Minutes-PC 2010/04/26City of Anaheim
Planning Commission
Minutes
Monday,April 26, 2010
Council Chamber, City Hall
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, California
Commissioners Present
:Chairman: Panky Romero
Peter Agarwal, Todd Ament, Kelly Buffa,
Stephen Faessel,Joseph Karaki
Commissioners Absent
:Victoria Ramirez
Staff Present
:
CJ Amstrup, Planning Services ManagerMichele Irwin, Senior Police Services Representative
Jonathan Borrego,Principal PlannerRaul Garcia,Principal CivilEngineer
MarkGordon, Assistant City AttorneyDavid Kennedy, Associate Transportation Planner
David See, Senior PlannerEleanorMorris, Secretary
Della Herrick, Associate Planner
Vanessa Norwood, Associate Planner
Agenda Posting: A complete copy of the Planning Commission Agenda was posted at4:30 p.m.
onWednesday,April 21, 2010, inside the display case located in the foyer of the Council Chamber,
and also in the outside display kiosk.
Published:Anaheim Bulletin Newspaper onThursday, April 15,2010
Call to Order-3:30 p.m.
Audience Attendance: 17
Pledge of AllegiancebyCommissioner Ament
Public Comments
Consent Calendar
Public Hearing Items
Adjournment
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda -3:30 P.M.
Public Comments: None
Minutes
ITEM NO. 1A
Approval to continue
Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning
consideration of minutesto
Commission Meeting of April 12, 2010.
May 10, 2010
(Faessel/Karaki)
VOTE: 6-0
Chairman Romero and
Commissioners Agarwal, Ament,
Buffa, FaesselandKarakivoted yes.
Commissioner Ramirez was absent.
04/26/10
Page 2of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Public Hearing Items:
ITEM NO. 2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2010-05488Resolution No. 2010-024
(DEV2010-00035)
(Ament)
Owner:
Jodi Nygard
Approved
401 Dyer LP-Optima Asset Management Svcs.
1600 Dove Street, Suite 480
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Applicant:VOTE: 6-0
Jonelle Bowden
Innovate Learning Center
Chairman Romero and
Commissioners Agarwal, Ament,
1209 Balboa Boulevard #2
Buffa, Faessel and Karaki voted yes.
Newport Beach, CA 92661
Commissioner Ramirez was absent.
Location:6509 East Serrano Avenue,Suite A
The applicant proposes to establish a tutoring facility in an
Project Planner:
existing commercial center.
Della Herrick
dherrick@anaheim.net
Environmental Determination: The proposed action is
Categorically Exempt from the requirement to prepare
additional environmental documentation per California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines -Class 1
(Existing Facilities).
Della Herrick,AssociatePlanner, provided a summary of the staff report dated April 26,2010,along
with a visual presentation.
Chairman Romeroopened the public hearing.
Jonelle Bowden,applicant, stated shehad reviewed the conditions of approval andwas in agreement
with the staff report.
Commissioner Faessel asked about the ages of thestudentstutored.
Ms. Bowden responded that the students would be between the 6th and 12thgrades; and indicated
there will be some drivers but the majority ofthe students would be dropped off orlive within walking
distance.
Chairman Romero asked if anyone was present to speak on the item, seeing no other persons
indicating to speak, he closed the public hearing.
04/26/10
Page 3of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Commissioner Amentoffered a recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt the resolution
attached to the April 26, 2010 staff report, determining that aClass 1 Categorical Exemption is the
appropriate environmental documentation for this request and approving Conditional Use Permit No.
2010-05488(DEV2010-00035).
Eleanor Morris, Secretary announced that the resolution passedwith six yes votes.Chairman
Romero and Commissioners Agarwal, Ament, Buffa, Faessel and Karaki voted yes. Commissioner
Ramirezwas absent.
OPPOSITION:
None
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 10-dayappeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, May 6,2010.
DISCUSSION TIME
:4minutes (3:34to 3:38)
04/26/10
Page 4of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
ITEM NO. 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3763A Resolution No. 2010-025
(DEV2010-00038)
(Buffa)
Owner:
Bipin Gala
Approved
24525Paseo De Toronto
Yorba Linda, CA 92887
Applicant:VOTE: 6-0
Paresh T.Rambhia
Big Bob’s Market Chairman Romero and
Commissioners Agarwal, Ament,
1330-1332 South Magnolia Avenue
Buffa, Faessel and Karaki voted yes.
Anaheim, CA 92804
Commissioner Ramirez was absent.
Location:1330-1332 South Magnolia Avenue
The applicant proposes to delete a condition of approval
Project Planner:
pertaining to the sales of single-serving alcoholic beverages
Della Herrick
in an existing convenience market.
dherrick@anaheim.net
Environmental Determination: The proposed action is
Categorically Exempt from the requirement to prepare
additional environmental documentation per California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines -Class 1
(Existing Facilities).
Della Herrick, AssociatePlanner, provided a summary of the staff report dated April 26, 2010,along
with a visual presentation.
Commissioner Buffa referred to the sales of single-serving alcoholic beverages and stated she
thought that was something that was not typically supported.She asked how the subject
recommendation to allow sales of single-serving alcoholic beverages fits into past efforts to restrict
sales to pre-packaged multi-packs.
Ms. Herrick responded the Police Department reviews each case individually and it was determined
that the subject facilityhasn’t had any problems in the past.
Commissioner Buffa suggested that if the City wasgoing to allow single sales of alcoholic beverages,
a clear criterion of what is acceptableshould be established; instead of reviewing these requests ona
case-by-case basis.The permit runs with the land and does not run with the operator; She
questioned how weknow if the person who operates the business next will have an equally good
performance record.
04/26/10
Page 5of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Commissioner Faessel concurred with Commissioner Buffa and said he likes consistency and it
doesn’t appear that weare being consistent in the waythat weare addressing these types of
requests, and he expressed his concerns.
Commissioner Karaki said he doesn’t think they can set the criteria themselves and suggested the
Police Department handle these requests on a case-by-case basis, as they know the history of the
business. He prefers to have a recommendation from the Police Department with the Planning
Commission reviewing these ona case-by-case basis.
Commissioner Agarwal asked staff if this is the first time that the Police Department has
recommendedthe sales of singles.
Ms. Herrick responded there havebeen other cases and one case,Thomas Liquor,was considered
by the City Council which approved a request to allow the sales of singles based on thestore owner’s
track record.
Commissioner Agarwal said he would be more comfortable if he knew what criteria the Police
Department is looking at, and what is involved initsdecision-making process.
Michele Irwin, Senior Police Services Representative, stated they review the crime statistics for the
surrounding quarter milearea, review the crime statistics for the actual location, and check the
census tract information to see if there is an over-concentration issue. In making a recommendation,
they alsotake into account facilities such as churches, schools, parks and sex-orientated businesses
in the area, and they contact ABC to see if there are any complaints on record.
Commissioner Agarwal asked if those guidelines are written downor are they subjective.
Ms. Irwin responded that the sameanalysis is contained within ABC guidelines. She also contacts
ABC to see if there are any complaints on record.
Commissioner Ament said it sounds like an objective process and asked if a matrix can be prepared,
passor fail, in order for an applicant tobetter understand the reasons behind a recommendation.
CJ Amstrup responded that it would be very difficult to come up with a numericstandard that would
consistently lead to afavorable outcome, as there will always be exceptions. It is a possibilitybut he
is not sure if it isnecessarily a desirable way of addressing the issue.
Further discussion amongst the Planning Commission and staff took place regarding the process of
handling thesetypes of requests, and the criteriaand factsbeing used by the Police Department for
recommending approvalor denial.
Mr. Amstrup relayed that if an applicant doesn’t have a demonstrated/knowntrack record for their
business, the Commission can add a condition of approval to have the applicant come back to the
Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item, applying a certain time period such as 6, 9 or
12 months, in order to get beyond concernsabout fairnessthat the Commission may have.
Chairman Romero responded it seems like a reasonable solution.
04/26/10
Page 6of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Commissioner Agarwal responded he would feel more comfortable with that, but would not want to
create more paperwork for staff or business owner.
Commissioner Ament said he would like to understand the cause and effect of what happens when
you sell singles in anarea that is above the crime rate. He struggles with the fact that a new operator
who doesn’t have a track record may get penalized from day one, but an operator with a decent track
record gets approved. It may be best to just let the business do their job and if they are not
conducting their business properly or are having a lot of problems then their license or conditional use
permit can be revoked.
Commissioner Buffa recommended a workshop be held pertaining to the subject issue.
Chairman Romeroopened the public hearing.
Paresh T. Rambhia, applicant, stated he had reviewed the conditions of approval and was in
agreementwith the staff report.He has been running the business for a number of years and has a
clean record with ABC. He received an appreciation certificate from the County of Orange for his
business.
Commissioner Agarwal asked the applicant what percentage of beer and wine increase that he
perceives.
Mr. Rambhia stated if a customer doesn’t see the single sales he doesn’t lose the beer business only
but also losessales of other items. He believes he would lose overall sales of approximately 13
percent.
Bipin Gala, owner, stated he has owned the property since 2000, and has been in the same type of
business for the last 30 years. Hestarted in the City of La Habra and had a very good track record
with the Pólice Department, and has a good track record with ABC.
Chairman Romero asked if anyone was present to speak on the item, seeing no other persons
indicating to speak, he closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Buffa offered a recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt the resolution
attached to theApril 26, 2010 staff report, determining that aClass 1 Categorical Exemption is the
appropriate environmental documentation for this request and approving the amendment to
Conditional Use Permit No. 3763A(DEV2010-00038).
Eleanor Morris, Secretary announced that the resolution passedwith six yes votes.Chairman
Romero and Commissioners Agarwal, Ament, Buffa, Faessel and Karaki voted yes. Commissioner
Ramirezwas absent.
04/26/10
Page 7of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OPPOSITION:
None
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 10-dayappeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, May 6,2010.
DISCUSSION TIME
:33minutes (3:39to 4:12)
04/26/10
Page 8of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
ITEM NO. 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNO. 2010-05481Resolution No. 2010-026
(DEV2010-00023)
(Agarwal)
Owner:
Shawn Danesh
Approved
Triple Net Management Group
26996 La Paz Road
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
VOTE:6-0
Applicant:
Rujirek Kittimonthorn Chairman Romero and
Commissioners Agarwal, Ament,
7402 Mooney Drive
Buffa, Faessel and Karaki voted yes.
Rosemead, CA91770
Commissioner Ramirez was absent.
Location:676 South State College Boulevard
The applicant proposesto permit the sales of beer and
Project Planner:
wine in an existing restaurant within a commercial center.
Vanessa Norwood
vnorwood@anaheim.net
Environmental Determination: The proposed action is
Categorically Exempt from the requirement to prepare
additional environmental documentation per California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines -Class 1
(Existing Facilities).
Vanessa Norwood,AssociatePlanner, provided a summary of the staff report datedApril 26, 2010,
along with a visual presentation.
Commissioner Faessel referred to Condition No. 9 and asked staff to clarify what “level of sufficient
lighting” means.
CJ Amstrup, Planning ServicesManager, responded staff will revise the condition to include the one
foot candle standard, and will use the same language that they used in one of the resolutions from
the last Planning Commission meeting.
Commissioner Faessel said he believes it is consistent with the Police Department’s criteria.
Commissioner Karaki said it is a new center, and the lighting is very adequate.
Commissioner Buffa said she is comfortable with the Police Department’s and Code Enforcement’s
judgment; and would rather not add the burden of additional lighting study on any applicant.
Commissioner Faessel said in a past agenda item, the condition of approval’s language was too
“unclear”, he said he is interested in consistency.
04/26/10
Page 9of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Chairman Romero said those issues were addressed when the center was built, approximately four
years ago.
Jonathan Borrego, Principal Planner, stated at one point in time staff took a look at adding a specific
standard to the code and it was one foot candle, and it was in anticipation of a code amendment and
they researched several other cities who have different sorts of standards. However, staff determined
it would be very expensive for many “mom and pop” type businesses to actually have a photometric
plan developed and the other issue wasthat staff would have to be trained and buy the equipment to
measure the lighting. Therefore, staff decided not to pursue thatcode amendment and instead stay
with the more “loosely” worded standard, and if there were ever issues with crime or illegal activity
taking place in a parking lot that wasn’t well lit, the City could then go back and take necessary action
through other measures.
Commissioner Karaki concurred with Commissioner Buffa and said if you have a business that is part
of an existing commercial center, and you ask one particular business to conduct a study for the
whole commercial center parking that would be very unreasonable.
Commissioner Agarwal asked for clarification regarding the difference between a restaurant and a
liquor store pertaining to the percentages of allowed sales of alcoholic beverages.
Michele Irwin, Senior Police Services Representative, stated that Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC)
has a difference in percentages of allowed sales;there is a percent you are allowed for a
convenience market and a percent you are allowed for a restaurant.
Chairman Romeroopened the public hearing.
Applicant stated he had reviewed the conditions of approval and was in agreementwith the staff
report.
Chairman Romero asked if anyone was present to speak on the item, seeing no other persons
indicating to speak, he closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Agarwaloffered a recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt the resolution
attached to the April 26, 2010 staff report, determining that a Class 1 Categorical Exemption is the
appropriate environmental documentation for this request and approving Conditional Use PermitNo.
2010-05481(DEV2010-00023).
Eleanor Morris, Secretary announced that the resolution passedwith six yes votes.Chairman
Romero and Commissioners Agarwal, Ament, Buffa, Faessel and Karaki voted yes. Commissioner
Ramirezwas absent.
04/26/10
Page 10of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OPPOSITION:
None
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 10-dayappeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, May 6,2010.
DISCUSSION TIME
:9minutes (4:13 to 4:22)
04/26/10
Page 11of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
ITEM NO. 5
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNO. 2010-05487Resolution No. 2010-027
(DEV2010-00034)
(Faessel)
Owner:
Behrouz Zaman
Approved
Vermont Center, LLC
1014 South Gretna Green Way
Los Angeles, CA 90049
Applicant:VOTE: 6-0
Sang Lee
Sang’s Smog
Chairman Romero and
Commissioners Agarwal, Ament,
336 South Anaheim Boulevard
Buffa, Faessel and Karaki voted yes.
Anaheim, CA 92805
Commissioner Ramirez was absent.
Location:895 South East Street
The applicant proposesto permit an automotive smog shop
Project Planner:
within an industrial center.
Vanessa Norwood
vnorwood@anaheim.net
Environmental Determination: The proposed action is
Categorically Exempt from the requirement to prepare
additional environmental documentation per California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines -Class 1
(Existing Facilities).
Vanessa Norwood,AssociatePlanner, provided a summary of the staff report dated April 26, 2010,
along with a visual presentation.
Commissioner Buffa asked how the property endedup with a series of retail and restaurant uses in
an industrial building that is now severely under parked.
Ms. Norwood responded she was unsure of how the parking supply at this location had evolved over
time.
Commissioner Buffa asked if on-street parking is allowed on Vermont Avenue.
Ms. Norwood responded thatstaff will research that questionnow.
Chairman Romeroopened the public hearing.
King Woods,applicant, stated he had reviewed the conditions of approval and was in agreementwith
the staff report. He said Mr. Lee has been in his current location formore than 21 years, and is being
relocated by the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency in order to make way for a new development; he
has a lot of experience and serves about 7-10 cars per day.
04/26/10
Page 12of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Chairman Romero asked if anyone was present to speak on the item, seeing no other persons
indicating to speak, he closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Buffa said her concern is not about the subject business, it is about the shopping
center and how it converted from industrial to retail over time without parking. If there is on-street
parking on Vermont Avenue,it will provide the necessary spillover. If it is not,she’s concerned about
parking encroaching into the residential neighborhood to the east.
Jonathan Borrego, Principal Planner, responded that staff did the research and there is parking
allowed on Vermont Avenue, west of East Street.
Commissioner Faesseloffered a recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt the resolution
attached to the April 26, 2010 staff report, determining that aClass 1 Categorical Exemption is the
appropriate environmental documentation for this request and approving Conditional Use Permit No.
2010-05487(DEV2010-00034).
Eleanor Morris, Secretary announced that the resolution passedwith six yes votes.Chairman
Romero and Commissioners Agarwal, Ament, Buffa, Faessel and Karaki voted yes. Commissioner
Ramirezwas absent.
OPPOSITION:
None
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 10-dayappeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, May 6,2010.
DISCUSSION TIME
:5minutes (4:23 to 4:28)
04/26/10
Page 13of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
ITEM NO. 6
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNO. 2006-05137AResolution No. 2010-028
(DEV2010-00019)
(Buffa)
Owner:
Kevin Reardon
Approved
Shamrock Properties
7331 East Stone Creek Lane
Anaheim, CA92808
Applicant:VOTE: 6-0
Phillip Schwartze
The PRS Group
Chairman Romero and
Commissioners Agarwal, Ament,
3187 San Juan Creek Circle
Buffa, Faessel and Karaki voted yes.
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Commissioner Ramirez was absent.
Location:3040 East Coronado Street
To amend conditions of approval for apreviously-approved
Project Planner:
outdoor storage facility.
Vanessa Norwood
vnorwood@anaheim.net
Environmental Determination: A previously-approved
Negative Declaration has been determined to serve as the
appropriate environmental documentation for this project in
accordance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Vanessa Norwood,AssociatePlanner, provided a summary of the staff report dated April 26, 2010,
along with a visual presentation.She also referred to a revised resolution that has been provided to
the Commission.
Chairman Romeroopened the public hearing.
Phillip Schwartze, applicant, stated he had reviewed the conditions of approval and was in agreement
with the staff report.
Chairman Romero asked if anyone was present to speak onthe item, seeing no other persons
indicating to speak, he closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Buffaoffered a recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt the revised
resolution attached to the April 26, 2010 staff report, determining that a previously-approvedNegative
Declaration is the appropriate environmental documentation for this request and approving an
amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05137A (DEV2010-00019
).
Eleanor Morris, Secretary announced that the resolution passedwith six yes votes.Chairman
Romero and Commissioners Agarwal, Ament, Buffa, Faessel and Karaki voted yes. Commissioner
Ramirezwas absent.
04/26/10
Page 14of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OPPOSITION:
None
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 10-dayappeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, May 6,2010.
DISCUSSION TIME
:3minutes (4:29to 4:32)
04/26/10
Page 15of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
ITEM NO. 7
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2010-05485Resolution No. 2010-029
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17333Resolution No. 2010-030
(DEV2010-00028)
(Karaki)
Owner:
Abel Avalos
CUP
Anaheim Redevelopment Agency
201 South Anaheim BoulevardApproved, deleted Condition No. 23
Anaheim, CA 92805andrevisedCondition No. 24
pertaining to public water mains.
Applicant:
Cheryl Casanova
Brookfield Homes
TTM
3090 Bristol Street, Suite 200
Costa Mesa, CA 92626Approved
Location:410-418 East Santa Ana Street
VOTE: 6-0
The applicant proposes to construct a 174 unit affordable Chairman Romero and Commissioners
Agarwal, Ament, Buffa, Faessel and
condominium project with a deviation in zoning
Karaki voted yes. Commissioner
development standards and a density bonus. The applicant
Ramirez was absent.
also proposes a 62-lot detached single family residential
subdivision and an 8-lot, 112 unit attached condominium
subdivision.
Project Planner:
Environmental Determination: A Negative Declaration has
David See
been prepared to evaluate the potential environmental
dsee@anaheim.net
impacts of this project in accordance with the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Dave See,Senior Planner, provided a summary of the staff report datedApril 26, 2010,along with a
visual presentation.In concluding, he said that a letter was received from a neighboring property
owner who is present today to speak; the issue is regarding access along Santa Ana Street.
Furthermore, he said that staff met with the applicant prior to the public hearing and the applicant is
requesting to deleteCondition No. 23; and staff is in agreement; and the applicant is also requesting
to modify Condition No. 24.
Commissioner Buffa referred to the Tentative Tract Map and asked what the typical lot
width/dimensions are for the single-family detached home.
Mr. See responded that the dimensions are not shown on the map but the applicant would be able to
answer that question.
Chairman Romeroopened the public hearing.
04/26/10
Page 16of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JohnO’Brien, Brookfield Homes Southland, applicant,provided a summary of the proposed project
along with a visual presentation. He noted that he is requesting deletion of Condition No. 23; and
referred to Condition No. 24, last bullet point, which references the public water mains within the
private streets and driveways. He said the proposed projects on today’s agenda will beBrookfield’s
thth
8and 9communitiesin Anaheim over the past 10 years. They have always been able to have
public water mains within private streets/private drive areas so they are hopeful that they can do that
again. It has been suggested that the language be amended to say “minimize public water mains
within private streets and driveways” and they are fine with that as long as it is depicted on the plans
provided today.
Mr. O’Brien referred to Commissioner Buffa’s question and said that the lot dimensions are
approximately 35 x 70feet.
Commissioner Agarwal referred to the common area and asked for the proposed square footage.
Mr. See responded that the required recreational leisure area,which is a combination of public and
private open space,is approximately 61,000 square feet and the applicant is proposing 118,000
square feet, whichis almost double the requirement.
Commissioner Buffa referred to Condition No. 24 and asked for staff’s comments regarding the water
mains.
Mr. See responded he spoke with Public Utilities staff prior to the public hearing, and their concern is
maintenance. After the water main is installed on private property, the City is still responsible for the
public water lines and if maintenance is needed then City crews would have to do the repairs and
disrupt living conditions of the residents.
Commissioner Buffa asked historically have we not had water mains under many streets that if they
had to be repaired it would be disruptive to the residents.
Mr. See responded yes we have.
Chairman Romero asked if anyone was present to speak on the item.
st
Greg Lowther, President of 1National Investment Properties, 12877 Main Street #914, Garden
Grove, CA, he said he owns the property across the street from the subject site at thenorthwest
corner of Kroeger Street and Santa Ana Street. He is a strong supporter of the project, but is
concerned about future access to Santa Ana Street. He referred to the map and said it appears that
his access to Santa Ana Street may be cut off, and his only access would be on Kroeger Street. He
wants to ensure he has full access.
Raul Garcia, Principal Civil Engineer, responded that there are two projects that are in play at the
moment. One is an Anaheim Redevelopment Agency project for the reconstruction of Santa Ana
Street and the other project is the subject item. Future access on the north side of the street would
have to be coordinated between Mr. Lowther and the Redevelopment Agency. The street
improvements to Santa Ana Street are being done by the Redevelopment Agency as a separate
project; therefore coordination between Mr. Lowther and the Redevelopment Agency should take
place to discuss those access concerns.
04/26/10
Page 17of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Mr. Lowther said it looks like there might be parallel parking along Santa Ana Street for the project
and asked for clarification.
Mr. Garcia responded the design of the street was done per the Anaheim Colony Downtown
Guidelines, andthere would be parallel parking adjacent to hisproperty.
Mr. Lowther said that is an issue forhim, and said that he would address his concerns with the
Redevelopment Agency.
Mr. Garciasaid he has already sent an e-mail to Redevelopment Agency staff with Mr. Lowther’s
contact information per the letter that was provided to staff today.
Mr. Lowther reiterated he does support the project.
Chairman Romeroclosed the public hearing.
Commissioner Karakioffered a recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt the resolution
attached to the April 26, 2010 staff report, determining that a Negative Declaration is the appropriate
environmental documentation for this request and approvingConditional Use Permit No.2010-05485,
with deletion of Condition No. 23 and modifications to Condition No. 24,and approving amendment to
Tentative Tract Map No. 17333(DEV2010-00028).
Eleanor Morris, Secretary announced that the resolution passedwith six yes votes.Chairman
Romero and Commissioners Agarwal, Ament, Buffa, Faessel and Karaki voted yes. Commissioner
Ramirezwas absent.
IN SUPPORT:
Oneperson spoke in favorof the project, but relayed concernsand submitted a
letterregarding future access to Santa Ana Street.
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 10-dayappeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, May 6, 2010.
DISCUSSION TIME
:25minutes (4:33to 4:58)
04/26/10
Page 18of 19
APRIL 26, 2010
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
DISCUSSION:
Jonathan Borrego, Principal Planner, indicated that Redevelopment Agency staff has requested to
present a Workshop on the development of the Packing House Block at the next Planning
Commission meeting of May 10, 2010.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 5:00P.M.
TO MONDAY, MAY 10, 2010AT 3:30P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Eleanor Morris
Secretary
Received and approved by the Planning Commission on May 24, 2010.
04/26/10
Page 19of 19