Loading...
Minutes-ZA 1990/03/08.._ • ACTION AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR THURSDAY, MARCH 8, 1990, 9:30 A.M. 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 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 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 of the Zoning Administrator's written decision being placed in the U.S. Mail, an appeal is filed. Such appeal shall be made at any time following the public hearing and prior to the conclusion of the appeal period. An 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 1628H • • la. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION lb. VARIANCE N0. 4032 OWNER: AMANO ELECTRICS OF AMERICA, INC., 1485 N. Manassero St., Anaheim, CA 92807 AGENT: H. MATSUNAGA, C/0 NIKKEN AMERICA, 333 S. Hope St., Suite 2650, Los Angeles, CA 90071 LOCATION: 1485 North Manassero Street Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to construct an 18,000 square-foot addition to an existing industrial building. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION N0. ZA 90-14 2a. CATEGORICAL EXEMPT-CLASS 5 2b. VARIANCE N0. 4033 OWNER: DAVID LLOYD, 547 N. Janss Way, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 547 North Janss Wav waivers of accessory living quarters and minimum side yard to retain a guest living quarters. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION N0. 3a. CATEGORICAL EXEMPT-CLASS 5 3b. VARIANCE N0. 4034 OWNER: NABIL ARIF, 801 S. Priscilla St., Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 801 South Priscilla Street Waivers of maximum lot coverage and open space requirements for additional bedrooms over 3 in a single residence to construct a second story addition to an existing single-family residence. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION N0. ZA 90-15 Approved Withdrawn Approved Page 2 • • 4. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: A. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT N0. 0045 AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPT-CLASS 5: Waivers of minimum front yard setback, minimum side yard setback and maximum lot coverage to construct and reconstruct additions to an existing single-family residence including a new garage at 2854 W. Monroe. (End of public notice period: March 8, 1990) 5.. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: "~ "I ~+ i/~Q/4C`I ~ ~~DLOCATIONS: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE (TIME) (DATE) AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSR SIGNED: If you challenge any one of these City of Anaheim decisions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in a written correspondence delivered to the Zoning Administrator or City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Will be Approved if no opposition received by 5:00 p.m. today Page 3 • REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES - MARCH 8, 1990 The regular meeting of the Anaheim City Zoning Administrator was called to order by Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, at 9:35 a.m., March 8, 1990, in the Council Chamber. PRESENT• Annika M. Santalahti, Zoning Administrator Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney Della Herrick, Assistant Planner Margarita Perez, Acting Secretary Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, explained the procedures for the meeting and that anyone desiring to speak about matters other than the agendized items would have the opportunity to be heard at the end of the meeting. ITEM N0. 1 - CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND VARIANCE N0. 4032 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: AMANO ELECTRICS OF AMERICA, INC., 1485 N. Manassero St., Anaheim, CA 92807. Subject property is an .irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 3 acres located at the southwest corner of Manassero Street and Hunter Avenue having a frontage of approximately 360 feet on the west side of Manassero Street and a frontage of 330 feet on the south side of Hunter Avenue and further described as 1485 North Manassero. Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to construct an 18,000-square foot addition to an existing industrial building. No one indicated their presence in opposition and no correspondence was received. Ms. Santalahti stated she was out looking at the property on March 7, 1990, at around 3:00 p.m. and she wanted to verify if the parking circumstances were typical of a normal working day. She stated there were quite a few empty spaces so she wanted to make sure it was not their day off. Hayahiko Takase, 333 S. Hope St., Los Angeles, architect for this project, stated that was a normal working day. • • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, MARCH 8, 1990 PAGE 2 PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Ms. Santalahti said the applicant submitted a traffic study and the City Traffic Engineer reviewed it and found that it was a satisfactory report. Ms. Santalahti concurred with the environmental impact analysis and approved the Negative Declaration prepared for the proposal, and approved Variance No. 4032 on the basis that the traffic report was satisfactory for the specific mix of land uses on the property which is offices, as well as warehousing activities. This decision shall become final unless an appeal to the City Council, in writing, accompanied by an appeal fee, is filed with the City Clerk within 15 days of the date of the signing of this decision or unless members of the City Council shall request to review this decision within said 15 days. ITEM N0. 2 - CATEGORICAL EXEMPT-CLASS 5 AND VARIANCE N0. 4033 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: DAVID LLOYD, 547 N. Janss Way, Anaheim, CA 92805. PROPERTY LOCATION: Subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately .25 acre, having a frontage of approximately 50 feet on the west side of Janss Way, having a maximum depth of approximately 130 feet and being located approximately 436 feet north of the centerline of Sycamore Street, and further described as 547 North Janss Way. Waivers of accessory living quarters and minimum side yard to retain guest living quarters. There were 6 people indicating their presence in opposition. David Lloyd, owner, stated the biggest opposition on this project is the future use of this property. He stated they classified it as "in-law quarters" and they do not have any problem keeping it as such. He stated the opposition's main concern is that it would be used as a rental unit when the house was sold. Ms. Santalahti asked him to explain how this addition came to be. Mr. Lloyd stated he bought the house in 1985 with the auxiliary living quarters in the back and he has been using it for his father. Ms. Santalahti asked Mr. Lloyd if he knew when these structural changes were added. Mr. Lloyd stated it is probably 3 or 4 years old. He stated he was not opposed to any stipulations to keep it as in-law quarters. Mike Bonk, 549 N. Janss, stated he was directly north of the subject property. He stated there has been a recent intent to sell the property and his concern is that the new owner who moves in has the option to rent that unit. He stated they are within a cul-de-sac and that it would really create • • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, MARCH 8, 1990 PAGE 3 a parking problem if that property was ever rented. He stated his concerns were primarily for the parking, the activity in the cul-de-sac and also the second usage. He stated he feels confident with the present owner because they have no problems with them using it to take care of their father. Betty Alexander, 503 N. Janss Way, stated she has lived in this neighborhood close to 30 years. She stated they really take pride in the fact that it is a single-family residence area. She stated they were not notified when this was built. She stated she can not even put a neighborhood watch sign in the parkway of her street because the city does not allow them, and she obeys that. She stated she does not want her neighborhood to have a rental unit because it devalues their property. She stated this house has been on the market to be sold and that it is her opinion that the only reason this came up is because the future owner wants to use it as rental property. She stated they have young couples moving in, paying high money for their property and they should be entitled to the right that this neighborhood will not become a rental area. Charles Howe, 609 N. Janss Way, stated he has no objections to this being classified as a granny unit. He stated he understands that being classified as an accessory living quarters makes it into an apartment and that is the thing he does not like, especially if it gets sold. Laura Lloyd, property owner, read a letter from her neighbor who is in favor of the project. The letter read "As a neighbor who owns property and lives in 603 N. Janss Way, I find no reason to complaint or disagree that the guest house at 547 N. Janss Way is any problem. Both owners of the property have provided for parents there and taken care to bother no one. Please consider this as my vote to allow them to continue with the permit or unpermitted area and conditions as they exist now. Respectfully, Mrs. Marie B. Taylor." Mrs. Lloyd stated they have no intent to renting that unit. She stated her father-in-law is very sick and he stays in there. George Tokar, 532 N. Janss Way, stated he has no complaint about the present occupants or the way the property is used. He stated his concern is that in the event the property changes hands, the new owner would be able to live in the guest house and rent the larger quarters. He asked if there was some safeguard against the rental of granny property. Ms. Santalahti stated in previous Planning Commission approvals, they have required the petitioner to record a covenant that states that the granny unit be utilized only by people who are senior citizens, and that the unit is not to ever be used for rental purposes. She stated, with a covenant, the future purchaser is forewarned in their title search that in buying the property, they are not obtaining a rental. She stated if it comes to the City's attention that they are renting the unit, then the City will enforce the conditions. She stated they have not had that situation happen yet, but have only had granny units for approximately the last 5 years. • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, MARCH 8, 1990 PAGE 4 Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, stated the covenant is recorded against the property requiring occupancy to be limited to persons 62 years of age or older. She stated that is done by a conditional use permit procedure so that if the terms were violated, the conditional use permit could be terminated. Ms. Santalahti stated the City has processed granny units as conditional use permits, so although the procedure is identical to a variance, legally a CUP is the proper way to handle it. Mr. Tokar asked when this is approved, would a covenant become a part of the deed on the property that would be found in a title search. Ms. Santalahti answered "yes", if a conditional use permit were approved, but staff did not advertise this project as a conditional use permit. She stated it needs to be readvertised as a conditional use permit specifically and in the wording of the public notice to say a "granny unit". Mr. Tokar stated his second concern was the .limits of a future expansion. Ms. Santalahti stated if this project were approved, it would be approved specifically as the plans show right now, which is a 350-square foot unit, with a living room, kitchen, bath and bedroom, and it would be specifically for that layout. She stated if someone came for a building permit to add on to it, they would not get the permit on the basis of the use permit plans. She stated people do things without building permits, but under code, they could not just expand it without a new public hearing. She stated the State codes on Planning and Zoning have established the concept of a granny unit. She stated they said a granny unit shall be permitted with no waivers, such as a granny unit in a legal location which is setback properly from the property lines. Then, technically, the City would have to grant it when they meet the State standards. She stated two of them are at least 640 square feet of living space and that there be at least one parking space available on the property. She stated if this project were approved, it would be approved specifically for the drawing hanging on the west wall of the Council Chambers and the owners could make no serious modifications. Ms. Santalahti asked how many parking spaces there are on this property and Mr. Lloyd answered it has a two car garage and about 5 or 6 cars can be parked on the driveway. She asked Mr. Lloyd if anyone has ever inspected his property to determine whether it can get building permits. He responded that should not be a problem and that someone did inspect. • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, MARCH 8, 1990 PAGE 5 PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Ms. Santalahti stated she would accept withdrawal this item. She instructed Mr. Lloyd to write a letter requesting withdrawal of this application in order to process an application for a conditional use permit. Selma Mann clarified this does need to go before the Planning Commission. She stated the fact that an application is filed and that all the documents are submitted is no guarantee of what decision the Planning Commission is going to be making. She stated this still is an application and is still a discretionary permit and it will be up to the Planning Commission to determine whether it wishes to grant the permit for the granny unit or not. She stated the reason a variance may not be appropriate in this instance is that the variance permitting the accessary use would have been linked to the property rather than to any use, so that upon the sale of the property, whoever acquired it would acquire it free of any restrictions at all. Ms. Santalahti accepted withdrawl of this application on the basis that there will be a new application filed for a conditional use permit specifically for a granny unit which will have to go to the Planning Commission, and also because the applicant presented a letter of withdrawal. This decision shall become final unless an appeal to the City Council, in writing, accompanied by an appeal fee, is filed with the City Clerk within 15 days of the date of the signing of this decision or unless members of the City Council shall request to review this decision within said 15 days. ITEM N0. 3 - CATEGORICAL EXEMPT-CLASS 5 AND VARIANCE N0. .4034 PUBLIC HEARING. OWNER: NABIL ARIF, 801 S. Priscilla St., Anaheim, CA 92806. PROPERTY LOCATION: Subject property is a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately .13 acre, having a frontage of approximately 50 feet on the west side of Priscilla Street, having a maximum depth of 111 feet and being located approximately 400 feet south of the centerline of South Street, and further described as 801 South Priscilla Street. Waivers of maximum lot coverage and open space requirements for additional bedrooms over 3 in a single residence to construct a second story addition to an existing single-family residence. No one indicated their presence in opposition and no correspondence was received. Nabil Arif, owner, stated he has the need for the extra living space and to enjoy the same privileges of his neighbors. He stated there are 7 houses in the same tract which already have four bedrooms. • • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, MARCH 8. 1990 PAGE 6 PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Ms. Santalahti stated she looked at the property yesterday afternoon and noted the number of two-story houses on similar rectangular lots. Ms. Santalahti stated she will approve Variance No. 4034 on the basis that there are other properties in the neighborhood which are identically sized and shaped which do have four bedrooms in two stories and further that this property was developed in 1971 prior to the 1972 modification to the RS-5000 Zone requiring that for anything beyond three bedrooms, there be a greater land area available. She stated that modification was made several years after the RS-5000 Zone was originally adopted, so the neighboring properties were legally developed under code with 4-bedrooms, and for those reasons, she will approve Variance No. 4034. This decision shall become final unless an appeal to the City Council, in writing, accompanied by an appeal fee, is filed with the City Clerk within 15 a s of the date of the signing of this decision or unless members of the City Council shall request to review this decision within said 15 days. ITEM N0. 4 INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: A. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT N0. 0045 AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPT-CLASS 5: Waivers of minimum front yard setback, minimum sideyard setback and maximum lot coverage to construct and reconstruct additions to an existing single- family residence including a new garage at 2854 W. Monroe. Ms. Santalahti said they had received no written correspondence on Administrative Adjustment No. 0045 and noted the appeal period would end March 8, 1990, at 5:00 p.m. She said she would act on this item after March 8, 1990. ITEM N0. 5 ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: None There was no one indicating a desire to speak. • • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, MARCH 8, 1990 PAGE 7 ADJOURNMENT• There being no further business, Ms. Santalahti adjourned the meeting at 10:20 a.m. ' Minutes prepared by: a Margari Perez Acting Secretary Minutes approved by: Annika M. Santalahti Zoning Administrator 0449g