22 (3)
Jennifer L. Hall
From:kathy tran <mimozat4@yahoo.com>
Sent:Sunday, April
To:Public Comment
Subject:\[EXTERNAL\] DEV2022-00007 - My Story ( Series of events summary of my interaction
with Anaheim Lodge Motel
Attachments:My Story-Series of events summary of my interaction with Anaheim Lodge motel.docx
Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message.
Dear City Clerk,
Please share with Mayor and City Council members.
1
My story (Series of events summary of my interaction with Anaheim Lodge Motel):
Thank you for your time to listen me. I do appreciate this very much.
I am happy that planning commission approved the modification of Conditional Use Permit No. 2237
for the Anaheim Lodge Motel, however I am extremely disappointed that two (2) of the conditions I
requested have been rejected, not considered.
A. We moved to our home in late 1990 and we have had no problem until 2007. At
that time, we started noticing people from the other side of the wall on the
Anaheim Lodge Motel side looking over into our living and bedrooms and also
trespassing into our backyard by climbing over the wall. We reached out to the
known owner of the motel, Mr. Yang Zhang.
B. Our house was broken into 2 times in 2007. Our neighbors to the north and south of
us also were broken into for 2-3 times in 2008. After many times asking and begging
the new owner of Anaheim Lodge Motel to keep the chain link fence between their
parking lot and the landscaped buffer area next to the wall locked to prevent people
entering the area and jumping over 4.5 feet height wall. Ultimately to try to prevent
people trespassing to our back yard, but to no avail. I then decided to try and get
help from City of Anaheim.
I brought my complaint about trespassing, invasion of privacy and safety issues to the
City of Anaheim initially back in 2010.
DETAILS OF WALL:
1. The block wall is only 4.5 feet height on the Anaheim Lodge Motel side; therefore,
almost anyone can just climb or jump over, or anyone can just look over into my
backyard and look into our living and bedrooms.
2. In 2010, Staff from City of Anaheim Code Enforcement suggested “a test trial “to
allow the motel owner to build 6 feet wood fence to see if that would help prevent
people trespassing to my property and provide some privacy. The staff also
promised if the trespassing continues, the City will request the motel to erect a 6
feet masonry block wall to meet compliance of the Condition Use Permit No. 6 of
the Resolution No. PC 81-200 of the Anaheim Lodge Motel.
3. *Please remember, the wood fence was a test trial, not permanent solution,
therefore it was not added or amended to CUP 2237. No permit, nor any inspection
from City staff has been done in regards to how the wood fence has been
constructed.
After this “test trial of 3 years to Oct 17, 2013”, I reached out to Sandra Sagert (Code
Enforcement) and asked for help again because people continued trespassing to our
back yard. She said “The City is proceeding with revocation of the CUP for the Anaheim
Lodge Motel and we are reviewing all of the documents on file for the property
including the one you mentioned in your email. Will keep you posted and appreciate
your patience (emailed Oct 29, 2013).”
11/20/2013, Sandra Sagert sent email and stated: “the City is actually moving forward
with filling a criminal complaint against the property owner instead of the revocation
process. By filing a criminal complaint, we can seek penalties and probation to ensure
the property does not fall back out of Code compliance. I will keep you posted on our
process.”
02/9/2014, Sandra sent email and stated:” Our code enforcement case has been turned
over to the City Attorney’s Office for criminal complaint filing. It will be reviewed by the
city attorney and they will notify the property owners if they are moving forward with
filing. As soon as we know, I can provide another update but our process has been
completed.”
05/23/2014. I had meeting with Sandra Sagert and Mark Dickinson at City Hall. I shared
pictures and Resolution No. PC 81-200 of the Anaheim Lodge Motel.
07/25/2014, The Anaheim Lodge changed to new owner, Mr. Mahendra Ahir.
08/5/2014, Mark Dickinson sent an email stating:” The City Attorney’s Office stated they
did not receive enough evidence from the PD to file a nuisance suit. I do believe the
motel has sold. As to matter with the wall, Code Officer Happle researched the back wall
a couple of year ago and had the building department verity that the current wall was
built as required under the original construction.”
I continued to work with City staffs and kept reminding them of the assurance given to
me that they had promised and ensured that the new owner must comply with the
Condition No. 6 in the Resolution No. PC 81-200.
08/20/2014, Mark Dickinson sent an email stating: “The Building Official has made the
determination that the Anaheim Lodge Motel property and its wall were built to the
specifications outlined in the original plans. In addition, the criminal cases were closed
due to the change in ownership and the fact that the violations were corrected. If you
disagree with the Building Officials determination of the wall, then that matter must be
taken up with their department. Oscar Davalos is the building inspector because he
conducted the original on-site inspection.”
08/30/2014, I had a meeting with planner Mr. White and Mr. CJ of Planning
Department, raising my concerns regarding the noncompliance item No. 6 in Resolution
No. PC 81-200 and provided pictures. Mr. White said that he will look into it.
10/1/2014, I reached out to Mr. Heinrich (Building Department) for help. He assigned
Mr. Gino Jimenez to help me.
10/20/2014, Sandra Sagert Sent an email and stated: “Both Code and Building have
inspected the location and do not see Code Violation. Building indicated the wall was
built to Code. I am sorry but there is nothing else we can enforce on this property.”
The City Staff decided not to enforce the condition of the block wall height
requirement; which we are left with the need to continue to deal with these problems.
08/18/2015, I had meeting with Mayor Tait, Planning director (David Belmer), Code
enforcement (Sandra Sagert) and Deputy City Attorney (Mark Facer) at the City Hall
regarding the same trespassing, safety, and privacy issues and noncompliance item No.
6 in the Resolution No. PC 81-200.
08/30/2015, I reached out and sent an email to Mr. Mahendra Ahir, the owner of
Anaheim Lodge Motel, to address the trespassing issues and notified him of one of the
conditions of Resolution was not updated to Code.
09/17/2015, Mr. Ahir emailed and stated that they “will stay in compliance with all
Codes.”
10/14/2015, I had meeting with Code Officer Oscar Chavez at my property.
01/21/2016, Officer Oscar sent email and stated: “We found no violation, except for
the height of the wall. As explained below, due to the existing circumstances, it has
been decided not to enforce a strict interpretation of the CUP’s block wall height
requirement.”
**City staffs recognized and agreed the height of the wall was not met to condition of
Resolution No. PC 81-200, but decided not to enforce? How can this legally occur? What
discretionary power does City staff have to allow for non-compliance with the condition
of the Resolution? **
04/27/2016, I invited City Staff (David Belmer, Sandra Sagert, Oscar Ochoa-Chavez, Mark
Facer to visit my back yard and the backyards of two neighbors, so they can witness and
understand the unsafe environment that my family and neighbors have been forced to
endure by the negative impact of criminal activities from the motels which directly are
caused by noncompliance in the height of masonry wall, Item No. 6 in Resolution No. PC
81-200.
After multiple emails and letters exchanged between Code Enforcement and City
Attorney, the best solution suggested to us was providing wood lattice extensions on
top of the wall. I have explained in detail why it did not work. Please read the email that
I responded to staff on 7/29/2016.
09/06/2016, I received letter from Deputy City Attorney, Mark Facer. He stated:
“Although the City disagrees with my arguments against the lattice extension, it has no
interest in forcing a solution on me.” The City will get the motel owner’s commitment to
maintain the chain-link fence and keep the gate locked.”
**Again, the City did not follow through with their suggestion of the “TEST
TRIAL”, referenced in “wall details” of page one of this document;
(In 2010, Staff from City of Anaheim Code Enforcement suggested “a test trial
“to allow the motel owner to build 6 feet wood fence to see if that would help prevent
people trespassing to my property and provide some privacy. The staff also promised if
the trespassing continues, the City will request the motel to erect a 6 feet masonry
block wall to meet compliance of the Condition Use Permit No. 6 of the Resolution No.
PC 81-200 of the Anaheim Lodge Motel.)
**The City did not want to enforce the motel owner to comply with item No. 6
in Resolution No. PC 81-200; instead, suggesting the unacceptable and understandably
illegal option of me placing a structure (lattice) on the top of the wall which was pointed
out to me by the building inspector that I could not do because it is “not my wall” and is
a “structural retaining wall.” Why? Just because the City staff approved the wall at the
wrong height in the past, it did not release the motel owner from providing a block wall
at the correct height per the respective Resolution No. PC 81-200, or the City’s
responsibilities related to correcting this error.**
I am greatly disappointed that the City Staffs, including the City Attorney’s office, could
not come up with a solution that would resolve this land use issue detail involving an
appropriate and correct wall height, which originally was legally determined in
engineering and structural design by the City of Anaheim for approval of conditional
land use; “RESOLUTION NO. PC81-200, No. 6”, “...6-FOOT HIGH MASONARY BLOCK
WALL SHALL BE CCONSTRUCTED (FROM THE HIGHEST POINT OF GRADE) ALONG THE
WEST PROPERTY LINE.”
This particular point in the RESOLUTION significantly contributes greatly to the quality of
our lives and our feeling of safety in our homes. As a result, we are left with the need to
continue to deal with these problems that could be eliminated if the City enforces the
motel to compliance with the condition of approval that was recorded for the motel as a
part of their respective approved Conditional Use Permit and the requirements of the
City’s Zoning Ordinance.
(Share pictures /video of trespassing and list of number of calls and texts to request to
keep the gate locked from 2016 to present.)
I have been politely patient and waiting since 2010; reaching out for guidance from each
department of the city and doing everything that I been asked to do and nothing has
been changed in the last 12 years. (2010-2022)
Therefore. I would like to request the following conditions be added to the CUP for the
Anaheim Lodge Motel:
1) The masonry wall shall be eight (8) feet constructed (from the highest point
of grade) along the west property as set forth in Table 46-A in Title 18
Zoning, Chapter 18.46.110 Screening, Fences, Wall, and hedges.
2) The landscape buffer area between the wall and parking lot shall remain
enclosed with a six (6) foot high chain link fence with a locked gate at all
times to discourage prowlers and trespassing from the area in accordance
with Plans and shall consist of ground cover and trees. This area shall be
clean and clear of all debris and shall be maintained in good condition at all
times. Signs contain the words “No Trespassing 602(K) P.C” shall be posted
at the entrance of the gate of the chain link fence.
3) Increase the wall height to six (6) foot high located on the South property
line to prevent and prohibit prowlers and criminals jumping over from the
adjacent motel (Sahara Motel) and trespassing to our back yard.
Please consider and accept our request to help improve the safety and quality of life for the
residents who live directly the motels on Beach Blvd. If the City is serious about revitalizing the
Beach Blvd, then serious action need be taken in this directly related area.
Kathy Tran (Resident directly behind wall of Anaheim Lodge Motel)
S. Hayward St.
Anaheim, CA 92804