Minutes-PC 2003/07/14r
CITY OF ANAHEIM
~~ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
J U LY 14, 2003
Council Chambers, City Ha((
200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California
•
~
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
CHAIRPERSON VANDERBILT
JERRY O'CONNELL,
SEATS
COMMISSIONERS ABSEN
STAFF PRESENT:
Selma Mann, Assistant G"ity
Greg McCafferty, Principal...F
~. ~
~ , ~~:.
CALL TO ORDER~ ~ ~
P`~.AN N I ~
• PRELIMI
on Planner
AGENDA POSTING A compiete cop~r of~the Fla~c~in~g, Go~nmission ~lgend~~vvas pQSted at 3:00 p.m. on
~~
Thursday, July 10, 2003a°.:inside the diSpl"ay c~se loc~fed in tlae~f6~e~-~mf the ;Council;;Chambers, and also in the
~ „w ~ ~-~
outside display kiosk ` ~
~ , ~y~ ,~
PUBLISHED: Anaheim Bulle#in News~ap~~4ta Thursd~y,rJune 19,~2003 ,, ~`
~ ~ ~...,~
RECESS TO AFTERNOON PUBLIC HEARI~I~G~,S~S LLfl~l~ `~
, ~~ ~ ~
~
~~ ~. _~. _ ~~
RECONVENE TO PUBLIC HEARING 1:30 P:M~~~3~~ ~z ""` ~
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 Bostwick
PUBLIC COMMENTS
CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
ADJOURNMENT
H:\DOCS\CLERICAL\MINUTESWC071403.DOC lannin commission anaheim.net
07-14-03
Page 1
JULY 14, 2003
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-B 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 Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman and MOTION
CARRIED (with two Commission vacancies), for approval of Consent Calendar Item 1-A as
recommended by staff, and to continue Item 1-B to the July 28, 2003 meeting. UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVED
1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Revised)
•
A. (a) CEQA EXEMPTION SECTION 15061 (b)(3)
(b) ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2003-00024
(c) RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2003-00108
Elisa Stipkovich, Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, 201 South
Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805, requests initiation of a
reclassification for a newly proposed downtown mixed-use overlay
zone within the Downtown Anaheim Area, and requests review and
approval of a draft Ordinance containing provisions to establish a new
Downtown Mixed-Use (DMU) Overlay Zone within the Downtown
Anaheim Area. Area is bounded by Lincoln Avenue, Harbor
Boulevard, Broadway, and Anaheim Boulevard.
Concurred with staff
Granted
Approved
(Vote: 5-0, with
two Commission
vacancies)
Sr2133ds.doc
Selma Mann stated that she would like to make some clarifications into the record with regard to some
of the comments made at today's morning session pertaining to Item 1-A.
She indicated that the ordinance would be revised from the draft that is in place, along with the staff
report. The substance of the ordinance will be the same, but the guidelines would be included as a
separate resolution at the time that the ordinance goes before the City Council. She also stated that
the ordinance is subject to further review by the City Attorney. In addition there were some
clarifications made during the morning session with regard to the environmental review that will take
place at the time that a final site plan comes forward to be reviewed by the Planning Commission,
since there has already been a significant amount of environmental work done. A number of EIR's
have been approved and validated that have approved a certain number of square feet of office space.
Only a portion of that has been built out-- less than half is built out-- and to the extent that a project
comes within the parameters of what has already been approved, as far as equivalent environmental
impacts, no additional review would be required. If the impacts of the project fall outside [those
parameters], then additional environmental review would be required.
•
Chairperson Vanderbilt responded that the comments have been noted.
07-14-03
Page 2
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman and
MOTION CARRIED (with two Commission vacancies), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission
does hereby concur with staff that the proposed project falis 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 Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman and MOTION
CARRIED (with two Commission vacancies), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
request review and approval of a draft ordinance containing provisions to establish a new Downtown
Mixed-Use (DMU) Overlay Zone within Downtown Anaheim. (Area is bounded by Lincoln Avenue,
Harbor Boulevard, Broadway, and Anaheim Boulevard) VOTE: 5-0.
Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman and
MOTION CARRIED (with two Commission vacancies), that the Anaheim City Planning
Commission does hereby initiate Reclassification No. 2003-00108 for a newly proposed
Downtown Mixed-Use Overlay Zone within Downtown Anaheim. VOTE: 5-0
•
~
07-14-03
Page 3
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• B. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Continued to
Meetings of June 30, 2003. (Motion) July 28, 2003
(Vote: 5-0, with two
Commission vacancies)
(This item was not discussed)
•
~
07-14-03
Page 4
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED)
2b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4187 Withdrawn
(TRACKING NO. CUP2003-04704)
OWNER: Islamic Institute of Orange County, P.O. Box 1236, Brea~
CA 92822
AGENT: Gamal E. Nour, 1221 North Placentia Avenue, Anaheim,
CA 92806
LOCATION: 1220 -1230 North State Colleqe Boulevard. Property is
approximately 1.93 acres, located north and east of the
northeast corner of Placentia Avenue and State College
Boulevard (Isfamic Institute of Orange County).
Request to amend exhibits for a previously-approved church to permit
phased construction of the main building and parking lot.
Continued from the June 2, June 16 and June 30, 2003, Planning
Commission Meetings.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. sr5022jr.doc
~ • ~ ~- • ~ • • ~ •
•
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman and
MOTION CARRIED (with two Commission vacancies), that the Anaheim City
Pianning Commission does hereby accept the petitioner's request for withdrawal of
Conditional Use Permit No. 4187 (Tracking No. CUP2003-04704) due to the fact that
the petitioner has been working with staff to resolve site design and coordination
issues related to the on-going construction and operation of the partially completed
mosque. These issues have been resolved ensuring compiiance with the cor~ditional
use permit that was granted to establish the facility, timely completion of the second
half of the mosque and remaining site improvements, as well as the safety of the
members of the congregation during the construction period. As a result of these
efforts, staff believes the petitioner's request is no longer necessary.
VOTE: 5-0 (with two Commission vacancies)
DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
~~
07-14-03
Page 5
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• 3a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 1 Continued to
3b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Jufy 28, 2003.
3c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04435
(TRACKING NO. CUP2003-04712)
OWNER: Palmall Properties Inc., 1428 West Bay Avenue, Newport
Beach, CA 92661
AGENT: Louis Garret, Fat Daddy's Auto Spa, 900 West Lincoln
Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: 900 West Lincoln Avenue. Property is approximately
0.58-acre, located at the southwest corner of Lincoln
Avenue and Ohio Street (Fat Daddy's Hand Auto Spa &
Chicago Eatery).
Request to amend or delete conditions of approval for a previously-
approved carwash with accessory take-out fast food service and to permit
a modular office trailer with waiver of minimum number of parking
spaces.*
*Subsequent to this item being advertised, the petitioner revised the request to
delete the accessory take-out food service, modular office trailer and parking
waiver.
Continued from the June 16 and June 30, 2003, Planning Commission
Meetings.
• CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. sr5024jr.doc
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman and
MOTION CARRIED (with two Commission vacancies), to continue the subject
request to the July 28, 2003, Planning Commission meeting in order to allow more
time to comply with conditions of approval and code enforcement violations
pertaining to the car wash property.
VOTE: 5-0 (with two Commission vacancies)
DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
r
07-14-03
Page 6
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ 4a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 1 (READVERTISED)
4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
4c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-04660
OWNER: Tran Thomas, The Vision Community Church, 1655 West
Broadway, Suite 6, Anaheim, CA 92805
AGENT: Francis Yoon, 1655 West Broadway, Suite 6, Anaheim, CA
92805
LOCATION: 1655 West Broadwav. Property is approximately 0.83-
acre having a frontage of 130 feet on the north side of
Broadway, located 525 feet east of the centerline of Euclid
Street.
To permit and retain a church within an existing office building with waiver
of setback for institutional uses adjacent to residential zones.
Continued from the June 30, 2003, Planning Commission Meeting.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC2003-106
Chairperson Vanderbilt asked staff to introduce the subject item.
Concurred with staff
Approved
Granted
sr8625vn.doc
Greg McCafferty, Principai Planner, stated the subject request is to permit and retain a church that is
• located in an existing office building at 1655 W. Broadway, Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04660.
He indicated staff is recommending approval of the one waiver and the conditional use permit,
however, upon site inspection staff would recommend an additional condition to indicate, "that the
landscaping at the west property line shall be refurbished". •
Chairperson Vanderbilt asked that the applicant or representative to come forward to speak.
Applicant's Statement:
Myung Chung, 3380 Flair Drive, Suite #222, EI Monte, CA 91731. He stated he is the architect for the
project, the subject project is a small church with about 150 members and currently the building is
being used as a medicai office. The request is to convert it into a church with Sunday school and an
office. He explained that they do have enough parking and would provide landscaping as
recommended by the City Planning Department. Also, they would be a good neighbor and therefore
request approval of the subject project.
Chairperson Vanderbilt asked the applicant if he had a chance to review the staff report.
Mr. Chung responded that he just received the staff report from his client, and does not see anything
to be unusual.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Bostwick asked the applicant if he has any problems with the added condition
pertaining to refurbishment of the landscaping on the west property line.
Mr. Chung responded that he has no problem with the added condition.
i Commissioner Romero asked if he had a chance to review the staff report pertaining to the hours of
operation.
07-14-03
Page 7
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ Mr. Chung responded yes, that they have proposed the same to the Planning Department and it is
acceptable.
Commissioner Eastman asked if the property is to be used strictly for the church, with no other tenants
in the buiiding.
Mr. Chung indicated that all the tenants are moving out, once the construction is done it is just for the
church.
Commissioner Eastman asked if the signage issue has been addressed.
Mr. Chung responded it is his understanding that the church would modify what is existing and utilize
the same signage.
Commissioner Eastman asked if staff discussed the signage issue with the applicant and would this be
an opportunity to reduce the signage. She also asked if the existing sign is in compliance with the
current sign ordinance.
Mr. McCafferty stated that the existing signage is a sign that has permits, but is unaware of the
dimensions. Therefore, he is not sure if it is consistent with what the code currently permits which is
an 8' x 10' monument sign, 65 square feet in area per face. He explained that he is unaware whether
it is a true monument sign with a base or a pole sign.
Commissioner Eastman stated she thought it was a little bigger than what they are currently
approving, therefore felt this may be an opportunity to have the applicant bring the existing sign into
compliance.
• Commissioner O'Connell asked if there are any pictures of the signage.
Commissioner Vanderbilt stated that the pictures provided in the staff report does not allow them to
see the sign, but he seems to recall that the existing sign does exceed 8 feet and may possible be 10
to 12 feet.
Commissioner Eastman stated that it seems to be larger than what may be needed for the proposed
church because it currently has some spaces for several different tenants, which is the reason why
she asked previously if some of the tenants were remaining.
Mr. McCafferty explained a few things could be done, one being we could require they come in for staff
review on how they are going to use the sign and if staff is not comfortable with that, then we would
recommend that it go before the Planning Commission.
He further indicated that they struggle all the time with these older signs, being if they have enough
nexus to ask them to modify the sign based on what the applicant is requesting. That is something
that we are mindful of, but certainly if the applicant is going to work with staff on a change out of the
sign, we can work with them. But, if staff feels that it is excessive, we can then bring it back to the
Planning Commission.
Commissioner Vanderbilt asked the applicant if he is in agreement.
Mr. Chung responded yes, that he would like to make the signage comfortable with the City and would
talk with his client about the issue. He further stated he would work with suggestions made by the
Planning Department.
~ Mr. McCafferty noted both the additions would be within 60-days similar to the timing in Condition No.
17.
07-14-03
Page 8
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ Commissioner Eastman indicated they would then need to add another condition.
Mr. McCafferty responded yes, that there are two conditions, "that the landscaping along the west
property line is to be refurbished", and "that a plan showing the use of the existing monument sign
shall be submitted to staff within 60-days of the approval".
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman and
MOTION CARRIED (with two Commission vacancies), that the Anaheim City
Planning Commission does hereby concur with staff that the proposed project falis
within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 1(Existing Facilities), as
defined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and is,
therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare additional
environmental documentation.
Approved Waiver of Code Requirement.
Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04660 (to permit and retain a church within
an existing office building), subject to the conditions of approval as stated in the staff
report dated July 14, 2003, with the following modification:
Added the following conditions of approval to read as follows:
• That within 60 days of approval, landscaping at the west property line shall be
refurbished.
That within 60 days of approval, a plan showing the use (sign copy) of the existing
monument sign shall be submitted to staff.
VOTE: 5-0 (with two Commission vacancies)
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
DISCUSSION TIME: 10 minutes (1:40-1:50)
~
07-14-03
Page 9
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~
5a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 1
5b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-04718
OWNER: Don H. Watson, 2704 Cove Street, Corona Del Mar, CA
92625
AGENT: Steve Allan, Super Shuttle, 1901 South Chris Lane,
Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: 1901 South Chris Lane. Property is approximately 0.63-
acre, having a frontage of 125 feet on the west side of
Chris Lane, located 245 feet north of the centerline of Gene
Autry Way (Super Shuttle).
To permit automotive repair in conjunction with a shuttle business.
~
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC2003-107
Concurred with staff
Granted
sr8624av.doc
Chairperson Vanderbilt introduced the subject item located at 1901 S. Chris Lane, Super Shuttle
project, and he asked the applicant or representative to come forward to speak.
Applicant's Statement:
William Beale, 1901 S. Chris Lane, Anaheim, CA 92805, stated he is present to represent Super
Shuttle.
Chairperson Vanderbilt asked the applicant if he had a chance to review the staff report.
Mr. Beale responded yes.
Chairperson Vanderbilt asked if he had any questions or concerns.
Mr. Beale responded no, and stated that he feels they have worked closely with the Planning
Department and have obtained everything that has been requested. Currently, their only issue
pertains to the trash bin enclosure.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Bostwick stated when the Super Shuttle use to be across the street from his business,
there were a lot of vans that stayed overnight and there was a liquid naturaf gas fueling station.
Mr. Beale agreed.
Commissioner Bostwick asked if that is the plans for the subject location.
Mr. Beale responded no, and explained that since post September 11th, they remodeled their business
and removed all 184 vans and became owner operated. Therefore, they don't need the utilization of
the fueling station and the current owner of the property has asked the fueling company to vacate that
fueling station within forty-five (45) days, which would have been approximately fifteen (15) days ago.
Commissioner O'Connell asked if there would be any storage at the subject property.
~
Mr. Beale responded that the Chris Lane facility is strictly for administrative and minor repair use, the
reason being is that they have ten (10) vehicles as he contracts services for Disneyland Resort and it
07-14-03
Page 10
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ is a 24/7 operation. The vehicles are basically stored at the Katella and Clementine location, and runs
24 hours a day for cast members and employees.
Greg McCafferty stated when the site was visited, they observed barbed wire that is visible from the
right-of-way; therefore, staff would request that it be removed in compliance with City standards.
Chairperson Vanderbilt asked the applicant if he would like to respond.
Mr. Beale responded they do not have any objections and indicated when they first came on the
property there was a closed fence with barbed wire. From what he understood with the Planning
Department, is that they were to remove any visible barbed wire that was on the front gate, therefore
they took the gate out completely. He concurred that there is barbed wire remaining in the back, on all
three sides of the property and if that needs to be removed they would not have any objections.
Mr. McCafferty explained only those portions visible to the right-of-way; as long as it is not visible then
it would not have to be removed.
Mr. Beale noted that he understood.
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman and
MOTION CARRIED (with two Commission vacancies), that the Anaheim City
~ Planning Commission does hereby concur with staff that the proposed project falls
within the definition of Categorical Exemptions - Class 1(Existing Facilities), as
defined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and is,
therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare additional
environmental documentation.
Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04718 (to permit vehicle repair in
conjunction with a shuttle business), subject to the conditions of approval as stated in
the staff report dated July 14, 2003, with the following modification:
Added the following condition of approval to read as follows:
That the barbed wire visible to the right-of-way be removed in compliance with City
standards.
VOTE: 5-0 (with two Commission vacancies)
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
DISCUSSION TIME: 5 minutes (1:51-1:56)
~
07-14-03
Page 11
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ 6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to
6b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT August 25, 2003.
6c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-04719
OWNER: Edward J. Brumleu Jr., 18612 Mariposa Drive, Villa Park,
CA 92861
AGENT: Jerry King, 1280 North Sunshine Way, Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: 1280 North Sunshine Wav. Property is approximately
0.46-acre, having a frontage of 65 feet on the northerly,side
of Sunshine Way, located at the easterly terminus of
Sunshine Way.
To permit and retain an automobile parts installation facility with waiver of
minimum number of parking spaces.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO, sr5021jr.doc
OPPOSITION: None
~ ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman and
MOTION CARRIED (with two Commission vacancies), to continue the subject
request to the August 25, 2003, Planning Commission meeting in order to address
site design issues with staff and retain a consultant for assistance in processing this
request.
VOTE: 5-0 (with two Commission vacancies)
DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
~~
07-14-03
Page 12
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
.
7a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 1
7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-04720
OWNER: Louis P. Smaldino, 13583 East Whittier Boulevard, Whittier,
CA 90605
AGENT: Nabil Houri, 12 Longstreet, Irvine, CA 92620
LOCATION: 804 South Anaheim Boulevard. Property is
approximately 0.43-acre, located at the southeast corner of
Anaheim Boulevard and South Street.
To establish a W.I.C. convenience store and to establish land use
conformity with existing zoning code land use requirements for an existing
legal nonconforming liquor store.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
Continued to
August 11, 2003.
sr3032_aey.doc
OPPOSITION: None
•
ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eastman and
MOTION CARRIED (with two Commission vacancies), to continue the subject
request to the August 11, 2003, Planning Commission meeting in order to allow for
time to work with the property owner regarding issues pertaining to land use
conformity for the liquor store.
VOTE: 5-0 (with two Commission vacancies)
DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
~~
07-14-03
Page 13
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• 8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved
8b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved
8c. COND1710NAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-04721 Granted for 15 years
(to expire on
OWNER: Kewg T. Taing, 2031 Vista Canyon Road, Orange, CA July 14, 2018)
92867
AGENT: Jeff Farano, 2300 East Katella Avenue, Suite 235,
Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: 1841 South State Colleqe Boulevard. Property is
approximately 1.0 acre, having a frontage of 187 feet on
the west side of State College Boulevard, located 470 feet
south of the centerline of Katella Avenue.
To permit a retail carpet and flooring business with waiver of minimum
number of parking spaces.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC2003-108 sr3033ey.doc
Chairperson Vanderbi{t introduced the subject item iocated at 1841 S. State College Boulevard, and
he asked the applicant or representative to come forward to speak.
Applicant's Statement:
~ Jeff Farano, 2300 East Katella Avenue, Suite 235, Anaheim, CA 92806. He stated he is present on
behalf of the applicant and that they have reviewed the staff report and are in agreement, but with the
exception of one item which he will address shortly.
He stated that they have been fairly explanatory as to the project which is going to be a retail carpet
outlet, they are in negotiations and are going to use it as a franchise as described in the application for
Stone Mountain Retail. He stated a question was raised by staff, which he didn't see in the application
regarding the color scheme. He explained that the building would be primarily white. He then referred
to a photograph that he previously submitted to staff and stated on the lower left hand corner there is
an example of another Stone Mountain building. The entrance of the building where they are redoing
the windows and doors and putting in some architectural detail will basically be that color scheme or
very close to it, because that is the essential colors of the Stone Mountain franchise. The rest of the
building would then be white or some similar neutral color. The architectural detail being added to it
would be probably steel color with some type of coating.
He explained that the owner of the subject use has operated New York Carpeting on State College
Boulevard in Anaheim for many years. They are entering into a negotiation to do the Stone Mountain
franchise at the subject property, which is a very good location for them because of the traffic and the
"tile mile" use. He further explained that al! uses, materials, inventory, etc., would all be inside, with no
outside storage.
He stated their only concern is the landscape issue and stated that the staff report indicates there are
two (2) trees out front in the landscape area, and he noted that there are three (3) trees existing. The
picture that is provided on page 2 of the staff report, doesn't display the third tree, which is an Olive
Tree, it is off to the left and is cut off of the picture.
~ He stated according to the ordinance, it states you need a tree for every 20 feet and the issue with that
is essentially there is only a 10-foot wide landscape for the subject area, and a tree every 20 feet
would essentially block the building from any view of the street. He felt that the best preference is to
07-14-03
Page 14
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ allow the existing landscape to remain and if there has to be more trees, he would like to reduce the
number of trees required and not require the trees to be essentially in front of the building.
He referred to the photograph on page 2 of the staff report and stated that the north corner of the
building, in the front, there is a tree there now and would like to leave that area open for visibility from
the street. If any additional landscaping were needed, they would propose to provide additional
landscaping such as a planter with shrubs and some flowers of color in between the trees. They could
submit another set of landscape plans, and go forward today on the approval of the subject project, but
state subject to approval of the landscape plan.
He presented staff with a photograph and stated it was taken today. He pointed out that the three (3)
trees are equally spaced in front of the building and if spreaded out by putting additional trees across
the building, it would cover up the whole building. Aiso, he noted they do want to do a monument sign
that is not part of the application, it is going to be within the dimensions and permissions allowed by
Code and would not be requesting any waivers.
Chairperson Vanderbilt proceeded to ask if anyone was present to speak on the subject item.
Mr. Farano stated that he would like to speak on one other item pertaining to the hours of operation,
which states that the hours would be 10:00 a.m. -7:00 p.m., seven (7) days a week. But, explained
that they would request a change in the hours of operation to be Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m.-
7:00 p.m., and Saturday and Sunday, 10:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOS~D.
Commissioner O'Connell stated he has questions on the signage, and asked Mr. Farano if he is talking
about leaving the Olive Trees alone and then in the signage you would have a monument sign, he
~ asked would you have any other additional signage higher, as in the doorway.
Mr. Farano stated they have proposed a sign over the door and referred to the plans. He pointed out
information pertaining to the elevations and architectural details and explained that they would leave
the three (3) existing trees in the landscaping and then a monument sign would be in that landscape
area within the size and area permitted by code. It would be similar to the same sign on the side of the
building.
Commissioner O'Connell asked if he wanted to add additionaf shrubbage.
Mr. Farano responded that would be our proposal in exchange for putting in additional trees, we would
put additionai shrubbery and a flower area, as a garden area, in between the trees that is in the
landscaping now.
Chairperson Vanderbilt pointed out that the pictures that were provided in the staff report show the
trees with a fuller canopy. In the most recent picture that was just provided today by the applicant
shows the trees having been trimmed. He asked the applicant if he believes that the trees are going to
be allowed to grow or is it the intent to leave the trees trimmed.
Mr. Farano indicated they would keep the trees trimmed as shown in the picture that he just presented.
He explained the trees have been there for a long time and the prior occupant/owner of the building
had not trimmed them. When they committed to the property is when the trees were trimmed. For
marketing purposes you would want to keep the trees trimmed for appearances as well as visibility of
the building. Therefore, a gardener has been hired to maintain the building on a regular basis,
including the trimming of the trees.
Chairperson Vanderbilt asked for clarification on the issue af the hours of operation.
~ Greg McCafferty informed that there is no condition in the staff report regarding hours, therefore, staff
does not have an issue regarding the hours.
07-14-03
Page 15
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ Chairperson Vanderbilt referred to page 3 of the staff report, Paragraph 11, pertaining to the letter of
operation, which states "open daily from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m." and now the applicant has stated a
modification to those hours.
Commissioner Bostwick informed that since we haven't conditioned anything in the actual conditions of
the conditional use permit, that the applicant could operate at any hours he wished, unless
Commission requests a condition to set the hours.
Chairperson Vanderbilt asked if the applicant is bound by the petitioner's letter of operation.
Mr. McCafferty explained as long as iYs not conditioned through the conditional use permit, the
applicant could operate as he sees fit, and in this area we didn't see any problems regarding the hours
he wanted to operate.
Chairperson Vanderbilt stated that it is noted in the record; therefore, there would not be any additional
questions or concerns.
Commissioner Romero stated the staff report indicates 37 parking spaces, but he counted twelve (12)
in the front and another fifteen (15) on the side. Also, the building is currently vacant, but if you look
facing south, all those spaces on the side are filled and he asked who is parking in those spaces.
Mr. Farano stated it is his understanding that those cars are from the adjoining businesses, and since
the building has lieen vacant, they are just parking there. He explained that the parking would only be
for our customers and empfoyees. There is also parking in the rear, the gates would be open and that
would be for customer parking as well, to make up the total of 37 spaces. We do not have an
easements or agreements with any other property owners to allow them to park on our site, and stated
~ that they would maintain exc(usiveness for the subject use.
Commissioner Romero asked if he is securing a 15-year lease.
Mr. Farano responded yes.
Commissioner Romero suggested putting a time limit on the conditional use permit for 15-years due to
the proximity to the Stadium Area.
Commissioner Eastman referred to staff's recommendation regarding the seven (7) trees, and stated
that it seems like a lot of trees. She asked staff what types of trees were being suggested.
Mr. McCafferty stated staff is flexible as long as it is keeping with the spirit of the Stadium Area Master
Land Use Plan Plant Palette. He also noted that the trees can be grouped, they don't have to be on
center. There could be trees that have a higher canopy or just a"cotton top" such as palm trees.
He explained because of the area where it is at and being the City has invested a lot of money into the
Stadium Area and in the right-of-way, with the enhancements that have been done with landscaping,
staff wants to bring everyone along with that theme.
Commissioner Bostwick asked if the seven (7) trees are total or in addition to the existing three (3).
Mr. McCafferty stated it is a total of nine (9), and Mr. Farano is correct that there are three (3) currently
existing, therefore the condition would be revised to state six (6) if that is what the Commission was
disposed to do.
Mr. Farano stated that a Planner sent a list of trees that are acceptable in the area, and there are five
~ (5) different trees that can be used, but we haven't looked at it to decide which trees would work or
not, because quite frankly when the application was submitted, we thought the building and
landscaping would stay the way it is and we wouldn't be requested to add additionaf trees. Therefore,
07-14-03
Page 16
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNfNG COMMISSION MINUTES
~ we really haven't had an opportunity to look at what trees on the list would work and what would not.
He noted that the Code is a little bit unclear as if it has to be every 20 feet or can they be grouped
down to one end. We would like the permission if we have to put in some additional trees to at least
group them down on the south end of the property.
Commissioner Bostwick stated he would hate to see the loss of nice trees, but suggested removing
some of the variegated (multi-trunk) trees where you have a low tree with a lot of brush on the top of it
and replace them with Queen Palms where you can group together, similar to what the Arco station
right on the corner has done, therefore allowing the property to be visible.
Mr. Farano explained they do not know and can not say how many trees they are going to plant,
because the problem is there is only 12 feet of iandscape area along the lengths of the building and
there is no where else to put the trees. They haven't yet examined it, therefore, if they have to put in
more trees they would like to come back with a certain plan. He indicated he doesn't want to stop
today's approval of the subject use and suggested it be subject to approval of the landscape plan.
Mr. McCafferty was in agreement, and stated to the extent feasible that they could plant more trees
and we would certainly work with them, it is not our intent to disrupt the visibility of the business but to
enhance the area. If the Commission is disposed of that then we could craft a condition that indicates
"that to the extent feasible the applicant would work with staff to plant an additional six (6) trees" and
they could be grouped however the applicant wishes. He also noted that if there is any disagreement,
it could then come back to the Planning Commission as a Consent Calendar item.
Commissioner Bostwick referred to Commissioner's Romero comment regarding the 15-year time
limitation on the conditional use permit in order to match the lease and asked staff and/or applicant if
they have any concerns.
~ Chairperson Vanderbilt referred back to Commissioner Romero's question regarding the additional
parking and stated based on the staff report and the plans, is it the understanding that the area that is
fenced off is counted towards the parking.
Mr. McCafferty stated it has to be open and accessible and there is a good count on the site plan,
there are 37 parking spaces and believes there is a gate towards the rear that would need to be
maintained opened, so that they are accessible to customers.
Mr. McCafferty clarified with Commissioner Bostwick if his previous question is for staff or the
applicant.
Commissioner Bostwick responded for both.
Mr. Farano asked if Commissioner Bostwick would repeat the question.
Commissioner Bostwick reiterated that Commissioner Romero had proposed a 15-year limit on the
conditional use permit in order to match the lease and asked if that is acceptable.
Mr. Farano was in agreement, and stated that is the length of their lease and he has just double
checked and there is no option negotiated on the lease to extend it after that, therefore, as long as it
covers the term of their lease, that would be fine.
During action taken on the subject item, Mr. Farano asked if there is a need to reduce the number of
trees that they are going to be planting, would it require a waiver.
Mr. McCafferty responded no.
~ Mr. Farano clarified the condition is indicating that planting the six (6) trees would be subject to
approval of the landscape plan and explained that his concern is what if he feels (4) trees would be
more acceptable.
07-14-03
Page 17
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
~ Commissioner Bostwick assured the applicant if it cannot be worked out with staff, the item could
come back to the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item.
Mr. Farano stated that the ordinance he read on the internet, states 15-inch box and staff is requesting
24-inch box.
Commissioner Bostwick explained to the applicant that they have been going with 24-inch box trees
for about 2-3 years now.
Mr. Farano indicated he understood.
• • ~- • - ~ • • ~ •
OPPOSITION: None
A photograph was submitted.
ACTION: Approved CEQA Negative Declaration
Approved Waiver of Code Requirement
Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04721 (to permit a retail carpet and
flooring business for a period of 15 years, to expire on July 14, 2018), subject to the
conditions of approval as stated in the staff report dated July 14, 2003, with
modification as follows:
~ Modified Condition No. 2 to read as follows:
That to the extent feasible, °°"~ six (6) minimum 24-inch box sized trees
shall be planted within the landscaped setback adjacent to State College
Boulevard. Further, said trees shall be consistent with the Stadium Area
Master Land Use Plan Plant Palette. A landscaping plan showing the trees
shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval. Any
decision by the Zoning Division may be appealed to the Planning Commission
as a Reports and Recommendation item. Said trees shall be maintained in a
live and healthy condition.
VOTE: 5-0 (with two Commission vacancies)
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
DISCUSSION TIME: 22 minutes (1:57 - 2:19)
~
07-14-03
Page 18
JULY 14, 2003
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
;~
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 2:2p P.M.
TO MONDAY, JULY 28, 2003 AT 11:00 A.M.
FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW.
Respectfully submitted:
~i~e~/~(/~, ,~~-~~.~
- -/
Elly Morris
Senior Secretary
~
~
Received and approved by the Planning Commission on v ~~ , 2003.
07-14-03
Page 19