Loading...
PC 1984/05/14REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITX FL~NNING COMMIS5IOP7 REGULAK t4EETING The r.eyular. meeting of the Anaheim Ctty P'~nning Commissi~n was called to or.dec by Ch~ir~•~in~n ~ouas at 10:00 a.m., May 14, 1984, in the Counc-t Chamber, a quor.um betng pr.esent and the Commiesion r.evi wed plans of the ttem~ on today's agenda. R~CESS: 11:30 a.m. RECUNVENE: 1:32 p.m. PRESENT ChaiKwoman: ~ouas Commissiuners; Bushore, AaSENT C~mmissianers: La Claire ALSO PRESENT Annika Sanl•alahti Joel Fick Jack White Jay T~.tua Paul Singer Jay Tashir.o Gr.eg Hastings Edith Harxis Fr.y, Her.bst, King, McBurney Assiatant Director for. Zoning A~sistant Director for Planning Assi~tanl Ctty Attorney Of£ice Engineer. Tzaffic Engineer. Assoctate Planner Assisrant Planner. Planning Commission Secretacy I2'EM NO. 1. EIR NEGATIVG DECL.ARATION AND VARIANCE N0. 3386 ~UBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: BERNARD J. STAHL AND BIL~ J. NICKEL, 8151 Katella Aven-ie, Sta~i~on, CA 9U680. AGENT: J. WARD ~JAWSUN, 2808 E. Katella Avenue, ~2U1, Otange, CA 92667. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consistiny of approximately 1.0 acre, 16ti8 South Nutwocd Stceet. aivers of ma~cimum structu~al hei,;ht and minimum structur.al setback to construct 2G-unit apactment compl~x. Continued from Apc;l 2, 30, 1984. ACTTON: Commissioner King offered a motion, second~d by Commissionec McSur_ney and MGTION CAR,~IED (COmmissioner. La Cl~ire absent), that ccnsideration of the afotementi.oned matter be continued to the regularly-scheduled mepting oE May 3U, 19d4, in order for the applicant to submit revised plans. 84-269 5/14/84 MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CI~Y PLANNING COMMIS5ION,_ MAY 14, 19a4 ___ 84-270 iTEM N0. 2. EIR NEGATIVE DECLTRA'PION RECLASSIFICA'l`[ON NC. 83-84-23 AND VARIANCE NO___ __3334 PU6LIC HEARING. OWNERS: DON C. AND Z'AMIRIS DUKE, 3538 W. Savt~nna Street, Anahc~im, CA 92804 and DUANE ERE~ERICK AND SA1.L: ANN PETERSEN, 600 S. Nutwood, AnAheim, CA 928U4. AGENT: J()HN K:NG, 19522 Independence, Lane, Hurit~ngton k3each~ CA 92646. Pr.ope~cty is descr.ibed as a r.ectangularly-ahapecf pnrcel of land conaisting of a~proximately U.78 acre, 353H W. Savanno Str.eet. RS-A-43,OU0 to the RM-120Q Waivera of: (a) maxim~m str.uctur.al he~ght, (b) minimum floor. area, (c) minimum landscaped setback, (d) pecmi.tLed encr.oachment into front yar.d and (e) permitted location of tandem par.king s~aces to construct a 28-unit apar.tment co~;. ' ex. Continued from April 2, 16 and 30, 1984. ACZ'ION: ~omrtiissioner. King of.fer.ed a mution, seconded by Commissioner. McBur.ney and MOZION CAkRI~D (Cummission~r La Clatr.e abser!t), ~ha~ consider.atton of the ator.ementioned matter be continued ta the regularly-scheduled meeting of May 30, ~984, in oruer. for the a~plicant to s~bm.tt revised plans. ITEM NUS. 3~ 4 AND ~ WERE CUNSID~REp TOGETHER. I`l'EM NU. 3. EIR NE~ATIVE Ut:r ,•I,ARATION AND_ GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT Nn. 193 (READVER'rlS~ll) + PUBLIC t1EARING. UWNERS: WCS INTERNATIUNAL, ATTN: GEORGE ADAM~, 32U0 B. Fronteca Str.eet, Anaheim, c:A 92806. Pcoperty is described as a r.ectangulacly-shaped par.c~l of land consisting of approximately 2.8 acr.es (Paxcel A) 0.9 acr.es (owner init.ited) located south of the Riverside Freeway and 1U30 feet east oE the cer,tecline of Glassell Street; and, (Par.cel B) 1 9 acre (City initiated) located south of the River.side Free~.~ay and 2000 feet edst of the center.line of Glasseil Street. To chanqe the current Genezal Open Space designation to Gener.al Industrial. It is the intent of the property ownEC to expand the existing r.esour.ce cecovery and recycling center. I.t is th~ Ci.ty's intention to br.ing the land use d~signatlon into conformance with the exi.sting zoning and land use. Cqntznuecl from Apr.il 16 and 30, 1984. ITEM N0. 4. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION RECLASSII'ICATION l~0. 83-84-15 (RF.ADVERTISEU) FU9LIC HEARING. OWNETtS: WCS INTERNATIQNAL, A`PTN: GEORGC; ADAMS, 3200 F Frontera Street, Anahei~m, CA 92806. Proper.ty descr.ihed as a rectanguiarly-shaped parcel ~f land consisting of approximately 1.85 acres, Street~ bein~,, located approximately 2,OQ0 feet e~st of the cPnter.line of Glassell Street. 5/14/84 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 14~ 1944 94-271 RS-A-43,UU0 (Residential, Agr.icultur.al) Zone to the MG (Induatrial, Limited) Zone to expa~d a resour.ce r.~cover.• and recycling oper.ation including an automobile diFinantling buainess with wholesale and cetail eales of .~uto partA. Continued ir.om Apcil 16 and '3U, 1984. IT~~M N0. 5. EIR NEGATIVE DFC~:.RP.TION, WAIVER OF CUDE REAUIREMENT AND CuNnl`PIONAL USE PERMI~ N0. 2525 (RE!1Ul'ERTISED) F`UBLIC k1EARING. UWNERS: HOLLY W. ~AVIDSUN, I~.U. [iaX 32~, Nolualoa, NI 9G725 and WCS IN`t'ERNATIONAL, 3200 E. Er.ontera 5tr.eet, Anaheim, CA 92806. AGENT: ORANGE CUUNTY STEEL/SF,LVAGE, INC., 32U0 E~contera Str.eet, Anaheim, GA 92806 and GEORGE ADAM5, 3200 E. Frontezu Str.eet, Anaheim, CA 92800. Pr.operty descr.ibed as an icxeq~alacly-shaped par.cel of land consiating of appr.uxtmately 8.2 acrea, .3200 East Fronteca Stceel (Or.Anye County Steel S~tilvage). Continued from APril 16 and 30, 1984. Geucge Engelage, Gener.al Manager., Urange County Steel, t~'~~+nked staff for helpiny him put kogether a great pr.oject. EIe explained this resour.ce recovery and r.ecycling cen:er. has been at ttita locatiun since 1977 and they r.ecycle items ~:uch as washiny machines, dryers, old car.s, etc. He stated they hav~~ purchased two adjoining pieces of pxoperty and plan to expa~id thetr. operati n onto those lots. He staLed the General Plan needs to be Amended because th~ use ~:s noL compatiblet and that they ar.e in the Redevelo~,ment ar.ea and ar.e wor.kiny wi~t~ the Redevelopnent Agency. He stated the Code r.equires paved patking aceas, but tha[ they feel because of the natur.e of the eperation, paving would not be practical. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSEU. Commissioner. Bushore r.efer.r.ed to informatiun furnished by the applicant r.egarding tests conducted by Georye Adams personally, wher.ein he d~g trenches 15 feet deep and can te::~ .~nd i7dicated that the soil wa~ unquestionably natural and that there ~•~ no evidence of prior di.sturbance, solid waste or other. foreign matter. 4 1 that he~ ~s a proPession~~l engineer with extensive experience in soils woric and i:; able to }udge the basic condition of soils and .landfills of all kinds. Nr. Engelage staced ':hey would ~~r.ovide staff with copies of the original County ma~ wF:ich showed what thc~ County indicated was the landfill and they have nevex come acr.oss anything that would show }-hat these two rcoperties wc~rE anything but natural soil up to the lan~fill and were never a part of tt ~ la~ldfiil itself. Commissionez Bushore stated the C~unty recenL•ly purchased pzope~ty on State College and put in a bus terminal and that site •~as a p~ioc lana.'tll and they did not know it and ended up having to put al~out 18 i~ches of cEment over. the propert;(. He stated the records sr~ow this lan9fi11 went down much deeper than 7 5 feet. Mr. Engelage stated he has a map which show~ how deep it was and ir. what areas and it clearly ~hows that tho~e two l.ots were never a part of the landfill. ~, 14/84 MI!+~~:~5, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMIS~ION. MAY 14, 198A 84-272 Commissionec Huahore atated the propecty was vacant when it w~a pur.chaa~d by thts petitioner and there was a problem with people dump~ng tr~sh onto the nld site. Mr.. ~ngelagP atated Fronter.a ends at thts lucatton and (~eople do come ther.e and dump debrist however., their. propecty is clear. of all debr.ts and there is no indication that it was ever. a landFi.il. Ne stated all the maps indicate how deep the tr.c,~~.nea were and what Y,ind of mater.ialt~ wer.e put into the landFill, etc. C~mmiasioner. [iushore stated he would have a pr.ok~lem appr.nving the negative declr~ration wi+:houL- Eor.mal samplings of' the soil. He asked about the water and it was noted the proper~y i3 serviced with water. which Chey are cur.r.ently uciny and fur.ther diACUSSion r.elAted t~ an inspec.ei.or~ fQe which has never been paid. Commissiuner E3u~hor.e Rtated r~e haa a cancer.n about the ~eptic tank syctem wF-ich consists of t~ur ce~~en~-type facilit.ies ~tir,d thoughk those shoul~ also be tesfed to muM~ sur.e they ac~a not aeeping or leaking because they ar.e right ~•.ac the County's watec supply. HQ ~tated he khought pr.oper sEwer. Jines should be r.equir.ed. Mr.. Engelage stated the curcenk sewer. facilities wer.e installed when this property was used a~: one o£ the lacgest asphalt plants in the County which had at least 150 employee~, and that their. operation has only about 50 employees and they are way unc~er capacity of the cucr.ent septic tank sysLem. Commissioner eusho •tated this system has not been teAted in 25 year.s and could be leaking. He stated cement is a ver.y porou~ material ~nd moisture does come in and he ::elt in o~dec to approve ttie negati.ve declaratton, the sYstem should be thoroughly tested. Commissioner Her.bst asked if it would be requiced that the properties be h~aked up to the se~ers under nocmal circumstances. Jay Titus r.esponded the City w~uld tequixe sewer. h~ok-ups; however, the nearest avai.lable sewer, wou~d be about 20U0 feet away to the east; and that sewers would be requiced in connection with buildxng permits or gr.ading activity ;nd her.e we don't have that situakion; however, it could be added as a condition of the Planning Cammission. Commissio~ner ~ecbst stated this is a~ entirely new business and the petitioner. is requesting a r.ecla~sification to industrial and he thought it should be brought up to industr.ial standards ~nd that sewecs should be required. He pointed out that this property is aajacent to the Santa Ana Rivec and h~e did no~ think any area along the river. shauld be developed with septic tanks. Commissioner Bushore referred to another property at the Lemon Street of£-r.amP of the Rivsrside Freeway w-iic~ was cezoned to inc3ustrial. and it h~d 1500 to 1G00 £eet to get to the sewer.s and wat~r and it wasn't as close to the rivec as this is. 5/14/84 84-273 MINUTES ANAHBIM CITY PGANNiNG COMMISSION MAY 14 1984 Commio~ioner Her.bst stAt.ed this pr.oper.ty was designated ope~ ~pace because it was next to open apACe ar~ the old dumpeiCe and he ~till queations whekh~r. or. not it was a pact oE the dumpatte beceuEe the Co~nly has made mistAkec °prt thsir. mapa in the past. He stated the owner. has dug a ditch on the ~ o~.. Y- but he would like to s~e a certitied cor.e sampli.ng because khPr.e is 40 feet of fill ri~dtbecause~thepsepticyL~nkesystem~cuuld beodetr.i~~ental to~the whol.e installe County becauae oi tt~e water supply. Commissic~nec eushor.e stated he r.hought the Commission shou~d asl; for certifir~tion of thc~ nr.esent septic tAnk system hecnuse under. the Pxistiny conditional use per.n~it, iE this was not approved or if the app2icant wtthdr.ew the app]ication, the present oper.at~on could continue and this would let the ~ommtssion know ii there was a pcoblem. Commissioner. Herbst stated the Froper.ty owner's arr.ogance pectaining to the City's Cod~s bothexb him; that he originally started the business without pr~pPr. per.mits and cfid not come i.n £or per.mits until he was Eor.ced to and now h~ has gone ahead and exp~n~ed the use wikhout c~mtn9 to the Planning Commission and he felt he ~hould be r.equired to abide by the Codeincludi.ng property should be brought up to all Codec befor.e tt is rezoned, sewers, becau~e once it is rezoned to industr.ial, ther.e is nothing the City can do to get the proper.ty propecly impr.oved. t~;r:. Engelage stated they have been wor.king with staEE putting together. a package encompassing all the proper.ties. He stated he coula ro ertyais Whx the City would wanC to have the sewEr~s tnstalled beYryYGlassell and Kr.aemer and rezoned, but the sewers wauld need to be pumped up Ghat would be extr.emely expensive and they cur.rently t~ave a smaller, number of employees than previously used the cur.rent facilitie:; anc~ he thought it would be p~emature to r.equire tf~em to install a sewer. at this time. Commissione~ Her.bst suggested leaving the proper.ty zoned as open s~ace. Commissioner Bushore suggested r.eviewing the ociginal conditional use permit. !e stated he wUUld agree with Comnissioner. Herbst regazdina the applicanC's flagzant attitude towards the City. Ne stated he wants tests on the pcesent septic tank syst~m and that he wants t~«r•ings and those ar.e both issues that can be discussed after the tests ar.e do~,~•. He s~ated the r.equest cannot be appcoved without appr.oval ot ti~e negative u~~clar.ation and at thi~ point, he would not be willing to a~pcave the negative d~~~~l-~~ation. t~r. E,~gelage r.esponded to Chairwotnan Boua~ regar.ding theic willingness to have the bori.ngs done, that at this p~int the CommissiWh~isallnthetpaPezwork~says being guilty of saying it is not vtr.gzn proper.ty, it is and that it was nevez associated with tk~e landfill. Commissioner Bushoce s~Ote~d ~~Stsucouldkbetperfozmedsonathe~septicntankrsystem date certa~n so that p. P and the soi.l. Joel Fick atated the timing would de~end upon whether or not the applicant is going to conduct the tes~ ana submit their. information for staff's review. 5/14/84 f MINU'1'E:S, ANAHBIM C~'fY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 1~ 1Q84 _„r 84-27A Commissionez eushore sugg~sstea a continuance for one mor:'.,~ ~nJ pointed out the intor.mation would have to be submitted in about ttir.ae weeka. ACTION; Commi.as.ionec Bue'~ar.e oEfe--ed A motion, that conaider.ation of the af~remer~tione~] matter.s, Item No~. 3, 4 and 5, be cor,t~nued tu the regul~rly-scheduled meeting of June 11, 19d4, in ocd~r. that certified tests aan be pecEor.me~ on the extati,ng aeptic *.onk syatp~, and on the aoil becausp the c:ommisaion would want further information p:i~r. to Appr.uval of the negattv~ declar.ation. Cammiseioner Nert~st Etated he was conceened brcause he had us~d that dumpsite to dump material yeac~ ago and iC wAS "one big hale'. Ccmmisstnner. Bushoce ~tat•ed there c~uld be fluids leakiny lawEr. than 15 feet, dependir~g on the subt~rr.ane~n drainaye and it could be flowing beneatti the propecty, or it might not be, but tecits ar.e th~ ~nly way t~ find out. Commtssi.onec Herus- s~ated rhe maps fur.nished by the applicant show that the landfill was withii, 5 feet and kas 4U feat dee~. t;ommissi~nct Bushor.e ~tated he would make i.t a par.t of h~: mc~tion that the b~cings would be of an adequate number and in adequate i.~cations to cover. the entir.e ~r.operty. Commissioner. Hecbst aeconded the motion ~or. a continuar.ce and M~'PION CARRIEU (Comrtiissioner La Clafr.e absent), that the mutter be co~~tinued to the meeting of June 11, 1984, in order foc the applicank to submit certified tests for. the cur.r.ent septic tank vstem and soils tests with bor.fngs taken at adequate locations and adequ.._~ number. to c~vec the entice pzoperty. ITEM N0. 6. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND VARIANC~ N0. 3399 PACIFIC BELL & A. 7'. T. COMMUNICATIONS Or' CALIFORNIA CORP., 7337 Trade Street, Room 414U, San Uiego, CA 92121. ATTN: P.L. HAMILTON. Property described as an irtegularly-shaped paccel oE ]and cons.isting of approximately 2.4 acres located at the southwest cornet uf Cypress StcceC and Lemon Street, and fuxther described as 217 N~rth Lemun Street lPacific Bell Telephone). Waivec of maximum structur.al height to permi.t two 23.5-foot high r.uof-mounted antennas. Ther.e was no o-ie indicating their gresence in opposition to subject reyuest and although the stafE repor.t was not read, it is referr.ed ta and made a par.t of the minutes. Commissfoner King declazed a conflict of interest as defined by Anaheim City Planning Commix;sion Resolution No. Pc:76-157 adopting a Conflict uf Intecest Code for the Planning Commission and Covexnment Code SPCtion 3625, et seq., in that he owns Common Sl•ock in Pacific F3e11 and pursuant to the pr.ovisions of the above C~des, declaced to the Chairman that he was wi;;t~drawing from the hearing in connection with Variance No. 3399, and would not take part in either the discussion or the voting thereoi~ and had not discussed this matter with any member of the Planning Commission. Thereupon Commissi~~ec King 2eft the Council Chamber. SJ14i'84 MINUTESr_ ANAHEIM CJTX PLANNING COMMISSI ONr MAY 14. 1964 ~ 94'275 ClifEor.d W. Stukes~ 2435 ~. Coast Highway, Cor.ona Del Ma~, acchitect, t-tatctcf they ar.e pr.opo~ing t~ tako the ~wo exis ~ing mobilp ~adlp antennas locAted an the lower tower. ~usl• ea~t of ~he high t ower on the building, which hAa the micKOwave relay And mount them on the norttieast nnd southwest c:c~rnere of the existing tower und they wuuld axtend 23 feet Above thQ r.uof level of the tower. Ne stated they will. demolish the exiating old I:ownr. TH~ PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSGL'. Rea~ondiny to Commission~z Fry, Mr.. St oke~ stol:ed the lower towet to the eaat ot the larye tower. is the one that would be r.emoved. Chair.wortian Aouas asked ii ther.e i.s anytt~ing thot can be done to make th~ tower look better.. Mr. stokea stated ther.e ceally i~n't any W~y to i.mpr.ove i.t and the pur~ose .is to geC better. r.ece~ti~on. He at~ted tt~e antennas themaelves a.~e not aolid and have a certain ~ranspacericy ayalnet tt~e skyline and would be symmetcically placed un the Cower.. Commisaioner. Her.bst stated the telephone compuny had originall,y submitted a beautif~l exhibit oL what the towera ~rould look like when ihey were construct~:d, but a£ter. they wece built, they neve r luoked like that pnd pointed out the Redevelo~menk Agenc;~ z ecommendo d ental of this use because Uthec alter.r.at.ives have not r~een explozed. Ne askpd what o~her. sites have been considered. Mr.. 5tokes stated other. sites would c r_ea~e a lot mor.e expense becau~e all the eyuipment is now in this buildiny. Commisai.onez Herbst ~tated the Redevelapment Ayency is trying to buf]d a beautiful downtown ar.ea and are r.er,ommendin9 denial and asked why the telephone company has otigina' :y submitted beaukiful planB of the pcoject which could nut be constructed. He s tated the R edevelopment Ayency has ~at~ there ar.e otlier sites wt~ich ar.e av•ailab~e. Mc. StoY.es stated these antennas are tcansmitters for. mobile r.adios. Commissionec Ecy stated he was on the Redev~ !opment Commi-ssion when the origi.nal plans wece presented and the plans ahowed a beautiful tower. and it was approved an~ any similar.ity to wh at was pcese nted and what was constcucted was pucely coincidental, plus ~hey a r e not taking car.e of the tower. that is existing. He stated the telephone c ompan/ does hot do what they say they are going to dc and hE would like to know i.f thece a re othEr. sites available and xs not inclined to approve tt~is today . Mr. Stokes cesponded to Chairwoman Bo uas that he would like t~ request a continuance in ordec t~ make a report on other a lternatives. Commissioner Hecbst st:ated there are not too many people who have mobile car phones but he was concerned about thQ number. oE peuple who would be a£fected by the towec. He atated there 3ce a couple o( mountafns close 5y which provide good relay stations. Mr. Stokes stated he would like a co ntinuance~ 5/14/84 MINUTES, 7~NAfi~IM CITX PLANNING COMMIS~ION, MAY 14- 1984 84-276 ACTION: c:ommir.sionec Fr.y offered a motion, aeconded by Commiasiuner Her.bak und MOTIUN CAk[tIEa (Co uni.~oioner. La Claice and King al~senl), t.hat consicleration of the efoKementioned mattec be continu~d to thQ mec~-ng uf June 11, 19f~4, at the r.equesl of the petitioner. Commieaioner King r.etu~~ied to the Counctl Chnmbec at 2:03 p.m. ITEM N0. 7, k;IP NEGATIVE DB(:LARATIUN, WAIVCR OF COQG RGQUIREI4ENT 1~ND ~CONDITIONAL U5E PERMIT N0. 2564 (READV~RTISED) PUE3LZC tIEARING. OWNFRS: S'P~VF:N D. AND L~A ANNE HEINRICH, 613 S. Bcuce 5treet, AnAhetm, CA 92bU4. Fraperty de~ccibec~ a~ a r.ectangulariy-shaped paccel ~f land conaieting of appr.ox imate~y 8, 528 squar.e Eeet, 613 5outh Bruce Stceet. To permit a day-car.e centNr. with a maximum of 12 childr.en with waiver. oE reyuiced loading and unloading ar.ea for. chi].dren. There was one per.son indicating t~er presen~t in op~osition ta aubject r.equest and although the staEE r.epar.t wa~ n~t read, it is refer.red to and made a part of the minutes , Lea Heinrich, owner, f.xplained they pr.opose a day-car.e center Lor. a maximum of 12 children with waiver. of r.equiced loading and unloading ar.ea for the children; that hopefully, in ear.ly 1985, they want to move in~o a cammezcial buildina and open a pre-~+chool, but would liY,e to star.t it in thetr home on a temporary basis. Doris Gheen, stated she owns pro~er.ty at 2421 W. Kandom, which is ad jacent to subject p~opertX and she is ~pposing a day-care centec because the ~tr.eet is r.~rrow and ~ucking would be 1.imited an~ the chi,ldren would be dr.opped off at 6:UU a.m. ~n the mor.ning an~ that would have an affect on her t~nants. Ms. Heinrich stated khey have r.eceived a license fr.om the State for 12 childcen ~,.~d that ahe i.s expecting a baby in August and will not have any more thar- a total of 6 childrer. at this time and the ma jority of the children coming n~w ace within walking distance and she did not kh:nk there would be a traffic problem. THE PUBLIC NEARIt~G WAS CLOSED. Paul Sinyer., :raffic Engineez, explained this str.eet has a 60-foot r.ight-of-way and is 40 feet wide cur~, ko cur.b. Chaicwomtan 9ouas clurified that ti children would be permitted without having the drop off area. Ms. Heincich stated ti~ey w~nt to apen a pre-school and ar.e going thzough this process to prove they do abide by the cules and regulations and want to make people awace of their servi~ce and do not intend to have 12 ch~ldr.en at this time. 5/14/84 MINU1'E5, ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 14~__19 64 84-277 ~'~~mmisaionar Fry statcd he would commend the petitton er on wanting ta etart ttiis kind ot school because there i~ cer.tainly a need in thi.s ar.en; h~w~v~r, hE was concerned abaut the dr.op uff Area. Paul Stnge r stAt~d the applican~ has subm~ttad a petition from adjacent ~~r.c~perty owner.~ stAting they da not hAVe any objection to the drop oEf zone taking pla~e in frunt ~f the pr.opertyt that Lhey lr~tend to po~t the Nroper.ty for "no packing ' for the hour~ of 6:00 a.m. to 6;0(I p.m. and an ordin~n~:e ~ould ha~ve to be ~r.ocessed to accomplish Chatj ttiat tlie problem ic~ that t.t~e proper.ty is not wide enough for. a ctrcular driveway and Ghat ia the prefecr.ed method for dr.op oEf. tie explr~ined parkiny would only be r.NStr.icted in fr.ont ~f ttiifi pr.o~erty and that tt wou]d be a whi.te zonc with a sign stntiny 'F~ssenger. Loading Are a, 6;00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m." Commissioner. McD~rney asked for. claritication that th is was to be a tem~orary situatiun until 1985. Ms. Heinrich stat~d that shc h as a cealtor looking for. a locatton at the ~resent time for. a~r.e-school. Commissioner. McHurney Asked if the petitioner would o bject to a one yeac time limit an the conditional uoe per.tnit and Ms. Heinrich r_esponded that they would not have an objecti~n because they plan to have a schc~ol npen no later than Apr.il 1y85. Commiasioner Bushor.e stated he did not u nder.stand why khe petitioner. is requesting ap~~ro4a1 for. 12 children whe n they ar.e allowed to have 6 by rlyht and th~t i.s all they ar.e planning to h~ve. Ms. Hetnr~ch ~tated basical.ly tt~ey just want to est~ b lts!~ a yood name with the City of Anaheim so they would have a 1ot of legalitie s behiiid them when Chey do f xnd a~ite and ~ome in to ceyuPSt a conditiona.l u~e permi.t for a pce-school, and so peoplc~ will know wt~o they ar~, and she would have her foot in the door to do business in the Ciky of Anahzim. Commissi.oner Bushore asked .tf the netghbors were awar~e of the fact she was r.equesting a maximum of 12 childcen. Ms. Heinrtch s t ated they wer.e aware oE exactly wtiat st~e plans to do. Cornmissionez Bushore stated his primary ob~ection ts that the Commission rec:omm~nded to the City Council that an ordinance be adopted requir.ing the dr.op ofC area for. the childcen; that 6 is probably a good number. because some familiea have 6 children, but he thought 12 chil~ren would cr.eate twice the pr.oblema, noise, super.visfan and traffic for. the neig hborhood. He stated he could r~ot vote foc 12 childr.en, especially since ther e is not an adequate dr.op off area. CommissloneK King stated he would offer a rQSOlution for approval since it will be for one year only. Commissioner eushor.e sta t ed even if it is granked for one year, he thought there would be a request fo r an extension of time at the end of the yeac, if not from tihi& petitioner, fro m the person who purchases the pzoperty and Chairwoman Bouas agreed. ACTION: Commissioner King offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner McBur.nPy and MOTION CARRIED (Ccmmiesionex La Claire absent) t h at the Anahe.im City Planning Commissian has reviewed the proposal to per.mit a day-cttr.e center for a maximum of 12 childr.en with weiver of cequired loa3ing and unloading azea for childcen on a cectangulacly-shaged parcel of lan d consist~ing of approximately 8528 squace feet, having a fcontage of appzoximately 55 feet on 5/14/84 MINUTE5. ANAH EIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 14. 1984 ~4-278 the w~at side oE Br.uce Str.Qet and fucthec dcsccihed as 613 S. e-.uce Streett and does her.eby appcove tl~e Negative Declaration upon fin~ing Lhat it has consider.ed the Negative Declar.ation together wlth any commenta r~ar,eived duri.ng the public rPview proceHS and kur.ther f inding on the bac~ia oE thc~ Initial Study and any commpnte received that ther,e is no subatantial evidence that the pr.oject. will have ~ signiEi.cant effect on the envir.onmPnt. Commisntoner King ofEered a motion, ~econded by Commissioner. Mcl3u-ney and MOTIUN CARRIED (Commisaioner.s Houas and BuRhore votiny no and Commi.asioner La Clair.e absent ), thaC the Anaheim City Planning Commtssion doeE her.~~by grant waiver of C~de r.equir.ement on the basis that the reqi~est has been tippr.oved by thE City Tr.af Eic Engineer. for. loadiny and unloeding only in front cf subject pr.operty and khe on-~tce~t area will be pr.operly desiynated with siqning and an or.dinance adopted Kestricting the pa~senger. loading And unloadin~~ ar.ea and on the banis that the pnr.k~ng Wa.iver will not cause an incr.e~se in crafftc conyex~tion in khe immediate vicinity nor. advecs~ly affect any ad jotring land usec~ and granking of the purkin9 waiver under tt~e conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, heal.th, ~aEety ard general welEare of l•he citizens of the City ~f Anaheim. Commi.ssioner King offer.ed Resolution No. PC84-87 and moved for its pussage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does t~ereby gr.ant Conditianal Use Per.mit No. 2564 pur.suant to Anaheim Muntctpal Code Se-.-tions 18.03.03U.030 thr.auyh 18~03.03U.035 for. a period of one year. and subj~~ct to Interdepar.tmental Committea cecommendations. Un roll call, the for~going resolution wa~ passed by tPie £olluwing vate: AYES: FRY , HERBST, KI~~G, MC BURNEY NU~S: BOUAS, BUSiiORE ABSENT: LA CLAIRE Commissioner Herbst clar.iEied that the appii.:ant will take car.e of the signing for the loading and un~oading acea with Faul Singec explatning the City wiil make the improvements and the applicant will have to ~ay for them. Jack White, Assistant City Attor.ney, presented the written cight to app~eal tl-~e Plannin9 Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ITEM NU. 8. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WAIVER OF CODE RE~UIREME!VT AND CONDITIUNAL t3SE PE;RMIT N0. 2570 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNEF25; GLENN F. LUKENBTLL AND JOAN M. I,UKENBILL, 4307 E. Alderdate, Anah~im, CA 92807. Fcopezty is des~ribed as an irregularly-~haped parcel of land ~onsisting of approximately 7, 670 squar.e feet, 4307 East Alder.dale Avenue. To expand a day care center to permit a maximum o€ 12 childr.en with wa~ver of r.equxr.ed loading and unloading area for children. Tt:ere was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject r.equest and although the staff repor.t was not zead, it is refecGed to a~d made a part of the minutes. 5/14/84 Y I 4 Glenn Lukenbill, owner, was pr.esent to answer any queations• THE PUHLi~ HEAkING WAS CLUSED. -2~ Cnmmissioner. King ~aeked how long they ~r.opoae to uae the prope!ty tor. thts buainess and Mr.. Luk~anbxll r.esponded they would .like to continue it i.ndef inil.elyt and that currently they ar.e licensed for 6 cnildr.en anc9 would like tt~is expanaion for. :~2 chi.ldr.en. Paul Sinyec cesponcled co Chairwoman Douaa that the str.eet rtyht-of-way is GO fc:et wide with th~ street being 4p feet curb-to-cur.b. ACTION: Commiesioner King offered a motion, aeconded by Commissi.oner E'ry And MO'PION CARRIF,U (Commissi.oner. La Cl~ir.e absent)r that the AnAheim City Planntng Commission ha$ r.eviewed the pKOp~sal to expand a day-cAre centec to per.mit a maximum of 1'l childcen with waivcr of requiced l~ading and unloadT~9imately r children on a ir.regul~+rly-3haped par.cel o£ land ronsisting of app ~67Q syuar.e feet, having a fr.ontage oE' approxitnately 69 feet on the nocthwest side of Alderdale Avenue And Lur.Chec descr.ibed as 4307 E. Alderdale Avenuej and doea her.cby app~ove the Negative Declaration upon Einding Ghat it has conaider.ed the Negative 7eclar.ation together with any comments ceceived during the F~ubltc zeview process and furtt~~ec findiny on the basis of the Inittal Study and any comme~ts received tt~at ~here ts no substantial ~evidence that the pr.oject will haye a signiEtcant effect on tt~e envi.ronment. Commissioner King offered a tt~ntion, seconded by Commisaione~ McDur.ne,y and MOTIUN (;ARRIED (Commisstoner La Clair.e absent), that the Anahetm City Planning Commisaion does hereby grant waivez ~t Code r.equirement on the basis that the parking waiver will nat cause an fncr.ease i.n tr.affic con~~estion i.n the immediate vicinity c~or adversely affect an,y adjoi.ning lxnd ~W~ilanot9benting of the parki.nq waiver under the canditions imposed, if any, detr.imental to r.he peace, health, saEety and yener.al ~elfarF of the ctti2ens of the City of Anaheim. Commissioner King offeced Resolution No. PC84-88 and moved fo_* its ~a~sage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby gr.ant Conditional Use Per.mit No03?U30.035ssubject toainterdep~Ttmental~Committees 18.U3.03U.030 through 18. cecommendations. Commissioner Herbst indicated he would oppo&e the re3uent: without a time limit because ll children could ~ceate a pr.oblem in the neighbothood whece 6 had been no problem. Cor.unissionec Ki.ng amended the r.esolution to include a one year time lim~.t to expice May 14, 1985. On rall call., the foreyoing resolution was passed by the followi.ng vote= AYES: FRY, H°RBST, KING, MC BURNEY NOES: BOUAS, BUSHORE ABSENT: LA CLAIRE Jack White, Assistant City Attocney, preaented the wzitten zight to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. 5/14/F3d MINUTF.S, ANAHEIM CITY PL~NNINC C~MMISSION MAY 14 198d 84-28Q IT~M N0. 9. ~IR N0. R2 INREVIOU~LY CERTIFSGD). RECLA,SIFICATION N0. 83-84-30. AND VARZANCE N0. 3401 PU6LIC HEARING. OWNEKS: ANAHEIM RF.D~VELOPMEN'T AG~NCY, 76 S. Claudinq St:r.eet, Suite 30U, Anaheim, CA 92805, ATTN: NO~MAN J. PR'tEST. Froperty dee~:ribed ~o an ir.regulacly-sl~aped par.c:el of land conui.eting of appr.oximaGely 5.7 ecr.es located at the noctheast cornNX of Br.oadwey and Har.bo~ R~~ulevar.d. Parcel A: Appcoxim~tely 2.3 acr.ea ak the northwest cocnec oi Bcoadway b Clementine St., Paccel B: Appcox. 2.2 acr.es an the north sidP of Br.oadway, appr.ox. "l~0 ft. east of the center.line of Har.bor. RaulevAr.d. PC-D and RM-1 "l0U to CU Waiver. aE minimutn structucal sstback to construct a camme~cial oEfice complex and packiny garage. Ther.e was no one indicating their. pcesence in oppusitton to subject reque~k and a.lthough the sta.Ef r.~por.t was not read, it is ce[err~d r.o and made a part of the minutes. c;~mmissio~er. B~shoze declarec~ a conflxc*. of interest a~ defineei by Anahei.m City Plann~ny Commission Re~olutf,~n ?~~. PC:76-157 ~dopting a Confltct of Interest Code Eor. the Ylanning Comrr~i~c~ion and Govecnment Code Section 3625, et seq., in that he is ~t Hcyi~is~.t+.l~n cYal estate agent for. ~he Anaheim Redevelopment Agency anu pursuanc t~ t;~e pr.ovisions of the abave Codes, declaced to the Chairmar. that he waa withdcawing fr.om the heacing in connection with P.eclassific~tion Nu. f33-84-3U and ~'ariance No. 3401, and would not take part in eitl-er the di~cu~sion or ttle voting thereon and had not di.scussed tt~is matter. with any memDer oE the P1Anning Commission. Thereupon Commissionec Bushor.e lr.ft the Council Chambec. Mike Welch, Pr.oject Planner, Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, explained the pr.oposal is thc fiGZt phase of the Anaheim Ctty Cent~c and pointed out the pr.elirriinacy drawings displayed and the model i~n front of the Council Chamber and explained the pr.oposal is Eor ~ 10-stor.y office building on the nor.theast cotner. of Haxbor. and Broadway and a 650-space parking str.uctuce with accessor.y zetail usea which will be constructed in two phases, initially with two levels below gr.ade and two levels above gr.ade with later veztical expansion to accommodate parkinq foc the second office building. He atated they anttctpete ground b~eaking fot the office building later this summec with thp parking structure to follow this fall and stated the agency will be providing all the off-site improvements such as th~ intersection at Harboc and Broadway and improvements along eroadw~y to Lemon Stceet and Fortions of Clementine and Hazbor. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLUSED. Commissioner Herbst asked why the waivec of setback is needed. Mi.ke Welch Kesponded that as part of the overall development of the off-sire public improvements, the cight-of-way for Broadway i~ going to be widened in some cases up to 25 feet on the nor.th side adjucen~ to this property, so there will be street impcovemenks on Broadway and at the Harboc/Broadway inter.section, east to Lemon Street. 5/14/84 MINUTES, ANAHEIM C7TY PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 14 _1984 ____ 84-281 CommiseiAnec Mcaur.ney ~eferred to e letter fr.om the Police DeE~art~ent reqar~ing the parking stcucture and Mt. Welch r.esponded they had aeen the memocandum And a ca~y has been pasaed on ta the developer. and ar.chitect ~nd they will do Qvexytt~ing possible to comply wil•h the space isaues. it was noted an envicanmental impact r.eport for. Par.cels 8 and 9(subject pr.operty) wae pr.eviously cer.ti~led by the An~heim Redevelopment Agency and the Anaheir~~ City Co~~nci.l on NovembeG ~, 1983. ACTIUN: Comm~asionec He[bst offer.ed Resolution No. PC84-89 and moved for. its pass~ye and adoption ~hat the Anaheim City Planning Commisston daen her.eby gr.ant keclassification No. 83-84-30 Rubject to Inter.departmAnkal Committee cecommendAtions. Chairwoman Bouas stated since this wi11 be a private street, there will be no ~ar.king on Chestnut Street. On r.oll call, tRe Eor.egotn~ r.esolution was passed by the fullowing va~~.~: AYES; ~iOUAS, ERY, HE~RBST, KING~ MC [3URNEY NUES: NONE ABSENT: BUSHORE, LA CL,AIkE Commissioner Her.bst offer.ed Res~luttan No. PC84-90 and moved for. tts pasaage and adoption that tt~e Anaheim City Planning Comrtiissian does her.eby grant Var.iance No. 3401 on the basis that thece are special cir.cumstaneNS applicable to the pcopecty such as size, shape, topoyra~hy, location and surroundings which du not apply to other identically zoned pruperty in the same victnikyi and that s!rict application oE the Zoning Cocte deprives the property nf pcivileges enjoyed by other p~operties in t.he identical zone and classification in the vicir~ity and subject to Interdepactmental Committee r.ecommendations. Un zoll call, the focegoing r.eso.lut.ton was passed by the followin~; vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HERBST, KING, MC BURNF.Y NOES: NONE ABSENT: HUSFIOJRE, LA CLAIkE Commissioner Fty stated Mr. Welch indicated that ground breaking will be either July or August and this is already May. Mr. Welch cesponded there will be some preliminary relocation and bui.ldtng removal of the pxisting bank befor.e cnnstruction stacts; and that they do anticipate they will start later this summer. ITEM NU. 10. EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS i AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2571 PUSLIC HEIIRING. OWldER5: COSMO V. TA4RMINA & ARLINE TAORMINA, 1231 N. Blue Gum Stzeet, ~9, Anaheim, CA 92806. AGENT: DOMENTCO DI SANZO, 1577 Benmore, #16, Anaheim, CA 92805. Proper.ty described as a xectangularly-sha~~ed paccel of land cansisting ~f approximately 8.87 acres located at the northwest coznec of Coronado Street and Blue Gum Street, 1231 Nocth Blue Gum Street (Anaheim 7'ruck Depc~t). 5/14/84 MINUZ`ES, ANAHEIM CITY_~LANNING COMMISSI~N ` MAY 14. .19$4 84-282 To per.mit on-aAle of beac and wine in r:,n existing reataur.A~st (Itelian Sub Hous~). Ther.e was no one indicating their. prer:~ence i.n appasikion ta subject r.e~~ueaC and Although tr~e ataff repurt was not r.ead, tt is r.efercerl to And mad~ A part of the minukes. Kathy Dine, pcoper.ty manager., and Pam p~.~z, manager of the italian Sub House, wer.a present to answer. a~y queations;. TH~ PUBLIC NEARING WAS CLOSED. Responding to Chaicwoman Bouas, Ma;. Uine expl~ined the p;atr.onr~ ar.e from the existing industrial area. Pam Uioz r.esponded to Chair.woman Bouas khat she t.hought her question pertAined to kruck dxivers cominy Er.om uutstde the .mmediate ar.ea. She explatned they do have an 8.85 acr.e complex and the enti~e ar.ea is r.ented out to J.oc.~l companie~ and they rar.ely have oul•aide tr~~ckers stopping oEf; and that most o~ the pakr.ons would tie local and most par.k theic trucks ther.e and go tiome in the svenings. Commissi.oner Her.b$t stated hF: is concerned because thia is a truck stap, explaining he tias been there sevetal times and thece ar.e truckers there who are getting their vehiclen repaired. Me. Dine cesponded ther.e are 5 mechanic shops and they do have ~~ackfng for trucks that come in f~c r.epaic and lhe large3t shop at r.his tiR,e would have about 3 truc;k3 in at one time to be repait•ed. She explained t:~ere is a tr.uck washing facility and the anly parking area at that facility t~'~ for ~he tr.uck that .i.s being w~shed and stated there a~uld be no par.king spa:~e for tr.ucks waitir~g to have their. vehicles washed and the drivecs would n~ot go in for beer or. whatever and there ar.e no par.king areas for. any of the ot.tier. companies. She explained they do have f.ueling islands, tut that iG not an ar.ea wher.e a tr.ucker could par.k~ She stated in ane month, there would tz maybe 8 trucks coming in for fuel from outside the complex. Commis~ionec Fzy stated he woulr7 put this use in the sAme category as an A.M. P.M. Market with the sale of gasolii~e and beer and wine ~nd he thought it would be hypocritical to approve this and deny th~se requests. Commissioner BushorE a9reed and stated he is opposed to this because the p:opecty is in the industr.ial area ancl service~ industrial clients and even though you cannot control where people purchase beer a;~d they can huy beer and wine in other plac~3, he thought the less chanc~ of getting it, the safer it would be to have them go back to woxk and also the Commission has ronsistently den,ted alcoholic A~iles af any kf.nd in conjunctior.~aith gasoline sales and even thouyh this is a lir.tle different, dri,nk~ng and driving don't mix and the less oppaztunxty of avai.la~bility, the greater. the public is pratected. It was noted the Planning Directoc oz his authorized cepresentative has determined that the pcoposed pr.oject fa11s within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 1, as defined in the State Enviconmental Impact Report Guidelines and is, thecefore, ~ategorically exempt from tY~e requirement to prepare ar, EiR. 5/14/84 MYNUTES, ANAHEIM CI'fY PLANNING COM_MIS~:ON, MAY 14, 198+1 84-283 ACTION: Commi.aRio~er Fry otfer.ed Ctesolution No. 8q-91 And moved it~r. ita passage and adoption that the Ar.aheim City Planni.ng Commisaion does her.eby deny Conditional Uae Permit No. 2571 on the basis that the entire industrial complex is oriented tOWACdB the tcucktng induatry with ce~atr, fueling and truck washtng facilities, and the sal~ of beer, and wine on the pr.oper,ty could cr.eate a definite hazar.d to the gener.al public z~nd would hAVe <i detrtmental etfect un the peace, health, saEety and gener.al welfar.e of. the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Un rc,ll call, the foceyoinq resolution w~3 passed by the Eollowing vvte: AYES: 80UAS~ BU5NU12E, FRY, H~;R6ST, KING, MC HUItNEY NOES: NONE ABSENT: LA CLATRE Jack White, Asfitstant Ci.t.y Attorney, presentecl the wr.itten cight t~ appeal khe Plann.tng Commissi~~n's decision within 22 days to the Ctty Council. I`PEM N0. 11. EIR NEGATIV~ pECLARATIGN AtJU CONDITTUNAL USE PF.RMIT N0. 2573 PUBt.IC :iEARING. OWNERS: CHAO :NC., 15bU S. Harbcr. Soule~ar.d, Anaheim, CA 9'1802. AGENT; AVUN RENT-A-~.',. 4840 W. Century Boulevar.d, Inglewood, CA 9U304. Property de~cr.ibed ~i,~ i.cregular.ly-shaperj par.cA.l oE land consisting oE approximately 0.4 acr.e, ~~sr. Hall R._ad. To permit an auta rental .a- ~. !~ '.~~e CG Z~ne. Thece was no one tndic~>- ~ ±:~+ _resence in op~ositi.on to subject request and althouyh the ata£f -~~ _:_ M~.s not read, it is r.eEer.r.ed to and made a par.t of ths minutes. Commissioner. t~ushore ~ic: ~---~:. a conflict ~f inter.est as defined by Anaheim City Planning Commir,si<,, _~~.,:lution No. PC76-I57 adopting a Conflict of Interest Code for the =_•=~~~~ing Commission and Gover.nment Code Sectton 3625, et saq., in that he is a h~~,~n~~ par.tner. witFi t'he petitioner. in another. business and pursuant to the pr.~:r•za~~-~~as of the above Codes, declar.ed to the Chair.man that he was wi.thdr.awi.ng ,_~~~~~ the hear.ing in connection wtth Condttional Use Pezm~t Nc. 25',3, and wou'm~ not take par.t in eithec the discusston or. the voting ther.ean and 'nad noz discussed this matter with any member. of the Plannxng Commission~ Th~--~~eupon Commissione~ Bushore left the Council Chamber.. Geor.ge Sullivan, cu~Gt~u~ctiun ~nsultant, stated this is an empty lot which is bardered an the east by a rec eational vehicle park, on the west by a gasoline stati.un and on the north by a packing lot ror a restaur.ant and they will pave the lot a~~ put i:- a~ental car ope~ation ~-nd none of the cars w~ll be less than one year old and they wi.ll service the hotels acound Disneyland and the Anaheim area. He stated the owners plan to put in landscaping, even though it i.s not a requirement of the Code and the oL'fice building is a trailer wtth skirting and thrr lease is for five year.s with a Eive yeax optzon. THE PUBLIC FiEF-RING V~AS CLOSED. 5/14/84 MINUTFS•,,,~;NAHGIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. MAY 14. 1984 ___ 84-284 Commisstcner. MeHur.ney asked i£ a pecmanent building is planned. Mc. Sullivan r.eplied a structur.e will only be built if the proper.ty can be pur.ch~sed by ttie petitioner., pointing out this is only a five year. lease. Commissi.on~r Fry stated he Eelt the propPr.ty ahould be scr.eened and it wan note~ thQr.e is a chain link fence ~r.oposed with 10 Ceet ot landacaping. Mr. Sullivun explair-ed the no~th end is cur.cently facing the reatAUCant proper.ty and ther.e is an existing block wall and stor.age butlding and it tA nnt vtsible fr.or~ Har.b~r L~~ulevar.d, and ~ gasoline station i~ on the ~~~at cide and there ar.e four Cypr.ess tr.ees ko acreen that side. He stat~d the ownecs wanted to have wr.ought ir.on fenctng so the Police Uepactment could see iE ther.e is anyone around the vehicles when the Eacilily i.s closed. He atated the Har.bor. Boulevard side will have a 10-foot l~~ndaca~ed ar.ea wi~h the fence :~et back 10 feet. ACTION: Commissioner. King offer.ed a motton, seco~ded by Commisstoner Ner.bst and MOTION CARRIED (Comr~~issioner.s La Clair.e an~9 Bushor.e absent), that the Anaheim City Planning Comm~.ssion has reviewed the pr.oposal t~ permit: an automobile rental agency in the CG (Commeccia]., Gen~ral) 2one on an trtegular.ly-shaped parcel of land consisCing of approximr~tely 0.4 acre~, having a fr.ontage of appr.oximately lA9 feet on the north side oC ea.ll Road and fucthec descr.ibed as 501 We~t Ball Road; and does her.eby appr.ave the Negative Declar.ation upon Einding thal it has consider.ed the Negative ,~eclaration together. with any comments r.eceived ~ur.ing the public review pr.ocess and fucther find.ing on the basis of. the Initial Skudy and any comments received tt-at theKe is no cubstantial evic~ence that the pr.o~ect will h~ve a significunt effect on the envir.onment. Commissioner King offered kesolutton No. PC84-92 and moved for. its passtlge and adoption that the Anahe~.m Clty Planning Commission does hezeby gr.ant Conditional Use Pecmit No. 2573 f~r. a pe~iod of five year.s to expir.e on Ma; 14, 1989, pur.suant ta Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.03.030.030 through 18.U3.030.035 and subjer_t to InterdeQWrtmental Committee r.ecomme-.dations. On roll call, the Eor.egoing r.esolution was pa~ssed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HER(3ST, KING, MC S~JRNEY NU.F.S: NONE ABSENT: BUSHORE, LA CLAIRE RECESS: 2:42 p.m. RECONVENE: 2:52 p.m. I'PEM NU. 12. EIR NEGATIVB DECLARATION AND CONDTTIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2187 (REAUVERTIfiED) PUBLIC HEARING. OWNE125: R. H. SiEGELE, P.O. Box 3284, Anaheim, CA 92803. Pcopecty described as a r.ectangularly-shapec] parcel oE land consist3.ng of approximately 3.6 acres located at the n~rtt,west corner of South Street and Rose Stceet, 919 East South 5treet. 'rn consider. possible r.evocation of Conditional Use Permit No. 2187 oc ko modify conditions of appcoval of Resolut+.on No. PC81-62. 5/14/84 84-285 MINUT~S, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNItIG COMMISSION MAY 14 198A Thar.e was one ~er.son indicating her preaence in opposition to sub~ect r.eyuest and although the staEf report was nol r.e~d, ft ta r.eferr.ed to and mnde a Pnrt of the minutes. Debn Sher.er. pr.e~ented the at~ff report and slides of. the existtng conditton of the faatlity pointing out the landscaping planter ha~ nut~. be~n inatalled, tr.ucks ~ar.ked in the e~at ~lley bincking the ~mer.yency access, trucks par.ked in the alley along the eas~ pr.oper.ty line, fenciny wi~:hout s1atG~ng as pr.oposed by t.hc P1Anning staff and not r.cquir.ed by the Planniny Cummis~ion, And poinl•ed out the Planning Department is atill r.ecommendrny the entire pr.uper.ty ~e scr.eened mintmally with an e-fooC high block wall on the nurth and west., r.ock and debr.l~ atc~:td nutside the ~nc,o~ure of the yards apilling onto the public right-af-w~~y, mater.ial:~ 3tor.ed behind the Eence, maher.ials stor.ed above the heighl• oE riie fence, peaple who cpme tu u~e the Eacilittes nhould b~ able to entec thw Eacility fvllowing cle~cly macked ye.ilow lines ~911d then exit the pr.oper.ty and potntcd out cher.e ar.e no ouch mark{.nys, aut.~mobiles blocking access thr.nugh the pr.oper.ty, and p~les oE paper. ~bout 10 feet high. Mr.. Slier.er. explained the baler. had been broken and the paper. would not normally be stacked that high. Mr.. Sherer. explaxned ttie Planning Comtnission had ap~raved ut least ~~x aE thes~ r.ecycling facilitie~ thr.oughout the City and pr.esented sli~es oE one such facility, ~unset Meta1H on Anahetm Bo~levard~ and :3tated this is typical of the kind of cecycling yard whece landscaptng is bei.ng maintained and ther.e ts pl.~nty of cust~msr par.king in the front-ardeit~elf is~scr.eenedcfr.omnAnaheim ~re aleared and easily accessible and the y aoulevacd and fr.om t~affic by slatted ~encing and the mater.ial i.s stor.e~ below the height of the existing f~nce. Fle stated that is the way staff woul.~ F>refer. to see r.ecycliny yar.ds o~erate. Jack White~ Assistant City Attor.ney, stated a letter oE npposition was r.eceived and Bhould be made a pact of the public r.ecord, together with the slides and staff r.epor.t, and t•hat Mr.. Siegele could have a copy ~f Any of the material presenked. Marilyn Helm, 700 South East Str.eet, ~tated her. property is about 2 to 3 blocks away from subject pr.oper.ty. She pr.esenLed a petitiun signed by surr~unding proper.ty owners and cead the foll~wi~g: 'We r.equest that tt~e Anaheim CiGy Planning Commission ~evoke Conditional Use Permit No. 2187 permitking a recycling ~acility and recreational vel~tclE stor.age facility. We ace cequesting this becau~e we feel that in the am~unt o£ t~me he has had this pecmit, he has made no effor.t to comply uith the condition~ r.equired fot: the granting of the per.mit. We feel that with the current movement within the City to clean up, cEnovate and beautify the areas, this irresponstble and negligent operation of this faciltLy without pr.oper scr.eening, tr.affic conk~ol and iandscaping is causing devaluation of the pr.oper.tfes in the ar.ea surcounding this facility. We requeat that if you do continue chis per.mit to operate and it is granted, that the wasvers of minimum landscaped setback, maxirt~um fence height, requir.ed enclosuz-a of outdoor uses, and minimum number of parking spaces be denzed.' She stated when the petit~oner moved into this azea, he promised that bigger is bettec; that he had a sma11 facility and that was causing his pcoblems and 5/14/84 MINUTBS ~__ANAH~IM CI'PY PLANNING COMMISSiUN MAY 14 1984 84-286 ahe felt he juHt went tnto a biggec faat!.ity and made a bigger. mess and di.d not do the thinga he pcomiaed. She atated East Str.eet is a heavily tr.aveled str.~et and thece is bound to be tr.Aah, t~ut the numbec of papera she picks up ever.yday out of her yard is nol nor.mal. 5he atated she has some Ftr.onq opposition and did not want ta say that anyone is lytng, but the piles of papecs aa shown ~n ~he alide ia whAt they aPe ever.yday and maybe the baler, has been br.oken more tban ahe knows. Ms. Helmx atated this wae appr.oved f~r a r.ecr.eat~onal vehicle storage yar.d and to hec know].edge ther.e has never been any r.ecr.eat.ionai vehtcles ~tor.ed on the proper.ty. She otated they feel he needs to have the outdoor uses enclosed and he ahould have an 6-Eoot h.igh b~ock wall which would help to keep the papers fr.om blowing out ot the yar.d and a wall would hel~ maintatn ~he ~tr blowing thr.ough the Lact~ity. She stated th~y sr.e co~cer.ned about the parking ~paces, cur.ba, gutter.s and sidewalka; that thts ts a hPavily troveled str.eet and people don't know wher.e to gQt into t:hi~ [acility and stop on the str.eet and the atr.eet is used by school children and she believed -ie should have marke~ driveway~ along with appropr.tate sidc~wniks and curbs and landucaping. She stated she feels Lhe petittoner. has ltiad tot~l disr.egar.d for. what the CoRimtssion asked him l-o do and for. those r.easons, the p~rmtt ~hould be revoked or. at least he should have to complX witl~ ttie canditi~n~ witf~ proper scr.eening- sidewalks, etr. Ray Siegele, a32 N. West Str.eek, Anaheim, stated tie han dtscursed the scr.eening he plans to do with staff. Concer.ning the approval ~~f r.pcceattonal storaqe yatd, he explained he had propos~d ~hat in ttie original application Eor the futur.e in lh~~ event he ended up with extr.a stor.age space that might be used foc RV storage, but obviously that has not occur.r.ed. He stated they dtd put trafEic lines down and the r.emain~ of some are still ther.e; however., they did not wor.k vecy well. tie stated the,y have a sign de~iqnating cust.omer. unloading areas; that they do no~: alwa,ys maintain the 2U-foot wide roadways thcough the facility, but do yener.ally have access. !~e stated they do -~ave empioyee ac~as and employee par.king sic3ns posted an~ nobody has discussed where else ~hey khnught the~ should have them; that they da have 'No ear.e Eeet' signs; that they only have seven employees that drive ~nd do ~ack in fcont of tk~e proper.ty because the vehicles wo~ld be vandali2ed in the rear; that they have p~rked tr.ucks outside; ~hat matecia~s ar.e 5tacked higher. than the fences; that their old baling ~ys~em was no longer capable of handling the matecial they wer.e pzocPssi.ny; however, theY had hoped to havn deliver.y of a new baling system last July, but fnv~cable financing was most difficulk to obtain ana he did not get financing h~ could affocd, until the end of 1983; that the machine was ordered artd L-hey wece advised tu stockpile same mater.ials because the inachine was so fast they w~uld need a lot of mater.ial to test it and to get it properly adjusted and star.ted; chat they did expecience a lot of difficu~ty in starting up wh~n the ma.chine arr.ived and explained they spent in excess of $200,OU0 to put the machinery in. Mc. Siegele referred to th~ landscaped planter referced to in the front and stated he had a nice plan; however., right after they moved in the economy changed and he had to borrow money ~ust to keep the business gotng; that screening wa~ planned and he has bxds out for various types of fencing and plans to install an 8-fo~t high block wall, not only for the visua2 aspect, but for secutity. 5/14/84 MINUTB~ ANAHCIM CITY PLANNIN~ COMMISSIUN, MAY 14. 1984 84-287 He atated he hns didcueaed the well with etaff and etated 'n~ was nat awace of the pcoblems on BasL• Str.eet. He stated they hove handled 4J-1/2 million pounds of peper in the last three years And s~me of it ie buund to be caugtit in the wind no matter what he doea, t~ut he Ghougt~t wtCh the volume, they hnve had very amall ~coblema with blowing ~aper.s nnd the block w~ll should help with thak eituatton because ther.e t~ a pr.evailtng wind. Ne stated the tr~~cks par.ked in the a11ey shown in the ~lide did not belang to himt that the picture ot the pile of paper. cun$ist~d of 52 tons oE paper. a~d thN rnt~chin~ wAa br.oken but has be~n r.epaiced and that pi.le of paper. was baled in ~bc~ut three hour~. He stated the machine i~ a high volume ayatem and will handle ever.ything they could possible run thcough the facilityt that they had to stockpile ver.i.ous types of mater.ials befor.e the machine was delivered s~ it could bF tested and the yard is Lull, but ~he material ta about 958 baled And tn r.hr.ep or. Eouc days it will be gone. tie stated the lady who apoke in opposition has never contacted him r.egar.ding tPie problems and therc would have been a aimple solution becau.3e he felt tie is a r.esponsible individu~l and would have done something ~o rectr.Ey the pxob.lerns. He stated given all tt~e evidence, t~~ can see wher.e the CommiFStun w~uld b~ ~trongly inc.l.ined tu r.evoke the per.mit and if he would have done nothing in a posttive senae, he cpu.ld alao r~ee wher.e the Commis,~ton would be inclined to r.evoke it, but he has mnde a ver.y lar.ge move in pur.chastng the new machine and he haa spent monEy, not f.or ae3thettc r.easons to begtn with, but ko get the mater.ial mt~vinyj and thak ;he site screeniny is the next ste~~ since the machine ig now oper.ational. He stated he would beg the CommP.seton's consider.atton oE staCf.'r recotnmendatton for. a possible extenston ef 90 days to accomplish the site sr:ceer.ing and they abviausly need it because he has just spent $200,000 E~r. d rnajo~ improvement; that the block wall will cost another. $6U,ODU to $70,000 and they ar.e pr.epar.ed to star.t constr.uction an that imn~ediately. Efe stated he would li.ke to cequest 90 days to get the wall up and then review l•he ~ituatior, to see what can be done; thal- the otl~er. matter.B by chemselves are, in his opinion, not thati impor.tant, but added uF~ they do become important, but he has had quite a£ew discusstons with Code Enfoccement Sraff and he would put the ~ines in and the Eencing and stgns c~esignr~ttng par.king areas and wanted to point out that he is not in total vi~lation of all the things listed. TNE PUB(.IC HEARIHG Vv'AS CLOSED. Commissioner. Hecbst stated he was one of the Commissioner.s who voked in favor. of this opecatton moving to this new location with the conditions as stiNulated to befng complied with and Prom 1981 to 1983 nothing was done. He statpd the signs wer.e installed, but not enforced and he, as the pcnper.ty owner, can tell the employees whece ko par.k. Mr. Siegele noted none of his employees par.k on the str.eet. Commisaionec Herbsl• stated the pet~ttoner. has not done anythin~ to maintain the conditional use permit and the conditions must be complied with all the tirne and not just once and it is up to the manager of lhe operation to take cace of those things; that he was by the pcoper.ty last week and aga~n this morning and it is a"dump° and is about the 'sickest Zooking thing" in Anaheim. He stated he felt the petitionec should be aehamed of the condition 5/14/84 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MA'i 14, 1984 84-268 this £aciltty is in. He stated e conditional uae permit or vartance is yreat as long as i.t doea not affect the ~eighbocs, but this a~E~r.ation daes aEtect ever.ybody around it and it is a disgcACe to the Ci.ty of Anaheim and he fe1C there is nothiny to do, aut r.evoke the permit. He atated Mr. Stegele pr.omis~d thinga thWt have not been complted wi.th and ~o~a not want to Abtde by the rulea laid down by tlie Planning Commisston. He stAted the petitianer. haa been befor~ ti~e Commi.aston pr.evi~usly, with the Cc~mmts-~ton tr.yinc; to get him to comply, and he did not think thi.s pr.ot~lu,n bel.~ne~s in the Ci~y of Anaheim arid the Condittonal Use Pecmit ahou.ld 'oe c~:vnE;~cl. Ne stated there are a lot oE condttions that he would have to comply with beEore he would even considec allowing him ta yo back into businas~ in the City of An~iheim. Ne stated no bueiness has the pcecogative of devaluattng other pNOple's proper.ty. Commissioner. Bushor.e stated when I~e was Cir.st on thp Commi.ssion, Mr. Siegele was beEor.e the Comroission to get the per.mit on the proper.ty on Atchtaon Str.eet r.evoked and at ~hat time, seven oc eiyht yeAC~ ago, he had a lot of the "milk of t~uman kindnee~" and that has r.eally sour.ed over ktie year.s becc-use he is noa pr.obably l.he tougt~est Comrnissioner, on the pnnel because he has yotten fooled too many times in the paat; l•t~at he went ta the faciltty with a Fire Depar.tment r.epr.esentativP and tald the pelittonec what he nceded to do and Mr.. Siegele agr.eed to c:amply, and he did comply by putting in Cypr.ess tr.ees, macking oEf the ar.eas, etc; and then t~e purr.hased the new site and was cementiny the ar.ea and it was betng done on a timely ba~is and the per.mit was approved witti a li.st oE condit'tons for a one year. per.iod. Eie stated he remembers coming to the pr.oper.ty a coup.le of yeaca ago and pofnting out ther.e wece a lot of th~ngs that nee~ed to be done becaUSe nothing much had been done to that po;.nt. Fle stated it ts not the i~tent of the k~lanntng Commission to put people out of busineas, but t~e has learned, if ther.e ar.e goi.ng to be problems, nok to allow it Prom the beginning and r.eferr.ed to the salvttge opecation on Fro~teca Street where the petit'tcner ha~ started L•tie opecatton a.nd ia ~ow coming ~n for per.mits. He stated he did not know how *_he ::o:nmission has al.lowed this to continue for. thr.ee year.s when nothing has been done; that he t~a~ seen the o~er.ation and he thought the siides wer.e pretty yood to the peti.tioner. becau~e they could have made it look a lot worse because oictures taken by c~ther people wer.e a lot worse. Cummissioner. King stated the Commission has been ver.y yener.ous and the staff report indicates the oper.atoc has shown little or no inter.est in cooperat~ng with the City in cleaning up the existing viola~tons. it is noted that Commi.ssi~n~c Her.bst offer.ed a motion for disappr.oval of the negative declar.atton nreviously appcoved on this project, and that no action was cequir.ed Eince the subsequer!t actton was to revoke the condittonal use permit. ACTION: Commi.ssionPx Herbst of£ered Resolution Np. PC84-93 and moved for its passage and ado~tion that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hezeby revoke Conditianal Use permit No. 2187 on the basis that the conditions of appr.ova'1 have not been complied with and that the use is detrimentai to the health, saFety and welfare of the commun~ty and detcimental to the pr.operties sucrounding it. 5/14/84 84-289 MINUTES.LANAHEIM CITY PI.ANNING CAMMIS3IOM M~Y 14 1984 , _ Commiesioner Necbal addod if thia action la appealed to the City Cauncil and if the CiCy Council dooa ~PPr.ove the pecmit, he would r.ecommend the c o~ditions of appcuvAl be included as r.ecammendod by thc Planning Depar.tment ztaff, including the 8-Eoot high blqck well~ however., he felt thte use doe~ nat belong in the City Af Andheim because the petitionec has n~t madQ any offnrt to abide by l•hc~ regulntion~a oE thR Planning Commission on two differe nt locattons Zoc the pa~t ~even or eight years. He added hg thought rhe Commiaston has been ver.y lenient and has given the ~utiaEte~rvlewing the aite oppoctunity to be a good busineaeman in thia City, this morning, felt it ts a ceal 'dump' and "is not a plac~ of business.' Jack White clarified tl~~t this r.eaolutiun will be to revoke Conditional Use Per.mit No. Zld7 based on the E'indingc that the exiatiny nperation hA ~ fa:led ta comply with Conditions 11, 12, 13~ 14, 15, 17 and 21, of tt~e ext~ ting conditional uae permit and on the baste that t.he use has been ao exe r.cteed ~o be d~trimental tc~>~he public health and saEety, ao Aa to constitute a nuisance. On roll call, the Lo~egoing r.eoalution was paased by the Eoll~wing v ote: AYES: BOUAS~ BUSNOR~, FkY, HERHST, KING, MC BURNF.Y NOES: NONE ABSENT: LA CLAIRE Jack White, Assistant City Attor.ney, preoented the wrttten right to appPal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 day~ to the City Council. I'PEM NU. 13. ElK NEGATIVE DECLARATIUN, WAIVkR OP COD_~ REQUIREM~NT AND CONUITIONAL USL•' PERMI'l` N0. 2569 PUBLIC HEAYtIN~. OWNERS: CHARLES VERMEULEN 6 IRENE VEP.MEULEN, 1159 1 C:ielo Place, Santa Ana, CA 927U5. AGENT: CARL KARCHER LNTERPRISES, P.O. Box 4349, Anaheim, CA 92803, AT'fN: RICHARp RENNA. Pcoper.ty deacr.ibed as an irr.egulacly-shaped parcel of land consisting of appr~~ximately 1.0 a cr.e, located at the northwest corner. of Katella Way and Mlanchester Avenue, 313 East Katella w~Y tCar.l's Jr. Restaucantl. To permit the expansion of a dr.ive-thcough r.extaur.ank with waiver, of minimum number of par.king spaces. There was no one tndicatiny thetc pr.esence ir~ opposition to subjec t request and although the staff r.epo~t was not read, it is ceferr.ed to and made a part of the minutes. Cortunissioner.s Bouas, Bushore and McBurney declaced conflicts of in te~est as defi~~ed by Anaheim City Planning Commission Reaolution No. PC76-15'7 adopting Confli.ct of Intecpst Code for. the Planning Commission and Gavernme nt Code Section 3625, et seq.~ in that they ace stockholder.s and havp a fi nancial interest in the ~utcome of the petttion and pur.suant to the provisiona of the above Codes~ declazed ta the Chairwoman that they Mece wi.khdr.awing from the hearing in connection with Conditional Uae PNr.mit No. 2569, and would not t~ke part in either the diacuasion or the voting thereon and had not d i scussed this matter with any member of th~ Planning Commf.ssion. 5/14/84 84-290 MINU7'ES~ ANANEIM CITY ~LANNING COMMISSIUN. M~Y 14 1984 Jack White, ~seietant Ci~y Attor.~ey- explain~d aince one Cammioaianer. i~ absenL ~rom todAy's meeting and thcee Commiesioner.s have dQC~Ar.ed r.onflictA of intereat on thie par.t~culec heacing~ thece Ace only thcee Comm~esionece left and that doea nol conatitute a yuor.umt tt~er.efor.e, Code requir.ee that it is nece~s~ry thut one of the thr.ee mem~ecs of the Commtsston who tiAVe d~cl~r.ed e c~nflict ~E intereat be ~llowed to pacticip~te in the heAr.ing only tor the pur.poeos oE c~~nstituting ~ legal qu~cum. He pr.e~cent~d thr.oe atr.awa for. the Commteatoner.s to dr.aw Crom ar,d Commieatoner. Bushor.e c9r.ew the ahort Atr.aw nnd r.ematned in Ghe hi~~~tionhoWTh~r.eupon CommieRtone~rstHouas`andaMcBUrneyn1eEt voting of tl~e app the Coun~•il Chamber.• Chairman Pro Tempoce liecbst asoumed the Ct1AIFt. Richard Rennt+, a9ent, explained ttiey are r.eyueating pecmisaion to constr.uct a 541-Kquace foot additi.on to ttie existing fast-food r.estaur.ant to pr.ovide addittonal stor.age space And fr.eezer apace~ leacening tl~e fr.ey~oomY °HQ $t.ated deliver.ies and to per.mit an addition~l 16 aeats in the dining they ace not c~ttempting to attr.act additional buslnes~, but wish to serve l•heic pr.esent cur~tomer.s because at the pr.esent time there ar.e not enouqh s~at~: durtng their. peak lunch hour.. He stated thia addition will not af.fect their. dr.ive-thr.o~.gh lane. Ne stated a Par.kiny Remand Study w~3 suGmitted whtch addresses the p~~r.king situation which is pr.esently oper.ating wtth a watver.; ttia~ the Code ce~~utres 93 spaces and they ar.e presently oper.a~i~~g with 76 spaces and by cloeing one ~f the driveway8 und r.estriptnq a por.tion of the lot, six additional p~ck.ing apaces will be added wh~.ct~ will mor.e than compensate for. the additional dtning r.oom spaces. He stated the site alsa contains t~ Del Taco Kestaur.ant arid all par.king is ahar.ed and ther.e are no ceser.vattons on any of the spaces with etthec buainesa. He etated h.he Traffic Bngineer. had a concer.n r.egar.ding the lU spacea fronting onto Manchester. because ther.e is not enouyh back-up room behind those stalls because they enccoach into the existtng dr.ive-thr.ouyh lane which could be a sli.yht pr.oblem, even though xt ha~ been ther.e for. a Eew years with no real pr.oblem. He stated subaequent to the submission of the Parking Uemand Study, he r.ecetved a letter. Erom the c:onsultant who r.eviewed that concer.n andwould~beeagreeablepto that~e cequiced to park in those spa~es and ~tated they ceskr.iction. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Responding to Commissionec King, Mr. Renna explained the Traffic Engineer has reyuested that th~se spaces be posted with a sign designating them as ceser.ved for employre packing only because they would not cause a conflict with cazs entecing aud leav.ti3g. He stated normally t'ney have a tu~nover during lunch of 2.3 times per hour foc eavh booth and explained tl~etr. employees would normally work 4 to 6an°uofskheir employees do notadriv~ andthelthought~aboutponeshalf• He stated m y would have vehicles. ACTION: Commissioner King offer.ed a motion, seconded by Commissioner. Fry and MUTION CARRIED (Commissioners Bouas, La Cl.air.e and McBurney absent and Curn~nissioner Bushore absl:aining), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the pcoposal t~ pe~mit the expansion of a dcive-through tastaucant with wa~ver of minimum number. of par.king spaces on an 5/14/$4 MINUTES. ANANEIM CLTY PLANNINC C()MMISSION ~ MAY ~4, 1984 84-291 ir,r.egular.ly-shaped paccel uf l~and coneiat~ng of appr.~ximately 1.0 acr.e lacated dt the nocthweat corner of Katell~ Way and Manchester ~venue and further. desccibed Ae 313 East Katell~ Wayi and doea her.eby oppruve the Negattv~ peclarAtion upon finding that it haa conaider.ed the Negative Dec~aration togethex with t~ny commenta received ducing rhe publtc r.eview proceas and [ur.ther. finding on tt~e bASie oE the Initial Study and any commenks r.eceived that there ie no substant:al evidance that the pr.oject will have a atgnificAnt effect on the envir.nntnent. Commissioner. Kiny offer.~d A mution, seconded by Commi.sstoner Fry and MOTION CARRIED (Commiasioner.s Uouai~, Lt~ C1Aire And McBur.ney nbsent nnd Commiasioner. Uushore Abatainingl, that the Anahettn City Planning doos her.eby gcant waiver. of Cnde equir.emn~~: ^r. the baeis that the par.k.ing ~raiver. will not c~uae An increase in tr~fEic congc~stton in the tmmediate vicinity nor adversely affect nny adjoining land uses ~nd gr.anting of the parking watve~ under. the conditions imposed, i.E any, will not be detrimenl~i to the pea~e, tiealth, safeL•y and gPneral welfare of the ct~tzena of the City of Anaheim. Com-niscioner.• Kiny of.ter.ed ite~olution No. PC84-94 and mnved for. its paasagE and adoption that ~he Anaheim Ctty Planning Commissic~n does heceby grant Conditlonal Use Pertnit No. 2569 pur.suant to Anaheim Municipal Code Sect.tons 16.Q3.03U.U3U thr.ough 18.U3.030.035 sub~ect to Inter.depACtmental Committee r.ecammendatfons. On coll call, the L~r.egoing resoluti~n was pa3aed by the folloh~ing vote: AYES: FF.Y~ f~ERBST~ KING NOES: NONE ABSENT: ROUAS, LA CLAIRE, MC BURNEY ABSTAIN: dUSHORE Commiasioners Boua~ and McBucney r.etur.ned to the Council Chamber. anc] Chair.waman Bouas assumed the CFII~IR. ITEM t10. 14 EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WAIVE;R OF CODG REQUIREMENT ANb CONDITIONAI, USE PERMIT NU. 2572 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: ROSE C. FUKUDA, ET Ai~, 332 Per.alta Hills Drive, Anaheim, CA 92807. AGENT: KRIONAS DOULGEROGLOU, 1909 E. Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805. Property described aa an irr.egularly-shaQed parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.33 acr.e, 1904 East L,incoln Avenue (Gilmor.e's C~ffee Shop). 7'o per.mit on-sale beec and wine in an existing r.estaurant with waiver. oE minimum number of parking spaces. There was one person indicating her pcesence in opposition to subject request and ~although khe staff report was not read, it is r.eferr.ed to and made a par.t o~ the m:tnutes. Mr. Gianakakos, agent, was pre~ent to answer any questions. 5/14/H4 MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLA~NING_ COM_MISS_ION1_ MAY 14, 1984 84-292 Mabel aetsho 1 d, 202 S. Beechwood, Anaheim, etated her. pcoper.ty is right oppoaiCe this reetaur.a~f and she doea not have a r.eal etr.ong oppoaition to tho sAle oE beer r~nd wine, but is concerned About the noit~e that cou.ld come fcom a ~tffexenr ty p e clienceler that their relationehlN with Gilmor.e's and the se~vice stat i on over the y~ars has been ver.y goodt that th~~ noise cight now comes from Arsgela's once a manth and the patrons from Angelo's uae Gilmore's to tur.n nrau n d and it is past midnight sometimes before the .~otaa atope. Mr. Gianakak o s atated he did not think ther.e would be any noiae becaune the service stat i on is clc~aed at 7:00 p.m. and the r.estnur.r~nt is closed at lO;OQ p.m. und he d.id not think they w~uld attr.acC a different ty~e of cr.~wd And their pGe3~n t customer.a have asked for. the sale of beer atid wine. THE: PUk3LIC: HEARING WAS CLOSER. Mr. Gianakt~k o9 responded to Chair.woman 6ouas that the hour.s of uperation will not change ar~d they will be open fcom 6:00 a.m. tA 10:00 p.m. ~nd serve br.eakfast, 1 unch and d.inner.. Commi~sioner. McBurney pc,.inted out 62 parking spuces ar.e cequested and ther.e ar.e 27 space s existing and the tr.afftc consultant ~ays ther.e ace a total of 44 spaces available under one owner.ship. Paul Si.nger. st.ated the pr.opr_r.ty may be owned by th e same owner becAUEe rher.e is a vacan~ loC adjucent to the pr.oper.ty and thec~ a r.e actually 24 s~aces available on-site And 3 addi.ttona]. ~paces have to be a cquiced. Mr.. GianakA k o~ r.esponded to Commisatoner Mc~ur.nEy that they have a per.mit for addtt:onal par.k{ng spaces from the pr.oper.ty owner. and they have been uaing them foc a~ ong time and wtll continue to be using them. He stated i.n the afteznoon t h e business is vecy slow and they have mor.e par.king »paces than requiced. Gceg Hastin g s, AsF:istant Plannar., pointed out staff has requested a condttton r.equ~ring t h at 3 addttional off-stte packing s~aces be pr.ovided to the satiafackxon of the City Tr.affic Engineer. and pur.suant to a par.king ~,greement approved by the City Attornex's Office. ACTION: Commissioner King offer.ed a mction, seconded by !'ommissioner Fry and MOTIUN CARRI.E~~ (Commis~toner La Claire absent), that. the Anahei~m City Planning Comm:ission tzas xeviewed the proposal of on-sale beer. an~: wine in an exisitng r.estaur.ant with waivec of minimum number nf par.king s~aces on an zr.regularly- shaped parcel of land consist.ing oE appr.oximately 0.33 acre, having a f r.o ntage of appcoximately 147 feFt on the nozth s~de of Lincoln Avenue, and fucther desccibed as 1909 East Lincoln Avenue; and does hereby appr.ove the Negative Declar.ation upon find:ing that it has conside~ed the Negati~ve Declaxation togethec with Any comments received dur.ing the public cevtew proc ess and fuzther finding ~n the basis af the Initial Study and any comments tecetved that there is no substant.tal evidence that the project will have a sig n ifiGant effect on the env~ronmcnt. Commissioner King offer.ed a;c. ~n, secoraded by Commi~ssioner Fcy and MOTION CARRIED (Commf.saioner La Clair~ abse~t), that the Anahei.m City Planntng Commission does heceby grant waiver, of Code r.equir.ement on the basis that the 5/14/84 MINUT~S,_ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISBION MAY ~4 1984 84-293 par.king weivec will n~t cAUae an increase 1n rreffic congestion in the immediate vicinily noc adver.aely affect rny adjoining lAnd usea and gr.dnting of th~ parking wetver under the condittone tmposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the poace, health, safet,y and general welEar.e of the citt~ens oi the City of Anaheim. Commiasioner, King offeced Re~alukton No. PC84-95 and mov~d Eor. ita pansage and adoption thet the Anahaim City P~anning Commission does her.eby gr.ant Conditional Uae Permit No. 2572 pur.suant to Anahetm Muntcipal Code Secttons 18.03.03U.030 thcough 18.03.030.035 subject to Inter,depar.tmental Committee r.ecommendationA. On coll call, tihe f~r.egotng r.eaolution was paased by the following vcte: AYES: BUUAS, BUSHORE, FRY~ H~RaST~ KING~ MC BUkNEY NUES: NONE AHSENT: LA CLI,IRE ITEM Nn. 15. EIR N~GATIVF UECLARATION, WAIV~,R OF CODE REQUIREMENx' AND CONDITIANAG USE PERMIT N0. 2562 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: ~QUITEC 80 RGAL ESTATE INVBSTORS, 1550 East Katel.la Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805. AGENT: 5HAWN COMMON, 18022 Cowan, i2Q4r izvine, CA 92714. Pr.opecty de~;cr.ibed as a rectangular.ly-shaped parc~l of land conststi.ng of approxlmately 18.9 acres located ak the southwest corner of Pacifico Avenue and State Colloge t3aulevard, 1971 and 1979/81 South State ColZege BculNVar.d (Home an~l eusiness Comp~~~r. Center. and Office 2000). '[b pertt~it r.etail saleb ~. ~ ~.era and office furnitur.e in tt~e ML Zone with ~aiver. of minimi~' number o~ ° ' ~ spaces. It ~+as notAd th~: =+pplic~nt w~G ~oL• pceser~t. a.~~tiON: Commissioner Bushor.e offer.ed a motion, seconded by Commissioner McBurney and MUTION CARRIED (CommissionPr. Lr~ Claice dbsent), that consider.ation of the afocementione~: mattec be continued to the r.egular.ly-schPduled meeting of May 30, 1984, in order for the applicant to be present•. ITEM N0. 16. EIR CATEGORICAL E::CEMPTION-CLASS 11 AN~. VARIANCE NU. 3395 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: PURUSHOTTAMDAS R. & NILA P. PATEL, 2017 S. Hacbor. Boulevacd, Anaheim, CA 92802. AGENTS: JOHN E. SWINT, 707 W. Nor.th Street, Anahef.m. CA 92805 AND JOHN L. SCHMITZ, 718 N. Anaheim, CA 92805. Pr~ximatel described as an irregularly°shaped paxcel of land consistxng of app Y 1.5 acres, 2017 South Hatbor Boulevacd (Convention Centec Inn). Waivers of: (a) maximum aKea of freestanding sign, (b) per.mitted locat~.nn of fxeestanding sign, (c) max~mum azea of roof sign, (d) per.mitted locat~on oE roof sign and (e) maxi.mum height of illuminated roof signs to constcuct a freestnndxng sign and an illuminated roof sign. 5/14/84 MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 14, 1984 84-294 The~e was no one indicating their. pr.eaenc~ in oppoaitton to subject request and altt~ough the ataff cepoct wAe not ceAd, it is r.eferred to and made a per.t of the minutes. John Schmitz, 718 N. Anaheim Alvd., agent, explained they a~a requesting a 185-foot high EreeetAnding aign and a].20-squer.e foot r.oof stgn Eor a new motel on the basis ttiat they have Amall str.~et fr.ontage As compered to the size of khe motel. He r.eferr.ed to the 4'Gaffic Fng.tneer.'s cecommendatton concecning location uf pole sign and potnted out they would be no closer to the aidewelk thr~n exist.ing telephone ~oles in the vicintty. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Respondiny ko Comminsioner. I3ushore, Gr.eg flastingrz, Ansistant Planner., explained this hotel waa not consider.ed by the Planntng Commission because it is ppcmitted in th{s zonr_ and ther.e wer,e no waiver.c~ r.e~ue~ted. Commisatoner Bushor.e aaked when the lot split occur.r.e~2. Jay Tttus, Ofttce Engineer., aftec checking the ~n~ineer.ing Depar.tmenk r.ecor.do ]ater. dur.ing F,he a~eetinq explained the lot spli~: nccurred in 1979. Commiasioner. F3uahoce stated in his ~pinion, this ts a~elf-created har.dship and he could nok justiEy appr.oval. Ne stated he dic! not like the size oc location of the sign and he did not like one sign factn9 into another motel at the r.ear.. Commissioncc Bunhor.e stated he thought the petittoner. was entitled to signing, but would Agree he did not like the sign f.acing in~o the rear. of another. motel, but hQ thought a hardship cuuld be justified based an the size and shape o~ the propecty. Responding to Commissionec F'cy, Gr.eg Nastiir ~::cplained they would be permitted a 40-squar.e foot freestandir.g sign k.ased on 2-squar.e feet per. lineal foot of fcontage and he could put a sign on the building equaling 208 of the face aF the building. Commisr~ioner. HEr.bst stated thia motel only has 20 feet of access and the Commission has allowed s~lgns to other property ownexs with that problem and it was noteci he could paint a s.ign on the rpar. towards t'c~e ather motel amounting to 20$ of the face of the building. ~~ ~. -ionec Her.bst stated he woeld pr.efer tu allow the largec sign in thF ~~,~~. with a stipulatton they wauld not put any sign on the rear of the hotel. Commissioner 8ushore stated if the petitioner. would aqree to tha` and not have any signs on the rear, maybe he could vote for appcoval becausc ~~ does have concerns regarding a lighted sign in the ceur shtning down tnto the r.esidences on Lamack Drive. Mr. SchmiL•z asked for approval be g~anted subject to that restziction and if the applicant is not agreeable. he can appeal that dectston to the City Council. Jack White stated the petitioner. does not have to agxee to that sti~pulation in ~rder. for the Commi~ssion to appr.ove it. Commfssioner He~bst stated he would vrefer to have the petitioner make the st.ipulation because he may want to deny the othe~ sign. Jack White explained if the permit is ycanted with tha't restriction, the peti~ioner cannot exercise the 5/14/84 MINUTBS~_ANAHBIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSICN MAY 14 1984 04-295 per.m~t unlese he meets the conditi~ns, or. he can appeAl the decisi~n t4 the C~ty Council, oc he can meet the Code wt~ich would limit the aign to ~0 ~quar.e feet fconting on Nsr.bor. Commissionec Her_bst stated if the petitionec is inl•ereated in a bigqer. aign on Har.bor, that ia one o~ the conditions And he would pre[er. the petitl.oner. to make that stipulatton. JACk Whike atated the Comm~ssion can go ahead and app~ove the per.mit aubject to th~t stipulatton And he cAnnot execci~e the pe~mit and put ~n the larger. eign on HAKbO[ unleuu he agr.ee~ to meet the conditton and r~~t put any signs on the r.car. Commissionec Herbst otated hc atill prefer.a to have the apPlicant mnke the stipulAtion beeaus~ thece would be bettec understanding of what the Commisaion wants and he would be more obligated to comply. Mr. SchmiC~ stated the mutel is r.eady to open next week and Cortunissioner Bushor.e slated 1:his aign cannot be put up for. 22 days efter the Commission's actt~n, if ther.e is no appeal. Mr. Schmitz stated tf they could get appr.oval today, he could star.t constr.uction and realized ther.e is a watting peri.od and would star.t conatc~uction and nat actually star.t putting the styn up until he got the per.mit. It was noLed tt~e Planning Director. or. hi.s author.ized r.epceAentative has deter.mined khat the pr.oposed project falls within the definitton uf Categorical Exemptions, Class 1.1, as defined in the State Envir.onmental Impact Repor.t Guidelines and is, therefore, categor.ically exempt fr.om the r.equtr.ement to p~epare an EIR. ACTION: Commtssionec Her.bst offer.ed Ftesolutton No. PC84-96 and moved for. tts pa~sage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commtssian does her.eby grant Variance No. 3396, in par.t, yranting waiver.s (a) and (b) on the basis of the size and shape of aubject pr.operty and d~anying waiver.s (c), (d) and (e) on the basis that strfct application of the Zoning Code does not deprive the pzopecty of pcivileges enjoyed by other. pr.oper.ties with identical zontng classification and vicinity and that the granting of wai.ver.s (a) and (b) in subject to the restr.iction that thece will be no wall or. r.oof sign per.mitted on the rea~ of the builcing Eacing Convention Way oc the Mar.r.iott or the Hilton Hotels and subject to Intecdepar.tmental Committee cecommendations. Commissioner. Bushor.e cla~ified that granting waiver.a (a) and (b) would allow a siQn up to 185 squar.e feet and the r.esolution will deny waivers (c), (d) and (e) with the stipulation that when the applicant comes in to get the per.mit fo~ the 185 square feet sign, h~ will sign something giving np the r.ight to hav~~ signs on the rear. He stated there have been pr.oblems in the past and he wants to see somethi~ng in the file that tne petitfone= has agxeed to this. Jack White atated the owner.'s agent is a~.ar.e of the condition and he did not feel the owner needs to sign anything in or.der foc thi.s restriction to be legal. He atated, howevec, if the Commission wants to add a condttion that pcior to Building Permits, they will sign an agceement, it could be done. Commissionec Bushore stated he thought it would be a saFer way to go and auggested a covenant be cecarded. 5/lA/84 MINUTE~ ANANEIM C1TY PLANNING COMMISStUN, MAY 14. 1984 44-296 Cummiastoner. Herbst atated all khe Commtseioners go ta that er.ea and will notice if a sign h~s ~een put up and he want•ed to be sure the ogent makes the pcoperty owner and th~ motel owner Awer.e oE this GondtL•io~ and if it ~s vtolated, they will have a lot to lose. On r.o11 call, the F~cegoing r.eaolut{on was p~saed l~y th~ following vote: AYES: tiUUASi DUSHORE~ FRY, HERBS'f~ KING~ MC BUitNEY NUES: NUNE AE3SRNT: LA CLAIKE J~ack Whi.t~, A3s~st~nt City Attor.ney, pcesenk~d the wcitCen right to appeal the Planning Cummission's decis.ion wtthin 22 days to the City Council. Commissio~-~r. Mr.Hucney asked wtiat. r.ecoura~ the Cit)~ woulc3 have if thEy do violate the ~er.mit by putting up the coof siyn or, wall sign. Jack White explai.ned the Commisaion cuuld revoke khe var.tance for. v.iolation oE conditions whtch me~ns the sign~ r.elattng tU the veciance, which i.a the over.size sign an Har.bar. R~ulNVar.d, would have to be r.emaved and the peti.ti.oner. would be limited to a 4U syuar.e feet gign. Eie s~ateci if ther.e is a violatton, the petittonEr woul~ be in the same sikuatton as if the r.equest was dented ancl would be li.mtted to signs as allowed Gy Code. I`PEM ~VCI. 17. EIFt NEGAZ'IVB DECLARATION ANU GENERAL PI.AN AMENUMENT NO. 194 - GE'NERAG PLAN T~;XT PUpLiC HEARING. AMENUMF.NT Tt~ TNE GENEI2AL PLAN TEXT. The amendment will c:onsicier. an update and consolidatlon of thp elements uf. the G~ner.al Plan. .1oe1 ~ick, Aasistank Dir.ectar. for Planni.ng, presented the staff repor.t to the Plunni.r.y Commission explaini:~g staff is ~rresenting a work book which conatitute3 a teci~.n.ical update to th~ adopted General Plan and the City's cucrE~nt Gener.al Pla~n consiste of aboat 11 separ.ate documents with the base dacument having been pr.epaxed in 19G9. Mr. Fick referr.ed to Item 19a an today's agenda pertaining ~o the Master Gnvironmental Asses~mer~t and s~ated Chat was prepaced in conjunction with the Negarive Declarati.on for. Gen~r.al P1an Amendment No. 194 and staff has found that this infor.maCion, whic~ is constantly being updated, has been extremel}~ us~aful, not only Ln the General Plan pr.oyr.am, but also in environmental analyses and stafE WqUld ~i.ke r,o foxm~ilize the Enviconmental Assessment pr.oceas to a~sist staff ar,d the general public. Mc. E'ick stated staff Ls cequesting three actions: (1) that khe Planning Commission xeconuner•d thac the City Council adopt a Negativ~ Declacatfon in conjunction wir.h GPA 194; (2) that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council adoption of the Master Envir.onmenkal Asses~ment as outlin~d on Page 19-a on today's ngenda ~nd that Commission r.ecommend City CQUncil consider this motion in conjunction witt~ GPA 194; and (3) that Commission adopt a tesclu~tior~ approvxng Genecal Plan Amendment No, 194. Commissfoner Her.bst asked why the Canyon axea was not included. Mr. Fick responded tr,e Canyor~ A~ea goals and policies aze included on the back of the 5/14/84 MINU'PBS. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY la. 1994 84-297 map and theic goals ~nd policies wer.e cr.oss-r.efer.enced and ar.e included in the wor.kbook documentt end that the Ganyon Ar.ea gosl~ a~d policiea wor.e r.eviewed and ar.e still ver.y much appr.opciate nnd they deEinitely will be included inside the workbook~ Cott~miasionec Her.bat commended RtafE and stated ~he Commission has never had anything like this befor.e and it is a fine document And he thought it would cut down on a lot oE ze~~ar.ch an~ review time. Jay Tashico, Assistant Planner, atated t[ this ~articular document is Appcoved by the Planning Commtsston And City Council, the pcinted final document will be br.ought beck to the ~omm.tasion and lhe only differ.ence will be additional ma~s and photogr.aFhs. ACTIUN; C~mmisstoner. Her.bst ofEeced a molton, seconded by Commissioner McF3urney and MOTIUN CARRIEp (Commissioner. La Clair.e absent), that the Anaheim C.ity Planninq CommisE.ion h~~s r.eviewed the Gener.al Pl~n Amendment to update and consolidate var.tous elements of ttie Gener.al E~lan and in conjunctton with currrnt state Gener.al Plan Guidelines and it~~ds that i~ has constder.ed the pr.oposed Negative Decaaralio~ together. wlt:h any comments r.ecetved during the public review pr.ocesa and fucther. flnciing on the t~A~i~ of Che Initfal Study and any comments r.eceived ther~ is no sub~3tanttal Pvidence the pr.oject will have a stgnificant impact on the environment. Joel Ftck asked the Commts!~ion to act next on the appcoval of the Master ~nvir.onmental Assessment Progzam as shown in Item 19-A on today's ag~nda. Commissioner. Her.bst offer.ed a motton, seconded by Commisstoner. Fry and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner. La Clatre absent), that khe Anahetm Ci.ty Planning Commission does heceby r.pcr;nmend to the Ctty Council that they adopt as a Master Environmental Assessment, that body of 60+ Atlas-type exhibits and r.elated summaries, files and micr.o-computer. data bases which togethec compr.iae an ongoing technical inventor.y uf City-wide phystcal, btoloqical, social and economic char.acteristics and furthec that ~he Planning Commiseton and City Council encourage use of the MEA and its various components, wher.e appcapcxate, to facilitate environmental assessments, C;ty studtes, and inter-agency coordination. Commissi~ner Her.t~st offer.ed Resolution No. PC84-~97 and moved for, its passage and adoption that the Anaheim Ci~y Planning C~mmission does hereby cecommend to the City Council adoption of Gen~ral t~lan Amendment No. 194, a dr.aft update and consolidatton of the existing Gener.al Plan Text (excluding the Canyon Area Genecal Plan Noi.se and Housing eleme~nts). On coll call, the focegoing cesolukion was passed by the following vote: AYES: BUUAS, BUSHORE~ FRY~ HERBST, KTNG, MC BURNSY NOES: NONE ABSEN'P: LA CLAIRB Commissionez [iushoce noted it shauld be a part of the record that some thtngs i.n these documents need to be updated so the City Council will be aware the ~eport is betng updated and there are changes to be made. 5/14/84 MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIO~j MAY 14, 1984 8A-298 Commisatoner Hucbst r.efer.rod to the Lslanda which ace not a par.t of the City and noted ther.e ace r.ecommendationa that they should be brought inko the City and asked the etdtue of th~t, indicattng aome of them ar.e n~t wanted in the City. Mr. Fick etated the LAFCO, Lacel Agency Pocmation CommiBaton, aever.al year.a ago expr.essed to all Or.anye County citiea that they wanted to eliminate Count~~ islands to Avoid duplicatton of ser.vices and the Anahetm City Council has been general~y aupportive of Choae efforks and th~re have heen a number of annexatians and ther.e were ~uite a fe~ hear.ing:zt however., r.ecently when one pcoper.ty uwner appl~es, all ~he owner.s within the ar.ea are picked up and the annexationa are lar.yer. and mor.e time conauming to ~cocess, but tn the long r.un save time. I?'EM NU. la. HILLSIDE GRAUING O~DINANCG WIxHIN TRACT NOS. 1098~ and 10984 HEQU~SiEll BY: JAME5 E. CRUSBY ENGINEERS, INC., 1820 E. Deer.e Avenue, Sutte ]UU~ Santa Ana, CA 92805. Pr.oper.ty lacated couCh of Santa Ana Canyon Roaa. ~~ast of Weir Canyon Road within the dauer. R~nch Ar.ea. Waivec of the r.equir.ement oE the Ctty of Anaheim Htllside Gr.adtng Or.din~nce as it celates to the locating of a lot linE at thf: top oE alope for. side slopes a' in height and less wlthin Tr.acts 1U983 and 10984. THE PU6L1C HEARING WAS CLOSEU. Jay Titus, Office Engineer., explained this is a r.equest tn Tracts 10983 and 10984 for a vartance fr.om the Nillside Gr.ading Ordina~ce on side yard slopes less than 5 feet tn height and the r.equirement uf the ordinance i~ that the pr.operty line be 2 to 3 fett from the tap of the slope and staff f~e~s they would have no objection tn pur.ttng the pc~per.ty line at the top of the slope. He explained the or.iginal tntent was to have the alopes tn one owner.ship and also there wuuld be r.oom at the top of the slope for vegetatton. He stated there ar.e sever.al requests Eor this 3atne waivec ar~d was sure the Commission will be seeing more in the futur.e. AGTiON: Commissioner Herbst offer.ed a motion, seconded by Commissioner. King and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner La Clair.e absent), that the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approvaZ of Waiver oE HI1lside Gtading Ordi.nance as zt celates to the locating of lot lines at the to~ of sloQes for side yacds 5 feet tn height or. less with~n Tcacts 10983 and 10984. ITEM N0. 19. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATI~"S_ A. MASTER ENVIRONMBNTAL ASS~SSMENT - Requeyted by the Planning Depar.tment Staff. Suggested by the Californfa Environmental Ruality Act tCEQA) guidelines. The following action was taken on this mattez during the hear.ing on Item No. 17, General Plan Amendment No. 194. 5~14/84 „~ MINUTES, A~'AHEZM CI'PY PLANNING COMMISSIONj MAY 14. 19B4 __ 84-299 ACTION: Commissioner Her.bst ofEer.~d a motton, seconded by Commi~s~aner. Pry and MOTION CARRJ,ED (CommiBaianer. La Cla~r.e abse~t), thst the Anaheim City Planntng Commissiun d0@A her.eby r.ecommond to the City C~uncil that th~y adopt as a::~~~ter. Environmental Aeseasment, that body of b0+ Atlae-type exhibtts and r.elated summar.~es, files and micr.o-computec data baaes which toqel•her. comprise an ongoing technical invenCnry of City-wide physical, bioloytc~l, social and economic character.istt~s and fur.ther that the Plenning Commisaton and City Council encourage use of the MEA and tts var~ous components, wher.e appropr.tate, to facilitate envir.onmenta.l ~~~QRSments, City atudleo, and inter agency coordinAtton. 9. CUNDITIONAL U:+E PGRMIT N0~ 2U29 - Request L-rom Al1An Lobel, Canex Investments fo. an extenston of ttme for C~ndittonal Uae Per.mit No. 2029, proper.ty described as 619-631 Nor.th Anaheim aoulevor.d. Commi~stoner. Bush~r.e ~tated ductng the oriq.inal hear.ing on thie matter. five yeacs ago, the Commission wae concer.ned about the kypes of unes up and dawn Anaheim ~oulevar.d ~nd the applicant had asaur.ed the Com~~i~sion that the use wa~ to be a tempor.ary uae And now they ar.e aplling the pr.~perty and are cequeating an extenston foc another five year.s. He atated also ti~e ~etil•taner. had indicated in the or.fginal public heartng that these would cnly be high quality car.s and now it is a typical used car. lot. Ne stated he sees no r.eason to contin~e thts use Eoz anothcr. ftve year.s. Commissioner. Her.bst asked if thia could be ceviewed un a year-tu-year. basis. Cummissi~onec Pry stated they could not li.mit the use to a par.ticular. type of automobile. Commissionec Bushore asked wh,y the Comm~ssion fooled l•hemsQlves five year_a ago by agreeing to a u3e ~n the basis it would be for a cer.tain type vehicle. He ctated the Commission gives the~e per.mits knowing theic intent and then they always seem to backfire. ACTIGN: Commisatoner. Her.bst affered a motton, seconded by Comrnisstoner. King and MOTION CARRYED (Commtsstoner. La Clair.e absent), that a one year time ~xtension be granted foc Conditional Use Pecmit No. 2029 to expire November 5, 1985. Commi.s;~ioner Her.bat reaponded to Commissi.oner. Bushore that he had offer.ed the motion foz approval beceuse he did not see any parttcular. harm betng done to the neighbozt-ood and the petitioner. would have to apply for a r~ew permit in one year. Jack Whxte, Assistant City Attorney, explained one of the pr.oblems with the way txme limits were impased in the past was that the petittoner could request additi~n~l extensions of time. He ~tated the Commission can express the.ir. intention not t;o ~ur.ther xenew thi.s per.mit and indicate that any subsequent extenstons would be only by way of new applicatton; however, in one year when the applicant makes the ~equest the Commigsion will have to make that decision. 5/19/84 MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSI~N MAY 14 1984 a4-30U CommiBaione~ Fry atated ociginally ~he ownec had indicated he planned ta build an office huildiny on thia pr.operty dnd thia was t~ be an i.nterim u8~. Jack White aeated I~e would aseume ther.e ~$ S~mofhvehicleshpecmitted would whereby the owner did etipulate the only typ be luxur.y car.a t~ut by gxanting the extensi.on of ttme, the Commfssion needg to unders~hnd they will be waiving any futur.e possible cevocatton oE the pecmit on the basis the u$e was obtained by fraud. He added he is not su~agesttng this per.mit was obtained by fr.aud, but is saying i[ the Commiasion was of the mind to r.evoke it because of miar.epceaenkatton at the or.iginal public hearing, they would have gr.unted an extenaton kno~ing thut it ls basically just another. used car. lot and would not l~ter be in a position ot saying n~w they have decided to r.evoke it foc that r.eason. Commisxioner. ~uahoce stated before it was built, the proper.ty was being offer.ed as a used car. lot and then as aoon aR it waa finaltzed, five ~i[fer.ent broker.s handled the proper.ty tr.ying to sell ir. as a u~ed car. lut an~ nuw the applicant io L~uying it as a used cac .lot. Curnmxssioner. King noted ther.e have been no complaints about this use. Commissioner Bu~hor.e stated the public hear.~ng ha~ not been adver.tised and ther.e wer.e not complaints about Siegele's pr.oper.ty until after the advertt~ement, Liut it was a major problem. Commiasioner. Her.b~t added hP would like the legal ter.ms added to his motion necessary to make this expir.e in one yeac. ~ack Whike clar.ified the Comm~.ss~.on can indicate the extension is for one year only and upon the expir.ation of the one year, it is the intention of the Plann~ng Commissian that any fur.ther. requests for continuances af this use shail cequir.e ce-applicatian by the pr.operty owner. ACTIUN: Commissioner. Hecbst r.estated his motton, seconded by Commissioner King and MOTION CARRIEA (Commissioner. La Claire absent), that the Ananeim City Planning Cortunission does her.eby grant a one year extens~on of time for Conditional Use Pecmit No. 2029 to expir.e November. 5, 1985, witti the und~rstanding thar sny fur.thec requests for extensions of time £or cont~nuatton of rhis use shall r.equicp a new application by the property owner.. C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2326 - Request fcom Antr.anik Gzbag for. a retKOactive ti.me extension for Cond~tional Use Permit No. 2326, pr.opezty described as 116 South Maynolia Avenue. ACTION: Commisaioner King offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner McBurney and MOTiON CARRIED (Commissioner La Claire absen~), khat the Anaheim City Planning Commission dnes heceby gr.ant a retroactive extensi~n of time for Conditional Use Per.mit No. 23'l6 to expire May 3, 1985. 5/1~/84 MINUTES, ANAHEYM CITY PLANNING COMMISS_ION, MAY 14, 1984 84-301 D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0~ 2408 - Requeet from Planning Staff for. clarification of permitted uaea undec Planning Commission Reaolution PC83-13, appcoving Cot~ditional Use Permit No. 2408. Propecty lo~at~d at the northwest corner, of La Pa1ma Avenue and Lakeview Avenu~. John Uoxr.is, Re.91 Estate Brokec, 2U022 Rnyal Oak Stceer, Yor.ba I.inda, Califocnia, explained when the application wao made, ther.e waA a r.estau~ant pcopo~ed ~n the cor.nor. and anotheK Luilding in the r.ear. f~r. ML and off.ice uses and ther.s waa a cer.tain list of limited uaea sugge~ted when the application w~s made and the Planning staff asked Eor. cl~rification on the uses And the petittoneG wants to make sur.e the clartEtcation ~ncludes the ML u~es And they do not went to be limited to this ~ar.ticulaz list. He stated ChEr.e is an electr.tcal company next d~or that mi~ht need the additional epace for their businesa and also the Anaheim Hills Medical Clinic which is beinq evicted from the Katsex complex aftec 7 yeacs, would be ~nter.ested in leasin9 th~ build.tng foc 10 yeacs with a lU year. option c~nd the petitionec would like to have a tFnant that would be ther.e for a lpng ktme. He explaincd the suggested list of usea was fuKnished ~y the engineer.. Commissioner Bushor.e noted that if the Planning Commission adopted this liat, a medical clinic could not go in. Mr.. Dor.r.is r.esponded this is ':he ML Zone and theY wanted the ML uses to be tn efEect and that does .inc.ude medical industrial use~. Commissioner. Elecbst stated a medical clinic to ser.vice the industcial azea might be acceptable, but h~ wasn't sure what type medical clin~c is beiny propoaed. Mr. Dorcis stated he under.stands that this ic the type clinic they operate and they are not a part nf Kaiser., but are a private clintc serving the industcial clfents and just happened to be on the Kaiser. proper.ty when it was purchased. Cammiss.ione~ Bust~ore stated medical demand a much highec par.king cequirement. Mz. Docris stated thi~ is a small oper.ation. Commisstoner Herbst atated he would have no problem with the use as ].ong as it is just a medical clinic because they aze needed in the indu~tcial area, but they ate usually small operations. Cummisstoner Bushoce stated if a use ia not on the list, ~t would nat be allowed. Mr. Docris stated the list was submi~ted by the ergineer and was not meant to be a complete list ~f uses they might want ~r~ hhe building. Chaicwoman Bouas stated the uses listed are foc an office building, but the agent is saying now they would ].ike to have it for an industrial building. 5/14/84 MINUZ'ES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSTON. MAY 14, Y984 84~302 Mr. Docrts stated tihey heven't r.ented the buildSng and it might be an oEEi.ce building or an extenston for. the tnduakr.ial use next door. or. the industrial medi.cal clinic. It wes noted the build.ing is 3910 squer.e feet and they juat want what is allowed in the ML Zone. Gceg Flast~ngE etated the curr.ent Zon.ing Coda undec ~er.mitted uaea, allows hoepitals or tnedtcal cl.inics which are induskrial in natur.e, although ~he par.king for. this particuldr. development was oc.iginally appr.oved Eor 4 per. 1,000 squar.e feet which is onl~ f:or. pcofessional oEfice and not medical oEfi.ca and it is posaible a par.king waiver would be r.equir.ed. He explatned a medical use would incr.e~ae par.king r.equir.ementa from 4 per. 10UU squar.e feet ~0 6~ec 1000 syuar.e Eeet, Mr. Dorr.ig stated the medical clinic wnuld only use twa-thtr.ds of the bui].ding and it was noted eight addiLic~nal pazktng apaces would b~ r.~qutxed iE the medical clinic used th~ enttr.e building. Commissionec Fr.y stated h~ hao no pr.oblem with an i.ndustr.tal cl~nic and Commtssioner. Bush~r.e ~tated the ceq!~c~st ts to add the uses as liated tn the stafL r.epor.t. Jack White ~tated t.he applicanC is xequesttng an amendment to the existi.n~ conditional use per.mit r.esolution, nunc pco tunc, to add as pecmitted uses a11 those uses as set Eor.th in Par.agraph 5, Page 19-U, 1 and 2 and all the per.mitted uses in the ML 7.one as aet Forth in Sect:on 18.G1.020, pr.ovided that any such uses comply with the othecwise applica~le parking requir.ements of the Ananeirn Municipal Code. Commtssionec Bushore asked how th.is could be done now nunc pro tunc. .Tack White stated the qaestion is whether or not it was the intenkion of the Planning Commission to limit the original per.mit ko these uses and :f the ~:ommission cannot make that finding, th ~ should have another public hearing. Commissio~ec Her.bst stated it was or.iginally approved as a 1-story offtce building and asked what uses wer.e allowed then. Gr.eg Hast.ings responded lt wasn'k made alear at the original meeting whether or not the list of uses shauld be included; however, the staff report in January 1983, included the list of uses as in the staff repoct t~day. Cammissioner Bushor.e r.eviewed tt,e list of uaes and pointed ~~ut cer.tain uses a~e not allowed in the zone by right, such as political o_* civic organizations. After ascer.taining the list of uses is a st~ndacd liat uaed by the Commission i^ the past, Commissioner Hecbst offeKed a mot~on that this list af uses be added to the zesolution, nunc pro tunc, appcoving Conditional Use PPCmit No. 2a08. Jack Whtte stated he would agr.ee witf Commi~s~~ner Bushor.e that civic orgr~nizattons ~hould not be include~l in tF,e list. Commissionec Bushor.e stated if the use is not permi.tted by Code, it could not be r.equested and most of these uses ere speci,f ically e:.:~ ~.a~.'.ed i.n the Canyon Industr. tal Axea. 5/14/84 MINU'rES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNlNG COMMISSION MAY 14 1984 84-303 Commiaeioner Herbst atated he wou~d chango hia motion ~o r.ead thAt ata[E should r.eview the liat and include or.l,y thoee uaes ap~roved in their. r.esolution and any etr.ora shoald be e] ~inated. He a dded h~ thought it would be Acceptrble t~ have atAff compt.e the list wi thout Cnmm~egton cev~owing it becau~ this is a amall building. Anni.ka SantalahCi, Asstatant Dir.ector. tor. Zoning, sta ted atAEE will compace thia liet with conditional use permi~a in .ind ustr.tal ar.eas other than the Canyon and if any of theae usea appeac on both lists, they will be eliminated fcom this list And tho~e uaes not on o t her. l.iats wtll be left in. Jack White atated per.initted industrial uaes in the Canyon Induatr.ial Ar.ea ace curr.etitly limited to automobile ~.apaic and overh aul, ~oilec and tank manufACtur.ing. banks, buildings or. str.uctur.es in exc eas of LQO feet in height, commercial sales bu~inesses which pr.imaefly ser.ve and ar.e compz~tible wilh industr.ial use cuotomer.s, health spa s ancl rhysical fitneso center~, ex~lo~ives, manuipc ~ring oper.ation s not olher.wtae li~ted as a permitted u~e, metals, smelting, hute:ls and rnotels, r.estaur.an~s, And r.ecycling And r.ecovery transEer Ea^ iltties. ~e ~tated these u3es cannot be allowed even wi.th a candttion .~ase Per.mit. I~e stated Section 18.61.050 saya "Not withr~tanding athe r pr.ovistons of the Code, only those cerlain uses enumerated in Section 18.61.050.06U shdll be conditionally permitted .in ~he ML Canyon and znd u str..ial a~ea." ACTION: Commiasioner. Herbst withdrew hts mokion foc apP[nval and ofEer.ed a motion for continuance to the meeting of June 11, 1984, in or.der Eor staff. to ceview the permitted list of uses tn the Cany~~~ zndustr.ial acea. Commissi.oner King seconded the motion and MOTIO~•. :.~.FRIED (Commissioner. La Clair.e absent and Commissionec McB~Kney abstainingl~ Mr. Dorcis asked if they would be allowzd permitr.ed usea in the ML 2one plus thia list and it was noted the list is differe r~t fo~ the Canyon ar.ea And that ~taff would be c~ntacttng him r.egard~ng th e list. AUJUURNMENT: ThPre being no f~~r.ther. business, Commiss i oner. Herbst offeced a motion, seconded by Commissioner King and MOTI~JN CARRIED (Commissionec La Clair.e absent), that khe meeting be adjo-~rned. The meeting was adjour.ned at 4:45 p.m. RespectEully submitt ed, ~~-z"-~. ~ ~ ~ Edtth L. Hacris, Sec rptary Anaheim City Planning ~:ommission ELFi : lm 0045m 5/14/84