Minutes-PC 1994/06/01i.
ACTION AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 1, 1994
10:00 A.M. - PRESENTATION BY PUBLC WORKS/ENGINEERING DIRECTOR PERTAINING TO
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW CP PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
- PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW (NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY ACCEPTED)
1:30 P•M• - PUBLIC HEARING BEGINS (PUBLIC TESTIMONY)
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: BOYDSTUN, CALDWELL, HENNINGER, MESSE, PERAZA,
TAIT
COMMISSIONER ABSENT: MAYER
PROCEDURE TO EXPEDITE PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. The proponents in applications which are not contested will have five minutes to present their
evidence. Additional time will be granted upon request ff, in the opinion of the Commission,
such additional lima will produce evidence Important to the Commission's consideration.
~,r , 2. In contested applications, the proponents and opponent will each be given ten minutes to
present their case unless addftional time is requested and the complexity of the matter warrants.
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 meet(ng.
4. The Commission will wfthhold questions until the public hearing is closed.
5. The Commission reserves the right to deviate from the foregoing ff, in fts opinion, the
ends of fairness to all 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
record 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 within the Jurisdiction of the Planning Commission,
and/or agenda tams. Each speaker wili be allotted a maximum of fNe (5) minutes to
speak.
AC060194.WP
~~.J
,~•.
i
,~~,
1a. CEOA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 21 No action
1 b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 2905. 3253. AND 3414 (Readvertised) Modified
condftlons of
INITIATED BY: CITY OF ANAHEIM, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92605 approval
OWNERS: SO CAL CINEMAS, INC., Attn: Bruce Sanborn, 13 Corporate
Plaza, Newport Beach, CA 92660; DEBEIKES INVESTMENT CO.,
Attn: Richard DeBeikes, 2300 Michelson Drive, #200, Irvine, CA
92715-1336
LOCATION: CINEMAPOIJS -Property is approximately 5.54 acres located on
the north side of La Palma Avenue and approximately 300 feet
west of the centerline of Imperial Highway (5635 E. La Palma
Ave.). IMPERIAL PROMENADE -Property is approximately 4.4
acres located north of the northwest comer of La Palma Avenue
and Imperial Highway (5645.5675 E. La Palma Ave.).
Possible revocation or modification to conditions of approval of an existing movie
theater complex and commercial retail center.
Continued from the January 10, 24, February 7, March 21, April i6, May 2, and
May 16, 1994, Planning Commission meetings.
CINEMAPOLIS RESOLUTION N0. PC94-64
(CUP NOS. 2905 & 3414)
IMPERIAL PROMENADE RESOLUTION N0. PC9465
(CUP N0.3253)
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS:
This Is a City init(ated item. Mc Yalda stated as he was Instructed by the Commission at ~
their last hearing, he faxed a copy of the memorandum to all of the property owners.
They may have some information.
Chairman Peraza Indicated they did receive a letter from Counsel for Sanborn Theatre's
Inc.
Commissioner Messe stated they did not receive the fax until 10:OOa.m. this morning.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS LEFT OPEN FROM THE PREVIOUS HEARING.
DISCUSSION:
Chairman Peraza stated they did receive their letter also, however, he did not receive h
until 11:OOa.m.
O6-0t-94
Page 2
~~
Mr. Sanbom indicated they had not, however, there could be a possibility. It depended
n on the traffic signal going in across the street with a crosswalk. They could not do h
otherwise.
Commissioner Boydstun stated they discussed that wfth Traffic this morning and it will
have a walk signal.
Alfred Yalda indicated it was planned that way.
Commissioner Taft stated he was not as convinced that there was as much of a parking
problem as there was before. He asked what Mr. Sanbom if there was a severe parking
problem at the peak hours?
Mr. Sanborn explained since they went from 69% of Code to 80% and they just went
through the busiest weekends of the year wkhout using the structure, for the most part
there was not a parking problem.
He further explained when they play Jurasic Park and City Sifckers II, there could be
temporary parking problems, but that is the nature of their business. To look at K on the
whole and say for 365 days out of the year, most of the time there is not a parking
problem.
Commissioner Tait asked out of 30:; days, how many evenings would be considered
insufffclent parking?
It was determined to be 20 days. Mr. Sanbom stated he did not think you design for the
maximum of anything, however, there will be times when there Is a problem. They
~^~ thought they had solved a lot of h by going from 69% to 80%.
Mr. Sanbom referenced his letter and stated basically they did not think that the staff
had wisely usod the traffic study they all paid for and thought they ought to do a better
job of understanding the report.
Dick DeBeikes, Imperial Promenade Partners, he presented 2 letters to staff and read the
cover letter Into the record from Imperial Promenade Partners to the Planning
Commission. He was responding to the suggested Conditions of Approval in the
May 17, 1994, memorandum from the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. He
stated any inferced approval of the suggested condftlons by Imperial Promenade
Partners is incorrect.
They met with Alfred Yalda on April 27, 1994, to express their disagreement wfth the
proposed conditlons. His statements that the recommendations were based in part on
the aforementioned meeting should not be taken as Inferring any approval by Imperial
Promenade Partners.
In regard to the parking supply to Imperial Promenade, the letter they are submitting
from the Traffic Engineering Consultant to imperial Promenade Partners, clearly states
that their review of the Kimberly Hom study shows an adequate supply of parking at
Impedal Promenade.
'~ 06-01-94
Page 3
;g
w
M
For any suggested modif(cation to their conditional use permit, they request that the
Planning Commission state the grounds for each modification and provide the
i"~ corcoborating evklence supporting their finding. i
Commissioner Taft asked ff he would agree wfth the assessment that there is a parking I(
problem roughly 20 days out of the year?
Mr. DeBeikes agreed wfth Mr. Sanborn and indicated they spoke about it extensively
and it was not until mid summer of last year that finally all of the construction was
complete on both properties. Since the Christmas season through today in operating,
they have not run Into parking difficulties on the she.
Commissioner Taft asked if circulation was a problem?
Mr. DeBeikes stated there are areas where circulation can be improved, but it is a matter
of do they want to lose any parking spaces and find a solution that is satisfactory to
both property owners. Both parties will continue to discuss this and look for a
resolution, but there is no simple answer today. Some things are better for the theatre
and some things are better for the retail. In both cases there are reductions and lass in
parking which they are trying to avoid.
Commissioner Tait asked ff signal(zation would help the circulation problem?
Mr. DeBeikes stated he did not believe tt would help circulation as much as it will assist
an access to and from the property.
Commissioner Messe asked ff he would like to summarize the submitted information for
the Commission?
l
Mr. DeBeikes did make some copies and submitted them to the Commission. He
explained h more or less states they found adequate supply in the study.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
DISCUSSION:
Commissioner Taft stated the sRuation has changed since this first started. Initially there
was a severe problem. Now it does not seem to be a problem except for 20 days a
year. With the signalizallon he was not certain there was a whole lot that would be
appropriate for them to do at this point. If there is a problem the market conditions will
take care of that; N h is di(flcult for people to find parking places he assumed eventually
they will not go there anymore and h will resolve Itself. He was not prepared to put on
anymore condRions that require off-site parking.
Commissioner Henninger suggested they look at Mr. Yalda's proposed condtions and
look at the conditions that deal wfth the traffic signal.
He referenced Condftion No. 1 regarding the installation of a traffic signal.
Commissioner Henninger asked ff this condition would be added to each of the CUPs?
Mr. Yalda Indicated that Is corcect.
Commissioner Henninger asked what the reason was for having this condition?
~ 06-01-94
Page 4
3
H
Mr. Yalda explained right now there Is no mechanism that Cinnemapolis or Imperial
Promenade will pay for installation of a traffic signal or provide them with an easement f
~ to properly start a traffic signal
Commissioner Henninger asked ff a traffic signal Is needed?
Mr. Yatda stated based on the one study they have, k does not Ind(cate that. They are
still working on It to see what would be the outcome. He added It is in process.
Commissioner Messe asked did he think for any safety reasons there might be a signal
required?
Mr. Yalda explained h will Improve the Ingress and egress to these properties and give
right-of-way assignments to all directions of traffic and pedestrians.
Commissioner Henninger stated ff it is not warranted could that problem be solved by a `
median?
Mr. Yalda stated h could be solved by Installing a median island and all of the properties
will be restricted to right-in and right-out only.
Commissioner Henninger stated the testimony he is gNing now is slightly dffferent then
what they have heard in the past. He thought previously he saki there had been a traffic
accident problem at this driveway and the best way to handle that was by Installing a
traffic signal.
Mr. Yalda explained he recalls ff someone exks the Cinemapolis driveway and becomes
.- , impatient In making alert-tum, then maybe that was the conflict point. The traffic signal
'+_ ~ would assign the right-of-way, i.e., for example, the people exiting Cinnemapolis will
have a green time to exit. The rest of the traffic would stop for them on I$ Palma
Avenue.
They are trying to coordinate the timing of the signal with CalTrans. If that is not
possible, they will coordinate with the next traffic signal west of that driveway.
Commissioner Boydstun asked where they would stand ff the signal was put in and they
let them take ft themselves from there?
Mr. Yalda stated whatever their desire is. They have spent 3 years working back and
forth and maybe ff they work together and they do not hear anymore complaints then
perhaps the situation will be Improved.
Commissioner Boydstun stated she would think they would have the incentive to worN.
together because ft is to better both of their businesses. it seems like they have spent a
long time and they are back where they started again. The traffic signal would eliminate
the safety problem and that is what the Cfry should be Interested in. She did not know ff
the City should be telling them how to run their businesses.
They are working on the easement portion of it right now. They have all of the property i
easement descriptions except for Cinemapolis and they should be gutting that from the ~
County. Hopefully, by the end of the week they should have all easements ready to ~
send to attorneys to finalize the agreement.
06-01-94
Page 5
;i
;1
Commissioner Boydstun stated then we could just put in the first condftion regarding the
signal.
~,
~ Mr. Yaida clarified they are recommending that condition.
Commissioner Masse asked staff, relative to Imperial Promenade, right now they have
23,577 feet of food service space. They are limited to that dght now and adding
Condition No. 4 does not change that.
Mr. Hastings indicated that would be corcect. Th(s would make it more evident that they
would hold to that particular number so they would not be coming back in asking for
additional restaurant area.
ACTION: Modified Conditional Use Permit Nos. 2905 and 3414 by adding the following
condition of approval:
That the Clnemapolis property owner and the Imperial Promenade property
owner enter Into a cooperatNe agreement with the Redevelopment Agency and
pay their fair share of the actual full costs for installation ref a traffic signal and
provide easement on their property for the oper..:~on of file tafflc signal on La
Palma Avenue at the drveway for these properties wthin 50 days of approval of
this condftion by the Planning Commission and/or the City Council. The cost
participation for the trefflc signal shall be 25 percent of the total cost of the traffic
signal for Clnemapolis (25% curcently estimated at $32,250 but subject to change
based on actual costs) and 25 percent for Imperial Promenade (25% curcentiy
estimated at $32,250 but subject to changed based on actual costs). The fair
share payments for the traffic signal shall be deposited to the Redevelopment
~- , Agency prior to the solicitation of construction bids for the traffic signal.
ModKied Conditional Use Permit No. 3253 by adding the following condftion of
approval:
That the Clnemapolis property owner and the Imperial Promenade property
owner enter Into a cooperatNe agreement with the Redevelopment Agency and
pay their fair share of the actual full costs for installation of a traffic signal and
provide easement on their property for the operation of the traffic signal on l.a
Palma Avenue at the driveway for these properties within 60 days of approval of
this condftion by the Planning Commission and/or the Clty Counci;. The cost
partic(pation for the traffic signal shall be 25 percent of the total cost of the traffic
signal for Clnemapolis (25% currently estimated at $32,250 but subject to change
based on actual costs) and 25 percent for Imperial Promenade (25% currently
estimated at $32,250 but subject to changed based on actual costs). The fair
share payments for the traffic signal shall be deposited to the Redevelopment
Agency prior to the solicitation of construction bids for the traffic signal.
VOTE: 6.0 (Commissioner Mayer absent)
~ Ofr01-94
Page 6
~~
2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
2b. RECLASSIFICATION NO.93-9408 (Readvertised)
Approved
Granted to the
RS-5000 Zone
OWNER: LIVING STREAM, Attn: Andrew Yu, 1853 W. Bail
Road, Anaheim, CA 92804
LOCATION: 1301 S. Empire Street. Property is approximately 2.97
acros located on the west side of Empire Street and
approximately 700 feet south of the centerline of Bail Road.
Reciassiflcatlon from the RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) Zone to
the RM-3000 (Residential, Multiple-Family) or a less intense zone to
construct a 2•story, 40-unit condominium complex.
Continued from the May 16, 1994 Planning Commission Meeting.
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION N0. PC9466
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
IN FAVOR: 2
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS:
~,~ Frank De Luna, 19142 Sierra Marla, Irvine, CA. He stated the Lh~ing Stream Ministry
contacted him to assist them in processing this 40-unit townhome project through the
City. At his advice they proceeded in this direction, however, due to the neighbor's
concems for parking, the head of the Living Stream, Mr. Lee, suggested they go ahead
and proceed wfth the 20-units as was recommended. However, he advised him that the
project was not economically feasible at 20 single-family homes based on the price they
paid for the land.
Based on his advice they proceeded wfth the application for the 40-units. However, over
the past few days 1te met with him and The Living Stream and they decided to drop their
application for the RM-3000 and just apply for the RS-5000 based on the concems of the
neighbors Mr. Lee and the Living Stream Ministry, being a Christian organization, are
very concerned wfth the feelings of the neighborhood.
The intention today Is to apply for the RS-5000. Again his advise to them was in order
to make it even a semblance of economic feasibility, the architect met with the City and
it looks like i;r order to get 20-unRs on there ft may require a slight variance here and
there. Hls recommendation and request is that the RS-5000 be approved wfth a
condkion that they be alicwed to build 20 single-family homes wfth an average square-
footage of 2,300 square feet per home. He explained there are 3 different floor plans.
06-01-94
Page 7
He realized they would need to present the plans later for the Tentative Map. In giving
~ up on the 40-unk townhome, he thought that would not be too much to ask for the Cky
to cooperate wkh them on building a minimum of 20 homes.
Discussion took place regarding the cultle-sac.
Commissioner Henninger asked what variances dkl he feel he needed to seek?
Mr. De Luna stated ff there were any variances, k would only be on the pie shaped unks
at the end of the cultle-sac regarding the sotback to get the necessary width for the lot.
There Is a lot width requlre:nent.
He stated one comment made by staff a few weeks ago was that they suggested putting
RS-5000 on the southern portion of the lot and RM-3000 on the northern portion Just to
compromise and build 30-unks. They would be willing to drop all of that and Just be
allowed to build 20-unks.
FAVOR:
Lots Gallagher, 2101 W. Hanle Avenue, Anaheim, CA. She is representing a group of
citizens residing in West Anaheim. They are very gratified to hear what Just happened.
They appreciate their concern for the neighborhood and they welcome them to the
neighborhood, but their problem in West Anaheim remains the same, I.e., k is too dense.
There are too many people in West Anaheim. They are here today, not only to talk
about this development, but to put a wont in for the future. They hope the Planning
Commission and the rest of the City of Anaheim will take a good hard look at West
Anaheim at what has happened and how bad k has gotten.
~'- They know they cannot Iimk development and they cannot stop development.
Development is a good thing, but when k intrudes on the neighborhood k is not,
therefore, they ask them to take a hard look at anything they do in the future. She
expressed the thanks of her neighborhood for the consideration and cooperation that
the living Stream Church has given to the neighborhood. They see this development at
20-unks and no more.
Commissioner Caldwell stated this group has once again proven that this process works
and k is wonderful that they have had a compromise between the two groups. The only
way to get a hard look at anything is for the people whc live in the City to participate in
the process.
Andrew KulJis, 1420 S. Penbrook, Anaheim, CA 92804. He has Ifved in Anaheim since
1950. He has been a member of other organizations seeking change and certainly this
organization is the first one that has ever been a successful organization. He was not
allowed to respond to the developer's edkorial on a question that Chairman Peraza
asked him last week and he thought that was unfair.
06-01-94
~~ Page 8
1.....
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
DISCUSSION:
No further discussion took place.
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
Granted Reclassiflcatlon No. 93.94-08, uncondftionally to the RS-5000 Zone.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Mayer absent)
•.~
U
06-01-94
Page 9
3a. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 281 (Previously Certified) Approved
~ 3b. AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 88-2 (Readvertised) Recommended
` THE SUMMIT OF ANAHEIM HILLS approval to City
~ounc(I
OWNER: THE BALDWIN COMPANY, Attn: Ron Freeman, 16811 Hale Ave..
Irvine, CA 92714
LOCATION: Prooertv fs aaoroxlmately 13 67 acres located on the w~~t
aide of Wetr Canvon Road aooroximately 1 2201eet north of
the centerline of Oak Canyon Drive and lurther described as
The Summit of Anaheim Hills Srecific Plan ISP8t!-2)
deslanated Park ,the ILot No. 12 of Tract No. 14 71 .
Amendment to Exhlbft No. 11 (Open Space/Recreation Plan) of SP88-2 and
the amendment of Condition Nos. 64, 65, and 77 of Resolution No. 88R-395
(adopted by Ordinance No. 4977) pertaining to the redesignation of the
previously approved Neighborhood Park (to a Community Park designation)
and the modification of conditions regarding the development and completion
date fnr file proposed 13.67 acre park site.
Continued from the May 2, 1994 Planning Commission Meeting.
RESOLUTION N0. PC9467
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: 6 people spoke In opposition
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS:
Diana Hoard, Vice President of Baldwin Company, 16811 Hale Avenue, Irvine, CA. They
are here requesting a modification to the Specific Plan which dfrecdy Impacts Condftion
No. 77a which deals with the timing of construction of Toyon (phonetically spelled) Park.
She gave a brief presentation on the history of the project. They built in a 2-year fudge
factor for bad times. They thought the project would be built out in a years. They built
in an additional 2 years to make it a 10 year project. They stand today 6 years Into the
project and they are not even half way on the units.
The times have been a lot tougher than they ever anticipated. There are quite a few
large builders like themselves who are not even around now. As they go forward with
the project they have had to do some things that they would probably not necessarily
like to do. They do want to finish the project; they want to build the park and they want
to be around so they can do ft. As a result there have been some things that they have
not done in exactly the time that everyone has wanted. She apologized. They are
trying as hard as they can and they want to do this.
~ 06-01-94
Page 10
She requested a continuance. T!:ay put in their letter numerous reasons for their
request. They are not where they thought they were. This was compounded by a
~ condition of approval on the Specific Plan, that they had to have an agreement between
themselves and their neighbor, Woodcrest, dealing with the park.
They entered Into the agreement with them; they dealt with a few other issues like
grading, etc., but basically ft was an agreement on the park. It was one that allowed the
park to move from 2 separate locations to one so ft could qualify for a communfty park.
Previously ft was 2 neighborhood parks. The need in the area is more for fields and
they needed a bigger combined park. Both developers agreed on that.
The agreement also was they would be responsible for construction of the park, but that
Woodcrest would reimburse for their portion of ft which amounts to approximately 25%.
They have attempted to collect some of that money and have rot succeeded. Their
chances of having Woodc; est reimburse on 25% of the park will be tough. It was a
signed recorded agreement and they did not expect they would be dealing wfth a
company that would be going out of business.
She asked for some time to accommodate for the market shift; they need time to make
up for what they now find themselves having to do which was not previously a financial
obligation.
They have worked wftl ..ie Parks and Recreation Department and they have come up
wfth some conditions which they feel they can INe wfth. They are satisfied that the park
will be done. She added there are a couple of items that she world Tike clarification on.
Sne referenced page 3, hem no. 9 which deals wfth the Woodcrest/Baldwin situation.
She would like for ft to be noted that they are becoming financially responsible for the
entire park by default and not by any previous agreement between both parties that they
would pick up the tab if they did not care to do ft. It is by default that they find
themselves responsible for their portion.
She referenced page 3, ftem no. 11. She referenced a map she had. This hem has
questions as to when they will do certain slopes. Ths Park does not include any slopes.
Parks was very careful to protect the Cfty's Interest in that matter for maintenance. She
explained ft is only the flat area. The sloping areas are colored coordinated to go wfth
the unts in the condominium project. This has been submitted to DRE. As certain units
are built, the slope adjacent to ft becomes that responsibility so when the HOA accepts
ft there is sufliclent unts paying Into the HOA so the maintenance can be maintained.
The schedule is based on what they feel they will be able to build at. If things get better
they will be building it faster.
Commissioner Messe asked H that schedule represents any change to what she
discussed with Farks?
Ms. rioard stated no, this is what was submitted to them .n response to ~helr concern
about when t~iey were going to do the slopes and this was recently submitted. It is also
what has been submitted to DRE so the budgets match.
06-01-94 t
Page 11
j
's
s
She referenced page 6, Rem no. 65. in their discussions with Parks and Recreation, she
agree that the change of the wording to say "not neighborhood park" but "communty
park" was floe. They did not feel that that in anyway affected them. She would like for
the record to clearly show that because R now says "communRy park," that has not
altered what they have to build there.
They have submitted plans to Parks and Recreation and they are almost completed for
the park. They were required to do R to a neighborhood park standard. She would like
for the condition to say: Per the plans that have been accepted by Parks and
Recreation or something of that nature because the way R is curcently worded R Implies
they would have to do R per the communty park standards.
She referenced page 7, Rem 77c regarding the cost estimate. They would request that R
first be due one year from the apprcval and then again prior to start of construction
which they would update the bond egain.
She asked that they approve their request. She stated they are not asking for the
deletion of the requirement or reduction in any of the standards they have asked them
to build the park to. They are asking for some time so that they can accommodate
what has been thrown their way both from the economy and from the Impacts the
economy has had on other builders, particularly Woodcrest. She expiained this is not a
Mello-Roos park, R is not something that was funded through that, R is strictly an out of
pocket park and is currently expected to cost more than 1.6M and as things go up she
was sure that would go up also.
OPPOSITION:
Don Galligan, 894 S. Parkglen, Anaheim, CA, located adjacent to the proposed park site.
He has lived here for a couple of years. They have been looking at this park site in
hopeful anticipation that someday R would get done. This delay of 2 years is somewhat
of a setback for them. The community is growing and they have more children in the
communty that would like to use the park because it would be nice and convenient.
Most of all, just to develop this eyesoar that is just sRting there. it is 14 acres of Mojave
desert that fs chopped off and is Just dust. He understands hard times, but you have to
plan for the hard times as well and he thought R was time.
He further explained they have been building homes there since 1988 and they shouid
get busy to develop this park. He stated there is a definite need for the park and they
said they would build the park. If they can spend money building homes and landscape
the areas of the new homes they are developing to sell, they should have enough
common sense to get going on the park. They can do nothing but enhance the
surrounding areas. He hoped the Commission would deny their request for a delay and
have them get going on the park.
Doreene Galligan, 874 S. Parkglen, Anaheim, CA. She stated they live across from this
dirt hill. She stated It looks terrible; R looks like a fire zone; and there are problems with
coyotes. She is a physician with 2 small children. She cannot encourage people to
move into the area because R is nct being developed as promised. They moved Into
the area because they were promised that the park would be built. She adder' this is
very upsetting to everyone in their neighborhood.
Page 12
Mark Moore, 82 S. Briar Rose Lane, Anaheim, CA. He stated they moved in about a
andrpick up wind a Thehsandbla t ng isi incred ble.sThey also had a rainstorm and thpeark
mud was incredible.
Unda Omellas, 8207 E. Merryweather Lane, Anaheim, CA. They all bought their homes
and are keeping them up in good farih. They were promised a park and they need a
park in the community. There are a lot of other people that could not be here because
of the time. They would like an extension so they can get more people together and get
petitions and more support behind them.
Maryanne Bourka, 962 S. Plint Ridge Way, Anaheim, CA. She wrote a letter to the
Commission which they received before the last meeting. She stated she has INed in
the area for 3 years and stares at the land everyday. The dust is tremendous; the
canyon winds blow all of the time and ri is very aggravating. She thought the park
would be built within one year of moving in 3 years ago. She did not think 2-1 /2 or 3
more years was justifiable. She stated 25% is only $400,000 and is not that tremendous
In today's environment.
Marey Penny, 8125 Oxley Court, Anaheim, CA 92808. She represents the homeowners
from Summit Point as well as many in the Summri Master Association and they are also
opposed to this delay in the park.
According to the Specific Plan, when the permris were pulled for this condo protect, The
Baldwin Company knew that they had to complete this park wthin one-year from
December 14th. They have had to have known at that time whether or not they thought
they were able to build this park. She asked why did ri take them until March 8th to
wrrie them a letter that they thought due to the economy they could not build ri?
She stated they should have planned way ahead for this park. They knew way in
advanco and they promised the homeowners and the Clty. She elaborated and stated
someone needs to hold them accountable.
Other homeowners have asked for, in addition to this park, Instead of Just being playing
fields, they would like for the Commission to consider a swimming pool for this park as
ft is now a community park. Who would say what would happen to Baldwin ff they are
claiming economy and other developers are having trouble. Who will say they will ever
get this park ff ri is delayed for 2 years. They should build ri now while they are
financially stable.
REBUTTAL:
None.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
DISCUSSInN:
Dick Mayer, Park Planner for the Criy of Anaheim. When Baldwin came to meet with
them they came up wrih a list of conditions that they felt were necessary to meet in
order for them to feel somewhat comfortable with the proposal and those candrilons are
included in the staff report that was provided to tha Commission earlier.
06-01-94
~*~' Page 13
He added the following to end of kem no. 'e' on page 7: This will take place no later
~ than January 1, 1995.
He referenced kem'c' page 7. The discussion he had wkh Baldwin basii:aliy is what
Diana Hoard had indicated to them earlier. He feels k is necessary to keep the wording
In that the cost estimate shall be provided to the Cky for approval by January 1st of
each year wkh the word "thereafter ' in front of k. It is noted he provided that
Information to the Commission earlier. This would ensure the Cky that the cost
estimates would continue to come into the Cky so they can evaluate them and make
sure that they have sufficient bonding capabiiky for the protect.
Mr. Mayer stated they are not in opposklon to their request, but they will go wkh the
direction of the Commission.
Commissioner Messe asked about the addkional $125,000 and ff the Cky taking was
taking any chance in delaying this at all?
Mr. Mayer stated he did not feel they were. They have bonding capabilky and ff Baldwin
defaults and does not complete the park by January 31, 1997, they will take k over and
build k themselves, I.e., they actually have the bonding company build k. They could
probably press the point and have them start the park and ff they do not start the park
by January 2, 1996, they are not living up to the condkions of approval.
Commissioner Henninger asked ff the bond was in place right now and what is the
amount of the bond?
Mr. Mayer stated the bond was in place and k was $1.62 million dollars.
t. Commissioner Henninger asked k that covered the full cost including the $125,0001
Mr. Mayer Indicated that was correct.
Commissioner Messe stated ff they had not gotten into their 900th building permk, the
park would not have been called to get started?
Mr. Mayer stated the park was to begin construction wkhin one-year after theft 970th
buliding permk was Issued or Issuance of a buliding permk for the condominiums.
Commissioner Messe asked ff they got out of phase wkh the condominiums?
Mr. Mayer indicated that was corcect.
Commissioner Caldwell asked It they should grant this amendment, Is there anything
that is going to be done to minimize the wind and water erosion that is going on in the
park over the next year or so until the work begins?
06-01-94
Page 14
Mr. Mayer stated he was sure there were things that Baldwin could do. The Park is not
^ City property so it would basically be Baldwin's responsibility to correct the problem,
! however, he is aware of some polymer type of product that can be put over dirt that as
long as no one drives over h, it should be able to hold down the dust. Under extreme
conditions they probably could get water trucks out there. He stated that is something
that they would have to determine and he did not know ff he could levy that condition.
He stated as far as the slopes are concerned again that is a Baldwin situation. They
have been working with the Engineering Department to try to resolve those problems
and he was not certain as to where that was at.
Commissioner Henninger asked the Engineering Department about the flat pad. He
stated there must be an existing condition in all of this approval that deals with erosion
control.
Melanie Adams, Public Works-Engineering, stated there are a:<isting conditions and it
appears Baldwin needs to step up their watering program and the application of polymer
in the area, therefore, the condition does exist for them to stay in compliance.
Commissioner Caldwell asked so then the condition already exists. He asked ff there is
any evidence, besides what the homeowners have stated, that they have not kept up
with that program of controls of erosion?
Ms. Adams explained the best way they have of knowing are calls from the residents
believing they are being subjected to the wind and water problems. Baldwin needs to
step up their watering program at least to keep the dust down at the site.
Chairman Peraza asked ff she has received any calls?
Ms. Adams explained not on this particular site. In the past they have had calls on other
sites, but not the park she.
Ron Freeman stated he would like to clarify the ~~sue of erosion control on the park site.
He explained the standard Grading Code Ordinance as they understand them, require
that ff Is the inspector's decision to apply polymer or some type of native seed material
to prevent erosion. It is not an afflrmative response on the Baldwin's Company part, it is
as the Inspector requires. They have never dishonored any request Ilke that and they
would continue to comply with grading ordinances.
Commissioner Caldwell stated he would only agree to vote in favor of the amendment
provided that Baldwin assured the residents that they were going to at least attempt to
mitigate the problems with erosion control. He is willing to support Baldwin in their
extension, but not at the expense and comfort of the residents. He did not know what
they could do about coyotes, because that was natural. They should do as much as
they can regarding wind and erosion to minim(ze the inconvenience to the residents until
the park is bull[.
Mr. Freeman stated with the current request for a delay, the time is now eMended with
which they would have to maintain the site in a bare condition and they would clearly
have an Interest in doing so to the benefit of the adjacent homeowners. It might also be
worthy to note that any slopes that are adjacent to the Woodcrest property for the most
part are under contrM of the Woodcrest posted bond.
06-01-94 k
Page 15
1
5
He stated he could not speak to eroslon on those slopes because they are on the
~ Woodcrest property, however, not a lot of eroslon occurs on a completely flat site. They
would be willing to maintain the Baldwin Company property per the Greding Code
Ordinances.
Commissioner Messe stated they do have wind conditions that kick up dust up on the
plateau and polymer would control the wind.
Mr. Freeman stated they would certainty dampen any lose dirt leaving the site.
Commissioner Caldwell asked if there was language they could add as a condftion to
this regarding this topic?
Commissioner Henninger stated they already have the authority, they Just need to ask
their inspector to go out and ask them to do something to take.care of this problem.
Ms. Adams explained that was correct. She did not think they needed to add any
conditions, but they will step up their enforcement of the eroslon problem. Baldwin
does need to make positive moves on their own. Their Inspector can only do so much.
They are expected to follow the conditions of their Grading Plan and Baldwin is
obligated to do their part.
Commissioner Caldwell stated ft has not been done so far because there has been no
request. At this point, Just saying it will not give him any assurances that it will be taken
care of. He asked ff they were going to see to k that they put on the polymer and
control eroslon?
Ms. Adams Indicated that was correct.
lr
Commissioner Taft stated one of the residents suggested phasing that can be done. He
asked N that was feasible.
Mr. Freeman explained that 99% of park Improvements wore on the Baldwin Company
property. There will not be a useable park until they have spent all of the money per se.
He did not see that as a viable option.
Mr. Mayer stated for his comfort he would like additional wording pt4 (n under item "c" ~
related to the performance bond. In discussions with the City Attorney's Office they
came up with some additional language to the bond that is In place at present. He
thought the foliowing ..girding should be put into the condftion: 'If principal falls to
perform the work on its part, Surety shall perform the work or have work performed at
Surety's expense. Clry shall not be required to perform the work and seek
reimbursement.'
He explained basically, ft takes the responsibility for the development of the park as a
contractor away from the City and requires the Surety or the bonding company to do ft
and that would increase his comfort level with the performance bond.
Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, stated there is also some additional language for ~
Condition No. 77a. The second sentence beg!ns: Shouid park construction not begin
by that date, to add the following language: and proceed on a schedule to ef/ect J
compietlon by January 31, 1997,' etc. f
~ 06-01-94 ?;
Page 16
s
~i
;;
Ms. Adams stated the Baldwin Company presented a proposed phasing plan for the ;~
development of the slopes adjacent to the park and this was their first opportunity to see
i their phasing plan. At this time this schedule would be unacceptable to the Public
' Works Department. She explained particulady it appoars that they are asking to delay
the largest slopes which are labeled 'D' and 'G" on their exhibit well Into 1997.
She further stated they would really be looking for a development of those slopes wffh
the next phase of development on Tract 14071 (the condominium she). They would
make one of two suggestions. Regarding the Phasing Plan: That they have a chance to
do more review and work wfth the Baldwin Company and bring it back to the
Commisslon as a Report and Recommendation item in about 30 days after the ,i
Improvement of this amendment. I
Commissioner Messe stated as he understands h, they are not approving the Phasing
Plan. He thought they just presented h and it is not cast in concrete. That is not what
they are discussing today. However, ff Ms. Adams has a chance to work with them,
then perhaps h should come to the Commission.
Ms. Adams stated deflnftely ft should come back as a Report and Recommendatlon item
and it does affect many homeowners surrounding tf;e property and she would hate to
see ft delayed too long.
Commissioner Messe stated anything they do today will not affect the slopes involved.
She suggested they add a condtion that says '30 to 60 days after approval of the I'
amendment that it be brought back to the Commisslon as a Report and
Recommendatlon item.' That way they would have a chance to do a more thorough
- review.
Commissioner Henninger stated he thought the point is that the Phasing Plan for the
landscape that goes with the condo is efther a condition of the Specffic Plan or ft is a
condtion of the Tract Map or a condition someplace else that is not on the agenda
today. He asked ff there was a condition that allows them to govern their phasing of
that landscaping and ff so where is ft and what process do they normaNy go through to
approve that sort of Phasing Plan?
Natalie Meeks, Public Works-Engineering. Shb explained what is typically done in these ~
developments, is prior to occupancy of the adjacent condos, they are requiring those
adjacent slopes to be fully landscaped wffh permanent landscaping irrigation. The park
site happens to fall Into that tract but there are no adjacent homes. It is the adjacent
park site which will not be completed for a number of years at this point.
She further stated the Public'Norks Department is concerned wffh the long term erosion
of these slopes ff they are left until park she completion and that is why they are
requiring a special Phasing Plan on this. Generally r is based on occupancy of the
adjacent unfts, they do not have that in this case. They nave a bare park sfte that will sft ~
there for a number of years and that is why they are concerned wffh the slopes that are
surrounding ff. There is one slope in particular that drains down into some lots wfthin
the Woodcrest Development that would probably present a problem ff left there fora
number of years. She added even ff h is hydroseeded, they think ft is a better Idea to ;I
put in permanent landscaping wfthin a reasonable amount of time.
i
~ 06-01-94
Page 17 t
~!
Y
~1
Commissioner Henninger stated what we have on the agenda today is an amendment to
r'~ the Specific Plan. If there was a need to address the phasing of the landscaped slopes,
they could do k today.
Ms. Mann explained as long as they find a nexus between the condkion they are
replacing and the request that is before them and indicate that on the record, for
example, that the slopes are adjacent to the park.
Commissioner Messe stated they heard as testimony, so as a result of what they are
doing today, they could ask for a Phasing Plan to come back to the Commission in 30
days as a Report and Recommendation kem aker approval ff today's action is approved.
Ms. Meeks stated they can discuss k wkh Baldwin and make some revisions to this plan
that they think k is appropriate based on delaying the park she and getting an adequate
Phasing Plan for the surrounding slopes.
Ms. Mann explained they may wish to recall that the Planning Commission will not be
the ones that take final action on an amendment to the Specific Plan. They will be
making a recommendation to the Cky Council and they may want to phase that
condklon based upon whatever decision the Cky Council ultimately makes, i.e., the
timing for that.
Maryanne Bourke (SP?) stated there are a lot of people that four wheel drive that area at
night. If they say driving on k affects that, k is not going to work. She can see fire
headlights at night. It Is a wide open field that people have free access to and there is a
lot of dirt riding because k Is left as a dirt field.
! Commissioner Caldwell asked what the people could do to protect themselves from
erosion?
Ms. Meeks stated if there is an erosion problem that the residents are concerned wkh,
they should call their Field Office and the Field Engineer who is on the she everyday can
give direction to the job superintendent to make those corrections. She gave them the
phone number. They will require them to re-polymer k or replace sandbags, etc. She
further explained H k is criminal behavior they need to call the Police Department.
Commissioner Caldwell explained they need to find a reasonable way to Iimk their
discomfort until the park ske is developed. Therefore, the residents need to work wkh
Engineering to find solutions to the problem.
Chairman Peraza reminded those present that the Public Hearing has been closed.
~'
06-01-94
Page 18
i'z
,1
'•i
x
ACTION: Found that the previously certified EIR No. 281 is adequate to serve as the
required environmental documentation for subject request.
{ Amended SP88-2 Open Space/Recreation Plan (Exhibff No. 11) to indicate the
park site designation change from a Neighborhood Park to a Community Park.
Amended Condition Nos. 64, 65, and 77 of Resolution No. 88R-395 to read as
follows:
'64. As required by Condtion No. 138 of Resolution Nos. 88R•144 and 88R-
229, the 12-acre community park site was irrevocably offered for
dedication prior to recordation of Parcel Map No. 87-363 (recordation
date 9/19/88). Prior to the approval of the first final tract or parcel
map adjoining any park area, the precise configuration of the park area
required for dedication and development by the owner/developer shall
be approved by the Department of Parks, Recreation and Community
Services and, ff different from the previously dedicated configuration,
the owner/developer shall provide an irrevocable offer of dedication of
the approved park site prior to recordation of the first final tract or
parcel map adjoining any park area.
65. That consistent with the agreement between the owner/developer and
the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Dopartment,
development of the City's park site shall begin and be developed to
City Park Department standards, subject to Park Department approval
and consistent wfth facilities provided for other similar community parks
within the City. Such Improvements must Include, but shall not ba
~m~~ec: to, Irrigation, landscaping (including turf, trees and ground
c^var~;, walkways, a children's play equipment area, restroom and
pi~•^~: Improvements. Park Department approval shall consist of the
following:
(a) Approval of Landscape Architect and other consultants used to design
the park and prepare the construction documents;
(b) Approval of Master Plan, schematic plans, preliminary plans and final
plans, specifications, cost estimates and other construction documents;
and
(c) Approval of all project materials and products used in constructing the
park and the right of Inspection by City Staff.
Property owner/developer shall also provide consultant(s) who prepared construction
documents for construction observations to Insure the project is constructed as Intended.
77. a. That the owner/developer shall complete the park construction by January 31, 1997. Park
construction shall begin no later than January 2, 1996. Should park construction not begin by
that date and proceed on schedule to effect completion by January 31, 1997, no further
building permits, including residential or commercial uses, will be issued by the City until park
construction is proceeding upon an acceptable schedule agreed to by the Director of Parks,
Recreation and Community Services.
~~ 06-01-94
Page 19
g
h
b. That The Summit shall begin construction of their park site within thirty (30) days of the f
~^, commencement of any construction required of the Sycamore Canyon property
owner/developer in thelr park site located contiguous to The Summit property, regardless of
the number of building permits issued for The Summft.
t
c. That an acceptable form of performance bond, certificate of deposft or other security be
provided for the park improvement. The form and content of sold security shall be subject to
review and approval by the City and such security shall be sufficient to Insure complete
coverage of the park project. This bond will be reviewed annually by the City to Insure
coverage is adequate to Insure the completed park and revised as necessary to meet any
increased costs. Owner/developer shall provide an annual revised cost estimate, subject to the
approval of the Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services, to be used as the basis
for revisions to the security. Thereatier, the cost estimate shall be provided to the City for
approval by January 1 of each year. The security shall be revised, as needed within 30 days
after City approval of the cost estimate. Faliure to provide the cost estimate or revised security
wthin the specH(ed time limits may result in the delay of building permit issuance for residential
or commercial buildings until those issues are resolved. if principle fails to perform the work on
fts part, charity shall perform the work or have work performed at charity's expense. The City
shall not be required to perform the work and seek reimbursement.
d. Should the park not be completed, including completion of the Notice of Completion period, by
January 31, 1997 and all requirements of the County of Orange grant program funding a
portion of the parking lot Improvements and the ballfield lighting installation not be met, the
owner/developer shall be responsible for an addftlonai $125,000 in County funding should that
funding be lost due to non-performance by the owner/developer.
e. The owner/developer shall send letters, as approved by the Director of Parks, Recreation and
~~ Community Services, to all Summit residents and to the Homeowner Association(s) for
Sycamore Canyon indicating that the owner/developer is responsible for the park construction,
the reasons for the delay and a schedule of events to occur in the future. A representative of
the owner/developer shall be Identified as a contact person for additional information as
necessary." This will take place no later than January 1, 1995.
Added the following condition of approval:
That within sixty (60) days from the date of this resolution, a landscaping and irrigation phasing plan
should be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a'Report and
Recommendation" item.
VOTE: 6.0 (Commissioner Mayer absent)
06.01-94
Page 20
y
i
4a. CenA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Previously Approved) Continued to
4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT June 27, 1994
4c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3245 (Readvertised)
OWNER: DENNIE I. DYER and MAJELINE B. DYER, NORWALK
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 n.sz
acre located on the east side of Rose Street an:
approximately 390 feet south of the cente;;ine of Santa
Ana Street and further described a; 032 South Rose
Street.
To amend or delete a conditirn of approval pertaining to the time
limitation of a previously approved auto body shop.
Continued frcrn the April 4, 1994 Planning Commission meeting.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO.
FOLLG~JING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED
'~~ OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Continued subject request to the June 27, 1994 Planning Commisslon meeting In order for the
petitioner to provide a complete submittal package for staff review and to appropriately
readvertise eub)ect request.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Mayer absent)
06-01-94
Page 21
I
Sa. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Previously Approved) Approved
5b. CONDITIOWAL USE PERMIT N0.3554 (Readvertised) Denied extension of
time
OWNER: EDGA ENTERPRISES, 1990 Westwood Bivd., Los
Angeles, CA 90025
AGENT: BYONG KEE KENT HONG, 2801 E. Chestnut Ave.,
Orange, CA 92667
LOCATION: 1490 South Anaheim Boulevard (Prestigio Towers Bar
and Grill). Property is approximately 0.95 acre located at
the northeast corner of Cercitos Avenue and Anaheim
Boul~•iard
Request for modiFlcation or deletion of a condkion of approval
pertaining to the Iimftation of time of an existing restaurant with on-
premise sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC94
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED
OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION:
~.
l PETITIONER'S COMMENTS:
Byong Hong, 2801 E. Chestnut, Orange, CA. When he started this restaurant, he thought he was
experienced and Invested a great deal of money in the business. Due to his lack of exparinece, he
had some problems. Because they were short of funds, a promoter came in and did a promotion and
that caused problems with the Police Department.
He voluntarily gave up all of the promoters aid oponed the business himself. Because the economy
is very difficult, he had another violation. He gave some further background regarding his business.
He will work wfth the Zoning and Police Departments. Also he is receiving help from a person who
has 20 years experience in marketing. He has made up new plans on how thay are going to proceed
and will help him as a new operator to this business. He asked the Planning Commission to give him
one more chance to make a successful business in the City of Anaheim.
Michael Mirassian, 2024 Fathom Lane, Anaheim, CA. After consulting with Mr. Hong on several
occasions regarding his busir:sss, he prepared a brief plan that would generate the right amount of
business to be able to recoop a portion of his investment and continue to make a profitable monthly
Income.
He has 20 years of experience in the hospitality industry. Approximately 5 of those years were right
here in the City of Anaheim at the Sheraton Anaheim Hotel as a Food and Feverage Director,
Executive Assistant Manager and General Manager for hotels for tha past 8 years.
06-01-94
~ Page 22
He explained that Mr. Hong lacked knowledge about how a business should operate and he lacked
~ knowledge of advertising and marketing to generate business. He has preparsd a plan for him that he
feels, gNen the opportunity, would be able to make a business success and be able to comply with all
of the guidelines, n;les and regulations that are laid out.
Tom Kieviet, Farano am Kieviet, 2100 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA. He is here on behalf of the
undedying property owner, Edga Enterpdses. As the underlying property owner, Edga Is Interested
and concerned wfth the actNfty that has taken place at Prestigio Re<taurant and they are committed to
having Prestiglo or any other tenant to comply wfth all applicable laves, rules, and regulations.
The heating events that happened in March and April were extremely unfortunate and should not be
trNialized. Obvi^usly, the property owner does not uondone any actNfty that would gNe rise to such
events and they have gone on record wfth Prestigio that the previous operations are not in compliance
wfth the terms of the lease and he must operate wfthln the confines of the law.
They have met wfth Code Enforcement and the Police Department !o discuss their concerns and to
discuss ways that Prestigio can address them. It is their understanding that Prestiglo has allowd
promoters to promote events in the past that has brought in an undesirable element of people. He is
no longer allowing outside promoters to take control of the facilftles. He has a new program for
operating the facility that will keep It functioning as it was originally Intended under the CUP that
serves alcoholic beverages.
The changing nature of the area over the past several years has made ft extremely dKffcult to secure a
tenant who can operate a viable business. The existence of a functioning business on the property is
preferable to an empty building. They want the building occupied and operated by a business that is
an asset to the area. They believe that the new operating program should at least be given an
opportunity to be implemented rather than Just shuting ft down totally.
They propose that the existing CUP be extended for a short period of time so as to give the new
program a chance. The new program is Intended to promote a bonaflde restaurant eating place and
will not actively promote the sale of alcoholic beverages. A condition of the new program they would
advocate that frequent inspections by Code Enforcement or the Police Department be provided at the
operator's cost so k is not out of pocket to the City to assure that compliance wfth the condiions that
are Imposed would remain in effec..
They would also consider other conditions that staff may wish to propose so long as ft will be given a
chance to redeem the operation of the business in a manner that is acceptable. Therefore, ft Is
ultimately their request that the Planning Commission either extend the current CUP for a short period
of time or as an alternative, allow the hearing on this extension to be continued so as to give the new
program a chance to operate and prove ftself before the City.
Les Ledereer, one of the owners of Edga Enterprises, 1490 S. Anaheim Blvd. He is also the managing
general partner of the contiguous and adJoining property known as the Anaheim Market Place.
Although there are different ownership Interests, they are very, very concerned about the operations
that have taken place in the past at Prestigio. They want to have a good and viable business
there-one that is an asset to the community. They dfnnfteiy do not want something that creates any
problems or has a bad reputation.
06-01-94
~ Page 23
He explained for that reason not only the owner of Edga Enterprises, but also the adjoining owner, are
,--. concerned about the operations and have addressed them wtth Mr. Hong. He has been persuaded
that he is well intended. Mr. Hong seemed to lack the experience when he took on this venture. He
did not believe in forfetting people who have committed their Iffe savings to an Investment and he did
got want to see him shut down. He does, however, want to see him operate wtthin strict guidelines.
Having said that and believing that he is well Intended, he has instttuted an Unlawful Detainer against
h?m; he has entered into a Stipulation for Judgment wtth him so that within certain confines he ought
to, ff this Commission gives him an extension, permit him to operate. If he operates within those
guidelines he will not be evicted and if he faulters even a little bit, they will evict him.
The Planning Commission has a hammer wtth tt~e conditional use permtt. He was Impressed that he
was willing to stipulate to that. He ast<ed the Commission to grant an extension. He was not certain if
it ahouid be for a year. Everytime he has been before the Commission with a request, their regr: Est
has been granted and they have always performed. They also have a tract record wtth Code
Enforcement and wtth every part of the Ctty administration for keeping their commitments. He does
not make commttments for people he cannot control. He also cannot promise that Mr. Hong will
abide, but he Intends to monitor him very closely-much more closely ttran the City staff is equlped or
financially willing to do.
He knows the Ctty can pull the plug on this business and he knows that that is not in his best interest
and he did not think tt was for the City. TheU requirements may even be tougher than the Ctty. If he
does not comply they will evict him and hop'rfully under their stipulation, work some kind of
arrangement for him to sell his business and recoop his loss. He added he did not want to reap the
beneftt of his forfetture and his Improvemer,',s. His improvements were in the area of $200,000 to
$250,000. These are Improvements that ~,vould be left in the building. He would not feel good about
renting an Improved building and recen+ing higher rent based on his Investment. He is standing
behind him and hopes he can succeed.
Their plan was two fold. One was to allow him to get a new operator. He has met Mr. Mlnassian and
he does have experience. If he spends the time he should be able to make tt run In full compliance of
the conditional use permtt. He was shocked at some of the events that were reported and he thought
there were explanations for some of them and would not trivialize them. They as the owners will
monttor him on a weeMy basis. They discussed with him the possibility of having him pay for City
monitoring. He spoke wtth Officer Gandy and understands that has been done in fire past. He
elaborated.
In summary he stated tt should be a viable and a good business and ane that would be a credit to the
area. It certainly is a business that could be used. In that area of town, having a leased building with
a good business is also good for the City.
OPPOSITION:
Mike Salgado, 2845 W. Ball Road. He is currently the Director of Parents Against A Gang
Environment. He explained they are a grassroots, community based organization. They work with
parents and Jwsnfles involved in gangs as well as the communir/.
This particular nightclub came to their attention back in the middla of October of 1993. Their
organization specializes In street level intervention work, i.e., going Into the neighborhoods, talking to
the gang members and parents. While they were in tha neighborhood, someone rame by and handed
a flyer to the gang members. Ha submitted the flyer to the Commission for their review.
06-01-94
Page 24
,~
'~ ate flyer was inviting them to a party. The party is called a 'Flyer' party which every other City in th(s
~., County has banned. No one wants Flyer parties. This is a classic example of a Flyer party going
directly to the heart of the gangs and taking them into the neighborhood where no one else is willing
t~ go. This goes to show you the type of people who were being invited.
This particular poster was taken off of Fourth and Grand in Santa Ana, close to downtown Santa Ana.
There is nothing on the poster that says there is a restaurant at the premises; there is nothing on the
menu serving foods. This is not a restaurant, it is a nightclub. The management had no intention of
converting k to a restaurant other than to a nightclub to make money off of the people.
They may have changed their format by not using promoters, but until 2 weeks ago, they had an
occupancy of about 65'k street gang members predominately out of the City of Santa Ana. There
have been numerous incidents that they call isolated inckents. These are not isolated incidents, this
is a breeding ground and a haven for this particular type of violence.
Anaheim Blvd. is a main thoroughfare to and from the City of Garden Grove besides State College
Blvd. and Harbor Blvd. You never can tell when someone will be InJured in a drive by shooting or be
killed. Their type of clientele hay not changed. By allowing this business to continue, or at least
monitoring him, you are asking for guaranteed trouble. They may not guarantee anything will happen,
but they want to guarantee that they will monitor him and keep an eye on him.
If the Commission does grant an extension, then they request that there are certain stipulations such
as no live or recorded dance music. There should be no music in there whatsoever. Anyone entering
should be 21 years of age. When h first opened up, ft had a tttie of Mexican Bar and Grill. When he
thinks of a bar, you need to be 21 years of age to go in. They have seen kids as young as 15 flash
fake t8 year old I.D. cards and they let them right on through. People 21 years of age buy alcohol for
people under 21 years of age. The security they have is not going to throw th~sa people out because
they need to raise money. They are In favor of free enterprise, but not at the cost of human life.
He hopes that this Commission can take this all Into consideration before someone gets killed. They
rope off the parking lot and charge $1.00 to park wfthin the parking area. If this is a club, you do not
charge someone $1.00 to park close to the restaurant doors. There are gang members in the parking
lot doing drugs and drinking and none of this is being enforced. They were there 2 weeks ago to
monffor the place. He asked the Commission to reconsider so they can provide a safer community.
Commissioner Caldwell asked ff he believed that once gang members patronize the business, no
matter what they do, as long as it remains some kind of combination of a dinner dance with alcohol,
will ff still attract these individuals?
Mr. Salgado stated they have to take away the attraction. The first attraction is live recorded dance
music as well as concerts they have held in the past. They also make money by having radio stations
promoted. They have people throughout all of southern Calffomia because ft is being announced on
some of the top radio shows.
Commissioner Caldwell asked ff he would be opposed to ff reopening as a 30's big band, i.e., ff they
change the music and format so h did not attract that particular clientele?
Mr. Salgado stated they have no problem witty a restaurant, but no live music and no live recorded
dance music and that would be fine.
Mr. Minassian, stated he is Just as concerned about public safety as the ge~~tieman that Just spoke and
06-01-94
Page 25
1..~
y
i;ie rest of the community. He explained it was Mr. Hong's intention of having a business that was '?
~^ going to operate legitamately. He agrees that the indlvkluals that call themselves promotors do attract 3
the element that a successful business would not stand for. i
This gentleman has obviously not seen the plan that he has prepared for the type of marketing and
advertising that he would do as an operator in that establishment. As they all know, in the City of
Anaheim, and especially at that location, it is very dKflcult to run a successful restaurant by ftself. He
has worked the Disneyland area for many years and he was in the hotel business for many years.
There are a lot of restaurants that are barely survNing. They cannot pay their rent or purchase the
necessary product to maintain a menu.
In order to have a restaurant that is successful, you must provide some kind of a draw and that draw
Is offering some sort of entertainment. Entertainment such as comedy or jau with dinner. T'nat would
appeal to an entirely different clientele and would provide a restaurant facility for the community that is
advertised in the Orange County register or KEZY total radio station. There is nothing wrong wfth
advertising on a Anaheim station that the Anaheim community listens to and that station and has
nothing to do wfth gangs in Santa Ana or Garden Grove. It would be a whole different market that
they will be appealing to. If Mr. Salgado would read the plan he would see that the format would
change completely.
Commissioner Messe stated he Just glanced over the plan because they Just received it. It would
appear that they are not going to be charging for admission anymore.
Mr. Mlnassian stated they would not.
Commissioner Messe asked then for examplo they would come in for d!nner at 5:30p.m. and there
would be a comedy act?
Mr. Mlnassian stated the concept would be a buffet. They would like an international buffet that offers
a variety of different hems on a dally basis. There would be a set charge for the buffet itself and then
they would set the time frame for a show in the evening. Food service would continue. An a la carte
menu for that area was not cost efficient.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
DISCUSSION:
Investigator, Jim Gandy, Anaheim Police Department. He stated he generated a memo to the
Planning Commission regarding the activity that has occurred at this business. He explained a year
ago October, based upon prior experience with different busineses similar to this, they could see the
potentiality of problems. The Police Department talked it over and decided that certain conditions
would be advisable to place on this to assure that it would not become what it has become today.
Some of the conditions they asked for are that there should be no alcohol sales after midnight.
They asked for adinner/dance permft which they approved because it was consistent wrth a
restaurant. They placed a condition on that permft that there be no live entertainment or no
entertainment without a valid entertainment permit being issued by the business License bureau. The
ABC License was consistent with th(s. The ABC is filing accusations against the owner of the business
for not having food.
C6-01-94
l,/ Page 26
He explained that one of the conditions that they ask for is that food must be available until closing
~, time. They have never seen food available there. The only food they have ever seen was after some
conversations that Code Enforcement had with Mr. Hong with some trays of food that was out. He
stated one night he was there wfth ABC around 12:30a.m. to see ff they were selling a~~ohol. They
sent 2 people over there and they were charged $20.00 each to walk in the door. When they asked
what the $20.00 was for they were told it was to cover the food charge, however, the food had been
consumed hours before that time, but they were stili charging $20.00. That seemed to be in violation
of the dinner/dance permft.
They have violated several of the conditions and they have recommended to Business License that the
dinner/dance permit be revoked for violating the conditions.
He stated they do respond to shootings that occur within the City of Anaheim. As many as 22 officers
were at the scene of one of the shooting incidents for almost an hour. There was a large crowd in the
parking lot and they had to have officers respond. He explained in the City of Anaheim ff you have 22
officers committed far an hour or more to clean out a parking lot, k has a severo Impact upon the
ability of the Poilce Department to respond.
They have had 61 calls for service since it opened up. Twenty-six calls were for fights or assults. If
this business calls on an assult and battery, they do not send just one officer.
He stated there are a couple of documented inc!~'snts where persons requested their security to call
the Anaheim Police Department regarding criminal activity. In those Instances they were denied and
those people came to the front counter of the Police Department. These are in addition to the 61
tails.
He stated the last time one of the officers was out there, he went in and again they were in violation.
~ r ` This took place on April 30th. The officer was aware that they had a condition that they could not sell
alcohol after midnight. They went In and spoke with Mr. Hong. The comment in the report was:
Mr. Hong stated he knew he could not sell after midnight, but he needed the money and he was only
open 2 nights a week to keep the City happy.
Mr. Gandy stated ff you keep the City happy being open 2 nights a week, what will happen 3 weeks
from now when he is approved for another yeaf~ Wili he go back to what he was before? fie has not
abided by the condtlons imposed. 11 they piece more conditions will he abide by the new condtlons?
Ha stated he does like Mr. Lederer and he has made comments and promises in the past and has
agreed wfth. those. He has never come back and said he would not do what he said he would do. If
he was not here, the conditions placed on the CUP will still be there. If Mr. Lederer sells the property,
will the next person enforce those conditions?
Sargent Mike Patterson, Vice Detail. He stated since Mr. Hong has been operating, he has been
operating this business as a nightclub arxf not a restaurant and this is the Issue Here. He explained
they have monitored the facility on several occasions and have begin Inside wfth ABC and there was
little or no food available inside the restaurant. At one time he did have a bullet, however, when
Officer Gandy went in there, the food was gone and looked like h had been eaten within an hour or
two and no more food was available.
06-01-ff4
~ Page 27
He stated he sees in the Concept Overview, he has p!anrad straight buffets on different nights. He
~~ expressed his concern that once they pay to get in, once the food is gone K is gone and you are there
for the entertainment. He did not think it would be run as a legkimate restaurnt. The police problems
they have had In the past have been serious wfth 3 shootings with six people shot. This is the kind of
activity they are trying to alleviate at this business.
Bruce Freeman, Code Enforcement. He stated in their packet they have a memo dated Apri128th.
Code Enforcement, in conjunction with the Police Department have been out there on several
occasions. They have been to the location on numerous occasions during the past several years.
Speciflcaily the memo po(nts out an inspection that was made on March 26th where Code
Enforcement staff went in, made the inspections, made contact and the results of those Inspections
are noted.
The business owner was advised. The Zoning records indicate that the business was approved as a
restaurant serving alcoholic beverages. He was Issued a notice because he was not serving food or
operating as a restaurant.
After this incident on Aril 7th, again Cade Enforcement staff went to the location to conduct another
inspection. (He noted they have 10 items listed on the memo to the Commission).
The memo indicates that the patrons at that time were being charged $8.00 cover charge. Personnel
were being searched at the front door; employees were preparing a small amount of food, but not
sufficient to indicate that a restaurant was in operation. Food was not available on the main floor-the
food was upstairs. The roof sign indicates it is a nightclub. That was on April 7th. On March 26Th,
the sign on the front of the business said Bar and Grill.
As it had been indicated, the use permit that was issued was for a restaurant with alcoholic beverages.
Mr. Hong was again advised on Apr(I 7th, that his CUP was Issued as a restaurant, however, ff he
wished to operate a nightclub, a new CUP would be required.
Based on their experience wfth the location, not just this particular use, but uses prior to this, the
same senario continues to reappear no matter what type of operation is there.
Commissioner Caldwell stated he is not in favor of closing any business down unless h is a detriment
to the health, s: `9ty and welfare of the community and this business has been documented that it has
been that. He did not think it is the time and place for them to review what may be a different use, so
he would recommend that they deny this CUP and let Mr. Hong and Mr. Minnasian provide
information to staff as to this CUP and let tham analyze h and bring h back wfth the appropriate
conditions.
Commissioner Boydstun stated she thought thay should mention that when this CUP was Issued they
were asked to submit a letter requesting to terminate the CUP before and that also has never been
done.
Mr. Hong stated he had a copy of the letter making the request.
Commissioner Boydstun stated staff did not have the letter.
Commissioner Henninger stated i.,: has a oli;htl; di"erant view. He expla{ned the CUP was a CUP for
simply a restaurant with an on-sale pem t anc~ the dh r»r'dance was done by a separate City permit.
The quickest way to address this problem •.a~~!uld !:= t,^ -.~tan7 the CUP on the condftlons that they
06-01-94
,~ Page 28
voluntarily surrender their dinner/dance and cease that, and that they shut down the restaurant for 30
~ days and reopen as a simple restaurant wkh on-sale. He could see extending the CUP under those
condkions.
Commissioner Messe stated he has heard testimony today that they could not exist under those
condtions. He would agree wkh Commissioner Caldwell in this case, i.e., to deny the request. He
stated Mr. Mlnassian described himself as an outsider looking In. It did not sound like he was
anything but the writer of a plan. He thought for the public's safety, health and welfare this business
does not belong here.
Commissioner Caldwell stated the present use has been a bad one and he is in favor of denying the
CUP and having staff, along wkh the applicant, look at k as a new use and bring k back as a new
CUP. The Commission, Code Enforcement and the Police Department can review k wkh staff and
determine ff that is what they want to do based on the history. He does not want to deny him a
chance to run the business, but at this point, he Is not in the posklon to review this particular
application that was handed to them today. Staff should look at k as k has some serious infractions.
Mr. Kieviet asked for clarkication ff procedurally, would k be possible, as opposed to a totally new CUP
application being filed, ff this one could somehow be continued and requested to be modHied to
conform to the progrem that is being offered to avoid the need to inkiate an entirely new CUP
process. Commissioner Henninger asked what his response would be to the proposal he made?
Mr. Kieviet stated on behalf of the landlord, they would want to have a viable business. He stated his
proposal does make some sense because k is truly Ilmking k to Just a CUP, but k is apparent that a
restaurant by kself will not fly.
Commissioner Tak stated perhaps we should ask the applicant that question also. It seems like that
~~~ would be a pretty decent proposal.
Mr. Hong stated he spoke wkh a couple of business consultants. He tried to open strictly as a
restaurant. They advertised for lunch hoping someone would walk in. Some days they had 10 people
having lunch and there were days when no one came for lunch. He wasted tons of food just by
opening.
He stated Mr. Gandy commented that the food sales must be more than the sale of alcohol. The only
way they can do this Is to have a buffet where people must pay to come in and stay for the
entertainment.
Commissioner Henninger explained that the problem was ha started wkh the wrong assumption. The
permk Is for a restaurant and then added adinner/dance which Is an accessory use to the restaurant
actfvky. They have had testimony, both from Mr. Hong and his attorney, that the basic underlying
problem here Is that this location is not sukable for a restaurant.
Mr. Hong agreed they cannot survive just as a restaurant.
Commissioner Messe stated he needed to establish whether he can get a CUP for nightclub.
06-01-94
Page 29
Mr. Hong stated he does not need to charge a cover charge for a nightclub, however, with the
!'~ restaurant, he charged for the buffet. If people do not want to eat, they have the right to refuse the
' customer. He did not want people to come in, get drunk and cause problems. He wants people to
come in, eat and enjoy their entertainment. He elaborated.
He brought In Mr. Minassian and he understands the problem now. Before he made a mistake. He
does not want to have anyone killed. When the shooting happened he closed up for the rest of the
evening. He stayed open just 2 nights because of the safety of the customers, not to please the Ciry.
He wants to work wfth the Pc~ice and the Ciry. He realizes the problems and wants to make ft work.
The only way to do that is for the Cfty to allow him to have entertainment and dinner together.
He asked for 6 months wfth the new plan to try it out. If something happens then they can close him
down and they can come any day to Inspect. He asked for another chance.
Selma Mann, Deputy Ciry Attorney, stated for the record that a restaurant is a permitted use in this
Zone and the only reason there is a CUP at all is because of the alcohol use in conjunction with the
restaurant and what is before them is not a request for a CUP, but rather Just the request for a deletion
or modification of the conditions of approval that terminated ft in March of this year.
Also, there are some d9flnitions of restaurants. There is one that Is in the Zoning Code that defines an
enclosed restaurant as any establishment which is engaged primarily in the business of preparing and
serving meals, provided that the activity of preparing and serving meals shall be conducted entirely
wfthln a building. The food preparation area for such a restaurant shall be an area permanently
designed for food preparation and shall constftute not less than 25 percent of the gross floor area.
She explained this business also has a dance permit and that ft is regulated by Chapter 4.16 of the
Code. The requirements for this type of establishment include a 13gftimate restaurant which she just
defined and ft goes further to say that there must be served at least one meal of a substantial nature.
For the purposes of this section, a meal is a quantity of any kind of food which not only consists of a
larger quantty of food than that which comprises a sandwhich, soup or salad, but that it consists of a
selection of food which is not susceptible of consumption In the absence of at least some article of
tableware and which cannot be conveniently consumed while standing or walking about. That is in
Section 4.16.050 Subsection .030.
A brief discussion took place regarding the previous CUP. Ms. Mann explained ft has not been
officially terminated and there are grounds for termination of a CUP that may be applicable and that
would need to be a separate action that would be advertised and brought back to the Commission.
Commissioner Messe stated that was a CUP that established a restaw~ant wfth a cocktail lounye and
banquet facilities.
Commissioner Taft stated he was going to vote against the resolution for dental. He would like to see
a very short trial period to see if this could succeed wfth very stringent control paid for by the
applicant.
Commissioner Caldwell stated ha did believe that Mr. Hong wanted to run his business correctly and
he feels Mr. Minassian is on the right track. He hopes the property owner encourages Mr. Hong to
come back to the Commission as rapidly as possible to get the business opened up and make ft a
nrofltable business.
06-01-94
~ Page 30
i
ACTION: Approved Negative Deciaratlon
Denied request to modffy or delete Condkion No. 23 of Decision No. ZA9251 adopted in
connection wkh Condkional Use Perrnk No. 3554.
Condkional Use Permk No. 3554 expired on March t, 1994.
VOTE: 5-1 (Commissioner Tak voted no and Commissioner Mayer was absent)
l ,,,~
..,, ,~
06-01-94
Pane 31
~'
6a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 3 No action
6b. VARIANCE N0.2676 (Readvertised) Approved amendment
to condkions of
OWNER: STAN HAHNE C/0 Paui Kott, 1225 W. Lincoln Avenue, approval
Anahelm, CA 92805
AGENT: DIEGO BARRIGA C/0 DIEGO'S BODY SHOP, 734 N.
Anaheim Blvd., Anahelm, CA 92805
LOCATION: 734 North Anaheim Boulevard IDfeoo's Body Shoa).
Property is approximately 0.18 acre located on the east
side of Anaheim Boulevard and approximately 337 feet
south of the centerline of North Street.
Modification or deletion of a condkion of approval pertaining to the
utillzatlon of a paint spray booth in con)unction wkh a previously-
approved auto repair and body shop.
VARIANCE RESOLUTION N0. PC9469
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MIND ES.
OPPOSITION: None
!~ PETITIONER:
Paul Kott, 1225 W. Lincoln, Anaheim, CA, representing the owner of the company.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
DISCUSSION:
Commissioner Boydstun asked for clarffication k there was going to be any retail?
Mr. Kott Indicated there would be no retail.
Chairman Peraza asked fi they determined where the paint booths would be?
Mr. Kott ind(cated the booths would be In the rear.
(.,.J
ACTION: Approved subject request.
Deleted Finding No. 4 and Condklan No. 4 of Resolution No. PC75.51.
VO'i'r: 5-0 (Commissioners Henninger and Mayer were absent)
06-01-94 `
Page 32 I{
t
,~
I~
7a. CEGA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Previously approved) Continued to
7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3500 (Readvertised) June 13, 1994
OWNER: C. DARLE HALE REVOCABLE TRUST, Attn: C. Dade Hale,
Trustee, 3910 E. Coronado ST. Unit-B, Anaheim, CA 92807
AGEPR: ZACHARY M. ANDERSON, Capitol Industrial Properties,
INC., F~iacentia, CA 92670-6972
LOCATION: 4001 E. L.a Palma Avenue. Property is approximately 0.95
acre located at the northeast comer of La Palma Avenue and
Van Buren Street.
Petftloner r.quests deletion of co!ditions of Tpproval pertaining to parking
requirements and time limitation for a previously approved industrially
related offlce building.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0.
1.,,~
i.,/
FOLLOWING IS A St1MMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED
OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
ACTION: Continued subject request to the June 13, 1994 Planning Commission meoting in order to
readvertise the request to Include a parking waiver and allow the petftioner an opportunlry to
prepare a revised parking study.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Mayer absent)
06-01-94
Page 33
~.
t .
1~
8a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved
Sb. RECLASSIFICATION NO.93.94~ Granted
8c. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Approved
8d. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.3686 Granted
8e. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 14952 Approved
OWNER: S.C. DISTRICT COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS, C/0 DECARLO &
CONNOR, 500 S. Virgil, 4th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90020
AGENT: JAMBOREE HORSING CORP., Attn: Ula Lleberthal, 17200
Jamboree Blvd., Ste. 0, Irvine, CA 92714
LOCATION: hoe W. Vermont Avenue. Property is approximately 2.78 acres
located cn the south side of Vermont Avenue and approximately
190 feet east of the centedlne of Cftron Street.
To reclassify subject property from the RS-A-43,000 (Resldential/Agricultural)
zone to the RM-2400 (Residential, Multi•Family) zone.
To construct a 2-story, 48•unft, "affordable" RM•2400 condominium complex
wfth waiver of minimum number of required covered parking spaces.
To esta`v;ish a 1-lot, 48-unit condominium subdivision.
RECLASSIFICATION RESOLUTION NO. PC9470
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC9471
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO DE CONSIDERED
OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
1 concerned person
PETITIONER:
Lila Lieberthai, Director of Jamboree Housing Corporation. Their Corporation is a non-profft 501C3
Corporation wfth an 1 t member volunteer Board of Directors who are committed to the provision of
affordable housing for low and moderate income households In Orange County.
She thanked the Cfty for the incredible amount of time, energy and resources they provided them In
designing this development so that ft Is the best possible housing for fts buyer and a major new asset to
the community. They have been working wfth staff for about 2 years and they are most appreciative for the
help and Input they have provided.
They are excfted about providing a well designed, qualfty home ownership pro(ect-affordable to moderate
income families who are currently renting in this area. There are no other new home developments in this
neighborhood that she knows of that offers the kind of qualfty homes at the kinds of prices they are going
to be offering to the average famlly renting in this srea that will be affordable to the average famlly.
06-01-94
Page 34
They are equally excfted about the belief that this new home development will act as a catalyst to
encourage the infusion of private and public dollars to renovate and rejuvenate this older, rental
~ neighborhood.
They decided not to maximl:.e the densty allowed; not to build stacked flats and to avoid the sea of
carports so many high density projects have. They could have had more density and more units, Instead
they spent enormous time and energy looking at how they could produce an attached condominium
project that provided the amenftles, the privacy, the back yards, the attached garages of a detached single-
family home. They know that tho buyers, small to medium size families, want as much of the quality,
convenience and amenfties of a detached single-family home as they can afford to buy.
She further explaino~ that some of the features they ara very pleased with are: no one is living over
anyone else; every home has at least a one car garage wfth its own private entry to the home; carriage
units have no families living below them and they have private decks and private garage access.
Their townhomes (about 6596 of their project) have private yards-some of them are es largr: as 30' X 30'
and private garage access; all of the roofs will be concrete file roofs with a Iffe time warranty; they will have
a lovely equipped playground for children where they can be seen and supervised by adults; and they have
a large, private open space for owners to enjoy.
In keeping with their overall goat to provide as many detached home features as they possibly could, they
are asking for the uncovered parking waiver becauss from a design and open space standpoint, and also
for owner's dally convenience, they did not want to have long lines of carports, rather they were Interested
in providing attached garages wfth parking spaces on the driveway in front of the garages, similar to how
single-family detached residences provide parking for residents and their guests.
,,,,, They understand there was some concem about trees along the back wall adjoining the RV Park and they
would be very pleased to plant trees in that area. Also, there was some concem about the west wall
relative to graffiti-again they would be happy to Install vines to alleviate this concem.
They believe that this development is a result of a tremendous partnership wfth the City and a local non-
profit. They believe ttre beneffts to the Cfty, in upgrading an older neighborhood in decline and to Anaheim
home buyers (mostly first time home buyers), will have home ownership opportunftlos close to where they
work. She added this will make all of us very, very proud of this effort.
CONCERNED PARTY:
Dr. Jerry Duer, (phonetically spelled), owner of Harbor RV Park, 1009 S. Harbor. He explainers the entire
length of the south property line of the project, runs contiguous with the RV park. He stated he Just
became aware of this project and has had very little time to review the information, but overall he Ickes the
concept.
He stated he had 3 re~auests or recommendations. The first is to have the anti grafffti code requirement
fully applied or excea<7ed particularly In tha sense of planting screening trees along the southem property
line. He would like to see a contiguous row of trees that are initially at least 6-feet in height that will double
In size at maturity at a minimum.
Secondly, he would recommend that the height of the block wall running along the southern parcel be
Increased from 4-1 /2' or 5' to a minimum of 6' in height.
Thirdly, he suggested that the setback, i.e., the 15 to 20 feet between the building and the southern
property line, be Increased to a minimum of 25 feet.
O6L'1.94
Page 35
His reasoning for the requests is because they do have a grafffti problem. They also have a trespass ;
~ problem through the RV Park. He also expressed his concerns regarding the swimming pool in the RV ?,
Park. Efforts to try to abate kids from coming over the wall, has resulted In the usual kind of mischief and
in some cases vandalism against the RV's and harassment of the tenants and in one case a frontal assault,
Thirdly, reason Is that the proposed structure is a 2-story structure, approximately 15 or 20 feet from the
property fine. Their experience has been that the second story balcony provides an Ideal mllftary outpost
for any 10 year old who wants to bombard the RVs below. It is also a convenient target range for anyone
with a bee bee gun. They had an incident last week and having a row of contiguous trees and increasing
the height of the block wall may help to mitigate the problem.
The fourth point is that the new modern 40-foot motor home buses are diesel driven. Approximately 1096 of
the motor homes are diesel dfiren, and he anticipates that trend becoming increasingly popular. He added
Increasing the setback between the property line to the home may make the Code Enforcement's Job easier
5 or 10 years from now ff that continues.
The one recommendation that he would most Ilke to see is the contiguous rows of trees, Initia!!y at a
minimum height of 6 feet that could double in height at maturity, and that should take care of most of ;`=r
problems.
Hal Woods, Archftect for the project. He clarified on the south property Iina, there are 2-story townhouse
configuration unfts. There are no balconies, so there would be no ability to have children on the second
floor of the rear portion. He further explained that the setback would increase to 25 feet at that point and
they would have to totally redesign the project.
Rick Moore, (phonetically spelled!, American Housing. American Housing will be the builder on the project.
Screening wfth 15-gallon trees was in their concept, but not reflected in the plan. The height of the black
;'~ ; wall, raising N from 4-1 /2' to 6' would not be a problem. He referenced the 25-foot setback. He stated one
of the items mentioned was people Jumping over the wall into the RV Park. According to the plan, all along
the back there are private yards-there is no common area that would be contiguous with ft, therefore, the
only ones that could have access would be the residents.
Commissioner Messe asked for clarftication if the block wall was presently 4-1 /2 feet on both sides or is
there a change In grade?
Mr. Moore explained it is 4-1 /2' on their side and 6' on the petftioner's side.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
AISCUSSION:
Commissioner Boydstun asked !.7r. Duer H they put trees In all of the back yards, would he consider
planting a row of cypress along his skfe of the fence which would give a double buffer, that would grow
nice and tall and no one could throw anything through ft after a year or two?
Mr. Duer stated he did try that before and the trees died. He explained the utilfties run along a trench 3
feet from the property line at the foot of the wall. He added they do plan to put addftional trees farther from
the wall which may have the same benefit.
Commissioner Boydstun reiterated that would give a double buffer iF he would plant them on his side also.
06-01-94
~ ~ Page 36
Chairman Peraza stated he thought that this would be an improvement for the area. The condominium
project is a higher density than he would like to see, but it is an improvement and he knows he would be i
entitled to more under some benefits. ~
The Secretary noted that Commissioner Caldwell's microphone was off or not working, however, he stated
he appreciated their cooperation that they dk1 not build to the maximum or ask for a density bonus.
Commissioner Henninger asked ff there was something they could do to control the noise that might enter
Into the bedrooms from the diesel RVs idling 15 feet away?
Mr. Woods stated for the most part the units will (in complying wfth Tftle 24 which are energy calculatinnsj
will have dual pane windows and that gives a substantial STC rating over the normal single pane window.
With the normal wall construction, most of the problems should be mitigated. The 6-foot high wall should
take care of most of the noise Impact to the rear yard because the noise will travel up and over. The only
problem would ba ff someone opened their windows in the evening. Hopefully the RVs would not be in
operation In the evening.
Commissioner Henninger stated they could start the engine up and let k idle while they are getting ready to
leave. He asked about the vents, etc.
Mr. Woods stated there is a fairly simple cost effective solution that may apply to the units on the rear ,:nd
that is called the "summer switch.` This allows the fan coil to run in the unft and recirculate air without
opening the windows. They could take the ventilation off the front of the unft rather than the rear of the
unft.
Commissioner t;enninger suggested they add those.
i It is noted that the applicant indicated there was not a problem.
Commissioner Henninger stated we will add those as a condition.
Jonathan Borego, Senior Planner, stated the Code does require the 6-foot block wall where the residential
meets nt,K of a commercial boundary. They would recommend that R be measured from the highest grade
and in this case h sounds like h is on the condominlum property. He recommended the following changes
to the condftions of approval.
He referenced Condition No. 8, page no. 11 of the staff report regarding recordation of the covenant fn
regards to school overcrowding. He recommended that it be moved to the rezoning application from the
conditional use permft application.
In addftion he wanted to add a condition to Page No. 11 requiring the Tract Map be rocorded prior to the
issuance of a building permit for the condominlum development.
For the record, ft Is noted by the Secretary that Commissioner Caldwell'sl mlcronlione is still not working
properly.
06-01-94
Page 37
ACTION: Approved Negat(ve Declaration
Grnted Reclassiflcatlan No. 93-94-10 and added the following condkion:
That an unsubordinated covenant shall be recorded wkh the Office of the Orange County
Recorder agreeing to provide the buyer of each dwelling unk wkh written Inforrnatlon
obtained from the school district(s) pertaining to possible overcrowded condkions and busing
status of the school(s) serving the dwelling unit. 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 DNision.
Approved Waiver of Code Requ(rement
Granted Condkional Use Permk No. 3666, as follows:
Deleted Condkion No. 8.
Added the following new condkions:
That the tract map shali be recorded prior to the Issuance of a building permk for the
condominium project,
That a six foot high wall shall be provided as measured from the highest grade at the south
side of the property.
That dual pane windows and a summer swkch ventilation system shall be provided for the
proposed unks located at the south end of the property and facing the RV Park.
That canopy trees shall be planted on the south property Ilne in a manner to create a solid
~-• landscape screen adjacent to the RV Park.
t
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Mayer absent)
06-01.94
Page 38
9a. CEQA WEGATIVE DECLARATION
9b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
90. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3685
OWNER: EUCLID SHOPPING CENTER, 2293 W. Ball Road, Anaheim, CA
92804
AGENT: FANCHER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, 1342 Bell Avenue, Ste 3•k,
Tustin, CA 92680
LOCATION: 1600 West Katella Avenue. Property is approximately
18.6 acres located at the southeast comer of Katella Avenue
and Euclid Street.
To permR a 1,989 square foot drive through restaurant within an existing
commercial retail center with waNer of minimum number of parking spaces and
minimum landscape setback adjacent to a residential zone boundary.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0.
continued to
June 27, 1994
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED
OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
~ ~ Chairman Peraza stated they received a letter requesting a continuance.
ACTION: Continued subject reouest to the June 27, 1994, Planning Commission meeting.
VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioner Taft declared a canAict of Interest and Commissioner Mayer was absent)
Mt+,
O6-0i-94
Page 39
Approved
,., 10a. ^°^A NEGATIVE DECLARATION Denied
(, 10b. WAIVER OF CODE RE iREMENT Grented, in part
loc. ~NDITIONAL USA PERMIT NO. 3682
OWNER: KEN G. and JOAN T. DEI, 6971-A Lincoln Avenue, Buena Park, CA
90620
AGENT: DAN HARE, L A. CELLULAR, 17785 Center Court Drive North,
Cerritos, CA 92701-4514
LOCATION: 2~~" West Llncoin Avenue (Unit H1. Property Is
approximately 1.2 acres located on the south side of Lincoln
Avenue and the west side of Laxore Street •:^•d
approximately 325 feet east of the centedn.~ of Beach
Boulevard.
To permit an unmanned 1,200 square foot cellular telecommunications facilfty
within an existing 15,300 square foot commercial retail center with one 60-foot
high monopole wfth waiver of required screening of roof-mounted equipment.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. PC94-72
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF 7HE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED
OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
PETITIONER:
Dan Hare, employee of the Los Angeles Cellular Company, 17785 Center Court Drive. They are regulat
very pooC to non-existent. Thle servi ells used by emergency serv ces such as police and flrle. tThey ayes
the service provider for all of the call boxes on the freeway. He briefly explained the project.
In order to minimize the visual impact they plan to paint the pole a light gray for ft to bland in wfth the
horizon. The pole will be located 4o the rear of the f:roperty and to the side, approximately 120 feet to the
nearest resident as the Zoning Ordinance requires.
back to the center so there it behmoresparking mthe areaQrTher fac9lfty does no9lnt rfe~e wfth any king
commercial television or any commercial radio broadcast and makes no noise.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
DISCUSSION:
Commissioner Boydstun asked if there was any reason they could not screen the roof-mounted equipmen
Mr. Hare explained they were going to screen ft.
06-01.94
Page 40
~-'
Commissioner Beydstun stated then we can do away wfth the waiver.
It was determined that the monopole was not obtrusive.
Commissioner Messe asked if they were going to have a standby power generator?
Mr. Hare explained they are planning on having standby generators at many of their facilRies.
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
Denied Waiver of Code Requirement because the petftioner agreed at the public hearing to
screen the roof mounted equipment.
Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3682, in part.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Mayer absent)
t.;'
'y
06-01'94
Pago 41
11a. CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to
11 b. CONDITIONAL~ISE PERMIT N0.3683 June 27, 1994
OWNER: UKAWA CORPORATION OF CALIFORNIA, 1010 W. Chapman,
#200, Orange, CA 92666
AGENT: KEN F. MUDGE, Horizon Property Manager, 1010 W. Chapman,
#200, Orange, CA 92668; RICHARD R. MILEWSKI, 4421 E. La
Palma, Anaheim, CA 92807
LOCATION: 4421 E. La Palma Avenue. Property is approximately 4.22
acres located on the north side of La Palma Avenue and the
west side of Lakeview Avenue
To permit an automotive modification (van conversion) facility.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0.
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED
OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
~~ ACTION: Continued subJect request to the June 27, 1994 Planning Commission meeting in order to
readvertfse the request to Include a parking waiver.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Mayer absent)
06-Ot-94
Page 42
~~
12a CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved
12b. WAIVER OF CODE REOUIREMENT Approved
12c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3684 Granted
OWNER: AETNA LIFE INSURANCE CO., Attn: Julia Viskanta, i74D
Technology Dr., Ste. 600, Attn: San Jose, CA ~'~110
AGENT: JOHN THOMAS C/0 WARE & MALCOMB ARG~'.iTECTS, 16002
Cowan, Irvine, CA 92714
LOCATION: Property consists of 2 uarcels of Iand• 525 'North Muller
tre t. Parcel 1: Approximately 2.06 acres located at the
northwest comer of Corporate Way and Muller Street. S,y25
North Muiler. Parcel 2: Approximately 2.28 acres located on
the north side of Corporate Way and Ic~cated approximately 368
feet west of the centerline of Muller St!•eet. 1975 West
,~roorate Wav.
To permit a private business school, Including off-site parking facilhies with
waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC94-73
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE CONSIDERED
~- OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
PETITIONER'S COMMENTS:
Larry Harmsen, agent for the owner of the property.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
DISCUSSION:
Commissioner Messe asked about the Ilmftatlon on the number of students. He asked who checks on the
number of students?
Jonathan Borrego, Senior Planner, stated typically the only way this would actually be inspected is ff there
were a complaint.
Commissloner Messe stated in the past there have been complaints on this operation in another City
where the project was under parked.
Commissloner Henninger suggested that they add a condition that says ff there should be a need for Code
Enforcement inspections that the operator shall pay for those inspections; and because the proposal Is for
some off-site parking, that a recorded agreement be to the satisfaction of the Trafffc Engineer and the City
Attorney.
06-01-94
Page 43
Mr. Hare stated R Is all part of the lease agreement and ft will be a separate legal parcel. However, they
r-~ would be happy to record ft designating chat parking for the lease as long as the lease is in place.
Commissioner Messe stated in addftion, the parking plan will be submftted to the Trafflo Engineering
Department so they can approve ft.
Commissioner Taft asked ff this was a pdvate business school?
Lou Osborne, Director of the ITT Technical Instftute stated they will be relocating from Buona Park to
Anaheim. Currently they offer 3 programs. Two are Associate Degree programs which range from 18
months to 2 years. They also have a third program which is a Bachelor of Applied Science Degree in
Electronics Engineering technology.
Commissioner Messe addressed Mr. Yaida, Traffic Engineedng and stated on Condftlon No. 5, page S, ft
shows conformance with the latest revision of Engineering Standards 436 and 602 pertaining to parking
standards and driveway locations. He asked ff he would be able to approve the plans wfth compact stalls
being as short as they are?
Mr. Yalda stated they have to show that they meet the parking standards which is 8-1/2' X 16' and also
provide adequate handicap spaces as required by the American Disability Act. He added by looking in at
the She Plan they do meet the standards.
Jonathan Borcego, Senior Planner, suggested to add language to Condftlon No. 5. i hey would 11ke to
recommend that the landscaping for the proposed parking area be shown an thzt plan as well. The plan
did not show the precise landscaping for the proposed parking area and tti~y would like that shown on the
plan as well so they can take a look at to see ff ft meets the landscaping requirements.
;~ Mr. Hare indicated they would and In addition, they would also show security lighting.
Mr. Borrego asked H that would also change Condition No. 1? That condition reads a little bft different
than the direction the Commission is going in right now.
Commissioner Henninger asked about the number of staff members.
Mr. Yalda stated because there is only one staff member per so many students, the number of staff really
does not make any differo~,..e, but ft does Impact the number of students.
It was determined that the number of parking spaces would be .93 per student.
06-01-94
Pago 44
ACTION: Approved Negat(ve Declaration
n Approved Waiver of Code Requ(rement (.93 spaces por studei.t)
Granted Condftional Use Permft No. 3664
Modified Condftlon Nos. 1 and 5 to read as follows:
1. That a minimum of .93 parking spaces per student shall be provided.
5. That plans shall be submtted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his
review cod approval showing conformance wfth the latest revision of Engineering
Standard Plan Nos. 436 and 602 pertaining to parking standards and drNeway locations
(including landscaping wfthin the proposed parking araa). Subject property shall
thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance wfth said plans.
Added the following Condftlons:
That the applicant shall pay the cost of any future Code Enforcement inspections which may
be needed to address and resolve any existing Code violations.
That a recorded reciprocal parking agreement, satisfactory to the Traffic and Transportation
Manager and to the Cfty Attorney, shail be submitted guaranteeing shared parking between
the subject parcels.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Mayer absent)
~~
... ~~
O6-01-94
Page 45
(^
~ 13a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13b. ENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.335
Approved
Granted
A City-initiated amendment to the land use E{~ment of the Anaheim General
Plan redesignating the subject area from Medl:~m Density Residential to
General Industrial. Subject area is ircegularly-shaped and consists of
approximately 3.34 acres, generally bounded on the north by Broadway, on
the east by Atchison Street, on the south by the Atchison, Topeka and Santa
Fe railroad right-of-way and on the west by Kroeger Street.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION N0. PC94-74
FOLLOWING IS A SIJMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
CITY INITIATED:
Greg McCafferty, Associate Planner. This is a Planning Commission initiated General
Plan Amendment that the Commission initiated on September, 1993 for the subject
property from the Medium Density Residential designation to the General industrial
designation.
He pointed out that the Redevelopment Commission, at their last meeting, did
approve and recomrnend approval of the subject General Plan Amendment to the
Planning Commission.
Commissioner Henninger clariFled this was afollow-up on a Zone change they did.
Commissioner Boydstun explained there are six houses left on the east side of
Kroeger--one empty and one in the middle of being renovated. Everything else in
that whole area is some type of Commercial.
OTHER DISCUSSION:
Mr. McCafferty stated there is another parcel that is des(gnated as Medium Density
and it is on the MCP Food site at the corner of Atchison St. and Broadway (the
southeast comer) this was not included in the orginal request by the Planning
Commission. He asked ff they wanted them to initiate the GPA on that one as well?
The Commission indicated they would.
ACTION: Approved NegatNe Declaration
Granted General Plan Amendment No. 335
VOTE: 6.0 (Commissioner Mayer absent)
06-01-94
~; Page 46
1
~''
14a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved
14b. r~NERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 337 Granted
A City-inftlated amendment to the text of the land Use Element of the
General Plan restating and clarifying existing provisions contained in the
General Plan relating to Government Code Section No. 65302, subparagraph
(a)
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION N0. PC94-75
FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED OFFICIAL MINUTES.
OPPOSITION: None
CITY INITIATED:
Commissloner Henninger stated this hem is basically clean-up language to the text of
their General Plan,
Greg McCafferty, Associate Planner, stated this Is also a Ciry initiated request that the
GPA fs basically a restatement and clarification of the existing text contained in the
Land Use Element of the plan and the hope is to provide a better understanding of
how building intensity and population density Is set forth in the plan. Therefore, k is
essentially a restatement of the existing teM language and the General Plan.
ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration
Granted General Plan Amendment No. 337
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissloner Mayer absent)
_~~..
06-01-94
Page 47
15. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
f~
A. PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATED REOUEST TO DISCUSS Withdrawn
INITIATING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1301 SOUTH
EMPIRE STREET
Continued from the March 21, April 4, and May 16, 1994 Planning Commission
meetings.
B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3165 -REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION Approved
QF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Dwight R. (to expire 6.5-95)
Belden, 450 Newport Center Drive, Ste. 304, Newport Beach, CA 92660-7640,
requests an extension of time to comply with condftions of approval for
Condftional Use Permit No. 3165 (to permit a commercial retail center and
'on-sale" alcoholic beverages in two proposed restaurants) to exptre June 5,
1995. Property is located at 2430 E. Katella Avenue.
~..
t
C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3262 - REOUEST FOR AN EXTENSION Approved
OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Robert (to expire 4-23-95)
Mickelson, P.O. Box 932, Orange, CA 92666-0932, requests an extension of
time to comply with condftions of approval for Condftional Use Pernik No.
3262 (to permft a carwash facility wfth gasoline sales in conjunction wfth a
commercial retail center) to expire April 23, 1995. Property is located
northwest comer of Weir Canyon Road and Monte Vista Road.
D. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY -Request to determine conformance wfth Determined to be in
the Anaheim General Plan for the proposed lease of office space for the conformance wfth the
Orange County Health Care Agency's Wcman, Infants and Children (WIC) General Plan
Program. Property located at 2137 and 2107 East Bail Road.
06-01-94
Page 48