FEBRUARY 28, 2022
PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES
ITEM NO. 4
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 2022-00008
LOCATION: 920 South Beach Boulevard
REQUEST: A City-initiated request that the Planning
Commission consider the revocation or modification of
Conditional Use Permit No. 2494 for an existing motel (Travel Inn).
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The Planning
Commission will consider whether Class 1 (Existing
Facilities) and Class 21 (Enforcement Actions by
Regulatory Agencies) Categorical Exemptions are the
appropriate environmental documentation for this request under the California Environmental Quality Act
Resolution No. PC2022-048
(Heywood/Perez)
Approved with a modification to
Condition No. 12:
The property owner shall not
“knowingly” rent motel rooms to
persons previously arrested on or
adjacent to the motel premises
for any reason.
VOTE: 6-0
Chairperson Meeks and
Commissioners Heywood, Perez,
Vadodaria, Wolfgramm and White
voted yes.
Commissioner Kring was absent
Project Planner:
Nick Taylor
[email protected]
Nick Taylor, Senior Planner explained this is the second motel that was identified by staff regarding the Rebuild Beach effort. It was previously approved with a CUP that contained one condition of approval and the lack of conditions hinders the city's ability to enforce operational practices designed to improve property maintenance and reduce criminal activity.
The Travel Inn is located at 920 South Beach Boulevard north of Ball Road and consists of 32 rooms. The motel was approved in 1971 with 22 rooms, then a ten-room expansion was approved in 1983, and in 1989 there was approval for a nine-room expansion that was never exercised.
It was selected as a priority site in the Rebuild Beach effort because of the poor property maintenance and significant amount of criminal activity that has proven to be harmful to public health and safety. There has been a dramatic increase in arrests and calls for service at the Travel Inn in recent years. Of the 18 motels on Beach Boulevard, the Travel Inn had the third highest calls for service in 2021. Arrests at the property jumped 67% between 2020 in 2021. Criminal activities include illegal gambling, assault, battery, drug use, firearms possessions, and carjacking. The 2021 photos show and illegal gambling facility, known as a slap house that was observed by police in a Travel Inn room.
FEBRUARY 28, 2022
PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES
Recent Code Enforcement violations include the illegal gambling, homeless encampments, overflowing dumpsters, illegal dumping, overgrown vegetation, construction without permits, holes in walls, pest control, missing window screens, and lack of smoke detectors. He presented photos taken by Code Enforcement staff showing property maintenance violations that create a blighted condition of the property.
Since 2019, Anaheim Fire and Rescue has responded to 42 calls for service for various calls for medical emergencies with approximately double the calls in 2020 and 2021. Specifically, there are calls related drug overdoses or poisoning, assault, mental emotional or psychological issues, unconscious or unresponsive individuals, near drowning, diving or water related injuries, flooding inside the building and cardiac arrests. Fire and Rescue noted that a significant number of resources are spent on Beach Boulevard including the Travel Inn which limits the availability of resources to other parts of the city.
Sergeant Paqua, Anaheim Police explained they didn't realize that the illegal gambling operation was going on for approximately five to six months. They noticed that the parking lot was relatively empty, then all of a sudden it was jam packed with cars and people; there was even overflow parking in the car wash behind the Chevron. It took them so long to find out about the gambling operation because there was a guard that would stand by the dumpster and stop and vet every car that drove in; this is commonly seen in organized crime. The parking lot was full, and everyone was going to the same room. Police didn't know if it was a brothel or drug sales, so they sent some of their undercovers to try to find out what was happening in the room, and they were stopped at the driveway apron. They were asked who they were, who was vouching for them, then they were turned away. He stated he finds it hard to believe that the ownership did not know this was going on.
They obtained a search warrant on the slap house and found gambling machines; that is a reason why the condition for daily cleaning is so important; to make sure there isn't a meth lab or a grow house or slap house in the rooms. Since the search warrant has been served and the gambling operation has been removed, there have been construction crews painting and he no longer sees the guard standing in the lot but he does see prostitution activity in the area.
The management has made steps to remedy the situation, but that doesn't take away from what happened in the past. If the police had not gotten involved the operation would have kept going on.
Mr. Taylor stated the Municipal Code provides seven findings that are related to modification or revocation of a CUP and if one or more apply, the Planning Commission may revoke for modify that CUP. Staff believes this motel has been operating in a manner detrimental to public health or safety so as to constitute a nuisance and that the imposition of additional conditions is reasonably necessary to FEBRUARY 28, 2022
PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES
protect the public peace, health, safety, and general welfare. Accordingly, staff believes three of the findings apply and that the motel operation has been in violation of various statutes, ordinances, laws, or regulations and has been detrimental to public health and safety and constitutes a nuisance. Adding conditions is reasonably necessary to protect public peace, health and safety and general welfare. According to the findings, staff is recommending adding conditions to the CUP to ensure operations that encourage property maintenance and discourage criminal activity. Conditions include providing a security management plan with an annual review, 21-year-old minimum age of guests, on site management 24 hours a day, daily cleaning service, prohibition on short duration room rentals and ensuring regular landscape maintenance, removal of graffiti and trash.
Staff believes that the lack of property maintenance and operation of the Travel Inn has been detrimental to public health and safety and is recommending that the Planning Commission modify the CUP to add the new conditions of approval. In the event that the property owner does not comply, they can pursue compliance through Code Enforcement, possible CUP revocation and or other methods through the City Attorney's Office.
Commissioner Wolfgramm stated his comments from the prior item are the same for this one:
That they revise the requirement for a police approved the security plan Revise wording regarding knowingly renting to people who have been arrested Reduce the room rental age from 21 to 18
Delete daily cleaning to a daily check
Chair Meeks opened the public hearing and invited the property owner to step forward.
Frank Weiser, attorney for the owner stated he doesn't want to have to repeat the same legal arguments that he made in the prior item and asked to incorporate those comments.
Leonie Mulvihill, City Attorney responded that he could incorporate his comments from the earlier item.
Mr. Weiser stated the police officer indicated that the owner has cleaned it up and there has been some remediation; therefore, these conditions shouldn’t be placed on the property. He needs documentary evidence that is competent and meets constitutional standards. It is undisputed that the documentary evidence has not been presented here today. The city should not be allowed to impose conditions on activity that was done in the past. if there is a nuisance and evidence support it, the city can exercise their power to impose a modification or revocation. There's no proof that imposing these conditions won't lead to a revocation. The courts will make the final decision as to whether or not the city of Anaheim adhered to their constitutional duties.
His client is doing the same thing as other motels and they are trying to make it a good property. He is concerned about Code Enforcement checking the rooms because there FEBRUARY 28, 2022
PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES
are fourth amendment issues. His client cannot give the city permission to enter the rooms because it is unconstitutional.
Pravin Ahir, owner of the Travel Inn motel stated he purchased the motel in March of 2021. He stated they've put a lot of time and money to upgrade the motel, but has had an ongoing change of management for the property. He objects to some of the conditions and would like to have more time to fix it.
Chair Meeks asked if the guests only rent rooms one day at a time and will daily service be mandatory.
Mr. Ahir responded that they are going to change it now and they will have their staff checked the rooms daily.
Lee McClements stated he has been a guest of the hotel for two years and the policeman was correct, and the place was a mess in 2021;it was run like a prison yard during the day. In the last four or five months the new owner implemented some changes and now he feels safe on the property. The latest manager has asked him for his credit cards and is also asking for a deposit on all the rooms now. The manager told him if they smoke in the room or have visitors they will lose their deposit and they won't rent to them again. He was never aware of any gambling occurring at the hotel and feels the new owner has been doing a good job at this hotel especially now that it has a security guard.
Lisa Klawe stated she supports the conditions of approval being added to the conditional use permit and it really doesn't appear as though much has been done to improve the hotel.
David Klawe stated the same comments apply to this item as the previous item. The original document that was approved states that they will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare to the citizens of the city of Anaheim. They are not meeting the standard; therefore, they need list of basic rules.
Chair Meeks close the public hearing.
Commissioner Heywood moved the motion and stated he doesn't think anyone on the dais has advocated for revoking the CUP even though some residents want it revoked.
He feels the city's approach is reasonable and a good middle ground and it will help the owners improve their value.
Chair Meeks asked if that included the change to add the word “knowingly” regarding criminal records.
Commissioner Heywood responded yes.
Commissioner Perez second the motion.
FEBRUARY 28, 2022
PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES
Chair Meeks stated she supports the motion, and, for the record this is not about destroying somebody's business, it is about addressing a nuisance in the city and establishing conditions that protect the neighborhood, but also able to operate as a successful, law-abiding business without the criminal activity that is negatively impacting the community. The Commission agrees that these are not unreasonable conditions based on what was presented. The City Attorney has drafted most of the conditions; Commission is being a little more specific with the security plan, but if the owner is already implementing a lot of them, then they should have no problem complying with the requirements, they are not unreasonable Commissioner White asked staff if they were able to review the security contract and should it be incorporated.
Director White stated he briefly looked at it, but the fact that they have hired a security guard and preparing a security plan is very encouraging. Staff wants to make sure there are specific details that are included in the security and operations plan, but the fact that they are already taking steps is encouraging and he is optimistic that they will be able to get it formally approved by the Police Department.
Commissioner White asked the owner if they have had an opportunity to review the modifications and are there any that are particularly onerous and impossible to meet.
Mr. Ahir asked how the annual review for the security plan will work.
Chair Meeks responded that he will need a formal security plan that will outline the security service, cameras, and operations.
Mr. Ahir stated he was happy to work with the Police Department.
Ms. Wetzel stated the motion passed with six yes votes.
OPPOSITION: 0 persons spoke in opposition to the subject request.
IN GENERAL: 2 persons spoke in favor of the subject request. 2 pieces of correspondence were received in opposition to the request.
DISCUSSION TIME: 37 minutes (7:49 to 8:26 p.m.)