Loading...
Minutes-PC 1996/10/14SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1996 PRELIMINARY PLAN REyIEW: 11:00 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY: 1:30 P.M. COMMISSIONERS P~~SENT: BOSTWICK BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, MAYER, MESSE, PERAZA COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: NONE STAFF PRESENT: Selma Mann Cheryl Flores Karen Freeman Richard LaRoc~~211e Melanie Adams Mired Yalda Tom Engle Tim Dunn Matt Lettereillo Edith Hams Ossie °_dmundscn Assistant Ctry Attorney Senior Planner Associate Planner Code Enforcement Supervisor associate Civil Engineer Principal Transportation Planner Vice Detail, Police Department Code Enforcement Officer Code Enforcement Officer f+i: Support Supervisor Senior Word Processing Operator P:\DOCS\CLERIC~L\M{NUTES\AC101496.WP 10-14-96 Page 1 OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AwENDA 1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SE PERMIT NO ?~S3 -INITIATION OF Continued to CONDITIONAL U- aFVnr~eTION OR MODIFII'ATION PROCEEDINGS: City initiated 16.97 (Anaiwim R?development Agency), 201 South Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805. Request to inftlate revocation or modffication proceedings for Conditlonai Use Permit No. 3253 (to permit a commercial retaN center and asemi-endosad restaurant with on- premises sale and consumptkxt of aicoholk: beverages, with waivers of minimum number of parking spaces, minimum structural setbacks adjacent to Imperial Hid I~yted at~5645 ft567 East La Palma equipment). Property Avenue pmperial Promenade). This item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of September 4, 1996. SR6357CF.WP ones ~ment tsoward the trafficrslgnal~InstailaCticon cysts aand full payment is expected bythenend of de PaY December 1996. A TI N: Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mayer and MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY that subject matter be continued to the meeting of January 6~i997, to allow the applicant time for compliance with Condition No. 35 of Resdution No. PC94~5, pe 9 payment of installation costs for a traffic signal. It was requested that the Traffic Dhrlsion aixl Community Development Department be notified of this action. 10-1496 Page 2 ~~~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 14, 1996 B. a. ~EOA EXEMPTION SECTION 15081 (b1 (31 Concurred w/staff b, CODE AMENDMENT NO 96-17 - TO AMEND THE ANAHEIM iult~NtCiPAL CODE: City initiated (Planning Department), 200 S. Recommended adoption of the Anaheim BNd., Anaheim, CA 92805, request to consider Code 96-17 pertaining to Chapter 18.110 of Title 18 nt No d A ordinance to the City Council . me men (Zoning) of the Anaheim Munidpal Code to correct the (7-0) boundaries of a paleontdogical resource area located in the SP94-1 (Northdast Area Specific Plan) Zone. A TI P!: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby concur with staff that the proposed project falls within the deflnftion of Categork:al Exemptkx~s, Bass 15061 (b) (3), as defined in the State EIR and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirements to prepare an EIR. Commissbner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City CouncA adopt the ordinance attached to the October 14, 1996 staff report which wAl kfentffy the location of apre-determined pu;~~tdogkal resource area by street boundaries rather than by assesso-'s parcel numbers. SR6368CF.WP This item was not discussed. C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2313 -REQUEST FOR Terminated TERMINATION: B.ANC Commercial, Attn: Luann Gay, Property {7-0) Manager, 7770 Irvine Center DrNe, Suite 680, Irvine, CA 92618, requests temnination of Conditional Use Penult No. 2313 (to permit on-sale beer and wine in a proposed restaurant). Property is located at 5659 East Orangethorpe Avenue. I TERMINATION RESOLUTION N0. PC96-102 I SR6354JKWP This item was not discussed. 10-14-96 Page 3 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 14, 1996 D, rONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 3341 d~ VARIANCE N0.2430 - Terminated by REQUEST FOR TERMINATION• Roland Frank Gonzales, 1336 East (7-0) Chapman Avenue, Orange CA 92866, requests termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 3341 (to permk an auto repair and ssrvk:e facpiry with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces), and Variance No. 2430 (to waNe the minimum number of required parking spacers to establish 23, 1-story mini-warehouse bupdings). Property is Located at 1133 North Tustin Avenue. TERMINATION RESOLUTION N0. PC96-103 I SR6355JKWP This item was not discussed. rONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2018 -REQUEST FOR E Determined to be in . DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE: Michelle substantial conformance with Essex Realty Management, 3146 RedhRl Avenue, Suite 150, Larson , CA 92626, requests determinatbn of substantial Costa Mesa the guidelines set , conformance for a cdlege in an existing office building. Property Is esolution ~ hPC f located at 1661 North Raymond Avenue. ~ (~-O) CONFORMANCE RESOLUTION N0. PC96-104 SR6364MA.WP Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner, corrected an error on the parcel map stating that the property location should read as 1661 North Raymond Avenue. Commissioner Henninger Indicated concern that this graduate level cdlege designation could be conskiered a stretch of the original intent and he was not sure this would be a good use of this property. Cheryl Flores explained they c~uuld process a separate conditional use permit; that there is a section in the ML Zone that does provide for non-industrial training schods, subject to the approval of a CUP. She explained this is an existing bupding and they would have to come back for a parking variance; and Chaim~an Messe added that would require a parking study. The Planning Commission has determined that the proposed use is in substantial confom~ance with the intent of the guidelines set forth In Resolution No. PC79-177 approved in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No. 2018. 10-1496 Page 4 ....~..,....,,., e~ w.uu-~r_ rnuiuiccrnN _ SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 14, 1998 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ~, nEnw reTer_norrer cxFU~p>nnN.CLASS 21 2b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3750 (READVERTISED) OWNER: JUAN M. MEDIOLA, 2600 E. Ward Terrace ~5, Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 804 North Anaheim Boulevard. Property is a rectangulariy- shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.16 acre, having a ftorrtage of approximately 50 feet on the east side of Anaheim Boulevard and located approximately 95 feet north of the centerline of North Street. Petitioner requests modiflcatlon of a condftion of approval pertaining to the maximum number of displayed cars in conjunction with a previously approved automobile sales lot. This item was continued ftom the Planning Commission meeting of September 4, 1996. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC98-1 Concurred w/staff Approved amendment to conditions of approval SR6326DH.WP -------------------------------------------------------- FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Richard LaRochelle, Code Enforcement Supervisor, gave a brief presentation of the staff report recommendations. Responding to Commissioner Henninger as to whether or not the applicant is trying to meet the conditions of approval and whether the number of vehicles approved for storage at the site is the correct number, Richard La Rochelle, Code Enforcement Supervisor, stated he thought they have approval for 20 vehicles and that the owner is trying to meet the conditions and staff will be working with them. He pointed out it is reported that vehicles which are for sale are being put on the street on weekends at times there are too many vehicles and the property was not striped for customer parking. Chaim~an Messe asked whether the landscaping and signage has been brought up to the original CUP. Mr. LaRochelle responded the notes Indicate there is some landscaping there and that is also a question regarding the signage on the windows to the business being in excess of 20%. t 0-1 Q-96 Page 5 OCTOBER 14, 1986 ANAHEIM CITY PIJINNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA Chairman Messe stated he noticed there were a number of ballooru at the site and asked ff there was a special event permit Mr. iaRochefle answered there was an inspection done on September 28, 1996 there several gees and some ground cover, butfhe did not see the~2-foot high Iwhkh~isaoP~ ofthe show conditions. PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Roberto Garduno, Manager of this business, stated they din Nice now vitiations and are fixing everything with the help of staff and added they have a landscap g He stated they have photographs of other car dealers on Anaheim Boulevard showing their advertisemern signs and explained he dkl rat know what size signs would be allowed and that he is asking for a little time. Mr. Garduno answered Commissioner Bostwkk that he has read the corxiitkx-s on Page 4 and 5 of the staff report. Commissioner Boydstun poirned out they need to have both the green and black trash cantalners so they recycle. Mr. Garduno stated he did not have a permit for the balloons and was rat aware that one was required. Mr. Garduno stated his own car was out front for sale on thei w~eeke~r-sd f~Mu~eR pemrl~sslon t~nhave 29 vehicles have to be sdd on the property. He noted the appl vehicles; that there are two 8 ants w~hi4ch shouldt be at least 5 gallonufn siz ~nnot see the striping and that they are su posed andlif his equest ist PProveduhe would antitoiosee the staff worktclosely withethe owner so ha o ~~ understands exactly what has to be done. Commissioner Boydstun stated there were 17 cars on that lot on Sunday afternoon and that she personally thought 20 cars would be too marry. She asked ff they are leaning engines or detailing the vehicles at this lot. She also referred to a letter whk:h had been submitted to the Planning Commission complaining about the use. Commissioner Henninger offered a moti~ foroadpe s ~~heisffend a thought~heyahave been put on seems to be working towards resolving Pr notice that the problems need to be corrected and ff not, ultimately this use could be set for public hearing and considered for termination. He added a condition requiring Planning Commission review of the use in sbc mornhs and then in one year to determine whether or not the conditons are being complied with. This would be a report and recommendation item. He also added a condition that the owner of the business will pay for periodic Code Enforcement in~~aectbns as deemed necessary, but not to exceed one per month and that the number of vehicles will be Iimfted to 20 as originally approved on the basis that he did not think the site would accommodate more than 20 vehicles. Commissioner Bristd stated Condition No. 10 should be modffied to require that Condition No. 3 shall be complied with within 90 days. 10-14-96 Page S OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PUINNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA ACTION: Concurred with staff that the proposed protect falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, pass 21, as de9ned in the State EIR and is, therefore, ~tegorkally exempt from the requirements to prepare an EIR. Approved moditkk:a~ t~lCondltional Us~olvPing tthe probla0ms on~thbasis that the fdlowing owner appea changes to conditions: Modified Condition No. 10 modified to read as follows: 10. 'chat Condition ~ da s from the dat eve-menti~o ~,rshail be completed within a period of thirty ( ) Y Added the fdlowing conditions: That this conditional use Permit shah be re~-iewed by the Planning Commission as a report and recommendation ftem in sbc (6) months, and again in one (1) year to determine whether or noc the c~ndftions are being complied with. That the operator of the business shall pay for periodic Code Enforcement inspections, not to exceed one per month. That the number of vehides permitted on site shall not exceed twenty (20), as originally approved. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision. DISCUSSION TIME: 16 minutes 10-1496 Page 7 OCTOBER 1a, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA Withdrawn 3a. GEQA NEGATIVE DECLARAnvn 3b. GONDITiONA' 1C° °FRMIT' N0.3857 OWNER: RPRP OPE N PLANN NGCCOMPAN~Attn:oS. Ritschel, 30 Executive Park, Suite 100, Irvine, CA 92713 AGENT: AIR TOUCH CELLULAR, Attn: Melinda Hsu, 3 Park Piaza, P.O. Box 19707, Irvine, CA 92713 LOCATION: 385 and 405 North Mul~er~ ~ i ~ W ~ g ~ rectangularly-shaped pa approximately 1.67 acres, having a ftontage of approximately 274 feet on the west side of Muller Street and located approximately 300 feet south of the ceMetl(ne of Corporate Way. To permit a 15-foot helgM e;ctension (91 feet total including whip antennas) and additional antennas on an existing monopde communication antenna. This item was continued from the Planning Commis:,lon meetings of August 5, 1996, September 4, 1996 and September 16, 1996. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ilESOLUTION N0. SR63391CP.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: MOTION CARRIED thattheAnaheim City PlanningbCommissionl does hereby accept the petitioner's request to withdraw subject proposal. VOTE: 7-0 This matter was not discussed. 1o-ta-ss Page 8 OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY 4CTION AGENDA ~_ 4a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) Approved Sib. CONDITIONI~L USE PERMIT N0. 3245 (READVERTISED) Approved for 1 year (To expire 7-11-97) OWNER: NORWAUC INVESTMENTS, 1020 N. Batavia Street, ~B, Orange, CA 92667 AGENT: ANACAL ENGINEERING, Attn: David Oueyrel, 1900 E. La Palma Avenue, X202, Anaheim, CA 92803 CHARLIE'S IXOTIC AUTO WDRK'S, Attn: Charife & Anna Barragan, 532 S. Rose Street, Anaheim, CA 921.505 LOCATION: ,~26 and '~2 South pose~Slr~eet~ProU 9 ~ rectaanguiarly-shaped par approximately 0.80 acre, having a ftontage of approximately 196 fret on 4he east side of Rose Street and located approximately 325 feet south of the centerline of Santa Ana Street 'Petitioner requests readvertLsement of CondfUonai Use Permit No. 3245 to amend or delete a condition of approval pertaining to the time limitation of a previously approved auto body and paint facility and to modify the existing approved exhibits to allow a decrease in floor area. This item was continued from Planning Commission meeting of September 16, 1996. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC96.106 I SR6335KP.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. The applicant was not present nor had funds for payment been received, therefore, this matter was trailed until after Item No. 5. OPPOSITION: 1 person spoke in opposition of subject proposal. Cheryl f7ores, Senior Planner, reported that the check (for $404.00) was returned unpakf which was submitted in payment of this request. Mr. Oueyrel has indicated that the operator of the business will be bringing the furxis to staff before the end of today's meeting. PETITIOyER'S COMMENTS: David Queyrel, 1900 E. La Palma, Indicated they are curcenUy trying to reduce the size their business. 10-14-96 Page 9 OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA OPPOSITION: 1 person present in opposltlon. George Bourget, owner of aparG~nent complex on East Street Lust opposfte the alley ftom Charlie's Exotic Auto Works, made the fdlowing comments: - When this pemnit was originally granted in 1990, they understood there would be little dtiange in the trafck: and that the place would be kept dean. - Fie is there everyday and has never seen the door and gate dosed. - Some of his tenants sleep during the day. - This establishment plays loud music ail day. - Main concern is traffic down the alley at approximately 30 MPH and there are children playing there. e o across there and use ft 11ke a - There Is a produce vendor who parks next door and peopi g grocery store. Big trucks which cannot make the turn, actually use his parking area. - They have been tderating this for s[x years. He caked Code Enforcement and two days later, his ti~•es were slashed. - There are 96 units on the east side of the alley, and that is about 150 cars. Mr. Bourget presented photographs and petitions containing approximately 18 signatures. Mr. Queyrel responded there is a high vdume detailing operation next door. Every time he has spoken with thatahe iseaware ofthiThis is the only CUP ihn that area' w!''r'hh comes up forareview every yearWO~ outsSde Richard laRochelle, Code Enforcement Supervisor, stated staff has been there anti found there were vitiations with inoperable w.nides, etc. and they were given notice; they dki take care of the trash and the Inoperable vehicles being stored in the rear, and they are working wfth the Fire Department regarding the fire sprinklers. He points:; out alt work has to bs done inside. TFIE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. He ihoughMthe p obis shwiic ontinuee Henlasked whamcandbe dono to take tae of thnese problemstN~ Mr. LaRochelle stated the Planning Department can review the situation; that there are several automotive repair facilities and several produce vendors and a large recycling operation in that area. Chairman Messe suggested the matter be placed on a future Planning Commission workshop agenda. Commissioner Henninger added that all work must be done inside the facAity. Commissioner Boydstun suggested Code Enforcement could enforce rules on the other businesses. Chairman Masse stated there are other condftional use pennfts in that area, but h~ did not know if they have one year time limits. Commissioner Henninger noted he had read the original conditions and there was no requirement that the doors be dosed. 10-14-96 Page 10 ' OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA It was noted the size of the business is to be reduced by one-half• Commissioner Mayer ws+s concerned about having a cap on the number of vehicles and Chaimtan Masse though the size of the facility wpl be cap on the number of vehicles. Commissioner Bostw~k stated in looking at the photographs they h2d one gate then in the next Picture you see they have knocked the fence out and put two gates. The vendor with the grocery business has plywood stuck up above the fence. Chairman Masse asked Cheryl Flores to schedule this for a workshop for discussion on to review of this area block. ACTION: Detemnined that the previously approved negative declaration is adec;~ate to serve as the required ernironmental documentation for subject request. Approved subject request for one year, subject to the business owner paying for ~;eriodic Code Enforcement inspections, as deemed necessary. Modified Condition Nos. 13, 15, 18 and 22 of Resolution No. PC90-58, ss amended by Resolution Nos. pC94-88 and PC95-9~., to read as follows: '13. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance wRh plans and speciFlcations submitted to the City of Anaheim, by the petitioner, and whic:: plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit No. 1, Revision No. 2. 15. That subject conditional use permit is granted (retroactNely) for a period of one (1) year, to expire on July 11, 199?. 18. That the subject property shall be subject to mandatory code enforcement inspecticns every three (3) months (during the months of January, April, and July) to ensure continued compliancy with condftions of approval and all applicable Code requirements. That the cost of code enforcement inspections shall be incurred by the property owner as required by the City's Code Enforcement Manager. 22. That signs shall be posted in front of 532 Sout~~ Rose Street, stating, in both English and Spanish, that parking is reserved for customers of subject business only." VOTE: 7.0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the appeal rights. DISCt.ISSION TIME: 12 minutes ADDITIONAL ACTION: Street'a All oorxlitional use permits for businaesses aloing that alley shoo d be reviewed s to dean up Rose i 0-14-96 _ Page 11 OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA ~_ ~. ~Ene r•ATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - 21 I Concurred w/staff 5b. VARIANCE N0. 1945-3 (READVERTISED) M~~~ INITIATED BY: CITY OF ANAHEIM, PLANNIN6;• DEPARTMENT (CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION), 200 S. Anaheim Boulevani, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 1126 NoRh Anaheim ®oulevard fel Mural F,gstaurantl. Property is a rcatangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 026 acre located at the northwest comer of Anaheim Boulevard and Parry Avenue. City-initiated (Code Enforcement Division) req Wiest to consider the revocation or modification ~ Variance No. 1E4.... ~.o permit the operation of a restaurant). This item was continued ftom the Planning Commission m~tings of July 22, 1996, August 19, 1996 and September 30, 1996. VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. 'G96-107 SR~~,,.,~P -------------------------------------- FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None 'fim Dunn, Code Enforcement Officer, presented City-initiated request to conskfer the revocation or modification of Variance No. 1945; attempting to modify and bring del variance up to current standards. PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Michael Cho, 3991 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 350, Newport Beach, CA (attorney representing the owner) made the fdlowing comments: - This is currently a restaurant and had a beer and wine license for about 5G years; - Want to continue operating as a restaurant and provide entertainment for v:;,~iding receptions, etc. in connection with banquets; milts, not(ng they - Concerned about Condition No. 7 prohibfting live entertainment without property pe currently can provide entertainment and would like to continue that practice and asked for clarification because the new tenant would like to provide ente:ainment to diners on a regular basis - Frklays and Saturdays without having a banquet situation and asked what they would need to do in order to be able to pruvkle that entertainment; - Concerned about Condftion No. 11 regarding hours of operation and they feel these hours are overly restrictive and would like to extend the hours for an additional hour per day; (1 a.m. on Friday and Saturday night and midnight during the week, or compliance with ABC license); 10-1496 Page 12 OCTOBEfl 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIOM -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA ~. - Concemin9 ~~~ 8 eny ~m~or~e parking on sit a nd dkl notbknow~f they have anragreemel nt to and they cannot gravid use the Clty Parking; - Number of banquets are for local sports teams such as: lJttle League, soccer, etc. and they rent the whc~e restaurant and do not prepay for the banquet facilities, and they charge people as they enter and Dart of the money is retained by the organization; - Otherwise, they feel all the other conditi~uard when theMehan ~ntertalnm~r(Sand~yers ftom 4, they agree to having a licensed security g Y Business Dense, referred to See ~h 4~1~8~air> h~ ~ ~~hip• and ft was noted h Uttle League sponstxed by a non-profit 9 ouP organisation or sports team organization would qualify. Irnestigator Tom Engle, Anaheim Pdke Department, regarding Condition No. 11 stated they would have no problem with tl'ie establishment staying open an additional hour. He added their concern is that this establishment become a restaurant and maintains being a e~~ ft ~ ~ ~ to t~ ~~ i and not the new owner wcwld have to apply for an entertainment perm business. Irnestigator asked when tf~e new owner will be taking over operation of the business. Mr. Cho responded h depends on what happens with this, request, but probably in about 90 days. The new tho ey weressve they could thope a e ~ the manner they desired. The new owner does not want K to less become a public dance hail. Cheryl Flores asked that Condition No. 7 be modified to read: 'That the business shall not be operated as a sex-oriented business unles.4 a Sex Oriented Business Permit is obtained; and further that there shall be no live entertainment, amplified musk; or dancing permitted on the premises at any time without issuance of proper permfts as required by the Anaheim Municipal Code and the Department of Alcohdic Beverage Contrd (ABC)'. The current ABC license (dated March 14, 1994) contains a condition prohibiting such actNlty except when limited to private, pre-arranged functions. Chairman Messe asked about parking on the City-owned parking lot; and Alfred Yalda responded he did not know who owns and operates that lot and he dkf not know if they should have, but that he could Investigate and find out which department has jurisdiction. Commissioner Baydstun stated right now the only restriction has been parking prohibited between 2 a.m. and 5 a.m. Mr. Cho stated they would work with the City regarding the parking lot and could put a sign inskie the restaurant instructing their patrons where to pa~~. Commissioner Julie Mayer suggested a condition be added to indicate Anaheim Arts CouncU be gNen notification of any proposed change to the mural on the wall. Commissioner Henni~iger suggested Condition No. 19 be changed to state owner would pay for periodic Code Enforcement Inspections not to exceed 1 monthly, ff deemed n®cesss'>~ by Code Enforcement. 10-14-96 Page 13 ,~` OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA Irnestigator Engle stated the Pdice Department would request that the existing telephone be removed or moved inside the buNd{ng. Commissioner Boydstun requested if the telephone cannot be removed because of a breach of contrail with the telephone company that it be changed so that there could be no inrbming calls. STAFF COMMENTS: Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, printed out this matter was brought forward for consideratbn of a modificatbn or terminatbn because the operatbn was in violation of the Variance. with staff they had discussbns that they would cooperate with this variance and Mr. Cho stated in meetings ~d a lot of the things that would fNe for a conditional use Permit but K seems they have already accompl for a CUP and leave be done under a CUP. Mr. Cho was not certain they would now have a need to apply with a mocitfled variance. Cheryl Flores explained as long as the establishment is operating as a restaurant with accessory banquets, they can continue with this existing Variance No. 1945-3. ACTION: Concurred with staff that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptbns, Class 21, as defined in the State EIR arxi is, theref~e, categorically exempt ftom the requirements to prepare an EIR. Modified Variance No. 1945. Mod~d Condition :Vos. 7, 11, 16 and 19 to read as fellows: r, That the business shall not be operated as asex-oriented business unless an application for and approval of a Sex Or{ented Business Permit is obtained; and further that there shall be no INe entertainment, amplified music or dancing permitted on the premises at any time without Issuance of proper permits as required by the Anaheim Municipal Code and the Department of Alcohdic Beverage Contrd (ABC). 11. That sales, service and consumption of alcohdic beverages shall be permitted only between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and midnight, Sunday through Thursday and between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 1:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday, or in compliance with the Alcohd Beverage Contrd Board license. 16. That there shall be no public telephones on the property that are located outside the building and within the contrd of the applicant. If the existing telephone cannot be removed due to a breach of contract or c~~not be moved Inside the building, the phone shall be modified so as no incoming calls can occur. 19. That the owner d the subJect business shall pay for the cost of perbd~ Code Enforcement Inspections, as deemed necessary by Code Enforcement staff, to address Code violatbns, not to exceed one per month. 10-14-96 Paget 4 OCTOBER 1A, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA ~_ Added the fdlowing condition: That the property owner shall Hotly the Anaheim Arts Councq ninoty (90) days to any anticipated change or removal of the existing wait mural and shall pra~lde proof or copy of the notice to the Zoning DNision. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: 37 minutes Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the appeal rights. 10-1496 Page 15 ' OCTOBER 14, 1998 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA ~- Approved ga. ~EOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Appr~~ eb. WAIVER OF CODE RFnuIREMENT Granted gc. SONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3866 OWNER: RONALD GROSMAN, 817 S. Brookhurst Street, Anaheim, CA 92804 LOCATION: X17 S Brookhurst Street All a4ons Tire & A r~to ~gnterl. Property is apl~r~imately 0.47 acre located at the southwest comer of 13rookhurst Street and Cdchester Dfi-e. To retain U-Haul truck rental in conjunction with an existing retaq fire and auto center, wfth waNer of minimum number w pa~~ r!q spaces. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0.__~,•~g-108 I SR632pDH.WP --------------------------------------- FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None . PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: f;on Grossman, President of Ali Season's Tire Company, Inc., made the fdlowing comments: - Have had a U-Haul truck rental dealer since 1988. - Never had an acckient or any vitiations. - Were not aware that they dkf not have a CUP. - There is apparently a concern about parking spaces. - Do not rent tracers -only U-Hatt trucks. - Have 4 trucks on site, others come in and go out. - Staff wants 41 parking spaces. - Their plan shows they have 37 spaces. - Sales invoices indicate 14 total receipts per day. - Cars are worked on inskle the bays and that only requires 10 spaces - Usually have 3 or 4 trucks and sometimes have no trucks. - When Code Enforcement inspected on February 17, 1996, they had 5 wcks on the lot and none on the street. He gave truck courts on several dates. Not sure why they can't park on the streets. Were tokf they could not park vehicles over 10,000 pounds on the street and their trucks are not that big. in had been taken care of. - Papers returned had CUP stamped on them so he though everyth g Matt LettereUlo, Code Enforcement Officer, stated the ficllowing: - On February 17, 1996 he observed 4 U-Haul trucks parked eastbound on Colchester in front of the business and one westbound. ~~ ~ the street. . Have had citizen complaints about trucks being pa - Photographs submitted. 10-14-96 Page 16 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 14, 1996 ~_ Mr. Grossman responded to Chaimran Messe that he has the option of not accepting returned vehicles and he does not accept traNers at this facAity. Matt LettereAlo stated on March 13, 1996 he observed 5 trucks on the west sloe of the property and one on the east skis of the property and on August 26, 1996 he saw 2 moving trucks parked on the west sloe of the property and I on the east sloe of the property and again on September 9,1996 he saw 4 moving trucks parked on the west sloe of tha property and 1 parked westbound on the street in front of the far west skis of the property and 2 parked on the east of the property. Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner, stated he thought there is a code in a Vot of areas where they are not pemtftted to park ovemlgM on the street and trucks parking on the streets sometimes create visibility problems for the residents. Chairman Messe pointed out a condition could be imposed requiring 37 parking spaces and that would accommodate four trucks. Mr. Yalda responded he would be comfortable with that ff the parking lot is restrfped for 37 spaces, THE PUBUC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. Grossman explained their citaCwn was for not having a conditional use permft and that he did not know they were not allowed to park on the street and that 36 parking spaces Is triple the amount they would need. He stated when they ~<<r~re rJted for not having a permit, there was r;.o discussion about the number of trucks or where they quid be parked. He responded to Commissioner Bostwick ti~at none of the spaces are striped at this time and he was wafting to see ff this is going to be approved. Commissioner Bostwick stated he was at the site on Saturday and there were z trucks parked in the back of the lot and approximately 6 or 7 cars. Mr. Grossman explained the plans he has submitted comply with the Traffic Engineering requirements and the trucks are parked in the rear by the s~all where customers are not permitted to park. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner, stated Exhibft No. 1 does not show the specific parking location for the U- Haui trucks and asked ff 4 spaces along the west property line would be the only place those trucks would be permitted to park. Chairman Masse responded he did not believe so. Mr. Grossman explained there is a 8-foot high block wall which is where they park the trucks so that no one can get into the trucks. Commissioner Henninger pointed out the staff report indicates the parking is adequate in one location and then the recommendation says the size of this sit is not adequate and asked for a clarification from staff. Cheryl Flores stated the recornmerxiatbn for denial is based on tine fact that In the past there have been more than 4 tricks at this tacpity and on the street and ff this was limited to only 4 trucks, there would be sufficient parking according to the testimony of the applk;aM. 10-1496 Page 17 OCTOBER 14,1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA Mr. Yalda responded to Commissioner Henninger that he would be comfortable with approval if it is limited t0 only 4 vehides. ACTION: Approved NegatNe Dedaratbn. approved WaNer of Code Requirement. Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3866, subject to conditions listed in the staff report. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant ~y att~y, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision. DISCUSSION TIME: 20 minutes 10-1496 Page 18 OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA 7a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLAR_eT10N (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) M~~ minions 7b. CONDITIONAL USE P RME IT NO 3595 (READVERTISED) of approval OWNER: N~DpoEd Beams' ~ ~~. INC. 1000 QuaN Street, Suite 220, AGENT: DR. DAVE LAGORE, P.O. Box 18085, Anaheim, CA 92817 LOCATION: 6109 East La Palma Avenue (Suite'A"1. Property is approximately 9.a3 acres located at the northeast comer of La Palma Avenue and Kelio99 Drive. Petitioner requests moditication or deletion of a condition of approval Pertaining to a time limitation for a prevbusly approved church. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION W0._ PC98-1011!-_- FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None SR6329JKWP answe any questionsMand indicated he had readhe staff report and agrees with the eecomm ~~to conditions. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ACTION: Determined that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Approved request to delete time lima for Conditional Use Permit No. 3995. Modified Condalon No. a of Resolution No. PC93-34 to read as fellows: '6. That in accordance wi!h Section 18.110.070.050,0511 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (pertaining to Iimaations for churches in the Northeast Area Sperm Plan) ob6 ~ p.m. church activates other than church office staff, shall ~ be Perm P~ observedhon the day of the actual hdid~ayn~e9 rdless of the day of wehweek.~ VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant Cay Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision. DISCUSSION TIME: 2 minutes 10-1496 Page 19 OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA I Concurred w/staff gp, CEOA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 11 Denied 8b. VARIANCE N0. OWNER: DR. CALVIN WIWAMS, 13320 RNerskfe Dr., #110, Shem~an Oaks, CA 91423 AGENT: WATKINS/BAILE & ASSOCIATES, 20321 Birch, #20'0, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION: ~ '-~'''""n""th""'° Avenue (Hillview $houoin~ M r Property is approximately 1.9 acres located at the northwest comer of Orangethorpa Avenue and Imperial Highway. WaNers of minimum distance between roof signs and fteestanding signst wfth maximum number of roof signs to const ~~iew ro ~`m~o~M~ ~ ~~ fourteen (14) roof signs and one (1) app monument sign. VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. PC96-110 I SR6351KB WP -------------------------------------- FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None PETITIONER'S COMMENTi S: Greg Watkins, ftom Watkins, Bade & Associates, explained the current signs are under the eaves and overhang and this request is to build on top of the existing sloped wall and relocate existing signs. He presented photographs of the signs being blocked by cars driving by the sfte and also of the shoppirt ~ the center next door. Their obJectNe is to get the sign up high enough so ft can be seen. A second pa project was to cut an access drNe ftom Orangethorpe into the site. Unfortunately there are 2 IIgM poles; gaslinemDue torthe cdost theyy wihl not bewabl~o afford the curb cut sot hey feel they desperately need the proposed signage. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner, explained the shopping center next door to the south in the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone and would be covered by those regulations which are more restrictNe. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Henninger asked about the shopping center next door and added there is a problem with this site ftom looking at these photographs. Ms. Flores stated R appears that those signs on the shopping center next door are on a parapet so they are conskfered as wall signs. 1 Q-14-96 Page 2.0 OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGEWDA ~_. Mir. YJatkins resporxied to Commissioner Boydstun that he plans to build a parapet and to Commissioner Br(std that the material will match the exterior of the facAity and that they will be repainted to match. He slated they have a problem with arxessibUiry and visibility at this site. They cannot provide access because of existing utUity facGftieg, etc. Commissioner Henninger stated the signs across the street appear to be on the wail with the roof line above and ftom these plans, he though this would be s parapet on top of a roof. Mr. Watkins presented an exhibit for Commission review. Ms. Flores sated Exhibft 4 which was the ftont elevation does show a mansard roof with a parapet above the roof. Commissioner Bristd stated if a parapet was built, this would be considered a wall sign. Commissioners examined the 2 foldout photo montages submitted by Mr. Watkins.] Commissioner Henninger stated from looking at theo~ ~ ~g request would be that every bus ness~in thew of the signs and he thought the problem with app canyon area would be asking for the same thing. Ms. Flores stated the plans they have submitted for the monument sign meet Code, and it is located within 300 feet of the proposed roof mounted sign. Chairman Masse stated H the roof-mounted sign was denied they cdd go ahead and build. Commissioner Bostwick stated he thought the property does have some difficulties wfth access and visibility gradehovegthe call oad tracks and the Iin~e of sight whichP is a~ually overcthetrootf. rHe thou~ght~a pde s gn would help the business. Commissioner Henninger stated the primary problem is with access which cannot be cured because of some of the utilities but if this >s allowed, the Commission will be seeing requests for roof signs from a variety of business in that area. He added we have already seen one shopping center remove all its mature trees so their signs would be seen better. Commissioner Bristd thought a good compromise would be to incorporate the signs into the parapet like they have done across the street. Commissioner Bostwick stated he would consider the parapet modffication as a wall surface. Commissioner Henninger added he had originally thought that way, but this isn't the same. He thought they could make a modfficatbn to their roof in the future and it could look good. ACTION: Concurred with staff that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 11, as defined in the State EIR and is, therefore, categork~lly exempt ftom the requirements to prepare an EIR. io-ta-ss Page 21 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 14, 1996 Denied Variance No. 4297 on the basis that no special circumstances exist. VOTE: 5-2 (Commissioners Boydstun and Bostwick voted no) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision. DISCUSSION TIME: 20 minutes 1 Q-t 496 Page 22 ..~.~~~^^ env o~ euurNr. r_nMMtsstoN -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 14,1996 9a. cFnA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 9b. ~ONDITIIINAL USE PERMIT N0.3675 OWNER: COUNTY OF ORANGE (HARBOR, BEACHES AND PARKS), 300 N. Flower, Santa Ana, CA 92702 AGENT: LOS ANGELES CELLULAR, Attn: Leslie Daigle, 17785 Center Court Drive North, Cerritos, CA 92701 J. L HARE ASSOCIATES, Attn: Holly Sandler, 17581 Irvine, Bivd. #200, Irvine, CA 92680 LOCATION: 7600 East La Palma Avenue ~Yorba Reoional Parkl. Property is approximately 113.05 acres located at the southwest comer of Weir Canyon Road and La Palma Avenue. To permft an approximate 59-foot high telecommunication mcnopde antenna and accessory equipment. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC96-111 Approved Granted for 10 years (To expire 10-14-06) SR6353KP.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Linda Paul, LA Cellular, 17785 Center Court Dri\re North, Cerritos, stated this is a much needed facility due to congestion of the sites adjacent to it. She clarified that this is a 59-foot high monopde wfth a 9-12' foundation, so the overall height does not exceed 60 feet. Ms. Paul stated there has been a correction of the number of antennas as the site plan shows this is what is called a 3-sectored site, each direction has 4 panel directional antennas. There would be a total of 12 antennas plus one microwave dish which would total 13 antennas. Cheryl Flores, Indicted there is a correction to paragraph 9 in the chart, the last box, on lower right should say'12 antennas (4 per array)'. Ms. Paul referred to Condition No. 1 regarding the time iimft which is recommended at 5 years and stated given the nature of the facility, ft would be unusual to have this kind of restriction and they would like the time limit extended to 10 years. Chairman Messe stated with today's modem techndogy, a 30-foot high pde may be all that is required instead of a 59 feet high pde. Ms. Paul responded that they would only build the pde as high as is needed. Chairman Messe referred to a letter received by the Planning Commission and Ms. Paul responded they have reviewed that letter and do agree and will paint the monopde to match. 10-1496 Page 23 OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY AC110N AGENDA Cheryl Flores stated paragraph 17 of the staff report indkated there are no other antennas located the Yorba Regional Park but the applicant has ind(cated there (s a 10-foot high monopole and ft was noted that be located wft in the existing fenced maintenance a ea but h s~~(nt fact~mmediatel adjacent tmhe fenced area. There was discussion regarding the floodlight on top and K was determined that the light should not be operational. maximum 3 oot ceenters~~ ~ ~~~ Conditioni No 61to~ead las'Exhibit Nos. in a, 2 and 3e THE PUBIJC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3875 for a period of 10 Years, to expire on October 14, 2006, with the fdiowing changes to condftions: Modified %ondition Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 6 to read as follows: 1. That the telecommunication monopoe and associated equipment shall be aparoved for a period of ten (10) years, to expire on October 14, 2006. 2. That the monopoe shall be painted a neutral color to match the existing adjacent baseball diamond floodlights. Further, that the floodlights on top of the monopole shall be non-operational. 3. That the mc~nopde base and the equipment enclosure shall be constructed of masonry block material painted to match the nearby existing buildings and shall be planted, Irrigated, and maintained, wfth minimum 1 gallon in size, dinging vines, planted on maximuir~ 3 foot centers, to provide screening of the enclosure walls and further to prevent grafffti opportunities. 6. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance wfth plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petftioner and which plans are on fUe with the Planning Department marked Exhibits Nos. 1, 1a, 2, and 3. That only the monopoe, antennas, floodlights, equipment, and fence enclosure illustrated on Exhibits Nos. 1, 1a, 2, and 3 are permitted. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the written right to appeal the Planning commission's decision. DISCUSSION TIME: 13 minutes 10-14-96 Page 24 OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PUINNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA ed i0a. ~EOA NEGATIVE DEC TIN Granted 10b. ~^N.,mONet ucF PERMIT N0.3876 OWNER: N Brame ~ DS ne 534~P.0 Box 1709, Gl~er-dalergCA~1 91209 AGENT: GN~,I9 West Lincdn Avenue, Suoe 1,, Ana helm, ICA 92805 LOCATION: "' c^uth Harbor Boulevard. Property is approximately 0.54 acre located at the southwest comer of Sarda Ana Street and Harbor Boulevard. To permit the conversion of a 3,920 square-foot bank bugding to a church. aC98-112 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. gP,634g,1KWP FOLLOVIiING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COIJIMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None e went in support of this request. SUPPORT: There were 10 peopl pr stated this PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Morris Ogden, minister o[ the waita~ 8 by r~t~nOs er~igd theyur>ow' have fs a 50-member congregation. Two years ago their property acquired a new fac~ity located a few blocks ftom the prior site. Mr. Ogden ant( Oteden ~ ~ ~i~ge 6, complying with the City requirements and restrictions regarding the property. 9d Condition No. 4 of the staff report, the wetbar that is presently there does include a stove. Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, corrected Conditkm No. 7 relative parking agreement. That infcmiation could be submitted directly to the Zoning DNision rather than the Pubik: Works Department. THE PUBUC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Melanie Adams corrected Condition No. 7 to read that an off-site parking agreement can be submitted to the Zoning Division rather than Publk: Works Department. Co 1805,oassChainnnan Messe agreed sincethat is what carries t e waNers~ete any refer to Variance N It was noted that a letter of opposftion receNed from an adjacent property owner (Mclnytre's) and also that they have the riglrt of appeal ff they are unhaPPY with the Planning Commission's decision. 10-td•96 Pge 25 OCTOBER 14, 1996 ANAHEIM CITY PUINNING COMMISSION -SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3876 with the fdlowing changes to condkions: MG~difled Condition Nos. 3 and 7 to read as fdlows: 3 .~ the owner of the subject property sf~all submit a letter requesting termination of Coral :ional Use P;gmrit No. 1476 (to establish an office in an existing residence with various waNers) and Variance No. 1545 (to waNe maximum pernitted structural height) to the Zoning Division. 7. That the developer shall submit evidence that either all four (4) parcels are under the same ownership or, ff any of the parking parcels are owned by a different party, submft an off-site parking agreement in conformance with Section 18.06.010.020 to the Zoning DNision of the Planning Department. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, Presented the wnten right to appeal the Planning Commission's decisbn. DISCUSSION TIME: 10 minutes ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 3:45 p.m. Since Q, ~~" ~ ~~~ Edith L Harris Planning Commission Support Supervisor 10-14-96 Page 26