Loading...
Minutes-PC 2004/07/26~~~,~EIM ~~~ CITY OF ANAHEIM • t{ f.C~ . . . ~ ~ Planning Commission ~ ~ Minutes _ ~~~ _ Mondav, July 26, 2004 ,C~O~ ~~ ~~~ , Council Chamber, City Hall g 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California ~NDED CHAIRPERSON: GAIL EASTMAN Commissioners Present: CECILIA FLORES, KELLY BUFFA, JERRY O'CONNELL, JAMES VANDERBILT-LINARES, (ONE VACANT SEAT) Commissioners Absent: DAVID ROMERO Staff Present: Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner Greg Hastings, Planning Services Manager James Ling, Associate Civil Engineer Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner Elly Morris, Senior Secretary Sergeant Michael Lozeau, Vice Detail Pat Chandler, Senior Secretary Danielle Masciel, Word Processing Operator ~ Agenda Posting: A complete copy of the Planning Commission Agenda was posted at 4:15 p.m. on Thursday, July 22, 2004, inside the display case located in the foyer of the Council Chambers, and also in the outside display kiosk. Published: Anaheim Bulletin Newspaper on Thursday, July 1, 2004 • Call To Order Planning Commission Morning Session 11:00 A.M. • STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSION ON VARIOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES (AS REQUESTED BY PLANNING COMMISSION) • PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW FOR ITEMS ON THE JULY 26, 2004 AGENDA • Recess To Afternoon Public Hearing Session • Reconvene To Public Hearing 1:30 P.M. For record keepinqpurposes if you wish to make a statement reqardinp any item on the aqenda. p/ease complete a speaker card in advance and submit it to the secretarv. • Pledge Of Allegiance: Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares • Public Comments • Consent Calendar • Public Hearing Items ~ • Adjournment You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following e-mail address: planninacommissionCa~anaheim.net H:\DOCS\CLERICAL\MINUTESWC072604.DOC 07/Z6/O4 Page 1 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES u C J Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 1:30 P.M. Public Comments: 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. Bob Sedillo, 1250 S. Nutwood Street, Anaheim, stated a Tentative Parcel Map No. 97-201 was approved on December of 1997, with a requirement of installing a streetlight. , He explained that he sold the property and adjusted for the streetlight requirement which was $15,000 for the certificate of occupancy and now seven (7) years later, the department that required it says that they are going to waive it and he asked why wouid it now be waived when no changes have been made to the requirements or the area. Chairperson Eastman asked staff if they are aware of the issue. Mr. McCafferty responded he was not aware that Mr. Sedillo was having an issue with the condition and stated normally the Public Utilities Department would have discretion through their rates, rules and regulations. He stated he could meet with Mr. Sedillo along with necessary Public Utilities staff and then report back to the Commission at the next Planning Commission meeting. Chairperson Eastman asked Mr. Sedillo if he would be satisfied with that. Mr. Sedillo responded yes. Consent Calendar: The Report and Recommendation items 1-A and 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. ACTION: Commissioner O'Connell offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Flores and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Buffa abstained on Item 1-A, Commissioner Romero absent and with one Commission vacancy) for approval of Consent Calendar Items (1-A through 1-B) as recommended by staff. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Reaorts and Recommendations 1A. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meetings of July 12, 2004. (Motion) • ACTION: Commissioner O'Connell offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Flores and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Buffa abstained, Commissioner Romero absent and with one Commission vacancy), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby receive and approve the minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of July 12, 2004. , Approved (Vote: 4-0, Commissioner Buffa abstained, Commissioner Romero absent and with one Commission vacancy) 07-26-04 Page 2 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ • • 1 B. Receiving and approving Supplemental Detailed Minutes for Item No. 7, Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04854, from fhe Pfanning Commission Meeting of June 14, 2004, scheduled to be heard as a public hearing item before City Council on Tuesday, August 24, 2004. (Motion) ACTION: Commissioner O'Connell offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Flores and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Romero absent and with one Commission vacancy), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby receive and approve the Supplemental Detailed Minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of June 14, 2004. Approved (Vote: 5-0, Commissioner Romero absent and with one Commission vacancy) 07-26-04 Page 3 J U LY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~~ CJ • Public Hearing Items: 2a. CEQA Neaative Declaration Continued to 2b. Waiver Of Code Requirement August 9, 2004 2c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04861 Owner: 230 West Colchester, CALP, c/o Chris DiRiggiero, P.O. Box 304, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Agent: Joseph Curd, Curd, Gallindo and Smith, LLP, 301 East Ocean Boulevard, #460, Long Beach, CA 90802 Location: 2230 West Colchester Drive. Property is approximately 0.87-acre, located at the southeast corner of Colchester Drive and Colony Street. Request to permit and retain two existing churches, a narcotics anonymous meeting hall, and to establish land use conformity with the City's zoning code requirements for an existing non-conforming commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Continued from the June 28, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. sr5105jr.doc FOLLOWING tS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Flores and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Buffa absent and with one Commission vacancy), to continue the subject request to the August 9, 2004, Planning Commission meeting, giving the parties an opportunity to meet and agree on the conditions. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioner Romero absent and with one Commission vacancy) DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 07-26-04 Page 4 J U LY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 3a. CEQA Catectorical Exemption - Class 1 Concurred with staff 3b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04852 (Readvertised) Granted for 1 year, with modifications ( to expire Owner: Cedar Mountain, LLC, 110 East Walnut Avenue, Fullerton, on July 26, 2005) CA 92835 Agent: Leon Alexander, Briggs and Alexander, 558 South Harbor ' Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: 2916 West Lincoln Avenue. Property is approximately 0.7-acre, having a frontage of 89 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, located 315 east of the centerline of Laxore Street (EI Calor Restaurant). Request to permit a nightclub. Continued from the June 28 and July 12, 2004, P(anning Commission Meetings. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2004-74 sr8750av.doc Chairperson Eastman opened the public hearing. Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 3 and stated a letter in opposition to the subject ~ request was received from Jack Leming and a copy of the letter was submitted to the applicant. He read into the record changes to the draft resolution pertaining to the conditions of approval. ApplicanYs Statement: Leon Alexander, Briggs and Alexander, 558 S. Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, stated he is representing the owner of EI Calor Restaurant. He stated the applicant does not have any promotions/promoters and the condition of approva! stated would not be an issue for them. He stated the facility was built in 1959 and the building permit states liquor license and restaurant. He stated from 1959 to 1975 the facility was a restaurant; from 1975 to 1990 it operated as Oscar's Night Club; from 1990 to 1995 it operated as California Dreams Night Club; and 1995 the applicant took over the premises as EI Calor. The business caters primarily to Latino/Hispanic entertainment and it has been operating under the grandfathering rights thaYs been in existence since 1959. A letter was sent from Code Enforcement in 2003, stating a dance hall permit was necessary. They went to register the permit and the licensing division informed the applicant that the permit was not allowed because they are located in the CH zone, and the zone would have to be changed to CL in order to qualify for a conditional use permit. He explained they applied for an application and at the time it was recommended by the Planning Department to apply for a nightclub because they are currently operating as a nightclub and he indicated they worked with the Planning and Police Departments to consider some conditions of approval in order to obtain a conditional use permit. He spoke relative to the police calls reported and stated most of the calls resulted in false alarms and were not related to the subject facility. He submitted material to the Planning Commission showing the difference between a nightclub versus a restaurant with a public entertainment permit and also provided information regarding the restaurant with a dance hall permit. He also submitted materiaf pertaining to the costs associated with providing the • necessary security and stated the average cost for a security guard is approximately $15 per hour, which would be about $360 a day/$7,200 a month to have the necessary security guards. The applicant would like to work with the Police Department on the number of security guards and suggests having 3 security guards. He pointed out that there is not much business on Sunday and doesn't feel 4 security guards is 07-26-04 Page 5 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES necessary. The applicant is also providing increased security surveillance in the interior and exterior of the ~ facility. He stated they read Mr. Leming's letter and would like to meet with him in order to resolve the parking issues. Albert Bushala, 2916 W. Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, stated he has owned the building since 1994 and was purchased from his uncle who operated the facility as Oscar's Nightclub. He gave a brief description of the facility and explained it has a long history of beirig a nightclub and there is an existing sign outside the establishment which states iYs a nightclub. Cover charge is necessary in order to keep out problems, etc. They have never had a promotion and he doesn't feel it is necessary to run a successful business. He indicated he would do his best to continue the safety but feels 4 security guards may intimidate some of the customers as they may wonder if there is a problem, and he believes 3 security guards is appropriate and 2 security guards on Sunday night. He stated a lot of the calls to the Police Department were proactive calls, and is not able to control the 911 calls but they do their best to alleviate problems. Chairperson Eastman asked the applicant if he read the conditions attached to the staff report. Mr. Bushala responded yes and he doesn't have a problem with those conditions. Nick Baclit, 4935 Greencrest Drive, Yorba Linda, CA, stated he is a police officer and has been hired by Mr. Bushala as a"spotter" who wears plain clothes and oversees security and situations that may arise and indicated he hasn't seen any serious problems within the past year. Public Testimony: • Robert Fournier, 213 S. Bridgeway Street, Anaheim, stated access to their tract is through Laxore Street and the area is congested with parking from the patrons of the subject establishment. The apartments in the area were built in the `60s and `70s and parking is crucial. He asked if there is a report from the Fire Department pertaining to the maximum occupancy. Mr. McCafferty stated there is a condition of approval that requires that they comply with the Fire Code pertaining to exiting/emergency access doors and occupancy. Chairperson Eastman stated the Fire Department would periodically monitor that. Mr. McCafferty was in agreement. Mr. Fournier stated if the establishment has adequate parking then he would recommend that they issue parking tickets to their patrons, therefore the number of parking tickets allowed would not exceed their parking lot and suggested that they not park on adjacent streets. Lilyana Sanchez, 121 S. Laxore Street, Anaheim, she expressed her opposition of the subject facility to be allowed to operate as a nightclub and believes the facility has generated high rates of crime and is a threat to their.health and safety of their community. She stated within the last two years she has experienced disturbances between 10:00 p.m. to 2:30 a.m., Wednesday through Saturday. One of those occurrences caused damage to her property and it was found that it was a patron from EI Calor Restaurant who was driving under the influence of alcohol and he was arrested. Other disturbances have included explicit acts, drinking in parked vehicles, overflow of parking and violent behaviors. She explained residential parking is limited in the area and patrons are parking on adjacent streets, which causes parking problems for the residents. She asked that the subject permit be denied and not allow the facility to function as a nightclub based on the above-average crime rate as reported from the Police Department and stated that businesses • should take into account the community's welfare. Esther Wallace, 604 Scott Lane, Anaheim, stated she is Chairman of West Anaheim Neighborhood Development Council (WAND) and has heard many complaints about EI Cafor Restaurant. She expressed 07-26-04 Page 6 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES her concerns pertaining to the high crime rate, parking and the number of patrons allowed in the facility. ~ She referred to the high crime rate and asked why hasn't the crime rate went down if they have security guards. She stated the area is primarily a residential area and there are multiple apartments and high density apartments and she feels the applicant needs to work with the community. Christina Sanchez, 121 S. Laxore Street, Anaheim, she expressed her concerns regarding the parking issue and the noise created from the patrons as they leave the nightclub. Applicant's Rebuttal: Mr. Alexander referred to the parking issue and stated with the addition of the security guards they could try to use the security guards to ensure people park in the designated areas. Mr. Bushala referred to the calls for service and explained that a lot of the calls on the report are proactive calls from the Anaheim Police Department and some were false alarms from their alarm company. Most of the calls were not related to their business. He stated he has a parking agreement with the adjoining shopping center and is quite aware of the parking situation. The facility has been a nightclub for over 35 years and today is the first time he has heard any complaints. Mr. Alexander suggested to the owner if he would be willing to put a large sign indicating parking in the rear in order to alleviate the parking problems. He pointed out they do follow the Fire Codes which is why sometimes there is a line of people waiting to get into the facility. He asked for Condition No. 21 to be modified to allow 3 vending machines. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Flores asked staff if grand fathering is the same thing as legal nonconforming status. • Mr. McCafferty stated yes, there are provisions in the code for legal nonconforming. The City Attorney's Office has been working with Mr. Alexander and the business owner and it is the City Attorney's Office opinion that there is no legal nonconforming status for a nightclub and there is legal nonconforming status for a restaurant with alcoholic beverages but not for a nightclub, therefore that is the reason why it is before the Planning Commission today. Commissioner Flores asked for further clarification regarding legal nonconformance. Mr. McCafferty referred to prior codes and stated anytime you petition for a nightclub it required a conditional use permit, however, the zoning that was in place a long time ago for the subject property was Commercial Heavy (CH) and with that zoning then you could have a restaurant that could be permitted by right along with an accessory sale of alcoholic beverages for on premises consumption, therefore, it is staff's belief that if there is legal nonconforming status it is for that aspect of the property and not for a nightclub. Commissioner O'Connell asked what is the capacity of the nightclub. Mr. Alexander stated the capacity is 299. Commissioner O'Connell asked how many parking stalls are there including the parking agreement with the neighbor. Mr. Bushala responded there are 77 on the subject property but is unaware of the number for their neighbors. Commissioner O'Connell asked where the employees park. • Mr. Bushala stated they are told to park off premises and they leave on site for customer parking. Commissioner O'Connell asked how many employees would need to park. 07-26-04 Page 7 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ Mr. Bushala responded about 20-30 cars. Commissioner O'Connell suggested that the employees park in the apartment area. Mr. Bushala agreed. Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares addressed the parking issue and stated he use to drive by the club frequently and from his observations it is consistent with the testimony received today pertaining to the parking issues. He expressed he is troubled by the parking situation but acknowledges that there is language that allows the parking as it exists and he is taking comfort with the request since there is a one year limitation. Commissioner Buffa referred to Condition No. 6 and stated it does not specify a number of security guards to be on the premises and she is comfortable with leaving it up to the Police Department as they are better positioned to know the issues. She asked staff to address Condition No. 21 because the applicant has requested that they keep their current arcade machines. Mr. McCafferty responded the Police Department usually applies that as a standard condition of approval in order to alleviate them becoming an attractive nuisances. If Sergeant Lozeau were amenable to limiting it to three arcade games then Planning Department staff would not have a problem with that. Sergeant Lozeau stated he is not aware of the type of machines at the establishment but as a standard condition they normally request that there are no amusement type machines. Mr. Bushala responded they have a Ms. Pacman cocktail table and in the smoking patio area there is a Centipede/Frogger game. •, Mr. McCafferty stated he doesn't believe those three arcade games would be a problem as long as it's limited to those current games. Mr. Bushala clarified that currently he has two arcade games but understands he is allowed up to three. Commissioner O'Connell asked when was the security increased. Mr. Bushala responded they always had three to four security guards inside, depending on the night, and three security guards outside. It was suggested they have outside security with a licensed security company and that was implemented a week or two after they met with staff. Further discussion took place amongst the Planning Commission, staff and Mr. Bushala regarding the number of security guards. Commissioner Buffa asked for staff's opinion if a condition of approval could be added requesting staff and employees park on the surface streets in the residential neighborhoods because they would be a much calmer group when leaving the nightclub. Mr. McCafferty understands the practicality ofi that but he explained that the code says you comply with the parking demand for your project on your property and not on the surrounding public streets. He believes the patrons may not know how to get to the parking area because it is in the rear of the nightclub and he stated they are complying with the code. Further discussion took place amongst the Planning Commission, staff and Mr. Alexander regarding the parking issue; Mr. Alexander stated they could include in the contract with the security company for them to enforce the parking and ensure the patrons park on site rather than off site and also patrol the surrounding • area to try to alleviate parking in the surrounding neighborhoods. Commissioner Flores stated there is something in the parking area that is covering the fence and asked the applicant if they could put something else rather than a tarp. 07-26-04 Page 8 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ Mr. Alexander responded he would take care of it. Mr. McCafferty spoke regarding the parking issue and stated in order to relieve the parking stress on the adjacent streets they could valet park and/or they could go into a formal agreement with an adjacent property owner subject to approval with the Traffic and Transportation Manager, and the only other provision would be that the particular use where they are borrowing parking from does not already have a variance on the property for parking. Commissioner Vanderbilt stated they have something in writing already and asked if it would need to be recorded. Mr. McCafferty responded that would be the option of the Planning Commission because currently they do comply with code. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS RE-OPENED. Mr. Fournier stated he opposes Commissioner O'Connell's' comment regarding having employees park in the residential area because one of their big problems is parking for the residents. He reiterated the buildings were built in the '60s and `70s with one car per apartment and the street parking is limited. He referred to busing to the establishment and stated there is commercial parking in front of Food 4 Less which the applicant may try to enter into an agreement. Commissioner O'Connell asked if they have dedicated parking for the duplexes and apartments. Mr. Fournier responded they have one single car garage per apartment and there are approximately 200 apartments in the area that have to access and egress through Laxore Street. • Commissioner O'Connell explained that he suggested employees park in the surrounding streets as they wouldn't be such a nuisance as the patrons may be. Mr. Fournier stated he understood the reasoning but parking is limited. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: 4 people spoke and 1 e-mail was received in opposition to the subject request. IN SUPPORT: 1 person spoke in favor of the subject request. Two (2) documents were received as part of the agent's presentation at the public hearing. ACTION: Commissioner Buffa offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Romero absent and with one Commission vacancy), 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. 2004-04852 to permit a nightclub for one (1) year to • expire on July 26, 2005; and adoption of the resolution attached to the staff report dated July 26, 2004, including the findings and conditions contained therein, with the following modifications: 07-26-04 Page 9 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Modified Condition Nos. 13, 21 and 39 to read as follows: • 13. That the petitioner shall not share any profits, or pay any percentage or commission to a promoter or any other person~ased-~+pe~ by means including but not limited to the following: monies collected as a door charge, cover charge or any other form of admission charge, including minimum drink orders, or the sale of drinks. 21. That the applicant may retain 2 arcade devices which are presently on the premises with issuance of the proper permits as required by the Anaheim Municipal Code. 39. That within 60 days from the date of this resolution, Condition Nos. 15, 19, 20, 26, 32, 33, 34, 35 and 38 above mentioned, shall be complied with. Deleted Condition No. 23 Added the following conditions of approval to read as follows: That within a period of one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of this resolution, the applicant shall obtain the appropriate ABC license (Type 48-Public premises). That there shall be quarterly Code Enforcement inspections to ensure compliance with conditions of approval. The cost of such inspections shall be paid by the applicant in a timely manner. • That a sign plan shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval directing patrons to parking in the rear of the facility. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioner Romero absent and with one Commission vacancy) Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 1 hour and 16 minutes (1:44-3:00) • 07-26-04 Page 10 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ 4a. CEQA Neaative Declaration (Readvertised) 4b. Waiver Of Code Requirement 4c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04866 Owner: Rebeca Rosemberg, 255 South Euclid Street, Anaheim, CA 92802 Transwestern Commercial Services, 2990 East La Palma Avenue, Unit D, Anaheim, CA 92806 Agent: Mario Ortner, 5638 Natick Avenue, Van Nuys, CA 91411 Location: 255 South Euclid Street. Property is approximately 6.67 acres, located at the northwest corner of Euclid Street and Broadway. Request to establish a commercial retail center and to construct a four (4)-unit commercial retail building (food court) and freestanding drive- through restaurant on a commercial property with waiver of (a) minimum number of parking spaces and (b) minimum drive-through lane requirements. Continued from the July 12, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2004-75 • Chairperson Eastman opened the public hearing. Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 4. ApplicanYs Testimony: Approved Approved Granted sr3074ey.doc Mario Ortner, 5638 Noctic Avenue, Van ives, CA, Designer for the food court portion, stated the windows for the restroom were 12x12; small windows high onto the ceiling and translucent. Chairperson Eastman asked what type of material would be used on the awnings in the food court. Mr. Ortner responded canvas. Mark Bookspan, of Carter Burgess, representing Yum Brands, Inc., for KFC and Long John Silver's brand, stated that his clienYs product is a building that is a dual brand product with licenses for KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, and Long John Silvers. At this particular location they have chosen to brand KFC and Long John Silvers. They agree with the staff report dated July 26, 2004 with respect to working with Staff Services Division to create a color scheme that would both compliment the center and please their corporate client, but feel very strongly about keeping the 5x7 image of the Colonel as they feel it is in proportion to the tower and recognizes their brand image. The awnings are externally illuminated and they are flexible to a canvas to match the food court building. They ask there be some flexibility in the location of some of the palm trees located in front of the KFC tower. Public Testimony: Rod Lemons, 1753 Brentwood Place, Anaheim, CA, stated that he and his neighbor to the south are both concerned over added noise pollution created by the proposal. Of the three tenants, Daniel's has been the • noisiest so far, mostly in the way of their customer's car stereos, etc. They ask if the restaurant would remain open 24 hours or close at 10 p.m., and are concerned that it would attract the same types of individuals that shop at Daniel's and therefore would require added security to enforce the noise situations. 07-26-04 Page 11 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Their other issue is the great investment the City has made in making the strip mall areas look more ~ aesthetically beautiful and open now taking a step backward and allowing buildings along the frontage, thereby cluttering up the openness and creating a hidden area in the parking lot for promiscuous activity and vandalism to take place. ApplicanYs Rebuttal: Mr. Ortner responded that before Daniel's Furniture Store came there was a vacant super market on the property for a couple of years so obviously with the property now occupied there would be increased traffic, parking and noise level. With regards to the concern of adding two new buildings along Euclid, the design would position one building in the corner and another building on the opposite side. He feels there should not be an issue of illicit activity behind the building because it would be open to the street and there would be open space in between. In regards to the development standards of the City, the design would be an improvement to the property. Chairperson Eastman asked if there were plans to have a 24-hour drive-through. Mr. Bookspan responded typically within the Los Angeles region the hours of operation for KFC and Long Johns Silvers is 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares asked the hours of operation for Daniel's Furniture Store. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS REOPENED. Douglas Nye, 16740 Harbor Boulevard, Fountain Valley, CA, affiliated with Daniel's Furniture Store stated • that Daniel's closes at 11:00 p.m. He has opened many shopping centers and is very concerned about people and noise, etc. Daniel's sits in an open area and there is lots of parking in the rear. KFC and Long John Silver's are going to be up against the street on Euclid Avenue and hopefully would not cause problems with the residents. Chairperson Eastman stated that she noticed while visiting the site on yesterday that Daniel's does have outdoor speakers and wondered if they were standard with them. Mr. Nye stated that they would look into it and support correcting anything that would bother the neighbors in this respect. Chairperson Eastman wished to clarify that he would be the one to speak with about those type concerns. Mr. Nye responded yes. Elias Gabriel, 1718 West Broadway, stated that he lives directly across the street from where the facilities are going to be located but had no objections. He suggested that staff look into the traffic flow and redesign the entrance to the drive-through because he could foresee that it would be a problem for the City with the driveway being close to Euclid Avenue. There would be a lot of traffic making left turns from Euclid Avenue and Broadway and particularly on the weekends there are the sounds of horns, tires screeching and a lot of near misses from people going into the driveway. Regarding the speakers he concurs that they are from Daniel's. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Buffa stated that her concerns were all related to the architectural treatment and signage on the drive-through building. Fundamentally it is a rectangular box with relatively narrow pop-outs to provide • minimal relief as opposed to the food court building which has tremendous detailing and great movement on the building facades. She does not feel that the two of them together blend very well. Regarding the signage she stated an example would be Shaquille O'Neal's height, but three of him standing side by side and it would be internally illuminated so that Colonel Sanders would be beaming down in two directions at 07-26-04 Page 12 J U LY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES the residents of Anaheim. She feels it would be astoundingly unappealing and unattractive. Instead of • taking the signage opportunities to promote their brand, they have chosen instead to use their signage opportunities for text that is meaningless. A sign that says, "Hungry" would not do anything to sell anyone a piece of fried chicken and while putting "welcome" above the door is friendly, it would not do anything to reinforce their brand. She disagrees that the sign is in proportion to the tower and feels it is too large relative to the scale of the tower. Mr. Bookspan responded that the Colonel's face is the marketing campaign for that brand as seen on the marketing campaigns in their television media and Long John Silvers' text with the fish jumping through the image is their brand and that is the reason for the two different signage strategies on the building, but they were consistent with the national brand marketing strategy. The 5x7 sign has been very well received in the community of Ladera Ranch. The only difference would be that there it is externally illuminated rather than internally illuminated. When the context is viewed 50 to 70 feet away as when on Ontonio Road it comes into proportion of the tower and fits very nicely. If made any smaller it would start losing its sense of belonging on the tower. Commissioner Buffa stated one of the distinctions is that the sign in Ladera Ranch is farther from the street and the proposed sign would be very close to Broadway and Euclid Avenue. And she could not imagine what the view from the back windows of the gentleman who lives across Broadway would be at night with an internally illuminated sign of that size. Mr. Bookspan stated it would not be seen from Broadway because it would be facing north up Euclid Avenue towards the 5-Freeway. Chairperson Eastman wished to clarify that they were no longer using the KFC logo because she felt they were pretty distinctive. • Mr. Bookspan stated they are looking at branding only the face for a marketing strategy and are getting away from text and going with more icon elements. Long John Silvers feels that the text is stronger in their brand rather than the fish. So that is why the fish is shown as a secondary element in the elevations. To the point of the architectural they converted the spandro window elements where the awnings are into pop-out relief elements that would cast shade and shadow on the building to break up the fa~ade so that it would not be just a flat plain element but have a series of projected elements coming up from the base form. They were also looking at adding an accent color on each of the elements to bring life into the building. They have specific needs inside the building that they have to meet which forces the shape into the box that Commissioner Buffa explained, and working within that box and creating external elements would make'it more consistent with the surrounding architectural. They are going to have extensive landscaping on the site that would act as a design feature for the site, basically elevating the look against Euclid Avenue and Broadway, so that it would not just be a flat area in front and they are going to have berming along Broadway and Euclid Avenue to screen the drive-through. So it would be a successful use of materials to soften the edge between both streets. Chairperson Eastman asked him to address the issue brought up regarding the drive-through and the fact that there would be cars lined up there. And also what seemed like unnecessary signage on Euclid Avenue over top of the canopy at the drive-in that said "drive-through". Mr. Bookspan stated they have a third brand that is an invisible brand, Yum Brand, the parent for both KFC and Long John Silvers, and Yum was trying to create a link between the brands. They are trying to work some whimsical elements within the brands to interact more with the customer of those brands by having points of purchase slogans, like the "Drive-through", "Welcome" and "Hungry". However, if Commission felt they were offensive and created clutter they could look at eliminating them so long as they could keep the proposed signage for the brands. , Commissioner Flores stated that there were not very many fast food areas in that area and feels once they are built they will improve the area. She concurs with Commissioner Buffa that something needed to be done to correlate more with the facilities there. 07-26-04 Page 13 J U LY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ Commissioner O'Connell feels it is going to be great for the area but recommended looking at the signage once more at a future date as far as the size. He asked if there was any way Commission could be provided with photos of other KFC signage that were of a smaller size. Mr. Bookspan responded that he had photos of Orange, CA, on Tustin, and some in Thousand Oaks, CA, which were downsized to a 3x5. He feels they are extremely small in terms of presentation of the street. Commissioner Buffa stated that she would also be interested in talking more about the architecture and would be willing to sacrifice some of he pop-outs in exchange for a better treatment at the entry to provide greater relief there. Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares asked if it was typical that they turn off the signs on their other restaurants during the hours that they were closed. Mr. Bookspan responded yes, they are locked into the whole lighting control system inside the building and was not on for advertisement during off-store hours. Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares stated that his concern was the orientation of the drive-through and the restaurant because they were asking for a waiver of the drive-through, and being allowed to fit it in so that there would not be vehicles lined up along the corner. He felt in order to accommodate that the orientation of the building should be tilted so that the fa~ade faces south onto Broadway instead of Euclid because Euclid was more traveled. Mr. Bookspan responded that they originally proposed a frontage against Euclid Avenue with the front of the building facing Euclid Avenue and were denied by Sav-On which has first rights of refusal on their site plan. Sav-On thought it was taking too much frontage parking from their store so they had to reposition the • building to be parallel to Euclid Avenue rather than perpendicular to Euclid Avenue. • • ~ ~- • ~ • • ~ • Chairperson Eastman asked about the windows in the food court and the purpose for them. She suggested using tile insets that were consistent with the rest of the building. Mr. Ortner responded that he would not have a problem eliminating them or replacing them with tile insets. Commissioner O'Connell suggested getting rid of the windows and doing a design, due to possibly having a restaurant move in that would move the restroom from that location and leaving a window in the back of another business. OPPOSITION: 1 person spoke in opposition pertaining to noise from the existing Daniel's furniture store and the potential increase in noise associated with the proposal. WITH CONCERNS: 1 person spoke with concerns of the ingress and egress of traffic for the business. ACTION: Approved CEQA Negative Declaration Approved Waiver of Code Requirement • Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04866 (to establish a commercial retail center and construct a four-unit retail building (food court) and freestanding drive-through restaurant on a commercial property with two existing units and adoption of the resolution 07-26-04 Page 14 J U LY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES attached to the staff report dated July 26, 2004, including the findings and conditions • contained therein, with the following modifications: Modified Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 35 to read as follows: 1. That final precise elevation and landscape plans for the drive-through restaurant shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Said plans shall indicate the specific colors and materia{s of the proposed buildings and shall be complementary to the existing food court building. Any decision by staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. 2. That the number of tenant spaces within the food court building shall be limited to four (4) for a total of seven (7) tenant spaces, including the drive-through restaurant. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. Any further division of space to create additional tenant spaces within any of the buildings on the property. shall require approval of a conditional use permit. 3. That only three (3) of the four (4) food court tenant spaces (5,300 square feet maximum) shall be utilized for fast food (with more than 10 seats) uses unless a parking variance is granted or the minimum number of required parking spaces for all uses shall be provided. 5. .. That the final sign plan for the drive-through restaurant shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. 35. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, . Condition ~ No. 33, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Deleted Condition No. 32. Added the following condition of approval to read as follows: That approval of a parking waiver is based on assumptions contained in the parking demand study, including the reduced parking requirement for the Daniel's furniture building from 5.5 parking spaces per thousand square feet of gross floor area to 2.2 parking spaces per thousand square feet of gross floor area for the furniture store. Any changes to said assumptions shall be reviewed by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and considered by the Planning Commission at a noticed public hearing. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioner Romero absent and with one Commission vacancy) Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 57 minutes (3:01-3:58) • 07-26-04 Page 15 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 5a. CEQA Neqative Declaration Approved 5b. Reclassification No. 2004-00125_ Granted Owner: William Taormina, 128 West Sycamore Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 Agent: Stanley E. Wise, P.O. Box 18237, Anaheim, CA 92817 Location: 2040 South Haster Street. Property is approximately 0.28-acre, having a frontage of 96 feet on the east side of Haster Street, located 183 feet south of the centerline of Leatrice Lane. Request reclassification of the property from the "T" (Transition), formerly the RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) zone to the RM-4 (Multiple- Family Residential) zone, or a less intense zone to construct a 6-unit apartment complex. Reclassification Resolution No. PC2004-76 sr5104jr.doc Chairperson Eastman opened the public hearing. Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 5. Chairperson Eastman stated that it had been brought to her attention that there was not a quorum because • Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares had to leave early and Commissioner O'Connell abstained. Mr. McCafferty offered to call him on his cell phone to get him to return. He suggested a 5-minute recess. A 10-MINUTE BREAK WAS TAKEN. THE PUBLIC HEARING RECONVENED. Chairperson Eastman asked Mr. Taormina if a two-week continuance would be acceptable to him. ApplicanYs Testimony: William C. Taormina, 128 West Sycamore Street, Anaheim, CA, responded that he would not be available in two weeks and asked to make a small statement. He stated that they could have built 10 units on the site (36 units per acre) but chose to build 6. They resolved that it was time to set a new standard in the Disney Land Resort Housing Area and rid Anaheim of cracker box apartments overdensed with bad quality of life and set a new standard for the area with the proposed project as follows: (1) Remove a historic home that was built in 1924 off the site and relocate it near Lincoln Avenue and West Street. The house would be restored; (2) Each one of the units would have private two car garages - just like a condominium; (3) Each unit would have a dedicated and fenced play yard and large greenbelt out in front of it; (4) Each unit would have a private patio; and (5) Each unit would have a washer and dryer. Mr. McCafferty stated it is consistent with the General Plan; it is under density; he has demonstrated that he can comply with the development standards of the zone and it implements the City's vision for the General Plan. Commissioner Flores stated she was expecting little boxes. • 07-26-04 Page 16 J U LY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Mr. Taormina stated no, there would be tile roofs, sectioned windows, relief architecture, they would also ~ be eliminating the garbage container enclosures and everyone would have their on recycle containers in their own garage - a full two-barrel system. Commissioner Flores asked what the rental payments would be. Mr. Taormina responded the rent would be $1.60 a square foot , approximately $1,500 for a two bedroom, two bath unit with washer and dryer and all appliances included, including a refrigerator; a miniature version of the Kramer Building. Chairperson Eastman wished to clarify whether he was looking at the project from a developer to sell standpoint or with the intent to hold in his portfolio. Mr. Taormina responded that was correct, he did not wish to sell. Upon Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares' return he restated his presentation. Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares stated that even though he had stepped away he had read the staff report dated July 26, 2004, over the weekend and felt sufficiently grounded as to what happened and he felt comfortable voting on the item. Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, stated that given the applicant's restatement of his remarks Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares had not missed anything because there were no other speakers and there was no other evidence offered to the Commission with regard to the item. • • ~ ~ - • ~ • • ~ • ~ OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Approved CEQA Negative Declaration Granted Reclassification No. 2004-00125 to reclassify subject properiy from the "T" (Transition), formerly the RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) zone, to the RM-4 (Multiple-Family Residential) zone; an adoption of the resolution attached to the staff report including the findings and conditions contained therein. VOTE: 4-0 (Commissioner O'Connell abstained, Commissioner Romero absent and with one Commission vacancy). Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 14 minutes (3:59-4:00) and (4:10-4:23) A 10-minute break was taken (4:00-4:10) Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares departed at approximately 3:58 p.m. Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares returned (4:18) Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares departed (4:24) • 07-26-04 Page 17 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 6a. CEQA Cateqorical Exemption - Class 3 Concurred with staff • 6b. Conditional Use Permit No. 1341 Approved, with (Tracking No. CUP2004-04867) modifications Owner: JMA, 400 North State College Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92806 ~gent: Felix Obamogie, 2278 Navarro Avenue, Altadena, CA 91001 Location: 400 North State Colleae Boulevard. Property is approximately 0.8-acre, having a frontage of 176 feet on the east side of State College Boulevard, located 508 feet south of the centerline of Sycamore Street (State College Car Wash). Request to amend exhibits for a previously-approved car wash in order to construcf an accessory oil change tunnel. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2004-77 sr8757av.doc Chairperson Eastman opened the public hearing. Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 6. ~ ApplicanYs Statement: Felix Obamogie, 2278 Navarro Avenue, Altadena, CA, stated he is the agent and designer for the owner. He stated the addition of an accessory oil change tunnel would be a good asset to the community and he doesn't believe traffic flow would increase. He referred to the staff report and clarified the hours of operation would be from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., not 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. McCafferty read info the record modifications to the conditions of approval. Commissioner Flores asked where the detailing work is done. Michael Aminpour, 400 N. State College Boulevard, Anaheim, stated they have a small section on the south side of the carwash where they do most of the detail work but they only have two to three cars per day for detaif. Commissioner Flores asked if the oil change would be completed before or after the carwash. Mr. Obamogie responded the oil change would be done before the carwash. Mr. Aminpour responded one of the lanes there is going to be pit and the people would drive through the pit to have their oil change, then vacuum and lastly the carwash. Commissioner Flores stated there is a tarp on the south side of the carwash and asked if the tarps are always there. • Mr. Aminpour responded it is always there because when the people drive off the sun reflects their eyes and it also protects from the sun in the vacuum area. 07-26-04 Page 18 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Commissioner Flores asked if that was allowed. • Mr. McCafferty stated it wasn't something that was originally part of the permit and he recommended some type of permanent shading structure. Chairperson Eastman suggested some type of permanent trellis, canopy or shelter to make it more permanent because the existing tarp is tacky. Mr. Aminpour stated they change it every other year because of the dust, etc., which makes it easier than a permanent structure. Chairperson Eastman stated some other carwashes use a trellis type structure with screening on the top. Mr. Aminpour stated they rather not use a permanent structure because they would have to install poles to support it and they don't want to damage cars as they open and close the doors. Commissioner Buffa agreed with Mr. Aminpour. Chairperson Eastman stated slender poles with a lightweight type of material could be used to support a structure and recommends a permanent structure or to have the existing structure removed. Commissioner Flores expressed concern regarding the landscape and the bricks in the flowerbed area by the entrance and asked that it be maintained, and she asked if the building is going to be repainted. Mr. Aminpour responded yes. • • ~ ~- • ~ • ~ • • • OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Commissioner Flores offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Buffa and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Romero and Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares absent and with one Commission vacancy), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby concur with staff that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 3(New Construction or conversion of Small Structures), 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. 1341 (Tracking No. CUP2004-04867) to amend exhibits for a previously-approved car wash in order to construct an accessory oil change tunnel); and adoption of the resolution attached to the staff report dated July 26, 2004, including the findings and conditions contained therein, with the following modifications: Modified Condition Nos. 20 and 24 to read as follows: 20. That the hours of operation shall be limited to 8 a.m. to 5-~: 6 p.m., daily, as stipulated by the petitioner. 24. That prior to final building and zoning inspection, . Condition Nos. 17 and 21, above mentioned, shall be complied with. ~ 07-26-04 Page 19 J U LY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Added the following conditions of approval to read as follows: ~ That the oil change and lube facility shall be an accessory use to the car wash operation and shall not operate independently. That the temporary material covering the car wash canopy covering the vacuum stations shall be removed within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of this resolution. VOTE: 4-0 (Commissioner Romero and Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares absent and with one Commission vacancy) Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 16 minutes (4:24-4:40) ~ \ J 07-26-04 Page 20 J U LY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ 7a. CEQA Cates~orical Exemption - Class 1 7b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04868 Owner: Brookhurst Group, LLC, 1026 South Wall Street, #200, Los Angeles, CA 90015 Agent: Ahmad Alzuq, Family Market, 319 South Main Street, Santa Ana, CA 92701 Location: 802-808 South Brookhurst Street. Property is approximately 1.8 acres, located at the northeast corner of Brookhurst Street and Brookmore Avenue. Request to establish land use conformity with current zoning code land use requirements for an existing non-conforming commercial retail center and to permit a convenience market. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Continued to August 9, 2004 sr8742dh.doc FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None • ACTION: Commissioner Flores offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner O'Connell and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Romero and Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares absent and with one Commission vacancy), to continue the subject request to the August 9, 2004, Planning Commission meeting at the petitioner's request. VOTE: 4-0 (Commissioner Romero and Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares absent and with one Commission vacancy) DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed ~ 07-26-04 Page 21 JULY 26, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ Greg McCafferty submitted documentation for the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Robber's Peak Subdivision. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 4:42 P.M. TO MONDAY, AUGUST 9, 2004 AT 11:00 A.M. FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW. L_ J • Respectfully submitted: /~ c~~~~ //~2t7~/J Elly Morris Senior Secretary Received and approved by the Planning Commission on ~_, 2004. 07-26-04 Page 22