The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 2003/04/21l t_~_ ,, CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA APRIL 21, 2003 Council Chambers, City Hall 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California CALL TO ORDER ,', ~r Y.. Y VANDERBILT MORNING SESS • ST • KCVItW,C • PREL~MIN', €'.t , RECESS TO AFTERNOON Y; i ~. RECONVENE TO PUBLIC I For record keeping pu`rpos complete a speaker car~;a PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PUBLIC COMMENTS CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ADJOURNMENT ~~rtlro tnepsecrera~ ~ „~~ ~ r `~~-; ~ t p X the agenda, please 04-21-03 Page 1 RECONVENE TO PUBLIC HEARING AT 1:30 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for members of the putilic 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: Item 1-A through 1-E on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the Planning Commission, staff or the public request the item to be discussed and/or removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. REVIEW OF A DEFICIENCIES AREA MAP: City of Anaheim, Planning Department, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805, requests Planning Commission review and approval of a draft ordinance pertaining to second units and related sections of the zoning code and a deficiencies area map. RESOLUTION NO. B. a) CONDITIONAL USE:PERMIT NO. 6601TRACKING NO. CUP20o3- 04689 : Mr. Abdel Jatibar Hamdan, 1717 South Brookhurst Street, Anaheim, CA 92804, requests termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 660. Property is located at 1717 South Brookhurst Street. TERMINATION RESOLUTION NO. C. a) CUP2003-046871. William Wilkens, Anaheim Hills Racquet Club, 415 South Anaheim Hills Road, Anaheim, CA 92807, requests determination of substantial conformance to construct a pool and spa in conjunction with a tennis and racquet club. Property is located at 415 South Anaheim Hills Road. D. a) GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE N0.2003-00025 - 1411 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805, requests determination of conformance with the Anaheim General Plan for the proposed acquisition of real properly far the construction of an elementary school adjacent to Ponderosa Park. Property is located at 105-147 East Wilken Way, 2103-2155 South Mountain View Avenue, and 330 East Orangewood Avenue. E. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of April 7, 2003. (Motion) Project Planner: (id ado nt(a) anaheim. net) sr1176jd.doc Project Planner: (evambao(a)an aheim. net) Q.S. 36 sr3015ey:doc Project Planner: (iaram irezna.an a h eim. net) Q:S. 192 sr5003jr.doc Project Planner: (twhite aC7anaheim:net) Q.S. 99 sr1142tw.doc 04-21-03 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS• 2a. CEQA NEGATNE DECLARATION 2b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-04665 OWNER: Kenneth B Isenhart, 302 South Benwood Drive, Anaheim, CA 92804 AGENT: Karen Isenhart, 302 South Benwood Drive, Anaheim, CA 92804 LOCATION: 302 South Benwood Drive. Property is approximately 0.19-acre, located at the southeast corner of Academy Avenue and Benwood Drive. To permit and retain an attached second unit in conjunction with an existing single-family residence with waiver of minimum side yard setback. Continued from the March 10, 2003 and April 7, 2003, Planning Commission meetings. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. 3a. 3b. 3c. 2003-00010 OWNER: Yong Sub :Kim, Thomas Liquor, 1015 West Orangethorpe Avenue, Fullerton, CA 92833 AGENT: Leon Alexander, Briggs and Alexander, 558 South Harbor Boulevard, Suite 100, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 1000 West Lincoln Avenue. Properly is approximately 0.35-acre, located at the southwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Illinois Street (Thomas Liquor). Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04669 - To permit the retail sales of alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption in conjunction with an existing legal non-conforming convenience market. Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2003.00010 - To upgrade an existing Type 20 (Off-Sale Beer and Wine) to a Type 21 (Off-Sale General Alcohol) alcoholic beverage license to permit the retail sales of alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption within an existing legal non-conforming convenience market. Continued from the March 24, 2003 and April 7, 2003, Planning Commission meetings. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY RESOLUTION NO. Project Planner: (vno rwood (a~ana helm. net) Q.S. 13 sr8587vn.doc Request for continuance to May 5, 2003 Project Planner: (avazg ue zCa~ a n a h e i m. n et ) Q.S. 63 sr8586av.doc 04-21-03 Page 3 4a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 1 4b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4020 (TRACKING NO. CUP2003.04675) OWNER: Orange County Water District, 10500 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 LOCATION: 4060 East La Palma Avenue. Property is approximately 125 acres, having a frontage of 5,617 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue, located 347 feet east of the centerline of Tustin Avenue (Santa Ana River Lakes). Request for reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on April 27, 1998 to expire April 27, 2003) to retain a 450 square foot, mobile office trailer in conjunction with an existing fishing concession operation. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. Sa. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 5b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 5c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.2003-04681 5d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16477 OWNER: Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1003, Anaheim, CA 92805, Attn: Elisa Stipkovich AGENT: John O'Brien, Brookfield Homes, 3090 Bristol Street, Suite 200, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 LOCATION: 2300-2340 West Lincoln Avenue.. Property is 8.8 acres, having a frontage of 660 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, located 650 feet east of the centerline of Gilbert Street. Conditional Use Permit No. 2003.04681 - To construct 32 attached and 50 detached ".affordable" residential condominium units with a density bonus, with waivers of: (a) minimum front yard setback, (b) minimum number of parking spaces, (c) maximum structural height adjacent to a single-family residential zone, (d) minimum landscape setback adjacent to asingle-family residential zone, (e) minimum interior setback, (f) minimum setback of buildjngs abutting single-family developments, and (g) minimum distance between buildings*. 'Waiver (b) has been deleted. Tentative Tract Map No. 16477 - To establish a 94-lot, 82-unit attached and detached residential condominium subdivision. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. Project Planner: fioramirez aC~anaheim.net) O.S 155 sr5002jr.doc Project Planner: (dsee(o anaheim.net) O.S. 33 sr2126ds.doc 04-21-03 Page 4 6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 6b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 6c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-04674 OWNER: Carlos D. Vargas, 816 North Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: Benjamin Zecua, 816 North Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 816 North Anaheim Boulevard. Property is 0.16-acre, having a frontage of 50 feet on the east side of Anaheim Boulevard, located 90 feet south of the centerline of Mills Drive (Babies "R" Us Nutritional). To permit a W.I.C. convenience store within atwo-unit office building with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. 7a. 7b. OWNER: LLC 1<elto, 1422 South Allec Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: John Bitterly, 1111 Town and Country Road, Suite 38, Orange, CA 92868 LOCATION: 1422 South Allec Street. Property is 0.99-acre, having a frontage of 125 feet on the east side of AIIec Street, located 539 feet north of the centerline of Cerritos Avenue. Request for reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on April 27, 1998 to expire April 27, 2003) to retain a telecommunications monopole and accessory ground-mounted equipment enclosure. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. Project Planner: (eva mbao(o)an ah em. net) Q.S. 71 sr3012ey.doc Project Planner: fvnonvood(a)an aheim. n et) Q.S. 96 sr8579vn.doc 04-21-03 Page 5 8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED) 8b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 8c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3927 (READVERTISED) (TRACKING NO. CUP2003-04680) OWNER; Haydon Brothers Incorporated, 1480 North Tustin Avenue., Anaheim, CA 92807 AGENT: Haydon Brothers Automotive, 1480 North Lakeview Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807 LOCATION: 1480 North Lakeview Avenue. Property is 0.84-.acre, located at the northeast corner of Lakeview Avenue and Eisenhower Circle (Haydon Brothers Automotive). To permit accessory retail automobile sales in conjunction with a previously-approved automotive repair business with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. 9a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 9b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 9c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-04678 OWNER: McDonald's Corporation, 11682 EI Camino Real, #400, San Diego, CA 92130 AGENT: Randy Kimoto, 42 Corporate Park, Suite 250., Irvine, CA 92606 LOCATION: 119 West Ball Road. Property is 0.86-acre, located north and west of the northwest corner of Ball Road and Anaheim Boulevard (McDonald's). To permit the expansion of an existing drive-through restaurant with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. Project Planner: (avazguez(a~anaheim:net) Q.S. 165 sr8585av.doq Project Planner: (evambaong anaheim.net) Q:S. 85 sr3013ey.doc 04-21-03 Page 6 10a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 31 10b. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16500 OWNER: Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, Attn: Elisa Stipkovich, 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1003, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 122-132 West Water Street and 123-133 West Stueckle Avenue. Property is 1.4 acres having a frontage of 191 feet on the south side of Water Street and 183 feet on the north side of Stueckle Avenue, located 155 feet east of the centerline of Lemon Street. Project Planner: (dsee(a) anaheim. Hell City-initiated (Community Development Department) request to establish a 6-lot, 6-unit, detached RS-5000 single-family subdivision to allow for the Q•S. 84 future relocation of historically-significant homes. sr2127ds.doc ADJOURN TO MONDAY, MAY 5, 2003 AT 11:00 A.M. FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW. 04-21-03 Page 7 CERTIFICATION OF POSTING 1 hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: (TIME) (DATE) 'LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK SIGNED: ~ ~~°"'+~ If you challenge any one of these City of Anaheim decisions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in a written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. RIGHTS OF APPEAL FROM PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The action taken by the Planning Commission this date regarding Reclassifications, Conditional Use Permits and Variances shall be considered final unless, within 22 days after Planning Commission action and within 10 days regarding Tentative Tract and :Parcel Maps, an appeal is filed. This appeal shall be made in written form to the City Clerk, accompanied by an appeal fee in an amount determined by the City Clerk. The City Clerk, upon filing of said appeal in the Clerk's Office, shall set said petition for public hearing before the City Council at the earliest possible date. You will be notified by the City Clerk of said hearing. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department, (714) 765-5139. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. Recorded decision information is available 24 hours a day by calling the Planning Department's Automated Telephone System at 714-765-5739. 04-21-03 Page 8 SC~-IEID~E 2003 MAY 5 MAY 19 JUNE 2 JUNE 16 JUNE 30 JULY 14 JULY 28 AUGUST 11 AUGUST 25 SEPTEMBER8 SEPTEMBER 22 OCTOBER 6 OCTOBER 20 NOVEMBER3 NOVEMBER 17 DECEMBER1 DECEMBER 15 DECEMBER 29 04-21-03 Page 9 WAIS Document Retrieval Page T of 4 ATTACHMENT R&R ITEM 1-A (N G, t) 65852. All such regulatiohsshallbe uniform for eachclass or kind' of building or use of land throughout each zone, but the regulation' in one type of zone may differ from those in other types of zones.` 65852.1. Notwithstanding Section65906; any city, including a charter city, county, or city and county mayissue a zoning variahce; _ special use permit, or conditional use permit for a dwelling unitto be constructed, or which is attached to or detached from;-a primary residence on a parcelzoned fora single-family residence, if the dwelling unit is intended for the sole occupancy of one adult or two ` adult persons whoare-62 years of ageor over; and thearea of floor space of the attached dwelling unit does not exceed 30 percent of the existing living area or the area of the floor space of the detached dwelling unit does not exceed 1,200 square feet. This section shall not beconstrued tolimit the requirements of Section 65852. 2, or the power of local governments to permit second units. 65852.150. The Legislature finds and declares that second units are a valuable form of housing in California_ Second units provide- housing for family members, students, the elderly;in-home health' care providers, the disabled, and others, at below market prices within existing neighborhoods. Homeowners who create second units benefit from added income, and an increased sense of security. It is the intent of the Legislature that any second-unit ordinances adopted by local agencies have the effect of providingfor the creation of secondunitsand that provisions in these ordinances relating to matters including unit size, parking, fees and other requirements, are not soarbitrary,excessive, orburdensome soasto unreasonably restrict the ability. of homeowners to create second units in zones in which they are authorized by local ordinance. 65852.2. (a) (1) Any local agency may, by ordinance, provide for the creation of second units in single-family andmultifamily - residential zones. The ordinance may do any of the following: (A) Designate areas withinthe jurisdiction of the local agency where second units may be permitted. The designation of areas may be based on criteria,. that may include, but are not limited to, the adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact oP second units '- on traffic flow. (B) Impose standards. on second units that include; but are'not' limited to, parking, height, setback, lot coverage, architectural review, maximum sizeofa unit, and standards that prevent adverse impacts on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historic Places.. (C) Provide that second units do notexceed theallowable density for the lot upon which the second unit is located, and that second units are a residential use that is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designation for the°lot. (2) The ordinanceshall not be considered in the application'of any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit-residentialgrowth. (3) When a localagency receives its first application on or after July 1, 2003, for a permit pursuant to this subdivision, the http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate? WAISdocID=8817894863+1+0+0& WAISacti... 3/28/2003 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 2 of 4 application shall be considered ministerially without discretionary review or a hearing, notwithstanding Section 65901 or 65906 or any local ordinance regulating the issuance of variances or special use permits. Nothing in this paragraph may be construed to require a local government to adopt or amend an ordinance for the creation of second units, A local agency may charge a fee to reimburse it for costs that it incurs as a result of amendments to this paragraph r enacted during the 2001-02 Regular Session of the Legislature, including the costs of adopting or. amending any ordinance that provides for the creation. of second units... (b) (1) When a local agency which has not adopted an ordinance: governing second units in accordance_.withsubdivision ta) or (c ). receives its first application on or-.after July 1, 1983, for a permit pursuant to this subdivision, the local agency shall accept the_ _ application and approve or disapprove. the application ministerially without discretionary review pursuant to this subdivision unless it adopts an ordinance in accordance with subdivision.(a) or (c) within 120 days after receiving the application. Notwithstanding Section 65901 or 65906, every local agency shall grant a variance or special use permit for the creation pf a second unit if the second unit complies with all of the following: (A) The unit is not intended for sale and may be rented. (B) The lot is zoned for single-family or multifamily use.. (C) The lot contains an existing single-family dwelling. (D) The second unit is either attached to the existing dwelling and located within the living area of the existing dwelling or detached from the existing dwelling and located on the same lot as - the existing dwelling.. (E) The increased floor area ofan attachedsecond unit-shall not exceed 30 percent of .the existingliving area... (F) The totalarea of floorspace for a detached secondunitshall not exceed 1,200 square feet. (G) Requirements relating toheight, setback, lotcoverage;:. architectural review, site plan review; fees; charges, and other zoning requirements generally applicable to residential construction in the zone in which the property is located. (H) Local building code requirements which apply to detached dwellings, as appropriate. (I) Approval by the local health officer where a private sewage disposal system is being-used,::: if required. (2) No other localordinance,policy, or regulation shall be the basis for the denial of a building permit or a use permit under this subdivision. (3) This subdivision establishes the maximumstandardsthatlocal agencies shall use to evaluate proposed second units on lots zoned. for residential use which contain an existing single-family dwelling. No additional standards, other than those provided in this subdivision or subdivision (a), shall be utilized or imposed, except . that a local agency may require an applicant for a permit issued.. pursuant to this subdivision to be an owner-occupant. (4) No changes in zoning ordinances or other ordinances or any. changes in the general plan shall be required to-implement this subdivision. Any local agency may amend its zoning ordinance or general plan to incorporate the policies, procedures, or other provisions applicable to the creation of second units if these.. provisions are consistent with the limitations of this subdivision. (5) A second unitwhich conforms to the requirements of this subdivision shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which it is located, and shall be deemed to be a residential use which is consistent with the existing. general plan http://www.leginfo. ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate? WAISdocID=8817894863+1+0+0&WAISacti... 3/28/2003 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 3 of 4 and zoning designations for the lot. The second units sha1T not be considered in the application of any local ordinance, policy, or: program to limit residential growth. (c) No local agency shall adopt an ordinance which totally precludes second units within single-family or multifamily zoned areas unless the ordinance contains findings acknowledging that the ordinance may limit housing opportunities of the region and further contains findings that specific adverse impacts on the public health, safety, and welfare that would result from allowing second units within single-family and multifamily zoned areas justify adopting the ordinance. (d) A local agency may establish minimum and maximum unit size requirements for both attached and detached second units. No minimum or maximum size for a second unit, or size based upon a percentage of the existing dwelling, shall be established by ordinance for either attached or detached dwellings which does not permit at least an efficiency unit to be constructed in compliance with local development standards. (e) Parking requirements for second units shall not exceed one parking apace per unit or per bedroom. Additional parking may be required provided that a finding is made that the additional parking requirements are directly related to the use of the second unit and are consistent with existing neighborhood standards applicable to existing dwellings. Off-street parking shall be permitted in setback areas in locations determined by the local agency or through tandem parking, unless specific findings are made that parking in setback areas or tandem parking is not feasible based upon specific site or regional topographical or fire and life safety conditions, or that it is not permitted anywhere else in the jurisdiction. (f) Fees charged for the construction of second units shall be determined in accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 66000). (g) This section does not limit the authority of local agencies to adopt less restrictive requirements for the creation of second units. (h) Local agencies shall submit a copy of the ordinances adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) or (c) to the Department of Housing and Community Development within 60 days after adoption. (i) As used in this section, the following terms mean: (1) "Living area," means the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit including basements and attics but does not include a garage or any accessory structure. (2) "Local agency" means a city, county, or city and county, whether general law or chartered. (3) For purposes of this section, "neighborhood" has the same meaning as set forth in Section 65589.5. (4) "Second unit" means an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single-family dwelling is situated. A second unit also includes the following: (A) An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of Health and Safety Code. (B) A manufactured home., as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Coda. (j) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code), except that the local government shall not be http://www.leginfo.ca~gov/cgi-bin/waisgate? WAISdocID=8817894863+1+0+0&WAISacri... 3/28/2003 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 4 0£4 required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit -_ applications for second units.. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate? WAISdocID=8817894863+1+0+0& WAISacti... 3/28/2003 ATTACHIIENT R&R ITEM 1-A (N0. 2) ~_ W a Z a M Z O O U N H za ~a } Z U ' ' S n ~ a ~ ~ ~ a a a a a ~ a a ~ a a a a _ a a a a ' ~ `o N. m m N ' m ~ m m y. N C O c0 N O '. ~ N ~ O ~ N m y: r m ~ V ~ ~ ~ B N ~ m (OO O m 0 N ~ m~ m n p .. m M m ~ O ~ C ] LL m ~ ~ O ~ ~ O ~: ~ O O ~ m r J: 'O f 'O N ~ ~ mQ~~ + 3 a 0 U U 0 ~ a a U U O a D a O O ~ a a D.. U a o< z U ~. ' ¢ ¢ ~o ¢ ¢ g ¢ ¢ ¢ ? ¢ ¢ ¢ '. ¢ om a cm om o~ ¢ UV Z Z Z - z z Z - z Z Z Z Z Z z a~p Z ^ ~ T z Q O~ a O a a a a Z O c ~ v i ~ a v v'- ~ > ' ~ > v > 'a > v > v > a > v > 'o > v > v > v > ' ~o v > 'o > 'o > F-- pU ~0 00 ~ ~ yo o oo >? o o o ~ 2 0 0 0 0 m • o 0 0 , U a,. c ~ d N a~ a~ 'c m c m •c v d ~ n•- no no n,= n~`'~ nm n~ nm n~-. nm no. nm: no nm ao a~ no nm nm a.~ n a ao am c m a a n n ~.v a~ 0 D Ur aco a.- am ar am aM arn am a~ ain a a.- D a a a Y N m ~ .~ N y U y y N U N U ~ N O C `w E m `m c o c ~ m : `m ~ °' ~ ' ~ ;~ c v v n a E > a v p m m d a E m m o `o , o >. a N 'O ~ ~ p O C 'O J • p W E 'O ~ • ~ N y C y C y y I ~ C_ G_ C ~ P G C_ G_ C_ C_ O I_ V m m O' Q W O' Q Q Q D' O' Q O' O' Q O' O' ~ Q O' W Z m Ip ~ y : y : y y y y y y y y y y y : V1 ~ N y y N~ ~ < °D m m o c~ o m o r ~ m ~n o <n 0 o 0 v 0 c~ 0 ~ r N o m : c~ v p m E o v m m v o y r m r ~ r m M m co m v c~ m m m in ur (71. 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 °o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o ', °0 0 Z 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N _ O 0 N 0 O 0 - O - o N o o N o N o N...:- 0 O 0 O 0 , N' 0 N 0 N CO 0 N Z.. r r r ~ r o r m m r~ o r r r m m r r r q ~ o J~ ~ J~ ~ J~ ~ cb ~ cb ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J~ cn J~ cn a ~ ~ 0 m c O ~ ~ N Ol d N - t (q ~ O. N O FH R7 m 0 r y 'R O ' ^~ m J N r m C . N m -~. ' O) In m `.~ U y d U Q O H y N ~ fn ~V. 3 Z a t0 C p m ! V E O 'O N V : V V' N C 1 N V' N N V f/1 (0 Y L ~ y Y [0 y N N C C E ~ N w U y0 O ~i th O d NU ~_ j O d N( 0 •O e-m O- ~- ~ 0_ OLL _ ~- E d r N m O y f0 ~ O ma O V' W N LL]U N Oc O rG O m ~ O c7J O r t7 ,a .J O m O N OW ~ O O O ~ O W O V~ >> M> "f N 0 m r a{U. ~O. ~~ OJ O m O O '.U N >> N> N NZ N.Z . NZ N~ m e7Z MZ M~ . thZ ~ ch M~ t7Z M W: ch Z. Mh c]~. M3 [O W M . ~ n. O N a~ ~~ ~ a O ~ aa ~~ a<+' 7 a J ao O~ a J ~ a O N a O N a ~~ . am ~ am O~ p a~ O ~ y a O p a O~ am J~ a 7 p ad' J~ a{ O 0 a O O UfO U.- p j Ur U.- ~ U~ N Ur U.- UN Ur Um UuJ ~ Ucn UN U~' U cg Uc7 U.- U r Ur Ur: U N Q. ~ € .~'aa a a a a a a a 'a a a a a a ~ 'a ~ o' N N N m r O ~ m O O 0 N 0 O In O ~ O ~ O 1fi O LL] O N V d' V In w '.. n m a D ~ ~ ~ N m 0 t m 0 r ~ O V I~ ` ~ ~ W ~ J II! a C t 0 . ~`Q ryp p 0 0 Q p Q Q ;. Q Q Q Q p p Q 'Q Q' m p ~ Z.. tp Z Oty e- Z Z Z Z Z n Cp a~ m l~ Q Q Q Q l O . Q 'Q p Z O v m v m ~o m 'o m v' m v m v m v m v m v m v m ~ m- a m aH. Q Q Q o o m o Q o on o 0 0 ' U m am n am a nti 'c a awl am n~ n~ av o 'c Q ~ a~ n nm a n~ m n am am n~ am: a~ n n . a m m Qm Q Q~ ¢ Q.-. 0 Q ¢v Qc~ ¢.- ¢r Qin ¢ Q o m U m U m ~ m m x m m > x ~ c° ~ w E ~ mn _ Q° N a C ~ Y ~ U O ~ o c Y m E % .1C m ~ C~ .E m : m H n p 'W m m ! m c c m m ai m m ' ~ ~ . K I v y m mm o c m ~ ! v m m >~ m m. ~ m m a m m '` c~ `m u '' ~, c~m `o v a Q C G ~ w.0 N d N p ~ p m C p T C C. C C G~ C S C p C E ~ '~ C x ~ U C m E ~ ~ ~m I ~~ ~ ~m ~y 1 ~ ~ ~ I 1 ~w O F ' W Z' v N o' b Q N v N c fq Q N v M Q N Q c d' ' o' v o' Q N~ o .- o o m rn m - v N N o : m v N m N a % o N r (n ~ m m ~"~ m V m m N O m N : m O lp t9 m ~ < m C O m ' O CO N t0 O ~ (~ 0 p 0 O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O 'Z 0 O O N N ' N N N O O O O O O Z N ~ o v~ ~ . r~ r~ ' n ~ ch Y i°n n r ti ~ n O rn J~ cn tb d~ rn J> ¢ cil ~ ~ J~ rn rn N R ~ ~ tr : ~ lr ~ ~ ~ tY ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ d Z. Z d ~' m m. m ~ ¢' m m ~ ° rn ~ aA (n ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ t d m ~ m o f Z.a ~ o m -m J Q . ~ ~ i~ m -y. rn m .. ..c E~ U rq 0 ~ o ~ . c r a o , mt rn u . ~ 3 in m E M ai Y m m s U m °' v ' a .o m m E K ~' j~ . C . a o- N Z o m a rn o ~ o a i ~ Z m . ~ N, m:U: ~'p m m ot v a O m o ~ N m c+) v M~ v `- U. (n CO (n M>. N U1 ~Uj NZ m NZ m N.Z ~ NZ n N~ n NtO m NZ NZ v i N~ N~ N~ Z ' ~~ N a tO = a f~ = a C7 ~ a c'1 = a In ~ a [t a O a a~ m a m a h a'- N aQ t0 aN M a~ S N '- ~- O O' N ~~- =.M =~ =m ~O ~.~. ~~ ~R ~N ~ch rt ~ UO) Um U I~ U1f1' Ucq U1q Um UCn Ur Um UtO UN Ut9 U~. U ~- ~ N m m c0 a ATTACHMENT RbR ITEM 1-A (N0. 3) (SUBJECT TO CITY ATTORNEY APPROVAL) AN ORDINANCE OF TH~IT~ANs~!~AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICII'AL CODE AND ADDING NEW SECTION 18.04135 TO CHAPTER 18.04 OF TTI'LE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING (SECOND UNTTS AND SENIOR SECOND UNTTS). WHEREAS, the State Legislature has declared that second dwelling units provide a valuable form of housing for family members., students, senior citizens, in-home health care providers, the disabled .and others at below mazket prices within existing neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the Legislature stated its intent that any second-unit ordinances adopted by local agencies have the effect of providing for the creation of second units; and that provisions in these ordinances relating to matters including unit. size, parking, fees and other requirements are not so arbitrary, excessive, or burdensome so as to unreasonably : restrict the ability of homeowners to create the second units in zones in which they are authorized by local ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Legislature restated its conunitment to second units as a valuable form of housing in 2002 with the passage of Assembly Bill 1866, which amends Government Code Section 65852.2 by eliminating the authority to require. a conditional use permit or any discretionazy review for second units and mandating ministerial approval of such units; and WHEREAS, Section 65852.2 authorizes a local agency to (i) designate areas where second units maybe permitted based on criteria that may include adequacy of sewer services, impact on traffic flow or other factors identified by the City; and (ii) subject to certain limitations, impose standazds that include parking, height, setback, lot coverage, architectural review, maximum size, owner-occupancy and standazds that prevent adverse impacts listed on the California Register of Historic Places; and, WHEREAS, the legislative history of Section 65852.2 indicates that the purpose of its owner-occupancy requirement is to protect neighborhood stability and the character of existing family neighborhoods and to discourage speculation and absentee ownership.. Sounhein v City of San Dimas (1996, 2nd Dist) 47 Cal App 4th 1181, 55 Cal Rptr 2d 290; and WI-IEREAS, the ordinance provides that second units will not be allowed in any portion of the City established by Planning Commission and/or City Council resolution as being significantly impacted by insufficient capacity for traffic. circulation, pazking, sewer; public utilities, or similaz infrastructure needs; and. WHEREAS, the City~o kl has id~ntiazeas of sewer deficiencies and pazking deficiencies which would b exa ate b-the stablshment of second units; and ~~ ~ ~ ~ WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to pernut second units, subject to the standazds identified in this ordinance, in all residential areas of the City, excluding only the areas established by Planning Commission and/or City Council resolutipn as deficiency areas; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to establish a procedure authorizing the Planning Director or his or her designee to consider second units ministerially, subject to established standazds and criteria, in compliance with the standazds in Section 65852.2; and WHEREAS, despite the City's goal of establishing clear, objective standards consistent with the Legislature's mandate of a ministerial process for consideration of second units, and recognizing the challenge of creating ministerial standazds for architectural review, there may be instances in which the Planning Director or the .applicant may need clarification of a provision of the ordinance, and; therefore, review by the Planning Commission for the limited purpose of clarifying the provisions relating to second units is provided; and WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim currently allows second units, including "granny units," subject to approval of a conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, most applications for conditional use permits for second units' have been approved by the City; and WHEREAS, the provisions of the Government Code authorizing a conditional use permit for second unit housing for senior citizens have not been amended; and WHEREAS, the City Council concurs with the Legislatut•e's findings that there is a serious shortage of senior housing units and an important need to maintain senior citizens in independent living situations and to encourage.housing azrangements that prevent isolation of elderly persons and reunites families; and WHEREAS, in addition to the second units authorized pursuant to the ministerial process required by Government Code Section 65852.2, which have no age limitations, the City wishes to provide. an opportunity to provide for senior housing in instances where the requirements for second units can not be met, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and any required waivers; and WHEREAS, the adoption of this ordinance regazding second units .and senior second units in single-family or multifamily residential zones to implement the provisions of Government Code Sections 65852.1 and 65852.2 is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.17 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15282(1), and, to the extent that Code provisions aze revised to ensure internal consistency, that the project is categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines 2 Section 15061(6)(3), which provide .t~at3a!here it can~be~seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in questi n u~~hayeia srgi;if~ant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CTI'Y COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION L : That the following definition is hereby added to Section 18.01.200 of Chapter 18.01 of Title l8 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: `Senior Second Unit' or `Granny Unit.' A second unit, as defined in Section 18.04.135.020.0205, which does not meet the requirements of Section 18.04.135 for a second unit, where the unit is for the sole occupancy of one (1) or two (2) adult persons who are sixty-two (62) years of age or over, and for which a conditional use permit is approved as authorized by Section 65852.1 of the Government Code." SECTION 2: That new Section .135 be, and the same is hereby, added to Chapter 18.04 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: "18.04.135 SECOND UNITS. .010 Intent. The City recognizes the importance of livable housing and an attractive, suitable living environment for all residents: The State Legislature has declared that second units are a valuable form of housing in California. It is the intent of the City to permit second residential units, in conformance with State law, in all those areas and subject to standards that will ensure the units contribute to a suitable living environment for people of all ages and economic levels, while preserving the integrity and character of single-family residential neighborhoods. It is not the intent of this Section to override lawful use restrictions as may be set forth in Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions or similar instruments. .020 Definitions. For purposes of this Section, the following terms, phrases, words and their derivations shall have the meaning given herein:': .0201 An `attached second unit' means a second unit attached to and located within the living area of the main dwelling unit, having at least one common wall and a common roof with the main dwelling unit, and located on the same lot. 3 .0202 A `detached ser.~o N meani~asecond unit detached from the main dwelling unit and I®, ted~n~lDe s~` me lot. ~.~ ~ ~~ .0203 An `efficiency unit' means a second unit with a minimum size of four hundred (400) square feet containing only one habitable room. .0204 `Habitable space' or `habitable room' means space in a structure for living, sleeping, eating or cooking. Bathrooms, toilet compartments, closets, halls, storage or utility space, and similar areas, are not considered habitable space., .0205 A `second unit' means an attached or detached residential dwelling unit on a lot zoned for residential use which provides complete independent living accommodations. and facilities for one or more persons which includes permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation, on the same parcel as a legally established single-family dwelling. .030 Density Provisions. A second unit which conforms to the requirements of this Section shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which such unit is proposed to be established and shall be deemed to be a residential use which is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designations for the lot. .040 Number of Units Per Parcel No more'than'one (1) second unit shall be allowed on a single lot. .050 Existing Lot and Uses. A second unit shall be allowed if the existing lot and dwelling meet the following requirements: .0501 The lot on which the second unit is proposed to be established shall contain one existing permanent single-family dwelling and no existing granny unit, guest house, servant's quarters or similar facility, unless the proposal includes demolishment or modification of such facility so as to comply with the provisions of this Section. .0502 The second unit is allowed in the zone in which it is proposed; .0503 The existing lot is a minimum of five thousand (5,000) square feet, except as may be provided in subsection .170; .0504 The existing residential use complies, or as proposed, will comply with current parking requirements; and 4 .0505 If the existing main,dweIlin any associated accessory structures have leganlyie~t~blished evi °fions from current zoning requirements, a sec~t'i`d umt~nay'be petted, provided the second unit complies with the requirements of this Section. .060 Prohibited Locations. Second units'are not permitted in any area of the City identified by resolution of the Planning Commission and/or City Council as being significantly impacted by insufficient capacity for sewers, traffic circulation, parking, public utilities, or similar infrastructure needs. .070 Development Standards.. The following development standards shall apply to second units: .0701 Facilities. The second unit shall have a separate entrance and shall contain kitchen and bathroom facilities separate from those of the main dwelling unit. .0702 Utility Services. The second unit may be metered separately from the main dwelling unit for gas, electricity, communications, water, and sewer services. .0703 Size. The size of the second unit shall comply with the following requirements: (a) The minimum total floor area shall be 400 square feet for an efficiency unit, and 550 square feetfor a'one-bedroom or two- bedroom unit. (b) The maximum total floor area'shall be as follows: (1) Attached second units shall not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the main dwelling unit living area, provided that if the main dwelling unit is one thousand three hundred thirty four (1,334) square feet or less in size, one (1) four hundred (400) square foot efficiency unit shag be permitted. (2) Detached second units shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the existing main dwelling unit living area or one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet, whichever is Tess. .0704 The second unit shall contain no more than two (2) bedrooms. .0705 A second unit shaltconform to the development standards for the underlying zone, including, but not limited to, standards for front, rear and side yard setbacks, height and parcel coverage, provided further that 5 a detached second umt shall have a minimum separation of ten (10) feet between the main ellin ~~ ~"~ m~-th :detached second unit. ~vnit~~ .080 Design. A second unit shall conform to the following design standards: .0801 Exterior stairs shall not be visible from any public right-of way, excluding alleys; .0802 The design, color, material, and texture of the roof shall be substantially the same as the main dwelling unit; .0803 The color, material and texture of all building walls shall be similar to and compatible with the main dwelling unit; and .0804 The architectural style of the second unit shall lie the same or similar to the main dwelling unit, or, if no architectural style can be identified, the design of the second unit shall be architecturally compatible with the main dwelling unit, and shall maintain the scale and appearance of asingle-family dwelling.. .090 Vehicular Access. The second unit shall utilize the same vehicular access which serves the existing main dwelling unit, unless the second unit has access from an alley contiguous to the lot. .100 Parking. Parking for. the second unit shall be provided as follows in addition to the parking required for the main dwelling unit and in accordance with Chapter 18.06 of the Municipal Code: ..1001 One (1) off-street space shall be provided for an efficiency unit or one-bedroom second unit; and .1002 Two (2) off-street spaces shall be provided for atwo-bedroom second unit.::. .110 Historic Buildings. .1101 A second unit proposed for any lot that includes a building listed in the California Register of Historic Places shall conform to the requirements of the State Historical Building Code. .1102 A second unit proposed for any of that includes a building listed in the California Register of Historic Places, or identified as a "Contributor" in the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan and other historic preservation plans as may be approved by the City Council are encouraged to comply with the design guidelines of such plan. 6 .120 Code Compliance.~hesecond anitshall;be constructed inaccordance with provisions of the latest edi~on of~u~ding and other codes adopted by the City. -~--~` ~_ ~_ ~~ a_ .130 Ownership and Occupancy. .1301 Owner Occupancy Required. One of the residential dwellings on a lot on which the second unit is proposed to be established shall be occupied as the primary residence of the owner of the lot and shall not be rented or leased as long as the second unit exists. If, thereafter, the owner occupies neither unit, the second unit shall automatically become anon- habitable space ,shall not be used as a dwelling unit, and shall not be rented. .1302 Rental Occupancy. The residential unit which is'not occupied by the'owner of the property in conformance with this subsection may be rented. .1303 Sale or ownership of a second unit separate from the main dwelling unit is prohibited. .140 Deed Restrictions. Prior to issuance of a building permit for a second unit, the property owner shall provide written proof to the Planning Department that an unsubordinated covenant setting forth the following requirements, in a form satisfactory to the Planning Department and City Attorney's Office, has been recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder: .1401 A reference to the deed ender which the property was acquired by the owner; .1402 The second unit shall not be sold or owned separately; .1403 The second unit shall be considered legal only so long as either the main dwelling unit, or the second unit, is occupied by the ovaner of record of the property; and .1404 The restrictions shall be binding upon .any successorship in ownership of the property. .150 Existing Nonconforming Units: '.Second nnits that exist as of the effective date of this Section that have'previously been legally established`may continue to operate as legal nonconforming second units. Any second unit that exists as of the effective date of this Section and has not previously been legally established is considered an unlawful use unless the Planning Director or his or her designee 7 ("Planning Director") determines that the_unit.meets the provisions of this Section. '~ i - ` .160 Conversion of Legally Established Structures to Second Units. The conversion of legally established structures that exist as of the effective date of this Section shall comply with the following requirements: .1601 Conversion of an existing legal "granny unit" into a second unit shall require that the unit meet the provisions of this Code. Any legally established waivers or nonconformity that exist on the effective date of this Section may continue, provided that in no manner shall such waiver or ;non-conformity be expanded. .1602 Legal non-conformities of the existing main dwelling unit, except for parking standards relating to number and type of parking spaces as specified in Section 18.06.050.011, shall be allowed to remain, provided the structure is not altered to accommodate the second unit in a manner which expands anon-conformity. .1603 The conversion of an attic, basement, garage or any other part of a single-family dwelling which was not previously legally established for habitable space shall comply with the provisions of this Section and the underlying zone. .1604 Any conversion of structures not previously legally established for habitable space constructed pursuant to approved variances from Code requirements pertaining to height, setback and lot coverage, shall comply with the provisions of this Section.. .170 Approval. The application for a second unit shall be reviewed by the Planning Director or his or her designee ("Planning Director") for compliance with the provisions of this section. If the Planning Director determines that the application and evidence submitted show that the second unit will comply with the requirements of this Section 18.04.135, the application shall be approved; otherwise the application shall be denied. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a unit on a lot which is less than 5,000 square feet which otherwise meets the requirements of this section shall be approved..:.. .180 Interpretation by Planning Commission. If a question arises relating to interpretation or applicability of a provision of this Section, the matter shall be considered by the Planning Commission as a Report and Recommendation Item, and determined by resolution." 8 SECTION 3. t i ~~ Thatsubsection .013(2 of Sec'tron i~. 6.Os0.010 of Chapter 18.06 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby; amended as follows: ".0132. Senior Second Units (p anny units) for which a conditional use permit is approved as authorized by of Section 65852.1 of the Government Code: One (1),parlcing space ; cavcrcd-ar-apen; for each unit - o SECTION 4. That. new subsection .015 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section ] 8.06.050.010 of chapter 18.06 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".015 Second Unit, as defined in Section 18.04.135.020.0205, in conformance with the criteria and standards of Section 18.04.135: One (1) off-street space for an efficiency unit or one-bedroom second unit; two (2) off-street spaces for atwo- bedroom second unit. Required parking spaces shall not be in tandem to other on-site parking spaces for the main dwelling unit." SECTION 5. .That subsection .010 be of Section 18.21.030 of Chapter 18.21 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same: is hereby,. amended in its entirety to read as follows: ".010 Accessory Living Quarters. The following living quarters are permitted in a detached accessory building, provided such quarters shall not have kitchen facilities and shall not be rented: ..011 Agricultural workers' quarters on farms or ranches of not less than ten (10) acres in area for the sole use of agricultural workers employed on the premises; ..012. Employee quarters used only by persons employed to provide services to the occupants on the premises;. .013 Guest quarters for temporary guests of the occupants of the premises." C 9 SECTION 6. -~ ` t~ ,. That subsection .020~S~ctiotl 1 Y.030-of Chapter ] 8.21 of Title I8 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby,'deleted. o , , c a SECTION 7. That new subsection .130 be, and the same is hereby, added to 18.21.030 of Chapter 18.2] of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows; ".130 Second Units, as defined in Section 18.04.135.020.0205, in conformance with the criteria and standards of Section 18.04.135." SECTION 8. ; That new subsection .327 be; and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.21.050 of Chapter 18.21 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".327 Senior Second Units, as defined in Section 18.01.200 of this Code. An unsubordinated covenant in a form satisfactory to the Planning Department and City Attorney's Office, limiting the occupancy of the senior second unit to one (1) or two (2) adults, both of whom are sixty-two (62) years of age or older, shall be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit." SECTION 9. That subsection .0] 0 of Section 18.22:030 of Chapter ] 8.22 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be; and the same is hereby, amended in its entirety to read as follows: ".010 Accessory Living Quarters. The following living quarters are permitted in a detached accessory building, provided such quarters shall not have kitchen facilities and shall not be rented: .011 Agricultural workers' quarters on farms or ranches of not less than ten (10) acres in area for the sole use of agricultural workers employed on the premises; .012 Employee quarters used only by persons employed to provide services to the occupants on the premises; to .013 Guest quay foctemporar~guests of the occupants of the premises." • o a . o a• • a .....SECTION l0: That new subsection .130 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.22.030 of Chapter ] 8.22 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".130 Second Units, as defined in Section 18.04.135.020.0205, in conformance with the criteria and standards of Section 18.04.135." SECTION 1 L. That new subsection .075 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.22.050 of Chapter 18.22 of Title ] 8 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".075. Senior Second Units, as defined in Section 18.01..200 of this'Code. An unsubordinated covenant in a form satisfactory to the Planning Department and City Attorney's Office, limiting the occupancy of the senior second unit to one (1) or two (2) adults, both of whom are sixty-two (62) years of age or older, shall be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit" SECTION 12: That subsection .010 of Section ] 8.23.030 of Chapter 18.23 of Title ] 8 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended in its. entirety to read as follows: ".010 Accessory Living Quarters. The following living quarters are permitted in a detached accessory building, provided such quarters shall not have kitchen facilities and shall not be rented: .011... Agricultural workers' quarters on farms or ranches of not less than ten (10) acres in area for the sole use of agricultural workers employed on the premises; it .012: Employee qua~tersused on13~J,rylpgrsons employed to provide ,r. services to the occupants on the,~pr~uirses; ter` ~. ~~ ~ .~ .._. .013 Guest quarters for temporary guests of the occupants of the premises:'. a i v > , o a SECTION 13. That new subsection .150 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.23:030 of Chapter 18.23 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to7ead as follows: ".150 Second Units, as defined in Section 18.04.135.020.0205, in conformance with the criteria and standards of Section 18.04.135." SECTION 14. That new subsection .065 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.23.050. of Chapter 18.23 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".065 Senior Second Units,'as defined in Section 18.01'.200 of this Code. An unsubordinated covenant in a form satisfactory to the Planning Department and City Attorney's Office, limiting the occupancy of the senior second unit to one (1) or two (2) adults, both of whom are suety-two (62) years of age or older, shall be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit." SECTION 15. That subsection .010 of Section 18.24.030 of Chapter 18.24 of title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended in its entirety to read as follows: ".010 Accessory Living Quarters. The following living quarters are permitted in a detached accessory building when the area of the lot is not less than one (1) acre, provided such quarters shall not have kitchen facilities and shall not be rented: 12 .011 Employee quarters~used ontly.6,y.~persons employed to provide services to the occu~an&~on th'e~p sQs. .012 Guest quarters for temporary guests of the occupants of the premises." a a b SECTION 16. -That new subsection .100 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.24.030 of Chapter 18.24 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows; ".100 Second Units, as defined in Section 18.04.135.020.0205, in conformance with the criteria and standards of Section 18.04.135." SECTION 17. Thatnew subsection .065 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.24.050 of Chapter 18.24 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to7ead as follows: ".065 Senior Second Units, as defined in Section 18.01.200 of this Code. An unsubordinated covenant in' a form satisfactory to the Planning Department and City Attorney's Office, limiting the occupancy of the senior second unit to one (1) or two (2) adults, both of whom are sixty-two (62) years of age or older, shall be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder prior to the issuance of a building permit." SECTION ] 8. That subsection .010 of Section 18.25.030 of Chapter 18.25 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended in its entirety to read as follows: ".010 Accessory Living Quarters. The following living quarters are permitted in a detached accessory building when the area of the lot is not less than one (1) acre, provided such quarters shall not have kitchen facilities and shall not be rented: .011 Employee quarters used only by persons employed to provide services to the occupants on the premises. 13 .012 Guest qua f em orar~~guests of the occupants of the premises:' ~ ~~~ SECTION 19. That new subsection .120 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.25.030 of Chapter 18.25 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".120 Second Units, as defined in Section 18.04.135.020.0205, in conformance with the criteria and standards of Section 18.04.135" SECTION 20. That new subsection .065 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.25.050 of Chapter 18.25 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".065 Senior Second Units, as det-med in Section 18.01.200 of this Code. An unsubordinated covenant is a form satisfactory to the Planning Department and City Attorney's Office, limiting the occupancy of the senior second unit to one (1) or two (2) adults, both of whom are sixty-two (62) years of age or older, shall be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit " ..SECTION 21. That subsection .020 of Section 18.25.062 of Chapter 18.25 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as follows: ".020. Maximum Lot Coverage. Coverage of a lot by all structures shall not exceed forty percent (40°]0) of the lot area; provided however, that swimmingpools and semi-enclosed patio structures shall not be considered as structures in ascertaining coverage:' SECTION 22. That subsection .010 of Section 18.26.030 of Chapter 18.26 of Title ] 8 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended in its entirety to read as follows: 14 ".010 Accessory Living Qvarters~ The f ofying living quarters are permitted in a detached accessory buildings tlteu tJrie a ` o~ the lot is not less than one (1) acre, provided such quarters shall shave h~t~hen~acilities and shall not be rented: .011 Employee quarters used only by persons employed to provide services to the occupants on the premises. ..012 Guest quarters for temporary guests of the occupants of the premises." C . SECTION 23. That new subsection .120 be, and the same is hereby added to Section 18.26.030 of Chapter 18.26 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read'as fo]lows: ".120 Second Units, as defined in Section 18.04.135.020.0205, in conformance with the criteriaand standards of Section 18.04.135:' SECTION 24. That new subsection .065 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.26.050 of Chapter 18.26 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".065 Senior Second Unit as defined in Section 18.01.200 of this Code. An unsubordinated covenant in a form satisfactory to the Planning Department and City Attorney's Office, limiting the occupancy of the senior second unit to one (1) or two (2) adults, both of whom are sixty-two (62) years of age or older, shall be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building perroit." SECTION 25: That new subsection .070 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.27.030 of Chapter 18.27 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".070 Second Units, as deemed in Section 18.04.135.020.0205, in conformance with the criteria and standards of Section 18.04.135:' 15 SECTION 26. u f4 ` That. new subsection . 65'be, d ~h~`s is hereby, added to Secton 18.27.050 of Chapter 18.27 of Title l8 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".065 Senior Second Units, as defined in .Section 18.01.200 of this Code. An unsubordinated covenant in a form satisfactory to the Planning IDepartment and City Attorney's Office, limiting the occupancy of the senior second unit to one (1) or two (2) adults, both of whom are sixty-two (62) years of age or older, shall be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit " SECTION 27. That new subsection .070 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 8.31.030 of Chapter 18.31 of Title ] 8 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".070 Second Units, as defined in Section 18.04.135.020.0205, in conformance with the criteria and standards of Section 18.04.135, on any lot developed with one (1) single-family dwelling." ....SECTION 28. That new subsection .070 be, and the same is hereby,'added to Section 18.32.030 of Chapter 18.32 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".070 Second Units, as defined in Section 18.04.135.020.0205, in conformance with the criteria and standards of Section 18.04.135, on any lot developed with one (1) single-family dwelling." SECTION 29. That new subsection .080 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.34.030 of Chapter 18.34 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to read as follows: ".080 Second Units, as defined in Section 18.04.135.020, irrwntormance with the criteria and standards of Section 18.04.135, on any lot developed with one (1) single-family dwelling." SECTION 30. SEVEI2ABILTTY The City Council of the City of Anaheim hereby declares that should any section, paragraph, sentence or word of this ordinance of the Code, hereby adopted, be declared for any reason to be invalid, it is the intent of the Council that it would have passed 16 all other portions of this ordinance independent of elimination herefrom of any such portion as may be declared invalid. ~ ~++~ ~~ SECTION 31. SAVINGS CLAUSE Neither the adoption of this ordinance nor the repeal of any other ordinance of this City shall in any manner affect the prosecution for violations of ordinances, which violations were committed prior to the effective date hereof, nor be construed as a waiver of any license or penalty or the penal provisions applicable to any violation thereof. The provisions of this ordinance, insofar as they are substantially the same as ordinance provisions previously adopted by the City relating to the same subject matter, shall be construed as restatements and continuations, and not as new enactments. SECTION 32. PENALTY It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to violate any provision or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this ordinance. Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of this ordinance or failing to comply with any of its requirements shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not exceeding One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment not exceeding six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each such person, firm or corporation shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each day during any portion of which .any violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance is committed, continued or permitted by such person, firm or corporation, and shall be punishable therefor as provided for in this ordinance. THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE is approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Anaheim this day of , 2003. MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: CTI'Y CLERK OF THE CTfY OF ANAHEIM 4910615MANNWpriI 16, 2003 17 Item No. 1-B SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY PROPERTY RAILROAD DU 1 1 I 1 r LIMIT I CL I I 58-59-45 a ~ j I -® LAW OFFICES J _ PROF. BLDG. CRESTWOOD LANE fm-210 ~-~'I F- W W 0_' o ~ N I'-' 2 `1 (] m 1 I U EAiH CRESTWOOD LANE ® RS-7200 I I 1 DU EACH FOREST LAN E - RS-7200 o p .°- p: 1 DU EACH ~ W Q J Q J J_ JUDITH LAN E RS-7200 t DU EACH MIDWOOD LANE Conditional Use Permit No. 660 ,` ~'.; Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2003-04689 Date: April 21, 2003 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: SANWA BANK CALIFORNIA CORPORATION Q.S. No. 36 REQUEST FOR TERMINATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 660 (TO PERMIT A TRAINING SCHOOL FOR MEDICAL AND DENTAL ASSISTANTS). A 1717 South Brookhurst Street s4a ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 7-B September 24, 2001 Kevin J. Bass, AICF City of Anaheim Planning Department Anaheim City Hall 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Dear Kevin, In response to your request the termination of Variance No. 1294 (to operate a children's dance studio at 1709 South Brookhurst street) we aze hereby informing you that we do not own this property. If you have anything related to this matter, please contact the owner of record for this property. We do request termination of the Conditional Use Permit No. 660 (to establish a training school for medical and dental assistants at 1717 South Broolchurst Street)., this is the property we own. Sincerely, Abdel-Jabbar Hamdan Belal Dalati Presid t Const lion anager '/ ~~ -. 703 N VALLEY Sl'RE E'1' SUI'I'8 'I' ANAHEIM, CA )?3U1 (7(d) G35-3113 E-MAIL:ANSAR~;~JUNCI.COM Islamic Society ~ ~' LI II b £ upaz wl qo ~'-~ 3 R1nW ° ~ fl4P8E999(11 °~ 6 P¢fi]dgfi6 ~I VM]]0] VM]wI ~ g I DU FACH LA PAZ CIR R9 ne! _]RACTND.finl ¢fi9d4dU 31. fl¢6I8 VARY4]fi OU OI y~l I ~\l J '~ ~ PLL~9)~d6le / NLL I}]6]0 2 ii<"~`r i. RCL )!.]fy L11P 15N Y j: LpH00lB °~ ~,1 Rs+1s3z RO9 R4 R~]9d119L1 RCL i]~T9y wP vTR CUP 9538 LuP 24ID LUP 2880 CUP 3559 CUP 348 CUP t15] 1 DV EACH vow ]iui I[u SPT 2002-00003 Yom" ~ !l l NYJN 2 1RRLT ND.9Z1] fl¢]5.]fiae ' R9A1933mR R31L532.WV 16/E&29 T) , ail f' ]0.n3] R¢1!-]WB R4 ]a]Y-Lr R¢R.i}fil IIOEA DRNF (T'CUP2002-0C566J CUP 2466 '" ~y~f 9 1? N¢S]dBEfi p IDV EAOI R46]d Iou PApl IDV FA~I P Ra Rte]!! )1 CUP 7dOfi / N Y y ~i\ Ra n.]ae ) TTT NNIS CLUB ~ ~ io e L m ~` iRee r w! r r xo wm f ~ ~ . . c iy° P4]S16Y0 CVP IIN d p ,,, -, N w.n nee vew4 ~ , x T ~ ] ]RL B1M iMC]Nn BBY1 1~ r y? /I P 6 / Dwm r.ua. YYm Rsaxfi4 vY ~, > RCL]}16Y0 \ RDL!}fi4+o~x1. 2i R ~Tr ~\ ~f y 5 O ~ gLVPOfNY VIR R036 1 W EMJI /£ l G~` VNI ]]e9 aPEC uFN TREE D.... I„ ~~RFYLLV~ NV. PbM 'P~~1. A T~ ~]~ 9 ~~N vJ IP '%,: ~LTrv, iln ineuiowLx ]o- Cih. quwai aq It,{ a cL VL! W~iPS~ gP¢I]oiiiiel iL ~i~i^] ~ j°r v~luv wenrl~~ L` ]Pixx]Yexr9 Rsu]am Wss. plv]`m RCL TNIi] 1LUP]WIL1Lli R )D]113 na mnv WP~~ ]o]!ya (Rn. tlIr~AGNTSA<1.080) v~n~]f~e. e[wog2]iiafla Rp~r,~pW~~~~LLLLY~ V/.L41i /.P.WIYFNi6 p. C~C~.Vmll~glil5 LtuIYmSY Jo?0.°LLYI'e5 NpH[ °L~.m?ae s~li2a Ragas °«am . a ']ly W°w ae~~ LQ PU~ Ra ]wan Ran.re.u Pl CH u'0 >^~ ]ea n.]gae NPLle! s L ~D -Q~1~G~ 1W Q ~R]I ]I0n ~Qj,O YIP~L\A 0.0.6)~y eNC°~jQ0.6 C ~HSON Vz qIP ]YW P~m1,r4N p~ S'nll9 `Z`y 0 cI 9ENioq LRIZEHe ¢ G/7 ~R °'4+ 0 MAgiYba//9 qCL ]),]e-0]PI ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE (SC) (SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONE /Y,/: Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-04537 / k., ;: Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2003-04687 Date: April 21, 2003 Scale: Graphic Requested By: WILLIAM WILKENS Q.S. No. 192 REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE TO CONSTRUCT A POOL AND SPA IN CONJUNCTION WITH A TENNIS AND RACQUET CLUB.. 415 South Anaheim Hills Road -Anaheim Hills Racquet Club sss Iren No. t-D RM-1200 59.60-93 V-1260 VAR 2002-04 m ( RM-I 200 A APARTMENTS D G) c m z RM-1200 RM-1200 APARTMENTS VAR 4275 ORANGEWOOD AVENUE RS-7200 1 DU EACH RS-7200 1 DU EACH 64UEBELL AVE RS-7200 CLIFFWOOD AVE RS-7200 DU EAC WILKEN WAY RS-7200 1 DU EACH I I 2 D t» m m m -I m n RM-1200 o: ? j APARTMENTS l RM RM-1200 ~~1 RVAF VAR 4275 RM-1200 RCL 69-70-13 ~~~~ VAR 2125 II RS-A- 43,000 a _m V SMALL SHOPS 6 O C Z --I D z < NDn + m ~ A °cpm~ °c ~~a m m =z'O ~ Z pN ( C m General Plan Conformity No. 2003-00025 ~,r, ,~:'. Subject Property Date: April 21, 2003 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested ey: GORDON ITOW, ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Q.S. No. 99 REQUEST TO DETERMINE CONFORMANCE WITH THE ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WITHIN A PORTION OF, AND ADJACENT TO, PONDEROSA PARK. G m z N A m m 1 D. 2100 South Hasler Street, 105-147 East Wilken Way, 2103-2155 South Mountain View Avenue, 330 East Orangewood Avenue 570 WILKEN WAY - ATTACWIENT -R&R ITEM 1-D ANA~IEI~I CI'I'~' SCI~O®L I~ISTRIC'I' OPERATIONS CENTER 1411 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 TeI714-517-7549 a Fax 714-517-8768 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES ~~~~~ 117)241~~1 . Paul Burkart CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT ,~ ~ >~ `~ ` March 24, 2003 ' ~ iw+t~:1t,2003 ~~ Joel H. Fick =~ Pec_~vSD -' ZONING Planning Director `~" DIVISION ti City of Anahefm ~~ 4, / 200 South Anaheim Boulevard ~'~ ti 6' Ll Anaheim CA 92805 - RE: REQUEST FOR GENERAL- PLAN CONFORMITY FINDINGS OF THE PROPOSED PONDEROSA SCHOOL SITE Dear Mr. Fick: Pursuant to Section 21151.2 of the Califomia Public Resources Code and Section 65402 of the California Government Code, the Anaheim City School District (ACSD) is required to give the Planning Commission having jurisdiction over a proposed school site notice in writing of proposed acquisition of property for a school site or expansion of an existing site. Accordingly, this letter shall serve as such formal notice and formal request for the following: Request that the City of Anaheim Planning Commission investigate the proposed site and within thirty days after receipt of this notice submit to the ACSD Board of Education a written report of the investigation and its recommendations concerning .acquisition of the site. • Request that the City of Anaheim Planning Commission investigate the proposed site and submit within 40 days written findings to ACSD of the results of the investigation as to the conformity of the proposed project with the currently adopted City of Anaheim's General Plan. PROPOSED PROJECT In a joint effort with the City of Anaheim, the ACSD intends to construct a school facility adjacent to the existing Ponderosa Park. The proposed project will involve the construction of a new elementary school complex in the Ponderosa Park and extending into the adjacent parcels. The District's Master Plan calls for a two story campus building to be located in the southeasterly portion of the expanded park. This new campus building will have a total floor area of 64,000 square feet and house 49 classrooms for grades Kindergarten through six grade. The initial phases of this project will involve the acquisition of real property located adjacent to the Ponderosa Park along Mountain View Avenue and Wilken Way in the City of Anaheim (see attached map). Also known by assessor parcel numbers 233-161-Ot through 233-161-08, 137-353-03 through 233-161-10, 233-161-09, 233-161-10, and 137- 351-32. The ACSD is presently preparing an initial study for this project and will soon have it available for public review during the CEQA process. Your earliest response to this request would be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please call me at (714) 517-7549. Respectfully, G~~/~/~ /~l%2~Z~~Z~ 'L Gordon ttow Senior Director, Facilities Planning CC: Paul Burkart 5:1p1anninB and developmentldalalnew_conshuctionbandervsabily_anaha'vnlgemplancon(orm.tloc ATTACHMENT R&R ITEM 1-D ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT PONDEROSA AREA Property Assessor Address Parcel Nos. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 105 E. Wilken 233-161-01 109 E. Wilken 233-161-02 115 E. Wilken 233-161-03 121 E. Wilken 233-161-04 127 E. Wilken 233-161-05 131 E. Wilken 233-161-06 137 E. Wilken 233-161-07 147 E. Wilken 233-161-08 2103 S. Mountain View 137-353-03 2107 S. Mountain View 137-353-04 2115 S. Mountain View 137-353-05 2121 S. Mountain View 137-353-06 2127 S. Mountain View 137-353-07 2133 S. Mountain View 137-353-08 2139 S. Mountain View 137-353-09 2145 S. Mountain View 137-353-10 2147 S. Mountain View 233-161-09 2155 S. Mountain View 233-161-10 330 E. Orangewood 137-351-32 ~~noz ~~ U .C+ N_ ^ d 8e ~a tq y Z, o U ~ E ~ ._ o ma L Cl0 Q ATTACHMEtJT R&R ITEM 7-D S iy Q O O w Z O w } Z w Y >_J W d m 0 S S RASTER ST o .- o 0 0 0 0 ® MOUNTAIN VIEW AV o e 1 DU EACH T OLAAVE ... _. _.. J a RS-7200 g RCL 67-68-72 p 1 DU EACH r 1 TROJAN PL RS-7200 1 DU EACH 1 I I BROADWAY ~ ~ T ~ Z f W RS-7200 Q SKYWOOD CIR RS-7200 ~ 0 o _ TRACT N0.2400 U ~ ' M. NO. 20D1.00216 ~ ~ 1 DU EACH w - r ROWLAND CIR RS-7200 ~ ~ 1 lu - j. ~ CUP 2003-04665 1 DU I11 J 0 ~ O O Z ~ ~ o 0 0 m r~ ~O ~' ~~ I 02 aU ~ oU ~ n ~W ~O ~ ~ =o ~ z I' I SAVOY PL ROWLAND /C- I~R ~ I T Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04665 Subject Property Date: March 10, 2003 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: KENNETH B. ISENHART Q.S. No. 13 TO PERMIT AND RETAIN AN ATTACHED SECOND UNIT IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN :EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK. 302 South Benwood Avenue ssa ACADEMY AVENUE ~ ~ 120 ~.~{ 'Staff Report to the 'Planning. Commission '..April 21,'2003 .:Item No. 2 2a. CEQAtJEGATIVEDELCARATION (Motion) 2b. I`, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion) 2c. 'CONDITIONAL. USE PERMIT NO. 2003-04665 (Resolution)z SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly-shaped, 0.19-acre property is located at the southeast corner of 'Academy'Avenue and Benwootl Drive with frontages of 65 feet on the east side of `=Benwood Drive and 120 feet on the soutfiside of Academy Avenue (302 South Benwood `brive). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit under the authority of California Government Code.Section 65852.1 to permit and retain an attached second unit in conjunction with ah existing permitted single-family residence with waiver of the following: SECTION NOS. 18.26.063.030 Minimum side yard setback. (5 feet required; none existing'or proposed) BACKGROUND: (3) This item was continued from the March 10, 2003, Commission meeting in order for the Building Division 4o complete an inspection of the second unit to determine :whether the structure could be brought into compliance with Uniform Building Code _~_.-J~-J~ TL.~:i~~... 6i~~.~J L..~~.:LM~A~w1~.9 7RflZ /~wmM,c.~.iww ....o...~. ....z . ~........~ ..y .. .......... ............ ~.r....,, o___, __ ..__._.. meeting in order to finalize review of permits issued by Orange County relative to 'this property. (4) This property is currently developed with asingle-family residence and an'unpermittad second unit and is zoned RS-7200 (Residential, Single-Family): The Anaheim General :Plan Land:Use Element Map designates this property for Low Density Residential land 'uses. (5) Surrounding land uses are as follows: Direction Land Use , Zoning; Generai Plan Designation All :Single-Family Residences ? RS-7200 Low Densiiy Residential PRIOR ZONING ACTIONS: (6) There are;no prior zoning actions pertaining to this property. I PROPOSAL: (7) The petitioner requests approval to permit and retain.. a 464 square foot, attached second ''unit in conjunction with an existing single-family residence on a 8,276 square foot lot. This Yequest is a result of a Notice of Violation issued by the Code Enforcement Division for the Lnpermitted second unit. ` Sr8587vn' Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21 2003 Item No; 2 (12) The petitipner, Mr. Ken Isenhart, has indicated the second unit existed on the property for :many years prior to his ownership and is intended for use by his elderlymother. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (13) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for .:review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and, herefore, recommends that a IJegativebeclarationlbe approved upon a finding by,the 'Commission that the'deciaration reflects the independentjudgment of the lead agency; and that it has'considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any comments 'received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and'any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will :have a significant effect on the'environment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: (14) :The Staff has reviewed the proposal to permit and retain a second unit in conjunction with !an existing single family residence, and the initial study (a copy of which is available for rreview in'the Planning Department) and finds no significant adverse environmental :impact land therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Zoning Administrator that the Negative Declaration reflects the'independent judgment independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the; proposed Negativebeclaration together with any comments received during the public review ('process and furtherlfinding on She basis of the Initial'Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that theproject will have a significant effect on the + ::.environment. EVALUATION: (15) `Granny units are permitted in the RS-7200 Zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit under authority of California Government Code Section 65852.1. The referenced Code section further specifies that the granny unit`must be intended forthe sole occuoancy of one or two adults who are 62 years of age or older, and that the floor area for an attached second`unit be limited to 30'percent ofthe floor area of the primary residence and for detached dwellings limited to a maximum of 1200 square feel i Plans indicate the size of the unit is 484 square feet and is 42 percentbf the floor area of the primary`; residence. (16) The requested waiver pertains to minimum side yard setback.: Code requires a minimum side yard: setback of 5 feet and plans indicate no setback existing and proposed for the `.'second unit which was constructed on the propertyline adjacent to Academy Avenue. This :'second unit was constructed without permits and there are no constraints or hardships Unique to the property that would prevent a newly constructed'unit from complying with Code. Therefore, tall recommends denial of this waiver. Page 3 Staff Report to the r Planning Commission `April 21, 2003 !.Item No: 2 The floor area of this attached unit is 484 square feet and is 42 percent of the Floor area of the primary residence. ' It should be noted that if the unpermitfed breezeway were removed this wculd be a' detached second unit and would oomply with the Floor area limitations provided by the State Code. Requirements relating to height, setback, lot coverage, architectural review, site plan :review, fees, charges and other' zoning requirements generally: applicable to residential bonstruction in the zone in which the properly is located. The unit does not meet City Codes relating to minimum side yard setback requirements since the unit is located oh the property line and provides no setback. Local building code requirements which appty to attached dwellings, as appropriate m The structure was constructed wthout the benefit of plan check review or building ;, permits. Compliance: with Building Codes would be necessaryprior to final approval of a building permit. Since the unit was constructed without permits, the ability to comply with(building codes would heed to be demonstrated as part of an on-site inspection 6ythe Building Division,': if the existing unit were allowed. to remain in the currentlocation. .'Approval by the local health officer where: a private sewage disposal system is being used, if required: This residential area, .including the existing residence, is served;by a public sewer system. The secondvnit is also: served bythe public'sewer system. (19) :State Code has established maximum standards that local agencies shall use to evaluate proposed'second units on lots zoned for residentialuse which'contain an'existing single- tfamilydwelling. The State Cotle explicitly states that no additional standards other than those outtined by the State shall be utilizetl or imposed. The State Code further states that 'ho other local ordinance, policy, or regulation shall'tie the basis for the denial of a building permit or a use permit authorized by State Code. Page 5 Staff Report;to the Planning Commission- April 21, 2003 Item No. 2 (20) The following,are previous requests for second units that have been considered by the Planning Commission: CASE NO, AND `ZONING SIZE OF APPROVED PC ACTION CC :LOCATION UNIT WAIVERS ACTION' CUP 2002-046A7 RS-7200 456sq. ft. Approved N/A .1643 W. Cerritos :1/13/03 CUP2002-04579: > RS-7200 896: sq. ft. - :.Denied 9/9/02 N/A 733 S. Euclid Street CUP:2002-04528 RS-7200 ' 796;sq. ft. Min. side and,rear Denied Denied 1190 N. Che Lane aid setbacks (13/6/02 CUP20D7-04487 ! RS-7200< 630 sq. ft. Min:side'and7ear Deniedl/14/01 > N/A 113a'N. Bodesbrive and setbacks CUP 2001-04362 RS-7200(SC) 619"sq. ft. Approved 6/01 N/A 121 rN. Jertilee Lane CUP 2000-04259 I RS-7200: 708 sq. ft. Approved N/A 1590 W. Fli en Wa 11/00 CUP 3611 RS-5000 537sq. ft Min. no. of parking Approved N/A 217: N. Emil Street a aces '6193 CUP 3427 ? RS-5000 756sq. ft. Max. no. of Approved N/A 724 N. Topeka Street bedrooms and min. 7/91 side and CUP3396 RS-7200 ' 630 sq, ft. - Approved N/A 628: S. Westchester 3/91 Drive` CUP;3256 RS-10,000.: 300'sq. ft. Min. side yard Approved N/A 547 N. Janss Street 3/90 CUP 3196 RS-7200 ' 640sq. ft. Min. no. of packing Approved N/A 31.18 W. Polk Avenue s aces 9/89 CUP 3184 RS-7200: 630 sq. ft. - Approved N/A 2549,W. Eola Drive g/t;g CUP 3175 s RS-7200 630 q. ft. Approved N/A 1319:. N. Co Terrace 7/gg CUP 3141 RS-5000 427 sq. ft. Min. rear yard. Approved N/A 302 El C ress'Street setback '5/89 CUP 3130 RS-5000: 360 sq. ft. 'Approved Approved 319 N`. Olive'Street g~gg CUP:3177 RS-7200 < 631 sq. ft. Approved N/A 1403 Trenton Ddve ~/gg CUP3078 RS-7200 634 sq. ft. Denied Denied 701`S. Lemon Street modular .1:1/88 CUP 3073 RS-7200 64p sq. ft. - Approved ,Approved '.1194 W: Lomita'Place 11/88 CUP 3067 RSA-43,000 536 sq. ft. Min. side and rear Approved Approved 1515 E: Broadwa aid setbacks 11/88 CUP 3043 RS-7200 504 sq. ft. ,Min. side and Year Approved N/A 1223 S. Walnut Street yard setbacks; min. '9/88 no and type of arkin s aces CUP 3040 RS7200 64p sq. ft. Mlrt. no, and. type of :Approved N/A 913St Ira Court ' arkin s aces '8/88 CUP 3027 RS-10,000 ' 440 sq. ft. Min. rear yard Approved Approved 817: W. North Street setback ': 8/88 CUP 2968 RS5000 630 sq. ft. > Min. front yard and .Approved N/A 703 S: Philadelphia min. floor 1/88 Street arealdwellin i CUP 3009 RS-7200 640 sq. ft. - Approved Al ,:,i;ved 503S: Vicki Lane g~8g Page 6' Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21,'..2003 Item No.2 CASE NOt AND ZONING SIZE OF APPROVED PC ACTION CC LOCATION UNIT WAIVERS ACTION CUP 2873 RS-7200 266 sq. ft. Min. structural and : Approved' N/A :325 N. New Avenue and ro uirements 1187 ,CUP 2875 RS-7200 .609 sq. ft. ; Mln. structural z Dented ? Denied 514 N. Ze rt Street setback 3/87 3 'CUP 2863 RS-7200 628 sq. ft. Min. rea[ yard Approved Approved 630 N. Clementine ! setback ahd max. 1/87 .!Street ! rear artl'covera e CUP 2778 RSr7200 504 sq. ft. Max. lot coverage, ',' Approved' N/A 911 N. Dicke) Street min. structural 4/86 setback and yard re uirements. CUP 2769 RS-A-43,000 631 sq. ft.;' - Approved> N/A 1881 W. Chateau 3186 Avenue CUP 2740 RS-5000 450 sq. ft. Min. no. of parking Approved': r N/A 608 S. Philadelphia i' spaces 11/85 Street i CUP 2654 RS-7200 464 sq. ft. Max. lot coverage Approved` N/A 837 N. Dicke) Street 1/85 CUP 2558 ! RS-720D 608 sq. ft. Rear yard setback ' Approved; N/A 2121 N on Place 5/84 'CUP 2552 RS-7200 904 sq. ft. Approveds Approved r 3430 W. Brad Street 6184 `CUP 2453 RS-7200 520 sq. ft. Approved ;Approved.. 1232 W. Romneya 9/83 Drive CUP 2423 RS-7200 :707 sq. ft. Min. number and Denied - Denied 1317 S. Claremont type of parking 5/83 i Street s aces (21) :The Commission may wish to note that filing of this request for a second unit is a result of iCode Enforcement action initiated in Ju1y2000, based on Code violations for this property .:including unpermitted commercial automotive repair: The Code Enforcement Division has submitted the attached memorandums, dated March 5 and April 2, 2003, regarding this property. Code Enforcement Division staff inspections have confirmed the petitionerhas corrected some of the Cotle violations. Further,'a letter prepared by the 'Zoning Division dated November 15, 2002, (attached) and requested by Mrs. Isenhart details allizoning cotle violations on the property including the unpermitted second'unit. The following are existing cotle violations: Two unpermitted 288 square foofsheds. • Ar! permitted enclosed patio converted to an'unpermitted room addition. • An unpermitted enclosed spa/patio. • An' unpermitted breezeway that attaches the second unit to the primary structure. • A sliding chain link gate on the north property line adjacent to Academy Avenue. (22} Currently, he two unpermitted 288 square foot, metal sheds on the property exceed size restrictions for buildings that do not require permits; therefore,' permits are required to be obtained'for these structures. `The petitioner has indicated that they will apply for permits for all outstanding structuresat the conclusion of Planning Commission hearings. Page 7 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21,::2003 Item No12 (27) State legislation, effective July 1, 2003, will provide that second units, including granny 'units, be;approved',`by right' provided they meet requirements: of the State Code; or !alternatively, that a jurisdiction has adopted an ordinance and'developmant standards ?regulating'second units. The: City of Anaheim is currently in the process'of creating; development standards for these units via the zoning code update. FINDINGS: (28) :When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the =Zoning Code, a motlification may be granted for thejpurpose of assuring that no property, because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose of any code 'waiver is o prevent discrimination and none shall tie approved which would have the effect of granting a specialprivilege not shared by other similar properties. Therefore, before any code waiver is granted by the: Commission, it shall tie shown: ;(a) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size shape, topography„location ocsurroundings, whichido not apply to otheridenticallyioned properties in the vicinity; and '(b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of!privileges'enjoyed by.other properties under identicat zoning classification in the vicinity. (29) `Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact 'chat the evidence presented shows thaYall of the following conditions exist: (a) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is ; authorized by the Zoning Code, or that said use is not listed therein as being a permitted use; (b) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to belocated; (c) That the sizeand shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner riot detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, healtft, safety, and general welfare; (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will noYimpose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved'to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the'conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health; safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: (30) -Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting,: and based upon the,evidence'submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing that the Planning Commission take he following actions: r (a) By motion; as rove a CEQA Negative Declaration. Page 9 Staff Report o the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 Item No. 2 (ti) By motion, deny the waiver pertaining to minimum side yard setback because' here is no justification'for granting the waiver based do the characteristics of the property nor haveahere been similar waivers granted in the`vicinity. Moreover; the hardship is self- created due to the construction of the second unit without permits. '- (c) By resolution, den Conditional Use Permit No 2003-04665 (to permit and retain an existing second unit in conjunction with an existing single.-family residence) based on the following: (i) That the existing second snit, as sited on the property, is not properlybne for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Codeand under California Code Section 65852.1', since ifdoes not meet the minimum standards of the State Codepertainingto size orthe Zoning Code pertaining, to setbacks: (ii) ; That the size and!shape of the property on which the second unit is built is adequate to allow the full development of a second unit without the need for waivers and irr a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, antl general'weifare. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SUBMITTED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS ACTING 1 AS AN INTERDEPARTMENTAL' COMMITTEE AND.ARE RECOMMENDED FOR ADOPTION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THE EVENT THAT THIS PERMIT IS APPROVED' 1. That with ninety (90) days from the date'of this resolution, plans shall be submitted to the Zoning and Building Divisions showing a 5-foot wide side: yard setback adjacent to Academy Avenge. " Said plans shall also demonstrate compliance with maximum floor area requirements of the State Code by reducing the size of the unit to 30 percent of the primary Yesidence br detaching the unit from the primary residence. Said modification shall be completed within ninety (90)`days of the issuance ofa building permit. 2. That the legal owner of subject properlyshall restrict the occupancy of the second unit to one (1) or two (2) adults, both of whom are sixty (62) years of age orolder, and shall specify that no rental fee shall be'charged for occupancy of the second unhand, furthermore, shall record: an unsubordinated covenant against the property so-restricting he occupancy of said unit. Said covenant shall be submitted to the Zoning Division4for transmittal to the; City Attorney's office for review and approval prior to recordation; A copy of the recorded covenant shag. be submitted to the Zoning Division. Said modification shall be completed within (10) days of the issuance'of a building permit. 3. !' That the. legal owner of the subject property shall occupy either the primary single-family residence or the second unit. The second unit shall be accessory to the primary residence on the lot. An unsubo~dinated covenant against the property so-restricting he occupancy of said unit shall be recorded. Said covenant maybe incorporated into the above-referenced (Condition No. 2) covenant and shall be'submitted'to the Zoning Division for transmittal to the City Attorney's office for review and approval prior to recordation.s'Acopy of,the recorded covenant shall be submitted to the Zoning Division. 4. That within a period of one (1) year from. the date of this resolution, and'annualfy on the anniversary date thereafter, the legal owner of subject property shall submit a signed affidavit that the. property owner and any occupant of the second unit are in compliance with all conditions of this conditional use permit,:. including:those concerning occupancy. The affidavit shall be submitted to the Zoning Division of the Planning Department. Page 10 "Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21,.:2003 Item Ncx'2 5. ThaYthe existing chain link gate shall be removed and may be replaced with aCode-conforming gate: Appropriate buildirg permits shall be obtained for installation of the new gate. ? 6. Thaf the existing structures shall comply with the minimum standards of the City of Anaheim, including the Uniform Building, Plumbing, Electrical, Mechanical and Fire Codes as adopted by the: City of Anaheim. Said information shall be'specificaliy shown on plans submitted fog Zoning and;Building Division approval. 7. That'a minimum of 2 garage spaces and 3 uncovered spaces shaltbe provided on-site for the primary residence and second unit. Said spaces shall be' approved. by the Zoning Division and City Traffic and Transportation Manager and shall in compliance with Chapter 18.06 (Vehicle Parking and Loading Requirements) and so specified on plans submitted for building permits. 8. Thansubject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted'to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner antl which plans are on file with the PlanningbepartmenNmarked Exhibit No. 1 Revision No. 1, Exhibit No 2 Revision No: 1, and Exhibit No 3 and as conditioned herein. 9. That within a period of ninety (90) days ftom the date of this resolution, or prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3 5, 6, 7, and 8, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code: 10. Thatapproval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed requesfonly to the extent that' it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code'and any other applicable City„state and Federal regulations.: Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the: request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. Page 11 ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 2 M)E1~®~lN~~i~ City of Anaheim Planning Department Date: April 3, 2003 To: Greg Mc Lafferty, Principal Planner From; ~~ Julie Seay, Building Official Subject: 302 S. Benwood Drive Staff, as requested by the applicant, performed an investigation of this property, on Apri12, 2003 revealing the following: A 484 sq. ft. residential unit with a sepazate electrical meter has been constructed along the northeast side of the property. The structure appeazs to have been built on a slab on grade with the fmish floor of the unit at the same grade level. The south, west, and east exterior walls of the structure consist of 24" high masonry blocks and wood framing used to continue the construction of the exterior wall up to the roofline. Extension walls have also been framed on the top of the north properly line block wall fence, and the wall is being utilized to form the unit's exterior wall. The unit has numerous code violations such as: ® The north exterior wall of the structure at the north property line has zero set back and lacks the required fire protection. ® The structure does not appeaz to have the required foundation. ® The finish floor level for the useable space is not 6" above grade. ® There is no evidence of the required moisture barrier under the unit's concrete slab. o There is no evidence that graded lumber was used for the framing or that framing connections meet seismic requirements. ® There is no evidence that the walls and ceiling of the unit aze properly insulated. ® The block wall fence is not designed for additional wall or roof loads. ® Utilities to the unit are supplied by improper installation of plumbing waste, vents, water, sewer, gas lines and electrical systems. ® The electrical service meter is unlisted for use by the Electrical Utilities Department and is not properly grounded. The unit is in substandazd condition to be used as a residential unit. It has been constructed without permits and will require extensive work to comply with 1972 or current building codes. If you require additional information on this property please contact Fred Martinez at extension 5847. C: Fred Martinez, Building Operations Manager CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Art Peck, Building Inspection Supervisor NO~.fI(7~--raC{,(Qf~ ATTACHMfNT - 1TEt1 N0. 2 MEMORANDUM. CITY OF ANAHEIM Code Enforcement Division DATE: APRIL 2, 2003 TO: VANESSANORWOOD,PLANNER FROM: LINDA C. EAVES, SENIOR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER SUBJECT: ISENHART PROPERTY - 302 S. BENWOOD DRIVE This memo is in follow-up regazding the detached, second living unit at the above location. Thorough research of County of Orange Tax Assessor's, City of Anaheim Building Division, and City of Anaheim Library records reveals: • Permits were never obtained for the structure. ® The structure was noted on the property in aerials dated 1964 and 1974. • It was a freestanding structure, and not attached to the original, primary permitted residence. • An inspection request form dated 8-21-72 was fora "Patio-Enclosed-Screen" structure. The left hand side of the second page diagram azea appeazs to be an example of what is required for conducting the inspection (diagram shows gazage, dwelling, add'n). The right hand side of the page appeazs to show the structure to be inspected. The orientation to Academy is correct. The dimensions of the structure (22'6" x 22'6") roughly coincide with scale approximations photographed in aerials, and reported squaze footage of the current granny unit (484 square feet). The inspection does not appeaz to have been completed. None of the possible azeas where notations concerning the structure (i.e. footings, zoning, permits) were filled in, There is only one notation on the front page of the form stating, "Play Room on property line. Owner informed to remove 5 ft". • The "Open Area" called out on the submitted plans is a fully enclosed/roofed area. Aceess to this azea from the north, side yazd azea is through a security screen door. A door on the east side leads to the granny unit. At door on the west leads into the laundry room in the original, primary permitted structure. A doorway has been cut into the south wall providing access into the unpermitted, enclosed patio/spa room. Code Enforcement believes the current granny unit was once an unpermitted screened-in, enclosed patio/playroom erected in the side setback azea prior to 1964. An inspection in 1972 noted the structure was on the property line. The location of the structure coincides with current documents provided to Planning by the Isenharts, and recently verified by the Building Division. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at extension 4472. Thank you. m~o3sLe.aoo CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT' NOo2CC~ C~U<ol S ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 2 DATE: TO: MEMORANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Code Enforcement Division MARCH 5, 2003 VANESSANORWOOD, PLANNER FROM: P~u'SMAX WILSON, CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER SUBJECT: KENNETH AND KAREN ISENHART-302 S. BENWOOD DRIVE Review of Code Enforcement records indicate ongoing,citizen complaints concerning a possible auto mechanic business and a lazge vehicle hoist in public view in,the rear yazd dating back to at least 2000. On August 2, 2002, I met the owner, Mr. Isenhart at the property and inspected the property and observed numerous Anaheim Municipal Code violations: AMC 18:04.090.020 -Building permits required -Several added rooms or structures including three lazge metal sheds, 10' x 24', 10' x 24', and 9' x 12'; a commercial type auto hoist was erected in the reaz yazd; an unpermitted granny unit; a fully enclosed structure/gazage erected between the unpemutted granny unit and original permitted detached gazage; a "spa" room with skylights; a breezeway between the original residence and the unpermitted granny unit; a shed attached to the north side of the permitted original gazage; and a previously permitted aluminum patio cover with screen and acrylic enclosure being used as a habitable living azea. AMC 6.44.010.100.1002 -Improper Occupancy -Improper use of the enclosed patio for living purposes (couch bedding, stereo/CD equipment; heating supplied to azea by forced air from primary residence); also allowing persons to live in an unpermitted attached granny unit. - AMC 18.02:040 -Land Use Regulation, General -Altering or erecting buildings without permits and Planning and Zoning approval. The fence in the side yazd was in the public right- of-way. AMC 15A2.000.030 Adopting Uniform Housing Code sections 1001.1 General, 1001.2.13 - Improper Maintenance, and 1001.5 Hazardous Electrical Wiring Numerous electrical extension cords hanging in the gazage areas supplying power to the.various lights and power tools and unpermitted electrical in the structures noted in structures above. 6.44.010.050.0504 -Improper Storage. Garbage cans visible from a public street. 6.44.010.050.0502 -Improper Storage. Inoperative, abandoned, wrecked or dismantled vehicles in public view for more than ten days. 6.44.010.070.0707 -Improper Maintenance/18.04.060.070. The front lawn required seeding and ongoing maintenance. 6.44.010.030 -Refuse and Waste. Auto parts and general debris in reaz yazd. 18.04.043.101 -FENCES, WALLS & HEDGES IN FRONT YARD. The fence in the front yazd was in excess of 36" and in the public right-of--way. 6.44.010.070.0711-Unsightly fence atreazalleyazea. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO ~GP7.~-~ul~~ ISENHART- 302 S. BENWOOD DRIVE PAGE 2 OF 2 On 08-26-02, a Notice of Violation and Order to Comply letter was sent to the Isenhart's outlining what was required to bring the` property into compliance. A Final Notice and Order to Comply letter was sent on 10-21-02, as the property was not in compliance. On 12-09-02, an attorney conference was held with Deputy City Attorney, Terese Oliver, Judy Dadant of Planning and Zoning, Senior Code Enforcement Officer Linda C. Eaves, the Isesharts and their attorney, Douglas Plazak, and myself. Subsequent to the attorney conference the Isenharts have abated all of the violations, except for the vazious zoning and building permit items relating to the two lazge sheds in the reaz yard setback; improper occupancy of the aluminum patio; the necessary application and approval for a Conditional Use Permit to retain the unpermitted granny unit; the breezeway; the "spa" room for which the current zoning item (C.U.P. #2003-04665) is being considered: '' If there are questions or desire additional information, please feel free to contact Senior Code Enforcement Officer Linda C. Eaves, at extension 4472, or me at extension 4480. Thank you M0046mw.dac ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 2 SECT10N4 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER) REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: V Y Z(y~ C C 3 U,>2O °'__ G / / (A s~p~'~te statement is required for each Code~aiver) PERTAINING TO: r J 1 ~-t~ ~~ C1Y'r~ S~'l"V~i f /~ Sections 18.03.04p.030 and ] 8.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance of Code waiver maybe granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown: 1. That there aze 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 That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regazding the property for which a variance is sought, fully and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages. 1. Are there special circumstances [hat apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topogrnphy, location or surroundings? X Yes _ No. 2. 3. "descri a the special circunvstances: / / > [ ~ Yi_O.e.O, ~drf1CQ~ ~~ IK.Ol2.Q. 1~ n~s~ 2erC . , -c- 4. The sole purpose of any variance or Cade waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shazed by other property in the same vicinity and zone which is no[ otherwise express authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances aze not permitted. ~->~ 0 12 0 Signature of Property Owner or A thorized Agent Date DECEMflER 12, 2000 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE NO. wun an nnnn n 1. L, t'i ri Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which aze in the same zone as your property? X Yes _ No Do the special circumstances applicable [o the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? Yes No Were the s ecial circumstances created by causes beyond the control of theproperty owner (or previous property owners)? Yes _ No I TEt1 N0. 3 m ~ RM~1 OO1GH Nt gGH ~ RM-1200 -® rn` VAR 2001A4445 m 1 DU VAR 3755 ~ APARTMENT 1D Du 1DU SMALL SHOPS SMALL C P 3 12 SHOP n VV A~ vA~• ~ CG a/ S-~REE~ GENT N i® Af Gn CPRWPSH oa b z\ y vENVE 1.yN~'O~ P~~ RM-~Z~H1GH PNPS NODU Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04669 x Subject Property Determination of Public Convenience Date: March 24, 2003 or Nessessity No. 2003-00010 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: YONG SUB KIM O.S. No. 63 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-04669 - TO PERMIT THE RETAIL SALES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR OFF-PREMISES CONSUMPTION IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING LEGAL NON-CONFORMING CONVENIENCE MARKET. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2003-00010 - TO PERMIT THE RETAIL SALES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR OFF-PREMISES CONSUMPTION WITHIN AN EXISTING LEGAL NON-CONFORMING CONVENIENCE MARKET. c V 11 1000 West Lincoln Avenue -Thomas Liquor snt2DOas-ts~ Staff Report to the Planning Commissibn .'April 21 y 2003 Item No; 3 3a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 1 r (Motion for continuance) 3b. CONDITIONAL>USE PERMIT NOf 2003-04669"- 3c. ! `DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY N0; 2003-00010 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) `This rectangularly-shaped 0.35-acre property is located at the southwest corner of Lincoln ? Avenue and Illinois Street,. with frontages of 110 feet on the south side of LincolnAvenue and 104 feet on the west sideof Illinois Street (1000 West Lincoln Avenue -Thomas Liquor). ; REQUEST: (2) `The petitioner requests approval of the following: (a) A Conditional Use Permit under the authority of Code Section No. 18.45.050.195 to permifthe retail sales of alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption in "conjunction with an existing legal non-conforming convenience market. (b) A Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to upgrade an existing Type 20 (Off-Sale Beer and Wine) tb'a Type 21 (Off-Sale General Alcohol) license to ;'permit the retail sales of alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption within 'an existing legal non=conforming convenience market. BACKGROUND; (3) This property is developed with an existing 2,400 square foot convenience market and is zoned CG (Commercial, General). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property forGeneral Commercial land uses. (4) At the request of the petitioner, this item was continued from the March 24 and April 7,:2003 Planning Commission meetings to pravide the business owner an opportunity to discuss recommended conditions of approval withPlanning and PoliceDepartment Staff. The petitioner, Leon'Alexander, has submitted the' attached letter dated, April;15, 2003, requesting an additional continuance to the May 5 2003, Planning Commission meeting in'order to allow the business owner more time to consider the7ecommended conditions of approval. '' RECOMMENDATION: (5) ` That the Planning Commission, by motion, continue this item to the May 5, 2003, meeting. sr85(36av .Page 1 714 5209248• APR-15-03 14:07; PAGE 21z NT SY: BRIGGS & ALEXANDER; / ATTACHt1ENT - ITEP1 N0. 3 Rgor 4Y W. 9Nigc~.- I.EUN C. ALC %AN(JCF. SVL Bn1AN C. L7 gTLGU 9M. SUE ANN IBMANIM ADAM C. Lq UGrI IIN A Fkucr99~u NqL 4n :n O~Ann4 RCTrteen April 15, 2003 LAW OFFICER OF ®RIC~GS & ALEXANDER ATTORIV EYS AT LAW A PRriF'ESSIp NAL, CORPORATION SSk3 BpLITH HAFxBpR Bp ULEVAR6 sulre lOp ANN-IEIM, CgLIF~RNIA 9'1.905 Via Facsimile # 714-765-5280 and IJ.S. Mail Amy Vazquez, Assistant City Planner Anaheim City FIall 20U S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, California 92805 Re: Thomas Liquor Conditional Use Permit Dour Amy: Tll1•NONd9141 o2q•9 ZGq [ACBIMILC 191 41 92q•n>.OR '11iis will confirm our telephone conversation this morning whereby the meeting between vw• client and yourself, currently scheduled for Apri121, 2003 is now scheduled for May 5, 20U3 ut 1:OU p.m. at yvur offices to consider the various cnndiiions noted in the Staff Report. Thank you ii~r your assistance in this matter. if you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. 5incercly yours, Law Offices of Briggs & Alexander A Professional Corporation Leon C. Alexander, I.CA/kd Encl. o~~..- ,~ 2003 z~~1~G ~~ Dlv:slog CONDITIONAL USE PERAAIT NO 2003" 04y'lo~) i Conditional Use Permit No. 4020 '`~ `>"' ~r.~~~ Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2003-04675 Date: April 21, 2003 Scale: Graphic Requested By: ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT Q.S. No. 155 REQUEST TO REINSTATE THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO A TIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON APRIL 27, 1998 TO EXPIRE ON APRIL 27, 2003) TO RETAIN A 450 SQUARE FOOT, MOBILE OFFICE TRAILER IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING FISHING CONCESSION OPERATION. 4060 East La Palma Avenue -Santa Ana River Lakes s3sl2oos-4-f7) Staff Report to the Planning Commission y Apri17, 2003 ? Item No 4 4a: CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 1 ` (Motion) 4b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO: 4020 (Resolution) (TRACKING NO.,CUP2003-04675) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTIONi ? (1) .This irregularly-shaped 125-acre property has a frontage of 5,617 feet art the south side of La Palma: Avenue, a maximum?.depth of 2,685 feet and is located 347 feet east of the centerline'of Tustin Avenue (40110 East La Palma Avenue -Santa Ana River Lakes). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests reinstatement of this permif by the modification or deletion of a ..'condition of approval: pertaining to a time limitation,(approved on April 27 1998, to'expire ion April 27, 2003) to retain a 450 square foot mobile: office trailer in conjunction with an existing fishing concession operation under authority of Code Section 18:03.093. ' BACKGROUND: (3) ahis property is developed as a recreational fishing area with a 450 square-foot mobile 'office trailer and is zoned SP94-1, DA6 (Northeast Area Specific Plan, Development Area 6 ' -Open Space). This property.. is located within the Project Aipha (Northeast Area) `.Redevelopment Project Area and the Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map 'designates this property for Water uses. (4) .Surrounding land uses are as follows: ::Direction Land Use Zoning" General'Plan Desi nation North (across La Palma Industrial Complexes SP94-1' (Development General Industrial Avenue) and Offices Areas 1 2, and 5 East(across Richfield Ihdustrial Eittns SP94-1;{Development Geheral Industrial and Road and Fee Ana Areas 5 and 6) General Commercial Street South-' Santa Ana River N/A Water Uses «r West = Office; Restaurantend SP94-1 (Development General Commercial Retail/lndusfrial Area 5) i' Com lex *DevelopmentArea 1 (Industrial Area), Develdpment Area 2 (Expanded Industrial Area),;: Development Area 5 (Commercial Area) and bevelopmeht Area 6 (Open Space) (5) Conditional Use Permit No. 4020 (to permit a 450 square foot mobile office trailer in 'conjunction with an existing fishing concession operation) was approved;by the Planning Commission on April 27, 199t3 and expires on April'27, 2003. i Resolution No. PC98-68 adopted fn conjunction with Conditional Use Permit!No. 4020 contains the following': condition of approval: "3. That this permit shall expire five (5) years from the date of this resolution:' Sr5002jr Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission' April 7, 2003 Item No. 4 DISCUSSION: (6) Donald L. Jackson, representing the landowner (Orange County Water District), has submitted this requesffor reinstatement to retain the 450 square=foot mobile office trailer in conjunction with an existing fishing. concession operation. The petitioner also requests`: deletion of the condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation:: (7) In order to demonstrate that the findings required for the reinstatement of this permit have been satisfied, the petitioner has submitted'the attached Justification forReihstatement which indicates that no aspect of the operation of the mobile office trailer has changed since the previous approval, that the physical property has remained the same, and that all conditions of'approval pertaining to the permit have been complied with. (8) The Code Enforcement Division has submitted a memorandum dated March 25, 2003,: :regarding thercurrenYstatus of the'property. The memorandum documents Shat the petitioner is complying with conditions of approval and a recent staff inspection indicates that the property is being properlymaintained. (9) The Commission may wish to note that there have been no changes to the SP94-1, DA6 zone standards or any other changes to the Anaheim Municipal Code that would invalidate the findings that were the basis forthe previous approval of this conditional use permit: (10) Staff has inspected the property and has determined that the mobile ofFce trailer is operating as intended. Further, the'operation of this facility is being conducted in a manner not detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood since there have: been no complaints regarding this'business' on file with`the Code Enforcement Division. (11} Regarding the petitioner's request to delete the condition of approval pertaining to the time limitation, staff recommends that this permit tie reinstated for a period of three (3) years and five (5) months, in order to continue to monitor the operations.: Based ortthe unique nature of this use and the fact thaE a subject property is located within the project Alpha Northeast Redevelopment Area, staff recommends that the reinstatement of this conditional use: permit be for the term of the lease agreement that the applicant has with the property owner, which expires on September 30, 2006. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (12) The Planning Director's authorized 7epresentativehos determinedthat the proposed project falls within the definition of Categdrical Exemptions, Section 15301; Class 1 (Existing Facilities), as defined in the CEQA'Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from'the requirementto prepare additional environmental documentation. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: (13) The proposed`projecthos been reviewed by affected City departments to determine whether it conforms to the City's Growth Managemenf Element adopted by the City Council on March 17,.1992. Based on Citystaff review of the proposed project, it has been determined that this project does not tit withinthe scope necessary to require a Growth Management: Element analysis, therefore, no analysis has been performed. '' Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission 'r April 7,'.2003 Item No 4 FINDINGS: (14) Before the Planning,Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that ail ofthe following conditions exist: ` . (a) That the proposed use,is properly;one for which a conditional use: permit is authorized 6y the Zoning Code, or that said use is not listed therein as being a permitted use; (b) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to belocated; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development. of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare; (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose ari undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic inthe area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, :will not be detrimental o the peace, health,rsafety and,general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. (15) Subsection 18.03.093.040 of the Zoning Code requires that before the Commission grants reinstatement of the approval by extension of any time limitations for an additional period or periods of time, or such time limitation is'deleted ormodified, the applicant must present evidence to establish the following findings: (a) The facts necessary to!support each and every required showing',for the issuance of such entitlement as set forth in Chapter 18!03 exist; (b) Said permit is being exercised substantiallq in the same manner and in .conformance with all conditions and stipulations originally approved by the approval body; (c) Said permit is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses; nor to the public peace, health and safety and general welfare; and (d) With regard'only to any deletion of a time limitation, such deletion is necessary to permit reasonable operation under the permit as granted. RECOMMENDATION: (16) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the I meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented atthe public hearing, the Commission take the following'actions: (a) By motion, determine that the project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15301, !Class 1; (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines. Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning.Commission April 7, 2003 Item No. 4 (b) By resolution, a rove reinstatement'of Conditional Use Permit No. 4020 (Tracking No. CUP2003-04675) to retain a 450 square-foot mobile office trailer in conjunction with an existing fishing concession operation for a period of three (3) years and five (5) months to expire on September30, 2006, based on the following: (i) That this permit has been substantially operated in the same manner as ', originally approved by the Commission. The Code Enforcement Divisionhas jnspected the premises and has determined that the facility is in substantial compliance with all applicable conditions'of approval: (ii) That the permit is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular 'area and surrounding and uses, as evidenced by the absence of Code `Enforcement complaints for this property. (iii) That there have been'no changes to the applicable zone standards that would invalidate the findings that were the basis for the original approval of this 'permit. (c) Staff further recommends that the Commission amend Resolution No. PC98-68 in its entirety, to be replaced by a new resolution with the following conditions of approval based'on the finding that the modification is necessary to retain a 450 square-foot mofile office trailer in conjunction with an existing fishing concession operation: 1. That this permit shall expire on September30, 2006.': 2. That the wall-mounted air conditioning unifon the modular office trailer sfiali 'not be visitile to La Palma Avenue. 3. That the existlrnp trees planted to screen the approved modular office trailer from La Palma Avenue shall be'professionally maintained to prpvide a continuous visual tioffer from tfie street. 4. That the subject property shall be developed and maintained substantiallyin accordance with plans and specifications submitted #o the City of Anaheim by he petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planing Department marked 'Exhibit Nos: 1 and 2; and as conditioned herein. 5. That any tree planted on-site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. 'c 6. That all existing mature landscaping shall be maintained and immediately:. :.replaced in a event that it becomes diseased or dies. 7. That approval of this application constitutes approval'of the proposed request only to the extent thatit complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action oPfindings alto compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. Page 4 ATTACHMENT - ITEH N0. 4 MEMORANDUM CTfY OF ANAHEIM Code Er forcemeat Division DATE: MARCH 25, 2003 TO: JOHN RAMIREZ, PLANNING FROM: BILL SMALL, CODE ENFORCEMENT SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE RENEWAL FOR THE PROPERTY AT 4060 E. LA PALMA AVE. I inspected this property on this date, and found the following in regazd to Resolutions 1 and 2. RESOLUTION 1 There is a single Natal Plum tree that has been planted, and is growing on the north side of the modular trailer. The owner stated that he had planted two trees but one of them had died. RESOLUTION 2 There is an existing outside mounted air conditioning unit on the north side of the modular trailer. It has been painted green to blend in with the color of the trailer. I was not sure this would satisfy the requirements of the Resolution, so I advised his to get trellis material or something of that nature to cover the actual unit, and paint the material in a matching color. He said he would go to the Home Depot and provide whatever was needed to meet requirements. He said he would have it finished by the end of this week. Code Enforcement does not have any open cases on this address. The last case we had was complied on 11-19-02. It was for unpermitted banners. ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0, ft PETITIONER'S STATEMENT JUSTIFICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT ° Section 18.03.093 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that before any conditional use permit or variance containing a time limitation can be reinstated for an additional period of time, or before such time limitation may be deleted or modified by the Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator, the following must be shown: 1. The facts necessary to suppbrt each and every required showing for the Issuance of such entitlement as set forth in the following excerpts from the Anaheim Zoning Code still exist: 18.03.030 (Relativeto Conditional Use Permits) Before the City Council or Planning Commission may grant any request for a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact, by resolution, that the evidence presented shows that all of the following exisL• _ .031 That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by this code, or is not listed herein as being_a permitted use; .032 That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which It is proposed to be located; .033 That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare; .034 That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not Impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; .035 ThaCthe granting of the conditibnal use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health., safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim; 18.03.040 (Relative to Variances) Before any variance may be granted by the Planning Commission ffshall be shown: .031 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; .032 That., because of special circumstances shown in .031, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. 2. Said permit or variance is being exercised substantially in the same manner and In conformance with ail condition. and stipulations originally approved by the approval body; 3. Said permit or variance is being' exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding Ian uses, nor to the public peace, health, safety and general welfare; and 4. With regard only to any deletion of a time limitation, such deletion is necessary to permit reasonable operation and the permit or variance as granted. ° In order to determine if such findings exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive a decision, please answer the folldwing questions fully and as complete as possible. Attach additional sheets if additio space is needed. 1. Has "any physical aspect of the property for which this use ermit or variance been granted changed significa since the issuance of this use permit or variance? ^ 1/GES ~NO Explain: ~u.~~~~/'~ .Yt.~1n ~Pyl ~11,'~'LC ~(%C Lt7 ~y~~~ ~ ~I~ ~~/~ _ _ ~ n n ~ l~r, n, n ~(1 n i9 / (over) CASE NO._,_____ CUP IUO. ,~ ~ p Z ~ 2. Have eland uses to the Immediate vfclNty changed since the Issuance of t is use pe it or variance? ^ YES~NO ~ ~ ~ ~~~ Explain: 3. Hasa sped of the nature of the operation changed since the Issuance of this use permit or variance? ~ YES~NO I/~ ~~ -~ ~ 'I Explain: ~ ~~~ ~ i f~ 1 i ~ / i • ~ GQ~I-1 ~" ~ `~ 4. Are the conditions of approval pertTaining to th 'use permit or varianc befnrq cpmplied wi1h1 ~p YES NO Explain: ~ ~ ~ l .Q/~ ~ < \ .,' ~ ) / ~~ L' 5: If you are req Gng a deletion of the lime limitation, is this deletion ne~~~eeessssary far the contipu d operation of This use or variance? YES ^ NO _ /~' ~~~ ` I / ~ /f ~ n l .Explain: / \ ~' '/~r.C~ti~fV vL{~4 ~~l{/'l~ r/i/ ) .-- ~~ ©t"~n ~ ~t71'f2'l~ ~I~t"lG'( N of aperty Owner or Authorized Agent(Please Print) (ti+cv~yL__ _G_' ~ ,~~~ - ignature of Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date CASE N0. 2062ISJK000 17N7 CUP P10. ~ ~e 0 2 z ATTACHftENT - ITEH N0. 4 RESOLUTION NO. PC98-68 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.4020 BE GRANTED ' - WHEREAS, he Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permihfor certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS REPORT IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE, CITY OF ANAHEIM, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF FRACTIONAL SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:. BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1 OF SAID FRACTIONAL SECTION 4, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING ALSO STATION NO. 17 OF U.S. GOVERNMENT SURVEY OF RANCHO CANON DE SANTA ANA, REFERENCE BEING MADE TO A M.4P FILED IN BOOK 1, PAGE 29 OF LICENSED SURVEYORS' MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;' THENCE SOUTH' 7-3/4° WEST,' ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 1 A DISTANCE OF 1364.77 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THAT PARCEL OF LAND CONVEYED TO M. APALATEGUI AND WIFE, BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 393, PAGE 399 OF DEEC)S; RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE' COUNTY; THENCE WEST PARALLEGWITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 1 A DISTANCE OF 569.30 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL CONVEYED TO M. APALATEGUI AND WIFE; THENCE NORTH 1354.29 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 1'DISTANCE OF 717:48 FEET WEST OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 717:48 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFP.OM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 OF DEED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECORDED MAY 2, 1967 IN BOOK 8240, PAGE 889 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY. ' WHEREAS, the City Planning Commissioh did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on April 27, 1998 at 1:30 p.m:, notice df said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code{ Chapter 18:03, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection; investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after tlue consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the fallowing facts: 1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.03.030.010; 18.88.050.055 and 18.110.110 to permit a 450 sq. ft. mobile office trailer in conjunction with an existing fishing concession operation. CR3269PL.DOC -1- PC98-68 2. That subject property is located in Development Area 6 "Open Space Area" of the Northeast Area Specific Plan (SP 94-1 ). 3. That this proposal was inadvertently advertised as a 4,500 sq. ft. mobile office trailer but the correct size is significantly smaller (450: sq. ft.), 4. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located.. 5. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare. 6. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area.: 7. That granting of this conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 8. That no one indicated .their presence at the public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING:r The Planning Director's .authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 3, as defined in the State Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby. grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: : 1. That additignal minimum fifteen (15) gallon sized trees shalt be planted, if needed, to provide complete screening of the approved modular office trailer from La Palma Avenue. 2. That the wall-mounted air conditioning unit on the modular office trailer shall not be visible to La Palma Avenue. 3. That this permit shall expire five (5) years from the date of this resolution: 4. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which .plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos: 1 and 2, and as conditioned herein. 5. That prior to commericement of the activity authorized by this resolution or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution., whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2 and 4, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 6. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations.. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.. -2- PC98-68 BE 1T FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicants 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. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of April 27, 1998. ATTEST: t2riat ?_i_cibnaclh~ ~anj Rostwickl CHAIRMAN ANA~IEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION IOriginai signed 6y ftPar®ariia Scioriol SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Margarita Solorio, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on April 27, 1998, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS:BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, NAPOLES, PERAZA NOES: COMMISSIONERS:NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:NONE VACANCY: ONE SEAT VACANT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 1998. tSri~inal signed by Margarita Soloriol SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC98-68 J, RM-1200 1 RCLfi1-62-92 ~ V-1794 I-9 V-1744 CASA aONITA 71 Du 000 u e CL 4 TPM N0.2001-160 RCL 61-62-92 CUP 963 CUP 955 V-1794 55 ~ M ADA 6 I GR INN MOTEL RESTAURANT ~, 6 ]G W W F f- UJ 0] J C1 RM-1200 RCL 69-70-24 CASA 6ELINDA 91 OU RS-A-03,000 CUR 1897 CUP 3fi36 LOWE ELEM. SCHOOL (CLOSED) 5 pU RM-1200 5 DU -RCL 77-76-21 RCL fig-70-28 ^m~ nmy ~'O1 p'w S DU (Res. of lnl. to CL)SDU drag mrc¢LL VARm971 ~ u u u»o 4DU OC 4DU rc Ao a LINCOLN AVENUE 96.99-11 RCL fit-6}2B CUP 2003-04fi6 y `, c OL CUP 307 RCL 77-76-23 VAR 4041 CUP 4085 GPA 139 CUP 1999 VACANT L AA NO. 76 SHOPPING CEMER CL Iar, »->a CL I I LJ RCL 77-78-23 ~--I I m I 9! ~ RCL AGRIC. ~ v ro, RS-A-03,000 1 DU w = ~'' ' 5 RS-7200 ~ R&7200 ~~ 1 DU EACH S 1 DU EACH TRANSIT AVENUE O RS-7200 ~ ~ ~- 1 DU EACH p ,°.~¢ z nw m D ~O Rs-7zoD ~ y 1 Du EACH ~ RS-A-03,000 CUP 2871 v-zzn PRIVATE SCHOOL POLK AVENUE 1 6U ua RS-A-03,000 RCL 71-72-02 (1) RCL 71-72-04 (Res of Infant to CL) 264 DU APARTMENTS Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04681 SubjecbProperty Tentative Tract Map No. 16477 Date: April 21, 2003 Scale: Graphic Requested By: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Q.S. No. 33 REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT 32 ATTACHED AND 50 DETACHED CONDOMINIUM RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH A pENSITY BONUS WITH WAIVERS OF: (A) MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK (B) MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES (C) MINIMUM LANDSCAPE SETBACK ABUTTING SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES (D).MAXIMUM STRUCTURAL HEIGHT (E) MINIMUM INTERIOR SETBACK (F) MINIMUM SETBACK OFBUILDINGS ABUTTING SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS (G) MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS TO ESTABLISH A 94-LOT, 82-UNIT ATTACHED AND DETACHED CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION. 2300-2340 West Lincoln Avenue 0 z -i K -m4 v K 634 a €ficcl 9}99-it 6L62-119 RCL 56-67-6] CUP 3640 EIR NO. 319 Staff Report to the Planning Commissioh: 'April 21 2003 Item No. 5 5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) Sb. ' WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion) 5c. 'CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:NO. 2003-04681 (Resolution) 5d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP'N0. 16477 (Motion) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly-shaped, 8.8-acre property has a frontage of 660 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, a maximum depth of 580.feet, and is located 650 feet east of the centerline of Gilbert Street (2300 --2340 West Lincoln Avenue). ':REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests approval of the following: Cpnditional'Use Perrnit No. 2002-04681 -to construct 32 attached and 50 detached "affordable" residential' condominium units with a density bonus under the authority of,Code Section No. 18.31.050.090 with waivers of the following: (a) SECTION NO. 18:04.045.0140 Minimum front yard setback. 35 feet requited ::adjacent td Lihcoln Avenue;'3i to 35 feet proposed).= (b) SECTION NOS. 18.06.050.0121 Minimum number of parking spaces. (Deleted). (c) SECTION NO. 18:31.062.013 Maximum structural height adjacent to a sinole i family residential zone. 1-stb permitted within 50 ::feet of asingle-family: residentiatzone boundary; 2- st~ dwelling units within 1 t to'20 feet of the `single-family zone boundary proposed). (d) SECTION NO. 18'.31:062:012 Minimum landscaped'setback adjacent to a sin~le- family residential zone. 20-footwide landscaped setback with one treeplanted per 20lineal:feet :required; 1_1 to 22 foot wide settiack proposed). (e} SECTION NO. 18:31.063:022 Minimum interior settiack. C9 feet requiredy 5 to 8 -feet proposed). (f) SECTION NO. 18;31.063.021 Minimum distance between buildinos 20 feet ?required between building walls;:? to 20 feet 'proposed); Tentative Tract Mao Nd. 16477 - to establish a 94-lot,' 82-unit attached and. detached! cdndominium subdivision. Sr2126ds < Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 Item No. 5 BACKGROUND: (3) The 2300 West Lincoln Avenue (easterly) property is currently developed with a retail furniture store and is zoned CL (BCC) (Commercial, Limited, Brookhurst Commercial' Corridor Overlay) with a resolution of intent to the RM-3000 (BCC) (Residential, Multiple-Family;!Brookhurst Commercial Corridor Overlay) Zone: The 2340 (westerly) property;s a City-owned vacant parcel and is zoned RM-3000 (BCC). The Land Use Element Map'of the Anaheim General designates these properties for Low-Medium Density Residential land uses. These properties are also located within the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors Redevelopment Project Area. (4) Surrounding land uses are as follows: Direc4ion Land Use Zoning General,Plan Designa4ion North across 'Retail Stores and CL (BCC) , General Commercial ` aCLincolrt Avenue Professional Offices East Apartments RS=A-43,000 ' General Commercial Billboard (County of Orange) and Medium Density Resolution of Intent to Residential RM-3000 (BCC) South Private School RS-A-43,000 Medium Density Residential and Low Single-Family Homes , RS-7200 Density Residential West Commercial Retail ' Center ` CL General Commercial (5) General Plan Amendment No. 2001-00399 (to redesignate the two properties at 2300 - 2340 West Lincoln Avenue from the General Commercial and: Mediumbensity Residential land use designations to he Low-Medium Density Residential lahd use designation) and Reclassification No. 2001=00063 (tp reclassify the property at 2330 - 2340 West Lincolm Avenue from the CL (BCC) zone to the RM-3000 (BCC) zone) were;approved by the City Council on July 23, 2002, following approval bythe Commission. (6) Reclassification No. 2003-00095 (to'reclassify the 2300 West Lincoln Avenue property from the CL (BCC) Zone to the RM-3000;(BCC) Zone) was approved by the Commission on March 24,:2003. PREVIOUS'ZONINGACTlONS:! (7) The following zoning actions pertain to these properties: (a) ;Variance No. 4041 (waiver of minimum number of parking spaces and limitations to permitted uses and structures to establish a 90,00Osquare foot homeimprovement store with an outdoor garden center) was approved by the City Council: in 1995 following approval by the Commission. This use is no longer in operation. Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21; 2003 Item No. 5 (b) Conditional Use Permit Na 3429 (to permit a portable food service use (hot dog cart) in conjunction with,a permitted retail store) was approved forone year by the Commission in 1991. In 1993, the Commission tleleted the time limitation. This use is no longer in operation. (c) Conditional Use Permit No. 2053 (to permit an auto service station) was approved by the Commission in`ig80. This use is ho lbnger in operation. (d) Conditional Use Permit No. 307 (to construct a service station and used car lot)'was approved by the City Council in 1962 following approval by he Commission. This use is no longer in operation. I DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (8) The petitioner proposes to construct a 94-lot (12 lettered lots for street dedication and, landscaping; and 82 numbered lots for the attached and detached condominiums), 82-unit attached and detached condominium subdivision. The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the following: Development Standards Proposed Project RM-3000 Zone Standards Site Area 8.8 acres' 382,800 s uare feet N/A Numbecbf Dweilin Units B2;dwellin units 127 unitsmax. Avera a Land Area °er Unit 4,668a uare feet 3;000 s.f, erMunit min. Lot Covera `e ' 21 % 40% max. Average Recreation/Leisure Area er Dwellin Unit 1,020 .f. per unit ' 83,644 s ware feet otal 1,000 s.f. peCUnit min. 82,000 s.f.'total (9) The site plan and tentative map indicate the following site characteristics:' Direction Proposed Structural Setbacks Code-Required Structural Adjacent Zoning , Setbacks North adjacent,to 31 to 35 feet 35 feet, fullyJandscaped NIA Lincoln Avenue East adjacent to an 5 to 10 feet 9 feet Resolution of apartment complex and Intent to RM-3000 vacant lot (BCC) RS-A-43;000, ,' (Lofwith billboard in the Coun South adjacent to 11 to 22 feet 50 feet (for 2-story RS-7200, ,single-family structures); 20 feet fully RS-A-43,000 residences and a lahdscaped'adjacent to rivate school' sin le-famil residences ..West adjacentito a 5 to 10 feet 9 feet CL sho in center (10) The site plan further indicates a setback of7 to 10 feet between the detached condominium residences..': Code requires a minimum of 20 feet between the structures.. The site plan further indicates front yard'patios for the townhouse units fronting on Lincoln Avenue. These front Page 3? Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21, 2003'` Item No. 5 patios would be enclosed(with a maximum 3-foot high wall or fence: Code permits fences at a maximum of three feet in height within the required front?yard setback. The petitioner has indicated that they intend o maintain the existing 6-foot block high wall along the east, west and south property lines with minor repairs and additions expected. (1 <' V~,o tentative tract map indicates the following subdivision characteristics: Lott No F .-.x. .~ ~osetl Umt ; a~~~~Pe'p` F.5' Y 2!!."4' ti'91 l< rte./-.,"r~s~Pvc. `r. #~roposed t=5pt S¢e ~ ~ „ ~ ~ ~~ ~s f )~ ~ ~ ~' rJ +.~~"` Yl `, SV~ "`~"'rix';-~ i',, u;'r;,. ~`m e~,~......:~t Y~ -~ Propasec! Lat Frontages ' ~~art a pz~ua~e street} ~ ~ ~Cf G`'v. ~YFa ~'S~S f'zi4.~eY.e k r~ ~.~' mow' ~i Proposed 611a~crm'uin Loi^ 6r" 'd ~ / ,2 1 Attached S.F. ;5,604 77.7 ' 81.6 2 tAttacfied S.F. » 5;187 67.4 85.7 3 Attached S.F. 16;478 197.6 ` ?78.3 4 ; 'Attacfied S.F. da 6,680 97.6: 72.1 5 Attached S.F. ':5;620 58.5 94.5 6 Attacfied S.F. :16;334 197.6 i' ;:82.9 7 Attacfied S.F. 5;620 58.5 ! 94.5 8 Attacfied S.F. 16,674 76.1 " 094.5 9 Attached S.F. .5;762 73.9 78.9 10 Attached S.F. 5;389 68.1 it 83.5 11 Detacfied S.F. 3',624 4! 1 93 12 Detached S.F. 3;813 41 x93 13 r Detached S.F. 4;371 47 93 14 Detached S.F. 4;371 47 'i 93 15 r Detached S.F. 3;720 40 : fg3 16 !Detached S.F. 3',720 40 93 17 + Detacfietl S.F. 3',732 36 ? 97 18 ;Detached S.F. !3,881 14.5 123 19 Detached S.F. 4;771 8.3 96 20 Detached S.F. 6;450 8.1 105 21 Detached S.F. :4,485 33.2 108.3 22 Detached S.F. '4;320 40 ?'108.3 23 Detached S.F. 4;295 40 i 107.1 24 Detacfied S.F. :4;483 42 107.1 25 Detacfied S.F. i 5,745 54.2 :' x106.3 26 Detacfied S.F. 5,689 54.2 105,4 27 Detacfied S.F. 14:376 42 ' 104.6 28 ! petacfied S.F. :4.,142 40 103.9 29 Detacfied S.F. 4,197 40 103.2 30 Detached S.F. 4;255 55.7 < 102.6 31 Detached S.F. 6,513 8.3 99.8 32 Detacfied S.F. 4',782 8.8 97.6 33 Detacfied S.F. 3',950 17.5 96'.8 34 Detacfied S.F. x3;792 40 96.8 35 Detacfied S.F. ::.3,780 40 94.5 36 ':;Detached S.F. '3;779 40 ' '.94.5 37 Detachetl S.F. 4;439 47 9415 38 Detacfied S.F. 4,438 47 "94:4 39 r Detacfied S.F. 3;776 40 " '"94.4 Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 `.Item No. 5' Lot Noy r .- 40 ~Praposetl Uni£ ; ~ T.ype,< -;~, „ „~'-'~Na.;~,~,.;; Detached S.F. P,~o~po$eci tot Size r y~ ~ ~~(s f j , r ,,.`~: s,-, ~y.~: , , 3,738 Prc~~osed Ldt Frontage ~ {on a,~vate stredt} ~ ~ ..,~, :,, .~",-,;,`e~s ~ ''x'mr,`~`~~,'.~ 43:1 ~ Proposed ' µ ~Aauimurtt Lot ,,.~ -D8 t~l`".,,.z.` ' 94.3 41 i Detached S.F. 3,621 40:5 90 42 Detached S.F. 3,150 35 90 43` Detached S.F. ! `3,150 +'35 90 44 Detached S.F. 3,150 35 90 45 Detached S.F. 1 3,285 34:5 ' 90 46 Detached S.F. 'x3,285 34.5 90 47- Detached S.F. 3,150 35 ' 90 48' Detached S.F. ' `3,150 "35 1 90 49 Detached S.F. 3,150 35 = 90 50 Detached S.F. '? 3,621 "40.5 90 5t Detached S.F. 3,483 40.5 86 52' Detached S.F. 3,010 ;35 86 53 Detached S.F, 3,010 '35 86 54! Detached S.F. ' ':3,010 35 86 55' Detached S.F. °:3,139 34.5 86 56 Detached S.F. 3,139 134.5 86 57 Detached S.F.' !3,010 '35 '' 86 58 Detached S.F. + 3,010 (35 86 59' Detached S.F. 1;3,010 35 86 60, :Detached S.F.; 3,483 4015 86 274,717 A? Private Street i 19,977 B': Private Street 20,928 Cs Private Street' 20,289 i 61,194 D Landsca in r 29,882 E- Landsca in 3,732 F^- Lahdsca in ' 1,265 34,879 G Private Drive 3,960 H Private Drive = x3,960 I!: Private Drive '! 1,762 J : Private Drive 7,049 K Private Drive 7,026 L; Private Drive ' 1,815 :25,572 Residential Lots 274,724 6.32 ac. Private Streets - 61,195. 1.41,ac. Landsca a Lots 34;880 0.81 ac. Private Drives:. 18;548 0.58.ac. Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21,.2003 Item No. 5 (12) Following is an'analysis of the proposed density (dwelling units per acre) of the subject property compared with nine other recently-approved detached condominium: projects in'the City:... Project Zoning No. of Site Area Density per Acre* Units acres Pro osed Project RM=3000 82 8.8 9.3 Olson Company RM-3000 21 2.5 8.4 3302 West Bali Road Rio Vista RM-3000 26 2.9 9.0 226-230 North Rio Vista Brandywine Development RM=3000 12 1.3 9.2 820 S, Ma nolia Avenue KnotUBall RM-3000 18 ;2.1 8.6 832 South Knott Ave. Peppertree Walk RM:3000 68 !5.6 111.9 1925 W. Lincoln Ave. Linhaven RM=3000 60 6.3 9.5 2144 W. Lincoln Ave. Cypress Infill RM-3000 t 41 3.0 =13.6 NEC C ress St.& Olive St. Coffman RM=2400 3 0!27 11.1 203:N. Coffman St. Lincoln/Brookhurst RM-3000 57 6:2.5 9.1 112-218 S. Brookhurst St: * Code allows a maximum density of;up to 14.5 dwelling units per acre mthe' RM-3000: Zone. (13) The floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 3-6) for the attached townhoi. ,. units indicate 2-story units;. consisting of a living room, dining room, kitchen, laundry`room, balcony, patio, bedroom,`, bathroom, and attached 2=car garages, as described in more detail in the following chart: Plan No. of Units: Liviha Area No. of First Floor'(without garage) Bedrooms Second Floor ' Bathrooms Total s.f. A 16 539 3 Bed 1796 2.5 Bath .1,335 10 596 3 Bed 903 2.5 Bath :1499 B2 6 590 3 Bed 903 2.5 Bath :1,493 (14) The floor plans (Exhibit Nps. 2 and 3) for the detached units indicate 2-story units consisting of a family room, living room, dining room, kitchen, laundry/service room, hall, porch and a 2-car attached garage, as described in more detail in the following chart: Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21 2003 Item No. 5! :Plan No, of Units 4Livin9 Area No. of ' First Floor (without garage), Betlrooms Second Floor Bathrooms Total s.ft 1 10 865 3 Bed 875 2:5 Bath 1,748 2 14 '' 1,011 3 Bed 1,016 2.5 Bath 2,027 +3 16 ~! 1,106 '+ 5 Bed' 1,177 ' 2:5 Bath 2,283 s'4 10 1,397 ' 5:Bed" 1,231 2!5 Bath 2,628 Bedroom couht includes a'"loft". Bedroom`count includes a "bonus room"c (15) Vehicular access is provided by wo new driveways from Lincoln Avenue. The site plan indicates 272 parking'spaces available within the subdivision, including 2 garage spaces for each unit, 10 driveway spaces, and 98 open (street and guest) parking spaces. Code requires a total of 272 parking paces based on the: requirement of 3 spaces for each 3-bedroom unif (3' x 56 units = 168 spaces), and 4spaces for each 5-bedroom unit (4 x 26 units = 104 spaces). (16) The site plan indicates a parkway and sidewalk on both sides of the U-shaped private street, which would comply with City standards for private street width and would allow for on-street parking on both sides'of the street for a total of 98 spaces. `: (17) Conceptual elevation drawings (Exhibit Nos. 11, 14, 17 and 20);indicate 2-story structures for tioth the attached and' detached'units. Eight elevation themes are proposed (4 plans and 2 elevation schemes for each plan) for the detached units throughout the subdivision as described in the following chart:': :Plan No. Exhibit.No. "Elevation Description 1 A 11 Spanish/Monterey architecture with'concrete "s"file roofs, stucco finished 4A 20 '' exterior walls, wood shutters, exposed rafters,! arched doorways, and 46 20 decorative cla outlooks'and attic vents 1 B 11 ' Craftsman Style architecture with wood shutters, gable roof with flat concrete% tiles, multi-paned windows, front porch with a balustrade, and decorative columns 28 14 Spanish Colonial architecture with'concrete "s" file roofs'.. stucco finished 3A 17 ` exterior walls, wood shutters, multi- aned windows, and.ex osed rafters 2A 14 ? Colonial Revival architecture with'gabled aspfiait shingleroofs, wood 3B 17 '' shutters, decorative columns around the mainentry, and multi-paned windows Page 7 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21, 2003' Item No. 5 Code limits the maximum height of multiple-family structures located within 150 feet of a single-family residential zone to 1-story within'50 feet of said zoneboundary. Between 50 and 150 feet, 2-story structures are permitted provided plansdemonstrate no visual intrusidn to the single-family residences. The Code further provides thaf the height. ofmultiple-family structures not exceed one-half the distance ofsaid structures to the adjacenfsingle-family zone boundary. (18) The conceptual landscape plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates 15 street trees in the parkway along Lincoln Avenue, 61 street trees in the parkway along the lJ-shapedprivate street, evergreen canopy trees in the fronf yard of each detached unit, and 59 accent trees within the front. setback adjacent to Lincoln Avenue, Code requires 1 tree for every 20 feet of street frontage to be planted in the landscape setback adjacenfto Lincoln Avenue. Code further requires reel planted on 20-foot centers and a 2Q foot wide fully landscaped setback adjacent to a single- family residential zone boundary. As a recommended condition of'approval, the petitioner will be required tosubmit final detailed7andscape plans for staff review: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (19) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds ho significant environmental impact and; therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Planning Commission that the Negative Declaration reflects the independent`judgment bfthe lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any; comments received during the public review process and'further finding on the basis of`the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: (20) The proposed project has been reviewed by affected City: departments to determine whether it conforms with the Citys Growth Management Element adopted by he City Council on March 17, 1992. Based on City staff review of the proposed project, it has been determined that this project does not fit within the scope necessary o requires Growth Management Element analysis, therefore, no analysis has tieen performed. EVALUATION: (21) The Anaheim General Plah Land Use Elemenfdesignates this property for Low-Medium Density land uses, with a tlensity range of 0 to 18 dwelling units per'acre. The.; petitioner:' proposes 82 detached antl attached`condominum dw~h„ ~g units ata density of 9.3 dwelling units'per acre. The proposed detached condominiun= : _ ";.mall lot, single-family' development proposal would be compatible with the existingresiderw.~ :ievelopments to the south (single- family residences zoned RS-7200) and the apartment complex (RS-A-43,000) east of tfie property. The project is also consistent with the Low-Medium Density Residential land use designation for the site. (22) Detached one-family dwellings (detached condominiums). are permitted in the 1ZM-3000 Zone, subject to the approval ofa conditional use permit. (23) Waiver (a) pertains to minimum front yard setback. Code requires a structural'setback of 35 feetadjacent to'Lincoln Avenue and'31 to 35 feet is proposed for the townhouse buildings Page 8 Staff Report to the :Planning Commissioh April 21 2003 item No. 5 adjacent to Lincoln Avenue. To justify this waiver request, the developer is applying for additional incentives in lieu of a density bonus as permitted under Anaheim Municipal, Code Section No.+:18.99.030.020 and Section 65915 of the California Government Code, 'Ah analysis of these incentives are described in more detail in paragraph no. (31) below.S (24) Waiver (b) pertaining to minimum number of parking spaces has been deleted subsequent to advertisement. (25) Waiver (c) pertains to maximum structural height within 150 feefof asingle-family residential zone boundary. Code permits 1=story dwelling units within 50 feet of any single-family residential zone boundary. Plans indicate four, 2-stOrv detachedresidences (Lots 20-23) within 11 to 20 feet ofahe single-family residential zone boundary. This waiver does not apply to the units along the east and west property lines because the adjacent zoning and uses are commercial and multiple-family; and does not apply to-the private school (portion of the south , property line) since the property is not developed with single-family residences. Although 'these units are classified as condominiums; the project i~ designed as single-familyresidences and the proposed rearyard setbacks of 11-20 feet are comparable with the. requirement of the RS-5000 zone; therefore, staff recommends approval of this waiver. (26) Waiver (d) pertains to minimum landscaped setback abutting asingle-family residential zone. i Code requires a 20-foot wide landscape setback with trees planted on 20-foot centers adjacent' to asingle-family zone: boundary:; Plans indicate an 11 to 22 foot wide setback for the units proposed along the single-family(RS-7200) zone boundary (Lots 20-23). Staff feels that although the detached'component is classified as a "detached condominium" subdivision, the design is that of asingle-family neighborhood. Plans show 11 to 22 foot wide rear yards adjacent to the single-family boundary, which is similar to the 1Q foot wide rear yard setback requirement' of the RS-5000 Zone. Staff recommends approval of this waiver because the project is designed with rear yards comparable with the RS-5000 Zone. To eliminate the potential for'visual intrusion upoh;the neighboring residences, staff further recommends that filial landscape plans ihdicate the required screening trees to buffer and protect the residences to the south: It is also recommended that filial elevation plans be submitted showing`bpaque orhighly-placed smalLwindows ph the south building walls of these four hpmes to better accommodate for the privacy ofahe neighbors. (27) Waiver (e) pertains to minimum interior setback. Code requires a 9-foot wide structural setback along the east and westproperty lines adjacent to commercial and multiple-family tlevelopmehts and a 5 to 8 foot wide setback is proposed. To justify this waiver request, the developer is applying for additional incentives in lieu of a density;bonus aspermitted under Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.99.030.020 and Section 65915 of the Califomla Government Code. An analysis; of these incentives are described in more detail in paragraph ho. (31) below. (28) Waiver (f) pertains to minimum distance between buildings. Code requires a minimum :distance of20 feet between thebuilding walls of the units. Plans indicate a 10-foot wide separation between most building walls and an overall range between 7 and 20 feet. `Staff feels that under mostsingle family zones the minimum setback for side yards is 5 feet and plans indicate a minimum of 10 between most units, which creates a 5 foof side yard aor each ` whit. Similar to the other waivers, the developer is requesting additional incentives lieu of a density bonus. Page 9' Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 Item No. 5 (29) The`proposed project would provide for affordable ownership housing, in furtherance of the City's HousingElement goals. The General Plan Land Use Map designates this property for Low-Medium Density Residential land uses and implementation of his project would be consistent witfi'this designation. Though the request is for "attached and detached condominiums", the majority of the'project is designed with a single-family character and would be at a densitycompatible with other single-family residential developments in the area. (30) The Commission should note that staff is processing an ordinance to anticipate this type of small-lot, single-family development, particularly for the detached component: Staff feels that although the proposed development is classified as a detached condominium`subdivision, the project is compatible with''the design and character ofsingle-familyresidences with 2-car garages, driveways, parkways, a large park, sidewalks, useable yards, individual trash'pick-up, and'compatible density. The Commission may wish to note that under the RS-5000 zone, the maximum number of units would be 76 and this proposal is to permit 82 detached units: under the RM-3000 zone. (31) The petitioner has applied for additional incentives in lieu' of a density bonus. Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.99:030.020 and Section'65915 of the California Government Code states that an applicant maybe granted either a density bonus and one additional% incentive, or other incentives of equivalent financial value based on'the fair market value of the landper dwelling unit in lieu of a density bonus and additional incentive. Anaheim Municipal Code Section`No. 18.99:050 further'states that additional incentives shall be limited to a change of no more than 25% from the development standard otherwise allowed. The following chart shows the amount of deviation for waivers (a) through (f). Waiver (b) has been deleted as noted above. Waiver Waiver RequesE Amount!of Deviation Pro osed° % i a :Minimum front and setback 10 (c) Maximum tructurai height within 150 feet of a sin le-famil zone bounds 25 (d) .Minimum landscaped.. setback abutting asingle- i famil residential zone 10 e Minimum interiorsetback 20 Minimum dtstancebetween buildin s 10 'Since the amount of deviation varies within each development standard range, the deviation was calculated by using an overall average: for each waiver. (32} Since the project is proposed below the maximum permitted density (82 units'propo~-ed,P127 unitspermitted and 31 additional units permitted with a25% density bonus), a pet¢ioner has applied for approval of incentives imlieu of a density bonus as described in Code Section No. 18.99.030.020`. 7o determine the equivalent financial value for the density bonus and all: five incentives, a detailed financial analysis was prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) (attached) at the request of the Community Development Department. KMA is an independent economic consultant specializing in'real estate valuation; redevelopment, affordable housing, economic development, fiscal impact, litigation support, and infrastructure financing. KMA reviewed the density bonus provisions, submitted plans, requestedwaivers, appraised property valuation, and all five incentives and determihed that the`value of the density'bonus units would be $1,750,000:' The value of the five requested incentives would be $776;500. Therefore, according to KMA, the value of the ncentiveswould exceed the value of the density bonus by Page 10 Staff Report to the Planning: Commission April 21, 2003 'Item No. 5 $973,500. The Community Development Departmentnas submitted a letter' concurring with the conclusions'of the KMA analysis regarding'these values. Section No: 65589.5(4) of the California Government Code requires that a local agency may not disapproves housingproject for very low, low, or moderate income housefolds or impose conditions of approval in a manner that renders the project infeasible for such housefiolds unless the agency can make'one of the'six written findings as described' in said Section. (33) The Commission should recall that at the previous Commission meeting on March 24 2003, the neighbor.. at 2341 West Transit Avenue((south of the subjecYsite) expressed concerns about trash accumulation and illicit activities occurringion the vacant lot at the southwest corner of the subject site. The neighbor inquired about the feasibility of the'developer acquiring this parcel and incorporating saidlot into this subdivision. Since that time, the .Community. Development Department and'the developer have met with this neighborand has been making a concerted attempt to contact the owner of the vacant lot but thus far bas not 'been successful. '_. ~ r ~ ~ ~ y ~ x ~ r~ ~ ~ ~ „y ~ ~` , Vacant lot ~,"~ ~E ~ ~~~ , f s g ~~ ~~ ~~'~" ~(`` Subiect site ~ l__T,~ x ~^t Sj.:.Y't ~~~ ~~ P~ c' -Y ,tt'~i ~,~ '~ ~ Single family ~~ ~~ . f~~ ~4 homes r < ~ ~ ,~~ ,: ~., ~ ~,~ ~ ~~~ 7 ~ ; ~., K ~: r Aerial view of the existing vacant lot (34) The project is located,in the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors Redevelopment Project Area and the Brookhurst Commercial Condor Overlay zone. The Community Development Department has submitted the attached memorandum indicating the project is being developed under the provisions of a Disposition andbevelopment Agreement (DDAjbetween the Redevelopmenf Agency and'the developer. Staff has been working with the developer on tlesign issues and based on the`proposed design, issupportive of the project. The ' Page 11 Staff Report to the Planning Commission ApFil 21, 2003 Item No. 5 memorandum also acknowledges that the developer is requesting incentives in lieu of a density bonus as analyzed in the attached stutly prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. FINDINGS: (35) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the Zoning Code, a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring that'ho property, because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall tie deprived of privileges commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose'of any code waiver is to prevent discrimination and none shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other similar properties. Therefore, before any code waiver is granted by the`Planning Commission, it shall be shown: (a) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, :which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity; and (b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. (36) Before the Planning Commission grants any conditional use permit,. it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that ail' of the following conditions exist: (a) That the proposed: use is properly one for which a'conditionai use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or that said use is'hot listed therein as being a permitted use; (b) That the proposed. use will not adversely affect the adjoining, land uses and the growth and developmentof the area' in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the. full development of the proposed use in a manner notdetrimehtal to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety,'and general welfare; (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved o carry tfie traffic in the area; ahd (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health,' afety and generatwelfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. (37) "The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473:5) makes it mandatory to include in all motions approving, or recommending approval of a tract map, a specific finding thatthe proposed Subdivision together with its design and improvement is consistent with the City's General Plan. Further, the law requires that the Commission make any6f the following findings when denying or recommending denial of`a tract map: L That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. Page 12 'I Staff Report to the Planning Commission' April 21, 2003 Item No. 5 2: That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable Geheral and; Specific Plans. 3; That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. 4 That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5 That the design of the subdivision br the proposed improvements are likely to cause sut?stantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or tfieir habitat. 6r That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. 7.' That the design of the subdivlsion or the type of improvements will'conflict with easements, acquired by the pubiic'at large, for access tfirough oruse of property within the proposed subdivision " (38) Code Section No. 18.99.090.030 of the density bonus ordinance ets forth the following findings which are required to be:made before a density bonus dr additional incentives in lieu of a density,bonus are: approved by the Planning Commission: :030 Selection of Additional Incentive. The selection and granting of Additional Incentives shall be at the sole discretion ofthe Planning Commission or theiCity Council. The Planning Commission or City Council shall. select the;particularAdditionaf Incentive or Incentives to be granted to ah applicant based on the following criteria:: (a) The selected Additional Incentive or Incentives shall contribute significantly to the ability of the Eligible Housing Development to provide housing to Lower Income Households and Very Low IncomeiHouseholds at an Affordable Housing Cost. (b) The selected Additional Incentive or Incentives shall be the most compatible with the character of the Eligible. Housing Development and to the surrounding area,'relative to other Additional Incentives which might be granted. (c) The selected Additional Incentive or Incentives shall nothave a detrimental impact on services and ihfrastructu~e, such es traffic volumes and'road capacities, school enrollments, recreational resources and parks and water, sewer and storm drain facilities, and shall be the most compatible with the public health, safety and welfare; provided that if every Additional Incentive wfiich might be selected would have a detrimental impact on services and infrastructure, the selected Additional Incentive or Incentives sfiall cause the least impact, relative to other Additional'Incentives`which might be granted, on services and infrastructure. (d) If the Eligible Housing Development is an apartment project which proposes to detlicate a minimum of ffty percent (50%) ofits units to`QualifyingResidents the following Additional Incentives shall not be granted unless the Eligible Housing Deyelopmen£has obtained a conditional use; permit under Section 18.94 of this Code: (a) deduction in floor space requirements, (b) eduction in vehicleparking requirements, and (c) increase in structural height imitations. ` Page 13 Staff Report to the Planning Commission ', April 21, 2003 Item No. 5 (39) Section 65589:5 (d) of the California Govemment Code .requires that a local agency shall not disapprove a housing project for very low, low, or moderate income households or impose conritions of approval iha manner that renders the project infeasible for develonm°nFfor the use of very low, low, or moderate income households unless the agency make . -en findings based. on substantial evidence in the record, as to one of he followa•' (1) ; The jurisdiction has adopted a housing element pursuant to this article that has been revised in accordance with Section 65588 and that Is in substantial cortipiiance with this article, and the development project is not needed for the jurisdiction to meet its share of '. the regional housing need for very low,"low ormoderate-income housing. (2) The development project as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to st3tisfactorilyrnitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households. As used in this paragraph, a'specific, adverse ims.:._ means a significant, quantifiable, direct,: and unavoidable impact, based on objet.=. identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they e~~sted on the date the application was deemed complete: (3) The denial of the project or imposition of conditions is required in order to comply with specific state or federal law, and there is not feasible method'to comply without rendering the development unaffordable to low-and moderate-income'householrjs. (4) ,Approval of the development project would increase the concentration of lower income households in a neighborhood that already has a disproportionately high number of lower income households and there is no feasible method of'approving3he development at a different site, including those sites identified pursuant to'paragraph; (1) of sutitlivision (c) of Section 65583, without rendering'the development unaffordable to low- and <` moderate-income households. (5) ;The development project is proposed on land zoned for agriculture or resource preservation that issurrounded on at least two sides by land being used for agricultural or resource preservation purposes, or which does not have adequate water or wastewater facilities to serve he project] (6) ;The development project is inconsistent with both the jurisdiction's zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation as specified in any element of the general plan `as it existed on the date! he application was deemed complete, and the jurisdiction has adopted a housing'element pursuant to his article:+ (40) Section 65589.5(f) of the California Govemment Code further provides as follows: "Nothing in this section shall be constNed to prohibit a local agency from requiring the development project to comply with written developmenYstandards,'.conditions, and policies appropriate to,'and consistenk with, meeting the quantified objectives relative to the development of housing, as required in the housing element pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 65583.': Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a local agency from imposing fees: and other exactions otherwise authorized by law which are essential to provide necessary public services and facilities to the development project Page 14 I Staff Report to the Planning Commission ' Apri121; 2003 Item No. 5 RECOMMENDATION: (41) Staff recommends thatunless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning: Commission, including the evidence presented in'this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at thepublic hearing, that the Planning Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, approve the. CEQA Negative Declaration. (b) By motion, deny waiver (b) pertaining to minimum number of parking spaces since it .has been deleted subsequent to advertisement, and approve waivers (a) minimum front yard setback, (c) maximum structural height within 150 feetof a single`family zone boundary (d) minimum landscaped setback abutting asingle-family residential zone, (e) minimum interior setback, and (f)minimum distance between buildings, based on the'followinga (i) That the petitioner has submitted a detailed financial analysis prepared by an independent economic consultant specializing in;real estate valuation and redevelopment to justify additional incentives in lieu of a density bonus as permitted under Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.99.030.020 and ...Section 65915. of the California Government Code. Said study concludes that the equivalent financial value of the density bonus exceeds the value of all five incentives being requested: (ii) That the RM-3000 Zone standards were intended for attached townhouse- style development and not "small-lot single-family" development being proposed on a majority of the subject property; and further that these waivers have'tieen granted for similar small lot single-family developments. (c) By resolution, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04681 (to construct 32 iattached"and 50 detached "affordable"'condominium'residential units with a density bonus), based on the following: '- (i), That the detached condominium subdivision portion of the project is properly one for which a'conditiona(use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code. (ii) That the attached and detached condominium subdivision es designed and conditioned herein would not adversely effecfthe adjoining land uses`and the growth and development of the area jn which it is proposed to be located. (iii) That the size and shape of he site for the attached and detached condominiumsubdivision is adequate to allow the full development of the 82 units in a manner not detrimental to the surrounding residential neighborhoods. (iv) That the traffic generated by the attached and detached condominium subdivision would not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. Page 15 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 Item No. 5 (v) That the granting of this conditional usepermit, under the conditions imposed, would not be detrimental to the peace, heath, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the: City of Anaheim. (d) By motion, a rove Tentative TractMap No. 1.6477 to establish a 94-lot, 82-unit attached and detached condominium subdivision since the design and improvement of the proposed subdivision would be consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Low-Medium Density Residential and RM-3000 zoning classification. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SUBMITTED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS ACTING AS AN INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE AND`ARE RECOMMENDED-FOR =~,DOPTION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION iN+THE EVENT THAT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT' NO 2U~=";-04681' IS APPROVED: 1. That final landscape and fencing plans for the subject property shall be submitted to the Zoning , Division forreview andjapprovaL Said plans shall show minimum 24-inch ox size trees in the front yard of each' home, screening trees at 20 feet on-center along the south property line: adjacent to the single-family residential properties and 1 tree for every 20 feet of Veet frontage on Lincoln Avenue planted in the landscape setback'adjacent to Lincoln Avenue. Any decision made by the Zoning: Division regarding saidplan maybe appealed to the Planning Commission and/or City Council' All trees shall be properly;and professionally maintained. by the homeowners association to ensure mature, healthy growth. 2. That final building elevation plans, a colors and materials board, and street presentation plans, showing building articulation and architectural embellishments fdr all elevations, shalt be submitted to the Zoning Division and Community Development Department for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations".item. 3. That the City. of Anaheim sewer cdnnectlon and seweccapacity mitigation fee for the West Anaheim :area shall be paid. 4. That the developer shall install minimum 24-inch box sized trees on 30-footcenters in the parkway or in tree wells (minimum' S2-inch'square) in the public fight-of-way along Lincoln Avenue. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for P:•'~iic Works and Planning Department approval. 5. That the property owner/developer shall install street lights on Lincoln Avenue as required by the: Electrical Engineering Division. A bond for the installation of therstreet lights shall beposted with the City of Anaheim prior to issuancebf building permits. The streetlights shallibe installed prior to occupancy. of the first. unit. 6. That ail backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback area in a manner fully'screened from all public streets: Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water systern equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division in either underground vaults or outside of the street setback areas in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys: Said information shall be shown on plans and approved by Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control inspector before submittal forbuilding permits. Page 16 Staff Report to the Planning Commission 'April 21, 2003 Item No. 5 7. That since this project has landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed and shall comply with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be shown oh plans submitted for building permits. - 8. That all requests for: new water services or fire lines; as well as any modifications, relocations,' or abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through, Water Engineering Division of the Anafieim Public. Utilities Department:' 9. :That gates shall noYbe installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may 'adversely affect vefircular traffic in the adjacent putilic street. hstallation`of any gates shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan No 609 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic -and Transportation Manager.? Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for 'building permits. 10. `That an oh-site trash truck tum-around area shall be provided'per Engineering Standard Detail No. 610 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. -Trash truck turn-around shall be provided through each construction phase of the project. Said tum-around area sfiall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 11. That trasfi storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Putilic Works ', Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and inaccordance with approved plans on file with said :'Department. 12 `That a plan sheet for' solid waste storage;and collection and a'plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department; Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 13. That a comprehensive trash management program'shall be submitted to the Public Works Department,:. `Streets and Sanitation Division. Said program shall include information on the following: a detailed, scaled site plan showing the storage and collection areas for automated trash barrels for each unit, the location of any trash enclosure with enclosure details drawings, and truck access tfirough the'alley; `.the placement of an`access "Knox" box at both automatic entrance gates; and disclosures in the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions'{CC&R's) describing the location and storage of automated `containers for eacfi`unit. The CC&R's sfiall be reviewed by the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division.:' 14. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water ServicesStandardsc Specfications. Any water service and/or fire line that does notmeet current standards shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed.:. The owner/developer sfiall be responsible forthe costs to' upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line. 15. That prior to submitting water improvement plans, the developer shall submit a water system'master `plan, including a fiydraulic distribution network analysis, for Public Utilities Water Engineering review and approval, The`master plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on-site water system to meet the project's water demands and fire protection requirements. 16. That water improvement plans shall be submitted to the Water Engineering Division for approval and a pertormance bond in the amount approved by the City Engineer and City Attomey,`and shall be posted s with the City of Anaheim. 17. 'That prior to application for water meters, fire line or submitting the water improvement plans for approval] the developer/owner shall submit to the'Public Utilities Water Engineering Division an Page 17 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 Item No. 5 estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum. day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water,system to provide the estimated water demands. Any off-site water system improvements required to serve the project shall occur in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 cf the Water Utility Rates, Rules and Regulations:i 18. That the locations for future above-ground utility devices including, but not limited to, electrical transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices, etc„'shall be shown on plans submitted fog building permits. Plans shall alsc identity the; specific screening t~eatmentsof each device (i.e. landsczpe screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.) and shall be subject to the review ahd approval of the appropriate City departments. 19. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the G = oper's expense. That landscape and/or haFdscape screening of all pad-mounted equipment ,>, iall be required and stlall be shown on plans submitted for building permits, 20. That roll-up garage doors shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. Said doors shall be installed and maintained as shown on submitted plans.: 21. That plans shall be submitted to and approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager indicating how the vehicular security gates and vehicle tum-around area will. function. 22. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and ipproval showing conformance with the cunent version of Engineering Standard Plan.: Nos. 436'..601 ;;rid 602 pertaining to parking standards and driveway,locatlons. 'Subject property shall thereupon be developed and marr,:ained in conformance with said plans. 23. That no required parking area shall be fencetl or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 24, That atl driveways shalt be constructed with ten (10) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 137. Said information shaltbe specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 25. That no compact parking spaces shall be permitted. 26. That the streets, sanitary sewers, and storm drains within the development hall be privately maintained.:: ' 27. That all air conditioning facilities and other ground mounted equipment shall be properly ~* relded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent residentiafproperties: Such information'shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for buildingpertnits. 28. That all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be fully screened by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for buildingpermits. 29, That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removalcf trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24)'hours from time of occurrence. Page 18 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 2Y 2003 Item No. 5 30. That clothes washerand dryer hookups shall be incorporated into each condominium dwelling unit and shall be shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 31. '.That this Conditional Use Permit is granted subject to approval and recordation of Tentative Tract Map No. 16477, now pending. 32. .That the property owner shall submit a letter requesting termination of Variance No` 4041 (waiver of minimum number of parking spaces andlimitationsto permitted uses and structures to establish a 90,000 square foot Home improvement store with an outdoor garden center), Conditional Use Permit No. 3429'{to permit a portable food service use (hotidog cart) in conjunction with a permitted retail 'afore), Conditional Use Permit No. 2053;(to permit an auto service station), and Conditional Use Permit No, 307 (to construct a service'station and used cariot) to the. Zoning Division. 33. i That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications rsubmitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which.. plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 21, as conditionedlherein. 34. .That prior to issuance of a building permit, orwithin a period of one (1) year from the date of this :resolution; whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1,'2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 24,'27, 28, 30, 31 and 32, above-mentioned, shall be complied with.':Extensions far further time to : completesaid conditions may tie granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal; Code. 35. ::That prior.to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 33, above-mentioned, shall be complied: with. 36. That approval of this' application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Codeand any other applicable City, State and Federal i regulations. Approval does not include any action or find'tngsas to compliance or approval of he request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SUBMITTED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS ACTING AS AN INTERDEPARTMENTAL` COMMITTEEAND ARE RECOMMENDEDFOR ADOPTION BY THEPLANNING COMMISSION IN THE EVENT THAT TENTATIVE TRACT. MAP N0 16477 IS'APPROVED. 1. That the properly owner/developer shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement to be determined as electrical design is completed 2. :.That the legal property owner shall irrevocably offerto dedicate to the City of Anaheim (Water 'Engineering Division) an easement twenty (20) feef in width for water service mains and/or an easement for largemeters and other public water facilities. 3. i That all condominium units shall be assigned streef addresses and that the street name for the private `street (if requestedjby the developer or required by he City) shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Division. 4, That prior to approval of the final map or grading plan, the developer shall submit a Water Quality Management Plarr (WQMP) specifically;identifyingfhe post construction best management practices ? that will tie used on-site to control predictable pollutants from stormwater• runoff. The WQMP shall be submitted to the Public Works'Department, Development Services Division for review and approval. Page 19 Staff Report to the Planning Commission Aptil 21; 2003 Item No. 5 5. That prior to final map approval, a maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney's office.'The covenant shalt include provisions for maintenance of common area landscaping, perimeter walls and private facilities,: including compliance with the approved Water Quality Management Plan and a maintenance exhibit. The covenanf shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. 6. That a tract map to record the division of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and shall then be recordetl in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. 7. Tftat approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 16477 is contingent upon approval of Conditional Use Permit No.2003-04681, now:pending. 8. That the legal property`owner shall execute a subdivision agreement, in a form approved by the .City Attorney, to complete he required public improvements at the legal property owner's`expense. -Said agreement shall be submitted to the Publlc Works Department, Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney and City Engineer and then recorded'concurrently with the final map: 9. That prior to final tract map approval, Condition Nos. 1 2, 4, 5, 7'and 8, above-mentioned, shall be compi:ed with. 10. Tftat approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal. regulations..; Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding; any other applicable ordinance, tegulation o~ requirement. Page 20 MEMORANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Community Development Department DATE: March 4, 2003 TO: David See, Senior Planner FROM: Damien Delany, Senior Project Manager ~D SUBJECT: CertiFcation of Affordability Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") staff has been working with Brookfield Southland Holdings ("Brookfield") to develop a site plan for the combined Daniel's Furniture Store and Old Home Depot Parking Lot sites at 2300 and 2340 W. Lincon Avenue. The combined sites contain approximately 9 acres of land. As proposed, the development will consist of ahigh-quality residential development with approximately 82 units of for-sale housing. The Redevelopment Agency approved an Amended and Restated Disposition and Development Agreement ("Amended DDA") on January 7, 2003. The Agency's obligation under the Amended DDA is to sell the combined site to Brookfield with certain conditions. In addition, the Agency/City will commit approximately $1,025,000 from its Second .Mortgage Assistance Program ("SMAP"), HOME and other first-time homebuyer programs to income-qualified buyers for the planned affordable component that includes 41 (50 percent) of the planned 82 units. l3rookfield's obligation mnder the Amended DDA is to obtain entitlements., construction financing for the project and the sale of the homes. The 41 affordable homes must be sold to income-qualified households (see attached schedule). Brookfield will also offer preference to Anaheim residents and persons employed in Anaheim to qualify for homes prior to a general public release. Brookfield anticipates starting construction of the model homes during the fall of 2003, with closeout to be approximately one year thereafter. If you have any questions or need additional information., please call me at (714) 765-5238. Attachment Brookfield Southland Holdings LLC Disposition and Development Agreement Affordable Housing Cost by Home Number of Number of Sales Price Homes Bedrooms Affordable to 80%D of OC 6 2 - 3 $279,000 Median* Affordable to 110°/D of OC 26 2 - 3 $309,000 Median* Affordable to 120°/D of OC 9 3 $375,000 Median Market Rate 41 3 - 4 $425,000 - $489,000 Total Number of Homes** 82 * Requires 45 year resale controls per state law. ** Current estimate of homes to be built. Total number of homes will be based on land use entitlement obtained by developer. F:~DOCS W DMDi~MEMOS~DdMJi'OA.DDC ATTACHMENT - ITEM W0. 5 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WANER) REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: PERTAINING TO: is required For each Code waiver) Sections 18.03.040.03p and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown: That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surtoundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and 2. Thal, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings?X Yes _No. [f your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: ~ee~~t=~el}ed 2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the same zone as your property? ~ Yes _ No If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: See attached. 3. Do the special circumstances applicable to ~re property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? _Yes _No If~ree aatieactiYesd _ describe the special circumstances: 4. Were the s~ecial circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property owners)? _Yes _ No EXPLAIN: See attached. The sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone which is not oth 'see res horized by zone regulations governing subj t property. Use variances are not permitted. ~ ~ Signature of Pr perty Owner orized Agent ate 37625~DECEMBER t2, 2000 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO. Justification Waiver. dot ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 5 Petitioner's Statement of Justification for Variance/Code Waiver Brookfield Homes is requesting a waiver ofAnaheim Municipal Code Section 18.04.045.0140 (the 35-foot minimum front setbacks from Lincoln Boulevard) for Tentative Tract Map 16477. On the proposed site plan, the 16 units fronting Lincoln Avenue have a front setback that is less than 35-feet (the minimum required front setback). The minimum setback on the proposed site plan is 28.9-feet from the property line to the front door. ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 5 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER (NOT REQUIRE1D FOR PARKING WAIVER) REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: ! 8 • ~ ~ • O/ 3. Dom. 1 n ~ {A separat tatement is required for each Code waiver) PERTAINING TO: II/'~IaA U y~1_~ h~t-~~ r ~ k Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the 7.oning Administrator or Planning Commission, the fallowing shall be shown: 1. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surtoundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and 2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages. 1. Are there specia~circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings? _ Yes _ No. If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: See attached. 2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which arc in the same zone as your property? X Yes _ No If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: See attached 3. Do the special circumstances applicable toahe property deprive it of privileges curtently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? Yes _No If your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances: SPa a++arl~A 4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property owners)? ~- Yes _ No See attached. EXPLAIN: The sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone which is not of vise expres authorized by zone regulations governing subje t property. Use variances are not permitted. ~ r Signature of P perty Owne uthorized Agent D to CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE NO. 3~625tDECEMBER l2, 2000 Justification Waiver. do[ ATTACHMEIJT - ITEM N0. 5 e RROOK~I~LR H O M E S Petitioner's Statement of Justification for Variance/Code Waiver Brookfield Homes is requesting a waiver of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.31.063.022 (the minimum rear and side yard setbacks from the rear and side project property lines) for Tentative Tract Map 16477. Brookfield Homes is confident that the setback of the interior homes will not negatively impact adjacent properties. As described in the Application for Tentative Tract Map 16477, the adjacent land uses include a pazking lot to the west, a carport to the east, and a school recreation field to the south. There aze also three single-family detached homes on the southwest corner. The units adjacent these homes feature asingle-story garage to the rear, providing an additional 10- to 15-feet to the second story. SOUTHLANO BUSINESS GROUP 3090 aristol Street, Suite 200, Costa Mesa CA 92626-3061 Phone 714.427.6668 • Faz 714.427.6869 ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 5 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER) REQUEST FOR WAVER OF CODE SECTION: (B- ~ I. OG S • OI n ' "°' / (A separa a sta)ement is req tred fo( each Code waiver) PERTAINING TO: ~ IYl I VtA U Vy1 G6 t ~ n r.~ P-f'rc JQ2Vt ~r ;~.~( t'inCr S ,.. Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown: 1. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and 2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully and as completely as possible. [f you need additional space, you may attach additional pages. 1. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or surtoundings? _/ Yes _ No. If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: See attached 2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the same zone as your property? % Yes _ No If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: See atta~haA 3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? gYes _No If your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances: See attachar3 4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property owners)? ~, Yes _ No EXPLAIN: See attac The sole purpose of any variance or Cade waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone which is not ise xpre s uthorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted. Signat e o rope wn or thorized Agent CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO. 37625~DECEMBER l2, 2000 Justification Waiver. dot ~ROO~F~~Lo H O M E S Petitioner's Statement of Justification for Variance/Code Waiver Brookfield Homes is requesting a waiver of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.31.065.010 (the minimum distance between buildings) for Tentative Tract Map 16477. The intention of this code was to ensure adequate distance between buildings of attached residential dwellings. This code was not intended to be applied to single family residences. The attached townhomes in the proposed site plan are in compliance with Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.31.065.010. SOUTHLAND BUSINE65 GROUP 3090 Bristol Street, Suite 200, Costa Mesa CA 92626-3061 Phone 714.427.6868 • Fax 714.427.6869 ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 5 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF 7USTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER) REQUEST FOR WAVER OF CODE SECTION: Il' . 3 ~. d ~3 . 02 A,~1 II PERTAINING TO: 'IVl ltn lvl~ U VN ~GYIdS uc.~~ (A sepppp Uotb rate tatement is required for eac ccc~ a ~i,.,.-r{7nG Si~~a l }~ Co e? ~r waiver) -„ ~ ,~ ~ v Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the Zonine Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown: 1. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and 2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages. I. Are there special.circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings? g Yes _ No. If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: See attached. 2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the same zone as your property? $ Yes _ No If your answer is "yes," describe how the property i different: SPP attarhaA 3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? gYes _No [f your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances: See attar•haA 4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property owners)? ~ Yes _ No EXPLAIN: The sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be approved which have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone which is not of r 'eel ass t orized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted. Sienatur of P ooerty Ow~ or thorized Aeent 3762SDECEMBER 12, 2000 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO. lus[ification Waiver. dot ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 5 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF NSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER) REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: h . 3 ~- OG 2 • O j 2- A~ !/ - r / /' (A s paste statement is fequired for each Code waiver) PERTAINING TO: IVI~YIrylRrlt~n c~ C~r1f' ~nri%~~iHi S /a~,i~iThn Sin~~n.~rnnnr~~i Sections 18.03.040.:030 and 18.12.Oti0 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown: 1. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and 2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings? X Yes _ No. If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: See attached. 2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different fiom other properties in the vicinity which are in the same zone as your property? ~ Yes _ No If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: See attached. 3. Do the special circumstances applicable t~the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? _Yes _No ~~e r a~~ach~des;' describe the special circumstances: 4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property owners)? R Yes _ No EXPLAIN: See attached. The sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be approved which ould have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone which is not oth is xpr authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted. Signature of operty Own r or uthon d Agent Da e ` tz, 2000 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO. Iustiticntion Waiver. dot ATTACHI1ENT - ITEt1 N0. 5 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAPdER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER) REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: . ? PERTAINING TO: e waiver) Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown: That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and 2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages. 1. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings? X Yes _No. If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: -~;r~i:~e;re~ 2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which arc: in the same zone as your property^: Yes _ No See attached, If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: 3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? Yes _No If ur answer if " es "describe the special circumstances: ~ee attaclYie$. 4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the conVOl of the property owner (or previous property owners)? XYes _ No EXPLAIN: See attach d The sole pure o any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be approved whi h uld have the of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone which is not the ise re a rized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted. 3 ^l('O~ Signature of P petty Owner o tzed Agent Date tz, zoao CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO. lustiFcation Weivcr. dot ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 5 a~ OOOOKFBELO H O M E S Petitioner's Statement of Justification for Variance/Code Waiver Brookfield Homes is requesting a waiver of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.31.063.024 (20-foot minimum landscape setback of buildings .abutting single-family residential development), Anaheim Municipal Code 18.31.062.012 (50-foot minimum setback of buildings abutting single-family residential development), and Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.31.062.013 (maximum structural height of buildings abutting asingle-family residential zone) for Tentative Tract Map 16477. Brookfield Homes will mitigate any potential privacy intrusion of the adjacent single family residences through landscaping, window orientations, and increased second-story setbacks. SOUTHIANt] BUSINESS GROUP 3080 Bristol Street, Suite 200. Costa Mesa CA 92526-3061 Phone 714.427.5868 ~ Fax 714.427:6569 ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 5 MEMORANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Community Development Department DATE: April 16, 2003 TO: David See, Senior Planner FROM: Damien Delany, Senior Project Manager ~ SUBJECT: 2300 - 2340 W. Lincoln Avenue Brookfield Homes ("Brookfield") proposes an 82-unit housing development at 2300 - 2340 W. Lincoln Avenue, the former Home Depot site now occupied by Daniel's Furniture Store. The 8.8-acre development site is located in the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors Redevelopment Project Area. On January 7, 2003, the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency approved an Amended and Restated Disposition and Development Agreement ("Amended and Restated DDA") with Brookfield. Pursuant to the Amended and Restated DDA, Brookfield will construct and sell 82 single-family homes. 32 homes will be attached and 50 homes will be detached. Brookfield Homes will be making 41 units available to low and moderate-income homebuyers. Over the last year, Community Development Department and Planning Department staff has been assisting the Developer with the design development of the project. The Developer is requesting incentives in lieu of a density bonus. The value of the density bonus and total number of units that are allowed under the RM-3000 zone exceeds the value of the requested incentives by $973,500.. With a density bonus, this project could yield approximately 160 units on the site under the RM-3000 zone. However, the Developer is seeking incentives in lieu of the density bonus. The value of the density bonus is greater than the requested incentives, as analyzed by the Keyser Marston report attached to this memorandum. Therefore, Community Development staff is recommending approval of all requested waivers in lieu of a density bonus for the proposed project. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at (714) 765-5238. Attachment F 1DOCSb1Dh11MMEAlO510dh1JJ NT. DOC ATTACHMENT - I TEf1 N0. 5 TABLE 1 ESTIMATED VALUE OF A DENSITY BONUS BROOKFIELD HOMES ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA I. Site Description' Gross Land Area 8.80 Acres 383,328 SF (Less) Right of Way Dedication 0.00 Acres ` 0 SF Net SF Land Area 8.80 Acres 383,328 SF Current Zoning RM 3000 14.5 UnitlAcre Revised Zoning (Per General Plan) RM 3000 14.5 Units/Acre Gross land Area 11. Maximum Allowable Units (RM 3000) Acres 8.80 Allowable Density (Units/Acre) 14.5 Maximum Allowable Units 128 III. Multi-Family Land Value' $7,000,000 Per Allowable Unit $54,690 Per SF Net Land Area $18.26 IV. Densitv Bonus Maximum Allowable Units 128 Density Bonus 25% Density Bonus Units 32 Total Units . 160 VI. Value of Densitv Bonus Land Value with Density Bonus s $8.,750,000 (Less) Base Land Value (7,000,000) Value of Density Bonus 51,750,000 ' Per the Section 33433 Summary Repor[ for Brookfield Southland Holdings LLC. Z Total number of units times $54,890/unit. Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Filename: Brookfield Density Bonus - 2; TABLE i; jlr; 4l15/2n03 TABLE 2A ESTIMATED VALUE OF FRONT YARD SETBACK WAIVER BROOKFIELO HOMES ANAHEIM. CALIFORNIA 1. Front Yard Setback Requirement Setback Requirement 35 Feet Setback Requested Average of 30 Feet Land Area II. Land Value Per Square Foot RM 3000 z Sid.'6 III. Setback Required Linear Feet subject to Setback 660 Additional Setback required 5 IV. Additional Square Footage Required Landscape setback area required 3,300 Estimated Value of Waiver $60,300 See TABLE 1. Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Filename: Brookfield Density Bonus - 2; TABLE 2A; jlr; 4/15/2003 TABLE 28 ESTIMATED VALUE OF LANDSCAPE SETBACK WAIVER BROOKFIELD HOMES ANAHEIM, CALIFOP.i`IIA I. Minimum Landscape Setback Adjacent to SFR Zone Current Landscape Setback Requirement 20 Feet Landscape Setback Requested Average of 11 Feet Gross Land Area II. Land Value Per Square Foot RM 3000' ~18.2i; III. Setback Required Linear Feet Subject to Setback 108 Additional Setback required 9 IV. Additional Square Footage Required Landscape setback area required 972 Estimated Value of Waiver $17,700 See TABLE 1. Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Filename: Brookfield Density Bonus - 2; TABLE 2B; jlr, 4/15/2003 TABLE 2C ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE TWO STORY SETBACK WAIVER BROOKFIELD HOMES ANAHEli49, CALIFORNIA I. Second Storv Setback Requirement Setback Required 50 Fee[ Setback Requested 20 Feet Gross Land Area II. Land Value Per Square Foot RM 3000 ;.,1g.2g III. Setback Required Linear Fee[ subject to Setback 200 Additional Setback required 30 IV. Additional Souare Footaoe Required Landscape setback required 6,000 Estimated Value of a Zonin Chan a $109,600 TABLE 2D ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE INTERIOR SETBACK WAIVER BROOKFIELD HOMES APJAHEII4J, CALtFOR~dIA I. Interior Setback Requirement Setback Required Setback Requested 10 Feet 5 Feet Gross Land Area II. Land Value Per Square Foot RM 3000 z ~182e III. Setback Required Linear Feet subject to Setback 870 Additional Setback required 5 IV. Additional Square Footage Required Landscape setback required 4,350 Estimated Value of a Zoning Chan e $79,400 Per Developer estimate. Prepared by; Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Filename: Brookfield Density Bonus - 2; TA9LE 2D; jlr; 4/15/2003 TABLE 2E _ _. . ESTIMATED VALUE OF DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDING WALL WAIVER BROOKFIELD HOMES ANAHEIM, CALIFOP,NIA . I. Building Setback Requirement Required Distance Between Building Walls Distance Between Building Walls Requested 11. Setback Required .Number of Units Average parcel depth (feet) Additional setback required (feet) III. land Area Required Land area required 20 Feet 10 Feet 31 90 10 27,900 IV. Land Value oer Square Foot $18.26 V. Estimated Value of the Set-Back Variance $509,500 Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Filename: Brookfield Density Bonus - 2; TABLE 2E; Jlr, 4/15/2003 P > 3~p 'r X3296 ? o n 'ono o~ of ~3 •F n }Af ~ y9(~ s+a m~ iV m N AvERNgSTREE~ i vPae6 i~ V-719 J~ Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04674 Requested By: CARLOS D. VARGAS 1~ \VE Mt~t'S ~~ N~R-(N S ~ ~. ~ ~~- N ~~ Rg. m m1 0 ~ Z C o~ ~ ou ~/ r 2~ vM3ec Zp S~ZOU i V-~p1 ', 2 1 J C ~~6 0~ 3~ 9983 S0~ 1 pU .136 16 1 ~r° Subject Property Date: April 21, 2003 Scale: 1" = 200' Q.S. No. 71 REQUEST TO PERMIT A W.I.C. CONVENIENCE STORE WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 816 North Anaheim Boulevard 635(2003-4-10) Staff Report to the `Planning Commission Apri121, 2003 Pltem No'. 6 6a. - CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) 6b.' WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion) 6c. -- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO'2003-04674 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) :This rectangular-shaped, 0.16 acre property has a frontage of 50 feet on the east side of Anaheim. Boulevard; having a maximum'depth of 143 feet and`is located 90 feet south of the centerline of Mills Drive (816 North Anaheim Boulevard -Babies "R" Us Nutritional). .REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code section No. 18.45`050.195 to permit a WIC (Women, Infant'and Children) convenience store within an existing two-unit office building with waiver of the following: SECTION NOS. 18.06.050.022 Minimum number of oarking spaces. 'AND 18:45.066.050 i (14 spaces required 8 spaces~;proposed and recommended by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager.) s BACKGROUND: (3) .This property is currently developed with atwo-unit office building and is zoned CG '(Commercial, General). The Anaheim General Plan iLand Use Element Map designates this property for General Commercial land' uses. (4) Surrounding land uses are as follows: Direction Land Use Zoning General Plan Designation North Offices CG General Commercial East across alley Single-Family Residential RS-5000 Low-Medium Density Residential South i Automotive Businesses CG General Commercial West across'Anaheim Blvd. Automotive Businesses CG General Commercial (5) There are no prior zoning actions pertaining to this property, DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL (6) :The petitioner proposes to establish a Women, Infants and Children (WIC) store, which is a market supported by the State of California to provide basic food items to qualitying low Sr3Q12ey Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commissiort April 21 { 2003 Item No. 6 income families. The WIC store would operate within an existing 1,010 square foot tenant suite, located within an existing 3,l]SO square foot office building.' {7) The submitted site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates that the property is developed with one tiuifding located on the'westem portion of the property with no setback adjacent to Anaheim Boulevard. The parking lot is located on the eastern portion of the property with access from a public alley, There is no existing or proposed landscaping on the subject property. (8) The floor plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates a 1,010 square foot WIC store, including a 470 square foot eustomer area, storage room, office, and two restrooms. The floor plan further shows two entrances for this tenant space, one which: fronts on Anaheim Boulevard and the other which leads to a hallway with parking lot access. SThe petitioner has indicated that customer access will only be permitted through the door adjacent to Anaheim Boulevard. t ~~r~n.„~^r ~`1~~ y.!~?.--HkYL~' t'y ~`'xrar4F4`"c~~ r` 4~~. ,~_'„-' ~r ~ ,,. '~?"._e" ~x .'~~ ~t .~ Y.-; :, Y'~Ys'~. ~~~Y'~~.~":~°' '~N"'e.~Y ~-?' i `~Y -,>,Y ~ ~~c-~`Yzr ~~ ~ X . ~~ .~ ~ sat' Y'rY =Y ,.~ ~s „~~e~f ~ Lr y, 2 "-j g~G' ",y dr,"~„ ,k~~,~~,, i ~` ~~~T .rIH mss, ~~~ rr * ~' y ~,' `~~~~~^Y~ ~ ~w ~, a' 4 Wit! '~ ~ 'a't „Y'~~? ~ + ~` .o s *.Y~ 1' ~%~ n"r r `~ T s`ti'r -: ~ ~~` ~~'~.~~s~x,e '~ ~ mac. ~ ^t°~~~^~""""~.^,~ .~`~%` ~~ ,o*~^ r a v^' ^ticu .~~.~` a.~.t ir"k" r ~ ~ w~ v~zYi . %ti~kM'~"~'"^~ S~YS`^"" s ~ t ,u i'-' ff ~„. ~"~~,., t ~ ~~L ~ Y.%rert:.t '. ,,: ,rtif' ~`' `~ ~. 7 s. fi „?' ~x`~'Y`3 ~~.~`~w.t`~~r,+Mrr ~`~~'_Y',„m"~ q ~ t . tit ~ ' .~ a ~ '.:'sw+%~ z tg {` `t~-t?arw Y e ~,.. .w.i a~`.'.br„Yr-' ~~fr ,,;,5 ~, ~ 2?wl~1YxE' 'k a"' r "w ~, ...~ ~ <.. a'.~a ~c-z..-n"3~` View of proposed WIC aonveniehce store and existing office tenant space (g) Vehicular access is provided to the property via a public alley adjacent to the east property line. The site plan indicates a total of 8 parking spaces proposed; Code requires 14 spaces based on the following: Page 2 off Report to the ? arming; Commission ril 21, 2003 m NoP 6 Code?Required Required Business Name Square footage Parking Ratio Number of (per t,ooo sq. ru or Spaces rossfloor area).;: Babies "R" Us Nutritional 1;010 5.5 5':5 Vargas Tax and 2;070 4 8:3 Immigration Services Total 3,080 - 14 (10) The submitted photos indicate Gone-story building with a maximum height of approximately i '14 feet. The photos further indicate that exterior building materials consist of a stucco .finish and a brick facade. l (11) As part of this application, a sign plan (Exhibit No, 3);was submitted proposing a wall sign on the west building elevation with a sign :area of approximately 23 square feet, or 9' 'percent of the building elevation. Code permits wall(signage not to exceed 10 percent of :.the tenant_space building elevation. There are no existing or proposed freestanding signs on this property. (12) The petitioner has submitted a letter of operation indicating thestore would be open .Monday through Friday, 8:30 am. to 7 p.m. and Saturday, 10 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., with a maximum'of two employees operating on a single shift. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (13) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study,(a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmehtal impact and, therefore, recommends that a Negative leclaration be approved upon a finding by the Commission hat the declaration reflects the independentjudgment of the lead agency; and thaf it has 'considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the publicTeview process and furtherflnding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments: received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a ignificanfeffect on the environment. GROWTH MANAGEMENTELEMENTANALYSIS: (14) The proposed project has been: reviewed by affected City departments to`determine whether it conforms with the City's Growth Management Element adopted by the City :Council on March 17 1992. Based on City staff review of the proposed project, it has been determined that this,project does not flt within the scope necessary to require a Growth :Management Element analysis; therefore,: no analysis has been performed. ..Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21; 2003 'item No. 6 EVALUATION: (15) Convenience markets, including WIC convenience stores, are permitted inthe CG Zone subject to the approval'df a conditional use permit. (16) Staff has previously contacted the State of Califomia, Department of Health Services regarding W IC stores. !In a telephone conversation with a State representative, Bertha King (Chief of Retail Management Unit) indicatedthere are'no location requirements to separate these WIC stores, the stores are authorized (not licensed) through the State of California, and there is ho County. affiliation with the stores. Mrs: King did state that these stores must meet local drdinancesto open this type of busir~~% , and that theState of Califomia, J Oepartmenfof Health Services does not partia~." : ~ he approval process nor expresses support of petitions to establish WIC stores.:: Bec „e the WIC'stores are not considered County facilities, a determination of General Plan i;onformity is not required. '(17) The =fanning Commission may wish to note that the proposed WIC store would operate differ~•atiy than a standard convenience market. The W IC store would sell Limited goods, which may only be purchased with coupons' issued by he State of California. Moreover, the WIC store would operate with limited hours;: as indicated in paragraph no. 12, (16) The requested waiver pertains to minimum number of parking spaces. Plans indicates total of 8 parking`spaces and Code requires a minimum of 14 spaces,; as described in paragraph no.) Office. uses require 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of grass floor area, whereas retie ~ uses require 5.5 spaces per,1,000 square feet of gross floor' area. Additionally,',the size of parking stalls and drive aisles withinthe parking lof ^c; noYmeet current standards, and the recommended'redesign of the parking area would aecrease the number of spaces from 10 to B spaces. (19) When the requested parking waiver does not exceed ten percentof the Code requirement or for uses requiring thirty or fewer spaces,. the Code permits "such other study" approved by;the Traffic and Tra~sportationManager. The petitioner has submitted a`parking letter to substantiate the requested parking waiver. Based on information provided in the parking letter, the majority of the market's potential customers do not have vehiclesand the proposed market will have afull-time driver to provide transportation for customers. The City Traffic and Transportation Manager has reviewed'the parking letter and has determined that the proposed parking is sufficient for the proposed WIC convenience store and the existing office use provided the parking lot is restriped with a minimum of 8 spaces incompliance with Standard Engineering Plans pertaining to parking spaces. (20) Tfie petitioner has also'provided the following operational information as evidence to s substantiate the requested waivers: (a) Our business parking needs are minimal. Most of our clients'do not have vehicles'and therefore do noLdrive. Our market has a full time driver who provides ransportation for 75%ofour clients. The market's'hours of operation are Monday through Friday 830 a.m. to 7:00 p.m, and Saturday 10:00 a:m. to 4;30 p.m. Page 4 Staff Repprt to the Planning Commission `April 21;'2003 Item No 6 (b) The building in question is an old building that does not comply with current parking standards and/or regulations. To modifgor change the building's parking situation'would be not pnly extremely ezpensivebut detrimerital to the business. (c) Our next door neighbor operates a tax business.- Most of their client's are individuals whoiive in the neighborhood and do not drive or have any means of transportation. The bulk'of their business is for 3 Y:months out ofithe yeas .Their parking requirements are also the very minimum:' FINDINGS: <; (21) That Section 18.06:080 of the parking ordinance sets forth the following findings which are required to be made before the parking waivers are approved by the Planning Commission or City Council. (a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed if any, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided forsuch use than the number of such spaces.: necessary to accommodate all vefiicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use; and {b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed if any, will not increase the demand ahd competition for parking spaces upon thepubfic streets in the'immediate vicinity of;the proposed use; and (c) That the waiver, 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 theproposed'use;and (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not Increase traffic congestion within the off-sheet parkingareas or lots provided for such use; and (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, ifany, will not impede vefiicular ingress to or egress from: adjacent properties. upon the: public streets in the immediate:vicinity of he proposed use. Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the grant of any waiver pursuant to this section by the Planning Commission or City Council, the granting of any such waiver sfiall be deemed contingent upon operation of such use iniconformance with the assumptions relating to the operation and intensity of the use as contained in the parking. demand study that formed the basis for approval of said waiver. Exceeding„violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of said assumptions as contained in'the parking demand: study shaUbe deemed a violation of the express conditions imposed upon said waiver which shall'subject said waiver to erminatidh or modification pursuant to the provisions of Sections 18.03.091 and 18.03h092 of this Code. r (22) Before the Planning Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding bf fact tHaf the evidence presented shows: that all of the following conditions exist: Page 5 Staff Report to the 'Planning: Commission April 21, 2003 Item No. 6 (a) Thaf the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning,Code, or that said use is not listed thereirtss being a permitted use; (b) Thaf the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the areain which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use i~ adequate to allow the f, development of he proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular arc:. nor to the peace, health, safety, and'general welfare; (d) Thaf the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon he streets and highways designed and improved to'carry the't~affic in the area;. and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permitunder the conditions .imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace;. health, safety and general welfare of the > citizens of the City of Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: '(23) Staff recommends that; unless additional oricontrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the. public hearing, the Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, aoorove a CEOA Negative Declaration. (b) By resolution, aborove Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04674 (to permit a WIG convenience store within an existingjtwo-unitbffice building) based'on the following: (i) That the proposed convenience market is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code in he CG Zone. (ii) That the proposed convenience market, with the proposed type of service and limited hours'of operation, would not adversely affectthe adjoining land uses antl the growth and developmentof the area in whicfi it is proposed to be located. (iii) That the size and shape of the site for the proposed convenience market is adequate to allow`the full development'of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particulararea nor to the peace, health, safety, and i general welfare. (iv) That the traffic generated by the proposed use would not impose an undue burden'upon the streets and highways designed'and improved to carry the traffic'in the area Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April2l'2003 Item No'. (i (v) That the granting of Conditional Use Permit No2003-04674, under he conditions imposed, would not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the Ciry of Anaheimi THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SUBMITTED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS ACTING AS AN' INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE'AND ARE RECOMMENDED FOR ADOPTION BYTHE PLANNING' COMMISSION IN THE EVENT THIS PERMIT IS APPROVED. ,, 1. That the granting of the parking waiver is contingent upon operation of the use in bonformance with the assumptions and/or conclusions relating to the operation and intensity of use'as contained in the parking letterthat farmed the basis for approval of said waiver. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating frorrmany of saitl assumptions and/or conclusions, as contained in the parking letter, shall be deemed a:vlolation bf the expressed conditions imposed uponisaid waiver which shall subject this conditional use permit to termination ormodification pursuant to the provisions of Sections 18.03.091 and 18.03.092 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.: 2 That the hours of operation shall be limited to 8:30 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 10 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Saturday. 3. That the rear entrance to the building, adjacent to"the parking lot, shall be utilized trictly for employees, and shall not be utilized foG,patrons of the WIC convenience store. 4. That no alcoholic beverages: shall be sold or consumed on the premises. 5.. That no video, electronic or other amusement devices or games shall be permitted on the premises. 6. ; That nofast-food services or other services separate from the normal WIC transactions shall be permitted in the convenience market. 7. , That all public telephones (existing or proposed) under the control of the applicant shall be located ! inside he building only. 8. ' The roof-mounted balloons or other inflated devices shall not be permitted on the property. ; 9. That no outdoor vending machines visible to adjacent public streets shall be permitted on the property. 10:' That there shall be no outdoor storage permitted on the premises. 11: That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage or'other merchandise storage or display. 12 That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval showing'conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard: Plan Nos: 436, 601 and 602 pertaining to parking standards and drivewaylocations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 13: That prior to commencing operation of3he convenience market, a valid businesslicense shall be obtained from the,Business License'Division of the Ciry Planning Department. '.Page 7 Staff Report to the Planning Commission.' .April 21, 2003 Item No. 6 14. That the proposal shall comply with all signing requirements of he CG Zone unless a variance allowing sign waivers is approved by the City Councilor Planning Commission. 15. That no sign shall be lighted between the hours of midnight and 6:30 a.m unless such signs identifies a business which remains open'tluring those hours. 16. That window signageshall not be permitted for the convenience market. All fixtures; displays,'.. merchandise and other materials shall besetback a minimum of three (3) feet from all window :areas. 17. That four (4) foot high street address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of the building in a :color contrasting to fie roof material. The numbers!shall not be visible to'the view from the streets or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police 'Department, Community Services Divisiorcapproval 18. That any existing or proposed roof-mounted equipment shall be subject to the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.45:030.130 pertaining to the CG (Commercial,'General)Zonc. `Said information shall'be specifically shown on plans submitted for Zoning Division approval 19. That the property shall be permanently maintained irran orderly fashion by the provision of regular landscaping maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours from ime of occurrence. ' 20. That 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 Planningbepartmentmarked Exhibit No. 1, 2 and 3 and as conditioned herein. 21. That the parking lot shall be repaired and resurfaced with a new slurry coat. Said information shall 6e specifically shownon plans submitted for review and approval by the Traffic and Transportation Manager. 22. That prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution or within a period of one (1) :year from the date of his resolution, whichever occurs first, Contlition Nos: 12, 13, 1Z, 18, 20'artd 21 above-mentioned,'shall be complied with. Extensions for further time o complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 23. That approval of this application constitutes approvai'of the proposed request only to the extent that it complieswith the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and anypther 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, Page 6 I 1 I rn l >'I_ I -- -- -- CUP 3330 ~ Z 1 5 - - L 54 5-02 MU TIF 1 BURKEA EC STREET--- -- _ L OODS _ ~ CUP 3991 SPECIALTY BUSINESS CENTER ~ ~ TRUCK ML DISTRIBUTORS PARKING CUP 2902 m 1 R CUP 2fi50 j V 9 ~ CUP 3174 -~ (7 CUP 1369 ~' I i AMERICAN TOUR a ~~ '~ ~ BLEASING y ML :D o VAR 3943 m m SMALL IND. FIRMS ~ - ~ w 9 330' Mfi 68-67-36 y T 4 ~ BUA1413 9 50.55-02 n ro CUP 2668 CUP 3321 ~ - CUP 3174 r ~ rn j CUP 1369 G CUP ]fi50 G A NgN E6 MAINrE C 6667.36 6061-113 5455-02 (n - ML -I ML ML 6667-3fi ~ 5455-02 6061-113 m 6667-36 6667-14 SMALL IND. 545532 T-GUP 200&04677 Rt 6051-113 FIRM CUP 4016 --I SILGAN PLASTICS CUP 23fi9 AA 0008 RMS D. S F ut I 5455-02 ~ SMALL IND. FIRM ML ML 666756 6061-113 fib-fi7-36 ML $465.42 fi061-113 6667-36 CUP 1369 54-5532 fi061-113 TRUCK BLUE RIBBON 5465-02 SALES COMAINERS SMALL IND. FlRM -- -- CERRITOS AVENUE Conditional Use Permit No. 4016 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2003-04677 Date: April 21, 2003 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: LLC KELTO Q.S. No. 96 REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT OF THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO A TIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON APRIL 27, 1998. TO EXPIRE APRIL 27, 2003) TO RETAIN A TELECOMMUNICATION MONOPOLE AND ACCESSORY GROUNp-MOUNTED EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE. 1422 South Allec Street 63s Staff Report to the '' Planning Commission April 21,:2003 Item No::7 7a.' CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) (Motion) 7b CONDITIONAL' USE PERMIT N0 4016 (Resolution) (TRACKING NO: CUP2003-04677) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly-shaped 0.99-acre property has a frontage of 125,feet on the east sideof Allec ' Street, having a maximum depth: of 330 feet, located 539 feet north of the:centerline of Cerritos Avenue (1422 South Allec Street).; REQUEST: ' (2) The petitioner requests reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion ofa condition ofapprovalpertaining to a time limitation,(approved on April 27,:1998, to expire April 27, 2003) to retain a telecommunications monopole and accessory ground-mounted equipment enclosure under authority of Code Section 18.03.093: BACKGROUND:`. (3) This property is developed with amulti-tenant industrial building and a 60-foot high monopole r and accessory ground=mounted equipment: The property is zoned ML (Limited Industrial) and is designated for General Industrial land uses on the Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map. (4) The monopole was originally installed with Zoning Division approval in 1989, prior to the requirements of a conditional use permit for telecommunication facilities. lh 1998, modifications to this facility were'approved by the Commission and a time limit was imposed. (5) Surrounding land uses are as follows: Direction Land: Use Zoning ::General Plan Desi nation North Industrial Uses ML :General Industrial East 'Auto Storage and r Maintenance ML i General Industrial South :Small Industrial Firms ` ML Generailndustrial WeSf(acrossAllec Street Industrial Firm `. ML General Industrial (6) Conditional Use Permit No. 4016. (to construct a 60-foot high telecommunications monopole with three arrays having seven antennas each, and three microwave dishes to replace an existing 60 foot high wood monopole) was approved by the Planning Commission on April 27, 1998, for alive-year period. Planning Commission Resolution No. PC98-85 adopted'in conjunctioniwith this permit contains the following cohtlition of approval: "1 j That this conditional use permit is approved for a period of five (5) years, to expire on April 27, 2003 " sr8579m.dac Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 :`.Item NoJ 7 (9) Staff feels that as technology improves and area surroundings transition, stealth opportunities should be explored for these facilities. Several years'ago, monopoles of this type were the only mechanism for wireless communication systems.`Today, opportunities for a variety of stealth facilities exist. Staff believes that wireless carriers with older facilities, such asr#his one, should'anticipate arequirement to explore all alternatives and prepare'for a motlification oG'replacement of older facilities in order to adequately. stealth and decrease visual clutter along major'corridors throughout he City. (10) Staff encouraged the petitioner to'expfore stealth telecommunication facility'alternatives in this searcKrng and requested additional justification for continuation of this facility of he establishedllocation. Mr. Bitterlylhas provitled information, in an`attached letter, relative to relocation and initiation'of a new facility indicating thatthis alternative would`be cost prohibitive, compromise a significant component of the existing infrastructure and create a high loss of calls. (11) This facility is isolated ih a predominantly industrial area. Because the existing unscreened monopole is`not readily visible from surrounding major'corridors,'staff feels that sufficient justification exists to reinstate this: permit as previously-approved and recommends that the Planning Commission`aoprove reinstatement of this facility subject to a five(5) year time limitation. (12) The Code Enforcement Division has submitted the attached memorandum dated March 28, .2003, indicating compliance with conditions'of approval for Conditional Use Permit No: 4016. Code Enforcement Division records indicate that therefare no outstanding complaints pertaining to his property and the ite is being properly maintained. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT'ANALYSIS: (13) Staff has reviewed the request for reinstatement of this permit and finds no significant: adverse environmental';impacts resulting from this request. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously-approved Negativebeclaration in connection with'Conditional Use Permit No. 40.16 serve as the required environmental documentation for this'~equest upon a finding by the Commission that the Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and hat it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study (a?copy of which is available for review in the Planning>Department) and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will. have a significanPeffect on the environment. '- GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENTANALYSIS: (14) The proposed project has been reviewed byaffected .City departments to determine whether it conforms with the City's Growth Management Element adopted'by the City Council'on March 17, 1992. Based on City staff review of the proposed project, it has tieen determined that this project does not flt withinthe scope`necessary to require a Growth Management Element analysis, therefore, no analysis hasbeen performed. FINDINGS: (15) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence' presented: showstfiat all of the following conditions exist: Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Cpmmissiort April 21; 2003 item No. 7 (a) ;That the,proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or that said use is not listed therein as'being a permitted use; (b) ;That the proposed use will not adversely. affect the :adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area ih which it is proposed to be located; (c) ' That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed'use in a manner notdetrimentel to the particular area nor to the peace, healtft, safety, and general welfare; (d) ;That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and;improved'to carry the rafBc in'the area; and (e) ;That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health,' afety ahd' general welfare of the citizens"of the City of Anaheim. (16) Subsection 18.03.093.040 of the Zoning Code requires that before the Commission grants reinstatement of the approval by extension, modification'orde~etion the applicant must present evidence to establish the following findings: (a) I The facts necessary to support each and every required showing for the issuance of such entitlement asset forth In this chapter exist; (b) Said permit is being exercised: substantially in the same manner and in conformance with all conditions and stipulations originally approved by the approval body; (c) ;' Said permit is being'exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses, nor to he public;peace, health, safetyand general welfare',and (d) ;With regard only to any deletion of a time limitation,,such deletion is necessary to permit reasonable operation under the permit as granted. RECOMMENDATION: (17) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the hearing, and based upon: the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the previously-approved CEQA Negative Declaration is adequate to serve:as the appropriate environmental documentation forthis request. (b) By resolution, a rove reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 4016 (Tracking No. i' CUP2003-04677). for a period'of five (5)years to expire on April 27,.2008, to retairi'a telecommunications monopole and accessory ground-mounted equipment enclosure based on the following: (i) That this permit is being exercised substantlelly in the same manner and in conformance with all conditions and stipulations originally approved by the Commission as required by subsection 18.03.093.040 of the Zoning Code. Page 4 .Staff Report to the Planning Commission ?.April 21, 2003 Item No, 7 (ii) :That there have been no Code violations or complaints associated with this operation,'and the facility has not adversely affected adjoining land uses.'! (iii) That the size and shape of the site is adequate to allow the full development of the telecommunication facility in a mannernot detrimental to the particular area bor to the peace, health safety,and gene~ai welfare since no intensification of use is proposed. (iv) That without the modification ofthe time limitation, the telecommunicationifacility would not be permitted to continue operating at thisproperty because a 'telecommunication facility requires a conditional use`permit. (c) Staff further recommends that Commission amend Resolution No. PC98-85 in its entirety to be replaced by a new resolution with the following conditions of approval (Condition Nos. 1', 5, 6, 7, 8 9, 10, 11'and 12 are new conditions): 1. That this permit shall expire on Apri127, 2008. 2. That the telecommunications facility shall be limited to 60 feet in height, with 3 sectors: consisting of'seven (7)' panel antennas per sector with'maximum'dimensions of 4 feet: in height by 1-foot in width, two (2) 2-foot diameter microwave dishes and one'(1) 4-foot' diameter microwave dish on the existing tower and accessory ground-mounted equipment. No additional antennas hall be permitted without the approval of he Planning Commission. 3. That no signage, flags banners, dr any other form of advertising shall be attached to the antennas od he transmission tower structure. 4. That the height of the monopole shall not exceed the height of the attached antenna arrays at any time. ' If the arrays;are lowered, the monopole height must be reducedto correspond to the height df the arrays: 5. That the portion of the property being leased to the telecommunication provider shall be permanently maintained loan orderly fashion by providing regutar'landscape maintenance, removal of 4rash'or debrisjand removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24) hours from time of occurrence.: ' 6. That the operator of this use (the "Operator") shall ensure that this installation and choice of frequencies will not. intertere with the 800 MHz radio frequencies required by the City of Anaheim to provideadequatespectrum capacity for publicsafety and related purposes. ` 7. That at all times, other than during the 24-hour cure period provided in Condition No. 9 below, the Operator shall not prevent the City of Anaheim from having adequate spectrum capacity on the City's 800 MHz radio frequency. 8. That the Operator shall submit o a test to confirm3hat the facility does not interfere with the City of Anaheim's public safety radio equipment. This test will be conducted by the Communications Division of the Orange County Sheriff's Department or a Division-approved contractorat the expense of the Operator. 9. That the Operator shall provide a "single: point of contact" including a 24-hour telephone number, fax number`and a-mail address in its Engineering and Maintenance Departments to the Zoning Division (to be forwarded to the Fire and Police Departments) to which interterence problems maybe reported, and shall resolve all interterence complaints within'24 hours.' '.Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 Item No. 7 10. That the Operator shall ensure that each of lts contractors, sub-contractors or agents, or any other user of the facility, shall comply with these conditions of approval 11. That should this telecommunication facility be sold, the City of Anaheim, Zoning Division shall be notified within30 days of,the close of escrow. 12. That all equipment, including supply cabinets and power meter, shall be installedend maintained orr private property and shall be screened from public view, as approved by the Zoning.: Division. 13. That: the subject property shall be developed and maintained substantially in accordance with the plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anafteim by the petitioner. and which plans are on file with thePlanning Departmentroarked Exhibit No.,1 of Conditional Use 7 Permit No. 4016, and as`conditioned herein. 14. Thafwithin thirty (30) days from the'date of this resolution, Condition nos. 8 and 9, above mentioned, shall be complied with. 15. Thatapproval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code`and any other applicable City,`State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include anyaction or findings as to compliance or approval of he request regarding any otherapplicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. Page 6 ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0, 7 MEMORANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Code Ei forcemeat Division DATE: March 28, 2003 TO: Vanessa Norwood, Assistant Planner FROM: Antonio Olivos, Code Enforcement Officer SUBJECT: 60-foot high steel telecommunications monopole,1422 S. Allec St. Reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit #2003-4016 This memo is written in response to your request for information regarding the telecommunications tower at 1422 S. Allec St. Code Enforcement records indicate no complaints have been received regarding this property. On March 28, 2003, I conducted an inspection at this location and found that the property was open and operating within the conditions of approval for conditional Use permit #2003-4016. If have you any father questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at ext. 4482. ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 7 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT JUSTIFICATION FOR REINSTATEIUIENT ° Section 18.03.093 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that before any conditional use permit or variance containing a time limitation can be reinstated for an additional period of time., or before such time limitation may be deleted or modified by the Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator, the following must be shown: 1. The facts necessary to support each and every required showing for the issuance of such entitlement.as set forth in the following excerpts from the Anaheim Zoning Code still exist: 18.03.030 (Relative to ConditiohalUse Permits) Before the City Council or Planning Commission may grant any request for a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact, by resolution, that the evidence presented shows that aA of the following exist: .031 That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by this code, or is not listed herein as being a permitted use; .037 That the proposed use will hot adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; ..033 That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare; .034 That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; .035 That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim; 18:03.040 (Relative to Variances) Before any variance may be granted by the Planning Commission it shall be shown: .031 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 blassification in the vicinity; .032 That, because of special circumstances shown in .031, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under Identical zoning classification in the vicinity. 2. Said permit or variance is being exercised substantially in the same manner and In conformance with all conditions and stipulations originally approved by the approval body;.. 3. Sold permit or variance is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particula(area and surrounding land uses, nor to the public peace, health, safety and general welfare; and 4. With regard only o any deletion ofa timi: limitation, such deletion is necessary to permiEreasonatile operation under the permit or variance as granted. ° In order to determine if such findings exist, and to assist the Zoning Administratoror Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer the fallowing questions fully and as complete as possible. Attach additional sheets if additional soace is needed. 1. Has any physical aspect of the property for which this use permit or variance been granted changed significantly .since the issuance of this use permit or variance? ^ YES ~ NO Explain: `~~&'~~ M~~l •'' ~sx~~.1 ~ C:~)G~~ -12~ `rb4't' ~t-/S1C/,1... 3-"1-5 0~ ~~ Q~oP `~t-t=. 5"rV~i~C-t`_lx'-L S o2 i~` (]6``.!. `Tl`i~s P~P~t;/ ~'-~~t~,U~~-t1a1.5 i-~~i - r~oT G~I~iC-,e~ `J~t~e( r- -~'~ ~~ t-r~rs~ SCI l_tT`'L W'i5 1 t~fS~1l~U (over) CASE 1 CUP NO. - 4 016 =ROM RNP FAX tom, 7146351306 Jan. 30 ~Id3 bu evn•i r~ 2. Have the tend uaeg In tl~a Itntnedlate vlGnlty chan0ad since the Issuanoa of this use. permit ar Vadance7 Ei YEB & NO Explah: The iand uses in the vicinity of the proiect site have not changed i>z five years and the predominant land use in the area is still industrial uses. 3. Has any aspect of the nature of the aper®tlon cnan0ed shoo the Issuance of Ih)s use permit pr variande9 ~ YE6 8) NO Ezplaln: No, the operation of this wireless tai eoommuni a+; nn antenna facility has not chanced since insta~„lation 4. Afe the condltbna of approve! penalnlnp to Iha uea permit or vadanee being wmpllad with9 S1 YE'.5 ^ No Explain: Yes, all conditions. continue to be complied with.. 5. If yeu are requastlng a delatbn of the time Ilmltetlon, la thI® deletion hecassary for the aonunued operallon of Ihle uca ervadenca? AYES CB NO Ezpletn: No, the deletion is not necessary but s; nce' c^ondi r; nna at the site and the operation of the facility will not changes„ (static usel r n w;>1g- +t,a rrru a> }• f~z.ears. do G nn+ caaro necessary. - ;D~p e~ lT~-~..''~ .. Nama of Progeny Owner a Aulhatzed ApeMtPlease Prtnq 2~7?~ 03 IpOetu of Properly Owner or I od Aponl Dole 7Get26lKDOC 1S1BY a 9EY-d OI/50'd ZSO-l CASE NO. CUP W0. _worj _ 4016 55~E1 EO-:Z-ZO ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 7 RESOLUTION F1Cet,QCgB.BB A l3EBOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIN[~ CGRANII6810N 'THAT PEI'1TION FOR CONDITIONAL U8E d'~ERRRIT N4. 4018 9E Gt2AdV'TED vNHERF.A6, the Anaheim City Planning Cornmlavalon did receive a varfifl®d Petitt~ for ~nditional Use Perlral4 for ca:rtatn real propa3rty sltuatsd in th® City of Anahalm, County of Oran®e, State Calltornla, described ®s. PARCEI. 3 IN THE CITY OP ANAHEIAA, COUNTY OF ORAtdGE, 6'TATE OF CALlFOIZNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILEp IN 6QOK 20D, PAGES 9 AND 1D OF PARCEL MApS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY F2EC012®ETd OF eAlb COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. WtiERIeAS, the Clly Planning Commission did hold a public h®arinp at the Civic Center the City of Anaheim on April 27,1x98 se 1:30 p.m., notice of said public h®aong having been duly ran as ~qulred by law and In aacoMance with the provlsiona of tha3 Anaheim Municipal Cods, Chapter ,D3, to hear and aansider evidence foe' and against said proposed conditional u®® permit and to res4lpate and make findings and recomm®ndationa In oonnecllon therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, aft®r due inap®ction, invesYlgatton and study made by elf and In its behalf, and after due oonsideratlon of all evldencs and ropoAs offered a4 said hearing, es find and determin® the following facea; 1. That the propos®d uss is properly one for which a conditional us® permit is Rhonasq by Anaheim AAunlclpal Code S®otlon 18.61.OS0.d60 to construct a eo-foot high et®al ecomtnunicatlons monopole with three arrays having as®van want®nnas each end wi4h thre® microwave ;has to r®pleoe an eXtating BD•foot hi®h wood monopole. 2. That the us+e Is heraaby approved for a period of five years. 3. That the proposed use will not adveraraly a~®~ the adjoining land uses end th® owth and d®velopment of 4h®area in which it Is propo to be located becau®® at this s~~a location a sight line Is not adversely impacted. 4. That the size and shap® of 4he sitm for the proposaed use is adequate to allow full ~v®lopm®rtt of the proposed uas In a manner not detrtmentail to 4he particular area nor to th® pesos, lalth, aafety and gen®ral w®IPar®. 5. That the traffic generated by the proposed uae will not Impos® an undue burd®n wn the streets and highways designed and Improv®d 40 any the traffic In the area. B. That granting of this conditional use palrrrlt for a period of five years, under the inditlons Imposed, vain not be tletrlmental to the p®®~, health, solely and ®Bn®ral welfare of the tlzens of the Clty of Anaheim. 7. That no one indicat®cl Ihelr presence at the public hearing In opposttlon; and at no correspandanc® was received In opposlpdn to 4he subjaa petition. i2326tiPL.DOC -1- PCBB-65 CUP N0. - 4 O 1 6 CALlFdRNIA E~jVIRONAd~N`r L QUA tTV AC'r FI ^INC~: That the Anaheim City mning Commiesion has reviewed the proposal to Constnact a dt] toot ttlgh st®el tel®communtcatlons ~nopola with 4hrea arrays having seven antennas each and with threo microwave dishes to raplac® an s41ng 60-foot high wood monopole on a D_99-acre parcel having a frontage of 925 Poet on the east side All®o t5treet, a maximum depth of 330 f®®t, and being looated 539 f®et north of th® oenterlina oP rritos Av®nue (9422 t3oulh Atl®o Street); and does h®reby approve th® Negative p®claration upon iing that the dactaratlon reflects the Ind®pend®nt Judp®ment of th® load ag®ncy and that ft has tsidered the Negativ® ®eclaration too®ther with any oommants t~cetved during the public r®view icetas and Purther finding an the basis of 4he Initial study and any comments roceivad that 4hero (s no ~atantlal evldente that the project will have a significant affect vrr the environment. f\JO~I, TFIERE{=QRE, BE IT RESat.VED that tho Anaheim city Planning Commission es hereby grant sutaJ®at Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are reby found to ise a necessary prat®quisite to the proposed use of the suBJect prop®tty In order to ~Ne 4he safely and general weltar® of the CI4lxens of the City of Anah®Im: That this conditional use permit 16 approved for a period of Plve (5) yeans9, to expire on April 27, 20US. Thgl a ntaxlmum of three (3) antenna arrays with sev®n (7) antennas each and three (3) mlcrtswave dishes shall he located on the monopole et a maximum height of si$ty (t3o) Pe®t, No additional antennas Shall be permitted without the approval of Ih® Planning Commission. That no signage, flaps, banners or any ocher form of advertising shall be attached to the approved monopole and array structur®. That the monopole structure shall pe painted to blend with, ®nd match, the surrounding structures and cky. T7ta4 the height of the monopole shall no4 exceed kh® height of the attached antenna arrays at any lima. If the an'ays era lowei~d, the monopole height must be reduced (r®mov®d) to correspond w(th the hoight of the arrays. That within a period of one (1) year from the dat® of this resolution, Cho subject property shall be d®velaped subatantlally in accordance with the plans and spaclllcation5 submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner end which plans ere on file with 4he Planning Department merited ExhlY~it No. t, ®nd as canditloned herein. Extenslona for further time to template Bald condttlona may bo granted in accordance with 6ec91on 16.03,0®0 of the Anaheim Municipal Code That the cables: Donn®cting the accessory equlpm®n4 in "Unk J° of th® adjacent building to th® monopole shelf be 4ndgrgrbund. Said oonnedlon shall be speoiflcaily shown on plans submitted for permits. That appr>DYaI of this application constJtutea approval of the proposed request oNy to the ext®nt tha4 It complies smith the Anaheim RAunlclpal Cod® and any other applicabl® Cky. Stat® and Federal ragulatlons. Approval do®s not indud® any action or findings as to complianc® or approval of the nsquest reaaRling any other applicable ordinance, regulaRlan or requir®ment. ~~ I7 FURTHER R~ECLVED that th® Anaheim City Planning Gommisslon does her®py id and delermin® that adoption of this Resolution is ®xprassly predicated upon applicant's comphanc® lh each and all of the conditions harelnahova s®t forth. Should any such condition, or any pari thereof, ~ deolar®d Invalid or unenforceable by th® final judgment of any Court o1 compet®nt ]urisdlction, then la Resolution, and any approvals h®rgln contained, attsll be deemed rtuU and void. THE FOidEGOING RE6oLtTt'ION was ado~®d ae tha planning Comm meeting of CRETARY, ANAHEIM CI'PY PLANNING 60~AflAISSION A1'I/ OF GALIP'ORNIA ) ~UN'1Y OF ORANGE ) ~. PY OF dONAHEIM } 1, RAar®artta Solorio, 6ecretary ®f the Aneh®Im CNy Plannln® Commlaslon, do hereby city that the fnfegoing resolution was passed anei adopted at a meeting of the Anahaim CI4y Planning mmiseian held on Apfil 27, 1888, hY th® following vote of th® m®mbers thereof; 'ES: GOMMISSIaNEidS: @OS'i'l~ICK, BOYD6TUN, E~RI870L, MI:NNINaER, NAPOLLtS, PEt~ )E&; OQNtAAISSIOPIERS: BdONE SENT: COMMIS81t~lER6: NONE ,CANG"Y: ON1= St~a4T VAGANl° IOP~~ne9 ~1~ra~ 5~ ~.t`r~ari~a Sotorgm: tN WiTNHS~ WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto aet my hand this day of 1948 ORANGE7-HO w W I ~ I QI W_ I ~ I w YI J AVON TOPE- RGPSB 9712 YORBq 8'69-931) GROWERS~NGE SUNKIST B~pGN. A~ CH~L 1 ~ i ~I I ~ 89' 14V1`CVUJ-V400V CUP 3927 I CUP 2291 AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR FACILITY ~I m `/~ r~~ CUP 2553 oA2 gl~ Y?N A '' L KEVIEW BUSINESS ~o ~ ~~~ CENTER VIti U~U RCL 70.71-47(26) ¢q U ~. RCL 70-77-46 WIW = CUP 2616 , U 5Iz ¢ EISEN HOW a ERCIRCLE -f I SP 941(SC) UP 2369 RCL 70.77-q7 (26 ) RCL 70-71-06 CUP 2291 I CHARLES C SP 04_1 (SC REGgN CO.~ RCL 70_77~~ (R es. of Intent to ML)4 S70Rq~E Rqj RCL 70 7 - 7-86 CL 70.77-q7 RCL 70-71-. CUP 2297 EISEr N~ER CIRCLE ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE (SC) (SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONE RCP 68 69 gg12 RCL 68-69 g 1) IND, BLDGS. ~¢ `/e~ ~a .-o 4LL ~ mn d0 iS aorZ (n ~rJJ ~ ~~~ K LL ~ m m a U A 0 Conditional Use Permit No. 3927 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2003-04680 Date: April 21, 2003 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: HAYDON BROTHERS AUTOMOTIVE Q.S. No. 165 REQUEST TO PERMIT ACCESSORY RETAIL AUTOMOBILE SALES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR BUSINESS WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 1480 North Lakeview Avenue - Haydon Brothers Automotive 637 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21; 2003 item No. 8 'i 8a.' CEQANEGATIVEDECLARATION(PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED). (Motion) 8b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion) 8c. > CONDITIONAL''USE PERMIT NO. 3927 (READVERTISED) (Resolution) !`'(TRACKING NO; CUP2003-04660) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) .This rectangularly-shaped 0.84-acre property is located at the northeast comer of Lakeview Avenue and Eisenhower Circle with frontages of 149 feet on the east side of Lakeview :Avenue and 89 feet on the north side of Eisenhower Circle (1480 North Lakeview Avenue- Haydon Bothers Automotive).> REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests to permit accessory retail automobile sales in conjunction with a preciously-approved automotive repair business with waiver oR3he following underauthority bf CodeiSections 18:03.091 and 18.110:070.050(0504: SECTIONS 18.06.050.0212 - Minimum number of pa~kinp spaces. l4? ':18:06'.050':0222 spaces required; 32 spaces proposed AND 18:1:10.070.110 and recommended by City Traffic and Transportation Manager) BACKGROUND::' (3) ..This property is developed with an industrial building and is zoned SP94-1, DAZ (Northeast 'Area Specific Plan„Expandedlndustrial Area). The Anaheim General Pian Land Use !Element Map designates this property for General Industrial land uses. (4) !Surrounding land uses are as follows: Direction Land Use Zoning General Plan Designation North ` Atwood Flood`.Control ' General Industrial Channel East ' Industrial buildings SP94..-1, DA2 General Industrial South (across Industrial buildings SP94-1, DA2 General Industrial Eisenhower Circle) West (across City of Placentia - - Lakeview Avenue):. sr8585av `Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission Apri121,2003 Iterti No. 8 ~~ PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (5) The following: zoning actions pertain to this property: (a)' Conditional Use Permit No. 3927 (to permit an automotive repair facility inside an existing 10,585 square foot industrial building and to construct a 1;600 square r'<, ~ mezzanine stprage area with waiver of!Yequired parking spaces 67 pace requires, 26' spaces approvetl) was approved by the Planning Commission on April 28, 1997. (b) Conditional Use Permit No. 2291 (to permit general offices and retail sales with waiver of minimum number'of parking spaces) was approved by the City Council on March 16, 1982, subsequent to denial by, the Planning Commission on January 25 1982. DISCUSSION: (6) The petitioner proposes to amend the previously-approved conditional use permit to allow accessory retail sales of automobiles in conjunction with an automobile repair business within artexisting 10,585 square foot industrial building. The'petitionersubmitted'a letter of,~equest indicating a daily demand and opportunity for the salesbfpre-selected vehicles to the' existing customer base; No significant modifications to the existing business would take place; the only minor change would be the addition of five (5) interior parking spaces((for a total of eight.: (8)) and three (3) retail display spaces within the outdoor parking lot. z + ~~, ~f ~ p G S~ ~.+ ~~~`-gip;"~'`~ l sV' r ~ , .MS€ .rwrvw i" S- XX 4 ~ , ~.~ ~y r ~ y e ~j ib ~ 4 1 i" ~ "~s, .9^ ,Q,xvr~ ~ .: ;t ~ ,y '~ ~ ~C~'d~"~: d U j ! ~ l C 4 r -'~ ~. s •- > > f 1 f%'-. f> rv ,~ ~.c~ r're;,,,~ s r`' .r- ~ ,,, ry/``K7~ ~~~ s ~_" t i Vs ~e^,~ of exterior (west) elevation Page 2 Staff Report to the 'Planning Commission'. .April 21, 2003 Item No. 8 (7) The ownerof the existing automotive repair business describes the service shop as clean, 'small and exclusive; pecializing in Porsche, BMW and Mercedes Benz cars. The motivation `behind this request would be to have the ability to purchase pre-owned vehicles primarily from r customers; and sell them to the'existing customer base. 31 ."` ~a .'w is .x ~~-, ;' ~°,~r°.^' `~`~ ffi~~ ~ ~;~~ x51` °,^ .ra ~' ..c' ~, ^s;> ;. .: f `~c' ~ rein ~ :~ r' ~*~ a T ~ ~ , f ~' kd :i `~M=mow ~" ~ y; .g qF~~~ .a f . `~ "~ '~ ~ '.,v~ ~'~~ ~y* t ~r~ jet ! ~ 4?~,vh 'J Tir' ~F' "~~5~ ~-~~`~ I Y~iJ-"xY.~rw'~' ~.+~. r"~'e "r '"'w v~~r'~~a-a•,' ~:,~'~ ~¢~ ys r ~ ~r f y - ~ ~ G 5 G ~~„~ ,c a . ,~~ . .',' .,, ~~ ~,. ~ ~ ....C ~ Cr. Yf~ ~, n~ y y .y t,, ... ~' ,i, `n. A.y-. ~. ~~; ':View of interior automotive repair area (8) The requested waiver pertains to the minimum number of parking spaces. When the Commission originally approved the automotive repair business in 1997; the required parking :for automotive repair was 5.5 spaces per.:1,000 square feet. Utilizing the: current Code requirement of 3.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor+area actually reduces the ''parking requirement for the business from the prior: approval Using the Gpdated ratio, Code requires a total of 42 parking spaces (including 4 display spaces) for the,proposed auto repair.: and sales facility and 32 spaces (including 8 interiorspaces) are proposed. The petitioner 'has submitted a revised parking study prepared by Weston P~ngfe and Associates, dated iJanuary 23, 2003, which has tieen reviewed and approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager based; upon a determination that the addition ofaccessory,retail :'sales would not adversely affect the existing parking supply provided the maximum'number of displayvehicles is limited to four (4). Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 Item No. 8 (9) The parking; study also includes the following findings to substantiate the requested parking waiver: "(a) The variance will not cause fewer off street parking spaces to be provided for such use other than the number of such spaces necessary o accommodate alfvehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such'use. The off-street parking supply of 25 parking spaces exceeds the existing observed demand of 15'parking spaces plus3hree spaces for employees and nine for office use for a total of 27 parking spaces, providing`a deficiency of 2 parking spaces. In addition, 10 additional parking spaces may beimade available if needed within the confines of the;repair shop. This total supply of 35 spaces would provide adequate parking for thelexisting use and theproposed automobile sales demand of 27 parking spaces. (b) The variance will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon: adjacent private properly in the'immediate vicinity ofthe proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with Section 18.06:010.020 of this Code). The field studies of the actual operations for the two busiest days of the week and additional estimates for sales indicated that the parking demand can be accommodated on the project site. In order to' help mitigate any potential demand for parking spaces on the public street„'additional`parking can be provided within!the repair shop. (c) The variance will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon: adjacent private property in the: immediate'vicinity of(the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with Section 18.06:010.020 of this Code). The orientation: of the project site in combination with the on-site parking layout and supply will serve to contain the project related parking oh-site. No significant impacts on adjacent private property is expected. `(d) The variance will not increase treffic congestion within the off-streef parking areas or lots (provided for such use. The site plan was reviewed and is expected to'pru~~ ~e adequate traffic operations, so increased on-site traffic cbngestiort is not anticipated. (e) The variance will not impede vehicular ingressto or egress from adjacent properties upon. the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 item No. B The access to the site is separated from adjacent properties and only serves the project. There is no potential of this project affecting vehicular access for adjacent properties:' (10) A site inspection revealed that the property is well maintained and ail prior conditions of approval have been' complied with. Code Enforcement Division records ihdicate no code violations;on this property. (11) .Staff is supportive of the request to permit accessory automotive sales iRconjunction with the i existing repair business based on the intention of the petitioner that a maximum of four (4) :vehicles would be displayed on'the property at a time. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (12) Staff has reviewed the proposal to amend Conditional Use Permit No, 3927 and finds no ;significanfadverse environmental impacts resulting from this request to amend this'permit. .Therefore,.: staff recommends that the previously-approved Negative Declaration in connection' :with Conditional Use Permit No 3927 serve as the required environmental documentation for this request upon a finding by the Commission that the Negative Declaration reflects the ndependehtjudgmeht of the lead agency;; and that it has consitlered the proposed Negative beclaratioh together with any comments received during the public review process and further ..finding on the basis of the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the,Planning ; 'Department) and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project` r will have a'significan€effect on the environment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: (13) She proposed project has been reviewed by affected City departments to determine whether it conforms with the City's Growth Management Element adopted by the. City Council on 'March 17,.1992. Based on City staff review of the proposed project, it has been determined .'that this project does not fit within the scope necessary to require a Growth Management Element analysis, therefore, no analysis. has been performed. FINDINGS: (14) .Section 18.06.080 of the parking ordinance sets forth the following findings which are ;required to be made before a parking waiver is approved by the Commission: (a) That the waiver, undedthe conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use'under the normal and. reasonabiy,foreseeabie conditions of operation of such use; and' (b) That the waiver, underahe conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand `and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the Immediate vicinity of the proposed use; and Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission + April 21, 2003: Item No. 8 ~~ ~~ (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed; if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces; upon adjacent private property,rn the immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with Section 18.06.010.020 of this Code); and (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed; if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for such use; and (e) Thatthe waiver', under the conditions imposed; if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress fromJadjacentproperties upon the public streets in the immediate i vicinity of the proposed use, Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed "upon the granting of'any waiver pursuant to this Section by the Commission, he'granting of any such waiver shal(be deemed contingent upon operation of sup:: use'in conformance with he assumptions relating to the operation and intensity of the!use as contained in'the parking demand study that formed the basis for approval of said waiver. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of said assumptions as contained in the parking demand study shall be deemed a violation'of the express conditions imposed upon'said waiver which shall subjecfsaid waiver to termination or modification pursuant tothe provisions of Section 18.03.091 and 18.03.092 of this Code. (15) Before the Commission: grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented'shows that all of the following conditions exist: (af That'the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning'.Code, or that said use is not listed thereinas being's permitted use; (b) Thaf the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area. in which: it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner: not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and'general welfare; (d)' Thatthe traffic generated. by the proposed use swill not impose an undue burden upon the streets and';highways designed and improved to carry he traffic in the area; and (e)s That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, :health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. (16) Subsection 18.03.09Zof the Anaheim Municipal Code'provides for the modification or termmination of a conditional use permit for one or more of the following grounds: Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 Item No. 8 '! .010 That the appi .020 That the use . ,,specified in s .030 That the use suspended o more; .040 That the perr or eonditiops regulation; '; .050 That the use detrimental t~ .055 That the use based upon'. necessary to entitlement a ited is notbeing exercised within the time anted has'ceased to exist or has been a period of six (8) consecutive months or has been exercised contrary to the terms 'of any statute, ordinance, law or rated has been so exercised as to be so as to constitute a nuisance; hted hasnbt beertexercised, and that changed circumstances, the facts juired showings for the issuance: of such iger exist; and/or .,..,., ..,_....., ..~... .__..._~. , ..._.__..~ ..._ .....position ofany additional conditions thereto, is reasonably necessary to protect the public peace, health, safety or general welfare, or necessary to permit reasonable operation under the conditional use permit' as`granted. RECOMMENDATION: (17) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the smeeting, and based"upon the evidence submitted to he Commission, including the'evidence `` presented'in this staff report, and oral and'written evidence presented at the public hearing, '.'the Commission take the following actions; {a) By motion, determine that the previously-approved Negative Declaration is the appropriate ehvironmental documentation for this request. (b) By motion, a 'rave the waiver pertaining to minimum number of parking spaces based: on the findings contained within the parking study submitted by the. petitioner as described in paragraph: nos. 8 and 9 of this report and that the City Traffic and Transportation Managed upon review of said parking study has determined that there is ah adequate supply of parking spaces for he automotive repair and sales business, based on the following: (i) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, and based upon the conclusions contained in he submitted parking demand study, would not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for the business provided the maximum inventory of vehicles for sale is four (4) or less. Page l Staff ReporEto the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 Item No. 8 "' (ii) That the waiver,Lnder the'conditions imposed, would notiincrease the demand and competition for parking;spaces upon the public streetsand adjacent privateproperty in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. (iii); That the waiver,'under the conditions`imposed, would noYincrease traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provitled for such use. (iv) That the waiver,'under the conditions;fmposed, would not impede veh(cutar ingress to or egress from adjacent properties, upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. (c) By resolution, a rove this request to amend Conditional Use Permit No. 3927 (Tracking No: CUP2003-04680) to permit accessory retail automobile sales in conjunction with apreviously-approved automotive repair: business based oKthe following: (i) That an automobile repair and sales facility is authorized in the SP94-1, DA2 zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (ii) ! That the proposed modification of this permit to allow accessory automobile sales would not adversely affect adjoining industrial land uses and the growth and development of the area; and that the proposed auto :repair and retail sales business is compatible with the surrounding industrial land uses. (iii) i That the revised parking study approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager indicates on-site parking and circulation are+ adequate so as not to affect the surrounding land uses. (d) Staff further recommends that the Commission amend Resclution ata. PC97-47 in its entirety, to be replaced by a new resolution with'. the following cond~anns of approval (Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3,,7,13, 14 and 16 are new or modified conditions) based on the finding that the modification is necessary to permit the'reasonable operation of this automotive repair and accessory sales business: 1. That the number of employees shall be limited to 9 persons and a minimum of 32; parking spaces (including 8 interior spaces) shall be maintained on this property as indicated in the approved parking study. 2. That a maximum of three (3) retail display spaces shall be permitted in the outdoor parking lot and a maximum of four (4) retail vehicles shall be permitted on-site atone time. 3. That trash storage areas shall be refurbished to the satisfaction bf the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division to comply with approved plans on file with said Department. Page 8 Staff Report tothe - Planning Commission April 21, 2003 .'Item No. 8 4: That seven (7) 15-gallon'size trees hall be maintained within the landscape; setback area in compliance with City standards. 5: That the proposal shall comply with: all signing requirements of the SP94-1, DA2 Zone unless a variance allowing a sign waiver is approved by the Commission. That freestanding signage shall be limited to the existing monument sign. 6, That no banners or other advertising shall be displayed within the service bays facing the public rights-of-way: 7s That the property shatl:be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by;providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 8: That no outdoor storage of, display: of, or work on vehicles or vehicular parts' shall be permitted. 9 That the granting of the parking waiver is contingent upon operation of the use in conformance withthe assumptions relating to the'operation'and intensity of use as contained in the.: parking demand study that formed the basis for approval of said waiver. Exceeding„violating,: intensifying or otherwise deviating fromany of said assumptions, as contained in the parking demand study, shall be deemed a violation of the expressed conditions imposed upon said waiver which shall subject this conditional use permit to termination or modification pursuant o the provisions of Sections i 18:03.091 and 18.03.092 of the Anaheim Municipal Cade. 10. That an on-site trash truck tum-around area shall be maintained tb the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. 11. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager:: for his review and approval showing conformance with the latest version of ; Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436, 601 and 602 pertaining to parking standards and driveway ovations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed antl maintained In conformance with said plans. 12. That four (4) foot high address numbers shall be displayed on the flat area of the roof in a contrasting color to the roof material, provided the numbers shall notbe visible from the street or adjacent properties. 13. That if new or upgraded electrical service'is required, the legal owner of the subject property shall provide the City.. of Anaheim with a public utilities easement to be determined as electrical design is completed. Page 9 Staff Report to the Planning Commission it April 21, 2003 Item No.B~~~~ 14. that any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. Landscape and/or hardscape screening of all pad-mounted equipmentshall be required and shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 15. That the business hours shall be limited to 6:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday as indicated. in the letter of operation submitted by the' petitioner. 16. That subject property shall be developed as conditioned and substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on fate with the Planning Department'marked`Revision tJo. 1 of Exhibit Nos-. 1 and 2 ' and 2 and Exhibit Nos. 3'through 5 17. That prior to the commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution, or prior' to final building and zoning inspections„whicheveroccurs first, Condition Nos. 3 and 16 atiove-mentioned, shalt be complied with. 18. ' That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed: request i only to; the extent that it complies withthe Anaheim Municipal Zoning' Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal'regulations. Approval does ' not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of theiYequest regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. Page 10 ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 8 RESOLUTION NO. PC97-47 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3927 BE GRANTED WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orahge, State of California, described as: PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL .MAP NO. 81-230, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 168, PAGES 25, 26 AND 27 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on April 28, 1997. at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by taw and in accordance with the provisions. of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use .permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.110.070.050.0504 to permit an automobile repair facility :inside an existing 10,585 sq.ft. industrial building and to construct a 1,600 sq.ft. meaanine storage area with the following waiver: Sections 18.06.050.0212 - Minimum number of parkino spaces. 18:06.050.0222 67 spaces required; 26 spaces proposed and recommended 18.06.080 for approval by City Traffic and Transportation Manager) and 18.110:070.110 2 That subjectproperty is developed with an industrial building located in Development Area 2 (Expanded Industrial Area) of Specific Plan No. 94-1 (the Northeast Area Specific Plan); 3. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to the conditional use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. because the parking study approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager indicates on-site parking and circulation are adequate and the waiver will noYto affect the surrounding land uses; 4. That the waiver; 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; and that field studies of the actual operation for the two busiest days of the week indicated that the parking demand can be accommodated on the project site and, in order to help mitigate any potential demand for parking spaces on the public street, additional parking can be provided inside the building;. 5: That the waiver, 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 (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with Section 18.06.010.020 of this Code) because the orientation of the project site, in combination with the on- site parking layout and supply, will serve to contain the project-related parking on-site; CR2866PLWP -1- PC97-47 6. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-sVeet parking areas or lots provided for such use because the proposed development provides adequate traffic operations and, therefore, increased on-site traffic congestion is not anticipated; 7. That the waiver, 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 access to the site is separated from access to adjacent properties and only serves the project; 8. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code; 9. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining industrial land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; and that the proposed auto repair facility is compatible with the surrounding industrial uses; 10.: That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare; 11. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; 12. That the granting of the conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will: not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim; .and 13: That one person indicated her presence at said putilic hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the .proposal to permit an automobile repair facility inside an existing 10,585 sq.ft. industrial building and to construct a.1,600 sq.ftr meaanine storage area with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces on arectangularly-shaped 0.84 acre property located at the northeast comer of Lakeview Avenue and Eisenhower Circle with frontages of 149 feet on Lakeview Avenue and 89 feet on Eisenhower Circle (1480 North Lakeview Avenue); and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgement of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any gomments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject. property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: 1. That the maximum number of employees shall be ten (10) persons; and that a minimum of twenty- seven (27) parking spaces (including three (3) parking spaces inside the building) shall be maintained on this property, as discussed in the approved parking study. 2. That seven (7), fifteen (15)-gallon sized, trees shall be provided within the landscape setback area in compliance with City standards. Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval showing said trees will be planted in a manner which screens the service bays from the:public's view. 3. That the proposal shall comply with all signing requirements of Chapter. 18.110 pertaining to Development Area 2 of SP 94-1 (the Northeast Area Specific Plan), unless a variance allowing a sign waiver is first obtained. Freestanding signage shall be Ilmited to the existing monument sign. 4. That no banners or other advertising shall be displayed within the service bays facing the public rights-of-way. -2- PC97-47 5. That the owner of subjecE property shall be responsible for the removal of any on-site graffiti within twenty four (24) hours of its application. 6. That no outdoor storage of, display of, or work on vehicles or vehicular parts shalt be permitted. 7. That the granting of the parking waiver is contingent upon operation of the use in conformance with the assumptions relating to the operation. and intensity of use as contained in the parking demand study that formed the basis for approval of said waiver. Exceeding, violating, :intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of said assumptions, as contained in the parking demand study, shall be deemed a violation of the expressed conditions imposed upon said waiver which shall subject this conditional use permit to terminaticn or modification pursuant to the provisions of Sections 18.03:091 and 18.03.092 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 8. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, for review and approval. 9. That an on-site trash truck tum-around .area shall be provided and maintained to the satisfaction bf the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Said tum-around area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building pennits. 10. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval showing conformance with the latest revisions of Engineering Standard Plan Nos 436 and 602 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 11. That the developer shall submit a water quality. management plan (WQMP) specifically identifying the best management practices that will be used on site to control predictable pollutants from storm water .runoff. The WQMP shall be submitted to the Public Works Engineering Department,. Development Services Division, for review and approval 12. That a three (3) foot high reflective street address numbers shall be adhered to or painted on the building roof. The color of the numbers shall in contrast to the color of the roof. ` 13. That the business hours shall be limited to 6:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday, as indicated in the letter of operation submitted by the petitioner. 14. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 5; except as otherwise conditioned herein. 15. That prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution or prior to the issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 2, 8, 9, 10 and 11, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions maybe granted in accordance with Section 18.03.p90 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 16. That prior to the commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution or prior to final building and zoning inspections, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 12 and 14, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. 17. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. 18. That all employees shall park on-site. -3- PC97-47 19. That no more than twenty four (24) vehicles shall be parked on-site and outside the building at any one time. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does fiereby 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 arij% 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. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of April 28, 1997: CHAIRPERSON ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Margarita Solorio, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on April 28, 1997, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS:: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, MESSE, PERAZA NOES:COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS: MAYER IN WITNESS WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto set my hand this day of , 1997. SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC97-47 Y ~ 0 m m - cL L RCL fib-fi681 fi0-61-96 ~l 53-54-10 Q CU~~ 8fi4 7-11 54-55--0 (1 51 F1GE ~ G N \ RM-12Q01 545 6 C BUlLD1 ~ ~-1203 O 1 5V g y U 6 U BDU D BD N1, 4 F6cE O F 0U0.D1NG AVENUE M~ 4 1 GU~pN ~6 RG d X61 C94`'45-10 64 C ) GUtu'EN75 PPP 5 UU ~ O RC~6 ^ 6 lRas'52-53-A4559 p 3772 U C ~~ CUP2 g45 Cl DUP 454 1 241 V PR 52 53.15.10 C p216'15. 2 V P °- ~ G195.10 R ~~P 3 1 RGl Syp-92 S 5 j,002,44554 UP 3772 ;, D M` ~ VP~y1,E EVER R ~ CUP 3441 ~ MUtO f3 Mp7C E. 1 O ~~IER Ip,NT G G 4-10 ~Y L' P•C1060-03 m / 52~~~n4554 -149 -®{ BALL ROAD c[ p RCL 65.66-fit 60-61-98 W m ° m m D & r CUP 200~3~678 ° o n .e 2 RS-7200 1 U D AO -a m ~ ~ CUP 275 ~ o,n D ma= UP 9 EACH D 1 U F H ~ o~ 1DU F- ~ m> a ~ rc 5253412 (( RESTAURANT ML 6fi-67-14 =3 W m 55-Sfi-19 J Z s~~ R54200 ~ W oG cL >;a CUP 229 ~ = 1 DU EACH ~ i o vpR 26i3 c' p McPEEK DODGE W (/7 ~ U g MARGATE DRIVE: ~ w9 c U - L 5351-13 CUP 3959 CUP 2686 ML CUP 1544 V-315 66.67-14 ADJ 0083 SSSfi-19 PCN 95-01 V-1627 SHOPPING V-1382 CENTER / Conditipnal Use Permit No. 2003-04678 ~,~ Subject Property ~, Date: April 21, 2D03 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: McDONALD'S CORPORATION Q.S. No. 85 REQUEST TO PERMIT THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANT WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 119 West Ball Road - McDonald's Restaurant 638(2003-0-10; c.a Cl- A43g1 T-GU 351 9 ~ 1 4 2 5 CUP 3389 GUP ~ 9T u PR 3456 PES ERN ER D CPS C(P~ ME HDSP CpNHpSP~ PVC m ( Z ~1 m 1 RC 6M5`''Sc' M~~ ~CEs _~{ 1;•~, cal D 1Rfi35`~Y 10 v~GN 'Staff Report to the Planning. Commission April 21,' 2003 Item No 9 9a.` CEQANEGATIVEDECLARATION (Motion) ' 9b.' ?WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT ' (Motion) 9c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0:-2003-04678 : (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:i (1) This irregularly-shaped, 0.86 acre property is located Korth and west of the northwest corner of Ball Road and Anaheim Boulevard, withifrontages`of 149 feefon the north side of$all Road and 30 feet odthe west side of Anaheim Boulevard (119 West Balf Rcad - McDonald's). REQUEST; (2) The petitioner requests approval of a conditional usepermit under authority of Code'Section Nos. 18.03.030 and!1t3.44.050:300 to permit the expansion of an existing drive-through fast food restaurant with waiver of the followingi SECTIONNOS. 18:06:050.0233 Minimum number of oarkino spaces. l90 AND 18:44.066.050 spaces required; 43 spacesp~oposed and 'recommended byahe City Traffic and Transportation Manager) BACKGROUND: I (3) This property is developed with a fast food, drive-through restaurant and is zoned CL ?(Commercial, Limited)'. The Anaheim General Plan Land Use: Element Map designates this property fa General Commercial land uses. (4) Surrounding land uses are as follows: Direction' Lantl Use Zoning ', GGeneral Plan Designation North Office Complex 1 CH (SABC)*, Commercial Professional East ' Restaurant Supplies and CL(SABC) and General Commercial 7-11 Gas Station CH(SABC)' South (Across earl Road) Single-Family Residential RS-7200 Low-Density Residential West Kentucky Fried Chicken CL (SABC)'! General Commercial Fast Food Restaurant ` Resalutidn of fntenttd SouthMafieim Boulevard Corridor:Oveday Zone. : Sr3013ey ;Page 1 'Staff Report to the Planning`Commission 1 April 21;.2003 Item No: 9 (7) The site plan further indicates a total of 43 parking spaces available on the premises. Code .. requres aminimum of 90 spacesbased oon 16 spaces per 1,000'. square feet of gross floor area for fast food and drive-through restaurants (5,580/1,000 x:16 = 89.3). (8) The floor plan (Exhibit No, 2) indicates that the restaurant expansion would increase the fast food restaurant GFA to a total of,5,580 square feet, which includes a 1,035square foot enclosed children's play place/dining area, two main dining areas comprised of 2,392 square feet, a 1,843square foot kitchenlfood preparation/storage area, with the remaining area consisting of new handicapped accessible restrooms. 'Code requires that a`minimum of 20% ofahe GFA tie dedicated for kitchen, food preparation and food storage activities. Then' proposed remodel/expansion includes permanently designed areas for food preparation and food storage,;uses, comprising approximately 33% of the total building area. (9) Tfie elevatiort drawings (Exhibit Nos. 3 and 4) indicate that this restaurant remodel would include upgrading the existing exterior elevations in addition to the areas of new constriction. Tfie existing'and new portions of the building would be painted tomatch antl decorative file stone and painted exterior plaster would be;applied along the lower 4 feet of each elevation, Tfie tower element would have an exterior stone veneer treatment as well as tinted windows to'screen the indoor children's play place. The same stone veneer treatment would be applied to the main entrance on the east elevation. New terracotta colored`awnings are proposed atiove ali windows on tfie east and west building elevations, The plans further indicate that all roof-mounted mechanical equipment (existing and proposed) will be located iron equipment well and screened from putilic view by parapet walls. Additionally, the existing exterior ladder: is locatedto the rear of the building and is not visible to any public right-of-way. (10) Proposed signage for this fast food restaurant includes three 28-square foot "McDonald's" internally illuminated channel letter signs on a east, west and south elevations of the'tower element, two'42-square foot "Playplace" intemally illuminated channel lettersigns on the east and west elevations ofahe towerelement and one 16-square footlogo sign above the main entrance on`the east elevation. The proposed signage meets current Codepertaining to wall signs, allowing up to 10 percent of each building elevation to consist of signage. Existing signage includes a 20-foot high, 17-foot wide freestantling sign and two small guide signs adjacent to Ball Road and one approximately 15-foot high directional pole sign adjacent to Anaheim Boulevard. (11) The conceptual landscape plan indicates a proposed 10-foot wide landscaped setback adjacent to Ball Road,'as measured from tfie Critical Intersection'ultimateTight-of-way (58- foot half width for a primary arterial). The Commission may wish to note! that the portion ofahe property that is located within the'right-of-way is not required to be dedicated to the City until such time that the street is physically widenedt The private property located within the right-df-way is proposed to be landscaped with'drought tolerate sod'turf until the future commencement of street improvements. The plan indicates seven (7):.15- gallon Pigmy Date Palms to be planted within the front setback area adjacent to Ball Road. Within the parking areas, a total of ten (10) 15-gallon,Queen Palms and fifty (50) 5-gallon Green Carpet shrubs (along the east property line) are proposed':. Code requires onearee for every twenty,feet of street frontage for a total of seven (7) trees along Balf Road, Code also requires parking lot landscaping,inciuding landscape planters separating every ten parking spaces. .Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission' April 21,'2003 i Item No. 9 (12) Thelefter of operation indicates that this drive-through restaurant may be open up to 241 hours a day on an as-needed basis; with up to 10 employees during any one "shift. `ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (13) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of wht.?, es available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and, therefore, recommendsthat a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Commission that the declaration reflects the intlependentjudgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Negative?Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study"and any 'i comments received thatthere is no substantial evidence that the project will'have a significant effect on the environment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELIwMENT ANALYSIS: 1 (14) The proposed' project has been reviewed by affected City departments to determine whether it conforms with the City's Growth Management Element adopted by the City Council on March 17, 1992. Based on City staff review of the proposed project, it has been determined that this project does not fit within the scope necessary o require a Growth Management Element analysis, therefore, no analysis has tieen performed. EVALUATION: (15) Drive-through restaurants are permitted the CL Zone, subject to the approval'of a conditional use'permit. Staff has reviewed the,request for the expansion of the existing'drive-through fast food restaurant and'. the addition of a new: children'siplay place. Based on the submitted plans, the exterior aspect of the expansion will be consistent with the overall'architecture of the' building since the colors, construction materials and'architectural features would also be applied to the'existing portions of the buildings (16) The requested waiver pertains to minimum number of parking spaces. Code: requires a minimum of 90 spaces for this drive-through restaurant as described in paragraph no (7) of this;report. The site plan indicates'a total of 43 spaces available for this site.'The petitioner has submitted`a parking!study, prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. dated April 14, 2003, o substantiate the request for this waiver. The City Traffic and Transportation' Manager has reviewed this study and has determined that 43 parkingspaces inadequate for this facility. {17) The'parking study further' includes the following findings for the waiver of minimum number ofparking spaces: "(a) i That the' waiver, under the conditions imposed, if anv, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for such use than t`e- ~iumberof such spaces necessary to accommodate ail vehicleslattributatil4 20 such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. ,' The observed parking demand of the existing restaurant is 53 spaces per one thousand square feet. Application of this rate, plus a 25 percent contingency to account for increased patronage due to the play place, would result in a peak demand of 37 parking spaces. The project will provide a total of 41 parking spaces. As a Page 4 'Staff Report to the Planning'Commission April 21, 2003 ?Item No, 9 result, the project will provide adequate off-street parking o accommodate all vehicles attributable to the project under normal operation. (ti) Thatahe waiver, under the conditions imposed,`if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parktng spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The project will provide adequate parking on the project site to accommodate parking demand under. normal operation of the restaurant. Therefore, no demand for: parking on the public street is forecasted. (c) That the waiver; under the conditions imposed, if any, will oot increase the demand for parking spaces,upon adjacent private property;jn the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The project wilt provide adequate parking on the project site to accommodate parking demand under normal operation of tfie restaurant. Therefore, no demand forparking on adjacent private property is forecasted. (d) Thatahe waiver, under the conditions imposed,'. if any, wiil'not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for such use. The forecastediparking demand is 11 vehicles more during the peak hour than with the existing restaurant. As a result,' 11 additional arrivals: to and departures from the site would be expected. In terms of hourly traffic volume within the parking area, 11 trips would be a nominal number (approximately equal to 1 additional arrival or departure every three minutes) and would noticreate additional congestion. Inahe current condition, the parking spaces are striped in an irregular pattern, with some angles and some at 90 degrees. With the proposed project, the parking lot will be restriped so that the spaces are consistent and o that one-way flow: around the restaurant building is encouraged. The proposed striping will result in more efficient on-site circulation and less congestion within the off-street parking area. (e) Thatthe waiver, under the conditions imposed,'if any, wilPnot impede vehicular ingress to or egress from;adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The project is not proposing to change vehicular access to the site. 'Furthermore, it has been established previously that a sufficient supply of off-street<parking will be provided to meet the forecasted parking demand. Therefore, no stacking onto the public street, thereby blocking an adjacent driveway, would be expected to occur." (18) The Zoning Code pertaining to'signage has changed significantly since the original walk-up restaurant and drive-through'ezpansion were approved in 1962 and 1980; respectively. Current code ailowe'a maximum 65-square foot monument sign adjacent to Bali Road. Due to the significant 40 percent increase in floor area resulting from this eupansion ;:(7,595 / 3,985 = 40%), staff is'recommending thafthe site comply with currenfsign `standards pertaining to freestanding signs, including the removal of the nonconforming freestanding ign adjacent to Ball Road. Additionally, the existing ,freestanding sign is not compatible with,the materials and architectural features proposed for the new building exterior Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission `.April 21; 2003 Item No. 9' FINDINGS: (19) Section 18.06.080 of the parking ordinance sets forth the following findings which are required to be made before the parking waivers are approved by he Commission: (a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for such use than: the numtier of such: spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of'operation of such use; and (b) ; That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed Use; and (c) r That the waiver, under the conditions,mposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition.for parking`spaces upon adjacent private property in'the immediate vicinity of the proposed use,(which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance witfi Section 18.06.010.020 of this Code);'.; and (d) ; .That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within'the off-street parking areas or lots provided for such use; and' (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the putilic streets: in the immediate vicinity of the proposed usei Unless conditions tp the contrary are expressly imposed' upon the granting of any waiver pursuant to this Section by the Planning Commission, the granting of any such waiver shall be deemed contingent upon operation of such use in conformance with the assumptions relating to the'operation'and intensity of the use as contained in the parking demand study that formed the basis focapproval of said waiver. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating fromiany of said assumptions as contained in'the parking demand study shall be deemed a violation of the express conditions imposed upon said waiver which' shall subject said waiver to termination or modification pursuant to the provisions of Sections 113.03.091 and 18.03.092 of this Code. (20) Before the Planning Commission grants any conditional!use permit, it must make a finding of fact hat the evidencepr•esented shows thaPall of the following conditions exist: (a) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the. Zoning Code, or that said use is not listed: therein as being a permitted use; (b) ; That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of he area in which it is proposed+to be located; (c) That the size and'shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full i development of tfie proposed use in a'manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health; safety, and general welfare; Page 6 Staff Report to the ': i Planning Commission April 21;.2003 Item Na 9 (d) Thafthe traffic generated by the proposed use: will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways"designed and improved to carry the trafficin the area; and (e) ThaYthe granting of the conditional use permitLnder the'conditions imposed,'if any, will hot be detrimental to he peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: (21) Staff recommends that, unless additional br contrarylinformation is received during,the 'meeting, and based`upon the evidence submitted toithe Commission, including the 'evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the ;.public hearing, the Commission. take the following actions: (a) By motion, aooFove a CEQA Negative Declaration. (b) By motion, aDptoye the waiver pertaining to minimum number of parking spaces based on the Yecommendation of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager;that 43 spaces is adequate for this drive-through restaurant, and`based on'the findings as discussed in paragraph no. (17) of this report.'! (c) By resolution, aoorove Conditional Use PennitNo. 2003-04678 (to expand an existing fast food drive-through restaurant) based on the:following: '; (i) That the drive-through, fast food restaurant is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by tfie Zoning(Code in the CL Zone: (ii) That theproposed drive-through, fast food restaurant would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located. (iii) That the size and shape of the site for the proposed drive-through, fast-food i restaurant as conditioned, is; adequate to allow the.full development ofthe proposed use in a'manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare. (iv) ± That the traffic generated by the proposed drive-through, fast-food restaurant would not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. (v) ;That the granting of Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04678 under the conditions imposed, would not be detrimental to the peace,. health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Ananeim. Page 7 Staff Report to the 'Planning: Commission. 'April2l 2003 :Item No. 9 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SUBMITTED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS ACTING AS AN-INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE AND ARE RECOMMENDED FOR ADOPTION BY THE: PLANNING"COMMISSION IN>THE EVENTTHAT THIS'PERMIT`IS'APPROVED 1. That the granting of the parking waiver is contingent upon operation of the use in conformance with .the assumptions and/or conclusions relating to the operation and intensity of use as contained in the parking demand'study thatformed the basis for approval of said waiver. Exceeding, violating 'intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of said assumptions and/or conclusions, as contained in the parking demand study, shall be deemed a violation of the expressed conditions imposetl :upon said waiver which shall subject this waiver to termination`or modification pursuant to the provisions of Sections 18.03.091 and 18:03.092 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 2. That the existing nonconforming freestanding sign adjacent to Ball Road shall be removed, and plans for a conforming sign may be submitted to the Zoning Division. Any decision7egarding `; signage maybe appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations"item. 3. That roof and ground-mounted equipmenf shall be properly shielded from view from: adjacent streets and properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 4. That all plumbing downspouts, ladder and/or other similar pipes and fixtures located'on the exterior of the building shall not be visitile to the public right-of-way. Said information shall tie specifically shown onithe plans submitted for building'permits. 5. That there'shall be no public telephones oh the premises located outside the building. 6. That there shall be no exterior vending machines permitted on the premises. 7. That window signage: shall not be permitted for the drive-through restaurant. 8. That the property shall be permanently maintained ih an orderly fashion by providing regular andscape:maintenance, removal of trash'or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24) hours from: time of occurrence.' 9. That any tree planted. on-site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it Is rernoved, damaged, diseased and/or dead. 10. That the owner of subject property shall submit a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No'275 (to establish awalk-up restaurant) to the Zoning Division.' 11. That prior to grading plan approval, the developer shall submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifyingithe post consfructionbestmonagement practices that will be used on-site to control predictable pollutants from storm water runoff; The. WQMP shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, bevelopmeht Services Division for review and approval. 12. That the developer snail submiYan application for a Subdivision Map Act Certificate bf Compliance to the Putilic Works Department, Development Services Division. A Cert~cate of Compliance'or Conditional Certificate of Compliance shall be approved by the, City Engineer and recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit. Page 8 'Staff Report to the Planning Commissibn April 21 2003 Item No. 9 13.' That if the site consists of more than one legal parcel, a lot lute adjustment shall tie submitted to the Public Works Department; Development Services Division'to merge the existing'parcels into one legal lot: The LotlLine Adjustment shall be approved by the: City Engineer and recorded in the office of the Orange CountyRecorder prior to issuance of abuilding permit. 14.' That the developer shall pay he Sewer Capacity Mitigation Fee. 15. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval showing'conformance with the current version of Engineering'StandardPlan Nos: 436, 601 and 602 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shaiP? thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plays. 16. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall tie at the developer's expense. Landscape and/or hardscape screening of ail padmounted equipmenYshall be required and shall be outside!the easement area of the equipment. Said information shall be, pecificaliy shown on plans submitted for building permjts. 17. i That a final landscape plan shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval. Said plan shall incorporate seven (7) trees in the required setback adjacenfto BaII Road and include Code-required landscaping in the parking area. Ali trees shall be minimum 24-inch box in size. Any decision by Zoning Division maybe appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendation" item. 18. ' That subject properly shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner'and which"plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 5, and as conditioned herein. 19. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1),year from he date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos: 2, 3, 4, 10,:11, 12, 13; 14, 15 and 17 above mentioned shall tie complied'with. Extensions of further time to complete said conditions may be granted',in accordance witKSection 18:03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 20. ` That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 18 above-mentioned, shalj be complietl with. 21. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim MunicipaFZoning Code and any other applicable City, State antl Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or`approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation ofrequirement. Page 9 023 tF~oMP~Y 'Zonal ~ ~ ,55, ~~ 1 tpU t °u ~ 1DU m N t pU in O o Z ~ °U o ~ t°U m m ,°u a S~RE~~ ~ Z S ~~o19^ten "-05l) m P~° PPRTS C° .nRES ~ GG 2~ ~ 1y u ~ ep11o Ol) Uj~ (1yB54~RE~ N °o ~RKET ~ _,,, E P~EN~~ SO~TREE9 ~ Rc~ ~a Tentative Tract Map No. 1650p ? Subject Property 7> Date: April 21, 2003 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: ANAHEIM REVELOPMENT AGENCY Q,S. No. 84 A CITY-INITIATED {COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT) REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A 6-LOT, 6-UNIT DETACHED, RS-5000 SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISION TO ALLOW FOR THE FUTURE RELOCATION OF HISTORICALLY-SIGNIFICANT HOMES. A ~ N i ~o r ,1 a 122-132 West Water Street and 123-133 West Steuckle Avenue sss(zoos-a-15) Staff Report to the Planning Commissiort ::April 21; 2003 Item No. 10 10a, CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 31 (Motion) 10d. 'TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16500 (Motion) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly-shaped; 1.4-acreproperty has frontages of 191 feet on the south side of Water Street and 183 feet on(the north'side of Stueckle Avenue, a maximum depth of 345 feet, and is' located 155'feet east of the centerline of Lemon Street (122 - 132 West Water Street: and 123 - 133 WestStueckle Avenue). REQUEST: (2) ACity-initiated (Community Development Department) request for approval of a tentative tract map to establish a 6-bt, 6-unit detached RS-5000 single family residential subdivision to allow for the future relocation of histp~ically-significant homes. BACKGROUND: (3) The subject'property is currently vacant and is zoned RS-5000 (12esidentiaP, Single Family). :Two historid homes are currently being stored on the'project site: This site'is also located in tfie Commercial/Industrial Redevelopment Project Area and theSouth Anaheim Boulevard Corridor (SABC) Overlay Zone. The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates his site for Low-Medium Density Residential land uses. (4) Surrounding land uses: are as follows: Direction !Land Use, Zonin GeneraPPlan Desi nation North across Single Family Homes RS-7200 Low Density Residential and Water Street Low-Medium Density Residential East Apartments and RM-2400 and Low-Medium Density "Auto sales' CH* Residential` South across Single-Family Homes PD-C/RM=2400* Low-Medium Density Stueckle Avenue ahd A artments Residential West Single-Family;Homes RS-5000* Low-Medium D@hsity (Residential'% * Properties loptetl In the SouthMaheim Boulevard Corridor Overlay Zone. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (5) Reclassification No. 2000-00039 (to reclassify these properties from the RM-2400 and CH zones to the RS-5000'zone), Variance Noy 2000-04416 (waivers of minimum building ite and pad area, maximum lot coverage, and minimum building site width to establish an 8-unit "affordable"single family residential subdivision), and Tentative Tract Map No. 16171.: (to establish a 9-lot, 8-unit "affordable" single family residential subdivision) was approved by the Commission on December 18,2000. S~2127ds Page 1 Staff Report o the Planning Commission April 21,.2003 Item No. 10 `DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (6) The petitioner proposes to establish a 6-lot, 6-unit detached single family residential subdivision in the RS-5000 zone to allow for the future relocation ofhistorically-significant homes. The tentative tract map indicates the following subdivision'characteristics: ~ ~ 0$~-G~,~`0~,•~r1~~l~ ~ ~~, ~' ~~ th~ ~ ? ~ If . ~.~U.4~tQ i d~ , Jar i iFO.B . ~ .~~ll'r{~i:.s"~e U eC~, ~` 1 10,034 -' 58 173 2 10,380 60 ::.173 3 11,899 73 163 4 9,976 `' 58 ';:172 5 10,320 60 =:172 6 8,320 ? 65 128 Total 60,929 1.4 acres (7) The'conceptual site plan'indicates potential building footprint layouts far the proposed residential lots. The plan shows the houses situated in,the front portion of the lots with detached garages located in the rear. The plan shows new driveways adjacent to the public streets for Lots 2, 3, 5, and 6, and public alley;access for Lots 1 and 4. The plan does not show specific building setbacks or lot coverage for the proposed lots. Each parcel would need to comply with`the RS-5000 zone development standards, such as setbacks,'lot coverage, open space, and parking; prior to the issuance of building or house: relocation' permits. Code Section No. 15.32.010 requires City Council approval for the relocation of any: residential structures. Page 2 Staff t2i Plannin April 21 Item N conrorrns wnn uie i.ugs ~rowin ivienayenieni ~ienicrn au~Nicu. uy u ro any: wunun v.. rviewn 17, 7992. Based on City staff review of the;proposedSproject, it has been tletermined'that this project does not fit within the scope necessary to require a Growth Management Element analysis, therefore, no analysis has been performed Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission April 21 2003 'Item No. 10 (12) The projecf is located in the Commercial/Industrial Redevelopment Project Area. The CommunityDevelopment Department has submitted he attached memorandum indicating that' this project would complete the final phase of the Lemon Water Historic Preservation Project. The memo also states that phases one and two included the relocation and restoration of seven homes, all identified as Qualified Historic Structures and listed in the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan. FINDINGS: (13) 'The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory to include in al motions approving,,or recommending approval ofa tract map, a specific$nding that the proposed Subdivision together with: its design; and improvement is consistent with the City's General Plan. '- Further, the law requires that the Commission make any of the following findings when denying or recommending denia[of a tract'map: 1 t That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable: General and Specific Plans. 2 That the design or improvement of he proposed subdivision is not: consistentwith applicable General and Specific Plans. 3! That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.' 4 That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5 That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage'or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or tfieir habitat. 6; That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. 7 That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will`conflict with easements, acquired by he public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision." RECOMMENDATION: (14) Staff recommends that unless additional orcontrary information is received during the meeting, and based,upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in`this staff report, and'oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, that the Planning Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the project is Categorically Exempt, Section 15331, Class 31 (Historic Resource Restpration/Rehabilitation) of the CEOP, Guidelines. Page 5 Staff ReportTO the Planning Commission April 21, 2003 Item No. 10 (b) By motion, a 'rove Tentative TracfMap No. 16500 (to establish a B-lot, 6-unit detached RS-5000 single. family residential subdivision to allow for the future':. relocation of fiistorically-significanthomes), based on the following: (i) `` That the'design, density, and improvement of the proposed subdivisionwould I be consistent with the General Pian lantl use designation ofLow-Medium Density Residential and would provide additional housing opportunities in furtherance of the goals of the Housing'Element. (ii) That this subdivision would allow for the future relocation of historic residences and would comply with the developmentstandards'of the underlying RS-5000 zoning. (iii) That the`preservatfon, rehabilitation, and relocation of existing historic residential structures would tie in accortlance with`the goals of the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plah adopted;by the City Council in 1999. (iv) ;That the density of this single family residential subdivision, with lot sizes ranging from 8,320 to 11,899 square feet, would be compatible with the character and density of the adjacent single familyhomes north and west of the subject site. THE FOLLOWING' CONDITIONS ARE'SUBMITTED BY VARIOUS C~ "1' DEPARTMENTS.'ACTING AS AN 4NTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE'AND ARE RECOMMENDED ~?`iR`ADOPTION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THE EVENT THAT:TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO -i~500 IS APPROVED 1. That the property owner/developer shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement to be determined as electrical design is completed. 2. That streetlights shall be provided along the Water Street and Stueckle Avenue streetfrontage& to the satisfaction of the Electrical Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. A bond shall be posted prior o approval of the final map and the street fights shall be installed prior to occupancy. 3. That the developer shall pay the sewer capacity mitigation fee for'the Old Town Basin 8 Area. 4. That a tract map to record the division of sutiject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and shall then be recorded'in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. S. That prior to final tract map approval, Condition Nos. 1; 2, 3, and 4, above-mentioned,ahall be complied with. 6. That approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Codeand 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. Page 6 ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 10 MEMORANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Community Development Department DATE: MARCH 27, 2003 TO: DAVID SEE, SENIOR PLANNER FROM: STEPHEN STOEWER, PROJECT MANAGER SUBJECT: SUBTTM16500 Creation of a Six Lot Six Unit Single Family Residential Subdivision (Relocation of Historic Homes) The Community Development Department received an I.D.C. Route Sheet for Case Number SUBTTM16500. The applicant is requesting approval of a six-lot six-unit subdivision to accommodate the relocation of historic homes that would otherwise be demolished. In addition to saving historic homes from demolition, the creation of these lots will facilitate the completion of the Lemon Water Historic Preservation Project. These six lots make up Phase III of the Lemon Water Historic Preservation Project and the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency has identified four of the six structures to be rehabilitated. As additional structures become available, they will be reviewed to determine the feasibility of placing them at this site. Phases I (three homes) and II (four homes) consisted of the substantial restoration/rehabilitation of seven houses, all identified as Qualified Historic Structures and listed in the Anaheim Colony Historic District :Preservation Plan, and the new construction of seven, two-car detached garages. The Agency's developer, Stephany Hales-Panlilio, owner of Trucor, Inc., completed Phase I on February 28, 2002 and Phase II on December 20, 2002. Phase III will is final phase of the Lemon Water Historic Preservation Project. The Community Development Department fully supports the creation of this subdivision and ultimately the relocation and restoration of Anaheim's historic homes.