Minutes-PC 1983/10/31~
B6S~1W1R NBS'PINC 0! ~4i6 A1~11WEIM CITY PLANNING COMMI88ION
RaC~L11R MEl~TING Th• c~yulac m~~tinq af the 11nah~im City Pla~nning
Commi~~ion wa~ cailed to o~der by Chaitwoman Bousa st
10:00 a.~n., Octab~r 31, 1983, in the Counoil Chsmbar, a
qu~cum being pc~aen~ and the Commission rRViuw~ed plana o!
the iteme on today's eqenda.
RBCB88: 11:30 e.m.
RBCONVBNS: 1:30 p.m.
PRBSBNT Chairwoman: Houss
Commi~eionere: Huahore, Pry, xing, Le Cleire, Mc9urney
1-BSBNT Commisaionera: Harbat
J~LSO PRESBNT Annik+~ 8Antalahki
JACk Flhite
Jay Titue
Paul singer
,Tay Taahico
Dean Shecer
Kendra Motriee
~dith Harrie
1-o~iatant Directoc tor Zoning
Ac ;,istent City Attorney
City Engineec
Traftic ~nginerr
/-aexiate Plannec
1~eaociate Plenner
1-saxiate Planner
Plenning Commiaeion 8ecretary
ITEM N0. 1._ LIR NEGI-TIVE D~C1~11It11TI0N ~-ND V~RIIINCL N0. 3345
PUBLIC HE1~-RING. OWNERS: HU00 A. VAZQUEZ, 619 S. Live Oak Drive, Jlnaheim, CI-
92805. Property deacribed as a reckangularly-shepRd parcel of land congieting
of approximetely 0.2 acre, 129 South Meltoae Street.
waivecs o€ minimum lot area per dwelling unit, maximum atructucal height,
maximum site coverage and minimum si~eyard eetback to conatruct an 8-unit
affordable apartment complex.
Continued from 1-ugust 22, Septembec 19 a~nd October 3, 1983.
ACTION: Commiasioner Kir~g offered a motion, eeconded by Commiseioner McBurney
and MO~ION CJ-RRILD (Commisaio~er Herbst abaent), that, considecetion of khe
above-mentioned natter be continued to the meeting of November 14, 1983, at
the cequest of the petitionec.
ITBM NO. 2. BIR NBGATIVS DSCL11R11TION ]i1tiD V1-RI]-NCB N0. 3350
PUBLIC HBARiNG. OWNBRS: ALPREDO SiLVO CE8I~LIAS, ET 11L, 428-1/2 S. Melrose
Stceet, 1-naheim, CA 92805. Property described as A cectangulerly-syaped
parcel of l~nd consisting of approximately 6,375 square feet lxated at the
northeast corner of Santa ~,na Street dnd Melroee Street, 428 and 4?.8-1/2 South
Melrose Stceet.
Wafvers of: (d) minimum vehiculnr accessway, (b) minimum number and type of
p4rking ~pacea. (c) minimum lot area per dwelling unit, (d) maxi~num lot
coverage, (e) minimum flooc area, ~f) mi~imum lendsceped set~iack, (g) minimum
aideyard setb~ck to retain an illegal dwelling unit and to conatruct a garage.
83-707 10/31/83
i r
Mti~UTB9. ANAFIRIM CITY PL•~.S~iNING COI~I~$SION. OC}'QB~l~ 91._~Q~ _ 83-708
~ ~..~....~ . ~
Continu~d lcom n~~ting o! Octob~r 3, 1983.
~1C_ TIQN: Commiaaion~c Kinq olt~red e motion, s~cond~d by Co~miision~r Mceurney
and MOTION CARRIBD (Conuaiseion~r Hetbst eb~ent), that consid~ration of th•
ebov~-m~ntioned meLter be continu~d to th• meeting af Nov~mb~r 1~, 1983, at
the requeat oE th• p~tiitioner.
ITB., M,NO_3. BIR NBCJITIV~ D8CW1Rl1TION. WJIIV~R OP CODR RgQU2RBMSNT. CONDITIONAL
U8B PBRMIT N0. 2459
~~
PUBLIC HEARING. OWN~RS: K11I8BR AO~NDATION HOSPITI~LS, 333 3outh Gcand Avenue,
~3400, Los ~-ngele~, C1- 90071. Pr.operty d'acribed sa an irrfgularly-shsped
percel conaisting of approximately 9.6 Acres located at the northweat corner
of Riverdele 1-venue and Lakeview 1-venue, having a frontage of epproximetely
628 feet on the north aide of Rivecdale 1lvenue and a frontnge of approximetely
670 feet on the west side of Lekeview 7-venue end further describecf as 441
Norkh LAkeview 1-v~nue (Kaiser Found~tion Hoapital).
To permit expension oE en exieting hoapital with waiver of minimum number of
packing apaces.
ConCinued from .TUne 27, July 25, 1-uguet 8, September 19, October 17, 1983.
ACTION: Commiesioner King oFtered a motion, secohded by Commiesioner McBurney
and MOTION C1-RRIED (Commiasioner Herbet abaent), that conaidecetion oE the
ebove-mentioned metter be continued ta the meeting of November 14, 1983, at
the requeet of the petitionec.
ITBM N0. 4. BIR NBGATIVB DSCLARIITION (PRBVIOUSLY APPROV$D). CONDITION~-L U8B
PL~RMIT N0. 2342 (READVERTISL'D)
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: P1ITRICIA H. Q~APpELL, 808 N. Anaheim Boulevard,
Anaheim, C7~ 9a802 and DONI~LD A. .TACOBSON, 1664 W. eroadwdy, l~naheim, CA
92802. Property described es a cectsngularly-ahaped parcel of land consisting
of ~pproximately .24 acre , 806 a~d 808 North 1~naAeim eoulevard (L.O.R.D.S.
Ministcie~).
To consider modification and tevocstion of Conditional Use Permit No. 23~2.
Continued from the Reports and Recommendetioae portion of the October 3, 1983,
meeting in order to advertise for e public hearing.
1~CTION: Commiesioner King offered e moLion, aeconded by Commiaaioner McBurney
and MOTION CARRIED (Commisaioner Herbst abaent), thdt consideration of the
above-mentioned matter be continued to the meeting of Novembe[ 14, 1983, at
the raqueat of the petitionec.
10/31/83
~T6B.~1NiRIN CITY P1.AIiNINO COM!lI88ION, OCTOd~R 3~,~~~_ ___ __ 83-709
~_!1, N0. 5. E2R NBOATIVQ 03CLAR1ITSON. N112VER,_,0_P CODE RQaUIR1~MENT 11ND
CONDITIONAL 08E PERMIT ~10._ 250~
PUBLIC HBARINC. OWNBRSt ANJW LIN NILLS PROMENIIDB PARTNRRBHIP, 4000 MecArthu[
Boul~v4cd, Sutte 1500, N~wpoct B~~ch, CA 92660. 1-GiENTs RAYMQND SALM2
J-380CIAT!!8, 148 W. Mein 8tc~~t, Tustin, CA 92680. Propsrty described as a
cectangularly-shap~d para~l of land consieting of epproximately 3 acr~ae
loceted et tha northeast cocner of Sarreno 1-venue and Nohl Ranch Road, 6509
Serrano 1-venue.
To permit a church in the CL-ElS(sC) zone with waiver of minimum numbar, of
parki.ng apeces.
There wae no one indicating their preaence in oppoeition to subject requeet
and although the etetf report was not read, it ie retecred to enQ mede a pert
of the minutee.
Ray 3elmi, agent, wa~a present to enawer 4ny questione.
THE PUBLIC HBIIRING W11S CL03ED.
Responding to Commieaioner Pry, Mr. Salmi ateted they have not finalized their
leese eo d~ not know the terms as yet. He explained to Chairwoman Doues that
th~ senctu~ry will be in one building along with eome class cooma end the
officea, in this ehopping center.
Commiseioner King asked if e time limit ehould be included if thia is epproved.
Commissioner La Claice asked if there ~ce plens to eatablish a permanent
church in thie acea. Mr. Salmi atated they have already abtai.ned a
ronditional uae permit for a church on Santa 11na Canyon Road and the
difficulty has been financial in gettfng started on a parmanenC structuce. He
atated they have tseen loceted in an induattial area on La Palma ~nd there have
been no probleme at that location, but their lease ie expiring and they teel
the church ahould be in a residentia~l area.
Respondiny to Commiesioner Buahore, !!r. Salmf stated he had no way of knowing
when the permanent church construction r.ould be started. iie akated it is a
substantiel project and they were looking into phaainq it end at one time
planned to stert the aenctunry first. He atated they ar~ dealing with
C]-LTRANS, the City of l~naheim end 1~naheim Hills, inc. and there ia a
substa~ntial outlay in ~he beginning foc eng~neering costs for improvements foc
the drainage. He etated they have had to eet the plans aside for economic
reasons.
Mr. 3almi stated they will be tcying to negotiate o minimum 3-year laaae, so
this will not be a permanent ~nrrangement end this facility is emaller than the
one they are ~urrently utilizing on La Palma~, but they feel it will be more
compatible.
Coanaieeioner lcing etated he would euggeet e 3-year time limit.
10/31/83
MINU~'R8. ANJWRIM CITY PWINNING COMMI88ION, 0~,'TOBl~Ij~~l. 1983 83-710
Cotamia~ion~c La Claic~ ~ak~d ii th~ p~opl• to !h~ c~~r hav~ b~~n ~otili~d.
Ktndca Morci~a, 1-aai~tant Pl~nn~~, r~apond~d thay w~r• and no r~apona~~ h~v•
b~~n r~c~iv~d ~• !at a• ah• know~.
Commi~~tuner La Cl~ic• etated eh• he• doubla about th~ p~ckinq and s~kec! how
many memb~rs th• church ha~. Mr. 8al~ni r~apond~d th~y eneicip~t• 290 a~~mb~ra
end th~r• would be en av~csqe or ewo p~c~ans arcivinq p~r v~hicle. H•
r~lerc~Q to th• p~cki~y •tudy e~d atat~d ~.h~y w~re al~o conc~rn~d about !he
packing, but th~y do hav~ 130 epecea availabl• and th• only activ~ coaaneccial
activity o~ 8unday !s et the macket ena rn~y hav• 30 ap~cei ellokted to them
which they r~elly dun't us• Ainc~ it i• s convenience typ~ market.
Commiasion~r La Claice ~sked if th~y could utilis• th• sahool'a parking lat.
Mr. S~imi ateted that pos:;tbility ie being puraued, but they heve nat etsongly
puraueQ it becauee they did not think it would be necessery. He stated they
do have a good retationehip ~rith the achool distcict, however.
Ct~eirwoman Bouas ~teted i! perking becomea a pcoblem, they could always hold
two servicea.
Commieaioner 1La Cls~ •a asked Mr. Salmi to etipuleCe thet if it ie neceaeacy
becauae oE parkiny problems, they will hold two servlces. Mr. salmi atated he
would heve no pcoblem with tt~at conditiont however, he would like to atipulate
that they will either find adeyuate parking, such ag ~aing the achool parking
lot, or that they will hold two eervices.
Ac'_.TION: Commiseioner King offered a motion, aeco~ded by CAiamissioner Fc~~ and
MOTION CARRIBD (Commiesianec Herbet abaent), thet the 1-naheim City PlAnning
Commission hea reviewed ~he proposal to permit a church in the CL~ S(SC)
(Commerciel, Limiied-Hillaide, Sceoic Corcidoc) Zone with waiver of minimum
number of pntking spacee on a rectangularly-ahaped parCel of land conaisting
of approximately 3 ecres loceted at the northeast cornec of Seccano 1lvenue And
Nohl Ranch Road and turthec desctibed aa 6509 Serteno 1-venuet and does hereby
approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered the
Negative Declaration together with any commente received during the public
review procesa And further finding on the basie oE the initial Study ~nd any
comments teceived that chere is rto subatential evidence that the project will
have a signifiaant effect on the environment.
Commiasioner King offeced a motion, seconded by Commisaioner Pry and NOTION
C1-RRiED (Commisaioner Herbst abeent), that the Anaheim City Planning
Commiasion does hereby gcant waiver of Code requicement on the basis that the
parkinc waiver will not cauae an increase in treffic congeation in the
immediate vicinity nor adveraely affecti any adjo~ning land uses and granting
of the parking weiver under the conditione impoaed, if any, will not be
detrimer.tel to che peece, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens
of the City of 1-neheim and furthec on the basis thet the petitioner ~tipul~ted
at the public hearing that if parking is a problem, additional parking epacea
will be grovided or the chuc~h will hold two aeparate servicea.
Commiasioner King offered Reaolu~ion No. PC83-208 and moved for its pasaage
~nd e,doption that the Anaheim City Planning Co~omiseion does hereby grant
10/31/83
~
tyt~~e8. ANA~~i6IM CITY PLJ-NNINC CONK2~810ti. QCTQ4QR 31. 1983 8-9'711
Condlkional Ut• P~rn~iti No. ZSOA Loc a peciod o! 3 y~~ce to •xpi~~ on Octob~r
31, 1986, pu~~uant to 1-nah~i~n Municip~i Cod~ 8~ctions 16.03.030.030 throuqh
18.03.03.039, and ~ubj~ct ~o int~rd~p~rta~~ntai Conanitt~~ c~commsndations.
On roll c~ll, th• loc~going r~~oluiion wa~ paas~d by the tollawing votie:
11Yd8s BOUAS, PRY~ KINO, L11 CLAIRB~ MC BURN6Y
N069t NOMB
A886NT : H BRBST
ABST1-IN: BUBHORg
ITBM NO. 6~ BIR NBGJ-TIVB OBCLAMTION 11ND CONOITION7IL U8E PERMIT N0. 2506
PUBLiC HBJ-RING. OPMBR: JE71N K. PO(iARTY, 2020 E. Orangethorpe Avenue~
Pullectnn, CA 92631. 1-GENT: CURTIS SC~tW~1R~, 503 8. Gcnnd, Banta 11na, C1-
92705. Property deaccibed 4a an irr~gularly-ahaped ~arcel of lend conai~ting
of approximately 1.04 acrea, 2840 East Lincoln Avenue.
To permit a tempocary trailer toc a fieh maricet.
There were five p~caon4 indiceting their preeence in oppoaition to ~ubject
r~quest and although the skaff report was not read, it is ceferred to and made
a psrt of the minutee.
Jaan Fogacty, 6671 Canyon Hill~ Road, 1lnaheim, stated this will be a wholesale
to the public fi~eh marke~ and everything wi.ll be frozen.
Dale B radford, 28b1 Gerald Ciccle, 1-naheim, etated he moved into hia hame 20
yeacs ago end had a nice private backyacd with a 6-1/2 foot high fences
howeve r, the pcioc ownec ot subject property hae du:~ped tcash and debria next
to the wall end filled it in with a little dirt and now the fence ig only
4-feet 6-inches high and a ten-year o~d child could look cight 'nto hie
backys rd end he ha~ abaolutely no privecy. He stated they have pl~ced a
6-toot htgh concr~te wall about 1 Eoot from his wall which cceates a 1-foot
wide, 6-foot deep valley ahere cefuee is dumped for rata to bceed and thece
a~ce qophere galore. He stated there is also duat from the uti~paved area ahich
causes additional health hazerde.
Mr. Bradford sta'~d he hes worked at hotels end reetaurents all hia life and
knows that fieh boxea put into garbage conteiners do atink, whether t`+py are
fcesh or Frozen, v+hich will attrect csts, rets, mice and tliee galore. He
adsed operatioas of this type ahould not be lxeted adjacent to private
homea. He referred to the ~indinga cequired in order to grant thie permit
wherei n rhe granting of the pecmit under kha conditiuns impoaed, if any, will
not be d~trimental to the peace, health, aafety and ~eneral welfare of the
cikizena of the City of Anaheim and ataLed thie wilX be ~ detriment to the
City of Anaheim and woul.d not be an aeaet to this pcoperty.
Betty Miller, 2857 Gereld Circle, 7-naheiw, atakad her home will be direatly i n
back of this units that she can ha~rdly keep her pool clean because of the big
diese 1 tcucke pulling into the vACant property creaLing a lot of duet and she
ha8 ~o eontinually clean the pool and has tio keep her drapes closed= tha~ her
10/31/83
T68. ANJWRIM CI~f _~I~1~1;NG COM~IIl~$ION, 4CTOR~R 31. 1983 83-71Z
l~nc• is now oniy 4-loot, 7-ineh~s hi9h anel s~~ he• ~u!l~rRd v~ry abusiv•
lengusy~ lcom ahildc~n er~d trom t[uck dciwrs when ah• h~s ~old th~m tio movs
th~ir tcuck• ott this privele prop~rty. Sh• stated i! this is apptov~d, it
would rpuir~ a v~cy hiqh t~nc• t~ prot~ct tA~ir privecy end pr~vent rh~
amall. t3he stat~d th~y alceady h~ve a biy problem with ceta in tihia ecea and
a li~h merk~t in th~ ar~a will make f.t wora~.
1111ena ecedfocd, 2861 Cwcald Circle, 1-neh~im, cead a lettac of oppoiition lrom
James a~ d Macy 8mith, 2876 Gecald, indicstinq their oppoeition becauae of Lhe
amell end the attraction !or cata, •kc. 1- copy oP the l~tter is ava~ileble in
th~ Planning Aspsrtmsnt Eiles. 8he etated a he did not think it is Leir that
the neighbora could not ettend thia meeting b~cauee they had t o work.
Me. Pogarty atated ahe hea tried to get othe r uees un this propecty and ehe
thought thia ue• would solve a lot of the existing problems because ther.e are
s lot of tcuck~s whi~ch do perk there and it is dueky end putking this treiler
there will eliminate that problem. She stated ahe apende e lo t oE money
hauling the traeh away becaus• the people Er om the netghborhoad dump trash in
that alley and the traeh is no~ Ecom th~e cen t er~ She etated sh~ thought if
this ~rea geta developed, e lot of thase pcoblema will ba stopped and the duet
will be reduced beceuee the er~a will be psved end there should not be eny
trash. She stated thie fieh facility hae an operetion in Santa l-ne and thia
will be an outlet and all th• Eood will be f z~ozen~ She stated Lhe erea would
be landacaped alaoo Regncding th• fenae, she ateted ahe wes not aware that
was a problem einae thAt hdppened before she owned the propecty= thet she
di1 ~~t cid af a motorcycle shop which wae ca ueing problems fo r the neighbora
end ~;h~: ~aee not pecmit electrical aigns ahich would dieturb them. She stdted
she hab ±ried to cooperete with the neighbor s and thought they would be happy
thal• this development ia proposed foe thia property, but ce~n underatand the
concerns of those that back-up to the proper t y and pointed out Lhere are other
peopla in the erea who ece happy about the p r apoaal,
TElE PUBLIC HEIIRING W11S CLOSED.
Commiesi~ner Fry atated a fish merket can qo in~o any shopping centet without
a variance and he was not opposed to the use , but is oppoeed t o the temporary
nature of the structure.
Ma. Pogarty atated the operator of the fish wiarket could not be present~ that
the tem~orary skrucsure ia required for economic :easons because she will have
to develop the whole parcel ~-nd this opereto r is willinq to put edditional
money into the development if the IocaCion i s good. Reapondinq to Cheirwoman
Bouas, shE stated the operator has indicated they would be wil ling to invest
the money in twa yeara, but ehe thought they would know within one year
whether oc not this .s a qood locaLion. She sta~ed when the permanent
structure ia developed, it will meet Code rcaquirements. She s tated there is a
lot of thi8 propecty that is totally ua-usable, but the City requirea that it
be paved end that it ie nicely developed at this time and thst is not the drea
of the property which is creating the probl ea~.
Chairwoman Bouas stated the neighbocs went something to be don~ about the
fence. !!r. Pogarty atated she had not done any research regardin^ the fence
and had no idea what the cost would be.
10/31/83
IM CIT1~ P•~NNING COMM288ION. OCTQaER 31, 1983 83-713
Cheirwomen 8oua~ at~eed the l~nc• was ori9lnally 6 t~~t hiqh, but Che prop~rty
hs~ be~n ~ ill~d and now the neighbor• only hev• e 4-foot, 7-inch hiqh Penc~ on
th~ir ~ide. Mc. 8radtocd pointed out thr~~ or lour houa~s ar• involv~d with A
vall~y b~tw~~n the t~nc~.
Cheirwoman Houas ~uyqested a continuanc~ in ocd~r Eor rht p~titioner to
disaue• th• lsncin9 with th~ n~ighbota to d~t~cmin• wh~th~r ar not the pcoblsm
could be re~olv~d.
Commiasioner La Clair~ srated sh~ thouqht the problem ia thet the neighbo~a
hav• not sean tha plans and th~ prop~rty own~r doee not know what the
n~ighbors• problsms ar• reqarding the L~nce, etc. Sh~ stiatad sh• thought a
continuence should b~ grented in acdec !oc the petitionsr to meet with the
pcop~cry ownera and review the plans and a two-week continuence ahould be
adequate.
Me. Pogerty indiceted th+~t would be aatiatactory to hec.
11CTION: Com~aiesionec Le Claira otfered e motion, $ecanded by Commiseioner
King and i~OTiON C1-RRIED (Commiaoioner Herbet abaent), that the above-mentionad
mett~c be continued to the regularly-acheduled m~eting of November 14, 1983,
at the req uest of the petitioner.
Chairwoman Bouas explei~ed ~he neighbora will not be notified about the
meeting on the 14th and it doea etert at 1:30 p.m. dnd euqgeeted they call the
Planning Depdrtment to meke suce the matter will be conaidsred. She euggeeted
the petitioner should conta~ct all the neighbor8 end not juut those who are
pcesent today.
ITE!! N0. 7. EIR NEGI-TIVE DBCLARJITION 1-ND Vl-RIANCE NO. 3~61
PUBLIC HF•1-RING. OwNBR: OAVID C. 800MS, 229 3. i.oara Street, 1-neheim~ CA
92802. J-GENT: OSC/-R E. WHI~BBOOK, P.O. Box 314, Yorba Linds, ~C71 S2686.
Property deacribed as a rectangulerly-ahaped parcel o! land consisting of
appcoxima tely 0.53 acre, 219 South Lu~ra Street.
Waivers of minimum :ot area and minimum lot width to establiah a 2-lot
subdivision.
There wae no one indicrting kheic presence in apposition to subject requeat
and although the ataff repQrt was not read, it is referced to and mede a part
of the minu~es.
Devid Booma, owner, atdted when this propecty wae originally purchaeed thirty
yeara aqo, it was three parcela with 65 foot fronteqea each and there were
three drivewaya and all the front improvements were int however, thsre was
never any building constructad on 219 S. Loaca and the other lots were used
foz e storage yerd, but they do nat need that foc atorage now.
THE PUBLZC HBIIRING W~-S CIASED.
10/31/83
M_~T~B. 11I~lANBIM CITY P1.J1I~iN~NC C~~INI88ION, OC~,QB1~R 31. 1983 r, 8,_ 3-71~
~~~aponding to Cona~la~ionoc La Claic• aa to wh~th~c or nor ~h~~• kind• of
varisno~a h~v~ b~~n p~cmiti~d i~ this ac~e, K~ndra Morri~~ •xplained a•imilar
r~qu~~t was qrant~d at 139 8. Loara.
Coauai~Aion~r La Ciair• stetfd thi• looka lik• a si:sbi• r~ducrion. Ma.
Mocci~o c~apond~d current].y th• aoninq i~ Eoc r~sidsntial, aqricultural us~~t
how~vac, ah• undtcatand• th~y ulEimet~ly plan to hev• the prap~rty
r~cla~~ilied to industrial or comm~ccial ~oniny end tih~re ia na minimum lot
ais~ r~quir~menta in that sone. 8h• a~ated ata!! aAvi~~d th~ p~titioner thst
they would pret~r that th~y fil• foc r~ao~ingt Qow~ver, sinc~ the proparty is
qoing to r~msin vacant, th~ p~titioner pr~lerr~d to wait.
Kendca Mocriea atated the pcop~rty is unusable •inoa ha aannot have an
induetrial or commercial businesa~ however, he can grow strawbeccies or have
one aingle-femily dwelling.
Commisaioner euehace etated if this ie epproved, when the property comea in
for davelopment, the owner will be ~equeating a waiver because of the eize of
the lot.
Mr. Booms expleined he has owned the three parcdls which were euppoaed to be
eepacate aince the eacly 1950's, but now is finding out they are not eeperate
dnd knowsthat et one time thia property dnd Loare school wece one propecty.
Rasponding to Conunissionec Buehote regerding the juatificetion for appcoval,
Commiseioner King asked if other pcoperties in the acea heve the same
privilege. Coma-iasioner euahore stated he wae undec the impreseion that the
praperty south of this had been subdivided, but it just has a reaolution of
intent to ML, and the Commiaeion has allowed some variances far zero aetbacke
becauae the property backe up to the echool ancl because o! the eize of the
lot. He stated thia would be cceating another substanderd lot nnd there ia na
building proposed And pointed out the property to the eoutih had a building
pcopoaed when that was granted. He etated if the eubatandard lot ia eppcoved,
then the ownec will come in in the f uture for a variance because of the aize.
llr. Boom atated he plana to eventually aell the progerty and the people to the
south ar~ intereeted in purchesing it fac Euture expansion. Conuniasioner
Buahore stated they pcobably want the pcoperty for parking because that wae
their biggest problem since their building takes up two-thirds of the lot. 8e
pointed out they hed qotten their vACiance on the basis that the property
would be ueed for a warehouse, but it turned ont to be manufacturing.
Commiasioner La Claire stated ehe has great doubtg about this becauae it would
be creating the same situation.
Comraiaeioner Buehore atated he has doubte becauee of what has happened to tha
property to ~he aouth and approva~l of thia Mould be creating a hardehip parcel.
Paul Singec, Traffic Sngineer, stated there i~s a parkinq problem along rhe
weat side of Loera Stre~t because parents drop off their children at the
schoal or. that side of the etreet and the entire area is uaually taken up end
that they tried to eliminate the pdrking, but there waa an acute shortage.
10/31/83
TY P_I~ANNING C4~1lII_S~ION~QC~'0~4~1~ ~983 83-
A~aponding to Conaalaaion~r Buahoc~, Mc. eaom s~at~d h• M4t not ~uct whek we~
qoing on to th~ property to th~ aouth. H• •tat~c! trucka and c~ra w~c~ park~d
in th• perkiny •pac~~ and h• waa not ~w~c~ of 4ny eLoraq• out Eront.
Commiaaionsc t~s Claic• stat~d th~c• i• aom~one in~~ceoted in puroha~ing tha
prop~rty and obviou~ly, khey know what th~y w~nt to do vri~h the prop~rky and
aho would lik• to s~• plana bePoce gr~ntinq the vaciance.
Mr. Boom stat~d h• thoughti hi~ engin~er had brought in plans end they w~re
ceview~d in th~ aubdiviaion meetinq. Commis~ioner Le Claic~ stated the
Commiasion haa a k~ntat~va tract map to divide the progecty. Mr. eeom atated
he thought the pcoQerty wes to be ua~d !oc ov~rElow of atoreg~.
Commiasionsr Buehore indicetQd concecn b~cause the neighbor~ wer• interesred
i~ the parcel which ie to the nocth, as shown on the map (Parcel 1), and there
is enothar psrcel betw~en and aleo, tho map was drawn in 1965 and he thought
the property ahould heve been cesurveyed.
Cheirwoman Bouae skated th• Commieeion is not really objecting, but would like
to know whet the property ia going t~ be used tor end auggeeted it might be
better to wait until there are apecific plane before granting this veriance.
~ommisei.oner La Cleire pointed out the Commiseion is requiced to make certain
findinga in order to approve A variance which pertair~ to the property's size,
shape, topogcaphy, etc. end ahe doea not aee anything unueual ebout thie
prop~rty and could not vote in f+~vor of a vnciance.
Commiseioner Buahore stated he wnuldn't vote for it either and he would want
to review the file on the property to the south because he remembered there
hed been conaidecable diacusaion at the time that wes approved and he would
not want to aee it expanded. He atated he was not going to create a
eubetandard lot and Chairwoman Bouea asked if the: petitioner would like to
requeat a continuance.
Mr. Boom a$ked why the prope~ty waa classified ae three lots with three sewer
outlets and three dcivewaya ac.d three City addreasea when he ~+urcha+sed it new.
Jay Titue, Office Engineer, ~teted it is normal practice to put a sewer
lateral every so iaany feet. Mc. Boo~n atated the addresaes were iaaued by the
City's Building Depertment. Commisaioner Fcy skated there is no way of
knowing what went on thirty yeara ago.
Kendrs Mcrries at~ted if. it is the Commiseion's desire to have the petitioner
file for a rezoning to indua~trial limited and cequest a conditional uae
permit, she would suggest that the Commiseion ask the petitioner to withdraw
the requeat or the Conuaiesion deny the request beceuee ehe did not feel a
continuance would aerve any purpo~e at this time.
Commisaioner Le~ Clni.re ste,ted the petitioner could withdraw the petition
without prejudice and then come beck when he is re~dy to file foc a new plan.
Jack White pointed out a vaciance could be denied without pcejudice alao.
10/31/83
~ranT~n_ ~aiu~=h CITY P NNING COMMI88ION. QCTOB~R 31. 1983 83-716
Kendrs Morri~a •xpi~ined a wirhdr~wal wou18 b~ e p~c~nwnent withdcawal snd whan
h~ ia c~ady to submit n~w plans, he would hav~ ~o fil• another ~pplication and
pay the edditionel l~t.
Commiselon~r La Claire auqg~at~d a one-month continuanc• with Jack White
expleininq it cen b~ continued to any date se long a~ it ia to a
regulrcly-acheduled msetinq date.
1-CTION: Commi~sionsr Le Claira oftered a motion, s~conded by Commiesioner l~ry
and MOPION CARRIBD (Commiasioner H~rbet abeent), th+~t conaideretion ot the
atoremantioned mettec be continued to the regularly-$ch~duled me~ting of
,7anuary 9, 1984, ek the requast ot tha petitioner.
ITBM N0. 8. RBPORTS AND RLCOMMBNDI-TION3
/-. RBCLASSIFICATION N0. 82-83^Z7 1-ND VI-RIANCS N0. 3328 (Revision No. 3) -
Request From S~ate-Wicle Developera, inc. !or review o~ cavised plans on
proparty known es t~~e Eormer l-pollo .lunior H igh 3chool.
Commisaloner McBurney stated the revised plena eppear to be a major
change from Mhdt was originelly approved. Commiesioner La Claire steted
ahe felt the Commiseion should meke a cecommendation to the City Council
that the metter be eet tor public heacing.
Susan Bemis, State-Wide DevRlopers, etated the reviaed plans increese the
recreational area anr] decrease eome of the road syetema and they heve
agreed to do some sort of recorded document that would guarantee that
they would do eomething saCiefectory to the City Traffic E~ginrRr such as
e hemmer-head for each phase ao that if they were to build only one phase
without the other, there would be e guacantee foc edequate cicculaiio~.
Me. Bemie etated ehe reviewed all the minutes of pcevious heeringe an the
pro~ect to aee what the homeowners' concerns were and found the concerna
were that they did not want apartment houainy oc smallQr units, graffiti
on the walls, end the median in the center of Knott 1-venue. She atated
those wece the only concerns and ahe did not know what purpose a public
hearing would aerve.
Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, stated thete is a median required because
khe driveways ere off -set and the homeown~ers werR concerned th~et some of
their streets would be closed, but that ie not true.
Commiasioner McBurney atated he feele this is a drt~atic change even
though it ie much moce appeAling. He felt, however, the City should keep
the public informed of the changes.
Chaicwoman Bouas clarified thak the circulation concerns would be
cesolved. Ms. Bemis ceplied they have agreed to record a document to
cover the circulation.
10/31/83
~INUT~B. 11NAHBIM CITY PLIINNIN6 COMMx88I0N, OCTOB6R 31. 1983 _ 83_717
Commiasioner La Claic• stat~d Council m~y want to •e~ that docum~nt And it
would scem tf the dev~lopsr ia wiliinq to put in e h~mm~c-h~~d or to do
~v~rything th• Tratfic Bn9ine~c says, th~re should not b~ any problem.
Ms. Bomia stetad she undarrtooQ thet e condition r,ould not ba added to
tomething that ha~ elr~edy b~en epptaved, howevec, i! there ie d public
hasring, that aondition could be added, but they want~d to avoid the
additionel time if po~aible.
Commiaaion~c Fcy ask~d i! the propetty ownera would be notified it the
Commission mskes a c~commendation to City Council that th~ee plans be
approved. Jack White reepoaded thai they would not be notifisd ea a
matter of law end thet the Plenning Coramisaion ~en m~ke a r~commendation,
but ths finel deciaion is up to the City Council And notification would
only qo out if there ie ~ public hearing.
Commiaeioner Le Claire atstied Lheze wece a lot of peaple inte[ested in
thia project and it was controveraiel and ehe would like to leave it up
to the City Council, with the Commiasion recommending that the mattar be
set for public hearing.
ACTION: Cnmmiasioner La Claice offered a motion, seconded by
Commieeioner McBurney end MOTION C1-RR~ED (Commiesioner Herbat ebaent),
that the An~heim City Planning Conuniaeion daeo heceby recommend that City
Council set this matter for a public hearing becau~e they feel there ere
aubatantial changes and thece wae a lot of public intereet in the project.
Jack White auggested the Commisaion meke a ce~ommendation pertaining to
the cevised plane themaelves beceuae from paat expecience, the City
Council has wanted to aee the Commiasion'e input.
rr,
. Commieaioner ~~rbs~t etated thia motion should cead that the Commission ie
favocably impteased with the revised plana ovec the original plans.
Commissioner La Claire aeked about the circulation and Commiesioner Fcy
stated the petitioner hae to ptovide circulation to comply with the
Traffic Engineer'a reconuaendation. 1-nnika Santalnhti stated if the
Council takes Commission's recommendation and sets the matter far public
hearing, a condition will be added to the map approvalt however, if they
do not take that reconqnendation, the developer will be submitting en
agreement for recordation. She augqested the Commiasion ehould include
in their motion that that condition be ~dded pertaining to circulation to
make the Councl~ awace of Coauaieaion's concern.
Comn-iasionea La Claire oFfered a motion that her previous motion be
amended to include a recoaunendation to the City Council that a condition
be edded pectaining to the cicCUla~tion and ~lso, that the Commiesion
tinda the revised plana subgtantial improvement over the originally
~pi~~l~{ilane. Commissioner McBurney emended hie aecond and MOTION
GARRiBD (Commisaioner Herbst absent).
10/31/83
~y.
M~N~T68. ANAH6IM CITY~I.~NNINO COMMI88ION. OCTOBBR 31, ~83 83-718
~._.~._.,~~.~.~r. ~. .. ~
B. ~CON_D_IT~QNAL 08B P~ MIT N0. 1063 - Rtquest lcom R.11. McN~~s !oc a one yeAt
•xt~naion o! tim~ !oc Conditional Os• P~rmit No. iQ63 !or pcoperty
locet~d at 17Z1 s. Msnch~.t~r ~-venue (Th~ Cowboy).
1-CTiO : Commi~aion~c King o!l~r~d ~ mation, aecondsd by Commissionec Fry
end MOTiON C1-RRIBO (Commiasioner HerbiL eb~ent and CornmiseloneK Hushoc~
sbateining), th4t L•h~ 1lnaheim City Plan~ing Commisaion does heceby
epprove a on• yeac extenoion ot time fo[ Conditional Use Permlt No. 1063
to expire on Octobec 7, 198~.
C. CONDITIONAL USB PBRMIT N0. 1517 - Roqueet trom Robert W. Hoetetter !or e
retcoactive tWO yeac extenaion oE tim~ for propecty locdted ~t 703 N.
Lemon 8tteet.
/-CT~ION,: Commisaioner King offered a motion, seconded by Commiseioner Pry
and MOTION CARRIED (Commiesioner Herbat abeent), thet the 1-naheim City
Planning Commiasion does hereby appcove a re~coactive two year extenaion
of time for Condit.ional Uem Pecmit No. 1517 to expire on Mey 28, 1985.
D. CONDITIONAL U5E PERMIT N0. 1783 - Requaet from Michael L. 3chmuckec foc a
two year ext~nsion of time for ConditiAna~l Use Permit Na. 1783 for
property locnted at 32p0 W. Lincoln Avenue.
ACTION: CommiBeio~er King offered e motion, seconded by Commi$eioner Fry
and MOTION CARRIED (Co!nmisaionet Herbet abaent), thet the Aneheim City
Planning Commiasion doee hereby epprove e twa year extension of time for
Conditionel Use permit No. 1783 to expice on Aecember 19, 1985.
E. 1-N11HEIlf HILLS PUBLIC INPROVBMENTS - Steff updete on repai[s to
improvements in certain ereas of Anaheim Hills. (information item only)
Dean Sheret presented the stefE repoct And reviewed the letter from
Gunaton H all Company pertaining to (1) Pegasus Arive, southeast of
Serrano 1-venue and stated ultimate responeibility will be decided by the
couct on thati issuet (2) Nohl RAnch Road, west side north of Se[rano
l~venue, thece ie no agreement on that mattert (3) 1-rea 7, work would be
completed to the City's satiafectiont (4) ~-venida de Santiago, aork has
been completedt (5) Serrano ~-venue, the southeast corner of William
CircZe, no agreement on that: iesuet (6) intersection of Stege Coach Road
and Nohl Ranch Road, Anaheim Hills will repair the storm drain prior to
dedication.
Mr. Sheret conCinued there were two remeining outstanding issues that
have not been tesolved and Anehgim Hilis Feel~ that the bonds have been
released and the City ia saying that through past ocal and vrrbal ~ r ~''
commitments, 1-naheim Hille ia responaible to repair the work and if no
agreement ie teacl~ed, these me~ttera will be turned over to the City
Attorney for e-ppropriete ].egal actions.
3ay Titus atated the City does appceciate the emph+~eie the Planning
Commisaion gsve theee matters er their hearing because it qave the
petitioner the incentive to do eomething about theae mdttere.
10/31/83
~ ,-
MIN~T88, 1-NIWEIM CITX PLIINNING COMMI88ION. OCTOBBR 31~ 1983 83-719
F. RBVIBIONS TO ~418 PROPOBBD RBDBVI~LOPMBNT PL11N POR TH6 RIVBR V1ILGBY
RBDRVELOPMBNT PROJECT - R~development Aq~ncy tecommsnding revi.ione to
th• pcopoa~d Riv~r VAll~y Radevelopmsnt Proj~ct. Prop~cty located
norkhweat of the inteca~ction of the Riveraide Pr~~wsy end Wsir Canyon
Roed.
Commieeioner Buehore decleced a conllict of inteceat As defi~ed by
l~naheim City Planning Commiaaion Resolution No. PC76-157 edop~ing a
Conilict of intereet Coda foc the Plenning Commieaion anA Gavernment Code
Section 3625, et e~q., in that he ie e conttsctual agent for the
Redevelopme~t 7-gency a~d purauenr to the provieione o! th~ et~ov~ Codes,
declared to the Chairmen thet he was withdr~wing from the hearing in
connection wi~h the Propoaed Redevelopment Plan for the River Velley
Redevelopment ProjecL, and wuuld not teka pert in eithec ths discuesion
or the voting thereon end had not diacueaed this metter with eny member
of the Pldnning Commiasion. Theceupon Commiaeioner Bushora left the
Council Chamber and did not return.
Norm Ptieet~ Executive Director of the Redevelopment 1lgency, explained on
Octobet 3rd the Plenning Commiaeion acted on the pcopoaed Redevelopment
Plan foc the River Valley Redevelapment Project and that action deelt
with com~liance with ]-naheim'e Generel Plan and that subeequent to that
time, five changea were auggeated by their Counsel and are summarized in
the etaff repoct.
J-CTION; Commisaioner Fry offered Re~o].ution No. PC83-209 and moved for
its paseage and edoption thet the 1-naheim City Planninq Commiasion doea
hereby recomme~d certain revisiona to the proposed River Valley
Redevelopinent Project as recommended by the Redevelopment Agency.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was paeaed by the following vote:
11YBS; BOUI-S, FRY, KING, LA CLAIRE, MC BURNEY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: BUSHORE, HBRBST
G. Recommendation that the Ciky Council adopt a reaolution to the City of
Orange reconunending southerly extenaiona of imptrial Highway and Serrano
1-venue.
Jay Teshiro, Associate Planner, stat~ed this was e last minute item and
the Gity of Ocenge ia currently considering the extension of imperial
H ighway to cannect with Loma Street and there is a possibility that that
may be cul-de-sa~ced inatea~d of extended and the City of 1-naheim's
viewpoint, has alwaya been thet khnt would be connected. He stated the
aecond iseue relates to Serra~no Avenue and on November 7th, the City of
Orange Planning Commission will be considering e te~tative tract to
seperate ownership of 253 acrea nnd as pert of the conditiona, the City
of Orange staff haa recommended dedication and improvement of Serrano.
He ~tated hietorically, the City of Anaheim has anticipated thet Sertano
Avenue would be extended and developments have alwaya been contingent
upor~ Serrano being continued. He ata~ted the City ~f Orange hae requested
the City of l~naheim's aupport and this reaolution hae been prepared and
10/31/83
~ ~
~3~IpTEB. ANIIH6IM CITY PLIINNING COM,y~88TON, OCTOBRR 31. 19A~ ~ e~Zp
will b~ qoiny to !h~ City Council to~orcow. ~• •L~t~d •ta!! wouid
auqq~et that Pisnniny Co~aai~~ion aiake ~ r~aoauMnd~tion th~t th• City
Counaii ~dopt a r~~olution racoau~endinq eh• •outhe~n ~xt~n~ion• o~
imp~ciel Hiqhway/Lonia 8tre~t e~4 e~rrano 1-v~nu~.
Conai~~ion~r La Clair• ~tat~d ah~ r~nwa~b~rs s~rvinq on the Taak locc• and
much o! th~ ba~is o! th~ f7~n~ra1 Plan !or d~v~lopm~nt !ar th~ whole
canyo~ ~t~A waa co~tinq~nk upon th• exe~n4lon o! Imp~rial Hiqhway. Sh•
stated sh• did not a~e how it could be del~t~d now b~caua• it would be
harmlul to d~v~lopment in that ar~a.
AC,_TI„ON: Commissionec La Claice of[eced a motion, s~conded by
Commissione~ Fry and MOTION CARRZBD (Commissionara Buehoce and herbet
sbsent), that the 1~neheim City Pl~nning Commiesion doea heceby recommend
that the City Council adopt a r~solution to the City of Orenge
recommanding the eoutherly exkensions of Imperial Highway/Loma Stroet end
Serrano Avenue.
Commiasioner Pry •teted he had aeconded the motion beca~uee he felt just
Eor pub:ic aefety elone, they would need a northerly exit out of that
acea.
OZ4iBR DI$CUSSION:
Icendra Morriea made the following chenges to the ataff teporte: Page 8-a(4),
chenging coop-system to loop-aystem in Paregraph 18, Pege 8-c to two ptevioue
extensiona of time inetead oE three in P~ragreph 5 and un P~ge 8-d, change
December 19, 1983, to December 19, 1985, in the cecommendation.
JIDJOURNMBNT: There being no Eurther bueinese, Commieaionec Pry otfered a
motion, seconCad by Conrniesioner Le Cleire end MOTION C1-RRI~D
(Commiaeioneca Buahore and Herbat absent), that the moeting be
adjourned.
The meeting wae adjourned at 2:54 p.m.
Reepectfully submitted,
~~ ~ •
Bdith L. 8arcis, Secreta~cy
1lnaheim City Planning Commiesion
BIA : lm
ooiam
10/31/83