Minutes-PC 1991/08/26.'!r'1'ION AGII4DA
REGJLAR MEETING OF THE' ANAHEIM CPl'Y PLANNING CC~IMISSIGYV
MbNDAY, AUGUST 26, 1991 AT 10:00 A.M.
PRELSMINARY PLAN REVIII+' FLTHI~TC F~,'ARING
(fUBISC TESTIMONY)
10:00 a.m. 1:30 p.m.
10:45 a.m. - At]CdC ~4CH
CL"Y~ALiSSIG1VER'S PRESENT': BOYASIUN, BOUAS, FELDHAUS, HELI_~, tlEivril"^l~R,
MFSSE, PERAZA
PI~IRE It7 E~ID1TE PLANNING Q~4LiSSION HIHLIC HEARINGS
1. The proponents in applications which are not contested will have five
minutes to present their evidence. Additional time will be granted upon
request if, in the opinion of the Commission, such additional tine will
2. In contested applications, the proponents and opponent will each be given
ten minutes to present his case unless additional time is requested and the
complexity of the matter warrants. The Commission's considerations are not
determined by the length of time a participant speaks, but rather by what
' is said.
i
3. Staff Reports are part of the evidence deemed received by the Commission in
each hearing. Copies are available to the public prior to the meeting.
4. The Commission will withhold questions until the public hearing is closed.
5. The Commission reserves the right to deviate from the foregoing if, in its
opinion, the ends of fairness to all concerned will be served.
6. All documents are presented to the Planning Commission for review in
connection with any hearing, including photographs or other acceptable
visual repreeentationa of non-documentary evidence, shall be retained by
the Commission for the public record and shall be available for public
inspections. ~•
~ 7. At the end of the scheduled hearings, members of the public will be allowed
to speak on items of interest which are within the jurisdiction of the
Planning Commission, and or agenda items. Each speaker will be allotted a
maximum of five (5) minutes to speak.
~-.
~~
CA11020E
08/26/91
Page 1
p`"j3
...wr..,...~r.rr.r~
•, n
la. CAA I~IS,ATIVE DEL~..AR112'i~
lb. WAIVER OF CUCE RErX1IRII4ET7P
lc. CCNDITIGYVAL USE PERMIT NO. 3446 (RF.ADVEK[75ID)
QJR'ER: JOMO'S INC., -2459 Beach Blvd., Stanton, CA 90600
rY-.,^VT: ... H. JUHNSUN, PRESIDENT, 12159 Bea^h
Blvd., Stanton, CA 90680
I.C4ATION: 3478 East Orangethorpe Avenue. Proper-y is
approximately 2.9i acres on the south side of
Urangethorpe Avenue, approximately 900 feet east of
the centerline of MiL1er Street.
.~ permit on-premise ~a:.e and consumpt'.on of alcoholic
beverages in an approximate 5,:00 square-foot enclosed bar and
grill with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
Continued from the August 12, 19?1, PLanning Commissic„~
meeting.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC91-131
---------------------------------------------------------------------
_ a nn.~w r.~~u..nny~Zpp7. NOT=Tn.PF._
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
pFTITIONER'S COMMENTS: Concern expresaed regarding item no. 16 on
page 4 of staff report re pool room and arcade permits; concern
expresaed regarding condition no. 1 relating to fire sprinklers;
ordinance not clear ae to whether this is a new occupancy or a change
of occupancy; hours of operation are from 10:00 a. m. to 2:00 a.m., 7
days a week; contacted landlord regarding parking at church and he
was assured it would not be a problem.
COMMISSILN COMMENTS: Planning Commieeion not allowed to approve over
4 pool tables; concezned about church parking; asked petitioner if he
could open around 2:00 p.m. on Sundays.
STAFF COMMENTS: Greg Hastings - Fire Sprinklers were brought up at
the IDC meeting and it was determined by the Fire Dept. that
condition no. 1 was a :aT+i,rement by Fire Code.
CA TION: CEQA Negative Declaration - Approved
Waiver of Code Requirement - Approved
~ Conditional Use Permit No. 3446 - Granted (1 year)
voT 5-2 (Commissioner Hellyer and Henninger voting No)
U
Approved
Approved
Granted
(1 yr.)
sa
..
08/26/91 ,.s
ttE
1
Page 2
l' :;
r'.
~,~~
Y-- ~ ~~:
~~,,
J
~~?
• 'i9~
,LS;
:
~d
fiu
i ~;
:.
i`
.~
r: 4%!:h~
~,y~, ~,
~~.5
rs
~. .
~z ` y~, ,
~rj tt
,u
2a. !'~A N1Y',ATIVE DFX'r_..r1RkTION ~ Denied
2b. W,1P„~ OF CODE RE~.YIIR~Tff]dT i Denied
Zc, CgVpITIONAI, USE P°..FlKI'i NO. 3441 Denied
2d. !/~IVE'R OF COUNCIL POLICY :tiC•_ 533 Denied
I
CI/Nr'Rc JLLIUS wILLIAMS, 1240 N. VAN BUREN, ,tL'3, Anaheim, ~
CA 92907
t;,c IP: RCBERT F. TCRRES, 1240 N. VAN BUREN, /113, Anaheim,
CA 92807
~A^"`N~7: 10:'4-1030 :Vort11 Ketr.O Street. Property is
approximately 0.31 acre located on the east s:.de of i
hemp Street and approximately 350 feet north of the
centerline of La Palma Avenue.
;'~ permit a 15•-unit senioc citizen's apartment complex with ~
•.+aiver of maximu,n let ccveraye, minimma building site area, I
m..^._mum numter of open parking spaces and minimum structural
setback.
Ccnt;nued .from :he :uly 29, 1991, PLanning Commission meetLng.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC91-132
..urrr.~.rWr~~.~rrra.rY~w~ a ~riWYY1~' _. _. _.. ~ _-
~-~, FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. .
OPPOSI~ZON: None
PETIPIONER'S COMMENTS: Propose 2-story, 15-unit senior housing
project; minimum 550 s.f. per unit; propose elevator; has courtyard
area; previously patios and balconies faced the north and south
property lines and was asked to work with the Community Development
Department in the redesign of the project which they have done to
their satisfaction; other concern was providing enclosed parking; the
type of product they provide is one to one parking on their senior
housing project; previously they had 12 parking spaces and with the
revision they came back with 15 parking spaces; would like to enclose
all parking if allowed to do eo with roll up garage dcora with
openers; full security provided; will provide recycling cnntainera
for trash at the rear of the units; will provide laundry rooms and
rec room; have reduced coverage from 578 to 538 which is below the
558 required by the City.
~./
1+,
'7
J~
08/26/91
Page 3
.~
REBUTTAL•
t^
~~A~.
~,~~
a~
~~ q~'
r ;~,
,E,-~..
;; ~ `~ a
~"~
;. ~~~.~~
. - ., i jY~+.7.
{;': M9
~~
l1 •4.
1~5.
~Y
.'~~ ._
~ 1N, ~
• ~~i
~~,v4 t,
~rv~...
~,~-~..
l ~~Y
Peraza - Concern expressed regarding the 5 households that will be ~'
displaced ae a result of this project; only offerinq.7 unita,to the ',,4
City and therefore, tihere is no net gain. _ ~•
Torres - All 15 units would be made available to the Houainq
Authority; the remainder would be under the project based assistance
program; the Houainq Authority is not willing to make a commitment to
the remainder; it is not there at this ti,~e or they are reviewing it;
possibly that can still do it because it has not been eliminated,
however, fcr the record he will make those un3,ta available to the
project based assistance program.
Henninger - Would you make 15 or 12 so they would have a net 7
affordable to low and very low income families?
Laura, Community Development - Ae it stands there are 7 unite to be
rented at $Si:2 a month. r
Torres - Thay are requesting 16-units; his proposal would jump from
25i to 3F8; he can provide a unit or provide a roof--he would like to
provide a. unit as he meets all the open apace requirements and he is
providirq a parking space for that unit. He added he would make the
unite available if they qo up to 80t of the unite.
Eric Nicoll, Community Development - The developer requested that
they review the based Secei~~n 8 program for the project, however,
they declined at this time as it is a long process; they are moving 5
existing units that are affordable and they are receiving 7 back
which is a net gain of 2 units which is not substantial; the project
based Section 8 assistance does assist very low incom9 households
with the subsidy program, but also provides the developer with the
fair market return on the rsnt, -~ it is not truly subsidized by the
developer in the reductic^ i:. the rents; anytime the Commission looks
at additional affordability, shay support that request; they feel
that the rents based on median income ie a little bit high compared
to the market at $522 per month for a one bedroom unitf perhaps the
developer could review the rents and absorb the replacement housing
or additional 5 unite under the project.
Henninger - Asked about the possibility of having an agreement with
Housing that Hr. Torres will cap the rents on 12 unite rather than 7.
Torres - He could enter into an agreement depending on the rates,
however, he could not economically do this at the same rate.
Peraza - Expressed concern regarding the amount of concrete around
i-- the buildings; the south side is fully unlanecaped and so ie the east
~, side.
~~
08/26/91
Page 4
'' ~ ayl`~, , .
t s'a
y c
rc.
m~
%~ ~`~ ,
'~,~?~
~ r,~i
k '
:r ~h'TO7.
- ~u
c7X~ ~
iy~~x~
~',:..a zt ~~~
,~ ~ ~,g. .
:~
t
': ti'i~~
w
Jr~4 ~~•
3
1 rk~
y~- a, a .
L 4_~
~~
~ ~~
f~
Torres - The east aide comes off of the alley and the driveways qo to "';,
the trash and garage areas; at the west aide, or the front of the ,J .!
property, they do have ,some greenecape area ae~part of.a requirement; _~. b
they must set up a wall approximately 15-foot from the property line;
he suggested a wrought iron fence so it looks open and not enclosed; ~`
between the columns of each garage door he would provide a climbing ~~,
vine; in addition, they have an island on both sides of the driveway !~,,
area and landscaping will be provided along with landscaping in front
of the building; proposes to put in planters on the balcon+.ea.
Boydatun - All 7-unite are at the 5522/mo. and no very low unite? ~;
~:
Nicoll - Those are all very low income units at 5522 and rents are s: ;+~
~..
determined off of the household size of 2. _
Meese - what is the market rate?
Nicoll - 5600 to $625.
Hellyer - Market rate is closer to a dollar afoot now.
Nicoll - Need to look at the fact that it ie capped for 30 years and
from hereon out, it ie based on the annual adjustment factor ueinq a
standard income figure which may not neceaearily reflect seniors
incomes.
Henninger - Cannot support all of this density.
Feldhaus - Has no justification sheet or application in his packet;
dose not know why he 'should grant waivers on lot sizes when they are
asking for a 36~ increase in density; should be able to build to
Code.
eoydatun - What are unite renting for now?
ii
Torres - 5550 to $600 and one ie S615.
Boydatun - The average senior living alone cannot afford to pay 5522 I
a~month.
Nicoll - They are drafting an amendment to the senior ordl.nance that
will provide rents typically for a 1-bedroom at $365 for 25i of the
unite which gets closer to someone on a fixed income.
~, Meese - Would reconsider at $365/mo.
Io CEQA Negative Declaratlon - Denied
r. Waiver of Code Requirement - Denied
~ Conditional Uae Permit No. 3441 - Denied
Waiver of Council Policy No. 543 - Denied
~,
`.%
vo 7-0
'~;
L
'~ff
1
08/26/91
Page 5
~'t:
;:c~
k.
4 ri
~~
ti.
~~
'`~. .
r"
.r
yxrt ,re s
4s ~k~`~..1 .
~~.
~~.
. '~F^ ".
~.
G'~
Y F.
5 1 ~~;
`v r^a
S,~q~
Yl't ~,
J 1'~y
~ '::~ .
~~Y
1
r.. 3a. CEQA DECLARATION -
3b. WAIVIIt OF Gt~DE'RECXIIRF]~Il'.4VT
3C. OaNDITIONAL USE PERMPl NO.-3434
!^- OWNER: DOARY PLOTKIN, 1L819 E. Firestone Hlvd., Norwalk, CA
90650
AGfN!': LLOYD L. LOWRY, TRUSTEE, P.O. Hox 25448, Anaheim, CA
92825-5448
LOCATION: 300 North Wilshire Avenue. Property is
approximately 0.43 acre on the north aide of Wilshire
Avenue, approximately 660 feet southeast of the
centerline of Loara Street. To permit a church in an
existing office building with waivers of minimum
number of parking spaces and minimum dimen.:iona of
parking spaces.
CON.OITSONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC91-133
FOLLOWING IS A SU!4MARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO HE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAi~ MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: 2
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Small church with approximately 8 care on
Sunday; thin is for a one-year lease with a one-year exteneionf staff
has requested that fire sprinklers be installed in the building and
that ie a huge financial consideration compared to the value of the
tenancy; would like to work with Fire Department for some other
alternative; referenced condition no. 6 re fire hydrants and does not
feel they need to put one in; propose to Fire Department that they
put in breaker bars on all of the doors; that they put in the largest
freestanding fire extinguisher unit that is available rather than
sprinklers; requested appropriate access for trash disposal;
currently their is a single point of ingress and agrees on the site;
it is not a turn-around site; there was some concern with staff that,
that posed a hazard to traffic on Wilshire; property is not large
enough for a turn-around.
OPPOSITION CONCERNS:
Mr. Schaffer - Owner of office building at 292 N. Wilshire east of
the property in question; concern expressed regarding parking
~ situation; would like condition no. 13 be part of no. 15 because over
~ the years they have not done a very good job of maintaining the
property; would like landscaping done and some of the improvements in
before they start the project.
..-b,~.
-"L3:
j~1
Mf.;
~~
Approved -
i
Approved
Granted -
(3' yrs. ) ::~;
~~
08/26/91
Page 6
i
x.~
,ti.
~~ti,~~
' .y
•t :~,
nfl~h~ .
s ~^
*
}.~~;~
1 ti~
~
V ,
~ -
" k
((
~~
1~
~ .
y
a
;v
~-
2 ~~~~ b~
.
~~~,..
r
i`z"
~
i;
-~~
,.~
:
Shirley Smart -This is a residential area behind the buildings and `~~~ r
q,~
y
~~
would appreciate consideration for residential provisions.
' ~ r
?,
~
k~.
REBUTTAL: Parking on Wilshire will not be a major problem; they ' ,
~
r~"~4~
~4Y
'`
would like to be cleared for a meeting on Sunday morning and possibly r
holidays and evenings; he indicated currently they do not have an ~,r
F
~ evening schedule, but. wanted that policy in just in case they wanted >~"~c'
h ~ ~
an evening meeting. `
~~
J.
n Soydatun -What would hours be if you did something at night? y~
?~:
~'
• ~.
`
Applicant -Agreed that they would not start before 7:00 p.m.; ,~;t
evening meetings would be no longer than 1-1/2 hrs. and moat church r~-.
~~`~
meetings are geared around a 1 hr. schedule; an exception to this may I ~.
be a Chr?atian film. ~^
~ ~~;
Hellyer -Asked about landscaping. •
2 ~,,:,
Applicant - Mr. Plotkin ie prepared to upgrade the landscaping and do ='~~.
the irrigation system ae per staff's recommendations. ~:
Henninger - Ary plane to do Bingo? ,~;
Applicant - No.
ACTION: CEQA Negative Declaration -Approved
Waiver of Code Requirement -Approved ;.
Conditional Use Permit No. 3434 -Granted for 3 yrs.
(Eliminate condition no. 5; specify in condition no. 8 that ~??r:
~„
evening meetings would run up till 9:00 p.m. with a maximum <
~~ no. of 20 participants) fir.
~"
VOTi: 7-0 +~ ..
xr;
,;,
~ti
^
,.
"
~.
,^~ 08/26/91
~' Page 7
~
~
.,- ....................--~..- -------
__ - ~
h5
,~(T -.
~
.
J:
.i
~
kyf i
/ ~~
a Z`~~~~+V..
^, _. ~4~`
~M •(
'
.
~!
~~
~~
.
.e
~,; Y'
.` `
`~~~', ,
~ ~.:
~~k
'~
~~
T ~ 6'
~'
tt
afi.
~~ ..
r.f
' Fr
L~
' '`r ~~~.
~~i,``,'+4`
~~w
s ~~
~.k
t
<i~:
~~F..'.
T
.. .
.,'~ .;
~vk, ,
. f,=
~
~~.'
i-.
~./
4a. CDJA NFXsA!'IVE pFxLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPI~JVID) No Action
4b. CbNDITZONAT USE PERriiT N0. 2090 (READVE(a'ISID) Granted
(TO be reviewed ~•
OWNER: HARVEY S. OWEN, 11061 Huntinghorn, Santa Ana, CA once every 3 ?,?~
92705 years) { ~,;~4.
rOCA4'ION: 1160 Nalfih RL•ae~nez' Blvd. Property ie approximately ~o'ZA~
0.9 acre on the east aide of Kraemer Boulevard
approximately 242 feet south of the centerline of ~/~ ~'~
Coronado Street.
Petitioner requests a retroactive extension of time or deletion
of a condition of approval requiring annual time extensions to
retain a public dance hall.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC91-134 '
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
vFTITIONEA'S COMMENTS: Appeared last year for deletion of CUP and
was advised to come back 1 yr. later to see how things went.
Hellyer - Asked about issue of street lighting. ~ -
Applicant - That came up about 4 or 5 years ago prior to the fire
station next door putting in afire signal in front of their
building; they had RGS services talk to the City and they said it had
been resolved as they installed a street light right above the fire
signal and there was also a street light on their aide prior to the
property line and just beyond it on the right aide; it was left at
that; it is well lit now.
Hellyer - nnyone from electrical available?
Hastings - There was no one available to come to the meeting; their
hi rn'n was that they do definitely want ""~,~
~'~
KEVIN T. YOUNG, 1160 North Kraemer Blvd., Anaheim, ~ ~
CA 92806 ~-~( ~
conversation with them t e mo i q
alight adjacent to the property.
Houas - Do they know what is out there?
Applicant - Entire area is well lit; in the past 3 weeks they also
laid down the new traffic signal lights and put in a new box where
the light was originally suppose to go.
08/26/91
Page B
~.
,6
~ 4
1
x; :~;~~
~
si
:~ ~
~~ ~
~%
{
.
R'~
t
r ~y*
Y ~',. .
~
F
~
,r
rt~~Y'
,i 'rt
,;
~~ ~~~~:
' ~0~yq.q
~~
CY
~
ST tc.4~'4FFy
i~~
~
~
~-
r._.:'z .,.. . ~-..,....... ..•r, c.Mti nx« V~JtvY+rra~lh.'"`~nY:S•~J.:.-~ _. ;..' ', .. ~ r '- ~~ ~~'~y {!1
needs to be worked out with electrical; appears thin
~ H
i
-Thi i(~
enn
nger
s
needs to be resolved again. ~~'~ ~"•.
~:r~
1980 th
t
t
t li
ht
b
k
! ~~~
a
a s
ree
g
ac
in
; Hellyer -•It was in the conditions M
~""
~,
be provided. z
i
' '~
on may ~
approve this time extension, the commiss
~. Hastings - If wish to ~.;y ~'
wish to in the resolution, indicate that within 90 days the ~~,£~ ti .t
applicant meet with •the electrical engineering division and comply
with whatever the requirements are pertaining to street installation ~'
and if they are not required, then the condition will be satisfied ~ r°nF~
and staff can check with electrical engineering at the end of 90 dava ~`
and if there is a problem they can bring it back ~'.,~,~
ACTION•
-,.5.
CEQA Negative Decl.ration (Prey. Approv
Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 (Ready. x?~~'
. %~,z'.
(Review period to change to once every - ~
V
condition asking them to work out the
within 90 days) ;ter;
VDTE• 7-0
,`
;~~;:
~,
~^
~~
k
~.
~ a t,
~~ 1~y'
.,>.
,.
ajr
~'
(~".
}~ r
4
;,~ ,':
'1`~ c
• ~~ ~:
~ ~`1~~=
4.~{rte .
u~
^i k~k 4:
.8' ~A
l +f
~'~ f
a;~t~'~#
c 4 ;~~' ~
e~wp
~~
S,ti ~5''r
~~ ~ y
~k ~, ~,
a,.,: `~.
` ~ ''~v
si k ~.
~~ `
Y;~"`,~
.:
„, >
r, ~ r°>.
a~
~ ~,3y,
~~h, a,:~.r.
/~,
i-.
~-
l..J
Sa. CEOA NEGATIVE DEX:LARATIC~1 (PREVIOUSLY APPROVID) No Action rc+,1~. t b
5b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3025 READVER7'ISED _ Granted for '~`
QVNER: WINSTON INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES, 2201 E. Winston,' Suite expire 7/6/94) -`~,~'
A, Rnaheim, CA 92806 ~ ~'
AGENT: JEFFERY W. STOLPP, 2201 E. Winston Rd., Suite Q,
Anaheim, CA 92805 <""-
> ;;ti`'
LOCATION: 2201 Fast Winston Fml., Suite O. Property ie ,'t
approximately 4.7 acres located on the north aide of
Winston Road approximately 980 feet east of the
centerline of State College Boulevard.
To permit continued operation of an existing church with waiver
of minimum number of parking spaces. /~/~~~
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC91-135 ~/~+"^~
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. _
OPPOSITION: None
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Average approximately 50 to 75 members; ample
parking spaces and they average approximately 25 to 30 care; there
are over 200 available parking spaces; the original use permit shows
they were meeting on Friday night, however, they are no longer
meeting on Friday nights and are meeting only on Sunday mornings from
about 8:30a.m. till 1:00 p.m.
ACTION•
1 and 2).
CEQA Negative Declaration (Prey. Approved) - No Action
Conditional Use Permit No. 3025 (Read.) - Granted
(Fcr 3 years - to expire 7/6/94 with further extensions
being permitted by review and approval by the Planning
Commission under Reports and Recommendations; add a
condition that trash storage areas shall be provided _
and maintained in an acceptable location in the streets,
maintenance and sanitation division and drop items
VOTE• 7-0
08/26/91
Page 10
`~
O
u~ ,. ~.
6a.
6b.
~~ 6c.
` _ 6d.
i--~
~^~
~~
~` D~T+
t1~S,.X <
t. ,yam": `~ •
1.~ {l
:~lr
~ .
t~.{r? 4~
?+
;~ ~ ~~,~~
~i .~G
~y ;j.iA:
~o
~yp~ f
...,-. ,...,.,..~, . rti
.. .. ~~4 Y
J }{{
~ihV ~
7
~ !~
CEDA NEC,ATIVE DE~C.ARATION Continued h ;^I~~
VARIANCE NrO. 4136 (WITf!DRI~VN) to 9/23/91 k5wx:
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 14429 ^r `'~:
SPFxIbffN TREE RF1~X7VAL PERMIT N0. 91-07 ;~`~~
-:'x;~`.
AGENT:
~~,
ED STERN, LINDA STEAK, MANFAED A GLASTETTER, CHRISTA a
GLASTETTER, GARY F. LYONS, DONNA LEE LYONS, RAYMOND -::i''
W. PEARSON, PAMELA J. PEARSON, CURTIS B. PEARSON,
REITA BETH PEARSON, FRED GLASTETTER AND LORI '
GLASTETTER
,_
Fred Glaetetter, 25012 Via Del Rio, E1 Toro, CA
92630 `:,
IG~CATICBJ: Property is approximately 8.4 acres located on the
west side of Xenning Way apprnrtim3tely 350 feet south
of the centerline of ¢lintana.
Waiver of minimum lot width to establish a 7••Lot (plus a common
lot, RS-HS-22,000(SC), single-family aubdivia_on. ^'
To remove fifty-eight (58) specimen trees. ~~y~
VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. -- v/
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
CONCERNED CITIZENS: 3 (Not necessarily opposed to the project but
had other concerns).
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Questioned condition no. 1 asking for ahor~e -
trail along the south and west property line; due to the topography
it would be impractical to build a horse trail along that line; there _
is an existing 2 to 1 side elope.
OPPOSITION CONCERNS REBUTTAL AND COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Jeff Kenyon -Main concern was the question of the location of the
potential riding and hiking trail; spoke with Dick Meyer and ~~
Mr. Jolly at Anacal; an alternate needs to be worked out with the ~r
Park and Reca Department and the Engineering Department; if area ie "t~ "
impacted you could create an erosion problem plus environmental
concerns; suggested that part of the trail could follow along the
p:opoeed dedicated or private streets that will .be built; meandering
could crests more problems; not practical to follow the south and `,
west property lines.
Henninger - Ie there an easement on the back of your lot for a hiking
trail
`.'
08/26/91
Page 11
_!Y.
Y
f ~j
of
~ `..
~ ~ dJ4~ t
i
~ `
.'
f ,
F
b
~ 1
l:t
,~rf.
4:`
1'~S ~Y
~
~Y
t
y.~
`
;jy
'
~
S ti{G
}u[
~~
SL
Y ~
~
.
a ~~r; ~w
_
~t
~~~;
+:. ~~. {t
'
y
-,
L~
V.
.\)
~~~~
1
2
C~
`
`
Kenyon - There is a 5-foot easement that goes along the entire ~;~`~"~*:
eastern aide of tract 2197; a blanket condition was put on the
~
subdivision for the easement to be there and that satisfied the City, ~
but in terms of a practical application, it just will not work. _ - f,
"_it;
Harold euahore - Hexe with several of the neighbors; no objection to
the development per se; the horse trails are a joke; they are not
even hiking trails and they go nowhere; there is not one piece of
property in the area that is zoned for horses.
Virginia Whithera - Expressed her concerns regarding drainage and
wanted to make sure that this project is adequately taken care of
because there is a tremendous amount of water that comes down the
hill.
Applicant - Will be a full geology and soils report on the entire -
tract to prove stability; still have not solved the trail problem and
appreciates the input; does not have any suggestions on how to handle
it other than to request that it be eliminated from the conditions. '
Dick Mayer, Parka and Recreation Department - Met with representative
to disc~:ae the issue of the trail; they feel they can locate it
further away from the westerly property line; agrees that after
looking at the topography that they cannot run it up against the
actual wes'.-erly property line, but they can engineer it to work
within the tract adjacent to some of the street patterns in the area.
He explained the reason they put it on the General Plan is because it
,-. is a feeder trail on the trails master plan for the City and it is
his responsibility to see that they are implemented. There is a
connection point between trails that they have acquired to date up to
the proposed four corners trail which is in the process of being
acquired across the full length of the four corners pipe line and
adjacent areas; the reason these trails qo nowhere is because the
City does not have the funding available to acquire and develop these
on an intermittent basis throughout the overall Anaheim Hills area;
does not intend to run the trails on t1;a existing topographical areas
where there is a lot of steep elope and trees.
He clarified that they are not called horse trails, but are called
riding and hiking trails and in this area they are going with more
and more hiking trails rather than riding trails and it allows them
to relax the standards a little bit in that they do not have to be
quite as wide as a regular horse trail would be. He agreed there are
no horses in this area and the predominate use will be for hiking
purposes.
.^•.
L...J
08/26/91
Page 12
i'
p,~ `j^a
h, .;s
~ ~~.
r'Y t~
} ~~' ,.
__1 ~
' ~.~.~ SC ~ ,SKI.'
Ri~ 1'
-F ~~
s,~
r~:
~~ ~.
~` r..,
~,~~
~ ff ,4',
_...._..: ., . ..~,-,: it m•i«r: h5.2$c_:
. . "7~;fi~'~~'~?!:~-::.. FMS
:+.,
~+"^'~
'~ z
{
i:~Y~'
Applicant - Thinks it is impractical to try to adopt a trail just
because it is on a general plan; when those general plans were
adopted years ago someone just took a pen and drew it along a general
line or area and to try to enforce a location under those conditions
is impractical and if they try to bring the trail down into their
private drive area across a private residence, they are impacting
those residents and creating a burden on them.
~i
Henninger - This is characterized as a feeder trail. Where does the ~'-~.~
feeder trail feed from? %i~iti:
;~~~
.Mayer - Feeds from the north; there is a trail that goes from ,:'rc
Bayberry Court across Canyon Acres and ties into the bottom of this ~r.;,
particular piece of property; there is another trail that takes off
from that and goes over to Anaheim Hills Road and they are basically
meant for walking and jogging purposes.
In the past 3 years they have been working to implement changes in
the trails planning to this area as well as the overall recreational
planning for the City and they have had public meetings where the
community has come back to them and told them that they appreciate
the trails that are provided and want to see them stay from an urban
standpoint because it helps to keep the rural atmosphere in the
area.
Discussion took place regarding a habitat and that there was no
impact to wildlife species in the area.
Meese - Discussions came up regarding drainage, geology and biology
and asked about a focused EIR that would just direct itself to those
3 items.
Applicant - During the final engineer and after approval of the map,
all of theaA i9auce are properly designed and taken care of; after we
get an approved map they will hire a gaologiat and a soils engineer
who will make all of their findings and determine elope stability and
stability of retaining walla; water is being handled in a storm drain
at the end of their property.
Henninger - Everything is not o. k. and it would be appropriate to
review some of the concerns prior to approval of the tentative map,
i.e., soils and drainage problems.
McCafferty - Can require these atudiea ae sublimates to the initial
study and review them before the Planning Commission makes a
determination and,make a solid environmental determination without
having to go through the EIR process if it determined on the basis of
those reports that it is not necessary.
Henninger - Tha other concern is fire sprinkler requirements; have 2
unite at the end of along private driveway that is steep and if that
access waa blocked a home could burn down.
'"-~
ACTION: Continued to 9/23/91 to have atudiea in.
08/26/91
`,;
~=
7 • REL~KCS AND REGOF9~DATICkIS:
~. t~4.F ter.
'': / C'~ta'Y "
.._r~ 4.
5~ z
f ~~'
~~. 11 Y`L~C.,
~-.a
6 ~ ,,x~ 7
1 {$ ~ ~'~.
~~a
`j:~ ~ ~~}
~~~
'~,;.s~~~.,
~~
~T~ Y
,,~~
~.
sca~5;; 1
' .- - a~~!
!F'~
. , ., ,... v . .. . , . ., . ,< ..
e:
tr h
J : a~:
„~~}
L 4~ ,
,j
':
~ A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3257 - REQUEST FY)R EXTIIVSICkl OF I '~
TIME ~ COMPLY WITX CON.IITICklS OF APPR7VAL: Frank Flores
requests aone-year extension of time for property located
at 2171 5. Harbor Blvd., Anaheim, CA.
B. CONDITIONAL USE PE72MIT NO. 3414 - REQUEST Ft7R A NUNC PId~
TUNC RESOLUTICk1 2b AMEND REStiIUl'ION NO PC91-110
Approved ?~
~~
~/~~z
`,;; ~;;
Granted rs
RESbIITI'ICxI NO. PC91-136 ~` ~~ '
ACITCURNFiIIVT: The Planning C~ncnission hearing adjourned at 4:02p.m.
to the Planning Commission Work Session which followed immediately.
Note: The Planning Cbrmnission Work Session adjourned to the next
scheduled PIanning Cotmrtission meeting to be held on Wednesdav,
September I1, 1991.
It was further noted that there would be no Planning Commission Work
Session held in September.