Minutes-PC 2009/02/18City of na ei
lannan o i~~AOn
~nutes
Wednesda~, Februara 18, 2009
Council Chamber, City Hall
200 South Anaheim Bouievard
Anaheim, California
Commissioners Present:
Commissioners Absent:
Staff Present:
CJ Amstrup, Planning Services Manager
Linda Johnson, Principal Planner
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney
David See, Senior Planner
Ted White, Senior Planner
Scott Koehm, Associate Planner
Vanessa Norwood, Associate Pianner
Kimberly Wong, Planner
Andy Nogal, Project Manager II
Raul Garcia, Principal Civil Engineer
David Kennedy, Associate Transportation Planner
Grace Medina, Senior Secretary
Agenda Posting: A complete copy of the Planning Commission Agenda was posted at 2:00 p.m.
on Thursday, February 12, 2009, inside the display case located in the foyer of the Council
Cham6er, and also in the outside display kiosk.
Published: Anaheim Bulletin Newspaper on Thursday, February 5, 2009
• Call to Order
• Preliminary Plan Review 1:30 P.M.
~ STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSION ON VARIOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS
AND 15SUES (AS REQUESTED BY PLANNING COMMISSION)
~ PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW FOR ITEMS ON THE FEBRUARY 18, 2009 AGENDA
o Recess to Public Hearing
• Reconvene to Public Hearing 2:30 P.M.
Attendance: 34
• Pledge of Allegiance: Commissioner Ramirez
• Public Comments
• Consent Calendar
• Public Hearing Items
• Adjournment
Stephen Faessel, Victoria Ramirez, Panky Romero
Chairman: Joseph Karaki
Peter Agarwal, Kelly Buffa, Gail Eastman,
None
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLAfVMIfVG CO~liMISSION MINUTES
Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 2:30 P.M.
Public Comments: iVone
Minutes
IT~M 1A
Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning
Commission Meeting of January 5, 2009.
Continued from the January 21, 2009 and February 2, 2009
Planning Commission meetings.
ITENi 1 B
Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning
Commission Meeting of January 21, 2009.
Continued from the February 2, 2009 Planning Commission
meeting.
ITEM 1C
Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning
Commission Meeting of February 2, 2009.
Motion to approve a
continuance to March 2, 2009
(Faessel/Buffa)
Approved
VOTE: 7-0
Motion to approve a
continuance to March 2, 2009
(Faessel/Buffa)
Approved
VOTE: 7-0
Motion approving Minutes
(Eastman/Agarwal)
Approved
VOTE: 7-0
02/18/09
Page 2 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLAfVNING COMMISSIOfV nAINUTES
Reports and Recommendations
ITEM NO. 2
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT MO. 2008-00071
COMDITIONAL USE PERMIT fVO. 2008-05369 AMD
VARIAfVCE NO. 2009-04771
RECOMMENDATIOM FOR CITY COUMCIL REVIEW
Owner: Sandy Stahl
ACR Trust
1380 South Sanderson Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92806
Applicant: Nancy Parker
Quiel Signs
272 South I Street
San Bernardino, CA 92410
Location: Code Amendment - Citvwide
CUP and Variance Reauest - 380 South
Sanderson Avenue: This property is
approximately 2.2 acres, with a frontage of 50
feet at Yhe westerly terminus of Sanderson
Avenue.
The applicant proposes an amendment to the sign code
section of Title 18 "Zoning" of the Anaheim Municipal
Code to permit freeway-oriented, freestanding
readerboard signs for business schools. The applicant
also proposes to install a 65-foot high freeway-oriented,
freestandin_g readerboard sign for an existing business
school. The proposed sign is taller and larger than
allowed by Code for freeway oriented signs.
Environmental Determination: The proposed action is
categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare
additional environmental documentation per California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Class 11
(Accessory Structures).
This item was continued from the February 2, 2009 Planning
Commission meeting and re-advertised to include the
proposed conditional use permit and variance.
Motion to deny Amendment
Resolution iVo. PC2009-021
(Agarwal)
No actipn
Approved motion and
resolution to deny requested
Code Amendment, Conditional
Use Permit and Variance
VOTE: 7-0
No action on Recommendation
for City Council Review since
project was denied
Project Planner.
David See
dsee @ anaheim. net
02/18/09
Page 3 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLAMMING CONiMISSION MIMUTES
David See, Senior Planner, provided a summary of the staff report dated February 18, 2009 along
with a visual presentation.
Chairman Karaki opened the public hearing.
Gary Quiel, Quiel Signs, 272 South I Street, San Bernardino, described the proposed sign and
provided the following information in support of the project: the new sign would provide the school
with better visibility; there is no difference between a business school and a private school; the sign
would be setback a considerable distance from the freeway; the owner would be in agreement with
lowering the sign to 45 feet if needed; the electronic sign would only display on-site items such as
school scheduling and job fairs; and, the sign copy would be regulated by Caltrans. He also stated
he had submitted one design and then submitted a revised design after discussions with staff.
Rick Thomas, Project Manager with Quiel Signs, 272 South I Street, San Bernardino, stated the sign
would announce classes with the objective of increasing enrollment since they are less than half full
now. He stated the 65-foot high sign is needed because of the height of other signs in the area
including signs at Hardin Honda, the Honda Center and billboards. The proposed sign would be 150
square feet in area, the same as the current sign. Having the electronic sign display would be the
most economical way to communicate and advertise the availability of classes.
Sandy Stahl, 1380 South Sanderson, Business Manager for the property, stated this is a private
school. The purpose of this new sign is to help raise enrollment as they are struggling to get students
in this economy. She concurred with the information provided by the two previous speakers and said
they were willing to make the signs shorter and smaller if needed.
Chairman Karaki, seeing no one indicating to speak, closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Buffa, commented the applicant has talked about how this use should have the same
signage criteria as a private school. She said the issue for her is not whether this school is like a
private school. The issue is this is a freeway-oriented sign. She does not believe this use qualifies
for a large freeway-oriented sign because it is different from the Honda Center in terms of general
community interest and the need for public roadways and community airspace to be used for
advertising purposes. She does not support the request. __..
Commissioner Romero said he does not want this area to be like Los Angeles where there is a glut of
freeway-oriented signs. He concurs with Commissioner Buffa that this does not qualify as a sign that
should be approved.
Commissioner Eastman asked what the staff position would be if the applicant lowered the sign
height to 45 feet.
Mr. See stated staff is not supportive of this proposal, even if the height of the sign were lowered.
Commissioner Faessel asked if staff could work with the applicant to administratively approve minor
modifications of the sign short of adding a readerboard.
CJ Amstrup, Planning Services Manager, replied that any change to the sign requiring a building
permit, would require the sign to be brought into conformance with the Code.
02/18/09
Page 4 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANNIfdG COMMISSIOM MINUTES
Commissioner Faessel asked if the owner could reface the sign, change the lettering or change the
color.
Mr. Amstrup replied that changing the face or painting the sign would be permitted; however, any
major electrical or structural change would need a building permit and require conformance with the
Code.
Chairman Karaki asked if they changed the electrical wiring to accommodate a readerboard, would
they be able to add a readerboard without having a building permit.
Mr. Amstrup replied that change would require a building permit and conformance with the Code
Commissioner Faessel commented that the applicanYs willingness to keep the height of the sign to
45 feet shows they are cooperative; however, any modification to the sign, including adding a
readerboard sign, would require a building permit and conformance with the Code. He concurs with
Commissioner Buffa about the applicant making a point that they are similar to a private school,
however, this property is not a three-acre site. There does not seem to be a way they could improve
their signage and increase their enrollment without requiring a sign permit.
Chairman Karaki stated that he concurred with staff's recommendation and the other Cornmissioners
as there are a lot of freeway-oriented business signs. This use does no# qualify for a freeway-
oriented sign.
Mr. See said even if the applicant were to change the existing sign to add a readerboard sign, that
would also require a zoning code amendment in addition to a conditional use permit.
Chairman Karaki asked staff to clarify if this was because of the size of the sign.
Mr. See said that the code would need to authorize a readerboard sign for this type of use and a
conditional use permit is required for all readerboard signs.
Commissioner~Agarwal offered a motion determining that a Class 11 Categorical Exemption serve as
the appropriate environmental determination for this request, denying the draft Ordinance for Zoning
Code Amendment No. 2008-00071 and adopting the resolution denying Conditional Use Permit No.
2008-05369 and Variance No. 2009-04771 attached to the February 18, 2009 staff report.
Grace Medina, Senior Secretary, announced that the motion passed with seven aye votes
02/18/09
Page 5 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANMIfVG COMMISSIOM MINUTES
ITEnfl NO. 3
RECLP.SSIFICATION NO. 2009-00227 APlD
IViISCELLANEOUS CASE MO. 2009-00298
Owner Anaheim Redevelopment Agency
And 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1003
Applicant: Anaheim, CA 92805
Location: 2748 West Lincoln Avenue: This property
is approximately 1.7 acres, having a frontage
of 125 feet on the south side of Lincoln
Avenue and located 669 feet east of the
centeriine of Dale Street.
The applicant requests the property to be reclassified
from the General Commercial (GG) zone to the Multiple-
Family Residential (RM-4) zone. The applicant also
proposes to construct a 45-unit affordable apartment
comp'lex with Tier 1 and Tier 2 Density Bonus incentives.
Environmental Determination: A Negative Declaration
has been prepared to evaluate the potential
environmental impacts of this project in accordance with
the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
{CEQA).
Resolution fVo. PC2009-022
Resolution No. PC2009-023
(Romero)
Approved
VOTE: 7-0
Project Planner.
David See
dseeQanaheim.net
David See, Senior Planner, provided a summary of the staff report dated February 18, 2009 along
with a visual presentation.
Comrnissioner_Romero stated this Reclassification would allow 61 dwelling units. He.asked staff if
there were any guarantees that the property would be developed as proposed.
Andy Nogal, Project Manager, stated the agreed upon units would be included in the agreement
between the Redevelopment Agency and the developer. Mr. Nogal stated the proposal is for 45
units. The General Plan would allow up to 36 units per acre, allowing up to 84 units on the site with a
density bonus.
Commissioner Romero stated his concern was the Reclassification would allow a higher density than
proposed.
Mr. Nogal replied that the reclassification would allow a greater number of units; however, the
agreement with the developer is for a total of 45 units.
Commissioner Buffa said that this is the type of project she wanted to see and asked how many units
would be allowed in the RM-3 zone.
02/18/09
Page 6 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANNING COMMISSION M}NUTES
Mr. See replied that the RM-3 zone would allow up to 41 units, including a 35 percent density bonus.
Commissioner Buffa commented that even with a density bonus in the RM-3 zone, the developer
would not get to the proposed 45 units.
Chairman Karaki opened the public hearing.
Reverend Jimmy Gaston, Church of Christ, described the project and gave a presentation which
addressed previous efforts to assist motel families and provide housing for seniors such as the Tyrol
Plaza Senior Apartments across from Boysen Park. He also summarized the past efforts to
redevelop the Lincoln Inn site over the last ten years. Mr. Gaston stated they would like to
commence construction in 18 months.
Chairman Karaki commented on the project having a good design
Commissioner Eastman commented that she liked the Tyrol Plaza project at State College Boulevard
and Vermont Street; however, she expressed concern about the number and look of satellite dishes
on balconies facing the streets. She asked if the developer could address the issue of satellite dishes
in this project.
Chairman Karaki concurred with Commissioner Eastman's comments regarding the Tyrol Plaza
project.
Commissioner Faessel commented that he had talked with the Reverend about this project. He said
that Esther Wallace submitted a letter supporting the project and reiterating the height concerns
associated with the previous proposal for the site. He said this revised project has met the needs of
the community and he supports this project.
Commissioner Agarwal commented that this is exactly the type of project he had hoped for last
August and that the project has been redesigned to address the Commission's concerns raised at the
last meeting. He further commented that the redesigned project has resulted in a win/win situation
with the community. He said this project will be a'benefit to the City. --•-
Chairman Karaki, seeing no one indicating to speak, closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Ramirez thanked the developer and Redevelopment Agency staff for working together
and the effort to outreach to the community. She supports the revised project; however, it is
unfortunate that some affordable units were lost during the redesign of the project.
Chairman Karaki concurred and stated the project will improve the aesthetics of the area.
Commissioner Romero offered a recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt the resolution
attached to the February 18, 2009 staff repod approving a Negative Declaration and approving
Reclassification Np. 2009-00227 and Miscellaneous Case No. 2009-00298.
Grace Medina, Senior Secretary, announced that the resolution passed with seven aye votes.
02/18/09
Page 7 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OPPOSITION: None.
CORRESPONDEMCE: One letter was received in support of the project.
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, March 12, 2009.
DISCUSSION TIME: 26 minutes (3:00 to 3:26)
02/18/09
Page 8 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANMIMG COMMISSION hAIMUTES
ITEM NO. 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT fVQ. 2008-05396
Owner: James Axtell
Kilroy Realty
12200 West Olympic Boulevard, #200
Los Angeles, CA 90064
Applicant: Jonathan Michaels
Techco
3125 East Coronado Street
Anaheim, CA 92806
Location: 3125 East Coronado Street: This property
is approximately 7.5 acres, with a frontage of
740 feet on the north side of Coronado
Street, a maximum depth of 550 feet, and is
located 253 feet east of the centerline of
Kraemer Boulevard.
The applicant proposes to conduct automobile-related
uses in an existing warehouse building including the retail
sales of automotive parts, automotive repair, vehicle
sales, vehicle storage, and to permit community and
private events with consumption of alcoholic beverages in
two meeting rooms.
Environmental Determination: The proposed action is
categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare
additional environmental documentation per Galifornia
Environme~ntal Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Class 1
(Existing Facilities).
Resolution No. PC2009-024
(Eastman)
Approved
VOTE: 7-0
Project Planner;
David See
dseeQanaheim.net
David See, Senior Planner, provided a summary of the staff report dated March 2, 2009 along with a
visual presentation.
Chairman Karaki opened the public hearing.
Jonathan Michaels, 3125 East Coronado Street, Anaheim, representing the applicant, stated he was
available for questions.
Chairman Karaki, seeing no one indicating to speak, closed the public hearing.
02/1 S/09
Page 9 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANNING COMMISSIOM MIMUTES
Commissioner Eastman offered a recommendation tha3 the Planning Commission adopt the
resolution attached to the February 18, 2009 staff report determirting that a Class 1 Categorical
Exemption is the appropriate environmental documentation for this request and approving Conditional
Use Permit No. 2008-05396.
Grace Medina, Senior Secretary, announced that the resolution passed with seven aye votes.
OPPOSITIOfV: None
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, March 12, 2009.
DISC'USSION TIME: 5 minutes (3:26 to 3:31)
02/18/09
Page 10 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANNIPIG COMMISSIOM ~lIINUTES
ITENI NO. 5
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2008-05395 AND
REQUEST FOR DETERMINATIOM OF PUBLIC
CONVEMIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2009-00055
Owner: Kook Hoon Cho
590 Whispering Ridge Lane
Anaheim, CA 92808
Applicant: Dick Evitt
5905 Winncliff Drive
Riverside, CA 92509
Location: 1151 North Euclid Street: This property
is approximately 1.18 acres, with a
frontage of 100 feet on the west side of
Euclid Street approximately 16 feet south
of the centerline of Cutter Road.
The applicant proposes to establish a convenience
market in an existing commercial building with a Type
21 (off-sale general) ABC license for the sales of beer,
wine and distilled spirits for off-premises consumption.
Environmental Determination: The proposed action is
categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare
additional environmental documentation per California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Class 1
(Existing Facilities).
Resolution Mo. PC2009-025
Resolution Mo. PC2009-026
(Buffa)
CUP
Approved, modified Condition No. 14
PCN
Approved, modified Condition No. 6
VOTE: 4-3
Chairman Karaki and Commissioners
Buffa, Faessel and Romero voted yes;
Commissioners Agarwal, Eastman and
Ramirez voted no
Project Planner.
Scatt Koehm
skoehm ~anaheim. net
Scott Koehm, Associate Planner, provided a summary of the staff report dated February 18, 2009
along with a visual presentation. Mr. Koehm read into the record changes to Condition No. 6 of
Public Convenience or Necessity Permit No. 2008-00055 to read as follows: "Beer and malt
beverages in quarts, 22 oz., 40 oz., or similar size containers are prohibited and shall not be sold in
packages containing less than a six-pack."
Chairman Karaki opened the public hearing.
Dick Evitt, 5905 Winncliff Drive, Riverside, representing the applicant, said he had mailed out letters
to all residents within 500 feet about this project. He said he understood the revised condition.
Commissioner Buffa clarified that the sales of the singles would not be allowed and wanted to make
sure the applicant understood this.
02/1 S/09
Page 11 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANNING COMNiISSION MINUTES
Commissioner Faessel clarified that the revised condition said no singles could be sold, but a six-
pack is fine.
Chairman Karaki said that was correct.
Commissioner Buffa stated that the Police Department was working with ABC to get this language
clarified in the license.
CJ Amstrup, Planning Services Manager, said that the condition could be modified to replace "six-
pack" with language to reflect the quantities sold by distributors and manufactures.
Commissioner Faessel said the condition should be modified to accommodate how packages are
actually sold, but still prevent single sales.
Mr. Amstrup said that staff understood the concept and would modify the condition.
Mr. Evitt asked if sales of three-packs would be allowed, but 32 and 40 ounce is not allowed and
singles cannot be sold.
Chairman Karaki confirmed this.
Chairman Karaki, seeing no additional speakers, closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Faessel said he would like to see the condition limiting the sales of single beverages
revised as discussed.
Commissioner Eastman said she wouid have liked a representative from the Police Department to be
available at the hearing to provide the Police DepartmenYs view on this property being located in a
high crime area.
Commissioner Ramirez said she was concerned about this census tract having a high crime rate and
being surrounded by districts with high crime rates.
~ _ _,_
Commissioner Faessel asked staff whether Condition No. 14 of the Conditional Use Permit needed to
be changed to match Condition No. 6 of the PCN.
Mr. Koehm clarified that both the Conditional Use Permit Condition No. 14 and the PCN Condition
No. 6 would have the same wording.
Chairman Karaki re-opened the public hearing.
Commissioner Faessel asked the applicant's representative for his opinion on Condition No. 19 of #he
Conditional Use Permit.
Mr. Evitt stated that condition was acceptable.
Chairman Karaki closed the public hearing.
02/18/09
Page 12 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLAfVNIMG COMMISSION MINUTES
Commissioner Buffa offered a recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt the resolutions
attached to the February 18, 2009 staff report determining that a Class 1 Categorical Exemption is
the appropriate environmental documentation for this request and approving Conditional Use Permit
No. 2008-05395 with a modification to Condition No. 14 to state that "Beer and malt beverages in
quarts, 22 oz., 40 oz., or similar size containers may not be sold individually and must be sold in
multi-unit, prepackaged quantities as delivered from the distributo~" and a Request for a
Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2008-00055 with a modification to Condition
No. 6 to state that "Beer and malt beverages in quarts, 22 oz., 40 oz., or similar size containers may
not be sold individually and must be sold in multi-unit, prepackaged quantities as delivered from the
distributor."
Grace Medina, Senior Secretary, announced that the resolution passed with four aye votes and three
votes in opposition. Chairman Karaki and Commissioners Buffa, Faessel and Romero voted yes;
Commissioners Agarwal, Eastman and Ramirez voted no.
OPPOSITIOM: None
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, March 12, 2009.
DISCUSSION TIME: 13 minutes (3:31 to 3:44)
02/18/09
Page 13 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANNIMG COMflAISSION IIAINUTES
ITEM NO. 6
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2008-05394 AND
REQUEST FOR DETERMINATIOM OF PUBLIC
CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY NO. 2008-00051
Owner: Inc Aoun
P.O. Box 308
Buena Park, CA 90621
Applicant: 7-Eleven
330 East Lambert Road
Brea, CA 92821
Location: 1685 West Katella Avenue: This property is
approximately 0.38 acre, having a frontage of
135 feet on the north side of Katella Avenue
and 140 feet on the east side of Euclid Street,
at the northeast corner of Katella Avenue and
Euclid Street.
The applicant proposes to establish a convenience market
in an existing commercial building with a Type 20 (off-sale
beer and wine) ABC license for the sales of beer and wine
for off-premises consurnption.
Environmental Determination: The proposed action is
categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare
additional environmental documentation per California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Class 1
(Existing Facilities).
Resolution No. PC2009-027
No action taken on PCM since
alcohol sales were not approved
as part of CUP.
~flotion to approve a Class 1
Categorical Exemption for this
request
(Buffa/Agarwal)
Motion Passed
VOTE: 7-0
Motion to adopt a resolution
allowing a convenience market
with the sale of beer and wine
(Karaki/Romero)
Motion Faiied
VOTE: 2-5
Chairman Karaki and Commissioner
Romero voted yes; Commissioners
Agarwal, Buffa, Eastman, Faessel
and Ramirez voted no
Motion to approve a resolution, in
part, to permit the convenience
market with no sales of beer and
wine _ _ _._
(Buffa/Agarwal)
Motion Passed
VOTE: 5-2
Commissioners Agarwai, Buffa,
Eastman, Faessel and Ramirez
voted yes; Chairrnan Karaki and
Commissioner Romero voted no
Project Planner.
Kimberly Wong
kwonq2~anaheim.net
02/18/09
Page 14 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLP.NNING COMMISSIOM MINUTES
Kimberly Wong, Planner, provided a summary of the staff report dated February 18, 2009 along with a
visual presentation. Ms. Wong stated that two emails were received with concerns about the project.
Copies of these emails were provided to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Ramirez commented that the slide in the presentation showed incorrect reporting
district boundaries.
Ms. Wong clarified that the reporting district map shown in the presentation was not correct and the
correct map was attached to the staff report.
Chairman Karaki opened the public hearing.
Phil Schwartze, 31872 San Juan Creek Circle, 5an Juan Capistrano, representing the applicant,
described the project and stated they understood the recommended conditions of approval.
Bob Saville, opposed, 1647 South Humor Drive, Anaheim, stated he did not believe there was a need
for another convenience market since there were approximately five similar businesses within a mile
of this location.
Jeff Tucker, 330 East Lambert Road, Brea, representing 7-11 Market stated he would be available to
answer any questions.
Commissioner Faessel asked Mr. Tucker to clarify the percentage of anticipated alcohol sales since
the report indicates that alcohol sales would account for 12 percent of the store's sales; however, the
business model states that 25 percent of the area would be dedicated to the sales of alcoholic
beverages.
Mr. Tucker responded the typical amount of sales of alcoholic beverages is between 10 to 15 percent.
Chairman Karaki asked how many cooler doors were proposed.
Mr. Tucker responded it could vary, with potentially 12 cooler doors including four for beer and wine
sales. , _._
Janet Rigby, opposed, 1661 West Sumac Lane, Anaheim, stated the following concerns: the
business being open 24 hours a day could result in negative impacts on the neighborhood, the
potentiai for an increase in crime activities due to vagrancy and this would add another convenience
market to the area.
Commissipner Faessel asked Ms. Rigby since PJ's Liquor would be moving to an adjacent center,
would this change her opinion.
Ms. Rigby responded that no, her position would not change as there are several other locations in the
vicinity and she could not see how another convenience market would be a benefit to the
neighborhood.
Dan Rigby, opposed, 1661 West Sumac Lane, Anaheim, stated the following concerns: there are at
least ten business locations in the vicinity where alcohol could be purchased so having another
02/18/09
Page 15 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
P'LANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
convenience market is not important to the area; more convenience markets would negatively impact
the area; and, he has lived in the neighborhood since 1961 and has seen an increase in crime and
graffiti in the neighborhood.
Dennis Myers, opposed, owner of 1665 West Katella Avenue, Anaheim, for 35 years, stated the
following concerns: he described several locations in the vicinity of the property where alcohol is
already sold; there has been an increase of homeless people in the area; and adding another
convenience market would be a problem.
Nadine Morris, stated the following concerns: there are plenty of convenience stores and other
businesses that sell alcohol in the area; the area would benefit more by the opening of different types
of businesses which are safe and family-oriented; and, there are safety issues associated with having
a business open 24 hours a day.
Commissioner Karaki asked Ms. Morris if the area is safe now.
Ms. Morris responded that it is okay, that she sometimes walks around the neighborhood at night, but
she is cautious.
Ozzie Bernal, opposed, 1562 West Kimberly Avenue, Anaheim, stated he has known the owner of
PJ's Liquor Store tor the past eight years and has liked going to that store. He said he did not want to
see them leave the current location and relocate to the property next door, but would continue to give
his business to PJ's Liquor Store at the new location.
Angela Bernal, opposed, 1562 West Kimberly Avenue, Anaheim, stated she does not want a 7-11
business to open where PJ's Liquor Store was located as she has liked that business.
Commissioner Faessel asked staff to identify the existing a~d proposed PJ's Liquor Store location.
Ms. Wong said the PJ's Liquor Store has been on the subject site and is proposing to relocate to the
property next door.
Commissioner_Faessel asked Mr. Bernal if the community was concerned whether the 7-11 market
would attract crime because the store would be open 24 hours a day.
Mr. Bernal responded that there are other locations in the vicinity with late hours, 7-11 marke#s tend to
attract homeless persons, he has not seen a homeless problem around PJ's Liquor Store; and, he has
seen a homeless problem at the 7 11 market on Ball Road.
Kevin Baker, opposed, 1660 Sallie ~ane, Anaheim, stated he is a 30 year resident of the area and
provided the following co~cerns: there has been an increase in homeless persons and panhandlers in
the area and adding a convenience market that sells alcohol would add to the existing problems in the
area; there were more ABC license locations in the area than identified on the map in the staff report;
there is not enough parking on the site since many of the spaces are used for Pizza Hut delivery
drivers and traffic problems cou{d increase due to this market; the application asserts that the market
needs to sell alcohol to keep the business viable yet only 12 percent of alcohol sales are projected as
noted in the staff report; the business being open 24 hours would have a negative impact on the area
by attracting people to this site at night; and this project would saturate the area.
02/18/09
Page 16 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANMING COiNMISSIOM MINUTES
Commissioner Buffa commented that the Commission was provided maps which show the location of
existing off-sale and on-site licenses.
Bill Estep, opposed, 1219 West Laster Avenue, Anaheim, Co-Chair of the South District, referenced a
petition signed by people opposed to adding another convenience market with alcohol sales to this
area. He stated concerns about this site being adjacent to the City of Garden Grove, that homeless
people come from Garden Grove to this area and adding a 24 hour convenience market could
increase crime in this area by giving them somewhere to hide.
Commissioner Faessel requested a copy of the petition.
Mr. Estep submitted a copy of the petition to the Planning Commission
Mr. Schwartz responded to the comments and said this business would be different than the existing
facility because of conditions of approval addressing graffiti removal and the business would sell beer
and wine, not liquor. He said that being able to sell beer and wine would result in a ripple effect with
people who purchase beer and wine, also purchasing other items in the store.
Chairman Karaki closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Faessel commented that the current law gave the Planning Commission great latitude
in PCN issues. When the public comes out as strongly as this case, it is important to look out for the
community. He did not have enough time to study the petition; however, he said he would not support
this project because of the strong public opposition.
Commissioner Eastman referenced the petition and said it appeared that only area residents signed
the petition unlike other petitions they had seen with many non-city resident signatures. She thanked
the speakers for expressing their concerns. She also commented that there are problems with vehicle
circulation on the site.
Commissioner Ramirez said she appreciated the testimony and did not believe there was a necessity
for a PCN since there were other businesses selling alcohoL Commissioner Ramireasaid, based
upon the testimony, she was not sure whether the market without the sales of alcohol would have a
detrimental effect on the neighborhood and did not believe the findings for denial of a conditional use
permit for the market could be made.
Commissioner Buffa said Commissioner Eastman had said that two cars could not pass in the
driveway. She asked if staff had reviewed the site for parking concerns and if there was adequate
width for cars to back up and if there was an adequate drive aisle.
Ms. Wong replied the parking is an existing on-site condition.
Commissio~er Buffa inquired whether the parking lot could be modified if the design is problematic
and if the negative impacts could conceivably be compounded by this use.
Mr. Amstrup replied there would have been a concern if staff saw increased traffic volurnes or issues
ot stacking, but the convenience factor of the parking lot was not a factor that staff looked at; however,
02/18/09
Page 17 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANNING COMMISSION NIINUTES
this does not preclude the Planning Commission from looking at the parking layout.
Commissioner Buffa commented that sufficient evidence had not been submitted to support the Public
Convenience or Necessity Permit or the Conditional Use Permit for alcohol sales. She also
commented that she continued to be concerned about on-site circulation, but this concern was not one
where she would recommend denial of the market.
Commissioner Agarwal thanked the community for their comments and said he did not think this area
needed another convenience market with the sales of alcohol.
Commissioner Eastman commented that the poor circulation on this site would not be appropriate for
a market and other uses might be more appropriate for this busy corner. She stated she did not
support the project.
Ms. Wong stated if the Commission were to make a recommendation to approve the project with the
sales of beer and wine, staff recommends changing the condition regarding sales of single beverages
to be modified the same as Item No. 5.
Commissioner Buffa offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Agarwal, to approve a Class
Categorical Exemption as the appropriate environmental documentation for this request.
Grace Medina, Senior Secretary, announced the motion passed with seven aye votes.
Commissioner Buffa offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Agarwal, to approve Conditional
Use Permit No. 2008-05397, in part, to permit the convenience market, but with no sales of beer and
wine.
Chairman Karaki offered an amendment to the motion, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to adopt
the resolution attached to the February 18, 2009 staff report approving Conditional Use Permit No.
2008-05397 and a Request for a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2008-00051
to permit the convenience market with the sales of beer and wine because this reflects staff's
recornmendations, the Police Department did not have an objection, the City does not have guidelines
for making determinations of public convenience or necessity, this is a convenience s#ore with alcohol
sales projected to be 12 percent of the total sales and this is not a liquor store.
Grace Medina, Senior Secretary, announced the motion failed with two aye votes and five votes in
opposition. Chairman Karaki and Commissioner Romero voted yes. Commissioners Agarwal, Buffa,
Eastman, Faessel and Ramirez voted no.
The Commission voted on Commissioner Buffa's motion, seconded by Commissioner Agarwal, to
approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-05397, in part, to permit the convenience market, but with
no sales of beer and wine.
Grace Medina, Senior Secretary, announced the mokion passed with five aye votes and two votes in
opposition. Commissioners Agarwal, Buffa, Eastman, Faessel and Ramirez voted yes. Chairman
Karaki and Commissioner Romero voted no.
No action was taken on the Request for a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No.
02/18/09
Page 18 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLAMNIMG COMMISSION MINUTES
2008-00051 since alcohol sales were not approved as part of Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-05397.
OPPOSITION: Nine persons spoke and two pieces of correspondence and one petition were
received in opposition to the subject request.
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p:m. on
Thursday, March 12, 2009.
DISCUSSION TIME: 55 minutes (3:44 to 4:39)
02/18/09
Page 19 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
ITEM NO. 7
Owner; City of Anaheim
800 West Katella Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92802
Applicant: Raymond Smith
Federal Heath Sign Company
4602 North Avenue
Oceanside, CA 92056
Location: 2000 East Gene Autrv Wav.
2000 South State Colleqe Boulevard and
2379 East Oranqewood Avenue: This property is
approximately 98.5 acres, and is located at the
eastern terminus of Gene Autry Way and having a
frontage of 675 feet on the east side of State College
Boulevard, 1,445 feet on the north side of
Orangewood Avenue, and 100 feet on Douglass Road
(Angel Stadium of Anaheim).
The applicant proposes an amendment to a previously-approved
permit to allow two electronic readerboard signs on the "Big A" sign
at Angel Stadium of Anaheim.
Environmental Determination: The proposed action is categorically
exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental
documentation per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines:Class 1 (Existing Facilities).
IVote: This item was advertised as a request to permit "four
electronic reader6oard signs on the "Big A" sign". The
applicant modified their request subsequent to the
advertisement of this item.
(Chairman Karaki left at 4:39)
Resolution fVo. PC2009-028
(Faessel)
Approved
VOTE: 6-0
Chairman Karaki absent
Project Planner.
Ted White
Iwhite ~anaheim.net
Ted White, Senior Planner, provided a summary of the staff report dated February 18, 2009 along
with a visual presentation.
Commissioner Buffa asked staff whether the lighting on the sign was also being updated.
02/18/09
Page 20 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLANMING COMMISSIOM MINUTES
Mr. White clarified the portions of the sign that were previously approved and the proposed changes
He said the lighting changes were previously approved.
Chairman Pro-Tempore Romero opened the public hearing.
Ray Smith, 4602 North Avenue, Oceanside, Federal Heath Sign Company, described the proposed
sign changes and stated he was in agreement with the recommended conditions of approval.
Chairman Pro-Tempore Romero, seeing no one indicating to speak, closed the public hearing.
Comrnissioner Buffa commented that she had concems about this change and while she did not like
the neon lighting, nothing in the Code prohibited it.
Commissioner Faessel offered a recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt the
resolution attached to the February 18, 2009 staff report determining that a Class 1 Categorical
Exemption is the appropriate environmental documentation for this request and approving an
amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05293.
Grace Medina, Senior Secretary, announced that the resolution passed with six aye votes.
Chairman Karaki was absent.
OPPOSITION: None
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, March 12, 2009.
DISCUSSION TIME: 7 minutes (4:39 to 4:46)
02/18/09
Page 21 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2009
PLAN(VING COMMISSION NiINUTES
ITEM NO. 8
ZOMING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2008-00076
Appkicant: Planning Department
Gity of Anaheim
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, CA 92805
Location: Citvwide
The City of Anaheim Planning Department has initiated an
amendment to Chapters 18.08 (Commercial Zones),
18.10 (Industrial Zonej and 18.38 (Supplemental Use
Regulations) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to eliminate
"Automotive - Car Sales, Retail or Wholesale - Office Use
Only" as a specific land use category.
Environmental Determination: The proposed action is
categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare
additional environmental documentation under Section
21080, Public Resources Code.
This item was continued from the January 5 and 21, 2009
and February 2, 2009 Planning Commission rneetings.
Motion Recommending City
Council Approval
(Eastman/Agarwal)
Approved
VOTE: 6-0
Chairman Karaki absent
Project Planner:
Vanessa Norvvood
vnonvood ~anaheim.net
Vanessa Norwood, Associate Planner, provided a summary of the staff report dated February 18, 2009
along with a visual presentation.
Chairman Pro-Tempore Rornero opened the public hearing.
Chairman Pro Tempore Romero, seeing no one indicating to speak, closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Eastman offered a motion that the Planning Commission determine this action is exempt
from the California Environmental Quality Act under Section 21080 of the Public Resources Code, and
recommend to the City Council that the draft ordinance attached to the February 18, 2009 staff report for
Zoning Code Amendment No. 2008-00076 be approved.
Grace Medina, Senior Secretary, announced that the motion passed with six aye votes. Chairman
Karaki was absent.
OPPOSITION: None
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attomey, presented the 22-day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, March 12, 2009.
DISCUSSION TIME: 5 minutes (4:46 to 4:51)
02/18/09
Page 22 of 23
FEBRUARY 18, 2q09
PLANIVING COMNiISSION MINUTES
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 4:51 P.M.
TO MONDAY, MARCH 2, 2009 AT 1:00 P.M.
FOR PRELIMINARY PLAM REVIEW
Respectfully submitted,
~~~ ~r."~,~.~~~~/~.
Grace Medina
Senior Secretary
JReceived and approved by the Planning Commission on March 76, 2009.
02/18/09
Page 23 of 23