The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes-PC 1992/10/19~ ~' ~ x' J' - = ti~te ~,. ~, , n :a .~ ~. ` ~ mow' ~~ '~ ~ ACTION AGENDA ~~ :,. [~~..: ~ REGULAR M'' ~..TING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION . MONDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1992, AT 11:00 A.M. PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW PUBLIC HEARING i •;~~. .- -- - -- ;'~~` 11:00 AM. 1 :30 P.M. r ~~ r ~ COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BRISTOL, HENNINGER MESSE, PERAZA, TAIT, ZEMEL, `7 ONE VACANT SEAT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: NONE ~ ~~ STAFF PRESENT: ADAMS, BORREGO, FICK, B. FREEMAW, K FREEMAN, JENSEN, ,~,, _, , MANN, MC CAFFERTY, SOLORIO, YALDA _ PROCEDURE TO EXPEDITE PLANNING CCMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS . , yr...'.,. 1 • The proponerNS In applications which are not contested will have flue minutes to present their evdence. Additional time will be granted upon request if, in the opinion of the Cornrrdssbn, such additional time will produce evdence important to the Commission's considecatlon. '~ 2. In contested applications, the proponents ar~d opponent will each be gNen ten minutes to present their case unless sddttlonal time is requested and the complexity of the matter warrants. The Commission's conskieratlons are not deYennined by the length of time a particlpar-t speaks, but rather by what is saki. 3. Staff Reports are part of the evidence deemed received by the Commission In each hearing. Copies are available to the public prior to the meeting. 4. The Commission will withheld questions until the public hearing is closed. 5. The Commission reserves the right to deviate from the foregoing H, in fts opinion, the ends of fairness to ail concerned will be served. 6. All documents preserded to the Planning Commission for review In connection with arty hearing, including photographs or other acceptable visual representations or non-documentary evidence, shall be retained by the Commission for the public record and shall be available for pudic inspections. 7. At the end of the scheduled hearings, members of the pudic will be allowed to speak on items of interest which are within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, and jor agenda items. Each speaker will be allotted a maximum of fNe (5) minutes to speak. Anyone wishing to speak should fill out the forms availabe in the rear of the CouncN Chamber and submR them to staff prior to the mooting. AC101992.WP ` ~ 10j19/92 Page 1 Y~+' __ ~ ~ ~ .4 ~' ''LS~ },tr" l.H 'r 1 } ~ ' E' .. '' ~~ -'`SS .. ..• CE(iA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued ~ ~1b ~QNDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3547 November 16, 1992 FRt t .~. ~~ '- OWNER: DANIEL, AMAUA, REFl1GI0 AND ALICIA RUBALCABA, Attn: Dental Rubalcaba, 510 N. East Street Anaheim, CA 92805 ~'~~ '' '-': . AGENT: JAMES RAMO, 1004 S. Hathaway, Unit'P', Santa Ana, CA 92705 4C. LOCATION: 500.530 North Esst Street. Property is approximately 1.16 acres s~ :~, located at the northeast comer of Sycamore Street and East ' Street t}Yy . To permit the addition of a 780-square foot storage area to an existing '"'~ ~ commercial center with waiver of minimum number of partifng spaces and ~~ maximum structural height within 150 feet of asingle-family reskiential zone boundary. y ` ~ Continued from the October 5, 1992 Planning Commission meeting. _ . CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N ,;~ , . FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINJTES. Chairman Henninger explained that the staff report is not fully up to date and suggested that Code Enforcement give their presentation first. He asked to allow them to amend Paragraph No. 25. Bruce Freeman, Code Enforcement, stated he visfted the shopping center this momfng, 500-530 N. East Street. There was outdoor storage throughout the rear of the properties; vehicles parking between the bundings adjacent to the open area which Is required at this point; Ulegal structures constructed to the rear of 530 N. East Street-this structure is.within an encroachment area adjacent to a reskisntial zone. He also found manufacturing of com tortillas or other food products at the rear of 516 N. East Street. All of these items have been kientifled in the past with the property owner and the tenants and they are in vidatlon at this time. Chairman Henninger asked ff they should even go fonkard wkh this request or allow these problems to be solved first? Commissioner Zemel stated it was his impression that these problems were going to be solved prior to this meeting today and that would allow the Commission to proceed with this. Commissioner Messe stated they addressed the outdoor storage, but was not sure about the illegal stntctures. Mr. Freeman explained he checked the Building Division records this momfng and there are no permits for the Olegal structure at the rear on the north skis. This area is also a reyulred setback arse per the original conditional use permft that was established for the property. 10/19/92 ~' Page 2 ~. d l ll , ksP . ~n.xS~~}~'-F 1 dF _ t r :.k.. ire ~ ~ 1 yc~ .~k _ -~ _ Iceiit. Name not mentioned for the record. He stated he was not prepared for the Blegal and he •not aware of the manufacturing of food on the premises. ~•{ ;,4 f Chalm~an Henninger suggested that the applcant take a look at the p!?atos that were taken. The applicant took a look at the photos. He stated he was only pre~.~~red for the parking problam arxi the trash ,pick up problem; he was not prepared to discuss the other Issues. lie Heads time to darffy these issues. ~= F~ tJonathan Borrego, stated ff they wish to retain that Mructure, he would appreciate K ff the applicant cotdd notify ''~'"`them as soon as possible. He explained they could go ahead and indude that as a part of this request since i< ' ~;,.a~;,;. ~' ,would require a variance for the minimum stn:cturei setback adjacent to the single-family residences. ,' *~~ ,-., In addltlon, during the Interim, it would -~e a good kiss for the applicant tc go ahead and draw up a revised parking ~,,. lot plan and work wfth Traffic Engineering and Planning staff so that when the Commission reviews this, they will ~~ % have the revised parking layout. wm~ ~" ~ ., : Commissioner Messe agreed. ~' ^~~;•. y_ r' _`.. The applicant Indicated he did a revised parking study for the Traffic Engineer. .,~ r:Y ~ ` rulr. Borrego explained ff the structure Is going to be a part of this request, then they would need a 4 week Continuance. TF :Commissioner Peraza offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristd and MOTION CARRIED that conskleration of the aforementioned matter becontinued tothe regulariy-scheduled ~ eating of November 16, 5992 ;' ~ in order far the applicant to get darffication regarding the illegal structure and the manuis,:.uring of food. Y ~ t ``'~ ly~" - - rC~:~l . '::r; y. Continued to ~ - ; I November 16, 1992 • 1i1j i~ .>.z... ;` _~:~., .~, .. ~`' i. ;' ;• 2t1. '-;< ;fiOND1110NAL USE PERMIT N0.3548 OWNER: BRYAN INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES, 143 E. Orangethorpe Ave.,Anaheim, CA 921101; Edwarcl L And Maris Vanagd, 1510 N. State Cdlege, Anaheim, CA 92801 AGENT: .GARNER CHOW ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECT, Attn: Jerry N. Gamer, 500 Sihrer Spur Rd., Ste. ~t 11, Palos Verdes Peninsula, CA 90274 LOCATION: 1500-1542 North State Coileae BoulevaMs Property Is approximately 2.82 acres located at the northeast comer of Via Burton Street and State Cdlege Boulevard. To reclassify subject propert; from the ML to CL tone. To permit the cornersion of an existing 44,334 square foot industrial complex to a 9-unft commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Continued ftom the October 5, 1992 Planning Commission meeting. RECLASSIFICATION RESOL.l1TlON NO. CONDITONAL USE PERMIT N0. - FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. There was no one indicating their presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read, ft is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Jeny Gamer, 500 Silver Spur, Suite 111, Palos Verdes, CA He gave a brief history on tne3 last hearing and stated at that time the Commission wanted them to conskler a reciprocal Ingress/egress and barking agreement He spoke with the owners a few days later and they are willing to enter into such an agreement, however, they do have qufte a few concerns abe+ut being released from that agreement at some future date. One of the owners is in the hospital today having surgery and cannot be irnolved In this and, therefore, would like to request a continuance. ACTION: Commissioner Messe offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristd (one vacant seat) and MOTION CARRIED that conskieration of the aforementioned matter becontinued tothe regularly-scheduled meeting of November ?6, 19921n order for the all parties to be present. 10/19/92 Page 4 _li ~i... ... ..~. IVBYYYpOfi D6HGf1, W~ `JCW1! "R~ .LOCATION: 5635 East is Palma Avenue. Property is approximately 5.54 acres ":' located on the north side of La Patina Avenue and apprwdmately 300 feet west of the centerline of Imperial Highway. `~ Request for approval of revised slte phasing plan pertaining to the delayed ~' ~ construc!i,,n of a previously approved 29-foot high parking stricture to support a previously approved multi-screen theatre expansion. s :; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC92-122 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. There were 4 persons Indicating their presence In opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read, it is referred to and made a part of the minutes. _ Chairman Henninger asked staff to give a brief summary of the project and then play the video that was received at their homes over the weekend. Jonathan Borrego, Senior Planner, stated this protect was originally approved back in 1989 and subsequent to that, the petltioner came back in and requested an addition to the original theater which was previously approved and that expansion was approved subject to the stipulation that they would be providing 80% parking which would amount to 80% of the Code requirement. In additbn to that, there was a shopping center which was also developed to the east of this piece of property and because of some of the cUculatio~ restraints, there was an agreement which would allow circulation between the two sites which also ended up in resulting in a shared parking agreement which actuai!•y, as far as he knew, was never recorded, but apparer>tly there is an agreement in place allowing some reciprocal use of parking. He further explained that as part of the expansion for the theater, on the original plan showed a parking structure which was to be developed as a part of that project. However, the developer of the theater property is requesting that the development of that parking strx:Wre be deferred until a later date. He has also agreed to go ahead and provide 80% of Code parking. A video will be presented as part of this hearing. Chairman Henninger stated the current property is developed with a multi projection theater and that previously has been granted a waiver of Code parking requirement, and when they did that they had a consultant's staff report _ that they agreed with that stated parking would be adequate. Mr. Borrego clarified that was correct. ,~ 10/19/92 Page 5 h;c~s' ,. rego,darified that was correcx. He stated there are two findings that need to be made when a parking s granted and those do relate to vehkmiar circulation and congestion and arty parking impacts as well. ~ Fi:: Chairman Henninger stated adjacent to this is also a shopping center that has been approved and that shopping `~~%center was also granted a waNer of parking. ='; +~ Mr. Borrego indicated ha believed that was correct. ~~ F , He asked for dariflcation if they made the same set of flrxJings, i.e., that there would be no traffic circulation .::.problems due to the waiver of required parking? Nir. Borrego Indicated that was correct. He stated the request today is for dariflcatbn that there is a question whether they agreed to allow any combination of seats and parking that led to an 8096 ratio. That is one interpretation. The second interpretation is whether they insisted on having a parking swcturE~ built. Mr. Borrego Indicated that was correct. ~,;,: Chairman Henninger stated then that is our question today. °, • He asked to see the video. The vkleo was presented. Chairman Henninger stated before they start the public hearing, he wanted to make note that they have receNed several letters on this subject ftom the people who own the Kndiwood restaurant and ftom their attorneys or the attorneys of the adjacent shopping center. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, representatNe for the applicant, 7163 Cdumbus Dr., Anaheim, CA He stated they are trying to find a solution to exactly the congestion that they saw as a resuR of the video and that is to construct a parking structure behind the theater in order to accommodate the 8096 Code parking. He would Ilke to reRerate that at all times there will be 8096 of Code parking provided for the Cinernapdis theater. He stated ft is a question of timing that is somewhat of a problem. The intention was to construct a structure In January, February or March during the next opportunity window when the attendance at the theater is lower. However, due to a signNicant delay in the issuance and obtaining of a building permit for the parking structure, this is not possible. In order to construct a structure the next window of opportunfry will be in September, October and November and this Is what they are really here to discuss. In the meantime, however, at all times, the theater wpl be providing 8096 of Code parking as established by the Commission to be a reasonable waiver of parking for the theater operation. He referenced Item 12b of the staff report and stated h has already been approved and the applicant Is intending, at all times to adhere to that. He added he dkl not know what else could be done other than stating the very bare facts. The reason the parking structure could not be butt at this time is obvious because the building pennft to be issued will take another several months-it seems h is not a simple thing to issue a permit and there are delays as a result of that. 10/19/92 Page 6 e~~;::~- > r' . ;s:. ~~ '. -. `'° ° cal ht-of-wa that the ra9road may have. That was investigated and One of,the delays was caused by a trypotheti rig Y from~what he understands the Title Report on the property indks~tes that the raNroad does not Inoumber arty part of~i~,~sq now that the footprkd is in place it is alrigF~ .They now have to proceed in obtaining two additkMal things, not,anly the:_checking of the building plan, but also obtaining approval for the drainage to be drained towards the '~°•'°°~ w,• To otrtain a grading permR and all of those things take time and therefore, channel that Is adjacent to the property. fpfijlslcelly they cannot meet that requirement untN such time for the next window. ff the buiding permits are Issued by,.;July, at the very latest, then the September, October, November deadline can be met In the meantime, ~~ t .P.;Fowever, an adequate number of seats wql be removed from the theaters in order to accommodate 8096 of parking rt` ~,:w,,,... c ~~f as stipulated by the Planning Commission. fti ~~~ u~ :~~~~' : Mftch Nakamura, 1217 S. Spnu~ Avenue, Bloomington. He stated he Is responsible for coordinating the ~., {~'~,; ° archftectural and engineering portion through the contractor for So Cal Cinemas. ~ f ~~n4k . - He stated they were given direction from their owners to aggressively pursue permits, but as Mr. Singer stated the ,~°~..: ~ ~ right-of-way issue put a damper on that for the spring. Their stew direction is to permit, process, approve and an „ ,~ on constructing the parking structure at the next available window which is early September. Commissioner Messe asked Mr. Nakamura if that is a self imposed window? t ~~n ' ` . Mr. Nakamura stated that was something that was agreed upon in conjunction with the City based on industry ~'. standards in terms of when they have their peak periods etc. He explained after Christmas it slows down up unttl Memorial Day and then h gets busy for the summer season. Then around labor Day until Thanksgiving, there Is ~~~~ a second window. He added that is something that there has been discussion along with the City and Transportation as well. Joel Fick, Planning Director, stated just for clarification, that really was the basis far which the last request under Reports and Recommendations was taken to the Planning Commission. Because of the hdkiay season and the peak periods for the movie releases, the prior request was that the construction not take place until the spring time. He wanted to darHy the discussion about the building permit issuance, the plan checking process and the discussion regarding the railroad easement. He explained whGe that was something that was looked at fn the past, staff has represented to Cinemapdis that the plan checking for that facility can take place in a matter of about a one week time period. He stated there has been, in the last week, an addftional Issue brought up about the drainage into the flood contrd . channel and franMy he is completely unaware of that issue and he does not know the complexities about what type of permit might be needed ftom efthec the Ctty Engineering staff or other flood conftd people. But in terms of the plan checking and any Issues associated with the raGroad right-of-waY, the plan checking can be completed In about a one week tum-around. Commissioner Messe stated he just wanted to make sure that the September, October, November of '93 was indeed the first window of opportunftyl He asked if there was one in early spring liko February, March and April? Mr. Nakamura stated that starts In January and is approximately a 3-4 month process to construct the structure and that includes time far off-site precasting and so forth. He though the week and a half for plan check was something :net is probably doable amd reasonat:~le through the Building and Safety, but because they are exceeding the 500 cubic yards, they need to go through a public hearing or some sort of Council hearing through Engineering to get a grading permit and have floe grading plan, plan checked. 10/19/92 Page 7 s , . ~r~,„,. ~.~.; ~ .. ~~~ ~ r s r ~ ~~s ~_ ~ ~ ,~s ~~: ~. r t~~ : ~~~4C-,. ;r}'i. . e• they`could not, proceed wltlt determining tlrek design and drainage without knowing the cordiguration of footprint in terms of how they were going to surface drain. so urrtN that right-of-way issue was darified. and they hadeso ne level of confidence that tMs is what is going to be approved, R is at a stand stgl. E~ Commlealoner Masse stated we are sitting here now in October. ,,~ Mr Nakamura stated they were sfttlng here in October and their Is considerable time frame in terms of getting shop drawings generated, getting all of the precast hems taken care of off-sfte and then starting construction--they realiY • needed to break ground on-sfte January 1 and they are past that In terms of scheduling. h y}L~f{ ~ '. . ,r Flck stated the only Issue he had wanted to darHy was that since the parking structure had not bean designed rs } t~ ~; and. the drawings not completed for the drainage, he did not want the Planning Commissktrt to be under the Impression that there was some plan check hold up that was causing this delay. "~ ~a ~ Iv1r. Nakamura stated throughout that process and dealing with Planning, Zoning aril Building, lt was never ~ s mentioned that a bond insuring the completion of the parking structure would be conditioned and part ~ their a ,y~~* ;_• CertNicate of Occupancy for the theater. He Just wanted to go on the record and say that. ~N' L r :OPPOSmON: 9~} ~,, N ~ ,^ Mike Rhoades, (last name not spelled for the record) President of Kndlwood Enterprises, Inc., (they have the ~' ~~ `Kndlwood Restaurant)1717Or~ngewood Avenue, Sulte I, Orange, CA He stated he Is a little fuuy about exa y what the request Is and he Is hearing different things and he wanted to ask >f someone cruid dartfy for him exactly what the request is. He stated he knows lt is to open the new phase of expansion prier to a parking swcture being built, bit lt seems like there is more to lt than that. Chairman Henninger stated although lt has not really been said anywhere in all of this, he thought the «xe Issue Is whether the expansion would be allowed to operate at simply an 8096 parking ratio without a guarantee that the parking structure will ultimately be built; or whether there would be a guarantee in the form of a bond fcx the parking structure or whether they are going to let them operate that way wlthout the guarantee and Just their representation that some time in the fall they will build the parking structure. Mr. Rhoades stated ftom their standpoint, they have been at that Ic~cation since 1957 and they becamerwa I tfh oNm these and they have a very popular restaurant and at the same time Cinamapdis has a very pop complex and they benefit ftom each other. He kna4~s he wa:sld be lying to them if he said tls theaters did rwt prtY.~e customers for them and they are happy to have them situated so dose to them, however, the csimary concem to Knollwood is their ability for their customers to get in and out easHy and find parking spars. He added the customers cannot. He stated his concem fs what is going to happen when the rest of this center opens and There are 5 restaurants Instead of one tarxl there are many different retailers. On a Friday nigh when everyone is going full Mast, is there going to be enough parking for everyone? He Honestly does not think there will be and people are not going to valet park for a $2.90 ht~mburger. They are a convenience type establishment. People want to get In and out and the situation as lt stands needs to be re-evaluated by all panies to try to make ft work for the communky and for the businesses. Kndiwood took the video on the Saturday before last and that was the first weekerxi they opened in their new restaurant. They horxjstly thought with all of the extra parking that opened up, they would be in great shape. He understands tf~at some of the parking areas were not opened yet, but still they had dramatically more spaces then they ever had before and yet lt was gridlock out there. His biggest concem (s the future of their business and ff people cannot get in and out they will not come back and ® that is why he thinks lt Heads to be rn-evaluated• 10/l9/92 Page 8 ~;:; ~~ 4 ~? jfl~~ Fo: ~ , y L~~'~ ~~ J3 _ ~, ti}, r~ h .. Scotty Qast name not spelled for the rekxxd), 2532 N. Shady Forest Lane, Orange, CA His famAy awns the i~Federal.property that is at fire comer of the parking let away from KndMrood and in ttre northeast comer. pislretf they are landlocked and they haws to depend on parking and traffic flow for the rest of the property, 'ore, ..they have some very big concerns about where the parking is and haw the parking is arranged. ;: ,, ated their main concern is ff the variance is allowed for the parking at the Union Federal buffding In the ng: He explained for the time being that is not a problem because the bank >s dosed at nigh so parking is ,ble there. However, the fact the bank malt/ not be there 5,10 or 15 years from nrnv, Is a real concern to them. -variance Is allowed and there is anything that is carried forward aril an easement la ever granted allowing ~g there-ff that goes wfth the property theU have a big concern about that At some point in the future the ,~ ,~.~- bank maybe gone and they may develop h for s,xnething else and. therefore. give up some of their perking rights. ~U~~~,. 4l' He stated the parking, the while situation and the history of this property has really been bad from the beglnning and the fact that the parking structure was not butt first is stunning to them. In their view the oMy answer for the ,> ' " problem is to create a parking structure. They would be very against granting a variank.~e without having some kind of performance bond or something guaranteeing that the parking structure wil be bu>" and built on time. Their pest "_ exporlence over nt,ny, many years in dealing with the movie theater has nil been that good and they would Ilke ' r to see something guaranteeing that performance, Le., buNding a parking stnicture. i~~ . ~" ~ Timothy Randal, Lawyer, 18500 Von Kerman Avenue, Suite 600, Irvine, CA 92715. He is here representing the Center Park Imperial Promenade property which hs adjacent to the theater operation. ' He referenced item no. 12a. of the staff report under "Retxxnmendatkxrs" regarding the ellminatlon of the responslb0lty to build a parking structure. He did not read anything regarding a bond or performance guarantee on the parking structure. He asked ff staff could darffy exactly what action item Is being proposed? Chairman Henninger stated he believed there has been an ongoing discussion on this subJect He asked ff there was correspondence regarding the conditions that staff currently thinks should be associated with this before the Certificate of Occupancy Is Issued? Mr. Fick stated that is ~rrect. There was a letter that was sent out; he would say subsequent to that letter, there has been verbal representation by the theater owner that they would be maintaining the 8096 parking ratio In their proposal and hence the public hearing today is that they would be physically removing seats from the theater complex to reach that 8096 ratio. i. Chairman Henninger asksd ff he could review for them the k~nditions that were in the letter because there seems to be a misunderstanding about the action on the table today? Mc Fick explained there actually was a meeting that took place. Mitch Nakamura who is one of the owner's representatives, quarried about the need for the parking structure bond. One of the other represer-tatives representing Clnemapdis was In a meeting with staff and Imperial Promenade was In agreement with the requirement for tho bond. He explained that is why the letter was originally sent to both property owners, I.e., as a summary of the agreement reached at that meeting. Subsequent to that, and also it was represented at the meeting, that this would not be an obstacle because there was every intention to prokxmed right away as soon as the holiday season was over with the construction of the parking strtcture. 10/19/92 Page 9 i ~~,~.... lSS.tp. ~ ~\ 1~ l 1 k i ~~ ~ Mi ~~ .. - -7 s~bean represented. to them that fliers fs rat an fmmedl~ plan to buAd the parldrp struture. There vras aenfation here today that there Is rbw, sometime neod fall, and the dAemma that exists for staff Is that there newhet conflidin~ testimony and discussion to the minutes about whetherthe representation from Cinemepolls U.,,. , d`mereiy meeting a 8096 requirement fut811s the intention That the Planning Commission. had in approving the ~~ , ct. However, the conditions of approval for the original project do display a PerMn9 stnxxure on the. plans, iince there is a condition requiring substantial conformance with those plans, there was an original requirement {r He stated he knows this Is an incredibly confusing Issue, but at the moment, staff is net recommending that the K ~~~ t~rx1 be required in this staff report on the bests of the representatbn from Cinemapdis that the 80% parking ratio ~z~ would be maintained on-site visive physical removal of the seats. ~~';t` " ~~ Ctialrman Henninger stated for darffication, there is no change in the parking ratio that is being proposed today. ~ ~ ` They previously granted a waiver that talked about a ratio of 80% of their nom~al Code requirement. The question `that.is on the table today is, was h the intention of the Planning Commission when they made that decision, to alley;; `~~, an 80% ratio in whatever way the theater would like to produce that ration. In other worcls, they could have the ~~ Oexlbllity to eliminate seats or add parking. ~.~ -~ i- r ~ '~ ~ Mr. Fick stated essentially that is correct. Chalrnen Henninger further stated or was h their IMentlon to demand to them, to build, as shown on their plans, ,:. sparking structure? fdr. Fick stated that (s correct. ~' Chairman Henninger stated ti~en teat is the question that we are being asked to answer today? Mr. Fink responded yes. Mr. Randal stated the problem is that they have an extremely constrained site on both operations. Currently their expectation was that the parking structure would be butt at the time or permits would be Issued simultaneously ~n~th the theater expansion. That has been moved back. It is their understanding and their calculation that the site currently does not meet the condftlons of 80% parking. He stated by their calculations, they estimate that they are deficient 'by approximately 57 spaces. This does not take into account the fact that they also believe they are currently utilizing compact spaces to court towards their parking count. They are required under their conditions of approval of CUP 3414 to eliminate compact spaces. They have since reslurried and restriped to a size of a compact space. K seems to them that before the permit was even Issued for the theater expansion construction to commence, that they should have submitted and had reviewed and approved a detailed plan showing the location and number of spaces to be utilized to come up to that 80% requirement as was a condition under CUP 3414; and again he would like to ask staff-they have not been able to determine the existence of any such parking plan and wonder ff that does in fact exist? Chairman Henninger explained basically when they came they brought a plan with them that showed the parking, the expansion they wanted and the parking structure, so they dkf have a parking plan. Mr. Randal asked ff a copy should be stamped as approved and part of the public record? Chairman Henninger stated it is part of the public record-h !s one of the exhibits to the conditional use permit ;~ 10/19/92 Rage 10 ';x', klY (' . ~~xr, . ~ ~; ~ ti ~ {~u. G ~v„': 1 P b Mr. Randal stated•their review of the fie dk! not Indk~te that plan, but K seems to them that the eodst(ng approval or ex(sting mitlgatlon requires the removal of seats even to come up with whatever plan they have now to meet their ~~ 8096: requlrerrrent.. From cornersatkxms with their awn people, ft {s apparent that the number of seats have not been removed: so..that they come into compliance cuRerttly with the 8096 standard. All this tells them Is that they are c~r>< mplating something-that Is heavgy dependent on Pdk:e and eMorcement by r?~a City. It requires entry Into ttie r~i erior of the theaters physk~lly counting the number of seats whk~r could change on a daNy basis. They feel ~~.~:~~ itawouk! be'very unwise to build that type of requirement into the system that is dependent on an Increased level --•, Hof entotcement and pdicing by the City. Apparently It is not being lone currently and they have no reason to ~~:~s-that it will continue in the future. ~f "+~~~ fi '' Mr Randal stated another factor was that their development was conditioned upon entering into a reciprocal ~~ ~ parking and access agree rent with the theater site. That was mandated actually upon both sites and is a condftion ~P yr, under the CUP. That a~~~ R:sment, contrary to the intormatbn earlier, has been entered into and recorded In the ~. public record and this l;roposal would be in direct vldation of the terms of that agreement. In the agreement h ~~~ ~ requires the theater to build to conformance with their impn~ved site plan and they cannot materially deviate from ~''"'~ the lemma of that pre-approved site plan and they view the disposal of the parking structure as a material devlatlorr. 't~"~ They do not believe that the findings that the Commission are required to make can be made as It will adversely ~~ `' " affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of their site and other sites around them. it will be ~~' ~ detrimental to the peace, health and safety and general welfare of the citizens. As they saw in the vkleo, and can `` ~=: ~'' be determined by testimony, h does Impact the traffic circulation in that cars are backed up onto La Palma Avenue out of the common access driveway. Cars were having to be recirculated across the street and it causes a major - congestion problem. They have only opened up one use out of their total uses on the site which is a small fraction of their square- ,:: ;,• footage. You can see from the video that it is already mass chaos out there. He cannot Imagine ff they have a full up and running center what that vkieo would have looked like then. He dkJ not think K could have looked - worse, but it certainly probably would have been. They ask that they not approve the application and that the CUP be enforced and that no dispensation on that condition be granted. Dl~•: DeBakfs, one of the general partners of Imperial Promenade Pa!iners, owners of the shopping center adjacent to the east of Cinemapdis, 2300 Michelson Drive, Irvine, CA He stated he would keep his comments brief and to the point. He stated they have a lot of accomplishments to date artd he thought they should recognize that. He stated Commissioner Henninger has seen this project move through the procress and Commissioner Masse as well. He is pleased that they now have Phase I constructed and opening. What is of paramount Importance for theb project to be successful is to make sure that they have adequate parking for all of their businesses that are on their praperry. He stated he wanted to go back a I'rKle bit ~ m time. He stated Jonathan Borrego mane the statement that staff had requested a reciprocal parking agreemer. • with their property and the theater. That is correct On several occasions, staff and Paul Singer has asked to have a reciprocal parMng agreement between the two properties. Before they purchased the property, and began their planning process in February of 1990, they went back and read through the Cinemapdis file to find out what was their parking situation and ff you go to the record and review the parking study they performed as of July 17, 1987, ie clearly states in there that there is a 133 car deflcft at peak time hours fora 2,350 seat theater. So at the beginning they realized that the theater was under parked and saki they dki not want to take part in that request ~ ~, 3. 10/19/92 Page 11 ~ i. 'J ~µ'~r.1.. .... ,....,., y ~,. y` y* \ ~~~, th y performed their parMng study for the project, they did a dual parking study by the same ftrm (Unacott, ~`M~Qree and that ttg,„ nspan) parking study Is dated February 27.1990. The difference between their two uses fs that ~ theater;does rxtt have uses that shut flown during peak time; their retail site does have uses that wNl not be ~eratlonal in the peak evening hours, so there is a distinct difference between the two. They studied those ~. In their parking study lt showed that the theater had a deftclt of approodmatety 200 plus cars; w-`ren mbined with their site lt was shortened somewhat because they absorbed part of their )parking and theft shx+y owed they had a su us of s2 cars-tne needed 266 and ~~~", rpl y they had 317. They recognize zt~.w had some excess rlilnp but they d(d not want that to be totally absorbed by the theater. ~} ~'~ ~ f=rom' the standpoint of parMng, lt has been fairly well documented and in the public record that the theater ~; pnifesslonal consultant and their consultant have shown that they have not operated within the guidelines of ~"z" satisfactory parking levels. ~,.. }~ r F -. At the time the theater came in for an expansion fn July of 1991, they requested that they would they like to provide ~, *, , a reciprocal parking agreement and they aga~~t resisted that. He thinks that more than anything, the videotape that fir,<: Knoliwood took on the evening of the 10th of October dearly dxuments that there is a substantial parking ~ ~ consummation occurring on their property by Cinemapdis. In fact, when they arrived at 7:OOp.m. that evening, he was surprised that he was not able to gain access to the site--he had to park at Hughes Airc~t. By the time he ~~.~; walked and came back next door, there was a barricade. Again recognize that they Just opened up the new ¢3~, . `Knollwood restaurant. There is a olnt drlvewa that will serve both J y properties and there rg a barricade set up so people could come to and make a U tum. In front of the barricade was an employee of Cinemapdis wlth a flashlight directing people to make a U-tum and on his barricade he posted a sign that said 'No Parking, Park - Across The Street, Sorryl' Cfeaify, the theater recogn(zes they have a parking problem. Behind that person hdding up the sign was Knoliwood Restaurant trying to sell hamburgers that night. RIgM now they are at a 10-plex wlth 2,432 space seats. He dkl not think the 10-plex was adequately parked allowing those seats to be distributed among 13 screens. He stated If you go to the City parking Code a stand alone theater requires .6 parking spaces. The theory is that multi-plea cinemas do not have the same high demand movie showing at the same time, therefore, lt is .3 because you do not have blockbuster hits in all 10 theaters. With 8096 of that, you drop down to .24, but look how the theaters operate-they are showing multiple hits In multiple screens, therefore, taking away from the multi-plea theory that you do not have blockbusters in each and every screen. He thinks when they open in May, they had Batman II and prohably 3 screens. He thinks they had Lethal Weapon III and a couple more screens, so perhaps the parking Code does not adequately address what they really see as the operation of the theater. They whdly disagree tit : allowing them to operate with 8096 of their seats spread between 13 screens is going to solve the parking situation. He stated they talk about window of opportunity to construct their Improvements. In a public document that Is recorded. Clnemapdis made a very big point that they will not allow to construct any improvements that Impact their property during the high time. They said you cannot bugd, so in other words if you are going to reconstruct the driveway and connect the she at the other two access polrrts, you cannot do that between May 15 and December 15 because those are their big summer months--that fs when they are showing their blockbusters and you cannot be out there. When dkl they build their expansion? July, August, September and October. Where is the rationale In all of this thinking? Now they come before the Commission and Indicate the next time they c:an build lt is October of next year. He sees too many conflicting points in what they are trying to do and does not see any accurate infomratlon that has a consistent trail. WF~en they came before the Planning Commission in July of 1991, what they heard was that the theater wished to build an expansior, with a parking structure. They are whdly supportive of •_`'.at, but what they do not want to see is an expansion of the theater without the approved parking structure. i 10/19/92 Page 12 s~=:~- F~ K;is:z~.... Y ^~ E' ~~ . 'S' ..: Y I'au1;31~ nger.,stated he was sure everyone was very impressed by the video that was shown. He stated the vkleo s:taken at the time that the parking lot of the theater was undergoing sealing and 170 parking spaces were rrot a.R ..Y w.~ ...: eva9able to perk on because corestntction was taking k~laco the parMng lot was being alUrry sealed. He stated this ~` ~.~ happens every week. This is isYnot a condition first only one single time occurrence so pleas do not be swayed ,G,, Y,, ~,by that because rt is just not true. S ~ 1 ~He~stated thrare has been some question brought about on the plan for the parking structure. They have submitted ',;~: plarfs: Grant you they have never submitted a final plan as the parking layout Is going to show, and that parking ^';~ pieri is going tG be submitted to the City exactly the way ft was intended to bo. ~' The rkin structure is of to be butt. The theater Is pa 9 9 n9 going to provide 80% of the parking. Mr. DeBakis stated '' ~ that this theater should not have any parking waiver. He made h appear as though there was no parMng waNer on, his property and that he had surplus parking. The fact is that there is a parMng waiver as well on the Kndlwood '; .,parking area. As a matter of fact there are 60 parking spaces located for the Kndlwood area when In fact their ~4;'customers far exceed that, but he is not here to nft pick these type of things. There is going to be adequate ;,~~ parf<ing at all times for the theater because the theater Intends to stay with the 80% requirement. The parking ?structure is proceeding as quicMy as possible taking Into axount certain requirements that go wRh the parMng ,structure. You cannot build h any sooner than h is physically practical to do so and until a!I the permits have been ~~;~ It ks true that the building Issue for the building of the parking structure may be obtained within a week or 10 days, but that is not the point. There has to be drainage taken care of and grading. Those are the 2 additional permits :that have to be obtained and It cannot be done over night. No place does it state that the theater >s not going to comply wfth parking. The parking Is going to be complied with. The quantity of parking, compared to the seats, is at all times goring to be compiled with. They are now only requesting that a reasonable time be given in order to construct the parking structure. He thinks that k Is everybody's aim to allow and provide adequate parking. It is not clood business for anyone if there is no parking. He stated the sign that was displayed the one night during this congestion was because of the shiny sealing of the parking lot. He explained it was a one time incident and it was done by an over zealous employee of the theater. tt was not authorized in anyway shape or form by Mr. Sanborn. He added please understand that the parking lot was full because there was 170 parking spaces missing on that one night. ,~ Mr. Flck stated for dadfication there was a question raised ftom the bank about the 80% ratio and parking being provkled and their viewpoint toward that. He stated they do understand there is some type of arrangement. He did not believe that has been submitted to the City, however, there Is some type of arrangement with Cinemapdis and the bank. If ft was conditioned at >~% it would absdutely require that seats would have to be removed to 'retain that ratio and he just wanted to provide that dariBcatfon. Mr. Singer stated Mr. Flck is absdutely correct. The parking at the bank is oMy temporary. When the parking at the bank is no longer available then one of two things could happen. Tither an addition to the parking structure takes place or seats are removed, but at all times the theater Is going to comply with 80% of Code parking and that is the bottom line. ,; ~. 0 cater, . ~ ,' 10/1S/92 Page 13 i~ .. , ~. ~ 1N fMlJrlullCrll . ^!F i ergo, Supervisor of lCndiwood Errterpriaes, Inc.. 1717 orangewood Avenue, suite I, Orange, CA. He jus;„wanted to add something about the parking. He was the person that took the video a coupie of ago- (on the 10th) and he was there last weekend on Saturday night and they had the same situation gh they dkt ftnish the slurry and the other parking stalls were open. They still had the same melon i. He explained he had attempted to go to one of the stores and h took him 15 minutes just to get out 4cing lot w `W He stated he does beg to dfifer wfth the gentleman about the sign because there has been many oxasions where ` ~ they had put up signs where they say °Lot Full.' A lot of patrons then have to go across the street in the other ~~~ ` ?: center to park. Now there Is some signage across the street in that parking area that says there Is no theater ,~-~~. ` ~. parking, so you know there is already a problem. ~,~ i ,' He"added he is not too clear, but even though they say 80% for parking, he dkl not think it was adequate at ail. He is there every Friday and Saturday during peak hours and they had to direct their own tratflc so the theater patrons would not block the entrances and so forth. ~'' IN FAVOR: ~Ty~ i DenNs Gumaer, DlsMct Manager, So Cal Cinemas, l3 Corporate Plaza, Newport Beach, CA 92660. He has been '',~ to theater operations for over 24 years-he has seen this type of thing before and, therefore, he dki a study himself this last Friday night. He explained it is not scientific by any means, but he thinks the numbers speak for themselves. ,;: '' ~ He stated the theater peaked out at B:OOp.m., i.e., between B:OOp.m. and 8:45p.m., they dkf n~ have people coming or going and that is when everything settles in. At B:OOp.m. they had 1,170 people In their theater. At B:OOp.m. Knollwood had 262 customers In their restaurant (he counted them). He dkl a quick calculation as far as percentage and that tdd him that Knollwood had 18.25% of the total people on the lot and with the number of cars on the lot that represented 116 cars; there were 119 cars on their lot. He stated 81.75% of the people that night were In the theater-that percentage of the number of cars represents 519 cars. Even without a variance, they have enough parking with 495 spots on their lot, the shared lot, bank and everything else to accommodate these people. A lot of confusbn as far as the parking, fs the center cutout at their box office. He thinks that was poorly designed and he thinks that needs to be addressed at some time. They had over 700 people walking back and forth between the 2 buildings during a 4 hour period. He stated along with all of the cars, they need to do something for their a;stomers. He agrees that they have to be partners (n this for a long time; they have to be neighbors and they have to get along. He stated he has heard that the theater people are ;oing to be towed off of the Imperial lot and they need to be neighborly about this. I .; He stated he is worried about Imperial not having en;,~gh farkis,y, spa^.es arx". itlat Imperial Promenade, when they start opening up more night uses, ft is going to be a disaster. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chairman Henninger stated there is one more point of darlfication that they need to make. He asked if the 80% of Code required parking that was approved wfth the CUP actually represents an Increase in the amount of parking for the theater? Alfred Yalda, Traffic Engineering stated that is correct. ,= ; -~ condition that was there. ,~ I ~~~ ~ . . There is 6996 and this will increase it 1196 above the existing 10/19/92 Page 14 ~ .y ~ - r.n ~ i'' ~ •1* '~ 1 ~~ y - Ch~alnrtan Henninger stated then that perking is not in place yet? `s Mr Yalda stated no K k not ~~,{ ; a ~;_ Cammlastoner Masse asked about the seats? 4 ~M '~Mr tYalda stated he did not know about the seats. He was thereon Friday momtng to visit the site and he notk:ed ~~,;~'that'they resurfaced the parking lot and did not remove the compact cars. The compact cars are stNl there-and ;, t.'do not need anymore requirement. Furthemxxe, the plan tt~t they submitted to the City does not reflect w~;~` ~-%'~; is out there. He would request the applicant to provide them with an accurate plan that is signori by a registered y`L architect and sealed With a seal and also a dull Ineer 80 this Wa eng y they could verify the inforrnatbn that was ~ , stibmkted to them because the plans show dfffererrt dimensbns then what is out there and he dkl not think that ~;~ was. acceptable to the City. ~~ Commissioner Masse asked ff he was out there after the slurry sealing? ~`~~ r Mc. Yalda explained he was out there when there was slurry In the back of the parking lot so he was not able to `~ ~ ry `; count all of the parking. He measured several parking spaces at the west end and they were about 8' X 12' and °' on the east side, the total of the parking is about 54 feet which is short 6 feet and is the required minimum standard. ` Commissioner Masse stated he was stirs that anything Mr. Singer has to do with wnl not have any compact spaca3s in it. Chairman Henninger asked ff they submitted a plan? He asked ff fie was saying what is out on the ground is not •. ~ consistent wfth the plans? Mr. Yalda stated that is correct. Chairman Henninger asked far darffication as to wftat sort of problems there were? Mr. Yalda stated the plans show 40 feet, but in reality ft Is 36 feet and shovm on the west sloe of it, h is f~ teat but it >s not 60 feet, h is 54 feet and he does not know ff the number they put fn here is a correct number or not He would have to go back and verify all of these numbers. Chairman Henninger asked Planning staff ff the Budding De~artmeM had ever been out there to do an actual physical seat count? Mr. F~k stated no they have not Building has certainly been out there doing various inspections as the construction has been progressing. They requested a seat count from Cinemapdis as soon as the parking balance and seats are known and they will be submitting that to the City. Commissioner Masse asked ri the new theater was occupied yet? Mr. Flck indicated that was correct 10/19/92 Page 15 iy: fit ` ~ { i~: ,; 'x,. !i ~- ~~ ~~ Y~ ~a-. Commissioner Meese stated he would like to know from the City Engineer about the drainage and grading permits. - e asked about the tlmirtg. aMelanie Adams; Public Works-Engineering, stated regarding the drainage Issue, going directly Into the channel, they woi~! need to obtain a permit from the Coiurty Flood Control Agency for the grading if they are cut or fBling more 500 cubto yards. They wpl need a grading pertni< that would be issued by the City Engineer and pekx to .~ obtafning`that permft they would need to have a puMk: hearing and that would be a minimum 8 week pr:: mss. k She stated for dariftcatlon, there was some imdicatlon that these Issues were holding them up. To her knowledge .-'°ro plane have been submitted to their oNice and so these things could have been worked on concurrently. This ~ ` ~~ =~~ would not be something that the City is delaying them on. It appears that their own scheduling problems have ~~ ~ ~< been delaying them. ~" `~~ " Chairman Henninger stated he la, ;ed at the video, so om Friday night t'~e went down at about 7:OOp.m. to take a ~,~ , _ , look at the she. The area in the back of the theater was avaAable for parking and there was a terrible amount of ~~ congestion at the front parking lot, both in front of ICndiwood and around Kndiwood and in front of the theater. He stated h appeared that there were people parking In other a`~apable spaces-not on either of these sites, but rn'~' ',` across the street and walking across the street to go to the theater. ~ ~~ ~'~~ Surprisingly, the area in the back of the theater was entirely vacant and not a single car parked back there even tip';:;'". ~ though there were a lot of open parking spaces. Also, at the Kndiwood site there were spacers avai{able at the far reaches of the parkng lot. He referenced Mr. Randal's letter. He stated to the first paragraph, Mr. Randal Indicates that the perMng Is complete, the Improvements are complete and that is not the case. The area where the okJ lCndlwood use to be has just been removed and there is still construction going on there, so the parking lot Is not really complete in the way ft uftlmately will be. He stated Knoliwood was doing a land office business-they had long lines wafting for food and all of their seats were taken. It appeared as though there were a lot of people going to see the ng~r Kndiwood. Commissioner Zemel states he met with Mr. Sanborn on this Issue and subsequently, he accepted Mr. Rhodes' irnftation to comp out. He saki to come out any Saturday night after 7:OOp.m. He went over there at 10 minutes after B:OOp.m. on Saturday. He found tt a little bft different but on the same Tines of Chairman Henninger. When he got to the back parking lot, every parking space was taken and there were no vacant spaces in the back. There was a uniformed guard encouraging him to trod a space back there and she indicated she would be patrdling and protecting cars. She was very helpful. There was no parking on the skis; there were no parking spots In front. He then transferred over to the lCndlwood area and again, Saturday night they were very busy as well, so there is definitely joint usage going on there. He is somewhat amazed at the covert actions that are going on. He stopped and asked Jonas a couple of questions and he was in a So Cal Theater Tee shirt (today he has on a Kndlwoad tee shirt) he would like to see these neighbors somehow start patching things up. He stated he can see some real joint usage going on here and he can see people going to Kndlwood and to the theater and he can see it reversed and there wilt be more parking. He stated you really have to encourage these two groups to start working together. He asked staff, before the Certificate of Occupancy will be issued for the new theater, would the written copy of the parking agreement with Union Bank be provided to the City? '":~. 10/19/92 Page 16 r~f+ f •.. ~ - ..M . t .~T ~y. explained that, ~ correct and in fact Mr. Sanborn handed him a ~Py of that agreement just a few momerKs ~~ ;stated K is being distributed to them now. tt is dated October 14. 1992 and it relates to the terms and ~ifitlons for leasing 49 parking spars on that sRe. :~__ ~',;;: , nmtssbner Zemel asked ff a would be reviewed in detaq by staff prior to that crertifk~te being Issued? -'- 'Flckindicated that is correct. ~`~°°~~ Commissbner Zemel stated he realized there was slurry sealing and sMping taking place and asked N their staff n:.{~r_ _ .:. . .would yo out and actually count spaces and deckle which are compact and which can be used? ",7 ' Mr. Flck explained their intentbn was that prbr to the Certiftcate of Occupancy being submitted, that a plan would ~~. be submitted to the City that would spedfy the exact number of parking spaces and the exact number of seats that '' are on-she. That would then be submitted to Planning and they world fteld check that for accuracy prior to x :: ; 'Issuance of the Certfficate of Oxupancy. ,~. ~~~`, Commissioner Masse asked for darfficatbn ff that plan would show each screen and how many seats In each tteste-? ~~,.:.. ~ ~* :' Mr. Flck stated the representation from the Trafftc Engineering Sedkn today complicates that a bR because tt .sounds Ilke there are several inaccuracies that may have been in existence since the Inception of the theater and '.~~' that complicates the matter somewhat and that is something they would probably have to review with the attorney's office. '`~ Commlasloner Meese asked Mr. Singer to come bads to the podium just to darffy that there wNl be no compact spaces {ri the theater parking lot. Mr. Singer stated the intention, of course, is not to remove all compact parking spacers. As you know he is quite an opponent to compact parking spaces. He stated they have to understand, howe•~er, that there are pre-existing conditions that cannot be physically taken care of and specifically he is referring to the backup space because the compact parking spaces were laid out at both skies of the building. The result is that the aisle becomes somewhat constrained by approximately 2 feet or so because they were originally IakJ out at 15 feet plus the aisle. He explained ff you make an 18#oot space, there is rwt enough space between the building and the wall to ecx:ommodate it. Obviously, what can be done is putting in angle parking, but the result of that is you are losing parking and you are provkJing a one-way aisle and nefther one of those two sdutions are practical. ' Commissioner Masse asked with a 15-foot space, how long would that backup area be to the building? Mr. Singer stated the Code and the City Standard Is an 18-foot space with a 24-foot aisle and that aggregate rnimber is probably, in certain Instances, up to 2 feet short, but ft is not the end of the world. On the west skis you could make the planters smaller, but do you really waM to remove landscaping-probably not. Commissioner Masse asked what about the wklth of the spaces? Mr. Singer stated the width of the spaces are suppose to be S-1 /2 fee! He understands that the contractor made a mistake and p3fMed th@m 8 feet and K has to be taken care of because that is not according to any standard arKJ h should be COReCt@d. Chairman Henninger stated the lack of backup space could be partially mitigated by making the spaces sligtdly wkier. ~. 1o/1s/92 Page 17 ,M1. , ,~ $9~ 4 _ ~t 5__ r - - ? i~.. ~'? 'a?t ~ N )r." - ~~nn j IL' ~ - ~ - ~~ tgef stated again y0U are IOSI ng parMng. K I.4 not the etld Of the World to have a kxwple Of rrl0fe fee[. K WIII ffact the vehicles that are superlarge--they may have to backup. and they may hav®to seesaw. Most of the i fre has seen go to the theater take the smaller k~rs. Certainly there are some large vehicles there, but he ,say It Wouki be pretty rare. nan Henninger asked ff a Ford Taurus is considered a large or a small vehk:le? stated by today's standard ft is considered an lntemredtate size. Henninger stated then you are suggesting that these spak:es would not be any problem with a Ford fi`t' Mr. Sin er stated no, ou ,~~ - g y could probably backup In one movement. Obvkwsly the aggregate 18 plus 23 was ~~ ~ established for the very large vehicles. He added they tested these vehicles on the Stadium parking lot before they ~`~''F' ~ established the standard when he still worked for the City. ~:` ~~ ~~ Commissioner Bristd asked how many parking spots dkf he have on the sfte right now and Mr. Singer stated he . 7 ~'~ would havo to defer because he dkf not know. He responded 496. r s'~3.~, Chairman Henninger asked ff anyone else visfted the sfte. .'~ ~> } ~: Commissioner Bristd stated he was out thereon Saturday between 3:OOp.m. and 4:OOp.m. and the traffic was really tough. He was trying to get around between Kndhe-ood and the sfte and he wafted for about 4 or 5 minutes for a lady to maneuver her car to make the right tum to come on out. ' =' • Mr. Singer stated he could tell them what was causing ft and ft could not be blamed on efther one of the property owners or the City. He explained that Is the responsibilfty of Caftrans. He dkf not know how many years he has worked on Caftrans trying to obtain an access to Imperial Highrvay. He was never successful. Commissioner Bristd stated he dkf go to the bads and he agrees that there was very Ifttle parking; there were a lot of ~,aopie coming in and he though perhaps they were beginning an Batty show. There was a lot of available parking in the back, however, it was very congested where the t(nollwood restaurant is located. He stated there - was a security woman walking the parking lot and than he observed over by the Unbn Bank that there were probably 10 to 12 vehicles and according to this agreement, that is ftne. He noticed on the side of the Union Bank building there were signs that pointed In both directbns for all uses, i.e., the theater and Kndiwood and he was curious as to what that meant. He did not know ff that meant, go ahead and park on this side or go ahead and park across the street at the other shopping center. Commissioner Zemel stated he also saw the sign and he thought ft was joint parking. Commissioner Bristd stated ft looks like 49 reciprocal parking spaces for Union Bank according to the agreement. He asked (regarding the Promenade) ff ft was a redprocal agreement or are they just joined together on the parking? Chairman Henninger stated his recall on this is that at the last public hearing they had on this subject, they were asking for a reciprocal access and parking agreement and the Promenade representative would not agree to that and because ft looked to them like there might be this sort of parking problem, he thought they let him off on the reciprocal parking aspect. Commissioner Masse asked ff there were some 30 spaces that became reciprocal? ~.:~ tt ,., ~_.:. . 10/19/92 Page 18 . : _. L ( _ F ~-. n,~ :. .. :. .. ., .. . ; ;. Y ~ r ~-y _ ~~' <~` . ,,,~ '''~ av'1 -~ Chalmian Henninger stated K was through their prh~ate negotiations. -~~,a~;3 r Sc `ally stated, the Union Federal Bank is back in the comer and ev is ~~k,~ ~ eryone arguing over hts parking spaces. As tar.-as ~everjione shaking hands and being frkinds about it, that does not work either. He stated the answer to problem is to bu0d a parking stnxxure In the back as soon as possible. ~, ~,~, , d Commissioner Zemel stated he was not sure N the public hearing has been reopened. €Ir"'>~ } Chairmen Henninger stated he though he was coming up to answer the question of whether there a as a recprocal ~,w: parking agreement. ~; ' _ Mc ~cutty stated there has been no reciprocal agreement that they have signed off on with Union Federal. He ° °~~ 'spoke with Union Federal about this very problem earlier In the week and they have submitted a letter but there ~~~, has been no agreement signed and delivered and they will not sign off on any reciprocal agreement without the ,~~"~ „fact that there ig going to be a parking structure butt and a time frame deftnftely put into place for h to be bunk. ,..c t. „ ~~~ , Chairman Henninger stated then your point is that you do not want any long term commitment on the parking? ~~~, . lie understands that. He asked if someone could answer the other question about the Promenade. He asked H ~~ ~ ,~ the reciprocal agreement just imiolved access or parking also? r' ~ Mr. DeBakts stated h is a reciprocal access and maintenance agreement in that agreement, part of their "`-'1T`~` negotiations on the private side were that they would dedicate a certain amount of non exdusive spaces for both parties to use that could be considered reciprocal. They just completed the two acxess drives that were in the rear of the property and they are in the process of ftnallzing that with the theater representative. Commissioner Masse asked for darificatbn ff that was in the area of 35 spaces? Mr. DeBakls stated their numbers are 36 and the other is 42-they are very dose. It is a matter of walking the property with their architect aril they will ftnalize it Commissioner 2emel stated there is no doubt that there is a major problem and there are several things that are about to happen. He stated now that the dd Kndiwood has been tom down, there is going to be some more parking, but they also have the opening of the Festival Center theaters coming up--they are gc!ng to change the parking situation over there. He asked about a parking study. Alfred Yalda, Traffic Engineering, stated the study should be conducted with the consultant, but the applicant should bear the cost of R because they do not have the staff to do a parking study for individual private property owners. Chairman Henninger stated they have at least two Issues. They have the immediate Issue of the question of whether they were Just concerned about the ratio of parking or whether they are really demanding a parking structure; and then they have heard a lot of testimony today +.hat goes to the question of whether the orig(nal waivers on both of these properties were correct or whether now as it tams out that they have a problem that Interferes with the health and safety of the citizens of Anaheim. ~~ .~:,.;: 10/19/92 Page 19 ~1 Al 9K~ k'} ~i. a ~ s r K III ~ ,~~1 ~-V~.' , 3 t~ ~ C 7~{F ~, } ~~.II ~' '. ,Y,~ '< ~ ~._~ ~ t - .. misslorier,Messe stated right now they are in an Interim patio! where construction is now finalizing for the itionai'theatere and the t~rrstnxttlort (s finalizing for the KndhNaid property; addltkxral cor>strucUon wYl be ng~place on the Promenade property.and not all of the stores are open and not all of the parking spaces are are In a state where they really ttrerefore, the r at he th ki l f y , e e ng p an rom t in~t~iere aril they do~ nct have a proper par t;krtow. He stated they definitely need a sPecHk; parMng plan horn the theater group that the atipulatlon of do n o 8096 parking' was tacoeRgM about because they wanted an Improvement In the ratio of parking. They havo that and they;stipulate to &D'96~ (that is what they did originally) he thought that was a better deal then they had wRFt 8996. if ~ Ha stated he thought they could add some directkxral signs to make sure that people use the back parking lot, but . ~ agaln_tie thinks we aara In a perkxl where we are ready to say anything that is deNnfte. He stated he would like to ~. thls go on for awi~e; accept the 8096 stipulation; make sure there are no more seats than 8096 and look at h k see . ~~~~' agalr soon. . ~.. , .` Commissioner Zemel stated he would be willing to support that ff they could make sure (and he thought we had ~~„ a commitment from ,Joel Flck) that we do have a Certificate of Occupancy and that we make sure that does not ~ ,;, _~'.;Mn,; open up without these requirements being met and he would agree. ~~~ ~`'~'Chalrman Henninger stated he thought they needed to do something on the current item to darNy what their Intent a.,,. _ ~~_'~- was regarding the 8096 parking. He stated they need to bring all 3 of these CUPS back in 120 days to review the ° " ~~` : perfomrance of the parking and perhaps modffy the cAndRions of approval. He added by that time we should know ~ _ > what is going ~on. ~„ Commissioner Masse stated In that time they would have better preparation and better knowledge of what is really ~~~` >. going on there. Chaimtan Henninger stated with regard to the first subject, his sense is what they are really Interested in was providing 8096 parking and that he does not have a problem with a certain amount of flexibglty as to how that is produced. He though peri~apa they ought to add a condition to the existing CUP that is before them that says something to the extent that there will be parking that represents 8096 of Code requirement pn~vided prior to the issuance of a Certfficate of Occupancy and that, that analysis be based on plans stamped by a registered architect and a registered engineer and verffied by City staff.' Commissioner Bristd asked for clarification ff there was a need to verify the seats as well? Chairman Henninger explained that is why he mentioned an architect and they can verify the seat count and the parking count. Jonathan Borrego, Senior Planner, asked ff that was in accordarce with the recommended condition on page 4 with the exception of it being stamped by a registered architect aril civil engineer? Chaimran Henninger stated he thought he dkl 3 things different then this condition. He made the ratio verification a condition that is necessary prior to the Issuance of a Certfflcate of Occupancy; he dropped the recorded parking agreement; the parking agreement that they have In hand Is a month to month and Is not recorded. He felt that was adequate but they Just need to make the case ff this should be terminated, i.e., they should probably get in this agreement a requirement that these people notffy the City ff they should terminate this agreement and in that case they would come to the Commission with an adjustment, I.e., either a replacement of this parking some place else or an adjustment of the seats. ~ ~~.a1 °~ - r _ ~ dr f Pe ~~ S - ~~ed:there are two things that he would like to suggest at least for Commission conskleratton. One is ~ }darffitatbn recognizing that the request for the Certifkate of Occupancy is eminent and the discussion partkiular about the backup spacs3s on the pre-existing corMiUon. Unless there is dimcUon otherwise, their routd be to not withhold the Certffk;ate of Occupancy used upon that pre-existing conditbn of the backup slid he Just wanted darffication in that regard. ~~.,.:, The second part Is based upon the discussion about the inspections and recognizing that K w~l have an Impact fi~upoir".Code Enforcement staff or at least some resources. It is staffs belief that the theater owner should pay for "t~~ thaL" There was some testimony from the Imperial Promenade-or concern at least about staff being available to ~~:; :~:.perlodk~lly check that. They could chock that during the 120 day period or whatever the Commission agreement ~~'"_`" `is. ~-They. could check that on a month or bi-monthly basis. In maMng that check, they would request that the property owner pay for that and his guess is that the Code Enforcement inspection would probably be around ~ x50.00, but merely their time and for their present charge for their Inspection fee would be appropriate. etR r "' ~ ' Chairman Henninger stated they would add a condftion that says that they would do that, i.e., that any Code ~' ~~? '` inspections that turn out to be needed will be billed to the applicant ::: ,.,, , - x;~ Commissioner Masse asked for clarfficaUon that they do not want to hold up the Certificate of Occupancy, but we '` ' ~ : are going to be sure that we are at 806 at the time the certificate is issued? ,.;,: ~`„~ Mr. Flck stated that is correct Staff Is very Interested and have speciflcaJly requested, and are very appreciative >~' `" ` of the condition the Commission fs talking about that requires a plan to be avatlable and for staff to be able to "~~'' ' .` check that plan, both in terms of the number of spaces and seats. The one concern that was raised here today -and he wanted to darffy Is that apparently there is apre-existing condition of 2 feet regarding tha backup space that is available for the sloe property line to the building that sounds like B is an uncorrectable situation unless there .• is angle parking or one-way drives and again this issue is going to be revisited. Staffs recommendation to the Commission would be to not hold up the Certificate of Occupancy and ff that should specifically require discussion then that is something that the Traffic Engineer could discuss with the Commission the next time this is looked at Chairman Henninger stated we are talking about 2 rows of parking along the skies of the building that have Insufficient backup. The nomral width would be 8-1 /2 feet and asked ff that was an adequate wkJth or would K help to make them 9 feet or wl>at is the Traffic Department's recommer-dation? Mr. Yalda explained it is not 2 feet, ft is about 6 feet on one sloe and on the other skis, ft is 4 feet He stated on the most westerly skis, he would recommend that a minimum of 9-foot wkie parking spaces be installed because the total variable width Is 36 feet and even ff you allow a 2-foot overtrang, you are still short another 2 feet on that side. On the east skle the total is 54 feet and that is 6 feet short. If you all~.v a 2-foot overhang on each skle, you are still short. His recommendation would be that the most easterly skle all of the parking stalls should be 9 feet wkle and the same length that they are today which Is 12 feet because due to the constraint, you cannot make them wkler. On one skis make them 15 feet (the most westaiy one) by 8-1/2 feet and that should do IL Note: Some of the dialogue on the tape was garbled and not audible. Chaimtan Henninger asked ff the single loaded bay was on the west skis of the building? Mr. Yalda stated that is correct Chairman Henninger stated then you would like to see the single loaded bay 9 feet and the ones on the east skis ® of the building where they have the double loaded bay, 8-1 /2 X 15? 10/19/92 Page 21 mil x g at ~ ~ :; ~ ~~ ~ ,. Y .. ~f: y :b 4~"~ ... - k.. lr ~ ~. ~~~ i ~ ekf8 Stated he would also like to emphasize that the plans 8h01~tt be Signed by a registered archfted and dvY engineer so they can verify the accuracy of the plan. He added there is a fee that the ,applk~nt should pay for the tlme:ot the staff they are spending for this additional work. ~:: ~, , ~:yk , Mr Fk:k stated he Just spoke with Mr. Singer, the appik:ant, and he indks#ted that the 9-foot parkng space wkfth <wotdd be aix~ptable to Mr. Sanborn and that the Code Enforcement inspection fee would also be aa~ptable as { .~' ~Chalrman Henninger stated now we have a c~ndrition that addresses the 8096 parking ratio; a recommendation frrxn ~` our Transportation staff on the parkng size; a condiilon to add regarding the Code inspections and the cyst of ~{ those. ' x ° : Commissioner 2emel stated we have covered t`.~e Certiftcate of Occupancy. yi,+ ie ~: '1 ~~r:. ,~-~~ " Commissioner Taft stated when we talk about the 80%, how many seats are we talking about having to be removed -~' ?~ - from the theater? '~` r; . '~ s~=~ Mr. Singer stated he dkf not know how many seats had to be removed. ~~~ f' a ~ Commissioner Masse stated the question realty is how many parkng spacers could we have? Mr. Singer explained ft is always that the Parking Code of the Cfty of Anaheim is a direct ratio between the number of seats and the number of parking spaces resulting because of those seats. The applicairt warrts to assure the Commission he wpl at all times comply wRh 80% of that Code. Commissioner Tait asked for darifk;atbn if we were at 80% now? Mr. Singer stated right now it 1s in transftion and he dkf not think anyone could determine that. He explained at the time the occupancy permit is taken out and the specific plans that are requested are submitted, the ratio between the number of seats in the theaters and the number of parking spaces will beat 80%. He stated there wnl be from that time fotwani, except during the time that the parking structure is under construction. Commissioner Masse stated we are probably under 69% to answer the question because we have added some theater over a parkng space, so we are under 69%. He added they are moving to 80%. Chairman Henninger moved that their current action is covered by the previouslyapproved negaWe declaration (seconded by Commissioner Masse and one vacant seat) and MOTION CARRIED. Chairman Henninger offered a revised resdutbn for CUP 3414 adding the 3 conditions that they discussed. Mr. Borrego stated they had ail of the information that they have requested and they can efther combine it Into one cxu~dftion or they can make them separate and we have a record of all of the points that have been made. Mr. Fick stated to add some darNication, they would, prior to the issuance of a Certiftcate of Occupancy, be receiving a parking plan and a seat space plan, mafrrtalning a ratio of 80% parking to seats-that plan would be verffied in the field by Code Enforcement prkx to the issuance or ftnalization of the Certfficate of Occupancy and they would pertorm monthly inspections thereafter and the cost of those inspections; the parking spaces would be revised to be 9 feet in wkith. This condftional use permit would still permit the construction of the parking garage . (n the rear portion up to a one-year period uNess otherwise extended by the Planning Commission. 10/19/92 Page 22 {{ ,~~ r._ ~.:: r ~ i>e ~~.~ s~ - < }'Y d .. ' rn err Henninger stated foc further, dariNcation, the paricir~ wYl be all to Code except for the parMng that is parajlsl to the buAding the east skJe w9i be &1/2-foot wkte spaces and whatever the existing backup is; on the estTside'vvpl be 9 toot wkfe spaces. ~~t S~Ima";Merin, Deputy City Attorney, asked that an addffkxs;! point be added in writing that In the event arty of the agreements for reciprocal parkng are going to be terminated, that there be Immediate notffication of the City and ~that'a fepure to notffy the City by the applicant woad be consklered a vkAatlorr of the Conditional Use Permit. ~Chalrman Henninger stated he would like to add that as a condffion. Commissioner Messe stated ff Is more than just notiflcetion, h would also mean removal of seats to get back to the ~ ~-~ ~ Chairman Henninger stated they are adding an affirmation responsibiiffy for them to Hotly the City ff there Is a ~` : change to this off-sfte parking agreement. h~ ~,Y.~~ ', ~ Also, add a condffion that says that they will maintain an 8096 parking retb at all times. I x ; - -Chairman Henninger directed the Planning Staff to set these 3 CUPs, Le., the one they were just talking about, the } underlying one for the theater and the underlying one for the adiacent properties for a public hearing to discuss "~ ~ "whether there needs to be modff(cation to their condftions of approval regarding parking and that they bring that back In 120 days. Mr. Yalda asked for darfttcation ff they would like a total parking study for the while site so they see what the demand is at that time? Chairman Henninger answered yes. He stated he would like to get an Independent view-he knows they have had Traffic Engineers on both skJes that have been IrnoNed fn this for a long time. Na asked ff there was a third party . they could go to? Mr. Yalda indicated they could. Also, he could have Traffi;. Engineering staff verity the infom-atfon on specffk: nights that the study is conducted independently. Commissioner Zemel stated he thought that was important. Mr. Fick stated for darlflcation there are a variety of factors Irnolved, I.e, construction on-efts, consUUCtion off-site, construction on the adjacent eke, opening of the Festival Center and a number of factors that enter into the parking consklerations on this particular site. He suggested they gather the data for 120 days then bring that bade to the Commission to make sure all of those factors can be looked at, rather then bringing back the hearing in 120 days. The slgnfficance is that they may only have 3 months data rather than 4. 10~'19/~J2 Page 23 rman Henninger offered a nx~tlon, seconded by Commissioner Bristd (one vacant seat) and MOTION CARRIED .the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to approve a revised constriction phasing °delaying a~nstruction of a pn~rrbusly-approved 29-foot high parking structure Intended to be built in unction with the theater expansion, and does hereby find that the Negative Dedaration previously approved onnecUon with Conditional Use Permit No. 3414 is adequate to serve as the required environmental imentatkxr to connectbn with this request. ~~~, ~`~,~ Chairman Henninger offered Resdution No. PC92-122 and moved for Rs passage and adoptbn that the Anaheim ~ ~~ . ~ `.. Clry Planning Commission does hereby grant Conditkx~al Use Permit No. 3414 (Readvertised) pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Cade Section 18.03.030.030 through 18.03.030.035, subject to Interclepartmental Committee :recommendations and as fellows: ,,, (A)` That the available parking for the theaters shall, at ail times, be at least 80% of the minimum number of parking <~ ~ spaces requlrod by Code for saki theaters; 4 My~ ~~ (f3) That when the parking structure is completed, the 8096 parking ratio shall consist of on-site spaces and approximately 38 to 42 off-efts spaces located on the Imperial Promenade property to the east; (C) That c~rrstruction of the parking structure may be delayed in which case another approximately 49 parkng spaces shah be temporarAy prcwkfed off-site on the property to the southeast leased by Union Faders! Bank, In addition to the on-site spaces and the off-site Imperial Promenade spaces; (D) That the required off-site parking (about 36 to 42 permanent spaces on the Imperial Promenade property to the east and 49 temporary spaces on the property to the southeast leased by Union Federal Bank) shall be provided in a form and manner acceptable to the City of Anaheim, and that copies of agreements for such off-site spaces shall be furnished to the City for review and approval; and (E) That, in the evert the parking structure is ~ constructed, the theater owner shall (1) Obtain satisfactory replacement parking spaces in order to rrrafrttain the minimum 8096 parking ratio, arxf/or (2) Reduce the number of seats in the theaters in a manner satisfactory to the Planning Department to maintain the 8096 parking ratio, and/or (3) Obtain approve! of another parking variance. ACTION CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE s tc ~ ,t~.. . , ,0/,9/2 Page 24 &a -x q f v~ ~~,.~ ~`. _:,, , n " 34~ Y y~I FURTHER, that-the Planning Commission does hereby add the fdlowing new conditions: r ~ ~s '26. That prior. to issuance of a certiRc:ate of occupancy for the theater anne~c _:.;: ,~: - ~~E~,, (e) A plan shall be submitted to the Zoning DNlsion for review and approval, showing the flrrel existing seat ~,."_`; Courns for each theater in the multi-plex theater complex and the actual number, location and size of .p all existing on=sRe parking spaces (the minimum parking space width shall be eight and one haH [8~] a ~ feet except that where :he adjacent driveway aisle Is narrower than required by Code and/or Clty r ~{~ standards, the minimum space wklth shall be nine [9] feet). Saki plan shall have been prepared and l ~~fF~ . ^~ 5,*F~; certified by a registered architect and/or certified cN~ engineer as to accuracy (the Planning '`'°' Department may, by fleki inspection, verHy the accuracy of such plan). Said plan shall show that, in additbn to any City-approved off-sfte parking spacers, the total combined number of spacers is at least ~~' eighty percent (8096) of the minimum required by Code for all the seats in the theaters. ~"` ~ N the minimum eighty percent (8096) parlc(ng ratio has not been achieved, the number of seats In the `_ ~~` ' ; theaters shall be reduced proportionally and a new play shall be submitted to the Planning Department f for review and approval. ~~ `` (b) Parking agreements shall be obtained by the petitioner for any off-sfte parking and saki agreements ~., . ;` shall be submitted to the Zoning DNision for review and approval by the City Attorney's Office and the ~~ ` ' City Traffic and TransportatY~n Manager. Arty future changes to the seat counts for the theaters and/or number and/or location of required parking spaces shall be submitted to tyro Zoning DN(slon for further review and approval. 29. That the petftioner shalt be responsible for paying the fee for each separate code enforcement inspection conducted by staff for the purpose of verifying that adequate parking is being provkied relatNe to the number of seats in the theaters, based on at least eighty percent (8096) of the minimum number of parking spaces required by Code being p-ovkied. Such inspection(s) may be made monthly until constn~ction of Imperial Promenade to the east is completed and a valki determination can be made as to the adequacy of the available parking. 30. That within a period of six (8) noMhs from the date of this resdution, the Planning Department may submit a report to the Planning Commission regarding the status of subject multi-plex theater complex: the number of seats (n the theaters, the number of parking spaces (both on-si!e and off-site), whether the parking structure is being constructed, and the status of the Imperial Promenade development construction.' 10/19/92 Page 25 ~~ "~Tt S~ .r; .~ »: ~@. ' gNTAT1YE ~~ OWNER: AGENT: LOCATION: HILLMAN PROPERTIES, 450 Newport Center Drive, Ste. 304, Newport Bead, CA 92660-7640 Granted. Approved Granted Approved 'j f/ ~~ L Yn,f ;Yr ~ Ln iY PACIFlC AUTO WASH, 2300 Michelson Drive, Irvine, CA 92715 Sava Ranch eurriness Park. Property >s approximately 3.35 acres located at the northwest comer of Weir Canyon Road and Savi Ranch Parkway. '`~"'~! '" To redassffy from the CO(SC) (Commercial Office; Scenk: Corridor Overlay) Zone to the CL(SC) (Commercial, Limited; Scenic Corridor Overlay) or a less Intense ~.F;`. zone. M__ '~ To permft a service station/car wash facUfty with waivers of minimum structurPS setback, required landscaped setback and permitted roof mounted equipment. To establish a 3-lot, commercial subdivision. RECLASSIFlCATION RESOLUTIAli N0. PC92-123 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC92-124 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFlCIAL MINUTES. There was no one indicating their presence in opposltion to subject request and although the staff report was not read, ft is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Commissioner Taft declared a conflict of interest. Dick Debakis, General Partner of Pacific Auto Wash. Their intention is to purchase a portion of a s;ibdividod property in SAVI Ranch Business Park. He gave a brief preserttation regarding the project. They have reviewed a0 of the condftions of approval and are in agreement wlth them. Dwight Belden, Vice President of HUlman Properties, 450 Newport Center Drive, Suite 304, Newport Beach, CA. He referenced Elam no. 9, page 9 of the staifi report regarding skiewalks. He asked for clarification regarding some basic standards. He explained they need some language that talks about final location that would have to be mutually determined. He dki not think they wanted skiewaiks around Weir Canyon because ft would be a full loop and there are also ' some slopes and some other Issues that may make that a problem. He asked where do Zrou logically end the sidewalk on both SAVI Ranch Parkvuay 2nd also Crystal Drive? 10/19/92 Page 26 r srr ~: ~ ~r ~ t'~ ~'} ~~ M+f siorief Masse stated Crystal goes under the overpass so k would end at their property line. He stated the a'they might have a problem is SAVI Ranch Parkway. len staled that the cement grading shows about a 7-foot elevation dfffererree at the norti>easterly comer. skis staled on Crystal DrNe there ahot~id not be a problem because they are regrading the property, but fount be a transition point on SAVI Ranch Parkway where they terrnir~ate the sidewalk coming up Weir u ~, ~- `~ THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. k ~~~ ~.~ r~ ~ Melanie Adams, Pubik: Works-Engineering, stated that issue was brought up at the Interdepartmental Committee b ~ ~ meeting. She stated on SAVI Ranch Parkway. they would be responsible for constnrcting skfewalks on the flat "`:.'~ `: portion only. Aa k starts transftioning up the ramp, they would rwt be responsible for that area. In order to verffy ~_~:` that, they could go out with one of their Field Engineers and mark the location and agree on the starting point. There could be some comments in parenthesis on SAVI Ranch Parkway such as,'at grade locations as determined s -~, by the Fk~ld Engnneer.' ~.~: Chairman Henninger stated or'to the saW~faction of the City Engineer.' ..-,,; ., Ms. Adams stated that would be acceptable. Chairman Henninger stated 'at grade level or to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.' Karen Freeman, Planning Department, stated staff has several recommended revisions to the Mitigation Monitoring ' ~ Program and condftkxrs of approval as follows: Pagg 1 of Attachment A to the staff report. Item 3 on the Mitigation Monftoring Program 'Timing' for the review shall occur prior to approval of a Parcel Map or prior to Issuance of a building perrnft whkhever occurs first. Also on ite,n no. 3, the Installation and completion of that landscaping should occur prior to final building and zoning inspection. Paae 7 of Attachment A. The last Mftigation Montoring Program 'Timing' should be changed to for the dedic~tlon of-that should occur prkx to approval of a Parcel Map or Issuance of a bugling permft whichever occurs first and that improvement of the traA shall occur prior to final buAding and zoning inspections. In addftion, Condition No. 10 should show the same timing mechanisms. Commissioner Zemel stated there was some concern expressed regarding Landscape Area E. Chairman Henninger stated the staff recommendatkx~ Is that they move their shade structure away from Welr Canyon Road. He asked the applicant ff they agreed to that? Mr. Def3akis stated they have the flexibAity to work with staff and ff staff would like to move k to the south skis of the property, they could do that. He stated they purposely placed it at that posiilon because at Weir Canyon they have a substantial grade dffference between Welr Canyon and Crystal Drive and he thought k would be placed more out of view at that point, but they wAl live with either location. Chairman Henninger and Commissioner Masse agreed. 10/19/92 Page 27 t~~;:, ,y:; K ~ ~ .mss. 'M ,,' ~4 ~~~ ~ Via" F.;i .. .. _ ~ r Henninger asked about the. east elevation Of .the car wash tunnel. The thought was that there was. a area between the car wash tunnel and the adjacent property line and they wadd heavYy landscape that ~orc~~ tic vlew screen K. rN.. ~. L Mrs' ~t)eBeMs.stated they watld. ~~~-_~-` ~} J~than tiotrego asked for dariflcatton from the appik:arrt as to the extent of the activity that would be taking place 'q~ eneeth the shade sWcture. He Is assuming that R is for auto detailing only. !:~}'i ~~ ,; Mr. Debakis indicated that W88 Correct. He gave s brief explanation. '' ,gCTION: Addendum No. 2 to EIR No. 289 -Approved Redassffication No. 92-93-01 -Granted ~TF rr'~ :, ,. ~c~' `" Waiver of Code Requirement -Approved (Applk:ant to work with sla(t) f S~ndttkxial Use PemtR No. 3558 -Granted ~~ ~ , (Amend Condition No. 9 regarding sklewalks; add landscaping on the west elevation; amend Condftion No. 10 regarding the timing for the trail; and changes to the Mfdgation Measures as mentioned above). Tentative Parcel Map Mo. 92-172 -Approved ~' VOTE: 5.0 (Commissioner TaR dedared a conflict of interest and one vacant seat) • ~t~"~~ s~k .. 10/19/92 Page 28 ~rcv~r ~_` REVISIO tr q•:J - r`' OWNER: TAUBMAN COMPANY, Attn: Bradley A. Geier, Anaheim HBIs Festival, 125 Chaparral Court, Ste. 202, Anaheim, CA 92808 ~~ ' ' AGENT: BROBECK, PHLEGER and HARRISON, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, attn: '°„ ` - Linda J. Bozung, 550 South Hope Street, Los Angeles, CA 90071- yf~~.u, 2604 :~ u~R ~'?~'` <: LOCATION: Anaheim Hilts Festival Center (SP90.011. Property is approximately 4 a~~~;~ ~ 85 acres located at the southwest comer of Santa Ana Canyon Road a 5 r`' and Roosevelt Road. 4 ~, ~ ..' Petltbner requests review of revised slte plan for Development Area 2 Indicating a ~'-~ •^ 4,016 square foot Increase in budding area and redestgnating a portion of r. Development Area 2 from'Home Furnishing' uses to 'General f?.etail' uses wlth ''''~' Yr' ~ waiver of minimum number of parking spacers. SPECIFIC PLAN RESOLUTION N0. PC92-125 ` ~"'• VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. PC92-126 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSICERED OFFlCIAL MINUTES. There was one person Irxilcating their presence in c~pposltion to subject request and although the staff report was not read, lt is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Brad Geier, Development Director, Anaheim Hgls FestNal, 125 Chaparral DrNe, Suite 202, Anaheim, CA 92808. He explained that Area 2 of the Festival Site Plan has been revised to accommodate general retail uses as opposed to strictly home furnishing uses as originally contemplated. This is primarily due to the economic difficulties being experienced In the home furnishings Industry. The budding configuratlon has been changed to achieve a more efficient parking layout and, thereby, adds an additional 174 parking spaces over and above the 900 spacers originally proposed for Area 2. Their parking study has been revised acx:ordingly. Loading Is proposed to be screened by a combination of stucco screen wall and a landscape buffer between the proposed budding area and Festival Drive. An extensive amount of landscaping is being added at the top of the slope between Area 1 and Area 2 to provide an aesthetic screen of the Area 1 loading and service areas. OPPOSITION: Michael McKinney, 8085 Kendre Court, Anaheim, CA. This property directly abuts the center and he has been involved with this project for over 3 years. i~ 10/19/92 Page 29 Su ~. 5 - '~ ,: ,~ as a Directot on several communky organizadons indud(ng 2 of the kx;all homeowner associations. He ire `, representing them today, however they share some of the corrcems regarding the ,current ~datton. They are not opposed to a home furnishing .center, because k k needed. He voks,d his ;regarding noise assodated wkh loading. The loading area is oriented directly toward the homes ply south of the reconstnxted buAding. He discussed his concerns wkh Mr. Geier, but there does trot ~e arry akematives. The loading is wkhin 100 to 150 yards of where their homes are located. Further took place regarding his concern about the loading area. He thanked Mr. Geier for trying to date them. Y~~; Mr, Oeler made k dear that the area Mr. McKinney lives in is comprised of 11 homes that sk on the ridge "'~''~r~_r ~` tnunedlately above the shopping enter and while they have made every effort to mkigate the impact of a large ~r ~, . , ; regtorutl shoppin center, there is onl so much the can do throw h ' '~' ~ g y y g planning and landscaping to mkigate these .s conoems. .~ ~~ ,. ~^~~ qa He addressed the noise Issue and stated that one of the key buffering factors is the extensive landscaping that has ~ ' ' been planted on the south communky slope between the resklences and the center. It does not provide Immediate `~ ~ sound attenuation, but wAl wkhin a relatively short period of time. The amount of landscaping they pit on that ~,, ` .slope Is roughly 10 times greater than what is required. ' ' He has not heard the air condkioning unks operating ftom one of the backyards of the homes on Kendra Court; ha does know that In the original EIR, there were sound studies done that determined the ambient noise level from the freeway and was at a higher dedmal level then anything that would have been anticipated to be generated by the Festiva! Center. In regards to the hours of loading, as has been suggested, the hours are currently ftom 6:OOa.m. to mklnight. That does not mean that loading occurs at all times during those hours. They request that those hours be maintained. They dki not think there would be any impact ff there were 2 or 3 tenants as opposed to one tenant. They do not know the exact location of the loading because they do not have any specffic users at this time. It is their commitment to screen the loading wkh stucco walls and through landscape buffers between Festival Dfi-e and the future loading areas. Regarding security. It is their intent to operate the property in a first doss condkion. THE PUBLJC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Zemel stated he met wkh Mr. Geier on this and he is happy that the use will change and this will be a much better use. He agrees wkh Mr. Mcbnney that this area of Ana~,eim is in need of a home improvement center. He visked Mr. MclOnney's back yani and asked what the noise + ias. It was determined that k was the air condktoning unks on top of Target and not the fteeway. He asked a'.,out the possibiiky of a shield for the new structure. Commissioner Messe stated they could acoustk~lly dampan that. Mr. Geier stated wkhout the benefft of a consukant, they could find something that would be acceptable to mute the sound ftom thaw unks. He dkl not want to agree to build strictures over the unks. 10/19/92 Page 30 U, ' Nlt~ Zemel stated that the PavNkxis have a corrugated wall. He asked how effective they were? '4..~~.:,.. ated:that screen wall is for visual purposes only. The residences are up above and rw kind of screen to have an impact on the ndse generated by those units. ~~ Commissioner Brl~atd stated regarding the loading, for dariflatlon, do they have a user in mind? ;~cr: ' Mrs Geker explained they have spoken to a number of users and ai this point they do not have a commitment. .E ~'? ~~ Commissioner Bristd asked about the configuration for the tum-a~ ound. i 3. •M:: , ` '-:~' Mr. Geier stated to terms of the lading, it is possible that the loading mtgM be aligned on the north skis of the buAdine, however, because they do not have a user that they are currently working wfth, ft would be dffflcuft to ~ti ~~~ commk to that at this print. ;., b ~'~ Commissioner Messe stated ff they move the lading to the north side then they could probably move the outside ~~±, `~ sales area over to that aids. ~~~ ~ Mr. Geier clarffied that the outskJe sales area is up for grabs. The reason the outskle sales area is shown in that ~~ location Is because I: is dfffk:uft to get to that particular area from the front of the building because there Is an :-~;,;~ ~,+ ° elevation change between Festival Drive and the buNding pad. '~~` ' Commissioner Zemel stated he realized Mr. Geier dkl not want to commit to the lading area or changing the hours a,r lading. He stated ff he committed to the lading on the north end, possibly the hours would not affect the '" r _skients so much, or ff they wanted to leave h open, then there cook) bean adjustment in the hours for that store. Mr. Geier stated he would have a dffflcutt time committing to either of those options. Chairman Henninger stated he agrees to Commissioner Zemel's comments. They have had problems In the past with lading activities at early a.m. hours adjacent to residential and ff they go forward with the current plan, then they will be buying themselves a continuing operational problem. He suggested they could approve this location wfth limits on hours of operation and an aftemate location wfthout them. Commissioner Zemel stated the tenant would then have a chol^e. Chairman Henninger suggested 8:OOa.m. to S:OOp.m. Mr. Geier stated B:OOa.m is dffflcuft due to morning hour deliveries. Chairman Henninger suggested 7:OOa.m. to B:OOp.m. Monday through Friday and have dffferent hours on the ' weekends. Commissioner Zemel suggested B:OOa.m. to 8:OOp.m. on Saturday and Sundays. Mr. Geier stated he would like to see ft later than B:OOp.m. in the evening during the week. He suggested 7:OOa.m. to 10:OOp.m. during the week and 8:OOam to B:OOp.m. on weekends. Chairman Henninger stated on Sunday it should be 12:OOp.m. to B:OOp.m. People like to sleep in on Sunday ~ mornings. III 10/19/92 Page 31 ~ ~ ~ a - ` ~;' t txry far r ~F "i' .~h ~ ~,' ~' rr ~ - _ ~ a r4Rw. . 'G . rt y, ~~3. r n y~~ ^s'G:S. mm _ ~ Tak,stated he dki nd want to tie Mr. Geler's hands behind his bads on getting a tenant. He asked ~tli~~wo~ld~'do to Mr. Geierl ' ~?~''~ eocplained they are dealing with a she that is not as visible and not: quite as sua~ssful as Area I of their xlie;vafced his concerns regarding this type of cxx~strelnt, RetaNers are protective about operating their dneeee"s with regard to distribution. ~i Barrego'stated-one optlon woukf be to defer final she plan approval at a later date as an tnforrrratiorral Item. airman Henninger grated he still agreed with Commissbner 2emel's suggestion. -~:~:'~'Commlesloner Zemel ~auggested 9:OOam. to B:OOp.m. on Saturday and Sundays and 6:OOam. to 9:OOp.m. on week ~- ^' days M this location is selected by the new tenant, or go back to the Specific Plan N the tenant selects the north ~~` ~~ sloe location. ` ~ Mr, Geler agreed. r~ r " GEQA Negative Dedaratbn - ArNxoved MC ~ t{- ~. ' t ~ Variance No. 4201 -Granted .~,xt ~.~.,, SP No. 90-01 fRev. to Dev. Area 2 She Plan fReadl -Granted Hours of loading to be restricted on weekends at Satuniay from 9:OOa.m. to B:OOp.m.; weekdays from 6:OOa.m. to 9:OOp.m. -`,~ If an additional site (the north end of the buNding) is selected, the hours then revert to hours designated in the Specfiic Plan. Air conditbning units - If sound level is in excess of the EIR, that the applicant agrees to do the necessary buffering of that sound. VOTE: 6-0 (One vacant seat) 10/19/92 Page 32 2 '4 1~ -_~« f ~ "` .JET `"~~- ~~:, t. ~HTR iY ~ ::'.. 'NEf.'al1TIVE DECLARATION r , OWP~f=r1: ELSIE MENUEY, 27681 Via Turing, Missbn Viejo, CA 92692 ~~ Y AGENT: BLASH MOMENY, 27762 Pebble Beach, Mission Viejo, CA 92692 ~~ LOCATION: ~}jQ V`est Oranas Avenue. Property is appn~dmately 0.9 acre Ioc:ated on the south side of Orange Avenue and appnndmat~y 715 feet west of the cernedine of Brookhurst Street. To establish an 8-lot (plus 1 common lot) RS-5000, single-family residential subdNlslon. .' FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDEt~Et3 OFFICIAL - _ .... `- _ MINUTES. '~ ~~~ There was no one indk:ating their presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not .: ~- read, h is referred to and made a part of the minutes. . ~~,~. ~~ CEQA NegaWe Declaration -Approved ACTION: Tentathre Tract Map No. 14737 -Approved ;• VOTE: 6-0 (One vacant seat) ~, ';r 10/19/92 Page 33 n$,r ' i . ~ K,~'^ ~k ~ -:. ~, =OWNER PALMALL PROPERTIES, INC., A CORPORATION c/o 1436 W. Broadway, Anaheim, CA 92805 y ~~~ ~. :,~'Y '.~ AGENT: PETE BLECIQ=RT,1654 S. Douglas Road. Armheim, CA 9?808 LOCATION: 1430 West Brosdwav. Property is approximately .53 acres located at the southeast comer of Broadway and Adams Street. To pormlt diesel truck repair wlth waiver of minimum number of parking spaces and permitted encroachments On foont setback area. " ~~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC92-127 I ,~~~` kfat, FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. There was one person indicating their presence in opposltlon to subject request and although the staff report was not read, lt is referred to and made a part of the minutes. ®Craig Oka, representing the appiicant,1920 E. Katella, Sulte S, Orange, CA. He ~wted this tenant is being relocated ftom the Sports Arena area. He has found a facility that suits his needs. He exM3lned there is very little construction involved in this protect. The CUP is nerassary because lt (s a condltional use !n that zone. There is nothing fn his operation that would negatNely Impact the surrounding areas. He referenced waiver B regarding permtted encroachments in the front setback and stated they were proposing a 6-foot high slatted chain link fence. He sA~ted ff that was not acceptable they request consideration of an alternative, and that would be a 6-foot high decorative wall whk:h would also be a waiver. He referenced hem no. 8 on the agenda and stated they a; a requesting an 8-foot high decore-:oe block wall and indicated lt is similar in nature to their request He referenced page 2, Item no. 11 of the staff report regarding the landscape requirement for street trees. He explained they have no objection for the requirement for street trees, however, they have summed up al! of the ftontages including Adams Street wh(ch is really nothing more than an easement. They came up wlth 27 street trees to be plak~d on Broadway and Hassel. He felt this was an extraordinary number of trees to be placed on those two streets. He requested some sort of allowance to omlt the requlrer~.snt for Adams Street and that they maintain trees on Broadway and Hassel only. ;; ~ 10/19/92 Page 34 ~~ ~. '' ;. •` y ~ ~. iN~ . )},. j In; 400: S. G6budc, Anaheim, CA, located directly behind that property. He stated his m was the noise that the diesel trtrcks would make and the diesel fumes. ~;, . ; ,Oka stated he could not make amr statements as to what extent the diesel fumes would produce, ~. but they would not be running these diesel trucks all day. Ks . ' - ,Chairman Henninger asked about the hours of operation. la .,> „~.~: . ~~} ', ~ ~,* Mr. Oka stated K would be S:OOa.m. to 5:OOp.m. Monday through Friday. i THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ~, ~'~ Commissioner 2emel asked about the distance between Mr. FranMin's home and this propeityt ~' Jonathan Borrego, Senior Planner, indicated that the properties are separated by about 200 feet "` `~~'` aril also by a raAroad track. He explained that the homes along Ggbuck Drhre has a slid block wall that separates them from the ragroad tracks. Because of the development that wql occur on the property to the west, that should also further midgets some of the noise. Chairman Henninger asked what sort of storage were they going to have in the walled in front yard area? Pete Bledcert, 766 N. Highland, Fullerton, CA. He stated he would like i< for a deterrent mostly at night time. People tend tc use K for a thoroughfare and he would like to put something in to stop them. Commissions' ~sse asked what is preventing them from using the south parking lot for the storage of the urosel trucks? Mr. Bleckert stated they do use that. He darifled he only wanted to stop people from going through that area in case they would have someone's car parked there at night Chalrrnan Henninger asked ff gates o^ the driveway would solve the problem? Mr. Bleckert Indicated they could do that. Chairman Henninger suggested they could do that with the 36"'~'~h gate. They could do that according to Code. Comm(sskxrer Masse stated they could put in a wrought Iron fence. Mr. Borrego explained they cxwld have a 6-foot high wnwght Iron fence around the property, however, the onry thing they are concerned at•'~,d is the storage of trucks in the front setback area. There is a dHference they Ilke to make between parking and storage. Mr. Bleckert explained h would be an overnight situation and darHied they do not plan to store arty vehides at the facility. r '_t ~,. 10/19/92 Page 35 ~~-~- Toner Bristol asked for dariflcaclon as to what wig be in front of the buiding on a regale ~Cert responded employee and customer parking and in Ste event someone had to pk: Bide after hours, then they could allow them to pick It up from the front instead ~ the reap ":,'': '~ ": to store the diesel trucks the wer ssloner Messe asked for dariflcation ff they were going Y be repairing on the south side of the building and the north skle for employee and visits Ir: BleCkert indicated that was correct. ,~~ Chairman Henninger asked fa darMication if they were going with a 3f3' high fence In the or» ~~~r,~=:~ ~~ . Mr. Bleckert indicated that was correct. ~,~`-I;. ~; Mr. Borrego voiced hl+ concern that they did not advertise a Landscape waterer on this requea rtti . , however, the applicant is in the process of investigating the possibility of abandonment of Adan - ~ ~~~~--; . ' Street. He explained if that does occur, then they would no longer require a certain amount t <; trees based on that frontage since it would no longer be a public street and, therefore, R wou eliminate some of the trees. ,;.,, ,; Chalmian Henninger suggested that they plant the trees that are required for the other frontage and gNe them some amount of time to pursue the abandonment and ff they do not abandon then they could plant those trees or come back and ask for an addftional waiver. '' ~ Mr. Borrego stated that would be acceptable. A L : CEQA Negative Dedaretlon - Approved Waiver of Code Heouirement -Approved (Approve waiver A; DENY WaNer B) Conditional Ur_.e Permit_No. 3557 -Granted Subject to stipulations regarding the use ~ the front parking area; and the landscape change. The Commission agreed on one-year for putting In the landscaping in the event they do not proceed with the abandonment. COTE: fi-0 (One vacant seat) ;. ~:::i:;~~ to/ts/s2 Page 36 1~k ~ _ _ r ~'~ z^s ~ i T, - .. ,: a s>kN - "': i_c U4 c, r*. }'•-i .. rCBdA NEC'ATNE DECLARATION Apprr~ved 8b W/WER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved in P~ ~8t«~"~t CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3555 Granted in part 8d~'~WANER OF COUNCIL POLICY N0.542 APPr~ OWNER: DAVID S. GOWNS and MARION G. GOWNS, as Tntstees of the • h~--~ Cdlins Famgy and Susan Cdlins Borchers, as Trustee of the Susan °T"~ ; ~, Cdlins Borchers Tn~st, 2661 Tallant Road, X871, Santa Barbara, CA ~,ti 93105 `'~ `~ ~{ AGENT: MARK E. BOTICH, 883 S. Anaheim Bodavard, Anaheim, CA 92805 t LOCATION: 1514 West Broadwav. Property Is approximately 1.08 acres located at the southwest comer of Broadway and Adams Street. :~~. ` To pemylt a recreatkxral vehide and boat storage fac6ity with waivers of permitted = encroachmerrts Into required front setback area and IlgMing of parMng areas ry~ ~ `` adjofntng resider4fal premises. Request for waNer of Council Pdky No. 542 - r, pertaining to required sound attenuatbn and location, of resklentlal structures adjacent to arterte~ highways and railroad rights-of-way. CONDITi.'3NAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC92-128 j' "• FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFIGAL MINUTES. i. There were 3 persons ir-dicating their presence in opposition to subject request and although the staff report was not read, lt Is referred to and made a part of the minutes. Mark Botich, representing David Cdll,ns, 883 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805. They accept all of tha conditions of approval. David Cdiins, 2661 Tallant Road, Santa Barbara, CA. He voiced his concerns regarding the abandonment on Adams Street-there are 3 users of that street He explained they would have to have a Joint use easement worked out. He explained lt is only 30 feet wkle and they should do away wlth the landscaping slang ttw, street becsuse lt is ridiculous to landscape along a 30- foot street. OPPOSITI0~1 : Walt Franldin, 400 S. GAbuck Drive, Anaheim. He stated they are proposing 25-foot lights and his home is only 15-foot high. They are proposing 14 lamps and some ~ them are dual. We explained that wUl cause a ~~ajor glow. He voiced his concerns regarding the 2-story house they are talking about putting there. He has lived there 12 years and he does not want anyone to peer into his back yard. Harry Lister, 420 S. GRbuck Street His concerns were the same as above. 10/19/92 Page 37 x~, 3080 S. Gibudc whk:h k almost directly behind the fence. She stated she has the ~mti as the other 2 speakers. . Ikre.axpulttad that the Ilghts wii be sutomatlc by motlon detedbn so tFR.~-s wYl generally `.orie,or two on at the same tlme. They wl~ not all be on at the same tlme unless there u ~`~Commleatoner Masse asked for darfticatbn as to how many IIgM standards there were and t_ Mr.: Cdllns stated 24, however, they rxx~d reduce those and shade them. He added these pucres are"across the ra9road tracks *~~ k ~~ Mr. Botk:h stated they could go ahead and make the lamp posts 12-foot high, however, they are ~~ concerned that the motor homes s~ H to 10 feet high so they would have a problem wfth l~-1 i ~-~; security. ''.i `- ~ ~, ' Ha, stated the 2-story house u a 2-story apartment-they have 2-stories on their skis as well. He =` ~' '~~ y separated by a 10-foot setback from their homes to their back yard; there Is x;, explained the are r " ; aright-of-way about ~ feet for the raBroad and they are another 65 feet from the Property l1ne. He did trot think they would be looking Into their yards. They are also punting some undsc;aping in some spots along there for sound. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. '' .• Chairman Henninger stated he shared the concern regarding the lighting. He was concerned about the placement of the light standards--they may 1Merfere wRh the parking of the RVs. Commissioner Masse stated he was also concerned about the height and placement of the light standards for security reasons. Commissioner Zemel echoed the same concerns. He suggested getting some professional help on obtaining a lighting pun. Chairman Henninger stated Code is 12 feet. 15 feet was discussed. Chalmian Henninger suggested that they bring back a revised Ilghtlng plan with dlrectiona6 @~htlng and piles not to exceed 15 feet. Commissioner Zemel stated he wanted a detaBed pun. Commissioner Masse asked H the rest of the Commission would be agreeable to vote on this . today and the applk;ant to bring back the lighting plan under Reports and Recommendations? Commissioner f'eraza asked about the second story apartment. Commissioner Masse stated it is to the west skis of this piece of property and felt h was a good distance away. ;: • 10/19/92 Page 3t3 i ~ki,~. CondRional Use PermR iJo. 3P,55 -Granted in part ~'~ Add condftlon to bring back a detaNed Ilghdng plan through Reports and Recommendations; only landscape Broadway and do not landscape Adams Street at this time; delay landscaping Adams for one year to see fl abandonment takes place. `~ WaNer of C~ouncN Pdicy No. 542 -Approved ~~~~ ~ tiAr. 8orregu suggested that the property owners who showed up for today's meeting be notfiied. ~~ F~- . ; - He asked those people who are in atterxiance today to write down their names and addresses `~ ~~' ~ they could be notified personally. .~~1~;'~5ti'; W 1~qj~: 6-0 (One vacant seat) ~} '.:5:~. 1~ ~I \J 10/19/92 Page 39 4~a` ~R}. i, i ~ _ - - e: Rr. ..~a t ~ ~~ 6" 61 t .; .. ;'`;C ' A; CONDR1ON.e1 USE PERMR N0.3~3 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION: Frardde Flores requests Termination of Condidorral Use Permit No. 3053. Propety is #`~~ located at 201 West Katella Avenue. Termirv~tton Resdutbn No. PC92-129 B. ~ npneen e~~rNnruFNi' TO CHAPTER 18.06 TITLE 18 VEhIICI-E PARKING AND ~ na~w~ RFnrJIREMENTS FOR MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING. Commissioner Masse explained at their morning session, they changed some language relative to Section 3 for senkxs, paragraph .Ot3 that there be no tandem allowed and Section 4, Paragraph .0133, titat they should do away with the not less titan 2596 language and Insert .25 space per unit and also add no tandem parking. Commissioner Masse offered a motion seconded by Commissioner Pereza (one vacant seat) and MOTION CARRIED that the Planning Commission recommend to the City CouncN adoption of the ordinance amending Chapter 18.06 of Title 18 concerning revisions to the parking requirements for multi-famgy housing as fellows: Section 3, Paragraph .013 Add: 'That there be no tandem parkng allowed.' Section 4, Paragraph .0133 Delete: 'not less than 2596.' Insert: '.25 space per unit' Add: 'That there be no tandem parking allowed' C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2321 -REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF REVISED PLANS TO DETERMINE SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE: Alan Cameron of Pastel Cellular requests Planning Commisskm Review of revised plans to determine substantial conformance wifhpreviously-approved exh(bits. Property is located at 1460 N. Red Gum Street Tom Conzelman past name not spelled for the record), PacTel Cellular, 3 Park Plaza, Irvine, CA. Commissioner Masse asked if these dishes were to scale? The applicant stated that they were. 10/19/92 Page 40 ~ t4y{~~ ,K~~Y , ' i ~'' ~~'~~ i~(!a ~~ .~ S 'k~A '.1' ~ tr y ~ i ' tt d 'q _ ;~ '~. .' ~ _ #~ , , ~~~''~( g~,Q~(: Commissioner Peraza offered a motion, seconded.by Commusioner Brutd ~ , _ ~ (one' vacant seat) and MOTION CARRIED that the Punning Commission does hereby flncf, that the revised puns are in substantulconformance wfth prevtouslyappnnred _ .`. eaihi5fts based on the following: a. The revised puns wBl not succeed the 150-foot height Ilmft approved under Condltionai Use Permit No. 2321. .~~ ;• b. The additbnal antennas proposed w61 n~ create a visual Impact on the surrounding industrially property owners. k~,;> _ a The ML zone code would allow c~liular tower wRh the same amount of °'~:~' antennas with a maudmum height d 100 feet. The existing tower is currently 110-feet high, and the proposed whip antennas will marginally increase the height to 130 feet, stAl under the pn~riously approved 150-foot Iimk. a f ; ~ - D. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE STUDY OF THE BROADWAY-MANCHESTER INDUSTRIAL f `~" ApCA~ e t~ i Chalmratt Henninger stated they discussed this at their moming season and one of the ptec;es of information that came up was that most of this property is within one and ownership. Greg McCafferty stated they were suppose to get in contact with Redevelopment and `~ unfortunately, after the meeting they were unable to contact Brad Hobson In order for him to be presets today. Commissioner Zemel suggested that Mr. Hobson attend their next moming session on November 2, 1992. A N: Commissioner Zemel offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristd (one vacant seat) and MOTION CARRIED that conskleration of the aforementioned matter be continued to the regularly-sched~ed meeting of November 2,1992, in order for the applicant to submit raised plans. There will be no Punning Commission meeting for December 28, 1992 due to lack of a quorum. Mr. Borrego stated that Erlc Nicoll, Community Development, indk~ted they would Ilke to bring to the Planning Commission, as a Work Session item, a proposed condo cornerslon ordinance or formulate some future guklelines. He explained there are about 3 condo cornersion requests at the pre-file stage at this point. ~ ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adJoumed at 4:SOp.m. to the November 2, 1992, moming work • session. u~, ~ .'. .. 10/19/92 Page 41