Loading...
Minutes-PC 2006/10/02~ • ~,~PHE'M ~~~ City of Anaheim _ r - 04 o Planning Commission ~ ~ ~ D Minutes ,. s_~ ~~~ Q Mondav, October 2, 2006 . . ~ e, Council Chamber, City Hall ~~U1~I ~$~~ 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California DED CHAIRMAN: GAIL EASTMAN Commissioners Present: STEPHEN FAESSEL, CECILIA FLORES, PANKY ROMERO, PAT VELASQUEZ Commissioners Absent: KELLY BUFFA, JOSEPH KARAKI Staff Present. : Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney Deila Herrick, Associate Planner Greg Hastings, Planning Services Manager John Ramirez, Associate Planner Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner ' Jamie Lai; Associate Engineer Judy Dadant, Senior Planner Kimberly Wong, Assistant Planner Dave See, Senior Planner Elly Morris, Senior Secretary Susan Kim, Associate Planner Marie Witkay, Senior-Secretary Agenda' Posting: A complete copy of the Planning Commission Agenda was posted at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, September 28, 2006, inside the display case located in the foyer of the Council Chambers, and also in the outside display kiosk. Published: Anaheim Bulletin Newspaper on Thursday, September 7, 2006 • Call To Order • Preliminary Plan Review 1:00 P.M. • STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSfON ON VARfOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES (AS REQUESTED BY PLANNING COMMISSION) • PRELlMINARY PLAN REVIEW FOR ITEMS ON THE OCTOBER 2, 2006 AGENDA • Workshop 1:30 P.M. • PROPOSED HISTORIC PALM DISTRICT • Recess To Afternoon Public Hearing Session • Reconvene To Public Hearing 2:30 P.M. Attendance: 23 For record keepinq purposes if vou wish to make a statement reqardinq anv item on the aqenda please complete a speaker card in advance and submit it to fhe secretarv. • Pledge Of Allegiance: Commissioner Faessel • Public Comments • Consent Calendar , • Public Hearing ltems • Adjournment You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following e-maif address: piannins~commissionCa?anaheim.net H:\TOOLS~PCADM W\PCMINIACT12006MI NUTESWC100206.DOC ' OCTOBER 2, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 2:30 P.M. Workshop: • Presenter PhyAis Mueller, Ne+ghborhood Development Coordinator, with the Community Development Department offered a PowerPoint presentation on the proposed Historic Palm District _ , No one from the public was present to comment. 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. • • 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 priorto 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 Velasquez offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Faessel and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Buffa and Karaki absent), for approval of Consent Calendar Items 1-A and 1-B as recommended by staff. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVEQ Min 1A. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of September 6, 2006. (Motion) Continued from the September 18, 2006 Planning Commission meeting. 1B. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of September 18, 2006 (Motion) Approved Consent Calendar Approval VOTE: 5-0 Commissioners Buffa and Karaki absent Approved Consent Calendar Approval VOTE: 5-0 Commissioners Buffa and Karaki absent 10-02-06 _ Page 2 OCTOBER 2, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • Public Hearina_Items: 2a. CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 280 Romero/Faessel Approved (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED) - 2b. AMENDMENTe N0. 4 TO THE PACIFICENTER Romero Recommended City SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 88-3 Councilapproval, in part (TRACKING NO. SPN2006-00034) To approve the deletion of Owner: Tustin Retail Center, LLC, Attn: Julie Collins, 3670 West hotel occupancy limitations; - Oquendo Road, Las Vegas, NV 89118 and withdraw the portion of _ the request relating to Agent: Mark Frank, Promotional Signs, 20361 Hermana Circle, additional monument signage as requested by the applicant. Lake Forest, CA 92630 Location: 3610-3720 East La PalmaAvenue and 1001-1091 North VOTE: 5-0 Tustin Avenue: Property is approximately25.8 acres and Commissioners Buf£a and is located at the southwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Karaki absent Tustin Avenue (The Pacificenter Specific Plan Na 88-3). Request to modify the zoning and development standards pertaining to signage and hotet occupancy limitations for the Pacificenter Specific Plan No. 88-3. Continued from the May 31, June 12, July 24, and August 21, 2006, Planning Commission meetings. Project P/anner. • Specific Plan Resolution No. PC2006-83 (dhenick@anaheim.net) Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Della Herrick, Associate Planner, introduced this item by providing a brief history of the item and noted that staff recommends approvaL THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, stated this item would be scheduled for a public hearing before the City CounciL DfSCUSSION TIME: 4 minutes (2:34-2:38) • 10-02-06 Page 3 OCTOBER 2, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES . 3a. CEQA SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 332 AND ADDENDUM'{PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIEDI 3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05116 - 3c. FINAL SITE PLAN N0. 2006-00005 Owner: Lennar Ptatinum Triangie, LLC, 25 Enterprise, 3~d'Floor, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656-2601 Agent: Tim Smallwood, Lennar Platinum Triangle, 1900 Main Street, Suite 800, Irvine, CA 92614 tocation: 1404 East Katella Avenue: Rroperty is an approximately 2.6- acres development area within an approximate 40.6-acre propertyJocated between Katella Avenue and Gene Autry ' ' Way, extending from State College Boulevard to just west of Betmor Lane. Approximately 6.3 acresare located within the Platinum Triangle,:Gene Autry District, and 34.4 acres within the Platinum Triangle, Katella District (Development Area'A). Request: Conditional Use Permit Na 2006-05116 - Request to modify setback requirements to construct a'157-unit, mixed use project for Development Area A- Lennar's A-Town. Final Site Plan No. 2006-00005 - Request review and approval of a final site plan for a 157-unit, mixed use development for Development Area A- Lennar's A-Town • within the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use zone. Continued from the August 7, 2006, Planning Commission meeting. Continued to December 11, 2006 Motion: Velasquez/Itomero VOTE: 5-0 Commissioners Buffa and Karaki absent Project Planner. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. ~twnite@ananeim.net) OPPOSITION: None DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. OCTOBER 2, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 4a. CEQA SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 332 ~ ANDADDENDUM (PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED) ~ , 4b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2006-05117 4c. FINAC SITE PLAN NO. 2006-00006 Owner: Lennar Platinum Triangle, LLC, 25 Enterprise, 3~d Floor, Aliso _ Viejo, CA 92656-2601 Agent: Tim Smallwood, Lennar Platinum Triangle, 1900 Main Street, Suite 800, Irvine, CA 92614 Location: ; 1404 East Katella Avenue: Property is an approximately 3.7- . acres development area within an approximate 40.6-acre propertyJocated between Katelia Avenue and Gene Autry Way, extending from State College Boulevard to just west of Betmor Lane. Approximately 6:3 acres are located within the Platinum Triangle, Gene Autry District, and 34.4 acres within the Platinum Triangle, Katella District (Development Area C). Request: Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05117 - Request to modify setback requirements to construct a 167-unit, mixed useproject for Development Area C- Lennar's A-Town. Finat Site Plan No. 2006-00006 - Request review and approval of a final site plan for a 167-unit, mixed use development for Development Area C- Lennar's A-Town ~ within the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use zone. Continued from the August 7, 2006, Planning Commission meeting. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. OPPOSITION: None DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. Withdrawn Motion: Velasquez/Iiomero VOTE: 5-0 Commissioners Buffa and Karaki absent Project Planner. (twhite@anaheim.net) . 10-02-06 Page 5 OCTOBER 2, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 5a. `CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Velasquez/Eastman Approved 5b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2006-05111 . Velasquez Granted (READVERTISEDI Owner: BKM Anaheim Associates, 3185 Pullman Avenue, Costa Modifled Condition Nos. l, Mesa, CA 92626 2 and 13 Agent: Aspen Associates Telecom, 1223 Federal Avenue, # 212, voTE: 4-1` LOS Angeles, CA 90025 Commissioner Romero voted no, and Commissioners Location: 1299 North Patt Street: Property is approximately 0.28- Buffa and Karaki absent - ' acre and is a land locked parcel with a maximum depth of 190 feet located west of a parcel with 200 feet of frontage on the west side of Patt Street, 37 feet south of the centerline of Commerciaf Street. Request to construct a stealth ground-mounted telecommunications facility with accessory ground-mounted equipment to accommodate two carriers in an industrial office park. Continued from the August 21, 2006, Planning Commission meeting. ~ Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2006-88 ProjectPlanner.• (kwong2@anaheim. net) ~ . Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Kimberly Wong, Assistant Planner, introduced this item along with a brief history and a detailed visual simulation of the proposed stealth ground-mounted telecommunications facility. Applicant's Statement: Brian Malliet, applicant, noted his concern for a decision from the Planning Commission so that he could proceed in response to with whatever the Commission's decision was. He explained why he could not design the stealth telecommunications facility as part of a newly constructed building as previously agreed. He sited limitation factors such as wind, building height and structure. He stated that a building mounted telecommunications facility would not be viable on 7,000 to 9,000 square foot buildings which would be the largest structures in this project. He went on to explain that he has been working with staff in order to resolve the telecommunications facility issues. He noted that this particular project is located in the heaviest industrial zone in the City. He urged staff and the Planning Commission to consider the size of the buildings that the market is calling for and the resulting incompatibility of a building mounted telecommunications facility. He provided a history of the project including background information with regards to the individual telecommunications companies. He spoke in favor of other alternative solutions to the building mounted telecommunication facility such as faux trees. Amit Patel, T-Mobile applicant, described what the alternative faux palm tree design would be like. Mike Blackwell, Cingular Wireless applicant, provided details for several options using different types of faux trees to accommodate the stealth communications facilities. Public Testimony: • , , : 10-02-06 _ Page 6 OCTOBER 2, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ Janice Burke, 4338 East Elkstone Avenue, Anaheim, CA agreed with the applicanYs frustration at being . able to erect a stealth communications facility in a timely manner. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, stated that staff is in agreement with the approval issues and would like a resolution to the telecommunications facility as soon as possible alsa He reiterated that if the telecommunications facility had been a building mounted facility as preyiously agreed upon, this issue ` - would have been resolved. The reason that the facility has not been approved is because of the change in facility tlesign to a free standing faux tree. He read into the record written statements made by T- Mobile stating their, agreement to incorporate the telecommunications facility architecturally into one of the new buildings similar to the'original facility. He noted fhat it is staff's belief, which is stated in the Staff Report Recommendation and which is founded on all the evidence, thatthis recommendation should be , followed. ' . Commissioner Velasquez wanted to know why there was a change in the design in the , telecommunications facility. Mr. Malliet provided a thorough background of the reasons for the design change which was made due to market requests and structural limitations. He spoke in favor of the faux tree facility. Commissioner Velasquez agreed with the statements made by Mr. Malliet and said that she is in favor of the mono-palm design. Commissioner Faessel pointed out the existing palms in the general area of the proposed project and wanted the Commission to be aware of this. There was a lengthy general discussion between #he Commission, applicants and staff regarding the ~ height of tfie differenttypes of faux trees and the number of live trees as a possible option to be added to the site. Statements were made that the applicant has had one and one-half years to present a viable solution to the Commission that would be in accordance with the prior agreed upon design. Mr. McCafferky proposed that if the Commission wanted to, they could suggest a modification fo the type and height and number of telecommunication facilities, with the approval of the applicant. This modification should also include a final landscape plan that would come back to staff that includes the grove effect that the Commission is in favor of. At the end of the discussion it was agreed by all concerned that there would be a modification to the height of the mono-palm stealth telecommunications facilities and that a grove effect would be incorporated in the final landscaping plans submitted for staff approvaL Judy Dadant, Senior Planner, read into the record certain condition modifications pertaining to the item. OPPOS1710N: None IN SUPPORT: A person spoke in favor of the subject request. Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 24, 2006. DISCUSSION TIME: 50 minutes (4:27-5:17) • This item was trailed in order for the applicant to be present at the meeting (2:39 p.m.) This item was heard following ltem No. 9. 10-02-06 Page 7 OCTOBER 2, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 6a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Velasquez/ltomero AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN N0. 140 Approved (READVERTISED) 6b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2006-00179 Velasquez Granted 6c. WANER OF CODE REQUIREMENT . Flores/Faessel Approved 6d. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05109 Vela§quez ` Granted 6e. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16943 ' Velasquez/Romero Approved Owner: La Palma Real Estate, LLC, 160 Newport Center Drive, Suite 240, Newport Beach, CA 92660 WAIVERS Approved waivers (a) and Agent: T& B Planning Consultants, 17542 East 17`h Street, Suite (b);Denied waiver (c) since 100, Tustirl, CA 92780 it hasbeen deleted. CUP Modified Condition No. 3S Location: 3530 - 3540 East La Palma Avenue and 1010 -1040 North Grove Street: Property is approximately `5.2 acres, having frontages of 410 feet on the'south side of LaPalma VO'rE: 5-0 Avenue and is located 270 feet east of the centerline of Commissioners Buffa arid GroVe Str22t. Karaki absent Reclassification No. 2006-00179 - Request reclassification from the SR 94-1, D.A. 4(Northeast Area Specific Plan 94-1, Transit Core Area) zone to the SP 94-1, D.A. 4(MU) (Northeast Area Specific Plan 94-1, Transit . Core Area; Mixed Use Overlay) zone to construct 312 single family attached condominium units. ' Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05109 - Request to construct a 312 • unit, single family attached condominium project with 39 live/work units with waivers of (a) improvement of private street, (b) sound attenuation for residential developments, and (c) maximum wall height. Tentative Tract Map No. 16943 - To establish a 312 unit airspace attached single family residential condominium subdivision. Reclassification Resolution No. PC2006-85 Project Planner. (dsee@anaheim.net) Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2006-86 Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Dave See, Senior Planner, introduced this item by providing several renderings of the proposed 312 unit single-family attached condominium complex along with a multi-faceted description and indicated the Redevelopment Agency was working to implement a quiet zone for the railroad bordering the site on the east. Mr. See stated that staff recommends approval for the item. Judy Dadant, Senior Planner, presented a material board to the Planning Commission for this project. Applicant's Statement: Brad Barlow, applicant, spoke in favor of the project and identified additional pers onnel in the audience - who assisted with the development of the proposed complex. OCTOBER 2, 2006 PLANNINGCOMMISSION MINUTES • Robert Smith, 3500 East La Palma, Anaheim, CA owner of the adjacent property known as Anaheim Hiils Auto Body, spoke in opposition to the item citing conflict of property uses which are in close proximity to each other: ApplicanYs RebuttaL• Mr. Barlow stated that there should not be any conflict between the land use of the'auto body business and the condominium complex. He noted that all of the units would be facing inward towards the projects' courtyard. He went on to say that all potential sound issues have been taken into consideration and solutions have been incorporated into the construction of the units. There was a discussion between the Commission, applicant, staff and Mr. Smith regarding his use of chemicals and spray paint and how it might affect the adjacent compfex. Greg McCafferty, Principal Planner, stated that all laws concerning notification, air quality requirements and land uses have been : adhered to by all involved parties. Mr. McCafferty noted that the General Plan, the long term strategic plan for the City, does caQ for this area to be classified as residential, mixed'use. Therefore if Mr. Smith's auto body facility is conforming to all legal requirements, it is within the City Plan. A clarification of the specific boundaries of the mixed use overlay General Plan was identified for the Planning Commission. Mr. McCafferty noted that the Environmental Consultant wanted to address#he air quality issue for the , , Commission. He alsq stated that in the previous discussion and testimony there was no indication that Mr. Smith's business permit restricts the ability of his business from operating next #o a residential project. LindsayAnderson, 51 Grenada, Laguna Niguel, CA, PCR Consulting Project Senior Manager, spoke on issues regarding the environmental document pertaining to this project She stated for clarification purposes tliat Mr.'Smith's business does have to go back approximately every five years to renew their permit and their individual requirements would not change based on adjacent land use changes.!' As to toxic air contaminants, the auto body business is not included in Air Resources Board or the AQMD's list ~ of health risk citing guidelines. Mr. McCafferty interjected that the AQMD was included in staff routing list for environmental document and they did not provide any comments. Commissioner Faessel asked Mr. Smith if he was comfortable with the environmental findings that have been brought forth to the Commission. Mr. Smith stated that eventually there will be approximately 312 residents next to his business which probably will be a problem for some of the residents. In his opinion this might cause concern to some of the individuals and could negatively affect his business. Chairman Eastman made the statement that Mr. Smith's property value may increase due to the construction of the condominium complex. Commissioner ~lores agreed with the statement made by Chairman Eastman that Mr. Smith's property could increase in value due to the adjacent revised land use. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Romero wanted to know from staff what the definition of the live-work permits are for the project and what types of business would be approved. Ms. Dadant responded that the current Code specifies that live-work units are permitted such as business and financial services, dance and fitness studios, medical offices, general offices, personal service offices, restaurants and retail sales to name a few. The parking requirements have been "over parked significantly" over Code to accommodate any future needs. 7he businesses would also have to comply with all the building safety codes relating to the separation between the living unit and the commercial •: component of the unit as well as any health department requirements for the proposed land use. Ms. 10-02-06 ' Page 9 OCTOBER 2, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • Dadant went on to,say that when there is a list of conditionally permitted uses for the overlay zone and this would not need to appear befoce the Planning Commission. ' There was a general discussion between the Commission, applicant and staff regarding the commercial and resident parking requirements; the parking structure and if a business would be.allowed to bring in staff to work on site. Mr. Barlow and his architect, Jay Wu, 17992 Mitchell Southern,lrvine, CA described the uses and functionality of the live-work units in addition to how the parking arrangements between the residents andguests would be achieved. Ms. Dadant specified to the Commission that when the plans come in for plan check, staff will look at the final square footage of each of the'units and will ensure that the parking required for the commercial component is provided in an open and accessible parking area. This same procedure would be - completed for the residential portion of the complex. Chairman Eastman wanted to know if there could be taller palm trees added to the complex to the west - side to help take away#rom the stark archeturiaV design. Mark Schattinger, principal designer, 511 30`" Street, Newport Beach, CA responded by pointing out the large number of various kinds of trees that would be planted around the complex. : Commissioner Flores said that she had a difficult time approving the design for the complex and asked for , clarification of the plans. . , Mr. Wu described the exterior and interior elevation differences, the reasoning behind the designs and other unit options available to the owner. Commissioner Romero said that he agreed with the design and that it would compliment the general area ~ and whaf is being proposed for future uses. Commissioner Velasquez agreed with the comments made by Commissioner Romero. Ms. DadanE read into the record modifications pertaining to the resolution for the conditional use permit. OPPOSITION: A person spoke in opposition to the subject request. Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 10-day appeal rights for the Tentative Tract Map ending at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, October 12, 2006; and presented the 22-day appeal rights for the Reclassification and Conditional Use Permit ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 2~, 2006. DISCUSSION TIME: 1 hour and 3 minutes (2:40-3:03) trailed (3:35-4:15) Item No. 8 was heard following this item. ~ OCTOBER 2, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATNE DECLARATION Flores/Faessel Approved • AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN N0..139 (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED) ' 7b. ' CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2006-05121 Flores Granted, with stipulation made by the' aPPlicant Owner: Living Stream Ministry, 2431 West La Palma Avenue, ' pertaining to providing Anaheim, CA 92801 additional landscaping onthe north elevation. ' Living Stream Ministry, 1212 Hubbell Way, Anaheim, CA 92801 MMP Agent: John Pester, Living Stream Ministry, 2431 West La Palma Deleted Mitigation Measure Avenue, CA 92801 No. 'r-3 Location: 2411-2461 West La.Palma Avenue and 1212 North CUP - 'Modified Condition Nos. 4 Hubbell Wav: Property is approximately 40.4 acres and is a„d 20 locafed at the northwest corner of La Palma Avenue and _ Gilbert Street and at the northern termini of Hubbell Way and Electric Way, having frontages of800 feet on the north vOTEc 5-0 side of La Palma Avenue; 815 feet on the west side of Commissioners Buffa and Gilbert Street, 68 feet at the northern terminus of Hubbell : Karaki absent Way, and 59 feet at the northern terminus of Electric Way. Request to permit and retain a teleconferencing center and private conference/training center. *Advertised as CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration Project Planner. ~ Conditional'Use Permit Resolution No. PC2006-84 O,oramirez@ananeim.ner) Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. John Ramirez, Associate Pfanner, introduced this item by describing in detail the design, traffic requirements and suggested purposes for the proposed teleconferencing center. He noted that staff recommends approval for the project. Mr. Ramirez read changes into the record pertaining to the Draft Resolution of Approval and the Draft Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 139. ApplicanYs Statement: John Pester, applicant, spoke in favor of the item and accepts all conditions of approval as set forth by the City. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. There was a general discussion between the Commission, applicant and staff regarding topics of concern such as traffic, parking issues, which included the possible need for over flow parking, landscaping, fencing, etc. Judy Dadant, Senior Planner, clari~ed the times during the year thatthe center would have peak use in response to Commissioner Faessel's inquiry. The center is anticipated to have special events on 21 days out of the year which would typically include 12 days that would occur during two, six day conferences held during major winter and summer holidays. There would also be smaller conferences that would be held on various weekends, usually holiday weekends such as Labor Day, Memorial Day, 4'h of July and ~ Thanksgiving. 10-02-06 Page 11 OCTOBER 2, 2006 ' PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Commissioner Velasquez suggested increased landscaping along the north elevation facing the I-5 ~ Freeway. _ Mr. Pester'acknowledged thaf there will be additional landscaping than what was shown to the Commission in today's project renderings. Final landscaping plans will be submitted for approval to staff as requested. Ms. Dadanf clarified and read into the record that final iandscape plans must be submitted to staff for approval. Staff will ensure adherence to the Commissions' requests to add increased landscaping along the north elevation. Commissioner Faessel stated that he agrees with the adaptive reuse of land bythe proposed center. , Chairman Eastman approved of the statements made by Commissioner Faessel regarding the land use and noted that a quality American flag erected at the site would be a welcome addition. Commissioner Flores'also concurred with the comments made by Chairman Eastman and Commissioner FaesseL , OPPOSITION: None _ Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on ~ Tuesday, October 24, 2006. DISCUSSION TIME: 30 minutes (3:04-3:34) Item No. 6 was reheard following this item. 10-02-06 Page 12 ' OCTOBER 2, 2006 PLANN{NG COMMISSION MINUTES ~ 8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION FaesseWelasquez Approved 8b. WANER OF CODE REQUIREMENT FaesseWelasquez Approved 8c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2006-05128 Faessel Granted Owner: C Invest LLC, 4999 East La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807 VOTE: 5-0 Commissioners Buffa and Agent: Robert Dtis, Breath of the Spirit Ministries lnternationaf, Karaki absent P.O. Box 2676, Orange, CA 92857 ' Location: 4999 East La Palma Avenue: Property is approximately ' 3.13 acres, having frontages of 319 feet on the north side ' of La Palma Avenue and is loca#ed 610,feet east of the centerline of Manassero Street. Request to permit a church within an existing industrial building with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Conditional Use Permit Resolution Na PC2006-87 Project P~anner.~ _ (dherrick@anaheim.net) Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Della Herrick, Associate Planner, introduced this item and stated that the property is located in an area which allows for a variety of industriaF and non-industrial related uses. The potential for operational conflict with the surrounding commercial buildings is minimal due to the types of uses and because the church services occur on Saturday's and on week nights after'6:00 p.m. Because the adjacent industrial ~ uses do not have outdoor uses associated with their business operations, and do not operate in the evenings or on weekends, the subject use would not adversely affect the surrounding businesses, therefore staff recommends approval of the item. Applicant's Statement: Robert Otis, applicant, agrees with all the findings, conditions and recommendations by staff. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 24, 2006. DISCUSS{ON TIME: 4 minutes (4:16-4:20) OCTOBER 2, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ 9a. CEQA EXEMPTION 15061(b)(3) , Romero/Faesset Concurred with staff 9b. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2006-00051 Romero/Faessel Recommended City Council adoption of the - draft ordinance Agent: City )nitiated, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 VOTE: 5-0 LoCetion: CitVwide: Commissioners Buffa and _ Karaki absent Request to amend Chapter 4.04 and 18.44 of the Anaheim Municipal < Code to prohibit billboards in the City. * Advertised as `Request to amend proyisions of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to signs and billboards including prohibiting billboards." Project Planner.• (skim@anaheim.net) Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Susan Kim, Associate Planner, stated this request is to amend Chapters 4.04 and 18.44 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to prohibit billboards in the City. At the September 12, 2006, meeting the City Council conducted a public workshop relative to billboards. At the workshop, Council directed staff to seek input from outdoor advertisers about a potential exchange program which would provide for the removal of street-oriented biilboards in exchange for the instaflation of freeway-oriented billboards. In order to ` ensure that the new billboards cannot be installed in locations where they have previously been removed, Council also directed staff to prepare an ordinance to prohibit newbillboards. Ms. Kim stated according to a field survey conducted earlier this year, there are eighty-three (83) billboards in Anaheim as depicted on the map. The six (6) depicted in red are freeway oriented, five (5) of ~ the billboards were approved by the County of Orange prior to annexation of the underlining property to Anaheim, and the sixth sign is on the Anaheim Stadium property. New freeway-oriented billboards are prohibited in the City of Anaheim. The remaining seventy-seven (77) signs depicted in green are street oriented; new street-oriented billboards currently require a conditional use permit and are only allowed in certain commercial and industrial zones. The subject request would prohibit any new billboards regardless of whether they are street oriented or freeway oriented. Ms. Kim stated at a September 24, 2006, meeting the City Council approved the first reading of the subject ordinance to prohibit billboards. The second reading of the ordinance is scheduled for tomorrow nighYs City Council meeting. Since the Planning Commission is required to provide a recommendation to City Council for approval or denial of any amendments to Title 18, staff recommends that the Commission recommend that the City Council approve the subject ordinance. Also, on tomorrow's Council agenda there will be the distribution of the request for information to seek input from outdoor advertisers regarding the types of billboard exchange program they would be interested in participating in. This request is for information onty and does not necessarily mean that the City will enter into a billboard exchange program with any of the advertisers that respond to the request for information. Letters have been sent to all the outdoor advertisers that operate billboards within the City of Anaheim, notifying them of today's Planning Commission public hearing and the associated City Council meeting. Commissioner Romero asked for clarification if the signs are subject for exchange. Ms. Kim stated the terms of a billboard exchange program have not been determined yet, at this time the City is just considering any information that the outdoor advertisers might provide to them, and it has not been determined if there will be an exchange program. Commissioner Faessel referred to the staff report and asked staff for clarification that no permit has been ~ issued for a new billboard since 1989. Ms. Kim responded that is accurate. 10-02-06 Page 14 OCTOBER 2, 2006 DI eutil~l: rtAMMICSIAN MINIITFS Commissioner Faessel asked if there is any pending to staffs knowledge. • Ms. Kim responded there are none pending. Commissioner flores asked if the program is passed by Council if current billboards are allowed to be renovated. Ms. Kim stated under ce~tain requirements there could be some renovations to the billboards, they wouldn't be able to expand or change it, but if they needed to provide general maintenance they would be permitted to do tfiat. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ' , OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, stated this item would be set for consideration by the City Council ' as a non-public hearing item in accordance with Chapter 18.72 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and the hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, October 3, 2006. DISCUSS.ION TIME: 5 minutes (4:21-4:26) ~ /tem No. 5 was heard fo/lowing this item.