Loading...
Minutes-PC 1985/05/29 ~ ~~ . .~ . , r... 3 REGULAR PIEETINC OP THE ANAHEIM CI'TY PLANNING COMMISSION R~;GULAR M~ETING The [egular mec~ting of the Anaheim City Planniny Commis~ion was ~called to orde~r by Chairman Iierbst at lv :00 a.m. , May 29, 1985, 1n Che Counci 1 Chamber, a qu~~rum be~ng preaent, And the Comnission Keviewed plana of the itemn on today's agenda. RI:CESS: t1:30 a.m. RECONVENED: 1:30 p.m. P1tBSENT Chairman: Nerbst Con~miaeianers: E~ouas, Buehore, Fry, King, Lar,laire, McE3utney A6SENT; Comroissioner : None ALSU YftESENT Annika Santalahti Aesistant Director for Zoning Malcolm Slaughter Deputy City Attorney J ack Judd Civil Engineering Associate Paul Singer City Traffic Engineer Grey tiast.ings Associate Plannec Edith ktarris Planning Commission Secretary APPRUVAL UF MINUTES: Commissioner King offered a motfon, seconded by Commissioner Boua~s and MOTIUN CARRtED that the minutes of the meeting of May 13~ 1985, be app[oved as ca~cPctec to show Commisaioner Mc:Burney declaring a conflict of interest on Item No. 5, page 85-269, pertaining to Conditional Use Permit No. 2681 and that he did not vote on the motions or resolutions and that he returned to the meeting following iterti No. 5. THE ~ULLOWING MATTER WAS HEARD FULLOWING ITEM NO. 6 BECAUSE THE APPLICANT WAS NOT PRESENT AT THE AEGINNING OF THE MEETING. I2EM NU. 1. EIR NEGATIV~ DECLARATION AND VARIANCE N0. l482 PUl3LIC H~ARING. OWNERS: QRVILLE B. SVOODS, ET AL, 1224 E. La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 9280~. AGENT: MAGDY tiANNA, 400U HacAtthur Boulevard, Suite 680, Newpnrt Beach, CA 92660~ Property described as an irregularly-shaped paccel of land consisting of a~pcoximately 0.79 acre, 1224, 1228 and 1236 East La Palma Avenue. Wafver of maximum structural height to construct a 3-story, 26-unit apartment complex. Continued From the tneeting of April 29, 1985 85-293 5/29/85 MINUTES, ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 85-294 Thece wea no one indiceting their presence in apposit.on to subject cequest ~nd althouyh the stAff re~ort w~~ not rend, Lt is ref.erred to and made a parC of the minures. Magdy Hann~, ayent, was pre~ent to answer any questiona. TNE PUgLIC HEARING WAS CLOSEU. Chairman Herbat staCed he did not khink the petitione~ had made rPVioiona to meet the sugyestions made by rhe Planning Commisaion at the previoua meet•ing, ~nd noted it was sugyented lhat the Commieaion would probably approve anything aimilar to what had been approved previously on La Palmut and that three stories are atill proposed within 57 feet of single-family residences. Ne added that adeyuate landacaping could not be provided to screen tt~ose properkies for a long time, and thak the Commisaior~ is trying to protecl• the integrity of tt~e cesidential area and the reaidents were there first. Mr. Hann~ 3tated ttiey would stipulate to planr. whatever si.ze ~ree~ the Commission wishest and that the ~hapc oE thin patcel i~ ver.y unusual and diEficult to desiqn. He statPd they have moved the building further away from the person's residence who opposed the cequest at ~he previaus meeting. Chairman He~bst stated the Commission t~ac denied other three-story buildings whfch were proposed adjacent t.o the residential areas and he would nnt grant appro~~al uf this request when .it has been. denied to others. Commi.ssion. .:ing aeked what the t~ardships would be to j~stify approval. ot the 57-foot distance frorn the couth ~roperty line. Mr. Nanna stated thc shape of the property is very unuaual and pointed out they tiave provided the buffer area and will provide heavy land~caping. Commissianer Bouas asked if the project could be reduced to two stocies. Mr. Hanna stated that would only permit 16 or 17 units and that would not be feasfble. He stated he developed a 21-unit project at 5160 Ball Road (Ball and Western). Chairman Hesbst slated there are balconies proposed across the back of the building. Cammissi~ner La Claire stated even if t.he Commis~fon granted this request, the City Council would deny it because they are vehement about thcee stories cloeer tc single-family residential proppr~y than 150 feet. She stated the Commisoion t~as had numerous meetings with the City Council because the Commission felt 150 feet is too far in today's market and the City Counail agcted to a certain extent, but the ordinance was left as is so that each case could be reviewed i.ndividually. Greg Hasti.ngs, Assistant Ylanner, explained the projEGt next door is two and three stories, with the thr-~e stori.es further than 150 feet ar.d th~e two stories ak 72 feet from t'.a single-family residences to the south; and on the other side of that propezty, there is also a complex that is going te be condominiums or apartmer.te with two-story units 55 feet from the south property line, but no three stories are proposed on that property. 5/29/85 MINUTES~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNTNG CUMMISSIQN 65-295 Chairman Herbst daked it tt~e E~etiCioner would l~ke a continuance oc a vote today. He statNd he could not vot~ for three stories because they have never beon allowed that c.loae before and the residenCe deserve the Planning Commiesion's ~rotection. Commisaioner La Claire suggested tuck-under packing. Mr. Hanna asked Eor a continuance in ocder to revise the plans. ACTION: Commissionpr McBurney offeted a motion, ~econded by Cnmmissioner King and MOTION CARRI~D that coneideration of the aforementioned matter be aontinued to the cegularly-scheduled meeting of June 24, 1985, at the cequest oE the petitioner in ocder tu consider reviaed pl ~~s. ITEM NO. 2. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARAmIUN, RECLASSIFICATION N0. 84-85-36 AND VARIAN~E NU. 3485 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: MISAL BUILDING CONTRACTORS, INC., 300 S. Hsrbor Blvd., Suite 600, Analieim, CA 9i805~ ATTti; WARTAN L. MINASSIAN. Property described as a rectangulArly-shaped paccel of 1Gnd c:onsisting of apProximat.ely 0.75 acre, 1830 West Lincoln Avenue. RS-A-43,ODU to CL or a less inten~e zone. W~ivers of minimum atructural heiyt~t end minimum landscaped setback l•o construct a one-story commercial/retail center. Continued trort- the meeting of May 13, 1985. There was no one indicating their presence in opp~sition to sub~ect [equest and although the staft repurt was nol• read, i.t is refe~red to and made a part of the minutes. Howard kichacds, Misal Building Cor.trbckors, was pccsen_ to answec any questions. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ACTIUN: Commissi~ner FicBurney offered a motion, seconded by Commissicner King and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassif.y subject property from the RS-A-43,000 (Residential, Agricultural) Zone to the CL (Commercial, Limiked) 2one to conatruct a one-story commeccial/retail center with waivezs of maximum structural heighti and minfmum landscAped setback on a recta~gularly-shaped parcel of land consisting oE approximately 0.75 acre, haviny a frontage ot approximately 140 Eeet on the north side of L.incoln Avenue and further described as 1930 East Lincoln Avenue= and does hereby approve the Nega~ive Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration togethec with any comments received during the public revi~w process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any cumments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will t~ave a signiffcant effect on the environment. 5/29/8S ~ ~~ -2 I Commis~ionc~r McBurneX ofEered Resolution No. PC85-134 and moved for its passage ~nd adoption that the AnaheimBUbject1tonlnteedepe~rtmentateCommittee grant Reclassification No. 84-b5-36, Recommendatione. On roll call, the foregoing reaotution was pas~ed by the foll~wing vote: AY~S: NUES: ABSENT: BOUA5, BUSHURE~ FRY, HERB:iT~ KING~ LA CLAIRE, MC BURNBY NONE NQN E Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented th~ written right to ap~eal the Ptanniny Commission'R decisiun within 22 days to the City Council. IT~;M N0. 3. EIR NtiGATIVE DECLARATIGN WAIVE:R OF CODE R~,Q,UIR~MENT AND CONDI'PIONAL US~ PERMIT N0. 268'l. PUBLIC NEARING. UWNL•'R: d~NAHEiM CENTER COMPANY, 271b ~~o~COEaVAL.~oiNrvard94a Santa Moni~a, CA o0A05. AG~NT: MICNAEI. P. PICKRFN, N. Tustin Avenue, Y100, Oranye, CA 92665. Property de ~ribed as an irregulacly-shaped pacce~foLinco n Avenueiand~c:lementineaStree~t,~andrfucthered at khe southeast corner described as 2gU W. I,incoln Avenue tCalifornia Chicken). To permit on-sale beer and wine iri an existing drfve-thraugh restaurant with waiver of minimum number of packiny r.~pace~. There was no one indicatiny their presence in opposition to subject requeat and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Commissioner Bushore dpn1ResolutionfNoctPC'161157cadoptingea1Conflictnofeim City Planning Commissi Interest Code for the Planning Commission and Govecnment Code Section 3625, e seq., in thai: he is Che contractucal real estate agent for the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency and pucsuant to the pcovisions of the above Cudes, declaced to the ~hnditionalaUsee~'ecmitii~oar2682g andmwouldhn titakenpart in connection with ~o either the digcussion ar the v°tCommission~. aTheceupontCommissionerhBushoreer with any member of the Planning left the Council Chambec. Ruth Feinbery• 290 W• Lincoln, Anaheim, explained they propose the 3ddition of the 6ale of beer anacea`landnwal,k toetheerestaurantsandfhaveiaboutt45eminutes fcom the immediate for lunch. She ehphas~ehessaleaof~beeceandawinerand itihasnincreasedntheic another ciky whic volume by $2,OOQ per month and she has had expeLience in ser~ving beer and w ne and did not see any difficulty. 5/29/SS MIMUTES~ ANAHF:xM CITY PLANNING COMMI5SION ^~ ~~,297 THE ~UBLIC H6ARING WAS CLOSED. Reaponding to Commisaioner La Claice, Ma. Feinberg explained t~.l~e beer and wine will be served in plastir gl~eaea on the premises only, and not thcough the drive-through window. She a~ated she could une glnss containers rather than plastic, it that is the Commisai~n~r'Fi desire. She responded she would make that A stipulation of appcoval. Reaponding to Chairman fierbst., Ms. Feinberg stated the beer and wine would not be served thcouyt~ the drive-through window under any circumstances. ACTIUN: Comtnis~ioner Kiny offered ~ mution, aeconded by Commissioner Pry and MUTIqN CARRZCU (Commissiuner Dusho[e ab~ent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the ~roposal to permit on-sale beec and wine in an exiatir~~~ drive~through restaucant witti waiv~r of minimum number of parking sp~cea on a;i icregularly-stiaped parcel uE lAnd ~;onsisting of sppraximately O.S acre located at the southeast cocner oE 1.incoln Avenue and Clementine Slreet and further described as 29U W. l..incoln Avenue (Califocnia Chicken); and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has coneidered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during khe ~ublic review process and furtt~er finding on the basiB of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no aubstantial evidence that the project wilt have a siynificant effect on the environment. Commissioner King offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner B~uas and MOTIOt~ CARRIED (Commissionet Bushore absent) that the Anaheim City Plannfng Commiss.ion does }~ereby grant waiver of Code reyuirement on the basis that the parkiny waiver will not cause an increase in trafEi.c congestion in the immediate vicinity nor adversely affect any adjoining land uses and granting of khe parking waiver under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detcimentai to the peace, health, safety and generai welface of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Commissioner King offered Resolution No. PC85-136 and moved for its ~assage and ado~tion that the Anaheim Ci~y Planniny Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2682 pursuant to Anaheim Mt~nici.pal C.ode Sections 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035, and subject to Interdepartmenta.l Committe~: Recommendations including an additional condition that all beex and win~ will be served in non-disposable glass containe:s and that no beer and wine will be served th:ough the dcive-through window. On rull call, th~ foregoing resolution was pa~sed by the following vote: AY~~S: BOUAS, FRY, HERf~S~r, KIt~C, LA cLAIR~:, MC BURNEY NOES: NONE ABSENT: BUSHURE: Malcolm Slauqhter, Deputy City Attorney, prpsented the written right to appeal the Planhing Commission's decision within 22 days t~ the City Council. COMMISSIONER 6USHORE RETURNED TO THE MEETING. 5/29/85 ,.. t r t ~ ;~ M1NU7'ES. ANAHEIM CITY hLANNlNG COMMISSION 85-298 ~ _~~ 1TEM NU. 4. EIR NEGATIVE DBCLARATION~,,,,WAIVER OF CODE RE4UIkCMENT AND CONDITIUNAL USE P6RMIT N~D. 2fi90 ~UE~LIC tIF;ARING. OWNERS: ERAIiF~ b SARAtt b:. MINISSALE, 111 Snuth Mohler Dcive, Anaheim, CA 92807. AGENT: F3kOWN b MULLINS, INC., c/o PHII.IP E. BROWN, 2150 N. Arrowhead Avenue, 5an Bernardino, CA 924U5. Property described as an irregular'ly-shaF~ ' parcel of l~snd consistin~ of approximatelY 1.2 acres located at th~ soutt~west corner of santa Ana ~any~n Road and Mohler Drive, and Eurther described as 111 South Mohler Drivc~. To permit a child day care center for 204 children with waivere n[ minimum landsca~ed setback, muximutn aign area, required on-site loadi~g t~nd unloading ~rea and maximum stcuctural height. There were seven persone indicaring their presence in opposition to aubject reque~t and ~lthou5`: the statf report was not read, it is re~erred to ~nd made a part af the minutes. David Hiott, Kindercare Learning Centers, 160 Newport Center Dr.ive, Newport E~each, CA., explained Santa Ana Canyon Road will be extensively improved with widening, lighting, bicycle path, etc., and ti~e equeatrian trail will be relocated to the cear ot the property. Eie stated there is a school adjacent to subject pro~erty and there is a need Eor this ty~e facili.ty in the area. Frank Min.issale, ownet, explained he has 27 siqnatures of people who do not oppose the pLOject and five people would not sign but wauld not object and he thought ~robably only 9 of ~he 47 r~djacent property owners would object to the project. He stated this is the only pco~erty in that immQdiate area zoned residentially and he haa tried unsuccessfully to sell it aA residential pr~perty for three yeacs at a lower priae than the average residential praperty in the area. Lee ~raber, President of the Santa Ana Canyon Property Owners Association, 407 Country Hill Road, stated they are against the proposal and he is receiving ph~ne calls from concerned homeowners who ace wncried that this u3e will be a deviatian from tihe General Master Plan of Development for this community and that he is c~ncerned too. He added most of them inquired about the Master Plan before purchasing their homes and thought it would protect theic lifestyle and their investment and now Eeel threatened because they c]id not expect a large sign in the neighborhood nor a tall building with limited parking and they do not think the rules should be changed and are asking the Co,nmiasion to continue to prutect them. Prank Doty, 7431 Mill Stream Circle, stated he is concernpd a5out the severe increase in traffic which would result from this day care center and noted because of the high densiL•y in the area and with Mohler Drive being thP oniy access, ttiere is already a.lot of traffic and this addi~tional. traffi,c would make the situation ir~tolecable. He stated a property owner counted 315 cars that went up Mohler Drive in an hour. He presented petitions conL•aining 66 signatures of people who are thoroughly opposed to the request and to the proposed signs and waivers and asked the Commission to keep thefr implied promise of several years ago to maintain the character of the neighborhood. 5/29/85 ~ ~ MxNUTES, ANAH~IM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIAN 85-29y C. A. Arnold, 120 S. Mohler Drive which ia directly acroas the street from aubject property, stated he purahar~ed his home about two years ago And he can understand the petitionec's problem, but th~ propecty is buildable for a residenL•ial use and explained his is a 5,100 aq. ft. home and it is an excellent location, so tie thought the subject propetty cauld be sold and (~PVQ10j1P.C~ for res~i.dential purposee. tle atated the krAffic on Mohler Drive is extremely high and they have difficulty yetting out of their driveway on Mohler Urive and tt~e only acceao to ~t~e area is Mohlet Drive. He staked he ~tcongly ob~ect8 to any commErci~l use bein9 acroas the street from his home. He stated he purct~ased his home with what he thought was an understanding with kh~e City that the natuce of the property and the ar.ea will not change. Craig Yainter, 22U Country Hill Road, staLed t~e has two primacy concerns: 1) the characteriEtics of the Dtotiler loop area and many ceaidents have located there because oi the unique atmos~here that existed and he sees rhie proposal as a rhreat to the natural, more r.ucal enviconmentt and 2) is the total imp~act this day care center will have on the traffic which cannot be overlooked. sharon 5chlesinger, g96 Country Nill Road, statea she has a child atr,ending E1 Rancho Jr. High Schoo' and iE speaking E~r other parents who have students there and are concerned About the traffie hazard to their ar.udents with the additional traffic in the area. She stated a waivec is requeated for an ~n-site loading and unloading aten which meana there will not be enough parking spaces Eor the par~:nts which will create an additional traffic hazard. She tefecred to a letter from Ralph Jamison~ pcincipal of E1 Rancho Jr. High School, voicing his concern about traEEic safety for the students. She stated the President of the Parent's Aasociation at the achool could not call a board meetiny in time to appose this request, but as parents, they feel this situation would really endangec the children. She read portions of a letter from Susan &,Iohn Schaffer, 7630 l.~leasant Place, Anaheim, pertaining to added traffic. She stated she did not think widening Mohter and adding a traffic signal will eliminate this problem because there will be 2U0 additional cars twice a day every day. Mr. Hiott stated this will be communit,y orienteci service and there is no zone change cequested, and a day care center ia permitted. He stated the entire area has been [eviewed and they have cooperated by retaining the inlegrity t~f ~his location. He stated the City ordfnances cali for a drop-off area for tF,e children and they do not permit the student3 to be dropped oEf, and the parent has to actually pa:k the car and sign the child in and then sign the child out when they are picked up. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Cummissioner Buz;hore asked the ages of the chil~3ren, with Mr. Hiott. stating t:~ey will have inFant care startir-g at six months old and canging up to 11 or 12 Xears old, and the hours of operation would be from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. and they would be able to have about 204 students. He stated the number of children is governed by the State of California through licensing, and they adhere to HPalth Department rules. He stated a child can only be left for a couple hours aftec tl~e parent has Eilled out a lot of forms so it is no't 5/29/85 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIpN 85-30U desiynod aA a dro~-off place for a few houra. Ne ata~ed they have 1/2 day sesaions, but thu- ie a low ~ercontage o~ their business. Cammiasionec Bushore stated the bell tower is one foot above what is normally allowed and Mr. Hiott s*_ated that is a el•andacd design and ataff felt the one toot was not a siynificant change. Commisai~ner Buahore stated his basic concern is with traffic And he is familiar with the traffi.c problems and thia ptojk.cl would add ~ potential for 204 more cacs in the marning and afternoon und would create a lot more traffic than the previously proposed real eatate office. He stated the pKOb1Em mAy be ecunomics And it is poasible Che property owner is asking too much for the pcaperty, but the Commiasion has held to the Codes foc the other properties in the same area and approval o£ ti~is would have a real impact on the othec praperties. Paul Singer, TrafFic Engineer, res~onded to Commissionec Mc9urney that a traffic signal ia not planned for this intecsection but a right turn lane would be added on San~a Ana Canyon Road which would irtipc~ve the traffic situation an~ that UeI Giocgio and Santa Ana C~nyon Road will not be widened since they ace alresdy ~t ultimate width. Conunissioner La Claire stated stie did not think tne building it~elf would be too bad and the use is not that bad aince is near a school and a shopping Center; however, the ma~or F~roblem is the traffic and there is a pcoblem now because ~f the school and ta increase the traffic would be harmful to thF erea and she did not feel denia2 of thi.s request would curtail the property awner's use of the property and added she would consider this h.o be a commercial venture. Commissioner Bushore pointed out the playground is proposed right up to Santa Ana ~anyon Roao and added he would have concerns with that and thougt~t it should be set back further. Mc. Hiott stated there is 5 co 7-fool grade di.fference between SanEa Ana Canyon Road and the wall to the playground. Commissioner Bushore stated he knows there is a need for day care in that area and others have been approved, but there ace ather areas where they would not have as great an impact because of the ~raffic in the area. ACTION: ~~arnmiesioner Fry offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner King and MUTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to pecmit a c}~ild day care center for 204 children with waivers of minimum landscaped setback, maximum sign area, required on-site loading and unloading area and maximum stru~tural height on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land eonsisking of. approximately 1.2 acres located at the southwest corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Mohler Dri~~e, and furtiher described as 111 S. Mohler Drive; and does hereby approve the Negative beclaration upon finding that it has ,onsidered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments t~ceived that there is no substantial evidenc~ that the project will have a significant effect ~n the environment. 5/29/85 MINUZ'~5, ANANEIM CITY PLANNING CpMMISSION 85-301 Commisoioner Fry offered ~ motion~ seconded by Commissioner Bushore and MUTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does heceby deny waivers of Cude requirement on the basis that there are n~ special circumatances applicable to ttie pcoperty au~t~ a~ size, ahape, topography, locAtion and surroundings which du not apply to other identicAlly zoned propertiea in the vicinity and atrict applicativn of the 7.oning Code does not depcive the property af privileges enjoyed by other properties in identical zoning classification in the vicinity. Commissloner Ery offered Reaolution No. PC85-137 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anat~eim City Planning Commission does hereby deny Londitional Uae Permit No. '1690 on the bASis that the prop~sed uae will adversely affect the ad~oining land uses and Lhe gr~wth and develo~ment oF the area because of the increaaed traEfic it would gener~~te and it would impoae an undue burden on the streets and highways designed and !mproved tc carry the traffic in the area and will be detcimental to the peace, he,alth, saEety And gPneral welface of tt~e citixen~ of the City of Anaheim. Un rall call, the foregaing resolut{.or~ was pas~ed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS~ HUutIORE, ERY, NERBST, KING, LA CLAiRE, MC BUKNE:Y NOES: NONF ABSENT: NONE Malcolm 5laughtec, De~uty City P,ttorney, pre~ented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 2'l days to the City Council. ITEM N0. 5. EIk NEGATIVE UECLARATIOP7 AND CUNDITIONAL USE PF.RMIT N0. 2691. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: STEWAR2 GREEN ASSOCIATGS, ATTENTION: KARL MEADER, P. 0. Box 6371, Anaheim, CA 92806. Pcopecty descrlbed d~ an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting o~ approximately 27.11 acres located at the southeast corr~er of Lincoln Avenue and State Ccllege Boulevard, end further describec3 as 231.2 East Lincoln Avenue (Midas Muffler). To permit an automotive rep~ir facility. Tt~ere was no one indicating tt~eir presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read, it 's referred to and rnade a part of the minutes. Karl Meader, agent, explained they are proposing cunstruction of a muffler repair shop on a previously approved building pad. He referred to Condition No. 3 pertaining to a fire hydcant ~nd stated there is an exi.sting fire hydrant and Condition No. 4 pertaining Co fire sprinklecs. Chairman Hecbst explained compliance of those c4nditions would be up to the Fire Department. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. 5/29/65 ~.._: ,. MINUTES ANANEIM CITY PLANNI.NG CAMMISSIQN 85-302 Commisaioner Bushare stated rhak location w~e originally ~roposed for retail uae and 1n ceviewing tlie center as it hAb da~~loped, he thought nc~ mattec what is developed on th+~t site will have an itnpact on tho post office, and asked if it would be beL•ter to move thia facility to another locakion and thought. the only other location would be behind the poat oEfice building somewhere. Mr. MeAdec statec~ they thought about that loeAtionJ however, a lot of the muffler. :.:hop's businesa is conducCed on weeke--ds when the post office And savings and loan buaineES ace cloaed. Commissioner. Flushore suggested a condikio~ that rhe customers' vehicles waitinq to be repaiced or picked up would be parked in the cear of the post oFfice in a designated area. Mr. Meader atated it might be possible to have a designated area und explained normally a muE~ler repaic is completed within one huur and moce of the business is conducted on weekends than on weekdays. Gommissioner Bushnre stated in two different incidents, he has been away on vacation and had a muffler ptoblem and had to wait three hours and with the ~,roposed condition, that vehicle could be parked in another portion of the parking lot. Mr. Meader staLed he would have no objection to that restriction. Ned Jacobs, 2555 E. Chapman, Ste. ~02, Fu1lQrton, stated Midas would have no objection to that condition and that it could also be added to theic lease document, cortunissioner suahore stated monitoring t~at condition will be a pcoblem but he was sure the post offi.re repcesentativeo will let the City know if there is a problem and also he watches that center conatantly and if there is a pcoblem, somebody will know about it. he added if this is appcoved, there ace a co~~ple oF other suggestions he would like to include. Chairman Herbst stated that post oEtice is very busy and nobody uses the parking spaces in the rear; that there is a futuce home centervariances and in there is vacant land and that center has been granred parking hi.s opinion, they should utilize the vacant land to increase the parking. Mr. Meader stated the muffler repair shop will not fit on the future home center site, and Chairman Herbst: stated he would not vote for it on this site. Commissioner Bushore stated that site is propos~d for r~tail right now and people will eithec come there and sit or drop off theit cars and leave and it will require less parking spaces. Chairman Herbst stated the Midas shops have started ~oing brake repairs and other things and he thought they will have care waitin~ a lot longer than an hour. 5/29/85 .. ~~ r., .,. ~ MINUTES, ANAHEIM CImY PLANNING CUMMI5SION 85-•303 Commioaioner L~ Claire stated she was concerned about the noiae that would be generated. Mc. Meader stated ~he building will be conatruc~ed of concrete block And plastec and wood to makch the existirig center, and the side facing PecegrinQ will be solid block an4 the only dnors will be on the weat aide facing into the shuppi.ng center and there will not be very much noiae. (;ommiasioner Bushoce state~i assuming this is approved with a condition that cars wi11 be parked in a designated atea behind the poat oEfice, theze are s~me okher problema in the center which are starting to aurface hQcause of the increase footages being leased and the amount of traffic, especially the area between Ralphs and McCOnahay's, and now is the time to get that taken care of. kle suggested khe curDs in front of McCont-hay's be painted red becauae people are parking along the curb and that signa ahould be poeted that no parking ie allowed and vehicles will be towed away. t~e added that the diayonal spaces in fr.ont of Ralphh take up more room and an increa3e of probably 158 could be reali2ed 1E thoQe were repalnted as strnight spacea. Mr, Meader stated they would have no c,bjectinn to that, but Ralphs specifically requested the angled parki.ng and it ia included in their lease. He added he was not involved in rhat lease r-egotiation. He added he would like for the Anaheim Police Department tu patr~l that area so that people will not pa~k along that curb in front of hicConahay's. Paul Singer stated the petitioner would have to make z~ specific request For the Police Deparlment to enter onto L•heir propetty. Commissioner La Claire stated she has voted for almost everything they have requested in this c~nter, ~,ut she is not thrilled with the idea of a muffler shop because she did not think it wouid be a good mix and she thought there will b~ a lot of idling of engines associated with the rnuEf.ler shop. 5he added her concerns are noi.~e, air pollution, and traffic because of the past office and apartmenLs across the street. SF,e asked if there is another place in the ehope~ing center whece this could be located. Mr. Meader stated they considered the back parking lot, but Midas objected to that and then theze would also be housing on two sides. He ~tated *t-ere would not be much noiae because they would not use ait hammers to take the mufflers ~ft and the brake work would involve impact wrenches, buk they would be inside the building that backs up to Peregrine where the apartments are ?ocated. He stated one of the majur things Midaa is qetting into is replacing catalytic converters because that goes along with the mufflezs. Mr. Maadox stated when an automobile is brought in, it is not id~ed outside or inside the fr~cility, and is simply repaired from a visual inspection. Respond:tng to Commissioner Bushore, Mr. Meader stated the post office lease is until at least 1990 with extensions. Commi.ssioner Buahore stated when he firot looked at this plan, he did not think it looked conpatible but maybe there is an added built-in prctection with the post of.fice being thece becAUSe there is retail approved in that area and thought potential tenants would look at tt~e existi~~g po~t office as a 5/29/85 ':k~~, '~"~Y ~~ r ~' es-3oa ____._---- - MINUTES I~NAFIEIM CI'I'Y PL.11~1NINV GUMMI:iS1UN , benefir wiCh the tcaf~ic that 1+~ rlre~ij~Y genecated, t~ut thcn thece woutd be a ~,cohlem duriny the peAk seaROne a~~ateci~m~ybelifbthisfliatdenied,Wnothing~WOUld L•han witt~ other retai'l ueea. He e~er be developed on thi$ ~ite. , St~. 702r Fullerton. Const~uction nepartment~ Stan Peters, 2.i55 G. Chapman, atated tha noise Erom repeirs would be minimal Ut~ca~~~° all v~hi,n~dstfit veh~cle brought into the building and ~re checY,ed for cepaics~oih~ve135 vehic:es a dAy tte explained is not leEt running. He stated Midas woul~ be happY ~ or. more houcs to parked out thers abouk~onehhourUtodrepaireaomuffler andt s ore . it usuatly take and that c:~~cre will bE five ac~~ repair brakes, depending on the conditi°nand they woutd use the parking gp em~loyees, including the counter pecaon, away from thc site. ACTI~JN: ~ommiaeione~ Buahore offered a motion, seconded by Cummiasionpc Fry and MO^•ION CARRIEU that the Anaheim City E~tannin~,~ Commission has reviewed ~~he on an irregularly-shaped p~oE~osal to p~rmit an automative cepAir facility of appr.oximately 27.11 ncres tocatera at the ~,arcel of land consisting a ~ove southweat corner of Lincoln AAVer~ea(MidastMufflergt andtdoesdhereby~tiPeer described as 2312 E. Lincoln ~,h;~t it has consideced the Neya ~he Negative Declaration upon f:inding the puyl},~ ~evfew Declaration toyethec with any commenta received duriny rocess and furthec finding on the basis of thE Initial S~o~ectnwillyhavemar~ts P receivec~ thaL- there io no FuSstAntiai evidence thak the p J significant_ efEect on the en.+iconmPnt. Comn;issioner eushote offered Resotuticn i~o. PC85-1?R and moved for its pasea9e Commiss:~n does hereby grant anc. adaption that the Anaheim City Planning 2691 puGSiaant t~ Anah~~im M~~nicipal Code Sections Conditionul Use Permit lr'o• 18.U3.030.030 thr~ugh 1fl.03.030,035 sub~ect to Interdepartmental Camm ttee Recommendations includiny an additional conditipn requiring that the curb be ainted [ed and no parking si9n$ P~ated in th~ area west of Buildings D- ~r P and F as shown on Exiiibatlnoa a~$i9natledtarea atf thecrraeaof thetexisting post vehicLes ~~.all be parke ofkice facility; and that no cuiioCeLfocvlonyer thanl 15eminutes waitingtio~ the proposed muf~ler repair fac Y ost .,ffice information or an ests~Ctet and tt~at all maffl.er repair shop an p ucted to park in designated parking apa~es away from employees shall be zn the facility. ~omtnlssioner La C1airE seatedlnheiis still concerned about th~ p~rkin9ns~use s not the same as the glan and the spaces the configur.ation of the pack 9 ost office patro parallel ta the poat offic+. ace the one~ most of the p for the ar. the pre~ent time. she stat~d if thek~natforothehpostsofficeaunless they mufflec shop, there will not be any P~r ~ c~ven know that parkin? park behind the poat office buildin~ a~~d sh~ dic] not wps thece. 5/29/85 , MINUTE5, hNAHEIM CITY PLANNING CUMMISSION d5-305 Mr. MeAdec stated the a coa on the eide of the paet office is being u8~d by poat office employees primacily and thoy will ask the poat office to move its omployees to the rear of their facility end cl.arified that ia the angled parkiny along the aide of the poat nffice along Peregcine and thought they will cooperate. Mr. Maddox stated probably at any one time there would only be 6 to 8 cace b~in~ repaiced inside the building with maybe 3 or A cars outside wAiting to be re~aired and those f ew waiting to be ce[~Aired would be moved behind the post office. Chairman Herbst stated k~is wlfe wsi~ed at that post ofEice for 45 minutes last weeY, to pick up a packaye which indicaCes how busy it is And the only parkiny will be along t1~e aide and tio did not think that would be adeyuaCe. Fle added he ttiought this buildi ng is in the wcong location ~nd w.'~1 jeopardize one of tlie buaiest areas of the ehopping center. Karl Meader stated th e delay At tt-e p~st oFfice was pcababJy due ta the o~ecation of the post ~fkice anc~ not to the parl;iny lot. Commissioner La Claice stated na ma tter what `he ~roblem is, ~~ple have to have a place to park in order co go t o the post oifice and the pa~Ring is needed for the pos~ oFfice and will be req uired until their lease is up. jhe addEd she did not think the parki~g should be tak+~n a+~z~y fcom the post office patrnns. Co„~~~~issiunec Bushore s tated the petitioner h~a an approved plan foc a retail use at this location and tli~t will attr~ct a lut morP traffic ttian a mufflec ~hop and there will be less impact with the employees parkiny in the te~r and all vetiicles waitinq f or cepair or pick up parked in the rear. Chairman Herbst stated they may have approval for a retail u~e, but that does not mean they can lea se it and addwd they must real.ize that a lot of people ace brought into that center. by the post offic~ and r~ey will be jeopardizing sr~mething the people Y,ave to go to. Fie added he thought they cou2d relocate the building if they want to, and he fell• it doesn't belong in this location. Mr. Meader stated ret atlers look for Eoot trafiic and it was tizeic feeling that Cha muff ler shop w~s a yood customer for r.his site because they woulci have less traffic and he was sure they could lease it to someone else. Commissioner Bushore stated he could see two uBes that would fit into that site and fit in with the post ofPice, but would cause more people to park there and be tl~ere for ~ l~nyer period ~f time -- one being a packa9ing operation and the o tner a bL~nch outlet Eur United Parcel wi.:ch would competp with th~~ ~ost office directly and that would really create a p~rking problem. Commissioner Bouas s tated that there is a~ much parking at this loc~tion .. there is at the pos t vffice on Broadway. Mr. Meader stated there i~ still parki;~g in the front of the post office and pointe~ out the par k ing F.R proposed on the plans and noted t`~ere ace 26 spaces 5/29/85 MINUT~S, ANAHEIM CiTY YLANNING COMMISSION 85-306 pcopoaed almoat dlrectly acca eo[rom the center of the poat ofEiceJ and th: Midas hae ~ bays with maybe 3 ca[o waiting outside Eor 15 mi.nutes b~fore they move th~m. He eCated he un~ie rstands the concern3 nn~l cealizea there are some aerious trdffic problems now, and p oint~d out the future home center will have heAd-in packing along Lhe aid ~ o~ the poat office clospr than some of thE apaces ~te now, Concerning the mail drop-off box, M r. Meader stnted when khey t~ok over the cente[, the poat office had the drop-~fE box~ e located on the sideE~alk in front of their EACility and a?1 their custcmers were pulliig into the wrong lane of traffic to drop oEt r~ailand they built An ieland to celocate thoae dro~-•otE boxea L•o allevfate thntpr oblem and khose wtll probably be celocated. Commiasioner Buehore auggestedrel~cating those boxea to the rear. Paul Singer stuted Lhose boxes actually aid the parking situation because people ju~t drop off rhinga w:thout tiaving to pack their cars. He stated L•he boxes can be put on one side next ~o the poak offi.r..e with the islend across the way. 1ie added he will be happy to work with the petitioner on the arrangement foc the rnA i 1 boxes . Cortimiasioner La Claire asked whal. the lease reads regarding parking. Mr. Meader stated the lease spec itles that the shopping cen~~c management has the right to desiyn~te employee parking areus and since the people fram Midas agreed to ~ack lhe care in a nother portion ~f the site, that can ae added to the lease. Un :oll call, ttie foregoing zesolution wa~ passed by the Following vote: AXk~S: BOUAS, BUSHORE~ FRX ~ KING, LA CLAIRE, MC BURNEX NOES: NEKBS'I' AgSENT: NONE Malc~lm Slaughter, Deputy Cs ty Attorney, presented the written right ko appeal the Planning Conunission's d~claion within 22 days to the City Council. RECESS: 2 :50 P. Ft. RECONVENE: 3:00 p.m. 12`EM N~. 6. EIR NEGATIVE DECGARATION,_ WAIYER OP CODE REQUIREMENTI CONDITT~NAL USE PERMIT N0. 2692, AND APPRUVAL OF SPECIFIC PLANS. PUBL.C HEARING. UWNEtt: BR ~ROY~R•rI~S LIMITED PARTNER5HIP, 45J Newport Center Drive, #304, ;~~wport Beach, CA 92660. AGENT. HOWbRD F. THOMYSON 6 ASSOCIAT~S~ IHC., 1652Q Astoz~ Street, irvine, CA 9271A. Property descCibed as an irregularly-~haped par celof land consisting of approximately 3.6 acres located north and east of the nurtheast corner cf Santa Ana Canyon Road and h~e~ir r,anyon Road, having a f rontage of approximately 125 feet on the northwest side of pr~posed Riverview Dri~e (East Hills). To permit a 3-otory, 57-fout-6-inch high commercial of~ice huildinq with waivers of required site sc r eening, type of business sign, minimum structural setback, and minimum landscaped setback. 5/29/85 MINUTES ANANFIM CITY pLANNING COMMISSION 85-307 There was no one indicatiny their preaence in oppoeitic~ n to subject request ~nd alkhough the ata[f roport w~s not read, it is refe r red to and mAde a pact. of the minutea. tlowacd F. Thompeon, a~~pnt, referred to Page 6d, p~ragra ph No. 18, and paqe 6h, Conditi.~n No. 15, pertaining to roof••mounl:ed ey~ipment ~equiring thrt mechanical equipment enclosure plt+ns be submitted co tt~e ~tanni-ig Department. to enaure that all equipment moun~ed on the building i s an integral part of the roof and not roof tnounted. He explained their pla ris show root-mounted equipment screened by metal panels, color-matched witl, the glasa and aluminum skin of the building and a treliis ovet the top and th ey have ne~~r indicated to the Rtaf.f nor ahown that it was a well. TNE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chairman HerbAt st~ted that area is in the scenic .:~~rr ador and there are specitic cules, one bein9 that all roof-moui~ted equipm~nt wi11 t~e an ~nteqrnl part ot the building and as far as he is concerned, th ere will be no exceptions because it is very important when there are peopl~ living up on the hill luoking down on the top of the building. Fle add e d othrc petitioners hctve tried to acreen things and it just ha~ not worked. Commiasionec Bushoce asked about the pro~osed free-sta ndin9 monument s.tgn. Mr. 2~hompson atated they are requesting that aign beca use of the location of the site at the end of a cul-de-Aac in a seLluded area with very minimal traffic. He added there will be five buildings at th i8 location. Coriunissionec Bushore stated if this ia allowed, the other faur would want the same privileges. Mr. Th~mp~on stated thia is the largest huilding. Robert Neary, Vice President, explained ~..he initi.al p lan is to develop the site with the exceptfon of selliny one of the sites G o a speculative office buildiny user. Commiss.~nec Hushore stated by not d~veloping the si~ e r~s a who1Q with lesE than what was originally proposed, he was concecned tt~at in the future there could be some totally different development, especia 1 ly when the lots are sold. Mr. heary stated they would maintain control thr~ugh acchitectural controls for a high image devplopmcnt to ptotect their projec t in the futurp, noling they are also developers of the SAVI property. Commissioner 8ushore stated he could support everyth i ng that is requested, except the sign. Commissioner McFSUrne~~ pointed out the sign is nothin g more than a low monument sign for identification and i£ not visible from the f reeway. Chairman Herbst etat~ed a simil~sr request was just denied in that same area. He stated the problem ia that :evelo~iers re8earch ot tser Planning Commission actiona and this request is for three times above th ~ Code and he would be very reluckant to approve the sign because it could be developed within Code. 5/29/85 MINUTES, ANAHEIM ~iTY_kI.ANNING COMMISSION 85-307 There wae no one indicating tl~eir presence in oppoaition to subject cequeat and although the ataff cep~rt waa not read, tL• ie referred to and made a pact. of the minuten. Howacd F. Thompaon, agent, referred to Page 6~, par~graph No. 18, and page 6h, Condition No. 15, pectaining to roof-mounted equipment reyuiring that mechanical equipment encloaure p1Ans ~e aubmitted to the Planning Depec~ment ~o ensure tl~ak a11 equi~ment mounted ~n the building is an integral pact of the rnof and not coof mounted. tie explained their plans ~how rooE-mounted equipment acceened by metal panels, color-matched with the glasa und aluminum skin oL the buildi~~y ~ind a tcellis 'ier the kop and they t~ave never indicated to the staff nnr shown khat it wAa a well. THE PUBLIC H~ARING WAS CLOSEU. Chairman Herbst stated that acen ia in the Scenfc Corridor and there ar~ specific ruleo, one being that all roof-mounted equi.pment will be an integral part uf the bui.iding and as far as he is cancerned, there will be na exceptions because it is very ~mportant when there ac~ people living up on the hill ~~~kiny down on the top of the bullding. He added other petitionera have tciea ~~~ acreen things and it jusk has not worked. Commissionsr eusho:e asked abaut tl~e propose~ free-sl•anding monument siyn. Mr. Thompson atated ~hey are requesting t,.~t sign beceuse of the location of the aite at the end of a cul-de-eac in a secluded acea with very min.imal traffic. tie addpd thece will be five buildinys at this location. Conunissioner aushoce atated if this is °ilowed, the other fouc would want the same privileyes. Mr. Thampson stated r.his is the largeat building. Robect Neary, Viee Preaident, expleined the initial plan is to develop the site witl~ the eaception of selling one of the sites to a speculative office ~uilding user. Commissioner Bust~oce atated by not developing the aite as a whole wirh less than what was orxginally proposed, he was concerned that !n the future tt~ere could be nome totallu diffetenr development, especially when the lots are sald. Mr. Neary stated they would maintain control through architectucal controls foc a high image development to protect their project in the future, noting they aie also developers of the SAVI property. Commiss~oner Busi~ore etated he could support everything that is requested, except the sign. Commissianer Mceurney point~d out tt~e sign is nothing more than a low monument sign for iden~ification an8 is nc. visible trom the freeway. Chairman Herbat ataced a similar request was just denied in that same acea. He stated the probl~m is that developecs research other Planning Commission actior~s and this r~yuest is for three times above the Code and he would be very reluctant to approve tte sign because it could be developed within Code. 5/29/85 r MINUTES, ANANEIM CITY ~1,ANNING COMMY:i5I0N 8~-3Qa Commiasioner buel~ore asked what type wall F~yn is proposed. Mr. Neary atnted they ere not eure at thia time but wauld prefer an individual letter sign and are not thinking of Any sort of can~ed illuminat~d aign and that it would be ~~laced on the la~L ~,oCtion of the building. Commiesioner Le Claire atated b:~e tt~ought this is ceally a good projeck And it ie nee~~ed in t-~a~ areu Anc1 ahe ie glod they will have architectural cuntrol. She acidHd, however, since a aimilar aign reques~ was recently denied, ahe cruld not, in all. good faith, grant this onE. ;;he asked whot other roof-maunted equipment hae been ~ilowed i.n that area. Gceg Hastinys ntated there is no cestricl•ion of rooE-mounted eyuipment in the Scenic Corridor Industrial Zanet however, in the CommerciAl 2one, no waivers have been grantc~d. Annika santalahti, Assistant Director for Zcming, stated i~ is better ko consider the ro~;E-mounted equipment problem in the vecy beginning, anrl sometin~ts the ci~velopers do architectural devices which are deaigned to be a part of the b~iluiny, so it is best to design the t~uilding acknow.ledging the type of eyuipment they have and prepa:ing for it from the beginning. Commissioner La Claire stated she thought Keno's has their equipmerit weil dppressed so that it looks like a part of the building. Mr. Thompson stated droppiny roof-mounted equipment into an office building is a vecy expen~ive acrangement. He sCated the desiqn of the building doesn't lend itself t_~ adding an approxi.mate g-foot high elemenl• on top and the other problem is Chat the equipment is in the mi.ddle of the building, basically over the elevator cnre, and in order ta make the screening an integral part of the roof, it would force ~he ~creen out to the ~erimeter of the huilding so it Ss difffcu.it to fnc~rporate the screening into the design of this particular building. He asked if it would be acceptable if the screening appears to be made of the same material as the surf.ace of `:he c~iilding with a trellis on top. tie explained the sides could be a porcelafn type finish which would lock like the s~rface of the buildi,ng and be color mat~hed with a trellis on top. Annika Sa~talahti seated the problem with screening devices is that roofs with paranets are typically not flat and o~e of the basic things staf~ looks for with any roo~-mounted ec~uiprnen~, is that it cannot be seen by anyone standing at horizontal level, and how far below the edge oE the parapet the equfpment will be, and that the equipment be painked similar to the color of the roof, anct the roof line extpnded because some equipment is open on one side. She skated she has not discussed this subject with this petitioner. Mr. Thompson stated he did not discuss this any member ~f staff because it was shown on the plans as roof-mounted eguipmenk screened by metal panels, color-matched with gl~ss and aluminum and a screen tcellis on the top. Malcolm Slaughter explained the Code provides that there chall be no raof- mounted equipment allowed. Annika Santalahti stated she would assume that there is some roof line parapet around whatever they are doing and that approacn~s a satiEfactory solution, but stafP Would have to take a look at 5/29/P~i ~ ..~. 85-3G9 MINUT~S ANAHF'IM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIUN -- 1t. She added this type building scema to be more diffic~lC to work with because of the large span of roof. Sh~ stated tha real probi.~:~s ace with those usea that rAquir~ A lot of L-ens, such aa a dry cleanera, etc. Conun~ssioner La claire suggeatQd approving the requeat conditioned on the appraval by the staff of the coof-mounted equipment, as long ea it meetn the intent of the Code, and M~. Thrmpcon stated thnt would be acce~table. Cammissioner Bushoce asked how many buildinge o~rer 35 f.eel• high t~ave been allowed. He stated he is startin~~ ~~ have concecns about the heights of these buildinys and euggest~d when moi vE these cequests do cnme in, that staff tell the c..~umissfon which ones have been approved ~nd where they are eo~c~~te6 because he was concerned that these tall buildings will be blocking p P views and he did not think the buyers ar.e ?etting the true picr.ure of whet is being propoaed for develo~ment in that area. Chairman Herbat stated this property is zoneri Cl.. Commissioner Bu~hore stated he does not have a problem with this ceyueat, but• will be taking ~ clasec look at future requests and even thouyh there acP five buitd{ngs pcoposed here inetead ~f 10, he thought the intensity oL the devElopment is greater. Commissioner La Claire staCed a 3-st~ry buildiny would be allowed by rignt, with Greg Hastings explaining Code permits a 35-faot high building and by conditional use E~etmit, they are allowed to go above that 35 EP_Pt with no waiver requirea. Commissionec La Claite stated in the past the Commission hAa allowed higher buildings and then when a huusing tract is proposed adjacent to it, they come in and complain because af i.ncceased traffic. ACTION: Commissioner I.a Cla.ire offeced a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fry and F1U'rIUN CARRIEU that t~~n Anahe:m Cfty Plannin~ Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit ~ three-story 57-fo~,t 6-fnch -`i9~ecofmbusinessf~iyn, building with waivec of required site screening, tYg mini.mttm structural sstback and minimum landscaped setback on an ircegularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of appcoximately 3.6 acr~s located nortti and east of the northeast corner of Santa Ana Canyon Fcoad and weir Canyon Road; and doe~ hereby aF~rove the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has c~n~idered the Negative Declacation together with any cotnments received duci~sg the public review pcocess and further finding on the basis of the Initial 5tudy and any comments received that lhere is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner La Claire offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fry and MOTION CARkIEU that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby gr~nt waivers (a), tc) and (d) on the basis that there are speci~llocationtanc]eg applicable to the pro~ecty such as size- shape, topography, su[roundina~ which do nc+t apply ta other identically soned property in the same vicinityt and th4t strict application of the Zoning ~ode deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity; an~ denying waiver (b) on the basis that ssbject property is located in the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone and approval would set an undesirable precedent. Si'29/85 f MINUTES,_ANAHEIM CI'rY PLANNING COMMISSION 85-310 Commiasioner I.a Clr~ire offeced Res~lution No. pC85-139 and m~ved for its passage and adoption tt~~it the~Anaheim City Planning Commiasion doea herehy grant Conditiunal Use Permit No. 2692, in part, pucsuant to Anaheim Municipal Cade ~ectiuns 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.03(-.035, aubjecC to Interdepartmental Committee Recomme~detions, including khe condil•:lon requiring etafF af~proval of plans for roof-mounted equipment. Un ro11 call, the foregainc~ resolutian was E,r~r~sed by the follow.ing vote: AYES: BOUAS~ BUSHUFtE~ FRY, HEREiST~ KING, LA CLAiRE~ MC BURNEY NUES: NONB ABSENT: NUNE commissioner guahoce aaY.ed about approvat oF the proposed aignage, wtth Greg Hastings responding he did not think signing wes a r~art of the apecific plan approval. Commis~ioner Buahore added the plan~ show nice landscaping and he wanted ta be assured that that is what is developed and maintained. Commi~sioner La Claire offered a motion, ser.onded by Comm?ssioner Fry and MUTIUN CARRIEU thbt the Anaheim city Planning Commission c;~~es heceby a~prove specific plans with the Axception uf the roof-mounted equipment, which shall be Appr~ved by the P,anning Ue~artment statE in compliance with condition of approval ~E keclas~ification No. 77-78-64, granted by Lhe Ptanning Commission on Decembec 4, 197d. Respondinq to Commissioner 1,~+ Claire, Mr. Thampson stated construction of the building wil.l begin in abou~ :.:~~r m~nths. Malco?m Slaughter, ~~puty City Atl:a•ney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision rithin 22 aays to the City Council. ITEM N0. 7. kEPORTS AND FtECOMMENDA'P'ONS: A. TENTATIVE TRACT NQ. 10971 (~teu„ No. 2) - Re~uest from Fredericks Developm~n~ Corporation for apE~r~val of specific plans, pr~perty located approxirnacely 1740 feet southw~ast~~ly ~~f the intersection of Nohl Ranch xoad and proposed Stage Coach Road. C~mmissioner King declared a conflict of interest aa defined by Anaheim City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC76-157 adopting a Conflict of Ii-terest Code for the Planning Commission and Governrnent Code Section 3625, et seq., in tnat he owns stock in Pacific Lighting Corporation and Pa~ific Li9hting is a subsidiary oE Fredericks Develop:nent CorF~~ration, the applicant. ACTION: c:ommissioner McBurney offerea a motian, sec~nded by Commissioner BAUas and MOTION CARRIED fCommissi~ner Kiny abstaini~:g) that the Anah~im City Planning Commission does heceby apptove the spacific plans ar~ submitted by the applicant upon finding that the plans are in sut cantial conformance with previously Approved Tentative Tract Map No. 10971 (Rev.~ion No. 2). 5/29/85 r. * ~ ~,~;~ ,~ MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CUMMISSION 85-311 f3. TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 10972 (Rev. No. 2) - Requeet fr.om Fcedericks Development Corpor~tion Eor approval of epeciEi.c plana, property located approximate.ly 760 feet eouthwesterly of the intersection of Nohl Ranch Road and pcopoaed Stage Caach Road. Commiseioner Kiny ~~~lar.ed a conflict of interesC as de£inQd by Anaheim City Planning Camr~seion Resolution No. P~:76-157 ado~ting a Conflict of. Intereat Code f~~ the Planning Commission and Govecnment Code Section 3625~ et seq., ..n that he owna Etock in Pacific Liyhting cocporation and Pacific Light':~g is a subsidiary of tl;e owner, Kredericks Development C~rporation, ACTIUN: c.,mmissioner McBurney affered a motion, ser.onded hy Cammissioner Bouas anci MOTIUN CARRIED (Commissionec Kirg abstaining) thak the Anaheim City Plannir~y Commiesion does t~~~reby ppprove the speciEic plans as submitted by tt~e a~plicant upon Linding that the p:ens are in substanhial contormanr.e with previou~ly approved Tentative Tract Map NA. 10972 (Revision t~n. 2). C. CONDITIONAL USE P~RMIT N0. ~i569 - Request from Richard R. Renna, Cacl Karchpr Enterprises, for retroactive exten~ton of kime, pzoperty iocated at 313 East Katella Way (Carl's Jr. Restaurant?. ACTION: Commissioner King offered a mation, sec~nded by Commissioner Bouas and MUTION CARRIED (Commissionec McBurney abstaining) that the Anaheim City Planning CommisAion does hereby gcant a orie-year extension of time foc Conditional Use Permit Nc,. 2569, ta expire on May 16, 1986. U. VARIANCE N0. 3178 - Rec~uest from Patrick M. and Dorothy tj. Hur.ey for termination of Variance No. 3178, propecty located on the south side of Ball Road, approximately 26U feet wnat ~f the centerlfne of Magnolia Avenue. ACTIDN: commisaione~r Kiny of~ered Resolution No. PC85-140 and moved foc i~s rtissagP and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commisaion does hereby terminate Variance No. 3178. On rall call, ~he foreyoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BUSHORE, FRY, N~;RBST, KING, LA CLAIRE, MC BURNEY NOES: NONE ABSEN'P: NONE E. VARIANCE N0. 3210 - Request from Patcick M. and Dorott~y H. Hu.?ey for terminati~n of Variance No. 3210, property located on the south side of Ra.ll Road, apptoximately 'l60 feet west of the centecline of Magnolia Avenue. ACTIUN: Commfsaioner Kfng offered Resolution Nc~. PC85-141 and moved for its psssage and adop~ion that nc~ AnaSeim City Planning Commission does hereby tp -ate variance *io. 3210. 5/29/85 ~ _. ~~..~ MINUT~Sf ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION f35-3'2 On coll call, the Eocegoiny ceeolution was paased by the fallowing vote: AYES: BUUAS, BUSHURE~ PRY~ NEkBST, KING~ LA CLAIRE, MC bUR~BY NOFS: NONE AbSE:NT: NOPI~ F. CONDITIUNAI~ USE PERMIT No. 2050 - Aequest from Leonard N.u:ris foc termination of Conditional Use Permft No. 2050, property located at 2880 E. Miralouia Avenue (Pomona Tcuck Electric). ACTION: Commissioner King o[f~red Resolution No. PC85-142 and moved fc,r its passage and adoption th~t the Anaheim City Planning Commissian does hereby terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 2050. On rol.i call, the foregoing resolutioi: was pASSed by the following vo~~: AY~S: BUUAS, BU5HORE:, FRY, NERBST, KING, GA CLAIRE, MC BURN~Y NUES: NUNE AHSENT: NONE~ G. CONDITIONAL USL PERMIT N0. 2638 - Itequest from Nathan Ogints, et al, foc tecminatiori ~f Conditional Uae Permit No. 2638, property located at 1221 South Ar-aheim Boulevard. ACTION: Commissioner King offered Resolucion No. PC85-143 and moved Eor its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Plann:ng Commiasion does heceby terminate Conditional Use Permit No. ~638. On roll call, the foregoing resulution was pasaed by the f~llowing vote: AYES: E3uUA5, FRY, HERBST, KING, LA CLAIRE, NC BJRNEY NOES: Nc)NE ABSENT: NONE ABS~'AIN: BUfiHORE H. PROPUSED CODE AMENDMENT - Amending Section l".Q1.2!10 of Title 18 Zoning, pertaining to the definition of •story•. ACTION: Commissionec Kiny offered a m~ti~n, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and HOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning C~mmission does heceby recommenl to the City Council that khe aktached draft o:9inance be adopted amending Section 18.01.200 of Title 18, Zc ~g, pectaining to the definition of "story". I. PROPQSED COD~ AMENDMENT - Amending Subs~ction .293 of 5ecliun 18.45.050 of Chapter 18.45, adding Subsection .274 to Section 18.46.050 of Chag':er 1~.46, adding Su~sections .433 and .613 to Section 18.61.050 of Chapter 18.61 and addiny Subsection .373 to Section 18.63.050 of Chapter 18.6~, all of Title 18, pertaininq to self-storage facilities (~•ommercially operated). 5%29/85 ~ ~ MINUTES~ ANAtl~IM CITY ~LANNING COMMiSSIOM 85-313 ACTIUN: Commissioner King offerad a mukion, seconded h~y Commiasianer 9ouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anahaim City Planning Commieaion doea hereby recommend to the City Council that the accompanyiny drt~ft urdinance be adoptQd pectafning to self-ator~ge Facilities (commerciatly operated}. AD.~oURNML'NT: Chairmbn Herbst ofEered a motion, sPCOnded by CommissionPr 61cDurney and MOTION CA}tRIBi) tt~at the meel•ing be adjourned. The meeting was adjourned at 3:40 p.m. Respectf..lly submitted, ~~~ ~~~~ Edith L. Harris, Secretary nnaheim City Planning Commissio~~ ELH OllSm