Minutes-PC 1986/05/28REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIhG CUMMISSION
R~GULAK MEETING The regular meeting of the Anaheim City Planning
Commission was called to order by Chairwoman La Claire
at 10:U0 a.^_+_; May 28, 1986, in the Council (:hamber, a
quorum being present, and the (:ommission reviewed
plans of the items on today's a~;enda.
RE':ESS: 11:30 a.m.
RECONVENEU: 1:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Chairwoman: La Claire
Commissioners: Bouas, Fry, Herbst,
'.,awicki, ~Iesse, Mcliurney
ABSENT: Commissioner: None
ALSO PRESENT: Annika Santalahti Assistant llirector for 'Loning
Malcolm Sla~ghter Deputy City Attorney II
Carl Harrison Civil Engineering Assistant
Yaul Singer Traffic Engineer
Uan Schiada Assistant Traffic Engineer
Leonard McGhee Assoctate Planner
Edith L. Harris Planning Commission Secretary
MINUTES FOK APPROVAL - Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by
Commissioner Lawicki and MOTION CARRIEll that the Anaheim City Planning
Commission does hereby approve the minute~ of the meetings of biay 12, 1986, as
submitted.
ITEM N0. 1 EIR NEGATIVE llECLAEtATIGN, WAIVkR OF COllE REQUIFtE.IENT AND
CONDITLUNAL USE PERMIT N0. 2784
PUBLIC NLA1tING. OWNERS: AllA I. NIGDUN, WELLS FAftGO BANK NA TRllSTEE, 9600
Santa Monica Blvd., Beverly Hills, CA 90210. AGENTS: ANGELO'S, llENNIS
WILLIAIdS, PRI:SIDENT, 221 N. Beach Blvd., Anaheim, CA 9'L801. ProperCy
described as a rectanbularly-shaped parcel of land consistinb of approximately
0.57 acres, 221 North Beach Boulevard (Angelo's).
To permit on-sale beer and wine and an outdoor eating area in conjunction with
an existing restaurant.
Continsed from the meetiabs of April 14, 28 aad l~iay 28, lytib.
ACTION: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst
and MOTION CARRIED, that consideration of the aforementioned mat~er be
continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of June 9, 1986, at the request
of the netitioner.
86-337 5/28/86
MINL'TES, ANAHEIPI CITY PLANNING CUMMISSIQfi, MAY 28, 1986 86-33~
ITEM N0. 2. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION (READV.), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 'L13
(REAUV.), RECLASSIFICATION N0. 85-86-33 (READV.) ANll VARIANCE N0. 3568
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: CLAU~JiA KINNE, ET AL, c/o KIRK H. FINLEY, 1502 N.
Broadway, Santa Ana, CA 92701. AGENT: TONY WATTSON, WATTSUIJ REAL ESTATE
ZNVL'STMENTS, 840 Newport Center Dr., Sufte 540, Newpo:t Beach, CA 9265U.
Property described as a rectanguiarly-siiaped parcel of land consisting of
approximately 3 acres located at the northeast corner of Katella Avenue and
Claudina Way, 509 E. Katella.
GPA - request to consider amendment to the Land Use Elemen~ of the General
Plan to consider alternative pruposal of land use from the current genera.l
industrial designations to the general commerci.al designation.
i~IL to CL or a less intense zone.
Waiver of minimum landscape3 area to expand retail uses in an existing
retail/warehouse building.
ACTION: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst
and MOTION CARItIED, that consideration of the aforementioned matter be
continued to the rebularly-scheduled meeting of June 23, 1986, at the request
of the petitioner.
ZTEM N0. 3. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATIUN, ktECLASSIFICATION N0. 85-Sb-34 ANll
VARIANCE N0. 3559
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNtiRS: JOSEPH WILLIAM ROACH AND ~IAitY FRANCES ROACN, 1506 k~.
Melody Lane, Fullerton, CA 92631. AGENT: MASCIEL DEVELUPMENT, P. 0. Box
4241, Anaheim, CA 9'L801. Yroperty described as a rectanbularly-shaped parcel
of land consisting of approximately 6,465 square ieet, 16'L7 East Sycamore
Street.
RS-A-43,000 to RM-1200 or a less intense zone.
Waivers of maximum structural height and minimum structural setback to
cunslrucc a 2-story, 4-unit apartment building.
There were four persons indicating their presence in opposition to subject
request and although the staff report was not read, iC is referred to and made
a part of the minutes.
C. M. Tt.--.c.~r.; agent, explained this is the only property on L'hat side of the
street in th<-.t area which 1s not already rezoned to RM-1200 and is the
smallest .lor c~n that side of the 5treet . Ne stated the front setback as
requested would put this property in line with the adjacenC properties both to
the east and west. He stated the existing house is about 1-1/'L feet closer to
the sidewalk than they are proposing for this project.
John Rose, representinK the owner of the property Co the west, stated they are
opposed to the 2 stories and feel the lot lines and setbacks should be in
conformance to the rest of the aparcment projects in that neighborhood.
5/28/86
MINUTES, ANAHEIhI CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 28, 1986 Sti-339
Elizabeth Leglin, 170'L E. Sycamore, stated her maln concern ~s che traffic
because Sycamore is a main thoroughfare. She presented a sketch showing where
numerous accidents have happened on that street. She stated cars have gone
into her yard and into her neighbors' garage and she has been told by the City
Traffic Engineer's office that there has to be over ten acr_idents or someone
killed Uefore they would install a stop sign.
Ken Burton, 1633 E. Sycamore, manager of the apartments adjacent co subject
property, explained their project is single-story with 4 units and this
project would block the light to their units; that they are also concerned
about the rear area of the pcoposed project and are concerned that cars
turning around would create a problem for their tenants.
Sarah Amadore, 9262 Smoke Tree Lane, Villa Park, owner of the apartment
psoject adjacent to the previously-mentioned units, stated any projects built
in ~liat area should be sinKle story.
Mr. Thomson stated the setback proposed is within 1 foot of what is existin~
on that street. He stated there is a gap between the two segments of the
building and the rear porCion of the building will line up witii the rear
portion of the building next door and the 30-foot driveway will r• •vide more
open space between tlie buildin~s than tliere would be with a sing_a-family
dwelling. He stated a single-story project could not be built on that
property because it is so small and that it is on the edge of the zone. He
stated the 'Loning Code permits 5 units and they are proposing 4 and if only 1
story is permitted, the existing structure would probably remain. Concerning
the traffic concerns, he stated he knows Lhere have been petitions in the
neighborliuod to get a stop sign, but the traffic is not because of this
project; and they are providing adequate off-street parking accordinb to Code;
however, tenants cannot really be forced to park in the barages.
THE YUBLIC HEARING WAS CLUSED.
Responding to Chairwoman La Claire, Leonard McGtiee explained the RI~i-1200
apartment to the west is a single-story development. lie explained two 2-story
developments have been approved, but have not been developed, so essentially
all the apartments on that street are single-story. It was noted the two,
2-story projects have been set for public hearings by the City Council and it
was suggested ttte Comtnission should wait to see what the City Council does
with those projects located at 1721 and _7'22 E. Sycamore.
Commissioner Herbst sCated he has a problem with the parking aesign and did
not think the turn-around area would be adequate and thought vehicles would be
backing into the street.
Mr. Thomson stated the driveway is 30 feet wide and that the Traffic Engineer
staff had reviewed the circulation.
Commissioner Fry stated he felt they were just trying to put too many units on
this small parcel. Chairwoman La Claire agreed it would be too much at this
? ~.:dtion.
5/28/S6
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COt~iMISSION, MAY 'L8, 1986 86-340
Commissioner Herbst asked if the petitioner would like a continuance in order
to redesign the plan. Ptr. Thomson stated he would request a continuance eo
determine the outcome of the City Council's actions. Commissioner Herbst
stated even if the Cir.y Council grants those two projects, t~e would not vote
in favor of this project the way it is designed.
AC't'ION: Commissicaer Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas
and t40TI0N CARRIED that consideration of the aforementioned matter be
continued to the regula*ly-scheduled neeting of June 23, 1986, a~ the request
of the petitioner.
Chairwoman La Claire asked the City Traffic Engineer to investibate the
possibility of a stop sign on Sycamore.
Commissioner Herbst suggested revised plans be revieaed with the neighbors.
ITEM N0. 4 EIR NEGA'TIVE llECLARATION, RECLASSIFICATION N0. ~5-86-35 AND
'vARIANCE N0. 3565
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: ftASUL MONAGHEGH, ET AL, 1265'L Huston 5t. N.
Hollywood, CA 51(07. Prope:`~y described as a rectangularly-shaped parce~ of
land consisting of approximately U.22 acre, 314 West Elm Street.
ItM-2400 to RM-120U or a less intense zone.
Waivers of mzximum building height, maxiwum slte coverage and minimum
landscaped setback to const~uct a 6-unit apartment complex.
There was no one indicatinb their presenc.e in opposition to subject request
and althoubh the staff report vas not read, it is referred to and made a part
of the minutes.
Rasul Mohaghegh, was present to answer any questions.
TIiE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Herbst stated he felt each one of these requests seems to be
gradually exceeding more and more all the Code requiremen~s and most of the
garages have been at least 50% below grade level.
Chairwoman La Claire stated the petitxoner is requesting RM-1200 zoning and
that property is surrounded by R"1-2400; and that she r~.alizes there is RM-1200
across the street and that the price of land has g~ne up, but aKreed more and
more dense developments are being proposed. Commissioner Herbst stated this
is a nice rectangularly-shaped prope:ty and he could not find justification
for a hardship to allow the request.
Mr. Mohaghegh stated they have .22 acre and the Code would permit tt uni[s and
initially they started with 7 units, but due to the parking required, and
since tandem parking was not permitted, and due to the recreational-leisure
area required, had to reduce tha~ to 6 units. He stated he has owned this
property for sev~~n years and that two years ago he proposed 4 units, but found
S/28/86
86-'s41
MINUTF.S, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 28, 1986
it was economicalHe addedeheithou~ht this wouldebeeasbeautifulibuildingtandr
!tM-1200 'Loning.
would enhance the area.
Commissioner Herbst stated he could no=ofosalawouldsbepoverbuildinglthe nice
rectangularly-shaped parcel and thi~ p P
property. He stated the parking codes are to ~;et the cars off the street.
Mr. Mohaghegh stated this project would meet the requirements except for Che
heiKht and it was noted there is a request for rezoni~g to RM-1'100.
Chairwoman La Claire explained the variances are based onro ectO~isLjustKtood
for 1tM-240U they would andestatedrshe.understandsdthatseconomically RM-2400
much for this prope:ty roval of
may not be feasible,o u~h`~lsizemmshapenand topubraphy ofuthefproperty.
variances depending
Commissioner Fry stated this is an ideal area for assembly of parcels and he
would louk favorably on a reclassification of the whole b1e~L tO,mmedia~telybto
not on an indivi~'••~alrocess•ofMbeinbhsoldbandtthat possibly the one to the east
the west is in the p o erties will be coming in for
will be sold and eventually ttiose two p~ P
variances.
Commissioner Herbst asked if the petitiuncr w~~uld like a continuance in order
to revise the plans. Commissioner P1cBurn~y ~~ded lie would not voeceden[ainr
of the 3 s_ories. Commissioner Herbst stated this would set a P reed
that area and noted other garages have been underground. i4r. riohagtiegh ag
to request a one-month coneinuance.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motior., seconded by Commissioner Bouas
and MOTION CARKIED that consideration oL the aforemention198batatrthe request
continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of June 23,
of the petitioner.
ITh_ M N~• 5 EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATIUN ANll V~1tlANCE N0. 3561
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNEKS: JERRY TI2EMI~LE, INC., 505 City Parkway West,
Penthouse Suite, Orange, CA 92668. Property described as an
irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 2.35 acres
located at the southwest corner of Van Buren Street and La Yalma Avenue,
3941-3969 East La Palma Avenue.
Waivers of minimum structural setbac:: and yard requirements and, minimum
number of pdrking spaces to expand an existing industrial building.
There wa~ one person indicatinb his presence in opposition tu subject request
and alth~.~bh the staYf report was not read, it is referred to and made a part
of the minutes.
Karl Sator, agenl', 3150 E. La Palma, stated this complex is about 15 years old
and tl~ey would like to remodel it ar.ci make smaller units, increasin~ the
number ofandi explained they2had a Qarking surveylprepzred and the Traffice the
parking,
Engineer felt it was adequate. 5/2~/86
MIrUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 28, 1986 $6-342
Jim Hodd, 1849 Fort Wheeler Place, Newport Beach, representing the property
owners immediately adjacent to the west, explained they share an easement with
the applicant and there is a congestion problem with trucks entering the
easement area. H: stated the petitioner is suggesting closing one entry to
their property and he felt that would cause a hazardous or dangerous
situation; and that they have had problems with parking in the past and he
felt 2n additional waiver would caus~ more problems.
Mr. Sator stated the ~djacent property owners are causing the conbestion. He
explained they have four driveways into their property and the Traffic
Engineer is in favor of closing one of those driveways and most of the parking
is in front of the buildin~. He stated they are presentl~ in litibation with
the nei~hbor because of their encroachment onto subject property.
THE YUBLIC F{EARING WAS CLOSEll.
Mr. Sator responded to Commissioner Bouas that all the units were rented when
the parking study was conducted.
C':.airwoman La Claire asked why they wish to add unies to this nice facility.
Mr. Sator stated the units were just too large and they have had a lot of
people move in and out. He stated they will be spending a substantial amount
of money for just a scnall increase, but will be upKrading the Uuilding and
moving the landscaping closer to the building and feel these changes are
necessary in order to make this a more economical building. He stated they
have owned this building for about four years.
Commissioner Messe clarified this building was 100~ occupied in April when the
parking study was conducted.
Mr. Hood clarified their property is next door and is a multi-tenant
industrial building with smalle: units, much the same as the petitioner's
camplex. He stated they have had problems with the people from the
petitioner's complex crossing over onto their property. He stated they
already tiave a densiry problem in tliat area and allowing this increase would
creata more problems.
Commissioner Herbst stated La Ya1ma is one of the nicest industrial streets in
Anaheim and did not think this encroachment should be allowed and suggested
eliminating the 3264-square foot section of their new addition and even though
a variance would probably still be needed, the parking variance could probably
be deleted.
Mr. Sator stated the property is triangularly-shaped. He stated he was sure
the building next door does not meet Code because the Code has changed
requirin~ 2.5 parking spaces per 1000 square feet of area.
Commissioner Herbst stated he would have a problem approving this because of
the precedent that would be set and asked if the petitioner would like to have
a continuance in order to redesign the plans.
Mr. Sator explained the property next door has 15 back doors and subject
property only has 5 and that the doors face each other,so the property next
5/28/86
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CiTY PLANNING COMMISSION, D1AY 28,, 1986 Ab-343
door is the or,~• wi.rh the unloadiTg and loading problem. He stated they feel
the request ;.~~~ui~ b~ ~ranted because of the size of the properCy.
Commissioner Fry ~_!°•re~d the project could be redesf_gtted so thut no variarcc:s
are necess•~ary. ::rzai:'woman La Claire sCated t.nis Commission :~enas over
backwards trying '~~~ hel~, everyone h~t that sSie would not vote for this
encrciachment.
Commi~.;sion_-r Messe sl~ated he felt La Yalma has tu be N:ept the ws~i ~•~ is and
that he ~.ould not vote for the encroachment. He asked if the pc•:!.tioner would
like a continuance in order to redesign the plans. Mr. Sator stated he did
not think it would be worthwhilc to redesi.gn the plans.
ACTIUN: Cr-imissioner Fry offered a motion, seconded by CommissicaFr Lawicki.
and h10TIUN CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has ~eviewed the
proposal to expand an existing industrial building wiCh waivers of m~nimum
struct~ral se~.s~ack and yard requirements and minimum number of parking sps~e>.
on an irregularly-shap~ed parce' of land consisting of approxi.mately '2.35
acres, located sout:.W~st of the corner uf ',.a Yalma Avenue a~~d Van Buren StreEt
and further 3escribed as 3941-39b9 L•'ast La Palma Avenue; and does h~:r.eby
approve the Negative Ueclaration upon f:nding that it has consid^red the
Nebative lleclaration togetlier with any conucents received duriag tne nublic
revi.ew process and f~irther findicib on th~ basis of :ne Ini.cial Study aix~1 aay
comments received that there is no ~~ubst~ ~i~.i 1 ev. tien~e Y.hat tne p~v~c't w.~ll
have a signifi.canc eEfec.t on the enviro;,:: ."
Commissioner Fry offered Resolution Nc. PC8b-132 and mo~ed fr,r its passa~e and
adopt3on that the Ana~ieim (:ity Planning CocWis•=.iun does hereby deny Variattce
No. 3561 on the hasis ttiat there are no sk~rcial circumstances applicable ~to
the proper:y s~~~.f~ as size, shape, topo~;raphy~, location an•d surroundings which
du iiot apply to other identicaLly ~oned property in the same vicinity; and
that strict ~pplication of the Zon:.ng Code does not deprive the proper.ty of
privileges enjnyed by other properties in the identical zone and
classi.Eicatio^_ i:. the vicinity.
On roll call, tlie foregoinK resolution was Q8SSi4 by the follr,win~ v~te:
AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HF.lt3~T, ;.A CLA':Rr:, '~.WICKI, MC BURKEY, MF.SSE
NO~:S: NUNE
AIISE[iT: NOT•IE
Malcolm Slau~hter, ll~pu:.y Ci.~y Att~rney, presented the written right to a~peal
the Planning G~:mmission's decision within 22 days to .*_he (:iCy Council.
iTEM NG 5 FI`t i3EGATIVE UECLARA'~ION P.ND VAkIPuyCE N0. i56.3
^UELIC k{EARING. OWNER.S: i:AUF~lAN S BRUAll OF £0. CA:.. i.IC. , 5500 F. Santa Ana
G;:nyor~ ttoad, .lnaheim, CA 92807, ATTN: MAP-~ GCOi;.MAN. F.~roperty described ::, an
irreg~..larly-shaped par~el of iand consisting of ~pproxiwately 6.9 acres
genera:.ly located north and west oY thc inr.:~rse:t:in: oC Bauer Road and Monte
Vista Road (l:cndra Court-East Hills (Bauer ~anch - Area i).
5/28/86
86-344
MINUTES, 9NA1?E?M CI_ TY PLAI~NING COMMISSIO>d ''1AY 28 ~ 1986
wajv;.r„ of rPy:'_red loC frontage, minimum structural setbacks on cul-de-sacs,
~ni.nimum bu'1ding ::ite widtl~, minimum building Site width on cul-de-sacs and
mi:.?:^um frcnt-on gara6e setnack to c:ons.*_ruct a 15-lot sin~le-family detached
subdi.v!sion, subject to '.'~-~`~00 site development standards witn LoLS A& B
des2gnat'ed as open space.
There was no one indicating tteir ~.~°~ence iitoisoreferred~touandcmade~aepart
and although the ".aff report w;.~,. not, read,
oF L'he minutes.
Commissioner Bouas declared s c~~nflict of interest as defined 'oy Anaheim City
Planninb Commission Resolutiun No. PC76-157 ado~ting a Co~if~ict of Interest
Code for the Planning Commissi~~n and Governm::nt Code Sectt~n 3625, et seq., in
that her husband does caorlc for i1~C ~ieveloper and pursuant to the provisions of.
the ahove Codes, declar~•d >o the Chair~uan that l'ie w~s withdrawing frum Lhe
heari.ng in connectioii wil!~ Variance No. 35u:, and would not take part in
r.ithc,r the discussion or t.`~e votin~ thereon and had nut distussed this matter
Saith any memGe- of the Planain~ Commission. Thereupon Commis~ioner Bouas left
r.iic Council Chdw'~er.
M:i1K Goodman, agent, was preseat to answer any questions.
THE PUBLiC HEARING WAS CLUfitiU.
Chatrwoman La Claire c.Larified that autumatic garage door openers would be
installed, espec{~+1J-y' for Lots 13 and ].4. Mr. Goodman stated sidewalks are
being installed as :~~~OWIl on Lhe p.Lans.
ACTION: L'ommissioner McBurney offered •~ motion, seconded by Commissloner
Messe and MO'PION CARKIEU !C~mmissioner Bouas absent) that tiee r:naheim City
Planning Commi.ssion tias reviewed tlie pe[itiou to consrrucC ~~ ~•5-~~t
single-family detached s~bdivislon subjectUtents`a~e wiC~h waiversVOf~cequirE:d
standards with LoL's A and B defl^,rated p P
lot frontage, minimum sCructura.l setback on cul-de-sacs, mi.nimum buildinb s::te
widtti, minimum building site width cul-de-sacs and minimum front-OUximately
~~t;back on an iriegularly-shaped parcel of land consiseinb of app
,5.9 acres generally locaCeu north and west .:f th~ 1ntErsection of Bauer Road
and N.OR"L?. Vista Road and further siescribed as iCendia Court - East Hills (Kauer
Ranch Ar.eu 7); and does hereb;~ approve the Negative ll~claration upon findln;;
that it Ii~~~t considered the Neoative lleclaration Cogether with any comments
received duri.:e che public revi.~w process and further finding on the basis rf
tl~e Initi.al. S~udy and avy cumnen~s received that there is no suhstantia.t
evidencce tha~ the project will have a significant ef:ect on the environmen.t.
Co~cnissioner ?iceurney offered Y.e~olution No. YCti6-133 and muvad for its
passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commi:siun does hereby
grant Variance Nc. 3563 on the basis that there are special iocationdands
anplicable T.o the property such as size, shape, topography,
surro~indings which do not apply to other. identically zoned property in the
same vicinity; and that sCrict application of the 'Loning C,ode deprives Che
property of privi.le~es ecijoyed by other properties in the identical zon~ and
cla.ssification iu the viclnity and subject to lnterdepartmental Cownittee
recommendations.
5/28/86
86-345
M~NUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIiJG CO:iMISSION, MAY 28~ 1986
On ro11 call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HEABST, LA CLAIKE, LAWICKI, MC BU1tNEY, MESSE
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONB
Malcolm Slaughtar, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
r_he Planning Commissi.on's decision wi.thin 22 days to tlie City Council.
Commissioner Bouas returned t~ the meetin~;.
ITEM N0. 7 E'iK NEGATLVE ll6CLARATION, WAIVEK UF CODE I~QUIkt~MENT AND
CONll L US~ PL•'1tMI'C N0. 27y9
PUBLIC HEARING. OWN~RS: JAh1E5 EMMI•, 1U09 llolphin Terruce, Corona de ~~ar, CA
9'L625. AGENT: A1~UNllANT LIGHT FOUNllATIUN, 6EVERLEE J. McLAUGHLIN, 1304C
llurklee Ave., Gacden Gro~~e, CA 9'L640. Yroperty des~oxlmatelya3 acres located
irreaularly-shaped parcel of land consisti.ng of app
at the northwest corner of Kimberly Avenue and Raymond Avenue, 1853 Raymond
lvenue.
To permit a religious feliuwship including counseling services, print s.op and
bookstcre with waiver of minimum number of parkinb spaces.
There was no one indicaticib their presence in opposition to subjecC request
and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part
of the minutes.
Beverlee McLaughlin, 13U91 Durklee Avenue, Garden Grove, agent, explained they
are being relocsted from the present location b;~ Kedevelopment. She preseated
letters from two neighbors i~ th2 industrial park who are willin~ to bive her
more parking ;.f needed. She stated durinr, the times when they would be having
lectures and counselinb services, the other businesses would be closed, so she
did not think there would be a purki.ng problem.
Jim Emmi, owner of subject property, stated originally he did not think this
would be a good use for this property, but arter reviewing it, feels it would
Ue compatib'e with the neibhuorhood and that musl of the other businesses
operate durinb the day and most of tlie accivities oi this use would be during
tlie evenings and weekends.
TtiL YUIiLIC HEARING WAS CLOSEU.
Commissioner Messe asked 1f on-strect parlcing 1s permitted on Kimberly
Avenue. Mr. Emmi expiained thera are three building on each side of the small
cul-de-sac street and it is a City street and there is room for 'l5 to 30
vehicles along the curb.
Ms. McLau~hlin scaeed their meetings take place in tlie eveni.ngs afler 7:30
p.m. and on weekends and there would be 25 to 30 people present. She
explained they have been at S11 E. Lincoln '..' nine years and have never
caused any parkinK problems.
5/28/Sb
86-346
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CUMMISSION, MAY 28, 1986
Leonard McGhee, Asscciate Planner, explained the parking would meet Code for
an industri~l use at this location, but the parking calculation was based on
alJ the uses in the complex. He stated this use is being relocated from the
Lincoln address because it is in the Redevelopment Project Alpha area and the
Redevelopment Agency asked Planning staff to help arocess this petition;
therefore, an adequate pdrking study was not done; however, staff would like
the record to indicate that a letter w~~ submitted indicating the parking
provided was adequate and asked the ownar to submit a leCter indicating the
number of on-site spaces which thz applicant would have pArmission to use.
Mr. Emmi stated the applicant does not need permission ::~ park on the street.
He stated he built the street himself originally, but dedicated it to the
City. Leonard idcGhee stated ttie owner has ju.i indicated that the times C e
other tenants would not be usin~ their parking, those spaces would be
available and there is no conflict with the proposed use and that staff is
requesting a le[ter be submi.tted guaranteeing that the additional on-site
parkinb spaces are available.
Commissioner Messe noted the pe[i.tioner has letter~ from other tenan_~. Mr.
Emmi stated the appiicant has letters from at least two other tenants and he
had talked to one of the tenants Coday and he is perfectly willin~; to allow
use of the parking; however, was concerned about submitting a lehoweverHe
stated he would write a letter reoardin~ the on-street parki.n~,
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City ACtorney, stated the public parking on the
street is not subject to the owner's consent and is strictly under control of
the City and a letter from the owner regarding on-street parkinK would have no
meaning. He stated the other on-site parking spaces are apparently leased to
other tenants and the property owner probably does not have control over those
par.king spaces and the tenants would have to give that consent themselves.
Chairw~man La Claire stated the Commission is requesting a letter from Che
property owner statinb this petitioner can u~e the other parking spaces on
site in the even~.ngs and on week-ends. Mr. Emmi stated he cannot give
permission to this petitioner for use of the o[her parking spaces because the
o*_her tenants have the use of those spaces; hcwever, the other tenants have
indicaCed they would allow her [o use r.hose spaces, but do not wanL to put
that in writing. Commissioner Bouas asked how many spaces this would involve
and t~is. McLaughlin stated they •~+ould provide 28 additional spaces.
AC'fION: Commi.ssioner Fry uffered a mc,tion, seconded by Commissioner Buuas and
MUTION CAR1tIEll that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the
proposal to permit a religious fellowship including cuueseli.ng services,
print-shops and bookstore with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces on
an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consistinb of approximately 3 acres
located at the northwest curiier of Kimberly Avenue and Kaymon=o eethe Nega[i_ve
€urther described as 1853 ltaymond Avenue; and Aoes hereby app
Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negacive lleclaration
together witli any comments received during the publi^_ review process and
further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received
that there is no substantial evidence that the project wil'. have a signi.ficant
effect on the environment.
5/28/~S6
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 28> 1986 86-347
Commissioner Fr.y offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bosas and MOTION
CARItIEll that the Anaheim City Planninb Commission does hereby grant waiver of
Code requirement on the basis the ~pplicant has submitted letters from two
tenants in the same industrial complex agteeing their parking spaces can be
used. during the evenings and on weekends if needed and on the basis that the
parking waiver will not cause an increase in traffic congestion in the
immediate vicinity nor adversely affect any adjoining land uses and Kranting
of the parking waiver under Che conditions imposed, if any, wiil noC be
detrimerital to tlie peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens
of the City of Anaheim.
Malcolm Slaughter clarified it was the Commission's i.nCent that the variance
be granted on the basis the applicant submitted letters from the adjnining
tenants aKreeing to permit use of their parkinb spaces; however, if those
tenants terminate that agteement, this variance would still be in effect.
Commissioner Herbst suggested limitinb the permit to tlie length oi the lease
or to '_he person obtainin~ the permit because if this petitioner relocated, a
new use could become something other than what the Commission has envisioned
for this pr.operty.
Malcolm Slau~hter stated with the petltlcner's stipulation, th~. conditional
use permit could be restricted to this petitioner. Ms. Mcl,at,,.lin agreed that
restriction would be acceptable.
Coamissioner Fry offered Resolution No. PC~6-134 and moved for lrantassabe and
adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby g
Conditional Use Permit No. '17yy pursuant to ~naheim Mun~cipal Code Sections
18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035 and subject ~o Interdepartmental Committee
recommE:ndations includin~ the condition that the use shall be restric~ed to
operacion by the current petitioner.
On roll call, the foregoing resol~tion was passed by the folluwing ~~ote:
AYES: BOUAS, FKY, tiEI~iST, LA CLAlfi~, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESS~
NO~S: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorne~, presented the written right to appeal
the Planning Commission'~ decisian within 22 days to the City Council.
RECESSEll: '1:55 p.m.
1tECONVENEU: 3:05 p.m.
I'LEM N0. 8 EIR NEGATIVE DECLA1tATI0N, WAlVk:R OF COUE
CONllITlON,9L USE YERMIT N0. 2tSU0
IIZEMENT ANll
PUBLIC HEAR7".:::. '~WNEKS: RICHA:tll C. ANll WINIFItED C. MEAllOWS, 3455 E. La Palma
Avenue, An:.heim, CA :'2806. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel
of land consisting of approximately 0.3U acre located at the northeast corner
of La Palma Avenue and Fountain Way, 3455 East La Palma Avenue.
s/Za/sb
86-348
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CTTY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 28, 1986
To permit industrially-related sales ~usinesses and of.fice uses with waiver of
minimum number of parking spaces.
There was no one indicating their presence i.n opposition to subject request
and alt~ouKh the staFf report was not read, it is referred to and made a part
of the minutes.
Richard Meadows, owner, explained this request is to peroit retail sales of
eyeglass lenses, eye glasses, frames, contact lenses and associated eye wear
to the general public and industrial firms in the area by Southern California
Optical Company and that many of these items are manufactured on the site. He
stated the average stay of the customer is about fifteen minutes.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLO5Ell.
Responding to Chairwoman La Claire, Pir. Pleadows explained lie has been at this
location since last October.
Commissioner Herbst stated he could not agree with the proposed list of uses
and did not think it is realistic. Mr. Meadows explained he had submitted
tiiat list at the sugges~ion of the Ptanning D~partment staff. Commissioner
Fry s[ated that list is the approved list of uses f.or that area and that he
could go alon~ with the lis[, except for banks. Chairwoman La Claire
clari.fied the list only pertains tc the second floor and stated she could go
along with tne list if it is restricted to the second floor.
Leonard McGhee, Associate Planner, stated limitinb t.::~ uses [o the second
floor is not included in the r~commended condi[ions and that it should be
included if that is the Commission's intent. !ie scated Condition No. 2 should
be modified to read, " That the proposed office uses shall be limited co the
following listed uses, and also limited to the second floor of subje.ct
facility and that a covenant, reviewed and approved by the City Attorney's
Office, so limitir.g said uses and the location of said uses to the second
floor shall be recorded in ttie office of the Orange County Recorder........ ,
with the list as shown in the staff report, eliminating banks. He asked that
an additional condition be included to reaa, "That Condition Nos. 2, 3 and 4
shall be complied with within sixty (60) days.
ACTION: Chairwoman La Claire offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Messe
and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planninb Cowmission has reviewed the
proposal to permit industrially-related sales businesses and office uses in
the ML (Industrial, Limi.ted) Zoue with waiver af minimum number af parking
spaces on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately
0.30 acre located at the northeast cornsr of La Palma Avenue and Fountain Way,
and further descrioed as 3455 East La Palma Avenue; and does tiereby approve
the Nebative lleclaration upon finding that :lt has considered the Negative
Declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process and further finding on the basis of the lnitial Study and any commFlnts
received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a
significant effect on the environment.
5/28/86
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CI~i PLAIJNING COM;IISSION, MAY 28, 1986 86-349
Chairwoman La Claire offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lawicki. and
MOTION CARRIEll that the Anaheim City Planning Gommission Joes hereby grant
waiver. of Code requirement on the basis that the parking variance will not
cause an in^rease 3.n traffic congestion i.n the imuiediate vicinity nor
adversely affect any adjoining land uses; and that the parkin~ variance under
the conditions imposed, if any, will not be decrimental to the peace, health,
safecy or general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
Mr. Meadows asked if retai.l sales would be limited the 1'L77 sq. ft. Leonard
McGhee stated approval would be based on the i~st and uses which the Planning
Department staff determines to be compatible wi.th the iadustrial area.
Commissioner. Herbst explained 2ny uses n.ust service the i.ndustrial communi.ty,
such as a broker, uould have to be an i.ndustrially related broker. He stated
the purpose of that ordinance is to keep the retail trade out of the
industrial area. Mr. Meadows responded he understood and that an accountant
must service industrial accounts, and referred Co physicians or surgeons who
would service industrial clients. Chai.rwoman La Claire stated physi.cians and
surgeons would not be permitted. Mr. Meadows explai.ned he has an interested
tenant who does bookkeeping and billings for physi.cians and surgeons in the
Anaheim area.
Malcolm Slaughter stated staff's recommended conditions include a paragraph
that each individual use shall require the approval of the Planning Department
prior to occupancy, which approval stiall only be given when i.t is demons[rated
by the appli.cant that such use is either an expressly permitted use in such
zone or meeLS the criteri.a of Section 1ti.b1.OSU.b05 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code, and any use whicu i.s found to encourage retail sales of products or
merchandise or to attract customers other than 3.ndustrial uses for industrial
purposes permitted in this zone shall not be deemed a use which primarily
serves and is compatible with i.ndustrial uses. N: explained that is a strict
limitation on the list oi uses.
Chairwoman La Claire offered Resolution No. PCtS6-135 anu moved for its passabe
and adoption that the Anahei.m City Ylanning Commission does hereby grant
Conditional Use Permit No. 28U0, pursuant to Anahei.m Munici.pal Code Section
18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035, and subject to Interdepartmental
Committee Recommendations, as amended, including the list ot uses as proposed,
with banks eliminated.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HERBST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE
NUES: NONE
ABSENT: NUNE
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy Ci.ty Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council.
86-350
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CiTY PLANNING CUhIIi1SSI0N, MAY 28. 1986
ITEM N0. 9 EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WAIVER OF COllE REQUIItEMBIJT AND
CONDITIONAL USE YERMIT N0. 2801
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: DENNIS T. DeDOMINICO, GOLDEN GRAIN MACARO~NCBROS
1000 E. Cerritos Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805. AGENTS: RUBEN AMAD1, +
INC., P. 0. Box 4233, Covi.na, CA 91723. Property described an
irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting oi approximately 6 acres located
at the southeast corner of Cerritus Avenue and Lewis Street, 920 East Cerritos
Avenue.
To retain a road base processin~, storabe and distribution faci.llty with
wai.vers of mini.mum required setbacks and permitted encroachments.
There was no one indicati.ng their presence in opposition to subject request
and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part
of the minutes.
Leonard McGhee, Associate Ylanner, expiained staff received one letter
indicating opposition and presented a capy of that letter to the Commission.
Yaul Smith, Aman Bros., a~;ent, explained the request is ior permission to
continue business i.n this location and explained their business is reclaiming
asphalt aLd concrete and processi.ng it i.nto a road base material.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Responding to Chairwoman La Cla3.re, Mr. Smith stated they are on a b-mon[h
lease whi.ch can be terminated at anytime, and that they are requesting the use
for 5 years because of the influx of construction in the area and the
redevelopment of roads and construction of new roads.
He explai.ned in response to Commissioner Herbst, that they have a contract
with the City oL Anaheim for construction between Ball and Broadway on Harbor
Boul2vard and that should be completed late this summer.
Conmissioner Herbst stated his only objection is to having that pi.le of
materi.ai there witliout any screening which does not do the adjoininK
proper~:es any good, and that screening is required of other industrial uses
and added he feels this use does downgrade adjacent propert~oSertHeownerd Mr.
Smith ~:°?d the letter of oppusition from the adjoining p p Y
Kespondin~ to Commissioner Bouas, Mr. Smith stated they are continually
bidd3.ng on new jobs and and plan to continue bidding in this area. He added
also there is another conCractor who would like to use the property for the
same purpose.
He explained they use water to keep the dust down; that they water the
material before it is put into the crushing machines and there are sprinkler
heads on top of the machine and the most important property owner they have to
satisfy is the Golden Grain Macaroni Company because they are i.n the
prevailing winds most of the time. He explained they do use skiploaders and
dump trucks, and that they have water trucks i.n two or three times a day to
water the whole area.
5/28/86
MINUTES, ANAtiEIM Cl'fY PLANNING COMAIIS5ION, MAY 28, 1986 86-351
Commi.ssioner Herbst stated he realizes re-usi.ng this material provides a good
road base and it is a critical use, but thi.s use is starting to downgrade that
area.
Mr. Smi.th stated another company had stockpiled material from another City of
Anahei,m job on this property prior to them leasing it, and that they have been
there since Uctober of last year. He explained they have portable crushers
and they could move to another location when the pile of material is gone.
It was clarified there is only a 6-foot high fence and part of the pile of
material in the 50-foot setback area.
Mr. Smith e~plat.ned they have several of these sites throughout Southern
California, wherever they are doing work; and that they are also demolition
contractors and crush the materials from that operation. He stated they also
crush on site and the crushing time is probably only during one month and then
tlie crusher is moved and a person i.s retained on the site to maintain ttie
stockpile and for dust control.
Commissi.oner Messe suggested the permic be granted for one year with the
peti.tionEr having to reapply i.n one year. Mr. 5mith stated that would be
acceptable but they would like to have it for a longer period.
Chairwoman La Claire explained this area is near the Stadium where a lot of
good things are supposed to happen i.n tile future with larbe corporate offices
comi.ng into the area, etc.; and that this a good operation and the services
are r~ally needed, but when this area i.s developed, it might be extremely
i.mportant that this operatian cease. She stated she would like to see Lhe
permit Kranted for onc year. Commissioner rry stated he wuuld not consi.der
a 5-year permit.
Commissioner Bouas stated she would like to see some screening. Mr. Smith
asked if r.he Commission would like to have the fence slatted. He stated they
cannot move further f:om the street and that right now they can drive a dump
truck around the perimeter inside the property.
Chairwoman suggested approval for one year with scr.eening required.
ACTIQN: Commi.ssioner McBurney offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fry
and MOTIUN CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the
proposal to retai.n a road base materials processi.ng, storage, and di•~tribution
operation with waivers of minimum required setbacks and permitted
encroachments on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisti.ng of
approximately 6 acres located at the southeast corner of Cerritos Avenue and
Lewis Street, and further described as 920 East Cerri.tos Avenue; and does
hereby approve the Negative lleclaration upon findi.ng that i.t has considered
the Negati.ve Declaration together with any comments received during the publi.c
review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any
comments rece3.ved that there is no substanti.al evidence that the project wi.ll
have a signifi.cant effect on the environment.
5/28/86
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CUMMISSIUN, MAY 28> 1986 86-352
Commissioner McBurney offered a motion, second.ed by Commissioner Messe and
MOTION CARItIEll that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant
waivers of code requirement on the basis that the petitioner stipulated at the
public hearing to provide slatting in the fencin~ and on the basis that there
are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape,
Copography, location and surroundings, which do not apply to other identically
zoned properties in the vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning
Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in
identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
Commissioner McBurney offered Resolution No. PC86-135 and moved for its
passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission doeu=~uantYto
grant Conditional Use Permit No. 280U, for a period of one year, p
Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035, subject to
Interdepartmental Committee Recoamendations and applicant's stipulation Co
provide slatting in the existing 6-foot high chain link fence.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HERBST, LA CLAiItE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MES5E
NOES: NONY~
ABSENT: NONE
Malcolm Slaubhter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Planni.ng Commissi.on's decision withi.n 22 days to the City Council.
ITEM N0. 10 EIR NEGATIVE DECLAkATION ANll CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2$03
PUBLIC HEAItING. OWNERS: SHUEI YEU ANll NUN Y" LEE SUEN, 'LUlb E. Center,
Anaheim, CA 92805. AGENT: RICHARD CHANG, 30U 5. 3rd Street, Alhambra, CA
91801. Property descri.bed as an i.rre~ularly-shaped parcel of land consisting
of approximately 0.54 acre located at the southwest corner of Center Street
and Cenpla Way, 2016 E. Center Streec (Tampico Motel).
To construct a 12-room addi.tion to an existing 20-unit mo~el.
There was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject request
and althoubh the staff repor[ was not read, i.t is referred to and made a part
of Che minutes.
Richard Chang, arcliitect, was present to answer any questions.
TkiE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Respondin~ to Commissioner Souas, Mr. Chang explai.ned tnere will be no kitchen
units in the addition.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
McBurney and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commi.ssion has
reviewed the proposal to construc[ a 12-room addition to an existing 2U-unit
motel on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.54
acre, located at the southwest corner of Center Street and Cenpla Way and
further described as 2016 E. Center Street (Tampico Motel); and does hereby
5/28/86
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 7_8, 1986 86-353
approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that iC has considered the
Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the publi.c
review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any
comments received that there xs no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment.
Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC86-137 and moved for itTantssage
and adoption that the Anaheim Ci.ty Planning Commission does hereby g
Conditional Use Permit No. 2803 pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Sections
18.03.03U.030 through 18.03.030.035 and subject to Interdepartmental Committee
recommendaCions.
On roll call, the foreboing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, FKY, HER}3ST, LA CLAIRk, LAWICKI, h!C BURNEY, MESSE
NOES: NON~
ABSENT: NONE
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written ri.bht to appeal
the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council.
ITE~I N0. 11 EIR NEGATIV~ UECLr1RATI0N, WAIVER OF COllE itEl~UiKEMEN'P ANU
CONDITIONAl. USE PEItMIT N0. 2504
PUBLIC HEARING. OWNEKS: PASTUIt LAWItENCE G. DOWNING ANll PASTOR GREG NELSUN,
900 S. Sunkist, Anaheim, CA 92806. AGENT: MICHAEL ELIAS, 704 N. Glassell
Street, Urange, CA 926b7. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel
of land consisting of approximately 3.88 acre, 900 S. Sunki.st (Anahei.m 5eventh
Day Adventist Church).
To permit an overnight shelter in an existinb church facility with waiver of
mi.nimum number of parking spaces.
The~e were seven persons lndicating their presence in favor of sub~ect request
and approximately ninety people indicating their presence i.n opposition, and
althoubh the staff report was not read, it i.s referred to and made a part of
the minutes.
Leonard McGhee, Associate Planner, explained the Planning Department staff
received approximately 30 to 40 telePosed tolthisrrequestlandnthat names and
neiKhborhood indicating tliey were opp
telephone numbers of some of the people were taken and are available in the
Planning Department's files. He explained the people cailing in opposition
were told the opposition must be presented at the public hearing in order to
be consi.dered as evidence in the Planning Commission's decision.
Idichael Elias, agent, explained this request is to house up to 20 people at
the Anaheim Seventh Day Adventists Church at 900 S. Sunkist. He explained he
has been working with the homeless in Orange County for thP last 10 years and
that there i.s a tremendous need to house the homeless. He stated according to
1983 calculations, Santa Ana has the highest homeless papulation, wi.th Anaheim
k~avi.ng the second highest. He stated the Planning Departm~nt staff has been
very helpful; however, he was out of the country during the last week and felt
5/'18/86
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 28, 1986 86-354
there was an oversight in the staff report whic<< indicates there would be
individuals and families housed at this facility and that ~t t~as always been
his intention that they would only house families at this facility. He noted
he has also had a lot of phone calls regardinb this issue.
Mr. Elias ~ta[ed they want to house up to 2U peoFle in a room at the chur.ch
and Che number would be based ott family combinations. He explained the intake
proc.edures would continue to take place at their Urange facility and there are
no plans to open an intake office at this site and that these would be the
people who can't be housed at their Orange shelter. He stated 90% of the
homeless population is white, 2% black and 3% hispanic. He stated he has been
a member of this church for fi.ve years and is not interested i.n bringing any
problems into the community or the church. He explained people wlll be
transported to and from the church and po3.nted out there is no public
transportaCioa on Sunkist. He stated parkxnb will noc be a problem since most
homeless peo~le do not own vehicles and if they do own cars, he would estimate
a maximum of 10 to 12 vehicles on this site.
Mr. Elias presented copies of the i.ntake forms so the Commission could review
the information they do get from the clients. He explained tlzey bet Social
Security numbers, identification, the next of kin, vehicle registratiun and
the person's si~nature. He stated previously pnotobraphs were taken of each
family and he would be willirtg to do that same ~hing again if desi.red. He
stated the word "homeless" is such a negative term and they are viewed in
people's mi.nds as "wineos, criminals, etc." and it is true that some of them
are in those cate~ories, buC no[ the majority, and one oi the saddest
situations is a mocher with children and no place to bo, and that is the
population they will be tryinb to address with this facility. He stated there
wculd be no pro~rams at the church and the hour~ of operation will be from
S:UO p.m. ~_0 9:00 a.m.
Mr. Elias stated neibhbors have expressed concern about the people usinK thei.r
park and explai.ned in the ten years he has been working with the homeless,
living in the shelter and ri~ht next door to the shelter where they house up
to 80 people at night, and pointed out the shelter in Orange is located in a
residential area and is also neiKhbori.ng a public park, and there have been no
problems with people hanging around the facility. He stated Christian
Temporary Housing Foundation believes in getting people jobs. He presented a
copy of the Resident Agreement and stated it has been their policy that no one
be accepted witliout proper identification and it is required that there wili
be no loiterind around the bulidin~, in the parking lot, in front of the
facility and that all outside activities would be: conducted behind the fence.
}ie explained these are the Orange fac~lity rules and the same rules will apply
in Anaheim; and Lhat the children must be in theit beds by 8:30 p.m. and the
facility must be quiet by 10:00 p.m.
Mr. Elias stated lie visited 110 churches which are operatinb shelters for the
homeless and they are doing a tremendous job and it makes sense that buildings
sitting empty s~x days a week should be used to fill this tremendour need. He
stated there is just not enough money to build public buildings for ~:his use.
Bradley Williams, 2b00 E. Ward Terrace, Apartment 54, Anaheim, stated he is
the Associate Pastor of the church and a resident of Anaheim. He stated as a
5/28/86
8G-355
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COM1"iISSIO[~, MAY 28, 1986
Pastor of the church, they feel privileged to have the opportuni.ty to help
these peo~~le of Anaheim who have the mi~ovetthis requestnK Heestatedsas~aeless
and he would urge the Commission to app
resident driving the streets near the churcii often, he did not see any reason
for this use to have a negative impact on the community because there will be
no parking problems or problems related to the actual site and also, because
having sat on the Church Board and heard the plan as described, i.t seems to be
a tew~orary emer~ency kind of overflow shelter and is not somethi~tg that would
have people there dur3.ng the day, and they will be moviiig people in and out,
and the goal of tne project i.s to bring people i.n when there is no other
facility which can take them i.n and to help them to find job=oaTa~ eWillabee~
agai.n, but all services will be conducted in Orange and no p b
offered at thi.s church.
AYC Oswald, 12U61 Markee Circle, Santa Ana, explained he has been a resident
in Orange County for 25 years and is a reti.red anesthesiologist and 'nas been
working with Chri.stian Temporary Housin~ for lU years and i.s currently the
Chairman. He stated for many people homelessears aso whentCTHFfwasfpart uf
death. He stated he was interim Chairman 5 y K
the Lutheran Social Services of Orange County and added he wanted to speak for
the homeless and the dispossessed.
Ur. Uswald stated they met last Friday vitli r~embeust recently~illyyGraham~Ped
they had answered some of Cheir questions; that j
stated i.f all churches in the United States just took care of ten famili.es,
perhaps there would be no homeless in America, and added he believes this is
an opportunity for a churcli i.n a community too=CUnityPtotdofwo1rktin thi.s area
responsibility; and that they deserve the opp
of providinb homey for the misfortunate.
~r, Oswald stated ther~ was discussion with the neighbors that there was no
need in this parcicular community :or the services of chi.s faci.lity and that
it would be out of order for this kind of use in this location, but oiie
neighbor mentioned that he had i.ndeed taken une of the local residents down to
CTHF in Orange, out of this community into another community, and this
individual was dealt with directly by the Executive Director who took him into
his home, outside the communlty, and he was an Anaheim resident. He stated he
was sure there have been wealthy people who have been left temporary homeless
and remembered it was very difficult £or hi.m to a~tend medical school at one
time because there was no place for students to find housing, so he
understands the feelings of the situation of the homeless. Ur. Oswald stated
one of the neighbor's concerns was that perhaps the conduct of the clients
would be such that it would endanger their lives. He stated that particular
faci.lity riblit now is vacant most of the time and with people i.n the building,
perhaps that would offer some protection. He stated when people live in these
conditions, they know it is a privilege and it has been their experi.ence with
so many people in confined quarters, the clients are their own best monitors.
He stated he lioped the Commission will seriously consid~r granting this
conditional use permit fot' these very unfortunate individuals.
Fran Holland, 704 N. Giassell, Orange, stated eight weeks ago, sh2 did not
know shelters existed; that she had read about the homeless, the people who
live under bridges, in parks and people livinb in cars and she felt sorry for
5/28/86
MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 28, 1986 86-356
them, but ber_ause they were faceless and anonymous, it was an impersonal
feelinb of compassion and she had no ldea whatsoever that une day she would be
residing in a shelter. She stated she is very grateful that a shelter such as
C'THF has existed. She stated her situation i.s not unique and she thouKht i.t
was until she experienced the stories of other residents residing in the
facility; thst throubh a rapid succession of even[s, whi.ch affected botti she
and her husband adversely financially, thcy found themselves without a roof
over their heads for Chem and Lheir children; and that her Iiusband could not
Cake the pressure and lefC her with the responsibility of findin~ a home for
the two children and herself and there was no place to go, except for
something l~ke CTHF. She etated she had heard of the Salvation Army, but
thou~ht that was just for ~ransients. She stated she could see the fear in
her children's eyes because they were being disrupted from thei.r peer ~roups,
their school environment, thei.r home and Chei.r fatl~er and after some footwork
and referrals, she found CTHF.
Ms. Holland stated there is a sti.gma attached to people wl~o are homeless ar.d
tiiat she is builty of attaching that stibma herself. She stated academically,
she is an educated person and tias also been educated from tliis experience in
the shelter; and that she has very marketable business skills, but has a
temporary ~isability at present, anu Cliat this place has ~iven lier a chance te
get that all together both financially and emotionally. She stated she ls a
mother and i.s concerned about the neighborhood lier chi.ldren w~ll reside in and
about the schools tiiey will attend and the people they will associate with.
She stated the other residents residing i.n the shelter iiav~ a willingness to
get back on their feet and become employable and became able to contribute in
a valuable way to tl~e com~uunity and they are not the "dre~s of society", but
are people wlio need some assistance, both financially and emotionally, and
havicib that, ti~ey can help tt~emselves be able to contribute in a valuable way.
There were approxi.mately ten people indicatinb they wished to speak in
opposition Co thi.s request.
Todd Taylor, 2'L42 E. Vermont, stated liis residence is ri.ght across from
subject properCy and that it is not his intention [o attack such a probram and
that he is a Christian and agrees wi[h helpinK peuple. He stated his greatest
concern is where this probram will be held; that they do have a responsibility
to thei.r children and noted there are several schools in the area, the park,
the library and other activities whi.ch families utili.ze. He stated such a
program would invite transients and other people into the community who miKiit
be undesirable whi.ch could bring crime and other activi.ties whi.ch would affect
tlie communi.ty. lie stated he ie greatly concerned about the many children in
the area and there is no guarantee by the Police llepartment, the church ur any
individual tliat there would be adequaLe prutection for the children or that
transients would be kept out of tlie park. lie added he has been involved i.n
several probrams li.ke thls where they have helped people like this, but that
also invites the uninvited and that people do hang around and asked what
happens when the programs closes and asked who will keep the people out of
their parks, school and library, noting there is not enoubh manpower un the
Police llepartment to keep this area safe and there are not enough church
volunteers to provide guards to make sure the children are safe.
5/28/Sb
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING C~MMISSION, MAY 28 1986 86-357
Mrs. Carbine, 949 Peregrine Ylace, Anaheim, presented several letters from
neighbors whu asked her represent them. She stated she is representing a
num6er of mothers who could not attend this meeting and some who are here and
she di.d not th~nk the i.ssue of helpinb people is really the issue with the
group at all and tliey all feel concern, love s:id care and the desire to help
the homeless. She stated she Ytas been personally involved ovec the years with
organized and unorganized programs to help people and certainly would vote for
and would like to help ahenever she can, but her concern is that there are too
many questions unanswered and too many thinbs that have not been addressed,
su~h as statis[ics and backbround to meet many of the requirements that are
lisCed in the Sta~f ~eport, Page 11-e, Yaragraph 'LO which are the findj.ngs
reyuired before tti~ PAanni.ng Commi.ssi.on grants a condi.tional use permit. She
stated she triP~ t~~ ~ei infor~ati.on from various people, but no concrete
information has been fuKnished i.n order for lier to evaluate the program very
wiaely. She staCe.a. s!~e understands the program will be very different from
anythin~ else they liave set up and ~sked why there wasn't a study to determine
what they do plan, not onLy what they suppose will happen. She added [here
are too many loophales and too many questi.ons and che couid no~ go alonb with
the pro~.~osal,, as it stands, without more research and discussion with other
o:r~ailiza;.ions.
Tom Kornely, 2716 Gelid Court, Anaheim, stated he represents the homeowners
basically east of the 57 Freeway and himself as a father of two children. He
stated he participates i.n helpinb tlie homeless and needy through the
Presbyterrian ~'ood Relief program and ai.d for the homeless in Piexico, etc. so
is well aware of the needs. }ie stated as a resident of the community, he is
particularly concerne~d because the church is located within one block in
ei.ther direction of schools with 3,OU0 children aCtendi.ng those schools; and
to the north there is a pre-school which houses approaimately !00 children and
on South Stree[ there i.s South Jr. High School with approximately tt00
students, and Juarez ElemenCary School with about 60U children from two years
old thorou~h 8th brade, and also an lt.U.P. Program less thar. one block and
Katella High School within one block. k{e stated 3,U00 children impact this
area every morninb and afternoon and i~e is concerned about the young children
who have to walk by trie church.
Mr. Kornely stated they feel these people will i.mpact the area and presented a
picture from Sunday's newspaper showing a couple who live in their car outside
the facility at 704 5. Glassell. He s[ated tie is familiar with thaC faci.lity
and he is the person who tootc an individual there several months ago and that
these people live outside because there is no room iuside and the nei~hbors
are concerned that these kinds of people will mi.grate to tttis area. He stated
there are a lot of unanswered questions and they understand that there is no
present mi.nister at the church and the new minister is coming to the church
and is not aware of this request; and thaC they are also informed that this
church is planning to move to another location, but that is not concrete
information. He stated they asked where Che children will go wtien the
facili.ty is closed at 8 in the morning because they do not have the facilities
in Oranbe to take care of the additional 20 people since i.t is overcrowded
now. He stated when the facility closes at 8 i.n the morning, it means [he
children will have no place to go during the summer and will be on the streets
and in the parks. He stated Sunkist has no public transportation and no
restaurants. He added they are also concerned because many questions
5/28/86
MINUTES, AN~HEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 2$, 1986 Sb-35~
have not been answered and he personally is opposed to this request at the
present time and did not think i.t is a decent Facility because it is one big
bare room with no facilities, and it would be a difficult place for people to
start a new life.
Ed Vigil, '262'L E. Ames, cspri~~,~ 1 serious reservations about the request;
that the schools, libraries .~uu ,~arks are a concern and there are no existing
facilities for employment, no public L'ransportation, no restaurants and tliis
neighborhood only has homes, schools and churches. He stated the staff
reports indicates the recipients would job h~nt durinb normal busi.ness hours,
but apparently no provisions are made between 5 and S p.m•
Mr. Vigil asked where the children will be wliile the parents hunt jobs, will
they attend schools, will child care be provided and what will parents and
cltildren do between 5 and 8 p.m. He stated he has served on a lot of
volunteer programs and has serious reservations about this reques~ because it
is tough to recruit people and asked how they would be able to recruit enoubh
people to stay there every night and felt it would be very difficult to train
people to deal with situations which might arise. He stated chey are
concerned because this facility would provide a magnet for people who are
looking for temporary t~ousinb and thoubht they will be in the parks and
library. He stated the staff report states the Commission should not grant
this conditional use permit unless i.t does not present a detriment to the
peace, health, safety and welfare of. the citizens and speaking for his family,
he would request Chi.s permit be denied loday.
Dr. John H. Yayne, 887 S. Nilda, stated his property ~s adjacent to tlie church
and iie has been there for 'L3 years; tha~ his liome was built before the church
and the church property has a large parking l~t. He stated tl~e problem is
with this one room being used to house 20 people and asked if it is going to
be airconditioned. Ne stated there i.s not:h?.ng regarding ttie health of these
individuals and also the~' have lndicated an additional shower will be
i~stalled, not attached ~~. the buildin~, which mean& possibly two s:iowers to
serve 20 people a night ~nd he doubted that would be adequate. Fle'referred to
the staff report which indicates Sefore the Planning Commission grants any
conditional use permit, it must make a findinb of fact that the use will not
be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general weliare of the
citizens. He stated the safety of the children cominb to the facility is a
conceri. ~~acause they will be wanting to play and will be on the blacktop. He
stated he was worried about their safety and concerned that these children
would be going over the fence into their yards and added there is no proposal
to provide a fence for safety; and that the concern is not that the balls will
break their windows, but that the children will be in danger because of th_
swim~ing pools, etc. in the community. He stated when the church was
originally allowed, the Yastor agreed they would put i.n a churct~ and churc~:
related facilities oniy and there was nothing else allowed and they did not
want anything economical such as a restaurant ~n that area to be detrimental
to the residents. He stated g_lot of people were against the Pastor because
he would not assist with the conytruction of the fence and did not pay any of
the costs. He stated the place is totally unsafe for the children and the
homeowners who live there and he Was concerned that their house~: would be
pilfered; and that Lhey will take the children out at approximatt:ly 8:30 or °
in the morning and asked where they will be taken. He stated the,y have workeS
5/28/86
MINliTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 28, 1586 86-359
with the Police llepartment for many years to protect their homes and iiow there
is a chance to lose il all.
Diana Hardman, 602 S. Chantilly, asked how these individuals wi.ll be screened
and if professional and qualified people will be doin~ the screening and how
ti.ey will prevent transient~ from coming to the facilzty. She srated the
staff report indicntes there will be no one there with psychological, drub or
alcohol problems and asked how that would be ~.uaranteed.
Walter Martin, L542 E. Ames, stated his property backs up to the church and
the church has been a wonderful neibhbor. He reYerred to Ya~e 11-b,
Section 6 of Para~raph 7 stating that when considered appropriate, the
prospective resident will be required to liave a background check by the local
law enforcement agency. He asked who would be doing ~hat Secause it toas his
understandino that the Anaheim Police llepartment would not do [hat because it
is an infringement on an individual's rights. kle referred tu No. 7, 'that the
prospective resident is not at the time of thc request, an act~ve drug user,
alcoholic or of sucli ps~chological problems to require specialized treatment"
and asked liow that wi.ll be determined.
Eva Jo itomer~, 920 S. Clay, stated a lot of the nei~hbors concerns have not
been answered, such as, yittce thcy ~~ill only he open bet~:een Sp.tn. F, 9 a.m., Hhat
happens in between those times and what will happen to the children; and that
the room will be divided and the; only have tw~ showers for 2U peopl.e; and
that there will not be any loitering and aske~ how that wi.ll be ~uaranteed.
She presented an article fram the Los Anbeles Times on a si.milar shelter wnich
showed people loi.tering outside, waitin~ for the doors to open, and asked once
the word gets out, what will .happen witl~ the other homeless vanti.ng a place to
stdy. She stated these are ~hi.ngs that do concern them and there is no
guarantee. She stated the homeowners feel what they are wantin~ to d~ is good,
but they have chosen the wrong location and facility.
Nora Payne stated she is concerned because tlie facilities back up to her
property and she is concerned about children passing that church going to
school everyday; and that Sunkist i.s a very busy street; and that she did
attend the meeting with tl~e church and found the facility very poor and did
not know how it wouid house 20 people in one room witti no pattitions. She
stated they will have bunk beds for 20 people and she felt the request should
be denied.
Shirley 5awyer, 2528 lliana llrive, stated she is a mother of four and is
concerned about ~er c.hi.ldren because this faci.lity will be directly across
from the elementary school. She stated she i.s married to a Santa Ana Police
Officer and in di.scussions with her husband, he said when he was on patrol in
Santa Ana, they would dri.ve by the Third Str~:et overnight shelter and [here
woui~ be 15 to 3U people hanbing around CnaC facility.
Piary Hubbert, 1535 Canfi.eld Lane, Apartment 4, /~naheim, stated she i.s employed
by an agency whi.ch deals with the homeless and hungry everyday and her biggest
concern is that this will be a posi.tive experience for the City of Anaheim,
the neighbors and the homeless, and with all Che yuestions chat have been
asked today, she felt this would not be a positive experience, She stated her
main concern is the referral nolicy and stated if they call CTIiF as an agency
S/28/8G
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIhG COMMISSION, MAY 28, 1986 86-360
and ask for space, will they say that after 20 the answer is no or wtll the
~eople just be allowed to come in. She stated the agency she represents has
no food at the present time and there is a sign posted on the door and the
requests have dropped off because ehe "hotline" among the homeless and hungry
is saying "no food is avallable", but when the sign is reooved today at 3:00
p.m., she was sure they would be inundated aKain. She asked ~~~ ~~ ='3n be
limited to 20 with the cryi.ng need so breat.
Mi.ke Elias stated Christian Temporary Housing Foundation is not a"band-aid"
a~ency and they do nut promote the "soup kitchen" or "overnight emergency
shelters"; and that this proposal is a change and they w111 limi.t the number
of people to 20 and would welcome the neighbors having a watchdo3 to count the
number of people at the shelter. He stated there are 100 million homeless
people in the world today.
He stated the Salvation Army on Third Street in 5anta Ana services adult men
an1 there is loitering around that faci.lity, but that i.s not whac they are
proposing for this fac3.li.ty and Lhe di.fference is that they will be dealinb
wi.th famili.es. He stated there i.s no loitering at their CT!{F facility in
Orange and suggesL-ed the neibhbors visit that facility. He sL-ated they are
not proposing bunk beds. He added they cannot guarantee anythi.nb and there is
always a risk, but he can guarantee that they will transport people to and
from the site. He stated they provide a'plan of action' for the client to do
whatever tliey need to do the next day and it i.s not thei.r boal to have peo2le
hanginb around.
Mr. Elias stated i.t is true that the Anaheim Poli.ce Department will not check
the backgrounds of the clients; and that when they first started CTHF 10 years
ago, the Orange Police llepartment did do background checks. l{e explained i.f
the client does not check out, that person is told to go the local Yolice
Department and then i.f [he Police llepartment called Chem back and told Chem
the person had a clearance, they could stay, and he would hope the community
would understand that if that person tiad any problem, they would not ~o the
local Police L~epartment, but would move on out of the community. He stated
they will follow that same procedure i.c Anaheim. Ne stated lie canr.ot
g~arantee that the c13.ent would not be an active drug user, alcoholic or have
other problems, but duri.ng their intake procedure, there are certain things to
look for which will indicate a problem; however, there is no guarantee that i.t
won't happen, but :~aost of the clients in that category are si.nKle.
Concerning the question about what the people do during the day, he explained
it is not their goal to take over people's lives, but are offering those
people who are sleeping in the bushes and in their cars a place Co sleep for
one night and some food so they can bo out and do what you have to do the next
day to get their lives in order. He stated that a lot of the people are
waiting to get into a more permanent shelter, or are persons who are stranded
in Califcrnia and need to go back to where their famili.es, relatives or
friends live and they need time to get money from someone, get to the airport
to get the a3.rline tickets, etc.
Air. Elias stated he has a letter from the new pastor of the church and he
endorses the program and thst he would be happy to send a copy of that letter
to the City. He stated he does not have all the answers but is trying to help
5/28/86
_. ~
86-361
MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COh1MISSION, MAY 28, 1986
certain individuals in our community and that he is not about to open up this
community, the neighbors or the church to any harassment.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSEll.
Chai.rwoman La Clai.re clarified that the people would be pickemeaninr~a mother
Orange facility and that they will only consist of families, g
with children, a mother and father with the children, or a father witli the
children, and that they are taken to this facility at 8:00 p.m. and the
children wi.ll be in bed by 8:30 p.m. She asked if they will be fed at the
Orange facility.
Mr. Elias stated they are hoping the people would have already been fed; that
they will not have a"soup kitchen", but certainly there would be food there
for anybody who is hungry, milk for the childr.en, bottles far the babies, etc.
but because oF the late hour, they hope everyone wi.ll have been fed. He
noted other shelters have already closed for the night and most of the
homeless population has been taken care of by this ti.me. He stated he is
concerned about L'he mother and children wtien the father comes home drunk and
beats up the wife and she has no place to go because everythiny has closed,
but that she can get resources tl~e next day, and probably the Police
llepartment has already taken care of feeding tlie mother and children.
He explained a lot of the people have a check or some resources cominb the
next day and just need a place to stay for that nlbht, and after checking all
other places, they would be placed at this church.
Chairwoman La C.laire asked what the plans are for the people the nexc morning
w't~en they are taken back to wherever they ::ant to go. Mr. Elias explained
some people would go to work, if they already have a job, or they need to look
for a job and there i.s a job-finding facility in ~he Orange shelter where they
use the telephone to seek employment. He stated other people need to get to
the sirport, or just to ~et on the road. He explaicied they do not want people
to get dependent on their services and that the people would not be coming
back into the area. He stated the "thinbs to do sheet" is helpful and in some
cases the person needs another niglit, and that is true if they are working on
somethi.ng such as "Traveler's Aid" to move out of town, and it usually takes
two days for them to check it out, so it is written down that they must be out
of the area and if they come back, they would not get their bed. He 2dded he
has not yet seen a homeless mother disregard that stipulation. He stated this
population will be out of that area and doing what they need to do to bet
their act together.
Commi.ssioner Lawicki asked the maximum lengtt~ of stay. Mr. Elias stated they
will only be staying one night, with the exception of a prior arrangement when
they have indicated they tiave a plan of action ior the following day or cwo,
and a person with no plan of action would only be allowed to stay one night.
Commissioner Lawicki asked wi~e~e the children would be when the parent i.s
looking for a job, or if they have to go for an interview. Pir. Elias
responded there will be no day care provided; that there wi.ll food for them to
eat and other facilities at the Orange shelter and the children will be in a
safe environment while the parent is lookinb for work, but just because of the
5/28/86
~_ ~i
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMIS5ION, MAY 28, 1986 86-362
expense involved for liability insurance, no day care servi.ces will be
provided. He explained the children will be with one of the parents if ther!+
are two parents, and the mother can stay at the shelter with the chiidren, buc
they do have a problem when there is a sin~le parent there with the children.
Mr. Elias stated they would advise the parent not to abandon the children
during the day and maybe would advise them to go back to the state where their
families could ass~st by providing caXe for the child while the parent works.
Commiss~oner Lawicki asked the ages of tlie children, indicating concern with
control over having them in bed by 8:30 p.m. Mr. Elias stated generally
speakinb homeless parents du uot have teena~e chiJ.dren, and most teenagers
wi.ll not go to a shelter with their parent. He stated this population is so
tired that going to bed is a blessin~ and they are not in a frame of mind or
mood to be jumping over walls, going into the neighbors' swimminb pools, etc.
He responded to Commiss~oner Lawicki that the averabe aKe of the children at
the Urange facility is around the 3rd grade.
Commissioner Lawicki stated knuwinb there is a'network' amonb all people, the
question was raised about the possibility of other homcless people waitin~ in
the neighborliood ior an openin~ at that facility. Mr. Elias stated there are
no people waiting in the Urange area 5ecause they do the intake over the
telephone and the shelter is always full and the only additional people who
can get in uould be from "chi]d abuse" cases.
Mr. Elias stated he ?~ a member of this church and they are constantly being
approached for dccommodations because there are humeless people in that
neighborh.od. He responded tu Commissi.oner Bouas that CTHF would enter into a
lease agi'eement with the churcli to rent space. ~hairwoman La Claire indicated
concern thst with all tha homeless, a church would actually lease their
property to thi.s organization. Commissioner Bouas staCed that this is what
really qualifies this organi.zation for the block grant money, and rather than
providing a facility that will really take care of the people, they have found
a church which wi11 lease them the property; which yualifies them for the
money and if they have an overflow, ttie church will be used, but if there is
not an overflow, they will have the block grant money anyway. Mr. Elias
stated he wasn't sure how that works, but that the $20,000 can only bt used
for purchase of a building and not for the operations of CTHF.
Chairwoman La Claire stated she believes this is a sincere, needed and good
thin~ and she realizes the tremendous need, but it seems there should be some
forward planning, particularly in this area, to came up with ways to provide
affordable housinb for everyone. She stated i[ seems th~s is a just a"stop
gap" measure and she would like to get deve.lopers, people with money, and
people interested in this kind of program tobether and see tiow far they can
make that $20,000 go towards a permanent facility. She stated she understands
how the neighbors feel and pointed out this would only be helping 20 people.
She stated she was sure there would be some support from the Commission and
the City in a project liKe this.
Commissioner lierbst stated if that $20,000 is supposed to go for Anaheim
residents, he did not think they should be bringing clients from Orange. He
stated some of the information presented to the Commission in the staff report
contradicts what Mr. Elias has said. He referred to page llb, ltem 9, which
5/28/~b
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PL~NNING COMMIS5ION, MAY 28, 1986 86-363
indicates that the prospective clietit will participate in periodic in-house
meetings to enhance and promote harmonious group living, and stated thar_
sounds like somethinb permanent and not an "overnight" situation. Mr. Elias
stated the information he submitted was based on the Orange facility and No. 9
wauld not be appropriate for the Anaheim facility.
Cos.missioner Herbst asked if someone would be paid to stay at t~e facility and
referred to the persons indicated in the staff report who would be responsible
for opening the room, checkin~ the supplies, checkinb with the night attendant
and checking in the familzes upon arrival, or the nibht attendants and nibht
security guard, and asked if those people would be volunteers and what would
happen if they cannot find anyone for that nibht.
Mr. Elias stated if they do not have the voluiiteers, they would not ooen that
night. He explained Chey have a'hotline' and would know if the volunteers
are not ~oinb to be there. Cocnmissioner Herbst referred to the ribht
attendants who would be serving evening and morning meals. Mr. Elias stated
that me~ns if a mother comes in and has not eaten all day, they would provide
her with a meal, but they wo~~ld not be giving blanket meals. Commissioner
Herbst asked about the oChe~ people who are there who may nut have eaten, or
have eaten but may still be hungry. htr. Elias stated there are places in
Orange County wliere a person can get food, even if they can't Set a bed and
those are the people they would be pickinK up and briaginK to this facility.
Commissioner Herbst staLed he recognizes Che needs and fears of the people who
live the communi.ty and although he admires whaL- they want Co do with this
program, he feels this particular location is wron~ because he could not agrPe
with putting 20 people in a facility like this and with a little more
research, a better location could be found in Anaheim. He stated he feels
this is just a"band aid" on a bigger problem and would probably becume
permanent in the community; and that we have always had homeless and probably
always will have.
Commiss3.oner Fry stated in order to brant the conditional use permit, the
Commission must find that the use will not be detrimental to the peace,
healtli, safety and general welfare of the citizens, and he could not vote for
this use in that location. He stated he did not think there is a person in
this room who is against the pro~ram or a person would not extend a hand of
compassion, love and help, if the need came about, but he felt concerned that
there is a church that is supposed to be for the benefiL of all which will
charge ~20,000 to rent their facility.
Mr. Elias stated there will be large utility costs which the money can be used
for and it can be used for equipment and the charge will be $5U0 a month to
use that property, plus the utilities, and that tlie church has a small
struggling congregation. He stated the money will go for insurance, upkeep,
roof, showers, eCC.
Commissioner Messe asked if this is a pilot probram or if there has been a
family program organized in Oranbe County. Mr. Elias explained this is a
pilot probram in Urange County and stated there are a lot of churches lnvolved
in the sanctuary movement which have not come before the Commission and are
doing the same type thinK. He stated there are two churches right now in
5/28/86
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 28, 1986 86-364
Anahelm housing the homeless and he wanted the community to give CTHF credit
for trying to do the r~ght thing.
Chairwoman La Claire stated the homeless are not really represented today,
except for the courageous bls. Holland; however, most of the neighbors have
worked hard all their lives and their bibgest investment is probably their
home aad their biggest concern is for their children, families, homes and
their neighborhood, and they are scared and are not familiar wittt the program
and for that reason she could not vote in favor of this project. She stated
she xs serious about doing something about this situation and makinK some
long-range plans and getting some people together who are interested in the
same thinb and poolinb the resources, and starting to take an active role in
this City. She asked all the neighbors to join her in helping to find a place
for the homeless.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
McBurney and MOTION CARKIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has
revieWed the proposal to permit an overnight shelter in an existing church
facility with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces on an
irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisti.ng of approximately 3.8~ acres
having a frontage of approximately 113 feet on the east side of Sunkist
Street, approximately 13U feet south of the centerline of Ames Avenue, and
further described as 900 South Sunktst Aver.ue (Anaheim Seventh Day Adventist
Church); and does hereby approve the Negative lleclaration upon finding that i.t
has considered the Negative Declaratian together with any comments received
during the public review process and further 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 environment.
Commissioner Herbst ofrered Resolution No. YC86-238 and moved for its passaKe
and adoption that the Anaheim City Planninb Commission does hereby deny
Conditional Use Permit No. 2804 on the basis that the use would be a
"band-aid" operation on a problem that is very critical in this city, and even
though the program is very commendable and there needs to be a facility such
as this in the City of Anaheim, this residential area which has schools,
churches, a library and park, and with no commercial activities, is not the
proper location, and because there is money involved 1n this program, it could
be considered a commercial operation, not compatible with this ne•lghborhood,
and could have a detrimental effect on the peace, heal~h, safety and general
welfare of the citizens.
On roll call, the foregoin~ resolution was passed by the followinb vote:
AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HEk~3ST, LA CLAIP.L, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the C1ty Council.
Chairwoman La Clai.re thanked everyone for attending the meetinb and asked
those who really intended to offer their support to give their names to the
petitioner in the hall and added she would like to get together to try and
find a permanent facility.
5/2$/86
86-3G5
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLA•NNING COMMISSION, MAY 28, 1986
RECESS: 5:05 P.M.
RECONVEN~: 5:15 1'.M.
ITEM_ N~• 1~ EiK CATEGOKICAL EXF.MPTION-CLASS 1 ANll VARIANCE N0. 356'L
PL'BLIC HEARING. OWNERS: llELBEItT E. ANll SALLY L. YARBkOUGH, 3049 Cardinal
Street, Analieim, CA 92806• PLOProximatelyi0e14aacrere3049bCardinalhStreet.
parcel of land consisting of app
There was no one indicati.ng their presence in opposition to subject request
and although tbe staff report was not read, it i.s referred to and made a part
of the mi.nutes.
Sally Yarrrough, owner, explained they are proposing a 297-square foot
additaon to their existinb fami.ly room and kitchen.
THE PUliLIC I1E~,1tING WAS CLUSEll.
Mrs. Burke responded that there have been no objections from the neiglibors.
It was noted the Planning llirector or his authorized representative has
del'ermined that the proposeu project falls within the definition of
Categorical Exemptions, Class 1, as dcateeorically exempt~from the requirement
Keport Guidelines and i.s, therefore, b
to prepare an EIH.
ACTION: Commissioner Fry offered Resolution No. PC 86-139 and moved for its
passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
grant Variance No. 356'L on rhe basis that there are special locationaores
applicable to the proper[y such CQ pther identically~zoned~properties in the
surroundinbs which do not apply
vicinity; and that strict application of the zoning code deprlves the property
of privileges enjoyed by oLher prcperties in the identi.cal zoning
classification in the vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Committee
Recommendatlons.
On roll call, t.he foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HEI~35T, LA CLAIILS, LAWLCKI, Ml: BURNEY, MESSE
NOES: NUNE
ABSENT: NONE
Malcolm Slau~hter, lleputy City Attorney, presented the wriCten right to appeal
the Ylanning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council.
ITEM~ 3 EIK CAT~GOKLCAL EXMEP'LION-CLASS 11 AND VARIANC~: N0. 3564
PUHLIC HEARING. OWNERS: LIC, INC., 431 West Seventh Street, Los Angeles, CA
90014, ATTN: JOHN Hr1TNWAY. AGENT: LAURI BURKE, 15641 Product Lane, IiA12,
Hunti.ngton Beach, CA 92649. Property is described as an irregularly-shaped
parcel of land consistinb of approximately 3.74 acre, 8'L8 S. Anaheim Boulevard.
5/2$/86
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MAY 28, 1986 86-366
Waivers of maxlmum number of freestanding sibns and minimum ground clearance
of freestandin~ sign to erecC a freestanding sign.
There was no one person indicating his presence in opposition to subject
request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made
a part of the minutes.
Lauri Burke, agent, explained the request is for an additional freestanding
sign and the problem is that the existing si.~n is 7U feet high and is
excellent for freeway visibility, but the entrance on Anaheim Boulevard cannot
be seen and Anaheim Boulevard is a si.ngle lane road at that location and there
could be a possible traffic hazard.
Don Baggott, 130 MocninK Canyon Road, Corona del Mar, owner of property to the
southeast of subject property, stated he believed the sign in question has
been there for a long time and that he would be opposed to allowinb two
non-conforming signs. He stated the existing sign is 70 feet hi.gh.
Ms. Burke responded the er.i.sting sign is conformin~ and has permits.
THE PUBLiC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner kierbst asked if the existing sign has a variance. Commissioner
Bouas stated this sign has been there for a long time and Leonard McGhee
stated a sign can be as high as l0U feet in conformance with Code. Ms. Burke
stated they are refinishing the existing sign and would not want to take it
down. She presented photobraphs of tl~e sibn, and explained the top of the
sign cannot be seen from a car.
The Commission revi.ewed the plans for the proposed sign and it was clarified
the freestanding sibn is a monument sign, 3'3" in height and says "California
Self-Storabe" with a arrow pointinb to the entrance. Ms. Burke explained the
sibn face is 2'6" high and with the base it is 3'6" and it is internally
illuminated.
Commissioner Fry referred to the answer submitted by the that the "hardship
could be caused by potential traffic hazards," and asked the meaning of that
statement.
Ms. Burke stated the road has a sinble-lane and the entrance cannot be seen
and traffic travels very fast and if a patron of the self-storage facility
stopped with a vehicle pulling a trailer, it could be very danberous, and the
hazard is from drivers not being able to see the entrance.
Commissioner Herbst stated it seems the client has crea*_ed their uwn
hardshi.p. It •aas clarified there is no signage on the building and one would
be permitted. He stated the petitioner can exChec correct the existing sign
or remove lt and construct the driveway sign because ha did not feel they are
entitled to two siKns of that size because everyone else on that street would
want the same thing.
Ms. Surke stated there are other uses on the Anaheim Boulevard which have two
freestanding signs, and referred to the Nissan dealer. It was pointed out the
5/28/86
86-367
MINUTES, ANAkIEIM CITY PLANNING CUMMISSIUN, MAY 28, 1986
Nissan dealer was granted a variance. Commissioner Herbst stated once people
sCOre things at this facility, they will know where they are going.
Ms. Burke explained they have a permit for the existing sign. Commissioner
Bouas sug~ested the petitioner request a contlnuance and consider revising the
plans. Leonard McGhee explained Code does allow a wall sign on each wall and
that entrance or exit signs are not to exceed 3 sq. ft. in area and a maximum
of 4 feet h~gh at each driveway entering cr leaving the premises.
It was aoted the Planning Director or his authorized representative has
determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of
KeportrGuidelinestandSisCltherefores categoricallyeeSempt fromrtheerequirement
to prepare an EIR.
ACTION: Commiss~oner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC86-140 and moved for its
passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
deny Variance No. 3564 on the basis that there are no spec~alocationsornces
applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography,
surroundings wl~ich do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the
vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning Code does not deprive the
property oE privileges enjuyed by other properties in identical zoning
classification in the vicinity.
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the followinb vote:
AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HERBST, LA CLAiItY., LAWLCKI, P1C BUKNEY, MESSE
NOES: NONE
A~SENT: NUNE
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the wricten right to appeal
the Planninb Commission's decision within 22 days to the ~;ity Council.
?TEM NU. 14 EIR CATEGONICAL EXEMPTION (CONUITIONAL USE YERMIT N0. llbb) ANll
NEGATIVE llBCLARATION (CONDITIONAL USE YfiltrllT N0. 16Q5)
pUSLIC HEARING FOR DELETION QF CONllAnaheimOKCAX928020NSP~operty•described as
MICHACL L. VAL~N, 304 Katella Way,
an irregu~arly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.9 acre
located southwest of the southwest corner o£ Katella Way and Mountain View
Avenue.
Request for deletion of conditions pertaini.ng to annual review or for
extensions of time.
There was no one indi.catin~ thelr presence in opposition to subject request
and althou~h the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part
of the minutes.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered Kesolution Nos. PC86-141 and PC:86-142 and
moved for their passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Pla:ining Commission
does hereby delete Condition No. 2 of Resolution No. PC74-14 pertaining to
time extensions granti.ng Conditional Use Permit No. 1166 permitting bus
5/'L8/86
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, r~L=Y ~8~ 1g86 8f~-368
storage and repair facilities and incidental ~antin ~ConditionaleUsenPermit
Condition No. 10 of Kesolution No. PC76-156 g ~
No. 1645 permitting a bus Cerminal in the RS-A-43,000 zone on the basis that
the permit is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular
area and surrounding land uses, nor to the public peace, health, sa£ety and
permitlreasonablenoperation undertthe conditionaieuse~permitnass~rantedary to
~ln roll call, the foregoinb resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, FitY, HERHST, LA CLAIKE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE
NUES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Malcolm Slau~hter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal
the Ylanning Commission's decision ~rithin 22 days to tlle City Council.
1Nll RECOMMENllATIONS
ITEM~ S ~P~KTS .
A, TEN'fATIVE MAP OF TFtACT N0. 116U0 (1tEV. N0. 1) - Request from Elena M.
Wraight, for extc..5ion of time in order to Record Final Map No. 11600
(REV. 1) on property located southwest of Santa Ana Canyon Road and
Mohler Drive.
Gerald Bushore, 721 N• Fuclid, Ste. "LO'l, Anaheim, stated [his is just a
request for an extension of time for a tractActP todmakeschanges and
appropriate time, under the Subdivi5ion Map ,
there is one change he would like to make; that the original cunditions
of approval, Nos. 14, called for an equestrian tra3.1 over the back
portion of the property; however, Yarks and Recreation has no intention
of putting the trail in because the easements required were never made.
He stated the trail i.s on the General Ylaa and has to be shown, but it
goes nowhere, and suggested the situation be handled vith an irrevocable
offer of dedication in tlie future shuuld it be required. He stated
Condi.tion No. 15 requires liability insurance naming the City as
additional insured, ande~oficoverage issnonlongerravailablesurance
companies that this typ
Commissioner Herbst stated the staff report states the extension expires
in 1986 and it was noted that was a typographical error and should read
1987.
Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, stated the City Engineer makes
the final decision whether or to approve the final map when submitted and
has to make the determination whether or not and~heithou};lita-ie~would have
conformance with the approved tentative map;
some difficulty doi.nb that if the requi.red equestrian easements are not
shown and he would have a real problem where those trails are shown on
the G~neral Plan and are proposed to be deleted from the tract, which
means the tract wou1rovedlonHerS~ated henhasmnoyproblemhwith thel Plan
and could not Ue app
madeeasian irrevocable offeratorthe Citynsoathatnat suchetimeethetCity
5/28/86
86-369
MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COPIMISSION, MAY 28, 1986
installed the riding trails, the City would accept the offer and they
would then become effective g:ants, and he thought that would comply with
the General Plun re~uirements.
Mr. Bushore stated he has met with the various departments, includinb
Parks and Recreation, and they will be coming before the Commission in
about six months to a year to ask for the chan~e in the riding trails,
and the conditions also require that he improve the trails.
Mr. Bushore suggested the insurance issue should also be addressed.
Chairwoman La ~?aire stated she did not think there is any doubt that
Parks and Recreation wants Lo eliminate the trails, but if there is an
irrevocable offer, there should not be a problem.
Malcolm Slau~hter stated tliat change may be some of the presenC stafE's
feeling, but afte.r pub~.3.c hearings are conducted the General Ylan may not
be amended. He added lie would not have a problem with the modif.ication
to the original conditions for an irrevocable offer to dedicate.
Chairwoman l..a Claire asked if Mr. Bushore would agree to put the trail in
if the General Plan 3s not changed. Mr. Bushore stated he is willing to
make an irrevocable offer to dedicate, if che trail is guinb to be put
zn, and pointed ou~ there are property owners who havz blocked the trail
with construction, with Parks and Kecreation approvai. He added this
tract was approved, then w~s overturned and right now it shows as the old
tract on all the county maps 3nd still has to be removed and has to be
reverted back to its origiaal sta~e, or it has to be developed as twelve
the trails and theWtopogra~hy~and itaisbactuallysaabetter hiking trailt
than an equestr:ian trail.
ACTION: Commissioner Fry offered a motion seconded by Commissioner
Herbst and MOTIUN CAFtRIEU that the Anah2im City Ylanninb Commission does
hereby grant the request for extension of time for Tentative Tract Map
No. 11600 (Revision No. 1) to expire on June 2, 1987, subject to a
modification to Condition No. 14 of the oriKinal conditions allowing an
irrevocable offer of dedtcation for the equestri.an trail.
g, CONlll'PIONAL USE PEItMIT N0. 2650 - Request from Ro~oleL~' located atr1420
termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2650, p p Y
South Allec Street.
ACTION: Commissioner ~erbst offered Kesolution No. PC~6-143 and moved
for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission
does hereby terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 2650.
On roll call, ttie foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AYES: BOUAS, FRY, NERBST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
5/'18/86
MAY 28, 1986 86-3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1941 - Request from llavid R. Jackson, for
~, ro erty located at 1595
termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 1941, p P
l~est Broadway.
ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered Kesolution No. PC86-144 and move
Plann~ng Commission
fo s passage and adoption that the Anaheim City
does hereby Cerminate Conditional Use Permit Nu. 1941.
On ro].1 call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote:
AY~S. gp„~eS, FHY, ki~:l~ST~ LA CL.AII~.~ 1~WICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE
[dOES: NONE
ABSENT: NUNE
p, CONllL'PIONrIL USE PE1th1IT N0. 'Lb13 - Reques~ f.rom John Koycla for
termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2613, property located at 406
West Vermont Avenue.
ACTLON: Commissioner Herbst offered Resoluti.on No. PCSb-145 and move
Planning Commission
for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City
does hereby terminate Conditional Use Permit N°' 261jthe following vote:
On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by
AYES: BOUAS, FRY, IiEKBS'f, LA CLAlltE, 1.AWICKI, MC BUItNEY, MES5~
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NUNh:
E. VARIANCE NU. 923, SP~.CiAL USE PtiRMl'P N0. ~o ~Dminatefs~ubjectsper~~s~
NU. 765 - Request from Michael K. Hayde,
ptoperty located at 217U S. Harbor Boulevard.
ACTLON: Commissioner Nerbst offered ltesolution No. PC86-146 and move
Planninb Commission
for its passa~e and adoption that the AnahecialiUse Permit No. 37 and
does hereby terminate Variance No. y23• Sp
Conditional Use Permit No. 765• ~ote:
On roll call, the fore~oinb resolution was passed by the following
AYES: BUUAS, FHY, HERBST, LA C1.AI1tE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MF.SSE
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NUNE ~o~i.ssioner
ADJOURNh1ENT: Commissioner Lawicki offered a motion, seconded by
Bouas and MOTION CARRItD that the meeting be adjourned.
The meetin~ was adjourned at 5:35 p•ID•
Respectfully submitted,
C~ ~ ~ T ~
Edith L. Harris, Secteta y
Anaheim City Plmnning Commission
ELH:lm 5/28/86
~
~
-~e