr~~ed
median tould be provi~ed~ and (f thc lanes t+re ~~irr~rved~ a~-fa.~t wide~ non-I~ndscapec
strip eauld bc provlded,
Commi ssloner [iushore 3tntc~ hc felt tliis wou1J Ge an unneccssary expensr .,nd that the exi t
ec+ul d be des{gn~ted as righ[-turn-only wl th a curved-type enl t, r.~~courayin9 the traffic to
go ri ght only.
ACTIOII: Com+n(ssioner Kinc; offered a notion, seconded b•/ Cv~rnisst~ner Devid ~n~l MOT10N
CARFI ED (L'oi~missloner Fry being absent) ~ that the Mahelm L(ty Plonning Commisston has
~evle~ ed the prc~pc~sal to reclassify tfie praperty from the RIt-:ti'10 (Residen[ial~ Multl~le-
Farni ly) Zonc to [t~c CO (Commcrciai~ OffiGe and Prafesstcx~al~ .onc on a r~ctangularly-
shaped parce) af !and consistiny af appmxl~nat~ly f).'~ acre located at the s~utheast corn~r
of Santa Ana Strcet and Itarbor Boulevard, having approximetc frontages of 1;35 feet on th~
south siJe of Santa Ma Strcet and 1)~ feet on thc east sEdc of Ilarbor aoulevard; and da~s
hereby approve the Negat-vc Ueclaratlon frorn t-oe requirement to preparc an envlronmental
in~paet report on th~ basis tfiat Lhere woul~~ be nn 5(g~ific~~n; indtviduel or cumulative
adve~se envlrorii~~en[al impact duc to the ~pproval of this Negattvr, declar~tfon since the
Anahelm Genr;ral Plan d~sirn:,tes the subject praperty f~r cor~,x:rciat-rrofessional iand us~s
ccx~unensurate with the praposal; t`~at no sensitive environme~tal (mpaG;:s are ir olved in
thc propusal; trat the lnltial Stu~y submit[od by the petitioner indir.ates no stgnificant
indi vidua) or cu~ula[iv~ adverse envi ronrnental Impacts; an~ that the Negattve Oeclaratic~n
s~Dstantlating tl~e foreqoing fin~lings f5 on fllc in the City of Anaheim Planning
Depa ~Gment,
Paul Slnc,~e:r asked Ccmvnissioner dushore to cl~orlfy what type af restrictive curbs he is
suggcs[ing for encouraging traffic right and explained a driveway Nas developcd an a
parcel at La Palma ~nd Maynolia~ and that tt is a severr. right-turn encouragement~ but
that peoplc do make left turns. He felt a sign alonc wouid nat discourege traffic to Lurn
left.
Cor+~+issioner aushore indicated he dI~ not have a siyn al~ne In mind an~! wauld want to sec
ttie exi t curved.
Caszrnissloner King offered Resolution No. PC79~1;4 and movcd for its passage and adopcion~
that the Ma~~etm Gity Planning Cortr,is.sion does hereby gr~~t Petttion for Reclasstficatior~
No. 7y-b0-9~ subJect co ihe pet~tioner's stipulatlon to p~ovide a 6-foot high~ mssonry
7/30/79
,
~
i~;
~ MINIJTES, ANANCIM C 1PY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JULY 3p~ 1979
79-571
~ EIR NEGATIVC DECLAitAT10N NJD RECIASSIFICATION NU. 79-80- (co~tfnued)
! fence along the south
, property line, an~ subJcct to Interdcpertr~ntal Gommittee
~ racomrnendations.
PriQr tc~ votlny on the resolutton, Commisstoner F~ushare incilcateJ he did not want to vote
against the proJect because of tt~e rlght turn~ but felt sincC the property is close to the
ca~ner at Santa Ana Street~ It would ba a d~n~erous s~ u~tian end would be a bt9
liebiltty~ ~ncJ Felt f[ should be deslgned propcriy.
Commissioner Tolar steteci he did not thlnk rr~~;ing tl~e exit right-turn-only would cost the
developcr thAt inuch money and tl~at hc wauid Just tiavc to make tl~e turn sl ightly to the
nc~rth~ and suyycsc~J thnt the devcloper makc that st(pulation,
Mr. Tutt statsd he would i~ave no problem wicr~ n~klny thc cxit right-curn-only~ but thot he
really does not un derstAnd the effectiv~ncss and the precisc decai) of establfshtng an
angled rtryht ~lrivew ay and s~ated hc would stipulete to work wtth thc Traffic Englneer.
Paul $(riycr wonder~cl (n order tu ma~:e the riyht-furn-anly effectlve~ how much land would
be taken and how ef fect Ive i c woul d real ly be.
Cominissioncr Tolar st~tcd I~e is n~t suqyestlny that all Clie p~opie Nould bc en~ouraged to
turn right, but If ~0; could be discc~uraged fr~m turning Irft, thc si:uatlor~ would be
better.
Hr. Stnger stateJ they wl) l try ta do [he best they can wlthin ihe constrainis.
Chairwoman ~arnr.s stoted It ic th.~ consensusof ti~e Com~-ission that they wa~t a right~turn-
only wlth the plaris rcdesigned~ and Cammfss(cxiCr King stated he did not want to sce the
p 1 Ans redes i yned.
Commissioner UaviJ pointed uut chr Policc aepartment is located closr to this property and
he dlcl not think anyonc would be maG,lny i 1 Icgal turns.
Mr. Tutt stated he agrees with the senttments end tt would be much better to elimtnate the
left turns both in ancl ou[ of the property. bui felt In try(ny ':o accom~~tsh that through
physieally redeslgntng the pro,ject and maintaining a safP ne~~.;ria~~ ~ituatlon on the
sidewalks~ thcre would be a problem~ parcicularly f~- the so~~thboun+ traf ic wanting to
turn tnto the pruperty with the ~iriveway airning rlg~~t at thcm~ and felt c::,,t +ac~uld
encourage thcm to try to curn in. He felt~ how:.tr~ mos[ peoplr~ efter ~~s~r~•~ the access~
would find it easie r gotng south to go out Santa Ana Strc~t [o the s~gn~l, He ,tated they
would be happy to discuss this furttier with the Traffic Engineer and that [hey Nt~uld be
w1111ng tr, pr•ovl~e ~ right-turn-only sign,
Comm;ssloner Kiny stated his resotution wtli stand es is without the requircncnt for a
right-turn-only exf G,
On rol 1 cal I~ thc foregoing resolution was passed by tl~s fol fowing vote:
AYES; COMM15SIr~NERS: 4ARtICS~ BUSHORE.~ DAVID~ HEREiST, KIIIG~ TOLAR
NO~S: C~NMISSIONERS: HOt1E
AQSENT: COMM15510NER5: FRY
~
MINUTES~ ANAIIEIM CITY PLANNING GOMMISSION~ Ju~r 3~~ 1979 79•572
ITEh1 N0. PUaIIC NEARING. OWNERS: RALPN J. AND DOROTNY M.
~~,~E UCC~.~RATIOt~ WARDEN, P.O. Box ~-~~7~ Anaheim~ CA 928Q3. AG~NT;
RECLA SIFI ATION N~. '7-80•G ML LEAN b SCHULTZ~ 2~00 East Chapmen Avenue~
Fullcrton~ CA ~2G31. Petittancr ~equosts r~classi-
flcation of p~operty ciescribed es en (rregularly-
shaped parcGl of land consistin,y of apprax(macely Q.l+ acre hAVing ~ frontege af approxt-
mately 192 fc~et on ttie east side of Walnut Street~ t,avin~,~ r max(mum depth of approximatcly
203 fect~ being lacated o~proxlmatcly 1~-0 feet nortf~ af tt~e centerl ine oF Menchester
Avenue~ a~d turther c:escribeJ As 33~> South 1Jalnut Street~ from the Cf (CONNERCIAL~
GEi~ERI1L) ZONC TO TfiE PIL (INDUSTRIAL. LINITCf)) ZONf..
The~e was no one indicet(ng thelr presQnce in oppositlon to suhJect rrquest~ and although
the staff report to the Pl~nniny Commiss(~n deted July 3~~ 1'l79 was not reed at the public
hea r(ng~ It Is referred t~ and r~~fe a part of the minutes.
Nalloc~e Bartelt~ architect, was present to ansM+er any questinns.
TNE PUtiLI L NCARIt~G 41A; CLOSED.
Commissloner Davld esked fur clarlficat(on reyar~iing [he Tra~fic Enylneer's cor~nent
regarding th~ poLr.ntlat problem with the location of the propos~d lofld{ng dock, and Mr.
~ertelt stated they feel the c~~nunent by thc Traff(c Eng(neer was a.justiflable comment~
but that It went a ltttlc furth~r than It shoulJ, ar~d stated for n~.unerous years this
property tias been use:i by ;h~e Police D~part~nt as an tmpuund yard and the hist~ry of
peo~le r~aneuvcrin lnto thc yerd wi ih ~ velilcle pu) 1 inq ono[hcr vchiclc lias been to hen~1
nortii on Walnut an~ back into the parcel. ~~isstny the ~ailroad tracks further to the
sauth~ and ta back acr:~~,s th~ ral 1 rr~. ' tr~~cks a truck would have tc~ enter Nalnut, head
north. turn ar~~und. and ~ , the [rac~s and bacl. from tl~e. southern di rectio~ into the
prpposecl dri vcw.
~c,nmis~ione Oavid ask~. property would be us~c1 hy the Police Department for an
ir~~aund y~r ', the f~ tur.~~ ~n~i Nr, fiartelt replicd that the lot has bcen clcared.
Nr. aartPlt explained hls client has indicared at thc~ presen[ timr there are thr~e or four
tr~~ins a day on tfiese tracks and ci~at he yets passibly one se.mi-cruck per month. Ne
e•<pla~fne~1 this is strlctly a wholesale business of indusc~fal hnrdware (nuts~ bolts,
fast~ner~, ett.) whicf, Is solA strictly Co retal! suppliers an~i tt,e f~cility wll) noi be
~pan to t~~e pub 1 i c.
Gomrnissi~ner Tolar sLote~1 h~ would not went to Pver sec an "open to the ~ublic" sign on
this praperty~ and the petitioncr stipula[ed that would not happen.
ACTI~t~: Gommission~r Uavicf ~ffered a rr~tion~ seconded by Commissioner t;ing and MOTIGN
RR EU (Corn~issioner ~ ry beiny absent), t~-at the Anaheim City Planning Commission has
revie,~-ed the pr,~posel to rar-lassify property from the f.G (Ca+r.~erclal, General} Zone tu the
ML (Inclustr(al, Limicea) Zone o^ an irreyularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of
approxtmately 0.4 acre having a fron[.~gc of a{~proximately 192 feet on the east side of
ualnut 5trPet~ ha~ing a rn~ximum depth of approximatcly 203 feet. and being located
approximatcly 1~+0 feet north of the Genterl ine of tlanchester Avenue; and does hereby
a~pprove the Negativc Declaration from the requirement co p~~pare ar environmenr.al impact
reQort on the basis kt~a[ th~re would be no signlfican-, tndlvidual or cumulative adverse
environmental irrpact due to the approvai of this Negat(ve Decla~ation sinct the Anahrim
Genera) Plan ciesignates tf~e subJecc properiy for ge:~r:?3 corm~e.rcial land uses com~-ensurate
with the propnsal; that n~ sensi[ive envtronmental -~ acts .~re lnvalved in the propc~sal;
that the In(tiai 5tucty submitt~d by thz petitione~ i~+~~:lcat~s no signlftcant individual or
7/3~/79
~- l +r
~
'~., ~ ! .. ~
MINUT~S~ ANAI~EIM CITY PLANNING COMMISS IQN~ JULY 34~ t'~79 79-573
EIR NEGATIVE DECI.ARATION ANO RECLASSIFICATION N0. 1~-~'6 (continued)
~i.~~... ~... w .~ ~"~
cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and that the Negative Declaration aubstantlAtlny
the fo~agoln,y findtngs Is on filn in thc City oF Anehelm Planning OeparCment.
Commissloner David off~:red Rasolution No. PC79-155 anci mnved for its passac~e and odoptlon~
thr~t the Anahelm City Planniny Comnis~l.~n does her~by grenc Patltl~n far Reclasstflcatlon
No. 79-+i0-G~ subJect to Inicrdapartm~:nte) Comm(ftee reconn~ndations.
On roll eall~ tl~e foregoing resolut(on wes passed by the followtng vote:
AYES~ GOMM,ISSIONEIiS; UARNES~ BUSIIORE, DAVtD~ IiERliST. KING~ TOIA'r
NOCS : GOM111 SS I ONEP,S : NO!JE
ABSEI~T: GOMMISSIGtIERS: FRY
ITCM N0. iJ PUgLIC IIE;ARING. ONNER; EMKAY 4USINf.SS CEf~TRE/
E DL'GLARATION ANAHEIH~ c/o Emkay Uevelopment Company~ P.O. f~ax
ONp ONRL USE PCRHI- N0. ~'~O1 2394~ Newport tseach, CA 92fi(,3. Petitioner requcsts
perm( ss ton to ESTABII Sli AN OFF I CE USE 1 N TFiE ML IO~iE
on property descril~ed as en Irregularly-shaped
parce) of land cc~nsistlny of a{~proximately 1.5 ac.res having a frontage of approxirt-ately
2$0 fcet on the south ssde of Pac.ifico Avenue~ havtny a maxlmum depth ~f spproximatcly 317
faet~ and being locaied approximately 31~ fese c:ast of the cen[arline of AnAhef~~~
Boulevard. Prope~rty presently el~sslfi~d ML (IttDU51'RIAL~ IIMITED) ZONE.
There was na an~ in~llcating thelr presence in opposition to subJect rcquest, and it was
noted the appllcant was not presenc,
It was tlie general consensus af the Comr~isslan that thcy had several questi~ns they woutd
iike answered beforc acting on thls re~uest and thet [he inatter shaulci be contlnued.
ACTION; CommisSiuner Tnlar offered n~~ion~ seconded by Gommissioner King and H(1T10~1
ARRIEU (Conxnlssioncr Fry bc~ny absent~, thaC considerati~n of Cor~dltional Use Permit No.
2001 be continued to the regularly-schedul~d meetlny ~f the Planning Commissfon of August
13~ 197°~ 1n order f~r• the petitiuner to be present.
ITEN ~IO. 11
EIR NEGA IVE UEC UIRATION
V O~E U MEt~T
L , . RF11~~- 2002
~_
PUBLIC Hi,;RING. OWNERS: SOLOMON AI10 HARRIET JUNE
1lERNBERG. 273~ Jackson Avenue~ Anaheim~ CA 92306.
F'etittoner r~quests Rerr~iss(on to RETAIN At~ EXISTING
AVIARY WITN WhIVE".Fl OF REQUtRED SETf~ACK FOF A BIRD
COOP on property described as a rectangularlY-shaped
parcel of l~nd cons'" ~ng of apprax(matcly ~~~r'
square feet located at thc nor[hwest co rner of Jackson Avc• and Rio Vista 5treet. heving
approxlmnte frontages of lU3 ftct o~ the n~rth side of Jackson Avenue~ E9 feet or the west
side of Rio Vista St~eet and 89 fcet on the east side nf Plantation Platc~ and fc:~ther
described os z731 East Jackson Avenue. P~operty presenily classified RS-720Q
(KESIDENTIAL~ SINGLE-FANILY) Z013E.
Thare was no one dndice~ing tFieir presenee in oppc,sitlon ta subJect request. and although
the staff report to the Planniny Coi~lssion dat~d July ~0~ 197y was not read at the. public
hearing, It ts referred Go an~! mmde a part of the minutes.
Solor+wn Neinbe~g~ pttltio~+cr~ was pres~nt and Indicated the bird coop is on the west slda
of hts garage ~anc~ that hts garage Is ebout the furtfiest potnt away `~'' •'ny other house
7/30/79
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNINr, COMMISSION~ JULY 3~~ 1979
EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CONOITIONAL USE PERMIT N0~ 2002
and that his house Is isolated end the house directly behind
b~rder•s his praperty~ and that all the other property owners
supporttng thc request.
79- 5 7l+
(contlnued)
his is the only one thet
have slgned ~ letter
Cummlssionor Norbst pointed ou[ this request is the result of an actlon by thc Zoning
Enforcement Offic~r~ and Nr. Welnberg indicated he dtd not know who hed complained or why
thcy had complo(necl.
TIiE PUti~l C HEARI t~G WAS CLASED.
Commisslonr.r dush~re Indic;ate~f h~ had becn to the property r+nd from where he had stood at
various polnts~ Ch~~ only place the blrci coop wauld be seen ts from the north~ ac rnss the
street~ and that mayl~e at ccrtain times with windows open~ tt~ere would bc a slight nofse.
but that he had n~t heard any noist,
Commtssloner King ask~d if kherc had bec~~ any ador~ and Comc~issfoner 8ushnre Indicated he
hao not notica~J any bad ocl~rs.
M~, Wefnbery er,plained hc cleans the caycs evpry three wceks ~nd that baxcs c~f s~dn are
put ~n [hr.. yr~und to alleviate smell~,
Mr. Walnber~.~ IndlcoCed he asked fnr perr~ission to havc S~~ hirds~ but that he h~~s 6~ palrs
of para~:cets and rnayb~ 3~ pairs would hc breccilnc~,
CQmm(ssian~r ~us~~or~ asked Hr, ~leinberg If he ratses bircls for business or relaxation~ and
Mr. Welnber~ replieJ It ts a strictly a hobby and that I~e trades for rost of h(s btrds,
Robert tl~snninyc~r~ ,4sslst~nt Planner~ asked thAt thc following ccxiditlcxi be odcled to tf~e
Interde~artn~cntal Co~m~itt~•e rccorrnnr.n~fations lf thc rcyuc:st is appraved; "Thet thc
cxistin~~ structurP shali be brought u~ to the minimum standards of the City of Anat~elm,
inr.ludlnr~ the Uniform Uu(Idin~~ Plurnbing, Electrtcal, hkchanlcal and Firc Codes es ddopted
by lh~ Clty of Anahcfm."
ACTION: Com~issiorer U~vid offered a r,,otion~ seconded by Coms~issioner Tolar and M0710l~
GARRIED (Conmissi~~ner Fry being absent), thaf th~ Analieim CitY Plann(nq Commission has
revid+ed the request to retainan aviary Nitl~ a ~~,aiver of renulrcd sPtback for a bErd coop
on a rc.ctanyularl~--shape.! parcel of lar~d consi5tiny of anpraximatelv ~1G7 square fe~t
iocdted at etie norcfiwest corner of Jackson Aver~~e and Rio Vlsta Stre~t. iiaviny approximete
fro~tayes of IG; fr.et on thc north side of Jackson Avr.nue~ f'3 feet on the west sicle of Ria
Vista Street. and b9 feet on :hc east sldc of Plantetlon Place; and cir~cs h~reby approve
the Ntg~tive Deciaration from Ci~c requi~nment to preparc en environmental impact rep~rt on
the basis that there woulci be no significant Individual or cumulatlve adverse
anvironn-enta) impaci due to the approval of thls Negativa Decloratlvn since the Anaheim
General Pldn Jes(gnates tt~e subjec~ praperty for Ic~r density residentlal land uses
cmnrr~rnsur~te witn the prop~sal; that no sensitive e~nvircmment~i lmpacts are involved In
the proposai; that the in(tial Stucty submitted by the petitioner indicates no stg~ificant
indlvidual or cumulative a:fvers~ environar_ntal impacts; and that the Nogative Decleration
substantiatln~~ thr. fore9olr~y ftndings ts ~n file in the City of Anaheim Ptanning
Department.
CC~mmissicx~er Tolar ind(cated he would lil~C to sec the conditional usr. permit have a;Ime
limlt since the permtt would stay wi[h the prope~ty if this orcner decided Co sell it.
7/~/79
; ~ +'
MtNUTES~ ANAH~IM ClTY PLANMING COMMISSION. JULY 3Q~ 1~79 19'S75
EIR NEGATIVE UECLARATION AND CONDITIONAL USE PCRNIT N0. 2c102 (continued)
~~ I ~~~ r
Mr. Weinbory txplained t-~at the blr~i ccxap sits a~ the ground wlth no foundatir,n and there
is no clcctrical Ar plui~bing t~ [h~ bird cage except fnr watc~ and that tf he sells this
p rupc r ty . th~ b i rd c~. ge wou 1 d be t+~kcn dawn.
Robert Henninc~er explainc~i tl7at thn requlren~cnt th~t thc strutture be structually sound
would bc hanriled wlch ths Butldtny Uiv~-(r,n and thoy Nould nMke sure there (S nc~
pusslbility the cay<~ wou1J fall ov~r on so-rn~~nr~ and Ronal~l Thanpson~ Pianninq Dlrector~
add~:d the Bullding Utvis{~>n wuulcJ r~ake sure tl,cre will t,r no aac:i.flow of the wd[er system~
etc.
Commtssloner Davi~~ offcrca a motion, seu~ded by Commissir,~cr Tolor and MOTION CARRIED
(Corrxnissi~~nrr Fry bci~~3 ahsent) ~ that thn Anaheim Gity Flunninq Co~isslon docs hereby
qrar~r, the rcques[ for walvcr of cc~~ic rcquircr,rnt on the basis that the use does not
intcrfcr~ wlth L'hr~ I~~~alth, saf4ty ~ind acnr,.r~l welfa~e of the sur~oundin, neic~hbors.
Gommissioner Uavid offcrc~i Rcs~luliun Mo. PC7^-l~f an~1 rnav~~1 for its passaqc~ and ado~ti~n~
ChaL the Anal~eini City H13nnlnc~ ,r,pn1mI55IGn docs here!>y gro~t Petition for Conditf~nAl Use
P~rrntt No. 10'~2~ subjcct tr, thc G~~rsdition that thc~ strutturc v~lll be brou~ht lnto
confnrrn~ne;r w6t~~ buil~iln~; codes 4~Ithin ?q d~ys~ ,ina subJ~ct to revlaw at the end af a two-
yr.ar pcriod~ and subject to ~ntcr~feparti~cn~~~l Camrnitcec rccommendr~tic,n5,
On rc~ll crl l~ the fcireyolnr; r~~stilution w~s passc~ !~y t!~c ~cil lowiny vot~:
AYf.S : COM-~sl SS 10'~I:~S : t;l1R'~F. ;~ BUS~iUWE ~ UA~ I D~ HE~i(+ST ~!C I NG ~ TOt,AR
IaGf.S: C~MI~1;51~!~ERS: NONE
AtiSENT: C~h1NI5S10'~ER~.: FRY
ITEM N0, t~ PUBtIC N~AR1+1r,. (?WP~ERS: uALTER J, At~D MARY [.
~ Nt A„ C OLCL~P,ATI!"~ FfJRAt~UT~ 13j1 North East 5trcet, Unit 8~ Anaheim, CA
~~- o .~~ ~~0. lOJ3 ~2`i~J~. l~GkNT: CALVIN OLSC'1~ 133t NorCh Casi Strer.t~
~Jnit C~ Anahelrn, CA 92f~15, Petitioner requests
per-mi ss f~~n ta ESTAf~ L I St~ ~1UTONOL' I LE GIASS 1115TALLATI ON
ANQ RE1~11L GLASS SALLS I,~ TI~E M~. ZONC on G~.ope~ty des~:r(bed as a rectangutarly-shaped
parcef af lat~~1 cc>nsistEnc; of approx(r,~ate?y C,3 ~crc locate.l at the nort~riuest corner of
Kernruod Avenue~ and East Street, t-avinc; a;:~roximate front~ges of iQ0 feet an the narth s ide
of I:enw~wd Avcnur, an~i 1l+2 fect 4n thc west side of Eest 5[reet~ and furtlecer dtscrtb~cd a5
133~ ~rth E.ast Street~ Unit C. Pr~perty presently classiftcd ML (I!~UUSTRIAL~ LIMITEO)
ZOraC ,
There Nas no Une tnaicatine,; the;ir presence in oppoSitt~n to sutJect r~quest, and although
the str-ff r~port to the Plar~ning Gomrnlssic~n dated July 3b~ ly79 w~s not read at the publlc
h~caring~ it ~5 refe~r~~i trr :,nd madr a p~rt of thc minutes.
Celvlr~ Olaon, ~gcnt~ was presrnt tc~ answer arty yur.stions.
TIIE PUBLIC NCAHI'~G uAS CLOSED.
Chairrroman Ba~nes asked hc~+ long tliis bu:;iness has ber.r~ at thls location~ and Mr. Olson
( ndi csted they hecJ j us t rtec~ve~i to Anahe f m.
CpMM45SInNER TALAR LEFT THE COUNCIL CHAHBER.
Comnisstoncr i(ing Indicated he had visit~d Che site and ther~ was easy access to the
praperty a~d ampl~ parking~ and he dtd nat see any problem.
7/30/79
~
MINUTES, ANANEIM CITY FLANNING COMMISSION~ JULY 3n~ 1919 79'51~
EIR NEGATIVE t~ECLAaATION Ar~D CQriDITIONAI USE PERMIT ~i0. 2003 ~conttnued)
..~_.._... ..~ ., - - •-----------
Chal rwoman Barn~a askeci I f ti~ere was a pmblem wi th retal i sal~s in th~ ML ton~. and
Commi~sloner Ilerbst indicated he would have nv problem wlth thls use at this location.
ACTION: Commissioner Ktng offered a motion~ seconded by Commtssloner Devld and MOTION
A~RR ED (Commissi~ncrs Fry and Tolar bGing absent)~ that the Anahelm City Planntng
Commisston hes revlewcd fl~e proposal c~ permit automabile ylass Installat(on and retail
glass salas In an ML Xone on a rectanyularly-shaped parcel c~f land consisting of
approxtmately 0, 3 ecre loca[cd at tlie narthwest corner of Kenwood Avnnue and East Street.
havtng approximrte frontac~cs of 10~ fect on the north stde of Kenwnod Avcnue and 142 feet
on thc~ west sf~ie af East Strect; and does hereby ~+pprove th~ Ne~,~tive Oeclaration from thc
requlrement to prepare an enviranmentRl impact report ~n the basis that there wc~uld be no
stgnlflcant indlvl~fual or cu~~wl~~tivp adverse environmental Impact ciue to the appraval of
this Negatlve peclarr~tiun since the Anaheim General Plnn cieslctnates thP sub)ect property
far ~enerAl industrf~l land uses c~~mrr~rnsuratc wtth the pro~osal; that no sensitive
envlrontnental lmpacts Are involved ln thc. ~ropc~sal; that thc initiai Study submitt~d by
the petitloner indicates no stgnif(c~nt fndivl~fual or cumul~~tive adv~rse r,nvlronrr~~tal
impacts; an,1 tl~at the Noy,~tivc qcclaration substantl~~tfng thc foregotng findings is an
ft lc in the Ci ty of Anahcirn Planniny Uep~rtment.
Commisstoner King offe•rc~ Resolution No. PC7`3-1;7 and mov~~d for its passoqe and adoption,
that the Anahcim City Pl.innin~ Commisslon does herr.by ~~ront Petit(on for Con~ittionrl Usc
Perrntt No. ?.t103~ subject to Interdr.~~artrrvntal CommittP~ reconr'+en~l~tionc.
On roll call~ the fareyolny resolutirm was ~asseu by the follcnv(ng vatc:
AYCS: C!jr1111SSi~,~ERS: QARtIES~ BUStIOPE~ UAV1D~ HCRtiST~ KI~~~
NOLS: COMMI!'i510~~CP.S; ~~O1JL
ADSEtIT; GOMf115$IOI~ERS: FRY~ TOLAR
CdNt1) SS I Oi~F R TOLAF RCTUR;~~D TQ TIIC. CQUI+C 1 L CHAN~ER.
ITLM f~U. 1; PU~iLIC HEARIt~G. 0'ltdCR: It~VESTQRS GF.VCLOPMEN7 OF
E NEC~ATIV~ UECLf,RltT10'1 QR{~ICf. CQUNTY~ IMC,, 13~~~ North Grrsnd Avenue~ Santa
r iU. ~i Ana~ CA ~)27~)1. Af,ENT: SMI7LEY b ASSOCIATES, 141j
Eas t Ca i I i ns Avenue ~ O~ange ~ CA '7?.GE~7. Pet ( t loner
~equ~•: ~s 41AIVER OF 111NIMUN BUII.pIt~G SITE WIpTH TO
EST~IBLISH A TI;RE~-LOT~ RM-1?^~1 SU~301VISION on property ciescribed as an irregularly-shapad
parcel nf land c~nsfscing of epprc~ximatcly O.i3 acrr. t~aving ~ frantage nf approximately 1RQ
fect on the east sidP of Lewls Street, haviny a mc+ximur~ depth of approxirnately 217 feet,
bc(ng lacated appraxin~tcly 11F,~ feet s~uth of the ccnterline of Orangewood Avenue, anci
further described as ?.224 Souch Lewis Street. Pruprrty presc~tly classifled RM-1200
(MULTI PlE-FANI lY RES I JEt~T! Al.) ZQNE.
There wos no one Inditating chelr presence in opposltton to subJect request~ and although
[he staff rep~rt to thc Planniny Co~nission dated July 30, 1!1;~) was not read et the pubtic
heariny~ i t i s referred to .ind rn~de a part of tl~~ r,inutcs.
Harry Smitl~y~ agent, w~s present to answer any qucstions.
TNE PL't3Ll C t1EARltlt', VAS CLOSE.D.
Commissionsr Ilerbst was co~cerned about the mutual access nasement to allow Parcejs 2 snd
3 Co use the commn drivewey in casQ the properties we~e sold,
7/3a679
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMNISSION~ JULY 3~- 197`~
EIR NEGATIYE UECLARATION AND VARIAIICE N0.~144 (contl~ucd)
~9-571
JACk Wh(te~ peputy ~Ity Attorney~ explainnd the Legal Derartment would see thsi easemnnt
with the parcel map.
ACTION; Commisst~ner King offercd a mutfon~ seconded by Commisslo~er I~erbst and MbTION
~RRIEO (Comm(sst~ner Fry being abs~nx)~ that tl~e Anet~cin City Planning Commission has
reviewed the propose) to esteblish e threc-lot, RN-12~0 suhdiviston witti welver of mtntmum
bulldin~ site wicith on an (rregularl~~-shaped porcel of land conststing ~f a~praximately
0.~ acre having a frontage af approxlrmte~y 180 fect on tl~c eASt side of Lewis Street~
having e m~xinwm depth of Ap~r~xim.~tc~ly 217 fr_ct~ ~nd belny 14cateu apn roxlmately I1G0
fect south of chc cent~rl(ne of Orangewood Avenue; and dcx~s herehy approve thr_ Neqative
Ucclaraticx~ from the requircn~nt co prcparc an environrncntel im~,ect report ar thc bnsis
that there would be nn sic~n~ficant individual or cumulative adverse envtronmentel impact
clue to the approval uf this NC~AL{YC Qeclarati~n since the Anahe(m General P1~n des(g~atns
the subJect pr~perty for rn~dlum densiLv resldent~al land uses cortmensurate with the
proposel; the~ no sensictvic environn~ental impACts are inv~lvc~ in the propas~l; ihat the
Inltla) Study submEcted by the pet(ti~ner indiGates no siqnificant tndfv6cfual or
cumulative adverse envtranmenta) (mpacts; and th~at the Ne~etlve Ueclara~lon subst~nt(atin_y
the fo regotny ffn~iings is on fiie in the Glty of Anahci~ Plonn(ng Ucpertrt~nt.
Comm(ssioner Kinu offered Resolution No. F(.7'1-15;'. ond moved for its p,~ssaqe and adoption~
that thc Anahc(n~ Ci ty Planninc~ Commission rio,•s herchy grant Peti tion for Ve~rian~e No. 31~4
an the basis uf the unusual si,ane and size of thc parcel ~ an~1 suhJect to Interdepartn+ental
Cqmmittce recommend~tions.
On roll call~ the furegotn~ rc~~ulution was passcd by thc f~llowln~~ vote:
AYCS : COr1Mt SS I QN E RS : UARNi. S~ E~USHnRt. , DAV I U~ fiERF15T ~ KI ~~G, TOLAR
NOLS : CONNI SS InNERS : ~~0-~E
A(~SE11T: C~M-~ISSI~'~ERS: FR.Y
IT~N N~. 14 PUELIC NCARI~JG. ONNER: CI.ASSIL DEVELOPMENT CORP.,
R Nk:GATI VE DECLAf~/1T10!+ 1)b~32 hS( tchcl I~1ort`~ ~ Sui te A~ I rvi ne ~ CA 92714.
EQU ~R PP,OVAl. AGEN7; SIIA.LLER ~ LOlla~ ;6(.. San Miqucl Crlvc~ Suite
REl10V/1l UF SPLCIt1E~~ TRLES 311~ Newport Beach~ CA ~2660. Petittoner requests
APPROVAL FOR T1iE REMOVAL OF FIVE SPECIf1EN TPEES a~
pro~erty descrlbed :.: an irregularly-sh~ped parcel of
land consistiny of approximately ~.~1 acres hav(ng a frontac~e of app roximately '~34 feet on
the northwest side of Santa Ana Cenyo~ Ro~~d~ having e maximum depth of approxirt-ately 440
fect~ and be:ing l~c~ted approxirnately 1:~0~ fect nortl~erst of tlie centcrl ine of F4ohlcr
~f~VN.
There was no one Indi~atin~ their presence in oppos(tion to s~~j~ct reyuest, and although
thc staff rep~rt to the Plannin~ Coma~ission dated July 3~1, 197~ wa, not rear! at the public
hearln,y, IC Is referred to and mede a part of the minutes.
Ronald Noyes, representin~ Classic pevclopmentCorporation~ was prese~t to answer any
qucsifons,
TlIE PUt~L1C HEARING 41AS CLOSEQ.
Cortmissioner Hert~st asked about the~ H11i and Canyo~ Nunicipal Advisory Committee`s
{N/ICMAG) rccortxne~datian ihat the approvai of Chr specim~n ~rce remov~l be subJect to the
condiclon that th~ replacement tre~s be sycamores~ end M~. Noyes Indicated he would have
nh prc~ lem with replanting Sycamores end pin~s.
7/ 30/ 79
n
\
MINUTES~ 1WAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ JUL1' 30, 1~79 79-578
EIR N~GATIVE DECLARATION AHD REQUEST Fna APPROVAI. OF REMOVAI, AF SPEGIMEN TREES (conttnucd}
ACT'ION: Commiss(oncr Dt~vfd offered a motlon, seconded by Cor+x+~issionc~ King and MOTION
CAr~RICU (Coinmissi~ner Fry betn4 abser~t)~ that the Anahetm Clty Pianninh Lomn,(ssi~n has
revlewed tl~c proposa) co rerrr~ve flve spNCimen trees on an irreqularly-shaped parce) of
land consistlny of nppr~ximstcly 5,2 acres h~ving a frontage ~f ~ppraxtmetcly d34 fcet on
the northwest slde of Santa Ane Lenyon Rond~ ht~vinq ~ maxtmum depth nf appr~ximat~ly ~+~~~
feet~ and beiny locate~l approxtmately 13!)~ feet n~rtherst of the cr.ntcrline of M~hler
Drive; and dces hereby anprov~ the Negatlve Decleration from the requlrernent to prepare sn
~nvtronmentAl imp~ict report on the basts that there would be no si~.tniFicant indlvldual or
cumulati ie a~fversc envtronmcntal tmrect due to thc apprnvnl af this Nennt(vc Oeclaretlon;
that no scnsitive rnvironrtx:ntal impacts are l~v~ived in the ~~r~p~so1; that the Inlt(r~)
Stucfy submitted by tl~e. petitioner (n~licates no slgnfficant indivlduRl or cumulattve
adverse environment~il irnp~cts; and that the Negatlve De~clarrtion substantiating the
foregoiny f(nJinys is on fil~• in the City ~f Anehe(m Planning Depart-nent.
C~mmissi~ner Uavi~ offer~d a r~otton~ secondcd by Commissioner Tolar end MOTI0~1 CARRIF.D
(Commissioner Fry beinr, abscnt)~ th~~t the /lnahelm Ctty Planning Commissi~n does h~rchy
recommend cr~ the Clty Council that thc rcquest fnr appr~~vnl of rer~oval of spectmen t~ees
be grentad on the bisis Chat tho ct,araccer of tiu inn,cdlete nG(qhhorhoo~i in r~s~ect of
fpr~statlon wl ll not be rn,~tcrially affected by the ~r~posed rern~lval,
AUJ01)RNMEI~T: Commissianer Klnq offcred ~ m!~ti~n~ ~econded hy C.~xnisstontr DB~iu dr~1
MOTION LARP.IED (Commissloncr Fry kseing ahsent)~ th,~t there being n~ further
business~ thc mceting be adJ~u~ned to ttie speciei vro;k session to be hcld on
Auqust G~ 117?~ J;O~ ~,m,, in the ~ounctl ChAmber~ t~ disc~~ss the propo~~d
Ch~ng~~s to Lhe ML Zonc3,
The me~tinq was adourned :~t :,;2~ p.m.
Respectfully submittcJ,
~~ ~ ~~~
Edith L. flarris~ Secretary
Andt~eim City Pl~nning Gommisston
ELN;hM
7/30/79