Loading...
Minutes-ZA 1990/10/04~ ~ `P • ACTION AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR II THURSDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1990, 9:30 A.M. II Procedure to Expedite Meeting: The proponents for conditional use permit, variance, administrative use permit and administrative adjustment 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. 1048MS Page 1 • • la. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 5 lb. VARIANCE NO. 4064 (Readvertisedl OWNER: BRUCE ASHWELL, 22000 Laurelwood Road, Santa Clara, CA 95050. AGENT: DON WALZ - CALIFORNIA EXCURSION CO., 1240 N. Van Buren, Ste. 103, Anaheim, CA 92807. LOCATION: 1070 North Grove Street. Property is approximately 1.41 acres located at the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Grove Street. Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to establish an approximately 2,925 square foot outdoor storage area. zo Continued from Zoning Administrator meeting of September 11~, 1990. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION NO. ZA90-101 2a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 11 2b. VARIANCE NO. 4087 OWNER: RAUL O. BANGLE, P.O. Box 4468, Anaheim, CA 92803 AGENT: ENVIRONMENT CONTROL SYSTEMS, INC., P.O. Box 5, Glendora, CA 91740. LOCATION: 3883 East Eagle Drive. Property is approximately 0.84 acre located at the northwest corner of Hawk Circle and Eagle Drive. Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to establish an enclosed storage area. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION NO. ZA90-102 3. INFORMATIONAL ITEM: A. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 0055 AND CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 5: Waiver of minimum lot frontage width of flag lots to establish a 18.76 foot wide flag lot within a previously approved residential subdivision (Tract No. 12987). Property is approximately 20.7 feet on the radius of the cul-de-sac of Rosebud Court approximately 235 feet northerly of the centerline of Canyon Vista Drive. Property is located at 312 & 324 Rosebud Court. (End of public notice period: October 4, 1990.) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION NO. ZA90-103 Granted %~., Granted with 3 added cond~itIi/ons /~~"" Will be approved if no opposition is received. %~- 10-4-90 Page 3 • 4. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: None CERTIFICATION OF POSTING ~I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: ~ •~O`M ~-°~$ 9O LOCATIONS: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE (TIME) (DATE) AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK 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. Page 3 v G~ ~l REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES - October 4, 1990 The regular meeting of the Anaheim City Zoning Administrator was called to order by Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, at 9:30 a.m., October 4, 1990, in the Council Chamber. PRESENT• Annika M. Santalahti, Zoning Administrator Leonard Mc Ghee, Senior Planner Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney Bruce Freeman, Code Enforcement Supervisor Maggie Perez, Senior Word Processing Operator Ossie Edmundson, Word Processing Operator 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 NO. 1 - CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 5, VARIANCE NO. 4064 (READVERTISED) PUBLIC HEARING: OWNER: BRUCE ASHWELL, 22000 Laurelwood Road, Santa Clara, CA 95050. AGENT: DON WALZ - CALIFORNIA EXCURSION CO., 1240 N. Van Buren, Ste. 103, Anaheim, CA 92807. PROPERTY LOCATION: 1070 North Grove Street. Property is approximately 1.41 acres located at the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Grove Street. Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to establish an approximately 2,925 square foot outdoor storage area. Continued from the Zoning Administrator meeting of September 13, 1990. Don Walz, agent, stated that their company manufactures aluminum extrusions which are used by various companies. He stated they have been in the building for 15 years and operating it as it is today, unchanged. Over the years they have ended up with quite a few parking spaces in front of the building and 17 to the rear of the building. They use the rear of the building or the open lot as a staging area; that is moving items in and out and as a result they do not need the 17 spaces in back. 1017MN Page 1 ~~ MINUTES ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, OCTOBER 4, 1990 ~ PAGE 2 Ms. Santalahti asked what type the fencing materials will be used. Mr. Walz said it would be chainlink with slats. No one indicated their presence in opposition and no correspondence was received. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Ms. Santalahti approved this proposal on the basis of the traffic analysis that was reviewed and approved by the City Traffic Engineering Office and that the need for the additional parking spaces is generated essentially by an outdoor storage area which is easy to modiy if this building changes users in the future. 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 NO. 2 - CEOA CATEGORICAL EXMEPTION CLASS 11, VARIANCE NO. 4087 PUBLIC HEARING: OWNER: RAUL O. BANGLE, P.O. Box 4468, Anaheim, CA 92803. AGENT: ENVIRONMENT CONTROL SYSTEMS, INC., P.O. Box 5, Glendora, CA 91740. LOCATION: 3883 East Eagle Drive. Property is approximately 0.84 acre located at the northwest corner of Hawk Circle and Eagle Drive. Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to permit an enclosed storage area. Guy Williams, 2025 East Financial Way, Glendora, CA, stated they have reviewed the staff report and they agree to the proposed conditions. Since being retained by Roto Injection Products to process this parking variance, they have been working with Code Enforcement, Planning and Traffic Engineering to mitigate their concerns. Roto Injection sincerely regrets the delay in responding to Code Enforcement actions. Our client understands the ~~ MINUTES ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OCTOBER 4 1990 PAGE 3 importance of adherence to the Anaheim Municipal Code. These violations were caused by a very rapid increase in the demand for residential refuse containers which they manufacture and in orders part of to meet customer orders, part of the parking area, was converted to be used to load and unload trailers and store finished products. Approval of this request to utilize this area for storage and on and off loading will eliminate Code Enforcement action on this item. There is currently more that enough on-site parking to accommodate the 15 employees at the site, some of whom carpool and ride bicycles to work. To further mitigate on-site parking concerns we have worked with the Traffic Engineer to offset the work shifts so that there will not be an overlap for the use of the parking spaces. On the site plan, we have delineated that the first shift is 6:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. during which there are 10 manufacturing personnel and 5 office personnel. You will notice that the next shift starts at 2:30 p.m. so there is a 30 minute prevention of an overlap and they go to 10:00 p.m.. The manufacturing operation is still going on at 9:00 p.m. but the office personnel basically leave at 5:00 p.m. The next shift is 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. and there are 10 manufacturing people on-site. They believe that by utilizing the enclosed area for storage and on and off loading, Roto Injection will be able to conform to the City requirements, and therefore respectfully seek the City's approval of the parking variance. He said prior to the meeting he spoke with Bruce Freeman, Code Enforcement Supervisor, and he knows that he has some additional concerns about the off loading, where it is done and there is also some parking problems that~are occurring in the street. He said he would like to call attention to the fact that there are only a maximum of 15 employees on the site and they are proposing 20 parking spaces. He agreed that there are other problems going on in the area but Roto Injection is not contributing to them. Mr. Williams said prior to the meeting he reviewed some possible added conditions. He proposed that a condition #12 be added that all on and off loading be conducted in the designated loading area. That would mitigate the concerns about loading in the public street. New condition #13 would specify that all employees park on-site. Roto Injection did issue their employees a memorandum regarding parking on-site when his company was retained as their parking consultant in this matter. New condition #14 that the loading and unloading storage area fence height be increased to 12 feet to screen storage and loading. It would completely shield the trailers that are there plus it would screen peripheral storage in the corners. Ms. Santalahti asked what are the dimensions of the outdoor storage area? Mr. Williams said it is about 6300 square feet, about 24' X 60' square feet. Bruce Freeman, Code Enforcement Supervisor, remarked it was a 50 X 70 square foot area. • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, OCTOBER 4, 1990 PAGE 4 Ms. Santalahti indicated that at 50 X 70 she calculated 3,500 square feet. Leonard McGhee went to the map to measure the area. There was discussion going back and forth as to the dimensions of the outdoor storage. Ms. Santalahti asked whether in addition to the area discussion, was space on the north side of the building being used in a similar manner? Mr. Williams, no there shouldn't be. He said that they did know that the trash containers must be brought up to standards. Yesterday he received the specifications from the City Maintenance Department. Ms. Santalahti said that the offical square footage was 4,352. She asked if it is currently their practice to store materials to a height above 6 feet. Mr. Williams said they are not supposed to but they do. He guessed it exceeds the 6 foot height by a foot or two feet. Ms. Santalahti asked what is being loaded? Mr. Williams, responded that it is large plastic containers and some of the original plastic products used in the manufacturing of the product. His client is having problems and that recent legislation has resulted in a lot of cities placing purchase orders with them. They are trying to be good citizens but also stay in business. There are a lot of businesses in the area with the same problem because the buildings weren't developed for manufacturing use and no storage areas at all are provided for either products that is used in the manufacturing process or the finished product. Ms. Santalahti asked Bruce Freeman if he had any additional comments or questions to add. Bruce Freeman emphasized that he is in agreement with the suggested 12 1/2 foot fence height because at any given time they are going to have a certain amount of storage and even on weekends they have found this to be a fact and that the existing 6 foot high chainlink fence that is there now just does not accommodate the storage on even on a small scale. By installing the fence at a greater height it will give them more space to unload trucks and allow their trucks to come in rather. than park in the fire lane which has been the case on numerous occasions. A lot of the complaints on Eagle Drive have been brought to the City's attention because of the fire lanes being blocked and fire trucks or emergency vehicles could not get in. They have quite a few business them out there in the same situation. ~~ • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, OCTOBER 4, 1990 PAGE 5 Ms. Santalahti asked Bruce Freeman about the suggested condition of requiring that employees park on-site; has he had any experience in noting, functionally whether that it seems to work or does seem not to be a checkable issue? Mr. Freeman said he did not see how you can hold them; to such a condition; that it may be a civil matter between businesses and not the City as long as they have on-site designated parking spaces and if employees choose not to park on-site the City really doesn't have a means to enforce such a condition. Ms. Santalahti said such a condition she noticed in the staff report that the outdoor storage area was not calculated into the parking requirement although it was only an additional 2 spaces (1.7, actually). Ms. Santalahti asked Leonard McGhee whether he knew Traffic Engineering in their review of the parking analysis (a letter dated September 4th entitled "confirmation of operating hours and agreement not to off load trucks and designated, etc.") had included the outdoor storage area? Leonard McGhee said if your question is whether or not there was a calculation for parking for the outdoor storage area, he would say no, that the parking calculation he believed was used was for the specific primary use indoors. Ms. Santalahti commented it doesn't impact this one overly but it does add 2 spaces and she thinks it is appropriate to calculate those extra space. She asked Mr. Williams how long has the outdoor storage been there? Mr. Williams said it has probably been 3 or 4 months. Bruce Freemen said it has been going on for approximately 1 year. Ms. Santalahti asked if they intend to increase the number of employees in the near future? Mr. Williams said yes they do and he will be returning for another public hearing probably in November for a facility at 1251 Jefferson Street which they intend to purchase and run simultaneously with this one so there should be some elimination of the high intensity use that. is working out of one facility. Ms. Santalahti wanted to verify that the number of employees on any given shift indicating the highest most active shift was correct. Mr. Williams responded absolutely yes. a • MINUTES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, OCTOBER 4, 1990 PAGE 6 No one indicated their presence in opposition and no correspondence was received. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Ms. Santalahti approved this proposal on basis of the traffic analysis, including the employee count, that was given and including the outdoor storage area in the number of required parking spaces. She also added the conditions that Mr. Williams suggested and Mr. Freeman concurs with. The first additional condition being that all on-site loading and off-loading shall take place in the designated area as shown on the plan, i.e. the that 4300 plus square foot area labeled "outdoor storage". Second that all employees are to be encouraged to park on-site in designated employee parking spaces and, third, that the loading and off-loading area is to enclosed by a minimum 12 foot high chainlink fence interwoven with wooden slats and that the enclosure is to be on all 3 sides except the side that is against the building to fully screen any outdoor storage that might take place inside. She noted, in this instance, staff had recommended a one year time period to comply with the conditions, that seems long and she thinks a 90 day period is more appropriate. Ms. Santahlti asked Mr. Williams for his thoughts on this 90-day period. Mr. Williams asked that it be 6 months. Ms. Santalahti agreed. She commented that if there are any delays they should please contact Code Enforcement and if any difficulties arise with the 6 months period that an extension of time can be requested but it should be for good cause since this activity is presently taking place. 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 davs 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 NO. 3 INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 0055 AND CEOA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 5: Waiver of minimum lot frontage width of flag lots to establish a 18.76 foot wide flag lot within a previously approved residential subdivision (Tract No. 12987). Property is approximately 20.7 feet on the radius of the cul-de-sac of Rosebud Court approximately 235 feet northerly of the centerline of Canyon Vista Drive. Property is located at 312 and 324 Rosebud Court. (End of public notice period: October 4, 1990.) s MINUTES ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OCTOBER 4 1990 PAGE 7 Ms. Santalahti indicated that there has been no letters of opposition thus far. ITEM NO. 4 ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: R.P. Johnson asked when Conditional Use Permit No. 3313, pertaining to a satellite dish a residential zone, would be heard since he thought that this item was continued until today. Ms. Santalahti commented that she thought it was also scheduled for today but indicated that this item would have to be heard on the November 1, 1990 Zoning Administrator meeting. Mr. Johnson asked whether he can submit information pertaining to this item. Ms. Santalahti said she would prefer he wait until the item comes up on November 1, 1990. Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, stated she was concerned that since this item had not been agendized for today; anything that was said could not be taken as public record or part of the hearing on Conditional Use Permit No. 3313. In order to be part of public record for that hearing, Mr. Johnson would need to come back on November. 1, 1990 when the matter is properly reagendized. Mr. Johnson said he has done research of this item asked whether he can meet with the staff to contribute information. Ms. Mann requested that any information submitted to the staff be in writing, so that the applicant can receive a copy of whatever is ultimately going to be considered in making this decision. Ms. Santalahti said that Mr. Johnson could submit the information or an outline in writing then go over the information with staff. There were no other persons present indicating a desire to speak. s • MINUTES ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OCTOBER 4 1990 PAGE 8 ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, Ms. Santalahti adjourned the meeting at 10:00 a.m. Minutes prepared by: © ~J Ossie Edmundson Work Processing Operator Minutes approved by: G~~~~~ L~ Annika M. Santalahti Zoning Administrator