Loading...
Minutes-PC 1996/11/13SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA ANAHEIM CITY 10 A.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1996 PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION REGARDING INPUT FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING PROGRAM. 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT INPUT 2. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT INPUT 1:30 P.M. PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING WORK SESSION PUBLIC HEARING (TESTIMONY) COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BP.:STOL, HENNINGER, MAYER, MESSE, PERAZA COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: NONE STAFF PRESENT: Selma Mann Greg Hastings Cheryl Flores Karen Dudley Karen Freeman John Poole Julie King Alfred Yalda Melanie Adams Tom Engle Richard Wilson Edith Harris Ossie Edmundson Assistant City Attorney Zoning Division Manager Senior Planner Associate Planner Associate Planner Code Enforcement Manager Building Division Manager Principal Transportation Planner Associate Civil Engineer Vice Detail Environment Services Specialist PC Support Supervisor Senior Word Processing Operator P:\DOCS\CLERICAL\MINUTES\AC 111396.WP 11-13-96 Page 1 1.REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.1594 AND 3421 - Set for public REQUEST FOR REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION: hearing (1.6-9'~ for City-initiated (Anaheim Police Department), 425 South Harbor modification and/or Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805, request to consider inftiation of revocation of revocation or modification proceedings for a previously subject use permits approved restau:..nt with on-premises sale of alcoholic beverages and a public dance hall. Property is located at 500 North Brookhurst Street (La Estrella). SR6376DH.WP Investigator Tom Engle, Anaheim Police Department, Vice Detail, stated approximately one (1) year ago La Estrella was brought before the Commission for modffication. ht the time, the Commission gave them some guidelines and conditions :o adhere to in order to remain as restaurant. It lc file opinion of the Police Department that they have not complied and are still operating as they were in the past, as a night club. Numerous calls have been received by the Police Department. Calls that are in line with the type of calls for service receved by a bar or night club. Recently, the Police Department and Code Enforcement inspections have shown the kitchen to be closed and only Cne bar area to be open for business. Therefore, the Police Department requests that they be brought back before the Commission for a public hearing to consider revocation or modification of Conditional Use Permit No. 1594 and 3421. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3724 -REQUEST FOR Determined to be SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE: Bissel Architects, 446 in substantial Old Newport Bivd, Newport Beach, CA 92663, request to conformance wfth permit an approximate 38,000 square-foot church facility original approved within the ML Zone. Property is located at 412 N. Crescent plans Way. SR6379MA.WP Application: Glenn Gellatly, representing the Diocese of Orange and also the Saint Thomas Korean Center, and wfth him in the audience was, the Director, Father Benedict Kim. Basically, ft has been decided that the facility originally conceived was not adequate in size and the proposal before the Commission was to modify the existing condftional use permft to slightly increase the project over and above the original size. Melanie Adams, Associate Civil Engineer, Public Works Department, stated that when the conditional use permit was first considered in 1994, the Public Works Department did not review the mitigation monitoring that had been implemented for the Anaheim Plaza Redevelopment Area. That mitigation montoring program required certain items related to sewer and storm drain improvements, specific to the Redevelopment area. The Public Work Department is currently working together with Redevelopment Agency staff to find some financing for these sewer Improvements. They will work with the applicant to address these issues prior the issuance of the building permit of 11-13-96 Page 2 Phase II. The Deputy City Attorney had not had the chance to review this in depth. There may be some Iimftatfons as to what can be imposed at this time since the error was made at the time of initial condftional use permit review. CODE AMENDMENT N0. 96-10: City-initiated (Planning C Continued to a . Department), 200 S. Anaheim Bivd., Anaheim, CA 92805, future public hearing request to consider Code Amendment No. 96-10 pertaining to add reference to to Chapters 18.61 and 18.63 of Tftle 18 (Zoning) of the neutral colored Anaheim Municipal Code to allow PVC slats in chain-link screening materials fences as a permitted she screening device for outdoor uses and to add in the ML (Limited Industrial) and MH (Heavy Industrial) provision for PVC, Zones. other plastics, and fabric mesh to the draft ordinance SR6381KB.WP Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner, Planning Department, state6 this request would be consistent with the Codo Section that already exists in the nc.:theast areas Specific Plan which allow PVC and chainlink fencing as well. There was further discussion regarding various types of screening materials in chain link fences for site screening o:.rtdoor uses. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager, Planning Dep~~rtment, suggested the Planning Department my wish to continue this until they can work with the City Attorney's office to submit the draft ordinance. 11-13-96 Page 3 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 2a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) 2b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3289 (READVERTISED) OWNER: AN/'.HEIM HILLS ENTERPRISE, 5100 East La Palma, Suite 202, Anaheim, CA 92807 AGENT: IRA COHEN, 10832-C Lemon, Yorba Linda, CA 92886 LOCATION: 5100 East La Palma Avenue Suites i04 and 105. Property is approximately 6.3 acres located on the south side of La Palma Avenue, approximately 3,560 feet east of the centerline of Lakeview Avenue. To amend or delete a condftion of approval pertaining to time limitation for an existing church. Approved Approved amendment to conditions of approval (For 5 years, to expire on 11-13-01) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC96-116 I SR6365JKWP --------------------------------------------------------- FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Item was trailed since applicant was not present. There was no discusssion. ACTION: Determined that the previousSy approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Approved amendment to conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 3289. Amended Condition No. 12 of Resolution No. PC90-155 to read as follows: '12. That this Conditional Use Permit shall expire five (5) years from the date of this resolution, on November 13, 2001." VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 3 minutes 11-13-96 Page 4 3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED Approved 3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS 680 (READVERTISED) Modffied conditions of approval REQUESTED BY: CITY-INITIATED, 200 S. Anaheim ~o~.~:eva-a, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 100 South Canvon Crest Drive (The Eli Home). Property is approximately 0.22 acre located at the southeast corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Canyon Crest Drive. City-initiated publ(c hearing in accordance with Sections 18.03.091 and 18.03.092.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and pursuant to enforcement actions by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, to add, delete or modify conditions of approvai, Including, but not limited to, conditions relating to the limitation on occupancy by children, indoor and outdoor activities by children and fencing requirements relating to children, in connection with apreviously-approved group home for abused children and their mothers. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. pC96-117 I SR6361KD.WP --------------------------------- FOLLOWING iS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: 7 people spoke (n opposition of subject facility. SUPPORT: 1 person spoke in favor of subject facility. The following is a detailed transcript of Item No. 3: Chairman Messe: Item No. 3. Again, it is aCity-initiated conditional use permit that has been readvertised to do some modification. Since it was Ciry-initiated I would like C'~ty staff to introduce it, please. We wouldn't want to start without you Selma. Karen Dudley: Karen Dudley, Planning Department. This request is initiated by the City to amend or delete certain conditions that are perceived to be discriminatory against children through a complaint that was lodged through the Department of Fair Housing. Essentially, what weo al that wee noriginallyfon with the City Attorney's Office, we have taken a look at the conditions of app imposed for this particular project which is for a group home for abused children and their mothers. The conditions that are being proposed to be amended are conditions that regulate the number and type of occupancy/occupants for the building. Basically, what we are doing is taking away the chUd-centered language on these conditions of approval, however ft is staff's opinion and Ciry Attomey's opinion that these conditions do not change any of the requirements for operation. There is a condition of approval that requires that they operate In conjunction with a letter of operation that was submitted by the operator and it is our feeling that these conditions or modifications and deletions of conditions, hopefully will satisfy HUD's requirements as well as meeting the Cfty's needs and also the communties... maintaining or protecting the communities benefits as well. 11-13-96 Page 5 Chairman Messe: Alright any input from staff? I would call upon the public then to give us any input. Is there somebody here from The Eli Home? Anybody here from the neighborhood? Does the ~, you wish tootda k come onnup and ask any questions orngiveaus any input that you might haute. matter? If Lany Ritter: My name is Larry Ritter, 111ve at i51 Possum Hollow. I fear that any Input that the neighborhood is allowed) to present will have no effect whatsoever today as ff did in the initial public hearing on this matter. The original applicant/application was submitted and approved for a variance for a conditional use permit with the input from the application only, the opposftion from the neighborhood was not incorporated whatsoever in the final decision that approved this structure being modified for the housing of 21 individuals. Based on the occurrences since the original application was submitted it would put into question even the City lawyer calls into question the Intent of The Eli Home and its organization in the operating of the facility according to the letter of operation that they submitted. in the recent newspaper interview wfth the director, she intended or indicated that that guideline letter or that letter was only a guideline and not an operational letter that she intended to have included in the conditional use permit. By deleting the requirement for the childrens ages and number of occupancy, etc. we've actually done is we've allowed a business which is what we've allowed anyway, a business in a residential neighborhood 'hat by right should only ::ave 10 people in h to now have 21 people or maybe even more, according to the newspaper. That does not require R to be children, ft can be any kind of re uirement for kind of a individual based on a loose interpretation so therefore by removing any q children and under 12 years of aye was obviously was part of the letter of operation and intent that The EII Home had recommended and had suggest~ad. By removing that restriction ~.ve're allowing is a business to operate in a residential area that can be any combination of 22 people, 21 people including a manager. The staff had suggested that there was no adverse affect on the neighborhood. There has been an adverse affect on the neighborhood since the project started. The safety! of the neighborhood is in question since the requirement for the wasps are to be removed and now subjects every resident in the area to the possibilfty of lawsuit if one of these children should happen to run out into the street. Santa Ana Canyon Road which is a highly traveled arterial highway may not be having any kind of structure separating the children from the street so every resident passing on Santa Ana Canyon Road is being subjected to the possibility of an accident and lawsuft. Chairman Messe: Have you read todays staff report, sir? Larry Ritter: I have read the report that was printed prior to today, yes. I think I have already indicated what my feeling is and I have stated this to the Planning Commission before when ware talking about this application in the first place. My feeling was that the investigators, the Planning Department had seriously fallen down upon their obligation to inspect and to investigate the proposed building modifications in the first place and ultimately present it to the City Council. The project wfth approval recommendations and ultimately they have approved this project. Now we have the camels head in the tent and there is no way to keep the camel out unless the project is terminated. The application, ff there is a misconception, misleading comments, misleading information presented in order to get the application or conditional use permit provided in the first place, that is grounds to have ft terminated and this applicant has had no intention of following the operational letters that they have presented in the operation of this unit, which would have made it palatable to the neighborhood. Chairman Messe: Thank you eery much. Is there anybody else? Jean Averill: Hi, my name is Jean Averill, I live at Canyon Crest Dr'rve. I am here today to request that the CUP be overturned because it was issued after fraudulent information was submitted to the C'rty as well as to the public in general. The Planning Commiss~~n and the City Council were told that The EII Home was an r.'rganization run by volunteers. it is not, it has never have been run by volunteers. They are paid as independent contractors. The Eli Home was presented to you as a shelter. It is business in our community, I say ft is a business because, as in the past, the paid workers are intending to charge 11-13-96 Page 6 the abused victims rent at The Eli Home as reported in The Times last Saturday and is verified by past neighbors when they had their shelter in Orange. You were told The EII Home does not receNe any public money, then one must wonder haw they can charge (prudent) and ab;:<<• children to stay at a ~ shelter. Well, we were told in the past those in The Eli Home assisted individual and becoming new recipients on the welfare rolls then charged them rent from the welfare checks. That sounds like received public money to me. The Cfty was fraudulently presented with detailed drawings of The EIl Home which would be built to blend with the surrounding environment neighborhood and provide safety for abused victims. On CUP No. t5 states The EIi Home is to be substantially in conformance with plan specifications as presented to the City. Well immediately they turned around submftted their drawings and ft was wfth no file roof as originally told. It was with no wood sides as originally told. That is just one more example of the deceft they have portrayed. You were fraudulently told The EIi Home wanted to provide securfty for abused children through safe house. Now they want to eliminate the solid block wall they presented on their drawi~igs with the excuse that ft would be likened to a prison. Well I've got a &-foot block wall on my yard and I imagine a lot of you do too, do you consider your backyards to be prisons? I don't think so. Galloway is now calling the structure a showcase. It seems that the intention is now to parade and showcase abused children behind a transparent fence along the busiest road in Anaheim Hills. Now the children will be abused by The EIi Home as well the general public gawking at them as they ride down Santa Ana Canyon Road. You were fraudulently told that The EII Home wanted to be a peaceful, good neighbor. They have proven to be a horrible neighbor one could not imagines in your worst nightmare. The molluscous slap lawsufts they have filed against me and two of my neighbors have been very time consuming to us, very disruptive to our INes but costly to The EIi Home because tl~iey keep loosing. They certainly changed what use to be our quiet, peaceful neighborhood Into one what the newspaper has referred to as a war zone. There is a continual media circus going on at The EII Home. The solicft attention constantly. We have even had newspaper... we have even had news helicopters from orre N station over our home at eleven o'clock at night for 11:00 P.M. news because their executive director had called them out for another news conference. Just last Friday the news reporters from multiple organizations banged on every door in our street after the emergency news conference called by Larry Galloway at 12:30. You were fraudulently told that The EII Horne does not discriminate and would be open to all victims of child abuse. Then why are they abusing against handicapped mothers and handicapped abused children. Why is the City ~f Anaheim permitting a CUP for an organization to be in non-compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The minimum requirements for this structure being altered should include at least one (1) bedroom to be fully accessible, one (1) room to be accessible to people with hearing impairments and accessibility requirements for the bathrooms, entrance, etc. They have made no provisions for thra handicapped and also the interior of the structure was completely gutted new staircases added to the exterior, I believe that HUD should do an investigation on The Eli Home's discrimination. Maybe they will. I urge the City to quit discriminating agai»st residents of the neighborhood, revoke the CUP. As Jack Whfte stated in his letter of July 28, 1995 to HUD, the City of Anaheim has made numerous zoning changes in the face of commur.'rty opposition in order to accommodate The EIi Home, now you've been slapped with this. Please listen to the tax paying cftizens of our neighborhood. You were told before The EIi Home has a history of breaking the rules as evidence in the past shelter in Orange. Now history is being repeated. You've allowed a terribly sftuation be hauled into our lives. We can riot exft or enter our house without driving through the narrow passageway in front of The EIi Home. This organization is in our faces constantly. Please reject the CUP, turn ft down. Thank you. Chairman Messe: Thank you Ms. Averill. Anybody else from the neighborhood or? Sheri Ayre;t: My name is Sheri Ayres and I reside at 181 Canyon Crest Drive. It basically is my concern that the organization thy: wants to help abused women and children is now willing to delete from their requirements that they already set forth for themselves that the children shall now be permitted to play outdoors and activities outside after 7:30, they're going to delete that completely. The next thing that they want to delete is that the children staying at the subject facility shall be supervised by an adult at ail times whether indoors or outdoors. Thzt that will be deleted entirety. I'm sure most of 11-13-96 Page 7 you who have children would never leave your children unattended ff you dropped them off at a daycare center or ff you dropped them off at any other type of activity. You wouldn't Just drop them off at a pica place when they are 12 years old or younger. We all feel very involved with our children that the society today there are people out there that would want hurt our kids. So consequently, why would they waM these kids to be supervised both indoors and outdoors. i do not understand this, ff there's more than one family there that has some children. You know children just as wail as - do. I have two wonderful girls but do they g:~t along all the time, no, they do fight. But we stUi have a commonality that they can call upon either my husband or myself and we can then deal wfth the stuation. Bu- :runny times they don't even have to do that because when we're right there and there is a disagreement/argument we can then come in and settle ft for them. Well, at least give our input because wp are trying to get our kids to be mature individuals. When you have children coming from abused homes they have seen probably some physical abuse. They have probably scar: the other parent hit their mom or hit them as well. Now, these kids have a lot of anger and bitterness inside. When they are now confronted with other children maybe they don't want to share toys. Whatever the case might be, are they also going to react violently? We can't say no they won't. i just feel that the one complete idea of being deleted that the children shall be supervised by an adult at all times, both indoors and outdoors. They want to delete that. I don't feel any of us as parents would ever want our children to be unsupervised. When they are in a situation where there could be some other children that might be violent or that could react in a violent manner. I would like to call your attention to the original statement made at the very end of this conditional use permit, ft said be it further resolve that the Cfty Council does htreby find and determine that the adoption of this resolution to give them the CUP is expressly predicated upon an applicants compliance with each and all of the conditions herein set forth. Should any such condtions or any part thereof be declared invalid or 4nenforceable by the final judgement of any court of competent jurisdiction then this resolution or any approvals herein contained shall be deemed null and void. I am just talking about one aspect about the kids not being supervised indoors and outdoors. If they are really here to help children, they need supervision especially kids who have problems. My kids need supervision. I am not going to let them alone. t have a 13 year old and a 16 year old. If my husband and I go away we make sure that there is some supervision of some kind. We either know that there will be a neighbor closeby. We also at many times ff we had to go out of town on business trips we ha~~e people staying in our home. We are not going to let our teenagers be alone and unsupervised and these children are under 12. Would you want your children unsupervised? If this is truly for the safety of these kids I do not feel in an~~ way could be deleted and they need to be in compliance with the things they said they wanted to do from the very get go and now they are going back on it. I really feel you should look at that statement at the eery end of the original permit that said ff they cannot satisfy these particular conditions that the whole thing will be null and void. Thank you. Chairman Masse: Thank you very much. Any further input from the public? Donna Currie: Hi, my name if Donna Currie. I reside at 7570 Martella Lane, in Anaheim. I just don't understand how you can be an organization helping people for so many years and still not know what you do and what you're doing and what you need. This organization has been making changes for over 3 years since day one. I would think that they would have enough time there to figure out what Is really needed especially ff they have been an organization for so many years. They have and they are stUl making changes. They changed their original application to you, the City, right from day one. They said they wanted all these things and within weeks later it was changed and that goes to as far as the mothers aruf their children and quite a few things. I am a little confused as to who are they and what are they doing. That's basically all I have. Thank you. Chairman Masse: Thank you. Any additional input? Gene Seacrest: Good afternoon Commissioners, my name is Gene Seacrest, 121 South Canyon Crest Dfire, Anaheim. A couple of years ago myself and a -;~mber of our neighbors stood in front of a panel comprised of quite a few of you people. Mr. Bristol, I do not think you were on ft at that time. Mr. 11-13-96 Page 8 Bostwick, you weren't either. Madam, I don't think you were there either, Julie. What we heard at that Planning Commission meeting took approximately 4'f. hours. I listened to a portion of that 434 hours ~ over the last couple of hours this after^~on. I heard the voices that I'm hearing again this afternoon. Painstakingly go through all the information of 4'f. hours worth of testimony from approximately 50 residents and they took in signatures of ~titions of almost 200. During t''at time the Commission made a series of decisions that forged a conditional use pemnit. You're unique In what we're doing in what you're redoing today. Perhaps v%i;at we have seen ovar the lest couple of years is a very well manipulated haft and switch situation. You're confronted with a ;,~oblem. You had a bu(Iding in a neighborhood that was being occupied by a business. Anahei~~i Municipal Gode very dearly defines business. Business does not have to be according to Anaheim Municipal Code one for profit, ft can be one for non-profs, which this is. Today you're here to reconsider this. This is, I believe, the third time they have had reconsiderations made and things taken away. During that first Commission hearing what we though was very bitter medicine was covered with layer and layer of sugar coating to make it more palatable. What we found now is layer by layer of that coating if coming o nt and the white trimveWe e today is the colored eiev2•' :s of the wood sided building with the gray pa don't have the new roof. We don't have the slump stone wall. What we have is basically repainting of what was there when they started. What t~~ey're trying to do now is take away what you thought was prudent two years ago. These conditions that are imposed at the end of this condtional use permft weren't plucked out of the sky, they were forged out of ti•:e minds of each one of the peoples that sat here. But those conditions were forged in error. I don't believe ~o. I believe they wore as a result of careful consideration. I relistened to the anguish that you folks went through at that last meeting a couple of years ago. Why you came up with each one of them. Why you said they needed supervision. Why you needed the wall around the property. Why you needed to limft the number of people. The entire basis of what you wanted to do is create a shelter for 7 mothers and 14 children. Today you are deciding whether or not that shelter will loose that identity. I meet with HUD yesterday, I asked them some pointed questions. I said who instituted this complaint? They said Lori Galloway. We didn't seek Lori Galloway out, she sought us. She wanted a way to use the government system to remove those conditions that were self imposed. I asked them also, she is asking for 22 people and it is suppose to be a shelter for abused women and their children or abused children and their mothers, excuse me, because you need a State 11ce~se if it is the other way around. I said is there a reason why she can't come back in and refile another application or another complaint and remove that (monitor) of abused children and their mothers. Yhey said no she can come back after todays hearing and say what we like to do is have a shelter for abused people any type of abuse because it is, in fact, too restrictive to have it abused children and their mothers. That means ff an abused father or a father comes in with abused childran he's not gained admittance HUD could requirs that. What we see is the ominous presence of HUD being used to whip at the City of Anaheim and into removing further conditions. You people are unique in the fact that, being a novice student of history, when I hear first amendment rights I think of Thomas Jefferson. i can't dig Thomas Jefferson up out of the grave and say Thomas when you wrote the rust amendment did you mead nude girls standing on a table? I don't think he meant that. He meant the ability to stand up against oppression and speak your peace. I did and I was hft with a lawsuit for 19 million dollars. I do not know what they will do now. The bottom line is you are Thomas Jefferson. You know what you meant when you imposed these conditions. You don't have to guess, you know you had the best interest of the children and the best interesi in the neighborhood. What we're doing now is stripping away that best interest. We're eroding that basis of protection not only for the inhabitance, the residence, but also the people who live around the shelter. We truly are the people that are being affected. Everyone else cycles in within 30 to 45 days. We're there daily. We have no rights because they're unenforceable. As I think Mrs. Ayres said, tt;e end of the resolution that was adopted ;vas very clear and it said ff any part of this resolution or any such condition or part thereof be declared irn~alid or unenforceable by the final judgement of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this resolution and any approval herein contained shall be deemed null and void. The City of Anaheim has chosen not to have what is perceived as a court of competent jurisdiction make a decision because they know ff a Federal court said any of these conditions are invalid then by their own Municipal Coda the entire conditional use permit would be declared invalid. I believe in the opinion of several attorneys I 11-13-96 Page 9 have talked to in the last couple of days is that when the Cfty wrote into the Municipal Code any court of competent jurisdiction they did not merely mean those courts of the Federal and the State level. Your are truly a court of competent jurisdiction. If you don't believe that you are the court of competent jurisdiction that created this document and was approved by the Mayor, Tom Daly, City of Anaheim. If you were not you would not have the ability to alter ft, ft would have to be altered from a Federal or State court. Only the City can alter ft. Onh) the City created ft. Only the City can destroy ft. If ft's not broke why fix ft. If we are fixing ft ft must be broken. Your Code is specffic, ff ft has to be fixed ft has to be voided. Thank you. Chairman Messe: Thank you Mr. Seacrest. Anybody else. Leo Deterding: My name is Leo Deterding. I live and own the property adjacent to The Eli Home, 4'h acres. I've lived there since 1953. I am on the other side of the fence here. I completely support The Eli Home. Back in May of 1994, i read an article in the paper which the first I heard about The Eli Home going to buy this house and make a shelter for abused children and their mothers. I thought that was a wonderful thing and I looked Into ft further, very precisely. When I found out what ft was all about I decided to help these people. When I went and talked to Lori Galloway and some other people of The Eli Home I found out they were a little pinched for money for buying this home. I thought I could do a good civic deed and help them out. 1 did not have enough money to do the whole thing so I went and borowed $65,000 from the bank and with that put another $60,000 with ft that I had and loaned these people $125,000 so that they could buy this house and use the money that they had to renovate ft and get ft going. I thought I was doing a wonderful thing in the closing years of my Iffe that would help the whole neighborhood and I still believe that I done the right thing. Two days after the... I took the first trust deed back on the house as collateral for my loan. Two days after that loan closed and ft became public knowledge by recording that I had loaned The Eli Home the money so they woulri be able to buy this home Gene Seacrest came over to my driveway at 104 Canyon Crest and cursed me up one side and down the other because I had helped these people buy this house. He told me that he was holding me personally responsible for them bringing niggers and low Iffe into his neighborhood and that he would spend the rest of his life trying to get even with me for doing this. Now that puts a little bft different light on the situation here. I think all of this flap about them not wanting The Eli Home here is because they are a bunch of bigots and racial hating people and they're afraid that there is going to be some people of color brought into this house for a few days and helped out. For some people who do not the same economic status that they do so that they can be helped a little bit. This ~s the bottom line of all of this flap about the objections thst these self-serving people have to The EIi Home. Thank you. Chairman Messe: Anybody else? Anything new and different. We are beginning to... Is there anybody else after this gentleman that wishes to speak? Just one after you sir. Okay, go right ahead. Ray Currie: My name is Ray Currie, I live at 7550 Martella Lane. I am speaking on behalf of John Currie at 7570, Frank Currie at 7580, Charles Currie at 7560 and Andy Currie who will he 7590 Martella Lane. Sir and Lady. This is the third time i have been here on this subject matter. ''the issue at hand here is the conditional use permit. in speaking our thoughts on the subject, me and my neighbors have been accused by the press and by these enterpreuers as being a supporter of child abuse. A slander, now a bigot, and a rich big wig. Sirs, I have kids and I care about the kids of others. Both of my brothers have kids. You set a guideline in the original CUP, the last paragraph clearly states that ff these conditions are not meet the CUP is void. I live by the rules. The Eli Home ~n_ live by the rules and you should be able to live by the rules that you put upon yourself. This is not... we are not meeting here on child abuse and support of child abuse, this is a land use issue. I know when we've had these meetings here before we had parades and pictures of all kinds of neat things, beat up kids and they have an issue. But the Issue here is the conditional use permft and all that other stuK should be set aside and just look at the rules and play by the rules. Thank you. Chairman Messe: Thank you Mr. Currie. I believe there was one more speaker. 11-13-96 Page 10 Rita Chastain: Hi, I'm Rita Chastain and I'm a volunteer at The E!i Home for 10 years. I just wanted to remind you... Chairman Messe: Give us your address if you wish to. Rita Chastain: Business address? I don't even know it. D~ I have to? Chairman Messe: No you do not have to. Rita Chastain: I'd rather not. I wanted to just remind you that this was brought on first of all by HUD. The EIl Home went to HUD on a question of discrimination ftom the neighbors discriminating The Eli Home not the Ciy discriminating The EIi Home. So the issues were brought to the City by HUD and not The EII Home. And all we're asking is... HUD's normal activity for our children. Fourth of July barbecue they're saying we can not be outside after 7:30. All we're saying is can we have a barbecue outside after 7:30. Not that they are going to be roaming the streets and I've scan these children for 1l; years and they are probably some of the most well behaved children because they are abused, they don't react in violence. If anything they are afraid, therefore they listen and they tend to be more passi~~e. They are some of the more well-behaved children than your average child. They are not unsupervised going out to play on a swing outside in the backyard. An 11 year old does not require an adult to be watching them. I know that these parents can not tell me that they're out there with their 11 year old for four hours while they play on swings, and we just wanted to remind you that this was brought on by HUD and not The EIi Home. Chairman Messe: Excuse me, there would be somebody... Rite Chastain: The mothers are out there watching them. Oh, there's 24-hour supervision and the mothers are out there watching them all the time. Chairman Messe: The supervision is not something that The EIi Home is against, is that right? Rita Chastain: Oh, no of course not. Supervision, like any mother supervises her child and if anything this home has more structure and guidelines and rules than your average home does. I know, you know you just don't because we do have children and so many families. There is more structure there than in most average American homes that I've seen and these children don't have... Chairmar. Messe: Would you tell us again what your posi~ion is with the...? Rita Chastain: I'm a volunteer. Chairman Messe: Anything else. Rita Chastain: No. Chairman Messe: Okay, thank you very much. I'll close the public hearing now and open it up for questions from the Commission to staff or to any of the people that tesC~ied. Commissioner Henninger: I would like to ask Selma a couple of questions. We've had a fair amount of history w(th this proposed CUP, end I know in paragraph 4 of the background advertised this CUP to permit a group home for abused children and their mothers, and I think chat's what's still proposed, but with rea!!y with the changes and condition we really don't have any way of controlling that anymore. I mean basically with the changes and conditions we have a group home for 22 people, and this is I think a general question, we do a number of types of different group homes and how do we, ar can we, 11-13-9fi Page 11 condition our CUP's to make sure that that happens. It seems in this case that HUD is telling us that we can't. Selma Mann: Well, ft is still a CUP for a home fur abused children and their mothers just as you would issue a CUP for a restaurant even ff you didn't put expressed conditions on ft that you would serve food. It would still be a CUP for abused children and their mothers. But I believe that general conditions that have to do with land use itself are appropriate at any instance, and I think that HUI~ was perceiving that there may be a problem here is where there were specific conditions that were child-centered and there are specific laws that prohibit discrimination against families. I think that this is the typs of thing that HUD was looking at when they were making the suggestions on the changes in conditions. Commissioner Henninger: When I remember the floor plans of the buildings ftom the original hearings and I felt that the interior structure of the building was appropriate for mothers with their children. I am not sure that I would feel ft was appropriate fcr 22 unrelated individuals and so are you saying that even though we don't have we're changing this language on the condition that just putting a sort of overall occupancy cap we still at the end of the year for instance, the CUP only lasts for a year at the end of the year ff the place were not being run for abused children with their mothers we could then not renew it. Or would we be prevented from not renewing it by HUD? Selma Mann: Well, it would be a conditional use permit for a period of one year for abused children and their mothers. If that's not the use it had been put to that would certainly be a relevant factor in .ietermining whether or not to Issue a new conditional use permit. This conditional use permit expires on its own terms and the applicants understand this and understood this at the public hearing one year from the time that they began operation. If there are issues in regard to impacts on the community, negaYrve impacts on the community, and there are conditions that are not being complied with then it would be a matter for the Planning Commission, and possibly the City Council ff the matter is appealed, to determine ff another CUP is appropriate or not. Obviously, it would upon what types of violations we're talking about here as well. Chairman Messe: To go on wfth this line of questioning we have a CUP for abused children and their mothers, we therefore recognize there are going to be children here. Is ft prejudicial then to say that these children should have supervision? I just... I don't follow these two. Selma Mann: Well, we don't have a Zoning Code requirement that in single-family homes... Chairman Messe: On any CUP there are conditions of operation. Selma Mann: I don't know, that is a difficult question to answer. You still have the condition that they need to operate in accordance with their proposed rules for operation. I mean that's still a condition that's in place although, of course, that is modified to the extent that you change the conditions which, of course, is relevant to a point that seems to have been repeatedly made about the language in the resolution that states that 'rf any court of competent jurisdiction eliminates any of the conditions that the CUP is null and void. That's expressly because if there is a court of competent jurisdiction that ellminates the conditions there will have peen no due process and no opportunity for the neighborhoods and other interested parties to have Input. That's distinguishable from the process that is routinely used by the Planning Commission to amend conditional use permfts or to amer-d of terminate condtional use permits where there is a Froblem. The amendment does not necessarily indicate that there is a problem. If ft is the Planning Commission's uecision to amend file conditional use permit by changing some of the conditions then those would become the conditions that would be subject to this last paragraph. If they were deleted by a court of competent jurisdiction then the conditional use permit would be null and void. 11-13-96 Page 12 Chairman Messe: Do you see a court of competent Jurisdiction removing a condition that requires children to be supervised? ~- Chairman Boen~tua in at the subject facility shall be upervi~ed pe iod hey are supervised just have it that the child Y 9 Chairman Messe: Yes. Any children staying at the subject facil'dy shall be supervised. 1 Commissioner Bristol: We have a situation here, and the gentleman is correct I was not on here before, but we have HUD involvement here. HUD involvement must be regulating policies and procedures for The Eii Home. They must be doing that, what do their regulations call for on a particular thing like this, in other words, The Eli Home must be having to conform to certain things that the HUD requires for them, I guess, to get compensated on a monthly or weekly or yearly basis for this, am I right? Commissioner Boydstun: Steve, I don't believe HUD regulates them. If I remember from the first hearing. Commissioner Bostwick: I don't think so either. Commissioner Boydstun: Maybe Lori can answer that or Jeff but I do not believe HUD... Commissioner Bristol: HUD has no regulations on this type of .... Commissioner Boydstun: This is a private facility. Jeff Farano: Jeff Farano, Farano & Kieviet, 2100 S. State College Blvd., Anaheim, representing Elf Home. Chairman Messe: Where were you when we called for somebody representing Eli Home? I've closed the public hearing already. Jeff Farano: Well, I wasn't here to speak but I've had a question. If you would like me to answer the question I can, otherwise, I had no intention of speaking. Chairman Messe: Alright. Jeff Farano: Basically, we do not have an opposition with the staff report, there was no reason to get up and speak to it. fiat on that particto anybody that provide housing IandtHUD is now enforcing what neither Federal regulations that app y they consider be to discriminatory practices against somebody that is providing housing for children. But it is not a regulatory as far as we had.... Chairman Messe: Jeff, would you speak to the supervision issue then. Jeff Farano: Pardon me? Chairman Messe: Would you speak to the supervision issue? Commissioner Boydstun: Would it be acceptable if we just shortened it and took the last part o; it out just said any children staying at the subject facility shall be supervised? 11-13-96 Page 13 Jeff orted b HUDrand wasildetermined between staff and City Attorney anid HUD to be in to condition supp Y that was acceptable to all. Commissioner Henninger: Actually we have a condition like that and that is one of the ones that is being recommended to be deleted. That's condition 22. Co wmhis i but alsoYif that is in here maybe the neighborsare goingfto feel better.ngs we've heard we kno , Jeff Farano: The home is supervised, there is an on-site manager that's part of the operation of the home itself, as far as whether the children have to be supervised inside, outside, how much supervision required, what age children need to be supervised. Those are all problems that HUD has a problem with imposing restrictions on child-centered conditions and The Eli Home has a concem to make sure that they operate a well run home and they will supervise their children. Whort what HUD and staff and the CUP doesn't really concem them they will have supervision. They supp City Attorney have all agreed upon is the language which is recommended in your staff report. Commissioner Henninger: Maybe the answer to that is just to say that the facil'dy shall be adequately supervised at all times, the whole facility. Chainnan Messe: Absolutely. Commissioner Bostwick: Yes, it doesn't relate it to just the children. Chairman Messe: And that is a land use problem. Selma, I really do think it is a land use problem. Selma Mann: One of the reasons that we also took a look at that condition was how it could be enforced a~~d certainly the way that the !anguage read before that the children's stay shall be supervised by an adult at all times whether indoors or outdoors in view of the very strong feeling in the neighborhood and the very heavy scrutiny that this operation is going to be under. We could just see a situation where somebody is supervising a child outside looking out a kitchen window and you can't see the fedWlere conditionls that were) ahem ble to enforcement by Code Enforcementwanted to ensure that the Chairm ~ the Bu Iding Departmient could talk for matters ofechanges t plans ff the eI have been anys ~~ I wonde changes in plans? Julie King: Julie King, Building Division Manager, and the plans have not been changed at this time. They are still the plans that were submitted and approved. Any changes that have been made are Just as-built changes in the field, minor things as the construction is taken place, but no changes to the actual drawings that were permitted back in 1995. Commissioner Henninger: The drawings in 1995 didn't have a file roof and didn't have wood siding? I think those are the things I heard in the testimony. Julie King: There was a Planning Commission hearing where there was substantial confom>ance determined and the plans were approved and permits issued after that hearing took place. Commissioner Henninger: I would like a more direct answer to my question. Was there a plan shown at the original Planning Commission hearing with a file roof and wood siding that, for whatever reasons, even N we approved and I don't recall that? 11-13-96 Page 14 Julie King: At the original hearing, yes, that is correct. There was a subsequent hearing in which substantial conformance for design was considered and since that time a roofing permit was Issued for a l composition class A roofing material. Commissioner Henninger: Okay, so we went through a process and we approved slight different plans than were shown at the original hearing. Julie King: I'm song I.... Commissioner Henninger: So we went through a process and we approved slight different plans than were shown at... Julie King: That is correct. Commissioner Bostwick: I have a question about the ADA requirements, Julie. How did they not come into that? Julie King: The ADA requirements did not come into effect because this was considered as a residential dwelling and, therefore, they do not apply. Chairman Messe: Thank you. Chairman Messe: As to the 6-foot high fencirg, staffs recommendations to change that to eliminate the children-based wording in there, is that correct, but to leave the separation of the play area and the panting lot. Karen Dudley: That is correct. The only thing that does is take away the child-centered language. It still maintains staff felt that there was a safety issue that we needed to address to separate the on-site _. parking area from any on-site play area. Similar to what we would do with a child care facility or something like that. Chairman Messe: Any other questions? Chairman Messe: Does someone want to try this one on for size? Commissioner Boydstun: I move for a CEQA Negative Declaration. Commissioner Bostwick: Second. Chairman Messe: There is a motion and a second for an approval of CEQA Negative Declaration which had been previously approved. All those in favor? Opposed? That has been carved. Commissioner Boydstun: I would move Conditional Use Permit No. 3680 as modified except item 22. That would read that the facility will be supervised. Chairman Messe: Adequately supervised at ail times. Chairman Messe: And the findings? Commissioner Boydstun: Are on page 6. Chairman Messe: Alright, this is a resolution and therefore a button vote. 11-13-9ti Page 15 Edie Harris: The resolution passed with 7 yes votes. Chairman Messe: Thank you very much. Selma Mann: Mr. Chairman the Planning Commission's action on this item wil! be considered final in 22 days unless an appeal to the City Council is fled within that time. The Planning Commission has determined that the previously approved ~'~gative Declaration is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for this prcject. The Planning Commission has further approved an amendment to Conditional Use Permft No. 3680, the conditions as stated in the staff report wfth the exception of condition no. 2?_ which rather than being deleted in its entirety will read, 'fhe facil'dy shall be adequately supervised at all times'. Chairman Messe: Thank you very much. Thank you for all the input from the neighborhood. ACTIJN: Determined that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serva as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Modi'r(ed Condition Nos. 3, 8 and 22 of Resolution No. 94R-243 to read as follows: "3. That occupancy of the structure shall be limited to twenty-two (22) persons, including one (1) live-in manager. 8. That a six (6) foot high wrought iron or other decorative-type fence shall be installed to provide a physical separation between the outdoor recreation/leisure/play area and the on-site parking area. 22. That the facility shall be adequately supervised at all times." Deleted Condition No. 18 in its entirely. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 55 minutes 11-13-96 Page t6 4a, r~QA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 4b. WAIVER OF CODE REO IRl1 EMENT Approved, in part 4c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3f37f1 Granted, In part OWNER: THRIFTY OIL #191, 10000 Lakewood Blvd., Downey, CA 90240 AGENT: DAVID ROSE, 10000 Lakewood Blvd., Downey, OA 90240 LOCATION: 2101 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD. Property is approximately 0.49 acre located at the southwest corner or Orangewood Avenue and Harbor Boulevard. To permit a gasoline service station and convenience market with sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption with waivers of (a) minimum number of parking spaces and (b) minimum landscaping required. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC96-118 I SR6385KP.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: No one spoke in opposition to subject request. One letter was received in opposition. Van Tarver, Senior Vice President with the Thrifty Oil Company, 10000 Lakewood Blvd., Downey, (`iA., stated since they acquired the property, over a year ago, Thrifty has taken a number of steps to cleanup the property, remove the graffiti, eliminate the weeds, paint the entire facility. They are very anxious to move forvrard with a state of the art facility. Photo boards were displayed to the Planning Commission as Mr. Tarver spoke and used a rendering overlay to present their proposal and show what the facility would look like after completion was also displayed. Mr. Tarver stated thought, they are not in the Anaheim Resort Area, they have voluntarily agreed to bring their facility into the standards of the Anaheim Resort Area. This location will be the most expensive facility their company has ever built. There are a few issues that remain to be resolved. The major issue at the facility are the two drivewa;s at Harbor Blvd. Harbor Blvd. at that corner is a major artery, where a majority of the traffic is and the facility there has to address the customers on Harbor Blvd. They think to limit the facil'dy to one driveway on Harbor Bivd. would make it very difficult for the property to do business. They requested to consider what they feel is the most critical part of this development and that is an exception to the recommendation of staff to allow them to have two driveways on Harbor Blvd. Mr. Tarver stated Condition No. 8, the signage issue, is acceptable to them. The landscaping conditions, although they ase voluntarily agreeing to bring their facility into the standards of the Anaheim Resort Area, with the exception of the 36" high berm and the spacing of Magnolia trees on Harbor Blvd. They believe there are two sign cant keys for their facility to be successful. One is their price sign because they do not advertise so their major advertising is the visibility of their sign at the facility. They propose to put a significant number of trees on Harbor Blvd. but bunched rather than spaced so people can see their facility. The sign ordinance is acceptable tc them they will bring down the current pole sign and bring their sign into compliance to the current zoning. But they would ask for an exception on the 36" high berm and the tree spaced out on Harbor Blvd. 11-13-96 Page 17 Mr. Tarver stated regarding Conditions No. 13 and 25 (employees must be a minimum of 21 years or accept thoselcoedftions ffthose areethe condiUo s~ hats aregequired of olther people ompany is willing to Mr. Tarver stated regarding Condition No. 27 (parking) they initially proposed 6 parking stalls. They commissioned a company to do a study/analysis of the parking conditions a.+, convenience stores'n Orange County similar in size and volume to the proposed development. They revised their plans ;aping for 14 parking stalls which they feel are adequate. Dick Wilson, Public Utilities Department, stated there is known soil contamination at the site, high levels but they do not know the extent of the contamination. Therefore, there were two original condtions later modified after meeting with Mr. Tavern, they were wanting to place on the conditional use permit. The first condition modified by the number of days from 60 to 90 days. The second condition was essentially modified completely to indicate within 180 from the day of this resolution, a soil remedlation plan shall be submitted to the Environment and Safety Division of the Public Utilities Department, within 90 days of receipt of approved the developer shall Install the approved solid remediation system. Mr. Wilson felt that those two conditions would be satisfactory to ensure that the site gets cleaned up in a adequate time frame. Commissioner Hennninger asked what the depth of the ground water is? hDow delep the ontaminationi go sabot the deepest of samples taken indi ate a 70-foot bufferozone.w Commissioner Henninger asked the depth of the contamination tested is 30 feet? Dick Wilson responded yes. He further stated they do not have a complete site accessment, at this time, yo they do not know ff the contamination goes deeper. Commissioner Boydstun stated corner counts of driveways too close to a corner have indicted there tends to be a problem with rear end collisions. A solution might be to close those two driveways and put one in between where the two are presently in order to have access on Harbor Blvd. but yet further from the corner? Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner, Traffic Engineering, responded yes, ff is acceptable and they will work with the applicant as far as the width of the driveway to make it easily accessible to vehicles. Mr. Yalda showed the applicant on the plans. Van Tarver stated the driveway could be moved somewhat. Mr. Tarver stated the safety issue addressed is also a concern. Their primary need for a second driveway is to allow people to come into the facility and go to these islands and exit, but to put the driveway in the middle would not allow people to get into the inner islands to fuel. They could move the fueling farilities somewhat south 'rf trey were able to reduce the parking by 1 or 2 so that the traffic flow would work smoothly on the property. Alfred Yalda stated they recommend to close that driveway and widen the driveway that is most southerly due to the safety concern for our citizens. There was further discussion about the proposed driveways near the corner and safety ramffictions. Van Tarver stated they are dedicating 5 feet of property which is making the property tighter. They feel their driveway proposal is criticar to their project. Commissioner Boydstun asked 'rf Orangewood is the street that is going to go over the freeway (n future plans? 11-13-96 Page 18 Alfred Yalda responded that was correct, the traffic will drastically increase because Ka' ~Ila Avenue is going to be shut down and Orangewood is going to go to I-5 Fwy. so that is another major concem. By closing that driveway they could provide additional parking spaces. Chairman Masse asked whether one of the requirements for more parking is because of the fast-food implications? Van Tarver explained it will be a traditional convenience store an extensive "drink center'. They will have 1, 2, or 3 employees at any particular time. Mr. Tarver stated they are going to spend close to $2 million and they will not do that project without the two driveways. 7irare was further discussion regarding comparison, of other existing locations in Anaheim. Commissioner Peraza asked Police Department ff there were any concerns regarding the beer and wine license? Tom Engle, Police Department, responded yes, they did have some concerns about the license in the area, however, after talking with his staff he felt most of those concerns can be alleviated on the actual conditions on their CUP and the conditions on their ABC license. Commissioner Peraza asked about the condition regarding age requirement of selling beer and wine. Tom Engle responded you can be 18 to serve beer and wine but you can not sell ft. It is a requirement at all service stations that are selling beer and wine. The person actually selling it behind the counter must be 21 years of age. Chairman Masse stated he understood the amount cf money that Thrifty is willing to put into the location but when you consider the public safety involved he can not see having a driveway that close to the intersection, it is a dangerous situation with the driveway in those positions. Commission Mayer asked ff there was a designated left turn arrow on Orangewood or is ft turning against traffic? Alfred Yalda responded whether or not there is a left turn arrow or not the concern still remains as the left turning movements. Especially at this location that has approximately 34,000 average daily traffic on Harbor Blvd. and also Oran~zewood is going to increase drastically when the Katella Avenue goes into construction. Tom Engle stated there is also a large pedestrian traffic at that street. The Police Department has concerns about the cars stopping there far pedestrians walking southbound on that side of tha street. Commissioner Mayan stated a letter was receh~ed frorn Mr. Shaw mentioning a school bus stop and asked 'rf there is a school bus stop? Alfred Yalda responded he was not aware of any schocl bus stop. Chairman Masse stated for the record, they did receive a letter frAm Mr. Shaw who is opposed to the development. Selma Mann stated she would like to clarify discussion of conditions revised by the Utilfties Department was a question that they could continue in operation while this is done. Yes, from the Utilities Department point of view, however, they do need to meet the requirements of the Fire Department, whatever remediation laws are in place as well. This is not to suggest that approval is the only one that would be required for continued operation. 11-13-96 Page 19 ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Approved, in part, Waiver of Code Requirement: waiver (a) was appraved for 15 parking spaces; and, waiver (b) was approved for 14 clustered trees. Granted, in part, Conditional Use PermR No. 3878 with the following added conditions: That within ninety (90) days from the date of this resolution, the developer shall submit to the Environment and Safety Division of the Public Utilities Department for review and approval, a complete delineation of the lateral and vertical extent of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination on the subject property. That within one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of this resolution, a s~i0 remediation plan shall be submitted to the Environment and Safety Division c,r the Public Utilities Department. Wfthin ninety (90) days of receipt of approval, the developer shall install the approved soil remediation system. That there shall be no audio advertisement of beer and/or wine sales in the pump dispensing area. That there shall be no on-site tables or seating areas on the premises. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION 71ME: 56 minutes 11 ••13-96 Page 20 I ~, ~~ ~ NEGATIVE DECLARATION Withdrawn f 5b. RECLASSIFICATION N0. 96-97-01 5c. WAIVER_OF CODE REQUIREMENT 5d. CONDITIONAL U5E PERMIT N0. 3879 OWNER: R6O38 W un&o nEAEe., AnaheimE CAM92801TRUST, AGENT: NERMIN SOLIMAN, 1157 N. Seville PI., Fullerton, CA 92833 LOCATION: 16roxiRatelin0 98 acrenocated on the south side of app Y Lincoln Avenue, approximately 530 feet west ~f the centerline of Loara Street. City-initiated request to reclassify subject property from the CH (Commercial, Heavy) to the CL (Commercial, Limited) zone. Petitioner requests to permit a 1,760 square-foot automotive sales facility with 18 display vehicles with waivers of requireu parking lot landscaping and interior setback adjacent to a residential zone. RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION P~,~. M CONDITIONAL U':E PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. -- gR6378KB.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: CARRIED that he Anaheim City Planning Commis on does hereby accept the appMcant'OsN request to wfthdraw subject petition. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: Th',s ftem was not discussed. Discussion took place regarding the budget for Co (19 mi~ tD) elopment Block Grant Funding Program. Commissioner Bostwick - Referred to memo from the City Manager's Office regarding redLiction in Code Enforcement f~mding by $112,600. Commissioner Henninger -Felt improvements have been made through Cc:ie Enforcement's Efforts. 11-13-96 Page 21 John Poole -That was for an additional officer in the western part of the city, plus inflation costs. Chairman Messe -Plus, the representative from the school district asked for an additional Code Enforcemerrt Office. C.an you continue making improvements with the current staffing? Johmu hylou can don Tried to get additional officer funded because theoworM ads just co time toting ease.nly s y Commissioner Henninger - $1 million for Community Improvement -suggested asking them to define a specific targ3t project and a rea! budget, and then come back with a cost sharing arrangement. He thought $300,000 should be tre total sum. He felt more Code Enforcement efforts in the Beach Boulevard area would be put to good use and he would support Code Enforcement's request. than wereonot spen$as alllocated in tholpast and it qs r utine$tha0t theyire-program CDBGrfunds and that is monies Commissioner Boydstun -Beach Boulevard people have worked very hard in that area and have been helping themselves and last year they pleaded for another Code Enforcement officer, and many feel the City has deserted them and that is one area that needs help the most. John Poole - $112,600 would actually take it to $98^,60G. He responded ff they requested $112,000 and got $100,000, he could work something out. Commissioner Henninger -Suggested some of the $700,000 from the recommended reduction for Community Improvement be applied toward the Loan and Grant Programs. $100,000 in the loan program and $50,000 in the Rebate Program. Commissioner Bostwick - Thought the Beach Boulevard Redevelopment Adoption process is Redevelopment's responsibility and that $200,000 designa~ed fur that should not be 81ock Grant funds. Commissioner Henninger -Did not want Beach Boulevard project delayed if all their funds arrt committed. He also asked ff graftrci abatement !s adequately funded? John Poole - 0. K. with graffiil abatement. (use volunteers, etc.) Commissioner Henninger -Historical preservation is not on the same level as other social programs and should not be using CDBG'runds. how much they have spent Dis yearthiWeta can his fa~ andtspent enough money and do not wan t o Scse that sk effort. Commissioner Mayer -Asked for more information from Community Development Department for next year's Block Grant funding review. 11-13-96 Page 22 MEETING ADJOURNED AT 3:58 P.M. TO THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSIAN MORNING WORK SESSION OF NOVEMBER 25, 1996 AT 11:00 A.M. Respectfully submitted, Ossie Edmundson, Senior Word Processing Operator Planning Department 11-13-96 Page 23 1 i