Minutes-PC 2001/10/22~~
•
•
CITY OF ANAHEIM
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MONDAY, OCTOBER 22, 200~
Council Chambers, City Hall
200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California
CHAIRPERSON~~4~l~,a ~0 = = NY ARNOLD
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: PAl~~~O T1NI s~~K, 1'LL ~~~° STUN,
S~TEP ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ I ~~TC3L, ~~~AIL ~~S~fl.u`I~JOHN KOOS
CHAiRPERSON ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
Selma Mann, Assistant ~i~y A or~~`'`~~
~
Greg Has tings, Zoning~, v i,c~n ~
Greg McCafferty, Prin 3~ ~ al PI~ ~~ _~ er
Pat Chandler, Senior t~ ,
ws~
AGENDA POSTIN(
Friday, October 19,
the outside display
Alfred Yalcfa, '
Brad Hobson,
Elly Fernandes,
PUBLISHED: Anah~'~i ~
CALL TO ORDER ~
PLANNING C e ~~~ N~S;'SIQ~
• CDBG FU R. G ' '.,
• STAFF UPDAT
DEVELOPMEN ~~°~I?
PLANNING COMMIS,
• PRELIMINARY PLAN
~
~
RECESS TO AFTERNOON PUBLIC HEARING SESSION
RECONVENE TO PUBLIC HEARING 1:30 P.M.
For record keeping purposes, if you wish to make a statement regarding any item on the agenda, please
complete a speaker card and submit it to the secretary.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Gail Eastman
PUBLIC COMMENTS
CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
ADJOURNMENT
r H:\DOCS\CLERICALWI(NUTEStAC102201.DOC planninqcommissionCa~anaheim.net II
10-22-01
Page 1
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• C.D.B.G. Funding Requests for Fiscal Year 2001/2002
Planning Commission 11:00 a.m. Session - October 22, 2001
Commissioners Present:
Stephen Bristol
Paul Bostwick
Phyllis Boydstun
Tony Arnold
John Koos
Commissioners Absent:
Chairman James Vanderbilt
Gail Eastman
Code Enforcement Division
John Poole, Planning Code Enforcement Manager, thanked Commission for being so supportive of Code
Enforcement activities. This year they are asking for support of the current program, as there are no
additions from last year. They get funding from finro different CDBG areas. Approximately $1,064,655 is
for inspection efforts, neighborhood improvements in the CDBG Neighborhood Council Areas. The
primary focus will be public nuisance and housing, and Code Enforcement inspections in those areas.
They are also requesting $35,000 in CDBG money for graffiti removal, an amount that has remained flat
• for a number of years. In the past, they had asked for $50,000 in CDBG funding for graffiti removal, but
they try everything they can to reduce the draw of CDBG and they want the funding for Code
Enforcement to be used for enhancement to these neighborhoods. He stressed that the money is in
addition to funds already budgeted for Code Enforcement efforts.
Commissioner Koos stated some individuals on the board would like to see statistical background that
demonstrates what has been done in the neighborhood. Mr. Poole said he would provide that information
for him.
Commissioner Boydstun recommended approval of request for funding and all Commissioners that were
present concurred.
Respectfully submitted:
~t~-nt.l-~C.kJ
Simonne Fannin
Senior Office Specialist
•
10-22-01
Page 2
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• RECONVENE TO PUBLIC HEARING AT 1:30 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: NONE
This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the
Anaheim City Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public
hearing items.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Item 1-A through 1-E on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no
separate discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the
Planning Commission, staff or the public request the item to be discussed and/or removed from the
Consent Calendar for separate action.
Commissioner Koos offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick and MOTION CARRIED
(Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), for approval of Consent Calendar Items 1-A, 1-C, 1-E as
recommended by staff. Consent Calendar Items 1-B and 1-D were removed from the Consent Calendar
for separate discussion. (Vote: 6-0, Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent)
1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
~
•
A. a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREV. APPROVED)
b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000-04256 (TRACKING NO. CUP Approved
Approved for 1 year
2001-04452) REQUEST FOR A RETROACTIVE EXTENSION OF (to expire on
TIME: RHL Design Group, 1201 South Beach Boulevard, Suite 207, September 25, 2002)
La Habra, CA 90631-6366, requests an extension of time to comply
with conditions of approval to permit and construct a previously- (Vote: 6-0, Chairperson
approved service station with a convenience market with waivers of a) Vanderbilt was absent)
maximum width of monument sign and b) required landscaping
adjacent to interior site boundary lines. Property is located at 1201
South Brookhurst Street - Arco AM/PM Service station.
ACTION: Commissioner Koos offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Bostwick and MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), 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 Koos offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick
and MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), that the
Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve a one (1) year
retroactive extension of time (to expire on September 25, 2002) for Conditional
Use Permit No. 2000-04256 (Tracking No. CUP 2001-04452) based on the
following:
(i) That the proposed use remains in conformance with the current
zoning code and General Plan land use designation, and that
there have been no code amendments that would cause the
approval to be inconsistent with the zoning code.
(ii) That the property has been well maintained and is free of any
Code violations.
(iii) That this is the first request for an extension of time, and the
extension does not exceed the two permitted extensions of time
permitted by Code Section 18.03.090.0301. SR8101AN.DOC
10-22-01
Page 3
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
•
B. a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREV. APPROVED) Approved
b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4181 (TRACKING NO. CUP 2001- Approved Final Plans
04459~- REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF FINAL (with the added stipulation
PLANS: Pacific National Development, Attn: AI Marshall, 930 West made by the applicant at the
16{~et, #E2, Costa Mesa, CA 92627, requests review and meeting.)
approval of final building elevation, landscaping, signage, lighting,
mechanical equipment, trash enclosure, fencing and recreational area (Vote: 6-0, Chairperson
plans. Property is located at 3335-3351 West Lincoln Avenue - Lazy Vanderbilt was absent)
Living Mobile Home Park and Madrid Motel).
ACTION: Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), 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 Boydstun
and MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), that the
Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the final building
elevation, landscaping, signage, lighting, driveway treatments, mechanical
equipment, trash enclosure, fencing, and recreational area plans in
conjunction with a proposed 3-story, 132-unit "affordable" senior citizen's
apartment complex for Conditional Use Permit No. 4181 (Tracking No. CUP
2001-04459), with the following stipulations to be noted on plans submitted to
• the Building Division:
(i) That solid or opaque materials be used for the balcony walls
facing Lincoln Avenue. Such information shall be specifically
shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
(ii) That a 6-foot high block wall, as measured from the highest grade,
be provided along the west, north, and east property lines abutting
the existing single family homes. Such information shall be
specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
(iii) That the numeric address, in minimum nine (9) -inch letters, shall
be added to the proposed monument sign.
(iv) That as stipulated by the applicant at the meeting the balconies
facing Lincoln Avenue would not be used for storage other than
patio furniture and the balcony walls would be made with opaque
materials.
SR2093DS. DOC
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold introduced Item 1-B as a Senior Citizens Complex located at 3335-3351
West Lincoln Avenue.
Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, stated that Item 1-B is a request to review final plans for Conditional
• Use Permit No. 4181. As a condition of approval and recognizing Commission's approval of the project
earlier, Staff required the applicant to return with final architectural landscape plans. Staff recommends
Commission approve the final plans with the stipulations that are outlined on page 5, paragraph 17-B.
10-22-01
Page 4
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• A IicanYs Statement:
pP
Dao Doan, Senior Principal of Main Street Architect located in Ventura, California, stated he was present
to answer any questions raised by Commission and did not have any objections to the conditions issued
by the City. He believed they could comply with the conditions as stated.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold wished to clarify if that included the use of solid opaque materials.
Mr. Doan replied yes, and the primary concern is the elevation facing Lincoln Avenue. In discussions
with the Planning Department he understands that they can create an opaque balcony by having the
lower half stucco to match the building and having the upper half railing.
Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, concurred that the primary concern is Lincoln Avenue. He stated that
if the applicant complies with the stated conditions and has half stucco and half-railing, staff is okay with it
as long as whatever is going to be stored behind is screened from view.
Commissioner Boydstun asked if the stucco wall would screen the air conditioners that would be on the
deck.
Mr. Doan answered that it would certainly hide the air conditioners.
Commissioner Bostwick asked if there should be some type of condition to state that their rules and
regulations prohibit anything from being stored on the balconies other than patio type furniture.
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, replied that it is actually a condition of approval. The other
• conditions listed relate directly to the plan that has been submitted. To add an additional condition of
approval the condition would have to be called back for modification.
Commissioner Koos stated that if the wall were solid only half way off deck a number of things could be
visible to the public realm if conditions on the resolution were not tight on what could be placed on deck.
He stated that sometimes people put exercise bikes and other large items on their balconies that tend to
render an eyesore to the public.
AI Marshall, a representative of Main Street Architect stated that they were at the end of a very long
journey to be present so they would stipulate that the balcony would not show on Lincoln and also
stipulate in the management contract and agreements with individual residents that nothing would be
stored on the balconies other than patio furniture. They understand the concerns of the City and agree
with them entirely. They would like to make certain that all of Commission's concerns are met and they
have a bond issuance due November 20th in which they cannot miss any of the dates at this point. They
would prefer not to go to any kind of public hearing regarding this request and are willing to stipulate
accordingly.
During the Action:
Commissioner Bristol added that the CC&Rs should be noted as they specify stipulations regarding the
frontage of the units on Lincoln and that there be no storage.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold asked how it would be incorporated.
Mr. McCafferty replied that it could not be added as a formal condition of approval but it is stipulated in
the public record, and the project planner in this case would make sure in his review that the balconies
• accomplish the intent of the Commission.
10-22-01
Page 5
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
C. a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREV. APPROVED) Approved
b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000-04265 (TRACKING NO. CUP Approved Final Plans
2001-04468) - REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF Approved extension of time
FINAL PLANS AND REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME: Mercy for 1 year
Charities Housing California, Attn: Dara Kovel, 500 South Main Street (to expire on
#110, Orange, CA 92868, requests review and approval of final November 6, 2002)
elevation, landscaping, lighting, mechanical equipment and fencing
plans and extension of time to comply with conditions of approval. (Vote: 6-0, Chairperson
Property is located at 2240 West Lincoln Avenue. Vanderbilt was absent)
ACTION: Commissioner Koos offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Bostwick and MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), 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 Koos offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick
and MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), that the
Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the final elevation,
landscaping, lighting, mechanical equipment, and fencing and gate plans for a
previously-approved 3-story, 81-unit affordable (including density bonus)
senior citizen's apartment complex for Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04265
(Tracking No. CUP 2001-04468), with the following stipulations to be noted on
plans submitted to the Building Division:
• (i) That maximum 12-foot high parking lot light standards be
provided adjacent to residential properties.
(ii) That maximum 3-foot high fencing and handicapped railing shall
be constructed within the required front yard setback area
adjacent to Lincoln Avenue.
(iii) That the Eucalyptus and Brisbane Box trees shall be minimum
twenty-four (24) -inch box size.
(iv) That the proposed clinging vines on the trash enclosures and
perimeter walls shall be planted on maximum three (3) foot
centers.
(v) That the wall-mounted air conditioning grates shall be textured
and painted to match the building.
(vi) That the landscaping material (e.g. shrubs) used to screen the
utility equipment in the front setback shall be of sufficient size to
screen 75 percent of the equipment at the time of planting.
(vii) That the final specifications for the proposed identification sign
shall be compatible with the architecture and colors of the
building, and submitted to the Zoning Division for staff review.
Commissioner Koos offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick
~ and MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), that the
Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve a one (1) year
extension of time (to expire on November 6, 2002) for Conditional Use Permit
No. 2000-04265 (Tracking No. CUP 2001-04468) based on the following:
10-22-01
Page 6
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• (i) That the proposed use remains in conformance with the current
Zoning Code and General Pian land use designation, and that
there have been no code amendments that directly affect the
requested extension, that would cause the original approval to
be inconsistent with the zoning code.
(ii) That since the original approval in November of 2000, the
petitioner has been working closely with various public agencies
to complete the project financing and to comply with conditions
of approval and complete the necessary on- and off-site
improvements.
(iii) That this is the first request for an extension of time for this
permit, and the extension does not exceed the two permitted
extensions of time permitted by Code Section 18.03.090.0301.
(iv) That this vacant property is maintained in a clean and safe
condition and there are no code violations on the property at this
time.
•
u
SR2096DS.DOC
10~ 22-01
Page 7
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
•
D. a) CEQA EXEMPTION - SECTION 15061 (b)(3) Concurred with staff
b) GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2001-00398 - REQUEST FOR Approved initiation, with
CITY-INITIATED GENERAL PLAN PROCEEDINGS: City of modifications
Anaheim, Community Development Department, Attn: Lisa Stipkovich,
201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805, requests for (Vote: 4-2, Chairperson
Planning Commission initiation of General Plan Amendment Vanderbilt absent)
proceedings. Property is approximately 120 acres generally bounded
by Broadway to the north, East Street on the east, Vermont Street on
the south and Olive street on the west (Downtown Industrial Area).
ACTION: Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), 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 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirements to prepare
additional environmental documentation.
Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman
and MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), that the
Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby initiate a General Plan
Amendment for the redesignation of the Downtown Industrial Area from the
General lndustrial land use designation to the Low-Medium Density
Residential and Medium Density Residential land use designations.
• THE MOTION FAILED TO CARRY DUE TO THE FOLLOWING TIE VOTE:
AYES: Arnold, Bristol, Eastman
NOES: Bostwick, Boydstun, Koos
ABSENT: Vanderbilt
Commissioner Koos offered an alternate motion, seconded by Commissioner
Eastman and MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), that
the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby initiate a General Plan
Amendment for the redesignation of the Downtown Industrial Area from the
General Industrial land use designation to residential and other alternative
land use designations; and to implement a planning process with public input
and workshops with the Anaheim Colony Neighborhood Council, Planning
Commission, Redevelopment Commission and if requested, the City Council
along with providing updates to City Council.
THE MOTION PASSED WITH THE FOLLOWtNG VOTE:
AYES: Arnold, Bristol, Eastman, Koos
NOES: Bostwick, Boydstun
ABSENT: Vanderbilt
SR2095DS. DOC
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold introduced Item 1-D as a request for the Planning Commission initiation
• of general plan amendment proceedings related to the downtown industrial area. He stated that this is
not an approval of anything at this point but rather the initiation of further hearings at some point and time
in the near future on a general plan amendment.
10-22-01
Page 8
OC70BER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• Brad Hobson, Community Development, concurred that it is a general plan amendment from industrial of
120 acres to a residential mix of low medium and medium density. He stated that as they proceed with
analysis of the general plan amendment and development of the amendment itself, they would also be
developing an urban design plan that would address circulation, streetscape, and development issues
with regard to different types of residential that might be pursued in the area. It would include the north
and south side of Santa Ana Street all the way from Harbor Boulevard over to East Street and the
adjoining areas on this particular study area. Community Development would expect to return with other
plans right after the first of the year. The agency currently has an escrow of a 16-acre site at Olive Street
and Santa Ana Street and depending on the outcome of those environmental studies they would be able
to determine how much if not al{ of that could be developed as residential.
Commissioner Bostwick asked Mr. Hobson if he had discussed with Firmenich about their property.
Mr. Hobson stated they were in discussions at this point with Firmenich about their property but not in-
depth about long-term plans in the area or their immediate needs. Firmenich is in the process of
expanding and they want to do some landscaping in the area. Community Development is scheduled to
talk with them and will address the issue of their property.
Commissioner Bostwick asked if in their plans there was anything that would stop them from doing the
general plan and their overall study about having the general plan amendment.
Mr. Hobson responded that the objective of using the general plan as one of the tools to help guide
development in the area is that over the long term they would expect to see a conversion from industrial
to residential. The existing uses would continue to the extent that zoning remains the same, and from the
agency's perspective, overtime they would pursue different sectors of this area to go ahead and do
residential projects.
• Commissioner Bostwick affirmed that they could still do their development plan, traffic pattern and all the
things, etc., without having a general plan amendment.
Mr. Hobson confirmed that it was absolutely true but would also like to be able to implement it and
indicate to Development Community and the property owners what the City's direction is in that area. Fie
stated it is similar to what they did with the overlay zone on Anaheim Boulevard which is a general plan
amendment and that one adds uses that a property owner could pursue as well as their existing zoning
that is in place.
Commissioner Bostwick asked what happens if the Quikset site is not appropriate for residential.
Mr. Hobson responded that even if a portion of it were not appropriate for residential they would be
looking at an alternate use; an R&D park and building the appropriate buffers and address how circulation
would work in that incident.
Commissioner Koos stated that he is curious along the same lines as Commissioner Bostwick and
wondered if potentially this action is maybe premature. He was surprised to see it on today's agenda
because he had not heard about it in a formal sense and being somewhat involved in a predominant
neighborhood community of this area he had not really heard about it otherwise. He is wondering, given
this is a corner of the Anaheim Colony, if this is a staff driven process in the sense that the Planning
Commission Meeting is the first setting it has been presented to.
Mr. Hobson confirmed that the Planning Commission Meeting is the first stop on the circuit. If
Commission and City Council says to go ahead and look at it they would proceed and take it to the
Colony because there would be a lot of detail associated with it and they would look at the other sequel
issues related to it. After the first of the year they would have a better direction to go to the Quikset site
~ which is critical because there are 16 acres. There has been talk for a long time even as they were
processing and pursuing the overlay zone on Anaheim Boulevard about what to do with the industrial east
of Anaheim Boulevard down to Ball Road.
10-22-01
Page 9
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ Commissioner Koos asked between now and January what kind of planning steps, public outreach, etc,
would they conduct to arrive at the chosen designations.
Mr. Hobson responded that there are the neighborhood councils and that would include the Colony and
the area on the south end of the historic zone, as well as property owners.
Commissioners Koos stated that he is in favor of the concept but his concern is that there would be a lot
of staff work and consultant work occurring between now and the future date only to have Community
Development arrive at the Planning Commission Meeting with a schedule and tentative plans to proceed
along that path. He suggests maybe there should be a workshop mid-term or something to make sure
they are on the right track and to prevent them from being surprised later.
Mr. Hobson concurred that the suggestion was very reasonable and that they were looking at something
that was on the mix of low medium and medium density. He states whether it is site specific or not and
whatever general densities they are looking at they know they have something less than 36 units an acre
and something greater than 8 or 10 units under low medium. They will be able to complete enough work
to have alternatives brought forth and be able to discuss issues associated with a lot of those alternatives.
Commissioner Koos stated that it seems that they are taking bits and pieces of the City and some of them
are actually overlapping the Colony area. South Anaheim Boulevard goes all of the way down to the
freeway and it ends at the northern end of Broadway and the new development seems to grab a corner of
the Colony and stretches up and then dips down. So it seems that there is a lot that overlaps the Colony
and he wondered why they were not looking at this in more of a comprehensive fashion rather than a
piece at a time. He hoped to have a comprehensive housing strategy in which to reinvigorate certain
neighborhoods and transform them back into their original state. He wondered if there were not some
level of visioning that should take place before initiating more general plan changes.
• Mr. Hobson stated they should think about it in terms of when they brought the overlay zone forward.
That zone also has a meandering boundary, it is adjacent to South Anaheim Boulevard but the concept
was to protect and enhance all of the existing single family neighborhoods that adjoin it and that are
included in the Colony area. So from their perspective those existing neighborhoods are something to be
protected and enhanced. Since the district boundaries of the Colony has been approved there has been
some great sales and a lot of activity with people improving their homes. So from a vision perspective,
those neighborhoods would remain intact. Initially, Community Development took the spine down South
Anaheim Boulevard and discussed whether or not to get into the issue of conversion of some of the older
industrial property to residential and decided against it so that they could move the piece that was more
straightforward South Anaheim Boulevard.
Commissioner Koos stated he wanted to make sure that Commission periodicafly gets updates or
something. He is concerned that Community Development would proceed with some very specific
concepts, including urban design issues before they return to a Planning Commission Meeting to
enlighten them on proceedings. There is a lot of intecest in the Colony with what Community
Development has done in setting the stage to take it to the next level. Meaning if there is some housing
that guarantees in place that construction is consistent with the Colony, Commission really needs to make
sure it is done right and go through a true planning process.
Mr. Hobson stated that they would be taking plans forward to various neighborhood councils and the
Redevelopment Commission and would certainly be happy to come back to some of the Planning
Commission's workshops along the way for a discussion about what they found todate and where they
might be headed before adding it to the Commission's agenda.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold stated that it is obvious that all of the Commissioners have questions
with respect to specifics and details, etc., so if this passes today it is something Commission would be
• looking for a lot of information on.
Mr. Hobson responded that with Commission's direction today and ultimately the City Council's direction
they would go through a detailed work program.
10-22-01
Page 10
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ Commissioner Bristol offered a motion for CEQA Categorical Exemption No. Section No. 15061 B3,
seconded by Commissioner Boydstun. Motion carried.
During the Action:
Commissioner Bristol offered a motion for request for the initiation of general p{an amendment
proceedings clarifying that it is general plan proceedings to look into this particular area and its boundary.
Commissioner Koos responded that he thinks that they often initiate general plan proceedings based on
the community planning program because parts of the city has inconsistencies between the zoning and
the general plan but he thinks this is more than that for this area. He thinks this is the development of
more of a master plan in conjunction with the general plan and zoning code.
Commissioner Bristol concurred and assured that he would be very attentive to the plan when it returns
because Community Development would be taking a large poction of Anaheim and everyone is
concerned with what is going to be done with it.
Mr. Hobson responded that the general plan amendment and the urban design plan or master plan would
come back together and that is how they would know whether or not it is going to work or if the City
decides to go that route and how it could work.
Commissioner Bostwick responded that he thinks it is premature since they are going through the general
plan amendment process with the consultants and they could do their studies and come up with their plan
without initiating Planning Commission's approval. He suggests when Community Development has their
plan down and they know what is going to happen and they have the pieces of the pie put together; the
• railroad, the Firmenich, and the Quikset in a complete package, then they shoufd come and talk to the
Planning Commission.
Commissioner Boydstun concurred with Commissioner Bostwick. She is concerned that they have new
warehouses at Vermont Street and Olive Street and a lot of businesses in this area so to say relocating
them sounds great but the freeway proved that over 50% would move out of the City. She feels it would
be a detriment to the businesses.
Commissioner Koos stated that both Commissioners Bostwick and Boydstun are very persuasive. He
has been on the fence on this one and even though he seconded the motion he thinks they could
probably do this as a master planning or visioning process without initiating a general plan. He asked if
there is a mechanism by which Commission could give them direction to have a visioning process and a
master planning process and preserve the general planning changes initiation until later.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold asked Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, what the options were if
Commission has interest in Redevelopment pursuing planning and visioning processes but not at the
stage of pursuing a general plan amendment.
Ms. Mann stated that the actions before Commission today was just to initiate the general plan
amendment. 7here is not anything to require the general plan amendment to come back in a particular
period of time. Commissions' options are to approve the initiation, deny the initiation, approve the
initiation possibly with directions that there be some sort of interim step that is a master plan prior to the
time that the general plan amendment comes back in order to comment upon the direction that the plan is
taking.
Commissioner Koos stated that given those options he wished to withdraw his second of the motion.
• Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold asked Commissioner Bristol since he made the motion what did he wish
to do.
10-22-01
Page 11
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ Commissioner Bristol stated that he knows the general plan amendment procedure is 18-24 months, 20%
of a decade. He thinks what they are trying to do is put it out for discussion and he is up for discussing
the issue. He feels Mr. Hobson would not be present if he did not have someone pushing this issue. He
asked if the City Council and Redevelopment Agency did not think this is the procedure Community
Development should go or at least look at.
Mr. Hobson responded that it is also very important for their Housing Element that forward motion is
shown on identifying additional properties that may be available for residential development in the City of
Anaheim. That is another consideration and they would bring back a comprehensive package that would
include a general plan amendment and the urban design plan following discussion along the way on an
informal basis with all the parties concerned. They do not necessarily want to wait two years for the
overall general plan. In fact, they would be breaking out for this portion of it under an agency contract
with The Planning Center who is doing the long term general plan amendment for the entire city.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold stated ihat they would be brief at the general plan advisory committee
on the results of the various stay groups, visioning meetings, public input, etc., on the general plan
revision process. He asked has this come up in this process, and if any attention has been given to this
so far. Additionally there have been a variety of public meetings and various citizen groups and individual
citizens have been involved so he asked if this has been floated to the public.
Mr. Hobson responded not at the public meetings but with regard to working with the consultants and
taking it into consideration and having the economist look at the entire area south to Balf Road from that
perspective, yes.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold stated that he believes what he hears Commissioner Koos saying is that
there reaNy needs to be a significant amount of public input on this because there has been public input
• process on the general plan and this could appear like an end run around that process. So at the
minimum this needs to have some direction to it that there be a public input visioning process that goes
with it.
Commissioner Bristol stated by doing this they are going to get pubfic input. He is not firm on the plan.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold asked Commissioner Bristol if he would be willing to reoffer his motion
with directions that there be public input, committee meetings, and some interim briefing.
Commissioner Bristol responded yes, anything he wanted to do.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold suggested community meetings, public input and interim briefings of the
Planning Commission are the three critical things.
Commissioner Koos clarified that the only reason he pulled back his second to the motion was because it
was not formalized in fashion and more so because hearing what Commissioners Bostwick and Boydstun
stated in the sense that Community Development did not necessarily need to have a general plan
amendment process to do these kinds of visioning efforts. Fie stated "it is like putting the cart before the
horse". He asked what would they be changing to if they did not know exactly what they wanted. Either
way, Commission does not want ta tie the hands of staff because they want them to study the entire plan.
Commissioner Bostwick stated that they could do that without starting the process. Community
Development has been studying and thinking about this all along and even while they bought the property
they were thinking about it. So it is not like it has not been thought about or talked about. They can do
the studies on what we are worth. They are going to do their studies on the ground conditions and
whether they can build on it or not at least residential-wise what the contamination levels are. They are
still talking with the railroad about abandoning the railroad line and getting the railroad to move some of
• their locations so all of those things are in the discussion.
Commissioner Eastman wished to clarify if this is partly an administrative type of move that is possibly
brought about by the fact that the City is under increasing pressure to move forward or show forward
10-22-01
Page 12
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• movement on housing sites. She stated that is an area where studies have shown that Anaheim does not
offer enough housing and enough medium to low housing and the Commission does have to
administratively show that they have good faith and are going in the right direction.
Mr. Hobson responded yes, that is one element of it. Also the City does own property in the area that
could be residential at some point. This is early in the process. Community DevelopmenYs process
includes working with all community groups, the Planning Commission, and the Redevelopment
Commission. The Planning Commission is the first stop on this little journey so that is why it is brought to
Commission as a package. Community Development recommends Commission approve that package.
Commissioner Bristol stated that he thinks this action would get them off the "dime" talking to people
versus not doing it and allowing them to do it on their own. He thinks this is probably the best thing to do
as far as getting discussions going. He chose to stay with the same motion.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold asked if he wanted to initiate plan amendment proceedings and if he
wanted to put in any of the directions with the condition.
Commissioner Bristol responded yes, but he thinks Commission is going beyond what they should be
doing. He thinks that everybody is going to pay attention. He asked Mr. Hobson if he had to notify other
property owners.
Mr. Hobson responded absolutely.
Commissioner Bristol asked how far did they have to go outside the boundaries, 300 feet or a 100 feet
notification?
• Mr. Hobson responded he assumes it is 300 feet but everybody would know about it long before they get
to that point and they would keep bringing it back to Commission until they are told to stop.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold announced motion by Commissioner Bristol and seconded by
Commissioner Eastman. The motion failed to a tie vote; Commissioners Bristol, Eastman and Arnold
voting in favor and Commissioners Koos, Boydstun and Bostwick voting against.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold asked if the City Council could just set it themselves regardless to the
Planning Commission.
Ms. Mann replied that the City Council has broad powers and yes they could initiate the code.
Commissioner Koos offered a motion to initiate a general plan amendment for the designation of the
downtown industrial area from the general industrial use to non-industrial land uses, not being specific on
medium and low medium residential as determined through a visioning planning process conducted over
the next few months to include a nonspecific number of ineetings and workshops with the Anaheim
Colony Neighborhood Council, Anaheim Redevelopment Commission, Anaheim Planning Commission
and Anaheim City Council.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold announced the motion by Commissioner Koos and seconded by
Commissioner Eastman.
Commissioner Boydstun stated that she is having a problem understanding why Commission is changing
the general plan at a time they are paying consultants a big price to go completely over their general plan
and when they do not know what could be done with Quikset. She strongly feels that they are "putting the
cart before the horse" and it is wrong.
• Mr. Hobson responded that with regard to the whole general plan update process with the City, it is two to
three years out, and there are pieces that they have brought forward out of sequence and that they will
continue to bring forward out of sequence in order to continue to implement the redevelopment plans.
10-22-01
Page 13
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ This happens to be one of them and certainly the agency is using their consultant so there would be
consistency.
Commissioner Boydstun stated that with her background she is probusiness and she feels it is against it.
Commissioner Bostwick concurred with Commissioner Boydstun. He stated that the Commission has not
turned down other requests for general plan amendments such as on Gilbert Street and Crescent
Avenue, Magnolia Avenue and Crescent Avenue, and other places in the City where it made sense but
he just does not think at this time this makes sense. There are too many pieces that are not put together
and there are too many unknowns to start this whole process at this particular time. Maybe six months or
a year from now they might have it all laid out and it would all work, but he is not willing to do it at this
time. The motion is fine, it tells you that you want community activity but they are going to do that
regardless of the motion.
Commissioner Koos stated that the reason he voted no before is because he did not look at this simply as
a typical generaf plan amendment process that Commission goes through with the community planning
process because it is more detail involved than just zoning consistency along Lincoln Avenue and Gilbert
Street.
Commissioner Bostwick concurred with Commissioner Koos that they might not necessarily do what
Commission is asking them to do.
Commissioner Bristol stated that he still think this is to get residential. He suggests this may be a good
place for some type of commercial for the residents and for the neighborhood. He stated that he did not
want to take away the process of what the City does but the more he looks at the plan he agrees with
what Mr. Hobson indicated. This is to help with the housing element and yet they are not supposed to
~ stand still for two years waiting for what the consultants tell Commission. On the other hand if
Commission is to look at this area and press through in order to get residential it has potential for pretty
good industrial.
Commissioner Koos stated that Commissioner Bristol would perhaps support his original statement of
non-industrial land uses or alternative land uses.
Commissioner Bristol replied exactly.
Commissioner Koos amended his motion to say alternative land uses.
Commissioner Eastman stated that it need to say residential and alternative land uses so that it fits within
residential because she feels their intent is to make the neighborhoods a little more cohesive. Right now
there is residential across the street from industrial and something creative can be done there combining
both services.
Commissioner Koos concurred that it is a fair statement because Commission does in planning go
through alternative analysis and through a planning process they might discount non-residential right off
the bat but feels it should be looked at. He feels neighborhood compatible commercial might fit in but
they have to go through the planning process. He amended his motion to state alternative land uses,
alternative residential and other alternative land uses.
Commissioner Eastman seconded the motion.
Commissioner Boydstun stated that they could do this without changing the general plan. By changing
the general plan, they are also effecting everybody in that district and their economic values. She feels it
is very unfair when there is no plan to know what is going to go there.
• Commissioner Koos stated that she was right in so far as it will change the land use designations of the
existing property owners but by voting today on this they were certainly not voting on a change. They
were voting to begin a process.
10-22-01
Page 14
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• Commissioner Boydstun responded that they are voting to change a general plan and that would effect
them.
Commissioner Koos stated that Commission was voting to look at changing the general plan.
Commissioner Bostwick stated that they were voting to look at changing the general plan and that would
open up discussion and it would have stigmatism over top of the property values in the area.
Commissioner Boydstun concurred and stated that there were well-established businesses there that
Commission would be cutting their feet out from under.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold announced motion by Commissioner Koos and seconded by
Commissioner Eastman. Motion carried.
•
~
~~
10-22-01
Page 15
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
r
•
•
E. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission
Meeting of September 24, 2001. (Continued from the Planning
Commission meeting of October 8, 2001.) (MOTION)
Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission
Meeting of October 8, 2001. (MOTION)
Continued to
November 5, 2001
(This item was not discussed)
(Vote: 6-0, Chairperson
Vanderbilt was absent)
- --------------------------------
Continued to
November 5, 2001
(This item was not discussed)
(Vote: 6-0, Chairperson
Vanderbilt was absent)
10-22-01
Page 16
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
•
•
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
Continued to
2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION November 5, 2001
2b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04409
OWNER: Madison Squares Anaheim Hills, 2795 West Lincoln
Avenue, Suite F, Anaheim, CA 92801
AGENT: The Consulting Group, Attn: Duan Dao, 18500 Von
Karman Avenue, Suite 870, Irvine, CA 92612
LOCATION: 7777 East Santa Ana Canvon Road. Property is
approximately 3.06 acres located at the terminus of
Camino Tampico, with a frontage of 783 feet on the
northwest side of Santa Ana Canyon Road located 390
feet northeast of the centerline of Eucalyptus Drive
(Madison Squares Self Storage).
To permit a telecommunications antenna and accessory ground-mounted
equipment.
Continued from the August 13, September 10 and October 8, 2001
Planning Commission meetings.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR8108VN.DOC
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and
MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), to continue the subject request
to the November 5, 2001 Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant additional
time in order to finalize alternative plans.
VOTE: 6-0 (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent)
DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
•
10-22-01
Page 17
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
•
3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04404
OWNER: Synod of Southern California, 1501 Wilshire Boulevard,
Los Angeles, CA 90017-2205
AGENT: The Consulting Group, Attn: Paul Kim, 18500 Von
Karman Avenue, Suite 850, Irvine, CA 92612
LOCATION: 2580 West Oranae Avenue. Property is
approximately 2.6 acres located at the southeast corner
of Orange and Magnolia Avenues (St. Pauls
Presbyterian Church).
To permit a telecommunications antenna and accessory ground-mounted
equipment.
Continued from the August 13, September 10, September 24 and
October 8, 2001 Planning Commission meetings.
•
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO
Continued to
November 5, 2001
SR8075VN. DOC
i FOLLOWfNG 1S A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACT10N. ~
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristol and
MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), to continue the subject request
to the November 5, 2001 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow the applicant
additional time to finalize revised plans.
VOTE: 6-0 (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent)
DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
•
10-22-01
Page 18
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
•
4a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
4c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04417
OWNER: Leedy Ying Trustee, 12550 Whittier Boulevard,
Whittier, CA 90602
AGENT: GPA Architects, fnc., 1240 North Jefferson # J,
Anaheim, CA 92807
LOCATION: 101 East Ball Road. Property is approximately 3.4
acres located at the northeast corner of Ball Road and
Anaheim Boulevard.
To estabfish a three-unit commercial retail center with waiver of minimum
number of parking spaces.
Continued from the August 27 and September 24, 2001 Planning
Commission meetings.
C ~
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
Continued to
November 5, 2001
SR8120KB.DOC
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. ~
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman and
MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), to continue the subject request
to the November 5, 2001 Planning Commission meeting in order for the petitioner to
attend the public hearing as he was out of town for today's meeting.
VOTE: 6-0 (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent)
DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
•
10-22-01
Page 19
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• 5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved
5b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved
5c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04448 Granted
OWNER: SGF Limited Partnership, 201 South Anaheim
Boulevard, Suite 1003, Anaheim, CA 92805
AGENT: Hardin Honda, Attn: Dennis Hardin, 1381 Auto Center
Drive, Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: 1330 Auto Center Drive. Property is approximately
2.95 acres with frontages of 399 feet on the south side of Auto Center
Drive and 366 feet on the north side of Sanderson Avenue located 445
feet west of the centerline of Phoenix Club Drive.
To establish an automotive sales lot with employee parking in conjunction
with an existing automotive dea{ership with waiver of required parking lot
landscaping.
Continued from the October 8, 2001 Planning Commission meeting.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC2001-150 SR8104KB.DOC
• Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold introduced Item No. 5 as 1330 Auto Center Drive, a request for GUP
and waiver of code requirement for parking lot landscaping for an automotive sales lot with employee
parking.
Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, announced that there were no additions to the staff report.
Applicant's Statement:
Dennis Hardin stated he was present to answer any questions and feels the staff report speaks for itself.
Commissioner Boydstun stated it looks good and certainly looks better than the vacant lot.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISStON ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Approved CEQA Negative Declaration
Approved Waiver of Code Requirement
Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-04448 subject to the conditions of approval as
stated in the staff report dated October 22, 2001.
• VOTE: 6-0 (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent)
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
10-22-01
Page 20
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
•
6a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATiVE DECLARATION (READVERTISED) Continued to
6b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT November 5, 2001
6c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04366
OWNER: Living Stream, A California Non-Profit Corporation,
2431 West La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801
AGENT: John Pester, 2431 West La Palma Avenue, Anaheim,
CA 92801
LOCATION: 2411 - 2461 West La Palma Avenue and 1212 North
Hubbell Wav. Property is approximately 40.4 acres
located at the northwest corner of La Palma Avenue
and Gilbert Street, and at the northern terminuses of
Hubbell Way and Electric Way (Living Stream Ministry
and former Hubbell Site).
To permit a teleconferencing center and private conference/training
center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
Continued from the June 4, July 16 and August 27, and September 10
and September 24, 2001 Planning Commission meetings.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR1109TW.DOC
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold introduced Item No. 6 as 2411-2461 West La Palma Avenue and 1212
North Hubbell Way, The Living Stream Teleconferencing Center.
Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, stated that there were changes to the staff report: On page 13,
Condition No. 10 should be deleted. Paragraph 30 on page 8 which discusses growth management is in
error. In fact there was an extensive analysis of the growth management element and the requirements
that a performance evaluation be done based upon the traffic impacts of the project which the applicant
completed.
Applicant's Statement:
John Pester, stated on behalf of The Living Stream Ministry it was his understanding that the
representatives from the police department would like some additional time to consider the possible traffic
impacts of the plan and that they request a two-week continuance. The Living Stream Ministry is in favor
of the two-week continuance, however, they feel it might be good to give Commission an opportunity to
express any concerns or issues that they might like to address so that everyone could be aware of it in
the course of the police review of the plan. They are in support of all of the traffic management conditions
that are currently in the proposal and are willing to work with them.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold asked if Alfred Yalda of Public Works, or a representative from the
police department would like to speak.
•
Mr. Yalda responded that there was a representative from the police department present but they just
wanted to hear Commission's concerns and would review the project and come up with conditions for the
plan.
Commissioner Bostwick referred to Mr. Pester and stated that there was currently a church on Ball Road
and wondered if the church would remain there or if all the operations would move up to the new location.
10-22-01
Page 21
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• Mr. Pester responded that the facility on Ball Road would remain. He clarified that the facility at 2431
West La Palma Avenue is not a church and they did not anticipate using it as a church. It is the corporate
headquarters of The Living Stream Ministry, which is a publishing company.
Commissioner Bostwick referred to the Korean Church on the corner of La Palma Avenue and Brookhurst
Street and stated that a number of the parishioners park on The Living Stream Ministry facility and asked
if there was a parking agreement with them or some type of arrangement for that.
Mr. Pester stated that they have a very short-term parking agreement with them. When they had a
previous action before Commission one of the items listed was to try to coordinate with neighbors to
reduce parking related to their facility events but The Living Stream Ministry took that as a kind of desire
on the part of the city to see if they could assist Sa Rang in relieving some of their traffic congestions so
they allowed them to use their parking lot as an overflow parking facility. They did not have the
realization that there was a desire on the part of the City to have the parking arrangement approved by
the Traffic Management Department. They are more than willing to have them do that and if the City
makes the determination that it does not want Sa Rang using their facility on days when they are not
using it as an overflow facility, they are willing to accede to the wish of the City.
Commissioner Bostwick stated that his reason for that question is that he thinks there has to be obviously
a very good coordination between The Living Stream Ministry facility, the Sa Rang facility and the City
Traffic Management to make sure that everyone is not exiting and entering and utilizing all the streets at
the same time. He feels there would obviously be big traffic congestions.
Mr. Pester stated that they definitely have a situation where they will never have simultaneous events with
Sa Rang using their parking lot. Right now they are using the parking lot as an overflow parking facility
primarily on Sundays and they shuttle back and forth. Whatever the City wants related to this point, if it
• wants to stop the use of the parking as an overflow parking facility they are happy with that. If the City
Commissioner Bristol referred to Mr. Pester and stated they had a long discussion about this same issue
in the morning session and this use is one of the uses that have more parking, more trips, and more
extensive trips between 3 and 4 p.m. that they have seen in a long time. It affects the residents on
Magnolia Avenue, La Palma Avenue, and Gilbert Street to a great extent. Not only are they impacting it
from 3 to 4 p.m. which is typically a get-away for a lot of people they are affecting it after hours; 10:30
p.m. for certain times of the year. Additionally you have made a request to give a few more days for
extending weekends. The Living Stream Ministry on those events is putting some heavy traffic on the
streets. The parking study indicates the bus shuttle; the shuttle comes in and leaves and the vehicles are
three per vehicle at 1.81 % depending on the time of the day and the event, but if you take the 80%
between 3 and 4 p.m. it results in heavy traffic. It is one thing to have it on the streets but it is another
thing once inside for stacking. He tried to envision the property and drove it once again and asked
himself where are the vehicles going to be at 33 a minute if something happens, if one car backs in, what
is going to happen to it. The internal circulation concerns him also and he feels it should concern The
Living Stream Ministry. There is nothing in the plans about that anywhere except they state they are
going to talk about it. He advises that they be proactive because everybody is very sensitive about
residents and very sensitive of the noise and the light of the vehicles and buses, etc., after 10:00 p.m.
He informs what Commission is trying to do is get more infinitive on what is going to happen; a plan so
that it is proactive and they are not guessing how they are going to circulate inside the Living Stream
• Ministry Parking lot.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold stated that he is gathering what Commissianer Bristol is saying is that
the internal circulation is then going to affect what happens on the streets. If the cars are all backed up
inside the property then they are going to back up onto the street.
wants us to sit down with Sa Rang, The Living Stream Ministry, City Management and the City Traffic
Department and work out a control, they are willing to do that too. Their view when they allowed Sa Rang
to use their parking lots on Sunday, which they do not use at all on Sundays, was to try to find a way to
eliminate some of the traffic congestion problems that were occurring on the other side. They are
certainly not in it for any kind of monetary reason; they get $25 a day for the use of their parking lot. It is
more of a good faith cooperative arrangement that they are trying to have.
10-22-01
Page 22
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ Commissioner Boydstun asked Mr. Pester how was he conducting traffic control. Her understanding was
that they were to be working with the police department.
Mr. Pester responded that since the previous CUP was approved they have used the facility for two major
teleconference events. Once during Christmas 2000 and once during the July 4th holiday. He explained
that the first event they had police directing traffic on the streets and traffic went very smoothly. For the
subsequent event which occurred on July 4'h there was an unfortunate miscommunication between them
and the Anaheim Police Department. A faxed request to the police department went over approximately
a month before the event occurred. A confirmation was never received but on the day the event began
police cars were there in the early afternoon and it was assumed that it was indicative of the fact that they
had police traffic management in place the same way they had for the previous training. It turned out that
the police cars were just taking a break by their site and did not have police supervision for the event. He
stated it is their every intention for their events to have po{ice present.
Commissioner Boydstun stated that she was one of the people that could not get down La Palma Avenue
because all of the cars were coming out and there seemed to be no direction and the signals were not yet
done so that they could have had any control that way. She asked when the signals on Gilbert Street
would be complete and when the changes would be done on Magnolia Avenue.
Mr. Pester stated that they are in the process of finalizing their big package for the left turn at Gilbert
Street and La Palma Avenue and they expect to let that contract probably within the next month. They
needed to make sure that the specification plans they received from the City were what the City wanted
and then they needed to coordinate with the City to locate some contractors that the City Staff felt
comfortable with installing the lights. After that they would be in the process of finalizing the big package
according to the City specifications.
~ Commissioner Boydstun asked if he was going to have left turns from both directions. She stated that
she is very concerned about the neighborhood there where there is a possibility of cars coming out of The
Living Stream Ministry facility and going down Gilbert Street and completely blocking the people in with
the amount of traffic that is there.
Mr. Pester responded that right now the condition says that traffic exiting the facility cannot go south on
Gilbert Street.
Commissioner Boydstun asked how he would control that.
Mr. Pester responded that is a point they would need to consider with the Anaheim Police Department
and Traffic Management over the next two weeks finding a way to make sure that could be done. In
terms of Commissioner Bristol's concern about interior circulation, he recognized it, as a principal item
that needs to be addressed because the extent to which there is effective internal circulation is the extent
to which bottlenecks are created out on the street. They have tried to devise a plan of internal circulation
that brings the cars as far into the property as possible before they direct them into a parking lot so that
they can have the longest stream of cars coming into their site. The majority of the cars arrive within 45
minutes of the meeting and they can actually get most of those cars into the lot within 20 minutes. On
exiting, they can typically exit all the cars because they have numerous exit points; they can exit them in
less than 15 minutes.
Commissioner Bristol asked if he has had 10,000 people there yet.
Mr. Pester responded no.
Commissioner Bristol stated he is looking at the 10,000 people. Because the numbers currently listed do
• not reflect the circulation of 10,000 people.
Mr. Pester responded that one of the things that the City has been very supportive of that will help the
internal circulation when they do have 10,000 people is that they have indicated in principal that they are
10-22-01
Page 23
OCTOSER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ willing to abandon a portion of the easement that the City has at the end of Gilbert Street that would allow
cars to come into Gilbert Street and directly access the back driveway that runs along 1-5. Right now
Gilbert has a cul-de-sac and the City has indicated that in order to facilitate traffic movement into and out
of the property they are willing to abandon the portion from the end of the cul-de-sac so that it will be a
smooth transition into their property rather than having to make several interior turns within the property to
facilitate interior circulation. He assures he is more than willing to sit down with members of traffic
management and look at their internaf circulation. Right now they manage interior circulation through the
use of not allowing cars immediately turning into the parking lot off of La Palma Avenue to make an
immediate turn into one of the parking spaces because as they try to slow down to make the turn it
causes cars behind them to slow down as well. So they try to bring cars into the farthest interior point of
the lot and park them first and then fill the parking lot up that way. So they do have an internal circulation
plan but he is more than willing to have the experts at the City review it.
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold announced motion from Commissioner Bosfinrick to continue the item
until November 5, 2001, and seconded by Commissioner Bristol. Motion passed.
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. ~
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristol and
MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), to continue the subject request
to the November 5, 2001 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow Police
Qepartment staff additional time to review the Traffic Management Plan pertaining to traffic
• circulation on the interior of the subject facility and surrounding public streets.
VOTE: 6-0 (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent)
DISCUSSION TIME: 18 minutes (2:34-2:52)
•
10-22-01
Page 24
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMM1SSlON MINUTES
~
7a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
7b. COND{T{ONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3148
(TRACKING NO. CUP 2001-04436)
OWNER: Taylor Bus Service, Inc., P. O. Box 1062, West
Sacramento, CA 95691
AGENT: Daniel Boulange, 917 East Gene Autry Way, Anaheim,
CA 92805
LOCATION: 917 East Gene Autrv Wav. Property is approximately
4.3 acres located at the southeasterly corner of Lewis
Street and Anaheim Way.
Request to reinstate this permit by the modification or deletion of a
condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (originally approved on
July 17, 1984, to expire on September 1, 2001) to retain an existing bus
storage terminal.
Continued from the September 24, 2001 Planning Commission meeting.
•
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
Continued to
November 19, 2001
SR8121 K8. DOC
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick and
MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), to continue the subject request
to the November 19, 2001 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow the petitioner
additional time to comply with outstanding conditions of approval pertaining to the existing
unpermitted modular office buildings.
VOTE: 6-0 (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent)
DtSCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
~
10-22-01
Page 25
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to
8b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2001-00059 November 5, 2001
8c. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
8d. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04453
8e. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16233
OWNER: John Priem, 12012 Knott Street, Garden Grove, CA
92841
Mr. Shih Chang, C/O James Chang, P. O. Box 8032,
Newport Beach, CA 92658
AGENT: Comstock Homes, Attn: Brad Porter, 321 12th Street,
Suite 200, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
LOCATION: 832 South Knott Avenue. Property is approximately
2.1 acres with a frontage of 243 feet on the east side of
Knott Avenue located 280 feet south of the centerline of
Rome Avenue.
Reclassification No. 2001-00059 - Petitioner requests reclassification
from the RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) Zone to the RM-3000
(Residential, Multiple - Family) Zone or less intense zone.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-04453 - To permit a detached and
• attached condominium project with waivers of a) minimum parking space
dimension, b) maximum structural height adjacent to a single-family zone,
c) required building setback adjacent to a major arterial highway and d}
minimum distance between buildings.
Tentative Tract Map No. 16233 - To establish a one-lot condominium
subdivision to construct 18 detached and attached residential
condominiums.
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION NO.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR8128KB.DOC
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. ~
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick and
MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), to continue the subject request
to the November 5, 2001 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow the applicant
additional time to complete a redesign of the subject project to address concerns raised by
staff.
• VOTE: 6-0 (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent)
DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
10-22-01
Page 26
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
9a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
9b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
9c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04451
OWNER: Jill A. Richter and J. Rise Richter of Richter Farms
Trust, 5505 Garden Grove Boulevard, Westminister,
CA 92683
AGENT: Interpacific Asset Management, 5505 Garden Grove
Boulevard, Westminister, CA 92683
LOCATION: 1052-1098 North State Collepe Boulevard and 2021
East La Palma Avenue. Property is approximately 6.9
acres located north and east of the northeast corner of
State College Boulevard and La Palma Avenue
(Granada Square).
To permit a restaurant with public entertainment and on-premises sale
and consumption of alcoholic beverages with waiver of minimum number
of parking spaces.
i
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
Continued to
November 5, 2001
SR8126VN.DOC
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick and
MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), to continue the subject request
to the November 5, 2001 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow the petitioner
additional time to complete an updated parking study.
VOTE: 6-0 (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent)
DfSCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
~
10-22-01
Page 27
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
CHAIRPERSON PRO-TEMPORE ARNOLD STATED A MEMO WAS RECEIVED ON
OCTOBER 19, 2001 FROM JAMES VANDERBILT INDICATING HIS RESIGNATION AS
CHAIRPERSON OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION AND RESIGNATION AS
REPRESENTATIVE TO THE GENERAL PLAN ADV{SORY COMMITTEE (GPAC),
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD (CDAB) AND ANAHEIM UNION HIGH
SCHOOL DISTRICT (AUHSD)- SCHOOL FACILITIES TASK FORCE.
DUE TO HIS RECALL TO MILITARY SERVICE AS A RESIlLT OF THE SEPTEMBER 11T"
ATTACK ON OUR COUNTRY.
ACTION: Commissioner Arnold offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristol and
MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), that the Anaheim City
Pianning Commission does hereby waive the Brown Act for items where there is a
need for immediate action and the need to take action came to the attention of staff as
a memorandum from Chairperson Vanderbilt was received on October 19, 2001,
subsequent to the posting of the Plannir-g Commission Agenda (which indicated his
resignations as Chairperson and certain advisory boards and committees).
(Vote: 6-0)
ACTION: Commissioner Arnold offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristol and
MOTION CARRIED (Chairperson Vanderbilt was absent), that the Anaheim City
Planning Commission does hereby accept James VanderbilYs resignation as
Chairperson of the Anaheim Planning Commission; appoint Commissioner Paul
Bostwick as the Planning Commission representative on the GPAC and appoint
Commissioner Gail Eastman as the Planning Commission representative on the
CDAB as essential meetings were to take place prior to the next Planning
Commission Meeting; and the election of Planning Commission Chairperson and
Chairperson Pro-tempore along with the appointment to the AUHSD School Facilities
Task Force be agendized for the Planning Commission Meeting of November 5, 2001.
(Vote: 6-0)
Discussion:
Chairperson Pro-tempore Arnold offered a motion with four components due to unforeseen circumstances
which required immediate action. First, to waive the Brown Act due to the fact that a memo dated
October 19, 2001 from Chairperson Vanderbilt was received after the posting of the agenda at 10:00 a.m.
Friday, indicating his resignation as Chairperson of the Anaheim Planning Commission. Second, to
accept Commissioner VanderbilYs resignation as Chairperson and representative on the various boards.
Third, to appoint Paul Bostwick as the second member of the General Plan Advisory Committee. He
stated, "The urgency on that is that the meeting is tonight and it is critical to have another person attend."
And to appoint Commissioner Gail Eastman as the Planning Commission representative on the CDAB.
Fourth, to set at the beginning of the Planning Commission Meeting on November 5, 2001, the election of
a new Chairperson and Chairperson Pro-tempore and appointment of representatives to the AUHSD
School Facilities Task Force.
~
10-22-01
Page 28
OCTOBER 22, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 3:00 P.M. TO MONDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2001 AT
11:00 A.M. FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW.
Respectfully submitted:
~'2~!/Yt~cx/Ei
at handler,
Senior Secretary
Received and approved by the Planning Commission on , 2001.
~
~
10-22-01
Page 29