Loading...
Minutes-PC 1985/09/15, •;' R~GULAR_MEETING OF THE ANAH~;IM CITY pLANNING COMMISSTON 12EGULAR ME~TING The regula[ meating of the Anaheim City Planning Conunisaion waa cAlled to ordNr by Chairwom~~n I.a Claire at lO:UQ e.m., sei~tem~ec 7,6, 1985, in the C~uncil c:1~amL•er, a yuorum being preaent, and the Commiasion reviewed plana of the itert:s on today's agenda. RECESS: 11:30 a.m. REC:UNVENED: 1:30 p.m. PRESEN'P (:hairwoman: La Claire Cummiasioners: Bouas, Fry, Herbst, Mc Bu[ney, Lawicki ABS~N2': Commissioner; Mearte AI~SU PRESENi Annika Sant~lahti As:i.stant Director Eor Zoning MAlaolm Slaughter Deputy ~:ity Attorr.ey Carl Harriaon Civil Bngineering Assistant Paul Singer City TraEfic Engineer KendC~ Morties Ar~sietant Plannec Bdith Harris P~anning Commission Secretaxy PftESENTATION 0~ PLAQUES; Chairwqman La Claire pre~ented Ronald i,. Thom~son, former Planning Uirector, a plaque cecog~iizing his 23 yeacs of service and contributions tu the City of Anaheim and the Anaheim City Planning Commissior~. Chairwoman La Claire a~so noted that former Commisaioners Gerald R. Bushore and Paul King could not attend today's meeting and their plaquea wiJ.l be presented at a later date, recognizing their r~ervices to the City - Gerald eushore for 7 years and Paul King for 12 years. Chairwoman La Claire stated the Commfssion misses these two formet Commissionecs and ceally does appreciate Lheir many yeArs of dedicated spxvice to ri~e City. APPRUVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commiesion~r Nerbst and MOTION CARRIEL~ (Commissioner Hesse absent) that the minutes of the meet.ing of September 4, 1985, be approved as submitted. Chaicwoman La ~laice explained the Planning Commission public hearing procedure. ITEM N0. 1~IR NEGA'CIVE UI?CLARATION AND CUNDITIONAL USE ~ERMIT N0. 26~7 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: APF CENTER, A'i'TN; JACK HOROWITZ, P. 0. BOx 27163~ Los Ange~es, CA 90027. Property described a~ an irregu2arly-shaped parcel of land cc~~aisting of app:oximately 4.1 acres located at the southwe~t corner of Orangethorpe Avenue and Placentia Avenue, and fucthkr described as 1631 North Flacentia Avenuej Units A, B, G, O, p, R. To retain five automobile repafr and automotive related busineases in the ML zone. Conkfnued from the meetings of June I0, 24, ,7uly 8, 22, August 5, and 19, 1985. 85-489 9/16/85 MINUT~B ANANEIM CITY PLANNINC CUMMISSION SEPT~MBER 16. 1985 85-490 There wae no one indicating theic pre~ence in oppoaition to subject requeat and although the atAfE report weA not cead, it ie refQrred tn and made a part of the minutea. Donna Kubiak, repreaentinq the new owners, Orangethorpe Pr~menade, stated they would cequest that any tena~r.~ wishing ~ cundition~l use permit Rhould apply on their own. She explained she represenks Industrial Prop~rty Management, 1124 Main Street, Suite A, irvine, Cblifocnia. Walter Jerusal, Jerusal Machine Services, 1631 Nortt~ Pl~cen~ia, Unit G, ctnted he welds, grinda and repairs automotive parts and thc Code Enforcement OfflceC felt the use should be considered automotive related and sh.~~ld not be in this cc>mplex. tfe pxplained he repairs dooc hinges, etc. and that moat of his work is gmall and can be held in hia hand. Joe Hoag explained he is pro~~osiny to u~e Unita A and B and wants to find uut what he has ta do to get a E~ermit to have an automotive related busineas in that facility. He expl~ined he will be disposing of automob:le~ with terminated leases which are two year8 old= and that he will. be getting the au~omobiles ready for disFosal at this facility, similpr to detailing. THF. ~UBLIC HEARING WA5 CLOSED. Reaponding to Chairwoman La Claire, Mr. Jeru~al expl~~ined the welding is done inside the building and the back door is only open when he is ufiing heliarc with a lot ot argon ga~. He stated the operation is all inside. He explained he was cited for a few of his A-wheel drive trucks which wece still stored there and some other item~ which wece stored bef~re he moved, but everything has been rEmoved except one 4-wheel dri~e truck ~nd another old truck wt~ich has been aold and will be moved by the 30th of this month. Responding to Commissioner Bouas, Mc. Jerusal explained tne hours of operation are usually from 7:30 p.m. t~ noon on Munday, Tuesday and Wedne3day and from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on TY~ursday, Fciday anc3 Saturday. Con~is~ioner Herbst stated he sees no problem. with this type use at this location, but was concerned about the other uses listed on the application ~~ith four o~erators not being prese~t to explain their operations. Mr. ~Jerusal stated he could speak foc the c~m-grinding ope[ation which utili2es Units P and R and explained their operation is done inside the facilitf and that they grind cams and shafts for racing and special~ty applica~ions. Commissioner Souas stated maybe the r~presentative of the new owner could answer the questions because ob~~iously there are some things in this facility which are different than those shown in the staff report. Ms. Kubiak stated she did not know why the other tenants were not presei~t and explained they have just taken over the praperty. Commissioner Bouas explained the property owner filed the original cnnditional use permit and not the individual tenants. Chairwoman La Claire stated she is tired of delaying thi~ action and she realizes the property has changed hands, but the u~es have not changed. 9/16/85 MINUTE:S. ANANEIM CIxX PLANNING CUMMISSION S~PTEMBER 16 1985 U5-A91 Responding to Cheicwoman La ~lai[e, Mr. Jecusal atated the cam-grinding operation haA been thete foc at least twn yeats. Chairwoman La Claire stated she telt these usea should all be on aepacate conditional u~e permits becaus~ thece nave been Froblema in l•he paAt when one of the uaecs did not comply with the conditions or creatPd a nuisance, Malcolm Slaughter., Ueputy Ci~y Attorney, stated evidence ha~ bcen presented hy one tenant on behalf af thrPe of the five tenante in the staff rzpoct and he thought the C4mmi.ssfon ia 1n A poEition to yrant the permit on all ot ti~e units, none of the uhits or some of the units and he concurred tihat in the future, it would be better to 1~ave ~eparAte applications Commlesioner Fry stated he thouyht the permit could be granted Eor Units G, R ~nU P. commio~ioner ~oua~ in~icated che felt Ch~ window linting operation could also be included in this permit. Mr. Jerusal explained ti~e windaw tinting opecation is done inside the facility or on buildinge away f[om this sitc. It was not~d t~ir. Hodg is proposing to uae Units A and B foC bis detailing opera~ion. He explained there would be a maximum of 6 vehicles on site at one time and that 5 could be stored inside. Chairwoman La Claire explained vehicles cauld not be atored outaide in this area. She stated she would preLer to t~ave theee uses reviewed individually. Commiasioner Fry euygested approval af Units G, U, P, and R and asked what would happen i€ there was a violation in one of tt~c units. Malcolrn Slaughtier stated from a legal stan~point, cancelliny the pecmit bn onQ unit would be extremely complex, but it could prabably be done afler a pubiic heariny was granted to all the parties who.rights under thal resolution we[e affected. He stated the Con~ission eould grant the permit for one of these ~ses under this apPlication and in~truct the remaining tenants to make application 1E they so desire. Commissioner Herbst stated he ha~ no problem ~ith uses that are industrially-related beca~~e that area daes aack-up to the flood control char-nel and they would nor be detrimental to the acea and most of the uses existing have been allowed in other industrial areas. Ke stated he wauld have no problem granting approval for the pekitioners present, except Mr. Hoag who is proposing the detailin9 oP~rati.on, because he thought vehicles would be st~red outaide because they would end up having more cars than could be stoced inside. Malcolm 5laughtet suggested if the Cort~-ission is planning to yrant appcoval for more than one o~ the units, that the applicable conditions, particularly Nn. 2 shoul~ be done in such a way as to pecmit each unit to pay its pcaportionate share of the traffic siqnal assessment fees. Responding to Commis~ioner Herbst, Mr. Jerusal stated he had not reviewed the propused cond~tions and a copy of the staff report was given to Mt. Jerusal for his review and Kendra Morriss read the list of the conditfone. 9/16/85 ~ SEPTEMFIER ~6, 1985~, 85-492 MINU'PE5 `ANAHEIM CITY_PLANNING COMMISuIUN, - - Mr. Jecusa.l aeked about the trafEic signal assesamont fees, Kendr~ Morries explained that fee muat be p~id on each p[operty in AnAheim, depending an the type of use, and the ori~~inal foes wecli~cationnishforpc mmercial~usea, so it induatrially-related uses and this ~pp is standacd practice to reyuire that the diffecences bel•ween those two fees be paid. ~he explained the ffee is based on the aquare foot~ge of the units and the guilding Departmenl: would be able to give the petitionQr thp Amount required. Chairwomt~n La Claire sl•uted the uwner is not interestQ~l in gettin9 involved in the approval oE these Permitar so the costs will tiave to be paid by the tenants. ACTIpN: Commisaioner tlerl-,st offered a mation, second~d by Commissioner Fry and ~IUTION CARftiEL (Comtoissior.er Mess~ absPnt) that the Anaheim City Planning Commissi,on has reviewed the pro~osa! to retain t.ive aut~mobile repair and automotive related busineases in the M~ ilndustrial, Limited) Zone on an irre9ularly-shaped paccel of land concisting of appcoximately 4,1 acrea located at the southwest corner of Uranyethorpe Avenue and Placentia Avenue, and furthec described as 1631 Nocth Placentia Avenue; Uriits A/B, G, 0, P- R.= and does hereby approve the Negative Ueclaration upon Einding that it haa considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis ot the Initial Study and any comments received tha*_ there is no substant.ial evidence that the ~roject will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC85-205 and moved for its passage and aduption that the Anaheim City P~anning Commission daes heceby grant Cnnditional Use Permit No. 2697 fur Units G, p, F and R Pursuant ta Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.03.03Q.030 through 18.03.030.035 and subject to interdepartmsntal Committee recommendations including modification to Condition t~o. 2 pertaining to thp traffic signal assessment fe~ to be based on the ~quare footage of the unit. Kendra Morries stated staff wou?.d like Commission's instructions to rewrite the conditions to apply to the individual units. Commiss'.oner Hecbst stated that would be made part of thig resolution and pointed out they do not feel the detaili.ng business of leased automobiles would be a suitable use for this propecty because there would be cars ~tored outsidP. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vo'te: AYES: BOUAS~ FRY, HERBST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI~ MC BURNEY NGES: NUNE AB5ENT: MESSE MalcolanninugCommissionts decision~withinP22sdaysdto therCitynCouncilto appeal the P1 9 Commissioner Herbst atated to Ms. Kubiak that he pa~cses that pio~erty every day and it luuks like tl~e new owners are u~ ~ra%ir~ r'~a ftont portion of t•he 9/16/85 MINUTES. ANAHEIM CI~Y ~LANNING CUMt1I5SIUN, SEPTEKBER lb1 1985 ____. ~5-493 property and he wanted ta make auce they underuCand thia :a an indu~Lrial property, not commercial, and there ore a lat of violaL•ions there now and auygest~d the new owner check into the uaea cath~r than having the Code ~nforcement C~t.ficer~ make their inspectiono and suggasted ~f. ~omeone wAnta to cent A unit whi•~i servicea the induatrial c~mmuni.ty, that would be acceptable, but c~mmercial uaes are not permitted and any comm~rcial uo~a that are there will be cited foc vialation. Ms. Kubiak Rknt~d the,y have had t.he property foc about 2 weeks and are reviewing the uses And it will probably take 2 to 3 months betocc evrrythiny is checked. Commissione[ tlerbst stated the pcup~rty ia lookin~~ t~etCer. Chairwoman Lu Claire atated she vuced in L•avor of lhe petition even though ~he ie againat thir~ type of use in the indualrial zonN and auggeated the CommiRqion a~opr. a policy not to approve these on a b].anket permit in ~he futurc. ITghl Np. 2~IR NEGATIVE UFCLARA^.'ION, WAIVER OF CODE: RE~U:REMFNT ANU CONUITIONAL USE: PERMI`I' N0. 2709 PUBLIC HEAItIN~. UWNERS: MARTIN LU~'HER E105PITAL, 1NC., 1830 W. Romneya Drive, Anahein~,, CA 928U3. AGENT: ROBERT D. MICKEi.SON, P. 0. E3UX 23C3, O[ange, CA 92669. Propert,y described as a recCangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of a~proximately 7,560 equace feet, having a fcontage of appro:cimately 72 feet on the nocth side of Neighboca Street, approximAtely 200 feet east of- the centerline of Onondaga Avenue, and turther described as 1817 West Neighbors Avenue. Waiver of required locatfon of parking apaces ka pecmit a social rehabilitation center for chemical dependency in the RM-1200 (Recidential, Multiple-Family) Zone. Continued from the meetinga of July 22, and August 19, 1985. There were ~ix per~c.•ns indicating their pr~.~ence in favor of subject petition and approximatel}~ t'tiirty persons indir.ating their Fresence in ogposition, with nine persons indicating they would like to speak in opposition to ~sub~ect ceyuest, and althuugh the staff rnport was not read, it is refer:ed to and made a part o1 the minutes. Terry Belmont, president of Martin Lutt~er. Ho~pital, explained they requested a continuance from the meeting of one month ago in o~der to have time to meet with tt:e residenta of the area to better communicate their plans for the program because there was a lot of misunderstanding. He zxplained they ~ent a lettec to the Planning Commission addressing points of clarificat.ion requeste9 by the Commission at the hearing; that on July 31st they sent ~ lettPr notifying the residents on Neignbors Street of ineetings on August 5th and 6th to diecuas the program moce in detail; and on August lst they visited the South Coast Counseliny Center in Costa Mesa to review and photograph a sfmilar type program yhich is already in operation; Lhat the meetings were held on August Sth and 6th with neighbors and owners with no one attending the meeting on Auguet 5th and about 20 ownera and 2 tenants atkending on August tiths and on August 13th members of their staff distributed 9/16/85 MINUT~S ANANEIM CITY PLANNING COMMiSSIUN SEPTEMBER 16 1985 85-494 noticea tor an additional meeking co be held on August 26Ch1 an.d on Auyupt 2Qth an additional letter wa~ sent lo ownera updating and inviting them to the August 28t1~ meetingt and on Auguet 21st memb~ra oE their Rtaff, went door to door on Neighbors Avenue and epoke to approximately 35 individuala, end agein on Auguat 22nd members of thoir staff compl~ted th~ dooc-to-door visitation and contacted anothec 35 cesidentat And fin~lly on Auguat 28th they had A maeting at~ended by 2 individuals, Mr. and Mr~. Gene Strengkh. Mr. Belmont Rtated the primary renaonb given for the concecn~ oE the rebidents and owners were pro~erCy value decline, safety oL the neighborhood, supervision of the 24-hour ~~rc~gcam and parking and traEtic isaue~. Regatdiny tCaEfic and parking, he stated all parking will be on the hoapital site and they will discourage packing in front of the building. He Gtated Mr. Farley, Vice Pre~ident of Community kelatl.~ns, would addrec~a the saEety and pco~erty value 1.r,sues. HE atated there Ls 24••h~ur supetviaion in the programt however, none of the Counselors would live on the premises, but there would U~ 8--houc shif.ts and tl~err, will be continuous hoapital personnel with the patienta in t,he Neighboca Avenue facility. Mr. Belmont refer~ed to the Anut~eim Shores Uevelopmenk and stated there was a concer.n from the residents celating to noi~e and that is not germane to this discussion, but the hos~ital representatives continue ko be aansitive to r_heic neighbors ~'~nd want to be a youd pacC of the neighborhood. He explained they are currently retooling their plant operations to try ~nd get the noise down. He stat~d the noise level is within acceptable limite authorized t~y the City of Anaheim; however, Lhey tiave several diffecent alternatives and have a meeting with the residents of Anaheim Sho;:es scheduled far latsr Of this month. Gene 5trength, owner of the apartment complex at 1828 West Clen, stated he commends the hospital Lor wantiny to have khis type pr~9ram, but wuuld disagree it should be in the residential area; and that he did attend all the rneetings of which he was notified, but did r~ot receive any letters regarding the~e meetings. He explained he visited the three sitea Euggested by the hospital and referred to copies of photographs he had previously ~ubmitted for the Planning Commis~ion's cancideration of the sites. He pointed out from the photogtaphs that he thought the areas where Lhe other three facilities ace located ahould be viewed as commercial area~. tte statEd the ceason the hos~ital wants to go into this area is because of lower costs, but he felt the use should not be in a residenti~l area. E:e pointed out the facility on York Street is on a major thoroughfare with wide stceets. He also presenL•ed the color photographs from which the c~pies wece taken to show the details better. Chairwornan La Claire explairted the photoqcaphs, if they are submitted, will have to remain with t}~e City as part of the records. Mr. Strength stated his mai~ concern is that this u~e should be in the commercial area because Lh~ streets are not wide enough and thP commercial area would have wider streets or major th~roughfaces. nennis 5ellers, Trancamecica Management Company, 431 N. Brookhuret, Anaheim, repcesentfny the homeownecs of Aczaheim Shores, Wellington Landing an8 Lakeview complexes, explainPit that represents approximately 500 homes. He explained they have had some conversations with the hospital cpgarding the noise and they are warking on that issue and commended the hospital for making the 9/16/85 85-495 MINUTES ANAHBIM CITY PLANNING COMMIS5IUN, SEPTEMB~R_16,_1945 effoct to solve the pcoblem. Ne stated the homeowneca of these three asaociation~ are still extcemely concecned wilh the posaibility of a detoxification conter ;ln this neighbarhood. He s~ated the neighborhood next to the hoapital has had A[ece~t ~uK9e in crime catea of their personal pro~erty and the neighbors are concecned tt~at the ir.roduction oC this detoxiEicat~a'lClaireCexplainedett-isiis1nulcandetoxiEicationecentec~nbut1AaLea. Chairwoman rchabilitt~ti.on nente~. Mr. Sellera stated it will still bc tt~~;sting ra commerciAl huei.nesn intn a residential area and there ia yuastion uP the need for it because hoapitels hAVe a record ot having vacanciss. He Aaked wl~Y they couldHeostat~dide theae facillti~:s in the hospital instead of a residential area. app~r.ently paGkiny is a problet~ in thar_ ar.ea already and this will increase that problem. ~lna t~arbin, ownec of 1811 Neighbors, str~ted all theic tenants are opposed to the cequest and have qaid they will movn out if this is appcoved. She atated this complex is pact of their retirement prugram and they d~ not wish to ~ell and felt if khey are inrced to sell, this will affect theirGSed~.erty values. she stated every tenant :~he t~ae talked to is definitely opp ~atricia Vergaca stated they own four buildinga on Neighbors (1746- 1764, 1778 and 1801). She stated ttiey dic] not receive ~Shelstated theyrpurchasedithese with the huspital, but wenk to one meeting. buildinys recently and are trying hard to improve them and did talk to other o~nera about improving their praperties- but if she was a tenant, especially with childcen, she would not w~nt to move ortc, a street that has two recovery houses, p~inting out Martin Lu~her tlospital has pu~ct~ased the aecond building, making 32 drug addictE on that one street:. L. Attah, ownet of the apartment complex at 1741 Clen Av~nue, referred to regulations requiriny hoapitals to be more eff~oiCe~ucedtheirecoatstbyimovings and otated he though~ this hospital is trying their patienta to another area wher.e they would have a higher incort:e wirh lower living ex~enses. He stated the reyulations were not to provide higher income for the tiospl~al, but to Qrovide lower expenses for secvices to the people. He stated if this progsam is successful, he thought the hospital would want to add more units. Ann Hammershoi, stated she submitted signatures of 334 in opposition at the .Iuly 22r 1985, meeting and wanted to present one letter containing an additional 59 signatures and enother. letter witti 28 owners' signatures in opposition. She atated the owners had a meeting an~ every owner who ~ttended was opposed to this rec7uest and a11 ayreed tt~at the tenants had ind~cated the~,~ would move our if this is approved and this would be a financi.al burden on the owners which thel feel is unfair. Ms. Hammershoi stated she did attand a meeting at the hospital and the presentation they made was Roti verX convincing. She s~ated they showed a film of the facility in costa Mesa which is an entirely different s:tuation becausc it is located among~co o~rhave the~ownersaandhtenantsrto contendSwiths~and at that location they o that the 9/16/SS MINU1'E~S, A~HEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSZON. SEP'PEMF3ER 16, 1985 85-496 hospital ropreaentaGives did not send her ~ letter about the ineeting. She atoted they are willing to lie~on 1E tha h~spi.r.aJ. ha~ something new to preaent. Mn. !iammerahoi stated the parking in the area continues to be a roal problem and Qven tenants were Eighting over parking spaces and laRt ntght people were parking on the .luwns becauee there were nut enough parking »pacea for the p[esent L•enanCs. She ~tated garaqos would be elfmi.nated ~t subject prapecl•y and 1G people will be moved in who ate probably ~oin~~ to hnvP .~u~omnhil.ea An~ each building now has five garageA ~.atii.ch will be el.iminated. She stated the queation of. supervision came up ak the last meeting and reEerred to the staff report which indicatea t7~ere would not be 24-hour supervision, but it says there will be two em~loyeea thAt nay be nn the ~>remises. She stated that me~~ne there will be 16 patients nn the E~remiae~ with arug ~>rohlems and they will be open t~ pushers of druya and r~he did nat think they h~ve a chanc:e at Ll~te lor,atian. She ~tated drug~ ara a big ~roblcm in aociety todax, but putting them in an Area such as thi~ wi11 just inccease the I~roblem. She stated she did not think they will have A good handle on khe aupervis~.on of the 16 patienks Gecause the stafE will be at the hospital and she did not think the ptttients will park on the t~ospital packing lot anu walk to thia facility and wili be parking in fcont of subject E~roperty. Beverly Ranallo, 1590 W. Tedmar, An~he itn, stated they own twr~ apartment complexes in the area. She expluined st~e attencled A meeting with Martin Lukher and they had people apeaking a~ thE meeti.ng who were drug abusera who had been througt~ the vrograrn and they had explained ttiey went through ehe program f.oc 28 days and the alcoholics stayed fcom 2 to 5 day~ in the hospital anci then moved Co this facility and the drug abusers would stay in Che hosNital for 7 to 10 days and then move to the [acil.fty and she did not think anyone would tiave a chance ~o be cure~ during that short period of time. She stated the hos~ital ~~~wns pcoperty across the streeC on Komneya and asked why they did not .se that property. Vicki Jo Bradley, 1119 N. Onondaga Street, Anaheim, stated she is a tenant and wanted to know if. the patients would be able to come and go from thi~ facility as they please because thece ace a lot af people who are home ducing the day, especially wcmen. She also asked i.f they would have cestricted areas where they could go. Stie stated they did not ceceive any letters about the meetings and noted tnece is already a drug traffic problem in that neighborhood. Ebbe Hammershoi, stated he is one of the owners in the area and presented a letter of opposition from anather own~r. Larry May, 150 Horseshoe Drive, Placentia, stated Martin Luther Hospital has now completed escrow on the building adjacent to subject property. Larry Jacobson, Program Director of D iscover Recovecy, Martin Luthec Hospital, stat~d Mr. S~cength was correct that there are some commercial and industrial properties in the areas where the oth er facilities are located, but he a2so took pictures af those facilitiea anc3 presented the pictures to the Commission. He stated most of the h omea in a].1 thr.ee areas are single family and they f eel this use will be compat ible with the neighbonc~~d. He stated they hAVe had the pcogram at the hos p ital for 6 yeaca and tt~ey do a thorough 9/16/85 MINUTES ANAIi~IM CITY PLANN.ING CUMMISSION SEPTEMBER 16 1985 OS-49~ job oE acreening ~eople and the unil•, by law, is not lock~d, and they do not take people wtio nre not motivated to be n the pcogram, And thet people who co~e are motivatnd becauae the care ia expenaive and they Are covaced by inaucence. Mr. ~aco~son atated the supecvi3lon isaue keep~ coming up even thouqh they have explained it bofore and wanted to c~arity that thece will ab$olutcly be 24-ho~~c supervision at 1417 W. Neighbors (Social RehabilitAtion Center). He added he thoughL• th~ initial miaunderatanding waa wt~c~ti~er or not ct,aff would b~ livin~ on thN premises, and that they will not be livin~ there, but will be there on ~3-hnur shifts. Ne ~tated L•he ~rc~gcam provides educatiun and therapy and the patfents are often encoucaged ~.o come to the program by their family or their employers ~nd they are nol• peohlc~ who are focced ~~ go through thc pcogram. He stated al.i traLf ic. wi.ll be nirected thrauyh tYie l~ospital; that tt~ey cun not lock ttie doors or limit the mobility of L•he pa~ionts, buk if they do n~t Eoilr~w the regimen of khe program, they will be asked to leave. tle explained the program runs from B:OU a.m. until 9 oc 1U:00 ~.m. at nigtit and many of the meetings will be an the hospital premice~, with only A f~w on-sile. E~e stated they feel South Co~-at Counseling ia a very comparable program Erom a physical standpoint, but it ia diEferent because Che re:sidents work during the dAy. He stated al]. the parking wi11 be through the hospiCal wikh pccess tt-rough the al,ley and they intend to limit traffic irom Nei.ghbors Avenue. Mr. Jacobson ~tated the Social RetiabilitaCion Center is a new proje~t qeared to be a lower cost proyram so that patients will have more dccess for cace and not so the hospital can make m~re money, Gut t:~ey get many calls from people d~siring the treatment who do not have the insurance necessary or the cash available to go through an expensive hospital pcogram. He stated ~he length of stt~y i~ between 2 to 7 days in the hosE~ital and then they move into the center. He staCed they do not perform miracles in those 2 to 7 days, but try to detoxify patient~ in the hospital to allow them to be medically clear to rece'tve rehabilxtatian and the rehabilitakion is a combination of inedication and therapy, involv.ing the families and Fatients in a program of changing their liLestyle, and it is A lifetime program to allow people to recover from a diseaae that has changed their lives. James Pacley, Mar.tin Luther Hohpital, stated they have 12 units in khe hospital and that this program has been going on for 6 years and they are lu~'•ing for 16 units maximum and it has nothing to do with the purchase of the adjacent property. He skated he know~ the owners have been concerned about property values and wanted to point out that property values in the other areas where these facilities are located have not declined; that he talked to thp director of Soutt- Coast Counseling and was told that the fa~~?lity in Urange on Wilson cost $130,OOU in 1978 and was appraised in 198 at $235,000. He stated he drove arou~id the facility in Costa Mesa and it is basically a single-fami~~ area with dome cortunercial uses on Orange 5treet nearby, but not on 19th St~eet whece the facility is actually located. 'PliE PUE3LI.: H~ARING WAS CLU56D. 9/16/85 MINUTES~ ANAHEIM C1TY PLANNING CUMM~SSION, SEPT~MaBR 16,_1985 85-498 Chairwoman La Claire atated the ioaue of 24-hour supervision hae been covered end thece will be 24-h~ur ~upervie~on, but there will not b~ an,y staff inemb~ra .living on aite. She clarif.ied that the peop.l.e at the Lacility will go tt+rough ~etoxil"ication ut tt~e hospital and will not he on any dcugs and tt:ey would he allowed to l~ave, but if they leave they cAnnot. go bACk without qoiny ~hcough the hospitAl ~~rogtarn agafn. She Asked if they w~uld be Allowed to worY., She atAt~d dr.ug traffic in the area is alceady there and also there are parking problem~. 5he. askecl linw many peo~~p actut~lly ttttended the meeting at the hospital, with 12 people raising their hands, and 9 of the 12 indicating I:t~ey are property ~wners ~nd nune of thc own~~rs inritcatpd thc~y actually live in khe area. She commended them for attendiny the meeting. Commissioner McF3urney asked 1F there hud been any comE~laints pertaining to Conditional Use Permit No. 2589 gcAnted in ~uly of 1984 for a detaxification center. Kendra MoCcier, r.e~ponded there have not been any complaints and poinked out that wa~ an alcol~olic detoxification center. C:hAlcwoman La Clz~ire pointed out theee would be more problems with the alcol~olic detoxitication c~nter than with the rehabilitation center. Commissioner Hecbal atated the residents and ownern in this area have an extreme Eear of losing something they have and they have invested their liLe savings into Lhese com~lexes and he did not blame them for being scar~d. He stated he did not think Martin Luthec Hospital ha~ ~rESented a good prugram to make them understand and that was their responsibility. He stated he did not think the timi.ng is rfyht for a center in this arunwarrantedtibutathette~ants thought probably the neighbors fears Ar.e mastly Fle added are afraid and the ownecs wauld have a har.d time renting the units. Martin Luther could come up wilh a program for units on their own propecty and detecmine whether. nr not this location i.s suitable and then tliey could present He added the wliolE a program to the ~eople that would be acceptablP. neighborhood ia uPposed to this requeat and as a Commissionec of land use, he did not feel he could oppose that opP~$ition at thi~ time because the[e is a fear that they will ?~se muney for a~eriod of time until the iffaue is settled. t!e stated even though Chis would be under a conditional use permit which could be revvked at any time, Martin Luther could decide to leave it and the use could remain, and also a parki.ng waivec is required and the tenants would have to walk over a fence whi~h would open the doors foc the people to get in and out oE the parking lot. He stated if they t~ave purchased another 4-plex next door, they have not answeted why, and when a hospital buys property, there is a r.eason and he felt once this ic allowed, it could go into an expansion program. Chairwoman La Claire atated she w~nted the residents to get an underst~nding o~ what kfnd of program this is. She stated she does nok think people who are ~ druq free would harm the area ~-nd that thece are some 9rug problems on that street now=o e~~yevalues wQUld declineaandtalsaethey Are worried~aboutrtheir that the p p safety. She stated she thouyht hlartin Luther had d~ne a good job presenting their program, but thaY are faced with the fears at this time which they cannot ovscco~ne. She stated she is concerned about the parking on the stree~. She added there are many new owners in the area and p:operties are being upgraded 9/16/85 ~ MINUTES ANAHEIM CI'PY PLANNINC CUMMI55ION SEPTL•'MB~It 16 1985 85-499 dnd she was ha~py about that and ehe thought Marti.n Luther Eloapital would be A good neighboc and do a good job, but at thia time ahe did nat think it would bo poseiale to have a rehabilitation center at that .~,cation becauae there is too much public oppoaition and t~o much feur. and even though there has never been a problem bef~re with thi~ kind of opecntion, it is premature at thie time. ACTIUN; Commissioner Herbsl uttered a motion, FPCOnded by Commissioner McEiurney and MUTION CA1tRIED (Gammiasioner Messe absent) thpt the ~naheim CiLy Plbnnfn9 Commission has reviewed the E~~uposal to permir. A ROCjdl rehabilitation center for chemical dependency in the RM-1200 (Reaid~ntial, Multiple-E'amily) Zone with waiver of requiced location oE parking spaces on a cectangular.ly-shaped parcel of land conaisting of approximately 7,560 aquuce feet, having a fcontagc of approximately 72 £eet or~ the north sidc of Neighbors Str~et and fu~lhcr desc[ibed au 1817 West Neighbocs Avenue= and daes hereby a~prove the Neg~tive Uecl~aration u~on finding that it has considerecl the l~egative Declaration together with any commenta received during tt~e public review process and further finding on Lhe basis o£ the Initial Study and any comments received that thece is no subst~~'ial evidence ttiat the (~ru3ect will have a siqnificant effect on L•he envi~onmen~• Commissioner Herbst offe[ed a motion seaonded by c:ommissioner MeB~icney an~ MOTION CARRIEn (Commissioner Messe absent) that the An~heim City Planning Comniissi~n does hereby deny renuest of wai.ver of Cod~ requirement on the basis that there ie an existing parking pcoblem in the neighborhood and parking spaces pcovided on the Martin Luther parking lot to the north across a 20-foot wide alley would not be acceptable and nlso access to and from the hospital parking lot could create a problem in the neighborhoodt and furtY~er that the parking variance will cause an increar~e in traffi.c congestion in the immediate vicinity and adversel.y affect any adjo.ining land uses; and will be detr.imental to the p~ace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City oi Anaheim. Commissionec Her.bst offered Resolution No. PC85-206 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planni.ny Commission does hereby deny CondikiAnal Use Permit No. 2709 on the basis the use woul.d adversely affect adjoining lar.d uses and the growth and development of the are~ and cr~ate a financial burden on the apartment complex ownees due t~ lack of tenanks an~l also the hosl~ital has room on their own propecty to provide such a facility and the request is premature. Un coll ca].1, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BO~AS, FRY, HERBST, LA CLAIREr LAWICKI, MC BURNF.Y NpE5: NUNE ABSE;NT: M~SSE Malc:olm Slaughter~ Ueputy City Attorney, ~resented the written right to appeal the Planning Commis~ian's decision within 22 c~ays to the City Council. Commissior.er Herbst stated he did not appreciate comments that the Commission had alread,y made up their mind on this matter before hearing all the evidence and he has b~en on the Commission foc over 20 yesrs and everyone is given an opportunity to ptesent ~heir r.ase. 9/16/85 S MINUTBS, ANAHEIM CI'PY PLANNING CUMMISSION, SEPTE;MBEK_16y 1985 85-49Q and she was ha~py At.~out th~t And aho thought Martin Luther HoApitA1 would bP a good neighbor and do e good job, but at this time Hhe did nat think it would be poagible to have a cehabilitation centec at th~t location because there i~ too much public oppoeition and too much ~ear and Pv~n though there has never beon a~roWlem befare witt~ Chia kind of a~eratio~, it is premature at this time. ACTION; c:ammiseiorier Herbst nffered a motian, eaconded by Commise~ioner McFSUrney and MU'PION CARRIEU (Commissfoner Mes~e absent) thut the Anatieim City Planning Commi~sion has ceviewed L•he proposul to Permit a~ocial cehabilitation center for chemical dependency in ttie RM-120Q (Reaidential, Multiple-F:~mi1X) 2one with wuiver of requiced location of pArking apACea on A rectanqulacly-shaped parcel oE land connisting af Approximately 7,560 square teet, having a Econtage oE' appraximAtely 72 feeC on the north sicle of Ne~ghbnrs Stceet and fucther described de 1817 West Neighborn Avenuet and does hereby approve the Negative Ueclaration upon finding tt~at it has considered tl~e Neqative Declaration togett~er wiCh any commenta r.eceived ~9uri.n~ the public review process and turthec finding on the basi~ oE the Initial Study and any commenL•c received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significAnt ePfect nn the environtnent. Commissioner Herbst offered a motion seconded by Commisaioner McBurney and MOTiON CARRIED (Commissioner Messe absent) that the Anatieim City Planning Commission does hereby deny request of waiver of Code requirement on r,he basis that there ia an existing parking problem in the neighborhood And parking spaces provided on the Martin Luthec parking lot to the narth across a 20-foot wide alley would not be acceptable and als~ access Co and from the hospital parking lot could create a problem in the neighborhoodj and further that the parking variance will cause an increase in traffic cor.gestion in the :mmediate vicinity and adversely affect any adjoining land uses; and will be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general Welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Commissioner Nerbst offered Resolution No. PC85-206 and moved Eor its passage And adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby deny Conditianal Use Permit No. 2709 on the basis the use would adversely ~ffect adjoinin9 land uses an~i the growth and development of the area and create a financial burden on the apartment complex owners due to lack of tenants and also the hospikal h~as room on their own property to provide such a€acility and the request is premat~are. On rall call, the f4reqoing resolution was passed by the fallowing vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY~ H~RBST, LA CLAIkE, LAWICKI~ MC BURNEY NOES: NUNE ABSBNT: MESSE Malcolm Slaughter, Ueputy City AttorneX, preaented the written right to appeal the Planning Canmission's decision within 22 days tQ the Cxty Council. Commissioner Herbst stated he did not appreciate comments that the Commission had nlread~,~ made up their mind on this matter before hearing all the eviden~ce and he has been on khe Commission for ovec 20 years and everyone is given an opportunity to present their case. 9/16/85 MINUTBS. ANAH~IM CITY FLANNING CUMMISSION, SEPTEMBER 161 1985 $5-500 REC~SSEU: 3:05 p,m. RBGONVENED: 3:.15 p.m. TNk; FUGLOWING ACTION WAS TAKEN AT 2'HE BEGINNINC OF Ttl[•: MEETINC. ITRM N0. 3 EIR NEGATTVE UECLARATIC~N, RECLASSIEIC:A'rION Nq. 8A-85-43, AND Vn:~tiANC~ N0. 3499 Pl1Hi.IC FiFARING. OWNERS: LUCSON W.~ ,1R., AND BARBARA B. MYLES~ 3609 W. Savan~a Stceet, Anaheim, CA 92804 and ROBERT 2. ANU LINDA L. AaAIR, 3613 W. Savanna 5lceet, Anaheim, CA 92804 and JAMES A. ANA K~ THI,EEN AP7N t~IC.KFtART, 3621 W. Savanna Street, Anaheim, CA. ~r~perty described as an irregularly- ~happd parcel of land consisting af approx~mately 1.76 Acres, having a frontage of approximately 243 [eet on the norCt~ aide of 5avanna Street, and Eurther described aa 3bU9, 3613 and 3621 West Savanna Street. RecJ.aseification from kS-A-43,OOU to RM-1200. Waiver of maximum structural height to construct a 45-unit apartment complex. Continued From the meeking of July 22, 1985. ACTION: Commissioner Bouas off.ered a motion, ssconded by Cammissioner McBurney and MOTION CARRI~D (Commissione[ Messe absent) that consideratian of the aforementioned matter be contfnued to the cegul.arly-scheduled meeting of October 14, 1965, at the request af the petitioner in order to submit revised plan~. THE FULLOWING ACTION WAS TAKEN AT TNE B~GINNING OF T!{E MEETING. ITEM IvO. 4 BIFi NBGF~TIVE DECLARATION AND V1~RIANCE N0. 3504 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: GFtAX S. AND PAULR S. KILMER, 607 5. Harbor Boulevacd~ Anaheim, CA 92805, ATTN: MARY VE;RDONCK/HUGC VASQU~2. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consicting of approximately 0.43 acre, 220 and 224 Norkh Uli.ve Strect. Waivers of minimum building sit~ area per dwelling unit, maximum s~ruct~~ral height, maximum siCe coverage, minimum floor area and minimum ~tructucal setback to construct a 19-uni~ affordable apartment camplex. Continued fram the meeting of August 19, 1985. ACTION: Commi~sioner McSurney offered a motion, seconded by Commissionec Bouas and MOTION CARRIED (Conuniasioner Messe absent) that consideration of the aforementioned matter be continued to the regularly-schedulPd meeting of Se~tember 30, 1985, at the request of the staff in order to r.evLew revised plans submitted late ~-y the petitioner. THE FULLOWING ACTiON WAS TAKEt~ POLLOWING ITEM N0. ].. 9/16/85 MINUTBS ANAH~IM CITY PLANNING COM~ISSION, SEPT~MBER 16, ~985 85-501 ITEM N~. 5 EIk NO. 264 RBCLA5SIFICATION N0. 85-86-2 WAIVER OP CODE RE UIR~M£NT ANU CONUITIUNAL USE PGRMIT NU. 2713 PUBLI(: HEARxNG. OWNERS: STATE COLI.EGE PARTNEitS, c/o nUNtJ PROPERTIES, 28 FiCOOkholloW Driv~, S811L'~ Ana CA 92802. AGENT: BILL SINGER & ASSOC.~ 5100 tiirch Street, Newp~rt BeACh, CA 92G60. Property described as a rectangulsrly-shapod patcel of lend conaif;ting ot appcoximately 7.67 acres located at t.he northwest cornec ut Ora~gewood Avenue an~~ State College Buulevard (State College Plaz~). ML(FP) to CU(FP) oK a leas inLense zone to peemit a 10-story and 12-sL•ory commercial office oomplex with waivers oC (a) minimum riumbec of parking spACea, (b) maximum structural height and (c) minimum lAndscaped setback. Continued irom tht~ meeting of August 19, 1985. Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, explained the Commission plana to meet wit•h the City Council on Sepkembec 24th ln b joint woKk session to discus~ the Stadium Area Study. Commissioner Herbsk stated a conti.nuance of this matter wae the recommendation o~ the Laison Committee until after the Council meets with the Planning Cammission in thNir joint :~urk session. ACTION: Commissioner Fcy offQred a motion, seconded by Commisaioner McBurney and NaTION CAItFtIED (Commiasioner Messe abaent) *_hat consideration of the aforementioned matter be contir-ued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of. September 30, 1985, at the request of the Commiesion. THE~ FnLLOWING ACTIUN WAS 'PAKBN AT TH~ BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. ITEM NU. 6 EZR NO_._259 (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED) AND RECI,ASSIFICATION_N0. 85-86-3 PUBLIC: HEARING. OWNERS: D& D DEVELOPMENT, 11008 Norwalk Boulevard, Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670, ATTN: CAMILLE COURTNEY. i~roperty described as an irreyularly-sha~ed parcel of land consisting of approximately 7.5 acres, having a frontage uf approxamately 513 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, approximately 1,340 feet east of the centerline of Rio vista Street. R5-A-43,000 to RM-30U0 or a less intense zone to construct a 99-unit condaminium subdivi~ion. Continued fcom the meetinga of August 19, and September 4, 1985. ACTION: Commisaioner Bouas offered a mction, seconded by Commissioner Fry and MOTSON CARRIEU (Commissioner Messe absent) that consideration of the aforementioned mattec be continue~ to Chz regularly-scheduled meeking of September 30, 1985, at the petikionet's request. THE ~OLLUWING ACTION WAS TAKEN AT THE BEGfNNING OF THE MEETING. 9/16/85 MINUT~S. ANAHEiM CITY PLANNINC COMMI55ION, SEPT~M6ER 16. 1945 85-502 IT'M NU. 7~XK NF.GATIVE DECLARATIUN, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIR~MENT AND CGt+llITIUNAL USE PERMIT N0. 2694 PUHLIC H~;ARING. OWNERS: FRF.UERICK 7. AND MAURICE ZIEGLER, 9889 Santa Monica BouleVaccl, BeveCly Hills, CA 90212. AGENT: COLDWELL I3ANKER, 2100 West Orangewood Avenue, Suite 10U, O[ange, CA 92668, ATTN: JAMF.S KEANG. Property described As a rectAngulacly-shaped parcel of land crnsiating of approximately 3.1 c~r:rea located at the aouthea~t corncr of Miraloma Avenue nnd Red Gum Street, 1280 and .12~U North Red Gum Street and 2970 East Mirr~loma Avenue. T~ permit an automabile body and detail shop in an exisliny industria]. complex with waiver of minimum number ot parki~~g spaces. Continued from the meetings of August 19, and Sepkember 4, 1985 ACTIUN: Commissioner Bouas offered a motlon, aeconded by Commissioner Fry and MOTION CARRIEU (Commi.ssioner Messe absent) that consideration of the rtforementioned matter be continued tu the regularly-~cheduled meeting o£ October 14, 1985, in order For the petitioner to submit revisPd plans. ZTEM N0. 8 EIR NECATIVE LECLARATION (PREV. APPFtOV~G) ANU CUNDITIONAL USE P~RMIT NU. 2667 (READVERTISEU) PUBLIC HEARING. UWNEkS: KENNE2~E1 W. AND tiELF.N L. HOLT, 1557 W. ~lable Street, Anaheim, CA 92802. AGENT: DAVID JACKSUN, 1557 W. Mable Stceet, Anaheim, CA y2802. Property is described as a rectan~~ularly-shaped parcel of land consisL•ing of appcoximately U.66 acre located at the northwest corner of Chestnut SCzeet and Citron Street, 121 South c:it[on Street (Eairmont School). Approval of revised plans (No. 1) far expansion of a private school for a maximum of 225 skudents. There was one person indicating his pregence in opposition to aubject request and although the staff cepott was not read, it is referred to and made a par~ af the minutes. David Jacicson, Fairmont School, 1557 W. Mab'_e, Anaheim, Califarnia, explained the:e was an error in the original application approved in March 1984, pertaining to the square footage not being adequate for the 72 studer,ts they had enviaioned for the pre-school. He atated they will not be increasing the number of students and rhere will not be any additional teachers and that they have to have 35 square feet per student of floor acea and they had not included the bathrooms in their nriginal proposal and had to revise the plans. Joe White, 809 W. Broadway, stated t~e has some concecns about this after reading the staff ceport and he did not think this would be enough room for thak many students. He stated he is also concerned about the covenant on the parking and ~sked if there is an exclusive covenant or if the parking ie shared with the shopging center and pointed out some of the spaces are designa~ed for the Winston Tire Company and noted there was a truck parked there parallel with the easement. He stated they do have a p~rki.ng problem in that area now. He referred to the °no parking' signs which were installed an Citron and tt~en removed one week latex and a~ked why they wexe cemoved. He 9/16/85 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMTSSION. SEPTGMBER 16. 1985 85-500 RECCSSEU: 3:05 p.m. Rt:CONVENLD: 3:15 p.m. Tli~ FUULOWING AGTION WAS TAKEN AT THE BEGINNING OF TNE MELTING. IT6M N0. 3 EIR NEGATSVL llECLARATION, RECLASSIFICATION N0._84-65-43, AND .____.._._~ - VARIANCE NU. 3499 PUBL~IC I~CAI2ING. OWNERS: LUCION W., JR.~ AND BARE3ARA B. MYLES~ 3609 W. Savanna Street, Anaheim, ~:A 92804 and RUBERT Z. AND LINDA I~. ADATR, 3613 W. Savanna Street, Anaheim, C~. 92a04 and JAMES A. AND KATHLEEN ANN PICKNART, 3621 W. Savanna Street, Anal:eim- CA. Property described as an icregularly- sh~ped pArcel of land consist:~ig of approximately 1.76 acres, having a Eruntage of ap~~roximately 243 feet un the nortti side of Savanna Street, and Eurther described as 36U9, 3613 and 3621 Weat Savanna Street. Reclaseification from RS-A-43,000 to ItM-12U0. Waiver of maximum structural hei.ght to construct a d5-unit apartment cemplex. Continued fCOm the meeting of July 2?, 1985. ACTION: Commissioner Bouas ofFered a motion, seconded by Commissi~ner McButney and MUTION CARRI~D (Commissi~ner Messe absent) that consideration of the aforementi~ned matter be continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of 4ctober 14, 1985, at the request of the petitioner in order to submit revised plans. TFiE FULLUWSNG ACTTUN WAS TAK~,N AT TH~; BEGINNING OF TEIE ME~TING. IT~;M N0. 4 EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AP1D VARIANCE N0. 3504 PUBLIC EiBARING. OWNERS: GRAY S. AND PAULA S. KILMER, 607 S. Harbar Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92$05, ATTN: MARY VERDONCK/HUGO VASQUEZ. P[opecty dPSCribed as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.43 acre, 220 and 22A Noeth Ulive 5treet. ~laivers of minimum bui ciing site area per dwelling unit, maximum structural height, maximum site cuverager minimum floor area and minimum structucal setback to constcuct a 19-unit affordable apartment complex. Continued from the meeting of August 19, 1985. ACTION: Commissioner McBUrney offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Messe absent) that consideration of the aforementioned matter be conti~ued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of September 3U, 1985, at the request of the staff in ocder to review revised plans submitted late by the petitioner. THE FULI,OWING ACTION WAS 'PAKEN FOLLUWING ITEM N0. 1. 9,/16/85 ~INUTES1,ANAHEIM CI'PY PLANNING COMMIS5IUN. SEPTEM_UEK 16. 19$5 85-501 ITEM NU. 5~IR N0. 268, RECLASSIE'ICATION N0. 85-86-2, WAIVER 0~ CODE RE(UIR~MPNT ANU CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2713 pU~LiC FIGAHING. OWNERS: STATE CULLEGE PARTNERS, c/a DUNN PROPERTICS, 28 8rookhollow Drive, Santa Ana CA 928U2. AGCNT: BILL SINGER & ASSOC., 5100 ~irch Stceet, Newport Beact~, CA 92G60. Property dPSCribed as a rectanyularly-shaped ~arcel of land consisting of approximately 7.67 acres 1ocAted at the northwest corner of Orangewood Avenue and S~ate Co].lege Bouleuard (5tate College l~laza). M1,(FP) to CU(~P) or a le~s intense zone to Permi~ a 10-story and 12-story commercial ottice complex with waivers of (a) min3.mum number of parking spaces, (b) rnaximum st-:uctural height and (c) minimum landscaped setback. Continued frorn the meeting of Auyust 19, 1985. Malc:olm 5laughter, Ue~uty City Attorney, explai.ned ttie Commission plans to meet with the City Council on September 24th in a joint work session to discuss the SL•adium Ar.ea Study. Comtnissioner Herbst stated a continuance of ':his matter was the recommendation of the Laison Committee until after the Cour~cil meets with the Planning Commission in their joint work session. A(;TZON; Commissioner Fry offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner t4cBucney and MOTION CARR1~:7 (Commi3si.oner hlesse absent) that consideration ot the aforementioned matter be contir~ued to the regularly-sctieduled meeting of September 30, 1985, at the request of tt~e Commission. mEi~: FULLOW:NG AC`1'IUN WAS TAKEN AT THE BEGINNTNG OE' THE MEETING. xTEM NU. 6 EIR tJV. 259 (PkEV10USLY CEItTIFIED) AND RECC,ASSIFICATION N0. 85-86-3 ~UBLIC H~ARING. OWNERS: D& D UEVELOPMENT, 11008 Norwalk Boulcvard, Santa Fe Sptings, CA 9067U, ATTN: CAMILLE; CUURTNEY. Proper~y described as an i[regularly-shaped parcel of land consisting o_° approximately 7.5 acres, having a frontag~ of approximatply 513 Eeet on the soutt~ side of Lincoln Avenue, approximately 1,340 feet east of the centerline of Rio Vista Street. ItS-A-43,OOU to RM-3000 or a less intense zone to eonstruct a 99-unit condominium subdivision. Continued from the meetings of August 19, and Septetnber 4, 1y85. ACTION: Commissioner Bouas of~ered a morion, se~onded by Commissioner F~y and MOTIOtJ CARRIEU (Commissioner Messe absent) chat considerati.on of the aforetnentioned matter be continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of September 30, 19a5, at the petitionec's request. THE FOLLUWING ACTION WA5 TAKEN AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. 9/16/85 MINUT~;S, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNTNG COMMISSIQN~ S~P'PEMI3ER :6~ 1985 85_ 502 ITL•'bl NU. 7 L•'I1? NEGATIV~ DECI.ARATION~ WAIVF.R OF CQD~ REQUIREMCNT AND CONllITIUNAL U5E PERMIT N0. 2694 PUBLIC H~ARING. OWNERS: EREUERICK 7,. AND MAURICG ZIEGLER, 9889 5anta Monicd Boulevard, Beverly Nills, CA 902J.2. AGENT: CULUWELL HANKER, 210U West Oranyewoud Avenue, Suite 1(IU, Urange, CA 92668, ATTN: JAMES KEAN~. Property describWd As a rectangularly-anaped parcel oE land coneiating of approximately 3.1 acrea locaked at the southeast corneG of Miraloma Avenue and Red Gum Street, 1280 and 129U Nor~h ked Gum Street and 2970 Laot Mira.loma Avenue. To permit an automobile body and detail shop in an existirig induskri.al complex with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Continued from the m2el•inga of August 19, and September 4, 1985 AC'PIUN: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, aeconded by Commissioner Fry and MU'1'ION CARRIEU (CommiseionPr Messe absent) tha~ cunsiderakion of. the afurementioned matter be continued to the regularly-~chedul.ed meeting oi October 14, 19Et5, ir, ordec for the peL•itioner to submi.t revised plans. TTEM N0. 8~Ik NEGATIVE DECI~ARATION (PR~V. APPRQVEU) AND CONDITIONAL USE P~kMIT NU. 2667 (kEADVERTISGU) PUBLIC HEARiNG. OWNEkS: KENNETti W. AND t1ELEN L. fiUI.T, 1557 W. htable Street, Anaheim, CA 92F302. AGEN:': DAVIU JACYSUP~, 15~7 W. Mable Stceet, Anahcim, CA 92802. PropQrty is de:scribed as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land aonsisting of approximately 0.66 acre located at t}~e northwest c~rner of ChesL•nu1. Street and Citron Street, 121 South Citcon Street (Fairmont School). Approval of revised plans (No. 1) f.o~ :~xpansion of a private scnool fur a maxirnum of 225 st~de~its. There was one person indicating his presence in opposition to subject request and altt~ough the ~tafE report was not read, it is referred ko and made a p~rt of the minutes. David Jacksor,, Faicmont School, 1557 W. Mable, Anaheim, California, explained there was an err.or i.n the original application apProved Ln March 1984, pertaining to the square footage not being adequate for the 72 students they had envisioned for the pre-school. tie stated th~y will not be increasing the number of students and tt~ere will not be any additiorial teachers and that they have to have 35 syuare feet per student of floor area and they had not included the bathrooms in their original proposal and had to revise the plans. Joe White, 8U9 W. Broadway, state4 he has some concerns about this aftet reading the staff repart and he did not think this would be enough roor~ for tt~at many students. He stated he is also concerned about the covenant on the packing and asked if there is an exclusive covenar.t oc if the parking is shared with the shopping center and pointed out some of the spaces are designated for the Winston Tire Company and noted there was a truck packed there parallel with the easement. He stated they do have a parking problem in thak area now. He referred to the "no parking` signs which were installed on Citron and tt~en removed one week later and asked why they were remove~. He 9/16/85 ~ ,. M MINUT~S~ ANAH~IM CITY PLANNING COMMISSI~JN. SLPTCMI3CR 1_6~ 1985 85-503 strzh.ed he is also concerned about Che situation 4n Cheb~nut Street with school buses ~arking there for loading and unloading And noted iC ir~ a narrow Ptc~ ~~t. He t~eked if thare is adeyuate PJ.ay~round. Mr. Jackson ~tatcd there acc no requirementa foc a playground in ~he state gufdelines for elemantary school~, but '15 aquAre fh~t ~er student is required for pre-bchool children ~-ld they have room for 'l8u ~re-school children. He staL•ed a~ no tim~: wauld all the studenL•a be on the pl.aygc~und at the sam~_ time. Ne atated oriyinally Lhis was An r_lementary ~chaol thcouyh 8hi~ grade and he was the motivating torce Co change lt~at because the playgcound was not large enough for Lhe older or lArger students. I!e stated ha believe~ there is adcquate p~rking and has not noCiced . parking pr.oblem ev~~n at dismissal time and that th~y do try t;o schedule the buses to eliminate any pGOblerns. THk: PUE3I~IC Hk;ARINC WAS CLUSED. Commissioner Nerbst g':ated parkiny i~ pravided in the easement ar.~a with a 25-fo~t 5ack-up area beEore getling into tt~e alley and asked about the easemPnt. Kendra Murries, Assiscant E~lanner, explained the requirement tc, record a covenant for the easement was requ.ired in 1969 and thaL• covenant was recordeu against the property and they d~ have the right ta use those 15 ~,arkiny spaces wt~ict~ does meet Code. Chairwoman t,a Claire stated since they are not increasing the number oF students, the traEfic will not be incr.eased an~+ t•r~e otner problems wi7.1 be eliminated because these are pre-school c:iildcen with staggered schedul.e and t~~e p.laygruund is sufficient. 5he asked about the "no ~~.rking' signs which were ir,stalled and then cemoved. A~~nika Santalahti, Assistank Uirector for '1.oning, stated the Traffic Engineec would have L-o a~swer that question, but it is possilile they were placed there for some temporary purposes, such as construckione She skated prohibition of ~~,rk`.ny is done by ordinance with notification to property owne!-s ahead of tirne. ~'~he ehptained if°no parking{was made a condition of approval- it would havA been a eecoinmendation tt~at ~ public hearing be held to consider p~~onibition c~f parking. Chairwoman La c:laire asked ~taff to research this issue and f.ind out what ha~pened to the "no parking" signs. it was noted a negative declacation was approved for subje~;t pr.operty by the Planning Commission on March 1~, ].984. AC`PION: Commissioner H~rbrt oftered Resolu`ion No. PC85-207 and r~oved for its oassage and adoption that the Anaheim Cf`y Planning Commission does hereby grant• Conr~itional Use Pecmit No. 2567 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code 5ections 18.U3.030.030 through 18.03.U30.G35 and aubject to Interciep~rtmental Cotnmittee recummendations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the foll~wing vote: AYES: BUUAS, ERY, HERBST, LA CLR'.RE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY NOES: ~ONE ABSENT: tiESSE MIIJUTkS, ANAHEIM CT'PY PLANNING COMMI55IUN,__SEPTEMBE! R 16, 1985 85-504 Malcolm Slaughtec, Ue~uty c:ity Attornoy, prQSerited the written right to appcal the Planning Commi~sion's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ITEM NU. 9 EIF2 NEGATIVE D~CLARATIUN~ r~~AIVRR 0~ CODE REQUIRL•MENT; AND C:UNUITIUtJAL USk~ PE;RMIT NO. 2719 PUBLIC Hf3ARINC~. UWNEkS: CARL KARCHGlt EN~1t:kPRISES, 1200 N. Narbar 3oulevard, Anaheim, CA 92801, ATTN: BRIAN C. DF:RKHAUSEN. A~ENT: DONUVAN J. FI,ORIANI, 2100 Via Hur.ton Stree~, Anal--cim, Cp ~~240G. Property dePCCibed as a recCangulacly-shaped pArcel of l~+nd consir,ting of approxi.mately 0.27 acre, 1239 North Harbor doulevacd. To perrnit a private E~re-school and day caGe cent~c for a maximum of. 56 students with waive[ of r.equired dedicAtion anc3 ir^proaements. There was no one indicating t:heir presence in o~r~ositioc~ to rubject request and Although the sta~f re~ort: wa.~ nol: re~d, it is refe[rc~i l. ~~nd tnade a part of l-he minul•es. CommissioneC McBurney declarecJ a co~.Elict oC intereF as defined by An~heim City Planniny Commission Resolution No. PC76-157 adopcing a Conflict of Intereut Code for the °l~nning Cotnmission and Government Code Section 3625, et seq., in that he wou).d have a f.inanclal interest in the outc~me and pursuanl; to the p~~vi~~ions of the above Codes, declared L•u thp Chairman Lhat he was withdcaw?.ny from the heariny in connection with Conditinnal Use Permit No. 27.19, and would not take F~ark in either tt~e discussion or the votiny thereon an~1 tiad not discuswed this mutter with any member of the Planniny Conuni~:sion. Thereupon Commissioner McBur.ney left the Council Chamber. Dunovan Floriani, ayent, stated they are respanding .;o a need far day-care centers whi.ch he was sure the Planniny Commission was aware of thr~~ughout the 5tate of California. He stated they are trying to prov.de more than a baby-sitting secvire and have a real school derigned to fulfil'1 the needs of 2 to 6-year old chilc3ren. He stated they would reyue~t ttiat the additi.onal f inancial burdens imposed in the conditions be waived for at; least 6 years so they can get the schoul oper~.tiny at a pro£it. He stated the condition~ require 10-foot radius curb cuts and explained the property is presently ~erved by an in-driveway and out-driveway with curb cuts which are wide and have served a comme[cial use previously and asked that they only be requiced to maintain khe existing curb cuts and not increase them because tlarbor dc,ulevard would eventully be widened and any impravements would be a waste. THE PUBLIC HEF~2ING WAS CLO5Ell. Chairwortian La Claire stated she clid not seF= any traffic ha2ard with this use, particularly with ttie conf iguration of tt~e aliey behind the pcoperty and they have adequate parking. She stated the City will need tl~e dedication and the only question is the security re~uired for the improvements which may not happen f~r anoth~r 5 or 6 years. She stated she understands th.~ restriccion was not imposed oi~ the motel recently approved next do~c. 9/J.6/85 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PUANNING COMMISSION~ SEPTEMB~~ 16, 1985 85~505 Reaponding to Commisaioner Iierbat, Mr. Eloriani responded they have ~ 3-ye~c lense with a 3-yeAr aption. Commissionet Hecbst atated he has no problem with the use, and ha~ no ob~ection to waiving the requirement for a period of least 6 years, but would like the etipulAtion that if tlieir le~se ie extended, that condition could be reconaidered. Malcolm SlaughL•er, Deputy ~ity Ahtorney, suggested the conditional use permit be granted for a specific period oE time, ~robably 6 years, And if tt~ey are continuinq t•he u~e At that time, a new permit c~uld be requested and the conditian reviewed at th~t time. Ile stAted conditions impo~~d are on the pcoperty, but it rt~ay ar may not involve a tenant, but i[ the tenant cr,nnot convince the landlord to comply with the conditions, khey do nol have the right to use ~tie praperty becuuse the conditions have not been met. Chairwoman La Claire stated she wauld be in favar oE requirinq the dedication at this time and post~oning hhe p~sting of security Lor 6 year.s so this permit would ex~ire in 6 years and at that time ttie commission could impose the condition if necessary. Malcolm Slaugt~ter stated the Commissi~n can grant this permit for 6 years leaving the condition in requirin, the dedicati~n as i~, and grant Lhe waiver requiring th~ postiny of securiCy; however, tha~ is not th~ recommendation of the Engineecing Uepartment. Commissioner La Claire stated ~he did not think it is faic to have a proQerty owner who is in ausiness give the City ~aoney just to hold and even though she understands the City's point of view. She stated she thougt~t the permit should be gr.anted far : period of 6 years so t.he condition can be imposed at that tfine if cey,iired. Mr. Eloriani stated a 6-year time limi~ would be acceptable. Commissioner kierhst stated if Nar~or. is widened even in 6 years, he did not think widening thQ curb was a necessity and Condition No. G should be deleted. Annika Santalahti stated the Traffic Engi~eer t~a~ been cequiring that condition on a~l applications and feels more strongly in this case because ~f the volume of traffic on Harbor. Chairwoman La Claire ~tated she w~uld want to keep that condikion in because the use is located on Iiarbor. Mr. F'l~riani stated the driveways there presently are over 20 fect wide. de stated he reviewed this condition and pointed out if the driveway was rut, it would create a lraffic t~azard for people walking t~ecause the ~treet is about 12 inches below the grade of the property. Annika Santalahti pointed out the condition dees rpquire that the curb cuts be made subject to the approval of the Traffic Engineer, so it is possible the Z'raffic Engineer would r.ot even require them. Commi~sioner Herbst pointed uut they are one-way driveways and are as wide as any he has seen in any school in Anat~eim and did not think an expense like that should be imposed when it is not really necessary. 9/16/85 MINUTE:S~ ANAtf~IM CITY PLANNING COMM7.SSIGNj SEpmEMBFR 16, 19Q5 _ 85-506 ACTIUN: Commisaioner Herbst o ftered a mok.ion, seconded by Commiasioner Fry and MU'i'ION CAkRIEU (Commiseiariers Mease And McBucney absent) that tF~e Anaheim City P1Anniny c:~~mmir~sion has reviQwed the proposal t.n permit a private pre-school and ~lay-care center For a maximum oC 56 b~udents with w~iver of required dedicakion anc! improvemento on u rectHngulacly-shaped ~~arc~l of lz-nd consistinq uf a~proxirtiately U.27 acre, having a£rontage oE apFroximately 1Q0 test ori the west side of. Harb~r RoulevArd and further desc:ribed aa 1239 Nortl~ Harbor Houlevardt and dae~ her ~b,y approve the Negative Decla[ation upon ti.ndiny that it haa consider.ed L•he t~egative Ueclaration togeC}~er with any comments recei~~c~d during the p ublic review process and further t+nding on the basis ot the Initial Study an d any commentE received lhat there :~ no substantial evidenr.e that the project will have a signitic~nt etEeck on the environment. Cotnmi3sinner Herbst off.ered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fry and NOTION C„RRIE;U (Commissioners Messe a nd t4c13urney absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission doe~ here b y grant waiver of. Code reguiremenL•, in part, reyuiring the dedic~tion at th i~ time and waiving the r.equir~rnenC to post a bond or security to guacantee th~ cost of rclocaking the exasting street improvements to the ultimate 1 ocati.on on ~he basis th~t it i.~ not known when Harbor boulevard wil] be wide n ed anc. on lhe basis that the permit will be yranted tox a perio~ of 6 yea cs and the nece:~,i~y for street improvements can b~ r.eviewed at tt~at time. Commi~sioner Herbst otfered R e~olution No. PCaS-208 and moved for it:s passage and adoF>tion that the Anaheim Ciky Planninq Commi:~sion does hereby grant cc~nditional Use Pertnit tdo. "''7Z9 purauant to Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.U3.U3U.U3U through 1~.03.U 3U.U35 for a period ~f six (6) years and subject t.o Interdepartmental Committe e [ecommend~~tions. Un call eall, t•he foregoing resolution was pas~ed by the following vcte: AY~S: BUUAS, FRX, IiERBST, LA CLAIRF., LAWICKI NOES: UONE ABSENT: MC F3URNEY, MESSE Malc:.,lm Slaughte~, Depuly Cit y Attorney, pr.esented the written right to appeal lhe Plannin9 Commission's dec ision within 2"l days to the City Council. Commissioner McBurney returne d Y_o the meeting. TH~ FULL~WINU ACTION WAS TAKEN AZ' THE BcGINN1NG OF THr; MEETING. ITEM N0. 1Q. Elit NEGAZIVE DECLARATION, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMEP~T AND (:UtJDITIONAL U;iE PERMI'P N0. 27 2i PUbLIG HEARING. OWNERS: LED ERER-ANAHkIM, LTD., 1990 westwood F3oulevard, Third Floo[, Los Anqeles, CA ~'~+125-4514, ATTN: LES E. LEUERER. AGENT; MICHAEL FRA2IER AND RSSOCIATE S, 471"l Tucana, Yorba Linda, CA 92G86. Property described as an ircegularly- s haped parcel of lanc3 consisting of approximatelY 12 acres, located north and e~ast of the nurtheast corner of Cerritos Avenue and Anaheim Soulevard, 333 L•'a st CeXritos Avenue (Vi.neyard CT~ristian Fellowshi~). 9r~16/85 MINUZ'LS~ ANAH~IM CITY YLANNING CUMMISSION, SEPTIsMBER 16,_ 1985 85-507 ~r~ permit the expansion of a church in the 61L Zone with waiver of minimum numbec of parking spuces. AC'i'IUN; Commissi.aner B n uas offer~d a motlon, seconded by Commissioner F:y and MOTION CARRIED (Commis~ioner Plesse Abaent) that consideration of the aforementioned matter b e continued to the regularly-scheduled me~ting of September 30, 1985, at t h e request of the ~etitioner, ITBM NU. 11 k:IR NEGA'I'Iy ~ D6CLARATION AND VARIANCE N0. 3500 PUBLIC f1EARiNG. ~WNERS: NORMAN E: ANU LORF,LIE L. CLEMENS, 1035 S. Pieeker. Avenue, West Covina CA 9 1790. Pra~erty is described as a rectangul~rly-~t~ap~;d parcel of land consistin g of apE~coximately 0.50 acre, 1599 West Cer.ritos~ Waiver of minimum lot w idth and frontage to establi~h a two-lot, single-tamily subdivisi~n. 'Phere w~~ no one indica ting their presence in opposition tu subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is re£erred to and made a part oL• t minutes. Norman E. Clemens, owner, was present to answer any questions. THC PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED~ AC'i'IOt~: Chairwaman La Claire oifered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MUTION CARRIEU (COmmissioner MesF- absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewe d the proposal to eskablish a 2-lot- RS-7200 (Sinyle-Family) subdiv ision with waivec of minimum lot width and frontage on ~a rectangul<irly-shaped p arcel o~ land consifiting af approximately 0.50 zcre, havinq a frontage of a pproximately 12U feet on the north side of Cerritos Avenue and further des cribed as 1599 West Cerritos; and does F~ereby approve the Negative Ueclaration upon finding that it has consideced the Negative Declaratiun together. w ith any comments received during the public r~view prac~ss and further Einding on the basis of the Initial :~tudy and any coTmsnts received tt~at there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Chairwoman La Claire offerpd Resolution No. PCS5-209 and moved for it~ ~assage and adoption that th e Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Variar^e No. 3`~OU on the basis that there are special c~rcumstances applicable to the ~+roperty such a s size, shape, topography, location or surc~undings which du nut apply t o ather identically zoned properties in the vicinity; and strict applicati~n of the Z~ning Code depcives the property of privilzges enjoyed by other pco perties in ~he identical zoning classification or vicinity and subject to interd epartmenta: ~ommiCtee recummendationa. On roll call, the for egoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: k30UAS~ ~RY, HEc~BST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE A65ENT: MESSE Malcolm Slaughter, D eputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commiss i on's decision within 22 days to the City Council. 9/16/85 ~~ MINUTF,Sl AIJAHEIM_CITY PLANNING CUMM155IONr SEPTEMB~R 16, 1965 __85-508 ITEM N0. 12 EIR NEGA'1'IVE UECLARATTUN ANU ~AkIANCE N0. 3505 PUDI~IC tIEARSNG. UWNERS: SETCU, INC., P.O. [iox 3730, Culver City, CA 90231, AT'PN: WILLIAM L. [~kANDT. AGENT: ARCttITEC;TS URANGE, 144 N. Orange Street, Orange, CA 92666 ATTN: DARREL -lEBENSTREI'T. Property ~escribed as a rectangularly-Fhaped parcel oi land cUnsisting o£ approximately 12.4 acres, 4875 ~:.ast Efun~er Avenue. Waiver ol minimum number oi parking ~paces to construct an induRtrial building. Z~here was one pecson indicating her prE~ence in opposition ~o aubject cequest and although the sraff report wa3 not read, i.t is referred to and made a pact of the minutes. llarcel Hebenstrcit, agent, stated this project is already under construction and lhe plan wc~s~ designed tc pruvide Che total numbec parking spac-es required by cuerent i;it~~ Urdinances; however, they are reyue:s~ing a variance to simply allow part oY that parking area ta be installed with the initial eonstr~~ction as landscaped area fronting on Elunter Street wt~ict~ would ~rovide suhUtantial u~yrade to that street. Ne rtated the Z00 parking spaces required in tr~at area would r-ot be used, even with the expansion. He statec9 a parking ~tudy was provided which indicated 225 parking spaces would ~e adequate during peak ~eri~ds and they are proposing 285 spaces. He ~tated l-tiere is a large asphalt area for truck maneuvering on the east, west and north si~ies of: the facility which could be eaa~ily stri~ed for parking i.f a parking problem did develop. He atated based on the current use and the numbers suotnitted, they feel they are pruviding sufficient ~arking (aimost 25~ of the number that would be required). Uon Hanna, Wc~tern Investment Properties, stated he represents the developing agent, and wants to reassure the Commission that this is not an attetnpt ta circumvent the parking requirements tot ar.y po ential future uses of the bui.lUing and the c~wner does realize that this variance would only apply to the current user and the uwner wants to improve tr- appearance of tt~e very large concrete building on Hunter Avenue and if necessary lhey can convert the landscaping back ta packing or restripe the asphalt for parking at t.he rear of the building. fiobbi~ LeHouillier, stated L•hey own property cff Orangethorpe at 4730 E. Tanglewood and explained she was concerned when she received the notice of today's hearing and asked if this means people wi]1 be parkirtg on the other side of Urangethorpe and also asked if this will improve the other side of Oran~3ethurpe. It was noted the improvement would be on Hunter and not Orangett~orpe and that this would not affect her side of Urangethorpe. THE PUBLIC HEI,RING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Her~bt asked if the ~etikionPr would record a covenant that if parki~g is :.equired in the future by the City Traffic Engineer, that it would be provided or a parking structure will be constructed. Mr. Hebenstreit stated a covenant would be acceptable and stated they would either stripe some 9/16/85 MINUTES ?.NAH6IM CI'PY PLANNING COMMI5SION 3GPT~MBER 16 1985 85-509 of the area in the ~ear, or as A last resort, chanye sc,,^,Q of the landscaping to provide parki.ng. Kendca Morcies, Asaistant Planner, suggesCed a condition be included to read: "In the event A parking daf~ciency occur.a following occupancy of aubject property, said def.iciency having been demonstrated in a Parking Demand Study to be Eunded by the pru~ert-y owner at the request of t•he City Traffic Engineer and l•o bP reviewed and ttpproved by the City Tcaffic Engineer, addi~i.onal un-site parking ePaces Rhall be ~~rovided in a rnanner approved by the City TraEfic Engineer and that a c~~~~~nant ~hall be recorded in a Eorm and manner satisfc~~tory to ~.he City Att~~Cney's Office obliyating the petitioner and any Luture assignees L•o provide parking iE a deficiency is found r.o exist". Malcolm Slaughter, Ueputy City Attocney, stated he feel~tentialfbuyersG fet ~ is required as suggested, it would give notice to any p ~coper~y of th~ obligation to comply with that conditi~n. Mr. H~~enstreit stated they have no objection to the covenant. Chairwoman La Claire suggested plantiny trees or something in the r~~lr to improve the app~a~ance to the ather side of 0-.angethorpe. ACTION: Cotnmis~ioner McBucriey offered a motion, seconded by Commi.ssioner 8ouas and h~ '.'ION CARRIED lCOmtnissioner Messe absent) that the Anaheim Cit~~ Planning c:ommission has reviewed the proposal to construct an industrial building with waiver of minimum number of: parking ~P`~roxi.mately 12.4 acres, rect•angularly-shaped parcel of land can~isling of apF having a frantage of approximately 972 feet on L•he north side of Hunter Avenue and further described as 4875 E. Hunter Avenue; and does hereby approve the Negative Ueclaration ul>un finding that it t~as c~nsidered the Negative Declaration tog~.~her ~+ith any comm~.nts received during the publ.ic review process and furl•her finding on the basis of the initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will. have a significant effect on the enviconm~r~t. Commissioner McBurney offered Reaolution No. P~85-210 and moved for its passage and adoption that Anaheim Cil•y Plannin~ Commissior~ does heceby gtant Variar~e No. 3505 on the basi~ that, thEre are special circumstances applicable to the oroperty .such as size, shape, topography, location and surcoundings which n~ not apply to other identically zoned propert•y in the same vicinity; and that strict applicatior- of the 2oning Code depcives the property of privileges enjoyed by ather properties in the identica'. zone and classification in the vicinity and subject Lo Interdepartmental Commitl'ee recommendations including an additional cundition requiring a cover~ant to provide parking. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES• BOIiAS, ERY, HERBST, LA Ci.~IIRE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY NOES: NONE AH5ENT: MESSE Maicolm Slauyhtec, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written ri~ht to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the Cit9Ii6/85i1. MINUT~S, ANAH~IM CITY PI.ANNING CUMMISSION, SEP'PEMDER 16, 7~a5,~_ 85-510 lTEM N0. 13 REPGRTS ANQ RECUMMCNDATIONS A. 2~ENTA'1'IVE TRACT NU. 11~56 - Request Erom C.7. Queyrel, AnACa.l Engineering Lor ~. 1-y~ar extension of time, praperty located at 6J.G Peralta Hills Drive. ACTION: Cornmissioner Eierbst offered a motion, seconded by Comrnissioner t3ouan ~~nd h10~PI0N CAFtRIED ((:ommi3sioner Messe absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant a 1-year ext^7sion of time Eor Tentative Tract N~. 11856, to expire Uctober ~, 1986. OTHLR QISCUSSION: 1. It was noted a representative Erom the Planning Commission needs to k~e aesignated for lhe Communirywide Community Development f3lack Cr.ant Committee. Ac:'PION: Commissioner Ery nominated Commissi~ner Messe to be the representative trom ttie Anaheim City Planni.ng Coi,•mission f~r the 198G/87 Community Develo~,ment Blvck Grant Program, mutiun seconded by Cornmissioncr Luwicki and Ni0TI0N CARRIED (Commissioner Messe absent). 1. Commissioner ~ry stated he lhought thE~ Commission should adopt an unoEficial policy *hat uses in one complex should be reviewed individually fur corditional use permits. Kendra tdorrie~, state~ t.tie request on t,~day's agenda got out-of-hand becausP of change iii ownc.rship and in the Euture it wi.ll be a poli.cy that individual users wili subi~it se~arate ucc ~ermit requests. Malcolm Slauyhter stated i~ any case wt~~n a tenant wants to make use of a pro~erty, the staEf zequir~s a writ~en authorization from tY.e propecty owner to designate the ten~~nt as the agent in applying Eor the permit; hoaever, the issue the Comnission xs addces~ing herp is whether there will be multiple applicativ~•~ in a ~ingle conditional use per.rnit. Chairwoman I,a Claire stated tha~ ~:r.eates enforcet,~ent problems and she felt the oroblem should be eliminated by not approving more than one use or- one permit. Kendra Morries explained there is one request pending where more than one use was advertised with three separ.ate addresses with one person operatir:g thaL• business i7 those three units. She explained if there is a buildiny with 25 units and the operator in Unit A requests a permit, the conditions imposed will be based on the square foatage of that unit. Annika Santalahti stated the bi~gest conditions ace normally cor.~plied with by the property owner whicl~ are dedication and strePt impcovements, etc. when the building r~rmits are issued and are paid when the property is developed; however, if an ~perator is required to pay fc.r a signal assessment fee, that is figur~ad on a square foot basis. 9/16/85 MINUT~51, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNYNG COMMISSION, SGPTFMBER 16, 1985 85-511 3. Joint Work Session with City Council it was noted the City Council has sche~uled a wnrk session with the Ylanning CommiF~Lon to discuss the Stadium Area Development Plan on September 2A 1985, at 4:00 p.m.j however, the time mey be moved to 3:00 p.m. and it ~as suggested the Commizsion should adjourn to 3:00 p.m. Se~tember ~~th. ADJUURNM6NT: Commissioner Fry oPfered a motion, seconded by Commissloner Mc~urney and MOTIUN CARRIED (CommiASioner Me~3e absenk) that the m~etiny be adjourned to 3:00 p.m., September 24, 1985, to the Joint Work Session with City Councfl in the Council Chamber. The meeting was ~~journed at A:20 ~.m. Respectfully :~ubmitte .:~'~~ ~'~" ,~ ~E~ith L. Harris, Secretary AnahPim City Planning ~_ommissi~n ELH:.lm U142m 9/16/85