The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 2015/01/26City of Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda Monday, January 26, 2015 Council Chamber, City Hall 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California • Chairman: John Seymour • Chairman Pro-Tempore: Michelle Lieberman • Commissioners: Peter Agarwal, Paul Bostwick, Mitchell Caldwell, Bill Dalati, Victoria Ramirez • Call To Order - 5:00 p.m. • Pledge Of Allegiance • Public Comments • Public Hearing Items • Commission Updates • Discussion • Adjournment 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. A copy of the staff report may be obtained at the City of Anaheim Planning Department, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805. A copy of the staff report is also available on the City of Anaheim website www.anaheim.net/planning on Thursday, January 22, 2015, after 5:00 p.m. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda (other than writings legally exempt from public disclosure) will be made available for public inspection in the Planning Department located at City Hall, 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, during regular business hours. You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following e-mail address: planningcommission@anaheim.net APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS Any action taken by the Planning Commission this date regarding Reclassifications, Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Public Convenience or Necessity Determinations, Tentative Tract and Parcel Maps will be final 10 calendar 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. 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. Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 5:00 P.M. Public Comments: This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the Anaheim City Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing items. 01/26/15 Page 2 of 6 Public Hearing Items ITEM NO. 2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05759 VARIANCE NO. 2014-04985 PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00111 (DEV2014-00092) Location: 1001–1037 North Magnolia Avenue and 2610 West La Palma Avenue Request: For: 1) a conditional use permit for the partial demolition and reconstruction of an existing shopping center to include a drive-thru pharmacy and drive-thru fast food restaurant; and, to permit alterations to two legal nonconforming signs; 2) a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity for the sale of alcoholic beverages at the pharmacy for off-site consumption; and 3) a variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 2 (Replacement or Reconstruction of Existing Structures) Categorical Exemption. Continued from the January 12, 2015 Planning Commission meeting. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Gustavo Gonzalez ggonzalez@anaheim.net ITEM NO. 3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05775 (DEV2014-00136) Location: 1671 West Katella Avenue, #122 Request: To permit a tattoo shop within a commercial center. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities). Categorical Exemption. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Amy Vazquez avazquez@anaheim.net 01/26/15 Page 3 of 6 ITEM NO. 4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05777 VARIANCE NO. 2014-04999 (DEV2014-00140) Location: 4570 East Eisenhower Circle Request: To permit a dog daycare and boarding facility with an outdoor play area with fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Categorical Exemption. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Amy Vazquez avazquez@anaheim.net ITEM NO. 5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05770 (DEV2014-00121) Location: 280 North Wilshire Avenue Request: To permit the conversion of an elderly residential care facility into educational housing. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Categorical Exemption. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Amy Vazquez avazquez@anaheim.net 01/26/15 Page 4 of 6 ITEM NO. 6 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05768 (DEV2014-00106) Location: 412 West Carl Karcher Way and 1180 North La Palma Park Way Request: To permit a charter school within an existing office building and two modular classroom buildings. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Categorical Exemption. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: David See dsee@anaheim.net ITEM NO. 7 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05756 VARIANCE NO. 2015-05001 (DEV2014-00089) Location: 2926 East Miraloma Avenue Request: To permit retail automobile sales at an existing automobile wholesale business with fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Categorical Exemption. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Scott Koehm skoehm@anaheim.net Adjourn to Monday, February 9, 2015 at 5:00 p.m. 01/26/15 Page 5 of 6 CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: 4:45 p.m. January 21, 2015 (TIME) (DATE) LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK SIGNED: ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION The City of Anaheim wishes to make all of its public meetings and hearings accessible to all members of the public. The City prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. If requested, the agenda and backup materials will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. Any person who requires a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, in order to participate in the public meeting may request such modification, accommodation, aid or service by contacting the Planning Department either in person at 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, or by telephone at (714) 765-5139, no later than 10:00 a.m. one business day preceding the scheduled meeting. La ciudad de Anaheim desea hacer todas sus reuniones y audiencias públicas accesibles a todos los miembros del público. La Ciudad prohíbe la discriminación por motivos de raza , color u origen nacional en cualquier programa o actividad que reciba asistencia financiera federal. Si se solicita, la agenda y los materiales de copia estarán disponible en formatos alternativos apropiados a las personas con una discapacidad, según lo requiere la Sección 202 del Acta de Americanos con Discapacidades de 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), las normas federales y reglamentos adoptados en aplicación del mismo. Cualquier persona que requiera una modificación relativa a la discapacidad, incluyendo medios auxiliares o servicios, con el fin de participar en la reunión pública podrá solicitar dicha modificación, ayuda o servicio poniéndose en contacto con la Oficina de Secretaria de la Ciudad ya sea en persona en el 200 S Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, o por teléfono al (714) 765-5139, antes de las 10:00 de la mañana un día habil antes de la reunión programada. 01/26/15 Page 6 of 6 ITEM NO. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: JANUARY 26, 2015 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05759, DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00111, AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04985 LOCATION: 1001 – 1037 North Magnolia Avenue and 2610 West La Palma Avenue APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Glen Hartigan, representing Frontier Real Estate Investments, and the property owner is Kathy Watson. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of the following: 1) a conditional use permit to allow the partial demolition and reconstruction of an existing retail center to include a drive-through pharmacy and drive-through fast food restaurant; and, to permit alterations to two legal nonconforming freestanding signs; 2) a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages at the pharmacy for off-premises consumption; and, 3) a variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. This hearing was continued from the January 12, 2015 Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant time to work with staff to address various design considerations. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 2 (Replacement or Reconstruction of Existing Structures) of the State CEQA Guidelines, approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05759, Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2014-00111 and Variance No. 2014-04985. BACKGROUND: The approximately 2.76-acre project site is located south and west of the southwest corner of Magnolia Avenue and La Palma Avenue with frontage on both streets. The site is developed with an approximately 31,682 square foot retail shopping center. The property has five existing legal nonconforming freestanding signs facing Magnolia Avenue. The site is located in the General Commercial (C-G) zone. The General Plan designates the site for Commercial- Neighborhood Center (C-NC) land uses. The site is bordered by a residential street to the southwest and a public alley located along the southerly property line. Surrounding land uses include multi-family residential and commercial uses to the west, commercial uses to the north across La Palma Avenue, commercial and multi- family residential to the east across Magnolia Avenue, and single-family residential to the south. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05759, DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00111, AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04985 January 26, 2015 Page 2 of 5 PROPOSAL: The project entails a complete renovation of the existing retail center. A small building near the southern property line and the majority of a larger building at the center of the site would be demolished and replaced by a new 14,000 square-foot pharmacy with a drive- through and a 4,425 square-foot fast food restaurant with a drive-through. The remaining portion of the larger building would be renovated into a new 10,000 square-foot retail building. Once completed, the retail center would contain a total of 28,425 square feet of retail space, approximately 3,257 square feet less than the existing retail center. A contemporary architectural design is proposed for the new buildings, which includes slanted rooflines, metal columns, canopies and panel cladding. A total of 124 parking spaces are proposed to accommodate the parking needs of the retail center which, as further described below, is less than required by the Zoning Code. Access to the site is proposed to be provided via two driveways along Magnolia Avenue and one driveway along La Palma Avenue. The 20-foot wide public alley located along the southern property line is proposed to be vacated and incorporated into the project site. The vacation and sale of the alley by the City to the property owner is subject to a separate process that is addressed in the conditions of approval included in the attached conditional use permit resolution. Portions of the existing block walls along the southern and western property lines would be removed and replaced with new block walls ranging between six and eight feet in height, completely enclosing the southwestern portion of the project site where the property interfaces with the adjacent residential neighborhood. Finally, the applicant is proposing to remove three of the existing freestanding signs along Magnolia Avenue while restoring and relocating two of them. A single monument sign is also proposed along La Palma Avenue and has been designed to meet Code. With respect to the operations of the retail center, the proposed pharmacy would operate from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., seven days a week. The pharmacy is proposing the sale of alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption. The fast food restaurant would operate 24 hours per day, seven days a week. A tenant has not been secured for the 10,000 square-foot retail building. ANALYSIS: The following is staff’s analysis of the project: Conditional Use Permit: While commercial centers are allowed by right in this zone, drive- through facilities are permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. The proposed renovation of the existing retail center would significantly improve the overall appearance of the property and address a number of community concerns that have been raised by residents in the adjacent residential neighborhood at community meetings regarding the property maintenance and the trash and loitering that spill into the neighborhood due to the lack of separation between the commercial center and the neighborhood. Staff anticipates that the proposed remodel, including the vacation of the alley, will have a positive impact on the quality of life in the adjacent neighborhood. Pharmacy and Fast Food Restaurant Drive-throughs: The proposed project has two drive- through lanes. The drive-through lane for the fast food restaurant would be located adjacent to the southern property line adjacent to single-family residences. The existing alley is proposed to be vacated and an eight-foot high block wall and 20-foot wide landscape planter are proposed along the property line. The alley vacation is not anticipated to hinder circulation in the area and would eliminate current loitering in the alley that has been a concern to the surrounding CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05759, DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00111, AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04985 January 26, 2015 Page 3 of 5 neighborhood. The ordering intercom for the drive-through lane will be oriented away from the adjacent residences and the pick-up window will be 32 feet from the block wall, thereby reducing potential noise impacts to nearby homes. The drive-through lane for the proposed pharmacy building would not be located near any residences and has been designed to allow vehicles to exit the site via La Palma Avenue. Both drive-through lanes have been designed to provide adequate vehicle queueing lanes to ensure that on-site circulation and public streets will not be impacted. Legal Nonconforming Freestanding Signs: The applicant is proposing to restore and maintain two existing freestanding signs along Magnolia Avenue. The signs would be relocated along Magnolia Avenue from their current locations to accommodate a required three foot right-of-way dedication and street improvement along Magnolia Avenue, and create a greater distance between the two signs to create a less cluttered appearance. No other freestanding signs are proposed along Magnolia Avenue. The signs are approximately 40 feet and 30 feet in overall height and approximately 14 feet and 18 feet in overall width. The Zoning Code requires that all new freestanding business signs be limited to low-scale, monument-type signs not exceeding eight feet in height. However, the code permits nonconforming signs to continue, provided that any structural change or alteration that requires a building permit shall be subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. The existing signs would not be increased in height or size and would be restored to resemble their original character and appearance. Although staff generally does not support the retention of legal-non conforming pole signs, the signs proposed to be retained possess a unique googie-style design that would be consistent with proposed architectural elements of the renovated retail center and are reflective of the historical design character of the shopping center. The restoration and relocation of the signs would also bring the signs closer to conformity with the sign code by removing them from the public right-of-way and increasing the distance between the signs. Therefore, staff is supportive of the request. Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity: The sale of alcoholic beverages in drug stores over 10,000 square feet in size is permitted by right in this zone. However, a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity is required in this instance because there is an over-concentration of off-sale licenses in the Census tract. State law limits the issuance of alcoholic beverage licenses when a license is requested for a property located in a police reporting district with a crime rate above the City average, or when there is an over- concentration in the number of ABC licenses within a census tract. However, the law also states that such restrictions can be waived if the local jurisdiction makes a determination that the proposed outlet would serve a "public convenience or necessity." This property is located within Census Tract No. 868.01, which has a population of 3,267. One off-sale license is permitted based on this population, and currently there are five licenses in the tract, including one license on the project site which would no longer be active at this site with implementation of the project. The property is within Police Reporting District No. 1517, which is below the city average crime rate. There have been 36 calls for service to this location in the CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05759, DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00111, AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04985 January 26, 2015 Page 4 of 5 past year in response to five drunk in public calls, twelve disturbances, three trespassing, one brandishing of a firearm, three 911 hang ups, five suspicious circumstances, two petty thefts, one stolen vehicle, two burglaries, one suicide attempt and one sex offense. The crime rate within ¼ mile of this property is 72% above the citywide average based upon calls for service. These calls consisted of 14 simple assaults, 18 petty thefts and 11 vandalisms. Staff believes the sale of alcohol for off-premises consumption would be compatible with the surrounding area because the crime rate of the police reporting district is below the city average and the license would replace an existing off-sale license currently operated as a liquor store. The calls for service in the past year are attributed to businesses that will no longer be in operation at this site which include a bar and liquor store. Further, the pharmacy would represent the only business on site selling alcohol alcoholic beverages, with alcohol sales representing a small portion of overall retail sales activity of the store. The pharmacy operator also maintains strict alcohol sales policies and conducts extensive training for its sales clerks. Conditions of approval to help ensure that the business is operated in a responsible manner are included as part of the draft resolution. Staff does not anticipate that the addition of alcohol sales for off-site consumption at this location would contribute to an increase in crime in the area. Parking Variance: Parking for the project site is required as follows: Use Size Ratio Required Retail 24,000 sq.ft. 5.5 spaces/1,000 sq.ft. 132 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive- through 4,425 sq.ft. 10 spaces/1,000 sq.ft. 45 Total Spaces Required: 177 Total Spaces Provided: 127 A parking analysis was prepared by KOA Corporation dated September 2014, to determine the number of spaces needed for this project. This analysis includes a review of six other similar pharmacy parking site surveys and an evaluation of the parking supply and demand of the current proposal. This analysis concludes that 123 parking spaces are adequate to meet the demands of the project. A peer review of the parking analysis was also conducted by Kunzman Associates, Inc., one of the City’s on-call traffic engineering consultants. The peer review concurred with the conclusion of the parking analysis. Based on the conclusions in the parking analysis and the peer review, staff recommends approval of the parking variance. Staff has received several telephone calls and one email correspondence (Attachment 7) from the current tenants of the retail center with concerns and questions regarding the project. In addition, staff also received one email correspondence from a concerned resident regarding the existing El Patio restaurant. Staff has informed the applicant of these inquiries, and the applicant is working with the property owner to communicate with the tenants regarding their concerns. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05759, DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00111, AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04985 January 26, 2015 Page 5 of 5 CONCLUSION: The proposed project would represent a significant improvement in the overall appearance and operation of the center. The renovated commercial center, including the proposed drive-through lanes, refurbished non-conforming signs, and on-sale beer and wine sales in the pharmacy, would be compatible with the surrounding residential and commercial uses. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit, determination of public convenience or necessity, and variance requests. Prepared by, Submitted by, Gustavo Gonzalez Jonathan E. Borrego Associate Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Conditional Use Permit, Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity and Variance Resolution 2. Letter of Operations and Justifications 3. Parking Analysis and Peer Review 4. Police Memorandum 5. Site Photographs 6. Project Plans 7. Public Comments C-GRETAIL CONDOMINIUMS40 DU RS-2SFRISERVICESTATION IMEDICAL OFFICE C-GRESTAURANT C-GOFFICES C-GRESTAURANT C-GRESTAURANT C-GRESTAURANT RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RM-4MAGNOLIAAPARTMENTS100 DU RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE C-GSERVICE STATION RM-4MAGNOLIA PLAZAAPARTMENTS84 DU RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCERS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCERS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCERS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCEC-GSERVICESTATIONC-GRETAIL C-GRETAIL C I T Y O F B U E N A PA R KC I T Y O F B U E N A PA R K PROPOSEDABANDONMENT W LA PALMA AVE N MAGNOLIA AVEN FELICIDAD STW WOODLAND DRN LA PERLA STW GREENBRIER AVE N HANOVER STW FELICIDAD CIR W GREENBRIER AVE W VIA PALMA WOODLAND DR W. LA PALMA AVE W. CRESCENT AVE N. MAGNOLIA AVEN. BROOKHURST STN. DALE AVE. CRESCENT AVE 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue2610 West La Palma Avenue DEV No. 2014-00092 Subject Property APN: 070-191-05070-191-20 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 W LA PALMA AVE N MAGNOLIA AVEN FELICIDAD STW WOODLAND DRN LA PERLA STW GREENBRIER AVE N HANOVER STW FELICIDAD CIR W GREENBRIER AVE W VIA PALMA WOODLAND DR W. LA PALMA AVE W. CRESCENT AVE N. MAGNOLIA AVEN. BROOKHURST STN. DALE AVE. CRESCENT AVE 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue 2610 West La Palma Avenue DEV No. 2014-00092 Subject Property APN: 070-191-05 070-191-20 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo: May 2014 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05759, DETERMINING PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00111 FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE, APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 2014-04985, AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2014-00092) (1001-1037 NORTH MAGNOLIA AVENUE AND 2610 WEST LA PALMA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition for (i) Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05759 for the partial demolition and reconstruction of an existing retail center, to include a drive-through pharmacy, the renovation of the remaining portion of the center, the construction of a drive- through fast food restaurant with drive-through lanes, and to permit the alteration of two legal nonconforming signs, (ii) a determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to permit the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits at the pharmacy with a Type 21 (Off Sale - General) Alcoholic Beverage Control ("ABC") license for off-premises consumption (herein referred to as "Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2014-00111"), and (iii) Variance No. 2014-04985 to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code") (collectively, the "Proposed Project") for premises located at 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue and 2610 West La Palma Avenue in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 2.76-acre in size and is developed with a retail center containing two retail buildings totaling approximately 31,682 square feet, large surface parking areas and five existing legal nonconforming pylon signs along Magnolia Avenue. The Land Use Element of the Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Commercial-Neighborhood Center land uses. The Property is located within the "C-G" General Commercial Zone. As such, the Property is subject to the zoning and development standards described in Chapter 18.08 (General Commercial Zone) of the Code; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was scheduled before the Planning Commission at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on January 12, 2015 at 5:00 p.m., which was continued to January 26, 2015 to hear and consider evidence and testimony for and against the Proposed Project and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, as the “lead agency” under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the Planning Commission finds and determines that the Proposed Project is within that class of projects (i.e., Class 2 – Replacement or Reconstruction of Existing Structures) which consists of the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structures will be located on the same site as the structures replaced and will have substantially the same size, purpose and capacity as the structures replaced, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15302 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically, exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and - 1 - PC2015-*** WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing with respect to the request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05759, does find and determine the following facts: 1. The request to permit a drive-through pharmacy and a drive-through fast food restaurant are allowable uses within the "C-G" Commercial Zone under Subsection .010 of Section 18.08.030 of the Code provided that a conditional use permit is approved. In addition, the request to permit a Type 21 (Off Sale - General) ABC license to permit the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits at the proposed pharmacy for off-premises consumption is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized under Subsection .010 of Section 18.08.030 of the Code; 2. The proposed conditional use permit to permit the demolition and reconstruction of a portion of the existing buildings, the renovation of the remainder of the existing buildings, the construction of a fast food restaurant building and pharmacy with drive-through lanes, and the changes to the landscaping, parking and circulation would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses, or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the Proposed Project entails a complete renovation of the Property which will improve the aesthetics of the improvements on the Property and the overall appearance of the project site, and would not have an adverse effect on adjacent residential and commercial uses; 3. The size and shape of the site is adequate to allow the full development of the Proposed Project in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health, safety and general welfare of the public because the Proposed Project would reduce the overall total retail square-footage of the retail center while significantly improving the aesthetics of the Property and the overall appearance of the project site. Further, the drive-through lanes have been designed to minimize impacts onto the surrounding uses; and 4. The traffic generated by the Proposed Project would not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the traffic generated by the Proposed Project will not exceed the anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding streets and adequate parking will be provided to accommodate the future uses. Further, the proposed alley vacation is not anticipated to hinder circulation in the area and will eliminate a nuisance in the area; and 5. The granting of the conditional use permit will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim because the Proposed Project would significantly improve the aesthetics of the buildings and the overall appearance of the project site is compatible with the surrounding area, subject to compliance with the conditions contained herein; and WHEREAS, under and pursuant to Subsection .020 of Section 18.56.060 (Nonconforming Signs) of the Code, the relocation and alteration of two of the existing legal non-conforming signs, as shown on the plans submitted by the applicant and on file with the Planning Department, will (a) not increase the height or area of the sign copy for either of the two signs and will bring the two signs closer into conformity with the Code, (b) improve the aesthetics of the two signs, and (c) not be detrimental under the conditions imposed to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. The two signs will be restored to resemble - 2 - PC2015-*** their original appearance and are proposed to be integrated with the proposed renovations to the retail center. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing with respect to the request for Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2014-00111, does find and determine the following facts: 1. On July 11, 1995, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 95R-134 establishing procedures and delegating certain responsibilities to the Planning Commission relating to the determination of "Public Convenience or Necessity" on those certain applications for a liquor license requiring that such determination be made by the local governing body pursuant to applicable provisions of the Business and Professions Code, and prior to the issuance of a license by ABC. 2. Section 23958 of the Business and Professions Code provides that the ABC shall deny an application for a liquor license if issuance of that license would tend to create a law enforcement problem, or if issuance would result in or add to an "undue concentration" of licenses, except when an applicant has demonstrated that "public convenience or necessity" would be served by the issuance of a license. For purposes of Section 23958, "undue concentration" means the case in which the premises are located in an area where any of the following conditions exist: (a) The premises are located in a crime reporting district that has a lower number of "reported crimes" (as defined in Section 23958.4) than the average number of reported crimes as determined from all crime reporting districts within the City of Anaheim. (b) As to on-sale retail license applications, the ratio of on-sale retail licenses to population in the census tract or census division in which the premises are located exceeds the ratio of on-sale retail licenses to population in the county. (c) As to off-sale retail license applications, the ratio of off-sale retail licenses to population in the census tract or census division in which the premises are located exceeds the ratio of off-sale retail licenses to population in the county. 3. Notwithstanding the existence of the above-referenced conditions, ABC may issue a license if the Planning Commission determines that the "public convenience or necessity" would be served by the issuance. 4. Resolution No. 95R-134 authorizes the City of Anaheim Police Department to make recommendations related to "public convenience or necessity" determinations; and, when the sale of alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption is permitted by the Code, said recommendations shall take the form of conditions of approval to be imposed on the determination in order to ensure that the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages does not adversely affect any adjoining land use or the growth and development of the surrounding area. - 3 - PC2015-*** 5. The Property is located within Census Tract 868.01 with a population of 3,267 that allows for one (1) off-sale ABC license. There are presently five (5) off-sale ABC licenses in the tract. The Property is located in Police Reporting District No. 1517, which has a crime rate that is below the City-wide average; however, the Police Department evaluates these requests based on the crime rate within a one-quarter mile radius of the premises for the subject site. The crime rate within ¼ mile of this Property is 72% above the City-wide average based upon calls for service. Since there is an over-concentration in the number of ABC licenses within the census tract, a determination of "public convenience or necessity" is required to be made for this request. 6. A determination of "public convenience or necessity" can be made based on the finding that the requested license, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim because the sales of beer, wine and distilled spirits at this location will be a small percentage of overall sales for the proposed pharmacy business and an incidental commodity provided by the proposed drug store. 7. The sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits is ancillary to the primary business operations of the proposed pharmacy business and would serve as an added convenience to residents and visitors to the area who choose to shop at this establishment. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request for Variance No. 2014-04985 to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Code in conjunction with the existing restaurant, including an outdoor patio, should be approved for the following reasons: SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces. (177 spaces required; 124 spaces proposed) 1. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off- street parking spaces to be provided for the all uses on site than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such uses under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such uses. A parking analysis was prepared by KOA Corporation, determining that the proposed number of parking spaces within the Property is sufficient to accommodate all future uses on site. A peer review of the parking analysis was also conducted by Kunzman Associates, Inc., which concurred with the conclusion of the analysis of KOA Corporation; 2. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the Property because the proposed number of parking spaces within the Property is sufficient to accommodate all future uses on site, as determined by the KOA Corporation parking analysis and the Kunzman Associates, Inc. peer review; 3. 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 because the proposed number of parking spaces within the Property is sufficient to accommodate all future uses on site, as determined by the KOA Corporation parking analysis and the Kunzman Associates, Inc. peer review; - 4 - PC2015-*** 4. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use because the project site provides adequate ingress and egress points to the property and are designed to allow for adequate on-site circulation; and 5. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the project site has existing ingress or egress access points that are designed to allow adequate on-site circulation and, therefore, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the Property; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05759, Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2014-00111 and Variance No. 2014-04985, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the 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. - 5 - PC2015-*** THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of January 26, 2015. 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 PRO-TEMPORE, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on January 26, 2015, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 26th day of January, 2015. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 6 - PC2015-*** - 7 - PC2015-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05759, DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00111 AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04985 (DEV2014-00092) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT WITHIN 30 DAYS OF APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE OR BUILDING PERMIT, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST 1 Owner shall install an approved backflow prevention assembl y on the water service connection(s) serving the property, behind property line and building setback in accordance with Public Utilities Department Water En gineering Division requirements. Public Utilities Water Engineering PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS 2 The legal owner shall submit an application for a Subdivision Map Act Certificate of Compliance to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division. A Certificate of Compliance or Conditional Certificate of Compliance shall be approved by the City Engineer and recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. Public Works Development Services 3 The applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that conforms with current Orange County Guidelines and Requirements as well as the City’s WQMP Review Checklist. Said WQMP shall: • Address 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. • Incorporate applicable Routine Source Control BMPs. • Incorporate Treatment Control BMPs. • Describe the long-term operation and maintenance, identifies the responsible parties, and funding mechanisms for the Treatment Control BMPs Public Works Development Services 4 If the disturbed area is greater than an acre, the applicant shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under California’s General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number. The applicant shall prepare and implement a Storm Water Public Works Development Services - 8 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City review on request. 5 The legal property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim (a) a 53-foot wide easement for street and public utility purposes from the centerline of Magnolia Avenue, (b) a 60-foot wide easement for street and public utility purposes from the centerline of La Palma Avenue and (c) a 30-foot wide easement for street and public utility purposes from centerline of Felicidad Street. The form of the offer to dedicate shall be acceptable to the City Engineer. Public Works Development Services PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 6 The detailed landscape and irrigation plans submitted for planning staff review and approval shall be revised to reflect the proposed site plan as approved by the Planning Commission. Panning Division 7 Plans shall be submitted with the building permit submittal showing an eight-foot high block wall, as measured at grade from within the project site, adjacent to Felicidad Street, the public alley along the south property line, and the two residential properties. Said block wall shall include openings every three feet along the base of the wall to allow clinging vines to grow on the outside of the wall along Felicidad Street and the public alley along the southerly property line. Panning Division 8 Plans shall be submitted with the building permit submittal showing all fire lanes posted with “No Parking Any Time.” These improvements shall be installed and completed prior to the first final building and zoning inspection. Public Works Traffic 9 The developer shall submit to Public Works, Development Services Division for review and approval of the City Council, the Abandonment application of Public Alley. Public Works Development Services 10 The developer shall submit street improvement plans to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division to improve Magnolia Avenue, La Palma Avenue and Felicidad Street, in conformance with Public Works Standard Detail 160-A. A Right-of-Way Construction Permit shall be obtained from the Development Services Division for all work performed in the right-of-way. Public Works Development Services 11 The developer shall post security to guarantee the construction of public works improvements in an amount approved by the City Engineer and in a form approved by the City Attorney. Public Works Development Services - 9 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 12 That a private water system with separate water service for fire protection and domestic water shall be provided and shown on plans submitted to the Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. Public Utilities Water Engineering 13 That all backflow equipment shall be located abo ve ground o utside of the street setback area in a manner fu ll y screened from all public streets and alleys. An y backflow asse mblies currently installed in a vault will have to be brought up to current sta n da rds. An y ot her lar ge water syst em equipment shall be install ed to the satisfaction of the Public U tilities Department Water Engineering Div ision outside of the street setback area in a manner fu ll y screened from all pub ic streets and alleys. Said informati on shall be s pecificall y shown on pl ans and approved by Water Engineerin g and Cross Connection Control In s pector. Public Utilities Water Engineering 14 That all requests for new water services, backflow equipm ent, o r fire lines, as well as an y modifications, re l ocations, o r aband o nm ents of ex i sting water serv ices, backflow eq uipment, a nd fire lines, shall be coordinated and pe rmitted through Water En gineering Divisi on of the Ana heim Publ ic Uti l ities Departme nt. Public Utilities Water Engineering 15 That all existin g water serv ices a nd fire serv i ces shall con form to current Water Serv i ces Standard Specifications. A n y water servi ce a nd/or fire line tha t does not meet current standard s sh all be upgrad ed if continu ed use i f necessary or aba nd on ed i f the ex ist ing servi ce i s no longer n eeded. The owner/devel oper shall be responsibl e for the costs to upgrad e or to aband on any wat e r service or fire line. Public Utilities Water Engineering 16 The Owne r shall irrevocabl y o ffer to dedicate to the C ity of Anaheim (i) a n easement for all large domest ic a bove-ground water meters a nd fire h ydrants, includin g a five (5)-foot wide easement around the fire hydrant and /or wat er meter pad. (ii) a twent y (20) foot wide easem ent for all water service m ains a nd service l aterals all to the sa tisfaction of the Water Engineerin g Di v ision. The easem e nts sha ll be g ranted on the Water En gineerin g Division of the Public Utilities De partmen t's standard water easement deed . The easement deed s shall include langu age that requires the Owner to be responsibl e for restorin g any special surface improvements, other th an asphalt pav ing, i ncluding but not limited to colored co n crete, bricks, pavers, stamped concrete, d ecorative hardscape, wall s or l a ndscaping t hat becomes da maged durin g an y excavation, repair or repl acement of City owned wa ter facilities. Provision s for the repair, repla cement and m aintenance of all surface improv ements Public Utilities Water Engineering - 10 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT othe r than asphalt paving shall be the responsibility of the Owner and included and recorded in the Master CC&R’s for the project. 17 That the developer/owner shall submit to the Public Utilities Department Water Engineering Di vision an esti mate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and pea k hour wate r 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 wa ter syst em impro vements required to serve the project shall be done in accord ance with Rule No. 1 5A.6 of the Water U tilit y Rates, Rules, and Regul ations. Public Utilities Water Engineering 18 That indi vidual water service and/or fire line connections will be req uired for each parcel or residential , commerci al, industria l unit per Rule 18 of the City of Anaheim’s Water Rates, Rules and Regulations. Public Utilities Water Engineering 19 There are no existing backflow prevention devices on the water meters serv ing the property. Prior to any approval of plans, Applicant shall contact Water Engineering Cross Connection Control to determine requirem ents for installing back flow prevention devices at the meter or internall y. Public Utilities Water Engineering 20 All new water service connections shall for this development shall be locate on Magnolia Avenue. No new service connections will be allowed on La Palma Avenue. Public Utilities Water Engineering 21 No public water mains or laterals allowed under parking stalls or parking lots. Public Utilities Water Engineering 22 Construction documents shall be submitted to the Building Division for plan review. Building Division PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING AND ZONING INSPECTION 23 All required street improvements shall be constructed, subject to review and approval by the Construction Services inspector. Public Works Development Services 24 The 20-foot wide public alley right of way at the south end of the property shall be abandoned. The legal property owner shall complete the abandonment application case ABA2014-00288 and request approval of the City Council. Public Works Development Services 25 The legal property owner shall provide to the City of Anaheim a 10-foot wide Public Utility Easement within the 20 foot public alley right of way abandonment area, as required by the Public Utilities, Electrical Division. Public Works Development Services - 11 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT ON-GOING DURING PROJECT OPERATIONS 26 No display of alcoholic beverages shall be located outside of a building or within five (5) feet of any public entrance to the building. Police Department 27 There shall be no exterior advertising or sign of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. Interior displays of alcoholic beverages or signs which are clearly visible to the exterior shall constitute a violation of this condition. Police Department 28 The area of alcoholic beverage displays shall not exceed 25% of the total display area in a building. Police Department 29 Sale of alcoholic beverages shall be made to customers only when the customer is in the building. No alcohol shall be sold, exchanged, or distributed through the drive through window. Police Department 30 The possession of alcoholic beverages in open containers and the consumption of alcoholic beverages are prohibited on or around these premises. Police Department 31 Petitioner(s) shall police the area under their control in an effort to prevent the loitering of persons around the premises. Police Department 32 There shall be no amusement machines, video game devices or pool tables maintained upon the premises at any time. Police Department 33 The Petitioner(s) shall post and maintain a professional quality sign facing the premises parking lot(s) that reads as follows: NO LOITERING, NO LITTERING NO DRINKING OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES VIOLATORS ARE SUBJECT TO ARREST The sign shall be at least two feet square with two inch block lettering. The sign shall be in English and Spanish. Police Department 34 Loitering is prohibited on or around these premises or this area under the control of the licensee(s). Police Department 35 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 the parking lot. Additionally, the position of such lighting shall not disturb the normal privacy and use of any neighboring residences. Police Department - 12 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 36 Managers/Owners need to call the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and obtain LEAD (Licensee Education on Alcohol and Drugs Program) Training for themselves and register employees. The contact number is 714-558-4101. Police Department 37 Any Graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any adjacent area under the control of the licensee shall be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being applied. Police Department 38 Buildings shall be pre-wired for a comprehensive security alarm system (silent or audible) for the following coverage areas: • Perimeter of building and access route protection. • High valued storage areas. • Interior building door to shipping and receiving area. • Perimeter fence and security gating. Police Department 39 Address numbers shall be positioned so as to be readily readable from the street. Number should be illuminated during hours of darkness. Police Department 40 Rear entrance doors shall be numbered with the same address numbers or suite number of the business. Minimum height of 4” recommended. Police Department 41 Rooftop address numbers for the police helicopter. Minimum size 4’ in height and 2’ in width. The lines of the numbers are to be a minimum of 6” thick. Numbers shall be spaced 12” to 18” apart. Numbers shall be painted or constructed in a contrasting color to the roofing material. Numbers shall face the street to which the structure is addressed. Numbers are not to be visible from ground level. Police Department 42 All exterior doors to have adequate security hardware, e.g. deadbolt locks. Police Department 43 Wide-angle peepholes or other viewing device shall be installed in solid doors where natural surveillance is compromised. Police Department 44 The locks shall be so constructed that both the deadbolt and deadlocking latch can be retracted by a single action of the inside doorknob/lever/turn piece. Police Department 45 Overhead roll-up doors shall also be secured on the inside that the lock cannot be defeated from the outside and shall be secured with a cylinder lock or padlock from the inside. Police Department 46 Large store/business display windows shall consist of burglary resistant glazing or its equivalent that attaches to the frame. Police Department - 13 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 47 All glass skylights on the roof of any building shall be provided with: • Rated burglary resistant glass or glass-like acrylic material or • Security bars of at least ½” round steel, or 1” by ¼” flat steel material, spaced no more than 5” apart under the skylight and securely fastened. • Steel grill of at least 1/8” material under the skylight and securely fastened. Police Department 48 All hatchway openings on the roof of any building shall be secured as follows: • If the hatchway is of wooden material, if shall be covered on the outside with at least 16-gauge sheet steel or its equivalent attached with screws. • Outside hinges on all hatchway openings shall be provided with non-removable pins when using pin-type hinges. Police Department 49 A Knox box shall be installed at hatchway to allow Police/Fire access to interior. Police Department 50 Exterior roof access ladder shall be relocated within the building’s main resident tenant space. Exterior ladders allow easy roof access for criminals, etc. Police Department 51 All air duct or air vent openings exceeding 8” x 12” on the rooftop or exterior walls of any building shall be secured by covering the same with either of the following: • Security bars of at least ½” round steel, or 1” by ¼” flat steel material, spaced no more than 5” apart and securely fastened. • A steel grill of at least 1/8” material and securely fastened or • If the barrier is secured to the outside of the structure, it shall be secured with galvanized rounded head flush bolts of at least 3/8” diameter on the outside. Police Department 52 Monument signs and addresses shall be well lighted during hours of darkness. Police Department 53 Adequate lighting of parking lots, passageways, recesses, and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all person, property, and vehicles on-site. Police Department 54 All exterior doors shall have their own light source, which shall adequately illuminate door areas at all hours to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises and provide adequate Police Department - 14 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT illumination for persons exiting the building. 55 Landscaping shall be of the type and situated in locations to maximize observation while providing the desired degree of aesthetics. Security planting materials are encouraged along fence and property lines and under vulnerable windows. Police Department 56 Trees shall not be planted close enough to the structure to allow easy access to the roof, or shall be kept trimmed to make climbing difficult. Police Department 57 Minimum recommended lighting level in all parking lots is .5 foot-candle maintained, measured at the parking surface, with a maximum to minimum ratio no greater than 15:1. Police Department 58 “No Trespassing 602(k) P.C.” posted at the entrances of parking lots/structures and located in other appropriate places. Signs must be at least 2’ x 1’ in overall size, with white background and black 2” lettering. Police Department 59 All entrances to parking areas shall be posted with appropriate signs per 22658(a) C.V.C., to assist in removal of vehicles at the property owners/managers request. Police Department GENERAL 60 The subject Property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department, and as conditioned herein. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 61 Conditions of approval related to each of the timing milestones above shall be prominently displayed on plans submitted for permits. For example, conditions of approval that are required to be complied with prior to the issuance of building permits shall be provided on plans submitted for building plan check. This requirement applies to grading permits, final maps, street improvement plans, water and electrical plans, landscape irrigation plans, security plans, parks and trail plans, and fire and life safety plans, etc. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 62 The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 15 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 63 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 16 - PC2015-*** Rite Aid Corporation 320 Goddard Way, Suite 125 Irvine, CA 92618 Tel (949) 753-0614 I Fax (949) 585-9264 RITE AID CORPORATION December 4, 2014 Gustavo Gonzales, AICP Associate Planner City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Dear Mr. Gonzales: We are looking forward to working with you on our new store at the SWC N. Magnolia Ave. and La Palma Ave. In response to your request for a Letter of Operations, below are answers to the questions that were posed. Days and hours of operations: Rite Aid is open seven (7) days a week. Proposed store hours will be 7AM to 10 PM. Proposed pharmacy hours are 8AM to 10PM weekdays but the pharmacy would likely close earlier on Saturday and Sunday, with the exact weekend hours to be determined. Estimated number of employees: The store will employ approximately 17 employees. Approximately 6 will be working per shift. Peak hours: Peak times are 5pm to 7pm, Monday through Friday. Anticipated delivery schedule: Rite Aid receives one large delivery once per week. There are an additional 10-12 small deliveries per week from individual vendors. Delivery times range from 6AM to 7PM. Please let me know if there are any further questions. Thank you, Tracy L. Verastegui Tracy Verastegui Senior Real Estate Director Rite Aid Corporation ATTACHMENT NO. 2 McDonald’s USA 3800 Kilroy Airport Way, Suite 200 Long Beach, California 90806 562-673-8452 richard.gebele@us.mcd.com December 5, 2014 Gustavo Gonzales, AICP City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 RE: Magnolia and La Palma, Anaheim, CA Dear Mr. Gonzales: Please see the answers below relating to our proposed operations at the intersection of Magnolia and La Palma. • We are proposing to operate 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. • We will employee a total of 45-50 employees at the store. On average, we will have approximately 10-12 employees working per shift. • Peak business hours are 7-9 AM, 11-2PM, and 5-8PM. • Deliveries vary based upon store volumes. This could result in one daily delivery or one delivery per every 2 days. These will occur between the hours of 6AM-10PM. We look forward to working with you on this project. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Thank you, Richard Gebele Area Real Estate Manager McDonald’s Corporation January 7, 2015 Gustavo Gonzalez Associate Planner City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Suite 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 RE: Magnolia & La Palma Shopping Center 1001 North Magnolia Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801 Justification for Use of Existing Signage Dear Mr. Gonzalez, We are proposing to restore and maintain two existing freestanding signs along Magnolia Avenue. The signs would be relocated along Magnolia Avenue from their current locations to accommodate a required three foot right-of-way dedication and street improvement along Magnolia Avenue, and create a greater distance between the two signs to create a less cluttered appearance. No other freestanding signs are proposed along Magnolia Avenue. The existing signs do not conform to current standards but we want to keep them, make them safe, and use them for our project. The code permits nonconforming signs to continue, if certain findings are complied with per the Municipal Code Section 18.56.030 specifically, .01 That the proposed modifications to the sign do not increase the height or area of sign copy and bring the sign closer to conformity with the code. Our sign design does not increase the height or area of the area of the sign and it will be more structurally sound when installed. .02 That the changes proposed improves the aesthetics of the sign. Our design elevations show an exciting improvement to the aesthetics of the sign. .03 That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. The restoring of the signs will update the structural integrity of the signs which will better serve the health and safety of the citizens of Anaheim. We are excited to work with the City to preserve some of the unique features of the architecture of the past on this project. We expect our request and this justification meet with your approval. Sincerely, Glen Hartigan Frontier Real Estate Parking Study For a Proposed Retail Center In the City of Anaheim September 2014 Prepared for: Glen Hartigan Frontier Real Estate Investments 610 Newport Center Drive, Suite 400 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Prepared by: 2141 W. Orangewood Ave Suite A Orange, CA 92868 (714) 573-0317 Job No.: JB43111 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 2141 West Orangewood Avenue, Suite A Orange, CA 92868 t: 714.573.0317 f: 714.573.9534 www.koacorporation.com September 26, 2014 Glen Hartigan Frontier Real Estate Investments 610 Newport Center Drive, Suite 400 Newport Beach, CA 92660 949-800-8073 Subject: Parking Study for the Retail Center at the Southwest Corner of Magnolia Street and La Palma Avenue in the City of Anaheim Dear Mr. Hartigan: KOA Corporation is pleased to present the parking study for the proposed retail center located at the southwest corner of Magnolia Street and La Palma Avenue in the City of Anaheim. The site is currently occupied by miscellaneous retail stores. Frontier Real Estate Investments proposes to build a retail center with a total of 28,425 square-foot building area, including an existing 10,000 square-foot retail store, a 14,000 sqaure-foot pharmacy, and a 4,425 square-foot fast-food restaurant. Two access points from the site are proposed along Magnolia Street and one access point along La Palma Avenue. This parking study report was prepared to evaluate the adequacy of the proposed parking supply and provide a parking variance justification if needed. Similar site parking surveys have been conducted at three Walgreen stores and three CVS stores in Orange County. Shared Parking Analysis was also applied using the Urban Land Institute’s (ULI) Shared Parking Guide. It has been a pleasure to provide this study to you and to the City of Anaheim. Please contact us if you require any additional information, or if you have any questions about the study. Sincerely, Min Zhou, P.E. Principal J:\Cities\Anaheim\JB43111 AN SWC Magnolia La Palma Pkg Study\Documents\JB43111 AN SWC Parking Study 092614.docx Parking Study for a Retail Center i City of Anaheim Table of Contents A.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 A.2 PROJECT LOCATION ...................................................................................................... 1 A.3 SITE DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................... 1 A.4 SITE USES .......................................................................................................................... 2 A.5 PARKING REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................ 2 A.5 PARKING STUDY ............................................................................................................. 5 A6.1 PHARMACY PARKING DEMAND STUDY ......................................................................................................... 5 A6.2 SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................ 7 A6.3 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................................... 8 APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................ A-1 APPENDIX B .............................................................................................................................. B-1 Parking Study for a Retail Center ii City of Anaheim List of Figures FIGURE 1 – PROJECT VICINITY MAP ................................................................................................................... 3 FIGURE 2 – PROJECT SITE PLAN ......................................................................................................................... 4 List of Tables TABLE 1 – SITE USES ............................................................................................................................................................ 2 TABLE 2 – SIMILAR SITE SURVEY FOR WALGREENS STORE IN COSTA MESA ............................................................... 5 TABLE 3 – SIMILAR SITE SURVEY RESULTS FOR WALGREENS ......................................................................................... 5 TABLE 4 – SIMILAR SITE SURVEY FOR CVS IN HUNTINGTON BEACH .......................................................................... 6 TABLE 5 – SIMILAR SITE SURVEY FOR CVS ....................................................................................................................... 6 TABLE 6 – SHARED PARKING EVALUATION FOR FULL OCCUPANCY .......................................................................... 8 Parking Study for a Retail Center 1 City of Anaheim A.1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this parking study is to request for a parking variance to be granted by the Planning Commission for a retail center development project in City of Anaheim. The study complies with the Parking Variance requirements defined by the Anaheim Municipal Code, as well as parking requirements also defined by the Municipal Code. It provides the evidence that the project complies with the following:  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;  The variance, under the conditions imposed if any, will not increase the demand and for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use;  The variance, under the conditions imposed if any, will not increase the demand and 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 18.42.05.030 (Non-Residential Uses – Exception)  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  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. A.2. PROJECT LOCATION The proposed retail center is located at the southwest corner of Magnolia Street and La Palma Avenue in the City of Anaheim. Figure 1 illustrates the project vicinity map. Figure 2 depicts the project site plan. A.3. SITE DESCRIPTION The existing site is occupied by miscellaneous retail stores. For the proposed renovation and development, the site plan provides for a total of 28,425 square-foot building area, including a 14,000- square-foot pharmacy with drive-thru, an existing 10,000-square-foot retail store to remain, and a 4,425- square-foot fast-food restaurant with drive-thru. Two full access points will be provided along Magnolia Street, and a right-in and right-out access will be provided along La Palma Avenue. Adequate queuing spaces and circulations are provided for the drive- thru windows for both the pharmacy and the fast-food restaurant. The pharmacy drive-thru facility Parking Study for a Retail Center 2 City of Anaheim provides double stacking lanes. There is a proposed parking supply of 124 parking stalls for the project site. A.4. SITE USES The existing and proposed site uses are listed below in Table 1. On-site circulation with large truck turning template is shown on the site plan. Adequate emergency access and parking design with required handicap parking stalls are also shown on the site plan. Table 1 – Site Uses Site Use Existing / Proposed Drive-Thru Square Footage Retail Store Existing No 10,000 Pharmacy Proposed Yes 14,000 Fast-Food Restaurant Proposed Yes 4,425 A.5. PARKING REQUIREMENTS The City of Anaheim Municipal Code defines the nonresidential parking standards on Table 42-A, which indicates that 5.5 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet are required for the first 100,000 square feet of retail land uses. 10 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet are required for fast-food restaurants. Based on the Code, 55 parking spaces are required for the existing retail store, 77 parking spaces are required for the proposed pharmacy, and 45 parking spaces are required for the proposed fast-food restaurant. A total of 177 parking spaces are required for the site based on the code. Municipal Code parking requirements are general for all retail uses, not addressing the specific characteristic of a pharmacy use with a drive-thru. Therefore, this study documents the parking needs of the proposed pharmacy use, evaluating similar existing pharmacy uses to determine the appropriate parking demand rate for a typical pharmacy. This study also includes a shared parking analysis, considering the shared parking uses of both retail and fast-food restaurant uses. LEGENDProject SiteFigure 1Vicinity MapNOT TO SCALELa Palma AveCrescent AveCrescent AveStanton AveStanton Ave Dale StDale St Beach Bl v d Magnolia StMagnolia St Gilbert St 59191Parking Study for a Retail CenterCity of Anaheim, CAJ:\Cities\Anaheim\JB43111 AN SWC Magnolia La Palma Pkg Study\Analysis\Figures/JB43111 Figures.aiKOACORPORATIONPLANNING&ENGINEERING Figure 2Site PlanParking Study for a Retail CenterCity of Anaheim, CAJ:\Cities\Anaheim\JB43111 AN SWC Magnolia La Palma Pkg Study\Analysis\Figures/JB43111 Figures.aiKOACORPORATIONPLANNING&ENGINEERING Parking Study for a Retail Center 5 City of Anaheim A.6. PARKING STUDY A.6.1 Pharmacy Parking Demand Study Two studies are referenced to justify the proposed pharmacy parking demand in Anaheim. Both studies conducted three similar site surveys. The complete copies of the two studies are included in the appendix of the report.  Walgreens Parking Study in Costa Mesa, conducted by KOA Corporation, 2011  CVS Pharmacy Parking Study in Huntington Beach, by Rick Engineering, 2008 KOA conducted a parking variance study for a new Walgreens Pharmacy store in City of Costa Mesa in 2011. In order to accurately forecast the parking demand for the proposed pharmacy, KOA surveyed three Walgreens stores on a typical weekday (Thursday) and a Saturday between 11:00 am and 9:00 pm in 2011. Table 2 lists the three similar sites, their locations, and square footages. Table 3 lists the parking survey results. As indicated, the highest parking rate for a pharmacy is 2.5 spaces per thousand square feet. A 15% turn-over rate has been applied for conservative parking demand purposes. The 15% turn-over rate is to ensure that the parking lot will never be so full that vehicles cannot find a parking space. It also allows a factor of safety for unusual peak parking demands for special events. Table 2 – Similar Site Survey for Walgreens in Costa Mesa Similar Sites Location City County Survey Date and Time Period Square Footage 1 4935 Warner Ave Huntington Beach Orange August 11, 2011, Thur. August 13, 2011, Sat. 13,871 2 1301 E. 17th St Santa Ana Orange August 11, 2011, Thur. August 13, 2011, Sat. 14,490 3 1715 N. Bristol St. Santa Ana Orange August 11, 2011, Thur. August 13, 2011, Sat. 11,560 Table 3 – Similar Site Survey Results for Walgreens Square Footage Parking Supply (#) Max. Observed Demand (#) Max. Occupancy Rate Adjusted Demand* (#) # of Parking Spaces Required Per 1,000 s.f. 4935 Warner Ave 13,871 64 19 30% 22 1.6 1301 E. 17th St 14,490 72 32 44% 37 2.5 1715 N. Bristol 11,560 55 23 42% 26 2.3 Note: * Adjusted Demand = Maximum Observed Parking Demand X (1+Turnover Factor). Turnover factor is 15% in this study. Parking Study for a Retail Center 6 City of Anaheim Rick Engineering Company also conducted a parking study for a proposed CVS Pharmacy in the City of Huntington Beach in 2008. They surveyed three similar CVS sites in Orange County. The surveys were conducted on a typical Monday and Tuesday from the hours of 4PM to 8PM. Table 4 lists the similar sites, their locations and square footages. Table 5 lists the survey results. As indicated, the highest parking demand is 2.6 spaces per thousand square feet. Again, a 15% turn-over rate has been applied. Table 4 – Similar Site Survey for CVS in Huntington Beach Similar Sites Location City County Survey Date and Time Period Square Footage 1 18872 Beach Blvd Huntington Beach Orange September 22, 2008 Mon. September 23, 2008 Tues. 12,281 2 102 N. Main St. Santa Ana Orange September 22, 2008 Mon. September 23, 2008 Tues. 14,768 3 7065 La Palma Ave. Buena Park Orange September 22, 2008 Mon. September 23, 2008 Tues. 14,768 Table 5 – Similar Site Survey Results for CVS Square Footage Parking Supply (#) Max. Observed Demand (#) Max. Occupancy Rate Adjusted Demand* (#) # of Parking Spaces Required Per 1,000 s.f. 18872 Beach Blvd 12,281 54 24 44% 28 2.3 102 N. Main St. 14,768 73 33 45% 38 2.6 7065 La Palma Ave. 14,768 71 14 20% 16 1.1 Note: * Adjusted Demand = Maximum Observed Parking Demand X (1+Turnover Factor). Turnover factor is 15% in this study. Based on the above 6 referenced parking surveys, the highest peak parking demand with a 15% turn- over rate was found to be 2.6 spaces per 1,000 square feet for a pharmacy use. This is a conservative parking rate to be used for a typical pharmacy. The ITE Parking Generation book also indicates that the parking rate for a pharmacy with drive-thru is between 1.65 to 3.75 vehicles per 1,000 square foot. Applying this rate to this project site, the parking requirement of the 14,000 square foot pharmacy would be 37 spaces instead of 77 spaces using the general retail rate. This would bring the total parking requirement for the project down from 177 spaces to 137 spaces. The next section of the report includes a discussion on how the ULI sharing parking methodology was applied to further evaluate the actual parking demand of the proposed site. Parking Study for a Retail Center 7 City of Anaheim A.6.2 Shared Parking Analysis The concept of shared parking is to use a parking space to serve two or more land uses without conflict. Conventional regulations require that each land use type provides enough parking to serve its own peak demand, leaving unused parking spaces during the off-peak periods. A shared parking strategy permits parking spaces to be available for multiple uses. It is more efficient when the land uses considered have very different peaking characteristics. The proposed retail center has a mixture of retail and restaurant uses that could therefore share the parking supply. The shared parking concept is comprehensively documented in the Urban Land Institute’s (ULI) Shared Parking guide, and it is considered scientifically valid and acceptable by the traffic engineering community. This study utilizes a number of findings and concepts published in the ULI guide for the parking analysis. Shared Parking provides a matrix of percentages that can used to predict parking demand for specific uses during any hour in proportion to their peak parking requirements. This publication also includes the results of studies of parking demand by time of day for uses that commonly occur within a mixed- use development, and shows what percentage of each component will need to use the site’s parking supply at a given time period. ULI’s Shared Parking publication addresses two specific metrics, “Non- Captive Market Factors” and the “Time-of-Day Factors”. Non-Captive Market Factor reductions can be applied to optimize parking supply at the development, as patrons of one facility may also visit other facilities within the same trip. For example, a person working at the pharmacy may also go to the fast-food restaurant to eat or visit the adjacent retail store for shopping. In the base calculations, visiting three different uses would equate to requiring three parking spaces, but in this case only requires one parking space. The ULI Shared Parking guide indicates that restaurant uses can experience up to 50% internal capture, and retail uses can experience up to 10% internal capture, when the two uses are paired within a development site The ULI Time-of-Day Factors were considered to forecast peak parking demand throughout the day for the proposed land uses. Restaurants typically will be busiest during lunch and dinner hours, Modal adjustments for patrons that may walk, take the bus, carpool, or bike to the development may also help reduce parking demand. To be conservative, however, this modal factor was not used to further reduce the required parking requirement. Table 6 shows the base rate from A.6.1 in conjunction with ULI Shared Parking principles to estimate the parking demand for the proposed project. Based on the shared parking analysis, all of the proposed uses will require 123 parking spaces, which is a reduction of fourteen parking spaces required by the base ratio of 137 spaces. Parking Study for a Retail Center 8 City of Anaheim Table 6 – Shared Parking Evaluation for Full Occupancy Based on the shared parking analysis shown in Table 6, the proposed project will need to provide a total of 123 parking spaces to accommodate full occupancy of the site. The current parking supply of 124 parking spaces is adequate to accommodate the parking demand. A.6.3 Conclusion Frontier Real Estate Investments is proposing a retail center with a total of 28,425 square-foot building area, including an existing 10,000 square-foot retail store, a 14,000 square-foot pharmacy, and a 4,425 square-foot fast-food restaurant. The project proposes a total of 124 parking stalls. The Anaheim Municipal Code defines the nonresidential parking standards on Table 42-A. Based on the parking code, a total of 177 spaces are needed for the project site. A total of 123 parking stalls are needed based on the similar site surveys and shared parking analysis. In conclusion, the proposed number of parking spaces indicated on the site plan for the proposed project will be adequate for the expected demand. Unadjusted Base Ratios1 Monthly Variation2 (December) Time of Day Variation2 (1:00 pm) Modal Adjustment Non‐Captive Market Shared Use Total Customer 29 100% 100% 98% 90% 26 Employee 7 100% 100% 100% 100% 7 Customer 44 100% 100% 98% 90% 39 Employee 11 100% 100% 100% 100% 11 Customer 37 100% 100% 98% 90% 33 Employee 7 100% 100% 100% 100% 7 Total 137 123 Note: 2 ‐ Recommended factors for land uses during weekend as identified in the Urban Land Institue (ULI) Shared parking, 2 nd Edition guide. 1 ‐ Calcualted using results from A6.1 Weekdays Land Use Fast‐Food Restaurant Retail Pharmacy For a In APP Park a Propose n the City A-1 PENDIX A king Stud ed Walgr y of Cost A dy reens Sto ta Mesa Parking Study re y for a Retail C City of An Center aheim Parking Study For a Proposed Walgreen Store In the City of Costa Mesa November 2011 Prepared for: Ms. Amy M. Ciolek, AIA Project Architect Walgreen Co. 106 Wilmot Road, MS # 1640 Deerfield, IL 60015 Prepared by: 1120 W. La Veta Avenue Suite 660 Orange, CA 92868 (714) 573-0317 Job No.: JB13089 1120 West La Veta Avenue, Suite 660 Orange, CA 92868 t: 714.573.0317 f: 714.573.9534 www.koacorporation.com November 23, 2011 Ms. Amy M. Ciolek, AIA Project Architect Walgreen Co. 106 Wilmot Road, MS # 1640 Deerfield, IL 60015 Subject: Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store in the City of Costa Mesa Dear Ms. Ciolek: KOA Corporation is pleased to present the parking study for the proposed Walgreen Store located at 1726 Superior Avenue, at the northwest corner of Newport Boulevard (SR-55) at 17th Street in the City of Costa Mesa. The site is currently occupied by a vacant retail building. Walgreens proposes to build a 14,310-square-foot store including a 9,990 square-foot retail area on the first floor and a 4,320 square-foot basement. Two access points from the site are proposed along Superior Avenue. This parking study report was prepared to evaluate the adequacy of the proposed parking supply and provide a parking variance justification if needed. Similar site parking surveys have been conducted at three Walgreen stores in Orange County during a typical weekday (Thursday) and a Saturday to justify the parking supply at the proposed Walgreen store. It has been a pleasure to provide this study to you and to the City of Costa Mesa. Please contact us if you require any additional information, or if you have any questions about the study. Sincerely, Min Zhou, P.E. Principal J:\2011\JB13089 CM_Walgreen Pkg\Parking Study\Documents\JB13089_CM_Walgreen Pkg_Rev_Nov2011.DOC Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store i City of Costa Mesa Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................ 4 3.0 PARKING ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................. 6 3.1 PARKING DEMAND BASED ON CITY’S PARKING CODE .................................................................... 6 3.2 SIMILAR SITE PARKING DEMAND SURVEY ......................................................................................... 6 3.3 ANALYSIS OF PARKING ADEQUACY FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT SITE .......................................... 14 3.4 CITY VARIANCE REQUIREMENT ..................................................................................................... 14 4.0 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 15 Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store ii City of Costa Mesa List of Figures FIGURE 1 – PROJECT VICINITY MAP ..................................................................................... 2 FIGURE 2 – PROJECT SITE PLAN ........................................................................................... 3 List of Tables TABLE 1 – SIMILAR SITE PARKING SURVEY ........................................................................... 6 TABLE 2 – PARKING SURVEY FOR 4935 WARNER AVENUE, HUNTINGTON BEACH (WEEKDAY) .......................................................................................................................... 7 TABLE 3 – PARKING SURVEY FOR 1301 E 17TH ST, SANTA ANA (WEEKDAY) .................... 8 TABLE 4 – PARKING SURVEY FOR 1715 N. BRISTOL, SANTA ANA (WEEKDAY) .................. 9 TABLE 5 – PARKING SURVEY FOR 4935 WARNER AVENUE, HUNTINGTON BEACH (WEEKEND) ........................................................................................................................ 10 TABLE 6 – PARKING SURVEY FOR 1301 E 17TH ST, SANTA ANA (WEEKEND) .................. 11 TABLE 7 – PARKING SURVEY FOR 1715 N. BRISTOL, SANTA ANA (WEEKEND) ................ 12 TABLE 8 – FORECAST PARKING DEMAND .......................................................................... 14 Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store 1 City of Costa Mesa 1.0 Introduction Walgreen Co. is proposing a new Walgreen Store located at 1726 Superior Avenue, at the northwest corner of Newport Boulevard (SR-55) and 17th Street in the City of Costa Mesa. The site is currently occupied by a vacant retail building. Figure 1 illustrates the project vicinity map. Figure 2 depicts the project site plan. The site plan shows a total 14,310 square-foot building area, including a 9,990-square- foot retail area on the first floor and a 4,320-square-foot basement. There is a proposed parking supply of 44 parking stalls. The City of Costa Mesa Zoning Code defines the nonresidential parking standards on Table 13-89, which indicates that four parking spaces per 1,000 square feet are required with a minimum of 6 spaces for retail land uses. Based on the Code, 58 parking spaces are required for the proposed Walgreen Store if considering all 14,310 square feet (including the basement as retail uses), while only 40 parking spaces are required if considering only the first floor of 9,990 square feet as retail uses. The study documents the parking needs of the proposed project by evaluating the project land use and comparing it with similar Walgreen existing sites to determine the appropriate parking demand rate for a typical Walgreen store. Three existing Walgreen stores were surveyed in Orange County on a typical weekday (Thursday) and a Saturday between 11:00 am and 9:00 pm. The three sites were: · 4935 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 · 1301 E 17th Street, Santa Ana, CA 92706 · 1715 N. Bristol Street, Santa Ana, CA 92706 The recommended parking supply should normally be greater than the maximum parking demand observed for a limited number of surveys. This ensures that the parking lot will never be so full that vehicles cannot find a parking space. It also allows a factor of safety for unusual peak parking demands for special events. A turnover factor of 15% greater than the maximum observed parking demand is applied in this study to forecast the conservative parking demand and evaluate the adequacy of the proposed parking spaces. N Not to Scale C ALIFORNIA 55 C ALIFORNIA 55 17th StreetPlacentia AvenuePomona Avenue18th Street 19th Street 16th Street In d u s t r i a l W a y 16 t h S t r e e t 1 7 t h S t r e e t 18 t h S t r e e tHarbor BoulevardR o c h e s t e r S t r e e t Superior AvenueOrange AvenueSanta Ana AvenueNewport BoulevardFigure 1 Project Vicinity Map LEGEND Project Site 1726 Superior Av enue Costa Mesa, CA 92627 City of Costa Mesa Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreens Store J:\2011\JB13089 CM_Walgreen Pkg\Analysis\Figures\JB13089_Figures.ai City of Costa Mesa Figure 2 Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreens Store Project Site Plan Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store 4 City of Costa Mesa 2.0 Methodology The Costa Mesa Zoning Code has been reviewed as the initial step of the study to identify the parking needs for the proposed project site. Parking adequacy is the degree to which the supply of parking is adequate to handle the parking demand. This study analyzes the parking adequacy under three scenarios: · Scenario 1: calculate parking demand for 9,990 square-foot retail area using the City code, as only the first floor is used as retail space. · Scenario 2: calculate parking demand for the total 14,310 square-foot building area using the City Code considering the basement as part of the total retail square footage requirements. · Scenario 3: forecast parking demand for the total 14,310 square-foot building area using the parking demand rate derived from the similar site survey and a turnover factor. Similar Sites Study Three similar Walgreen Store sites were surveyed on a typical weekday (Thursday) and a weekend between the hours of 11:00 am and 9:00 pm. The maximum parking needs based on the similar site study are identified. KOA and Walgreens staff conducted detailed evaluation for all 55 Walgreen stores in Orange County, California in order to choose the three best locations. The criteria to select the three best sites considered the following: 1. Isolated Setting: Since the proposed site is not situated in a shopping center and there is no intended parking sharing, the similar sites should also have their own parking areas. 2. Similar Square Footage, and Preferably in Orange County: Since the proposed project does not include a drive-thru window, the survey should report any drive-thru vehicles observed on a similar site. The sites should have similar floor areas and it is preferred that they are located in Orange County so that they have similar regional parking characteristics. 3. Customer Survey: It may be difficult to identify similar sites with completely isolated parking lots. An informal customer survey (asking a simple question by our surveyor) should be able to identify any parked vehicles for land uses other than Walgreen. Occupancy Rate Calculation Parking occupancy documents the actual number of vehicles parked during the peak period of a typical weekday or weekend. Parking occupancy is summarized in terms of the percentage of parking spaces Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store 5 City of Costa Mesa that are occupied at any given time of day. Generally, there is a single peak period on a typical weekday or weekend that contains the highest number of accumulated parked vehicles. Turnover Factor Consideration Allowances must be considered for parking demand studies that are based upon field surveys to account for turnover. The recommended parking supply should normally be greater than the maximum parking demand observed for a limited number of surveys. This ensures that the parking lot will never be so full that vehicles cannot find a parking space. It also allows a factor of safety for unusual peak parking demands for special events. A turnover factor of 15% greater than the maximum observed parking demand is normally recommended for a study comparable to this situation. It is not necessary to add allowances to the City code rates. These rates include a turnover factor. Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store 6 City of Costa Mesa 3.0 Parking Analysis 3.1 Parking Demand Based on City’s Parking Code The City of Costa Mesa Zoning Code defines the nonresidential parking standards on Table 13-89. For the retail land use, four parking spaces per 1,000 square feet are required with a minimum of 6 spaces. Under Scenario 1, the City code requires 40 parking spaces to be provided for a 9,990 square-foot retail area on the first floor. The project site plan proposes a total of 44 parking spaces. This is more than the City’s requirements. Scenario 2 assumes that the 4,320-square-foot basement is part of the retail square uses. For a total 14,310 square foot building area, the code requires 58 parking spaces. The project proposes 44 on-site parking spaces. About 14 additional on-site parking spaces are needed, which may not be feasible due to the site limitation. Scenario 3 forecasts parking demand using the parking demand rate that is calculated based on the similar site study. The similar site study is discussed in the following section. 3.2 Similar Site Parking Demand Survey In order to accurately forecast the parking demand of the proposed project, three Walgreen stores were surveyed on a typical weekday (Thursday) and a Saturday between 11:00 am and 9:00 pm. Table 1 lists the three similar sites with the proposed project. Table 1 – Similar Site Parking Survey Similar Sites Location City County Survey Date and Time Period Square Footage 1 4935 Warner Ave Huntington Beach Orange August 11, 2011, Thur. August 13, 2011, Sat. 13,871 2 1301 E. 17th St Santa Ana Orange August 11, 2011, Thur. August 13, 2011, Sat. 14,490 3 1715 N. Bristol St. Santa Ana Orange August 11, 2011, Thur. August 13, 2011, Sat. 11,560 Project Site 1726 Superior Avenue Costa Mesa Orange n/a 14,310 Tables 2 through 4 present the weekday parking demand survey conducted on Thursday, August 11, 2011 from 11:00 am to 9:00 pm. Tables 5 through 7 present the parking demand survey conducted on Saturday, August 13, 2011 from 11:00 am to 9:00 pm. Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store 7 City of Costa Mesa Table 2 – Parking Survey for 4935 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach (Weekday) Inv. 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 # % (1) # % # % # % # % # % Regular 60 12 20% 14 23% 17 28% 15 25% 18 30% 14 23% Handicap 4 1 25% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Other Land Use Vehicles - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - Drive Thru 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 2 - 64 15 23% 15 23% 18 28% 15 23% 19 30% 16 25% Inv. 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 Average # Average Utilization # % # % # % # % # % Regular 60 13 22% 13 22% 12 20% 10 17% 8 13% 13 22% Handicap 4 0 0% 1 25% 0 0% 1 25% 1 25% 0 9% Other Land Use Vehicles - 0 - 6 - 3 - 0 - 0 - 1 - Drive Thru 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - TOTAL(2) 64 14 22% 14 22% 13 20% 12 19% 9 14% 15 23% Note: (1) % of Occupancy (Occupied parking / Available Parking Spaces) (2) Total = Regular Parking + Handicapped Parking + Drive-Thru Vehicles Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store 8 City of Costa Mesa Table 3 – Parking Survey for 1301 E 17th St, Santa Ana (Weekday) Inv. 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 # %(1) # % # % # % # % # % Regular 69 20 29% 17 25% 16 23% 23 33% 23 33% 16 23% Handicap 3 1 33% 0 0% 1 33% 0 0% 1 33% 1 33% Other Land Use Vehicles - 0 - 0 - 4 - 1 - 0 - 3 - Drive Thru 0 - 1 - 8 - 4 - 8 - 7 - 72 21 29% 18 25% 25 35% 27 38% 32 44% 24 33% Inv. 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 Average # Average Utilization # % # % # % # % # % Regular 69 15 22% 11 16% 15 22% 15 22% 13 19% 17 24% Handicap 3 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 15% Other Land Use Vehicles - 1 - 4 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - Drive Thru 5 - 5 - 7 - 8 - 0 - 5 - TOTAL(2) 72 21 29% 16 22% 22 31% 23 32% 13 18% 22 31% Note: (1) % of Occupancy (Occupied parking / Available Parking Spaces) (2) Total = Regular Parking + Handicapped Parking + Drive-Thru Vehicles Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store 9 City of Costa Mesa Table 4 – Parking Survey for 1715 N. Bristol, Santa Ana (Weekday) Inv. 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 # %(1) # % # % # % # % # % Regular 53 8 15% 13 25% 12 23% 13 25% 14 26% 20 38% Handicap 2 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Other Land Use Vehicles - 7 - 4 - 7 - 5 - 3 - 6 - Drive Thru 3 1 2 2 6 3 55 11 20% 14 25% 14 25% 15 27% 20 36% 23 42% Inv. 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 Average # Average Utilization # % # % # % # % # % Regular 53 19 36% 14 26% 14 26% 12 23% 14 26% 14 26% Handicap 2 0 0% 0 0% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 5% Other Land Use Vehicles - 3 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 3 - Drive Thru 4 - 2 - 8 - 2 - 0 - 3 - TOTAL(2) 55 23 42% 16 29% 23 42% 14 25% 14 25% 17 31% Note: (1) % of Occupancy (Occupied parking / Available Parking Spaces) (2) Total = Regular Parking + Handicapped Parking + Drive-Thru Vehicles Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store 10 City of Costa Mesa Table 5 – Parking Survey for 4935 Warner Avenue, Huntington Beach (Weekend) Inv. 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 # %(1) # % # % # % # % # % Regular 60 11 18% 10 17% 12 20% 9 15% 17 28% 16 27% Handicap 4 0 0% 1 25% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Other Land Use Vehicles - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - Drive Thru - 3 - 1 - 3 - 1 - 1 - 2 - 64 14 22% 12 19% 15 23% 10 16% 18 28% 18 28% Inv. 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 Average # Average Utilization # % # % # % # % # % Regular 60 10 17% 16 27% 10 17% 11 18% 6 10% 12 19% Handicap 4 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 2% Other Land Use Vehicles - 0 - 6 - 6 - 5 - 3 - 2 - Drive Thru - 5 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 2 - TOTAL(2) 64 15 23% 16 25% 10 16% 12 19% 6 9% 13 21% Note: (1) % of Occupancy (Occupied parking / Available Parking Spaces) (2) Total = Regular Parking + Handicapped Parking + Drive-Thru Vehicles Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store 11 City of Costa Mesa Table 6 – Parking Survey for 1301 E 17th St, Santa Ana (Weekend) Inv. 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 # %(1) # % # % # % # % # % Regular 69 16 23% 15 22% 18 26% 23 33% 19 28% 19 28% Handicap 3 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% 1 33% 0 0% 2 67% Other Land Use Vehicles - 1 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 3 - 3 - Drive Thru - 4 - 5 - 3 - 8 - 4 - 6 - 72 20 28% 20 28% 24 33% 32 44% 23 32% 27 38% Inv. 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 Average # Average Utilization # % # % # % # % # % Regular 69 12 17% 10 14% 10 14% 10 14% 6 9% 14 21% Handicap 3 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 18% Other Land Use Vehicles - 3 - 2 - 3 - 3 - 4 - 3 - Drive Thru - 3 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 3 - TOTAL(2) 72 15 21% 11 15% 12 17% 11 15% 6 8% 18 25% Note: (1) % of Occupancy (Occupied parking / Available Parking Spaces) (2) Total = Regular Parking + Handicapped Parking + Drive-Thru Vehicles Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store 12 City of Costa Mesa Table 7 – Parking Survey for 1715 N. Bristol, Santa Ana (Weekend) Inv. 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 # %(1) # % # % # % # % # % Regular 53 14 26% 7 13% 8 15% 11 21% 12 23% 12 23% Handicap 2 0 0% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% Other Land Use Vehicles - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - Drive Thru - 3 - 5 - 4 - 5 - 2 - 1 - 55 17 31% 12 22% 13 24% 17 31% 14 25% 13 24% Inv. 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 Average # Average Utilization # % # % # % # % # % Regular 53 11 21% 12 23% 6 11% 8 15% 7 13% 10 19% Handicap 2 0 0% 0 0% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 14% Other Land Use Vehicles - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - Drive Thru - 3 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 2 - TOTAL(2) 55 14 25% 12 22% 7 13% 8 15% 7 13% 12 22% Note: (1) % of Occupancy (Occupied parking / Available Parking Spaces) (2) Total = Regular Parking + Handicapped Parking + Drive-Thru Vehicles Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store 13 City of Costa Mesa Most Walgreen stores share parking with other land uses, particularly in Orange County. However, the three selected similar sites have very limited parking spaces sharing with other land use. During the field survey, our surveyors identified the parked vehicles for other land uses within the Walgreen store’s parking lots through observation and verbal communications with drivers. Those vehicles which parked in the Walgreen lots but serve other land uses are excluded from the Walgreen parking demand calculation. Since the proposed project will not provide a drive-thru window, the field survey counted the number of vehicles that used drive-thru. Those vehicles are included in the Walgreen parking demand calculation. For the Walgreen Store located at 4935 Warner Avenue in the City of Huntington Beach, the maximum surveyed parking demand occurs from 3:00 pm to 4:00 pm on Thursday, occupying 19 parking spaces with a 30% parking occupancy rate. For the Walgreen Store located at 1301 E 17th Street in the City of Santa Ana, the maximum surveyed parking demand occurs from 3:00 pm to 4:00 pm on Thursday, occupying 32 parking spaces with a 44% parking occupancy rate; and from 2:00 pm to 3:00 pm on Saturday, also occupying 32 parking spaces with a 44% occupancy rate. For the similar site located at 1715 N. Bristol Street in the City of Santa Ana, the maximum surveyed parking demand occurs from 4:00 pm to 6:00 pm and from 7:00 pm to 8:00 pm on Saturday, occupying 23 parking spaces with a 42% parking occupancy rate. Based on the above analysis, the second Walgreen store located on 17th Street in the City of Santa Ana represents the worst-case scenario for parking with a 44% occupancy rate. However, it is evident that the parking lot for this Walgreen store is well underutilized. Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store 14 City of Costa Mesa 3.3 Analysis of Parking Adequacy for the Proposed Project Site Based on the similar site survey, this study applied a 15% turnover factor to the observed peak hour parking demand to calculate the conservative parking demand. As shown in Table 8, the parking demand rate was calculated using the adjusted parking demand. Based on the three similar sites, the highest parking demand rate is 2.5 parking spaces for 1,000 square feet. If using this most conservative parking demand rate derived from the similar site surveys, the forecast parking demand for the proposed total 14,310 square-feet Walgreen, the needed parking spaces is only 36 stalls. The project site proposes 44 parking spaces which should be adequate to meet the parking needs. Table 8 – Forecast Parking Demand Square Footage Parking Supply (#) Max. Observed Demand (#) Max. Occupancy Rate Adjusted Demand* (#) # of Parking Spaces Required Per 1,000 s.f. 4935 Warner Ave 13,871 64 19 30% 22 1.6 1301 E. 17th St 14,490 72 32 44% 37 2.5 1715 N. Bristol 11,560 55 23 42% 26 2.3 Note: * Adjusted Demand = Maximum Observed Parking Demand X (1+Turnover Factor). Turnover factor is 15% in this study. 3.4 City Variance Requirement As identified in Costa Mesa Zoning Code Section 13-89.5. Reduction in Parking Requirements, a reduction in the amount of required parking is allowed where it can be shown that the required parking for a nonresidential land use will substantially exceed the demand of the actual use. The following conditions may be placed on the approval of the minor conditional use permit: (a) Allow such excess parking to be provided as landscaping, plazas, courtyards, or similar open space feature. (b) Require recordation of a land use restriction that restricts the future use of the property to ensure adequate parking availability. Based on the similar site analysis above, the required parking rate for retail land use is much higher than the actual parking demand rate for a typical Walgreen store in Orange County. The parking demand rate calculated based on the similar site survey and turnover factor is recommended to justify the required parking supply of the project site. Parking Study for a Proposed Walgreen Store City of Costa Mesa 15 4.0 Conclusion Walgreen Co. is proposing a new Walgreen Store with a total 14,310 square-foot building area, including a 9,990-square-foot retail area on the first floor and a 4,320-square-foot basement. The project proposes a total of 44 parking stalls. The Costa Mesa Zoning Code defines the nonresidential parking standards on Table 13-89. For retail land uses, four parking spaces per 1,000 square feet are required with a minimum of 6 spaces. This study evaluated the parking adequacy for three scenarios: · Scenario 1: calculate parking demand for a 9,990 square-foot retail area using the City code, as only the first floor is used as retail space. · Scenario 2: calculate parking demand for a total 14,310 square-foot building area using the City code assuming basement part of the square footage requirements. · Scenario 3: forecast parking demand using the maximum parking demand rate calculated based on the similar site survey and turnover factor. Under the Scenario 1, the City code requires 40 parking spaces to be provided for the 9,990 square-foot retail area on the first floor. The project site plan proposes a total of 44 parking spaces. The proposed number of spaces exceeds City’s requirements. Scenario 2 includes the 4,320-square-foot basement and requires 58 parking spaces for the total 14,310- square-foot building area. Based on Costa Mesa Zoning Code Section 13-89.5 Reduction in Parking Requirements, a variance is needed for a reduction of required parking. Under Scenario 3, this study selected and surveyed three Walgreen stores in Orange County on a typical weekday (Thursday) and a Saturday between 11:00 am and 9:00 pm, and applied 15% turnover factor to the observed peak hour parking demand to calculate the conservative existing parking demand. The worst-case similar site for parking shows a 44% parking occupancy rate. All surveyed parking lots for Walgreen stores are underutilized. The parking demand rate was calculated based on similar site survey and a turnover factor. The forecast parking demand for the total of 14,310 square-foot building area would be 36 parking spaces using the parking demand rate derived from the similar site survey (2.5 spaces per 1000 square foot). The project site proposes 44 parking spaces which exceeds this requirement. In conclusion, we recommend that the proposed number of parking spaces for the Walgreen store will be adequate to accommodate the anticipated parking demand. Ri APP ick Engin Parking B-1 PENDIX B eering Co Study Re B ompany eport Parking Study y for a Retail C City of An Center aheim 1111 Town & Country Road, Suite 34 Orange, California 92868(714) 973-8383 www.traffic-engineer.com November 17, 2014 Mr. Gustavo Gonzalez, Associate Planner CITY OF ANAHEIM 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 Dear Mr. Gonzalez: INTRODUCTION The firm of Kunzman Associates, Inc. is pleased to provide this technical memorandum peer review of the Magnolia/La Palma Shopping Center project in the City of Anaheim. The Parking Study for a Proposed Retail Center in the City of Anaheim was prepared by KOA Corporation (September 26, 2014). The project site is located at the southwest corner of Magnolia Street and La Palma Avenue in the City of Anaheim. The parking study was prepared to evaluate the adequacy of the proposed parking supply and provide a parking variance justification if needed. Similar site parking surveys were conducted at three Walgreens stores and three CVS stores in Orange County. The parking study generally follows standard practice for the City of Anaheim. PARKING VARIANCES The project complies with the City of Anaheim Section 18.42.110 Parking Variances as follows: Condition .0101 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; Evidence The parking study utilizes the City of Anaheim parking code requirements for the retail store (55 parking spaces required) and fast‐food restaurant (45 parking spaces required). The pharmacy parking spaces are based upon parking surveys at 6 similar pharmacies located in Orange County. The similar pharmacy parking surveys generated a need for 2.6 parking spaces per thousand square feet or 37 parking spaces for the proposed pharmacy. This calculated to 137 parking spaces required for the project site. Mr. Gustavo Gonzalez, Associate Planner CITY OF ANAHEIM November 17, 2014 www.traffic-engineer.com 2 In addition, the Urban Land Institute, Shared Parking, 2nd Edition, 2005, methodology was used in the parking study to share the parking supply between the mixture of retail and restaurant land uses. The shared parking calculated a need for 123 parking spaces for the shopping center. A total of 124 parking spaces are planned on the project site plan. Condition .0102 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; Evidence The project site is projected to provide sufficient on‐site parking spaces to meet the proposed demand (see Condition .0101). In addition, Magnolia Avenue and La Palma Avenue are signed for "No Parking Any Time" adjacent to the project site. Condition .0103 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 18.42.05.030 (Non‐Residential Uses – Exception); Evidence The project site is projected to provide sufficient on‐site parking spaces to meet the proposed demand (see Condition .0101). Condition .0104 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 Evidence The circulation within the parking areas on the proposed site plan provided within the parking study appears to allow relatively free flow of vehicular traffic with no constrictions. Condition .0105 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. Evidence The existing shopping center currently provides 2 driveways to La Palma Avenue and 4 driveways to Magnolia Avenue. The proposed site plan provided within the parking study is proposed to provide 1 driveway to La Palma Avenue and 2 driveways to Magnolia Avenue. The proposed project does not appear to impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties. Mr. Gusta CITY OF A Novembe CONCLUS Based up prepared parking at It has bee be of furt Respectfu KUNZMAN Carl Balla Principal A #5930 avo Gonzalez, ANAHEIM er 17, 2014 SION on the peer by KOA Corp t the propose en a pleasure her assistanc ully submitted N ASSOCIATE rd, LEED GA Associate , Associate Pl review of the poration (Sep ed shopping c e to serve you e, please do n d, S, INC. anner www.tra e Parking Stu ptember 26, 2 center. ur needs on t not hesitate t affic-engineer 3 udy for a Pro 2014), the pr this project. to call at (714 .com posed Retail roject site is Should you h 4) 973‐8383. KUNZMA William K Principal Center in th projected to have any ques AN ASSOCIATE Kunzman, P.E e City of Ana provide adeq stions or if w ES, INC. . aheim quate we can ATTACHMENT NO. 4 CUP2014-05759, PCN2014-00111, VR2014-04985 Attachment 5 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue, 2610 West La Palma Avenue CUP2014-05759, PCN2014-00111, VR2014-04985 Attachment 5 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue, 2610 West La Palma Avenue CUP2014-05759, PCN2014-00111, VR2014-04985 Attachment 5 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue, 2610 West La Palma Avenue CUP2014-05759, PCN2014-00111, VR2014-04985 Attachment 5 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue, 2610 West La Palma Avenue CUP2014-05759, PCN2014-00111, VR2014-04985 Attachment 5 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue, 2610 West La Palma Avenue CUP2014-05759, PCN2014-00111, VR2014-04985 Attachment 5 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue, 2610 West La Palma Avenue CUP2014-05759, PCN2014-00111, VR2014-04985 Attachment 5 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue, 2610 West La Palma Avenue CUP2014-05759, PCN2014-00111, VR2014-04985 Attachment 5 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue, 2610 West La Palma Avenue CUP2014-05759, PCN2014-00111, VR2014-04985 Attachment 5 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue, 2610 West La Palma Avenue CUP2014-05759, PCN2014-00111, VR2014-04985 Attachment 5 1001-1037 North Magnolia Avenue, 2610 West La Palma Avenue ATTACHMENT NO. 6 1700 West Anaheim Street Long Beach, California 90813-1195 Phone: 562.495.3808 Facsimile: 562.435.1867 www.superiorsigns.com Project: Account Manager: Designer: Scale: Design No.: Date: Page: Reg. No.: Revisions: This is an original unpublished drawing created by Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. It is submitted for your approval. It is not to be shown to anyone outside of your organization, nor is it to be reproduced, copied or exhibited in any fashion. The changing of colors, sizes, materials or illumination method does not alter the design. Ownership of this design is held by Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. Authorization to use this design in any fashion must be obtained in writing from Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. Note: The Colors depicted here are a graphic representation. Actual colors may vary. See color specifications. SEA 2014c Of: Address: FOR JOB CHECK DATE Acct. Mgr. Acct. Mgr. Acct. Mgr. Design Production • APPROVALS • FOR CONSTRUCTION DATE FOR INSTALL ONLY DATE AS NOTED Patti Skoglund 2.50 14-07-8174-14 07.22.14 05 La Palma & Magnolia Magnolia Ave. & La Palma Ave. Anaheim, CA 92801 R3 Jn (1.00) 10/28/14 update site plan, add photo rendering R4 Jn (1.00) 10/28/14 add second sign R5 Jn (.25) 10/28/14 rework 97 cents sign R6 Jn (1.00) 10/30/14 revise mon. R7 Jn (.50) 11/4/14 revise mon. R8 Jn (1.50) 11/24/14 add pylon renderings R9 Jn (1.00) 11/25/14 change pylon copy R10 AZ (.75) 12/04/14 update layout R11 AZ (.50) 12/10/14 update layout R12 Jn (.25) 12/22/14 update site plan R13 AZ (1.00) 01.19.15 update per notes R14 AZ (.50) 01.20.15 update plot plan Scale: 1” = 60’-0” SITE PLAN - SIGN LOCATIONS1EXISTING “GLO ROOM” SIGN TO BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF EXISTING “LIQUOR” SIGN TO REMAIN ON PROPERTY EXISTING “EL PATIO” POLE SIGN TO BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF EXISTING “ARROW” SIGN TO REMAIN ON PROPERTY PROPOSED NEW ARROW SIGN LOCATION EXISTING “97 ” SIGN TO BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF PROPOSED NEW LOCATION 02 2’-0” SETBACK A A 1700 West Anaheim Street Long Beach, California 90813-1195 Phone: 562.495.3808 Facsimile: 562.435.1867 www.superiorsigns.com Project: Account Manager: Designer: Scale: Design No.: Date: Page: Reg. No.: Revisions: This is an original unpublished drawing created by Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. It is submitted for your approval. It is not to be shown to anyone outside of your organization, nor is it to be reproduced, copied or exhibited in any fashion. The changing of colors, sizes, materials or illumination method does not alter the design. Ownership of this design is held by Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. Authorization to use this design in any fashion must be obtained in writing from Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. Note: The Colors depicted here are a graphic representation. Actual colors may vary. See color specifications. SEA 2014c Of: Address: FOR JOB CHECK DATE Acct. Mgr. Acct. Mgr. Acct. Mgr. Design Production • APPROVALS • FOR CONSTRUCTION DATE FOR INSTALL ONLY DATE AS NOTED Patti Skoglund 2.50 14-07-8174-14 07.22.14 05 La Palma & Magnolia Magnolia Ave. & La Palma Ave. Anaheim, CA 92801 R3 Jn (1.00) 10/28/14 update site plan, add photo rendering R4 Jn (1.00) 10/28/14 add second sign R5 Jn (.25) 10/28/14 rework 97 cents sign R6 Jn (1.00) 10/30/14 revise mon. R7 Jn (.50) 11/4/14 revise mon. R8 Jn (1.50) 11/24/14 add pylon renderings R9 Jn (1.00) 11/25/14 change pylon copy R10 AZ (.75) 12/04/14 update layout R11 AZ (.50) 12/10/14 update layout R12 Jn (.25) 12/22/14 update site plan R13 AZ (1.00) 01.19.15 update per notes R14 AZ (.50) 01.20.15 update plot plan EXISTING “GLO ROOM” SIGN TO BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF EXISTING “LIQUOR” SIGN TO REMAIN ON PROPERTY EXISTING “EL PATIO” POLE SIGN TO BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF EXISTING “ARROW” SIGN TO REMAIN ON PROPERTY EXISTING “97 ” SIGN TO BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF Scale: NTS EXISTING SIGN ELEVATIONS1 03 1700 West Anaheim Street Long Beach, California 90813-1195 Phone: 562.495.3808 Facsimile: 562.435.1867 www.superiorsigns.com Project: Account Manager: Designer: Scale: Design No.: Date: Page: Reg. No.: Revisions: This is an original unpublished drawing created by Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. It is submitted for your approval. It is not to be shown to anyone outside of your organization, nor is it to be reproduced, copied or exhibited in any fashion. The changing of colors, sizes, materials or illumination method does not alter the design. Ownership of this design is held by Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. Authorization to use this design in any fashion must be obtained in writing from Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. Note: The Colors depicted here are a graphic representation. Actual colors may vary. See color specifications. SEA 2014c Of: Address: FOR JOB CHECK DATE Acct. Mgr. Acct. Mgr. Acct. Mgr. Design Production • APPROVALS • FOR CONSTRUCTION DATE FOR INSTALL ONLY DATE AS NOTED Patti Skoglund 2.50 14-07-8174-11 07.22.14 05 La Palma & Magnolia Magnolia Ave. & La Palma Ave. Anaheim, CA 92801 R1 AD (.50) 7/24/14 Add 2nd design option. R2 mdm (1.50) 9/16/14 increase size of monument sign. R3 Jn (1.00) 10/28/14 update site plan, add photo rendering R4 Jn (1.00) 10/28/14 add second sign R5 Jn (.25) 10/28/14 rework 97 cents sign R6 Jn (1.00) 10/30/14 revise mon. R7 Jn (.50) 11/4/14 revise mon. R8 Jn (1.50) 11/24/14 add pylon renderings R9 Jn (1.00) 11/25/14 change pylon copy R10 AZ (.75) 12/04/14 update layout R11 AZ (.50) 12/10/14 update layout PLAZA 39’-10” OVERALL HEIGHT14’-0 ½”4’-0”4’-0 ½”2’-3” (B)1’-2”(D)30’-2” OVERALL HEIGHT18’-0 ½” OVERALL LENGTH 051’-6”2’-0”6’-0”4’-0”1 Scale: ¼” = 1’-0” D/F PYLON SIGN 2 Scale: ¼” = 1’-0” D/F PYLON SIGN DRINKS BURGERS NOTE: CUSTOMER TO PROVIDE APPROVED ARTWORK AND COLORS PRIOR TO FABRICATION BURGERS1’-0”McDonald’s 1700 West Anaheim Street Long Beach, California 90813-1195 Phone: 562.495.3808 Facsimile: 562.435.1867 www.superiorsigns.com Project: Account Manager: Designer: Scale: Design No.: Date: Page: Reg. No.: Revisions: This is an original unpublished drawing created by Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. It is submitted for your approval. It is not to be shown to anyone outside of your organization, nor is it to be reproduced, copied or exhibited in any fashion. The changing of colors, sizes, materials or illumination method does not alter the design. Ownership of this design is held by Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. Authorization to use this design in any fashion must be obtained in writing from Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. Note: The Colors depicted here are a graphic representation. Actual colors may vary. See color specifications. SEA 2014c Of: Address: FOR JOB CHECK DATE Acct. Mgr. Acct. Mgr. Acct. Mgr. Design Production • APPROVALS • FOR CONSTRUCTION DATE FOR INSTALL ONLY DATE AS NOTED Patti Skoglund 2.50 14-07-8174-13 07.22.14 05 La Palma & Magnolia Magnolia Ave. & La Palma Ave. Anaheim, CA 92801 R2 mdm (1.50) 9/16/14 increase size of monument sign. R3 Jn (1.00) 10/28/14 update site plan, add photo rendering R4 Jn (1.00) 10/28/14 add second sign R5 Jn (.25) 10/28/14 rework 97 cents sign R6 Jn (1.00) 10/30/14 revise mon. R7 Jn (.50) 11/4/14 revise mon. R8 Jn (1.50) 11/24/14 add pylon renderings R9 Jn (1.00) 11/25/14 change pylon copy R10 AZ (.75) 12/04/14 update layout R11 AZ (.50) 12/10/14 update layout R12 Jn (.25) 12/22/14 update site plan R13 AZ (1.00) 01.19.15 update per notes 1 Scale: 3/4” = 1’-0” SIDE VIEW 1’-4” Base 12341234 FUTURE TENANT BURGERS 041’-6”5’-8 ¼” CABINET8’-0” OAH10’-0” Base9”8’-6” REVEAL 9’-6” CABINET SIGN ELEVATION/ INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CUSTOM FABRICATED D/F MON. SIGN Qty: ONE (1) Required Scale: 3/4” = 1’-0”A 33.75 Sq. Ft. ½” Thick, FCO acrylic address numbers flush mounted to base. .080 aluminum reveal and base 1” Aluminum retainers Custom fabricated aluminum sign cabinet w/1½” aluminum square tube framing. Illumination provided by internal flourescent lamp lighting. Removable White #7328 acylic tenant panels w/applied translucent vinyl copy/logo. 1’-4” Cabinet 1’-8”1’-3”1’-3”1’-3”Brake form aluminum cornice cap 2”9’-0” TENANTS .125 aluminum base with ¼” wide (.063 deep) routed out score lines McDonald’s ATTACHMENT NO. 7 ITEM NO. 2 NEW CORRESPONDENCE ITEM NO. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: JANUARY 26, 2015 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05775 LOCATION: 1671 West Katella Avenue (Cali Culture Tattoo) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Sebastian Roman Molina and the property owner is Abdul Aziz. REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to establish a tattoo shop within an existing commercial center. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1, Existing Facilities), and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05775. BACKGROUND: This 0.8-acre project site is developed with a 14-unit, 13,800 square foot commercial center. The property is located in the General Commercial (C-G) zone and the General Plan designates this property for General Commercial land uses. The property is surrounded by single-family residences to the north and east, commercial uses to the west, and commercial uses to the south, across Katella Avenue. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to open a 428 square foot tattoo shop in an existing commercial center that is currently occupied by a variety of commercial and office uses. No changes to the exterior of the building are proposed. Hours of operation would be 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday, 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday and 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday. The business would employ three tattoo artists and a body piercing technician. Most services would be scheduled by appointment, but limited walk-in customers would also be accepted. ANALYSIS: A conditional use permit is required for tattoo shops in this zone in order to determine compatibility with the surrounding area. Tattoo shops are also regulated and inspected by the Orange County Health Department in order to protect the health of the customers and tattoo practitioners. There is a significant distance between the tattoo shop and the residential neighborhood to the north and the shop would be closed by 10:00 p.m., so staff believes that the proposed use will be compatible with the surrounding businesses and residences. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05775 January 26, 2015 Page 2 of 2 Staff is aware that a medical marijuana dispensary is operating within the commercial center. The property owner has been informed that the use is illegal. City staff has initiated enforcement action that will lead to closure of this facility. The City Attorney’s office has advised that the Commission should evaluate the merits of the proposed use independently from the enforcement actions underway regarding the medical marijuana dispensary. Therefore, the presence of the dispensary does not change staff’s recommendation regarding the appropriateness and compatibility of the proposed tattoo establishment. Parking: The Zoning Code states requires that parking requirements be calculated by combining the needs of the tattoo shop and the commercial uses on the property. The tattoo shop and the commercial businesses require a total of 58 parking spaces. The property contains a total of 60 parking spaces; therefore, the parking provided for the combined uses complies with the City’s requirements. CONCLUSION: Staff believes that the proposed tattoo shop is compatible with the adjacent uses and annual inspections conducted by the Orange County Health Department would ensure the business operates in compliance with health and safety standards. Staff recommends approval of this request. Prepared by, Submitted by, Amy Vazquez Jonathan E. Borrego Associate Planner, Lilley Planning Group Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Conditional Use Permit Resolution 2. Applicant’s Letter of Request 3. Photographs 4. Site Plan 5. Floor Plan C-GRETAIL RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE C-GRETAIL C-GWESTVIEWVOCATIONALSERVICES RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCERS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE C-GRETAIL C-GRETAIL RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCEC-GSHOPPING CENTER C-GMEDICAL OFFICEO-LOFFICESC-GRETAIL C-GRETAIL C-GRETAIL C-GRETAILRS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCERS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE C-GSHOPPING CENTER C-GSHOPPING CENTER RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE C-GMEDICAL OFFICE CITY OFCITY OFGARDEN GROVEGARDEN GROVES EUCLID STW KATELLA AVE W SUMAC LN S TIARA STW SALLIE LN S CAMROSE STS INEZ WAYS TIARA WAYW SALLIE LN W. KATELLA AVES. EUCLID STS. WEST STS. NINTH STW. CERRITOS AVE S. WALNUT STS. BROOKHURST ST1 6 7 1 West Katella Avenue, #122 D EV No. 2 0 14-00136 Subject Property APN: 129-392-21 °0 50 100 Feet Aeri al Ph oto :May 20 14 S EUCLID STW KATELLA AVE W SUMAC LN S TIARA STW SALLIE LN S CAMROSE STS INEZ WAYS TIARA WAYW SALLIE LN W. KATELLA AVES. EUCLID STS. WEST STS. NINTH STW. CERRITOS AVE S. WALNUT STS. BROOKHURST ST1671 West Katella Avenue, #122 DEV No. 2014-00136 Subject Property APN: 129-392-21 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo: May 2014 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05775 MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2014-00136) (1671 WEST KATELLA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05775 to permit a tattoo shop within premises located within an existing commercial center (referred to herein as the "Proposed Project") at 1671 West Katella Avenue in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 0.8 acres in size and is currently developed with a commercial center. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for General Commercial land uses. The Property is located in the “C-G” General Commercial Zone. As such, the Property is subject to the zoning and development standards described in Chapter 18.08 (Commercial Zones) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"); and WHEREAS, as the "lead agency" under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the Planning Commission finds and determines that the Proposed Project is within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 2015, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim, notice of said public hearing having been duly given in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05775 and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing with respect tattoo shop within a commercial center, does find and determine the following facts: 1. The proposed request to permit a tattoo shop within an existing commercial center is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized under the classes of allowable uses set forth in Table 8-A as "Personal Services-Restricted", as referenced in paragraph .0402 of subsection .040 of Section No. 18.08.030 of the Code. - 1 - PC2015-*** 2. The proposed conditional use permit to permit a tattoo shop, as conditioned herein, would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the building is surrounded by compatible buildings and uses; and, the tattoo shop would be located within an existing building with no adverse effects to adjoining land uses. 3. The size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the tattoo shop in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety because the facility would be located within an existing commercial center that is surrounded by other commercial and residential uses. 4. The traffic generated by the tattoo shop will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the traffic generated by this use will not exceed the anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding streets and adequate parking will be provided to accommodate the use. 5. The granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim as the proposed land use will continue to be integrated with the surrounding commercial area and would not pose a health or safety risk to the citizens of the City of Anaheim. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05775, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition (s), (ii) the modification complies with the Code and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal 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. - 2 - PC2015-*** THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of January 26, 2015. Said Resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 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 PRO-TEMPORE, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on January 26, 2015, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 26th day of January, 2015. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 3 - PC2015-*** - 4 - PC2015-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05775 (DEV2014-00136) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 1 Each tattoo technician shall obtain and retain a City of Anaheim Business License. Said license shall be visibly displayed at all times. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 2 The business shall be operated in accordance with the Letter of Request submitted as part of this application. Any changes to the business operation as described in that document shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director to determine substantial conformance with the Letter of Request and to ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses. Planning Department, Planning Services Division GENERAL CONDITIONS 3 The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 4 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 5 The Property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department and as conditioned herein. Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 5 - PC2015-*** ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. ITEM NO. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: JANUARY 26, 2015 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05777 AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04999 LOCATION: 4570 Eisenhower Circle (Dogtopia) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicants are Larry and Sherry Hartjoy with Furry Kids Kamp Corporation. The agent representing the applicant is Phil Schwartze with The PRS Group and the property owner is Lakeview Business Park. REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to establish a dog daycare and boarding facility with an outdoor play area. The applicant is also requesting approval of a variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1, Existing Facilities) and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05777 and Variance No. 2014-04999. BACKGROUND: This 0.6-acre property is developed with an industrial building. It is located in the Northeast Area Specific Plan, Development Area 2 - Expanded Industrial (SP94-1, DA2) and the Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay zone. The General Plan designates this property for Industrial land uses. The property is surrounded by industrial and office uses in all directions. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to open an 11,390 square foot dog daycare and boarding facility with an outdoor play area. The facility would be developed to accommodate approximately 60 dogs. No expansion or exterior changes to the building are proposed; however, two outdoor play areas would be installed along the east side of the building. The play area would be improved with synthetic canine grass and enclosed with an eight foot high vinyl privacy fence. The floor plan indicates five indoor play rooms, offices, grooming facilities and boarding areas. Operating hours would be 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday and 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on Sunday. The dogs would be constantly monitored during business hours to ensure safety and noise control. Overnight boarding would also be available and monitored by webcams. There would be a maximum of five employees on site during each shift. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05777 AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04999 January 26, 2015 Page 2 of 3 ANALYSIS: The following is staff’s analysis of the project: Dog Daycare and Boarding: Dog daycare and boarding was not anticipated in the SP 94-1, DA 2 zone and was therefore not expressly listed as a permitted use. However, the Zoning Code authorizes the Planning Director to determine that a use that is similar to, and compatible with, the uses that are permitted or conditionally permitted in the particular zone, shall be deemed a use which may be conditionally permitted in the particular zone as an Unlisted Use. The conditional use permit is required to determine compatibility with surrounding land uses. Of primary concern with the operation of a dog daycare and boarding facility are potential impacts on adjacent properties from noise and odor relating to the keeping of dogs. An eight-foot high vinyl privacy fence would be installed to reduce noise, and provide security and screening from the adjacent industrial businesses. In addition, the dogs would be constantly monitored by trained employees while the dogs are outside. Conditions of approval pertaining to dog waste and clean up to ensure a sanitary and odor free environment are included in the attached resolution. Staff believes that with the proposed conditions of approval, the dog daycare and boarding facility is compatible with the surrounding industrial and office uses. Parking Variance: The Zoning Code requires 46 parking spaces for the dog daycare and boarding facility based on four spaces per 1,000 square feet of the gross floor area. Ten parking spaces would be provided. A parking justification letter was submitted by the applicant indicating that the nature of the business is dog daycare, where customers remain at the facility for an average of five minutes. Research from other Dogtopia facilities and observations at a similar dog day care facility located on Daly Street in Anaheim indicate that there are no more than three customers dropping off or picking up dogs at one time. Staff has conducted field observations and verified the availability of adequate parking during peak drop-off and pick-up hours at this existing facility. There would be a maximum of five employees on-site at any one time, leaving five spaces available for customers. In addition, the applicant is proposing a valet service during peak morning and evening hours to ensure adequate parking for employees and customers. The parking ratio for day care centers for children is one space per employee, one space per 10 children and one space for loading. If this parking ratio were applied to this business, the requirement would be 12 spaces, which is close to the number of spaces provided. Based upon the findings of the parking analysis and staff observations, staff recommends approval of the parking variance as the parking spaces available on-site are adequate to accommodate the parking demand. In addition, staff anticipates consideration of an amendment to the parking requirements for animal grooming and boarding facilities as a future follow-up item that would be considered by the Commission. A letter of opposition was submitted by an adjacent business owner expressing concerns regarding the lack of parking in the area, traffic and the potential for barking noise and odors (Attachment No. 6). Conditions of approval pertaining to immediate waste collection and the staff monitoring of the outdoor play area are recommended to alleviate any odor or noise impacts. Staff believes the operational characteristics of this dog daycare facility would ensure that on-site parking is adequate to accommodate the parking demands of this business. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05777 AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04999 January 26, 2015 Page 3 of 3 CONCLUSION: Staff believes that the request to permit a dog daycare and boarding facility is compatible with the adjacent businesses and the surrounding area. There is adequate parking to accommodate the proposed business based on the operational information provided by the applicant and observations of parking demand at a similar dog daycare business. Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit and the parking variance. Prepared by, Submitted by, Amy Vazquez Jonathan E. Borrego Associate Planner, Lilley Planning Group Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Conditional Use Permit and Variance Resolution 2. Letter of Request and Parking Justification Letter 3. Photographs 4. Site and Floor Plan 5. Partial Site Plan (Outdoor Play Area) 6. Letter of Opposition (SC)DA2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCESP 94-1 (SC)DA2OFFICES SP 94-1 (SC)DA2INDUSTRIAL (SC)DA2O.C.F.C.D. SP 94-1 (SC)DA2OFFICES SP 94-1 (SC)DA2OFFICES SP 94-1 (SC)DA2LAKEVIEWBUSINESSCENTER SP 94-1 (SC)DA2OFFICES SP 94-1 (SC)DA2OFFICES SP 94-1 (SC)DA2OFFICES SP 94-1 (SC)DA2OFFICESCITY OF PLACENTIACITY OF PLACENTIAN LAKEVIEW AVEE ORANGETHORPE AVE ORANGETHORPE AVE E HUNTER AVE E WESLEY DR N HANCOCK STE EISENHOWER CIR N GLENVIEW AVEE. LA PALMA AVE E. MIRALOMA AVE N.KELLOGGDR4 5 7 0 East Eisenhower Circ le D EV No. 2 0 14-00140 Subject Property APN: 346-301-05 °0 50 100 Feet Aeri al Ph oto :May 20 14 N LAKEVIEW AVEE ORANGETHORPE AVE ORANGETHORPE AVE E HUNTER AVE E WESLEY DR N HANCOCK STE EISENHOWER CIR N GLENVIEW AVEE. LA PALMA AVE E. MIRALOMA AVE N.KELLOGGDR4570 East Eisenhower Circle DEV No. 2014-00140 Subject Property APN: 346-301-05 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo: May 2014 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05777 AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04999 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2014-00140) (4570 EAST EISENHOWER CIRCLE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition to approve (i) Conditional Use Permit No. 2014- 05777 to permit a dog daycare and boarding facility with an outdoor play area, and (ii) Variance No. 2014-04999 to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code") (collectively referred to herein as the "Proposed Project") for premises located at that certain real property at 4570 Eisenhower in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 0.6 acres in size and is currently developed with an industrial building. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Industrial land uses. The Property is located in the Expanded Industrial Area (Development Area 2) of the Northeast Area Specific Plan Area and is subject to the zoning and development standards of Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of the Code, combined with the zoning and development standards of the underlying base zone for the Property, which is the "I" Industrial Zone. Unless otherwise indicated in Chapter 18.120 of the Code, the standards of the “I” Industrial Zone contained in Chapter 18.10 (Industrial Zone) of the Code shall apply to the Property. The Property is also located within the Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone, meaning that the regulations contained in Chapter 18.18 (Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone) of the Code shall apply in addition to, and where inconsistent with, shall supersede any regulations of the "I" Industrial Zone; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Project is a use not expressly authorized or permitted in the Expanded Industrial Area (Development Area 2) of the Northeast Area Specific Plan Area or the “I” Industrial Zone and is also not authorized or mentioned in any zone throughout the City. Pursuant to the authority conferred upon the Planning Director by Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority) of Chapter 18.66 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Code and, specifically, paragraph .0201 of Subsection .020 (Unlisted Uses Permitted), the Planning Director has found and determined that the Proposed Project does not fit into an existing use class, as provided in subsection .020 (Inclusion of Specific Uses) of Section 18.36.020 (Classification of Uses), but may be authorized by conditional use permit until such time as the Code is amended to include such a use; and - 1 - PC2015-*** WHEREAS, as the "lead agency" under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the Planning Commission finds and determines that the Proposed Project is within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 2015, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim, notice of said public hearing having been duly given in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05777 and Variance No. 2014-04999, and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing with respect to Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05777 to permit a dog daycare and boarding facility with an outdoor play area within an industrial building, does find and determine the following: 1. Pursuant to the authority conferred upon the Planning Director by Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority) of Chapter 18.66 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Code and, specifically, paragraph .0201 of Subsection .020 (Unlisted Uses Permitted), the Planning Director has found and determined that the Proposed Project does not fit into an existing use class, as provided in subsection .020 (Inclusion of Specific Uses) of Section 18.36.020 (Classification of Uses), but may be authorized by conditional use permit until such time as the Code is amended to include such a use; and 2. The proposed conditional use permit to permit a dog daycare and boarding facility, as conditioned herein, would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the building is surrounded by compatible buildings and uses; and 3. The size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the dog daycare and boarding facility in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety because the facility would be located within an existing industrial building that is surrounded by other industrial and office uses. 4. The traffic generated by the dog daycare facility will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the traffic generated by this use will not exceed the anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding streets and adequate parking will be provided to accommodate the use. - 2 - PC2015-*** 5. The granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim as the proposed land use will be integrated with the surrounding industrial uses and would not pose a health or safety risk to the citizens of the City of Anaheim. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request for Variance No. 2014-04999 to allow less parking than required by the Code in conjunction with the proposed dog daycare and boarding facility should be approved for the following reasons: SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces. (46 spaces required; 10 spaces proposed) 1. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. A parking justification letter was prepared by the applicant, determining that the current number of parking spaces within the Property is sufficient to accommodate the dog daycare and boarding facility; 2. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the on-site parking will adequately accommodate the peak parking demands of the proposed dog daycare and boarding facility; 3. 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 because the on-site parking for the dog daycare center will adequately accommodate peak parking demands of all uses on the site; 4. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use because the project site provides adequate ingress and egress points to the Property and are designed to allow for adequate on-site circulation; and 5. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the project site has existing ingress or egress access points that are designed to allow adequate on-site circulation and therefore will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the dog daycare and boarding facility. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. - 3 - PC2015-*** NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05777 and Variance No. 2014-04999, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition (s), (ii) the modification complies with the Code and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal 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 January 26, 2015 Said Resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 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 PRO-TEMPORE, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 4 - PC2015-*** STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on January 26, 2015, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 26th day of January, 2015. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 5 - PC2015-*** - 6 - PC2015-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05777 AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04999 (DEV2014-00140) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 1 The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining the area adjacent to the premises over which they have control, in an orderly fashion through the provision of regular maintenance and removal of trash or debris. Planning Department, Code Enforcement 2 The applicant shall ensure that all animal excrement is collected immediately and disposed of properly. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 3 The outdoor play area shall be monitored at all times to ensure safety and noise control. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 4 No required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage. Planning Department, Code Enforcement 5 The business shall be operated in accordance with the Letter of Request and Parking Justification Letter submitted as part of this application. Any changes to the business operation as described in that document shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director to determine substantial conformance with the Letter of Request and Parking Justification Letter and to ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 6 Any Graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any adjacent area under the control of the licensee shall be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being applied. Police Department GENERAL CONDITIONS 7 The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 7 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 8 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 9 The Property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department and as conditioned herein. Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 8 - PC2015-*** ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 DOGTOPIA 4570 EISHENHOWER CIRCLE DOGTOPIA 4570 EISHENHOWER CIRCLE DOGTOPIA 4570 EISHENHOWER CIRCLE DOGTOPIA 4570 EISHENHOWER CIRCLE DW PROVIDE POWER & WATER SUPPLY FOR FUTURE USE PROVIDE POWER & WATER SUPPLY FOR FUTURE USE EXISTING ELECTRICAL CABINET EXISTING TRASH ENCLOSURE 9'-0"5'-0"8'-6"8'-6"8'-6"8'-6"8'-6"8'-6"8'-6"8'-6"NEW PARKING STRIPING 18'-0"25'-0"18'-6"51'-2"40'-2"40'-2"EXTEND WALL TO 8'-0" A.F.F. EXISTING GUTTER TO REMAIN 46'-0" FUTURE PLAYROOM FUTURE PLAYROOM HC PARKING SPACE OUTDOOR YARD 1 OUTDOOR YARD 2 EXISTING LANDSCAPING EXISTING LANDSCAPING EXISTING LANDSCAPING EXISTING LANDSCAPING EXISTING TRANSFORMER VAULT EXISTING TELEPHONE POLE 69'-1" EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT 24'-7 1/2"NEW PARKING CURB 8'-6"18'-6"5'-8 3/4"24 ' - 6 1 / 4 " SITE SQUARE FOOTAGE: BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE: -OFFICE AREAS: -PLAYAREAS: -SUITES, SPA & GROOM: -FUTURE AREA -TOTAL: EXTERIOR PLAY YARDS: TOTAL PARKING SPACES: - 2,425 S.F. 5,441 S.F. 871 S.F. 2,652 S.F. 11,389 S.F. 3,901 S.F. (9) SPACES + (1) HANDICAP SPACE 7'-6" +/- EXISTING WATER METER EXISTING GAS METER INDOOR PLAYROOM INDOOR PLAYROOM INDOOR PLAYROOM PROPOSED FENCING PROPOSED FENCING PROPOSED FENCING 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.6.7.8. 9. 10. 5' ELECTRICAL EASEMENT 5' ELECTRICAL EASEMENT 33'-6" OFFICE AREA OFFICE AREA OFFICE AREA OFFICE AREA OFFICE AREA OFFICE AREA OFFICE AREA OFFICE AREA 8' ROLLING GATE 4' SWINGING GATE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE SHADE SAIL SHADE SAIL SHADE SAIL SHADE SAIL SHADE SAIL MOVABLE WATER FOUNTAIN MOVABLE WATER FOUNTAIN FRENCH TRENCH DRAIN LEGAL DESCRIPTION: REAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 5 OF MAP NO. 81-230, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 168, PAGES 25 TO 27 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY GRAVEL TRENCH EXISTING GUTTER TO REMAIN AND TO BE COVERED BY NEW K-9 GRASS INDICATES PLAY YARDS (AREA RECEIVING K-9 GRASS) AREA OF ASPHALT TO BE REMOVED SCALE:2 FENCE DETAIL 1 1/2" = 1'-0"7'-8"8'-0"SCALE:3 FENCE ELEVATION 1" = 1'-0" PROPOSED DOGTOPIA 4570 EISENHOWER CIRCLE ANAHEIM, CA. CHECKED: PROJECT NO: DATE: REVISIONS NO DATE REMARKS DRAWN: SEAL: CONSULTANT: 2014.0494 COPYRIGHT cRESERVES COPYRIGHT & OTHER RIGHTS RESTRICTING THESE DOCUMENTS TO THE ORIGINAL SITE OR PURPOSE FOR WHICH THEY WERE PREPARED. REPRODUCTIONS, CHANGES OR ASSIGNMENTS ARE PROHIBITED.DAVID BOYCE2014604 COURTLAND STREET SUITE 100 ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32804 PH 407.645.5008 FX 407.629.9124 SCALE:1 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN 1/8"=1'-0" N 12.18.14 S1.0 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN ######## SCALE:4 VICINITY MAP N.T.S. N P:\D\Dogtopia\2014.0494 - Dogtopia - 4570 Eisenhower Circle, Anaheim, CA\3 CAD & Drawings\1 Preliminaries\2014.0494_xbase.dwg, S1.0, 1/12/2015 2:00:51 PM, THONUT, DWG To PDF.pc3, ARCH expand D (36.00 x 24.00 Inches), 1:1ATTACHMENT NO. 4 EXIST. GUTTER TO REMAIN. ASPHALT WITHIN PLAY-YARD TO BE REMOVED AND INFILLED WITH K9 GRASS, PER 2/S1.1 PROVIDE POWER & WATER SUPPLY FOR FUTURE USE EXISTING TELEPHONE POLE 5' ELECTRICAL EASEMENT EXIST. GUTTER TO REMAIN. ASPHALT WITHIN PLAY-YARD TO BE REMOVED AND INFILLED WITH K9 GRASS, PER 2/S1.1 EXTEND EXISTING WALL TO 8'-0" A.F.F. INDOOR PLAYROOM INDOOR PLAYROOM EXTEND EXISTING WALL TO 8'-0" A.F.F. OUTDOOR PLAY YARD 1,894 S.F. OUTDOOR PLAY YARD 2,007 S.F. OUTDOOR PLAY YARD 462 S.F. ASPHALT WITHIN PLAY-YARD TO BE REMOVED AND INFILLED WITH K9 GRASS, PER 2/S1.1 PROVIDE POWER & WATER SUPPLY FOR FUTURE USE SHADE SAIL SHADE SAIL SHADE SAIL SHADE SAIL MOVABLE WATER FOUNTAIN MOVABLE WATER FOUNTAIN SHADE SAIL PROPOSED FENCING 8' ROLLING GATE FRENCH TRENCH DRAIN CHECKED: PROJECT NO: DATE: REVISIONS NO DATE REMARKS DRAWN: SEAL: CONSULTANT: 2014.0494 COPYRIGHT cRESERVES COPYRIGHT & OTHER RIGHTS RESTRICTING THESE DOCUMENTS TO THE ORIGINAL SITE OR PURPOSE FOR WHICH THEY WERE PREPARED. REPRODUCTIONS, CHANGES OR ASSIGNMENTS ARE PROHIBITED.DAVID BOYCE2014604 COURTLAND STREET SUITE 100 ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32804 PH 407.645.5008 FX 407.629.9124 SCALE:1 PRELIMINARY PLAY-YARD PLAN 3/16"=1'-0" N 12.18.14 S1.1 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN ######## SCALE:2 PLAY YARD DETAIL N.T.S. INDICATES PLAY YARDS (AREA RECEIVING K-9 GRASS) AREA OF ASPHALT TO BE REMOVED P:\D\Dogtopia\2014.0494 - Dogtopia - 4570 Eisenhower Circle, Anaheim, CA\3 CAD & Drawings\1 Preliminaries\2014.0494_xbase.dwg, S1.1, 1/12/2015 2:31:05 PM, THONUT, DWG To PDF.pc3, ARCH expand D (36.00 x 24.00 Inches), 1:1ATTACHMENT NO. 5 From:Don Briscoe To:Amy K. Vazquez Subject:dog daycare and boarding facility Date:Wednesday, January 21, 2015 2:54:25 PM Attachments:letter.pdf hi amy, I am emailing you in regards to the proposed dog daycare facility next to my property. I do not want to see this facility approved. I do not think that up to 60 dogs being cared for next to my business is a good idea. I do not want to have to put up with the barking, traffic, lack of parking or smell. don’t get me wrong I like dogs, I have one. according to a letter (attached) I received the parking lot will be converted into a 4000 sq ft outside play area. parking is barely sufficient as it is. I have attached a few photos for you to see how the parking is around here. in addition, I am sure you are aware of the bridge being constructed and the one end of eisenhower being permanently closed off once complete this will only add to the traffic. per the anaheim municipal code a conditional use permit may be awarded upon a finding that: 1. the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses. 2. the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate. 3. the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways. the proposed dog day care facility does not comply with the three requirements listed above. thanks, don briscoe 4562 eisenhower cir 714 448 9014 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. ITEM NO. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: JANUARY 26, 2015 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05770 LOCATION: 280 North Wilshire Avenue (Cambridge Educational Housing) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Anizio Silva with Cambridge Educational Housing. The agent representing the applicant is Ha Nguyen with Win Nguyen Design Group and the property owner is Xin Wei Lin with Cambridge Educational Housing, LLC. REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to convert an elderly residential care facility into educational housing for international students. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1, Existing Facilities), and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05770. BACKGROUND: This 0.7-acre project site is developed with a 12,034 square foot, 25 bedroom elderly residential care facility. The property is located in the General Commercial (C-G) zone and the General Plan designates this property for Low Density Office land uses. The property is surrounded by single-family residences to the north, condominiums to the east, office uses to the west and the Interstate 5 Freeway to the south across Wilshire Avenue. PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to convert a vacant elderly care facility to educational housing for international students. The Cambridge Institute of International Education is a company with partnerships with over 200 schools in the United States. This location would provide housing for approximately 40 students that would attend Servite High School and Cornelia Connelly High School in Anaheim, St. John Bosco High School in Bellflower and Junipero Serra High School in Gardena. There would also be three to five residential assistants that would be on-site at all times. The floor plan indicates the educational housing facility would include 21 student bedrooms, four employee bedrooms, offices, a kitchen, a dining room, an indoor recreation room and a courtyard. No exterior changes to the existing building are proposed. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05770 January 26, 2015 Page 2 of 2 Transportation would be provided for the students by three vans operated by the Cambridge Institute. The pick-up and drop-off area would be located within three designated carpool van parking spaces near the entrance of the building. Students would not be allowed to own cars or bicycles while residing at this facility. ANALYSIS: Educational housing is not an anticipated use in the City of Anaheim and was therefore not listed in the Zoning Code as a permitted use. The Zoning Code provides for the consideration of a conditional use permit for uses that are not expressly listed when the Planning Director has determined the use to be compatible with the particular zone. There are single family residences located to the north and condominiums located to the east of the project site. Staff believes that the educational housing would blend in seamlessly with the adjacent residential uses since there are no outdoor activities proposed and transportation would be provided for the students. The office uses to the west would not be impacted by the educational housing since the students would be attending school and after-school activities during regular business hours. The letter of operation also indicates that the facility would be strictly monitored by live-in staff members who are trained in international education and residential services. Parking: Although educational housing is an unlisted use, the Zoning Code includes a parking ratio for room and board facilities. The Code requires the parking be calculated by combining one space per bedroom, one space per employee and one space for visitors. Therefore, the educational housing facility would require a total of 30 parking spaces and 38 are provided. Since the students are not allowed to own vehicles while residing at this facility, staff determined that this parking ratio is appropriate for this use. A condition of approval has been included in the draft resolution which requires the business to operate in accordance with the applicant’s Letter of Request submitted as part of this application. Therefore, the parking provided complies with the City’s requirements. CONCLUSION: Staff believes that the proposed educational housing is compatible with the adjacent office and residential uses in the surrounding area and the number of parking spaces provided exceeds the Code requirements. Staff recommends approval of this request. Prepared by, Submitted by, Amy Vazquez Jonathan E. Borrego Associate Planner, Lilley Planning Group Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Conditional Use Permit Resolution 2. Applicant’s Letter of Request 3. Photographs 4. Site Plan 5. Floor Plan RM-4PINE TREEAPTS24 DU RS-1SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RM-4WILSHIRE CRESTAPTS32 DU C-GOFFICES RS-1SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RM-4PARK WILSHIRE APTS77 DU RM-4CONDOS163 DU RM-3SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCEC-GVACANT C-GVACANT C-GRETIREMENTFACILITY C-GOFFICES RS-1SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 5 FREEWAY5 FREEWAY W LINCOLN AVE N WILSHIRE AVE W BEVERLY DR W B I R C H M O N T D R N PEARL STN WEDGEWOOD DRW. LINCOLN AVE W. BROADWAY N. EUCLID STS. EUCLID STN. HARBOR BLVDN. ANAHEI M BLVDS.M A N C H E S T E R A V EN. LOARA STS. HARBOR BLVDS. HARBOR BLVD2 8 0 North Wils hire Avenue D EV No. 2 0 14-00121 Subject Property APN: 255-011-04 °0 50 100 Feet Aeri al Ph oto :May 20 14 5 FREE W A Y5 FREE W A Y W LINCOLN AVE N W I L S H I R E A V E W BEVERLY DR W BIRCHMONT DR N PEARL STN WEDGEWOOD DR W. LINCOLN AVE W. BROADWAY N. EUCLID STS. EUCLID STN. HARBOR BLVDN. ANAHE IM BLVD S. M A N C H E S T E R A VEN. LOARA STS. HARBOR BLVDS. HARBOR BLVD 280 North Wilshire Avenue DEV No. 2014-00121 Subject Property APN: 255-011-04 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo: May 2014 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05770 MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2014-00121) (280 NORTH WILSHIRE AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05770 to convert an elderly residential care facility into educational housing (referred to herein as the "Proposed Project") for that certain real property located at 280 North Wilshire Avenue in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 0.7 acre in size and is currently developed with an elderly residential care facility. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Commercial land uses. The Property is located in the “C-G” General Commercial Zone. As such, the Property is subject to the zoning and development standards described in Chapter 18.08 (Commercial Zones) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"); and WHEREAS, as the "lead agency" under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the Planning Commission finds and determines that the Proposed Project is within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Project is a use not expressly authorized or permitted in the “C-G” General Commercial Zone and is also not authorized or mentioned in any zone throughout the City. Pursuant to the authority conferred upon the Planning Director by Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority) of Chapter 18.66 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Code and, specifically, paragraph .0201 of Subsection .020 (Unlisted Uses Permitted), the Planning Director has found and determined that the Proposed Project does not fit into an existing use class, as provided in subsection .020 (Inclusion of Specific Uses) of Section 18.36.020 (Classification of Uses), but may be authorized by conditional use permit until such time as the Code is amended to include such a use; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 2015, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim, notice of said public hearing having been duly given in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05770 and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and - 1 - PC2015-*** WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing with respect to Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05770 to permit the conversion of the improvements located on the Property from an elderly care facility to educational housing does find and determine the following facts: 1. Pursuant to the authority conferred upon the Planning Director by Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority) of Chapter 18.66 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Code and, specifically, paragraph .0201 of Subsection .020 (Unlisted Uses Permitted), the Planning Director has found and determined that the Proposed Project does not fit into an existing use class, as provided in subsection .020 (Inclusion of Specific Uses) of Section 18.36.020 (Classification of Uses), but may be authorized by conditional use permit until such time as the Code is amended to include such a use. 2. The proposed conditional use permit to allow educational housing, as conditioned herein, would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the building is surrounded by compatible buildings and uses. 3. The size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the educational housing facility in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety because the facility would be located within a property that is surrounded by other office and residential uses. 4. The traffic generated by the educational housing facility will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the traffic generated by this use will not exceed the anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding streets and adequate parking will be provided to accommodate the use since the students would not be driving at any time. 5. The granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim as the proposed land use will continue to be integrated with the surrounding area and would not pose a health or safety risk to the citizens of the City of Anaheim. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05770, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition (s), (ii) the modification complies with the Code and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. - 2 - PC2015-*** BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal 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 January 26, 2015. Said Resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 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 PRO-TEMPORE, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 3 - PC2015-*** STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on January 26, 2015, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 26th day of January, 2015. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 4 - PC2015-*** - 5 - PC2015-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05770 (DEV2014-00121) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 1 The student housing facility shall be operated in accordance with the Letter of Request submitted as part of this application. Any changes to the business operation as described in that document shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director to determine substantial conformance with the Letter of Request and to ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses. Planning Department, Planning Services Division GENERAL CONDITIONS 2 The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 3 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 4 The Property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department and as conditioned herein. Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 6 - PC2015-*** The Cambridge Institute of International Education 1025 Main St, Floor 3, Waltham, MA 02451 www.thecambridgeinstitute.org City of Anaheim 200 South Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: Brief in support of an Educational Housing Facility for High School Students at 280 N. Wilshire Avenue, Anaheim, CA. To Whom It May Concern: The Cambridge Institute of International Education is an international education consulting company that has partnership with over 200 schools throughout the United States. We help international students, primarily from China; attend mission-driven, private American high schools. In addition to improving global connectedness by introducing young students to American ideals and philosophies, our business stimulates local American economies by generating new expenditures, investments and tourism from families overseas. The Cambridge Institute is a well-regarded company and we’re proud to be recognized by the Council on Standards for International Education Travel (CSIET) for meeting their high expectations in regards to providing quality facilitation of international education relationships. We at The Cambridge Institute are seeking to run a dormitory/boardinghouse (Educational Housing Facility) on a property located at 280 N. Wilshire Avenue, a commercial property located within General Commercial area, currently structure been used as Elderly Residential Care Facility. This property would house international students (primarily from China) as well as local high school students from the United States. The property is under an agreement to purchase. There are no proposed changes to the “Lot” configuration, only minor or none to the structure of the inside of the property. We are partners with the following schools in the area: ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Servite High School in Anaheim, Cornelia Connelly High School in Anaheim, St. John Bosco High School in Bellflower and Junipero Serra High School in Gardena. We will have 3 minivans on site owned and operated by our own staff members; these vans will bring and return these students to and from the schools and any after school activity from Monday to Sunday. The vans will be available 24/7 as the service of the staff and students. The pickup and drop off will be in our own parking convenient and secured located within the property at Wilshire Avenue. These kids are not allowed to drive nor ride bikes while they are under our supervision, therefore we don’t have the need of bike racks. However, if this is a requirement, we will happy to install one on site. Cambridge is a for-profit educational corporation which is partnering with a local private high schools located throughout south California. This partnership seeks to create a residence for 40+ students and 3-5 on site residence assistants/directors. We are ready to comply with all requirements to make a safe housing facility, as well to improve the neighborhood. This dormitory is going to be a quiet housing with international high school students and will be under supervision at all times by live-in staff educated and trained in the areas of international education and residential services. We will also provide transportation from the Housing Facility to the school on the daily basis. Thank you for your consideration on this matter and please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions or concerns. I can be reached at Asilva@thecambridgeinstitute.org or by phone at 857 200-7296. Sincerely, Anizio Silva, R.E. Project Manager Cambridge Institute of International Education ATTACHMENT NO. 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. ITEM NO. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: JANUARY 26, 2015 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05768 LOCATION: 412 West Carl Karcher Way and 1180 North La Palma Park Way (GOALS Academy) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The property owner is Rod O’Connor; the applicant is David Wilk with GOALS; and the agent representing the applicant is Christopher Ward with CWA architects. REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to permit a charter school within an existing office building and two modular classroom buildings. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1, Existing Facilities), and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05768. BACKGROUND: This 0.64-acre property is developed with a 10,590 square foot, one story commercial building. The property is located in the Multiple Family Residential (RM-4) zone. The General Plan designates this property for Parks land uses. The property is surrounded by the GOALS facility to the east, a vocational school to the north (across Carl Karcher Way), a neighborhood shopping center to the west, and La Palma Park to the south, across La Palma Parkway. PROPOSAL: The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit to operate a charter school for elementary school students within an existing one story commercial building. The program would be licensed by the State of California and would provide an alternative to the traditional school setting for students. As described in the applicant’s letter of request, the owner and operator of the school, GOALS Academy, would operate in conjunction with the existing GOALS facility to the east. GOALS is a non-profit organization which provides free youth development programs for low-income youths in the Anaheim area. The organization provides free facility access, bus transportation, academic programs, a recreation center, career development programs, sports camps, nutritional education, and various fitness programs. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05768 January 26, 2015 Page 2 of 3 The floor plan indicates that the school would include a science room, technology room, art room, offices, storage, restrooms, and seven classrooms. The applicant also proposes to install two, 897 square foot modular buildings for additional classroom space, for a total of nine classrooms on the property. The charter school would accommodate up to 210 students for Kindergarten through 6th grades. No changes are proposed to the exterior of the building. The easterly parking lot would be reconfigured to include 13 parking spaces and a drop-off area. The facility would have up to ten employees, including seven teachers, when the school is expected to be at full capacity in 2018. Proposed school hours are from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. According to the applicant, approximately half of the students would arrive at the school at 8:15 a.m. and the other half would arrive at 9:00 a.m. In addition, half of the students would depart at 3:00 p.m. and the other half would depart at 6:00 p.m., after participating in after school activities at the adjacent GOALS facility. Three separate student pick-up/drop-off areas would be provided for the school: in the main parking lot driveway along Carl Karcher Way; along the west side of Homer Street (in front of the GOALS facility); and, along the north side of La Palma Parkway. GOALS employees would be present at all three pick-up/drop-off locations during the morning and afternoon peak hours in order to safely monitor pedestrian and vehicular traffic around the site. The school would provide all parents with written materials regarding pedestrian safety. The school would also require mandatory meetings with parents and students to explain their drop off safety procedures. A condition of approval has been included in the draft resolution which requires the business to operate in accordance with the “School Parking, Drop-Off, and Pick-Up Operations and Safety Plan” submitted as part of this application. ANALYSIS: Educational Institutions are permitted at this location, subject to approval of a conditional use permit to determine compatibility with surrounding land uses. The applicant chose this particular location due to its close proximity to the existing GOALS facility to the east. The applicant proposes to stagger the morning and afternoon schedule and provide three drop-off areas to minimize traffic congestion on the surrounding streets. The school will blend in with the adjacent GOALS facility and would not have an adverse impact on the surrounding commercial uses. A condition of approval has been included in the draft resolution to ensure that the school does not use the City-owned La Palma Park for parking and recreational activities without obtaining prior approval from the City. The parking requirement for the school is 17 spaces; this requirement is based upon one space per classroom, one space per non-office employee, and one space for office use. The applicant proposes 13 on-site spaces and four additional spaces on the adjacent GOALS property for employee parking. Additionally, the applicant indicates that approximately half of the students will utilize public transportation or walk to the site rather than being transported by vehicle. Because 17 spaces would be provided on the two contiguous properties, and because approximately half of the students would not be transported to the site by vehicle, there will be more than adequate parking provided for the use. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05768 January 26, 2015 Page 3 of 3 CONCLUSION: Staff supports the proposed charter school based on the described operations, which would blend in with the adjacent GOALS facility. The school would be compatible with the land uses in the surrounding area and parking is adequate to accommodate the proposed use. Staff recommends approval of this request. Prepared by, Submitted by, David See Jonathan E. Borrego Senior Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Conditional Use Permit Resolution 2. Applicant’s Letter of Request 3. Photographs 4. Site and Floor Plans C-GRELIGIOUS USE PRVACANT C-GCROWN MOTEL C-GAUTO REPAIR/SERVICE C-GPRESCHOOL C-GCARL'S JR. C-GBUSINESSSCHOOL C-GVACANT C-GSERVICESTATIONRS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCEC-GPALM MOTOR LODGE TLA PALMA PARK& STADIUM C-GAUTO DEALERSHIP C-GVACANT IINDUSTRIAL RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE PRVACANT C-GMEDICAL OFFICE RM-4MEDICAL OFFICE C-GHALFWAYHOUSE C-GRETAIL RM-4TRIPLEXRS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCEC-GVACANT C-GCHURCH RM-4OFFICES C-GRETAIL PRSPORTS FIELD PR OFFICESRM-4PARKING LOT RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE N HARBOR BLVDN SWAN STN LA PALMA PARK WAY W CARL KARCHER WAY N HOMER STN RALEIGH STW VICTOR AVE W JULIANNA ST W ROMNEYA DR N. EUCLID STW. LA PALMA AVE N. EAST STE. LA PALMA AVE N.ANAHEIMBLVDN. HARBOR BLVD4 1 2 West Carl Karcher Way1180 North La Palma Park Way D EV No. 2 0 14-00106 Subject Property APN: 267-131-04 °0 50 100 Feet Aeri al Ph oto :May 20 14 N HARBOR BLVDN SWAN STN LA P A L M A P A R K W A Y W CARL KARCHER WAY N HOMER STN RALEIGH STW VICTOR AVE W JULIANNA ST W ROMNEYA DR N PARRY AVEN. EUCLID STW. LA PALMA AVE N. EAST ST E. LA PALMA AVE N.ANAHEIMBLVDN. HARBOR BLVD 412 West Carl Karcher Way 1180 North La Palma Park Way DEV No. 2014-00106 Subject Property APN: 267-131-04 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo: May 2014 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05768 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2014-00106) (412 WEST CARL KARCHER WAY AND 1180 NORTH LA PALMA PARKWAY) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05768 to permit a charter school within an existing office building and two modular classroom buildings (referred to herein as the "Proposed Project") for that certain real property located at 412 West Carl Karcher Way and 1180 North La Palma Park Way in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 0.64 acres in size and is currently developed with a 10,590 square foot, one story commercial building. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Parks land uses. The Property is located in the “RM-4” Multiple Family Residential Zone. As such, the Property is subject to the zoning and development standards described in Chapter 18.06 (Multiple Family Residential Zones) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code") and is a permitted use within the "RM-4" Multiple Family Residential Zone subject to approval of a conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”) and the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (commencing with Section 15000 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; herein referred to as the "State CEQA Guidelines"), the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds and determines that the Proposed Project is within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on January 26, 2015 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, to hear and consider evidence and testimony for and against the Proposed Project and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and - 1 - PC2015-*** WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts with respect to Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05768: 1. The request to permit the Proposed Project is an allowable use within the RM-4 Multiple Family Residential Zone under Subsection .010 of Section 18.06.030 of the Code provided that a conditional use permit is approved; and 2. The Proposed Project would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses, or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located. The Proposed Project will operate in conjunction with the adjacent GOALS facility to the east and will not have an adverse impact to the surrounding commercial uses; and 3. The size and shape of the site is adequate to allow the full development of the Proposed Project, in a manner not detrimental to either the particular area or health and safety because the site can accommodate the parking, traffic, trash collection, and circulation without creating detrimental effects on adjacent properties; and 4. The traffic generated by the Proposed Project will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the Proposed Project has been designed with three separate drop-off areas so as to minimize traffic congestion on the surrounding streets; and 5. The granting of Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05768 under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim and will provide a land use that is compatible with the surrounding area, subject to compliance with the conditions contained herein. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission, for the reasons hereinabove stated, that Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05768 is hereby approved, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval described in Exhibit B attached hereto, are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property under Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05768 in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition, (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. - 2 - PC2015-*** BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the 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 January 26, 2015. 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 PRO-TEMPORE, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 3 - PC2015-*** STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on January 26, 2015, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 26th day of January, 2015. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 4 - PC2015-*** - 5 - PC2015-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05768 (DEV2014-00106) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 1 All backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault will have to be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans and approved by Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control Inspector. Public Utilities, Water Engineering 2 A building permit shall be obtained from the Building Division for all interior and exterior building improvements. Planning Department, Planning and Building Divisions OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 3 The business shall be operated in accordance with the Letter of Request submitted as part of this application. Any changes to the business operation as described in that document shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director to determine substantial conformance with the Letter of Request and to ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses. Planning Department, Planning Services and Code Enforcement Divisions 4 The business shall be operated in accordance with the “School Parking, Drop-Off, and Pick-Up Operations and Safety Plan” submitted as part of this application. Any changes to the operations as described in that document shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning and Public Works Department Directors to determine substantial conformance with that document and to ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses. Planning Department Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Division 5 The number of students in attendance at the school shall not exceed 210 persons. Planning Department, Code Enforcement Division - 6 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT GENERAL 6 The business shall not use La Palma Park for school-related parking and/or recreational activities without prior approval from the Director of the Community Services Department. Community Services Department 7 The subject Property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department, and as conditioned herein. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 8 Any Graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any adjacent area under the control of the licensee shall be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being applied. Planning Department, Code Enforcement Division 9 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 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. Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division 10 Vehicle gates shall not be installed across the project driveway or access roads without providing a vehicle turnaround area. Any proposed gates shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works, Traffic Engineering Division. Public Works, Traffic Engineering 11 Conditions of approval related to each of the timing milestones above shall be prominently displayed on plans submitted for permits. For example, conditions of approval that are required to be complied with prior to the issuance of building permits shall be provided on plans submitted for building plan check. This requirement applies to grading permits, final maps, street improvement plans, water and electrical plans, landscape irrigation plans, security plans, parks and trail plans, and fire and life safety plans, etc. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 12 The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 7 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 13 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 8 - PC2015-*** ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. ITEM NO. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: JANUARY 26, 2015 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05756 AND VARIANCE NO. 2015-05001 LOCATION: 2926 East Miraloma Avenue (Aaero Sweet Corporation) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant and property owner is Aaero Sweet Corporation, and the agent representing the property owner is David Lopez. REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow retail sales of automobiles at an existing wholesale automobile sales business. The applicant is also requesting approval of a variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1, Existing Facilities), and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05756 and Variance No. 2015-05001. BACKGROUND: This 0.86-acre property is developed with a wholesale automobile business. The property is located in the Northeast Area Specific Plan, Development Area 1 –Industrial Area (SP94-1, DA1). The General Plan designates this property for Industrial land uses. The property is surrounded by industrial uses on all sides. The Aaero Sweet Company operates a wholesale automobile business at this location where vehicles are purchased from private parties and then resold to automobile auctions in Southern California. After the vehicles are delivered to this location they are inspected for any damage to the frames and cleaned in preparation for auction. They are then delivered to the auction locations for sale. No automobile repair is conducted at this location. There is also an administrative office on the property. PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to modify their business operations to include retail sales of automobiles in order to sell vehicles to local credit unions for sale to their customers. The applicant indicates that these types of transactions require a retail sales license from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Two display spaces would be reserved for the display of vehicles as required by the DMV. No physical changes are proposed to the remainder of the property which contains parking for employees, vehicle inspection and storage areas. The letter of operation states that these retail sales would comprise a small portion of their business. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05756 AND VARIANCE NO. 2015-05001 January 26, 2015 Page 2 of 3 ANALYSIS: The following is staff’s analysis of the requested entitlements. Conditional Use Permit: The Zoning Code permits retail automobile sales in this zone subject to approval of a conditional use permit. The purpose for the retail sales request is not to establish a traditional vehicles sales and display lot, but rather to allow Aaero Sweet to partner with an area credit union to provide vehicles for sale to credit union customers. In order to sell vehicles to the credit union, the DMV has required Aaero Sweet to obtain a retail license. The primary nature of the business will remain wholesaling to the auto auctions and will not change with the addition of retail sales. Two display spaces are required by the DMV; however, the applicant has indicated in their letter of operation that they will not put advertisements on the vehicles or use promotional items such as balloons or banners. The business is also proposing to reduce the amount of vehicles that come to the site. Currently all of the purchased vehicles are brought to the site for an inspection before being transported to the auction houses. Aaero Sweet’s owner will be changing their business model to ship a large amount of vehicles directly to the auction houses where the inspections will be performed. This will reduce the number of vehicle deliveries and the number of vehicles stored on site. Staff has included conditions of approval that limit the location of vehicle storage and loading/unloading areas. Staff has also included a condition requiring the business to report back to the Planning Commission in six months demonstrating how they have complied with the conditions of approval and that there have been no impacts associated with the business operations. This will be presented as a Reports and Recommendations item and will not be scheduled as a public hearing. The land uses surrounding this business are all industrial in nature. Because the retail component is for sales to a credit union and not for the general public, the addition of retail sales will not create any impacts and will not cause the business to be incompatible with the adjacent uses. The parking requirement for the automobile sales business is 36 spaces and 14 spaces are proposed. The two display spaces would not count as required parking spaces. The business has over 20 employees but most of the employees travel throughout California as purchasers attending auto auctions and do not work at the property. Because this is a wholesale business and the retail sales component will be business to business and not advertised to the public, customer parking is not needed. Adequate parking is provided on site as on average less than 14 employees work at this location every day. Therefore, staff believes that the addition of retail sales to the wholesale auto business would continue to be compatible with the surrounding land uses. Staff received three letters of opposition from nearby business owners. These letters state that Aaero Sweet employees park on Red Gum rather than on the business property, that vehicle inventory is also parked on Red Gum, and that delivery vehicles use the center left turn lane on Miraloma for parking before delivering vehicles to the property. Staff discussed these concerns with the applicant and as provided in the letter of operation the applicant is proposing a change in the business model to reduce the number of deliveries and vehicles stored on the property and to ensure that the required number of parking spaces is available on site for employee parking. Based upon this proposed change, staff believes that this will alleviate the use of on-street parking and the need for delivery vehicles to park in the street. The applicant has stated that these changes will be effective immediately. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05756 AND VARIANCE NO. 2015-05001 January 26, 2015 Page 3 of 3 CONCLUSION: As conditioned, the proposed conditional use permit will be compatible with the surrounding land uses and the parking will be adequate to accommodate the proposed use. The parking variance can be justified because of the number of parking spaces will accommodate the number of employees on at the business. Additionally, the applicant is proposing changes to the business operations to reduce the number of vehicles stored on-site and the number of deliveries made to this location. For these reasons staff recommends approval of this request. Prepared by, Submitted by, G. Scott Koehm Jonathan E. Borrego Associate Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Conditional Use Permit and Variance Resolution 2. Applicant’s Letter of Request/Justification 3. Photographs 4. Site Plan 5. Correspondence Received SP 94-1DA1RELIGIOUS USE SP 94-1DA1MIRALOMA - RED GUMBUSINESS PARK SP 94-1DA1INDUSTRIAL S P 9 4 -1 D A 1 S IN G L E F A M IL Y R E S ID E N C E SP 94-1DA1BUSINESS PARK SP 94-1DA1I NDUSTRI ALSP 94-1DA1INDUSTRIAL SP 94-1DA1I NDUSTRI ALSP 94-1DA1INDUSTRIAL SP 94-1DA1BUSINESS PARK SP 94-1DA1BUSINESS PARK SP 94-1DA1MIRALOMA - RED GUMBUSINESS PARK SP 94-1DA1INDUSTRIALSP 94-1DA1INDUSTRIALSP 94-1DA1INDUSTRIAL SP 94-1DA1OFFICES SP 94-1DA1INDUSTRIAL SP 94-1DA1INDUSTRIAL E M IR A LO M A A V E N RED GUM STE LA C R E S T A A V E N L A L OMA CI RN LAS BRI SAS STE . L A P A L M A A V E E . M IR A L O M A A V EE. O R A N G E T H O R P E A V E N. MI LLER STN. BLUE GUM STE. FRONTERA ST 2 9 2 6 East Miraloma Avenue D EV No. 2 0 14-00089 Subject Property APN: 344-331-04 °0 50 100 Feet Aeri al Ph oto :May 20 14 E MIRALOMA A V E N RED GUM ST E LA CRESTA A V E N LA LOMA C IR N LAS BR ISAS ST E. LA PAL M A A V E E. MIRALO M A A V E E. ORANG E T H O R P E A V E N. M ILLER STN. BLUE GUM ST E. FRO N T E R A S T 2926 East Miraloma Avenue DEV No. 2014-00089 Subject Property APN: 344-331-04 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo: May 2014 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05756 AND VARIANCE NO. 2015-05001 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2014-00089) (2926 EAST MIRALOMA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (hereinafter referred to as the “Planning Commission”) did receive a verified petition for (a) Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05756 to permit retail sales of automobiles at an existing wholesale automobile business, and (b) Variance No. 2015-05001 to permit fewer off-street parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code (herein referred to collectively as the "Proposed Project") for premises known as 2926 East Miraloma Avenue in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, the boundaries of which commercial center are generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Property, consisting of approximately 0.86 acres, is developed with an office building and storage areas for a wholesale automobile business. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Industrial land uses. The Property is located in the Industrial Area (Development Area 1) of the Northeast Area Specific Plan Area and is subject to the zoning and development standards contained in Section 18.120.050 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"), combined with the zoning and development standards of the underlying base zone for the Property, which is the "I" Industrial Zone. Unless otherwise indicated in Section 18.120.050 of the Code, the standards of the “I” Industrial Zone contained in Chapter 18.10 (Industrial Zone) of the Code shall apply to the Property; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on January 26, 2015 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05756 and Variance No. 2015-05001, and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, as the "lead agency" under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the Planning Commission finds and determines that the Proposed Project is within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and - 1 - PC2015-*** WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing with respect to the request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05756, does find and determine the following facts: 1. The request for a conditional use permit for retail sales of automobiles at an existing wholesale automobile business is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized under paragraph .0547 of Subsection .050 (Conditional Uses and Structures) of Section 18.120.050 [Land Use and Development Standards – Industrial Area (Development Area 1)] of the Code, subject to a conditional use permit. 2. The conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will not adversely affect the surrounding land uses and the growth and development of the area because the Property is developed with a wholesale automobile business and is surrounded by other industrial uses. 3. The size and shape of the Property is adequate to allow the full operation of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health, safety and general welfare. 4. The traffic generated by the use would not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because automobile sales is within a class of uses already anticipated and analyzed for traffic generation on these streets and highways. 5. The granting of Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05756 under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim and will provide a land use that is compatible with the surrounding area. WHEREAS, based upon the parking justification letter submitted by the applicant, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request for Variance No. 2015-05001 to permit less parking than required by the Code should be approved for the following reasons: SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces. (36 spaces required; 14 spaces proposed) 1. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, 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. A justification letter was prepared by the applicant, determining that the current number of parking spaces at the business is sufficient to accommodate the uses on the site, including the retail sales; 2. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the on-site parking will adequately accommodate the parking demands of the automobile sales business; - 2 - PC2015-*** 3. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the on-site parking for the automobile sales business will adequately accommodate peak parking demands; 4. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use because the project site provides adequate ingress and egress points to the property and are designed to allow for adequate on-site circulation that will accommodate the proposed use; and 5. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the project site has existing ingress or egress access points that are designed to allow adequate on-site circulation that will accommodate the proposed use and, therefore, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the business; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission, for the reasons hereinabove stated, that Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05756 and Variance No. 2015-05001 are hereby approved, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval described in Exhibit B attached hereto, are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property under Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05756 and Variance No. 2015-05001 in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition, (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. - 3 - PC2015-*** BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the 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 January 26, 2015. 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 PRO-TEMPORE, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on January 26, 2015, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 26th day of January, 2015. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 4 - PC2015-*** - 5 - PC2015-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05756 AND VARIANCE NO. 2015-05001 (DEV2014-00089) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 1. Vehicles shall only be stored in vehicle storage areas identified on the site plan. Vehicles may not be parked or stored in any driveway, unmarked parking space, or vehicle pathway as indicated on the site plan. Vehicles may not be affixed with signs or used for advertising purposes. Planning Department, Code Enforcement Division 2. All vehicle deliveries including loading and unloading shall be performed on site. No loading or unloading of vehicles shall occur in the public right of way. Delivery vehicles shall not block any part of the public right of way. Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Divisions 3. The seven parking spaces on the north side of the office building shall be used for Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) vehicle display and customers or employees only, as designated on the site plan. No vehicle storage shall be allowed in this customer/employee parking area. Planning Department, Code Enforcement Division 4. Vehicle display spaces must be provided on the property in accordance with all DMV requirements or specifications. Additional display spaces shall not be permitted. Planning Department, Code Enforcement Division 5. The business shall be subject to a six (6) month review commencing from the date of this resolution. Planning Department staff will report back to the Planning Commission as a “Reports and Recommendations” (R&R) item on the status of the operation to ensure no impacts have been created associated with the business operations. The applicant/business owner shall provide a letter to the Planning Commission demonstrating compliance with all conditions of approval. The owner shall pay for the cost of processing this R&R item. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 6. The property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion through the provision of regular landscaping maintenance and removal of trash or debris. Planning Department, Code Enforcement Division - 6 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 7. The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 8. The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 9. The 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, and as conditioned herein. Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 7 - PC2015-*** 1/20/2015 City of Anaheim, The Aaero Sweet Corporation has been doing business in Anaheim for more than twenty five years buying and selling used cars. Our current need is to obtain a Conditional Use Permit simply allowing us to conduct retail used car transactions at our current location. Based on the Anaheim planning department research on our physical address this property does indeed qualify for our requested Conditional Use Permit. We expect to retail a small amount of used vehicles at this location strictly through an Internet referral affiliation with the Altura Credit Union located in Riverside which has offices throughout Southern California. The Altura Credit Union has entrusted us to service their credit union members used car needs for more than fifteen years. We service this account by providing credit union member’s late model used vehicles (when requested) and we also accommodate these members by purchasing their used vehicle when they buy or lease a brand new vehicle. We pay more than a dealer trade-in price which keeps us in good standing with both the Altura Credit Union and its members. It is imperative to the Aaero Sweet Corporation that we preserve this account as it is the largest one we have. We do not anticipate advertising any of our used vehicles to the open public as our main business is wholesaling used vehicles through a ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Manheim owned auto auction. We also will never place advertising stickers on any used vehicles for sale or have any promotional items such as balloons or banners. This location will at no time look like a traditional retail used car lot. What the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) is requiring of us is that we have two designated parking spots with two separate signs stating “For Display Only” which means no employee or customer parking in these areas. Our location of 2926 East Miraloma Anaheim, CA 92806 is slightly less than one acre of land which provides us a huge amount of parking for employees. Since we purchase our used vehicles direct from consumers, we accommodate them by going to their home or office to complete the transaction so customers very rarely come to our location and consume parking spots. Designating two parking spots per the DMV requirements will not in any way force additional employees to park on the street. Since 2013, the automotive industry has experienced a huge amount of growth primarily due to consumer confidence and the ability to obtain financing for a new or used vehicle. Because of the massive growth of the industry itself we have also experienced record years in both 2013 and 2014. Since this growth is expected again in 2015 we are changing our business model where we will be shipping a very large amount of our used vehicles we purchase direct to a Manheim auto auction located in Anaheim, Fontana, or Riverside. Currently, we have been purchasing used vehicles throughout the entire region of Southern California and ship them all to our current location for a “frame inspection” and possible detail of the vehicle before they are then sent to one of these three auto auctions. Because of our increase in volume we have decided to ship the majority of the used vehicles we purchase direct to one of these auto auctions and have made arrangements with them to do a frame inspection as part of what they call a Manheim Condition Report (CR). We have also decided to have the auto auction detail any of our vehicles if in fact they need to be detailed. This change in company procedure is effective immediately. We are 100% confident the change in our business model will in fact be a permanent one and we expect at some point 100% of our vehicles will be shipped direct to a Manheim auction unless there is a special need to come to our physical address. This change in our business model will indeed alleviate any future parking issues on our property or on the City of Anaheim streets as well as ensure all of our neighbors they will have no issues with parking overflow. There are no health and safety issues with this proposal and there is no burden on traffic on Miraloma Avenue or our cross street Red Gum. We respectfully ask consideration from the City of Anaheim for this Conditional Use Permit as it is part of the growth of our company as well as retention of our employees. Sincerely, Derek Emery Chief Executive Officer Aaero Sweet Corporation 2926 E Miraloma Ave Anaheim, CA 92805 From: David A. Lopez LOPEZ architects AIA 714 -720 9427 January 16, 2014 Re: Parking Variance To whom it may concern, Upon review of the site and the use of the business Aero Sweet Corporation, daily ongoing no more than 12 to 14 employees and customers park on site at any time. The remainder of the site is used for storage, picking up, and dropping off vehicles from the auction and vehicle inspections. And at no time is any surrounding business or street parking used. We are proposing 14 parking spaces for employee and customer parking (and as a whole Aaero Sweet Corporation has very little to no customer required parking) as well as 2 DMV required display spaces. Our total proposed parking is 16 spaces which we feel is more than adequate. Thank you David A. Lopez ATTACHMENT NO. 3 1/16" = 1'-0"EXISTING SITE PLAN1be verified at the job site.These drawings and specifications are the copyright and property of Craig J. Lopez Architect, A.I.A., and shall not be used for any other project except by agreement with the Architect. Written dimensions take preference over scaled dimensions and shall These drawings shall not be reproduced in any form except by arrangement with the Architect.The Contractor shall verify any discrepancy on the drawings with the Architect prior to proceeding with any work.SHEET OFDRAWING NO.2 0 1 1DateRevision JOB NO.:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:SHEET TITLE: PROJECT: OWNER:(714)720-9427155 Granada Street, Suite LCamarillo, CA 93010(805)484-4962voicefax1173 N Kraemer PlaceAnaheim, CA 92805www.lopezstudio.comPlanningInteriorsArchitectureConsultingarchitectsCONDITIONAL USE PERMIT-AUTO SALES 2926 E MIRALOMA AVE ANAHEIM CA 92805 AAERO SWEET CORP. 2926 E MIRALOMA AVE ANAHEIM CA 92805 SITE PLAN 1409DALA1.0LEGENDEXIST OFFICE BUILDING: 3267 SQ. FTVEHICLE STOR. 5645 SQ. FT.PARKING REQ:EXIST OFFICE REQ14EXIST VEHICLE STORAGE22AUTO SALES 1 DISPLAY 1TOTAL SPACES REQ.38TOTAL SPACES16GENERAL NOTES1. LAWS AND REGULATIONS -- ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM WITH ALLORDINANCE, LAWS, AND REGULATIONS OF ALL GOVERNMENTAL BODIESHAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE WORK AND THUS WITH ALL REQUIREMENTSOF THE SERVICE CORPORATIONS FURNISHING UTILITIES. WORKMEN'SCOMPENSATION, PUBLIC LIABILITY, AND PROPERTY DAMAGE CERTIFICATESSHALL BE PROVIDED.2. EACH CONTRACTOR SHALL CHECK AND VERIFY ALL CONDITIONS ATPROJECT SITE BEFORE EXECUTING ANY WORK. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLNOTIFY THE OWNER OF ANY AND ALL DISCREPANCIES BEFORE PROCEEDING. 3. EACH CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AND APPLY FOR ALL PERMITSREQUIRED BY LOCAL AUTHORITIES BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THERESPECTIVE INSTALLATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO ARRANGE ANDPAY FOR ANY INSPECTIONS AND EXAMINATIONS REQUIRED BY THOSEAUTHORITIES.4. ALL EXISTING EQUIPMENT REMOVED BY DEMOLITION ORREHABILITATION SHALL BE DISPOSED OF AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER.5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR AND REPLACE ALL PROPERTY DAMAGEDBY THE PROCESSES OF WORK UNDER THIS PROJECT, TO THE SATISFACTIONOF THE OWNER. ALL PIPING, CONDUIT, ETC., THAT ARE ENCOUNTEREDSHALL BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THE OWNER AND SHALL BEADEQUATELY SUPPORTED UNTIL PERMANENT SUPPORT IS PROVIDED ORREMOVAL IS AUTHORIZED. 6. WHEREVER IN THESE DRAWINGS ANY MATERIAL IS INDICATED, IT ISFOR THE PURPOSE OF FACILITATING DESCRIPTION OF THE MATERIAL ORPROCESS DESIRED. THE CONTRACTOR MAY OFFER ANY MATERIAL ORPROCESS WHICH SHALL BY DEEMED EQUIVALENT BY THE ARCHITECT ANDTHE OWNER TO THAT MATERIAL OR PROCESS INDICATED OR SPECIFIED.7. THE LATEST EDITION OF THE GENERAL CONDITIONS (A-201) ASACCEPTED BY THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS ARE TO BECONSIDERED A PART OF THESE SPECIFICATIONS.8. THE ENTIRE WORK OF THE PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED INACCORDANCE WITH THE BEST STANDARDS OF THE PRACTICE RELATING TOTHE TRADE INVOLVED AND UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF A COMPETENTFOREMAN OR JOURNEYMAN, WHO SHALL CAREFULLY PLAN AND LAY OUT THEWORK, AS REQUIRED TO CARRY OUT THE INTENT OF THE DRAWINGS AND TOPROPERLY ACCOMMODATE THE WORK OF OTHER TRADES. 9. GUARANTEE OF WORK(a) EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED, ALL WORK SHALL BE GUARANTEEDIN WRITING BY THE CONTRACTOR AGAINST FAULTY WORKMANSHIP ANDMATERIAL FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FROM DATE OF FILLING THENOTICE OF COMPLETION OR FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE BUILDING BY THEOWNER. (b) IF WITHIN THE GUARANTEE PERIOD, CORRECTION OF FAULTYMATERIALS OR WORKMANSHIP IS NECESSARY IN THE OPINION OF THEOWNER, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL, PROMPTLY UPON RECEIPT OF NOTICEFROM THE OWNER AND WITHOUT EXPENSE TO THE OWNER, CORRECT THEFAULTY MATERIALS.ATTACHMENT NO. 4 From:Don Dormeyer To:Scott Koehm Subject:RE: Conditional use permit 2014-05756 (dev2014-00089 2926 East Miraloma Date:Monday, January 19, 2015 12:30:53 PM Hi Scott City of Anaheim, Planning Department RE: Conditional use permit2014-05756 (dev2014-00089 2926 East Miraloma NO! PLEASE NO! When I moved my business to the corner of Miraloma and Red Gum I was REQUIRED to provide a specific number of parking spaces for employees and customers. At the time I thought the required number of parking spaces was excessive, but time has shown that it was about right. Occasionally a film production here uses many of my private spaces for very large Grip and Lighting trucks or vehicle transports during production, and we are short a few of my private parking spaces for cars. You would think this would not be any problem with street parking available all along Red Gum Street. However it is a very BIG PROBLEM because the parking on Red Gum Street is filled beyond capacity from early morning until mid afternoon. I am told by many neighbors that have been here longer than me, that this is caused by automotive related businesses that refuse to allow their own employees to park on their premises because they use required employee and customer parking spaces for inventory. In addition to using up their legally required parking, this INVENTORY STORAGE sometimes overflows on Red Gum Street further reducing the amount of public parking in the area. There are, in reality, NO parking spaces available along Red Gum street weekdays, anymore. Seems to me that the parking spaces required for INVENTORY should be in addition to parking for employees and customers, not instead of, just because the inventory has wheels. It's still inventory. One business should NOT be allowed to hog all the public parking at the expense of all the other area businesses. This has become such a problem that it has already created a resentful environment in the neighborhood, with signs posted at every other business threatening towing of any unauthorized vehicles and the need for other businesses to spend time checking who is parked on their premises and customer spaces, in their private parking lots. When my business has an occasional parking overflow for a day, I make arrangements with other neighboring businesses in the area to USE and PAY them for the use of their private lot parking because there is NO AVAILABLE STREET PARKING for MY customers. To allow ANY exception in the parking requirement for one business, will only make the ATTACHMENT NO. 5 problem worse for every other business and their customers. The parking requirements should be enforced the same for everyone, and the constant use of parking spaces for inventory instead of employees and customers should be stopped. My inventory is stored inside my building or on my premises, not displacing my legally required parking spaces. If the legally required number of business parking spaces is allowed to regularly and intentionally be displaced by inventory or other occupying use, then the legal requirement for a specific number of parking space is irrelevant, and the planning department's efforts at intelligent planning will be worthless. Please do not make this intolerable situation worse. If my business begins to overflow and negatively affect my neighbors, I will move to a bigger more suitable location not impose on my neighbors to subsidize my business needs. . Don Dormeyer President Visual Support Inc DBA Red Gum Creative Campus 2983 E. Miraloma Anaheim CA 92606. Don Dormeyer Red Gum Creative Campus 2983 E. Miraloma Anaheim, CA 92806 Don@RedGumCreativeCampus.com www.RedGumCreativeCampus.com From:Bill Mathy To:Scott Koehm Subject:permit 2014-05756 Date:Monday, January 19, 2015 11:53:38 AM Hello Scott, I am against the request for this company to obtain a retail automobile sales permit. My business is directly across the street and I have been at this location for 8+ years. As it stands now, their trucks, car carriers, etc. continually park in the center lane on Miraloma and make it difficult for eastbound cars to turn left into our business park throughout the normal work day. Plus their trucks cut through our business park many times weekly for convenience. Additionally the noise pollution from car alarms is disruptive to my business and annoying. There are plenty of retail auto business locations in North Orange county. Let them find a suitable retail location for this segment of their business. For example, I noticed an available lot near Orangethorpe and the 57 freeway. Miraloma avenue is geared towards industrial businesses, not retail activity. Please take this into consideration when making your decision. THANK YOU, Bill Mathy PRESIDENT Related Visual, Inc. 2941 E. MIRALOMA AVE., SUITE 3 Anaheim, CA 92806 www.relatedvisual.com (714) 535-1414 (714) 630-3518 FAX "Providing AV Sales and Rentals since 1985" *Projector Lamps *LCD/DLP Projectors * Projection Screens *Portable Sound Systems *Microphones & more This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. From:John Davis To:Scott Koehm Cc:sherri@ciprealestate.com Subject:Condittional Use Permit No. 2014-05756 (DEV2014-00089) Date:Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:39:44 AM Mr. Koehm, I am a tenet at 2941 E. Miraloma Ave suites 6 and 7. The above mentioned proposed permit would create additional parking problems to the current problems we have at this time. No parking is allowed on Miraloma, in front of the propose business, and the parking on Red Gum is packed at this time. The only other parking available is in front of my building facing Miraloma directly across from the proposed business. My property management company has been dealing with people parking in assigned spot for quite a while. I feel that retail sales business in this location would add much more congestion and increase the possibility of infringement on our assigned parking. John Davis ITEM NO. 7 NEW CORRESPONDENCE ITEM NO. 7 NEW CORRESPONDENCE