Minutes-PC 1997/09/03SU MARY ACTION AGEN®A
A AHEIM CITY
PLANNI G COM ISSIO MEETING
WEDfVESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1997
10:00 A.M. UPDATE ON THE FORMATION OF THE ANAHEIM
COLONY HISTORIC DISTRICT
• STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSION OF VARIOUS
CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES
11:00 A.M. PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW
1:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BOYDSTUN, BOSTWICI<, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, MAYER, NAPOLES, PERAZA
COMMISSIONER ABSENT: NONE _.
STAFF PRESENT:
Selma Mann
Annika Santalahti
Greg Hastings
Cheryl Flores
Greg McCafferty
Richard Bruckner
Melanie Adams
Alfred Yalda
Margarita Solorio
Ossie Edmundson
Assistant City Attorney
Zoning Administrator
Zoning Division Manager
Senior Planner
Associate Planner
Community Development
Associate Engineer
Principal Transportation Planner
Senior Secretary
Secretary
P:\DOCS\CLERICAL\MINUTES\AC090397. W P
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
None
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
NONE
09-03-97
Page 2
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved
2b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved, in part
2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3957 Granted, in part
2d. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 97-155 Approved
OWNER: CH ANAHEIM, LTD., C/O CROWN REALTY &
DEVELOPMENT, 20101 S.W. Birch Street, #260,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
AGENT: CROWN REALTY & DEVELOPMENT, ATTN: FRITZ
HOWSER, 20101 S.W. Birch Street, #260, Newport
Beach, CA 92660
LOCATION: 2001 • 2221 East Katella Avenue and 1750 South
State College Boulevard -Stadium Crossings.
Property is 11.9 acres located at the northeast corner
of Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard.
Request to establish an 8-lot commercial complex to construct a
planned "mixed-use" center (including a 140-room hotel with
accessory sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption.,
a drive-through fast food restaurant, up to 4semi-enclosed
restaurants with sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premises
consumption, retail, office, bank, .and a fitness center with accessory
sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption) and up to
thirteen (13) freestanding signs with waivers of (a) required lot
frontage, (b) minimum landscape setbacks., (c) minimum parking lot
landscaping, (d) maximum aggregate area of signage in the CO
Zone, (e) minimum number of parking spaces, (f) minimum structural
setbacks adjacent to arterial highways and (g) minimum structural
setbacks adjacent to an interior site boundary line.
Continued from the Commission meeting of August 18, 1997.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-121
S R6776KB. W P
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
09-03-97
Page 3
Applicant's Statement:
Robert Flaxman, Crown Realty and Development, as agent for Cli Anaheim, Ltd. (Owner of the
property): Stated it is his understanding in speaking with Fritz Howser (a staff member of their
company) that other than the two open items staff is also in agreement with all the other items.
Greg McCafferty, Associate Planner: Stated Mr. Flaxman is correct, the two outstanding items are:
1) the garden wall signs for Carl's Jr. and 2) the expanded list that is different from Attachment "A" of
the staff report where the applicant wants to included national and regional chains that have a certain
number of stores (franchises) in the region.
Robert Flaxman: Assuming they obtain the approval from Commission, asked how he would get into
the record the items that they have agreed to in the terms of an addendum to the staff report itself.
Chairman Bostwick: Asked if the memo could serve as an addendum?
Greg McCafferty: The only substantive changes to the staff report are Melanie Adam's (from Putilic
Works) additions and refinements regarding the drainage and hydrology, the sewer and the private
street. The only other change would be Building "E", the corner building at Katella and State College,
instead of calling that a shop would be allowed tenant., it will be a pad tenant, which would mean a
different amount of signage for that corner.
Robert Flaxman: Stated Greg was correct. There were other things discussed and he was not certain
if the staff report would be the appropriate place for them or not. One was an issue of the relative
allocation of costs and work for the undergrounding of the utility lines between developer and the
Electrical Engineering Division and a cost sharing or reimbursement agreement that they could petition
the City for the new signal at Katella. Those are two significant items, they are in agreement on but
whether they should be incorporated with the approval.
Greg McCafferty: Suggested when action is being taken on this project, Melanie can read into the
record the revised conditions and staff can read with regard to the method district for the sharing of the
cost of the traffic signal. The costs of the developer and the City is an items for discussion. The costs
of the undergrounding of the utilities is something that Public Works or Utilities necessarily agrees with.
Robert Flaxman: Stated these understandings arise from conversations that he has had with Mike
O'Keefe and the Electrical Engineering Division. It is Mr. Flaxman's understanding that they are to dig
the trenches, lay the conduit, put in all the underground vaults. Electrical Engineering will provide the
actual engineering, that is tell them what they are suppose to build, come in and lay the cable and
install the transformers. When the users come in for serve, they will have pay the associated hookup
fees. There will be a back bone system that will be within the project for which the applicant will be
providing an easement to the Electrical Engineering Division. An the applicant pays 100% of the costs
for things within their project. With the undergrounding of utilities at Katella and State College they
have agreed upon the allocation of work and cost (they put in conduit and do the trenching and
Electrical Engineering puts in the cable, transformers and equipment.
Greg McCafferty: Stated he thought there was not much disagreement on what Mr. Flaxman had
stated. Staff just wanted to make sure that the conditions were worded appropriately so the applicant
would understand what their costs are. Greg confirmed Mr. Flaxman's statement was in line with what
Mike O'Keefe had indicated to staff.
Robert Flaxman: Stated it would be appropriate at this time to discuss the two open items.
First the tenant list: When they were working with staff on the buildings in question (Pads A,B,C and
D), staff asked them for the types of tenants that they thought were most likely to occupy those
09-03-97
Page 4
buildings. They came up with an example of the types of tenants that they thought were most
appropriate and were in the market place for those buildings. They did not submit the list with the idea
that this would evolve into an approved tenant list. They preferred not to have a list at all. They just
wanted an approved use and to know how many tenants can go in the building. They do not want to
not have to return to Commission every time there is a 1200 sq. ft. tenant that is initially going in or
there is a replacement. if Commission feels they need to have a list, then they have suggested that
any national or regional business that operates at least three stores in California be suitable:' They
want language that gives them some flexibility and who they accept as tenants.
Chairman Bostwick: Then is Mr. Flaxman is suggesting that, Item 26 on page 24, the list, be
eliminated and use some language that relates to operators of businesses with multiple tenants?
Robert Flaxman: Clarified by indicating that they do not see a need for a list or any language at all
that the project is conditioned for certain uses. They, as the owners of the property, should be allowed
to lease the space to whomever they see fit as long as it otherwise conforms with the conditions.
Alternatively, if that is not acceptable to Commission, then keep the list but add the verbiage
suggested earlier.
Greg McCafferty: Stated staff understands his concern but their whole recommendation was
predicated on that list. Had they not submitted that list., staff would have looked more carefully at Pads
A through E in terms of tenant spaces that he was asking for. He was essentially asking for certain
number of tenant spaces but he does not have all his tenants lined up yet. Staff believes it is critical
because of its location to have a good idea of the quality of the uses as well as the use itself.
Commissioner Henninger: Stated his sense of this is that they should probably add the clause "or
similar tenants" at the end of the tenant list and amend the language proceeding that to say that for
non-similar tenants, the petitioner must come back to Commission as a Reports and Recommendation
and ask for a change. Then staff has the ability to discuss what similar means with the applicant. The
suggested wording of "national chain" does not indicate what type of use it would be.
Robert Flaxman: Responded he could agree to that. When they put the list together it was something
that was rushed and not a lot of thought was put into it. He has been talking with Mr. Howser, their
project manager, who indicated there have been several tenants that have inquired about the project
that they never thought to include on the list. For instance, they received a call from Remedy Temp
which is a service commercial use which is not on their list. He would agree on the language that
Commissioner Henninger suggested and if they have a problem working with staff then return as a
Reports and Recommendation Item.
Commissioner Henninger: Asked if staff was agreeable to this?
Greg McCafferty: Responded it was fine with staff.
Chairman Bostwick: Stated the other issue was the garden wall sign
Robert Flaxman distributed a handout (materials Commission has been given previously, to serve as a
reference for the discussion) then stated there was a discussion about the garden wall sign at the
previous public hearing. The essence of their continuing request for the garden wall sign. The
approved signage cannot benefit the drive through business proposed for the center of the project
because it is screened from the street. They have suggested incorporating these signs into the
landscaping that they have proposed to screen the project. They are building a four to five foot
landscape berm almost the entire length of Katella from the .pads over at the new intersection almost
all the way to State College. They are designing a sign to be harried in the berm as part of that
landscaping. They think it is tastefully done, enhances the project and provides the type of tenant
09-03-97
Page 5
identification that is worthy of the architecture and the money invested in the project
Chairman Bostwick: Stated he agreed the signs are appropriate where they .are and rather than
putting another tenant at the corner of Katella and State College add to the congestion. He likes the
architectural design of the proposed "Southern California" theme for the restaurant which is going to
add to the center and hopefully to the City of Anaheim.
Commissioner Boydstun: Agreed, the signs fit in .and are not intrusive in any way.
Commissioner Henninger: Thought the restaurant is going to look unique and looking forwarding in
seeing it.
Chairman Bostwick: Asked whether Mike O'Keefe is going to testify?
Greg McCafferty: Responded he had been paged. He asked Mr. Flaxman about the wording of
Condition No. 15, page 22, and if it was acceptable and meet the understanding of what their
obligation would be. If it does, then staff does not have an issue.
Robert Flaxman: Noted that it states all costs for substructures and conduit is paid by the developer.
That language came as a result of their discussions and agreed with Electrical Engineering. If they all
agree that this condition means the applicant will put in all the substructure and conduit and Electrical
Engineering puts in the cable and the equipment, then he is fine with the language.
Commissioner Henninger: Stated that is what is stated in the condition and it will be noted in the
minutes.
Chairman Bostwick: Stated he noticed Item No. 30-K, page 25. It states Pad E hours 9:00 a.m. to
11:00 p.m., it needs to be changed to 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Greg McCafferty: Stated the following changes:
1. Staff report, page 22, Condition No. 20 -regarding the monument signs. (See revised verbiage
on page 8 of this document, #20 under 'Action').
2. Staff report, page 25, Condition No. 30-K -The hours would be from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. for
Pad E.
3. Page 28 of the staff report, Condition No. 46 -Added on another sentence, "The pfoperty owner
or developer may petition the City to create a reimbursement district andlor reimbursement
agreement for cost sharing of fifty percent (50%) of the signal cost".
Greg McCafferty: Stated Melanie Adams has the changes that would be made both to the parcel map
conditions and the use permit conditions for the three conditions.
Melanie Adams: Stated the changes to page 17 of the staff report, Conditions 6 and 8 to the Tentative
Parcel Map Conditions is on the memo that was give to Commission (and a copy was give to the
applicant as well). (See verbiage on page 10 of this document, no. 6 under 'Action').
Condition No. 8 of the Tentative Parcel Map Conditions should read as follows: (see verbiage on page
10 of this document, no. 8 under 'Action').
09-03-97
Page 6
Greg McCafferty: Stated that the last addition with regard to findings were for the record. Staff
requested to incorporate this, by reference the applicant's waiver of justifications and to indicate that
due to the irregular shape of the property, the fronting on two .major arterials and the disproportion
amount of dedication are all justifications for the waivers being proposed.
Robert Flaxman: There was one last item, on page 23 of the staff report, Item No. 23-A. In their
memo they had suggested that in addition to Pads A and B, the outdoor uses shown on the exhibits
for C and D are also acceptable.
Greg McCafferty: Stated that is agreed.
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
Approved, in part, Waiver of Code Requirement -Approved waivers (b), (c), (d), (e)
.and (g) on the basis that subject property is irregularly shaped, that it is fronted by 2
major arterials, and because of the disproportionate amount of dedication; and
denied Waivers (a) and (f) on the basis that they were deleted following public
notification.
Granted, in part, Conditional Use Permit No. 3957 with the following changes:
Selected the "Southern California" architectural theme for the Carl's Jr. restaurant.
Approved the two (2) garden wall monuments signs for the fast food restaurant.
Modified Condition Nos. 11, 20, 23-a, 26, 30-K, 46 and 54 to read as follows:
11. That the vehicular and pedestrian access, extending from Katetla Avenue to
State College Boulevard., shall be developed as a private street. The travel
lanes shall be a minimum twenty eight (28) feet, curb to curb. A sidewalk,
minimum four (4) feet wide, shall be provided on the north side of the street.
No parking shall be permitted on the private street. An easement shall be
dedicated to the City of Anaheim for the curb to curb width for Public Utility
purposes, including ingress and egress rights for maintenance, on the final
parcel map or by separate document prior to the issuance of the first building
permit, whichever occurs first. The street name for the private street shall be
approved by the Building Division prior to final map approval.
20. That one (1) monument type sign shall be permitted facing the intersection of
Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard of the size and design shown in
the approved Sign Program; provided, however, that said sign shall be an
identification sign for Stadium Crossings (or such other name as may be
selected for this entire mixed use project) and may identify not more than two
(2) major office or pad tenants of the project, unless the garden wall monument
signs are deleted in which case the maximum number of signs shall be three
(3). For the purposes of signage, a "Major Tenant" shall be as described in
the Sign Program.
09-03-97
Page 7
23.
26.
(a) That the only outdoor uses permitted in connection with this conditional
use permit shall be the existing Community Bank automatic teller
machine (ATM) and those uses specifically identified herein and on the
approved exhibits. Permitted outdoor uses (identified on the approved
exhibits) include the hotel pool and spa, outdoor seating associated
with the full service restaurant on Pad E, the fast food restaurant .and
the food uses located on Pads A, B, C and D. Perimeter fencing
and/or barriers for such outdoor seating areas, as required by the
Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) or the Planning
Department, shall be uniform in design and appearance and shall be
maintained in a neat and orderly fashion. No advertisement of any
alcoholic beverages shall appear on such outdoor furniture.
"That the maximum number of tenant businesses on each parcel shall be
limited to the following:
Pad A: Three (3) units
Pad B: Four (4) units
Pads C and D: Five (5) units
Pad E: One (1) full service, sit down restaurant with a minimum floor
area of five thousand (5,000) sq.ft.
Bank: One (1) tenant andlor multiple business offices
Fast Food Pad: One (1) tenant
Except as specified herein, all other tenants and uses shall be as specified on
the approved exhibits. If additional businesses or changes to the floor areas
are proposed, new conditional use permit(s) may be submitted and approved
for such specific use(s) and/or change(s). Future tenants for Pads A, B, C and
D shall be limited to the following tenant list and similar tenants, and that any
non-similar tenants shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review
and approval as a "Reports and Recommendations" item:
31 Flavors
Baja Fresh
Blimpies
Brugger's Bagels
California Fresh Mexican
CheasaPeake Bagel
Chick-Fit-A
Chick's Natural
Clarke's Charcoal Broiler
Coffee Beanery
Coffee Centralia
Cold Stone Creamery
Culinary Wraps
Dairy Queen
Dietrich's
Domino's Pizza
Dunkin Donuts
East Coast Bagels
Einstein Bagel
EI Pollo
Fat Burger
GNC
Grizzo's Sandwiches
Hansen's Juice
High Tech Burrito
Hogie Yogie
Java City
Johnny Rockets
Juice Club/Jambs Juice
Juice It Up
Juice Stop
Kelley's Coffee/Chocolate
La Salsa
Little Caesar's Pizza
Los Primos Mexican
Manhattan Bagel
Noah's Bagels
Panda Express
Pasta Bravo
Pick-up Stix
Pizza Hut
Presto (Cucina, Cucina)
Rubio's Bala Grill
Schtolzsky s Deli
Seattle's Best
Starbuck's Coffee
Sub Station -
Submarines
Subway _-
Western Bagel
Winchell's Donut
Wok Spirit
Worlds Wraps
Yoshinoya
Zu Zu Mexican
09-03-97
Page 8
30-k. That sales, service and consumption of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted
only between the hours of 9 a.m. to 11 p.m. daily for specified tenants on Pads
A and B, and from 9 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. daily for the sit-down restaurant on Pad
E.
46. That prior to issuance of the first building permit, plans for the traffio signal at
the new intersection on Katella Avenue shall be submitted to the Public Works-
Engineering Department for review and approval; and that prior to issuance of
a building permit for the first building, a bond, or other security satisfactory to
the City, shall be posted with the City to guarantee completion of said
improvement. The traffic signal shall be completed and operational prior to
issuance of an occupancy permit for the first building. The property owner or
developer may petition the City to create a reimbursement district and/or
reimbursement agreement for cost sharing of fifty percent (50%) of the signal
cost.
54. That the developer shall complete the Sanitary Sewer Gapacity Study in
conformance with Public Works Department procedures. The report must be
approved by the City Engineer prior to grading plan approval or approval of the
final parcel map, whichever occurs first. The developer shall pay fair share
Sewer Impact Fees towards future sewer upgrades within the existing sewer
basin to accommodate future development conforming with the current General
Plan. The existing sewer basin is defined as all sewer lines currently
connecting to the fifteen inch (15") sanitary sewer in State College Boulevard
and the eight inch (8") sanitary sewer in Katella Avenue. The existing sewer
basin does not include future discharge from additional development at the
property on the south side of Katella Avenue currently owned by the City of
Anaheim, also known as the Anaheim Stadium site.
Approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 97-155 with the following changes to conditions:
Modified Condition Nos. 6 and 8 to read as follows:
6. That the vehicular and pedestrian access, extending from Katella Avenue to
State College Boulevard, shall be developed as a private street. The travel
lanes shall be a minimum twenty eight (28) feet, curb to curb. A sidewalk,
minimum four (4) feet wide, shall be provided on the north side of the street.
No parking shall be permitted on the private street. An easement shall be
dedicated to the City of Anaheim for the curb to curb width for Public Utility
purposes, including ingress and egress rights for maintenance, on the final
parcel map or by separate document prior to the issuance of the first building
permit, whichever occurs first. The street name for the private street shall be
approved by the Building Division prior to final map approval.
8. That the developer shall complete the Sanitary Sewer Capacity Study in
conformance with Public Works Department procedures. The report must be
approved by the City Engineer prior to grading plan approval or approval of the
final parcel map, whichever occurs first. The developer shall pay fair share
Sewer Impact Fees towards future sewer upgrades within the existing sewer
basin to accommodate future development conforming with the current General
Plan. The existing sewer basin is defined as all sewer lines currently
connecting to the fifteen inch (15") sanitary sewer in State College Boulevard
and the eight inch (8") sanitary sewer in Katella Avenue. The existing sewer
09-03-97
Page 9
basin does not include future discharge from additional development at the
property on the south side of Katella Avenue currently owned by the City of
Anaheim, also known as the Anaheim Stadium site.
VOTE: 7-0
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 10-day .appeal rights for Tentative Parcel Map No.
97-155 and the 22-day appeal rights for the balance of the actions.
DISCUSSION TIME: 27 minutes (1:35-2:02)
09-03-97
Page 10
3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to
3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT tdO. 3952 September 15, 1997
3c. 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 corner of Cerritos 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.
Continued from the Commission meetings of July 21, and August 18, 1997.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY
RESOLUTION NO.
SR6780JK.DOC
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION:_ Continued subject request to the September 15, 1997 Planning Commission meeting
in order for the applicant to submit revised plans and additional information
requested by the Commission at the August 18, 1997 meeting. --
VOTE: 7-0
DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
09-03-97
Page 11
4a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to
4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT September 29, 1997
4c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3948 (READVERTISED)
OWNER: GENERAL BANK, 4128 Temple City Boulevard,
Rosemead, CA 91770
AGENT: QUINCY T. DAO, 44 Montelegro Street, Irvine, CA
92714
LOCATION: 3107 - 3115 West Lincoln Avenue. Property is
0.63 acre located on the north side of Lincoln
Avenue, 100 feet west of the centerline of Grand
Avenue.
To permit a mortuary with waivers of miriimum number of parking
spaces, prohibited signs, maximum number of roof signs, maximum
area of roof signs, permitted location of roof signs, minimum
distance between signs and maximum height of illuminated roof
signs.
Continued from the Commission meeting of July 21,1997.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
SR6518DS.DOC
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Continued subject request to the September 29, 1997 Planning Commission meeting
in order for the applicant to submit a parking study.
VOTE: 7-0
DISCUSSJON TIME: This item was not discussed.
09-03-97
Page 12
Sa. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED)
Sb. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3659 (READVERTISED)
Approved
Approved
amendment
OWNER: NOHA KHOURAKI AND MOHAMED KHOURAKI,
1217 South Brookhurst Street, Anaheim, CA 92804 (To expire 9-30-98)
AGENT: PAUL RUSSAVAGE, 9762 Fairtide Circle, Huntington
Beach, CA 92646
LOCATION: 1217 South Brookhurst Street - Al Tavebat Market.
Property is 0.31 acre located on the west side of
Brookhurst Street, 280 feet south of the centerline of
Ball Road.
To amend or delete a condition of .approval pertaining to a time
limitation to retain a market.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-122
SR1014TW.DOC
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
IN FAVOR: 1 letter was received in favor of subject proposal.
OPPOSITION: None
Applicant's Statement:
Russ Russavage, 9762 Fairtide Circle, Huntington Beach, CA: 92646: Stated he was concerned with
two conditions. The first one is the one year time limit. It costs them about $3,000 every time they go
through this process. His second concern is on page 3, no. 16, staff is recommending getting rid of
the metal scissors gate. They have had them since the store opened and they have always had
scissors gate. They remodeled over 3 years ago and lost 9 parking spaces in the remodel so the trash
collectors could get to the trash can better. They remodeled the building and have spent over
$90,000. They would like to keep their scissors gate out front. The Health Department has approved
them to have food out there because they have an overhang that the food sits under and they have
been doing this since the store has been there. He feels they should be able to continue under a
grandfather clause.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Chairman Bostwick: Stated the food outside does not contribute to the business, operation or the
looks of the market. The scissors gate is not a good appearance for the business. He agreed with
staff on the recommendations. He could appreciate the problem of the one year requirement but
Commission needs to see some cooperation and with the development of the gas station next door
and with the parking he thought staff wanted to make sure everything was fine before they go for a
longer time.
09-03-97
Page 13
Commissioner Henninger: Stated he did not feel the commercial code has ever allowed outdoor
display and sale of merchandise. That is handled through a special events which takes place a couple
of weeks out of the year at most. He actually has not been allowed to do it but has done it. It does
not add to the beautification of the City. He asked staff whether it actually costs $3,000 to file for a
CUP?
Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Responded the fees are approximately $1,100 which includes the
advertising and the processing for a conditional use permit.
Commissioner Boydstun: Asked if there was any way to put this on an R&R at the end of one year so
that a fee would not have to be paid and Commission could review it and see how things were going?
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney: That would be a very different affect. The conditional use
permit with an R&R on it would, in effect, not have a termination date and the burden would shift then
to the City to establish that it was appropriate for the business to continue as opposed to the way it is
presently worded where the burden is upon the applicant.
Cheryl Flores: Stated for a readvertisement to amend a condition of approval the fee is $330. So it is
much less expensive than the original fee which is have been $1,100.
Commissioner Henninger: Stated the cost is actually $330.
Commissioner Boydstun: Asked if they extend it for a year, the fees would only be $330?
Cheryl Flores: Stated for the record a letter was received from Hillcrest Hertiage Estates
Neighborhood Watch dated August 29, 1997. It was given to the Commission in the morning session
and it states unless Code Enforcement Division or any other City Department has any concerns with
this request that they feel that this request should be granted.
Cheryl Flores: Stated there was a correction on staff's recommendation for modification of the existing
condition on page 3. It should read, "That the subject use permit granted for a period of one year to
expire on September 30, 1998, provided, however, that reinstatement may be sought in connection
with Planning Commission public hearings in the event that reinstatement is requested", and the rest
will remain the same. The reason for the change is to be consistent with the proposed Code
Amendment.
After the Commission voted, Mr. Russavage stated in his testimony he said it costs $3000 which
includes an architect drawing the blueprints for $1,500, $200-$300 for a mailing list, $300 for the filing
fee. He gets paid $55 an hour to come before Commission. It is $3,000 by the time all of the costs
are added and they comply with all the requirements. He felt his customer went out of his Way to
improve this site and that Commission has done him a disservice to him today and they will appeal the
decision to the City Council since they strongly disagree with the decision.
ACTION: Determined that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serve
as the required environmental documentation for subject request.
Approved request. Amended Condition No. 14 of Resolution No. PC94-15, adopted
in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3659, to read as follows:
14. That subject use permit is granted for a period of one (1) year, to expire on
September 30, 1998; provided, however, that reinstatement may be sought in
connection with a Planning Commission public hearing. In the event that
reinstatement is requested, the petitioner shall submit satisfactory evidence to
09-03-97
Page 14
the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his .approval indicating that the
ten (10) on-site parking spaces and the nineteen (19) off-site reciprocal parking
spaces located to the south of subject property continue to be sufficient to
support this market.
and added the following new condition:
16. That the existing metal "scissors" gate at the front of the store shall be removed
and that there shall be no outdoor display or storage of products other than
activities which are authorized by the approval of a Special Event Permit.
VOTE: 7-0
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
DISCUSSION TIME: 10 minutes (2:05-2:15)
09-03-97
Page 15
8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
6b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3961
OWNER: GERALD G. PYLE, SCOT A. BROWN AND STEVE
A. PARSONS, 469 Cerritos, Anaheim, CA 92805
AGENT: JEFFREY L. FARANO, 2300 East Katella, #235,
Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: 865 South East Street. Property is 0.46 acre
located on the west side of East Street, 565 feet
north of the centerline of Vermont Avenue.
To permit and retain a taxi transportation and dispatch center within
an existing 4,147 square foot building.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
Continued to
September 15, 1997
SR6512DS:DOC
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Continued subject request to the September 15, 1997 Planning Commission meeting
as requested by the applicant.
VOTE: 7-0
DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed.
09-03-97
Page 16
7a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
7c. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 97-98-03
7b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
7d. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3962
OWNER: ARGONAUT HOLDINGS, INC., 515 Marin Street
#100, Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
AGENT: DENNIS K. LINVILLE, 515 Marin Street,
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
LOCATION: Northeast corner of Pullman Street and Old
Canal Road. Property is 2.95 acres.
To reclassify subject property from the CO (SC) (Commercial
Office & Professional Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone to the CL
(SC) (Commercial, Limited Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone.
To construct a 70,825 square foot, 2-level automobile sales and
service facility with accessory parts sales, an interior showroom,
service bays, roof mounted equipment, outdoor (at grade) and
second level vehicle display/parking area with waivers of (1)
minimum parking lot landscaping, (2) permitted freestanding signs
and (3) permitted wall signs.
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION NO. PC97-123
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-1244
Approved
Granted, unconditionally
Approved
Granted
SR6772JK.DOC
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
Applicant's Statement:
Gary Whitfield, Whitfield and Associates Architects, representing the applicant: Stated they have read
the conditions and agree all but two items. First, the parking configuration which they currently-have is
extremely tight for their needs and the requirement for landscape requirements in and under their
parking structure would be not only detrimental to what they are trying to achieve but it would limit the
number of cars they are trying to put on the site. The required landscaping under the parking structure
would be hard to grow. Secondly, they would like to maintain their sign. They want to advertise their
products on Weir Canyon but where their site is below the street level and it is hard for them to get
above the street with a smaller shorter sign. They would like to try to maintain a sign as high as
possible, even thought staff is recommending against it. They have requested four additional signs
which would be directed only at each individual driveway. The size would conform to Code but they
would indicate what each of those entrances were for service entrance, customer entrance, right turn
only, and service entrance located at Savi Ranch Road).
09-03-97
Page 17
(Revised: 10-16-97)
Dennis Linville, General Motors Corp.: Stated all the items that they are requesting are specifically
asked for to make sure this dealer is as successful as possible. Of particular importance is the
parking. The applicant needs every parking space on the lot to maintain an inventory that will allow
him to be successful.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED
Chairman Bostwick: Stated this is going to be two stories high and the applicant is going to have wall
signs on the side of it. At two stories the applicant should be up to the height or above Weir Canyon.
Therefore, the wall sign should be able to be seen.
Gary Whitfield: Responded yes the building signs because of the large easement that they have in
front the building is about 120 feet away from the right-of-way. The reason for signs on all four faces
is because there are four streets that surround them. They do not have a back side of this building.
Their main goal is to make this site as easy for a customer to enter on as possible.
Chairman Bostwick: Was concerned that there not be transports stopped in the streets.
Gary Whi~eld: Stated that is why they have a turnout at Savi Ranch, specifically for transports
because their grades are such that they can not reverse the site with a transport because it will bottom
out. They have very low clearances.
Commissioner Henninger: Asked the status of the Savi Ranch Wayfinding Program
Richard Bruckner, Community Development Department: Responded Yorba Linda is intending to go
forward with that. In order to complete their portion of it, they will be before the Commission to renew
their CUP. He guessed it would be within the next 6 months. They are having continuing discussions
with GM and others about funding for the Anaheim portion.
Commissioner Henninger: Asked on the Wayfinding Program what sort of provisions would there be to
direct people into those auto dealers.
Richard Bruckner: Responded it is a much more complicated problem than it appears because there
is also discussion of changing the circulation patterns to eliminate the clover leaf configuration. So
there are a series of discussions regarding the circulation.
Commissioner Henninger: Asked how the circulation would be changed?
Richard Bruckner: Responded rather than installing a traffic signal per a direct access to the two
there would be a four way intersection. They are trying to identify money make an engineering study
now. If that were done, it would simplify the Wayfinding dramatically. -
Commissioner Henninger: Regarding the driveway signs, was there something similar to this allowed
by another dealership?
Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Responded yes, that was correct. They would have to meet Code as
far as the dimensions (3 feet high and 3 feet wide). Staff was told there would be four of them placed
on the driveway entrances for direction, only to be used on the site.
09-03-97
Page 18
(Revised: 10-16-97)
Commissioner Henninger: Stated he thought perhaps they should wait for the outcome of the
Wayfinding and try not to undermine that quite yet. But if it does not come together soon, maybe then
Commission would need to rethink the signage that they have been allowing.
Commissioner Mayer: Agreed
Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager: Stated the other automobile dealership to the north did receive
approval for a monument sign (40 s.f., 8 ft. high, 5 ft. wide). The requested sign is identical to the size
of the one approved on the property to the north. If it is located near the main entrance of the
dealership, it would be useful as a directional sign as well as for advertising.
Commissioner Henninger: Stated according to the testimony he understood the applicant was
proposing to put it out along the Weir Canyon frontage.
Greg Hastings: Responded he was not sure that could seen. It appears that any signage could be
placed on the building itself and be just as easily seen from Weir Canyon Road.
Commissioner Henninger: Asked the applicant where they were intending to place the sign?
Gary Whitfield: Responded they were trying to identify themselves as seen from Weir Canyon as best
they could. They tried to get it at an elevation that could be seen before the right turn to come around
to their site. They would like to place the sign on the front of the property, off of Weir Canyon able to
be seen from the street.
Commissioner Henninger: Regarding the landscape planters, in reviewing the plans at the morning
session it appeared there were areas where four planter breaks could be installed that are not in the
shade area of their overhead parking structure. Asked if four parking spaces are going to ruin the
whole site?
Gary Whitfield: Responded, that, to the dealer, one parking place is too many because he feels that
he is already out of parking spaces before he opens the door. He knows from doing other projects for
other dealers in other cities that if they cut back on their parking spaces in these new locations, they
become successful. They had also planned a second deck on this project at one point but, in order to
make a rent factor work and the dealer stay in business, they had to reduce that and so now they are
lacking parking spaces. Four parking spaces sounds minor and they can relocate them but, in the
dealer's mind, four parking spaces are very important.
Commissioner Boydstun: Asked if that meant that they are not going to double deck?
Gary Whitfield: Responded they had originally planned to have three stories but it turned out to be
more costly than they could afford.
Commissioner Henninger: Stated the applicant imagines that the parking spaces are dear because of
the double decking and the cost factor.
Dennis Linville: Stated regarding the pylons, they feel they have a lot of landscaping because they
have to landscape four sides. They have landscaping all around the facility so it is not going to be a
big parking lot. They will have new cars out there so it should not be a steady problem.
09-03-97
Page 19
(Revised: 10-16-97)
Commissioner Henninger: Stated on Waiver 3, at the morning session, staff had indicated 1 be
permitted where 9 were proposed. At the morning session staff had come up to 4 or 5.
Greg Hastings: Referred to paragraph 16 (page 4 of the staff report) as follows:
• Sign A would remain.
• Sign B would only say "service" (without a logo).
• Sign C duplicates another sign, therefore staff recommended it be removed.
• Sign D, E, F remain.
• Sign G be removed.
• Sign H remain, sign I be removed.
This would bring down the total proposed to 6 signs.
Commissioner Henninger: Recommended approving Waivers 1, 2, and 3 with a change to Waiver 2 to
show 80 s.f. On Waiver 3 to show that as a 6 wall signs.
Greg Hastings: Suggested, they be similar to other signs in the Scenic Corridor; the letters and the
symbols light up (opaque background) on the sign rather than background and that the signs be turned
off after midnight.
Commissioner Henninger: Recommended converting paragraph 16 into a condition. The table tc
show the Sign A through H, striking the logo portion in B. Need to add as an exhibit the non-
illuminated support signs and add as an exhibit the pylon sign and include the construction based on
the format mentioned by staff (opaque background for sign). Add a condition that the lit sign should be
turned off after midnight.
Greg Hastings: Asked for a clarification. Where the sign would be located?
Commissioner Henninger: The sign could either be located along Pullman frontage or Old Canal
Road, between the two driveways.
Greg Hastings: Stated staff also request that it be placed in the landscape area
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
Granted Reclassification No. 97-98-03, unconditionally.
Approved, in part, Waiver of Code Requirement as follows:
Approved waiver (1) as proposed, approved waiver (2) fora 40 sq. ft. double-faced
sign, and approved waiver (3) for 6 wall signs. _
Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3962 with the following changes to conditions:
Added the following conditions:
09-03-97
Page 20
That the following signs shall be permitted:
Stgm, E evatioo Copy ize
(ppprox)
A East {weir Cyn. Ra.l 'Anaheim Chevrolet",
logo 68 s.f.
B East 'Service" 8 s. .
D South "Service" 8 s..
E South "Quick Lube" 12 s: .
F South 'Anaheim Chevrolet",
logo 68 s. .
H North (save Ranch
Pkwy.) Chevro et", ogo 40 s.f.
That the two (2) plans showing the forty (40) square-foot pylon sign and the non-
illuminated directional signs submitted at the September 3, 1997 Commission
meeting shall be added to and made part of the file and marked Exhibit Nos. 7 and
8, respectively.
That the maximum forty (40) square-foot, double-faced pylon sign with an opaque
background shall be located either along Pullman Street or Old Canal Road, between
the driveways. Said sign shall be placed in landscaped areas and, if illuminated,
shall be turned off at midnight as required by Code Section 18.05.091.052.
VOTE: 7-0
Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights.
DISCUSSION TIME: 25 minutes (2:15-2:40)
09-03-97
Page 21
8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3963
OWNER: MELINDA H. GRUBBS, 2 Civic Plaza, Suite 240,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
LOCATION: 323 East Ball Road. Property is 1.24 acres located
on the north side of Ball Road, 480 feet east of the
centerline of Technology Circle.
To permit a 10,800 square foot auto repair facility, including paint and
body repairs within an existing building.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-125
Approved
Granted
S R6781 KB. W P
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.
OPPOSITION: None
Applicant's Statement:
David Grubbs and wife Mindy, 323 East Ball Road, Anaheim, CA: Stated they are requesting a
conditional use permit for the rear of their property for a paint and body shop in a 10,800 s.f. building
and about 18,000 to 20,000 s.f. fenced parking area in the back. They are in agreement with staffs
recommendations and conditions. He noted on Recommendation No. 21, page 5, that the boat had
been removed. The portable sign which had been welded tp a fence by the .previous tenant without
his approval or knowledge is now removed. The only debris left in the rear yard is some plastic pipe
left by another previous tenant who had sold it to someone who was suppose to pick it up. It never
was picked up so Mr. Grubbs arranged with a nursery company to have them pick it up by this coming
weekend. On Condition No. 1, page 5, requiring trash storage areas be provided; he is very particular
with how tenants behave on his property. He has a tenant coming in, a paint and body shop, that was
in an area that was too small. This property is quite large and he could comply with all the
requirements. Particularly the paint and body shop. They provide refuse removal, so they contract
that as part of their tenant services. He has always contracted Anaheim Waste Removal to provide
large bins with covers on them which can be quickly and easily removed weekly. He does not like to
have bins where people can hide and pile up items. He feels the covered bins seem to work out better
than building a concrete enclosure. Condition No, 6, page 6, regarding a landscape plan, they have
spent a considerable amount of money to bring up the aesthetics of the property. The area between
the sidewalk and the street is limited. They have landscaped all they can and will probably be putting
up a couple a more palm trees on the east end. It is also a very much used waste station. The truck
scale which is used by the Convention Center and by the Anaheim Stadium is there. He does not
have anywhere to put more landscaping. They will certainly be receptive to putting some landscape
islands against the building; he needs to investigate to see what that would involve. He requested to
have a clarification on the submission of a new landscape plan.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
09-03-97
Page 22
Chairman Bostwick: Stated there are standards for the trash collection and that is what that condition
calls for. The applicant can get a copy of the standards from the Sanitation Division and then build the
appropriate structures to house those blue containers from Anaheim Disposal so that they are out of
view of the public and still accessible to the trash removal company.
Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Stated that was correct regarding the trash enclosures. They are
required by Code. In addition, they need to have some landscaping around them if they are visible
from the public right-of-way so that they do not present the possibility of graffiti, perhaps some vines
should be planted next to them. As far as landscaping in the front, staff feels that there could be some
landscape planters up against the building at a minimum and possibly adjacent to a portion of the
fence in front. That would help ease the affect of the building with some landscape treatment. In
Paragraph No. 13, she wanted clarification. The petitioner states that the large parking lot at the rear
of the building will be used for storage of wrecked or inoperable vehicles and that was written on the
conditional use permit. At the IDC (Interdepartmental Committee) meeting, the applicant stated there
would be no storage of inoperable vehicles or auto parts so she asked for a clarification of that from
the applicant.
David Grubbs: Responded the vehicles are client vehicles that are there but they do not dismantle
parts since there is plenty of room inside, almost 11,000 s.f. He pointed out that this property is well
off the street and they are going to re-slat the fencing; nothing is visible from the street. The tenant
needs to be informed and be fully aware of his standards. He will see that they are carried out.
Commissioner Bristol: Indicated it appeared that the tenant in the back was not going to have
signage.
David Grubbs: Responded the former tenant repaired fire vehicles and he put a sign in the rear with
his address on it. The applicant had asked initially to put one more strip on the 48 s.f. monument sign
so the tenant could have identification.
Commissioner Bristol: Wondered whether asking staff for their suggestion before there is an illegal
sign place up there, because there is no way of anyone to know.
David Grubbs: Responded he did not know how to deal with it because it is difficult for a tenant to
have that much square footage and no signage.
Chairman Bostwick: Stated with the number of tenants that he has it would be better to come up with
a sign plan that .adheres to Code instead of just the signs pool sign out front to represent all of his
tenants.
David Grubbs: The problem they have is the sign in front where trucks come in one way and out the
other and it covers the whole property. He said he would review that. The tenants in front da_not
have a problem because their own signs. It is the tenants in the back that have a problem. He will
probably take the existing sign out, have it redone, split it in half, and let his long term tenant have half
of it and the bottom would say "auto body". Asked if it is allowed to have the street number of a few
words on the fence to identify where to come enter.
Cheryl Flores: Responded that the Code does not allow for a sign on the fence. However, if there
was a directional sign that was not visible from the street, it would be permitted as on-site directional
sign.
09-03-97
Page 23
Commissioner Henninger: Agreed with applicant on the splitting of the sign. Then once people are on
the property they the could have directional signs that are not intended to be seen from the street. It
is best to meet with staff to discussion the situation.
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3963.
VOTE: 7-0
DISCUSSION TIME: 13 minutes (2:42-2:55)
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 2:55
TO MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 1997 AT 11:00 A.M.
FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW.
Respectfully submitted,
Ossie Edmundson
Planning Department
09-03-97
Page 24