The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes-PC 1998/09/28SUMMARY ACTION AGENDA CITY OF A~IAHEiM PLAN~IING ~OMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, SEPT~MBER 28, 1998 10:30 A.M. • CITY ATO'ORNEY'S OFFICE WORKSHOP REGARDING CONFLICT OF INTEREST 11:00 A.M. • STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSION OF VARIOUS CITY DEVC.LOPMENT~ AND ISSUES (AS REQUESTED BY PLANNIN~ COMMISSION) • PRELIMINARY PLAN REViEW 1:30 P.M. ~ PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, ESPING, KOOS, NAPOLEB COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: WILLIAMS STAFF PRESENT: Selma Mann Mary McCloskey Greg Hastings Che~~l Flores Linda Johnson Karen Dudley Don Yourstone Micheie irwin Alfred Yalda Peter Gambino Margarita Solorio Ossie Edmundson Assistant City Attorney Deputy Planning Director Zoning Division Manager Senior Planner Senior Planner Associate Planner Senior Code Enforcement Officer Community Services, Police Department Principal Transportation Planner Associate Civil Engineer Acting PC Support Suporvisor Senior Secretary 09-28-98 Page 1 ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: A moment of silence was offered in memory of Julie Mayer (former I'lanning Commissioner) who passed away on September 27, 1998. 1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED~ Approved b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3816 - REQUEST FOR Determined to be DETERMINATION OF SUBST.~NTIAL CONFORMANCE: Solid in substantial Rock Foursquare Church,101 E. Orangethorpe, Anaheim, CA conformance. 92801, requests deterrnination of substantial conformance to construct an outdoor play area in conjunction with a previously- approved church. Property is located at 101 East Orangethorpe Avenue - Sold Rock Foursquare Church. ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Williams absent), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby determine that the prevfously-approved negative declarati~n is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Commissioner Bostwick oftered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Williams abser~t), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby determins that the outdoor playground is substantialiy in conformance with the approved exhibits for the previously-approved church provided that the play area is used only on Sundays and Wednesday evenings, prior to and after church se~vices ApplicanYs Statement: Glen Merriman: Stated their request is to construct a piay area for church children. The piay area be available only on Sundays and Wednesday evenings, prior to and after church services. Cheryl Flores: Asked if there was lighting available in the back? Glen Merriman: Responded the parking lot is well lit. 09-28-98 Page 2 B. a) CEQA NEGATNE DECLARATION (PREVlOUSLY APPROVEDI Approved b) CONDIfIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3957 - RcQUEST FQ$ Approved ~EVIEW AND APPROVAL: Fritz Howser (Crown F:ealty & Development), 20101 SW Birch ST., #260, Newpo~t Beach, CA 92660, requests review and approval of a semi-enclosed restaurant (Panda Express) with sales of beer and wine for on-premises consumotion within z proposed and previously approved planned "mixed-use" commercial comptex. Property is located at 2001-2221 East Katella Avenue and 1750 South State College Boulsvard - Stadium Crosssings. CA TION; Cummissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick and MOTION CARRIEO (Commissioner Williams absent), that the Anaheim City Planning Commissfon does hereby determfne that the previously-appraved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Cammissianer Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Williams absent), that the Anaheim Ciry Planning Commission does hereby approve Panda Express as a replacement restaurant tenant with the sales of beer and wine for on- premises consumption based upon the following: 1. That Panda Express is a listed restaurant in Resolution No. PC97-121 as suitable for this center. 2. That the type, size and hours of operation described for Panda Express are similar to the previously approved restaurant (Presto by Cucina! Cucina!), including the Type 41 ABC license for saies of beer and wine for on-oremises consumption. 3. That the Anaheim Police Department is satisfied with the operational characteristics of Panda Express provided that the originally approved conditions of approval pertaining to alcoholic beverage service are followed. This item was not discussed. 09-28-98 Page 3 C. (a) CEQA EXEMPTION SECTION 150691b)(31 (b) CODE AMENDMENT N0. 98-03 - AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 18.021ZONING PROVISIONS) AND CHAPTER Concurred wlstaff Recommended to the City Council that the 18.12 (ZONING ADMlNISTRATOR): City of Anaheim, 200 S. existing ordinance Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92803, City Council request for not be amended and Planning Commission review of a draft amendment to Chapter that enforcement of 18.02 (Zoning Provisions) and Chapter 18.12 (Zoning the ordinance be Administrator) pertaining to pot-bellied pigs. postponed for 90 days from the date of ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Council's decision. Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED 6-0 (Commissioner William absent), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby If Council wishes to concur with staff that the proposed project falls within the definition of adopt an amendment Categoricat Exemptions, Section 15061(b)(3), as defined in the Slate EIR to the ordinance, the Guidelines and is, therefore, categorical~y exempt from the requirements to Planning Commission prepare an EIR. recommended some additions to the Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner proposed draft Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED 6-0 (Commissioner Williams absent), that ordinance. the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the existing ordinance not be amended and that enforcement of the ordinance be postponed for ninety (90) days to give time to present pot- bellied pig owners to make arrangement for their pig outside the City limits. If Council wishes to adopt the proposed draft ordinance, the Planning Commission recommended that the following sections be added: That the pot-bellied pig owners shall pay for the cost of each Code Enforcement inspection related to validated Code violations. That pot-bellied pigs shail be kept on a concrete surface. SR1073JK.DOC THE FOLLOWING IS A DETAILED SUMMARY OF THIS ITEM. John Poole, ~ode Enforcement Manager: Stated this Code Amendment was sent to the Planning Commission for review, by the C~ty Council. In June 1998, Code Enforcement received a citizens comp~aint regarding a person owning a pot-bellied pig in a residential area property, zoned RS-7200, and that complaint came about after the problem of the smell from the pig. They gave the owner of the pig notice to remove the pig and the owner appealed the matter to the City Council. The ~ity Council then asked staff to hold off any enforcement action and to draft an ordinance for Council consideration that would allow pot-bellied pigs in the City an parcels under one acre. Currently the City Code allows pigs on parceis of an acre or more. When the ordinance was drafted, Code Enforcement received a number of unsolicited informational packets from animal rights organizations which recommended to the City Council and t~ staff that the Code not be amended because pot-bellied pigs have proliferated in the United States fn the iast few years. There are heaith concerns, pigs become large and can grow to over 200 ibs., that they are unwanted and they cause a negative impact on the animal shelters that have to care for them because ;here is not much demand for pot-bellied pigs, apparently, after they get big. That is why the matter is before Commission. The proposed ordinznce is in Commission's packets. He asked Commission for their input on whether they think they shuui~ go forward and return to Council to have the ordinance amended to allow a farm type animal, pot-bellied pig. 09-28-98 Page 4 The reason they have ordinances in the City that restrict these type of animais is because the City became more urbanized over the past decades. Before, animals were permi~ted in many cities and now most cities restrict these type of animals. Code Enforcement feels there are health and safety concems as well as staffing concerns if the Code is amended to allow for pot-bellied pigs. The City Attorney's Office worked extensively on gathering information regarding this ;ssue. Selma Mann, City Attorney's Office: The City Attorney's office was requested to prepare an ordinance in the event the City Council der,idPd that it wished to permit pot-bellied pigs in the Ciry, which is what they did. They obtained copies of ordinances from many jurisdictions. Some jurisdictions have licensing schemes which were not a very feasible alternative for the Ciry of Anaheim. Code Enforcement does not do the licensing for animals, except for some very unusual types of permits when it becomes involved and Code Enforcement resourc~s are already stretched to the limit with increasing demands being placed upon them. Therefore a licensing scheme did not appear to be a very reasonable alternative as far as proposing that in an ordinance. The County Animal Control Department handies licensing issues for the City of Anaheim and the City of Anaheim does pay for those services. They also contacted the Sta`e af (:alifornia, did Internet research, contacted County agencies and memorandum are in the Commissioner's supplemental packet that they received. Also ircluded in the staff report that was originally prcvided for the Council is a list of pros and cons. Th~re is a segment of population requesting this change who feels that pigs make excellent pets and that the issues ralating to them are primarily training issues regarding these animals. City Attorney's Office did their best attempt at preparing somPthing based on the ordinances that were reviewed and also based on the review of the ordinance by a veterinarian who treats pot-bellied pigs, who made suggestions. The doctor increased the weight limit which they had initially propused and made a few other changes as well. Chairman Bristol; For the record, Corcimission received a substantial amount of materials related to Vietnamese Pot-Bellied Pigs. Just before the meeting started they received a letter from the Animal Rights Foundation in Florida Inc. It appears to be urging the Commission not to change the ordinance. Nancy Peponis: Stated she is a representative af Pigs Without Partners. They are a Southern California based pot-bellied pig organizati~n that deals in rescuing, fostering, adoptirg the abandoned pot-bellied p?gs as well as issues of education and training of the pot-bellied pig. They are an animal welfare organization. The difference betwean animal welfare and animal rights is an issue that she would like to address because although the term:s sounds similar, they are very different. Animal rights organizations such as ihe Animal Rights Foundation, Animal Alliance of Canada, Pigs of Sanc!uary beli~ve very strorgly in a radical agenda fhat animals sr;culd not be consumed as food, n~t researched upon and should not be used as pets; not just pot-bellied pigs but any pets. If those organizations had their way you would not be able to have a cat, dog or pig as a pet. It is not in their vested interest to suggest that the City of Anaheim zone for pot-bellied pigs because they do not believe that any animal should be used as a pet. They prefer that the pets be returned to their natural environment. As a~ animal welfare organization they believe that it is not very likely, if ever, thai these animals will ever be returned to their natural environments, therefore it is their moral obligation as human beings to take care of them and to work within legal limits in terms of taking care of them. Pigs Without Partners have successfully adopted out 150 Vietnamese Pot-Bellied Pigs in the past two years. She is an adoptive parent of a pig that had been abandoned in Los Angeles a year ago. For the right family, pot-bellied pigs can make excellent pets. They are very intelligent, very responsive creatures. Their organization and most responsible breeders as well as all sanctuaries and rescue organizations stated, "This is a good pet for the right f2mily." There has been no documented case of a pot-bellied pig being exposed to rabies, much less passing it along to s human. For this reason there has been no vaccine created for pigs with rabies because it is a very minimal risk. The chances are much higher be~ng infected by rabies from a cat or dog. The pigs are not highly aggressive animals by nature. They are the animals that are eaten not the animals that do the eating. 09-28-98 Page 5 Aggressive pot-bellied pig behavior is really caused by an owner who is not educated. A pig is a herd animal, so when they are introduced to a house or a herd of pigs therR is some aggressive behavior that occurs while the pig is trying to figure out where it plays into the "pecking" order. Once that accurs then the behavior subsides. An educated owner wiil teach the pig that it, the owner and the human members of the herd of the family, are actually top "hogs" ir~ the famiiy. So that is where aggressive behavior comes from. .fust like dogs pot-bellied pigs can learn to walk on a leash. They are highly inteliigent trainable animals. Anaheim has excellent access to a support nelwork. Pigs Without Partners is based here, also the Southern California Association for Miniature Pot-Bellied Pigs is based in Riverside. There are also a number of veterinarians who deal with Pot-Bellied Pigs. Dr. Lorrie Boldrick, who spoke with the City Attorney, is based in the City of Orange. Dr. Doug Coward in Mission Viejo, Dr. Ron Vered has a mobile animal clinic that will come ou; to homes in Orange County. They do not belisve that the zoning for pot-bellied pigs is going t~ cause any increase in the demand for the animal. The oig craze for people to acquire pot-bellied pigs because they were a new exotic animal really crested about 10 years ago. Their experience leads them to believe that when people think about getting a pig they really do not think whether their community is zoned for a pig. The USDA, for exampie, considers the pot-bellied pig not to be swine fit for consumption. When people decide they are going to get a pig they are thinking about it as a pet and do not really consider zoning. They do not think that zoning for pigs is going to cause people to run out and buy a pig if they were not so inclined to begin with. They feel the City can prevent a rise in the unwanted pigs by changing the ordinance. Often individuals are forced to give up pigs because an ordinance prohibiting the animals living in the city is enforced. Tney feel the situation could pose a problem to the City where there are approximately 100 families who own pot-bellied pigs; if these people gzt cited and are forced to abandon their pig. She spoke with the Orange County Director of Animal Control, Judy Maitlen, who told her that the Orange County Animal Control does not have a problem with the ordinance being changed. Ms. Maitlen has seen other cities change their ordinance to allow pot-bellied pigs and hes not encountered major problems with that. The following are other pot-bellied pig facts: • Pot-bellied pig feces are not as odiferous as those of a cat or a dog becausN pot-bellied pigs eat a vegetable based diet and they er~courage people to feed their pigs fruits and vegetables. • Pot-bellied pigs seldom create noise disturbances, Their usual mode of communication amongst pigs are low-level, low pitched grunts. A pig will squeal if it feels threatened but you do not get excessive barking or squawking that will go on for hours as you might for a dog or bird. They feel thst existing nuisance ordinances are already available to desl with those issues. Should a neighbor have a problem with one of those issues with a home that has a put-bellied pig, they can be addressed in the manner in which those issues would be addressed with a doc~, cat or bird. !n closing she read a brief statement from Cher Houston (spelling not given), who had been the woman whose pig (Mu Shu) was originally cited which resulted in the change or ordinance issue in play. "Dear Planning Commission Members, I wish that ! could address you in person but a fam?ly obligation requires me to be out of town today. Thank you for tf~e effort that you are putting into researching the revised pot-bellied pig ordinance. It makes me feel much better to know that the Ciry of Anaheim has conducted objective fact gathering. I believe that I speak for all pot-belliad pig owners in Anaheim ~n~hen I request that you recommend adoption of the revised pot-bellied pig ordinance. Our pets will live far happier lives by remaining in their loving homes. Our own lives will be greatly enriched by the continued presence of our pets. As a responsible owner, I would eagerly comply with ari ordinance. 09-28-98 Page 6 The ordinance's adoption would be a wnrin win" situation for pet owners in the City of Anareim and pot-bellied pigs. Sincerely, Cher Houston " Keiley Sakata-Moon: Stated she is also a representative for Pigs Without Partners which is a Southem California based rescue, foster and placement organization. As they are a rescue organization, they feel the ramificatians of irresponsible pet ownership and pet pig sales. So they are not Inclined to encourage people to own pot-bellied pigs. All they are saying is that given the proper education that pigs are no greater health risk or danger to the community then dogs or cats, probably less so because of their nature of always being the "hunted never being the hunte~', as in dogs. She submitted s~me written suggestions, this moming to Judy Kwok to forward to Commission, for restriction requirements with regards to the ordinance change. She addressed item by item the suggestions by the City Attorney for the change of ordinance and the concerns that the City Council had. • item No.1 - Currently the suggested restricted amount of pot-bellied pigs per single family household is one. The restriction currentiy in play for dogs is a maximum of three as well as cats. They ask the Commissic.; consider increasing the number to three maximum pot-bellied pigs per household. • Item No. 2- As a rescue organization they absolutely support the prohibition of breeding of these animals as well as supporting the spay and neutering requirements recommended, however, the age restriction of females currently stated at two months (in Spain) is a health risk for the pot-bellied pig. Most veterinarians recommend that they do not go through the procedure (neutering) , which is considered major surgery since it is a complete hysterectomy. It is their recommendation that they change the age to four months or they therefore recommend that the ordinance requires spaying of females by six months of age. • On the second paragraph of item no. 2, they further recommend that the ordinance be extended to any sale of pot-bellied pigs in the City of Anaheim since pot-bellied pigs are usually sold prior to these age requirements, they recommend that all sellers be required to report the sale of an unneutered or unspayed pot-bellied pig to the agency responsible for monitoring the other requirements. This would further discourage backyard breeders and in pet stores that are currently sellinc~ these animals with little or no education or information provided to the prospective owners. They recommend that failure to report such a sale would carry a find of no less that $500. It is in the best interest of their organization as well as the City of Anaheim to discourage the unscrupulous breeding and sale of pot- bellied pigs without proper education to people and they see the direct ramifications of that. So it is in their best interest as well. • Item No. 4- She thought that was covered and based on the recommendation of Dr. Lorrie Boldrick, that was changed to drop the height and length restrictions and increase the weight limitation to 200 Ibs. • Item No. 6- They are in favor of licensing pot-beilied pigs as a possible mitigation of puss;ble fiscal impact of this ordinance change. They suggest fees within the price range to those required for dogs. They understand that there might be a minimum fiscal impact to the agencies that need to monitor these requirements. It is absolutely reasonable for the Ciry to recoup any fiscal impact that occurs. They only ask that they consider the current fees far other pets and make it within a price range that is reasonable and affordable for people who really do want to have a pot-bellied pig as a pet. e Item No. 1 Q- The suggested 50 foot restriction that the City Atkorney recommended, currently with the houses in the position and lot sizes, that severely restricts who can o~vn a pot-bellied ~ig as a pet. As Nancy Peponis indicated, pigs are less malodorous than dogs or cats because of their fecal matter and also because pigs do not have sweat gtands. Therefore, they do not have body odor. The odor that comes from a pig is based on the environment that it lives in, not from the actual animal itself. Regarding the proposed ordinance under Section 4, Savings Clause, they strongly recommend amnesty to current owners of pot-bellied pig to encourage compliance with spaying and neutering requirements and all other provisions of the ordinance. They are concerned about the financial impact to the City of Anaheim should this ordinance not be passed and people who are cited and forced to surrender their pets 09-28-98 Page 7 in a hurry. They see and experience the impact of that. It also does not encourage current pot-beliied pig owners to comply with the ordinance and essentiaily they go into hiding, which they do not encourage. 7hey want everyone who owns a pot-bellied pig to take advantage of the education of resources available but if ihey are in hiding because they are in fear of being cited or in fear of losing their pet, they may not necessarily access those resources. Commissioner Bostwick: Nancy Peponis made the statement that their organization rescued approximately 150 pigs in the last two years. Did Ms. Sakata-Moon know how many Rot-bellied pigs are on the loose and uncontrolled in the environment today? Kelley Sakata-Moon: Responded they know of no pot-bellied pigs that a~e loose and unaccounted for. As a rescue organization they work a great deal with the humane societies, shelters and animal control agencies. They are usually the first ones the agencies call when they either receive notice of a pot-bellied pig on the loose or that they brought one into their facility. Commissioner Bostwick: Written information received by the Commission from an organization called the Californians for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Bamyard Rescue Division jfrom Susan Finsen, Director] stated, "This high rate of abandonment creates severe animal control problems. In San Bernardino County, the county shelter in Devore refuses to take owner-released pigs and will only pickup stray pigs. When owners call to turn in pigs they are simply referred to an organization, and :~a are often fuil to capacity. Stray pigs picked up by the county are shipped off to livestock auction.... Animal shelters are not set up for pigs, animal control officers do not know how to handle them, no one comes to adopt them and animal health technicians don't know how to properly euthanize them. !n short, pot-bellied pigs are sn animal control nightmare " He wonde~ed whether Orange County has a problem with helping to create this. He lives next door to a large park in the County and they get many abandoned ducks, dogs, cats, chickens and he could see the possibility of the pot-bellied pigs also being abandoned in the park. Kelley Sakata-Moon: She could understand his concern but that is highly unlikely. If you look at the amount of dogs and cats being abandoned and look at the percentage of pot-bellied pigs that would be abandoned - the number would be so minimal. She does volunteer work for two different humane societies and knows for a fact that they rarely receive calls for pot-bellied pigs. She has worked with them, educating their employees on the proper care of pot- bellied pigs and encourages them to contact her so they do not have to house and shoulder the financial responsibility of caring for these animais, that is what their rescue organization is for. They try to take these animals and place them somewhere with people who know how to care for them properly which is obviousiy not the Animal Control, Humane Society or other facilities that do not have the knowiedge available to them. She really does not see the percentage of that happening or that heing an issue. The change of this ordinance is not going to encourage anyone to go aut and buy a pig that was not inclined before. Most people think of this animal as swine and would not be interested in having them as a pet regardless of whether the ordinance is in place or not. Commissioner Bostwick: On Item No. 2, they made a recommendation that the ordinance be extended to any sale of pot-bellied pigs in the City of Anaheim and asked what about outside of Anaheim? For example, the fair comes around every year, people go to the fair, s~e a pig, think it is cute and decide to buy one and bring it into the City of Anaheim. So this Section they are proposing would not effect those people because they are buying them outside of the ~ity of Anaheim. Kel~ey Sakata-Moon: They are encouraging all cities and all counties to adopt that portion of the ordinance. They do not encourage irresponsible breeding; do not support backyard breeding; do not support the sale of pot-bellied pigs in pet steres because they do not pass on the proper care information, behavior or training and they see the direct result o' it. Therefore, it is not in their best interest to supp~rt any breeding. In order to discourage backyard breeders and pet stores from selling them, thsy need to make sure that it is no longer profitable for them to do so. Unfortunately that means some kind of a financial impact on them that proves to be more excessive than the profit that they are making on selling these animals. 09-28-98 Page 8 Chairman Bristol: Asked how would someone purchase a pig if they dn not purchase it from a pet store? Kelley Sakata-Moon: There are qualified breeders that have the proper training and also there are pot- bellied pig regfstries. A number of them are based in Califamia where people can contact them should they want to purchase a pot-bellied pig. She was interested in purchasing a pot-bellied piy and researched them for a year and actually met with 10 breeders in Northern California prior to purchasing her pig. So there ar~ qualified breeders that are breeding responsibly and not creating an over population problem. Chairman Bristol: If a 200-Ib. pig was loose, could 3he get it by herself? Kelley Sakata-Moon: Absolutely. She just recently did this. She loaded up a 180-Ib. ~ot-bellied pig in an animal carrier and transported it to their s2nctuary in Solvang, California this past weekend. Chairman Bristol: According to some of the documentation that Commission received, it indicated that it usually takes two or three individuals to get a pig. Kelley Sakata•Moon: If you chase a pig it would run screaming. Keep in mind, a pig is always the "hunted; never the hunte~'. If someone is coming from behind its instinct is t~ run because it thinks iYs going to be "lunch". She can load a pot-bellied pig and get it in an animal transport; she would need assistance picking it up and putting it in a vehicle but she has done it a number of times. Commissioner Koos: Does she consider pot-bellied pigs a domestic animal, in the same way as dogs and cats? Are there any other "livestock" animals tha! she would be consider a potential domesticated animal, or are pot-bellied pigs the exception? Kelley Sakata-Moon: Pot-bellied pigs are not native to California and they were imported for the purpose of being domesticated pets, not ever intended for consumption. Therefore, she does agree that they are "domesticated" pets. She does not ccnsider them in the general category of swine because swine, to her, would be for possible consumption. Commissioner Koos: in the foreseeable future could they see some other foreign species coming into the country under the vein that they are also being converted into domesticate~ pets? This could possibly set precedence for trends in the future. Were these animals domesticated prior to this trend occurring over the last few decades? Kelley Sakata-Moon: In Vietnam these animals were prized and kept inside the dwellings of the families. Only in areas of severe poverty were they eaten. Most of the time they were kept as family pets and held in high esteem and lived in the family dwelling with the families. Commissioner Bostwick: He felt there is a great difference between Vietnam and the United States. It is a very rural atmosphere and they also sat dogs in Vietnam. So he would not compare the two societies. He really has a problem with this. He could appreciate her feelings on the issue, but the City Council has asked the Commission's opiniun on the ordinance and he would recommend to the Council, as far 2s he is concerned that they rot change the ordinance, that they leave it as an acre req~irement. If they care to expand this ordinance as it is proposed, he would then add in a section that if there is a problem found with odor and cleanliness in the care of the animal then the owner of the animal would be charged for Code Enforcement inspections and that those inspections would be made on a monthly basis. He also recommended that the owners maintain the pig on concrete because it is not so much the feces as it is the urine smell that a pig has that is much more offensive. A cat buries its waste, a dog does not, but it does not have the odor unless it is contained in a very small cage but in a pig the urine smell is very offensive. His family ran a pig f~rm in Missouri and he is very well aware of keeping a pig and also a family pig. He knows that they are not the same as a pot-bellied pig but they still have a high urine ador. He would recommend to the Ciry Council that they not change the ordinance, but should they do so, he would then like to see those items added to the ordinance. 09-28-98 Page S !Celley Sakata-Moon: She has a front and back lawn and takes her pig in her front lawn and the pig stays in her front lawn on a hamess. She also has a neighbor across the street that lets his dog loose to urinate on her lawn. Not only is his urine offens(ve but it has killed her grass. Her pot-bellied pig frequently urinates on her lawn and it does not kili the grass. Her neighbors have not complained of any malodor coming from her pig but they have complained very much about that dog. Commissioner Sostwick: She should get the Anfmal Control after the dog since it should not be out loose Keliey Sakata-Moon: She personally has not found any difference. She finds the feces and urine to be much less malodorous than dogs but she understands Commissioner Bostwick's concerns. Commissioner Koos: The comparison between the dog is overstated. In this country we have come to accept, in some ways, certain things about our society. He thought the dog is a poor example because it goes along the cultural norms and that is something that can not be overlooked. He did not agree with the impression given that she points t~ the pig as being more superiar as a pet over the dog. Kelley Sakata-Moon: She does not say that the pot-bellie~ pig is superior to a dog but she did state there are a number of dog bites reported each year. How many dogs of ttieir own natural inbreedi~g or breeding have the instinct for being aggressive, in turn, how rnany reports have been received in the past two years of pig bites? Commissioner Bostwick: Given 200 years of having pigs in our sociery perhaps we might have the same problem. They are still talking about barnyard animals versus domestic pets and he fee!s there is a place for them and they belong in a rural society and not in our urban society today. Chairman Bristol: There is a reason why these ordinances were the way they were for such as iong time. In reading this ordinance, the City Attorney has done a good job researching the information and looking at the restrictions that an owner of a pig can not be within 50 feet of another off-site dwelling, however, the reality is that is actually 95% of the dwellings in the City. The fact of making areas for wade pools to keep the pigs cool in the summer. There is a minimum of 200 square foot outside and 75 feet inside required. The fact that probably two-thirds of everything he has read indicates that the pigs are being mistreated. So t!~ey would be voting to allow something that they know that the pigs are going to be mistreated or are already mistreated. Kelley '.3kata•Moon: She did not agree they are all mistreated, it is a small percentage. Chairman Bristol: No, that is not what he is saying. The reality is, according to everything he has read, it appears people are taking these animals in without the wherewitha{ ta t~ke care of them, not having the education for caring for these animals and as a result something is going to happen to these animals. Kelley Sakata-Moon: She is not saying they should just allow anyone to purchase a pig and keep it. Th~ argument that they presented to both the City Council and the Planning Commission is that these pot- bellied pigs are not more dangerous or a nuisance problem than any other domesticated animal currently being housed in single family dwellings and even apartments. They are saying that the pot-bellied pigs are neither the ideal pet, nor a terrible pe!, but what they are saying is that everyone should have a right to have a pet. She felt they presented a valid case to prove that they are not a threat health wise or public nuisance and that is what she is endorsing, not that everyone run out and buy one. They do make good pets. She has one and does not have a problem with her ~eighbors, and her pig is well trained. She had a comment from the neighbor that she wished people wowd have more pigs and less dogs because a pig is so far less of a nuisance than a dog. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS Cl_OSED. Commissioner Boydstun: We are in an urban area and they are farm animals. She did not feel the ordinance should be changed in any way except to consider a grace period for owners who have these animals to make other arrangements. For animals liice these you have to live in the country. 09-28-98 Page 10 Commissioner Boydstun: She offered a motion that Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that they leave the ordinance as it was originally drafted. Should they change and desire to adopt the proposed ordinance that they add a section xo it which cove~s the payment of Cod~ Enforcement inspections on a monthly bas(s for s.ffending violators of any complaints of mis-care. That they add a section to the Code that the pigs ~re to be kept on a concrete surface. Commissioner Koos: Also that there be a grace period for those existing pig owners. To impose this immediately would seem a burden. • Commissioner Boydstun: The owners should be given a 90 day grace period to make other arrangements for their pig because she does not feel this is an animal that should live in an urban area. It fs not fair to the animal and it is not fair to the neighbors. Commissi~:~ier Boyds~un: She recommended that the enforcement of the ordinance be postponed for 90 days for only those currently owning a pig. Ninety (90) days from the from the timo the City Council m~kes it final to make arrangements for their pigs outside of the ciry limits. Chafrman Bristoi: There is a motion and a second (by Commissioner Napoles). All those in favor say AYE7 Commissioners: AYE. Chairman Bristol: Opposed7 (None). Mation is carried. 09-28-98 Page 11 D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2620 - REQUESJ FOR A NUNC Approved QRO TUHC RESOLUTION: City of Anaheim, l-'ianning Commission Secretary, 200 South Maf~eim Bivd., Anaheim, CA (Vote: 4-0, 92805, requests a nunc pro tunc resolutfon to amend Conditfon Commissioners No. 8 of Resolution No. PC64-188 a~opted in connection wi#h Koos, Esping and the approval of Conditiona! Use Permit No. 2620, and further Wiilfams abse~t) amended by Resolution No. PC98-145. Property ls located at 6304•6308 East Santa Ana Canyon Road - Round Table Pizza. NUNC RRO'~UP?C RESOLUTION N0. F"C98-148 This item w~s not discusse~. 09-28-98 Page 12 PUBLIC NEARING ITEMS: 2a. ENVIRONMENTAL IN 2b. VARIANCE N0. 4346 OWNER: Cinderella Motel, Inc., Attn: Raiph Kazarian, Jr., 2416 W. Shaw, Suite 109, Fresno, CA 93711 AGENT': Ralph Kazarian, Jr., 2416 W. Shaw, Suite 109, Fresno, CA 93711 Pamela S. Schmidt, c/o Berger and Norton,1620 26th Street, Suite 200 South, Santa Monica, CA 90404-4040 LOCATION: 1747 South Harbo~ Boulevard - Candy Cane Inn. Property is 2.84 acres located on the west side of Harbor Boulevard, 250 feet north of the centerline of Katella Avenue. Waivers of maximum wall fence height requirements and minimum setback area requirements and permitted freestanding monument signs, to reconstruct the main entrance driveway and install new landscaping and landscape treatments in the front setback area adjacent to Harbor Boulevard, including the construction of a fence and a new monument sign i~ conjunction with an existing hotel. Continued from the Commission meetings of August 17, August 31, and September 14, 1998. VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. PC98-149 SR7230DH.DOC • • • • • e ApplicanYs Statement: Wayne Peterson: Stated he is representing the Candy Cane Inn and Mr. Ralph Kazarian, the owner of the property. They were before Cammission in August 1998 with their original plan. At that time they received recommendations and suggestions from Commission relative to modifications to their plan. They met with staff immediately following the public hearing and discussed several alternatives, which resulted in the submittal of a revised plan that has been reviewed by staff. While Mr. Kazarian believes the original plan is stil; the best alternative he is agreeable to this alternative and is prepared to accept the conditions of approval as well as the recommendations of City staff for the project as it is presented today. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioners Boydstun and Bostwick: Both expressed that they were pleased with the changes that were made and appreciated the applic~nYs cooperation. OpPOSITtON: None 09-28-98 Page 13 AGTION: Determined that tha Previously-Certified EIR No. 311 is adequate to seNe as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Granted Variance No. 4346 subject to the findings and conditions stated in the staff report. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioner Esping and Commissioner Williams were absent) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attamey, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 4 minutes (2;22-2:26) 09-28-98 Page 14 s8. tNVIKUNMENTALiMPAGI KtYUK11VV.373 (YKtV:GERTIFIED) Continued 3b. ANAkEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN N0. 92-2 to 10-12-98 AINENDMENT NO. 2 OWNER: Chevron Products Company, Attn: Mario Bautista,1300 S. Beach Blvd., La Habra, CA 90631 AGENT: RFI Inc., 2058 S. Santa Cruz, #2100, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: The approximate 555-acre Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area ~s generally located adjacent to and southwest of Interstate 5 between Bali Road and Orangewood Avenue and is accessible from Harbor Boulevard, Ball Road, Freedman Way/Disney Way, Katella Avenue, West Street/ Disneyland Drive, Orangewood Avenue, Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard and Walnut Street. Proposal to amend the Maheim Resort Specific Plan Zoning and Development Standards (Section 18.48.070.050 of Chapter 18.48 of fhe Anaheim Municipal Code) to add "Coffee House" as a Conditionally Permitted Accessory Use in conjunction with an automobile service station. Continued from the Commission meeting of August 31, 1998. SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION N0. FqLtOWING IS {k SUMM~4RY OF:THE'PLANNING COMMISSION AGi'ION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subJect request to the October 12,1998 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow sufficient time for staff to review the dra4 ordinance submitted by the petitioner and prepare a report for Planning Commission's consideration. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Williams absent) DISCUSSION TIME: This item ~vas not discussed. 09-28-98 Page 15 4a. ENVfRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 313 (PREV.-CERTIFI~D) Approved 4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved, in part 4c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 4062 Granted, in part OWNER: Adel Ata Ali, P.O. Box 3989, Mission Viejo, CA 92690-39~9 AGENT: Abdul Ismail,1198 W. Ball Rd., Anaheim, CA 92802 Jeff Chess c/o Architerton, 220 Gienoaks Blvd., Suite C, Burbank, CA 91502 LOCATION: 1198 West Bail Road - Stnp'N' ShoplUltramar Service Station. Property is 0.50 acre located at the southeast corner of Ball Road and Walnut Street. To remodel an existing legal non-conforming convenience market with gasoline sales and off-premises sale of beer and wine, including the replacement of underground tanks and fuel pumps, and the construction of a new pump island canopy, new building facade treatments and new signage; and, to authorize the retention of two fast food lease spaces located inside the convenience market, with waiver of (a) minimum number of parking spaces and (b) permitted wall signs. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC98-150 SR7211 DH.DOC • • • e • • ApplicanYs Statement: Jeff Chess, 220 N. Glenoaks Blvd., Burbank, CA: Stated he is representing Abdul Ismail, who is owner and leasee of subject property. Mr. Ismai! purchased this business approximately a year ago and is currently leasing the property. Mr. Ismail proposed the following site improvements: • The tanks be changed along with piping and other items to upgrade to conform to EPA establishad guidelines. + The new fueling ca~icpy will have stucco finish and a tile roof, which will compliment the design of the existing food mart. • The new building will have a pre-finished fascia and the awning that is currently there will be removed. • The storefront will be replaced with automatic doors and full height glass. • The tile relief work on the building will be removed and the building will be stucco and repainted. • The lot will be repaved. • The existing ID sign will be removed and installation of a new monument sign/new building signs would take place. • The broken trash enclosure would be replaced with a City standard double bin. • Permanent compliance will be brought to the fast food operations as well as changi~g the current offering. • The interior would be brought up to Title 24 Handicap Compliance. • There will be extensive upgrade to the landscape, according to the Anaheim Resort guidelines. ~ They are trying to provide enough parking for this facility. A parking variance is being sought. A parking demand study was done and was shown that there will not be a problem with the number of spaces being provided. Another reason there is not a parking probiem there is that there are many patrons that are pedestrians from the~ hotels surrounding the area, who are the primary users of this facility. in the parking study done there were other sites selected that were similar in use to this one. 09-28-98 Page 16 It showed 4hat there a~as no a particular ~arking problem with this type of scenario. It does not have a drive-thr~ugh. • Thsse ara existing compact stalls on the site that will be eliminated. Back up space for the parking wiil be €~dequate which is cur~~ntly not the case. • Ail ihe diR:;nsions of the parking spaces will be brought up to City standard. • The improvements being rr,ade are going to help facilitate traffic through the site. Building signage. There is a variance requested for building signage. The sign ordinance does not address this type of use. They are trying to "fit" the signage required for such facility within a"template" that does not work. This facility has to compete with other facilities outside of the Anaheim Resort Area. It is located at the entrance of the Anaheim Resort. He feels the signage is a very important factor in making this project successful. The uniqueness of this location would not set a precedence for excessive signage. There was some discussion in the moming session regarding the mo~ument sign and of placing "Westem Union" on that sign. (Ne submitfed a color rendering of the proposed monument I.D. sign. to Commission.; Western Union is one of their key operations at this site. They have E~een working with staff to try to eliminate as mucfi of the signage as possible and Westem Union ended up off of their main I.D. sign. Western Union is a service that is used a great deal by patrons of the Anaheim Resort. Their concept does not increase square footage. The existiny pole sign is approximately 200 square feet and 20 feet h~gh which is being proposed to be demolished. The new monument sign is 167 square feet and 6 feet high, representing a reduction of 15% in area and 70% in height, which they feel is dramatically reducing the signage. On Condition No. 17, the applicant feels that 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 Midnight is a more appropriate time frame for the fast food operation. The condition specifies 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Condition No. 18 asked for the public phones to be placed inside but the applicant prefers the phones be placed outside. The advantages of executing the project are very c~ear. The variances being asked f~r are minimal and they supply justification for completing all the proposed improvements. The Commission's approval of the project with the requested variances is an opportunity to clean up the site and supply the Anaheim Resort entrance with a positive image. Abdul ismail: Stated he is the Vice President of the corporation, which is leasing the property. They are ieasing the property from the currenl owner. The basic idea behind getting into this property and now purchasing it is contingent upon receiving a CUP approval, remodel ~he facility, bring in a fast food franchise and upc~rade the property. The gas station and convenience market alone can not support the amount being spent on the project. Therefore, they had to bring in the fast food franchises to support and help towards paying the debt. Not having the proper siynage on the monument sign and on the building will effect their business and will "make ar break the deal". If they do ncF have proper exposure of their business then they will not be able to do the business that they anticipate. THE P~IBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Boydstun: There was a sketch in their packet this morning very similar to the one that they just receivec! but on it the three businesses were across the bottom and this gave the applicsnt room ~n the Texaco area to say "Star Mart". Karen Dudley, Associate Planner: That was a drawing that staff actually put together as a conceptual design plan that could be accommodated on the sign that wouid be in compliance with Code. Commissioner Boydstun: She was surprised they were advertising Texaco without the Star Mart. She tYiought their market would also be important. Abdul Ismail: That sign is not per scale. 09-28-98 Page 17 Karen Dudley: It is drawn to scale to a 10 scate, as close as possible. One of the issuss is that he has four (4) types of gasolines that he would be seiling and by State law he is required to provido pricing for ali four of those gasoline types. That might limit hfm to the amount of room that the appiicant has left on the sign because he is only allowed 49 square feet in a 10-faot wide cabinet of signage. That is to advertise his business sctivity as well as his prices on the one sign. She had ~poken with the applicant this moming, and they are proposing to add the condition about the roplacement of the sign. She read it into the record, "That within 45 days from the commancement of construction activities to repiace the underground tanks and/or remodel the pump island canopy or building, or prior to final building and zoning inspections, whichever occurs first, the existing non- conforming pole sign shall be removed and/or replaced with a ne~v Anaheim Resort monument sign " The property owner is eligible for the Anaheim Resort Signage Program. They cover the full reimbursement costs of the replacement of that sign. It does not cover costs involved with a waiver for that sign. At this time the applicant has not requested a waiver to the monument sign standards. The applicant has requested a waiver to the permitted wall signs and that is what is under consideration today. If he were to go forwarJ with a waiver to the minimum stand~rds on the monument sign then the Planning Department would have to readvertise that waiver. Commissioner Bostwick: Asked if the drawing that Commission received this morning would require a waiver? Karen Dudley: No, that would be in compliance with Code requiremenls. The sign plan design that the applicant just submitted is not in compliance with the intent of the Code. On the ground sign the applicant is allowed to advertise the main business activi~y and the main business activity would be the Texaco Star Mart. The other activities such as the two fast food uses or Western Union are accessory uses and are only allowed accessory signage. That s~gnage would have to be much smaller. Mary McCloskey, Deputy Planning Director: Historically the reason they created those types of standards in the Anaheim Resort Signage Program was to minimize the clutter onto a monument sign. So they carefully reviewed those code standards when they were created in order to give the ability to hava signage but not to have excessive or equal signage for everyone on a site. The dilemma of that would be a sign would e:nd with a considerable amount of iniormation on it. Commissioner Koos: Then the drawing that Commission received this morning would be acceptable. Mary McCloskey: That Code be met and they could enter into an agreement with the property owner as soon as staff received the necessary paperwork. They would pay all costs to remove the pole sign as well as to build and install that sign. Commissioner Koos: The diesel fuel would also need to be added to the sign. Mary McCloskey: Yes, they understand the pricing needs to go on the sign as well. Chairman Bristol: Asked how staff felt about changing the hours of operation and the public telephones, on Condition Nos. 17 and 18? Karen Dudley: The hours of operation that are listed in tt~e conditions of approval were actually what the applicant had listed in his letter of operation. Staff does not have an objection to the chan;;:~ ~f hours of operation as long as they are clarified in the conditions. As far as the pubiic telephones, i-~at ks a standard condition of approval that is imposed now on all mini marts and therefore staff would prefer ihe public tefephones be inside. Mary McCloskey: That has been a requirement for a long time that ~he public telephones be inside based on problems in the past when the public telephones were outside. Regarding the hours of operation, there is some residential development across the street on Ball Road and Walnut as well. Since Ball Road is 09-28-98 Page 18 such a large arterial the hours may be ali right but there is some sensitive land use across Ball Road and Walnut. Commissioner Bostwick: If the applicant lists all four of the (gasoline) prices and enlarges it to say "Star Mart" and puts three accessory uses below, would that conform? Mary McCloskey: Yes, three accessory uses can be listed down in the lower portion. Staff wouid work with the applicant on the design. Equal billing for all four businesses would not be in conformance with Code and staff wouid strongly recommend against that. Commissioner Bostwick: The other problems are the signs on the building, the waiver, which is the requirement that one is permitted and three are proposed. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked if one sign could go over entrance listing the three accessory uses? Linda Johnson, Senior Planner: Currently the Code permits one wall sign for the building. Accessory uses are only permitted as one business name over a storefront. In this case there is only one entry to the building so the Code would only allovr one name. The applicant did reference other convenience marts in the Anaheim Resort Area. The signage on those locations are legal non-conforming. They will, by Code, be required to remove all legal non-conforming signage by specified dates along Harb~r and Katella, December 31,1999. The other streets are December 31, 2002. Commissioner Koos: When he visited the site the applicant ment;oned that Texaco itself requires that they put the Star Mart sign right above the door. Abdul Ismail: That is right. They have two entrances to the building - not one. TExaco requires that the Star Mart sign be placed right above lhe main entrance. Commissioner Koos: Asked the applicant how Texaco would feel about the other accessory uses? He wanted to ensure that it was not prohibited by their business agreement. Abdul Ismail: They can work with Texaco, it should not be a problem Linda Johnson: The Code was developed for accessory uses, a store front meaning individual stores. A typical process is that a tenant will have just one unit but this is obviously very different. It is one building with several uses. The Code was developed to hare one name over a storefront. This is a tricky situation since there are two doors into the building. A restaurant for example has two doors, it is still the same requirement, and one business name for that 5usiness, just because they have two different doors does not allow them to have their name two times. Commissioner Boydstun: if the applicant puts Star Mart over the door and have the other three accessory uses listed on their sign out front, how is that a problem7 Abdul Ismail: He understands where she is coming from but Planning staff is suggesting that they will allow only 6-inch letter height for each accessory item which is not enough signage to run a business. Linda Johnson: !n terms of the signage they would like to see the predominant narne being the main name, tl?en the accessory being the other. Some relationship such as a two-thirds predominant name then one-ttiird the other names or something like that that they could work with the applicant in developing. In terms of the specified height of the letters, they are not certain at this point. The maximum letter height is 12 inches. Abdul Ismail: He was glad to hear this because up to now they were told they could not have more than 6 inches which is very small. As long as there is a variable to the proportion then he does not have a problem with that. Mary McCioskey: The impo~tance of working with the City is that they have to get all the paperwork in order because the signage program ends on December 31 st of lhis year. He needs to start very soon 09-28-98 Page 19 before the deadline. Once the program ends, funds will no longer be available. Abdui Ismail: They submitted their application and have already been working with Karen Dudley. They are keeping that in mind because that fs a considerable amount of money and they need to ensure that they take advantage of that. Mary McCloskey: She was certain they can work with the applicant for some type of design in the sfgn that would be ayreeabie to both parties. The worst case scenario would be that the applicant would retum to Commission requesting a variance. Abdul Ismail: He wanted to be certain he understood what the worst cass scenario would be. He asked for a clarification. Mary McCloskey: She was referring to the major proportion of the sign which needs to be devoted to probably their convenience market signage with Texaco and then he could have the three accessory uses in a smalier scaie at the bottom. Staff wou!d not be able to support equal billing for all of the businesses as was proposed on the drawing submitted to Commission. Abdul Ismail: There are lwo issues. Regarding the first issue is Ms. McCloskey referring to the portion of the sign allocated for Texaco Star Mart compared to the three spaces allocated for the three accessories or for each accessory at a time? Mary McCloskey: Whoever they identify as being primary, probably the Texaco Star Mart, that would have top billing. The other three would be accessory to that in an equal but smaller scale alnng the bottorr~ or some other design that basically accomplished that. Abdul Ismail: Please keep in mind, it is a service station so they are required to give their sign space out for pricing, so they do not have a choice with that portion. The other item is if they go along with the suggestion just mentioned about taking Texaco and putting Star Mart where "QSR#2" is and taking basically the bottom half, then each lettering is going to be cut down to 6 inches. Commissioner Bostwick: It does not have to be exact proportions of 50/50 and then divide it three ways (the 50°/a). Mary McCloskey: The purpose is to have the sign readable from the street. They also have the same concerns. They still want the intent of the sign designed to be in conformance with the Code. They can work with the applicant on how to get it into the correct proportions and in the best configuration. They hire sign consultants and graphic specialist who do that; staff does not do this work. The applicant would be working with a sign contractor who would submit graphics to staff for that purpose. In turn staff would refine it. That is how they are all done. Commissioner Bostwick: This can be ~vorked out but his concern is regarding the building signs. How is he going to get four items on a building? Basically, the waiver is a request for the parking and the permitted wall signs. He suggested the applicant put the Star Mart with the three smalier accessory uses underneath. He realizes it is not enough sic~nage for the applicanPs business. He understands the app-icanYs concerns, yet he would like to stay within the confines of the Anaheim Resort Development Plan, If Commission allows this applicant to do this then someone else is going to want three signs for their business. Linda Johnson: Staff did write the findings in rec~mmending denial of that waiver and in the event that they would change that Commission would have to make specific findings of hardship on the property and look through those varance items. Commissioner Boydstun: It was her understand :~7 that at the end of this year and next year that these extra signs are going to expire. So if the applican! ;,ays to put them up then they are going to have to be taken down soon. 09-28-98 Page 20 Linda Johnson: All the legal non-conforming signage that came in effect when the Code ~vas changed to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the Hotel Circle Specific Plan all have abatement dates and all that signage is required by Code to be removed by those dates. If this Code waiver were approved it would aliow whatever signage is approved fn connection that Code waiver, Staff s concem with that is that they have a lot of other properties where they are tell;ng them that they need to remove their legal non-conforming signage and staff is concemed about precedence setting as well. Chairman Bristoi: Asked how many businesses on Harbor and Katella have two or more uses in a building that are the same circumstanaes as this applicant? Mary McCloskey: She could not recall anyone because there are no convenience markets in the Anaheim Resort or gas stations with muitiple uses. There are some hotels that have gift shops or a restaurant where they snter into the restaurant and they are entit~ed to have wall s?gnage for their name because they are a separate business. Abdul ismail: The monument sign is going to be mainly for people driving from west to east. People coming in from Walnut wilf not see the monument sign at ali. If they enfer the building they will not see the monument sign at all unless th~re is something on the building indicating what is inside. Commissioner Esping: People are going to be able to see the sign adequately. There are stop signs which means people are stopped frequently. It is going to be a nice property. In adding the extra signage along the front is going to look cluttered. Mary McCloskey: Staff has checked the drawing regarding the canopy. The clearance on the canopy is 16 feet and the building is 13 feet, so she did not believe they have a visibility issue. Abdul Ismail: He is competing with other businesses in the area but those businesses do not have to abide by the same restrictions, which he has to. Commissioner Esping: They offer different facilities. Commissioner Boydstun: They do not have hot food or a reataurant in them. Chairman Bristol: At Ball and Brookhurst, one of those businesses is not allowed to have alcohol. Commissioner Bostwick: The applicant does have the advantage over the business with the beer and wine license. Mary McCloskey: The Code does address convenience markets, they are prohibited in the Anaheim Resort, so to a degree this use is prohibited. Chairman Bristol: It is known as a Iegal non-conforming use. Linda Johnson: The other locations in the Anaheim Resort, the Shell station Just has a convenience market, they do not have a separate business in the convenience ma~t. There is an Arco with no separate business. There is a new Chevron station, which she did not believe has a separate business in a convenience mart. The applicant does have an approval for a separate freestanding fast food location. Chairman Bristol: Asked if there was anyone present wishing to speak on this item. (No response.] OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Determined that the previously-certifisd EIR No. 313 is adequafe to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. 09-28-98 Page 21 Approved, in part, Waiver of Code Requirement as follows: Approved waiver (a) pe~taining to mfnimum number of parking spaces on ihe basfs that the park(ng waiver, as conditioned, wili not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for the use than the number of spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to the use, nor increase the demand and competition for on- sireet parking or parking on adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity in that a minimum of 22 on-site parking spaces will be provided which, based on the information contained in the Parking pemand Study prepared by Associated Transportation Engineers dated August 8,1998, is adequate to accommodate the existing convenience market with gasoline sales and on-premise sale of beer and wine and the proposed fast food uses under norma~ and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operafion; and, that the parking waiver, as canditioned, will not increase on-site traffic congestion or impede vehicular ingress/egress to or from adjacent properties in that thQ amount of parking which is needed for the uses (as indicated in the Parking Demand Skudy dated August 8,1998) will be accommodated by the number of parking spaces provided on-site. Denied waivor ~b) pertaining to permi:ted wall signs on the basis that there are no special circumstances appiicable to the property, such as size, shape, topography, location or surrounding, which deprives the property of privileges commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone, and the approval of additiona! wall signs would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other similar properties. Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 4062 with the following changes to conditions: Modified Condition No.17 to read as follows: 17. That the hours of operation of the fast food uses shall be limited to 8:00 A,M. to 12:00 A.M., daily. Added the following condition: That within forty five (45) days from the commencement of construction activities to replace the underground tanks and/or remodel the pump island canopy or building, or prior to final building and zoning inspections, whichever occurs first, the existing non- conforming pole sign shall be removed and/or replaced with a new Anaheim Resort monument sign. VOTE: 6•0 (Commissioner Wiiiiams absent) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presente~ the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSfON TIME: 46 minutes (2:27-3:13) 09•28-98 Page 22 5a. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 313 (PREV: CERTIFIED) Approved 5b. WAIV~ER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved 5b. CONDI'tiCNAL USE PERMIT N0. 4065 Granted for 5 months OWNER: Anaheim Marriott, Attn: General Manager, 700 W. (From 11-1-98 to Convention Way, Maheim, CA 92802 3-31-99) AGENT: Litiznger & Associates, 2435 East Coast Hwy., Suite 5, Corona Del Miar, CA 92628 LOCATION: 700 West Convention Way - Anaheim Marriott. Property is 15.06 acres located on the south side of Convention Way, 480 feet west of the centerline of Harbor Boulevard. To permit a temporary tent for convention operations at an existing hotel from November 1, 1998 to April 30,1999, with waiver of minimum number of pa~•king spaces. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC98-151 , SR7222DH.DOC e • • o ~ e ApplicanPs Statement: Debbie Krebs, Director of Event Management at the Anaheim Marriott Hotel, 700 W. Convention Way, Anaheim: Stated she is proposing to receive approval on an extended tent permit. The dates in question are November 1, 1998 through March 31,1999, for a 13,000 square foot tent stn,cture. (Submitted a color photograph into the record.J Due to the Anaheim Convention Center construction their ability to accommodate catering business has been dramatically reduced. Most of thair space is on hold for meetings and scientific sessions preventing them from booking revenue producing catering functions. Under normal conditions these meetings and scientific sessions would be t;aking place at the Anaheim Convention Center. They also have several other groups who will need the structure for their private special events. Without the tent it will result in reduced room revenue as well. They have had several tents up in the past and are actually asking for an extended tent permit primarily during their convention season. Mary McCloskey, Deputy Planning Director: Asked Ms. Krebs for clarification, in their application it indicated they wanted it through April 30, 1999 but in her testimony today she stated March 31,1999. Debbie Krebs: That is correct, they have changed that to March 31,1999, which is a shoRer time period. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chairman Bristol: Asked Ms. Krebs what their plans are after March 31 st when the tent permit expires? Debbie Krebs: Their primary convention season is January through March, actually through November as well. They are asking for this primarily through the convention season. After the convention season they are hoping to accommodate mosf of it inside the hotel. Commissioner Bostwick: Asked if the Converition Center is going to be far enough along that they will pick up some of that extra business? ~ebbie Krebs: Many of the conventions will not be at the capacity as a lot of thair major citywide conventions that take place January through March. Therefore, they should be able to accommodate most of the catering in-house after that date. 09-28-98 Page 23 Commissioner Koos: What about the following yea~? Debbie Krebs: She will be retuming to Commission. aPPOSITION: None ACTION: Determined that the previously-cetiified EIR No. 313 is adequate to serve as the reyuired environmentai documentation for subject request. Approved Waiver of Code Requirement Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 4065 for five (5) months (from November 1,1998 to March 31,1999) modifyinc~ Condition No. 8 to read as follows: 8. That no t~ter than April 1,1999, the tent stn:cture shall be removed and the 23 parking spaces displaced by the tent structure shall be made arailabie as parking spaces. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Williams absent) Selma Mann, Assistant Ciry Attomey, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 3 minutas (3:14-3:17) A break was taken following this item. d9-28-98 Page 24 6a. E NVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 313 (PREV.-CERTIFIED) Approved 6b. GONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3913 Denied OWNER: Aftab Ahmad & Kaneez Ahmad, 2310 W. Knox Avo., Santa Ana, CA 92704 AGENT: Scott K. Kime, 92 Argonaut, Suite 225, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Ard Keuilian,16168 Beach Blvd., Suite 251, Huntington Beach, CA 92647 LOCATION: 1100 West Ball Road -~lacant service station site. Property is 0.43 acre located at the southwest comer of Ball Road and West Street. Requests a retroactive time extension to comply with the conditions af approval to permit an automotive service station with a drive-thruugh, self- service car wash facility. This petition was originally approved on May 12, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC98-152 SR721 o • • • • • ApplicanYs Statement: Ard Keuilian: Stated he is representing the property owner who could not be present. He recently realized that the conditional use permit that they acquired over a year ago had expired and therefore filed for an extension. He understands that the Planning staff is recommending denial of the extension. There have been quite a few extenuating circumstances and that is why he is present. If the Commission would decide n~t to grant the extension then the owner would have a negative alternative to pursue. The owner can r~o longer afford to maintain the ownership of the property because his other service station in Norwalk (Shell Mart Car Wash) has not been improved due to the merging of Texaco and Shel; a~d forming a new company. They have decided to wii~tihold funds from the applicanfs improvement that he was promised. He has to spend all his time now running the business himself. The 2pplicant received a letter of vio~ation from Code Enforcement requiring him to replace the existing blue cover on the fence to a green cover and to trim the weeds that are ailegedly accumulating on the property. In Iooking at the photos, taken from Code Enforcement, he can not see where there are weeds growing. The owner has been very conscientious about taking care of the growth~. The bulb on a light fixture on the south side of the property has loosened up and hung down off of the post. The owner'~ only option is to get rid of the property because he can na longer afford to maiiitain the ownership. Since applying for an extension, he has acquired a buyer (Mr. John Kiley (spelling not given), from Newport Beach). According to their agreement, with Mr. Kiley, he will take ovPr the prope~ ty pmvided they are granted ihe time extension for this conditional use permit. Between the determination of the sale of the prope~ty, the extensive freeway and road construction thaPs going on the freeway adjacent to them and Ball Road, including underground work by the Utilities, it has been a~most impossible to develop the property as the conditional use permit required within a year. Now they are looking at another possible three months before they can break ground and perForm on khe conditional use permit. 09-2$-98 Page 25 They are ready to submit the working plans for ihe improvements on the existing site. The existing site consists of a three bay service stat~on. It has canopies, tanks and pumps have been removed, the soil has been tested and they have received closure form the Health Department. The Yeager Company has offered to take care of all of their violations in retum for using the property untii the end of the year for their construction employee parking and to store their equipment at night, if the Commission and City Council approve their condikional use permit. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Esping: Stated that they have many different requests on the table at ane time and different permits, depending on what they do and what the other person does. He finds it confusing. Linda Johnson, Senior Pianner: Stated that as indicated in Paragraph 7 in the staff report, in order for the Planning Commission to approve an extension of time, they mus4 make a finding that the evidence presented shows that all of the conditions listed in that paragraph exist. One of the conditions is that the property is being maintained in a safe, clear and aesthetically pleasing condition with na unremediated code violations on the property as confirmed by an inspection by the Code Enforcement Division. Code Enforcement did inspect the property and did issue a netice of violation so they do have unremediated code violations. Also, all of the construction work within the Resort is being coordinated with the City Staff, including Traffic Engineering, so that they have coordinated parking of all of the construction workers. None of the staff has heard that there has been a parking issue. Don Yourstone, Senior Code enforcement Officer: Staff inspected the property on September 10, 1998 and found weeds, an unsightly fence and sight screening needs to be repaired. As a result sent ttia owner a letter of violation on September 15, 1998 indicating violations should be corrected and gave him other alternatives regarding th~ building to eithe~ bring it up to code or demolish it. There is still an onc~oing investigation. Chairman Bristol: Asked if he heard from the applicant? Don Yourstone: Responded no. Chairman Bristol: Asked Ms. Johnson if she heard from the applicant and asked if there was an absentee owner there? Linda Johnson: Said no. Chairman Bristol: Asked if anybody else from Commission had questions. He also agreed with Commissioner Esping regarding the fact that there a~e a lot of proposals on the table about the possible uses of the property and now someone else wants the property to continue with the present use and yet they don't have anything from the owner. Commissioner Soydstun: Asked the applicant if the buyer was going to keep the service station or demolish the bui~ding and do something else? Ard Keuilian: The intent for the quick resolution is to sell t~ the person that they have escrow with now who wants to proceed with the existing conditional use permit only. They will not be demolishing the building because the c~nditional use pErmit, which h2s expired, does not provide for a rebuild unit, only for a remodeling and upgrade of the existing unit. The condition of their escrow is that they get an extension today so that they can immediately proceed with the improvements. Commissioner Esping: Asked if another company can come in under their conditional use permit? Mary McCloskey: The conditional use permit runs with the land. However, when a conditional use permit is approved the property owner needs to maintain the properry in a safe and aesthetically pleasing manner so it daes not become blight to the neighborhood. When an extension of time or retroactive extension of time is requested there are mandatory findings that have to be made. 09-28-98 Rage 26 Commissioner Bostwick: it is 8me this property comes up to the use of the adjoining properties. He d1d not feel that having someone come in and run with what was approved is appropriate at this time. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Determined that the previously-certified EIR 313 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Denied the request for a retroactive extension of time for Conditional Use Permit No. 3973 based on the following: 1. Th2t the subject property has not been maintained in a safe, clean, and aesthetically pleasing condition, and that there continuss to be unremediated code violations on the properly, as confirmed by an inspection of the subject property by the Code Enforcement Division and as set forth in the Notice of Violation and Order to Comply letter dated September 15,1998. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Williams absent) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 20 minutes (3:25-3:45) 09-28-98 Page 27 7b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 96-99-03 7c. VARIANCE N0. 4347 7d. TENTATNE PARCEL MAP NO. 98-178. REVISION NO 1 Granted, unconditionally Granted, in part Approved OWNER: Lee Pete Nguyen and Mai Lan Thi Nguyen, 223 Camellia Street, Anaheim, CA 92804 AGENT: Pzu Pham,17660 San Simeon Street, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 LOCATION: 1915 West Bal! Road. Property is 0.72 acre located on the north side of Ball Road,128 feet west of the centerline of Nutwood Street. Reclassification No. 98-99•03 - to reclassify this property from the RS-A-43,000 Zone to RS-7200 Zone or a less intense zone. Variance No. 4347 -(a) waivers of required orientation of single- family residential structures (deleted), (b) minimum lot width (deleted) and (c) minimum lot depth adjacent to arterial highways. Tentative Parcel Map No. 98-17E - to establish a 2-lot single-family residential subdivision. Continued from the Commission meetings of August 31, and September 14, 1998. RECLASSIFICQTION RESOLUTION NO. PC98-153 VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. PC98-154 SR7223TW.DOC • • FOLLOWING:IS A SUMMARY OF;TH~ PLANNIN~ COMMISSION AGTION. ` ApplicanPs Statement: Hoss Eftekhari, 100 South Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA: He stated that at the last meeting Commission recommended that they meet with the Planning staff to get access from Emerald for lot 2. It was recommended that they get an easement from Emerald in case of new construction or major remodeling en the existing house using Emerald as an access. Chairman Bristol: Asked if applicant was in agreement with the staff recommendations. Hoss Efkekhari: Responded yes. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Suggested another condition of approval. On the revised site plan, the 20 foot wide vehicle access easement from Emerald Street is shown. Staff would like to ensure that it stays on the map by adding, that a minimum 20 foot wide vehicular access easement over parcel 1 shall be shown on the parcel map for access to parcel 2. The purpose of providing access to parcel 2 is in the event that the access from Ball Road is no longer available. Chairman Bristol: Verified that was i~r page 7, nc. 5 and asked if applicant understood and was in agreement. Hoss Eftekhari: Agreed. 09-28-98 Page 28 , .. .;;.;.,~ . _. .. . . . _ , ._ S~ ~. .. .. . . , . . OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Granted Reclassification No. 98-99-03, unconditionally. Granted, in part, Variance No. 4347 as follows: Denied waivers (a) and (b), above-mentioned, on the basis that they were deleted following public notification. Approved waiver (c) pertaining to minimum lot depth adjacent to arterial highways on the basis that: (1) There are speciai circumstances in that the shape of Lot No. 2 differs from the size and shape of other RS-7200 zoned properties in the area since it is nearly 3 times greater in width, justifying the waiver of minimum lot depth. It should also be noted that the surrounding existing RS-7200 Zoned properties are 100 foot in depth and 63 feet wide; and, (2) The strict application of the Zoning Code deprives this 13,500 square foot property the privileges enjoyed by other RS-7200 zaned properties in th~ vicinity. Approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 98-178, Revision No.1 with the following added condition of approval: That a minimum 20-foot wide vehicular access easement ovzr Parcel 1 shall be sFiown on the parcei map for access to Parcel 2. The purpose of providing access to Parcel 2 is in the event that the access from Ball Road is no longer available. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner 1,Nilliams absent) Seima Mann, Assistant Ciiy Attamey, presented the 10 days appeal rights with regards to Tentative Parcel Map No. 98-178, Revision 1 and the 22-day appeai rights for the balance of the items. DISCUSSION 71ME: 7 minutes (3:46-3:53) 09-28-98 Page 29 8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECi.ARATIOh Approv 8b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4056 Denied OWNER: Bahman and Lilly Bayati/Afshin Bozorgamenesh, 678 S. Frontier Ct., Anaheim, CA 92807 LOCATION: 602 North Anaheim Boulevard. Property is 0.14 acre located at the northeast comer of Anaheim Bo~?levard and Alberta Street. To permit a used automobile sales faciliry for up to fifteen (15) automobiles. Continued from the Commission meeting of September 14,1998. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC98•155 • • • • • • jCommissioner Boydstun declared a conflict of interest.] ApplicanYs Statement: Bob Mickelson: Stated he is representing the applicant. Mr. Bayati (owner) has been in the automobile business in Orange County for over 5 years and has been looking for a site to have a small lot. He has been doing wholesale and retail out of an office without displaying cars. He would like to have the opportunity to have a small lot to display some automobiles. He checked on the zoning and permitted uses prior to purchasing the lot and at that time staff indicated that it was a permitted use and on the basis of that he purchased the lot. That is not to biame the staff; he has been watching what has been going on in Anaheim regarding car lofs and realizes that the attitude is changing especiai;y towards the smaller car lots. Mr. Bayati is motivated to accept reasonable and appropriate conditions that comply with him because he does have a desire to move forward. Staff expressed concern in the staff report over the appearance of a temporary building. After meetir,g with staff they came to an agreement that the building is a minimal huilding, a much better job could be done on that. (He submitted a broch~~re from Commercial Mobile Systems that gives some examples of other buildings.] This is an opportunity to clean uF a badly deteriorated unsightly parcel and to improve it with a Iandscape and the appropriate conditions that staff recommended. In their meeting last Friday they did agreed that they would accept a condition to place a block wall along the easterly property line. There is a single-family residence there ever though it is in a commercial zone. Even though it is not required, the applicant would stipulate that it was acceptable. In reviewing the conditions, he had the following comments: • Condition Nos. 3, 6, and 16 - They agree with these conditions. • Condition No. 11 - That it shall expired 1 year firam the date of the resolution on September 14th. They asked that it be changed to the effective date of the resolution. • Condition No.15 - Asked for a clarification on this condition. • Condition No.17 - Should be omitted because even if the site was totally cleared a trash truck could not turn around on this site, the area is too small. • Condition No. 22 - Requests that the effective date of the ordinance be inserted. 09-28-98 Page 30 Ths alder home is on an approved qualified historic structure list and Mr. Bayati has prepared a statement that states [paraphrasingJ,'He understands that it is on the list and to mitigate concems over the possible loss of the structure thoy will offer it to any party qualified to move it to another site for restoration " The applicant will pay that party an amount equal to an acceptable bid for demolition and removal of the structure. They would like to have a time limit such as 30 nr 60 days. If no one comes fon~~ard in the period of time then the owner is free to demolish it. 'T'HE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Bosi~rick: He has dealt with a number of these car facilities and car lots and they have shown to be a problem. He has a problem supporting that type of facility at that site due to such issues as noise, outdoor activities and the small size of the site. Chairman Bristoi: He agreed. He did not feel this is the proper site for this type of use. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Approved tVec~ative Declaration Denied Conditional Use Permit No. 4056 on the basis that: (1) That the requested use of this property as an automobile sales facility has the potentiai for a significant detrimental impact on the residential properties to the east due to the noise and high level of outdoor activity associated with automobile sales agencies. (2) That the property is not large enough to support tho automobile sales facility without providing a substantial buffer area to reduce the detrimental aspects (such as noise) of the business from the abutting residences; (3) That the property is not large enough to disp~a~~ and circulate the proposed number of cars in a manner not detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the surrounding residential neighborhoods and public rights-of-way. (4) That the proposed modular building, in conjunction with the display and operation of an automobile sales facility on an undersized lot, is not aesthetically compatible with the growth and development of commercial business along an arterial highway. (5} That the proposed site and development are similar in size and nature to existing land uses, as indicated in paragraph no. (18) above, that have caused detrimental impacts anc; Code Enforcement problems in the past. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioner Boydstun declared a conflict of interest and Commissioner Williams absent) Seima blann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-aay appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 9 minutes (3:54-4:03) 09-28-98 Page 31 9a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 9b. RECLASSIFICATION N0. 98•99-05 10-12-98 9c. CONDITIONAl. USE PERiNIT N0. 4047 OWNER: Hunter's Pointe Homeowners Association,14600 Goldenwest Street,102-A, Westminster, CA 92683 AGENT: TDI, Inc., Attn: Adan Madrid, 3150 Bristol Street, #250, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 LOCATION: 6900 East Canvon Rim Road. Property is 3.05 acres located on the south side of Canyon Rim Road, 180 feet west of the centerline of Fairmont Boulevard. To consiruct telecommunications antennas on an existing lattice tower (Edison) structure and ground-mounted accessory equipment. Continued from the Commission meetings of August 31, and September 14,1998. RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION N0. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESQLUTION N0. • • • • • • OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the October 12,1998 Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to address staff concems regarding the aesthetic impact of the proposed telecommunications antennas. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Williams absent) DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 09-28-98 Page 32 10a. CEQA NEGATIVE 6ECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED) Approved 10b. CONC~ITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3920 (READVEitTISED) Granted for 1 year OWNER: OTR, an Ohio Ger~eral Partnership, 275 E. 8road Street, (T~ expire 9-28-99) Columbus, OH 43215 AGENT: Donahus Schriber, Attn: Ms. Michelle Holling, 3501 Jamboree Road., #300, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION: 8028 East Santa Ana Canyon Road -The Anaheim Hills Festival - 24 Hour Fitness. Property is 85.0 acres Iocated at the southwest comer of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Rooseveit Road. To permit a temporary heaith club facility in an existing 9,200 square-foot retail tenant space during the constivction oF a new previously-approved 35,000 square foot health ~lub facility. CONDITIONAL USE PERMlT RESOLUTION N0. PC98-156 • e • r • o ApplicanYs Statement: Don Fischbeck, 24-Hour Fitness, 6 Tenia, Laguna Niguel, CA: He read the staff report and is in agreement with staff's recommendations. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Recommended added a condition, that the temporary facility shall be developed in accordance with Revision No.1 of Exhibit No.1, and Exhibit No. 2 as submitted by the applicant. Condition No. 22 requires that the plans for the permanent facility shall be submitted prior to the commencement of the temporary faciliry and staff wanted to make sure the plans are ready to go. Don Fischbeck: Plans are currently being drawn and are not ready for submittal but they have already submitted the plans for the temporary facility. The plans for the permanent facility should be submitted on October 6th. They have approval for sales only in the temporary facility. This use permit is being requested would allow for workouts. Commissioner Bostwick: Condition No. 22 would, therefore, not fit in tnis case. Cheryl Flores: Correct. in this case it is best to delete this condition. Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney: The effective date of whatever decision the Planning Commission makes is actually 22 days from today. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Determined that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Approved modification ofi Conditional Use Permit No. 3920. Amended Resolution No. 97R-40 by adding the following conditions of approval: 09-28-98 Page 33 21. That the temporary physical fitness operations within the 9,200 square foot retail tenant space (formally used by the Discovery Zone) shall be permitted for one (1) year, to expire on September 28.1999, or upon occupancy of the permanent health club facility, whichever occurs first. 22. Thet subject properly shail be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City af Anaheim by lhe petitioner and which plans aro on file with the Planning Department marked Revision No.1 of Exhibit No.1, and Exhibit No. 2, and as conditioned herein. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Williams absent) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 3 minutes (4:05-4:08) 09-28-98 Page 34 11a. CEfaA EXEMPTION SECTION 15061Lb1(31 A roved 11 b. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO 98- Approved 06 OWNER: Fairmont Plaza Partners, LLC, P.O. Box 17724, Anaheim, CA 92817 AGENT: Ciayton V. Ching,136 S. Fairmont Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92807 LOCATION: 136 South Fairmont Boulevard - EI Rancho Plaza. Property is 2.4 acres located at the southeast corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Fairmont Boulevard. To determine public convenience or necessity to allow ttie retail sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption in a 900 square foot specialty retail store within a conmercial center. DETERMINATION OF PUSLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY RESOLUTION N0. PC98-157 SR • • • •~ • • ApplicanYs Statement: Clayton V. Ching,136 S. Fairmont Blvd., Anaheim, CA: Stated he is proposing a specialty retail store which would include the sale of fine wines. He is in agreement with the staff report except for Condition No. 8 which states that no wine shall be consumed on the premises and that the wine that he has for sale needs to be chiiled. John Besta, principal of EI Rancho Middle School: Stated EI Rancho Middle School has approximately 900 seventh and eighth graders. The proposed proFerty is adjacent to the school. Fie is concerned that liquor will be displayed and accessible to the stu~ents if they enter the property for any other t~pes of purchases. ApplicanYs Rebuttal: Clayton Ching: The sale of liquor will be a smail part of the sales, less than 10%, for the collectors and connoisseurs. The bottles can range from $100 and up. These wines are targeted for the collectors, for someo~e serious about wines. He is a practicing dentist. He has the suite next door and is very much concerned with the image that he is going to present. He does not want it not to be something very visible. In the store there are going to be other items for sales such as pottery, scented candles and decorated gift baskets. He is also concerned as a practicing dentist in the community, and there is a vested interest on his part that he not create a negative image. Commissioner Esping: Asked if the dispiays are going to be visible? Clayton Ching: in the window he will have other specialty items. The wine is going to be kept behind the counter. When customers come in they may see the bottles behind the counter. They can bring them out from the storage locker that is hidden in a separate storage area. He has been a coltector of wines and enthusiast for a number of years and has made contacts with a number of people. It is a small part of his business. 09-28-98 Page 35 Commissioner Bostwick: There were concems in the moming session with Conditio~ No.11, that the areas of wine display shall not exceed 10% of the total display area and that the tenant space and wine inventory shail not exceed 10% of the total retail inventory for this store. Is the appliaant willing to go along with that? Clayton Ching: Yes. Commissioner Bostwick: It would not take very many sales of wines at $100 to ~xceed 10%. Clayton Ching: Is that 10% of the inventory or 10% of the total revenues. Commissioner Bostwick: 10% of the total retail inventory. There was f~~rther discussion with the Planning Commission and the applicant regarding the wine sales exceeding 1Q% of the total inventory vs. the revenues. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager: If it becomes a larger percentage approaching a IiGuor store in which case the applicant would need to come apply for a conditional use permit. Clayton Ching: His intent is oriented around the wine "craze" that is popular and would like to do it in a tastefui way. He does not want something neyative on his business because it can also hurt him in his profession. Commissioner Boydstun: She thought it co~~d be conditioned to wine only, that way no one could come in and ~dd other items to it. Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney: She could see the concerns that some of the Commissioners are having. What is being approved today is a land use rather than for a specific applicant who has a vested interest in having a particular type of operation. It is being analyzed as something ths: .s being permissible in his area because it is not a liquor store, which has a primary use. The sale of alcoholic beverages, however, is really nothing that would mean that another store that comes in with an interpretation that if one bottle of wine is sold or if one bottle of wine is in invenio,y for every ten pencils that he has on display, it would still be less than 10°/a. It is not the primary business and because of the unique nature of what is being proposed today, what is anticipated are some high ticket collector items that possibly the applicant could suggest some wording that would limit the types of wines that would be sold. She would image the collectibles in itseif might not be sufficient in the sense that somebody might collect "Gallo". If there were something more detailed or if the applicant had a minimum price for the wines ihat the appiicant is going to sell then that might be something that would give the Commission some comfort. Clayton Ching: The wines tliat he has for sale will have a price associated with the bottles. The wines from his personal collection and some he can acquire thruugh other colle:;tors will vary depending on the inventory. The wines he has for sale are net in great quantities. Ne may have 6 or 12 bottles and it is something that is a non-replenishable itern. There is a value for these wines and sorr;ething that is very collectable. Most of the wines would be in excess of $50 as compared with liquor stores who are sell wines for $6 to $30. It would depend on the what inventory he would get from month to month ar week to week. He has certain relationships that he has established with California wineries. Commissioner Koos: is there a dollar figure on the low end that the applicant would be comfortable with a condition that states that wines will not be sold lower than a certain dollar amount? Clayton Ching: Yes, from $50. John Besta: He would not have an objection as long as all the alcoho! is stored behind the counter and not in reach of any students that might enter the store. 09-28-98 Page 36 „ , Cheryl Flores: Noted that there is an error in Condition No. 4, it should say "the separate inventory amounts of wine and other items." OPPOSITION: 1 person spoke with concems. ACTlON: Concurred with staff that the proposed project falls within the d~finition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15061(b)(3), as defined in the State EIR Guidelines and Is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirements to prep2re an EIR. Approved Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 98-06 with the following changes to conditions: Modified Condition Nos. 4, 5 and 8 to read as follows: 4. That the sales of alcohol shail be limited to wine only, and sf~al! nat exceed ten percent (10a~; of the items available for retail sales during any three (3) month period. The applicant sh;all maintain records on a yearly basis showing the separate inventory amaunts of wine and other items. These records shall bs subject to audit, and rt~ade available, when req~osted by any City of Anaheim official during reasonable business hours. 5. That the saies of aicoholic ueverages shall be prahibited with the exception of wine sold at a minimum retaii price of forty dollars ($40.00) per T50 milliliter bottle. 8. That no wine sh211 be c~nsumed on the premises including wine tasting. VOTE: B-0 (Commissio~er Williams absent) Selma Mann, AssEstant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 22 minutes (4:09 -4:31) 09-28-98 Page 37 12b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDI'JIENT N0. 358 10-12-98 12c. AMENDMENT N0. 3 TO THE SUMMIT OF ANAHEIM HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN ~SP88-2) 12d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0.14124 AND FINAL SI7E PLAN 12e. DENSITY TRANSFER N0. 98-01 72f. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF 12a.12c.12d. and 12a OWNER: New Millennium Homes, Attn: Dave Redillion, 2823 McGaw, Irvine, CA 92614 AGENT: Douglas Bender 8~ Associates, Attn: Alan Oveisi, 22936 Mill Creek Drive, #A, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 LOCATION: Property is 4.8 acres located at the northwest ~ ner of Oak Canyon Road and Weir Canyon Road (Development Area 208 of The Summit of Anaheim Hills ~pecific Plan No. 88-2). General Pan Amendrnent No. 358 - to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to redesignate this property from the General Commercial land use designation to the Hillside Medium Density Residential land use designation. Amendment No. 3 to th~ Summit of Anaheim Hills Specific Pian (SP88-2) - to amend Exhibit No.10 to redesignate Development Area 208 fr~m commercial land uses to single-family attached residentiai land uses and tu amend the Developnient Area 208 zoning and Development Standards to permit attached single-family dwelling units. Tentative Tract Pdap No.14124 and Final Site Plan - to estaolish a 27- lot (including 5 lettered lots)' 22-unit single-family attached residentiai subdivision. ' Advertised as 25-lot (including 5 open space lots). Density Transfer No. 98-01 - in order to transfer a total of 22 units from Development Area 205 to Development Area 208 to justify the proposed 22-unit attached single-family residential development. GE~ERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION N0. SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT RES~JLUTION N0. DENSITY TRANSFER RESOLUTION NO. to SR7238KB.DOC • • • s • • OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request tu the October 12, 1998 Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to submit final elevation drawings for the proposed 22-unit paired home developme~t. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Williams absent) 09-28-98 Page 38 _ ~o ~ ;;; DiSCUSSiON TIME: This item was not dlscussed. 09-28-98 Page 39 13a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 14 (PREV: APPROVED) Concurred wlstaff 13b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3861 (READ1fERTISED) Approved reinstatement OWNER: Grace C. And Omar L. Blanchard,120 EI Dorado Lane, Anaheim, CA 92807 (To expire 3-31-00) LOCATION: 191 South Old Sprinas Road - Hillsborouah School. Property is 1.42 acres located at the no~thwest corner of Monte Vista Road and Oid Springs Road. To consider the reinstatement of this permit which currently has a time limitation (approved on September 4,1996 until September 4,1998) to ret~in a temporary modular building and to amend or delete a condition of approval pertaining to permit activities within the existing temporary modular building in conjunction with a previously-approved child day care facility and private elementary school. Continued from the Commission meeting of August 31,1998. CONDITI~NAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC98-158 SR7202KB.DOC ApplicanYs Statem=nt: Rex Bianchard: Stated there are a couple of issues of concern: 1) They have had a modular building since approved on September 4,1996, for a period of two ye2rs (to September 4, 1998. He was under the impression that there were lwo options, either constructing a permanent foundation on a modular building or a temporary foundation. Asked how would they go about making this into a permanent modular situation? 2) The second issue in the condition states they can use those two classrooms as a computer lab and a library. This past January they openPd a school across the street, which enablsd them to open up the room that was previously occupied. They wanted to request that they use that room as the computer ~ibrary. They can move all the computer equipment into the main facility and then use those tvvo rooms as classrooms. Chairman Bristol: Asked if the applicant is asking how to remove the extension of time on the modular building? Rex elanchard: Yes. They do not want to keep retuming every year or two and wanted to know how they would make this into a permanent situalion? Chairman Bristol: To makE the building per,manent and not a modular. The intent out in that area is not to have modular buildings iF at all possible. Rex Blanchard: When they researched the area they found that there ars s~me modular buildings that are permanently situated. They started out at the time asking what their options were. They had a school starting and were under a lot of time constraints. Their thoughts were that would go permanent in 2 years. Cheryi Flores, Senior Planner: She did not think the church is permanent. The Light of the Canyon Methodist Church is scheduled for one of the next public hearings. They are asking to reinstate their permit, which is the same as being done on this item. 09-28-98 Page 40 13a. CEDA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 14 (PREV: APPROVED) Concurred w/staff 13b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3861 (READVERTISED) Approved reinstatement OWNER: Grace C. And Omar L. Blanchard,120 EI Dorado Lane, Anaheim, CA 92807 (To expire 3-31-00) LOCATION: 191 South Old Surinsas Road - Hillsborouah School. Property is 1.42 acres located at the northwest comer of Monte Vista Road and Old 5prings Road. To consider the reinstatement of this permit which currently has a time limitation (approved on September 4,1996 until September 4, 1998) to retain a temporary modular building and to amend or delete a condition of approval pertaining to permit activities within the existing terrporary modular building in conjunction with a previously-epproved child day care facility and private elementary school. Continued from the Commission meeting of August 31,1998. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC98-158 Applicant's Statement: Rex Blanchard: Stated there are a couple of issues of concern: 1) They have had a modular buiiding since approved on September 4,1996, for a period of lwo years (to September 4, 1998. He was under the impression that there were two options, either constructing a permanent foundation on a modular building or a temporary foundation. Asked how would they go about making this into a permanent modular situation? The second issup in the condition states they can use those two classrooms as a computer lab and a library. This past January they opened a school across the street, which enabled them to open up the room that was previously occupied. They wanled to request that they use that room as the computer libra~y. They can move all the camputer equipment into the main facility and then use those two rooms as classrooms. Chairman Bristoi: Asked if the applicant is asking how to remove the extension of time on the modular building? Rex Blanchard: Yes. They do not want to keep returning every year or two and wanted to know how t~ey would make this into a permanent situation? Chairman Bristol: To make the building permanent and not a modular. The intent out in that area is not to have modular buildings if at all possible. Rex Blanchard: When they researched the area they found that there are some modular buildings that are permanently situated. They started out at the time asking what their options were. They had a school starting and were under a lot of time constraints. Their thoughts were that would go permanent in 2 years. Cheryl Fiores, Senior Planner: She did not think the church is permanent. The Light of the Canyon Methodist Church is scheduled for one of the next pubiic hearings. They are asking to reinstate their permit, which is the same as being done on this item. 09-28-98 Page 40 _ . . . . . . i . . The permanency of the modular building has to be done through the Building Division and the modular has to comply with the Uniform Building Code. Tney typically consider modular units as temporary uses with a time limitation. Commissfor,er Bostwick: He would prefer the applicant build brick and mortar buiidings then the applicant would not need to retum to the Commission. Perhaps as they open the school across the street they might be able to get more room over there so they will no longer need modular buildings. Rex Blanchard: They told parents that they would make that a large multi-pu~pose room. They realiy need that space. Chairman Bristol: Asked if the landscape plans discussed in the morning session were ever received? Cheryl Flores: She thought they had. A concem this moming was the condition of the slopes that are maintained by the Association of the complex. The landscaping does need some attention, especially along Weir Canyon Road and site specific to this on Monte Vista, there is a condition of approval that required landscaping to be planted and staff n~ticed that there is a rather bare spot where this modular unit is visible from Monte Vista. Asked that the appiicant address that with more landscaping. Rex Blanchard: There is an easement through the back properties and they require a sliding fence. They painted the modular to match the school and put sidewalks around it and landscaped it and put awnings on it, therefore it conforms to the building. Rex Blanchard: Requested a two-year extension on the conditional use permit. Commissioner Bostwick: A compromise would be March 31, 2000. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Concurred with staff that the proposed project falis within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 14, as defined in the State EIR Guidelines and is, therefore, categoricaliy exempt from the requirements to prepare an EIR. Approved reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 3861, as readvertised. Amended Condition Nos. i and 13 of Resolution No. PC96-90 to read as follows: 7hat this conditionai use perrr~i shall expire on March 31, 2000. 13. That use of the proposed modular buiiding shali be limited to the students and facuiry of the subject chiid day care and etementary school facility for classroom uses oniy. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Williams absent) DISCUSSION TIME: 11 minutes (4:32-4:43) 09-28-98 Page 41 14a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 14b. WAIVER OF CODE REDUIREMENT 10-12-98 14b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Md. 4057 OWNER: Hinn-8 LLC, Attn: Shan Namvar,11601 Witshire Blvd., #1400, Los Angeles, CA 90025 A~GENT: Travis Engineering, Attn: Karl Huy,12453 Lewis Street, #201, Garden Grove, CA 92840 LOCATION: 1101 Norfh Maannlia Avenue. Property is 0.92 acre located at the northwest comer of Magnolia Avenue and La Palma Avenue. To construct a 4,807 square foot service station with convenfence market and integrated fast food restaurant with drive-through lane with waiver of (a) minimum number of parking spaces, (b) permitted number of freestanding signs, (c) permitted types of signs, (d) minimum drive-through lane requirements and (e) minimum landscaping adjacent to interior boundary lines CONDlTIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. SR6901 DS.DOC • • • • • • OPPOSITION: None AC710N: Continued subject request to the October 12,1998 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow addi;ionai time for the applicant to meet with staff to resolve issues pertaining to site design and the possible elimination of code waivers. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Williams absent) DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 09-28-98 Page 42 15a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 15b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT October 12,1998 15c. CONDITIONbL USE PERMIT N0. 4059 OWNER: Valencia lnvestment Group, LLC, 1985 S. Santa Cruz St., Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: Mary Ann Chamberlain, 2426 S. Rita Way, Santa Ana, CA 92704 LOCATION. 1576 West Katella Avenue. Property is 027 acre located on the south side of Katella Avenue, ? 30 feet east of the centerline of Bayless Street. To construct a sel~ service automobile car wash with 5 bays and accessory outdoor vacuums with waiver of minimum landscape setback. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. SR7234TW • • • e • • ApplicanYs Statement: Mary Ann Chamberlain, agent for the apalicant: The applicants are Adam and Alan Antoyan and the;r are acting on behalf of Big A Auto Wash. She introduced Steve Rosco, on behalf of Paul Kott Realty, to inform the Commission about the history of the property. Steve Rosco, Paul Kott Realtors,1225 W. Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA: The current owner ha~ owned the proper~y since 1982. It has been a real estate office but burned down approximately 12 years ago and has been a vacant lot ever since. Currently on one side of the vacant lot is a real estate office and on the other side is a palm reader. He listed the property for sale on December 3,1996. 7o date there has only been one serious party that has been willing to write up an offer, the Antoyan's. The seller has no plans to improve this property. Mary Ann Chamberlain: The app~icants are requesting authorization to construct this, own and operate it as a state of the art facility for a car wash. The applicant requested his architect to redesign the plans to address staff's concerns with a multi-family residential project located across the street, The proposed project will be redesigned as a Galifornia Mediterranean style. [She referenced the materials board on display.j Landscaping has also been upgraded to add a 3-foot berm area along thP Katella frontage. The applicant has also agreed to install 24-inch boxed trees along the Katella frontage, also to install 24-inch tre~s along the rear property line. This would only add to the existing dense foliage. jShown on photo no. 3 and 9.J Location of the trash enciosure. It was originally proposed for the northwesterly corner of the property, adjacent to the front landscaping. The planners had indicated that it probably should be moved to the rear of the site for aesthetic reasons. In doing so this move caused an improvement for aesthetics but now has caused a necessity for the Code waiver. They were unaware of the requirement for the Code waiver. If desired by the Commission the trash enclosure cauld be returned to the front of the property, if one of the parking spaces is removed. Another pre-file item of concern were the hours of operation. The applicant has agreed to siience ti~a rear vacuums at 10:U0 p.m. in the evening. 09-28-98 Page 43 Regarding the noise - with the Lamb Acustek Quite Motors that are proposed. This type of insulation that co~~ers the motors would bring the sound level down, not ~nly to a commercial level which is allowed, but it would bring it down to a residential level. The accepted residential level of noise is 65 decibels. Chairman Bristol: Asked what the decibels would be to the residents directly to the south? Mary Ann Chamberlain: To the south at 60 feet it would be less than a car idiing. Actually the street noise from Katella is louder than the noise of the vacuums. Page 2, item 6. Site plans further indicate that 3 self-service vacuums will be located between parking spaces at the rear of the property. They are actualiy 3 dual where people can drive in and can access ii from either side. The project is adjacent to a residential zone but the closest structure is a garage which is 55 feet southerly of the subject property. The closest home is 70 feet from the property with dense landscaping and a fot more proposed. 16(b) of the staff report details the firewall. (Submitted photos on 8'/: X 11"sheets.] It was noted in the staff report that this type of firewall does not represent the best architectura~ design for the site. The firewall will be hidden by the palm reader structure. The equipment building is proposed at 21 feet. The actual size of the structure of the palm reader (a two-story house) is approximately 28 to 30 feet. The entire firewall looking towards the east will be outlined by the structure of the paim reader. It wili not be seen traveling west on Katella. It will not be seen a! all because it will be completely hidden by the palm reader structure. Commissioner Bostwick: Is the block wall on the palm reader's property? Mary Ann Chamberlair,~ rhe property has not been surveyed. If it were on the site of her client then it would be removed beca ~s; ;hat is where the first story would start for the equipment room. If it were the palm reader's wall then thay would be building adjacent to it. The whole car wash is actually set back several feet. 16(c) the egress. They meet with Alfred Yalda, from Traffic Engineering, he explained that they would be allowed to use the easement for egress from the site. He has agreed that it could be opened and utilized. When traffic approaches Bayless, turning right in a northerly direction to Katella would seem quite obvious because Bayless appears to dead-end at the south end of the street with homes around it. The applicant proposes to install a speed bump to control the speed of the traffic exiting onto Bayless as well as on-site. 16(d) The applicant agrees to eliminate the vacuum and parking space on the northeasterly corner of this site, which is adjacent to the ~~alm reader. However, they request that the project be allowed to retain the vacuum and the parking space on the northwesterly corner of this site. With a 3-foot berm proposed the heavy landscaping, front planter and also in the public right-of-way the single vacuum ~NOUId be hidden from street view. 16(e) The site plan must be modified or redesigned to incorporate a 20-foot wide drive aisle adjacent to the west property line for fire truck access. She met with the Fire Department today and they do not have that requirement for a 20-foot. 16(fl Hours of operation. She referred to Mr. Adam Antoyan, one of the proposed owners~ who will give testimony about his operation and hours of operation. Adam Antoyan: He is the applicant along with his father Alan Antoyan, for Big A Auto Wash. They have a location at 1044 W. Katella Avenue in the city of Orange, which is less than 1 mile from the Anaheim City limits. They have been open for over 3 years. ~t is a very modern, state of the art facility that is well maintained and managed. He is on-site every day along with an attendant who is on-site in the morning hours and in the afternoon hours. Commission was provided their standard uperating procedures for the Orange location, which they propose to be ihe same at the Maheim location. 09-28-98 Page 44 The main reason he wanted to pursue a site in Anaheim was because he fs so close from the city limits and he has received feedback from numerous customers who drive from Maheim saying there is not a nice location in Anaheim. Tha specific site they are pursuing to develop would be off a major street with a high traffic count. He feels a self-service car wash fs needed because the closest location is in Garden Grove at Chapman and Euclid, which is not managed very weli. The reasons a self service car wash is needed: • An economical solution for people to wash their vehicles. • Environmentally friendly. When someone washes their vehicie at a residence a standard garden hose can output 18 to 20 gallons of water a minute. The self-service car wash outputs 1.5 to 2 gailons per minute. When a car is washed at a residence all the soap, grease, brake dust, general dirt and road grim off of a vehicle runs to the curb or gutter which yoes to the storm drain and in turn to the ocean. But at a self-service car wash the water drains into a"classifier pit" and the water then drains out to the sewer which goes to water treatment before it goes to the ocean. Security - All their bays are open to the street which makes customers feel very safe, visible from the street. (He submitied a handout.] They are proposing to install a new technology calied the "Vac-It Up Centralized Coin Collection System". The coin travels underground into the centralized coin collection system that is inside the equipment room. When a customer deposits the money for the wash bay or the vacuums, the money immediately travels underground. It is a fairly new and expensive system. This alleviates the possibility of people trying to break into any machines. They can put up decals to inform the public that there is no money inside these machines to detour any theft. Their building will have an alarm system with 24-hour monitoring. Lighting - They aropose to provide a lot on lighting. They put 2,400-watt fixtures, over each wash bay for 800 watts. They will spend a lot of money on the perimeter lighting and lighting over the vacuum and parking stalis and keep that lighting on all night which detours any unwanted activity. Locks - They utilize all Medeco locks which are locks that can not be cut or drill out. There are only a select number of locksmiths that can cut keys for these types of locks. Door - The door leading into the equipment room will be the same type of door as at the Orange site, which is a doub~e steel door with triple Medeco dead bolts on it. They have had a great record in Orange. He feels part of the vandalism situation or attempted theft is just defouring the p~rson from even attempting to do it. 24-hour operation - In the spring, summer and fall when it stays dark after 8:00 p.m. at 80° or 90° (degrees) they get a lot of customers that like to come in the evening hours because the site is so well lit and wash their vehicles. That is why they are proposing to have the same hours of operation at the Anaheim site. They ~iso do a lot of business during the very early morning hours before people go to work. Therefore, they are proposing to be open 24 hours. He feels they ~re proposing a high quality project, it will be the finest self-service car wash in Anaheim, if not one of the finest in all of Orange County. He feels it will be a successful operation. Public Testimony: Scott Nash, 1820 South Eileen Drive, Maheim, CA: Stated he is located on the back side of the cul-de- sac. Development of this property wnuld be outslanding because he has lived in this property for 10 years and the subject property has been an "eye sore," The concerns are .,s follows: 1) 1`he 24-hour operation. it is not going to stop most peopie from pulling their cars forward, opening to car doors, turning on their car radios. He really does not want hear that at 2 am. Ha does not want to wake up at 6 am on Saturday or Sunday to the loud music. Currently he likes to pull into his yard, sit back, and relax in the early evenings. He does hear a low rumhle from Katella. He hears comments G9-28-98 Page 45 from his neighbors that is in a quiet area. He is looking for time constraints during the week and on the weekends, so they are not kept up or awaken by that type of activity. 2) The other concern is Bayless Street in and out of their housing tract. They have no back way to get out to any other street. Katella is a difficuit street to make a left turn on. This is probably going to compound the problem, it will resuit in more incoming traffic coming into their tract. Even though they are not going to be coming into our tract, they are going to make a turn directly into this area. They are still going to be fighting with people to yet out of their tract. Those are reaily his only two concems. The applicant has obviously done an outstanding job and ~t looks like they are going to put a quality product in there. He would really like to see time constraints piaced on it. The Bayless Street issue is a huge concern to him. Those are concerns that he has, nothing really against developing the property, because the property cPrtainly needs it. AppiicanPs Rebuttal: Adam Antoyan: He can appreciate Mr. Nash's concern about the traffic coming out of Bayless Street but he felt as though everyone is talking as if there is going to be major tre~c congestion at the site. He does not think there is going to be an increase in traffic pulling out of there. The customers are not going to turn left onto Bayless Street unless they reside in that neighborhood. He would be happy to post signs that say no loud music because it can be a nuisance not only for the residents but also other customers. They need that access easement onto Bayless for proper circulation on the site, which is how that site has been used since day one. There has never been a curb cut on the Katella side that is how the real estate office was accessed. Michele Irwin, Community Services, Police Department: She asked the owners about the attendant he referred to, ;n~ould there be an attendant on duty on a 24-hour basis7 Adarri Antoyan: He could provide it in the operation procedures but it would not be a 24-hour attendant. Micheie Irwin: The P~lice Department is recommending that the gate remain. Currently there is a gate closing off the easement. They do have the easement and prefer it for the flow but the Polica Department is concerned it brings up the possibility of crime into the neighborh~od. Anytime there are additional cars going into the neighborhood, if they do not know their way around could make a left instead, especially with a 24-hour operation. They are adding to the probability of auto thefts and possibility of residential burglaries into the area. Once that gate is opened children could use that as a cut through to go to Stoddard Elementary School, or if cars speed in and out without a gate there is a safety issue. They are recommending that a gate be up at all times. Commissioner Bostwick: !f the only access is Bayless Street to Eileen Drive, they only have one acc2ss out and wouldn't that cut it down? Michelle Irwin: You are bringing an element into the neighborhood that would normally not be there and the possibility of increased crime. Commissioner Boydstun: Suggested putting in a right turn enly sign as the cars come out. Adam Antoyan: He would be happy to put up any sign. Alfred Yaida, Principal Transportation Planner, Traffic Engineering Division: To address the access point, he agrees with khe Police DepartmenPs recommendation. His other concern is the inside circulation of 17 feet is not wide enough and he did make that very clear ta the applicant. !t shouid be 20 feet. Chairman Bristol: Asked Mr. Yalda if the site was too tight having the easement open? Alfred Yalda: if they have all the bays fully loaded there might be some circulation probiem but there is adequate parking there that they could make their three point tumaruund and go back to Katella Avern~~. 09-28-98 Page 46 There may be ~ littie congestion but they could get in and out. Ths Sanitation Division wiil not be able to do that and there is going to be a problem with sanitation because !hey need to somehow make their tums. If they do not allow the applicant to have access then they ,ndy consider having that gate open during trash pick up or some kind of inechanical way so when they pfck up the trash on a particular day, that they be able to exit through Bayless. Adam Mtoyan: Regarding the side drive, 4hey are proposiny that side drive to be one way with the egress utilizing the easement which in the staff report it mentions that it needs to be 20 feet for the Fire Department. They spoke with the Fire Department this morning and they said that is not their conc~:rn as Mary Ann Chamberlain had mentioned. They are proposing the access to be one way and use the easement for egress only. Chairmsn Bristol: If they do not have the easement for egress, then how would they accomplish that? Adam Antoyan: They feel it is needed for proper circulatian. Alfred Ya;da: Regardless of whether the access is open or closed, ther.~ would be times when people would come to fhat site that choose not to come into that access po?nt an~ choose to go back to Katella Avenue. They have a minimum of 20 feet for internal circulatio~. They way the applicant is prop~sing, in practicality, when there is not an attendant, and a customer chooses to go back to Kateila Avenue, they are going to ~se that and probably not foilow the sign because it will not be enforceable by anyone. All they are going to do is turn and go back. So they did request to make that at least 20 feet. Adam Antoyan: The site is so small, Ms. irwin was concemed about speeding on the site. If you pull off the wash bay, by the time they reach the easement it is only a few feet so it uuould be very difficult for someone to speed on the site. He proposed putting in a speed bump at the easement area to alleviate any concerns about cars speeding. Chairman Bristol: Disagreed with the applicant on this issue. He used the Pxample of a car wash located on Santa Ana Street. Commissioner Boydstun: She thought their hours may need to be changed (6:00 a.m. -12:00 midnight) because she did not feel they need to be open 24 hours a day Adam Antoyan: There is a new car ~Nash in Huntington Beach, Frogs Express Wash, and they have condos next door. That city restricted their operating hours. All the equipment is on time clocks and it shuts off at a certain time. Tney could do something lilce this at this site and reduca the~r hours ~s suggested. They have an attendant in the morning and one in the afternoon. He is on-site periodically throughout the day. Alfred Yalda: As an alternative they m~y want to consider having that area gated and be closed at certain hours of the day. For example, that the car wash open from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. then at that time the gate closes and opens :he next day. Commissioner Boydstun: The hours could be from 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight. They could lock the gate so people can not use it go into the residenlial area. Adam Antoyan: it would not be feasible for h~m or an employee to go every night at midnight and clase lhat gate. Chairman Hristol: This site can not be compared to the Orange site because this site has a nearby ~ esidential area and an easement. He is concerned with the noise and Bayless Street. Commissioner Bostwick: if the business is closed that would preclude the traffic from coming througli there. The parapet wall exceeds a~d goes beyand the roofline. Asked if it was possible to bring it down and match it to the roofline i Adam Antoyan: They requireci that for the 2 hour burn factor. 09-28-98 Page 47 Cheryl Flores: That is true. The building would have to be relocated away from the property line in order to eliminate the ne~d for the parapet wall. That fs one of the concems of staff fs the appearance from Katella of the ~arapet wall projecting up above the roof of the bu?Iding. There are severai issues that have cnme up, one being the relocation of the trash enclosure. Staff would like to see that shown on plans and that ft be constructed so it does not appear as a trash enclosure from Katelia. 7'he drlve aisle still needs to be made 2~ feet wide to be seen on revised plans. Commissioner Boydstun: Suggested a continuance of thfs item for two weeks to see if the applicant could address these concerns. Adam Mtoyan: Agreed. He would like this item aontinued for iwo weeks. Commissioner Bustwick: He asked that the applicant address remcving tha vacuums up front, wiclening the drive aisle, 20 feet, showing ~he speQd bump on the easement, rlght tum sign, conditions relating to the haurs of operation, and sign regarding no loud music. Chairman Bristol: On entering the easement there fs a parking space, wauld it remain? Adam Antoyan: He did not know who striped that, but it would be removed. Commissioner Bostwick: Uffered a motion for continuance to October 12,1998, seconded by Commission Napolzs and motion was caRied. OPPOSITION: 1 person spoke with concems. ACTION: Continued subject request to tho Octeber 12,1998 Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to meet with statf and try to resolve outstanding issues pertaining to drive aisles, hours of operation, speed bumps, the location of "No Loud Music" signs and a right turn sign. V07E: 6-0 (Commissioner Williams absent} flISCUSSION TIME: 51 minutes (4:44-5:35) 09-28-9$ Page 48 MEETING A~JOIlRNED AT 5:35 P.M. 7~ MONDAY, OCTOBER 1~,1998 AT 9:45 A.M. FOR CDBG PRESENTATION-COMMUNiTY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BG~Al2Q STRAT~GIC PLANNING ~~1PUT BY CODE ENFORCEMENT. 10:00-11:00 A.M. PLANNING COMMISSION EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOP, PART I. Submitted by: ~~.c~~J Ossie Edmundsan Senior Secretary 09-28-98 Page 49