Loading...
Minutes-PC 1994/04/04 REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, APRIL 4, 1994 11:00 A.M. - PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW (NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY ACCEPTED) 1:30 P.M. - PUBLIC HEARING BEGINS (PUBLIC TESTIMONY) ACTION AGENDA COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: CALDWELL, HENNINGER, MAYER, MESSE, PERAZA, TAIT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: BOYDSTUN PROCEDURE TO EXPEDITE PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. The proponents in applications which are not contested will have five minutes to present their evidence. Addtional time will be granted upon request ff, in the opinion of the Commission, such addftional time will produce evidence Important to the Commission's consideration. 2. In contested applications, the proponents and opponent will each be given ten minutes to present their case unless additional time is requested and the complexity of the matter warrants. r- 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 recehied by the Commission in each hearing. Copies are available to the public prior to the meeting. 4. The Commission will wfthhold questions until the public hearing is closed. 5. The Commission reserves the right to deviate from the foregoing N, in its opinion, the ends of fairness to ail concerned will be served. 6. All documents presented to the Planning Commission for review in connection wfth any hearing, including photographs or other acceptable visual representations or non~documentary evidence, shall be retained by the Commission for the public recorr and shall be available for public inspections. 7. At the end of the scheduled hearings, members of the public will be allowed to speak on items of Interest which are wfthln the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, and/or agenda terns. j Each speaker wil{ be allotted a maximum of fNe (5) minutes to speak. 1 acoaoasa.wP a -~ ,t y~ '. 1 _:~' ' ' ~r~ •y I ' - J~ - ~ s ' ~ ~: ~ ~ ~ i I _ . ~ .. v ~ t n ~ I y ~. ~~ 1 / I I~ ~ `. . itI .~` _ ~`I ~ ~ i J I b t ~•~,. , d' •:e j , `i a j • • ;{ ' ~ s ~ ~` , -~ . • ~ • - ~ ~ <~-' t ( _ ~~ ~ `~~ ~ ~ ~ ,~:.: Ij _ ,/ _. ` , ~ ~ ,. , I .~ ! !~ . ~ r .. '. 1 ,.:. .t ~ I I K `r r '.. S ~ e I I ~ ~ - r ~, ~ ~ ti ~ I rY 4 IM ! - - k, ` < ds . - . - I , ~ .-, ia. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1b RECLASSIFICATION N0.9"x9408 Readvertised OWNER: LIVING STREAM, A CALIFORNIA NON PROFIT CORPORATION, 1853 W. Bali Road, Anaheim, CA 92804 AGENT: ANDREW YU, 1853 W. Bail Road, Anaheim, CA 92804 LOCATION: 1301 S. Emolre Street. Property Is approximately 2.97 acres located on the west side of Empire Street and approximately 700 feet south of the centerline of Bali Road and further described as 1301 S. Empire Street. 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-unft, condominium complex. Continued from the March 7, and March 21, 1994 Planning Commission meetings. Approved No Action due to a tie vote Referred Action to City Council Requested the advertisement at City Council to Include "Rezoning to the RM-3000,Qr a less Intense zone.' RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION N0. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: 6 people opposed/a petttion was submitted wfth 800 signatures in opposftlon to subject request NOTE: THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS LEFT OPEN FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING. PETITIONER'S COMMEWTS: Frank DeLuna, 19142 Sierra Maria, Irvine, CA. This is a proposed 40 unft townhome development. The property is presently zoned RS-A-43,000. The General Plan allows Medium Densty Residential. He Is applying fer the lowest end of Medium Density which is RM-3000. It does meet normal crfteria for development between RS-5000 and RM-1200 properties to provide a transftion between these two types of properties. It is a very well thought out and nicely designed plan. APPOSITION: Charles Sarano (phonetically spelled) 2114 W. Chalet, Anaheim, 92604; Lois Gallagher, 2101 W. Harle Avenue; Dan Boone, 215 Primrose; Jim Wallace, 435 S. Shields Dr.; Brian Diulio, 2117 Chalet; David Gagliano, 1416 Amerwick Lane; 04/04/94 Page 2 MAJOR CONCERNS OF OPPOSITION: Pictures were submitted for the record. Parking; safety Issues; traffic; Inadequate law enforcement; graffiti and litter; park overcrowded; Increased density; overcrowding of school; decreased quality of iffe; prefer RS-5000; already have a congested area; low budget apartments; gang members; neighborhood has detedorated over the past 3 years; and single-family residence would be a better buy. REBUTTAL: Mr. DeLuna stated the pictures taken were taken over the Easter weekend and there would be extra cars parked in the area. Planning staff did recommend approval of this request. They are proposing the lowest available zoning wfthln the present Genoral Pian Designation. He thought RS-5000 would possibly be spot zoning. He gave some statistics on square-footage and proposed pricing of townhomes. He gave some further statlstlcs retarding single-family housing. DISCUSSION: Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, stated prior to the close of the public hearing, the Commission may want to give the applicant an opportunity to look at some of the information that was presented to the Commission. She explained they have a fairly large parcel that has a considerable amount of property to the south that Is zoned RS-5000, therefore, unlike the typical type of spot zoning situation, h would not be an island in the center of differently zoned property. Commissioner Caldwell stated we need to stay with the plan; we need to build single-family homes and ff not, leave it vacant until we come to grips wfth the problems that plague this ,_ community. Commissioner Henninger stated there are 40 units being proposed. He asked Alfred Yalda, Traffic Engineering, what percentage Increase would there be on Empire Street? Mr. Yalda explained they do not take average dally traffic on local streets because the traffic could go from 1,000 to 5,000 cars In 24 hours. In this case, for the peak hour, they will probably generate between 40 to 60 trips. Commissioner Henninger asked ff they had twenty RS-5000 homes, how many trips would that generate? Mr. Yalda explained 8 probably would be the same or perhaps a little bit less. Commissioner Henninger asked about the schools applicable to student generation. He asked what the comparison was between the proposed project at 40 units and twenty RS• 3000 homes? Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, explained he did not have the information, however, they could find out. Commissioner Messe explained multiple-family homes generate a lot more elementary school age children then do single-family residences. Single-Famiiy stand alone residences seem to generate more high school students. 04/04/94 Page 3 Commissioner Henninger agrees with Commissioner Caldwell in that they should stick with ^ the plan. There certainly seems to be a problem in the neighborhood in regards to traffic, parking and circulation. It seems that that problem is created by the public park and churches in the area. If we have allowed all of these other people to use up all of the available capacity in these public facilities to the point where there is nothing left for this remaining parcel, it somehow does not feel right to him, therefore, he would prohably go with this. Commissioner Messe asked ff there was any discussion from the Police and other public facilftles that would have to service this relative to the density that is being requested? Mr. Hastings explained through their Interdepartmental Committee, they do solicit input and there was nothing negative from the departments pertaining to this. He pointed out that on the General Plan, the property is under Medium Density allowance which would allow up to 36 units per acre. He added the General Plan was formulated wfth the information from the different departments originally. Commissioner Caldwell stated he had the opportunity to INe in an area that followed the General Plan and watched the area get disfigured by the General Plan and Its direction. We have an over burdened Infrastructure. We have added more people to this area then they have justifiably take care of. Each time h is a small increment and each increment adds to the already over burdened system. He is against it for that reason. He would like to see single-family homes. We need to draw the line somewhere and he wishes they had drawn it 10 years ago. Commissioner Taft stated ft is more of a presumption to follow the General Plan unless you have a strong reason not to. He felt this falls Into that category of a strong reason not to. If they Just blindly follow the General Plan, then there would be no need for a Planning Commission. This is one of those rare sffuations where there is a problem. IntuftNely the density in multi-family Is higher than at the time the General Plan was made up. He hates to add to the problem. He agrees wfth Commissioner Caldwell. Commissioner Messe stated ff they were asking for a reclassification to the RM-1200 or P.M-2400, he thinks that would be too much. He Is asking for RM3000 which is ownership and the people that buy condominiums have pride in ownership, they are good citizens of Anaheim and they take care of their property. They are dealing between a RM-1200 and RS-5000. He thought the proposal was a fair one. He thought he would vote yes on the RM-3000 reclass. Mr. Hastings gave some student generation factors. He explained the high school uses a .204 per dwelling unit for both single-family and multiple-family. The elementary school district uses has separate single-family and multiple-family figures. The single-family is .39 per dwelling unit and multiple-family Is .fib per dwelling unft. Chairman Peraza also felt that the proposal was fair. He is opposed to apartments as a who{e although he 1Ned in apartments for many years. He agrees that there are a lot of people in the flatlands of Anaheim, however, he did not think this was the developer who caused the sffuation. He was for the RM-3000 reclassification. ,~ 04/04/94 Page 4 r~ Commissioner Mayer stated this area is over built, over crowded and the schools cannot ~ handle it. She felt they should go back to single-family. She lives about 4 blocks away from the proposed protect. The traffic is tremendous and sounds like the church has an overflow parking problem. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration 4.2; (Commissioners Caldwell and Mayer voted no) Commissioner Henninger offered a resolutlon for approval of Reclassification No. 93-94-08 and moved for fts passage and adoption. On roil call, the foregoing resolution failed to carry with the following vote: AYES: HENNINGER, MESSE, PERAZA NOES: CALDWELL, MAYER, TAIT ABSENT: BOYDSTUN Commissioner Caldwell offered a resolution for denial of Reclassification No. 93.94-08 and moved for fts passage and adoption. On roll call, the foregoing resolution failed to carry with the following vote: AYES: CALDWEtl, MAYER, TAIT NOES: HENNINGER, MESSE, PERAZA ABSENT: BOYDSTUN .-~ Commissloner Henninger offered a Motion, seconded by Commissioner Caldwell and ~ MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Boydstun absent), that the Anahelm City Planning Commisslon does hereby refer action on this matter to the City Council. Commissioner Henninger offered a Motion, seconded by Commissioner Messe and MOTION CARRIED (Commissioner Boydstun absent), that the Anahelm City Planning Commission does hereby request that the Saint Justin Martyr Church be looked at for traffic generation and parking along with Uving Stream by Code Enforcement and that the Parks and Recreation staff report to them the possibility of adding more parking spaces to ModJeska Park. \,~ it 04/04/94 Page 5 ~. 2a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION I Approved 2b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved, in part 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3666 Granted, in part OWNER: CONVENTION CENTER INN, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Attn: Ashik Patel, 1734 S. Harbor Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92802 AGENT: JOHN SWINT, 707 W. North St., Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 2017 South Harbor Boulevard (Convention Center Innl. Properly is approximately 3.3 acres located on the west side of Harbor Boulevard and approximately 360 feet south of the centedfne of Convention Way and further described as 2017 S. Harbor Boulevard. To permit an 64-foot high, 5-story, 312-unk motel complex, including the demolition of a 78-unit building and a 3,800-square foot restaurant, remodel of the existing 122-unit building, and construction of a 190-unft building and a 5,776-square foot restaurant with waivers of (a) minimum number of parking spaces, (b) minimum structural setback, (c) permitted encroachment Into front setback, (d) required landscaping of surface parking lot, (e) required landscaping adjacent to parking structures and (f) permitted signs for motels/hotels. Continued from the March 21, 1994 Planning Commission meeting. ,~-. L. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. PC84-44 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: None PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: John Swint, 707 W. North Street, Anaheim, CA. He stated one of the variances concerns location of the transformer. It was agreed that it should be moved to a point directly west of the trash enclosure shown on the She Plan. The landscaping shown on the surface and the parking shown on the surface parking, (s over the roof of the underground parking and h is impossible to grow trees in that area. They have increased the amount of parking on the south property line in the 10-foot setback in order to compensate for the lack of the trees that are shown in the parking area. On the north side of the building, Code calls for one tree every 10 feet because It is a parking structure, but when you look at the north exposure on the model it does not look anything like a parking structure. He dkl not think that requirement should apply to this particular building. There were some comments about the entry sign coming Into the building. That has been deleted. They will no longer have that entry sign. 04/04/94 II Page 6 4 U, There was some discussion about the monument sign. His cilent has gone through half a i'` dozen different sign drawings and they were ail the standard monument type of sign. Finally they came up wfth one that they thought was unique. There was also some discussion as 30 where that sign would be located. At the present time the sign would be 12 feet from the existing property line. In the future, affer that area has been dedicated the sign will be 5 feet Into the right-of-way. His cilent is willing to post a bond to move that sign when the time comes that Harbor Blvd. is wklened. There are some commente ah~ut the face Ifft of the existing building to the west of this addftion. The building is a masonry building which Is on the property line. There is noway you can attach any veneer on the bunding because k would encroach onto the adjacent properties. His client would also have to work on other people's properties in order to do any work and that would be Impossible. The water meter and valves would be located in the north side yard so ft would not be encroaching in the front setyerd. There are some comments about the layered landscape design that the Cfty would Ilke to see. The City has hired a consultant and his comments were that ft was the best landscaping he has seen. Comments conceming the Edison easement. The staff reports states the location of the wires are not shown. That is not true, the wires are shown as to the height and location of all of the wires over the Edison easement. They want to make sure the $455 assessment would only be on the 112 unfts and not on the ,._ 312 unfts, because there are an existing 200 unfts on the property. i The sign includes a waterfall and the comments in the staff report are that ft Is a fountain. He clarified it is not afountain-ft is a waterfall that cascades down the narcow side of the sign. Commissioner Messe asked if that would be moved at the developer's expense also? Mr. Swint explained he would post a bond guaranteeing ft would be moved when the time comes. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Some discussion took place regarding the model versus the plan on the exhibft board. Mr. Swint explained the model was merely to show what the building would look like once ft was completed. Commissioner Messe asked if the air vents should be covered wfth some kind of landscaping? Mr. Swint stated the openings are rather small-nothing like you would see on a normal parking structure. Commissioner Messe stated the landscaping in the parking lot, where there are not as many trees as required, what would happen H he added those trees? How many spaces would you lose? 04/04/94 ~.,~ Page 7 %-~ Mr. Swint explained the roots would not have any place to go because the surface parking you ~ see is the roof of the underground parking structure. The underground parking extends all of the way back through into the area that you see as surface parking. Commissioner Messe asked ff he could put In any landscaping? fAr. Swint stated you cannot put in any trees. They can have pots wfth bushes and shrubs. Mr. Swint and the Commission approached the model. Further discussion took place. Kevin Bass, Planning Department, stated the surface parking area includes ali of the west portion as well as the south portion. The majority of k is over the underground parking, but the entire area is where he based his calculation for the total number of trees. What staff is asking is can 30 trees be located in those two areas? The apptlcant shows 20 trees proposed. Where can they place 20 addftional trees? Commissioner Henninger suggested ff they add planters they could get in another six trees. Mr. Swint explained he has the possibility of p(cking up at Least 4 or 5 more parking stalls so he could possibly put some more trees on the surface in the rear once he finds out how many parking stalls he can pick up in the underground parking structure. Commissioner Mayer asked ff he could get six more trees? Mr. Swint stated ff he could pick up 6 more parking stalis, he could pick up more than six trees. ~^ Discussion took place regarding the elimination of Waiver D. i Mr. Hastings explained the trees could be clumped together. You don't necessarily need one tree pnr parking space. A parking space is large enough to put more than one tree in. Commissioner Messe stated that would glue him 6 parking spaces to add trees to on the surface parking. it sounds like they could get in 10 trees. Mr. Hastings stated that would roughly be about 1,OOD square feet. Commissioner Caldwell stated they could eliminate Waiver D and Mr. Hastings agreed. Commissioner Messe asked Mr. Swint ff he felt comfortable wfth that and Mr. Swint Indicated he did. Commissioner Henninger asked about WaNer E. He asked abour the intent of this Cade Section. Mr. Hastings explained the intent was basically to soften the effect of a parking structure as well as to shield from view any look of the structure that looks Tike a parking structure such as a grid or exhaust system. Staff was concerned about a grid that was shown on the plans that looked like bars might be in place of a window area. Staff felt strongly that there should be trees on that side to soften the effect. 04/04/94 ~~ Page 8 ~ Mr. Swint stated there will he a 6-foot high wall on the property Ilne and that would screen %~ practically all of it. Commissioner Henninger stated trees would not be an effectNe screen there. It would be better to have tall shrubs. Mr. Hastings stated Mr. Swint pointed out there would be a wall which would not show up in an elevation plan and which would screen part of that. There is a requirement that the wails be covered with ivy or some type of clinging vine. Commissioner Caldwell stated they need to add planting material, but certainly not trees. Mr. Swint commented that he did not want to hide the building because it was a goad looking building. Commissioner Masse stated they have a basis for approving that waiver based on the fact that there is all of this architecture treatment above and around the parking structure. Commissioner Henninger asked staff what their opinion is of the sign with the condklon that they post a bond to move it at the time Harbor is widened. Unda Johnson, Planning Department, stated the purpose of widening Harbor Is not to widen the roadway, but to install a new streetscape program which would Include an 8-foot parkway next to the street with an 8-foot sidewalk and then adjacent to the property Ilne another 8-foot parkway. The timing on that is not known yet. Once the proposal for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan is finished and circulated, the proposal for the monument signage is zero setback ~'' at the property line. Currently the setback is 7 feet so they would be proposing a setback of zero feet to the ultimate property line. They would not be encouraging any encroachment Into the area simply because they do not know yet the timing or the implementation of the streetscape and they would like the monument signage to itne up. Melanie Adams, Public Works-Engineering, stated addkionally h would have to be approved by an encroachment pem:ft that potentially would have some Input from the City Council so the bond would not necessarily be the proper thing to do. They could make application for an encroachment permR, but that has an entirely different approval process then this meeting today. Commissioner Caldwell asked ff the 30 square-foot sign hanging the drive approach does not meet the new Commercial Recreation Signage program? Ms. Johnson explained k does not meet the existing and it does not meet the proposed. Mr. Swint stated he was going to eliminate the sign at the entry. Commissioner Mayer asked what the sign wfth the waterfall was constructed oi^ Mr. Swint expl load h is a simulated boulder and ft will mostly likely be fiberglass. it can be constructed In such a way that the whole thing could be shifted westward in order to conform at a later date. ~,J 04/04/94 Page 9 ', F ~a :'a Commissioner Henninger stated ft sounds like the Commission does not do encroachment permfts. Mr. Hastings explained curcently there is a 7-foot requirement. Commissioner Henninger asked when the Cade was going to change to zero? Ms. Johnson explained they are finalizing the SpecfFlc Plan document an;; hope to release ft some time this summer wfth the Planning Commission to look at it late summer, therefore, he was not qufte sure how many public hearings k will take. Commissioner Henninger ;fated ff they were to provide this waiver at zero, that would be consistent wfth the new Code? Ms. Johnson stated ft would be consistent wfth what they era proposing. They are proposing a consistent monument signage and the special focus Is along Harbor and Katella. They are hoping all new development will put in that new signage. They encourage the property owner to put in thou morniment signage at the latest possible point and consistent wfth what they are proposing. If they do not put In any signage by the time the SpeciFlc Plan is adopted and the new standards are proposed, they will have to adhere to the new standards. Commissloner Caldwell asked by grandfathering in signs. Ms. Johnson stated they are not recommending gra~idfathering in signs at this point simply because they would like to achieve a new look for the area including the monument signage. ~^ She explained further that In the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan ft showed a certain erwelope "~ for monument signage, but they have refined th :; since that document was adopted. The plan is to propose the new design as part of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and if that is adopted they will also amend the Disneyland Resort SpecH(c Plan to be consistent so that the monument signage throughout the area will be the same. Commissloner Messe stated they really cannot consider too much of that today because ft is not an ordinance in place. Commissloner Henninger stated they could question what the hardship Is. Ms. Mann stated the Planning Commission may also place very specfflc condftlons on the sign approval that have to do wfth what the sign will need to conform to at such time as ft is moved. There can be very specftic language that would make k perr~,,;tly clear that ft is the contemplation at this time that the sign, at whatever time ft is bu;lt, will conform to whatever sign code is in place and that at such time as ft is moved it is not grandfathered in, but rather will nc.^d to conform to whatever sign standards are in place at that particular time. Commissioner Henninger stated they can do a waiver at zero setback and not approve the sign and ask the applicant to go back and design a sign in conformance wfth certain specftications that staff could come up wfth. Mr. Swint explained the east end of the sign is 7 feet west of the existing property line. 04/04/94 `~ Page 10 ., ACTION: 1. Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration ~. 2. Approved Waiver of Cade Requirement, as follows: a. Approved Waiver A on the basis that the Traffic and Transportation Manager reviewed and approved the traffic study submitted by the applicant. (Vote: 6-0, Commissioner Boydstun absent) b. Approved WaNer B on the basis that k relates to a building that already exists and will be retained. (Vote: 6-0, Commissioner Boydstun absent) c. Denied Waiver C on the basis that the electrical transformer can be relocated behind the proposed 190-unit building. (Vote: 6-0, Commissioner Boydstun absent) d. Denied Waiver D on the basis that 30, 24inch box trees will be provided for the surface parking area. (Vote: 6-0, Commiss:~~er Boydstun absent) a. Approves: Waiver E on the basis that the nature of the architecture adequately screens the parking structure with the 19 proposed trees. (Vote: 6-0, Commissioner Boydstun absent) f. Approved, in part, WaNer F. Approved a zero (0) setback subject to the sign plan being redesigned following the design crkeria which v~ill be provided by staff consistent with the new sign ordinance being prepared fa' the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Area. (Vote: 5-1, Commissioner Messe voted no and Commissioner Boydstun was absent) Accepted withdrawal of the 30-foot hanging sign as originally y., requested by the applicant. f, _ "~) (Vote: 6-0, Commissioner Boydstun abs~~:~ 3. Granted, In part, Conditional Use Permit No. 3656 with the following changes to the conditions of approval: a. Deleted Condition No. 5. b. Deleted Condition No. 9. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Boydstun absent) `~ ~/ i 04/04/94 Page 11 ~, 3a. CEOA NL•GATiVE DECLARATION I Approved 3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3670 Granted for 1 year OWNER: SO KUEN LAU AND YUK TING LAU, 8922 Emast Folsom, Garden Grove, CA 92641 AGENT: ALLEN DAVID ORNSTEIN, 5295 Cameron Dr., Apt. 408, Buena Park, CA 90621 LOCATION: 314 N. Beech Blvd. (The Electric Circus) Property Is approximately 0.67 acre located on the east side of Beach Blvd. and approximately 1,050 feet north of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue and further described as 314 North Beach Blvd. (The Electrlc Circus) To permft on-premise sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages within an existing restaurant/billiard center wfth live musical entertainment. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC94-45 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: None ,•-. PETITIONER'S COMMENTS: Allen David Ornstein, 5295 Cameron Dr., Apt. 406, Buena Park, CA 90621. He was not made aware of the memorendum from Sergeant Patterson. He was not prepared for some of the statements. He did not understand that he had to go and get a permft, he thought going through the Planning Commission and seeking approval was his permft. He now has a pool room permft. They did a major renovation on the club and the restaurant was not up to Code. They are now open and are serving meals and have been for 3 to 5 months. He went over some of the statements. The Drolect is neared to a vounaer crowd. They want hamburgers. They do have a menu and ft will Increase. There Is not a lot of money In the area and they need to keep the prices down. Sometimes they do get a large crowd. They never go over capacity and never have any problems. He is under oxtrerie financial difficulty. No live entertainment and dancing Dermftted. He is bewildered. Why no live entertainment? The schools all teach music. What is so bad about giving them a plane to perform? He hires young local musicians to play at the club. Commissioner Henninger stated these things were included to show that the use was being operated as a nightclub rather than a restaurant. ~~ 04/04/94 Page t2 a j No admission fee or cover charge be placed. He explained the people who play are professional ~-. musicians and they should be pakl for their services to help pay for their Instruments and lessons. He added they need to get the money from somewhere. You have to be 18 to eet into the club. Mr. Omstein explained that is not true. In the evening they suggest they are 18 because there is a curfew after 10:OOp.m. The majority of his business between 11:OOam. and 7:OOp.m. or B:OOp.m. are high school students. They have never had an age Iimft during the day time ever. They do try to impose an age Iimft in the evening. They do not normally card anyone until B:OOp.m. or 9:OOp.m. John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. He stated when they look at any application like this one, they look at two things and that is the area where the proposed business would be and what are the past problems they have had wfth similar businesses. Mr. Omstein may think that staff brings up information about his type of business and he may think it is personal, however, ft is not. The reason staff brings up articles, etc. is because staff finds something different as to what he Is proposing to do. He is proposing to have a restaurant wfth alcoholic beverages. We find that ft is more of a nightclub than a restaurant. He was out there a week ago Saturday night and met wfth Mr. Omsteln and brought up several problems that needed to be corrected. He has corrected all of those Including removing a sign, repairing a fence and doing some of the other things. The time he was there, there were no meals being served. As they look at the operation, ft appears more like a nightclub than ft does a restaurant and alcoholic beverage sales which he is proposing. This is where they are coming from-they are not against this type of business. If there are problems ft is their Job to look Into potential problems and advise the Commission. Sergeant Patterson, Anaheim Police Department, Vice Detail. He stated their main concern is that Mr. Ornstein originally met wfth them and he presented a nice packet, i.e., that they would have a nice up scope pool room and restaurant similar to the Shark Club In Costa Mesa. They were very favorable towards that and felt ft was an Improvement for the area. His CUP has expired after one year and he has done a number of things that were required to be done. The Police Department is strapped for calls for service. In 1982 they had 319 officers at 103,000 calls for service. In 1993 they had 351 officers and their calls for service were 210,000. This area has drastically changed. He added this business has ran pretty much like a nightclub. Other locations like the Electric Circus have opened up and after they open up as a restaurant, they turn the establishment Into a nightclub. The Police Department, Code Enforcement and ABC have had enormous expense policing these locations. He gave some examples. They are concerned about this location and would like to add some condftlons. He expressed his desire to have security guards on the premises. Tim Clark, Supervising Investigator, wfth the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Contro:. They are here at the request of the Police Department. He stated this location currently has a type 47 license which is an on-sale general public eating place license. This allows the holder of this license to sell beer, wine and distilled splrfts for consumption on the premises as wet! as beer and wine to go in sealed containers. 04/04/94 `~ Page 13 ~ This is a type of license that a restaurant has as opposed to the type of license that a nightclub or a cocktail lounge would have. He was in the location during the latter part of January of this year and the premises was not fn compliance wkh their food requirements. The kkchen was not operational at that time. He has been told that k since has been in operation. Whether or not they are substantially !n compliance wkh their sections that require bonafled meal service, he does not know. There is currently in the process, an application to add Mr. Ornstein to the license wkh Mr. Lau who is the current licensee at this location. Before that transfer can occur, they will have to be In compliance with this particular section, but k has been their experienca where they have marginal food operations and there is a tendency to slide Into a "no food" operation and Just operate as a nightclub. It is curcently licensed, but k is an eating place with a restaurant license and k would have to a~ntinue to be operated until they decide to either get a dkferent type of license or exchange k 1~ a Public Premise License which would require no food service whatsoever, however, everyone in the location would have to be 21 or over. That would be an option sub)ect to approval of the Cky to make sure they had the proper zoning and/or CUP requirements met before the department could approve such an exchange of a license. They have been working with them trying to get them into compliance and they have held this In abeyance trying to get Mr. Ornstein to be added to the Ilcense. In an effort to get him into compliance they have allowed him to have the benefk of the doubt before they take any type of administrative action. Officer Gandy, Police Department. This is at the north end of our City close to the border of Buena Park and that reporting district referenced the crime In the area. This is in a reporting district that Is half in our Cky and half in Buena Park. The half that is located in our City is 91% above the normal average crime rate. 'r ~ Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, stated there is a distinction between what the Anaheim Municipal Code defines as a restaurant and what the ABC is considering what is relevant. The deflnklon in the Zoning Code defines a restaurant as any e: ablishment which is engaged primarily in the business of preparing and servicing meals provided that the activity of preparing and serving meals shall be conducted entirely wkhin a building. The food preparation area of such a restaurant shall be an area permanently designed for food preparation and shall constkute not less than 25% of the gross floor area. It does not Indicate what types of food are going to be served, but merely that k be engaged primarily of preparing and serving meals. The ABC, for the type of license described by Mr. Clark (Type 47 license), is an on•sale general eating place and that authorizes the sale of beer, wine and distilled services for consumption on a bonaflde public eating place type of premise. This is the ABC's deflnkion: Bonaflde public eating place, means a place which is regularly and in a bonaflde manner, used and kept open for the serving of meals to guests for compensation and which has sukabie kkchen facilkies connected therewkh containing conveniences for cooking an assortment of foods which may be required for ordinary meals. The kkchen of which must be kept in a sanitary condition with the proper amount of refrigeration for keeping of food on Bald premises and must comply with all of the regulations of the local Department of Health. 04/04/94 Page 14 -.J Meals means the usual assortment of foods commonly ordered at various hours of the day. The ~,..~ service of such food and victuals only as sandwiches or salads shall not be deemed in compliance wffh this requirement. Guest shall mean persons, that during the hours when meals are regularly served therein, comp t'o a bonafide public eating piece for the purpose of obtaining and actually order and obtain at such time In good faith a meal therein. Nothing in this section shall be construed to require that any food b~a sold or purchased wfth any beverage. She stated that is so;neth(ng that the ABC would be enforcing or seeking to enforce. As a part of any approval that the City Issues the applicant is not thereby excused from complying wfth any other laws or regulations that would be applicable to the particular business. It would be up to the applicant to make sure they complied with both the Cfry's requirements and whatever other agencies and in this case, the ABC. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Caldwell stated the reason for all of this Information is not to blame him for the increasing crime, etc., but (s to find whether or not they are complying wfth the Intent of the CUP. There appears to be a body of evidence that says that Mr. Omsteln and his partner are not complying with the CUP and there is some fear that their Intent to comply is going to wane in the future. They are strictly trying to get them to respond to their CUP and the conditions. Mr. Ornstein stated they have compiled fully now. They had some monetary problems and nothing was done maliciously. Commissioner Messe asked about the age group. .-- Mr. Ornstein stated 18 to about 30. He would like to raise that. He would like to raise the demographics about 4 years. Commissioner Messe asked what he considered his business, I.e., did he consider this a restaurant or did he consider ff a nightclub (public entertainment)? Mr. Ornstein stated he considered ff a circus where people can come and eat, play pool, listen to music and meet someone. A circus means you can go there and do a number of things. You can eat there. Commissioner Mayer asked how he reached the people that are coming in? What are you telling them they are coming there for? Mr. Ornstein showed some flyers he had. He has not done any major campaigning. Commissioner Mayer stated there was no mention about food on the flyer she had. She has a review by Pat Lewis that refers to them as a nightclub; she has another review that he participated in the Nightclub Owners Promoters and Bands. She stated ff he is marketing a restaurant and ff is his primary business, he missed ff somehow. Mr. Ornstein stated ff he has a restaurant, he wants to promote that restaurant. 04/04/94 ' `,~ Page 15 ~ Commissioner Mayer stated we should be talking about a restaurant and they are talking about a ~ nightclub. The last time they were here, we asked them to come before the Commission with whFt h Is they wanted to do there. She has all of his material and what she sees is a nightclub. He needs to ekher change his focus and put together a restaurant or come in and ask for a nightclub. She added we are right back where we were last time. Commissioner Messe stated part of the problem is he has a catch 22 sftuation. If he calls himsalf a nightclub then you must be 21 years of age. He thought his market was for a younger group of people. Commissioner Caldwell stated when people go out there, the perception is that they see a nightclub and not a restaurant. Commissioner Messe asked ff Mr. Omstein had any problems with the conditions that staff has suggested? Mr. Poole stated they have had several discussions with Mr. Omsteln and explained he needs to decide whether he wants to be a nightclub and restrict the age to 21 or ff he wants to be a restaurant without alcoholic beverage sales. He probably keeps vacillating because financially he has not figured out which way to go, but staff has fully explained to him the difference between the two and it is a decision he has to make, otherwise, he keeps walking this floe Tine. He is operating as a nightclub and he is saying he is a restaurant with alcoholic beverage sales. He wants a restaurant wkh alcohol. He does not just want to have a nightclub. If that is what they suggest, then that (s what fie will do. He wants to do whatever they ask him to do. He does have a kitchen that he spent a lot of money on remodeling it. •~ Commissioner Henninger stated he could take the Police Department's recommendations and eliminate their recommended Condftion Nos. 10 and 11. That would then be a restaurant. The conditions that are attached to the staff report do not fully say that and these added conditions would fully say that and add one or two others. Commissioner Mayer stated fire newspaper stated they charged a cover charge to get in. Commissioner Henninger stated that is one of the conditions he eliminated under the Police Department's recommendations. Mr. Ornstein explained people do need to get paid, it is their occupation. Commissioner Messe asked ff he only did that after 9:OOp.m.? Mr. Ornstein explained they have entertainment tonight that is free; tonight is Open Night whore people come and play and h does not cost anything. It Is called Cafe Mondays. He clarified he only charged for entertainment after 9:OOp.m. and not everyday of the week. Chairman Peraza stated staff recommended a minimum of one unfformed security officer. He stated after 9:OOp.m. there needs to be more. Mr. Ornstein stated they have 4. Chairman Peraza asked ff they were willing to stipulate to having 4 all of the time? 04/04/94 Page 16 --..~ ~ Mr. Ornstein explained on Wednesday, Thursday, Frklay and Saturday they have 4. They hsve not • ,^ been conscious of the parking lot. Chairman Peraza asked H the security guards were uniformed and licensed? Mr. Omstefn explained they are part of the Electric Circus staff. They have shirts that say Electric Circus and k says'Staff.' Mr. Poole stated staff would recommend that they be uniformed and licensed by the City. Commissioner Messe stated there should be one on duty in the parking lot and one interior to the establishment at all times uniformed and licensed. Commissioner Mayer wanted to see the word "restaurant` in the flyers. Commissioner Messe clarified that Mr. Omstein would be paying for the Code Enforcement inspections. Mr. Ornstein indicated he understood. Chairman Peraza stated he Is voting in good fafth that Mr. Omstein is going to do the things that were agreed on and not that he has economic problems. He added the Commission expects he will do h. Commissioner Caldwell stated they want him to run the establishment per the conditions on the CUP. If there is a change, regardless of what the reason those changes are, he shculd come back and ask ~ _ for a change. 1 Mr. Omsteln referred to the establishment as a nightclub. Commissioner Henninger stated for clarification the point of all of these conditions is to operate a restaurant and that is what the applicant has told them. The applicant has not come and asked for a nightclub. Mr. Poole stated Independent of the Planning Commission's actions if the Planning Commission and ultimately the Council approves Mr. Omsteln's application, Just a reminder, he would also need to get a separate entertainment permit. Commissioner Tait asked about Condition No. 6 of the proposed conditions from the Police Department, (the minimum age requirement). He would like to suggest deleting that one. Commissioner Henninger stated that relates to the type of beverage license they have. Mr. Poole clarHied it was because of the ABC permit due to the restaurant. They do not restrict the age of the patrons to a restaurant. Discussion took place regarding age restrictions. It was determined that condftion no. 6, 10 and 11, as proposed by the Police Department, would be eliminated. 04/04/94 ~_ J Page 17 a k. ACTION: Approved NegatNe Declaration Approved Condftlonal Use Permft No. 3670 with the following changes to condftions: Modified Condition No. 5 to read as follows: 5. That a minimum of two (2) uniformed and licensed securty officers, tasked exclusively with security duties, shall be present to monitor activity both Inside the restaurant and in the parking lot during ail live performances. Added the following condftlons of approval: That food service (ncluding meats shall be available until closing time on every day of operation. That the alcoholic beverage license Issued by the State Ncoholic Beverage Control shall not be exchanged for a public premises type license nor shall the premises be operated as a public premises. That the sale of alcoholic beverages far consumption off the premises shall be prohibfted. That the quarterly gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed the gross sales of food or other commodities during the same period. That there shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, Including advertising directed to the extedor from within the building, promoting or indicating the avaliability of alcoholic beverages. That the parking lot of the premises shall be equipped wfth lighting of sufficient power to ~~~ illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot. That there shall be no bar or lounge area upon the licensed premises maintained for the purpose of sale, service or consumption of alcoholic beverages directly to patrons for consumption. That no alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on any property ad)acent to the premises under the control of the applicant. That there shall be no coin operated games located upon the premises at any time. That the hours of operation shall be Ilmked to the following: Sunday through Thursday: 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday: 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. That the applicant shall pay the cost of Code Enforcement D(vision inspections for a maximum of once a week during the first sixty (60) days and onco a month thereafter. VOTE: 5-1 (Commissioner Mayer voted no and Comrnlssioner Boydstun was absent) The applicant was reminded that he will need to obtain a separate entertainment permit from the City Business Ucense Division. 04/04/94 Page 18 ~~ ~ ti^- 4a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 4b. RECLASSIFICATION NO.93-9409 June 13, 1994 4c. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 4d. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3651 OWNER: KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS, Attn: Kevin Becker, 393 East Walnut Streot, Pasadena, CA 91186 LOCATfON:I 441 North Lakeview Ave. (Kaiser Pennanente Medical Center) Parcel A: Subject property is a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 9.45 acres, located at the northwest comer of Riverdale Avenue and Lakeview Avenue, having approximate frontages of 628 feet on the north side of Riverdale Avenue and 710 feet on the west side of Lakeview Avenue, and further described as 441 North Lakeview Avenue (Kaiser Perrnanente Medical Center). P r B: Subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 3.56 acres, having a frontage of approximately 310 feet on the east side of Lakeview Avenue, having a maximum depth of approximately 576 feet, and located approximately 435 feet north of the centerline of Rverdale Avenue, and further described as 480 North Lakeview Avenue (Kaiser Permanents Parking Area). RECLASSIFICATION - PARCEL A: Petitioner requests raclassiflcation of the western and southern portion of subject property (Parcel A) from the RS-A-43,000(SC) (Residential, Agriculture; Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone and the CO(SC) (Commercial Offlce; Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone to the CL(SC) (Commercial, Umited; Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PARCEL A & B: To permit a 588,245-square toot expansion to an existing 289,794-square foot medical center (including a 307,000-square foot parking structure, 165,000-square foot addition to the existing hospital, a 20,700-square foot central plant building, and a 8,200-square foot communication building) with roof mounted equipment wfth waivers of required interior setback for instftulional uses adjacent to residential zone boundaries, required parking lot landscaping, permitted number and type of mor~~ment signs, permitted number of wall signs, maximum structural height, required setback from an arterial highway, and required landscaped screening adjacent to an arterial highway. RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION N0. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. ACTION: Continued subject request to the June 13, 1994 Planning Commission meeting VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Boydstun absent) ,~ 04/04/94 Page 19 --~ Continued to May 2, 1994 OWNER: MANUEL GARCIA and RUDY A. BALDERRAMA, 1200 S. Highland Ave., #108, Fullerton, CA 92632 LOCATION: 806 East Orangewood Avenue. Property is approximately 0.34 acre located on the south sloe of Orangewood Avenue and approximately 156 feet west of the centerline of Spinnaker Street and further described as 606 E. Orangewood Avenue. To permft a church with waiver of minimum setback for institutional uses adjacent to residential zone boundaries and maximum structural height adjacent to residential zones. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: One person spoke In opposition PETITIONER: Rudy Balderrama, Pastor of Church of God of Prophecy, 1200 S. Highland Ave., Fullerton, CA. This ~~ request is for the purpose of expanding their building and to function as a church in the community. There fs a great need in the spiritual area of the community. OPPOSITION: Terrill Dalton, 2117 S. Spinnaker Street, Anaheim, CA, approximately 4 houses away from the proposed church. Some churches are very stayed and somber, but not this one. This one is very, very loud and very boisterous. So loud that when he turns up his television on full volume to try to mask out the noise, tre can still hear the singing and shouting. He has to turn on his stereo to drown out the noise. He has had to call the police in the past. For this reason he is vehemently opposed to the granting of the CUP permit. REBUTTAL: Mr. Balderrama stated Mr. Dalton is referring to their music. Most of the time the music is down. They do have some young people that get a Ifttle carried away. However, that could be rectified by lowering down the volume. Chairman Peraza asked ff the neighbors have ever approached him to complain dlrecUy? Mr. Baiderrama stated he never has spoken to the neighbors. He would have liked for Mr. Dalton to talk to him about the music. They are very conscious of their neighbors. They are concerned about the well being of everyone and that Is their purpose. They want to be of help to the community. 04/04/94 Page 20 ~.; Mr. Balderrama stated the gate is closed and a Ilght is kept on in the back and (n the front. They do not have lights in the parking lot, however, they are planning to do so. i- _. Commissioner Messe stated he would like those fumed off at 9:30p.m. Chairman Peraza stated they would like them to plant vines along the wall to prevent graffiti opportunfties. Commissioner Henninger asked about the wheelchair ramp out front and wanted to know H it could be eliminated, I.e., there was one in the back and the front and asked if he needed both of them? Mr. Balderrama stated one would be sufficient. Commissioner Messe stated they will have to move the handicapped parking space. He suggested they take a look at the plans when this has been redesigned. The Commission is asking for an eliminatfon of 200 square feet in the sanctuary and changes in the parking. Commissioner Henninger stated they could ask staff to update the conditions of approval consistent with the discussion they have had. For clariflcatfon Commissioner Henninger stated the hours of operation would be t1118:00p.m. on Sunday evening; 8:30p.m. on Tuesday and 9:30p.m. on Friday. Commissioner Caldwell stated they would like to havo the lot closed and the gate locked and emptied wfthin 30 minutes of each of those closing times. Commissioner Messe stated there is also a stipulation relative to sound proofing the sanctuary. ACTION: Continued subject request to the May 2, 1994 Planning Commission meeting to redesign plans so as to eliminate encroachments in the ftont yard and eliminate the setback waiver request pertaining to the area adjacent to the single-family homes to the east. VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Boydstun absent) 04/04/94 II Page 22 :~ Chairman Peraza explained that we do have a noise ordinance in the City of Anaheim so neighbors are not disturbed. Mr. Balderrama stated they are going to put in sound proof walls in the new structure. Commissioner Caldwell asked what days and hours dkl he find the noise to be most detrimental. Mr. Daiton stated primarily on Sundays during late attemoon or eady evening. Ha cannot speak for his neighbors, but one of his neig`;bors is more perturbed then he is because he is closer to the church. In addklon, children from the church throw rocks Into his neighbor's pool over the block wall. Commissioner Messe brought to Mr. Dalton's attention, the request for expanded hours of operation during the weak. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: At Commissioner Caldwell's request, Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, gave an explanation for Waiver A. A discussion took place regarding the maximum setback for institutional uses (15-foot setback from residential zone boundary line required). Mr. Hastings explained ff conformance was provkfed they would lose 3 parking spaces to bring it to the 15 feet. It is primarily for the backup spaces that they have to swing out a Ikde bft. Commissioner Caldwell stated in order for him to vote for this he would have to find a way to offer the single-family homes and protect them from most of the noise that they would be subjected to. He was ~._., sure the church did not want to offend the neighbors. If they could meet the parking requirements and ~ provide that 15•foot of landscape buffer between the properties, that would be a big help. He would also like to see the hours of operation reduced In the evenings. Commissioner Mayer asked about the size of the congregation. Mr. Balderrama stated approxlrnately 50 people. Commissioner Mayer asked ff he was recruiting members at this time? Mr. Baiderrama stated ft has been that way fcr quite some time. Most of the people INe in the neighborhood within walking distance. Commissioner Henninger stated he did not think the extra landscaped setback would do anything for the noise. Limiting the hours of operation made good sense to him. Discussion took place regarding the hours of operation and concern was expressed regarding the hours extending to 10:OOp.m. in the evenings because of the nearby residents. It was determined that services should conclude at 9:30p.m. and that the back lot would be vacated by 10:OOp.m. Commissioner Mayer stated she would also like to see the lot gated so that the last person out locks the gate so there is no unauthorized use during the rest of the night. 04/04/94 ,~ Page 21 !~ OWNER: STANDARD fiRANDS REALTY, 4300 W. 19th Street, Torrance, CA 90509 AGENT: E.A. GENTILE, 220 Small Way, Anaheim, CA ~-.-. LOCATION: 2145 West Lincoln Ave. Property is approximately 1.19 acres located on the north side of Lincoln Avenue approximately 218 feet east of the centerline of Lindsay Street and further described as 2145 West Lincoln Avenue. (a) Petitioner requests modification of a condffion of approval pertaining to hours of operation for a previously approved church wffh caretaker's Wing quarters. (b) Petitioner further requests cone-year time extension (retroactve to June 2, 1993) to commence building for subject petffion. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC94-46 Approved Approved amendment to condffions of approval Approved a retroactive extension of time to expire on 8-2-94 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTE:'. OPPOSITION: Nrne PETITIONER'S f:OMMENTS: Ed Gentile, ~~14 S. Brookhurst, Suite 101, Anaheim 92804, agent representing the actNity on this item. The request was «:.''.e for a time change for the use of the protect which is also a church. Tha church has complied wfth the request. The fee for readvertfsement has been paid and the also the sewer mitigation fee has been paid. He referenced page 2 of the staff report regarding the hours of operation. They are asking for an increase of one hour on Saturday from 9:OOa.m. to 11:OOa.m and on Sundays from 9:OOa.m. to B:OOp.m., which is a 3 hour Increase; and In addition they are adding Monday and Fridays from 7:OOp.m. to 9:1~p.m. He explained the level of noise would be minimal. It will be more of an educational use in the sanctuary and thane Is no special school for children and no buses. Jerry Smiley, (phonetically spelled), 263 W. Elm, Fullerton, CA. He is an architectural and mechanical designer. This particular church project is a volunteer effort and it is taking longer tl.~n ff ff were a commercial project. They anticipate submitting their grading plans this week and building plans shortly. 04/04/94 Page 23 ~~ The reason for the time change, is they break their services up Into small groups. They will have 3 small ~-. groups that will be meeting In the building--each of about 100 to 150 people and they will meet at different times on Sunday consecutively wfth a gap In between for traffic use, etc. During the week each one has evening services. He gave some further detalis regarding the schbduiing. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. DISCUSSION: Mr. Sm!ley gave some background on the location of the parking. Staff showed the Commission the plans. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Approved request by amending Condftlon No. 4 of Resolution No. 92R-109 to read as follows: '4. That the hours of operation shall be the fdlowing: Sundays: 9:00 a.m, to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Frklay: 7:00 p.m. to 9:15 p.m. Saturdays: 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. Granted cone-year time extension (retroactive to June 2, 1993) to comply wfth conditions of approval, to expire on June 2, 1994. j VOTE: 6-0 (Commissiorer Boydstun absent) 04/04/94 ~~ Page 24 Continued to June 1, 1994 Readvertised OWNER: DENNIE I. DYER and MADELINE B. DYER, NORWAJC INVESTMENTS, 1020 N. Batavia, Ste. B, Orange, CA 92667 AGENT: CARLOS BARRAGAN, 532 S. Rose Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 532 South Rose Street. Property is approximately 0.52 acres located on the east side of Rose Street and approximately 390 feet south of the centerline of Santa Ana Street and further described as 532 South Rose Street. To amend or delete a condkion of approval perta(ning to the time Iimkation of a previously approved auto body shop. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES. OPPOSITION: None r-.~ PETITONER'S COMMENTS: Ms. Barragan, 1259 E. Eastwood Dr., Anaheim, CA. She is requesting to renew the condklonai use permit. She referenced a letter from Code Enforcement and went over the Code violations. John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager, stated he was just presenting to the applicant the photos that she was describing. He believed the Commission was familiar wkh this location. It was developed a number of years ago and certainly not up to their curcent standards. The problem they have had, especially wkh the automobile type of business, is k there is not adequate pa-'~!~g k is hard to tell because that is a contiguous building wkh different owners throughout the building. When they went out, they looked at the overall property. It has been an ongoing problem to try to keep that property free of inoperable vehicles; the double t+arking; the refuse and waste. They think that the applicant has outgrown this location. Thalr business seems to be so good that there is not adequate room fnr them to operate. Commissioner Henninger asked about paragraph 15, page 3 of the staff relative to the Redevelopment Commission recommendation. They recommended 90 days to remedy ail of the Cade Enforcement violations. It implies they were thinking this use would continue. In the first part of the paragraph they recommend the Commission deny deleting this condkion, however, that suggests that the business move away. So k seems to be inconsistent. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, stated he thought they were recommending that they deny the deletion of the condkion, however, allow them an addkional 3 years, in other words keep them on a time schedule rather than to delete the condkion. ~ 04/04/94 r...~ Page 25 i ; 1 For clarification Commissioner Henninger stated then their recommendation was to leave the condition; ~. ^• allow an extension of time and give them 90 days to clean up their act? Mr. Hastings indicated that was correct. Commissioner Henninger asked H staff's recommendation differed, i.e., staff's recommendation was to deny this condRion and also not to allow an extension? Mr. Hastings Indicated that was cored, based on Code Enforcement Information, staff felt that was more appropriate to deny the entire request, both for the deletion of the condition and also for the time extension. Commissioner Henninger asked ff staff would like for this bust less to move elsewhere? Mr. !iastings indicated that was correct. Commissioner Mayer stated they had just heard the applicant say that most of these hems listed are not theirs. Mr. Hastings explained they based their recommendation on the information they had at the time. Discussion took place regarding the parked and double parked cars and cars being worked on, etc. PAs. Barragan stated they do have a problem on the inside because they are a little bit crowded. There is a bank building next door. Perhaps they cr,uld lease the rear of the building next to them and that would allow them to have more space. She was previously told to resolve the problems on the permit at the location where .hey currently are first. Commissioner Henninger explained they would have to readvertise this in order to expand it to the new address. He asked what Code Enforcement thought about the concept. Mr. Poole thought k would help alleviate the skuation gaffe a bit. If they do expand then you can tell where the problems are coming from. They have baen successful and they have very little room to work inside. Commissioner Messe stated it sounds like they are at the point where they lead more square footage. Commissioner Henninger suggested they continue this for 60 days during which time the applicant would have time to clean up some of the existing Cade problems they have; show them they are capable of doing that and also have time to get some sort of lease In place. He did not want to encourage them to sign a lease just yet, however, he felt they should gat at least a tentative agreement on a lease and then they can readvertise for the expanded space. Commissioner Mayer suggested they put some sort of identiFlcation on the dashboard of vehicles that are their vehicles that they arr. working on. When Code Enforcement drives through they immerJlately know which vehicles belong to them. She also would Ilke Cade Enforcement to call Animal Control regard(ng the dog. If it is not their dog, h should be licensed and tagged. They need to find out who the owner is. 04/04/94 `~ Page 26 /^ Commissioner Caldwell stated he would also iike to make sure that they condftion this to have the t '.^ applicant pay for Code Enforcement Inspections. There appears to be a track record of not running a real clean and tidy business. He would like to have this conditioned when they come back for Code inspections over a period of time. ACTION: Continued subject request to the June 1, 1994 Planni~rg Commission meeting in order to readvertise the expansion into an adjacent unit and to work wflh Code Enforcement DNision to clean up the property. VOTE: fi-0 (Commissioner Boydstun absent) Code Enforcement was directed to contact the County Animal Control in reference to the dog being caged on•site. ,.~.~.. 1..._.~% ,, •;'''~ 04/04/94 Page 27 '` ~. 8. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: '°1 B, rONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3573 -REQUEST FOR AONE-YEAR Continued to RETROACTIVE EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF April 18, 1994 APPR VA',_, Tim Bundy, 20331 Irvine Ave., Ste. 7, Santa Ana, CA 92707, for Code Enforcement requests aone-year retroac;~:e extension of time to comply wfth condftions of inspection/report approval for Condftional Use Permft No. 3573 (to permit a car wash wfth waiver of minimum structural setback and minimum landscape setback) to expire March 2, 1995. Property is located at 201 E. Ball Road. John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager, stated their concern fs that there appears to be people living in an RV (trailer and motor home); also there is a sign that advertises a business other than what is there. Just the general appearance of the property. There is trash and k is not Weil maintained. Code Enforcement feels ff they are going to get a continuance then they need to clean the property up and they need to stop the living in the motor home and camper trailer and remove the off-she sign. Commiss!oner Henninger asked iF they had any contact wfth them yet? r ,.~ ' Mr. Poole stated they might have recently. When they reviewed their request, they did see some problems and he believed that the area Code Enforcement Offlcer has contacted them. He could check. Subject Item was continued to April 18, 1994. END 8-B C. THE DISNEYLAND RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN N0. b?-1 -FINAL SITE PLAN Determined that the final REVIEW FOR LANDSCAPE ASSOCIATED WITH THE DISNEYLAND landscape sfte plans are ADMINISTRATION BUILDING SETBACK REALM (ON-SITE LANDSCAPE in substantial SETBACK AREA ABUTTING THE ULTIMATE BALL ROAD AND I-5 conformance with the FI,EEWAY RIGHT OF-WAYI. Requested by the Walt Disney Company, 500 Disneyland Resort South Buena Vista Street, Burbank, CA 91521. Property is located at the Specific Plan southw3st comer of Ball Road and the I.5 Freeway. A. PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATED REOUEST TO DISCUSS INITIATING Postponed action to AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN: undetermined date Property is located at 1301 South Empire Street. Continued from the March 21, 1994 Planning Commission meeting. Doug Moreland, Disney Development Company, 1313 Harbor Bivd. They are here today to discuss the setback area around the proposed Disneyland Administration building. The building is located at the corner of Ball Road and the I-5 Freeway. He reviewed the conceptual landscape plan. END OF 8-C t 04/04/94 Page 28 .-~ D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N_ 0. 2685 -SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE DETERMINATION REQUEST: Yussed Amin, 6101 Chery Avenue, Fontana, Determined that the revised plans are in requests review of revised plans for Conditional Use Permft No. CA 92336 substantial conformance , 2665 (to expand a restaurant and cocktail lounge with waNer of minimum wffh the original approved number of parking spaces). Property is located at 1074 N. Tustin Avenue. plans and that the new operator would not change the operation as approved by CUP 2685 Yussed Amin, Architect for the project. The project is Bessie Walls restaurant at 1074 N. Tustin, CA. Commissioner Henninger asked ff the intent of this remodel was to open ff as a new and better restaurant? Mr. Amin indicated that was correct. Commissioner Henninger asked ff they were proposing a nightclub? Mr. Amin indicated they were not proposing a nightclub at all. He was Instructed by his client to upgrade the vintage of the buliding to cater to the requirements of a prevailing market. They are deflnffely facing some diff(culties In the existing buliding. He elaborated and gave some further details about the revised plans. Commissioner Messe asked ff he was going to use the basement or subterranean floor for dining anymore? ~~ ~~ Mr. Amin stated ff was calculated very carefully that they need a place for storage and for a wine cellar. The basement will remain as the wine cellar for file restaurant and some linen storage. He clarified no customer service would be down there. END OF 8-D ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: REVIEW OF SHOPPING CENTER IDENTIFICA•fION SIGNS WITHIN THE SCENIC No action CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE. CITY ATTORNEY DISCUSSION PERTAINING TO PUBLIC RIGHT-0F-WAY No action DIRECTIONAL SIGN PROGRAM FOR NEW HOMES. _ There was no further discussion regarding the above items. THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED THEIR MEETING AT x•15 P.M. TO THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MORNING SESSION OF APRIL 18, 1994 AT 11:00 A.M. THE FOREGOING IS A FULL, TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIG IN;.L~R[L~1D ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE ~P]LANNING DEPAFlTh1ENi. 04/04/94 ATTEST, ~_,,n_ Page 29 EDITH L. HARRIS, SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION