The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes-PC 1994/03/07,n ACTION AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF" THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, MARCH 7, 1994 10:00 A•M• - WORK SESSION WITH ANAHEIM SCHOOL DISTRICT 11:00 A.M. - PRELIA4INARY PLAN REVIEW (NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY ACCEPTED) 1:30 P•M• - PUBLIC HEARING BEGINS (PUBLIC TESTIMONY) COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BOYDSTUN, CALDWELL, MAYER, MESSE, PERAZA, TAIT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: HENNINGER PROCEDURE TO EXPEDITE PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS i 1. The proponents in applications which are not contested will have flue minutes to present their evidence. Addtional time will be granted upon request if, In the opinion of the Commission, such additional time will produce evidence Important to the Commission's consideration. 2. In contested appflcatlons, the proponents and opponent will each be g(ven ten minutes to ~.,, present their case unless additional time is requested and the complexity of the matter warrants. d , ~ The Commission's considerations are not determined by the length of time a participant speaks, but rather by what is said. 3. Staff Reports are part of the evidence deemed received by the Commission In each hearing. Copies are available to the public prior to the meoting. 4. The Commisslon will whhhold questions until the public hearing Is closed. 5. The Commission reserves the right to deviate from the foregoing ff, in its opinion, the ends of fairness to all concerned will be served. 6. All documents presented to the Planning Commission for review in connection wkh any hearing, Including photographs or other acceptable visual representations or non-documentary evidence, shall be retained by the Commission for the public record and shall be available for public Inspections. 7. At the and of the scheduled hearings, members of the public will be allowed to speak on items of Interest which are within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commisslon, and/or agenda ftoms. Each speaker will be allotted a maximum of five (5) minutes to speak. t AC03W94.WP 1a. E A M71~CATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Previously Approved] I Approved ib. RECLASSIFICATION NO.93-9405 (Readvertised) Approved 1c. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14886 (Readvertised) Approved OWNER: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, ET AL, Attn: Brent Schultz, 201 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: fCAUFMAN AND BROAD, 180 N. Riverview Dr., Ste. 300, Anaheim, CA 92808 LOCATION: Property is approximately 20 acres generaliv bounded by Lincoln Avenue to the north. East Street to the east. Broadway to the south and the Atchison-Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad right of wev to the west. Request: Petitioner requests an amendment to condiions of approval by deleting a condftlon of approval (pertaining to the recordation of a covenant) from Reclassification No. 93.94-05 and transfercing said condition to Tentative Tract Map No. 14866. RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION NO. PC9429 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: None PETITIONER: Brent Schultz, Project Manager, Anaheim Redevelopment Agency. Requesting to amend conditions of approval on the Area 5 entitlements, specNicaily the Reclassification conditions regarding the School District Covenant, that it be deleted and moved to the Tentative Tract Map conditions, in order to give the agency sufficient time to acquire the remaining parcels and then they can record the covenant. They will then have ownership of the complete site. They hope to record the Tract Map some time in June. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ACTION: Approved request as follows: transferced Condition No. 1 of Resolution Nu. PC94-1 granted in conjunction with Reclassification No. 33.9405 to the conditions of approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 14866 and further required that Condtion No. 1 be completed prior to recordation of the final tract map to read as follows: (Continued on next page) U 03-07-94 Page 2 ~ -. 1. That prior to recordation of Final Tract Map No. 14866 an unsubordinated covenant shall be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder agreeing to provide the buyer of each dwelling unft wfth written information obtained from the schod district(s) pertaining to possible overcrowded condftions and busing status of the school(s) serving the dwelling unft. A copy of the covenant shall be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation. A copy of the recorded covenant shall be submitted to the Zoning Division. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Henninger absent) 03-07-94 Page 3 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3658 Approved Approved Granted OWNER: ENDOWMENT REALTY INVESTORS, INC., c/o TCW REALTY ADVISORS, 665 S. Figueroa Street, Ste. 3500, Los Angeles, CA 90017-2543 AGENT: SANDRA QUILTY, COMMERCIAL CENTER MANAGEMENT, 865 S. Figueroa St., Los Angeles, CA 90017-2543 LOCATION: 5620 E. Santa Ana Canvon Road. Property is approxfmateiy 10.63 acres located at the southwest comer of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Imperial Highway. Request: To permft an 8,710-square foot semi-enclosed restaurant with on-prernise sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages and roof- mounted equipment wfth waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Cont(nued from the January 10, 24, and February 23, 1994, Planning Commission meetings. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC94-30 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: None PETITIONER: Sandra Quilty, Commercial Center Management. They manage the property In question for Endowment. They have taken care of the issues that came up at ttie meeting 2 weeks ago. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Messe asked K they have read all of the condftions of approval Imposed by the Police Department? Ms. Quilty explained she has read them and discussed them wfth Officer Gandy. 03-07-94 Page 4 Greg Hastings, Zoning DNision Manager, stated Condkion No. 11, on page 10, ,-~ needs to be tied to a timing and that condkion Is required to be comptled wkh prior to commencement of the actNky or prior to final building and zoning inspections whichever occurs first. That would be a new condkion. ACTION: Approved NegatNe Declaration Approved Waiver of Code Requirement Granted Condkional Use Permk No. 3658 as follows: ModtFled Condkion No. 11 to read as foliows: 11. That prior to commencement of actNity authorized by this resolution or prior to final building and zoning inspections, whichever occurs first, subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submkted to the Cky of Anaheim by the petkioner and which plans are on file wkh the Planning Department marked Exhibk Nos. 1 through 3. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Henninger absent) .-. :'',;. ,~. 03-07-94 Page 5 n -. 3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION I Continued to 3b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT March 21, 1994 3c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3662 OWNER: WEST STREET DEVELOPMENT CO., INC., P.O. Box 18021, Anaheim, CA 92817 LOCATION: 6270 E. Santa Ana Canvon Road. Property is approximately .94 acre located on the south s'de of Santa Ana Canyon Road. and approximately 515 feet west of the centerline of Fairmont Boulevard. Request: To permft a 4,415 square foot private educational facility (pre- school to 3rd grade) and a 4,372 square foot church with waivers of minimum landscape setback adjacent to a residential zone boundary and minimum setback of institutional uses adjacent to a residential zone boundary. Continued from the February 23, 1994, Planning Commission meeting. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT r... TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: 5 people PETITIONER: Dcug Brawn, 151 S. Quintana, Anaheim. The building was placed against the wssteriy line. He went to the neighbors who were most affected by the project and requested that they contribute to the design of the project In order that the butlding be most compatible with their residential use. They designed a project that was effectively placed against their property line and therefore, giving them permanent privacy. He came before the Planning Commission July, 1992 and ft was passed by a substantial margin. It was later over fumed by the City Council tacause someone who was not included in that consideration in his estimation, went to the City Council and received a no fee appeal. It was reheard and over fumed. The primary concerns were that the property had 5 variances. The property is developable by rights. He can develop ft as ft fs with no CUP and no variances wfth a minor modff(cation. The only variance he is asking for is a relaxation of the standard of the 10-foot landscape from the westerly property Ilne to 7 feet of landscape setback. 03-07-94 Page 6 I~ C He had an architect prepare the landscape plans. This landscape plan ~~-, complies with the landscape ordinance required for parking and frontage with a min(mum of one 15•gallon tree provided for every 20 feet of frontage along Santa Ana Canyon Road as well as substantial coverage throughout the site. The question before the Commission is basically a land use question. He is applying on behalf of two users, whn he has secured for the property, for condftional use permits for the rear and front buildings. The rear building Is a proposed Montessori school. It will be operated by two women who presently res(de in Yorba Linda and Anaheim Hills. They operate a Montessori school in the City of Carson. That school is almost identical as the one they are proposing on this site. They have patterned this operation after that one in terms of the size of the playground, parking and traffic considerations, etc. The lower and upper floors of the building to the back would be for the exclusive use of the Montessori school. Its eventual application would be to go from Infant care through grade 3 which is extremely crftlcal in the City of Anaheim and the Anaheim Hills area. The front building is also a two story structure. The lower floor is a proposed use for a church. He has provided no floor plan as the use is not yet designated. It will probably fall to an office user based on the other uses that are in the she at thb present t(rne. The advantage of the two proposed users is they compliment each other in terms of non Interference of traffic. The preschool will be closed on Saturday and Sunday and the church will be open on Sunday. It will also have some minor office use, perhaps 5 or 6 staff members using the offices durfng the week. Wednesday night they have an educational and fellowship session after the olosing hours of the Montessori school. The middle building Is proposed as an office use. He has a tentative user, although that is not yet committed. The use will be extremely low Impact. He was handed a copy of a letter that was presented to the Planning Commission which he had not addressed. He was Izte to the meeting because he went back to the drafting table and produced the Information requested. He will post it on the board at the appropriate time. IN FAVOR: Mrs. Sydney May, 8215 E. Summerset Lane, Anaheim. He has owned and operated a Montessori School In the City of Carson for 16 years; it Is In a Commercial zone and very similar to the proposed site. In the 16 years she has been in operation, she has never had one person complain about the children's noise. It is not just a day care center per se. 1t is ::n educational instftution. They do serve children from 2-1 /2 through 4, then Kindergarten upwards. At the beginning of their operation, they will not have older children because they will not have time to build up their clientele. 03-07-f34 Page 7 L.• The Montessori School puts emphasis on education more than play. his, Montessori children are not outside on the playground nearly as often as a day care center. They will not have a big Impact on She neighbors in the adjoining homes. When they are out on the playground they go out by classrooms, so there would be a maximum of 20.24 children out at a time. OPPOSITION: Peggy Meadows, 6275 E. Rio Grande DrNe, Anaheim Hills. She is one of the persons that opposed Mr. Brown's plans before. There are five of them up on the hill and their property directly hooks onto this piece of property. Mr. Brown did come to their Homeowner's Association meeting; he was very nice and showed them the plans the way they are sitting on the lot; they worked it out and came to an agreement. She noticed that he has the air conditioners on the roof. They really oppose this. They feel the air condkioning noise will be right in their bedroom windows. She explained when you 11ve on a hill, the noise echoes up the hill. She expressed her concerns regarding the elevation. He has made a suggestion to buy the SAVI Canal from the City. If he is going to elevate his building on the SAVI Canal, they are talking about another 4 feet plus the height of the building which is 32 feet. That is 36 feet. She thought she had a house with a view. Her only view would most likely be of a second story building. The school concems her with all of the whistles and the noise. She thinks K will be extremely noisy. ;~ She has no problem with the church. She thought there would be a parking problem. She also has not seen a proposal for a fence between the horse trail and her property and his property. That would be on the south sldo. She asked that he finish the horse trail whore the shopping center left off. They brought h up to the shopping center and stopped ft. IN FAVOR: Dave Glessley (phonetically spelled), Pastor, Hope Community Church, 22700 SAVI Ranch Parkway, Yorba IJnda, CA. They would see themselves as temporary tenants in the proposed sfte. There are 3 primary segments of their usage. They have a staff of 3, therefore, there would be a staff of 3 people working out of that site during normal working hours. Sunday mornings would be the heaviest usage and the heaviest usage would be between 6:30a.m. and 12:OOp.m. on Sunday mornings when they hold services and the educational classes. The largest segment of the mldrveek programming would be on Wednesday evenings after 6:OOp.m. with occasional meetings on other nights of the week. 03-07-94 Page 8 w The Sunday morning usage, as well as the Wednesday Evening is off hour usage, therefore, they did not think the traffic would present a problem. As far as adequate parking, they would seek a reciprocal parking agreement with the Hughes market and hopefully that would alleviate that anxiety. OPPOSITION CONTINUED: Susan Sigmond (address not given). She read a letter from the Board of Directors of the Anaheim HIIis Business Coalition Into the record. Ray Pontius, 6276 Calle Jaime, Anaheim Hills, CA. Mr. Brown has been coming to the Commission time after time to check things out to see ff they are going to ..e approved or not. He expressed his concerns regarding the Iine- of•sight. He submitted a list of 7 names objecting to the school. He added the noise abatement study has not been done properly. He did not feel Mr. Brown had everything put together in order to go forward wfth the project. He did not object to any project that makes sense or to anyone making a dollar, he Just did not want h to impact the community. He referenced the staff report and expressed his concems regarding several hems. He thought they should continue this item. Chairman Peraza stated that staff has recommended a continuance. He read an excerpt from a letter into the record from an attorney on Calle ~-, Jaime. He asked for aline-of•sight approval so that the neighbors can get an idea of what the line-of•sight would do to this property. He stated several of the people in the Immediate area have said they would Tike to see this building placed on the west side instead of the east side of the property. Comm(ssioner Mayer asked if he objected to the noise of the children playing on the play ground? Mr. Pontius stated yes, from 6:OOa.m. to 6:30p.m. There Is nc objection to the church or the offices. The ob;ections he had from the 7 people are regarding noise; and cars coming and going. He expressed concern regarding crossing over the Santa Ana Canyon traffic during the hours the children are going to be dropped off and picked up at the school. He further expressed his concerns regarding getting approval from Hughes Market for overflow parking from the church. 03-07-94 Page 9 ~~ Dan Huffman, 6275 Calle Jaime, Anaheim. He lives on the street directly west n of the property in question. He has a problem with ail 3 businesses being sftuated on the property the way they are. NI of the buildings on the east most f boundary of the property would face towards the west in a two story fashion 3 and would look directly down on his street where his children and other children play. He lets them play out in the street unsupervised and he lands to like that. He bought on a cul~e•sac street. The original plans were for the building to be on the west most boundary of the ~, property with no windows on the back side of the building so they would have complete prvacy. That ruling was overturned. His recommendation would be that those plans be reviewed once again to see if they cannot get the businesses, the property owner and all of the residents to concur with positioning of the buildings. Commiss(oner Mayer asked that staff explain the proper designation for this property. One of the gentleman was surprised to hear that this was already approved for Commercial use. Jonathan Borcego, Senior Planner, stated the property was recently rezoned within the last year from the RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) Zone to a Commercial Zone which was consistent with the City's land use designation on the General Plan for the property. The current designation of CL (Commercial Limited) which the property now has, would allow for retail uses, restaurant uses and general offices uses. The reason this is before the Commission today as a public hearing is because the types of uses they are proposing right now. The church and the school) roquire a conditional use permit and are not permitted on the property by right. REBUTTAL: Mr. Brown went to the exhibit board and explained their position on the SAVI Canal. He is proposing to acquire ±he remaining 25 feet which was not abandoned through this project which will make the lot a little bit wider then what ft is. Without the acquisition of the SAVI Canal, the lot is extremely narcow. There is a substantial grade differential between the SAVI Canal as one walks to the back of the SAVI Canal. He is not going to build on top of that, he is going to cut down 10 to 11 feet and remove the soil. The majority of the soil will be exported. The back wall of the building will become a retaining wall. This keeps the elevation of the building down. T,~is shows the projection ofi his roof line to the Hughes roof line. He elaborated further. He addressed the windows that would be facing the property. He explained h will intrude on their privacy until the landscaping matures. One must recognize that these windows across the top of the property are not windows where offices will be. This is not roof•mounted equipment. Instead he is building the building 9 feet higher then ft has to be In order to house the equipment under a built up roof which means the only places where the air condftioners will be able to breathe is from the corners of the b:dldings. 03-07-94 Page 10 The southedy elevation of the building is completely closed at the air ~ condkioning Ilne so no air condkioning noise goes up the hlli. i He explained there are very few buildings in compliance wkh the roof-mounted equipment ordinance in Anaheim HIIis. Most of the buildings are screened in some fashion. He is nearly completely mkigating the noise output by enclosing z k by Ircorporating k into the building. They become air handlers in the roof. He made some further comments relative to the line-of-sight.He stated there is r no roof-mounted equipment-k is attic mounted equipment. He will be building the buildings. They are here to ask the Planning Commission whether or not these uses will be detrimental to the neighbors. I He made a trip to the Cky of Carson wkh the acoustics engineer who dkl a ' decibel level check on their operating facility to determine what ks operating level was and made recommendations in order to mkigate that. The woman from the Anaheim Ckizen's Coalkion addressed a matter which is true. The hardscape and other surcoundfngs of the she will affect the transmission of noise. These kids are going to playing on a grass or bark or combination of grass/bark sand covered playground which is not a transmitter of noise. They are not going to be playing on blacktop or PCC, but on grass which is an absorptive device. In addklon, k Is shown on tho ske plan that the back wall is a crib wall rather than a concrete retaining wall which would be noise transmitting. In the crib wall is planted clinging vines which is a noise absorbing factor. It was designed that way. Addkionally, against Peggy's property line, or the horse trail, is a 6-foot high block wall which is a further noise abating device and k is required. He is a student of acoustics and is familiar with k, however, he did not use his own Input. He used a study from a registered engineer to support the findings regarding noise transmission. They are operating substantially below that which is permitted by the City of Anaheim. He wants to keep the buildings to a sandblasted gray finish which means they will take the existing blocks, sandblast them, use a concrete detail around the French windows. They will be glad to put on some roof canopies as needed. These are things that can be worked out with Planning staff. He is willing to show the exact precise plans. Commissioner Mayer asked how many children would be on the playground playing at any one time and for what periods of time these children would be on the playground and how k is supervised? Ms. May explained her current school opens at 7:OOa.m., however, they are proposing to open earlier because people In Anaheim Hills have to drive a lot further distance to the their job location so they are going to need early morning day care. She explained they can modify that if it becomes a problem. 03-07-94 Page 11 Normally In the moming, they do not go outsi:le, they go Into the classroom. ~ They do not go out onto the playground until approximately 8:30a.m. and there it is only for 1/2 hour. They go out room by room and no more than 24 children at a time. In the moming between 9:OOa.m. and 11:30a.m. (12:00 noon being lunch time) each class will have a 15 minute playground time. In the afternoon, the children under the ages of 5 years old are napping. The kindergartners will be out for approximately 1/2 hour for lunch. Between 3:OOp.m. and 4:OOp.m., the children remaining may go out onto the playground for approximately 20 minutes; they will come back in and do day care activities. The Kindergartners will go out for approximately 20 minutes and after 4:30p.m. or 5:OOp.m., there will be no one on the playground in terms of actual playing. The parents come at staggered times from 3:UOp.m. on. Mr. Brown stated the buildings are not attached. They are proposing to adjust 5 existing lots down to 3 legal lots. There is sizemic deflection between each building and they all have their free standing walls. He addressed the cypress trees and stated that the difference between 7 feet and 10 feet is not critical. It does allow the buildings to be shaped a little more normally on a very narrow and long parcel. He referenced item 27 (1 ). There is not a parapet wall. He explained they must have a minimum of 5 feet of any opening to a property line. The ultimate design, if h is desired by the Commission that it be restructured, is that they put some other canopies to raise the relief on the building. Paul Pachuda (phonettcaliy spelled), 2796 'B' Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach, CA. He is representing the owner of the Hughes Market s`ropping center known as Anaheim Shopping Village which is adjacent to Doug Brown's parcel. He was actually here for another matter. He heard the gentleman representing the church mention they would work out a parking agreement with them. Overall they would like to see the property developed and the uses submitted were floe. They do have some concern about the parking. They do not want to be in a situation where they are having to regulate the parking on Sundays for their tenants. However, they would like to see something worked out. He hoped that they could get involved in this somewhere to make sure that no parking spills over into their center, and if it does, at least they are able to regulate it. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Messe asked Ms. May (operator of the Montesord School) if that was the school where the acoustic study was performed and how many children did they have? Ms. May explained it was and they have 105 children. 03-07-94 Page 12 Commissioner Messe asked how many would they have at this new school? Ms. May stated they would eventually like to have approximately the same number, however, they did not see that happening for about 2 or 3 years. He asked for clarification N 105 would be maximum? Ms. May stated she thought 100 would be the maximum. He asked for some statistics on the school in Carson Ciry. Ms. May ex~!ained their current school Is preschool, kindergarten through 4th grade. They are requesting that the proposed school go through third grade, but it may just be pre-K and kindergarten. Commissioner Messe stated he noticed the acoustic study was done only involving preschool and kindergarten. Ms. May indicated that was correct, because in the beginning she did not foresee having any elementary school age children. Commissioner Messe stated they are not worried about the beginning-h is the end they are worried about. tie was concerned about the dHference In the number of children and whether first graders make more noise than kindergartners. Ms. May stated actually not. When the acoustic engineer came out he also did a study on their older children and they were exactty the same. She did not believe it was included in the report. Commissioner Messe stated he was surprised ft was not included in the report so they could conclude the same thing, Melanie Adams. Public Works•Engineering Department, stated there were two conditions of approval from the Public Works Department that did not make k into the staff report. These were given to Mr. Brown at the February 10th Interdepartmental Committee meeting. One is related to the lot line adjustment and the other one is related to a Water Quality Management Plan. She read them into the record as follows: 1. That prior to issuance of a building permit, a lot line adjustment shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and approved by the Ciry Engineer and then recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder to adjust the property line such that any new building conforms to the Zoning Code and the Building Code. The Lot line adjustment shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan and shall Include the same number or fewer legal parcels then currently exists. 03-0734 Page 13 2. That prior to grading plan approval, the property owner shall submit a Water Quality Management Plan specifically identitying best management practices ' that will be used on•site to control predictable pollutants from storm water run-off. The plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Subdivision Section, for review and approval. Chairman Peraza stated that Mr. Brown mentioned, page 5, number 12, that that was not proposed at this time. Mr. Borcego stated that may be a carry over from the last report that was written on the property. There is one other thing he would like to clarify about the roof. In paragraph no. 27, he real(zes there is not a parapet roof and that the equipment they are proposing Is completely concealed within the building. Their contention was that the equipment does not have to be placed up at that levoi and ff ff were placed on the ground (which Is a possibility) that would eliminate the need for that third story which would reduce the height by approximately 8 feet. If that were done, it would probably be a lot easier for the building to accommodate a different roof style. Something that would be more consistent with some of the other roof styles with a pffched roof. Chairman Peraza asked staff ff they were still recommending to continue this order for submittal of revised plans and are they asking for east and west elevation drawings? Mr. Borrego stated Mr. Brown did submit one elevation that they had not previously seen and that was the last elevation. He has addressed some of staff's concems. However, there are some other issues that they would need to explore. The architectural style that he has shown and even his alternative is exactly what they are looking for. There is still the Issue of the 3 free standing signs which he is showing on his plans which staff does not think are a good idea. If you interpret the Code the way it is written, he would not be able to have them anyway. Freestanding signs in the Scenic Corridor Oveday, according to the Sign Ordinance, are only permitted for retail centers and this would not be considered a retail center. Commissioner Messe asked about the space between the buildings? Is that just dead space? Mr. Borrego stated based on his conversation with Mr. Brown, his concerns have been alleviated. There is a going to be a wall which comes out and encloses that area and will run the full height of the building. There should be no debris pile up which was their concern. The wall fs shown on the plot plan, but ff you take a look at the west elevation you can see that it appears to be one continuous wall and you do not have 3-foot breaks. Commissioner Caldwell asked ff Mr. Brown could address the Issue on the air handling equipment, i.e., placing ft on the ground and eliminating the 8•foot height? Mr. Brown explained occasionally kids walk up and drop rocks Into the curcent ground mounted equipment. The ground mounted equipment Is not preferable. 03-07.94 Page 14 ~../ ':T His ske fs so narrow and so small that he challenges them to find a location where ~i ground mounted equipment can be placed where it does not aesthetically Interfere. The height of the building is built so a man can service the air condRioningequlpment. When the building is built against the property along the back, all you see is the freeway sound wall. That elevation is invisible ftom anywhere except from a comer of Villa Burgers. Commissioner Messe asked what the resident's of Rlo Grande see on the roof when they look down? ~ Mr. Brown stated they see a nice finished roof with nothing. The roof he proposes is a charcoal colored roof which is a lot more attrdctNe. Commissioner Caldwell explained there is some concern about the compatibility of his drawings. He would like to see the finished drawings. Chairman Peraza stated the parking seems to be a big concern to the neighbors and to the market. He added the representatNe from Hughes did not seem to know about the agreement. Mr. Brown stated he would not approach them until it becomes a matter of consideration. It could be reciprocally done so that stairs are produced so when people go to the church they would patronize the shopping center. They have nct addressed that because ft is not a consideration. At present tnere is plenty of parking provided. It is not just the parking, there is ail of the overflow of the ~- Sunday morning parking which is not used by anyone else in the center. The ~ Montessori school abandons this parking on the weekend. There is a lot of self contained parking or. the site. It is a formatNe church right now and parking is more than what ft needs. Commissioner Messe asked ff he would st(pulate that the second story would never be used as sanctuary space. Mr. Brown indicated he would. Once the second floor does have a specified use, he will have to produce a traffic study ff h intensifies the use. Commissioner Messe asked for clarification as to how may dba's were allowed at the property Ilne per the sound ordinance? Greg McCafferty, Planning Department, stated 60 dba. Commissioner Messe stated he found the sound study to be Inadequate. There is vory little detail on the number of children and the age group of the children is different then what Is going on in this project. Mr. Brown explained the noise study was based on similar data that they picked up from the existing school. 03-07-94 Page 15 F I 'F ;b Commissioner Mayer asked about planting the cypress trees closer together so the maturity growth would achieve a barrier socneR Mr. Brown stated this plan was designed by a landscape architect and he will accept his recommendations. As the trees get bigger they need a Ifttle more room when they fll! out. Planting them closer together map be counter productive to what the ultimate goal is which Is to make a permanent landscape barrier. The landscape architect wail specify what is required in order to achieve that harder. Commissioner Masse asked for clarfflcation ff the cypress trees were going to be a minimum 8 feet tall? Mr. Brown clarfffed they would be minimum 8 feet tall at planting. Commissioner Caldwell asked how long h would take for them to get the final drawings together? '~ Mr. Brown answered 2 weeks. Commissioner Caldwell asked fora 2 week continuance in order to see flnat plans. Commissioner Mayer stated she would like to see the other part of the of the sound study that the school operator said was done, but not included that compared the other grades. Commission Taft asked start to evaluate the feasibility of putting the roof•mounted r.., equipment on the ground. ACTION: Continued subject request to the March 21, 1994 Planning Commission meeting. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Henninger absent) ,`~Y, 03-07-94 Page 16 ~../ f, 4a. c`EQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Previously Approved Approved 4b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3266 Readvertised Approved amendment to conditions of OWNER: ANAHEIM DISPOSAL INC., Attn: Richard B. Winn, it31 N. approval i Blue Gum Ave., Anaheim, CA 92815 AGENT: INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, COUNTY OF ORANGE, Attn: Jim Pfaff, 320 N. Flower St., Ste. 400, Santa Ana, CA 92703 LOCATION: 2780 Cast White Star Avenue. Property is approximately 1.9 acres located at the northwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Blue Gum Street and further described as 2780 E. White Star Avenue. Request: To amend a condition of approval pertaining to the time limitation of a previously approved household hazardous materials collection facility operai!ng in conJunction with arecycling/resource recovery transfer statlon. CONDITIONAL USE PERMiT RESOLUTION NO. PC9431 FOLLOWING !S A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: None PETITIONER: Jim Pfaff, County of Orange, Integrated Waste Management Department. The purpose of their readvertisement Is because the household Hazardous Waste program was recently reassigned to the Integrated Waste Management Department from the Orange County Fire Department. In the development proposal it Initially stated that the hours of operations were from Monday through Sunday from 7:OOa.m. to S:OOp.m. with a maximum of two employees. He clarified that they operate Monday through Saturday from 9:OOa.m. to 2:OOp.m. for members of the public only. They are open hours prior to that and some after that in order to take care of the site. Otherwise, for the public, they are open 5 hours a day, Monday through Saturday. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Messe stated the recommendation is that this permit is to terminate April, 1996. He asked if they could make this a longer period of time? G3-07.94 Page 17 Mr. Pfaff stated the length of time fs uncertain at this time. Ideally they would like to continue without a cap or an endir date; this facility will go on for a number of years. They do want to proviae this program to all citizens In Orenge County. Commissioner Messe stated they initially put a time limitation on this because they were not ,ure how ft was going to operate, however, ft seems to have operated quiti+ successfully and it is a value to the public to have them be able to get rid of Hazardous waste. He asked H there was any reason that staff saw for a Iimtation as stringent as this? Jonathan Borrego, Senlor Planner, stated he did not think staff would be opposed to extending this further to meet the applicant's needs. Commissioner Caldwell asked fo: clarification ff the applicant did not want any termination date? Mr. Pfaff stated ideally !hat is what they would prefer. This is the terms and condtlons they have for the other two sites that are currently operating and they also will be opening a fourth sfte in the City of Irvine with the same term and condition, i.e., it will continue to operate until such time as they close. They do not anticipate closing for a number of years. At that time they will have to satisfy other regulatory agency requirements in the process of doing those closures. He explained this is a regional collection center. They encourage individuals ~., that INe in the general vicinity of the facility to go ahead and patronize that ~ particular facility. It is available to all Orange County residents and residency Is required In order to participate. Commissioner Caldwell stated this Is a heavily regulated use and it seems to be a waste of time for them to come back every three years. ACTION: Approved Mitigated Nega?Ne Declaration Conditional Use Permit No. 3266 -Approved amendment to conditions of approval (deleted Condtion No. 12 of Resolution No. PC90-89 in Its entirety). VOTE: 6-0 03-07-94 Page 16 L./ 5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Previously Approved Approved 5b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3623 Readvertised Recommended approval of revised OWNER: FRANK MINISSALE AND SARA MINISSALE, 111 S. Mohler plans to City Council Drive, Anaheim, CA 92808 LOCATION: 111 S. Mohler Drive. Property is approximately 1.49 acres located at the southwest comer of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Mohler DrNe and further described as 111 S. Mohler Drive. Request: Petitioner requests review of revised plans for a previously considered convalescent facility. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTIOfJ N0. PC9432 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: 2 people spoke/A petition was submitted with 67 signatures In opposition PETITIONER: ~,, Frank Minissale, 111 S. Mohler Drive, Anaheim, CA 92808. It was suggested __ to him at the last meeting that he retain an architect; cut the facility down to 80 beds and increase the parking to 64 spaces. All of the entries are in the back away from Mohler DrNe; the trash receptacles are approximately 300 feet from Mohler Drive; the size of the rooms have been increased; all double beds and full baths wfth a full tub in every room. It is a very fine facility. OPPOSITION: Susan Slgmond, 6312 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road, Suke 157, Anaheim, CA. She read a statement prepared by the Board of Directors of the Anaheim Hills, Citizen's CoalRion Into the record. Concerns Included a comprehensNe landscape plan demonstrating planting and hardscape which are compatible wfth ne(ghboring properties; color scheme; and are balconies decorative or functional on the north facing the side of the building? Rod AgaJlan (phonetically spelled), 120 S. Mohler Drive, dlrec0y across the street from Mr. Minissale's project. He submitted a petition of ind(viduals opposed to the project. He stated staff indicated in the staff report that traffic would not present a problem. He gave some details and expressed his concerns regarding the number of employees, daytime visitors and deliveries. 03-07-94 Page 19 ~../ He stated the only person who gains is Mr. Mlnissale. The losers are the residents that live in the area. He was opposed to a commercial venture across the street that would be operating 24 hours a day. He expressed concerns that the value of their property will go down. At the meeting Mr. Mlnissale was directed to try to work with his neighbors. When It went to Council, h was the last thing they Bald. He has tried. He even contacted the architect and asked him for a copy of the elevation. He would not give the elevations to him. The architect asked Mr. Minissale and Mr. Minissale told him do not gNe him anything. The real estate market is depressed and when h turns around, he could build homes on that property and sell them. He was apposed to fuming ft into a commercial venture. He did not even ask his neighbors what they would like including the color code or landscaping. REBUTTAL: Mr. Minissale gave some background on the homes across the street. Mr. AgaJanian does not want anything there. They must take into consideration that the land on which he lives is designated for a CUP. He was pleased with the architect's design. Once the facility is built, there will not be that Influx of traffic. He gave some details on the traffic study he did. The traffic will be minlmai. Dave Amestoy, Architect, 1125 E. Whiting Avenue, Fullerton. They fully intend to have a landscape archtftect design the landscaping for the facility when they go to final working drawings. At this time it is generally not common to ~~ do a full landscape design for a preliminary design of this sort. Far color they are looking at a grayish building with a gray concrete file roof (with a slate appearance) with a white accent to compliment the gray. They are trying to make it look as residential as possible for this type of building. The balconies on the north side will be functional. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Alfred Yalda, Traffic Engineering, stated the intersection of Mohler Drive and Santa Ana Canyon will operate at Level of Service A which is a very good intersection as far as the traffic is concerned, i.e., it clears the traffic at that intersection. Since the proposed driveway Is about 100 to 200 feet, the area south of the Intersection will not have an impact. It will bring addtional cars, but that street Is designed to take additional cars. Commissioner Messe asked for clarification as to the numbor of employees per shift and what hours would these shifts be breaking? 03-07-94 Page 20 ~' Mr. Minissale explained he would advise the operator to break the shffts so ,~ that the first shift will have to start at 7:OOa.m. so it will not Interfere wfth the ' school traffic which starts around 7:30a.m. Quitting time will be 3:30p.m. which is one-half hour after the school closes. The school traffic totally disappears at 3:17p.m. The third shift will get off around 11:OOp.m. He explained there will be 28 employees total. That includes 3 cooks full time; 5 kitchen helpers; one helper in the dining room; 8 nurses (3, 3 and 2 for each of the three shfffs); a manager; two bookkeepers; activities director; and a janitor. Commissioner Caldwell asked what the maximum number of persons would be on a shift at any one time? Mr. Minissale Indicated the morning shift would have the most (19 persons). He added most minimum wage workers come by bus. Commissioner Caldwell asked ff they would get a landscape plan? Commissioner Messe stated they should put that in the conditions of approval, that they review, for approval, a final landscape plan. Commissioner Caldwell stated any sfgnage would also come back as a Report and Recommendation kem. Commissioner Taft stated without an operator, they are really speculating on the operations and he does not feel comfortable approving this based on Just speculation. He felt they were too premature on voting on this. Commissioner Messe stated if they had an operator and they approved it, that operator could change the condftional use permit_g goes along wfth the land. They are recommending approval or denial to the City Council. Mr. Hastings explained that City Council has the original set of conditions and the Planning Commission can add additional conditions to their motion to the City Council. Commissioner Caldwell stated they could condition it as to the maximum number of employees. Commissioner Tak did not want to limit it to an unreasonable number of employees. He reiterated they are a little premature. Commissioner Boydstun stated tha last couple of years she has spent a lot of time In one of these facilities and they are not going to find that all those employees dr(ve-ff you have 20 employees they will not have 20 cars. They come wfth someone or ride the bus. A large part of these employees are low Income employees, i.e., the housekeepers, etc. 03-07-94 Page 21 ~. Commissioner Caldwell stated Mr. Min(ssale was wise enough to hire an ~ archftect. It appears to be a beautiful facility that will fit in from a residential point of view. He shares in their concerns as he lives in Anaheim also. He is happy to see all of the things that he has done. They will definitely condition this to Include a landscape plan and a sign plan. He Is !n agreement with this particular proposal and he is going to recommend to Cky Council that they approve h. Opposftlon. He asked for a copy of the elevation and Mr. Mlnissale stated he would get him a copy. Commissioner Mayer stated she felt this was a vastly Improved proposal and she was very pleased to see Mr. Minissaie took most of their suggestions and had them implemented. ~~ ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Recommended approval of revised plans to Ciry Council in;luding the following recommended conditions of approval: 1. That a landscape plan shall be brought back to the Planning Commission as a report and recommendation item for review and approval. 2. That a sign program shall be brought back to the Planning Commission as a report and recommendation item for review and approval. ~~ 3. That the working shifts shall break at non-peak traffic hours. 4. That the total number of employees shall be Iimked to thirty five (35). VOTE: 5-1 (Commissioner Tait voted no and Commissioner Henninger was absent) ,, ~'' ~. 03-07-94 Page 22 l.~ ~' 6a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Previously Approved Approved 6b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.3462 Readvertised Approved OWNER: WEIR PARTNER'S LTD., 10 Corporate Park, #220, Irvine, CA 92714 AGENT: JOSEPH CARROLL, C/0 WEIR PARTNERS LTD., 2910 Redhili Ave., Ste. 210, Costa Mesa, CA 92626; Greg Collins, 2910 Redhill Ave., Ste. 210, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 LOCATION: 761 South Weir Canvon Roed. Property is approximately 11.9 acres located at the southwest comer of Weir Canyon Road and Serrano Avenue and further described as 761 S. Weir Canyon Road. Request: Petitioner requests modiflcation of Conditional Use Permit No. 3462 to permit a 975 square foot expansion to apreviously-approved child day care c::nter and further requests modiflcatlon to a condition of approval pertaining to the maximum student enrollment. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC94-33 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT ,.,., TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. t ; OPPOSITION: None PETITIONER: Greg Collins, representatNe for Wefr Partner's, 2910 Redhili Ave., Sufte 210, Costa Mesa, CA. They are proposing to expand a previously approved day care facility. It is currently 7,425 sq. ft. It is In an existing shopping center on the corner of Welr Canyon and Sorrano. They have a waiting list and would like to expand their facility to an existing sufte next door which is an additional 975 sq. ft. for a total of 6,400 sq. ft. In regards to the vehicular access and parking, on page 4 of the staff report, the facility actually decreases the p: rking demand. The conditional use permit, previously approved, limits the number of enrolled children to 144. The proposed use would Increase or have a maximum limit of 180 children; 118 would be preschool and kindergartners (ages 2-5) and 62 after school care (ages 6-12) with a maximum of 15 employees. 03-07-94 Page 23 1 He explained the number of children using the playground area will not /1 change. It will not increase. The Department of Social Services goes out to the facflky and physically Inspects k to determine the usable square footage and that is how they establish the maximum number of children that can be enrolled In the school and determines how many children can use the playground area. Staff recommended that subject request be continued for compliance with Code requirements and conuitions of approval. He referenced the attached memorandum from Code Enforcement. They received a copy and unfortunately, were not aware of some of the Issues. They are certainly willing to comply and work with staff and Code Enforcement to alleviate the Commission's concerns. They ask that this does not impact the approval of the day care center. He briefly went over the list. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Concern was expressed about having a cable and metal barrier. It was determined that this was already taken care of. Commissioner Messe asked Code Enforcement to report back in 30 days relatNe to the clean-up of the hems discussed. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration ~, Approved modH(cation to Conditlonal Use Permit No. 3462, as i requested VOTE: 6.0 (Commissioner Henninger absent) 4`4 03-07-94 Page 24 l„s ^ 7a. CEOA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 7b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved 7c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3663 Granted OWNER: INTERCHEMICAL CORPORATION, Attn: Donald R. Smith, 100 Cherry Hill Road, Parsippany, NJ 07054 AGENT: GRIFFITH COMPANY, Attn: Thomas Foss, 2020 S. Yale Street, Santa Ana, CA 92704.9974 LOCATION: 1244 N. Lemon Street. Property Is approximately 8.12 acres located on the east side of Lemon Street and approximately 830 feet south of the centerline of Commercial Street. Request: To permft the manufacturing of road base material from recycled asphaltic concrete and one 160 square toot modular office unit wtth waiver of maximum fence height. Continued from the February 23, 1994, Planning Comm(ssfon meeting. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC9434 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. ~~ OPPOSITION: None PETITIONER: Tom Foss, GrifFlth Company, 2020 S. Yale, Santa Ana, CA. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Greg McCafferty clarified in regards to the permit, h is actually 90 operational days, I.e., they can crush rock at that location for a period of 90 days. The flue or 10 day Increments do not matter as long as they do not exceed those 90 calendar days. Commissioner Messe suggested that they clean up the language in the mkfgation monftorfng plan. 03-07-94 Page 25 ~~ ;. r-~ Mr. McCafferty stated this is an addition to the third mitigation measure and is worded as follows: 'Bald period of time may be divided into smaller Increments provided the total operational period at the she does not exceed 90 calendar days in any given year.' ACTION: Approved Mitigated Negative Deciaratian Approved Waiver of Code RequlremenC Granted Conditional Use Permit No. y"~63 with the following change to Mftigation Monitoring Progrwm No. 0075 Added the foilowing wording to the end of the third Mitigation Measure: Bald period of time may be divided into smaller increments provided the total operational period at the site does not exceed 90 calendar days in any given year. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Henninger absent) r^, 1... ~:;;~, 03-07.94 Page 26 ~.~/ 8a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION eb RECLASSIFICATION NO. 93-9406 OWNER: LIVING STREAM, A CALIFORNIA NON PROFIT CORPORATION, 1853 W. Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92804 AGENT: ANDREW YU, 1853 W. Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92804 LOCATION: 1301 S. Empire Street. Property is approximately 2.97 acres located on the west side of Empire Street and approximately 700 feet south of the centerline of Ball Road and further described as 1301 S. Empire Street. Request: To reclassify subject property from the RS-A-43,000 (Residential/ Agricultural) Zone to the RM-3,000 (Residential, Multiple- Family) Zone to construct a 2-story, 40-unit, condominium complex. Continued to March 21, 1994 RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION NO. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. IN FAVOR: 4 people spoke In favor OPPOSITION: 4 people spoke (n opposition PETITIONER: Frank Deluna (phonetically spelled) 19142 Sierra Maria, Irvine, CA. He is assisting The Living Stream in getting this project processed. The General Plan will allow RM-1200 or RM-2400 or RM-3000. They are applying for RM- 3000 which is the lowest density. This would allow 43 units and they are proposing only 40 units. They are designed as attached single-family housing. The project will be tailed Grace Gardens. The owners want to put in the highest quality of landscaping to try to Improve the surrounding area. John Wells, Architect, John Wells and Associates, 4320 Campus Drive, Newport Beach. He is available for questions from the Commission. IN FAVOR: Paul Onika (phonetically spelled), 1565 W. Chanticleer, Anaheim; Ronald Cangus (phonetically spelled), 2121 W. Chalet, Anaheim; Frances Bali, 1819 W. Chanticleer, officer with Living Stream Ministry; Andrew Yu, 1853 W. Castle, officer of Living Stream. 03-07.94 Page 27 4: ~: Commissioner Caldwell asked if Mr. Cangus was familiar with The Living j r-~ Stream ministry and Mr. Cangus explained he is one of the main editors and j has worked for Living Strew n far 20 years. Commissioner Caldwell asked Mr. Onika if it was the same for him and Mr. Onika indicated k was. Mr. Ball explained that the parking for the condominiums is not a problem. It is all taken care of in the plan. The property will be gated fo: security reasons. Only people who live there will be able to enter. The accusations towards the people are not related. They do have conferences and when that happens they make arrangements with Francis Scott Key School or with the property directly across the street (trident) from their meeting hall including their own parking lot. These conferences take place twice a year. Mr. Yu explained they are not planning on carrying on any church activities of any kind on this property. It is strictly to be developed as private residential. They do have members who would like to move Into the area. There would be a possibility that those people will buy these places. They wanted to make ft clear that there Is no intention of making a church or having any church related activities. They do have a rec building and it Is to be used strictly for the ones who will be living there. They do not anticipate an over crowding in the parking. The amount of parking in this plan is more than adequate. There should be no overflow or spilling Into the street and this project should enhance the neighborhood. ~.. OPPOSITION: Bryan Deilo (phonetically spelled), 2111 Chalet, Anaheim, directly behind the proposed project; David Gogliano (phonetically spelled), 1416 Amerwick; Father Joseph Nedakov (phonetically ^^^"^~), Pastor of St. Justin Martyr Church; Clyde Eldridge, 641 S. Neptune. OPPOSITION'S MAJOR CONCERNS: The previous speakers were all members of the church; there are a lot of people in the neighborhood who totally object to the this project; parking is a serious problem; overflow parking Into the school parking lot; people walk through the tract to their church; there are people in the middle of the road with flashlights directing traffic; graffiti is out of control; gang members are a problem; doing this for the money; it will not benefit the neighbors; wi!I try to pre sell to church members; would like to see zoning stay the same; must be an error in the study because in the surrounding land uses they are not mentioned (St. Justin Martyr Church located directly across from proposed project); they have 2,500 registerd members. REBUTTAL: Mr. Deluna stated they wot!Id like to keep the comments directed to this ~i project as a development. The required parking is 3 stalls per townhome-•two enclosed and one open. Parking should not be an issue. There is security parking. 03-07.94 Page 28 ?, i~. ,,~ ;:ti Their intention Is to build a better than normal project In an effort to enhance A .-~ the community. This Is the closest thing they can get to RS-5000. These are RM~000 attached single•famiiy homes with very high quality construction. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Caldwell asked if they gave any consideration to building single-family homas7 Mr. Deluna stated ft was looked at. Because of the RM-1200 on the north and west side, ft would be difficult to soli single-family homes. The purpose of this protect Is to provide the transition from the RM-1200 to the RS-5000. It is the lowest density they could expect to get in here. This is in conformance with the City's General Plan and k does provide a transiion from the high !tensity of RM-1E00 down to the RS•5000. This is the lowest medium density you can get. They are proposing only 40 units and RM-3000 allows 43 without a density bonus. He could understand opposition ff they were trying to get RM-1200 or RM-2400 which would allow 69 units. He was having a hard time understanding why there was any opposition. Commissloner Caldwell explained that we have more multi-family housing in Anaheim now then they have single-family units. They have seen the problems with tho same type of ;;evelopment. Move some of your members Into single-family homes and give them a back yard. He would like to see ~„ them change their proposal to single-family. ~ - Mr. Deluna stated he did not think it was very realistic to expect any developer to put single-family there. There were 3 other offers besides the one from Living Stream and each one of those were contingent upon getting approved RM-1200 or RM-2400 zoning. One of the reasons they chose them as a buyer is because they were proposing a less dense project and they wanted to sell it to Christians. As ?developer he knows they would try to get the most units he could get. Commissioner Messe asked for clarification if these units would be open to sales to everybody and not Just to Christians? Mr. Deluna Indicated it would be open to all and added they cannot restrict religious oriented meetings in the rec building. Commissloner Tait stated they are asking for a reclassHication. If it were already zoned for the condominium protect he would probably approve it, but ft {s not. He would be willing to rezone to an RS-5000 but in Ileu of the school overcrowding, he is hard pressed to push it to the RM-3000. Commissioner Messe asked if Commissioner Tait would ask for a General Plan Amendment and Commissioner Taft stated he would have to. 03.07.94 Page 29 `.J Mr. Deluna stated he spoke with Mr. Borrego and ft seemed that the staff was :;t ,^ pleased that a protect like this was coming through. It was even lower than what the General Pian allows. Commissioner Tait stated this Is a tough one and he asked ff they could get a continuance on this. He was having difflculry making a decision on this. i Mc Deluna stated ff ft is required that this be RS-5000, he did not think any developer would buy ft. Commissloner Caldwell stated then that will be 40 less families. In the flatland area of Anaheim, that will be more of a plus. They cannot take care of the problems they have now. This development will not make ft batter. Commissloner Boydstun stated at this hearing, all they are looking at is zoning. At a future time they would look at what was going to be put on there. She knows there is a real problem in the schools. She agrees with Mr. Deluna that going with RM-0000 does make a buffer between the RM-1200. They just did the same thing to make a buffer for new housing that Redevelopment is putting In. They feel this makes a buffer also. This Is probably the best they are going to get. It would have to meet Code if they changed the zoning. She has no problem with it. Commissioner Messe agreed. It offers a transition between the existing RS- 5000 and the existing RM-1200. ,,, Commissloner Boydstun stated she would love to see 20 single-family homes, ~ however, she knew Mr. Deluna was right, i.e., it would not work and they would not sell. This will give a buffer to those houses that are on the 5,000 lot. It will be a gated community which gives ft more security then normal residential. Commissioner Messe stated he hears some mixed emotion on the Commission and he asked Nir. Deluna if he wanted a continuance. Mr. Deluna indicated he did not. Commissioner Mayer would like for them to come back with RS-5000. There is a tremendous traffic and parking problem in that area. She was not prepared to vote today. Chairman Peraza stated he agreed with Commissioners Boydstun and Messe. Commissioner Caldwell asked for clarification as to what process they use to Inftiate a GPA to this piece of property/? Commissioner Caidwell/Taft offered a motion to agendize a GPA for property included in Reclassification No. 93-94-08. 03-07-9h Page 30 ~../ Mr. Deluna asked for clarffication if the property owners were responsible for the GPA. They do not want a GPA. Commissioner Boydstun explained they want to discuss ff to see ff they want to start proceedings for one and then the City w0uld be doing h. The owners would not be paying for it. ACTION: A nw olutlon was offered to Approve Reclassification No. 93-94-09 and failed to carry with a tie vote (3-3), Commissioners Caldwell, Mayer and Taft voted no; and A resolution was offered to Deny Reclassfficatlon No. 93-94.08 and failed to carry with a tie vote (3-3), Commissioners Boydstun, Peraza and Messe voted no. Subject request was continued to the March 21, 1994 Planning Commission meeting in order to have all commissioners present. MOTION: Commissioner Caldwell offered a Motion seconded by Commissioner Taft and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Henninger absent) that the Anaheim City Planning Comr ,lssion does hereby direct staff to agendize a general plan amendment :ur the property located at 1307 S. Empire St:eet for discussion. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Henninger absent) ,n r ~._~~ 'fir' 03-07-94 Page 31 U 9a. rEOA CATEGORICAL EXEMPT-CLASS 11 9b. VARIANCE N0. 4245 OWNER: REDONDO INVESTMENT CO., P.O. Box 14478, Long Beach, CA 90803 No action Denied AGENT: HARRY S. WEINROTH, P.O. Box 1566, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92693 LOCATION: 6330 6396 East Santa Ana Canvon Road (Anaheim Hills Shopping Vlliage). Property Is approximately 5.97 acres located at the southwest corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Fairmont Boulevard and further described as 6330 -6396 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road. Request: Waiver of permitted type of shopping center and Identfficatlon signs in the Scenic Corridor Overlay zone to construct two (2) 60- square foot interior illuminated freestanding monument signs with multiple-tenant identffication panels. VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. PC94-35 .- .__ FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. IN FAVOR: 3 people spoke OPPOSITION: None PETITIONER: Harry Welnroth, agent for Redondo Investment Corporation which owns the subject shopping center. They were here a little over a year ago when they were granted them a variance approval for a monument sign. The owner and tenants were not too happy with what was approved. The sign as approved was only 4 feet in height. The square-foot area of the sign was acceptable, however, Indirect ilghting was proposed and a certain color scheme. There were no names for the tenants. They had not asked for that at that time. In meeting with the tenants, after they got the approval, it was indicated that the sign would not be acceptable as far as they were concerned unless they could have same of their names on the sign to indicate where they are. 03-07-94 Page 32 ~i ~: t i .s ~;! 'Y z There is a concern about this. The shopping center is situated higher than ~~, ~ the road on Santa Ana Canyon Road at that location. The stores are set s back over 200 feet from the street. At one part of the center there Is an ~ adobe building that had to be retained that blocked the view of the shopping c center. The tenants are not visible from the street and that is the need for ; the monument sign, j In addition, the owner is concerned about the inability to have interior illuminated signs because there is a great deal of vandalism. He has had indiroct lighting for the existing monument signs and the lights point towards the signs-they do not last. The only way it Is going to be successful is to Ilght them from the interior. They are here on a variance mainly because they think they have a unique situation because of the topography and the way the center was designed. He mentioned there were several shopping centers located within a reasonable distance from their center on Santa Ana Canyon Road that have large, tall, signage. He eluded to the AAA signage. (5' x 12'). Staff is asking for earthen tones. He referenced other signs in the area and gave some further details. They are asking to be treated equally and therefore, are asking for a variance. They feel it is warranted. They would like to have a sign of less than 40 square feet on each side. They have 2 signs proposed and they are only asking for one side. In total, they are not talking about more than SO ,,, square feet of actual sign area--not the wall. The way staff As measuring h, it i would be 120 square feet. They are asking for interior illumination; that the colors be primary colors and not earthen tones. They ask that they be allowed to have up to 6 tenants to be shown on these signs. They are not Interested in the name of the shopping center-that does not mean anything. IN FAVOR: Paul Pachuda (phonetically spelled), 2796'6', Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach. He does the leasing for the Hughes Market Center and the Anaheim Hills Shopping Village and have done the leasing for that center and several other centers in the area since about 1990. He gave some background. It is very difficult for their tenants to compete with other centers in the area because the topography and the unfts are set back so far. They are not located at the hub of things and they get far less traffic. Many of the tenants could not make it today, but they have signed a petition requesting that the variance be accepted. At the end of this year several leases are coming due and they may lose them unless they can be as competitive as the rest of the centers. Even with their lower rates, it does not help without the foot traffic. He felt the monument sign would help and so did the tenants. 03-07-94 Page 33 ~~ Tom Carter, 5365 Vfa Epaiina, Yorba Linda, CA. He stated in July of last year he purchased a travel agency located (n the center. They have been in operation i:,r 8 months. They are in the red. Most people do not know he is there. He would like to be able to identify the location of his business at Santa Ana Canyon Road with a sign. He urged the Commtsslon to consider their plight. Cher)d (speaker's last name not audible). Owner of Color Studio and Beauty Supply in the Hughes Market shopping center. She explained in 1993 she spent over $7,000 in advertising. It is a lot for a small business. She emphasized It is very important to be on the monument sign In order to stay in business. They asked every customer how they found out about them and invariably they say word of mouth and that they had no Idea they were in that center. Solomon, Manager for Hughes Market. He has been working for Hughes for 17 years and he has been at this location for one year. Their business Is down and their profft is down. He asked them to consider letting them put up a sign. Most of the small businesses depend on the Hughes Market. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Chairman Peraza stated there are 22 businesses and he wanted to know ft they ware planning on splitting up the 12 spaces? Petitioner. The cost of building these monument signs is quite expensive ($10,000 to $15,000) for each monument sign. There will be a charge made to the tenants of how ft is going to be done. He did not know the exact details. Those tenants that are willing to pay the charge will determine who will get the slots. All of the tenants have not Indicated they wanted to be on the sign. Chairman Peraza stated he thought he heard dftferent. Petftioner. He explained ft will be Iimfted, so only those tenants who are there will be selected. Petitioner. All of the tenants signed the petition for the sign. The landlord will pay for the price of actually building the sign. They have not figured out they are going to apportion who gets on ft. Obviously those tenants who showed up and stood before the Council will get preference. They are going to charge to be on the sign. The motive is not to make a profit on the s(gn, but to keep the tenants in business. Commissioner Boydstun asked for clarification if he wanted 2 signs, one at each entrance? 03-07-94 Page 34 .Speakaa He Indicated one at the corner of Fairmont and Santa Ana Canyon ~ and one at the entrance. The other entrance is off of Fairmont. They do not ~ want one on Fairmont because the traffic on Fairmont is not that heavy. 6& Each sign will only be one sided. The access from Santa Ana Canyon is only [ eastbound. They will only be able to house t2. They can rotate tenants and another possibility would be to sell sign space. Some of the tenants do not need h. Commissioner Messe suggested to have Hughas on the sign that was approved and let them do the drawing for the rest of the center and have the internal signage take care of the rest? rSpeaker. He did not believe the draw for Hughes would be sufficient for the rest of the tenants. Not at the sales level they are doing now. They definitely want to have Hughes on the sign. They think the tenants need to be on the sign and so do the tenants. Commissioner Boydstun asked for clarification if they wanted a sign similar to the Auto Club sign. .Spoakerr He indicated that was correct. He also explained there is an on-going graffiti problem and they have a problem with the Indirect lighting on the monument sign. They break the lights off. ~~ Commissloner Boydstun stated the Auto Club sign is a nice looking sign. ~ ~ today's business they certainly need the recognition. Commissloner Messe suggested they change the Sign Ordinance then. Commissloner Caldwell stated we are only a few signs away from ending this recession. Everytime he turns around rnore people come in and say because of the recession they are going in the hole. We have a good Sign Ordinance. You cannot miss the Hughes Market. People know the shops in their area and the majority of business is drawn from those people. When business is not going well it looks like the Ciry is trying to drive people out of business. If the business is not doing well, he did not think a sign would save them. Jonathan Borrego, Senior Planner, stated they did receive a letter related to this request. He distributed it to the Commission and to the applicant. Commissioner Boydstun asked if the Auto Club had a variance on their sign? Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated he believed it did. He gave some further background. 03-07-94 Page 35 ~ `.J t ;h Cheryl. In the Festival Shopping Center, they have 4 monument signs. She ~ finds wfth this particular center, people do have a problem flnding her shop. Hughes is no longer exclusive to the residents. Times have changed and thoy have Ralphs, ~% ~^~s and Alpha Beta. It is completely different then ft use to ba. It is impertt~e that they have the sign. Commissioner Caldwell understands that Cheryl has a small business, but Hughes Market is not. ' Chairman Peraza reminded them that the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tait asked staff for an explanation of the Festival signage. Mr. Borrego explained when the Festival was developed, ft was developed under a Specific Plan and ft was designated as a reg(onal shopping center and because of that there was some special consideration given to the signage that was permitted. He was not sure of the ecact count of existing monument signs. There are a number of businesses in there that do not have any visibility whatsoever and do not have any advertising on the street as well. He explained that the smaller users are not on the free standing signs. Commissioner Caldwell stated the question is do we want to step outside of our curcent sign ordinance or do they go back and study ft? Commissioner Tait asked what was approved out there now that is not built? "~ , Mr. Borrego stated there was a sign variance which was granted. He clarified that ft was not limited strictly to externally illuminated signage. There was a provision for Internal illumination, but the Internal illumination to be used was a halo lighting where the backing of the sign Is actually opaque and only the letters are translucent. So rather than have the entire sign lit up, it is just the letters that are illuminated. He wanted to clarify also that the reason they had gone with earth tones on that particular sign was, at the time the original sign was proposed, the backing of the sign face was proposed to be red. The letters were proposed t., be yellow. They felt ft was totally inconsistent with all of the other free standing signs. He was sure there was some area for compromise. Unfortunately, they do not have control over the bus benches which are In the public right-of-way and have no control over the advertising. Commissioner Messe asked for clarification ff the new ordinance would allow identification of the primary user and if they changed the name to The Hughes Center then they could have the Hughes Center and then one other user. 03-07-94 Page 36 Mr. Hastings stated that would be possible. He explained he would have to take a closer look at the Code, however, the Intent would be to have the name of the center and then put a major tenant with that. That would probably meet the letter of the Code, however, that Is not the Intent. Commissloner Caldwell stated he is trying to stay within the Code and quit beating h up and changing h. We have seen what happens. Anaheim HIIIs was suppose to be a sparkling place where we did not relive all of the errors we previously made. ACTION: Denied Variance No. 4245 VOTE: 5-1 (Commissioner Boydstun voted no and Commissloner Henninger was absent) ,~., ~..~ 1,.~ ..~4. ~~ I ~ I 03-07-94 Page 37 I 10a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 10b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3665 Approved Granted OWNER: LEDERER ANAHEIM LTD., Attn: Les Lederer, 1990 Westwood Blvd., 3rd. Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90025 LOCATION: 1440 South Anaheim Boulevard (Anaheim Indoor Marketplace). Property is approximately 14.74 acres located north and east of the northeast comer of Cerritos Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard and further described as 1440 South Anaheim Boulevard. Request: To permit a pawn shop in conjunction with a Jewelry store within an existing indoor swapmeet facility. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC9436 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: None PETITIONER: r... John Schroeder, General Manager, Anaheim Market Plaza, 1440 South Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA. The proposal for a pawn shop is not at all what they have in mind. The proposed business is for jewelry only. The store owner already operates a Jewelry store located at the main entrance of the Market Place. The visual Impact would be that one or two of his display cases would hold used jewelry instead of the new Jewelry that is there now. Neither the store owner nor the Market Place Management want a full blown pond shop within their walls. The store owner asked that them to bring this request before the Co~nmfssion to meet a community need in these tough economic times. GNen the limitations they have already placed on the store owner, they do not foresee a negative impact on the community at all and urged their approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Boydstun asked for clarification H they would (ust be handling Jewelry and no guns? Mr. Schroeder indicated Jewelry only. 03-07-94 Page 38 `./ f~ ~.. ACTION: Approved NegatNe Declarat(on Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3665 VOTE: 6-0 (Commfssfoner Henninger absent) 0307-94 Page 39 U 11a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 11b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 93-9407 11c. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 11d. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3867 OWNER: ALLAN L. LOUDERBACK, TRUSTEE, OSCAR WILLIAM and DOROTHY FRENCH LOUDERBACK, TRUST, P.O. Box 761, Temple City, CA 91780; MARSHALL L. and JANE P. SHOEMAKER, TRUST, 1214 Await Drive, Mountain View, CA 94040 AGENT: MR. KAZUHO NISHIDA, 11166 Vence Blvd., Culver City, CA 90230 LOCATION: 125 North Brookhurst Street and 2217 West Llncoin Avenue• Property is approximately 1.6 acres (on two parcels) located north and west of the northwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Brookhurst Street with Parcel 1 having a frontage of approximately 160 feet on the west side of Brookhurst Street and Parcel 2 having a frontage of 190 feet on the north side of Lincoln Avenue and further described as 125 N. Brookhurst Street and 2217 W. Lincoln Avenue. ._ ,` Request: To reclassify subject property from the CH (Commercial, Heavy) Zone to the CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone. Request: To permit afull-service carwash with related retail sates area (4,244 sq. ft.) and aself-serve automated car wash (1,656 s.f.) or+. Parcel No. 1 with an automobile tube/oil change facility (2,652 s.f.) on Parcel No. 2 with waiver of minimum landscaped setback adjacent residential zones, maximum number of freestanding signs, minimum distanca between signs, permitted location of freestanding signs and permitted encroachments Into required yards. Approved Granted, unconditionally Approved, in part Granted, in part RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION N0. PC93-37 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. PC93-38 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. (Continued nn next page) 03-07-94 Page 40 t .s OPPOSITION: None ~. IN FAVOR: 1 person F PETITIONER: Tim Bundy, representing the petitioner, stated this is in order to convert the ~ existing car wash Into something better than what k is now. He referenced the staff s recommendatlons. There are some circulation issues they are trying to deal wkh that require some identification from Lincoln Ave. as well as from Brookhurst to delineate to the customers, the types of services that are being provided. Along Lincoln Avenue, there are two driveways to allow access on the she to facilkate two different types of car wash uses. There is an automated system and a hand wash system. In order to provide adequate indication of which drNeway to use for which particular use, there would need to bs the two signs along Uncoin Avenue specifically to eliminate some of the cross circulation tratflc that typically happens on a car wash ske. They are proposing a sign along Brookhurst that was designated as a 9' x 9' sign in order to be visually observed along Brookhurst as you are travelling south above an existing block wall of an adjacent commercl2l ups. They are being required to take a portion of that block wail between their property and Ranchko Street which is on the north side and mova that into a ,,., landscaped area. The primary concern is to provide a nice visual screen to 1 . ; the residential area to the north and keep k out of the setback area. They feel there is adequate justiflction for the signage along Lincoln and in addkion they feel the landscape plan they are proposing has been addressed in more ways then what the Code requires to address the visual Issues along the she. INTERESTED PARTY: Robert Linn, Redevelopment Commission, however, not speaking as the Commission formerly. They dealt wkh this matter last week. These issues were brought up at their meeting and the Planning Commission has their recommendatlons. Their primary concern was the landscaping on the back side and the need for a buffer as well as the high signs and the eMra signing. They d(d not feel k was that necessary. Commissioner Messe asked k their Commission discussed the signage variances? Mr. Unn indicated that was correct and stated they brought the plans in. The cross traffic was not mentioned in the presentation. He stated someone wkh some experience putting up a single sign could take care of that problem. 03-07.94 Page 41 . •y 7~ t~ THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Caldwell stated he did not see a reason for variance "A." If i they are that close, they can give us the 10 feet and stay within Codo. He referenced the signa~e. He stated he understands there is going to be a problem. There will be 2 uses coming in off of Lincoln. He prefers to see them put up one sign identffying the businesses that occur on the property per Code and then put smaller monument signs which would direct the people to the exact service they wanted to use. Then they would not have to step outside of the rules and reguiatlans. The~+ are very lenient in the flatland area of Anaheim. Commissioner Messe stated he was concerned about the Impact of the vacuum motors on the residential neighborhood . They did receive the noise study which was self performed, but he thinks they should look at that with a professional acoustical engineer. Their reading shows 45 feet to the property line which is 72 db. He was not certain what scale they were reading. It is scary to think of that neighborhood being under that constant sound. Commissioner Boydstun stated they had a car wash a few mcnths ago and they said they were able to put noise makers In the ground (the vacuums) and this drowned the sound. Commissioner Messe agreed and stated they acoustically dampened the sound that was created and they also had a problem being close to r residential. An Independent acoustic study showed that these particular motors would not affect the neighborhood. Mr. Bundy explained the owner did the evaluation himself, based on the car wash he owns in Culver City. The report indicated what he is using to Justify the numbers. In particular, the vacuums on the northwest portion of the site are probably the ones that will rreate the most concern and they are backed up against a 6-foot wall which will help somewhat, but not entirely. There is the possibility of providing an enclosure that wraps around the motors to dampen the noise without going to the expense of putting them below grade. In addftlon, they are having to deal with some very specif<c parking requirements. Due to the narrow inlet to that lot, they had to minimize the dimension between the property line and the landscape curb to allow the traffic to come in to get the proper dimensions t'or the drive aisle. There Is a way they could modify that from a-foot to a 10-foot. There is the property line just to the west of Brookhurst abutting the north side. (He pointed to the site plan for clariflcatlon). Mr. Bundy went to the exhibit board and a discussion took place between Mr. Bundy and the Commission regarding this issue. 03-07-94 Page 42 U Commissioner Caldwell stated as you come Into the driveway off of ~ Brookhurst, there is the first group of parking and then an island. That property immediately north of the first group of parking is Commercial property and behind that on the other side of the Island is residential. That is wh:,re he wants to see the 10 feet. The Commission should at least give it~ose people who own the home there, the minimum Code requirement because it is their duty to them. Further discussion took place regarding the exhibit. It was determined there were only 7 spaces where they needed the variance. Discussion took pace regarding the block wall. The owner is willing to landscape on the other side of his property to accommodate not only the vines they are proposing, but he proposed to provide some sort of turf. He would maintain it with his Irrigation system until such time the City decides to put in a sidewalk. The owner Is trying to bend over backwards to come up with a nice site and provide a nice emiironment for the car wash. Chairman Pereza asked if they could do it wish one internal sign for direction? Mr. Bundy stated someone suggested combining the two monument signs Into one and then have a couple of smaller directional signs on•sfte. He asked for direction o~ the directional signage. ~~ Jonathan Borrego, Sailor Planner, stated typically they would define a directional sign to ~.omething that is not intended to draw people off of the street to do business at a particular location. He c!arifled they would expect a directional sign only to guide those people who were already on the property. They co~Id stipulate as to what the language should be. Commissioner Caldwell asked if there was a Code for the directional signal. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated their Code Indicates not more than one such sign (entrance or exft sign) not to exceed 3 square feet in area and a maximum height of 4 feet shall be permitted at each driveway. Commissloner Tait asked H this was a Texaco Station? Commissloner Taft explained that his firm worked for Texaco and he would have to abstain. He apologized. Kazuho Nlshida, 12619 Indianapolis St., Los Angeles, CA. He Is the person who is purchasing th(s property. He has a car wash in Culver Cfty. He has been in business for a number of years and he wanted to speak about the sign and circulation problem. 03-07-94 Page 43 f~ He explained the car wash in Culver City is a full service car wash. It has ~ one tunnel. It has one drhreway for an entrance and one driveway for exit wkh a very large sign. Despke that, they get people coming Into the exk driveway Instead of through the entrance. If is a very slow day k does not create too much of a problem, however, they are going against the traffic. All of the cars on the "kiss oft" area, I.e., all of the cars that are pointed in the same direction, all go out the exit driveway. i They are going to have an exterior car wash on one side, and full service on the other side. If a car comes in on the wrong driveway, they will try to accommodate it, but it can create a problem in a car wash with only one tunnel and one function. It would really minimize the problem ff they cou~d have very clear signage and a definite identification fn the minds of the customers that this driveway is only for ride through. He explained a smaller directional sign (3 square feet) may do it for the majority of people, however, he thought for a fair number of people, they are going to miss it. Commissioner Caldwell explained they are trying to stay within the Code requirements. Mr. Borrego suggested they could bring their overall sign package back to the Planning Commission as a Report and Recommendation item before they pull their building permits. That condition was attached to the car wash application which the architect had considered on Ball Road a couple of ~, years ago. Wkh car washes, they tend to find a lot of accessory signs that are placed on the premises to guide people to certain areas of the facility and also for the pricing, etc. They could take a look at the directional signs. Commissioner Caldwell asked about the vacuums. Commissioner Messe stated they have to be at 60 db at the property line. They are better orr if they do an acoustic study. Mr. Nishidl, stated when he spoke with the vacuum rep at Culver Ciry, he Bald there have been car wasnes that enclose the motor section. He elaborated. There have beer car washes that have enclosed the entiro area over the air exhaust and motors. It cuts the noise down quite a bit, however, he was unable at the tune to get the names of the car washes who had such a setup so he could measure. He was considering building something like that for his carwash anyway. He will go ahead and do that and measure the difference at that time. They can also get a professional noise study done. Melanie Adams, Public Works-Engineering, stated the agent was talking about sidewalks on Ranchito Street. She wanted to make k clear that it was Code requirement when they develop Parcel 2, for the construction of sidewalks. If they were looking for relief of that Item, they would need to r:.~Ke application for a waiver to the Ciry Engineer. 03-07-94 Page 44 Mr. Bundy Indicated that was news to them. Would landscaping still be ~-^ allowed to accommodate some of the other concerns? Ms. Adams stated she was not familiar wfth the layout on that street. Typically h would have the landscaping adjacent to the street and then the sidewalk behind it. She was not certain of the situation on that street. If there was a possibility of some flexibility, they could put their landscaping on the back side. Sorne further discussion took place regarding this matter between the Commission and Mr. Bundy. Mr. Hastings stated reciprocal parking and access agreement between the two properties shall be recorded prior to issuance of a building permit. (Between Parcels t and 2). ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Granted Reclassiflcation No. 93-94.07, unconditionally Approved, in part, Waiver of Code Requirement as follows: Approved Waiver A for the first eighty four (84) feet on the extreme northeast comer of Parcel 2 (at the property line of the residents). Parcel 2 will stay the same as it Is on the plan and as you go west the next 81.45 feet, h shall go from its present position and will average a ten foot width across that portion. `~^•; Denied Waivers B, C and D (they were deleted at the public hearing) Approved Waiver E Granted, in part, Conditional Use Permft No. 3687 and added the following condRions of approval: That prior to the issuance of a building permit, an acoustical sound study shall be conducted on subject property to demonstrate the sound will not exceed what is permitted in the noise ordinance. That a sign program shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as a report and recommendation Item for review and approval. That an unsubordinated reciprocal access and parking agreement, in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded agreement shall be submitted to the Zoning DNision. VOTE: 5.0 (Commissioner Taft declared a conflict of Interest and Commissioner Henninger was absent) 03-07-Y+ Page 45 `J n 12. A. VARIANCE NO. 780 -REQUEST FOR TERMINATION: Sam Morfta, Terminated 303E N. Oceanvlew, Orange, CA, requests termination of Variance No. 780 (original zoning action - to establish a service station). Property is located at 1905 East Lincoln Avenue. TERMINATION RESOLUTION NO. PC9439 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3583 -REQUEST FORA Approved RETROACTIVE EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH (to expire 8-8-94) CON~i fl NS OF APPROVAL: AI Scappaticci requests a two month retroactive extension of time to comply with conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 3583 (to permit rental and outdoor storage of semi-truck trailers, minor maintenance/repair and use of a modular office building wfth waivers of (a) minimum landscape requirements (b) required parking lot landscaping and (c) required improvement of outdoor storage and parking areas. Property is located at 1860 South Lewis Street. OTHER DISCUSSION: Commissioner Messe stated there was a great deal of testimony today about t ^ the parking conditions at the Living Stream Church. He lives in that neighborhood and he has on several occasions, seen what ft can do. It Is very massive with parking encroaching into the neighborhoods. He asked if there was a CUP that they could look at? Mr. Borrego stated someone did take a look at that during the hearing. There is a conditional use permit for the church. There was no parking waiver granted for the church. One of the things they should take a look at is to make sure that the floor plan they submitted is in fact what they are actually utilizing out there. It is feasible that there have been some changes in the way they have that setup to accommodate the additional people. Commissioner Messe asked if they could agendize some kind of a staff report from Code Enforcement? J Commissioner Mayer asked if that would tell a maximum occupancy for the areas thoy use. There are a lot of people. Commissioner Messe stated they also asked at the last meeting to agendize the library parking lot. 03-07-94 Page 46 S ;A• Ms. Adams stated it will be on the next agenda and her Manager will be "~'~ making that presentation. Chairman Peraza stated they will adjourn to March 21, 1994 at 10:OOa.m. (Brown Act and Library). Agend(ze discussion for shopping center Commercial signs. (2 meetings from now). ADJOURNMENT: ADJOURNED AT 6:07 P.M. TO MARCH 21, 1994, at 10:00 A.M. -WORK SESSION - SELMA MANN - TO DISCUSS THE LATEST LEGISLATION REGARDING BROWN ACT FOLLOWED BY MELANIE ADAMS TO DISCUSS (1) THE WATER QUALITY ENGINEERING PLAN, (2) THE NEW PARKING LOT AT MAIN LIBRARY (HARBOR BLVD. AND BROADWAY). ~. ~.._~ 03-07-94 Page 47