Loading...
Minutes-PC 1988/01/04I~'SNUI'FS ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIh1G CQdMISSIO[d January 4, ]988 'Ihe regular meeting of Use Anaheim City Planning Com;,ission was wl]ed Lo order at 10:00 a,m., January 4, 1988, by Ui_ (9iairm3n in tale Council Chambers, a quorum being present, and flu Oonmission reviewed plans of the it;ers ar~ today's agenda. RECESS: 11.:30 a.m. RECOtdVENID; 1:30 p.m. ~IO~,q p,,IDQ~ ; Chairman Messe Ilouas, Hoydstun, Carusillo, Feldliaus, HerLsC, hfcBurney (Crnmissioner Feldliaus arrived at 1.:45 p.m.) COPAbIISSIi,NERS ABSEPR': :vONE A~ pRID~p(': Joel Fitt Annika Sant;alahti Ma]rnLn Slaughter Arthur L I]3w Pau]. Sirgr_r Debbie Vagts Greg Hastings I~nard Mc.C,ttee Edith Harris Planning Director Zcming Administrator Q~nuty Ci1:y Attcrrey Deputy City Engineer Traffic Engineer Ha:sing Operations Coordinator Senior Planner Associate Planner Planning Ccmnissicn Secretary' AGITIDA PGi'I'IIy~ - A panplete copy of the Planning Commission ag^n:la was posted at 4:00 p.m. llet:emher 30, 1907, inside Uie display case located in the foyer of tau Council gtiamhers, and also in file out`ide display Itiosk. ruhlished: Anatuim Bulletin - i7~~cember 24, 1987. PUffi.IC INPfTI': Cliaintran Messe explained at Uie end of Uie sdmdnlc~ Bearings, mem.~ers of Ute public will lie allowed t:o speak on items of interest which are within the jurisdiction of the ?tanning Commission and/or agenda ittacrs. taNl1CFS FOR APPROVAL: diairtn:n Messe pointed o~"• Commissioner Boydstun lead declared a conflict of interest on Variance No. 3729 and page 892 of tale lUovcanber 23, '_987, minutes should be corrected. Crnmissioner Boydstun pointed out Page 866 of Uie November 9, 1987, minutes siwuld t:o corrected to show 5 yes votes and 2 no votes, Comnissirners Boydstun and Carusil.lo voting no on (bndiL•ional Use Permit; No. 2961. ACTION: Commissioner BcuaS offered a moon, seconded bl' Cannissioner McBurney and MOTION CAF2RIID (Cannissioner Feldhaus ~.scTt and Caemissioner Hertst abstaining on L•he t~vemher 23, 1987 minu',;es) that: tl~e minutes of the meetings of November 9, 1987, and Novmd:er 23, 1987, be approt•ed as corrected. 80-0] 1/4/88 88-02 MIN[IIES, ANAHEIM CITY PLAN.'~'I~ CX]I•tfISSION, JAti'[~T1Y 4,1988 -.^ I•!'~'f NO_~;, C£QA NEGATIVE D~115RATIOV AA'D VARIANCE .'JO• 3i19. F„Jl'_,,i^ (~ = IrI- ,"'•=:~L%: 1~ ~ VICI~RIA I. ilJt1D0~`7, 404 is d20 N. LcT'r., P~aheim.vl 92805. IA~i~i: ri 0 ~;pi~, P. O.l3o;: 2868, Anaheim, CA 92604. Property descril:ed as a rectzny^ularly-slaped parcel of land consistirx~ of approximately 0.6] acre, leaving a frontaoe of approximately 200 feet on Uie east side of Leron Street, approximately 730 feet south of Uie centerline of Sycamore Street and further de=^_ribed as 404-420 North l~:un Street. Reeuest: T'o cronstruct a 3-story, 24-unit; (previously 26 unit) "affordable" apartment crony:lex with waivers of minL~um building sits area per c::elling unit, maximum structural height, maximan site coverage, and mirimarn distance between buildires. Continued from the meeting of Novend~er 23, 1987. Tlmre were ten persons indicating their presence in opposition to sut3ject rc~uest and alt:liough ti:e staff report was not: read at the public Bearing: it. is referred t:o and made a part of the minutes. Camissioner Hoydstun declared a cronflict of interest as defined Ly Anaheim City Plannir.~ Ccmnission Re:~clution No. PC76-157, adopting a Conflict of Interest Oode for ti:e Plaru:ing Ocmnission, and Cxrver!:!!ent Code Sectior. 3625, et: seq., in ;3:at her son is the deal estate agent involved, and pursuant t:o the provisions of the al70ve Codes, declared that sire was wiUtdrawirg from the hearing on Variance No. 3729 and that she wrould not; tike part in either ttie discussion or t;lie voting thereon and that slte had not di:~cussed tlu~ matter with any member of t;l:e Planning Cam!ission. Thereupon, Cott:r.:ssiorer Bcydstun left '" ouncil Chamber. PETITIONER"S PRESEITATION Kent Boydstun: 703 N. Anaheim Fxaulcvard, Anaheim, represenl:ing Uie buyers and sellers of U:e proposed property, explained concerns were addressc~ by the neighbors at the November 23, 1987, public liearinc and Utey lave revised U:eir plans t:o address t:l:ose rvrxerns; flat one of t:he major concerns was Lhe rassiveness and design of U:e ;soject and they did consult wiU: t}te ard:itects wt~o are creating guidelines for tl:e Central. City ai", and incorporated tlmse guidelines into Uiis project. He staged they eliminated twro units on tl:e Ll:ird floor and redesigned Um roofline wiU: cable ends t;owar-'.s IRamn Street; and lowered the o,;eral.l hei;h,t of U:e lwildim try !:luee fuel: witidt is mre car;.atible wiUt tl:e surrounding neiglilxrt~ood. He addc4 they wire able to attain internal circulation in U>e parking structure and eliminate the crivew•ay to aye norU! :.elide might have creaked conflicting traffic and reduced Ure parking U, five spaces wi:idi gives more roan on flee ground floor. He staged trey nave also provided an elevator t:o all tluee floors. Mr. l3oydskun stated they moved Use office to file around floor near the entranre to Uie parkirr3 wttidi will provide more control over wi:o goes in and out cf tl:e parking garage; and that U:ey have provided a wood and stucco exterior, wiUi front balconies ccverev, etc. He pointed out the colored rendering wi~idt gives a Bette: concept of the proposal and explained Uie gabled roof cn t:i:e I:lurd floor and the window above Una balconies add a different dimension to Ute property- He note-~d the staff report: states Plan C is a 1-bedrocxr, 1-Uath unit, at 790 sq. ft., tut it: is 825 so. ft. Ccmnissioner Feldlaus arrived at: 1:45 p.!n. Mr. Bcydstun stated Floor Plans A S B have laundry (took-ups next w the dining area with an expandable closet tall, so the project laundry rom will. not t:c used as muds. He stated l•.e thought t:lte revised plans address t9te cror:cerns of Ute neighbors and Uat this will to a good project and that; 1141ea ~IitvITPFS,WvAHEl~I CI`T'Y PLAIrtv1N~ ~flIISSION, JA'JUARY 4.1`IC9 88-03 this is a yood location across from Ure park and w•Ir;:n i.t is finished, should be saneUring 'the neiglrLcrlrood can be proud of . OPPOSITION Dr. rvilliam Koon, 821 N. Le;ron, neigtrbor and Vice Chairman of Central. Cit:y Neigirlxrrhood Council and member of the Cortmunity Development Block Grant Oomnittee, stated on Novenber 23rd they presented a petition wiUr 100 signatures of neighbors w~lro oppose this projcr:t and they continue to asY. UiaC the varianrns not be granted; Drat they mgt with the real estate agent but did not see U:z revised plans and today is the first time lie leas seen t:lrem. He pointed out the rendering does not include Ure rear building which is Urree stories. Dr. Koon stated there are no special circwnstanrns for granting Lire waivers in this :one; Lila[ RM-i200 is the most dense zone Anaheim allows and just last }'ear Ire and his neighbors gat t:cvgether and asked tl•.e Commission t:o down zone tare area t:o Ure north and east of [:his area, and now in this entire area bounded hy~ Anaheim, llarlnr, Lincroln and La Palma, Urere is only Uris one area, 2 onz~-half b1oGs, facing Pearson Parlt left as R'1-1200 and less than 100 feeC away and across t:he street tarere is RS-7200 propert}~ and this does not provide a buffer area for t]'ASe <,ingle-famil}~ residences. He seated tarere is no other three-st:or}' buildings in that area and Ure} ~:o not• wish to set: a very dangerous precedent for other developers. He stated Ure recently refurbished apartments wiridr occupy laic property now are 100n: affordable and Uris develo[x:r is asking for Waivers to provide less than 1.0% affordable; and taut he uc~erstands sane of the units are occupied r.R' seniors citizens and Vision 2000 states we must provide affordable housing for seniors. He stated these proposed apartments do not reall}' fit into their neighborhood architecturally and Urerc are "for rent" signs all over Ure area. Dr. Kron stated Urey would suggest tale de~mlcpers consult wiUr Brurn Judd w•1ro t:he City of Anaheim leas recently hired as a consultant for the Redeveloprmnt Agenc}~ and use [:hose guidelines to make the project: nare amenable so tl•.at it fits in rmre with these older Irons in Che area and notzd sane are over 100 years old. Dr. Koon stated the apartments t:o be re;mved, according to a Survey of Historical Buildings in Anaheim, are the finest examples ever )wilt in Orange County of multiple-family, California craftsnNn houses. He stated Urey stand ready as neighbors and nranbers of cacmunity organizations t:o talk w these developers and try to work out same sort of canpranise, l;ut Ure project as presented dais noC benefit Ure neighborlrocd imcause of its size and the architecture, and because of setting a dangerous precedent, for three-story units in Anaheim. Frances Nutto, 621 Jaml;al}'a Street, Ana}tiim, stated Ure G~eral Plan provides for apartments on this property but Ure property should l;e developed in oocnplianrn wiUr tare zoning regulations and tare reouested waivers should l:e denied. He stated tarere are no pcactica] difficulties or unnecessary i,ardsirips on this property to justify granting the waivers and it appears bare only reason for UrN waivers is sc Carat Ure owTers can intensify Ure use of Gre property for their awn financial gain; Ural; Uu owners should not be granted waivers at tare expense of Ure surrounding neighbors and Urere does not appear to be any relevant connection between the waivers requested and any ~raracteristic of tare property and Ure only }rardslrip appears to be financial. He stated financial irardslrip on Ure property owner is not a legally sufficient reason t:o grant waivers and asked what specific property in Uris neighborhood lras a 3-story apartment or what specific property in Uris neighborhood is enjoying Ure privilcyes indicated by Ure requested waivers. ttr. Nutto stated cronrnrning Ure environmental. impact, a Negative Declaration should not be approved as a mataer of course; Carat increased density on Uris property will. create additional traffic; drat traffic corxgestia: is Lad and getti:rg wrorse aad Urere should tx~ a supplemental environmental impact report: on Ure sul,jecc of traffic. l/9/88 88-04 MI~, 7tNAF1EII'% CI`IY P1A23`1IMG COhfIISSI01~ • JAIQUARY 9, 19EP, PE'iiTI011ER'S REBUITAL Kent 13oydstun stated Dr. Kcon's bi.~;~st concern is Ure adjoining RS-7200 homes t.o i::re norUr and he tarcught t-1zy had addressed large concern wiUr a lwffer zone. He stat:c:d Ire thought there is a neeE for new affcr~aUle housing in downtown in Anaheim t:o drau Ure i:yPe of People we need to rake downt:oxn ;row and Presper. He ~cp]ain~ tenants will not: 1,~ displaced at t}tis time, and Drat: it is 100 affordable now under a HUD cronCracl: Co relrabi]itai:e it:, but t:ha Hrop.:xty is in named cf some repairs. He sCal:ed this will. l~ an at:tract:ive twildin; and t:ha arrhitecCUre will. fit: intz ta>r neigirbonc~od and he did net think 3 stories is very far out of line xi Ch what: is in Ure nei;hirorl;ocd, and thought: the Ell'., Building hill be develolx~d intro scrn other use ~r~cause it: is really in t:ad shape and t:lrai: tarere will be some tne9ium trig:r-rise de~2lepnenC on Anaheim Boulevard in Lira fut:ura. He strafed Ure RS-7200 acjoinin; to t:he rcrth is a ver)• viaUle concern but did not ClriNc Ure prcjecl; presents any traffic Prol;lctre and adeguat:e parlcing is hein_ provided at 2-1/2 spaces per unit; and brat Che parking garage is designed tell and there wi]1 tai easy ingress and dress. niE '7UBLIC HEAPING 1x4.5 CIASID. Cgrmissicrer Bouas asked the heighC of t;h:: projn:C. Mr. Bcydst:un res;:ondec it: is 32 feet :;i~h t:o Che t:al.lest: piCch of I:Ire roof; and Chat: t:he first: Plans had it, at: 35 fe: C high. Camissioner IierlsC as'rec l:he raxirnz~ iroiylrt: ;:ermiCt:ed Uy CoSe. Grc7 Bast:ings, Senior Planner. res,-.cnc•ed Lire heighC, as rr:asured in any hillside zone, is Lalcen from tare natural grade Co fire ceiling of tare ul:firmest uniC, and in this case, tarn R2i-1200 Zone allows Cwo st;cries. Ccmnissioner Herhst: staged t:he Council. changed tare Code and calls packing a story even if iC is entirely undergrcund and t:irat is ccnf+>.irrg; Urat: 32 fart marimrsn height for this iruildin~ in tans area, is nut: cut: o[ lire, and a tare-st;cry Irous.a wuld lx~ cronsCruct:ed at 32 feet: Irish and saris proje<a: woulC st:il.l. i.~ within the imi;irC ra;uircrrnC for tuc stories He st:atrti Urere arr_ crona:rns alrouC Ure ::ay 1:Ire C7e is wriLCCn• gwirran Hesse strafed in a laCcr hoarin^, today, Cira height: is mr_asured t:c Che r_cilin; of Ure I:op floor and askcrd uhaC that xould Ue in this case. Gre, Nasirings staCr' Urat would lre 32 feet: mirr~s Ure heighC of Cire roof structure. Comnissicner Her1sC stated it: xas 32 feet t:c Che CoP of t:he peal: on Ure drawings. Cannissioner Bouas asi<ed the height ~.f fire frcnC i:uildin;. ?tr. floydstun res,~onded t:IraL r:ould lxr 25 feet high, and ~cpl.ained t~rere is a lit:Cle more roof surfarn expcsad ir, C1raC front: Lwildiny and there is al:out 7 ~;; feet difference. Greg Hastings stated in clred:in,^ t!re C;tie, 3G feet. is tale lraigL•c ' imic, for twro-sCOries, sc this ErojracC would ire alx;uC two fa't: ever t:1raC limiC. Crmnissicner Herl~t slat;eci t:he State randated thaC for a certain numt:er of affordalae units, tare devolo;,~2r car. ra;uest; a certain numl~r o[ waivers and Uris projecC does include sor;rr affordaUl.e units. He siatec Urey are entiClad l:o certain waivers and there is a drastic need fcr affcrdable uniCS ir. all cities. He stag=ti he raad in Che Re;ist;er Sunday t!raC in 20 years I:hero will. la no afferdable units. He asi:c.:i alxut: Ure City Ccuncil's rec:enf: recrriremenl: fora 30-year a;reemenC rat:lrer Llran 20. ]/9/86 MI?7UTES, 1a27AHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 4, 1988 88- Debbie Vayts, Housin; O;.erations Coordinator, star;ed t;L•e Council. canted the term t:o Ge cronsistenL vita Gte senior cit:i:.ens agreanertt and exi:laines that has a senior citizen project: wltidt includes both a density toms acs the senior citizer. ordinance r~cttirPrr_nt~. Cottmissicner Herbst states he ttvtu_itt: affcrdahle units should remain afforsala2 forever and he vculs lilce t;o sea t:he ayreennnts for SO years instead cf 20 pears. N.S. vagts stated Ute current: recuirement: is for 10 pears or hhatever the Plannin; Curissicn approves. Chairman ?iesse stated it has yenerall}~ teen fate Ccrmissicn's policy Cc rc~-uire 20 years and Ms. vats si;ated ghat: is crorreca. Ccamis=ionar Feldltaus stated tae ~:armissien ace; t;o ]cols at Lhe direca:ion t;he dosmtcti,•n Project Alpha is ccin; and this is right; at: t:ho peripttrral and there is a nr_ed fcr residential units t:o sub, cr1: to:e retail. center developine there and that: file Project: Area Corrrit.Cee as wel] as rite Redevelcpti:rt: Catmission hire: a con=_ultant: and a st:usy will ire eomirn; feriat ::ith a rec:cm:terdatior. a..^.d tlicc_!a; this sevalcpnenC fits ans erc• of t:he re!;uirc~nents is for l:i;:•. censity residential. Gtairrtran t•;esse stated 1; ;o cf Che waivers are a result: of the d~:zsitp triu=_ fcr affordalae hcusin; and are rtr3ndat;ed t;y tats St;ate if tare develo;.er recurats apsova] cf affcrdable units. A(iION: Cannissioner }'.orbs]: offered a motion, s~ccndr_c t~~ Casrissioner Ficuas, and AfOTION CARRIED (Cerrrissio.^.2r 13c}~3stun at ;ant) th,t: the Analr..in City Flannin^, Ccrmissior: has reviewer U:e proposal t:c ccnstrt:ct a 3-story, 24-rnit "affordatac" ahart:n>urt; canpler, wit:]: ~~•aivers cf mir.itmsn L•uildir.~ site araa per dt;elli:ic uniC, raxim~r st:ract:ural height, rkaxirtnu^ siia c:everay~ and minimum di=.t:anc:e ixtxct.n buildings cn a r<aar.,u]arly-sl>a;_ed ;.areal cf land c:onsistin; cf apprcximate]y 200 feet: cn rate east: side cf i~ffi1Gn S1:r::r_C, approximate]}~ 130 fcr-. t: sough of tha crntzrline of SyrarArr Stmt: ars Furtaer descri:;cc as 404-42C Picrtit i~emor. Sl;rn;t; and does lterel:y anprcve fire Negative Decaaral:ion on tfie psis that it Itas considerrv Ufa proposc~ \c-,ati•/e lxclaraticn t:oSether ~it:h any c~tr,~ nts rec:eivcd Burin, tae public review process and further fir.'in_ ct: rate i:asis cf t!:e Initial Study and any ccnr;ents reczived that: there is no suttstantial widener: tatat tan projact: will l:av a si;nificant; effer.C on C!te envircntt~nr.. Commissioner HerL•=.t offered Resolution No. PC 58-01 and moved fer its rassace and adcpticr. CItaC the Anaheim Cit;y Planning Con~ission does hereby ?rant: variance D;o. 3724 or. the Lasis ti•.at; there are si:ec:ial ciretrst;arcs-s a;:,aicztae t;o t;he ;:roF:crty sucat as size, sitalti, te;.arap3ty. 7ocaticn or surroundings, whic,t do rot ap,-1y to enter id°ntically zoned ; rccrrties in t:ha vicinity; and that strict application of taro Zorirr Cade deprives fate ,--rc;.crty cf privileges e:.jcyed t:y of;her pret:arties ir. identical zorin; classification ir. t:he vicir.it:}~ and subject: Cc Int;er8~parunenta; Corrtit:tee Recxamertdati.;ns iacludin; tare ccrsition tact ]0~ cf Lae units sisal] lxz desi_naY.ed as "affordaLle" fcr a porioc: cf 20 years. Gt tell call tl,e fcrey-oinc resolution ::as ;sassed l:y t:he fcllc::ir. veto: AyFS: CCf~.^I15SI0;.•ERS: 13UUAS, CARUSILZO, FrI.iX?4[,5, HEP.PSl, I•,'E.SSE, E1C P,i,'lLVEY tiOES: CQ•A:ISSIUVERS: NAVE Ai~SFTI: CO:MSISSIfk:t:RS: BD}'ASiL>,'7 Malcolm Slaughter, Ueputy City Attorney, presented the uritt:~r. riht i;o a;•~eal Lae Plannin_ Co^mission's decision wit!tin 22 days to the City Council. Cotrmissioner Boydstun returne'_ t:c fate r,Lc;t:ing 1; 4/88 PIINUTES, 14y,UiEID1 CITY PLANNING CODL~fISSION, _JANUARY 4, 1988 88-6 ITEM N0. 2. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND VARL4NCE NO- 3718. PUHi.IC FiFARING. OWNERS: PERALt^r, LTD., 3]50 E. Birds, Brea, CA 92621. AGI•SiI': SOGAR CONST'RUCT'ION INC. , 1650 N. Glassell, #h1, Orange, CA. 92667 Properly described as an irregularly-shaped parcel. of land consisting of approximately 0.5 acre, having a frontage of approximately ]36 feet on Use north side of Cops de Oro Drive, approximately 230 feet north of Use centerline of Nohi Rardi Road and ftuUter described as 5091 Cola de Oro Drive (lot 29 of Traci: No. 12576). Request: Waiver of maximum structural height t.o construct a 30-foot high, 2-story single-family residence. Continued from Use meeting of Deer 7, 1987. It was noted the applicant was not present:; however, Use oonsult;ant who conducted Use ballaxt tests is present. It was determined Use presentation regarding Use balloon tests would be heard now and Use actual discussion of Variance No. 3718 trailed until the developer arrives. C9~airman Messe declared a Conflict of Interest as defined Ly Anaheim City Planning Crnmissivn resolution No. PC76-]5?, adopting a Conflict of Interest Cx1e for U~te Planning Commission and ,overtmient Code Section 3625, et seq.. in that Use property owner is a customer of lus firm and pursuant Lo Ute prrn~isions of Use above codes, declared UtaL• he was withdrawing from the hearing on Varianoe Na 3778 and U~at he would not take part in either the discussion of voting thereat, and U~at he had not discussed this matter wiUt any member of Um Planning Commission. Thereupon, Chairman Messe left Um Council gtambers. Chairwoman Pro Teapore Bouas assumed f:he d~,air. Piiil.lip Schwartze, PBR consultant. presentc<1 slides taken of Use balloon Lasts conducted in Tract: 12576. Cmmmissioner Carusillo stated he is catcerneci about the lo1;s imsedial:ely adjacent to the four mentioned and Utouyht Utere were Utree or four lots whid~ are at a lower elevations. Mr. Sdtw-artze stated Use lots located closest to Ute existing residences and wiU~ Use least amount of height differential were Lots 34, 35, 36 and 37 and most of Um slides were concentrated on U~ose lota. Commissioner Carusillo asked if Lot 33 iam~diately adjacent and west of Lot 39 has a drop in elevation. Mr. Sdttarl.ze responded it has an increase in elevation fry Lot• 34 and the pad is 12 feet below Ute existing residences to llte east. Commissioner Carusillo stated it appears Use 35-foot high structures would definitely impact Use residences on Brook Lane. tdr. Sdiwart:z stated TAts 3l, 32 and 29 are silhouetted behind Lot 33. I':em No. 2 was trailed until later in Ute meeting in order for Use applicant i:o be present. 1/4/S38 MINUTES, ANAIiEIM CITY PLANNING CODih1ISSI0N, JANUARY 4, 1988 88-7 Following the recess at 9:15 p.m. Item No. 2 was discussed as follows. (Chairman Dlesse absent) 11~ere sas no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and alLwugh the staff reix~rt• was not read, it is referred to and rude a part: of the minutes. Miles Folsom, agenC, was present to answer any cuestions. giain+arian Pro T'erq~ore explained Lie Planning Ccrmission lead reviewed the slides of Lte balloon t:c~ts as presented b}' Phil) ip Sdtwartze of PBR. Comnissioner Mc Burney stated obviously only a smll percentage of this stricture is above Ute maximum structural height limit and will not interfere wilt anyone's view. ACTION: Cortmissioner Mc Burney offered a motion, secronded tn~ Camissioner Herbst, anti hK7fI0N CARRIID Liat the Anaheim l'it:y Planning Cor:nission has reviewed Lie proposal to rnnstrud; a 30-foot high, 2-sWry single-family r::~sidence with >.aiver of m3;cimum structural lteiglri. on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land cronsisting of approxirat:el}~ 0.5 acre, ]laving a ~rent;age of approximately ]36 feet on the norLi site of Copa de Oro Drive, approxim3t,~ly 230 feet norLi of the centerline of Nolu Randt Road and furLier ~escr:bed as 5091 Cops de Oro Dzive, (Lot 29 of Tract No. 12576); and does herel:}~ approve Lie Nc~ati.et A:rlaration on trite L•asis that it l;as considered t;he proposed Ncgati~r Declaration toceLter wit:lt an}~ caments r^r_eived during the public review process and furUter finding on Lte basis of Lte Initial Study and any carrrients recroived that Ltere is no suix;tantial evi3.rce Ltat Lte project: will leave a si,nificant effecC on Lte envirorunent. Carmissioner Carusillc stated ite still feels there should lxa criteria for granting a waiver and he did not; see a hardship on this property. Cortmissioner Herlst stated Lte Ccmaission has granted several variances where views wrre not; blocked in t:}tat area. Ccrmissioner c~rusillo staged if the 30-foot high structure is ccrrµ~aCible, Bien t:he ~.~ should tie dtanged. Annil~. Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, stated staff is curresttiy loolring at dtangirr I:tte Code to per~it• 30-foot lri5h structures in Lte hill and canyon area. Ccrmissioner Carvsillo staked he felt approval would just open tale floodgates for additional requests for similar rrai~rss. Carnissioner Mc Burney offered P,esolution No. PC 88-02 and rtcn2~c for its passage and adoption t:]tal Lie Anaheim City Plartning Com~issicn does ItereLy grant t'ariance No. 3778 on the Lases that Liere are special circ~t::nces a;~licable t;o Lte property suds as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, wftidt do not apply to otter identicall}r zoned properties in Lte vicinity; and Lrat strict application of the Zoning Code deprives Lie prr:pe+.rty of privileges enjoyed try other pro,terties in ioent:ical zoning clasificatiort in the v:.cinit}'; and LtaC only a minimal portior. of Um st:zucf:ure ew,eeds 25 feel, and subject to Interdepartmental Camittee Retcnnendatiens. On roll call Lie foregoing resolution was passed try Lie folla:+ing vote: AYES: COFPIISSIOtJIIiS: BOtTFU^, BOYDSTIR~, FE[.7FiA115, F~RBSf , D1C B(JR~~'EY I~ID: C•k'AIISSIONERS: NONE AffiI•NI': COi$dISSI~1'132.5: MESSE APSTAIN: CO['SIISSIOfv'ERS: CARUSILLO Dialcolm Slaucht:er, De;.uty City AtWrney, presentc~! Lie kritt:en right to appeal Lie Planning Camission's dr_cision wetter, 22 days w Lie City Council.. Qtairm3n A;esse returnc~: t:o Lte nesting. 1/4/85 idINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COD>r1ISSI0N, JANUARY 4, 1988 __ 88-8 ITIM N0. 3. CEQA NFSt4TIVE DECLARATION, GFVERAI. PLAN Ahifli'IN,FM' N0. 234, RECLASSIFICATIQV N0. 87-88-25, AND VARIANCE N0. 3727. - PUHLTC li"c.4RIi\G. Oi+I~'ERS~ tvTLLIAM AND JOAP. TODD, 3620 Savanna Street, Anaheim, CA 92804. JOHN A1vT] ROHFR'I'A WARD, ROBFItT AND MAP.Y BiIRKS, 3630 Savanna Street, Anaheim, CA 92604. ROIXv'EY AhD SHEILA HART, 3540 Savanna Street, Anal~im, CA 92804. AG&YP: MMiGGDY HAfu'W, 4000 MacArthur Hlvd. ,"£i80, Newport I?Eadt, CA 92660. Prcperty descrilx°d as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately ].9 acres, located at Ute soutlrest corner of Savatvta Street and Marian Way, and further described as 3640 West. Savanna Street. GPA - To dtange tl:e current Lv~r-Medium Density residential designation to Nkdium Density residential on approximately 13.4 acres located on the norUt and souUz sides of Savanna Street, west of Knott Street. Reclassification - RS-A-43.000 and RS-7200 t:o [~+t-1200 Propwal: To corst;ruct: a 70-unit, 3-story apartmenC crnplex uitlt waiver of maxi'mun structural. height. any ITFM N0. 4. CEQA 1~'FX~ATIVE DECL4RATION, G~'ERAL P1A14 AMF.~TI~NI' N0. 234, RECLASSIFICATIQ\ ,W. B7-86-33 AND VARIANCE 1b. 3739. PUALIC HEARING. Ot~A'ERS: LA QtJITA J. Z1T'DA, 3603 Savanna Street, Anaheim, CA 92801, CO~V'NIE RAE HALL, 362.1 Savanna Street, Anaheim, Ca 92801, LUCION W. A,\T) BARBAR.A B. hS1T.FS, 3609 Savanna Si:reet, Anaheim, CA 92801., ROBERT A,~T1 LIIv'DA ADAIR, 3613 Savanna, Anaheim, CA 92801. AG)iVI': MF>wDY I'.Ah''7A, 4000 M?^Artiiuz 31vd., r68C, Newport Beadt, CA 92560. Property is an irregularly-siwFxd parcel. of land consisting of approximately 2.39 acres, located on the norUi side of Savanna Street, having an approximate fronts;e of 332 feet on Uie nort~t side of Savanna Street and approximately 660 feet vest of Clte centerline of Knott Street., and furLlier describxd as 3603, 3609, 3613 and 362] Savanna Street. GPA - Tb dtange Um current Lou-Medium Density Residential. designation to Ncdium Density Resident;ial on approximately 13.4 acres located on the norUt and south sides of Savanna Street, west of Knott Street. Reclassification - RS-A-43,000 t:o RM-1200 Proposal: To construct an 86-unit, 3-story apartment complex with waiver of traxirra;m structural height There were approxi;;ate]y l0 persons indicating their presence in oppo.:ition to subject request and alUtcugh Uie staff report bras not. read at the I:ublic hearing, it is referred to and made a part of Use minutes. STAFF PRiSEA'I'ATION Leonard McGhee, Associate Planner, presented Ute staff report pertaining to U>e General Plan At;~dmerit noting Uus is a property osmer and City-initiated amendment to d;ange tine Lou Medium Density Residential. designation to Medium Density Residential; and Utat it is the developer's proposal t;o construct a 3-sWry, 70-unit apartment eanplex on the south side of Savanna Street and a 3-story, 86-uniL• apartment complex on the north side of Savanna Street. He stated it is the City's 1/4/88 1dINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CODUtISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 88-8 ITEM ND. 3. CEQA NExATIVE UEl7r1RATI0N, Gf'JF3'AL PLAN A*1~lIIiiE•IIvvI' N0. 234, P.ECI.ASSIFICATIQN N0. 87-88-25, Ft. '.'}1RIANCE N0. 3727. P[Jffi,IC HEARIAIG. OHT~iE~t.S: 1vTLf..IAM AAID JOAN TODD, 3620 Savanna Street, Anaheim, CA 92809. JtJH~1 AND ROBER'I'A WARD, ROBERT' AND NARY BLTRI{S, 3630 Savanna Street, Anaheim, CA 92804. ROIX~'EY Atu'7 SHEIIA HART, 3540 Savanna Street, Anaheim, CA 92804. AGEVI': MAGDY HAtu'SA, 4000 MacArU;ur Blvd. ~i80, Newport Bead;, CA 92660. Prcperi:y described as an irregularly-st;aped parcel. of land consisting of approximat;ely 1.9 aces, looted at Ute soutl;vesC corner of Savanna Street and Marian Way, and furU;er described as 3640 hest Savanna Street. GPA - To change U;e current Law-Medium Density residential. designation to Medium Density residential on approximately 13.4 aces located on the north and souCl; sides of Savanna Street, vest of Knott SL•reeL. Reclassification - RS-A-43.000 and RS-7200 to FL~i-1200 Proposal: To construct a 70-unit, 3-s1Ary ap3rt:mnt cnmpl~x vital; xaiver of rexinnrm structural !;eight. anc ITTT1 N0. 4. CEQA iv'I~ATIVE DECLARATION, G61'ERAI. PLAN AASE~i,12MFM' N0. 234, RECLASSIFICATION N0. 87-88-33 AND VARIIL~ICE N0. 3739. PLTILIC HEARING. (7n"QERS: LA QUITA J. ZYNDA, 3603 Savanna Street, Anaheim, CA 92801, CQV'vIE RAE HAIL, 3621 Savanna Street, Anaheim, Ca 92801., LUCION 14. AND BARBARA B. MYL.ES, 3609 Savanna Street, Anaheim, CA 92801, ROBERT AND LIIvT1A ADAIR, 3613 Savanna, Anaheim, CA 92601. AGENT: MAGDY HA,WA, 4000 MacArthur Blvd., ;;fi80, Newport Bead;, CA 92b60. Property is an irregularly-sl;aped parcel of land consisting of approximate!}' 2.39 acres, located on the Wort:!; side of Sava.~u;a Street, having an ap~r,roximate frcntage of 332 feet on U;e Wort:; side rf Savanna Street and approximately 660 feet: west of U;e centerline of Knota Street, and furti;er described as 3603, 3609, 3613 and 36?.l Savanna Street. GPA - To dtange t};e current Lair-;Medium Density Residential designation to Medium Density Residential. on approximately 1.3.4 acres locat:c~ en tl;e norU; and soutl; sides of Savanna St:reeC, west of Knott Street. Reclassificatior. - RS-A-43,000 t:o RM-1200 Proposal: To construct an 86-unit, 3-story' apartment cotrplex wztl; waiver of maximum structural. i;eigl;t 77;ere were approximately 10 'persons indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and alti;ough U;e staff report was not read at the public hearing, it is referred to and made a part cf U;e minutes. STAFF PRESEATATICf~ I,ecnard IMCGI;ee, Associate Planner, presented U;e staff report pertaining to U;e General. Plan A^endment notirr this is a property amer and City-initiated amendrt~nt t:o d;ange tite I,ou-Medium I)e;sity Resicent:ial. designation to Meditnn Density Residential; and U;at it is t:l;e developer's proposal to construct a 3-story, 70-unit apartment car{~lex on 12m south side of Savanna Street and a 3-sWry, 86-unit: apartment cv[q~lex on U;e north side of Savanna Street. He stated it is the City's 1/A/S8 tdINUTGS, ANAHEIM CITI' PLANNING COt•L~tISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 88-9 intent t;o consider Ute impact of medium density residential land uses on rate entire study area and tlx: applicant has sutmitted separate petitions for Reclassification and waivers of maximum structural }teigltt; and that tare totai subject: area cronsists of 13.4 acres and circulation is proposed via Savanra Street ultidt is nut designated as an arterial highway and is approximately 1,330 feet long and is a dead end street. Mr. N[~ltee stated 17dtibil A is Ute City's initiated exhibit and addresses the 13.4 acres under medium density residential. and typically Utat resignation is implertentec what apartr>~ts; ltc•.retmr: at a higher density of 36 units lter acre; that Exhibit A addresses two different land uses; medium density residential. of 7.8 acres, including about 4.3 acres witidt is Ute applicant's proposal, and 5.6 acres of low medium density residential, and Ecaibit II not only includr_s the applicant's proposal for medium density residential. on tmt:lt rate north and soutt sides of Savanna Street, L•ttt reflects rite medium density residential approved on the east end of Savanna Street: on Chc south side. N,r, +ieGltee stated as rc:quast:ed b}• the Planning Cannission on P7ovcrilx'r 23rd, a traffic study was prepared by Justin Farmer, Transportation Ern;ineers and the City Traffic Engineer itas ap,-.roved Jte adequacy of the report and croncurs with the study findings Utat a traffic signal is not currently needed or warranted at tits Savanna/Knott int;erscction at this t:itm; howr_ver, under Ute medium density designation on Exhibit A, a Craffic signal xould he considered. He sLat;ed GPA ]41-I reduced t:he permitted densities fro'1 Medit~ Density t:o Lrn;-;aediutn Density in 1977 end rate amendment was init:iat:cd at tu: direction of Ute Planning Camission in response t:o residents' conc.~rns regardirr, t;raffic on Sa:•anna Street; and that a numl;er of public hearirs were cronduct:ed or. Savanna Street: east of fate subjeca: area ti+.ich have considered higher density land uses and approvals have ccctirred ttet;ween Ute intersection of Knott SCrcxa; and Savanna Street, and 600 feet: nest: of Knott Street on Savanna Street. He st;aCed approval cf t.)x_• meditan density residential designation crould signal a potential requesC for similar development cet undeveloped }•arcels on t:he nort!t side of Savannah Strc~a, currently averaging approximately lb units per acre; and taut: the estvrat:ed rumaer of average daily trite on Savanna St:rcet crould increase fran approximately 2,000 to o:er 4,000 trips per day. PETITIO:JER'S PRFS1;'~'I'ATIO~'~ Magdy Hanna, agent, stated Utey hope to gain Commission's approval of these Luo quality projects on Savanna Street; that the traffic study was conducted and found tatat: Lte traffic can lte }candled on Savanna St:reef and Ute Traffic Consultant; is present t:o any questions. fie stated in ]977 several itottcrowners in t:he area wanted t;o lower rate zoning trsause of tateir single-family i.otnes and because of ;tarkin^„ cwt now all of the single-family honern;ners have elected to rmve and there arc nine parcrls left on the st.rr_•t and only two pazcels have single-family hogs witidt are part of Utis General Plan Pr.~endmnt. IIe stated after Utis, there is notltin? left t:o develop on Savanna Street, exrnpt mayt:e redeveloping the oortdaminiutt>r or duplexes existing on Marian M.r. lia,tna state-d Utey uil.] develop a quality proj2c:t and i:lte Project Architect is present to answer any questions; that they are requesting cnly one waiver for lire ]St:!-foot set}acic Wsingle-family areas; however, if ttte 3eneral plan amendrtr:nt is approved, there wauld is no waiver recuired because IaYnt pro+:erty is part of l:ltis areno^.r_nt. He static*_' t:ltey trill. t;e dedic:at;ing 32 feet on Savanna and will construct: curb, gutter and side,ralks witidt will. definitely im a plus l~~ause wit:hcut chc3n, there is a t;raffic hazard and when Utey develop itoUt Ltese projects, Savanna Stroet will Le 1:otally developed. 1/4/88 MINUTES, ANAf1EIhf CITY f CANNING COMh1ISSI0N, JANUARY 4, 1988 __ 85-10 Mr. Hanna presented a petition signed by homeowners in Lte area in fawr of fire project. Al Alarwtall, Ardtitect, 225 Sout!t Solanon, Anaheim, stated Uteir project's are ccnstrtct.ed with highest cuality raterials and are designed Lo focus the attention of tare residents t:o trite interior courts and faci]ities located within trite cctnplex; UtaL Utey stave parking in acecrdanc2 wiUt Code rectairetmstts to kca:p parking frcn the street and feel the design of Lte project al.lcwing ar_~cess t:o Ute units fran insi62 the garage enrnurages resident parking in the designated spots. Ha staged they met wiUt the neighbors during the design phases and one ccncaern was dangirg t}te General Plan; and flat Limes dtange and ~eo?le alto opposed Ute dtange in ]977 are now the ones selling the properties and proposing tae dtange. Mr. Dtars1a11 stated if there were a lot of other single-family :acmes adjamnt, Utere could t;e additional concerns on Uaeir fart as Lo how t;o protect titre !acmes. He stated there are no visual views intro the condcminitans and Lhey have kept to one story and blank walls on tae si.:e adjacent t;o Ute crondomiriur;rs. H° stated the rtuin concrrns r~rardin; traffic were Ute rumirr of trips and parking; and ghat: oLlter cortoerns regardir loiterin^, and sitt:ir on cars, etc. core alro brought up. He strafed the traffic study was done as requested and Mr. Singer 1',as made cro;,nents fiat; Ltere would l;e no irtynact b}• this deve]opnent on t:he surroundirx3 street system because Utis is n:n a big cromplex and a develefrx=^.t; of Ltis size would not dramatically affect tae area, but the Comission was concerned about wrest hanpens an the rest of tae street. Mr. Marshall. referred Lo Exhibit II and stated t:tese twro parcels are Lhe re•naining two w l;e dan-,ed and Uae other parcels on the scut:'t side of SavarNa, east of ?farian, have already been redesi;rtat;ed and trill probably 1:e develcped as lZ`5-1200 and Lae rcainin3 focus i , on the current crondaniniuru and duplexes. He stsated at Lhe request of tae City, til.:y studied the entire neig:tborltcod as if evera~Uting was demolisa~ and redevelolxd from scrat:cdt and lnt:t studies sho:•e: there would tx no impact:. OPPQSITIO\ Rase Leadt, 649 S. Marian tiay, Anaheim, st;atcv she is present w request t:at the Comnissicm not approve this plan; tritest no one crt Marian Pray liL•es Ute idea cf Ravin, trite apartments plarni can L:teir side of Marian ir_cause they ail] 10.5e Uteir privacy and trite value of their property will. be reduced; resat Gtere are a lot of dtildren on fiat streeC and Utis will bring in more dtildren and ie.Qact 1.'.teir sdtools. Slte statca: t:itere have begirt prol.lm~s on Che street and Ute Police crould not get there and bringing in more ;xople will. rta're tritest problem wrrse; t1taL :ester is also a concern and r;ientioned a well currently being used; and also traffic is a ,^.robl~n and iC is ar: to rake a left t;urn onto 1(notL now. She st;atxd at Ute meeting on f7ovcmber 23; there was disc-ussian about Learirtg darn tae duplexes and L•uilding more apartlmltls and she did not lotow aow that rcany people crould In put inW t:at area. She statcy: ever}rone on Marian signed a petitior. that t:tey Sid not want the apartm=nts because cf trite water, sc:tools, traffic, Police Depart:r.~stt, dtildren's safety, etc. ate sWl;ed she does not t:ltinlc t~tis is a good project for Utat area. ]3ernice Ta.,-,,art:, ]2857 S. Ereezewroa:, Ia '!irad3, stated she nuns ones of the duplexes at B45 S. Marian Clay and ] ivad there for several years, and intends t;o yo lxiclc here in the future; and Uat site objects to testis pr~•z~sal anc: alsa ouject;ed in i977 and tltcught ever}rone aas taeen c.~onsidered. exc~pL t::tose in Lae cuplexes. She st;at:ed '~tose w`to signer the petitioner's ;?etit;ion are alt:: ones t8to :rant w sell. and not Ute people w:to live t:laere; rifest they laugitt the property lmc:ause it is a ;,uiet street 1/4!88 h1INUTfiS, ANAf~EIM CITY PLANNING COhlh11SSI0N, JANUARY 4, 1988 88-11 and sim rents it t:o a family wtto want to live in a Home. She staged fences are proposed on U:e west, but not on Um east adjacent to their properties; and that twro and three stor}• apartments uill look right inW their bedroom windo:s and she did not UtiN: t;hey should l;e permit:led. Art 5tahovich, 805 Ramlaewrood Drive, owner of property at 3639 Savanna, asY.ed what: time of Um day the sLud}• was taken. Q:airman 1•tesse skated Um traffic study considers all. hours, including peak hours and Mr. Stahovidi aslcc~i if the weaUmr would affECt the traffic cnents. Paul Singer, Traffic F7tgineer, stated tdtenever possible, traffic studies are ccnductz~ :dmn t:he surface pavmtenC is dr}~ and ttzere is no appreciable difference w9let:her it is sunny. :".r. Stahovich as!:N9 when the traffic counC was Wl:en. He stated he drives that street; from 3 Cc 10 times a day and tlia traffic count was tal:an on Dc<~nt;er arc and 4t:h and t:l:e counter was put: there at ahouC 7:30 p.m. on Tlwrsday night, and U:at: it rained on Friday, the 41:h of Decanber, and Umre was nc traffic during that Lime. He explained his concern is 1:haC 1a:a1; is not: a fair traffic crount. ~iairran Messe_ stated tale report was dated Deccnnirr 29t:h, bat t9taC is not the date of the count. He e:glaincd there will i~ an oppJrtunity for questions regardin? tale traffic st:udy. N.r. Stahovidt staged Utere tins a c:arcnt made that taiere trould 1>e no problem wiUt emergenc}' ecuipm:nt getting in and ouC of ti.at street and t:he Fire De['art:~rnt indicated the projects would be sprinklered so twat is not a wncern. ik stated sprinklers are not a had idea, but ghat: doesn't help the people wito do not have sprinkaers. He referred t:o a fire several years ago when tare ecui;attent could not get in because it is a one wa}• street. He stated on 1)ec.~nt:er 6 he and another gentaemar. surveyed the thole aria and there were_ 12 differenC vacancies, plus Ll:r~ of his n. :r buiidirs whid: were vacant. He slated in 196:1 he tried to get leis propert}' rewned ar was denied, and now those o::ners want w rezone and move at: the other otmers t'xxnse. He stated ta:ose wlic live there nave invested their life savings in their propert:ics and plan to stay. He stated also tare developers ]rave said Umy would not have anyone under two years olc livino there, but that is illegal and is discriminating. ire stated lie is for develolnent, iwt; it should not t;e overcrcwtiec bemuse that brings more crime. He slated U~is is a good CiL•y and this is a good Planning Cortmissicr. and l:r_ trould lii:e to keep it that way. larr}• I]nerson, 3931 Savanna, staged he is opposed to this project: because tare density is t;oo high and as proposed, the project will have a celeterious effect: on the Savanna Street cxnmunity; Uwt traffic is one concern and iC is vc-.r}' difficult t:o maY.e any turnirr, m7vmrnC onto Knott from Savanna Street and visibility is very bad and lool:irr, ncrtiiaound on Knott, you cannot see tc~ffic and he did not; Utinl: t;lmy will lm able t:o acquire prepert:y to ;vke Chat ,situation 1;eLt:er and a signal at: that; intersection wrouid not adequately mitiaat:e Use ir}oact: of a iiigii cin~sity project in ghat area. He salted he rea]izes development is inevitable, 1:uL Clu ,rropa~ed densities are rude too high and suggest;ecl RM-3000 cevelop:tenL. He salted frrxn Um esWblisl:ed land use pat:Lern in that area, it appears medium density residential. is 1,eCter suitxd and rim higlmr densities are not as ca;a~at:ible with tam existing duplexes and concominitmts and contiguous land uses are in Um lot;-medium ranoe and flat would seem t:c tr_ rare reasonal:le; taut Utcre appears t:o Ix~ inadequate oiler. space and infrastrucCUres and tlm closest: fart: is quite a distance away and dtildren would have t:o cross a nejor arterial t:o get to the lark. lie added he uculd he opposed to tl:e proposals. T:vd Keeton, 3561 Savanna, staged he is opposed to Lhe l`soposed 86-unit: apartment cromplex and U~at he suimit:Ced over 45 signatures at tam last taeetim cpl~ing Llie 70-unit cotstplex on tam south side of tha street; that according t:o the traffic totals, it would increase frcxn 80 dai:~ L•r.ips Co over 1300 daily trips with these L::o projects and ghat is a significant increase and he did not Dunk Uieir reeii;ential streeC could Landle it. He slatted he would not: Lr ol•posed Co a tuo-stor}', 35-unit apartmnt, canpler, on tam soutt side of tlm street and 40 units cn Um norUt side, provided Ute units 1/4/88 DIINUTES, ANAHEI<•1 CITY PLANNING COD4fISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 88-]2 stepped up from a single story to a two stor}' away fran adjawnl; single-story hatr_s and tatat would maximize privacy and Help Ute residents in Lhe single-story liars not to feel. i;oxed in. He stated he feels Umse two eafiplexes would tx'nefit the people selling out, tae developers and Umir i~G:ors, LaC Uie property values of Lilo lwnecrnass and residents Silo remain would go down significantl}~. He asked Um Carmission to cronsider Ute people remaining on Savanna Street rriten Utey make their decision. '~=.ry Bader, 6701 Savaruta, staged slm owns an 8-unit c:arq~lex tiitic9t is actuall}~ in Buena Paris; t:ltat .. a tatey were iwilding the ccni;]ex, it: was zorcd for 23 units, tut Use Cit;}~ of Anaheim wroulc on]y give Umm utilities for 8 units and U:e area bras rezoned in 1.977 ir_c:ause of traffic trifidt Las irotzbly vaL'd; and that: her propctrt:y is in escrow, lx;t Ute st:rctet: cannot handle fate Craffic; that: Utere are seven parcels to l;e developed on t:he north: ghat; their proposal is for 70 units, plus two other .lots on Um east and site did not; imc:: hcv many rsid2nts are Umre now, l;ut eilamr prcjeca would mare than double the 1:raffic and she fe1C the high densit}~ is ncC appropriate. Sharron Cooley, 3569 Savanna, stated she rnms one cf laic 9-unit; single-story condominiums; and that; slte is oppose3 to Use tatrae stories and Co the density. Slm stated on the day after the last: hearing, November 24, she left bane Co gc tc work and :.as Che sixiaf car at Savanna and Knott: and it gook almost 15 minutes t;o get Lc tale crorner Lo make a rigid: turn and because of increased traffic, she has to leave ham earlier; C}:at: Knott: is heavily traveled and she t:hcugat Lhe increased traffic on Cwo dead end str~°ets does not mal:e yooc sense. Site stated site is opposed to a 1:}:roe-stor}' canplex on tale outer side of her fenm; UtaL imr lx:drom windows and patio woulc face fatal; ca;fplex and she does not Lc he ucd?ed i.n wiUt taro stories on Lhe rear and three. stories on the front and Utought: it :.rould i;e just; t:oo crowded and thought: it: will drrrease her I:ropers:}~ value; that: a lol; of developers say it: till not: hurt pro{-art:y valu_, iwL her brother has keen told by the real estate agents that: ?Lis i;roperLp values are louer hectau~a of Ute apartmenCS adjacwnt: Lo his prop_~rty. S::e stated she is goi to remain U:ere, at: least: tza:~torarily, anri Choy are ;oing t:o he irtyucted with increased roc^le, Craffic. and she hel.ieved an increase in crime. She ad~cd if i1: is approved, she ?rlieved a 1:raffic signal is mardatcry aC Lhe ecrnrr of Knott and Savanna and Che crab on the rorUt side of Knott; should i:e painted red Co prohibit; packir~ m provide visihl]>ty for tlm traffic; and t:at the spcr_~ limit shculc lxa decreased ar:d there should tie increased police ~aLrol. ts. Bader asi:ed if tale sewer system will. handle 1:he increased usa;e and if noC, will Utose alto are left i;dtind ix; paying for it. S1te salted the ardtitr_rt staged Umre will be blank walls facing Um crondcminitu:~ and aslmd if Clutre is a guarant;ee !:}tat :ritat: is proposed today is :clot will. actually he lx;ilt or if limy wn dfange rate plans after approval. C1Uairm3n 14sse state if this is approval, it; would lxr subjec:l: !.o Um e.+dtibits presented Coday. t•Ls. Bader stated she l,elievc~d Lhe Ca:missior, itas ar. eUtical obli.gaLion Co Um people :rho are rcmainin; and noC Co the pc~:ple wito are selling out; and sitculd ecnsidur :itat it is test for everybody and wi.aC is best for Llte toes tying left behind. Karen t•icrltalick, 320 22nd Street, Hun7:ingCOn Beads, state she owns property aC 855 S. I•larian iJay and is opposed to Uiis project ttec:aus2 oI t:ha traffic and t:haC she ho:r's the area ]Las to he develoi.c'cl, iwt; Utought it has t;o be done int:elligs,Ciy and did noC Utink Utis prcjecC will be good for Cite neigiil:crhoc:i and Ute d:ildren in U~~.= neiglitx~rhood tc lwr~ all tataC traffic and also Chore could lie an cverflcr: cf parking and increased crime. FETITIONER' S R]:BUPfAL Idr. Hanna slat;ad regardirr, sd:cols, Utat they will leave Co pay a fee for cads unit t;o Um sdtool. district and l;hc total sdtool firs could be about 5200,000 far tails de•/elopmertt and t;hat uill. improve Ute sdtool system and add :fare sdtools and he t:hotx~hC ta,aC will help t:ho cm:run:l.•~. He sWt.ed 1/4/88 MINUTES, ANA}lEIht CITY PLANNING COhA1ISSI0N,JANUARY 4, 1988 88-13 concerning water and sewers, they will comply wiU~ all requirements '~f the City and it lws been indicated t1taL• there are adequate facilities. He stated everyone is concerned about Um Lraffic and Ute 1;raffic engineer will be happy t;o answer any questions; Lltat• onr concern is a le°t-turn on ivtett and they are willing to participate in a traffic signal. at Utat intersec~t;ion. He st•eted he wants tz: develop a project everycne is happy wiUt an. they do noC want t:o invade tale neighbrr's privacy. Concerning emergency equipment, he stated the street is 63 feet: wide and the equipia.:~~ would nave access and that their project would be 1007E sprinllerei and was sure when Savanna Street is developed, better access will be provided. Cncerning vacancies, he thought development of these projects will. bring more tenants to Um other units wiiidt are currently vacant. Regarding fate occupancy limit of ttiro persons, he stated that is somet'ning tam City has required and thought the City Attorney could answer Ute question regarding enforcement of that restriction. He statE~ they are providing 2]] sq. ft. of leisure area wliiclt is more Ulan required and there are areas where file dtildren can pla}~ He staged privacy of the condominiums will. lie totally maintained wiUt single-story and walls wiUt no openings next to Uteir units. H2 stated reducing Ute speed limit as mentioned is prohabl}~ a good idea and increasing police patrol. is someUiing the City tiould ;+ave to provide. He explained they wi]] he paying a sewer fee and was sure the system will be improved and the existing homeowners would not hate to pay for Ute improvements. He stated famy will guarantee to build t:he project according to the plans present,~d here. Mr. Marshall s~,at;ed their traffic cronsultant ~iil discuss tlm tines of Um traffic counts. Concerning +ut:c comments about no fence next: Co their property, he pointed out tatere is a fence cut Ute east side as well.. Mr. Gobran, representing Justin firmer Traffic EYtgineers, 207 S. Brea Boulevard, staged Ute count was taken on December 3rd because they usually try to avoid duistmes and Utat it vas Thursday w•Itidt is a fairly representative day. Qtairrrnn Messe skated he noticed Umy used ITE numbers and asked if ITE numbers used Uu-oughouL the Ifiiteci States are good for SouUmrn California. hir. Gobran stated these figures are considered to he representative of residential developmertC all wer Um count;ry. dtairman Messe staged he is questioning that because tl:e figures tarry have cam up with, for peak mocttirr and evening it~•~rs after full buildout seem t:o be very low. Mr. Gobran stated tamse calculations figure six trips per da}' for an apartJmrtt and franttis point of view, it• seems to be adequate. Cocmissionez Bouas asY.ed if it was rainirr, when Ute traffic count: ryas taken and Mr.u"ol:ran responded it tias not raining and explained the}' leave Ute traffic counter Utere for ]c:~ger than a day. He staL•ed if the eaeather is not dry, it tiouId be menticned be in the repnzt.. Chairman Messe stated he has a pronlerm with Um ~.eal: hour figures and t:here was sam discussion regarding Ute figures used in Um study wiUt (9vairman 1•lesse pointing out sam of Ute st:alemnts made do not•tmatcl: Um figures and information in Ute report. Catmissioner Herbst stated he did not agree with Uva peak hour figures either. HA Mated he Utought ancU~er study should be conducted. Comnissicner Feldhaus asked if these figures included tam huildcut of these two 9rojecis only, or all of Savanna. Leonard tfcQtee stated buildout included Utese two projects anc two vacant parse}s if develcped at RN,-1200. C]taizman Messe asked how many additional. units could be developed m.'er Ute 156 units proposed in Umse two applications. Leonard McC-liee responded those two parrnls potentially could be I/4/88 s8-la DIINUTES, ANAL{L=IN CITY PLANNING COhirIISSION JANUARY 4 1988 developed t:o RM-]200 if rezoned at 36 units per acre and U4ere are about; L•wo acres vacant. (bmrtissioner Carusillo staged that could mean 220 units total and this report indicates only 88 vehicles rnuld tie going out in Ute morning. Responding to Ccmissioner Bouas, h1r. Gobran stated Ute morning male hour is mnsidereci to be from 6:30 a.m. t:o 9:00 a.m. and this represents only one Hour. Paul. Singer staged ta4ere are a number of Grips generated by eadt unit and Uiose Grips are distritwted among Use peak Iwurs and also fate figure is furUter dilutcni at the intersection of Knott; and Savarula because a certain percentage turns right anr, a certain percentage will. rt4aY.e a left turn. He stated Che ones turning left are tale ones mailing mnf].icting turns and causing delays and that could he easily roriedied t;y restriping Ute street and making three lanes, cne inbound and two outbound, cne being a left turn lane, and in this instance, that: would mitigate Ute i;c~zct. He stated the City does do that as a rreCter of crourse when they find a s~.rEeC has a great number of turn movements. CaTmissioner Carusillo asY.ed if file street: is wide enougi: and if it is not wide enough, would parking be eliminated t:o widen it? Paul Sinter stated street; ear{:ing is not canted for Uiis cani;lex because they are stpposed to provide adequate off-street parking, but: if the street was rest:riped, there is adequate width to provide that lane and eliminate the P.~r)cing for that distance required for the left tasrn lane. Cortmissioner Feldhaus slaCed Gie Traffic Engineer 14as indicated he dog not foresee a traffic problem with file development of t!mse mrplc.es, and asY.ed if :ie shill. feels that; same 4.ay. Mr. Singer states he still feels that way; U4at from a professional Wolof of view, Utere is no traffic problem on this particular street, but from an ir.~ividual. or residenC's view, tatat could d~,ange. He stated in U4is case on Savanna Strc-rt, some delays will !a: caused, l.~ut cid not think it will cause a hazard or txcam an intolerable situation w~iiere a traffic signal is needed- Ile stcited if a signal. is needed, it would be I:ut: on a priority list Bice any otaier ]xaL•ion Uiroughout t:he City arri: -., °ignal would be scheduled. He addr-:: Uiis traffic report is ccmnensurate 4;ith fife practices of the City of Anaheim. C94airman Hesse staged this is a cul de sac street: and this is a prorosal for U4e most density allowed in Anaheim. Paul Singer staged lie is not: a proponent of this dense development, and is rerely addressing Che ntmtber of tri{~ generated yrr, this development. He stated he would not litre to see a signal zt Uwt intersection and 4;ould recommend t2tis project noC be approved if U~aC is fate case because he would not want w see. a traffic signal at ta4is location. Respondine to Commisaioner Feldhaus, Ns. Singer stated 14e does not wart t:o see a traffic sigma] because it is an addit:icnal interruption to Utrough traffic on Knott: Avenue and Uwt w~e have taxan zl.l over t:he City, but they are not desiraL•le tc Um traveline pulaic. Commissioner Feldhaus staged it seems a signal 4,ould adaress Ute roncerns of tale people wito ]lave been unable w get out cf Savanna and malm a left turn- Afr.Singer staled every st:raet without a signal has difficulty malcirg left: turns. Cannissioner Carusillo stated Use Traffic Engineer would prefer not Co have a traffic signal, iwt it; semis if tatis is developed as proposed, one would definitely t~ required to handle lace increased traffic flow. Mr. Singer stated a signal causes delays on Knott Avenue. He stated eventually we stave t:o start rtnvirtg traffic in Ute City in fife general transportation s}~staltt and noC just: in one location. ~ PUBLIC IiEARIt~ 1tiAS QASID• 1/4/88 MINUTES, ANAi1P.Ih1 CITY PLANNING COhLMISSION, JANUARY 4, 1985 88-15 Commissioner Hertst asked if the developer ltas considercri develop;rertt under Ute present zoning. Mr. Hanna responded Utey aid consider that, but Ute economic value of f:lte propert;y makes UtaC impossible. lie staged Utey actually at,m some of Utese properties now. Commissioner Hertst: stM.ed he was a Ca:cmissioner in 19i"' and sat through the Ixtb]ic hearings what late property owners cut: Utere and carne up wiUt watat they tatought would be last for Ute people living there and he did not see where Utere have firm any changes, except now tatose owners t.ltat t:o sell their property for fate highest use; tarot late Commission is to look at Ute land use and Ute land use approved then was what the people wanted znd Ute Commission ltas rreintained it, and outer requests for higher density have been de~tied and they ocnstructed t:o Ute Rti1 2900 zoning requircanents and tatose studies were ttased on traffic. etc. He stated Ut=re have outer problems on Ufa street: suds as drainage and Utat the !'J/I 2900 is still. appropriate. Mr. Hanna stated in 1977 all Ute property owners ltad single-fami]?~ homes, taut these are na longer single-family homes and Utis is late cjtange that: rtes Cal:mot place, and Clce single family owners have mgred. Comissioner Herbst strafed lire condominiums were developed after long sCUdies and he UtoughC Utis developer could 2wild in Ute ]Ztil :000 7.one, and asked wlty iL sltouid be dtanged t;o 2MM ]200. hie. Hanna staled tl:ere are RDt-1200 developnrrts in fate area a~trrn-c~ after 1977. Ccrmissicner hfc Burney stated staff addressed tarot in Eeltibib B. He explained Utere is one other property to the south that is HId-1200. Commissioner Bouas sliced trite term high density is being used and it is medium densit:y wi:idt is actually t;he highest density pemitted in Ntaheim, txtC is not: as high as what is allowed in outer placers. Slte stated she would router see these units developed as i?M 2500 with density ttonuses for affordab]e units because Utese would be quality units. Commissioner Mc:Burney asi:ed Ito»~ long it would be }~^`.ore tare City could partic•ipat:e in Ute cast of instilling a traffic signal if fan developer is ui,.ling w participate. Mr.Singer responded he does not have Ute mat;clting funds available. He explained a l:raffic signal costs about $100,1)00. Mr. Hanna scaled he can see there is a traffic proh]em and thought a signal. woule !:alp tatat• situation and that he •,:ould be willing Co give t:he funds to Uw City until the CiCy has fate mat:dting funds. Responding to Cartmissioner Boydstun, Mr. Singer sCaf:ed traffic signal assessment fees for this develolxnent would not be very muds at $62 per unit. tie added if Ute developer wishes to participate in one-half Ute cosC of a traffic signal, and fund 100A of it, lte can start budgeting for it in July 1989, and Uten Ute developer could be reimbursed. N,alcolm Slauyhtrr staged he did not know how we could cormit fate City Council tct appropriate money in its twdget to reimburse this developer. Cartnissioner Carusillo asked if Mr. Fianna wculd develop and m]int:ain the project, or sell it to an investor. Mr. Hanna responded fatey will mainCain a.•nership cf LroUt projects txacatse of Che size Mr. Hanna stated Ire would tie willing 1:o participate in w9tat;ever :__ ^n*mission desires rey-arding traffic signal. Commissiorer Boydstun stated it seers a necessity to have a traffic signal. Commissioner Carusillo as'red if Utere is access fr•am Ute garace t:o L•Ite unit w encourage parking in Ute structure. 111 Marshall. stated Utere is access from the garage Co Ute unit through Ute courtyard area and net t:o the individual. units; and that a 1;enant would noC walY, bade up t:o the street: to go inL•o the units. 1/4/88 hfINUfES, ANAHEIhf CITY PLANNING COh1h1ISSI0N, JANAURY 4, 1988 88-16 Carmissioner Feldlwus stated the area was icepL• aC RM 2400 in 1977 and a Question was asked :•diy dwrrge it new, but U:ings dwng~ and a lot of taw property owners wi:o opposed it in 1.977 and row L•ltirrgs have dwnged, the same owners want it: dwnged. CUnnissioner Her1sL salted Um streets ]lave not dwnged since 1977 and the properties }wee not dwryed; that ownerships tray have dwnge', l:ut U:e people t.H:o oohed the properties were irnrol.ved in those studies and U:e area was practically all. zoned for low-medium density ~ not over ]6 units would be developed and this is a request: far 36 units Lo the acre. Cormissioner Feldlwus asked when sewers were provided for U:aC area. Art Data. Deputy City F2rineer, stated sewers Mould iwve been required with tl:e first incrr~.~< in develop;rnnt, and UwuyhC it was probably wiU: the development of the duplexes on Dfarian Y7ay. Clwirman Hesse salted the people presEntl.y living there will be seeing a dwnge in t;i:eir way of life and he has not really heard any reason to dwnge Um adopted General. Plan from low-nedium density to medium densiC}•. Mr. iianna stated Uiere were single-family hcries in f:he area in ]977 and then the apartments were developed im~ading their privacy, etc., violating the City ordinances and it is Cheir wish t:o rake Ll:is dwnge. t3wirman 'Hesse stated t:i~is will. be d:.:nging things for t]:e press'rt: residents in t:he multiple-family ]:casing, and he has not heard anything from U:e residents in G:e condminiuras UwL they want Ll;is dwnge. Mr. Hanna slated there is a new R'H 1200 development on t{:e souU: site of Savanna near Knott, and U:ey are requesting a dwrre going with the trend of dwnge. Camissioner HerisL stated U:ere are Limes when the General Plan needs tc tie dwnoed, but increased densities, not onll• affect the people living in the area, lwt affects people all over Anaheim; 1:Iwt our roads are getting to a point of gridlocY.ing now an6 the General. ?lan gives a good density at low-median and allows 18 units an acre and U:is request is for 36 units per acre, and tlwt will. add more traffic. He s1;aL•ed Cl.at is wily he Ceels the General Plan should not l:e dwnged in this area. tHr. henna stated Orange County is a very popular place and a lot of people will be moving here and tatere is a mixture ~f uses on LiwL street and he just taring all the uses and making U:en conform and be suiLaL•le and they will. provide a traffic signal nal:ing it better for euerylndy. Cannissioner Carusillo asked if there are Lwo more acres t:o he developed since Ms. Hanna has said after l:his is developed, there is nocdting left to be developed. Dir. Hanna stated only two parcels are left any Lhey do not Local two acres. gwirman Dfesse stated Marian l:'ay trou]d be srbjecC t:o redevelop;nent also. Nr. k-:nna responded Umre are a~cisting duplexes on Dtarian Slay and no developer would demolish twro units on these wall lots and develoi, four units because it: is not economically feasible. AC:IO,\:Comnissioner HerlsL offered a motion, secronded lry Ca;missioner Md3urney, and Df~TION CARRIID Uwt the Anaheim City Planning Comnissinn iws revietimd the proposal w dwnge 11ie current Irow-Medium Density Residential designation to `feditan Density Residential. on an irrec~fularly-slwped parcel of land consisting of approximately 13.4 acres located on U:e nort:h and south side of Savanna St:reeL, west of Knelt Slxeet; and to reclassify s:bjecL property from tl:e RS-A-43,000 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 88-17 (Residential, Agricultural) and RS-7200 (Residential, Single-Family) Zones t:o RM-1200 (Residential, Multiple-Family) Zu,c to construct a 70-unit, 3-story apartment canplex cairn waiver of maximum strt:ct:ural heicitt on an irrecvlarly-shaped parcel of land rnnsisting of approximately 1.9 acres, located at the souCirnest crorner of Savanna Street and Marian Hay, and furUter described as 3640 Savanna Street; and does hereby approve the Negative I>eclaration on the laasis Lltat it leas ecnsicered trite proposed Negative I>ec:iaration t;ogeUter with any ca:mer:ts rec_~eived during the public revieta process and further finding on trite ta:sis of Llte Initial Stud} and any crnr~nts received t:ltat there is no suisWntiai evidercr_ that Ute project: will stave a significant effect: on the errvironmenC. Commissioner Felo'haus staged Utere is mixture in the area now vita ELN-1200, R+7-3000, RM-2400 and a few single-family hones cn RS-A-43,000. Cormissicner Herlst offered Resolution No. PC88-03 and raved for its passage and adoption t;itat late Anaheum City Planning Ca:mission does hereby disapprove General Plan Psendrmnt No. 234, latereby retaining Ute current designation of Low-rkdium I>Lnsit}~ Residential. permitting develo7menC of 0-18 units per acre. On roll call Cite foregoing resolution was i,assed try fire following vote: AYES: CQvtuISSI0N~2.~: IlOYDSRIDI, CARL'SILLO, fiFa2IISI', tf.ESSE NoE~: C~`4dISSIQ~'~ aortas, FEI.aiAUS, rte >3<,~~~EY AI3SFNC: CONPSISSIONEF25: NOiJE Cormissioner Herlst. offered Resolution C:o. ?C 88-04 and moved for its passage and adoption t1taC fate Anaheim City Plannin; Ccrtmission does hereby de:n~ Reclassification No. 87-88-25. On roll. call t:he forgoing resolution was passed try fire following vote: AYES: COFMISSIOi,'ERS: BOYD6T1.Ni , CA}2lJSILLO, }iERItSf, MESSE LAOIS: CGMMISSIONI~2S: BO(JAS, FII,L1iA[S, ~1C ELTLtiE1' AffiFVI': CU`MISSIQVERS: NO\'E Cpttnissioner Herlst offered Resolution No. PC 88-OS and moved for its passage and adoption that fate Anaheim Cit}~ Planning Commission does herelry deny Variance No. 3727 cn late lasis thaC there arc no special circurrstanms applicable to Cite pcocerty s:dt as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, tiiticit do not apply to other ident;scatty caned properties in the vicinity; and that strict applicaL•ion of Lte Zoning Code does not deprive rate property of privileges enjoyed by o!`lter properties in identical zoning classification in the vicinity. On roll. call the foregoing resolution was passed b}~ the followin, vote: AYIS: Ct7t~MISSIQvIERS: HOYAS'1W, CARUSILLO, Hr~28Sf, MESSE NOI•S: COt~f9ISSIt)V~',RS: 84lJAS, FE1.DEiAUS, MC P,(7RNEY AffiFAT: CQtiP1ISSI0NER..: NONE ACI'IIXrS ON ITE, NG. 4. General Plan Amendment No. 239 was not approved by Resolution [`rc. PC 88-03. Co:missioner Herlst; offered a motion, seconded try Ccmnissicn.s MrBUrney and PIOTIUY CARRIID C}tat Ute Ana!tcim City Planning Carmission ltas reviewed late proposal to reclassify subject property from the RS-A-93,000 (Residential., Agricultural.) Zone Co tl~e RM-]200 (Residential, 1/4/88 DIINUCL=S, ANAIi~IM CITY PLANNING COb'MISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 88-18 Multiple-Family) Zone to cronst:ruct a.. 85-unit, 3-stor}~ apartlnznt canplex wiU: waivzr of maximw~ strt:cl:tual :;eight on an irregularly-siwped parcel of land consisting of approximatzly 2.39 acres, located on the north side of Savanna Street, ]roving a frontage cf approxim3t;el.y 332 feet• on tare norUt side of Savanna Street an6 Leing located approximately 660 feet asst of tl:e ceni:erline of KnotC Street and further described as 3603, 3609, 361.3 and 3627 Savanna St:ri~et; and does hereLy approve Ute Negative I)eclarat:ion on t:l;e lasis tlwt: it lws considered the propped Negative l7eclaration together wita: any cortmentw received during Llie public review process ant further finding on the basis of rate Initial Study and any conmenls received tlwt there is no sulst:antial evidence t;wt the project will trove a significant effect on the envirorunent. Crnmissionez Herlst offered Resolution No. PC B8-06 and ixved for its passage and adoption Uwt Ute Anaheim City ?lanning Cormission dms hereh}~ cent' Reclassification No. 87-88-33. On col] call Clte forz^eoing reso:a,ion was passed ~' the following vote: AYES: C©`f~fISSIUVERS: DOYI~i1+TJ, CARUSILLO, IiERL~i', MES.SE NOFS: COhPdISSIOPIERS: BOIIAS, FELDIi1U5, (•1` 1TJR.\`EY AESEYI': COt~~TiISSIONERS: NOhB Commissioner Herter offered Resolution No. PC 82-07 and moved for its passage and adoptior. Uwt the Anaheim City Planning Commission does deny Grant: Variance No. 3739 on Uie t~asis tlwt: there are no special circwmt:ances aplaicable to t:he property sud, as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, atiidt do not apply t;o ot:her identically zoned grope-rties in the vicinity; and tarot strict application of the Zoning Code does net deprive tlm property of privileges enjoyed try otaier properties in identica.t zoning classification in the vicinity. On roll call ta'~e foregoing resolution was passed h}~ the following vote: A}'rS: COI~fNISSI0t1ERS: EgYIXi'n:l, CARl3SILCA, HER'f.5'C, I~frSSE NOES: COD^:ISSIONEF25: BOUAS, FEI.OHAUS, MC I3URl~'EY AffiE\T: COhYdISSIONr"E. LS: NOME Commissioner Souas offar~ a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bcydst:un and M7IIQV CARRIED Uwt: 1;he Anaheim City Planning Commission dor-s hereby recamm~d City Council review Reclassification !\b. 87-88-25, Varianm No. 3727 and Retlassificatim Ne. 87-BS-33 and Variant` No. 3733 in conjunction with General Plan Amr-rd:nent No.234. RECF~SS: 9:05 p.m. RECOtNENE: 4:15 p.m. C9wirman Meese did not return. Item No. 2 was heard following the recess. Chairman Diesse had declared a conflict of interest on Item No. 2. Chairman i•Icssc returned to the meeting following the action on Item No. 2 1/4/88 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY p'Lp,;JNING COMMISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 88-19 ITEM N0. 5. CDOA CATEGORICAL E)¢]~T'ION-CLASS 3 AND COhIDITIONN. USE PERMIT N0. 2968 (READVERI'TSID) AND VARIANCE N0. 3736. PUBLIC HFIiRIA};. l)<+NERS: BETTY A. Wi-IITFII7.D, 710 S. CIAUDINA STREET, ANAHEIM, CA 92805. AGENT: JAMES N. KAPKO, 703 S. PHIIADELPHIA STREET, ANAHEIM, CA 92805• Property described as a rectangularly-sltaped parcel. of land consisting of approximately 5457 square feet, having a frontage of approximately 50 feet on the west side of Philadelphia Street, approximately 340 feet north of Uie centerline of South Street, and further described as 703 S. Philadelphia Street. Conditional. Use Permit Request: To converC a siryle-family residence 1:o a"granny" unit. Variance Request: To cronslruct asingle-family duelling to replace the existing dwelling proposed for conversion to a granny unit with kaivers of minimwn front yard setlaaclc and minimum floor area of dwellir.; unit. Continued from t:li~ tneetirr of December 7, 1987, in order for the pet;it:icner to sulmit an application for a variance to construct a new single-family residence on subjeca propert;}~. There kas no one indicating their nres~n-- i. oppositicvi at; Uie public ]scaring and although tiie staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minuLS. James Kapico, agent, ea-plained he is purdiasine_ Uie property, an'.''he rear house is very small and they need rare room; and also they are }iopin; his grandmoUier will. live in Uie "granny unit". lk' responded to Clwirnan Messe that if his grandtmUter doesn't live in it, I>e will rent: it to senior citizens only as required with no more Uwn taro persons kilo are 60 years or older. He stated there is anoUier granny writ on the sL•reet. TfiE PUBLIC liFARIi~ WAS CIAS11l. h1r. Kapko responded fa Commissioner Feldliaus Utat; l:e has to sign a crovenant with the City agreeim not to rent; the unit ::o an}~one oilier than a senior citizen. Cannissioner HerbsL• asked r.~tiy he did not add on to t:lie rxisting imuse. Mr. Kapico salted it orouid not l:e feasible lx~cause of Ute titiay Ux~ lwuse is placed on the property and also it is an older lwuse wiUi a different type foundation. It was noted Uie Planning Director cr ari authorized representative ltas dater:nined Uiat t;he proposed project falls within Uie definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 3, as defined in Uie State CEQA Guidelines and is, Uierefore, catgorical]y exempt from Uie recuiretrent t_-; prepare an environmental. imzct report. ACTION: Ccmnissioner Boydstun offered Resolution No. FC 88-08 and moved fcr its passage and adopL•ion Uiat Ute Anaheim City Planning Conmissicn does herel:y grant Conditional L'se PermiL• No. 2968, pursuant w Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035, subject Lo Interdepartmental Comnitt:ee Rec.~mndat;ions. Cn rol] call. Uie forgoing resolution was passed bl' Uie follouirr vote: AFE5: pOhf1I5SI0IQEEtS: Bouas, ]loydstun, Carusillo, Feldhtaus, iierlst, hlesse NcEurney NOES: t70hTIISSI01\'ERS: :d01JE ABS&VI': CQ'TIISSIONEItS: i~B 1/4/88 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CONAfISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 88'20 Ca;missioner P,oydstun offered Resolution 140. PC 88-09 and r.[nred for its passage and adoption Utat Uie Anaheim City Planning Commission does herety grant Variance No.3736 on the basis UzaL' here are special. circutnst;aneos applicable to the property suca: as size, shape, bopograplty, l0c'-at:io^ or surroundings, w11iGt do not appl}~ t.o other identically zoned properties in fate vicinity; and Uiat strict application of Ute Zoning Code deprives Uie property of privileges enjoyed 1>)~ other properties in idenl;ipl zoning classification in Uie vicinit:y and subject to Interdeparttmnt:al Committee Rccgtmendaticns. O7 roll call. the foregoing resolution was passed bT the following vote: AYES: CCt`1KIS.iI0NER5: DO[1~5, ]30YDSTWi , CARUSILLO, FELDE{AUS, H[12}1SI' MESSE, ^~ P,URl`'EY NOFS: tXkt'SISSIO,\'ERS: NU\'E A13SEvT: CQ`S~'SSSIU\'ERS: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Alt:crney, presented t:he written right to alneal the Planning Ccrtmission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. Ii..`~`S N0. 6. CEQA NFI;ATIVE DECr1+RATICr1 (PREVIOUSLY ADVERTISID) AI4D VARII+,\'CE A'0. 3699 (REFIDVER'TI SID) - ~JDLTC HFARiI~G. Olv''4ERS: DORIS A. 711Fti~~sS, 1208 S. ]3R00{+Tl(JRSI STREET', A,'4A}L.Iif, CA 92804. Al;FI4'I': JENSON C. t3I&~1, 17011 REACH DOl1Ia"'L'ARD, SUITE 800, HfIhiING'I'0:; ]3EACH, CA 92647. Property described as a rectangularly-s)ta,~'d pared. of land cronsistirr cf approximately 1.1 acres, Navin, a frontage of approximately 178 feet on the south side of Orange Avenue, apprcxirti3l;ely 550 feet east of tau centerline of Knott Street and further described as 3416 t4est: Orarrc Avenue. RecuesC: Approva] of revised ;cans (Re•~ision No. 1) •aitai waivers of maximum strucCural height and triaximm site crnmrage t:o cronstrucL a 2 and 3-sorry. 34-unit apartment: canplex. Jenson Chen, agent, ~:plained tails project was approved for 33 units and w:ten they surveyed fate land, it uas larger than ll:at was pre;,entcd w fife Planning Department and Liey can add one unit and still rret all file Zoning requirements. TEiE PUBLIC HEAP.II4G 14AS CYASID. txmnissioner Herbst stated he taiowhl the plans are sulslanlially in c:onfcrn3nce with U:e previously approved plan and one additional unit is a miniryf request. It was nolcti the negative declaration ~,as previously approved. ACTI01:: Cumissioner Herbst offered Resolution No. PC 88-70 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Cannission doe:: herebry apprwc revised plans in connection will: Variance No. 3649 on ta,e basis t:ltat U~ere are special circurast:an,es applicable W Ute property such as size, shape, top.:,rapi~y, loo-ation er surroundings, whlc.:] d0 nob a~~ly t.o otau~r identically zoned properli~s in tlm vicinity; and that stricC application of fate Zoning Code deprives Ute property of privileges enjc}~ed l:y oU:er properties in identical. zoning classification in the vicinity and subject to InlerdeparUnental Ccrtmittee Ree:c,-:mendations, replacing the previously approved conditions in their enliret}~. On roll call. the foregoir><, resolution was passed b}~ U~ following vote: 1/4/88 MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 88-20 Cannissioner Boydstun offered Resolutio;~ No. PC 88-09 and moved for its passage and adoption 2:hat Ute Anaheim City Planning Commission does liereL-y grant Variance No.373fi on the basis that Umre are special. circunr>tancrs applicable to Life property such as size, shape, Lopogza~ty, location or surroundings, w•lticdt do not: apply t;o oilier identically zoned properties in fate vicinity; and Utat strict application of Ute Zonirxa Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed l:}• ether properties in identical. zoning classification in t:he vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Csmnitt;ce R°comnendatiorts. On roll. call. Ute foregoing resolution tvas passed lry the following vote: AYES: COhMISSIONERS: AQUAS, BO}'DSIUN, GARISIIJA, FELDHAIlS, HERBST 1~S.SE, A~ I?LJR1'EY NOES: CQ`i`1ISSI01'ERS: NONE APSIITf: CQ`1'SISSTO,\'EE2S: NO~1E Malcolm Slau,iit:r_r, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right: to appeal. the Flannin, Commission's ccrision W71:b1:9 22 day<_ to t:he City Council. I'i~.l N0. 6. CEQA A'F1;ATIVE ll[X^1~R11TION (PREVIOUSLY ADVERTISED) A[V~ VARIANCE N0. '_649 (REA1n'IIZi'ISED) . i'UBLIC [iFARIM. OL~2vEE2S: CHRIS A. 'iliA1~5, 1208 S. P•F200iUlUR.+"T STREET, ANAI~]M, G't 92804. AG1:1'C: JE•JSON C. C7~'J, ]7011 BEACIi BOIIL.c'VARD, SUITE B00, illl\iIN,^,TO:; E&1CH, G~ 92647. Property described as a recta,-tgelarly-shaped parcel of land cronsistirr cf a;.,:roritrately I.1 acres, having a frontage of approximately ]78 tort on Ute seut:h side of Orange Avenue, ap;.roxim>3tely 5°0 feet east of fate c:ent:erline of fUtott StrerC and further described as 3416 West Orange Avenue. Request: Ap,:roval of revised plars (Revision ;Jo. 1) :pith waivers of t:aximum structural heighC and maximum site covecaye t:o eonst:cuca: a 2 and 3-stor}•. 34-unit aCartment. complex. Jenson Chen, agent:, explained tatis project: was approved for 33 units and waen they surveyed fate }and, it tins larger Utan w1~:, wts pre_scrttcd t:o the P]annin^, Departm~tt• and Ltey can add one unit: and still rr_rt all. Ute Zoning requircrents. Tf~ PUBLIC iIEARIAG WAS CIASED. Conmissioner HerisC stated he Gtought the plans are sulntantially in cronfcrnuncr_ with the previovsly approved plan and one additional. unit: is a minimal request. It was notcti t}te negative declaration tas previously approved. ACTICN: Commissioner HerLst; offered Resolution No. PC 88-10 and nrnred for its passage and adoptia: that the Analteila City ?lanning Ccmnission does ir_rein• approve revised plans in connection with Variance P:o. 36Sy on tare basis that tatere are special circwnsWnc:es applicable lA the property sudt as size, shape, top~raphy, location or surroundirrs, witiclt do not apply t:o otater identically zoned properties in Ute vicinity; and tatat strict: application of the Zoning Code deprives rate property of privileges erjo}•ed Lys ota:er properties in identical zonin,- classifigtion in the vicinity and subject to Interdepartmental Oatriitaee Recrmm~r:datiens, r~placin; Um previously approved conditions in Uteir entirety. Or. roll call t:he foregoing resolution was sassed try 1:i:e following vote: 1/4/88 x: D1INUTL•S, ANAIiEIM CITY PLANNING COhL~tISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 8S ,: AYES: CQ•SIISSIONERS: BOIJA.S, BOYDSISJ~i', CARUSIIJA, FELDHAI)^i, HERNST, MESSE, ~ EiURiQEY NOES: CCPP4SSIONERS: NOI':E ABSEAT: CCM'"IISSIO,~'ERS: N01'E Aalcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented Um w7itten right to appeal elm Planning :artnissirn's decision within 22 days t:o tl:e City Council. ITEM N0. 7. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND VARIANCE N0. 3734. PU3LIC l'.FARII~G. 01~'NFRS: DALE A. DEVITT A+'\D MARGARET J.DEVITI, 7]78 1•IANI'CLIFF AVENUE, L1S VEX~AS, NEVALVt 89177. AGENT: FUTURE ESTATES, II.'C. , 7711 Center Avenue, X25, Huntington Seadr, CA 92647. Property described as a.^. irregularly-shaped parrnl of land consisting of approximately 0.41 acre located south of the intersection of Catalpa Avenue and Fir Avenue and northeast of tim Santa Ana (5) Freeway, having a ir:.nWge of approximately 325 feet on Lhe southwest side of Catalpa Avenue and approximately 550 feet south of the centerline cf Dogwood Avenue and furUmr described as 2130 Ivest• Catalpa P.venue. Reque.t: To est;ablisli a 3-lot subdivision and t:o construct; 3single-family residences rriUi waivers of minimum lot area, minimum lot width, minimum frcnt yard setback and minimum rear yard setback. 'There was no one indicating their resencro in opposition to subject request and alChough Um staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Harry 3uth, agent, 10221 Slat;en, Fountain Valley, CA, cr~lained in revies:ing the plans, Um square foot:ages of t;Im lots are slightly higher uiUi the yrullest IoL being 5,944 square feet not 5,850 square feet; as shown in Um staff report. lk: state,: ire did not ]mow if the Planning Department k>3d seen Umse dranges. He sl;aged Condition ~o. 4 is requiring a parcel. m3i- and the City Errginca:r iws indical:cd a lot line adjustment xould be acceptable. He stated tlmir minimum lot width is 68 feet and many 1•.ave 10, 11 or 12 foot seCl~dcs and they are aslking for 6,000-square foot lots tiiirh all. Ute neighbors have. Malcolm Slauglit:er, Deputy City Atwrney, sug5ested Condition No. ~ be modified w include a parcel map or lot line acjustment, as required by Uie City En-3ineer...•~. ACTIIXv: Commissioner Bouas offered a motion, necronded bl' Ccmnissianer `fc Burney, and MOTIQV GIRRIED that the Anaheim City Plannin3 Commission I~as rovieued the proposal to establish a 3-lot subdivision and to consi:ruct• 3single-family residences uitli waivers of mirimu:n I.ot area, minimwm lot widUi, minimum front yard seL•badk and minimum rear yard setback on an irregularly-slwped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.41 acre located south of the inte¢section of Catalra Avenue and Fir Avenue, apprcxirrately 550 feet scut] of tl:e m~ntezline of Dogwood Avenue and furUmr described as 2130 West Catalpa Avenue; and does hereln• approve tl:e Negative Declaration on tine basis that it has considered Um proposed Negati~ro Declaration t:agetlmr with any crommsts received during elm public r.^_view procr-ss and further finding on L>m l;asis of Lhe Initial Study and any c~rmnts received L7at Umre is no substantial. evidence that: the project: will lwve a significant effect on ale environrt>~rt. Comn1551gnCr Bouas offered Resolution No. PC 8E-I1 and moved for its passage and adoption Drat the Anaheim Cit}~ Planting Cocmission does Hereby grant: Varianm No. 3734 on elm 'basis t:1raL• there are special. circw:stances applic-.able t:o tt~e property suds as size, si~ape, topography. location or surroundings, kiiich do not apply to other identically zoned properties in Um vicinity; and Uiat strict application of t:lte Zcnir,3 Code deprives the property of privileces enjoyed lry oUier properties in identical. zoning classification in elm vicinity and subject tc Interdepartmental Ccatmii;tee Rec:onrtendations, including Ure modification to Condition No. 4. 1/4/88 htINUTGS, ANAt1EItd CITY PLANNING COt+PtISSION, JANUARY 4, ]988 88-22 On roll. call. L•he foregoing resolution was passed try Gee follrnring vote: AYES: CGFY•IISSIONIILS: BOUAS, BOYAS1T.hN, CARUSILSA, FEI,DHAUS, IiII213ST, MESSE, F1C LsURNEY NOES: CQ•MISSIONERS: N6~'E ABSEf~T: COPPIISSIQNER.S: NOtvT Malcrolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeallai~ Plannirtg Cccmission's decision witaun 22 days to 1;ho City Council.. ITEM N0. 9. CEOA NEGATIVE DECU'1RATIIXV AND VAP.IA.`CE_ A10. 3750. PUBLIC HEAPING. OWAIFI2S: STES~ART GREl:~f ASSOCIATES, 29]9 ONE CAU'~ARY PLACE, 330 Stat Avenue, S.W., CALGARY, ALEERTO, CANADA T2POIA. AGEtvTS: McCLEL1NJ/CRUZ/GAYLARD E ASSOCIATES, 18201 Von t(arman Avenue, ;#250, Irvine, CA 92715. Property described as an irre;ularly-slu3ped parcrl of la.~d consisting cf approeim~tel}~ 27.1 acres, located at the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and State Col]caje Boulevard, and furtater described as 2280 E. Lincoln Avenue. Request: to cronstrucl; an 18,000-square foot addition to a crommrcial shopping center wiGt waiver of minimums number of l~arlcing spaces. 'There was no one indiratiny Gteir. presence in opposition to sul:jecC rc-west, and although fire staff report was not read at: flue puL.lic hearing, i!: is referred to and made a part of Gte minutes. F11 Cralcer, agert., explained this is t.lw_ last: rvrcel t;o lm remodel. at laic East Anaheim Shopping Center aC Stat;e College and Lincoln. Fie explained they itad a traffic study done and the report indical:es that I:ltere will ire sufficient; parY.iny I;o facilitate this Cenant. 'THE PUBLIC HEARING 1r7S CEASED. Responding Catmissioner Ilouas, Mr. Craker, stated Lhe shoppirg center is 85% occupied. He pointed Gut hiidas hfutfler uses all Gte parhirrj spaces in front of Emir facility and fatal Gte Jolly Roger remodeled and impacted Chat area with par,cing also, lwl; t:1taC he still. felt Chere is adequate spaces. Respondi:r to Ccxtmissioner Carusillo, itc staged there are prol:ably alnut 400 canployees in Gtis shopping cr_nter. Commissioner Herlst asked'if it would lm possible t;o have store operators along Gte main portion of tlt,: center t:o require their e!t~loyees to park in Gte rear t:o relieve some of the congestion in Gee front of the center near Gte Ralry'is Market. Mr. Craker. responded Gtat was altar vas originally planned, buC a large portico of Gte er~lcyees are waters and they de not tram t;o calk outside in Gte rear of Gte center at night. Commissioner Hertast• stxJgested increasin^, Elie lighting in the rear. (7tairman N,esse sCaCed Gte lights would leave to be direc:tzd away from the single-family Itanes t;o the souGt. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, stated lighting could be inrseased and securiCy provided for Gee ery~loyees. He added it is a fact Gtat Gee employees park in front and Gte spaces in Gte rear are vacanC and sotm of Gee problems in Gte center would be alleviated if Gte emgtloyc~-~s were made to earl: in Gte rear. He recatimnded a condition Ito added requiring additional 1.ighL• in the rear paricing lot to provide safety to Gee mc~loyee parking area. 1/4/88 MII~RII'F5, ANAl1EII~1 CITY PLANNING CQ•PIISSIO~, JANUARY 4,__1988 __ 88-23 Commissioner Feldltaus stated lie would not participate in the vote on Utis matter because of a conflict of irterest•. ACI'IQ~: Commissioner Bows offered a trotion, seconded by Ccmnissiorer Mc Bttrney, and MOTION CARRIID (ComnissionPr Feldhaus alsWining) Gtat• the Pnalteim City Planning Commission has reviewed L'ne proposal to construct an 18,000-sgwre foot addition to a coemercial. shopping center with waiver of minit:um number of parlciny spaces on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 27.1 acres located at Gte souUteast corner of Lincoln Avenue and State College Boulevard and furGter described as 2260 E. Lincoln Avenue; and does hereby approve Ute Negative Declaration on the basis that it has considered the proporeci Negative Declaration together with any eamients received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any cannents received that there is no sutstantial evidence that Gte project will ]rave a significant effect on the environnent. Commissioner Bouas offered Resolution No. PC 88-12 and moved for its passage and adoption Gtat the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant Variance No. 3740 on the basis that there are special circumstances a~.~licable t:o Gte property suds as size, shape, Copograplty, location or surroundings, wltidt do not apply to otter identically zoned properties in Ute vicinit}~; and Gat strict application of the 7.oning Code deprives the property of privilc~es enjoyed ty~ other properties ir. identical zoning classification in the vicinity and subject to '1nL•erdepart:merttzl Crnmittee Recromnendations, includin, an additional condition. regttiring additional lighting to provide sxurity to Gte employee's parking lot in tare rear to fate souGt as stipulated to 1>y~ Gte petitioner at the public hearing. On roll. call the foregoi;tg resolution t,as passed try the following wte: AYES: CCf,^'ISSIOA'ERS: BO[&~S, DOYD57L>':, CARUSILIA, HERBSI, `i}=SSE, MC BURh'EY \nES: COrMISSIO\'EELS: Iv'0,~'E Affi'EPTI': CCY~IISSIQVFP,S: N0~\'E ABSTAIN: CCNMISS70NIItS: FEI.D}It,US MalcroLm Slaughter, Deputy City Ataorney, l:resented Gte t:ritten right to appeal G:e Plannirry Commission's decision within 22 days to t.lte City Council. ITEMN lv'0. 9. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION, RECUISSIFICATION N0. 87-88-29 AND VARIMY:E N0. 3737. PUBLIC HEARING. a~'ERS: VA2QUEZ b DE LEON 12, 2290 h. LINCOIP: ,AVE;vUB, ANAHEIM, CA 92801. AGENT: HUB A. VA2~dJf~Z, 2240 W. LI,1'CO1N AVII.11E, ANAHEIM, CA 9280:. Property describcd as rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.55 acre, ha•:iny a frontage of approximately 122 feeC on Gte west side of Coffman Street, approximately 490 fc-et norGt of Gte centerline of Center Street, and furtter described as 207 and 271 North Coffrar, Street. Reclassification - RS-7200 t:o RM-3000 'Ib construct a 2-stc~y 8-unit condominium oanplex with waivers of maximum stn:ctural height (deleted) and maximum fence height. lttere were two people present indicating Grey were interested in hearing Gte applicant's presentation, and alGtough the staff report was not read at the public hearing, it: is referred t;o and Made a fart: of Gte minutes. 1/4/88 htINUTES, ANA}{EIM CITY PLANNING COh1hfISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 _ 88-24 Hugo Vazquez, 6l4 S. Live Oak, Anaheim. staL•ed the}' nave purchasEd a11.tx~L Y.xo lrareels c:med b}' laic Dfasciels on the east side of Coffman; 11iat this property is on Ute crest side and they ai;t:empted l:o purc-liase the entire west side lwt xitl~ the price Uie sellers were asking, it kas ernnomicall.y feasible. Evelyn Clark, stated she has lived on del}m Drive for 40 years an3 sere saw the plans and would litre to imow if Uiey will remain mndaniniums or could U~ey 1x~cam apartment. Sloe also questioned the ceiling height;. Q~airman Nesse pointed out the plans indical;e these rill. be 8 apartment units. Pfr.Vazquez staked ti~ey xere presented t;o staff as apartments, twt aFter staff review and cortnents, they decided t;o request condominiums. He explained the overall height of the project is depicted on Ule plans and Chairman hfesse pointed out tiwL ~..rould i:e 27-i/2 feel, as shosm on lace plans. ~mnissionnr Houas asi:ed if t~~ s~aimnirg pool could l;e cowed so U~at• it could not be so close to file property lire and Mr. Vazquez respcndeci that is a large park-l.il:e area. He also responded t:o Commissioner ]3ouas that: iL• depends on heir ability t:o sell Uce units c„ceUcer or not i.key will rv[ain crondominiu^~. Mr. Vazcvez responded Co Commissioner Carusillo that Uce average size of the units is 1250 sq. ft. Co 1300 sq. ft. and Uce selling prim xou]d he $95,000 to $120,000. Cannissioner 13ouas indicated concerns stout parking because of the large size of fix: units. Pfalcolm Slaughter, Delwty City Attorney. pointed ocC c~cere is no :ai~•er of part:ing being requested, sc parkin; uou]d Dave w conform tc Code. He fuzUcer eaZ:lained that just: cxcause floe Cannission approves the Zoning and varianrn, There is no cafmitmen+ that the petitioner rill exercise tlcose rights and he could get twildiny permits under tlm iAf-3000 Zcne and lwild apartments in conform3nco wiUc t1caL Code. Responding t.o Commissioner 13ouas, Greg Hastings, S:nior Planner, e~lained under t:he F~f-3000 Zone, the maximurm number of units perm+:Led would depend on wicetlcer or not they were aparL~cents or condorni.niur:~s, wil;h Mr. Slaughter furUcer e~lainircy, it t:ey not be Ucis project. 'Iii PU!]LIC f~AR]NG PAS CLOSID. Clcai>~n Afesse asked M5. Clark if her questions load been ansrered satisfacl:orily. [sfs. Clark stated she had asked about tlm landscaping and was concerned about Uce 25 year old avocado trees 1.0 feet from Lhe fence. Site asi:ed if Ucose were removed, xould Ucey tie replaced with mature 1;re~:s. Hugo Vazquez stated he xould ].ilre t:o .leave the avocado trees twt it depends on Uce placenenL• cf. tlm units on the property and rigid; nox he did noC t:icini: they would interfere with those trees. an 8-fool: lugh block wall xith mature trees xould be cronsl:ruch:ed on Uce cnsterly t~oundary. Commissioner ,tcl3urney clarified Ucat he load stipu]atc~cl +~ plant:iny nature trees. ACTION: Commissioner Carusillo offerod a motion, secondo~d bl~ Commissioner 13ouas and M(YTION CARRIID float the Analuim City Planning Commission 1-as reviewed floe proposal i;o reclassify subject property from the RS-?20U (Residential, Single-Famil}+) Zcne t:o Uv.1LM-3000 (Residential, 1/4/88 DIINUTES, ANA}icIDt CITY PLANNING CUDfI<tISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 83-25 Multiple-Family) Zone W construct; a 2-sWr~~, 8-unit: crondcminium ca:~.lex witlt waivars of maximwn structural ]ieight (deleted) and ma:ci.~aaa fence Height ~n a rectangularly-slwpr4 parcel of land consisting of approxifretely 0.55 arse, ]roving a frontage of approxurei:ely 122 feet on Uie west side of Coffman Street, approximately 490 feeL• north cf the centerline of Center Street, and furUzer described as 207 and 211 North Coffman SL•re2L•; and does hereln• approve tl:e Negative Declaration on file basis tlwt i.t has considc--red Uie proposed ~IegaL•ive Declaration t:ogei:her witi~ any camm~ts received during tl~e public review process and further finding on the lasis of the Initial Study and any cmnents received Uwe t;lnre is ro sulstantial evidence Uwe the project will. ]rove a significant effect on Uie environment. Comissioner Carusil.]o offered Resolution No. PC 88-13 and mgved for its passage and adcptiun Uwe Uie Anaheim Cit}• Pl.annine, Ccnmission does lierel:}' grant Reclassification P:o. 87-88-29 subject; t:o Interdepart.r.~ntal Ccrnitt:ee P,ec.~m:~idations. On roll call, t:to forc;oing resolution uas r.,:ssed ly Uie following vote: AYES: CCC,•TSISSIONERS: DOIJAS, BOYDS'i.AQ, CARUSILLO, FELDFIAGS, i[II2Fl;i, MESSE, A:C BLiRNEY NOES: COhB•I'iSSI0NEF2S: NO\B ,II,PI: CCY•1"IISSIONII25: NO1:B Ccmmissioner Carusill.o offered Resolution \b. PC 88-14 and rnvcv' for its passage and adctcion trot the Anaheim City Planning Camission does hereb}' grant Variance No. 377 on Lt:e tar>is taws: there am special cirem~slzncros applicable Co file prop~rt~ such as size, slw;x:, tapography, location or surroundings, which do not appl}~ t:o oU:er id~sttically zoned propertirs in Cho vicinity; and that strict; application of t1w Zoning Ccce deprives tape proxrty ei privileges enjoyed l:y other 1:roperties in identical zoning classificaCion in the vicinit% and subiect Co Int:xder~art:mrenWl Comnitac~ Recrmmndations including a c_rondition Uwe lan?scapirg on Uie ti:esterl;~ boundar}' siwll include mature trees. On roll call. the forc~oim, resolution was passed by the follohirr vote: AYES: CCriMISSICMIETiS: DOUAS, DOYDSTUN, CARUSILIA, F'ELSBiAUS, Fes, lFSSE, MC FIITRA'EY NOFS: COi•f~IISSIONFRS: ;A:2E ABSfTT: COt•4~IISSIOfv^.~iS: PJ(hYE Malcrolm Slaughter, Deputy City At:torne}•, presented the trrit:ten right 1:o appeal file Planning Commission's decision within 22 days to the City Council. Commissioner Bouas as~-ed t'~en Evel}m Drive will be closed. t•lr. vazSuez responded wiLlun 60 days. I'i'FTi nom. 10. CEQ,1 Nl1;ATIVE DECf1lRATIU\, RECIASSIFICATIOiJ N0. 87-68-30 AND VARIAACE N0. 3732. PUBLIC IIFARING. gti;tEFLS: KIY09iI SHIGEF~A74A AND WILLIAM SHIGE+GAh7t, 725 S. Elder StseeL•, Anaheim, Ca 92805. AGFiTI': :~.*1102}1ILL DEVIIAPMFIY' C~ANY, 1]22 E. Lincoln Avenue, Ste. 113, Orange, CA 9266', A5 iN: ROB>1cf h'ELLS. ProperL•y descritrod as arectangularly-:Taped parcel of land cronsistin. of approxin3tr7~~ 3.7 acre, lowing a frcnt:a,^e cf approximately 274 feet on the norU~ side of L3 Falma Street, approximately 750 feeC east of tlm center}.in^ of State Collee Boulevard. Reclassification - RS-A-43,000 tc Rif-1200 ]/4/88 MINUTES, AW+F~IM CITY PLAATv'ING CU°.•IISSI~i, JANUARY 4, 1968 88-26 Request: To construct a 2-sl:ory, 92-unit apartment c:catrp.ex wiU~ waiver of maximsn structural height. 'ISrere was no one indicating Ureir presence in opposition w subject' request and alUrough Ure staff relwrt to the Planning Oorrmission was not read at Ure puhl.ic Bearing, it is referred to and made a part of Ure minutes. Robert Wells, agent, explained Ure ieneral Plan permits 36 units per acre, or ]38 units an Utis property and they are proposing 92. He explained Urey have met with t:lie hanc4wners and reviewed Ure plans. He stated the staff report indicates they are proposirry 28 units per acre, )wt they are requesting 29 units per acre. 'IFS PUBLIC HEARItJG WAS CLASID. (lrairman Messe asked if they had met wiUi Ure surrounding owners after 1:17e plan was dranged. Mr. Wells responded they were not able t:o arrange a meting during Ure iiol.idays with tJre owners, but Drat Urey did show Use plans to the president of Ure hamowners association. Cannissioner tdc Burney stated in view of Ure intrusion into the sinal~-<.r•^ily area, lie would like to know if Carat issue was addressc~l ly Ure humco•~ners association. `:gills responded Drat was discussed and this is wirat t:he homeowners preferred. Commissioner Herbst asked the height of Ure garages. Mr.Wells responded he thought Urey tiere 8 feet Bigh. Canmissioner Herbst asked if Ure homeowners were aware fire garages are backiny up right t.o 1:heir Back yard and added he would not vote for this plan because this type developmenC was Imrmitted in the past and aft^r they wece constructed, all Ure residents see is a long massive buildiny wiridr cuts off Ure.ir air circulation and sate of Ure srurl fight in their l~dc yards. He stated the Plannin, Carmission lras a policy of requiring a 20-foot landscaped buffer area adjacent t;o single-family' hams. Mr. We11s stated he was aware of Drat policy and did discuss it wiUr staff and brouyht it up at the meting with Ure ircmeowners and t:lu lrarraowners preferred no twffer zone and wanted t,o have the yarages backing up Lo Ureir prcpert:y. He explained Ure 6-foot high block wall. be continued on Ure east and norUr property lines and the Existing wall will lx' repaired or replaced. Responding t:o Corrrissioner Herbst, hit. Wells stated they do not abut: Use single-family properties wit)r two-story units, arrd Ure}' are rwt 20 feet. Carmissioner Herbst indicated it appears on the plans Ural Ule balconies are atouC 15 feet awa}~. Mr. 14e11s answ>`red only Plan ll lras a projection into Ure 20-foci: sea;bad:. Will. Haines, ardiitcct, explained t,trey looked at several variations, and Drat; there are 5 units adjacent to the property line, and UraL• the homeowners did not rsnC a dead area. Mr. Haines stzted Ure grade will )re 3 feet lower than Ure existing residential development; and that Ure drainage will be towards La Palma. 7NE PUBLIC HFIIRIN(+ WAS CL~ID- Ccarmissioner McBurney stated Ire did not Uiink the 8 feet indicated as Ure garage height is correct trecause ti:ere is a ]8" parapet:. Mr. Wells salted to satisfy some of U:e fire department's recuirement:s, Urey were recuired to add to t:lie roof structure. 1/4/88 h1INUTES, ANAl1fI'4 CITY PLANNING COh7r1ISSI0N, .JANUARY 4, 1988 88-~ Cortmissicner Herbst staled eilater tatis developer has done an excellent job selling Utis project t;o Ute neightbrs, or Utere leas been some misunderstanding because there is no opposition here and atis is Ute firsC apartment project h~ ]tas seen with two-stor}~ units a1x,Cting sirgl.e family homes at approximaCel}~ 20 feet or closer t:iUt no opposition and that Itc could not vote for it. gtairman Messe asked hrn: rtanp of Cltese units could l:e infringing on Ute homes. Cacmissiorrc hierlst stat.ec: in rate past; line-of-sight drawings stave lteen rcruired t:o shoo t:he irryract;. hlr.Wells stated Utey did worl: with fire haneoo:ners. Cannissic,~er HerttsC indicated croncern also CitaC etn~r' other developer trill ix: tranCin; Ute satt>` seCiaac:l: Ca;raissioner Bcydstun statcti she has Cal)ced to a crouple of People t;to live in that reighhorhood and Utotght they would t;e here for Utc tieeCing; and Utat; they did tell. her atom: t:he r.~~etsings and they secstcd to l:e satisfied uiUt Ure develoP~^r's ansr_rs. gtairmut hlnsse ~taCed he tonder:d if Ure neigliltors might: ;rave misun::erstood and Utcught ICrn rro. l0 would he heard fol.lo:,ring a dinner break and sug-,estcd actior. on this request: tie t;railed anti, after the recess. i•ZJR'IFIER DISCUSSION AND ACi'ION ON IT&~1 NO. ]0 WAS TPAIl,c"D Utv'I'II, AFTEP. 'IIiE RECESS FOR DINNER, R1x15S: 5:35 p.m. RECONVINID: 6:45 p.m. Fol2otring the rc<.rss, there was skill no opposition pre>ent to subject request. i~1r. 4rel.ls stated rite only unit; uiUt uindo',rs adjacznt to fate sinal.t-family homes is Unit B and UtaC could he redesigned and have blan{c Calls. IIe c]arified Chere t:ou]c it tlli'ce units wiUt t:indctrs on Che north side, and Utat: is 'ritere there is a grade different`_al.. ACTION: Camission,"• hk: Burney cffered a motion, secrondcti by Camissioner Eouas, and MOTIOt+' CARRIED Utat: tare Anaheim City Planning Ccamission ttas revietred Ute proposal to reclassify subject: proxrty fray Ure 1tS-A-S'_,DOO (Residential, A~ricvllrural) Zone Co ta•~2 R•f-1200 (Residential., Nu3tipl.e-Family) Zone and to cronstn:ct; a 2-story, 92-uniC al:artrrrtt; cmplex will: traiver of m~xitart sCtvet;oral. hei;ht on a rr~,;anyulariy-sltalxd parcrol of land consisting- of approxir.~tely 3.7 acres, staving a frontage of apprcximstely 274 Ceat on Ute norUt si.d~ of ha Palma Avenue, approxirately 7~0 ieeC east; of the centerline of Stale College Boulevard; and does hereby approve tare Idcrative Declaratior. cn the basis Utat it: ltas cro-vsidered Ute proposefl Negative I~claralicn to-aoUter wiUt any c..ra;ents raeived durin, the puitlic review l:rocrss and further finding on Che 1>3sis of Ure Initial Stu::y and any c:arrrnts received titaC Utere is no sulsWntial evidence titaC Ure I":rojcct: will love a significant effect en Che envirtnment. Ca!missiener t•Sr. Burney offered Resolution No. PC 88-1o and mwcd for its l~ssa,e and adcption UtaL• Ute P~aheim City ?lannir Camission does hereby grant Reclassification IJo. 87-88-30 subject Co InterdeP.arl;rcr,Cal CocmiCtcr_ Recom;iertdaL•ions. On rcl.l call, Che Fore;oing resolution tras passed 1>)~ f:hc folloxing vote: AYFS: CUI•f4ISSI0rdF.RS: BOIIAS, DOYfxil>.11, GARUSILLO, FELDHA[1S, H}S2BS:, hfFSSE, h1C BUR~'EY r~oFS: cohsusslauERS: raa~~E AIISE'1f: CCPPIIS.SION17tS: NOhIE 1/4/88 t MINUTES, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CO~R~IISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 88-28 Cannissioner Herbst staled approval of Uie variance would be al.lrnring trro-st:or}' apartrienLS ~ztaiin 12 feel of single-family banes an3 Uiat is sanething U:e Planning Conmissicn has never dcna and approval could open "Pandora's Box". He sWt;ed he thought it• was a poor design wiUi units loo'riry rigi~L• intro Use baG:}~ards of Uiirteen RS 7200 single-family banes; and even though lam people are not here in opposition, as a land planner, he felt it is a hay' design and does not; proteya ta:e integrity of Uie single-famil.}~ resicenLial Brea. q:airsmn hlesse agreed and staL•ed ti:at is sonetiiing 1:lie Cor:mission leas nol; allotired before. Ca:[nissicner Feldhaus stated ae rrould agree lwt that the ha;eoc~ers ~mre notified and are not; here t:o opL~ose t;hc project and Um reason for t:he earlier postponeaent was to find ouL• if Uie neiglilbrs had misunderstood iaien the natter rrouLd be heard. Cannissioner HertsC staked he realized ta:aC but that he +ras still concerned abouC setting a pr-cement; and oL•'ner developers :aa:in tare sam rcruest. Ccrtmissioner McBurney sWhca3 our atwrney says thaL• the Planning Comnissicn does not set; precedent. Camissioaer Flerlst s1;aLed tail type project has i.^en approved beforo and Use}~ proved t:o be deLrimenWl 1;o file area. Camissioner N~:Burne}' offered a resolution to grant Variances t:o. 3732. On roll. call, the resolution failed Lo carry !~y Clue fol.lctring vote: AYES: OCPMISSIOhtERS: F17.DIiA[]S, h1C BURt:EY iJOES: COhP1ISSIONERS: BOUAS, BOYI15IWi , G4RUSIIJA, t$RB.S"P, hfESSE. ABSEVf: CCOtfISSIO\'EP.S: t70idE Nr. t4ells state' Liffey nave done their lmsC to please tale homecimers and thought this is Che best plan they c:oul.d propose on this proLa.rt;y. ACTION: Ccmissicncr Hert~t offored R2solut;ion t:o. PC 86-16 and moved fee its passage and adoption ta:at the Anatmim City Planning Cortnission does hereby deny Variance h:o. 3732 on Ur basis U:at here are no special. circurvtarces applic:al:le l:o the pro~lLy sucat as size, sltiape, topography, l.ccaion or surrou:,dings, wilicdl do net apply to other identically zonr3 prolr_rties in tale vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning Code daas not deprive the property of privil.c~es onjoysl ty oCtier properties in Lhe identical ~anirrj classification in Uu~ vicinity. On roll call, laic foregoin, resolution passcti b}' Lae folloc:ing vole: AYES: CQ~1tlISSI0IEPS: BOUI+S, HOYAS'I[Y~1, CARUSIIJA, HERffiT, AfFSSE NOa"S: COM~IISSI02~e~2S: FELD}IAUS, it` °..(JRIQEY ABSEli: CCfh~fI5SI0~!',-.:.RS: :IONS hlalcrolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented fate ;rriLLen right: t:o ap,~al the Plannnin3 Camissicar's d^cision within 22 days tc Ure City Council. 1/4/88 NSNITI'ES, ADIAHEIM CITY PLAhTR1~G COM~IISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 88-29 ITE-; iiv. ,? ~u'~n ivtz~'t•1VE DECL:~RATItaV, RECLASSIFICATION MO. k37-88-31 MD VARIANCE N0.3735. PUBLIC NEARING. OhTBERS: 131<< (}IAPMAN, 4207 h. (7IAPD9+A'. ?`.`," ', ;'-"'_ : `v CA 92668. A1;FIJI': MIDREW FIQ~ff.S, 4000 MAC P17CF1UR B[.VD., ',IEi80, NEh'PORT BEACH, CA 92660, ATTiV: Mii'_ NAWAR. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel. of land consisting of approximrtel}~ 3.62 acr~a located at Uie southeast turner of Orangewood Avenue and Lewis Street, and further described as 21!,'0 South Lewis Street. Reclassification •- RS-A-93.000 to RM-1200 Request: ib const:rud: a 15? •-:li- ? •::,~ 4-str_.1 '~.,.__~~>:e'• apartmenC complex with tiaivers of minimum building site area per dwrlling unit, maximum structural Imight, maxiirwn site coverage and minimum side }yard setl:ack (deleted). 4here were approximately 23 persons indirati.:, tl.eir ,:~~:+_nce in opazsition to subject recuest and although laic staff report was not; read at: t:he public Bearing, it: is L::ferred t;o and made a part of Ute minutes. Greg Hastings, Senior Planner, pointed out; a correction i.n ta.e staff report on pane 1, tlv7t tiaiver (d) for minirtum sine yard setbad: way deleted ~.reviously, but more recent plans Have reinstated that waiver ~1ith 5 feet required adjacr~t to Uie south and east property lines and none prcoosed. PETITIONER'S PRESFTTATION Magdy Hanna, agent, explained this is a very difficult property t:o develop because of its unusual shape and size and also Utere are oUi2r contingencies sudi as Uie future widening of Orangewood and Lewis Streets, and the future proposal. for widening of Orangewood h}~ CALTRlu1'S. He stated he worked wiUr staff and has cane up wit:h wdrat he feels is a quality project wlridr will. provide open space, affordable units, elevators, etc. Mr. Hanna stated Utey were concerned alx~uC Uie single-ianuly Bares on Lewis and provided a 100-foot setback and there are no windows or doors on that side of tl~e project:. Fie st:a::ed all Uie recreational area is on top of the deck and it is calculated as site coverage and '.ie felt Llte Code should be dianged because that: area is provided for Llte people living in the units. He stated Umy mould lose 52 parking spaces if CALTRAfv~ widens Orangewood airidi would bring the parking demon from 2.5 spaces per unit to 2.3 spaces. OPPOSITION Linda Hilton, 2136 Andwr Street, stated Uie rear of her borne would bade up to Uu~ 4-stories, wliidi is Um largest portion of Uie proposed project;. Slm referred t:o Paragraph 5 of the staff report w•ludi describes the surrounding area and pointed out• it does not mention Uie 204 apartments presently being built across U;e street Fran Uie Uiis project. (Greg Hastings pointc-d out Ural is the project referred to as Orangewood Acres on Uie map). Slie asked if that project is for 204 units since Uiey were never Wld. Chairman Messe responded Utat• is a very large parcel and it• could very well ~ 204 units. Grp Hastings staged he did not Have Uiat information available, but• it is avai]able in Uie Planning Department. Linda Hilton continued Drat one of leer concerns is traffic crongestion and asked if Uiere has been a report• done for this area. 1/4/88 88-30 !~!?S~4L`t~..l~A.uyv, Ci^,•_;-~,~fzp~ tYY•T'QSSION. JA,\'UARY 9, 1°88 Paul Singer, Traffic F]igineer, staked there ltas been no traffic study generated by Uiis particular project. He fiuU7er stated the traffic impact will not be caused by this particular development; but that it will be caused in t]te future when a bridge is constructed across the freeway, and that traffic will be a real problem U~en. P15. Hilton slated she would disagree that U~ere will be no traffic impact caused bS' Uiis project: that rtelcing a left turn now off Andwr Street• is a problem; that traffic backs up for 500 feet and when it is backed up, she nelces a right turn onto Lewis, t:o Simrons, to Spinnaker, whid~ is a residential street, and then out to Orangewood; so this project. is adding congestion not only to Lewis, but to Spinnaker, and now as oUier people ]earn about: this route, they are using Sunrons and Spinnaker to avoid file traffic crongestion. 9ie st:at:ed some neighbors only got these notices on 15mrsda}' and Friday was a ]toliday, but Uiey leave had a fantastic response w a petition and presented petitions and letters containing apprexitretely 266 signatures of people opposing this project. Concerning parking, Pis. Hilton st:at:ed currently at• 2220 and 2229 Lewis, Cher- ;re two fourplexes and one duplex and one gentleman who lives in one of tlm units has 13 vehicles; and due to the restriping of Luis, tl?e parking is causing a hazard and people are parking in the righC turn lane onto Simmons. She added they do not want all. Utat traffic caning into their residential neiglil;orhood, and there have been a number of accidents on Anchor and Simmons due to vehicles ol~truct:ing views. PLS. Hilton explained most of their bedrooms lack up to Lewis Street and Ute noise at night is awful; that Uiere is rot:liing fran Orangewood to Chapman to slo',+ the traffic and 11iey leave leer bottles and trash Uu^own from cars into their yards, and their fenrns and walls are pai~so wiUi graffiti. Slit added it is said "cleat apartments do not affect property values, but a pe buying a ltacr_ would not want w buY in a neighborhood where Uie liquor store leas security bars on Uie windows, etc. Sloe stated there are no two-story structures from Orancewood to Uie Orange/Anaheim city limits, and fran Raster Co t:l~e freeway and they would like to see the higlrrise apartments above twro sWries kept on rile south side of the freeway. St1e stated the enrollment at Paul Revere Sdiool, where Ulese diildren would attend sd~ool, is presently Overcrcw•ded and there are 200 to 300 students currently being bused to Madison and Key Sd~ools. Slte stated she called Uie sdiool district fcr information, l;ut• due to the holidays, was not able to geC any information, but: one person at the sdiool was shocked to hear about this and did not even l~:ow about tale apartments going in. She stated a sdwol bus lwlds 90 students, and right now eight: bus loads of students are being transported due to Overcrowding. 9ie stated they are asking to please be allowed t:o keep Uieir single-family neighlx~rlwcd; that the developer claims there will. be no loss of privacy, but a 9-story building will frost definitely look into Uteir back yards and tr_droom and kitchen xindows and if ghat is not• a loss of privacy, she did not iatow what is. Gary Raney, 2121 Andtor, stated his concern is rim traffic congestion that would be generated by Uiis project. He stated he was sure this property would tie developed in the future, but lie Iwped not with this project because 905 additional. cars in that area from this project would be a dratnati.c impact; and in addition to Ute apart~m_nts going in at Use norUtwest corner of Lewis and Orangexood, this would create ver}' significant traffic congestion. Concerning the population, he stated most families have 2.1 dularen, so tlwt is 390 diildren ]/9/88 88-30 ~q~}~, pIg7~1-IEIM CITY PLAATiING CONII`IISSION, JAIQIJARY 4, 1988 Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, stated Ulere has been no traffic study generated Ly U~is particular project. He furUter stated the traffic impact will not be caused b}~ this particular develolment; but that it will be caused in Uie future «i~,en a bridge is constructed across the freeway, and t:ltat traffic will be a real problem Bien. Ms. Hilten stated she «rould disagree Uiat Uiere will be no traffic impact caused try this project; Uiat rtalcing a left turn now off And~or Street is a problem; that traffic backs up for 500 feet and when it is backed up, she rrekes a right turn onw Lewis, t:o Simmns, to Spinnaker, wliidt is a residential streeL•, and then out to Orangewood; so U~is project; is adding croncest;ion not only t:o Lewis, but f•.o Spinnaker, and now as oUmr people learn about this route, they are using Simmons and Spinnaker t:o avoid the traffic congestion. Ste sWt;ed same neighbors only got Urese notices on I}wrsday and Friday was a holiday, but; Uiey ltave lead a fantastic resl;onse to a petition and presented petitions and letters containing approximatel}~ 266 signatures of people opposing this project. Concerning parking, `45. Hilton stated currently at 2220 and 2224 Le~dis, there are two fourplexes and one duplex and one gentlcaran wito lives in one of the units has ]3 vehicles; and due to Ute restriping of Lewis, Uie parking is causing a }iazard and people are parking i:r t:l~e right turn lane onw Simmons. Slte added they do not want al.l that traffic caning into their residential neighborhood, and there have L~een a number of accidents on Andior and Sirnnons due to vehicles obstructing views. DLs. Hilton exp]ained mast of their bedrooms bacJc up w Lewis Street and the noise at night is awful; that there is noUting from Orangewood to gwpm3n tq slow Uie traffic and 13~ey leave beer bottles and trash thrown from czars into Umir yards, and their fences and wails are painted wit}i graffiti. She added it is said tlwt; apartments do not affect property values, 1wC a person buyirr a bane would rot want to buy in a neighborhood where Uie liquor store leas security l;ars cn the windows, etc. Ste stated t:ltere are no two-story structures from Orangewood t:o the Orange/Anaheim city limits, and fran Raster to the freeway and they would like to see i:he high-rise apartments agave t:wo stories tcept on the south side of Ute freeway. 9ie staged the enrollment at Paul Revere School., where Umse dtildren would attend sdwol, is presently wercrow~ded and Giere are 200 to 3W students currPlrtly being bused w Madison and Key SdwoLS. She stated she called the sdwol district for information, but due Co Uie holida}~s, was got able to get any information, lwt; one person at the sdtool was shocked to hear about Uiis and did not even Imow about tl~e apartments going in. Slte stated a sdwol bus holds DSO students, and right now eight ]ws loads of students are been? transported due to overcro«ving. 9ie stated they are asking t:o please t;e allowed to kc.:p their single-family neighborhood; t]iat Uie developer claims there will be no loss of privacy, but a 4-story luildin^, will most definite].}' look into Uteir bacK yards and bedroom and kitchen windows and if ghat is not a loss of privacy, she did not know what is. Gary Raney, 2121 Anchor, stated his concern is Uie traffic congestion Uwt would be generated by this project. He stated he was sure this property «rould he develop~~cl in the future, 1x~L lie hoped not wiUt Uiis project because 405 additional cars in Uwt area from Uiis project would be a dramatic impact; an6 in addiL•ion to flee apartments going in at the norUtwest crorner of Lewis and Orangewood, this would create very significant traffic congestion. Concerning flee populaL•ion, he skated most families have 2.1 dtilaren, so Uiat is 340 dtildren 1/4/86 MINUfFS, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COhPfISSIOM, JANUARY 9, 1988 88-31 Ural would have w be twsed, and currently drildren are being bused t:o Key Sdrool and iiadison and Ural is quite a distance to bus drildren of elementary school age. He stated this is done lxcause Paul Revere Sdrool irad over 800 students; and Drat rrost: of st:udenl;s Drat are bused are from lire apartments and most of the drildren attending Paul Revere are from Ure single-family neiglrborlrood. He stated ]re would like for Ure Planning Commission t.o consider tarot tare dPnsit:y of Copulation taxis would generate would affect the quality of life; Ural he has been an Anaheim resident for 3 years and likes Anaheim, but dense population does not appeal to him: and they have a t:remrndous population density in that area nevi due to the apartments; and Ural; Carey have a helicopter fly over atzut evr=r}~ 20 minutes Exam the Anai7eim Police Department with spot lights, etc. th stated the developer is proposing 10% of Ure units for affordable housing, and Drat; he would nc•t begrudge anybody a housing unit, trot that he does lxgrudge dense population and felt saretaiing less dense would be more a,.~xopriate for Uris area. Leonard Lowery, 2156 Andior, staked he has ix~en Y'. r 16 years; and Carat traffic creates quite a hazard at Lewis and Orangewood; and withc+~! snits whidr will. increase Use vital b}~ about 600 airs in the area, there is already a pari:.:r...,_,.ulem with people pari:ing on the street, even in areas where no parking is allowed; and Ural: Use impo¢t on Uie sdrools will create more twsirr and 8 or 10 L~uses will be required t:o take care of Use drildren from Urese apartments; and Ural: is iwses in and out t:,irn a day ono UraC is also a great expense on Use taxpayers of Anaheim; that; his drildren are grown, 2xrC Uiere are a lot of drillren on the street and lie appealed t:o the Commission t;o consider Ure drildren. Ile stated clre developer is asking for deviations from laic Code requirements on the size of t;ire units and the density and he did not Drink Urey should be granted. He slated Urere are no :and 4-story apartment: rnnplexes in Drat area. Ann Raney, 2127 Andror, staked Irer mein cronrnrn is t:he twildings will !xa so close to Lcn:is Street. and Ureic bad: yards and she understands Urey propose Ure project only ]00 feet Exam Use property line and the Code requires 150 feet. Slre stated she was also ecurmrned about a floe i>ozard sirrn her home is right: across Ure street. Ms. Raney slated they have a high crime, rate nevi cause try people fran Ui° apartments and cars cone spinning into Ure col de sac and drop beer bottles from Use windows and only recently a neighbor irad bullet holes in their car. Slre stated Uiey feel Urey are just being squeeze.' out wiUr apartments around Urem and Drat Uiis is Ure last little nest of single-family homes in Drat area and Urey love Urem and want: t:o keep UrrJn Drat way. Stewart: Coudr, 2149 Andtor, stated Ure junior high sdrools and high sdroois were not mentioned, Cwt students are txrsed from Urose sdrools tr.;o. He referred to tare Crystal. Cathedral wlridr Iras over 10,000 manlxars and trying t:o enter traffic on Lewis or Qrapman when tarose people are caning or going t:o durrdr is a problem and you can wait Urrough 5 or 6 signals; and Drat: Uiey Dave counted 25 cars waiting in Ure le'n't-turn lane in a 15-second period of Lime. He referred to Ure City Stropping Center, with a 20-story high-rise building wiridr is about t:o open, a multi-story office crortgrlex under construction right now, and several buildings riridr are already open and Urose people will travel. on Lewis, C]rapman and Orangewood. Mr. Coudr referred to the area at i~I, Ure Theo lacy expansion whidrlras very heavy traffic, and Ure Platinum Triangle wlridr is to be developed- He stated lre is not against development and believes developmenL• of. Ure Platinum Triangle will provide a lot of jots. tae referred to an article in Ure Register on Decetnirer 30Ui cronrnrning anL•icipatE : development of 18 high-rise 1/4/88 88-32 1g1NCES, MQAh~IM CITY PLANNINIG (~Y+IISSION, JANJARY 4, 1988 buildings, whid; is over 6 million square feet of space, nor including U?e Roll Ccmxny whid; is already building ever 1 million square feet, so that is 7 million square feet of proposed construction an6 he was sure U;e Traffic Fhgineer is going t:o have a real. nightmare. He stated all.i:hat traffic will dt~np out onto Lewis and Orangewood and right inW U;eir housing tract- Brian Roe, 2108 S. Andtor, stated he is new w the oo~n1tY'rtt1s are bui11C1SHe stated it 3felt price and feels he can keep U;e property value if no more apa ties and he felt U;ey are t:l;is project arould 1?e a trcanendousi dej rf~setapart,mentsland traffic PF3 ,stated he litres Maheim being overcrok~led and engulfed l;} y lained yus and wants to sL•ay here, iwt tl;is projec:L would be an invais situated panyone with a window or property backs up to Lewis and wiU; U;e ++~y the building balcony ~rould look inw lus back }yard. He salted concerning U;e traffic, ~ eking he stated he 8idrnot1Lh Nc U el' arc Propos~rgdenougl~ left- onW Orangewood- Concerning pa Tamil leas ':~.'o inople v~crking wit:l; two vel;icles, spaces for guest parking because almgst: every 1' and if they leave d;ildren T`onare~ul~ ~o~IL LLheirvstreeLLanduI.~~:is SLreeLlisotoo narroanfo'e U;ought U;e overflow of pa 9 '~~ aL U;e 1:rcrendous number of apartments parking. He suggested driving down Orangewood and looking a. rtmf-~t U;cse now, and also on Hastier and Orangewood- He stated he lained he1l;gadacalledytimAPolice oanplex in U;is area would not be good for tl;e area. He exp DeparUmnt before moving there t0 dmdt on the crime rate and was 1:old t];ere is a Crerrndous proulan at Ponderosa Parl: whid; is immediatel}~ west: of Cl;is property. He stated Clue developer say:; Utey are providing a place for recreation and for U;e d;ildren ~ Paal and tylerl~awnxilllbe U;e plans, he did not: U7ink tl;ere will. be a place for taU1ed~llldren LorU;e park wi;id; is a real. on t:l;e parking sL•rucCUre and ];e felt: t:luy will sendinc, Lin their area. proL•lem area and he just felt this is a terrible project to pu' PEfITIU~TFR'S REBITITAL N,r. Hanna stated he thought U?e CiLy Traffic Ecrincer could ansti.~er 13;e questions abauC traffic on Lewis and Orangewood and has said Ll;ey can tolerate U;e adds~~al fln ftl;at 2'Stparkingrspacrs providing 2.5 parking spaces per unit and 81 guest: parking 1 Kaye been adequate for. apartment parking in the City. He stated Cl;is cotnplc.': will not attract tl;e Find of people wiw will be U;rowing trash in their yards and Ci;e t;enancs would have w qualify and have an iciam' of $2,500 i:o X3,000 per rmnU;• He slated he did not investigate U;e sd;ool enrollment, lx~t thPxe is a possibility of opening new sdtools if U;ey are overcrowded- Concecn;rrg Privacy' t:o tr;e Iwcnes on Lewis Street, he stated they can redFSign the project and maintain U?eir privacy and t:ltat• he would 'ask for a continuance in order to Provide ].OOX Privacy: that tleey are actually 100 feet away fran tl;e sincle-family lxanes and UiaL is more Chan U;ey leave ever provided in any oU;er Project:. Rc~arding U;e concern for fire haurd, he explained t:l;e project will lr_ 100 sprinklered; and Chat they dedicating cn Orangewrood, Lewis and hhnd;est:er and will tie putting in curls, 1w1;Lers and sidewalks whid; xill improve um area and it: will. improve ti;e traffic chid; is a probl~n now M' prwidirg left-turn lanes and that Lewis Street will 1?e fully developed for bett:Fr traffic flw. TSIE P[JBLIC HFARII~ 1v71S CIASI•ID. ' 88-33 MI,WI'ES, ANAHEIM CITY PIAfVNII~ CO`MISSIU\, JANUARY 4, 1988 Gary Raney asked for clarification of Mr. Hanna's reference to two }wn..~ on Lewis Street. Mr. Hanna stated taiere are seven banes on Lewis wludi would be affected and that t}u~y can redesign the project t:o make sure U1eir privac}~ xill never he invaded. He added they am yen}, concerned and rr3nt t:o make sure the ca[munity is in agream~L• with what Uiey are proposing. Commissioner Herbst stated the plans show only 20 feet tc Lhe ecistinq right of way and U~en another SS-foot• sethadc and asked if that wi].1 be Um area for street widening. Mr. Hanna explained that additional sethaclc is because of the possibility of widening by CALTRPu\S. MalcoLn Slaughter stat;ed staff is rerxmm~ding 45 ftt't for Lewis Street and Orangewood Avenue. Cartnissioner NertsC slated Ute street widenings will. relieve wife a hit cf the congestion. and Mr. Hanna stated it will improve the traffic because right now tliat• is only half a street. Commissioner Felaliau~ stated iu? cannot ignore file vast audience present an9 tale 266 signatures on Uie petitions and suggested Mr. Manna eaetact: these P~Pie and 1:ry to al.lr_viate choir concerns. Mr. Hanna stated he wculd like w get a reading fram Uie Commission as to v~.a+: they would like w see developed there and Uiat he will he liapp}~ t.o rcruest a ax:tinuance Eor tau weeks and work with tlm neiglibcrs and cane up with a proj,~ct; acceptable t:o everyone. Paul Singer stated separate right and left turn lanes can Ue provided onto Orangetiwrood xliidi uonid greatly facilitate traffic. He added, in tale meantime, l~ vas not ati;are there vas Uie congestion a1; Orancewood and Lewis and has made a note and will. study the feasibility of lx;tt;ing in a 4-ova}' sWp. He stated plans are currently undr_nay fcr tale Orangewocd Overcrossing whidi crould possibly r~i;ire additional right of vay as shov^; on this plan and at tEwt time there is going to im a major traffic vcq~act on this neighborhood, along xiUi tale impact of a possible hrioge over Lewis Street. He stated there are goine w be score serious traffic prohiemv in Utis area and in t:lie Disneyland and Uie Piatin~n Triangle areas,. Concerning parY.ir~g, Mr. Singer explained the proUlean at Uiis tine is that Use apartments viii:>> are existing vere built under old parking erodes and U1e}~ were not required t:o provide adequate parking spaces t~}~ today's standards; hov~ever, he vould not anticipate a parking problem caused tn~ this development. Responding i:o Commissioner 8ouas, D1r.Singer sWt,ed tluare is no way w predict• vimn the Orangewood Overr_rassing might:lrcam a reality because for the most part, it is a CALTRASS responsibility, and tl7e City's responsibilities will dep°nd on Use improvemnts required in oronnection wiUt Uu3 Platinum Triangle developments; Utat olrviously it is a very expensive project and depends on the funding and at• this time it is not lmown if i.t will he at: grade, above grade or below grade and even planning for a bridge is difficult until the I-5 Stud} is carpleted, vitid~ is going to lie two years from nc.+. He added it is a possibility witatin the nerd: ten years. Greg Hastings explainc~l tlm General Plan designation fcr U~aC area is currently medium density residential. Cannissioner Herbst: sWt;ed lie tawught Uiis project vruld probably Dave less impact cn tape neighlncs ttan otlur projects Ute Oannission has sc~.n. He asked if Ute four stories could he reducr_d or relocated to at least 150 feet. 1/4/88 88-.iS l~VfES, 1tNAllEI'1 CITY PLA!'SlIIJG CCa•PIISSICPIER, JAA'OARY 4, 1988 Mr. Hanna si.at;ed he will t:ry 1:o increase Ute distance to 150 feet: and try t:o naintain total privary to Ute sim.,le-family hares. Responding to Commissioner h1c Burney rcx~arding the 0-setbaclc, Grr:g Hastings explained Ute parkin structure is proposed at Ute property line, and is within Code rrquirc-tmnts. N,r. Hastsings salted notices are sent t:o the sdtool. dist;riots as a matter of course. Calrnissioner Bouas explained if the sdtool dist;ric:t felt tatere was a problem, they wrould nol:ify tlt2 City, tut: w~e have not heard from U?can regarding this proposal.. Carmissioner Hertst staged Utz develo,:.er has indicat;e9 he wrould eliminate one or two units. tIe also asked tatat the contrilution t:o Ute school systens is for this project. Mr. Hanna responded trite fee is $1.50 per square foot, or about $1,500 ;ter unit. Ccr;missioner Herl><t; r~G~laincd those fc~s are mandated tt}~ the state and all developers are recuired Le pay than to het^^. support Ute sdtool system. Ms. Hanna slated he will lxa contributing about $250,000 for t;tis project to the sdtocls and tatey use it t:o open =drools or to reduce the impact on existing sdtools. Mr. Hanna st:at~l Utey do their chn drawings in house and a two-tac+_l; crontinuance wrou]d tx' adc~uate. Chairman i•Sesse pointed out; another long agenda is antici;asted for the meeting in tuc r:cel:s. Carcrissioner Hertst; pcint:ed out w Gte opposition that late state mandates Ute Cit}' to give developers certain densif;}' trenuses triton they designate a certain percentage of the units for affordalle itcusiny--. Annika Sant:alahti, Zcnin; Aaninistral:or, e;ti~lained Uua state law says t1taC if Ute developer provides 25~ of L!te numirer cf units allowed by Code as affordable units, the City shall Dive Utan a density l;orrus up 1;0 29t,, and it is at. Ute City's disc:ret;ien t:o give U:em additional. waivers and in tabs case, the state mandate is restricted to •„aiver (a). Camaissioner Carusillo stated lte realizes Ute Orarwewood Overcrossirg is ,,^.rcbably 10 years in Ute future and asked if to?e developer can do anyUting t:o mitigate that probl.c~. He stated that is a concern tatat 1•.as t:o be 2ealt with ttecause it will not gc away. Ccrosissicner McIIurney stated the developer has included provisions for Lltat; on trite plans and will not build in that area so lte car. dedicate rate property when necessary. 2au1 Singer stated the lonc term protalem is to mraY.e t:he L•ridge affordable tr}' gett:ine Ute right of way tltrou~h irrevo~ble offers of dedication. A;aleclrt Slaughter siztod just: Uc-cause the developer is not develoi.irtg in t1taL• area does not: mear, that he is dedicating it tc rate City; that all w•e recuire is Ute standard 45 feet and +9te City or CALiRAIdS uculd have W luy that strip cf property in Ute future for ttte widP.ning. Grca; Hastings responded tc dtairnan Messe that if Ute plans are in bl' this Friday and do not• have t:o be readvertised, it cart rte heard on the 18t1t, even Utcugh that is expected 7ti be z long agenda. t•1s.Santalahti staged tabs it:an wuld t,e plac ~d at the errd of Ute agenda and s1~;gest:ed anyone interested tc cal] fire Planning Derartment to verify that Ute developer ltas not zecusted a centinuanc?e. ]/9/88 I•IINUI'ES, ANANEH]T1 CITY PU1hNING CCTi`IISSION,JN][TARY 4, 1986 88-35 Cacmissioner Bouas stated if Ute neiglibcrs meet whit the developer and tateir concerns are satisfied, Utey may not have to Dane to Ute meeting at; all. Chairman Messe sU31:ed staff should make sure this item is last: on Ute agenda. ACTION: Crnmissioner hlc Burney offered a motion, s,~ecnded l:y Cmnissioner P.cuas and NpT'IQV CAR.RIID t1taC consideration of rate aforerent:iened mat:l:er be continued to Ute regularly-scheduled meeting of January' l8, 1988, and Utat it l:e placed as one of trite last itc~ on late agenda at t:he recuest of the neighhors. ITEM N0. 12. CEQA NEGATIVE DE(•Ie1RATI0N, GEv'ERAL PIA,V 1Lvi&1'IY•~.FI~i N0. 235, RIxIASSIFICATIQV N0. 87-86-32 FU'QD VARIANCE N0. 3738. PUBLIC BEARING. OhNERS: SANIOS IIECERRA AVD ROSH Er"CERRA, 1014 E. Ncrl;h Street, Anaheim, CA 92805, DONALD K. SvT+LLEY AID JERI [•t. HOLLINGSh'OIYiH, ]020 E. Nortat Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 and JAA~S R. A~®HANI AND SHIRI,E'i A. WEEDHAi:, 1028 E. Norf:h Str,:et, Anaheim, CA 42801. AGEi~'I: „AGDY iiATw'VA, 4000 I•;ac•Itrthur Dlvd., ;:580, Nc,raort: Eeach, CA 92660. ProF+ert}' decrilx_c as a recl:angularl; -sltap^d Farce] of land c:en.,istim e: apr,rcximately 1.07 acres, Itavie; a frorl:age of apprcxir,~aCeiy 210 feet cn Cite soul:h side of Ncrtlt Street, al:prorimat:ely i90 is-~I: t:•cst• of t:he cr_rterline of East St;reef and fur::her cescribec as 10]4, 1C20 and ]02fi East: ;4ort:h Street. GPA - Pro~ri;y o::nor-initiat:ec change free Che ntrrent: Lct:• Dersit;y Re:aidentia] I:o i~ow-1•~~c:ium Ikansity Rcasi~ential cesiynatien cn t:he !an% Ussa Elcmant: cf the General Plan. ReclassifiwCicn - PS-7200 t;c R"1-2400 Rec.urst: To c:cnstruct a 24-unit, 2-st;Dry "affordable" a;,art~cx;nt: cvn;a.^~: with :givers of minimun t:uildirg site area per dulling unit, ra::imaa structural hr.ight, and mininwn floor area of ct;el.lir.; uniC. Ttere acre 27 ;x-0ple indicating Uteir aria>ence in opposition anc although tltu staff rc{rort tas not read, it is referr,~d w anc ;Wade a pert: of ti7G minutes. LEnnard ~Sc.Ghse, Asa:iate Planner, present: t:he staff r -:ort: W tare Planning Ccmntssicn Wolin; rata subje<a: area is currentl}' dorreloped will: three =in31e-family hcr:~s and is zcnrd P,S-7200 (ResicenCia], Sin;le Family) and adjacent F.rcpert;y t:o t;he east gas rc•ciesignal:ed to LoH-h~dium Dersity Residential lry the Plannin; Ca;rtission cn Dec:adzr 7, 19E7, and that action is pending i~fore the City Council.. PEI'TTIO,VER"S PRESEhiATION i~Jaydy Hanna, agent, scarred they are reSuestirg 1;Itis projccC antler RMe400 standards since Cite Cacmission roc-v;rrndc-o tare entire area Le ci:an;ec to RM 2400; Utat: Cho rroject is single-sl;cry adjacant: to t~.e sir.^,le-family hcmes and one and Cwc stcries cn blte soul:h, t:ith no t;incet;s cr doors en t!tat soutat side; that Ltey have ;.rovidcc twice t;h2 amount cf rac:reation area reccired and paric.iny as recuirrti and they Rave provided t:he 2C-fcot L•uffer recuired l:et;ween rate projecC and t:ha sin;le-famil}~ hams; and Chat: North Sl;r~l; is trice enough to aarortnrdal:c I:ha light: traffic that: would ta. ;2nerateB ley this dev2lopr~..t. 1/4/88 tffNfTI'ES, lt^,Ali-'IN+ CIiY FLA1vTII'JG O~PiISSION, JA,ti'UARI' ~, ]988 88-~6 OPPOSITIOC: Lleyd Lassley, 758 N. Rose Street, stztec; }+.is propert:}' bads right: u;, to Chis ;.rcperty and l:e has a large pool in his Ltacl: yard and tl;e axlsLing houses are lx'inc rented and Lice diildren wall; the fence new anti s:,im ir. iris pool wizen ire is Bens and t;:is wou]c t:rin.;• „ore r'7iidren. He statti~;. this .:evelo~2r ::anl:eci Co i:uild three stories ;:revicusly anti 1:hc neigl:l:ors i;ave l~n fi;i:Cing t;c ;:::e,: apartments cut: cf ta,eir l:ad:yars sinro 7980 and wculti like t;c have a little p:eacc: and cuick; that t;crc are apartrent;s all around tai.an no:r and it; secs tau devele,^.ars are just: train; Le clear tl:e whole area out, a litale bit: at: a tine. H^ asl:cam if he erould in_ a11c:.T-d tc l:uild apartm:nts c., his ,~ro;xrhp- (G;airman Plcsse restbnd-0 he r:culd certainly lrn alla:as t.c apply t:ut: t:Y~at doesn't rman it: would lz a~,:roved.) ?,r. lassley skated all t:he ;xropl~ wti:c live ju>t. cnz blcc:k off Easl: Stre,:k would like t:e Boll their ;:repert:y and move lx_~ause cf all t:he apart.crnLS ir. fauir t:ac:!:yards- He sWt:r' this till 1.L ctm,:let2ly surrcundirx• him witi; apartments and ghat t;here ie c:orstant: infcrrot:ion iz~in_ Q15C.VSSf?C-i titst t:i;a sca;cels a.._ overcrcwccd. Drian F:Yalle, ]OOi E. North St:re:,k, stat;ec ti;er._ are about: four houses that: face Lhe cxal.lcx on tike north si;:e and if fire ;-sojeca: ie i:uili:, tare flavor of the .^.c.ighl,onc~cd would dram;:. dranr~Cically hec:ause Ciuy r:.ally nave a single-family residential neighl,orhooc starkir Cher: ans ti:is is a major ta;crou;ltiarc intro ta:at housing tract ar.C it; het^s tc retain t.]+..: d:araca;er cf th:: n:,igi;lxrhooa tc maint~ir, those hcrr_s rigi;L at ta~a: ate~ay at: ta,. <:crner of lord: an;. East: SCrecC. iic acd..d I;li' i~recze blcas nerta:ward ov:.r ta;eir residences and tare}• would ixs severray irw:acted wit:h Ci1c noise ti:at ::ould to ;cn-'.rat:cc t:.' this ti,_valclamnt. Hn raf::rres t:c Fa;e 8, r2?, whicat indic:atcs CL•er: are tl:reo cxterier slainays err-readzinc a•;:rcximal:ely 6 feet into tau settac;c and caarific•S ti;cs': stainays would l~ 14 fit; frm I;he i.ro;a:rty line. iim Foster, 710 N.Busi:, raferrcti t:o Faca 8, ;:1S and as;ced iF tin.e numlx:rs si;ould t:e ]d0 PeeC an. staled ire would trot; want a I;t.u-71.cry ,:rojrct 20 fceC frog his pool; that rcae cur~~se a house and ex;:ed: ~ro,:erty valt:es to go u;: and ir, ord;:r Lc i;av a nice ,dare Lc icing u,: their children, I;uL Ia:is just: l:rin;s in more pcv,^ae ans he did rcL see he:: that crouls evar hell: tale area anti it till drive Lhe t~ri^.e of ta;r. i:c~es dc~n. lle stake:: i:c will love sxnt: over $'_00,000 wf:er: hn 1-,as paid off his i;ousa- and that: is a lcl: of money tz s,x'ra t;o have a house ir. the middle of arzrtmant: ccmt.lcxes, and he did not t;kink ti:at: is right. riat;br}m Lingle, 71° ;:. Pl;3i;, Mated sire is an cri;inal e~rer in flu area and rev;lx:r: :,iur. taure :,ere 85 d:il2ren en ta,~ b1ocJ: and iC :.as a great laacc t:o li~^ i:ut: that she has seen a L•rtamndcus d~.an-e it Ci:e aria. S',~.e sr' ,.zd it is nice t;o :,ea Llxse goon; people tneve ir. and t;ry to raise their children there. ,,7u stated Jt- cualit:y of life ir. ~1r:ahaim iias tmen deteriorakin fee tnam' years and ,:NCa; cE th.f: aas t~xr. c_c Cc I;i;o apartments in ta;a area. SI:a adced il; is net the sl:rucf;ures taiv-•t>relves, ..ut: Liu ircreasir;c nurl~r of irresponsii;le ;-.cam;aa •.itc live in then; Cl>3t; nurrosdi ~ skrarts iY<YTf racetiays and trash is P!1ro::n fran car-; ti;at: ararC;:f°nt;s arc not; e.,m;xitiblc witi::;inglc-family d;,ellins, and t;he ,:rivac:y, perso:.al =a_sty, traffic flora and ;:crr.Ll. dec:^nf: rvircrrrrt for e:;ist:in; nei;itl:or!:oods era all c:cm,;romisec, or deetroyed :r1:en apartments ar_ allc:rd. Slta sLakoi rental. units adj3c:ant. Cc tare ;,rc;?ors ;.reject should it mnsicor<; kl:at t;:a~• .re tare n<.nst. buildings on 1:he iaoca; an;: k}:are is rc setaacl: except rams leasing inw ;ara_as vhid: are not: us;,: ice car_; that car; stracdle Live si,de::aL': and earl; on Norti: Street: and ca ::arm dayr., ;ara;es are o,.:_n and fill^' :riti; ,koi;lc. Su asked why it has i;ec:ane necessaz}' t:c attend these hearin;-=. and asl:ec if recorss cf the i,revic:~s Iv_arin;s involvin_ essenf;ially 1/4/88 P;IIv'tJI'F5, .VdFilIEIId CITY PII4I3dING OR'MISSiQ~, JAMIARY 9, 1988 88-37 Ute sane ttetters are discarded or if a few who will profit: at fate expense of hundreds of nearby residents just; continue rccycli.ng Uteir al?pl.icaticns and Utink it: vi11 eventtaally go Utrottgh unnoticed; Utat after a request is dznied, taro week latter utey seem t;o be Lack again. Slte salted bad ccnditicns ta,3C already exist: are mainly catsed bl• cver~rrn:dirg Of many Hearty residences and Mzll cnly l;e accerttuatcd by apartments and Cl;e existing drssity in Utis part of to4m is ttncrontrolled and an increasing nsmtlrer of people are bec:rne incensc~ at overbuilding in all. wtegeries tntile cgly high-rise buildings bloc]: the view and block out Ute sun, and that sraller rut4.artz~d struci:ures like apartments are poiscnous to existing neighl:orhoods and especially tateirs. Carol Wilscn, 1001. E. NorUt S1:rEet, read a statecmr.t from Fid:ie 7u;,ie, 1015 E. North Street, indicatinc ii: reflects fate nr_ighl;ors' views; and Utey are mncerncti in fear areas: 1) traffic croncesticn, eslti:.ially aC Ute ea__=t end of ivortlt Street, and the difficulty gelatin, cut of Lhe neiglilrorhood due t;o t:he closeness of tare L: Palma int;er:.ection and 4riUt 2 cars ter unit, traffic congestion 41LL'ld he increased; 2) dc:gracation of the neighborhood and dtanging of its dtaracH:er wit:R affordable apactm ttws; fatal late apartments en Davis and duplexes on t:he coaster of :lcrtit and East are occupied lt}' icsr incare families and they have t:o double up in order to p.}~ Lire rent and this may irrrcve Uteir livin, crondil;ions, but: iL• will dzyradr. Ute neighbors' living conditicrs and racy ]rave alrr_ady seen the dec:rading that }Las uxurred with those units; and tare d~;radat:ice has occurred lrcaus;e the people 41to live there do net; have late same croncr_rn for property and overerouding occurs and putting in apartments :,ould drst:roy Utc "neiglilnr" character of Cheir nziglil;onc~od since they al] ]mow e:,ch crater, 4;;tidt gives them a sense of security and safety, and uiUt arrtmrnt: ds;ellers ulm are trmperar}', it 4.rould l:e impassible tc l:cep track of s.9to itelongs in the neigliltorhood; 3) late pcl;ential parking problcan, and even though fate develcper Says tltey are providing adecuat:e parking, there will Lc cars of visitors sato ui]] par]: on facie streets; and tact when Utey have fricstds over, tal('xe is no place t:o part: and site does net. like lase idea of strangers constantly parking in front; of her h~.tse; and 4) the potential crir.4_; Utat she itas heard oUtr_r p.~ople at tatese )tearings streak of increased crirtte in that neighborhood sincr_ rate apartlmlrts on Nevis srent in, raven Lo fate extent of a rtu;rder outside a neigltlpr's ham. Ste stated they have fruit; stole~t frcm Uteir farces, trash latro:,~t in Uteir }•ards and tare drug dealers t;m)cing deals in front of tateir houses. Site stated the developers tray feel sinrn Gtere arc ahead}~ aparlmenCS on fate Crest: end of Nor4t, Caere s;tculd not: ix: a I:ig deal adding mare, ]wt; lira]; tabs different: because those apartments are primarily on L3 Palmy and o;tly Utree open catt:o \'ortlt Street and they are a serrate caarunity and do not; affect tats neighl;orhocd, Taut apartments in tlxa pro;:osed area :rill only certinue the prcx:ess of destroying the e}:isting crorrm:::iC}• :9tidt :.as lr±gurt ln• Ute cn^struction of the apart:rtrsts on Plavis. Slte stggest:e6 Utese develc;.ers stop trying to lxry haxs in established neigltirrhoods and staid: t:o areas on major. lawrougitfares riuere t;he factors of traffic, parking and dta:t,ing rate dtaracter of tae neighl;crhood are not so rrn:dt a problem. FrarJ: Guevara, 753 Id. };ash, scat:cal at: 719 North Street Ute decision of tare Planning Cannission and CiC}• Council. was net to allow a de4ntloxr to l;uild II units and now 350 feet a4,ay, ]tore is a request for 25 units an6 he would li1ce far the Catmissioners to rememl;~x 4rlty they voted acainst ti.e otater one and vote in the same canner. He added this is a single fatru]}• area and tatere is taco taudt traffic already. Treat: Wilson, 1001 E. NorUt, staged Utey have ]teen before the Catmission many times and once regarding property irrnediately t:o fate west and this is acrws Ute street frm his property and all late ,.mints mace then are appropriat:e Hoar. He asi:ed if "affordablz° units whidt invil;e wcivers are an option cf tak cctirolcxr or w1;eUt:r all developers are required to ixovide "affordable" units, and Chairman Afesse responded developers are not required w provide affordable units, acrd it is t•Ir. Hanna's dtcice. 1/4/86 ifINU.'w, ANAHEIM CZTY PIA,' LING CCTIKISSIOiV, JA1vTJARY 4, 1988 88-38 Ns. Nilson sLei:ed Um :aivPxs provide ;rare density, U:ereforn, more prcfiC; snaller units, U:erefore, more profit, and assuming U:e percentage= are relatively low and since it: is the developer's option, it: wrou.l.d he a iusiness venture on lus hart and U:eir neiylil;orlwod is in the lusiness of preventing U:is and i:ave diligently goL•ten t,~eLher and revie:.•ed ta:e situation, signed Ure petit;ions and hepe Lc crontinue in U:is direction because they do not :ant; to ise Lho..e people :i:c, in effect, pick up Cl:e oti:er side of the coin as it relates t;o affordable and it is not: U:eir place t:o aar_pt: t:he wngestion, additional peoplr_, sc:ool problem, additional rats, t:he crirca problcan, and t1:e trash ;:roulr3;, in cyder for Mr. Hanna Lo have a sofit;able business because Cl:ey live here and gill eroutirn:e la l.iva here and Dtr. Hanna does not: live here, nor 60 laic people who would live in tl: ae aparl:ments and doulae tare population on a small cul de sac street. He stated Norfa: is net a Ciu^ough s1:rmL; U:at this not lilted l:y ta:e neighhorl:c+gd and is not an improvemrr.C and is notival:ed l:y profit. He staled Um developer indicated U:e lreaut:y of the ptrojrtN; should be a strorr, favcrai:le move fcr acceptance and ira saw the rendering and it sho4r-d full grc.n rul:ure trees, Uie ful] i:ei_ilt: of t:he two-story lwilding, planted in less than a 3-fool seal:~r,•c, a.d they did not thin;: L:e project; would evec Tool: lilt. ta:at: rendering so U:e developer's creciibil.il;}' is st:ret:c9:ed. He staco:; Um neigiilrors would like for Cl:e neigi:l~;rhooc t:o remain t:he way it is. Alr. Hanna stated he understands the concerns of the neiGhl:onc~od and wrouid like 1;o redesign the prejxti: to ccnfom w f:he R'•i 240C "Lone uiU: no waivers, a ene-sWry project: srita: 2-1/2 parkin, s;zces par unit and recu=s: ~d a contiroancc fcr t:uo:;eelcs. iI~ i'SJBI,IC HEARI\G h7cS CiASID. Camiissioner Fierlst: stated herausa of Um large size and shape of Uxse properties which are Suite deep, noting he is familiar with Lhis area and is cenmrned because of the crorner at Norta: and Ia PaLra uhica: is one of 19:e worst: in Anaheim, he ::ould sugcest: single-story mndominiuns rather fa:an a;.~rll;ienLS ~,:Vause they are owner-occupied and would l:c more cra;f>atible uiLi: 1a:e surrounding neig!il:ori:ood. He added ta:c dcnsiLy iias to tie kept: drnan i~ecawe of t:}u traffic. problcars. He staked Lhe neighbors might ire more uil.lin; Lo go along wit;l: sarcf:i:ing like U:at. i4r. 14~nra staled 1;here would it bleb cuali Ly i:enants in this apartimnL and a ccndomiri~n would not: r:uice t:l:at: rr,:cl: diffuenc~ He stated t;he area was actual]y zoned for 1~1-1200, and taxis is proposed fcr Rh1-2400. Canaissioner Flouas stat;cd there is no way t:he prcl~erLy :;ill. 1x: developed with single-family hcries and something wi71 be luilt U:ere and an nice eca~:le:: Uat; is ue].1 riar:aged might lye beLLcr U:an son' of U:e lwuses that are Ding rented in 1:}:at area now and U:is area certainly does need to he cleaned up .=.o tlx:y keep U:eir ~.roperty values up and sucgested U:ey all uorlc togoti:er to see :d:at can he done. Cormissioner Her1sC stated Dlr. Hanna ;Ws developed a lot of properties i.n Anaheim and is one of Lhe better develo~rs and if lx does construct a project, iw, hoped i.L would t;e satisfactory t:o the neishhors. h'.r. Hanna stated h^ Li:oughL he could erne u;, :;ita: a p13n and show iC to the ncigiil~ori:cod and recuestcd a twro-::eef: centinuanr-e. C7>;irm3n N.2sse staged I:a would prefer t:o see t;his c:ale 1'acl: in four weeks and Lt:ete is a heavy agenda in Lwro accts and Li:at does create a real l:ardsl:ir. on staff. ASr. Hanna recuesl:ed a four-w•c~l: mnLinuance and added GuL• :rill give him a cl:ancr Lo sl:cw Lice rei;iilcrs t:he plan. ACTIOiV: Cq:missicrer P1r.Burne}~ offered a motion, sracronded l:y Commissioner Herlrot; and MO'!'ION CARRIID ta:at c:onsideral:ion of tl:e afor;~nticnec naLt:er be continued to Uu regularly-scik.:ulcd meeting of Lrel:ruar}' ], 1.988, at the reruest of late peLiL•ionar in order t:o work uith L•he nei~iil~ors and sal:nit r^_vised plans. i/4/88 A[dA]lE1M CITY PLAI4NI1~ ~!`4"QSSIO!J, JA,WARY 4, 1988 88-39 C9tairrttan Hesse pointed out Utis rtetter will not tie readvertised. FraN: Guevara asked if Utis could be last on the agenda so more people can attend. Cltairt;~n Hesse responded UtaL• can lte arranged. IT&`i PLO. 13. CFQA DATIVE DE•XSARATIIXJ AP:D l`ONDITIQ~'AI, USE PERMIT X10. 2972. PUffi,IC HFI~RING. CJ<ti'NERS: LARRY P. 13FNNRY, ET AL, 2251 tv. LAARA SiTtEET, ANAHEiP1 CA 9280]. AGINP: AR's FLARES, 1771 W. GI.I•N, ;4, 1EIM, CA 92801. Propert}~ descril:ed as a t;riancularl}'-shaped parcel of land consistinc of approrinately 3550 square feet loc:aCed at the norUtuesL•erl.}' rnrner of Mandtester Avenue and Thalia Stec-mot, and further described as 200 South Mandiester Avenue. R°Suest: Tc permit awall:-up restaurant. 'There t,•ere t:wo persons indicating their presence in opposition t:c suL•ject request and although the staff reporL• was not read at file public hearing, it is referred Co and made a part cf the minutes. Armando Flores, agent, ea~tiained he has been in file restaurant txtsiness for over 10 years and ias working at the Sunshine Broiler on Harbor whee it; was closed; and taut *tr. Kardter 1•.ad arranged the txmey for itim to open Utis iwsiness. Ccmnissioner FIc:Durney stated he would noC Lake parr, in this hearing since !te is employed lt}' Kardter Enterprises and there is a possibility of a conflict: of interest. Corriissioner Dk: Burney left Ute Council. Citamtters. Ra}mnnd Runo, 1120 Kentaccc Place, Fu1lerLOn, referred t:o a letter he Clad written to Ute Planning Commission ehplaining his opxsition. Gtairm3n Hesse stated t;he Commissioners did receive his letter earlier today and have read it. Tile letter is in Ute Planning I)eparlamnC files and a rnpy :.mss Given to Ptr.Flores. Mr.Runo stated the property is very small and then e~.lained he Clad reviewed tare effici~a. <:cnstruci;icn plans and Ute applicant's plans show Ute measurements from curb :.o curb rather Ulan property lire t;o property line wltidtimeans the property is 20 feet smaller in all. directions Ulan what his plans shoo an6 there are only 3 parking spaces and tai:in^, off Ute 20 feet ueulc only leave 2 spaces and that trould he very difficulC for him and his tenants to live wii;h. He ;::,~lainc-d his prcFerLy is adjacent to Uie sut;jccC property. June NcIr.C}~re, 9i7 W. Sycamore, staked she was Ute Administratrix of Utz Estate adjoining another property at 206 S. Tltal.ia Street; and asked if Ute Con, nissioners had inspecl:ed Uie property. Site st;aLed iC was fate former Grafton ]ieigltnrtst;er Scale, and Utat she was i:orn in tiu. house across t;he street and l:-r t~Uter opposed the installation of Cite scale at• Ute Lime but it was approved and was operates on t:he city streets until just a few years ago; !to•.:ever, Utirrs are not done like t:itat• any~rcre; Utat she s}mnpat:hizes v:it:h this pet;iticner, Cwt Utat property trould not support• a opzration l.ihe Utis because it is so smell and site did net UtiNc sanita~' cedes will pemit it ttcrause it is ro cid and Cite scale is st;ill. under Ute portion near P7andtester and it: ]tas rot been taken care of for years and she was afraid sameUting will t;reak under Utere. Slte stated she txlieved Ute City Codes specify that when there is a dtan~e in rn:nersitip, :altaLever is Utere ltas Lc be rctmcved. ids. McIntyre st;at:ed Ute staff report indicates 45 fc>`t from Ute center of Nardtester must lte irrevocably offered for dedication t;o fate City as a right of ta:: and taking the 45 feet for Aiandtester and Ute foota;e for curbs and sidevallcs trculd furtter reduce Ute siu of. Lhe prepert.y, and also the driveway nigh] 1•.ave to be closed, and Ute}' uil.l tte left; wiUt a very smell building wiUt 3 emgtl.oyees, and swrage room, etc. and slte did not tatiN: Utc~}~ could make i L• trorlc and also she die not think Utey could part;. tatree cars there. She staged Utey indicated ]lours from 6 a.m. ]/4/88 MIN[7CES, ANAIiE]Pt CITY PIAT~IIdIT~ IXR~PffSSION. JANUARY 4, 1988 _ 88-40 to 10 p.m. and ta?at• is a problcan area already and trucks park U?ere and U?ere is a lot; of trash and garlage and sl?e felt U?is business *.:i11 attract the type of people who part: their cars and stay U?ere and she thought it would cause a 1?azard and attract: people trl?o migi?1: trurglar9 ~s U?eir properties, etc. She stated also 1a?ere are ether foci' service L};e businesses in t}?e area and si?e did not 1a?inlc G?is lwsiness is necessar}~. h1r. Flores stated he 1?as measured the property and 1?as painted and cleaned up t:he property to tnaht it look nicer and tl?ree employees uoul.d not be 1a?ere all. ta?e firm, and normal.l}~ only one cr twn ~ople would he tamre. G?airman Messe asiced if hfr. Flores !?ad read the staff reporC. h1r. Flores responded he had and that U?e ot:ner was planning t:c rempve Ll?e scale as far as he l.~new. G?airman Ncsse asks^d about the sidesallcs. Mr. Flores st:at:ed he will canply trio? al.l to?e City requirements. Tim PUBLIC HFAF.ItJG WAS QASED. Commissioner Hoydstun asked if Mr. Flores 1?ac gotten permits fran ti?e County Health Department to operahr_ a restaurant; at: ta?is location and also .i?c1a?er or not; U?e restrooms vrould rr~t: Codes. hir. Flor^s responded he did not how about the permits iwt: he 1?as cleaned up the facility and painted the r.~stroons and Umy do lcalc nice, and tl?at he will 1?ave U?e trash enclosures in tale rear and U?ey will be croverc{l. Greg Nast:^gs explained he will. tx rcauired Lc tenet tlu County Healtl? Deliartl[r_nt: and City B~,?ildiny TrpartmenC regulrt:iens and t:he Building Delart:rtnnt: does work witi? tale Heal.Ut Departmnt, and U?ey will. !?ave 1:o r^°eC tl?e erodes of both agencic~, and they will I?ave to sutrtit plans for permits t:c i'-~ Buildine Le;art~nt. hir. Flores stated he ti:2s ~aitin; for this approval before applying for !;he County permits. G?airtmn Messe explaireci fate ecncern is ti?ether or not the County will. issue U?e proper permits for a restaurant: in tl?is l:uildin^y. h1r. Flores res, ended to Camnissioner Feldi?aus t,?at: lte ta?ouyht tlu~ permits frm tale County would nrolaalay cost about $700; and responded I:o Crnmicsioner fiouas la?at he plans to sell. mostly hLxic:an foods and l;ot: and <rol~a sanduid?es. G?aixran htesse stated t:o get: U?e County permits and also Cc get: t•]te property owner to tenet all U?e c:cnditions of approval ti;i].1 be ver}~ expensi~~e. Malcolm S.laugi?t:er, Deputy City Attorney, stated he will 1?ave t;o apply Cc t:he County Healt:l? DeFarlmenC for a fara handling t:usiness and he tas not sure wl?at: requirements the}~ might impose and t;i?at would ]?ave t:o be done before food rnuld be sold. Commissioner Bouas stated si.e Ci?cught he needed a l~tt:er l.ccation. ACTI0~11: Cormissioner Bouas offered a troticn, seconded try Commissioner Feldl?aus and h10TIQ\ CARRIED (Commissioner tfc Burney ats~i:) I:]?aL' t:he Fnaheim City Planninc Commission 1?as reviewed U?e proposal to permit a :alJ:-up restaurant on a triangularly-sl?aped rarcel of land consisting of apf~roxiretely 3550 square feet la:ated at the northwesterly corner of Manchester Avenue and 'II?al.ia Street, anc fiu-tl^.er desc:ritz'd as 200 SouU? Manc~?est;cr Avenue; and does herely approve the Negative Dr_rlaration on the taasis U?at ii: has cronsidered rho propas~l Negative Ik°clarat:ion 1;ogeC1?er with any ;:an?ents received during Lhe public revie~r process and furtl?er findim on U?e I/4/88 PtIIr'UI'FS, ANAElE12•f CITY PLAPNIING CCrY9ISSI0N, JANUARY 9, 1988 88111 t:asis of t:he Initial. Study and any eaanents received L•haL• there is no sutstantial evidence that: tlu projc-tit will have a significant effect on L•he environrtent. Commissioner Bouas offered a resolution to den}' Conditional. Use Permit No. 2972 on tale basis t:hat• this is not; tlu prover location for this type use. On Roll. Call t;he foregoing resolution FAILED Z'0 CARRY BY 'i1IE FOLTI.7JING Vt7PE: AYES: COPMISSIUVERS: Bouas, Bo}~dsi:un, Carusillo NOES: COA1PiISSI0NERS: Feldhaus, Hertst, Piesse ABSIIJP: 1:0i+ltilISSII>rIFRS: Mc: Burney Prior I:o voting, Commissioner HertsC aslcc~t w1~aC could be developed on that: property, and Camnissioner Bouas responded she Wasn't sure but aid not: cant to see Lhis petitioner spend Honey on Uus application t:~''cause she did not: thinly he could get 1±roper permits. Mr.Runo poinL•ed cuC he had spelt: $500 for t:he plans ~.iiich are net accurate. Mr. Flores responded he had worked what t:l:e Cit;y's Planning staff c:liile leaving flee plans revised before sutmitting alum. Ccrmissioner Hertzst offered a resolntio^ t;o grant Conditional Use Permit ido. 2972 subjech; to the rec.~ancended conditions o£ approval. and Lo the ,.~citioner's stipulations. Commissioner HrrtsL• ext,lainctt tau pet:iticner ro;ould not ?x al;le t:o get: t;he permits from ta,e County witaxut uu approval. of this permit. He st:at:ed also 1•.;e irmproverm~ts made by tau pro;~xty okras t:o tau crorner t:il:h curls, out:ters, sidetial.ILLs, etc. ~:il.l. be a iulp 1:o the area. On roll call., the forcr~oirr~ resolution FAILEll Z'0 CARRY try' flu fol.la:ing vote: AYFS: COPMISSIOPIEP.S: Felditaus, Herlst, Pfesse NOES: COPY~IISSIONPTtS: Bouas, Bcydstun, Carusillo ABSENT: COPPffSSIU~IIiS: Mc Burney Connissioner Carusil.lo explainer although i1e s}'m~atitizes vit:h Uu petitioner and tirant:ed Lo see him be successful., taure are t:oo many obstacles on that shall. parcel and he did not rant to see him send more money. Malcrolm Slaughter e;~lained t:tie Commission can refer i:his mala:er t:o Lhe City Council for action since flu L•ie vote cannot be broken. ACTION: Cunnissioner Bouas offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and P10TICt1 CARRIID (Ccrtmissioner hlc Burney alsent) U~t tau Anaheim City Planning Commission does herely regucst City Council revieH and action on Conditional Use Permit No. 2972 hue t:o tie votes cn resolutions of£ereci for denial and w grant said permit (Cannissioner Pic Burney l~avirg declared a possit~le conflict of interest). Cliairron t~W_sse suggested Mr. Flores crontacl; Lhe Cour:ty Hea.ltai Deparlment: prior to the City Council hearing to determine ti:hettur or not it is feasible to obtain t:he proper permits. Camnissioner Mc Burns}~ returned Co Ute meeting. 1/9/88 ITEM! N0. 14. CEQA NEGATIVE DECIARATIQ\ AND CONDITIONAL USE PFI'a'ffT N0. 2973. 86-42 PUBLIC HEARING. OSvNERS: ORKLV ID1C.,c/o ThRIFPY OIL COt•II'ANY, 10000 Lakewood Bivd., Downey, CA 90240. AGEdi': TAIT b ASSOCIATES, P.O. BOX 9425, Anaheim, CA 92803. Propersty drscrit._''d as a recLangular]}~-sl;aped parcel of land mrsisting of appraeimatel}~ 0.52 acres located at Uie souUieasL rnrner of Broadway and Magnolia Avenue, and furLlier descrit;cc as 304 South Magnolia Avenue. Rewest: To perrtiit a cenvenier:ce r:arkeL• with gasoline sales and off-sale bees and uine. There was no one indicating their presence in oppositicn to subject recuesl; and alUiough Uie staff report was nol: read at t:he public hearing, it; is referred t:o and r;ade a part of 1:he minutes. Mike Xencs, agent, stated triis is trim last of tlm Circle K recvests in Anaheim and that Um pYl sting service station will l:c rearnved. TI$ PJBL[C HEARING t~.'4S CLOSID. Mr. X.nos responded to Comnissior:r I~>r Burney Utat Uiis is proposed to be a 24-hour a day ol~rat:ion; and that they would r:ccept: api.roval. uit:hout the right t:o sell. ix:er and wine, twt would prefer 1;o sell. beer and wine. Ca:missioner Herlast staged im 1;hou5hL it was a good design and srould su,^_port: it witricut Use sale of beer of uine. ACTION: Camissio,ler H~t~st offered a racLicn, seconded tn' Ca;nissioner Mc Forney, and DDT'ION CARRIID U~at Lim Anaheim City Flanning Commission leas reviewed Um proposal to lxarmit a convenience market: wiUi gasoline sales an3 off-sale beer and xine on a ri~eL•angularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.52 acre 1cxaLed at: L17e souUmasL• corner of Broadway and Magnolia Avenue and further descritmd as 304 SouU~ A13rnolia Avenue; and does Imret~y~ approve Clie Negative Declaration on Uie basis tltut it iias cronsidered Um prcposcc3 Negative Declaration t;ogeUmr with any comments received during the ouL•l.ic r~~iew process and furti:er findi*rg on Uie basis of the Initial. Study and any crommcnts received Utat 19mre is no substantial evidence UiaL t'~,:~ project cril.l !lave a si;nificanL effecL• on Lhe ~vironment. Cormissioner Herbst offerc~ Resolution No. PC 88-17 and rmovcd for its passage and ado,:tion Lhat; the Analwim Ci1:y Plannin, Canmission does hereby grant Conditional. Use Permit: Ne. 2973, in part, pursuant; t:o Anaheim Municipal Code S,~c-Cions 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035, prohibiting t~:e safe of i;cer ar+.d i:ire and sui~ject: tc InLerdepart:rienLal Conmitt;ee Rc~rr,>:mendation_s. On Roll Call. fire foregoing resolution was passed t~}• tJ~e following vote: AyID: CO;~SiISSI0A1QtS: Houas, EbydsLUn, Carusillo, Fel.cltiaus, Hertzst, Diesse tfcBurnep IWEu: COt•Y•IISSIGQQEIi.S: h'0,``E ABSE\Z': COt•MISSIONERS: IK1A~E Ma].colr~ S].au;hLer, Deputy City Attorney, presented Lim right t:o appeal. Lhe Planning Ccarmission's decision wiUiin 22 da}•s to t:he Cit;}~ Council. 1/4/86 IyR'UTES, AA'Al1EIA7 CITY PLAt\LNING OCDPlISSIQV, JAhiIn,RY S, 1988 88"S,'-_ ITE•1 N0. ]5. CEQA NDGA'":VE DECLARATION, 7•~I~/ER OF COD£ REQUIRhiF7dC AND OO,~IDITIONAL USE PERt+IIT N0. 2375. P[JHLIC HFARING. OItiTQER: FSII~Et KASCAL AND P+1RA'EY StJARDIAF: °T AL, 3481 1JA SCMBRA, I,OS A+`1G£C.ES, CA 90068. AGINI: RICHARD E. 7~AialE'~A4ICHER, PATRICK 1+lFDIA Q .,P, 15:0 W. 1+1rSF1ING'II~N BLVD., IDS A1~19:.ES, CA 90007. Prc~rt:y descrilxad as an irregularly-~.va7ed pazcol of land consisting of approximately 5 acres ].~ea~:cd at Utie soutlnmst cbrn~r of Anaheim Boulevard and Ball Roac+, and furUtier described as 1202 South Ana7ieim Boulevard. Recuest: Tc Permit a 36-foot high, 672-scuare foot; hilll;card wiUti waivers cf minitmnn structural. setl,acc and maxinum height. Titiere tics one person indicating his pseserce in ol:position IA subject: request and altl:eugh Utie sl;aff report was noC read, iC is referred to and made a part of Uxa minutes. P1;TITIONFa2' S PR}Sr?~R'ATION 2icltiard 4Pannenmavter, agern:, stated Utiis billboard will rot adversely affects amp adjoining properties nor lx detrin~ntal 1;c I;he peace, health, safety and Senegal welfare of U:e citizens; and Utat• it; does not generate traffic. He referred to the street :+idening and explained they ::ill be wi].lir.; t;o reloc:ate the siGn at no cost to Che City iE tatie street is widened. He pcint~-d cut; fatiere arc billboards in Utie area and t)r~ size and irrecular shape of the property constitute justification for t:he tiraivers. Mr. Wannenmadtier referred to titre Condition No. 1 rc~euiring dcci<:ation for fatie corner, and stated it sons all. of Anaheim Boulevard has kz:een ti:idened or, at least ncna curls and gutters and sidr;allcs ltiave ix~cn installed and trees ltiave ixc~n planted. OPFQSITION FtanC.L's P:utto, 621 Jaml:alya Street, salted there are no practical difficulties or unnecossar}' itiardslu,;< on titiis pro;:ert}~ t;o justif}~ granting tam regti,est;ed waivers, an3 iC could appear ro l;e morel; for Utie otimer tc get; a financial cain and Utie rnmers sltiould noC be granted waivers at t!~x> expense of the neigitibors, residential. or catrercial; ghat Utie unusual s7tiape of tltie property does net justify a hardship for granting a waiver on Utiis propert}' l:ecaw.e t;here is no hardship in conmcaion with Utiis billboard. He ask~ni tidtiaC specific property in this neighborhood is enjoyir>; Uu: privileges indicat;cc l;y Utie rocuest:ed :.aivers. Ele staf:ecl a Negative 0.claration sha:ld net be approved as a matter of course and tatiis should be subject t:o a focused envirer2ental i;r~:act report. PETITIONER'S REBUTTAL Mr.i9annenmarher statc4' page 3 of Utie staff report: gives Um criteria necessarJ in order t:o y^rant; a waiver. Tim PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSID. Ca:missioner Mc: Burney stafa:C it would not l.~e prudent t:o allo:a a billboard tiahen lam City Council is tn~ing to rrsnove as pang as possible and he could noC support putting any more bil.]boards in Utie City until he imoti+s trltiat: 7;l>` City Counci]. wan1M, ' Camissioner Feldltiaus st.al;ed latie billboards are lx'ing revie:.~d by Utie City Council. as a possible revenue producr_r. 1/4/88 88-49 MINJIFS, ANAHEIM CITY PUltv'NIt~ COFfiIISSION, JAA'UARY 4, 1988 Q;airman Messe staged Uie pet:itioner had indicated that the sign would be perpendicular vith the residences and could not be ,eon, but he did not see how Utat could }~ t;he case. Mr. t:anncrunadter staged Lie sign faces north and south and residents on Zris would t;e looking at Lhe side of the billboard. Cannissioner Feldliaus staged lw ~.roul.d agree wiiat ~v3irman tfesse and ;~ait• for Uie Cit}~ Council. decision; t}wt signs used to be fcr identification, Iwt nos it seems the ecmpanies tram t;o see who can put; the sign laic highest end biggest. He added lua could not; vote for appro-,;al of tlus r~uest. Commissioner Herl~t stated Caie permits a ma;:imum of 300 square feet and Greg Hastings explained a cronditiona.l use permit is recuirctl for anything over 300 square feel; and tlwi; would rot be a waiver. Ma].coLm Slaughter furUier explained in addit;ion to the requircament fcr a conditional. use rxs- colt as set: forth in that section cf the Code, trro waivers are nec:essar}~; and L•liat the applicant has said there are ctlu~r hil.l.inards in Use area whidi rrou]d justif}~ grant:irg of the z,aivers, but tawt itas notiiins to do wiUt granting fate rnndii:ioaal. use permit. ACfION: Cctimissioner Herixst; offered a motion, seconded b}~ Conmissioner Boydstun, and I.1(7I`I0N CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Cmmission lws reviecred file proposal to permit: a 36-fool: lugh, 672-sware foot billboard t,zli~ waiver of minirwm structural set;badc and ma:;irnan height or. an irregularly-siwped parcel. of land consist:ing of approximately 4 acres local:ed at the southw~esC crorner of Anaheim Boulevard and Ball. Road, and furti~er d~_critx~d as 120i South Anaheim Boulevard; and does herel;}~ approve the Negative Declaration en tale basis tawt it: has considered the propicscx: Negative Declaration t;ooether uitai any egtrnenis received during Uu public revieh~ Nrocess and furtais finding or. tl:e lxasis of the Initial. Study and any cm:rnts received Uwt Uiere is no s:tzsl;antial evidence tawt; the project will. lwve a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner Herbst: offered a motion, secronded lry Commissioner Boydst;un and I.37TIQ~I CARRIID tlwt ttie Analui„~ City Planning Cannissicn does hereby deny waivers of crocie recuirc3rest on t:he basis that there are no sp_aial circuist;anc~:.c applicable to the property such as size, slwpe, topogra;aiy, location or surroundincs, :d~ic3i do not: apply t;o oU~er identically zoned properties in tale vicirit;y; and Uwl, struct application of the Zoning Cello does not: deprive tale propc~rt}~ of privilc~;es cnjcyed t;y ot'ner properties ir. identical zoning classification in Uie vicinity. Cormissioner Her1~sL• offered Resolution No. PC 88-78 and roved for its passage and adoption tawt tale Anaheim City Planning Camission dcec hereL~}~ deny Conditional. Use Permit No. 2974 cn the psis tYat t:he use will adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the groatih and develop~mnt of Uie area in yiiic~i it is proposed w be located and crou]d ix~ detrimental to Uie peacae, 1',ea1L•h, safety and g~seral imlfare of Uie citizens of face City of Anaheim. lfi Roll Call. the foregoing rnsolution was passe try Lilo following vote: AYES: CCt•;uSSIO!~"r.'~.5: Dcuas, Eo}~dstun, Carusill.o, Felo'Iwus, Herla.t, Afesse AfcFlurney NOES: CQ`29ISSI0NERS: A'Q`'E AffiFM`: CQ~t`IISSIONIILS: NQ~IE Malcolm Slauohtez, Deput}~ Cit}~ At;wrney, presented the right; to appeal. the P.lanni.ng Ccrtmission's decision wiUtin 22 days to the City Council. 1./4/88 DIINui~:, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CO"AIISSIQI, JAA'UARY 4, I988 88-45 ITFM N0. 16. CEQA NFX3ATIVE DDCLARATIQU, 1~AIVER OF CODE REQfJIRE`fFF'~T, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2976. PUBLIC HEARING- (7u\TFRS: PHILIPE DELGADO, ET AL, 712 E. HAIL ROAD, ANAHEP,1, CA 92806, C/0 R013ERT S. SKL4R. AGENT: FARAN'0 AND KIEVIEI', ]00 S.ANAHEP,1 BLVD., SUITE 250, ANAHEIM, CA 92805, ATI1J: KARIN L. LvATIS. Property described as a rectangularly-sl:apcq parcel of land cronsisting of approeiatatel}~ S.C6 acres having a frontage of approximately 270 feet on the south side cf Ball Road, and being located approximately 660 feet west: cf the centerline of Lewis Street• and furtizer described as 712 E. Ball Rcad. Request: To retrain a liquidation sales outlet wiU::.ziver of minimmn number cf parking spaces. Karin hai;ts, ago=nt, explained th° t}~.e of merd:andise sold at: this liquidation crater incluces out.dat:ed display models fron all U:eir stores in Southern California, and also reconditioned used rnerd~andise and damages merchandise. Concerning Ute conditions, Ms. katts states her client would like to leave six months t;o caopl}~ :;iUi tare rewirerr~t of side•+ralls. Slides :;ere sho•n of the e.~ctrerior am interior of faze liquidation center. Gerald Eushore, 721 N.Eucaid, Anaheim, stated ile has tress 1;o tares Phil and Jim's liquidation center many times and felt Che hours should Ire limiter and flee part;ing restricted, minting cut tatey also store truck time. He added he has parked in file rear w~17en he l.as gone there and there is a lot of activity going cn there in the mornings with U:e truck tryin, t:o go in and out. He stated he did not lmow :atere the mr~loyees earl: lwtr Uiere is not enouch roam fee ert~loyees and the trucks to parlc_ He s'.:ated he rc~lrers in t:l:e ,,^zst : ~:er. Phil and Jim's wenC in on Tustin Avenue and a lot of Uiings acre promised w9iidi leave not cam tc pass. He stat:rd if a ;irking stud}' .as done, i1: has to tee ore-sidctl; and tlwC t:his is a cartmrcial use cn an indusL•rial property and if it is approved, tl:e l:curs should lx limlCed and parking rest:rioted trecause tatere is a problem Umre row whin the trucks are going out in tl:e mcrninc and cominc laacl; in Uie eveniny^ and unloading. He :,Gated since they are st.orir, trucla on the property, it is actual].} <r dual use. Floyd Faranc, attorne}~, stzted he tibuld give a rrore detailed e~~larztion of :ale czraticn and :itaL' l:acpens at U~is facility; that all Uie rmrd:andise is delivered b}~ railroad flat ~r sad: as refrigerators, stoves, Dashers, dryers, etc. ultid: are received in a camaced ccnditien; U:aL• Iti-cause of the expense cf Cranspcrt:in? tliaL damaged merc:andise t~cl; to 1:he rarufacturer, U:ey rel.]. it as is or ti+.e}' are traded for credit; to,ards other rmrd~ardise. He e;plained tam ;mrd:andisa is delivered frcn U:e flat car by Lruc;s to U:eir outlets; and t:l•,at certain other rmrd>ondise ta:at is returned iry Uie cstorrrs is d.-aivered l:o this center because they need U:e r;arei:cuse space; U:at: in addition to the 103,000 sc. ft•. tarehcue, t9~ey have a 10,000 se. ft. repair facility. He e.~laired a cust;aner weed leas purdiaser samUting from Ptul and Jirs can return iti to U~is facil.iL•y a.^.d receive credit, tra:e it ir, or have it: repairer and i1; would be sold tc taro public. Ile st;<.tcd oUier merdhandise crould trc display itcsns wl;idi ray leave teen displayed on store shelves for one or two years and has never Leen used, I;ut is cut of model., and Ueat is sold t:lerou;h Uus facility. He e~:plained Uee volure at Uiis store is about $2-1/2 nil lion dollars and 2Ok Las lx-er; repaired or is tlec outdated display models zrs 80% is tnerdeandise taeat leas des Zama~ed Ly the freight carriers; Ia:at: every piece of merceandise sold tleere can lee traced frcn late fire it was receives until it goes out the door and no mrdeanrise is L•rcught in fran an}~:eere L•ut Phil. and Jim's and Ueey leave inviter L-l:e Plan^.ing Departrrnt t;o deeds the records. ]/4/88 MINIli'F", ANAHEIM CITY PLRiuTTII9G OLPTIISSION, JA:WARY S, 1968 88"116 Mr.Farano staged the hours are listed as 10 to 5, and 11 on Saturday and Sunday and the hours do not conflict wiUi rcyular working lwrars; that Uiere is no good place to dispose of Utis type merdtandise; Drat used, second-]wnd or damaged merdwndise is not someUring the City of Anaheim could like t:o be sold from regular outlets. He staked Uie Ccrmissio^. can place any restriction they desire on the t}~pe of rmerdtandise t:ltat crould be sold Here. THE PUIILIC HEARI;~ i'~AS C1AS®. Commissioner Herlst staged Uie Planning Commis=_ion denied this in Fet:ruar}~ 1987 and Uie City Council denied it in March of 1987 and it toelc Code Enforcement investigation to bring Uiis to light. Mr. Farnao explained t+s.Sklar, Vier. President of Phil and Jim's, went to the Plannin; Department t;o find out what would lie reouircu to conduct this type of business and tluough a misunderstanding, leis request: for infcrriation was cenvert:ed int:c a reouest before Ute City Council to diange t}te Cede or Ordinanres to allow this use specifically, and !te did not consciousl}~ make that: request and did not aplxar l;efore the City Council. at the hearim and did not lmow abut it until after it was done. He stated Uiat was none-sided Imaring and it is U:eir belief ghat Mr. Sklar did not make that request. Commissioner Me Burney stated in 1484 ar, appliance warelreuse and office use only wiUt no retail. sales permit Was issued, so he l~ew at that time Utiat this was not allowed. b;r. Farnao stated t:}te warehouse facil.it}' was init:iat:ed first and it leas Leen ti:ere for }ears and C!:e repair facilit}~ follaw'ed close and he lxalieved the ret;ai] sales ~.as cor;menced '«ithout taxwght whether it was legal or illegal. He stated also Umre was a file c~mq~any in this location prior t:o Phil and Jim's hiiich sold to the public anG that: ]ed Uie tenant t:o believe retail. sales were Permitted. sold tc t;he pull ic. Clairman M^ se states fire issue is wiieUier this retail sales use is acceptable for the industrial zone, and does it service U:e industrial community? ~rissioner Hcuas asked the difference between Utis and Uie file companies all up and do.n the strceC. Cltainmtan Masse salted Code Enforcement should do Ute same Using with fire ti]e cr~anies Uiat Umy did here, or the ordinances should l:e dwrred. Commissioner llouas stated Phil and Jim's is :arelwusing file mrer•±randise there and U~ retail sales is a small. portion, cater-aced W tlm rest of t:iie lxiildiny. Odmiissioner Racist and gwinc~an Nesse stated they did not Utink it is a sn311 portion and parking is not adequate because iC really doesn't belorr,; there. Cormissioner Herbst staged if tiler= is going tc be retail sales Utere, Uten the}~ should provide adequate parking and Uiey said before they were servicing contractors in tyre industrial area and it turned out w he purely retail. He state-d Uiis Goes not: service tlm industrial. area any Utat; lie is concrrneG about Ute integrity of Use industrial zone and Clrere are commercial prol:erties all. over Anaheim Utey crould use if Utey want retail.. Mr. Farano passed out: pictures of the facility and stated l:e concurs with Ca:niissioner Racist, but did not think this operation by Phil and Jim's is a true retail. operation and they are not catering Lo the public. Commissioner Herlst stated they run full page advertisetments, and Mr. Fararo salted the advertisements are fee licuidation. Fie asl~~ riiere they should be loc~atc-d since Ute merdiandise arrives by rail car and is daraged. He sWt;ed this is rmore cronvenient because it is part cf Uteir nareltouse facility. i/4/88 P1I.WI'ES, ANAHEIM CITY PI.AIWZ~W' COPfrffSSION, JAIQOARY 4, 1988 88-47 Ciairmen Masse stated it is in the industrial. area and tlroere is not enough parking. Mr.Farano stated i:he City of Anaheim would not want U~is in a cam~ercial area and tlmre are restrictions specifiglly in the redevelopment area to prohibit second-line merdtandise sales, so Anaheim leas expressed an attitude about damaged merdtandise, and an operator would not be able t.o pay Uze price for cotrtcercial space to sell. damaged merd~andise. He stated no first line merdiandise is sold at i:his facility. Commissioner Feldhaus stated the seci;ior, of the Code quoted fcr making L•his application does not perrtdt• Uiis type use. Mr.Fararo salted unless there is a specific finding ]ry a m~nber of tl~e Planning Department, t1~e Codes goes on to say 1:lwt this may be an appropriate use and lie understands there has been a finding made that this may be a proper use in that zone. Ftalcolm Slaughter stated Code Sctaion 18.03.030.070 under wi~id~ Uus appligtion was rsde permits the Commission t-o consider a conditional use permit wlmn Ute use is similar to outer uses in the zone wren the Planning Director or his designee has made a determination that the use is similar in or car4tatible wiUt uses permit:Cad in the zone; but: that the problem is Utat the information included in the file has been specifically dtanged Co say that this liquidation center may be similar t;o a permitted use. He stzted he would have sane real questions tarot that even meets +;ite basic requirements to fall under Utat code section because t:lte Planning Director leas apparent•1}~ not made the required finding. Commissioner Fel.dltaus stated ire really wants Co see Utis licuidation outlet survive score place., but Ute original appligticn was denied by ute Planning Cam:ission and then reviewed and denied iy the City Counci] and yet they did it an}~,ay and t9ten the Code ]hforcr3nent Officers investigated. Mr.Farano stated a requesC to amend fire Code was denied and an application was not actually made; and that Utere are sane letters in Che file wtiidtrxpl,ain sore of the actions and there was a misunderstanding. Cannissioner Bouas asked if there can tie an}~ parking added tx:cause t;ltaL is really the problcan. Mr.Farano stated only 85 people work at this facility and witeClter Utis appligtion is approved or nut, Utat numiter will. not dtange and no more Utan cwro at me time uvula Fie assigned to this use and there is a sl:atatertt in the report that t:1te Traffic FJrineer ltas found that it is not adequate, but it is leis understanding that the stud} is adequate. Paul Singer, Traffic l~tgineer, staged Utat ccmrent was made when lie got Ute original. study with Ute plan that did not matdt; 1•.gwever, since then Ute consultant, Larry Greer, itas amended Ute plan and study and Utey now meet Llte requirements. Cormissioner Boydstun asked haw many vehicles suds as trucks are on that property during Ute day regularly. ASr.Farano responded 23 vehicles are stored there at night, but are out delivering Burin, t:he day. ACTION: Commissioner HerLst offered a option, seconded tt}~ Commissioner 13ouas, and MYI'IQN CARRIID that Ute Anaheim City Planning Catmission has reviewed the proposal t:o regain a liquidation sales outlet with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces on a rec.~t:arwularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 5.06 acres }•,aving a frontage of appraximatel}~ 270 feet on the south side of hall Road and being located approximately 680 feet west of the centerline of Izwis Street, and further descrilxc as 712 E.13a11 Road; and does Imretry approve the Negative Declaration on ute Lasis utat it• ltas considered the proposed Negative Declaration t:ogetlter with any arments received durirr., the public review process and further finding on Ute basis of file Initial SL•udy and any comrnertts received Utat there is no sutsWntial evidence ghat the project will. have a significant effect on the environment. 1/4/as r •. i PSIIQU."E5, ANAI:EIM CIiY PIAi'~'1NG OfI~MISSICN, JAN[L=.2Y t, 1988 88-48 Carissiorer Herizst offered a motia~, seconded by Ccrmissicner Feldiiaus and MJTItx1 CARRIID (Ca:missioners 13ouas and ]3oydstun voting ro) Uiat the Anaheim City Plannin; Cc;nmission does her~rlry deny waiver of parl:inc, code reeuirc3nenis an Uie basis Uiat I:l~e parking waiver will cause an in~'-ease in traffic congestion in U:e im[ediate vicinity and adversel}~ affect an}~ adjoining lane uses, and mill Ue deCriracssital. to 11ie peaces, healUi, safety and General. welfare of file citizens of t]~e CiL•y of Anaheim. Cormissioner Heri~L• offered Rerolut;ion No. PC 68-19 and moved for its passage and adoption 1!7at Uie Anaheim City Planning Ccrmissicr. does herel~}~ d. ny Conditia~al Use Permit; 1`0. 2975 ~n t:;ie iasis Uiat it does net service Uu: industria] cc~~::aunity. On Roll Call t;he forecoing resolul;ion tics ?assed r1' Uie fo]lowing vote: AYES: C17[fiIISS1u:JEPS: Can~sillo, Feldhaus, Heslst, h;esse, Mc Burne}' NOES: COhMISSIU~IFR.S: Bouas, 13oydsLUn AIIS~S'I': C'OIfiIISSIONERS: NONE Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy Cit}~ At;tcrne}~, ~resent:ed t:he ri;ht i.o appeal bhe Planning Cormission's decision wii:hin 22 da}~s tc the City Council.. ~~1~$, A'vAIiEIM CITY PIANNING CCFT'1ISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 88-49 ITEl N0. 17. FNVIROhTM~TP.L L"'PACI' REPORT N4.257 (PREVIOUSLY APPRO'JID), TFNI'ATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 11600 (REVISION N0.1) A\'U SPECII~IFN TR.°E RII•fOVAL W• 87-07. PUBLIC HEARING. O/2NER5: WALT TA'•SJL,IN.4S, 1843] Yorba Linda Dlvd., Yorba Linda, C.4 92686. AGFSTI': MORRIS-REPI~ INC., 507 E. First Strut, Tustin, CA 92680, A'ITN: JACY. NORP.IS. Property described as an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 8.3 acres ltavinc a frontage of approxineLely 590 feet on the east side of t?enning Way, approximaLel}~ 1,100 feet: souUt of Ute centerline of Arboretum Road. To re-establ.islt a ]2-lot, ItS-HS-22,000(SC) (Residential, Sirr~le-Famil}~, Hillside Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone subdivision (Revisicr. No. 1) of Tentative Tract Dfap No. 11600. Request for retrqual of 1] specit~n trees. There were nine persons indicatinc i;heir ,:resenm in opposition Co subject request; and altlmugh the staff report t:as nct read at Ute public hearing, it: is referred t.o and made a part of tare minutes. Jac)c Norris, anent, stated the staff re;.ort ind.~etes this is Revision No. 1 of 'Tract No. 11600, and it is actually Revision Ab.2. He st:aLed Condition No. 1 pertains to the roadway widUt of 32 feet of paverenC from curl: facie to curb face, rather titan 24; and t:ltat is a prol,lem lx-~cause at Ute mortar end in the first. 500 feet, this road goes up a narrow steep canyon and with t;he 24 feeL• tate}~ are proposing, it; just; fits. He sLaCed they trould noL• have a problem on the higher rorCicn, but tatere is not enough roan in the loner portion and he would request; sane latitude to wrorlc taut configuration out: with staff; and UtaL Utey would not: tianL f:o prcros° something unsafe or inadequate. ;tr. Norris referred co L•he Mohler Drive roadway standard ar.3 stated it; tales up additional space ltorizonWlly and explained Utat is LI•.e road called (Hidden Grove Lane) and that it ltas no lot frontage. He state3 fatey stave no problem xitlt t:he additional. xidUt or curlxs and gutters for the upper roar (Fox Glen Drive). Mr. Norris stated Utis tract was approved as Tract 994 xiLit tabs proposed road configuration, L•uC that tract: was nullified and was resulmitLed as Tract: 11600 in 1982 and approved with Lit:.s road configuration; and UtaL Utis nex Condition Ne. I acme up one week ago and Utis streat w;~^:lt will take up additional. roam and r~uire Ute r~meal of clever. additional Crew so the application xould stave t;o be acmnded and rate grading w'oulc; dtange or possibly 7-fool high retaining Calls for a length of 475 feeC along the road 4rould tie reouired. He added that: is nci. consistent; xiUt Ute rural atraspitere they are L•rying to achieve. OPPOSITION Hob SCeuarL•, 29i SouClt Quintana Drive, Anaheim, stated as a result cf Ute neigitl~orltood meeting of everyone in Ute area where Utis tract is proposed, titcy are concerned altout Llte main access road; that; Quintana Drive and Cite loner part of Trail Drive is an old unitcq~roved private road. wiUt an average widClt of about 15 feet, and at Ute loner end of Trail Drive, iC narrows down to ]3 feet, and ]80 feet from Ute beginning is w}tere they propose t.o bring in a 30-foot aide road. He staL•ed they do not understand wlty nothing itas ever been said about Utis and Lltat it is Lite only accr_ss W this property and they have discovered t:ltat fire road is l:elox standards as recc;tmended for 1/4/88 MIi4ITfES, A11AHEl2f CITY 1'LA1~T~`ItdC COhTIISSIQ\, JANUARY 4, i988 88-50 emergency equipment w9iid1 is a minimum of 2U feet. He stated Grey would like to laow that: samL•ime in Gee future Grey xill not be rc~uired to improve Geis road trcause of Che additional. traffic wludi will. tie doubled try Geis t;race on Giat road wfiidi is rxrr barely adequate t.o service Uie homes Gat are G~ere. He stated Grey want to know Gee new road is readily accessible and Giat Gmy latex emergenc}~ cyuipmenL• can geC Lo this new area, twt fran Quintana Drive and SouGt Quintana Dr'••e, there are sam doubts. He stated no one has made a report on this area and it is obvious Giere is a definite problem. Ne stated they xould ].i6-e t:o be assured that if there is a problem, it: will. tie addressed, and Grey feel t:ccause of L•he developmertt: above, Gtat would be a prirtary concern Lo Giis developer. He st;atr_d they feel he slwuld be willing Lo put in minimal. improvements whidi r_ould tie an additional 3 or 4 feet of pavanent: in sane areas to make it: possible and available to emergency equipment. He stated Grey also have had sane problem in the past with Castil.le Builders and during construction, they tore up t:he road and taiey had assuranco they would repair any damage, twC the} did not finish the project: and Giey wire left with tape road xhidi needed repair. Susie and Neal Siegle, 622] Trail. Drive, were present. t4.. Sicyle statz~d it is taieir contention as residents at t:he base of Gee proposed access road, Hidden Grove Lane, twat the existing EIR done in 1980 is not adequate wita~ Una construction of their bane and several oGier hams on Trail Drive and Quintana whidi did not: exist at: the time of that EIR and 19iat has significantly al.l:ered Gee siLual:ion and CliaL z new EIR nrould reveal. significantly different findings. S1ie stated their concern as hanrowmers, and more importantly as parents, pertains Lo the safety of G~eir family Ixcause taiey are directly across Trail Drive aL Gm base of Gee access road. 9ie presented pi~otograplvs shoving the ]ovation and explained the proposed acce:,~ road is only 17 fe?t: from Cheer driveway where t:he dtildren play; and Gnat it leas been estimyted t}:at ]49 vehicle trips Fran Gee proposed hams would take place each day and Giat road itas an incline and Grey fear cars speeding down Gat access road crould lose crontrol and taut tape diildren play on Gee driveway and all the dtildren in Gte neighi~onc~od walY, on Trail Drive because tlmre are no sidewalks or lights at night: and Giey feel. that road as proposed is a disaster waiting to Iwppen and G>at: danger factor together with increased traffic, headlights shining directly into Gieir hrnte, the noise and Gee entire maintenance question strongly suggests Gat tads issue lr_ reviewed, and the current: hams on Trail. Drive and Quintana wiiidi did not exist: when tads approval was given should be t.akrst into consideration and urged Gnat: Giere must lie an assurance tl•.aC Gic~ pronosed ingress and egress 1;o this development would not endanger or negatively impact any liamowners. She salted it is essential Gm road entry lx relocated txt a safer position and a stop sign installed so as not t:o endaryer their family and property. Marty Wilson, 6201 Fast Trail Drive, salted the EIR should not; txe a• ~ .i and Grey feel. it: is outdated and them etas t~_n a trermsdous growth in this area in Gee lr 15 years. She stated in Gee report, it: said taiere should tie no traffic congestion tmcause Gee proposed entrance road would serve TracC 11600 only and there would be easy amess 1:o Quintana and Santa Ana Canyon Road and since that report, G~ree Hams leave been twill and Gte road is maintained try L•hose Ghee hamowners, plus late oG•~er homeart:ers in t:he area. 9m stated Gee traffic to Geis nex development would be past these G;ree hams and Gist would lx> a significant impact on a road Giat canncC accotmtodate Gee extra traffic. 9ie stated Giere I~as been no contact: try Gee developer wiGi Gee concerned haneowners t;o assure U,etn of Gee road prot:cct:ion and how it is going to be kept and properly maintained; GiaL a few people were notified of Giis Bearing twt: Grose people at Gee l~oLt:Cm of tape hill. w9io will. lie affected by this development, have not lwen contacted try Gee developer. She suggested the ]/4/88 NSNITIES, ANAHER: CI7y PI11I~`IIJG :St•MlSSIIxi, JAivVARY 4, 1986 88-51 developer find an alternate entrance y' Via Arboles frm Ramsgate and that flee plan include a guarantee for the developer to naintain Ute road in proportion t:o t:lle amount of traffic that development will add. She staged further study siwuld be done before any final. decision is made t:o approve these plans. iJe•.rt Williers, 361 Henning Way, stat;ecl lie moved t:here in 1979 and bought his home for seclusion and privacy in a rural area; Utat they ltad a near disaster Umre when a po«er line carp down and Um Fire Department could Hardly get up Henning Way wltidt goo's off t:o trite right of Trail Road and Ute entrance is narrow and there are specimen t;roes located there. He pointed out the people who bought Utere, bought Utere 2tec:ause of Ute rural at:tmsplte ~e that: Itas been there for 30 }ears; and ghat file planned developments that have been proposed ]k,ve all proposed sing Henning Way for access;and L•he City records sheer in 1.980 when tiltey itad that disaster, emergenc}~ equipmenC• ]lad a hard time getting there and could hardly mtal:e the flan tdten tlte}~ got to their residenep fran the Gregory's property. Eie stated t3mre leas to be a lot: of thought givcrn t:o t:ltis lx~cause of Ute hazardous conditions and the traffic with cars speeding down Trail Road and joining F?enning Wa}. He pointed out; the trash trucks also have a hard time gelding up there. He added of significant; importanrn is keeping t;he area preserved. Arthur Henning, 350 Henning Way, staged he has lives: there for 41 years and could refut:e a lot L•ltat leas been said; t:ltat; a lot: of this tas sett:l.ed when Tract: 11.600 was approved and U~t Mr.Wit:hers trent:ioned Ute difficult time they Dave getting to Uteir property and that is because a1: Ute widest: point, limning Way is 12 feet wide and tatey just paved it last year, and there are no shoulders on one side, and Utere are eucalyptus trees and a hillside on Ute ot9ter :.ide and Utere is no room to pass. He staged he did not see where that leas anything to do with this tract, because Utey Drill go up anoC•her canyon and not: Henning Way; twt Utat if this tract is approved, he would not want heavy trucks going up there. He stated rfien he rroved there, Cleat road t,as a trail and now Utere is a lot of traffic. and it will not accannodate any additional.ttraffic. He added he is concerned about the fill opnosit:e I,ot ]0, and did not uant any soil pushed over onW ]tis property, unless it was at Ute bottan. He stated he is not sneaking for or against Utis tract; and Utat he moved there in 1946 and I~ows what is y^oing on and is aware of tste easement t:o this property. Gerald Busitore, 72] N. EL•clid, Malteim, stat:~d the City was sued b1' Ute people t;tto lived at;o•+e Utis tract: and he rm~n-ters Ute attorney who said he did noL• a get a notice and '+anted the whole thing stopped; and that Utere Bras a ruling and the final map was overturned and duriny^ 1:ltn C•ime of 1:he lawsuit, the developer lost the tract; and Utey had agreed Utere would lie no traffic on Fleltrting. He stated he leas cronsl:ruction going on now and lie cannot crontrol his own people and they use Henning i9ay and it is very steep. He salted the garbage truck can only cane up part way, and Chen a little ~~n etas to cane Ute rest of Ute way and pick up the gar.1»ge. He staged Utere is no place Co turn around and lie cannoC ant9tasize enough Ute importanrn of traffic not caning up there. He stated Utere is nothing in the conditions al~att a crash gate on tl;e 20-foot• eases~tt where H..nning Drive ain.s up and it needs to lte installed alrost immediately, oClterwise 1Jtere will. not be any crontrcl.. I?e stat.ed no one objects t:o the tract: and that ite bought his itot~se knowing a tract was approved on Utat property; Chat Ute horse trail ttat 1•.as ben impaled on Cite developer goes nowitnre and it is a switcitbaclc and is very dany^erous. He stated he was veld altrost two years Utere was going to -te a General Plan Arrendrtent t;o eliminate that• trail. and a ocndition should be included t;o cover that situation. He stated 49 logs Co the east are being developed and there is a stahil.ity problem along Lots 9 and 10, and in fact, it exists on all of Ute hillsides on the wrsC and Utere are si1L•stone beds w•hidt create a potential for slides and this EIR does not address that; and maybe tlte}~ did sore studies after 1•~tat. He staged Ute developer is going W iwild 4 or 5 spec banes and Dien sell Ute resL• and that: pads for Lots 1 and I/4/88 DtINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 4 1988 88-5~ 2 have been raised considerably and mere lc:rered previously Co Lahe care of t;he concerns of ta:e pc-0ple at~~e; and they :rill do tale grading and then t:hera will tre 12 ~.rojezts going en ant iL really si:ould be a finished ;-ad trac.-t;. He staled Lhe t:.•c brid;es have tr_en el iminat:ed and there are save significant environmental ccncrrns on taut: property and the EIR re~rt was certified wer six years ago and ghat report :raa done at: Lhe rtY,vest cf t:he court and 17e world iC^cncerned atput just auLOmat:ically t:alcing no action. Mr. Busl:cre stated in addition, U:e map is ever six years old and tree size= ar. indicated as Lhe carte and he t~as rot avare ci a near tree sL•ud}~ and ti:ere are new t;rtes in the area and he thcuyhL that: siwuld ix: reviewed carefully. Hr sLat.ed ti:rre trill tie addil:ic,~ta1 r~cursts for Crce rrartoval because taure are other tries in tae arna. He ststed timre are also ether concerns such as a fox ti.9:ic1: is in that area and that i:e did rot; I;nc:r a9:at: hind of fox it; is, lout l:as keen i:old tlut it; does not; exist: an}mtcrc in California, and Li:em arc c:oyct:c.=., at.c:. He added he did not: lmow if UtaC is croesidered se:aeata:in,? s}'~c:ial, bit: it si:ould be cronsidcrsd Mr. L'usl,ore slated it :ns int;ended on t!:e ori;inal tract; map L}:aC ti1G utilities ge dc..•n that: 20-foot; escape easerr-nt I;o Hennir, Way ant ri;hl; nc:: famrc are no s~w~r:. cr gas u~ Ut2re. Y.z staged U:is is ;tin; to ~ si:ec houses ant t:he lots sold ant it: is irrhxrt:ant; t;o co t:ha gradin; no:c and Lai;c care cf Urse c:crcrrns; and that he was sure they could ::ocl; out a solution tc. ti:e problaa cf mairbenanca of the road witi: t:he devalo~..~r and not: ever. involve Lhe nrr..issior.. Mr. A'crtis sl:at;.^c: tha first: t;wc cronc:erns :sera :vita: ta:ree new bons ar.C Lire EIB and adde' 11:e houses ::nse under crons!:ntction :a:en t:hw EIR was done and thcu_,i:L t:hcy ::are sd::ressed. Ccrc~rnir f:raffic er: Hanniny Wap, hr_ sLatar~ U:e dcvclcsr ::Gale stipulabc Chat; Hen;•iny Way ::Galt not be used; LI:aC Hennin; Way is nol: .art cf ta:e t;racl; and tl:^re ::ould 1~ ro rerrtan~nl; traffic on Henning t~:a}• arc I;he devaleper ~rould .=.t;i;:ulaLe there rculd t~ no cronsLructien traffic on Henrtine iiay. He staled Y.ennirc 'r:ay is eery n:.rrcw and cteei: aC 19;~ aid it: coald i:e apprepriat:e t:o restrict traffic frm H.~rrin^, t{ay. He stztec ~ ::as not sure :1iaC Lt,_ cbjea:ion to Ltze fill. in laic canyon is, l:ut talat: he ::Galt ask Dfr. Herrinc alrcuC t:llat since hr leas e:R'ress~^d aF.proval cf G:e plars. Mr. Norris static tir crourt rescinder a,,^~soval of this tract, l::rt rot lased on tl:e tr_rits cf Lae 1;riot, t;ut t:ecaus.. cf 'J:e noticss Co peo;~]c in tl:r e.:_rrcundin; era ant Cha dczisier. t;o racuire a fu]1 EIR :inch ias cone; tl:aL they go along with eliminaLin; U:e l:crse grail since it ;ces nowhere; and Laat Cirere is a ccnc~rn r._,ardin~ landslides involvir,; Les S and ]0 ant there is a gcolaical instal;ility L•here anti the fill in ta:e canycr: is t:o sbabil.ize LI:aC and iC was addressed in tare EIR. He sWtcti U:2re will. n-~ed to 1~ sane additional invest;i;aLicn in that area. Mr. Norris staCc~3 U:e trees acre r:era;ioned and explained Carey did ncL• do a ca:y;letx study sec:enLly, L•ut die .eview the trees in Li:e field to se tar differenc^ in :that ::as surveyed txEore and ncu and notci L•herc ara so;m addit;icnal t:rses ti:i~l: they could not sm t:eforr• lxacause of Lire avcc:ado trees :;pica: have been ramved. 1/04/88 88-53 DIIM1I'ES, ANAIiEIt•1 CITY PLN~'NING COFt"IISSIOty, JANUARY 9. 1988 Mr. Norris stated they leave noted witidt trees have been rertv/ed pursuant: t;o the previous tree removal permit. Walt Tamiwlinas, petitioner, stated they are very sensitive t:o Ute residents in the area and understand that Utis is a real natural. envirorvrenL: and that Lltey put most of their empatasis on Via Arboles above because of all the opposition many years ago, and they stave met with sgna of the residents and xitat Mr. Henning and h;r.Gre_or}' who are most itmediately impacted b}' Ute project. He explained Utey intend to put; a road in and have rough graded lots and believed that is the only via}'tA make the project: work. He stated they leave trorked diligently wiUt Ute engineer to avoid previous problems and have backed off on some cf the lots i:ecause of the opposition and Utis project is act:uall}' the result of the litigation and is a catq:rcmise tract map latat was approved by t:he court and existing surrounding residents at fate time, and Utey have gone further t;o make it more ltarmxtious wiUt Ute environment, limiting the number of trees rem7ved and keeping it: as mudt natural terrain as possible. '111Y, PUBLIC HEARING Y7+5 CI,OS®• Cdrmissioner Carusil.lo asked if it is possible to gain access from tare tract to the east off Via Arboles and Ramsgate. Dlr. Tamulinas respondeu they did investigate that possibility and believe it is physically impossible and lataL access would have Lc lie short and steep. Crmnissioner Carusil.lo stated tatere is a tract approved there now end Utought: iC was ir. "plan dteG:' and one of fire loll must t:e adjacent w this property. Mr.Tamul.inas responded many of Utem are, tx:t Lhe hill is filled with drainage culverts and etas outer problems and they did gall; to Clte develcper ne>,~: door about: Utat issue and did not tltinlc fatal; is an a]ternative. Conmissioner Carusillo asked if they would object to a centinuanee in order to try and mitigate some of the concerns of fate neighbors. Dlr. Tarrntlinas responded they did not sutmi.t any floor plans and felt Utat: would be worked out: t?etwrcn now and tine for ir.~ilding permits. lle stdt;ed Llte property would actually be transferred t:o a developer and would prefer Le have a decision tonight. He apologized to late neighbors for concrstrating their interest on L}te residenls on Via Arholes, and maybe rate residents below were neglect:ed• but they intend to follow whatever rules apply and intend Lc be in harmony with Utem as well. Ccmnissioner Feldltaus stated the court decision was in June 1981 and t}te tract map was all.rnaed f;o expire and as)ced if tatey have Co go titrougit Ute same process in order Lo re-establish it. Greg Hastings responded Utat is Ute current: recvest. Cgemissioner Feldltaus pointed out 43 trees were approved for rcamval originally and nrnr Utis request is for I1 additiorwl trees, for a vital of 54 trees. Greg Hastings explained the original permit for the removal of Ute trees did noL• expire and is separate from the tract t~p• Cacrnissioner Herbst asked if they have an easement up Trail Drive and referred t:o rate concerns of Ute neighbors altout Ute neintenanm of that easetmnt and it appears because iL is a private road wiUt an easement, Utat Utere sltculd a homeowners association on al.l these lots so everybody participates in t1taL maintenance. Mr. 'I~mtlinas stated they agree and expect to join what the neighbors in an association. He added Utey just recently acquired Ute property and it: was tried up in a double receivership and tttaL is t:he reason the tract map was allowed IJ4/88 88-54 MINfIIE5, ANAHEIM CITY PIANINI; COA~`fISSION, JA1'UARY 9, 1988 ~~ expire. He stated Uiey have wcrkad dilige_zt;ly to 1.'eep Use nw!S~=r of trees Lo be removed to a mininnrm. Crnnissioner Feldhaus asked if any soil cccmppaction tests ]gave teen done- Mr. Norris staged there leave been two spies engineering firms investigate t]taL', one with Tract 9594 and the later one wit:l: i'ract 11600 probabl}~ in 1987 and P.xcerpt;s from that- report are in the EIR; ti~at it was exploratory and was done to support a comreaL• on a tentative rap and is not conplete enough for cronsL•rurtion purposes and more invesL•igation will have to be done. Ccamissioner Feldliaus sL•at2d a lot of ;people feel file EIR should M redone as a result- of all the diaries that leave occrurred in L•he ana. Crairmzn Atzsse salted he is not; familar wita~. that EIR and has not r -3 it and asked if it should be reviewed by Uie Ccrtmission before acting. Mr. Hast;logs there is marber JC the Planning Department staff aiw reviews flee EIRs and Uiat person is not present, but that: he understands tine EIR kas reviewed. Ccnmissioner Herisi: stated Llie picture presented sterns t;l;e street deadending right- into flee neigi~bor's property and asked if tltiat rnuld be relocated. Air. i~rn~l.inas stai:ed Lhe EIR was amended and updated just recrer!L•ly and he understood fran staff that; they ]gad reviec.•ed it: and were aware of the amended EIR. Chairman hizsse aske•I if an artend~ EIR would have tc ix reviewed and approved b}• the ~;::c:.[ • `ion and Greg Hastings responder he thought it would, Yxrt has not atiare that an amended t ~..~ Seen sulmitted. ~~rr:. Alesse statrv the developer is saying Uie EIR was arended and star: .s saying L•haL• it was not, so flee Crnrrission isn't really sure. Mr. Norris stsated they suimitted supplemental information after reviewing flee £I R and sulmitted what they saw to he differences cpecifical.ly, and iL• was a one page typesmrtt•P1! report. i3e pointed out tine Ca;Mission has that information also. He referred to the plans with the road craning dawn to Trail Drive northerly, and stated that is within an 80-foot e3serent on Atr. Her!r:ing's property and then iL narrows to a 60-fool ti:ide easement s5 it approadies Trail Drive and iL appears !!gybe the road could tie moved over ai~ut 15 feet, and if headlichts are a croncern, Uiey !;ill not be pointim right into a ito!!se. Ca~missioner 1•]c Burney asked if it• would he possible to open flee throat of the raad as it appzoadies Trail Drive to allo~r a s:ooUler transiLior. from iYail Drive onto flee road. Ali. Norris sL•aLed UAL is possible and U~ere should be a stop sign. He staged Lhe headlights of a car ariving down the lril~. aL night am going to be painLirrg doa~!ward aL a 12;~ grade and he did not think LhaL avuld be a ;r:~at concern; however, Ule people living in L•hose houses would see and hear tine cars. Greg Hastings sL•at;ed there tiros sane additional information in the file wliidl explains the Initial Study uhidi is required on any case caning irefore flee Planning Conmission and there is no addition to the EIR and that information just explains tine differences between w}iat was originally approved in flee EIR and wine of the dian;es that are being requested now, and read the information intc+ the record. 1/4/86 ~.._ .' l4IMiTFS, ANAHEIM CITY PIJUVNING CQ`fIISSIUN, JAiJUARY 4, 1988 88-55 A gentlemen fran Use audience st-atra9 Paragraph No. 6 states the EIP. l:as expired and asked what Ural roans? It was pointed out Ural rerers to just the tract mop. C7tairrten Messe slatted he feels pretty uncanforWbl.e wiU: U:is wiU:out a reporL• from staff pertaining tc U:e EIR. Cormissioner Her}uC stated a ]oC of U:ings have been discussed tonight, inr_ludiry minor cl:ames on the drawings, etc. and Ural he would like le see Use property rnmer rres,l wiU: U:e neiglil~ors and wort: out some of Use problems such as n-aintenance of Use road, which ta:e Catmission has nothing t:o do wiU:, and that: approval. of the trams: crap is usually a simple Using, LuC now there have been s+rre questions and Use people are not; satisfied. Ci:airmen FLSSe pointed out; talk neigh}x;rs have indicated thzy recrognize a tract will. be developed U:ere, lx~t U:ere are sam unanswered questions. t•!r. Tamul.inas responded Thep realize t1:aC, lxrC t;l:at U:ey feel. same of tale questions are beyond tare scope of fates re~:esl; and UtaL• they realize the hour is late, but U:ey have been very patient today waiting for their opportunit:}~ and hvuld appreciate mor.^ of Ute Commission's time now 1:o wort: some of lire problems out witicat ti.DUld save them time in having Ce cam back. He stated they have d~amonslraled they are sensitive t:o Ute neighbors' needs and ltavcr every intention of doing wltaC needs to be done t:o protect t;lie Itomeormcrs surrounding the prcperL•y. Mr. Tamulinas slated cronmrning Use frees, he tatoughl sane of Ute trees are deceased and Utal could lte the differt'ltco in Ute numlmrs. Conmissiater Bouas slated she ltad no objection t:o apfsoving Ute tree removal. f•1r. Norris staled fate discrefzncy lxtween Ute n•.mdter of frees is that; 17 of t:ltose trees were covered ~' a previous permit and rnwL of Use trees covered in liie previous permiC leave already been removed. Carenissioner 13ouas sWLCd one concern tras Ute uidUt of Ute road and site t~toughl Utat Itas tc be world out t;itat Ute City Engineer, Traffic Engineer and Fire Departnent•. Art Aa:;, Input}~ City Engineer, stalcti Ute access read to get Co Ute tract was not discussed a t; U~ inCerdexrttnental ccrtmittee meeting, but the l:asic road shorm eras reviewed and the Fim DepailIn<,n1; did not express any uronoerns. lbmmissoner Feldltaus staked lie Mruld like a continuance in order for staff t:o cam back wiUt ans:>ers to tl:e amended EIR and U:e questions that have Ixen presented tonight. Malcolm Slau,ht;er atal;ed a specific da1:e for a continuance must lie given. Mr. Hastings pointed out there is a lung agenda anticipated on Cho 1.91:h, lxtt it mold be lai:en Uten, if Ute Catmission ui::ites to have a longer meeL•ing. Commissioner 13ouas stated she did not; think it would lre fair to hold Utam up an}~ longer Chan Use 18Ut. ACTION: Commissioner Feldltaus offet.~d a motion, seconded tt}~ Comissioner Carusillo and MOTIGN CARRIED that consideration of ,lte aforementioned matter be continued t:o Use rc;ttlarl}~-scheduled meeting of Januar.~ 18, 1988, fcr additional information parWining Co the amended EIP., 'and ~Uter concer.:, expressed. Commissioner Bouas clarifi ~' Ute Crnmission would like a report from staff about Ute am.~ded EIR. Cannissioner Felo'ltaus added he trould like rare inforration altouL• Ute outer gvestia l/~/88 MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 88-56 ITEM NO 18 CEQA NFGATIVE DECLARATION AND TENTATIVE MAP N0. 13130. PUBLIC HERRING. OWNERS: PHILIP W. GANOlIG, ET AL, 2307 Myrtle Street, Bakersfield. CA 93301, ATTN: JANET GANONG. AGENT: SAND DOLLAR DEVLOPMENT, 17802 Skypark Circle, Irvine, CA 92714. Property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 2.3 acres located at the southwest corner of short Street and Rellogg Drive. To establish a 10-lot, 8-unit, RS-5000 (Residential, Single-Family) Zone. There was no one 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. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. A TI N: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to establish a 10-lot, 8-unit, RS-5000 (Residential, Single-Family) single-family subdivision on an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 2.3 acres located at the southwest corner of Short Street and Kellogg Drive; 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 findin3 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. Cc.i~nissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find that the proposed subdivision, together with its design and improvement, is consistent with the City of Anaheim General Plan, pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5; and does, therefore, approve Tentative Map of Tract No. 13130 for a 10-lot, 8-unit (RS-5000)single-family subdivision subject to the following conditions: 1. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subdivision, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. 2. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 3. That prior to final tract, map approval, the original documents of the covenants, conditions, and restrictions, and a letter addressed to the developer's title company authorizing recordation thereof, shall be submitted to the City Attorney's Office and approved by the City Attorney's Office, Public Utilities Aepartment and Engineering Division. Said documents, as approved, shall thea be filed and recorded in the Office o£ the Orange County Recorder. 4. That "A" Street shall be improved in accordance with Engineering Department Standard Detail No. 122 for parking on both sides of the street. 1/4/88 { _. 88- s~ MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 5, That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim along Rellogg Drive and Short Street (to 12 feet northerly of the centerline of Short Street), including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, water facilities, street grading and pavement, sewer and drainage facilities, or other appurtenant work shall be complied with as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with specifications on file in the Office of the City Engineer; and that security in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim, shall be posted with the City to guarantee the satisfactory completion of said improvements. Said security shall be posted with the City prior to final tract map approval, to guarantee the installation of the above-required improvements prior to occupancy. 6. That the owner of subject property shall irrevocably offer to dedicate t~ the City of Anaheim a strip of land 45 feet in width from the centerline of the street along Rellogg Drive for street widening purposes. 7. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the appropriate major thoroughfare and bridge fee shall be paid to the City of Anaheim in an amount as specified in the Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee Program for the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor, as approved by City Council Resolution No. 85R-423. 8. That prior to issuance of a building permit, appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees shall be paid to the City of Anaheim in an amount as determined by the City Council. g. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the appropriate traffic signal assessment fee shall be paid to the City of Anaheim in an amount as determined by the City Council. 10. That prior to final tract map approval, the private street name shall be approved by the Zoning Division. 11. That prior to any occupancy, temporary street name signs shall be installed if permanent street name signs have not been installed. 12. That the property owner shall furnish to the City of Anaheim an agreement in a form to be approved by the City Attorney agreeing to complete the public improvements required as conditions of this map at the owner's expense. Said agreement shall be recorded concurrently with the final tract and is not to be subordinate to any recorded encumbrance against the property. 13. That street lighting facilities along Rellogg Drive and Short Street shall be installed as required by the Utilities General Manager in accordance with specifications on file in the Office of Utilities General Manager, and that security in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, or cash, is an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim, shall be posted with 'the City to guarantee the satisfactory completion of the above-mentioned improvements. Said security shall be posted with the City of Anaheim prior to final tract map approval. The above-required improvements shall b~ ?nstalled prior to occupas,.^y. 1/4/88 MINiJTES. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 88_58 14. That all lots within subject tract shall be served by underground utilities. 15. That prior to commencement of structural framing, fire hydrants shall be installed and c:~arged as required and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department. 16. That al: air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground mounted equipment shall be properly shielded from view. 17. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall present evidence satisfactory to the Building Division that the proposed project is in conformance with Council Policy Number 542 "Sound Attenuation in Reside~itial Projects" and with Noise Insulation Standards specified in the Cal.iforaia Administrative Code, Title 25. 18. that prior to final tract map approval, condition Nos. 3, 5, 6, 10, 12,. 13, and 19, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. 19. That prior to final map approval, the requirements set forth in Condition Nos. 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17, above-mentioned, shall be set forth on the face of the final map is a form satisfactory to the City Engineer. 20. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicablte ordinance, regulation or r•:~quirement. Maico:m Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision within 10 days to the City Council. 1/4/88 DiIi1UfE5, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COhY•'QSSION, JF4WARY 4, 1988 88-59 ITFI~f N0. 19. CEQA NF);ATIVE DECLItRP.TIOtd (PREVIOUSLY AF'PROVID) ARID CONDITIONAL USE PER"ST DIO. 1517. PUBLIC FARING - [~TFNSION OF TLtifE. OS,~'II2: ROBERT' FfOSTEPI•ER, 2129 W. VT^I'ORIA, ANAHEIDf, CA. 92809. Property described as a rectangularly-si:aped parcel of land consisting of approximately 7,700 square feet, located at the norUiwest ~~rner of tPill:elnina Street; and Lvsmn Street, and furUier described as 703 N. Lemon Street. Request for approval of a 2-year retroactive extension of tine t:o lday 28, 1.987 and extension of firm to retain a hoard and care Lacility for the treat:tm~rt of alrnholics. Robert Hostetter, owner, stated Uiis use i~as linen at this location sinaa 1.975. Dr. William Koon, 82] N. Lanon, stated he lives 1-1/2 block from tans property and asked U~at Use request Le denied because it is across the sl;reef trm RS-7200 property and is across Uie street from tape Carl Karc:Jler home and U~ere have lien sorre problems uiUi laic property. He state-d during the 1asC year Uiere have been t~.v verbal altercations with 1:he residents at the ham and it was taasicallp at;out paricirg; tlwt parking is at a premium in twat blcclc of North La;an brc_ause it right ne:ct to Hacienda Courts and there is not enough parking for those people at: tans facility. He stated t.imre is no infomation af:ouC the number of people alloered to be Liere and asked if ta~ere is a day care facility involved because taiere i:ere a Hunter of caiildren playing Umre ye:-Cerday. Tie added he must take t:road exception to Paragraph No. 9; that they liavc worked very lard with Code Enforc,ef:ent in the Central City and that Carmissioner Feldhaus saC with him cn a can~itt:ee last: month about Uiis sam Using and they decided one of U~c hest.taiings they soul: do for Central City was to pom- a lot of aaney into Code Enforcam~rt and he has yott:en to kna; Uie Code Enfercrn:nt: people and Umy have gotten them $300,000 additionally for this particular area. He stated during Cl•.e past year there have been numerous canplaints registered with Code Enforcermnt and it went so far ghat one neighbor t:roughC p1~ol:oSrapltis of cars narked on Uie las.•n to the Crstral City Comnitt:ee while Dlr. Poole eras there and he cas also t;old about; anct:her problem with a seagcing boat parked in Use drivetiay. Ile aslrnd again U~at Uiis request ixa denied. Dlr. Hostetter stat;ecl he gas surprised at u11at hr_ less just. Beard; U~at he is familiar vital a crouplc cf crottq~lainls in Ute pasC primarily about parking; that Ute}~ Dave about 7,700 scuare feeC of I:roperC}~ and Uiere is an 23-unit apartment c~lu: adjacrst t:o the north and laiey are sutrst;andard, but that Umir parking is not Icing used lry Uie apartments but did not: believe U~ey are responsible for all t:he parking problcr>s on t4ilhelmina and Leman in that area. He staged he leas never sew ~iildren Uiere, and durim, Uie last 12 }ears, the residents Dave tx~en t,•amn; however, recently Umre I~as tycen sane refurbishing and r.>aylm saneone iWS bee;i Uiere rdua~ he aid not: latotir about; L'iaC Uie t:alkE~d to the lessee toniyiit: and he was not yell, - but he rtiul.-; he able Co arLSUer any questions aC a later date. iF PUBLIC HFAf2II~ k~iS CLOSED. Commissioner Elcuas sugge.^>ted lu~ariny tram Mr. Poole before approving this. Chairman Dfesse stzt;ed laierc secnns w t;e a difference with l:ile staff report. Catmissioner Boystun sWl:ed her offioe is in that• area and she passes that corner a minitewn of six Limas a day and she ;sous tamre arc several. cars parked cn ?•Iilhe117ina regularly; U~at taro t;elon^, to two tenants of Use apartrtrnts to I:he ncrth; twat Utey cannot get t:heir cars intc Uti. garage. Slu: stated sim leas seen the cars, t;ut leas never seen children there. Stm 1/4/88 SF FIII4U1'ES, A*7A}iEIM CITY P11tI~IIJIDIG Nt•TIISSI011, JANAURY 4, ]988 88-60 added sim did not tltiNc tlm parlcim is from residents of this facility and ate beat: has hcmn gone fora .l.cng time. Commissioner 13ouas asked if they are parking cars on tam lawn. Dr. Koon resla:,nded lie uent by Utere yesterday afternoon and Utere was a car parked on the side lawn and children playing in Um trees on tale mortar next t;o Ilaciesda Courts and when he caii~ l:o tau r,~~eting today, Um car was still. there and again at 6:45 p.m., it was still parked on Um lah-n and previously there was a true;: parking on t;lm lawn; and that t:lu itou:~: has a single narrow driveway on the north and Utat is tare cttl.y ]zrlcing t;hey leave for that: facility available, plus Ute street i:arlcing. He stzt;ed fate neigl4~rs biro live in tlm area will tell Ute Casmission Chal; Umre is a parking problem in the area and that tlmre are cars parking on the lawn. Commissioner Fadhaus stated Umre will always t;c isalat:ed problems, iwC this facility has been there sirc:e 1975 and it there were flagrant vir,._:•.ions going on, .long before I:his Uteir xrm:it: would have teen rviewed. Dr. Koon stated this p._t.'miC has been terminet:ed fc~r over seven rnonUts and that Im ]tas lived there since 1976 and he did not: Imow about: Code Qtforco:nnt or late Planning Cassnission until last year and he got: a valuable lesson hiu:n lr ask Ute Commission l;o please lisf;en 1;o than • and Ccmmissioner Ptrl3urney said t:Jm Ca:mission listens I:ct anytltirg said at: this microphone and t:haC is city he and his wife and neighbors have gotten involved in ratings ].eke Utis and have gotten to Imow Mr. Poole and fire Cone 'r}tforcr~nent; people. He added Utey thought i;efore tlsat late City just: let: it go and Utis is hay tltc neighltorhoca :as going and they found out 11uy could try tg turn the neighborhood around; that ta::r^ were four problem houses in the 700 and 800 blacJCS of North Irarrxt and one of Utose houses is no longer a problem area. Commissioner Feldhaus stat;c~3 he is willing Co delay this and get: infcrmaCicn from the Code F7tforc:camrst Office. Gtairman t+esse ash :d if Code Lhforecsmrt actions have I;erus taken on Utis particvl.ar property and if those actions acre sucdt t;hat: it, would rte grounds for the Commission not: to give Utis l:.rticsiar facility an extension of Cim±. Dr. Koon salted this facility does not fit into rate neichherhood and t}tere is nothing else except Um Nar)dtam Guest Home beth2en 900 and before the RS-7200 starts in fire flay l:laclc of tJorUt Lennon. Hr_ staged tare guest ham residents do not; go in and out: and this use is net: consistent with Um neighi;oritood and is different 1;Itan rate 1tacY.ground given in Cho staff report. Gtairman Messe stated this type use is permitted in this neigltlwrltood wiUt t:he approval. of a conditional use permit. Dz. Korn responded that is what tt:ey kncn;, and that is say they are - aslcing Chat it not be granted because it is conditional.. Commissioner F'eldltaus slat;ed it; ]ta= keen share 12 years already and t:itis is like moving into an area where there is an airport and limn asking iC• to move. Dr. Koon ..=.Cated this was i>ermil:l;ed for a two goer perir„i or?:p and to tie renewed and 1:}taL• Umy did not; how it: was a home for recgv~~ing alcohclia; un..l last: year and thought it; has a place before Ix~ol~le parked on Um lash a lot. He stated Liu:,• t.'s:ed to neighbors yesterday and they aska: whaC c:ou19 be done abouC Ute parking on 1:Im lawn ar,d he instructed them to call Code fhforcr~rent. Commissioner Hertast; stated Dr. Kcx;n 1'a3s been here since 1.:30 and if lm stayed t:ltat long, im must: stave felt strong enough about: t:his znd there must t;e sam problc~ and he felt t:he operator should be recuired t:o appear Ixafore the Cannission to P~.plain hitat is going on. 1/4/88 ~y: _.i N.. 88-61 1~'[TiES, ANA1lEIM CITY 1?IA.'~IIQING QT~PiISSION, JANUARY 4, 1988 Mr. Hostetter stated t:lie driveway ~ 1]ie north is atwo-ribbon type driveway and tl;at could be ul:at he is referring t:o but no one actually pares on tli~ lawn: and U7at they t;col; care of the Lwo violations in less than five da}~s an6 Uie boat was tl~e original violation and he did not• Imoca of any violations U~at tirould Ue detrimental. t;o the neigiil:orlwod. He stated he is alad to lmow Uzere is a probianlr_cause he leas had the property for 20 years and tries t;o keep it in good crondit;ion. Commissioner Herlst stated Uiere appears to be a problem and it is tine i;o gel; t:he operator in to discuss it and maybe it can Ue resolved. tbmussioner Mc Burney stated Code Ihforcrsm~it should also died: ouL• al.l. four corners because the apartmrnts wiiidt do not leave adequate crould Ue parking on t]ie street and possiUly Farkirg sun`t;lung I:liere whidi Uiey are not even airare of and flee entire area should lie dmcl:ed . ACPION Commissioner HrxUst; offered a motion, seconded by Ccmnissioner Bouas and h:0'I'IU~ CARRIED Uiat cronsiderat:ion of Use aformentioned coati;er be cromtinued t;o l:im rewl.arly-sdleduled mretinq of February 1, 1.988, in order to oM:ain additional. information from the Code Enforc:crr°.nt Office pertaining t;o Uiis location and Uie ot]mr properties in f:im irn~liat;e area regarding parking, diildren playing on subject prcperty, etc. 1/9/88 S 'IHL• REPOR'T'S AI~1D RE(Ja'M&\'DATIQ\`5 h'62L' ACCID Q'v PRIOR TO iIIE DIIv'~IER BRFAiC AT '3:35 p.m. d8-62 MINUTES A2IAHEIM CITY PLANNIt:C COMMISSION Ta~)ARY 4 1988 - ITEM NO ?0 REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. RECLASSIFICATION N0. 74-75-26 - Request to amend Condition No. 12 of City Council Resolution No. 85R-75 and Condition No. 8 of Ordinance No. 4573 pertaining to restriction of property use for general office development only. A TI N: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mc Burney and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that following a public hearing, the City Council amend Condition No. 12 of City Council Resolution No. 85R-75 and Condition No. 8 of Ordinance No. 4573, to read as follows: "That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Revision No. 4 of Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 1568 & 15~~T - Request for termination from Kee W. Ha of Olympus Propexty Management Company on property loated at 1713 North Orangethorpe Park End 83'i Orangethorpe Avenue. A TI N: Commissioner Iierbst offered Resolution No. PC 88-20 and moved for its passage and adoption that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 1568 and 1596. On roll call, the foregoing resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, CARUSILL,0, FELDHAUS, HERBST, 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. C. CONDITIONAL~$E PERMIT N0. 2741 - Request for retroactive extension of time to comply with conditions of approval from Andrew W. Edwards (Owner/Operator of Anaheim T_?+lls Saddle Club) located at 6352 East Nohl Ranch Road. A TI N: Commissioner Herbst offerE+d a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mc Burney and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve a one-year extension of time for Conditional Use Permit No. 2741, to expire on January 6, 1989, in order to comply with conditions of approval. D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2928. - Request for extension of time to comply with conditions of approval from La Quita Zynda on property located at 3603 Savanna Street (E. Z. Pickin's RV Storage). A TI N: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mc Burney and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve a 90-day extension of time to expire an April 18, 19 8 8 . I /4/88 1/4/88 ry •J' MINUTES ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 4 1986 88-63 E. QRANGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY - REQUEST TO DETERMINE CONFORMANCE WITH THY GENERAL PLAN. The Orange County Environmental Management Agency proposes to conduct Solid Waste Assessment Tests (SWAT) on former Refuse Disposal Station No. 17, located on the Orange County Steel Salvage property, south of the Riverside Freeway, and north of the Santa Ana River, between Glassell Street and the AT6SF Railroad line. Testing will done in compliance with Water Code Section 13273, as directed by the State Water Resources Control Board. It will consist of construction of ground water monitoring wells near the landfill perimeter, boring holes, the installation of gas monitoring probes at intervals around the landfill perimeter, and air quality testing along the surface of the landfill site. The testing will occur during a six to twelve-month time period. A TI N: Commissioner Herbst offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bouas and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find that the conducting of Solid Waste Assessment Tests osa the Orange Caunty Steel Salvage site would be in conformance with the Anaheim General Plan. F. RE E,ST FOR CLARIFICATION OF DEFINITI N - Request for autor:~obile conversions from Steve Saleen Autosport, at 4955 Hunter Avenue. Philip Schwartze, Consultant, PER, explained Saleen avt~spart currently converts appro~mately 1,000 automobiles a year for Ford Company; that they do no particiYate in retail sales of the finished product; that they receive car "shells" from Ford Motor Company and upon completion of conversion distributes them to Ford car dealers throughout the country; that they are recognized as a manufacturer by Sports Czrr Club of America; they do not paint nor perform engine or drivetrain work. at t'_.eir facilities; and that all work on the autombiles will occur indoors; and that automobile "shells" will be stored in a screened outdoor receiving area. Finished automobiles will be temporarily stored outside pending shipment to dealers. A TI N: Commissioner Mc Burney offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herbst and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission dots hereby determine that modification of partially complete automobiles for distribution to automobile dealerships be consiriered as a permitted manufacturing use in conformance with Section 18.61.020.170 of the Zoning Code. ADJOURNMENT• A TI N: Commissioner McBurney offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Aouas and MOTION CARRIED that the meeting be adjourned Lo 9:3U . .January ]8, '_988. The meeting was adjourned at 11:25 p.m. Res ctfully submitted, ~ ~' ~'~ Edith L. Harris Secretary Anaheim City Planning Commission