PC 2005/06/13Anaheim Planning
Commission Agenda
Monday, June 13, 2005
Council Chamber, City Hall
200 South Anaheim Boulevard. Anaheim. California
Chairman: Gail Eastman
Chairman Pro - Tempore: Cecilia Flores
Commissioners: Kelly Buffa, Joseph Karaki, Ed Perez,
Panky Romero, Pat Velasquez
. Call To Order
Preliminary Plan Review 12:00 P.M.
• Staff update to Commission on various City developments and issues
(As requested by Planning Commission)
• Preliminary Plan Review for items on the June 13, 2005 agenda
• Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04960 — to consider initiating revocation
proceedings for failure to comply with conditions of approval.
• Discussion to consider changing the time of the public hearing.
Recess To Afternoon Public Hearing Session
• Reconvene To Public Hearing 2:00 P.M.
For record keeping purposes, if you wish to make a statement regarding any
item on the agenda, please complete a speaker card in advance and submit it to
the secretary.
. Pledge Of Allegiance
. Public Comments
. Consent Calendar
. Public Hearing Items
. Adjournment
You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following
e -mail address: plan ningcommission(Wanaheim .net
H: \Tools \PComm Admin \PC agendas \06132005.doc (06/13/05)
Page 1
Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 2:00 P.M.
Items Of Public Interest:
Oath or Affirmation of Allegiance: New Planning Commissioner— Panky Romero.
Public Comments:
This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the
Anaheim Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing
items.
Consent Calendar:
The items on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate
discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the Planning
Commission, staff or the public request the item to be discussed and /or removed from the Consent
Calendar for separate action.
1 A.(a) Conditional Use Permit No. 2056 — Request for Termination
(Tracking No. CUP2005- 04993)
Agent: Said Abuqartoumy, The Car Man Auction, INC, 2920 East
La Jolla, Anaheim, CA 92806
Project Planner:
Location: 2920 East La Jolla Street. Kimberly Wong
(kwong2 @anaheim. net)
Request to terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 2056 (to permit a
contractor's storage yard). Q. S. 131
Termination Resolution No.
1 B.(a) Variance No. 4209 — Request for Termination
(Tracking No. VAR2005- 04657)
Agent: Jack Jakosky, Jakosky Properties, 503 32"" Street, Suite
200, Newport Beach, CA 92663 Project Planner:
Kimberly Wong
Location: 5747 East Santa Ana Canyon Road. (kwong2 @anaheim.net)
Requests to terminate Variance No. 4209 (waiver of prohibited roof- Q S. 185
mounted equipment to retain a roof - mounted satellite dish antenna in
the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone).
Termination Resolution No.
H: \Tools \PComm Admin \PC agendas \06132005.doc (06/13/05)
Page 2
1C.
ng
Owner: Jack Jakosky, Jakosky Properties, 503 32 ntl Street, Suite
200, Newport Beach, CA 92663
Location: 5747 East Santa Ana Canyon Road.
Request to terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 1608 (to permit on-
sale beer and wine in a proposed restaurant), Conditional Use Permit
No. 1727 (to permit sales of (a) beer and wine for on- premises
consumption in a proposed restaurant, and (b) alcoholic beverages for
on- premises consumption in a proposed restaurant, Conditional Use
Permit No. 1735 (to permit sales of beer and wine for on- premises
consumption in a proposed restaurant), Conditional Use Permit No.
3221 (to permit a veterinary clinic), Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-
04428 (to permit the expansion of an existing full - service restaurant,
including outdoor dining areas and the continued sales of alcoholic
beverages of on- premises consumption in conjunction with an existing
commercial retail center) and Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04750
(to construct a full service restaurant with on- premises sales and
consumption of alcoholic beverages, including outdoor dining, and roof -
mounted equipment in the CL (SC) zone with waivers of maximum
number of wall signs and minimum front setback adjacent to a scenic
highway).
Termination Resolution No.
1D.(a) General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00420
(Tracking No. GPA2005- 00432)
Agent: City of Anaheim, Planning Department, 200 South Anaheim
Boulevard, Suite 162, Anaheim, CA 92805
Location: No Address.
City- Initiated request to initiate a General Plan Amendment for the
following:
1) Amend the City of Anaheim General Plan Circulation Element
redesignating a segment of Cerritos Avenue from a Primary
Arterial Highway with a typical with a typical right -of -way width of
up to 120 feet to a Secondary Arterial Highway with a typical
right -of -way width of up to 90 feet in width; and
2) Amend the City of Anaheim General Plan Circulation Element to
provide for a segment of Gene Autry Way to be up to 170 feet in
width to provide for the construction of the Gene Autry "Grand
Parkway ". This segment of Gene Autry Way is designated as a
primary arterial with a current typical right -of -way width of up to
120 feet.
1E. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission
Meeting of June 1, 2005 (Motion)
H: \Tools \PComm Admin \PC agendas \06132005.doc
Project Planner:
Kimberly Wong
(kwong2 @anaheim. net)
Q.S. 185
Project Planner:
Vanessa Norwood
(vnorwood @anaheim. net)
Request for continuance to
June 27, 2005
(06/13/05)
Page 3
2a.
2b.
2c.
Location: 802 -808 East Broadway, 801 East Santa Ana Street and
409 -421 South Vine Street. Property is approximately 2.3
acres, located on the west side of Vine Street between
Broadway and Santa Ana Street.
Variance No. 2005 -04652 - Request for waivers of (a) minimum front yard
setback, (b) maximum and minimum building wall length, (c) improvement
of public right -of -way, (d) type of parking spaces, (e) required parking lot
landscaping, (f) maximum wall height, (g) minimum number of parking
spaces, and (h) minimum interior setback to construct 60 -unit, 3 -story
"affordable" apartment complex.
Waiver of Council Policy No. 542 - Pertaining to sound attenuation for
residential projects to construct 60 -unit, 3 -story "affordable" apartment
complex.
Petitioner requests Planning Commission review and recommendation to
the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency of basic concept drawings for a 60-
unit, "affordable" apartment complex.
Variance Resolution No.
3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED)
3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3732
(TRACKING NO. CUP2005- 04987)
Owner: Vaskin Koshkerian, 10621 Equestrian Drive, Santa Ana, CA
92705 -0000
Agent: Bhupinder S. Mac, 1198 South State College Boulevard,
Anaheim, CA 92805
Andrew Paszterko, Gasoline Retail Facilities Consulting,
2055 North Alvarado Street, Los Angeles, CA 90039
Location: 1198 South State College Boulevard. Property is
approximately 0.52 -acre, located at the northeast corner of
Ball Road and State College Boulevard
Request to amend or delete conditions of approval pertaining to hours of
operation and restrictions on packaging of beer and wine products in
conjunction with a previously- approved conversion of a service station
repair bay area within an existing service station to a convenience market
with off - premises sale and consumption of beer and wine.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
H: \Tools \PComm Admin \PC agendas \06132005.doc
Project Planner:
David See
(dsee @anaheim.net)
Q.S. 93
Project Planner:
John Ramirez
Qpramirez @anaheim. net)
Q.S. 115
(06/13/05)
Page 4
Agent: Elisa Stipkovich, Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, 201
South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805
4a.
4b.
4c.
Owner: Stadium Land Partners, LLC, Brad Redelsperger, c/o
Newport Federal, 4425 Jamboree, #250, Newport Beach, CA
92660
Agent: John Stanek, Integral Partners, 160 Newport Center Drive,
Suite 240, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Location: 2045 South State College Boulevard. Property is
approximately 3.8 acres with a frontage of 292 feet on the
west side of State College Boulevard and located 337 feet
north of the centerline of Orangewood Avenue (Gateway
Centre Condominiums).
Request to approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the
project and circulated for public /responsible agency review in compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and
City of Anaheim CEQA Guidelines. The Draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration is available for public review (May 19, 2005 until June 7, 2005)
and copies of the document are available for review at the City of Anaheim
Planning Department, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim CA 92805.
Development Agreement No. DAG2005 -00006 - Request to recommend
City Council adoption of Development Agreement between the City of
Anaheim and Newport Federal for the Gateway Centre Condominium
Project to construct a 266 -unit residential condominium project.
Tentative Tract Map No. 16826 -To establish a 1 -lot, 266 -unit airspace
attached residential condominium subdivision.
Development Agreement Resolution No.
H: \Tools \PComm Admin \PC agendas \06132005.doc
Request for continuance
to June 27, 2005
Project Planner:
John Ramirez
Qpramirez@anaheim. net)
Q.S. 108
(06/13/05)
Page 5
5a.
CEQA Negative Declaration (Readvertisment)
Request for continuance
5b.
Reclassification No. 2004 -00141
to July 11, 2005
5c.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951
5d.
Tentative Tract Map No. 16833
Owner: Marci Odon, 3117 West Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92804
Agent: Walter Bowman, Bonanni Development, 5622 Research
Drive, Huntington Beach, CA 92649
Location: 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road. Property is 1.4
acres, having a frontage of 198 feet on the north side of
Ball Road located 741 feet east of the centerline of Western
Avenue.
Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 - Request reclassification of the
property from the T (Transition) zone to the RM -3 (Residential, Multiple -
Family) zone, or less intense zone.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 — Request to permit a 16 -unit
attached and detached single - family residential subdivision.
Project Planner:
Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 —To establish a 1 -lot 16 -unit attached
Amy Vazquez
and detached single - family residential subdivision.
(avazquez @anaheim.net)
Continued from February 7, 23, March 7, April 4, and May 2, 2005,
Q.S. 10
Planning Commission meetings.
SR RCL2004 -0141 050205
akv.doc
Reclassification Resolution No.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
Adjourn To Monday, June 27, 2005 at 10:00 A.M. for a tour of the
Mountain Park Specific Plan Area and Preliminary Plan Review.
H: \Tools \PComm Admin \PC agendas \06132005.doc (06/13/05)
Page 6
M 4AIIy[aA11l?]z go] 2161-111zV
I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at:
3:00 p.m. June 9. 2005
(TIME) (DATE)
LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND
COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK
SIGNED: {Original sianed by Danielle C. Masciel}
If you challenge any one of these City of Anaheim decisions in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in a written
correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
RIGHTS OF APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL FROM PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Any action taken by the Planning Commission this date regarding Reclassifications, Conditional Use
Permits and Variances will be final 22 days after Planning Commission action and any action regarding
Tentative Tract and Parcel Maps will be final 10 days after Planning Commission action unless a timely
appeal is filed during that time. This appeal shall be made in written form to the City Clerk, accompanied
by an appeal fee in an amount determined by the City Clerk.
The City Clerk, upon filing of said appeal in the Clerk's Office, shall set said petition for public hearing
before the City Council at the earliest possible date. You will be notified by the City Clerk of said hearing.
ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the Planning Department, (714) 765 -5139. Notification no later than 10:00 a.m.
on the Friday before the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure
accessibility to this meeting.
Recorded decision information is available 24 hours a day by calling the Planning Department's
Automated Telephone System at 714. 765.5139.
H: \Tools \PComm Admin \PC agendas \06132005.doc (06/13/05)
Page 7
SCHEDULE
2005
June 27
July 11
July 25
August 8
August 22
11 September 7 (Wed) 11
11 September 19 11
October 3
October 17
October 31
November 14
November 28
December 12
II December 28 (Wed) II
H: \Tools \PComm Admin \PC agendas \06132005.doc (06/13/05)
Page 8
ITEM NO. 1 -A
4
S 69 62-6
MLl
lReSj o
41
t
lR s 01 `sERYM1 -1
NUpp1
n
� D �� S P R EES
n
M2
Q - NA
N�
epse
N A
7 c v oN
5P 62 y9 1581
CIA vvw (
nZ�� �Q
?10- cu? �P-�E
g-oc. N-A
N �
N
B ppY (
\
SP g4,169 1581
RG�-6 cu p p2162
PBF 89
19 4 SP 62 691 211
RG�
c up 1942
15 GUP IBUTANGE
SP 6269 �Bl GN
a1J RO`WyEF CO . A
'J, OC1r p
p
9 p9
CIA vvw (
(1i
\ C
g-oc. N-A
N �
�3
B ppY (
9,09 1181
RG 04-- ?P,?-
SP 9411
D�p2,09 f21)
RG� 15 o
G
GDNST. .
SP 04A
Dp 100 (
RG�01Z p1.04334
1 -GU� 4 �5
GUP 1551
D U1GHM pN
N n
f
y �v m
Y
mo o
Conditional Use Permit No. 2056 Subject Property
TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04993 Date: June 13, 2005
Scale: 1"=200'
Requested By: SAID ABUQARTOUMY Q.S. No. 131
REQUEST TO TERMINATE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2056 (TO RETAIN A CONTRACTOR'S
STORAGE YARD).
2920 East La Jolla Street
D
1879
�n
y X0 9
Y
0
aN >4
T�
N�
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 1 -A
1 -A. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
a. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2056 - REQUEST FOR (Resolution)
TERMINATION
(Tracking No. CUP2005- 04993)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This rectangularly- shaped, 1.12 -acre property has a frontage of 155 feet on the south side
of La Jolla Street, a maximum depth of 314 feet and is located 194 feet west of the
centerline of Red Gum Street (2920 East La Jolla Street).
REQUEST
(2) The property agent, S. Abuqartoumy has submitted the attached letter requesting
termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2056.
BACKGROUND
(3) The property is developed with an existing industrial building and is zoned SP94 -1 DA 1
(Northeast Area Specific Plan, Industrial Area). The property is also located within the
Merged Anaheim Redevelopment Area. The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element
Map designates this property and surrounding properties for Industrial land uses.
(4) Conditional Use Permit No. 2056 (to retain a contractor's storage yard) was approved by
the Planning Commission on March 24, 1980.
(5) Condition of approval no. 23 of Resolution No. PC2001 -112 (to permit an automotive repair
(auto body) and towing facility with vehicle impound with waiver of minimum number of
parking spaces (70 required, 13 proposed)) requires the termination of Conditional Use
Permit No. 2056.
(6) The property manager is requesting termination of this conditional use permit since this
entitlement is no longer needed-
RECOMMENDATION
(7) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including
the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the
meeting that the Commission, by resolution, terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 2056.
Srcup2056kw.doc
Page 1
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * **
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2056
(2920 EAST LA JOLLA STREET)
WHEREAS, on March 24, 1980, the Anaheim Planning Commission, by its Resolution No.
PC80 -54, grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2056 to retain a contractor's storage yard at 2920 East La Jolla
Street; and
WHEREAS, Said Abuqartoumy property agent, has submitted a letter requesting termination of
Conditional Use Permit No. 2056 to comply with Condition of Approval No. 23 of Resolution No. PC2001 -112 for
Conditional Use Permit No. 2001 -04399 (to permit an automotive repair (auto body) and towing facility with
vehicle impound with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) approved by the Planning Commission on
August 13, 2001, since this entitlement is no longer needed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2056 on the basis of the
foregoing findings.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 13,
2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of the Anaheim
Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event
of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on
June 13, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
2005.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
Cr1PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005-
Page 1 of 1
Attachment- R &R 1 -A
Scott Koehm
From: SAIDGT2 @aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 12:28 PM
To: Scott Koehm
Subject: Re: Termination of CUP No. 2056
June 23, 2004
City of Anaheim
200 S. Anaheim Blvd. MS 162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Attn: Mr. G. Scott Koehm (Planner)
Dear Mr. Scott,
This letter is to request a termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2056 (to retain a contractor's storage yard).
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at my cell # (714) 813 -4619.
Sincerely,
Said Abuqartoumy
,
6/23/2004
ITEM NO. 1 -A
/ J�JPGr
WA Y (SR -91)
i GPI\ i
C-G(SC) f O
RCL 85 -86 -17 \ m
RCL 78 -79-22
T -CUP 2000 -04206
CUP 3335 RCL 71 -72 -21 ( O
CUP 2750 RCL 67 -68-55
VAR 3818 CUP 200404876 / p
HANFORD HOTEL T -CUP 2003 -04809 o A J 0
CUP 2003 -04750 c N 1 r
CUP 2001 -04428 m�
CUP 2001-04406
n n
CUP 2000 -04241 x�
T -CUP 2000 -04200 D
CUP 4067
-G (SC) CUP 4021 O
RCL 71 -72 -21 CUP 3747 O
RCL 67 -68 -55 CUP 3629 A
RCL 65 -66 -17 CUP 3600
RCL 64 -65 -90 CUP 3221
CUP 200404876 CUP 2395 N
} T -CUP 2003 -04809 CUP 2372
CUP 2003 -04750 CUP 3219 /
CUP 2001 -04428 CUP 2348
CUP 2001 -04406 CUP 2261
= CUP 2000 -04241 CUP 1757 '
T -CUP 200 0 - 042 00; CANYON PLAZA CUP 1735
(7 CUP 4067 SHOPPING CENTER CUP 1727
CUP 4021 CUP 1608
CUP 3747 J � w CUP 3719 T -VAR 2005 -04657
VAR 4222
Q "' ¢ w CUP 3672 VAR 4209
a U CUP 3629 VAR 2836
z 0 CUP 3600 VAR 2802
Lu oz CUP 3221
VAR 2310
d za CUP 3219 (CUP 3383)
¢o CUP 2244 ( )
T U = T -VAR 2005 -04657 CUP 1616
I — y VAR 4222
VAR 4209
43 VAR 2310
VAR 2948
, (CUP 3383
fER (CUP 988
(VAR 30 ) lo g5 n l/ z
N Q < N U.
BALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE (SC) (SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ONE ¢ C6 W
Variance No- 4209 Subject Property
TRACKING NO- VAR2005 -04657 Date: June 13, 2005
Scale: 1"=200'
Requested By: JACK JAKOSKY Q -S- No- 185
REQUEST TO TERMINATE VARIANCE NO- 4209 (WAIVER OF PROHIBITED ROOF - MOUNTED
EQUIPMENT TO RETAIN A ROOF - MOUNTED SATELLITE DISH ANTENNA IN THE SCENIC
CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE) -
5747 East Santa Ana Canyon Road 1878
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 1 -13
1 -B. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
a. VARIANCE NO. 4209 - REQUEST FORTERMINATION (Resolution)
(Tracking No. VAR2005- 04657)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This irregularly- shaped, 15 -acre property is located at the northeast corner of Santa Ana
Canyon and Imperial Highway, with frontages of 1,095 feet on the north side of Santa Ana
Canyon Road and 570 feet on the east side of Imperial Highway (5747 East Santa Ana
Canyon Road).
REQUEST
(2) The property agent, J. Jakosky has submitted the attached letter requesting termination of
Variance No. 4209.
BACKGROUND
(3) The property is developed with a commercial retail center and is zoned C -G (SC) (General
Commercial; Scenic Corridor Overlay). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element
Map designates this property for Neighborhood Commercial land uses.
(4) Variance No. 4209 (waiver of prohibited roof - mounted equipment to retain a roof - mounted
satellite dish antenna in the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone) was approved by the City
Council February 9, 1993.
(5) Condition of approval no. 30 of Resolution No. PC2004 -105 (to construct a freestanding
building consisting of five (5) commercial retail tenant spaces, roof - mounted equipment,
and outdoor dining area in conjunction with an existing commercial retail center with waiver
of the minimum number of parking spaces) requires the termination of Variance No. 4209.
(6) The property agent is requesting termination of this variance since this entitlement is no
longer needed.
RECOMMENDATION:
(7) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including
the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the
meeting that the Commission, by resolution, terminate Variance No. 4209.
Srvar4209kw.doc
Page 1
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * **
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH
VARIANCE NO- 4209
(5747 EAST SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD)
WHEREAS, on March 24, 1980, the Anaheim City Council, by its Resolution No. PC80 -54,
grant Variance No. 4209 waiver of prohibited roof - mounted equipment to retain a roof - mounted satellite dish
antenna in the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone; and
WHEREAS, Jack Jakosky property agent, has submitted a letter requesting termination of
Variance No. 4209 to comply with the Condition of Approval of No. 30 of Resolution No. PC2004 -105 for
Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04876 (to construct a freestanding building consisting of five commercial retail
tenant spaces, roof - mounted equipment, and outdoor dining area in conjunction with an existing commercial
retail center with waiver of the minimum number of parking spaces) approved by the Planning Commission on
September 20, 2004, since this entitlement is no longer needed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Variance No. 4209 on the basis of the foregoing findings.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 13,
2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of the Anaheim
Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event
of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on
June 13, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
2005.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
Cr>,PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005-
7412712005 16:20 949 - 673 -2258 JAKOSKV PROPERTIES PAGE 02/02
Attachment- R &R 1 -B
a�
April 27, 2005 VIA FAX: (714) 765 -5280
John Ramirez
Planning Department
City of Anaheim
200 South Anaheim Blvd.
Anaheim, CA 92803
RE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 2004 -04876
Dear John,
Pursuant to Paragraph 30 of the Conditions to Approval for the above
referenced CUP, the undersigned property owner hereby requests that the
following previously approved CUP's and Variances affecting the shopping
center be terminated:
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 - 047,0
2. Conditional Use Permit No, 2001.e04-2&04+?—'R
3. Variance No. 4209
4. Conditional Use Permit No. 3221
5. Conditional Use Permit No. 1735
6. Conditional Use Permit No. 1727
7. Conditional Use Permit No, 1608
It is my understanding that your receipt of this request will complete the Planning
Departments conditions and thus allow for a building permit to be pulled.
If you have any questions or need any additional information please do not
hesitate to contact me,
Very Truly Yours,
CANYON PLAZA, LLC
t a 7 ck " Jakose
Member
cc: Debra Sands (849) 833 -1140
J; Conditional Use Permits 503 32ND STMT, SUITE 200
NWPORT B&ACf9.
CALIFORNIA 9.2663
949 •673 -0500
FAX 949 - 673 -2259
ITEM NO. 1 -A
REEWAy (SR 91) CA,
1' J 9 66 S c
RIV ERSID EF � °G�°ryo o °o°�� ? a J EP�Y� <
�cJ IGPt;o'\P�
J
25
17
90
S
r
,NT
J
643
1
AZA
NTER
Q
J
Q
W
a
C -G(SC)
RCL 85 -86 -17
RCL 78 -79-22
T -CUP 2000 -04206
CUP 3335
CUP 2750
VAR 3818
HANFORD HOTEL
W rc
<Z az
w
ao
zo
oz
>a
z
U
y
CUP 2001 -04428
CUP 2001 -04406
CUP 2000 -04241
T -CUP 2000 -0420(
CUP 4067
CUP 4021
CUP 3747
CUP 3719
CUP 3672
CUP 3629
CUP 3600
CUP 3221
CUP 3219
CUP 2244
T -VAR 2005 - 04657?
VAR 4222
VAR 4209
X 109
C -G (SC)
RCL 71 -72 -21
RCL 67 -68 -55
T -CUP 2005 -04994
CUP 2004 -04876
T -CUP 2003 -04809
CUP 2003 -04750
CUP 2001 -04428
CUP 2001 -04406
CUP 2 0 00 -04 241
T -CUP 2000 -04200
CUP 4067
CUP 4021
CUP 3747
CUP 3629
CUP 3600
CUP 3221
CUP 2395
CUP 2372
CUP 3219
CUP 2348
PLAZA CUP 2261
CENTER CUP 1757
CUP 1735
CUP 1727
CUP 1 608
T -VAR 2005005-0
4657
VAR 4222
i C
( u
L\ n
0
Ir
C
°A IC
cN r
M_
OO
C)
0
A
m
m
N
V 1R 1V
CUP 3383)
CUP 1616)
y it
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE (SC) (SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE)
9
c
N L Q �L
Conditional Use Permit Nos. 1608, 1727, 1735, 3221 Subject Property
2001 - 04428, 2003 -04750 Date: June 13, 2005
TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04994 Scale: 1"=200'
Requested By: JACK JAKOSKY Q.S. No. 185
REQUEST TO TERMINATE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1608 (TO PERMIT ON -SALE BEER AND WINE
INA PROPOSED RESTAURANT), CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1727 (TO PERMIT SALES OF (A) BEER
AND WINE FOR ON- PREMISES CONSUMPTION INA PROPOSED RESTAURANT, AND (B)ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGES FOR ON- PREMISES CONSUMPTION IN A PROPOSED RESTAURANT), CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 1735 (TO PERMIT SALES OF BEER AND WINE FOR ON- PREMISES CONSUMPTION IN A
PROPOSED RESTAURANT), CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3221 (TO PERMIT VETERINARY CLINIC),
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001 -04428 (TO PERMIT THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING FULL - SERVICE
RESTAURANT, INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING AREAS AND THE CONTINUED SALES OF ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGES FOR ON- PREMISES CONSUMPTION IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL
RETAIL CENTER), CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003 -04750 (TO CONSTRUCT FULL SERVICE
RESTAURANT WITH ON- PREMISES SALES AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, INCLUDING
OUTDOOR DINING, AND ROOF - MOUNTED EQUIPMENT IN THE CL(SC)ZONE WITH WAIVERS OF MAXIMUM
NUMBER OF WALL SIGNS AND MINIMUM FRONT SETBACKADJACENT TO A SCENIC HIGHWAY).
5747 East Santa Ana Canyon Road
1880
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 1 -C
1 -C. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
a. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 1608. 1727. 1735. 3221. (Resolution)
2001 - 04428. AND 2003 -04750 — REQUEST FOR TERMINATION
(Tracking No. CUP2005- 04994)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This irregularly- shaped, 15 -acre property is located at the northeast corner of Santa Ana
Canyon Road and Imperial Highway, with frontages of 1,095 feet on the north side of
Santa Ana Canyon Road and 570 feet on the east side of Imperial Highway (5747 East
Santa Ana Canyon Road).
REQUEST
(2) The property agent, J. Jakosky has submitted the attached letter requesting termination of
Conditional Use Permit Nos. 1608, 1727, 1735, 3221, 2001 - 04428, and 2003 - 04750.
BACKGROUND
(3) This property is developed with a commercial retail center and is zoned C -G (SC) (General
Commercial; Scenic Corridor Overlay). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element
Map designates this property for Neighborhood Commercial land uses.
(4) Conditional Use Permit No. 1608 (to permit on -sale beer and wine in a proposed
restaurant) was approved April 12, 1976.
(5) Conditional Use Permit No. 1727 (to permit sales of (a) beer and wine for on- premises
consumption in a proposed restaurant, and (b) alcoholic beverages for on- premises
consumption in a proposed restaurant) was approved by the Planning Commission July 6,
1977.
(6) Conditional Use Permit No. 1735 (to permit sales of beer and wine for on- premises
consumption in a proposed restaurant) was approved August 1, 1977.
(7) Conditional Use Permit No. 3221 (to permit a veterinary clinic) was approved by the
Planning Commission December 4, 1989.
(8) Conditional Use Permit No. 2001 -04428 (to permit the expansion of an existing full - service
restaurant, including outdoor dining areas and the continued sales of alcoholic beverages
of on- premises consumption in conjunction with an existing commercial retail center) was
approved by the Zoning Administrator July 26, 2001.
Srcup1608kw.doc
Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 1 -C
(9) Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04750 (to construct a full service restaurant with on-
premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages, including outdoor dining, and
roof - mounted equipment in the CL(SC) zone with waivers of maximum number of wall
signs and minimum front setback adjacent to a scenic highway) was approved by the
Zoning Administrator September 4, 2003.
(10) Condition of approval no. 30 of Resolution No. PC2004 -105 (to construct a freestanding
building consisting of five (5) commercial retail tenant spaces, roof - mounted equipment,
and outdoor dining area in conjunction with an existing commercial retail center with waiver
of the minimum number of parking spaces) requires the termination of Conditional Use
Permit Nos. 1608, 1727, 1735, 3221, 2001 - 04428, and 2003 - 04750.
(11) The property manager is requesting termination of these conditional use permits since
these entitlements are no longer needed-
RECOMMENDATION
(12) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including
the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the
meeting that the Commission, by resolution, terminate Conditional Use Permit Nos. 1608,
1727, 1735, 3221, 2001 - 04428, and 2003 - 04750.
Page 2
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * **
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 1608, 1727, 1735, 3221, 2001 - 04428, AND 2003 -04750
(5747 EAST SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD)
WHEREAS, on April 12, 1976, the Anaheim Planning Commission did, by its Resolution No.
PC76 -70 grant Conditional Use Permit No. 1608 to permit on -sale beer and wine in a proposed restaurant; and
WHEREAS, on July 6, 1977, the Anaheim Planning Commission did, by its Resolution No.
PC77 -162 grant Conditional Use Permit No. 1727 to permit sales of (a) beer and wine for on- premises
consumption in a proposed restaurant, and (b) alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption in a proposed
restaurant); and
WHEREAS, on August 1, 1977, the Anaheim Planning Commission did, by its Resolution No.
PC77 -164 grant Conditional Use Permit No. 1735 to permit sales of beer and wine for on- premises consumption
in a proposed restaurant; and
WHEREAS, on December 4, 1989, the Anaheim Planning Commission did, by its Resolution
No. PC89 -306 grant Conditional Use Permit No. 3221 to permit a veterinary clinic; and
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2001, the Anaheim Zoning Administrator did, by its Decision No.
ZA2001 -28 grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2001 -04428 to permit the expansion of an existing full - service
restaurant, including outdoor dining areas and the continued sales of alcoholic beverages of on- premises
consumption in conjunction with an existing commercial retail center; and
WHEREAS, on September 4, 2003, the Anaheim Zoning Administrator did, by its Decision No.
ZA2003 -34 grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04750 to construct a full service restaurant with on- premises
sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages, including outdoor dining, and roof - mounted equipment in the
CL(SC) zone with waivers of maximum number of wall signs and minimum front setback adjacent to a scenic
highway; and
WHEREAS, J. Jakosky has submitted a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit
Nos. 1608, 1727, 1735, 3221, 2001 -04428 and 2003 -04750 to comply with the Condition of Approval No. 30 of
Resolution No. PC2004 -105 for Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04813 (to construct a freestanding building
consisting of five commercial retail tenant spaces, roof - mounted equipment, and outdoor dining area in
conjunction with an existing commercial retail center with waiver of the minimum number of parking spaces)
approved by the Planning Commission on September 20, 2004, since these entitlements are no longer needed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Conditional Use Permit Nos. 1608, 1727, 1735, 3221, 2001-
04428, and 2003 -04750 on the basis of the foregoing findings.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 13,
2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of the Anaheim
Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event
of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
Cr1PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005-
[DRAFT]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on
June 13, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
2005.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
Cr1PC2005 -0 -2- PC2005-
7412712005 16:20 949 - 673 -2258 JAKOSKV PROPERTIES PAGE 02/02
Attachment- R &R 1 -C
a�
April 27, 2005 VIA FAX: (714) 765 -5280
John Ramirez
Planning Department
City of Anaheim
200 South Anaheim Blvd.
Anaheim, CA 92803
RE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 2004 -04876
Dear John,
Pursuant to Paragraph 30 of the Conditions to Approval for the above
referenced CUP, the undersigned property owner hereby requests that the
following previously approved CUP's and Variances affecting the shopping
center be terminated:
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 - 047,0
2. Conditional Use Permit No, 2001.e04-2&04+?—'R
3. Variance No. 4209
4. Conditional Use Permit No. 3221
5. Conditional Use Permit No. 1735
6. Conditional Use Permit No. 1727
7. Conditional Use Permit No, 1608
It is my understanding that your receipt of this request will complete the Planning
Departments conditions and thus allow for a building permit to be pulled.
If you have any questions or need any additional information please do not
hesitate to contact me,
Very Truly Yours,
CANYON PLAZA, LLC
t a 7 ck " Jakose
Member
cc: Debra Sands (849) 833 -1140
J; Conditional Use Permits 503 32ND STMT, SUITE 200
NWPORT B&ACf9.
CALIFORNIA 9.2663
949 •673 -0500
FAX 949 - 673 -2259
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 1 -D
1 -D REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
a. CEQA EXEMPTION —SECTIONS 15061(B)(3) & 15262 (Motion)
b. REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION TO INITIATE GENERAL PLAN (Motion)
AMENDMENT NO. 2004 -00420
(Tracking No. GPA2005- 00432)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
(1) The proposed General Plan Amendment encompasses two street segments including a 0.67 -
mile segment of Cerritos Avenue between State College Boulevard and Douglass Road and a
0.32 -mile segment of Gene Autry Way between Betmor Lane and State College Boulevard.
REQUEST:
(2) This is a City- initiated (Planning and Public Works Departments) request to consider initiation
of an amendment to the City of Anaheim General Plan Circulation Element to:
A) Redesignate a segment of Cerritos Avenue between State College Boulevard and
Douglass Road from a Primary Arterial Highway to a Secondary Arterial Highway; and,
B) To increase the maximum ultimate right -of -way width for a segment of Gene Autry Way
between Betmor Lane and State College Boulevard to up to 170 feet to provide for the
Gene Autry Grand Parkway design-
DISCUSSION
(3) Cerritos Avenue: Staff proposes that the segment of Cerritos Avenue between State College
Boulevard and Douglass Road be redesignated from a Primary Arterial Highway to a
Secondary Arterial Highway. This redesignation would be consistent with the Orange County
Master Plan of Arterial Highways map which currently designates this segment of Cerritos
Avenue as a Secondary Arterial Highway. The typical width of a Primary Arterial is between
106 to 120 feet, consisting of a six -lane divided roadway with no on- street parking or a four -
lane divided roadway with left -turn pockets and on- street parking. The typical width of a
Secondary Arterial Highway designation is 90 feet, consisting of four undivided lanes with on-
street parking. The existing street width for this segment of Cerritos Avenue is 70 feet,
consisting of a four lane undivided roadway with no on- street parking.
(4) Gene Autry Way: Staff proposes to increase the ultimate right -of -way width for the segment
of Gene Autry Way between Betmor Lane and State College Boulevard from 106 feet to up to
170 to provide for the design of the Gene Autry Grand Parkway. The Circulation Element
Planned Roadway Network Map currently designates this segment of Gene Autry Way as a
Primary Arterial Highway with an ultimate right -of -way width of 106 feet consisting of a six -
lane divided roadway with no on- street parking. The current street width varies from 98 to
106 feet between Betmor and State College Boulevard. The General Plan Circulation
Element currently provides for the extension of Gene Autry Way between State College
Boulevard and Harbor Boulevard over the 1 -5 Freeway. The roadway will retain the Primary
Arterial Highway designation. The increased width of 170 feet will be indicated on the Right -
of-Way Exceptions List. The proposed Gene Autry Way Grand Parkway design would
provide for enhancements to this connection between The Platinum Triangle and The
SR_GPA2004- 004201rj Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 1 -E
Anaheim Resort. Conceptual plans for this street call for a landscaped median island, two
through traffic lanes in each direction, enhanced parkways with bikelanes, a one -way travel
lane on each side of the street, on- street parking and wide sidewalks. Exhibits showing a
conceptual street cross - section and an illustrative depiction of the Grand Parkway are
provided as Attachment No. 1 to this staff report. Refinements to this design for the subject
segment of Gene Autry Way are in progress and staff will provide a recommended cross -
section to the Planning Commission prior to the public hearing on this item. At a future date,
staff will bring forward more refined designs for the remaining segments of the Gene Autry
Way Grand Parkway in The Anaheim Resort.
(5) This General Plan Amendment will be scheduled for Planning Commission consideration in
connection with Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 for The Platinum Triangle
and other related actions. Staff anticipates that these items will be scheduled for the July 25,
2005, Planning Commission meeting.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(6) This action initiates planning and feasibility studies under the Anaheim Municipal Code to
evaluate the proposed general plan amendment proceedings, which will be considered by the
Planning Commission and City Council at a later date. Staff recommends that the
Commission find the above listed action exempt under CEQA Guidelines, Section
15061(b)(3), which states that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for
causing a significant effect on the environment and by Section 15262 which exempts projects
involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future action-
RECOMMENDATION
(7) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the
evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the
meeting, the Commission take the following actions:
(A) By motion, determine that this action is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Sections
15061(b)(3) and 15262 since the environmental analysis of this action will occur in
conjunction with the future public hearing on the proposed redesignation.
(B) By motion, initiate an amendment to the City of Anaheim General Plan Circulation
Element to (1) redesignate a segment of Cerritos Avenue between State College
Boulevard and Douglass Road from a Primary Arterial Highway to a Secondary Arterial
Highway; and 2) increase the maximum ultimate right -of -way width for a segment of
Gene Autry Way between Betmor Lane and State College Boulevard to up to 170 feet to
provide for the Grand Parkway design. This initiation would result in a scheduled public
hearing before the Planning Commission and City Council at a later date.
Page 2
[DRAFT]
June 13, 2005
City of Anaheim
Planning Department
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, CA 92805
Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of
June 13, 2005 .
I i b: 7 :1:101 1 . 4 61 _ 1010 1 .4 :14161 L I L 10 0107-1 Ice] 0 6
D. General Plan Amendment No. 2005 -00420
(Tracking No. GPA2005- 00432)
City Initiated
Location: Citywide
Request initiation of an amendment to the City of Anaheim General Plan Circulation
Element to:
A) Redesignate a segment of Cerritos Avenue between State College
Boulevard and Douglass Road from a Primary Arterial Highway to a
Secondary Arterial Highway; and,
B) To increase the maximum ultimate right -of -way width for a segment of Gene
Autry Way between Betmor Lane and State College Boulevard to up to 170
feet to provide for the Gene Autry Grand Parkway design.
ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and
MOTION CARRIED), that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to
initiate an amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan to redesignate a
segment of Cerritos Avenue and increase the maximum ultimate right -of -way width of Gene
Autry Way and does hereby approve the CEQA Statutory Exemption upon finding that the
above listed action is exempt under CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15061(B)(3) and 15262,
which exempts projects involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future action.
Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve initiation of General
Plan Amendment 2005 -00420 to initiate an amendment to the Circulation Element of the
General Plan to (a) redesignate a segment of Cerritos Avenue between State College
Boulevard and Douglass Road from a Primary Arterial Highway to a Secondary Arterial
Highway; and (b) to increase the maximum ultimate right -of -way width for a segment of Gene
Autry Way between Betmor Lane and State College Boulevard to up to 170 feet to provide for
the Gene Autry Grand Parkway design.
Sincerely,
Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary
Anaheim Planning Commission
crG PA2004- 00420em.doc
m
m
v
G n
n —. N
0 3
C D
< v 3
m m
� o o �
� � n
m ° m_ 3
o � 3
3 N
m O
a O
A
O
0
A
N
0
m
m
Knott
Street
Western
Avenue
Beach
Boulevard
Dale
Avenue
Magnolia
Avenue
Gilbert
Street
Brookhurst
Street
Nutwood
Street
Euclid
Street
Ninth
Street
West
Street
Harbor
Boulevard
Haster
Street
Lewis
Street
St. College
Boulevard
I " -1
I
I I
Co D
c o
Q w
n w.
D 3
n
m —
d m
x
� w
v,
Knott
Street
Western
Avenue
Beach
Boulevard
Dale
Avenue
Magnolia
Avenue
Gilbert
Street
Brookhurst
Street
Euclid
Street
Harbor
Boulevard
Lemon StJ
Anaheim Blvd.
East
Street
State College
Boulevard
M
Kraemer Z
Boulevard Q
D
Miller
Street
Tustin
Avenue
Jefferson
Street
DO DO DTI n0 Am DO Dr DO Dr DO
< s < < d o w < < < < w <
c c io c c io c c o a w c io
w 3 w s
I
miss
rA
a -� - juawgoe33v
ITEM NO. 1 -A
R VP 41 �8
a�
13 V q32 C)
r A 13
N �N
21 (cRS 92.18
\1 1 1 9,3 7
00 00
J � R 89
00 0 6
V PR 143
R EN \GH
o- � p y ��ro V.85
m N
y�N
l
0
m
m R
N�
\ m
.12
\ }
VPR 43 g2
Y� VPRPR43 83
Z F \RM`E \GH
UN
O
Z
N
m VPR A069
R 3 g4,05 \ 1
co UoMNUMS \ �'••'
Np AL_pHP
i .
MENTi E
�iT� one s� s
LOP QM- 4 _.a�� rN VV
IPA
j ` 43 16
vP
\ 4316 FIRM
V PR 42 62
F RMe SPN7 P NIAP S1C
/ A
N� F \RM
Variance No. 2005 -04652
V
W- 1 1 4 PR 42 0
\Np F\RM
® Subject Property
Date: June 13, 2005
Scale: 1"=200'
Requested By: ELISA STIPKOVICH Q.S. No. 93
REQUESTS WAIVERS OF: (A) MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK
(B) MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM BUILDING WALL LENGTH
(C) DEDICATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY
(D) TYPE OF PARKING SPACES
(E) REQUIRED PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING
(F) MAXIMUM WALL HEIGHT
(G) MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES
(H) MINIMUM INTERIOR SETBACK
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF COUNCIL POLICY 542 PERTAINING TO SOUND ATTENUATION FOR
RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS
TO CONSTRUCT A 60 -UNIT, 3 -STORY AFFORDABLE APARTMENT COMPLEX.
802 -808 East Broadway, 801 East Santa Ana Street, and 409 -421 South Vine Street
D
1850
4
Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002
Variance No. 2005 -04652 ® Subject Property
Date: June 13, 2005
Scale: 1"=200'
Requested By: ELISA STIPKOVICH Q.S. No. 93
REQUESTS WAIVERS OF: (A) MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK
(B) MAXIMUM AAND MINIMUM BUILDING WALL LENGTH
(C) IMPROVEMENT AND DEDICATION OF OF PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY
(D) TYPE OF PARKING SPACES
(E) REQUIRED PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING
(F) MAXIMUM WALL HEIGHT
(G) MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES
(H) MINIMUM INTERIOR SETBACK
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF COUNCIL POLICY 542 PERTAINING TO SOUND ATTENUATION FOR
RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS
TO CONSTRUCT A 60 -UNIT, 3 -STORY AFFORDABLE APARTMENT COMPLEX.
802 -808 East Broadway, 801 East Santa Ana Street, and 409 -421 South Vine Street
1850
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 2
2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion)
2b. VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04652 (Resolution)
2c. WAIVER OF COUNCIL POLICY NO. 542 -SOUND
ATTENUATION FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS (Motion)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) The site consists of multiple properties with a combined area of approximately 2.1 acres
and is located on the west side of Vine Street between Broadway and Santa Ana Street,
with frontages of 125 feet on the south side of Broadway, 125 feet on the north side of
Santa Ana Street, and 757 feet on the west side of Vine Street (802 - 808 East Broadway,
801 East Santa Ana Street, and 409 - 421 South Vine Street).
REQUEST:
(2)
(3)
The petitioner requests waivers of the following under authority of Code Section No.
18.74.040.010 to construct a 3 -story, 60 -unit, "affordable" apartment complex:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.06.090.010.0102 Minimum front yard setback. (20 feet required
along Broadway; 18 feet, 8 inches to 29 feet
proposed)
(b) SECTION NO. 18.06.090.060 Maximum and minimum building wall length.
(Maximum 20 feet and minimum 12 feet
required; 45 and 7 feet proposed)
(c) SECTION NO. 18.40.060 Improvement of public right -of -way (8 foot
parkway along Vine Street and Santa Street
required; 5 foot parkway proposed)
(d) SECTION NO. 18.42.030.020.0206 Type of parking spaces (Enclosed garages
Lot permitted; 62 garage spaces proposed)
(e) SECTION NO. 18.46.060
(f) SECTION NO. 18.46.110.030
(g) SECTION NO. 18.58.050.010
(h) SECTION NO. 18.58.060.010
Required parking lot landscaping (Landscape
break required for every 10 parking spaces; no
landscape breaks proposed)
Maximum wall height. (8 feet high permitted;
14 feet high proposed along west property
Fine)
Minimum number of parking spaces (117
required; 106 proposed)
Minimum interior setback (15 feet required; 9
feet, 6 inches to 17 feet, 4 inches proposed)
The petitioner also requests approval to waive Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound
attenuation for residential projects.
SRvar2005- 04652d s.doc
Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 2
BACKGROUND:
(4) This property is currently zoned RM-4 (Multiple Family Residential) and the Anaheim
General Plan designates this property for Medium Density Residential land uses. This
property is located within the Merged Redevelopment Project Area and is currently
developed with various commercial (along Broadway) and industrial uses such as a
contractor's storage yard.
Page 2
View of existing commercial buildings on Broadway
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 2
View of existing industrial building on Vine Street
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL:
(5) The petitioner proposes to construct a 60 -unit, 3 -story "affordable" apartment complex. The
proposed complex would consist of six separate buildings, attached garages, surface
parking lots, a courtyard, laundry rooms, and two community centers. The site plan (Exhibit
No. 1) indicates the following site information:
Development Standards
Proposed Project
RM -4 Zone Standards
Site Area
100,200 s.f. 2.1acres
N/A
Number of Dwelling Units d-u.
60 d.u.
83 d-u. max.
Average Land Area per Dwelling
Unit
1,670 s.f. /d.u.
1,200 s.f. /d.u. min.
Lot Coverage
34.8%
65% max.
Average Recreation /Leisure Area
er Dwelling Unit
250 s.f. /d.u. (15,000 s.f. total)
I
200 s.f. min. (12,000 s.f.
I total
Page 3
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 2
(6) The site plan further indicates the following site characteristics:
Direction
Proposed Structural
Setbacks
RM -4 Required Setbacks
North adjacent to Broadway
18 - 24 feet*
20 feet
East adjacent to Vine Street
16 — 27 feet
15 feet
South adjacent to Santa
Ana Street
22 — 34 feet **
15 feet
West adjacent to a railroad
10 — 15 feet
15 feet
* Setback measured from ultimate right -of -way line as determined by the General Plan
Circulation Element (45 feet from centerline of Broadway).
** Setback measured from ultimate right -of -way line as determined by the General Plan
Circulation Element (30 feet from centerline of Santa Ana Street). Existing right -of -way width is
34.75 feet from the centerline of Santa Ana Street.
(7) The unit plans (Exhibit Nos. 2, 3, and 4) indicate 60 two and three bedroom family
apartments with eight different model types. Each unit consists of a kitchen, dining area,
sleeping and living areas, bathroom, closet, and entry. The following chart enumerates the
characteristics of each unit:
Plan
Floor Area
s.f.
Min. Floor Area
Required s.f.
Bedrooms
Bathrooms
A
854
825
2
1
B
849
825
2
1
C
1,212
1,000
3
2
D
1,055
1,000
3
2
E
1,067
1,000
3
2
F
942
825
2
1
G
827
825
2
1
H
851
825
2
1
(8) The building floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 5, 7, 8, 10, and 12) indicate the unit characteristics for
each building as follows:
Building
No. of
No. of units
No. of garages
Other Facilities
Type
Buildin s
100
2
13
8
- --
(each building)
(each building —
16 total
200
2
18
16
(each building)
(each building —
32 total
300
1
14
7
Community Center,
Laundry Room
300B
1
15
7
Community Center,
Laundry Room
TOTAL
6
60
62
Page 4
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 2
(9) Vehicular access would be provided by four driveways from Vine Street. No vehicle access
gates are proposed. Wrought iron fencing and pedestrian gates are proposed around the
outdoor courtyard in the center of the property and adjacent to the walkways adjacent to
Santa Ana Street and Broadway. The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) shows a total of 106 parking
spaces for the entire apartment complex, consisting of 62 enclosed garage spaces and 44
surface parking lot spaces in the rear. Code Section No. 18.58.050.010 requires a
minimum of 117 unenclosed spaces based on the following ratios:
Required Parking Spaces Required Parking Spaces
in Qualified Housing in Qualified Housing
Development for Development for
Unit Size Affordable Units Non - Affordable Units
1 bedroom 1.0 space per unit 1.5 spaces per unit
2 bedroom 1.5 spaces per unit 2.0 spaces per unit
3 bedroom 2.0 spaces per unit 2.5 spaces per unit
4 bedroom 2.0 spaces per unit 3.5 spaces per unit
(10) The elevation plans (Exhibit Nos. 6, 9, 11, and 13) indicate two- and three -story apartment
buildings with a maximum structural height of 35 feet. The plans indicate a Craftsman style
of architecture with exterior building materials consisting of a stucco finish, painted wood
siding, gable roofs with composition shingle roofing materials, tapered columns with a ledge
stone veneer, and foam and wood trim elements. Code permits a maximum height of three
stories or 40 feet.
(11) The landscape plan (Exhibit No. 14) indicates a minimum 16 -foot wide landscape planter
adjacent to Vine Street, consisting of 8 California Pepper trees, 22 Brisbane Box trees, 12
Crape Myrtle trees, shrubs, turf, hedges adjacent to the sidewalk, and ground cover. The
plan also shows a minimum 22 -foot wide landscaped area along the south property line
adjacent to Santa Ana Street with 4 Brisbane Box trees, 1 Crape Myrtle tree, shrubs, turf,
and ground cover. The plan further indicates a minimum 18 -foot wide landscaped area
along the north property line adjacent to Broadway with 4 Brisbane Box trees, 1 Crape
Myrtle tree, shrubs, turf, and ground cover. A 4 -foot, 6 -inch wide landscaped area is
proposed adjacent to the west property line abutting the railroad tracks with 35 Canary
Island Pine trees, 25 Brisbane Box trees, clinging vines, and ground cover. Lastly, a
common recreational courtyard area is proposed in the center of the property with 8
Chinese Fringe trees, trellis, barbeque area, benches, tot lot and playground, and picnic
tables. All trees are proposed to be 24 -inch box in size.
(12) No sign plans were submitted as part of this proposal. Code permits a 20 square foot
identification sign for an apartment complex, including either a wall sign or a freestanding
monument sign with a maximum height of 4 feet.
(13) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates a new 14 -foot high block wall adjacent to the railroad
tracks to reduce the sound levels of freight and passenger trains. Code permits 8 -foot high
block walls located adjacent to railroad tracks.
(14) The submitted letter of operation indicates that this 60 -unit affordable apartment complex
would accommodate residents earning between 30% and 60% of the Area Median Income.
The project will house an on -site manager's office and a professional property management
company to manage leases, house rules, and parking rules. There will be an on -site
security system and the community rooms and management office will be open during
normal business hours, Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. There will also be a total
of four on -site employees to oversee the daily apartment operations.
Page 5
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 2
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(15) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review
in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and, therefore,
recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Planning
Commission that the Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead
agency; and that it has considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any
comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the
Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the
project will have a significant effect on the environment-
EVALUATION
(16) The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for Medium
Density Residential (MDR) land uses. The MDR designation allows for multiple - family
residential developments, implemented by the RM -4 Zone, with a maximum density of 36
dwelling units per acre. The proposed 60 -unit apartment complex would be built at a
density of 26 dwelling units per acre and would be in conformance with the permitted
density as prescribed in the General Plan.
(17) Waiver (a) pertains to minimum front yard setback. Code requires a minimum setback of
20 feet along Broadway and 18 to 29 feet is proposed. The petitioner has submitted the
attached justification of waiver letter indicating that the property has size, configuration, and
building envelope constraints that make it difficult to build a multiple family project without
the need for waivers. Since the property has constraints such as a narrow lot depth, three
street frontages, and close proximity to a railroad track, and since the overall average
setback exceeds the required 20 -foot wide front setback requirement, staff concurs with
this justification and recommends approval of this waiver request.
(18) Waiver (b) pertains to maximum and minimum building wall length. Code requires a
maximum and minimum building wall length of 20 feet and 12 feet, respectively, and 45 and
7 feet is proposed. The petitioner has submitted the attached justification of waiver letter
indicating that the proposed project would be architecturally compatible with the
surrounding residential uses and that this waiver is needed based on the physical
constraints of the property. Staff concurs with this justification and feels that the project
complies with the intent of this Code provision since the buildings are well articulated with
varying wall and roof planes. Moreover, the project has been designed to conform to the
guidelines and standards of the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan
adopted in 1999, the Affordable Housing Design Guidelines adopted in 1992, and the
Community Design Element of the General Plan adopted in 2004.
Page 6
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 2
(19) Waiver (c) pertains to improvement of public right -of -way. Public Works Standard Detail
No. 160A requires a 30 -foot right -of -way width to the street centerline (18 -foot street/curb,
8 -foot parkway, and 4 -foot sidewalk) for Vine Street and Santa Ana Street. A 21 -foot wide
street/curb, 5 -foot wide parkway, and 4 -foot wide sidewalk is proposed for Vine Street, and
a 25 -foot, 9 -inch wide street/curb, 5 -foot wide parkway, and 4 -foot wide sidewalk is
proposed for Santa Ana Street. Thus, a waiver is being requested for the street width on
Santa Ana Street, and the parkway widths for both Santa Ana and Vine Streets. Broadway
will be improved with a 32 -foot wide street/curb, 8 -foot wide parkway, and 5 -foot wide
sidewalk in conformance with the Public Works standard. The petitioner has submitted the
attached justification of waiver letter indicating that this waiver is being requested due to the
narrow depth of the lot. The letter also states that a 5 -foot wide parkway would be
consistent with other existing parkway widths in the surrounding Anaheim Colony Historic
District neighborhood. Planning and Public Works Department staff concurs with this
justification and recommends approval of this waiver request.
(20) Waiver (d) pertains to type of parking spaces. Code does not permit enclosed garages for
multiple family housing projects in the RM-4 zone, and 62 garage spaces are proposed.
The petitioner has submitted the attached justification of waiver letter indicating that there
are special circumstances applicable to this affordable housing project and that the
developer, Mercy Services Corporation (MSC), will include an on -site management office to
enforce strict lease provisions pertaining to the use of the garage spaces exclusively for
parking purposes. Since the property has constraints such as a narrow lot depth, three
street frontages, and close proximity to a railroad track, there is a lack of space to provide
enough open parking spaces to meet Code; therefore, the applicant is proposing to provide
enclosed parking spaces on the bottom level of each building in lieu of open spaces.
Planning and Public Works Department staff concurs with this justification and
recommends approval of this waiver request.
(21) Waiver (e) pertains to required parking lot landscaping. Code requires a 5 -foot wide
landscape break every 10 parking spaces and no landscape breaks are proposed. The
petitioner has submitted the attached justification of waiver letter indicating that the property
has size, configuration, and building envelope constraints that make it difficult to build a
multiple family project without the need for waivers. Since the property has constraints
such as a narrow lot depth, three street frontages, and close proximity to a railroad track,
staff concurs with this justification and recommends approval of this waiver request.
(22) Waiver (f) pertains to maximum wall height. Code permits a maximum wall height of 8 feet
and a 14 -foot high block wall is proposed along the west property line adjacent to a railroad
track. The petitioner has submitted the attached justification of waiver letter indicating that
the property has size, configuration, and building envelope constraints that make it difficult
to build a multiple family project without the need for this wall height waiver. The letter also
states that a 14 -foot wall height is necessary in order to mitigate train noise along the west
property line. The wall would be similar to the sound wall constructed to buffer residences
on the opposite side of Broadway from train noise. Staff concurs with this justification and
recommends approval of this waiver.
Page 7
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 2
(23) Waiver (g) pertains to minimum number of off street parking spaces. Code requires 117
unenclosed spaces and plans indicate a total of 106 spaces, including 62 enclosed garage
spaces. The petitioner has submitted a parking letter dated March 1, 2005 (attached)
prepared by the Community Development Department. The letter was reviewed and
approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager based upon the findings and
conclusions contained in an "Affordable Housing Parking Incentive Report" prepared by
LSA Associates, Inc., in 2003. This study concludes that the parking demand for affordable
housing projects are less than market rate apartment complexes based on a lower auto
ownership for the lowest income bracket out of the three income levels analyzed in the
report. The study concludes that auto ownership per person rises proportionately with
rising income strata. The study also concludes that the high cost of off - street parking
raises the cost of residential projects, reduces the density of these projects, and reduces
the developer's incentive to building affordable housing.
The study also further recommends that in exchange for less parking for this affordable
housing project than existing Code requirements, as described in paragraph no. (9), that
certain conditions and restrictions be imposed on the development. These restrictions
include the following:
• Dwelling unit occupancy restrictions
• Provision of transportation - related on -site amenities such as bicycle lockers, bus passes,
kiosks with transportation information, and an on -site manager to assist residents with
alternative transportation modes.
• Provision of other on -site amenities such as laundry facilities, day care amenities,
convenience store, telephone or internet access, and community gathering areas.
(24) The developer is applying for approval for the parking waiver under the new affordable
housing ordinance (AMC Section 18.58), but proposes to apply an affordable unit parking
standard which does not conform to Code requirements. Except for the overall minimum
number of parking spaces, the project complies with all other affordable multiple family
parking provisions, including occupancy restrictions, on -site management, being located
within 1 /4 mile of a high service transportation corridor, and proximity to service amenities.
But the project does not comply with the provision that rents must not exceed 30 percent of
the 50 percent of the area median income under Section 18.58.020.020. Due to the State
of California Tax Credit financing requirements, 50 percent of the units will be affordable at
30 percent of 60 percent of area median income, which does not comply with the technical
rent criteria to qualify for the affordable parking incentive in this section. However, the
project will be 100 percent affordable, and a parking waiver is being requested to use the
affordable parking standard for all units within the project.
(25) Waiver (h) pertains to minimum interior setback. Code requires a minimum setback of 15
feet along the west property line and 9 to 17 feet is proposed. The petitioner has submitted
the attached justification of waiver letter indicating that the property has size, configuration,
and building envelope constraints that make it difficult to build a multiple family project
without the need for waivers. Since the property has constraints such as a narrow lot
depth, three street frontages, and close proximity to a railroad track, staff concurs with this
justification and recommends approval of this waiver request.
Page 8
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 2
(26) The Housing Element of the City's General Plan identifies this property as a "Housing
Opportunity Site" with a density range of 19 to 36 units per acre. The City regional housing
need share during the planning period, from 1998 to 2005, is 11,508 units. Overall, the
Housing Element identified 154 housing opportunity sites throughout the City with
appropriate density ranges to accommodate 16,048 to 20,841 housing units. The State
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has found the City's Housing
Element to be in compliance with State Law. The finding of compliance was conditioned
upon successful completion of the City's commitment to rezone identified housing
opportunity sites to a medium density residential zoning classification (RM -4). If sites are
not designated in time to allow development to occur within the planning period (1998 to
2005), the Housing Element would no longer demonstrate sufficient and adequate sites and
must be promptly amended to identify and designate alternative sites. This variance
request would promote the goals of the Housing Element, and if approved, would result in
the construction of 60 "affordable" multi - family dwelling units on the subject property.
(27) The applicant requests approval for waiver of Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound
attenuation for residential projects. This Policy states the following:
"It is the policy of the City Council that a noise level analysis shall be performed for any
proposed residential development located within 600 feet of any existing or adopted
freeway, expressway, major arterial highway, primary arterial highway or railroad and that
the Planning Commission be authorized to waive specific requirements, subject to appeal
to the City Council.
The following noise attenuation features shall be incorporated in these residential
developments as required to reduce the noise levels as indicated.
No habitable residential structure shall be located less than 100 feet from a railroad track.
In all residential developments located within 600 feet of a railroad track, there shall be a
sound barrier which will provide line -of -site shielding from all points 8 feet above the tracks
to the eaves of all habitable structures located within 600 feet of the tracks. The sound
barrier shall consist of an earth berm, a masonry wall, or a combination thereof. A masonry
wall, which is used as a sound barrier, shall be no more than 6 feet high. Where vehicular
or pedestrian access through the barrier is permitted, gates or baffles may be provided,
however, said access shall be designed to minimize sound transmission.
Residential structure shall be designed to limit the interior noise caused by motor vehicles
or railroad trains to a maximum of 45 dB CNEL on an annual basis in any habitable room
with windows closed. Proper design may include, but shall not be limited to, building
orientation, double or extra - strength windows, wall and ceiling insulation and orientation
and insulation of vents. Where it is necessary that windows be closed in order to achieve
the required level, it shall be provided for ventilation/cooling to provide a habitable
environment."
Page 9
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 2
(28) As indicated in the attached noise analysis summary, all 60 apartment units are proposed
to be in close proximity to the railroad track. The study concludes that exterior living areas
would be exposed to worst case noise levels of 84 dB based on long term noise
measurements. In order to conform to the 65 dB noise criterion in outdoor living areas and
45 dB for indoor living areas, the study recommends that a 14 -foot high block wall barrier
be constructed along the west property line. Staff recommends approval of this request to
waive the sound attenuation policy to allow a sound barrier greater than 8 feet in height
(and a concrete masonry wall greater than 6 feet in height) to adequately attenuate the
proposed 60 -unit "affordable" apartment complex.
(29) A majority of the future housing opportunity sites in the City, as identified in the Land Use
and Housing Elements of the General Plan, would be located adjacent to major arterials,
railroad tracks, and freeways. To apply more appropriate noise standards to future housing
projects, Planning Services Division staff is in the process of drafting an amendment to this
Council Policy pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects. This amendment will
be agendized for Planning Commission review next month-
FINDINGS
(30) Section 18.42.110 of the parking ordinance sets forth the following findings which are
required to be made before the parking waivers are approved by the Planning Commission:
(a) 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;
(b) 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;
(c) That the variance, under the conditions imposed if any, will not increase the demand
and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate
vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for
such use under an agreement in compliance with subsection 18.42.050.030 (Non -
Residential Uses — Exception);
(d) 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; and
(e) 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.
Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the granting of any variance
pursuant to this section, the granting of the variance shall be deemed contingent upon
operation of the proposed use in conformance with the assumptions relating to the
operation and intensity of the use as contained in the Parking Demand Study that formed
the basis for approval of the variance. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or otherwise
deviating from any of the assumptions as contained in the Parking Demand Study shall be
deemed a violation of the express conditions imposed upon the variance, which shall
subject the variance to revocation or modification pursuant to the provisions of Section
18.60200 (City- Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits).
Page 10
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 2
(31) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the
Zoning Code, a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring that no property,
because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly
enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose of any
variance is to prevent discrimination and none shall be approved which would have the
effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other similar properties. Therefore,
before any variance is granted by the Commission, it shall be shown:
(a) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically
zoned properties in the vicinity; and
(b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
(32) Section 18.58.110 of the "Affordable Multiple Family Housing Development" ordinance sets
forth the following findings which are required to be made before an affordable housing
project is approved by the Planning Commission.
(a) That the Qualified Housing Development will be compatible with the scale and
character of the existing neighborhood and nearby land uses.
(b) That the Qualified Housing Development will preserve the integrity and character of
the zoning district and the General Plan.
(c) That the Qualified Housing Development will be consistent with design guidelines
established for affordable housing and will comply with all affordability
requirements-
RECOMMENDATION
(33) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the
evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the
public hearing, the Commission aoorove the applicant's request by adopting the attached
resolution including the findings and conditions of approval contained therein.
Page 11
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 =""
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04652 BE GRANTED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Variance
for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California described as:
LOTS 1 AND 2 IN BLOCK H OF THE LORELEI TRACT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM,
COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 29,
PAGE 24, MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CALIFORNIA.
LOT 3 IN BLOCK "H' OF LORELEI TRACT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF
ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 29, PAGE 24,
MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CALIFORNIA.
LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 AND 12 IN BLOCK "H" OF THE LORELEI TRACT, CITY OF
ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN
BOOK 29, PAGE 24, MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY
CALIFORNIA.
LOTS 13, 14 AND 15 IN BLOCK "H" OF THE LORELEI TRACT, CITY OF ANAHEIM,
COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 29,
PAGE 24, MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CALIFORNIA.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on June 13, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60
"Procedures ", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed variance and to investigate and
make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said 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, does find
and determine the following facts:
That the petitioner proposes waivers of the following to construct a 3 -story, 60 unit affordable
apartment complex:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.06.090.010.0102 Minimum front yard setback. (20 feet required
along Broadway; 18 feet, 8 inches to 29 feet
proposed).
(b) SECTION NO. 18.06.090.060
Maximum and minimum building wall length.
(Maximum 20 feet and minimum 12 feet required;
45 and 7 feet proposed).
(c) SECTION NO. 18.40.060
Improvement of public right of way (8 foot
parkways along Vine Street and Santa Ana Street
required; 5 foot parkway proposed).
(d) SECTION NO. 18.42.030.020.0206 Tvpe of parking spaces (Enclosed garages not
permitted; 62 garages proposed).
CR \PC2005 -0 -1-
1*k1Ir7rY
(e) SECTION NO. 18.46.060
(f) SECTION NO. 18.46.110.030
(g) SECTION NO. 18.58.050.010
(h) SECTION NO. 18.58.060.010
Required parking lot landscaping (Landscape
break required for every 10 parking spaces; no
landscape break proposed).
Maximum wall height. (8 feet high permitted; 14
feet high proposed).
Minimum number of parking spaces (117
required; 106 proposed).
Minimum interior setback (15 feet required; 9
feet, 6 inches to 17 feet 4 inches proposed).
2. That the above - mentioned waivers are hereby granted on basis that there are special
circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which
do not apply to other identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning
Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in
the vicinity.
3. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the
property involved or to the intended use of the property, including constraints such as a narrow lot depth,
three street frontages, and close proximity to a railroad track, that do not apply generally to the property or
class of use in the same vicinity and zone.
4. That the requested variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in
question.
5. That the requested variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located.
That * * ** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal to construct a 3 -story, 60 unit affordable apartment complex and
does hereby find that the Negative Declaration previously approved in connection with this Variance is
adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation in connection with this request upon finding
that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the
Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further
finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that
the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does
hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a
necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and
general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That the City of Anaheim Sewer Impact Mitigation fee for the Old Town Basin 8 Area shall be paid.
2. That as a condition of the abandonment of the existing northerly alley, the legal property owner shall
relocate the existing sewer and reserve an easement for public sewer purposes.
3. That the property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim an easement 45- feet in
width (5' feet additional dedication from existing right -of -way) from the construction centerline of the street
-2- PC2005-
along Broadway for road, public utilities and other public purposes. Corner cut -off dedications are also
required on Vine Street at Broadway and Santa Ana Street.
4. That the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department Development Services Division for review
and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that:
• Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas,
maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero
discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas.
• Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area
Management Plan.
• Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP.
• Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMPs.
• Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the
Treatment Control BMPs, and
• Describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment
Control BMPs.
5. That the applicant shall:
• Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and
installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications.
• Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non - structural BMPs described in the
Project WQMP
• Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available
onsite.
• Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural
BMPs.
6. That all driveways shall be constructed with ten (10) foot radius curb returns as required by the City
Engineer in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115. Said information shall be specifically shown
on plans submitted for building permits.
7. That gates shall not be installed across the driveway in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular
traffic in the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan
No. 475 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager
prior to issuance of a building permit.
8. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval in
conformance with the Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for the sign or
walltfence locations.
9. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval
showing conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436 and 470 pertaining
to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and
maintained in conformance with said plans.
10. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for storage uses
11. That no compact parking spaces shall be permitted.
12. That an on -site trash truck turn around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476
and shown on plans as required by the Department of Public Works, Sanitation Division. Said information
shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
13. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works
Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said
-3- PC2005-
Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily
identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from
graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum 1- gallon size clinging vines planted on
maximum 3 -foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans
submitted for building permits.
14. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the
Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval.
15. That the locations for future above - ground utility devices including, but not limited to, electrical
transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices, etc., shall be shown on
plans submitted for building permits. Plans shall also identify the specific screening treatments of each
device (i.e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.) and shall be
subject to the review and approval of the appropriate City departments.
16. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or
abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering
Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department.
17. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Services Standards
Specifications- Any water service and /or fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if
continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The
owner /developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line.
18. That since this project has landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall
be installed and comply with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of Anaheim Municipal Code.
Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
19. That prior to application for water meters, fire line or submitting the water improvement plans for approval,
the developer /owner shall submit to the Public Utilities Water Engineering Division an estimate of the
maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information
will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water
demands. Any off -site water system improvements required to serve the project shall occur in accordance
with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules and Regulations.
20. That the property owner /developer shall install street lights on Vine Street as required by the Electrical
Engineering Division. A bond for the installation of the street lights shall be posted with the City of
Anaheim. The street lights shall be installed prior to occupancy.
21. That the property owner /developer shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement to be
determined as electrical design is completed.
22. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. Landscape
and /or hardscape screening of all pad mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on plans
submitted for building permits.
23. That the entire property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular
landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours
from time of occurrence.
24. That any tree planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed,
damaged, diseased and /or dead.
25. That if required by the Urban Forestry Division of the Community Services Department, street trees shall
be installed, by the property owner, within the public right -of -way adjacent to Broadway, Vine Street, and
-4- PC2005-
Santa Ana Street. The size, type and number of trees shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Urban
Forestry Division of the Community Services Department.
26. That all air conditioning apparatus and other roof and ground- mounted equipment shall be properly
shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent residential properties and the public right-of-way-
Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
27. That all dwelling units shall be assigned street addresses by the Building Division.
28. The applicant shall agree to construct, operate and maintain the Affordable Units in accordance with a
written "Affordability Agreement" between the applicant and the City, in a form acceptable to the City
Attorney and Community Development Department, duly executed and acknowledged by the applicant
and the City, and recorded against the subject property in the official records of Orange County, California.
The Affordable Units shall be subject to the requirements of the Affordability Agreement for a period of
fifty -five (55) years, beginning on the date a certificate of occupancy is granted for the Affordable Units.
29. That clinging vines shall be installed on the masonry wall adjacent to the railroad tracks and shall be
permanently maintained in an orderly fashion. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans
submitted for building permits.
30. That final landscape and fencing plans for the subject property shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval. Said plans shall show minimum 24 -inch box size trees, shrubs,
groundcover, and clinging vines to be planted in layers adjacent to the sound wall along the west property
line adjacent to the railroad tracks. Any decision made by the Planning and Community Development
Departments regarding said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission. All trees shall be
properly and professionally maintained by the property owner to ensure mature, healthy growth. Such
information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
31. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications
submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning
Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 14, and as conditioned herein.
32. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 28,
29, and 30, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said
conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
33. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 5, 7, 22, 27, and 31, above - mentioned,
shall be complied with.
34. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code 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.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that 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.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that 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
-5- PC2005-
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.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
June 13, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, 'Procedures"
of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council
Resolution in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on June 13, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
2005.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-6- PC2005-
SECTION 4
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER Attachment- Item No. 2
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: 18.58:020.020 & 18.58.050.010
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver) `
PERTAINING TO: Definition of Affordable Rent and Affordable Parking Ratios
Sections 18.74.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the
Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown:
That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, locatipn or
surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to
arrive at a decision, please answer each of [he following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sough[, fully
and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages.
Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings? X Yes _ No.
If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances:
e`
2.
3.
4.
Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the
same zone as your property? X Yes _ No
If your answer is "yes; 'describe how the property is different; Tnr nroooved aere~onmem win tie nror~ssiooaiiv m~r~~~a ~~d..au
Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring
properties located within thesame zone? X Yes _No
If your answer if "yes; 'describe the special circumstances: Tn~ nroocrfv i, tocntcd in a
Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property
owners)? X Yes _ No
'The sole purpose ~
is
ode waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be
of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
rized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted.
4.26•oS
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VAR(ANCE NO. _
2 VAR NO
of
Authorized Agent
Dale
2D05-04652
SECTION
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER Attachment- Item No. 2
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: Citv Council Policy No. 542
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING TO: Sound attenuation for developments near railroad tracks
Sections 18.74.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the
Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the Following shall be shown:.
I. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to
arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully
and as completely as possible. If you need additionatspace, you may attach additional pages.
I. Are there special circumstances that apply to the propertyin matters such as size; shape, topography, location or
surroundings? X Yes _ No.
If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: n,ashbia~e oroacnv.
.v w...• .. •~...~... ... ~.. ter.. uu-v I-11, VII,. VI 11111'V.
2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the
same zone as your property? X .Yes No
If your answer is "yes," describe how [he property is different: A, seared anovo. rhls mm~errv. ankke those mm~cn c~caltd
3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring
properties located within the same zone? X Yes _No
If your answer if "yes; 'describe the special circumstances: ew~t concttucleJ houvine cxises imm~~iotely across Broadevav f'ror
v mr v vc~ cmcnu.
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property
owners)? X Yes _ No
EXPLAIN Thc rcionc of rhi v nrnnrnv m n rr<idrnrini ucn umc ~ni,im.d by r6.. G,.d ...L...~.,..~, e. .,,-,.....d ,...........i ~....~.., r ._ -- _m_~ ._
The sol ur-pose of an ariance r Code waiver shall be [o prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be
approv d wou • ve the ffect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
which s no othe see res y authorized by zone regulations governing subject propetty. Use variances are not permitted..
4-Z~ • os
Signature of Pr p rty Owner or Authorized Agent Date
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE NO.
9 VAR ~0. 2005 - 0 4 b~ 2
SECTION 4
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF Attachment -Item No. 2
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
:REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: 18.06:090.060
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
..PERTAINING TO: Wall Leneth
..Sections 18.74.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that before anyvariance or Code waiver may Ge grantedby the
'Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown:
I . That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape; topography, location or
surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity,
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to
arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully
and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages.
Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings? X Yes _ No:
If your answer is "Yes;' describe the special circumstances:
2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties'in the vicinity which are in the
same zone as your property? X Yes No
If your answer' is "yes," describe how the propertyis different: Tne oruncrly ~s to~~ uaa nartuw ~~d ;~ aajoceni to m~ m;im,a aaek
Multiple Family Houaine ON;nances which dfctale a mini , um 12 Feet and ma<imum 1u Feet w•ml lene~h reowremrnC
3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring
properties located within the same zone? X Yes _No
If your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances: Thcuroncnvis ~ocared fn an esisiine reafdent;at nefehburnoua w;th
resid •ntiol true mho ~in ~ ~imilnr d ~ign fcaturea as the orunused nroicct in I d'ne w Ila u•i~h leas than a minimum of 12 Feet a d arcmcr ih~n ~n feel
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property
owners)? X Yes _ No
~~/~c1! 4.26.05
Signature 9~ P operty Owne r Authorized Agent Date
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE NO
3 VAR gyp, ZA05 - 0 4 6 5 2
p o of any vari Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be
hich uld hay the a ct of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
t othe ise ex essly uthorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted.
SECTION ~
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER Attachment- Item No. 2
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: 18.40.060.020 & .030
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING TO: Dedication & Improvements along Vine Street and Santa Ana
Sections 18.74.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the
Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission; the following shall be shown:
1. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed byother property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist; and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to
arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully
and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages:
1. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings? X Yes _ No.
1 f your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: 7hc subim mm~em• is ions and namow• nna mo mn¢th mns alone n mitr
2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from othet properties in the vicinity which are in the
same zone as your property? X Yes _ No
If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: The sahiect nroncm is aonmsimately tzs r~•et •n aemh between vino
Str •t and the '1 •m mm~erty lin • ~hich i ~ consid •mbly les • than th • d •oth of nei~hboriny omn •rti •s For examole the enies immediately ucro the
street nn Vme arc annroximately 155 feet in dcoth
3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring
properties located within the same zone? X _Yes _No
If your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances: As stated inn± above. me sohicct nron •rtys conader my arrower than
surtoundine oroncrties Ac a tesuh the devcloomenl is constmincd in mectine the dedications and imom ~emcn[s nlon cnnm An nd Vine Street
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property
owners)? X Yes _ No
EXPLAIN Thc rcrone of this orco •rrv to ~ mideminl use nvs initiated by the Red ~elonment A~encv in an etTon to ensure land use compatibility ith
Flt r[nunaine ukw mtd the Grneml Plan
The urp a of y va ' nee Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be
appr vt:d wh~ch uld hay the of ect ofgranting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
whi is of erw' exp essly uthorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted.
~•Zto•OS
Signature of Pr perty Owner or Authorized Agent Date
CONDff[ONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE NO.
4 VAR gyp, 2A05 - 0 4 b 5 Z
SECTION 4
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF Attachment -Item No. 2
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: 18.06. (00.030
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAIN WG TO: Recurred Storase Areas
Sections 1$.74:060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that before any variance or Cade waiver may be granted by the
Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown:
I. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
]n order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to
arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully
and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages.
I . Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings? X Yes _ No.
Ifyour answer is "Yes; 'describe the special circumstances:: me sabieet oronem is lone and narrow. in;d the lenatn runs Mona a raiirond
2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the
same zone as your property? X Yes ~ No -
Ifyour answer is "yes;' describe how the property is
requirement underthe Citv's Multiple Familv0 dinance hickdictatesa minimum lOU cubic l"eet peru it reauisment
3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive i[ of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring
properties located within the same zone? X Yes _No _
Ifyour answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances: The subicct nronenv is con'idemhly nano •er thnn urronndina nropenies
4.
rCgUlremeal%1.
The urpose of an v anc or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be
ap ove hich wool a the ffect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
wh his ex ressl authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted:
4. zc~ ~ 05
Signature of ro erty Owner or Authorized Agent Date
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE NO.
a LIAR ~Q, 2005-04652
Were [he special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property
owners)? X Yes No
SECTION 4
APPL{CANT'S STATEMENT OF
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER Attachment -Item No. 2
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: 1.8.42.030.020:0206
(A separate statement is required for each Code
PERTAINING TO: TVPe of Parkne Saaces- Private Garaees
Sections 18.74.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the
Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown:
I. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, which do not apply to other. property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to
arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully
and as completely as possible.: If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages.
I. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings? X Yes _ No.
If your answer is "Yes; 'describe the special circumstances: The tocadon orthe nroocrty is in an ex~crin ~ residemi•d area thm inct des a
2.
3.
Are the special circumstances that apply. to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the
same zone as your property? X Yes _ No
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property
owners)? X Yes No
EXPLACN Thc rcronrofthic ro n • to 'dc tial uvc wa it' cd b the Redcc to e t eency ioan etPi~n to ensure land use comnmihil
The le u ose of an va 'once o Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be
appr ved hich wou ha the a ect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
whi is n exp essl uthorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted.
4.26•oS
of Pr o~erty Owner of Authorized Agent Date
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE NO.
s VAR (Vp 2005 - 0 ~+ b
Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring
properties located within the same zone? X Yes No
If your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstancesi 'rt,~ oronem• is iocured in an cxisriac res drmiat ~ •; hbornooi! where
neiehhorinu mm~cnicc have cncloti~~ar:iaes
secnoN a
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER Attachment- Item No. 2
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: 18.58.060.010.01
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING TO: MinimuminteriorSetbacks
Sections 18.74.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the
Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown:
1. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or
sun•oundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and'
2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to
arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully
and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages.
,1. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such assize, shape, topography, location or
surtoundings? X Yes _ No.
If Your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: The sub'ccr c ', I and nn wand the len nh runs alon a m'Iroad
2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the
same zone as your property? X Yes _ No
If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: Tree sutt'ect ro en is a rosimatei t?s r'cet in de to between Vine
3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring
properties located within the same zone? X _Yes _No
If your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances: n sorted in ua ahuee. me snniect oroonrty rs ennsidemmv narrooer t
surruundine mm~cnic5 Asa result the deecloomenl is constrained in mee[inFlhe imerior xclbacks alonu the western nronenv line Mitieatina eni
be made to minimize the en'ect of nor mmine the interior vntb~ckc ouch ns buildine desi¢n that en+ures no windows or emmnces ore within the re0
area.
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property
owners)? X Yes _ No
EXPLAIN The rezone of this nroncnv m u residcmial use teas initim~nt by the ltcdevclonment Aecncv in an efPon to ~mwrc land use comnmibi
cuttts m me rem ^ t c souna worn conamrn tree nroncnv oe umnme access.
The s Ipose of y va once r Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shalt be
appr ve hich w Id ha a [he ec[ of granting a special privilege no[ shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
whic is rwise ex essl authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted.
4.2~ •o~j
Signature o Pro erty Owner or Authorized Agent Date
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE NO.
VAR ~Q, 2005-0465.2
SECTION ~
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF Attachment -Item No. 2
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: 18.06.090.OIO.OIO~
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING TO: Minimum Front Setbacks
Sections [ 8.74.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that before any variance or Code waiver may be grented by the
Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown:
I. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to
arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully
and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages.
I . Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings? X Yes _ No.
If your answer,is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: The sabieet mm~em• isJona and narrow: and me ten~rth nrnc stool. , m;tr„~rt
2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which arc in the
same zone as your property? X Yes No
If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: rna.abicai nroncnv is anom:imudv I zs feet in demh between vine
~~
3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring
properties located within the same zone? X Yes No
If your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances: ns<tnt~~i in a? above the •ub'ect oron •m; on idcmbly narro ~cl
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property
owners)? X Yes _ No
EXPLAIN The rezone of thin mm~ertv to a residrntial use xos initia[,r by the R Je 1 nment Aeenev in an effnn to enure land ux comn~t'b'I'ty ith
cunut J' ~ uu ~ •md the C m •ml Plan Funhcr tti~nv vests prior to ou•netshin cf the mm~env b the Fiot Cn Authority a m'Iroad track u-ts de eloped
ulon ~ the wetlem r line whichthe c msultcd'n a loo fronts re t the ra en This crni IeJ w'th he ui a is to m'li m a jai st the
c ttLS [hc 'sad ,c c and wall constrain the men limitin ~ access.
The sol rp se of any var' ce or ode waiver shall lie to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be
approv d w i fi would e e effe of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
which s not of pre sly a prized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted.
¢•Z6•o5
Signature of P op y Owner or uthorized Agent Date
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO.
a VAR ~Q 2[!~5 - 0 4 6 5
0
Vine Street Family Housing
CUP Application
Letter of Operation
Attachment- Item No. 2
Description of Proposed Use
This proposal is for 60 units of affordable rental family housing on a 2.3 acre city owned
site in the City of Anaheim, California. The property is a long and narrow site that was
recently rezoned from light industrial to residential. This rezone was initiated by City
staff and was completed concurrently with the required CEQA process which resulted in
a negative declaration.
The proposal calls for 29 two- bedroom and 31 three - bedroom units affordable to families
earning between 30 and 60% of the area median income. The project consists of 2 and 3
stories with both townhome style apartments and flats. The architectural style was
developed through a community design process and reflects the neighboring single
family bungalow style homes. The proposal also includes a 2,881 square foot community
room that will provide space for resident activities. This space will also house on -site
management offices.
The property is bound to the east and south by a mix of single - family and multi - family
residential. The east property line, which would be the main entrance to the proposed
development, faces primarily older, bungalow -style single family homes. The north
property line is on Broadway, a major transportation corridor that has multi - family
residences as well as some smaller retail and recreational establishments. The western
property line abuts a railroad track, separating the site from a primarily light industrial
area, some of which is being converted into residential as part of the City's
redevelopment agency plan. Within walking distance to the site are a park, community
center, bus stops and a Boys & Girls Club.
Management will be provided by Mercy Services Corporation (MSC), a professional
property management company that is a division of the owner, Mercy Housing
California. MSC will provide full staffing for the property as outlined below. In addition
to having on -site management offices, one of the MSC employees will also live at the
property. MSC will require all tenants to enter into leases that among other standard
lease provisions, include the following attachments:
House Rules — agreement consisting of rules for common areas, overnight guests,
respect for other residents, etc.
Drug Free Housing — agreement to maintain a drug -free environment
Parking Rules - agreement consisting of rules for use of parking spaces which
expressly do not allow use of spaces for storage, mechanical work on vehicles, etc.
These attachments are considered a part of the lease and MSC will ensure that tenants
strictly adhere to,these provisions. Tenants who do not adhere to these provisions will be
in violation of their lease.
VAR NO M05-04652
C `
J
• Attachment- Item No. 2
Days & Hours of Operation:
Because this proposal is for a residential development, it will be accessible by residents
on a 24 hour basis and will be monitored with an on -site security system. The
community rooms and management offices will be open during normal business hours,
Monday- Friday, 8am -6pm.
Number of Employees Per Shift:
The management of the site will require both a full -time and part -time property manager,
a full -time maintenance employee, a full -time resident services coordinator, and a part-
time janitor, for a total of 4 full time equivalents. All employees will work the same shift
during the normal business hours as stated above.
VAR Np 2005 - 0 4 6 5 Z.
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF ANAHEIM
DATE: March 1, 2005
TO: John Lower, Traffic/Transportation Manager
FROM: Andy Nogal, Redevelopment Project Manager
Attachment- Item No. 2
SUBJECT: Vine Street Multifamily Affordable Housing Project —Parking Letter
Request
That the City Traffic Engineer concur that the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency's
submittal of the "LSA Affordable Housing Parking Study and this memorandum meet the .
requirement for a parking study for the Vine Street Affordable Multiple - family Rental
( "Project" ) project.
Background
A parking study was prepared by LSA Associates on December 10, 2003, as part of the
adoption of the affordable multiple - family ordinance which established parking ratios for
affordable units and recommended criteria in support of parking requirements for
affordable projects with occupancy restrictions and on -site management.
The proposed Project applicant, Mercy Housing California, is applying for development
approval under the new affordable multiple - family housing ordinance (Chapter 18.58)
for the construction of a new 60 -unit affordable multiple - family project. The applicant is
seeking parking incentives for all units and proposes to use the affordable unit parking
standard. The Project complies with all of the provisions of the affordable multiple -
family ordinance including, occupancy restrictions and on -site management, but not with
the provision that rents must not exceed 30 percent of 50 percent of area median
income under Section 18.58.020.020. Due to the State of California Tax Credit
financing requirements 50 percent of the units in the Project will be affordable at 30
percent of 60 percent of area median income which does not comply with the technical
requirement of the ordinance.
The Project will be 100 percent affordable; however, the units with rents at 60 percent
do not meet the rent criteria to qualify for the affordable parking incentive in Section
19.58.050.010. A waiver is being requested from Section 18.58.020.020. in order to
use the affordable parking standard for all units in the Project.
VAR No. W05-0465 2
Vine Street Multifamily Ardable Housing Project — Parking Oer Attachment - Item No. 2
Page - 2
Justification
The proposed Project complies with all of the criteria to qualify as a Qualified Housing
Development in Section 18.58.020.170. and meets the intent of the ordinance to provide
a greater number of affordable housing units. The site complies with all of the criteria
necessary to qualify for the parking incentive under the affordable multiple - family
ordinance as follows:
1. The Qualified Housing Development is located within one - quarter mile of at least
two social service facilities:
a. Boys and Girls Club at 311 East Broadway
b. Child care facility at 100 South Atchison Street
2. The Project will impose occupancy restrictions and provide on -site management.
Conclusion
The Project meets the requirements of the ordinance as a Qualified Housing
Development. It exceeds the minimum requirements of the ordinance and will comply
with the development criteria for on -site management, occupancy controls and proximity
to social service facilities. The Project proposes to use the affordable parking standard
for all units.
The Parking Study prepared by LSA Associates on December 10, 2003, (attached)
supports this proposal and will be forwarded to the Planning Commission:
su
Aridy
Project Manager
F%D CSNDMI EMOSWNM5215AANWWSA.DOC VAR No. 2005 - 0 4 65 2
0 0
Attachment- Item No. 2
EXTERIOR NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT
PREPARED BY:
Martin Newson & Associates LLC
2001 Santa Monica Blvd, Ste. 301
- Santa Monica CA 90403
Tel. (310) 829 6343
Joseph W. Celano, P.E.
e-mail: joe®newsonacoustics.com
PREPARED FOR:
Mercy Housing California
500 South Main Street, Suite 110
Orange, CA 92868
jQke: 30 November 2004'"
BAR Na 2005 -04b
page 1
' INTRODUCTION
Attachment- Item No. 2
Mercy Housing proposes to construct approximately 60 units of affordable housing on Vine Street
between Broadway and Santa Ana Street in the City of Anaheim. Due to the proximity of the
project site to the Metrolink/Amtrak railroad right -0f - -way, an acoustical analysis has been
requested. Figure 1, below, shows an aerial photograph of the existing site and the location of the
acoustic measurement positions. It should be noted that subsequent to this photograph being
taken, the easterly most of the three tracks, which was a siding serving the southerly portion of the
project site, was removed. Only the two `through' tracks remain.
This report presents an analysis of present and projected future railroad noise impacts on the
proposed project and presents recommended noise mitigation measures sufficient to conform to
the City's CNEL 45 maximum interior noise and CNEL 65 maximum exterior criteria.
STANDARDS
Figure N -2 of the Noise Element of the City of Anaheim- General Plan (Noise Element) presents
compatibility guidelines for various land use categories based upon exterior noise exposure in
terms of Ld. or CNEL. The L,� and CNEL descriptors are time of day weighted average noise
metrics. Both impose a 10 dB penalty on noise occurring during nighttime hours between
10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following morning.. In addition CNEL imposes a 5 dB penalty on
noise during evening hours between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. These penalties are to adjust for the
increased human sensitivity to noise during periods of relaxation and sleep.
MAh' No. 2 005 -0465?
Figure 1 - Existing Site Plan (not to scale)
page 2
• Attachment- Item No. 2
The applicable compatibility guidelines for `Residential- Multiple Family' are
CNEL < 65 dB(A)
Normally Acceptable
CNEL 60 -70 dB(A)
Conditionally Acceptable
CNEL 70 -75 dB(A)
Normally Unacceptable
CNEL >75 dB(A)
Clearly Unacceptable
In addition, Table N -3 of the Noise Element defines allowable interior and exterior noise standards
f6r various land uses. The applicable standards are CNEL 45 interior and CNEL 65 in "habitable"
exterior areas. These standards are based upon the requirements of the California State Building
Code. The State regulations also require that if the windows must be closed in order to meet the
interior noise standard, ventilation or air conditioning must be specified to provide a habitable
interior environment.
NOISE MEASUREMENTS
Acoustical measurements were conducted on 10 November 2004 and 15 -17 November 2004 to
establish the existing exterior noise environment at the project site.
Short term measurements of individual train operations were taken on 10, 15 and 17 November to
establish the frequency spectrum of the noise for use in the exterior- to-interior noise reduction
calculations.. The measurements were taken with a Bruel & Kjaer (B &K) type 2260 Investigator
Precision Sound Analyzer. Immediately prior to each series of measurements, the analyzer was
calibrated utilizing a B &K type 4231 acoustic calibrator (certification 2 June 2004). The
measurement position, labeled "Mess Posl" on Figure 1,.was located near the westerly property
line of the site approximately 30 ft from the center of the two tracks and approximately 25 ft from
the center of the `near' track which was observed to carry north bound operations. The
microphone was fitted with a foam windscreen and was supported approximately 5 ft above the
existing site grade.
Over the three days of measurements a total of 31 train operations were measured. These
consisted of 8 northbound Amtrak, 9 southbound Amtrak, 1 northbound freight, 5 northbound
Metrolink and 8 southbound Metrolink operations. Table 1, below shows a summary of the
measurement results.
Train
Octave Band Center Frequency
- Hz
A-
Type
Number
63
125
250
500
1000
2000
4000
8000
wtd
Amtrak
17
85.5
82.6
84.6
90.9
87.2
81.8
74.7
65.5
91.5
Freight
1
93.4
853
87.9
85.0
83.9
76.2
72.7
-70.4
.87.6
Metrolink
13
89.2
84.7
79.9
88.2
90.3
87.7
80.4
72.3
93.9
All
31
87.9
83.7
83.4
89.8
88.7
85.2
78.0
69.7
92.6
Table 1 - Average Train Noise Spectra
It should be noted that the 0.1 dB precision shown in Table 1 is the resolution of the numerical
display on the analyzer and is only retained for illustration and to reduce the cumulative effects of
rounding in subsequent calculations. The absolute calibration accuracy of the measurement
VAR a 2005-046521.
page 3
Attachment- Item No. 2
system is approximately t 0.5 dB. For reference, a change in sound level of 1 dB or less is
typically not noticeable to an "average" listener, a 3 dB change is noticeable to most listeners, and
a difference in level of 10 dB is necessary for the sound to be judged to be half or twice as loud.
A long term (56 hour duration), unattended measurement was taken to determine the CNEL at the
site. This measurement utilized a Rion type NL 21 sound level meter and consisted of a series of
consecutive 1 minute duration time average (L samples beginning 10:00 a.m. on 15 November
and ending 6:00 p.m. on 17 November. Immediately prior to, and after completion of the
measurements, the analyzer was calibrated utilizing the same B &K type 4231 acoustic calibrator.
The microphone was supported above the southwesterly comer of the roof of the existing
commercial building on the northerly end of the project site, labeled "Meas.Pos2" on Figure 1.
The microphone was located approximately 14 ft above the existing site grade and approximately
32 ft from the center of the two tracks. The measured 1 minute L data were utilized to calculate
hourly average noise levels that were in turn utilized to calculate CNEL. Figure 2, below, shows
the time history of the hourly average (Le I hour) noise levels, indicated by the squares, and the
maximum (L..) noise level recorded during each hour, indicated by the triangles.
Figure 2 - Average and Maximum Noise Levels
Measured at Roof of Existing Commercial Building
The hourly average (Leq I hour) noise levels ranged from a low of approximately 54 dB(A) during
the 4:00 a.m. hour when, presumably, no trains passed by the site; to highs of approximately
80 dB(A) during hours with several train pass -bys, typically morning and evening hours with
VAR N0. 2005 =0465 2
■
Figure 2 - Average and Maximum Noise Levels
Measured at Roof of Existing Commercial Building
The hourly average (Leq I hour) noise levels ranged from a low of approximately 54 dB(A) during
the 4:00 a.m. hour when, presumably, no trains passed by the site; to highs of approximately
80 dB(A) during hours with several train pass -bys, typically morning and evening hours with
VAR N0. 2005 =0465 2
0
page 4
Attachment- Item No. 2
`heavy' commuter operations. Maximum (L.) noise levels due to the loudest individual train
pass -bys were in the 115 to 118 dB(A) range.
On the basis of this measurement, taken over a period of more than 2 days, the present noise
exposure on the project site would be approximately CNEL 78.8 at the westerly facade of the
existing building, 32 ft from the center of the two tracks.
NOISE ELEMENT RAILROAD NOISE CONTOURS
Figure N -4 of the Noise Element shows locations of the `future' railroad noise contours.
However, the scale of the map is such that determining noise levels close to the tracks is
problematic, at best. Table 2, below, shows distances to the Future CNEL contours, as reported by
a representative of The Planning Center, who prepared the background information for the Noise
Element. Note two columns of data are presented, the first is for locations remote from grade
crossings and the second is for locations in close proximity to a grade crossing.
Table 2 — Railroad CNEL Contour Locations
The width of the railroad right -of -way varies in vicinity of the project site. The preliminary site
plan indicates approximately a 35 R setback between the center of the two remaining tracks and
the westerly facades of the proposed residential buildings. On the basis of the noise contour
locations shown in Table 2, this setback distance would result in exterior noise exposure of
approximately CNEL 73, if the site were not located near a grade crossing. However, there are
grade crossings located at both the northerly and southerly ends of the site, at Broadway and Santa
Ana Street, respectively. Therefore, based on the tabulated distances for the `Close to Grade
Crossing' condition, the future exterior noise exposure at the westerly facade of the residences
would be approximately CNEL 84.
As described above, the present noise exposure at the westerly facade of the existing building on
the northerly end of the site based upon more than two consecutive days of continuous noise
monitoring was approximately CNEL 79. Thus, the measured present noise exposure is
approximately 5 dB lower than the future CNEL computed based upon `Close to Grade Crossing'
contour distances shown in Table 2.
It is possible that some portion of this 5 dB difference between the tabulated contour locations and
the measurement data may be due to an allowance for future increases in the number of
operations. However, a 5 dB increase in CNEL would require essentially tripling the total number
of train operations if the time of day distribution were to remain constant; or else a substantial
increase in the number of evening (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and/or nighttime (10:00 p.m. to
7:00 a.m.) operations. It is also possible that the difference is partially due to variations between
Mr( NO. 2005 - 0 4 6 5 2:
Distance from Center of Tracks to CNEL Contour - feet
CNEL
No Nearby Grade Crossing
Close to Grade Crossin
70
54
294
65
117
465
60
252
1002
Table 2 — Railroad CNEL Contour Locations
The width of the railroad right -of -way varies in vicinity of the project site. The preliminary site
plan indicates approximately a 35 R setback between the center of the two remaining tracks and
the westerly facades of the proposed residential buildings. On the basis of the noise contour
locations shown in Table 2, this setback distance would result in exterior noise exposure of
approximately CNEL 73, if the site were not located near a grade crossing. However, there are
grade crossings located at both the northerly and southerly ends of the site, at Broadway and Santa
Ana Street, respectively. Therefore, based on the tabulated distances for the `Close to Grade
Crossing' condition, the future exterior noise exposure at the westerly facade of the residences
would be approximately CNEL 84.
As described above, the present noise exposure at the westerly facade of the existing building on
the northerly end of the site based upon more than two consecutive days of continuous noise
monitoring was approximately CNEL 79. Thus, the measured present noise exposure is
approximately 5 dB lower than the future CNEL computed based upon `Close to Grade Crossing'
contour distances shown in Table 2.
It is possible that some portion of this 5 dB difference between the tabulated contour locations and
the measurement data may be due to an allowance for future increases in the number of
operations. However, a 5 dB increase in CNEL would require essentially tripling the total number
of train operations if the time of day distribution were to remain constant; or else a substantial
increase in the number of evening (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and/or nighttime (10:00 p.m. to
7:00 a.m.) operations. It is also possible that the difference is partially due to variations between
Mr( NO. 2005 - 0 4 6 5 2:
•
page 5
• Attachment- Item No.2
actual train noise levels at this specific location and the generalizations utilized to calculate the
noise contour locations.
INTERIOR NOISE ANALYSIS
On the basis of the long term noise measurements, the present exterior noise exposure at the
westerly facades of the buildings facing the railroad right -of -way would be approximately
CNEL 79, and the `future' exterior noise exposure based upon the distances indicated in Table 2
for locations `Close to Grade Crossings' would be approximately CNEL 84. Therefore, depending
upon which exterior noise exposure value is specified by the City to be utilized as the basis of
design, a minimum of either 34 dB(A) or 39 dB(A) of exterior - to-interior noise reduction would
be necessary to conform to the City's CNEL 45 maximum noise criterion in habitable interior
living spaces.
An exterior noise design spectrum was established based on the average of the measured train
noise data as shown in row `All' in Table 1. The overall level was adjusted to correspond to the
`present' CNEL 79 and `future' CNEL 84 exterior noise exposures.
At this time, detailed floor plans and elevations of the northerly, westerly and southerly facades
have not been established. Therefore, a preliminary analysis has assumed that windows having
line of sight to the tracks would not exceed 50% of the exposed area of the facade in any room.
Exterior wall construction was assumed to be stucco plaster, on plywood sheathing, on 2x6 wood
studs, with fiberglass batt thermal insulation in the cavity, and interior 5/8" thickness gypsum
board finish.
Windows were assumed to be `double window' assemblies such as Milgard `Quietline' which
incorporate two windows in a common frame with an approximately 2 -1/2" air gap between the
two windows. In order to meet CNEL 45 indoors for the measured CNEL 79 exterior noise
exposure, the windows should have a minimum acoustical rating of STC 41. However, in order to
meet CNEL 45 inside for the `future' CNEL 84 exterior noise exposure, the windows should have
a minimum rating of STC 45. Both of these assemblies utilize 3/4" insulating glass [1/8" double
strength (ds) - 1/2" air - 1/8" ds] as the outer glazing. The inner glazing in the STC 41 assembly
would be 1/8" ds glass. The inner glazing in the STC 45 assembly would be 7/32" laminated
acoustical glass. It should be noted that these windows have much higher acoustical performance
(and presumably cost) than those typically utilized in residential projects.
Due to the high exterior- to-interior noise reduction requirements, use of through -wall air
conditioning units would not be acoustically acceptable. In addition, fresh air intake ducts would
have to,be internally acoustically lined. The exact requirements would depend upon length of duct
runs and locations of air intakes relative to the tracks.
OUTDOOR NOISE ANALYSIS
The present exterior noise exposure at the westerly edge of the project site along the railroad right -
of -way would be approximately CNEL 79 based on the long term noise measurements. The future
'" N0. 2005 =04652
0
page 6
• Attachment- Item No. 2
noise exposure would be approximately CNEL 84 based upon the distances indicated in Table 2
for locations `Close to Grade Crossings'. Therefore, depending upon which exterior noise
exposure value is specified by the City to be utilized as the basis of design, a minimum of either
14 dB(A) or 19 dB(A) of shielding would be necessary to conform to the City's CNEL 65
maximum noise criterion in outdoor living areas.
At this time, the project site plan is preliminary. Distances from the tracks to potential `sound
wall' locations, locations of outdoor areas required to conform to the City's CNEL 65 exterior
noise criterion, elevations of outdoor living areas relative to the tracks, etc., are not' precisely
known. Preliminary barrier attenuation calculations were performed utilizing the average
measured train noise spectrum shown in Table 1, assuming that the `sound wall' would be located
approximately 30 ft from the center of the two remaining tracks. A top of wall elevation not less
than 10 ft above the tracks could reduce train noise at locations on the project site close to the wall
by approximately 15 dB(A) and a top of wall elevation not less than 12.5 ft above the tracks could
reduce train noise close to the wall by approximately 19 dB(A). Exact wall height requirements
would have to be confirmed subsequent to review of a final site plan indicating distances from the
tracks to the proposed `sound wall' location(s), elevations of the tracks relative to the final site
grading, etc.
For reference, it should be noted that there is an existing, approximately 14' -8" high `sound wall'
located on the northerly side of Broadway between the tracks, which are elevated on ballast
relative to the base of the wall, and an existing multi- family residential development.
CONCLUSIONS
In order to conform to the City of Anaheim's CNEL 45 indoor noise criterion, closed double
windows having acoustical ratings of STC 41 or STC 45, based upon confirmation by the City of
the exterior CNEL value to be utilized as the basis of the design, would be necessary. Stucco
exterior wall construction with fiberglass batt insulation would be acoustically acceptable. Since
the windows would have to be closed in order to meet the indoor noise criterion, air conditioning,
or mechanical ventilation, as required by code to maintain a habitable interior environment would
be necessary.
In order to conform to the City of Anaheim's CNEL 65 outdoor noise criterion in required outdoor
living areas, a `sound wall' would have to be constructed along the westerly property line of the
project site. A top of wall elevation on the order of 10 ft to 12.5 ft above the tracks, or
approximately 12 ft to 14.5 ft above adjacent finished grade elevation would reduce noise in
required outdoor living areas to meet this criterion depending upon the final site plan arrangement
and confirmation by the City of the exterior CNEL value to be utilized as the basis of the design.
04 -278
projlMercy Housing Vine St\Ext -urt rptl
VAR No. 2605= 0465.2
ITEM NO. 1 -A
CLIFPARK WAY
RS -2
RS -2
1 DU EACH
I I 1 DU EACH
ALMONT AVE
a
a RM-4
RCL 66-67-68
VAR 2095
' 4 DU EACH
RCL 74 75 -34
VAR 2069 RCL66 -67-68
IY
VAR 1897 CUP 4011
Q
ALMONT AVENUE
APTS. CUP 3634
108
VAR
J
C
ALMONT W OODS 3986
W
-G
VAR 1897
:D
RCL 61 -62 -123
RETAIL
O
BUSINESS
CENTER
m
COLLEGE
L=
RCL 61 -62 -123
W
CUP 2002 -04618 C -G
RCL66 -67-68 CUP 3211
CUP 3630 RCL65 -66 -76
AUTO CUP 1523
W
CUP 806 TLUP 2005-04987
PARTS CUP 1152
J
RESTAURANT TLUP 2005 -04954
P 2001 -04496 VAR 1897 VAR 1897
O
TLUP 2003 -04758 C -G
CUP 4002 r O RESTAURANT
V
CUP 3732 RCL 61 -62 -123
CUP 1059 ¢ w z
a o
CUP 3150 CUP 3968
VAR 1897 STORE O z
w z
W
CUP 123 CUP 3742
TILE PAINT w U z m
AREHOUSE w w RCL66 -67 -23
Q
z CUP 3075 CUP 1876
( )
"o! CUP 3915
��� SERVICE STATION PLAZA DE SEVILLE
~ VAR MOBIL
(4
tiLaa COMM. SHOPPING
1897
S.S.
°w CENTER
RCL 66-67-23
o
U
50'
BALL ROAD
L 66 -67 -14 RCL 66 1 67 -14
C-6-
RCL 82-83-02
I RCL66 -67 -14
RGL66-67 -09
R CL 54554 RCL 5455 -42
L 54 -55-42
RGL65fif ID8 C -G
VAR 2096 CUP 3909
- GUP2W104751 C -G RCL 76 -77-60
KING 76 S. S.
-CUP 26U3 -047x3 RCL 76-77-60 RCL 64 -65 -15
'HEM ALARM
VAR2m2-04495 RCL 6465 -15 RCL 56 -57 -76
CURE
VAR 3283 CUP 2007 (Res. of Int. to ML)
SS_ CUP 610 CUP 2062
EL TORITO
RESTAURANT CUP 610
BEN IHANA
RCL 54 -55-42
C -G RESTAURANT
VAR 2515
RCL 76 -77 -60
RCL 54 -55 -42 NEW YORK
RCL 64 -65 -15
CUP 1969 CARPETS
RCL 56 -57 -76
54 -55-42 VAR 2096
Res. of Int. to ML
ADCRAFT CENTER POINT
'RODUCTS BUSINESS PARK
CUP 3529
CUP 2145
CUP610
PACIFIC PLAZA C -G
I
RCL 76 -77 -60
RCL
RCL
5
T R42
AL
INDUSTRIAL
56 -5 7
RCL 56 -57 -76
Conditional Use Permit No. 3732
® Subject Property
TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04987
Date: June 13, 2005
Scale: 1"=200'
Requested By: VASKIN KOSHKERIAN
Q.S. No. 115
REQUEST TO AMEND OR DELETE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO HOURS OF
OPERATION AND RESTRICTIONS ON PACKAGING OF BEER AND WINE PRODUCTS IN
CONJUNCTION WITH A PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED CONVERSION OF A SERVICE STATION
REPAIR BAY AREA WITHIN AN EXISTING SERVICE STATION TO A CONVENIENCE MARKET
WITH OFF - PREMISES SALES AND CONSUMPTION
OF BEER AND WINE.
1198 State College Boulevard
1849
I�
�ha
Conditional Use Permit No. 3732 Subject Property
TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04987 Date: June 13, 2005
Scale: 1"=200'
Requested By: VASKIN KOSHKERIAN Q.S. No. 115
REQUEST TO AMEND OR DELETE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO HOURS OF
OPERATION AND RESTRICTIONS ON PACKAGING OF BEER AND WINE PRODUCTS IN
CONJUNCTION WITH A PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED CONVERSION OF A SERVICE STATION
REPAIR BAY AREA WITHIN AN EXISTING SERVICE STATION TO A CONVENIENCE MARKET
WITH OFF - PREMISES SALES AND CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND WINE.
1198 State College Boulevard
s CLIFPARK WAY
SIC
ALMONT AVEN�E�
1849
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 3
3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED) (Motion)
3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3732 (Resolution)
(TRACKING NO. CUP2005- 04987)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This rectangularly- shaped, 0.52 -acre property is located at the northeast corner of Ball Road
and State College Boulevard with frontages of 150 feet on both the north side of Ball Road
and the east side of State College Boulevard (1198 South State College Boulevard).
REQUEST:
(2) The petitioner requests to amend or delete conditions of approval pertaining to hours of
operation and restrictions on packaging of beer and wine products in conjunction with a
previously- approved conversion of a service station repair bay area within an existing service
station to a mini - market with off - premises sale and consumption of beer and wine under
authority of Code Section 18.60.190.030.
BACKGROUND:
(3) This property is zoned C -G (General Commercial) and is developed with an existing 1,817
square -foot service station and convenience market with two pump island canopies. The
Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Neighborhood Center land uses. The
Land Use Plan of the Anaheim General Plan further designates properties to the north and
east for Neighborhood Center land uses, properties to the south (across Ball Road) for
General Commercial land uses, and properties to the west (across State College Boulevard)
for Low - Medium Density Residential land uses.
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
(4) Conditional Use Permit No. 3732 (to permit the conversion of a service station repair bay
area within an existing service station to a mini - market with the off - premises sale and
consumption of beer and wine) was approved by the Planning Commission on January 9,
1995. On October 6, 2003, the Commission approved a modification of exhibits to raise the
height of two existing pump island canopies with waiver of minimum structural setback
adjacent to an arterial in order to maintain the existing non - conforming setbacks. The pump
island canopies have been modified as previously-approved-
(5) Conditional Use Permit 123 (to operate a service station) was approved by the Planning
Commission on May 29, 1961.
(6) Resolution No. PC2003 -137 adopted in connection with the latest modification to Conditional
Use Permit No. 3732 included the following conditions:
"3. That the sales of beer and /or wine shall be permitted only between the hours of 9
a.m. and 10 p.m., daily.
8. That beer shall not be sold in packages containing less than a six (6) pack; and
that wine coolers shall not be sold in packages containing less than a four (4)
pack."
SR CUP3732 PC 061305jr.doc
Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 3
PROPOSAL:
(7) The agent for the property owner, Andrew Paszterko, requests modification of Condition No-
3 to allow the sales of beer and wine from 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m., and deletion of Condition
No. 8, to allow any unit of sale for both beer and wine. No construction is proposed in
conjunction with this request.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(8) Staff has reviewed the proposal to amend or delete conditions of approval pertaining to hours
of operation and restrictions on packaging of beer and wine products in conjunction with a
previously- approved conversion of a service station repair bay area within an existing service
station to a mini - market with off - premises sale and consumption of beer and wine and finds
no significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from any changes to the existing
project. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Negative Declaration in
connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3732 serve as the required environmental
documentation for this request upon a finding by the Commission that the Negative
Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered
the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for
review in the Planning Department) and any comments received that there is no substantial
evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment-
EVALUATION
(9) The applicant is requesting modification of this permit to allow the retail sales of beer and
wine from 6 a.m. to 2 a.m. within an existing convenience market and to allow the sales of
single bottles and cans of beer and wine. Staff surveyed the surrounding properties and
identified two service stations within the vicinity (1199 South State College Boulevard — Mobil,
and 1201 South State College Boulevard — Union 76) that have ABC licenses. Both of these
service stations have conditions limiting the hours of retail sales of beer and wine — one until
10 p.m. and the other until 12 a.m.; however, neither of these service stations have
conditions limiting the unit of sales of beer and wine. At the time these two service stations
were approved (1997 and 1998) they were not located in areas of high crime or over -
concentration; therefore, the Police Department recommended approval of their requests with
no conditions.
(10) The Anaheim Police Department has submitted the attached memorandum dated May 25,
2005, stating that this property is located within Reporting District No. 1828, which has a
crime rate 145 percent above the Citywide average. The Police Department has responded
to calls for service from this property seven (7) times in the last year. The calls included: 1
robbery, 2 car stops, 1 disturbance, 1 fight, 1 suspicious person, and 1 missing adult. There
was one (1) report taken for the robbery. This property is also located within Census Tract
No. 863.06, which allows up to three (3) off -sale liquor licenses and there are currently four
(4) licenses in the tract. It also allows for four (4) on -sale licenses and there are presently
two (2) licenses in the tract. The Police Department opposes the deletion of the condition in
respect to selling singles due to the property's location within an area of high crime and over -
concentration. This condition has been consistently applied to both service stations and
convenience market requests for off - premises sale of beer and wine /alcoholic beverages
since 1995/1996 for properties located within areas of high crime and over - concentration, and
more recently, for all requests for off - premises sale of beer and wine /alcoholic beverages,
regardless of location within these sensitive areas. The Police Department strongIV
recommends that this portion of the request be denied as the sales of single cans and
bottles of beer and wine would potentially contribute to loitering, vagrancy, and public
drunkenness, further contributing to the high crime rate in the area. With respect to the
Page 2
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 3
request for modification of the hours for beer and wine sales, the Police Department indicates
that they would support extending the hours to 6 a.m. to 12 a.m., consistent with the nearby
service stations. Extending the hours beyond this time would not be supported based on the
proximity of the El Vaquero Restaurant (located directly to the north at 1168 South State
College). This property has been an on -going public safety challenge for the Police
Department. The Police Department has responded to 39 calls for service from June 2004
through June 2005 to the El Vaquero Restaurant including violent incidences such as
fighting, felony assault, and possession of firearms. The opportunity for after -hours purchase
of beer and wine would potentially contribute to the public safety challenges due to the site's
proximity to the El Vaquero Restaurant. The Police Department further requests that the
remainder of their conditions apply.
(11) In October of 2002, the Commission considered an identical request to modify hours of
operation and delete a condition of approval pertaining to restrictions on packaging of beer
and wine products for a service station and convenience market located at 301 South
Anaheim Boulevard (ARCO AM /PM). As in this request, the property is located in area of
high crime; and therefore the Police Department did not support that request for modification
of this condition. Both the Commission and the Council did not approve this portion of the
applicant's request for the Arco at 301 South Anaheim Boulevard. This limit on the unit sales
of beer and wine is a condition that the Commission has consistently required for
convenience markets in order to deter unlawful activity resulting from singles sales of beer
and wine. If the Commission approved this modification, such a decision may encourage
similar business to petition the City to modify their permits as well — potentially in even more
sensitive areas. Based on the adjacent service stations' current operating hours, the high
crime rate and the Police Department's concerns as indicated above, staff recommends the
Commission approve the applicant's request, in part by modifying Condition No. 3 to allow
the sales of beer and /or wine between the hours of 6 a.m. and 12 a.m., daily. and leave
Condition No. 8 unchanged-
FINDINGS
(12) Before the Commission grants any major modification to a conditional use permit, it must
make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions
exist:
(a) That the modification of use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is
authorized by the Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030
(Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority);
(b) That the modification will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth
and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located;
(c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area
or to the health and safety;
(d) That the traffic generated by the modified use will not impose an undue burden upon
the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and
(e) That the granting of the modifications under the conditions imposed will not be
detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
Page 3
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 3
RECOMMENDATION:
(13) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the
evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the
public hearing, the Commission approve the applicants request, in part. modifying the
hours of operation as requested but deriving the request to allow the sales of single bottles
and cans of beer and wine by adopting the attached resolutions and the findings and
modified conditions contained therein.
Page 4
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 =""
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. PC2003 -137 ADOPTED IN CONNECTION WITH
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3732
WHEREAS, on January 9, 1995, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did, by its Resolution
No. PC95 -2, grant Conditional Use Permit No. 3732 to convert a service station repair bay area in an existing
service station at the northeast corner of Ball Road and State College Boulevard (1198 South State College)
to a mini - market with the retail sale of beer and wine for off - premises sale and consumption; and
WHEREAS, on October 6, 2003, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did, by its Resolution
No. PC2003 -137, grant a modification to Conditional Use Permit No. 3732 to raise the height of two existing
pump island canopies with waiver of minimum structural setback adjacent to an arterial in order to maintain
the existing non - conforming setbacks; and
WHEREAS, the property is developed with a 1,817 square foot service station and
convenience market with two pump island canopies; that the zoning is C -G (General Commercial), and that
the Anaheim General Plan designates the property for Neighborhood Center Commercial land uses; and
WHEREAS, the petitioner has requested an amendment to this conditional use permit to
modify Condition No. 3 to allow the sales of beer and wine from 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m., and delete, in its
entirety, Condition No. 8, which limits the unit sales for beer to be sold in packages not containing less than a
six (6) pack; and that wine coolers not be sold in packages containing less than a four (4) pack; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City
of Anaheim on June 13, 2005 at 2:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required
by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 "Procedures ",
to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and
make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said 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, does find and
determine the following facts:
1. That the requested amendmenUmodification of use is properly one for which a conditional use
permit is authorized by Section 18.60.190.030 of the Zoning Code.
2. That the request to modify Condition No. 3 of Resolution PC2003 -137 to allow the sales of
beer and wine from 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. is hereby approved, in part, to allow an expansion of the hours
from 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. (midnight) daily, because the expansion in hours of operation would be
consistent with service stations in the area and would not be incompatible with the closing time of the El
Vaquero Restaurant (located directly to the north at 1168 South State College).
3. That the request to delete Condition No. 8 of Resolution PC2003 -137 which limits the unit
sales for beer to be sold in packages not containing less than a six (6) pack; and that wine coolers not be
sold in packages containing less than a four (4) pack is hereby denied because of the negative secondary
effects that deleting this condition would have on the above - average crime rate for this reporting district as
the sales of single cans and bottles of beer and wine could potentially contribute to loitering, vagrancy, and
public drunkenness, further contributing to the high crime rate in the area.
4. That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the
proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety.
Cr1PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005-
(Tracking No. CUP2 005- 04 9 8 7)
5. That the traffic generated by the modified use will not impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area.
6. That the granting of the modifications as recommended and under the conditions imposed will
not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim; and
7. That "* indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition to the proposal; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim City Planning
Commission has reviewed the request to amend this conditional use permit to amend or delete conditions of
approval pertaining to hours of operation and restrictions on packaging of beer and wine products in
conjunction with a previously- approved conversion of a service station repair bay area within an existing
service station to a convenience market with off - premises sale and consumption of beer and wine under
authority of Code Section 18.60.190.030 at 1198 South State College Boulevard; and does hereby find that
the Negative Declaration previously approved in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3732 is
adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation in connection with this request upon finding
that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the
previously approved Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no
substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby amend Resolution No. PC2003 -137, adopted in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3732, to
approve the applicant's request, in part, by modifying Condition No. 3 to allow the sales of beer and /or wine
between the hours of 6 a.m. and 12 a.m. (midnight), daily and denying the request to delete Condition No. 8
which limits the unit sales for beer to be sold in packages not containing less than a six (6) pack; and that
wine coolers not be sold in packages containing less than a four (4) pack; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the conditions of approval in Resolution No. PC2003 -137
are amended in their entirety read as follows:
1. That the quarterly gross sale of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed ten per cent (10 %) of the gross
sales of food and /or other commodities sold in the convenience market during the same period.
2. That no beer or wine shall be sold, furnished, or delivered via a drive -up window.
3. That the sale of beer and /or wine shall be permitted only between the hours of 6 a.m. and 12 a.m.
(midnight), daily.
4. That the quarterly gross sale of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed ten per cent (10 %) of the gross
sales of food and /or other commodities sold in the convenience market during the same period.
5. That there shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the
exterior of the building from inside the building, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic
beverages.
6. That no alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on any property adjacent to the licensed premises and
under the control of the licensee.
7. That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped and maintained with lighting of sufficient
power to illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about
the parking lot. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to
unreasonably illuminate adjacent properties.
8. That beer shall not be sold in packages containing less than a six (6) pack; and that wine
coolers shall not be sold in packages containing less than a four (4) pack.
-2- PC2005-
9. That prior to the change in hours of operation, the applicant shall modify their existing Alcohol
Beverage Control (ABC) License to reflect the new hours of beer and wine sales, and provide a
copy to the Planning Services Division and the Police Department.
10. That there shall be no coin - operated telephones maintained outside the building at anytime.
11. That there shall be no coin - operated games maintained on the premises at any time.
12. That prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution, subject property shall be
developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by
the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through
5, and as conditioned herein.
13. That prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution, or within one (1) year from the
date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition No. 9, above - mentioned, shall be complied
with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with
Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
14. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code 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.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that 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.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the property owner /developer is responsible for
paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 7 days of the
issuance of the final invoice or prior to the commencement of the activity for this project, whichever occurs
first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of
the approval of this application.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
June 13, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Zoning
Provisions — General" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced
by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-3- PC2005-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on June 13, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
, 2005.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-4- PC2005-
City of Anaheim
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Special Operations Division
F- ARFdITT I MIMiil0GIN
To: John Ramirez
Planning Department
From: Sergeant Mike Lozean
Vice Detail
CC:
Date: May 25, 2005
RE: CUP 2005 -04987
Chevron
1198 S. State College
Anaheim, CA 92806
The Police Department has received an I.D.C. Route Sheet for CUP
2005 - 04987. The applicant is requesting to modify conditions on an
existing service station and convenience market with off - premises sales
of beer and wine.
The location is within Reporting District 1828, which has a Crime Rate
of 145 percent above average. It is also within Census Tract Number
863.06, which has a population of 3,570. This population allows for 4
off sale Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses and there are presently 2
licenses in the tract. It also allows for 3 on sale licenses and there are
presently 4 licenses in the tract.
The census tract boundaries are:
North
Wagner
South
Ball
East
Rio Vista
West
State College
Off sale licenses in the immediate vicinity of the applicant:
1177 S. State College
1210 S. State College
1801 S. State College
1201 S. State College
1199 S State College
Anaheim Police Dept.
425 S. Harbor Blvd.
Anaheim, CA 92805
TEL 714.765.1401
FAX 714.765.1665
/AiFT7. M70 i NIMii1R.IQ
Memorandum
John Ramirez
Chevron
On sale licenses in the vicinity of the applicant
1105 E.
Katella
2020 E
Ball
710 E.
Katella
1759 S.
Claudina
2100 E.
Ball
1929 -1939 S. State College
1801 E.
Katella
2000 Gene
Autry
1168 S.
State College
1340 Sanderson
1221 &
1331 E. Katella
2695 E.
Katella
2438 E.
Katella
1177 S.
State College
1440 S.
Anaheim H8
2610 E.
Katella
2550 E.
Katella
1440 S.
Anaheim H2 & 11
1210 S.
State College
The census tract surrounding this location is as follows:
South and West — 863.03
On Sale allowed 5 /active 19
population 4,546
Off Sale allowed 3 /active 5
East — City of Orange
The Police Department has responded to 1198 S. State College 7 times
in the last year. The calls include: 1 robbery, 2 car stops, 1 disturbance,
1 fight, 1 suspicious person, 1 missing adult. There was 1 report taken.
The report was for the robbery.
The Reporting District north of the location is 1728; it has a crime rate of
5 percent above average. The Reporting District east is 1829; it has a
crime rate of 78 percent below average. West is 1827; with a rate of 8
percent below average, and south of the location is 1928; with a crime
rate of 42 percent above average. The Reporting District to the
southwest is 1927; with a crime rate 56 percent below average.
Page 2
F -AIM 7. r rMU ifa(Mii1i!G1IQ
Memorandum
John Ramirez
Chevron
The Police Department opposes changing the condition in respect to
selling singles. This rule applies to every service station since
approximately 1995. We absolutely oppose this portion of the request.
With respect to the operating hours modification, we would agree to
12:00 midnight. There is another station that sells alcohol and is open
until that time on the adjacent corner. We would be opposed to a later
time due to the fact that these stations are next to the El Vaquero
Restaurant. This is a problem property, and we would not want sales of
alcohol after closing. The other station was given the same reason for
their hours of operation. The Police Department requests that the rest
of their conditions still apply.
Please contact me at extension 1451 if you require further information in
regards to this matter.
f: \home \mmirwin\2005 -04987 Chevron 1198 S State College.doc
Page 3
/_NFRIT iL , MIMI11104GIt3
P.C. Date:
June 13. 2005
Existing A.B.C. Sites
863.06
1 1168 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD
2 1198 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD
32115 EBALL RD
4 2145 E BALL RD
5 2429 E BALL RD
6 2501 E BALL RD
7 2525 E BALL RD
8 1105 E KATELLAAVE
9 1199 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD
10 1201 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD
11 1210 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD
12 1210 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD
13 1221 & 1331 E KATELLAAVE
14 1340 SANDERSON AVE
15 1440 SANAHEIM BLVD H8
16 1440 SANAHEIM BLVD SP H2 & 11
17 1759 S CLAUDINA WAY
18 1801 E KATELLAAVE
19 1801 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD
20 1929 -1939 S STATE COLLEGE BL
21 2000 GENE AUTRY WY
222020 E BALL RD
23 2100 E BALL RD
24 2438 E KATELLAAVE
25 2550 E KATELLAAVE
26 2610 E KATELLAAVE
27 2695 E KATELLAAVE
28 710 E KATELLAAVE
Legend
1
On Sale License
Off Sale License
Pending License
Suspended License
219.22
Census Tract
6/3/1
Licenses:
Flowed /Active / Pending
1868 -1
CUP 2005 -04987
CENSUS TRACT MAP
CUP 2005-04987 Attachment - Item No. 3
POLICE REPORTING DISTRICT MAP
P.C. Date:
June 13, 2005
Proposed Site:
CHEVRON
1198 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD
1244 Police Reporting Districts
184 % + /- Percentage Above or Below the Average
Number of Crimes per District Citywide
Bhupinder S. Mac
1198 S State Collage Blvd
Anaheim CA 92805
714.535.6500
04/18/05
Letter of Request
To Whom It May Concern
City of Anaheim Planning Department
200 S Anaheim Blvd Suite 162
Anaheim CA 92805
Dear Sir /Madam;
I am the legal owner of
Collage Blvd Anaheim CA
County of Orange, State
Andrew Paszterko, Archi
Consulting to apply for
Conditional Use Permit,
changes:
the property at 1198 S State
92806, in the City of Anaheim,
of California, and I authorize
:ect, of Gasoline Retail Facilities
Modification to an existing
No.3732, to effect the following
1 Hours of operation Change permitted hours of sales of
beer and /or wine from 9am to lopm, permitted
presently, to from Gam to 2am
(Condition 3.)
2 Single sales eliminate requirement forbidding beer
sales in packages containing less then 6, and wine
coolers sales in packages containing less then 4
(Condition 8.)
Sincerely,
x
Bhupi r S. Mac
CUP No. 3 732
F_AXFdMF_if01=00IGXN
RESOLUTION NO. PC2003 -137
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. PC95 -2 ADOPTED IN CONNECTION WITH
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3732
WHEREAS, on January 9, 1995, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did, by its Resolution
No. PC95 -2, grant Conditional Use Permit No. 3732 to convert a service station repair bay area in an existing
service station at the northeast corner of Ball Road and State College Boulevard (1198 South State College)
to a mini - market with the retail sale of beer and wine for off - premises sale and consumption; and
WHEREAS, the property is developed with a 1,817 square foot service station and
convenience market with two pump island canopies; that the zoning is CL (Commercial, Limited); and that
the Land Use Element of the Anaheim General Plan designates the property for General Commercial land
uses; and
WHEREAS, the petitioner has requested an amendment to this conditional use permit
consisting of waiver of minimum structural setback abutting an arterial highway and modification of the
previously approved exhibits to raise the height of two existing service station pump island canopies (from 13
feet to 14'/2 feet as measured to the underside of the canopies, and 18 feet as measured to the top of the
canopies) to accommodate high profile vehicles; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on October 6, 2003, at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to
hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed amendment and to investigate and make findings
and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said 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, does find and
determine the following facts
1 - That the petitioner requests an amendment to this conditional use permit under authority of
Code Section 18.03.092 for waiver of the following to raise the height of two existing pump island canopies at
a previously- approved service station with a convenience market with the retail sale of beer and wine for off-
premises
Section 18.44.063.010 - Minimum structural setback abutting an arterial highway
10 feet, fully landscaped, required;
none to 3 feet existing and proposed along Ball Road and State College
Boulevard)
2. That the waiver of minimum structural setback abutting an arterial highway is hereby approved
due to a special circumstance applicable to this property consisting of its location at the intersection of Ball
Road and State College Boulevard which was designated a Critical Intersection 31 years after the service
station and pump island canopies were approved in 1961; that when the service station and pump island
canopies were constructed, the development complied with the required structural setbacks along both
arterial highways and no waivers were necessary; that the Circulation Element of the General Plan was
subsequently amended to designate this intersection, among others in the city, a Critical Intersection which
included wider ultimate planned rights -of -way along both highways (53 -foot to 65 -foot half widths as
measured from the centerline); and, further, that this property's dual frontage on two primary arterial
highways effectively doubles the impact of the planned ultimate right -of -way changes, creating a hardship for
the existing service station that does not apply to other properties in the vicinity.
Tracking No_ CUP2003 -04758
CR \PC2003- 137.doc -1- PC2003 -137
F_AXFdM7_ifai 00reXCI
3. That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other
properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
4. That amending this conditional use permit and approving the waiver, under the conditions
imposed, is reasonably necessary to protect the public peace, health, safety or general welfare, and
necessary to permit reasonable operation under the conditional use permit as previously granted.
5. That no one indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition to the proposal; and
that no correspondence was received in opposition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim City Planning
Commission has reviewed the request to amend this conditional use permit by waiver of minimum structural
setback abutting an arterial highway in connection with a previously- approved service station with a mini-
market with the off - premises sale and consumption of beer and wine at 1198 South State College Boulevard,
and to amend the previously approved exhibits to raise the pump island canopy heights of two existing
canopies to accommodate high profile vehicles; and does hereby find that the Negative Declaration
previously approved in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3732 is adequate to serve as the
required environmental documentation in connection with this request upon finding that the declaration
reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the previously approved
Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further
finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that
the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby amend Resolution No. PC95 -2, adopted in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3732, to
approve the waiver of minimum structural setback abutting an arterial highway to raise the height of two
existing pump island canopies at the previously- approved service station with a convenience market with the
retail sale of beer and wine for off - premises; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the conditions of approval in Resolution No. PC95 -2 are
amended in their entirety read as follows:
That the property owner shall record an unsubordinated covenant agreeing to remove the pump island
canopy and associated improvements abutting State College Boulevard at no cost to the City at such
time as the street is widened to the width designated on the adopted Circulation Element Map of the
Anaheim General Plan. Said covenant shall be reviewed and approved as to form by the Public Works
Department and City Attorney. Following approval, the covenant shall be recorded in the Office of the
Orange County Recorder. A recorded copy shall be submitted to the Public Works Department and the
Zoning Division.
2. That no beer or wine shall be sold, furnished, or delivered via a drive -up window.
3. That the sale of beer and /or wine shall be permitted only between the hours of 9 a.m. and 10 p.m.,
daily.
4. That the quarterly gross sale of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed ten per cent (10 %) of the gross
sales of food and /or other commodities sold in the convenience market during the same period.
5. That there shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the
exterior of the building from inside the building, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic
beverages.
6. That no alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on any property adjacent to the licensed premises and
under the control of the licensee.
7. That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped and maintained with lighting of sufficient
power to illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about
-2- PC2003-
F_AXFdr 7_ifNfMiiV5XG?
the parking lot. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to
unreasonably illuminate adjacent properties.
8. That beer shall not be sold in packages containing less than a six (6) pack; and that wine coolers shall
not be sold in packages containing less than a four (4) pack.
9. That the property owner shall record an unsubordinated covenant agreeing to remove the pump island
canopy and associated improvements abutting Ball Road which may be located within the future public
right -of -way at no cost to the City at such time the street is widened to the width designated on the
Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. Said covenant shall be reviewed and approved as to
form by the Public Works Department and City Attorney. Following approval, the covenant shall be
recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A recorded copy shall be submitted to the
Public Works Department and the Zoning Division.
10. That the legal property owner shall submit a letter to the Zoning Division requesting termination of
Conditional Use Permit No. 3150 (permitting a new service station and convenience market).
11. That there shall be no coin - operated telephones maintained upon or adjacent to the building at any time
(other than those which may exist on the date of this resolution).
12. That there shall be no coin - operated games maintained on the premises at any time.
13. That prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution, subject properly shall be
developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by
the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through
5, and as conditioned herein.
14. That prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution, or prior to issuance of a
building permit, or within one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition
Nos. 1, 7, 9 and 10, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete
said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
15. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code 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.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
October 6, 2003.
(ORIGINAL SIGNED BY JAMES VANDERBILD
CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
{ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PAT CHANDLER}
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
-3- PC2003-
F-AMF M7- ifatMiiLGXN
I, Pat Chandler, 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 October 6, 2003, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
BOSTWICK, EASTMAN, FLORES, O'CONNELL, VANDERBILT
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NONE
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
ROMERO
VACANCY:
COMMISSIONERS:
ONE SEAT
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
, 2003.
{ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PAT CHANDLER}
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
4- PC2003-
Direction
General Plan Designation
North, East, and South (across
Ball Road)
General Commercial
West (across State College
Boulevard)
General Industrial
•
•
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 6, 2003
Item No. 11
11 a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED) (Motion)
11 b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion)
11c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3732 (Resolution)
(TRACKING NO. CUP2003- 04758)
Sr5046jr
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
Attachment - Item No. 3
(1) This rectangularly- shaped, 0.52 -acre property is located at the northeast corner of Ball Road
and State College Boulevard with frontages of 150 feet on both the north side of Ball Road
and the east side of State College Boulevard (1198 South State College Boulevard).
REQUEST:
(2) The petitioner requests amendments to exhibits for a previously- approved service station with
a convenience market and retail sales of beer and wine for off - premises consumption under
authority of Code Sections 18.03.091, and 18.03.040 with waiver of:
BACKGROUND:
(3)
(5)
(
(
SECTION 18.44.063.010
Minimum structural setback abutting an arterial
highway Ck3 feet required; 0-3 feet existing and
proposed)
This property is developed with an existing 1,817 square -foot service station and
convenience market with two pump island canopies. The Land Use Element Map of the
Anaheim General Plan designates this property for General Commercial land uses.
(4) Surrounding General Plan designations are as follows:
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
Conditional Use Permit No. 3732 (to permit the conversion of a service station repair bay
area within an existing service station to a mini - market with the off - premises sale and
consumption of beer and wine) was approved by the Planning Commission on January 9,
1995.
(6) Conditional Use Permit No. 3150 (to permit a new service station and a convenience market)
was approved by the City Council on June 20, 1989, following approval by the Planning
Commission. This permit has expired and is no longer active.
Conditional Use Permit 123 (to operate a service station) was approved by the Planning
Commission on May 29, 1961.
PROPOSAL:
The agent for the property owner, Andrew Paszterko, requests modification of exhibits to
raise the pump island canopy height of two existing canopies to accommodate higher profile
vehicles.
Page 1
(
• • Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 6, 2003
Item No. 11
The letter of request indicates this application is to allow an increase in the height of the two
existing canopies from 13 feet to 14 feet, 6 inches (as measured from the underside of the
canopy). The petitioner indicates this structural modification is necessary to ensure the
safety of customers at this establishment, as the canopies have been damaged by high
profile vehicles due to insufficient clearance. The petitioner further indicates no relocation or
expansion of the canopies is proposed, no new signage is proposed, and no other
construction is proposed as part of this request. Minor changes are proposed to the canopy
design as part of the height extension (removal of gable pitch to be replaced with a more
contemporary flat roof). The total height of the canopies would be 18 feet (as measured to
the top of the canopy).
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(10) Staff has reviewed the proposal to amend previously- approved exhibits for the service station
and finds no significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from any changes to the
existing project. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Negative
Declaration in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3732 serve as the required
environmental documentation for this request upon a finding by the Commission that the
Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has
considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public
review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study (a copy of which is
available for review in the Planning Department) and any comments received that there is no
substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS:
EVALUATION:
Attachment - Item No. 3
(11) The proposed project has been reviewed by affected City departments to determine whether
it conforms to the City's Growth Management Element adopted by the City Council on March
17, 1992. Based on City staff review of the proposed project, it has been determined that this
project does not fit within the scope necessary to require a Growth Management Element
analysis, therefore, no analysis has been performed.
(12) The requested waiver pertains to minimum structural setback abutting an arterial highway.
Code requires a setback of not less than ten (10) feet in depth, fully landscaped as measured
from the planned highway right -of -way line designated on the Circulation Element of the
General Plan. Both Ball Road and State College Boulevard are primary arterial highways
and this intersection is designated as a critical intersection on the Circulation Element. The
planned highway right -of -way line for critical intersections for primary arterials is 65 -feet
measured from the centerline of each street. As measured from this planned highway right -
of -way (ultimate right -of -way), the canopy abutting Ball Road has a setback of 3 feet and the
canopy abutting State College Boulevard encroaches 4 feet, 2 inches into the ultimate rioht-
of-way.
(13) At the time the service station was constructed and the location of the canopies approved
(1961), the ultimate right -of -way at this intersection on both streets was located at 53 -feet
from the centerline of each street. A subsequent amendment to the Circulation Element Plan
Map designated the intersection of Ball Road and State College Boulevard as a critical
intersection, resulting in an expansion of the planned ultimate right -of -way by an additional 12
feet from the centerline of each of these streets (from 53 -foot half width to 65 -foot half width).
Page 2
•
Attachment - Item No. 3
•
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 6, 2003
Item No. 11
> 1
- MEE
OCT 0 6 2003
Y L. I G
COMMISSION
Ex;sfi rg-
CAA c py
Loc$'b
I;N
-_ - - -
--R-o-
Sair °�
etheflklf
OIiln+atC
4,5
O
z
6 9 , <�
• a
Q
E 3 • 0
£ d l�
031100 31tl1S HInOS
J
4J
(SIP Ha -315 0
-- ^:C••'v:\.C \030dOte \Ce- E n:3- �nz�: C: \�:iC \59 :. n:c:
Current and proposed right -of -way modifications
(14) In November of 2002, the City Engineer approved a modification to the ultimate right -of -way
for critical intersections. This modification to the ultimate right -of -way is proposed as part of a
series of recommended changes to the Circulation Element to be included in the pending
General Plan Update. If adopted, this modification would result in a further modification to
the ultimate right -of -way from the current half width of 65 feet on both streets, to a half width
of 69 feet on Ball Road and 58 -feet on State College Boulevard. The new ultimate right -
of -way, if adopted, would result in an encroachment of 1 foot into the right -of -way for the
canopy abutting Ball Road, and a setback of 2 -feet. 10 inches for the canopy abutting State
College Boulevard. In order to address this anticipated encroachment on Ball Road, staff has
included a condition of approval requiring that the property owner enter into an agreement
that at such time as the critical intersection improvements along Ball Road are initiated, the
owner would bear the cost of relocation of the canopy and associated improvements outside
the public right -of -way. The petitioner has indicated his consent to this condition of approval.
Page 3
(15) The Development Services Division of the Public Works Department has indicated that the
design for critical intersection improvements along State College Boulevard has started, and
proposed improvements are funded and anticipated to begin within two years (Summer of
2005). However, critical intersection improvements to Ball Road have not been funded and
have no definitive schedule.
(16) Staff believes there are special circumstances applicable to the property due to the change in
location of the ultimate right -of -way resulting from the critical intersection designation. At the
time the service station was constructed, it complied with all development standards and no
waivers were requested. Additionally, the dual frontage on both primary arterials effectively
doubled the impact of the right -of -way change, creating a hardship for the existing service
station that does not apply to properties within the vicinity. Because of these unique
circumstances and the fact that the canopies would remain in the same location as originally
constructed and currently existing, staff is supportive of the variance request.
FINDINGS:
(17) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the
Zoning Code, a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring that no property,
because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly
enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose of any code
waiver is to prevent discrimination and none shall be approved which would have the effect of
granting a special privilege not shared by other similar properties. Therefore, before any
code waiver is granted by the Planning Commission, it shall be shown:
(a)
• • Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 6, 2003
Item No. 11
That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned
properties in the vicinity; and
(b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by
other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
(18) Subsection 18.03.092 of the Anaheim Municipal Code provides for the modification or
termination of a conditional use permit for one or more of the following grounds:
(a) That the approval was obtained by fraud;
Attachment - Item No. 3
(b) That the use for which such approval is granted is not being exercised within the time
specified in such permit;
(c) That the use for which such approval was granted has ceased to exist or has been
suspended or inoperative for any reason for a period of six (6) consecutive months or
more;
(d) That the permit granted is being, or recently has been exercised contrary to the terms
or conditions of such approval, or in violation of any statute, ordinance, law or
regulation;
(e) That the use for which the approval was granted has been so exercised as to be
detrimental to the public health or safety, or so as to constitute a nuisance;
(f) That the use for which the approval was granted has not been exercised, and that
based upon additional information or due to changed circumstances the facts
necessary to support one or more of the required showings for the issuance of such
entitlement as set forth in this chapter no longer exist; and/or
Page 4
Attachment - Item No. 3
• • Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 6, 2003
Item No. 11
(g) That any such modification, including the imposition of any additional conditions
thereto, is reasonably necessary to protect the public peace, health, safety or
general welfare, or necessary to permit reasonable operation under the conditional
use permit or variance as granted.
RECOMMENDATION:
(19) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the
hearing, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence
presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing,
the Commission take the following actions:
(a)
By motion determine that the previously approved Negative Declaration is adequate to
serve as the required environmental documentation for this request.
(b) By motion, approve the requested waiver pertaining to minimum structural setback,
based on the following:
(i) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property due to the
change in location of the ultimate right -of -way resulting from the critical
intersection designation. At the time the service station was constructed, it
complied with all development standards and no waivers were requested.
Furthermore, the dual frontage on both primary arterials effectively doubled the
impact of the right -of -way change, creating a hardship for the existing service
station that does not apply to properties within the vicinity.
(c) By resolution, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 3732 (TRACKING NO. CUP2003-
04758) to amend exhibits for a previously— approved service station with a convenience
market and retail sales of beer and wine for off - premises consumption based on the
following:
That petitioner's request to amend previously- approved exhibits is reasonably
necessary to permit reasonable operation under the conditional use permit in
order to eliminate the potential damage to the canopies by higher profile vehicles
utilizing the service station pump dispensers.
(d) Staff further recommends the Commission incorporate the conditions of approval
contained in Resolution No. PC95 -2 into a new resolution with the following conditions
of approval (Condition Nos. 7, 8, 9, 10, and 13 are new and /or modified conditions):
1. That the property owner shall record an unsurbordinated covenant
agreeing to remove the pump island canopy and associated improvements
abutting State College Boulevard at no cost to the City at such time as the
street is widened to the width designated on the adopted Circulation
Element Map of the General Plan. Said covenant shall be reviewed and
approved as to form by the Public Works Department and City Attorney.
Once approved, the covenant shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange
County Recorder. A recorded copy shall be submitted to the Public Works
Department and Zoning Division.
2. That no beer or wine shall be sold, furnished, or delivered via a drive -up window.
3. That the sales of beer and /or wine shall be permitted only between the hours of
9 a.m. and 10 p.m., daily.
Page 5
Attachment - Item No. 3
• • Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 6, 2003
Item No. 11
4. That the quarterly gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed ten per
cent (10 %) of the gross sales of food and /or other commodities sold during the
same period.
5. That there shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including
advertising directed to the exterior from inside the building, promoting or
indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages.
6. That no alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on any property adjacent to the
licensed premises under the control of the licensee.
7. That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped with lighting of
sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance
and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot. Said lighting shall
be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to
unreasonably illuminate adjacent properties.
8. That beer shall not be sold in packages containing less than a six (6) pack,
and that wine coolers shall not be sold in packages containing less than a
four (4) pack.
9. That the property owner shall record an unsubordinated covenant agreeing
to remove the pump island canopy and associated improvements abutting
Ball Road which may be located within the future public right -of -way at no
cost to the City at such time the street is widened to the width designated
on the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. Said covenant
shall be reviewed and approved as to form by the Public Works Department
and City Attorney. Once approved, the covenant shall be recorded in the
Office of the Orange County Recorder. A recorded copy shall be submitted
to the Public Works Department and Zoning Division.
10. That the legal property owner shall submit a letter requesting termination
of Conditional Use Permit No. 3150 (to permit a new service station and
convenience market) to the Zoning Division.
11. That there shall be no coin- operated telephones maintained upon or adjacent to
the building at any time (other than those which may exist).
12. That there shall be no coin - operated games maintained on the premises at any
time.
13. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with
plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner
and which plans we on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit
Nos. 1 through%, nd as conditioned herein.
14. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within one year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 8, 9 and 10,
above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to
complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090
of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
15. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request
only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and
any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not
Page 6
Attachment - Item No. 3
• • Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 6, 2003
Item No. 11
include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request
regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
Page 7
RESOLUTION NO. PC95 -2
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3732 BE GRANTED
THE SOUTH 203.00 FEET OF THE WEST 203.00 FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF SECTION 13, BEING A PORTION OF LOT 41 IN TOWNSHIP 4
SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO SAN JUAN CAJON DE SANTA
ANA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 2, PAGES 256 AND 257 OF
PATENTS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
Item No. 3
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for
Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of
California, described as:
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in
the City of Anaheim on December 12, 1994 at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly
given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter
18.03, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to
investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and that said public hearing
was continued to the January 9, 1995 Planning Commission meeting;
WHEREAS, said 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, does find
and determine the following facts:
1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by
Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.44.050.195 to permit the conversion of a service station repair bay area
within an existing service station to a mini - market with off - premises sale and consumption of beer and wine.
2. That the proposed use, consisting of a 1,736 sq.ft. mini - market with a service station, is
properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code;
3. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and
development of the area in which it is proposed to be located;
4. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health,
safety, and general welfare;
5. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area;
6. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not
be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim; and
CR2270 M S. wp -1- PC95 -2
7. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City
Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit the conversion of a service station repair bay
area within an existing service station to a mini - market with off - premises sale and consumption of beer and
wine on an irregularly- shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.52 acre, located at the northeast
corner of Ball Road and State College Boulevard, having frontages of approximately 150 feet on the north
side of Ball Road and 150 feet on the east side of State College Boulevard, and further described as 1198
South State College Boulevard; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the
declaration reflects the independent judgement of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative
Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the
basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby
found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the
safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1.That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the
Department of Maintenance for review and approval.
2.That the sale of prepared food items shall be prohibited unless five (5) additional on -site parking spaces
are provided or a parking variance is approved.
3.That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications
submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning
Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 3.
4.That if the applicant does not obtain an alcoholic beverage control license within one (1) year from the date
of this resolution, the portion of subject conditional use permit pertaining to the sale of beer and wine
shall terminate.
5.That no beer or wine shall be sold, furnished, or delivered via a drive -up window.
6.That the sales of beer and /or wine shall be permitted only between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
daily.
7.That the quarterly gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed ten percent (10 %) of the gross
sales of food and /or other commodities sold during the same period.
8.That there shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the exterior
from inside the building, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages.
9.That no alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on any property adjacent to the licensed premises under
the control of the licensee.
-2- PC95 -2
10.(a)That the parking lot of the premises shall be equipped with lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and
make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about said parking lot;
and
(b)That the lighting in the parking lot shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to
unreasonably illuminate the window areas of any nearby businesses.
11. ( a)That, if sold, wine coolers shall be sold only in quantities of a four (4) pack or more; and
(b)That signs shall be prominently posted at the wine storage and the cash register areas reading: " Wine
coolers may be purchased on this premises only in quantities of a four (4) pack or more."
12. ( a)That beer shall be sold only in quantities of a six (6) pack or more; and
(b)That signs shall be prominently posted at the beer storage and cash register areas reading: "Beer
may be purchased on this premises only in quantities of a six (6) pack or more."
13.That there shall be no coin - operated telephones maintained upon or adjacent to the building at any time
(other than those which may currently exist).
14.That there shall be no coin - operated games maintained upon the premises at any time.
15.That prior to issuance of a building permit or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition No. 1, above - mentioned, shall be complied with.
Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section
18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
16.That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 3 and 10, above - mentioned, shall be
complied with.
17.That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code 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.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
find and determine that 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.
January 9, 1995.
ATTEST:
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
CHAIRWOMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-3- PC95 -2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Margarita Solorio, 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 January 9, 1995, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOYDSTUN, HENNINGER, MAYER, TAIT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: CALDWELL, MESSE, PERAZA
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
1995.
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-4- PC95 -2
ITEM NO. 1 -A
I (PTMU) RCL 56 -57 -93
RCL 2004 -00129 CUP 3873
RCL 99 -00-15 CUP 2562
(Res. of Int. to SE) CUP 2508 PR (PTMU)
RCL 90 -91 -06 CUP 1908 ANGEL STADIUM
(Res. of Int. to CO) CUP 1725 PARKING
RCL 66 -67 -14 CUP 1587
STADIUM BUSINESS PARK
SMALL INDUSTRIAL FIRMS
COMMERCIAL
SHOPS
O-L (PTMU)
RCL 99 -00 -15
(Res of 1- to SE) (PTMU)
RCL 81 -82 -02 O-L TTM 16826
99-0 <
RCL 56 -57 -93 RCL 99 -00 -1-1 5 -RCL 99 -00 -15 (1) Q
VAR 4326 (Res. of Int. to SE RCL 85 -86 -02 > UCI MEDICAL CENTER
VAR 3279 RCL 81 -82 -02 Res. of Int. to CO)
PARKING RCL 56 -57 -93 RCL 66 -67 -14 _ J GENERAL SERVICES AND
CUP 2979 RCL 56 -57 -93 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT
VAR 4326 VAR .086 N O FACILITY
VAR 3279
PARKING DAG 2005 -00006 00 I (PTMU)
CL
METRO CENTRE T -FSP 2002 -00003 ( (CUP 2713)4) RCL 99-00.15
OFFICE BUILDING FSP 99-04 VACANT PARKING LU (Res. of Int. to SE)
RCL 66 -67 -14
W RCL 56 -57 -93
566 LU VAR 4235
SUMMITVILLE
O- L(PTMU) J TILE
I (PTMU) RCL 99 -00 -15 O
RCL 99 -0615 I (PTMU) (Res. of Int. to SE) U
:es. of Int. to SE) RCL 99 -00 -15 RCL 81 -82 -09
RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 66 -67 -14
RCL 56 -57 -93 (Res of 6- to SE) W
CUP 1953 RCL 66 -67 -14 R VAR 34623 1-- ETRO CENTRE RCL 56 -57 -93 m Q RCL 99 -00.15
OF
OFF. BLDG. CUP 1953 VAR 3606 O-L (PTMU) m Res. of 9- G- SE)
OFFICE BUILDING VAR 3587 FICE ~ ( RCL f Int. to
STADIUM CENTRE BUILDING U) RCL 56-57-93 Ii
PARKING L
1(P MU) ELEC
VACANT
ORANGEWOOD AVENUE _
A A NAHEIM CITY LIMITS
' I I(PiMU)
Ri;L969 15 VACANT
\ \\ ( ( �� (Res of Int to SE)
\ ■ RCL6667 -14
\ (-+� ( ( / ■ RCL 5 57 -93
\ ( ( CUP2777
I (m 1U)
■ RCI Fl(i -F
Tentative Tract Map No. 16826 Subject Property
Development Agreement No. 2005 -00006 Date: June 13, 2005
Scale: 1"=200'
Requested By: STADIUM LAND PARTNERS, LLC Q.S. No. 108
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16826- TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT, 266 -UNIT AIRSPACE ATTACHED
RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DAG2005- 00006- REQUEST TO ADOPT A DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND STADIUM LAND PARTNERS, LLC, FOR
THE GATEWAY CENTRE CONDOMINIUM PROJECT TO CONSTRUCT A 266 -UNIT RESIDENTIAL
CONDOMINIUM PROJECT.
2045 South State College Boulevard - Gateway Centre Condominiums
1851
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 4
4a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION
MONITORING PLAN NO. 131 (Motion for continuance)
4b. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16826
4c. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00006
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This irregularly- shaped, 3.8 -acre property has frontage of 292 feet on the west side of State
College Boulevard, a maximum depth of 566 feet, and is located 337 feet north of the
centerline of Orangewood Avenue (2045 South State College Boulevard — Gateway Centre
Condominiums).
REQUEST:
(2) The petitioner requests approval of the following:
Tentative Tract Map No. 16826 - to establish a 1 -lot, 266 -unit airspace attached residential
condominium subdivision.
Development Agreement No. 2005 -00006 - request to recommend City Council adoption
of a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Newport Federal, for the
Gateway Centre Condominium Project to construct a 266 -unit residential condominium
project. The Planning Commission's role is to look at the land use aspects of the
Agreement, specifically whether the eligibility criteria has been met, whetherthe
Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and whether the project implemented by
the Agreement is compatible with the development of the surrounding area. The City
Council will consider whether to approve the Agreement-
BACKGROUND
(3) This property is currently vacant and contains overflow parking for an adjacent office
building and is zoned I (PTMU) (Industrial, Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay). The
Anaheim General Plan designates this property and all surrounding properties for Mixed
Use land uses. The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP) further indicates
the property is located in the Gateway District of the PTMU Overlay.
(4) The applicant's consultant, Geoff Scott, has submitted the attached letter dated June 8,
2005, requesting a continuance to the June 27, 2005, Commission meeting to allow time to
prepare more detailed final exhibits in anticipation of the public hearing-
RECOMMENDATION
(5) That the Commission, by motion, continue this item to the June 27, 2005, Planning
Commission meeting.
SR(con't )-DAG 0506 PC061305.dm
Page 1
file: / // REPORTS / Planning %2OCommission /PC %2OJme %2013, %20200 ... k/Item %20No " /0204/ Attl/Request %20ContinumeeDAG0506PC061305.htm
From: Geoff Scott [Geoff@tbplanning.com]
Attachment -Item No. 4
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 5:19 PM
To: John Ramirez
Cc: John Stanek (E -mail)
Subject: Request Continuance
John,
This is an official request to continue the Planning Commission Hearing for the Gateway Centre
condominiums from Monday, June 13th to Monday, June 27tH
Regards,
Geoff Scott
Principal
& B Planning Consultants
file: / // REPORTS / Planning %2OConunission /PC %2OJme %20 ... No. %204 /Attl/ Request %2OContinu eeDAGO506PCO61305.htrn6 /9/2005 1:12:43 PM
ITEM NO. 1 -A
TERANIMAR DRIVE
-90 -39
10911.
L135
7 -36
10
TER/
2E
36
1 DU
7E RS -2
x x 1 DU EACH
Z
N Q 0 N Q
� W C6 W
° D °
M S-2
M R
1 DU EACH
RM-4
RCL 73 -74 -29
VAR 2568
APTS. 1
VAR 3673
RM-0
T
RCL 76 -77 -35
LU
1 DU
T
RCL 69 -70 -04
Z)
RCL66 -67 -29 (:
Z
LU
>
T
Q
VACANT
Z
N
V
w
RM -4
F
W
RCL 77 -78 -16
a
LU
VAR 3419
RM-4
�¢
APTS.
RCL 84 -85 -32
VAR 3487
C -G
RCL 63- 64-139
APTS.
m
�a
RCL 61 -62 -20
a'
CUP 3002
Uw
I VACANT
F
741
L135
7 -36
10
TER/
2E
36
1 DU
7E RS -2
x x 1 DU EACH
Z
N Q 0 N Q
� W C6 W
° D °
M S-2
M R
1 DU EACH
RM-4
RCL 73 -74 -29
VAR 2568
APTS. 1
VAR 3673
RM-0
P N 91 -02
RCL 76 -77 -35
VAR 2867
APTS. RM -4
T
RCL 69 -70 -04
1 D
RCL66 -67 -29 (:
RM -4
RCL 62-63 -109
APTS.
RM-2
RCL 87 -8849
I RM -4
RCL 69 -70 -(
VAR 2107
APTS.
RM -2
RCL 74 -75 -33
RCL 65-66 -116
(/AR 2709
VAR 1797
RM -4
CL 69 -70 -21
VAR 2133
APTS.
RM -?
GLEN HOLLY DR
41
CUP 2004 -04951
1 DU EACH
-ACH N;
am
op m
m
wae
K�
a— 198'
BALL ROAD
Cn
U
H
ry
D
O
U
x
U
W
0
°
U
Cn
W
Q
C7
F-
Q
W
Q
W
DI °
Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 (READVERTISED) Subject Property
Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 Date: April 4, 2005
Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 Scale: 1"=200'
Requested By: ODON MARC[ Q.S. No. 10
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004 -00141 - REQUEST RECLASSIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY FROM THE T (TRANSITION) ZONE TO THE RM -3 (RESIDENTIAL, MUTIPLE- FAMILY)
ZONE, OR A LESS INTENSE ZONE.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04951 - REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 16 -UNIT, ATTACHED
AND DETACHED, SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16833 - TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT, 16 -UNIT, ATTACHED AND DETACHED,
SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.
3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road
1748
T T
N 1 DU EACH
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
June 13, 2005
Item No. 5
5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion for continuance)
5b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004 -00141
5c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04951
5d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16833
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This rectangularly- shaped, 1.4 -acre property has a frontage of 198 feet on the north side of
Ball Road, a maximum depth of 277 feet and is located 741 feet east of the centerline of
Western Avenue (3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road).
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of the following:
Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 — to reclassify this property from the T (Transition) zone to
the RM -3 (Residential, Multiple - Family) zone, or less intense zone.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 —to permit a 16 -unit attached and detached single -
family residential subdivision.
Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 —to establish a 1 -lot, 16 -unit attached and detached single -
family residential subdivision-
BACKGROUND
(3) This item was continued from the February 7, February 23, March 7, April 4 and May 2, 2005,
Planning Commission meetings to allow the architect to redesign the project to comply with
the Corridor Residential Design Guidelines.
(4) The applicant, Walter Bowman, has submitted the attached letter dated May 26, 2005,
requesting a further continuance to the July 11, 2005, Commission meeting to redesign the
project in response to comments received from the neighborhood and staff-
RECOMMENDATION
(5) That the Commission, by motion, continue this item to the July 11, 2005, Planning
Commission meeting to allow the architect additional time to redesign the project.
SR- RCL2004 -00141 akv.dm
Page 1
05/26/2005 10:19 7149954825 BOWMANREALESTATE PAGE 01/01
Attachment - Item No. 5
Bonaoni Properties/D.S. Products
5622 Research. Drive
1-luntington Beach, CA 92649
May 26, 2005
City of Anaheim Planning Divi sion
Attn: Amy Vazquez, Associate Planner
Judy P. Dadant, Senior Planner
VIA FAX 714 765 -5280
RE: 3117, 3121, and 31.25 West Ball Road
C.EQA Negative Declaration
Reclassification No. 2004 -00141
Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951
Tentative Tract Map No. 16833
Dear Ladies,
Pursuant to our discussions on this matter, please be advised that we wish to
request a continuance of this item to the July 11, 2005 Planning Commission meeting.
Your continued consideration and cooperation is greatly appreciated If you have
any questions, please call me @ 714 995 -4432
Sincerely,
Walter K o 4 an
Associate
cc