Loading...
Minutes-PC 1997/03/17S ARY ACTION ACENA ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 17, 1997 1 1 A.M. STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSION OF VARIOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES ® DISCUSSION REGARDING ROSE STREET TOUR ® PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW 1:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BOYDSTUN, BOSTWICK, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, MESSE COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: MAYER AND PERAZA STAFF PRESENT: Selma Mann Assistant City Attorney Greg Hastings Zoning Division Manager Cheryl Flores Senior Planner Karen Dudley Associate Planner Della Herrick Associate Planner - Kevin Bass Associate Planner Karen Freeman Associate Planner --- Bruce Freeman Code Enforcement Supervisor Tim Dunn Code Enforcement Officer Alfred Yalda Principal Transportation Planner Melanie Adams Associate Civil Engineer Tom Engle Vice Detail Dora Monzon Management Assistant Margarita Solorio Senior Secretary Ossie Edmundson Senior Word Processing Operator P:\D C CS\C LERICA L\M I N UTES\AC031797. W P A. a. EIR 313 (PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED( Approved b. FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 97-07 -REVIEW AND Approved APPROVAL OF A FINAL SITE PLAN• Hiroshi Fujishige, c/o Jane Fujishige, 1854 South Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92802, request for review and approval of a Final Site Plan to construct a produce stand in conjunction with, and accessory to, an existing agricultural use. Property is located at 1854 South Harbor Boulevard (Fujishige Farmsl. SR6587KD,WP Karen Dudley, Associate Planner, Planning Department: Stated the request is for a final site plan review to construct a 2,200 square foot prefab metal produce stand on an approximate 58 acre site that is used for agricultural purposes. The agricultural stand is an accessory use to the primary agricultural use and is a permitted accessory use under the Code. Staff reviewed the Site Development Standards, the Design Criteria for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and the Environmental Compliance form and concluded the project falls within the presumptions and time frames of the previously-certified Environmental Impact Report for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. There will be no mitigation measures with this proposal. 03-17-97 Page 2 B, VARIANCE NO. 1229 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. Initiated 2199 -INITIATION OF REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION modification PROCEEDINGS: City initiated (Code Enforcement Division/Police and/or revocation Oepartmentl, request to initiate revocation or modification proceedings for proceedings for Variance No. 1229 (to construct a 70-unit motel 4-28-97 .and coffee shop and Conditional Use Permit No. 2199 Ito permit a cocktail lounge in an existing motell. Property is located at 823 South Beach Boulevard. SR 6403 DS. W P Tim Dunn, Code Enforcement Officer, Code Enforcement Division: Stated they had a meeting with the owners of subject motel in June 1996. There have been four major inspections of the property and many Code violations have continued since meeting with the owners. There has also :been calls from the Police Department in excess of 350, types of violations include housing, electrical, smoke alarms, etc. Tom Engle, Vice Unit, Police Department: Stated in excess of 350 calls for the calendar year 1996. It has become a major drain on the Police Department's west end forces. Cheryl Flores: Stated this can be set for public hearing on April 28, 1997. C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 505 AND VARIANCE NO 1716 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION: Jeff Meger, Grimmway Management Company, 760 North Euclid Street, Suite 207, Anaheim CA 92801, requests termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 505 (to establish a theater and a 10-story office building with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) and Variance No. 1716 Ito waive the maximum area of a freestanding sign and maximum sign heightl. Property is located at 760 North Euclid Street. TERMINATION RESOLUTION N0. PC97-23 Terminated SR6581JK.WP 03-17-97 Page 3 D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 3876 -REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SIGN PLANS• Unitarian Church of Orange County, 918 West Lincoln Avenue, Suite 1, Anaheim, CA 92805, requests review .and approval of wall signs for a previously-approved church. Property is located at 511 South Harbor Boulevard. Approved sign plans SR6585JK.WP E. REQUEST FOR INITIATION OF RECLASSIFICATION PROCEEDINGS: Initiated by City of Anaheim, Planning Department, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805, request for initiation of reclassification proceedings of subject properties from the RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) Zone and the CG (Commercial, General) Zone to the CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone. Initiated reclassification proceedings SR6592NP.WP 03-17-97 Page 4 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 2b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTS April 14, 1997 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3903 OWNER: TAORMINA INDUSTRIES, INC., c/o Richard B. Winn, P.0. Box 309, Anaheim, CA 92815 AGENT: ARCHITECTURAL TEAM THREE, Attn: Lon Bike, 14 Hughes Street, Suite B-204, Irvine, CA 92718 LOCATION: 2830 East Gretta Lane.. Property is approximately 0.57 acre on the south side of Gretta Lane, approximately 366 feet east of the centerline of Blue Gum Street. To permit a transmission repair facility within an existing 12,399 square-foot industrial building with waivers of minimum number of parking spaces and permitted outdoor uses. Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of January 22, 1997 and February 19, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR6589JK.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION ACTION: VOTE: None Continued subject request to the April 14, 1997 Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to explore alternative designs and submit revised plans. _. 5-0 (Commissipners Mayer and Peraza absent) DISCUSSION TIME: This .item was not discussed. 03-17-97 Page 5 3a. EIR NO. 313 (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED( Continued to 3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IVO. 3913 4-14-97 OWNER: AFTAB AHMAD, 2310 West Knox Avenue, Santa Ana, CA 92704 AGENT: SCOTT K. KIME, 92 Argonaut, Suite 225, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 LOCATION: 1100 West Ball Road. Property is approximately 0.43 acre located at the southwest corner of Ball Road and West Street. To permit an automobile service station with adrive-through self- service car wash facility. Continued from Planning Commission meeting of March 3, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR6596KD.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION ACTION: VOTE: None Continued subject request to the April 14, 1997 Planning Commission meeting as requested by the petitioner. 5-0 (Commissioners Mayer and Peraza absent) DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 03-17-97 Page 6 4a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 4b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3912 ~ 3-31-97 OWNER: KENNETH J. CUMMINS, TRUSTEE OF THE COUCH LIVING TRUST, 4041 MacArthur Blvd., A360, Newport Beach, CA 92660 AGENT: TEAM RENTAL OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA , dba BUDGET CAR AND TRUCK RENTAL, Attn: David Steeves, 1549 North Fern Street, Orange, CA 92667 LOCATION: 2144 South Harbor Boulevard IArbv's Restaurant) Property is approximately 0.55 acre located approximately 500 feet south of the centerline of Orangewood Avenue . To permit the conversion of a fast food restaurant to a truck and automobile rental lot. Continued from Planning Commission meeting of March 3, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR6469DS.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the March 31, 1997 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow additional time for the petitioner to submit revised plans indicating improvements that need to be completed on the property. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Mayer and Peraza absent) DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 03-17-97 Page 7 5a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 5b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved 5c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3905 Granted for 2 years OWNER: MING INTERNATIONAL GROUP, 5405 Alton (To expire 3-17- Parkway, Irvine, CA 92604 99) AGENT: WINDY MEYER, PARTNERS REALTY, 5405 Alton Parkway #631, Irvine, CA 92604 LOCATION: 5247 East Oranaethoroe Avenue. Property is approximately 1.47 acres located at the northeast corner of Post Lane and Orangethorpe Avenue. To permit a child daycare facility within a commercial retail center for up to 40 children with waiver of minimum setback of institutional uses adjacent to residential zone boundaries. Continued from Planning Commission meeting of March 3, 1997 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-24 SR6454JK,WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Applicant's Statement: Mr. Shivah Rezvani, 5247 Orangethorpe, Anaheim: Stated he contact the landlord and the landlord indicated he could not do anything soon. The other concern was regarding the opinions of the neighbors: He spoke personally with his neighbors and presented their signatures approving the project. Mr. Rezvani stated the neighbors were supportive and pleased to see a day care at that site. Chairman Messe: Asked about the issue of the driveway. Mr. Rezvani: Responded he did not see any problems. They are not going to create any traffic problems. They have more than 15 parking spaces available. Parents are required to sign in their child before leaving. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED 03-17-97 Page 8 Alfred Yalda, Traffic Division: Stated it is very common for parents to park in the middle of the driveway which creates traffic to backup, a potential problem on Orangethorpe. He has seen it in other locations throughout the City and it is a very difficult problem to control. Mr. Rezvani: Stated it is their policy that parents dropping off their child are required to sign them in regardless of whether parents are running late. Mrs. Rezvani: Stated in their day care center it is a strict policy that parents are required to park and sign in their child. Chairman Messe: Stated this does not mean they have to park in a parking space. Mrs. Rezvani: Responded their day care center requires parents to sign in their child. Alfred Yalda: Stated if they could somehow work out so as parents .register their child at the day care they must park their car and not block the driveway. As long as that takes occurs he is comfortable with that. If the driveway was closed it would give parents more room to come in, sign in their child then exist. Chairman Messe: Asked if this is the driveway that was put in without knowledge? Cheryl Flores: Responded she believed it was a centered driveway that was put in that does not match the last approved exhibit, which would take the approval of the Traffic Engineer, Commissioner Boydstun: Perhaps a solution would be to require all parents registering their children for the day care to sign a notice stating that they had to park in a parking space. If they blocked the driveway their child would be removed. Commissioner Bristol: Stated he agreed perhaps parents could be fined if they parked where they were not suppose to. Mr. Rezvani: Responded they would do that, that would not be a problem. They could add that to their policy. Chairman Messe: With a sign. Mr. Rezvani: Agreed with a sign in front. Commissioner Bristol: Stated Mr. Rezvani had indicated the landlord was not going tn. do any landscaping. Is he :referring to the entire landscaping, Commission was referring to the entire project along with the side area on the east (the emergency areal and .asked who currently --- maintains it? Mr. Rezvani: Responded they are responsible for the area they are in and they are going to do the landscaping. There is landscaping which is missing and that is what the landlord said she is not going to do. They are going to maintain the landscaping which currently exists. Bruce Freeman: Stated since the last Planning Commission meeting they did inspect the property and it is in great need of relandscaping and they are in the process of sending a letter to the property owner to refurbish the landscaping that is missing. Conditions relative to landscaping were 03-17-97 Page 9 set by the previous conditional use permits Chairman Messe: Asked, for verification from staff, whether the conditions are already in place Commission do not need have conditions regarding landscaping included in this conditional use permit. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager, Planning Department: Stated yes, keep in mind they are going to be using a portion of their landscape area for their proposed outdoor play area. Perhaps that part could be conditioned in maintaining or adding any landscaping. The balance can be taken care through Code Enforcement as well as any previous zoning action. Chairman Messe: Stated there was the issue of noise. Mr. Rezvani: Responded not all the children are going to be outside at the same time. Chairman Messe: Asked if he has read Condition No. 6 that states the outdoor play area should not be utilized prior to 9:00 a.m. or no later than 5:00 p.m. and should not be used by more than 10 children at one time.. Mr. Rezvani: Responded he was in agreement with that. Commissioner Bostwick: Asked if they are going to change the requirements regarding landscaping? Commissioner Henninger: Stated it sounds that they have existing requirements on the overall shopping center. Suggested petitioner be requested to take care of the landscaping within their play area and the emergency area. Asked if three spaces could be .labeled for child drop off and pick up only? Alfred Yalda: Responded that would be a good idea. They could work with the applicant to designate which parking spaces would be the most appropriate. He thought they could have five (three permanent ones and two with pedestal) spaces would be better. Cheryl Flores: Stated there was not indication of any time limitation. Commissioner Bostwick: Stated that was a good idea, perhaps two years. Commissioner Bristol: Asked if there was anything specific regarding the emergency area in front pertaining to the fence. _ Mr. Rezvani: Responded they are going to redo the fence. The children are not in that area:- Commissioner Bristol: Asked if this area was the emergency areal Mr. Rezvani: Responded yes. Commissioner Bristol: He was concerned that the wooden fence did not appear to be safe 03-17-97 Page 10 Selma Mann: Stated Commission may wish to consider there are lease requirements for reciprocal parking that may preclude ear marking particular spaces for particular purpose or possibly to frame that in terms of working with Traffic Engineering to designate a drop off point. Commission may wish to consider requiring the operator effectively enforce the requirement and leave it up to the operator to use whatever means. If operator is in violation of that it would be reason fpr calling it back for modification or termination. Chairman Messe: His understanding was that Commission should have a condition requiring the operator to enforce no parking in the drive isles. Bruce Freeman: Stated on the last permit the Commission did require a rod iron fence on the south portion of the property to secure it from the neighbors. He request that this area for emergency access match with rod iron. Mr. Rezvani: Stated his preference to treated wood or redwood rather than metal. Chairman Messe: Stated he would like to see the plans for the fence come as a Report & Recommendation item. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked if the front part that requested had been installed? Bruce Freeman: Responded the south portion requested by the Commission was install, an approximate 6 foot high rod iron fencing. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Approved Waiver of Code Requirement Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3905 with the following changes to conditions: Deleted Condition Nos. 2 and 5 Modified Condition Nos. 3 and 8 to read as follows: That the on-site landscaping and irrigation system within the play and emergency areas shall be refurbished and maintained in compliance with City standards. 8. That the applicant shall work with the City Traffic and Transportation Manager to provide a suitable drop-off and pick-up area. That-all-drop-off and pick-up shall occur from properly marked parking spaces. The applicant shall develop rules to enforce said condition to prevent parking in the drive- aisles. 03-17-97 Page 11 Added the following conditions: That prior to the commencement of the activity, the existing fencing around the emergency area shall be replaced with fencing that is more suitable. Final plans for said fencing shall be submitted to the Zoning Division of the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Report and Recommendation item. That subject use permit is granted for a period of two (2) years, to expire on March 17, 1999. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Mayer and Peraza absent) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 28 minutes 03-17-97 Page 12 6a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 6b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3916 OWNER: MOHAMED AND NOHA KHOURAKI, YOUSSEF AND ANGELINA IBRAHIM, 1200 Quail Street, #220, Newport Beach, CA 92660 AGENT: YOUSEF IBRAHIM, 1200 Ouail Street, #220, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION: 1200 South Brookhurst Street. Property is approximately 1.18 acreslocated south and east of the southeast corner of Brookhurst Street and Ball Road. To permit an approximate 3,785 square-foot convenience market within an existing commercial retail center. Continued from Planning Commission meeting of March 3, 1997. Approved Granted CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-25 ~ SR6598DS.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Applicant's Statement: Hassan Almadi, representing the petitioner: Stated they were in agreement, as tenants, with all the conditions. The owner had agreed to attend the public hearing to discuss certain issues but unfortunately was not present. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Chairman'Messe: Asked if he was in agreement with all the conditions) Mr. Almadi: Responded yest those conditions that pertained to him as a tenant. He could not speak for the owner. The owner promised to be present but did not show up. Commissioner Henninger: Asked if they disagreed with Condition Nos. 4 and 15? Mr. Almadi: Responded they disagreed on the liquor sign and the time of operation. They now have no problems with those conditions. Chairman Messe: Asked about Condition No. 131 03-17-97 Page 13 Mr. Almadi: Responded they did not discuss that with the Police Department. He stating at the last meeting there was discussion as to whether they could stack some merchandise by the windows. They will not use this for any signs whatsoever. Commissioner Henninger: Asked what hours they were interested in7 Mr. Almadi: Responded from 8:00 a.m, to 9:00 p.m. Commissioner Henninger: Asked about Condition No. 3 (freestanding signll Mr. Almadi: Responded they have no problem with the condition. They asked to keep the existing sign (lower one) and increase the size, keeping the same height but expanding it to 1 or 2 feet. They are willing to lower the sign. Commissioner Henninger: Asked staff if the remaining sign's square footage could be increased within Code? Cheryl Flores: Responded they would be allowed two times the highway frontage of Ball Road and the map indicates 130. Commissioner Henninger: Asked if the property owner is willing to comply with Condition No. 47 Mr. Almadi: Responded they did not discuss this with the owner. He has no idea how he feels. Chairman Messe: Asked about item no. 15, .requirement for trash storage area? Mr. Almadi: Responded it is the property owner's responsibility. Mr. Almadi understood that the owner indicated to staff that he was willing to submit plans but Mr. Almadi does not know if he took action on this. Dora Monzon, Management Assistant, Streets and Sanitation Division: Stated she did speak with the property owner and he is willing to comply with their conditions. Commissioner Henninger: Asked where the unit is in relation to the two frontages? Cheryl Flores: Stated the unit faces Ball Road, north side of the shopping center. Commissioner Henninger: Stated their building along .Ball Road (130 feetl, would they refurbish the landscaping planters? Mr. Almadi: Responded the owner promised when they last met with the owner that this is part of his responsibility and he was going take care of it. Commissioner Henninger: Offered a motion approving a CEQA Negative Declaration, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun. Motion carried. Mr. Almadi: Stated on number 3, it was discussed that they could take up to 8 feet height for the sign but there is no mention on the report. Greg Hastings: Responded it was staff's intention to allow the applicant to use part of the existing sign for economic reasons, however, if there are major changes to the sign staff would recommend that they utilize the currently excepted condition that there be a monument sign. 03-17-97 Page 14 Commissioner Henninger: Stated the applicant basically has two options: 11 If there are not many changes that needs to be done to this sign then applicant can use a portion of that. 21 Otherwise, if he wants to make major changes to the sign then staff would prefer the applicant build a monument sign. Discussion following the action Mr. Almadi: Asked for clarification on number 2. Chairman Messe: Responded one 111 wall sign not to exceed 10°k of the building shall be permitted on the north elevation. Also two of the existing facia signs on the west elevation shall be permitted. Commissioner Henninger: Stated there are two issues. One is the area of the sign and the basic rule is that the area of a wall sign should not be more than 10°~ of the wall. There is also a rule about the number of signs. He can have one 111 sign there, 10% of the wall but he can not have four 14) signs. Mr. Almadi: Asked about the size of the signs? Cheryl Flores: Stated it is 10°k of the wall but with this condition staff was hoping that the size of the two l21 existing signs that are there now would be the maximum size of the facia signs to remain. They are approximately 15 square foot each.. Greg Hastings: Stated those signs are continued out to the entire center, or to that side of the center.. So, staff would ask that those same signs be used for uniformity. Commissioner Henninger: Stated that means not to change the size of the signs. They want petitioner to use the two existing signs and not enlarge the signs. Mr. Almadi: Asked if that meant they could not modify or alter them, they have to be as they are now. Commissioner Henninger: Yes. Marhan Apardos (not certain of spellingl: Stated all the stores in the shopping center changed all their signs. Commissioner Henninger: Responded they do not have to keep the physical box if it is old and out of date but you need to keep the size of it. If it is replaced it needs to be replaced with one the same size. Commissioner Bostwick: Stated so that all the signs in the center match at the center Marwan Apardos: Asked why they can not make the sign a little bigger because it is not enough for their name? Commissioner Bostwick: Responded they could reduce the size of the letters to fit inside the box. Marwan Apardos: Asked if they could be different the other signs in the shopping center? Commissioner Henninger: Responded they would like the signs to match. 03-17-97 Page 15 Chairman Messe: Stated they are trying to prevent clutter. He suggested they work with staff on this issued since this will be coming before Planning Commission as an Report & Recommendation item. Mr. Almadi: Regarding Condition No. 6, Mr. Almadi stated they are .not going to have alcoholic beverages but did not want it to be conditioned. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Granted Conditipnal Use Permit No. 3916 with the following changes to conditions: Modified Condition Nos. 3 and 4 to read as follows: 3. That the freestanding sign adjacent to Ball Road shall be modified to remove the upper portion of the sign (currently stating "LIQUOR") with use of the two existing lower sign cans permitted. The changeable copy signage shall not be permitted. Final signs plans shall be submitted to the Zoning Division of the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Report and Recommendation item. 4. That the existing planter areas along Ball Road shall be refurbished, permanently irrigated and replanted with additional shrubs including two additional minimum 15-gallon trees and groundcover to the satisfaction of the Planning Department. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Mayer and Peraza absent) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 20 minutes 03-17-97 Page 16 7a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) Approved 7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3726 (READVERTISED) Approved revised plans OWNER: VINEYARD MINISTRIES INTERNATIONAL, 5300 East La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807 AGENT: FAIRMONT SCHOOLS, INC., Attn: David Jackson, 1557 West Mable Street, Anaheim, CA 92802 LOCATION: 5310 East La Palma Avenue (Fairmont Private School . Property is .approximately 23.08 acres, having an approximate frontage of 1,238 feet on the on the south side of La Palma Avenue, located approximately 2,370 feet west of the centerline of Imperial Highway. Petitioner requests review and approval of revised plans (Revision No. 11 to permit the conversion of an approximate 8,292 square-foot area of an existing auditorium into a total of nine additional classrooms, to convert a portion of an existing parking lot area into an approximate 12,475 landscaped play area for students and modification or deletion of a condition of approval to increase the maximum student enrollment from 450 to 650 students for apreviously-approved private educational institution (an accessory use of an existing churchl. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC97-26 SR6463KP.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Applicant's Statement: Jim Meyer, Facilities Manager with Fairmont School: Indicated he read the staff report and was in full agreement with the conditions. _._ PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Commissioner Henninger: Stated he would like to see an added condition whereby the applicant signs a disclosure that informs them of the types of uses that .are allowed in this industrial area because their use is not compatible with an industrial use. Commissioner Bostwick: Indicated in their :packet there was a memo from Bill Christiansen indicating he has not agreed to any of these changes. Whyl 03-17-97 Page 17 Jim Meyer: Stated Bill Christiansen spoke with Ms. Pfost and told her to proceed with it. The floor plan that he was given was a reduced size which Mr. Christiansen did not see the cut out of the rest of the building. Mr. Meyer meet with him on Friday and showed him the enlarged floor plan and he was then satisfied. Mr. Jackson and Bill Christiansen are in negotiations now regarding the amount of rent to be charged. They can not move until the rental contract is signed. Chairman Messe: Asked if the auditorium is going to be broken down into classrooms? Jim Meyer: Responded yes, it is already subleased and Mr. Christiansen was already having problems with that, so there was some talk about some modifications so he could use their rooms storing the chairs, should the need arise. Chairman Messe: Asked staff about Ordinance No. 5224, it allows churches in the Canyon Industrial Area on a permanent basis provided that said churches are the exclusive use of the property. With a tenant on the property is that considered an exclusive use? Cheryl Flores: Responded the schools are considered accessory to the exclusive use which is the church. Chairman Messe: Asked what is meant by exclusive? This is a large operation 1650 children) in an industrial area and the Ordinance said the use should be exclusively the church. Cheryl Flores: Responded the problem may be the wording on the ordinance because it does specify that the church would be the exclusive use but then it goes on to say it may include educational facilities as an accessory use. Chairman Messe: Stated that would be an accessory to the church, but this is a tenant of the church. He thought they have a school on Sundays and thought that was the intent. Greg Hastings: Stated the original intent was that it not be within a multi use industrial park. When it was originally issued this wording was carried over into the Specific Plan which now exists on the property. Chairman Messe: Had a concern about the compatibility of a school this size in an industrial area ACTION:: Determined that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Approved revised plans for Conditional Use Permit No. 3726 Modified Resolution No. PC94-147, adopted in conjunction with the approvalof this Conditional Use Permit, as follows: Modified Condition Nos. 5 and 6 to read as follows: "5. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the .Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 2 and 3 and Revision No, t to Exhibit No. 1." "6. That the student enrollment shall not exceed 650 students at 5310 East La 03-17-97 Page 18 Palma Avenue." Added the following conditions: "18. That prior to commencement of use of the proposed playground, a fence enclosure of the playground shall be constructed of wrought iron wherever the fence is visible from La Palma Avenue with the remainder of the fence constructed of chain link, as requested by the petitioner." "19. That within a period of sixty (601 days from the date of this resolution, the proposed parking spaces along Cambridge Circle la private street) shall be striped to match Revision No. 1 to Exhibit No. 1." "20. That within a period of sixty 1601 days from the date of this resolution, a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan far recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval." "21. That the applicant shall submit a signed statement, approved by the City Attorney's Office, acknowledging that industrial uses are permitted, and may be located immediately adjacent to this site. The statement shall indicate the current Code permitted primary uses and conditionally permitted uses of the SP94-1 (Development Area 2) Zone and acknowledge that the uses may be subject to change by Specific Plan Adjustment without further notice to the subject property owner. Said signed statement need not be a recorded document. Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. VOTE: 4-1 (Commissioner Messe voted no and Commjssioners Mayer and Peraza were absent) DISCUSSION TIME: 10 minutes 03-17-97 Page 19 8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 8b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved 8c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3920 Granted 8d. SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 90-1 REVISION TO DEV AREA 2 SITE PLAN Approved 8e. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR REVISION TO Recommended ORDINANCE NO. 5110 approval OWNER: OTR, OHIO GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, Mr. Bill Shurman, 275 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215 AGENT: DONAHUE SCHRIBER, Attn: Michele Holling, 3501 Jamboree Road, Suite 300, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION: The Anaheim Hills Festival Center. .Property is approximately 85 acres located at the southwest corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Roosevelt Road. Petitioner requests the following: 11 approval of a revised site plan to permit the expansion (up to 25,000 square feet or 1,500 seats) of the existing theater; 2) .approval of a revised site plan to redesignate 20,000 square feet of area for general retail uses; 31 approval of a conditional use permit to construct a 35,000 square-foot health club and a 10,000 square-foot child day care facility with a 15,000 square-foot outdoor play area; 41 amendment to Condition No. 9 of Ordinance No. 51 10 to permit on-street parking on Festival Drive; and 51 waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-27 I SR6579DH.WP SPECIFIC PLAN RESOLUTION NO. PC97-28 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: 3 people spoke with concerns. 03-17-97 Page 20 Applicant's Statement: Michelle Rolling, 3501 Jamboree Road, Suite 300, Newport.Beach, CA, representing the ownership at Anaheim Hills Festival: Stated in 1990 the City approved the site plan for the .shopping center consisting of approximately 533,000 square feet of retail including a 4,000 square foot gas station and 33,000 square foot theater. In addition, on the 85 acres was room fora 450 room hotel and ancillary business. In 1992, they were granted a Variance No. 4201 to redesignate Area 2 from home furnishings to general retail and home improvement. During the last four to five years their firm has worked to put a home improvement and other major retail uses on their Area designated at 2. Due to the location of the property on the upper level, it lacks visibility to Santa Ana Canyon Road as well as the 91 Freeway. It has limited their ability to do something with that property. Current conditions have afforded them the opportunity to work with several retailers that are interested in their property in keeping with the original uses that were allowed with the center as well as uses that they believe will be beneficially to the residents in the area. They consist of the expansion of Edward's Theaters by another 6 screens, 24-hour fitness center which includes a swimming pool and basketball court and Tutor Time Day Care Learning Center. This is .all in keeping with the redesignated use of 105,000 square feet. Don Jobe, President of the Anaheim Crest Homeowners Association: Stated they have a few concerns about the proposed expansion. Some of that goes back to the Specific Plan which a waiver was granted on the rooftop air conditioning because the owners specified that they were going to put in measures to mitigate the noise (high efficiency and plantings along the slopel• None of these have mitigated the noise from the rooftop air conditioners. This new development will be the closest of all the buildings to the homes to the other edge of the shopping center., If they were to have rooftop air conditioning on the proposed expansion part of this the noise would increase dramatically from what it is now. It is presently approaching non-acceptable. It would be their desire that the original specific plan would be adhered to and another form of air conditioning rather than rooftop would be provided. The loading area in the original specific plan was to face the loading area in the development in Area 1 (immediately north of the proposed expansion) and according to the photos of the proposed addition, the loading area does not face the existing loading areas. Again, this would impact the noise level in the surrounding residents. The health club was originally suppose to be 4,000 square feet unless there was a waiver provided. Now it is going to be 9 times larger and operate 24 hours a day.. The proposal is for 50 parking spaces on Festival Drive and they are concerned with the potential for accidents. Marie Bessem, resident of Anaheim Hills: Stated she lives off Santa Ana Canyon and Fairmont. She can not get to her home from another avenue but Santa Ana Canyon due to the amount of traffic. She is concerned with the expansion of Edward's Theater since it already has major traffic congestion on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays evenings, traffic going eastbound on Santa Ana Canyon. She is concerned with the waiver of minimum parking spaces and also the parking at Festival Drive. She has almost been hit and is concerned with the .parking spaces being too narrow. 03-17-97 Page 21 Rebuttal: Michelle Holling: Responded with respect to the concerns with the rooftop and the noise levels, their intent is not to create a negative environment for the community. They see the neighbors an integrated part of their shopping center and they are the people who patronize their shopping center. With respect to mitigation measures, they would be happy to work with the City to see what can be done with the air conditioning units on the rooftops. Regarding the loading area, she was not certain what was being referenced. Chairman Messe: Stated when it was originally agreed to the design of the initial home decorating center, they were very careful with the loading of the trucks so that it would not impinge on the homeowners and he believed the loading area was moved to the front. Michelle Holling: Stated the site plan is not doing home furnishings. The opening of the fitness center is planned to face towards the existing parking lot towards Edward's. In the front facade where they have the additional 20,000 square feet, that they can build their store fronts., and they are not loading areas. She did not believe those would be facing out towards the residents on Festival Canyon. Chairman Messe: Asked where the truck will deliver the soft drinks and food to the fitness center? Michelle Holling: Responded at the front loading. They really do not envision that as being an issue. The concern of the 4,000 sq. ft. 5 times the size; the 4,000 sq. ft. was originally proposed under the specific plan but that they would require a CUP if they did anything above 4,000 square feet. That is what they are attempting to do but they are still in keeping with what the permitted :issues were and what the .permitted square footage was for their .Development Area 2. She introduced Kevin Mc Guire who is with 24-Hour Fitness to address concerns regarding the operation hours and controlling any noise factors. Kevin Mc Guire: Stated 24-Hour Fitness was a northern California based company and they merged with what was Family Fitness in southern California. Historically, Family Fitness was a 20,000 foot facility and there is one currently in Yorba Linda. They have known that they have had many members come from the Anaheim Hills side of the freeway for years. Due to the makeup of the community they are going to do what they call a premier facility which is larger and would include basketball and swimming. They found over recent years that they had their cleaning crews come in at 11:30 p.m., after the facility closed at 11:00 p.m., and would stay until 4:30 or 5:00 a.m. when the club would reopen. A number of members that work on a swing shift asked why co_uldn't the hours be expanded. They also found that there were people that worked in .Los Angeles and that rather than coming at 5:00 a.m. would actually come in at 4:00 or 4:30 a.m. if they were given the opportunity. They dp not really sell many memberships between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m. They found that it did not add much to the operating costs because the cleaning crew was already in there, but it provided a huge convenience to the members to be able to workout earlier than 5:00 a.m. or later than 1 7:00 p.m. At the present time, that is only the case Monday thrpugh Thursday. They will close at 8:00 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. Wes Pringle, 23421 South Point Drive, Suite 190, Laguna Hills, CA: Stated they have been involved with the project since it was started. Responded to the questions raised regarding parking at Festival Drive by stating they are proposing if that is used, .again it would only be used if the additional 20,000 square feet of retail is put in which may or may not happen. However, if it does happen it would be restriped, the current 2-way left turn lane would be removed and there would be 03-17-97 Page 22 left turn channelization at the driveways. Other points there would only be a centerline which would be moved over and parking would only be on one side of the street. In essence, that is a 40- foot wide street. It is 8 feet for parking which would leave 32 feet fora 2-way traffic, so it is more than adequate to accommodate parking on one side with 2-way traffic. As far as traffic increase to the theater, theaters are generally low trip generators during peak hours. They generate traffic during the evening times and especially on Saturdays. During the mornings there is no peak traffic generated and the afternoon peaks are generally low compared with other uses. With regards to the child care, they have done a number of studies and he felt it was definitely not 2 or 4 trips per child. In most cases, there are multiple children per car and not all children are there every day. Chairman Messe: Asked if their parking study showed an adequacy of 11 parking spaces, would he suggest that they reduce the amount of square footage on the retail or possibly reduce the number of seats on the theater? Wes Pringle: Responded the deficiency is theoretical. There are spaces available on the lower level at that time. This was done in consultation with staff and it was felt this was a better approach. Keep in mind., they are doing a lot of estimating as to what the future might be. Typically when the theater expands the parking demands that exist now decreased somewhat. Dorothy McNukin, resident of Anaheim Hills: Stated she lives with noise and traffic on a daily basis. At 3:00 p.m. in the afternoon she can not get out of the parking area from the school due to traffic congestion. Any of these facilities being increased is going to be totally undesirable for the residents of Anaheim Hills. PU6LIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Rebuttal: Wes Pringle: Stated there will be an increase in traffic under the existing specific plan as well as what is being proposing. The increase of traffic, however, is not going to be greater than what was anticipated in the original specific plan. Chairman Messe: Asked Traffic Engineering due to 11 spaces, would they suggest reducing the square footage of retail or removing some seats from the theater? Alfred Yalda: Responded if it is agreeable with the applicant when they come back to build that 20,000 square feet, at that time we can review the parking situation and see what the parking need is at the time. Michelle Rolling: Stated they also looked at building 10,000 sq. ft. rather than 20,000 square feet and when they looked at that study, they were well within the parking requirements. Possibly a compromise would be that if they built out 10,000 sq. ft., it would not have to go back. Whereas, if they built out more than 10,000 sq. ft. then they would have to go back. Alfred Yalda: Responded in looking at the overall parking that would be fine. Michelle Rolling: Asked Alfred if they do the parking count then they would only be 2,000 square feet shy. 03-17-97 Page 23 Alfred Yalda: Responded yes. So if you go back 18,000, for example, you do not have that shortage. Michelle Holling: Asked it it would be acceptable to build up to 18,000? Alfred Yalda: Responded sure. Michelle Holling: Stated that is what they will do. Chairman Messe: Asked for Alfred Yalda's assistance in figuring if they dropped 12,000 sq. ft. of retail, how many required parking spaces would be dropped? Alfred Yalda: Responded after 100,000 sq. ft. actually the parking goes down to 4.5 per thousand, so to answer the question it would go down to about 50 parking spaces. He explained all they have to do is update the traffic study and if at that time there is adequate parking then leave it the way it is. He responded he believed they have a plan for retail. .Michelle Holling: Responded at the moment they do not have any prospective tenants for the 20,000 square feet. Commissioner Henninger: Asked if it would it be possible to build all those new air conditioning units through some sort of noise muffling efforts to reduce the noise 2 dB (decibels)? Michelle Holling: Responded she is not an expert in that area but they would certainly take a look at it. Commissioner Henninger: Stated he proposed that they add a condition that says they develop noise reduction on the existing and proposed air conditioning systems to yield a 2d8 improvement over existing conditions. Michelle Holling: Responded she is not certain at this time. Commissioner Bostwick: Stated there may be a way they can put a shield to direct the noise towards the freeway to the north rather than going straight up which would be heard by the neighbors because it is going to travel the direction of the air. Commissioner Henninger. Stated they will develop noise reduction methods with a goal of 2 d8 reduction-and that a final plan will brought back to the Planning Commission for review .and approval. If it is determined that 2d6 is not possible then they can do something about it w_it_hout having to readvertise it. Commissioner Bostwick: Stated the traffic is not a cause of The Festival Center but rather other contributing factors. There was further discussion regarding parking. 03-17-97 Page 24 ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Approved Waiver of Code Requirement Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3920 with the fallowing changes: Added the following conditions: That prior to the issuance of a building permit for the general retail uses (up to 20,000 square feed, an updated parking study shall be prepared by a qualified traffic engineer and the results shall be submitted to the Zoning Division of the Planning Department for review by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and the Planning Commission as a .Report and Recommendation item to determine if the parking is adequate to accommodate said general retail uses. That a sound study shall be prepared determining the current dB reading of existing roof mounted air-conditioning equipment and methods for reducing the existing reading of the equipment affecting the residential properties to the south by two 121 dB's. All new equipment shall have a dB reading not exceeding this two (21 dB reduction. Said study shall be submitted to the Zoning Division of the Planning Department as a Report and Recommendation item for Planning Commission review. Implementation of said study shall be required as directed by the Commission. Approved Revisions to Development Area 2 Site Plan of Specific Plan No. 90-1. Commissioner Bostwick offered a Motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristol and MOTION CARRIED {Commissioners Mayer and Peraza absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to Council amendment of Condition No. 9 of Ordinance No. 5110 to read as follows: "9. That the striping on Festival Drive shall be modified to provide 50 on-street parking spaces within the vicinity of the theater. The striping plan shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval prior to issuance of any building permit for additional square footage (up to 20,000 square feet) for general retail uses located in Development Area 2." And further, recommended that the Council review Conditional Use Permit No. 3920, the Revisions to Development Area 2 Site Plan of Specific Plan fJo. 90-1, and the Revision to Ordinance No. 5110 at a public hearing. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Mayer and Peraza absent) DISCUSSION TIME: 35 minutes 03-17-97 Page 25 9a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) 9b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3817 (READVERTISED) OWNER: LEDERER ANAHEIM LIMITED, 1990 Westwood Boulevard, #250, Los Angeles, CA 90025 AGENT: ROBERT WEISS, 1440 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD, ANAHEIM, CA 92805 LOCATION: 1440 South Anaheim Boulevard (Anaheim Indoor Marketolacel. Property is approximately 14.74 acres, being located north and east of the northeast corner of Cerritos Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard. Petitioner requests approval of revised plans to relocate a previously-approved indoor entertainment center, to add an approximate 3,500 square-foot outdoor event area and to amend or delete conditions of approval to reflect the requested revisions. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-29 Approved Approved, as readvertised for 2 years (To expire 3-17-991 SR6464JK.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.. OPPOSITION: None Applicant's Statement Les Lederer, General Partner of Lederer Anaheim Limited, the owner of subject property: Stated they essentially are switching .around some existing uses that they had. They meet with staff and he had just spoken with Judy Kwok and indicated there was a correction to the staff report. 03-17-97 Page 26 Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner, Planning Department: Stated she had been advised that there were changes to the chart on page 4 of the staff report as follows (changes in boldl: USE SQUARE FOOTAGE PARKING PARKING RATIO REQUIRED Retail Stores 86,948 sq. ft. 478 Broadcast Studio 3,514 sq. ft. 132 (no seating, max. 30 performers/employees & max. 269 person studio audience) Proposed Outdoor 3,283 Imax. 370 172 Entertainment Area seats/patron and 30 employees /performers) Total Parking Spaces Required 1,200 There are 1,215 parking spaces existing. Les Lederer: Stated he wanted to point out that these requirements were brought to the attention of the staff in a letter that is part of the Planning Commissioner's packet. They are in agreement with staff's recommendations. On page 7 of the staff report, they requested that they not be required to give up Conditional Use Permit No. 3665 which permitted a pawn shop type operation with their existing jewelry stores. They do not have a jewelry store that is operating as such now but it is something that they have always wanted to have. There is a possibility that an existing jeweler may want to do that as an adjunct to their business. Chairman fvlesse: Asked when a pawn shop receives a business license does the Police review those? Greg Hastings: Responded he believed that they do, through business they receive a copy for their review. Les Lederer: Stated on paragraph 18, it is not their intention of having concerts or amplified music but they would like the right under the conditional use permit to do so should they have the special event. The special events permits would not be denied based on the provision of the conditional use permit. They would like paragraph 1 S to say except as may be allowed with a special events permit. Similarly although it is extremely unlikely, they are getting much competition from some of the large outdoor swap meets that have concerts. They get reasonable groups that is cost prohibitive for them to do unless they are allowed to serve beer and wine. They have never done that and it is not their intention to do it, but they would like to be able to do that with a special events permit. If they find something that works they can come in and show it to staff and Code Enforcement. 03-17-97 .Page 27 (Revision) Mr. Lederer: Stated they would like Conditional Use Permit No. 3817 to be granted for the duration of Conditional Use Permit No. 3400 which is their master conditional use permit for the property, expires on April 22, 2001. Les Lederer: Stated sometimes they charge and other times they do not charge for these outdoor events. They hope that there would not be any restrictions on the right to charge. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Melanie Adams, Associate Civil Engineer, Public Works Department: Stated she would like to add a condition that was passed in the IDC meeting but did not get in the staff report, relative to sewer fees in the area. That prior to commencement of the activity, the developer shall pay the sewer impact and improvement fee for the south central area for the new outdoor event area. Les Lederer: Stated they do not expect that there will be any impact from their outdoor usage because it is drawn from their existing clientele. He did not know how much the sewer impact fee wasl Melanie Adams: Responded the fee is currently 5160 per thousand square feet. It does increase the useable area within their development so they do believe it is applicable. Based on just the new outdoor event area. Commissioner .Henninger: Asked Code Enforcement for their opinion on this proposal of allowing alcohol sales during a special event in the outdoor areal Bruce Freeman, Code Enforcement Supervisor, Code Enforcement Division: Stated anytime they have an operation that is operating outside of the building their concerns are increased. What was proposed .initially is that this would be for sports type activities. The possibility for problems with increase significantly when alcohol is this type of entertainment. They would have some reservation as would the Police Department. Commissioner Henninger: Stated if they approve this they would be approving a CUP with a sporting type events in this outdoor area. With modifications that have been asked it seems that he is asking for possibly having a concert with alcohol sales as a special event. If they were to allow that then he would come in and .ask for a special event. How do you condition thatl Cheryl Flores: Responded the special event permit does not allow cover the use of alcohol. It is for the event~and it does not have anything to do with the alcohol use. Selma Mann: Stated she does understand that it is quite easy to get a permit from ABC for a period of time for a special event and they may recall some of the issues that arose with regard to the Halloween Open House (special) event that was apparently quite troublesome for the City. There is actually very little control and very :little that can be done when something is a problem with regard to the alcohol use. If there are to be any conditions the Commission may want to consider that carefully at this point so it is part of the conditional use permit rather than relying on the special events permit which is largely unregulated. 03-17-97 Page 28 Bruce Freeman: Responded to Commissioner Henninger's questions of allowing entertainment on a special event basis by stating it was his understanding again that this was for sporting events, at that point he did not have concerns. However, there have been live entertainment music etc. on that same location in that corner of the property and they have received a number of complaints, the sound does carry for long distances and they do not always occur then they are working but they get the complaints afterwards regarding the loud music, etc. Discussion following the action: Les Lederer: Asked if it would be with charge or without charge on these sporting events? Commissioner Henninger: There is no condition regarding that. Selma Mann: Stated if this is a special event the applicant would still need to comply with the Code and obtain a special event permit. Chairman Messe: Stated this would need to be brought before Planning Commission on a timely fashion. Cheryl Flores: Asked for a clarification if this was for each and every outdoor events or anything other than wrestling? Chairman Messe: Responded anything other than a sporting event, ACTION: Determined that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Approved revised plans for Conditional Use Permit No. 3817. Modified Resolution No. PC96-18, adopted in conjunction with the approval of this Conditional Use Permit, as follows: Modified Condition Nos. 3a, 3b and 13 to read as follows: "(3a1 That all uses at the subject property shall be in conformance with the required parking chart as contained in paragraph 12 of the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated March 17, 1997. (3b) That this entertainment facility shall be limited to the maximum number of seats approved by the Anaheim Fire Department. Seating in excess of five hundred 15001 seats shall not be permitted unless a separate variance of the minimum number of parking spaces is approved by the Planning Commission and/or City Council in conjunction with adult'-noticed public hearing. (13) That subject property shall be developed :substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Revision 03-17-97 Page 29 No. 1 to Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2." Added the following conditions: 17. That no outdoor concerts or amplified music shall be permitted. That no alcohol sales/service shall be permitted in conjunction with indoor or outdoor entertainment uses. That the applicant may request outdoor entertainment (other than sporting events) on a case by case basis to the Planning Commission as a Report and Recommendation item to be conditioned, approved or denied as determined by the Commission. 18. That the outdoor event area shall be limited to sporting-type events. 19. That all outdoor events shall comply with the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 6.70 "Sound Pressure Levels" . 20. That the indoor entertainment uses shall be limited to live music concerts, closed TV broadcasts, and catered banquets as stipulated to by the petitioner. 21. That provided the restrictions of the Anaheim Fire .Department are not lesser, the maximum occupancy of the indoor entertainment area shall be 269 (audience) and 30 (employee/performers), as stipulated to by the petitioner." 22. That prior to commencement of activity, the developer shall pay the sewer impact and improvement fee for the south central area for the new outdoor event area. 23. That subject use permit is hereby granted for a period of two 121 years, to expire on March 17, 1999. VOTE: 4-0 (Commissioner Bostwick declared a conflict of interest and Commissioners Mayer and Peraza were absent) DISCUSSION TIME: 17 minutes 03-17-97 Page 30 10a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 10b. VARIANCE NO. 4301 OWNER: WILLIAM C. TAORMINA AND VINCENT C. TAORMINA, P.O. Box 309, Anaheim, CA 92815-0309 AGENT: RICHARD B. WINN, P.O. Box 309, Anaheim, CA 92815- 0309 LOCATION: 1070-1090 North Blue Gum Street. Property is approximately 1.2 acres located at the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Blue Gum Street. Waivers of minimum landscaped setback adjacent to an arterial highway ILa Palma Avenue) and a freeway frontage road (La Mesa Avenue) and permitted encroachments into required yards, to construct a private off-site employee parking lot for a regional material recovery facility and an adjacent aluminum parts manufacturer and temporary Cal-Trans employee/contractor parking. VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. Continued to 3-31-97 SR6595KP.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION, OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the March 31, 1997 Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to complete the required landscape plans. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Mayer and Peraza absent) DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 03-17-97 Page 31 11a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 11b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTS 11 c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3915 OWNER: MOBIL OIL CORPORATION, 3700 W. 190th Street, Torrance, CA 90504 AGENT: HUSSEIN BERRI, 16205 Hemp Circle, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 LOCATION: 1199 South State College Boulevard (Mobil Service Station . Property is approximately 0.52 acre located at the northwest corner of Ball Road and State College Boulevard. To permit the expansion of a service station and accessory convenience market to include sales of fast-food and retail sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption and to construct a new drive-through self-serve car wash with waivers of minimum parking lot landscaping, permitted location of freestanding signs, minimum distance between freestanding signs .and minimum landscaping adjacent to interior property lines. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. Continued to 3-31-97 SR6460KB.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Applicant's Statement: David Rose, Regents Group, 3870 La Sierra, Suite 193, Riverside, CA 92505; on behalf of the property owner and applicant: Stated the request to reactivate and expand an existing and vacant Mobil station located on the northwest corner of Ball Road and State College Blvd. across from another abandon and vacant gas station. There is also a Shell and a Chevron on the subsequent corners. The proposal is for the applicant to take out the existing station from Mobil, reactivate as a Mobil station and expand the existing which consist of some bay as well as a very small mini mart at 643 square feet as well as adding a 700 (plus or minus) square foot self service drive through car wash. They were in agreement with staff's recommendations and conditions of approval, with the exception of the following six conditions Condition No. 23 and 27, page 10 -Currently there is a ranch style architecture. In a letter to the Planning Commission and staff, Mobil requested that the applicant be allowed to maintain the future style of the Mobil "branding" which :includes a metal facia wraparound banner. The 03-17-97 Page 32 applicant's desire is to come forward with a modification of the existing structure, putting on a wraparound band on the interior property side with the Mobil logo which is standard for all stations in the area. Basically, a duplication of what exists across the street at the Chevron station. Mr. Rose forwarded copies to Commission and staff . He explained the photo shows across the street a project approved two years ago (January 1995) has the same type of facia that they are proposing. The only difference being the applicant is not proposing any type of symbol or wording on the State College and/or .Ball frontage. On the Chevron station it shows their "Coat of Arms" on the street frontages and there is a Chevron on the facia. They are proposing is to put Mobil on the north and south on one side (State College Blvd.) and a Mobil on the east and west (Ball Rd.l, so they are not actually fronting the street, they are more internal towards the property. The reason for this is gasoline sales is no longer profitable since they making about 1 G a gallon. Some of the independents are probably making less than that, they are actually selling their unleaded gas at a loss. Other gas stations .are now including such services as a bank, dry cleaning service which delivers and .beer and wine. The reason for this is due to competition. Mr. Rose stated basically the applicant is requesting is to have the ability to market his product and have the same opportunity as his neighbor across the street has. The applicant has come in with a number of variations from his original proposal. He is no longer requesting a :pole sign but rather a monument sign. He is also no longer coming in with secondary advertising signs and applicant also deleted a couple of the variances. One of the applicants major concerns is the ability for people to see him and hopefully customers with a Mobil credit card are not going to be interested in the price but interested in the .product that they are use to. Condition No. 28 -The applicant feels they have addressed that and have redesigned the site. Unfortunately, they did not get the Conditions in a timely manner to where they have a new plan and have shown that plan to the Traffic Division and there are some issues regarding the location of the handicapped space. They are willing to relocate the handicapped space in front of the entrance which would address the issues of traveling through drive isle. So they are proposing to have 17 spaces. 3. Condition No. 30 - A concern to both the applicant and to Mobil. They are proposing to have two driveways at the corner of State College Blvd. and Ball Rd. They are proposing to shorten that driveway to 25 feet which would then accommodate two parking spaces at the corner and provide a landscape planter. Once the critical intersection dedications are taken by the City in 10 to 20 years, there will be provision for landscaping on the corner. The major reason for having the second driveway for deliveries of petroleum products. Chairman'Messe: Asked how many driveways were on the plans reviewed by Commission in the morning session? David Rose: Three driveways. He then continued they are proposing to reduce the driveway by 5 feet. Five feet further from the corner than is existing at the present time. David Rose (continued): 4. Condition No. 32 -The applicant has no problem with the four 15-gallon trees to be placed at the corner. The concern is with the 3-foot high landscaped berm. Is the signage permitted to be on top of the berm or that berm be located in the front of the signagel Since they are no longer proposing to have a pole sign they are concern that the berm would black out the sign which is only 8 feet high and their concern is whether the berm would be located underneath the sign or in front of the sign. 03-17-97 Page 33 Cheryl Flores: Responded typically the sign is measured from the grade of the sidewalk rather than from the top of the berm. David Rose: Asked if it would be permitted to put a shortened sign on top of the berm if it was of a lesser height) Cheryl Flores: Responded the maximum height of the sign is as always as long as it does not exceed from the grade of the sidewalk width criteria. David Rose: Stated general speaking if they wanted to change what was permitted, they would come back as an Report & Recommendation item, if they wanted to revise the signage plans that are approved today. Chairman Messe: Yes, if it was general conformance but if it was something out of the ordinary that they wanted to do it would have to be a new hearing. David Rose: 5. Condition No. 35 regarding the two bathrooms. The applicant does not have a problem with that their only concern is they have another station in the City where only one bathroom was required. The last approved station last week only had one bathroom also, and asked for a point of clarification for the second bathroom. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Commissioner Henninger: Stated his concern, regarding Condition No. 23, with the architecture and the appearance. David Rose: Stated they are proposing the same exact style as the station across the street. Chairman Messe: Asked if the were dropping the "ranch" style appearance) David Rose: Responded they are leaving the structure exactly as they are and wrapping a facia board that so that will not be visible from the street. Commissioner Henninger: Stated the elevations that were presented are different from what Mr. Rose is suggesting. The major elements are the way the roof would like behind the facia. David Rose: Asked whether or not the gable would project above? Commissioner Henninger: Responded yes, how far up does it go and what is the maferiall. On the photo Chevron Station it looks like it was reroofed with some gray material so the roof line fades into the background. David Rose: Stated the applicant is held under Mobil's strict conformity guidelines. Mobil will close a station dovvn if they do not meet those guidelines. The applicant is not going to do anything that would not be beneficial to his site. Chairman Messe: Stated it looked like a "hodgepodge" architecture from the elevation drawing. 03-17-97 Page 34 David Rose: Responded everything that goes through is approved by Mobil station. They do not have a problem committing to the Commission that their elevation plans will look actually like Chevron. Perhaps it could come back as a Report & Recommendation item with extrapolation of the facia boards. Greg Hastings: Stated the photo shows staff's concerns regarding the gables showing. Staff would recommend that there be a way that the entire restructure be hidden from view. Commissioner Henninger: Stated he agreed. In reviewing the elevations had a much stronger concern regarding the roof line of the existing "ranch" style building. It seems that the roofing material would need to match the Chevron station. David Berri, 8441 Emerido PI., Westminster: Stated the canopy will definitely be reroofed in the same manner as the Exxon. The plans, regarding the elevation of the canopy, will be a 3 foot facia. The roof top will definitely be reroofed. The side of the gables coming up to a point, that area will be capped off with a flat sheet metal facia, then painted. The gable going up will not be seen, only a flat facia will appear. The same company that did the facias at the Chevron Station also did their same canopies over at a site in Santa Ana, which is going to be the same. David Rose: Stated the applicant is willing to do is to further expand and raise the facia. Currently it is a three foot which is the minimum standard required by Mobil for a facia. That could go higher as well as a capping of where the gable meets. Mr. Rose indicated he did .not know if there was allowance or restriction for that in the Code. David Rose: Stated the proposal of the facia is a minimum standard for Mobil (three feet) and what the applicant has indicated if it is the desire of Commission and/or staff then they could further raise the facia and make it as high as four feet. The issue is that comes into play is whether or not there is a Code requirement or allowance for the facia height. The other issue is they will be capping off the ends which are setback because there is a wraparound facia of where the gable actually meets. The pitch of the roof will not be seen, there will be a piece of flat metal off to the side which is painted to match the color so it blends in. Commissioner Bristol: Stated the picture of the gable of the other site compared to the picture on the Chevron site, it's much more severe than is gable, is that rightl David Rose: Responded him guess is that it probably is based upon his knowledge of the Mobil canopies which is why he indicated they could go higher facia. Commissioner Bristol: Would the station across the street be about 2 or 3 feed So the facia across the street on their side would be approximately 1 %z times or 2 times. David Rose: Stated the facia on Chevron is three feet. Commissioner Bristol: Stated he presumed that the facia on his side would have to be double that. David Rose: Stated on the photo on the street side versions of the canopy you can see how the canopy or pitch actually is, painted white. So it is about the same, canopy may even hang down lower. 03-17-97 Page 35 Commission Bostwick: Stated you could probably cover the canopies with an expanded facia but the actual station building itself with the birdhouse on the top and different architecture because the roof is going in two different directions. How do they propose to cover that? David Rose: Responded the birdhouse is going to be removed. The reason for showing the photo is strictly as a representation. Commissioner Boydstun: (Referencing the photo) Asked if they would be changing the roof covering on that part so that it blends in with what they are doing? David Rose: Responded it will either be the roof changed or painted (new shingles) in a fashion similar to the Chevron Station. David Berri: The .new shingles he believed would be composition which is standard on service station, he did not think it would be a wood roof. Chairman Messe: Asked Alfred Yalda to address the .parking issue and asked if he was satisfied with the 17 spaces. What happens to the two spaces that were close to the driveway? Commission then reviewed the new (revised) plans. David Rose: Stated he had a photo of the existing canopy and a photo of the identification on the facia boards in reference of Condition No. 23. Commissioner Bristol: Asked if the plans have changed from the ones they reviewed in the morning session. It appeared the entrance to the tunnel to the car wash was changed. David Rose: Yes, it has been reversed. The changes in your plan are basically the two spaces that were along the northerly property line along State College with Car's Jr. Those two spaces have been removed and located on the east side of the building. There has also been a third space that was not included in the original plan which has been located parallel to the building on the south side pf the building on Ball and then two spaces on the corner have been changed and given an allowance of landscaping at the corner and also the direction of entry and exit for the car wash has been changed. Commissioner Henninger: Stated he was not comfortable that he understands how the architecture is going to work and he would like petitioner to take whatever time is necessary to revise the architecture.. The architecture and elevations shown current are not acceptable to him."Perhaps they may have to do some restricting of the roof or put higher facia boards on it. Chairman Messe: Stated especially the service station. Commissioner Henninger: Stated he liked the idea of making it look like the Chevron. They did a good job there. 03-17-97 Page 36 David Rose: That would be no problem with the condition as far as the facia bands go on both the canopies and the buildings to come back before them as an Report & Recommendation item and have a much more detailed drawings and elevations done as an R&R because of the time line of negotiations with Mobil, the applicant does not desire a continuance of the hearing. If Commission wishes to approve the item today and come back with an R&R they not have a problem with that. Commissioner Boydstun: Now that you have changed your layout you are planning of fast food? David Rose: Responded yes. Since the original submittal there has been a OSR. The reason that has not been identified is .because they are independent, they have been an independent franchise. The have not designated who they are going to go with, because he is an independent versus a corporate there are trying to get the best deal they can get as a franchisee. That is the reason for the generic outline of the floor plan. Once a tenant is identified they can come back as an Report & Recommendation on this also. Commissioner Bostwick: Asked what they were going to do for signage? David Rose: Responded it would be added to the monument sign on the corner. There will not be any facia sign on the canopies or the building. There will be a sign similar to a car wash slot. They are required to have certain signage according to State requirement for advertising, etc. and what is left is at there discretion (a small panel). An example far be ARCO, they are do doing a lot of 31 Flavors and Taco Bell Expresses. The primary use would be a service station. Chairman Messe: Stated before them is a new set of plans compared with what they were shown in the morning session and suggested a continuance to give time to review the plans. David Rose: Responded that was fine. The reason there is a new plans before Commission is because they received a set of conditions on Friday which they had never seen which were not the same as they received from IDC and tried to address the issues that staff raised. Chairman Messe: Stated he did thought that they have tried to address some of those issues but staff and Commission should be given the courtesy to be able to review the new plans. Greg Hastings: Indicated there was no representation at IDC from the petitioner. Commissioner Henninger: Stated they would need to submit the .revised architecture by the end of this week to Planning staff. David Rose: Responded yes, that would not be a problem. ACTION; Continued subject request to the March 31, 1997 Planning Commission meeting in order for staff to review the revised plans submitted at the March 17, 1997 meeting. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Mayer and Peraza absent) DISCUSSION TIME: 40 minutes 03-17-97 Page 37 12a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 12b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3921 3-31-97 12c. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 97-05 OWNER: F.J. HANSHAW ENTERPRISES, INC., 1092 Westminster Avenue, Garden Grove, CA 92843 AGENT: DESAPRIYA JINADASA, 1112 North Brookhurst Street, #1, Anaheim, CA 92801 LOCATION: 1112 North Brookhurst Street. Suite 1 ICheersl. Property is approximately 0.91 acre, located north and east of the northeast corner of Brookhurst Street and La Palma Avenue. To permit a 2,200 square-foot convenience market with sales of alcohol for off-premises consumption within a commercial retail center. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY RESOLUTION NO. SR6476DS.WP2 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the March 31, 1997 Planning Commission meeting in order for the petitioner to address issues relative to parking requirements. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Mayer and Peraza absent) DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 03-17-97 Page 38 13a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 13b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 13c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3914 OWNER: CARL KARCHER ENTERPRISES, RAYMOND & ESTELLE SPEHAR, TRUSTEES, MARCIA ANN HALLIGAN, P.O. Box 4349, Anaheim, CA 92803 AGENT: CONNIE CARTER, 315 First Street, JJU-130, Encinitas, CA 92024 LOCATION: 5701 East La Palma Avenue Karl's Jr. Restaurant). Property is approximately 0.9 acre, located at the northeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway. To permit the 1,109 square-foot expansion of an existing drive- through restaurant for an outdoor playground/dining area with 36 additional seats with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. Continued to 3-31-97 SR6597DS.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the March 31, 1997 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow for additional time for the petitioner to review the conditions and recommendations for this project. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Mayer and Peraza absent) DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 03-17-97 Page 39 14a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3918 OWNER: PUBLIC STORAGE EURO PARTNERSHIP VI, LTD., Attn: Kay Merg, P.O. Box 25025, Glendale, CA 91221 AGENT: LOS ANGELES CELLULAR, Attn: Holly Sandler & Leslie Daigle, 17785 Center Court Drive North, Cerritos, CA 90701 J.L. HARE AND ASSOCIATES, Attn: Holly Sandler, 17581 Irvine Boulevard, #200, Tustin, CA 92680 LOCATION: 4880 East La Palma Avenue. Property is approximately 3.74 acres, having a frontage of approximately 340 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue, being located approximately 480 feet east of the centerline of Hancock Street. To permit an unmanned 420 square-foot cellular communications facility within an existing self-storage business with an approximate 47-foot high triangular monument (tower) with twelve face-mounted antennas. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. Continued to 3-31-97 SR6599KP.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the March 31, 1997 Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to submit revised plans for a project more architecturally compatible with the surrounding area. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Mayer and Peraza absent) DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 03-17-97 Page 40 15a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 15b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTS 15c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3919 OWNER: WORLDWIDE REAL ESTATE, 515 Marin Street, Thousand Oaks, CA 91630 AGENT: WHITFIELD ASSOCIATES, 1100 South Coast Highway, Suite 201, Laguna Beach, CA 92651 LOCATION: 8200-8250 Crustal Drive. Property is approximately 2.3 acres located at the southeast corner of Pullman Street and Crystal Drive. To permit a 15,050 square-foot, 2-level automobile sales and service facility with accessory parts sales, an interior showroom, 1 1 service bays, roof .mounted equipment, outdoor (at grade) and second level vehicle display/storage areas with waivers of (a) permitted freestanding signs, (bl permitted directional signs and Icl permitted wall .signs. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-30 Approved Approved, in part Granted, in part SR6474JK.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Applicant's Statement: Gary Whitfield, Whitfield and Associates, 1100 South Coast .Highway, Laguna Beach, CA 92651, represented the owner and the applicant: Stated they had reviewed the conditions and were in agreement with staff's recommendations. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Approved, in part, the Waiver of Code Requirement: Approved Waivers lal and Icl as proposed, and approved the directional language for the two directional signs adjacent to Crystal Drive and denied the third directional sign at the corner of Pullman Street and Crystal Drive for Waiver Ibl. Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3919. 03-17-97 Page 41 VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Mayer and Peraza absent) DISCUSSION TIME: 3 minutes ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MEETING ADJOURNED AT 4:15 P.M. TO THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION MORNING WORK SESSION OF MARCH 31, 1997 AT 11:00 A.M. Respectfully submitted, ®~ Ossie Edmondson Senior Word Processing Operator 03-17-97 Page 42