Minutes-PC 1983/12/12RBGULAR ME~TING OF THE ~NANEIM CITY P~ANN7NG COMMISSIpN
R~GUL1-R MEETING The royular meeting of the Aneheim City Planning
4pinmiaeior~ w~R celled to order by Ch~irwoma~ Bouas at
10:00 a.m., December 12, 1983, in the Councfl Chamber, a
quorum being present end thP Cummieaion reviewed plene of
the itema on today's agenda.
RECESS: 11:00 a.m.
RECUNVENB: 1:30 p.m.
PRESENT Chairwomen: Bouas
Commisaiuners: Buahore,
McBurney
ABSENT Commissionere: None
Fry, tlerbat, King, ~e Claire,
AGSU PRESBNT Jack White
Anniku Santalahti
Joel Fick
Jay 'l~ashi,ro
Kpndra MorrieH
Paul SingNt
•Jack ,Judd
Edith Harr?a
Aesistant City Attorney
~ssihtant Director for Zoning
AaRistant Director fnr Planning
~saociet~ Planner
Aasistant Planner
City Tcatfic Enginve~
Civil EnginePCing Asaociate
Pl~nning Commiasion SeccetA[y
APPROVAL OP MiNUTES: Commisaionec King oftrred a motion, seconded by
Commieaioner Fry bnd MOTION CARRIEU (Cummissionec McBurney abetaining on
approval of the November 'l8, 1983 minutes) that the minutes of the meetingn of.
November 14 and November 28th, 1983, be approved as submitted.
ITEM N0. 1. El~t NEGA'iIVE DECLARATION, WAIVBR OP COUE REQUIREMENT AND
CONDITInN11L USE r~^.rtIT N0. 2513.
PUBLIC HEARING. OttlNERS: AI,PRED ARDEN AND MARTHA J. LINGLE, 1509 W. Kimberly
Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92d02. AGENT: JEFF LINGLE, 1509 W. Kimb~rly AvenuP,
Anaheim, CA 52802. Pcoperty deaccibed as a cectangularly-shaped pacce: of
land consisting qf approximately 7200 square feet, having a frontage ~f
approximately 72 feet on the north side of KimbE~rly Avenue, and further
described as 1509 West mberly Avenue.
REQUEST: To retain a bird aviary i~ the RS-7200 2one with waiver oE minimum
setback for bird lofts.
Continued Erom the meeting ~f Nove~mbez 14, 1983, in ocder that the a~pplicant
cauld wock with aurrounding property ownera reyarding pcoblema the applicant'e
birds may be causiny.
There was no one in~icating their presence in opposition to subject request
And elthough the etaff report was not read, it ia ceferred to and made a pact
of the minutea.
,7eff Lingle, Agent, explained he has letters fram his neighbors who were
opposed to thie requeat indicating they were no longer o~posed because he has
worked the problems out. He presented the letters for the file.
83-796
~0019m 12/12/83
MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY P1.ANNING COMMISSIQN QECEMBER 12 1963 ~3'797
THF. PUBLIi' HGARING WA5 CLOSEb.
Reapondiny to Commiagionec F3uehoce, JeEE Linglp expleined previously he would
let the birda fly in ttie efternoon rnd tt~e neiyhbo~a did not like to aee them
flying aEter they yot home Erom work, so now he has agreed Co let the birda
out in the morning (4 or 5 at a time) while the nelghbnrs are at wock.
Responding ko Commiasioner Nerbst, Mr. Lingle ateted h~ experts to keep the~se
birds a couple of yeara and that he has about 35 racing pigeone.
ACTION: Commiesioner La Claire offeced a mation, aecondeu by Commieaioner
Ktng and MOTION CARRIED that the Anahein City Planning Commieaton hes reviewed
the proposal ta retain a bird aviary in the RS-720U Zone with waiver of
minimum aetbacka for bird lofte on a rectangularly-Ahaped parcPl oi .land
consiaking of approximately 72UU square feet, having a frantaqe of
appcoximat~ely 72 feet on the north eide of Kimbecly Avenue, and further
desccibed as 1509 West Kimberly Avenue; and do~y hereby approve the Neanr.lve
Declaration upon finding that it hae considered the Negative Declaratlon
together With any commc~nts received during t~e public review process and
further findiny on the basis of the initial Study ~nd any commentF received
tt~at there is no aubstantial evidence that the project. will have a~ignificant
eEfect on the environment.
Commissioner La Claire offeced Resolution No. PC83-228 and moved fur it~
pasaage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2513 far a period of two (2) year.s, subject
to the peti~ioner's stipulation at tt~e public t~ea.ing to release only 4 or 5
birds at one timP and to only release them in the ni~rninga, and subject to
Interdepactmontal Cotr,mittce Recommendations.
On coll call, the foregoing resolution was paosed by the following vote:
AYES: DOUAS, BUSHORE, FRY, HERB5T, KING, LA CLAIRE, MC BURN~Y
NOES: N~NE
ABSENT: NONE
Jack White, Assistant City Attorney, presented the wcitten r.ight to appeal t•he
Planning Commiasion's dec;isi~n within 22 days to the City Council.
ITEM N0. 2. EIFt NO 254 (PREVIUUSLY CEttTIPIED), WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
Al~D CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2322.
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: WILLIAM P. DRAGAN'LA, ET AL, 2045 S. HARBOR
BOULEVARD~ ANAHEIM, CA 92802. AGENT: WALTER C. NONG, 2045 S. HARBOR
BOUI.EVARD, ANAHEIM, CA 92802. Property deacribed as an irregularly-shaped
parcel of land consiRting of ap~roximately 195 feet on the west sidP af Hart~or
Boulevard, and furthec desccibed as 2045 South t:arbor Boulevard (Regency
Hatel).
REQUEST: To consider revised plana to conatruct a 4-story, 42-foot high,
321-room hotel with accessory usee and on-sale al.coholic beverages and with
waivec of minimum number of parking spaces.
Continued from the November 14 and 28, 1983, meetings.
12/12/83
MINUTES. ANAHEIM CTTY NLANNING COMMISSION, DE~EMB~R 12. 1983 83-796
There was no one indicating their ~r~aenco in oppoeition to eubject requeat
and elthough the ataEf report was not r.ead, it is re~erred to end made e park
of the minute$.
Walter Nong, agent, wnn preaent to answer any queRtions.
THE PUf3LiC HEARING WAS CLUSED.
Reaponding to Co~nm18a1onPr ouahore, Mr. Hong otated he is the PresidPnt of
Southern CaliEo~nia Architectural Seven Gngineering CorE~oration and that he ia
a licenaed Civil Engineer wit.t~ the Sta[e of Califocnia and that he conducted
tha pecking atudy.
~ommiasioner Bushoce referred to the I~oliday Inn uaed for comparieon and Mr.
Honq atated the Holiday Inn i~ on Chapman right next to Che freeway.
Kendra Morries, Asnistant Planne~, preeen~ d informutiar~ ta the c;ommission
regording other hotels in the area.
Chairwoman Bouar~ ,~teted it seems as the plans have been revined, the size of
the lobby has been increased and asked if tl~ere are plane to uae l:he lobby foc
anything other than lobby, such As a publlc room for serving cocktails, etc.
Mr. Nong replied it is just- a lobby area and explained he did not thtnk the
size has been increased very much over what th~y had before.
Commioeioner King referred to the Traffic Erigineer's recommendations to
redesign and increase the number of handicapped atalls and to provide shuttle
bus service~ and to execute and record an agreement guaranteeing the
improvements at the inl-ersecti~n of Harbor eoulevard and Katella Avenue.
Mc. Hong ceplied he has discussed those recommendaliona with the Traffic
Engineer, and ia willin~ to comply. He stated he alsa discusaed participation
in a oubliC aackin4 St :uc~ ~-'e.
Commissioner Bushuce stated it is possible there will nevec be a public
parking structure and a~:k~d how more parking will be added to this afte. Mr.
Hong stated they can ~~~ 16 spaces in the rear. He stated they will rely on
the study as to the anticipated parking needs.
Commissioner Bushore stated since Mr. Hong had done the parking study, he di~
not think it could be very imparti~l. H~e referred to the requirement on all
the other hotels which have been appcoved that they be able to provide
additional parking, if necessary.
Mr. Hony stated they cannot adcl any parking to their propecty because of the
conEiguration, and it is adjacent ko eingle-family residential property.
Commissioner Pry atated the same prob]ert~ exista with all the motels in that
area and they all agceed t~ go into a parking district.
Commisaioner McB~rney asked why another revision
already been granted. Mr. Hong atated the fi.cst
structure, and they planned to join venture with
etructure, but they have the loan approved for a
hope to bceak ground when this is approred.
is requested when two have
request was for a six-story
a hotel chain for a 12-story
4-story erructuce, and they
12/12/83
MINUTBS, ANANEIM C1TX Pi.ANNING ~'~)MMISSION, uC;I:~MBBR 12Z 1983 fl3-799
CommiRaioner La Cleira referrFd io the liet of other h~tela approved in the
erea and the parking waivec perc~antages, under ttie old and new r.odee, and
following a brief diecusai.on, tt wea determined thet ~hia request i$ Ec+c e 33t
devi+~tion undec the old code. Mr. Nong sta~ed khey uRed the aeme formule as
wae pceviously appcoved.
Commieaiont:r Buehore stated tie hos some real concecnR about the parking.
Chaicwoman Bouss pointe~~ ~ut tt~cy are not asking Eor any more than wes granted
other hotrle in the area. Commiesion~er I.a Cleire ~ated they ace asking £or a
little more then Marriolt nnd Hilton and CommiaL,oner Bushore poinked out they
are not near the aize of Chose two hotels and do not have tl~e capability of
bookiny the large~ conventiona. I~e stated he thought thia is a m~ach better
project than this agent has pregenked before. Mr. Hong atated he had thought
they could use th~e old formula bncause they have decreased ttie intenslty of
the pcojoct from 488 roome to 322 rooma. He explained he ha$ developed a
;~00-coom hotel in La Habra and a 160-room hotel in Gus Angeles.
Commissionec La Claire stated ahe did not think any of the Commissioners are
oppoaed to a parkiny wAiver, but ahe was bothered that this is a larger
percentage r.han gran[ed any of the other hotels.
Commi3eioner Hushore stated the Marriott and Hilton are aelf-operated hotels,
based on large hotel chains witt~ experience, ancl th1E agent has no experience
with a hotel this lacge. Mr. Hong ex~lained his partner will he operat.i,ng the
hotel and they do t~ave ex~erience.
Commiaeioner Herbat stated ti~e parking requirements for the other hotelA were
calculated under the old Code, and pointed out using the old Code, their
cequest is far a 23i waiver.
Kendra Morcies e1arlEied using thH ~ld Code cequirement3, this proposal is for
238. Mr. Hong stated this calculation i~ based on a11 large cac spaces and he
felt they ~hould be given conaideration under the ~ld Code eince that was the
Code uAed previously. He atated the 23t reque~t ia less than their neighbor,
the Marriott.
Pau1 Singer, Traffic Engineer, stated since thia hotel came in oriqin~ally
under the old Code, along with the Marriott, Hilton and Emerald, the
deficiency of parking ax proposed is approximately the 8ame as the other
h~tels and there is a new Code which pecmits variatione of mixed nses within a
hotel, and this hotel ceally daes not have variations and mixes of uaes end it
will be strictly hotel auites, un2ike hotel rooms, and they did not have large
convent.ion facilities, nor a large restau[ant, and he believed the waiver
being requested is no greater than the ones approved for the Emerald, Hilton
or Marciott, which were app~oved under the old Code.
it was noted Enviconmental Impact Report No. 254 was previously c~ctified by
the City Council on May 11, 1982, in corejunction with the original approval of
Conditional Uae Fermit No. 2322 (permitting a six-story, 68-foot high,
488-room hotel).
ACTION: Cotnn~~ssioner Herbst offered a motion, aeconded by Commiesionec Fry
and lAOTION C1-RRIED that the Anahefm City Planning Commiesion does hereby grant
12/12/83
MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMI5S10N1 DECEMB~H 12. 1983 83-800
waiv~r oE parking requirement on the DASie tt~et the parking varlence will not
ceuae an inccease in treffic congestion in the immediate vicinity nor
adversoly effect ~ny ad~oining land u~esr and thet thp gcanting of khe pecking
variance unde~ the conditions imposed, if any, will no~ be detrimentel to the
peece, health, aefety oc general welfare o[ the citizens af he City of Anaheim.
Gommiesioner HeKbat oEfered Reaolution No. PC 83-229 and moved for its pessege
and adoption that the Aneheim City Planning Commiseion doea hereby approve
revieed plana cR~viston Nu. 3) far a 4-story, 42-foot high, 332-[oom hotel
with accesaory uaea and on-Aale alcoholic beverages in connection with
Conditionnl Use Peemit No. 2322, subject to the Interdepactmental Committee
Rgcomm~ndations.
On roll call, the focegoiny ceaolution waa pas8ed by the following vate:
AYBS: GOUAS, BUSt10RE, PRY, HERBST, KING, LA CLAIRE, MC BURNEY
NO~S: NONE
ABSENI': NONE
ITEM N0. 3. EIR NEGATIV~ DECI.ARATION ANn CUNDITlONA1. USE PERMI'C NU. 2516
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: GENBRAL ELEC':RIC COM~ANY, One Rive[ Road,
Schenectady, New York, 12345. AGENT: PAUL C. SCHAT2, 1390 5. Main Street,
halnut c:reek, CA 94596. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel
oE land consisting uf approximately 6.33 acres, having a Econtage of
approximately 370 feet on the north side of La Palma Avenue, an~i further
described as 36U1 East I,a Palma Avenue (General Electric).
REQUEST; To consider revised plans to construct a 4-story, 42-foot high,
327.-ccom hotel with accessory uses and on-sale al~oholic beverages with waiver
of minlmum number of parking spaces.
Continued from meeting of November 28, 1983.
There wa~ no one incJicating their prese~~ce in opposition to subject request
and althougt: the ataff report was not read, it is reEer.red to and made a part
oi the minute~.
Paul Schatz, ayent, was present to anawec any questions.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner La C1 .re pointed out the staff report, Paragraphs 3 and 27, did
not m+~nti~n that this mattec was continued because of a aplit vote on the
approval of the EIR Negative Declarar.tcyn and she felt that sheuld be a part of
the ~cecord.
Reaponding to Commisaioner Herbst, Mr. Schatz stated they would probably be
using the facility the heaviest foc about 1-1/2 to 2 yeacs, an~ the use would
very rapidly decrease after that because there is a atrong intereat by most
owners to gek rid of them, but they lack an avenue to accomplish it.
12/12/83
MINUTES. ANAHElM C_ITX PLANNING CUMMI5SION. QECEMB~R 12, 1983 d3-801
Commiaeioner Nerbat auggested rpproval Eoc a period of one yeer bec~uae there
has been e lot of edver~e publi~ity, yet he felt there ia a necesaity Eor t1~is
type Eecility and cealized thia is a very small farility, but it is ovec the
weter aupp.ly and the Conunisaion doea h~ve aome reF•~vatione. He ateted hN
felt aa lony ae it is p~operly mnintained and scr~ ,nized very closely end all
the requirements ot the local egenciea followc~d, it ahould be setisfactory.
He ask4d if the petitioner ia willing to put in an outd~or loading Area with
berme, ao if there is a spill, there will be berms and concrete to ~top it.
Mr. Schatz atated putting the Elooc in will require a subsCantial investment
and he Eelk a one-year period of. ti-ne would not be reasonAble.
Commissioner Hetbst stated he would like to have a review at the end of one
yeac.
Commiasioner I.A C.leice atated ehe realizes the Commiasion did get additional
inforr'~Lion fcom the petitionec, but ~he still felt there is a problem hese
dnd t~e[e is a lot of i.nformation from Y.he campany, but tlie Commiesion atill
doea not havE the ather aide ot the picture and doen not know what riaks a[e
involved= that the Commisafon ia suppoaed to protect the health, sefety and
general welfare of the citizene oE the City of Anah~im and ahe still did not
know what the dangers ace and before she could v~te for a~proval for this use
over the water table, aF~e would want ko see a focuaed en~ironmental impACt
report. She stated she did not undecstand why there is auch oppoeition to
dc~ing a focused EIR.
Mr. Schatz responded to Chairwoman Bouas that pcepacation of an EIR is
time-canauminy and costly and that he felt it is a mat.ter of education and he
thought the information he did sut~mit wa~ pcesented by people with good
credentials and it shows ik is a very undeGided isaue.
Commi.ssioner La Claire stated she contacted two chemical engineere who worked
with PCBs and they expressed concecn; that they work for a large company, and
from what she understands, she would agcee that all the data is not in and the
engineers were concerned with the permeability to the soil around it, or to
the rineing procedures, etc.r and th~k she knows there ara several things PCBs
can turn into when they bucn wtiich ace extremely dangerous. She stated the
engineers felt if they did live in this area, they would want tc~ see all the
data. She state3 if a.ll of the problems are met, she would not be opposed to
the requestt but that this is a secious .issue; and noted ~he is not ~cared of
PCBs, ana usually doesn't request an EIR, but thia is a~erioua subject and
she felt a focuaed EIR 1~ required since thie might be endangering people's
lives.
Mr. Schatz responded to Chairwoman Bouas that most of the time the
transformera ace not brought to this facility when :hey are cleaned out, but
some could be located close to food procesaing facilities and would be brought
to this facility, but it would be within the ~iked area with the epoxy
fiooring and there is no conceivable way, shoct of somebody trying to sabotage
the operation, that it would ever contaminate, permeate~ or vaporize.
12/12/83
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CYTY PLANNING COMMISSIUN,_UECEMBER 12, 1983 83-802
Mr. Sch~tz steted thie really is An educacion progr~m and there ia a lot of
information on both aide~, but there has been very little damage done as
proven by people who have u~~d it Eor yeare, and thac ie aubatantiatrd very
welli thbt he would not want it in hie houaehold, but in terme oE safety, it
has to be brought into preepect.ive and that the informeti~n aubmitted was foc
the Commiseion r.o review, but thNre are QrgumentR on both sidea and it is
still under exZenaive investigation and he thought it is juat blown out of
propo[tion. He added he would not mind living next door t~ thia fa^_ility.
ACTION: Conmisaioner Herbsc of.Eeced a motion, aECOnded by Commiasioner King
and MOZ'ION CARRIED (Commissionere Busl~ore, La Clalre and McBurney voting nol
that the Anaheim City Planniny Commi~sian has reviewed the proposal to permit
the accessory indooc storaqe of polychlorinar_ed biphenyl (PCB) in an exieting
industrial building on an irregularly-sh~ped parcel ot land conaiatfng of
approximately 6.33 acres, having a frantaye of approxirti~tely 37U feer_ on the
nocth side of La Palma Avenue, ~nd fucther described r3 3601 Eaat La Palma
Avenue (GenEral Electric)s ~nd doe=; t~ere~y approve the Negative Declaration
upon tinding thaC it has con~ideced the Negative Declaration ~oget}ier with any
comments received ducing the public revlew procea.s and Eurther Einding on tl~e
basis oF the ~nitial Study and any comments received that thece is nu
substantial evidence that the proJect will have A siynificant effect on the
enviranment..
Commiasioner Herbst offered Resc~lution No. PC83-23G and moved for its passage
and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commias;on does hereby grant
Conditional Use Permit No. 2516 on tt~e basin ~1~bt the petitioner will camply
with all federal, atate, county and city :eyulationa reletin~ to the storage
of hazardous matecials, and alsa on tf~e ba~is that berms will be r,onatcucted
around the outside loading area and the necessary impervious floocing will be
installed to pcevent contamination of the ground in case of a spill, and
granting of the pecmit for a period of ane year, subject to ceview, and
~ubject tu Interdepartmental Committee cecommendations.
Jack White, Assiatant city Attorney, stated normally permits are granted far a
cectain pecio~ of time, rather than aubject to a cevi.ew, an9 then a new
application is submitted, and he di~ not think the Commission sh~uld deviate
:rom that procedure, especially for ~ use of this type.
Commissioner Herbst suggested the permit be granted for a twc~-year period,
subject to review in one year. Jack Whir_~ noted the Commission cAn review the
u~e anytime they deaire. Commis~foner Herbat stated he still wanta an
automatic ceview in one year, even though the petitioner indicated he did not
think it would be necessary for lonqer than two years, and the~e is a
substantial expense to put in the berms and floocing on the outside loading
acea. He stated he would want a review to make s~re the federal, state,
county and city regulations had been strictly adhered to.
Jack White stated he thought Com~~~issionec Herbet would like to see a report
from staff in one year to see if the petitioners are complying with the
requirements, and that is possible, and also noted the Commiasion can ceview
the uae at any time. He stated the permit can be granted far two years, but
one year from now, there will be an automatic report to the Commission as to
compliance with conditions.
12/12/83
J
MINUTBS, ANAHBIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION~ DECEMBBR 12. 1983 83-803
Commiasionec Hecb4t gtated he ~i~ not think thia City h~s evec had a
conditional uae ~ermit for a une thet hae hed thAt mAny regulatione kied to
it, ~nd he wns concecned and did not went to heve to wa:t. Eor aomeb~dy to tell
him theC the conditiona aGe heing vi~laked.
Jack White stated the fact thet thece is a eutomatic review doea not guerantee
that th~re wfll not be e review before thet time and if there io infocmation
submitted eix monthr aftec the operation begins that thcre ia a violation of
the conditiona, tha review would be brouyht before the Commiaeion then.
On coll call, the Eocegoing cesolution wda paHaed by the following vote:
AY~S: BOUAS, FRY, HEKBST, KING
NOES: BUSNORE, LA CLAIRE AN~ MC BURNEY
ABSEN~: NONE
Jack White, ~s~istent City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the
Planning Commiasion's decision within 22 aays to the City Council.
ITEM NU. 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NU. 262 AND CONDITIONAL USE PBR~IT
~-
NU. 2460.
__.____.__
PUgLIC HEARING. OWNER5: RIVIERI- MOBIL6HOM~ PARKS, 300 ?!. Katella Avenue,
Anaheim, CA 92802. AGENx: FLOYD L. FARANU, 2555 E. Chapmen Avenue, ~uite
415, E'ullertan, CA 92631. Pcoperty described as an irregularly-shaped parcel
consisting of appraximately 1.8.1 ~c~res, haviny e frontage of approximately 895
feet on the south side of l;atella Avenue, furthec described as 300 Fiesk
Katella Avenue.
CONDITIONAL USE t26QUEST: To permit a 17-story, 171-fooC high, 852-coom hotel
with accesaocy uses and on-sale alcoholic bevecages.
Continued from the meetiny of November 28, 1983.
ITEM N0. 5. ENVIRUNMENTAL IMPACT RFPORT N0. 262 AND CONDITIONAL USE PE.TtMIT
N0. 2461.
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS. RIViERA MOBILEHOME PARKS, 3Q0 W. Katella Avenue,
Anaheim, CA 928U2. AGENT: PLOYD L. FARANO, 2555 E. Chapman Avenue, Suite
415, Fullerton, CA 92631. Property described a~ an irregul3cly-ahaped parcel
consisting of approximately 19.1 acres, having a frantage of approximately 895
feet on the south side of Katella Avenue, further described as 300 Weat
Katella Avenue.
CONDITIONAL USE REpUEST: To permit two 14-stoty, 200-faot high office
complexes.
Continued from r.i~e meeting of November 28, 1983.
12/12/83
MINUT65, AN~HBIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, DBCEMBER 12, 1983 H3-804
ITE_ M Np. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT N0. 262 GBNERAL PL~N AMBNDM~NT N0.
165~ RECLASSIFICATION N0. 82-83-35, WAIVBR OP CODE RBQUIR~MENT AND CONUITIONAL
USE PERMIT N0. 2462.
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS. RIVIEttA MOBILENOME PARKS, 300 W. Ketelle Avenue,
Anaheim, ~A 928U2. AGENT: PLpYD L. FARANO, 2555 E. Chapman Avenue, Suite
415, Full~rkon, CA 92631. Property deacrit~ed as ~n irr~:gularly-ahaped parcel
conaieting of approximately 1H.1 acrea, having a frontage of epproximately 895
feet on the sauCh aide of Katella Avenue, further de~cribed as 300 Weat
Katella ~,venue.
GENEKAL PLAN REQUF.ST. Ta conside~ an amendment to [he land uge element Erom
the c.urrent commercial recreation deaignation to medium denaity reaidential.
RECL~SSIFICATION KEpUEST: RS-A-43,000 to RM-1000
CONDITIONAI~ USw REU~~ST~ To Permit two 234-foot high, 180-unit co~daminium
toweca with waivers of (a) minimum building site area, (b) m~ximum atructural
hPight and lc) minimum landscaped ~Etback.
Continued from the meeting of November 28, 1983.
Items 4, 5 and 6 were diacussed together.
Thece were two person~ indicating their pcesence in opposition to ~ubject
request and although the staff report was not read, it is ceferred to and made
a part oE th~ minutes.
Floyd L. Farano, agent, explained they did meet with the property owners to
the south~ the Fujiahiges, and that Masao Pujishige ia presentt and that the
Pujishiges have cetained the services of an attocney and he spoke with the
attorney and he yives peKmission for him to say the following: that the
Fujishiges have tentatively agreed to dedicate- donate, or make available,
(stating he did not know exactly how it is going to work out) the property for
the dedication of the streets khcough their property, b~th from the southerly
terminus of subject property to the nartherly t~rminus of Troy or Clementine
Street, and fcam Harbor Boulevard tu t.he easterly side of the Fujist~ige's
propectyt however, that agreement is subject to some conditions which ceflect
some of the desires of the Pujishiges.
He atated they also met with c.t:; ataff (Planning, City Attorney, Traffic,
Engineering, and City Manager) and the Fujishiges' have ayreed to a written
agreement between the City of AnaY~eim and the Fujishige ownet:s and perhaps the
ownera of Riviera, but the agreement is complex and will cequire a
considerat~le amount of wosk and effort on everyone's park.
He atated ':hey find it very desirable to commence ~onstruction in the 4th
quartec of 19~4, and following canaideration by the City Council and after the
resalution iR adopted by the City Council, if it is apptoved, they hAVe to
give six~u~~nth notices to the tenants of the mobilehome park. He clarified
aesuming a~proval in January or February, thfs brings them into June or July
of 1984, an~.l hi.s client has expressed the desice to t.ry to move ~he p~oject
along and t~.ey will etipulate to submit a letter of appeal on Conditional Use
Permit Nos. 2460, 2461 and 2462.
12/12/83
MINUTES~ ANAHBIM CITY PLANNING CUMMISSION, DBCEMBER 12. 1983 93-905
Mr. Farano pcenented a dreft o[ proposed amendmenta to the conditions end
indicAted a copy hea been dintributed to each member of the Comminsion. He
atatecl they are egreeing to all othec conditiona with rega~d to the storm
dcein, aprinkler sYsreme, fire and wator requiremenL•s, eewer, fire atation,
shuttle aervice, and the only suggeated changes relete to the atreet and
dedicatian of tbe atreet. He ataGed they heve also agreed t~ pay for, subject
to reimbursemPnt, e 40-foot wide aGceet from the southern terminus of their
property to Conventio~ Way, and Convention way to Harbor Roulevord.
Ne referted to Conditi~~nal Uae Permit No. 2461 for the office toweca,
~ondition No. 2, with ndded lAnyu~,qe, and chanyes to Conditiona 11 and 12
which ate more aiqnificant with r~gard to t.he streeter and if adopted the
Commieaiun would act upun t:he pr~jects without regard to the etreets, othec
than the fact that they have to be thece before the ofEice towers ere
c~mpleted or certiEied for occupancy, without reference to wiio :a going to
pay, who is going to dedicate, what's goi~g to happen, etc. becauae that all
has to be worked o~~t yet. Ne added the last part wan in the npiri~ that they
did not want to give the appearance of l•ryinq to cenege on their promise to
E~ay foc the 40-foot wide street.
Mr. F'arano referred ~o CondiCiun No. 13 for Cnnditionnl Use Permit No. 24b1
and suqgested that it be deleked because ~:F~ey do not think it applies to the
ofEice tewerat Chat Condition No. 17 should be deletFd t~ecause the ceal
property interests are all wcapped up in the final aettlement of Conditions 11
and 12; that Conditiori No. 22 ehould be deleteds that Conaition No. 24 ahould
be amended deleting Condition Nos. 17 and 22; that Condition No. 25 relates to
Condition 13 and they auygest that Conditlon No. 26 be added aa amended by
their draft. He suggested that Jack White, Assistant City Attorney, give his
opinion [egarding these pcoposed changes to the c~nditions.
Masao Fujishige, 1848 Margie [.ane, Anaheim, stated he has a lot of yuestionss
howevec, he thinks this is a wonderful pro~ect, but he did not know whether or
not the hotel will really ever be tuilt, or that the office buildings will be
built. He stated the last time he heard from the Anaheim I~lanning Commission
was in 1977 and they were askiny him about a parkf.ng structure, and he was
pushed then, but he hasn't heard anything since then. He stated he really
doesn't know what is going to happen there, and if thia proaect does go
through it will be a good thing fo~ Anaheim. He stated he would like to help
tt,e City as much as tie can, but thece are questions in his mind.
Mr. Farano stated there ace no absolute guaxanteea that this will ever be
done; however, it is the attitude ui hi.s client that they have invested a lot
of money in this project and have shown every indication of wanti~g to do it
and are in the proceas of making their own financ:ng arrangements at this
time, and they do intend to build a hotel fitat, the condominiums second and
the office buildinga in phase three.
THB PUBLIC HEARING WAS ~LOSED.
,3ack WhitP stated the current staff canditions as proposed are written in A
way that they celate, in hia opinion~ solely to land use planning mattecs and
they requi~e off-site acquisitions, dedications and improvementa, and are not
tied down, for the moat part, to who is to pay or how it is to be ecquired, or
12/12/63
MINUTE~. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, UECEMBER lZ, 1983 _, 83-806
who does whet, and they only require thet certein thinge will happen betore
the development proceede to n certain pointr ChAt the propoaed conditione are
written, in hia opinlon, in a way to go furtt~er in this rEgecd and Condition
No. 1) says thet the a~ner of the property ehall not be cequired to acquire ur
otherwlse negot.tate Ear o[E-site real pcoperty intereats. He otated
presumably that would leave the acqui~it.ion to khe City end he questioned
wl ther that woulc! t1~en commit the Clty to ecquire the property. He added hie
over~:l comments are, as Ear ne the City Attorney's OfEice is concecned, that
the current wording of the cond~tiung leavea tc~ another dey the determination
and allowa the ~raperty uwner tu negokiate with the City as to who is going to
be cequir~d to do what oc pay E'or what, ~ind if ti~e owner oE the propecty
wiohes to puraue that through proposing agreements witti the City, the ~ro~osed
conditions by staff wi11 allow that to happen.
Mc. White contlnued ~he co~ditione, as propor~e~ by the applicant, r~pppar to be
committir,~ the City ln a particular direction by, of necesaity ur~der the
wucding, relieving the owner oE the property from certain obligations and he
Lhought ~hat takea away some of the negotieting pnwe: and ties it down
probably a little f~rther then the i~lanning Commiseion would normelly considex
itselE to be in a poeition to bind the City. He gtated his cecommendation
would not ~nge and that is to still adopC the pc~posed conditic~r~a as
contained in the ataff reporC witt~out the ct~anges recommended t,y the applicai t.
Commissione~ Fry stated for Mc. Parano, as an att~>rney, to present five
legal-siae pages with ceferen~~ to r.ert~:n changes and expect the
Commi~.~ioners to digest them and Lake action iR .~~~so!utely ludicrou~.
Commissiuner Herbst st:ated tie would ayree wi!h the City Attorney ~hat this
Commission does not have the power to mbke d+~cisions ~~erlaining to Einances
for the Citys and the Commisaion is concerned with land use and sl~ould
consider whether ot not this is a go~d use for the land and leave decisions
re~acding righto-ot-way up ko the Council.
Chairwaman bouas asked if the petitioner iR willing to agree to the conditiona
as proposed ~y staEf. Mr. Parano respo~ded thece is a cecommendati~n of staff
that very clearly atates the ataff rec~mmends if the Plar,ning Comm:ssion
wxshes to approve this proposal, tt~at th~ applicant should b~ cequired to
acquiGe and dedicate the off-site real property necessary for off-site
improvements, and he underatands that that, t~gether with the conditions as
they are worded, means that ~he City is looking to them to acquire and
dedicate propECty off their site, and if that is not the intenti~~n of the
City, then he would not have a problem.
Jack white stated that particul.ar statement is nat one of the ~onditions and
if iC alleviates everyone's m~~~d, ~t can be eCiQulat~d by the staff that that
detecmination ultimately will be mac3e by th~ City c:o~ncil and it can be
stipulated that tt~Nre is no intencion in the current conditions to foceclose
the op~ortunity to f urther negotiate as to who is g~ing to be acquiring or
paying for what, and thc City ia not trying to lock in the developer or the
City as to th~ fina~cial me~:t,anism oc the acquisition mechanisn which may be
ultimately a~rQed upon or cequired.
12/12/H3
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CIT~ PL~NNING CUMMIS5IUN, DECEMBER 12, 1983 83-607
Mr. Facano euggeeted mayb~ thet Hnould t>e e~~ondition dnd they will ~erteinly
ngree thet befoce the third phase oEfice towere are ~onACructed or e
cectiflcate of occupancy ia given, thet that etreet hAO tu be 1n end
~pecetional without reference L•o wlio Ln yoing to pay for it.
Jack White atated ~ight now the conditione atate With regard t~• the
acquisition of the right-of-way, thet the cight-oE-wey ~hall be a^quired, and
lt doean't say thal the developer haA to acyuire it or thet the City ie goin~~
to acyui[F it, and the City ~~.~uncll hae to make that deciaion. He edded it la
ataff's ~pinion that thls right-of-way is needed for the project and tf there
ts subsequently an agreRment n~gotiate~f khet eays the City will acqutre it ~nd
pay Eur it, that Ahouldn't be any c~ncern of ti~e Planning Commiusion. He
n~ted e~taff has determined that the street is not necd~ar9 until thF office
to~rere are conntructed.
Paul SinyEr etated thece is conyestion out ther~~ righ+ ~ow and thie project
will adci ta that congeations th:.;t in order to m~~ke the inxtallation of the
extenbion of c:onvention Way and Clemenl.ine a re~sonable project, it ts pre~ty
evident that it will have to t~e done at the time the o[fice towers a[e
con:3CCUCCN~:1 huwevec, ft ie denirat~le that th~ c~treet gu in today, bu~ as a
last resoct, it hat~ to be in before the towers ace o.:cupied.
Commirssioner Ery a~ated, in esaence, the Commiasian irt eayin~~ the street may
never go in beceuse it iF continyent upon the lacr_ phose and therF~ Ls nathing
to pcevent Mr. Fujist~iyN fror~i ~ell.iny hi~ property next year. Mr. Singrr
r.espon~ied what~ver develupment take~ place on tl~e PujiAhige property itFClf
will probab!y be conditioned sooner o: lal•er on the extrnaion oE Conventiun
Way, but the property ehown on the pla~. foc the two off~ce ~owers could not be
developea without the stceet because ot thig condltion and the property would
remain vacant until such time as the street is inat~tled, whe~hec it ia by the
RiviAra developer~ or the Fujishige ,>r perly could deve'op before the office
tc.- ers.
Commiseioner La Claice refer~e~1 to Page 5-f. of khe staff report, ltem (11)
which statea thAt prior to t:;e tssuance of the buildi~g p~rmits for the
ofEicea, the developer shall ~xtend Clementine Street from Ketella Avenue to
~rangewood Avenue, providing... she stated this does s:~y that regardless oE
what ~thec development goes in ~~ che area, even the Fu~is;~ige pruperty, it
will be thir; deve2oper's responsi~ility to extend the atreet.
Annika Santalahti, Assiat~nt D:.rector f.or Zoning, stated the City's approach
is chat any co:~dit:onal use per.mit or item consideced between now and Lhe time
thfs one is develoE~rd will be analyzed on the basls of that project at that
time and if it necesaitates fhe improvement3 -~eing coi~struch.ed, they would
potentially have on identical condition and if the condition had been
satixfied by somebody else, this develaper would not then be a party to that
particular improvem~~t.
Commissioner La Cla+.ce auggested the condition read: •Prior to the issuance of
building pertuitn fo ~ tt~e offi.ces, an extension af Clementine Stceet fcom
Katella Avenue t~~ Oranycwood Avenue ......shall be ~onstructed.' She added
ahe thought wordiny t~e condition that way would encourage the property owner
to cooperate bacause there is no incentive right now since this developer
always is the one who has to puC in the atreet.
12/17/83
MINUTES. JINANBIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. QBCEMBRR 12, 1983 __ __a3-808
Annika Sontalahti eteted the one adventage of the condition beiny wordod thia
.~ay is thnt if foc eome reeson the cu[rent pcoperty owne~ decidee to s~11 tt~e
prapecty, whoever i}; the purchaser and r.ecetvea e resolution that reada thie
way, will, hopefully, be eware dnd concerned nnd will tnyuire ebout the
conditiont howeve~, she did not think it meke4 any precCi~~al diEference, hut
felt this is [eall;~ a~ood method of elertin~~ future owno~~ thet they mny be
responaible.
Commisaioner La Claire EQlt it should definitely be worded that the atreet has
to go in in that ph++se of the development, but waen't eure if the word
'developer' needed to be in the cundition. ~hairwomen Buuas etated if
somebody ~huuld buy the pro ~crty and ~he condition said thet the st.reet has to
go in, thPy may just louk at it an~l think they are not th~ onea that have to
do it, but if it saya 'developer', ttiey would know thAt tl~ey have to look into
it.
Mr. Farano atated the Commissionera have just said whaC he has been afcaid of,
khat if so:~ebody else comes along and buy.~ the p[opetty, they are going to
look et tt~it and aay that_ t hey will have to do it~ and thAt is exactly hia
fear.
Chairwoman aouas etated the City ~ou.-cil will decide who is going to pay for.
the atreet, but the conditian should ahow tt~at tt hag to qo 1n and Eor future
referEnce 1E the property ie sold, there ahould be something to alert ttie
buyer that they may be obligated t.o do it.
Mr. harano stated his point ls that iE the buyec eees a condition that
Clementine Street has to be extended, t.hen he knows that befoce he can bu'_ld
his office building, that must be done, but if the Commission is saying that
t,e may be liable for it and that is the apirit of the Commission, tha.. juRt
defeata what Mr. White haF just sald; and he thought lt dho4ld read that
Clementine shal.l be extended without ce(erence tc who is going to do it.
Jack White stated he views Condition No. ~1 as being seperate from Condition
No. 17, with 17 beinq the acquisition of the rigt.t-of-way and 11 being the
improvements, and Condition No. 11 does no[ seem ~o be tercfbly difficult Erom
the lang uage pcoposed, and the draft prepared by Mc. Farano says that the
applicant agrees to pay the costa of conatructing the mi.nimum 40-foot
coa~lway. HQ stated the Commission 1-as alreadY been told that this ia being
appealed to the City Council, at wt~ich time all theae things will be presented
and hopef ully worked out by agreement as to who pays what and what ~he coste
wil.l he. He stated ultimately all these conditions may be reworded several
times.
Commiss~oner McBurney sta ted aome assumptions are being made that some~ne is
going to dedicate this ci ght-of-way or purehase thie cight-of-way and pointed
out the property to the south might etay in the agricultural preserve for the
cemainder of thie century, and asked how the City c~uld possibly condem~
property that i~ in the agricultucal preserve.
Jack W hite stated it is posei.ble for the City to condemn the property, nd
nothing the Planniny Cortuaission is doing today should be taken as construing
in anyway that the City will, in facL•, exercise the power of eminent domain
brcause that kakes four ot~a of the City Council; that this is an application
12/12/83
MINUTES~ ANAHBIM CITY PLANNING COMMiSSION, DBCBMBER 12. 1983 83-808
Annika SantelAhtt atated the one advantago of the conditlon bping worded thia
way is th~t if for some reaeon the current property owner decidea to sell the
pcopecty, whoever ia the purchaaer and receives e reeolution that reads thie
way, will, hop~fully, be eware ana concecned dnd will inguire about thr.
conditiont however, st~e did not think it makea ar~y practical difference, but
Eelt thie is ceally a good method ~E alerting futuce own~ra thet they may he
responsible.
Commiasionec La Claire Eelt it ehould definitely be worded that the street ha~
to go in in thet ~haee af tha development, but. wasn't sure if the wocd
'developec' need ed tu be in the condition. Chairwoman Bou~s atated if
somebody nt~uuld buy the property and the canditton said tt~at the street has ~:o
go in, they may just look et it ar-d think they are not t',._ o~es that have t_
do it, but if it says '~leveloper', they aould know that they have to look into
it.
Mr. Farano akated lhe Commiseioners have just said what he has been afraid of,
that if somebody else comes along and buys the propecty, they are going to
look at that and say tl~at they will h~ve to do it, and r.hat is exactly tiis
tear.
Ct~airwoman Bouas st:ated the City Counci; will cide who is goinq to pay for
the atreet, but t:~e condition should ~t~ow tha~ lt hae to go in and for future
~eference 1E the property ia eolc3, ttiere stio~ld be somethiny ta alect the
buyer that they may be obligated ko do it.
Mr. Farano stated his paint ie that i[ the buyec sees a con~iition that
Clementine Stceet t~a~ to be extended, then he knows that befoce he can build
his office building, that must t~e done, b~t if r1~H Commisaion is saying that
he may be liable foc it and that is th~e spirit of the CommiRaion, that just
defeats what Mr. Wnite has just eaid; and he tt~ought it 5hould cead that
Clementine shall be exCended without refecence to ~ho is going to do it.
Jack White etated he views Condition No. 1] as t,einy separate Erom Condition
No. 17, with 17 being the acquisition of the riyht-of-way and 11 being the
im~rovements, and Condition No. 11 does not se~em ko be terribly dif:icult from
the lanyuage pr~pnsed, and the draf' -epared by Mr. Faran~ says that the
applicant ayrees to pay the costs oi .~nstructing the minimum 40-foot
roadway. Ne stated the Cammission has already been told that this is being
appealed to the City Council, at which time all the3e things will be presented
and hopefully worked out by agrecment as to who pays what and what thz coste
will be. He stated ultimately all these conditions rnay be reworded several
tim~s.
Commissioner Mc Burnev stated some asaumptions are being made tt:at someone is
going to dedicate thi~ rfght-of-way or purchase this right-of-way and pointed
out the praperty to tt.~ south might stay in the agrir~~lkural preserve for the
remainder of this ce~tury, and asked how the City could poasibly condemn
pcopertf that is in the agricultural preserve.
Jack White stated it is poasible for the City to candemn the property, and
nothing the Planning Commisafon is doing t~day should be taken as construinq
in anyway that the City will, in fact, execcise the power of eminent domain
because that takes fou= votes of the City Council; that this is an application
li/12/83
MINU'rE5, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMl3SION DECEMBER ].2 1983 83-809
for a permit and e pecmit author e s~meone to do something, but it doea not
obligate them to do dnything• a~~ ~henN pecmite could be approved to<fay an~
they may or may not be exerc.sRd, ~r only one ~r two mey be ~xercised.
Mr. Fara~~o ateted in view of the inga ttiat heve to be wo[ked out in
connection with Condltional Uae Permit No. 2461 concerning the oEfice towere,
he would ouggeat that coneideration of that permit be continued, and that the
Commission coneider ncting on Conditionel Uae permit Nos. 246U nnd 246~,
especi++)ly 2460 which celatea to the hotel.
Jack Whitp aketed he doea not have an opinio~, on tt~at request fo[ continuance
cne way or the athers that 1E the pucpoae oE the contLnuance ia to Allow the
petitioner en opportunity to explore the ag~Nem~nt betaeen partiea and if. it
is the i.ntent to I~AVe an agrecment in pla~e approved by ttie City Council
before they coRe ~ck with the offices for Phese 3, he would not have d
problemr howeve~, unlesa th~ce ia an agreemenC appcoved by the City Council,
he did not think his poeition w~~uld chanqz on what the conditions ahnuld say
c+nd what commitmenc the Planning ~ommisfli~~n ahould be making in the way of
financial mechanlams.
Commisaioner La Claire asSced what woulcl be the result iE thP Commiaai~n
approved all three of these applicatl.ona with the conditions as propoaed, and
asked if Mr. Far.ano has time to work out tt~e agreement beEore he goes to City
Cuuncil.
Mr. Farano stated ~hey would n~~t be requesting the continuance in order to
wo~k on thQ ~onditional language, but ~hey would like to work on that and come
back tu the Commisaion with the agreement after it +s appcove~ Dy the Council
and ~ie did not uee c~ny r~ason Why the continuance would not be acce~tah2e
since the uffice towecs are cea~l~ the la~t pha~e and the perpetrator of the
new atreet.
Chafrwoman eouas indicated she rhougt~t it ia ~eally n~_cessary to know whether
the~e will be a road before goinq ahead with th~ hotel and condAminiums. Mr.
F'arano stated they are going to build the stceet from Katella to the southern
boundacy of their p~operty.
Jack White stated if Commission approved all ;:hree af these permits today and
everything was agreed to today, the developrr still would ha~e the right to
exercise the firat coc~ditional use permit for the hqtei and r.ot the other two,
or the f'.rst two and not the third and st~ff has already sai~~ thaf while it
might be nice to have that coad there to~:ay, it is not going to be requiced as
a condition until the thi.d phase, so if thece is never a third phase, as pact
of this pcoject, that road would not be ceouired, t,ut that is not to bay that
as a part of a diffecent p:~oject, or at aometime in the future, by some ottier
action, that the coad wouldn't go through, but aimply as a part of this
project, the road would not go through.
Chaizwoman Bouas asked what the result wauld be if only the ficst phase is
developed or the first and second phase is done and there is no road. Mr.
Singer responded there is a bottleneck there today and the h~tel is guing to
contribute a certain numbec of trips as outlined in the EIR and so ~ill the
ceaic:;ntial tcips in those two towere, but tiie most serinus traffic congestion
12/12/t33
MINUTES, AN~HEIM CITY kI.~NNING COMMISSION, DECuMeER 12. 198; 83-81
ie anticipeted with the t~o office towere, but thifi t~ not che last of. iti
that there ia A lot of vacant lanci tn that ecea and he anticipatea e vpry
aimilec condition upon othec deve:~pera in the erea, obvious. ~f course, is
thv Fujiat~ige pruperty, if lhey e~~r pull it out of the ag~icultur~l prenerve
or if they evet develop, thPre wo~ld be the same type ~onditions foc
constcucting the roed. Ho stated there are a~so aeveral prupertiea that are
undecutili2ed along Herbor Boulevard which may wish to redevelop and const[uct
high valume producing treffic yeneretor.e and that condition could again be
repeated on uther pcoperti~s, even thouqh they ace not immediately ~~~jacent t~
th~: ~rope~ty.
Commisaioner Herbst etated the environ~nentel impact report reflec.ta ti~~ whole
development and the Gouncil will be seeing everything and hp thouqht t~ •~~~ld
be to the petitionec's advantage Eor the Commiasi,n to act ~_~n all thre~
pcojecta.
Mr. Fa~nno atated they preaented the entire project in order. to let ChE Cfty
know wheC tt~ey intend to develop on the entire property, but :~e did not know
how lonq it will take to finalize the flgreement di~cussed. He apologized for
handing the commission the dcaft of amended ~:onditionc~ at the last minute, but
thie only came about on Friday afternoon. He stflted he woulr3 hope they would
be able to get to ttie hearing befure the Council in the mid to latter part oE
January, but he wasn't aure they can make it, and the tiotel 1~ the critlcal
iasur because it is the firat une in line an~ if it is delayed paet March,
there will be a serious problem.
Cvmmissioner La Claire asked iE Commisaion can approv~ all three permite, with
a cecommendation to tl~~ City Cauncil that Commissi~n teeis that it is n~t
really faic for one developer tu pay all of the c.oata and acquire the
pcoperty, and there are negotiati ns going on right now with the Puiishigea
and the Council is ultimetely going to have to wo~k out the cum~romise.
Jack White stated he would nor have a problem with the Commissiun approving
ull three permits, if that is their desicP and they could, by a separate
motion~ recommend that the Council consider some agreement, but he did not
think it ehould De too ~pe::ific.
Chairwot~an B~uas staked ahe thougi~t th+~ Commission should act on all the
pcojects so the petitione~ can pcesent :`~e whole pr~ject to Council. Mr.
Farano stated they felt the wording as proposed is loaded with danger ~nd he
~~as a p~oblem with it because everyone on the Commission just agreed that they
want the developer or someone downstream to know that he might have to put in
that road. Chairwoman Bouas felt it would be t~etter for tf.e developec to know
that they might have to put it in. Mr. Parano :;iated he i~ not krying to
conceal it from a purchaser, but he wo~lld like to go forward in the context
that somebody is going to put th~ road in, and whc, and ho~ it is going to be
accomplished, is something to be determined by tt~e City Council.
Commissioner Hecbst cl.:if~ed that Mr. Farano wouid like for the Commission to
act on CUP Nos. 2460 and 2462 ana continue action on No. 2461s and that the
Council will be heacing thoc~e sepacately and that Wuuld not tie it to the road
which might delay the whole projec.t. He added he would have no problem with
that if that is what the applicant wants.
12/12/83
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CiTY PLANNING CUMMISSI~N1 " CE~BER 12. 19N3 _83-811
Commisaioner PrY F~teted the City will never see khe road if it ie done thet
wey. Cheicwom~n eouae aaked if the t.owere cauld be cemovpd from the model
beEace the Council b~ee r. Commissioner Herbat ~teted thF road ~oeg not have
tu be put in with these .w~~ developments, so the applicant coul~ atill build
the hotel and the condominiums and delete the aifice towera, and never bulld
the ~oad anyway ar~~f hP woul.d like t~ work out t.he road requicement so when it
gets to Council, the project will not be delayed.
Jack Whit~ atated legally tie sees nuthing wrong with that ar.tion.
Commissioner Fry ataced In addition to that, in the event the pcoperty to ttie
so~th came in foc development, the COdd could atill be rey~ired at that time.
Jack White stat.ed a road can be required of any develo~~ment project where thak
road is required a~ e eondition because ir. is ceaaon~~bl.y necessary due to that
pacticular development, whethe~ it is an on-site ~r off-site roed.
Commissioner Fry ~lariEied thar. this devc~loper now has t~ puc in the road from
Kdtella ko his south pruperty :ln• rind any future road may connect to it.
ACTiUN: "ommiseio~er Herbst ~fEered a motion, seconded by Commiasioner King
and MOT;ON CARRIEU chat after considering Uraft ~IR No. 262 foc the proposed
kiviera Pruject and reviewing evidence, both written and ocal, preaented ~~
supplement Draft EIR No. 262, the Planning Cammi3sion findn ttiut EIR No. 262
is in compliance wit', tt-e California Environmenta.l Quality Act and the Ci+y
and 5tate CEQA GuidelinesJ and that the Planning Commisaion fur~.her Eindrs that
economic and aocial considerations make it inEeasible to eliminate entirely
the significant erivironmental impar~s whicn have been identifipd i~ Finel EIR
No. 262. Howevec, the beneEite of the project have been balanced against
thefr unavoidat>le enviconmental impact an~ pursuant to the proviai~~ns of
Section 15093 of the State CF.UA Guidelinea, the occ.urrence of the .~anificant
enviconmental effects tdentified in F~inal EIR No. 262 and as :,et fortti ,hove
may be pecmitted without further mi~igatian due t~~ thQ Eollowing overric;:~g
considerations:
{1) Aftec completiun, the propoaed project is expected to
generate a net Eiecal :~urplus of $1,620,500 pe: year for
the City. Thie will pcovide funds for the o~eration of
programs for the benefit of all Anaheim residents which
would not otherwise be economical.ly feaeiDle.
('l) The proposed projert will provide a balancPd development
wt~icl- is compatible with and complementary to the adjac~nt
commercial-cecreation area.
(3) The proposed project will provide employment for an
eatimated 4,200 persons.
Ther2fore, the Planning Commission hereby certifies Et~t No. 262 for the
Riviera Project and adopts this Statement of Overriding Considecationa.
Commisaioner Herbst oEfered Resolu-:ion No. PC83-231 and moved foc its passe~e
and adoption that thE ~naheim ~ir.y Planning Commisaion does herPby grant
Conditional U~e Permit No. 2460, pursuant to Anahetm Municipal Code Sections
18.03.03U.03G through 18.03.030.03' and aubjec-. to interdepertmental
Cnmmittee R~coaunendations.
12/12/83
MINUT6S. ANAHBIM CITY PLJINNINC COMMISSION, DECEMBF.R 12L 1983 83-812
Mr. ~ereno reapunded to Chairwoman eouas thet the Cowere will not be removed
.~om khe model when thia mattec is heerd by tl~~ City Council becausP he would
w~nt thom to see khe entire project. He added he plannRd to request e
continuence for Conditional Uae Permit 2461 to J~nuary 9, 198~, with the hope
thet by tt~et time, they will heve eome anewerst tnat for the Fujiahigea' own
legal reac+ona, they ace not going to be able to eign any kind of legel
agreemAnt for 30 days, which meens it will be tt-e m~ddle of Janu~~ ~.
Commiseionec Herbst poinr,ed out the Cuuncil seeing the entirp ~roject,
including the two 19-story office towera, i8 reelly no diff~ ~~nt than them
seeing the entire proposal by Cebat, Cabot and ForhES of t~ Stadium
development.
Chairwoman Houns asked if Mr. Parano ayreeA with thp Ir erdepactmenta.l
Committee Recommendations and he replled that Chey wil, comply.
On coll ~ all, the foregoing resolution vas passed by tF~c following vote:
AYES: BOUAS~ BUSHOk~, FRY, HERBST, KiNG, LA CLAIRF., MC BURNEY
NUES: NONB
AaSENT: NONE
Commisaioner Herbat oEEered ~ mot~un, seconded by commisaioner King and MoTION
CARRIEA that coneideration of Conditional Use Permit No. 2461 (ICem No. 5) be
cuntinued to the regulariy-sch~duled meetiny of January 23, 1984, at tt~P
cequest of the petiti.oner.
Jack White stated it should be made cle~r t.hat Phase 2 is prohably not
anticipated to be commenced withtn the next year and Section 18.03.090 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code provides that if a project for which a conditio~al us~~
permit ia issued is not commenced within one year from the d~te the permit ia
approved, that the approval shall eit•her be null and void ~r it shall be
requiced to be extended by the body that granted that approval, and the
alteznative is that C~mmission can specify a different time period in thF
cesolution. He stated h~ did not want to see the applicant falling into that
pit, if there is l:kelihoad that the condaminium phase is n~t going to be
commenced within the next year, and .t-e developer ~aould have to come back in
every year f~r an extension and it wout~ be putting him into je~pardy every
year.
Mr. Farano cerp~~nded ta Chai~woman Bouas Chat thPic tentati~e plana are that
tie hotel will be cammenced the l~tter part of 1984 and that would take
probably c o years, and he would as~~ime fcum what he underacands t;,at the
condominiums would be commenced v~ry aoon thereafter, ~nd they would like to
suggest a five-year time limit.
Commissioner Herbs~ pointed out a general plan amendment is required in this
action and that bothers him because it changes the deaignation from commercial
recceatiAnal uae3 to medium density residential an~ in five years the whole
concept could be cevised.
12/12/~3
MINUTES. ANAHEiM CI7'Y PLANNING COMMISSIUN UECEMRER 12 1983 83~813
~nnike Santalahti atat~d strtE cdme up wikh wording that. the project
authocized by Lhia conditionAl use permit ahell be commPnced and thereafter
diligently edvenced to completion within a peciod oE three (3) yeoca Erom the
date of this reeolution~ unleea such time is uthPrwise extende in eccordance
with 1d.03.090 of t•he Anaheim Muni~ipal C~~de and that baeically meena that if
the thcee yeara pdea and n~thing hea hAppened, +t could be extended ac,~in for
enother three yeeca.
Commieaioner. Herbst felt three years is more reasonaDle than five years. Mr.
Farano ateted up until n~w they have been with one yeer, and now ataff wante
to change it to three yeara and he was not sure what anyone had in mind, and
indicated he would rathec jusk leave ik at one year, or go for five yeass
beceuse thete is no way to cor.trol conatruction strikes, etc.
Mr. White pninted out no additional condition would be necessary and this
woul~' Eall under the normal Municipal Code requirement that if the permit is
not exerciaed within one year, it could, upon appcoval, be extended foc
additional yearly perioda of time. He explained the rea9on for that is to
determine if there ace changes in the area.
Commissioner Herbst oftered Reeolution No. PC83-232 an~ m~ved for its passage
and adoption that the Anaheim City Plan~~ing Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that General Plan Amendment Nu. 195, Exhibit A, be
approved.
On roll call, the focpguing resolution was passed by the followiny vot~:
AYES: BC~UAS, BUSFfURE, ~kY, H~NRS7', KING, I.A CI.AIRE, MG BURNEY
NOES: NONE
ABS~N~: NONE
Commissionec Herbst offered Resolu~ion No. PC83-233 and moved for its passage
and adoption t:~at Lhe Anahe~im Cit;• Plann;ng Commisaion does heceby grant
keclassification No. 82-83-35 sub~~ect to Interdepactmental Committee
Recommendations.
Jn roll call, the .:oregoing resol~~:ion was passed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, E3USHORE, FRY, HERB3';, KING, LA CLAIRE, MC BURNEY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NUNE
Commissioner Herbst otfered a motion, secondec] by Commiesi~~er Fry and MOTION
CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commissfon does heceby grant waiver of
Code requirement on the basis that there are epecial circumstances applicable
to the property such ae aize, shape, topography, location or surroundings
which do not apply to other identically zoned properties ur.der identi^al
zcntng classification in the vicinitys and that atrict application of the
2oning Code depcives the prUperty of privileges enjoyed by o~t~nr propecties
under identical zoning clsssification in the vicinity.
12/12/83
MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING ~OMMISSION1 DBCEMBER 12, 1983 83-814
Commiasioner Hecbet off.ered Resolution No. PC83-234 and moved Eor ita pessage
end adoption thet the Anaheim City Plenning Commiesion doea hereby grant
Conditional Use Parmit No. 246? rurauant to Sectiona 18.03.030.030 t.hrougl~
.16.03.030.035 of the ~naheim Municipal Code, And subject to tnterd,~pdrtmental
Committee Recommendationa.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution wa~ passed by the Eollowing vote:
AYES: BOUAS, BUSHORE, FRY, H~R~ST, K1NG, LA CLAI~E, MC BURNEX
NOES: NONE
ABSENT; NONE
.iack White, Asaiatant City Attorney, pceaented the written right co appeal the
Planning Commiaefun'8 deciaion within 22 days to the City Council..
Mr. Farano stated because of the complexity oE ~his pcojecl, he has worked
-nany long hard hours wikh the Cicy sr.aff nnd he would likc t.o extend his
appreciatlon tor ths diligent, coo~ecative, intelligent and competent manner
ln which they warkPd.
Chairwoman eouas coroplimented Mr. Farano on this fine pruject and atated
Commission hopee that it will become a reality because it would become an
excellent addition in that acea.
RECESS: 3:2U p.m.
REC~NVENE: 3:30 p.m.
ITEM N0. 7: EIR NEGATIVE AECLARAI'ION, WAIVtP. OP CODE REQUIRF.M~NT AND
CUNDITIONAL USG PEF2MIT NU. 2515. ~
PUBLIC HEARING: OWN~R: U-HAUL COMPANY OF ORANGE COUNTY, b60 S. Placentia
Avenue, Pl.acentia, CA 92670. Property described as ~ reckanguleirly-shaped
parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.8 acre located at the southeast
cornec of Watec Street and Anaheim Boulevard, and further deaccibed as 600-626
South Anaheim Boulevar~ Haul Moving and Storage).
RE~UEST: To expand ~• ruck and trailer rental facility with waivec of minimum
numbec af parking spaces.
There was no one indicating theic presence in opp~sition ~o subject raque$t
and although cne st,zff reporL was not read, i~ is ceferred to and made a park
of the minutes.
8i11 Guthcie, Presid~nt, U-Haul Company of Orange County, was present ~
~.~swe: any questiona.
THE PUBLIC HEARYNC WAS CLOSED.
ACTION: r.ommiasioner King offered a motion, seconde~i by Commissioner Pry and
MOTION C1-.RRIED that the Maheim City Planning Commisaion hme revxewed the
~roposal co expand a truck and tr.ailer rental facility with waiver of minimum
number of pe.rking spaces on a cPCtengularly-shaped parcel of land consisting
of appro°imately U.8 acce located at the southeast corner of Wate~ St:eet and
12/12/83
MINUTES, ~NAHEIM CITY P~~NNING COMMI3SION, pECEMRER 12, 1983 83-815
1~s,s:~eim Boulevecd, and fucthec deRCribed as 600-626 South Anaheim Boulevacdr
and doea hereby approve the Negative De~.laration upon finding thet it hea
conaidered the Negative Declaretion together witih any comments received dur.ing
lhe public ceview pcoceas and ~ucther finding on the baeis of the initial
Skudy and a~y commente rACeived thet tl~ere is no substantial evldenae that the
pro~ect will heve a aignificent effrct on khe envlronmenk.
Commiasi~~ner King offere~ a motion, eeconded by Commiasioner Pry end MOTION
CARRIED thet the Anat:eim City Planr~ing Cammission does he~eby grent waiver of
code cequirement on the ba~la thet tne pecking variance will not ceuae en
increaee in tcefEic congeqt!on in the immpdiete viclnity nor adveraely effect
any adjoininy land useat and that the gcanting of the parking variance under
the conditionu impoaed, if eny, will not be detrimental to the peace, health,
safety or general welface oE khe citizene of the City of Annheim.
Comm:esioner Ki~ig ofFered Reaolutian No. FC83-235 and muved for ita ~~assage
and adoption that the ~neheim City Planning Cc,,miasion doe9 hereby granc
Conditional tlse Permit No. 2515, pursuant to Sect.ons 18.03.030.030 through
18.03.J30.~35 of the ~naheim Municipal Code, and aubject to Interdepertme~taJ.
Committee Recommendatior~.
~n ro11 call, the focegoing reao!~+tion was pasaed by the following vote:
AYES: $OUAS, d~SHORE, FR~, ilERR:~T, KING, LA CLAIRE, MC BURNEY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NG~:E
IT6M NU. 8: EIR N~^vATIVE DECLARA'i'ION ANU CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 'G517
PUBLIC HEARING. :RS: PARKS PROPERTIES, INC., ET AL, 9Q3 E. Alosta, Suite
D, Glendora, CA y1740. AGENT: JOHN C. VBRHUEVEN, 24602 Rajm~nd Way, Suite
Q-111, E1 Toro, CA. 92630. Property desccibed as a rectangularly-shape~
paccel of land consiating of appcoximately 0~4 acre located at the southwest
corner of Lacy Avenue and East Street, and furt~~er described as 1040 Lacy
Avenue.
REQUEST: To oecmit an indoor pitching and batting academy in the ML Zone.
There was no one indicating their pr!=sence in opposicion to subject cequeat
and ~lthough the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a p~~t
oF the minutes.
John Verhoeven, egent, was present to answer any questions.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSEA.
R~.ponding to Commisaioner La Clair~, Mr. Verho~ven stated he does not plan to
havs ar, arcade fn conjunction with this uae.
ACTION: Commisafoner La Claire of~ered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Herb3t and MOTION CARRIED that the ~-naheim City Planning Comm~s&ion has
revi~awed the propoea] to ~ermit an indoor pitching and batting academy in the
ML (Inaustcial, Limited) Zone with 18 pdrking spaces proposed on a
12/12/83
MINU~BS, ANAHEIM CITY P WINNING COMMISSION, ~ECBMBER 12, 1983 83-816
re~:engulsrly-ahaped parcel of land coneisting of approximately 0.4 ecre
located dt ~.hR southwest cerner of Lecy Avenue and East Street., and further
described as 1040 Lacy AvenueJ and does hereby approve the Negative
UeclaGatien upon Einding thnt it has conslderRd the Negative Declac~ti.on
together with Any comm~nt~ received ducing che public ceview process and
fucther Einding on thP baeie of the Initiel Study and any comments rECeived
that thece ia no eubstantiul evidence that the project will have a aignificant
effect on the envi~onmei.t.
Cummtsaiorie~ L~ Cla~re offered Resolution No. PC83-736 ond move~ for its
peseage and adoption that the Annheim City Planning Commisaion does hereby
grant Conditional Uae Permit No. 2517, pucaunnr to Sectione 18.03.030.030
through 18.03.030.035 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and subject to tt~e
petitioner'~ stipt.lation l:hat there atiould bf~ n~~ arcade in conjunclior. ,aith
this u~e, and subject to Interdepartment:al Committee Recommendattons.
~~n coll cAll, the Eoregoing resolution w~s passed by the Eoll~wing vote:
AYES: BOUAS, BUSHORE, FKY, HF.RBST, KIN~, LA CI.AJRE, MC BURNEY
NOES: NUNE
Af3SENT: NONF.
Prioc to voting Mr. Verhoeven asked at~our the condition requiring sidewalks on
Lacy Avenue and it was noted that the petitioner can req~~est a waiver of that
requirement from the ~ity Engineer.
Mr. Verho~ven stated the ownec installed ctreet lightb in 1964. It wz~s
pointed out thet these are atandard ~onditions and if they have been inatalled
oc paid ~or, that condition will be oeemed satiafied.
ITEM NO. 9: EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND C~JNDI~IONAL USE PL'RMIT N0. 2519.
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: BRYAN INDUSTRIAL PROPBRTIES, INC., P. 0. Box 4486,
Anaheim, CA 92803. AGENT. TOM TALBOTT, 15732 Tustin Village Way, Tustin,
CA 92680. Property deacribed as a cectangulacly-shaped parcel of land
consistiny of. approximately 1.4 acres, having a Econtage of appro:imately 300
feet on the east side of. State c:ollege Boulevard, and further described as
1542 North State College Boulevard.
RE~tUEST: To perm_'.t retail furnttuc~ ;ales in the ML Zone.
There was no one indicating Cheir presence ~n nnppeition to sub~ecr. request
and althouyh the staff repoct was not cead, it i~ referred to and made a part
of ~he minutes.
Tom Talbott, agent, was present to anawer any ques~Ions.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WA5 CLOSED.
Commissioner McF3urney asked if these sbles will be c:onducted by :.he same
owner, or if there will be several dealecs who rent a apace to sell different
typea of furniture. lir. ^'albott responded he will be the only dealer.
12/12/83
~N~H~IM CITY PLANN:
MINU'PES ~ CQMMISSIUN. LECEMSER 121 1983 83-817
1,,
Commisaionec Her~~t pointed u~t this 1A a quesi-comcaec~ie? aree ri~ht now.
ACTION; Commieaioner King offeced e motion, ~on~e~ hy Commissioner Herbat
end MOTION CARkIFP ~hAt th~ A~ehelm City Planninq Commisaion hae reviewed ~he
proposal to permit retail furnicure oalAe ir; the ML lInduatr.ial, Limited) 2une
on a rectangularly-ehep~d percel o[ lend coneiating of dppcoximately 1.4
acrFS, having e fr.ontage of dpproximately 30; feet on the eaet ei.de of State
College Boulevacd, end further described as 154T North State Culleye
Boulevardt and dues heceby app[ove the Nogative Declaration upo~ finding that
it has conaidered the Negative Decleration to~}•ther wit~ any c~~mments ceceiveci
~uring t.he public review procesa enA Cucther finding on the basi~ of the
Initial Stud~~ and an~+ c~r„menta recpi~:i that here ir. no aubstantial evidence
t.hat the project will have a 9lgnificent effect un the enviro~ment.
Commiseiuner King of[ered Resolution No. PC83-237 and mov~~d foc its passaye
and adoptian t.hat the Araheim City 1'lennin~ Commission do~.:~ heceby qrant
Conditional Use Permit N~. 2514, pucsuant tu Sections 16.03.030.030 throuqh
16.U3.03U.U35 of lh~ Anah?i;n Municipa.l Code, and hubject to Interdepartmental
Committee Recommendatiors.
Cn roll call, t~~e to~rgcing resoluticn was passed by the Eoll~wing vot.e:
AYES: BOUAS, BUShURE, FitY, FjERBST, KING, LA CLAIFtE, MC BIIRNEY
NUES: NONE
ABSENT: NUNE
ITEM NU. 10: ~,IR NEGATIV~ UECLARATIUN,_WAIVF.Y. 7F ::~ UE REQUIREMENT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERM.i'P NO. 25'l0.
PUt3GIC NEARING. O~-'NERS: ALF:X AHD LINUA STAYROPOU;,~)S, 14252 Saacinen, Irvine,
CA 9Z664. AGENT: 'I.OYU L. PARANU, 7555 E. Chapman J-venu~, Suite 415,
Fullerton, CA 926s1. Property described as a rectangularly-~haped parr.el of
land consieting of approximately 0.57 acre, having a frontage of approximately
132 feet on the north side oE L~a Me~;a Avenue, and fucther described as 3025
East La Mesa Avenue (The GreekE' Mattress Wacehousel.
REQUEST: To permit retail furnlture sa.les in the ML Zone with waiver oE
minimum numbec of parkiny spaces.
Thece was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject request
and alt~~ough the staff report w~s not read, it is refer~ed to and made a patt
of the minutes.
Floyd 1.. Parano, ayent, explained they have submitted Exhibit A with their
application which deacribes the operation; that the own~r preaently conduct.s a
mattress manufactucing operation at thie site and wishes to designate
appcoximately 1/3 of the facility to Ehe sale of mattcesses which he does not
manufacture on the premises, t~gethec With sleeper sofas, corner groups, bunk
beds, recliner chairs, rocking chairs and table and floor. lamps. He stated
the p~`itioner would be happy to have the sales limited t~ thoae ±tems.
Concerning the requeat for variance from the parking requirpments, Mr.. [~arano
referred to Exhibit B which reflects a parking study conducted by the
12/12/83
MINUTES AN~NEIM CITY PLANNING COMF1iSSI0N DECEMBER 12, 1983_ _ _ 93-818
appli~ant which indicates an ho~rly avorego of 2.5 vehiclea on the premi~ea~
i.ncluding employees, and t.he staff repoct doas indicete that thia comes well
within the [ange and thAt pro~ably additional pa~king would nat be required at
thie time.
i'HE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLUSED.
Mr. Facano referce~ to Condition No. 2 concrrning the tcefEic eiqn~~l
assessment fee, and requesC~d thAt that fea be limited to 33i of ttie total
f.looc area ein~~~ that is L•he amount of s[~aee cestcicted tu retail sales. Pdul
Singer, Tcaffic Engineer, at~*~ed that was the intention oE that condition.
Respondin~ to Comm:ssioner Fry, Mc. Farano explained the pptittoner does
m.nufacture mattreases on the premises, and the ~anufacturing will compriae
approximately 792U squace feet nnd retail oales will occupy 4212 Hq. ft. and
the ofEice will uccupy 629 sy. Et.
Commiesionec King aoked Mr. Facanu to atipulate that only 1/3 ~~ the flooc
spac~ would be devoted to retail aales, which he did.
ACTIUN: ~om~issioner King oftered a motion, aeconded hy Commiseioner Herbst
and MUTIUN CARkIED thak tt;e Anaheim City P]Anning Commi~sion has reviewed the
proposa'. to permit retail Eurniture nales in kt~e ML (lndustrial, Limited) zone
with waiver oE minimum numbec of parking apar.es on a rectangular.ly-shaped
parcel of la~d cunsist:ny of approximately 0.57 acre, having a frontage of
appr~ximately lj2 Eeet on the north eide of Ga Mesa Avenue, and further
desccibed as 3025 East I.a Meca Avenue (Zhe Gceeks' Mattress Warehouae); and
does he[eby approve the NeyativQ ~ec~aration upon findinq that it has
considered the Negative ;~~:~laration ~ogethec with any comments recei~ed d~~~ing
the public review proceos and further finding on the basis of the Initial
Study and any comments received that there is no substant.tal evidence r.hak the
pcoject will ha~e a aignitiicant effect on rhe environment.
Com~i~siuner King ofteced a motion, seconde~ by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION
CARRILD that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant waiver of
cude requirement on the basis ttiat the parkir.g variance wi~l nut cause an
increase in traEfic c~ngeation in the immediate vicinity nur adver3ely aEfect
any adjoining land use~; and that the granting of the parkinq variance under
!he conditiona imposed, iE any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health,
safety or general welfare of ~he citizens of the City of Anaheim.
Commissionec King offeced Resolution No. PC83-2a8 and moved f~~r its passago
and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission doec hereby grant
Conditianal U•~e ~ermit No. 2520, pucsuant io Sect~on 18.03.030.03~ through
18.03.030.035 of the Anaheim Municipal ~~de, on the basis that retail salea
sh~ll be limiked to 338 of the total flooc area, and subject to
Interdepart.mental Cammittee Recommendations.
On coll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: B~UAS, FRY, HERBST, KING, LA CLAIRE, MC BURNF.Y
NOES: BUSHORE
ABSENT: NUNE
12/12/B3
MINUTES. ANAHEIM C[T` PLANNING COMMISSION. DBCEMdER 12. 1983 _ 83-819
IxBM N0. 11. EIR NEGATIVB DECLNtATION, WAIVFR Of CODE REQUIREMENT AND
CONUITIONAL USE PERMIx N0. 25~1.
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNBR: BRAILLE INSTITUTE OF AMERICA, 527 N. Dale AvenuP,
Andheim, C~ 92d01. AGENT: WARE i MALCOMB ARCHITECTS, A'rTN.: £LENI M.
BOUKIDIS, AIA, 181102 Cowan, Irvina, CA 91714. Propecty dea~ribed an a
cectangulacly-shaped perc~l oE land cons~eting of appcoximately 1.75 acres
locAted et thc southweat ~ocner of Creacent Avanue And Dule Avenue, and
fucther deecribed ae 527 North Dale Avenua (Breille Institute).
REVUE3T: To permit expanaion of a private educational ina~itution with a
mexi~um encollment of 240 studen~s with waiver oE minimum num~er oE parking
spaceR.
There were tt~cee pereons indi~atlny their preaence in oppoAitio~ to subject
ceyuest and although the steff. report aas not read, it ia refecred to end made
a part o[ the minutes.
Wanda Marshall, represenking Bcaille InsCitute, explained they plan to
cons:ruct 3ome buildings on their property in ocder to expand the'r aervlces,
but not. for more peo~les ttiat they ace a rehabilitation r-enter for people who
have lost their vision; and thaG they are a non-profit organization and work
witt~ people of all ages.
Eleni Boukidib, architect, pointed out 1:he cxhibits ~n the wall nnd explained
this will be a one-stury structure with what tF~ey call livinq classrooms which
are uspd for purpc.3es of tear.hing F~~ople wtio have lost th~ir vision basic
skills s~ich as cooking, cleaning, locating %.cticles of ciothing, etc., and
al.so they are adding three clessrooms, adminiatration offices and a
cafeteria. She explained the:~e function~ are nuw bein~g serviced in the
existing buildings, and point~:d out the dw~~lling unit currentl! beir~g used
will be remoyed. Sl~e stated they will be adding edditioral parking which will
serve as an acE~a to drop atudents ofE since obviously the studenta will not be
driving.
A. T. 2amora, 523 N. Dale, Anaheim, stated t• ~; property is on the south side
of D~le, and he is concerned about ~irainage an the whole coKner southwext of
C~esoent and Dale, and pointed out a crown where Crescent and Dale cross from
which water flowe in four different directions and when buildings ace built
surface drainage ia increased. He stated he has worked with staff inemb~ra in
Engineering and the City put in a kerm to ~lleviate the drainage problem. He
p~i.nted out the people at Braille were not aware of the prot,lcm. He asked
what will happen to the drainage if thia is approved nince it will cause
additional problems if mnce drainage is put onto Dale; that the berms are
already ovectaxed, but they will work to resolve that pcotlem. He added he
really cares for Braille, but doec~ not want hia property harmed by ignoting
certain thinys.
Mr. Zamora explained the different drainage flows and stated that Braille's
drainage in the past has gone onto their parking lot, into a pump and on out
onta Dale. He atated he wanted sidewalks end CUCb8 which ehey could have had,
but two property owners would not dedicate the property, and those two ownera
are now tcying to move. He steted all he wanta is to have the surface
drainage cocrected. He stated he ia also speaking for hie n~iqhbora to the
south and stated they do have a pretty good cre~k at thfs time. He stated the
drainage ditch ia too nerrow and the water jumpe the berm.
12/12/83
MINUTES, ANAHE'M CITY PL~NNING COMMIS5IAN, DECEMDER .12, 1983 83-820
Bleine Poreythc, 517 N. Gele, Aneheim, At a~ed he agceea aith M[. Zamorar that
theic property doee receive conaiderable watec since t:he berm t~as been hu~lt
beceuae it doeen't adequately let th~ wat er flnw down the ACruet. He etated,
in addikion, tie ~ould like to make sure that the new fecility ie strictly to
houae the curcent students, pointing out iE the stud~nt pop~ilati~n ahould be
increased, he helieved tha preaent bus ~3t op facllities in tront ~f eceille
Inetitute will not handie the ttaffict ~hat thPy liave a semi-clrcle driveway
and it La cur~en~ly norkh and 8outh of the bus atop and laet week the bus did
no~ fully pull into the actual bua Rtop a nd aomeone i~ a wheelchair was
getting off the bus on the ramp and thP ramp actuAlly did not meet t.he curb
and the p~reon was dumpedj and if that b~~s atop is corr~r.ted to handle both
the bu~eA end the traEfic, he would have no pcot~lem with thia r~~queat.
R~semery McKuaky, 8392 Creacent Avenue, Anaheim, ceferred to Paragrapt~ 9
regarding the public addrese system and loud speakers, and stated if they are
qoing to have administration in this building r.ight up ageinat the wall wnich
is closer to hcr house, she will have A pcoblem becauae alreAdy the PA Aystem
ia ovecly loud. She etated Paragraph 11 refers to traffic and as she
undecatands it, they will have two driveways on CreacenC AvFnue whe~e ~eople
can dcive in and also exit, and she poin ted aut on Cce.acent Avenue, there is
only one lane or yoing atraight and makiny left turnR and one lane only for
making right turna onto Dale and she tho ught this would cause a lot of
congeation. She asked if people will be allowed to come out uf tlie drlveway
and make a righ[ turn heading weat on Ccescent arid stated that could cause a
prablem. She stated Crescent and Uale is a vecy danger~us corner. She added
ciyht in fconk of hec hou~e un the cocner uf Kendoc and Creocent, there ie a
r.ed zone s~cictly becauoe the stceet narraws the~e.
Mr. 2amora stated he did not point out t hat the propecties south of Dale are
all quite large, 1/2 r~cre ana 3,i5 acre, ~o this is not juat a srnall l~t.
Ms. Marahall stated thev have always had nice relationshipe with tFiei.r
neighbors and, in fact, Ms. Zamoca is on e of their volunteers. She adcied they
are glad to hear their concerns, because the neighbor's concecns are also
thei: concerns.
Ms. Boukidis referced to the existing circular drive and stated they propose
to not use that cicculac drive for the s tudents, and it will only be ~sed for
emergency acceas fc.r tF~e Fire Department, and they will put a chain or
aomething across it to prohibik access.
Ms. E3oukidis refecred to the two propos ed driveways on Crescent, and noted one
is a two-way drive and will accommodate the larger buseo, and p~inted out the
exit only point. She stated they only have four buses a day so that would be
the ext.ent of traffic using one of the driveways. She stated the upper
c:riveway will have ingress and egress but she did not expect it to be a major
amount oE traffic.
Ms. Marshall atated the noiae ehould be decceased becauae they will be much
more self.-contained and the noise will be toward thP center of the pcoject.
Ms. eouk.dis pointed o~t the area is now an open field and all the apeakers
are in tt,:~t direction, but with the .~ew building there will be no openings on
that side, so the noise should be significantly reduced, eapecially since it
is a little hiyhec.
12/12/83
MINUTES RNAHEIM CITY PL~NNING CUMK~ISSION UECEMB~R 12 1983 83-82 1
Responding to Chalrwoman Douaa concecning the dreinege, Me. Doukidis ateted
they will do anything thet ie requiced hy the City to tnk~~ care of the
drainage becauae it is their ~esponaibility es erchitocte t4 make AUCR thet
the eite does dcAin, usually to a tight-of-way wt~ich ie uaually one oE the
atceel-s, but they will work ~~irh the City to meet whatever requicements there
a[e to cerry the water to a point wherP it doesn't do damage to anyon~'s
prnpr.rty.
M~. Zamura asked liow they will know if khe dr.ainage problem has been
resolved. Me~ MarShall stated befoce the buildinq permit ia isaued, the Cit y
could require them l•~ aubmit an engineerlny atudy that addresaea that !saue.
THE PUBLIC NEARING WAS CLOSEU.
Commieaionec Fry stated three or faur yeacs ayo when this w~s before ~he
Commiasion originally, there wae a requirement for a pump of oome sort to be
inatalled to pump the watec out to Uale Street and then ther.e would be a berm
so the reat of the property owners would not be aEfrcted.
Ms. Marahall etated tt~ose thinya were done and ahP did not think Mr. 7.amora is
complaining nboUt an e~ciating problem, but is concerned about the fuLUre.
Commisaioner Bushore ntated at that r.ime the City did install the berms and
the pcobler~ is no longer with the Cit.y, but iC is with th~ae two property
owners who would not dedicate foc the sidewalk and curbe, and unkil the own e ra
will dedicaCe, the:e is nothing more the City can do.
Jack Judd responded Co Commiseioner [,a Claire thac normally in conjunction
with approval of a plot plan ar ~ gr~ding plan, F.~ngineering sGaEf would
requice that the developec furnist~ e~idence as to how they pcopone to drain
the property, and now that he is awace of Che problem, the City could inaure
that the exiating berms handle the sliylit i~creased runuff. He atated it is
t~ue that when a p[operty i.s developed, thece is a little more runoff than if
it is undeveloped, but for thac size property, khe amount of runoff would be
inaigniEic~nt, Ho ff the present berms handle the water a8 it is now, he wo uld
assume they would in the future alsu.
Commiasionec La Claire stated she is hearing that the berms ure not taking
cere of thE water presently. Mr. 2amora responded to Commissioner La Clair~e
that the be[ms do not handle the water now and he has been working on this
situation with the ~ngineering Depactmentt that he built hia own hause and
sucveyed the property and knows the area and what happened after all the
present groWthJ that the street desi~n Isn't proper and the ditch to the c u rb
is koo small and too narrow and consequently the v~lume cannot be contained
and the water jumps over the becm.
Commissioner Bushore asked how much of Mc. ZamorA's property sticks out in t o
the ultimate width of ~ale Street. Mr. Zamora replied he was hoping for c urbs
and sidewalks, but there ia 8 feet where they would have been inatalled, a nd
the eidewalk and curb would have taken care of the problem, but a berm doe sn't
take care of it.
12/12/83
TES. AN~HEIM CITY PLANNING C OMMISSIO~;~M~_~R 1
Commiasioner B~shore atnted the problem ia wit.h the dedicAtion and top~~gcQPhY
~E the ptopecty. Mc. Zdmore responded the prc~blem is with the emount c~f water
coming fcai.dewnikscend curbc~ewouldetake careic~titherdrainagecproblomhe
believed
Commiaeloner I.e Cleire asked if the City alwa~re waits for dedicetion bet'oce
wa i t. 8
putting in sidewalka and curba. cd~eCtYdowne[a.ed~l~ck~White explained if the
for the dedicetion from al.l tne p op would have to be
City did not get the dadication voluntacily, the pcopecty
condemned and a.cquiced.
Commiesionec Buahor.P stated if two propert.y ownera did not dedicate, whorver
was ~n the north eide of that paccel that did not dedicate would get all the
water ~nto their pcoperty, rati~aer lhan it yoing onto t h e Braille parking lot,
and ttiat is ~he reason the City said, 'all or none.' He stated the City '~i~
the maximum they cauld three y ears ago and until they d edicate, the City
cannot do c~nything and then be l~.ab.le for the water going into Mr. Znmora" s
yard or onto his neighbor's p~ aperty.
Commiseioner La Claire state~~ ~fed the`City9maketone~moreatryhto geteall th~~o
8omething about it, and sugg roval contingent u.~on
owner~ to ayree. She ntated s he would not make thia a pp
that happeni~iyt and that st~e 1 ikes lhis project, and did not think iF. bu~l _,he
increase the watec ~~~~O~ftdto attemptdonce~more~to getathe~ayreement/from ~ill
w~uld like to direct
the prope~tY awne~s on that s treet•
Chairwoman Bauac asked abc,ut. the number of students, pointing out they
pressntly havc~ 163 students a nd are Aakinq tor 2A0. M s. Marsh~ll atated they
are not anticipatiny nn incre ase in the number of sGu d ents. She atated
Bcaille has thcee sat~llites (Long 8each, Santa Ana a nd Corona del Mar) a nd
they anticipate taking eecvic ea lo peoPle ~ather tha n bringi~g people into
Anaheim.
Commiasioner Bushore stated they have 163 ~tudents r ighc. now and with the
additiun ace asking for 240. Commisaioner La Claire t~ought t.he previous
approval was foc 2A0 student s, Ms. Marshall stated all their atudentcoval was
present at the same time. K endra Morries stated the previous CUP epp
for a maximum of 163 atudent s, and thls request is f or a maximum of 240.
Commissionec Bushore stated thia should be Eor a max i mum at any one time.
Ms. Marshall stated th~y wou ld nat wish to nWOUba belbrought~in~ongardayeth~~tC
somebody who has loat their si9ht, but t.~ey
had leas s~.~dents. Commissianec eust~ore thought they should ask for a maxicnum
number on any give~ day of 1 esa tha-n 240 because if they ever expand, the
number qf employees and volunteera wo-tId be incceaswdilabe usinawtheasatellite
the parking requirement. Mts. Merahall atated they
centers.
Cummissio~^er Buahore stated page 1 of the trafEic stud1Vealaa aband based on
ex~sting cc.~~+c'.itions, wi.th 80 students on site on any g' Y~
that 35 empl~~yees and 10-20 volunteere are needed.
12/12/83
MI N UTES~ ANAH~ZM CITY PL~NNING CUMMISSIONj UEC~MBER 12, 1983 83-823
Commiaeio ner La Cleire asked MA. Mershall to stipu~ake to no more then 150
st udenta per day. Ms. Marahall reaponded they would have no pcoblem with thet
nu mbec, e nd ChAirwoman $ouas auggeetpo leaving the number et 163 per day.
M x. Marshall noted they t~ave wrttten permiesion Eram the church to ellow them
C o uoe as many parking space~ ae they need, ao thoy do not have a parking
~coblem.
AC TION: Commission~ac l~a Claire offered a motion, seconded by Comm~seionec Fry
a n d MUTION ~ARRIF,D that the J~nahetm ~ity Planning Commiasion has reviewed the
p r opoeal to permit ext~ansion of a pcivate educatLonal institution with a
ma ximum e nrollment of lb3 atudents at any one time in thp RS-A-43,000
(R eaide~tial/Ag:i.:ulturaZ) 2one with waiver of minimum number oE parking
spaces un a~ea;tangularly-shaped parcel oE lai~d consist•.ing of approximately
1. 7r acres located at the southwest cocnPc ~f Crer~cen*. Avenue and Dr~le Avenue,
a n d Eurthec described as S27 Nortti Dale Avenue lBraille Instltute)s and c~oes
h ereby ap~cove Che Negative Declaration upon finding tha~t. it has conaidered
t h e Negative Declaration toqether with any comments received dutinq the public
revlew procesa and furtt~er finding on the t>asls oC the Initial Study and any
c omments ceceived ttiat there is no substantial evidence t.haC the project will
have a sigriificarG eEfect un the environment.
Commissionec La Claice offered a moti~~n, seconded b,y Commiss.taner McBurney and
htOTiUN CARRIEU that the Anaheim City Flan~iny Commission does he[eby grant
w aiver of code reyuirement on the basio that the parking aa:vec wil!. not cause
a n increase in traffic congestion in the immediate vicinity nor adversely
a ffect a ny adjoining land u3es and grantiny of the E>atking waiver under tt+e
c o ndltions imposed, if bny, will not be detrimental to the peace, health,
s afety end general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
Commissioner ~.a C1Aire nffered Resolution No. PC83-"l39 and moved for its
passage and adoption that Llie Anaheim City Planning Commisaior~ doe~ hereby
g zant Co ndiCional Use Permit No. 7.521, p~rauant to Sections ]8.03.030.030
t hrough 18.03.030.035 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, and subject to the
p etition ec's stipulatior, that there shall be no more than 163 students on the
s ite at any one time, and subject to Interdepactmenkal Committee
P.ecommendations.
J ack Whit.e suggested an additional condition to read that not more than 163
s tudents sYiall be present at the facility at any one time, and also that
Conditio n No. 3 re9uiring a paccel map shoulr~ be modified to yive them the
option a nd it ahould read that a covenant ahall be recorded merging all of the
e xietiny parcels into one parcel, which covenant would be approved by the City
Attorney's Office.
Cammissi oner LaClaire stated those conditions should be included as part o,r
h ec motion, and also that the petitioner's stipulation to wock with the City
E ngineer's Office to alleviate the drainage problems aho~ld be included.
C ommissi oner Hecbat atated the parkir~g Rtudy was based on 80 students and
a pproval for 163 doublea that numbF , Ms. Mazshall etated the atudents do not
drive so that would not make any diife~rence as long as the number of staff ar~d
v olunteers is not increased. Commissioner Herbat aeked Ms. Marshall ~o
12/12/83
MINUT~B ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CUMMISSION. DEC~MBER 12,_ 1983 _ 83-824
atipulete that the numbeG of staEf and volunteera will not be incc~aned. Ma.
M~rehall cepl.ied she woul~ st~pulete thet they would nol increaee the number
of ntaff and volunteocs until the~~ get additional packing. She expleined ~~n
the heaviest daye, they do park on the church perking lot acroas the atrceC.
She added they wiah to acquire mo~e parking and will do it ae soon es poseible.
Jack Whlte referced to th~ new Candi*.ion No. 8 and atated it ~hauld read thac.
the nu~ber of studenta aha11 not exceed 163 et any given time en~ that the
number of ~taff end volunteera at~all not at aiiy time excead the number es
shown in the tcaEf.ic atudy dated November 16, 1983 which is 35 empluyees frum
8;30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. end 10 - 20 ~~oluntecra fram 9:3~ a.m. to 2:30 p.m.
Ms. Marehall stated they normally li+~ve 12 to 14 v..~lunteers on an avprnge day.
on roll call, the foregoing ceaoluCion wa~ pasaed ny che followi~ig vute:
AYES: BUUAS, BUSHURE, PRY, NF.FtBST, KING, I.A c:l.AIRE, MC E;UttNt;Y
NUES: NONE
AB~ENT: NONE
Jack White, Assi$tant City Attorn~yr pC@ACII~EI~ the wri*.ken right to appeal the
Planning Commiasion's deciaion within 2? days to the C1ty Counc.il.
Commissioner La Claire asked s*_aff r.a look in~u the puRaibility of again
meeting with the property uwners tv t~y to get '_hem t~ dedicate fo. sidewalks
and cucbs to olleviate the d:a:nag~ ~~ruhlc:m.
ITEM NO. 12. EIR_ NEGATIV~_G6C'i.ARAT:Q'7 A"7D VARIANCE N0. 3368.
PUBLiC HEAkING. OWNER: RL~E~IN tiI[.1. UFVELOPMENT CUMPANY, ATTN. MARTHA S.
SCHNIEDERS, 405 S. Be'+e:]y Urive, Beverly Hillsr CA 90'112. Prope[ty
described aa as~ irrr.,3ular15~-shaped parcel of land conaisting of appcoximately
14.4 acces, havir.~~ ap~ruximate frontages of 370 feet and 200 feet on the nortF.
aide of Bi,~ Sk; Lane, appcoximate.ly 62U feet southwest of the centerline of
Imperi~l Efi~}:~~~ay.
REQUE;S;: Waiver of m~nimum average lot width to Establish n 46-lot, 45-unft
F.~-HS-1G,U00(SC) single-family subdivision.
':here was no une indicating their pret~ence in opposition to subject r?quest,
and there was one person indicaCing his presence in favor of subject request,
and although the staff report was not cead, it is referred to and made a part
of ~he minutes.
Kendra Morriea, Assistant Planner, pointed out changes in the staff ceport,
page 12-b, Parayraph 10~ aquare footagee of unite to cead as follows: A-
2000t e-2 - 2700; C-3 - 2750t D-3 - 2150 to 230i;, and also on page 12-c,
paragraph 15, the aecond sentence ahosld cead: 'Sut,mitted plans indicate a
proposed average lot width of 69 feet oc 92i of the rpquired minimum average
lot width.'
12/12/83
MINUTES, AN~HEIN CITY PI.ANN7NG CUMMISSION, QECEMBER 12, 1983 83-825
Macths Scfiniedere, egent, steted they ere Che devel~pers ot Trec~ 10410, also
known as TenCative Tracl: 1192~, and it ia their deeire to develop thie as e
aingle-f~mily luxury subdivieion ~f 45 homeaj thet she would l.ike to ~dd
informatio~ to the ataff, report r.hat th~ir de~ign meeta the iriC~nt of the
ordin~nce fo- thia zone, in terma of the aKea, deneity, setbacY.a and parking,
with the exception uf the verience uf minimum averege lot. width requeated.
She atated tl~e weiver is not for the minimum fr~ntege, but for the average
minimum frontage of th4 entire treckt Chat they ate using the eame house
originally deeigned for the tract- which is essenklelly the arme house they
~uilt et Robin Hill, Tract 10407 which is immediately adjacentt t.hat they are
making no ch~nge to the first 12 lota which ia the portlon of the tract which
is single loaded from F.atate Ridge Noadj that they are presently under
conotruction in thet port.ion o[ the tcact with the homea that would be their
modela. She ~teted besides the beneEit to the homP buyin~ public, the changes
they ace seeking will all~w them to apread t.he very high land coats over more
liouses~ that t~e increaaed number oE bul2ding pads helpn to step d~wn a very
eteep hill which in the portion on the left ~ide of the ttact where Eatake
Ridg~ Road meets sig Sky Lanes and that tliere will be a priva~e atreet oerving
four lota cather than individual driveways which wculd create four Elag lots
and H4 fe~t of cuncreCe ribbons coming onto F.atate Ridg~ Road.
THE PUHLIC HFARING WAS CLOS~D.
~ommisaioner eu~li~r~ asked if: tt~e pet±cionec had discussed the pro~ect wi.th
the homeowners an the ac9jacent tract whu were opposed,
Phillip M~cF'adin, 552U [3ig Sky Lane, Anaheim, stated he is in favor of the
project; that t~e was before the Commissiun in ~he past speakiny in oppoxition
Co incceased de~sity; ttiat he appreciates the privilege of being able Co epeak
his oppositian, and also conaidece it his duty to let the Commission know if
he is favor af tne pco~ectJ that he has studied this plan and Eeela it ia a
very reasonable one; tt~at it makea vecy good use of the land end tie can see no
aubstantial adverse effer.t on trafEic flow, aurrounding praperty values,
public safety oc increased burden on City utilities end he will stconyly
support any recommendation the Commis~ion malces regarding the appcoval of this
variance.
Ms. Schnieders responded ~.~ Commissioner Bushoce that she did talk to the
neighbocs who wece opposed to the project in the pastj that she met with them
o~~ Novembec 16 and showec~ them the plana, end met with the homeowneca
asaociation on Decemb~r 7 at Canyon Pointe which is the tract immediately to
t~~e north.
Coaunissioner Bushore stated the pcoject is far better thar the proposal ahown
the last time, but he wanted to know why the proposed aquarp footages were
reducec~ frum what was ahown in the staff ceport.
Kendra Mocries ex~lained apparently there was some discrepancy between the
floor plans staff looked at and the actual $quare footagea the applicant is
indicating. Ms. Schniedeca stated she did not cealize staff waa com~~~ting the
garage footages into the unit eizes, sa when ahe saw the staff report, she
called staE£ immediately to say the sizes ahown in the staff report were much
higher. She stated the plans presented are the correct plans and Are
presently under construction.
12/12/83
MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY pLANNING COMMISSIUN ~ DECCMBBR^ 11. 19d3 83-826
Commie~ion~r auahoce atet~d h~ wanted to make eure thet theee Are the aeme
plans the neAghbors were shown. He a~k~~i if gardges are n~rmAlly compute4 in
unit aizea.
Co~mie~ioner La Claice ~tated ehe thought thia was a vecy nice project an~
ayceed thal it cannot poeRibly huct nnyone and that pcoperty value~ nre going
to atay up. Commis~ioner He[bst atate~i h~ khlnks it better E'ita the
m~rketplace 'od~y.
It was noted ~nvironmental Impact Ref:~rt No. 218 was prepored in conjunction
with Tentative Tcact Noe. 104U7, 104UE1, 1G409 and lOd1U an~ certiEied by ttie
Planning Commi~aion or~ Auguak 2a, 197ti.
ACTION: Commissionec Herbat: c~IfEered lteaolutioii No. PC83-240 and moved fcr its
passage and adoplion that. khe AnAhelm C1ty Planning Commiasion does her~by
grant Vaci.ance No. 3368 un t.l~~~ basie that there Are Apecial circumstancf~s
spplicable to tl~p property such ar~ aize, aha~~e, topoycaphy, locatinn or
surcoundings, which ~io not apply to othsr identically zoned {>ropertie~ in the
vicinikyt and tliat strie:t applicakic~n of tF.e Zoning Code depriv~as the property
ot pcivileyea enjoyed by ott~ec p~opert.ie3 in identical zoni~g classittcation
in the vicinity, and subject to Interdepartmental Committc~e Recommendationa.
On rull cAll, the farPyoiny reo~~lution was passed by the following ~~ote:
AYES: BUUAS~ BUSHURE, FRY~ HERE3ST, KING, I.A CI~AIRE, MC BURNEY
NUES: NONE
ALiSENT: NONE
Jack White, Aseistant City Attorney, ~teaented the written right. to nppeal the
Planning ~:onuniseion'a decision within 22 days to the City Counc~l.
Commissioner La Claire t.h~3nked Ms. Schnieders for working with the homeownera
to resolve the p[oblems.
ITEM N0. 13. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMEt~~T NO. 189~ AND
RECLASSI FICATIOtI N0._ 83-$4-14_
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: ANACONbA-ERICSSON, INC., Gceenwich Office P~rk III,
Greenwich, CT 06830. AGENT: CE~'I'URY AMERICl-N CORPORATION,. 1428 E. Chapman
Avenue, Oran~e, CA 92666. Property described as A rectanguldrly-shaped
parcel of land consisting of approximately 9.4 acces, hav`.ng a frontage of
approximakely 6'10 fQet oi the south aide oE Crescent Avenua and 668 feet on
the north aide of l~lameda Avenue, appruximately 680 feet west of khe
centerline of Muller StGeet.
GPA KEQUEST: To cunsider an amen+~ment to the land uae element from the
current general ind~strial designation to low-medi~-m density cesidential.
RECI.ASSIFICATION REQUEST: ML to RM-300Q to construct a 136-unit condominiun,
complex.
There was no one indicating thefr presence in opposition to aubje~t request
and although the staff ceport was not read, it ie ~eferred to and made a pact
of the minutea.
12/12/83
MINUTES, ~NAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSJON, DECEMBBR 12, 1983 83-827
Barry Cocldle, Cen-ury 1lmericen Corporeti~n, agent, ar.ated they went to develop
li6 reeidential condominiuma on the south etde oi Crescent, eest uf
Brookhucst, and thet the plans conform t~~ Code. Ne aleo presente~.f a lerge
colaced aite plan.
THE PUBLiC HEAkING WAS C[.OS~D.
ACTION: CommieAioner La Claire ofEered a motton, seconded by C~~mm,asioner
Mc F3u[ney and MUTION CARRYED, that the 1-nahetm City Plnnning Commi~~sion has
reviewed che propoe~.l to amend the Land Uae F.lement oE the Anah~eim Genecel
Plan fron Gene~al Industci~l designati~n to Low-Medium Denaity Reaidential nd
tecle~sification of subject proper[y Lrom Cf1B ML (Industciel, Limited) Zone to
the KM-3009 (Regidentlal, Multi~le-t'amily) Zone Co construct ry 136-unit
residential condominium complex nn u~ectang~alacly-shaped paccel of lAnd
conaistiny of approximately 9.4 acres, haviny LconCagea of aF~proximately 670
feet on the aaut`~ side o~ Creacent Avenue and b68 feet on th~~ nocth side of
Alameda Avenue, appcoximately f,80 tPP_~ west oE the centerline of Muller
Streetf and does hereby appcove t!i~ Nega~iv~ Declaratlon upun findiny that ic.
has considered the Ney~tive Declare:ion toyether wit~- any comments ceceived
ducing the public review pcoce:;:~ ~~ Eurther Eindinq on the bASie of the
Initisl Study and any comrnents r pived that there is no substantinl evidence
that the p[o~ect will have a ,~ fican~ effect ori th+~ envtconment,
Commissioner La Clnice offe~ __.lu~ion No. PC83-241 and moved for its
passaye and adcptian r.hat t ,,~r ;~~.ity Planning Commissio~ does he[eby
recommend to the Ciky c:oun< ,~~. ~r,.. of General Plan Amen~~ment No. 189, Land
Uae FlAment, Exhibit A.
On roll call, tiie forey~ ., ,t~on was ~assed by khe Eollowing vote:
AYES: BOUAS, C~USHCIttt., kH.,T, KING, LA CLAIRE, MC BURNEY
NUES: NONE
ABSEN~1: NUNE
Jack White, Assistan~ c~~. ~:,cney, sugge:~ted that Condition No. 5 on page
13-i be aR~ended to inclu~~ -•a: vehicular and pedestrian access ~ighta to
1-lameda Avenue shall be d~e..~,•.atedj and also Condition No. 16 requir~s the
property owner to lands:.ar.. and main~:ain the 3-foot wide parkway and
cecommended that r_he [o:~lo~.^~g be added to that condition: 'cecord a covenant
agreeing to maintain...."
Commissionec La Ciair~ >_t~red F~ solution No. PC83-242 and moved for its
nas~age and adoption tha! :he A:~aheim City Planning Commission does hereby
grant Reclassificati.~n N~,:. 83-84-14, subject to Interdepartm~ntal Committee
Recommendatlons, includ:ng modffications indicated by attocney.
o~n roll call, r.he Eo~egoing resoluGion was passed by the following vote:
l+YES: BCN~AS, BI;SHORE, FRY, HERBST, KING, LA CLAIRE, MC BURNEY
'NfJES: N')NE
ABSENT: NUNE
12/12/83
MINUZ'ES. ANAHEIM CITX PLANNING COMMIS5IUN, DECEMBER 12i 19$3 83-828
ITBM N0. 14: REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS,
The Eollowing etaff reports w~re presented, but not read at the Planning
Commisaion meeting:
A. CONllITION~L USB PERMIT NU. 2265. Request from Meurren A. NarCy for
a o~ie-year extension oE time for Cnnditional Use Permit No. 2265 for
pcoperty located at the northw~st corne[ of Oran~~~wood Avenue and
State College Bouleverd.
Paul Singer, Traffic Enginaer, stated the ~ropecty is at the cocner
of State Co.ilege and Ucangewood Avenue ~nd Chece wae a praviaion
with that developmenc. khat a study be conducted, pai~~ for by the
deve~opQr, Co determine whar the satucation rate for office
c~mplexea will be in the immediate vicinity and they were ~ttisesAed
~35,OOU, and he thought that study needs to be done, and the City
has nut receive~ the money aitnply because the applicanr. has chosen
not to exercise this conditional u~e permlt.
JoEI FicY,, Assiatant Director far Planning, s~ated there is an item
at the end of tuday's agenda (14-K) and reviewed the ataf.f repoct
nottng that recent development activity in the St~dium area and
contemplated Euture propogals testify to the fact that the char.actec
oE portions of the •Stadium I~duatrial Area' are chanqing rapidly
into a v~ry inten~e business cenker. He pointed out the~~e is a
revised C~lan beiny submitted for the Orangewood pcoject which iF~ on
today's agenda (14-A) foc an extension of time. He added from a
comprehenaive planning slandpoint it would be desirable fo~ etaff
to know the estinated ex~ent and lucation of the changes ao they
w~uld be in a position to comprel:ensively evaluate and plan for ~he
inEta$tcuctuce that is needed to ac:ommodate the planned lar,d use~.
He ctated the ataff recommendation .s o~tually that staff pucsue
pcivate sector funding and if that iunding source is Favorable: that
the City ~rc~ceed with a comprehensive land use strategy for that
area.
Mr.. Fick continued that proceeding with a study like that,
i~reapective of how i~ is funded, would be comprehensive with the
responsibilities that are identified in the Development ~greement
beCween Lhe City and Cpbot, Cabot and Forbes.
Commi~sioner Bushore stated if the City wants the 535,000, the
exteneion of time for Conditional Uae Permit No. 2265 should be
grantpd since the}~ are in the pco~~ese of finally beginning and that
is a condition of epproval.
Jack Harty, Burnett-Ehline Company, stated with regard to Mr.
Singer's comments, the appcoval granted by the Planning Commission
pcavides for ~50,000 and that it le to be paid prior to the issuance
of building pecmits, but it was nevec their understanding ~hat they
were in arrears, or that it was even appropciate at this point and
the purpose of the study was to identify short and long-term
improvements to achieve vehicular cicculation and watet service for
the area, and it is their intention to participate at the
appropriate time.
12112/83
ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMM15ti1Vn u~~n~~~.~ •- ---- -
Commiasioner Fry atated this cor~dition involved e new right-tucnbeen
lene and when this came up, Cabot, Cabot and Porbea he~ awith~ut the
before the Commiesion dnd they hnd done a traffic ae8dea ,~`~at
cooperat~on of anyone elae, a~d the Commieaion augg
perhaps the two developera ehould get togethec. Mc. Hart! indicated
that ia coc~ect.
ACTION: Commigeianer Nerbot offered a motion, aeconded ~y
planning
Commissione[ Pcy and MUTIUN CARRIED thet th¢ Anaheim Ci~~
CommiaeioCon~itto~n~lbUserPecmi~•Notr22b5ito•expi[eeon Nuvembern30f
time foc
1984.
Annika Santal~hti, As~istant Director foc 2oning, atAted Commiasion
may wish to cumment on the fact that there wab a preci~.e dollar
amount adopted in 1981 for ~50,000, based on the anticipated r,ost at
that time, ~nd the Commisaion may wish to alert the petitioner that
they woulc9 be acrutin~2ing an~ther reque3t a year from now because
of highec coats.
Commieaionec Hecbst pointed our, there mal br_ more development by
then too, so the cost cou.ld be leas.
g. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1917. Request Erom William Guthcie foc a
retroactive two-yeac extenaion of time for propertY located at 600
and 626 South Anaheim Boulevard (U-Haul M~vinq and Stccage).
Commisaioner Hetbst aoked if this action cor[elates with the E~ermit
approved on today's agenda. Kendra MorriES, Asaiatant Planner,
explained the petitioner will be requeating termination of this
pecmit as a co~dition of approval of Conditio~al Use Permit No.
2515, but it was felt thia extension should be gtanted just in case
CUP NU. 2515 was not granted.
ACTION _ Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded bYplannin9
Commis.aionec Fry and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City
Commission does hereby 9rant a two-year 'retroactive' extenaion of
time foc Conditional Use Permit No. 1917 to expice on Decert~bet 4,
1984.
~. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 167U. Request from Nancy J. Jaycox €or a
one-ysae extension of time for property locat~d at 1016 East Ratella
Avenue.
ACTION: Commissioner King offered a motion, seconded by
Commissioner F[y and MUTION CARRIED t.hat the Anaheim City Planning
Commiss~°ConditionalbUserPermit~No.y1670•toeaxpiceVOn Decembern6of
time for
1984.
D. CONDITIONAL USE PBRMIT N0. 2156. Re~uest from Raymond C. Salmi Eor
a one-year extension of time for property having a frontage of
approximately 400 feet on the e~utheast side of Santa Ana Canyon
Road, approximately 500 feet east of the centecllne of Eucalyptua
Rosd. 12/12/83
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIUN~ DEC~MHER 12. 1983 83-83Q
ACTION: Commis~ioner La Claire o~fered e motion, a9conded by
Commissioner King and MOTION CARRIED (Commieaioner Buahore
abeteining) l•het tha Aneheim Cit.y Planning Commiaeion doea heraby
grant A one-year extonsion of time for Conditionsl Use Pecmit No.
2156 to expire on December 15, 1984.
Commissioner Buahore explained he had sbstained because he could
have a pc*antial legal conflict aince he~ was involved ln Che
property acroas lhe stceet.
E. REC~ASSIFICATION N0. 78-79-27 AND CONDITIONAL U~E PERMIT N0. 1936.
Request from Janathon T.Y. Yeh for a retroactive extension of time
for property located at 420 South eeach equlevard.
ACTIUN: Cnmmissioncr Fry offered a motion, seconded by Commissionec
Kiny and MOTIUN CAItRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission
does heceby y[ant a time extension Eor Reclascification No. 78-79-27
and Conditional Use Permit No. 1936, to expire February 26, 1995.
P. CONDITIUNAI. USE PERMIT' N0. 1924. Requeat from J. Neymond Bridgea
£or a one-year extension of time for property locdtF•d at 1743 WesC
Lincoln Aven~e.
CommisRioner McBurney offered a motion foc approval. of the request
for extension of time.
Commisaioner Bushoce poinLed out that the applicant was in one year
ago to answer queation~ and c~mplaints about parkiny polka••dotted
r_ars on the st[eet over the week-end, and last weekend he wt~s by the
Froperty and there were two on tfe street and two parked in ~he
front [ight-ot-way, so he is right back to doing the same things
again. He stated thera is aleo an automobile repair facility f.n the
rear whe[e Che person does all the work outside and tie thought this
wrs ^ unique propetty befo[e, but apparen~ly the two usQS don't
mix. He added he did not like a peraon eaying they will do
something and then not follow through.
Commissionec Herbst euggesCed continuing tt,is item and asking the
applican~ to appear befure the Commiasion to answer concerns.
Cammissioner McBurney removed his motion far approval~
ACTION: Commissioner King offered a motion, seconded by
Commiasioner McBurney and MOTION CARRIED that the Ar.aheim City
Planning Commissian doee hereby continue consideration of the
aforementi~ned matter to the meeting of January 9, 1984, in ocder
for the applicant to be contacted so he can appear to anawer
questions and complaints.
G. CONDITIONI~L USE PERMIT NU. 2293. Request ftom Patrick T. Flynn for
a one-year extenaion of time for propecty locr.ted at 1400 South
Harbor Boulevard.
12/12/83
R3-831
MINUTEE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION DEC~MB~~ 12 1983 _~
Commiseionrr Buohore noted the applicant hae asked not to be
required to romove the drivewayst however, Budget-Rent-a~Car is no
longer there, end it ie now Avis +nd thie eppcoval ~s far e
different aPplicant, and he thought the driveways hed ~~ot been
parmanentl} c~osed.
ACTIpN; Commtsaioner Herbst oEEecad a motion, second~~~ hy
Commiseionec King ~nd MOTION CARRIED that the ~naheim City Plenning
CommieFion dves hereby continue consider~tion of the afor~~Tentioned
matte~ to the meeting of ~anuecy 9, 1984, in order to aer.ertain
wheth~r oc nc~t the driveways have been pecmanently cloaed.
N. CONDI.TIONAL USE PCRMIT NG. ?2b_, Requeat fcom Nugo ~. V~squez for
termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2267 for property ?~~cated
at 129 South Ulive Stceet.
ACTION~ Commissioner King offered Reaolution No. PC63-243 and moved
fuc its passage and adoption ct~et the Anaheim City Planning
Con-miesion doe8 herebY terminate Conditianal Uae Permit ~~c~. 2267.
Un rull call~ thF foregoing reaoluti~n was passed by the following
vote:
AYES: BOUA5, PRY, NERB5T, KIN~~, LA CLAIRE, MC BURNEY
N4ES: N~~NE
ABSENT; NONE
ABSTAIN: BUSHORE
Commiasioner eusho[e explained t~e abstained beceuse ~ubject pcopecty
ia located in the RedEVelopment Acea and he has a contractural
agreement with the Redevelopment Agency.
I. CONDITIANAL USE PERMIT N0. 2241. Request f[om Marilyn R. Watson and
Lois M. R~imcnt for termination of Conclftional pse Pecmit No. 2241
foK propert.y located at 656 South Walnut Street.
ACTION: Commisslonec King offered Resolution No. PC83-24A and moved
fac its passage and adoption that the 1-naheim City Planning
Commission does heceby terminate Conditional Uae Permit No. 2241.
On coll callr the foxegoing reaoluti~n was pasaed by the fol.lowing
vote:
AXES: BOUAS, BUSHORE, FRY~ HERBST, KING, L11 CLA.LRE~ MC SURNEY
NOES: ~10NE
ABSENT: NONE
J~ pR1-NGE COUN~Y LNVIRONMEN'"i+L MANAGEMENT 1-GENCY (BMA): Orange County
gKA ~equests determination ae to conformance with the General Plan
for conatruction of flood contcol improvements to the Santa Ana
River from Imperfal Highway to Weir Canyon Raad.
12/12/83
MINUTES ~N~HEIM CITY PLANNING CAMMISSION DECBMBBR 12 1983 83-832
Jey Tashiro, ~ssociate Plannrr, Axplained this 1A A:equirempnt of
ths Govecnment Codc, and the Planning and Bngtneecing atnff~ hav~
revi~wed it and Einds that it is in confocmance, and oxplained it is
e minor improvement.
ACTION: Commisaionec King offe~ed Resolution No. PC83-245 and moved
foc ite passAge and adoption that th~~ Anaheim :'ity Planning
Commiasion doea heceby find that i.he cunsh.ruction of. flood contcol
improvementa to Che Santa Ana River fr~m Iinperial Higt~wey to Weir
Ce~nyon Rodd would be in conformance with r.he City of Anaheim's
GeneraZ Plan.
Un roll call, the foregoing resolu~ton wae pansed by the following
vote;
AYES: BOUJIS~ HU^aHORE~ PRY~ HERBST~ KING~ LA CLAIRF.~ MC HURNEY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
K. COMMERCIAL GPFICE ;.~VELOPMENT IN THE STADIUM VICINITY. Joel Fick,
Asaistant Director f.or Planning explained he had diacuss~d this
cepoct ducing the discussion f.or 14-A and that stafE's
racommendation ia thal the Planning Commisaion adopt a motion
dicecting staff to exPlore pcivate sector funding and iE it is found
to be a feas:ble alt~:rnative, to proceed with the study, and that
motion would appear on the City Council consent calendar.
ACTION: Commisaioner La Claire offered a motion, seconded by
Commissioner Herb~t and MOTION CARPIED that the Anaheim City
Planning Commisaion does hereby direct ataff to explore private
sector funding to r,onduct• a study to devel~p e comprehenaive land
use atrategy for the Stadium and aucrounding areas~ and 1E it is
found to be a feasible altern~~tive, tc pcoceed with the study.
UTHER DISCUaSION
1. Cammissioner Bushoce stated he wanted the Commission to think about
the fact that landacaping is not required Sn the Commeccial General
Zone, aince all. the other zones require landsc~ped aetbacks.
2. Commissioner Busho:e stated he would like for atafE to ceport back
to the Commissirn on how meny other cities actually count garage
space in their calculationp of squ~+re footage.
Annika Santalahti, 1-ssistant Director for Zaning, explained the
discussion ehould have been on equ~+re footage of the dwelling unit
only and the only reason the aquare Eootage of the garage would be
included would be foc coverage purposest and that aome develoveKs
will put down that number and not make it clear what they are doing
and unleas it ie cleat on the plan, it can be miatakenly included,
but normally stafE does not in~lude it.
12/12/83
hINUTBS. AN~HEIM CITY PLANNZNa COMMISSION D~CB~BR 12t 1983 83-833
3. Annika sentalehti, As~i4tant Dicectar Eor Zoning, etated the
Commisaion miyht be intecesCed in mak~ng a raquest ko the Ssnioc
Citizen'e Commiseion regacding the .;ge limit of people Iiving in a
aenioc citizen houaing pcoject beceuee they do h~ve leas then
one-half the pecking requitement. She etated the Council ie setting
two aenior citizen'a pcoject Eor. public hearing, on~ wher.e the
minimum age requirement waa 55 ye~ra of ag~ of et leaet one thnent.
in each unit, and one was pceviously approved ~t 6Q end the fadecel
government hae a minimum requirement of 62, ao the Council is going
to be diecueaing that ieaue i.n the near future. She atAted the
Senio~ Citizen's Commission also diacueaed that iesue at one of
theic mpeting cecently and she wondered if the Commiaaion would be
inteceateu in aeeking their input.
There was bri~t diacusaion and it was the yenerel conaenaus of the
Commiasion that the minimum age ahould Do 62.
ADJUURNMENT•
There being no further buainesa, Comrtoiseioner Fry offeced a motion,
aeconded by Commiasioner King and MOTION CARRIEU that the meeting be
adjourned.
The meeting was edjourned at 5:05 p.m.
RespectEully submitted,
~~ -r /~~
Edith L. He[[is
Seccetary
0019m
12/12/83