Loading...
Minutes-PC 1999/10/11SUMMARI' ACTION AGENDA CITY OF ANAHEIi~! PLANNING COMMISSION MEETI~fG MONDAY, aCTOBER 11, 1999 11:00 A.M. ~ FISCAL YEAR 2000/2001 CDBG FUNDIlVG REQUESTS PERTAINING TO HlSTORICAL PRESERVATI4N, LAND USE ISSUES, CODE ENFORCEMENT, AND PLANNING STUDIES • STAFF UPDATE TO COMMISSION OF VARIOUS CITY DEVELOPMENTS AND ISSUES (AS REQUESTED BY PLANNING COMMISSION) • PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW 1:30 P.M. • PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMQNY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, lCOOS, NAPOLES,VANDERBILT, OhlE VACANT POSITION STAFF PRESENT: Selma Mann Greg Hastings Greg McCafferty Don Yourstone Alfred Yalda Melanie Adams Russ Sutter Happy Medina Margarita Solorio Ossie Edmundson Assistant City F~ttorney Zoning Division Manager Serior Planner Senior Code Enforcement Officer Principal Transportation Planner Associate Civil Engineer Police Sergeant Police Officer Planning Commission Secretary Senior Secretarv ~ P:\DOCSICLERICALIMINUTES1AC101199.DOC Ciry of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action AgEnda 10-11-99 Page 1 2000/2001 REQUESTS FOR CDBG FUNDS Planning Commission Meeting - October 11, 1999 Following is a summary of the discussion, which occurred in the moming study session of the October 11, 1999, Planning Commission meeting regarding 2000/2001 City Requests for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds. Richard LaRochelle, Code Enforcement Supervisor, indicated he is presenting a recap of 1998/99 and then go up to 2000/01. The staff assigned to the CDBG areas responded to 23,535 citizen complaints and did 33,551 inspections, which resulted in the observation of 32,227 violations in the CDBG areas. In the graffiti removal program in the CDBG areas they removed 303,472 square feet of graffiti from 4,489 locations in the target areas, and they removed 600,000 square faet, city-wide. He informed staff that they received a mobile paint lab from Anaheim Beaiatiful which is ~urrently being used, and which will help in the coming years. He indicated the Weekend Enforcement Program involves a senior code enforcement officer and two part- time officers. They compieted 1,477 inspections, observed 1,430 violations and issued 10 notices to appear in court to the violators. Since July ?" of 1998, the west Anaheim Code Enforcement officer conducted 4,216 inspections, obsei ved 5,100 violations and responded to 2,717 citizen complaints. They also filed 19 criminal complaints and issued 6 criminal citations to appear in cou~t. The officer assigned October 1,1997 to the Community Policing Unit did approximat,~ly 335 apartment inspections. They observed 11,418 code violations and filed on 25 of the property owners out of 44 properties. As of June 30th, the program no longer exists due to buoget reCUCtions. The CDBG fundin~ for the City Attorney that does the prosecution for 1998/99, filed 157 criminal cases. For the years 2000/01, they are expecting the same fun~ing as before to keep the Weekend Enforcement Program going. They need to reinstate ihe funding for the code enforcement officer to work with the Community Policing Unit so they can go after the pro~erty owners who are currently on probat~~n and continue thE quarterly inspections to be sure their properti~s are being maintair.ed. He indicated relative to the new mobile paint lab, they wouid also need funding for the extra supp~ies. Commissioner Koos asked what was the program that CDBG cut. Richard LaRochelle responded it was the Weekend Enforcement Program and the Community Policing Program. Commissioner Koos asked if it was approximately $117,000. Richard LaRochelle responded he believes that is correct. Commissioner Koos asked N~r. LaRochelle if he wouid be presenting the case for the CDBG hearings. Richard LaRochelle responded either himself or John Poole would be presenting the case. Commissioner Koos asked if they could demonstrate because CDBG was tight on money last year and the program was cut, was there a perception that the money couid be used better elsewhero. He asked Ciry of Anaheim Pianning Commissinn Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 2 Mr. LaRochelle if he could demonstrate what they didn't get to do last year without the money. He stated the mejority is from the neighborhoods and they have their own agenda. They need to show what the money is going to. Richard LaRochelle indicated that it's the same as their graffiti rem~val program because they have a seven-day coverage with two part-timers, court referrals and volunteers. He informed staff that a difference can be seen out there and they're keeping on top of the situation. Chairperson Boydstun pointed out that the paint can now be matched which makes a big difference. P.ichard LaRochelle concurred that they can match the paint, which dces make a big diiference. Commissioner Vanderbilt asked for clarification relative to the volunteers helping out and he asked Mr. LaRocheile if the volunteer group is included in the statistics mentioned earlier. Richard LaRocheile responded no. He stated the volunteers come out and do wall beautifications on Saturdays. The civic groups, church groups, and boy scouts, etc. wili come out on Sundays. He indicated they did approximately 2d0,000 square feet of walls, city-wide, especially on the main arkerials and he stated they don't have the "patch" look and thaYs where the volunteers come in. Commissioner Vanderbilt asked if iPs separately funded. Richard LaRochelle stated iYs basically volunteers. The CDBG funding and/or the general fund provides the paint and the volunteers provide their own roller handles. Commissioner Bristol asked how much money was allocated last year. Commissioner Koos responded it was a little over a million. Greg Hastings stated staff will be sending minutes over to Community Development and he indicated that there is one request for John Poole to take a look at some further information. He asked if there was anything else to be included relative to this subject. Chairperson Boydstun stated that she feels the Planning Commission r;eeds to stress strongly that these are necessary items and without Code Enforcement the City of Anaheim neighborhoods would be in dire straits. They do go anywhere they get a call if there is a problem, they're not just doing it for the neighborhoods. But you can see by the hours thai the neighborhoods tfiat are eligible for CDBG are where most of the money is spent and iYs strongly benefiting them, Greg Hastings asked if the Commission is supportive of all the aspects that Richard LaRochelle indicated. Commissioners responded yes. Commissioner Bristol referred to Santa Ana's program and he stated that this is the only thing that we have to match. Richard LaRochelle indicated this is all we have, Santa Ana does have the apartment inspection. Chairperson Boydstun stated they access the people for it, so ;hey get money for it. Commissioner Bristol pointed out that the apartment association with the County is going to support a City of Anaheim Planning Commfssion Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 3 ~~p~Y . -~. ' ~ i'.~_k ~ .:- 3~ i -~ r' ~. x ~~.. ~~ ; . ;_ ~ • : relnstatement in another four years because they have been very successful. f~e statod 75~0 of all their ~ ' cails in 1992 were in the 32,000 units: Currently, they are getting less than 13%. ' Commissioner Napoles concurred and he stated it is less than 13%. Commissioner Koos asked when the money was taken away what was the loss. ThaYs what needs to be told. Richard LaRochelle indicated the weekend enforcement needs to be continued, pius put the officer back on in the Community Policing Unit. Chairperson Boydstun indicated they need to point out what this gives us, so they could realize iYs their benefit because iYs the neighborhood's benefit. CDBG's make-up is different now and the neighborhoods make up by far the majority and they need to realize they are really the ones who are benefiting from it because without it they would be in dire straits. Planning Comrnissioners and staff unanimously supported the subject item. 5ubmitted by: /~~~ ~~i~cL,tc~-F.D Elly Fernandes Senior Word Processing Operator City of Anaheim Piannfng Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 4 ITEMS OF PUFsLIC INTEREST: Nane REPORTS AND RECOI~MENDATIONS A. a) CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - SECTION 15061(b)(3) Concurred w/staff I b) CODE AMENDMENT N0. 99-06: City-initiated (Planning Department), Recommend to 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805, request for Ciry Counci! the cansideration to amend Chapter 18.06 (vehicular parking and loading adoption of the requirements) for convenience markets and hotel/motel facilities. • code amendment with modifications. Continued from the Commission meeting of September 27,1999. (4-2, Commissionsrs ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Koos and Vanderbilt Napoles and MOTION CARRIED (one vacant seat), that the Anaheim City voted no) Planning Commission does hereby concur with staff that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 15061 (b)(3), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, catego; ically exempt from the requirements to prepare an EIR. Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded b~~ Commissior,sr Napoles and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioners Koos and Vanderbilt voting nu and one vacant seal;, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council adoption of Code Amendment No. 99-06, as proposed, with the following modification: Recommended amendment of C~de Section 18.06.050.0225, Convenience Market, Take-out, Food/Meal Service, to read as follov;s: "Five and one-half (5.5) spaces per 1,OU0 square feet of GFA plus three (3) parking spaces for the first additional use plus one (1) parking space for each ad~'~tional use theraafter, except that said additional spaces shall not be required when the use is integrated within a commercial retail center." SR7557CF.DOC SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION. Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, stated this item is to amend Chapter 18.06 pertaining to vehicular parking and loading requirements for convenience markets and hotei facilities. This item was continued from the meeting of September 27'h in order to erplore the convenience market portion. Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner, stated based on the last meeting they reviewed both proposed code changes. They recommended for the convenience market the same as previously which Ciry of Anaheim Pianning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 5 is 5.5 per 1,000 plus 3 additional parking spaces. They made modifications on the hotel/motel based on a discussion to include the number of employees within the restaurant for the hotels, which they changed from 6.7 per 1,000 to 8. Commissioner Koos sQated most cities in Orange County require 5 spaces per 1,000 for this use and others require only 4 spaces per 1,000. Staff's recommendation is 5.5 plus 3. He asked if Anaheim has special circumstances that would require a higher requirement than cities in Orange County. Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner s:ated one would be the number of visitors to the city and its diversity. He indicated that two other cities that they checked were less at 4 per 9,000. First gas stations came in with a convenience market, then they added food us~ and now the trend is two separate complete fast food services with a gas station. They see the trend changing and are trying to update their parking code based on the demand. Thby receive many parking variances for this type of use and felt this will eliminate the number of parking variances and streamline the application process that the applicant goes through. What they are recornmending may not fit all the uses but he felt it would serve the majority of the convenience markets throughout the city. Commissioner Koos was concerned that would actually generate a number of variances. He is not convinced that Anaheim needs to require more than the other cities in the County and is concerned it would place an undue burden on development of these uses. Commissioner Bristol asked if 5.5 exceeds %: a space of any city in Orange County. Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner confirmed that was correct. City of Irvine, Santa Ana, Buena Park, and Garden Grove are requiring 5; Fullerton requires 4. He concluded that the majority of the cities the size of Anaheim are requiring 4 and 5. Chairperson Boydstun feit that if it is changed to 5/3 then it would reflect the current change. Commissioner Bostwick was in favor of the 3 additional spaces for the first use and dropping it down to 1 or 2 additional spaces for each additional use thereafter. Since they have the 5.5 and the 3 for the second use on the property then drop down 1 or 2 spaces for each additional use thereafter. Commissioner Koos wondered if that would not be more than the current recommendation Alfred Yalda stated if you wouid look at the average of two users that would be four. If you pick 3 for the first use the second use would be 5 and ths third use would be 6 and fou~th use would be 7. Selma Mann, Assistant City Attomey stated the ~hanges made to the provision were in response to the last Commission meeting and some discussions. The actuai text of this would depend on what Commission decided. Commissioner Bristol stated perhaps the suggestion of 3 in 1 is better. If there was a convenience market of one use (5.5) and had two other uses then it would still be less than the convenience store at 5.5, it would be 4. City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 6 . ~;1 r~. _ ~ ': ~ , Chairperson Boydstun clarifled they are asking for 5.3 and then they wuuld add 1 for each'other use. Commissioner Bostwick stated the proposal is 5.5 spaces per-1,000 square feet plus 3 parking spaces for the first additional use plus 1 parking space for each additional use thereafter. Commissioner Bostwick explained this would not affect the new t~end of a gas stafion with a fast food attached to it or ne~ to it on one property such as at Magnolia and L2 Palma because they have seating and therefore consfdered a fast food which fall under a different pa~t of the Code. Commissioner Koos stated if approved then it would b~ s~81ng precedent for parking requirements because it would be going above and beyond any other cities in Orange County. City of Maheim Plann(ng Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 7 _ . ~ .. : :,,; _... .. , .. B. a) CEQA CATEGORICAL EX~MPTION -SECTION 15061(6)(3) Concuned w/staff b) CODE AMENDMENT N0. 99-07: City-initiated (Planning Department), Recommended to 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805, requsst f9r Cfty Councll consideration to amend Chapter 18.04 (Site Development Standards - adoption of the General) pertaining to fence requirements adjacent to raflroad rights-of- ordinance way. ACTION: Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Koos and MOTION CARRIED (one vacant seat), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby concur with staff that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 15061 (b) (3), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirements to prepare an EIR. Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Napoles and MOTION CARRIED (one vacant seat), that the Anaheim City Pianning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the draft Ordinance attached to the Planning Commission staff report dated October 11, 1999. SR7538CF.DOC SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIQN. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner, stated this requested code amendment will standardize the screening requirements of the commercial office outdoor storage in industrial developments when they abut a railroad right-of-way. The current requirement which was adopted earlier this year requires a minimum of 6-fnot high decorative type masonry biock wall, earthen and berm or combination thereof to screen these types of uses when they are adjacent to a railroad right-of- way. Staff believes that it was not the intent of the new code amendment to prohibit chain Iink fencing as a screening alternative for commercial office outdoor storage and industrial developments abutting a railroad right-of-way and therefore recommended approval of this request. City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-1'l-99 Page 8 ...,. T'. . . . . . ' - ' .. . .,,.. . . . ' ' . C. a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED) Approved b) CONDI710NAL USE PERMIT N0. 2521- REQUEST FOR Determined to be in SUBSTANTIAL COMFORMANCE: Bra(Ile Institute - Orange County substantial Center, 527 North Dale Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801-4699, request conformance determination of substantial conformance to expand the existing student store by 264 square feet for a 4otal floor area of 680 square feet. Property is located at 527 North Dale Avenue. ACTION: Commissioner Bristol offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boshnrick and MOTION CARRIED (one vacant seat), that the Anaheim City ~ Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously-approved negative declaratfon is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subjact request. Commissioner Bristo~ offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bostwick and MOTION CARRIED (one vacant seat), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby determine that the revised site plan, floor plan and elevation pian are in substantial conformance with the previously-approved exhibits in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No. 2521. SR1015TW.DOC SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION. Greg McCaf;'erty, Senior Planner, stated this is a request for substantial conformance to add an additional 264 square feet to an existing sludent store for the Braiile Institute. He corrected paragraph 2, to read 680 square feet. City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 9 D, a) CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 11 Concurred w/staff b) FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW N0. 99-05 - REQUEST FOR REVIEW Approved final site AND APPROVAL OF A FINRL SITE PLAN: Cinderella Motel, Inc., plan 2416 West Shaw Avenue, Fresno, CA 93711, request for review and approval of a Final Site Plan to install two (2) wall-mounted hotel identification signs and two (2) freestanding directional signs. Property is located at 1747 South Harbor Boulevard -~andy Cane Inn. ACTION: Commissioner Koos offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristol and MOTION CARRIED (one vacant seat), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby concur with staff that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 11, as defined in the State EIR Guideiines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirem mts to prepare an EI'r2. Commissioner Kaos offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristol and I MOTION CARRIED (one vacant seat), that the Anaheim City F~lanning Commission does hereby approve the Final Site Pian (identified as Exhibit Nos. 1 through 6 on file in the Planning Department) based upon a finding that the Final Site Plan is in conformance with The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1. SR7552KD.DOC SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION. Karen Dudley, Associate Planner staied this is a request for review and approval of a final site plan to install two wall mounted hotel identification signs and two directionai signs at an existing hotel in the Anaheim Resort as described in the staff report to the Commission dated October 11, 1999. Staff reviewed the final site plan and found it to be in conformance with the requirements of the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan including the Zoning and Site Development Standards and the Design Guidelines. Staff also determined that the project falis within the definition of Categorical Exemptions ^lass 11 of the CEQA Guidelines. Based on the findings staff recommended that the Commiss:on approve the final site plan. E. CONDITIONAL USE ~ERMIT N0.1043 - REQUEST FOR INITIATION Concurred w/staff OF REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION PROCEED~NGS: C'ity-initiated Initiated revocation (Code Enforcement Division), 200 South Anaheim Bouievard, Anaheim, or modification CA 92805, request to initiate revocation or modification proceedings for proceedings Conditional Use Permit No. 1043 (to permit a 129-unit, 3-story motel with a waiver of maximum sfructural height). Property is located at 2748 West Lincoln Avenue - Seville Inn. ACTION: Commissioner Bostwick off2red a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bristol and MOTION CARRIED (one vacant seat), that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby initiate revocation or modifications proceedings for Conditional Use Permit No.1043. SR7540VK.DOC City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 10 SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION. Greg McCafferty, Senior Pianner, stated his is a ciry-fnitiated request by the Cods cnforcement Divisian to consider initiation of revocation or modification proceedings for Conditional Use Permit No.1043. Dor. Yourtone, Senior Code Enforcement Officer, stated untii January 14,1999 there have been 145 complaints received regarding the Seville Inn which resulted in 581 code violations as of that date. The violations included substandard housing conditions hazardous plumbing; wiring; deteriorated walis, ceilings and floor; refuse and waster; graffiti, inoperable vehicles; and a~ polluted swimming pool. There are stili extensive nuisance and substandard housing vialations present at the Seville Inn. In November 1998 Code Enforcement, Orange County Health Department and the Police Department met with the owner. On March 11, 1999 he requested a criminai complaint be filed against the previous uwr,er which resulted in court action being taken. Qr June 30,1999 the properry was quick-claimed back to the current owner, Mr. Ben Karmelsch. Even though there has been some improvements, Mr. Karmelsch plans to sell the property and they are trying to have conditions placed upon the conditional use permit to help in relieving the problems at the Sevilie Inn. Officer Medina, Anaheim Police Department, Community Poiicing Detail, stated the Seville Inn has had ~ history of criminal activity for many years and that the Police Department decided to assign two officers to work primarily on the Seville inn, himself and Officer Fife. Their job is to address and deal with the problems associated with the Sevilie Inn's criminal activity. They have been so assigned for the past two months and have seen many positive changes. Part of their job is to address long term solutions to this problem. They feel that the amendments of the CUP would help them in that effort. Commissioner Bosbn~ick asked Officer Medina to explain the calls for service. Officer Medina stated he had activiry dating back to 5 years but addressed the calls for this year. The activify for the first seven months is the highest that they have had in the last 5 years. They have had 515 calls for service (from January 1,1999 to July 31,1999) and in that period they made over 101 arrests. He compared some other motels in the area and by far the Seville Inn had the most criminal activity in the west end of the city. Due to the size of the motel, the problems and officer safety reasons they have been allowed two more patrol officers to assist them with this location, which means there are now four full-time officers working one motel. They are also looking at the west end as a whole because the problems associated with the Seville Inn, the need to concern themselves with the whole area. Commissioner BrisCOl asked Officer Medina to address the issue of ovarcrowding. Officer Medina responded they do see some overcrowding issues. There are 117 rooms at that location bui he has noticed overcrowding issues. Most of the rooms are 1-bedroom. He has seen closets made into bedreoms. Owner's Statement: City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 11 . . . . . . . _...1, , . Ben Karmelsch stated he originally owned the 3eville:inn in Decembe.p 1994 through August 1996. it was sold in August 9996 and went through a chain of o.wnerships. He was eventually trying to foreclase on the property. At the beginning uf this year, he convinced the existing owner to give him the deed of the property back because'the owner was about to declare bankruptcy and tie up the property for 6 months longer. He took over ihs property in the last two months and he has been working Officer Medina and Don Yourstone address:ng the code violations. There were18 initial evictions the first month and he has 18 more evictions currently in progress. They are working on approxfmately 20 rooms a month bringing them up to code. The police activiry has slowed down in the past two months. Officer Medina mentioned sinca September calls for service have dropped to 22 calls. Mr. Karmelsch has been cc•operative in terms of evicting people that they were concerned about that were involved fn criminal activity. Ben Karmelsch stated he is very willing to work with Officer Medina and Don Yourston~ b~t his only concern wouid be the type of condi±ions fmposed on the permit and how would it affect his business. Commissioner Bostwick stated there has been plenty of testimony given that they need to look at this property and its permit to find a way to reduce r,ity services to this ~roperry since it is takirg a iot of resources away from the rest of the community. Ciry of Anaheim Planning Commissian Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 12 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: 2a. 2b. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIJN-CLASS 21 ConcuRed with staff CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.1629 (READVERTISED) Modified for 1 year INITIATED BY: City-initiated (Planning Department), 200 South (To expire 10-11-2000) Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 OWNER: Tillie Jones, 512 East Czntral Park Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92802 AGENT: Guillermo Ibarra,1416 North Central Park Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92802 LOCATION: 9416 North Central Park. Property is 0.38 acres located at the southwest comar of North Cen:ral Park Avenue and East Central Park Avenue (Cofifee Break). To ~onsider revocation or modification of Conditional Use Permit No. 1629 (to permit a restaurant with sales of beer and wine for on-premises consumption). CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC99-176 SR1127JD.DOC SUMMARY AF DISCUSSION. Sgt. Russ Sutter, Anaheim Police Department, stated this location was origi~ ~ally brought to their attention on May 1998 with complaints from the neighboring businesses with possible aicohol and narcotic activities outside the business. They investigated and found no activity of narcotics but did find the use and sales of alcohol we: e not in compliance with the Code. In 1993 when the Ibarra's took over thP property they agreed to several conditions including the following: • No pool tables on the premises were permitted which they do and continue to date, • No signs advertisin~ slcohol, which they do. • No drinking in the parking lot, which tttiere has been in the past and has only declined recently. • No serving of alcoholic beverages in unpermitted lounge area, which they seroe in the pool area. • No serving of alcoholic beverages to minors, which the police department has a case on file of this establishment serving to a minor. • No serving beyond 8:00 p.m. and there are violations up to 10:00 p.m. • No amplified music ailowed and they have a joot-box in the location. • They ulso provide alcohol to go which is in violation of ABC and their conditions for the City. Don Yourstone, Senior Code Enforcement Officer stated he did an inspection of subject property in July 1999 and f~und that the bus~ness expanded into another room and a new bathroom has boen added and roof top signs. They were serving food when he was there, which appears to be operating as a restaurant. He visited the site last Friday and the pool tables were still there and an em~loyee informed Cify of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 13 ~tM. ~-~;1. him that they are not being used at this time but the expansion still exists and the signs are still on top of the building. ApplicanYs Statement: Tony Alvarez stated he is representing and interpreting for the Ibarra's (who were beside him). Regarding the violations they are in agreement and there are steps being taken to address them. The pool tabies are in 4he process of being sold. The hours of operation will be reduced. Theyi would like to request a continuance to November 22,1999 to address the remaining issues. Commissioner Vanderbiit stated each time he visited the site it appeared that a majority of trash consisted of beer botties, or boxes containing beer bottles. That suggested to him that a large percentage of their business is alcohol related and a stipulation of their ABC license is that FO% or less should be generated from that. He asked how they intended to comply with that condition. Tony Alvarez stated that is one item that they intend to monitor. He indicatsd that not all the trash is theirs since there is a nearby school where soccer is played and where people consume a(cohol, they can not control that becauss that is not at their property. Rather than throwing the beer bottles in the trashcan he recycles them. Commissioner Bristol referenced the letter from the Police, which indicated that a customer purchased alcohol at this location and left the premises carrying the beer and asked why thet was ailowed to happen. Tony Alvarez stated on occasion in the evening Mr. Ibarra is the only person working the kitchen and the front counter, it is difficult for him to see who comes in and out with an alcoholic beverage. Commissioner Koos asked if the Ibarra's had any issues with any of die conditions in staff report Tony Alvarez responded they are in agreement with all the recommendations except for the hours of operation. They are requesting from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Sgt. Sutter indicated that 8:00 p.m. would not be a good closing time since this location is in an industrial area. After 5:00 or 6:00 p.m. this area is empry and extending the hours would cause it to be more of a cocktail/pool p4rlor situation and draw more people into this area at night. Commissioner Koos stated he did not see the purpose in continuing this item given the Code violations, which need to be addressed. Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, clarified in ~ondition Nos. 9,11 and 12 where it indicates "alcoholic beverages" that it refers to beer and wine. Condition No.12 indicates that they are to have no advertising devices related to alcoholic beverages placed on the windows. Advised if Commission moves forward today, he recommended a condition be added that any new signs will be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval as a repert and recommendation item to the Planning Commission. Mr. Ibarra asked if hours could be changed to open at 7 a.m. Chairperson Boydstun agreed it would be better for the people going to work. Ciry of Anaheim Planning Commissfon Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 14 . • • ~ ~- ~ ~ • ~ • ~ • _~ . r• 0 PP ~ OS ITI. iV. Nora I ACTION: Concurred with staff that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 21, as defined fn the State CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from tha requirements to prepare an EIR. Modified Conditional Use Permit No.1629. Amended Resolution No. PC76-122 by adding the following conditions: "2. That the hours of operatian shali be limited to 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday, closed on Sundays. 3. That this permit shall expire one (1) year from the date of this resolution, on October 11, 2000. 4. That food service with a fuli meal shall be available from opening time until either 6:00 p.m. or ciosing time, whichever occurs first, on each day of operation. 5. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within lwenty-four (24) hours irom time of occurrence, 6. That the establishment shall be operated as a"Bona Fide Public Eating Place" as defined by Section 23038 of the California Business and Professions Code. 7. That there shall be no pool tables maintained upon the premises at any time and the existing pool tables shall be removed. 8. That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a public premises (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be operated as a public premise as defined in Section 23039 of the California Business and Professions Code. 9. That the sales of beer and wine shall not exceed 40°/a of the gross sales of all retail sales during any three (3) month period. The appiicant shall maintain records on a quarterly basis indicating the separste amounts of sales of beer and wine and other items. Thesa records shall be made available, subJect to audit and, when requested inspection by any CiEy of Anaheim officiaf during reasonable business hours. 10. That there shall ~e no live entertainment, amplified music or dancing permitted on the premises at any time without issuance of proper permits as required by ihe Anaheim Municipal Code. 11. That the sale of beer and wine for consumption off the premises shall be prohibited. 12. That there shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including adve~tising directed to the exterior from within, ~romoting or indicating the availability of beer and wine. City of Anaheim Plannfng Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 15 13. That the activities occuRing in conjunction with the operatfon of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to sunounding properties. 14. That the parking lot serving the premises shail be equipped with lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discemible the appearance and conduct of ali persons on or about the parking lot. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminate the windows of nearby properties. 15. That the business operator shall comply with Section 24200.5 of the Business and Professions Cod~ so as not to employ or permit any persons to solicit or encourage others, directly or indirectly, to buy them drinks in the licensed premises under any commission, percentage, salary, or other profit-sharing plan, scheme or conspiracy. 16. That all doors serving subJect restaurant shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and shall be kept closed and unlocked at all times during hours of operation except for ingress/egress, to permit deliveries and in cases of emergency. 17. That there shall be no public telephones on the property that are located outside the building and within the control of the applicant. 18. That the unpermitted roof sign shall be removed. 19. That the proposal shall comply with all signing requirements of the ML Zone uniess a variance allowing sign waivers is approved by the City Councii, Pianning Commission or Zoning Administrator. 20. That tne on-site landscaping and irrigation system shall be (a) refurbished and (b) maintained in compliance with City standards. 21. That the unpermitted expansion of the restaurant into the adjacent unit shall be removed and returned to its original condition. 22. That any new signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. 23. That Condition Nos.7, 12, 14,16,18,19, 20, and 21, above-mentioned, shall be comp!eted within a period of thirty (30) days from the ~ate of this resolution. 24. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it cor;plies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compli~nce or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement:' VOTE: 6-0 {one vacant seat) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 22 minutes (2:16-2:38) City of Anahe(m Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 16 3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 3b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Denied 3c. CONDIT90NAL USE PERMIT N0. 4142 Granted, fn part, for 5 years OWNER: Karland Edith Sator, 3150 East La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806 (To expire 10-11-2004) AGENT: O'Neai Communications, Attn: John Murphy, 23141 Verdugo Drive, Suite 105, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 LOCATION: 3150-3164 East I.a Palma Avenue. Property is 6.4 acres located south and east of the southeast comer of La Palma Avenue ard Kraemer Boulevard. To construct a 60-foot liigh telecommunicatio~s monopalm with waiver of minimum structurai setback (deleted). ~ontinued from the Commission meetings of August 16, and September 13, 1999. CONDI'PIONAL USE PERMiT RESOLUTION N0. PC99-177 SR1013T1N.DOC SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION. (Commissioner Koos declared a conflict of interest due to his professional relationship to the industry.J John Tandy stated he is with O'Neal Communications Group representing PacBell Wireless. They proposed a 60-foot high monopalm, telecommunications pole dressed as a palm tree at the southeast corner of La Palma and Kraemer Boulevard. They worked with City staff in redesigning project by shifting location of the monopalm to address concerns about visual impact in the area and added live paim trees. They were in agreement with the conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chairperson Boydstun asked the applicant why the Embassy Suites across the street could not be used as a location for this item. Mr. Tandy responded the building was too high from a radio frequency engineering standpoint to allow for a roof-mount and the architectural design was not suitable for side mount. There would have to be too much drilling through many floors in order to have the cables out of view. Commissioner Bristol asked why the palm trees were not clustered. Mr. Tandy advised they would be willing to cluster the palm trees. The location of the trees was negotiated wilh the Planning Department. They were placed so that a group of them could be seen from the freeway and Kraemer Street. City of Maheim Planning Commission Summary Actio,~ Agenda 10-11-99 Page 17 Commissioner Bostwick suggested moving trees to the curbed area that go around the building, or move the monopalm farther toward the freeway and place the palm trees behind it toward the parking area and make it look like a grave of trees. Mr. Tandy advised that the owner of the property intends to use some of that particular area for parking. Originally the intent was to put a monopole closEr to the fteeway, but at the request of the Planning Department, they revised the plans and moved it back away from the freeway. They are reconstructing a new trash enclosure for equipment. Commissioner Bristol asked if this site is the only alternative, is i~ safe to assume that PacBell is never going to put anything on the other buildings. Mr. Tandy responded that other properties have been contacted. The site has to work from a radio frequency standpoint, a landlord standpoint and from a planning standpoint. Commissioner Vanderbilt asked staff if they were comfortable with project. Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, respanded this is the oniy feasibl~ type of telecommunications device that can go in on this area; the answer was no, partly because of their lack of knowledge of hotiv the engineers determine where they should be placed. Greg Hastings stated one of the goals was to try to get the monopalm as far away from the public right-of- way as possible. Staff was trying to get it towards the center of the property or away from the arterial highways and freeways. There may be a problem with the landlord nat wanting it at a particular locatinn, which goes above and beyond what the Commissions purpose would be. Staff prefers it be further away from the public-right-of-way if it has to be on this property as a monopalm. Greg McCafferty suggested if Commission chose the palm, the trees could remain there and they could extend the planter out and cluster them around the monopalm. Mr. T~ndy stated they are open to adding more trees. They cannot alter the species of the monopalm but they are flexible for the changing/adding surrounding trees as long as the landlord is agreeable. Commissioner Bostwick suggested placing the monopalm in front and put palm tress behind it, one to the north and a couple to the west, then leave the three that are in a row. It would give more of a grove look to the trees. Mr. Tandy feit it was fine as long as the landlord was in agreement. ' FOLCOWING 15,A SUMMARY:OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. .' > OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Denied Waiver of Code Requirement on the basis that the proposed waiver was deleted following public notification. City of Anahefm Pianning Commfssion Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Rage 1 S 4. That the location of the mono palm and the trash container as shown on Exhibit No. 4 shall be reversed. That at least six (6) Iive palm trees, minimum 40 feet in height, shall be planted and maintained in a heaithy condition. Subject live palm trees shali be planted around the mono palm as follows; one (1) to the north, two (2) to the west and three (3) to the south. That the final plan showing the location of the trees and the mono palm shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. That an iMgation plan for the pal~ trees shaii be submitted to the Building Division for rgview and approval. That any tree planted on-site shall be replaced in a timely manner with a tree of like-type and height, in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. 11. Th; t the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with the 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, 2, 3 and 5, further that Exhibit No. 4 sh~ll be revised as stated in Condition No. 4, above-mentioned, and as conditioned herein. VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioner Koos dsciared ~ conflict of interest and one vacant seat) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSI~N 71ME: 27 minutes (2:39-3:06) City of Maheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 19 _ . : . _ _ . : .;_ . 3 _ ~.. . ~.'.. . , ;<_ ..~ ~ .... '~. 4a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT October 25,1999 4c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 4143 OWNER: Grock Wocy Jung and Chun Chun Jung, Trustees, 433 South Vicki Lane, Maheim, CA ~2804 AGENT: Jimmy Tong Nguyen, P.O. Box 15749, Newport Beach, CA 92659 LQCATION: 420 South Brookhurst Street. Property is 0.50 acre located on the east side of Brookhurst Street (Seafood Piace Restaurant). To permit a banquet hali facility with service and on-premise consumption, but not sales of beer and wine with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Continuod from the Commission meeting of September 13, 1999. C~NDITIdNAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. SR1029V.DOC + • • • • • OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the October 25, 1999 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow the petitioner to continue to resolve outstanding parking issues. VOTE: 6-0 (one vacant seat) DISCUSSIQN TIME: This item was rtot discussed. City of Anaheirn Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 20 5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PRE1/IOUSLY-APFROVEDj Approved 5b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Denied 5c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2334 (READVERTISED) Approved, in part, as readvertised OWNER: Califc,rnia Auto Dealers Exchange, 9920 North Tustin Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807 AGENT: 0'Dell McKinney,1320 North Tustin Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807 LOCATION: 1320 North Tustin Avenue. Property is 34 acres located on the east side of Tustin Avenue, 220 feet north of the centerline of Miraloina Avenue (California Auto Dealers Exchange - CADE). To p~rmit and retain five (5) temporary trailers for office use, 2 canopies and 2 new auction vehicle lanes in conjunction with an existing automobile auction and reconditioning faci!ity with ~vaiver of minimum structural setbacks adjacent to put~lic streets (deleted). CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC89-178 SUMMAP.Y OF DISCUSSION. ApplicanYs Statement: SR7549KP.DOC Jim Desrochers, General Manager of California Auto Dealers Exch.ange, was in agreement with staff's recommendations. He pointed out there was a typographical error on Item 23 regarding the hours of operation, on Thursday they are open 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. Commissioner Vanderbilt asked about another typographical error under the number of employees. Jim Dasrochers stated the part timers versus full timers is reversed. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Bostwick asked what tf~2y do off af Etchandy Lane. Jim Desrochers responded it is a check in point, all the banks, GMAC, Wells Fargo, etc., use it as an entrance to deliver their off lease and repossessed vehicles that are auctioned off. Semi-trucks and car carriers have been addressed with Code Enforcement. The gate will be widened so trucks do not have to stop; they will bring cars directly inia the facility. There is a 24-hour guard service at the gate to let them in. Most cars are driven in by staff and don't come in on a car carrier. Melanie Adams, Associate Civil Engineer, explained when the property was previously before the Commission testimony was that there was no access being taken in the back. Now, given the amount of use they are doing on the street, it would be proper for them to install sidewalks within the public right-of- way and install additional improvements, as the Commission requires. City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 21 Commissioner Bostwick asked whether the driveways were to code. Melanie Adams responded she dfd not have an inspection report to resp~nd to that. Commissioner Bristol recalled from a previous meeting that if they had to put sidewalks in, they would have had to move the fences. At that time it caused an undue burden expense and the faat that they weren't going to use it for ingress, thoy received an exemption. Commissioner Bostwick indicated if they install a sidewalk they would loose landscaping because they would need to move the fence back to provide the setback and the IandscaRing. Commissioner Bristol stated the cul-du-sac is being used because of the (mpact the business had on Tustin Avenue. He suggested the razor wire be removed. Jim Desrochers responded that it would be removed. • e • • e • OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Determined that the previously-approved negative declaration is adequate to seNe as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Cenied the Waiver of Code Requirement on the basis that it was deleted following public notification. Approved, in part, Conditional Use Permit No. 2334, as readvertised. Madified Resolution No. PC95-141 as follows: Deleted Condition Nos. 6,12 and 13. Added the following conditions: 12. That the number of trailers on the property shall be limited to five, the n~mber of canopies to two, and the number of outdoor auto auction lanes to two as shown on Revision No. 2 of Exhibit No.1 and Exhibit Nos. 2 through 5. 13. That the existing structures shall comply with the applicable minimum standards of the City of Anahelm, including the Uniform Building, Plumbing, Electrical, Mechanical and Fire Codes as adopted by the Ciry of Anaheim. 14. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash and debris, and removal of graffiti withiri twenty-four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 15. That the proposai shall comply with all signing requiremente of the SP94-1, DA-1 Zone unless a variance allowing sign wa(vers is approved by the City Councii, Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator. City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 22 16. That 3-foot high address numbers shail be displayed on the roof of the main building in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from the view of the street or adjacent properties. 17. That all automobile parking storage and circulation areas shal! be fully pav~d with three (3) inch asphalt concrete or other comparable material and shall be maintained in good condition at all times. 18. That in order to enforce the City of Anaheim regutation prohibiting on-street parking along Tustin Avenue, the prope~ty owners shall paint the curb along the entire length of this property red and shall maintain this painted area on Tustin Avenue. The painting shall be subject to the approval of the City Traffic Engineer. 19. That under no circumstances shall car carriers be unloaded or loaded on any public right-of-way, nor shali any vehicles be parked or staged on these streets. 20. That aIi vehicies intended for auction or already auctioned shall be stored in the fenced araa only and shall not be parked in the parking area intended for dealer-customer parking. 21. That the owner of this property shall submit a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permi! No. 2052 (to expand an existing automobile auction and reconditioning facility in the ML Zone) and Conditional Use Permit No. 1566 (to permit an automobile auction and reconditioning facility in the ML Zone) to the Zoning Division. 22. That all trailers shall be upgraded to include skirting (or maintain existing skirting) and further that Trailer E shall be replaced with a newer trailer similar to the other on-site trailers. 23. That the hours of operation shall be as follows: Monday through Wednesday: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Thursday: 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. Friday: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. 24. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with the plan and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the pe!itioner and which plan is on file with the Planning Department marked r~evision No. 2 of Exhibit No. 1 and Exhibit Nos. 2 through 5, 25. That within 90 days from the data of this resolution, Condition Nos.12, 13, 16, 17,18, 21, 22 and 24 shall be compiied with. 26. That the existing razor wire shall be removed. 27. That any new signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. VOTE: 6-0 (one vacant seat) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 15 minutes (3:07-3:22) City of Anaheim Planning Co~rmission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 23 6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATiON (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVE[ 6b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3511 (READVERTISED) OWNER: Spieker Properties,1531 South Sinclair Street, Anahe(m, CA 92806 AGENT: Stadium Vineyard Church,1531 South Sinclair Street Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 1531 South Sinclair Street. Properfy is 0.89 acres located e^~ ine west side of S:nclair Street, 395 feet south of the centerline of Cerritos (Stadium Vineyard Ghurch). To consider reinstatement of this permit which currently contains a time limitation (originally approved on April 6,1892 to expire on October 1, 1999) to retain a church. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOI.UTION N0. PC99•179 SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION. ApplicanPs Statement: Approved reinstatement for 5 years (To expire 10-11-2004) SR7544KB.DC-C Ed McGlassen, stated he was representing the Stadium Vineyard Church requesting a reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 3511 for another 5 years to coincide with their lease. THE PUBLIC IIEARING WAS CLOSED. : FOLLOWINGIS A SUMMARY;OF 7HE.PLA~ININGCOMMISSI.aN ACTION. - `'? OPPOSITIOW: None ACTION: Determined that the previously-approved negative deciaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Approved reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 3511 for five (5) years. Modified Resoiution No. PC94-134 4o read as foilows: "1. That subJect use permit shall expire five (5) years from the date of this resolution (on October 11, 2004);' VOTE: 6-0 (one vacant seat) Selma Mann, As~istant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSIOI~ TIME: 2 minutes (3:23-3:25'~ (fHERE WAS A BRE.AK FOLLOWING THIS ITEM. j Ciry of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Aetion Agenda 10-11-99 Page 24 7a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED) Approved 7b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved 7c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4135 (READVERTISEDj Approved, in part, as readvertised OWNER: Joseph T., Emma W., Roger and Randy Kung, 20866 East Quail Run Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91789 LOCATION: 5555-5665 East Santa Ar~a Canyon Road. Property is 8,03 acres located at the northwest comer of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Imperial Highway (Imperial Canyon Shopping Center). To construct one retail pad building with roo(-mounted Aquipment, I subdivide one unit into an office and retail unit (for a total of 2 units), and amend conditions of approval pertaining to permitted monument signs and maximum number of units in an existing commercial center with waiver of (a) minimum number of parking spaces. CONDI710NAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC99•'180 SR1126JD.DOC SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION. ApplicanPs Statement: Randy Kung submitted photos of traffic flow from different angles and discussed the results of a video tape analysis he took of the various intersections in great detail. He states the existing trafific flow next to bank plus the projected traffic flow from the demand of the new building will average 2 cars per minute during peak hours. The new entrance will carry much less load than the present entrances and will have a better design so incoming cars will have free flow. Asked Commission and staff to consider this new data concerning the project. Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, stated, for the record, a letter was received in opposition from the F,naheim Hills Citizen Coalition. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Koos stated that the first two times Commission denied a building at that location was not solely due to traffic issues, part was pedestrian issues, and general aesthetics. Focus on traffic is misleading as to why this project should or should not be approved. Commissioner Bristol asked Mr. Yalda what the size of a parking space is for Anaheim. Alfred Yaida, Principal Transportation Planner, advised 18.5 by 18 with 24 feet back up space. Commissioner Bristol stated plans submitted by Mr. Kung show 16 foot maximum striping, and on Imperial side there is another 2 feet of overhang. Alfred Yalda stated the plans show that but Mr. Kung knows the standards are 18. Ciry of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 25 Greg McCafferty stated the plans show the stretch of Imperial Highway next to Don Jose has a 20-foot landscape setback. Beyond that, a 2-foot ovefiang and a 16-foot stali length. Going further south on Imperial next to Wells Fargo, it goes from 20 feet clear to an excess of 22 feet. The plans do comply with required setback at those loca!ions. Alfred Yalda pointed out that the overhang is allowed if they are not encroaching within the landscape area. Commissioner Bristol fslt the proposed computer business would generate a lot more tra~c. It was approved before with the two uses on the west side because the argument was made that thers was more parking on the west side. Mr. Kung stated the old dimensions are all "grandfathered" but the new dimensions are 18-foot lengths. The number of 2 trips per minute includes all the projected traffic that wili occur. The last one that was approved had a total trip demand of 51. Replacing tha restaurant with the PC store will reduce the trip demand. There was no pedestrian walkway before, now there is a walkway included with a fence to provide safety. Commissioner Bostwick asked Mr. Kung when he was planning to change the Wells Fargo building and reduce the drive through. Mr. Kung responded there is a dispute with another City department regarding the cost of the entrance. The City is requiring that he pay $95,000 so he obtained his own appraisal report, which indicated $42,000. It is in the hands of arbitrators at the present time. In the meantime, he has deposited $21,000 to guarantee the City that he would take out the entrance if it is not approved. He wants to remove the canopy at the same time. He has already spent $40,000 to $50,000 to increase parking spaces by 10. Commissioner Koos asked why the new driveway is needed. Mr. Kung responded that initially his traffic engineer told him that 40% of traffic comes southbound into his center. The new en~rance will help customers. Commissioner Bostwick's perception is that nothing has changed since the last time A4r. Kung was before Commission and this is still a very impacted area and without the finish of that driveway and the Well Fargo drive through being reduced, it is too crowded to put another building in there. He suggested Mr. Kung finish the zdditiori to Don Jose's, do a sign plan with quality signs, reduce wall signage, change colors and canopies, and then return so the Commission can look at it again. Greg McCafferty advised there were corrections on page 4 paragraph 11, statement at the end should read "excluding"' instead of "including". Page 11, paragraph 26, item (d), first sentence read "by resolution approve the request to add" instead of "modify" and the rest can remain the same. The discussion at the morning work session indicated bringing back color and material boards and signs as a Reports and Recommendations item. The setback along Imperial Highway is in compliance with approved plans. Melanie Adams, Associate Civil Engineer, stated that Commissioner Bostwick had expressed some concern about making a decision without the dri~ieway being physically in place, but a proper analysis can be done of what the impacts of the traffic on the driveway would be. The issue of the driveway and the value will be heard by a hearing officer appointed by the City Council, and can, therefore, be considered two separate issues. City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 26 Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated previous approval was for a massage establishment and at the same time, because they did not have a CUP on the center, the Planning Commission granted conformity for the center. Ali Conditions of Approval pertain to the actual massage facility, which was only granted for one year. Only one condition is left which requires substantial conformance with the Plan that was presented. Greg McCafferty recommended deleting Condition Nos.1, 2 and 24 and Condition 23 of the previous resolution that applied to the restaurant which was withdrawn. Following the action: Mr. Kung asked if the signage was denied. Commissioner Bostwick explained the change in signage was denied and suggested Mr. Kung go with signage that was approved last time and return those plans to the Commission for approval. • • ~• s • • • ~PPOSITION: None Correspondence was received in opposition. ACTION: Determir~~sd that the previouslyapproved negative declaration ts adequate to serve as the required envlronmentai documentation for subject request. Approved waiver (a) pertaining to the minimum number of parking spaces. Approved, in part, the modiflcation of Conditional llse Permit No. 4135, as follows: Denied the request for a freestanding retail pad buildinc~ (Building Y} with roof- mounted equipment based on the following: (i) 1'hat the size and shape of the site for the proposed addition is not adequate to allow the full development of the proposed retail buildiny in a manner not detrimental to the surrounding area as evidenced by the circulation patterns and potential for congestion and vehicle conflicts arcund the building. (ii) That tho proposed freestanding building wili intensify a commercial center which is near or at its maximum development capacity. (iii) That the proposed new building may adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area by crea4ing an opportuniry for circulation conflicts which may not be present without the addition. Approved the request to add the 39 square foot addition to the Don Josa restaurant and subdivide Unit 5573. Modified Resolution No. PC99-129 as follows: City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 27 Deleted Condition Nos.1, 2, 23 and 24. Amended Condition Nos.19 and 25 to read as follows: "19. That the subject property shall be limited to a maximum of fifty two (52) units. 25. That the 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 filz with the Planning Department marked Revision No.1 of Exhibit Nos.1 (without Building "Y"), 4 and 7, and Exhibit Nos. 2, 5, 6 and 8, and as conditioned herein " Added the following new conditions: 29. That prior to final zoning inspection, thP existing ~~~all sign stating "Imperial Canyon Plaza" shall be removed. 30. That prior to issuance of building permits, the legal owner of subject property shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim (Water Engineering Division) an easement twenty (20) feet in width for water service mains and/or an easement for large meters or firelines. 31. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the owner shall submit required easements for ail water utilities for this property. 32. That prior to final zoning inspection, 3-foot high address numbers shall be displayed on the roof in a contrasting color to the roof materiai. The numbers shall not be visible from the view of the street or adj~cent properties. 33. That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped with lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discernable the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking iot. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminate the window areas of nearby residences. Photometric plans shall be submitted to the Anaheim Police Department for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Such plans shall be implemented within thirty (30) days from the date of approval. 34. That no outdoor pay phones shall be permitted. 35. That a final sign program shall be submitted to the Zoning Division of the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendation item. Denied the request to amend signage. VOTE: 6-0 (one vacant seat) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSION TIME: 54 minutes {3:35-4:29) City of Maheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 1 Q-11-99 Page 28 .~ , _ . R : r;; . , , > ';: , ,: .. , . . , . ,,,> _ , : ,, 8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 8b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT P10. 4151 October 25,1999 OWNER: Karl and Edith Sater, 90Q East Katella Avenue "J", Orange, CA 92867 AGENT: Salvador Magana, 21580 Via Pepita, Yorba Linda, CA 92886 LOCATION: 3148 East La Palma Avenue, Unit C. Property is 5.4 acres located south and east of the southeast corner of La Paima Avenue and Kraemer Boulevard. To permit and retain an automotive repair facility (auto body work) within an existing industrial complex. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION PIO. SR7559VK.DOC • • • • o • • OPPOSlTION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the October 25, 1999 Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to provide staff with additional information regarding this request. VOTE: 6-0 (one vacant seat) DISCUSSION TIME: This item was not discussed. City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Actian Agenda 10-11-99 Page 29 9a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 9b. CONDITIONAL IiSE PERMIT NO. 4154 Granted OWNER: The Servite Fathers, A Califomia Corporation, Attn: Father Gerald Horan, OSM,1952 West La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801-3592 AGENT: John T. Ahern (ar~hitect),12270 Alta Panorama, Santa Ana, CA 92705 LOCATION: 1952 West La Palma Avenue. Property is 14.75 acres located on the south sf~e of La Palma Avenue, 515 feet west of the centerline of Onondaga Avenue (Servite High Schooi). To permit a freestanding electronic readerboard sign. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC99-18'! SR7554KP.DOC SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION. ApplicanYs Statement: John Ahern ,Architect for Servite High School, working on marquis sign. He requested a 38 square foot marquis sign with a reader board below it. They were in agreement with the conditions of apbroval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Vanderbilt asked if the sign would go off after 10:00 p.m. John Ahern explained that the actual sign would stay on but the reader board would go off at 10:00 p.m. • • • • s • OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 4154 subject to the conditions of approval listed in the staff report. VOTE: 6-0 (one vacant seat) Selma Mann, Assistant Ciry Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. DISCUSSIQN TIME: 2 minutes (~:30-4:32) City of Anaheim Pianning Commi~sion Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 30 10a. CEQq NEGATIVE DE~CLARATION Continued to 10b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIRERAENT December 6,1999 10c. GONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 4155 OWNER: Devtech Inc., Attn: Young Woo Kim, President, 1812 FairFord Drive, Fulferton, CA 92833 LOCATION: 500•528 South Beach Bouievard. Property is 1.91 acres located at the northeast comer of Orange Avenue and Beach Boulevard (Rite Aid Drug Store). To permit a commercial shopping center including a drive-through drug store with sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption and retain an existing convenience market with sales of beer and wine for off- premises consumptfon with waiver of (a) minimum dfstance between freestanding signs, (b) permitted lighting of parking areas adjacent to residential zone boundaries, {c) minimum number of parking spaces, (d) maximum structural height and (e) required setback adjacent to a residential zone. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. SR7543KB.DOC SUMMARY OF QISCUSSION. Greg McCafferty, Senior F'lanner, clarified that the applicant had requested a continuance to December 6, 1999. He further stated, for the record, there was a letter received from Clifford Evans in opposition. ~, : fO.LLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None 1 letter was received in opposition to subject request. ACTIQN; Continued subject request to the December 6,1999 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow the petitioner to review and respond to the possible tenant changes. VOTE: 6-0 (one vacant seat) DISCUSSION TIME: 15 minutes (3:07-3:22) Cih~ of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Actfon Agenda 10-11-99 Page 31 F= - , . ' . . ~ . .. ..~:. n. ' . . . . . ~ .. ~, .,.r ..-. .~.:~. ~' . . . . ~ ~ 7~t~'jr.y4~. ' . {,J,.. . ~ . . . . .. ez. . . . ' 11a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION . Continued to 11b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT~ ~• December 6,1999 11c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 4157 OWNER: Vietnam Minfstries, P.O. Box 4568, Anaheim, CA 92803 AGENT: Hammill and Associates, 414 Femhill Lane, Maheim, CA 92807 LOCATION: 1100 North Paradise Street. Property is 1.99 acres located at the southerly terminus of Paradise Lane, 370 feet south of the centerline of Balsam Avenue (Issac Walton Recreation Center). To permit a church with accessory living quarters and recreational facilities with waiver of minimum setback of institutional uses adjacent to a residentia! zone boundary. CONDlTIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. SR7600KB.DOC ~ • • • • • • OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject ; equest to the December 6,1999 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow the petitioner sufficient time to review the potential abandonment of the abutting public parking area and 4o submit revised plans to add this area into the projeck VOTE: 6-0 (one vacant seat) DISCUSSION TIME: This item ::as not discussed. City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 32 12b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 369 Recommended adoption of 12c. RECLASSIFICATION N0. 99-00-08 Exhibit A to City Council Granted, unconditionally 12d. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF 12a. AND 12c. Approved INITIATED BY: City-initiated (Planning Department), 200 South Anaheim #162, Anaheim Boulevard, CA 92805 LOCATION: 101-311 North Beach Boulevard and 3001-3021 West Lincoln Avenue. Property 16.6 acres located at the northwest corner of Beach Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue. Generai Pian Amendment No. 369 - City-initiated amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan redesignating these properties from the Medium Density Residential land use designation to the General Commerciai land use designation. Reclassification No. 99-00-08 - To reclassify subject property from RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) Zone to CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION N0. PC99-182 RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUT~ON N0. PC99•183 SR6974DS.DOC SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION. Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, stated this a City-initiated request as a result of an action item of the Community Planning Program. Request to amend the land use element of the General Plan, redesignating the westerly portion of Parcel A and B from Medium Density Residential to Generai Commercial. Hlso, to reclassify Parcel A from the RS-A-43,000 (Residenlial/Agricultural) Zone to CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone. Propose to bring General Plan and Zoning into conformance with what is actually there. Corrected the staff report -12c indicates Reclassification 98-00-08 it should be corrected to read 99-00-OS. THE PUBLIC HEARI~IG WAS CLOSED. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated staff recommends that the Commission recommend to City Council that the reclassification be considered along with the General Plan Amendment since the City Council is required to have the final consideration on the General Pian Amendment. FOLLOWING'IS A S.UMMARY OF,THEPLANNING COMMISSION AC'fION. : OPPOSITION: None Ciry of Anaheim Planning Commission &ummary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 33 Granted Reclassification No. 99-00-08, uncunditionally. MOTION: Commissioner Bostwick offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Napoles and MOTlON CARRIED (one vacant seat), that the F,naheim City Planning Commission does hereby request that the City Council consider Reclassification No. 99-00-08 with their mandatory review of the General Plan Amendment. VOTE: 6-0 (one vacant seat) Selma Mann, Assis:ant City Attorney, stated the Planning Commission's action on these items will be set for public hearing before the City Council. DISCUSSION TIME: 5 minutes (4:33-0:38) City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 34 13a. CEQA N~GATIVE DECLARATION Approved 13b. VARIANCE N0. 4374 Granted 13c. TENTATI1fE TRACT MAP N0.15927 Approved 13d. SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL N0. 99-2 Approved OWNER: Daniel Rudat, 370 Old Bridge Road, Anaheim, CA 92808 AGFNT: Nicholson Const~uction Company, Attn: Thomas Q. Nicholson,1421 North Wanda Road #160, Orange, CA 92667 LOCATION: 370 Old Bridge Road and 355 Coun4 Hill Road. Property is 4.0 acres located on the east side of Old Bridge Road, 450 fee# north of the centerline of Fairmont Boulevard. Variance No. 4374 - Waiver of (a) minimum lot area - Lot 2 and (b) building site requirements - panhandle/flag lots. Tentative Tract Map No.15927 - To establish a 7-lot (6 residential lots, 1 private street lot) single femily residential subdivision. Specimen Tree Removal No. 99-2 - To permit the removal of 12 specimen trees. VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. PC99•184 SR7551 KP.DOC SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION. ApplicanPs Statement: Tom Nichoison stated their proposed homes are in character with current homes in the area, no height variance will be requested. They have preserved the area along Country Hill Road and the eucalyptus trees on the west side of the property. Asked for favorable consideratio~. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Chairperson Boydstun stated for the record that letters in opposition were received from Patricia Cook; Patrick Pepper from Anaheim Hills Citizens' Coalition; Marc Branson from Bridge Homeowners Association; and Debbie 0'Neill (via lnternet). Greg McCafferty, Senior Planner, advised they also received three letters in opposition and another from someone in the Canyon not specifyinc~ Item No.13, but concerned about the removal of trees. The other letter was from Mr. Nicholson's consultant, Bob Mickelson. Chairperson Boydstun asked if the applicant will be grading and not deviating from the plans that were presented. City of Anaheim Pianning Commissfon Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Rage 35 Tom Nicholson advised no. Bob Nicholson spoke to Mr. and Mrs. Bronson and Pat~icia Ciark. They were concemed about the trees but he does no~ think they object to the project. Citizens are happy that they are preserving the trees. Commissioner Bristol asked if some of the land they are acquiring has GC & R's on it. Tom Nicholson st2ted there will be a lot line adjustment that will take some rear slope area, (approximateiy 6,000 square feet) of one home that he currently owns. They will be lot line adjusting some portion of the rear slope. There is a title issue and they will ask the Homeowners Association to abandon their interest in that slope area, but it will be resolved during the mapping of the project. Chairperson Boydstun asked staff about a condition that there would be no access off of Country Hill Road. Greg McCafferty responde~+ it is on page 9 under the Tentative Tract Map conditions, which has 2 correction to Condition No.12, it shows Old Bridge Road and should be Country Hil! Road. Meianie Adams, Associate Civi! Engineer, stated the parcel closest to Country Hill Road was originally 3 parcels as part of Tract No.13092 and was consolidated into one parcei. She corrected the staff report on page 7, Condition No.1, first sentence "prior to the issuance of a buiiding permit" should be changed to "prior to approval of the r"inal tract map". Conditior No. 5 car. be deleted. Page 9, Conditions for the :entative tract map, Condition No.1 should be modified to read, "that the private street shali be developed in accordance with Public Works Stan~ard Detail Number 116". Cond~:'.~n No. 5 should be removed, it is not applicable to the project and replaced by another condition that the existing home on proposed lot 2 and 3 shall be demolished prior to final tract map approval. Asked if Chairperson Boydstun wanted a condition on the pad heights. Chairperson Boydstun recommended a condition stating the grading follow closely to the map they were shown so that there are no height adjustments and with no more than a 1-foot deviation. Commissioner postwick asked if there were going to be CC&R's for the tract. Tom Nicholson responded there would be a maintenance agreement. Greg McCafferty stated on page 7, Conditions 1, Public Works modified it to indicate prior to issuance of final map ,o it should carry over to the conditions on the tentative tract map on page 9. It would be a condition on the tract msp then removed from the variance conditions. Page 9, Condition No. 9 needs to be deleted from the Tentative Tract Map conditions an~ added to Variance conditions as Condition No. '' 0 ~. Greg Hastinys stated if wording on Condition No. 9 is changed to "prior to final tract map approvai' °F can be left in. Advised the applicant that the substance is not being changed, simply the locations. Greg McCafferty stated on page 9, Condition No.12, it shoul~ read "Country Hill Road" instaad of "Old Bridge Road". Suggested adding a cundition to Variance con~itions on page 8 ta state that "subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with the plans and specitications submitted to the Ciry of Anaheim by petitioner and which plans are on file marked Exhibits 1 through 3 as conditioned herein". City of Anaheim Planning Comr.lissio~i Summary Actiun F.genda 'l0-11-99 Paga 36 Selma Mann, Assistant City Attomey cla~ified it wi!I be a maintenance covenant not maintenance agreement that is recorded against the property. It would noi be sn agreement, it ~vi!! not involve the ~ity, and will be more in the nature of CC&R's than an agreement. • e ~ • • • s • OPPOSITlON: None 4 letters were received expressing concems on the project. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Granted Variance No. 4374 with the following changes to the conditions of approval: Deleted Condition Nos.1 and 5. Added the f~llowing condition: That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans end specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner ard which plans are on file marked Exhibits 1 through 3, and as conditioned herein. VOTE: 5-1 (Commissioner Vanderbilt voted no and one vacant seat) Approvad Tentative Tract Map No.15927 with the following changes to :he conditions af approv~i: Deleted Condition No. 5. Modified Cond~tiQn Nos.1, 9 and 12, to read as follows: That the private street shall be developed in accordance with the Publ:.: Works Standard Detail No.116 for private streets. (Private streets are those which provide primary access and/or circuiation within the project.) Said streets shall be properly identified on the finai map. 9. That prior to final tract map approval, the developer or owner of this property shall submit a set of improvement plans for Public Utilities Watar Engineering review and approval in determining the requirements necessary for providing water service to the project. 12, That vehicular access rights t~ Country Hill Road shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim on the final map. Aaded the following cond~tions: That the existing home or. proposed lots 2 and 3 shall be demolished prior to final tract map approvai. That tha building pad heic~ht shall not deviate more than one (1) foot from the figures shown on the grading plans submit;ad and reviewed by the Planning Commissic.n at City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 37 the October 11,1999 meeting. That p~ior to approvai of the Snal tract map, a lot line adjustment plat shali be submitted to the Subdivision Section (Development Services Division) and approved by the City Engineer and then recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder to adjust the property line of Lots 73 and 80 of Tract 8560 to new Tentative Tract 15927. Vote: 6-0 (ore vacant seat) Approved Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 99-2 subJect to the conditions listed in the staff report dated October 11,1999. Vote: 6-0 (one vacant seat) Selma Mann, Assistant City Attomey, presented the 10-day appeal rights for Tentative Tract Map No. "5927 and the 22-day appeal rights for the remainder of the Items. DISCUSSION TIME: 24 minutes (4:39-5:03) City of Anahefm Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 38 i~ : 14a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 14b. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0.15861 October 25,1999 14c. SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT MO. 99•3 OWNER: Paul S. Murata and Sachiko Murata,194 South Lakeview Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807 AGENT: Brian Kerr, Muskoka Development Inc., 34 Balboa Coves, Newpart Beach, Ca 92663 LOCATION: 194 South Lakaview Avenue. Property is 5.91 acres located on the north sids of Lakeview Avenue. Tentative Tract Map No.15869 - To establish a 5-lot single family residential subdivision. Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 99-3 - To permit the removal of two (2) specimen trees. Continued from the Commission meeting of September 27, 9999. SR7603TW.DOC • • • • • • OPPOSITION: None ACTION: Continued subject request to the October 25, 1999 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow staff additional time to review revised pians recently submitted by the petitioner. VOTE: 6-0 (one vacant seat) DISCUSSION YIME: This item was not discussed. Cfty of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 39 15a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 15b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.1322 (READVERTISED) November 22,1999 OWNER: Sidney E. Bickel Trust, 5585-B Via Dicha, Laguna Hilis, CA 92653 AGENT: Greg Hammill, 414 Fernhill Lane, Anaheim, CA 92807 Sam Governale, 633 S. East Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 633 South East Street. Property is 1.9 acres located on the west side of East Street,182 feet north of the centerline of South Street (Quartz Dealer Direct). To permit and retain an automobile wholesale and retail auction facility. Continued from the Commission meetings of July 19, September 13, and September 27, 1999. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. SR1062VK.DOC SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION. Chairperson Boydstun stated, for the record, tF~ere was one letter with 10 signatures, and another letter received Marilyn Nelm. Greg Hammill, agent for applicant explained changes and efforts since last meeting. Due to concerns about the back lot area needing screening, they are going to put up new chain link fence with plastic slats to provide scre~ning. Off loading on East Street should not be a concern due to all the construction being done on it. Loading is now being done on west side of property in the back alley. They are trying to mitigate parking in the residential area by producing flyers instructing buyers to park at CHOC lot. Business Iot is too small and they are trying to find another s~!itable site in the City of Anaheim. They have also rented space in another lot on Anaheim 9oulev2rd to park 25 to 85 cars. They have investigated complaints about wash water and drainage going out onto East Street, but property drains to the west and to an alleyway in the back. Water in that alley does not come frum Quartz, because they use buckets and do not regularly wash cars. Employees are parking on site or cars are being shuttled to CHOC lot. At the request of Alfred Yalda, a comprehensive parking study on CHOC lot was completed and states :he Quarts lot is worhing well. Mr. Yalda also suggested a reciprocal agreement for parking between Quartz and CHOC. Per the request of Chairperson Boydstun they have done a mailing to dealers advising them of the shuttle service from the CHOC Iot. There is no maintenance or repair on property, it is strictly auto sales, At the request of Commissioner Bosbn~ick they have started coning off the driveway. He felt there are no envirormental impacts as stated in the staff report. Their traffic study was done during the peak period of a Nionday auction and there was only one car parked in the neighborhood that was related to Quartz and traffic study reinforces that. City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 40 Quartz is also trying to downsize its fnventory fram 150 cars to 125. There are three categories of cars and the intention is to develop another site with the bulk of the auction, A and B vehicles there, and maintain the East Street site for the C category cars. He requested to have item 8 in the Conditions of Approval be for a 2 year period. In item 19, regarding business license, Quartz has had a business license since it began. Public testimony: Marilyn Helm, stated he submitted a letter previously since she was not certain that she would be present today. The traffic has an impact on their neighborhood. The problem is the people that come to Quartz Dealer Direct, they do not seem to have much consideration for the people in the area and block the street on both ways. There is currently major construction on East Street, which compounds the problem. She felt they have grown and become more successful. They have downsized in the past week and it has decreased somewhat. Businesses shouid have parking to accommodate their needs. She indicated that there was a car carrier parked across their driveway last week, and remained there until it off loaded in the middie of East Street. She is concerned with the traffic at the alley since the children use it to walk through. They should be off loading within their facility. They are also open on Sundays which was not listed in their rours of operation. Peggy Choliet-Guibert,1218 Crestbrook, Anaheim, stated there have always been traffic there particularly on Mondays. She never received a letter form Quartz Dealer Direct. She mentioned she had forwarded a fax at a previous meeting. Her husband tried to purchase a vehicle, as the applicant indicated was available as an option for the neighbors, but was told he had to have a wholesale license. Jo Verdigatly (spelling and address was not givenj stated she was born and raised in Anaheim. The traffic situation has improved but not enough. The business has been successful and it is time that Quartz thinks about relocating to another location in order to continue their success. They have noticed that on auction days the area is very impacted. John Maresca,146 East Oranc~ethorpe Avenue, stated his wife and himself under the name of Sagmore Properties own and manage the 16,200 square foot multiple tenant industrial building to the north of subject prope~ty. Parking from the auction continues to be a problem. He forwarded a letter to Mr. Governale at that time inviting him to discuss with him how they could solve this problem as it relates to his property. Unfortunately Mr. Governale never responded to his letter. Instead he had to take the time to set up a PPI (Private Party Impound Arangement) with Orange County Towing and a special parking permit for this own tenants in the facility. Once the program began Quartz Dealer Direct seemed more sensitive about the parking infractions. Knowing the inconvenience that has occurred for the neighboring residences, he thought there would have been a greater levei of communication from Quartz Dealer Direct to all neighbors including himself, unfortunately that has not been the case. The parking violations on his own property have been reduced because of the action that he has taken. Another concern is the ongoing washing of vehicle~~ and the extensive water run-off in the alley to the west of subject property. Mr. Hammill tried to deflect this concern. He submitted photos (3 sets each] taken 2 to 3 weeks ago. The first set of photos is looking northward on the ailey along the west property line where there is run off and residue coming directly from subject property. He requested that water run-off be properly contained on-site completely. Mrs. Adams City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agend~ 10-11-99 Page 41 recommended the possibility of redirecting the run-off or requiring the run-off to the East Street side of the property only, which he felt would be an acceptable solution. A one-year time frame for the permit would be applicable because it would aliow for the continuing monitoring of all the concems raised. He supported siafPs findings and recommendations with the clarifications as he provided. Sam Governale, 725 Whitewing Lane, Walnut, CA, stated his plan is to keep Quartz Dealer Direct open not just for ons year. He has been downsizing, trying to appease and not interfera with surrounding neighbors. He is willing to conslder any suggestions. They tr(ed to adhere to what the Commission has asked them to do. They contracted the company recommended by the City Traffic Division to do the parking study and yet the parking study that was done seems to be getting criticized. He felt they have made very strong efforts for the neighbors, businesses and customers to detour any problems. He asked for any suggestions that they could do that they have not done yet. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. (Commissioner Koos stated he was not present at the July 19, 1999 meefing but read the minutes of fhat meeting.J Lee Kuli, Code Enforcement Officer, stated their case file begins in January 1996 w:th off-loading vehicles on the street to June 12,1996, not enough parking space available. In March 1997 the owner was contacted concerning illegal parking at the public alley. In July 1998 they were washing engines and oil in alley and going into the city drains. On March 8,1999 the auto auction sales in the afternoon were blocking customers from other businesses. On June 14,1999, loading and unloading car carriers in the street. In July 1999 there was inadequate parking of customers. On July 20, 1999, unloading on East Street, safety problem and customers parking on the street. On March 5,1999, car auction and inadequate parking. He was at the location this morning and went to the adjacent building to the south, 711 South East Street, and he asked the manager why there were so many cars on his lot. He said that there were 2 cars deep at his lot that do not even belong to him. On Mondays and Fridays he has trouble with his customers finding a place to park because there are other cars parking at that ailey on his property. He was also at the alley at the west side of property and there was soapy water in the alley, weeds along the fence line, the chain link fence needs repair, there was a flat bed truck off-loading vehicles, and a Vokswagon van parked there. ApplicanPs Rebuttal: Greg Hammill stated he was at the site when Mr. Kull was there. He walked over to the exhibit wall and explained the building that Quartz is in. Their lot in front of their gate has more parking and they also lease another piece of property as well. The oniy access to the parking stalls is through McLogan's driveway. The only way to get to the parking spaces, which Quartz leases, is to go in through their driveway. They can park two deep vehicles and not block the driveway. Therefore any use of those spaces is included in their parking study. After Mr. Kull left he questioned the manager at McLogan and he is not happy that his boss leased this properly to his neic~hbor and so he does not like ihe fact that there are cars parking there coming in through his drivewzy, City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 42 Regarding the violations since 1996, they tesfrfied at the last hearing (in July 1999) that it was a problem The police had inst~ucted them to offload on the sUeet and ~ot to do it In the alley but then Code Enforcement was advising them just the opposite. They are trying to comply. He indicated the alley is weil used not only by Quartz but also the recycling center. Commissioner Bostwick asked about Hardin Uldsmobile unload their cars in ihe middie of Anaheim Boulevard and asked if that was legal? Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner stated it is illegal for anyone to offload/onload on public streets or alleys. Any unloading/loading for any bjpe of use should be taking place on their o~m property and not on a public street or public alley. His copy of the parking study does not indicate that they lease the parking from the adjacent property (referenced Figure 2). He called the applicanYs traffic engineer and confirmed that t~ey were leasing it. He aiso clarified that their office does not recommend any particular traffic engineering companies. They have a list that they provide and it is the applicanYs choice to select any traffic engineer that they would like. Sam Governale responded to Mr. Maresca's testimony that hs ignored a letter he sent to him. He indicated that none of the customers ever parked there or were towed away from that properry. Chairperson Boydstun felt much of the parking problem is probably due to the apartment units together with the current street construction, which results in people from the apartment units pzrking several blocks away in the area. Commissioner Bostwick suggested adding into the conditions that they have someone on site, 24 hours a day, so they can back the semis in off the street so they can unload on the property rather than on the street or in the alley. Also adding a condition that they install a wash facility with proper drainage with a catch basin. He preferred the permit to be for 1-year permit. Commissioner Koos stated he was at the site on Sunday night and observed the front parking iot was full. The code violations date back to 1996, the neighbors have been complaining for at least a year and even after the public hearing (in July 1999) they still have cars parking on a Sunday night in front. It is apparent that their business has outgrown their site and he could not see how the situation could be solvable. They need to be sensitive to the neighbors. Commissioner Vanderbilt stated there are diametrically opposed opinions about this project. The major factor is the parking of cars and owners of cars that no one is quite certain who they belong t~. It puts Commission in a difficult position because he sensed a desire of the applicant to mitigate all of these problems and the efforts that they have made. He would like to see some language that reduces the amount of cars. Commissioner Bristol was concerned about the apparent lack of employee parking and the statement that the applicant made at the previous hearing that he could not always control the dealers that c~me to his site. He asked the applicant how could he make a case for this site being adequately large enough to have this use. Sam Governale stated what they have been doing is downsizing. They are actively looking for another site. He might have stated that every dealer that comes to the auction will not come to a residential strest. His staff has done such a good job with their parking program. He was surprised with the parking study City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 43 that stated that only one parked vehicle could be attributabis to Quartz. That one vehicle was there for only one hour. Commissioner Bristol asked where his employees park when his lot is completely full. Sam Govemale respond~d that their lot is not completely fuil. He agreed that they could have a 24-hour attendant for off loading. Off ioading of transports on the premises which he admitted that they do, mostly 2 and 3 haulers only. He has not witnessed off loading on East Street while he is there and he works 80 hours a week. During the road construction a neighbor called Code Enforcement and there was a flat bed in her driveway but it was not related to Quartz. it could also be in the middle of the night when he is not there. But from the testimony given from a neighbor they indicated that there was a transporter unloading in the lot next to her and driving them into Quartz driveway, which meant it still was not in the street. Commissioner Bristol asked Mr. Govemale where their employees park. Sam Govemale stated throughout the week their employees park on the premises. On Mondays their employees park on their premises. In the morning their lot crew shuttle their employee's cars to the CHOC lot except for some of their late arriving employees which makes more room for their customer parking. Chairperson Boydstu~ ~ stated when she was at this site on a Sunday they were working on shifting the cars getting them ready for the auction. The securiry man walked to the back of the lot with her and there were vacant spaces. She was told that and he said thaYs where employees parked. There was a row that was not being used. Commissioner Bristol asked whether the applicant couid control transporters from delivering vehicles between 10 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. because it seems to be very noisy at night. Sam Governale responded he could make a concerted effort in doing that and completely stop the deliveries at those hours or whatever is necessary. Commissioner Koos asked if it is feasible for them to discontinue unioading on the public right-of-way completely. Sam Governale stated that contrary to Mr. Yalda's statement, the law that allows unloading of vehicle transporters in center dividers of any street in the State of California. Chairperson Boydstun asked if they could notify the transport companies that they deal with not to deliver between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Sam Governale responded there are some companies that are more familiar to their location than others. You never know when a strange company will show up. He is willing to notify all the companies they know of the restriction on the hours. Fie asked if that meant off loading outside of their perimeters or inside. Chairperson Boydstun stated at 11:00 or 12Midnight if they are inside or outside the fence they are still going to hear the noise. There needs to be no unioading from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Sam Governale stated they could notify everyone that is currentiy coming to them that they are aware of City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Page 44 Commissioner Bostwick stated McPeek unloads in a public street but the area is in an industrial area but Hardin doas not havs that ability so they unload in the middle of the street, which is a much wider street, and drive them onto the lot. Chairperson Boydstun added there is a center lane that they can get into for tuming and that is where they pull into so the traffic c~uld still move. Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner stated that East Street is very narrow. In some parts of the street they have a left-hand turn but much of the street does not have this and there is no parking available. That street was not designed to carry the heavy traffic, especially truck tra~~~. Commissioner Bristol stated the neighbors major concerns were noise ar,d the parking. It appears the applicant has worked diligently trying to ensure that people p~~rk at CHOC but he felt their site is too smail for this use. He is willing to agree to 'I year with a condition o~` prohibiting transporters deliveries from 10:00 p.m, to 6:00 a.m. on-site and off-site so the noise will not impact the neighbors and continue with the CHOC parking and review this after 1 year. Commissioner Koos felt this item sho~~ld be continued despite ihe fact that CHOC is under ut~lized, by Code. i'hey have to have enough for their own parking and whatee~er a~reements the applicant has in place. They can not allow someone to violate code on an issue in ordJr to satisfy a ~UP. Greg McCafferty stated it has not been studied so they do not know whether that retail center that CHOC is on can supply the Code required amount of spaces and then have a surplus to be leased out for this use. If that were the case and if thPy liad extra spaces that they coul~ lease then they would have to add a condition of approval that guaranteed that those spaces would be available for the use by the petitioner and that agreement would have to be ra~orded. Melanie Adams, Associate Civil Engineer, ;~t.;ed that Commissioner Bostwick had expressed concerns about the washing of cars on the facility and thg possibility of adding a wash rack somewhere on the property. Wash racks are expensive to install, if they were to only rinse the cars up front towards East Street, that rinse water would go into the catch basin south of their property, which may offer a reasonable alternative. Commissioner Bostwick recommended a 4-week continuance so they can do a study on the CHOC property and have a written a~reement in hand to provide to Planning staff, so that it can be part of the Conditions. Alfred Yalda asked about the 7-Cleven that {hey are leasing the parking from. They should revise the parking study to state what the required code is for the two properties and the amount of spaces they are leasing. Generally, these conditions have to be recorded with the property because that has been a common practice with Planning Commission for other uses. When ihere is any kind of lease agreement, it should be identified, and recorded with the County. Greg McCafferty advised they could have a preliminary agreement. He did not feel they need an executed agreement and if the Planning Commission is willing, staff can, as part of the Conditions of Aqproval, have it in a form that can be approved, executed and recorded within 30 days of approval. With regard to the parking code, it allows Commission to consider having parking that is in reasunabie proximity to the use, and it is subject to determination whether that reasonable proximity is all the w~y up East and Lincoln. Greg Hammill felt six weeks would be enough time to prepare documents and have it analyzed City of Anaheim Planning Commission Summary Action Agenda 10-11-99 Paga 45 Commissioner Vanderbilt indicated at the last meeting he suggested it would be easier if there was an agreement between the neighbors, but there was not mention of one at the presentation today. Neighbors also need to realize the efforts that have been made by applicant and be open to suggestions. Chairperson Boydstun advised the applicant to get notices to the car haulers now and not wait until the next hearing when it may become a condition. Commissioner Bristol offered motion for a continuance to November 22, seconded by Commissioner Napoles and motion carried. FOLLOWINGIS A SIJMMARY OF THE PLANNING`COMMISSION ACTION: OPPOSITION: 4 people spoke in opposition to the request. Correspondence was received in opposition. A petition with 10 signatures in opposition of the proposal was received. ACTION: Continued subject request to the November 22,1999 Planning Commission meeting (n order for the applicant to: (1) Prepare and submit a preliminary parking agreement with the properties that he leases parking spaces nom; (2) Submit a revised parking study identifying the required parking spaces of the properties he leases parking spaces from; (3) Identify the number of parking spaces he is leasing from each property; and (4) Meet with the surrounding neighbors to see if they car. come to an agreement. VOTE: 6-0 (one vacant seat) DISCUSSION TIME: 1.5 hours (5:05-6:35j City of Anahefm Planning Commtssion Summary Action Agenda 10-11-95 Page 46 u ~ 4 t . , ~:~. ~ ~ . . . . . _ , . . . , ADJOURNED AT 6:35 P.M. TO MONDAY, OCTOBER 25,1999 AT 9:00 A.M. FOR CONVENTION CENTER TOUR. Submitted by: ~~~ Ossie Edmundson Senior Secretary 7~-~v,r-c.~.. Simonne Fannir Senior Office Specialist Received and approved by the Planning Commission on 11 ^~j -~I 5 Cfty of Maheim P{anning Commissfon Summary Actlon Agenda 10-11-99 Page 4'/