Minutes-PC 1982/11/15REffUW1R M1C~'PINff OF THE AN1IH~IM CITY PI.ANNINC COMN1288ION
Ra(iUL11R M3ETZN0 Ths reqular m~~tinq o! th• 1lnahaiQ, City Planning Coa~ai~~ion
aas aalled to ordsr by Chairman Fry at 10:00 a.en.,
November 15, 198Z, in the Counoil Chember, a quo.rwn beinq
pr~tent nnd the Commi~sion r~viMwed pl~ns of the itema on
teclsy'~ aqen~fa.
R8C888: 11:30 a.m.
RECONVbNE~ 1s30 p.m.
PRESENT
ABSS?~iT
1-L80 PRE$ENT
Ghairmeni Fry
Commisalonero: Houa$, Hushore, HerbsL•, 1Cinq, Le Claire,
McBurney
Commiaei~nerg: None
Annika 8entalahti
Jack White
Jay Titus
Paul 8inqaz
Dean fiherer
Jay Tashiro
Bob Kelley
Edith Nnrrie
Assi~tan~ Director !or Zoning
Aeeiatant City Attorney
Oflice Engine~r
Traffic Enqineer
Aeeociate Planner
Aedocinta Planner
Aseociate Planner
Planninq Gammiaeion Secretary
APPROVAT. OF MINUTSS: Comartisoioner Kinq offerod a motion, secondad by
Cotaoai~esioner Boues and MOTYON CARRIED (Comiaisaioner McHurney nbetnininq), thnt
the mi.nutea ~rom the ~aeetinq of Novemk+er 1, 198~, be npproved ea aub~nitted.
ITBM NO. 1. EIR N~31-TIV$ DBCx.ARATIfRi ~ND VARIANCS NO. 3292
PUBLIC H~J-RING. OWN~RB: WILLIAM C. & CYNTHIl1 LYNN TAORMINl1~ P.O. Hox 309,
An~heim, CA 92805. Property described aa e rectanqularly-ahaped parcel of
land aonsieCinq oP approximately 0.49 acre located at the southwest corner of
l~dele 8treet and Anaheiea Boulevnrd, 327 North 11na~heim Boulevnrd.
Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to construct a commercidl office
building.
Continued from the meeting af October IS, 1982.
~-CTIONs Commiesioner Souas offered d motion, seconded by Consnieaioner
Mceurney and MOTION CARRI3b, thet subjact petition be withdrawn et the requeet
of tho petitioner.
02Z4H 82-590 11/15/82
MIN~B~ At~A.HEIM CI'PY ?L11N1iINa COMM28~IOt1. NOVEMSER 15, 1482 82-591
ITEM N0. 2. EIR Nlai1-TIVI~ D1~CL11R11TION~ G3NEttAL PL~1N 11MENDMDSNT NO. 179,
RECL11$BIFICJITION N0. 8Z-83-9 71tiD V11Ai111~1CE N0. 3301
PUSLIC HB11RI1~(i• OWN~RB: CaNTR11'~ C11PIT11L CORP. P.O. 8~x 81511, Ban Di~qo, C]-
92318. A(iSNT: O.C. pROP1ERTIE8~ INC•. 2152 Dupont, 8uite 200, Zrvin~, C11
92715. Proparty deecribed d~ an irr~qularly-sheped parcel ot land consi~ting
o! approximntely 9.8 ecra~ located sou~h and weet o! tha eouthweet corner ot
Lin~oln Avenue and Rio Viste St:aat.
GPA R8QUE8T: To chnnge the current generel commercial cl~aiqnation to mediun-
density•
ItECLAS8IFICATZON REQUSBTs RS-A-43,OOQ to RM-1200
VARIANC~ REQUFSTs Weivers ot: a) ioaximum structural heiqht, b) minimuen floor
area and c) required onclo~ure of carports to construct a 274-unit epartment
complex.
Continued trom the meetinq of November 1, 1982.
There were aeven peraons indiaating their preaence in opposition to eubject
request end althouqh the stntf report wae not rea8, it is referred to an8 made
a part o~ the minutee•
Jon Bueee, GC Properties Inc., aqent, explained they have revised plans to
accommodate the Coannission's euqgestions and have moved aome at the unite away
lrom the property line which were immediately ed~aaent ta the aingle-family
residential properties on the southwest corner end heve provided e 2U-foot
landacaped bufter aith no stornqe units or walkways encroachinq. He ndded
they uleo reduced the number of bachelor units to 62 and reduced the total
number o! unite by 2.
Mr. Busee atated he Aid meet with a group of haaeowners at thA Carson's
residence on Novembez 4th and reviewed the revieed plens with them and ns a
result ot that meeting, relacated three ~arkinq apacee away from the Carson's
residence, e~eed to provide flet pavemer~t rather than enriched pavement (euah
ae cobbleatone) which a-lqht be noiey and switched the traeh enclosure near the
Bereznay's residence with a laundry rocxn et the othar end of the cerport. He
etated the reaidents are atill concerned about the ~leneity and the 2-story
units within the 150 leet ed~oininq their sinqle-lamily residence, however,
the RFl-1200 'Lone would permit 315 units and they are requeatinq 272. He
stated they have also stipulated to provide an 8-foot wall.
Ed Ca:eon, 2725 Purit+sn Place, Anaheita, stated he did meet with Mr. Buese and
he did agree to alleviate eome o~ their minor concerns, but their main
objection is atill to tha density and they do not ~eel the RM-1200 ehould be
permitted on thie property and it ahould be either RM-3000 or R3-5000 and they
feel 272 unita is juat too asnae tor this 9.8 acre parcel. He presented
petitions siqned by approximately 176 of the eurrounding nei.ghbora oppoeinq
the request.
lyr. Careon reterred t~ the recreational-leisuze area referred to and indicated
he 81d not know hoM thoge ~iqures were calculated unless sidewalke and
gregnbelts wara included.
MINUTES~ ~N~H~IM CITY PI+ANNINO COMMI88ION, NOV1tiMB~R 15, 1982 82-592
H~nry Kubn, 2711 puritnn, ~naha±m, ~tatad his property i~ adjaoan~ to ~ub~ect
property snd relerrad to Paraqraph 12 ot the etal~ report aoncsrning the
anviroTUnentel impect rsport ste~us and disagreed thAt a naqative daclaration
should be dpproved becausa o! the tratfic concsrn or~ Linaoln. He etetad h~
had been to pravious meetinge b~tora the Planning Cammission when the Tralfir,
Dspartment h~d been concmrnAd bacause cars travsl et 50 MPH on Lincoln and f~e
thought trying to qet on the treewey wouLd be a dangeroue ait~iation. He
•tatsd he hae traveled w~dt on Lincaln and tried to mnke e lelt turn ~nto Rio
Vista with cars t~ilgatinq nnd it wae vary dangeroua. He ndded ho nl~o wae
surpriAed in circuleting the petitione thet ebout 70t o! the paople in thu
areA did not know thnt apartments were propoaed on that property.
Frenk Bereanay, 528 Cerdifl, Aneheim, eteted ha would like to reintorce whnt
Mr. Careon eaid nbout the density and t:he 2-etory unite leea Lhan 150 leet
lrom th91r homee. Ha augqestad in order to eccomplish the desired density,
thet 3-etary unite be constructed in the center o! the project with no 2-etory
unite adjacenti to their homes. He etated Mr. Buase hr~e ba4n very cooparative.
P~te Pitagai, architgct, Kiyotoki Asaocieten, preeenta~ elid~s of the revieed
plena and crose-sect~ons ehowinq the impact of the 2-etory units within 150
feet of single-lamily reeidential, end deacribed the type of lendacaping
gropoeed. He pointed out in response to Ch~irmen Fry, thet there are no
windowe in the 2-etory units facinq the ai.ngle-lamily homea and pointed out
the shed roof eftect•
Reepondinq to Mr. Car~on's concerns, Mr. Buase stated they do not feel the
conaer.ns with trAt~ic nnd crime will occur and thnt they would not be willinq
to spend substantidl sume of money on this property unless they felt it would
be a qood development. He stated he thought Mr. Carson had mentioned a
vnriance of the required separation between unite and noted there are no
variances requeeted on thnt iaeue becnuee they have canformed to the zoninq
o~dinances and are ortly asking for e variance to build within the 1S0-foot
area. He added the Traffic Departmant did not have any commenta on the
traffic ~nd they do not feel trnffic will be a problem•
Concerning Mr. Bereznay's euqgestion for 3-atory unita in the center ot the
project, he explained they do nat feel 3 stories would be economically
feasible bec~use elevators would be required, etc. and they would not l~e able
to provi~e a qarden type projectt and thet they have propoeed smaller unita in
ordar to provide new affordable housinq in the City of Anaheim. He added they
are prepared to move ahead and will beqin construction in January if approval
ia qranted.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CL03ED.
Comanias~oner Herbst stated he does not have any queatione. He stat.ed for the
opposition concerned about the tr.affic, that the traffia qenerated from a
com~aercial or office development would be tr~m 7,000 to 8,000 vehicle tripa
per day and for npaztments, it would be approximetely 2,900 tripa per day and
also a commercial development would be open at night and create more noise
than apartmeat complexes. He reterred to the 150-foot setback requirement and
stnted the Planning Coirmiesion and City Council had aeveral wQrk aesaiona to
review that situationt that a lot of cities r.e~-e 50-toot setback requ.trementet
hoaever, rather th~n change the code to 150 leet, the City Council qave
inatructiona that the Planning ~ommieaion ehould consider each case on an
individual basis in order to give maximum protection to the single-family
MZNl1TE$, 1WAHEIM CITY PId1NNINfi COMMI8820N, NOV~+1PaR 15, 1982 82-593
re~idenc~~ in th• area and ths code we• not moditied~ how~ver, bacaue• o! tha
oost o! lend and aonetruction today, th• 150-foot tetback i~ not in th~ b.~t
intereat. Hs sdded he has always besn vsry vehament ahout proteatinq the
r~~idential are~s, but le1C this project doe• o!!~r that protection.
Coannissioner King eteted ha tavore the projectt and that there ere epartmente
in hio are• end th~y do not create eny p:~obl~ms. He statod tha oppooition
mentioned the treffic buk i! Aneheim ie to qrow and proeper, thare will
obviouely be en incranse in tra!lict dnd also epartn-ents are needed tor ,younq
couples nnd th~ elderJ.y on tixed incomes who cdn't a!lord to purchaee homee.
Commiseionar La Claire etate~ ehe felt this ie roally a qood pro~ect. She
added tha Commieeion did not slect to chenge the requirement to a 50-foot
aetback aven thouqh many other cities 31d and that the housee exietinq in thie
eree were conetructed cloea to the proporty line wliich ie another reason thare
ie not very much room. 3he ateted ehe did n~t think thia project will brinq a
bad element into that area esnd the apartment dwellere she knowe are just
people who can not attord to purchese their own homee in today's expeneive
me~.rket and ahe thought the criminal element would be worse in a commercinl
ehopping center. She stated if ehe lived therer she would wdnt thie project
more than anything else she has seen propaaed !or thet proper~y.
Cotnmissioner McBurney conqretulated the developer far working with the
neiqhbare and the Plenning staff a~nd Commission in redesiqninq the project so
i~ doeA !it into the neiqhborhood and etated he thouqht it would be a nice
project Por the City.
Chairmen Fry etr~ted he thouqht thie would be an ou~atandinq project and he did
not believe the neighbora would have near the probleme they enticipate.
ACTION: Comml.saioner Herbet offered a motion, secoi•,dect by Cocimissi.oner Kinq
and MOTION CARRIED, that the Aneheim City PlannS.ng Commiseion has reviewed the
propoeal to chanqe the current General Plan deaiqnation trom qenerel
commercial to medium ~iensity residentiel on ~.8 acree bounde8 on the north by
Lincoln Avenue, on ~he east by Rio Vieta Street and on the west by the Ornnqe
(57) Freeway, and doea hereby recommand to the City Council approvnl o! the
Negative Declaration from the zequirement to prepa-e an environmentnl impact
report on the basis that there would be no siqnificant individual or
cwnulative adverse environmental impact due to the appraval of thia Neqakive
Declaration since the Anaheim General Plan desigmates the subject property for
qeneral commercial land usea commeneurnte with the proposalt that no aensitive
environmental impacta are involved in the proposalt that the Initial Study
subtnittc~d by the petitioner indicatea no aiqnificant individual or cumulative
adverae enviroruaental ~mpacta; And that the Neqative Declaration
sub~tantiatinq the foreqoing findinqs is on file in the City of Ar:ahetm
Planninq Department.
Comanisaioner Herbst offered Rssolution No. PC82-205 and caoved for its passaqe
and adoptian that the Anaheim City Plnnning doea hereby adopt and recomiaend to
the City Council ddoption of Generel Plan Amendment No. 179 - Land Use
Element, 8xhibit A.
On roll call, the foreqoinq resolution wna passed by the following vote:
AYEB: HOUAS ~ BU3HORE, FRY, HERH6'i' ~ KING, I+~ CLAIRE r MC BURNB'Y
N088s NON$
A8g8NTs NONE
. Y....~ ._~
MINITT38, ANl1HEI!! CI'PY PI,11Nt~12Nf3 COMM1I88ION, NOVENHSR 15, 1982 P.2-S9b
Comtnissioner H~rbst o!l~r.ad e motion, seeonded by Commi~sion~r Kinq end h'OT20h
C1IRRISD, that th~ 1~neheim Cit•y Planninq Commi~~ion has reviowed the propoaal
to reole~sily ~~bj~ct property fraa the R8-11-43,000 (Residential,
1~qricultural) Zone to RM~1200 (Re~id~ntiel, Multiple-ldmily) 2on• to construct
e 272-unit apartmenC complex with ws~.vez• o! maximwa etructurel height,
rainlmum lloor area and requir~d encloeure o! carports on a 9.8 acre parcel o!
land locat~d south and wo ~t. of the sauthwoat corner o! L~ncoln 1~venue nnd Rio
Vi9te 8treet~ and doas h~reby approv~ ths Neqative Dacleration from the
requirement to prapare en environmentel impect report on the baei• that there
wocld be no ~iqnilicent individual or cutauletive edverse environmental impact
due ta the approval ~t khis Naqative Declaration. aincn the Annheim General
Plan dssiqnates the eubject prope~rty for medium denaity residonti~l land uses
comeaensurate with the rropoeal.t that no eaneitive environmantal impacts ara
involvad in the propo.elt thet the ~nitinl 8tudy aut~raitted by the petitioner
ind.icet:es no siqnilicnnt individuel or cumuletive advfrse environmentnl
impactst and that the Nmqetive Declarntion eubatan~latinQ the loreqoinq
lindinge is on file in the City ot Anaheim Planninq Department.
Commieei.oner Herbat ofterea Ree~lution No. PC92-206 and aioved !ar ita pee4eqe
and adnption that the Anaheim City Planninq Conuniselon does heraby grant
Reclnssi.f icaticu- No. 82-83-9 aub ject to Tnterdepartmentel Couunittee
r. ecommen~lations.
Prior to voting on the above raeolution, Jay Taahiro, Aseociete Planner,
recommended that Commieeion recommend approval to the City Council. JaCk
W'hite et+-hed the Commieaion ie the final 3uthority on the reclasaitication end
variance and recommended that a condition he eddod to the epproval of the
reclaseif:cation requizing that the Generel Ple~n Amendn-ent be finelized prior
to the ir.troduGtion of en ozc9lnance reclassityinq the property beceuse it is
poeaible tttet the reclassification end vdriance could became fin~l prior to
the public heering on the General Plan Amem9n-Ant•
On roll cetl, the foreqoinq resolution was passed by the followinq vote:
AYES: BOUel3, BU3HORE, FRY, HEAS3T, 1CING, LA CLa1IRE, MC BURNEY
N08$s NONE
ASSENT s t~ONE
Comcaiesioner Herbet oflered Reaolution No. PC82-207 and move~d for ita pnseage
and adoption that the Anaf~eim City Planninq Cocamiseion doea hereby qrant
Variance No. 3301 oe the basia that denial would depsive subject prnperty of
privileqee bein~g enjoyed by other propertiee in the same zone and vicinity,
and eub~ect to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations.
~n roll aall, the foreqoinq reaolution was paesed by the lollowing vote:
AYBS: BOUAS, BUSHVi2E, FRY, EIERH3T, KING, LA CI.AIRE, MC HURNEY
NOBB: NONE
ABSENTs NONE
( ~, ~ 1
NINUT~S~ 11NAN~IM CITY PLIIHNING COMMI88ION, NOVEMBSR 15, 198Z 82-595
J~ck Khite explain~d uni~a• th~~~ no~ion~ by th~ PlanninQ Coamtit~ion sro
nppaa~dd, Ch~ r~alsssilication and var~anos ~muld baaome tinal af.t~r th• 22
day ~ppeal period nnd euqge~ted the Planninq Commis~ion recoa~nend to the City
Council thst ehsy ravieM the Plenning Commissian's daai~i~n on Lh~o~ tv-c
mattsrs et ths esme time they hev~ the public hearinq tor the (ienerel Plan
Amsndtaant No. 179 ,
ACTION: Comn-is~ioner Hsrbst o!lared a motion~ aeconded by Comn~iesioner Boues
an Ma~OTION C11RItI8D, that the l~r-ahaic- City Planning Gonunios~.on do~s hereby
recommend to the City Council that R~eclasailication No. 82-83-9 and Varianco
No. 3301 be consider~d conjunctivaly with GPA No. 179.
Jack White exPlained thnt the City Council hearinq will bo advertised in the
eame nu~nner as the Planning Commi.eion hearinq and preaettted the written riqht
ot appenl to enyone wiehing to appedl the Planning Commiaeion's decieion
within 22 days to the City Council.
Commieaioner Herbet pointed out that the Planninq Department advertiaes
Plenninq Commiaeion und City Council public heari~~~qa in three di!lerent waYe -
notice[ to property ovm~rs within 300 leet, the newepapers end ectual poetinq
o! the property.
ITEM N0. 3. EIR NEGATIVE DECI,AT2ATION AND VARIANCE NO. 3300
PUHLIC HBARING. OWNERs WILLIIRM J. CLl~ItK, 2751 W. Pacitic Coaet Hiqhway,
Newport Beach, CA 92663. AGEN~': DBNNI3 BOL9INGER, 2025 W. Commonwealth
Avenue "C", Fullerton, CA 92633. Property deecribed es a rectnngularly-shaped
parcel of land coneisting of approxitaately 3.~ acres loceted at the northweet
corner of Palm Lane nnd Palm Way~ havinq frontaqes of npproximately 430 leet
on the north eido of Palm Lane and 380 laet on the weat side ot Palm Way and
further described ea 1231 Palm W~y.
Waivers ofs a~ minitaum buildinq site area, b) maximum atructural heiqht, c)
minimum number and type o.f parkinq spaces to conBtruct a 132-unit apartn-ent
complex.
Continued trom the meeting o! Novecaber 1, 1982.
There wae no one lndiceti:,q their presence in opposition tn eubject request
and although the ataff report was not read, it is referred to nnA mede a part
of the minutea.
Dennis Bolsinger, aqent, stated they a~re propoainq 132 apartment units to
replace unite burned in the April firet t.hat they have revised the plana anS
reduced the number of Z-bedroom units and refluced paesage corridors which they
had coneidered to be extrasf thet they have included 25 open small car epe~ces,
but they do not affect the parking requirementa because they were designed to
eliminate turninq prablems for traeh vehiales. He etated they are also
propoeing 3-etory units and the onee frontinq on Palm Lane Wnx will appear as
2-story unita and are turn~d inside towa~rd the court area•
TEiE PUHLZC HBARING WA3 CL088D.
. .. . . .._. _.. ....._ ._,.~~_w._,....,.~
~........_...~~,o.~..T.,~.,w..,,..,~,,.~....ri.~..~~~,~.N.3.~. ..., _ ...._ .. _....--.,.... . ,. ._ --
8~-g96
h(IpUT~B, AN11H3IM CITY PL7INNIN(i COMMI88IOiI~ r t~10V1Q11lER 15 r 1981
Commia~ioner Herbe~ •tat~d h• was no~ pr~.ent at: th• pr~viou~ hoarinq but did
r~vi~M thss~ r~visad plan• and l~lt the pro j~ct aiEhout ad~quat• perkinq ie
ju~t too denr• partioularly in tl~it ar~ound and h~ oouldinotllind•eehard~hip6
unita d~vslop~d on thi~ sit• on lee~ qr
!or juetifM:~eire laoea~una~ratih~!~old~codssewithlth~'~amo•nwab~re tuunitsinetc.
that lirs P
rtr. Solsinqh:r:~P`iadnesdylorecwre apert.ment~uinethi~earea~anddthi4er+ouldnh~lp
they ~slt t
aolv the housinq probl~en.
Connni.nioner Herbet stated they are propc~sing t~a~A~o uueti~yntheiwaiv~rel,
in addition to a aonan~rcial paresl~~antw~etonlrovide n!lordebla unite in
would b~ i! tha dnveloper would 9~ idellnesp
aacorAancs with tha stnte and city gu
Nr. Bolsinqer zeplied he wae under the impression thet thi.e Council endld -~a
considsred reasonable baeed on the past history u! tha City
Planninq Coa~misaien. Commi4sioner Herb~st stat•ed he did not know of any
apartmenta allowed under t'~~ae circumstances.
Commiesioner eushore c.laritied the prssent owners did not own the property
when it was destroyad by fire. He stated the ngent miqht hav~ gottan the
wrang impreasion et the prev•lous public tiearinq end could have thought
bzinqing the parking into contormance vrould satisl,y the Cominieeion's concerns r
however, the Connniesion did not realise the developere could rearrar-qe the
units and provide the required pa.rking and ectually the C~nm~iseHenadded this
concerned ebout the denaity, but did not actually cllecuse it .
ib a cQhem~into co~~orniance withecodeswith~poasiblyioneroretvro r.eesonable to
brinq t
wafvere.
Commissioner Herbst indicated tse wae slso concernQd about the coamercial e ita
proposed and did not think inteduoutvthnt~is notran~iasue~betore~t~herPlanninq
that area. Chairn~an Fry po
Commission at this tima.
Mr. Bolsinqer stated they did not inv~etigate the poseibility of ntlordable
housinq• Commissioner I.a Claire explair.ed ahe thouqht the probletn was that
the Coma-iheietated ehasthouqht thierv~as~onepofntheemostndense pro~ectstshe can
units. 8
remember seeing•
Mr. Bolainqer etated all the driveways and alleys conPorm Lo code requirements
~nd they can atill meet the parking requir~ments without countinq the emall
car apaces and tfiey are there to provide aua ~~le turninq redius for t`~e larqe
vehiclea cominq into the area ~
Commissioner eouae stated ahe thouqht the size of these units ie much better
than many projects which have been approved and that thie is certainly a qood
lookinq project.
1 ~~~
82-597
MIINUT88r 11A11-H~IM CITY PI.l1NNING CQMMI8820N- NOV~MD3R 1S, 198Z
J~ck Nhil~, J1sai~tent City Attorn~y, •xplainsd th~ d~n~ity bonu~~~ vrhich aould
b~ qx~nteQ i! bh~ dsv~loprr ent~r• into •n aqr~~m~nt v-ith Che Hou~i.nq
Mpartmsn~ to provids not l~s~ than 1S• o! th~ unire a• •!lordeble uniC~ to b~
rented to l~mili~• o! lov+ to a~od~ret~ inaaa~ •nd that tho~~ Q~n~ity bonue~a
aould sppiy to o~h~r ccx~• r~quir~ment~ ahich vrould ba n~o~ssary to meat the
d~n~i~y. H~ ~xplainad ths dev~lop~r would have eo work with tha Coanaunity
Mvalopment Depertmant and eneer into an A~'°~1oQtol~timern~tdetarm:nad`byrtha
the units woald ramain a~ a!lorQab~e for a p~
City Council.
Mr. Hol~inger ~tatad he woiild like to r~quest n continuance in erder to
•xplore th~ a!lordabla hausing concept.
11CTION~ Comcniesionar Herbst o!ler~d n motion, •econded by Caaun-esione: Bouas
an M u~d to~t~ha8re9ulerly echadulad mastinqao!lDecember~l3a 1982.ratethe
oonL
request of tha petitionar.
Denn 8herar, llsax ia~a Plann9r, explnined the Plenninq Comia~saion hae npproved
eevar~-1 projecta with a 15i waiver without the +t!lordable aqreement. Fie also
noted pert of the denAity problem is one o! design beceuse the loop drivewnya
were deducted in the ce-iculatione ainca they are nore than 150-leet lonq.
ITEM NO. 4.
C~NDI~T ION11L
EIR C71T8GORICAL SXEMPTION-CLASS 1, WAI''ER OF GODE
~gE pERMIT N0. 2390
REMENT AND
PUBLIC HBARING. OWNERS: PULLII-M~ FROPERTIE3, INC., 1517 North Fairview, Santa
Ana, CA 92706. AGENTs WAYNE L. P1.-TBRSON~ p.0. Box 1122, Yort~a Linda, Cl-
92686. Property described es an irregularly-shnped parcel o! land consietinq
o! approximato].y 2.9 aores, 3456 Eaat Oranqethorpe 1-venue (The Unqaa~bling
Casino).
To permit the on-sale of beer and wine in nn existinq school !or gaiablinq
inatruction with waiver of minimum numbez o! parking epaces.
Continued from the meetinq of November 1, 1982.
There was no one indicating theix preaence in oppoeition to subject request
and althouqh the staft re~,ort was not read, it i• referred to and made a part
of the minutes•
John C. Teel, attorney repreeenting the Unqamblinq Casino, preeented
photogre~phs of the area~ taken lrcm ncross the street and lookinq diractly weat
to Miiler Stxeet es~d lttaemer Boulavard. He referred to the Police Chiet's
reca~mendation that thie request be denied on the b~+ei.e that thsre are rtine
other alcoholic bevereqe licanaea in this area and etated he did not know
where tbose eatablishments eould be locatedt that there is a aandwich shop
next door which is closed nt niqht aftex 6s00 p.m• and a liquor store further
Qovm in the center. He explained alao the Aneheim city limits are to the
tniddle o! Oranqethorpe 1-venue, go the property to the north is not actually in
1-naheim. He explained the meinager o! the eatabliahment and the
representstives o! the ownar o! the property are also availabla to answer any
quaetions.
_ .....,.
~
MZNUTEB- 1-N11H3IM CITY PI.JINNING COMMI88ION. NOVEMB~R 19, 1982
82-598
Mr. T~el •tet~d the menaqer picke up ~hs be~r t,ottla~ a~d o~ns out o! ths
park~nq lot ~v~ry niqht b~oaus• patron~ lrom thi~ estebli~hment go to th~
liquor atore and purchas• bavereq~s ~nd drink them in th~ir vehiciea and then
throw tihs bottl~s and aen• out onto the pwrkinq lot.
R~qard~.nq parking, he statsd ther• hava been no psrking problema end thet
s~versl o! the uni~~ havs bsen vacant~
TtiB PUBLIC HBARIN(i S~?At3 CL08SD.
Commitsionsr 8ushora alarified thet thea• are the same cliants !or which the
oriqine] parmit wna granted. Ne explaiaed he hed voted ~geinst this project
originally becsuee o! its proxi.mity to the induetrial aren nnd that he hes not
chanqed hie opinion, and that he a leo queetioned the loqic o! cankinq this
com.~.Arcial property, but beceuse it wea isolated, etc., it wee qrented end
uees that could be~ p~rmitted were diaousaed.
Reepondinq to Commiesioner Le Clai ra, Mr. Garrott, me-nnqer, explained paople
are being tauqht how ko properly ptay the gnmee of blackjack, crepe, etci and
on Mondaya the claesee ere etrictly for people w11o want to bACORIS deelerst a~nd
on an everaga night there will be six teachere !or 20 to 25 people and on
Mondey the eize ot the olage woul d vary from 1 to 15 end they would only be
open for tl-r-t clase, whatever the number of wtudante would be, end woul.d be
open from 3i00 p.m. to 11sU0 p.m• on Tuasday, Wednesday and Thur,~day;trom 3:00
p.m. to 1:Od a.ta. on Friday end 3aturday and there would be lrom 30 to 40
people attanding on Friday and Sa turday niqhts. H~s ex~'ained people usually
stay between 4 and 5 haura nnd during th~e courea c,f t~ eveninq, would walk
down to the liquor store and buy beer nnd drink it in cheir cers. He
explained they charge l~7.00 a day and anyone who comes in will have to pay tho
~7.00 few, if this is approved.
Jack White clarified thnt anyo~~e who comes in will actually be a etudent and
am•one over 21 would k~e allowed to purchase the alcoholic baverages.
Conuniesloner Ln Claire explained the Commission ie concerned that thie
e~tablishment could become a~ requlr~r beer ber, pointinq o~:t a conditional use
pezmit qoea wil,h the prope~ty• Bhe added this is th~ only eetablishment like
this the Commission has seen nnd they have to be vary cautious.
Jnck White etated a condition could be imposed which would precluds it lrom
becominq a cocktail lounqe or public be-r by requirinq that evaryone elicantg
muat pay the admission or inatructian !ee as ~tipulated ~o by the app
Comiaissioner Kinq auqqested that the permit be approved for d time limit of
one year, and lelt i! e~7•00 tee ie charqed to everyone, no one woul.d qo
there juet to drink beer.
Mr. TQal eteted they would stipulate to that con~son~ahonentere mustspay~the
understandina that this is a echool and everf pe
~es.
Jack White expleined the resolution could he worded aa that the uae ie bei.ng
qranted !or the aale ot beer and v~ine in conjunction with the qn~ablinq
instructioa achoolt however, the ownership of the property aould change.
~
D ;
~ k ~
~ MIl~~IT88, l1N111iBIM CITY PI.~1tdNIt~ COMl~IZ88ION, NOVEMHER 15, 1982 92-601
ITlM_ N0. 6. EIR Na(i11TIVE DECLa1R11T20N, RaCLd188IFIC1ITION NO. 82-83 -10 AND
~~~.. ~.... ~
Vl-RIANCS N0. 3307
PtJSL2C K311Jt2N0. OWNERB s RAYMOtdD M. M718CI6L, ~'P Al., 1127 W. North 8treet,
l~nsheic~, C11 9~801. AObNT~ CiARY M118CIai,, d20 S. ~uclid 8treet, Mahsim, C11
9290Z ane! WiLLDAN A880CIAT~B, 290 8. Aneheim Houlevard, l~nahoiu-, Cl~ 928Q5~
Prop~rty dssct ibed e~ e reotanqularly-shaped parcel o~ lnnd o~nsisting o!
approximately 4,960 equaze feet, 304 Wsst Varmont Avanue,.
RBCLA88IFIC1ITION REQUEBTt RS-1--43,000 to RM-1200~
VARIAttCE R$QUESTt Waivera ot: a) maximum etructurel heiqht, b) tainimum
landecap~d ~atback, c) permitted type o~ parking epaces and d) required
screeninq of parkinq f~ailitiea.
It wes noted the petitioner hnd requeeted thnt eubjsct petition be continued
to the meatinq of November 29, 1982.
ACTIONi Coanairaioner Bouus ofterea e motion, secanded by Camnissioner King
and MOTIdN C]~RRIED, lhat conaideration ot the elorementioned item be continued
to the regularly-echedulad meeting ot November 29, 1982, at the request o! the
petitioner .
ITSM N0. 7. EIR t~iffiGATIVE DEGI~ARATZON, WAIVSR OF CODE RRQUIRRM$NT ANA
CONDITIONAL U8J P$RMIT N0. 2392
PUBLIC HEI~RING. OWNERs RAYMOND G. SPEt1AR, ET AL, 693~ a-venida de Santiaqo,
Anahaim, G 92807. AGgNT: GOLDSN 6P~ST t~NTERPRISEB, INC., dba litlOG14T RENT A
CAR UF 11NAHEIM, 1400 3. Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92602. Property
desctibad ns en irregulnrly-ehaped parcel of land coneisting of appro~cimc~t.eiy
3 acree, 5710 East I,a PAlma ~-venua (Anaheim Hille Motor Inn ).
To permit an automobile rental aqency in an exietinq rnotor inn with w~~xver~~
of : a) permitted signi~tig, b) maximum eize and location of wr~ll siqn~ and ~;~
` prohibited eign liqhtin.q.
There was na cne in3lceti»Z the`_r preeence in apposition to eubject reque~~t
nnd although the etatf report wa~, Rot read, it ie relerred to and made a part
of the minutee.
Elmer Ha-nson, 465 Fair Drive, Coeta Meaa, repreaentinq Budqet Rent A Car~
agent, stated they nre proposing to operate a car rental aqency lrom the
Anaheim Hills Motor Lodqe to earvice the visitore, residenta and bueinesaee in
that eren. Iie stated they would like to have nn additional monumentnl sign in
front becauae o~ the visibility and explained aigna account for approximately
30 to 40• o! their business.
TF~ PUSLIC HE]~AING WAS CL088D.
Commiasioner Herbst etated this property is locate~ in the 3cenic Corridor
Ov+e~rlay Zone ~rhich hue nwre eic,~n reetrictions and there ia no way he will vote
for another ~siqn. He ndded there is a lot of conqestion in that area now and
he lelt this uge woul~ have to be operated entirely trom the hotel lobby
because he would not want to ereate tvro sepnrate businesaea on one proper.ty.
~~
8~-~9A
MItil1TE8, ANAN~IM CITY p1.~NNINQ Gd4MI88IpN ~ NOV1EMlS1LR 15 r 1982
It ws~ noted th~ Planninq Director or hia authoris~d r~pr~t~ntetivo ha~
d~t~rmin~d that the propos*d proj~ct lalls within th~ d~liniti~n o!
Cat~qori~uid~li'nTMistand~i~ ltherelor~,aoat~qoricslly exemptBlrom the~requirement
Mpo
to pr~per• an aiR.
]~CTIpN- Coattnio~ion~r McBurney otf~red a motion~ seoonded by Commis~iortar I,e-
~ aire end MOTIOI~I C11RRI6D (Cott~tai~sioner Bu~hor• voting no), thet th• Mahsim
City 4lanninq Coa~mission doeo~ l~er~by qrant waiver o! ~ode rmquiruasnt on ths
basis o! the naturs ot this u~e with l,imitad nwnbo! afprivilete bsin nenjoyed
bseie tihat denial would deprive eubject prog~rty 7 9
by athar propertie~ in the same zone and vicinlty•
Cota~ai~eionar McAurney o!lered Rea~lutlon No~ PC82-208 and movad !or its
passaqa and adoption that the 1lnnheim Ci~y Planninq Cnwaission Qoe* hereby
qrant Conditional Uss Pern-it No. 2390 !or a period of ana ysar, to expixa on
Novamber 15, 1963, end eub~ect to the peti~ioner'• stipuletion that each
per~on nttendinq tha echool shell be required to pey en eclmissian tee ~r
instruotion !ee of ~7.00 end eubject to Interdepsrtmental Com~aittee
raco~menda~tions .
Prior to voting on the above resolution, tha poea.ibiltty of lowering the
edmiseion !ee v+as discuesed with the petitionar atipulatinq the ~ee would not
be any lower than $7.00, but thati it could be increaeed. in the luture, i!
neceaeary.
Jack White augqested the condition requirinq that no alcoholic beveragee shall
be sold or made available to peraona other than those payinq the standard
daily ediaigsi~n or inetruction P.oe of not lasa thAn ~7.00.
On roll call, the loreqoing reeolution wae pnssed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, P'RY. FI$R88T. 1CING. LJ1 CLAIR~, MC SURNEY
NOB3: HU3HORE
AASSNTi NONE
,7ack White, Assietant City Attorney, preaented the written right to eppeal the
Planninq Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council.
ITEM P"J. 5. EIR NBGATIVE DECLARATION AND TENTATIVE FlAP OF TRACT NO. 11766
PUBLIC HS1~1tING. OWNSR: BSPgRANZJ- VII.L~3'~x22303haOranee,~CA19 669in, CA
92680~ AGENTs RO$SRT D. MICICELSON, g
Property deacribed as an irregulerly-ehaped parcel of land conaistinq of
approximately 7 acres (21 lote), having approximate lrontagee of 470 fest on
Maritn Lane, 490 feet on the east side of Kellogq Driver 570 feet on the north
eide of Orengethorpe~ 1-venues and 520 teet on the west side of Post Lane.
To eatablieh a~ 21-lot, 97-unit atfordable condominium eubdivision.
Thare aaa no one indicatinq thair preeence in oppoeition to subjec~ request
and although the statf rep~rt wes not read, it is ra~errad to and made a part
o! the mi.n., as.
MIN~'!'1~8, 111~Al1~IM CI'PY PLAI~INING ~OM~I~BI.ON, NOVEhISER 15, 1982 82-600
Anb Miok~l~on, aq~nt, was pro~ent t.o ensw~r any questions.
THE PfJBLIC HEIIRIN(i N718 CL083D.
IL w~s notsd ths n~qntiva decleration wa• pr~viou~ly +~pprovad in conjunction
with Conditional Use Psrmit No. 2391 an Noveaber 1, 1482.
11CTIpN= Commi~sionar Horbst o!lered e motion, ~~cond~ed by Commi~~ion~r Bousa
and MOTION CARRIED, thet the 1-nahsim City Ple-nninq C~mtai~~ion doa~e hereby tind
that the propoeed eubAivioion, toqethsr wi~hh itis dasiqn and improvam~ent, ia
consistent with the City ot Anaheim Generel Plan, pursuant to Gc~v~rna-ent Cod•
Smction 66473.5t nnd Aaes, tharetore, approve Trntative M+~p o! Tract No~ 11766
!or a 21-lot, 97-unit a!lorc~able condocninium eubdivision eubject to the
lollowinq conditlones
1. That ehould this eubdivieion be developed as mora than one
eubdivieion, eech aub~ivision thereo! ehall be aubn~itted in tentative
torm for approval.
2. That the original documente of the covennnta, c~~nditions, and
restriction. end a letter addree~ed to the 6avelopez's title compeny
authorizing recordation thereof, ahall bc~ eubmitted to the City
Attorney's Ottice etid approved by City 1-ttorney's Otfice, Public
Utilitiee Department, Buildinq Division, end the Enqine~rinq Division
prior to the linal tract map approval• Said documents, en approved,
shall be recorded i.n ~he Office of the Orenqe County Recorder.
3. Th~t the owner(e) o! subject property shall aubiait proof o!
compliance with ~he tenant notiticntion provisions speciPied in
Government Code Sectiun 66427.1 in a torm approved by the City
Attorney.
4. That prlor to approvnl of the final tract map, the applicant ehall
present evidence aetistgctory to the Chief euildinq Inspector that
the converted units nre in contormance with Council Po11cy No. 542,
Sound ~-ttenuation in Reaidantial Projecta.
5, That the aell~r ehall provide the purchaser of each condominium unit
with written inlormation concerninq Anaheim Municipal Code 14.32.500
pertaining to "parking reetricted to tacilitate street aweeping."
Such written infor~aation will clearly indicate when on-etroet parking
is prohibited and the penelty for violation.
6. That the ^Mveloper shall enter int~ a*. ayreement with the City oP
~-naheim .-~. sunnt to Governa-ent :.'ode 65915 which aqreemant shnll be
recorded concurrently with or j~rior to the epproval ot the FinaZ Mlap
and which ahall provide thet ^5~ of the unite shall be sold as low or
awderate income houainq aa det9r.jd in C3overnment Code 65915 and with
approprinte resala controls as approved by the City of Anaheim.
7. That the exietinq structures sha7.1 be brought up to the minimuan
atrndarda of the City o! l~naheim, includinq the Uniforen Building,
Plumbing, 8lectrical, Housing, Meahanical and Fire Codea ns adoptad
by the City of Ar-aheim.
MINUTEB, ATi7WEIM CITY PLANNINO COMMI88ION, NOVaMBER 15, 1982 82-602
Mr. Han~on expleined tha r~ntal aqency ancl the hotel are two saparate
bu~inessss wit•.h aep~rata ownsr~.
tt~spondinq to Comtni~~ioner Ua Claire, Mr. Hanson exp~ained thay pl~n to hava
no mora than 5 vshioles on the •ite at any one time.
Commissioner La Claire stated ahe ~ c~ncarned about La P~lme beceuse 1t i• a
haavily traveled street and ie var, acmgeeted now and i! the Planninq
Coaimisalon dic! epprove this reque~t, it rrould be severaly r~atricted and ceuld
n~t be increaaed.
Mr. Henson stata~ they are addinq to tha txa!!ic now by coc~ing and qoinq to
pick up p+itrons, notinq that some ot their potentisl customere ere e~ao qoinq
to other citiea to rent vehlcles becauae o! the distance to thair lacilities.
Cotmnisaioner La Claire atated eha could eee thio ns an excellent site lrom the
petitioner's point of view, but it would be eatabliehinq two eeparate
businesses on thie property. Bhe atated she did egroe thet there ia ~ need
!or thie type of aervice in thet area, but wea concernad because ehe felt this
bueineas would becorae so euccesstul th~~ tre!!ic would be e real problem,
eepecially with the acceae to La Pa Lan. 8he eugqeated the petitioner try to
locate snother aite in this aren.
Commiesioner Herbst atated he did not have a problem with the use, but could
not allow the signing and eaked if the petitioner could live with the siqn
inside the hotel lobby, and he did not think tretfic would be increased very
much.
Commisaioner La Claire atated Approval would heve to be liia.ited to a r.ertain
number of vehiclea wit}i Mr. Haneon replying thnt he had already agreed there
would be no atore than 5 on the property et eny one time.
Regardinq the siqns, Mr. Hanaon stated in hie experiencer 30 to 40• of theix
business is a result of eiqning and ehere is a problem with vieibility on thia
site, with a garaqe blockinq it to the north.
Respondinq to Commiasioner Bushore reqardinq khe pessenqer vans, Mtr. Hanson
explained 'the vans pick np throuqhout the City. Connaiseioner Bushore e~teted
this use will not eliminate the van oz any o! the tratfic and he lelt actually
tra~tic would be increased with thia uae. He steted he thought people will
look for the chenpeat rental cars rather then whera they are aloses~.
Mr. Hnnaon explained eeveral buainesaes in the area heve also vo~tncted them
about rental cars.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbet offered a motion, seconded by Conuniaeioner Kinq
and MOT20N CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planninq Commiasion hae reviewed the
proposal to permit an automobile rAntal agency in an exlFtinq mo+tel w.lth
waiver of permitted eiqning on an irregularly-ahaped parcel o! land consistinq
o! approximately 3 acres, locatad south and east o! the aoutlieaet c+orner of La
Palma Avenue and Imperial Avenue and further deecrib~d ae 5710 8ast La Pa'11aas
and doee hereby approve the Neqative Declaration from the requirement to
prepare an environment~l inipect report on tho basie that there Nou~d be na
siqnificant individual or cwaulative adveree environmentel impact due to the
~~
MINUT88, AN7111EIM ~IT1l PI.~NNItiG COMMIadION, NOV3M81lR 15, 1482 82-603
spproval o! thi.s N~qative Osclar~tic+n ~f.no~ th• 11nah~im C3~n~ra1 Plan
ds~iqnatas th• •ubj~ct property !ox qsn~rei camm~rcisl land uia~ comn-~n~urate
vrith the proposalj that no oensitiv~ environmental in~p~ct~ ar• involv~d in the
prorasal~ that ths 2nitiel 8tudy ~ubmi~ted by the pstitionar indicete~ no
siqniticant individusl or cwnulativt adver~• environtaentel impact~l and that
the Negative Osaleretian substantiatinq th~ toreqoing linQings ia on lile in
the City o! ,i~neheim Alanninq Dapartment.
Cc~mmission~r Narbet otfer~d a motion, seconded by Commi~sioner Hushoza end
MOTION C1~RRIBD, thst the 1-nehaim City Planning Commiesion doer hsre~iy deny the
request !or waiver o! permitt~d siqning on the basi~ that the property ie
lxated in the Saen.Lc Corridor Ovorl~y Zone and aince other similar rsqumets
hava bean denied,approval o! this requeet would be qr~nting e privileqe denied
ather propertiss in the •eme xane and vicinity.
Prior to votinq on tha above motion, the Commiseion discuased the siqne,
makinq it very alear thnt no aAditional sic,~ninq will be permitted on the
exterior o! the buildinq, nor on top o! the vehicles.
Aean 8harer, Asoociate Planner, explnined under tha code thie bueiness aould
be permittad one exterior wall aiqn facinq Impari~l Hiqhway with Commissioner
Herbet clarityinq that hie motion is for denial o! nny additional siqning
other then Mf1AL le permitted by code.
Coamtiseion~r La Clnire e~~ted she did not want to eee eny more eiqns and asked
if they caulc! include a ef.qn on tha existing motel siqn. Denn 8herer
raepond~d that the petitioner could work with Planning Departa-ent stntf anfl
incarpozate thei.r eiqn without crnn~nq back to the Connaiesion.
Coami~aloner Herbet offered Resolution No. PC82-209 nnd moved for its passaqe
and adoption thet the Annheim Ci~y Plnnninq Commieaion doe$ haraby qrant
Conditional Use Permit No. 2392, in part, subject to Interdepertmental
Comsnittee recommandationa.
On roll call, the foreqoinq reaolution was pasaed by the ~ollowing votes
11YESt BOUAS, FRY- H~R88T~ 1CING, I.A CLALR~, MC BURN$Y
NOES: HUSHORE
AH$SNT: NONE
Jack WI~.iCe, ~-eeiatant Ci~y Attorney, presented the written riqht to appeal the
Plannlnq Commiseion's decisioi. within 22 days to the City Council.
ea-6oa
NII~itTPlB~ 11Nl1NaIM CITY PLIIIININf3 COMNIBSION~ NOV~~A 1S, 198Z
Z11 (PRINIOUBLY CERTITI~D) 7WD
ZT1lM N0. 8. 1t~1VIRONMIENT1lL I1~11CT RSPORx' ti0.
._......,u ~., _ ~ ~ t n~-dvSRTIBED)
pUDLiC HEIIRING. O~/NaRt TSX7-CO r 1~'~~EIM Hi.i J~8 ~ INC ., 380 8' I~ah~ 3~OH811•
Roed~ ~neheimr C1- 92807. A(iENTe THE ~3UNSTO~rty do c~ribea,a• an
1lnarisim Hill• li~ad, 1lnaheim, C1- 928~~ • r~~i~t~ly 31 ecra• loceted
irragularly-~haped parcel o! land consistinq ~~ apP
at the southwest and eoutheast cornsr o! 8srrano Av~nue and Nidden Canyon Roe~d.
To ra-eatablioh ~n 18-lot (plus one op~n epace lot) Re-HS-22,000(BC) Zone
subdivisi.on.
Thers was no ana indicatinq their pra~enca in oppoeition to aubjact request
and although the statt repor~ wes not read, it ie relerred to and made a part
o! the minutes.
(ieorqe Mason, agent.v aplbutehashexpired,st is to re-eetnbliah a tract which
aae prav~ously appro ~
THE pUBLIC HEIIRIN(3 WA9 CLOSED.
Coauaisaioner La Claire clarilied that this traat will be a Qart of the Mas:.ar
Eioa-eowners Aseociation.
Environmental Impact Raport No. 211 wem previously certified hY the t`ity
Council on March 14, 1978, in conjunctian with the A~proval of Tentative Tract
No. 8520 (Revision No• 1)•
ACTION: Coamnisaloner Kinq o!lerad a motion, .econded by Cr~mm~ieaioner Houas
and M~OTION CARRIED- thdt t'he Anaheim City plenning Commi~sion does hereby lind
thnt the proPoaed subdivision, toqether wlth ita desiqn anB improvement~ is
consistent with the City o! 1-nahei.n- Gener~l~v~1~~tatl~+e~MepYetGTrn~t~Not 8520
Section 66473.5~ and does, thiugtone/o ~n epace lot) RS-HS'Z2.000(SC) Zone
(Rev. No. 2} for nn 18-lot (p Pe
subdivieion aubject to the followinq conditione:
1~ Thnt shouid this subdivision b~n developed as awre thsn one
aubdivision, each eubdivielon thareo! shall be submitted in tentative
~o~ for approval.
2. That eubject property shall be eerved by underqround utilitieR.
3. That prior to the introSuction ~f an ordinance e linal tract mAp o~
subject property ehall be eubmitted to and epproved by the City
Council and then be recorded in tha Otfice of the Orange County
Recorder.
4. That any proposed covenants, conditions, and reetrictions shAll be
gubmittad to anQ approved by the City 1~tkorney's Office pxior to City
Councii appxoval of the ~inal tract map and, further, that the
a~pproved covnnants, conditione, ~n~v~i:Btrictions ahall be reaorded
prior to the tinal tr3ct map app
MINtJT1~8~ ]1N11HEIM CI'PY PI.~INNINCi COMMI88ION, NOV31~iBBIt 15, 1982 82-605
5. That ~Lr~et nams• •hnll be approv~d by th~ City Pl~nninq Departmsnt
prior ta approval o! a tinal tract aiap•
6. That the ownsr o~ subject prop~rty shall pay to the City o! 1-nahaim
ths appropriat~ perk and reor~stion in-lieu teo~ es dsterminad to be
Rppropri.ata by ~.hs City Council, said L'~as to be paid et the t~.ma tha
buildinq permit is iseued.
7. Thet drainaga ot snid proparty shall be dispos~d o! in a mennar
aati~lactory to the City Bnqineor. It, in ths preparetion ~! the
eite, sutficieat qrading i~ rsqui.red to n~cer~itate a qrading permit,
no work on qrading aill be parmitted betweon Octabar 15th dnd April
15th unlees all required o!!-site dreineqA tacilltle~ have besn
inst~llad and aze operative. Poeiti~~ aseurence ehall be provided
the City thet euch drainnq~ lacilitiee will be completed prior to
October 15th. Necassary riqht-of-wny !or o!f-site drainaqe
tecilitiea ehn11 be dedicated to the City, or thR City Council nhnll
have initia~ed condomnation proceeflinqs there~ore (the costs o! which
ahall be borne by the daveloper) prior to tho cooanence~aent of gredinq
operationa. The rec~uired drainage lacilities ehall be o! a sise and
type autlicient to carry runofP aaters oriqinatinq Prac~ hiqher
propertiee thrnuqh eaid property to ulticanta disposAl ae approved by
the City Enqine~ar. 3aid drninege lacilitiee ehnll be thA firat item
of aonetruction and ehell be cocapleted and be lunetional throughout
the trect and from the downatream tx~undazy oP the property t~ thQ
ultimate point of dlapoeal prior to the iesuance o! any final
bnildinq inspections or occupancy permita. Drainage dietr.i~ct
reimbureement aqreements may be inede available to the deve)~pera ot
anid proparty upon their request.
8. That greding, excavation, and all other construction activitiee ehall
be conducted in such n manner eo ae to minimize the possibility of
any silt originating fraa this praject being carried into the Santa
Ana River by storm watcr oriqinatinq from or flowinq throuqh this
project.
9. That the aliqnment and terminnl point of stona dra~ins ahown on this
tentative tract mep ehall not be considered final. Z'hese draina
ahall be subject to preciee desiqn coneiderationa and appzoval of the
City Enqineer.
10. If permanent atreet name aigna have not been inatnlled, tempornry
street neaie eiqna she11 be insta~lled prior to any occupancy.
11. Thnt ~.rash atoraqe dreae ehall bm prov,ided in accordance with
approved plnna on lile with the Olfice o! the Executive Director of
Public Works.
12. That prior tc+ approval of the final tract map, the pet!tioner shall
mnke eome provieion, acceptabla to the City Council, ~or landecapinq
And A-aintenance of the slopes within and/or crented by the
development of this property. Said provision shnll include an
easem~ent to nllow for mnintennnce of Lot No. 17.
MTNUT1t8~ 1W1-HEIM CI'1'Y p1~J1NNINA COMKI8820N, NOV~IHBR 15, 1982 82•606
13. Th~t minimum d~~iqn ~pasd !or 1lwnida d~ Bantiaqo ahali be Z5 mil~s
p~t hour.
14. Th~t nli r~quir~mant• u! Fir• Zone 4, otherwi~e id6ntilied •~ Fire
lldn-ini~tratiw Ord~r No. 76-01, will ba mst. Such r~quirem~nts
include, but are not limit~d to, ahimn~y ~park err~stor~, protscted
e-tti.c anA undar lloor opaninq~, Class C or b~tter ro~tinq au~taria~
nnd c~ne hour lire r~sistiv~ construction of hori:ontal aurlaaee i!
witih~n 200 laet ot edjacent brushlend.
15. Thst: nRtive •lopes adjncent to newly conetructed home• ehell be
hyd:oseeded with a low luel aambu~tible seed mix. Such slopas ahell
be eprinklerad an8 weeded a~s required to aet~sblish 100-leat
taparation o! linmm~ble vegetation trom nny structuro.
15. 'rhat luel breako shell be provided ne deterwined to be required by
tha F1te Chiet.
17. That the devaloper o! aubject tract ehall en~
lacilities egreement with the City !or wnter
Rlevation Systam, ns required by Rule 159 0!
Rules and Requletione prior to approval of e
atipulnted to by the petitionar.
18. That prior to any development on Lot No. 17,
eccess !or eaid lot e~hell be provided.
:er into e speaiel
facilitie• in the Hiqh
the Weter Utility itates,
linel trect eaap, ae
acceptnble vehicular
1g. In acaordance with the req~~irements of Section 18.02.047 perteina.ng
ta the initial Sale of reeidontial hotae3 in the City o! Maheim
Planning llrea "B", the seller shall provide each buyer with written
information concerninq the 1-nahaim General Plan end the exiating
zoninq within 300 leet of the boundaries of eub~ect tract.
20. That minimum etrest lightinq coneieting of ea!ety liqhtinq approved
by the City Tra~fic Enqineer and the Eldctricnl Uivision of the
Public Utilities Departaterit may be constructed subject to n bond
being posted to quarantee installation o! caaplate atreet liqhting at
eny time during the two-year period lollowing recordation ot the
tinal tract c~ap, i! auch lighting is determined to be necessary tor
the heelth, sefety, and welfare o! the residente in subject trnct.
21. That ~ire hydranta shall be inatalled +~nd charged as r.:qciired and
dete~nined to be necessary by the Chie! of the Fire Depnrtment prior
ta conmaencam~nt o! atructural lraminq.
22. ThAt appropriate water auae:sment fees as determined by the Oftice o!
Utilitiea Ganaral Mnnaqrsr 4ha11 be paid to the City of Maheim prior
to the issuance of a builflinq pexa-it.
23. That the owner(s) of aub~ect property shall pay t1~e trat~ic eiqnal
aseesement !ee tOrdinance No. 389G), in an amount as determined by
the City Council, !or each new dwellinq unik prior to the issuance o!
a buildinq permit.
~
MIN!.1TE8, ~NAHSIM CITY PL~NNINCi COMMI$8ION, NOVIMAER 15, 198Z 8Z-607
24. That ths ovmsrts) o~ ~ubj~c~ pzoperty rhall d~dicete and improv. a 10
lo~t wid~ equ~~trian ~nd hikinq trail a• rhovm on the l~qu~atrien and
Hikinq Treils Caaponent o! ths ]lnahaim ~ien~r~l Plani •~4 that
improvamenC plen~, in aacordenc~ with standard plen• and
epsciliea~lons on !il• in th~ 0!lice o! Lhe City ~ngineer, Rhsll be
~ubmitttd in conjuncCion with tt~e qtedinq plen~ and/or thet n bond in
an eunount and lorm aati~laotory to the City o! 1~naheim shall be
poated with the City to qusrantes the .tnstella~ion ot the
abave-mentioned requiremant• prior to occupency.
25. That tha ownare o! tha subj~ot properky ehall exaeute and record a
covenant obliqatinq thA homeownsr~ e~soctation to (1) n-alntein end
repair tha hikinq and equ~strian trail, (2) indemnity end hold t~9
City harmless !or damngee reaulting theretrom, and (3) atieintein
linbility inaurance !or eaid trnil n+~-minq ~he City as an additional
insureQ. T'he lorm o! eaid covenant sha11 t~e appraved by the City
Attorney's Otfice end ehall be recordad concurrently wiCh the Linal
tract mep. The devaloper o! the gut~ject trect shal~ itnprovw and
maintnin the hereinabove described hikinq nnd equestrian trsil,
including providinq the abo~ve specilied ineurnnce, until such time ae
the homeownera associntion becomes leqelly obligated therelor e-e
hereinnbove provided. The developer ehall post a bond in an emount
and i'orm eatistactozy to tho City of Annheim to quare-ntee perlormanca
of developer's obllqations hereunder. Evidenae of the required
ineurance and bond ehe-11 be submitted to, and approved by, the City
Attorney'a Office pricr to approval of the finel toap~
26. Thnt the aeller ahall provide the purchaeQr of eech condontinium unit
with written inforniation concerning Anaheim Muniaipal Code 14.32.500
pertaininq to "parkinq reetricted to ~aeilitate atseet gweepinq."
Such written inforiaetion will cleerly indicate when on-s~reet ,parkinq
ie prohibited and the penelty !or violetion.
27. Thet "No Yarking tor Street Sweeping" signe ahall be inatalled prior
to final etreet inspection aa required by tha Public Woxks Executive
Director in accordnnce with apecificationo on file with the Street
Maintenance Diviaion.
X~
MINUT38, XN1~H8IM CITY 1'L1INNINO COMMI88ION, NOVEMBER 15, 1982 82-608
ITIlM NO. 9
RI~p0~RT8 AND RSCpMl+l~NDATIONS
The lollowinq Report,s and Racommandations steff raporta were presented but not
rasd:
A. R~UEB~' FOR APPROVIIL OF SPECIFIC USE - Request from Pe~~line 8ink !or
approvsl o! s beeuty ehop in en axieting .ingle-lamily ~lw lling located et
721 8. Maqnolie Avenue.
Followinq e brie! discuseion with the epplicant end Jack White, Aesistant
City Attornmy, reviewinq the requixemente Por e home occupation permit
with the applicant, it wae determined that n homr~ occupation permit would
be applicebid nnd no ection by the Commiesion wes required.
H. ENVIRONMLNTAL IMPACT REPORT N0. 258 - Requeet that the Planning Commiesion
recommend certificAtion to the City Council o! eai.d EIR prepared !or the
propoeed annexation, land use and zoninq of an eree of epproximately 51
ncres identi~ied as 8horb Wells.
ACTIONs C~nmisaioner La Clnire olfered a motion, eeconded by C~aunieeioner
Mc8lurney and MOTION CARRIED. that after coneiderlnq 8nvironmental Impect
Report No. 258 far the proposed ennexation, General Plnn Amendment and
zoning o! the 51-ecre afte identif.ied ne Shox~b Wells and reviewinq
evidence, both written and orel, presented to aupplement DreFt EIR No.
258, the Plannlnq Co~pmisaion finde th~t EIR No. ~58 ie in compliance with
the California Snvironmental Quality l~ct and the City and State CSQA
Guidelineet thnt potential environmental impacts cen be ceduced to dn
insignificant level by conformence with City plans, policies and
ordinancea and, there~ore, based upon sucr information, khe Planning
Commiseion recoaunendg that the City Council certify fiIR No. 258.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no turther business, Commieaioner Herbet ottered a
motion seconded by Coa~miasionsr Bc~uas and MOTION CARRIED, that
the meeting be edjournecl.
The meetinq was adjourned at 3:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~i~!.C-C.~. ~C r G~~~~
Sdith L. Harrie, Secretary
Anaheim City Plnnninq Cononiseion
ELH:lm