Loading...
Resolution-PC 2012-094RESOLUTION NO. PC2012 -094 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 2012 -04913 AND FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2012 - 00006 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2012- 00112) (1027 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (hereinafter referred to as the "Planning Commission ") did receive a verified Petition for Variance No. 2012 -04913 and Final Site Plan No. 2012 -00006 to expand an existing restaurant (the 'Project ") with a variance for fewer parking spaces than required by the Anaheim Municipal Code (herein referred to as the "Code ") for certain real property located at 1027 South Harbor Boulevard in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as more particularly described on Exhibit A. attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property "); and WHEREAS, the Property, consisting of approximately 1.14- acres, is developed with a full service restaurant. The Property is located in the SP92 -2 Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Zone. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Commercial Recreation land uses; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on December 3, 2012 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed variance to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, as the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as "CEQA "), the Planning Commission finds and determines that the proposed project is within that class of projects which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the proposed project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing with respect to the request to permit the proposed Project on the Property does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the request to expand the existing restaurant complies with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92 -2), subject to the approval of Variance No. 2012 -04913 and the conditions of approval. - 1 - PC2012 -094 2. The design and layout of the proposed Project will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. 3. The architectural design of the proposed Project is compatible with the character of the surrounding development located within the land area of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. 4. The design of the proposed Project will provide a desirable environment for its occupants, the visiting public, and its neighbors, through the appropriate use of materials, texture and color, and will remain aesthetically appealing and be appropriately maintained. 5. The proposed Project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity of the proposed Project. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request for a variance for fewer parking spaces than required by the Code and for a setback that is less than required by Code should be approved for the following reasons: (a) SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parkin spaces. paces. (110 spaces required; 84 spaces proposed) (b) SECTION NO. 18.116.090.040 Minimum interior setback requirement. (80 feet required; 10 feet proposed) 1. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use because a parking study was submitted by the applicant, determining that the proposed number of parking spaces for the project is sufficient to accommodate the proposed expansion of the restaurant. The parking study indicates that 67 parking spaces will be required by the restaurant during peak demand operating hours based on observations at the existing restaurant; 2. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the on -site parking will adequately accommodate the peak parking demands of the restaurant; 3. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the on -site parking will adequately accommodate peak parking demands of the restaurant; -2- PC2012 -094 4. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off -street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use because the project site provides adequate ingress and egress points to the Property and are designed to allow for adequate on -site circulation; and 5. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the project site has existing ingress or egress access points that are designed to allow adequate on -site circulation and therefore will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the restaurant. 6. That there are special circumstances applicable to the Property, including size, shape, location and surroundings, which do not apply to other property under the identical zoning classification in the vicinity of the proposed Project that result in limited and inefficient use of the Property if it were developed in conformance with development standards. The subject Property has a lot width that is significantly greater in the front of the property than in the rear. The shape of the property limits the available area for expansion to the front of the property and the setback requirement is intended to prevent tall structures adjacent to residential uses. The height of the restaurant at the proposed setback is 21 feet. Therefore, it is appropriate to permit a reduced interior setback. 7. That, because of these special circumstances, strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the Property of privileges enjoyed by other property under the identical zoning classification in the vicinity. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim as follows: 1. The Planning Commission does hereby approve Variance No. 2012 -04913 and Final Site Plan No. 2012 - 00006, subject to the conditions of approval described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the conditions, (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. 2. Any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City - Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. -3- PC2012 -094 3. The adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. 4. Approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Zoning Code of the City of Anaheim and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. 5. The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice. Failure to pay all charges shall result in the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of December 3, 2012. Said Resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 of the Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. Ohl CHAIR, ANAHEIM CITY PL NING COMMISSION ATTEST: v � SENIOR SEYRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2012 -094 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Grace Medina, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on December 3, 2012, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, FAESSEL, LIEBERMAN, PERSAUD, RAMIREZ, SEYMOUR NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: AGARWAL IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 3` day of December, 2012. SENIOR'S`ECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -5- PC2012 -094 EXHIBIT "A" DEV NO. 2012 -00112 W BALL RD 7 F-1 r J Q 6 N g O o sc mn Source: Recorded Tract Maps and/or City GIS. Please note the accuracy is +/- two to five feet. -6- PC2012 -094 EXHIBIT `B" VARIANCE NO. 2012-04913 AND FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2012-00006 (DEV2012- 00112) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL REVIEW BY SIGNED OFF BY PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 1 There is no backflow prevention assembly at the existing 1 -inch Public water service meter. A lead -free backflow prevention assembly Utilities, meeting the City of Anaheim's standard shall be installed at the Water meter prior to issuance of the first building permit. Additionally, Engineering if this project contains more than 2,500 SF of landscaping, a Division separate irrigation meter and backflow prevention assembly meeting the City of Anaheim's standard is required prior to issuance of the first building permit. 2 Property owner /developer shall contact Water Engineering for Public recycled water system requirements and specific water Utilities, conservation measures to be incorporated into the building and Water landscape construction plans. Engineering Division PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING AND ZONING INSPECTION 3 The subject Property shall be developed substantially in Planning accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Department, Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 7, and as Services conditioned herein. 4 That extensions for further time to complete conditions of Planning approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 Department, of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Planning Services 5 That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be Planning amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause Department, Planning provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the Services original intent and purpose of the condition(s), a the modification complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. 6 Approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed Planning request only to the extent that complies with the Anaheim Department, Planning Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Services Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. -7- PC2012 -094