Loading...
Minutes-PC 1998/06/22SUMMARY ACTION AGEN®A CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING CO MISSION MEETING MONDAY, JUNE 22, 1998 11:00 A.M. STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSION OF VARIOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES (AS REQUESTED BY PLANNING COMMISSION) PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW 1:30 P.M. ° PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, NAPOLES, PERAZA, WILLIAMS COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: NONE STAFF PRESENT: Selma Mann Annika Santalahti Greg Hastings Cheryl Flores Linda Johnson Kevin Bass Alfred Yalda Margarita Solorio Ossie Edmundson Assistant City Attorney Zoning Administrator Zoning Division Manager Senior Planner Senior Planner Associate Planner Principal Transportation Planner Acting PC Support Supervisor Senior Secretary 06-22-98 Page 1 ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: None REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREY: APPROVEDI Continued to b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3711 -REQUEST FOR 7-6-98 DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE: Marvin Stober, 1811 East Mauretania Street, Wilmington, CA 90744, requests determination of substantial conformance to permit and retain a 16 square foot addition to an existing freestanding sign in conjunction with apreviously-approved automobile service station with accessory uses. Property is located at 5650 East La Palma Avenue -Texaco Service Station. Chairman Bostwick announced this item would be continued to July 6, 1998 and asked if there was anyone present. There was one person present who wanted to give his testimony. Isa Albert Bahu, 5700 East La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA: Stated the applicant is applying for a variance for his conditional use permit to allow another "pod" on his price sign for his car wash which should npt be allowed. ~He submitted photographs.] In the oil industry the first three or four prices are unleaded, mid-grade, super and diesel. In looking at the photographs the applicant's top price looks tike the unleaded (gasoline) price but he has put the unleaded price up there with the car wash. It is 10¢ cheaper. He feels it is very deceptive and should not be allowed to do this. He can not fairly compete with the applicant because he can vary that price more than 10¢ and there is noway he can compete. If he had it somewhere else, on the side and advertised in a different manner then he would have no opposition to it, but the way he has the board set up and the pricing is made to look cheaper than his top three prices. 06-22-98 Page 2 B. a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREY.-APPROVED Continued to b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3742 -REQUEST FOR 8-3-98 DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE: Cory Remp (Puddles Car Wash), 2037 East Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92806, requests determination of substantial conformance to retain two (2) wall signs in conjunction with a previously- approved car wash facility. Property is located at 2037 East Ball Road -Puddles Car Wash. SR7149TW.DOC Applicant's Statement Cory Remp, Puddles Car Wash, 2037 E. Ball Road, Anaheim, CA: Stated that they are requesting approval to retain a couple of signs already posted. The signs have brought them much needed business. It has been very devastating to their industry this past year with "EI Nino". They have had a 60% drop in business over last year due to the rain. They have noticed a dramatic change in business since these signs have gone up. He believes these signs are aesthetically pleasing to the property. He feels that the signs blend well with the building and the lettering in the signage matches the roof. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Bristol: Asked Mr. Remp if he was aware that those signs are not permitted. Cory Remp: Responded he did not know it at the time when he put them up but he found out later when Code Enforcement came by and informed him. At that time he went through the proper procedures to try to approve a permit for the signs. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Staff was hoping that some of these signs could be incorporated into one to obtain the same benefit because it does advertise car wash on three elevations which is visible from the street. Commissioner Henninger: Stated a problem he has with these signs is that they fit in well with the shopping center. The shopping center has signs all over it. He felt that if they deny these signs then it may seem that they are picking on the applicant. If he were going to deny these signs, then he would want a commitment from staff to look very carefully at the whole shopping center and work on all of the signs. Cory Remp: Stated the three signs are visible from the street, although one is inside away from the street and not easily seen. Commissioner Henninger: Staffs thought is that perhaps the applicant needs to look at the overall signage on the car wash and see if there are some other signs that would be better for him to remove than these. Commissioner Boydstun: Perhaps put his price on the inside rather than out in the street. Cory Remp: Regarding the sign with the special price, there are several neighboring business which he competes with. Most of those car washes, being that they have been there longer that Puddles Car Wash, have signage where they are able to advertise specials, etc. to motorist going by. Chairman Bostwick: Offered a motion for a continuance to August 3, 1998 to allow the applicant time to work with staff to come up with a complete sign plan, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and motion was carried. 06-22-98 Page 3 C. a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREY.-APPROVED) b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3994 -REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF FINAL PLANS: Environmental Landscape Concepts, Attn: Dan Mickelson, 2490 North Glassell Street, Orange CA 92865, requests review and approval of final landscape and lighting plans for apreviously-approved outdoor swap meet marketplace. Property is located at 1500 North Lemon Street (formerly Anaheim Drive-In). ACTION: Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously-approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Commissioner Henninger offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Gommission does hereby approve the final landscape and lighting plans based on consistency with the previously-approved Revision No. 1 of Exhibit No. 1 and the conditions of approval contained in City Council Resolution No. 98R-66 adopted in conjunction with the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 3994, and further stipulating that the property owner shall be responsible for proper maintenance of the chain link trash enclosure fencing at all times and that five (5) additional trees shall be provided. Approved Approved with the addition of 5 trees Applicant's Statement: Dan Mickelson, Environmental Landscape Concepts (landscape architects): Was present representing Pacific Theaters. Commissioner Henninger: Requested that the applicant add 5 more trees on any of the streets on the property, otherwise a waiver would be needed. pan Mickelson: Agreed to add 5 more trees. 06-22-98 Page 4 D. a) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT N0.313 (PREY.-CERTIFIED) I Approved b) ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-2 FINAL SITE PLAN Approved ADJACENT TO WEST STREETIDISNEYLAND DRIVE: Walt Disney World Company, 500 South Buena Vista Street, Burbank, CA 91521, requests review and approval of the Final Site Plan setting forth the width and design of landscaping for the Pacific Hotel setback area adjacent to West Street/Disneyland Drive. Property is located within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Zone (1717 South West Street). ACTION: Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously-certified EIR No. 313 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Finai Site Plan (identified as Exhibit Nos. 1 through 7 on file in the Planning Department), based upon a finding that the Final Site Plan is in conformance with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2. Linda Johnson, Senior Planner, Planning Department: Stated this is a proposal to landscape the existing Pacific Hotel setback area with a layered landscape concept including a mixture of Palm trees, shrubs and groundcover which are compatible with the landscaping planned for the West Street/Disneyland Drive street right-of-way. The staff report describes the proposed planting materials and the Commission has been provided with a site plan and cross-sections showing the proposed landscaping. The new landscaping will be installed in connection with the Disneyland Drive street improvements which are currently underway. Staff has reviewed the proposed plans and has found that the Final Site Plan is in conformance with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan requirements. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that the previously-certified EIR No. 313 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request and that the Final Site Plan be approved based upon finding that the Final Site Plan is in conformance with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. 06-22-98 Page 5 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: 2a. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 300'(PREV.-APPROVED) Approved 2b. AMENDMENT NO. 3 OF THE ANAHEIM HILLS FESTIVAL Recommer SPECIFIC PLAN (SP90-11 to City Cou 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4030 Granted 2d. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF ITEMS 2a AND 2c Approved OWNER; TWA-Anaheim Limited Partnership, 200 East Long Lace Road, #300, Bloomfield, MI 48303 AGENT: American Housing Partners'Inc., Attn: Robert Zamora, 19700 Fairchild, #170, Irvine, CA 92612 LOCATION: 135-185 South Festival Drive The Anaheim Hills Festival. Property is 17.1 acres located on the south and west side of Festival Drive, 762 feet south of the centerline of Santa Ana Canyon Road. Amendment No. 3 of the Anaheim Hills Festival Specific Plan (SP90-1) -proposal to amend the Anaheim Hills Festival Specific Plan (SP90-1) to conditionally permit senior citizen apartments within Development Area 4 (Business Commercial Area). Conditional Use Permit No. 4030 - to permit a 259-unit, 3-story senior citizen apartment complex within the Anaheim Hills Festival. Advertised as Environmental Impact Report No. 256. Continued from the Commission meeting of June 8, 1998. SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION NO. PC98-96 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC98-97 SR7152KB.DOC (Commissioner Henninger abstained from voting since he was not present at the previous public hearing concerning this item.] Applicants Statement: Jeff Farano, 2300 East Katella Avenue, Suite 235, Anaheim, CA: Stated he is representing the applicant. They have been working with staff over the past two weeks and have compile the paperwork that they are required to have for the ordinance and submitted the findings that they feel are necessary to support any waiver, not including the affordability. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Stated there were a couple of conditions that staff is recommending to be added. Condition No. 5, 16 and 23, regarding the trash enclosure design. The exhibits show a covering on the trash enclosure design. Staff would like to make sure that it is incorporated into the plans that are submitted for building permits. To add a condition that shuttle service be made available to transport senior citizen residents to services that are not within easy walking distance from of this project. 06-22-98 Page 6 Jeff Farano: They did not have an objection to those changes and agreed to them. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Determined that the previously-certified EIR No. 300 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Recommended approval of Amendment No. 3 of The Anaheim Hills Festival Specific Plan (SP90-1) to the Ciry Council. Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 4030 with the following changes to conditions: Modified Condition Nos. 5, 16 and 23 to read as follows: 5. That trash storage areas shall be providedand maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage areas shall be designed (including the covering as shown an the exhibits submitted by the petitioner), located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as clinging vines or tall shrubbery. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 16. That final plans shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item for the following aspects of this project: (a) elevations drawings, (b) exterior building materials and colors (including roofing), (c) landscaping, (d) lighting, (e) signage, (f) fencing, carport and trash enclosure design (with a covering as shown on the exhibits submitted by the petitioner), and (g) mechanical equipment. 23. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 9, 12, and 21, above mentioned, shall be complied with. Added the following condition: That shuttle service shall be made available to transport the senior citizen residents to services that are not within easy walking distance of this project. ACTION: Commissioner Boydstun offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peraza and MOTION CARRIED(Commissioner Henninger abstained),. thgt the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby request City Council review of Environmental Impact Report No. 300, Amendment No. 3 of the Anaheim Festival Specific Plan (SP90-1) and Conditional Use Permit No. 4030. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Henninger abstained because he was not present at the previous meeting when this item was discussed) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, stated this item will be set for a hearing before the City Council. DISCUSSION TIME: 4 minutes (1:43-1:47) os-2z-sa Page 7 3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.4024 7-6-98 OWNER: Melinda Grubbs, Attn: David Grubbs, 2 Civic Plaza, #240, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION: 309 East Ball Road -Yamaha Golf Cars. Property is 1.24 acres located on the north side of Ball Road, 480 feet east of the centerline of Technology Circle. To permit and retain an automobile (golf cars) sales lot within an existing 28,047 square foot industrial building with outdoor displays. Continued from the Commission meeting of June 8, 1998. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. e® o o m e Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Stated the applicant would not be able to attend and requested that this item be continued for 2 weeks. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the July 6, 1998 Planning Commission meeting as requested by the petitioner. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 06-22-98 Page 8 4a. CEQANEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVEI 4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 4c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3124 (READVERTISED) OWNER: Sanderson J. Ray Development, 2699 White Road, Suite 150, Irvine, CA 92614 AGENT: Bart Rainone, 3364 East La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 3364 East La Palma Avenue -Concourse Bowling Center. Property is 4.87 acres located on the south side of La Palma Avenue, 250 feet west of the centerline of Miller Street. To permit and retain an arcade, a day care center for up to 30 children, and accessory public dance hall in conjunction with an existing bowling alley (with accessory and incidental sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption) with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Continued from the Commission meeting of June 8, 1998. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. Continued to July 6, 1998 FOLLOWING IS A.SUMMARY-OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: ;- OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the July 6, 1998 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow additional time for the petitioner to meet with staff to resolve issues pertaining to the requested arcade, day care, and public dance hall operations. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 06-22-98 Page 9 5b. VARIANCE N0.4341 ~ 7-6-98 OWNER: Chevron Products Company, Attn: Mario Bautista, 1300 South Beach Blvd., La Habra, CA 90632 AGENT: RFA, Inc., Attn: Rich Stark, 2050 South Santa Cruz, Suite 2100, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 1801 South Harbor Boulevard -Chevron Service Station. Property is 0.50 acres located at the southwest corner of Katella Avenue and Harbor Boulevard. Waiver of permitted freestanding monument signage to permit two (2) double-faced freestanding monument signs. VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. to ® • s o e o OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the July 6, 1998 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow additional time for the petitioner to meet with staff to resolve issues pertaining to the location and design of the requested signs. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed, 06-22-98 Page 10 -- 6a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 1 Contin 6b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1081 IREADVERTISED) 7-6-98 OWNER: Wang Chih W. & Mei H. L., 539 South Santa Anita Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91107-5251 AGENT: Debra Gray, 3360 West Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801 LOCATION: 3360 West Lincoln Avenue - EI Dorado Inn. Property is 1.80 acres located on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, 785 feet east of the centerline of Knott Avenue. To amend or delete conditions of approval pertaining to motel operations. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. ® • e e OPPOSITION: None AGTION: Continued subject request to the July 6, 1998 Planning Commission meeting as requested by the applicant. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 06-22-98 Page 11 7a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 1 Continued 7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1042 tREADVERTISED) 7-6-98 OWNER: Wong Kuok-Su, 539 South Santa Anita Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91107-5251 AGENT: Debra Gray, 3360 West Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801 LOCATION: 2630 West Lincoln Avenue -Valencia Inn. Property is 1.69 acres located on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, 300 feet east of the centerline of Stinson Street. To amend or delete conditions of approval pertaining to motel operations. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. to s o ® s o m OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the July 6, 1998 Planning Commission meeting as requested by the applicant. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 06-22-98 Page 12 8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 8b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 8c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.4033 OWNER: The Garden Church, Inc., Attn: Pastor Brian Crow, 8712 East Santa Ana Canyon Road, Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 8712 East Santa Ana Canyon Road -The Garden Church. Property is 64.81 acres located on the south side of Santa Ana Canyon Road, 3,759 feet west of the centerline of Gypsum Canyon. To permit a 29,503 square foot church with accessory day care center, fellowship hall and multi-purpose building in conjunction with existing modular buildings with waiver of (a) required setbacks for institutional uses and (b) minimum number of parking spaces.. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC98-98 Denied Granted, in part Their final plans do not include any requests for variances, waivers or other exemptions. They concur with staffs recommendations and findings, with one exception. Condition No. 16 and 18 as they relate to each other. Condition 16 requires the removal of the current temporary buildings from the site, either prior to the issuance of a building permit or within one year. They would like to have the one year changed to a 5 year period because there will be a gradual transition phase from the temporary to the permanent buildings. Other than that they fully concur with staffs recommendations. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED, Commissioner Henninger: Recommended adding wording that appropriate permits shall be obtained before any disturbance of Lots 2 and 3. _ _. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Denied Waiver of Code Required on the basis that requested waivers were deleted following public notification. Granted, in part, Conditional Use Permit No. 4033 with the following changes to conditions: Modified Condition Nos. 16 and 18 to read as follows: 06-22-98 Page 13 16. That within a period of five (5) years, the existing modular buildings (except for the dressing room and restroom located adjacent to the outdoor chapel at the western portion of the property) shall be removed from the subject property. 18. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 13, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03:090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Added the following condition; That appropriate permits shall be obtained before any disturbance (including but not necessarily limited to grading and clearing) of Lots 2 and 3 takes place. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Napoles declared a conflict of interest) Sefma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 8 minutes (1:49-1:57) 06-22-98 Page 14 9b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.4035 Denied OWNER: Alireza Bahrami, 329-331 North State College Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92806 AGENT: Mary Ann Chamberlain, 2426 South Rita Way, Santa Ana, CA 92704 LOCATION: 329-331 North State Colleae Boulevard. Property is 0.37 acre located on the west side of State College Boulevard, 150 feet south of the centerline of Redwood Avenue. To permit and retain an automobile sales lot with a maximum of five (5) vehicles on display. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC98-99 SR7148TW.DOC Applicant's Statement Mary Ann Chamberlain, agent for the owner: Stated a concern of staff referenced in the staff report was the affect on the surrounding neighborhood. There are neighbors with them today speaking in favor of the project. They will be presenting a petition of business owners in the area in favor of the project. She introduced Greg Ross, owner of the proposed business. Greg Ross, owner of the proposed Ideal Motors: Stated he has a similar business in San Juan Capistrano. (He submitted information on the San Juan Capistrano operation to Commission. Included in the information is a letter of reference from the business park owner.] The conditions at that location are for a smaller lot. It is in a business park and conditioned for 2 parking spaces. He has a great relationship with that City and the commercial park for the past 3 years of this operation. Staff recommended denial stating that the applicant already had cars on the lot and was conducting business before receiving approval from Commission. He explained that they only created a "working" model of what it was going to look like in preparation of this putilic hearing. There was no business conducted nor cars sold. The cars that were there were actually borrowed from local dealerships to show that there was very little congestion and that the plan works. The other condition regarding the noise was a major concern listed throughout the staff report. He explainedrthat this site is going to consist of high line vehicles. There will be no banners, slogans, balloons, nor loud noises such as compressors because they wash the cars across the street. There is a car wash that is going to be getting their business and down the road they do the repairs. There is also a tune and smog shop nearby. There will be no noise concerns. He has never had a complaint at the previous location and this will be similar. The other concern were the neighbors. Some of the neighbors did sign a petition in favor of the proposal. The previous lot was very dark. It had a lot of broken glass, graffiti, etc. There will also be no trucks .moving vehicles in and out. All the cars that are brought there are personally driven and are very well kept. He introduced his partner and general manager, Ivan Pavonavic. Ivan Pavonavic (spelling not given), 4922 East Glenview Avenue, Anaheim, CA: Stated Anaheim was the first town that he lived in when he first came to this country. Most of the time he has worked in South Orange County. When he and Mr. Ross joined and discussed where to open the dealership, their first choice was Anaheim. 06-22-98 Page 15 They will be selling only high line vehicles. Mainly through advertising and the display of five vehicles. He is looking forward in working and living in Anaheim. Jack Webb, 1938 East Redwood, Anaheim, CA: Stated his property is behind subject property. Transients were throwing things into his yard but now with this proposed project coming in he will no longer have that problem. He felt this is a good use for the neighborhood and recommended that Commission approve this project. Marvin Rogers: Stated he owns the property at 315, 319, 321 North State College Blvd., directly adjacent and behind subject property. Since Mr. Pavonavic has purchased this property he has completely renovated it, lit it, removed all the homeless people sleeping there, has beautified it by putting in nice landscaping and completely renovating it. He is in favor of this proposal. Bob Mickelson, 1600 W. Struck, Orange, CA: Stated Alex Bahrami, owner of subject property, has asked him to speak on his behalf. Mr. Bahrami has had experience in retail auto sales and so understands the business and therefore understands that he must keep all three of his tenants happy if he is going to retain them. Mr. Bahrami agreed that he would accept conditions that would restrict this use, realizing that even though the applicants are going to run a good operation, should they sell the business then the new owner would have to comply with the same conditions and Mr. Bahrami fully intends to comply. Condition No. 2, they agree that a landscape plan be submitted for review and approval by the staff. They requested that they not require precisely 7, 15 gallon trees in the parkway area along State College Blvd. There are only 52 feet of frontage at that parkway. It may very well be that 7 trees will fit but they would like to be able to have the flexibility to have less if they find they do not have enough space for the 7 trees and perhaps put more trees on the perimeter. Condition No. 3, requires the installation of a new monument type sign. Skipping to Condition No. 13 they realized that they only are allowed fora 1 year permit. They would prefer to have the first year with the existing sign and when they return for a second year then at that time they would install a new sign. They would at that time submit a sign program as required for the remainder of the signs. Condition No. 8 -they agree that it be limited to the display of only 5 vehicles. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked if any of the neighbors on Almond Drive were contacted. Jack Webb: The day they received the notice in the mail, the mailman indicated that he had delivered around Almond Drive all the way down to the Redwood Avenue. It was also posted at the corner of Redwood and State College Boulevard. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked who distributed the petition? Greg Ross: Responded he went to the immediate surrounding neighbors. Commissioner Boydstun: Asked whether he went to State College and not back to Almond. Greg Ross: Theyare well buffered by the apartment complex. It almost circles around them to the back. He did not want to annoy or seem too pushy by knocking on too many doors. Chairman Bostwick: Asked what actual type of vehicles did he propose to sell? Greg Ross: Responded hi-line cars such as Mercedes, Toyota Camry, Nissan Maximas, Acuras and newer models under warranty. In the past he has had much success in getting premium cars and letting the cars sell themselves. Chairman Bostwick: Asked what is his volume presently in San Juan Capistrano? 06-22-98 Page 16 Greg Ross: Currently he has the two spots filled in San Juan Capistrano and probably does about 2 to 5 per month. Commissioner Williams: Asked if the cars are owned by his dealership or are they consignment? Greg Ross: Responded they are owned by himself. Ivan has a tremendous experience, 25 years in the car business. They get some from auction or trade-ins that they were either going to wholesale or to a lot. The relationship is so strong in the surrounding area that this works for them quite well. Commissioner Williams: Asked if he was running a storage lot somewhere and running them in and out, just changing inventory. Greg Ross: No. They fill the gaps as they arise and rotate. It is very easy to rotate in this location. Commissioner Bristol: Has a concern with the parking. He referenced the letter from Code Enforcement and asked Mr. Ross how the business could survive on 5 vehicles. Greg Ross: He has been very successful in San Juan Capistrano with just the 2 spots and it is actually quite easy to sell them if you have the right cars. Knowing that the owner has a vesting interest in the other tenants there at the location, they will be adhering to his strict guidelines. Commissioner Williams: Asked if that would be 5 vehicles outside and 1 inside or 5 total? Greg Ross: Responded that would be 5 outside. The one inside is limited by the width but that is their plan. There is a large room that they only need a couple of desks and an office for Ivan, who will be there most of the time. One vehicle could fit with plenty of room to spare. Chairman Bostwick: Asked if there would be other staff besides Ivan at the lot? Greg Ross: Stated he does DMV work, Mr. Pavonavic has complete background in the financing and sales. Basically he is the closer from beginning to the end. He is well versed with experience. Especially in financing and the sales. Chairman Bostwick: Stated the major concern is if Mr. Ross and Mr. Pavonavic are not around in the future and someone else comes in to operate this business they may have a completely different situation. This use does not fit the neighborhood, it is not big enough. There have been some other car lots in the past, particularly on Anaheim Boulevard, that were small in size that can not operate under these conditions and becomes a overcrowding situation causing many problems. Commissioner Henninger: Stated he has the sense they are not dealing with a car lot. He is more of an auto broker. He thought perhaps they could approve this for 6 months and see how it works. Chairman Bostwick: He felt the 1 year condition is probably adequate. - - Commissioner Bristdl: Thought it was a good idea but he agreed with staff that this is not the appropriate site for this type of business. Greg Ross: An important factor was that Ivan has been in the business for several years and this would be a dream situation where they would be grassroots. So the long term ramifications are there. The 1 year condition is a good way to measure and see how it goes. Commissioner Williams: The business is more of a car broker than a dealership. If they are willing to comply with all the conditions and willing to spend that kind of money why not approve this for 1 year. If they have problems then revoke the conditional use permit, Greg Ross: Stated they would be willing to have a condition of 6 months rather than 1 year. 06-22-96 Page 17 IN FAVOR: 2 people spoke in favor of subject request. OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration (Vote: 4-3, Commissioner Bristol, Commissioner Boydstun and Commissioner Peraza voted no) Denied Conditional Use Permit No. 4035 based on the following: (1) That the requested use of this property as a automobile sales facility has the potential for a significant detrimental impact on the residential properties to the south, west, and northwest of the property due to the noise and high level of outdoor activity associated with automobile sales agencies. (2) That the property is not large enough to support the automobile sales facility without providing a substantial buffer area to reduce the detrimental aspects (such as noise) of the business from the abutting residences nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the surrounding residential neighborhoods. (3) That automobile sales facilities are unique commercial facilities which require independent development and methods of operation for the location, circulation, display and advertising of vehicles, and that development of such facilities are not compatible within commercial strip centers with shared parking and access. (4) That the site is not sufficient in size to allow for the full and adequate development of the site as an automobile sales facility in a manner that could adequately separate the facility from the adjoining commercial uses (presently furniture and carpet stores). Plans do not include a drop off area for any truck delivery of vehicles that may occur. VOTE: 4-3 (Commissioner Williams, Commissioner Bostwick and Commissioner Henninger voted no) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 23 minutes (1:58-2:21) 06-22-98 Page 18 10a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 10b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved, in part 10c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.4036 Granted, in part OWNER: California Drive-In Theaters, 120 North Robertson Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90048-3102 AGENT: Rick Manners, 680 South Lemon Avenue, Walnut, CA 91789 LOCATION: 2150-2170 South State College Boulevard - CarMax. Property is 6.0 acres located on the east side of State College Boulevard, 570 feet south of the centerline of Orangewood Avenue. To permit an automotive sales lot with accessory service/repair facilities and two, 10-foot high, 150 square foot monument signs with waiver of (a) required parking lot landscaping, (b) permitted location of freestanding signs, (c) maximum sign width and (d) minimum sight distance requirements. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC98-100 SR7153KB.DOC ` .FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNINGCOMMISSION ACTION., ; , Applicant's Statement: Rick Manners, representing CarMax, 680 S. Lemon Avenue, Walnut, CA: Stated in reading the staff report he :indicated he wanted to clarify the following items: Page 3, item 11 -Regarding the nature of the building. According to staff, it is still called a "split-faced" block building. In their previous design review and CUP application with the City of Orange, original building was split face. They subsequently came in and submitted a "tilt up" concrete version of that which was approved. For clarification the building will be a tilt-up building versus concrete block. Architecturally, it has the same character and flavor as a split-face building. Page 4, item 16 -Hours of operation, under the service hours. Apparently on their application they had a "typo" on their application. The intention of the service area is for it to be a 24-hour operation, for their own internal prepping and cleaning up of the car which were brought onto the site either from auction or trade-in, etc. Once they come to the site they take them through their service building which is an enclosed building behind an 8 foot screen wall. They need to detail cars, do tune-up, etc. Typically that is done on a 24-hour basis, 7 days a week, so they constantly have their sales lot stocked. Essentially, the hours should be from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. versus 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p:m. Page 6, item 22 -Regarding signage which also goes into one of the conditions. He addressed that later Page 8, item 32(b) -Regarding their parking lot landscaping within their customer parking area. They do not have a :problem bringing that up to City standards. The 8 by 8 foot tree wells versus the 5 by 5 tree wells that they had shown on their plan, they do not have a problem bringing that up to Code. Page 9, item 2 -Pertaining to the monument sign on Orangewood. They concur putting that on the east side of the existing driveway would be an appropriate location. They are in agreement with the setback of 7 feet. Page 9, item 3 -Regarding the other freestanding signs, specifically on State College Boulevard and again on Orangewood. They did recently receive an approval on a 48 foot pylon on the freeway. The reason they went to 48 feet was their understanding of the I-5 fwy. improvements are that the freeway will be 06-22-98 Page 19 coming up 28 feet from where it sits today. In essence they will end up with a 20 fopt high pylon sign from the freeway. Being on the I-5 iwy. with its traffic count, they were looking at the visibility to the freeway clientele. The monument on State College Boulevard. They would be willing to live with the 8 foot high, 65 square foot monument sign on State College and the 8 foot high 25 square foot sign on Orangewood. They are in agreement with that. The pylon is not a readerboard. It is simply an opaque panel. It's a blue background and the letters "CarMax" and "Auto Superstore" are lit. The entire sign itself is vinyl faced which is internally illuminated. So the entire sign has a glow to it but only the CarMax letters read through. Their intention is that they cater to the freeway with a pylon but then for the streets themselves, coming :northbound on the I-5 fwy., off on State College, over to this side of the freeway, they need a means to bring their customer to their site. They feel that a percentage of their customers would be coming through the Orangewood driveway. That existing with several others in close proximity to it for adjacent properties. They felt that they do need an identifier there, not only for their trucks but for any customer who know the area and know they could come from the 57 freeway onto Orangewood. They would like a sign so that customers can find their driveway. Page 10, Condition Nos. 1, 2 and 3 under the Recommendation -Regarding recycling waste management. Afl of those functions on the current site plan fall on the City of Orange portion of the site. It seems that there should be some wording that states, should those functions come to the Anaheim side of the site then these conditions would pertain. Page 11, Condition No. 13 - Regarding a comprehensive sign program. The request is that it return to Commission. They would like to pinpoint the timing of that. He suggested adding wording that it could happen prior to permitting. Robert Lu, 2211 East Orangewood, Anaheim, CA: Stated he is concerned with the signage on Orangewood and how it would affect traffic coming in. In the applicant's proposal in the staff report stated that it was only for service but as the applicant just testified now they are looking at attracting customers coming through the back door. The applicant addressed the size issues so he felt that is something Commission should consider with the increased traffic coming on Orangewood. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner, Traffic Engineering Division: Stated regardless what city is responsible for the trash, his recommendation is that the trash truck turnaround should be provided on-site and believes they do have enough room on-site to comply. Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, Planning Department: Stated Condition No. 18, page 12, references connecting this conditional use permit to the business and the activity that is approved in the City of Orange also. Recommended rewording the last sentence. It essentially remains the same and reads, "That this Conditional Use Permit No. 4036 and all activities and uses permitted herein is expressly conditioned upon City of Orange CUP No. 2199-98 remaining in full force and effect and if the portion of this dealership in the City of Orange ceases to exist or said use permit expires or is terminated by the City of Orange it shall constitute sufficient grounds for termination of this Conditional Use Permit No. 4036". (A copy of the wording was then forvvarded to Commission and staff.] Rick Manners: Agreed with the rewording of Condition No. 18. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Stated the petitioner asked about the timing of Condition No. 13 as a Report and Recommendations item and that would be done prior to the commencement of the activity. It was suggested that it be part of the issuance of the building permit but that will accomplish the same thing. Chairman Bostwick: Asked if there would be a problem with adding the verbiage that the applicant suggested on Condition Nos. 1, 2 and 3, that should these functions be placed on the Anaheim side of the property that these conditions will take affect. Commissioner Henninger: Stated Mr, Yalda wanted the pickup on-site regardless of whether it was the Orange site or not. 06-22-98 Page 20 Annika Santalahti: Stated she thought it was possible on a condition like this when the other department is aware of the property a lot of the activities being outside of the City of Anaheim that they will very likely look at it to verify that there is no trash enclosure. if they receives a copy of the approved plans that the City of Orange has given, she thought that would serve to satisfy the condition. There may be some wording to make it very clear that if the other city approves the plan and it is on their side then that will suffice with the conditions. Commissioner Boydstun: Felt that 6 more trees are needed if the 25 foot planters are installed. Rick Manners: Agreed to comply with the request. So they will maintain the 5 by 5 tree wells and simply add 6 more trees. Commissioner Williams: Stated for a total of 46 trees in the tree wells. Commissioner Henninger: Regarding the second waiver, the setback for the sign proposed at Orangewood. Asked where their sign will be relative to the access that is going to meet Code requirements? Kevin .Bass, Associate Planner: Responded the sign on Orangewood will be on the east side of the driveway. The driveway is not directly centered within that 50 foot alley. There is sufficient room on the east side to allow them to place a sign that would comply with Code requirements for both setback to the adjacent property as well as setback from the street right-of-way. Rick Manners: Asked to get clarification on the adjacent property setback, as to whether the requirement is 16'/~ feet. Kevin Bass: Responded the way the plans scale, there is more than 16 feet of setback between the driveway and the eastem property line. That would allow the sign to be located next to the driveway. So it would have more than a 16'h foot setback from the adjacent eastern property line. That takes care of one waiver in terms of setback location and a 7 foot setback from the right-of-way on Orangewood would allow adequate line of sight distance for the other waiver. Rick Manners: Stated the reason he is asking the question is because he drove it again today and observed that the adjacent property owners are parking on both sides of the current driveway. On the west side, the State College side, they are diagonally parking approximately 18 to 20 feet, then there is the driveway. East of that they are parallel parking up to the existing fence. He is not sure they can meet the 16'h feet on that side where the driveway sits. Kevin Bass: The parking that is on the drive isle is there just because it is available. No one has taken the steps necessary to secure the property. He does not believe the parking spaces are suppose to be there. Rick Manners: He agreed, as point of reference far dimension when you look at what is there now he was not sure there is 18'6 on the east side of the driveway that is clear of the curb cut. During the action: Commissioner Henninger: Recommended approving Waivers A and B and denying Waiver C and D. Regarding Waiver A, they are waiving only the location of the required landscape but not the square footage of required landscape or number of trees. Regarding Waiver B, they are waiving the setback requirement only to the extent necessary to allow a sign directly adjacent to the driveway on the east side. Recommended amending the condition as stated by staff (Annika Santalahti). Cheryl Flores: On Condition No. 11 recommended adding that verifications shall be submitted to the Zoning Division prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Selma Mann: Stated that would be clarification by the City of Orange since they are the ones in charge of the mitigation monitoring program. 06-22-98 Page 21 OPPOSITION: 1 person spoke with concerns. ACTION: Approved the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Approved, in part, the Waiver of Code Requirement as follows: Approved Waiver A, in part, waiving only the location of the required landscaping, but not the square footage required or the number of trees; Approved Waiver B, in part, waiving the setback requirement only to the extent necessary to allow a sign on the east side of the driveway; and, Denied Waivers C and D. Granted, in part, Conditional Use Permit No. 4036 with the following changes to conditions: Amended Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 11, 12, 18 and 19 to read as follows: That trash storage area(s) shall be provided and maintained in location(s) acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as clinging vines or tall shrubbery.. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for Streets and Sanitation Division approval. If, however, the above requirement is provided entirely on the portion of this dealership located in the City of Orange and plans are submitted to and approved by the City of Orange, a copy of those approved plans shall be submitted to the Zoning Division, Anaheim Planning Department. Said approved plans will satisfy this condition. 2. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, for review and approval. If, however, the above requirement is provided entirely on the portion of this dealership located in the City of Orange and plans are submitted to and approved by the City of Orange, a copy of those approved plans shall be submitted to the Zoning Division, Anaheim Planning Department. Said approved plans will satisfy this condition. 3. That an on site trash truck turn around area-shall be provided in accordance with Engineering Standard Detail No. 610 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Said turn around area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted far bLilding permits. If, however, the above requirement is provided entirely on the portion of this dealership located in the City of Orange and plans are submitted to and-" approved by the City of Orange, a copy of those approved plans shall be submitted to the Zoning Division, Anaheim Planning Department. Said approved plans will satisfy this condition. 11. That the developer shall be responsible for compliance and any direct costs associated with the Mitigation Measures established by the City of Orange, as required by Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code, to ensure implementation of those mitigation measures identified in the Recommended Conditions of Approval (Nos. 15 through 41) approved in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No. 2199-98 for Mitigated Negative Declaration tJo. 1542-98, as adopted by the City of Orange. A certified copy of said compliance with those mitigation measures shall be submitted to the Zoning Division, Anaheim Planning Department, to ensure implementation. 06-22-98 Page 22 12. That the two (2) proposed freestanding signs on subject property shall be monument type not exceeding eight (8) feet in height as measured from the grade of the closest public sidewalk and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager to verify adequate lines of sight. The display area of the monument sign near the driveway on State College Boulevard shall not exceed sixty five (65) sq. ft. The monument sign on Orangewood Avenue shall be located on the east side of the driveway, as close as possible to the driveway, and the display area shall not exceed twenty five (25)sq.ft. 18. That the portion of this dealership located in the City of Anaheim shall not be developed as a separate or independent automobile dealership; and that the parking lot and auto staging/storage areas shall be developed in conformance with approved exhibits on file with the City of Anaheim (Conditional Use Permit No. 4036) and with the City of Orange (Conditional Use Permit No. 2199-98). Furthermore, this Conditional Use Permit No. 4036, and all uses and activities permitted herein, is expressly conditioned upon City of Orange Conditional Use Permit No. 2199-98 remaining in full force and effect; and, if the portion of this dealership located in the City of Orange ceases to exist or Conditional Use Permit No. 2199-98 expires or is terminated by the City of Orange, it shall constitute sufficient grounds for termination of this Conditional Use Permit No. 4036. 19. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 10; as conditioned herein and including that the total combined square footage of the landscaping required in the planters distributed throughout the parking area shall not be less than required by Code Section 18.04.060.050 "Parking Lot Landscaping:' Waiver (a), required parking lot landscaping, was approved, in part, by the Planning Commission and permits more than ten (10) adjacent parking spaces in a row without separation by a minimum forty eight (48) sq. ft. landscaped planter. However, the waiver, as approved, requires that the landscaped planters which are provided shall have a total combined square footage equal to, or greater than, what would be provided if the parking lot landscaping complied wholly with the above-mentioned Section 18 04.060.050 (that is, one 48 sq. ft. landscaped planter separating every teri parking spaces from the next ten parking spaces). VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: 21 minutes (2:22-2:43) 06-22-98 Page 23 ~ 11 b. VARIANCE NO. 4340 ~ 7-fi-98 to OWNER: Anaheim Hills Plaza, Inc., Attn: Bob Courtney, P.O. Box 16700, Encino, CA 91416 AGENT: LEADS, Inc., Attn: Eric Hull, 1820 East 1st Street, Suite 550, Santa Ana, CA 92705 LOCATION: 460 South Anaheim Hills Road -Anaheim Hills Plaza. Property is 11.4 acres located at the northeast corner of Nohl Ranch Road and Anaheim Hills Road. Waiver of (a) permitted commercial center identification and (b) maximum number of permitted wall signs to permit 3" monument signs for the existing retail center and 5 wall signs for a proposed retail store (Sav-on). ' Advertised as 2 monument signs. VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. OS5JK.DOC OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the July 6, 1998 Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to redesign the proposed signs. VOTE: 7-0 DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. 06-22-98 Page 24 12b. 12c. OWNER: EMIF, 1026 South Wall Street, Los Angeles, CA 90015 AGENT: Hani EI Haj, 944 South Brookhurst Street, Anaheim, CA 92804 LOCATION: 888 South Brookhurst Street. Property is 1.78 acres located at the northeast corner of Brookhurst Street and Brookmore Avenue. To establish a 4,727 square foot convenience market within an existing 24,341' square foot commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. ' Advertised as 25,095. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC98-101 Approved Granted SR6567DS.DOC ~._,~,: ~~,, ~, ..FOLLOWINGJIS A~SUMMARY'OF-THE PCANNING';COMMISSION;AC,T,ION.;,, -. " ~-~ - ~-- Applicant's Statement: Abdel AI-Omar, engineer for this project, 1144 N. Gilbert Street, Anaheim, CA: Stated they are proposing a convenience market where they will basically be selling Middle Eastern and Greek goods. Also they will have a meat department, grocery department, produce department and deli (without cooking). There will be no eating inside the proposed market. The only item of concern is Condition No. 2, which is the removal of the existing 25-foot pole sign and replacing it with a monument sign. Their understanding, according to the planning engineers, was that if the sign was placed there by a permit from the City then they do not have to remove it. He went to the Building Division and pulled the permits. They want that condition changed because the landlord will not agree to removing that pole sign and change it to a monument sign because it is a major expense on his part. Other than that all the conditions are acceptable to them. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner: Stated the sign that is currently there is permitted and therefore requested Condition No. 2 be deleted. Recommended rewording Condition No. 9 to read, "that the retail sales of alcoholic beverages and prepared fast food sales shall be prohibited". The reason for that is that there is an additional requirement for 5 extra parking spaces if there is fast food and staff would like this condition to specifically prohibit that. Chairman Bostwick: Asked Ms. Flores to explain exactly how that works. The applicant stated he was going to have a deli. Cheryl Flores: Responded the deli does not require the 5, it's the hot prepared fast food. She also recommended that Condition Nos. 15 and 18 be combined to read, "That building elevation plans incorporating any exterior shopping cart area shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for the review and approval of the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item, that unless an exterior shopping cart containment area is approved by the Planning Commission, shopping carts shall be stored within the building at all times". 06-22-98 Page 25 OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Approved Waiver of Code Requirement Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 4026 with the following changes to conditions: Deleted Condition Nos. 2 and 18. Amended Condition Nos. 9 and 15 to read as follows: 9. That the retail sales of alcoholic beverages and prepared hot fast food sales shall be prohibited. 15. That building elevation plans incorporating any exterior shopping cart area shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for the review and approval of the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. That unless an exterior shopping cart containment area is approved by the Planning Commission, shopping carts shall be stored within the building at all times. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 5 minutes 06-22-98 Page 26 ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boydstun and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby appoint Commissioner Steve Bristol as the 1998/1999 Chairman. ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristol and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby appoint Commissioner Phyllis Boydstun as 1998/1999 Chairperson Pro-Temp. Commissioner Peraza thanked staff for their help and the City Attorney for her guidance. He stated he will be available to attend upcoming Planning Commission meetings until someone else gets appointed.. Commissioner Henninger stated he had a great time being a member of the Planning Commission and thanked staff and the Planning Commissioners for all their hard work.. Chairman Bostwick thanked both Commission AI Peraza and Commissioner Bob Henninger for the great job they have done serving on the Commission. He stated they will be missed and they need them until they get new appointments. Cheryl Flores thanked Commissioners Henninger and Peraza for all their great work and stated staff will be taking them to lunch and will present them with a plaque in the near future. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 3:00 P.M. ', TO MONDAY, JULY 6, 1998 AT 11:00 A.M. ', FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW Submitted by: Ossie Edmundson Senior Secretary 06-22-98 Page 27