Loading...
Minutes-PC 1997/02/03SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA ANAHEIM CITY PLANNI G COMMISSION EETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 1997 9:30 A.M. • PRELIlVIlNARY PLAN REVIEW STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSION OF VARIOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES (AS REQUESTED BY PLANNING COMMISSION) STADIUM TOUR IlVIMEDIATELY FOLLOWING 1:30 P.M. • PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY PRESENT: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, MAYER, MESSE, PERAZA STAFF PRESENT: Selina Maim Mary McCloskey Greg I-Iastings Chery] Flores Linda Jolmson Karen Preeman Brune freeman Lisa Slipkovich Bill Sel] Jolut Lower Jack Blake Alfred Yalda Melanie Adams Margarita Solorio Ossie Edmondson Assistant City Attamey Deputy Planning Director _, _. Zoning Division Manager Senior Planner _ Senior Planner Associate Planner Code Enforcement Supervisor Executive Director -Community Development Treasury Manager Tratlic and Transportation Manager Contract Administrator Principal Transportation Planner Associate Civil Engineer Senior Secretary Senior Word Processiug Operator P:\DOCS\CLERICALWGENDAS WIINUTES WC20397.DOC 1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: A. a. EII2 NO. 313 (PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED) Approved b. FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 9G-09 -REVIEW AND Approved APPROVAL OF A FINAL SITE PLAN: Good Hope International, Inc., 1530 South Harbor Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92802, request for review and approval of a Final Site Plan, including floor plans, elevation plans, sign plans, .and landscape/hardscape plans, to renovate the facade of an existing hotel, including construction of a new portecochere, an addition to an existing detached gift shop, .and enhanced landscape and hardscape treatments. Property is located at 1530 South Harbor Boulevard (Carousel Inn and Suites). ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Henninger and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and does hereby find that the previously-certified EIR No. 313 is adequate [o serve as the required environmental documentation for Final Site Plan Review No. 96- 09. Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve Final Site Plan Review No. 96-09 (identified as Exhibits No. 1 through 5 on file in the Planning Department) on the basis that the Final Site Plan, including floor plans, elevation plans, sign plans, and landscape/hardscape plans, is in conformance with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2. SR6435KD. WP B. a. EIR NO. 313 (PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIEDI 'Approved b. FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 97-04 -REVIEW AND Approved APPROVAL OF A FINAL SITE PLAN: Makan Hospitality Inc., 7810 Telegraph Road, Commerce, CA 90040, request for review and approval of a Final Site Plan, including elevation plans and sign plans, to install nvo (2) wall-mounted signs. Property is located at 300 East Katella Way (Comfort Inn and Suites). ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a mofion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City _ Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and does hereby find that the previously-certified EIR No. 313 is adequate [o serve as the required environmental documentation for Final Site Plan Review No. 97- 04. Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boshvick and MOTION CARRIED [hat the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve Final Sile Plan Review No. 47-04 (identified as Exhibits No. I through 4 on File in the Planning Department) on the basis drat the Final Site Plan is in conformance with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2. 02-03-97 Page 2 C. a. EIR NO. 313 (PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED) Approved b. FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 97-OS -REVIEW AND APPROVAL Approved OF A FINAL SITE PLAN: The Walter Companies, 9150 Wilshire Blvd, #245, Beverly Hills, CA 90210, xeques[ for review and approval of a Final Site Plan, including elevation plans and sign plans, to install a neon accent band along the roof line of tluee exisflng hotel structures and to install three (3)wall-mounted signs. Properiy is located at 1850 South Harbor Boulevazd (Holiday Inn to be renamed "Radisson Hotel"). ACTION: Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boshvick and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and does hereby find that the previously-certified EIR No. 313 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for Final Site Plan Review No. 97-05. Commissioner Bristol offered a moflon, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve Final Si[e Plan Review No. 97-05 (identified as Exhibits No. 1 through 8 on file in the Planning Department) based upon a finding that the Final Site Plan is in conformance with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2. SR6456KD. WP D. a. b. EII2 NO. 313 (PREVIOUSLY-CERTB+IED) Approved FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 97-02 -REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF Approved, in A FINAL SITE PLAN: City initiated, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, part Anaheim, CA 92805, request for review and approval of a Final Site Plan, including a site plan, floor plans, elevation plans, and landscape plans, to expand the Anaheim Convention Center. Properiy is located a[ 800 Wes[ Ka[ella Avenue (Anaheim Convention Center). ACTION: Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and does hereby find that the previously certified EIR Np. 313 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for Final Site Plan Review No. 97-02. Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby partially approve the Final Site Plan (specifically the revised location of- Convention Way, not it's width), as being in conformance with ttte Anaheim _. Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2; and, further, that the balance of the Final Site Plan, including the following additional components, shall come back before the _ Planning Commission as a Report and Recommendation item for review and approval: I. Proposed tram circulation; 2. Plans showing improvements to the Car Park 1 parking structure handicapped ramp; 3. Plans showing proposed handicapped parking locations; 4. Plans showing more details about the drop-off areas; and AP7008LJ. WP 5. Detailed pedestrian way plans, 02-03-97 Page 3 DISCUSSION Linda Johnson, Senior Planner, Planning Department, stated this is a request for Final Site Plan approval to expand the Anaheim Convention Center. I[ would include new exhibit halls, enhancement of new existing exhibit halls, additional meeting rooms, the continuous atrium area to accommodate pre-function and registration area and multi-purpose room and service areas. Also proposed are associated improvements to Convention Way on-site of [he parking facilities in landscaping. Ms. Johnson stated staff has reviewed the plans for conformance with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan PR District and has found that the plans are in conformance with the zoning requirements. The one area that does need to be refined, however, the Katella drop-off area. The plan identifies an on-site drop-off area which will be refined to be in conformance with the landscaped program for Katella Avenue which will include an 8- foot parkway next to the street, an 8-foot sidewalk and then an additional 8-foot parkway area and staff would recommend that the drop-off area will be in a general location when the final plans are drawn. The final design will be in conformance with the Special Plan. Staff has also taken a look a[ the Environmental documentation and the EIR was certified in connection with the approval of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and it did allow far approximately 358,000 of Convention Center expansion azea. This proposal results in approximately 138,586 sq. ft. of traffic generating square footage and staff does find the previously certited EIR is adequate to serve the environmental documentation for this proposal. Carl Johnson, Project Architect with HOK, stated the expansion is [o meet the requirements of the Convention Center to meet the demand for an exhibition space and meeting room space. Level I will accommodate additional expansion of the exhibition hall and pre-function space and regisfration space. Level 2 expansion will accommodate approximately 160,000 sq. ft. of meeting room space in combination with Level 3 meeting room space. Level 3 amulti-purpose meeflng room and an expansion of administration offices. The desire was [o establish a new identity establishing [his with a curtain wall eastern exposure facade that will face the Hilton and the Marion Hotel. They have propose the curtain wall as a glazing that will modulate behveen blue-green and cleaz. They aze looking to establish a transparency between the interior and exterior. The development of the site was to de-emphasize roadway Vafiic and emphasize public access to create a public garden to enhance the Convention Center in relationship to the hotel Vai$c and to all conventioneers coming to the site. The access has been changed to Convention Center in that they are focusing their main flow of traffic through Convention Way to a central turnaround which will lead to the front of the build and allow for bus drop-off and vehiculaz through traffic to access Caz Park 4. The Center Drive is proposed to be removed, presently it is fed from Katella and lead down from through the site all the way across the front of the present building and to Wes[ Street. Due to the emphasis of the public garden aspect of the project they have proposed to lead that portion of access and divert any access to Car Park 1 directly through their drop-off off Katella and develop a series of stacking lanes that would feed into Car Park 1. The main access is off of Katella through the revision of Convention Way and also off of West SVeet into the Car Park. Commissioner Henninger stated he would like ro see the detailed plans of the pedestrian azea, where [he streetis to be closed. Some elevations of how the landscape architecture will look like and hbw'the side wall of the Hilton and the parking structure would be screened. Carl Johnson responded he has elevations from their landscape architect that show that and also clarification on the Katella parkway. The drawing shows proliferafion of palms and it is difficult from the line drawing to find the 8-foot designation for the parkway and the 8-foot walkway but i[ is there and he colored it in another plan [o make it more easily discernible. Coupled with that drawing and the elevations that he had of the Hilton and the Marriott from the public garden area he offered to demonsVation the screening of the landscape plans that they have on the board. Commissioner Mayer asked if there has been an inclusion for public art element 02-03-97 Page 4 Carl Johnson responded that presently the package that he presented is mainly focused on the exterior. Although within the landscape portion of the project they have delineated a series of seating azeas which use the motif of Indian drawings to establish the image of a bird and the sun. Although that is no[ a part of the public art program, it is starting to identify, in the exterior, elements that are dealing with an art imagery. It has been determined with the project designers that they focus the art program on the interior of the space. There is a back wall of their "pre-function" and registration area that continues from the first floor to the third floor that has been identified as the wall to focus public art. Currently, they are in progress with their designers and their sign graphic consultant and the City to develop a specific art program to involve specific artist to develop proposals on how to address this specific area within the structure to receive art. Commissioner Mayer asked whether the exterior seating was an architectural element. Carl Johnson responded the architectural wall is just an element but the concept was to integrate the art into the azchitecture and at this stage of the proposal they do not have specific artist aligned but the intent is to develop the concept for the artist [o develop specific art related pieces to the interior and specifically [o the "canyon" wall. They are considering a variety of materials. Carl Iohnson walked the elevation drmving to the Planning Commission for their review and discussion. Carl Johnson continued by stating in [he development of the public garden they do displace a centrally located parking lot that accommodates 9 handicapped spaces. They feel that they can make up the difference in that area by locating the handicapped parking spaces in the Car Park 1 which is currently called the "V1P" parking area which could be easily accessed. Since the public garden area will be developed, the ramp way that is presently there could be renovated and developed as a handicapped ramp way to enter into the public garden from Car Park 1 area. This would put someone right across from the northern entry to the Convention Center expansion. So this was their proposal for making up the difference there and then adding additional handicapped parking spaces to Car Park 1. Chairman Messe asked whether they could condition the approval of these site plans on actual plans showing that to be accomplished. Carl Johnson responded correct. Commissioner Bostwick asked if we have entered into negotiations with Marriott [o obtain their property. Carl Johnson responded no they have not. They are proceeding with a plan to coordinate staking out the encroachment on their land. Mr. Johnson stated he spoke with the officials from Marriott to have that done and have their civil engineer proceed in that and then have the appraisers go ahead with evaluating that property and having the negotiation take place from that point on. Commissioner Bostwick stated since we are taking away part of their parking, would that create a non- conforming use out of the Marriott Hotel parking area. John-Lower, Traffic/Transportation Manager, Public Works, stated they did have an opportunity to research with the Planning Department the existing Marriott parking and they currently have a waiver of code for 2,130 spaces, they currently provide 1,602. Approximately 30 spaces would be lost with the- proposed plan, a key consideration in regards [o the Anaheim Resort Area. The Convention Super Block was entitled to build to trallic generating. An intensity of 125 rooms per acre with the understanding that the traffic generated by that development be reduced back to the equivalent to 100 rooms per acre. Less trips generated by the types of conventions booked. Relying more on pedestrian traffic from the people staying at area hotels as well as aggressive shuttle operation between outline hotels and the Convention Center and provision for that shuttle service on-site a[ the Convention Center is seen as a key for reducing the actual parking demand. Commissioner Mayer asked if the "dog leg" road area is going to stay the same width as it is now. John Lower responded as it is now i[ will no[ be affected and stays as is. 02-03-97 Page 5 Commissioner Mayer asked whether they expected additional traffic as it is being re-routed away from that access across from Convention Way. John Lower responded they anticipate additional pazking at the intersection of Katella and West and also at West and Convention Way. Chairman Messe asked whether cars [raveling eastward from the west wanting [o get into that area, won't they take "dog leg" rather than to go all the way to Harbor and around Convenflon Way. ` John Lower responded they have a changeable message sign on Katella located west of West SVee[ and that was put there intentionally to direct traffic from the west to the Convention Center to make a right turn on Wes[ and enter Convention Way on Car Park 3 area. Caz Park 3 is expected to be just a assessable to the Convention Center as the other car parks because of the tram service to be provided by the Convention Center. Commissioner Messe asked to here more about the tram service Carl Johnson responded as it has been discussed there is a proposal down the road to provide a tram service either off-site and on-site. The concept being if [here are some remote parking areas that need connecting and bring people closer into the Convention Center that would be one role for the tram service [o connect these outlining parking areas and bring conventioneers from the pazking areas [o points of access along Katella or along Convention Way. The other approach is interior and would allow for drop- offs along the front of the building. They have the fire lane or central promenade and these would be proposed as small scaled tram drop-otf points. Carl Johnson clarified, for Chairman Messe, that for the outlining parking areas the tram would come and drop people off at Katella, then people would get on another smaller version of [he tram which would then go up past the arena towards the gate entrance. The integration of the concept of tram has not been clearly defined or developed within their site plan. Chairman Messe asked questioned whether this wouldn't be an very important element of [he master plan for the Convention Center to have in place and appeared this was not being addressed. Carl Johnson responded in terms of the master plans he wanted [o focus on this portion of the development and not quite sure how the overall master plan and the tram system would be developed. This being the first step of the expansion , he knows there is a desire to bring people in closer to the Convention Center and in terms of their development on this phase of the project they were not initially involved in providing for a tram access that has come up conceptually as an added feature to this plan as it is shown. Commissioner Mayer stated traditionally the users for such a service as families with several small children or elderly people that are not handicapped but have access limitations and can not walk a long way and if they are going to be transferring from one tram to another are there going to be some sort-of shelters for them to wait. John Lower stated these are all valid issue which will be addressed by Bartin Ashman the firm doing the traffic work for the Convention Center study. It is not complete and therefore do not have all the answer available at [his time. The tram will be similaz in operation to the Disneyland tram. Keep in mind these are relatively wide walkways. He anticipates the Bartin-Ashman study will call out striping needs. Chairman Messe asked how soon will that study be finalized. Linda Johnson responded Jack Plake from Public Works can discuss the phasing schedule in more detail. Her understanding was [hat the first work needs to occur in Convention Way itself of relocate some of [he infras[mcture. Following that work they would start on the expansion of the halls. 02-03-97 Page 6 Commissioner Henninger stated not seen on the plan regarding a [ram way is a designated lane that the tram would use. Commissioner Bostwick stated and also not seen on the plan is a turnaround and drop-off location for the tram. Chairman Messe stated his concern before approving the site plan there should be some understanding that [here will be tram service in that area. John Lower stated they aze approximately 4 to 6 weeks away from the completion of the tram study Commissioner Henninger asked whether they could wait until the tram study is completed. Jack Plake, Engineering Contract Administrator, Public Works Department, stated he is in charge of administrating Engineering agreements and constmction contracts. At this point, they aze asking for their approval of the site plan, as i[ is today, in order that they can move forward with their first package of bidding. They do understand Commission's concern for this tram. It is something they have been discussing in their design meetings. The Convention Center staff is going to have to be the staff that will actually put that plan together with the consultants and buy off on it to ease their operational concerns. Bu[ a[ this point they need approval on this site plan today in order to allow them to move forward on their first package which considers the relocation of some of [he utilities on Convention Way. Commissioner Henninger asked why they need approval of this to relocate utilities. Jack Plake responded that they are attempting to provide for their design [o be completed and [heir project bid and under construction by September of this yeaz and it is critical that they move forwazd with this planned construction phasing. Commissioner Henninger stated they could move forward with the reallocations without the approval. Jack Plake responded that is correct but their future designs are going to be predicated upon the approval today of the reallocations. Commissioner Henninger stated there appears [o be uncertainly concerning details of the tram which could very easily amend the current plan, along with the concerns about the reallocations and suggested it might be better to wait until they have their tmm study completed. Jack Plake stated he understood their concern. Cazl Johnson stated the tram study would in no way result in a change of the building dimensions and locations. The tram study is to operate around that on existing or to be existing pavement. Chairman Messe stated what Mr. Johnson indicated is that the tram study wiU in no way change the site plan. Carl Johnson responded the building aspects. Not in terms of location but all you would see added if another layer on to this plan would be the striping and the demarcation of the passenger loading and drop- off areas for [he tram. Commissioner Mayer stated she felt uncomfortable with [his because they have spent so much limo on [he Disney Resort talking about being a destinaflon city, inviting pedestrian promenade. I[ appeazs we are attempting [o be user friendly with a pedestrian atmosphere. The missing link here is the element of moving them around once we get them. We have a reciprocal parking going on with Disney on some of our Convention Center uses. It appears we do not know how we are going to get them out of their cazs and become pedestrians ufllizing these trams, but this is a very important element to whole user friendly component. 02-03-97 Page 7 Chairman Messe stated his concern is that they are being asked to approve the site plan which does not show any of that element in it. Linda Johnson stated one alternative might be to approve the expansion to the buildings itself and the change to Convention Way because that is part of today approval, the southerly portion of Convention Way and then ask for the tram plan to come back as well as the whole look along that pedestrian espinode there. ff there are any changes to the building that is made in determining that tmm location then that could also come back at that same time. In reviewing the schedule by Public Works, the reason they need to get some clearance on the final site plan on the southerly portion next to Convention Way is that along with this final site plan approval is a determination that this work is in conformance with the previously certified EIR In affect, the final site plan approval would be a limited approval with certain items to come back to the Commission. Chairman Messe stated there are a leas[ two items to come back to Commission which are the tram way circulation element of this glan, the ramping and pazking for handicapped visitors. The ramping is very steep and he knows that is out of the essenfial azea but that has got be part of the overall final plan. Commissioner Henninger stated during the discussion of the circulation, he did not feel comfortable concerning the drop-off areas and how they work, including the tram circulation and the ramp. Perhaps a little mare detail as to how the pedestrian way would look like. He still had no[ heard conclusive argument. Generally reallocations are not something that they approve and he thought that could go forward now. Commissioner Mayer stated she was no[ comfortable with the drop-off areas and pedestrian flow and accessing. I[ needs a more thought. Commissioner Messe stated with certain reallocations of utilities etc. have to be started and can not be started without some sort of site plan approval. Cormnissioner Henninger made a motion that they approve this site plan only in so far as is needed to allow the reallocations to commence and asked when the other elements could be brought back to Commission. Carl Johnson responded in four to six weeks. Mr. Johnson stated the items that they aze looking for is a change of the Katella configuration to confirm with the Smart Street plan which is amended to align with the Anaheim Resort Area Plan, that is one item. The handicapped parking and access from Caz Park 1 and a proposal of a pathway identifying the tram circulation from within the facility. Commissioner Henninger stated plus a more detailed look at the drop-off area, how the drop-off area works both at Katella and Convention Way. Commissioner Bristol stated he had a concern regarding the left-hand [urn off of Katella. Impacflng Katella coming off of the street with a tram which he had not heard anything about that, going from one overflow parking lot to the other and how that would work with Katella. --- Commissioner Henninger stated he thought there was support to bean aerial crossing there. Commissioner Bostwick stated they were going to slide the signal forward from where it is at now to the crossing. Need to show all of that in the Smart Street design [hat was discussed. Iohn Lower stated they would be glad to come back at the same time that they have the tram study with that information but just to clarify that the Disney tram is going stay on the Disney side. People would get out and walk across the relocated signal. So they are crossing at an signalized intersection and then another tram waits a[ the Convention Center. Therefore, there will be no tram crossing of Katella. Chairman Messe asked if that mean[ that handicapped people that pazk in the Disneyland parking lo[ are going to be crossing Katella. 02-03-97 Page 8 (Revised) John Lower responded that meant handicapped people do cross a[ signalized intersections throughout the City. Handicapped people will be encouraged to use the handicapped pazMng facilities that we are going to create on the Convention Center site. Chairman Messe asked whether that would be done through the electronic sign boazd and things of [hat nature. John Lower stated there aze a number of ways that aze being explored with the Convention Center staff as they book events to get the word out on whether handicapped pazking is most convenient. Comrission Henninger asked whether they could slate what reallocalions are being discussed. Jack Plake stated they intend to relocate a major storm drain about 60 inches in diameter on Convention Way as it travels easterly and then turns and goes north easterly all the way through Convention Way access. They have to have those utilities relocated prior to making room for the expansion of Exhibit Halls D and E. Once those reallocations are completed they are then allowed to provide for the expansion. Commissioner Henninger made a moflon that the reallocations are consistent with the specific plan and asked if that was the appropriate motion. Selma Mann responded what is actually before Commission is a review and approval of the fmal site plan. There are aspects of it that they could approve. Commissioner Henninger stated the aspect that they would like to approve is the reelections since which needs to go forward,. the revised location of the storm drain and related ufllities. Selma Mann stated i[ is her understanding that is related to the revised configuration of Convention Way so that it is part and parcel of that. The approval should be more specific, possibly Planning or Public Works could help to define what aspects of the site plan that are required in order to proceed with the relocation and then to have [he balance of the informaflon needed be brought back to Commission when the study is complete. Commissioner Henninger stated utilities do not have to be under a street, many times the utilities aze in easements. He thought they could safely approved the utilities reallocations and hold off on the rest until they get those issued worked out. Chairman Messe asked if they could approve the site plan as far as the relocation of Convention Center Way. Commissioner Henninger stated what happens if they need that tram travel lane two ways and that ends up being 25 feet wide and it has to fit in there and there is no[ room for it under the present plan. Carl Johnson stated the tram issue may be dominating the discussion but the drop-off areas along the front of the building stem from the central point of the turnaround and they are trying to supplement thaf with other points to the north of that. The main emphasis of dropping off and getflng to the Convenflon Center is from Katella from the central turnaround where they have provisions for the bus drop-off lane from other remote hotels for tram vehicles to come in. Use that lane in front of the center portion of the Convention Center to proceed south along Hall B, C, D & E. So they are covering most of the Convention Center drop-off from the turnaround down to the south. They do no[ wan[ to extend any further than the existing points of drop-off now but they do want to emphasize that the provisions along Convention Way from the turnaround down to the south are mainly for bus drop-off and For tram or other vehicle drop-offs. Mr. Johnson referenced the central turnaround as the central point of entry and drop-off, anywhere along that point pedestrians can enter the center of the building and then access Hall A, B, C, or D in either direction. The dependency on coming in from the north is fairly minor compared to the main points of access along the center portion. Their focal point is getting people into the center point and follow- through to the one-way drop off lane and vehicular path [hat proceeds south from he central turnoff. Chairman Messe asked what percentage of visitors did they foresee as coming to that turnaround azea. 02-03-97 Page 9 Carl Johnson responded appro.~imately 80% Commissioner Mayer stated she still had some real concerns about reciprocal agreements with Disney parking which is going to drop people on the other side of Katella, negotiations with the Marriott, vehicle and pedestrian access changes and removing handicapped parking and she would like more information. Commissioner Henninger stated there was much emphasis placed on the concept of "pedestrian friendly" and thereby reduce the traffic generation of these uses and thereby reduce the amount of parking need. This is going to take a serious commitment to accomplish this and he does not believe they have followed through on it. Mary McCloskey, Deputy Planning Director, Planning Department, stated she spoke with the Public Works staff and one alternative to consider might be to look at the environmental documentation and [he final site plan clearance for at least that portion of Convention Way coming off of West Street running to the east and northerly to the existing Convention Way that borders the Marriott Hotel. If that segment appears to be appropriate then you could do the environmental documentation on that as well as clear all of the lines (infrastructure that goes with that alignment) and have that cleared and that would enable them to move fonvazd with some of the relocation work that needs to occur as quickly as passible. Then ask as soon as they have the other information it would come back as a separate review and approval. Chairman Messe stated that would be as he had recommended. Commissioner Henninger offered a motion finding that the revised location of Convention Way and up to the existing location, find that location but not the width of i[, in conformance with the specific plan. Commissioner Henninger offered a motion of consistency with the previously certified the EIR No. 313. Commissioner Henninger offered a motion approving the limited new location of Convention Way without approving its width. Chairman Messe stated [he understanding is that everything else would be brought back to Commission when it is ready from 4 to 6 weeks. Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, City Attorney's Office, stated the Planning Commission has determined that the Environmental Impact Report No. 313 is adequate to service as [he environmental documentation for the project. The Planning Commission further determined that [he site plan in regards to the relocation of Convention Way, no[ necessarily it's width, is approved. The balance of the site plan elements are to be returned to Commission at a later date. 02-03-97 Page 10 2a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Withdrawn 2b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. G40 {READVERTISED) OWNER; FRED HP.TAMI, 23891 Bridger Road, Lake Forest, CA 92630 AGENT: IIARRY ERICSON, 3328 Alabama Circle, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 LOCATION: 1771 South Brookhurst Street. Property is approximately 0.32 acre located at the northwest corner of ICatella Avenue and Brookhurst Street. To permit two (2) gasoline pump island canopies for apreviously-approved automobile service station with waiver of minimum structural setback. Continued from the Planning Commission meetings of December 9, 1996 and January 6, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR6458JK. WP ® a e o OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby accept the petitioner's request to withdraw subject proposal. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 02-03-97 Page 11 3a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 3b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTS Continued [o 3c CONDTTIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3908 February 19, 1997 OWNER: W.C.B. 99 L]MITED PARTNERSI-IIP, 450 Newport Center Drive, #304, Newport Beach, CA 92660 AGENT: MICHAEL GALLEN (E.S.A.), 2525 Cherry Avenue, Signal Hill, CA 90806 LOCATION: 120-130 North Riverview Drive. Property is approximately 2.45 acres located at the northeast corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Riverview Drive. To permit a three story, 42-foot high, 122-unit hotel with waivers of permitted freestanding sign, permitted wall signs, minimum number of parking spaces and minimum structural setback adjacent to freeways and scenic highways. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR6441KB. WP „FOLLOWING l5%ASUMMARY-_OF,;,THE`~PL'ANNING;COMMISSION ACTION." ;;' `; ',, OPPOSITION: 2 people spoke with concerns. Mazcy Adler, 913 North Salida Del Sol, AZ 85224, Real Estate Manager with Extended Stay America, stated she does several territories throughout the United State including Southern California. She stated the concept "Extended Stay America". The company was found about a year and a half ago. They went public and had a public offering in December 1995 and did very well in that public offering. Since then they currenlly have 50 hotels across the country that are open, another 50 hotels that are under constmc[ion and about 105 different properties that they currently have under contract. They aze expecting by the end of the first quarter the number of openings to increase to almost 100. Part of the reason why [he concept was found is that in their research they realized there was a large mazke[ for the business travelers [ha[ were looking for something they could utilize that would provide them with a safe, comfortable environment where they could stay for extended periods of time that would be at a certain value. So that is how the whole concept of "Extended Stay America" evolved. Ms. Adler stated they just completed a Gallop poll where they found that 80% of all of their guests were staying with them far business purposes. 93% of the guest were [here for business purposes, whether it be personal orcorporate. 80% of their customers were extremely or very satisfied and were likely to recommend someone else to use the facility. They selected the Anaheim Hil(s site in order to be in close proximity to business. Easy access and freeway visibility is good for identity. They look for places [ha[ aze very safe and very comfortable. They add a lot of landscaping and make the rooms nice and comfortable. They are pleased that staff has recommended approval of their CUP, however, they do have a few concerns which Mike Gallen will elaborate. Mike Gallen, Construction Manager with Extended Stay America, 2525 Cherry Avenue, Signal Hill, CA 90806. Mr. Gallen stated they have been working with City staff for a number of months now. The elevations do address a number of the concerns which City staff had. They have added a number of things to the building to make a pleasing appearance. They have added a lo[ of landscape to the site, going beyond the requirements of the Scenic Corridor. Mr. Gallen stated they have a few concerns with some conditions: 1. Condition No. 19 - "Every occupied guest room shall be provided with daily maid service". They provide twice weekly towel service and weekly maid service and feel [hat is sufficient for the extended stay 02-03-97 Page 12 value type clients. For those who check in on a daily basis they do provide daily maid service at a slightly higher rate. But for their weekly guest, based on their data, a large portion of their clients, they do no[ provide that service because the they are looking for that price break. It would change the whole strategy of their company if they had [o go in and provide daily maid service. 2. Condition No. 31 - "A 3-foot high landscape berm shall be installed and maintained in the landscaped setback azea adjacent to Riverview Drive'. To the extent possible they can comply with that condition but he believed that the grades that are going to be along Riverview Drive would slope down from the street. So he did not know whether it would be possible to slope down 3 to 5 feet and then slope back up 3 fee[. 3. Condition No. 32 - "That in the event the Police Chief determines the need for an on-site security guard, a licensed uniformed security guard, as approved by the Police Chief, be provided". He has provided some additional language to clarify that condition and in speaking with staff he did not believe the intent was more than a stop gap measure. Should at some time in the future a problem situation does arise or consistently occur at the site then that would be provided at that point. As far as their corporate policy is concerned, they are willing to step forward and admit they have a problem onsi[e and need to do something about it. Mr Gallen read their proposed revision as follows: "In the even[ the Police Chief determines the need for an onsite security guard, the Police Chief may make such request in writing setting specific reasons and costs for such request that the owner and the property manager provide licensed uniformed security guard upon the premises beriveen the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 3:00 a:m. each day of the week specifically to provide security for hotel employees and guests and to discourage vandalism and/or trespassing or loitering upon subject property. Furthermore, that the owner/property management shall be given the opportunity to challenge such written request of the Police Chief, to the Planning Commission if the owner and/or the property management feels the request is unwarranted and that the concerns of the Police Chief might be mitigated by another means. The owner and/or properly management shall be given 30 days from the date of written receipt of the request from the Police Chief [o provide the security guazd or submit appeal to the Planning Commission." 4. Condition No. 34 - "That subject motel shall be reviewed in three (3) years by the Planning Commission as a Report and Recommendation item". Mr. Gallen reviewed a copy of the Municipal Code and they do not believe that this is being proposed as an additional condition above and beyond the Code but merely stating to them what the Code already gives them the power to so. The only clarification they would like to make is that it would be to the extend that it is permitted through the Municipal Code so they aze not revisiting and opening new items. Jean Williams, a resident across the street on Ambenvood, stated her window is the only window in the entire tract that faces the front of the hotel. She would like more information in reference to the signage. There are three or four different areas. Page 9 refers to i[. Another concern is the parking. They are asking for a variance in [lre number of parking spaces since [here is no parking anywhere on the street both in the residence area and on Santa Ana Canyon Road or Riverview. The pole and signage lighting is another concern, They are not clear on any of the documentation that she has reviewed exactly what kind of signs wilt be used. Finally, she did not feel it is an appropriate site for a motel and did not feel they aze compatible to the Marriott Hotel. The proposal states the rental of a room would be $279 a week, however, the Marriott rents their rooms a[ low corporate rate of $400 a week, which is a drastic difference. She would like [o see some guarantees that i[ not going to be a inexpensive motel coming in to the Anaheim Hills area. Mike Gallen responded as follows: I. signage -The conditions of approval state that the majority of [he sign will be lit and that the letters will be the only thing lit. Their signage does not emit very much light. He does not feel there is a tremendous amount of light coming off of the sign. 2. Parking -They have conducted a parking analysis for the site which has been approved by the City Traffic Engineer. It examined a number of other hotels which have been previously approved throughout the City of Anaheim and conducted an independent analysis of those hotels and the parking that they utilize compared to what is provided. The report submitted and approved stated, based on what is being utilized by other residents and in other similar types of hotels throughout the City tltat the parking they are providing is sufficient. 02-03-97 Page 13 3. Lighting - In the Conditions of Approval there is a restriction on the height of the lights which he thought is 12 fee[ and that they shall be shielded from view from the local residents. They have done a site line study on the project there which shows that their site is quite a bit lower than the adjacent residents and, therefore, should not be any light shining down on the properties. 4. Maintenance -They look upon themselves more as a hotel than a motel type of facility. For example, their property will have interior corridors with security measures. They have a national reputa8oh to uphold and allowing any of their properties to slip below a grade A quality hotel facility is not acceptable to them. Conditions provide for regular maintenance, removal of graffiti, etc. Paul Fuller, resident at 8417 East Ambenvood, stated he understands that the azea across from their neighborhood was designated commercial property but it does not designate it as a property where they can have additional residents. Mr. Fuller felt it is really going to impinge upon his privacy as well causing additional Vaffic. Mike Gallen responded as follows: 1. Traffic -The site has been sitting vacant for quite a long time. The property and part of the Conditions of Approval addresses the fact that it is currently entitled fora 3-story, 70,000-foot office building which would generate a tremendous amount more traffic than their proposal. Their site is under the normal trigger of 100 trips and their hotel use is under that. 2. Lighting impacts -The grade of Ambenvood Drive is a leas[ 30 feet, the street level is at least 30 fee[ above their finished pad azea and the roof of their hotel is just slightly higher than the ground floor of most of those residents. Considering the additional landscaping, limiting the height of their pole signs and the fact that their signs do no[ emit a tremendous amount of light, he felt they have addressed their concerns. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Commissioner Peraza asked to hear from the Police Department or Code Enforcement regarding Condiflon No. 19 and 32. Bmce Freeman, Code Enforcement Supervisor, Code Enforcement Division, stated as follows: 1. Condition No. 19 - It has been their observation that hotels/motels that have a daily maid or cleaning service tends to have less problems. The rooms aze inspected on a daily basis. It has been their experience when the service is reduced that there seems to be more problems with other activities occurring. 2. Condiflon No. 32 - If they have a problem they learn about it very quickly. They meet with management and discuss the problem. He is no[ comfortable with the Police Chief has to send their managemenUcorpora[e managers a notice and give them 30 days. Within 30 days they have seen very goodlocations tutnazound completely and they would rather no[ have this matter come before the Planning Commission unless there is a problem which would require more drastic acfions then just a review. Code Enforcement needs the ability with the Planning Department and the Police Department to make [hat decision and [o require of them that this service be provided. Commissioner Henninger asked what type of control is there over the number of units and the occupancy of each unit. Bmce Freeman responded that unfortunately there is no occupancy standazds For motels or hotels. These operations are built for the traveling public. They have a real concern with a number of motels that have actually been converted into apartment complexes. Commissioner Henninger pointed out that Condition No. 18 stated they are not going to rent the rooms out by the hour, nor rent them for 30 consecutive days. Would that prevent someone from renting it for 30 conseculive days then re-rent it for another 30 consecutive days? Bmce Freeman responded there is no ]mv that stipulates that they can not rent longer than 30 days. 02-03-97 Page 14 Chairman Messe asked what the TOT Ordinance states. Bill Sell, Treasury Manager, Business License Division, stated after the 30th day the TOT is no longer due. So on the 31st day the person will no longer be required to pay [he 15% TOT rate. The only exception to that is the way it has been applied that if for example someone is in a room for 30 days and they check out and move into another room for 30 days, obviously that starts the timing all over again. Commissioner Henninger asked given these conditions, what is to prevent this structure from becoming a permanent residence hotel. Bruce Freeman responded [hey have seen that happen in the past. Commissioner Bristol asked [he applicant to explain why the applicant's transient occupancy rate tax rate that they provided in their Economic Benefits Statement for Anaheim was incorrect. It was understated by one third. They indicated that it is 10% for the City of Anaheim but in fact i[ is 15% which is a lazge difference. Mike Gallen responded it may have been a typo but he believes the Code states that the rate that they advertise is no[ to include the tax. So that the total weekly rental is $279 plus the City and State taxes on top of that so the rate they are advertising is pretax. Commissioner Peraza stated he felt the daily maid service is needed. Mike Gallen stated he is not sure the intent of having the daily maid service as opposed of three times a week: towels twice a week and cleaning once a week. Commissioner Bostwick stated it is the care and maintenance of the property that occurred when maid service is provided on a daily basis. The rooms are kept clean. There is no[ [he problem of accumulated food, etc. This approval goes with the land not with their company. So in the future if they sell the property and the new owners begin to renting this property for months a[ a time the City of Anaheim may have a problem with which Code Enforcement has expressed. Mike Gallen responded stated he understood the City has had problems in the past. Some of the problems inherent with those facilities is a condition of the location of the property. Commissioner Bostwick stated this situation can happen wherever the price and conditions aze right. Mike Gallen stated they drafted a convent condition with another City in Orange County which basically to basically as a type of title restriction trying to ensure that the property remains in Vansient use. He forwarded a copy of a previous agreement with the City of Lake Forest which he indicated addresses the concern of making sure the facility remains Vansient. - -- Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, Cily Attorney's Office, was give the copy of the agreement for her review at this time. Commissioner Bostwick stated they are referring to the low income person that can not afford to rent an apartment who would tend to use this type of housing. Mike Gallen stated providing an interior corridor gives the management a lo[ of conVOl over the property and the type of people that are staying there. Commissioner Bostwick noted there is no provision for any recreation whatsoever. Mike Gallen responded within the facility they have laundry facilities for the use the people staying there and there is a small section with vending machines. That is based on the way they operate and how they can provide the price that they do for the corporate clients that they have. 02-03-97 Page 15 Alfred Yalda Principal Transportation Planner, Traffic Engineering, responded to Chairman Messe regarding the parking study. The applicant is requesting a 33% waiver of code requirement by indicating that their traffic engineer looked at three sites and looked at each facility, counted the number of parking spaces then went back to see how many of those were occupied between 6:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Then they picked the highest amount for these three and applied that to this new facility which is generally what they do when they do a parking study. There was further discussion regarding the parking. Selma Mann stated she did review the convent and agreement affecting real property that the applicant's company entered into in Lake Forest. The situation is somewhat different but it does include a convent with regard to non-residentiallnon-transient use. Transient hotel use in the convent means guest lodging for check in period not exceeding 30 consecutive days. Bu[ i[ also includes guest lodging in excess of 30 days provided the guest occupants check out on or before the 30th day. Guest occupants may check back into the hotel the same day renewing the rental period for up to 30 consecutive days with no limit on the number of times that a guest may check out and check back in on the same day as long as no single rental period exceeds 30 consecutive days. It addresses the issue with regard of transient occupancy tax to the extent that he transient occupancy tax is specifically geared to this type of use of City services and facilities. But it does not effect the Commission's concern that these become a residential substandard apartment. If the Commission is looking toward approval of this contract, possibly a combination of having a convenan[ that has this language with regazd to the transient hotel use to address the transient occupancy tax issue and in addition some recitals that are developed by the Planning Commission on the differences between the residential uses and the types of impact on the community. If there is any change in the property use, the convent requires that the applicant wme back to the City for a modification of the conditional use permit. Mike Gallen stated the applicant is a competent company which intends to mn a corporate business in Anaheim to maintain a high quality facility primarily geared towards the corporate business customer. Commissioner Henninger stated the issue of the 3-foot berm had no[ been discussed yet. The applicant is saying their site falls away from Santa Ana Canyon Road and to create the 3-foot berm would mean creating a 12-foot wide flat area before [hey started their down slope onto their building pad. Greg Hastings, Planning Department, stated perhaps wording could be added that says where the grade at Riverview Drive is approximately the same as the 14-foot with of the landscape area be put in. Commissioner Henninger asked if i[ is possible to put a condition on a hotel that states [here will not be any school children attending school coming from it. That is one of the major differences between a residential use and a hotel use. Selma Mann stated that is a good question however she would need to look into it before she could response to this question. Mike Gallen stated it would be a good idea to continue this item so they can meet with the Police - Departinent on their concerns and other concerns discussed today. Chairman Messe asked if he saw any way of decreasing the parking waiver. Mike Gallen responded they provide over one space per room. The have 122 rooms and they provide 134 pazking stalls. Requiring them to provide additional parking would require that they purchase additional land. At this point they do not know if the could afford the additional cast. 02-03-97 Page 16 ACTION: Continued subject request to the February 19, 1997 Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to meet with staff. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: 1 hour and 5 minutes. 02-03-97 Page 17 ITEM NOS. 4 AND 5 WERE CONSIDERED AT THE SAME TIME BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION 4a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 4b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 96-97-09 February 19, 1997 4c. WAIVER OF CODE REOUH2EMENTS 4d. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3906 4e. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15418 OWNER: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, 201 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1003, Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: KAUFMAN & BROAD OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, 180 N. Riverview Drive, Suite 300, Anaheim, CA 92808 LOCATION: Property locations arc as follows: (11 at the northeast corner of Cvnress Street and Olive Street and (21 at the southeast corner of Pauline Street and Adele Street and further described as 300, 304, 304'/:. 308, 308%:. 312, 31Y/:, 314, 314'/: and 320 North Olive Street 300 301 306 306'/: 308 309 310 311 312 312'/:. 315 :md 317 Narth Sabina Street: 300, 305, 307, 312, 318 and 322 North Pauline Street: and 411, 415, 419.421, 517, 521 and 527 East Cvnress Street. Property is approximately 3.79 acres. Reclassification No. 96-97-09: Petitioner requests reclassification of subject property from the RS-5000 Zone to the RM-2400 or a less intense Zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 3906: To permit a 51-unit, 2-story affordable condominium complex with waivers of maximum structural height, minimum structural setback, minimum distance between buildings, minimum number of parking spaces and minimum recreation-leisure area. Tentative Tract Map No. 15418: To establish a 5-l0[ and 1 lettered lot, 51-unit airspace condominium subdivision. RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR6440DH. WP 02-03-97 Page 18 Sa. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to Sb. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 96-97-10 February 19, 1997 Sc. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTS Sd. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3907 Se. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15422 OWNER: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, 201 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1003, Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: KAUFMAN & BROAD OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, 180 N. Riverview Drive, Suite 300, Anaheim, CA 92808 LOCATION: Property locations are as follows: "Olive Infill" Parcel No. 2 Property is approximately 0.36 acre located on the east side of Olive Street approaimately 300 feet north of Broadway and further described as 128 and 202 South Olive Strcet•, "Olive Infill" Parcel No. 3 Property is approaimately 0.57 acre located on the west side of Olive Street approximately 155 feet north of Broadway and further described as 203, 209, 211 and 215 South Olive Street. Reclassification: Petitioner requests reclassification of the subject property from the RM-1200 Zone to the RM-2400 or a less intense Zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 3907: To permit an 11-unit, 2-story condominium complex with waivers of minimum sWC[ural setback and maximum swc[ural height. Tentative Tract No. 15422: To establish a 2-l01, I1-unit airspace condominium subdivision. RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR6447DH. WP e ® o e o OPPOSITION: 6 people spoke with concerns Lisa Stipkovich, Executive Director of Community Development, stated the Agency is the applicant because they aze the owner of the majority of the property and stated Item No. 4 and 5 are part of an agreement with Kaufman and Broad. This project covers Redevelopment because it combination of the Olive Street project which is a Redevelopment area and a project just outside Project Alpha on Cypress Street which is part of an obligation they had as a redevelopment agency to modify that street and put an affordable for sale project there. In addition to [ha[, they are also creaflng all of those as affordable units, 100 of these units will be affordable and they will use the section of [he law that refers to the density bonuses as well as affordable housing and require that 25% be affordable to low income people. They will also be providing down payment assistance for all of the units. Another area is the Neighborhood Preservation issues in stabilizing the neighborhood and also providing improvements to the neighborhood by taking out blighting conditions and replacing it with housing that is truly part of the neighborhood with both sides of Cypress and Olive Street facing the street, being part of the community and part of the same 02-03-97 Page 19 azchitecture and architectural treatment. From their department standpoint they are involved with this project in many different respects. Kristin Lusk, Project Manager, Kaufman and Broad, stated they feel that this site plan reflects the best of all the alternatives that they have gone through. It includes 51 new townhomes that are comparable to both the Center Street project and the Renaissance Project (on Broadway). It is a guard gated community with enhanced landscaping with both surrounding and throughout the project It will also have enhanced landscaping at the entrance. They have attempted to face the townhomes along Cypress and Olive Street to create a very neighborhood type of feeling. They feel that they have created a safe, secure and beautiful addiflon to addition to the surrounding area. Debroah Wright, Kaufman & Broad Architecture, stated they have gone to great lengths to capture the architecture the craftsman spirit that they feel is in this neighborhood. Overall, they feel the look and feel will 61end with the existing Heritage place neighborhood. In addition their proposed color scheme reflect the craftsman character. Lisa Stipkovich stated K & B referred to the color boazds. She had a staff member walls them up to the Commission for their review. Lisa S[ipkovich stated regarding affordaliility, this project, particularly the Cypress Infill, there are waivers. On Olive there are not waivers but they are doing an affordable project [here as well. On Cypress it is an affordable project; f[ was advertised as an affordable project. Their department would typically assess affordability then follow up with an affordable agreement. They do have in the disposition development agreement with K&B the stipulation that these are affordable but they will follow up with the subsequent affordable agreement that will be given to the City Council, just as they do with any affordable project. They will restrict sale prices, who can buy the units and they will also make the commitment of down payment assistance to the project So that then qualifies under the Density Bonus Program for affordable housing. The City Attorney's Office is working nth Community Development have reviewed this issue. The reclassification and the rezoning of the property qualifies as the acflon for density bonus but because they exceed the minimum under the law, only 20% affordable, the Commission may grant two more additional variances, waivers or incentives. If Cypress and Olive are blended there fs a net increase of about 8 units and that does not include the 6 that you could count for the industrial property that they purchased. So possibly there is a net gain of 2. There are variances and waivers listed and she wen[ over those of which some they have actually looked a[ and tried to find other answers to modify or change some of them due to issues that were brought up. Waiver 1 -Will stay the same. Waiver 2 - Wfll be working with the adjacent property owner to see if there can be changes in his setback, but she can not make a commitment on that. Waiver 3 -She requested a change with concurrence with K&B and the City Traffic Engineering and that is to spread the units out along Pauline. Waiver 4 regarding parking and parcel map. Parcel map gets recorded and they take the title to the middle of the street and they would give back to the City an easement which would-be a public right-of--way. The City would typically get an easement for the street, curb, gutter, parkway and sidewalk. In this case they are not giving the City all of that because the City does no[ wan[ it, they want them to kdce the responsibility. The association will give the City a public right-of--way but they will maintain ownership of the street from the centerline as well as take care of all the maintenance on the curb, parkway, sidewalk. They would put in the waiver that there will be a parking restriction that the City would honor which allows residents to label that and put on their own stickers. Waiver 5 - Whether the front yards are considered usable space. Lit is counted, it meets Code; if is not it does not count.. On Broadway the frontage was counted (verified by Greg Hastings). Ms. Stipkovich stated only three properties still remain as an open issue, 300 N. Olive, 411 E. Cypress, 322 N. Pauline. They are considering a stop sign at [he intersection of Cypress and Olive. The majority of the units will exit, to the north, other than the exit onto Cypress out to Olive. 02-03-97 Page 20 Jim Fueger, 547 East Chartres, resident and Board President of Heritage Place, stated they support the project. They aze glad [hat the location is being developed. He is an original owners at Heritage Place and is very excited. He did, however, have a few concerns: 1. The public safety and [ratflc flow. They are concerned with Pauline Street being closed. The new project will have exits to the north but they will not, the iwo exists at Cypress, that will force them [o go out to Olive and Cypress. I[ does need s stop sign and they are hoping it gets approved prior to the constmction. They would like to see Pauline remain open since a number of [heir residents exist there, or a[ lease realign it differently or remove two units. The intersection of Cypress and Otive has atwo-way stop and needs a foaz-way stop since it is very difficult to see traffic coming south. 2. They would like to see an on-site park inside the community provided. 3. The front yards that face Cypress, they hope that they do no[ include the rod-iron fence or the boxwood hedge, they feel the frpn[ yard should be free flowing and blend with [he existing units. 4. Entry gates - [hey are interested in knowing more detail about the entry gate to match the gates. 5. During construction they are interested in know road rats when [hey grade and remove [he two properties. The are hoping the address the pest control. 6. Directional signs -where arc they going to put the signs and to have the models are residents going to be an impacted. 7. Construction noise -concerned with the conswction noise and hours of construction. Nina Gonchazov, resident at 482 East Cypress, stated she is concerned with the property value reduction due to the project. Ms. Goncharov stated when she purchased her home she was told by Kaufman & Broad Sales Division that there would be single-family homes opposite her property. Only recently she was informed by the Planning Department of the reclassification request, therefore, she requested more information regazding that request. Teresa Coway, resident on South Cypress Street, stated she is for the project, however, she had two concems. One is the level of noise constmction, especially on weekends. Another concern additional enrollment of students into the school district and to her understanding there has not been a school designated or identified. Albert MIranda property owner at 300 North Olive (corner of Cypress and Olive), stated stated his major concern is he has seen all of these plans for this project but he has not made a decision on the properly because that is where his 72-yeaz old mother resides. His father recenty passed away and he is concerned with all the new developments effecting his mother's life. Jim Walker resident at 217 North Olive, stated he recalled 1988 when Community Development stated before Planning Commission that all the properties would be single-family dwellings. He has a property at the historical section. That section was immediately rezoned to single-family residenzs and proceeded with the planned development across the street. He felt there was something inherently wrong that the City is a land developer and landowner. He suddenly found out that the grading plan was 6 feeFhigher as it is directly across the street from his unit, plus added a 6-foot fence, and went 2-story. He is concerned with the agreement that Community Development has with K&B and feels the City should not have any agreements with a contractor. He is concerned with the quality of homes since they aze no[ high quality conswcted buildings. At the corner of Lincoln and Olive there have been many accidenzs at that location and after many complaints the curb was moved three fee[. He is concemed with the alignment of the street concerning this project. He is concerned with the distance of Olive Street from the setback and another fence type arrangement. Mr. Walker indicated the Fire Department can not drive in and tum azound on Heritage Place, they have to back out. He is also concerned with the amount of people that there will be in this area. Mr. Walker estimated according to his calculations there would be approximately 600 people in the development. He fett that currently it is difficult to get out of Cypress and Olive. He asked for a stop sign years ago and Traffic Engineering indicated it could not be done because it is a main corridor through the City and they have to leave it open. He feels the area was zoned singe-family and should remain that way. 02-03-97 Page 21 Carianne Bagne property owner at 107 North Topeka and a Board Member, stated his concerns: 1. Affordability -She is concerned about her property values. 2. Intersection of Lincoln and Olive -There have been many traffic accidents that have occurred at tha[in[ersection. 3. Cypress and Olive Street -There was a problem at [heir street a few weeks ago and [he Fire Department could not get down [heir street and [urn around. 4. Miranda property -She is concerned with the Miranda properly because in order to exit Cypress Street onto Olive you have to go almost halfivay into the intersection to turn left or right or to go straight and the probabilities of getting hit are great. 5. Liability -Their association has a great liability with all the people that would be using the pool and pazk. Kristin Lusk, responded as follows: 1. Entrance Park -They plan on having an entrance park. She responded to Chairman Messe's question by indicating they did no[ have it planned at this time but they can come back and discuss it with the homeowners. 2. Fencing -They would prefer not to put in a fence in the front of the homes on Cypress. They would like [o create a neighborhood field between [he bvo communities and would like them to really work together. They feel the fence would create a hazdscape vs a softscape. Their front yards will have a boxwood hedge surround the property to deFine each properties. 3. Cons[mction Noise -They will by all means meet Code. 4. Homeowners issues -They are going to surround this site with a tarp so there will not be as much dust and the construction site will no[ be as harsh to look at. 5. Models -They aze along Cypress, at the entrance on the right hand side and them is onsite parking available. 6. Rats -They will along with the City address use pest control service for this problem. 7. Pauline Street -They feel by closing off Pauline Street they are creating more of a secure neighborhood environment with no through traffic. They are not so certain with loosing 2 units but rather creating a single neighborhood. Lisa Stipkovich also responded to the comments by stating they did build a single detached project and exactly [he site plan that was approved by the Planning Commission. There are some paired units in there. The Agency is no[ the developer, Kaufman and Broad is the developer. They take the risk and the Agency, therefore, does no[ get involved in the disposing or selling of the houses and there will be changes as they go along resulting from discussions. To her knowledge there had not been any significant difference in the market rate which tend [o be focused upon what kind of housing product and living environment they aze in. They are trying to convert to more ownership opportunities and converting many properties of which were rental properties. She would like to look into the matter of the Fire Department since this is the first time she had hear of that. Lisa Stipkovich responded to Chairman Messe's questions by indicating the Fire Department has seen the plans - Mike Murphy, Site Civil Engineer, stated the layout of the circulation of the alleyway has been setup so that the fire tracks, trash trucks, school buses can flow through the project. There are exit gates a[ the north side so that there will be no need for them to back up and it's a similar system to the one that they use in the Renaissance Project at East and Broadway and it apparently has been working well. Lisa Stipkovich stated in terms of the accidents, they are recommending a stop sign at Cypress and Olive Street and hope that does get implemented and she recognizes that would need to come through formal review with the Traffic Engineering Division. Chairman Messe asked regarding the school issue pertaining to adding 62 units. 02-03-97 Page 22 Lisa Stipkovich responded by referring In a revised letter from the Anaheim City School District which stated [hat they do no[ have a problem with [his project and the Agency has been working very closely with the school district. The Redevelopment Agency has funded $2 million worth of improvements a[ Anaheim High School as well as $5 million which resulted in a new school being built at Jefferson. When you look at the entire project area they have actually deleted a number of units in the project azea, even though, they have created new units they have taken out a lot of multi-family rentals as well as some hotels being used as residents. So when you look at the total project including [he Cypress Infill, there is no net gain to the school districts. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Commissioner Peraza asked how many children they were loosing from that area Lisa Stipkovich responded they probably lost more. Although [hey took out 41 units, many of them were overcrowded and currently still relocating at the present 6me, where the number of residents faz exceed what would typically be considered Section 8 Rental Units Standards (as two per bedroom), they far exceed that. The school district did not calculate in terms of how many were lost. Chairman Messe stated he was concerned about the panhandle at Pauline and could no[ invision pu[fing hvo units [here side-by-side. Mike Murphy responded the panhandle is a narrow strip approximately 56 feet from the back of the walls to the wall but it is being planned currently fora 2-unit building. The width pf the building would be 43 fee[. There has been a waiver requested to utilize a 5-foot offset from [he (currently) 8-foot block wall. It Sts and it is the first time Kaufman & Broad has ever done in [his type of housing project, a 2-unit building. Chairman Messe indicated [here was some discussion about the acquisition of the industrial site just to the east. Lisa Stipkovich responded that would be their preferred Phase 2. What they have tried [o do is work with K&B and they all agree it would be better if they could expand the project and acquire approximately 60 fee[ into the other property. Lisa Stipkovich has had very preliminary discussions with the property owner and he is more interested in a property trade, he does not necessarily want to give up the land unless the can replace it, which might be feasible if they can understand the motivation of the owners to the north. They aze looking forward to doing that, however, as of today, they are asking for approval of this should they not be successfiil even though they will try to make this happen. This would have to be the project [o be built if they are unsuccessful. Mike Murphy stated the project is being phased for that area to be the last phase to be constructed and the project is being engineered so that it can expand to accept those additional units. There is a lot of hope and planning on this project to be expanded in [hat area. ` Commissioner Bostwick asked what would happen if they did no[ acquire those last three properties:" Lisa Stipkovich responded there is one property, the Miranda property, where the position is based upon that site plan they can actually work around that. The other two do impact the site significantly, particularly the one that is on Cypress and intersects where the drive isle is. So they would have a very difficult time working around that. Commissioner Boydstun asked hmv wide is the alley along Sabina and also the alley behind the project. Mike Murphy responded that [he alley behind the project is 18 fee[ wide and they are providing an additional foot on the south side on this project. The alley along Sabina is 18 feet wide at the time [hat was the City standard. Commissioner Boydstun stated her concern about the exit/entrance by closing Pauline Street Would they look at 51 units and asked how many are across the s[reet7 02-03-97 Page 23 Lisa Stipkovich responded 64 Commissioner Hoydstun stated her concern in case of an emergency residents would only have one small street to get out. Lisa Stipkovich stated she was right about Uie residents to the south but the residents in this project would be able to get out of two other alternative ways. Commissioner Boydstun stated some people are going to come through the front entrance. Lisa Stipkovich responded exiting going north but if you are going to be going south they would come in the front entrance. Chairman Messe asked for confirmation whether this would make Cypress Street east of Olive Street a cul-de-sac and asked if there is a City ordinance as to the length of the street. Alfred Yalda stated they revised their staudards a couple of years ago to 750 feet but some of these streets aze alder streets and he is not certain how long they are. Krisfin Lusk, stated some of the units do no[ exit, six units do not even exit at all. They are not guard gated so they would exit automatically through Pauline. Commissioner Boydstun stated it is only going to affect two units to take out and two units [ha[ are not going to be in that gated project. Krisfin Lusk stated the circulation is that there will sflll be the same people exiting the same way, they will all have [o exit through Cypress. The homeowners from Heritage exiting through Cypress/Olive where most of these homeowners would go the other way. There would not be all three communities going at the sameflme exiting at Cypress\Olive. Mike Murphy asked how many units would be allowed with a single exit on a standard subdivision under current City standards. Melanie Adams responded the standard is se[ by the Fire Department, to her knowledge that is well over 150 units before they start looking for a second exit. Kristin Lusk stated it should be noted that all the units are sprinklered. The Fire Department was please with the circulation and all sprinklered. Commissioner Peraza asked how many units are there south of Cypress in Heritage Park Kristin Lusk responded 64. Chairman Messe asked Lisa Stipkovich to comment on the Figure that Mr. Walker stated that 600 people living at the development. Lisa Stipkovich stated she did not know how he arrived at that £gure because these are one and two bedroom units unless there are some assumption [ha[ this property is going to be handled inappropriately and overcrowded. They have no[ seen that happen on any of the other downtown for sale projects that the Agency has participated in. The entire south project with all units is 64 plus the 51 which would have access three different ways. Comrissioner Boydstan asked if the gates that go to the alley are exit only or will [hey be entrance gates. Mike Murphy responded they are automatic gates and they could be se[ up be to entry and exit gates. Commissioner Boydstun asked if they are on the plan now. 02-03-97 Page 24 Mike Murphy responded they have designated them as exit gates. Commissioner Boyds[un asked what they are designated on the plan currently. Mike Murphy responded they are designated as exit gates on the plan now but it would just require an opening device to open on the other side which aU the homeowners would have. Chairman Messe asked if staff had received new letters from the school district. Lisa Stipkovich responded that she did want [o clarify [hat they do have a revised letter from the school district. It is a little confusing in that they state all the problems of the district and they go on to say but they will work with the Redevelopment Agency. That was their way of revising their letter. Greg Hastings clarified that letter was the one in the staff report dated January 1Q, 1997 marked "revised" Cormnissioner Boydstun stated they still want $568,000. Lisa Stipkovich responded they really did no[ come out and ask for that they state that [his is their position and then if you read on they state that this is their position on every project. Yet in talking with them they acknowledge that overall with this alpha project it has no[ been an impact and certainly with the funds they have received from the Agency it has been more than an offset. Chairman Messe stated the Anaheim Union High School District seems to feel the City has a high growth plan. Chairman Messe stated although the two projects have been discussed together they should be addressed sepazately for any new conditions or any changes. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager, Planning Department, stated there was one issue that he want to bring up [ha[ was not stated and that was about the construction noise. There is a City ordinance on Chapter 6.70 which does allow construcflon from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., 7 days a week. The Planning Commission could further condition that to reduce those hours beyond that if they wish. Chairman Messe stated due to it being so close to a residential area that the condition should be 6 days a week and probably 8:00 a.m. He asked to hear from the developer. Kristin Lusk stated they would be more than willing to give up Sundays. Commissioner Bostwick suggested what about 7:00 through 4:00 p.m. Kristin Lusk responded that is difficult because they are dealing with subcontractors and that is difficult to monitor. On Saturday they agree at 8:00 a.m. Greg Hastings suggested they may consider federal holidays as well. Kristin Lusk responded they do not work on those days. She asked for one exception to work 7 days a week until the model construction is completed for the one building since it is a timing issue so they can open for sale. Commissioner Peraza asked when they advertise these homes for sale, are they notifying prospecflve homeowners with children that they may no[ be able to go to their nearest school. Kristin Lusk, responded yes they have to disclose to each prospective homeowner what school their child will be attending. They have to disclose how far they walk, if they will be bused or nat. They check with the school district and they find out where they will be attending. 02-03-97 Page 25 Commissioner Boydstun stated she would like to add a stipulation that prior to start of constmction that there be a four-way stop sign at G~press and Olive. Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner, Traffic Engineering, responded the installation of the stop sign, the way the ordinance is written it has to meet the State of California minimum requirement for the installation of stop sign. They follow that throughout the City for any location that they install a stop sign and [hey already completed a study for that intersection. It is a matter of analyzing it. If it meets the warrants they will install a stop sign. Chairman Messe asked if that mean if Utis development when finished may not meet the warrants. Alfred Yalda responded they just completed a traffic counts. They will consider the number of units and how many trips generated. He could no[ say now if i[ meets the warrants, he just received the counts that morning. Chairman Messe asked if the stop sign is put in what does the State do to us if it does no[ meet the warrants. Alfred Yalda responded as far as the liability issue is concerned, there is certain criteria they have to meet to install any stop sign throughout the City because this is a public street. There was further discussion regarding the stop sign. Chairman Messe asked if this development after i[ is built does not meet the warrants, then a stop sign can not be put in. Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, City Attorney's Office, stated it is beyond the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission determining where a stop sign is going in. That would be something that would be determined by Traffic Engineering. Probably if there were requests made to the City Council, the City Council could consider if there were an alternative to what was being request for some reason. Chairman Messe stated for this development this is going to be a recommendation to the City Council for the reclassification, and asked whether they could advise the City Council that they would like it conditioned with a stop sign. Greg Hastings stated Planning Commission is the final authority on a Reclassification. Selma Mann stated the Planning Commission's acfion on these items aze actually final unless it is appealed to the City Council Chairman Messe asked if it is the jurisdiction of the Traffic Division, will the Traffic Division put the four-way stop sign in. Alfred Yalda responded there is a certain criteria they have to meet for every stop sign and if they do not meet them they do not install them but in a majority of locations they have looked a[ it and comply if it meets those warrants. Commissioner Bostwick asked if the City Council [ells you to install it would you will put it in. Alfred Yalda responded they are the ultimate decision for the City and they would install it. Commissioner Hezuunger stated they could put in a condition that the developer will petition the City Council to put in a stop sign if it turns out that the Traffic Division decides not to install a stop sign. Selma Mann stated it goes beyond that, there are statewide standard, immunities with regard to the design and the operation of the streets that are in the goveramenLcode under the tort claims act and to the extent that we deviate from statewide standards we assume certain responsibilities with regard to whatever change it is. 02-03-97 Page 26 Lisa S[ipkovich stated they would like to see a stop sign going in and they fully support [hat and Traffic Division is looking at it and if they can justify it legally it will be installed. Melanie Adams, Associate Engineer, Public Works Department, asked to have a condition be deleted on page 17, Condition No. 9 related to CC&R's. On Item No. 5, page 10 delete Condition No. 9. Also on Item No. 5, Condition No. 4 clarify on the first sentence, that applies only to the east side. Commissioner Bostwick stated he would tike to see the whole square block done rather than half of a block and make it a total development, wait the time and proceed with the acquisition. He prefers single family or paired houses like across the street instead of the townhomes. Chairman Messe asked what the time frame is Lisa Stipkovich responded they have been waiting five years for a site plan that works and the problem is that they can not wait indefinitely. K&B has agreed to phase this and give them some time on the Pauline Street piece to see if they can acquire the rest. But they can no[ postpone this forever because the economics of carrying this property. They think they have enough property acquired now [o say here is a project that could be built, yes we could have a phase 2 and if we acquire the rest of the property we will give you a better project on Pauline Street. If we don't we don't want to say the whole thing is going to sit vacant. The time frame is to get something started as soon as possible because they feel if is taking too long to acquire the property and aggregate it to the point where the neighborhood and the area has actually been harmed leaving that vacant. Chairman Messe asked if the property in its current configuration better for RS-5000 rather than the project they aze looking at. Lisa Stipkovich responded they bought it with afl'ordable money and unless they have a lot more money to subsidize this they can no[ economically make that work. This is not a Redevelopment project, it is an afl'ordable housing project. The townhomes are very complimentary and the lowest density, lower than RM-2400, i[ is at 16 units to the acre net acreage. Lisa Stipkovich stated the eight units on Pauline would probably make the project infeasible economically because they will not be able to get anything for the land. The spread of the improvements over 51 units finally makes sense. Lisa Stipkovich stated it is a phased project and phase 2 definitely wiU be something that they would like K&B to give them enough time to see if they can acquire the properly and do a trade. The problem is that a trade has to be worked out and that is not easy dealing with the property owner who wants to trade and finding the property owners to the north who wan[ [o do the trade. Commissioner Boydstun asked if it would work with 49 units and leave Pauline open. - - Lisa Stipkovich responded the one unit is not the issue, K&B feels the whole project is harmed andtheir gated community issue and how that impacts other units beyond that one or two units. Commissioner Boydstun stated they are working all this azound one piece of property because they could not acquire it and there are 64 homeowners that live on the other side. Lisa Stipkovich stated is if K&B said they could still build the project if those tvvo units were deleted and leave Pauline open and it still worked, that would be a different story. Kristin Lusk stated they would like to close Pauline because they want to be able to extend with the extension of phase two because they too are planning on extending the project with a phase two. They aze planning their DRE budgets and HOA based on more future homeowners. They would like to be able to have [hat. They are planning on more homeowners. That would be one fluent project just as Heritage Place is one fluent project. They want to keep it as one solid unit, it is going to be called Legacy. 02-03-97 Page 27 Commissioner Boydstun asked how they are going to do [hat when they are leaving the Solario property in the middle and [hey have an alley and a street. Kristin Lusk responded he has his own separate entrance. He is not in the guard gate. Commissioner Boydstun stated it would only effect 2 unit if you left Pauline open. Kristin Lusk responded but [hen it if effects the community as whole. I[ is no[ just about the two units. Commissioner Henninger asked if they are planning on putting a second gate. Kristin Lusk responded there is a gate at the entrance, there is a gate at Pauline and then there is a gate off the alley. At a later date [hey would like to have everyone inside but right now they can no[ do [ha[ with the constraints of [he site. Commissioner Boydstun asked how they are planning on doing that with the Solazio property. Kristin Lusk responded it is going [o continue up and around. Discussion continued including Mike Murphy and Steve List, from K&B, regarding the issue of the t<vo units and Pauline Street. Commissioner Henninger asked if there has been any though[ given to putting a single control gate for both projects on Cypress. There was further discussion with Steve List on the idea of a single control gate. Lisa Stipkovich requested a two week continuance so they can provide visual information to show what it could look like to better understand the project. What decisions Commission makes on [his project will impact the phase 2. Also further discuss the issue concerning Pauline and what gets gated and what does not has a bigger impact as you pull those units over another 60 feet. Commissioner Boydstun asked if there is going to be a continuance whether someone from the Fire Department could be present. ACTION: Conflnued subject request to the February 19, 1997 Planning Commission meefing order for staff to submit additional information. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: I hour and 32 minutes. 02-03-97 Page 2& 6a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (READVERTISED) Approved 6b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 343 (READVERTISED) Granted 6c. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 9G-97-03 (READVERTISED) Granted Gd, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTS (READVERTISED) Approved, in part 6e. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3902 (READVERTISED) Granted, in part 6f. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE Approved OR NECESSITY N0.97-03 Gg. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL TO REVIEW Requested review [o ITEMS 6a. 6c. 6d, 6c and Gf City Council OWNER: BILL HOYER, 510 West Ball Rd., Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: SHANE SHAW, 12362 Beach Blvd, #110, Stanton, CA 90680 LOCATION: 520 West Ball Road. Property is approximately 0.98 acre located a[ the southeast corner of Ball Road and Harbor Boulevard. General P-an Amendment No. 343: To amend the Land Use Element of [he General Plan, redesignating subject property from the existing Commercial Professional and Lpw Density Residential land use designations to the General Commercial land use designation. Reclassification No. 96-97-03: Reclassification of subject property from the RS-A-43;000 (Residential/Agricultural) and RS-7200 (Residential, Single-Family) Zones to the CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone. Conditional Usc Permit No. 3902: To permit a service station and accessory convenience market with sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption, and a 2,000 square-foot (subsequently increased to 2,100 square-foot after advertisement) drive-through, fast food restaurant with waivers of (a) maximum wall height, (b) minimum number of parking spaces, (c) minimum swc[ural and landscaped setback adjacent to a local street and required site screening and (d) minimum landscaped setback adjacent to a residential zone boundary. Determination of Public Com~enience or Necessity No. 97-03: To determine public convenience or necessity for retail sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption within the service station accessory - convenience market. Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of January 22, 1992 ~ GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-7 RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION NO. PC97-8 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-9 DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY RESOLUTION NO. PC97-10 =' ",EOLGbN'(NG, IS A SUMMARY OF=THE PLANNINGCONIIVIISSION ACTION ; '; :,: OPPOSITION: None 02-03-97 Page 29 Shane Shaw, Growth Management, 12362 Beach Blvd., Suite 110, Stanton, California 90680, stated they are they authorized agent and engineer and architect for the owner of the property. They worked with very closely with various City departments concerning this project and he thanked Kevin Bass and Alfred Yalda for all there assistance. They are very pleased with the recommendation and they do no[ have any objections. Victor Koskarian, businessman in Anaheim, stated in January of 1993 the City of Anaheim granted permission to open a service station a[ Ball and State College. He hopes his request to develop the comer of Ball and Harbor Blvd...He has no objections to staff's recommendations. They requested 10 feet of landscaping and he gave them 15 fee[. They requested 6 foot of wall and he gave them 8 fee[. Chairman Messe stated on page 17, Condition No. 39, regarding the hours of operation and asked if the convenience market hours were from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. He suggested that perhaps it should read that no beer be sold from 6:00 a. m. to 11:00 p, m. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager, Planning Department, staled that is how it was on the letter of operation, but they would be concerned with the adjacent residential as long as this is a quiet type operation. Chairman Messe asked if customers would be going inside to pay a[ [he pump and or go inside and pay. Commissioner Bostwick stated Condition No. 25 on page 16 of the staff report which permits [he sale of beer and wine from 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. so he would suggest they delete the line regarding the convenience market on Condition No. 39. The convenience market is part of the service station. Victor Koskarian asked if they could have the fast-food drive-through open for 24 hours. Chairman Messe stated [here are single Family residents on the other side of the drive-thrn and 11:00 p.m. is appropriate. Commissioner Bostwick asked if i[ ryas going to be a franchise type operation. Victor Koskarian responded he would prefer Carl's Jr. since i[ is an Anaheim company. Commissioner Peraza asked if there will be speakers a[ the drive-thrv. Commissioner Bostwick stated the speaker on the plans aims towards Harbor. Commissioner Henninger asked if there is a need to merge the properties. Melanie Adams, Associate Engineer, Public Works Department, responded yes, they will be merging them, page 14, Condition No. 2. Lisa Hunter, Vice Units/Anaheim Police Department, stated the Police Department did not have a problem with this request for Determination of Public Convenience. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Recommended Approval of General Plan Amendment to City Council Granted Reclassification No. PC96-97-03 Approved Waiver of Code Requirement, in part: Approved waivers (a) and (c) and denied waivers (b) and (d) on the basis that they were deleted following public notificaflon. Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3902, in part, with the following changes to conditions: 02-03-97 Page 30 Modified Condition Nos. 31 and 39 to read as follows: VOTE: 31. That the order speaker device shall be equipped with an operable volume control. The sound emitted shall not be audible at the residentially zoned boundaries to the south and east. The ordering device shall not be utilized after 11:00 p.m. or before 6 a.m. 39. That hours of operation shall no[ exceed the Following: Service Station/Convenience Market Ooen 24 hours Fast-Food Restaurant Ooen 24 hours Drive-Through Lane 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Added the following condition: That if determined to be necessary by the Anaheim Police Department, a minimum of one (1) licensed uniformed security guard, shall be provided on the premises specifically to provide security, and to discourage vandalism, trespass and/or loitering upon or adjacent to the subject property. Said security guard hours shall be as determined to be appropriate by the Anaheim Police Department. Approved request for Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 97-03. Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristol and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby request the City Council to consider Reclassification No. PC96-97-03, the Waiver of Code Requirements, Conditional Use Permit No. 3902 and Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 97-03 at the public hearing on the basis [hat it is necessitated by the Council's mandatory public hearing consideration of the requested General Plan Amendment. 7-0 DISCUSSION T1ME: 18 minutes 02-03-97 Page 31 MEETING ADJOURNED AT 5:35 P.M. TO FEBRUARY 7, 1997 AT 3:00 P.M. FOR A COMMUNITY PLANNING WORK SESSION TO PRESENT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: 1. PRESENTATION OF PRELINIINARY ACTION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE EAST ANAHEIM PLANNING AREA. 2. PRESENTATION OF COMMUNITYPLANNINGPROGRAMTEN-YEAR WORK PLAN. Respectfully submitted, Ossie Edmondson Senior Word Processing Operator 02-03-97 Page 32