Loading...
Minutes-ZA 1999/04/08ACTION AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CTTY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR THURSDAY, APRIL 8,1999 9:30 A.M. PRESENT: Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney Dave See, Associate Planner Taher Jalai, Principal Traffic Engineer - Patricia Koral, Word Processing Operator. 1a. CEQA EXEMPT {SECTION 150611b1(31} i b. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 157 APPROVED OWNER: J. BRUCE CAMINO 1915 W. Orangewood, #303 Orange, CA 92868 LOCATION: 385 Via Montanera. Property is 22,113 square feet having a frontage of approximately 25 feet on the south side of Via Montanera, and a maximum depth of 240 feet and is located at the terminus of Via Montanera. Waiver of minimum structural height (25 feet permitted; 26 feet proposed) to construct atwo-story single-family residential custom home: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION NO. 99_11 Appeal period ends, April 7, 1999 at 5:00 p.m. REMARKS: Zoning Administrator approved Administrative Adjustment No. 157 No opposition was received. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM:: 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION + 2b. VARIANCE N0.4351 Cont'd to 4/22199 OWNER: THE SCHWAB FOUNDATION/ARDATH SCHWAB 5000 E. Bonanza Road Las Vegas, NV 89110 04/08/99 Page -1- AGENT: JEFFJONSSON 6 Morgan, #100 Irvine, CA 92610 LOCATION: 3361 - 3369 East Miraloma Avenue. Property is 0.83 acre having a frontage of approximately 165 feet on the north side of Miraloma Avenue, and a maximum depth of 221 feet and is located 160 feet west of the centerline of Miller Street. Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces (48 required; 31 provided) to retain 8,742 square feet of office space within an exiting 20,395 industrial complex. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION NO. ------------ REMARKS: Applicant's agent present: Mr. Jeff Jonsson Annika Santalahti, Is the proposal to maintain the existing office space as well as to add additional office space within the building? Mr. Jonsson said No, just trying to justify what is already there. Annika Santalahti: Item no. 12 of the staff report states seeking to maintain the existing, as well as to add more. Mr. Jonsson said it is already existing, we are just trying to make it legal. The building has an upstairs, cross hatching on the first floor was alt existing from the original construction. A total square feet of 15% office (cross hatched) and now it is 43% office. The building was constructed approximately 15 years ago. Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, said the staff report shows that the site was developed in 1978. Ms. Santalahti, said in the past, the Planning Department allowed approximately 10% office use within an industrial/building when it was a supportive part of the basic tenant and not separate offices that were leased out. Is the use of the office space a separate tenant or is that part of a single user of the building? Mc Jonsson said there are multiple users in the building. The upstairs area is broken up into individual offices. The office on the left is an electronics manufacturing company, The front part is a printing company. Taher Jalai, Principal City Traffic Engineering, said the parking analysis was conducted on vehicles and the number of people occupying the building. Our main concern is that the plan and the parking study are not consistent. The plan shows 38 stalls, the traffic study indicated 36, but because it is not completely stripped in back and in fact there are 31 available. Our main concern is the fence and sliding gate in back, if they choose to close the gate and lock it, then they won't have adequate parking. The plan does not indicate a gate but there is one in the back. Mr. Jonsson said if there is a gate on the fence he did not have a problem removing it. 04/08/99 I?age -2- Mr. Jalai, said there is a picture in the file showing the gate. Ms. Santalahfi, said, Based on the photos, it appears that they are not storing anything behind the gate. Mr, Jalai, said there were a total of 31 stripped spaces including inside the fenced area Mc Jonsson said they have a couple of compressors out by the gated area and a heat pump that is not roof mounted, the main tenant in the building is electronics manufacturing. Ms. Santalahti, verified that there is no one else wishing to speak regarding Variance tJo. 4351and said Staff recommended denial of this application.. Dave See, Associate Planner stated that staff could not make the findings for approval, based on the City's: Traffic Transportation Manager's analysis, field. observation and a recommendation for denial Mr. Jalai, stated that they have done subsequent surveys on February 11, 1999 and observed 27 occupied spaces, and it is his opinion if they choose to restripe the site to Code and removed the sliding gate then they should have adequate parking. The plan does not show dimensions of parking size. Nonnally stalls against the building or a wall or fence need to be 12 ft. wide and the rest can be S-1/2 ft. but the plan does not show any width dimensions. Before considering approval for an industrial building which has that much office in it without knowing: , whether the stripping is done to maximize the available spaces, and since there is not an east west dimension he can't tell from the plan or divide the parcel width by the number of spaces to verify possible spaces. I would like to have a new site plan in detail with the accurate dimensions on the property, the north; south, east and. west, and an account of the parking spaces verifying the size of the spaces, and if they are larger then the minimum required by Code today,. how many spaces could be added to approach current code. Mr. Jonsson stated he thought the parking had been restripped and brought up to Code, however he will check further Ms. Santalahti, would like an accurate depiction of the properly dimensions and the parkingspace dimensions and count..:;. Mr. See, stated that staff also recommends that if there is any exterior equipment, compressors, holding tanks or something of that nature that it been shown on the. plan. Ms. Santalahti, said that anything in that fenced area other than parking spaces should be indicated: It appears that there is a building access at one point off that north area and it should also be shown, property dimensioned, all parking spaces dimensioned, accurate count on the parking spaces both in the front and rear of the building, to clearly show the area which appears to be the westerly side of the rear which seems to be an entrance to the building for vehicle access or loading and if there is any large items like utility elements out of doors. 04/OS/99 Page -3- Ms. Mann, suggested that ff Traffic Engineering is still in opposition of approval of the waiver that the reasons for that be expressly stated with reference to the findings that would not be applicable in Traffic Engineering's opinion based updn its observations and any other evidence that ft had. Since this use has already.; been expanded to expand anon-conformity beyond what which was originally, approved she recommended that there be an appropriate condition placed parking variance is granted which makes the waiver contingent upon the operation in conformance with the assumptions related to the operation and the intensity of use as stated in the traffic study that was submitted to justify the waiver. It may be that the numbers in the traffic study and the actual .numbers are in conflict, and the Uaffic study may need to be updated to reconcile the discrepancy. She does recommend a condition that is based upon the language in 18.06.080.050 which indicates that any variance is granted based upon the assumption that are in the study. Ms. Santalahti asked Mr. Jonsson to make sure that the traffic study matches the plans, etc., and if it needs to be amended with the conect numbers, it should be submitted along with the revised plan. Continued on April 22, 1999. 3a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION SECTION 1150611b1(111 3b. VARIANCE N0.4349 Referred to Planning Commission May 10, 1999. OWNER: - 'JOHN H: and DONNA M. CURRIE 7570 E. Martella Lane - Anaheim, CA 92808 LOCATION: 7570 East Martella Lane. Property is approximately 1.0 acre having a frontage of 146 feet on the south side of Martella Lane, having a maximum depth of 309 feet and being located 627 feet east of the centerline of Martin Place. Waiver of minimum front yard setback to construct an 811 square foot garage addition for an existing single-family residence. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION NO. ------- Continued from the Zoning Administrator meetings of December 3, 1998, January 28, 1999, February 25 and March 25, 1999. REMARKS: Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator stated tfiat we should :have had a staff report. We do need to get something in the file indicating this item was on the agenda today. This item has been continued ahumber of times in order for the applicant to take a look at modifying the plans to approach the code requirement more closely'and also looking at the issue of the private street width at this particular location. It is the understanding of the Zoning Administrator that in the discussions that the owners have had with staff, that they are looking to an additional waiver of the requirement for private streets standards. She asked is this private street standards in the Mohler Drive area or is it a city-wide private street standard ? Dave See, Associate Planner, stated that it is the Peralta Hills private street standard. 04/08/99 Page -4- Ms. Santalahti, said so this area is required to satisfy the Peralta Hills private street standard and the applicant is looking to a waiver of that standard because of this specific situation where the road bed lies relative to the full easement width? Mr. See, pointed out that staff received a letter from the owner on April 7, 1999 asking for the additional waiver and also asking for waiver of the permit streamlining act. Ms. Santalahti, asked what is the date that we would have to take action if they did not ask for a Streamling Act waiver? Mr. See stated this would expire on April 27, 1999. What will happen is that Variance No. 4349 will be readvertised before the Planning Commission because the Zoning Administrator cannot hear a waiver of a private street standards, so it will be readvertised in its entirety for the Planning Commission to include both the existing waiver of the front setback as well as the waiver of private street standards. Ms. Santalahti asked Do we know what date it is going to be? Mr. See, replied that the staff can meet the legal advertising requirements and go to the May 10, 1999 Planning Commission Hearing. Ms. Santalahti, asked is this advertisement also going to be made to all the property owners along this section of private street? Mr. See stated yes, notification will be give beyond the 300 ft. radius of the property which is typical to advise other owners along this street. Ms. Santalahti, asked do you recall if there are any further private streets, easements or access to any properties other than the residential properties fronting on this street? Mr. See replied there is Martetla Lane only. Ms. Santalahti suggested that someone will need to take a look to make sure that there are no drive-ways that serve several property owners who don't have frontage on this street. Mr. See said staff will look into that Ms. Santalahti stated Item No. 3, Variance No. 4349, is being referred to the Planning Commission to consider an additional waiver and the item will be readvertised for the appropriate meeting. 4. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: NONE 04/08/99 Page -5-