Loading...
Minutes-PC 1992/09/21"~ ~ °s~ rir~~ •~. r ~"' ACTION AGENDA t°" . REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CC~Y PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 2t, 1992, AT 10:00 A.M. i:~~>>' ~ PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW PUBUC HEARING (PUBUC TESTIMONY) 10:00 A.M. 1:30 P.M. '~~'~ ~. ' µ,r.,. ,, ~~ COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BRISTOL, HENNINCER, MESSE, PERA~..A, TAR, ZEMEL, ONE VACANT SEAT STAFF PRESENT: BORREGO, FREEMAN, HASTINGS, JENSEN, JOSEPH, LOCIWIAN, MANN, MONICAL, SOLORIO, YALDA PROCEDURE TO EXPEDITE PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. The proponents in applications which are not contested will have five minutes to present their evidence. Additional time w(II be granted upon request ff, in the opinion of the Commission, such addtional time w"ni aroduce evidence important to the Commission's conskleration. 2. In contested applications, the proponents and opponent will each be given ten minutes to present their case unless additional time is requested and the complexihr of the matter warrants. The Commission's conskferations are not determined by the length of time a pa~~icipant speaks, but rather by what is said. 3. 4. 5. 8. ~~ ~ ~. ," ;', Staff Reports are part of the evidence deemed received by the Commission in each he~~ring. Copies are available to the public prior to the meeting. The Commission will withhold questions until the public hearing is closed. The Commission reserves the right to deviate from the foregoing ff, in fts opinion, the ends of fairness to all concerned will be served. All documents presented to the Planning Commission for review in connection with any hearing, including photographs or other acceptable visual representations or non-documentary evidence, shall be retained by the Commission for the public record and shall be available for public Inspections. At the end of the scheduled hearings, members of the public will be allowed to speak on items of intarest which are within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, and/or agenda it•ams. Each speaker wBl be slotted a maximum of five (5) minutes to speak. Anyone wishing to speak should fill out the forms available in the rear of the Council Chamber and submft them to staff prior to the meeting. CA092192.wp `' ~~ ` u~., . ~~ ~a'~C'e-rte q~> Z/y~. ~~ :~. . Clteimiart Henninger presented a plaque to former Commissioner Glenn Helfyer. ~r , ~`~4' ~~- NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) Ib^: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.2029 (READVERTISED) OWNER: CANEX INVESTMENTS, Attn: Alien Lobel, 2225 Harbor Boulevard, Ste. 214, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 619 North Anaheim Boulevard. Property (s approximately 0.6 acre located at the southwest comer of VJilhelmina Street and Anaheim Boulevard. Petit6aner requests deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation for apreviously-approved sutomob8e sales agency. Approved Granted for 5 Years ., ~_ _. ~';= Continued from the June 29 and July 27, 1992 Planning Commission meetings. ,,~..,; ~. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC92-112 F9LI.OWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. nPPOSITION: None Lobel, Newport Beach, CA 92660. Mr. Lobel gave his presentation. Diccussion took place regarding the tree$ that staff recommended on page 3 of the staff report Mr. Borrego explained that the reason some of the other car lots do not have trees Is because they recently adopted a landscape ordinance and they were not subject to the tree planting requirements. If any new car deale,~ships dkl come Into the Clty, they would be expected to meet that requirement. He added the recommendation was far less tress than what they would typically be required of a brand new dealership coming k~o thrs r.,ity. One of the options that the petftioner has, ff he is overly concerned about having the trees blocking the view of his display vehides, etc., is to duster the trees in one location near the intersection of Wiihelmfna and Anaheim Blvd. i. ,.~. :~;.~ ~cr ... X9/21/92 Paye 2 4;~ ~fl.. 4': Ji M1 ,~y~i tr-... r+ ~~ `'fi~. ; ~ , ~..dn$ 1 ~ .. .. s-o (one vacant seat) 09/21/92 Page 3 ~ ~; - E.. ~ - 2a.~ ~~~ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT N0.273 (Previously Certified) Approved ~,., TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12888 (REVISION NO. 1j Approved "~'' ND FlNAL SITE PLAN :.;. ~ ,~`t ,.:: , °`` OWNER: THE PRESLEY COMPANY, Attn: Alan Uman, 19 Corporate Plaza, Newport Beach, 92660 CA F ;~ LOCATION: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 12666. Property is 'cf ~ `. appro~dmately 66.7 acres located on the west skfe of '~ .R:4 Sunset Rkige Road and approximately 45 feet west of the ~' ~ ' centerline ~ Moonridge Lane. To establish a 101-lot (plus three open space lots including one open space lot comprising a portion of Deer Canyon) single-family detached reskleMisl subdivision in The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan ;:fit; (SP87-1). .~~,: ~'j :'. Continued from the September 9, 1992 Planning Commission meeting. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFlCIAL MINUTES. OPPOSRION: None One person spoke in favor. Boyle, 2098 S. Grand, Santa Ana, CA 92805, rapreserning The Presley Company. He gave a brief presentation for ftems 2 and 3 and submitted sorrre cross sections to the Planning Commission fqr their review and consideration. ACT10N: EIR N0.273 (Prev. Certified) -Approved Tentative Tract Map No. 12686 (Revision No. 1) and Final She Plan -Approved y~• s-0 (One vacant seat) os/2t/s2 Page 4 t ~~ - ~ • <-~ ~' ' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORt :VO.273 (Previously Approved) Approved 3"~ s, ., `TENTATIVE 1ReCT MAP NO.12887 (REVISION NO. 1) Approved ~~ ~ AND FlNAL SITE PLAN ~t~~~ ~ OWNER: THE PRESLEY COMPANY, Attn: Alan Uman, 19 Corporate ~="s ~~" Plaza, Newport Beach, 92660 CA LOCATION: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12887. Property is approximately 100.7 acres located on the south skle of Hdlow Oak Road and approximately 110 feet west of the centerline of Tristania Lane. ~I To establish a 118-lot (plus two open space lots including one open "`~~ ., space lot comprising a portion of Deer Canyon) single-famAy detached _ residential subdivision in The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan (SP87-i). ,.~ ~x: ~; a,~ne _, ~„ ~` Continued from the September 9, 1992 Planning Commission meeting. _, , .. ,,: FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFlCIAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: None One person In favor ~oth item nos. 2 and 3 reflect the same public input. Please refer to Rem no. 2 for dialogue. ACTION: EIR N0.273 (Prey. Approved) -Approved Terrtative Tract Map No. 12687 (Revision No. 1) and Final SRe Plan -Approved VOTE: 6-0 (One vacant seat) i• 09/21/92 Page 5 r ~~ ke,~i ~1~~~?.~ ~f7~;~ - Y': - ^ ~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3545 " M OWNER: LEDERER-ANAHEIM LTD., 1990 Westwood Boulevard, 3rd ~:' Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90025 AGENT: FARANO AND IgEVIET, Attn: Tom Kievlet, 100 S. Anaheim Boulevard, X340, Anaheim, CA 92805 Approved Approved Granted for 1 year LOCATION: 1440 S. Anaheim Boulevard. Property is approximately I • 14.94 acres located north and east of the northeast comer of Cerritos Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard. _;;"-: To permit outdoor installation of auto alarms and stereos and a batting cage in conjunction wfth an existing commercial retatl center (indoor swap ,4~r` ,,. ,ry<< meet) with waNer of permitted outdoor rues. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC92-113 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFlCIAL MINUTES. ~PPOSRj~N: None Tom IQeviet, 100 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805, representative for Lederer-Anaheim Ltd. He gave a presentation regarding the outdoor batting cage and outdoor installation of automobile alarm and stereo systems. He submrited some photographs for the Commission's review. They have cooperated with the City since they have taken over the facility in late April and they will do whatever is necessary in order to make sure this is nat a nuisance. He referenced the street widening that is required by the redassHication of the property. He explained h has not . yet been complied with. He pointed out that there is a bond in place which the Cfry is taking action on to caAecf. They are a third party beneficiary of the bond which was put up by the previous operators so funds will be avaAable to construct the street wkdening. They are asking for the opportunity to conduct outdoor uses that would greatly benefit the business attraction that the Anaheim Marketplace can have which w81 benefit not only the businesses that are located there, but it w>8 also benefit the City of Anaheim by attracting more business. Les E Lederer, owner, 1140 S. Anaheim Blvd. He statod he has overcome many problems. They are asking '. permission to have outdoor stereo installation which would have been permitted under the CL zoning. He recognizes that they are the only commercial property within an otherwise industrial zone. 09/21/92 Page 6 1 A ^r ~ ~5 ~Iried that-the stereo installation is in the tn~ck loading areas of the building; R is fenced and screened off ilk; view grid is setback 600 feet and the property is very unique. ad~the`.batting cages are setback even further on the skJe of the building. He referenced a picture and Bil K Is to the extreme left and ail the way to the back. He explained it will be completely out of view from ~e. He stated they propose that there will be 5 pitching machines. will be an enhancement to the property and there is no negative impacts on traffic or their ~`. CF 4'4r y ' i`~ Mr.:Kieviet stated they would agree to all of the conditkxrs that have been proposed by staff. He referenced ;'. Cor'~t>iltion No. 1 and suggested a one year annual review to revoke the permit as opposed to requesting an `~ '' ~ extension as this would be a burden on the business owner. They agree with all of the other conditions. "' THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Bristd asked about the alarm systems relative to the noise Issue. ';.F V Bnxe Freeman, Code Enforcement Division, City of Anaheim. He explained typically the units are namially tested and they are somewhat distracting. He could not think of one location where outdoor installation has been pernftted. `Discussion took place regarding the batting cage between the Commission and the petitioner. Commissioner Bristd asked if they were going to have 2 entrances and Mr. Lederer explained that ft was their n to have people go in through the front door of the building and out through one of the pedestrian exits ~e snack bars. Mr. Lederer explained that they needed the batting cage as a traffic builder and the proceeds for the batting cAge will probably be donated to the Booster Club. Discussion took place regarding she screening. Commissioner Bristd asked if there are slats in the chain Zink fence and Mr. Lederer stated they were going to replace the slats. Commissioner temel asked about the pending applkatbn for an arcade. Mr. Lederer stated when he took over they were tdd that they would have to take out some of the games because they could not have more than 4 or 5 wfthout a special permit. Commissioner Messe stated the setback is very large and noise would not be heard from the street, therefore, f9e would be willing to grant the variance because of the location. Chalrtnan Henninger stated one of the things he dki not see in the conditions of approval was that this is an accessory to the use that was granted in conjunction with CUP 3400. There should be a condition that would say that this use is being gm3nted under CUP 3400 and cam only be operated so long as the use approved in ` CUP 3400 is actNe. .Commissioner f:~s!~a indicated that they should go for one year and they can revoke it anytime. 09/21/92 Page 7 n r ~~~ . ~""""'~ 1. ' ~ ` meted there is a fping fee that is approximately ^800 every time they axne 6n and make the request. ,, ~, Zoning Diyl§lon iiAanager, clarified they could grant this for a period of one year with further thaE way the extenskxra wBl be under a public hearfng and the cost would be approximately $300. n, Deputy City Attorney, stated there is a very dffferent standarei ark a very different finding that >i,rt ri you are going to terminate what is an existing property right then when there is already ~nent for ri to expire, i.e., ri puts the burden upon the other party to establish that this is a use that ~ in here rather than putting the burden upon the City to establish that ri has risen to a level to where xt Is required. n Henninger agreed and stated that they are dealing with an experimental use for this site and they have ides of problems wrih it, but ri seems as though ri is now being corrected; he still feels like there is a risk Ding the wrong way and they might want to keep dose control over ri. He was going to suggest that Wld take a bond to secure the removal of the batting cages should there be a problem, however, he will ~ntmend that, but feels like one year is the right way to go. iunisaloner Brlstd stated he was In favor of the project, however, one thing does concern him and that is the -and egress. He was concerned about the possibility of increased traffic and that there are no directional 011 VI.+A Mr, ICieviet stated sub)ect to approval they would be more than glad to direct them to the back area. Commissioner Brfstd asked if the cars should be coming from the west sloe all the way to the back, or should they be coming the other directian to go to that site and not cross over the batting cage area? ~r. federer went to the exhibit board and explained where the batting cages were and the traffic pattern. ACT10N: Cc~A Negatbe Declaration -Approved Waiver of Code Requirement -Approved ~pr~ifticnal Use Permit No. 3545 -Granted for 1 yoar with possib(Iriy of further extensions of time; add condition that these uses be performed only during the time that CUP 3400 is operational. VQ'~F: 6~0 (One vacant seat) ® 09/21/92 Page 8 ~~ ~.3''ttkastn, -. ty iw~ `~~ a ', '.G~ ' i :. g',' _ nYt '. ,~,~ `y g, I ti y ~ ~a'~~ t r~ ].:. •. ~~;~~4 i~i ~2 nw uer_wTnre nCf~i'e1~AT1AN Withdrawn -"~'+ 9~° ~~ ', OWNER: LEELAND INVESTMENT II, Attn: James Bohan, General ~ Partner, 2001 E. Fourth Street, X208, Santa Ana, CA ~~. ,..,, 9270) <<,. , AGENT: TOM OESCHGER, 27271 Sdverado Canyon Road, Sgverado, CA 92676 LOCATION: 609 East Katella Avenue. Property is approximately 2.97 ~ WT acres Located at the northeast comer of Katella Avenue and gaudina Way To permft on-premise sale and consumption of beer and wine in s, conJunrxion with a permitted bAliard center with waiver of parking lot landscaping. ., - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OF'FlCIAL MINUTES. Withdrawn -Requested by the petitioner ~~ ~ ,~ ,,._ 09/21/92 Page 9 ~~, ,.. t . ~ - ~ ~ - d ~ y. y~ ; ~Et~A!CATE GORIf.'AL EXEMPTION-CIJISS 11 No Action ~`' `- CONDITIONA L USE PERMIT N0.3545 Granted OWNER: ISMAEL SILVA, JR. ET. AL, 16101 Santa Barbara Lane, Huntngton Beach, CA 92649 ~~.,..: ~~` ' AGENT: JAIME AVILES, 7662 Edinger Ave., Huntington Beach, CA rr ~.s ~ 92647; SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ORTHOPEDIC/Sports '~ Medicine Ctr., 1717 E. Uncon Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805 ~wz LOCATION: 1717 East Uncoln Avenue. Property fs approximately 0.56 ,~` acre located at the northeast comer of LIncdn Avenue and ,~ Evelyn Drive. ~~ To permit a mobtle MRI unit in conjunction with an established ~~~>?' orthopedic/sports medicine center. ' '~~'~ ~'' CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. - ~ FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY 7F THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. I~i)T TO BE CONSIDERED OFFK:tAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: Ona Aviles, 1717 E. Uncoln, Anaheim, CA. He made a presentation with regards to br(nging a MRI unit to a medical facility. He referenced the She Plan on the exhibit board and explained that they are requesting that this uNt he brought in every other Wednesday for a period of approximately a hours. h vras noted that there are no attending physicians on Wednesdays and this helps to alleviate the patient load. The proposed use will not affect the adjoining land uses. They agreed to all of the conditions in the staff report. OPPOSITION: Sylvia Pizzana Qast name not spelled for the record). She stated she lives directly across from the Orthopedic c She explained that there were flood lights installed on the building that glare right Into her house. She stated that she has called many times and nothing has been done about it. ~~ Mr. M+1es explained that was not a part of the MRI unit; that they have been robbed approximately 9 times and the ighting was installed for security purposes. He added he would be willing to correct the problem. ' : Mr. Bonego, Senior Planner, explained ff they add a condition to redirect the lighting, there is no building permft, tt>ereiore, there should be a time Ifmit to complete these conditions such as 60 days. ' ~ 09/21/92 Page +0 ~ ~..., ~.s~rryi ~.~~ ~' y~:yk# _y ~ .. _ •,. Z~ i `Henninger stated the parkng on this proposal arorks because the doctors are not using the faclifty on ~.'~. Ines~ays..Therefore,,on,Ca~dition No. 3, they should have this activity ae long as the doctors do not ~F`5 ~:. A use to change their schedule. Messe.suggested that the hours of operation should be restricted to every other Wednesday ~<,~ ,,. n attending physictene do not have office hours from 8:l)t)a.m. to 6:OOp.m. ~~ t ~~ lrrnan Wenniriger agreed. Meese asked for dariflcation ff the attending physicians do not have office hours on those r.. Aviles explained that they have 5 other facilities and the physicians are at the other facilities on Wednesdays. Meese asked ff the parking is much more adequate on those Wednesdays and Mr. Aviles stated CE4A i~teoorical Exemption - Bass 11 - iJo Action Conditional Use Permit No. 3543 -Granted Redirect security lighting to point down to the parking area within 60 days; tum off advertisfnq sign between 1f1:tlUp.m. and sunrise. Add to condition no. 3 that hours of operation shall be restricted to every other Wednesday when attending physicians do not have office houn~ from 8:OOa.m. to 6:t>Op.m. ,y_Q~: s-0 (One vacant see:) e I ® 09/21/92 Page 11 ;~, , OWNER: RUTH ANN ~~1AMMOND DICI~lf,1941 Bayshore Drive, Anaheim. CA '~1 ~.`- LOCATION: 1785 West Gten Avenue. Property is approximately 0.18 k'-' acre located on lire north skle of Glen Avenue and s: approximately 790 feet west of the centerline of Eudid Street. Waivers of minimum number of parking spaces ar!d minimum landscape requirements to permit the addition of ;bedroom to each of four 2- bedroom units. "~ ° VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. PC92-115 ~;~~~:; :,y~r ,, _ "'Z ~r `~ FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED ~' - OFFICIAL MINUTES. -OPPOSfTION: None Ruth Hammond Dickey, 194! Bayshore Drive, Anaheim, CA. She stated she has been a resident of Anaheim for 2S years. She stated she was shocked when she read the staff report because the intent of her project was ~pletely omitted. She explained she was here under the provision of the density bonus and other concessions. She gave some background on her project Mr. Borrego, Senior Planner, explained that all of the information she submitted was passed onto the Planning Commission induding all correspondence and the background. Ron Joseph (Housing Department) dkl not Identify himself. He stated they dki send a letter with their recommendations. He added this has been approved by HUD. -THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. Joseph stated they found out there was Mme overcrowding and discovered that by adding this bedroom the overcrowding problem would be taken care of. They checked with HUD and they were in agreement Commissioner Messe asked how large the bedrooms were? Mr. Joseph responded 15'X20'. Ms. Dickey explained some of that is attic space and the bedrooms would be about 3 feet shorter than that. Commissioner Messe stated it amazes him that they are thinking of addLig bedrooms to decrease overcrowding; `;' that may be good for a short term plan for tenants in the building, however, long term in the neighborhood, the neighborhood will suffer. He stated that the nefghbofiood seems to be overcrowded and under parked. i• 09/21/92 Page 12 jv i1~ Y ~1A%.~:~... ;.~~ F_ Y_ i s 7 '~,r Y i ~~ T t@ ~f:_ 4 ~ t ~ ~~' k" ~~~ ?` ,explafnedthey qre trying to rehabilitate the neighborhood and Mrs- Hammond is the only one that ~forwarcl,' They ho fie that this wpl set a precedent. f) ey stated there is a severe lack of 3-bedroom apartments and when You have children of the opposfte '~''~' 'a em as Housing wortld concur ets to be -:1G P~ ,.,9 :- Ms: Dk~ey gave further explanation as to why they shotdd be able to add on another bedroom. ~' ` ' ~Gmmis'sloner Zemel stated we are talking about increasing the number of sleeping quarters which will decrease r--_ : 1;t}re.an-ercraM-ding. He asked how they could help the community when we have a problem with over: rowding n f ` tfie'e~ite area; M they help this family then it would lead to hurting everyone else. ~t ~ aired there are periodic inspections so that they do not add cousins and extra families; Housing Ms.. Dickey expl `," Is very atrlct on that and the Density Bonus Qnilnance is even more strict Cornmiesioner Zemel stated adding a bedroom is not going to take the family out of the garage. f` ~ ,... Ms: Dkkey stated she does not have that many drivers in her units; she has mostly children and dd people and `;,,` ;iw0 people who norrnaily go out to eam a living; she has 6 vehicles in the proposed four-plex and she has pr~~18 parking spaces. Cliairrnan Henninger asked if the Housing agreement would result in a reduction of the housing cost in the area? fdr. Joseph explained Ms. Dickey is willing to sign over one of the apartments for 30 years at the affordable rate. Chairman Henninger asked ff that would change the rent on the apartmenYT ~r. Joseph explained no, but it would if it were a 5-bedroom. Right now it is a 2-bedroom. Ms. Dickey explained that the Housing Department is En strict contrd of this and they subsidize the tenants according to their ability to pay. The one unft that would be dedicated for 30 years is further restricted and the rerrt on a 3-bedroom would be equivalent to a 2-bedroom, so the family in that unit would be especially fortunate because they wottld have reM contrd. She was willing to agree to that in order to get this project approved. Chairman Henninger asked ff these units were enrolled in Section 8 and Ms. Dickey stated they were. Laura Monical, Community Development, stated it was her understanding that under the Density Bonus law, the City ordinance does she the State law which does require a project, in order for h to fall under the Density Bonus State law, a minimum of 5-units. She explained their dNislon has not been IrnoNed in his project. Because of that, she did think that the project would have difficulty qualifying under the Density Bonus law. She stated ff the project owner is proposing to corrrrrR one of the units to a 30 year term affordability as an offset for the waivers in the parking, then that is some~ttting different. Chairman Henninger stated they have a whole line of bul>dings that are all of a similar design on square lots and he did not see how they could make the findings on the waiver. 09/21/92 Page 13 -r2 r , k t 3r~~-` t ~'~ ~ `Planning Department, stated they should also consider the cumulatNe impacts. of paring and .x ~1fenY ~t'~seltlti~'if this was approved in terms of other people coming in and asking for the same thing and end contributing to parking' problems In that area ~~ had an existl ri roblem? a~~ Henninger asked if the neighborhood ng pa ng P ~^~ " ;reeman, Code Enforcement, stated they have ar*_ extreme parking problem in the area already; it is not mon to site 10 to 15 cars a day in the alley; the curbs are literally car to car, on street sweeping days ,:. ~ ; e.up on the yards, other streets and shopping centers directly Est of the property. He could not say t t rry people park in their garages because their garages are usually being used for some sat of storage. Issioner Zemei stated he could not make the ftndings to approve a CEQA Negative Declaration. CEQA NeoatNe Declaration -Denied ~ ~ - ~~~ Unable to make CECA ftndings on page 3 of staff report; and based upon the parking :~..-: , - problems and the axumulated impacts ~~~, ~.: ,3~rs Variance No. 4197 -Denied Unable to ftnd any unique aspects to the property; and health, and concern regarding health, ~ ~;.. safety and welfare due to parking. ,yQj~: 6-0 (One vacant seat) os/2i /s2 Page 14 r ~ r y } IMF ~ Y k ~'~ ,a.v r r y 5 ~~ } ;'-~ :r ~~ N~,;,. ,,t r :OWNER: ANAHEIM MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION, 1111 W. Le Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92803005 ~' ..LOCATION: A n R .Property is approximately 6.02 acres located on the north side of Santa Ana Canyon Road, approximately 930 feet west of the centerline of Welr Canyon Road. WaNer of permitted wall signs to permit a 67.5 square foot wall sign. VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. PC92-116 i CIO ACtlOn Crdnted in part ~~ ;~~FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED ~ ° ~ OFFICIAL MINUTES. `OPPOSITION: None fury Baxter, Director of the Memorial Medical Plaza, 760 Lang Tree Lane, Anaheim, CA 92807. Their building ~Igrtage on Santa Ana Canyon Road is the only sign that directly addresses residential areas wfthln Anaheim. Their proposed sign wAl face the fteeway and wail not directly address Anaheim Hilis residents. It will face the - SAVI Ranch Commercial Park in the City of Yorba Linda. ~mian Henninger stated that the staff recommends that they trice off the existing wall sign that faces the off-ramp at Weir Canyon. Mr. Baxter explained that their preference would be to leave that existing sign; it is located down the slope on the freeway off-ramp and K does provide some direction to the facility. He stated ff they had to make a choice, their preference would be the signage on the building instead of the monument sign. ` THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Peraze stated his preference would be just the one sign. ~TIQN: CEQA Categorical Exemption Class 11 - No Action Variance No. 4196 -Granted in part Delete sign on freeway and approve one an the bulding VOTE: 6-0 (One vacant seat) os/21/92 Page 15 ~S ~ ~ - v"'io5. a~, i ; "v. (I" 1~,NG RECOMMENDATIONS ^ ~~ 3~ - ~~, , ' , SX Y ' ,;;Cm 1 - ;"Y!:{/V'°VVnunwnru. a~ac rcnmi~ nv..xav - ncv~+ca~ rvn s~=-'=TERMINATION:. Raymond Tedford request for Termination. Property is located .~.-,:,: ,~:; ; `'af 2804 -2816 W. Uncdn Avenue. F, TERMINATION RESOLUTION NO. PC92-117 ~ , ' B: RECLASSIFICATION N0.91-92-20. SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL h, 92.02. VARIANCE N0.4181 AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14841: Morgan Development Inc. request for Planning Commission recommendation to City Council regarding revised plans for a proposed 32-lot, RS-7200, single-fam0y residential subdivision pnduding the construction of 30 rwsidancx3s). r; ._:- >•~x; $g~~: Pettioner requests Planning Commission review and approval of revised plans for a 32-lot RS-7200(SC) and RS-A-43,000(SC) residential subdivision. The petitioner has requested Planning Commission review of revised plans prior to subject petitions being considered by the City CouncU as an appeal to the Planning Commission's previous denial of subject petition. ,~lZN: Commissioner Messe offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristd and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the revised plans to the City Council subject to the following recommended conditions and based on the fdiowing: O (a) That revised plans have addressed the density and land use compatibility Issues discussed during previous public hearings. Petitioner is now requesting a redassiBcallon to the RS-7200(SCj Zone. (b) Revised plans indicate a reduction of the proposed density from 3.86 to 3.4 dwelling u: pits to the acre. Plans indicate the reduction is possible due to the elimination of 4 residential lots from the July 27, 1992 proposal. (c) Petitioner has submitted plans which indicate an average lot size of 9,671 square feet which is in excess of the RS-7200(SC) Code requirement. The increased lot size provides a suftabie transition between the existing RS-7200(SC) tract to the east and the existing RS-HS-10,000(SC) tracts to the west and south. (d) Staff recommends that the City Council add a condftfon to the tract map requiring that the private street plans and plans for both contrdied access gates be submitted to the Subdivision Section. Both access gates shall provide for automatic exiting. The gate designs shalt be approved by the Traffic Engineering Division and the Subdivision Section prior to final tract map approval. GRANTED RECOI~ND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL WITH ADDED CONDITIONS 09/21/92 Page 16 ~, z ~ ;;,rK ,...; t'C ~ ~() Staff also'recommerrds the addition of a cotrdltion requiring that a ~~:,~ • 10-ioot.wkfe hlkMg and equa~trien traA easemern be provided near the west and south property Imes. The tray shall conform to City Standard 603 and shall be shown on the tract grading plan. The traA design and easement alignment shall be approved by the Parks Dhrision' prior to final tract map approval or grading plan approval, whichever occurs first. CONDITIONAL Uee °carurT NO 3282 - REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND eaapAV4L OF PHASING PLAN: Bob Michelson requests review and approval Of ~ `, s phasing plan to permft a c,~rnmercial retail center and scar-wash facility. Property is located at ~3 the northwest comer of Monte Vista Road and Weir Canyon Road. ~~~ ~ _ `. } r''~ D. ~~~ ~,.. ,. E y~w~^~ "^- '~°^-- REOUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW OF ^~•n°~^ ^~ ~„~ :r, ^eTe°uINE SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH PREVIOUSLY APPROVED EXHIBITS: Chris Hostert requests determination of substantial rxxriormance pertaining to Variance No. 4180. Property is located at 610 South Sunkist Avenue. rONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 3489 -REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMM1~~'^a$EVIEW OF REVISED LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE: Jarret-Suhamoko requests review of revised landscape plans for detem-ination of substantial conformance pertaining to Conditional Use Permit No. 3489. Property Is located at 1556 West Katella Avenue. F, ^~"'JiT1ONAL USE PERMIT NO 3454 -REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Michael Selby requests cone-year extension of time to comply with conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 3454 (to permit self-storage facility) to expire on September 23, 1992. Property is located at 155 South Adams Street. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: None OTHER DISCUSSION: Commisskxrer Zemel offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Messe (one vacant seat) and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has changed their morning sessions from 10:OOa.m. to 11:OOa.m. effective October 5, 1992 for an indefinite period of time. ADJOURNMENT: The ~~eeting adjourned at 4:OOp.m. ri 09/21/92 Page 17 -.r `.; CONTINUED TO 10/5/92 APPROVED CONTINUED TO 10/5/92 APPROVED TO EXPIRE 9/23/93 _, ..