Minutes-PC 2000/09/25t '"
o °
'aPN~1MC~`' CITY OF ANAHEIM
i *
z
° ' PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
p~VNDED lbyl
DATE: MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
MORNING SESSION: Chairperson Koos cafled the Morning Session to order 10:30 a.m. in the
Council Chamber.
10:3Q A.M. • Discussion pertaining to churches and schools in
Industrial and Residential Zones and related parking
Requirements
• Discussion pertaining to developing a new procedures
resolution for the conduct of Planning Commission Meetings
• Staff update to Commission of various City
developments and issues (as requested by Planning
Commission)
• Preliminary Plan Review
PUBLIC HEARING: Chairperson Koos called the Public Hearing to order at 1:30 p.m. in the
Council Chamber and welcomed those in attendance.
1:30 P.M. • Public Hearing Testimony
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge Allegiance was !ed by Commissioner Vanderbilt.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
Arnold, Boydstun, Bostwick, Bristol, Koos, Napoles, Vanderbilt
Selma Mann
Greg Hastings
Greg McCafferty
Don Yourstone
Alfred Yalda
Melanie Adams
David Gottieb
Margarita Solorio
Ossie Edmundson
Assistant City Attorney
Zoning Division Manager
Senior Planner
Senior Code Enforcement Officer
Principal Transportation Planner
Associate Engineer
Redevelopment Manager
Planning Commission Secretary
Senior Secretary
AGENDA POSTING: A complete copy of the Planning Commission Agenda was posted at
10:30 a.m. on Friday, September 22, 2000, inside the display case located in the foyer of the
Council Chambers, and also in the outside display kiosk.
PUBLISHED: Anaheim Bulletin Newspaper on Thursday, August 31, 2000.
H:\DOCS\CLERICAL\MINUTESWC092500.DOC planningcommissionCa~anaheim.net
09-25-00
Page 1
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
None
RECEIVING AND APPROVING THE MINUTES FOR THE PLANNING Approved
COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 28, 2000. (Motion)
(Vote: 5-0,
Continued from Commission meeting of September 11, 2000. Commissioners
Bostwick and
ACTION: Commissioner Arnold offered a motion, seconded by Chairperson Boydstun abstained)
Koos and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Bosfinrick and Boydstun
abstained), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve
the Minutes for the Planning Commission Meeting of August 28, 2000, as
amended.
„
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
, RECEIVING AND APPROVING THE MINUTES FOR THE PLANNING Approved
I COMMISSION MEETWG OF SEPTEMBER 11,.2000. (Motion)
(Vote: 6-0,
ACTION: Commissioner Arnold offered a motion, seconded by Chairperson Commissioner
Koos and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Bostwick abstained), that the Bostwick abstained)
Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Minutes for the
Planning Commission Meeting of September 11, 2000, with the following
corrections:
On page 17, deleting the parenthetical following the applicanYs name indicating
his disability.
On page 19, adding to Commissioner's Bristol comments that the hardship was
tied to findings.
"
09-25-00
Page 2
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
"
'l. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. a) CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 21
b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3790 (CUP TRACKING NO.
2000-04257 - REQUEST INITIATION OF REVOCATION OR
MODIFICATION PROCEEDINGS: City-initiated (Code
Enforcement Division), 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim,
CA 92805, request to initiate modification or revocation
proceedings for Conditional Use Permit No. 3790 (to permit a tree
service contractor's storage yard and a modular office building with
waiver of a) minimum yard area abutting a public street, b) required
screening of outdoor uses). Property is located at 1514 West
Broadway.
Approved
Initiated revocation or
modification
proceedings
(Vote: 7-0)
ACTtON: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by
Commissioner Arnold and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City
Planning Commission does hereby concur with staff that the proposed
project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 21,
as defined in the State EIR Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically
exempt from the requirements to prepare an EIR.
"
Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, introduced this item stating this is a City-initiated request to
consider revocation or modification proceedings for Conditional Use Permit No. 3790 for property
located at 1514 West Broadway (B&J Tree Service).
„
Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Arnold and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning
Commission does hereby direct staff to initiate the revocation or
modification proceedings for Conditional Use Permit No. 3790 based on
the evidence as presented in the Code Enforcement memorandum
attached to the September 25, 2000 staff report. SR1060TW.DOC
09-25-00
Page 3
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
B. a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED)
b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4141 (CUP TRACKING NO.
2000-04260 - REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF
SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE: Kevin Parker, Swain Sign
Company, 1384 East Fifth Street, Ontario, CA 91764, request for
determination of substantial conformance with previously-approved
plans and Stadium Crossings Sign Program for modifications to
wall signs. Property is 2005 East Katella Avenue (Denny's Diner).
Approved
Determined to be in
substantial
conformance
(Vote: 7-0)
ACTION: Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by
Commissioner Arnold and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City
Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously-
approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required
environmental documentation for subject request.
Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Arnold and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning
Commission does hereby determine that the revised sign plans are in
substantial conformance with previously-approved sign plans and in
conformance with the previously-approved Stadium Crossings Sign
Program. SR1062TW.DOC
Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, introduced this item stating this is a request for a determination of
'~ substantia{ conformance with previously-approved sign plans and the Stadium Crossing Sign
Program for revised wall plans for the Denny's Diner Restaurant for property located at 2005 East
Katella Avenue.
t,
09-25-00
Page 4
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
C. a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED)
b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4104 (CUP TRACKING
NO. 2000-04273 - REQUEST FOR RETROACTIVE EXTENSION
OF TIME: David Rose, 3870 La Sierra Avenue, Suite 193,
Riverside , CA 92505, request for a retroactive extension of time in
order to comply with conditions of approval (to permit the
conversion of the service station auto repair/cashier building into a
convenience market with retail sales of beer and wine for off -
premises consumption with waivers of (a) continuation of non-
conforming billboards and (b) minimum landscaped setback
adjacent to an arterial highway). This petition was originally
approved on May 4, 1999 and to expire on May 4, 2000. Property
3101 East La Palma Avenue (Arco Service Station).
ACTION: Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by
Commissioner Arnold and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City
Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously-
approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required
environmental documentation for subject request.
Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Arnold and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning
Commission does hereby approve a one-year retroactive extension of
time for Conditional Use Permit No. 4104 (CUP Tracking No. 2000-
04273) to expire on May 4, 2001, based on the following:
„
(i) That this first extension of time will not extend the approval
beyond 2 extensions of time, with each extension not to exceed
one year as specified in Resolution 99R-86 of Conditional Use
Permit No. 4104.
Approved
Approved
(To expire 5-4-2001)
(Vote: 7-0)
(ii) That the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 4104 remains
consistent with the General Plan and the zone district designation
for the property.
(iii) That no Code amendments have occurred that would cause the
approval to be considered inconsistent with the Zoning Code, nor
has the petitioner submitted plans that would render the project
inconsistent with the existing Zoning Codes.
(iv) That the property has been maintained in a safe, clean, and
aesthetically pleasing condition with no outstanding Code
vio(ations or complaints affecting the property, as confirmed by an
inspection of the subject property by the Code Enforcement
Division.
(v) That there are no additional information or changed
circumstances which contradict the facts necessary to support
one or more of the required findings for approval of Conditional
Use Permit No. 4104.
~J
KB.DOC
09-25-00
Page 5
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
„ Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, introduced this item stating this is a request for a retroactive extension
of time for Conditional Use Permit No. 4104 in order for the applicant to comply with conditions of
approval for property located at 3101 East La Palma Avenue (Arco Service Station).
'~
"
09-25-00
Page 6
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
D. a) CEQA EXEMPTION SECTION 15061(b)(3) Concurred w/staff
b) VARIANCE NO. 4349 (VARIANCE TRACKING NO. 2000-04410) Approved
- REQUEST FOR RETROACTIVE EXTENSION OF TIME:
Donna Currie, 7570 E. Martella Lane, Anaheim, CA 92808, (To expire 6-7-2001)
request for retroactive extension of time in order to comply with
conditions of approval for Variance No. 4349 (waiver of minimum
front yard setback to construct a 485 square foot garage addition (Vote: 7-0)
to an existing single-family residence). This petition was originally
approved on June 7, 1999 and expired on June 7, 2000. Property
is located at 7570 E. Martella Lane.
ACTtON: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by
Commissioner Arnold and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City
Planning Commission does hereby concur with staff that the proposed
project falls within the definition of CEQA Exemption Section
15061(b)(3), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines and is,
therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR.
Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Arnold and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning
Commission does hereby approve the request for a one-year
retroactive extension of time for Variance No. 4349 (VAR Tracking No.
2000-04410) to expire on June 7, 2001, based on the following;
'~
I. That the proposed plan remains in conformance with the current
Zoning Code and General Plan land use designation, and that
there are no current Code violations on this property.
II. That this first request for an extension of time will not extend the
approval beyond 2 extensions of time, with each extension not to
exceed one year as specified in Resolution No. PC99-104 of
Variance No. 4349.
III. That no Code amendments have occurred that would cause the
approval to be considered inconsistent with the Zoning Code, nor
has the petitioner submitted plans that would render the project
inconsistent with the existing Zoning Code.
IV. That the property has been maintained in a safe, clean, and
aesthetically pleasing condition with no outstanding Code
violations or complaints affecting the property.
V. That there is no additional information or changed circumstances
which contradict the facts necessary to support one or more of
the required findings for approval of Variance No. 4349.
SR7821 VN.DOC
'~
09-25-00
Page 7
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~~
E. a) CEQA EXEMPTION SECTION 15061(b)(3)
b) REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATION OF
RECLASSIFICATION PROCEEDINGS: City-initiated (Community
Development Department), 201 South Anaheim Boulevard,
Anaheim, CA 92805, request to consider initiation of
reclassification proceedings from the RM-1,000 and RM-1,200
(Residential, Multiple-Family) Zones to the RS-A-43,000
(Residential/Agricultural) Zone. Property is located at 2951-2961
West Lincoln Avenue.
Approved
Initiated reclassification
proceedings
(Vote: 7-0)
ACTION: Commissioner Arnold offered a motion, seconded by
Commissioner Bostwick and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim
City Planning Commission does hereby concur with staff that the
proposed project falls within the definition of CEQA Exemption Section
15061(b)(3), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines and is,
therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR.
Commissioner Arnold offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning
Commission does hereby initiate the reclassification of this property
from the RM-1,000 and RM-1,200 zones to the RS-A-43,000 zone.
R1063TW.DOC
Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, introduced this item stating this is a City-initiated request by the
" Community Development Department. They are requesting that Commission consider initiation of
reclassification proceedings for property located at 2951-2961 West Lincoln Avenue from the RM-
1,000 and RM-1,200 (Residential, Multiple-Family) Zones to the RS-A-43,000
(Residential/Agricultural) Zone.
Applicant's Statement:
Phillip Schwartze stated he is representing one of the two property owners that are part of the
consideration that has been offered by the Redevelopment Agency. They were not advised of this
item on the agenda until Friday aiternoon. They have been working carefully with the Planning
Department and Redevelopment Agency for approximately three years trying to find a solution to
the problems that are well known about that site, and suddenly this has occurred.
While this has been going on they have put the property in contract and the person representing
that group was present in the audience. There is a General Plan Amendment zone change, etc.
coming before Commission in the near future for consideration. In the meantime, the City has
commissioned an environmental study, which is ongoing. The results should be out sometime next
month or so. He felt that this it is premature to take an action on the property when they know that
within the next month or so there will be a full presentation on this and they will have an
environmental study available.
He requested that this item not be agendized and wait until all the information is available to
Commission before a decision is made, recognizing that this property has an approved final map.
A portion of the property has already been built on, which are existing apartments. The zone
change down to RS-A-43,000 would further confuse the issue beyond what it is now.
" Shawn Boyd stated they are currently under contract to purchase the property. They provided to
the Commission members a tentative conceptual site plan and elevations, which is what they are
09-25-00
Page 8
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
" moving forward with at this time. They are currently in the pre-file process for a General Plan
Amendment and zone change only for the Lincoln frontage. The balance of the property,
approximately 22 acres, is currently zoned and entitled for the use they are proposing.
He requested that Commission "table" this item until their process has moved forward. He felt it is a
violation of their due process to move forward at this time. They were surprised to receive a call at
4:00 p.m. on Friday to learn that this action is being initiated.
Chairperson Koos stated that there was a presentation at the morning session on this and there
was a lengthy discussion. There is no action being taken today regarding the actual land use
designation. He asked staff to comment on Mr. Schwartze's request that this item be delayed until
after the environmental studies are completed and wondered what kind of impact would that have
on staff's recommendation.
Commissioner Boydstun indicated the RS-A-43,000 Zone is basically a"holding pattern" and that is
where they need to be until all the environmental studies are completed.
Commissioner Arnold's understanding is that this is the basis for staff's recommendation to put it in
a"holding pattern" until the appropriate uses, based on the environmental studies, can be identified.
The goal is not to establish any particular long term zoning pattern for the property, but merely to
put that decision off until such time as there is more detailed environmental studies.
Chairperson Koos stated that it seems this could have been foreseen some time ago and perhaps
action taken before preliminary plans were submitted to the City assuming that they could build, by
right, a project based on the zoning, understanding that there are particular environmental issues
related to this property that are unique. It is misleading, to have a zoning code classification and
" indicate to the applicant that they do not want them to do that there. If that is the case then the
zoning should be changed accordingly well in advance before an applicant goes to the trouble of
preparing plans. It is unfortunate that this has occurred. At the same time, Community
Development staff is recommending a public hearing in approximately 4 weeks.
Phil Schwartze explained that staff has never had any conversation with them on this at all. The
only thing they know is that they have an approved project, it is in the correct zone, and the
environmental study will determine whether it will be able to support the project. If that zoning is
taken away they have an approved final map, appropriate General Plan designation and wondered
where they are at that point. He wondered whether he would need to return for a zone change
because an existing non-conforming use has been created and felt this action does not make any
sense and is not right.
David Gottlieb, Redevelopment Manager, Community Development Department, felt that
Commissioner Arnotd summed it up very well. They are not attempting to preclude any use on the
property in the future. They are attempting to put the property in the RS-A-43,000 zoning
classification which would allow for a full study of the property to be done. He also agreed with
Chairperson Koos' statement that perhaps this could have been done previously. They now have a
pre-file application filed with the City for 510 apartment units, a portion of which are in commercially
designated land in the property, and not fully entitled as the applicants indicated. There are some
things that need to be taken care of.
He agreed that this is probably somewhat confusing, but what they are indicating at this point is
rather than to add to the confusion that they can initiate the rezoning of this property to the RS-A-
43,000 Zone until all the issues related to environmental issues are evaluated. They are actually
indicating that rather than moving forward now that they put the property in the zoning classification
that would allow them to get the matter clarified before moving forward.
"
09-25-00
Page 9
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~' Commissioner Arnold was also disturbed by in the process and shares the concern with
the applicants with the manner which this came up. His understanding is that at this point
Commission is only considering the initiation of a hearing on the reclassification. The
environmental condition of land in Anaheim is an important basis for the appropriate land
use and, therefore, something that the Commission should be considering which he felt is
sufficient to put this issue forward to Commission in a hearing.
„
~~
09-25-00
Page 10
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
',
OWNER: State of California (Caltrans), Attn: Daniel J. Hing,
3347 Michelson Drive, Suite 100, Irvine, CA 92612
AGENT: Hardin Honda, Attn: Dennis Hardin, 1381 Auto Center
Drive, Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: Auto Center Drive/Caltrans Riqht-of Wav. Property
is 0.11 acre and is a portion of the SR-57 (Orange)
Freeway right-of-way located at the southeast corner of
Ball Road and the SR-57 northbound off-ramp and
north of the Anaheim Auto Center.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
2b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUfREMENT
2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000-04250
Continued to
10-9-2000
To construct an employee parking lot for an existing automobile
dealership with waiver of (a) permitted encroachment into required yards
and (b) parking lot landscaping.
~
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
Commissioner Boydstun offered a continuance to October 9, 2000, seconded by Commissioner Napoles
vote taken and motion carried.
SR1061TW.DOC
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. j
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Continued subject request to the October 9, 2000 Planning Commission meeting as
recommended by staff to allow adequate time for the petitioner to revise plans to
meet Code requirements pertaining to the minimum parking lot landscaping. The
petitioner concurred with staff's recommendation to continue this item.
VOTE: 7-0
DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
~'
09-25-00
Page 11
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
3a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 1
3b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
3c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3042
(CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04251)
Continued to
10-9-2000
OWNER: The Roman Catholic Bishop of Orange, 5800 East
Santa Ana Canyon Road, Anaheim, CA 92807
AGENT: Andrade Architects, Attn: Stan Andrade, 24501 Del
Prado, Suite D-1, Dana Point, CA 92629
LOCATION: 5800 East Santa Ana Canvon Road. Property is 6.0
acres located at the southwest corner of Santa Ana
Canyon Road and Solomon Drive (San Antonio
Catholic Church).
To permit and construct a two-story religious education building in
conjunction with an existing church with waiver of required parking lot
landscaping.
-L_J
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
SR7764KB.DOC
Commissioner Bristol offered a motion for continuance to October 9, 2000, seconded by Commissioner
Boydstun vote taken and motion carried.
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. '
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Continued subject request to the October 9, 2000 Planning Commission meeting in
order to readvertise the project to include an additional waiver pertaining to permitted
roof-mounted equipment.
VOTE: 7-0
DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
~~
09-25-00
Page 12
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
"
4a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 5
4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
4c. CONDfT10NAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000-04252
Concurred with staff
Approved
Granted
OWNER: Lester E. Tjelmeland, 18621 Arc Way, Yorba Linda, CA
92886
AGENT: Jeffrey C. Jonsson, 22365 EI Toro Road #150, Lake
Forest, CA 92630
LOCATION: 1420 and 1426 North Burton Place. Property is 1.16
acre focated on the east side of Burton Place, 345 feet
south of the centerline of Via Burton Street.
To permit the retail sale and installation of tires and wheels in conjunction
with a wholesale tire warehouse with waiver of minimum number of
parking spaces.
"
~.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC2000-110
SR7823KP.DOC
Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, introduced this item stating this is a request to permit the retail sale and
installation of tires and wheels in conjunction with a wholesale tire warehouse with waiver of minimum
number of required parking spaces for property located at 1420 and 1426 North Burton Place.
Chairperson Koos asked if the applicant was present. There was no response and therefore this item
was trailed and heard after item no. 5.
Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, reintroduced this item.
Applicant's Statement:
Jeff Jonsson, representing Santa Ana Wheel, 22372 Estalins in Mission Viejo, felt that the site is
appropriate because of the storage facility and outside storage. Parking should not be an issue since
they will not be using all the office because it happens to be an auxiliary use for the building.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Bristol asked if they were keeping the razor wire around the storage area.
Jeff Jonsson replied it will be taken away from the trash enclosure, but it wi(I be ieft around the storage
area for security reasons.
Commissioner Vanderbilt asked what signage is permitted since it is adjacent to the freeway and what will
be posted.
Greg McCafferty explained that Code allows 10°/a of any wall elevation. In the IDC (Inter Departmental
Committee) meeting, the applicant indicated they will take advantage of one elevation that faces the on-
ramp and provide wall signage.
Greg Jonsson, 2029 Orangewood Avenue, is Buyer's Broker. They would like as much signage as
possible.
09-25-00
Page 13
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
', Commissioner Vanderbilt indicated that the letter of operation states they do not expect a lot of public use
and that is why they are requesting lower parking needs, yet, he wants to maximize signage and asked
what the signage is. He would understand if it read, "tires.com".
Greg Jonsson stated it would read, "SantaAnaWheel.com". He is not looking to expand his retail
operation, but simply wants people to know about it.
Commissioner Vanderbilt asked clarification from staff what the owner is allowed to use as the verbiage.
Commissioner Bostwick explained that the applicant cannot advertise something that is not on that
property. It has to be his company that he advertises on the property.
Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, confirmed that was correct. It has to advertise either a service
or product available on-site.
Greg McCafferty advised there is a condition of approval that requires staff review signs, if staff feels it is
excessive or does not identify the business, then they can bring it back to Commission.
Commissioner Vanderbilt stated it is philosophical because there are some businesses that have signage
to not only identify their location, but more as advertising reinforcement. He thought that is different than
the intent is of having signage on a building so that someone can find it. This application indicated there
is a need for less parking, finding building is less critical because of the nature of the business involved.
Chairman Koos stated that it is more relevant when they are talking about a discretionary issue, but he is
putting up a sign that is within the Code.
'~ Commissioner Arnold felt they need to be cautious about regulating content of signage since that gets
into free speech issues and areas that require careful treading.
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Concurred with staff that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical
Exemptions, Class 5, as defined in the State EIR Guidelines and is, therefore,
categorically exempt from the requirements to prepare an EIR.
Approved Waiver of Code Requirement.
Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04252 subject to the conditions of
approval listed in the staff report.
VOTE: 7-0
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
DISCUSSION TIME: 7 minutes (2:43-2:50)
~,
09-25-00
Page 14
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
"
5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
5b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
5c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2000-04253
Approved
Denied
Denied
OWNER: Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of
Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints, 50 East North
Temple Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84150
AGENT: Shirl Cornwall or Kent Cornwall, 234 North EI Molino
Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91101
LOCATION: 1518 West Westmont Drive. Property is 0.29 acre
located on the south side of Westmont Drive, 355 feet
east of the centerline of Loara Street.
To permit and construct a parking lot for an existing church with waiver of
(a) institutional uses adjacent to residential zones and (b) minimum
parking lot landscaping.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC2000-111
SR7822KP.DOC
Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, introduced this item stating this is a request for a conditional use permit
to permit and construct a parking lot expansion for an existing church with waivers of institutional uses
'~ adjacent to residential zones and minimum parking lot landscaping. This property is located at 1518 West
Westmont Drive.
Applicant's Statement:
f~
Shirl Cornwall, architect, 234 North EI Molino Avenue, Pasadena, stated he has been hired by the church
to implement the process so they can construct this parking lot, adding to their existing parking. The goal
of the church to take cars off of the street. They want to be good neighbors and are willing to pay upwards
of $20,000 per parking stall to accomplish this. The lot under consideration is 12,675 square feet of that
space, 35% will be planted (or 4,485 square feet). The yard setbacks are 25 feet in front, 15 feet on the
east side and are asking for an average of 6 feet in the rear of the property. The property will have a 6-foot
high block wall in both the rear and the east side separating the residential properties. There will be
adequate planting in front of those walls.
There are two issues regarding waivers that they are requesting which staff is recommending a denial.
The first is the rear yard setback. The purpose of the 15 feet requirement in the ordinance is to protect the
neighbors which they understand. A 6-foot block wall will be erected so that at ground level the neighbors
will not be able to see the new parking area or any part of it. A couple of homes on the rear are two-story
homes and from their upper windows there would be a view into the parking area if they look down.
The residents have an unusual property line configuration. The view from the second story on the new lot
is not much different than they are from the existing lots. The setback, which averages 6 feet, will be
heavily planted with trees that will further shield the view from the upper story windows. Planting is a
consideration for 15 feet of planting versus the 6 feet that they are asking for. The lot will have 35%
planting which is an overabundance for that lot, which they do not consider to be a problem.
09-25-00
Page 15
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
t, Noise that would transfer over the wall should not be a problem at 2 decibeis. They feel that rear yard
conditions wouid be very beneficial because if it is not granted they would then loose two parking spaces,
which then would put two cars on the street.
The configuration of the parking lot on one side are 15 cars and on the other are 13 cars. There will be
35% landscaping in that total yard. It seems redundant to remove two parking stalls to provide
landscaping which does not seem to be needed.
By granting the two waivers each will take two cars from the street (total of 4) and will help elevate a
parking situation.
Doug Hampton, 685 North Helena Street, Anaheim, acknowledge that they received a copy of a letter that
was sent to the City regarding issues that a neighbor (Paula Eberhardt) had with their property and would
address those issues later in order to avoid being redundant.
Public Testimony:
Paula Eberhardt, 1500 Westmont Drive, stated she is the neighbor next door to the proposed parking lot.
She indicated that Commission had received a copy of her letter, which included two photos.
She objected to the proposed parking lot and asked that Commission deny. It is going to affect her
family's health and safety including several areas of the neighborhood. She felt it would add to the noise
and traffic congestion to the neighborhood. The applicant needs to do something about the on-street
parking, but does not feel they have gone through all the other alternatives. There are other lots on both
sides of the street which there does not seem to be much parking in those lots. Therefore, she has a hard
time believing that agreements were made with either the school or the shopping center, but has not
'~ discussed that directly with the church.
She is concerned with their safety due to the difficulty seeing beyond the parked cars on the street. When
she checked into their permits she found that there is not a valid permit for the Westmont driveway and is
asked that if there is no permit then they should close the gates because it would take a lot of traffic
congestion off of Westmont. Loara is much more commercial and could handle that traffic.
The landscape buffer is a small Boxwood hedge which does not seem to be what was on the original
permit. She wondered if a problem occurred who would enforce it if this permit were approved.
There are security gates, but they are not closed at night. The gate on the Loara side is kept closed which
causes all the traffic on Westmont. She would like to see the gates closed at night to provide more
security. She felt there should have been an engineering study completed before there was an opening on
Westmont Drive.
The information in the letter of operation indicates the following:
A ward = 100 families X 50% 50 cars
A meeting house X 2-3 wards 150 cars max.
A stake house X 3-4 meeting houses 450-600 cars
She felt they could schedule a few functions throughout the day, but there are still going to be cars
overlapping. She is in favor of a parking lot, but not one next door to her home which is a Residential Low-
Density area.
She would like to see the church make other arrangements, but has also seen how this has occurred in the
past. {f this is approved she would like to see the block walls match ("pink" colored brick used in the area),
" and no coniferous trees be allowed. Pine needles are very messy and are difficult to pick up by the
09-25-00
Page 16
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
', gardeners. She requested that the orange tree, in the back yard, remain. It produces little fruit, which the
ApplicanYs Rebuttal:
Doug Hampton stated there would be a 6-foot fence. As people drive in they will "head" in when they park
and will not back in so that exhaust is vented to the rear of the car. They feel that they are addressing the
safety issue by removing the cars off the street. The letter, from Ms. Eberhardt, received stated that there
were 51 cars parked on the street. He explained that it was during their State conference which occurs
twice a year in September and January. This additional parking would give them room for overflow. They
currently use 157 parking spaces for a church service. There are 3 wards and a branch that meet in their
building, 628 members attend that building out of 2,743 members of the church in Anaheim.
The Westmont gate has been in existence since it was the building was built. He was not aware of the
issue of whether it was permitted or not. It was originally used as the construction entrance when the
building was constructed.
The elementary school constructed across the street has aligned their driveway with theirs on Westmont
so they can use their parking lot for overflow and could reciprocate in the same way by letting the church
use their parking lot as overflow. According to their blueprint, the school will have 76 additional parking
spaces across the street.
The use of the parking lot that they requested will only be impacted by approximately 12 cars weekly out of
27 parking spaces. They have asked members during their State conferences to team up as much as
possible in order to reduce the amount of cars.
', The gates were installed when Wal-Mart was built in the Anaheim Plaza. They had burglaries occurring
weekly when Wal-Mart was opened and found it necessary to have a security guard on their facility for a
year. The gates were permitted and installed and they have kept Loara closed. He is at the building twice
a week at night, generally until 10:00 p.m., and usually one of the last people out of the parking lot. They
also have someone do a security check at 10:00 p.m. He is not aware of problems with crowds or people
hanging out. They have a gardener that come weekly. Their buildings are well maintained.
Commissioner Vanderbilt asked if the fence on Westmont is left open.
Doug Hampton responded that they do not lock the Westmont gate because they have seminary that
starts early in the morning. They keep that gate open so that those that work in the family history center
can have access. Due to safety issues they do not want those people to open and close the gates.
Commissioner Arnold thought that he indicated that they had security at night and if so then that person
could lock the gates.
Doug Hampton explained that they have someone who comes and checks the building every evening to
ensure that it is secured. If they had someone lock the gates at night then they would need to have them
unlocked in the morning which they do not have staff to do that.
Commissioner Boydstun stated that she would like to see the Westmont gate locked at night and cannot
vote for it unless that is added as a condition of approval.
Doug Hampton stated that he is not aware of any police reports or problems regarding that area, but if it is
an issue then they are willing to help out in that way. He indicated that the Loara side is closed and it
remains closed all the time.
" Commissioner Bristol asked if there is any time during the year when they use the facility in the evening
and have more parking problems or situations than they do on Sundays.
gardeners can pick up and requires little water.
09-25-00
Page 17
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
t, Doug Hampton explained that they have an anniversary banquet once a year and perhaps one another
occasion. Every three to four years they may have a larger event, but not very often.
Commissioner Vanderbilt asked Mr. Hampton whether this parking expansion resolves the parking
problem because they just had the State conference and the testimony along with the photos indicated
what appears to be more cars than their lot with the expansion could accommodate.
Doug Hampton replied the use of the parking lot when the elementary school is completed would take care
of the overflow for State conferences for those occasions which are three to four times a year when they
have a real issue regarding parking.
Commissioner Vanderbilt asked if that was a formal agreement with the school.
Mr. Hampton replied that was. They have spoken with Anaheim Plaza, but due to the lease agreements
that they have with their tenants they are not allowed to let the church use their parking lot. The lot that the
new elementary school built was for their disposal, which they did use, but the school has purchased that
and they have asked the applicant to reciprocate with the use of their parking of which they are doing now
for construction. It is agreed on that on Sundays, if need be, they could use their additional parking. Also
the school has no egress on Loara. They have used Westmont for the entry of the school and he was not
aware of any issue brought up regarding that. He thought the 600 children that are going to attend that
elementary school would be a much larger impact on that neighborhood than the 27 parking stalls that
they are asking for.
Commissioner Vanderbilt felt that the issue is whether there is a way to ensure parking is accommodated
and then to go further to see if there are means to accommodate parking that could be obtained without
" creating this larger parking space.
Doug Hampton stated that they have 3 wards consisting of approximately 150 families. There are 3-hour
blocks of time. They have 4 schedules, so there is an hour overlap in each of those instances. They start
at 9:00 a.m. and end at 5:00 p.m.
Commissioner Bristol asked for a show of hands from the audience to get a sense of how many people
were in favor of the project, against the project or church members. Majority present for this item were
church members in favor of the project (approximately 35).
Commissioner Bristol thought Commissioner Vanderbilt had a valid concern of the taking of a single-family
residence away for a parking lot when there could be other mitigation measures. This is a use that is
impacting a neighborhood. He wondered whether it was more prudent to try to mitigate this with the new
school rather than encroaching on a single-family residence.
Chairperson Koos felt that to encroach into the east with a parking lot into what has been traditionally a
single-family neighborhood is not good planning. The residents who purchased a home in an area that
had a single-family character would reasonably expect that it would continue to remain single-family in
nature. It simply does not make sense and, therefore, he cannot support this proposal. This is a land use
issue and he does not want to see this encroaching on a single-family neighborhood.
Doug Hampton stated they are trying to mitigate one of the neighbor's complaints that they have been
encroached upon and cannot get in or out of their driveway. Although he is not certain that is actually the
case because he arrives at 7:00 a.m. and usually leaves at 12:00 noon and does not usually see that
many cars in the street. However, if that is an issue then he would think that the parking lot would be
welcomed.
" Commissioner Arnofd stated thai part of the reason that neighbors are experiencing a problem is because
it appears that their use of the church property has expanded far beyond the capacity of that parcel to
09-25-00
Page 18
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
', accommodate it. Simply because people are illegally parking in front of someone else's driveway does not
seem a good reason to approve a different activity that is going to have adverse impacts on the local
community. The law prohibits them from approving a conditional use permit if they find that the use will
have adverse impacts on the surrounding community.
Mr. Hampton asked even if the "surrounding community" would be one resident? There has only been one
negative comment regarding the use of that property.
Commissioner Koos explained to Mr. Hampton that Commission does not judge a project simply by the
amount of people present at the public hearing, but by laws and established guidelines related to land use
issues.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Boydstun asked whether the RS-10,000 Zone would need to be changed in order to make a
parking lot out of it.
Greg Hastings explained that they are considered accessory uses to a church and are_permitted in most
zones in the City by a conditional use permit. This is an accessory use to the church but it would be
permitted, if Commission approves it.
Commissioner Arnold stated that paragraph no. 10, of the staff report, mentions two congregations,
although he heard three congregations up to 628 members and wanted to verify that this was a correct
understanding on the basis of what the applicant is representing. The other question has to do with the
closing of the gates on the Westmont access and whether that is a required condition.
" Greg McCafferty replied that it is a very old resolution and staff could take a look at it to see if that was a
condition, but his understanding was that when the church was originally approved it did not have the
driveway. In the 1970's when they returned with revised plans the driveway was on the exhibit. In their
letter of operation it indicates under building utilization that the day-to-day meeting house would be used
by 2 to 3 wards daily.
Commissioner Arnold stated that he wanted to make it clear for the record that they are discussing a fairly
significant use of this property by the church, as the applicant indicated, considerable overlap as well.
Chairperson Koos stated for the record that they received a letter from Mr. Gary Miller regarding the
operations which is on file.
Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner, verified that the letter is part of the previous file.
Commissioner Bostwick felt that it is a good idea that they expand their parking. They are trying to be a
good neighbor and improve the conditions in the neighborhood and keep the cars off the street. He
agrees that the gate should be closed in the evening. It might take some type of electrical control, but it
could be a condition. He thought it is a good idea and is in favor of the gate closing.
Commissioner Bristol stated he was concerned with the use of the new parking lot to be used in the
evening due to the lighting which would be difficult to enforce.
Commissioner Boydstun asked if this will be accessed from the existing lot or will another driveway be put
in.
Doug Hampton stated it is a horseshoe design and will be accessed through the existing parking lot. They
intend not to use it in the evenings when there are no parking issues, it is only on Sundays and for State
" conferences twice a year, but the school parking will be made available in about a year.
09-25-00
Page 19
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
', Commissioner Boydstun suggested they install a chain across it except for Sundays.
Commissioner Bristol understands their logic, but is going to vote against it because of the concern
regarding encroachment.
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: 1 person spoke and submitted a letter opposing the proposed project.
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
(Vote 4-3, Commissioners Koos, Napoles and Vanderbilt voted no)
Denied Waiver of Code Requirement
(Vote: 7-0)
Commissioner Boydstun offered a resolution for approval of Conditional Use Permit
No. 2000-04253 with changes to conditions of approval and THE RESOLUTION
FAILED TO CARRY with the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, NAPOLES
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ARNOLD, BRISTOL, KOOS, VANDERBILT
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
Commissioner Bristol offered a resolution for denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-
04253 and THE RESOLUTION PASSED with the following vote:
" AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ARNOLD, BRISTOL, KOOS, NAPOLES, VANDERBILT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
DISCUSSION TIME: 1 hour (1:42-2:42)
„
09-25-00
Page 20
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSfON MINUTES
',
6a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 32
6b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000-04254
Withdrawn
OWNER: Knott Avenue Christian Church, Attn: Sharon Pierce,
315 South Knott Avenue, Anaheim, CA, 92804
LOCATION: 315 South Knott Street. Property is 5 acres located
on the west side of Knott Street, 845 feet north of the centerline of Orange
Avenue (Knott Avenue Christian Church).
To permit two (2) modular buildings to be used for classrooms in
conjunction with an existing preschool and church.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
SR2037DS.DOC
Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion for a withdrawal, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun vote
taken and motion carried.
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
~,
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristol and
MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
accept staff's request for withdrawal of Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04254.
VOTE: 7-0
DISCUSSION TIME: 1 minute (1:39-1:40)
~~
09-25-00
Page 21
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
',
7a. CEQA NEGATiVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED) Approved
7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3935 Approved reinstatement
(CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04255) for 1 year (after
issuance of certificate
OWNER: M&M Invesco Inc., 6732 Westminster Boulevard, of occupancy)
Westminster, CA 92683
AGENT: Bhikhu Patel, 6732 Westminster Boulevard,
Westminster, CA 92683
LOCATION: 1125 North Maqnolia Avenue. Property is 1.5 acre
located on the west side of Magnolia Avenue, 280 feet
north of the centerline of La Palma Avenue (Magnolia
Plaza Office Building).
To consider reinstatement of this permit which currently contains a time
limitation (reinstated on August 2, 1999, to expire July 21, 2000) for a
previously-approved 2,876 square foot restaurant and 5,760 square foot
banquet facility with on-premises sale and consumption of alcoholic
beverages.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC2000-112 ~~ SR2036DS.DOC
~
Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, introduced this item stating this is a request to consider reinstatement
of this permit for a previously-approved restaurant and banquet facility at 1125 North Magnolia Avenue.
Irv Pickler stated he is representing Bryan Industrial Properties who owns over 100,000 square feet of
industrial building to the east of subject property. They are not opposed to the project, and support staff's
recommendations and conditions of approval on the project.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
• • ~ ~- ~ ~ • • ~ •
OPPOSITION: 1 concerned person spoke.
ACTION: Determined that the previously-approved negative declaration is adequate to serve
as the required environmental documentation for subject request.
Approved reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 3935 (CUP Tracking No.
2000-04255) for 1 year from the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. Amended
Resolution Nos. PC97-92, PC98-137, and PC99-146, in their entirety, and replaced
them with a new resolution which includes the following conditions of approval:
That this permit shall expire one (1) year after issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
2. That trash storage areas shall be refurbished to the satisfaction of the Public
Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, to comply with approved
plans on file with said Department.
'/
3. That trash storage areas shall be maintained in a location acceptable to the
Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance
with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage areas shall be
09-25-00
Page 22
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
', designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from
adjacent streets or highways. Clinging vines planted on maximum 3-foot
centers or tall shrubbery shall be maintained adjacent to the trash enclosure.
4. That this establishment shall be operated as a"Bona Fide Public Eating Place"
as defined by Section 23038 of the California Business and Professions Code.
5. That there shall not be any off-street or walk-in sale of alcoholic beverages;
and that alcoholic beverages shall only be served at banquets in the banquet
facility and not in the restaurant.
6. That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a public
premises (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be operated as a public
premises as defined in Section 23039 of the California Business and
Professions Code.
7. That the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises shaff be
prohibited.
8. That there shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising
directed to the exterior from inside, promoting or indicating the availability of
alcohol beverages, with the exception of one (1) sign indicating "cocktails."
That the activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this
establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surrounding properties.
„ 10. That there shall be no pool tables or coin-operated games maintained upon the
premises at any time.
11. That the parking lot serving the premises shall be maintained with lighting of
suf~icient power to iHuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and
conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot. Said lighting shall be
directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably
illuminate the windows of nearby businesses.
12. That the hours of operation for the restaurant shall be limited to 11 a.m. to 11
p.m. (seven (7) days per week); and that the hours of operation for the
banquet facility shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. (weekdays) and 11 a.m. to
11 p.m. (weekends), as stated by the petitioner.
13. That a maximum capacity af sixty (60) persons shafl be allowed for the banquet
facility during the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and that a maximum capacity of two
hundred thirty (230) persons shall be allowed for the banquet facility during evening
hours after 5 p.m., as specified by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager.
14. That at all times when entertainment or dancing is permitted, security shall be
provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to deter unlawful
conduct on the part of employees or patrons, and to promote the safe and
orderly assembly and movement of persons and vehicles, and to prevent
disturbance to the neighborhood by excessive noise created by patrons
entering or leaving the premises.
15. That all doors serving subject restaurant shall conform to the requirements of the
" Uniform Fire Code and shall be kept closed and unlocked at all times during hours
of operation except for ingress/egress, deliveries, and in cases of emergency.
09-25-00
Page 23
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
', 16. That there shall be no public telephones on the property that are located
outside the building and within the control of the applicant.
17. That the granting of the parking waiver is contingent upon operation of the use
in conformance with the assumptions relating to the operation and intensity of
use as contained in the parking demand study that formed the basis for
approval of said waiver. Exceeding, violating, intensitying or otherwise
deviating from any of said assumptions, as contained in the parking demand
study, shall be deemed a violation of the expressed conditions imposed upon
said waiver which shall subject this conditional use permit to termination or
modification pursuant to the provisions of Sections 18.03.091 and 18.03.092 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code.
18. That a valid City of Anaheim business ficense shall be obtained from the
Business License Division of the Finance Department.
19. That signage for subject facility shafl be limited to that shown on the exhibits
submitted by the petitioner and approved by the Planning Commission. Any
additional signs shall be subject to approval by the Commission as a"Reports
and Recommendations" item and shall comply with all signing requirements of
the CL (Commercial Limited) Zone unless a variance allowing sign waivers is
approved by the Planning Commission.
20. That three (3) foot high address numbers shall be "maintained" on the roof in a
contrasting color tot he roofing material, not to be visible from ground level.
t, 21. That window signs shall not be permitted.
22. That the applicant shall be responsible for maintaining the premises free of
litter at all times.
23. That no banners, pennants or balloons shall be permitted unless a Special
Event Permit is first obtained. Roof-mounted balloons shall not be permitted at
any time.
24. That no vending machines shall be visible from any public right-of-way.
25. That any tree planted on-site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event
that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dies.
26. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by
providing regufar landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and
removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24) hours from time of occurrence.
27. That subject property sha11 be developed substantially in accordance with plans
and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which
plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2a, 2b, 3
and 4.
28. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 2, 3, 18, 20
and 27, above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
" 29. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request
only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipa{ Zoning Code and
09-25-00
Page 24
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
', any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not
include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request
regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Bostwick absent)
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
DISCUSSION TIME: 11 minutes (2:43-2:54)
t,
'/
09-25-00
Page 25
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
"
8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
8c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000-04256
Approved
Approved, in part
Granted, in part
OWNER: Atlantic Richfield Company, P.O. Box 2485, Los
Angeles, CA 90051
AGENT: RHL Design Group, Attn: Jim Forgey, 1201 South
Beach Boulevard, La Habra, CA 90631
LOCATION; 1201 South Brookhurst Street. Properry is 0.6 acre
located at the southwest corner of Ball Road and
Brookhurst Street (Arco AM/PM Service Station).
To permit and construct a new service station with a convenience market
with waiver of (a) maximum area of monument sign (deleted), (b)
maximum height of monument sign (deleted), (c) maximum width of
monument width, and (d) required landscaping adjacent to interior site
boundary lines.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTtON NO. PC2000-113
SR7765KB.DOC
Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, introduced this item stating this is Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-
~, 04256 for a proposed Arco AM/PM Service Station with waivers of (a) maximum area of monument sign
(deleted), (b) maximum height of monument sign (deleted), (c) maximum width of monument width, and
(d) required landscaping adjacent to interior site boundary lines.
Applicant's Statement:
Jim Forgey, project manageNarchitectural consultants from RJL Design Group 1201 South Beach
Boulevard, La Habra, addressed the requested waivers. Waiver (c), pertains to maximum monument sign
width. The proposed width is a 13-foot 8-inch wide monument sign, which exceeds a 10-foot wide
monument sign allowed by code. The additional sign width is necessary to attempt to compensate for the
pole sign, which is being taken down. Other stations in the neighborhood have "grandfathered" signage
so Arco is asking for approval of this sign. The sign square footage is within Code.
Waiver (d), pertains to required landscaping abutting interior boundary lines. Noting that property abuts a
CL Zone and typically no landscaping is required between two adjacent commercial zone properties, Arco
is asking for this waiver to be approved. Arco befieves to maintain paths of visibility into the site for
dispenser operation and store parking, it becomes impossible to add four additional trees in the planters
as staff has recommended. The landscaping is at 15.9% and there are 28 trees proposed to be planted,
adding four more trees would limit visibility, therefore, Arco is asking that the additional trees
recommended by staff be deleted. They would also like the 24-gallon box trees that staff is suggesting be
15-gallon minimum.
Staff is also asking for planters to be added in front of the building, but there are three considerations for
this. One is visibility for the cashier inside the store to the customer fueling and visibility for police going
by to be able to see into the store is restricted when planters are placed in front of the store. It also acts
as a tripping hazard and a haven for trash, etc.
„ Eric Cahn, Arco representative, 4 Centerpointe Drive, La Palma, stated the planter in front of the building
is important and landscaping with trees make sense. They need visibility to maintain high volume.
09-25-00
Page 26
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
', He addressed the following conditions:
• Page 9, Condition No. 17 public phones. They would like to include an option for a phone on the
outside of the building.
• Condition No. 20, window signage. Arco has regular promotions and the only way they can advertise
is with signs in the windows.
• Condition No. 33, roof-mounted balloons. Occasionally there is a special and they would like to be
able to use them.
Jerry Zamorodian, operator of store, would like to have the option to be able to have an outside phone
because it attracts unwanted customers inside the store.
Commissioner Boydstun asked how wide the sign is in his station on Broadway.
Mr. Zamorodian replied it is 10 feet, but it is triangular with three sides. He would like to have the
triangular option.
Commissioner Bostwick asked why he did not plan for this on this sign.
Mr. Zamorodian explained that the architect did the original plan for Arco, but the architect and Mr. Cahn
would like the triangle sign, which would be 10 feet.
Commissioner Boydstun stated all of the new stations have met the 10-foot code and she is having
trouble with an exception. The sign on Broadway works well because you can see it from any direction.
Commissioner Arnold asked what justification related to special circumstances is applicable to the
„ property? Certain required findings have to be made in order to justify a waiver. He does not see where
the need to get a maximum number of customers meets the legal requirements for a waiver. Asked what
is unique about this particular property that does not apply to other identically zoned properties that
justifies waiver.
Greg McCafferty stated that the sign waiver form (see staff report) does not appear that there is
justification for Waiver (c).
Mr. Zamorodian explained that it is a busy street and there are three gas stations options and it would
have more visibility.
Commissioner Arnold stated everybody wants more visibility, what is unique that would justify the waiver.
It is not a matter of what the applicant would like, they are bound by the Code and in order to grant a
waiver there are certain legal requirements.
Mr. Cahn stated they are at a competitive disadvantage if they remove the existing pole sign because
there are other pole signs. If they make the sign less visible, it limits their ability to draw in customers.
Commissioner Bostwick stated if they change to a triangular sign, they would get more visibility and a
better angle and comply with Code.
Mr. Cahn stated they would go to the triangular sign, it conforms in width, but adds square footage.
Greg McCafferty stated the Code has been changed to allow only a double-faced sign since the sign
across the street at Arco was put in. The Shell station no longer exists and the Mobil station only faces
the corner.
" Judith Ann Gollette, representing WAND (West Anaheim Neighborhood Development Council, Land Use
and Business Development Committee), stated this is a neighborhood that knows the station is there, it is
09-25-00
Page 27
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
" not a tourist area. She is concerned with the parking for the market to the south if space is taken away
from them. They are also concerned that Arco will come in at a future date and ask for a liquor license.
She also requested that signage be kept at a minimum.
Irv Pickler, 2377 Mall Avenue, Anaheim, thought the Arco would be a plus and felt it is a step in the right
direction.
Mr. Zamorodian stated there is no beer and wine and they want to beautify that corner. Regarding the
market, that was Arco property that was being leased and now they are taking it back to put the building
there.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Bristol stated the new driveway on Ball Road appears to be close to the corner and asked
Mr. Yalda to comment on that.
Alfred Yalda stated they do not have many choices there because their frontage is very small. They
cannot move it due to gas tanks.
Commissioner Boydstun stated they will not allow outside phones in the City. Explained if he wanted
balloons he will have to go to the City to get it approved.
Greg McCafferty stated it is zoned CL so he can apply for a special events permit, but cannot have any
balloons.
Greg Hastings further explained that all stations and other businesses have been conditioned to not allow
~' roof-mounted balloons.
Commissioner Bostwick suggested Condition No. 20 be deleted and leave it as standard code or delete
the first part of the condition regarding window signage.
Greg Hastings advised the Code requirement is a maximum 20%, however the Police Department and
Code Enforcement strongly encourage these conditions due to activities that occur. Commission can put
whatever percentage it wants to, but Code Enforcement suggests not allowing any because the
percentage tends to change over time. It has been imposed for some time and if it is changed today, the
direction would be changed.
Mr. Zamorodian asked if they could assign a number instead of percentage. They use window signage
across the street and felt he should also be allowed.
Commissioner Bostwick does not recall taking all the signage away. Commission has made the liquor
store pull back with counters and displays from the door, but does not remember signage being part of it.
That was not done to the station on Brookhurst and La Palma.
Greg Hastings stated staff can let Commission know exactly how long they have been doing this if they
wish. Typically this goes with the alcohol sales, however they have applied this to some of the
convenier-ce markets. It is staff's intent to minimize the amount of signage going up on any building. The
difference is that the majority of them have been with alcohol sales.
(Commissioners discussed appearance and problems with trash placed in the landscape planters.]
Greg McCafferty suggested deleting Condition No. 14 and replace it with the following, `The legal
property owner shall submit an application for a Subdivision Map Act Certificate of Compliance to the
„ Public Works Department Development Services Division. A Certificate of Compliance or Conditional
09-25-00
Page 28
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
', Certificate of Compliance shall be approved by the City Engineer and recorded in the office of the Orange
County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit".
He also suggested modifying Condition No. 23, after the first sentence to read, In addition, a total of 34,
24-inch box trees shall be shown on the landscape plan for the site. That takes the south property line
where they are not putting in the trees on 20-foot centers and making them up elsewhere on the lot. If it
is not Commission's choice to have those, then staff would except out those trees that would be normally
required on that south property line.
Commissioner Bristol asked if there was a break/opening on the landscaping on the west property line.
Greg Hastings explained that there is an area where there is a remediation facility up against the property
line.
Greg McCafferty further clarified that there was no break there.
Commissioner Boydstun asked if the special event permit code states that there are no balloons
permitted.
Greg McCafferty responded that the special event code allows staff to do this on an administrative level
and if they feel uncomfortable permitting a roof-mounted balloon then that pushes it up to a Special
Circumstance Waiver befiore the Zoning Administrator.
Commissioner Boydstun asked why they could not have it that for any special advertising devices that the
applicant obtain a special permit and then at the time see what they want to do and make the decision
then.
" Greg Hastings stated it centers around the balloons. They have had numerous complaints against
balloons in areas that are in nearby residential areas. There is a residence next door, so staff has
historically been putting these in those circumstances as well as in industrial areas where staff does not
feel it is appropriate.
Commissioner Boydstun did not understand why they should be treated any different than any other. !t
should be decided at the time according to what they want to do. She felt it should have the standard
special event wording and when staff looks at it they can decide whether it would work. She further
explained her suggestion that the applicant needs to obtain the special event permit and if it is something
that staff is comfortable with then they can indicate.
Greg Hastings stated that staff's recommendation would be for denial of that and asking that it be placed
permanently in the conditional use permit so staff does not have to make that decision over and over
again.
Jerry Zamorodian stated that he thought that the existing Code for the City of Anaheim is 14 days
maximum to obtain a banner or a balloon for any business.
Commissioner Boydstun suggested adding three days so it could be cover the three weekends.
Greg Hastings cfarified that a speciat events permit would be allowed here under the existing Code. The
only restriction that they are recommending is that there not be roof-mounted balloons allowed as part of
any special events permit.
Commissioner Bostwick recommended leaving that condition in and the applicant can apply for the
special events permit.
'/
09-25-00
Page 29
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
', Greg Hastings stated leaving the condition as is would not allow roof-mounted bafloons allowed which is
what staff is recommending.
Following the Action:
Greg McCafferty clarified to Mr. Zamorodian that if it is a triangular sign then the Code standards for
freestanding monuments do not permit that, so it would not be a Reports and Recommendations Item, but
a Variance application for a 3-sided sign.
• • ~ ~- • ~ ~ • ~ •
OPPOSITION: 1 person spoke with concerns.
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
Approved, in part, Waiver of Code Requirement as follows:
Denied waivers (a) pertaining to maximum area of monument sign and (b) pertaining
to maximum height of monument sign on the basis that they were deleted following
submittal of revised plans.
Denied waiver (c) pertaining to maximum width of monument width on the basis that
a hardship could not be found on the property to justify the waiver and that other CL-
Zoned service stations and commercial developments are required to comply with
Code requirements for monument signs. Further, approval of this waiver would grant
a special privilege not shared by other similar service station properties.
„ Approved waiver (d) pertaining to required landscaping adjacent to interior site
boundary lines based on the narrow shape of the lot, and that similar CL-Zoned
properties do not require landscaping along interior boundary lines when abutting
other commercially-zoned and developed properties.
Granted, in part, Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04256 with the following changes
to conditions of approval:
Modified Conditions 14, 20, and 23 to read as follows:
14. The legal property owner shall submit an application for a Subdivision Map Act
Certificate of Compliance to the Public Works Department, Development
Services Division. A Certificate of Compliance or Conditional Certificate of
Compliance shall be approved by the City Engineer and recorded in the Office
of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit.
20. That window signage shall not exceed ten percent (10%) of the glass surface for
the service station or convenience market.
23. That a landscape and irrigation plan including a minimum of thirty-four (34), 24-
inch box sized trees shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and
approval. Any decision made by the Zoning Division regarding said plan may
be appealed to the Planning Commission and/or City Council. Said landscaping
shall thereupon be installed and maintained.
VOTE: 7-0
" Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
09-25-00
Page 30
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
', DiSCUSSION TiME: 48 minutes (2:55-3:43)
Commissioner Bostwick requested that a workshop be agendized to discuss roof-mounted signage.
Staff and the other Commissioners reminded Commissioner Bostwick that a workshop had occurred
within the last year pertaining to this subject. No further action was directed.
Commissioner Boydstun requested that workshops involving more than one department be considered
separately.
"
,/
09-25-00
Page 31
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
"
ADJOURNMENT AT 3:50 P.M. TO
MONDAY, OCTt3BER 9, 2000 AT 11:00 A.M.
FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW.
Respectfully submitted:
Ossie Edmundson
Senior Secretary
~~ ` ~~ '~.~~c~rC~
~!~K-6
Simonne Fannin
Senior Office Specialist
~'
,/
Received and approved by the Planning Commission on f o- 9- o~
09-25-00
Page 32