Loading...
Minutes-PC 1997/03/31SUM ARY ACTION AGENA ANA EI CITY PLANNING COIN ISSION MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 31, 1997 11 A.M. STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSION OF VARIOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES ® DISCUSSION REGARDING ROSE STREET TOUR ® PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW 1:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BOYDSTUN, BOSTWIGK, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, MAYER, MESSE, PERAZA COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: NONE -STAFF PRESENT: Selma Mann Greg Hastings Cheryl Flores Linda Johnson Kevin Bass Karen Freeman Bruce Freeman Alfred Yalda Melanie Adams Margarita Solorio Ossie Edmundson Assistant City Attorney Zoning Division Manager Senior Planner Senior Planner Associate Planner Associate Planner Code Enforcement Supervisor Principal Transportation Planner Associate Civil Engineer Senior Secretary Senior Word Processing Operator P:\000S\CLEflICAL\MINUTES1AC0331 BT.N/P 1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3623 -REQUEST FOR Approved RETROACTIVE EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH (fo expire3/22/98) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Frank Minissale, 111 South Mohler Drive, Anaheim, CA 92808, requests a retroactive extension of time, to expire on March 22, 1998 to comply with conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 3623 (to permit an 80-bed convalescent facility with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces). This petition was originally approved on March 22, 1994. Property is located at 111 South Mohler Drive, Anaheim, CA 92808. SR6580MA.WP Bruce Freeman, Code Enforcement Supervisor, Code Enforcement Division: Stated i was discussed in the morning session whether the property was in compliance. Previously, they reported problems included a deteriorated fence, overgrown vegetation, inoperable vehicles and a large amount of refuge and waste on the property. There was an Inspection of the property that morning which found that the weeds had all been cut on the property. The unpermitted off-site track sign was Issued a permit on Friday (March 28, 1997). The inoperable vehicle was in the process of being repaired. There was still a large amount of accumulation of dry wood and lumber pieces on the property which the owner had indicated he was in the process of removing. As of March 31, 1997 it was not in compliance .but steps had been taken to correct the violations. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner, Planning Department: Stated this was originally approved in 1994 and due to the amount of time that has passed and the possibility of different neighbors not being familiar with this use, they are also considering an extension of time. An additional hearing might be appropriate. Chairman Messe: Stated In 1994 there were many public comments related to this application. Is staff's recommendation to make this a public hearing item? Cheryl Flores: Responded, that would be fine. Chairman Messe: Asked if Commission continues this matter to make it a public hearing, is there an expense to the developer? _ Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager, Planning Department: Responded staff could _ _ advertise that with no expense to the developer. Frank Minissale, 111 South Muller Drive (property owner): Stated he had let that time lapse due to three surgeries that he had. Referencing the memo, as attachment, he stated number one (overgrown vegetation), number 2 (wood fence knocked down), and number 4 (unpermitted off-site real estate tract sign) had all been corrected. The sign had been permitted. He thought when he gave people permission to put the tract sign up that they had already taken out a permit but apparently it was only taken out on Friday. The only item that remains to be completed is the pile of broken lumber which he has started to cut it up In small sections. 03-31-97 Page 2 Chairman Messe: Stated this item was approved by Commission in 1994 and at that time there was a lot of public concern about the use. They are not sure that some of those concerns may not arise again and they were thinking of making that a future public hearing .Item.. Frank Minissale: Responded he already has a buyer for the property. Is there some concern about taking that CUP from him? Chairman Messe: Stated it could be 'rf things have changed there. If there have been certain changes over the last four years. Frank Minissale: Responded there have been no changes whatsoever. He did .not understand why there needed to be another hearing because ft took him two years to find a buyer. He stated he did not have the money to go through a public hearing process again. Chairman Messe: Stated perhaps Commission would like to consider a 1 year extension on this CUP? Commissioner Bostwick: Stated the time extension was until March 22, 1996, therefore, it would be a retroactive time extension for 2 years, until March 22, 1998. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1756 - REQUEST FOR SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE: Dennis Hardin, 1665 South Claudlna Way, Anaheim, CA 92805, requests to retain boat sales in conjunction with apreviously-approved automotive sales agency. Property is located at 1234 South Anaheim Boulevard. ACTION: Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby determine that boat sales are in substantial conformance with the previously-approved automotive dealership subject to the following: Thai within thirty (30) days from the date of this approval, the petitioner shall submit a revised site plan showing twenty (20) parking spaces on site to the Zoning Division of the Planning Department for review and approval by staff. Determined to be in substantial conformance subject to the submittal of a revised plan showing 20 parking spaces on the site. SR6584KB.WP Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner, Planning Department: Stated this is a request to allow boat sales on a property that was approved for automobile sales. There is a requirement for 20 parking spaces which would be the same whether they sell automobiles or boats. Currently Inventory of boats is such that there are not encugh Code required parking spaces available. Staff recommended that they look at this as anew conditional use permit to determine whether the planned use is appropriate for boat sales. 03-31-97 Page 3 Chairman Messe: Asked 'rf the plan that has been offered is showing 11 parking spaces? Cheryl Flores: Responded the report indicates that there are 11 customer parking spaces shown. Applicant's Statement: Dennis Hardin, 489 Westridge Circle, Anaheim: Stated he has four business locations in Anaheim. They have been selling boats on Anaheim Boulevard for a couple of years and did not realize they were not in conformance with their conditional use permit. At this time of the year, they are preparing for the spring selling season in the business and they have an unusually high number of boats in their inventory. They have the Orange County Boat Show upcoming at the end of April with about 15 boats on display. Most of which will be sold at the show. Their current Inventory is not representative of what they would have throughout the rest of the year. Contiguous to the property that the conditional use permit is being requested for they have 5 %= acres devoted to the dealership operation. They recently purchased a parts warehouse on Claudina Street immediately behind the dealership, adding another acre to their operation. They have plenty of room for parking, for customers to store boats, and other needs. He was baffled by staff's .recommendation or implication that they do not have adequate parking. If they wanted to they could park up to 250 boats on their property which would not .hamper their operations or traffic flow, He has not heard of any traffic flow on Anaheim Boulevard being hampered due to their boat operations. It seems to him that they are properly organized and have plenty of room. Some of the boats from their facility are as expensive as $80,000. They would like remain in the City of Anaheim. Hardin Marine has been operating in the City of Anaheim for 30 years and they have found Anaheim to be a friendly place for business. He asked the Commission to grant their request to continue operating in Anaheim. Chairman Messe: According to their plan, it shows there are 22 parking spaces for visiting vehicles, employees and visitors? Dennis Hardin: Responded that was correct. Chairman Messe: Stated he looked at that lot recently and it appeared that there may be 1 space open for visitor parking. Asked if they are planning on clearing that area with all the land that they have so there are 20 spaces available to visitors and employees? - Dennis Hardin: Responded having been in business for sometime, if they understand the importance of providing convenient and adequate parking for their customers, which they intend to do. Chairman Messe: Do they do repairs at their site? Dennis Hardin: Responded no they do not. 03-31-97 Page 4 Commissioner Bristol: Stated he visited their site on Saturday and spoke with a gentleman named Fred. Commissioner Bristol understands staff's concern regarding crowding. The applicant explained he was going to refurbish the building, putting boats inside, open the front a little, and were shown the back of their site. It appeared the back area was part of their other property and he stated it would seem that the applicant could make arrangements regarding the access of that back area. Dennis Hardin: Responded the plans show that is not part of the boat operations but he is correct. If they needed to be part of the boat operation they will do so and continue to expand boat Inventory storage or make room for customer parking in the front part of the lot. Commissioner Bristol: Continued by stating he was there at the time a customer was picking up a boat. It appeared very tight the way the property is configured. The customer had to backup Into the driveway and move the boat out. Commissioner Bristol thought they actually have a lot of room ff the building is open and put those boats fn and utilize the space in the back. Dennis Hardin: Responded when the building is refurbished., opened and made to the point where it can accept inventory they will be able to display another 7 or 8 boat inside of the building. That will lessen the space requirement in front of the boat dealership and allow easier parking for customer, easier turning around, etc. Chairman .Messe: Asked ff their plan was to supply 20 spaces for customer parking and applicant was stipulating to that. Therefore, Commission is being asked to vote on substantial conformance. Commissioner Henninger: Stated on the plan there are 7 spaces and asked where were the other 13 spaces? A problem staff had with the proposal was they could not understand the plans very well because they were difficult to read. Asked Mr. Hardin to show on the plan where the customer parking spaces are and how this lot would relate to the storage parking in the back lot, if needed. Dennis Hardin: Responded he was not certain how the number of 20 customer parking spaces was arrived at. All he sees is 7 parking spaces for customers. The boat business is not like other businesses where you have several people looking at a product a one time. They have a maximum of 2 sales persons at any one time and usually it is just one sales person. Consequently, they do not get a lot of customer traffic through there, so he does not need 20 spaces. There is parking on Anaheim Beulevard for customers. Bruce Freeman, Code Enforcement Supervisor, Code Enforcement Division: Stated - they have no problem with the plan as long as he does comply wfth the proposed plan. Code requires X number of parking spaces. Code Enforcement has no problem should Commission choose to reduce it down to 7, as long as they are kept open and available. Chairman Messe: Asked ff that would require that they have a waiver? Cheryl Flores: Responded ff would as .long as they did not meet the Code requirement. The Code requirement is based on 2'l: spaces per 1,000 square foot of the sales facility area plus 4 spaces per 1,000 square foot of office area. Staff also 03-31-97 Page 5 had concerns about the boat preparation area Dennis Hardin: Stated the boats are shipped to them fully assembled, but they need to do a certain amount of preparing a boat before ft is .ready for sale. All work is done at a central location in Mira Loma. All the boats from their six locations go to Mira Loma for preparation and then are shipped out to the other stores. So they are ready for delivery by the time they get to the Anaheim site. Commissioner Henninger: Asked what they plan to do at the service area located at the back of the existing building? Dennis Hardin: Responded currently they have a service facility at 1711 Claudina. Service is currently being done at that site for their customers, that require service. They also have a boat building operation at that location. Their plan is to close down the boat :building operation and to merge the boat service operation onto Anaheim Boulevard. Commissioner Henninger: Asked whether it was going to be outside or Inside the building? Dennis Hardin: Responded it will be "California service stalls" which is a roof awning but it will not be totally enclosed. Chairman Messe: Asked for a clarification, the plan states 22 parking spaces but R shows 7 spaces. Dennis Hardin: Responded there will be 7 spaces available for customer parking. Given their level of customer activity it is more than adequate. However, if it is not then they will provide space on the property. Chairman Messe: Stated if they say that they will provide the 20 spaces that are required then it is not .necessary to go through a waiver. Dennis Hardin: Responded he could make those spaces available. Chairman Messe: Stated then all that would be needed is a plan for those spaces. Dennis Hardin; Responded he may use those spaces for other uses. Commissioner Bostwick: Stated total the 22 parking spaces within that whole - complex to come up wfth their total required spaces. Dennis Hardin: Responded it could be done very easily. He could provide another 15 parking spaces and that would give them the additional space. With purchase of their parts warehouse, their facility will become much less congested. Chairman Messe: Stated with the advent of service at that lot he wondered whether it would remain that way. Dennis Hardin: Responded with the advent of boat service that would put more demands on the space, however, they have the space to handle that. 03-31-97 Page 6 Commissioner Bristol: Asked staff if the conditional use permit on 1300,1234 or 1280? If it is on ail three then he probably has the parking. Cheryl Flores: Responded she would have to verify but she believed it was for 1234? Originally on the map it does have the three addresses but on the staff report it does states 1234. It was just an oversight that the map did not .reflect the one address. ' Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, City Attorney's Office: Stated another issue not reviewed is concerning what the parking requirement was at the time that the conditional use permft was approved as opposed to the current parking requirement. That is something that may need more time for staff to review. It may possibly provide some flexibility in terms of f(nding a solution without requiring a parking waiver. Also clarifying what the limitations are on that determination of substance conformance so there is not unlimited change in the future without a return for a modification of the conditional use permit before the Commission. Chairman Messe: Stated the 20 spaces that staff indicated are required may not have been required at the time the original CUP was granted, was that correct? Selma Mann: Responded that was possible. Chairman Messe: Asked whether there were any records available? Cheryl Flores: Responded there is a plan and she will provide a copy. It shows 44 spaces that was apparently the plan for the original approval. It does not show which spaces are customer and which are for the dealership. The Code requirement was higher at that time. Chairman Messe: Stated it is down to 20 now. Cheryl Flores: Responded yes. Commissioner Henninger: Stated if you look at the plan, the depth to the fence is 180 feet. Site plan provided to the Commission shows it as being 200 feet. If he was to conform the site plan with the site that has a CUP on it, there is another 20 feet there and probably provide enough parking. There was further discussion on the parking spaces. Cheryl Flores: Stated the difference in the depth of the lot may have to do with the - street widening that has occurred since the approval 1977. Dennis Hardin: Stated that was correct, the City has taken approximately 10 feet on the north side of the property with the widening of Anaheim Boulevard. Chairman Messe: Stated that would still leave them wfth 10 extra feet over and above that their plans show (of 18D feet). They can probably provide that lot with sufficient parking to meet the current standard. Dennis Hardin: Responded yes they should 03-31-97 Page 7 Chairman Messe: Asked ff they would be able to come back with revised plans that show that? Dennis Hardin: Responded yes if need be. Chairman Henninger: Stated he thought it would be good to show the service area with the shade cover over it, consistent with his testimony. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager, Planning Department: Asked since there are not conditions attached to this item and therefore not advertised, is the Intent to have this come back to Commission for their review and approval? Chairman Henninger: Responded ft should be submitted to the Planning Department and have staff review it. C. a. EIR NO. 313 (PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED( b. FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 97-02 -REVIEW AND Approved Approved with a APPROVAL OF A FINAL SITE PLAN: City initiated, 200 preference to the South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805, request "Base Plan" for review and approval of a Final Site Plan, including the two alternative site plans, floor plans, elevation plans, and landscape plans, to expand the Anaheim Convention Center. Property Is located at 800 West Kateila Avenue (Anaheim Convention Center). ACTION: Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and does hereby find that the previously-certified EIR No. 313 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for Final Site Plan Review No. 97-02. Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Final Site Plan, including the two alternate site plans (expressing a preference for the "Base Plan"), floor plans, elevation plans and landscape plans (ident'rfied as Exhibits - Nos. 1 through 12 on file in the Planning Department), based upon a finding that the Final Site Plan is in conformance with the Anaheim Resort Spec'rfic Plan No. 92-2; and further, requested that any changes be brought back to the Planning Commission for approval under a Report and Recommendation item. AP7009LJ.WP Linda Johnson, Senior Planner, Planning Department: Stated Cad Johnson, from HOK (the project archRect) will present an update on the revised Anaheim Convention Center expansion plan. 03-31-97 Page 8 Carl Johnson, Project Architect with HOK: Stated the plans submitted are displayed on the side board. They consist of the base plan and the alternate plan. It is the alternate plan that was reviewed in February 1997. During the course of the project they went through some value engineering and developed a base plan. Both will be in the bid package. The base plan is what they want to establish the project on now. Both plans reflect the comments that were presented in February 1997. One being that the curb Imes along Katella have been brought Into alignment with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan; the interim plan and the ultimate plan. Both plans have addressed the replacement of handicapped parking from what was Garage Park 3 Area that is being demolished. Those handicapped parking spaces have been relocated as an extension of the existing handicapped parking area on Car Park 1. They have on both plans added a total of 13 handicapped spaces. On Car Park 3 there were a total of 13 spaces, 9 of which were handicapped and 4 were regular parking spaces. In their replacement of Car Park 1 they have totalled the 13 as all handicapped. They are adjacent to the existing handicapped spaces, also adjacent and close to the ramp that is an existing handicapped ramp that accesses the Convention Center from Car Park 1. Chairman Messe: Asked if any handicapped spaces are left on the western parking areas? Carl Johnson: Responded in Car Park 4 there are existing handicapped spaces. The number is still balanced between the parking garage/car park areas. Carl Johnson: Stated there are 22 existing and now they are adding 13 to that number. Cad Johnson: Explained the differences between the base plan and the alternate plan as follows: The landscaping which is now part of the alternate plan has been removed from the base plan. The base plan will use the existing hardscape and landscape as it is currently. It will also maintain the use of Center Drive down to a point where it reaches the VIP driveway that pulls Into Car Park 1. At that point, R will be terminated and instead of being two one-directional lanes, they will be two way access. One will be able o make a left turn off of Katella, come in on one lane and have the option to turn around and come back out again. It also maintains the closeness to the advance ticket sales booths. Commissioner Mayer: Stated she could support the base. plan which basically addresses the issues and concerns that she had. It seems to work well. This other plan puts things back where we were before. " Chairman Messe: Stated in the request for the approval of the two plans, Commission is being asked whether they conform. Is there some way that they are gping to come up with a single plan combining the two. Cad Johnson: Responded as they are preparing for construction documents, they are focusing on either of these two plans. The landscape concept which was a driving force in the alternate plan may be reconsidered in its fullness but as they are looking for value engineering items they looked at that as possibly a .bonus that they could put aside in terms of dollars and look for dollars in other places as well. That is why they came to the point of deciding to establish the base plan as the existing conditions around the arena. What they like about the base plan is the retaining of Center Drive 03-31-97 Page 9 the site plan was the amount of the hardscape proportional to the green area such that the circulation on-site for pedestrians. The .main difference between the two is the Car Access that Center Drive allows you is not in the alternate plan. That plan was to maintain a park atmosphere around the arena. Initially, the idea was to not have automobiles pull in so close to the site. To emphasize creating an area for pedestrian/community involvement within a garden area and trying to keep automobiles out of the area. Chairman Messe: Stated they are being asked to vote on conformance of the base plan as well as the alternate plan. He asked if the plans will change fn any way that would come back to them? Linda Johnson: Responded ff plans check on-site, it will depend upon whether it is a substantial change. Staff can take a look at it and find it In substantial conformance. If it is a change within the public right-of-way it needs to meet the standards for the Smart Street Program and the Anaheim Resort Identity Program. Chairman Messe: Stated of the two .plans, In his view, the basic .plan is certainly the superior plan. But he understands they are being asked to find both in conformance. He would like to be assured that if there are any changes to either one of those plans that they get to see it again. Commissioner Henninger: Stated he also agreed that the base plan was the superior plan from a circulation point of view. On the other hand, both plans conform with the Specific Plan. He also asked staff if there are any changes to either of the two plans to bring It back before Commission. Commissioner Mayer: Stated the discussion has been with value engineering which she is assuming is budget. Does the criteria that they will use to determine which plan to use budgetary? Cad Johnson: Responded yes. D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 1113 AND 1390 - REOUEST FOR TERMINATION: Dudley B. Frank, 505 North Tustin Avenue, #153, Santa Ana, CA 92705, requests termination of Conditional Use Permit Nos. 1113 (to permit on- sale beer and wine in conjunction with a proposed enclosed restaurant) and Conditional Use Permit No. 1390 (to establish a beer bar). Property is located at 426 South Euclid Street. TERMINATION RESOLUTION NO. PC97-31 Terminated (Vote: 6-0, Commissioner Henninger absent) SR6477KB.wP 03-31-97 Page 10 E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 1281 AND 1529 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION: Gary Wing, Texaco VCP, 5650 East La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807, requests termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 1281 (to permit a restaurant in conjunction with a service station) and Conditional Use Permit No. 1529 (to permR on-sale beer and wine in an existing restaurant). Property is located at 5650 East La Palma Avenue. TERMINATION RESOLUTION NO. PC97-32 Terminated (Vote: 6-0, Commissioner Henningerdeclared a conflict df interest) SR6576KB.WP F. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3586 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION: Robert Weiss, General Manager-Director of Operations, 1440 South Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805, requests termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 3586 (to permit an indoor soccer field in conjunction with an indoor swap meet facility). Property is located at 1440 South Anaheim Boulevard (Anaheim Indoor Marketplace). TERMINATION RESOLUTION NO. PC97-33 Terminated (Vote: 6-0, Commissioner Bostwick declared a conflict of Interest) SR6609JK.WP G. REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATION OF Initiated conditional CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCEEDINGS: City Initiated ' use permit process (Code Enforcement Division), 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, for auto related uses #525, Anaheim, CA 92805, request to initiate Conditional Use Permit proceedings for the properties located at 524 West Lincoln Avenue, 718 West Lincoln Avenue and 808 West (Vote: 6-0, Lincoln Avenue to permit general automotive repair in the CG Commissioner (Commercial, General) Zone. Henninger absent) RESOLUTION NO. PC97-34 SR6612CE. WP 03-31-97 Page 11 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2b. WAIVER OF CODE REOUIREMENTS 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3911 OWNER: GRACE NUVAL, 545 South Knott Street, Anaheim, CA 92804 AGENT: FRANCIS ONG, 8907 Warner Avenue, #168, Huntington Beach, CA 92647 LOCATION: 910 South Knott Street. Property is 0.3 acre located on the east side of Knott Street, 440 feet north of the centerline of Ball Road. To permit the conversion of asingle-family home to a 2,179 square- foot medical/dental office with waivers of minimum number of parking spaces, maximum number and area of signs, minimum side yard setback, minimum rear yard setback and permitted encroachments. Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of February 19, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. Continued to 4-14-97 SR6453DS.WP3 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the April 14, 1997 Planning Commission meeting in order for staff to review revised plans submitted on March 24, 1997. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 03-31-97 Page 12 3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3912 4-14-97 OWNER: KENNETH J. CUMMINS, TRUSTEE OF THE COUCH LIVING TRUST, 4041 MacArthur Blvd., A360, Newport Beach, CA 92660 AGENT: TEAM RENTAL OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA , dba BUDGET CAR AND TRUCK RENTAL, Attn: David Sleeves, 1549 North Fern Street, Orange, CA 92667 LOCATION: 2144 South Harbor Boulevard (Arby's Restaurant). Property Is 0.55 acre located 500 feet south of the centerline of Orangewood Avenue . To permft the conversion of a fast food restaurant to a truck and automobile rental .lot. Continued from the Planning Commission meetings of March 3, and March 17, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR6469DS.WP5 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the April 14, 1997 Planning Commission meeting as requested by the petitioner. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 03-31-97 Page 13 4a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION I Continued to 4b. VARIANCE NO. 4301 4-14-97 OWNER: WfLLIAM C. TAORMINA AND VINCENT C. TAORMINA, P.O. Box 309, Anaheim, CA 92815-0309 AGENT: RICHARD B. WINN, P.O. Box 309, Anaheim, CA 92815- 0309 :LOCATION: 1070-1090 North Blue Gum Street. Property is 1.2 acres located at the southeast corner of t.a Palma Avenue and Blue Gum Street. Waivers of minimum landscaped setback adjacent to an arterial highway (La Palma Avenue) and a freeway frontage road (La Mesa Avenue) and permitted encroachments into required yards, to construct a private off-site employee parking lot for a regional material recovery facility and an adjacent aluminum parts manufacturer and temporary Cal-Trans employee/contractor parking. Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of March 17, 1997. VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. SR6606KP.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the April 14, 1997, Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to submit revised plans and for advertisement of a waiver pertaining tp minimum parking lot landscaping. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 03-31-97 Page 14 5a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION ,Approved 5b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTS Approved, In part 5c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3915 Granted, in part OWNER: .MOBIL OIL CORPORATION, 3700 W. 190th Street, Torrance, CA 90504 AGENT: HUSSEIN BERRI, 16205 Hemp Circle, Fountain Valley, CA 92706 LOCATION: 1199 South State College Boulevard (Mobil Service Station . Property is 0.52 acre located at the northwest corner of Ball Road and State College Boulevard. To permit the expansion of a service station and accessory convenience market to include sales of fast-food and retail sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption and to construct a new drive- through self-serve car wash with waivers of (a) minimum parking lot landscaping, (b) permitted location of freestanding signs, (c) minimum distance between freestanding signs and (d) minimum landscaping adjacent to Interior property lines. Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of March 17, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC97-35 SR6607KB.WP --------------------------------------------------------- FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Commissioner Peraza and Commissioner Mayer stated they were absent at the previous meeting but had read the minutes and were updated on this item. Applicant's Statement: David Rose, Regents Group, 3870 La Sierra Avenue, Suite 193, Riverside, CA 92505: Stated an independent franchise is proposing to go in and take over the existing vacant _ _ facility located on the northwest corner of State College and Ball Road. The applicant is proposing to completely rehab and expand the existing use. Previously, there were two service bays as well as a small Mobil Mart. The applicant is proposing to completely renovate the site, expand the existing facility, add a store with alcoholic beer and wine sales, a OSR (quick service restaurant) and a self serve car wash at the :rear of the property. The concerns of Commission at the previous meeting were related to the facia as well as other issues. The applicant is proposing to demolish a portion of the existing store which is facing Ball Road and is proposing to back out that store towards the westerly property line. At staff and Commission's recommendation they went back and looked at the site and proposed a larger facia both on the existing canopies to address the issue of the pitch of the existing canopies and roof line as well 03-31-97 Page 15 as reconfigure the site adding a little bit of landscaping and trees. There still are a couple of concerns: Condition No. 27 -Request of the applicant to reconfigure the architectural aesthetic style of the project if he chooses to vary from the existing "ranch" style: Mobile is prohibiting the applicant from keeping the exlsting style as it is not in ' their current marketing scheme. Mobil is moving towards a metallic facia of the buildings similar to what Is across the street at the Chevron station. One of the issue raised at the last Commission hearing was the proposal of a 3 foot facia. Commission showed concerns whether or not that could sufficently cover the existing pitch of both the canopies and the roof. Upon further review, the applicant is proposing a 4 foot facia. They are going to the maximum and requesting a 4 foot, then capping off (1 to 1'/z foot) the corners of the pitch. The hardship is the applicant is doing what they are told to do by Mobil but also want to meet the wishes of the Commission. The applicant is willing to come back with a different architectural style. Chairman Messe: Asked if plans show a 3 foot or 4 foot facia? David Rose: Responded it shows a 4 foot which Is revised. 2. Condition No. 28, 30 .and 32 -That no fast food or prepared food shall be permitted unless Code .required parking (17 spaces) is provided. There are various Issues, one of which being circulation and quing activity for the delivery of petroleum products by the double hauled rigs. The applicant is not able to close off both driveways. He has voluntarily closed off the driveway on .Ball Road in an attempt to not only address City Codes but also to provide additional landscaping. On one .hand, he needs to have a second driveway on State College in order to address the quing aspects. The applicant has a second concern which is in a critical intersection pathway because of that there is a concern by staff of additional landscaping once the critical intersection Is taken. Whether this be 5, 10 or 20 years away, the applicant is aware of this but he is concerned because he does not know when that activity is going to take place. He wants to provide as much landscaping as possible. If the driveway is kept open on State College, they would then be keeping additional parking as requested by staff to be deleted, they would also be eliminating some of the landscaping that staff has indicated they want maintained at that corner. Once the critical intersection is taken both on State College and Ball Road., the applicant does not have the ability to provide the landscaping that staff is requesting because his existing canopies are grandfathered in. Once they are removed by the City, not only will applicant be" removing the landscape planter at the corner but also be wiping out some the parking spaces. The applicant wonders how he could maintain the pafking for :his site that in 10 to 20 years will be taken. He will be able to meet the Code now but once the intersection is taken he is not going to be meeting Cade. David Rose: Stated regarding the 31 trees, the applicant is willing to put in as many trees as is feasibly possible in the property. Assuming that once the intersection is taken those trees will be at the rear of the property vs. on the frontline. David Rose: Stated wfthout the fast food the applicant looses his marketability. The applicant is coming In and taking over an abandoned station. Due to the restrictions, the applicant was not able to do that wRhout having the various profit center such a 03-31-97 Page 16 OSR (quick service restaurant), a store with the beer and wine and also the car wash. Jf fast food is included then Condition No. 28 goes away. Chairman Messe: Asked if those are the conditions that still need to be resolved? David Rose: Responded yes, on Condition No. 27 they will come back with a revised drawing if they do not get through this today. Condition No. 28, 30 and 32 still remain to be resolved. Staff is asking for 10 additional trees but .applicant can provide 5 trees. He is not going to have much room on the outer portions of the parcels .because there already are a minimum of 8 trees on each side which they are already requesting a variance to their placement of that. Hls tree spacing is going to be less than 20 feet both on the north .and westedy property Imes. He asked if that .meant he is going to have to modify his request for a variance to include the north property as well with the placement of those trees and specifically on Condition No. 32. He is proposing an 8 foot high sign. Staff is also .requesting a bern which was addressed at the last Planning Commission. They have a 3 foot berm in front of their sign; the bottom 3 feet of their sign disappears. He can not place that 8 foot high sign on top of the berm because the 8 foot sign then becomes a 5 foot sign. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner, Planning Department: Stated the plans submitted for landscaping do not indicate an existing 3 foot wide brick planter on State College. It appears it would be removed as a part of this development. It also would be within the critical intersection widening but it appears it would be removed right away. Plans show a 3 foot high berm and she was not clear with Mr. Rose's testimony on this. Chairman Messe: Stated the berm was alright as long as the applicant could get his 8 foot sign on top of it. Cheryl Flores: Stated normally it is counted from the grade of the sidewalk. Lastly, .regarding the provision of 31 trees, they can be closer than the 20 foot centers. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager, Planning Department: Stated there may be other areas on the property where landscaping could be installed. For instance, the northside of the building there is an area where the cars back into the building area. It appears there is more than enough room for backup area. The trees do not have to be against the front property lines especially since there is a waiver on this. They could tie-in a different location. - - Cheryl Flores: Stated plans do not Indicate the direction of travel through the car wash 'rf that was a concern of the Commission. Chairman Messe: Stated the arrows have disappeared in their tunnel. Is that atwo- way tunnel? David Rose: Regarding the landscaped planter on State College, the applicant's proposal was to remove it. If that is the desire of the Commission .and staff, they will maintain the planter. The second issue is regarding the direction of the car wash facility. The applicant had reversed it based upon Issues and discussion with traffic people. The applicant is proposing to meet with Traffic Engineering and asked them at 03-31-97 Page 17 a later date which direction they want traffic to go. Discussion with Traffic Engineering indicated that could be determined at a later date. Chairman Messe: Stated there has been in the past accessway from the north (Carl's Jr.). Is that going to remain? David Rose: Responded there was a reciprocal access agreement between Mobil and Cad's Jr. They had a quick claim to that on their behalf taken from Carl's. Therefore, that access will be closed off. There is currently one on the westerly property line between the industrial complex and this facility which will remain unless Commission desires to have it closed off. They are proposing to maintain that existing reciprocal access way (on the southwest adjacent to Ball Road). Commissioner Bristol: Asked where would that access be on the westerly side? David .Rose: Responded on the second westerly driveway on Ball Road. As soon as you come in make a quick left heading west into the industrial complex. It is more of a convenience. Currently, the accessway is more of an alley way for people to gain access Into the Cad's Jr. It serves no other purpose to the existing facility. That is actually where the car wash would be. Currently, there is a chainlink along the rear of the property but there still is access to the Carl's Jr. The reason for that is ai the time, Mobil had not extinguished the existing access agreement with Carl's Jr. Commissioner Boydstun: Regarding Item No. 30, the 2 driveways on State College and one on Ball, stated perhaps if this is going to be a busy station, the applicant would need that second driveway. Closing the one on Ball Road makes sense but the second one on State College is needed since it gives a better flow. David Rose: Stated they have shortened that driveway from its current existing condition in order to pull farther from the corner in an effort to somehow mitigate that Issue. Chairman Messe: Stated it seems that there is a lot being put on this property and that is the reason for the real problems. With the 2 driveways on State College, how many parking spaces do they have as shown on the plans? Cheryl Flores: Responded it would be 18 with the 2 drivewaysat State College and 1 on Bail Road (without the enhanced landscaping). Chairman Messe: Stated they are asking for enhanced landscaping at the comer which would eliminate 2 spaces? Cheryl Flores: Responded there are only 17 required, perhaps they could eliminate one of them. Greg Hastings: Stated he thought both of those spaces could be eliminated or at least relocate one of those spaces and still have landscaping there. The one space could be at an angle to the Intersection rather than the way it shows in the plan. Chairman Messe: Stated have that one space at a diagonal and then they would meet Code at 17. Increase the size of the planter substantially and put one parking space there. Any problems with circulation if that was done? 03-31-97 Page 18 Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportatlpn Planner, Traffic Engineering Division: Responded there shouldn't be any problems 'rf they put the one space diagonally. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked if they could discuss what type of food place they are considering putting In? The plans show more of a restaurant than a snack shop. David Rose: Responded they are currently fn discussions with several franchise operations. They did that only to show a little more embodiment of what they are proposing as a fast food restaurant. Hls discussions with staff have indicated that anything extremely afar from what is shown would require a substantial conformance review. There will be no on-site or outside seating. Commissioner Boydstun: Stated rt seems so much for this site in having service station with a car wash, fast food restaurant and a store. Commissioner Henninger: Stated there was no discussion on Condition No. 35, they are now providing 2 bathrooms. David Rose: Responded they did not have a problem with that. The floor plan will be modified from what is existing based upon the condition. Staff has requested that landscaping be placed at the northeast corner, to provide additional landscaping at State College. They do not have a problem with that either. Chairman Messe: Asked if Condition No. 34 was new? Specifically, that nothing be discharged from the car wash system except between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Melanie Adams, Associate Civil Engineer, Public Work: Responded depending on the location, there are some areas where there are sewer constraints, this is one of those areas. They will be asking the applicant to discharge on the off peak hours. Commissioner Henninger: Stated the architecture going to a wider band still looks like a ranch style house with a wide band around It. He thought perhaps the one thing that would work better would be reframing the roof section over the old service base. David Rose: Responded they have actually gone out and physically looked at the service bay aspect. The applicant Is going to be demolishing the section where the Mobil Mart portion of the restroom was. They have discussedit and that Is feasible. It all comes down to the structural aspects of it. Should Commission wish to condition that, they do not see that as being a problem. The only issue that arised was whether or~ot that is consistent with the existing canopies and that the Commission is satisfied with that. Commissioner Henninger: Asked if they were going to re-roof? David Rose: Responded definitely. The applicant has no problem, whatsoever, in putting a flat roof on the existing building, would not be touching the structural aspects of the canopies :but the building itself would have a completely flat roof not having gable projection above the facia wrap on the building itself. Chairman Messe: Asked about handicapped parking shown on a fairly good incline and if they were going to move those handicapped parking spaces? 03-31-97 Page 19 David Rose: Responded his understanding is that you can not have anything above a 2% incline. But the issue is that whole portion of the building is going to be demolished. His assumption is when they do fine grading that, there will not be an incline grade there. Chairman Messe: Asked If the billboard will stay? David Rose: Responded unfortunately the buyout of that lease would be expensive. He realizes the City does not like billboards but, unfortunately, the applicant is inheriting an existing condRion. It is a Eller or Patrick board which is very difficult to buy out their existing leases. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager, Planning Department: Stated staff would ask that when the final plans are submitted that the billboard be shown on the site plan. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Approved Waiver of Code Requirements, in part, denying waivers (a), (b) and (c) on the basis that they were deleted following public notification and approving waiver (d) for the relocation of the trees only. Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3915, in part, with the following changes to conditions: Modified Condition Nos. 24, 27, 30 and 32 to read as follows: 24. That no food or beverage consumption areas shall be permitted. 27. That the petitioner shall submit revised architecture plans showing a flat roof on the existing building and that said plans shall be submitted to the Zoning Division of the .Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Report and Recommendation ftem. 30. That the existing driveways on Ball Road and State College Boulevard shall be removed and replaced with standard curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping. Only one driveway is permitted on .Ball Road and two (2) on State College Boulevard, subject to " the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager 32. That a minimum of thirty-one (31) trees (minimum 15 gallon size) shall be planted on-site as follows: a minimum of five (5) trees shall be planted and maintained in the increased planter area at the corner of Bail Road and State College Boulevard. The trees shall be located on-sfte, not to be located within the ultimate right-of- way. This area shall also contain a 3-foot high landscaped earthen berm. A minimum of two (2) 15-gallon trees and additional shrubs and groundcover shall be planted at the northeast corner of the property adjacent to parking space no. 11. A minimum of eight (8) 03-31-97 Page 20 addtional 15 gallon trees shall be planted elsewhere on-site. A minimum of eight (8) trees shall be planted adjacent to each of the Interior property lines. A final landscape plan showing compliance with placement of these trees and the additional landscape areas shall be submitted to the Zoning Division of the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Commission' as a Report and Recommendation item. Added the following condftion: That the property owner shall submit a final site plan to the Zoning Division of the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Report and Recommendation item, the .plan shall show the proposed monument sign and the required 3-foot high berm and how the sign will be modified to comply with Code Section 18.05.093.025 which allows signs to be located within the line-of-sight triangle provided there be no display surtace between 30-inches and 8- feet above ground and when critical intersection widening occurs. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIAAE: 38 minutes 03-31-97 Page 21 6a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 6b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 4-28-97 sc. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3927 6d. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 97-05 OWNER: F.J. HANSHAW ENTERPRISES, INC., 1092 Westminster Avenue, Garden Grove, CA 92843 AGENT: DESAPRIYA JINADASA, 1112 North Brookhurst Street, #1, Anaheim, CA 92801 LOCATION: 1112 North Brookhurst Street. Suite 1 (Cheers Market . Property is 0.91 acre, located :north and east of the northeast corner of :Brookhurst Street and La Palma Avenue. To permit a 2,200 square-foot convenience market with sales of alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption within a commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of March 17, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY RESOLUTION NO. SR6476DS.WP FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: .None Desapriya Jfnadasa, 1112 North Brookhurst Street, Unit 1, Anaheim: Stated there remain some parking concerns. He referenced a letter that he submitted. Regarding the liquor license, he submitted for a beer and wine license only. He spoke with the Tom Engle from the Police Department over the phone and Mr. Engle Indicated to him that there was no problem with his request. .However, the staff report indicates the Police Department is requesting denial of their liquor license. He stated that he .has received several requests from customers for liquor at the market. According to Cal Trans the Shell service station is going to be closing down, therefore, it is going to make it more difficult for the community to obtain grocery items. He is 2 minutes away from the business and intends to keep the business well maintained. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Bruce Freeman, Code Enforcement Supervisor, Code Enforcement Division: Stated Investigator Engle and Steve Walker are out of town. Discussion in the morning session indicated it would be appropriate to have the census track map prior to Commission deciding on this matter. He provided a memo at the morning session that was faxed to him indicating 03-31-97 Page 22 that additionally the Police Department was requesting a denial of this due to the over concentration, however, ff Commission chooses to approve this there are Rems listed that the Police Department requested be conditioned to the applicant. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner, Planning Department: Stated the staff report also indicates that Community Development Department has also recommended a denial of the request for alcoholic beverages from this location as well as the school district which has concerns about public elementary school and residential properties within close proximity. She also point out an error In paragraph no. 7. It refers to a 22,000 square foot tenant space, It should be 2,200. Chairman Messe: Asked staff about the applicant's statement indicating that the gas station due to Cal Trans interchange there would be taken. Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner, Traffic Engineering Division: Stated according to their latest plans dated September 29, 1995, it does not indicate they will take the gas station. However, that does not mean that Cal Trans did not change their plan. There would be some changes to that intersection. Specifically, on L.a Palma but it does not appear Cal Trans is planning to take anything on Brookhurst. Chairman Messe: Asked if there are still going to be 2 lights on the on/off ramp? Alfred Yalda: Responded there would be some major changes at that intersection. The only effect La Palma Avenue is it may or may not Impact directly the gas station and may be one of the driveways to the site. Chairman Messe: Asked if there was a convenience market at that gas station now? Cheryl Flores: Stated she could verify agains their records but she did not believe there is npw. Desapriya Jinadasa: Stated this location has had a liquor store for more than 20 years and as a market for more that 30 to 40 years. Commissioner Peraza: Asked for clarification whether applicant is currently selling beer and wine. Chairman Messe: Responded no, there is no liquor sold there now. The applicant has applied for a beer and wine license but he would also like approval for a liquor license. Desapriya~inadasa: Stated he applied for beer and wine license. Even if he has the liquor " license he is not planning to sell the liquor himself. Commissioner Peraza: Stated it is difficult to make a decision due to the issue of over concentration. Chairman Messe: Stated unfortunately the 2 Police Officers involved are both out of town on a special assignment. Asked 'rf they knew when they were going to be returning? Bruce Freeman: Responded Investigator Engle would be returning within two weeks, for the meeting of April 14, 1997. Chairman Messe: Stated Police Department has requested a denial of the beer and wine 03-31-97 Page 23 license as well as the liquor license. Commission does have some questions for them and suggested continuing the item for 2 weeks and asked the applicant 'rf he would accept a 2 week continuance of this item? Desapriya Jinadasa: Responded yes Alfred Yalda: Stated Commission may want to address the parking because the variance that is being asked is more than 10°k of the Code. They have to do a parking study. Chairman Messe: Stated there is going to be a need for a parking study do to the differential between the parking and what is required by Code is more than 10%. He suggested the applicant meet with Alfred Yalda, from Traffic Engineering, to discuss the requirements. Cheryl Flores: Stated she was not certain 2 weeks would be long enough to get it back and review. Alfred Yalda: Stated he agreed because their office needs 5 working days to review it. ACTION: Continued subject request to the April 28, 1997 Planning Commission meeting in order to have a representative from the Police Department and for the applicant to submit a parking study. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: 12 minutes 03-31-97 Page 24 7a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 7b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 4-14-97 7c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3974 OWNER: CARL KARCHER ENTERPRISES, RAYMOND & ESTELLE SPEHAR, TRUSTEES, MARCIA ANN HALLIGAN, P.O. Box 4349, Anaheim, CA 92803 AGENT: CONNIE CARTER, 315 First Street, #U-130, Encinitas, CA 92024 LOCATION: 5701 East La Palma. Avenue (Carl's Jr. Restauranil. Property is 0.9 acre, located at the northeast corner of t.a Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway. To permit the 1,109 square-foot expansion of an existing drive-through restaurant for an outdoor .playground/dining area with 36 additional seats with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of March 17, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR6466DS.WP2 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the April 14, 1997 Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to review the recommended conditions of approval and staff recommendations for the project. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSfON TIME: This item was not discussed. 03-31-97 Page 25 8a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 8b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3918 5-28-97 OWNER: PUBLIC STORAGE EURO PARTNERSHIP VI, LTD., Attn: Kay Merg, P.O. Box 25025, Glendale, CA 91221 AGENT: LOS ANGELES CELLULAR, Attn: Holly Sandler & Leslie Daigle, 17785 Center Court Drive North, Cerritos, CA 90701 J.L. HARE AND ASSOCIATES, Attn: Holly Sandier, 17581 Irvine Boulevard, #200, Tustin, CA 92680 LOCATION: 4880 East La Palma Avenue. Property Is 3.74 acres, with a frontage of 340 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue, located 480 feet east of the centedine of Hancock Street. To permit an unmanned 420 square-foot cellular communications facility within an existing self-storage business with an approximate 47-foot high triangular monument (tower) with twelve face-mounted antennas. Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of March 17, 1997. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. SR6611 KP. W P FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the May 28, 1997 Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to investigate alternative locations and design options. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: This item was npt discussed. 03-31-97 Page 26 9a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS II 9b. VARIANCE NO. 4257 (READVERTISED) OWNER: K-MART CORPORATION, 3100 West Big Beaver Road, Troy, MI 48084 AGENT: PENSKE AUTO SERVICES, 1045 South Pullman Street, Anaheim, CA 92807 SWAIN SIGN, 1384 East Fifth Street, Ontario, CA 91764 LOGATION: 1095 Pullman Street (Super K-mart Centerl Property is 18.69 acres located at the southwest corner of Old Canal Road and Pullman Street. Waiver of permitted wall signage in conjunction with apreviously- approved sign variance. VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. PC97-35 Concurred w/staff Granted SR6591 DH.WP --------------------------------------------------------- FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Applicant, Nancy K. from Swaim Signs, was present. CLOSED PUBLIC WAS HEARING. Melanie Adams, Associate Civil Engineer: Stated the K-Mart Corporation has not completed grading and street Improvements at the site as specified In plans approved by the City Engineer. The Public Works Department has attempted to work with the K-Mart Corporation to complete the .project but has been unsuccessful. Public Works Department staff will consult with the City Attorney's Office to consider taking legal actions against the security bonds posted for the project. Chairman Nlesse: Stated this is a matter for their information and to pass on to the corporation. It does not necessary have anything tc do with the current application. Nancy K., Swaim Signs, 1384 East 5th Street, Ontario, CA: Stated she is with the sign company but she was in about 1 year ago with other signs (monument) that were a 3 level type with a condition which was a K-Mart issue (landscaping not being completed). This current project is not through K-Mart, but a sole preparator there, as a lessee. Greg Hastings,Zoning Manager, Planning Department: Stated a copy of the resolution will be going to the property owners as well. So they can still make a comment on that. 03-31-97 Page 27 ACTION: Concurred with staff that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class II, as defined In the State EIR and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirements to prepare an EIR. Granted Variance No. 4251. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Mayer absent) DISCUSSION TIME: 6 minutes MEETING ADJOURNED AT 3:16 P.M. TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MORNING WORK SESSION OF APRIL 14, 1997 AT 10:30 A.M. FOR AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UPDATE, FOR A SAVI RANCH WAYFINDING SIGNAGE PROGRAM UPDATE, FOR AN FOR AN UPDATE OF VARIOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES, AND FOR A DISCUSSION REGARDING THE ROSE'STREET TOUR. Respectfully submitted, Ossie Edmondson Senior Word Processing Operator 03-31-97 Page 28