PC 2015/03/09
City of Anaheim
Planning Commission
Agenda
Monday, March 9, 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
• Workshop – Discussion of Park Fees - Pamela Galera, Principal Project Planner
• Public Comments
• Consent Calendar
• 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,
March 5, 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
03/09/15
Page 2 of 5
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.
Consent Calendar:
There will be no separate discussion on the Consent Calendar item prior to the time of the
voting on the motion unless members of the Planning Commission, staff, or the public request
the item to be discussed and/or removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
Reports and Recommendations
ITEM NO. 1A
AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 2015-015, NUNC PRO
TUNC, TO CORRECT THE ADDRESS PERTAINING TO
PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00109
(DEV2014-00067)
Location: 2270 East Lincoln Avenue (99 Cents Only)
Request: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
adopt the attached resolution to correct an inadvertent error in
Resolution No. 2015-015, previously adopted.
Resolution No. _____
Project Planner:
Elaine Thienprasiddhi
ethien@anaheim.net
03/09/15
Page 3 of 5
Public Hearing Items
ITEM NO. 2
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05005
(DEV2015-00016)
Location: 1801 East Katella Avenue
Request: To allow two additional wall (awning) signs at
an existing restaurant (Zov’s) that exceed the size and
number of permitted signs.
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 11 (Accessory Structures) Categorical Exemption.
Resolution No. ______
Project Planner:
Amy Vazquez
avazquez@anaheim.net
ITEM NO. 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05773
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05006
(DEV2014-00133)
Location: 716-720 South Beach Boulevard
Request: To permit an adult day care facility within an
existing commercial building with less parking 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 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small
Structures) Categorical Exemption.
Resolution No. ______
Project Planner:
Gustavo Gonzalez
ggonzalez@anaheim.net
03/09/15
Page 4 of 5
ITEM NO. 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05776
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05003
(DEV2014-00139)
Location: 1500-1542 North State College Boulevard
Request: To permit a motorcycle sales and repair
facility with retail sales of motorcycle parts and
accessories, in an existing retail building 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:
Vanessa Norwood
vnorwood@anaheim.net
Adjourn to Monday, March 23, 2015 at 5:00 p.m.
03/09/15
Page 5 of 5
CERTIFICATION OF POSTING
I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at:
4:00 p.m. March 4, 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.
ITEM NO. 1-A
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: MARCH 9, 2015
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 2015-015, NUNC PRO
TUNC, TO CORRECT THE ADDRESS PERTAINING TO
PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00109
LOCATION: 2270 East Lincoln Avenue (99 Cents Only)
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission, by
motion, approve the attached resolution to correct an inadvertent error pertaining to
the address of the subject business.
DISCUSSION: On February 23, 2015, the Planning Commission approved
PCN2014-00109 to permit the sales of beer and wine for off-site consumption in
conjunction with an existing discount store. The address referred to in the public
notice, staff report and Resolution No. 2015-015 was 2274 East Lincoln Avenue
rather than the actual address of 2270 East Lincoln Avenue. It should be noted that
the documents included the business name, 99 Cents Only, such that there was no
misunderstanding as to which business had requested the permit.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Elaine Thienprasiddhi Jonathan E. Borrego
Associate Planner Planning Services Manager
Attachment:
1. Resolution, redlined to show errors and corrections
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
[DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1
- 1 - PC2015-***
RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-***
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING ITS RESOLUTION NO. 2015-015, NUNC PRO TUNC, TO
CORRECT AN INADVERTENT ERROR, RELATING TO DETERMINING PUBLIC
CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00109 TO PERMIT A TYPE 20 (OFF-SALE
BEER AND WINE) ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE
(DEV2014-00067)
(2270 EAST LINCOLN AVENUE)
WHEREAS, on February 23, 2015 by adoption of its Resolution No. 2015-015, the
Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (hereinafter referred to as the “Planning
Commission”) approved a determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2014-00109 to
permit the sale of beer and wine with a Type 20 (Off-Sale Beer and Wine) license issued by the
California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (herein referred to as "ABC") for off-
premises consumption in conjunction with an existing discount store commonly known as 99
Cents Only (herein referred to as the "Proposed Project"), located on a portion of a commercial
retail center at 2270 E. Lincoln Avenue in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of
California, as such commercial retail center is generally depicted on the map attached hereto as
Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, it has been discovered that an inadvertent error was made in the drafting of
that portion of Resolution No. 2015-015 which included references to the Property address.
Specifically, the address “2274 East Lincoln Avenue” incorrectly identified the Property, when it
should have been identified as “2270 East Lincoln Avenue;” and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission now desires and intends to amend Resolution No.
2015-015, nunc pro tunc; that is, to now correct said inadvertent error that, upon adoption of this
Resolution, will have the same legal force and effect as it made at the time when it should have
been made, i.e., upon the adoption of Resolution No. 2015-015 on February 23, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has inherent authority to amend its resolutions
under these circumstances, which will have retroactive legal effect upon adoption of this
Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Anaheim cure the inadvertent error made in referring to the Property by the incorrect address,
and that the Property shall now be referred to as 2270 East Lincoln Avenue.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
March 9, 2015.
CHAIRMAN, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ATTEST:
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
- 2 - 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 March 9, 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 9th day of March, 2015.
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
- 3 - PC2015-***
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. 2
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: MARCH 9, 2015
SUBJECT: VARIANCE NO. 2015-05005
LOCATION: 1801 East Katella Avenue, Suite 1001 (Zov’s Restaurant)
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Armen Karamardian of
Zov’s and the agent is Greg McCafferty with Development Advisors, LLC. The
property owner is State College/Katella, LLC.
REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a variance to allow two wall
(awning) signs at an existing restaurant that exceed the number and size of signs
permitted 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 11, Accessory Structures) and approving Variance No. 2015-05005.
BACKGROUND: This 6.2-acre property is developed with the Stadium Lofts
mixed-use project. It is located in the Industrial (I) and the Platinum Triangle
Mixed-Use (PTMU) Overlay zones. The site is designated for Mixed Use land uses
by the General Plan. The property is surrounded by industrial uses to the north
across Wright Circle, a bank to the west, a service station to the south across Katella
Avenue and a retail center to the east across State College Boulevard.
PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes two new awning signs for an existing
restaurant. The awning signs would replace existing black awnings on the south and
east building elevations. Each awning sign would include a seven square foot
“Zov’s” sign and eight square feet of directional “Parking” text on the awning
valance. The total sign area for each sign would be 15 square feet. The awnings
would be back-lit with translucent letters.
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05005
March 9, 2015
Page 2 of 3
ANALYSIS: For purposes of determining compliance with the Zoning Code, the proposed
awning signs are considered the equivalent of wall signs. A variance is required because the
proposed signs exceed the maximum number and size of signs permitted by the Zoning Code.
The following is staff’s analysis of the proposed signs:
Retail tenant spaces that have more than one building elevation are permitted one sign for each
street-facing elevation. The restaurant currently has one, two-sided blade sign located at the
southeast corner of the building that advertises “Zov’s.” The restaurant also maintains two
accessory eyebrow signs reading “Kitchen and Bar” located on metal canopies adjacent to the
blade sign, facing south and east. Since the blade sign has one sign panel visible to State College
Boulevard and another visible to Katella Avenue, staff considered each side of the blade sign as
an individual sign for purposes of determining the number of signs on each elevation. Therefore,
each building elevation would have three wall signs where one sign is permitted.
The maximum size of wall signs per building elevation is limited to one square foot of sign area
per lineal foot of building elevation or 150 feet, whichever is less. The restaurant has an 88-foot
long storefront along State College Boulevard but only maintains 21 feet of storefront on Katella
Avenue. A total of 40 square feet of sign area is proposed on each building elevation, including:
15 square feet of sign copy on the awning; an existing 14 square foot blade sign; and, the 11
square foot accessory eyebrow sign. The amount of sign area proposed along the State College
Boulevard building elevation would comply with the Zoning Code. The amount of sign area
proposed along the Katella Avenue building elevation exceeds the Zoning Code allowance by 19
square feet. The “Stadium Lofts” signs located on the tower element above the restaurant are not
a part of this variance since they identify the entire mixed-use complex rather than advertise a
particular tenant.
The applicant has submitted a letter of justification indicating that the variance is requested
because there is a lack of visibility to the existing blade sign due to its location and orientation.
The blade sign is partially obstructed by traffic signal poles and street landscaping and is not
visible to westbound traffic on Katella Avenue or northbound traffic on State College Boulevard
due to its orientation. While the blade sign is attractive and serves as an interesting architectural
feature for the building, it is not an effective business identification sign and, according to the
applicant, customers have difficulty identifying the restaurant. In addition to identifying the
business, the awning signs would also direct customers to available parking. The applicant’s
letter also references a wall sign variance to allow signs that exceeded the square footage
allowed by the Code that was granted in 1997 for the Stadium Crossings retail center across State
College Boulevard as further justification in support of this request.
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05005
March 9, 2015
Page 3 of 3
Staff has reviewed the applicant’s letter of justification and believes that there are findings to
support a variance for the proposed signs. Staff conducted site inspections of the property,
confirming that the existing blade sign is partially obstructed by improvements in the right-of-
way and that the restaurant is not readily identifiable looking north from State College Boulevard
or west from Katella Avenue. Visibility to the existing wall signs is also impacted by the
significant number of palm trees planted in front of the restaurant. The number and size of
proposed signs are appropriate given the height and length of the building. Although the signs
exceed the amount of advertising allowed on the Katella Avenue elevation due to the limited
amount of street frontage that the business maintains along that street, that building elevation as a
whole maintains little additional signage and, therefore, would not appear to be cluttered with
excessive advertising. Since the property is developed with a large mixed-use building,
appropriate identification is essential for the success of the ground floor commercial uses. Strict
application of the Code would deprive the business of privileges enjoyed by other properties in
the vicinity since a variance was granted for wall signs at the shopping center located directly
across State College Boulevard.
Letters of Support and Opposition: Two letters of support were received for this request
(Attachment 6). Both letters were from Stadium Lofts’ homeowners who indicated that they
thought the signs were attractive and would benefit the establishment. Two letters of opposition
were also received. The opponents expressed the belief that the additional signs were not
necessary, may impact the aesthetics of the neighborhood, and that the lighting of the signs may
impact the livability of residential units.
Staff has carefully considered these concerns, but believes that the proposed awning signs
complement the architecture of the building and their size, scale and style is appropriate for the
building. In addition, the lighting proposed is internal and would not impact the residences
located above the restaurant.
CONCLUSION: Staff believes that the proposed signs are appropriate for the size, scale and
design of the mixed-use building and are compatible with the goals of the Platinum Triangle by
providing advertising that also adds visual interest to the streetscape. Staff recommends
approval of the variance.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Amy Vazquez Jonathan E. Borrego
Associate Planner, Lilley Planning Group Planning Services Manager
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution
2. Variance Justification Letter
3. Photographs
4. Sign Plan
5. Letters of Support and Opposition
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BVACANT
O-L (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area CBANK
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BVACANT
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BPARK VIRIDIAN APTS
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BVACANT
O-L (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area CPARKING LO TO -L (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area CBALLY FITNESSI (PTMU)OfficeINDUSTRIAL
O-L (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area CCONDOMINIUMS/TOWNHO USES
O-L (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area CTOWNPLACE SUITESBY MARRIOTT
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BVACANT
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BVACANT
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BSERVICE STATION
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BVACANT
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BBANK
I (PTMU)Gene Autry Sub-Area AVACANT
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area CRESTAURANT
O-L (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area CRESTAURANTS
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BVACANT
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BINDUSTRIAL
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BINDUSTRIAL
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BINDUSTRIAL
I (PTMU)Katella Sub-Area BSTADIUM LOFTS
E KATELLA AVE S STATE COLLEGE BLVDS CAMPTON AVEE WRIGHT CIR
S UNION STE MERIDIAN LN
S PARK LNS METRO DRE W R IG HT CI R S RIGNEY WAYHUDSON PLSTADIUM CROSSING
E. KATELLA AVE
E. CERRITOS AVE
E. ORANGEWOOD AVE
S. HASTER STS. ANAHEIM BLVDS. SUNKIST STE. GENE AUTRY WAY S.DOUGLASSRDS. CLEMENTINE ST1 8 01 East Ka tella Avenue
D E V No. 2015-00016
Subject Property APN: 082-260-97
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Ph oto :Ma y 2 01 4
E KATELLA AVE S STATE COLLEGE BLVDS CAMPTON AVEE WRIGHT CIR
S UNION STE MERIDIAN LN
S PARK LNS METRO DRE W R IG HT CI R S RIGNEY WAYHUDSON PLSTADIUM CROSSING
E. KATELLA AVE
E. CERRITOS AVE
E. ORANGEWOOD AVE
S. HASTER STS. ANAHEIM BLVDS. SUNKIST STE. GENE AUTRY WAY S.DOUGLASSRDS. CLEMENTINE ST1 8 01 East Ka tella Avenue
D E V No. 2015-00016
Subject Property APN: 082-260-97
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Ph oto :Ma y 2 01 4
[DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-***
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05005 AND MAKING
CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
(DEV2015-00016)
(1801 EAST KATELLA AVENUE)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (herein referred to as the
“Planning Commission”) did receive a verified petition to approve proposed Variance No. 2015-
05005 to allow two additional wall (awning) signs at an existing restaurant that exceed the
number and size than permitted by the Zoning Code (sometimes referred to herein as the
"Proposed Project") for certain premises located at a mixed-use project commonly known as
1801 East Katella Avenue, #1001 in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California
(the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, the Property is a part of 6.2 acre mixed- use project, which is generally
depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. The
Land Use Element of the Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Mixed Use land
uses. The Property is located within the “I” Industrial and the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use
Overlay (PTMU) 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, this Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in
the City of Anaheim on March 9, 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 (herein referred to as the “Code”), to hear and consider evidence for
and against proposed Variance No. 2015-05005 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 which consist of
the construction, or placement of minor structures accessory to (appurtenant to) existing
commercial, industrial, or institutional facilities, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15311
(Class 11 – Accessory Structures) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the
Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore,
categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study
made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at
said hearing with respect to proposed Variance No. 2015-05005 to wall signs for an existing
restaurant that does not meet the Code in relation to the maximum number and size allowed by
the Code, should be approved for the following reasons:
- 1 - PC2015-***
SECTION NOS. 18.44.110.0102 Permitted Number and Size of Wall Signs
AND 18.44.110.0105 (1 wall sign; 21 square feet, on the south
elevation and 1 wall sign; 88 square feet on
the east elevation permitted); (2 wall signs;
40 square feet, on the south elevation and 3
wall signs; 40 square feet on the east
elevation proposed)
1. The store frontage facing Katella Avenue is slightly less in lineal feet than the
frontage required for the size of the wall signs and is a minor deviation from the Code; and
2. The strict application of the Zoning Code would deprive the Property of privileges
enjoyed by other properties under the identical zoning classification in the vicinity of the
Property since a retail center in the area has wall signs that exceed the Code requirement in
relation to size.
3. The wall signs are appropriate in relation to the large property and are consistent
with other wall signs in the immediate area.
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 Variance No. 2015-05005, 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 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
- 2 - PC2015-***
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 March 9, 2015. Said Resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in
Section 18.60.130 (Appeals – Planning Commission Decisions) of 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, 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 March 9, 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 9th day of March, 2015.
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
- 3 - PC2015-***
- 4 - PC2015-***
EXHIBIT “B”
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05005
(DEV2015-00016)
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the
City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively
referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnities”) from
any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against
Indemnities to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the
decision of the Indemnities 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
Indemnities and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including
without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and
expenses incurred by Indemnities in connection with such
proceeding.
Planning
Department,
Planning Services
Division
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 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
- 5 - PC2015-***
JUSTIFICATION FOR
VARIANCE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLANNING SERVICES DIVISION
Revised 10/2009
Sections 18.74.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that before any variance
may be granted by the Planning Commission, the following shall be shown:
1. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including
size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other
property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning
code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under
identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
In order to determine if special circumstances exist, and to assist the Planning Commission
to arrive at a decision, please provide a letter of justification to answer each of the following
questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, as fully and completely as
possible. The letter should list each code section for which a variance is required including
a brief description of the requirement. Justification must be provided for each separate
variance request.
1. Identify any special physical characteristics of the property such as shape,
topography, location or surroundings that cause the requested development to not
meet zoning codes.
The proposed location is a mixed-use project that includes residential above ground
floor commercial uses. This building configuration makes sign placement and
visibility more difficult than a traditional retail center where the storefronts are
designed to accommodate adequate sign visibility. Zov’s restaurant occupies the
extreme corner at State College and Katella. The existing blade sign is too small
and its orientation does not allow unobstructed visibility from surrounding streets. It
serves more as an architectural feature than a sign. The proposed awning signs in
combination with the existing blade sign will improve the visibility of the restaurant
and give potential customers enough time to make the required turn movement to
enter the parking structure.
2. Do other properties in the vicinity have the same type of physical characteristics
as this property? If so, please identify a few of them.
No. The other corner properties opposite our location include a service station,
McDonald’s and a retail center. These properties have freestanding sign
locations that include monument and pole signs, as well as ample building area
for wall sign placement.
3. Identify any other neighboring properties that have the same type of
improvement that you are requesting.
Yes, the Stadium Crossings Shopping Center received a variance for their wall signs
in 1997.
-Page 1-
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CITY OF ANAHEIM JUSTIFICATION FOR A VARIANCE OR CODE WAIVER
Page 2 of 2
4. Identify the cause of the special characteristics of the site that limits the ability to
comply with code requirements (e.g. natural slope of the land, placement of other
structures).
These characteristics include the unique building configuration and mixed-use,
the lack of visibility at this corner due to the palm trees and limited opportunities
for wall sign placement. All of these characteristics make it difficult for potential
customers to see the restaurant.
********
Project Site (Facing Northeast)
Project Site (Facing North)
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
Project Site (Facing Northwest)
Adjacent Property (East of Project Site)
Adjacent Property (Southeast of Project Site)
Adjacent Property (South of Project Site)
Project Site (Facing Northwest)
Project Site (Facing West)
Project Site (Facing North)
PROJECT NO.
FILE NAME
SHEET TITLE
SCALE
DRAWN BY
CHECKED BY
ISSUE:
SHEET NO.
PROJECT:
REVISION:
AS NOTED
MIHRAN KEOLYAN
1
custom awnings &window coverings, inc.12832 Muscatine StreetPacoima CA 91331tel 818-768-1502fax 818-768-1528
0
ZOV’S ILLUMINATED
AWNING GRAPHICS
PROPOSAL
01/07/15
ZOV’S ILLUMINATED AWNING GRAPHICS PROPOSAL
BACKLIT AWNINGBACKLIT AWNING
FREE PARKING FREE PARKING
14’-0”8’-0”14’-0”8’-0”ATTACHMENT NO. 4
From:Shane Jones
To:Amy K. Vazquez
Subject:Re: Stadium Lofts DEV2015-00016 INFO
Date:Wednesday, February 18, 2015 5:36:41 PM
Thanks so much Amy. The awnings they are proposing look great. BTW-that you of-
has the city received any permits for any of the open commercial spots in our building
yet?. Was hoping the sign proposals were for new retail tenants. If you don't know
that's OK. thanks for your help!
Shane
On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 2:21 PM, Amy K. Vazquez <AVazquez@anaheim.net> wrote:
Hi, Shane- The sign plan for Zov’s Restaurant is attached. –Amy
From: Shane Jones [mailto:ornique1@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2015 7:27 PM
To: Amy K. Vazquez
Subject: Re: Stadium Lofts DEV2015-00016 INFO
Amy,
Thanks for the quick response! If your able to send me a copy of the sign plan on
Tuesday I would appreciate it. Thanks again!
Shane
On Sunday, February 15, 2015 4:44 PM, Amy K. Vazquez <AVazquez@anaheim.net > wrote:
Hi, Shane- I can send you a copy of the sign plan on Tuesday. City Hall is closed
tomorrow for the holiday. Basically, Zov's Restaurant is proposing an awning sigh on
the existing black awning over their patio.
Enjoy your weekend, Amy Vazquez
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 15, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Shane Jones <ornique1@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi I was wondering if you could give any information about the sign
variance request at 1801 E Katella Ave (Stadium Lofts) listed on the city's
development proposals page. I am a homeowner at the property and am
interested in what they are proposing with our buildings' signage.
Thanks,
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
Shane Jones
1801 E. Katella Ave. #1106
Anaheim CA. 92805
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH
IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL,
AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAWS. If the reader of this message is
not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or copying of
this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
the sender immediately by e-mail or telephone, and delete the original message immediately. Thank
you.
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH
IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL,
AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAWS. If the reader of this message is
not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or copying of
this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
the sender immediately by e-mail or telephone, and delete the original message immediately. Thank
you.
From:Yukun Hsia
To:Amy K. Vazquez
Subject:Re: Variance No. 2015-05005 (DEV 2015-00016)
Date:Monday, March 02, 2015 12:48:08 PM
I like to object to the granting of variance at Zov's
Restaurant. It is a well established establishment. It
does not need additional advertisement signs to entice
new customers. I believe in maintaining the present
aesthetics of the neighborhood.
Yukun Hsia
From:Jim Gray
To:Amy K. Vazquez
Subject:Variance for Zov"s Restaurant
Date:Wednesday, February 25, 2015 1:07:05 PM
Dear Ms. Vanquez,
As the property owner at 1801 East Katella, Unit 1059, I fully support Zov’s Restaurant’s request for
a variance. This is not a significant variance, in my opinion, and the presence of such a quality
establishment on this block will be a benefit to the community at large, as well to us property
owners.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit my thoughts.
James P. Gray
Unit 1059
2400 E. Katella Avenue • Suite 800 • Anaheim, CA 92806
www.development-advisors.com
March 4, 2015
Subject: Variance No. 2015-05005 (Item No. 2) – Zov’s Restaurant
Dear Planning Commissioners:
Our firm represents Zov’s Restaurant in its request to incorporate signs onto awning structures
along the Katella Ave. and State College Blvd. frontages. This is a response to the letter
submitted by the law firm of Swedelson Gottlieb dated March 3, 2015, expressing opposition to
the sign variance.
Zov’s currently occupies a portion of the commercial space previously used by El Torito Grill. A
consulting firm occupies the remaining space. The other retail space on Katella Ave. located to
the west of the parking garage is currently vacant. Zov’s has been challenged by the lack of
visibility because the restaurant is located at the extreme corner of a mixed-use building with
only a short frontage on Katella Ave. The modest request to add lettering to the existing
awnings would enhance the restaurant’s visibility in a tasteful manner. In addition, Zov’s will
continue to assume all maintenance of the awnings.
Zov’s is no stranger to the restaurant business, having established their flagship restaurant in
North Tustin nearly three decades ago. The family matriarch Zov Karamardian, was recently
awarded 2015 Restaurateur of the Year by the Orange County Business Journal (see attached
article). The Karamardian family took a chance on the Platinum Triangle and needs the City’s
help in establishing the Anaheim location as another quality venue for dining near Anaheim
Stadium and the City’s other event venues.
Zov’s son Armen Karamardian, is the applicant for the sign variance request. As clearly indicated
in the staff report and the Justification for Variance Form (Attachment No. 2 to the Staff
Report), there is evidence to support the findings required under State law and the Anaheim
Zoning Ordinance for approval of the sign variance.
Special Circumstances that Apply to the Property – The property, unlike properties at the
other three corners of the intersection, has been developed under the City’s Platinum Triangle
Mixed-Use Overlay Zone. Development under the Overlay places buildings adjacent to the
street eliminating the ability to construct a freestanding sign. The limited building frontage
allocated for the restaurant also limits available sign area, thus restricting placement of wall
signs.
NEW CORRESPONDENCE
ITEM NO. 2
The surrounding environment also restricts visibility of the restaurant signs. Specifically, the
palm trees and traffic signal poles in the right-of-way obscure the view of the restaurant from
surrounding streets. These obstructions make it difficult for passing vehicles to see the
restaurant or existing signs at all, or until it’s too late to make the require d turn movement into
the parking structure. These circumstances are unique to this property and not shared by the
properties on the other three corners of the intersection.
Strict Application Deprives Property of Privileges Enjoyed by Other Properties in the Vicinity –
The properties located on the other three corners have monument or pole signs located at the
street corner enhancing the visibility of existing businesses. Moreover, the Stadium Crossings
property located at the northeast corner of the intersection was granted a sign variance for wall
signs.
Lighting – The proposed awning signs will be constructed to confine the lighting source within
the awning structure. Illumination will be limited to the white vinyl lettering cutouts sewn into
the awning structure. Little to no light seepage will occur. Please see below for examples of
how the awnings will be constructed:
CC&R’s, Mutual Benefit Agreement and City Zoning – Zov’s understands its obligations under
the legal documents that govern use, activities and maintenance of the property. These are
private agreements between the residential and commercial owners of the property and as
such, are not the City’s burden to enforce. The City has historically not inserted itself as the
enforcer of private agreements. With regard to compliance with City zoning, the Zoning Code
allows application for variances subject to State and local requirements. We have provided
evidence that establishes the basis for granting the variance.
NEW CORRESPONDENCE
ITEM NO. 2
We concur with staff’s recommendation and urge the Planning Commission to approve our
request. Should you have any questions regarding this request, please feel free to contact me at
(714) 606-7208 or greg@development-advisors.com.
Sincerely,
Greg McCafferty
NEW CORRESPONDENCE
ITEM NO. 2
3.2.15_SR Fifi_Layout 1 2/27/15 10:43 AM Page 15 NEW CORRESPONDENCE
ITEM NO. 2
16 ORANGE COUNTY BUSINESS JOURNAL Local breaking news: www.ocbj.com MARCH 2, 2015Chef Built Beloved Restaurant on Natural Talent
Our now legendary Orange County lady chefand restaurateur Zov Karamardian set out tointroduce the dining public to Mediterraneanfood 27 years ago.She’s still leading the way in fascinating uswith the authenticity of foods from countries ofthe Mediterranean and Middle East, now withCalifornia sensibilities of pristinely fresh ingre-dients and beautiful presentations built in. She’s my pick as Restaurateur of the Year be-cause of her vision so long ago and her success-ful passion to better our dining world over threedecades. She deserves that and more. What’s important to note is that Zov never hadany formal chef training. She did have a familybackground, as did her husband, that when theywere growing up, revolved around family mealsthat honored good food. She proved from the outset that her geniuswas in her soul, with a desire to replicate superbdishes that had already been making appear-ances in her catering. Zov is confirmation that cooking is an art andsometimes a natural talent, not always a productof an expensive culinary education.Her first restaurant, Zov’s Tustin, was a dar-ling little gem. She started out with a warm, un-pretentious but sophisticated, lovely bistro. Itsfurnishings and aura were like a beloved littlerestaurant somewhere far abroad. It was and isas sweet as anything in the county. We savor adifferent kind of appetizer and have some of thebest lamb dishes in Orange County. Soon her success led to expanding the kitchenand adding a Zov’s Bakery & Café combo onthe other side of the kitchen.
Zov had been taking on a new reputation formaking awesome pastries, and that part of herbusiness became quite strong, along with herfull menu of Mediterranean specialties. An ad-joining space in the little center where Zov’swas located became available, and she snappedit up and put in her own baking facility to pro-vide even more pastries and breads to accom-pany her cuisine.Zov recently unveiled the $750,000 remodelof her flagship restaurant in Tustin whose cen-terpiece is a new, massive bar that offers 360-degree seating. The bar’s chevron patternpractically beckons guests to take a seat in oneof its cane-back, cushioned bar stools to eatfrom an expanded small-plates and cocktailmenu. An updated lighting system with soffit illu-mination and several imported fixtures add justthe right touch. New seating and freshly uphol-stered banquettes await in the adjoining lounge.Zov and her family built on the success of the
original location and began to expand the busi-ness. Her husband had left his own career tojoin her in the restaurant business, and today herdaughter and son are also actively involved inall of the restaurants.The business now encompasses Tustin’sMarket Place, Zov’s on Portola in Irvine, Zov’sNewport Coast, and two outlets at John WayneAirport.Her newest restaurant, Zov’s Anaheim, is afull-scale eatery with a bar and lounge for all-day dining. It has a great location near theHonda Center and is quite popular in the area.I’ll let Zov’s Tustin take the lead in our foodand beverage conversation since it is the origi-nal that influenced the other locations. Twentyseats allow you to belly up to the activities atthe fashionable bar and to eat there if you wantto.Otherwise, you’re opting for the luxe loungeseating.I have to smile when thinking of eating the
Dirty Fries while sipping my cocktail at the bar.Perfect fries strewn with chopped fresh herbs,parmesan cheese and cabernet-mushroomgravy—Zov’s take on poutine.Good, good Tahini Chicken Tacos are a com-bination of spicy chicken, cabbage, fresh salsa,red pepper aioli, a few micro greens and ribbonsof tahini sauce. Zov and I go back in our acquaintance to about18 months before the beginning of her restaurantcareer. I was writing restaurant columns for Or-ange Coast Magazine, and one day, my phonerang and Zov introduced herself. I immediatelyliked her soft voice.She asked if I ever wrote about caterers. I saidI hadn’t but that if there was something of greatinterest to me in that realm, I could. We had avery nice chat, and within minutes of her tellingme that she was catering from her home and herdescription of the foods she cooked, I knew Iwanted to know more. I had a few columns piledup and said any article would be about three orfour months out, pending, of course, my re-searching more about her catering business andtasting the food, then making a final decision. It wasn’t long before Zov called again andasked me not to write about her catering becauseshe was opening her first restaurant. Her enthu-siasm was palpable through the phone wires.And here we are, so many years later.Zov has authored two cookbooks and accom-plished something else no other chef in OrangeCounty, and possibly the Southland, has man-aged. She has had some of America’s celebritychefs give lessons, do meals, and host culinaryseminars at Zov’s Tustin.She’s received too many of the industry’s mostprestigious awards to list them. She is our granddame lady chef. Supremely talented, involved incommunity happenings, and a very kind personwho is beloved by her customers— that’s ourZov, our Restaurateur of the Year.
Mixes Ethnic Food Smarts,Hunger for Better Dining
By FIFI CHAO
Tahini Chicken Tacos: spicy chicken, cabbage, salsa, red pepper aioli, microgreens, tahini sauce
3.2.15_SR Fifi_Layout 1 2/26/15 3:31 PM Page 16 NEW CORRESPONDENCE
ITEM NO. 2
NEW CORRESPONDENCE
ITEM NO. 2
City of Anaheim Planning Commission
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim CA
SUBJECT: Zov's Illuminated Awning Variance Request
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05005 (DEV2015-00016)
March 8, 2015
It has come to our attention that the Board of Directors for the Stadium Lofts Community
Association (SLCA Residential Condominiums) has opposed Zov's restaurant variance request to
replace two standard building awnings with lighted awnings. We do not concur with our condo
board's action submitted to the Planning Commission via Swedelson Gottlieb.
We, in fact, support the business owner's variance request to the City and urge the city
Planning Commission to "find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 11 (Accessory Structures)
Categorical Exemption./I
One complaint cited by Swedelson Gottlieb in the letter to the Planning Department is the
added expense for maintaining the signage that the commercial property owners install.
Section E of the Recitals provided to the Planning Department in the attorney's letter states
that "(5) the reimbursement by the Commercial Owner of a portion of the Shared Expenses ... as
incurred by the Residential Association in the performance of the Shared Maintenance
Obligations./I We believe that any issues regarding expenses related to maintenance of the
complex belong in meetings between the Residential and Commercial Associations -not in City
public hearings.
Additionally, Section 2.2 of the property USE RESTRICTIONS provided by the attorney to the
Planning Department makes it clear that lighted signs are permitted as long as there is "not
unreasonable escape of light into any Residential Condominium./I It appears to me that there is
more light from the Arco station across Katella than any street level lighted sign will present.
It is our opinion that Zov's has done an admirable job in retrofitting and redesigning the former
EI Torito restaurant space. They provide a vital anchor business to the evolVing and growing
Platinum Triangle in Anaheim. We believe that Zov's should be granted the CEQA variance and
that the City and Residential Homeowners Association need support the success of the
commercial properties in this mixed use Platinum Triangle facility.
Sincerely,
Richard & Dianne VY,illiamson
Owners, Unit 2048 Stadium Lofts Condominiums
1801 East Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805
NEW CORRESPONDENCE
ITEM NO. 2
ITEM NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: MARCH 9, 2015
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05773 AND
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05006
LOCATION: 716 – 720 South Beach Boulevard (New Life ADHC)
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Gary I. Park, representing
New Life ADHC - Artesia, and the property owner is National Strategic Investments,
LLC.
REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit to allow an
adult day care facility within an existing commercial building with less parking 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
(CEQA) under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the
State CEQA Guidelines, and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05773 and
Variance No. 2015-05006.
BACKGROUND: This approximately 0.98-acre project site is developed with a
two-story, 9,266 square foot retail building and a 1,600 square-foot restaurant with a
1,348 square-foot outdoor patio. The retail building is mostly vacant with a flower
shop operator leasing approximately 1,160 square feet of the building. The site is
located in the General Commercial (C-G) zone. The General Plan designates the site
for Corridor Residential land uses. Surrounding land uses include multi-family
residential to the north and east, single-family residential to the south across
Stonybrook Drive, and commercial uses to the west across Beach Boulevard.
PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to establish an adult day care facility within
an existing commercial building. To accommodate the use, the applicant is
proposing to combine the first and second stories of the building into a single story
and construct a 592 square-foot addition to the eastern portion of the building, for a
total of 7,897 square feet. Façade upgrades and the restriping of parking stalls to
accommodate shuttle buses, passenger loading and delivery areas are also 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. 2014-05773
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05006
March 9, 2015
Page 2 of 3
As indicated in the attached letter of operation, the facility would provide community-based day
health care services for up to 188 adult clients with chronic medical, cognitive, and/or mental
health conditions and disabilities. Clients would be transported to the facility via shuttle buses as
they are not able to drive vehicles. Hours of operation would be from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday. A total of 20 staff members will be employed at the facility at full
capacity, with a ratio of approximately one staff member for every 15 clients. As indicated on
the proposed floor plan, the facility would include a main hall area, nurses’ room, offices,
restrooms and a small food preparation area.
ANALYSIS: Following is staff’s analysis of the project:
Adult day care centers are permitted in the C-G zone subject to approval of a conditional use
permit to determine compatibility with surrounding land uses. The proposed use would be
compatible with surrounding uses because Beach Boulevard is a predominantly commercial
corridor and the use would provide a needed service to the surrounding community.
Parking Variance: The project site is accessed via one driveway from Beach Boulevard and one
driveway from Stoneybrook Drive and will contain 51 parking spaces as a result of the proposed
parking lot restriping. Parking for the site is required as follows:
Use Size Ratio Required
Day Care 7,898 sq.ft. 1/employee plus 1/10 clients plus 1 for loading 40
Restaurant (with outdoor dining) 2,984 sq.ft. 8 spaces/1,000 sq.ft. 24
Total Spaces Required: 64
Total Spaces Provided: 51
In December 2014, the Planning Commission approved a parking variance for the property in
conjunction with a CUP to allow beer and wine sales in an existing restaurant. Based on the
restaurant’s anticipated peak parking demand of 11 spaces on Friday and Saturday during dinner
hours, it was determined that sufficient parking existed on-site to accommodate the parking
demands of the restaurant and a retail use in the subject commercial building. Staff anticipates
that the proposed day care facility would have less parking demand than a retail use in the
commercial building because a maximum of 20 employees would be on-site during business
hours and day care clients will be transported to the facility via shuttle buses. A limited number
of visitors are anticipated during business hours. Further, peak parking demand for the existing
restaurant would occur during off-setting hours from the day care facility. As such, staff believes
that parking would be adequate to accommodate the demands of the project site.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05773
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05006
March 9, 2015
Page 3 of 3
CONCLUSION: The request to establish an adult day care center within an existing
commercial building is compatible with existing restaurant and surrounding land uses. Further,
it is not anticipated that the use would create a parking deficiency for the project site. Staff
recommends approval of this request.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Gustavo N. Gonzalez Jonathan E. Borrego
Associate Planner Planning Services Manager
Attachments:
1. Draft Conditional Use Permit and Variance Resolution
2. Letter of Operations and Justifications
3. Site Photographs
4. Project Plans
RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCERM-2CONDOMINIUMS/TOWNHOUSES
C-GVILLA INN
C-GWEST ANAHEIMMEDICAL PLAZA
C-GANAHEIM LODG E RM-4COBBLESTONEAPARTMENTS34 DU
C-GVACANT
C-GMOTEL MO ONLIG HT
RM-2CONDOMINIUMS/TOWNHOUSES
RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
RM-2CONDOMINIUMS/TOWNHOUSES
C-GRETAIL
C-GRAINBOW INN
C-GCOVERED WAGON MOTEL TBADEN-POWELLELEMENTARY SCHOOLRS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
C-GBAYMONT INN & SUITES
C-G AUTODEALERSHIP
C-GANAHEIM BUENA PARKTRAVELODGE
RM-4STONYBROO KAPARTMENTS56 DU
RM-4BEACHWOO DAPARTMENTS301 DU
C-GRETAIL
RM-4DON QUIOTEAPARTMENTS50 DU
RM-2CONDOS7 DU
C-GRAMADA LIMITED
C-GWEST ANAHEIMMEDICAL PLAZA
W H A YW A R D STW C H E RY L LYN LN
W R O M E AV E S GAYMONT STS HAYWARD STW STO N Y B R O O K D R
S BEACH BLVDW. BALL RD
W. LINCOLN AVE
W. ORANGE AVE
S. DALE AVES. KNOTT AVE. CERRITOS AVE S. MAGNOLIA AVES. WESTERN AVEW.BRO ADWAY
W. LINCOLN AVE
7 1 6 South Beac h Boule vard
D E V No. 2014-00133
Subject Property APN: 126-120-11
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Ph oto :Ma y 2 01 4
W HAYWARD STW C H E R Y L LY N L N
W R O M E AV E S GAYMONT STS HAYWARD STW STO N Y B R O O K D R
S BEACH BLVDW. BALL RD
W. LINCOLN AVE
W. ORANGE AVE
S. DALE AVES. KNOTT AVE. CERRITOS AVE S. MAGNOLIA AVES. WESTERN AVEW.BRO ADWAY
W. LINCOLN AVE
7 1 6 South Beac h Boule vard
D E V No. 2014-00133
Subject Property APN: 126-120-11
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Ph oto :Ma y 2 01 4
[DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-***
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05773 AND
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05006 AND
MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
(DEV2014-00133)
(716-720 SOUTH BEACH BOULEVARD)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning
Commission") did receive a verified petition for (i) Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05773 to
permit an adult day care facility within an existing commercial building, and (ii) Variance No.
2015-05006 to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Anaheim Municipal Code (the
"Code") (collectively, the "Proposed Project") for premises located within a commercial center at
716-720 South Beach Boulevard, in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California.
The commercial center is generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and
incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 0.98-acre in size and is developed with an
existing restaurant building and a two-story retail/office building. The Land Use Element of the
Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Corridor Residential 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, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in
the City of Anaheim on March 09, 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
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
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 3 – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) which consist of construction
and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new
equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from
one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure. The
Proposed Project will consist of combining the first and second stories of a portion of the center
into a single story and the addition of approximately 592 square feet of space. Therefore,
pursuant to Section 15303 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Proposed
Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically,
exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study
made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at
said hearing with respect to the request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05773, does find
and determine the following facts:
- 1 - PC2015-***
1. The proposed conditional use permit to permit an adult day care facility within an
existing commercial building 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 Beach Boulevard is a
predominantly commercial corridor consisting of other commercial uses; and, the use would
provide a much-needed service for residents in the immediate area; and
2. The size and shape of the site is adequate to allow the full development of the
existing use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health, safety and
general welfare of the public because the Property is currently improved with a commercial retail
center; and
3. The traffic generated by permitting an adult day care facility within an existing
commercial building 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 this use will not
exceed the anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding streets and adequate parking will be
provided to accommodate the use; and
4. 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 Property is a commercial center
which allows an adult day care facility within an existing commercial building, subject to the
granting of a conditional use permit, and the use would be compatible with the surrounding area,
subject to compliance with the conditions contained herein.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request
for a variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Code in conjunction with the
proposed adult day care facility, should be approved for the following reasons:
SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces.
(64 spaces required; 51 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 justification letter was prepared by
the applicant, determining that the current number of parking spaces within the Property is
sufficient to accommodate all of the current and future uses on site. Additionally, since the day
care clients will be transported to the facility via shuttle buses as they are not able to drive
vehicles, parking would be adequate to accommodate the full parking demands for the property;
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 existing parking spaces on site will adequately accommodate the peak
parking demands of the existing restaurant and the proposed day care facility as the peak parking
demands of all existing and future uses will not occur at the same time;
- 2 - PC2015-***
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 Property will adequately
accommodate peak parking demands for the current and futures 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 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. 2014-05773 and Variance No. 2015-05006, 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.
- 3 - PC2015-***
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
March 9, 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, 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 March 9, 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 9th day of March, 2015.
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
- 4 - PC2015-***
- 5 - PC2015-***
EXHIBIT “B”
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05773 AND VARIANCE NO. 2015-05006
(DEV2014-00133)
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
ON-GOING DURING PROJECT OPERATIONS
1 That the existing gates shall remain open during the business hours of
both the existing restaurant and the proposed day care facility.
Public Works
Traffic
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS
2 Please submit construction documents to Building Division for plan
review. Construction document shall include but not limited to
Architectural drawings, Structural drawings and structural calculations,
Soils report, Energy Efficiency Standards documentations, Plumbing
drawings, Electrical drawings, Mechanical drawings, and California
Green Building Code compliance documentations.
Planning
Department,
Building
Division
PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING AND ZONING INSPECTION
3 The legal property 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
Surveyor and recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder prior
to issuance of a building permit.
Public Works
Development
Services
4 A fire alarm system shall be designed, installed and maintained as
required by the Fire Department. Fire Department
GENERAL
5 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
6 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
- 6 - PC2015-***
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
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
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
- 7 - PC2015-***
.AP+E .
Architecture Planning Engineering
541 South Hibiscus Way Anaheim California 90024
Telephone: 424 365 2070 Fax: 714 844 4371 Email: seannourani@yahoo.com
Revised January 15th 2015
Page 1 of 3
Project justification for conditional use permit
Project:
Conditional use permit application, for an Adult Day Health Care center
Remodel existing building interior and exterior including an addition
Project location:
716-720 South Beach Blvd. Anaheim California 92804
Client, Tenant
New Life ADHC,
Represented by: Gary Park
Client address:
12220 South Street Artesia California 90701
Telephone 562 480 2447
Adult Day Health Care (ADHC)/Community-Based Adult Services (CBAS)
The Adult Day Health Care (ADHC)/Community-Based Adult Services (CBAS)
Program is a California State licensed community-based day health program
that provides services to older persons(18+) and adults with chronic medical,
cognitive, or mental health conditions and/or disabilities that are at risk of
needing institutional care. The majority of ADHC participants are Medi-Cal
beneficiaries.
This program is to care for immediate population of surrounding neighborhoods
and is being proposed for such zoning condition
The primary objectives of the program are to:
Restore or maintain optimal capacity for self-care to frail elderly persons or
adults with disabilities; and
Delay or prevent inappropriate or personally undesirable
institutionalization
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
Page 2 0f 3
The proposed use has been carefully studied for this existing facility. This facility
will provide us approximately up to 188 care capacity. This number of capacity
ensures us a growth potential for into the future.
The Program stresses partnership with the patients, the family and/or caregiver,
the primary care physician, and the community in working toward maintaining
personal independence.
This program is designed to provide shuttle service for picking up and drop off of
care participants. This action will reduce traffic to this facility and surrounding
land use.
The center has a multidisciplinary team of health professionals who conduct a
comprehensive assessment of each potential participant to determine and plan
services needed to meet the individual's specific health and social needs.
Services provided at the center include the following: professional nursing
services; physical, occupational and speech therapies; mental hea lth services;
therapeutic activities; social services; personal care; hot meals and nutritional
counseling; and transportation to and from the participant residence.
The other role of ADHC/CBAS program besides promoting the quality of life for
the fail senior citizens is to curve the rising cost of health care. ADHC/CBAS
prevents unnecessary Emergency Room visits and/or premature
institutionalization such as the 24-hour care nursing facilities, which will cost the
State immensely more compares to the day health care programs.
The ADHC/CBAS center is essential for the local community.
To improve health and safety of citizens of city of Anaheim
As the population of senior citizens ever rises, the need for senior care facilities
is also rising in the community. The New Life ADHC/CBAS center will play vital
role in the promoting the well care of the frail senior citizens in the city of
Anaheim. Also The New Life ADHC/CBAS center is a good employer in the
community, which employs about 20 full time jobs, contra cts to the local
businesses such as catering services, transportation services, pharmacies,
medical device services and others.
Page 3 of 3
Business day to day operation data:
8:00 AM – 5:00 PM
-to-client ratio
1 employee to 15 participants ratio
20 employees
per shift at full capacity
20 employees (only one shift)
-off and pick-up hours
8:00 AM – 9:00 AM and 1:00 PM – 2:00 PM
7 – 20 clients per shuttle
8 trips per day
There is no delivery.
- 4 hours per day
Thank You for your consideration
Sean Nourani Architect
PARKING STUDY JUSTIFICATION TEMPLATE: Why do I need a parking variance? The Anaheim Municipal
code includes regulations on the minimum number of parking spaces required to serve various types of
uses or businesses. For example, a typical office building is required to have 4 parking spaces for every
1,000 square feet of gross floor area. By contrast, a medical office building is required to have 6 parking
spaces for the same 1,000 square feet of floor area. These requirements are based on industry
standards. A parking variance is required when the number of parking spaces on a property does not
meet the number of parking spaces required by the municipal code. For example, if an industrial building
that was originally intended to be used for warehouse with few employees is converted to a church with
large congregation, but has peak hours opposite of the surrounding industrial uses, a variance can take
these circumstances into account. By filling in all the blank spaces below with the required information,
this template is designed to assist you with preparation of a parking justification letter.
********
Date: 01, 26, 2015
To: City of Anaheim Planning Department
200 S. Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, CA 92805
From: Sean Nourani Architect, Representing New Life ADHC (Client)
541 South Hibiscus Way Anaheim California 92808
Telephone 424 365 2070
RE: PARKING STUDY LETTER FOR NEW LIFE ADHC ADULT DAY CARE AND INCLUDED IS FOR
ON SITE RESTAURNAT GUERRERO MEXICAN GRILL
SITE LOCATION: 716- 720 SOUTH BEACH BLVD. ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA 92804
Introduction
The purpose of this parking justification letter is to determine the parking demand New Adult
day care and Guerrero Mexican Grill restaurant. The City of Anaheim Municipal Code’s parking
requirement for the Project site, which includes an additional is as follows:
Use Size Ratio Required
Adult Day Care
7,305 sq.ft.
Plus 592.5 sq. ft.
addition
1 Parking per employees: Max
20 required
Day cared participants parking
required 19 Plus 1 for delivery
40
Restaurant (Guerrero Mexican Grill) 2,984 sq.ft. 8 spaces/1,000 sq.ft. 24
Total Spaces Required: 64
Total Spaces Provided: 51
Total Spaces Short: 13
Note: Existing second level office space of 2,161 sq. ft. to be demolished.
Operational Characteristics
The project consists of an existing retail building which is being converted to an adult day care
of 7105 sq. ft. also on this site is an existing restaurant located within a 1,600 square-foot retail
building, including a 1,348 square-foot outdoor patio. The applicant is requesting a conditional
use permit to allow fewer parking spaces than permitted by the Zoning Code based on the
applicant’s intent to convert exiting retail building to a lesser occupant load of adult day care.
Characteristic Description
Total Building Square
Footage:
7897.5 sq. ft. of Adult day care
2984 sq. ft. of restaurant
Total Building Square
Footage to be used:
Same as above
No. of Chairs:
(restaurants/
churches/schools only)
Restaurant 97
No. of staff: Maximum 20 employees at each shift of Adult day care
Anticipated 6 employees during peak business hours of the
restaurant
Max no. of people at the
facility at one time:
Adult day care: 20 employees at maximum shift plus 19 cared
participants
Restaurant: Approximately 35 during business peak hours
Days of Operation: Adult day care: 5 days a week
Restaurant: 7 days/week
Hours of Operation: Adult day care: 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM
Restaurant: Sunday – Thursday, 10am – 9pm
Friday – Saturday, 10am – 10pm
Peak Hours of Operation:
Off-site Parking Permit/
Agreement?
No Yes, see attachment
Observed Parking Demand at Project Site
The existing parking lot for this building contains a total of 57 spaces. This site parking layout
has been revised to accommodate parking requirements of adult day care and number of
parking spaces has been reduced to 51
Other Circumstances
Other circumstances exist at the project site as proposed use that reduces the parking demand
and includes:
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. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: MARCH 9, 2015
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05776 AND
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05003
LOCATION: 1510 North State College Boulevard (Lifestyle Custom Cycles)
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Mark Skolnick and the
property owners are Maris Vanags and Bryan Industrial Properties.
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow
a motorcycle sales and repair facility in an existing retail building. The applicant is
also requesting approval of a variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by
the Zoning Code.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the
attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt under the
California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1, Existing Facilities) and approving
Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05776 and Variance No. 2015-05003.
BACKGROUND: This approximate 2.65-acre property is developed with three
warehouse buildings utilized for retail sales. The property is located in the General
Commercial (C-G) Zone. The General Plan designates this property for General
Commercial land uses. The property is surrounded by a flood basin to the north, the
flood basin and industrial uses to the east, a motel to the south across Via Burton
Street, and a transit bus parking lot and retail uses to the west across State College
Boulevard. The business currently operates in an adjacent building on the property.
The business was permitted for retail sales of motorcycles parts and accessories.
Previous Entitlements: In 1992, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use
Permit No. 3548 to permit the conversion of an existing 44,334 square foot industrial
complex to a 9–unit commercial retail center with fewer parking spaces than required
by code; 275 spaces were required and 119 spaces were provided.
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05776 AND VARIANCE NO. 2015-05003
March 9, 2015
Page 2 of 3
PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to establish a motorcycle sales and repair business with
fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. The 15,500 square foot business would
accommodate sales of new and pre-owned motorcycles, sales of parts, accessories, safety and
clothing items, and an approximate 2,500 square foot service/repair facility. The proposed hours of
operation are Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. and on Sunday from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. The business would include office and
motorcycle sales areas, accessory products display areas, motorcycle storage, and five motorcycle
service bays. The majority of motorcycles would be displayed indoors, but a limited number of
motorcycles would be displayed on the concrete walkway immediately in front of the building
outside of required pedestrian pathways and vehicular circulation areas. An existing 13,953 square
foot mezzanine would be utilized for storage of business records, holiday decorations and
overstock. No exterior modifications to the building are proposed except for refurbishing on-site
landscaping, painting the building, and installing new signs.
ANALYSIS: Following is staff’s analysis of the project:
Conditional Use Permit: The Zoning Code requires a conditional use permit to authorize
vehicular sales and repair businesses in this zone in order to ensure compatibility with
surrounding land uses. The proposed business would utilize a building that was originally
constructed as an industrial building, but has previously been permitted and utilized for a
retail business. The building is suitable for the proposed mix of motorcycle sales and repair
activities proposed for this business. The business has been operating in the adjacent building
for over 15 years in a manner compatible with the surrounding area. A condition of approval
has been included in the draft resolution limiting outdoor display of motorcycles to the area
immediately in front of the store, outside of all required parking areas, landscape setbacks,
and required pedestrian paths of travel.
Parking Variance: The property currently has a parking variance permitting commercial uses
on the property with 43% of required parking spaces; 275 spaces required and 119 spaces
provided. The proposed mix of tenants on the property would require 180 spaces, including
71 spaces required for this business. The 106 spaces provided on-site would provide 59% of
the required parking. The difference in the number of parking spaces currently provided on-
site, in comparison to the number provided under the original parking variance, is primarily
the result of restriping the parking lot to provide ADA-required accessible parking spaces
which eliminated several standard parking spaces. Staff has conducted several site visits to
observe parking demands for the motorcycle sales business and the property in general. Staff
has observed that more than adequate parking has been available during each site inspection,
including weekdays and weekends. Based upon the existing and proposed operations of the
business and other businesses in this center, staff believes the parking spaces available on-site
are adequate to accommodate the parking demands of all uses.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05776 AND VARIANCE NO. 2015-05003
March 9, 2015
Page 3 of 3
CONCLUSION: The request to allow a motorcycle sales and repair facility in an existing
commercial building is consistent with the operational characteristics of the commercial
center which contains a mix of commercial and industrial uses. Staff believes the proposed
use is compatible with surrounding land uses based on the 15 year track record of operation at
this property. Staff has further observed that parking is sufficient for all uses on the site and
that the proposed mix of tenants on the property results in providing a greater percentage of
the required parking spaces than previously entitled. Staff recommends approval of this
request.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Vanessa Norwood Jonathan E. Borrego
Associate Planner Planning Services Manager
Attachments:
1. Draft Conditional Use Permit and Variance Resolution
2. Applicant’s Letters of Operation and CUP Justification
3. Site and Floor Plans
4. Site Photographs
C-GMOTEL 6
IRETAIL
IAUTO REPAIR/SERVICE
IINDUSTRIAL
IINDUSTRIAL
IINDUSTRIAL
IORANGE COUNTYTRANSIT AUTHORITYFACILITY
C-GRESTAURANT
IINDUSTRIAL
IINDUSTRIAL
IORANGE COUNTYWATER DISTRICT
IINDUSTRIAL
IINDUSTRIAL
IINDUSTRIAL
IINDUSTRIAL
IULTIMATE 10 SHOWGIRLS
IINDUSTRIAL
C-GMOTEL 6
C-GRETAIL
C-GRETAIL
C-GRETAIL
IINDUSTRIAL IINDUSTRIAL
IINDUSTRIAL IINDUSTRIAL
IINDUSTRIAL
IINDUSTRIAL IINDUSTRIAL
E V IA B URTO N S T
NDALYSTN STATE COLLEGE BLVDA N A H E I MANAHEIM
F U L L E R T O NFULLERTON
E. LA PALMA AVE
E. ORANGETHORPE AVE
N. ACACIA STN. BLUE GUM STE.MIRALOM A A V E
N.
EAST STN.PLACENTIAAVEE . O R A N G E T H O R P E A V E
1 5 10 North State College Bo ulev ard
D E V No. 2014-00139
Subject Property APN: 338-181-07338-181-08338-181-09
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Ph oto :Ma y 2 01 4
E V IA B URTO N S T
NDALYSTN STATE COLLEGE BLVDA N A H E I MANAHEIM
F U L L E R T O NFULLERTON
E. LA PALMA AVE
E. ORANGETHORPE AVE
N. ACACIA STN. BLUE GUM STE.MIRALOM A A V E
N.
EAST STN.PLACENTIAAVEE . O R A N G E T H O R P E A V E
1 5 10 North State College Bo ulev ard
D E V No. 2014-00139
Subject Property APN: 338-181-07338-181-08338-181-09
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Ph oto :Ma y 2 01 4
[DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-***
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05776 AND
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05003 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS
IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
(DEV2014-00139)
(1500-1542 NORTH STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (hereinafter referred to
as the “Planning Commission”) did receive a verified petition for Conditional Use Permit No.
2014-05776 to permit to allow motorcycle, accessory sales and repair facility in an existing retail
building and Variance No. 2015-05003 to permit fewer off-street parking spaces than required by
the Zoning Code (herein referred to collectively as the "Proposed Project") for premises
commonly known as 1510 North State College Boulevard, which is located within a commercial
center at 1500-1542 North State College Boulevard in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange,
State of California. The commercial center is 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 2.65 acres, is 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, meaning that 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, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center
in the City of Anaheim on March 9, 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. 2014-05776 and Variance No. 2015-05003, 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
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. 2014-05776, does find
and determine the following facts:
- 1 - PC2015-***
1. The request for a conditional use permit to allow motorcycle, accessory sales and
repair facility in an existing retail building is properly one for which a conditional
use permit is authorized, subject to the imposition of conditions of approval;
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 commercial center and is surrounded by
other retail 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 retail vehicle (motorcycle) sales is within a class of uses already
anticipated and analyzed for traffic generation on these streets and highways; and
5. The granting of Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05776 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, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the
request for Variance No. 2015-05003 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.
(180 spaces required; 106 spaces proposed)
1. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, will not cause fewer off-street
parking spaces to be provided for the Proposed Project than the number of such spaces necessary
to accommodate all vehicles attributable to the Proposed Project under the normal and
reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. A previously-approved parking
variance permitted commercial uses on the property with 43% of the required parking spaces
(275 spaces required and 119 spaces provided). The proposed variance would permit the
commercial center, including the Proposed Project, to operate with 59% of required parking
spaces (180 spaces required and 106 spaces provided), which is significant closer to compliance
with the Zoning Code requirements. In addition, staff conducted several site visits to observe
parking demands for the motorcycle sales business and the property in general, finding that more
than adequate parking would be available to accommodate the Proposed Project. Therefore, the
current number of parking spaces within the commercial center is sufficient to accommodate the
uses on the site, including the Proposed Project;
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
proposed motorcycle, accessory sales and repair facility along with the demand for parking
associated with the other uses within the commercial center;
- 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 motorcycle, accessory sales and repair facility,
along with the demand for parking associated with the other uses within the commercial center,
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 both the proposed use and the other uses
within the commercial center; 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 both the proposed use and
the other uses within the commercial center and, therefore, will not impede vehicular ingress to
or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the
commercial center.
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. 2014-05776 and Variance No.
2015-05003 are hereby approved, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval
described in Exhibit B attached hereto, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to
the proposed use of the Property under Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05776 and Variance
No. 2015-05003 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 March 9, 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, 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 March 9, 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 9th day of March, 2015.
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
- 5 - PC2015-***
- 6 - PC2015-***
EXHIBIT “B”
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05776 AND
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05003
(DEV2014-00139)
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS
1. 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,
Code Enforcement
Division
Police Department
2. That any outdoor display of motorcycles shall be located only on
the walkway immediately in front of, and adjacent to, the building
and no motorcycles shall be displayed within any required
vehicular drive aisles, pedestrian paths of travel, or landscape
setback areas.
Planning Department,
Code Enforcement
Division
3. The mezzanine shall not be utilized as a retail sales area open to the
public or for office uses.
Planning Department,
Code Enforcement
Division
4. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any
adjacent area under the control of the business owner shall be
removed or painted over within 24 hours of being applied.
Planning Department,
Code Enforcement
Division
5. The applicant shall complete a Burglary/Robbery Alarm Permit
application, Form APD 516, and return it to the Police Department
prior to initial alarm activation. This form is available at the Police
Department front counter, or it can be emailed to applicant by
contacting Officer Budds at mbudds@anaheim.net.
Police Department,
Planning & Research
Unit
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
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
Planning Department,
Planning Services
Division
- 7 - PC2015-***
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
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.
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
- 8 - PC2015-***
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
A-1.0MJBMJBScale: 3/32 = 1'-0"SITE PLAN102/6/15SITE PLANJOB NO.SHEET NO.REVISIONSDATECHK'D BYDRAWN BYOwner/ApplicantJob Title
Sheet Title
Architect
300 East State Street, #360
Redlands, CA 92373
Phone: (909) 798-2748
michael@michaelburkedesign.com
Michael Burke &
Associates Architects
Retail Store Relocation Lifestyle Cycles
1510 N. State College Road
Anaheim, CA 92806Scale: NTSTRUNCATED DOME DETAIL2ATTACHMENT NO. 3
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"FIRST FLOOR PLAN1A-1.12/10/15FIRST FLOOR PLAN
Retail Store Relocation Lifestyle Cycles
1510 N. State College Road
Anaheim, CA 92806JOB NO.SHEET NO.REVISIONSDATECHK'D BYDRAWN BYOwner/ApplicantJob Title
Sheet Title
Architect
300 East State Street, #360
Redlands, CA 92373
Phone: (909) 798-2748
michael@michaelburkedesign.com
Michael Burke &
Associates Architects
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"MEZZANINE FLOOR PLAN1A-1.22/10/15MEZZANINE FLOOR PLAN
Retail Store Relocation Lifestyle Cycles
1510 N. State College Road
Anaheim, CA 92806JOB NO.SHEET NO.REVISIONSDATECHK'D BYDRAWN BYOwner/ApplicantJob Title
Sheet Title
Architect
300 East State Street, #360
Redlands, CA 92373
Phone: (909) 798-2748
michael@michaelburkedesign.com
Michael Burke &
Associates Architects
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.