Loading...
Minutes-PC 2007/06/11~~P`~EIM ~~~ City of Anaheim • '~ 04 ~ Planning Commission ~ Minutes U ~' ~~a~ Monday. June 11, 2007 e, ~~~ l$~~ Council Chamber, City Hall N D E D 200 South Anaheim .Boulevard, Anaheim, California .CHAIRMAN: GAIL EASTMAN Commissioners Present: KELLY BUFFA, STEPHEN FAESSEL, CECILIA FLORES, JOSEPH KARAKI, PANKY ROMERO, PAT VELASQUEZ Commissioners Absent:.. NONE Staff Present: Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney Bruce Freeman, Public Works Operations Superintendent Judy Dadant, Acting. Principal Planner Scott Koehm, Associate Planner Kimberly Wong, Assistant Planner Jamie Lai, Principal Civil Engineer Dave See, Senior Planner EIIy Morris, Senior Secretary Agenda .Posting:.. A complete copy of the Planning Commission Agenda was posted at 11:Op a.m. on Thursday, June 7, 2007, 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, May 17, 2007 • Call To Order • Preliminary Plan Review 1:00 P.M. • STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSION ON VARIOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES (AS REQUESTED BY PLANNING COMMISSION) • PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW FOR ITEMS ON THE JUNE 11, 2007 AGENDA • Workshop on Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) • Recess To Public Hearing • Reconvene To Public Hearing 2:30 P.M. Attendance: 10 • Pledge Of Allegiance: Commissioner Buffa • Public Comments • Consent Calendar • Public Hearing Items • Adjournment. H:\TOOLS\PCARMIN\PCACTI ONAGENDA\2007MI NUTESWC061107.DOC JUNE 11, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • Anaheim Planning Commission Meeting - 2;34 P.M. Workshop: • Danny Wu, Senior TransportationAnalyst with the Public Works Department, offered a presentation on the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC). Public Comments: • None Consent Calendar: Commissioner Faessel offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Flores and MOTION CARRIED, for approval of Consent Calendar Item 1-A as recommended by staff. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED Minutes 1A. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Approved, with Meeting Of May 30, 2007. (Motion) modificationsto pages 18 and 2Q . Consent Calendar Approval VOTE: 7-0 • 06-11-07 Page 2 JUNE 11, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • Public Hearing Items: 2a. CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 313. Velasquez/Faessel Approved - (PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED) 2b:' WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Velasquez/Faessel Approved 2c.'' CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.2007-05198 Velasquez - Granted Owner: Steiner Corporation Added a condition of b05 East South Temple ' approval - Salt Lake City; UT 84102-1004 VOTE: 7-0 Agent: Geoff Bonney; Bonney Architects 300 East State Street, Suite #620 Redlands, CA 92373 .Location: 1740 South Zevn Street 1755 and 1763 South Anaheim Boulevard: Property is approximately 2.1 acres; having a ' frontage of 326 feet on the east side of Zeyn Street and is located 250 feet north of the centerline of Katella Avenue. Request to expand a legal non-conforming commercial laundry facility with waivers of (a) minimum landscape and structural setback adjacent to Zeyn Street and Anaheim Boulevard, (b) maximum permitted fence.. height, (c) minimum distance between driveways serving adjacent parcels, and (d) minimum number of required parking spaces. Continued from the April 30, May 14, and May 30, 2007, Planning Commission meetings. Project Planner: (kwong2@anaheim. net) Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2007-58 Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Kimberly Wong, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Geoff Bonney, Bonney Architects, representing Alsco, Inc., 300 East State Street, Suite 620, Redlands, CA, presented history on the project, stating that the site has acted as a laundry facility going back to the 1950's: Alsco purchased the property in the 1960's and has been operating there since. They service 179 customers in the AnaheimlOrange/Garden Grove area; ninety-five (95) in the resort district of which sixty-two (62) are hotels and restaurants. They have fifty-one (51) employees in Anaheim and feel they have a useful purpose in the resort district. He stated although they have talked about an expansion, for the most part it is to enclose and rearrange what is already there. Phase 1 would enclose an existing open air sorting facility and would help with the aesthetics of the surrounding area by screening bags of laundry sitting on the ground. Phase 2 would consolidate two existing out buildings into anew structure that is attached to the main building so that employees would not have to travel across the parking and truck traffic areas to organize the outgoing laundry. Also, they are replacing the lunch room located on Anaheim Boulevard, at the east end of the existing building, with a two-story structure that would include an updated lunch room, restrooms, and a few offices on the second floor. 06-11-07 :Page 3 - JUNE 11, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • In response to a question posed by Chairman Eastman, Mr Bonney indicated he had reviewed all of the conditions-and agreed with staff's recommendations. Chairman Eastman closed the public hearing. Commissioner Buffa stated the traffic report for the project indicated that in the future the number of trucks could possibly decrease and that they might need less truck parking in the future than currently needed.. She asked what would cause the number of truck deliveries to be reduced.: Mr. Bonney responded that Alsco, inc, is constantly expanding in southern California and some of the new centers might pull the truck traffic from the subject facility and shift it to other locations. Chairman Eastman asked the City Resort Manager if he would like to give testimony. Bruce Freeman, Superintendent of the Resort Services Division of PublicWorks, stated over the last year and a half they have noticed an overuse of the parking facilities on the west side of the property (facing Zeyn Street). The general manager indicated approximately 47 parking stalls are identified on the property and the staff report indicates they will have 77 parking stalls once the. remodeling is completed. His concern is that there are more vehicles than parking stalls on the property not only for employee parking but for sales, and delivery, etc. From a safety standpoint the driveway aisles are being blocked. Therefore, Resort Services is concerned that they have.the required parking and that they park where. they are supposed to. Commissioner Faessel stated that his inspection of the property showed that regardless of the time of day or the day of the week, there is still a parking issue. Mr. Freeman responded that is correct, and that they actually started taking photographs on May 3, 2007, and have continued taking them up to today. He stated that he was there last Friday and the same problem that they have seen for the last month and a half is still ongoing. Commissioner Faessel asked if the parking spaces provided for automobiles were actually being taken up by the trucks are vice versa. Mr. Freeman responded that the trucks are utilizing some of the parking stalls but the drive aisles to access the parking stalls are being utilized for parking also. He also indicated that vehicles block the drive access into the parking lot on all three entrances into the property. In response to a question posed by Chairman Eastman, he said he believed emergency vehicles would have a difficult time accessing the property. Commissioner Buffa asked if there were currently 77 striped spaces on the property. Mr. Freeman responded that the proposed plans include 77 but there are currently 47 marked stalls on the property. In resonse to a question posed by Commissioner Buffa, Mr. Freeman agreed that increased the existing- poo(of parking by 30 spaces would really help address the problem. Commissioner Flores stated what would also help address the problem is a stricter regulation so there is an area for commercial trucks and another area for the employees so that a truck could pull in and park and then pull out.. She asked if the employees were being ticketed for parking in the stalls intended for trucks. Mr. Freeman responded that on private property they could not issue citations and on the public streets • there is no parking or stopping at any time. He stated that if the owner of the property wanted to make private. property impounds they could; however, he is not sure if all of the cars were from the employees or adjacent businesses. 06-11-07 Page 4 :JUNE 11, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Commissioner Flores stated maybe they needed to have stricter regulations regarding parking tomake - sure the employees and trucks park in designated areas. Commissioner Romero stated that the applicant's parking report indicated they needed 75 spaces but were actually proposing 77 spaces and.the Citytraffic consultant has reviewed the analysis and , determined that it is okay. In addition, the applicant has indicated they would eventually move to another location; therefore, if the 77 spaces being proposed meets the Code, the City has to determine whether to allow the waiver. Commissioner Flores clarified that staff is also concerned that commercial trucks are coming in and the employees are taking up the parking intended for the trucks. Commissioner .Romero stated to his understanding they are restriping the area to have a better organized parking structure in order to have their trucks parked in a way that would better utilize the existing space. Judy Dadant, Acting Principal Planner, stated there are a couple. of issues: 1) The existing operation, even in its current condition, not even looking at the expansion that is before the Commission, may not be completely in compliance with the original exhibit; and that it sounded as though there maybe some issues of things being stored and cars being parked where they are not supposed to be. ,She stated staff could work with the applicant ahd .Community Preservation to try and get the existing condition cleaned ,up as much as possible and also see if the manager on the site could find ways to solve the issue of people parking in the streets or the overflow situation. '2) Relative to the requested waiver, the parking , demand study indicates what will be provided is sufficient and is actually in excess of the demand by two ,spaces. The City's traffic and transportation consultant has reviewed and approved the study and found it to be'complete. So, if there are concerns that perhaps staff needs to watch.a little closer or they need to develop a parking plan, there are a couple of things that could be done. First, a condition could require that they implement, in addition to providing the stalls in accordance with the approved exhibits, a parking plan to indicate how they are going to specifically make sure their employees park on site in designated stalls so that there would not be a conflict with the trucks and the pedestrian'vehicles being intermixed and causing a problem with circulation. In addition, staff could go out for an inspection during the course of construction to ensure that in the interim condition, while they are under construction, that they. provide adequate parking on their site so that they are not spilling over into the street.. She stated that those are certainly two conditions that staff could add to the draft resolution today to help ensure that there is nova spill over parking problem beyond the immediate situation. Commissioner Velasquez stated staffs testimony indicated there is a parking issue; however, she feels what is being proposed would alleviate the parking issue. Also, she concurred with Commissioner Romero that if two parking studies deemed the parking sufficient she would not argue that it is not sufficient. She stated, however, that she would like to add a parking plan to the conditions of approval Commissioner Buffa asked if there were currently 47 spaces striped on the property. Mr. Bonney responded he counted 46. Commissioner Buffa stated that currently there are more employees than parking spaces and if at the end of phase 1 he would have implemented all proposed parking. Mr. Bonney responded at the end of phase 1 they will have implemented all of the car parking. Commissioner Karaki stated he believes the issue is not the parking for cars but the trucks. He stated that he is curious to be informed how many employees they have and believes the truck parking is taking more space than the cars and more than what was being demonstrated on the site plan. Mr. Bonney responded that the total number of spaces is split between the cars and trucks and that the City traffic report also split the total between the cars and trucks, indicating thaf at the peak time there • was a certain number of cars on the property and at the peak time there was a certain number of trucks 06-11-07 Page 5 JUNE 11,2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • on the property; therefore, they also measured the number of spaces by peak times. However; he stated that he is not sure they happened at the same time but theytook the peak number of cars and. provided that number of car spaces and took the peak number of trucks and provided that many truck spaces. He referred to the submitted photographs which showed theplant being closed and not a lot of cars parked in the front but depicted a large quantity of sorting being done in the back. He explained that Phase 1 would bring all of the sorting activity inside the building: He stated that a traffic consultant did the traffic study and counted the numberof cars coming onto the site but it appeared that most of them were going to the front leaving the back under utilized. Therefore, he referred to the proposition ofmanaging the parking better so that the stalls striped in the back wouldbe utilized properly even if it meant the employees had to walk an extra 200 feet to get from where they parked their cars to where they would report to work. Mr. Karaki statedthat Mr. Bonney indicated his client is building other facilities and the reason for expanding in the subject facility is to accommodate the new growth in the City of Anaheim and he asked if they would to be able to service the future hotels. Mr. Bonney responded that a lot of the truck traffic is due to outer areas bringing their laundry into the. - subject facility; however, as the Ontario plant opens some of the traffic would get directed there, -especially the larger trucks. He stated the expansion of the sorting facility would increase the efficiency of the laundry operation, allowing more laundry to be processed with the same or less employees. Commissioner Karaki stated the City has no jurisdiction for what happens onsite, but the issue is the ingress/egress of the trucks on site and it needs tote addressed regardless of the number of parking .spaces. He stated that he did not have a problem with the 77 parking on site but the traffic that is going to be generated in the future. In addition, he stated that the Resort superintendent might have a problem with the trucks traffic; therefore, he would like to have the superintendent's concern addressed. Chairman Eastman concurred that the Commission's concern is public safety and how they could not get.. an emergency vehicle in and out of their parking lot at times. She asked if he had a plan to deal with the emergency issue. Shawn Swingholm, General Manager, 1750 S. Zeyn, Anaheim, CA, clarified Mr. Bonney's statement that they may have opportunities to move or shift some trucks to Ontario and stated that it is a depot or substation and they do not do any laundry there. They do transport clean linens there to be served to their customers and retrieve the soiled ones and bring them back, essentially using one transport truck to take the place of several smaller trucks that deliver, which would eliminate four or five vehicles. He stated that the other opportunity is in the back area they are not really utilizing for parking and they could probably put trucks in that area. In addition, he stated that they could possibly assign spaces. In response to a question posed by Chairman Eastman, he stated he was ready to make'that happen immediately. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Karaki, Mr. Freeman indicated that he is willing to work with the applicant in anyway possible to accommodate the Commission and planning staff. Commission Velasquez asked if staff believed it was necessary to have someone go out and check the parking. Ms. Dadant responded that staff would look at each phase to see where their parking would be and add a condition stating a Community Preservation Officer would go out and inspect the site during the course of construction to make sure everyone parks on site. In addition, she stated that the applicant indicated all of the parking spaces would be provided with phase 1. Commissioner Velasquez asked if it is a part of the conditions of approval that all of the parking spaces be provided with the completion of phase 1. Ms. Dadant res onded staff could add it as a condition to make sure it is clear. p 06-11-07 Page 6 JUNE 11, 2007. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Commissioner Velasquez'stated that would please her and should that happen the Commission would not have to have someone go out during the construction. phase: Chairman Eastman stated that it might not be physically possible based on the needs of construction. staging and that when the applicants were asked what parking they would have of the end of phase 1 the response was that they would have all of their car parking; therefore, she. feels they should be allowed some flexibility during construction. Commissioner Buffa stated that she would be happy if the applicant provided a parking plan for the construction phase. and then also demonstrated how it would work. She does not feel the need to duplicate the effort in having the presence of an additional Community Preservation officer there because Mr. Freeman would already be in the Resort District. Commissioner Karaki stated that it is a well designed building in terms of integrating into the existing facilities and giving it a lot of meaning. Commissioner Velasquez offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Faessel, to determine the` Previously Certified Environmental Impact Report is adequate. Commissioner Velasquez offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Faessel, to approve waivers (a), (b), (c) and (d). Commissioner Velasquez offered a resolution to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05198 and add a condition of approval stating the applicant is to provide a parking plan that will be acceptable to staff.. Elly Morris, Senior Secretary, stated that the resolution passed with? aye votes. OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 3, 2007. DISCUSSION TIME: 37 minutes (2:43-3:20) 06-11-07 Page 7 ..JUNE 11, 2007. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES • 3a. CEQA CATEGORICAL. EXEMPTION- CLASS 3 Romero/Karaki Concurred with staff 3b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Romero/Karahi Approved 3c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05210 Romero Granted Owner: 1700 EI borado, LP Added a condition of 151 Kalmus Drive, K-1 approval Costa Mesa, CA 92626 VOTE: 7-0 Agent:. Paul Chiavatti Impresa Development Corp., 1340 W. Pearl Street #A Anaheim, CA 92801 Location: 1320 Wesf Pearl Street: Property is approximately 0.2- acre, having a frontage of 65 feet oh the south side of Pearl Street and is located at the terminus. of Dwyer Place. Request to establish a drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility for up to 24 residents with waivers of minimum number of parking spaces. Project Planner. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2007-59 (dsee@anaheim.ner) Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Dave See, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Tim Salyer, President of Healthcare Services, Inc., 151 Kalmus Drive, K-1, Costa Mesa, CA, stated they have read the staff recommendations and agree with the findings and were present to answer any questions regarding the quality of their program, etc. Tim Holcomb, Deputy Superintendent, Anaheim-Union High School District, 501 Crescent Way, Anaheim, CA, stated their concern is that the facility is quite close to Anaheim High School. By his count, it is approximately 16 properties away from the western property line of the high school. He clarified that he has not been at the high school district for the past two years and therefore was unaware of the two previous conditional use permits for the two adjacent properties. However, he stated that their concern as a district is the concern for the students; that they remain drug free and are not exposed to drugs and chemical usage. Therefore, they wanted to express their concern with the business being placed so close to a school Commissioner Karaki asked how the project would affect the students of the high school. Mr. Holcomb responded their concern is that students walk and ride their bicycles to and from school and.. would come very close to the facility and they are concerned that they are in their neighborhood next to their schools and that their known associates may also be in the neighborhood. Commissioner Faessel stated that there were already two properties to the east of this proposed property that engage in similar types of counseling so he asked if any of the current facilities have caused any issues to the high school • Mr. Holcomb responded-they had not. 06-11-07 Page 8 JUNE 11, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Chairman Eastman asked Mr. Salyer to return to the podium to give more insight into what he would actually be-doing there, what the restrictions are for his residents, and how he manages the facility to possibly address the superintendent's concerns. Mr. Salyer responded that they have other facilities throughout California and a larger facility in Stockton that is no more than 300 feet from the local high school and they have been there six (6) years. Before whey took over; it was supposed to be run as a low income housing seniors apartment project that turned into more like an older addict hangout with prostitutes. They had approximately four (4) police calls a week but since-they have taken it over they have had zero (0) police calls. They actually partner with the high schools to bring their people in to give talks to the high school students regarding why they should not get involved with alcohol and drugs, etc. Currently this facility is an all women's facility and it is very structured. All of the residents are nonviolent, non-sex offenders. They are not allowed off the premises fora certain period of time at all. They are undergoing treatment all of the time in one form or another. They have free time and time for themselves: Only after they have been there for a certain. period of time are they allowed off the property, then they are not allowed off the property unaccompanied.: They have to be scheduled and signed out with somebody who would then transport them wherever they are ..going . to go. They organize field trips to parks and to different shopping centers to help the residents with their socializing skills.. They have an onsite parole agent everyday who works very closely with the Anaheim Police Department. People are not allowed to walk onto the property, it is gated. Before people can come onto the property they have to be screened. The. residents are not allowed to wander off on their own.' It is a good size facility for the small number of people living there. They completely remodeled all of these units and spent several hundred thousand dollars upgrading them and painting them. They did not make any physical additions. They have a lot of open space for residents and they don't require any parking except for staff. They have a minimum staff of two people 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Commissioner Romero asked how they actually select the residents. He asked if the residents had any kind of criminal record: Mr. Salyer responded that it depends on what contract that they receive the applicants under. One of the contracts with the State of California requires pre-screening by the state. Residents have to be nonviolent, non-sex offenders and the primary reason for their incarceration has to be a substance problem. They get notification of who is coming and have discretion to not take residents. He indicated that in six years, with over 600 beds throughout the state in different facilities, they have never had an issue: They residents are well behaved and are people who want recovery. They are not forced to do this and it is not a conditional probation to stay out of jail. They want to stay clean and sober so they are very willing participants. Chairman Eastman asked how long the average stay is at the facility. Mr. Salyer indicated it was approximately 120 days average but it depends on how well the clients progress. They offer a whole curriculum of about 11 courses including literacy, computer skills, and job interview skills. They help place the residents in the community in appropriate job opportunities. They help-the residents reunite with their children and give them parenting skills, anger management, relapse prevention, and social skills. Some do it faster than others and some need more time. Mr. Romero asked about the occupancy and how they provide 24 beds in a four-plex. He indicated that it seems like it is overcrowded. He asked if they also have a resident staff person. Mr. Salyer responded that the staff does not live there but there are always two people working 2417. He said that is a low density for this type of facility. They have six (6) bedrooms that have, bunk beds and a single bed and then they will. have three (3) rooms that have two beds for a total of 24 beds. The rooms are larger and they encourage the residents to be in a common area and participate with other people, much like a senior retirement facility. They create the floor plan to encourage the residents into the common area so that they will mingle with other people. The facility provides a far greater square footage than is required by thestate code. - 06-11-07 Page 9 .TUNE 11, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Commissioner Faessel asked if Mr. Salyer could describe his relationship with 17 Eldorado LP and also if they were the actual property owners. Mr. Salyer responded 17 Eldorado is a limitedpartnership, consisting of approximately 6 individuals and the general partner is Healthcare Services, of which he is president. Healthcare Services provides the treatment and has the contracts to provide all the services. He formed Healthcare Services in 1998 and has been providing services since then. Commissioner Faessel asked if the 24/7 management is .provided at each of their three facilities. Mr. Salyer responded that each of the 3 facilities would have management 24/7 in some form or another. It might go from two people to three or four people in handling the three units. There would be at least one in each unit and then they would have one or two managers float between the three: In response to a question posed by Chairman Eastman, Mr. Salyer responded their contract with the State of California requires supervision at all times: He also indicated they are licensed by the alcohol and drug programs of the State of California. Commissioner Faessel asked that since they have had these other two units. for quite some time; if they have formed any type of cooperative partnership with Anaheim High School: Mr. Salyer stated Healthcare Services has had those other two units for a little overa year and it usually:., takes some time to create a good culture in the unit. Commissioner Faessel encouraged the applicant to work with the school district given their concerns stated here today. Mr. Salyer responded that they would be happy to do that. Commissioner Flores asked how the residents get to the facility. Mr. Salyer responded if it is a private pay person, the family would bring them and if it is a contract with the state, then state officials deliver them to the property. Commissioner Flores noted there will probably be three (3) in residents in each unit and asked Mr. Salyer to confirm that each bedroom is over 120 square feet. Mr. Salyer responded six (6) of the bedrooms have a bunk bed and a regular bed and appropriate dressers and a closet. The state requires at least 50 square feet per person. Commissioner Flores stated that the Building Code requires 70 square feet for the first two individuals and then 50 square feet for another person. She asked if each bedroom was at least 120 square feet.- Mr. Salyer stated that he had to look for this information. They don't put more than six per unit which is the normal number of residents per living unit. Commissioner Flores asked staff for the size of the bedrooms. Mr. Salyer stated it is the same as what they have at the other two units next door that we are approved. It is the same as what they have throughout the state. Commissioner Buffa asked Commissioner Flores if it is possible that the UBC, which regulates standard residential uses, is not the same rule that governs this type of situation. Commissioner Flores asked if they would be using the living room for sleeping and using the kitchen in .common. -06-11-07 _ Page.10 JUNE 11, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Mr. Salyer responded that the residents sleep in the bedroom but then congregate. in the living room areas and have meetings. They spend most of their time in the living room, kitchen, or outside; very little 'time is spent inthe bedrooms. _ Mr. See stated the smallest bedroom is 120. square feet and the master bedroom, which is slightly larger, is approximately 150 square feet. Commissioner Flores asked what the residents do after counseling sessions, if they are allowed outside. Mr. Salyer responded #hat they are not allowed to leave the premises unless they are accompanied individually or as a group with supervisors. They have free time and he offered to have the coordinator explain their daily schedule. Commissioner Flores responded that information would help the school district also. Commissioner Buffa stated the Commission is making a land use decision on whether it was appropriate to have a group home in this place. It is not about the operational characteristics of the facility. The ,applicant has testified that they are not allowed to leave the premises uriaccompanied; he has testified that there have not been any historic problems outside the facilities. She did not feel that what people do all day is relevant. Commissioner. Flores stated she is asking for the benefit of the school district because they have a concern. Commissioner Buffa restated her concern over the relevancy of what they are doing. inside the facility all, day.. Chairman Eastman stated she would like to know and asked for a brief summary. - Shahida Syed, Anaheim Facility. Director of Healthcare Services, Inc., 1320 Pearl Street, Anaheim, CA, stated she is the program director of the two facilities that are already in existence. It is a 24 hour .monitored program and they have a morning meeting with the residents after breakfast, and then they are separated into respective groups. They have sessions in anger management, substance abuse, family dynamics, grief and loss. The counselors are all certified drug and alcohol counselors. The groups run until noon or 11:30 and then they break for lunch. After lunch the residents are assigned to other groups according to the treatment plan. After that they break for dinner between 4:30-5:00 and then they have an evening meeting. On Fridays they have groups for entertainment on the, premises and they have arts and crafts and different kinds of games. If they need to take the residents out, they take them in a group with the parole agent that is on the premises and maybe his supervisor would also come along. They would have more staff to take the residents out to the park or beach. The residents are never without supervision. She indicated that she has been involved in the school district in Upland where she lives and spoke to the parents to look for signs that kids were involved in drugs. She shared how to approach the issue if there was a drug and alcohol problem in the family, and families in this day and age have not confronted this problem. She is more than happy to be involved in this school district. She offered to take the school district representative's card and get involved by giving lectures or address his concerns. Commissioner Flores indicated there is a need for facilities like these and if it is well run then it gives a better chance of this program succeeding and hopefully they can open up in other areas. Ms. Syed stated all of their residents are randomly checked by their staff and by the parole agent so there are no drugs oh the premises. She thinks the community is better off with this facility to provide treatment to the people who need it. The neighbors are very happy with them. They have not had any complaints, no police visits, and nothing has ever happened. She said they have a very tight and good program. i Commissioner Faessel asked if the City has had any record of any community concerns, or Police or Community Preservation issues for the two existing facilities. 06-11-07 Page 11 -JUNE 11, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Mr. See responded that he received several calls from concerned neighbors but they did not oppose it formally. In the past there was one violation for each property and they were related to trash storage outside.. The violations were remedied the cases were closed. Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, stated staff has notbeen able to receive information from the Police Departmehf regarding the call history at this particular location and that he has some general information that at .1310 West Pearl Street in about a 17 month period there fiave been approximately 10 . calls for service to that location.. He does not know the nature of those calls -whether they were just police department assisting other agencies with inspection or whether they were in response to a call from the location or a surrounding residence. Mr. Salyer stated that those calls came before they took over the property because the prior operator had a home for people that were on SSL When they got the property it was not in the condition that it is today. It was much less attractive. He said that those were not calls for this facility. Chairman Eastman stated they may have been for disabled seniors needing police assistance, but there is no evidence to indicate at this point. Commissioner Romero offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Karaki, to approve the environmental`determination. The motion passed with seven affirmative votes. Commissioner Romero offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Karaki, to waiver the minimum number of parking spaces. The motion passed with seven affirmative votes.. Commissioner Romero offered a resolution to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05198. Elly Morris, Senior Secretary, statedthe resolution passed with 7 aye votes. OPPOSITION: Tim Holcomb, Deputy Superintendent, Anaheim Union High School District, spoke with concerns regarding the subject request. Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 3, 2007. DISCUSSION TIME: 42 minutes (3:21-4:03) • 06-11-07 Page 12 JUNE 11,2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 4a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 4b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0.2007-00460 June 25,2007. 4c. RECLASSIFICATION N0.2006-00190 4d. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Motion: Buffa/Velasquez 4e. CONDITIONAL'USE PERMIT N0.2006-05175 4f. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17139 VOTE: 7-0 'Owner: Natalie Tran 3100 Lindacita .Anaheim, CA 92804-1715 Quyen Tran 237 South Beach _ . .Anaheim, CA 92804-1815 Agent: Mertco Attn: Ray Ward 2614.Ocean Blvd.. Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 Location: 237 South Beach Boulevard and 3100 West Lindacita Lane: Portion A: Property is approximately 0.27-acres, having a frontage of 47 feet on the southeast side of Lindacita Lane ~, and a maximum depth of 142 feet (3100 W. Lindacita Lane). is a land- 68 acres 1 roximatel i a t P i B , . y pp roper y s on : Port locked parcel and is located north across a flood control channel from 3067 and 3079 West Orange Avenue and is located 175 feet south of the centerline of Grand Avenue (237 S. Beach Blvd). General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00460 -Request to redesignate Portion A from the Low Density Residential designation to the Low-Medium Density designation. Reclassification No. 2006-00190 -Request reclassification of Portion A from the RS-2 (Residential, Single-Family) zone to the RS-4 (Residential, Single-Family) zone, or a less intense zone, and Portion B from the T (Transition) zone to the RS-4 (Residential, Single-Family) zone, or a less intense zone and to remove the Mobile Home Park Overlay zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05175 -Request to construct an 11- unit detached single-family residential subdivision with waiver of improvement of private street for Portions A and B.' Tentative Tract Map No. 17139 - To establish a 12 numbered and 1 lettered lot, 12-unit detached single-family residential subdivision for Portions A and B. General Plan Amendment Resolution No, Reclassification Resolution No. Project Planner Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. (kwong2@anaheim.net) 06-11-07 Page 13 JUNE 11, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Commissioner Buffa offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Velasquez,to continue this item to the June 25, 2007 Planning Commission meeting as requested by the applicant. Motion passed with seven affirmative votes. .OPPOSITION: None DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. t 06-11-07 Page 14 • 5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION FaesseUBuffa 5b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT FaessellBuffa 5c. , CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.2007-05211 Faessel. 5d. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP N0.2007-137 Faessel/Buffa ', Owner: 5410 East La Palma, LLC 2441 South Pullman Santa Ana, CA 92705 .Agent: Ware Malcomb 10 Edelman. Irvine, CA 92618 Location: 5410 East La Palma Avenue:. Property is approximately 4 acres, having a frontageof 340 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue and is located 305 feet east of the centerline of Brasher Street, Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05211 -Request to permit an automotive dealership in an existing industrial building with waiver of minimum building and landscape setbacks abutting a street. Tentative Parcel Map No. 2007-137 - To establish a 1-lot, 6-unit* airspace attached industrial condominium subdivision. * Advertised as 10-units Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2007-60 Approved Approved Granted `Approved CUP Added two conditions of approval VOTE: 7-0 Project Planner. (skoehmQanaheim.nety Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Scott Koehm, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Eastman closed the public hearing, stating the applicant was unable to attend and there was no one from the public who wished to speak. Commissioner Romero asked what the definition of a display pad is and how many cars were in a pad. Judy Dadant, Acting Principal Planner, stated that in this scenario staff would expect one vehicle per pad because of the size of the pad. Commissioner Karaki defined `pad' as a display to raise a platform to display a car. He stated Land Rover used a ramp to show their vehicles, having four or five in the front, and therefore feels they are probably going to put a concrete platform and place a car in the area. Commissioner Faessel offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Buffa, to approve the. negative declaration. Motion passed with seven affirmative votes. Commissioner Faessel offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Buffa, to approve waiver (a). Motion passed by seven affirmative votes. ~~ Commissioner Faessel offered a resolution to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05210. EIIy Morris, Senior Secretary, stated the resolution' passed with 7 aye votes. 06-11-07 Page 15 ,JUNE 11, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 11, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES .~ Commissioner Faessel offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Buffa, to approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 2007-137. Motion passed with seven affirmative votes. OPPOSITION: None Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented .the 10-day. appeal rights for the Tentative Parcel Map ending at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 21, 2007, and presented the 22-day appeal rights for the Conditional Use Permit ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 3, .2007.. DISCUSSION TIME: 8 minutes (4:04-4:12) • i MEETING ADJOURNED AT 4:17 P.M. TO MONDAY, JUNE 25, 2007 AT 1:00 P.M. FOR PRELIMINARY. PLAN REVIEW. Respectfully``submitted: ~~ ~~ 1J~.0uv~c~~ Pat Chandler Senior Secretary Received and approved by the Planning Commission on ~~p ~ o~-rJ , 2007. 06-11-07 - Page 16