Loading...
Minutes-ZA 1987/06/04Y _. ~~ ACTION AGENDA r REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR THURSDAY, JUNE 4, 1987, 9:30 A.M. PRESENT: Procedure to Expedite Meeting: The proponents for conditional use permit and variance applications which are .. not contested will have 5 minutes to present their evidence. In contested applications, the proponents and opponent will each have 10 minutes to present their case unless additional time is requested and the: complexity of the matter warrants. After the opponent(s) speak, the proponent will have 5 minutes for rebuttal. Before speaking, please give your name and address and spell your last name. ' Staff Reports are part of the evidence received by the Zoning Administrator at each hearing. Copies are available to the public prior to and at-the meeting. The zoning Administrator may withhold questions until the public hearing is closed. The Zoning Administrator reserves the right to deviate from the foregoing if, ~ in the Administrator's opinion, the ends of fairness to all concerned will be served. All documents presented to the Zoning Administrator for review in connection with any hearing, including photographs or other acceptable visual representations of non-documentary evidence, shall be retained by the City of Anaheim for the public record and shall be available for public inspection. The action taken by the Zoning Administrator on this date regarding conditional use permits and variances is final unless, within 15 days, an appeal is filed. Such appeal shall be made in written form to the City Clerk, accompanied by an appeal fee equal to one-half the amount of the original filing fee. The City Clerk, upon filing of such an appeal, will set said conditional use permit or variance for public hearing before the City Council at the earliest possible date. You will be notified by the City Clerk of said hearing. After the scheduled public hearings, members of the public will be allowed to speak on items of interest under "Items of Public Interest". Such items must be within the jurisdiction of the Zoning Administrator. Each speaker will be allotted a maximum of 3 minutes to speak. Before speaking, please give your name and address and spell your last name. Page 1 ;2168H~, ~: ~~ June 4,-1987 PUBLIC HEARINGS: la. EIR.CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 5 lb. VARIANCE N0. 3659 (READY.) OWNER: KEITH JOHN HULTQUIST AND MARLENE MARIE HULTQUIST, 1225 Andrea ' Lane, Anaheim, CA 92807 AGENT: BLUE RIBBON BUILDERS, INC., 1135 W. Katella, Orange, CA 92667, ATTN: LYNN NEALE LOCATION: 1225 Andrea Lane Waiver of (a) maximum lot coverage and (b) maximum number of bedrooms to construct a 2-story addition to a single-family residence. Continued from the Zoning Administrator meeting of May 21, 1987, in order to be.readvertised with the correct hearing time. 2a. EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 5 2b. VARIANCE N0. 3662 OWNERS: CLIFTON J. TATRO AND ROBERTA S. TATRO, 7192 Sunbreeze, Huntington Beach, CA 92647 AGENT: JIM YORK, 1245 W. 6th Street, Corona, CA 91720. LOCATION: 6912 Avenida De Santiago Waiver of maximum building height to construct a two-story, 30-foot high single-family residence. DECISION OF THE ZONING ADP9INISTRATOR N0. ~ ZA 87-OS. ~~ 3a. EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 5 3b. VARIANCE N0. 3663 OWNERS: WILLIAM H. TABB AND CAROLYN S. TABB, 6312 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road, No. 292, Anaheim, CA 92807 AGENT: JIM YORK, 1245 W. Sixth Street, Suite 10A,.Corona, CA 91720 LOCATION: 6930 Avenida De Santiago Waiver of maximum building height,to construct a two-story, 30-foot high single-family residence. - DECISION OF THE ZONING ADA4INISTRATOR N0. ZA 87-06 4. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:' None Meeting adjourned: 10:40 ~F'~DAVIT OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: ~~i .~CI ~~. ~ , ~ / ~ LOCATIONS: .COUNCIL CHAMBER' FOYER WINDOWS (TIME) (D TE) AND COUNCIL LOBBY DISPLAY CASE SIGNED' ~-KJ ~ : ~~~~'i~",a. :ontinued ~0 6/18/87 applicant ~o submit nodified Mans . approved Approved. ~/~i%87 REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR June 4, 1987 The regular meeting of the Anaheim City Zoning Administrator was called to order by Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, at 9:30 a.m., June 4, 1987, in the Council Chamber. PRESENT: Annika M. Santalahti, Zoning Administrator Linda Rios, Assistant Planner Edith Harris, Secretary Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, explained the procedures for the meeting and further that anyone desiring to speak would have an opportunity at the end of the meeting. ITEM N0. 1. EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 5 AND VARIANCE NO. 3659 (READY.) PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: KEITH JOHN HULTQUIST AND MARLENE MARIE HULTQUIST, 1225 Andrea Lane, Anaheim, CA 92807. AGENT: BLUE RIBBON BUILDERS, INC., 1135 W. Katella, Orange, CA 92667, ATTN: LYNN NEALE. Property is a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 4,908 square feet, having a frontage of approximately 50 feet on the west side of Andrea Lane, approximately 350 feet north of the centerline of La Palma Avenue, and further described as 1225 Andrea Lane. Request for waivers of maximum lot coverage and maximum number of bedrooms to construct a second-story addition to a single-family residence. Continued from the meeting of May 21, 1987, in order to be readvertised with the correct hearing time, and for the applicant to be present to answer questions. Keith Hultquist, owner, explained he had discussed this project with the neighbors abutting the property and presented a plan showing signatures of three neighbors. Annika Santalahti stated she had looked at the property and was basically concerned because the house is presently one story and the high roof could be a concern to one neighbor, and also noted there are a number of two-story residences in the area already. She stated the drawings presented will become a part of the official file showing that the owner did contact the neighbors. She stated the addition is over the existing dwelling and the patio area, so no additional square footage is being proposed. Perry Hanstad, Agent, Blue Ribbon Builders, stated they will be doing the construction and that he felt this plan is within the intent of the variance application. Joe Bueno, 1217 N. Andrea Lane, stated he is the neighbor immediately to the south and adjacent to this property and that he only became aware of this proposal when Mr. Hultquist approached him with the plans; and that he thought the addition would be straight up, but it isn't. He stated this is the Scenic Corridor and they are supposed to have a view and he is only concerned with -1- • • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, June 4, 1987 Page 2 one portion of the addition. He added the two-story residences in the area are at the end of the street and that this two-story addition will obstruct his view, and the extension past the patio is within 5-1/2 feet of the property line and the two-story addition will invade his privacy and will overlook his pool area, and the noise would be a problem. Ms. Santalahti asked if the windows are the primary concern. Mr. Bueno stated the windows are a concern but mainly his entire view will be gone. He stated the neighbor had indicated there are other things that could be done, but that he wanted to go ahead and see what happens with this request. Ms. Santalahti stated the property to the south is larger than subject property and asked if there is a 25-foot rear yard setback to subject property. Mr. Bueno stated the houses did not align with each other. Ms. Santalahti asked if the addition as shown over the patio area would overlook the neighbor's back yard and Mr. Bueno responded that it would. Mr. Hultquist stated the neighbor had added a two-story addition in the last three years, and that there is a balcony overlooking his back yard and neighbors on the other side have a straight wall and he can see nothing but a wall. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Ms. Santalahti stated the RS-5000 zone allows a shallower side yard setback and a 5-foot side yard setback is typical in Anaheim, but the 10-foot rear yard setback is not normal in other zones and that is shallow. She stated the current zoning standards for maximum lot coverage and maximum number of bedrooms in the RS-5000 zone had been in existence for at least five years prior to the Code change pertaining to number of bedrooms relating to the size of the lot; and that lot coverage request is minimal at 39$ rather than 35$, and is not a concern, but the usable room at the rear is a concern. Ms. Santalahti asked if any modifications can be made to the south facing wall to try and pull away from the property line and explained she is talking about the design so that there is less stucco visible. She stated she did not think there is much architectural interest on the plans. Mr. Hanstad stated they would have to rearrange the whole addition to accomplish that because of the location of the stairs. He stated there is a vaulted ceiling and if the room addition is moved forward, they would lose that vaulted ceiling. He stated the neighbor built a room addition three years ago and for three years has looked down into the Hultquist's yard. He added he is under the impression that the neighbor wants to sell his house and doesn't want construction going on while he is trying to sell his house. He stated he feels the design presented is really the only way to do it in order to have bedrooms over bedrooms and family room .over family room. Ms. Santalahti stated, originally, a lot of effort houses look interesting, with high roof lines, etc. roof would be no higher than any other house in the probably be lower than the neighbor's. was made to make these Mr. Hanstad stated the tract, and would actually -2- • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, June 4, 1987 Page 3 Ms. Santalahti stated she was not really concerned about the height, but it appears the rear yard is 25 feet wide and although Code allows that encroachment, a variance is required, and the coverage doesn't concern her and a one-story addition could be done without the concern. She asked again if there could be any modifications made to the south facing wall, specifically the part over the current patio. Mr. Hanstad stated the window could be eliminated. Annika Santalahti suggested some wood treatment on the design. Mr. Bueno responded to Ms. Santalahti that eliminating the window would help, but his primary objection is to losing the view and having a closed-in feeling, and whether or not he is going to move is not an issue. He stated his foundation was not extended when he did his addition. He stated he thought property values would also be decreased. Mr. Hanstad stated it is difficult to design an addition on an RS-5000 lot and most of the houses were developed originally to meet only the minimums, leaving no flexibility for future improvements. Ms. Santalahti stated the addition over the patio is a concern and that does, impact the lot coverage; however, a waiver would still be necessary if she approved this in a modified format, but she would have difficulty approving it as submitted. She asked if the applicant would like an opportunity to revise the plans, possibly eliminating the portion over the patio or modifying it. She stated if she acts on this request now, her determination would be to deny the first waiver and approve the second waiver, in part. Mr. Hanstad stated that would be denying this owner a privilege the neighbor has. Ms. Santalahti stated a waiver is needed for this room addition. Mr. Hanstad stated other waivers have been granted for two stories in the area. Ms. Santalahti stated Variance No. 3640 referenced in the staff report, is east of this property and was basically a one-story addition and was on a large lot, and the impact on the neighbor was much less with a 19-foot rear yard compared to 10 feet in this request. She stated if this is approved, there is concern that others in the area with similar lots would want the same thing. She stated several two-story residences were built when this tract was originally developed and there were no variances approved in this immediate vicinity. Mr. Hanstad stated this is basically the same thing the neighbor has, and he could not understand why the neighbor is complaining because his balcony overlooks the applicant's backyard. -3- • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, June 4, 1987 Page 4 Ms. Santalahti stated she would approved this, in part, and the applicant can appeal that decision to the City Council; that waiver (a) would be denied and waiver (b) approved, in part, to allow 4 bedrooms. She explained the addition over the existing patio would not be permitted because it would have a major visual impact on the one neighbor. She stated she would be willing to consider a modification to reduce "that visual impact. She explained she could continue consideration for two weeks in order for the applicant to submit revised plans, if desired. Mr. Hanstad responded he would like a two-week continuance.. Variance No. 3659 was continued to the meeting of June 18, 1987. Ms. Santalahti explained the matter would not be readvertised. She suggested the plans be reviewed with the neighbor. ITEM N0. 2 EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 5 AND VARIANCE N0. 3662 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: CLIFTON J. TATRO AND ROBERTA S. TATRO, 7192 Sunbreeze, Huntington Beach, CA 92647. AGENT: JIM YORK, 1245 W. 6th Street, Corona, CA 91720. Property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.13 acres, having a frontage of approximately 231 feet on the southeast side of Avenida De Santiago, further described as 6912 Avenida De Santiago. Request for waiver of maximum building height to construct a two-story, 30-foot high single-family residence. There was one person indicating her presence in opposition. David York, Designer, explained this lot sits about 3 feet below adjacent property, and they would like to raise the elevation by about 5 feet. so the property does not appear to be sunken into the area. Annika Santalahti stated this is the first house to be built on the south side of Avenida De Santiago. Robbie Tatro, owner, stated all the lots .are elevated and this house will back up to a slope. Ida DeForrest, 6901 Avenida De Santiago, stated once a variance is granted, it sets a precedent; that she has been there about 4 1/2 years and when they built, they were told that the whole south side would never be developed, then about one year later there was a proposal and a big controversy and the development was held up for about a year. She stated every lot is filled and all lots were created by bringing in fill. She stated that property was originally the side of a mountain and there are quite a few pads along the curve; however, the area where this house is proposed is fairly level. She explained her concern is that if this is permitted with a 3'0-foot height, it could block the views of the four houses on the other side which are all one story. She stated this structure will not affect her property because her property is higher; but it will affect other lots of that street and she is objecting on the basis that it is setting a precedent. -4 - MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, June 4, 1987 Page 5 Mr. York pointed out the ridgeline of the structure and the area which is 30 feet high. He presented a model of the proposed structure for review. Ms. Santalahti asked that a photograph of the model beypresented for the record. Mr. York pointed out the orientation of the structure for the views involved. Ms. Santalahti stated she did review the property and asked. if there are any existing 30-foot high structures in the area and Ms. Tatro responded there are. Ms. Santalahti stated the underlying zoning permits 30-foot structures, but the Scenic Corridor Overlay establishes the height restriction at 25 feet and a number of waivers have been processed and, typically, have been approved by the Planning Commission, even though not in this immediate area, but more toward Hidden Canyon Road; and that the Commission has not been particularly concerned because the 30-foot portion of the building has not been over the entire structure. She stated architectural freedom has been expressed in the design of this structure and she would approve it on the basis of the underlying hilly terrain, and that the adjacent property to the west is higher and,the property on the other side is lower. She added this is a large structure, but the entire roof line does not encroach. She added precedent is a concern, but each project would be reviewed as it is presented and if someone presented a similar project requesting a similar variance, she would not be concerned. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Ms. Santalahti stated she would approve this request and that the decision will have a 15-day appeal period from the date of the written decision and anyone wishing to appeal the decision should contact the City Clerk's Office. OTHER DISCUSSION: Ms. Santalahti stated to Ms. DeForrest that if this house was on up the hill, there would be different concerns. She stated she would agree the view to the south is beautiful and that she did not realize the lots had been filled. Ms. DeForrest referred to the area up Hidden Canyon where houses are being constructed on the mountain and asked how they could have gotten variances to put them so close to the edge. Ms. Santalahti stated she did not think there have been any zoning actions in those areas, but she did notice the houses were close. Ms. DeForrest stated she did not think there is enough room for a person to walk around the houses safely or to even put up a fence. Ms. Santalahti stated she did not think the Commission had approved anything in that area, but she would review it to determine if the Codes are being met. -5- • • .. MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, June 4, 1987 Page 6 ITEM N0. 3 EIR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 5 AND VARIANCE 3663 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: WILLIAM H. TABB AND CAROLYN S. TABB, 6312 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road, No. 292, Anaheim, CA 92807. AGENT: JIM YORK, 1245 W. Sixth Street, Suite 10A, Corona, CA 91720. Property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.15 acres, having a frontage of approximately 121 feet on the southeast side of Avenida De Santiago, being located approximately 378 feet southwest of the centerline of Via E1 Estribo and further described as 6930 Avenida De Santiago. David York, designer, presented a model of the proposed structure and stated they need a variance for the 5 feet for the roof height. He added it is compatible with the other homes in the area. Responding to Ms. Santalahti as to the percentage estimated of the flat pad area and its drop off to the southeast, Mr. York stated he wasn't sure, but they have about 94 feet from the front setback to the end of the pad. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Annika Santalahti stated, this particular lot is relatively flat compared to the neighbors. She stated the front setback from the street is about 37 feet which is a fairly deep front yard. Mr. York stated it is reduced by the turnaround area. Ms. Santalahti stated she would approve this request on the basis of the hilly terrain and since adjacent properties are lower than subject property, and that the house is set back 37 feet, which is greater than 'required by the Code; and the impact would be minimal. She stated the decision will be mailed and there will be a 15-day appeal period. PUBLIC INPUT There was no one indicating a desire to speak. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Ms. Santalahti adjourned the meeting at 10:40 a.m. Minutes prepared by: .. ~~~~~ Ed th L. Harris, Secretary Minutes approved by: Annika M. Santalahti Zoning Administrator -6-