Loading...
Minutes-PC 1997/07/21SlJ ARY ACTT®N GEN ANAEI CITY PLAN ING CO ISSIO MEETING IVrOiVDAY, JULY 21, 1997 9:00 A.M. STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSION OF VARIOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES ® REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF A PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT RELATED TO THE CITY'S BUSINESS SIGN PROVISIONS 10:00 A.M. DISCUSSION OF SEPARATION OF FACILITIES AS RELATED TO ICF/DD-H (HEALTH CARE) HOMES AND RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES AND DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS BETWEEN LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE HOMES. 1 1:00 A.M. PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW 1:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BOYDSTUN, BOSTWICK, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, MAYER, NAPOLES, PERAZA COMMISSIONER ABSENT: NONE STAFF PRESENT: Selma Mann Assistant City Attorney Joel Fick Planning Director Greg Hastings Zoning Division Manager Cheryl Flores Senior Planner Linda Johnson Senior Planner Karen Freeman Associate Planner Tim Dunn Code Enforcement Officer Tom Engle Vice Detail Melanie Adams Associate Civil Engineer Taher Jalai Associate Traffic Engineer Lee Sohl City Clerk Edith Harris PC Support Supervisor Margarita Solorio Senior Secretary Ossie Edmundson Senior Word Processing Operator Mark Yuravich Community Policing AC072197.WP Oath or Affirmation of Allegiance Reappointment -Phyllis Boydstun. ~~ Reappointed New Planning Commissioner -Robert (Bob) Napoles. ~) Appointed Swearing in of Robert Napoles and reappointment of Phyllis Boydstun conducted by Lee Sohl, City Clerk. REPORTS APID RECOiVIRAEfiIDAYIOPJS A. a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREY: APPROVED) Approved b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3976 -REVIEW OF FINAL Approved SIGN PLANS: Yousef Ibrahim, 1200 Quail Street, #220 Newport Beach, CA 92660, requests review and approval of final sign plans for apreviously-approved convenience market. Property is located at 1200 South Brookhurst Street. Continued from the Commission meeting of June 9, 1997. ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Henninger and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Napoles abstained), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and does hereby find that the NegatNe Declaration previously approved in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3916 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation in connection with this request. Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Henninger and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Napoles abstained), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission _ does hereby approve the submitted final sign plan indicating a maximum sign panel area of 40-square foot for the convenience SR6506DS.WP_ market. 07-21-97 Page 2 B. a. CEOA EXEMPTION SECTION 150611b113) Concurred w/Staff b. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 97-08 -PERTAINING TO Recommended VEHICULAR PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS: adoption of the Staff-initiated request to amend Chapter 18.06 pertaining to ordinance to City minimum parking requirements for motor vehicle repair Council facilities. ACTION: Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby concur with staff that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15061(b)(3), as defined in the State EIR and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirements to prepare an EIR. Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council the adoption of the draft ordinance attached to the staff report dated July 21, 1997 amending Chapter 18.06 of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to minimum parking requirements for motor vehicle repair facilities. SR6716JK:DOC 07-21-97 Page 3 C. a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREY: APPROVED) Approved b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3070 -REQUEST FOR Approved EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF (fo expire 9-16-98) APPROVAL: Audrey Welton (Service Station Services), 4 Hutton Center Drive, Suite 711, Santa Ana, CA 92707, requests extension of time to comply with condftlons of approval (to construct a 1,126 square foot service station Including a 1,000 square foot convenience market). This petition was originally approved on September 16, 1996. Property is located at 956 South Brookhurst Street -Arco °AM\PM service station. ACTION: Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and does hereby find that the Negative Declaration previously approved in connection wRh Conditional Use Permit No. 3870 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation in connection with this request. Commissioner Bristol offered a motion., seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the requested extension of time for Conditional Use Permit No. 3870, to expire on September 16, 1998. SR6719KB.WP D. a. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 1370. 3007 & 3774 b. VARIANCE NO. 2470 -REQUEST FOR TERMINATION: J.J. Coffey (Arco), 4 Center Pointe Drive, La Palma, CA 90623, requests termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 1370 (permitting a fully enclosed restaurant in the ML Zone), 3007 (permitting an automatic car wash in conjunction with an existing service station) and 3774 (permitting expansion of an existing vacant restaurant to Include adrive-through lane wRh waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) and Variance No. 2470 (approving waivers of maximum number of freestanding signs, minimum distance between freestanding _ signs, minimum distance of freestanding signs from abutting property line and maximum area of a freestanding sign in parking landscape area, to construct 5 signs in conjunction with a proposed service station). Property is located at 1801 South State College Boulevard. TERMINATION RESOLUTION NO. PC97-87 Terminated (Vote: 7-0) SR3702KB.WP 07-21-97 Page 4 E. VARIANCE NO 1288 -REQUEST FOR A TERMINATION: Youssef Ibrahim, 1200 Quail Street, Suite 220, Newport Beach, CA 92660, requests termination of Variance No. 1288 (to permit the establishment of a dance studio). Property is located at 1216 and 1218 South Brookhurst Street. TERMINATION :RESOLUTION NO. PC97-88 Terminated (Vote: 7-0) SR6508DS.WP F. a. _CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREY: APPROVED) Approved b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3345 -REQUEST REVIEW Approved AND APPROVAL OF LANDSCAPE PLANS: John Oviyach, (L A. Freightliner)., 700 East Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805, requests review and approval of a final landscape plan. Property is located at 700 East Katella Avenue. ACTION: Commissioner Bdstol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the fnal landscape plan as shown, provided that the future wall sign be affoced to the portion of the building located in the area between the proposed palm trees and that Chinese Fringe trees are planted adjacent to Katella Avenue. SR6721 KB.WP 07-21-97 Page 5 G. a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREY: APPROVED) Approved b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3974 -REQUEST FOR Approved REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF FINAL ELEVATION PLANS: Connie Carter, P.O. Box 146, Silverado, CA 92676, requests review and approval of final elevation plans. Property is located at 5701 East La Palma Avenue -Cart's Jr. Restaurant. ACTION: Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mayer and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Boydstun declared a conflict of interest), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mayer and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Boydstun declared a conflict of interest), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the final elevation plans, as submitted. SR6505DS.WP Commissioner Henninger. Stated staff's recommendation is that they change the :roofing material on this addition. Asked if the applicant was aware of this and in agreement? Steve Capolutto, corporate architect wRh Cad's Jr. Restaurants: The playgrounds that they build currently have a netting shade structure over them. In order to support the roof they would have to build an additional structure, possibly outside the boundaries of the playground. Currently, they are at a minimum height of 14 feet which was approved at the last Commission meeting. Their request is to waive that and just use the shade cloth that is supplied with the playground. Chairman Bostwick: If they put a false front around the perimeter of the play area with file to hide the roof line, how much additional space would be required? Steve Capolutto: Responded about another 2 feet around the perimeter of that playground in order to get it high enough to support a 4 in 12 pitch which would match the roof. In essence, that would end up raising the structure ftselF which contradicts what they were talking about: blocking the view of the tenants in the back. Commissioner Henninger: Stated he did not fully understand their elevation. He referenced photos of a structure they at another location; it has a flat top with a mesh over it. The elevation however appears to show some sort of parapet around it. Steve Capolutto: Stated it is a pitch, a little pftch sill covered with an open 50°,6 mesh cloth. Commissioner Bristol: Asked for clarrfication, is the parapet cloth? Steve Capolutto: It is not really a parapet. Chairman Bostwick: After reviewing the plans with the Commissioners, he stated that now they see what he is referring to as far as the roof not having much pitch to it. It appears it is going to be hard to do that. Commissioner Henninger: Stated he thought they should go with the plans as presented. If they were to build a full file roof on this structure then the pitch of the roof would need to be changed. 07-21-97 Page 6 The roof would then seem to be floating because it would not have much structure underneath holding it . It would not look appropriate. Whereas, what Is being proposed with sheet cloth would look more like a play structure and seems well scaled. Cheryl Flores: Stated staff also agreed. H. a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREY: APPROVED) b. VARIANCE NO. 4292 -REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE FOR APREVIOUSLY- APPROVED OFFICE BUILDING: Dennis Dannahy, 2062 Business Center Drive, Suite 40, Irvine, CA 92612, requests determination of substantial conformance for apreviously- approved office building. Property is located at the northwest comer of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Maude Lane. ACTION: Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Henninger and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Ciry Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously approved negatNe declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mayer and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby determine that the submitted .plans are not in substantial conformance wfth previously approved plans on the basis that this proposal will Intensify the use. Approved Determined that subject request is not in substantial conformance with previously approved plans SR6698MA.WP Chairman Bostwick: Asked Mr. Dannahy to verity that he changed the building from a medical to a real estate office and asked the applicant to explain his proposal. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Dennis Dannahy, architect of the project, 2062 Business Center Drive, SuRe 140, Irvine, CA 92612: Responded that was correct. His client is Ron Douglas from Seven Gables Real Estate. The owner purchased the property from Sam Hanna, who had obtained the original approvals for the building as real estate and medical/dental office. Seven Gables has been in Anaheim for several years and selected this location for their permanent residence. They would like to begin construction as soon as approval, permits, and so forth are completed.. They revised the building and added 700 square feet to accommodate Mr. Douglas's business. Parking was also added. The building height was reduced by 2 feet from the original proposal. Landscaping was added to the project (5 trees and 41 shrubs). They have extended the one-way exft onto Santa Ana Canyon. Road from Maude Lane about 24 feet in order to accommodate parking and to provide more landscaping along the Santa Ana Canyon Road side of the building. Mr. Dannahy stated he reviewed the project with the neighbors and had a signed approved from the neighbor directly adjacent to the property at 1191 Maude Lane (Rosalyn Parell). He attempted to meet with the other neighbors a various occasions and was unsuccessful. Chairman Bostwick: Stated there was a concern in the morning session about the number of real estate agents and how they were going to be staffed at this location. 07-21-97 Page 7 :Dennis Dannahy: The maximum number of agents would be 20. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked how many licenses did they have? Dennis Dannahy: Responded he did not know how many licenses they would have in this office. Chairman Bostwick: Stated K they were to have a meeting that would include the 20 agents and any other staff members, there would not be enough parking spaces. Dennis Dannahy: Emphasized that 20 would be the maximum number employees at the building at any one time which would include office meetings. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked Mr. Dannahy 'rf there was anyone present that might know how many licenses they had? Dennis Dannahy: Responded that he was the only one present. Commissioner Bristol: Asked 'rf they are not going to be open after 6:00 p.m. Dennis Dannahy: Responded Mr. Douglas purchased this property knowing that there were regulations placed on the hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and he would conform to that. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked 'rf they have on file with the City Engineer how they were going to handle the drainage problem? Dennis Dannahy: Responded he realized that there Is a problem with drainage and they would take ail the steps necessary to alleviate the problem. Melanie Adams, Associate Civil Engineer: Stated the grading of drainage plans have not been submitted to date. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked 'rf those plan should have been submitted? Melanie Adams: Responded no, they are submitted in conjunction with the development project. Chairman :Bostwick: Stated the architectural was changed to a Tutor style and asked whether it would exceed the 27 foot height limit. Dennis Dannahy: Responded that it would not. Presently the design they have before them showed an 8 foot section that was a 28 feet 2 inches and he was nofrfied by City staff that was unacceptable. Since then they have reduced h to 27 feet. _. Commissioner Boydstun: Stated she would still like to know how many licenses they have and was concerned how the parking would be effected by the amount of staff attending an office meeting. She did not feel this fs a Report and Recommendation item and thought it should be reheard. Dennis Dannahy: Stated he was not a realtor but he does know that many offices have numerous license within the office, some of which practice out of their house. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked H those people come to the office meetings? Dennis Dannahy: Periodically but not everyone 'rf required to attend. Mr. Douglas has stated that he believes there would be 20 maximum. 07-21-97 Page 8 Commissioner Boydstun: Asked where could the customers park? Denriis Dannahy: Responded Code requires t8 parking stalls and they have provided 20 stalls, which is an increase in the stalls from the previous approval. Commissioner Boydstun: Stated this is an Increase traffic business from what was approved- previousiy. Dennis Dannahy: Stated the original approval was for medical/dental and real estate. Commissioner Boydstun: Stated Commission was very specific on the number of patients that they would have at any one time. Dennis Dannahy: Stated he thought the 2nd floor was real estate and the 1st floor was medical/dental. Commissioner Bristol: Stated there were several comments in the past from .neighbors at this site and ft was for a lesser use than what is being proposed. He felt the applicant should be present to answer questions about the activities of the office. He could not imagine not operating areal estate office after 6:00 p.m. Therefore, he was in favor of putting this item to a public hearing due to the intensification of the use. Commissioner Mayer: Asked 'rf the real estate office was the only use being proposed? Dennis Dannahy: Responded, yes that was the only use. 07-21-97 Page 9 a. EIR NO. 311 (Previousiv-CertiTiedt Approved b. THE DISNEYLAND RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-1 - Approved FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 97-1 FOR THE FUTURE EXPANSION DISTRICT SETBACK AREAS: The Walt Disney Company requests review and approval of the Final Site Plan setting forth the width and design of landscaping in the Future Expansion District setback areas adjacent to the south side of fCatella Avenue and the west side of Haster Street. ACTION: Commissioner Henninger offered a .motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and does hereby find that the previously-certified EIR No. 311 Is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Final Sfte Plan (identified as Exhibit Nos. 1 through 5 on file in the Planning Department), on the basis that the Final Site Plan is in conformance with The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1. Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, .presented the 10-day appeal rights. DR6740W Linda Johnson, Senior Planner: Stated this is a request for a review and approval of the final site plans, setting forth the width and the design of landscaping in the Disneyland Resort future expansion distr(ct setback areas adjacent to Katella Avenue and Haster Street. She presented John Graves of the Disneyland Company who was present to describe the proposed landscaping in more detail. She further stated the Commission had been provided with a plan palette as well as a site plan showing the proposed landscaping. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: John Graves, Development Manager for Walt Disney Imagineering: Stated he was please to be able to present their final sfte plan for Katella Avenue and Haster Street setback areas adjacent to the proposed cast parking facilities. He stated Joining him was a representative from the SWA Group, the landscape consultant for this project, who will briefly describe the plans. As noted by the staff report the landscape plans for the setback areas are consistent wRh the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan. They also provide a layered landscape treatment which will screen the surface parking lot from the adjacent streets. They are excfted about moving forvvard with this project and are confident that the proposed landscape improvements will compliment the planned Katella Smart Street Program. David Berg, SWA Group Landscape Architect: Stated what Is before Commission is one more important piece of a large puzzle. They are please to be able to move forward with the setback landscape for the cast parking lot: the portion that fronts Katella and Haster Street. The palette before Commission consists of vines and shrubs, ground cover and trees which forms the setback landscaped garden environment for those areas fronting Katella and Haster. The landscape is Intending to serve as a dense back drop to provide color, shade and texture, principally to screen the lot from the public vantage points. 07-2 t -97 Paae 10 J. REOUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATION OF A Initiated adjustment SPECIFIC PLAN ADJUSTMENT TO AMEND THE HOTEL CIRCLE SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 93-1 ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Staff requests Planning Commission to Initiate a Specific Plan Adjustment to consider amendments to the Hotel Circle Speck Plan No. 93-1 Zoning and Development Standards relating to, but not limited to, standards addressing the final sfte plan review process, definitions, driveway widths, conditional uses, permitted encroachments, parking, signage and vacation ownership provisions. The 6.8-acre Hotel Circle Specific Plan site is irregularly-shaped wfth frontages of approximately 246 feet on the east side of Clementine Street, 576 feet on the west side of Zeyn Street, 100 feet on the east side of Zeyn Street, 285 feet on the west side of Anaheim Boulevard, and 254 feet on the north side of Katella Avenue and further described as 1742 and 1754 S. Clementine Street; 1730, 1733, 1743 and 1755 S. Zeyn Street; 1733 and 1745 S. Anaheim Boulevard; and, 201 W. Karelia Avenue. ACTION: Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mayer and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby innate a Specific Plan Adjustment to amend the Hotel Circle Specific Plan No. 93-1 Zoning and Development Standards. SR673tDH.WP K REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATION OF A Initiated adjustment SPECIFIC PLAN ADJUSTMENT TO AMEND THE DISNEYLAND RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-1 ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Staff requests Planning Commission to initiate a Specific Plan Adjustment to consider amendments to The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 Zoning and Development Standards relating to, but not limited to, standards addressing height limitations, permitted encroachments and screening requirements. The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan area encompasses approximately 490 acres located within the Anaheim Resort area of the City of Anaheim and is generally located adjacent to and southwest of the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) - between Ball Road and Katella Avenue (with approximately 24.7 acres located south of fCateila Avenue) and east of Walnut Street. - ACTION: Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mayer and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby initiate a Specific Plan Adjustment to amend The Disneyland Resort Specific .Plan No. 92- 1 Zoning and Development Standards. SR6745W.WP 07-21-97 Page 11 L REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATION OF A Initiated adjustment SPECIFIC PLAN ADJUSTMENT TO AMEND THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-2 ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Staff requests Planning Commission to initiate a Specific Plan Adjustment to consider amendments to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 Zoning and Development Standards relating to, but not IlmRed to, standards addressing the final site plan review process, definitions, permitted encroachments, screening requirements, permitted uses and conditional use permit provisions, driveway widths, sign regulations, and special event permits. The Anaheim Resort Specfic Plan area encompasses approximately 554 acres within the Anaheim Resort area of the City of Anaheim and Is generally located adjacent to and southwest of the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) between the West Street/Ball Road interchange and Orangewood Avenue, with a portion located north of the I-5/Harbor Boulevard Interchange. ACTION: Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mayer and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Peraza declared a conflict of Interest), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby initiate a Specific Plan Adjustment to amend the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 Zoning and Development Standards. SR6746LJ.WP 07-21-97 Paoe 12 PUBLIC HEARIPJG ITEMS 2a. CEOA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 21 Concurred w/staff 2b. VARIANCE NO. 1229 (READVERTISED) Modified (To expire 7-21-98) OWNER: City-Initiated, City of Anaheim (Code Enforcement Division/Police Department), 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 823 South Beach Boulevard -Covered Waaon Motel. Property is 1.3 acres, with 190 feet on the west side of Beach Boulevard and is located 975 feet north of the centedine of Ball Road. City-initiated (Code Enforcement Division and Police Department) request to consider revocation or modification of Variance No. 1229 (to construct and operate a 70-unit motel and coffee shop). Continued ftom Commission meeting of April 28, and June 9, 1997. VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. PC97-99 SR6504DS.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Chairman Bostwick: Asked Mr. Parkin iF he had a chance to review the staff report? Gregory Parkin, owner, Wagon Wheel Motet: Responded he had not. Commissioner Peraza: Requested to hear testimony from the Police Department. Tom Engle, Vice Detail, Anaheim Police Department: The Police Department is recommending that the security guard be increased at the sfte to 24-hours a day. It is requested that h be a private security company that is fn no way connected wRh the company that owns the location. There have been Incidents (as recent as Friday and this weekend) at this location having to do with narcotic sales, known prostitutes living In the areas and in the motel. They do not believe the location has proper security for the people living there and to prevent illegal activities in the rooms. Tim Dunn, Code Enforcement Officer, Code Enforcement Division: Stated since their last meeting they have seen signiftcant improvements in the conditions. There were small violations, that maintenance and their maids should be able to take care of. They did note that there were several residents that had been occupying their rooms for longer than 30 days rather than the temporary stay that they look for in motels of this sort and allowed by the variances. He guessed that there were half a dozen long term guests Irving there. He was also concerned with the condition of the roof. In two previous inspections the roof has been leaking Into some second floor rooms. A 07-21-97 Page 13 building official was out at the property last week and was unable to spot any repairs that had been done. They were looking for that as the owner had told them that he had the repairs made. He wanted to firing that up since they will probably have a problem wfth it in a few months. Gregory Parkin: Stated he was very surprised because he walked through the property with Mr. Engle about 10 days ago. His comment to him at that time was that he did not have a problem. He is aware of one the incidents that happened this last weekend and it involved some'peopie who had been kicked off the property in the past; they were on their "don't rent" list. They had seen them on the property earlier and kicked them off but they sneaked back and went in a guest room. There were actually no arrests made but these people were known to the Police as being "bad". Since April there have been 27 calls. That would actually make it only 7 calls a month. Recently they installed a close circuit television monftoring system that monitors both sides of the property. They have video equipment that they purchased but the technician has not installed it yet. In the very near future every activ'tty on that property is going to be video taped. During the day time they have 10 full-time employees, not counting office staff working on the property. He felt the $7,000 to $10,000 necessary for 24-hour security services Ovoid not be effective to prevent police complaints. He has distributed a "don't rent" list and some of the other motels are cooperating with him. There are over 100 names on that list. He feels they are doing everything they can to rid that area of the wrong element. Mark Yuravich, West Area Anaheim Community Policing: Stated he has .been assigned to West Area of Anaheim since about March 1995. He stated they have continue to have the same problems in the area. All those motels on Beach Boulevard are generally the same. Residents complain constantly about them because there are many long term residents there. The motels in that area tend to attract that type of people because the rent is so low. Beach Boulevard is well known for being an area of heavy prostRution and narcotics and those motels really do tend to serve in that purpose. It fs true the calls for that motel are down but working that area he just sees that same thing. That area is under study for redevelopment and he thought that is probably the only thing that is going to cure the area. He felt they have just out lived their usefulness. Chairman Bostwick: Stated Commission has conditioned a number of motels there wfth the security officer 24 hours a day. He asked Mr. Yuravich what is his experience wRh the pertormance of that? Mark Yuravich: Responded 'rf ft is a legftimate security guard not affiliated with the motel then it seems to help. The Pacffic Inn at 426 S. Beach Blvd. has that condition as well as others. Commissioner Peraza: Askedrf it is necessary to require a security guard on a 24-hour basis? Mark Yuravich: Responded Officer Engle thinks 24-hour protection is most desirable. -In his opinion, he would settle not less than from 6: p.m. to 6 a.m. Gregory Parkin: Stated ft was very difficult the first year to get familiar with the situation. In the first year there were 350 calls. That averages to 29 calls perm month and now ft averages to 7 calls. They have been trying to Improvement the situation. Their assistant manager is a state licensed security guard and an ex-Marine. In the past when they were before Commission they had 15 letters of support from their nearest neighbors including a local church and there were 10 people speaking on their behalf. He acknowledged that the building does still need work to be done. He stated 'rf they siphon off every bft of profit provide around the clock security to stop 7 calls a month, would not be enough money to finish off the property. It is going to make progress much more difficult for them. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. 07-21-97 Page 14 Commissioner Boydstun: Asked about Mr. Parkin's long term tenants which is a major problems and how R appears as though he is not willing to get rid of them. Mr. Parkin: Responded they have amended all of their procedures to conform with what Zoning has asked of them. They do not allow anyone to stay in a room for more than 28 days. They can return H they behave themselves. Many of them go to their other motel in Buena Park and stay there for a day or two and then, H they want to return, they can. They have no one that lives .month after month. That was the case in the past but not now. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked if they have maid service when they are staying there for 28 days? Mr. Parkin: Responded absolutely, currently the have 4 maids that change the beds, etc. and 1 man who shampoos carpets 6 days a week plus 2 maintenance people. Chairman Bostwick: Stated that in the rooming session there was a report from Code Enforcement and he asked that Tim Dunn return to discuss the Issue of long term stays since ft appears there is a conflict about that. Tim Dunn: Stated they did speak with several of the tenants there and some indicated they had been there 3 to 6 months, others were there over 30 days. It did not appear that the rooms were cleaned on a daily basis. Mr. Parkin: Stated he knows of one person that Mr. Dunn is referring to (Barbara) and she has been there for 8 months but not continuously. She has had to leave every 28 days. The reason that they do that is, ff they stay over 30 days then they become a permanent resident and he has to file an unlawful detainer to evict them. If the records were checked at the North Orange County Municipal Court they would find that he has filed about 20 unlawful detainer to get rid of the people that were there on a long tens basis. Commissioner Mayer: She asked to hear from Investigator Engle on the proposal to shorten the 24-hour security proposal from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Tom Engle: Responded he felt that would be reasonable at this time. He could not believe that some of those people that live in that motel are able to get up and move out. If they are leaving, they are leaving, for t day to spend it down the street and are coming dght back for their next 28 days. There was t room that Officer Engle could not even get into because there were so many cats living fn it and it is difficult to believe that room is getting daily maid service. Mr.-Parkin: Responded he got ail over the maids for that. There are times when people will not let the maids in. He tells the maids that they have to go into the rooms everyday. If is diffic_ ult sometimes to supervise the maids since they are there in the rooming when he is not. He inspects the rooms every Sunday and makes a list of rooms that he feels are not getting adequate maid service. Commissioner Henninger: Asked the Police Department how this property did over the last weekend. Tom Engle: Responded fast weekend the Anaheim Police Department Vice Detail was doing a sweep of Beach Boulevard for prostitution activity in conjunction with the Task Force for Street Narcotics. His supervisor, Sgt. Walker, and one of his investigators observed 2 known prostitutes walking onto his property from Beach Boulevard and that is why they made the stop that they did Inside Mr. Parkin's property in one of the rooms. He also received a report from Street Narcotics 07-21-97 Page t 5 that they went In on Saturday and Sunday and purchased narcotics from indviduals INing in the motel. Commissioner Bristol: Stated in the morning session Commission discussed page 4 of the staff report regarding public nuisance. He asked the Assistant City Attorney whether this type of actNiry could be construed as a public nuisance? Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney: Responded the she could basically give the definition of a public nuisance and point Commission to the section that says that 'rf the variance for which the approval was granted was exercised so that at either now or in the past has been exercised as a nuisance either now or in the past. This would be a ground that they would consider in making their decision as to whether to mod'rfy or terminate a Conditional Use Permit. She stated the definition of a public nuisance Is one which effect at the same time an entire community or neighborhood or any considerable number of persons although the extent of the annoyance or damage inflicted upon individuals may be unequal. So 'rf they believe that the facts have been brought before them at this .hearing demonstrate that, then they would so state that the testimony presented rises to the level of a nuisance as it is defined. The Planning Commission is the fact finder. All she can do is inform Commission what they rule 1s and then Commission would need to make the decision based on the information from the public hearing and what is in the staff report. Commissioner Boydstun; Stated she was concerned with the roof and asked Mr. Parkin 'rf he had a roof certffication for the work done. Mr. Parkin: Responded they had a bad leak problem from the rains last December (1996). The son-in-law of one of his plumbers is a roofer. This roofer looked at their roof and indicated that they could "cold patch" it because the ft has about 2 to 3 years left and there is no sense making elaborate repairs 'rf they can get the roof to stop leaking. Eventually Mr. Parkin will need to replace ft. So that is what they did and it does not .leak now. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked H this roofer is in the position of certify that the roof has a couple of years of life and that he has repaired the leaks. Mr. Parkin: Responded yes he thought so. He could get a roofer to certify ft. Commissioner Boydstun: Stated Commission needs something to show that it has been faed and that there is no danger there. Mr. Parkin: Agreed. Commissioner Henninger: Recommended changing Condition No. 1 to read that they provide a maximum of 2 licensed un'rform security guards as may be required by the Anaheim Police Department. He eliminated the wording "at all times". He also recommended adding a condition that states, wRhin 30 days from today's date, the applicant will delNer to the Planning staff a roof certification cert'rfying that the roof does not leak and Indicating how.much useful I'rfe might be left on the roof. Commissioner Mayer: Was concerned with the dally maid service and asked whether a log could be kept that shows that. in fact. each room has daily service so that we know that someone from his staff is entering each room. 07-21-97 Page 16 Mr. Parkin: Stated residents do not have the right to keep maids out because he has amended their folio and in the back ft states that room is going to be available to staff. Police Department and Code Enforcement at all times. Chairman Bostwick: Stated there is a condtion in there that guests can not become long term. Mr. Parkin might need to pursue that in court to evict the long term tenants in order to,correct the situation. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked to have Condition No. 3 changed to indicate that guest need to be gone for a certain length of time. Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney: Stated there is nothing in the Code that requires the owner to have any occupancy limitation other than in the definition of a hotel or a motel which defines transients as persons renting accommodation for one or more periods of time any single time period not exceeding 1 week or 7 days and it goes on to say nothing contained herein shall preclude any person or persons from renting any accommodations described herein for as many successive weekly or 7 day time periods as set person or persons may choose. So the Cie itself does not have a limitation. However 'rf you have identified an impact of this use which is related to long term occupancy, it would be appropriate to place a condition that relates to the impact that has been identified. If there are problems identified with the long term occupancy then a time Iimttatfon to address that problem Is appropriate. Commissioner Henninger: Stated Condtion No. 3 should be amended to state that a guest not be allowed to occupy a room for more than 30 days and the guest needs to go somewhere else for 30 days. Mr. Parkin: Stated he has some very good tenants and if he kicks those people out fora long period of time they will not come back and then he is faced with trying to find a replacement. Chairman Bostwick: Stated they need to give him some tool which can help Mr. Parkin sort out those people and solve some of the community's problems. There was further discussion about the length of time a guest occupies a room. Commissioner Henninger offered a resolution approved Variance No. 1229. Resolution passed with 7 yes votes. Selma Mann: 22-day appeal period Se/rfia Mann: Stated that Item No. 2 was a continued public hearing item and due process does not allow a new Commissioner from participating in a vote if they have not heard all of the _. testimony. She advised Commissioner Napo/es that he may wish to withdraw his vote on this item. Additional Discussion: Commissioner Henninger: Stated that previous discussions with Redevelopment Agency on the SRO's and perhaps converting some of these motels into an SRO format and Redevelopment staff was reviewing that would were suppose to return with a report. He asked what the status is? Greg Hastings: Stated they were doing that in conjunction wRh the Beach Boulevard Redevelopment Plan which Commission has not seen yet. He will relay the question to Redevelopment. 07-21-97 Page 17 ACTION: Concurred with staff that the proposed project falls within the definRion of Categorical F~cemptions, Class 21, as defined in the State EIR and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirements to prepare an EIR. Modified Resolution No. 235 -Series 1950-60 granting Variance No. 1229 (to construct and operate a 70-unit motel and coffee shop) in it's entirety by adding the following conditions of approval: 1. That a maximum of two (2) licensed uniformed security guards, approved by the Anaheim Police Department, shall be provided upon the premises specifically to provide security, and to discourage vandalism, trespassing and/or loftedng upon or adjacent to the subject property. 2. That the owner/manager shall maintain a complete guest registry or guest card system which includes the full name, address, and ver'rffed driver's license or legal ident'rficatfon and vehicle registration number of all registered guests, date of registration, length of stay, and room rate, and shall be made available upon demand by any police officer, code enforcement officer, or license inspector of the City of Anaheim during reasonable :business hours. 3. That guest rooms shall not be rented or let for periods of less than twelve (12) consecutve hours, nor more than thirty (30) consecutive days, excluding one (1) manager's unit. Once a room has been occupied for up to thirty (30) days by the same guest{s), it must be vacated for a minimum thirty (30) day pedod before the same individual or entity can occupy the room again. 4. That every occupied guest room shall be provided with daily maid service. 5. That the owner and/or management shall not knowingly rent or let any guest room to a known prostitute for the purposes of pandering, soliciting or engaging In the act of prostitution, or any person for the purpose of selling, buying, or otherwise dealing, manufacturing or ingesting an illegal drug or controlled substance; or for the purpose of committing a criminal or immoral act. 6. No guest room shall be rented or let to any person under eighteen (18) years of age, verified by a valid driver's license or other legal ide7rtrfication. 7. That all available room rates shall be prominently displayed in a - conspicuous place within the office area, and that the property owner and/or motel management shall comply wfth the provisions of Section 4.09.010 of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to the posting of room rates. 8. That the property owner and/or motel management shall comply with the provisions of Section 2.12.020 of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to the operator's collection duties of transient occupancy taxes. 9. That within sbcty (60) days from the date of this resolution, this property and these buildings and accessory structures shall be brought into compliance 07-21-97 Page 18 with the statutes, ordinances, laws or regulations of the State of Calffomia, as adopted by the City of Anaheim, including the Un'rform Building Code, Uhfform Housing Code, Un'fform Fire Code, Unffonn Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and Un'fform Mechanical Code, and permanently maintained thereafter in compliance with such statutes, ordinances, laws or regulations. 10. That on-site landscaping shall be refurbished and permanently Irrigated and maintained, Including regular removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 11. That the property owner shall pay the costs of Code Enforcement Division inspections once each month for six (6) months from the date of this resolution, and as often as necessary thereafter until the subject property is brought into compliance, or as deemed necessary by the Ciry's Code Enforcement Division to gain and/or maintain compliance with State and local statutes, ordinances, laws ar regulations. 12. That a statement shall be printed on the face of the guest registration card to be completed by the guest when registering, advising that the register is open to Inspection by the Anaheim Police Department or other City of Anaheim personnel for law enforcement purposes. 13. That this Variance shall terminate one year from the date of this resolution, on July 21, 1998. 14. That no guest room(s) shall be rented or let to any person unless compliance is determined by the appropriate division or department, with statutes, ordinances, laws or regulations of the State of Calffornia, as adopted by the City of Anaheim, including the Uniform Building Code, Un'fform Housing Code, Un'rform Fire Code, Un'rform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and Un'rform Mechanical Code. 15. That any tree planted on-site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. 16. That the subject property shall be developed, as conditioned, and substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner in conjunction with the approval of Variance No. 1229, and which plans are on file with the Planhing Department marked Exhibit No. 1, .and as conditioned herein. 17. That Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10,12 and 14, above-mentioned, shall be complied with immediately. 18. That within thirty (30) days from the date of this resolution, the applicant shall deliver to the Planning Department a roof certification, certifying that the roof does not leak and the roofs I'ffe expectancy. 18. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the eMent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable Ciry, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or 07-21-97 Page 19 approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. Said Resolutlon was modi0ed on the following grounds: .050 That the vadance for which the approval was granted has been so exercised as to be detrimental to the public health or safety, or so as to constitute a .nuisance; .060 That any such modification, including the imposition of any additional conditions thereto, is reasonably necessary to protect the public peace, health, safety or general welfare, or necessary to permit .reasonable operation under the vadance as granted. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Napoles abstained) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22~day appeal rights. OISCUSSIOPI TIME: 44 minutes 07-21-97 Page 20 3a. CEQA NEGATNE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED) 3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3812 (READVERTISED) OWNER: TW INVESTMENT AND IW INVESTMENT CORPORATION, c/o Kape Properties, P.O. Box 6474, Beverly Hills, CA 90212 AGENT: MICHAEL BATES/MB TECHNICAL SERVICES, 1539 West Spring Street, Lpng Beach, CA 90810 LOCATION: 1315-C. 1315-D. 1321. 1325. 1331 and 1341-C North Blue Gum Street [advertised as 1325-1341 North Blue Gum Streetl. Property Is 9.7 acres located at the northwest comer of Miraloma Avenue and Blue Gum Street . To expand an existing automotive van conversion and mod cation plant wfthin an existing industrial park. Continued from the Commission meetings of April 28, 1997, May 12, 1997 and June 9, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. Continued to September 15, 1997 SR6722KP.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: 2 people spoke in opposition of subject proposal. APPIJCANT'S STATEMENT: Michael Banks, 1539 W. Spring Street, Long Beach, Cal'rfomia: He was representing the tenants, Star Custom Van Industdes and the representative for the owner is present as well as Alan Winestock. Stated the in the spring of last year they were before Commission requesting approval for a van conversion facility. Since then there has been an increase in the business at that location. Because of that, it has resulted in some problems in the way the business was able to operate. Basically there was not enough space in the existing buildings that they are occupying in order to comply with the existing cond'Rional use permit. They have had some inspections from Code Enforcement during the time period and, after careful analysis of the situation, the indication was that business had increased. They made a proposal to occupy a couple of other building on the site and they came In wfth that request recently. They feel that if they are allowed to expand in the existing industrial park that would allow space for the vehicles, storages and overall better form of operation of the business. He stated Rem no. 3 shows the layout of what they are proposing. The way it is proposed it basically restricts the activity of the van conversion facility to the rear half of the industrial park and they think that is better for the industrial park as a whole as well as for the other tenants who are occupying other building space in the industrial park. In addition they are also requesting permission to Install a chainlink fence across the rear portion of the lot, mainly for security purposes. 07-21-97 Page 21 Mr. Banks showed a three minute video to illustrate the condRions of the site. Alan Winestock, representing the property owners: Stated they are in support of this as they would be for any of their tenants who desire an expansion in their Industrial park. They worked very hard with staff and wRh the enforcement officer when there were problems and they had brought the property into compliance. On July 9, 1997, they were summoned by staff and told of other items, such as landscaping, which they are addressing at this time. He stated 90% of the landscaping is maintained in excellent condftion, maintained on a weekly basis. The parking lot was refurbished approximately 1 year ago. They do their best to maintain a clean and aesthetically pleasing industrial park. The owner is in agreement that this tenant should be allowed to expand his use at the park. PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Patricia Humphreys with California Automatic Gate, one of the tenants at of 1315 North Blue Gum, Unit C: Stated the van people have now occupied the adjacent building to her, one of the 4 segments into her back unit. Since they increased their volume it has been a problem for everyone in the industrial park. Parking is the major issue. It had made R very difficult and dangerous for her delivery trucks to deliver. She has gone to notify them numerous times asking them to move their vehicles parked illegally all the way around, especially around the island. That takes time in order to get that accomplished. Since they increased their production there has been more employees and therefore more and more spaces have been taken. Her major concern is that with the expansion they will be increasing the amount of employees creating a larger problem. She has already given them some parking spaces but what she has found is that if you .allow 3, they will take 5 spaces. This is a daily, ongoing problem. She stated she is not the only tenant who feels that way but she is the only tenant that will speak out. They are proposing to also take her building of which her lease may not be renewed at this point. There fs another company called Kosakura that has been there for many years and they have decided to leave due to the ongoing problem. Her biggest concern is that if this is approved then they will get bigger and bigger and take over the other buildings. Commissioner Boydstun asked for a clarification of where her unit was located so Ms. Humphreys walked to the exhibRs on the side wall and pointed out exactly where her unit was located.. Commissioner Bristol: Stated for the records Advanced Spas submitted a letter indicated they were having headaches and nausea due to fumes. He asked Mr. Humphreys ff they had similar problems? Ms. Humphreys: Responded they did not have a problem with fumes. They have had_ a problem with' other peoples fumes. Susan Holmes, Executive Vice President of Advanced Spas: Came to the podium and identified herself. Commissioner Bristol then asked her about the fumes referenced in her letter and asked for more specifics on the problem. Susan Homes: Responded they share a building that was divided in some point in time and she thought what is happening is that the fumes are coming up and over the roof and into their portion of the warehouse. Commissioner Henninger: Asked what they are doing that is causing the fumes? Susan Homes: Responded that she is not certain exactly what they are doing. 07-21-97 Page 22 APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Mr. Banks: Referred to a memo send from the Code Enforcement Officer to Cheryl Flores (dated July 17, 1997) fn response to the fire lanes being blocked, on the second page, next to the last paragraph Indicating that Items No.2 and No. 5 were complied with. Item No. 2 stated that the fire lines were not to be blocked and he wanted to indicated that the issue has been resolved. The company Calrfomia Automated Gate, is concerned thatrf this increase is granted that they would just take over the entire park but he wanted to clarffy that the only :reason that they requested the additional space is strictly for the additional storage of vehicle space and they are not increasing production. Currently at the buildings that they are occupying they do not have adequate space to store their vehicles and ff they did have the additional building space then that would eliminate the any conflicts related to parking congestion with the other tenants in the park. Chairman Bostwick: Asked Mr. Banks how many employees they currently have. Mr. Banks: Responded currently the have approximately 70 employees. Commission Boydstun: Asked what his company does in Building "F". Mr. Banks: Responded that is the woodworking area where they are doing some light sanding and buffing of the wood interior parts. The painting takes place in .Building 1331 for which they have the approval from the Fire Department and Air Quality Management District 2 prefab spray booths. Commissioner Bristol: Asked Mr. Banks about the conflicting testimony from Advanced Spas that they smell lacquer and other fumes that permeate the building. Mr. Banks: Responded that he could not adequately address that but the business owner is present and perhaps he could address that for him. Steve Rabe, owner of 1331 North Blue Gum Street: Regarding Commissioner Bristol's question on Building "F", they do some resin pouring which (s non-flammable. They have been in that building for about 8 months. Since the ftrst day, they have used the same thing. Two months ago their forklift hft the wall and the wall caved in and he had to repair h. Again about a month ago they hit the other side of the wall and again the wall caved in. He has asked that they fbc it. The resin does have some smell and that is probably what they are referring to. Commissioner Bristol: Asked 'rf the employees wear masks? Mr. Rabe: Responded yes they use a respirator as required by A.O.M.D. Chairman Bostwick: Asked how many vans are on the property at any one time (in processing or waiting to be done or shipped)? Mr. Rabe: Approximately 100 to 120. Commissioner Bristol: Asked ff vehicles are going to be stored in Building "E"? Mr. Rabe: Responded they are not going to store vehicles there. They are currently trying to expand the work volume, not the physical business. He does not really need the additional building space. The only reason is that the tenants were complaining. Alan Winestock, representing the property owners: Stated Kosakura who was occupying 1321 has 07-21-97 Page 23 purchased a building in Santa Ana, has been amonth-to-month tenant since 1994 and has been activ'tty perusing looking for a building since then. The tenant was occupying space in the park at that time but it was no where close to having this size business starting in 1994. He noted it in a letter dated May 28th as well as Pat Humphreys mentioning the Kosakura move because of this tenant. He categorically stated that he has been working with this tenant since 1994 to .renew and also to show him space to move and that is not the case. There are problems but that is not the reason for Kosakura to move from this location. He also mentioned that there are other tenants on this property that have asked him to renew their lease as well as expand in the Industrial park. They are trying to accommodate all the tenants so everyone is happy with the situation that they have to live with. Commissioner Bdstol: Asked Mr. Wlnestock if he had read the letter from Advanced Spas and asked 'rf he disagreed with her regarding the fumes. Mr. Wlnestock: Responded this was the first he had heard about this problem and he sees other tenants constantly regarding problems. This was not something that was brought to his attention at any point in time. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Henninger: Stated he was mystified by the parking numbers, and asked for verrfication as to whether there are 400 spaces on this sRe. Code requires 271 so that would make B almost 130 fee spaces and yet there Is testimony that there is a major parking problem out there. Testimony from the owners indicated there were 80 vans. He asked what is happening with all the other parking spaces? Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Stated In paragraph 14 of the staff report it shows the areas parked at 1.55 space which is the Code radio for industrial related manufacturing type uses. They have been given an advantage by using this ratio when probably they are more in line with an auto repair use which would require 5% spaces per 1,000 square foot or 3 h depending on the Code Amendment they approve for this. Commissioner Henninger: Stated he has the sense that this is really a manufacturing business but you would think there would be 120 or so spaces free at any given time. They have approximately 80 van in process at any time, yet clearly according to the testimony, there is a major parking problem. He asked for a response from the property representative. Mr. Wlnestock: Responded parking is something that is very near and dear to everybodys heart. The leases all call for certain parameters related to contiguous parking spaces for each building. On duly 9th at a meeting wfth staff he was told he could not do that; he has to allow parking to be filled in and, with such a van congestion, they were encroaching other people to reconsider those spaces which are theirs. So the vans were squeezed together. When they told the van people to take their employees, the other tenants said they could use some of their spaces but they would need to walk approximately 100 yams. The issue here is congestion and preference parking. There are certainly enough parking spaces. It is that people have to be considerate of one another, especially the Van's people have to park farther away so that a) tenant trucks can load and unload, and b) people can park near their own building. That is the issue that they have. Commissioner Henninger: Stated both in the video and in the photos that Code Enforcement took, he did not see very many empty parking spaces. Js there some space on their site that has not been shown where there are plenty of empty parking spaces? 07-21-97 Page 24 Mr. Winestock: Responded no not plenty but if this tenant at 1321 took his proposal, there Is a lot there that would be able to be utilized by him inside and outside which Kosakura has reserved for himself. The van people need to be considerate of their neighbors and park their cars further away on the parcel. Commissioner Mayer: Stated that is what they need to accomplish and asked why is that not happening now? Mr. Winestock: Responded not due to his lack of effort or concern but he suggesting asking Steve Rabe this question. Steve Rabe: Stated he had a meeting with Planning staff approximately a week ago and they were told that they had to use all of the parking spaces and how that is done is between him and the other tenants. He said it varies on the amount of parking spaces that the tenants use: some have a need for more, others less. Commissioner Mayer: Asked for an explanation of the operation. They are occupying 4 different spaces and they want to occupy 5. Is there a different process that happens in each one of those buildings and they move vans from one to the other or does the same process go on each location? Steve Rabe: Responded they are trying to get some of the units which are at 1325 and bring them in this area. If you look at that unft, there are a lot of parking that they can utilize because R is on the comer. That is the building with the most parking spaces. He does not need the building for expansion. He needs the associated parking spaces. Commissioner Henninger: Stated some of the landscape planters in the parking lot have palettes stacked in them others look like they have been seriously degraded by people walking on them and perhaps not watered. How did they get that way? Steve Rabe: Responded there are people that come onto their property and go into their garbage and pick up all the palettes and throwing all the other garbage. They do have a 24hour security. Therefore what they have done Is stack the palettes beside the trash can or on the grass. Chairman Bostwick: Asked 'rf they have a facility for their employees such as a lunch room. Steve Rabe: Responded the have a designated lunch room .area. Commissioner Bristol: Stated he visited the area yesterday about 2:00 p.m. and he counted 27 van7hat will be outside their proposed wall on the west. They would take almost half of the area on Building "B". He then reviewed the parking on the west side of the proposed chainlink fence and he saw a lot more vehicles and he tried to envision the 27 or 28 vans and vehicles inside the proposed wall. He considered the comments of staff regarding blocking fire lanes and in fact they did have a van that was blocking the fire lane between building "C" and "D". Nothing could have gotten through. He could not find the 3 trash enclosures between Building "D" and "C" but there were 3 barrels there. If this were to be approved, would they have enough parking for all of the vehicles that he saw on Sunday and also be able to do what Code requires as far a accessing the trash? Steve Rabe: Responded yes, the last building has a lot of parking spaces; it is the largest building in the industrial park. He felt that is the best way to try to resolve the situation. 07-21-97 Page 25 Commissioner Bristol: Asked ff k was his opinion that if this went through then they would never have to park outside the wall on the east side, the location the tenants would be concerned about. Steve Rabe: Responded they would not have any vehicles parking there. Commissioner Henninger: Asked staff to walk over to Mr. Rabe and have him review the photos because he wanted to make sure that Mr. Rabe saw the photos submitted because it look as though there has been considerably more taken out of the fresh enclosure than just palettes. Commissioner Boydstun: Suggested why don't they lock up the trash enclosures? She also suggested iF the problem continues he could build a wall around it with a screening on top so that they the trash would not be dumped out. Steve Rabe: Stated they are still in the process of learning and have tried to resolve problems such as the trash pickup day. Previously it was on a Monday and now they have changed it to Fridays and that seems to work better. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked how long they had been at the location? Steve Rabe: Responded since 1992. Michael Banks: Stated they feel that if they are able to construct a chainlink fence as proposed, ft would provide all the necessary security to prevent this type of things from occurring. Commissioner Henninger: Stated staff recommends that this request be dented on the :basis that they think there is not adequate space on this sfte for the use that they propose. It is unfortunate that they have had troubles since it appears they have been successful. He suggested they might consider a continuance to see 'rf they could work this out with staff in order to have a better idea of how they are going to co-exist with their neighbors and get some of these problems under control. Commissioner Bristol: Stated he totally agreed. They are obviously doing well with their business but ft seems to be intensifying the property and effecting the other tenants in the industrial park. Commission has to look at all the issues andrf there are still outstanding issues concerning Code Enforcement that have not been .addressed. Commissioner Mayer: Stated she also agreed. She would like to see a plan that ident'rfied the total maximum number of vans that they would have on-site at any one time and show Commission exactly where those would go. Also identify an employee parking area. Perhaps wonting with their fellow tenants in order to identify an area for their employees, possibly provide a parking sticker for their cars to Identify the employees. _ Commissioner Henninger: Stated ff there are 120 extra spaces on the site that they could feasibly park their vans being converted, perhaps they could develop at good operations system that controlled .all of these problems. Steve Rabe: Stated for the past few months they having been using two a different locations to store their vehicles off-site. One is in Garden Grove and the other in the City of Commerce. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked iF they had a 60 day continuance, do they feel they could work on some of the problems discussed and be able to return with a revised proposal? Michael Banks: Responded yes they would 07-21-97 Page 26 Commissioner Henninger: Suggested that resin fabrication is probably not the best use to use of a building that is .shared with another tenant. There are some other buildings on the property that are separate. Perhaps consider moving it to another building where there is more control over ft. Steve Rabe: Stated they have been discussing this with 2 scientists in North Carolina and they are coming up with a new product which would reduce the smell of fumes. Hopefully that will be accomplished in a month or so. ACTION: Continued .subject request to the September 15, 1997 Planning Commission meeting, as requested by the applicant at the public hearing, in order to meet with staff and try to resolve parking and storage problems. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Napoles abstained) DISCUSSION TIAAE: 47 minutes 07-21-97 Page 27 4a. EIR NO. 316 (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED) I Withdrawn 4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTS 4c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3938 OWNER: CALIFORNIA STATE TEACHER'S RETIREMENT SYSTEM, 7667 Folsom Boulevard, Sacramento, CA 95826 AGENT: DONAHUE SCHRIBER, Attn: Mark Whitefield, 3501 Jamboree Road, #300, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION: 590 North Euclid Street -Anaheim Plaza. Property is 38.25 acres located at the southeast comer of Crescent Avenue and Euclid Street. To construct a 3,156 square foot drive-through restaurant with waNers of minimum drive through lane requirements and minimum structural setback and yard requirements adjacent to an arterial highway. Continued from Commission meeting of June 9, 1997. CONDITIONAL'USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WO. SR6741 KB.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mayer and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby accept the petitioner's request for withdrawal of subject petition. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: 1 minute 07-27-97 Page 28 5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED) Approved 5b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTS Approved Sc. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3855 (READVERTISED) Approved 5d. REQUEST COUNGIL REVIEW OF ITEMS No Action 5lal. 5(b).and S/cl. IN CONNECTION WITH VARIANCE NO. 4302 OWNER: JAS PARTNERSHIP, 1985 South Santa Cruz Street, Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: LEON ALEXANDER, 558 South Harbor Boulevard, #100, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 1985 South Santa Cruz Street -Global Cellular. Property is 2.44 acres located at the northwest comer of Santa Cruz Street and Stanford Court. To pennk a total of two industrially-related sales and office uses wkhin an existing 35,000 square foot Industrial building wkh waivers of permkted type of sign and minimum number of parking spaces. Continued from the Commission .meetings of May 28, June 9 and 23, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-90 SR6725KB.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Leon Alexander, Global Cellular: Stated the staff recommendations d1d not provide adequate background facts. He wanted to review some facts that were not in the staff report, _ 1) Remember this is a forced relocation. Global Cellular has been doing business in Anaheim for the past 15 years and they are be(ng forced to relocate by Cai Trans as a result of the widening of the I-5 Fwy. They relocated as of July 1, 1997. There is economic blight In the area and k is very difficult to do business in and around the area. 2) Global Cellular purchased the .building directly behind k which was vacant for approximately 3 years and invested ks money and time in order to stay in Anaheim. 3) Meantime, Cal Trans is going to lift that freeway approximately 14 to 15 feet. They were informed that there will be an HOV/carpal lane that will be going from the I-5 Fwy. into Gene Autry Road dlrecUy Into the Stadium. This new carpal lane will be for the benefk the Anaheim Stadium which will obstruct some visibility of Global Cellular's new location after construction is completed. He referenced plans that showed how k would look and be configured after construction. Coming southbound on the I-5 Fwy. the overpass 07-21-97 Page 29 (approximately 40 to 45 feet high) will block the visibility of Global Cellular. 4) The new building which Global Cellular is going to move into is 6 feet lower than its current building. They feel it is a considerable difference. At this time the signs that are on the building are approximately 28 feet eye level from the freeway. When this new freeway is built wRh the 15 feet to take in consideration his signs will only be approximately 10 feet high. If the signs are raised as they propose. He emphasized that is a very important factor to consider. Remember that during the next 4 or 5 years there will be tremendous construction In and around the area. The premises will be difficult to get into; there will be a lot of detours; and Global Cellular needs the added visibility. 5) Global Cellular is expending a great deal of money to develop the new building at least a half a million dollars or more just to renovate this old building. 6) They disagree with the staff recommendation. They feel that staff has :not provided the adequate background to be able to understand what is going on, They disagree with reducing the wall signs from what is allowed at 20°k to 10%. It has already been approved for the 20% wall sign. Global is asking that the sign be elevation in order to make concessions for the HOV lane to be constructed. 7) On the list of recommendations, they would like to .add on telecommunications services and printing and office supplies. 8) As for the requirement of not allowing banners, they do not mind agreeing to that as long as they are allowed to get their permits for whatever temporary banners that they are allowed to put up there. 9) They have an approved CUP 3855 and obviously the do not waive any of the approval of the Commission and City Council has provided to them. Jim Shab, owner of Global Cellular: Stated they have moved into their building and now they would like to get their signs up on the building. There were some conditions of concem that he discussed later regarding a name change which is one of the reason for not presenting a final plan. They intend to Invest money in uplifting the entry areas of the building with a "facade"/enhancement to the building where the materials would be completely wrapped around from the exterior to the front and the sides. It would appear similar to buildings such as Best Buys. They are not asking for any additional square footage of signage but rather what is allowed by Code and to place that permitted sign allowance within the enhance area of the building. They do not agree wRh minimizing the sign because h is costing too much to enhance the building. There is a concern in the staff report that they would tie that issue to the pole sign which is being heard tomorrow at City Council. He did not know whether that was a way of possibly trying to delay their process so that the new ordinance could get passed that Is suppose to minimize or lower what will be allowed. They do not want this item to be delayed any longer. They feel they are separate valid issues. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked Mc Shab about the sign .areas are they looking at using all the area or similar to their old building, the emblems of the different products? Jim Shab: The current building shows PacTel, the represent Air Touch. They are looking into representing other companies as well within their industry. He did not foresee advertising every company that they represent. They would like to have their name and some message that 07-21-97 Page 30 represents their company and would like to do that In a professional manner. They are asking to maintain the square footage that is allowed by Code. He does not know exactly what they are going to put up there at this time. Commissioner Bristol: Askedrf Mr. Shab is more concerned with the height or the square footage? Mr. Shab: Responded with both. They are not asking for more than what is allowed for by Code. They were told in the past that they could go up to 100 feet but obviously that does not work and they elected to only go up 10 feet and that would put them only 10 feet higher than the building. That would be 10 feet lower than their current existing signage on their old building. Commissioner Bristol: Stated he remember there were different elevations. One concern that was brought up by staff was their concern that it would actually be built as a roof sign. Mr. Shab: It was discuss previously whether the back side of the elevated portion would be covered or exposed. Chairman Bostwick: What they had before had some archtectural definftion to it. It made the building look a little different instead of just a concrete tilt up. They looked Ifke they were sign cans that have been stuck with a little more sheet metal tp wrap around the sign and come down the face of the building. They do not do much for the architectural design. It looks like a sign post instead of an actual archtectural design of the building to give ft relief and beauty so it stands out to passersby. John Shabe: Stated his understanding is that they are permitted regardless. Chairman Bostwick: Stated they can put the sign on the side of the building. That 1s not a problem but it is how they do it, how they are structurally placed on the building. If they go above the roof they become a roof sign and that is not permitted. John Shabe: Stated on number 12 i[ discusses the type of materials that is going to be used, Basically it has framing that supports the entire structure which makes it structurally sound but ft actually Is completed wfth concrete texture to match the existing tilt of the panels. When it is completed h will look like part of the building. The only difference is it enhances the visual appeal of the entry areas. They believe ff the entry areas are enhanced rt lessens the confusion as to when the entrance is. Commissioner Boydstun: Compared this proposal wfth Circuit City which looked nice when it was completed to mark the entrance of the building. - John Shabe: Stated In the request for permitted signs for the CUP ft was requested that In item no. 2 that any proposed roof-mounted equipment should be completely screened from view including the view from the reconstructured grade of I-5 Fwy. and this partially does that. It takes a fairly large size of the building and actually blocks it from view from the freeway. They feel that is an addRional beneftt for the City of Anaheim. Commissioner Henninger: Asked if these new elements about the roof line would be enclosed at the back edge of the those walls that project in towards the building? John Shabe: Responded correct. 07-21-97 Page 31 Commissioner Henninger: Asked ff staff understood what he was asking when he asked about the enclosure being at the back edge of those walls? He wanted it to look as though there was a big enclosed structure back there. He did not want the finish to simply wrap around so it looks like a 6-Inch thick wall. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager: Stated it might be a good Idea 'rf the applicant could-provide a roof plan on this. John Shabe: Responded they would be happy to provide that. Greg Hastings: Asked if they wanted to see a roof on that as well? Commissioner Henninger: Stated if they look totally enclosed they look like a true facia of the building and he could see that being called a wall. John Shabe: Stated from a sign standpoint he could not work with putting signs in there if they are going to tap off the top of rt. He did not understand why there would be a cap on top. Commissioner Henninger: Responded because ft is not a billboard that they are allowing. John Shabe: His concern was from an installation and maintenance stand point of any signage that does go on the building. Commissioner Boydstun: Suggested making a door in the back so they can get into R. There was further discussion on signage. Commissioner Henninger: Requested that the roof enclosure return as a Report and Recommendation item in order to review the construction plans. Commissioner Peraza: Stated he was absent at the June 23rd meeting when this hem was discussed however he did read the minutes. Greg Hastings: Stated that in Condition No. 12, the restriction is 10% of the building wall and asked 'rf that was meant to remain in place since they do not have the signs and they would be returning as an R&R? Commissioner Henninger: They would have to ask how much signage could he have on the existing building without these additions? Hardly anyone uses 20%. John Shabe: Stated his understanding was 20%and they are requesting that as well ---- Greg Hastings: Stated their analysis of what has been used primarily in commercial locations and especially in industrial is 10%. John Shabe: Stated they would like to simply remain on the current existing allowable square footage maximum. They do not intend to use it but to limit them below that for a new ordinance that is coming in the future would not be a fair request. Greg Hastings: Stated they reason staff was suggesting 10% was because this was suppose to be an industrially related business rather than a commercial advertisement from the freeway. 07-21-97 Page 32 John Shabe: Stated they are intending to Improve the location and it is a disadvantage to them to be told they can use less than what is allowed by Code. Chairman Bostwick: Stated his is in a manufacturing zone and they are using k as commercial location so that creates a different situation. Commission understands his problem wRh relocation and the things he is trying to do but at the same time Commission does not want something that looks chaotic. John Shabe: Stated before the public hearing he went to check at the Planning Department's front counter to reconfirm what the allowable square footage would be for an industrial or business related zoning and he was told that ft would be 20% of the wall space. Greg Hastings: Yes, that number is correct, 20%, however, by a conditional use permit the Planning Commission has the authority to reduce the number down to whatever they feel is appropriate. Commissioner Henninger: Stated the whole CUP is open at a public hearing and when the applicant asks for a change in a condtion then they take their chances. There was further discussion regarding signs. Chairman Bostwick: Stated Condition No. 12 should be changed to read that signs will conform to plans submitted in square footage. This condition should also be reworded to read, That a comprehensive sign program for the freestanding sign and wall signs, wRh details and spec~catton as present at the July 21, 1997 Planning Commission Public Hearing. Final drawings will come back under a Report and Recommendation item for review and approval. Selma Mann: 22 day appeal rights. ACTION: Determined that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Approved Waiver of Code Requirement Approved request. Amended Resolution No. 96R-150 as follows: Modified Condition No. 5 to read as follows: "5. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance wfth .plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file wfth the Planning Department marked Revision No. 1 of Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2; Exhibit Nos. 4 through 8, and Revision No. 1 of Exhibft No. 9; Including compliance with Condition No. 4, above." 07-21-97 Page 33 Added the following conditions: '10. That the granting of the parking waiver is contingent upon operation of the use In conformance with the assumptions relating to the operation and intensity of use as contained in the parking demand study that formed the basis for approval of said waiver. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of said assumptions, as contained In the parking demand study, shall be deemed a violation of the expressed conditions imposed upon said waiver which shall subject this conditional use permit to termination or modification pursuant to the provisions of Sections 18.03.091 and 18.03.092 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 11. That final spec'rfic floor plans and elevation drawings (including detailed notes regarding exterior building materials, finish, and color scheme) shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for Planning Commission review and approval as a "Reports and Recommendations° item. 12. That a comprehensive sign program for the freestanding sign and wall signs, with details and specifications shown on plans presented by the petitioner at the Planning Commission meeting of July 21, 1997, shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for Planning Commission review and approval as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. 13. That the proposed second industrially-related sales and office use shall be limited to the following listed uses and that an unsubordinated covenant, reviewed and approved by the City Attorney's Office so-limiting said uses, shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder, a copy of which shall be submitted to the Zoning Division: 1. Accounting -Bookkeeping, CPA Firms or temporary CPA Firms 2. Advertising 3. Appraisers 4. Brokers -Real Estate, Business Opportunities, Etc. 5. Business System Companies 6. Communication Consultants 7. Computer Analysis Firms 8. Credit Reporting Agencies 9. Designers -Industrial, Interior, Graphic 10. Development Companies 11. Facility Maintenance and Planning 12. Insurance Companies/Agencies _ _ 13. Inventory Services 14. Leasing Companies 15. Management Consultants/Companies 16. Marketing Research 17. Office Supplies 18. Personnel Agencies 19. Printing or Reproduction Services 20. Quality Control Analysis 2t. Secretarial and Business Services 22. Telecommunications 23. Any use permitted under Zoning Code Section 18.61.020 "Permitted Primary Uses and Structures," and subject to all conditions of said Section. 07-21-97 Page 34 Each individual use shall require the written approval of the Zoning Division and the City Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to occupancy, which approval shall only be given when h is demonstrated that such use is an expressly permitted use in such zone, meets the criteria of Section 18.61.050.145 `Conditional Uses and SWctures° of the Anaheim Municipal Code, and complies with said assumptions as contained in the approved parking demand study. 14. That no banners or other temporary advertising devices (such as flags, balloons, etc.) shall be displayed on this building or on-site. 15. That prior to operation of the second tenant space, the business owner shall obtain a valid City of Anaheim Business License Division of the Finance Department. 16. That a final roof sign plan showing the signs attached to a fully enclosed 4- sided area with a roof and a door or removable panels shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for Planning Commission review and approval as a "Reports and Recommendations° ftem.° VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Napoles abstained) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 42 minutes 07-21-97 Page 35 Ba. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 11 I Continued to 6b. VARIANCE NO. 4307 August 4, 1997 OWNER: WATT COMMERCIAL COMPANIES, INC., 2716 Ocean Park Boulevard, Suite 3040, Santa Monica, CA 90405- 5218 AGENT: SIGN METHODS, 1749 East 28th Street, Signal Hiil, CA 90806 LOCATION: 5711-5799 East La Palma Avenue - Canvon Village Plaza. Property is 9.91 acres located north and east of the northeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway. Waivers of permitted freestanding sign and permitted type of sign to construct two (2) freestanding pole signs and nineteen (19) roof- mounted signs. Continued from the Commission meeting of June 9, 1997. VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. SR6720KP.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. IN FAVOR: 1 person spoke in savor of subject proposal. OPPOSITION: None APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Dan Cardone, Sign Methods: Stated they thought originally to enhance the center. The center has been as this location for long time. The best way to make it cost effective, enhance the center, and make it architecturally pleasing was to come up wfth a new sign criteria which has been submitted. In relation to the sign criteria, they have requested the construction of a parapet above the roof line to put the signs down where they are now and illuminate channel letters. It can be down but the signs are low, close to the ground. He passed out a computerized rendering showing the difference between the sign band being above the roof and below the roof. The upper parapet sign would be 361nches high. The reason they are doing this is to blend In with the centers major tenants. The other Issue is their request for 2 pylon signs which normally in the surrounds Anaheim Area would be approved but since they are in the Scenic Corridor there are some questions about it. A number of the tenants have driven in the Scenic Corcidor and have seen other signs that are well above the 8 foot level that staff has claimed that their signs have to conform to. After checking the area, one weekend they visited the Scenic Corridor and found 15 locations that have signs well above the 8 feet limit and so they are asking for the same benefits. 07-21-97 Page 36 PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Shelly Seabel, Citizens Thrift and Loan, 5729 W. La Palma Ave.: Stated they are one of the tenants in the shopping center and they would be very appreciative 'rf they would approve these signs. Especially with the Karl's Jr. expansion that w(II be taking place shortly. Karl's just got more height added to their 14 foot IimR. The public has difficulty locating particular businesses. Ms. Seabel submitted photos for Commissioner's review. She endorse the proposal and indicated she would greatly appreciate it 'rf Commission would approve it. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chairman Bostwick: Stated he personally preferred option "B" rather than building the facade higher. If they paint the building to something lighter and brighter it might be more attract than the brown. Commissioner Henninger agreed. Chairman Bostwick: Questioned their proposed large multi-tenant pole sign identifying the center. He thought the photo of the Festival sign was a good example which lists all the various major tenants and asked if that conforms with the Scenic Corridor sign ordinance. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Explained The Festival is under a Specitlc Plan so it would be different zoning and staff is not aware of any other shopping centers wfth anything other than a monument sign. She added there are freestanding signs in the SC Zone that were permitted under ML zoning which may have changed. Commissioner Henninger: Stated he remembers the Festival and that was part of the specific plan and was to be a regional shopping center and that is why that signage was permitted. Many of these signs were permitted in the past and h would be n(ce to see what can be done over time. Chairman Bostwick: Preferred Sign B and could see the pylon sign going on the Imperial side but would have a problem with it on La Palma and thought it would block the view of some of the tenants in that center. Commissioner Henninger: Asked ff the signs shown in Option B are permitted by Code, and noted they are very similar to the signs that are already there. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager: Responded Option B would be permitted by Code. _ Commissioner Henninger: Asked if monument signs specifying the name of the shopping Center and major tenants are .permitted on the two frontages. Mr. Hastings: Stated there are three frontages and each one could have 26 square feet of signage, and he thought the height is 30 inches and we have had quite a few waNers for the shopping centers out there. Commissioner Henninger: Stated the Hughes shopping center was allowed a monument sign so they could list the tenants. Mr. Hastings: Thought Canyon Plaza has one which is probably a Nicer example of what staff would Ifke to see. 07-21-97 Page 37 Commissioner Henninger: Clarified they would need a waiver for that and asked if the applicant would like to continue this and submft revised plans with some monument signs that would be more consistent with what has been .allowed in the past. Cheryl Flores: Stated the waiver for permitted freestanding signs has not been advertised and possibly another option would be to condftion ft for a monument sign. Mr. Cardona: Stated their main concern is their small tenants because their major tenants are doing fine and asked if the other monument signs are directories. Commissioner Henninger: Stated he would like to see something nicer than the Lakeview Plaza sign. Mr. Hastings: Stated the Code only allows the name of the center, plus one major tenant. Ms. Flores: Stated staff would recommend that Condtion No. t be deleted from the timing of Condition No. 7 -that the existing freestanding sign shall be removed prior to the construction of the proposed freestanding sign, so if that were to occur, h would happen at that time rather than prior to Building and Zoning inspections. Mr. Hastings: Stated since this is a waiver there should be some perimeters in terms of the height that would be permitted and the square footage, as well as the number of tenants that could be on the sign, then the sign plans would not have to have a public hearing. Mr. Henninger: Responded he would like to use the average of the existing 3 or 4 variances that have been granted out in the Canyon area for the shopping centers (Hughes, etc.) Otherwise, this could be continued and they could bring back sign :plans and Mr. Hastings thought that would be better because the numbers stay wfth the variance. The applicant stated they would redesign It and bring ft back. Mr. Hastings: Stated most monument signs are 8 feet or less and 50 to 80 square feet in area. RECESS ACTION: Continued subject request to the August 4, 1997 Planning Commission r_neeting in order for the applicant to submit revised plans. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioner Boydstun declared a conflict of interest and Commissioner Napoles abstained) DISCUSSION TIME: 20 minutes 07-21-97 Page 38 7a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 7b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTS Denied 7c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3932 Granted, in part, without the alcohol OWNER: ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, Attn: Paul Loubet, sales P.O. Box 2485, Los Angeles, CA 90051-0485 AGENT: RHL DESIGN GROUP, Attn: Monica Maa or Tom Riggle, 1201 South Beach Boulevard, #207, la Habra, CA 90631-6366 LOCATION: 1201 South Brookhurst Street -Arco Service Station. Property is 0.60 acre located on the southwest corner of Brookhurst Street and Ball Road. To permit a service station (the existing service station to be demolished) to Include a convenience market with retail sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption with waivers of minimum structural setback adjacent to residential zone boundaries and minimum retail sales floor area. Continued from the Commission meetings of May 12, June 9, and June 23, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-91 SR6501 DS.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: 1 person spoke In opposition to the retail sales of beer and wine. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Paul Loubet, 4 Centerpointe Drive, La Palma, CA 90623, representing Arco Products Company: Stated they are proposing rehabifftation of their existing station at 1201 S. Brookhurst._This is an older station in the Brookhurst Redevelopment area and due to competition and other factors, they have been losing money and sales volume and feel at this time they would like to rehabilitate, modernize and make the sfte more efficient and in keeping with Brookhurst Redevelopment, clean up this area. He stated Arco and the consultants have worked with staff and have not come to any agreement on the architecture and referred to the artist's rendering showing the new look that Arco is trying to propose. He stated this building is in keeping with all the site crfteria for the City and there are no variances associated with this application; and that Redevelopment is excited about anything that will help this area. 07-21-97 Page 39 Tom Riggle, RHL Design Group, 1201 S. Beach Blvd., Ste. 207, La Habra: Stated this Is an existing facility, probably built 30 to 40 years ago. It is a metal building, wkh yellow and blue banding around the entire building, and ft has two canopies which also have some yellow and blue accenting similar to the Smog-Pro's banding. It has minimal landscaping and they are looking to significantly modernize the facility, He thought staff saw modemizing the building as a detriment and they hope through the presentation today, it will be seen as an improvement. They are removing 5 driveways and will be installing two new driveways which, hopefully, provides a beneftt to the City. They will be reworking the grading and are obtaining some additional property to the south and will remove a retaining wall and level out the entire site. They will have additional enhanced landscaping and berming at the street. Mr. Riggle: Referred to Condtion No. 2 regarding the signage and noted staff is recommending that they pursue a monument style 8-foot high sign and they are allowed 350 square feet of signage and a 25-foot high pole sign. There is an existing pole sign and they are not proposing to increase the height nor the square footage of the sign, but simply to replace the faces and to also modemize the faces of the signs. He referred to Condition No. 36 and the letter regarding a previous CUP, and added they want to make sure they are not relinquishing any rights for the project. He referred to the archRecture which staff commented on in the report and that modernizing might not be the best solution for this site and stated in looking around the City, he sees that modernization Is most often a good thing. He refereed to the post office and the Texaco station at Imperial and [aPalma which was recently done and wanted to use that as an example of what the City has recently approved and use that as a guideline. He thought this would be a higher quality and better looking facility. Mr. Riggle: Referred to the rendering they have provided, an overall picture they have provided of the site wfth the existing pole sign and they hope the Commission will see that they really are trying to make a quality project. They are basically trying to maintain a portion of the look that Arco is pursuing for the future stations and that look has basically been retained at the front of the building over the entrance, specifically trying to call out the entrance as an element. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager: Pointed out staff is not recommending denial of the entire project, Just the architectural style of the building. PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Joseph Ibraham, owner of the shopping center on the southeast corner of Brookhurst and Ball, behind the Mobil station across the street from the Arco station: Stated he is not opposed to a new station for Arco, but does oppose the sale of beer and wine for Arco. He would love-to see a new beautfful station on the southwest corner similar to the new Mobil coming in front of their shopping center. He added last year in October or November, he came here and opposed the beer and wine license for the Mobil station and it was denied. He stated personally he thinks beer and wine at gas stations is bad; that there are a lot of beer and wine and liquor licenses all over. He felt there are enough. The area is rough as shown in the Police Report and he did not think there is any difference between the southeast corner and the southwest comer of Brookhurst and Ball. That Arco has beer and wine about 1-1 /2 miles on the southeast corner of Brookhurst and Crescent and another one less than 1-1 /2 mile on Ball and West, which is by the .Disney Office Building. Basically, he really thought they have enough beer and wine sales in the area and that the area is really rough and Mobil was denied recently and he did not see why Arco should be approved. 07-21-97 Page 40 THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Peraza: Asked 'rf one of the big reasons for redevelopment was because of the number of beer and wine and liquor licenses on that whole street. Greg Hastings: Responded he thought their main concern was on-sale alcohol and secondarily was the off-sale beer and wine in the redevelopment areas and Brookhurst was certainly one of those. Commissioner Bristol: Asked how we ran deny one comer and approve the other comer since k is well below the crime average. Tom Engle, vice Detail, Anaheim Police Department: Stated Public Convenience and Necessity fs not even a question here because there is neither high crime .nor over-concentration of licenses in that census tract which ends in the middle of that intersection and that is what causes this problem Most of the census tract that this comer is on is in the County area and is not wfthln the Anaheim city limits so that keeps the crime rate low and he was unable to get the statistics from the County to show what the crime rate is in their part of the city. This is the exact same situation as on the comer of State College and Ball. There are four gas stations on that corner and three of them are in low crime rate areas and one is in a high crime rate area. Commissioner Peraza: Clarified that Investigator Engle only has the crime rotes for Anaheim and not the County and thought it would probably be higher in that area. Investigator Engle: Stated he does recommend the conditions. Commissioner Henninger. Stated the State allows the Commission to make some judgements on the alcoholic beverages licenses, and asked if that is only in high crime areas or where there is over-concentration. Mr. Engle: Responded that is true and added the CUP allows the Commission to attach the conditions and 'rf they are granted the CUP to allow alcohol, they still have to go to the State to obtain a license and that license would also be conditioned. Investigator Engle: Responded to Commissioner Henninger that they do not have alcohol sales at this location now. Mr. Hastings: Responded to Commissioner Henninger that the Redevelopment staff did look at this request and in the past if they have had a concern, they would give staff a memorandum and there does not appear to be one in this case. Commissioner Bristol.: Stated he thought this would be of utmost concern for Redevelopment. Commissioner Boydstun: Stated Redevelopment would be looking at the area and not just one corner. Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney: Stated there is a distinction of what the Commission should look at for the determination of public convenience and necessity which has to do with the issuance of a ABC license in which the City has input. The City will have input in those instances where there is an over-concentration or where there is a certain crime rate and that just has to do with the ABC Issuance of the license. Separate from that, is the Zoning decision that the Planning Commission makes and in making its Zoning decision with regard to whether the findings for a conditional use permit are appropriate for a particular use. The Planning Commission is not 07-21-97 Page 41 limited to a census tract and is not limted to figures that are arbitrarily divided in the:middle of the street but may properly consider the areawide crime figures in making its determination provided that it is all linked to the findings that are necessary for approval of a conditional use permit. Chairman Bostwick: Stated in this case we don't have any necessary convenience or necessary determination because it is not in a high crime area for the City of Anaheim or that it is, any of those things that trigger our response but we have the ability to condition this for hours, sales, etc. and/or deny the entire market for the fact that they would be able to sell alcohcl at that location. Commissioner Boydstun: Stated they are asking for approval of a conditional use permit with beer and wine sales and asked if the Commission can approve a CUP without beer and wine. Selma Mann: Responded, °yes°; and stated actually the resolution that was passed by the City Council with regard to the public convenience and necessity also states that when the Commission makes a decision approving a CUP that permits beer and wine, the Police Department will not then be going to ABC opposing the decision and in fact, the Commission is acting for the City Council. It is linked In that 'rf the Commission approves the beer and wine, then the Police Department will not then oppose ih although they may later oppose or request conditlons based on their day to day enforcement actNities and observations. Commissioner :Boydstun: Asked H the Commission approved the CUP without beer and wine, could the applicant then ask for it from ABC. Selma Mann: Answered that the Commission would have denied the beer and wine and they would not have the Zoning approval that would permit them to obtain an ABC license. Commissioner Bristol: Stated staff was not happy wRh the architectural plans and he thought that the Council had some input on that subject. Greg Hastings: Stated Arco had submitted plans for a very similar type of architectural style at Katella and State College and two plans were being considered and City Council approved the more traditional Spanish style with the the roof service station at that location. Also, we are looking for a lot of architectural detail which is more that style for a lot of the service stations that are coming before the Commission. He referred to the one Just approved by the City Council at Broadway and Anaheim Boulevard which has a tot of architectural relief. The planner did go out and look at this area and there is a mixture so there is not really a clear cut direction in this particular location. There are some buildings in the area in the traditional type of archRecture with the Spanish style facades. Commissioner Henninger: Stated the Arco station at the corner of State College and Katella involved the investment the City was making in the Stadium. _ __ Mr. Hastings: Stated that was part of it although there was no clear architectural trend in that area yet and there was no standard. Commissioner Henninger: Remembered the discussion there and R had a lot to do with the massive investment in Sportstown and the Stadium. The one across the street here on Broadway, similady had some discussions about downtown and the old Carnegie Library and City Museum across the street, so there were spec'rfic reasons for both of those locations. The applicant provided photographs of the Texaco station and he thought that was a bright thing for them to do because it does give a little reality check; and noted that is a real nice station across from Cinemopalis. 07-2 t -97 Page 42 Mr. Hastings: Added he thought 'rf staff had this come before them today, they would make a recommendation for some changes to the Texaco station relative to some architectural detail. These photographs do not really show the landscaping very well and that would be a major issue. Wfth this Arco proposal today, staff is very satisfied with everything on the sfte except the style of the building. Plus, staff's recommendation is for an 8-foot high monument sign. Commissioner Peraza: Agreed and added the monument signs look good at some of the other stations. Commissioner Henninger: Agreed and stated he is tempted to let them go with the architecture; that the City does not have architectural guidelines and we don't enforce a theme; that he understands how we came to the conclusion on the other two locations to demand certain archtecture but thought here perhaps they should be allowed to do what they want. He agreed wfth a monument sign and no beer and wine and they could have the architecture they want. Selma Mann: Stated there has not been public discussion prior to this hearing at a public hearing, so ft would be appropriate for the new Commissioner to vote. Melahie Adams, Associate Civil Engineer, Public Works Department: Correction to Condition No. 32, deleting the second sentence. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Made the following corrections: ® Condftlon No. 26 -that the address numbers on the roof shall not be visible from the view of the street or surrounding properties. ® Condition No. 30 -that there shall be no facilities for on-site consumption of food. She explained that would include like a .bar area. ® Condftlon No. 33 -the last sentence says, Master Plan of Drainage or pay storm drain impact fee. ® Condition No. 34 -that all driveways shall be constructed to accommodate 10-foot radius curb returns in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 137. ® Condftlon No. 39 -add Condition No. 36 to be complied wfth prior to the .issuance of a building permit. ® Condition No. 40 -add Condition No. 21 and No. 37. ® Add a new condition: 'That the fence adjacent to the residential property at the southwest comer of this property be 6-foot high. The landscape plans do show oleanders which right now has problems with blight and perhaps a different type of landscape material should be substituted. Greg Hastings: Asked that a condition be included requiring vines to be placed on the wall that separates the south property from this property and those should be on both sides of the-wall. The wall should be recessed to allow for the vines. Commissioner Bdstol: Stated he would like to deny the sale of beer and wine on this site, and eliminate all the conditions pertaining to the sale of beer and wine due to the fact that this area has been under study for several years and now it is a redevelopment area and a great deal of that had to do with the amount of alcohol, both off site and on site and just because ft is on a comer that doesn't have as much geography inside Anaheim is not really an effective way to judge this particular area. Commissioner Mayer: Referred to shared parking this sfte had with the adjacent sfte and asked what happens to that now. 07-21-97 Page 43 Chairman Bostwick: Added apparently that was not part of their conditional use permit and was their private agreement. Cheryl Flores: Stated ft is her understanding that the market to the south has Code required parking for their use. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked 'rf that extra parking for the market to the south now belongs to Arco? Mr. Loubet: Stated they have always owned that property and had given them a lease on it for parking but have given them notice on their lease. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Denied WaNer of Code Requirement on the basis that both waivers were deleted following public notification. Granted, in part, Conditional Use Permit No. 3932 wfthout the retail sales of beer and wine for off-.premise consumption and with the following changes to conditions: Deleted Condition Nos. 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18 and 27. Modified Condition Nos. 26, 30, 32, 33, 34, 39 and 40 to read as follows: 26. That the building roof shall be painted wRh 3-foot high reflective address numbers in a contrasting color to the roofing material. Said address numbers shall not be visible from ground level. 30. That there shall be no facilities for on-site consumption of food. 32. Prior to issuance of a building permR, the developer shall pay the Sewer Capacity Mitigation Fee established for the South Brookhurst Corridor sewer deficiency study area. 33. Prior to grading plan approval, the developer shall submit a drainage report, prepared by the Registered CNiI Engineer, to document both historic and proposed drainage patterns and quantities. The report shall also show how the development will impact the areawide drelnage system. If the development increase or redirects the current or historic storm water quantity or point(s) of discharge, then the project will be required guarantee mitigation of the impact in conformance with the Master Plan of Drainage or pay Storm Drain Impact fee. 34. That all driveways shall be constructed to accommodate ten (10) foot radius curb returns in conformance with Engineering Department Standard No. 137. 39. That prior to issuance of a building permR, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 17, 28, 29, 31, 32, 36 and 38, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 07-21-97 Page 44 40. That prior to final building and zoning Inspections, Condition No. 21, 26, 34 and 37, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Added the following conditions: That the fence adjacent to the residential property at the southwest corner of the property shall be 6 feet in height. That minimum 1-gallon size vines shall be planted on max(mum 3-foot centers on both sides of the wall that separates the south property from this property. That final landscape plans shall be submitted showing the replacement of oleanders with a different type of landscape material. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal dghts. DISCUSSION TIME: 17 minutes 07-21-97 Page 45 8a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved Sb. WAIVER OF CODE REOUtREMENT Approved 8c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3935 Granted OWNER: M/M INVESCO INC., 6732 Westminster Boulevard, Westminster, CA 92683 AGENT: VICTOR PATEL, 24351 Rede Gauguin, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 LOCATION: 1125 North Maanolia Avenue. Property is 1.5 acres located 280 feet north of the centerline of La Palma Avenue. To permit a 2,876 square foot restaurant and 5,760 square foot banquet facility with sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Continued from the Commission meeting of June 23, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-92 SR6678TW.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Mr. Patel: Stated they are requesting this CUP fora 2,876-square foot restaurant and 5,760-square foot banquet facility, along with a liquor license. He stated there is a real need for this type of facility because a lot of places do not allow outside catering. He explained when they use the banquet facility at this location, all the offices will be closed, so there will not be a parking Issue. They are agreeable to having a restriction placed on the alcohol because they do not plan to have a bar or lounge. He stated a CUP was approved for this same location to permit on-sale liquor. Commissioner Peraza left the meeting at 5:25 p:m. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked 'rf they did not have a beer and wine license, would they be able to get aone-time license for a wedding reception. Tom Engle, Anaheim Police Department: Thought they could get something from ABC for an occasion such as that. He thought they are talking about not having any retail sale of alcohol at all In their day to day operation and would have it Just for the banquets. He was concerned about the close proximity to the Imperial Theater. 07-21-97 Page 46 Commissioner Henninger: Thought the proposal for the banquet hall would be rented to people who wanted a wedding and that they would have their own private caterers. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Mr. Patel: Responded they have the restaurant on site and they are proposing no catering from outside and the restaurant would be preparing the food for the banquet. He suggested allowing them to have the operation for twelve months andrf the Police Department is not satisfied, they will let go of their license. There will be no public sale of alcohol. Tom Engle: Stated the applicant had indicated to him that there would be no retail or public sale of alcohol In the day to day operation of the restaurant and it would only be for the banquet facility and he could support that wfth the conditions. He understood a person could not walk in off the street and purchase a drink. Commissioner Henninger: Asked what is meant by banquet. Tom Engle: Responded that means the facility is being rented for a private party and Commissioner Henninger added that the individuals who would be related to one another by profession, kinship, organization, etc. He clarified the banquet facility will be separate from the restaurant. Cheryl Flores: Stated staff would recommend deletion of the last sentence of Condition No. 13. Also, a condtion that there will be no off-street walk-in sales of alcohol of any kind and alcohol will only be served to individuals attending banquets and not inside the restaurant. Commissioner Boydstun: Added there shall be no bar or lounge maintained on the property. Commissioner Henninger: Asked that the condtions be changed according to the Commission's intent. ACTION: Approved Negative :Declaration Approved Waiver of Code Requirement Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3935 with the following changes to conditions: Deleted Conditions Nos. 3, 4, 6 and 14. Modified Condition No. 13 to read as follows: 13. That as determined by the Ciry Traffic and Transportation Manager, a maximum capacity of 60 persons shall be allowed for the banquet facility during the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and that a maximum capacity of 230 persons shall be allowed for the banquet facility during evening hours. Added the following condition: That there shall not be any off-street, walk-in sale of alcohol. Alcohol shall only be served at banquets and not in the restaurant. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioner Napoles abstained and Commissioner Peraza absent) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION: 11 minutes 07-21-97 Page 47 9a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 9b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3598 (READVERTISED) Approved, as readvertised OWNER: BRADMORE REALTY INVESTMENT COMPANY, LTD., (To expire 7-21-02) Attn: John Bohn, 721 Santa Monica Boulevard, Santa Monica, CA 90401-2685 AGENT: MARK BOVE, CALVARY CHAPEL, 270 East Palais Road, Anaheim, CA 928D5 LOCATION: 270 East Palais Road -Calvary Chanel Property is 4.69 acres located on the south side of Palais Road, 710 feet east of Anaheim Boulevard. To amend or delete a condition of approval to Increase the maximum enrollment from 123 to a total of 220 total pre-school and elementary school students, and to permft the 10,000 square foot expansion of an existing pre-school and elementary school within an existing industrial building in conjunction wfth an existing church. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-93 SR6727KP.WP FOLLOWING iS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Chairman Bostwick declared a Conflict of Interest. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Mark Bove, 5515 River Avenue, Newport Beach 92663: Explained In 1991 they leased the front portion of this building and in 1993 they started a school for 123 students and the school is now growing, and they now have an opportunity to move Into the back 10,000 square feet and build four addftional classrooms. He stated they want to go to 220 maximum students. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Bristol: Explained Condition No. 13 is Imposed because there are a lot of school activities and this is an industrial area and there could be some hazards. Mr. Bove: Stated at the present time there are no hazards. Commissioner Henninger: Added at any time somebody could lease the building next door to this church and school and they could start using fiberglass which could have an adverse impact on this property. Mr. Bove: Stated they understand and are willing to sign the document. He added they know 07-21-97 Page 48 there are several public schools in the Anaheim area which are next to industrial parks (Loara High School, etc.) and they face the same issue. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Stated staff would recommend that Condition No. 13 be amended to required an unsubordlnated covenant. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager: Noted this matter was referred to the Planning Commission from the Zoning Administrator due to the level of controversy. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Approved request. Amended Decision No. ZA93-30 as follows: Modified Condition Nos. 1 and 6 to read as follows: °1. That the maximum number of children enrolled in the pre-school and elementary school shall not exceed two hundred and twenty (220) students. 6. 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 No. 2 of Exhibit 1 (plot plan) .and Revision No. 1 of ExhibR 2 (floor plan) and as conditioned herein.° Added the following conditions: 10. That this conditional use permR shall expire five (5) years from the date of this resolution on July 21, 2002. 11. That the pre-school, school, and extended daycare (for on-site students only) hours shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 6 p. m. Monday through Friday as stipulated to by the pettioner. 12. That any additional or modified signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. 13. That within a period of sixty (60) days from the date of this resolution, the applicant shall submit an unsubordinated document for review and approval by the Cary Attomey's Office, to the Zoning Division acknowledging that Industrial and commercial uses are permitted, and may be located _ _. immediately adjacent to this property. The statement shall Indicate the permitted primary and conditionally permitted uses spec"rfied by industrial (ML Zone) and commercial (CL Zone), and shall acknowledge that the uses may be subject to change wRhout further notice to the this property owner. Upon approval by the Ciry Attorney's office, the document shall then be recorded at the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded document shall be submitted to the Zoning Division. 14. That use of the asphalt parking lot for playground purposes (other than In areas specifically identified on Revision No. 2 of Exhibit No.i) shall not be 07-21-97 Page 49 permitted unless thls permft is readvertised and approved by the Planning Commission to expand the area of the permitted outdoor uses. VOTE: 5-0 (Chairman Bostwick declared a conflict of interest and Commissioner Peraza absent) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 15 minutes 07-21-97 Page 50 10a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 10b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 70c. CONDITIONAL'USE PERMIT NO. 3947 OWNER: CRESCENT SOUTHERN BAPTIST CHURCH, 622 North Gilbert Street, Anaheim, CA 92801 AGENT: DONALD L SPANGLER, 622 North Gilbert Street, Anaheim, CA 92801 LOCATION: 622 North Gilbert Street /Crescent Southern Baotis4 Church . Property is 1.89 acres located on the east side of Gilbert Street, 329 feet north of the centerline of Crescent Avenue. To permit a private school (grades 6 through 8, with up to 200 students) wfthln two existing church buildings with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-94 Approved Approved Granted (To expire 7-21-02) SR6723KP.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Donald L Spangler, 2743 W. Coffman, agent for the church: Explained they have built four buildings over the last four years, and they are primarily Christian education buildings; that they have thought about starting a school :but it has not happened and now Anaheim Discovery Christian School wants to use their facilities. Carol Kowlpharpe, Administrator of Anaheim Discovery Christian School: Explained they need more space; that they have a middle school of 6th, 7th and 8th graders which has grown from 32 to 8b students and they have no room for the existing 5th graders moving in, except on a first come, first served basis. This is a tremendous facility for their needs and they could have. maybe 200 students within the next 10 years. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Asked that a condition be added to limit enrollment to a maximum of 200 students, as stated by the petitioner. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Approved Waiver of Code Requirement Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3947 wRh the following added condition: 07-21-97 Page 51 That student enrollment shall be limited to a maximum of two hundred (200) students. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Peraza absent) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSIOfd: 7 minutes 07-21-97 Page 52 11a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 11 11b. VARIANCE NO. 4309 OWNER: WINSTON COLLEGE LLC, 2030 Main Street, Sute 1630, Irvine, CA 92614 AGENT: BICKEL UNDERWOOD, Attn: Matt Cormia, 3600 Birch Street, Suite 220, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION: 1340-1400 South State College Boulevard and 2000- 2050 East Winston Road. Property is 9.07 acres located at the southeast corner of Winston Road and State College Boulevard. Wfth waivers of maximum number of freestanding signs and minimum distance between freestanding signs to construct monument and tenant ident'rfication signs. VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. PC97-95 Concurred w/staff Granted SR6707JKWP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Phil Ramming, 2030 Main Street, Ste. 1630, Irvine, CA: Explained their proposal is to upgrade the property, add a little life to the elevation and dress up the store front. He stated the sign band was a part of that concept. They have been working wfth staff and agree with the staff report. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Bristol: Asked how far the cabinet is going to be away from the wall? Mr.73amming: Answered one of the features of the entries is that the doors are actually recessed and from the door that could be as much as 12 to 15 feet. From the store front, they are-about 4 to 5 feet. Cheryl Flpres: Stated staff did scale the drawings and they are from 2 to 16 feet. ACTION: Concurred with staff that the proposed pro)ect calls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 11, as defined in the State EIR and Is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirements to .prepare an EIR. Granted Variance No. 4309 VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Peraza absent) 07-21-97 Page 53 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSIOPI TIME: 5 minutes 07-21-97 Page 54 12a. CECL4 NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 12b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3952 August 18, 1997 12c. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 97-11 OWNER: LEDERER ANAHEIM LIMITED, 1990 Westwood Boulevard, Suite 250, Los Angeles, CA 90025 AGENT: ANAHEIM, INDOOR MARKETPLACE, Attn: Robert Weiss, 1440 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 1440 South Anaheim Boulevard -Anaheim Indoor Marketplace. Property is 14.74 acres located north and east of the northeast comer of Cerrftos Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard. To permit a 6,809 square foot addition for a television studio and entertainment area and determination of public convenience or necessity for retail sales of beer for on-premises consumption and a second level, 1,209 square foot office area in conjunction with an existing indoor swap meet. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY RESOLUTION NO. SR6717JKWP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Chairman Bostwick declared a Conflict of Interest. Cheryl Flores: Stated a letter was received from the Anaheim School District and a copy was provided to the applicant. _ APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Robert Wise, General Manager, Anaheim Marketplace: Explained they want to enclose the already approved outdoor entertainment area and combine R with their indoor entertainment area so they can have larger capacity events on a regular basis; that they wanted a Type 40 beer license so they could serve beer with certain events that would be held inside the facility; that no one would be leaving wfth beer and no one would be served :beer unless they are attending one of the events; that they have talked about boxing matches, concerts, etc. and most of the events would be in the evenings or on weekends and also that food service would be available and it would be the same type of food served at Angels Stadium or the Pond with similar events. It is very Important that they have this allowance because it would help attract other events. 07-21-97 Page 55 THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Tom Engle: Stated there are 17 licenses in the area and there should only be 6 and that is because of the size of this census tract which is really big, from Vermont Street to the north, all the way to Katella on the south. It was his understanding from the drawings that this was to be an open area, not enclosed and askedrf those doors will be secured. Mr. Wise: Stated it will be limited access and it will be controlled because people will be paying to get in. Tom .Engle: Asked how many entrances and exits there would be and Mr. Wise responded he wasn't sure but there should only be one entrance and exft and everything else would be emergency exRs. Commissioner Henninger: Asked 'rf all the events in this facility will have a charge associated with them? Mr. Wise: Responded some of the concerts they have on the weekend are free, but it would depend on the event. Tom Engle: Stated their concern is that someone could walk in and purchase alcoholic beverages and then walk out at any of those entrances or exfts along the side. Mr. Wise: Stated basically they would have security on the doors from within the existing Marketplace, .and the other doors around the perimeter will be emergency exits only. Commissioner Boydstun: Askedrf those emergency exits would be wired wfth alarms? Mr. Wise: Responded they could do that. and added they would place guards by those exts during an event. Commissioner Peraza returned at 6:00 p.m. Tom Engle: Asked what they will use for alcohol sales. Would it be a portable unft and where will they sell from; and would it be a walk-up booth like at the Anaheim Stadium. Mr: Wise: Responded it would be like a small bar, maybe a hot dog cart and they can fimft the size ff desired and stop sales at a certain point during the event. Tom Engle: Clarffied the alcohol sales would only be for sale during an event. Gommissioner Bristol: Stated right now the establishment sells beer and R is really nice but that he is really hesitant about this request; that they are doing really good there right now, but he Is nervous about a boxing match; that the normal operation ends at 7 p.m. and a boxing match would go until 11 p.m., so the activity could be Increased with a lot of people drinking, and asked ff they could limit the .beers. Mr. Wise: Responded he would be willing to limit the amount of sales and not sell any after a certain point in the event, similar to what is now being doing at the Pond or Stadium. 07-21-97 Page 56 Tom Engle: Stated he would feel better K it has the proper restrictions and now he understands that the doors will be locked and secured and the alcohol sales will be on the north end of the room and exits will be on the south. He added he would like to see the size of the cups limited. He stated those types of things will be placed on them by ABC as well. Commissioner Bristol: Asked about restrooms for the new area and Mr. Wise responded there are no addftional restrooms proposed. Commissioner Bristol asked how they would stop people from going in and out to use the restroom. Mr. Wise: Stated that is a good point and they would need restroom access, .and that he needs to talk to the archtect about making the restrooms separate. He agreed to a continuance so he could talk to his architect about restrooms. Commissioner .Bristol: Asked 'rf these events would be when the swap meet is closed. Mr. Wise: Stated they like to have some of the events at the same time the swap meet is open. Tom Engle: Asked how many people would attend one of these events. Mr. Wise: Responded the capacity is for 670 people, plus employees. He explained there are two existing restrooms in the warehouse area adjacent to this area which could be made accessible and open to the public, and thought he could have the plans redrafted to include them. Tom Engle: Stated he would work wRh ABC and get some of the condtions in writing which they are currently working on for the new Celebrity Theater and these conditions would be similar. ACTION: Continued subject request to the August 18, 1997 Planning Commission meeting 1n order for the applicant to submit revised plans showing restroom facilfties. VOTE: 5-0 (Chairman Bostwick declared a conflict of interest and Commissioner Peraza was absent) 12 minutes 07-21-97 Page 57 13a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECL4RATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED) 13b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3648 (READVERTISED) OWNER: THEODORE TODOROFF, 909 North Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: BRUCE WEINER, 333 City Boulevard West, Orange, CA 92668 LOCATION: 909 North Anaheim Boulevard. Property is 0.24 acre located at the northwest corner of La Veme Street and Anaheim Boulevard. To amend or delete a condition of approval to permit an automotive stereo sales and installation facility (previously an automotive fire sales and installation facility).. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-96 Approved Approved, as readvertised (To :expire 7-21-98) SR6706KB.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: 2 people spoke in opposition to subject request. APPLICANT' S STATEMENT: Bruce Weiner, agent: Stated they are willing to abide by all the conditions. He noted this sfte previously had a CUP for automobile fire Installation. PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Edward Fish, 904 N. Zeyn: Stated his property abuts the rear of subject property and he has lived there for 3 years, but has owned the property for a number of years. He stated the Issue Is the noise. He believes a basic property right is quiet enjoyment of his home and loud noises causes stress and a reduction of property values. The staff reports says there shall be no testing of stereo equipment outside the building and this business has been there for awhile and the stereo equipment is audible outside the building frequently. - Mr. Fish: Stated there is another noise problem and it is not only stereo equipment that is .being sold and installed there, but car alarms as well. The testing of alarms is very loud, even ff it is short. This business does best on weekends when the neighbors are home in their houses or out in the yards. The third concern is the noise coming from the building with stereos being played by the staff which is very loud, plus he really objects to the bad language that is heard from the music that is being played. Mr. Fish: Stated the staff report also indicates that ail windows located on the west side of the building shall remain closed during business hours and the west facing overhead door shall be permanently sealed and that has not been done, and pointed out there is a steel security gate that has been installed on the inside of that door. 07-21-97 Page 58 Theodore Toderoff, owner of the subject property: Stated he owned subject property before Mr Fish bought his property. He felt Mr. Fish just wants to get back at him personally; and that Mr. Fish restores cars and creates a lot of noise and has a chainlink fence and should build a block wall. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Mr. Weiner: Stated they will try to accommodate Mr. Fish and keep the testing noise down and have ft done solely inside the building and they will talk to their staff about the noise level from the stereos inside the building. This site has been used for various automobile installations before and they are certainly willing to comply with the condftions and staff recommendations in the matter. Mc Gonzales, 908 N. Zeyn, located right behind the shop: Indicated he also has complaints; that he has lived there 4-'~ years and this business has been very noisy. He works 10 to 12 hours a day and on Sundays likes to relax and enjoy his family in the back yard, and he likes to sleep for a couple of hours. Mr. Gonzales: Suggested they put padlocks on the trash :bins because there are a lot of homeless people who use them for shelter and he never knows who is there or what is going on. Also, cars park right there by the alley and intertere with the trash pick up and they damaged his fence. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Bristol: stated he was there yesterday in the afternoon and the west-facing overhead door being discussed was definftely open and they were working on cars inside and it was rather warm. He thought when they close that door to test something, it would be really warm, but did not believe that they would close the door to test the equipment. He added he understands what the two gentlemen are talking about. Commissioner Bristol: Asked where the notice was posted and 'rf somebody had removed R. He was concerned because only two people are here to oppose this. Mr. Fish: Explained he had gotten a written notice in the .mail, He added he is not trying to put this person out of business; that he has talked to the operator, bu[ is here because he thought the issue of noise needs to be addressed. Commissioner Peraza pointed out the City has a Noise Ordinance and 'rf they are making a lot of noise, the neighbors could call Code Enforcement. He asked 'rf they are installing car alarms. It wa's noted the staff report indicates the request was advertised for automotive stereo and alarm installation facility. _ __ Commissioner Bristol: Asked if there would be anyair circulating ff the overhang door is closed and the other window on the west elevation is closed. The operator of the business responded 'rf that door is closed, there is no ventilation and it will be hot Inside. He .added he has talked to this neighbor and told him if anything bothers him, he will do whatever he has to and will close the back door and would open another door on the other side. He explained the door actually faces the alley and they have been exploring other possibilRles. Commissioner Boydstun pointed out they have no other overhead door to that building and they 07-21-97 Page 59 would not be able to get a car Inside to work on it. Mr. Weiner: Stated they could efther bring the car in through the existing door or Install a new door on the south side. Commissioner Henninger. Thought a new door on the south side would be a big improvement. Commissioner Boydstun: Stated something has to be done about the employees playing the stereos. Mr. Weiner: Stated they will discuss that with their employees. Commissioner Henninger pointed out the fire business was closed on Sundays. The operator of the business stated his business depends on Saturday and Sunday, and that he has talked to all his neighbors. Most of his business on Saturday and Sunday and that they stayed late one Saturday, until 7 p.m. and they are supposed to close at 5 p.m. and that from now on, they will close at 5:00 p.m. Mr. Weiner: Stated he thought the main problem is the noise and if they can change it so that the noise does not come out to the alley, it would be a big improvement. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Stated the prior approved exhibit shows the 16-foot roll-up door facing the alley would be closed and a new proposed 12-foot roll-up door would be installed facing south. Mr. Weiner: Stated the prior business was supposed to do that but they operated several years without complying, but now they will take care of it. Commissioner Bristol: Asked that some insulation be provided on the door that is to be closed. Commissioner Boydstun: Suggested adding a condition that the new door would be installed within 30 days. Commissioner Henninger: Suggested adding a condition that says this conditional use permit wvl expire one year from today and then would have to be renewed. He stated basically he has heard the applicant say they have had noise problems with the neighbors and has agreed to correct that and in one year 'rf that is done, there should not be these complaints. He added the Commission has the option of revoking the permftrf the problems are not resolved. Ms. Flores: Suggested adding that Condftipn No. 19 be complied wfth wthin 30 days. ACTION: Determined that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Approved request. Amended Resolution No. PC93-132 as follows: Modified Condition Nos. 1 and 11 to read as follows: That all business activities shall be conducted wholly wRhin the building. 11. That subject business shall be limited to the sales and installation of stereo and alarm equipment, purchased only on the subject property. 07-21-97 Page 60 Added the following condf[lons: 15. That there shall be no testing of stereo or alarm equipment that is audible outside of the building. 16. That this conditional use permft shall expire one year from the date of this resolution (July 21, 1998). 17. That the on-site landscaping and Irrigation system shall be refurbished and maintained in compliance wRh City standards. 18. That the hours of operation shall be limfted to 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Friday and 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Saturday and Sunday with 4 employees, as stated by the petitioner. 19. That within a period of 30 days from the date of this resolution, plans for a comprehensive sign program shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a °Reports and Recommendations" agenda ftem. No signs other than those specifically approved by the Planning Commission shall be permitted. 20. That no overnight storage of vehicles shall be permitted, as stipulated to by the pettioner. 21. That staff radios shall not be audible outside the building. 22. That wRhin a period of thirty (30) days from the date of this resolution, the existing 16-foot roll-up door facing the alley to the west shall be closed and insulated and that a new 12-foot roll-up door shall be installed on the south side of the building. The shop shall be closed at the end of the thirty (30) day period until the door on the south side of the property is completely installed and the door to west closed and insulated. VOTE: 6-1 {Commissioner Henninger voted no) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. 23 minutes 07-21-97 Page 61 14a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 14b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3951 Granted OWNER: RONALD L McAMIS, RONALD G. SMITH AND CANDACE J. SMITH, 205 West Bristol lane, Orange, CA 92665 AGENT: A-1 FENCE ENTERPRISES, INC. 2898 East Miraloma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 2831 East La Cresta Avenue. Property Is 0.76 acre located on the south side of La Cresta Avenue, 398 feet east of the centerline of Blue Gum Street. To construct a 1,800 square foot office building in conjunction wfth a 35,325 square- foot contractor's storage yard. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-97 SR6712TW.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None APPLICANT'S STATEMENT; James Sypftkowski, owner of A-1 Fence company since 1987: Stated they would like to amend Condition No. 4 requiring asphalt .paving and would propose gravel where the materials are stored, with pavement where the forklift would run up to those materials. He stated it Is easier to store the materials and then put the fork under it 'rf the area is not paved. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager: Responded to Commissioner Peraza that staff would probably agree with the applicant's suggestion, and that typically we do require all pavJng, but 'rf the areas where the forklifts are used are paved, it will be acceptable. Commissioner Boydstun: Thought the forklift would Just tear up the asphalt paving. The Commission: Reviewed the exhibit and noted basically the area around the perimeter of the fence would have gravel about 10 to 15 feet wide. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Granted CondRlonal Use Permft No. 3951 wRh Condition Nos. 4, 5 and 9 mod'rfled to read as follows: 4. That all outdoor storage areas shall be paved to a minimum depth of (3) inches, except that gravel may be placed around the pedmeter where materials are stored. Said storage areas shall be permanently maintained. 07-21-97 Page 62 5. That all roof-mounted equipment shall be completely screened from view of the right-of-way in conformance with Code Section 18.110.050.030.0309. Said Information shall be shown on plans submitted for building permfts. 9. That the building roof shall be painted with 3-foot high reflective address numbers in a contrasting color to the roofing material. Said address numbers shall not be visible from ground level. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attprney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. f)ISCUSSIOPi: 7 minutes 07-21-97 Page 63 758. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 15b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT September 3, 1997 i5c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3948 OWNER: GENERAL BANK 4128 Temple City Boulevard, Rosemead, CA 91770 AGENT: RUSSELL TSAI, 913 North Sheffield Street, Santa Ana, CA 92703 LOCATION: 3107-3115 West Lincoln Avenue. Property is 0.63 acre located on the north side of Lincoln Avenue, 100 feet west of the centerifne of Grand Avenue. To permit a mortuary with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR6507DS.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the September 3, 1997 Planning Commission meeting to allow additional time for the petitioner to address parking Issues and to advertise an additional Code waiver. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 07-21-97 Page 64 16a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 16b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved 16c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3941 Granted OWNER: HKJ GOLD INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, 4000 East Union Pacific Avenue, Commerce, CA 90023 AGENT: HOWARD SPLINT ASSOCIATES, INC., 14407 Gilmore Street, Sute 203, Van Nuys, CA 91401 LOCATION: 3400-3456 West Lincoln Avenue. Property is 6.0 acres located on the south side of Lncoln Avenue, 198 feet east of the centedine of Knott Street. To permit a one addftional tenant space within an existing commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-98 SR6500DS.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Howard Spunt, 14407 Gilmore Street, Suite 203, Van Nuys, CA: Stated he had gone through the conditions with staff and has questions on three -Condition No. 5, and wanted to clarify that refers to the planter on the east side of the building and stated the condition reads that all the landscaped areas shall be refurbished. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager: Answered that actually staff would like to make sure that all of the landscaping on this particular parcel is up to standards; and that the portion that needs total refurbishment is the area next to the building. He thought the rest of the site was fairly well landscaped, but any landscaping that dies should be replaced, etc. - Mr. Spunt: Referred to Condition No. 16 regarding removal of a fence and explained he thought the fence was on their property and ff f< Isn't, they will try to work with the adjacent property owner to remove it. They will put the wrought iron on their property. They would not want their project held up if they can't get the adjacent property owner to agree. Greg Hastings: Stated Condition No. 16 is almost a duplicate of Condition No. 21 and staff would prefer that Condition No. 21 remain so would recommend that Condition No. 16 be deleted and No. 21 be retained with any changes the Commission would like to see. Mr. Spunt: Referred to Condtion No. 20 concerning hours of operation and explained when they submitted their application, they indicated the hours would be 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. but would like more flexibility and would like that condition amended to read a a.m. to 10 p.m. 07-21-97 Page 65 Greg Hastings: Stated staff would recommend that condiion be deleted entirely and that this site does not abut any residential property. There was discussion regarding removal of the fence, and Commissioner Henninger noted if the fence is not on their property, they should use good faith efforts to work with the adjacent property owner to have ft replaced with wrought iron and they should offer to that property owner to replace the fence free of charge. Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney: Asked 'rf the applicant is not able to convince the owner of the fence to remove the fence, if the applicant is required to still construct the wrought iron fence. Greg Hastings: Stated actually there is no reason for there to be a fence between the two commercial uses, so the fence is not a requirement and if the applicant cannot get the cooperation of the property owner, then Code Enforcement would probably have to require the owner to repair the fence or to remove ft. Commissioner Henninger: Stated the applicant is to work with the adjacent property owner to remove the existing fence and replace it with a wrought iron fence and iF the property owner will not do that, the second option would be that he would work with the property owner simply to remove the fence and if that property owner is not willing, he would not be required to do anything, but that he has to present evidence that he has made reasonable efforts to work wfth the property owner. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Approved Waiver of Code Requirement Granted Condftfonal Use Permit No. 3941 with the following changes to condftions: Deleted Condition Nos. 16 and 20 Modihed Condition No. 21 to read as follows: 21. That the existing 8-foot high chain link fence with barbed wire located along the rear portion of the east property line shall be removed and replaced with a .new 6-foot high wrought iron fence to match the color and style of the existing contiguous wrought iron fence. If it is determined that the 8-foot high chain link fence is not on the applicant's property, the applicant shall - work with the adjoining property owner offering to pay for the replacement of the fence. If after a good faith effort, the adjacent property owner is not willing to allow the removal of the existing fence, the applicant will not be required to replace it. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION: 11 minutes 07-21-97 Page fib 17a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 17b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3953 Granted OWNER: CALCOMP, INC., 2411 West La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801 AGENT: LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY, N.C. INC. 30 Executive Park, Suite 100, Irvine, CA 92614 LOCATION: 2411 West La Palma Avenue -Cal Como Property is 27.94 acres located at the northwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Gilbert Street. To permit industrially-related office uses within an existing 394,629 square foot former corporate complex. CONDITIONAL'USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-99 SR6708KB.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Eric Hansen, Lincoln Property Company, 30 Executive Park, Irvine: Stated they recently acquire the Cal Comp property and their objective is to reposition and renovate and update the current project and then offer to lease to major firms. The property is currently zoned ML although most of the use has been office .and engineering. They have created a theme for the project which embraces two important elements (Anaheim and palm trees) and they will rename the project, °Anaheim Palms Corporate Center." They will spend about $10 million on the facilRies, will create some new entries and additional cosmetic treatment to the buildings. He presented exhibits of the project. Mr. Hansen: Stated an advantage of the repositioning is to take advantage of the 1~4~nile freeway visibility and they believe their freeway landscape plan will not only accomplish this, but allow the renovated Anaheim Palms Corporate Center as a landmark project to be seen as an enhancement to the area and an attraction for new corporate tenants. He stated they accept staff recommendations, but request deletion of Condition No. 2. The palm trees will be placed along the freeway and they intend to keep aloes-level shrubbery that will screen automobile traffic but allow visibility to the project, and they use the palm tree theme throughout the project including around the buildings and the entry off La Palma. Commissioner Henninger: Stated the first sentence of Condition No. 2 addresses the freeway frontage and the second sentence addresses the remaining trees on the property and there are certainly a lot of other trees on the property and asked 'rf they have a problem wRh the rest of the trees on the site, noting there are a lot of mature trees there and he thought they are worth a lot in terms of the value of the real estate. He asked how many of the existing trees will be removed (50% or 75%)? 07-21-97 Page 67 Mr. Hansen: Stated they will be submitting to the City a landscape plan which will maintain the appropriate trees, planters and vegetation and will be utilizing as many of the existing trees as they can; :however, they want to have a palm tree theme. Jim Ridge, Landscape Architect: Stated the Intent is where the trees are in the right place, they will try to keep them; that they do value them as an asset where they work with the site plan; and that they are trying to create a new look and the existing trees along the freeway edge would be removed. They are trying to maintain as many of the existing trees as possible in the internal campus. Mr. Hansen: Stated an important element is to maintain a campus theme and an Important part of that is the existing landscaping and trees so ft is important to maintain as much of that as they can. Mr. Hansen: Responded to Commissioner Boydstun that there is a possibility in the future, based on parking, that they could be in a position to present the possibility of a new building but not as apart of this request. He explained part of the grass will be utilized for parking. Concerning the sign, Commissioner Henninger pointed out the staff report says they are going to use the sign to advertise the real estate. He asked what they plan for the sign after that. Mr. Hansen: Stated they have commercial real estate firm representing them in the marketing and leasing of the space and they feel it is very important to advertise the project. They plan to have temporary "for lease° signs utilizing that monument sign, and then if they land a large corporate tenant, they could utilize the sign for that tenant and ff they end up wfth a number of smaller tenants, it could be utilized to name the project,"Anaheim Palms Corporate Center.° Their commitment is to only use it temporarily as a 'Yor lease" facility. Commissioner Henninger: Asked about removing it? Mr. Hansen: Answered he thought R is an important element in the project and it is going to be important to a large corporate tenant. Commissioner Henninger: Suggested a condition that they can use the sign for three years for leasing the real estate, and then at the end of that three years, the applicant will either remove the sign or come back wfth an alternate proposal as a Report and Recommendations item for the signage plan. Commissioner Henninger: Referred to Condition No. 2 and suggested maintaining the_ landscaping in place until they have negotiated with staff as to what trees are going to be removed and which trees will remain and we don't want any trees taken out until we have approved ft. He added it is really the desire to maintain as many of the mature trees as possible. He added maybe that seems Ilke a nice Idea to have new palm trees but those mature trees are worth something and should not be removed ruining that value to the property and pointed out we have seen that done a number of places in Anaheim recently. Commissioner Henninger: Responded to Greg Hastings that the Commission is satisfied with the Ilst of proposed uses since it is the standard uses normally accepted. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3953, modifying Condition Nos. 1 and 2 to read as follows: 07-21-97 Page 68 1. That the existing freestanding sign may be used for a period of three (3) years -- as a real estate sign. At the end of the three (3) year period, the sign shall be removed or an alternate sign proposal shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for Planning Commission review and approval as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. 2. The property owner shall maintain the existing trees and hedge on this property and replace damaged, dying, and dead vegetation with similar species and similar size until Planning Commission approves a tree removal plan in conjunction with more detailed landscape plans as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIRAE: 8 minutes 07-21-97 Page 69 18a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 18b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3950 Granted OWNER: DAVID L RUDAT, P.O. Box 1841, Orange, CA 92856 AGENT: LA. CELLULAR, Attn: Linda Paul and Holly Sandler, 17785 Center Court Drive North, Cerritos CA 90703 iOCAT1ON: 1110 East Orangefalr Lane. Property is 0.25 acre located on the south side of Orangefair Lane, 196 feet west of the centerline of Raymond Avenue. To retain and modify a legal non-conforming cellular telecommunications monopole antenna. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-100 SR6713KP.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Holly Sandler, LA Cellular: Stated basically they proposing to modify the existing facility which has been in existence for six or seven years. They are proposing to add antennas to increase the capacity which reduces the amount of dropped calls and the inability to make calls. They .plan to change the antennas since they are planning to change to a digital system which requires larger antennas and to correct an arm extending over the property line which was an oversight. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3950 VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. 1 minute 07-21-97 Page 70 19a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED) Approved 19b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 3691 (READVERTISED) Approved, as readvertised OWNER: ISLAMIC INSTITUTE OF ORANGE COUNTY, Attn: Dr. Jamai Nour, 1221 North Placentia Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 1221 North Placentia Avenue. Property is 1.69 acres located on the north and east of the northeast comer of Placentia Avenue and State College Boulevard. To amend or delete condftlons of approval pertaining to the required minimum landscaping adjacent to the north property Ilne adjacent to an existing apartment complex for apreviously-approved religious instRution. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-101 SR6734MA.WP --------------------------------------------------------- FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Jamal Nour, owner: Asked for amendment to the CUP. He stated they will maintain mature trees and will add more trees. That they were formerly located on Mt. View, but their property was taken by Caltrans. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ACTION: Determined that the previously approved negative.. declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. _ Approved request ModiOed CondRion No. 8 of Resolution No. 94R-217 fo read as follows: "8. That a landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and approval showing on-site landscaping consisting of a minimum £rve (5) foot to twenty (20) foot wide landscaped setback as shown on Revision No. 1 of Exhibit No. 1, along the north edge of the property and Code-required trees to be planted in the setbacks along State College Boulevard and Placentia Avenue." VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 4 minutes 07-21-97 Page 71 MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:15 P.M. TO MONDAY, AUGUST 4, 1997 AT 11:00 A.M. FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW Respectfully submitted, Ossie Edmundson Senior Word Processing Operator 07-21-97 Page 72