Loading...
Minutes-ZA 1994/12/22 ACTION AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR THURSDAY, DECEMBER 22,1994 10:30 A.M. Staff present: Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator; Seima Mann, City Attorney; Jonathan 8orrego, Senior Planner; Don Yourstone, Sr. Code Enforcement Officer; Susie Areyan, Business License; Jim Gandy, Police Officer; Kim Cervantes, Planning Aide; and Betty Preston, Sr. Office Specialist. 1a. EXEMPT FROM CEQA (PUBLIC RESOURCES CODES 21080(a); CEQA GUIDELINES S 15268) 1 b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3735 Denied OWNER: ALEX STAUROPOULOS 3025 East La Mesa Avenue Anaheim, CA 92807 AGENT: BILL BADI GAMMON 583 North Wrightwood Drive- Orange, CA 92669 LOCATION: 3025 East La Mesa Avenue (Funtease) Property is approximately 0.56 acre, having a frontage of approximately 135 feet on the north side of La Mesa Avenue, having a maximum depth of approximately 180 feet and being located approximately 165 feet west of the centerline of Kraemer Place. To permit a Sex-0riented Business (Funtease) a live performance sex-oriented theater. Remarks: Akbar Mehr, representative of Mr. Gammoh, spoke in support of project. One letter of opposition was received and three people spoke in opposition to project. Ms. Santalahii denied project due to application not meeting criteria of Anaheim Municipal Code regarding permitted sex-oriented. businesses location. (Bits Gammoh, Agent, spoke after the public hearing was closed.) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION NO. 9433 2. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: None f ~\ • Verbatim transcript December 22, 1994 Zoning Administrator Meeting Re: Conditional Use Permit No. 3735, to permit aSex-Oriented Business (Funtease) Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator -I'll open today's Zoning Administrator meeting and first of all I'll review the procedures that I'll be following. Everyone who comes to the podium, I would like you to introduce yourself by name and address and if you would please spell your name so we get it correctly for the record and also if you would write your name and address on the pad of paper that should be up there at the podium so that we get it correctly for the public record. I'd like the people who speak to try to hold themselves to 3 minutes or less, the first - so that we can get through everybody if there is several people that want to speak -the first person to speak will always be the applicant for the proposal or their representative; after they're finished if there is anyone in support of the proposal they will speak; when they're finished if there are people in opposition or with concerns they will speak; when they're finished the applicant or their agent will have the opportunity to rebut or respond to any of the comments that have been made; and after that's done I'll close the public hearing. I may be asking questions during the public testimony and if there is any concerns, not any concerns, but if I don't understand what's actually said. There are two items on today's agenda, one is .the Conditional Use Permit No. 3735, No. 1, and No. 2 is items of public interest, and items of public interest is intended for anyone who has .something to say other than regarding the public hearing item today -you can say it at that point. Any decision that I might be making today in connection with the condition use permit has a 10-day .period during which I'll be preparing the written decision and mailing a copy to the applicant or the names, I should say, that appear on the agenda. If there is anyone else present who would .like a copy of that written decision I would like you to furnish uswith aself-addressed, or at least with your names and addresses, and we'll send you a copy of the decision as well. The .decision I'll be making today, potentially making, on the conditional use permit for the. sex-oriented business at 3025 E. ]..a. Mesa Avenue will be final with my written decision -assuming it is made today. I'll open the hearing on Item No. 1, Conditional Use Permit No. 3735, for 3025 E. La Mesa Avenue, this is the proposed Funtease, asex-oriented business, a live performance theater. What I'd like to do first is to swear in everybody who expects to speak or thinks they may speak - if they choose. not to ultimately that's not a problem, but I need everyone to be sworn in so if everybody. present who intends to speak or present evidence would please stand -this includes staff. Raise your right hand and when I'm finished you can say I do. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, .and nothing but. the truth, please say yes. (Yes from audience). Thank you. Any documentation by the way or papers or pictures or else that's presented to staff will be part of the public record and will be retained in connection with this file. OK staff. Jonathan Borrego, Planning Department - A staff report on this matter has been prepared by the Planning Department and at this time I'd like to enter this report into the official record of this hearing. And in addition to that I also wanted to state for the record that we -1- • • have received one letter of opposition to this request and, I believe, a copy of the letter has been given tothe applicants, or the applicant's agent, but at this time I'll go ahead and put a couple of copies up near the podium there in case anyone else would like to take a look at this letter. And also the letter is from Bill Taormina at 1131 N. Blue Gum Street in Anaheim and the letter is dated December 20, .1994. Annika Santalahti - I should note also that copies of the staff report are available up in the front with the attachments and I hope everybody has taken a look at that so that if you have any questions or comments concerning that you can also bring that up during the time you are speaking at the podium. Is that all you have Jonathan? Jonathan Borrego - I'm sorry? Annika .Santalahti - Is that all you have? Jonathan Borrego -Yes Annika Santalahti - Ok, thank you. All right, is the applicant or their representative here? Akbar Mehr -Good morning Miss Annika, good morning everybody... Annika Santalahti -Excuse me, Santalahti is my last name I apologize for that - I don't have the last name here, with me. My name is Akbar Mehr, my last name is M E H R, my residence is 80817th St., Apt. # 16, Buena Park, CA 90621. I'm representing Mr. Bill Gammoh today because of the proposed location of the business and I know that we are not here to request for the approval of this proposed business because we already have been denied on the staff report and because we, allegedly are not complying with the, some of the items of the adult business zoning ordinances. I need to mention two things before I wrap up my speech. First, we totally disagree with the overall zoning scheme of the City of Anaheim when it comes to adult businesses and second, since there is a court hearing tomorrow in the superior court in Santa Ana at 1:30, I do not find it appropriate to discuss the matter further. Thank you. Annika Santalahti - Is there anyone else who would .like to speak in support of the proposal? No one else indicating .their .presence to speak in support? Is there anyone present who. would like to speak in opposition of the proposal or with concerns regarding the proposal? Yes, come up to the podium please. Good morning, my name is Lillian Runo, 1120 Kenwood Place in Fullerton and I am opposing granting the permit .3735 to the sex-oriented. business at 3025 La Mesa in Anaheim. Our property is next door, 3035 La. Mesa in Anaheim, affects on owners, tenants and families are all negative. Financial impact to owners, building values as well as rental rates will go down. There is a great safety factor to owners and tenants in that immediate area or in other areas surrounding this business. The tenants and owners would lose control of the building and parking area both day and night. Now I know that Anaheim has approved a permit to 4sex-oriented clubs, two topless and two nude, but I beg of you not -2- • • to grant this permit to the Funtease Theater Nude which -this type business degrades the area and it .encourages crime and .trouble. Annika Santalahti -Thank you. Someone else would like to speak in opposition or with concerns? Rev. Lou Sheldon - Do I need to sign in here? Annika Santalahti -Yes, please, we'd like to get the spelling and the name correctly basically and if you'd also give your address when you introduce yourself. Good morning, my name is Rev. Lou Sheldon, I am the chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, and we represent a large number of churches in the City of Anaheim and one of our major concerns is representing them in the area of lobby is the area of pornography and obscenity. I come before you as a resident of the City myself of 21 years and I am opposed to the conditional use permit for the Funtease sex-oriented business. There is already a proliferation of these sex-oriented: businesses in Anaheim. At last count it looked like there was one, two, three, four of them potentially -one just recently being opened on Ball Road very close to a church. We know the City does not want this and we know the City has tried very hard not to have .this so the coalition is in sympathy with all the tremendous efforts of the City. This growing number of sex-oriented businesses negatively impacts .upon the ..quality of the life of families. Many times these places are a magnet .for crime, drug use, drug dealing and, of course, prostitution is always a potential problem with sex-oriented entertainment. As such, these establishments give a bad image to our City. As we all know, Anaheim is a City that is very much known as a tourist center - we cannot afford to become another Orange County Mustang Ranch. Mustang Ranch was the place of prostitution in Nevada and with 4 of these at this time there is no particular way to see how we're going to stop this unless we stop it here. Such a negative image will infect -will affect tourism which affects jobs, which in return affects our economy. Sex-oriented business such as this one are bad for Anaheim families and Anaheim's economy so I urge you, as a commission, to use all powers within your authority to deny the CUP to the applicant. Thank you. Annika Santalahti -Rev. Sheldon, it just occurs to me, I dan't know if you were, I .didn't notice -you walked in a few moments late. Were you one of the people who was sworn in when I swore in everybody? Rev. Sheldon - No Annika Santalahti -Goodness, City Attorney, how should I? Sorry I noticed it well into your speaking here... Selma Mann, City Attorney - I think that we could just do it by stating that do you swear or affirm that the testimony .that you have given is the truth? Rev. Sheldon - Yes, I do so swear. Annika Santalahti -Thank you. I did notice someone else came in also later on so that if -3- • another person speaks who wasn't sworn in, I'll be swearing you in. OK, someone else who would like to speak in opposition to the proposal:. or with concerns? Richard Alvarez - Do you want to swear. me in? Annika Santalahti - Yes I will.. Would you raise your right hand please. Do you solemnly swear or afhrm that .the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, please say yes if that's the case. Richard Alvarez -Yes. Annika Santalahti -And if you would also give your name and address vocally My name is Richard M. Alvarez, I'm with Alvarez Properties at 27999 Front St., Temecula, CA 92590. I represent the property at the southeast corner of Kraemer Place and La. Palma Avenue as well as a few other properties inthe direct area where this business will be going, or .where .they plan to be. First off, I'd like to say that I think this type of business in this area will create a negative impact on the area. It will bring crime, drugs, prostitution and all other elements that go along with it and as for the local businesses in the area with these type of people running around most of these businesses tend to be, you know .they are industrial-type businesses, and they have security problems, you know, in and of itself, and now you're going to add. to that problem. Another problem is the fact that, as I understand it, this area is zoned for redevelopment, and if that being the case, this is like taking a step backwards, not a step forward. In redevelopment and changing the zoning in the area, you look to .upgrade the area maybe to more retail uses and to create a new and nice environment for the area. Adding this type of business to that area is only. going to downgrade what you have planned for the area. As you know, you're in the process of expanding the. road on La Palma and you know with what .you have planned there it is a very nice plan -trees and shrubs and retaining walls and such. and the type of businesses that I think you're looking for -upper scale businesses -well this business here is just going to drag everything down in the. area and I don't think the other business owners in the area would appreciate the type of people that will be around this proposed business. Driving through the. streets at nighttime, they might be hanging around and these businesses - a lot of them shut down at night and you're going to have.a serious, serious crime problem in the area with the businesses that are already existing. You know all of a sudden you might need security.. guards and this just looks bad ..for the area and after awhile some of these businesses, you know with these problems persisting, they will have to move out of the area and what will happen is you will have a lot of vacancy: in the area as well as property values will be decreasing. And with a lot of vacancy you're going to have like a ghost townthat I've seen in similar circumstances of, you know, a business like let's say a mattress place or something. - if I owned a mattress place and I see this sex-oriented business that would be next door to me, compared to another location that may be 2 or 3 miles away but .has no business like this next door, I would definitely pick that other location. I mean there's no reason for me to want to add any possible problems to where I might be going. So in other words, I'd like to restate that I just feel that it would be a negative impact on the area with the crime, the prostitution: that may exist, it's going to create a negative environment and I really feel that the best thing .for you to do would be to not allow it in there for the sake -4- • of what you have planned in redevelopment as well as the local owners there. Thank you. Annika Santalahti -Thank you Jonathan Borrego -Madam Administrator, I just wanted to clarify for the record that although this area is near the redevelopment area there, this particular property here is just south of the redevelopment area boundary and is outside the redevelopment area. Richard M. Alvarez - .That is true, but to get to the property you will be going through the redevelopment area because that street on the property that I represent at the southeast comer of Kraemer .and La. Palma will be, from my understanding, it will be zoned in the redevelopment area, therefore, to get to this location you will have to go through the redevelopment area and it is that close to it. Annika Santalahti - Ok thank you. Since two of you at least came in after I gave my initial comments, there are staff reports available on the front wooden thing there and you know go ahead and take a copy so you can see: the staff recommendations aswell asthe staff analysis of the proposal. Is there anyone else present who would like to speak in opposition or with concerns _regarding this conditional use permit? No one else present who indicates their interest in speaking - Ok. Mr. Meter would you like to respond or rebut to any of the comments that have been made? No - ok. He indicated no from the audience for the record or did you want him to come up to the podium? Selma Mann - .Madam Administrator I would like to clarify a number of items. That the Zoning Administrator is sitting at .this hearing not in her ordinary capacity as the Zoning Administrator, but as a hearing officer who has been appointed by the Planning Director in accordance with the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code 18.89.030.040, paragraph .0401, also that although it is a agenda that is indicating a regular meeting of .the City Zoning Administrator that has some generalized language on here, the only item. is the application for asex-oriented business. Although the general language indicates the usual appeal procedures for a conditional use. permit, I'd like to point out that in the case of an application for a conditional use permit far asex-oriented business there is no appeal. The decision of the Zoning Administrator will be final. That decision must be rendered within 10 days of this hearing. Thank you. Annika Santalahti - Ok, thank you. Ok, since the applicant doesn't wish to make any further comments I'll close the public hearing. The staff report that was prepared reviews some of the criteria which must be satisfied for asex-oriented business under a conditional use permit like this to be approved in the City of Anaheim. If they fail to satisfy those criteria then it is required that the application be denied. If, on the other hand, they were to meet all of those criteria then the application would have to be approved, despite, or if any of the criteria found to be, you know, incorrectly analyzed, would have to be changed. In this particular instance .there are 3 of the locational types of criteria that are not satisfied by the business location in this specific interest at 3025 E. La, Mesa Avenue. First of all, under Code Section 18.89.030.050.0502 it specifies that sex-oriented businesses shall not be located within 400 feet of any residentially-zoned property or any residential use. In this instance the location is approximately 150 feet to the east of 2671 E. La Mesa Avenue. -5- • i There is an attachment to the staff report - a location map that shows the specific location of that residential .agricultural zoning and the approximate 150 foot distance between the two properties. The second finding that is notsatisfied in this instance is that asex-oriented business under Section 18.89.030.050.0504.01 shall not be located south of La. Palma Avenue when located east of Gilbert Street. In this instance the property is located south of La Palma Avenue and east of Gilbert Street, which is the street farther to the east between La Palma and Brookhurst Avenue for anyone who isnot familiar. The third locational criteria that cannot be satisfied is under Section 18.89.030.050.0504.03 which requires that a sex- . oriented business not be located within 100 feet of a freeway right-of--way or an arterial highway right-of--way as designated on the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. In this case the. subject property is located approximately 65 feet north of theright-of- way line of the State Route 91/Riverside Freeway. So, on the basis of these 3 findings, and I should note also, or will note for the record that in connection with the CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) findings this is a .ministerial action and therefore no CEQA ...finding will. be made in this case. I expect to deny Conditional Use Permit No. 3735 on the basis. of the 3 findings that I have listed. The written decision will be prepared within the next 10 days and mailed to the 2 names that appear on today's agenda. I will also mail a copy of the decision to anyone else who is interested if you furnish us with your address and indicate that this is the item that you want the decision on. As the. City Attorney noted my decision is final today and there are no appeal periods attached to this decision which will be final when its mailed - on the date that it's mailed out in its written form which will be some day next week Tuesday through Friday probably - I don't think it will be tomorrow. Jonathan Borrego -Madam Administrator I wanted to clarify something else for the record. I .think it was .stated earlier by the applicant's representative that the decision had been made on the matter based on the contents of the staff report and I just wanted to clarify the fact that the staff report only contained a recommendation based on the findings which you just .made, and also wanted to clarify the fact that at times when staff does make a recommendation to the decision making body, if in fact contrary information is received at the public hearing, that it is common or it does occur at times where the decision .maker actually will go contrary to staff's recommendation. Annika Santalahti -Thank you, I'm glad you noted that. When Mr. Mehr said that I thought of that myself and I forgot to comment on that point that it's only following the public hearing that the decision is actually made. I think that's all I'll be doing. Thank you. Yes? ....faint talking from audience, but not transcribable Annika Santalahti -Excuse me, would you mind giving your name and address please. My name is Bill Gammoh, I live in 583 N. Wrightwood in Orange. I've been living there for 7 years. I don't know how the City of Anaheim applied by law goes on somebody and somebody elses not. Fritz 2 has been open for last 8 months. He has no license. He's in the Anaheim Development. Because the guy is strong enough, I don't know what the story over here: - I .applied with all -everything with your rule and regulations. You guys denied my first application when I have a right to speak. And before you denied it you adopt a -6- • • new law which is 100 feet from the freeway. I mean, I mean we're not stupid over here. And this gentlemen -his dad was almost renting me his .place but I found out the street is going to be wide and I refused to take it because they're going to take half the parking outside. And this lady -she sold her building to Vasquez Tarcarian, the guy owned the Flamingo. But I submitted my application before him -she's still in escrow with him. I don't see anybody apply. I mean the church - I'm not going to tell the church people to come to my place. If I want to hold you to go - if you want to try to go to church, will I could stop you? I cannot stop you man. Thank you. Annilca Santalahti - I don't think it's necessary, well I shouldn't... Selma Mann -All of these comments are. outside of the public hearing. You're certainly welcome to go ahead and address the Zoning Administrator in any event and I would like to respond following the comments. Annika Santalahti - OK, if you. want to Mr. Alvarez go ahead, I'd like anybody whose present who wants to .speak Richard Alvarez - I just want to make this clear. Mr. Gammoh indicated that we had at one time participated in getting him to lease one of our buildings. He did inquire about leasing one of our buildings but as soon as we found out what type of business it is we immediately denied any chance of it going any further. Annika Santalahti -Thank you Selma Mann -What I'd like to point out is that this project has never satisfied the locational requirements contained in .0502 of 18.89.030.050 which prohibits the issuance of a sex- oriented business permit for any property within 400 feet of a residential zone. This requirement. was in place for almost a year before the applicant submitted his first application for asex-oriented business. The applicant was always precluded from developing a sex-oriented business on the subject property. If the goal was to prevent this business, it would have been unnecessary for the City to amend its sex-oriented business ordinance. Annika Santalahti - Ok, thank you for clarifying that point. Ok, the final item on today's agenda is Item #2, Items of Public Interest, and this is for anyone else here about anything other than what. was under the public hearing to comment on. Anyone interested in speaking? No one indicating they wish to speak so I'll close today's meeting. c3735min.wp -7-