Loading...
Minutes-PC 1992/12/02mr ., " 4~' ' ~.t C15., `i i4~ ACTION AGENDA ~~ ~. ~i ~~ REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION .~ ~ ~ z:~, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1992, AT 10:00 A.M. ~.9' ;,,tea'?,~. .`, PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW PUBLIC HEARING ~;~•;;= (PUBLIC TESTIMONY) ~:,,~~"' z~, ~~~ 10:00 AM. 1 :30 P.M. ._ COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BRISTOL, HENNINGER, MESSE, PERAZA, TAIT, ZEMEL COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: NONE (ONE VACANT SEAT) STAFF PRESENT: BORREGO, B. FREEMAN, HASTINGS, JENSEN, LOCKMAN, MANN, MC CAFFERTY, SO'~.ORIO, YALDA, AND REPRESENTATIVE FROM POLICE DEPARTMENT PROCEDURE TO EXPEDITE PANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. The proponerts in applications which are not contested will have five minutes to presort their evidence. Additional time will be granted upon request ff, in the opinion of the Commission, such sddftional time will produce evdence important to the Commission's conskieration. 2. In untested applications, the proponents and opponent will each be given ten minutes to presort their case unless additional time is requested and the umplexity of the matter warrants. The Commission's unskioratlons are not determined by the length of time a participart speaks, but rather by what Is saki. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 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. The Commission will withhold questions until the public hearing is dosed. The Commission reserves the right to deviate ftom the foregoing ff, in its opinion, the ends of falmess to all uncemed will be served. All documents presented to the Planni~;g Commission for review In connection with any hearing, induding photographs or other acceptable visual representations or non~locumentary evidence, shall be retained by the Commission for the public record and shall be available for puWk: inspections. At the end of the scheduled hearings, members of the publk: will be allowed to speak on ftems of irterest which are within the Jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, and/or agenda items. Each speaker will be allottes.+ 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 submit them to staff prior to the meeting. AC120292.V,'P -. ~~: -- ,~ .~~ ~+ ,.~~ ~ ~~~ ~.z: n ~~) - ~ .~ - - .. ' ,;lei. CE~iA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLia-SS 11 No Action ' `1ti: :VARIANCE N0.418s Granted OWNER: REDONDO INVESTMENT COMPANY, Attn: C. Robert Langslet, General Partner, P.O. BOX 14478, Long Beach, CA 90803 AGENT: H.S.W. ASSOCIATES, Attn: Hany S. Weinroth, P.O. Box 1566, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92693 ~~ -:5h . LOCATION: 6330.8398 E. SANTA ANA CANYON R AD. Property (s approximately 6.6 acres located at the southwest comer of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Fairmont Boulevard. Waiver of permitted type of shopping center kfentiflcations sign, maximum sign area and permitted location of freestanding signs to consWct two 20 square- foot, freestanding shopping center kientiflcation sign. Continued from the August 10, October 5, and November 2, 1992 Planning Commission meetings. VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. PC92-139 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. There was no one indicating their presence in opposftion to subject request and although the staff report was not read, K Is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Hany S. Walnroth, Consultant for Redondo Investment Company and owners of the shopping center, Box 1566, San Juan Capistrano, CA. He stated they have been working on this matter for S or 7 months in order to work on the preparation of the plans for the sign. He voiced his concerns regarding page 5 of the staff report regarding recommended revisions to tho proposed sign. He explained you only measure the sign face area, not the entire wall. Their sign area is small at this point; he has no problem reducing the sign helgM another foot. They have no problem with the monument sign. He stated the colors that they picked for the sign were chosen so it could be seen in the day time hours. He stated staff Is proposing a halo sign, but halo signs are extremely expensive aril probably double the price. He is very concerned about the Increase in c;~st. He stated they would Ilke to stay with the red background with the yellow letters, however, ff the Commission wants to make the sign more subdued, they are more than willing to do that. They would like to stay with internal Biumfnation rather than go wfth a halo sign because of the expense involved ($10,000 to $15,000 per sign). Discussion took place regarding the halo sign. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ~~, ::;~`ti~~~`.. Page 2 12/2/92 n~ t ~~ S ~f! - H ~~'. Borrego, Senkx Planner, stated the-type oF~stgn that is being proposed for the shof~ng r~ntsi ~r~-ttd'z+rc ..u~ is.ttot ~con~stent with anything they,currently have Out there. A8 a Compromise to the halo typa sign whk;h . r,~""mertitioned, in the ataif report,' he suggested the)' COUId use Indirect lighting whk;h 18~the type Of IlghNng flied melles up tfte rrialority of shopping center kfer>tiflc;ation signs. Hs added that would signiflc:aritly reduce ~ ~ .,.,, r ,.~ kFthe Cost.,of the sign. `Y~ Commissioner Zemd stated ff they are going to allow a second sign, k is reasonable to reduce the sign by • '~ ,afoot. He asked the applk;arrt ff he would be wAling to do the secondary IlgMing? r y~q~ . &~'~ Mr. Weinroth indk~ted they would have no problem with the indirecx lighting and stated they would be 4~~ ; wRling to change the odors along with some direction regarding odors. ~~~ ~` ~ ~ ~ ACTION: CEQA Categorical Exemption - Bass 11 (No Action) - Variance No. 4188 -Granted t'p~X (Sign to be reduced in helgM from 4 feet to 5 feet; that the odors conform to staffs - }" ~ recommendation for earth tones); that they have an option of using either back Itt or Indirect ~, lighting; and modiflc;.^tion of sign base in order to meet the definition of a monument sign (maintaining a slid base). ~~, 4~ , ~ ' . ' ~ yQ~: 6-0 (One vacant seat) r ,~ ;~ . Page 3 12/2/92 :~~ ,a , r ~~ r~ ~" 1 ~rr~~; ~, ` CECIA NEGATIVE DECLARATIC 21i. 'VARIANCE N0.4202 (READVERTISED) ~:',`" OWNER: RICHARD HELD, 264 North Saltair Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90049 ~,; ` LOCATION: 540-546 South Rose Street Property is approximately .56 acre • located on the east skJe of Rose Street and approximately 160 feet ~'~;;, north of the centerline of Water Street ,~. ~k: Waiver of minimum landscape requirements, minimum number of required parking spacxts and refuse storage requlremer~ts to pem~ft the cornersion of a 4•unit, 14,000 square foot industrial buAding to a 4-unit Industrial condominium complex. Denied Dented t ~ Continued from the November 2, 1992 Planning Commission meeting. ~,~ ,~, ~, VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. PC92-140 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. 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. Richard Held, owner of property, Rose Associates. He submitted a picture of the property. He explained Rose Street is an dd industrial area. The property In question is near th~a end of the cul-de-sac which • houses a recycling yard. The property is approximately 30 years dd and K would be Impossible to upgrade the parMng to meet today's standards. They are one space short--37_ exist and 33 are required. The landscape and refuge requirements would further take away required parking spaces. He addressed the issues as to why staff recommended disapproval of his variance. He explained trash enclosures were not feasible on this particular place of property. He took exception to the staff report comment that he has had repeated nuisance violations pertaining to trash and debris. He explained the trash and debris is created by the recycling yard next door. He stated the man is a good tenant and if approached he will dean up the area. He stated they have meant all of Code Enforcement's conditions. He stated they want 4 separate owners in the form of condominium ownership as opposed to one owner and 4 tenants. He felt over the long run that ownership by small businesses will be an asset to a depressed area as opposed to renters. They are not changing the configuration of the property, there are only changing the method of ownership from one owner to 4 rnrners by way of condominium conversion. They will not be creating 4 IndMdual lots of demensions of 35' X 177'; they will be creating a single lot of 4 condominium ownerships measuring 140' X 177'. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chaim~an Henninger asked to see the pictures. ~~yy5.. } 1.6.'~~l KY'u't:.. Page 4 12/2/92 . ~ _:. .. l f . r, • `. Y ) t f 7 4Y~y ,r ~~ ~ ,~ - y ortetltan' Borrego, Senior. Planner, stated each of the operators do have their own trash enclosures, ti~16 er;~that poses a problem with the parking layout that he has. The reason they are urrabla to bugd a rash enclosure is because there Ia ra room for ik Even wlthout the trash enclosures, the area is so tight h6it`ttte trash bin itself further impedes parking and circulation in the rear of the building. ~iedmian Henninger asked what other parMng waivers have been granted on this street? 5'r Mr , 6orrego stated there have been several parking waivers granted on this street and the biggest reason ~~~ ' ° for that is because there are several auto related uses on the street and each of those auto related uses .~u e< - :. ,,.,r . -combined have created a real parking problem on the street. ~ ~: ~~ -, Chairman Henninger indicated there was a CUP on this property for an auto related use. ~;=A., Mr. Borrego stated there is, although he dkl not believe that the business is existing arty longer on the property and they would request that the CUP be terminated. ' Discussion took place regarding parkng requirements for the building. ':%_~} i. Further discussion took place regarding the trash bins. ..Chairman Henninger stated th(s was too much building and too little parking. Bruce Freeman, Code Enforcement. He stated currently the property Is owned by one person; ff this protect is approved, they will have 4 individuals to deal with rather than one. It is a problem and lt is not manageable at this time. For the past 5 years there have been constant problems with parking, trash, and outdoor storage on this block and on this property. Commissioner Brfstd inquired about the recycling center next door. Mr. Freeman explained there is a trash problem because of the recycling center to the south, however, this is not the entire problem. It is the industry that Is there and Just an influx of problems such as a circulation problem through the alleys, and in the front as well as the use itself. Commissioners Zemel and Bristd troth concurred that the trash was not just from the recycling center. ACTION: CE!]A Negative Declaration -Denied Variance No. 4202 -Denied (Parking problems/storage problems/trash problems) VOTE: 6-0 (One vacant seat) '• Page 5 12/2/92 r 1 M f#~ -~+.~w~u..,. . a ~~.~. ~'. ~~it 'i3C CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3565 r OWNER: FRANK and SARA MINISSALE, 111 South Mohler Drive, Anaheim, CA 92808 LOCATION: 111 South Mohler Drive. Property fs approximately 1.2 acres located at the southwest comer of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Mohler Drive. To permit apre-schod facility for up to 204 children with waiver of minimum dimensions of parking spaces, minimum landscape requirements, minimum parking lot landscaping and minimum landscape setback. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. _ PC92-141 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. There were 4 people indicating their presence in opposRion to subJect request; 10 letters were received in opposition, and although the staff report was not read, it Is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Frank Minissale, 111 South Mohler Drive, Anaheim, CA 92808. He is applying for a condluonal use permit for a pre-school. He stated they daim traffic Is the issue, however, he dkf not see how that could be the issue. He gave some history on some other uses that have been applied for. He explained when the first ~ raster plan came out, his comer was designated for a neighborhood shcpping center and that was one of the reasons he bought the property. He referenced some petitions that should be on file with the Planning Department and signed by 8596 of the people stating they would not oppose him. He explained the topography and location of the property has created an extreme hardship on him. He explained he has tried to sell the property by utilizing 3 maJor real estate firms and has tried on his own, but has been unsuccessful. He stated they want him to build homes, but homes are not selling. He stated in the resdution, it states that all property west of him was resklential, but all property north of him is reskfential, and a!I property west of him is commercial. He elaborated. He darifled he has 1.5 acres and not 1.2 acres. He referenced the findings regarding strict enforcement of the Zoning Code. He stated there are special circumstances and hardships or ha would have solo the property many years ago. He asked if any of the Planning Commission members have any kleas of what he could do with the property-he is willing to listen. Page fi 12/2/92 ~i a L 'n. Ci+w, ~i~ ~ W~ ~I.~ ,r ff yy ~,~SUeatt Sigmund (fast name not spelled for the record), memfoer df the Board of Directors of the Anaheim Hills ,.C~1zen'sCoalftkxr, 6312 E Santa Ana Canyon Road, Anaheim H01s, CA. She urged the Commission to deny the ~ ` .CUP None of the. concerns regarding this condftional use pemtft have changed. The conditional use would ~: ~,~;'~ Iri~feasA~traffiC at this already congested Intersection. tt wouk3 endanger those aoc~ssing D Rancho school by +l rL Jehlde,~and ~Orl foot. 68Cau38 Of the nature Of the proposed use, these traffic and safety Impacts cannot be ;~ ,mitigated. She asked that the request be denied. She stated others were in attendance that had addftional letters „~, of opposition whkh were presented for the public record. ~,~ ~'' ~~' ' Phyllis Duncan, 7625 Pleasant Place, Anaheim, CA She stated she objects to this CUP. She explained ft is not a personal matter; but is a matter of danger that exists now. She had several letters and presented them for the public record. It is noted by the Secretary that the letters are on file for the public record. Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, stated the applicant sho?~Id have an opportunity to view the !otters. Staff was ~~ asked to have copies made and provide those copies to the applicant. Pam Fraizer, 485 Country Hill Road, Anaheim, CA. She ds here for the third time representing Santa Ana Canyon Property Owner's Association. The Facecutive Board urges the Planning Commission to deny this protect for all of the past reasons. She reviewed some of the ~prol~lems. She darifified this is not a personal Issue. She was opposed to the waivers and asked the Planning Commission to deny the project an the basis of integrity of land '` ' use for the homeowners in the vicinity and for the safety of their children. Phil Du John Roche past name not spelled far the record), 450 Via Vista, Anaheim, CA. He is also a member of the Santa Ana Canyon Property Owner's Association. When choir area was annexed into Anaheim in 1971, they were assured by the Government that this would remain a low density reskfentlal area. The property in question needs to be developed in the character of the neighborhood as ft is developed today which is primarily residential. He explained ft is residential on 3 sides and a school on the fourth side. He expressed his concerns regarding traffic and daAy trips generated by that traffic. :. ; ~ REBUTTAL: Mr. Minlssale stated west of him Is no resdential property. He deleted 36 of the children on this proposal and, therefore, takes exception to the 500 trips generated daily by traffic. He stated the exaggerations continue and that is not true. One woman indicated ft would be an eye soar, but the staff report states that they find no significant ernironmental impact. He stated he would have 4096 more playground area then any other pre-school; he will have more parking and the one 15-foot setback for landscape area he is asking a waiver for (s up against a 20-foot embankment a..d will have no affect on the aesthetics of the area. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Jonathan Borrego, Senior Plannor, darrfied that the number of waivers the applicant is requesting was deleted down to one waiver. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated they took a look at their General Pian map going back to 1965 and the property since that time has been designated residential. Prior to that ft would have been under the County's General Plan. In addftfon, all of the surrounding properties are zoned residential. Land use wise, the school is the -;;, only exception until you get to Fairmont where they do have the cluster of Commercial which was planned back in 1965. Page 7 12/2/92 a~ ., v ~''`~ ,~w.R~~:,;., . !~ a ~2 ,~1 ~, ~' k i;,~r~missloner Zemel asked ff the Traffic Engineering Department has had time to update their infomratkxr in that •areasince the first request? -~ K~ Yakfa, TrafNc Engineering, explained due to the hdidays they had their 24 hour count yesterday and today. '~ ~` have, not tabulated all of the information. He can tell them that the traffic has Increased since last year due ~~~` ~ fact that a lot of parents are dropping off their children Instead of busing them to the school. The numbers ~ ~3 tie does f>a`ie Ls as fdlaws: Near the schad between 7:OOa.m. and S:OOa.m, there were about 291 cars; at the p.m. peak between 2:OOp.m. and 3:OOp.m., there were 146 cars. Last years data was taken in July and may not be a .. 'good comparison. If the proposed she is in full capacity, R wpl generate approximately i50 plus Mps in the moming. Further discussion took place regarding the number of trips. }4 ~. 4 (ire McCafferty, Associate Plannrx, stated that a Negative Declaration for apre-ached on this ske was previously ,~'' denied based on traffic and safety concerns. This She Plan is essentially the same Site Plan that was before the ~.;;,;, , Commission to conjunction wfth CUP 3403. In order for the Planning Commission to approve the CEQA on this, " y K would have to find that the Sfte Plan was modified sufficiently to alleviate those Impacts. ~Sti' _ s` ~ ~ Commissioner Zemel tcld Mr. Minissalle that he would be happy to sft down wfth him and talk about the ~ ~ development on this property, but it would be irresponsible for them to approve development that is not adequate. ~ ~jQ~: CEQA Neaative Dedaratbn -Denied (That the proposed use will adversely affect adjoining land uses, and that the traffic generated by the ^`~< proposed use will Impose an undue burden on the streets and the graining of the CUP under the conditions Imposed wNl be detrimental to the peace, health, safety aril general welfare of the Citizens of Anaheim) Waiver of Code P.eau[rement -Dented Condttional Use Pennft No. 3565 -Dented ' ;~ (Dented based on the same findings as mentioned above) VOTE: 6-0 (One vacant seat) Page 8 12/2/92 '~ ii r'- ~~a ~~.~ :'~: ~? ' k '~ OWNER: JOHN H.14NNEY JR. and iDA KATHERINE IONNEY, 3579 Vfa Loma ti'.s:'; Vista, Escondido, CA 92029 ~:"~{ ~'~~~} ~ AGENT: CB Commercial, Attn: Jim Shoemaker, 2400 E. Katella Ave., 7th Floor, ~N;'~ Anaheim, CA 92806-5938 t S '~ .t LOCATION: 100 W Winston Road. Property Is approximately 0.49 acre located at ~„ Tea' the southwest comer of Winston Road and Anaheim Boulevard. r, ~R ~~ 1:, ~,, ` To perrnft a transportation (bus) terminal and temporary treiler. ~~ ~"~~ ~ CONDI110NAL llSE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC92-142 n ~ ` Y 1 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFlCIAL ~ MINUYES. ~`~ There was no one Indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not - read, ft is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Larry Reaves, jest name not spelled for the record) Reaves Associates Architects, Los Angeles, CA. He represents Greyhound who is the user on this property. They have been working wfth staff and neighbors and have agreed with ail of the condftions of approval. The Pdice Department was worried about security on the sire. They asked if the facility was open, that they provkle a security guard at the site. They propose that they operate from 6:30a.m. to 8:30p.m.; they do not drop that many people off or pick that many people up after 8:30p.m. They would stop service after 8:30p.m. Anytime that they are open or passengers come to the facility, the facfifty would be open and there would not be a security problem. Commissioner Messe asked for clarification that there would be rw buses after 8:30p.m. and if a bus did stop, would there be somebody there? He explained when the facility !s open, there will sfther be an employee or they will provide some other type of protection. He emphasized they wit! never have someone there when there is not someone available to operate or watch the facility. Commissioner Taft asked what other type of protection? Mr. Reaves stated ft is cheaper for the bus company to be open for a couple of extra hours then ft is to hire an armed service. The majority of the runs are from 6:30a.m. in the moming to 8:15p.m. It dues not hurt them to not stop between the hours of 8:30p.m. to 6:30a.m. THE PUBLIC l-IEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Zemel asked what if the bus is late? You are asking to extend the hours past 6:30p.m. to 8:30p.m., but you are not offering a plan to accommodate a late arrival. Page 9 12/2/92 ~ ~ u ~ s~ •r "}', a:,; teaNe8 elated if the bus does not get there untl later, there WNI always be someorat St file terminal .anytime ne is pk:ked up or ~Iropped elf or a bus stops at the bus terminal. misstoner Zemel stated that woukf be contradictory to their hours ~ operation and Mr. Reaves stated only ff ~~~':' °tfie„bus Is late. {~, , ;, Chaimnan Henninger asked what hours would they want on Saturday and Sunday? ~' " Mr. heaves eurplalned the hours would be the same, i.e., 6:30a.m. to 8:30p.m. s.-- , ~_~,_ ~~ AliredYakfa, Traffic Engineering, stated their parMng study shows that they had passengr3rs at 11:45p.m. who were `' picked up in Anaheim. ~, , Mr. Reaves stated they will discontinue those stops. Commissioner Messo asked ff there would be any amenities in the terminal such as lockers, food machines, etc.? Mr. Reaves stated they are building brand new bathroorns; they will have a new waiting room and vending machines, no game machines and at this point they are not putting lockers in. Commissioner Bristd stated then at 8:30p.m. It is locked up and no one is in there? Mr. Reaves indicated that was corned or until the bus gets there. Commissioner Masse asked ff they would stipulate to no parking o. buses ovemlght-that when the bus comes in it leaves? Mr. Reaves darffied K Is strictly a drop off and pick up and there is no Intent to store a bus there. Chairman Henninger stated then you are going to stipulate to a guard service if you have after hour drop offs? Mr. Reaves stated basically they would prefer to have staff watch. Chairman Henninger darlflfled that you asked for a change in ycur hours of oE~eration although you do not believe you will have any after hours. Mr. Reaves stated if they do, they will never leave a passenger. Mr. Yalda stated since there is a problem wRh the circulation of the bus fuming to Winston Avenue, and the parking is permitted on Winston Road, they would like to add a condftion that the applicant pay for the removal of the parking on the north skle ct 1Mnston Avenue ff the property owner on that skle agrees to ft. If they do not, they would have to go back aril see how they could modify the Site Plan to accommodate for bus fuming movement and that might require major changes in the circulation. Chairman Henninger asked for darifk;ation ff Winston was a public street? Mr. Yalda responded that Is correct. Chairman Henninger asked ff the City has the abiifty to stripe certain curbs red? Page 10 12/2/92 ~~~~ 9~` ,~~ r-~ M~ ~YakJa explained net for the benefit of the property owners; they usually install red curbs when there fs a generL' tblkg rx visibNity problem. In this case they are Just fac~itating his dreulation and they shoukf not necessargy do ,.that fora 8pedlk: Use. ~~ _ k3 The condition 18 58 fdlOwB: ~f-rt ~, 'That the applk~nt shall pay for the removal of parking on the north side of Winston Road. In case that the parking ''i~~ ,< cannot removed, the Site Plan shall be modffled as required by the City TrafNc and Transportaton Manager for bus er"; ~- droulatlon on Winston Road. Fin ~ ~ Chafmtan Henninger asked for clarification: how much of the north skis? Was he talking about the ftrst 100 feet a` ~ from the Intersection? t~~ r} ° ' ~Mr. Yalda stated probably to t'ne first driveway. He explained there is a fire hydrant there and in between the fire ~~~~ hydrant and the d'r:ueway h should not be any problem, btd he walled to make sure they do not do something that % wpl upset other property owners. .~ ~~~,~ Mr. Reaves stated it is 76 feet and of the 76 feet 25 feet fs already red striped; 51 feet is not red striped, so that erf~a ~~~ ; would be parking for 2 cars. ~~ Chaim>an Henninger asked the applicant ff he would agree to the condRion? Mr. Reaves stated yes. He explained they are already widening the driveways by 2 feet and increasing the radita. to 15 feet which Is a commercial radius. They have been trying for 2 to 3 weeks to get onto the property to do '~h Id Ilk t add additional Ian ua a that states'at the approve! of the Traffic Department.` If • i~ drive testa ey wou e o g g for some reason they cannot get the red Ifne, they wouir ~ .ci: ~o go with their dfire tests and ff they can prove they can get on ft by Just doing modfficatlons to the curbs, then they would like to be in that posftion. Chairman Henninger asked for darfficatlon ff he would like the condition to say that "the drive accesses should be to the satisfaction of the Traffic and Transportation Manager.' Mr. Yalda indicated that would be flue. Commissioner Tart asked to hear from the Pdice Department regarding security. Representative from the Pdice Departmert (name not audible to the Secretary). He stated with the dosing from 8:30p.m. to 6:30a.m., the only stipulation {^,e would 11ke to see added would be a way cf dosing the driveways off to Ilmit vehicle access to the property. He expressed his concerns regarding the nature of ii7e property and the locaticn of the property. He was concerned that during the dosed hours that vehicles would be parking on the west skis in the dosed off area to get away from law enforcement view and possibly vandalize and burglarize th.; building. Mr. Reaves explained they have a gate for the back parking lot which }!~ey plan on locking every night so no one can get to the back of the property. When they dose, the last person that leaves doses the gates and locks h. They also leave the lights on in the back. Commissioner Messe asked ff the front parking area will be open? Mr. Reaves indicated that was correct. He added they are increasing the Iighti~g in the front also and will be leaving h on. Page 11 12/2/92 - A ~~. ~fiF 1,~) r~ if _ ~ ~. c .{~ CEDA.Negative DedAratbn - AppraNed ,, Coi~Rlonal Use Pemttt No. 3567 -Granted _ . " y Applk~rt stipulates to no overnight perking; the rear narking lot wAl be gated and locked every ;,,~}~ night; on-site security shall be provided for arty after hour;drop oBs~ and that hours of operation ,~~s7~~', "' be from 6:30a.m. to 8:30p.m daffy including Saturdays and Sundays. `~`~ a, ._ ~' °,~ The following condition was added: ~«r` .. :~ 'That the applicant shall pay for the removal of parking on the north skie of Winston Road. In k 'x case that the parking cannot be removed, the Sfte Pian shall be modified as required by the City ~`~ Traffic and Transportation Manager for bus circulation on Winston Road, and driveway ,- acxess . ,t;: , In addftion, Condftlon Nos. 15 and 16 were modified as fellows and changes are underlined: 15. That prkx to the placement of the on-sfte temporary trailer, gommencement_oftpe activity ,. ,~ prkx to the Issuance of a building permk, whichever occurs first, Condtion Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12 and 13, above mentioned, shall be compiled wfth. 16. That grkx to final buAding and zoning inspections, or commencement of activity. Condfilon Nos. 10, 11 and 14, above-mentioned, shall be compiled with. ~(Q~: 6-0 (One vacant seat) ,'~ ~~ Page 12 12/2/92 f~yC: w: 2 ` s. L' V OWNER: WYLJE and ELIZABETH AITKEN, 180 Cobbestone Lane, Anaheim, CA 92807 LGCATION: 180 Cobblestone Lane. Property is approximately 1.0 acre located on the east side of Cobblestone Lane and approximately 240 feet north of the centerline of Peraita Hills DrNe. To permlt a satellte dish antenna and to construct a 171-square foot addtion to a detached accessory structure wlth waiver of min(mum side yard setback. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC92-143 ~` ' FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO B'c CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. There was no one indicating their presence in opposition to sub)ect request; one Interested person was present, and although the staff report was not read, lt is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Betty Altkin, 180 Cobblestone Lane, Anaheim, CA. She stated she is applying for a penult to relocate a satellte dish and also to get a variance setback to add onto a detached structure at the e back of their property. She explained she has one neighbor that this may impact, but she stated lt would be alright to add onto the structure to wlthin 5 feet of her property line. Her neighbor was - concerned initially about the satellite dish, but not ff they relocate lt to the ground. Sha stated lt will be covered by foliage, an 8-foot fence and mature trees. She added there is a tennis court on one side. Jack Ranaldi (last name not spelled for the record), 694 Peralta Hills Dri\re. They are the easterly neighbor to Mrs. Aftkin. He asked ff the proposed location of the satellite dish (s on the ground because lt looks like lt might be attached to the additional building? They are referencing the 7 foot satellite dish which is currently on the roof and he wanted to know ff that was the same dish that will be relocated? He stated the report is not dear and ff that is the case, they have no problem. REBUTTAL: Mrs. Aftkin stated the satelllte dish is 7 feet and that (s the one they are going to relocate. She darffied lt will not be attached to the new addition-lt is going to go Into the ground. They did have a 12-foot dish but this one wnl be smaller. It will be located next to the tennis court and behind an 8-foot fence by the addition. Page 13 12/2/92 ,s s r .w ;;; N~ y, 4 ~ ~R ~~ ~r ,y .. .. .. ~ ..:' ~ ,. RAnaldl indk~ted they were`prevtousiY concerned with the 12-toot satellite dish, twt the smaller be Me WlaYthern. K43' } _ Sortre;.d took place regarding the She Plan. k ,y! THE PUBLJC HEARING WAS CLOSED. .*Coininissloner Taft stated they receNed a letter from Daryl Kraft. _ Mrs. A1tMn stated she was not aware of the letter urKN she called yesterday and asked ff there was ~' atry interest on this applk~tion. She called Mrs. Kraft and left a message on her answer machine ~ with tr~ornration ~ she woukf relocate the satellite dish on the ground. Mrs. Kraft left her a return Zvi `ny,. message Indk~ting she would not mind a satellite dish as long as h is located on the ground. g~j~; CEQA Categorical Exemption - gees 3 (No Action) }spy s' Waiver Of Code Requirement -Approved '~° Conditional Use Permit No. 3560 -Granted yr r~- ',: ,y ~~ ~~ ' yQT~: 6~0 (One vacant seat) ,... Page 14 12/2/92 A , - r x= A fYt` .~,~ v _ `J - .Gt .K S. ~CATEGORICAI..EXEMPTION-CLASS 15 No Actlon 1TIVE PARCEL MAP MO. ti2.237 Approved ~4 s>~ OWNER: JANUARY INVESTORS, 777 Calffomia Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94304 AGENT: PATRICK COSTANZO JR., 777 Calffomia Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94304 LOCATION: 175-225 North Rio Vista Street. Property is approximately 10.06 acres looted north and west of the northwest comer of Uncdn Avenue and Rb V(sta Street. To establish a 2-lot, RM-1200 subdivision. ~ x" FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE ~~ CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. ~~r~ "~.; , ~. There was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subJect reques* c^~ ~."hough the staff ti, =µ, report was not read, K is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Peter Fadovan (last name not spelled for the record), Agent for the owner, January Irnestors, 777 California Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94304. They have read the staff report and agree to the conditions. THL PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Jonathan Bcrrego, Senior Planner, stated for darificatfon on page no. 4 he wanted to add some timing to the one condition that they have stipulated to in the report. 'That prior to the approval of the final parcel map, that condition no. 1 shall be satisfied to the satisfaction of the Flre Department.' ACTION: CEQA Categorically Exempt-Class 15 (No Action) Tentative Parcel Map No. 92-237 -Approved (With added condition as mentioned above) VOTE: 6-0 (One vacant seat) `~ ~; ,r,~ Page 15 12/2/92 t *~~C ,~. y _~ ~. ~" L ~ OWNER: ANAHEIM LAND ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, c/o HILLMAN PROPERTIES WEST, INC., 450 Newport Center Drive, Ste. 304, Newport Beach, CA 92660 >~.: f~. LOCATION: 2430 E. Katella Avenue IStadlum Towers Plaza. Property is ~ approximately 2.4 acres and located en the south side of Katella Avenue and approximately 380 feet south of the centerline of Sinclair Street To establish a 4-lot, commercial subdivision wfth waiver of required lot ftorttage. ~~`~_ VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. PC92-144 FOUAWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. There was no one indicating their presence in oppositon to subject request and although the staff report was not read, h is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Commlasloner Zemel declared a conflict of interest Kerry Lawler (name not spelled for the record), K W. Lawler and Associates, Inc., 2832 Walnut Avenue, Sufte A, Tustin, CA. They have reviewed the conditions of approval and agree with all the recommended conditions. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated this condftion wni read as follows: 'Ttmt an unsubordinated restricted cornenant providing reciprocal access and parking, approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and Zoning Division and in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney, shall be recorded wfth the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the n rovisfons shall be nin Divl Ion. In additio t the Zo s recorded covenant shall then be submitted o g , p made fn the covenant to guarantee that the entire complex with subject subdivision shall be managed and maintained as one (1) integral parcel for purposes of parking, vehicular circulation, stgrrage, maintenance, land usage and architectural contrd, and that the covenant shall be `,' referenced in all deeds transferring all or any part of the interest in the property." ~~.- ~:~a,:,. Page 16 12/2/92 t~"~ T; c ,~ y~: ,.,i ;;';: i. Page 17 12/2/92 S r~ .w~rer^orrd c~it:u E REOUIRE O ' at~gN.CLAS31 AAENT NO Ad9orr Approved D OF C R ------ ---- ----..~......~... Granted r ~„ , ~-',' OWNER: ENDOWMENT REALTY INVESTMENTS, INC. OF COMMERCIAL CENTER r --- - MANAGEMEP.7, ATTN: AIMEE BRAZEAU,1740 E. Garay Ave., Ste. 110, ~: ~``-~ Santa Ana, CA 92705 1.'~. ;. ," 1 AGENT: GABRIEL SOULTANIAN, 5576 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road, Anaheim, CA ~.:; 92807 riy~ ~ ~} , ~ ~,r?','; LOCATION: y576 East Santa Ana Canvon Road Property is approximately 10.63 . ;~~~~~, ;, . acres located at the southwest caner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and ~ ~~~~~!~ ' Imperial Highway. w To permit a semi-endosed restaurant wfth waiver of minimum number of parking '' ~ "` spaces. ,, ,. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC92-145 ~_ ~r= FlpI1QWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING AMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. 'there was no one indicating their Presence in opposftion to subject request and although the staff report was not read, ft is raferred to ar-d made a part of the minutes. lik Soultanlan, 5576 Santa Ana Canyon Road, Anaheim, CA. He has read the staff report and a®rees wfth the conditions of approval. 7HE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ACTION; CEQA Categorical Exemption -Gass 1 (No action) Waiver of Code Requirement -Approved Condftional Use Pemtft No. 3569 -Granted V~~: 5-0 (Commissioner Bristd absent and one vacarn seat) Page 18 12/2/92 d f ~ - - ' s c . .. a „~ e~~ ,~:'~ LARATION Continued to :,C~FOs-NE :RWen-ER GATIVE DEC OF CODE REDUIREMENT January t 1, 1993 y'iiifs. g0"~.,~^^~DI71 t. 0N_~-_L USE PERMR N0.3568 ., ~? ";.OWNER: THRIFTY OIL C0.,10000 Lakewood Bo~evard, Downey, CA 90240. AGENT: BILL BADI GAMMON, 3101 E. La Palma Ave., ~B-1, P.naheim, CA 92806 . LOCATION: 3101 ^st La Palma Avenue. Property is appro~dmately 0.7 acre ::~~' located at the northeast comer of La Palma !venue and Kraemer F~.~ +~`'~ Bo~evard. 's .~ii~i,~'~'`r ~-~ . To retain an sutomobpe repair fac(Iity in conjunction wfth an existing gasoline sales ~ faclfty with waiver of minimum landscaping abutting Interior property line and required improvement of parMng areas. .~ .; ~-`:' CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. A ~, , °~. ;;: FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE ~'%~~ CONSIDERED OFFlCIAL MINUTES. '. There was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read, ft is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Commissioner Taft dedared a conflict of Interest • 811 Gammoh, 3101 E. La Palma Ave., ~B-1. Anaheim, CA 92806. He is the owner of the auto repair shop. He has read the staff report. Allred Yalda, Traffic Engineering, stated they asked that the 2 driveways dosest to the intersection be doseG, He referenced page 6 of the staff report, item no. 5. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. Gammoh stated he is only leasing the auto repair bays and the rest is Thrifty 011 Company. Ctrairman Henninger stated in order to go forward wfth the CUP, he would have to meet the condftlons of approval. Mr. Gammoh stated he would have to talk to the Thrifty ON Company because he would not be able to dose any driveways. q~airman Henninger stated he also needs to look at the tree planting and curb radius. Mr. Yalda explained dedication for the Crfticai Intersection is also part of the condftions. Page 19 12/2/92 • s ~`~~ ~y~y t an, Code Enforcement, stated he is very familiar with this site; there has been a ~blem with the trash as well as other ongoing problems. On a continual bests, the 3ered with signs, banners, inoperable vehldes, trash around the parking lot as well as loner Messe asked about the barrels that look like hazardous waste located inside the ~, Mr. Freeman stated that is a constant problem wRh that site. ~~%^ ` Mr.:Gemmoh stated most of the people come and do their oil change by themselves. They bring ! • gallons of oil at night and dump it next 20 the trash. He stated they cannot hire a guard all night long. He tries to store oil in the tanks and then call a company to have them come and pick i< up. '~~ ,=. ' He discussed the sign and sak( that they received a notice from the City. They took mast of the ~~,~`~ signs out. They have less then 20% from the wal! sign. The oil is another problem. ~~ ` "' Chairman Henninger stated our Code normally does not allow an Independent operator separate ~• ~~ ~ .~ from the gas station and the reason is because of these conflicts. He suggested that he meet with ~j,~~" ' Code Enforcement, understand what their concerns are and before you come back, get with the 'r `- gas operator and get all of these conflicts worked out. Right now there are concerns with how the `~'"`~~ operation is run. Mr. Freeman stated they would be happy to meet wfth Mr. Gammoh at his convenience. Jonathan Borrego, Senior Planner, stressed to the applicant that Thrifty 011 Company is aware of all of the condftions the City will be requiring of them and to make sure the applicant goes over the conditions with the property owner to m ke sure they are willing to complete them and if not, they should show up at the next puaic hearing. ACTT N: Commissioner Zemel offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza (Commissioner Bristol absent and one vacant seat) and MOTION CARRIED that the aforementioned matter be continued to the regularly-scheduled meeting of January 11, 1993 in order for the applicant to meet with the owner. << r +?:•`~. ~'6 r , Sii:., _ i _t~~: `,a v'~ .',.'}i Page 20 12/2/92 {O'rYNER: CALVARY CHAPEL OF PLACENTiA, 3456 E. Orengethorpe Avenue, Anaheim CA 92807 +_~ ~\ + LOCATION: 345fl~ F. Oranaethoroe Avenue (Calvary Chaoell Property is _ approximately 2.91 acres Ixated on the south skle of Orangethorpe Avenue and approximately 900 feet east of the centerline of Miller Street. Request for amendment or deletbn of a condftion of approval pertaining to a time Ifmitatbn of a pmviously-approved church wfthfn commercial complex. 4J CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC92-146 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. There was no one indicating their presence in opposftion to subject request and although the staff report was not read, ft is referred to and made a part of the minutes. ® Adam Lestk: past name not spelled for the record), 1067 Grand Canyon Way, Brea, CA. He is representing Calvary Chapel of Placentia. He has read the staff report and agrees with staffs recommendation. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Zemel stated he was concerned about the request for unlimited time. He asked when their lease expires? Mr. Lestic stated January of 1993. He was not sure when the new lease expires. Commissloner Zemel was concerned that the church may change hands and the new parties may not run the church equally as wall. He would rather have a time period that expires so h is easier for the City t^.~ do what needs to be done if things do not work out. I Chairman Henninger stated he would Ilke to see ft extended for S to 5 years and allow them to come back for further extensions of time. He explained that the CUP goes with the property. The Commission agreed on 5 years. A r~s~~ to ; Page 21 12/2/92 ~'~ ~, ~ ~,' ~kti ~~. ~'c,j _, r..' -.}F 5 9~4 i f j`;~::a. ~. Page 22 12/2/92 ;~i:~a: , ~ A _ ry L:. ' V1DTE ~Aw111 QCMl1\\Cw111AT1AlUC ~,~ ~ x~ ~ A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1564 -REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY `" hd ~ yVCTH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R. Court Hush requests a ens-y~r e~dension of time to 's,!~<'i comply.with conditlorss of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 1564 (to permit a kid's carnival ~`„r..::,-. 3o exptrP April 16, 1993. Property is located at 1041 North Shepard Street. ~ { Petitioner submitted a request for con?inuance to December 14, 1992. ~~ f~' ~ ~ ACTION: Continued to December 14, 1992. ., • ; g, cnNem~Na~ rrSF pFaMTT NO 3471 -REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY ~,:~ -" '"= V'lITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND REOUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SUBMITTED '~=` `~ LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR A PREVIOUSLYAPPROVED 128-UNIT CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION: aar~' `, John Coelho Jr., requests a ens-year extension of time to comply wfth condRfons of approval for ~~~ Conditonal Use Permit No. 3471 (to permit the cornersion of a 128-unit apartment complex to '"?" "` ` a 128-unft air space condominium complex) to expire on December 16, 1993 and approval of ""~~ " submitted landscape plans for a T;reviously approved 128-unft condominlum cornersion. Property ~'ns, is located 425 N. Magnolia. No discussion. Approved Extension of Time (To expire 12-16-93) Apprcwed Landscape Plans . ~~ C. REQUEST FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR SELECTION OF REDEVELOPMEIJT PROJECT AND APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR BROUKHURST COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR. A representative from Community Development was present. Revised language was submitted reganiing incompatible land uses. Item No. 12 on page 3 was changed as follows and read into the record: '12. To eliminate blight through abatement, code compliance or elimination of incompatible land wises, and. through reconstruction of parcels Into more developable sites for more compatible uses.' A I :Granted {With revised language) V TE: 5-0 (Commissioner Bristd absent and one vacant seat) RESOLUTION N0. PC92-147 ~.~ ~. ,,. Page 23 12/2/92 6 W:S' R ..1 ~ w ... ~~'l i 1: -_ . ,. ~~rr mnu nnuu~uttrv • ne~ier ADUn.R nCDADT~AFhIT Ff1R CFI F(`.TI(]N -.AF 5 ~ {.,'COMMERCIAL%INDUSTRIAL AREA. ' fA representative from Community Development was present Revised language was submitted ,.~~ regarding incompatible land uses. Item No. 11 on page 3 was changed as fdlaws and read Into r the record: `11. To eliminate blight through abatement, code compliance or elimination of incompatible land uses, and through reconstruction of parcels Into more developable sites for more ~~mpatible uses.` '~,~~ ~•; ACTION: Granted (With revised language) ~;', y;. ~~^% VOTE: 5-0 (Commiss!oner Br(std absent and one vacant seat) cj~~ RESOLUTION NO. PC92-148 M~ ~.• . *; , ,.. i_ Page 24 12/2/92 N t js ~~.~ •~r. '} .<