Loading...
Minutes-PC 2005/06/01 (2)~R`~E''~ ~~ CITY OF ANAHEIM ~ ~ ~' ~j~ • • • ° ~ Planning Commission : ~ ~ Minutes U' ~ ~' r a~D{}~ Wednesdav, June 1, 2005 . . m~ ~ ~ Council Chamber, City Hail ~ g~~ 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California UNDED 1 `CHAIRMAN: GAIL EASTMAN Commissioners Present: KELLY BUFFA, JOSEPH KARAKI, ED PEREZ, PAT VELASQUEZ (arrived at 2:30 p.m.), (ONE VACANCY) . Commissioners Absent: CECILIA FLORES , Staff Present: Mark Gordon; DeputyCityAttorney James Ling, Assoc'iate Civil Engineer Greg Hastings; Planning Services Manager Amy Vazquez, Associate Planner Greg McCafferty; principal Planner Kimberly Wong, planning Aide Della Herrick, Associate Planner - Jessica Nixon, Planning Aide Janet Baylor, Deputy Fire Marshal Elly Morris, Senior Secretary Cathy Mobley, Fire Inspector II • Linda Eaves, Sr. Community Preservation Officer Agenda Posting: A complete copy of the Planning Commission Agenda was posted at 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 26, 2005, inside the display case located in the foyer of the Council Chambers, and also in the outside dispiay kiosk. Published: Anaheim Bulletin Newspaper on Thursday, May 5, 2005 • Call To Order Preliminary Plan Review 1:00 P.M. • STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSION ON VARIOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES (AS REQUESTED BYPLANNING COMMISSION) • PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW FOR ITEMS ON THE JUNE 1, 2005 AGENDA • Recess To Afternoon Public Hearing Session • Reconvene To Public Hearing 2:00 P.M. For record keepinq purposes if vou wish to make a statement reqardinp anv item on the aqenda please complete a speaker card in advance and submit it to the secretarv. • Pledge Of Allegiance: Commissioner Buffa • Public Comments • Consent Calendar • Public Hearing Items • • Adjournment . _ You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following e-mail address: planninttcommissionna.anaheim.net H:\TOOLS\PCADMI N\PCMI NIACT~2005MI NUTESWC060105.DOC JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ' • 'on A enda - 2:00 P.M. Anaheim Planning Commiss~ g Public Comments: None This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the Anaheim Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public; hearing items.', ' Planning Commission Appointments REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF POTENTIAL APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES AND ALTERNATES FOR THE FOLLOWING: • Anaheim Transportation Network Board ofDirectors • Utilities Underground Conversion Subcommittee Appointments were continued to the June 27, 2005, Planning Commission meeting in order to have a full Commission present. Consent Calendar: The items on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate : discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the Planning • Commission, staff or the public request the item to be discussed and/or removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. Commissioner Buffa offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Perez and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Flores and Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy), for approval of Consent Calendar Items 1-A through 1-I as recommended by staff. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED Reports and Recommendations 1A. CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously-Approved) Conditional Use Permit No. 3235 (Tracking No. CUP2005-04984) Owner: Hardin Honda, 1321 South Auto Center Drive, Anaheim, CA 92806 Agent: Walter Cadman, Hardin Honda, 1321 South Auto Center Drive, Anaheim, CA 92806 Location: 1321 East Auto Center Drive. Request for determination of substantial conformance pertaining to signage to retain two unpermitted wall signs in conjunction with an existing automotive sales and repair facility. Approved Determined to be in substantial conformance Consent Calendar Approval VOTE: 4-0 Commissioners Flores and Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy kwong2@anaheim.net JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ 1 B. Conditional Use Permit No. 4097 - Request for Termination (Tracking Na CUP2005-04986) Owner: Westport & State College LLC, 1517 South Sepulveda Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90025 Location: 420 South State College Boulevard. Request to terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 4097 (to retain an automotive repair facility). Termination Resolution No. PC2005-80 • • Terminated Consent Calendar Approvai VOTE: 4-0 Commissioners Flores and Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy jnixon@anaheim.net 06-01-05 Page 3 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 1C. Variance Nos. 1711 and 2416 - Request for Termination Terminated (Tracking No. VAR2005-04651) Agent: Theodoros Daskalakis, M.D., 300 North Wilshire Avenue, #6, P.O. Box 3880, Anaheim, CA 92803-3880 Consent Calendar Approval Location: 2792 W. Ball Road vOTE: 4-0 Commissioners Flores and Request to terminate Variance No. 1711 (waivers of sign maximum velasqueZ absent and with one height limit and minimum distance between tworoof signs) and Variance Commissionvacancy No. 2416 (waivers of minimum distance between freestanding signs, maximum number of freestanding signs, permitted location of freestanding signs and minimum height of freestanding signs to construct twoJighter box signs and two canopy signs in conjunction with an existing freestanding sign). , Termination Resolution No. PC2005-81 kwong2@anaheim.net • u 06-01-05 Page 4 • • • JUNE 1; 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 1D. Determination of Public Convenience or Necessitx Na 96-01 - Terminated Request for Termination (Tracking Na PCN2005-00020) Owner: Daniel Rosenberg, 255 South Euclid Street, Anaheim, CA, Consent Calendar Approval 92802 VOTE: 4-0 ' Location: 255 South EuClid St~eet Commissioners Flores and Velasquez absent and with one Request to terminate Public Convenience or Necessity No. 96-01 (to Commission vacancy permit the sale of beer, wine, and general liquor for off-premises consumption in conjunction with a supermarket). Termination Resolution No. PC2005-82 kwong2@anaheim.net JUNE 1,2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 1 E. CEQA Statutor~Exemption - Section 15262 Approved General Plan Amendment 2005-00433 Approved iniriation of a General Plan Amendment City Initiated Location: Cltywlde Consent Calendar Approval To initiate an amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan voTE: 4-0 to re-establish the Exceptions List to Arterial Highway Rights-of-Way. Commissioners Flores and Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy ethien@anaheim.net • 06-01-05 Page 6 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES r _ Minutes 1 F. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Approved Meeting of April 18, 2005 (Motion) Consent Calendar Approval Continued from the May 2, 2005 Planning Commission meeting ' VOTE: 4-0 Commissioners Flores and ' Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy 1G. Receiving and approving supplemental detailed Minutes#orltem Approved No. 3 from the Planning Commission Meeting of April '18, 2005, scheduled to be fieard as a public hearing item before City Council Consent Caleudar Approva~ on Tuesday, June 7, 2005. (Motion) VOTE: 4-0 ITEM NO. 3 Commissioners Flores and CEQA EIR No. 329 and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 132 ' ` Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00416 , Reclassification No. 2004-00114 Variance Na 2004-04597 i Tentative Tract Map No. 16440) AAProved 1 H. Receiving and approving supplemental detailed Minutes for Item No. 4 from the Planning Commission Meeting of April 18, 2005. Consent Calendar Approval (Motion) VOTE: 4-0 ITEM NO. 4 Commissioners Flores and CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 128`' Velasquez absent and with one i i C T T N 1 on vacancy omm ss entative ract Map o. 1683 Development Agreement No. 2005-00001 Development Agreement No. 2005-00002 Development Agreement No. 2005-00003 11. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Approved Meeting of May 2, 2005 (Motion) ~ Consent Caleudar Approval VOTE: 4-0 Commissioners Flores and Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy 06-01-05 Page 7 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMfSS10N MINU7ES • Publi Hea i It e ' c r n g ms: 2a. CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Perez~araki Recommended City Council Monitoring Plan No. 129 aPProval 2b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-04975 Perez Granted 2c. Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 Perez/Eastman Approved 2d. Development Agreement No. 2005-00005 (Readvertised) Perez Recommended City Council apProval Owner: US Southeast Corporation, 1818 South State College Boulevard, Suite 200, Anaheim, CA 92806 Agent: John Stanek, Integral Partners, 160 Newport Center Drive, CUP Suite 240, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Added a condition of approval pertaining to the applicant Location: 1818 South State Colle~e Boulevard. Property is submitting building/acchitectural plans for review and approval by approximately 3.1 acres, IOCat@d SOUth afld eaSt Of #h@ the Pla~ing commiss~on. southeast corner of State College Boulevard and Katella Avenue, having a frontage of 327 feet on the east side of State ' College Boulevard and 105 feet on the south side of Katella TT1~ Avenue (Platinum Centre Condominiums). ' Modified Condition :Nos. 3, 4, 17 and 19 ' Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-04975 - Request to modify the required - setback abutting State College Boulevard and the proposed private street for a 265-unit residential condominium project. DAG Modified Condition • Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 - Request to establish a 1-lot, 265-unit Nos. 3, a,17 and 19 airspace attached residential condominium subdivision. Development Agreement No. 2005-00005 - Request to adopt a Development vOTE: 5-0 Agreement between the City of Anaheim and U.S. Southeast Corporation for a Commissioner Flores absent and ' 265-unit residential condominium project. with one Commission ~acancy Continued from the May 2, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2005-83 Development Agreement Resolution No. PC2005-84 avazquez@anaheim.net Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Amy Vazquez, Associate Planner, stated prior to her introduction of the item that Associate Civil Engineer James Ling from Public Works Department will read into the record modifications to the conditions of approvaL James Ling, Associate Civil Engineer, referred to the Draft Tentative Tract Map excerpt and read into the record modifications to Condition Nos. 3, 4, 17 and 19. Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, stated the companion conditions in the development agreement would also change accordingly since the tentative tract map conditions are mirrored as an exhibit attachment to the development agreement. Amy Vazquez introduced ltem No. 2, and presented a PowerPoint presentation which was provided by • the applicant illustrating a visual simulation of the project. 06-01-05 Page 8 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, stated at the Preliminary Plan Review earlier #oday they had discussed some issues pertaining to the elevations and it has been discussed with the applicant. He stated that the applicant is prepared to address not only the amenities within the landscape court yard area but also with regard to how the State College elevation looks, specifically the north elevation adjacent to the McDonald's property. Applicant's Statement: John Stanek, 160 Newport Center Drive, Suite 240, Newport Beach, CA, stated he is a partner with Integral Partners and they are the applicant and developer for the subject property. He stated there are a couple of elevation elements both along the corners of State College Boulevard and Katella Avenue , as well as the southerly corner of the building that they feel they should enhance the elevation by wrapping stone around the building. He gave a brief description pertaining to the amenities of the project. It is a complex building which is new to the Fire Department, therefore, they spent a lot of time on the design of the project and 4~ow the surrounding setback areas could meet the public safety standards. Ne reiterated they would like to make additional enhancements regarding the elevations, consistent around the building. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Perez referred to the digital rendering of the exterior of the building and stated he did not see a lot of greenbelt and asked if that issue could be addressed. Mr. Stanek stated they did not include the color rendering to the Commission and indicated that the Platinum Genter Code requires a setback for parkway and landscaping between the building and the edge of the property line; and he explained and illustrated that the building is surrounded by greenery and stated the exact plant types are listed in the preliminary planting list. ~ Chairman Eastman stated the Commission was not provided with that material, and expressed her concerns regarding the lack of greenery. Mark Schadenger, President, MJS Design Group, Landscape Architecture, stated the design guideline for the Platinum Triangle are very clear about what they like to see on the streetscapes, medians and the landscape setbacks, therefore, they have followed those guidelines. He gave a description of the landscaping for the project pe~taining to the three levels of landscaping which is about 4 feet high and 2 feet inside the planter, canopy trees which create more of a canopy of the walkways, and the palm trees to soften the 4-story element that they have in the corridors. Chairman Eastman asked if they will have CC&Rs prohibiting storage of a bike on the patio or installing a satellite dish. Mr. Stanek responded yes, but there is also a condition of approval in the tentative tract map which prohibits satellite dishes. Further discussion amongst the Commission and the applicant took place pertaining to the guidelines on what is acceptable and what is not acceptable on a private patio facing a major street. Commissioner Buffa indicated that there were concerns raised at the Preliminary Plan Review session regarding the architecture. Commissioner Karaki spoke with concerns regarding the elevations and interior of the courtyard. He referred to the exterior elevations and suggested to have something along State College Boulevard that would identify the building because it needs a certain character, and feels the inside elevations are too close together and suggested giving something visual instead of distance. t , Mr. Stanek stated he would work with staff to enhance those areas. -06-01-05 Page 9 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ Chairman Eastman expressed concerns pertaining to the towers/bathroom windows and stated she would rather see a blank wall with a wonderful art work than a lot of bathroom windows because that is going to be a first impression of the building when people travel on State Coflege Boulevard and Katella Avenue, therefore she suggested another solution. Mr. Stanek explained those are not bathroom windows they are bay windows, additional windows off of the living room. Jay Wu, KTGY Architects, stated the elevations illustrated are bay windows that are designed off of the bedroom. The configuration on the plan and the configuration on the floor plan is thatthe plan will be modified to have the bay window off of the bedroom. He clarified that the windows Chairman Eastman is referring to are going to be windows designed into the walk-in closets. ' Further discussion amongsf Commissioners and the applicants took place pertaining to the windows/architecture. _ Commissioner Buffa referred to the exterior elevations and stated the proposed building doesn't seem to show much decorative enhancement to create that statement the Commission is looking for. She feels that Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard, Platinum Triangle District, is one of the most important intersections and they need to make an impressive statement at that corner. 'She expressed concerns with the proposed project having too much stucco and lack of treatment on the corner. She feels that the Commission is looking at a way to enhance the elevations either through other materiaf, decoration or change in floor plan, eta ' She referred to the interior elevation and stated that the City's General Plan policy does not allow them to require public art. She stated it is encouraged by the Commission but the decision is up to the applicant. ~ Mr. Stanek stated he believes there are some treatments they could consider which should be pleasing to the Commission. He stated with regards to concerns raised pertaining to the other exterior efevations, he explained that they ensured that every home in the building had its own patio/deck. Commissioner Buffa suggested that the final building plans return to the Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. Commissioner Perez stated it is a wonderful design but they are just looking for the character enhancement. OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 10-day appeal rights for the Tentative Tract Map, and the 22-day appeal rights for the Conditional Use Permit; and he stated the recommendation concerning the Development Agreement is subject to review by the City Council. DISCUSSION TIME: 57 minutes (2:20-3:17) (Commissioner Yelazquez arrived to the Council Chambers at 2:30 p.m.) i 06-01-05 Page 10 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 3a. CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously-Approved) BuffaNelasquez Approved ' 3b. Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 Buffa Approved reinstatement (Tracking No. CUP2005-04982) for 2 years (to expire on March 1, 200~ Owner: Sidney E. Bickel, 5585 Via Dicha, # B, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Agent: Phillip Schwartz, PRS Group, 31682 EI Camino Real, San voTE: 5-0 JUan CapiStrano, CA 92675 Commissioner Flores absent and with one Commission Location: 633South East Street. Property is approximately 1.9= vacancy acre, having a frontage of 240 feet on the west side of East Street and is located 182 feet north of the centerline of ' South Street (Quartz Deale[ Direct). Request for reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a timelimitation (approved on July 28, 2003 to expire March'1, 2005) to retain an automotive wholesale and retail auction facility. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2005-85 avazguez@anaheim.net Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. ~ Amy Vazquez, Associate Planner, introduced Item No. 3. ApplicanYs Statement: Phillip Schwartz, PRS Group, 31682 EI Camino Real, San Juan Capistrano, CA, he gave some information pertaining to the history of the business and asked that the Commission allow them to remain at the subject facility for another two years. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Deputy Ciry Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 23, 2005. DISCUSSION TIME: 4 Minutes (3:18-3:22) ~ 06-01-05 Page 11 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • iv e I a i Pr viou I-A roVed Eastman/Perez 4a. CEQA Negat e D c ar t on ( e s y pp A roved pp 4b. Conditional Use Permit No. 4142 Eastman Approved reinstatement (Tracking No. Cup2005-04980~ for 5 years (to expire on October 11, 2009) Owner: Karf T. Sator, 900 East Katelfa Avenue, # J, Orange, CA 92867 Agent: Aspen Associates Telecom, 1223 Federal Avenue, Los voTE: 5-0 Angeles, GA 90025 , Commissioner Flores absent and with one Commission Location: 3180 - 3164 East La Palma Avenue. Property is vacancy approximately 6.4 acres located south and east of the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Kraemer Boulevard. Request for reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation {approved on October 11, 1999 to expire October 11, 2004) to retain a 60-foot high telecommunications monopalm. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2005-86 dherrick@anaheim.net • ~ Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Della Herrick, Associate Planner, introduced Item Na 4. Applicant's Statement: Amit Patel, Aspen Associates Telecom, 1223 Federal Avenue, #212, Los Angeles, CA, stated he is in agreement with today's staff report. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Perez asked staff to address the issue on landscaping. Della Herrick responded that she visited the site and they were required by their conditional use permit to install six (6} palm trees which have been completed and she feels the landscaping is being very well maintained. Commissioner Perez asked if there is any future consideration of any co-location or redesign of the monopalm. Mr. Patel responded currently there are no additional carriers that wish to co-locate on the subject property, and there is no anticipation that the technology will change substantially to allow them to minimize the facility but if something was to occur that they would be glad to work with staff in order to redesign as necessary. Chairman Eastman and Commissioner Buffa expressed their support of the subject request. 06-01-05 Page 12 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 23, 2005. DISCUSSION TIME: 7 Minutes (3:23-3:30) • r JUNE '1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES . 5a. CEQA Categorical Exem~tion'Section 15061(b1(3) Bufra/vetasquez Concurred with staff 5b. Zoninq Code Amendment No. 2005-00039 suffa/Eastman Recommended City Council approval Owner: Sandy D. Sigal, Newmark Merill, 5850 Canoga Avenue, Suite 650, Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Draft Ordinance Location: Citywide. Modified Section 1, pertaining to banners Request to modify the sign code to permit marquee or electric reader restricting display ofbanners board signs in conjunction with a commercial retail center,with a minimum to one time per year for each of twenty-five (25) acres in area subjectto a conditionaf use permit. tenant in a center that installs a marquee or electronic reader-board sign. _ : VOTE: 3-1 Commissioner Perez voted nq Commissioner Karaki abstained, and Commissioner ' Flores absent and with one Commission vacancy dherrick@anaheim.net Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. • Della Herrick, Associate Planner, introduced Item No. 5. Public Testimony: : Sandy Sigal, Newmark Merill, 5850 Canoga Avenue, Suite 650, Woodland Hills, CA, stated they purchased Anaheim Towne Square in 1999 and have done a very extensive remodel in 2000. They have spent extensive money every year on community events, marketing support for the tenants and other various attractions to bring people in to support the retailing activities. They have approximately 4-6 events yearly, and in support of those events they would have banners. He stated staff suggested that they consider investing in a reader board in lieu of banners. In November 2004, the Planning Commission approved amendment to the code to allow centers to add a reader board program. He stated there are tenants who have seasonal events that go outside the normal "center" promotional events, and they feel it would be a hardship on those tenants to not allow them one opportunity a year to advertise their specials. Therefore, he asked that the zoning code amendment be modified which would allow a tenant to obtain one special event permit, yearly. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Velasquez asked the applicant for clarification regarding events the center conducts and events the tenants may have. Mr. Sigal responded the tenants may have a special event for their own retail store. Commissioner Velasquez asked if the tenants could use the proposed reader board. Mr. Sigal responded yes, but it would depend on availability and explained different circumstances why a '• tenant may need a banner for their store. Commissioner Perez asked if this is a code enforcement issue. 06-01-05 Page 14 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ Greg McCafferty, Principal Pfanner, responded if is not a code enforcement issue. The applicant has done a great job in upgrading the retail center, but they do a lot of programming of communityevents and based on the size of the center they want the ability'to continue to do that in an effective way; and the issue is if there should be special event permits for individual tenants in the center., Chairman Eastman stated she would not like to see individual tenants be penafized, but she understands staff's concern where it could become unsightly with flagslbanners everywhere. Mr. McCafferty responded that the tenants could still obtain special event permits, but they can not have a banner associated with the special event Greg Hastings, Planning Services Manager, he pointed out to the Commission that the subject request is a code amendment that would apply city-wide for all centers that are 25 acres or-more. There are ways under a conditional use permit to further restrict the signage in the center, and feels staff is amenable to a compromise on the matter. He believes the applicant has come to a good compromise, however staff is interested in keeping these centers clean and hopefully the reader boards could be used in place of the banners in such a way that it would work for the centers as well as the tenants. Commissioner Buffa stated once you are in a shopping center, especially one that has an unusual configuration that a tenant should be allowed to have the opportunity to inform the public of the special event, and once a year is very reasonable. Chairman Eastman and Commissioner Velasquez concurred with Commissioner Buffa. Further discussion was taken amongst staff and the Commissioners regarding the current code amendment and the proposed amendment. ~ Commissioner Karaki expressed his concerns and stated he feels the tenants should have more opportunity than once a year in order to be able to compete with other businesses. Mr. Sigal indicated they still would have to retum for a conditional use permit, and if there is a bad landlord at another center and they came for a conditional use permit, the Commission could restrict banners completely as a condition of approvaL Commissioner Velasquez stated she concurs with the applicant. Mr. Hastings stated the proposed request is in addition to Christmas t~ee lots and pumpkin patches which have their own set of requirements for banners. Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, referred to the draft ordinance and stated the proposed language and the text change is not very clear as to what restriction they are imposing because it addresses the shopping center and not the tenants of the shopping center, and it sounds as they are restricting the shopping center's ability to have a banner in connection with a promotional event when it is meant that a tenant is being restricted, therefore, he suggested changing the language to ensure the modification is accurately made and clearly understood. OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 23, 2005. • DISCUSS{ON TIME: 26 Minutes (3:31-3:57) 06-01-05 Page 15 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 6a. CEQA Negative Declaration veiasqueZBut'fa ` Approved 6b. Waiver of Code Rec~uirement velasquez/Buffa Approved 6c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-04983 Velasquez Granted for 2 years (to expire on June 1, 200'n Owner: Cris DiRuggiero, P.O. Box 304, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Agent: lglesia Evangelica, Ministero Impacto Nuevo, P.O. BoX Modified Condition No. is 3536, Anaheim, CA 92803 Locafion: 2230 West Colchester Drive. Suite Nos.13-16. Property vOTE: 5-0 is approximately 0.87-acre located at the southeast corner Commissioner Flores absenc of Colchester Drive and Colony Street (Iglesia Evangelica and with one Commission It7lpaCtO NUeVO). vacancy Request to permit and retain a church in conjunction within an existing non-conforming commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2005-88 ~ ~ Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, introduced Item No. 6. jramirez@anaheim.net Linda Eaves, Senior Community Preservation Officer, stated currently at the property they have a code enforcement history dating from 1984. They have had a number of conditional use permits and at the current time the subject church is in units 13-16 which they have recently expanded into from units 15 and 16. They have previously approved a conditional use permit for Victory Outreach which is in units 1 through 5 and were given 60 days to bring the property plans because of the numerous alterations on the property. They have not obtained Planning Services Division or Building Division approval for the tenant improvements. Their 60-days expired and when they conducted an inspection last week none of the alterations was taken care of and nothing has been submitted to the Planning Commission. Applicant's Statement: Eglai Dealmeida, Iglesia Evangelica, Ministero lmpacto Nuevo, P.O. Box 3536, Anaheim, CA, stated he is the pastor of the church. They were waiting to see if they would receive the permit, and if permitted would then make the changes. Most of the items to be completed are the owner's responsibility. Therefore, they are waiting because they do not want to spend money if they do not receive the necessary permit. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Buffa informed the applicant that the conditions of approval are his responsibility and asked if he is aware of that. Mr. Dealmeida stated he understands. Chairman Eastman stated it is her understanding that they have been exceeding the maximum occupancy allowed at their services. Mr. Dealmeida responded they allow 49, and sometimes it may increase to 60 but it is not every service. 06-01-05 Page 16 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINU7ES • Chairman Eastman asked if the representative present from the Fire Department would address the issus of the impo~tance to not exceed the occupancy limit. Cathy Mobley, Fire Inspector il, stated the purpose of 49 maximum occupancy is because there is not proper exiting and the unit is not considered an "A° occupancy for public assembly, it is considered a"B" occupancy which could only hold 49 peopie. Chairman Eastman asked when the applicant complies with the modifications of the building, will he be allowed to exceed 49. Cathy Mobley responded they could have more than 49 after they bring the necessary items up to code, and they would need to obtain the approval from the Building Division for an occupancy change. Chairman Eastman explained to the applicant that until these changes are madehe is endangering people when he allows the occupancy to exceed 49. ' Mr. Dealmeida stated he wants to make the changes to be in compliance but feels they are in the middle between the City and the owner. Chairman Eastman expressed her concerns in approving the request unless the applicant ensures that he would restrict the number of people into the facility. Mr. McCafferty stated the applicant needs to understand that he needs to keep the occupancy to 49 until the occupancy has changed so that it meets Buifding and Fire codes which hasbeen a previous requirement. Commissioner Velasquez stated regardless of who pays for the tenant improvements they have to ~ comply with the Fire DepartmenYs maximum occupancy. She asked the applicant if he would be turning people away once the limit reaches 49, and if he understands that once he is in compliance with the conditions of approval that he would have to obtain approval with the Buitding Division in order to increase the number of occupancy. Mr. Dealmedia responded yes and that he understands. Commissioner Perez asked the applicant how long has he been at the subject location. Mr. Dealmedia responded eleven (11) years. Chairman Eastman stated they had a conditional use permit which expired and asked the applicant why it wasn't renewed. Mr. Dealmedia responded it was his first time and he wasn't aware because he never received any notice from the City indicating that the permit needed to be renewed. Further discussion took place amongst the applicant and the Commission regarding the maximum occupancy. Cathy Mobley stated there was a violation notice given by her on October 21, 2004, requesting that they lower the occupancy to 49. Commissioner Karaki asked if the app{icant would consider having two services. Mr. Dealmedia stated they have been considering the matter to have two services. • Commissioner Perez stated his concerns pertain to the applicant complying with the conditions of apprOVal and suggested to apply a timeframe to the request in order to ensure the applicant is in compliance. , 06-01-05 Page 17 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ Janet Baylor, Deputy Fire Marshal, stated the applicant is in violation and the Fire Department could take measures to stop the church activities; also she will send representatives on the Sunday services to monitor the occupancy level. Linda Eaves stated Community Preservation Division would also continue to monitor the progress of the church activities. Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, stated the provisions for revocation of a permit are contained in Section No. 18.60.200 of the Zoning Code and it does authorize the Planning Commission by its own motion'to initiate revocation proceedings with'10 days notice to the affected party. Basis for revocation is that #he permit is being exercised contrary to the terms and conditions of approval or in violation of any statute, ordinance, law or regulation. Linda Eaves suggested that a condition of approval be added indicating that #he property be monitored on a quarterly basis, at the prevailing rate that they are currently charging. Commissioner Buffa asked staff if they imposed a similar condition on the prior applicant, Victory Outreach Church. This item was trailed in order for staff to provide additional material requested by the Commission, and discussion was continued following ltem No. 7. Mr. McCafferty stated the condition pertaining to Community Presenration fnspections is in the draft resolution attached to the staff report, Condition No. 15, he suggested changing the wording in order to match the condition in the conditional use permit for the other church, and he read into the record a modification to Condition No. 15. i OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 23, 2005. DISCUSSION TIME: 33 Minutes (3:58-4:27) trailed (4:43-4:47) This item was trailed in order for staff to provide additional maferia! to the Planning Commission. ~ 06-01-05 Page 18 ~ ~ i JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING GOMMISSION MINUTES 7a. , CEQA Negative Declaration Buffa/ve~asquez 7b. ' Waiver of Code Requirement sucfa/velasquez 7c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-04981 ' Buffa Owner: Anaheim Business Campus, LLC, 394 West Cerritos Avenue, Anahe+m, CA 92805 Agent: EI Gallardo, 11932 Gary Street, Garden Grove, CA 92840 Location: 167 and 175 West Cerritos Avenue - Building No. 2. Property is approximateiy 12.3 acres located at the southwest corner of Cerritos Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard {The Place}. ' Request to permit a banquet hall with on-prem+ses sales and consumption of aicoholic beverages with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2005-87 ' Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Amy Vazquez, Associate Planner, introduced Item No. 7. Applicant's Statement: Approved Approved Granted for 2 years (to expire on June 1, 200'n Modified Condition No. 33 Added a condition of approval pertaining to a dance hall permit. VOTE: 5-0 CommissionerFlores absent and with one Commission vacancy avazquez@anaheim,net Elliezer EI Gallardo, 11932 Gary Street, Garden Grove, CA, stated they had an incident last year but they called the Police Department because some people were drinking in their parking lot. There is always two or three staff members at the location at all times, including security guards inside out outside. They have been at the subject location for a year and a half with no problems. They are a family owned business to provide a place for their guests to hold family pa~ties, weddings, and other special occasions. They will provide tables, chairs, decorations, beer and wine, D.J., and an open dance floor. He stated he is aware that the Police Department has an issue with the subject business, but they do maintain safety at all times. He stated they will try to have a minimum kitchen requirement and they will contact Alcohol Beverage Control to check the requirements. Public Testimony: Solita Hart, 1550-1600 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA, stated she is the property manager for Lease All Anaheim which is across the street from the subject facility. She stated she is present on behalf of the owner and she relayed concerns pertaining to alcohol consumption and parking on the nights and weekends. Mr. Gallardo stated they have a licensed company that provides security and staff is present throughout the duration of the eventlparty. Commissioner Perez asked if the parking is exceeding the limit THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. 5 Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, stated during the operation of the facility most of the tenants in the complex are gone; therefore staff does not feel there woufd be a parking prOblem. 06-01-05 Pa e 19 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINIlTES • Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, referred to Condition No: 33 and suggested deleting the candition of approvaL Commissioner Buffa stated that the applicant is planning on modifying the facility to include a kitchen facility and suggested a modification to Condition No. 33. Mr. Gordon stated the Building Division and the Fire Department may want to #ake a look at that because he belieyes there are building code issues that are associated with the development of that type of facility on the property. Commissioner Buffa stated in the Preliminary Plan'Review session today they talked about adding a condition of approval, that if they want to apply for a dance haH permit that they must come back for an additional conditional use permit. Mr. Gallardo stated they do not want to operate as a nightclub; their goal is to have family parties such as weddings and receptions, etc. Chaicman Easfman stated that if the business was sold the new owner would have to comply with the conditions of approval; therefore the added condition would not only pertain to the current owner. Mr. Gordon'stated the requirements with respect to a public dance hall do have certain exemptions, therefore certain types of activities would be exempted from the requirement to haVe a permit. ~ OPPOSITION: A person spoke in opposition to the subject request expressing concems regarding parking. Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 23, 2005. DISCUSSION TIME: 14 Minutes (4:28-4:42) Following this ifem, ltem No. 6 was further discussed since it was trailed. ~ JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION_MINUTES ~ 8a. CEQA Negative Declaration Perez/velasquez 8b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-04971 Perez Owner: INC Hidco, 5395 East Hunter Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807 Agent: Laura North, 2828 North Danbury Street, Orange, CA 92867 Location: 5395 East Hunter Avenue. Property is approximately 2.1 acres, having a frontage of 320 feet on the north side of Hunter Avenue, and is Iocated 110 feet north of the centerline of Brasher Streef (Pump 1t Up). Request to permit a children's indoor private recreation facility. Conditionai Use Permit Resolution No. PC2005-89 Chairman Eastman opened the pubfic hearing. Kimberly Wong, Planning Aide, introduced Item No. 8. Applicant's Statement: Approved Granted for 3 years (to expire on June 1, 2008) Modified Condition No. l VOTE: 5-0 Commissioner Flores absent and with one Commission vacancy kwong2@anaheim.net ~ Rick Solberg, 201 E. Center Drive, Anaheim, CA, stated he is the architect for the project and it is not a store front operation, it is a facility to be used for private parties and does not require main st~eet exposure, as he feels it requires a good reputation and "word of mouth". They intentionally have focused on finding a tocation that would afford them a dual tenant building because they knew that the other uses in the industrial type zone allows them the ability to compensate for additional parking. Randy Baker, 5820 Stoneridge Mall Road, Suite 300, Pleasanton, CA, stated he represents Pump It Up Management, and their first facility opened up 2'/ years ago and they were the first indoor facility for recreational inflatables. They are currently recognized as the industry leader for safety and they are registered in 49 states, and their facilities comply with all restrictions having to do with safety that has been established by the local jurisdiction as well as the ASTM federal guidelines set forth by their manufacturer. He stated they are a destination/reservation based business and are not open to the public on a walk-in use, and that 90% of their business takes place after 3:00 p.m. on weekdays and on weekends, therefore, usually there is not a conflict with traffic andlor trucks. Mr. Solberg further gave information pertaining to parking at the facility and the type of uses allowed for the facility. He stated in the subject zone there are other less desirable uses that are permitted without requesting a conditional use permit. Also, there are educational facilities, above the 12'h grade and doesn't believe that they would consider those uses/occupants to be exposed to any more of a hazard than what the children would. He feels if the use is not appropriate for the subject zone that it should apply uniformly across the zone. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Perez expressed his support of the project. Commissioner Buffa stated she is comfortable with the request since the property owner is the other . tenant. She expressed her support of a one-year time limitation in order for the applicant to assure the Commission that the nature of the other tenant in the bui{ding hasn't significantly changed and that they are not handling hazardous materials andlor conducting anything that would create a conflict with the children. 06-01-05 Page 21 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSfON MINUTES ! Mr. Baker asked is there a renewal fee. Chairman Eastman expressed concern that they are not imposing a burden on the applicant that they would not normally do, and stated in other situations they have tied the time limit to the term of a lease renewaL Mr. Baker stated their lease renewal is five years. Commissioner Velasquez suggested allowing a three year time limitation; Commissioner Buffa concurred with a three year time limitation. Mr. McCafferty stated staff would agree with three years and feels that would be a reasonable time period to see if there are any compatibility issues. He stated they understand that the property owner is limiting themselves byallowing the subject use and they understand the distinction between the subject business assembly use and publicJprivate schools since those do have regularity frame works that they have to consider. The only regularity frame work w~th regara to the ~and use permit today is the negative declaration and the findings for the conditional use permit which may change in three years. OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, ~ June 23, 2005. DISCUSSION TlME: 25 Minutes (4:48-5:13} Following ltem No. 6, fhis item was discussed. ~ ' 06-01-05 Page 22 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ 9a. CEQA Negative Declaration Buffa/Karaki Approved 9b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-04985 Buffa Granted Owner: Robert J. Ricci, 21680 Dunrobin Way, Yorba Linda, CA Modified Condition No.1 92887 Agent: Randy Edwards, 4070 Live Oak Lane, Yorba Linda, CA voTE: 5-0 92$$6 Commissioner Fiores absent and with one Commission Location: 4771 East Hunter Avenue. Property is approximately vacancy 0.63-acre, having a frontage of 16 feet on the curvilinear portion of Hunter Avenue, and is located approximately 113 feet north of the centerline of Hancock Street (House of Bounce). Request to permit a children's indoor private recreation facility. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2005-90 jnixona>ananeim.net ~ • Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Jessica Nixon, Planning Aide, introduced Item No. 9. ApplicanYs Statement: Randy Edwards, 4070 Live Oak Lane, Yorba Linda, CA, asked for clarification regarding Condition No. 1 of the draft resolution pertaining to admission fees. Chairman Eastman responded that admission into the facility would be pre-arranged. Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, stated the wording of Condition No. 1 is awkward since they will be charging for parties in order to participate in activities at the facility. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 23, 2005. DISCUSSION TIME: 11 Minutes (5:14-5:25) 06-01-05 Page 23 JUNE 1, 20Q5 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ 10a. CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously-Approved) Withdrawn 10b. Conditional Use Permit Na 3235 (Tracking No. Cup2005-04984) Owner: Hardin Honda, 1321 South Auto Center Drive, Anaheim CA Motion: BuffalEastman 92806 VOTE: 4-0 ' Agent: Walter Cadman, Hardin Honda, 1321 South Auto Center Coznmissioners Flares and DriVe, Anaheim, CA 92806 Velasquez absent and with one Commission vacancy Location: 1321 East Auto Center Drive. Property is approximately 2.3 acres, having a frontage of 350 feet on the north side of Auto Center Drive and is located 1,400 feet west of the CGnterline Of Phoenix Club Drive - Hardin Honda).. Request to amend or delete a condition of approval pertaining to signage to add three additiona! wall signs in conjunction with an existing automotive sales and repair facility. Kwong2@anahe+m.net ~ • OPPOSITION: None DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 06-01-05 Page 24 JUNE 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • Chairman Eastman suggested changing the public hearing portion of the meeting to a later time than 2:00 p.m., in order to aliow adequate time to discuss the Preliminary Plan Review items. Therefore, discussion was made and it was determined to agendize the matter to the June 13, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. There was also general/informa! discussion amongst the Planning Commission and staff regarding various issues related toPlanning Commission and regarding Platinum Triangle projects. • MEETING ADJOURNED AT 5:45 P.M. TO MONDAY, JUNE 13, 2005 AT 12:00 P.M. F~R PRELIM{NARY PLAN REVIEW. • Respectfully submitted: ~ ~~~~ / ~~~ ~ Elly Morris Senior Secretary Received and approved by the Planning Commission on ~u ~~ Z...vr , 2005.