Resolution-PC 2015-056RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-056
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND ADOPTING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION IN CONNECTION WITH APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2720, THE FIRST AMENDMENT THERETO, AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3640,
AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
(DEV2015-00003)
(1731 WEST MEDICAL CENTER DRIVE)
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.
3640A, Variance No. 2015-05000 and Administrative Adjustment No. 2014-00361 to construct a
two-story, 58 -unit expansion to an existing 194 -unit senior apartment building with fewer parking
spaces than required and a higher floor area ratio (FAR) than permitted by the Anaheim
Municipal Code (herein referred to as the "Proposed Project") for certain real property located at
1731 West Medical Center Drive in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this
reference (the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, on September 30, 1985, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
85-216 approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2720 (herein referred to as the "Original CUP") to
construct a 179 -unit senior citizen's retirement facility and a 99 -bed skilled nursing facility with
waiver of required lot frontage; and
WHEREAS, on November 21, 1988, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
88-322 modifying Conditional Use Permit No. 2720 to approve waivers of (a) minimum number
of parking spaces for Parcel No. 1 and (b) required height and type of fence for Parcel Nos. 1 and
2 to complete construction of the facility (herein reffered to as the "First Amendment to the
Original CUP"); and
WHEREAS, on November 1, 1993, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 93-
119 approving Conditional Use Permit No. 3640 (herein referred to as "CUP 3640") to permit a
16 -unit (16 -bed) expansion to an existing 179 -unit (206 -bed) senior citizen's retirement facility
with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces; and
WHEREAS, the Original CUP, the First Amendment to the Original CUP, and CUP 3640
shall be referred to herein collectively as the "Existing CUP"); and
WHEREAS, the Property is located in the "CG" General Commercial Zone and is subject
to the zoning and development standards contained in Chapter 18.08 (Commercial Zones) of the
Anaheim Municipal Code ("Code"). The Anaheim General Plan designates this Property for
Institutional land uses; and
PC2015-056
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources
Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as "CEQA") and the State of California
Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (commencing with
Section 15000 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; herein referred to as the "State
CEQA Guidelines"), the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of
environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, following preliminary review, the City prepared an Initial Study to
determine if the Proposed Project may have a significant effect on the environment, which Initial
Study shows that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the City,
that the Proposed Project may have a significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, a draft Negative Declaration was prepared in accordance with CEQA, the
CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual to evaluate the physical
environmental impacts of the Proposed Project. The Negative Declaration was circulated for a
20 -day public/responsible agency review on July 17, 2015 and was also made available for
review on the City's website at www.anaheim.net. A complete copy of the Negative Declaration
is on file and can be viewed in the Planning Division of City Hall located on the First Floor at
200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, California. Copies of said document are also available for
purchase; and
WHEREAS, the City gave notice of its intent to adopt the Negative Declaration to (a) the
public pursuant to Section 15072(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, (b) those individuals and
organizations, if any, that previously submitted written requests for notice pursuant to Section
15072(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, (c) responsible and trustee and other agencies with
jurisdiction over resources that will be affected by the Proposed Project pursuant to Section
15073(c) of the CEQA Guidelines, and (d) the Clerk of the County of Orange pursuant to
Section 15072(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the City intends and desires to use the Negative Declaration as the
environmental documentation required by CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the City's
Local CEQA Procedure Manual for the Proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, based upon a thorough review of the Proposed Project and the Negative
Declaration and the comments received to date and the responses prepared, staff finds that the
Proposed Project will have a less than significant impact upon the environment with the
implementation of the conditions of approval attached to this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in
the City of Anaheim on August 10, 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, 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. 3640A, does find and
determine the following:
-2- PC2015-056
1. The request to amend a conditional use permit to allow the expansion of an
existing 194 -unit senior and assisted living facility with fewer parking spaces than required and a
higher floor area ratio (FAR) than permitted by the Code in the C -G Zone is properly one for
which a conditional use permit is authorized under Section 18.08.030.0402 (Convalescent &
Rest Homes) of the Code; and
2. The Proposed Project will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the
growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the Proposed
Project is consistent and compatible with existing residential and commercial uses in the
surrounding area. An existing perimeter wall would be maintained and a landscape setback
exceeding Code requirements is proposed along the front of the property. Existing access points
to the site are adequate to serve the use and would be maintained; and
3. The size and shape of the site is adequate to allow the full development of the
Proposed Project in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety
because the Proposed Project is designed to ensure its compatibility with surrounding land use.
The setback depths required by the zone are existing and will be maintained with the proposed
expansion; and
4. The traffic generated by the Proposed Project will not impose an undue burden
upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the
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
5. The granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not
be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim as the proposed
land use will be integrated with the surrounding commercial area and would not pose a health or
safety risk to the citizens of the City of Anaheim or the adjoining City.
WHEREAS, the parking study prepared by Lindscott Law & Greenspan justifies the
parking variance and the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request
for a variance for 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.
(226 spaces required; 188 spaces proposed)
1. Based upon a review of the findings of parking study prepared by Lindscott Law
& Greenspan and reviewed and approved by Traffic and Transportation Division staff, the
variance, under the conditions imposed, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be
provided for the proposed use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all
vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of
operation of such use because the maximum peak parking demand for the Proposed Project is
179 spaces and 188 spaces are proposed; and
-3- PC2015-056
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 adequate parking to meet the demand would be provided on-site. Direct traffic
access to the site will continue to be available at the two existing driveway locations along
Medical Center Drive. The drive aisles within the site are sufficient to accommodate the site's
existing and anticipated expansion traffic without undue traffic congestion. Additionally, the
removal of the parking gates will create a continuous loop for trash and other service vehicles;
and
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 adequate parking to meet the demand would be provided on-site. Curbsite
parking spaces are available along the project frontage on Medical Center Drive, but the parking
analysis has not relied on usage of any curbside parking. Further, the midweek parking counts
were performed on street sweeping day in which no parking is allow on Medical Center Drive;
and
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
adequate parking to meet the demand would be provided on-site; 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 two existing access points to serve the property are adequate to
serve the use. Traffic movements at each of the Project driveways have been established for
many years and the expansion will not add significantly to those driveway movements.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request
for an Administrative Adjustment should be approved for the following reasons:
1. The adjustment is consistent with the purposes and intent of the Zoning Code. The
proposed addition would comply with all other dimensional standards of the C -G Zone,
including required landscape and building setbacks and allowable height. The General Plan
designates this property for Institutional land uses, which has a maximum FAR of 3, far greater
than the project proposes;
2. The same or similar result cannot be achieved by using provisions in the Zoning
Code that do not require the adjustment since the only alternative to processing the adjustment is
to reduce the overall size of the addition, which would impact the size of the protected internal
courtyard as well as the size and quality of common areas that are proposed to be provided for
residents, including wellness areas, activity rooms and living rooms. These on-site amenities
would contribute to a quality living experience for residents of the community;
3. The adjustment will not produce a result that is out of character or detrimental to
the neighborhood. The existing facility is an established component of the community and the
overall size and massing of the proposed addition is compatible with the character of the
neighborhood.
-4- PC2015-056
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 as follows:
1. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the
requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's Local CEQA Procedure
Manual and serves as the appropriate environmental documentation for the Proposed Project; and
2. That the Planning Commission has carefully reviewed and considered the
information contained in the Negative Declaration (including the Initial Study and any comments
received during the public review period) prior to acting upon the Proposed Project; and
3. Based upon the record before it (including the Initial Study and any comments
received), the Planning Commission finds that the Proposed Project will have a less than
significant impact upon the environment and that the Negative Declaration reflects the
independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission and the City of Anaheim; and
4. The Negative Declaration are hereby approved and adopted; and
5. The Negative Declaration together with the Initial Study and other materials
which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which the decision of the Planning
Commission is based are on file in the Planning Division of the City of Anaheim located on the
First Floor at 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, California; and
6. City staff is authorized and directed to file with the Clerk of the County of Orange
a Notice of Determination following adoption of this Resolution in accordance with Section
15075(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, based upon the aforesaid findings and
determinations, the Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No.
3640A, Variance No. 2015-05000 and Administrative Adjustment No. 2014-00361, contingent
upon and subject to the conditions of approval, which are described in Exhibit B, and attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Said conditions 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.
-5- PC2015-056
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any amendment, modification or revocation
of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit
Approval) and 18.60.200 (City -Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby find
and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's
compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition,
or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of
competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be
deemed null and void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that approval of this application constitutes
approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Code and any other
applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings
as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation
or requirement.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission
meeting of August 10, 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.
C,
CHAIRMAN, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ATTEST:
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
-6- PC2015-056
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby
certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City
Planning Commission held on August 10, 2015, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, CALDWELL, DALATI, HENNINGER,
LIEBERMAN, RAMIREZ, SEYMOUR
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this I 01 day of August, 2015.
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
-7- PC2015-056
EXHIBIT "A"
DEV NO. 2015-00003
APN:
072-150-76
072-150-72
91 FREEWAY
465'
0 1—
o C
c
a m -+
v
z
w
u Z
4 60'
W MEDICAL CENTER DR
8 e
W ROMNEYA DR
Source: Recorded Tract Maps and/or City GIS.
Please note the accuracy is +/- two to five feet.
-8- PC2015-056
EXHIBIT "B"
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3640A
VARIANCE NO. 2015-05000
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 2015-00367
(DEV2015-00003)
NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS
1
The applicant shall submit a Final Drainage Study prepared by a registered
Public Works,
professional Civil Engineer in the State of California. The Study shall be based
Development
upon and reference the latest edition of the Orange County Hydrology Manual
Services Division
the applicable City of Anaheim Master Plan of Drainage for the project area.
All drainage sub -area boundaries per the Master Plan for Drainage shall be
maintained. The Study shall include: an analysis of 10-, 25- and 100 -year storm
frequencies; an analysis of all drainage impacts to the existing storm drain
system based upon the ultimate project build -out condition; and address
whether off-site and/ or on-site drainage improvements (such as detention/
retention basins or surface runoff reduction) will be required to prevent
downstream properties from becoming flooded.
2
The applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department/Development
Public Works,
Services, for review and approval, a Water Quality Management Plan, as
Development
described in Drainage Area Management Plan for Orange County. Said WQMP
Services Division
shall:
• Address Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as
minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing
directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero
discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas.
• Incorporate applicable Routine Source Control BMPs.
• Incorporate Treatment Control BMPs.
• Describe the long-term operation and maintenance, identifies the
responsible parties, and funding mechanisms for the Treatment Control
BMPs.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS
3
The applicant shall execute and record a Covenant and Agreement to Hold the
Planning &
Property as one parcel for Building Requirements in a form satisfactory to the
Building, Building
Building Official and the City Attorney. The Covenant shall be reviewed and
Division
approved by the Bulding Official and the City Attorney prior to its execution
and recordation in the Official Records of the County of Orange. A copy of the
recorded Covenant shall then be submitted to the Planning Department.
4
Landscaping plans shall show plant materials adequate to screen existing
Planning &
equipment within the front setback. Any new equipment shall be located outside
Building, Building
of setbacks and screened by plant materials if visible to the street.
Division
5
Building plans shall demonstrate that curbs adjacent to the drive aisles shall be
Public Works,
painted red to prohibit parallel parking in the drive aisles. Red curb locations
Traffic Engineering
shall be clearly labeled on building plans. All existing conflicting signage shall
Division
be removed.
-9- PC2015-056
6
Building plans shall demonstrate that fire lanes shall be posted with "No
Public Works,
Parking Any Time." Said information shall be specifically shown on plans
Traffic Engineering
submitted for building permits. All existing conflicting signage shall be
Division
removed.
PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING AND ZONING INSPECTIONS
7
All required WQMP items shall be installed, operational and inspected by the
Public Works,
City.
Development
Services Division
8
Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer
Planning &
shall submit to the Planning and Building Department a letter from a licensed
Building, Planning
landscape architect certifying that all landscaping and irrigation systems have
Services Division
been installed in accordance with the approved landscaping plans.
9
Gates preventing access to parking spaces on the northern portion of the site
Planning &
shall be removed.
Building, Planning
Services Division
GENERAL CONDITIONS
10
The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its
Planning &
officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually
Building, Planning
and collectively as "Indemnitees") from any and all claims, actions or
Services Division
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.
11
The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of
Planning &
this discretionary case application within 30 days of the issuance of the final
Building, Planning
invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever
Services Division
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.
12
The subject Property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans
Planning &
and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which
Building, Planning
plans are on file with the Planning Department, and as conditioned herein.
Services Division
-10- PC2015-056