Loading...
Minutes-PC 1987/03/16!tl£OULAR MEBTINO OF 'Ct1E ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION The rogular meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission was called to order by t;heirman McBurney nt 9:00 a.m., March 16, 1987, in the Council Chamber, a quorum being present, and the Conunigsion reviewed plans of the items on today's agenda. RECESS: 11:30 a.m. R~CONVENEU: 1:30 p.m. PRF.SEN'C: Chairman: Canmissioners: ALSO PRESEN'C: Annika Santalahc.i Malcolm Slaughter ,lay Titus Paul Singer Debbie Vagts Greg Hastinys Edith Harris 7,oning Administrator Deputy City Attorney Office Engineer Traffic Engineer Leasing Supervisor Senior Planner Planning Commission Secretary AGENDA POSTING - A complete copy of the Planning Commission agenda was posted at 10:00 a.m., March 12, 1987, inside the foyer windows and in the display Case located in the lobby of the Council Chamber. PUBLIC INPUT - Chairman McBurney explained at the end of the agenda any member of the public would be allowed to discuss any matter of interest within the jurisdiction of t-he Planniny Commission, or any agenda item. MINUTES FOR APPROVAL - Commissioner iierbst oEEered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED, that the minutes of the meetings of February 18, 1987, and March 2, 1987, be approved as submitted. ITEM N0. 1. EIR NEGATIVE DECI.ARATION,L~RECLASSIFICATIUN NO. 86-•87-21, AND VARIANCE N0. 3634. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: JOSEPH ANU LOIS CLARK, 1234 DALE STREET, ANAHEIM, CA 92804. AGENTS: MAGUY HANNA, 4000 MAC ARTHUR BLVD., N680, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately i.12 acres, having a frontage of approximately 166 feet on the east side of Dale Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of the centerline of Ball Road, and further described as 1234 Dale Avenue. RECLASSIFICATION FROM RS-A-93,000 TO RM-1?.00. Waivers of maximum wall height (deleted), minimum site area per dwelling unit (deleted), maximurn structural heiyht, maximum site coverage and minimum structural setback (deleted) to construct a 3-story, 40-unit (previot[sly 49-unit affordable) apartment complex. Mceurnc~y Bouas, Fry, tierbsk, Lawicki, La Claire, Messe $7-153 MINUTES.. ANAHE3IM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION1 MARCH 161 1987 $7-154 't'here were seventeen (1'7) persons indicating theic• presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff retort was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Commissioner La Claire declared a conflict of inkerest as defined by Anaheim City Nl.anniny Commission Resolution No. PC76-157 adopking a Conflict of Interest Code for the Planning Commission and ~,overnment Code Section 3625, et seq., in that the agent contributed to her City Councll campaign and pursuant to the provlslons of ttie above Codes, declared ko the Chairman that she was withdrawing from the hearing in connection with Reclassification Teo. A6-87--21 and Variance No. 3634, and would not take part in either the discussion or the voting thereon and had not discussed this matter with any member of the Planniny Commission. Thereupo;~ Commissioner La Claire left the Council Chamber. Magdy Hanna, agent, explained he has met with the neighbors and revised the plans reducing the number of units Erom 49 to 40, and the project will face Dale Street in order to preserve khe southcr•n boundary of the property, and the western portion of the protect will be single story over the subterranean garage. He stated he did have two meetings with the homeowners and thougt-t they agreed on the developrttcnt. He skated originally Eive waivers were requested, but ghat has been reduced to two. Peter Talson stated he lives in Stanton and that they dial have two meetings with the developer and he gave them copies of the plans and said khey were revised, but they were dated November 17, 1986, and he was not sure they were really revised plans since they were prepared at the same time as the original plans and wondered how many diEEerer~t plans were originally prepared. He stated the plans show the first floor 7-1/2 feet above grade and that will expose all the windows on the first floor to their backy~~rds. Mr. Talson presented photographs showing the view Erom the north Erom existing apartments onto adjacent single-Family dwellings. tie stated the developer had indicated he would move the swimming pool area to khe north, but that has not been done and they feel that will create a hazard with trash being thrown over the wall and also noise Erom the pool area would be a problem. He added they are particularly concerned about drainage and feel it should be into the City of Anaheim drainage system, rather than into the Stanton streets, noting they already have a serious drainage problem. He staked the trash area should be relocated to the north side of the property and something needs ko be done about the rodents and insects which have accumulated on the property. He stated the clearance Eor *he sidewalks on the north is only three Feet and he dig' not think that is adequate in case of emergency. He referred to the easement on the property and added they do not Eeel the developer should be permitted to build in the easement area. He stated the local schools are at maximum capacity which means the students would have to be bussed to other schools and that would increase kaxes and also ctrildren crossing the streets would be endangered; and that their insurance rates would probably increase with an increase in the number of renters in khe area and parking will be a problem because it is not convenient Eor the tenants to park in the underground structure. 3/16/87 MINUTHu~ ANAItKIM CITY_PI.ANNI.Nt3 CONQ'~II~~iSION~ MARCH 16, 198'1______•__,,,__,~87~_155 Mr. Tolson staked no hardship has beKn demonstrated to justify approval of this vacianco. ite referred to the recommendation far an tdlR Negative Declaration and stated ho clicl nok agree with that recommendation and noted that was based on the information supplied by the applicant and he thought traffic problems would be creal•ed, etc. Mr. Tolson stated there are trrrs that should be preserved and noted there are many birds which inhabit the area; and that he was sure there is an earthquake fault rlght through thc~ property, and a qualified geologist shaald be consulted. He stated at least a 1'L-fa high wall i.s needed on the south and that they would only want: to see one--story structures developed on that property; and that there should not be an increase in density or any variances granted. He stated the swimming pool should be rerlocatecl Co the north as promised. Lowell Johnston, A6~i2 l..ola, stated his main concern i.5 .at the developer agreed ko single-story development on the south at grade level and the plan shows a two-Eook suUterranean garage anal he would not consider two feet subtec•ranean. He stated the t~lanniny Department considers this as two stories end added it kakes approximately 10 Ec~et to provide the necessary Lnfrastcuctuc•e and that would make the structure beforca the First floor at 8 Feet above grade level. He stated there is a 20-foot setback to the suhtec•ranean and the patios would overlook the neighbors' backyards and eliminate any privacy. Mr. Johnston stated a project was just completed at 7.910 W. Hall and those units arc within 5 feet of the pcoperty iine and the first floor is about 1 foot above the 6--Foot high wall of the adjacent propert/ owners and they have lost their privacy. He stated everything else in the area is single story. t~rothy Wong, represenCing the owner at 1.230 S. Dale, stated a 34-unit project was just completed on 1.4 acres and t`~ey are single story and now this developer is proposing 2--1/2 stories with parking underneath and the tenants would be able to look right into their property and see everything that is going on which waul.d make their project less desirable and would cause more robberies, etc. She staled there is not enough parking and there is nat very much street frontage; and that a building this high to the south would block their air circul.atian and light. She stated they would abject to the trash areas and swimming pool being moved to the north acid noted they have had problems with transient people, etc., and do not need any more of these type problems. Mr. Hanna stated originally they requested a waiver for a 1'L-Foot high wall buL- the neighboc•s objected to that request and it was deleted and the building was moved from 17 feet to 20 Eeet Erom the property line. tie stated along the south boundary of the property on the Ldison easement there are existing mature trees which they are tryir.y to preserve and those tress provide total privacy to the homes to the south. He stated they are willing to eliminate the swimming pcwl and that the water will drain into the street drainage system and will be properly designed and will not create a hazard to the Stanton streets.. He stated the trash enclosure area will be surrounded by a block wall and would not create a problem. 3/16/$7 MINUT.RSy ANAHG+IM CI'1'X PLANNINQ COMMISSION~MARCH _16,1987 87•-1.56 Concerniny Eumi.gat.S.nn, Mr. Hanna stated they can stark t re Fumigation proyc•am before they start construction in order to kill all the injects, etc. He skated they will not be building in the easement area and are ectual.ly 20 feet From the easement. tie stated there would be no parking on Dale S t reef and the 100 parking spaces will be on site and they Eeel they will be amp 1 e. lie added he was not sure lE the property is located on an earthquake Fault; and that khe project will have a complete sprinkler system and will not be a Eire hazard. He stated he thought khis would be a goad improvement for the area and added, in their experience tenants do use the srabtere•anoan parking. Pak McClave, Key Realtors, Fountain valley, stated the Clarks are setliny the property For health reasons since they c.an no longer maintain 1t and Mr. Clark's health is deteriorating rapidly and they have purchased another home and need to claw escrow an this property. THL PUHLiC Ht:ARINr WA5 CLOSRU. Chairman Mcl3urney stated he received a letter Erom Mrs. Wong spe 1 ling aut her opposition and wanted that included it tt~e record. Commissioner Herbst sated he did not think the developer had done what he was instructed to do in redesign of tt~e plans and khere will actually be three stones backing up to single-Family homes and the developer is trying to say these are sir le story but they are on top of a parking yarage. tie stated the Commission t•.s not approved any projerts such as this in Anaheim and the closcai. has been at about 50 Feet From the single-Family resident ial area; and that Code does say 150 Feet, but the City Council has instructed them to look at each project individually. He stated multiple-Family units ad ~acent to single-Family homes must be single story or the garage has to be lower. Mr. Hanna stated there are a lot of trees and plants on the south _ Commissioner Herbst stated that does not make any diEFerence and this project would be a lot r,loser than any tiring else that has been allowed in Anaheim. Chairman McBurney stated a two-story, single--family home could be built on that property closer to the property line. Commissioner Herbst stated there would only be two single-family homes and this project would mean a lot more rcople. He stated these exist ing single-Family homes were there First and deserve their privacy. t!e stated no project has been approved closer than 50 feet. Commissioner Rouas asked if. the subterranean garage can be lowered. Mr. Hanna stated he go down four or Five Eeet, similar to what was approved in the past, and those were considered as one story and just recently the ord finance was changed, but they have been granted the same privilege in the past. Responding to Commissioner Herbst, Mr. Hanna stated a project was approved at Ball and Western at 15 Eeet Erom single Family and was zoned RSA-43,000 and also one was approved at Lincoln and Magnolia. 3/15/87 MIWUTBS.y ANAtiBIM CITY S?LAIJNINtl COMMISSION, MARCH 1^6L 198'1 ____, ~ A7-15? Artnika gantalahti stated one of the projects referred to was taken back to the City Council under a rrheari n g after it wrs discovered there was a problem with the water level wlton diggirty for the subterranean garage, and the City Council was sympathetic: and allowed the two story and she thought that was the only project less than 50 feet. Mr. Hanna skated he will rod esign the subterranean reducing it from 2 feet to A or 5 Eeet. He stated theycould only construct about 20 units iE they were restricted to one story because of the required parking. Crag Hastings responded to Chairman McBurney that a sinyle-story, single-Family residence would be approxl.matel.y 12 to 15 feet high, and to lower the garage enough to put Lhis project at the same heiyht would require it to be completely subterranean. Commissioners Fry and Eiouas indicated they could not find a hardship for granting s variance. Mr. Hanna stated i.f the subterranean 13 at A or• 5 feet, the building would be about 15 feet high and a sirsgle--family home could be that high. Commissioner Herhst ,fated maybe a 8-foot high wall instead of 12 feet as originally proposed would be more acceptable to the neigh!~ors and dropping the subterranean gar,~ge to 5 Ee e t would put it 3 Eeet above grade. Mr. Hanna stated tie would be willing to comply with th' ~stions and asked if the project coup] be aa~~roved subject "o those G Commissioner Herbst stated he would Like to sef: devised plans, and suggested Mr. Hanna meet with tt-c.~ n~i~hbo,~^ bred try to sncisfy their concerns wikh the redesign of plans, a.nd also tha{. -.he pool should be eliminated. He added he has no problem with the KM 1 200 zoni.nq, as long was the property is properly developed. Mr. Hanna stated he would request a continuance and meet with the neighbors, bu: could not satisfy everyone. Commissioner Hers L• stated there has to be some compromise on both sides and added the Engineering Department would make sure the drainage is properly designed. Malcolm Slaughter stated revised plans would have to be submitted by Friday of this week. ACTION: Chairman McBurney offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner i,a Ci.aice absent) that consideration of the aforementioned Rutter be continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of March 30, 1987, at the request of the petitioner. 3/l6/87 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MARCH 1~ 1987 ~__ 87-158 ITEM N0. 2. F.IR_NFi(3ATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 224. PUBLIC NEARING. INITIATED BY THE CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION, 200 S. ANAHEIM BOULEVARD, ANAFIEiM.CA 92805. General Plan Amendment to consider an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan proposi.nq the designation of a police station in the vicinity of Weir Canyon Road and Monte Vista Road. It was noted Frank ElEend, consultant Eor the Wallace Ranch, with the concurrence of. the Police Department, has requPSted a continuance in order to allow them sufficient time to adequately integrate the location of the proposed police Facility into their development plar-s. ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commission Bauas and MOTION CARRIED that consideratiart of the aforementioned matter be continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of April 13, 198'!. ITEM NO. 3. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CONDITIONAL, USE PRRrlIT NU. 2896. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: JAMES A SHAB, E'P AL, 2545 West Woodland Drive, Anaheim, CA 92801. Property described as an irregularly-scheduled parcel of land consisting of approximately 1 acre located at the northeast corner of Stanford Court and Anaheim Boulevard, and Further described as 1980 5out1~ Anaheim Boulevard (Global Telecommunications Corporation). To permit sales, installation and repair of cellular car phones and two-way radios in the ML (industrial, Limited) Bone. Jim 5hab, applicant, stated he would like to request that this matter be continued for two weeks. Commissioner Messe suggested the matter be trailed until the Code amendment !s discussed at the end of the agenda. The Fallowing action was taken following the discussion on Item No. 14-A, at the end of the agenda. Commissioner Herbst suggested continuing Item No. 3 For two weeks so :.- applicant can talk to his attorney and then come back and tell the Ce ',.:,ion what he woulr1 like to have the day before the meeting before the City :;ca„a,cil. ACTION: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fry and MOTION CARRIED that consideration of the aforementioned matter be continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of March 30, 1987. ITEM NO. 4. EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 5 AND VARIANCE NO. 3641. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS; JOAQUIN AND AGNES SUEIRO, 1909 DEER CREEK. CIRCLE, ANAHEIM, CA 92807. AGENT: CALIFORNIA REMODELING, 2821 WHITE STAR, #C, ANAHEIM, CA. 92806. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting af. approximately 5304 square feet, having a frontage of approximately 51 Eeet on the northwest side of Deer creek Circle,3/16/87 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MARCH 16, 1987 87-159 approximately 135 Eeet north of the centerline of Cresthill Drive and further described as 1909 Deer Creek Circle. Waiver of maximum numbor of bedrooms to construct a second-story, 3-room addition to a single-Eamily residence. There was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and although the staL•f reporl• was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Casey Jurado, agent, explained they wish to add three rooms to an PxlSting residence and one of the rocxns would be considered a den and one would be a study. He explained there are four children in the family and they are expecting a grandmother to move in. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSEU. Greg Hastings, Senior Planner, explained Code defines a bedroom as any room other than a liviny room, dining room, Eamily room, kitchen, bathroom or closet. Commissioner Bouas asked if all the rooms would have a closet. Mr. Jurado stated the den would have an open bookcase. Commissioner Herbst stated the plans show a closet in the den. Responding to Commissioner La Claire, Mr. Juardo stated he has built second stories onto two homes in the neighborhood but he did not know how many two- story homes there ace in the area. Mr. Jurado stated the owners of the property discussed their plans with the neighbors and there were no objections. Responding to Commissioner La Claire, Greg Hastings explained residences in the RS-5000 zone are permitted to have three bedrooms, and any additional bedroom requires an additional 800 square Eeet of land area and in this case, they would be required to have 8,400 square feet of land. Responding to Commissioner Messe, Mr. Jurado stated the house will be 3,016 square Eeet after the addition, and the owner could not afford to purchase a home of comparable size. Commissioner La Claire stated the neighbors were notified and they are nit present to oppose the request, but that does disturb her because in the past when the Planning Commission has approved such a request, the neighbors have shown up at the City Council meeting. Commissioner Herbst asked if a condition could be included requiring the applicant to submit letters Erom the neighbors on three sides indicating they are not opposed to this request. Malcolm Slaughter stated tt-at would be giving a veto power of Planning Commission action to the neighbors and suggested a covenant be recorded 3/16/87 MINUTES,L,_ANAEIRiM CITY PLANNiNO rgMMiSSIC~N~ MARCH _16 ~_ 1987_,___~,_,~,.,Y87-160 between the property owner and the neighbors. Mr. Jurado stated ono of the neighbors is contemplating the same thing. It was noted the Planning Director or leis authorized representative has determined that khe proposed project fall, within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 5, as defined in the Statr F:IR Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare an FIR. AG"rION: Commissioner Fry offered Resolution No. PC 87-61 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning commission does hereby grant Variance No. 3641 on the basis that there are spacial rlrcumstances applicable to the property such as s~lzc, shape, topoyraphy, location ancf surroundings which do not apply to other identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning Code deprf.ves the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone grid classification in the vicinity and sub}act to interdepartmental Committee recommendations. Commissioner Masse asked about parking in the area. Mr. Jurado responded there are no parking problems :~lnce this l.s a small cut de sac. On roll call, the Foregoing resolution was passed by the Following vote: AYE5: BOUAS, FRY, IiERBST, LA CI.AiRE, I.AhJ1CK1, MC HIIRNEY NOES: MESSE A.dSEN'1': NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Ueputy City Attorr-ey, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council.. ITEM N0. 5. F.IR NEGATIVE D@CL.ARATION__~EADVERTISEU)_AND VARIANC? NO, 3642_ SREADVF.RTISEU . PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS; RUEHEN DE I.fiON, 11095 Meads Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801. AGENT: HUGO VAZQUEZ, 7.240 WEST LINCGLN AVENUE, ANAHEIM, CA 92801. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of Land consisting of approximately 0.62 acre, having a Erontaye of approxianatoly 122 feet on the west silo of Coffman Street, approximately 490 feet north of the centerline of Center Street, and further described as 207 North Coffman Street. Waivers of minimum building site area per dwelling unit, maximum structural heiyht, maximum site coveragr~, maximum structural setback (deleted) and minimum required recreation-leisure area to constr~~ct a 12-unit "affordable" condominium complex 'in the RM-2400 zone. It was noted Planniny Department staff has requested a continuance to the meeting of March 30, 1987, in order to .:orrect an error in the adver~tlsement. ACTION: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fry and MOTION CARRIED that consideration of khe aforementioned matter be continued to the regularly-scheduled meetiny of March 30, 1987, in order for staff to correct an error in the advertisement. 3/16/87 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MARCH 1~ 1987 ~ 87-161 ITEM NO. fi. EIR NE3A'CIVE DECLARATION AND VARIANCE NO. 3644. PUBLIC IiEARTNG. OWNERS; JOHN R. TOWNSP.ND, 8310 Cerritos Avenue, atanton, Ca 90680. AGN;NT: TAB E. JO1{NSON, 302 W. 5th Street, Suite 302, ;3an Pedro, CA 90731. Property described as a rectanyularly•-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.34 acres located at the southeast corner of We .kern Avenue and Ball Road. It was noted the petitioner has requested a continuance in order to submit revised plans ko acccxnmodate a driveway relocation. ACTIA'1: Commissioner t3ouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lawickl and MOTION CARRIE:U that consideration of the aforementioned matter be continued to the meeting of March 30, 198'7, at the request of the petitioner. ITEM N0.7. ENVIRONMENTAL_INIPACT REPOR'T' NO. 273 _SSUPPLPMF.N'CAL AND SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 87 -1. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: SO. PAC PROPERTIES, INC., 2 North Lake Avenues, Suite 800, Pasadena, CA 91101, ATCN: JOHN JAMESON. AGEN'P: ELFENU ANU ASSOCIA'T'E:S, INC., 1151 ik~ve Street, Suite 130, Newport Beach, CA 92660, ATTN. FRANK ELFENU. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of Land consisting of approxi.tnately 816 acres located north of Canyon Rim Road at~d e?~~•t of Serrano Avenue bounded on the north by East Hills Planned Community (Bauer Ranch), on the east by Wallace Ranch and Uak Hills Ranch, on the southeast by Irvine Con;pAny property, on the west by the original Anaheim Hills Planned Community and further ciesctibed as the tiigTrlands at Anaheim i~i11:;. Request for approval of Environmental Impact Report No. 273, Specific Plan No. 87-1 (including a Public Facilities Plan), Specific Plan Zoning and Uevelopment Standards, and a Fiscal Impact Analysis for the development of the 81.6-acre Highlands at Anaheim Hills. It was noted staEE has recommended that this item be placed as the Eirst item on the March 30, 1987, agenda enabling the Commission to consider it before they consider the landlocked Oak liills ranch which would provide Eor a more informed decision making process by progressing from a currently developed area. ACTION: Commissioner Bouas oEEeced a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lawickl and MOT'TON CARRIED that consideration of the aforementioned matter be continued to the meeting of March 30, 1987; and that it be placed first on the agenda. ITEM NO. 8. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, RECLASSIFICATION NO. $6-87•-25 AND VARIANCE NO. 3645. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: NORMA WU, TAINAN CROUF, 6965 Aragon Circle, Buena Park, CA 90620. AGEN'T': YRW-•KAI tiUANG, 1414 Oxford Road, San Marino, CA 91108. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.62 acre, having a frontage of approximately 125 feet on the west side of Magnolia Avenue, approximately 250 feet south of centerline of Crescent Avenue and further described as 527 North Magnolia Avenue. 3/16/87 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MARCH 16, 1987 __ 87-162 Reclassification from RS-A-43,000 to RM-1200. Waiver of maximum site coverage to construct a 2-story, 21-unit apartment complex. There were two persons indicating 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. Yaw-kai Huang, agent, was present to answer any questions. Robert Hartnett, 2677 Cameron Court, expla:tned he represents the condominium project next door and they would not want a packing variance to be yranted because there is a parking problem in the area now. He stated the height of the wall i.s a concern where it adjuiris their project and noted the plan shows there is a 6-Foot high wall and it is actually only four feet hiyh on their side and they would request that it ve raised. Chairman McBurney stated the variance refers to the maximum site coverage and no parking waiver is being requested. Greg Hastinys, Senior Planner. stated there is no requirement Eor a wall between twc~ multi-family urrir.s. Mr. Hartnett stated the pc•oposed project does not have a pool or a Jacuzzi and their condominium project does and they already have a problem with the people in the existing apartment project and sometimes raising the height of a wall makes Eor a better neighbor. Mr. Huang stated they would raise the height of the wall. Chairman Mc Burney stated the two neiyhbors could work out an acceptable agreement regarding the wall. Greg tiasti.ngs stated 1E the wall is any higher than 6 feet as measured from the highest yrade level, a variance would be required. Commissioner La Claire stated maybe the property owners could get together and place the fence on the highest grade. Responding to Commissioner Messe, Mr. Huang stated they have read the recommended conditions of approval and will comply. ACTION: Commissioner La Claire offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Souas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassify subject property Erom the R5-A-43,000 (Residential, Agricultural) Zone to the Rm-1200 (Residential, Multiple-Family) Zone to construct a 2-story, 21-unit apartment complex with waiver of maximum site coverage on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.62 acre, having a frontage of approximately 125 feet on the west side of Magnolia Avenue, approximately 250 feet south of the centerline: of Crescent Avenue, and further described as 527 North Magnolia Avenue; acid does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has 3/16/8'1 MINUTBS, ANANEIM_ CI'L'Y PLANNING COMMISSION, MARCH t6, 1987 __.. 87-163 considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on tha: pasis 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 La Claire oEEered Resolution No. PC 87-62 and moved for its passage and adoption that thR Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Reclassification No. 86-87-25 subject to Interdepartmental Committee Recommendations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, NERBS'I', LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC GURNEY, MF.SSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Commissioner La Claire offered Resolution No. PC87-63 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby Grant Variance No. 3645 on the basis that there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply toLicationdoEtthelZoningQCode deprives the same vicinity; and that strict app property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity and subject Co Interdepartmental Committee recommendations. On roll call, the Eoregoiny resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, tiERBST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC GURNEY, 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 City Council. ITEM N_O. 9. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION VARIANCE NO. 3646 AND SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL NO. $7-02. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: PACIFIC TERRACE APARTMENTS, 1801 F. Park Court Place, Suite 201, Santa Ana, CA 92701, ATTN: BOYCE JONES. AGENT. MILLId BRIGGS, 5815 E. La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807. Properoximatelib38 acres located irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisti.ny of app Y at the northeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Chrisden Street, and further described as 5815 E. la Palma P.venue (Friendly Village Mobilehotae Park). Request to remove 200 specimen Eucalyptus trees with waiver of required replacement of specimen trees. There were two persons indicating 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. 3/16/87 ., ~ - - - -.~-- . MINU'PBS, ANAHSiM CiTY PLANNING COMMiS5i0~ MARr.H 16, 1987 87-164 Boyce Jones, agent, explained subject property is a mobilehome park on La Palma and the trees hive been there slnce the days of khe orange groves as a wind break. He stated there are homes on one side of the row of trees and mobilehome coaches on the other side; and that the trees have berome very dangerous and one has actually Fallen on a coach and they constantly have to clean up Erom the winds. He stated they have attempted to correct the problem by triauning the trees every year. He stated the trees are planted in an area about 6-feet wide ar-d they have cnatured and have large trunks. Concerning replanting the trees, Mr. Jones explained they have a lot of trees in the park and after staff came out to the park, they agreed there is no need Eor additional trees. He explained they will remove the errti.re tree and then use an acid process to kill the root system because they cannot get equipmen! into the area. Mary Plummer Stated she lives in this mobilehome park and that she is opposed to removing any tress; however, these are hazardous and are a problem. She referred to previous testimony i.n today's hearings indicating that tress are briny preserved in Ar-ahelm and she wanted to thank the Commission Eor enEorci.ny the tree removal policy. Mr. Jones stated he realizes there is always a problem with the removal of trees; however, these tress are a danger during the winds and they do not provide proper shade or give a pleasing appearance. He stated the trees between the property and the railroad tracks will be preserved. Jim Henderson, 5815 E. La Palma, Space 56, staked he lives under these trees and is in favor of seeing them removed because they are dangerous and tte has had damage to his roach and vehicle and they have had to evacuate along the eastern boundary because of high winds. He stated the trees were planted to provide a buffer Eor the orange groves, but they have outlived their usefulness. He stated there is also a lot of debris between the Fences and that is a Eire hazard. THF. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Greg Hastings, Senior Plai~«er, responded to Commissioner Herbst that he thought there are adequate trees in the park to offset the removal of these trees. Commissioner Meese stated this hearing was advertised to the property owners to the east and they are not present to oppose this request. Canmissi.oner La Claire stated she was at that park not too long ago and thought then that those trees were a hazard. She stated normally she would not vote for the removal of trees but in this instance she would agree they are a hazard and that they have outlived their usefulness. Mrs. Plummer clarified that she does object to the removal of trees, but supports this request and just wanted to let the Commission know that she appreciateswhat they are doing to preserve trees in Anaheim. 3/16/87 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MARCH 16 L1987 ~ 87-165 AC'l'ION: Commissioner Fry oEEered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Corrunission has reviewed the proposal to remove 200 specimen Eucalpytus trees with waiver of required replacement of specimen trues on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 38 arses located at the northeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Chrisden Street and Curthor described as 5815 E. La Palma (Friendly Village Mobilehome Park); and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon Finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and Further Einding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant eEEect on the environment. Co..~nissioner Fry oEEered Resolution No. PC87-64 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Variance No. 3646 on the basis that there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to other identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoni~,g Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations. On roll call, the Foregoing resolution was passed by the Following vote: AXES: BOUAS, FRY, HERBS'P, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Commissioner Fcy oEEered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 87-02 on the basis that the safety of persons or property requires the removal and Further on the basis that Variance No. 3645 was granted in conjunction with this request waiving the requirement of replacement of specimen trees since there are adequate trees currently on the site. Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision witt-in 22 days to the City Council. ZTEM N0. 10. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND VARIANCE NO. 3647. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: DOYLE E. SMITH AND MARJORIE L. SMITH, P. O. Box 580, Nuevo, CA 92367-0580 and NEVILLE LIBBY AND VIOLET LIBBY, 1661 W. Cerritos Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92802. AGEN'P: GERALD R. BUSHORE, P. 0. Box 18581, Anaheim, CA 92817-8581. Property described as an rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.5 acres, having; a frontage of approximately 22E fret on the north side of Cerritos Avenue, approximately 575 feet east of the centerline of Liuclid Street, and further descrihed as 1643 and 1651 West Cerritos Avenue. Request: Waivers of required lot frontage and required orientation of structures to establish a G-lot, RS-7200 Zone, single-family residential subdivision. 3/16/87 MINGTL'S, ANAHEIM CITY P:.ANNING f:OMMISSIUN, MARCH 16, 1987 ~_ 87-166 There were Fourteen (14) persons indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and although the st~.FE report was rr~t read, it is referred ;:o and mnde a part vF the minutes. Doyte Smith, owner, explained he is proposing to build three houses on his property artd the property owner next door is proposing to build three houses on his property Eor a total of six and he thought there are a lot of people who would like to see that area upgraded. Eugene Dunham, 1642 Buena Vista, slated he has lived khere For just aver 20 years and is opposed to the request. We stated there are eight individual lots on t•he north side of Cerritos and those property owners could potentially ask For the same thing. We stated the Anaheim General Plan designates t•he property Eor low density residential land uses and there are no special circumstances which apply to this property and the petitioner has not demonstrated a hardship to justify granting this request. He stated if all those eight lots were joined and developed in this same rnanr~er, there could be Four private streets entering Cerritos and Cerritos i.s a two-lane street and iF individual lots should come in one at a time, they would be entitled to the same privilege and if someone did not want to join their property with another property, they would be deprived of that privilege. He stated their neighborhood consists of single-family residences on large lots and they are not tract homes and they have been there Eor years and there could be 24 homes on those 8 lots. Earl Martindale. 1652 Buena vista, stated his property is just north of subject property. He read a letter From Gerald Ritter, 1658 W. Buena Vista, indicating his opposition because there are no special circumstances applicable to this property. Mr. Martindale suggested a public: street entering Erom Cerritos along the east side of the property located at 1643 W. Cerritos and extending to the west through the center of the properties toward Euclid Street. He staked that would allow for orderly development of contiguous properties and would provide Eor lots on both sides with the structures on the south oriented to the rear or to Cerritos, thereby eliminating the need Eor the requested variances. He stated he believed the owners of the other six lots are just waiting to see iE this is approved so they can do ttre same thing. Mr. Martindale read a quotation from a letter dated January 20, 1987, to all management staff of the City of Anaheim regarding implementation of Vision 2000. He stated they would not like to see increased density in the area and would like to maintain their privacy. Neville Libby asked 1E Gerald Bushore had requested a continuance. Greg Hastings stated staff has not received any request Eor a continuance. Mr. Libby asked For a two-week continuance. Commissioner La Claire stated she is not opposed to a continuance but felt some things need to be rlariEied because she tell there is misunderstand?....; and pointed out none of these lots are under 7200 square Eeet and, in fact; 3/16/87 r. MINUTl3a, ANAHBIM CITY PLANNING COMMI33ION~MARCH 16, 198'1 _ 87-167 the smallest lot is 8550 square feet net and all the lots; are larger than the lots on Guerra Vista. she explained the developer is only requestir,~• a cul de sac and there are cul de sacs all over Anaheim and they do make yoou living conditions. she suggested they meet with the developer In order to understand the proposal. Mr. Smith staked hecliclnot think a two-week continuance would accomplish anything because they are not asking Eor anything the neighbors don't have. Commissioner La Claire suggested a recess allowing the neighbors to review the exhibits. Mr. Smith stated these will not be two-story homes. RECESS: 2:55 p.m. RECONVENED: 3:05 p.m. Following the recess, Mc. Libby asked if the request could be approved subject to a restriction requiring single-story development. Mr. Smith agreed that restriction would be acceptable to l~im. Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, stated if the parkies involved wish to limit the development of their properly to single-story, they could record a covenant to the other property owners restricting the development to single story arrcl than if the present or future owners decided not to abide by that restriction, the neighbors would have a recourse, but there is no reason for the City to take over the obligation of enforcing such a restriction. Mr. Smith indicated he would be willing to comply with that condition. ACTION: Commissioner Fry offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to establish a 6-lot RS-7200 single--family residential subdivision with waivers of required Lot frontage and required orientation of structuc•es on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.5 acres, haviny a frontage of approximately 228 feet on tt:e north side of Cerritos Avenue, and further described as 1643 and 1651 West Cerritos P~venue; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further Finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner Fry offered Resolution No. PC87-65 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Variance No. 3647 on the basis that there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to other identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Committee recommendations,Band Further subject to the petitioners' stipulation at the public hea3~lg/87 MINUTLR~, ANAHBIM_CI'1'Y PLANNING COMMIS3ION,_ MARCH 16`1987 ~ _ 87-168 record a covenant to the adjacent property owners restricting development to single story residential structures. On roll ral.l, the Foregoing resolution was passed by the Following vote: AYES: GOUAS, FRY, NERHST, LA CLAIRE, LAWICKI, MC GURNEY, MEriSE NOES: NONE AGSF.N'I': NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Uepuly City Attorney, presented 1•he written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 22 days t:o the c:il•y Councll. ITEM NO. 11: EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION1 WAIVER Or CODE RL: UIREMFNT ~,ND CONDITIONAL !)SE PERMIT N0. '1.885. PUGLIC i1EARiNG. OWNERS: WII,LY 6 HARRLE'L' C. SUL7~MANN, 1884 a. Santa Cruz Street, Anaheim, CA 92805. AONNT: OREGOKY A. PRESTON, 1884 S. Santa Cruz Street, Anaheim, CA 9280. Property described as a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.38 acre, havi~~g a Frontage of approximately 104 Feet on the east side of Sa,~ta Cruz Street, and Et;rther described as 1884 South Santa Cruz Street. REQUE5'1': To permit ari automobile repair Facility with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. There was no one indicatiny their presence in oaposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Greg Preston, agent, stated this will be a Mercedes repair Facility and they will repair an average of 6 to 10 vehicles a dayand will utilize about 1/2 the building and there should be adequate parking. THE PUGLIC HEARINv WAS CLOSED. Responding to Commissioner eouas, Mr. Preston stated there was an automotive repair Facility there before and they have just moved into the building, and then found out that a conditional use permit was needed. Coaunissioner Messe asked about street parking. Mr. Preston stated street parking is Eull during the week, but they do not Eeel they will be adding to that parking. F.esponding to Commissioner Herbst, Mr. Preston stated generally they are ab?e to store all vehicles inside at nighl•, but occasionally they do leave two or three outside. ACTION: Commissioner La Claire offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit an automobile repair Facility with waive, of minimum number of parking spaces on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.38 acre having a Frontage of approximately 104 3/16/87 MINUT6S1 ANAHEIM CITY_PLANNINq COMMISSIONi MARCH 16- 1987 87-169 feet on the east side of Santa Crux Street and Eurthec described a:. 1884 N. Santa Crux Street; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaratiun together with any comments received during the public review process and further Eroding on the basis oc the Initial Study and eny comments received that there is no substantial evidence thAt the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner La Claire offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant waiver of Code requirement 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 granting of the parking wal.ver under the conditions imposed, i.E any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Commissioner La Claire effaced Resolution No. PC87-66 and moved Eor iks passage and adopkion that the Anaheim City planning Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2885, pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.03.030.030 through 18.030.030,035, and subject to Interdepartmental Committee Recommendations. Oreg Hastings, Senior Planner, asked that a 90-day limit be added to the conditions since the peti.tiorter lies actually moved into the Eacili.ty. On roll call, the Eoregoirig resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HBRBST, LA CLAIRE, 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 City Council. ITEM N0. 12. EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2895. PUDLIC HEARING. OWNERS: ORANGE COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION, c/o D, A. MANAGEMENT, 7777 Center Avenue, Suite 500, Huntington Beach, CA 92647. AGENT: D. A. MANAGEMENT, 7777 Ceniet~ Avenue, Suite 500, Huntington Beach, CA 92647. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 3.7 acres Located at the northeast corner of Knollwood Circle and Woodland Drive, and further described as Woodland Business Park (2627, 26733, 2651 Woodland and 1150, 115y, 1162, 1176, 1178 Knollwood Circle). To permit sales businesses and office uses in the ML Zone. There was 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. Jeff Stevens, agent, was present to answer any questions. 3/16/87 MINUTF5, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION) MARCH 16, 1.987 ~,~_,• 87--170 Robert Warren, LAg32 Grassmier Lane, Orange, stated he is opposing this request based on his experience as a tenant in this complex (N11 SA) last year; that this was shown to him as oEEice space and they occupied it as oEEice space and there were nine aEEices. He stated the City of Anaheim inspected the premises and issued a citation Eor improper use and hased on that, he relocated his oEEice. He stated they were cited again on December 3 Eor the same thing. Mr. Warren presented photographs he had taken last Saturday show ing some of the condikions on the property. He pointed out a "poison sign" on a business located adjacent to two of the units on which they are requestin y this permit to allow oEEices, and a photograph showing Century Laminators w i th chemicals stored about 30 Eeet Erom one of the units and with~ln 100 Feet o f three or Eour other units; and a photograph showing missing ~?anels on the roof and a deteriorated screen; and one trash enclosure Eor the entire comp lex. 1{e stated they have indicated they have adequate parking, but that is not correct because when he was in the complex and it was only 50$ occupied, they were having trouble because people were parkiny l~legally because there was no parking available and the Anaheim Police was actually called to resolve conEl.icts. 1{e stated there are no infernal sidewalks and there are Eood establishments in the area and it is dangerous; and that there are no cross walks. He stated cars speed through the parking lot because it is quite long and iE this is approved, tt~e number of people in the complex wi 11 increase and the problems will be increaser]. Ne added maintenance of the c:o~mplex has been very poor. Mr. Stevens skated they are here basically because of the viola Lions and that he was not aware the roof needed repairs because they have not t•~ad any problem with the roof leaking, etc.; and that tYiey du meet Code with the proper trash enclosures and no one has complained. He stated the poison re£ erred to is a distributor of soils chemical and they have never been cited for any violations. He stated the complex has never only been 50$ occupied and they have not had any complaints about• parking from the tenants. He stated there are no cross walks in the entire area. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Responding to Commissioner Bauas, Mr. Stevens stated they have not been at 50$ occupancy as long as he can remember and have always been at more than 50$. He read the list of tenants and stated they do meet Code with regard to parking. Commissioner Fry stated he does not see anything wrong with the tenant list end they seem to be industrially oriented. Cotamissionec• Herbs t• pointed out all uses must service the industrial community. ACTION: Commissioner Herbst oEEered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fry and MOTION CARRIED that she Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit sales businesses and oEEice uses in the ML zone on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 3.7 acres located at the northeast corner of Knollwood Circle and Woodland 3/16/87and MINUTES. ANAHF'tM CITY FLANN'ING COMMISSION. MARCH 16, 1987 __ 87-171 further described as Woodland Business Park (26'l7, ?633, 2651 Woodland Drive and 1150, 1154, 1162 1176, 1.178 Knol lwood Circle); and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments rer_eived during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Skudy and any comments received that there is no substantia 1 avid ence khat the project will have a significant effect on the environment . Commissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC87--6'1 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City P 1 anni.n q Commission does hereby grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2895 purseiant t o Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035 and sub;Ject to Interdepartmental Cammittee Recommendations. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the Following vote: AYES: BOUAS, FRY, HEttBST, LA C1.AIE2E, LAWICKI, MC BURNEY, MESSE NOES: NONE ABSENT: NUNE Malcolm Slaughter, Ueputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal l•he Planniny Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. ITEM NO. 13. EIR NEGATIVE D1.3CLARATION, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NA. 2Ci98. PUBLIC HEARING. OWNERS: IRINEO YUV Z ENCO ANU CF.LES'['1NA YUVIENCO, 1941 E. Center Street, Anaheim, Ca. 98205. AGENTS: GENE ICASIANO, 3460 Wilshire Blvd. 101015, Las Angeles; CA 90010, C~iRISTIAN R. QU1MP0, 2555 E. Chapman, Suite 712, Fullerton, CA 92631. Property subject is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.63 acre, having a frontage of approximately 130 feet on the north side of Center Street, approximately 122 feet west of the centerline of State College Boulevard; and Further described as 1941 East Center Street (Hacienda Christian Rest Home). To expand a rest home from a maximum capacity of 32 persons to 46 persons with waivers of permitted location oE. par king spaces. minimum number of parking spaces and minimum rear yard setback _ It was noted the applicant has requested a continuance in order to submit revised plans (including Floor plans) of the existing facility (as well as the proposed expansion) and to submit a parking demand study to substantiate the requested parking waiver and to correct outstanding fire code violations for the existing Facility. ACTION: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lawicki and MOTION CARRIED that consideration of the aforementioned matter be continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of April 13, 1987, at the request of the applicant. 3/16/87 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITX PLANNING COMMIuSIONi MARCH~1•~1987 87.172 ITEM NOY_19. REPORTS AND RECQ*1MENDATIONS: A. RE4UESTED CODE AMENDMENT - Re~cuest Erom Jim Shab to emend Section 18.61..020 to allow the installation~~air and sales of mobile tele hones as a_permitted use in the ML__"Industria.l~ limited" zone. Jim Stiab, applicant, asked 1E the Commissioners had received his letter outlining this request. He stated prior to June 13, 1986, he spoke with Annika 5antalahti regardiny the possibility of buying some land and building a building and conducting his business; end that he brought Forth all the inCormetion and was straight•~Forward about the use and asked her Eor an answer to make sure he was doing the right thing and would he allowed this use in that area. tie stated it is his intention today to see 1E this use can be r_onsidered as an industrial use and stated the purpose Eor discussing the matter was to make sure he was not going to be assessed the stadium fee which he was made aware of by the broker before he paid a sum aE money that would be Forfeited. Mr. Shab stated he received a letter dated Jilne 13, 1986, confi.rminy that he would be considered an industrial use based on the information submitted verbally and in letter Form to Annika; arrd that he then paid $25,000, non-refundable, tovaarcls purchasing, and had plans developed at a cost of $30,000, non-refundable. lie stated after plans were completed, he was told duri.ny plan check that he would not be permitted as an industrial use and would have to pay the assessment Eee, and his argument is that he should not have to pay the Eee and should be "grandfathered" in as an industrial use. Mr. Shab Axplai.ned the rra)ority of the business will be car kelephone installations, and that they have been doing it Eor Eive years in an industrial zone end never had a problem. Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, stated when the building ~.ermit issue came up, she and Mr. Shab had a meeting with Malcolm Slaughter from the City Attorney's office, as well as Norm Priest, to discuss the situation and at that time it was decided that the letter she had sent wes incorrect and that the use was not permitted as an industrial use. She stated, subsequently, Commission received a Code amendment request for a conditional use and it turns out that is not what Mr. Shab intended, but there has been a Eair amount of discussion about this and the Fact that it doesn't fi.t into the category of a permitted use. she stated she wrote the letter in June and he was notified in September that it would not be permitted. Mr. Shab stated the escrow closed on October 13, 1986, and Commissioner La Claire pointed out that was after he Found out that this would not be permitted. Mr. Shab stated at that point he had ~ spent $50,000, and prior to the letter, he would have had an opport...~ y to get back those funds if he had known the Stadium fees would be imposed, or he could have discussed it with the seller and maybe the price of ttie property would have been reduced. 3/16/87 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MARCH 16, 1987 __ 87-173 Conunissioner Herbst stated a conditional use permit has always been required Eor automotive uses in the industci.al zone. Mr. Shab skated he did not feel this is an automotive repair facility since they have nothing to do with automobiles, except installation of the phone into the vehicle. Commissioner Herbst asked why they should be considered an industrial use if they are setli.ng telephones. Mr. Shab stated they should be considered industrial because of the installation; and that they do assemble the telephones into cases they manufacture which makes the phones portable. He stated there is a lot of wholesale business conducted in supplying and repairing phones foe the retail trade outside their company. Commissioner Herbst stated this is not an industrial use and should be allowed in the industrial zone only with a conditional use permit and then the Commission can review the use. He stated only the city Council could yrant any re ].i.ef on the money and the applicant can appeal to the City Council, but that he would still want to see a conditional use permit req~lired for th!s use in the industr•i.al zone. Respondiny to Ccxnmissioner 13ouas concerning "grandfather.ing", Annika Santalahti stated the fee came into play one year ago in Jartuary; and that the City Council would have to amend the fee ordinance in some manner, but right now there is no provision for a waiver and they have not shown any interest in tV~;-t. She stated another alternative is to identify the use by what exactly happens on the premises and identify the portion that is commercial and split the fee based on the square Footage used. Commissioner Herbst stated this was industrial propec•ty before and a conditional use permit was required under the automotive uses and there is no "grandfather" clause to lean on. He stated he sympathizes with the applicant, but could not see how this could be considered an industrial use i.n its entirety and, therefore, it would come under the conditional use permit provisions of the Code. lie slated the applicant could request the City Council to waive the fees. Mr. Shab stated there are similar uses in the industrial zone without conditional use permits. He added a conditional use permit would also require additional packing spaces which would impact khe entire project. Commissioner La Claire asked if the retail sales could be reduced? Mr. Shab responded the retail sales area is probably less than 500 square feet, or about 5$ of the total area. Commissioner La Claire stated 25$ retail sales are permitted in the industrial zone. Annika Santalahti clarified they would have to manufacture the product on the premises in order to have retail sales. Mr. Shab stated they do manufacture the portable cases, but that is not the primary portion of the business. He stated they intend to conduct retail sales but the wholesale business is greater than the retail. 3/16/87 MINUT~Sa ANAli6IM CI'CY PLANNtN(3 C(uR+li.~SION . MARCH 16 1987 ~87-174 Commissioner Meese stated it is unfortunate that this error was made, but he slid not see how the Code could be amended just. Eor this instance. Commissioner La Claire stated the property is in the Mt. Zone and a waretrouse is permitted and also the manufacturing is permitted and he has less than 25$ retail sales and he does store materials [or wholesale. She stated she sees this use fitting into the ML zone and asked where else a business like this could be located. Respondiny to Commissioner Bouas, Mr•. Shab stated it takes from 45 minutes to 2-1/'l hours to install the car phone. Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, asked where the car phones are produced. Mr. Shab responded they are produced all over the world but primarily Japan. Malcolm laughtec• stated Cade permits retail distributors as an accessory use to a permitted industrial use of products produced on the premises and Mr. Shab has just indicated that the product is produced all over ttie world, but not on the premises, so it is not a permitted use. Mr. Shab stated they do prcxluce the portability of the product. Commissioner La Claire stated in many instances, the industrialist produces only a portion of what he sells. Commissioner Herbst asked how much of the business is wholesale. ~Ir. Shab responded they deal lass in wholesale today ttran they will when they move to the new facility and they intend to provide the smaller retailers with equipment and have the ability to provide installation or service. He stated the equipment is brought in by hand and they would do repairs so that vetricles will not be irr and out in every instance. tie stated they have been doing this for five years in the same location in an industrial zone. He a9ded he thought the amount of wholesale would be about 10 to 20$ currently and would double in the new location. Malcolm Slaughter staked the Anaheim Municipal Coyle spec ificall.y limits wholesale businesses to sell to other retailers for resale and specifically precludes sale to consumers or the public in general on the site. Commissioner Herbst stated many quasi-industrial uses have been permitted under the term "wholesale" with a conditional use permit and he thought it still must remain in that category because there are too many different uses. Mr. Shab stated the Code is clear today, but it wasn't clear when he spent the $50,000 based on his intention of going into the project with ttte understanding that he would be considered an industrial use; and if he was "grandfathered" in as an industrial use, it would be clear to any users in the future that they would have to have a conditional use permit. Conunissioner Fry stated he did not know how this could be done and suggested the City Council might have the authority to allow it. 3/16/87 MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY__PLANNINO COMMISSION. MARCH 16 L, 1987 87-175 Commissioner La Claire stated the issue is really whether this is a use permitted in thR industrial area or not. Commissioner Herbst stated it is allowed with the approval of a conditional use permit. Malcolm Slaughter stated ur-der the recently adopted Code, the use would be permitted wikh the approval of a conditional use permit; however, the applicant is requesting that the Code be less restrictive and the use be made a permitted use as a matter of right. He stated the applicant is thinking that if it is a permitted use in the industrial zone, he will be exempted Erom the Stadium assessment fee, but there are two possible interpretations that could be made of that ordinance and one could be made that it is only referring to the then permitted industrial uses and not necessarily anything that might be amended into it. He stated the City has not taken a position on that issue, but it seems to attempt to change a whole zoning code to acco[nmodate an exclusion from what would otherwise be a fee is not appropriate. Commissioner Masse staked he thinks what has transpired is a little bit unfair and asked if there are any other tools to waive the fee. Commissioner Herbst suggested the Commission make a recommendation to the City Council that they consider waiving the fee. Commissioner La Claire suggested the fee be assessed only on the retail portion of the b~lsiness. Mr. Shab stated the product has to be assembled Ln the vehicle and that could be considered industrial. He stated in 99$ of the casa:s, they do perform the installation. He stated they would install a car phone purchased from someone else and the bulk of their business is service and installation. Commissioner La Claire staked she does not like to see the City tell someone something and then tell them something else, but many of the people who owned property in the industrial zone which already had approvals Eor certain developments, are having to pay that Eee. She stated if there is any possibility of working something out, she would like to see that done because she did not think it is fair that he pay the fee. She stated she did not know where this use should be located. Commissioners Fry and Herbst responded they thought it should be in a commercial zone. ACTION: Commissioner Masse offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council deny the request to amend Section 18.E~1.020 to allow the installation, repair and sales of mobile telephones as a permitted use in the ML (Industrial, Limited) Zone. Malcolm Slaughter stated staff will be taking this matter ro the City Council automatically. Annika Santatahti stated noratally this would be going to the City Council in 22 days and Mr. Shab should contact the City Clerk's office to verify ttte time and day, unless he wants to try and schedule it earlier and two weeks would be the earliest. She stated if he plaps to continue the conditional use permit request, it should be continued Eor four weeks. 3116/87 MINUTS,S, ANAL{BIM CITY PLANNINC3 COMMISSION- MARCH 16i 1987 _~,~_Wr87-176 Mr. Stub stated he has the building under construction and the lease is expiring at his present location based on his anticipated move and approximately 26 employees are currently expectiny to move no later than May 1st. Chairman McBurney sr.ated Commission can take an action on the conditional use permit request and then Mr. Shab can appeal that to the C~.ty Council. Malcolrtt Slaughter stated 1E the Commission acts favorably on this request Eor a conditional use permit, then Mr. Shab can proceed under thA terms of the conditional use permit, even 1E the City Caunr,il refuses to amend the code. Mr. Shab asked about ttie $;,0,000 which he would not have paid 1E he had known this. Chairman McBurney stated l-he Commission is not in a position to do anything about that problem. Mr. Shab stated he has been advised by his attorney that he should not go ahead with the condit~lonal use permit process, and suggested that the matter be continued f~~r two weeks so they could try to come to some understanding, but obviously there is no where to go with the Commission. He stated he is not only concerned about the $50,000, but also the number of parking spaces, etc. Annika Santalahti stated the proposal before the commission meets the parking code requirements and the office portion of the building has be analyzed on a higher requirement than the warehouse/industrial portion. Mr. Shab stated referred to Item No. 8 of the staff report which talks about 5.5 parking spaces per 1,000 square Eeet on the garage area and asked why more spaces are required for the area where cars are being parked. He stated the parking requirement is taking away Erom the office space Eor the next industrial tenant and noted he is only using 1/2 the building. He stated he understands up to 50$ can be used Eor office space, but parking is needed to supporl• that and he created that in the beginning, buk is now being required to have addition parking than originally requested as an industrial use. He stated these are other impacts, in addition to the money he has already spent, and they are long-term problems to the project. Malcolm Slaughter stated a certain number of parking spaces are required which would limit the use of the rest of the building. He stated there is no request for a parking variance before the Planning Commission at this time. Mr. Shab stated it is more limiting and is more of a burden. Commissioner Bouas stated there would only be a problem, depending on the other tenant in the building, and a study would have to be done when a tenant is chosen. Commissioner La Claire stated site has no problem with approval of the conditional use permit and it might be beneficial to appeal both to the City Council at the same time. 3/16/87 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, MARCH ].6, 1987 B7-177 Malcolm Slaughter stated if the Code is amended to permit the use as an industrial use, then a conditional use permit would not be required. Mr. Shab skated he understands the Council could approve it as an industrial use. Annika Santalahti stated the City Council can amend khe Code and the Planning Commission can recommend Code Amendments. Malcolrt~ S1AUghter skated the applicant can request that the City Council amend l•he ordinance and noted this is not a public hearing and the applicant does n~~t have to wait the 22 days. Commissioner Herbst stated 1E the City Council denies the request to amend the code, the applicant would Lose three or four weeks on the conditional use permit. Annika Santal.ahti stated the applicank would have to contact the City Clerk's office to get the matter on the agenda in two weeks. Commissioner La Claire stated if ttie conditional use perm'.t request is continued Eor two weeks, nothing would change because tho Commission would still be hearing it the day before the City Council. Mr. Shab stated he needs to do sort~ething fast; that his lease is up and his employees are standing around with no place to do their work. Annika Santalahti stated if Commission wishes to act favorably on the conditional use permit request, the Eee could be based on the area of the building that is appropriate for the intensification. Stye stated the parking analyzed 3036 square Eeet as being the pact that needs the conditional use permit and Commission may wish to approve that• and amend Condition No. 7 pertaining to the Eee to apply Co the portion of l-hat building that is being identified for the intensification of land use. Malcolm Slaughter stated the condition is merely citing whale the Code otherwise requires and the fee is $4.12 a foot if the use is not permitted by right under the zoning codes and this condition is merely bringing to the applicant's attention, the Eact that it is a requirement so that he is not proceeding down the path not knowing about the fee, but the ordinance determines the amount of ttte Eee and it is not what the Commission may decide is the correct amount. Commissioner La Claire stated the condition says the Eee is to be paid in the amount as determined by the City Council. she stated Commission could approve the conditional use permit and make a recommendation to the City Council that they consider the circumstances. Malcolm Slaughter skated the fee has been determined by `he City Council and the basic obligation is not changed; however, the Commission can make a recommendation to the City Council, iE they so desire. 3/l6/87 MINUTES, ANANBIM CITY PLANNING COMMI5SION1 MARCH 16, 19$7 ____,_ $7-178 PUBL'iC INPUT Michael Shook staked he is associated with the new management of Anyelo's and that are taking certain steps to eliminate the problems associated with the Cruise Night and the problems the neighbors and the City have experienced. lie invited the Commission to come and see thei[ success on the next Cruise Night, April 3. He stated Mr. Nugoy has kaketi over the control of the corporation and that he has been very successful in the Food service business with 32 donut shops. He stated the new owner was very surprised to Eind out khe depth of problems and controversy of the Angelo's and they met with the neighbors and conEror-ted the problems and have redesigned the Heach Boulevard Facility to meet the ordinances with respect to the drive through lane and layout of l•he parking lot. He stated they intend to seek a conditional use pr_rmit allowing them to extend the food service and beer and wine to the outdoor patio area at the State Colleye location. Chairman McBurney stared they should see the Planning Department staff in order to get their requests on the Planning Commission agenda. Annika Santalahti stated they should withdraw the petitions that are pending before the Planning Commission and submit new applications. Ccxnmissioner Fry stated t-e was by the State College site on the first Friday night of this month and the Facility was closed. Mr. Shook stated the publicity was instrumEnta.l in Helping them alleviate the impact of the First Friday Niyht and the police wore concerned at First that the event had grown into sotnethina that they could not stop, but John Poole, Code Enforcement Supervisor, suggested closing the Facility on that night. He stated they are looking Forward to continuing the policy of working with the city, as opposed to Fighting and struggling with anybody, especially the neighbors. Concernir-g the facility on Beach, he stated they have eliminated Cruise Night and removed the video games to reduce the activities not associated with the purchase and consumption of food and to reduce loitering. He stated they have put up signs with parking limits and redesigned the parking lot to provide short term packing Eor the people having car hop service along the Fence adjacent to the Giant, and the parking along the recreational vehicle park Fence would be for those people who would be coming inside and sitting down. OTHER DISCUSSION A. It was noted the Commission discussed touring the Highland's property before the next meeting and that today's meeting should be adjourned to 9:00 a.m., March 30, 1947. H. Annika Santalahti stated Gerald Bushore had called and asked for a continuance of Item No. 10 at 3:15 p.m., but that she was not aware of the call at the time that item was heard. 3/16/87 MINUTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANN~NCi COMMISSION,~~MARCH 16~ 1987 _ 87-179 ADJOURNMENT: Commisaianor Mesao aFEered a :aotic~n, seconded by Commissioner Bouaa and MOTION CARRIED that the meeting be adjourned to 9:00 a.m., March 30, 1987. The meeting wes adjourned at 4:25 p.m. RospectEully submitted, Ed~.th L. Harris, Secretary Anaheim city Planning Commiaslon 112147p 3/15!87