PC 2006/10/02na i nin
i~si n a
Monday, ®ctober 2, 2006
Council Chamber, City Hall
200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California
• Chairman: Gail. Eastman
• Chairman Pro-Tempore: Kelly Buffa
Commissioners: Stephen Faessel, Cecilia Flores,
Joseph Karaki, Panky Romero, Pat Velasquez
• Call To Order
• Preliminary Plan Review 1:00 P.M.
• Staff update to Commission on various City developments and issues
(As requested by Planning Commission)
• Preliminary Plan Review for items on the October 2, 2006 agenda
• Workshop 1:30 P.nA.
• Proposed Historic Palm District
• Recess To Afternoon Public Hearing Session
• Reconvene To Public Hearing 2:30 P.DA.
• Pledge Of Allegiance
• Public Comments
• Consent Calendar
• Public Mearing Items
• Adjournment
-- -- You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following
e-mail address: planningcommission(a~anaheim.net
H:\docs\clerical\agendas\100206.doc 10/02/06
Page 1
Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 2:30 P.M.
Public Comments:
This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the
Anaheim Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing
items.
Consent Calendar:
The items on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate
discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the Planning
Commission, staff or the. public request the item to be discussed and/or removed from the Consent
Calendar for separate action.
Minutes
1A. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission
Meeting of September 6, 2006. (Motion)
Continued from the September 18, 2006 Planning Commission
meeting..
1B. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission
Meeting of September 18, 2006 (Motion)
H:ldocs\clerical\agendas\100206.doc 10/02/06
Page 2
Pub4ic Hearing Items:
2a. CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 280
(PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED)
2b. AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO THE PACIFICENTER SPECIFIC
PLAN. NO. 88-3
(TRACKING NO. SPN2006-00034)
Owner: Tustin Retail Center, LLC, Attn: Julie Collins, 3670 West
Oquendo Road, Las Vegas, NV 89118
Agent: Mark Frank, Promotional Signs, 20361 Hermana Circle,
Lake Forest, CA 92630
Location: 361-0-3720 East La Palma Avenue and 1001-1091 North
Tustin Avenue: Property is approximately 25.8 acres and
is located at the southwest corner of La Palma Avenue and
Tustin Avenue (The Pacificenter Specific Plan No. 88-3).
Request to modify the zoning and development standards pertaining to
signage and hotel occupancy limitations for the Pacificenter Specific Plan
No. 88-3.
Continued from the May 31, June 12, July 24, and August 21, 2006, Planning
Commission meetings.
Specific Plan Resolution No.
3a.
3b.
3c.
Owner: Lennar Platinum Triangle, LLC, 25 Enterprise, 3rd Floor, Aliso
Viejo, CA 92656-2601
Agent: Tim Smallwood, Lennar Platinum Triangle, 1900 Main Street.,
Suite 800, Irvine, CA 92614
Location: 1404 East Katella Avenue: Property is an approximately 2.6-
acres development area within an approximate 40.6-acre
property located between Katella Avenue and Gene Autry
Way, extending from State College Boulevard to just west of
Betmor Lane. Approximately 6.3 acres are located within the
Platinum Triangle,. Gene Autry District, and 34.4 acres within
the Platinum Triangle, Katella District (Development Area A).
Request: Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05116 -Request to
modify setback requirements to construct a 157-unit, mixed
use project for Development Area A - Lennar's A-Town.
Final Site Plan No. 2006-00005 - Request review and
approval of a final site plan fora 157-unit, mixed use
development for Development Area A - Lennar's A-Town
within the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use zone.
Continued from the August 7, 2006, Planning Commission meeting.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
H:1d o cs\cl erica I\ag a nd as\ 100206. doc
Project Planner:
(dherrick@anaheim. nett
Request for
Continuance to
December 11, 2006
Project Planner.
(t white@anaheim. net)
10/02106
Page 3
4a.
4b.
4c.
Owner: Lennar Platinum Triangle, LLC, 25 Enterprise, 3rd Floor, Aliso
Viejo, CA 92656-2601
Agent: Tim Smallwood, Lennar Platinum Triangle, 1900 Main Street,
Suite 800, Irvine, CA 92614
Location: 1404 East Katella Avenue: Property is an approximately 3.7-
acres development area within an approximate 40.6-acre
property located between Katella Avenue and Gene Autry
Way, extending from State College Boulevard to just west of
Betmor Lane. Approximately 6.3 acres are located within the
Platinum Triangle, Gene Autry District, and 34.4 acres within
the Platinum Triangle, Katella District (Development Area C}.
Request: Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05117 -Request to
modify setback requirements to construct a 167-unit, mixed
use project for Development Area C - Lennar's A-Town.
Final Site Plan No. 2006.00006 - Request review and
approval of a final site plan fora 167-unit, mixed use
development for Development Area C - Lennar's A-Town
within the Platinum Triangle Mixed: Use zone.
Continued from the August 7, 2006, Planning Commission meeting.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
5b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05111 (READVERTISED)
Owner:. BKM Anaheim Associates, 3185 Pullman Avenue, Costa
Mesa, CA 92626
Agent: Aspen Associates Telecom, 1223 Federal Avenue, # 212,
Los Angeles, CA 90025
Location: 1299 North Patt Street: Property is approximately 0.28-
acre and is a land locked parcel with a maximum depth of
190 feet located. west of a parcel with 200 feet of frontage
on the west side of Patt Street, 37 feet south of the
centerline of Commercial Street.
Request to construct a stealth ground-mounted telecommunications
facility with accessory ground-mounted equipment. to accommodate two
carriers in an industrial office park.
Continued from the August 21,.2006, Planning Commission meeting
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
H:\docs\clerica I\agend a s\ 100206.doc
Request for
Withdrawal
Project Planner:
(fwhiteQanaheim.nel)
Project Planner
(kwong2Qanaheim.nel)
10/02/06
Page 4
6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (READVERTISED)
6b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2006-00179
6c. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
6d. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05109
6e. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16943 (READVERTISED)
Owner: La Palma. Real Estate, LLC, 160 Newport Center Drive,
Suite 240, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Agent: T & B Planning Consultants, 17542 East 17~h Street, Suite
100, Tustin, CA 92780
Location: 3530 - 3540 East La Palma Avenue and 1010 -1040
North Grove Street: Property is approximately 5.2 acres,
having frontages of 410 feet on the south side of La Palma
Avenue and is located 270 feet east of the centerline of
Grove Street
Reclassification No. 2006-00179 -Request reclassification from the SP
94-1, D.A. 4 (Northeast Area Specific Plan 94-1, Transit Core Area) zone
to the SP 94-1, D.A. 4 (MU) (Northeast Area Specific Plan 94-1, Transit
Core Area; Mixed Use Overlay) zone to construct 312 single family
attached condominium units.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05109 -Request to construct a 312
unit, single family attached condominium project with 39 live/work units
with waivers of (a) improvement of private street, (b) sound attenuation for
residential developments, and (c) maximum wall height.
Tentative Tract Map No. 16943 - To establish a 312 unit airspace
attached single family residential condominium subdivision.
Reclassification Resolution No. Project Planner
(dseeQanaheim.net)
Conditional Use Permtt Resolution No.
H:\docs\clerical\agendas\100206.doc 10/02/06
Page 5
7a.
7b.
Owner: Living Stream Ministry, 2431 West La Palma Avenue,
Anaheim, CA 92801
Living Stream Ministry, 1212 Hubbell Way, Anaheim., CA
92801
Agent: John Pester, Living Stream Ministry, 2431 West La Palma
Avenue, CA 92801
Location: 2411-2461 West La Palma Avenue and 1212 North
Hubbell WaV: Property is approximately 40.4 acres and is
located at the northwest corner of La Palma Avenue and
Gilbert Street and at the northern termini of Hubbell Way
and Electric Way, having frontages of 800 feet on the north
side of La Palma Avenue, 815 feet on the west side of
Gilbert Street, 68 feet at the northern terminus of Hubbell
Way, and 59 feet at the northern terminus of Electric Way.
Request to permit and retain a teleconferencing center and private
conferenceltraining center.
'Advertised as CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Sb. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
8c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.2006.05128
Owner: C Invest LLC, 4999 East La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA
92807
Agent: Robert Otis, Breath of the Spirit Ministries International,
P.O. Box 2676, Orange, CA 92857
Location: 4999 East La Palma Avenue: Property is approximately
3.13 acres, having frontages of 319 feet on the north side
of La Palma Avenue and is located 610 feet east of the
centerline of Manassero Street.
Request to permit a church within an existing industrial building with
waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
H:\d ocs\clerica I\ag end as\ 100206. d oc
Project Planner:
Qpramin=zQanaheim.oet)
Project Planner.
(dherrickQanaheim.oet)
10/02/06
Page 6
9a. CEQA EXEMPTION 15061 (81131
9b. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2006-00051
Agent: City Initiated, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA
92805
Location: Citywide:
Request to amend Chapter 4.04 and 18.44 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code to prohibit billboards in the City.
' Advertised as "Request to amend provisions. of Title 18 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code relating to signs and billboards including prahibiling billboards "
Project Planner:
(skim@anaheim.nef)
Adjourn To Monday, October 16, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.
for Preliminary Plan Review.
H:\dots\clerical\agendas\100206.doc 10102/06
Page 7
CERTIFICATION OF POSTING
I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at:
10:00 a.m. September 28, 2006
(TIME) (DATE)
LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND
ff COUNCIL DISPLAY KI SK
SIGNED: ~; H' ~(~ ; ~ C. ~ C(. .
1
If you challenge any one of these City of Anaheim decisions in court, you may be limited to raising. only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in a written
correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
RIGHTS OF APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL FROM PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Any action taken by the Planning Commission this date regarding Reclassifications, Conditional Use
Permits and Variances will be final 22 days after Planning Commission action and any action regarding
Tentative Tract and Parcel Maps will be final 10 days after Planning Commission action unless a timely
appeal is filed during that time. This appeal shall. be made in written form to the City Clerk, accompanied
by an appeal fee in an amount determined by the City Clerk.
The City Clerk, upon filing of said appeal in the Clerk's Office, shall set said petition for public hearing
before the City Council at the earliest possible date. You will be notified by the City Clerk of said hearing.
ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the Planning Department, (714) 765-5139. Notification no later than 1.0:00 a.m.
on the Friday before the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure
accessibility to this meeting.
Recorded decision information is available 24 hours a day by calling the Planning Department's
Automated Tele hone S stem at 714.765.5139.
H:\dots\clerical\agendas\100206.doc 10/02/06
Page 8
SCHEDULE
coos
16
October 30
November 13
II November 27 II
II December 11 II
27
H:ldots\clerical\agendas1100206.doc 10/02/06
Page 9
Specific Plane No. 88-3
TRACKING NO. SPN2006-00034
LA PALMA AVENUE
RIVERSIDE FREEWAY
Requested By: TUSTIN RETAIL CENTER, LLC
EAGLE pR
SP 94-t
RCL 6&fi6
(Res pF lnlenti /~
RCL fi5-66~ //~/ \\\\1
T-CUP 2003-[
CUP 402
\CUP 216' ^'
Subject Property
Date: October 2, 2006
Scale: Graphic
Q.S. No. 150
361D-3720 East La Palma Avenue and 1001-1091 North Tustin Avenue (The Pacificenter Specific Plan 88-3) too53
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE MERGED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (NORTHEAST AREA)
Specific Plan No. 88-3
TRACKING NO. SPN20D6-00034
Requested By: TUSTIN RETAIL CENTER, LLC
Subject Properly
Date: October 2, 2006
Scale: Graphic
Q.S. No. 150
3610-3720 East La Palma Avenue and 1001-1091 North Tustin Avenue (The Pacificenter Specific Plan 88-3) too53
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE MERGED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (NORTHEAST AREA) Date ofneria~ Photo:
Julv 2005
.`Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2D06
Item No. 2
2a. CEQA ENVIRONMENTALiMPACT REPORT NO. 280
r(PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED) (Motion)
2b. AMENDMENT N0.4 TO THE PACIFICENTER SPECIFIC - (Recommendation Resolution
PLAN NO. 88-3 and Request for Withdrawal)
.(TRACKING NO. SPN2006-00034)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This irregularly-shaped, 25.8-acre property is located' at the southwest corner of La Palma
Avenue and Tustin:Avenue; having frontages of 745 feet on the south side of La Palma
Avenueand 1,240 feet on the west side of Tustin Avenue (3610 -3720 East La Palma
Avenue and 1001 -.1091 North Tustin Avenue; The Pacificenter. Specific Plan No. 88-3).
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of Amendment No. 4 to the Pacificenter Specific Plan No.
s88-3 to modify the zonlhg and development standards pertaining to signage and hotel
occupancy limitations
BACKGROUND:
(3) :This item was continued from the May31, 2006, June 12,`2006, July 24, 2006 and
August 21, 2006, Commission meetings to allow the applicant and staff time to
review otherpptions for monument signage.
(4) This property is developed with amixed-use commercial center, a home improvement retail
store, offices, a 150-room hotel, 4wo drive-through Yestaurants and supporting commercial
`uses. The Anaheim GenerakPlan designates this property°arid the`property to the east for
'--'GeneraLCommerciaf land useszThe properties to thenorth and west are designated as
Mixed Use land uses. To the south is the SR-91 (Riverside) Freeway.
(5) ::The applicant, Richard Christie President of Promotional Signs, has submitted the
attached letter dated, September 74, 2006, .requesting a withdrawal of the portion of
this request relating to signage as the owners of the property are no longer
interested in pursuing the amendment for additional monument signage.
(6) Apart of this request includes aCity-initiated request to modify the hotel occupancy
limitations cohtained in the Pacificenter Specific Plan.-On March 25, 2003, the City Council
<' amended Council Policy No: 550 (attached) which states that "It is the policy of the City
Council that no zoning entitlement for any hotel nor motel shall be approved, and no
.existing zoning entitlement. for any hotel or motel shall be amended, in any manner which
would require the owner or operator of such hotel or motel to limit the length of occupancy
of any guest therein to any specific period of time:' In order for the specific plan to be
:consistent with Council Policy No. 550, the following condition found in Appendix 11, Hotel
Conditions of the Pacificenter Specific Plan, should be deleted:
"11. That hotel guest rooms shall not be rented or let for periods of less than twelve (12)
consecutive hours nor more than thirty (30) consecutive days, excluding one (1)
manager's unit"
_ SPN2006-00034sr
1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
-0ctober 2, 2006
Item No. 2
(7) Staff is recommending that this requestpe withdrawn in part, accepting the applicant's
request to withdraw the portion of the amendment pertaining to monument signage and
recommending City Council approval pf the deletion of the hotel occupancy.
FINDINGS:
(8) ..Before the Commission. grants any specific plan amendmeht, it must make a finding of fact
that the evidence presented shows. that all of the following conditions exist:
(a) That the property proposed for the specific plan has unique site characteristics such
as topography, location or surroundings that are enhanced by special land use and
development standards;
(b) That the specific plan is consistent. with the goals and. policies of the General. Plan
and with the purposes, standards and land use guidelines therein;
(c) That the specific plan results in development of desirable character that will be
compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding
neighborhood; and,
(d) That the specific plan respects environmental, aesthetic and historic resources
consistent with economic realities...
RECOMMENDATION:
(9) Staff recommends Ghat unless additionalpr contrary information is received during the
> public hearing and, including the evidence presented in this staff repbrt, and.oral and
written evidence presented at the public hearing, the. Planning Commission take the
following actions::
(a) By motion, determine that that the previously-certified EIR Np. 280 is adequate to
serve as the required environmental documentation for his request.
(b) By resolution. recommend to the City Council approval of Amendment No. 4 to the
PacifiCenter Specific Plan No. 88-3 in Dart. to approve the deletion of hotel
:occupancy limitations and accept the applicant's request to withdraw the request to
amend the zoning and development standards to allow an additional monument
sign by adopting the attached resplutiomincluding the findings contained therein.
2
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2006-"'
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION, IN PART,
AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO THE PACIFICENTER SPECIFIC PLAN 88-3
ORDINANCE NO. 5278.
WHEREAS, On July 25, 1989, the City Council, by Ordinance Nos. 5045 (to implement the
Zoning and Development Standards), approved the Pacificenter Specific Plan permitting amixed-use
commercial development including 500,000 square feet of office area, 24,000 square feet of retail commercial
area, 4,000 square feet of drive-through restaurant area, a 150-room hotel, an 8,000 square foot restaurant and
three parking structures within three Development Areas on 25.71 acres; and
WHEREAS, on July 25, 1989, the City Council further adopted Ordinance No. 5046 relating to
reclassification of certain real property described therein into the Specific Plan 88-3 Zone subject to certain
conditions as specified therein; and
WHEREAS, on March 5, 1991, the City Council, by Ordinance No. 5207 (amending the Zoning
and Development Standards as adopted under Ordinance No. 5045), approved Amendment No. 1 of the
Pacificenter Specific Plan to allow a warehouse building and an indoor physical recreation facility as a permitted
use within Development Area 1; and
WHEREAS, on December 10, 1991, the City Council, by Ordinance Nos. 5277 (amending the
Zoning and Development Standards adopted under Ordinance Nos. 5045 and 5207) and 5278 (amending the
Specific Plan SP88-3 Zone name from Santa Fe Pacific Plaza to Pacificenter as adopted under Ordinance No.
5046),. approved Amendment Nc. 2 of the Pacificenter Specific Plan to expand the list of permitted and
conditionally permitted uses within Development Area 2 and amending the Sign Program to permit a 44-foot high
pylon sign and a 96 square fgot freestanding monument sign for the drive-through. restaurant; and
WHEREAS, on August 24, 1999, the City Council, by Ordinance No. 5695, approved
Amendment No. 3 to the Pacificenter Specific Pian No. 88-3 (amending Exhibit Nos. 4 and 6, Development Area
standards,. the listed permitted and conditionally permitted uses, and the Sign Program Appendix) and a Final
Site Plan in order to create a single, unified Development Area for the development of a mixed-use commercial
center within the Specific Plan, including the development of retail, office, hotel and other supporting uses; and
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Anaheim Civic
Center, Council Chambers, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, in the City of Anaheim on May 31, 2006, at 2:30
p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 and 18.72, to hear and consider evidence for and
against said proposed amendment and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection
therewith; whereas the meeting was continued from the May 31, June 12, July 24, and August 21, 2006,
Commission meetings and
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission, after due consideration, inspection,
investigation and study made by itself and on its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts:
1. That Amendment No. 4 pertaining to the deletion of the length of occupancy for the existing hotel
is consistent with"the goals, objectives. and policies of the Anaheim General Plan, including the standards and
land use guidelines provided therein; and
2. That the proposed amendment pertaining to the deletion of the length of occupancy for the
existing hotel would. provide for consistency with Council Policy No. 550 pertaining to hotel occupancy; and
Cr\PC2006- -1- PC2006-
3. That the proposed amendment pertaining to an additional monument sign has been withdrawn
by the applicant.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS: That the Anaheim City Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal., and did find and. determine and recommend that the Planning
Commission find and determine, pursuant. to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
based upon its independent review and consideration of the previously-certified Final. EIR No. 280 and the
evidence received at the public hearing, that the previously-certified EIR No. 280 is in compliance with CEQA
and the State and City CEQA Guidelines and is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation
for this Amendment to the Pacificenter Specific Plan and satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no
further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, pursuant to the above findings, the Anaheim
Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council of the City of Anaheim. approve Amendment
No. 4 to the Pacific Center Specific Plan in part, denying the proposed amendment pertaining to freestanding
signage and approving the amendment pertaining to length of occupancy as follows:
Amend Appendix No. 11 hotel conditions to delete as follows:
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
October 2, 2006. Said. resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of
the Anaheim Municipal. Code pertaining to appeal procedures.
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNJNG CC
STATE OF CALIFORN+A )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
MISSION
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
the foregoing resolution was passed. and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held
on October 2, 2006,. by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN W ITNESS W HEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
2006.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-2- PC2006-
PAGE 02/02
Attachment -Item No. 2
September 14, 2006
Della Tierrick, Planning YDept.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
200 S. Anaheim Slvd. -
Anaheim, CA 92805
RE: Case Number: SPN88-3
Deaf Ms. Herrick;.
We are officially withdrawing our application for this project. The owners
are not interested in pursuing this sign application. Please close out the
account.
We were told that the total would be $4,700.00, which has been paid.
cerely,
Richard Christie
President
RC/mc
°q Full Service Elecfricol 3 Commerciol Sign Company?
Attachment -Item No. 2
RESOLUTION N0.2003R- 51
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADOPTING A POLICY PROHIBTTING THE
IMPOSITION OF ANY SPECIFIC TIME LIIvIITATION ON THE
LENGTH OF GUEST OCCUPANCY IN A HOTEL OR MOTEL
AND RESCINDING ANY SUCH LIMTfATION HERETOFORE
IMPOSED IN ANY ZONING ENTITLEMENT.
WHEREAS, in a limited number of instances and under certain circumstances, the
City Council or City Planning Commission has heretofore approved new zoning entitlements, or
amended existing zoning entitlements, for certain hotels or motels to include conditions limiting the
permitted length of guest occupancy in such hotels or motels [o a maximum of thirty days within any
ninety day period, or other similar specific time limitation (the "Occupancy Limitation"); and
WHEREAS, said Occupancy Limitation has heretofore been imposed as a condition
of approval in the following zoning entitlements currently in effect:
Conditional Use Permits Nos. 244 and 564 authorizing a 52-unit
motel on the .property located at 1800 West Lincoln Avenue,
Anaheim, California (Executive Suites Mutely.
Conditional Use Permit No. 3928 authorizing a 45-unit motel on the
property located at 420 South Beach Boulevard, Anaheim, Califomia
(Best Budget Mote]).
Variance No. 1229 authorizing a 70-unit motel on .the property
located at 823 South Beach Boulevard, Anaheim., Califomia (Covered
Wagon Motel).
(hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Existing Entitlements"); and
WHEREAS, the stated purpose of such Occupancy Limitation was as expressly stated
in each of said Existing Entitlements; and
WHEREAS, upon further review, the City Council has determined that such
occupancy limitation is no longer necessary as a means to accomplish the stated purpose for which
such limitation was originally imposed; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires, as aCity-wide policy determination, to rescind
any such Occupancy Limitation heretofore imposed, including any such limitation curen[ly
contained in,any of the Existing Entitlements;. and
WI3EREAS, the City Council further desires to prohibit the imposition of such
Occupancy Limitation as a required condition of any future zoning entitlement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Anaheim as follows:
That any Occupancy Limitation heretofore imposed in any conditional. use permit,
zone variance, or other permit or entitlement which is otherwise currently in effect, including any
such Occupancy Limitation contained in anyof the Existing Entitlements, is hereby rescinded and
of no further force and effect.
The Planning Commission is hereby directed to initiate such amendments to the
Existing Entitlements as may be necessary to conform the Existing Entitlements. to the provisions
of this resolution.
Section 2.
That new Council Policy No. 550 be, and the same is hereby adapted, to read as
follows:
"It is the policy of the City Council [hat no zoning
entitlement for any hotel or mote] shall be approved,. and no existing
zoning entitlement for any hotel or motel shall be amended, in any
manner which would require the owner or operator of such hotel or
motel to limit the length of occupancy of any guest therein to any
specific period of time. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to
prohibit any limitation on the term of any zoning entitlement.
The term `zoning entitlement' as used herein shall
mean any zoning reclassification, conditional use pemtit, zone
variance, administrative adjustment, orotherdiscretionary entitlement
approved by the City Council, City Planning Commission or Zoning
Administrator pursuant to any provision of the Anaheim Zoning
Code"
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is her y adopted proved 6y the City
Council of the City of Anaheim this 25th. day of Ma , 2 3
MAYOR OFT CTI'Y OF ANAHEIM
ATTEST:
t ~ ~~
CITY CLERK F THIr CTI'Y OF ANAHEIM
"` 4ASR4.1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, SHERYLL SCHROEDER, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2003R-61 was introduced and. adopted at a regular meeting provided by law,. of
the Anaheim City Council held on the 2Sth day of March, 2003, by the following vote of the
members thereof:
AYES: MAYORICOUNCIL MEMBERS: Chavez, Hernandez, McCracken, Pringle, Tait
NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None.
ABSTAINED: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MAYORICOUNCIL MEMBERS: None
i
.C~ ~c~E.
TY CLERK F THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
(SEAL)
Item No. ;
"
T
i
~~
~
IIW Area)
x vases Bac els
EI [I
1 P
ro~Ya 400Bx1
a
B
• RxmSID
W
ne,Iw N
1610 ;
p
iE
~
1 PR B~
Idol w.u S P ~b%.Ia
El.
b
6E1 RLL660i.,
p `
6A P LSeO}.Bl
GIPS)5
9BD15 I
PLIS
W
V1VNt
b zEl
DIS
~ P6 ,5
b5E1 p,e „xu 6[
1
i
xv
~
ls
]nl Mi
t m
P]Yf tlz
El
a
I
IP L591
l
i Pam 1
_ [YP]83 g
SPpi
.4 wmfS
tl
NPlB6 CDP ZfeE dfl° ~
. tlMe6n{ i ~,
m
lwelcwof 5 cVPxml
3
e
w.
npiwrns
rylMl
aazmwblss
lee alz.lo'sEl
N0.6601na
Dnci6sss°msx]
pwnssuonx
pnom~samaf
KATELLA AVENUE
s
rc
iS
GENE AUTRY WAY
n. ei immu Iva o5E ILPBwI \
flCLSNNx SaaEDx IPUL CIn~rofSEl
RSD6x la
IlPrwl ~_
m:: e'~° e'sEf
P455d6fe
XLt5s55ax
iMim
rt i
lS
,SEl
Biqa eBBa ACL010c6155
flP4B661~1IE1
CLStdSi] flR9~5HZ
N ~b1B]B
a'
n
Y
06
v^
l
cuvic?
cuvun
pioo m'i
w
""i° n
~
i[I snolwtoP]s
N
K
NEVVf
r
I
CWDVIINIVM
Wx
P458~BPIfS
Mp.dN, va5E1
vP:n s
nnlmLmin
"G41C5 SB 13B Pwveiie
IP^ tllrc 1o9E1 roP]SSi
dvvd,aB cuPi~
pl..,mnbrol cuP ens
6 MB~MBYS WE59PP'4~E/t.
Q
W
m
W
J
17
U
W
Q
N" R
E
m:O4a~a°~:Ef
BI-c
Pp IPruVI
/ Lt ^JMLLNOVSiPULEING
\v/ ~O ~fAVr1 //////~L\\\\\
9
CW ICaO 1!B ~/ V
\ actodoo-,5 nP.LdC2Y~5
Sy Ifl~ad ln,b6El BIn.tl4a.1~6EI
~ nft 66'A&IS A ~
•~ t~b~ Bc0€dtN.fe s I ucwsp d V
a.a.°uP~`."o ___ ____ P""'"e nc.wvl ___ cErvrl
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE.
Subject Property
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05116 Date: October 2, 2006
Final Site Plan No. 2006-00005 Scale: 1" = 400'
Requested By: LENNAR PLATINUM. TRIANGLE, LLC Q.S. No. 108
1404 East Katella Avenue, Development Area C
10096
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 3
3a. CEQA SUBSEQUENT EiR NO. 332 AND ADDENDUM
.(PREVIOUSLY- CERTIFIED)
3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05116
30. FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2006-00005 (Motion for Continuance)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
{1) .This approximate 2.6-acre development area is located within an approximate 40.6-acre
property located between Katella Avenue and Gene Autry Way, extending from State
College Boulevard to just west of South Betmor Lane.. Approximately 6.3 acres are located
:within the Platinum Triangle, Gene Autry District and 34.4 acres within the Platinum
Triangle, Katella District (1404 East Katella Avenue -Development Area A).
..REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of the following:
CUP 2006-05116 -Request to modify setback requirements to construct a 157-unit, mixed
use project for Development Area A- Lennar's A-Town.
FSP 2006-00005 -Request review and approval of a final site plan fora 157-unit, mixed
use development for Development Area A- Lennar's A-Town. ',
(3) This property is currently vacant and is zoned i (PTMU) (Industrial; Platinum Triangle Mixed
Use Overlay). The Anaheim General Plan designates the property for Mixed Use land uses..
Surrounding properties to the north and east are also designated for Mixed Use land. uses;
properties tp the south are designated for Office-High and Mixed Use land uses; and
properties to the west are designated for Office-High land uses. ',
(4) This item was previously continued from the August 7, 2006, Commission meeting. The
applicant has submitted the attached letter, dated September 20, 2006, requesting a
continuance to the December 11, 2006, Commission meeting. This continuance request is
to allow time for the applicant to complete the shared parking analysis, public realm plan
and final map. These tasks are required to be complete prior to the review and approval of
any final site plan within the A-Town community.
RECOMMENDATION:
(5) .That the Commission, by motion, continue this request to the December 11, 2006, Planning
Commission meeting.
sr-CUP2006-051~6eaw100206
1
Attachment -Item No. 3
September 20, 2006
Mr. Ted White
Senior Planner
City of Anaheim Planning Departrnent
200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162
Anaheim, CA. 92805
Re: Parcel A
Dear Ted:
,w
- 4.~ ..
`~
.
v .
co
Yc`
~~ia. ie
This letter is to formally request a continuance of CUP number 2006-05116 and FSP number
2006-0005 to a Planning Commission hearing date of December 11"', 2006.
Thank you in advance for this consideration and now await your response.
Best regards,
`v~ ~
G rg~ elle~
Project Manager
cc: Donna Kelly
Gary Hildabrand
Andrew Han
Tim Smallwood, MVE Studio
GT/vk
Main: (949) 349-8200 • Fax: (949) 349-1762 • www.lennar.com
Item Nc
n4 BEaG~S
E
Ifl
I PR1
m.dllco
0.20E41.)B
P45EU1n 1) E
sVPEPLENIEfl
a16E1
Iflli3m ~d)9a
)
Ce/III OVCi EYSiE16 µOAENGU
SING
umslvPPCF
~
Ipgc o
N b5E1
CL 66O)n.
H lSSF16
a ~I~~i] 5.5Y]
°C
` IIPSKII
5cs§561s
I uPZm
C
cuvz6ly
P4zm+.mrze
IPn tll
nl uEEl P~L9scon5 511U1N BVE
~ Ixea vxnlb5E1
P4665]~'0 P
4BB4615
IPe. tlIN1o EEl
KECX CFIRx
MHIF?P04
I Pu 6651.1.
SeSY]
IPaa eelNmvE fl~Y~Sl19EE
P46~]~1. LM ~
W
"cv~uv6lmis) ]I.fS
vw zonsmv
zmsmmfi
Pw
S
u`
°w .wwnw
PE
T
a
r
IIVJ IneaJ
eB
° o6ao-1s
:
m
m
psEl
x6sii.N Ifl
a.
E1
P4de~di.1.
~
flLVP 161p~ P l
m1~
61 I IPCL MP ~6I6511iE1
.666
5 I S
P F1
a5E1 PR666A PCL56 T9]
cUPS)6
w F PNE
no
os5ws v^W'*
d1lPS.nsE1
6BUO16 e
N W1
.
bSEI P
rtiP
5E
^e
u
e°N m1s5El ~
Passonl6
m1eM56 4 Pw dw. gsEl
508 m 5
P 1
IP
E 1
SPOx1
LPGEL
~
~ 5
_
oaa 1s
~ CUP)695 Ifl® E)
M e16 CW1 ~
F
w
Ya
uvnt Eaao S cu
l' wI WV. FIPMS W O FWMS
KATELLA AVENUE
1~
neuu Irvrwl.
wvPw;
GENE AUTRV WAV
Mw
R I
5 k
Me j
9
W
R J
IryM11
i P~016 Watiiie~f El I m
M W
n
~~P J
O
U
Po ;5
n
`
e sEl
mw
mp Q
P
a
aEt
[U
•'
S N
mNl
EAx
C.LVmI
P4]m1+[11ID
mL
R4N,e~,ae~ M2 w
PF~U~y ~ P
L flx46uanI5E PwF99nl
IPna¢e¢alaeEl NmiE~oe
GI OtP
M
] PPIPruul
P4666
I.
6IILPIMBV6ME99 GNUt
M., aLUUemusrPLU EIP6¢
LuP)fix de
S 6,EP6
ft4B3Yl
\ e6:` o
'+5 ryas. SEI
~~
dTlSN.15
P
s
Pn.d InL1~6E1
ftL8B2&I6
~Ib~
~~II
I ~®~1
A r
oMEV
N
ao-
;o P.m1e.E a<L>s)I<1 fV
cENn
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE
i s_
l
-
~
T I :
~ i
I C
r
I I s
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 4
4a. CEQA SUBSEQUENT EIR NO. 332 AND ADDENDUM
(PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED)
4b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 200fi-05117
4c. FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2006-00006 (Motion for Withdrawal)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This approximate 3.7-acre development area is located within an approximate 40.6-acre
property located between Katella Avenue and Gene Autry Way, extending from State
College Boulevard to just west of South Betmor Lane. Approximately 6,3 acres are located
within the Platinum Triangle, Gene Autry District and 34.4 acres within the Platinum
Triangle, Katella District (1404 East Katella Avenue -Development Area C).
.REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of the following:
CUP2006-05117 -Request to modify setback requirements to construct a 167-unit, mixed
use project for Development Area C- Lennar's A-Town.
FSP2006-00006 -Request review and approval of a final site plan fora 167-unit, mixed
use development for Development Area C- Lennar's A-Town.
(3) This property is currently vacant and is zoned I (PTMU) (Industrial; Platinum Triangle Mixed
Use. Overlay). The Anaheim General Plan designates the property for Mixed Use land uses.
Surrounding properties to the north and east are also designated far Mixed Use land uses;
prdperties to the south are designated for Office-High and Mixed Use land uses; and
properties to the west are designated for Office-High. land uses.
{4) This item was previously continued from the August 7, 2006, Commission meeting. The
applicant has submitted the attached letter, dated September 20, 2006, requesting
withdrawal of this. item. This request will allow the applicant time to modify building design
.plans for Development Area C.
.RECOMMENDATION:
(5) .That the Commission, by motion, accept the applicant's request for withdrawal
sr-CUP2006-05117eaw-withdrawal
~~ ~.
L E N~ t~il~``.~2
;., ~ ~~~r
(~' )unfirl[.l!a1u~71ue~ raJ ~ ' n~~:.
Attachment -Item No. 4
~•
September 20, 2006 • .:
Mr. Ted White
Senior Planner
City of Anaheim Planning Department
200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162
Anaheim, CA. 92805
Re: Parcel C
Dear Ted:
,~~~~,..,.ud%1'
,5~
ZQ~
ppg~l~
This letter is to formally request a withdrawal of CUP number 2006-05117 and FSP number 2006-
00006.
Thank you in advance for this consideration and now await your response.
Best regards,
~~~/~ .
George Tellez
Project Manager
cc: Donna Kelly
Gary Hildabrand
Andrew Han
Tim Smallwood, MVE Studio
GT/vk
~ennar urange uoas[ uavu • ~~ encerpnse • Huso vie7o, v~ ym~o
Main: (949) 399-8200 • Pax: (999) 349-1762 • www.lennar.com
Item I
"' I k w
S I I Qp
]LW505 CUP tI]6 61-
'] Z VAR f9J63a BATtERY RECYCLING LUP 2009 I N
Q KINSfiVRSNV INL FACILITY
ROpERT5ON5 I
RE4pYA11%, INL. VAa 199SZ
VAR 199}x
BflIOGFOaO
COMMERCIAL STREET FDaDS coaP
f
VAa 1995 3
yAa 19L] x SMW 91O $VSTE
I
I COUNTRY LRY
PLLIEU BWLDING TOWING INC
PRDpucrs COMMERCIAL ST
f
I vAR 2pp1.p
CL 5LSb2 I I VAq 15~
CVP I<]B MtgFURNfFURE yqR 9pe9 NOR CAL OEVI
DIVERSIFlEp
ASPH4T
P0.000LT5
~ I
p CW ]66]
Q CERAMIC TILE
W DISTR10VfpR5
NA ITW W 1
u m
Vedwl ~ F VAR9
W ~ W VAR'
~ - NOR fAL OE
W ¢ D
2
a CVP Zpp695111
i Z VAR ZppSW665 I
Q (CM Zp01-0M1p) $TEPZHAN
RSPa{ELLN. 1 WD BLDG CHEMICPL
lu ornce I
LUP ]za5
SUNWESTMETPLS ~ 1
F VM 15p
ul Y+ 1
O- APPLIED POWE
e CONCEPTS
al~nlenlfoCGl I
~vy VAg1996-18
PNOMEIMTOWING Cp
„111 ~ I .
~ LITV
n ]n~ I pnnnpu r- - JULIAI
ua4x PO . RMA
3pp4pJ6- ataR T I O 1DU EACH ,-.
VAVJJ! ~~ rv
su~~' I - Ipu JVLIANNA AVE
PARKING
ARM. np ao3m :pu I@
f Du ~. 3DU ylq c
vAR l9arw wP]ut
ELELTRAGEAR ~ 3pu 3pu xDU 3 ~ ~ C]@.
d 8 a
RCV6.P50 W 4CUPpWI: 30V k ]pV g - L~ ~
VAR 319515 ~' ~ 3pV ]W 4 ~E SMALL INDVSTa1A1 Q
WHFEL I ~ 4y eO T~t _p FIRMS Z
WAREHOUSE ATCNESONS EXPRESSN 10U viou °
a _ RMi m
VAR]Zp VAR 2159 y~ ~
TXOGRAPX n^ y. .a
y\\~II/y~',''1~\I~T\'I ,,A 3pV ]pV Iy APARTMEM
sIIpP EE
.,j cG RMS vAa ou' o
LJJ~LL LD W $ ~s 1 61 DU ~R
g oV Zp Ip 30 Ip ~n
i~ iU
CpmmervaVlnduso-al (Npdh Central Area) __ __LA PALMA AVENUE
cp~~ Radevep ment Area
P - . Ip FATII ~.~ _~~gp9g09~ DU- D 1D ~P xDU 1 N 10tl a%af ///~~~
. < L£GMx xDU ~ - - "r6Rli1`7q FAH vrx>ti°1 { 1OU 'D Z 10U: FAH 1D
tEDU U ~ ~ e6s OIP vo DU xDU y 10U10U VM ~J + µ 1 ////~V\\`
g40 \4 V,y~ J/AtsO! ~ , Pm + ~ i ~s c ~ 1
"9 Jam' P xDU ^".~ c ;' tDUSDU c pI
.p .Y `DU ~~. Ada ~.~8 x~.,,l jO.u..r Paou 4 Du10.., ~ xpU ._,1 ...,. N
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05111 Subject Property
Date: October 2, 2006
Scale: Graphic
Requested By: NORTH ANAHEIM ASSOCIATES, LLC Q.S. No. 70
1045 North Kemp Street tooso
o:
July 2005
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05111 Subject Property
Date: October 2, 2006
Scale: Graphic
Requested By: NORTH ANAHEIM ASSOCIATES, LLC Q.S. No. 70
1045 North Kemp Street ioaso
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
..Item No. 5
5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion)
5b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMJT NO. 2006-05111 (READVERTISED) - (Resolution)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1} This irregularly-shaped, 0.28-acre property is a land locked parcel with a maximum depth of
.190 feet located west of a parcel with 200 feet of frontage on the west side of Patt Street,
>37 feet south of the centerline of Commercial;Street (1299 North Patt Street- North
Anaheim Industrial Park).
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit to construct a stealth ground-
mounted elecommunications facility with accessory:ground-mounted,equipment to
accommodate two (2) carriers in an-industrial office park under authority of Code Section
:16.10.030.040.0402 (Telecommunications.Ground-Mounted and 18.38.060.
BACKGROUND:
(3) This item was continued from .the July 24, August 7, August 21, 2006, and September
6, 2006, Planning Commission meetings,to allow the applicant time to modify the
proposal.
(4) This property is currently undecconstruction for an industrial building within an industrial
office park and is zoned I (industrial Zone}.: The Anaheim General Plan designates this
property forJndustriaf land uses.' Properties to the north, east,' and a portion of the west are
also designated for Industrial. land uses; prbperies to,the south and a,portion of the west
:are designated forMixed Use land uses.
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
(5) The following zoning actions pertain to this property:
(a) Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-04410 (to permit a telecommunications
antenna and accessory ground-mounted equipment) was denied by the
Planning Commission on October 8, 2001. The applicant requested approval
for a monopole disguised as a flagpole and was denied due to negative
visual impact to the adjoining residential land uses and the visibility due to
the significant height.. i
(b) A Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit (MIS2002-00045) (to permit aroof-
mounted telecommunications facility and ground-mounted equipment shelter} was
approved by the Planning Department qn May 17, 2002 for the former industrial
park. This facility was demolished to accommodate the redevelopment of the site.
(d) A Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit (MI52005-00118) (to permit a
temporary telecommunications facility) was approved by the Planning Department
on July 7, 2005, with a time limitation of eighteen (18) months to expire on
December 7, 2006, for the industrial park. This permit was issued to allow
continuous telecommunicaticns service during construction of the,industrial park in
srcup2oos-osit~klw_ioozos Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
.October 2, 2006
Item No. 5
anticipation of a new stealth building-mounted telecommunications facility
integrated with theproposed buildings.
(d) Variance No. 2005-04665 (to waive the requirement for a lot o fronts public or
private street) (Phase I of this industrial park) was approved by the Zoning
Administrator on November3, 2005.
(e) Tentative t3a~cel MapNo.2005-147 (to establish a 21-lot, 22-unit industrial
airspace subdivision to subdivide an industriatcomplex) was approved by the
Zoning Administrator on November 3, 2005.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL:
(6) The applicant requests a conditional use permit to construct a stealth ground-
mounted telecommunications facility to accommodate two {2) carriers with
accessory ground-mounted equipment adjacent to a newly constructed industrial
building. The applicant has submitted two (2) development proposals.
(7) Development Proposal A proposes to construct a 64-foot high. stealth faux pine
telecommunications facility, Development proposal B proposes to construct two (2}
a stealth faux palm telecommunications facilities. The,proposed faux palms. consist of
one 54 foot high facility and one 64 foot high facility.
(8} The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates proposed site is located within a!larger thirty-seven
(37) building industrial park that has'recently been constructed. The elecommunications
facility would be located within a planter area at the northern portion of the industrial park,
adjacent to a one-story (26 feet high), 4,700 square foot building. The`sitepian indicates
the addition of two (2) live palm or two (2) live pine trees within the landscaped
planter area adjacent to the proposed telecommunication facility(s) to create an
aesthetic grove effect. No additional landscaping (i.e„ shrubs or;groundcover) is
proposed.
(9) The submitted elevation plans (Exhibit No. 3) indicate the following characteristics
for the proposed facility:
Proposal A- Proposal B-Two Previous Proposal -
One Faux Pine Faux Palms Faux Eucal tus
Antennas 48 Feet & 58 48 Feet & b8 Feet 48 Feet & 57.5 Feet
O eratf~ Center': Feet
OveralfHeight of ' 64 Feet 54 Feet & 64 Feet 66 Feet
Facilit
Proposed Live 25 Feet 32 Feet 35 Feet
Tree Height (2
ro osed
(10) The equipment layout plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates that the proposed telecommunications
fadility(s) and equipment would be located within an approximately 750 square foot lease
__ areaabutting the industrial building and five (5) feet awayfrom the north property line.
Twelve (i2) proposed BTS .equipment cabinets would be'located adjacent to the
Page 2
Staff Report to the
:Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
..:Item No. 5
telecommunications facility(s) and enclosed by a new eight (8) foot high block wall painted
antl textured to match the adjacent tilt-up building.'The plan does not. indicate the addition
rof shrubs or vine,around the enclosure. 'In order to reduce the opportunity for graffiti, staff
has included a condition of approval for clinging vines around the enclosure.
(11) The equipment layout plan further indicates that each facility would consist of three
(3) antenna arrays with four (4) antennas each for a total of twenty-four (24)
individual antennas. The three {3) antenna arrays for each. proposed carrier extends
#ive (5) feet from the monopole structureand each array is'eleven (11) feet wide. The
:panel antennas for both development proposals are five (5) feet in height by one (1)
foot in width and four (4) inches in depth.
(12} The elevation plans and photo simulations {Exhibit No. 4) for Proposal A (faux pine)
:indicate the trunk of the proposed faux pine wouldbe round with a four (4) feet wide
diameter. The submitted elevations, as shownbelow, indicate the antennas are
located at operating centers of 48 and 58 feet above ground'level, and the faux pine
has a maximum height of 84 feet. The antennas are camouflaged within the canopy
of he tree and painted to match the pine tree.
Proposed antennas
~T=Mtsbi(e)',
Proposed lAntennas
{Cingular}
~P
~.j~.
~„~ ,,
~~~~ ~ sue` ~ s ..
s ~ ~£ ~~' ~ ~~h^ P /a ~ m' ~ £
r,d~ t'~ a~~N.M~ -~:.,,, r"'» ,mo'''w');<'"~~~~`,
~ ~~ ~
4 t ! r ~> ~~ k M ,£ s2 ~ rpy, ~"~~T~y
s~ i~,~~ a~ ~ s~ ~~ ~tJ6~'t1J31~ E1t(~t#7~.~`~
rr,z~.=v z,~,."~r-,x''..^'~`w^., K` ~e..S°xr-~~'~s~~ .'.-!~ ~£'s,~ d ~'a..£,u;t ~%ti2..rw
Photo Simulation of Proposed Faux Pine
(View from Commercial Street)
(13) The elevation plans and photo simulations (Exhibit No. 4) for Proposal B (faux
,palms) indicate the trunk of the proposed fauxpalms would be round:with a four (4)
foot wide diameter. The submitted elevations, as shown below, indicate the
Page 3
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 5
antennas are located at operating centers of 48 and 58 feet above ground level and
the faux palms have a maximum height of 54 and 64 feet. The palm is proposed with
a brown;faux palm tree finish and green fiberglass palm fronds interspersed among
the antenna arrays at the op of the structure. The antenna arrays and palm fronds
.would be painted to match.
,~^'
x Y
F'ropr3stEd i~~nog~~~rra ~ ~~'
.~ ~ f~, opos~~~Vlonop~frn
r,~~ttg~aE~r)
F ~
z~.
r.y ~ ~ c
~, , ~
) ~
~~~ ~ ~ ~ ,~
~ ~1;~~
, ~ ~ ~'~
~ ~'r
,a'oH S.y,^~~~s~ G G Yh.~r'~s, ~ ~~ ~a ~x
Sx' Y vx s ^-.
oxo ~ti u~/ ~t ~ {s3"F~. Yv^ '~ sx r ~+` A ~te1
d "'v~YhN l,. { 1"C~ 7' ~~~~" ~r~~S,~s~Gnx~_° .~$'~`i'e S'Sl
~-..,~ ~ r t ~ ,w*..a .-ry ~. ~.~ ..,.~ ~. ~ ,'-rr
~r ,mil "~, r ga '~ n `sw-~-rr~'~r^'*~3'.~"~~ffr~ fi' x x ~r . ~''w'.~~"/'~r' ~„" z` ;° ,
ti' yr u may, ~,a ~. ~^'~-v`7 ~ ~ ,,z v:. y i dd r' °` r%:%' ;
? k ' 2.a~--~ / w1 ~ a„~" ~ y Gv'sa-s ~' `+,,£%- y,7~' %' e 'ems ^~'~ c
a ,rays„ ~"a ~ ~~e s '~'~ {bv~~~iM~hdl~~~~ r"~g
Photo Simulation of Proposed Faux Palms
(View from Commercial Street)
{14) The applicant's supplemental information statement indicates that the proposed site
would be a replacement for the previously-approved facility (T-Mobile) and a provide
the necessary coverage for an additional carrier. (Cingular). The proposed search ring
is to provide continual coverage for the homes and streets`surrounding the Riverside
Freeway,;La PalmaAvenue, ahd Lemon Street.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(15) Staff has reviewed the proposal to construct a stealth ground-mounted telecommunications
.:facility with accessory ground-mounted equipment to accommodate two (2) carriers and the
Initial Stutly (a copy of which is available for review in thePlahning Department) and finds
no significant environmental impact ahd,' herefore, recommends that a Negative
Declaration be approved upon a finding bythe Planning Commission that the Negative
- Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has
considered the proposed Negative DeclarationYogether with any comments received during
__ _ the public review process and furtherfinding on the basis of the Initial Stutly and any
Page 4
Staff Report to the
Panning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 5
Page 5
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 5
(18) The Planning Department continues to discourage unscreenedtelecommunications
facilities due to the significant cumulative visual impact on the community as a whole. The
recently updated Zoning Code includes design guidelines and requirements for
telecommunications facilities. Code requires telecommunications facilitiesbe co-located
where technologically feasible and visually beneficial. Staff feels "stealth".installations and
co-location are the best alternative io decrease visual clutter and preservethe aesthetic
quality of the community. Code defihes'a "stealth"facility as "A wirelesscommunication
facility that is disguised to appear as a natural object or part of an existing man-made
.object, facility or structure, which is designed to blend into the surrounding environment or
which is concealed within or architecturally integrated into a building or other concealing
structure " In order for a facility to be an appropriate stealth. installation two (2) main factors
must be addressed. First, the facility itself needs to be designed such that the antennas
are disguised to appear as a natural object pr part of an existing man-made object, facility
or structure. Secondly, he facility heeds to blend .into the surrounding environment in
which it is proposed. Factors to consider for this second criterion include the height of
buildings in the surrounding area, structures on the proposed property, in the case of
facilities hatare disguised as natural objects,: the presence of other similar. natural objects
in the immediate area, and3he visibility of the facility.
(19) `Although the proposed telecommunications facility disguised as a palm or pine tree
is an?appropriate manner to satisfy the first crfterion, the'proposed co•locetion on
'one facility under Proposal A requires the use bf a pine tree which, can not satisfy
.the second criterion due to the lack of backdrop for the facility to blend with. Of the
two options, Proposal B is the mare natural option because the possibility of
creating a backdrop is more feasible; however, staff feels that a stealth building
mounted facility is still the best option for this site. The SR-91 Freeway is
approximately 490 feet north of the proposed facility. The property across
Commercial Street does not have a building along Patt Street that would screen. the
facility from the view of traffic along he freeway. Therefore, the facility would be
highly visible from the freeway. In addition, the heights of the buildings in the
industrial office park range,between 25 to 30 feet in height. As a result, there are no
structures o shield or serve as a backdrop for the facility. furthermore, the
proposed types of facilities would be visible to the existing residences and a City
park site to the south and southeast.
Page 6
.Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
.October 2, 2006
Item No. 5
~,
t
~~ 64 Feet
~~
iw .
~~
,
~
~~~ ~
~
gg
~: Ii _ 'bx'~,~~'
r ~,2e~~
;, i`
C a
1~
J#r'~
.
~,a.1
25 Feet ~~~,%
ms
' { ~
^ ^~, ^
~
e T^
~
t ~ t
5pi ~
S y v
Development Proposal!A -Proposed West. Elevation
~~
v~
~
~
u
~~ f' .;
~~=
~~
y ~
64 Feet
54 Feet ~
3E Feet ~ ~~ ~
~~
_ ~ ~
~ ~~,~,
~~=-
1
i~
~'
`~
~
w
I? ~ ~?I
~
~;
"
~ ^ ^
t
~
e
~~ ~ ~
~A L ii i -~
i
I ~ .
Development Proposal B -Proposed West Elevation
Page 8
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 5
j21) As a point of comparison, staff requested a stealth building-mounted facility as depicted in
he following renderings, as an alterhatve proposal to the faux eucalyptus.. The new tower
would architecturally match the industrial building currently under constructioh by
incorporating a similar roof-line, and utilizing the same materials and colors of the building.
The renderings are fora 66 foot high fiacility; however the previous facility was
established at approximately 55 feet in height.. Staff believes a stealth installation
..similar to one depicted on the following-page is the best alternative rather han a stealth
ground-mounted facility disguised as a tree. if the facility is owered to 55 feet consistent
with the. previous buildhg-mounted installation, the structure woultl be more in scale with
the existingindustrial buildings, achieve and achieve the objective of an architecturally
integrated facility that blends with the surrounding area
r:'
A ~~ Carrier #1
,~
1'~~E. ~ ~ ;'_.~`
.. ~ 4 .
~'~
',.t. Carrier#2
r. r
..;~ New
Industrial
-; =• ~ ~ :~. :.Building
' . t ',,:~
.a, '
~~; :.
` ; . .; .,'
•rJ
South Elevation (facing Interior accessway)-
Page 9
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2. 2006
Item No. 5
' „,
Carrier #1 ~ ~: ~ n
.t~ i
~~ '1
Carrier #2 , , ;r•, • j,
•.
, ..a
~. ''
New
• > ' •. Industrial
Building
East Elevation (facing Patt Street)
(22) At the September. B, 2006, Planning Commission meeting, the following project
issues were discussed:
Proposal of other types of stealth ground-mounted facilities.
o Integration of facilities into the building(s) by constructing two (2) towers or
some othecarchitectural element.
As a result of the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission, the applicant
was directed to modify the plans to address the feedback',provided at the public
hearing.
(23) Based upon the feedback provided at the September 6, 2006 public hearing, the
applicant has redesigned the proposal as detailed above. Development Proposal A
proposes one (1) 64-foot. high monopine with two (2) newpine trees adjacent to the
proposed telecommunications facilityto mitigate the visual impact of a single pine
tree. Staff is not supportive of the proposed faux pine since there are nopine trees
in the vicinity and the proposed pine trees would not be capable of reaching an
adequate height to provide a backdrop for atleast twenty years.
(24) Development proposal B proposes two (2) adjacent faux palm trees at varying
heights, with the tallest,proposed height of 64 feet. Imorder to create a "grove" of
palm trees to mitigate the visual effect of the proposed faux palms, the applicant
proposes to plant two (2) new live palm trees adjacent to the proposed facilities.
(25) At the September 6, 2006, Planning Commission meeting,. there was discussion
pertaining to apreviously-approved telecommunications facility disguised as a palm
tree at the adjacent property across Commercial Street. The applicant used this
facility as a point of comparison and indicated that the proposed facility would also
be a ground mounted facility disguised as a tree but that. the details used in this
Page 10
.Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
.October 2, 2006
Item No. 5
proposed installation would be amimprovement to the existing faux palm. A
conditional'use permit was approved in 1999 for the faux palm for a maximum: height
of sixty-two (62) feet, with the addition of a minimum of three (3) new palm trees at a
minimum height of forty (4D) feet within closeproximity of the faux palm. The
<request was to construct a new facility on an existing site. and did not include
complete reconstruction. on the property as is the case here..
(26) If the Commission approves the faux palms, staff recommends a minimum of two (2)
to four (4) live trees for every facility proposed in order to create a grove as a
backdrop to the facilities. In addition, since the previously-approved faux palm
,across Commercial Street required thepew palm trees tohave a minimum height of
',forty (40) feet, staff recommends the,proposed trees to have a similar height.
Therefore, staff has included a condition of approval. for the addition of a minimum
of four (4) new palm trees with a minimum. height of forty (40} feet if developed.
(27) Although both proposals meet the stealth criteria of the Zoning Code, the success of
the facility,is dependent on an appropriate setting.,Both proposals would
significantly;impact the visual aesthetics of the area since (t would be visible from
the Riverside Freeway, La Palma Avenue, and Anaheim Boulevard. Although staff
continues to recommend a stealth building mounted facility, of the alternatives
proposed, staff believes the two. (2) proposed faux;paims are better suited to lessen
the visual impact on the surrounding area. The varying heights of theproposed
monopalms and additional palmtrees to be planted adjacert to the facilities
produces,a grove of palms and a more realistic visual background rather than a
tand of,pine 4rees in he area
1(28) Since the September 6, 2006, Planning Commission meeting, the applicant has not
submitted a proposal for abuilding-mounted facility, or provided an explanation. as
to the reason for the inability to erect a stealth building-mounted facility as
:recommended by the Commission. Staff continues to encourage facilities that are
designed to minimize its visual impact and are compatible with existing .architectural
elements, building materials, and other site characteristics. The prevailing thought
is that alternatively designed facilities through architectural .enhancements, such as
clock towers and obelisks, to existing buildings are available which could-enhance
the City's streetscapes rather than reproduce a product that is marginally: effective at
looking natural. Staff. continues to believe there are opportunities for stealth
building-mounted facilities to be integrated in the proposed construction of Phase 2
#or the industrial office park. Staff continues to recommend that the applicant
explore other alternatives to provide abuilding-mounted installation either on- or off-
-ste, and therefore, staff recommendsa continuance of this request to redesign the
facility consistent with the previously-approved facility.
fINDINGSr
(29) .Before the Planning 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:
(a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the
Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses
- Permitted) of Section 10.66.04D (Approval Authority);
Page 11
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 5
jb) That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land .uses br he growth. and
development of the area in which it is proposed to be located;
{c) .That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area
or to the health and safety;
<(d) That the. traffic generated by the use. will not impose an undueburden 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 health and safety of the bitizens bf the City of Anaheim.
RECOMMENDATION:
(30) 'Staff recommends hat,'unless additional or cohtrary information is received during
the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including
he evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and. written evidence presented
at the public hearing, the Commissioh continue this item to the October 30, 2006,
':meeting for the applicant to work with staff to redesign the telecommunications
`facility topropose 8 stealth building mounted #acility thatis similar in height to the
previously-approved telecommunications facility.
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SUBMITTED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS
ACTING AS AN INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE AND ARE RECOMMENDED FOR
ADOPTION BY'fHE PLANNING COMMISSION iN THE EVENT THIS PERMITIS APPROVED.
Development Proposal A =Faux Pine:
1. That this telecommunications facility shall be limited to no more that two (2)
telecommunicatiorts'carriers.''Each carrier shall be limited to a maximum of three (3)
'sectors with no more than four{4) panel antennas on each. sector for a'totaf of twenty-
`.four (24) antennas bn he faux pine and accessory ground-mounted equipment.. The
: antennas shall beTmited to an operating center height of forty-eight (48) and sixty -
four (64) feet and an overall height of sixty-six (66) feet. No additional antennas shall be
`:permitted without the approval of the Planning Commission. Said information shall be
specifically. shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
2. That the round-shaaed trunk of the faux pine shall be painted brown to appear similar
to a pine tree trunk in order to blend with 4he live pine trees. The antehna'arrays and
individual panel antennas shall be finished and painted to match. the faux pine. Said
information shalt. be specifically shown on theplans submitted by building permits.
3. :That the walls of the ground-mounted equipment enclosures shall be protected from gtaffiti
;opportunities. by the use of plant materials sudh asminimum 1-gallon size clinging vines
,: planted on maximum 3-foot centers or tall shrubbery.. Said information shall be specifically
shown on the plans submitted forbuilding permits.
Page 12
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2005
..Item No. 5
4. That all equipment, including supply cabinets and power meter shall be screenedfrom the
public right-of-way. In addition the cable connecting. to the equipmentshall be,underground
and shall not be visible to the public Said information shall be specifically shown on plans
submitted for building permits.
5. That the Operator shall ensure that. its installatioh and choice of frequencies will not interfere
with jn the BOO MHz radiq frequencies requiredlby the City of:Anaheim to provide adequate
r spectrum capacity for public safety and related purposes:
6. That before activating this facility, the Operatorshall submit to apost-installation test to
confirm that the facility does notinterfere with the City of Anaheim's Public Safety radio
equipment. This test shall be conducted py the Communications Division of the Orange
County Sheriff's Department or a Division approved contractor at the expenseof Operator.
7. That the Operator shall provide a 24-houctelephone number to the Planning Services Division
(to be forwarded to the Fire and Police Departments) to which interference problems may be
reported, and shall resolve aII interference complaints within 24 hours.
' 8. That the Operator shall ensure that any of its contractors, sub-contractors or agents, ocany
other user of the facility, shall comply with. the terms and conditions of this permit.
9. That should this telecommunications facility be sold, the Planning Services Divisions shall be
notified within 30 days of the close of escrow.
q0. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the,applicant's expense.
Landscape andlor landscape screening of al(pad mounted equipment shall be required and
shall be specifically shown. on plans submitted for building permits.
11. That portion of the property being leased to the telecommunications providershall be
permanently maintained in an orderly fashion through .the provision of regular landscaping
maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24) hours
c from time of occurrence.
12. That. no signs, flags, banners, or any other form of advertising shall be attached. to the
faux pine tree.:,
13. That. landscape plans indicating a total of two (2) pine trees with a minimum height of
twenty-five,(25) feet and understory landscaping shall be,provided adjacent to the
proposed faux,pine. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted
forsbuilding permits. Any decision by staff regarding said plans may be appealed to the
Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. Once planted, the
trees and landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy condition.
14. That the subject property hall be developed substantially in accordance with the plans and
specifications submitted do the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plahs are on file
with. the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 4 and as conditioned herein.
15. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of
this resolution, v/hichever occurs first, Condition Noa t, 2, 3, 4, t-0, and 13, abpve mentioned,
Page 13
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
.October 2, 2006
Item No. 5
shall be complied with. Extensions of further#ime to complete said conditions may be granted
' in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
16. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 6, 7, and 14; above
mentioned, shall be complied with.
17. That timing for compliance withbonditions of approval. may be amended by the Planning
Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that
satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with
`the Anaheim Municipal Code and (iii) the applicant hasdemonstrated significant progress
toward establishment of he use dr approved development.
18. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request onlyto the
extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal. Zoning Code and any other applicable City,
State and Federal regulations: Approval does not include anyaction or findings as to
::compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or
requirement.
Development Prooosai B -Faux Palm:
1. That there shall be a maximum of two (2) telecommunications facilities disguised as
palm trees. That each of the proposed facilities shall be limited to a maximum of three
(3) sectors with no more than four (4) panel antennas on each sector for a total of
twelve (12) antennasfor each facility onahe faux palm and accessory ground-mounted
equipment. The antennas shall be limited to an operating center height of forty-eight
(48) and fifty-eighf (58) feet and an overall height of fifty four (54) and sixty four (84)
feet. No additional antennas shall be permitted without the approval of the Planning
.Commission. Said information'shall bespecifically shown on plans submitted for
building permits.
2. .That the round-shaped faux palms trunk shall be painted brown to appear similar to a
live palm tree trunk in order to blend with the four (4) live palm trees. The antenna
arrays and individual panel antennas shall be finished and painted green to match the
artificialpalm fronds attached to the structure. Said information shall be specifically
shown on the plans submitted by building permits.
3. That the walls of the ground-mounted equipment enclosures shall be protected from graffiti
opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum 1-gallon size clinging vines
`planted on maximum 3-foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically
shown onahe plans submitted for'building permits.
4. That all equipment, including supply cabinets and power meter shall be screened from the
public right-of-way. In addition the cable connecting to the equipment shall be underground
and shall not be visible to the public. Said information°shall be specifically. shown on plans
submitted`for building permits.
5. That the Operator shall ensure that its installation and choice of frequencies will not interfere
with in the 800 MHz radio frequencies required by the City of Anaheim to provide adequate
'- "` spectrum capacity forpublic safety and related purposes.
Page 14
StafF Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 5
6. That before activating this facility, the Operator shall submit to apost-installation test to'
confirm that the facility does not interfere with the Citybf Anaheim's Public Safetytadio
,equipment. This test shall be conducted by he Communications Division!of the Orange
.County Sheriffs Department or a Division approved contractor at the expense bf Operator.
7. That the Operator shall provide a 24-hour telephone number to the Planning .Services Division
(to be'forwarded to the:Fire and Police Departments) to which interference problems maybe
reported, and shall resolve all interference complaints within 24.hours.
8. That the Operator shall. ensure that,any of its contractors; sub-.contractors or agents, or any
other user of the facility, shall comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
9. That should this telecommunications facility be sold, the Planning Services Divisions shall be
.notified within 30 days of the close bf escrow.
10. That any required relocation of City electrical. facilities shall be at the applicant's expense.
Landscape and/or landscape screening of all pad mounted equipment shall be required and
shalt be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
11. That portion of the property being leased to the telecommunications provider shall be
permanently maintained iri'an orderly fashion through the provision. of regular landscaping
maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24) hours
from time of discovery.
12. That no signs flags, banners, or any other form of advertising shall be attached. to the
fauxpalm trees.
13. That final landscape plans indicating a total of at least four (4) palm trees with a
minimum height of forty (40) feet and understory landscaping shall be provided
adjacent to the proposed faux palms. Said information shall. be specifically shown on
plans submitted for building permits. Any decision by staff regarding said plans may
be appealed to the Pianntog Commission. as a Reports and Recommendations item.
Once planted, the trees and landscaping shall be maintained to a healthy condition.
14. That the subjectproperty shall be developed substantially in accordance with the plans and
specifications submitted tq the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file
with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 4 and as conditioned herein.
15. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of
this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, and 13, above mentioned,
shall be complied with. Eztensidns of further time to complete said conditions may be granted
in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
t6. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 8, 7, and 14, above.
mentioned, shall be complied with.
Page 15
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 5
17. Shat timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning
Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is`established that
satisfies he,original iritentandpurpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with
he Anaheim Municipal Code and (iii) the applicaht has demonstrated significant progress
toward establishment of the use or approved development.
18. That approval of this application:constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the
extent that it complies with the Anaheim MunicipaLZoning 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 othecapplicable ordinance, regulation or
requirement.
Page 16
Clty Of AnaheiM Attachment -Item No. 5
~~~~~~~~ H.yE~~i~d~~~~
www.awheim.nel
July 7, 2005
Aspen Associates Telecom
ATTN: Amit S. Patel
1223 Federal Avenue, Suite 212
l,os Angeles, California 90025
Re: Development Request - T-Mobile Wireless Temporary Telecommunications
Facility (1075 North Patt Street, Anaheim, CA 92801)
Dear Mr. Patel:
I am writing this letter to inform you that T-Mobile's proposed temporary
telecommunications facility at the above referenced property, consisting of a fifty-foot
high "portable" tower with radio cabinets and related cables and connections, has been
approved by the City of Anaheim's Planning Departrnent for a period of eighteen (18)
months to expire on December 7, 2006. The future permanent facility will need to be
approved by the Planning Department prior to this date. Please be advised the facility's
design and location has been approved according to the documents provided to us on
July 1, 2005 and as attached.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (714) 765-5139, extension
5804.
Sincerely,
(~ ~_
John Ramirez
Associate Planner
Attachments
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
P.O. 0ox 3222
Anaheim, Calftdrnia 92003
TEL (774) 765-5139
Attachment -Item Mo. 5
~SPEN f~SS®CIATES ~ELEC®
1223 PEnEAA.L A VENUE, SUITE 2 t 2
LOS ANGELES , C A L I F O R N I A 9 0 0 2 5
~(3f0)691-5360 8(875)425-8902
A P A T E L ac A S P E N A S S O C I A T E S C O M
July 1.,.2005
Mr. John P. Ramirez
Associate Planner
Planning Department
City of Anaheim
200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162
Anaheim, CA 92805
RE: DEVELOPMENT REQUEST
LA02477A (SM078) - T-Mobile Wireless Telecommunications Facility
1075 N. Patt Street, Anaheim, CA 92501
Dear Mr. Ramirez:
Aspen Associates Telecom is pleased to submit this Development Request on behalf of
blcm Development Company, LLC ("BICM") and T-Mobile USA, Inca ("T-Mobile") for the
relocation of the T-Mobile wireless telecommunications facility located at 1075 N. Patt Street in
Anaheim, California, 92801 (owned by North Anaheim Associates, LLC).
As you aze aware, BKM is currently in the process of redeveloping the property subject
to plans and proposals previously and separately submitted to the City of Anaheim. A necessary
step of the redevelopment is the demolition of several existing. structures on the property,
including the building upon which the T-Mobile wireless antennas and support structure aze
located. This. DevelGpment Request is fora "temporary use permit" or equivalent,. consenting to
the relocation of the existing T-Mobile facility to an interim location to allow for the demolition
and redevelopment of the applicable areas of the property, without extended interruption of the
valuable wireless services currently provided by this T-Mobile facility to the community. The
permit is requested for such time (i.e., approximately eighteen months) as required for the
construction of the planned complex on the property including a permanent location for the T-
Mobile wireless facility.
The proposed temporary facility consists of a "portable" tower approximately fifty feet in
height (as compared to the fifty-five feet height of the existing structure), associated radio
cabinets,: and related cables and connections. To minimize interference with construction efforts
W W WASP ENASSOCIATES.C O M
of the planned development, the proposed facility will be located adjacent to an existing power
meter and cabinet and the required telco needs will be satisfied using a microwave dish
(approximately two feet wide) connecting to a nearby T-Mobile facility. Please find enclosed
the following exhibits illustrating the location and design of the proposed temporary T-Mobile
wireless facility:
1. Ptat Map with existing and temporary sites identified (approximately)
2. Aerial Map with existing and temporary sites identified (approximately)
3. Proposed temporary T-Mobile wireless facility site plan
4. Photo of proposed temporary T-Mobile wireless facility location
5. Three photos of the proposed temporary T-Mobile wireless equipment and structure
6. Photo of existing T-Mobile wireless facility
T-Mobile is prepared to install the temporary facility immediately upon approval and
issuance of the "temporary use permit" or equivalent by the City of Anaheim. The estimated
time required for installation and configuration of the temporary facility and removal of the
equipment shelter and antennas from the existing shelter is two weeks.. Demolition of the
existing facility and surrounding buildings will proceed immediately thereafter as part of the
master redevelopment plan.
Our goal is to expeditiously move the temporary facility to a permanent one acceptable to
the City of Anaheim. Since redevelopment of the property involves solicitation of other
businesses as tenants and/or buyers and incorporation of their needs, plans for the master project
are still under preparation and review. However, the planned permanent T-Mobile wireless
facility will be included into the overall design of the complex and in compliance with all City of
Anaheim (as well as applicable state and federal) requirements. and codes. Specifically, we
intend to incorporate the wireless facility architecturally into one of the new buildings similar to
the original facility. Fortunately, since both building and facility will be constructed together,
the final structures should reflect a uniform design rather than the `add-on' design of the original
facility. Our tentative schedule is for construction to commence by December 2005 with
building and facility completion by December 2006. We will submit a separate application for
the necessary land use entitlements for this permanent facility once a design is completed.
We would appreciate the opportunity to discuss the project further and/or address any
concerns or questions you may have. Please do not hesitate to contact me directly at (310) 691-
5360.
. S~inc'e'rle~ly,
' X"""'~
Amit S. Patel, Esq.
-2-
Item No. 6
sP 9a-1
DA4
RCL 61-62-fig (23)
CUP 2516
CUP 2759
CUP 3254
VAR 1951
GENERAL ELECTRIC
~ SP 94-1
RCL 61.62'-69 (23)
SP 94-1 CUP 2759 /
RCL fi1D 2469 (64) VAR 1951 ~NV~
LPP P/ A ~
' SP 94-i -
~
4
SP ea-I RCL 6
2
69 (36)
D ~ CUP 3844
--62.69 (fi4)
:L fi1 ~ VAR 4064
CUP 36bb
Aura eoov O AUTO
&PAINT < REPAIR
f
n
m
SP 99-1
DA4 m
RCL 6h62E9 (541 m
cuP 3004 .~
cuP zsfi6
SMALL IND. 6P 941
FIRM
SP 94-1
I DA4
CL 61-fit-69
SP 94-1 SMALL INC
DA4 FIRM
JCL 61-fit-fig (73)
VAR 3479
CUP 1603
VAR 3344
SELF-STORAGE sP??-1
SP 994
OA4
RCL 61-62.69
FIRM
SP 94-1
DA4
TTM 16943
RCL 2006-0[1179
RCL 61-62-69 (36)
cuP Zoos-oslos
CUP 3fi69
.INDUSTRIAL
FIRM
SP 94-1
SMALL IND.
FIRMS
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE ALPHA (NORTHEAST AREA) REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
Reclassification No. RCL2006-00179 Subject Property
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05109 Date: October 2, 2006
Tentative 1`ract Map No. 16943 Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 150
Requested By: TR LA PALMA REAL ESTATE , LLC
3530-3540 East La Palma Avenue and 1010-1040 North Grove Street
10131
~,
SP 94-1
DA4
61-62-fig (32)
ID. FIRMS
a
RCLE
e
7
¢P
4~
~e
2
L
' ye SP 88-3
o O T-SPN 2006-00034
~° Q RCL 66-67-14
( ~
~ RCL 58-59-112
4
° CUP4119
ti CUP 3410
p CUP 3371
`~ CUP 3368
c~i CUP 3215
~
e VAR 4103
FSP 2002-00008
(VAR 4134)
COMMERCIAL RETAIL
ER
SHOPPINJG
/
~
o:
Reclassification No. RCL2006-00179 Subject Property
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05109 Date: October 2, 2006
Tentative Tract Map No. 16943 Scale: 1" = 200'
O.S. No. 150
Requested ey: TR LA PALMA REAL ESTATE , LLC
3530-3540 East La Palma Avenue and 1010-1040 North Grove Street 10131
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 6
6a. - CEOA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION ,
MONITORING PLAN NO. 140 (READVERTISED) (Motion)
6b. RECLASSIFICATION N0: 2006.00179 - ,:(Resolution)
6c. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion)
6d. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05109 (Resolution)
6e. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 16943 (Motion)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
- (1) This 5.2-acre,parcel has a frontage of 410 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue, a
maximum depth of 800 feet, and is located 270 feet east of the centerline of Grove Street
.::(3530 - 3540 East La Palma Avenue}.
REQUEST:
(2) .The applicant requests approval of the following:
Reclassification No. 2006-00179 -request to reclassify the subject property from the SP
9d-1, D.A. 4 (Northeast Area SpecificPlan 94-1; Transit Core Area) to the SP 94-1; D.A. 4
(MU} (Northeast Area Specific Plan 94-1; Transit Core Area; Mixed Use Overlay) zone to
construct 312 single family attached units.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05109 -.request to construct a 312 unit, single family
attached condominium project with 39 Ifve/work units under authority of Code Section Nos.,.
18.32.030.040.0402 {Dwellings -Single-Family Attached), 18.32.030.080 and
18.32.030.120 with the following waivers:
(a) ` SECTION NO.18.40.060.030 Improvement of orivate'street. 56-foot wide street
with sidewalks and parkways onboth sides
required; 60-foot wide street with no sidewalk on
one side proposed).
(b) SECTION N0. 18.40.090 Sound attenuation for residential developments.
(65 dB CNEL required for recreational areas; 74
d6 GNEL proposed).
(c) SECTION NO.18.46.010.030 Maximum wall height. (Deleted).
Tentative Tract Map No. 16943 - Request to establish a 312 unf airspace attached. single
family residential condominium complex.
BACKGROUND:
(3) The subject site is currently developed with an industrial building. The property is zoned
SP 94-1, D.A. 4 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-,1; Transit Core Area) and is also
located within the Merged Redevelopment Project Area. The Anaheim General Plan
designates the site for Mixed Use land uses: The properties to the south and. west (across
Grove Street) are also designated for Mixed Uses; the,properties o the east (across the
railroad tracks) are designated for General Commercial land uses; and the,properties to the
north (across Lapalma Avenue) are designated for Non Residential Mixed Use land uses.
SR-RCL2006.00179ds
Page l
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
.item No. 6
(4) :Conditional Use Permit No: 3689 {to permit an indoor volleyball training center with waiver
of minimum. number of parking spaces) was approved by the Planning Commission. in
-1994. This entitlement is no longer necessary and a condition of approval has been added
4'td terminate this permit.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL:
(5) The applicant proposes to reclassify the subject property from the SP 94-1, D.A. 4
(Northeast Area Specific Plan; Transit Core Area) zone to the SP 94-1, D.A. 4 (MU)
(Northeast Area Specific Plan; Transit Core Area; Mixed Use Overlay) zone fn conformance
with the General Plan. ?he applicant also raquests approval of a conditional use permit to
construct a 312. unit single family attached condominium project with 39 live/work units.
The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the following information far he proposed 7-story (1
subterranean parking level; 2 parking and live/work unit levels above the subterranean
garage level, and 4 residential floors above the 3 parking levels) condominium complex:
Development Standards Proposed Project MU Overlay Zone
Standards
Site Area ' 5.2 acres ' 3 acres
Number of dwelling units/density 312 dwelling units
726 s:f:/unite 60 d.u./acre 312 units max.
60 d.u./acre
Re wired commercia6 floor area -0.1 FAR° 0.1 FAR
.Recreation/Leisure Area: '288 s.f. per;unit
89,859 s.f.:total 200 s.f. per unit
62,400 s.f. total
Live/work units
(6) ..:..The site,pian further indicates that the project is designed with a podium style 7-story
'-complex;(4-story residential complex constructed `over a 3-level parking structure).. The
buildings: will be separated byrecreatidnal courtyards do the podium. deck as shown in the
'' following site plan. The plan indicates the following information pertaining to theproposed
setbacks:
(7) "Plans also indicate 4-story residential buildings constructed. above the podium deck with
building to building setbacks ranging between 44 to 78 feet in the courtyards and 20-foot
wide corridorsbetween each domplex. 'Code requires a minimum bufldfng separation of 50
'feet in the courtyards ahd 30 feet for the corridors."'Code permits a modification of this
`-standard in connection with. the conditional usepermit.
Paget
:Setbacks Zonin Pro osed Re ufred
North (adjacent to La ----- 30 - 48 feet 20 feet
Palma Avenue
East (adjacent to Grove ----- 115 feet to Grove St.;' 5 feet at Grove St.
Street 5 to 8 feet to industrial None at industrial
South (adjacent to SP 94-1 12 feet None
industrial uses D.A. 4
West (adjacent to a ----- 60 feet 30 feet
railroad track
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item. No. 6
~ '' ~ &]Y@ 6llE[MABY
ecandory Eaiain9 l-ataxy Bulding ~~.vyyo~y
Vchln~lor Enhv im'ec Dalulm ana mYII
.IDOJUI m M aaaaan ®YabmB
im
ra a: ® 4~f ~ -Z ~. p. ~ .ate , ~~~
„'""..~
j ~,,. e
~p p. t 3 p - 2 = ~at'~m
9 'll 9 ~=
-nma u uw
r ~ ",~' , 4 ,~.
I I I I NI ®.
q. p ap ~I~ _p p .a q• ~\
Oh ~ ~ m
Priwte_Str__ ' __ _ ~ \ :
Site Plan
(8) The floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 2 - B) indicate one underground parking level, parking and 39
live/work units on the ground and second levels, and stacked units on the third to sixth
floors. The ground level floor plan. (Exhibit No. 3) shows the location of the`live/work units
along the La`Palma Avenue frontage and adjacent to the private streets. Parallel parking
will be provided in the private streets in front of the live/work units.
(9) The unit plans (Exhibit Nos. 9 -10) for the condominium units indicate a great room,
kitchen, bedrooms, bathrooms, and closets.'The unit,types are summarized as follows:
Plan'. No. of Units Living Area (sf) No. of Bedrooms
1 89 773 1 Bed
`2_ 112 1,124 2 Bed
3' , 24 1,144 1 Bedh
4 : 72 - 1,214 2 Bed
5`- 15 ' 1,505 1 Bed+toft
;Live/work units
(10) Vehicular access would be provided by one driveway on Grove Street and one main
driveway on La Palma Avenue. ' A 60 foot wide private streetis proposed with 5-foot wide
andscapedparkways on bothsdes, 28-foot wide street, 8-foot wide parallel parking
spaces, and 6-foot wide sidewalk;on one side adjacent to the live/work units. Nosidewalk
is'proposed adjacent to the railroad tracks. Code requires a 56 foot wide street with
idewalks on both sides of the street. The sfte plan:indicates-740 on-site parking spaces
within the three parking levels. !Due to variations in parking demand and unique needs of
mixed-use p~bjects,'vehicle parking requirements and the designof the;parking areas,
inoluding ingress and egress, are determined as part of the conditional. use permit process
based upon information contained in a parking demand studyp~epared by an independent
raffic engineer. The study indicates that. the minimum number of spaces to accommodate
the complex 1s 560 an-site spaces. Since 740 spaces are proposed, the parking demand
,would be exceeded by ] 80 spaces. For comparison purposes, he required parking for
mixed use developments within the Platinum Triangle Overlay Zone would be 568 spaces
Page 3
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 6
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 6
~. -If
I'q ~ ~
r ~~~~~~~~_~_~_~~.
. - - - - ~ ~----4~,~
"I-
6 .q
Sectional view of building
(14) .The landscape plans (Exhibit Nos. 20 - 24) indicate a mixture of 24- and 36-inch box trees.
arranged within the landscaped setback along the private street and interior;private
courtyards between the buildings.:: Trees and shrubbery arealsoproposed within the street
setback adjacent to La Palma Avenue and Grove Street. Code requires one 24-inch box
evergreen tree for every 20 feet of street frontage to be planted in the landscape setback
;adjacent to each public street. Alayered lendscaped heme is required to provide depth
and variety within the landscapedsetback. Code further requires that 50% of all shrubbery
be'a minimum of five gellon in size at the time of planting. In addition to the on-site
landscaping provided, the applicant will be required to landscape theparkways that will be
provided along the public street with a combination of gees and groundcover. The on-site
.property management would be responsible for maintaining the parkway andscaping. The
submitted plans comply with code for landscaping. Landscaping. on the,podium deck
.includes a decorative hardscapesurtace, water features, and raised planters with 24-inch
box Palm,.Orchid, Flame, Sweetshade, and Umbrella trees. As a recommended condition
of approval,: the applicant would be requiredto submit final detailed landscape plans for
staff review including detailed plans for the treatment of the podium deck.
(15) .Since this project is a transit oriented development, the landscape plan further indicates a
pedestrian plaza with a fountain, palm trees,;and decorative hardscape elements at the
northeast comer of the property adjacent to the railroad tracks.: The plan also shows S-foot
high block walls along the south. and west property lines adjacent to industrial uses, and 6-
foothigh decorative metal fencing along the east property line adjacent to the railroad
tracks in compliance. with code requirements.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(16) A Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND} was circulated to
,public agencies and.interested. parties on August 17,2006, fora 30-day comment period.
The NOI, Initial Study, and MMP analyzed environmental issues. associated with the
project, including: AestheticsNisual, Air QualRy, Biological Resources, Cultures Resources,
Geology and Soils, Hydrology and WatecQuality, Land Use and Planning, Noise,
Transportationlfraffic,;Utilities/Service Systems, and Cumulative Impacts. Based on a
review of hese issue areas, the Initial Study/MND concluded that through. project design
features and/or mitigation measures, all:impacts could be mitigated.
(17) Based on the analysis contained in the Initial Study for the proposed project, a copy of
which has been provided to the Planning Commission and is available for review in the
Planning [)epartment, tall finds that with the incorporation of mitigation measures set forth
in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. No. 140 and the project design features; no significant
environmental impacts would result from the proposed project and, therefore, recommends
that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the. Planning
Page 5
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
item No. 6
Commission that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of
the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Mttigated 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 thepmject will have a significant effect on the environment.
EVALUATION:
(18) The Anaheim General Plan designates the property for Mixed Use land uses. The
applicant proposes to construct a 312 unit single family attached condominium project with
39 live/work units at a density of 60 dwelling units per acre,`consistent with the type of
housing envisioned for this transit-oriented area. The General Plan Land Use Element
includes the following goals and poiicies'to encourage infill housing and mixed use
developments near transit centers:..
Goal 2.1:
'Continue to provide a variety of quality housing opportunities to address the City's diverse
housing needs.
Policies:
`i) .Facilitate new residential development on vacant or underutilized infill parcels.
''2) Facilitate new residential development in The PlatinumTriangle and Downtown.
3) Facjlitate the conversion of the City's. uhderutilized strip commercial areas into new
housing opportunity sites.-
4) Encourage the development and integratiohof residential land uses into mixed use
development where appropriate.
',5) Encourage a miz of quality housing opportunities in employment-rich and transit
aooess ibis' locations.
6) Ensure quality development through appropriate development standards and by
adherence to related Community Design Element'policies and guidelines.
GOAL 5.1:
Create and enhance dynamic, identifieble places for the benefit of Anaheim residents,
employees and'visftors.
Policies:;
1) :.Encourage mixed-use and commercial development that providesr
a) .Safe, protected places forpedestrians to walk;
b) Attractive surroundings;
c) Opportunities for social interaction;
d) "Comfortable places td si# and relax; and
e) Interpiaybetweeh the interior uses of bulldings and outdooractivities, such as
sidewalk cafes or?tastefully designed outdoor merchandise displays.
2) Facilitate the development of residential land uses into mixed-use areas to provide a
consumerand employment base for commercial and office uses.
3) Mixed-use end commercial centers should be physically linked with'adjacent residential
'neighborhoods.
4) Promote deuelopment4hat is efficient, pedestrian-friendly, and served by a variety of
transportation options.'
GOAL 7.1:
_. Address the jobs-housing telationship bydeveloping housing near job centers and
transportation facilities.
Policies:
Page 6
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 6
1)_, address the jobs-housing balance through the development of housing in proximity to
local job centers.
2) :;Develop housing that addresses the need of the. City's diverse employment base.
3) ;Promotenew residential development within Downtown, The Platinum Triangle, and
.other mixed-use districts, in accordance with the Land Use Plan.
4) Continue o pursue infill residential development opportunities at mid-block locations
along the City's erterial streets as an alternative to underutilized commercial land uses.
(19) The applicanttequestsareclassification from the SP 94-1, D.A. 4 (Northeast Area Specific
Plan tJo. 94-1; Transit Core Area) to the SP 94-1,`D.A. 4 (MU).(Northeast Area Specific
Plan No. 94-1; Transit Core Area; Mixed Use Overlay) zone to construct a 312 unit single
.:family attached condominium project with 39 live/work units. The request for a residential
project and reclassification to the SP 94.1-D.A. 4 (MU) zone would be consistent with the
Mixed Use land use designation in the General Plan. The proposed mixed use zoning
ciassffication for this area would,complement and support the existing and proposed
.development in the Canyon area, the goals and objectives of the Merged Redevelopment
Project Area, snd ongoing City programs identified inAnaheim's Housing :Element.
(20) Waiver (a) pertains to required improvement of private street. Public Works Standard
Detail No. 162, pertaining to right-of-way design fora 2-lane Private (residential) Street,
requires a width of 56 feet to include parkways and sidewalks on both sides of the street.
Plans indicate a 60-foot wide private street with a sidewalk on one side of the street..Since
no pedestrian activity isanticipated on the east side of the street,(adjacent tothe railroad
tracks), Public Works Department. staff supports the applicant's. request for#his private
street standard waives The parkway and sidewalk improvements would tie installed by the
developer and privately maintained.
(21) Waiver (b) pertains to sound attenuation for residential projects. Code requires exterior
noise within common recreation. areas of any single family attached projecfto be
.attenuated to not exceed a maximum of 65 dB CNEL, (Community Noise,Equivalent Level).
The CNEL accounts forsingle event noise as part of a 24-hour time-weighted average.
Interior noise levels shall be attenuated to a maximum'of 45 dB CNEL. `Based on a noise
study prepared by Urban Crossroads dated March 24,2006, for he existing railroad track
along the east side of he property, the worst case unmitigated noise exposure would be
;approximately 74 d8 CNEL. Tp reduce exterior noiseJevels, theAedevelopment Agency is
in the process of creating a "Quiet Zone" at grade crossings near he site. The purpose of
a Quiet Zone is to eliminate the use of train. horns at each of the crossings, which is a large
contributorto the single-event noise levels generated,by the train.. The Agency will. be
,required to construct new vehicular and pedestrian barriers at each crossing. Since the
property has a narrow lot depth that would make it difficult to construct a condominium
,project without the need for this sound attenuation waiver,' and since the Agency proposes
to establish a Quiet Zone at,adjacent grade crossings,,and thereby further reduce sound
Tevels at the subject site, staff recommends approval of this waiver. With respect to interior
noise, the,applicant proposes to comply with the required 45 dB CNEL standard by
.installing double glazed windows with a maximum acoustical rating. With the appropriate
sound transmission control glass as identified in the sound study, the interior. noise levels
would comply with Code requirements.
(22) Waiver (c) pertaining to maximum fence height has been deleted subsequent to
advertisement because plans have been revised to comply with code.
_ (23) The applicant also requests a conditional use permit to construct a 312 unit single family
attached condominium project with 39 live/work units.'Mixed use projects are permitted in
the SP94-1, D.A. 4 (MU) zone, subject to the approval of a conditional_use permit under
authority of Code Section 18.32.040.0402.. The project would provide residential uses in
Page 7
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission.
October 2, 2006
:Item PJo. 6
the Canyon area as a means to create an active street life, enhance the vitality of
businesses, and reduce the need for automobile travel in this area. `In addition., the project
would provide additional housing options for residents who want to live near their workplace
:and/or near a transit center. Therefore,: staff recommends approval of this conditional use
permit request.
(24) The (MU) Overlay zone requires a minimum FAR of 0.1 (or 10% of floor area) for non-
residential uses, or as determined by conditional use permit. Plans indicate that the 39
"live/work units would occupy 1-0perceM of the overall flobrarea of the condominium
<complex in compliance with the minimum FAR requirement.
(25) As mentioned above, plansindicate building to building setbacks ranging between 44 to 78
'feet in the courtyards and 20-foot wide corridors between each complex: Code requires a
%:minimum building wall separation of 50 feet at the courtyards and 30 feet at the corridors...
Modification of this development standard is allowed in order to promote increased
pedestrian activity, provide for a unified street frontage, ensure private and light for
residential uses, provide for public spaces and promote compatibility with existing
development as outlined in Code Section 18.32.070.020. For comparison purposes, mixed
"use developments in the Platinum Triangle are required to provide minimum 40-foot wide
courtyards and 20 feet between separate buildings: Staff believes the'proposed building to
building setbackswould be adequate since the setbacks are comparable to similar mixed
use developments in the Platinum Triangle and would comply with thebuilding separation
requirements in the PTMU Overlay zone: Moreover, the buildings are well articulated;
adequateprivacyond light fs provided for the residential units; the complex would exceed
-'the amount of recreational space required by code;`and the project world achieve a good
project designed topreserve and enhance the area.
FINDINGS:
(26) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the
`Zoning Code, a modification maybe granted for the purpose of assuring that no property,
because of speciatcircumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly
enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinttyand zone.=The sole purpose of any
variance is to prevent discrimination'and none shall be approved which would have the
effect ofgranting a special privilege not shared by other similar properties.' Therefore,
before any variance is granted by the Commissibn, it shalt be shown:
{a) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such assize, shape,
topdgraphy, 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 otherproperties in identical zoning classification in the vicinity.`
(27) The Planning Commission may grant exemptions from all or any portion of the
requirements imposed by Code Section 18.40:060.020 "Dedication of Right-of-Way' in
accordance with the. procedures established in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) #or the
' processing of variances except that the findings set forth in Section 16.74.060 (Findings) of
Chapter 18.74 (Variances) shall not be required and provided that before any such
' exemption is grantedby the Planning Commission'it shall be shown that either.
-- (a) There is no reasonable relationship between the need for the required dedication and
improvements and the'type of development project on which such requirements are
imposed; or ''
Page 8
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006.
Item No. 6
(b), The cost of the rdquired dedication and improvements unreasonablysxceeds the
burdeh or impact created by the development project.
(28) .Before the Commission grantsany conditional use permit, it must make afinding of fact
hat the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
(a) ' That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is'authorized by the
Zoning Code, dais an unlisted use as defined in Subsectioh .030 (Unlisted Uses
Permitted) df Section 18.66,040 (Approval Authority);
(b) That the use will not adversely affecEthe adjoining land uses or the growth and
development dithd area in which it is proposed td be located;
(d) ` That the size and shape df the site for the use is adequate'to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental td the particular area
or to the health and safety;
(d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved td parry the traffid ih the area; and
(e) That the granting;df the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any,
' will hdtbe detrimental to the health and safety dithe citizens df the City of Anaheim.
(29) The State Subdivision Map Act (Gdvemment Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory
to include iRail motions`approving, or recommending approval of a tract map, a specific
fjnding that the proposed Subdivision together with its design. and improvement is
donsistent with the City's Gendral Plan.
Further, the law requires that the Commissidh make any of the following findings when
denying or recommending denial: df a tract map:
t.' That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans.
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is hot consistent with
applidable 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 dr wildlife
or their habitat.
6. That the design pf the subdivision dcthe type of improvements is likely to cause
serious public hdalth problems.
7. That the design of the subdivision drthe type of improvements will conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through. or use of property
within. the proposed subdivision."
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
Page 9
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 6
?the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented. at the
public hearing, the Planning Commissibh take the following actions:
" ' ja) Bymotion, approve a CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring Plan No. 140 based on the finding that potentially significant impacts have
been eliminated or reduced to a level considered less than significant; and that there
is no substantial evidence that the. project will have a significant effect on the
environment.
{b) , By resolution, approve Reclassification No. 2006-00179 to reclassify the subject
property from .the SP 94-1, D.A. 4{Northeast Area Specific Plan; Transit Cpre Area)
to the SP 94-1, D.A. 4 (MU) (Northeast Area Specific Plan; Transit Core Area; Mixed
Use Overlay) zone, by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and
conditions contained therein.
(c) By resolution, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05109 to construct a 312
unit single family attached condominium project with 39 live/work units; by adopting
the attached resolution including. the findings: and conditions contained therein.
{d} By motion;'aoprove Tentative Tract Map No<16943 to establish a 312 unit airspace
attached single family residential condominium complex based upon the attached
conditions of approval and findings that the design and improvement of the
subdivision are consistent withthe General Plan, and the site is physically suitable for
.the. type and density of the proposed development.
Page 10
[~~~]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2006--°"
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2006-00179 BE GRANTED
(3530 - 3540 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE)
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified petition for
Reclassification for real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described as follows:
Legal descripPion to be inserted.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of
Anaheim on October 2, 2006, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by
law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18,60 "Procedures", to hear
and consider evidence for and against said proposed reclassification 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 lts behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and
determine the following facts:
1. That the applicant proposes reclassification of subject property from the SP 94-1, D.A. 4
(Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1; Transit Core Area) to the SP 94-1, D.A. 4 (MU) (Northeast Area Specific
Plan No. 94-1; Transit Core Area; Mixed Use Overlay) zone.
2. That the Anaheim General Plan designates the property for Mixed Use land uses and the
proposed SP94-1, D.A. 4 (MU) zone is the appropriate implementation zone for this land use designation.
3. That the proposed reclassification of subject property is necessary and/or desirable for the
orderly and proper development of the community.
4. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does properly relate to the zones and their
permitted uses locally established in close proximity to subject property and to the zones and their permitted
uses generally established throughout the community because it would result in a residential project that is
consistent with the type of housing envisioned for the Canyon Area.
5. That *** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That. the Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal; and does hereby approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the
associated Mitigation Monitoring Program upon finding that the declaration reflects the independentjudgment of
the lead agency and that it has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration and together with any comments
received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments
received that there is no substantial. evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby
approve the subject Petition for Reclassification to authorize an amendment to the Zoning Map of the Anaheim
Municipal Code to exclude the above-described property from the SP 94-1, D.A. 4 (Northeast Area. Specific Plan
No. 94-1; Transit Core Area) zone and to incorporate said described property into the SP 94-1, D.A. 4 (MU)
(Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1; Transit Core Area; Mixed Use Overlay) zone based upon the following
conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of subject property in
orderto preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
CR\PC2006- -1- PC2006-
That prior to introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property or within one (1) year, whichever is
less, a preliminary title report shall be furnished to the Planning Services Division showing the legal
vesting of title, a legal description and containing a map of the property.
That the approval of Reclassification No. 2006-00179 is granted subject to the approval of Conditional
Use Permit No. 2006-05109, now pending.
That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed. request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal
regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the
request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution shall not constitute a rezoning of, or a
commitment. by the City to rezone, the subject property; any such rezoning shall require an ordinance of the City
Council, which shall be a legislative act, which may be approved or denied by the City Council at its sole
discretion.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all
of the conditions hereinabove set forth: Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or
unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any
approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to
the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to
the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in
delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION. was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
October 2, 2006. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of
the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution
in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-2- PC2006-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
the foregoing. resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on
October 2, 2006, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERSc
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS;
2006.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
SENIOR SECRETARY. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-3- PC2006-
[®f2,4FT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2006--"`
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION. FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05109 BE GRANTED
(3530 - 3540 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE)
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional
Use Permit to construct a 52-unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus and incentives for
certain. real property situated: in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as:
Legal description to be inserted.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold. a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on October 2,.2006, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Cade, Chapter 18.60, 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 request to construct a 312 unit single family attached condominium
project with. 39 live/work units is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim
Municipal Code Section Nos. 18.32.030.040.0402 (Dwellings.- Single-Family Attached), 1.8.32.030.080 and
18.32.030.120 with the following waivers:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.40.060.030
(b) SECTION NO. 18.40.090
(c), SECTION NO. 18.46.010.030
Imorovement of private street. 56-foot wide street
with sidewalks and parkways on both sides required;
60-foot wide street with no sidewalk on one side
proposed).
Sound attenuation for residential developments. (65
d8 CNEL required for recreational areas; 74 dB
CNEL proposed).
Maximum wall heioht. (Deleted)
2. That waiver (a) is hereby approved since no pedestrian activity is anticipated on the east
side of the street (adjacent to the railroad tracks) Public Works Department staff supports the applicant's
request for this private street standard waiver because there is no reasonable relationship between the need
for the required dedication and improvements and the type of development project on which such
requirements are imposed.
3. That waiver (b) is hereby approved since the property has a narrow lot depth that would
make it difficult to construct a condominium project without the need for this sound attenuation waiver, and
further since the Redevelopment Agency proposes to establish a Quiet Zone at adjacent grade crossings
and thereby further reduce sound levels at the subject site.
4. That waiver (c) is hereby denied since it has been deleted subsequent to advertisement.
5. That the proposed project is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and
maintains good overall project design.
Cr\PC2006-52 -1- PC2006-52
6. That the project would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and
development of the area in which it is proposed because the site plan is well designed with adequate
setbacks to the street and within the development.
7. 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.
8. That the granting of this conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, would not be
detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
9. That *** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal to construct a 312 unit single family attached condominium. project
with 39 live/work units; and does hereby approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the associated
Mitigation Monitoring Program upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead
agency and that it has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration and. together with any comments
received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any
comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the
environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does
hereby grant. subject Petition for 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 all existing driveway approaches on La Palma Avenue shall be removed and replaced with curb,
gutter, parkway landscaping., and sidewalk. A Right-of-Way Construction Permit shall be obtained from
the Public Works Department. Said ihformatioh shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building
permits.
2. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department
.Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that:
m Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious. areas,
maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero
discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas.
m Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area
Management Plan.
Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP.
m Describesthe long-term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMPs.
m Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long-term. operation and maintenance of the
Treatment Control BMPs, and
> Describes the mechanism for funding the long-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment
Control BMPs.
3. That prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shalC
Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and
installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications.
a ~ Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non-structural BMPs described in the
Project WQMP.
Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available
onsite.
e
` Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural
BMPs.
-2- PC2006-52
4. That all driveways shalt be constructetl with ten (10) foot radius curb returns as required by the City
Engineer in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115. Said information shall be specifically shown
on plans submitted for building permits.
5. That gates shalt not be installed across the driveway in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular
traffic in the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan
No. 475 and shall be subject to the review and approvaf of the Planning Services Division prior to issuance
of a building permit.
6. That the developer shall remove and/or relocate any traffic signal equipment or any other related item to
the traffic signal if the project requires street widening or modification of any driveways.
7. That plans shall. be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval in
conformance with the Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for the sign or
wall/fence locations.
8. That plans shalt be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and. approval showing
conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 4028, 436 and 470 pertaining to
parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained
in conformance with said plans.
9. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for storage uses.
10. That no compact parking spaces shall be permitted.
11. That an on-site trash truck turn around area shall' be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476 or
an approved alternative, which shall be shown on plans as required by the Department of Public Works,
Sanitation Division. Said information. shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
12. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works
Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said
Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily
identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from
graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimuml-gallorsize clinging vines planted on
maximum 3-foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said information shalt be specifically shown on the plans
submitted for building permits.
13. 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.
14. That the locations for future above-ground utility devices including, but not limited to, electrical
.transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices., etc., shall be shown on
plans submitted for building pennits. Plans shall also identify the specific screening treatments of each
device (i.e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.) and shall be
subject to the review and approval of the appropriate City departments.
15. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or
abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering
Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. A minimum of two (2) connections to public water
mains shall be required. A minimum clearance of ten (10) feet shall be provided between any sewer and
water lines. Any water line shall be located a minimum of five (5) feet from the curb line of the street.
Water looping inside the project shall be required.
16. That all existing. water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Services Standards
Specifications. Any water service andlor fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if
-3- PC2006-52
continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The
owner/developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line.
17. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the front setback area in a manner
fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault
shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shalF be installed to the
satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division outside of the front setback area in a manner fully screened
from all public street and alleys. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans and approved by
Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control Inspector.
18. That since this project has landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall
be installed and comply with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of Anaheim Municipal Code.
Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
19. That prior to submitting water improvement plans, the developer shall submit a water system master plan,
including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, for Public Utilities Water Engineering review and
approvaF. The master plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on-site water system to meet
the project's water demand and fire protection requirements.
20. That water improvement plans shall be submitted to the Water Engineering Division for approval and a
perfonnance bond in the amount approved by the City Engineer and in a form approved by the City
Attorney shall be posted with the City of Anaheim.
21. That prior to rendering water service, the developer shall submit a set of improvement plans for Public
Utilities Water Engineering review and approval in determining the conditions necessary for providing
water service to the project.
22. That prior to application for water meters, fire line or submitting the water improvement plans for approval,
the developer/owner shale submit to the Public Utilities Water Engineering Division an estimate of the
maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information
will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water
demands. Any off-site water system improvements required to serve the project shall occur in accordance
with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules and. Regulations.
23. That the property owner/developer shall provide the Ciry of Anaheim with a public utilities easement to be
determined as electrical design is completed.
24. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. Landscape
and/or hardscape screening of all pad mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on plans
submitted for building permits.
25. That the entire property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular
landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24) hours
from time of discovery.
26. 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.
27. That if required by the Urban Forestry Division of the Community Services Department, street trees shall
be installed, by the property owner, within the public rights-of-way adjacent to La Palma Avenue. The
size, type and number of trees shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Urban Forestry Division of the
Community Services Department. Said information shall be spec~cally shown on plans submitted for
building permits.
-4- PC2006-52
28. That all air conditioning apparatus and other roof and ground-mounted equipment shall be properly
shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent residential properties and the public right-of--way.
Such infomtation shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
29. That all dwelling units shall be assigned street addresses, and all private streets shalt be assigned street
names,. by the Planning Department.
30. That final landscape and fencing plans for the subject property shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval. Said plans shall show minimum 24-inch box size trees, shrubs,
groundcover, and clinging vines to be planted in layers and shall also show decorative hardscape
treatment within the central courtyard area. The landscape material selected shall be appropriate to the
width of either the parkway or the planter area. Any decision made by the Planning Department regarding
said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission. All trees shall be properly and professionally
maintained by the property owner to ensure mature,. healthy growth. Such information shall be specifically
shown. on the plans submitted for building permits.
3t. That the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05109 is hereby granted subject to the approval
of, and finalization of, Reclassification No. 2006-00179, now pending.
32. That the property owner shall submit a letter to the Planning Department requesting termination of
Conditional Use Permit No. 3689 (to permit an indoor volleyball training center with waiver of minimum
number of parking spaces).
33. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans. and specifications
submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with. the Planning
Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 26, and as conditioned herein.
34. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution,
whichever occurs first, Condition No. 2, above mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further
time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170.
35. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. i, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 27, 28, 29,
30 and 32, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said
conditions may be granted. in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
36. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 3 and 33, above-mentioned, shall be
complied with.
37. 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.
38. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon
a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent
and purpose of the condition(s), (fi) the modification complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and
(iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved
development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and
all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared
invalid,or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution,
and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
-5- PC2006-52
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related
to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or
prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay alt charges
shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this. application.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
October 2, 2006. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Zoning
Provisions -General" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and maybe replaced
by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY,. ANAHEIM. PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on October 2, 2006, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
2006.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-6- PC2006-52
City of Anaheim
~LAI~I~>[I~G ~>E~AI~')<'1~>E';I~t'lC
October 2, 2006
La Palma Real Estate LLC
160 Newport Center Drive, Suite 240
Newport Beach, GA 92660
Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of
October 2, 2006.
6a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
wviw.anaheimnel
6b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2006-00179
6c. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
6c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05109
6d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO: 1.6943
Owner: La Palma Real Estate LLC, 160 Newport Center Drive, Suite 240,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Agent: T & B Planning Consultants, 17542 East 17th Street, Suite 10D, Tustin,
CA 92780
Location:. This 5.2-acre parcel has a frontage of 410 feet on the south side of La
Palma Avenue, a maximum depth of 800 feet, and is located 270 feet
east of the centerline of Grove Street (3530 - 3540 East La Palma
Avenue).
Reclassification No. 2006-00179 -request to reclassify the subject property from the SP 94-
1, D.A. 4 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1; Transit Core Area) to the SP 94-1, D.A. 4
(MU) (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1; Transit Core Area; Mixed Use Overlay) zone.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05109 -request to construct a 312 unit single family
attached condominium project with 39 live/work units under authority of Code Section
18.32.030.120 with waivers of improvement of private street and sound attenuation in
residential projects.
Tentative Tract Map No. 16943 -Request to establish a 312 unit airspace attached
single family residential condominium complex.
ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and
MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to
establish a 312 unit airspace attached single family residential condominium complex and
does hereby approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the associated Mitigation
Monitoring Plan No. 140 upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment
of the lead agency and that it has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration and 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
209 South Anaheim Boulevard
P.O. Box 3222
Anaheim, California 92803
TEL (714) 765-5139
Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby determine that the proposed
tentative map, including its design and improvements, are consistent with the General Plan,
and the site is physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed development, and
does therefore approve Tentative Tract Map No, 16943, to establish a 312 unit airspace
attached single family residential condominium complex subject to the following conditions:
1. That the final map shalt be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and the
Orange County Surveyor and then shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange County
Recorder (Subdivision Map Act, Section 66499.40).
2. That the legal property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim
(Water Engineering Division) an easement twenty (20) feet in width for water service
mains and/or an easement for-large meters and other public water facilities.
3. 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 shall
include provisions for maintenance of private facilities, including compliance with approved
Water Quality Management Plan, and a maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall be
recorded concurrently with the final map.
4. That prior to issuance of the first building permit, excluding mode! homes, the final map
shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and the Orange County
Surveyor and then shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder
(Subdivision Map Act, Section 66499.40).
5. That prior to final map approval, all units shall be assigned street addresses by the
Building Division.
6. .That approval of this tract map is granted subject to the approval of Conditional Use
Permit No. 2006-05109, now pending.
7. That approval of this tract map is granted subject to the approval of Reclassification No.
2006-00179, now pending
8. That prior to final tract map approval, Condition Nos. 2, 3 and 5, above-mentioned, shall
be complied with.
9. 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.
Sincerely,
Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary
---- Anaheim Planning Commission
TTM16943_Excerpt
Attachment -Item No. 6
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
An Initial Study was prepared by the City of Anaheim (City) in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended, to evaluate the potential
environmental effects associated with implementation of The Crossing at Anaheim residential
development. The Initial Study assessed the project's potential for significant environmental
impacts for each environmental category listed in the City of Anaheim's adopted Environmental
Checklist Form. Mitigation measures were developed as needed to reduce potentially significant
effects of the project to a less than significant level. Based on the conclusions of the Initial
Study, the City intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the proposed
project.
The Initial Study was submitted to the State Clearinghouse, Governor's Office of
Planning and Research, and circulated for public review on August ZI, 2006. A Notice of Intent
to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated with the Initial Study. The Notice of
Intent was also mailed to property owners within 300 feet of .the project site [Note to City:
Please verify radius]. The 30-day comment period required by CEQA Guidelines Section
15073(b) concluded on September 19; 2006.
II. COMMENT LETTERS
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15074(b), prior to approving a project, the
decision-making body of the lead agency shall consider the proposed negative declaration or
mitigated negative declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process. The decision-making body shall adopt. the proposed negative declaration or mitigated
negative declaration only if it finds on the basis of the whole record before it (including the
Initial Study and any comments received), that there is no substantial evidence that the project
will have a significant effect on the environment and. that the negative declaration or mitigated
negative declaration reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis. The City
received a total of three comment letters during the public review period. These letters include
submissions from one state agency, one regional agency, and one special interest group. Copies
of the original comment letters are included on the subsequent pages. Each comment letter is
followed by a response from City staff. None of the comments made on the Initial Study, or
changes made to the Initial Study based on the comments, affect the original conclusions related
to potential environmental significance that were drawn in the Initial Study.
"_."" City ofAneheim The Crossing et Anaheim
PCa Services Corporation Sepkmber 2006
Page 1
STATE
PUBLIC l1TILfTiES COMMISSION
320lNEST 4"'STREET, SWTE She
LOS ANGELES, CA 90013
September 15, 2006
David See
City of Anaheim
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, CA 92805
Dear Mr. See:
Re: SCH~ 2006081 117; The Crossing at Anaheim
IOLD S G-94{Af?ZENEGGER, Govemo~
S '~
1a~ ;,~.
5 4;i` .
SEP 2006 - ~= r,.~~p "°
FiEC-.v::O ~'~
PLAN'N;NG '
OEPA%rNENT
.,~~
As the state agency responsible for rail safety within California, we recommend that any
development projects planned adjacent to or near the Southern California Regipnal Rail
Authority's (SCRRA) Olive Subdivision right-of--way be planned with the safety of the rail
corridor in mind. New developments may increase traffic volumes not only on streets and at
intersections, but also at at-grade highway-rail crossings. This includes considering pedestrian
circulation patterns/destinations with respect to railroadright-of--way.
Safety factors to consider include, but are not limited to, the planning for grade separations for
major thoroughfares, improvements to existing at-grade highway-rail crossings due to increase in
traffic volumes and appropriate fencing to limit the access of trespassers onto the railroad right-of-
way.
The above-mentioned safety improvements should be considered when approval is sought for the
new development. Working witfi Commission staff early in the conceptual design phase will help
improve the safety to motorists and pedestrians in the City.
Please advise us on the status of the project. If you have any questions in this matter,. please contact
me at (213) 576-7078 or at rxmncnuaca.gov.
Sinc
I
i
k
Rosa uiioz, ~~J
Utilities Engineer
Rail Crossings Engirieeriiig' Sectioh - ~ °~ ' `
Co'nsuriidiProteetiori&SafetyDivisiori-'" ~' `'` ~"'''~''`'?`~~`
.r~ ... ._.....
C: RoB'Hari•is'SCRR"A '
_.
---- - Laurene-Lopez; SCRRA
Response to Comments
Date Received: September 15, 2006
Rosa Munoz, PE
Consumer Protection & Engineering Section
Public Utilities Commission
320 West 4°' Street, Suite 500
Los Angeles; California 90013
R);: SCH# 2006081117; The Crossing at Anaheim
Response
The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) recommended that the project take into
consideration the safety of the rail corridor with regard to both vehicular and pedestrian traffic
near the railroad right-of--way.. _ As discussed in Section 4., Explanation of Checklist
Determination of the Initial Study (specifically the Transportation and Traffic and Aesthetics
sections),. the proposed project includes design features that would assist in ensuring the safety of
the rail corridor. With respect to pedestrian traffic, the project proposes asix-foot fence along
the eastern edge of the project site which would separate the residential development from the
railroad right-of--way. The project also locates a private street nearest the rail corridor, which
would also act as a buffer near the railroad right-of--way, With regard to vehicular traffic,
Mitigation Measure TR-3 in the Initial Study requires the installation of a raised median along
East La Patma Avenue extending west from the train tracks to Grove Street in compliance with
the Federal Railroad Administration's Train Horn. Rule. Implementation of Phis mitigation
would assist in preventing back-up of traffic along La Palma Avenue near the railway that could
potentially influence rail safety.
Additionally, an area in the northeast corner of .the project site has been planned to
address future development of a pedestrian bridge that would connect the project site to the
Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station. This area is designated on Figure 2-5 of the Initial Study as
the Plaza area that would contain a water fountain feature. Although development of the
pedestrian bridge is not proposed as part of the project, it could be accommodated at this location
in the future.
'-"` City of Anaheim The Crossing al AnahNm
PCR Scrvi<es Corpororion September2006
Page 3
1't4Z5
~ ,~
b
m
®~°~°~ ~ U~~~\~
~
September 18, 2006 ¢-Q.~,~ L ;"
EtprIRD t)I=DIREC7DI7i 0
CS' P. ~~''
c, Dr;~ ~I
(
'~'
"'0""Otlro"" 1
,
David See
C:hainn;n;
City of Anaheim Planning Department
`nr"'r'O'"~"`''°
vi°rrra;r 200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, CA 92805
Palnr Gerr,:
fiirc:.lur
si??Cdn,pbal; Subject: Notice of intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
nnnclnr Crossing at Anaheim Project
L°u Ccrrea
D`'°"°r Dear Mr. See:
kiclinrd?..-Gixun
°i`°"°` The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) has reviewed
MiG,acl°"~" the above-mentioned document. The following comments are provided
Duecfar
for your consideration:
Cathy Green
DIR'rl°I' -
1. Orange County Metrolink Service
Gary,4I°nahan
Rirrcr°r
c.,,r;,;,,,,~Y Metrolink currently operates sixteen daily trips fo the Anaheim Canyon
u7ecYOr Train Station. adjacent to your proposed project. Service is expected
Cun Pdn9le to increase by two trains per day by the year 2020, and by ten
°f'°°'°r additional trains by the year 2030.
d4ignel A. Fulid°
Uimcl°r
6°.~~n Ri~achel 2. Future Infrastructure Imarovements at the Anaheim Canvon Station
Rirarror
?hark paver,
Ulrx-1°r The design and construction of the Crossing at Anaheim should not
preclude future construction of a second railroad track and platform,
JamesWSllm
Rvectnr as well as consider an allowance fora landing pad for a future
T pedestrian bridge. Please contact ..Metrolink directly foc._.additionat
homas W. W?ISnn
Rirecrnr comments.
Gragnry T. Winlerbalf°rn
°i"'°'°r If you have and questions regarding this transmittal, or need further
Clndv Cnnn information, please contact me at (714) 560-5683 or via a-mail at
Ga~mm°r,
Ea-OlfiGo Member
clarwood.@octa.net.
;Ffl£F EXECURVF_CFFICE Sm
Frlhur T. Leahy ~
J
::hie(Ex°cu!iva Olficer ~
"
l.
Charles Larwood
Section Manager, Corridor Studies
c: Abbe McClenahan, OCTA
Orange County Transportation Authnrify
550 South hfain Street / P.O. Qox 14184 /Orange /California 92863-1.564 / (i 14) 566-OCTA !6282)
to Comments
Date Received: September 18, 2006
Charles Larwood
Section Manager, Corridor Studies
Orange County Transportation Authority
S00 South Main Street/P.O. Box 14] 84
Orange, California 92863-1584
RE: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Crossing at
Anaheim Project
Resaonse
Item No. l of Orange County Transportation Authoritys (OCTA) letter notes the number
of existing Metrolink trains that pass through the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station adjacent to
the project site as well as the number of future projected trains. The comment is noted. This
information does not change the original conclusions made in the Initial Study related to
potential environmental significance with regard to noise and groundboume vibration.
Item No. 2 states that the project should not preclude the .construction of future
improvements to the Anaheim. Canyon Metrolink Station including a pedestrian bridge that
crosses the project site. The project would not preclude the construction of future improvements
to the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station including a pedestrian. bridge. An area in the
northeast corner of the project site has been designated for the future .development of a
pedestria~~ bridge that would connect the project site to the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station.
This area is designated on Figure 2-5 of the Initial Study as the plaza area that would contain a
water fountain feature. Although development of the pedestrian bridge is not proposed as part of
the project, it could be accommodated at this location in the future.
--~° City afAnnheim The Crossing nt Annhcim
PCR Services Corpamtion Seplnmber 2006
Page 5
C'C A
P.l). Box 54132
Irvine, C.A 92619-4132
www.ccrua.wm
California Cultural 12esource Preservation p+lliance, Inc.
An alliance of American Indian and scienti5c communities working for
the preservation of archaeological sites and other cultural resources.
September ].9.2006
Mr. David See
City of Anaheim Planning Department
200 South Anaheim Boulevazd
Anaheim, CA 92805
Re: Notice of Intent to of the Initial Study(Mitigated Negative Declazation, Initial Study, The Crossing at
Anaheim (August 2006)
Thank you for the opportunity to review this document. The planned mitigation and protection provisions,
CR-1 and CR-3 are for the most part consistent with our recommendations and standard practice. They
should be appropriate for routine measures as well as most unanticipated occurrences. However, since no
archaeological survey of the proposed construction site has been possible due to pavement covering the
azea, and since the 5+ acres to be developed aze in an area deemed to be moderately sensitive
archaeologically and for human remains, we request that should important or extensive cultural remains be
revealed, where possible; every effort be made to cap the site and preserve it or portions of it under open
space or paved areas incorporated into the development. Preservation should be considered as the first
and preferable option when dealing with cultural resources. It is also frequently the most economical
option for the developer.
The CCRPA is pleased to work with the City of Anaheim on cultural resource issues. Please let us know
if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Virginia Bickford
Secretary; CCRPA
on behalf of the Board of Directors
Response to Comments
Date Received: September 19, 2006
Virginia Bickford
Secretary on behalf of the Board of Directors
California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance, Inc.
P.O. Box 54132
Irvine, Califomia 92619-4132
RE: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Crossing at
Anaheim Project
Response
The California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance, Inc. (CCRPA) commented that
since no archaeological survey of the proposed construction site has been possible due to
pavement covering the area, and since the ~+ acres to be developed are in an area deemed to be
moderately sensitive archaeologically and for human remains, should important or extensive .
cultural remains be revealed, where possible, every effort should be made to cap the site and
preserve it, or portions of it, under open space or paved areas incorporated into development.
Mitigation Measures CR-I through CR-3 were recommended in the Draft Initial Study to ensure
that potential adverse impacts related to cultural resources would be reduced to a less than
significant level. Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-3 have been revised as follows to address
the request of the CCRPA:
Measure CR-1: After the removal of the pavement currently covering the project site,
a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the Applicant and approved by
the City of Anaheim to perform a site inspection of the ground. beneath the
pavement. This inspection shall include a survey of exposed ground surfaces,
and may include sample screening of sediment disturbed by the parking lot
removal and limited sub-surface testing if deemed appropriate by the qualified
archaeologist. If archaeological resources are identified, the archaeologist
shall have the authority to halt constmction within the immediate area and
assess the find. Should important or extensive archaeological remains be
revealed where uossible every effort shall be made to cap the area and
preserve it or portions of it under open space or paved azeas incorporated into
the development. If no archaeological resources. are identified as a result of
this sampling effort, a qualified archaeologist should still be retained to
monitor all subsurface excavation associated with this project. The
archaeologist will prepare a report summarizing the results of the investigation
including documentation and significance assessment of those cultural
resources encountered, if any. A copy of the report shall be provided to the
City of Anaheim and the Applicant. The resources and. a copy of the report
shall be deposited in an accredited curation facility.
"" "' Cily aCAnaheim The Crossing at Anaheim
PCIt Services Co[pom[ion Sepkmber 2006
Page 7
Response to Comments
Measure ClZ-3: If human remains are unearthed during construction activities, State
Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance
shall. occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to
origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. if
the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has
24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The
NAHC will identify the person(s) thought to be the Most Likely Descendent
of the deceased Native American; who will be consulted with respect to
determining the most appropriate course of action for managing the remains.
Everv effort shall be made to cap the area and preserve it, or portions of it,
under open space or paved areas incorporated into the development as
appropriate.
The revisions reflected above do not constitute substantial revisions that would alter the
outcome of ttre environmental analysis or require recirculation of the document (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15073.5).
"~" ~' City afAmheim The Crossing at Anaheim
PCR Services Corpomlian September 2006
Page 8
SOUTHENN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION Of
GOVERNMENTS
Main Offlce
878 West Seventh Street
12th floor
September 25, 2006
Mr. David See
City of Anaheim, Planning. Department
200 S. Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, CA 92805
ti i~+
.~
SEP 200fi
RECEIVED
P~LP4laNlNG
RFfiF47di
Los Angeles, Callfornla RE:. SCAGClearinghouse No. 120060573The Crossing at.Anaheim
90017-3435
Dear Mr. See:
[(273)236-7800
f(213123CrIE25 Thank you for submitting The Crossing at Anaheim for review and comment.
As areawide clearinghouse for regionally significant projects, SCAG reviews the
V+s'+++xa9~Cm8aV consistency of local plans, projects and programs with regional plans. This
activity is based on SCAG's responsibilities as a regional planning organization
Offkera: Prtsidenc Yvonne 0. BmYe Los
AngtlesWlmlY•hialMePaevuenClary uviN. pursuant to state and federal laws and regulations. Guidance provided by
sang=mama°m~mlv•s~°ndylanP,le<"I: these reviews is intended to assist local agencies and project sponsors to take
AiMaN Oimn, lake Final • Immediak Pml
Pfal^¢nC,n^iyn°myPmlNcesmm¢ actions that contribute to the attainment of regional goals and. policies.
Impnlal County: Vltmf (aMlly, Imyetlal
mumy -las fdneY, fl f<mm
lm Angeles County: Yaonne B. Rule, las We have reviewed The Crossing at Anaheim, and have determined that the
Angeles[wnry•y¢vYafmlavMy.LaAngeles ro osed Proect is not re ionall si nificant er SCAG Inter ovemmental Review
[aunty dim AldNgePManhalpn Bmth•Hafry P P 1 9 Y 9 P 9
Baldwin, San Layd¢f•Pam Bw.Aem (mrtas• (IGR) Criteria and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
ivdd (amptell, BmWnl • kny (Mews, Las
Angelea • sMn ca:fml. Ea HaBm "=Iq"° • (Section 15206). Therefore, the proposed Project does not warrant comments at
Malgar¢a (IoM, Fosemea0 Uew Navlmi,
Paramvum-Mlle Dliptnq Palmdale •ludY this fime. Should there be a change in the scope of the proposed Project, we
BimbP.Inglearvad•NaeuabeBM.luny0eash•
Bavld Lafiry pvwney~Lltfultelli,laAngele would appreciate the opportunity to review and wmment at that time.
• VkMy Lteuel, La Angeles • Ran La1WP,
(udahyknite NaBn, lot MgNes•ItadvrcUall,
mmymn•AnMw.Hantr.a:~a-MSinalnc A description of the proposed Project was published in SCAG's August 16-31,
la hngeks •7anla0ange.(aAfgNm•PaNa
lansa..Pnyl NawaMa, imm~m•Pam 2006 Intergovernmental Review Clearinghouse Report for public review and
O'(nnnoL Sanla Mmltn • Alei Pad'dla, lm
Anyeln•Bmmld Patls,los Mgdn•dn Ynry, Comment.
[m An9Ma - Ed BeKS. luv Angela • BIII
Romndahl, tea Angeles ~ Brelg Smllh, lvs
"ng°'at •,um Bytrs. w.°"°' • Pa"',albnl. The project title and SCAG Clearinghouse number should be used in all
ANamNa • Mite leg Svmh Pasadew • ivnM
A=y«, Wanga. t"n9 Beatls Amoniv correspondence with SCAG concerning this Project. Correspondence should be
VAMmigvw. la Anyel¢a • Uennis Vyaihbum, ~ -
(autaaas.MM ran. ~ Ngeie+_ N=m A -sent to the atteFltion of the Clearinghouse Cboraih3toi•. If you have a_ny questions,
wesam, b., lca Angna • emni: one. la' Please contact me at (213},236-1851`. Thank ydu:
Angeles
Oaange [vunry: [h:u NaAY, Umnge (wnay• ' -
^eiaUne Barnes la Palma • )dm Amman.
Brea dvu Bmc, IUUN •bI A:°wR Buma PaM Sincerely,
- AI¢Aam (hareq Awhelm - Uebbie fool,
Nunlingtvn Beath • ledle Baiyle. NewPOn
Bexh • ANIaN Blacn, fate lamsl • hol41aa", ~~
layuni Niguel•Ab:UynnPw,tvs Mdmilaf /" -~
ANeaslde Caump.le051w¢, AivenWe Cvumy '/mil//(A/.
. dhvmu BuMley, take Elsinore - tlonnle VERNE JONES '
fllMingec Mnenv Vallry - Avn lmnidge.
R"enlde • L,eq R.M. °"'""' olY • A°" Plannin Technieian '
Aahnkdemxuln g
son Beiwldina mmflY: Luy BYBI. son Intergovernmental Review - .... ~ - -
BemaNinv (mm:y • Wwseme PoI=; Aanfaw • ~ .
Paul fefwA IACmskif • le My Gatla, Grand -~ - ~ ~ - ~ - -
lenaa •TmJa¢pn,kweatAVde Vallry•tarty ,. - ..
Mnalhn,Nghlard dlebnah Avbensan; Rlalm ~ " "
•AlanWtmen Unlailo ~ ..
Venmta lounMludYMikh, Venlun[vwry• _,
G@n eetew.LlAl Valley d:atl Mnehaae, San '
Bueravemma-ionl Young, Po"Ilumeve
Ovvge (ounlY IfiwpelGlioe AYtbuellp
Lvu (on ®. Ca:mg al On age
RheNde (every iranymUtlvn
Cvmmlvbn: Avlun Lmre,lkmn
venture (aunty Lonspana6vn Doc #126803
(nm:n',sslvn:yNM. Milshvae, NOn{aM
5N:1 W tt
Attachment -Item No. 6
PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARILING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: 18.40.060.030
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING TO: Improvement of private street. f56-foot wide street with sidewalks and parkways on both
Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Cade 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 passible. 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.
answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances:
2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which
are in the same zone as your property? X Yes _ No
If your answer is "yes," describe how the 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? X Yes _No
If your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances:
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control. of the property owner (or previous
property owners)? X Yes _ No
EXPLAIN The location of the OCTA Metrolink train station and tracks adjacent to the property was
beyond the control of previous property owners.
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 otherwise expressly authorized by zone regulations governing subject property.
Use variances are not permitted.
Signature of Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date
CONDITIONAL USE PERMtTNARIANCE NO.
pEGEMBER 12, 2000
.484atclreveent - lteeve N®. 6
PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCEICODE WAIVER
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: 18.40.090
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING TOr Sound attenuation for residential developments. (65dB CNEL required for recreational areas: 74
dB CNEL proposed).
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 cr 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
pdvileges 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 fn matters such as size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings? X Yes _ No.
answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances:
2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which
are in the same zone as your property? X Yes _ No
If your answer is "yes," describe how the 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? X Yes _No
answer is "yes," describe the special circumstances:
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous
property owners)? X Yes _ No
EXPLAIN The higher CNEL is caused by the Orance County Transportation Authority tOCTA1 Metrolink train
station and tracks located near the orooertv.
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 properly in the same vicinity
and zone which is not otherwise expressly authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are
not permitted.
Signature of Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITA/ARIANCE NO.
DECEMBER 12, 2000
Item No. 7
I
RCL SSSn]
VAR 235]5
VP0.1119
WICKS
FLIRNRV PE
L
PCLS15Ll
ssu] wPlom ssu
p wPlam
_ sMPLL Of£ILE PARR
,•
E~
PCL S}~]
~
J
W
a ` > u,
dg a
o m>
z3
e
61
Y1
P
P651541
NP1W 9
~
Rns}a2 ~
' aciir~'
~
ns
Yv
Lllp
n sasu]
Pnsiu]
P0. sssw
sM.uf~laa
L
I
a RCl s1L-] I. yP1EL
sMAU wsusTnl
WOGOLANG GRNE
~J
P0.51Y]
~ G
3 w`
1
RCL 6G6T-id
RCL S}5Fi
CUP 2W6-95121
T-cuP zoos-04915
T-CUP 2004-04913
CUP 200}0gi10
T-CUP 2003-04]09
CUP 2001-043fi6
CUP 2W0-0626]
CUP 4014
CUP 3953
T-VAR 2002-0d514
VAR 2002-04499
VAR 3240
~L(CUP041 ])B02)
(VAR 31105)
LIVING STREAM
MINISTRY
/ice
VPq
Pnsssw
~. i
N ]¢G
RM< NP ¢l
c
UPIu
A
PLL ASYrt;
RLL5SS;9 M
P
V~¢¢e RCL IL
-TI-R 111
VAR;]90 a' Bm
'S!^.¢
wpsse vaavee {{
' IAPALNaLV0005 u'~E>~
amas
ouH~
_ *~
L~Y}
~ s Fs
P3 F
MMTYENi$
'~ w ou 4
~u°p lws
LIIPI]i -
ma53ssam
RLL 6&6i-14
PGL 5351.14
NPdp91
THE PMR
SMPLL INO. PIRM:
I _
uvsm]
PS 2
1LU acH rryy _
/M]1Pil ~ vµ 116] ~ ~ ryu ¢ qP4
_ @ ~ ~ ~O ~ ~~ cR II
~ o ~ ~ ~ `2w ~ vullsm - ~ t
r iL N
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05121
Requested By: LIVING STREAM MINISTRY
2411-2461 West La Palma Avenue and 1212 North Hubbell Way -
Living Stream Ministry and former Hubbell site.
Subject Property
Date: October 2, 2006
Scale: 1" = 300'
O.S. No. 24
totes
LA PALMA AVENUE
~:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05121
Requested By: LIVING STREAM MINISTRY
' Subject. Property
Date: October 2, 2006
Scale: 1" = 300'
Q.S. No. 24
2411-2461 West La Palma Avenue and 1212 North Hubbell Way -
Living Stream Ministry and former Hubbell site.
70129
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 7
7a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED)
qND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 139 s{Motion)
7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05121 -;(Resolution)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This irregularly-shaped 40.4-acre property is located at the northwest corner of La Palma
Avenue and Gilbert Street, and at the northern termini of Hubbell Way and Electric Way,
having frontages of 800 feet on the north side of La Palma Avenue,. 815 feet on the west
side of,Gilbert Street; ti8 feet at the northern terminus of Hubbell Way, and 59 feet at the
northern termipus of Electric Way (2411 -.2461 West La Palma Avenue and 1212 North
Hubbell Way -Living Stream Ministry and former Hubbell site).
.:REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit to permit and retain a
(teleconferencing center and.private conference/training center underauthority of Code
Section 18.10.030.040.0402, (Community and Religious Assembly/Educational Institutions).
BACKGROUND:
(3) Thin property oonsists of two (2) mixed use industrial/office complexes with a total of eight. (8)
buildings having a cumulative floor area of approximately 530,507aquare feet. The property
is zoned I (Industrial) antl the Anaheim General Plan esignates 3his property and properties
to the east and west for jndustrial nand uses.: The Interstate 5 Freewayborders the site on
the north and properties to south are designation for Low Density Residentiatland uses.
The property is also located within the Merged Redevelopment Project Area.
sPREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
(4) The following zoning actions pertain to this property:
a) Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-0471-0 (to permit an aduldcareer training center in
conjunction with a teleconference center:) was approved by the Commission on June
16, 2003. The proposal permitted by this entitlement was not developed and the
permit has expired.
b) Variance 2002-04988 {waiver of (a) maximum number of freestanding or monument-
type signs and (b) permitted location of freestanding or monument type signs to
'construct a new monument sign) was approved by the Commission on May 6, 2002.
c) :Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-04366. (to permit a teleconferencing center and private
: conference/training genter with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces, (Phase 1
- 2_ 093 required; 1719 proposed) (Phase 2 - 3~ required; 2,681. proposed) was
approved by the'Commissionbn December 3, 2001.:The proposal permitted by this
:entitlement was not developed and the permit has expired.
CUP2006-05121 PC100206JR
Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 7
d) Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04263. (to permit a temporary 40,000 square foot
teleconferencing center and private conference/training .center with waiver' of minimum
number of parking spaces, 1,985 required; 1;488 proposed) was approved by the
Commission on October 23, 2000 (to expire on October 23, 2003}.: This permit was
subsequently reinstated to expire October 23, 2007.
e) Conditional Use Permit No. 4074 (to permit a 22,000 square-foot adult careerltraining
center for approximately 200 students with waiverbf minimum numberof parking
spaces) wasapproved by the Commission on November 23, 1999. -
f) ConditiohaLUse'Permit No..1888 (to permit offices and restaurants in an industrial
complex) was approved by the Commission in September, 1978: This entitlement was
required to be terminated as a condition of approval for CUP2000-04263 and has not
been completed.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL:
(5) The applicant proposes to establish a 115,814 square fioot permanent teleconferencing
center: and private.conference/training oenter by renovating an existing warehouse building.
Theproposal also includes the tlemoltion of an existing 18,000 square foot building on the
'former Hubbell site to accommodate a new parking lot. There is no new quare footage
associated with. thisproposal.
(6) The overall site plah (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the teleconference and training center would
occupy100,814 square feet of an existing 115,307 quare foot industrial building. The
remaining 15,000 square feet would house utility service areas and warehousespace
accessary to the`cehter.
(7) The teleconference center site plan. (Exhibit No. 2) and letter of operation indicates the
proposed project will include a total of nine (9) buildings with the following characteristics
and uses:
BuildingNo. Square Footage Use (Existing/Proposed)
1 75,736 .Office (Existing)
2 19,600 Office (Existing)
3 7,664 Office (Exjsting)
:Warehouse (Existing temporary
4 62
748 conference/training building per CUP 4263 will
, 'revert to warehouse use at completion of project)
Telecom:'Warehouse Pro osed
5 26;460 office/Warehouse (Existing)
6 196
992 Telecom: Warehouse/Private School (American
, Career CoNe a Existin
7 814
115 Warehouse (Existing)
, Teleconferencin Center Pro osed
Page 2
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Jtem No. 7
8 4,048 Mechanical Equipment (Existing)
9 2,645 Maintenance/Storage (Existing)
Total " :'512,507
(8) Vehicular access to this property is provided by two (2) existing driveways. on La Palma
Avenue and three: (3) existing driveways on Gilbert Street.:Additional access would be
provided by one (1) driveway from Hubbell Way, and one (1) driveway from Electric Way. A
bus parking area to accommodate 23 buses is proposed to the west of the proposed
.teleconferencing center;.-Buses would follow a circular path of travel throughahe site, by
entering through the driveway at the terminus of Electric Way, circle around the building and
park along the west side of the property,,behind the building, then exit throughahe driveway
on Hubbell Way.
(9) The;applicanthad submitted a traffic management plan with their'teleconfe~ehcing center
proposal in 2001 demonstrating how event traffic would be managed on-site ahd directed to
surrounding public streets. An updated traffic'management plan was submitted aspart of
this request (September a5, 200fi). Traffic Engineering`Division staff has verified that this
traffic management plari`is adequate to address traffic issues associated with the current
proposal. The plan includes the following operational provisions which, where determined to
be appropriate by the Anaheim Police Department Traffic Bureau and Traffic Engineering
Division, and shall be incorporated into a final traffic management plan:
"(a) Police Department and/or Traffic Management personnel will ensure the orderly and
timely ingress/egress of traffic on La Palma Avenue at staffing levels recommended
by the Anaheim Police Department Traffic Bureau.
(b) Circulation into and out of the project site will be facilitated by protected left turn
phasing at the tntersection`of Gilbert Street and West La Palma Avenue. ,[This work
has been completed by the Cityj.
(c) Prior to private events, the. applicant shall notify. the Anaheim Police Department,
Traffic Bureau, and provide a detailed schedule of the event and traffic management
plans Any costs associated with the'need for'additiohal traffic control personnel as
'determined by the Anaheim Police Departmentshall be paid by the appiicanL
(d) : Bus arrivals and departures shall occur on Woodland Drive.
(e) The movement of vehicles'into and out of Anaheim Palms Corporate Center (APCC)
fooprivate teleconference events shall be facilitated by the coordinated use of interior
traffidflow and parking assistants
(f) Cars entering the site shall be directed to interiocareas of the site through. the use of
traffic flow assistants and tra~caones to reduce backups ahd delay on public streets,
(g) Parking assistants shall systematically fill parking areas "
(10) The site plan indicates that 2,048 parking spaces and 23 bus parking spaces are proposed
on-site. Code requires the submittal of a parking demand study to determine the parking
:requirements for community assembly uses Code further indicates thaf if a parking demand
.study is required due to the unique nature of the use, the parking requirements shall be
':determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and/or Planning Commission
based on information contained in a parking demandstudy prepared by an independent
_ traffic engineer. The proposed use requires a parking study,: therefore a study was
Page 3
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
:October 2, 2006
Item No. 7
conducted by Katz, Okitsu and Associates on November 22, 2002, and updated in 2004 to
accommodate the American Career College permanently on the site. The study was again
updated on September 13, 2006, to reflect the latest proposed uses and. revised parking
layout for the site. This study recommends that a minimum. of 1_~ (and 23 tius) parking
spaces for the teleconferencing center. Staff has reviewed the study,and has determined
the existing uses combined with the proposed teleconferencing center would not create any
additional demand beyond the proposed number. of spaces. As indicated in the parking
study, dhe Code-required demand is 1;972 soaces forahe combined uses on site, ahd a total
of2~automobile and 23 bus spaces are provided, in excess of the amount determined
necessary by the. parking demand study:
(11) Floor plans (Exhibit tJo. 3) forahe proposed teleconferencing/training cehter, ihdicate a
8,880 square foot exhibition. hall Other notable features of the floor plan include a large
reception/lobby area, multi-purpose rooms, and catering/food prep area. !A complete floor
plan summary is as follows:
:Use :Area (square feet)_
.':Conference Seating Area 46,880
Entries/Circulation 14,298
`'Restrooms ' 8,870
Lobby Seating :1.,532
`Multipurpdse Rooms < 9,816
'.` Audio Visual Room 2,996
Administrative Offices 12,180
Translation Room 912
' Catering/Food Preparation 1,330
`Mechanical/Electrical and Storage 14,493
Total 115,307
(12) ,The renovation of the existing. warehouse facility includes structural and roof modifications
and decorative exterior treatments. Elevation renderings and materials board for the
proposed remodel (Exhibits No: 4 and 5} indicate a contemporary design utilizing a mix of
materials including tinted glass, natural-toned exterior stucco and decorative metal-clad
canopies: The majority of the building has a height of Z4 feet, 8 inches; with the front (east)
elevation at a maximum height of 32 feet atthe main entry to the facility. The east elevation
'::which faces the existing campus contains fhe main entrance and hasthe most architectural
treatment.r.This elevation, while substantial in length, is successfully divided into smaller
sections by the use of surtace belief, glass entryways, varied fagade height and a mix of
natural toned colors: The application of sandstone veneer and varying height contributes to
the architectural interest and emphasizes he primary entrance to the facility.?The northern
building elevation. facing the freeway receives similar architectural treatment with the
' ::application of stone veneer and metal clad canopy framing the office entry to the building.
As with the east elevation, he stone veneer extends along the bottom; eightfeet of the
building. No signage is proposed with his request. `The west and south elevations include
the loading docks, service doors, ahd exits leading to the back of house ahd bus
,parking/staging area..
Page 4
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 7
(13) .Landscape plans (Exhibit No. 6) indicate proposed landscaping for the teleconferencing
center along the eastand west'sides of the building.; In addition to the shrubs and ground
cover flanking the building, a 4#0 8 foot wide landscape,plantedsurroundsthe entry
`colonhadeand provides a buffecfrom he parking lot 'Along the northern border of the site,
the row of.existing Mexican Fan Palms are continued the entire length of the northern
:property line. 'Plans also show andscaping in parking areas adjacent to the
teleconferencing building; including rows of Camphor trees. Ehhahced paving for the
':pedestrian areas leading from the parking area to the building entryway is included as well
The applicant has indicated the entry colonnade would incdrporate enhanced paving,
tlecorative seating areas and shadestructures to often this area far event attendees
waiting for ehtry. Nospecific design fdr this area. has been. submitted. The landscaped
planters within the parking area are proposed with trees, shrubs'and grdundcover. Code
requires a minimum of one (1) tree per 3,000 square feet df parking area and/or vehicular
access ways.!!Code further requires no mdre han ten;,(10) parking spaces adjacent to each
other without being separated by alahdscape area ora minimum #ouc{4) foot wide
(excluding curb) continuous landscaped area with shrubs and trees at he front end of
parking stalls: In addition, a landscaped planter with a minimum width of five (5) feet and. a
minimum depth of sixteen (16) feetshall be provided at the end of each row,df parking.
Both types of landscaped areas are provided in theparking area for the teleconference
center as required by Cotle. Staff has included a condition of approval requiring final
'lahdscape plans reflecting the extension of the row of palms along the north. property line
and an enhanced pedestrian area along the eastern portion of the building (entry colonnade)
be submitted. Thelahdscape plans as proposed comply with Code.
(14) The submitted letter of operation describes the facility as a multiple user teleconferencing
'center which would be open to thepublic for corporate meetings; featured speaker
broadcasts; distance learning seminars, town meetings,',virtual trade shows;'product
presentations,;etc. This;part of the operation would occur primarily during normal'. business
hours of Mondaythrough Friday, 13;00 a.m: 0 5:00 p.m.; with occasional evening and
weekend uses. The number of participants could rahge from an executive board of fewer
fhah 25people up to a large training group of:1,900 people. The main teleconference and
training area will be divisible by movable wall systems according to the size of the group.
(15) The facility is also proposed as a private conference and training center for he owner of the
property, Living Stream Ministry. 1n this capacity;'the facility would host international
conferences fora maximum of 5,000 people: These events would utilize the
teleconferencing technology of he facility to broadcast on-site events hroughout the world.
The letter of operation indicates that this aspect of the facility would occurho more than 21
days per year, with 12;of those:days occurring during two (2) six-day conferences held
during major winter and summer holidays. Other smaller conferences are held primarily
during the weekends (usually holiday weekends such as Labor Day, Memorial Day, 4`h of
July, Thanksgiving, etc.), Proposed hours of dperation for this aspect of the facility are
Monday through Saturday, 2 p.m. tq 10:30 p.m., with participants arriving between 2 p.m.
and 4 p.m., and departing between 9:30 p.m. and 10:30,p.m. During these events, other
services would not be available to he general public. The number of employees would vary
depending on the number of conference participants.
Page 5
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 7
.ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(16) :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 adverse environmental impacts
r resulting from any changes to the previously-approved project; Therefore staff recommends
that the Mitigated Negative Declarationprevlously approved in connection with the
previously-approved teleconferencing center and private training center onderConditional
se Permit No.2003-04710 (now expired) is appropriate to serve as he required
environmental :documentation #or his request upon a finding by the Commission that the
.:declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered
he proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration together. with any comments received during
the public teview process and furtherfinding on the`basis of the Initial :Study that there is no
substantial evidence, with he imposition of mitigation measures, that the project will have a
significant effect on the environment.:Mitigation measures have,been identified from the
.;previously-approved Mitigated Negative Declaration and refinements o those measures
have been incorporatedinto Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 139 for this'projecL The
mitigation measures:identified and incorporated into his Negative Declaration are subject to
l the monitoringheporting program as set forth.by Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources
Code.
EVALUATION:
(17) The use of his facility as a teleconferencing center and private raining center is permitted
within the I zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code
Section 18.10.030.040.0402 (Community and Religious Assembly and Educational
Institutions).
(18) .Code requires the submittal of a parking demand study to determine the parking
requirements for community assembly uses.. Code further indicates that if a parking demand
tudy is required due to the uhique nature of the use,'the parking requiremepts shall be
,determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager ahd/or Planning Commission
based on information contained in a parking demand study prepared by an independent
traffic engineer.
(19) As tliscussed above, the applicant has submitted updated parking and traffic impact
analyses by Katz;Okitzu'and Associates.'7he studies were reviewed and approved by staff.
The parking and raffic study also contains a number of recommendations as follows which
have been included in the. proposed conditions of approval;
"• Special Events now require and will continue to require registration, including
information on the location where theparticipant will be staying.
• Busing shah be`provided to and from the facility o the designated conference hotels.
Living'Stream Ministry currehtly uses buses to reduce traffic and parking congestion at
its existing West Ball Road facility. Records indicate that 30% of participahts routinely
arrive and depart in buses.''As per the'assumptions made earlier regarding bus
utilization ifwill be necessary to keep close to this level of bus utilzatioh to adequately
allow for on-site parking and transportation of all conference participahts'at APCC.
• The event administrators shall require participants to use accommodations at
designated conference hotels in order to cluster the individuals and thus facilitate transit
- to and from. the teleconferencing center by bus, hotel shuttle, or taxi.
Page 6
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 7
e Participants shall be informed of the parking available at the facility and every effort shall
be made to encourage individuals to use the buses:.
m Participants shall be informed that on-street parking at the event should be avoided as a
courtesy to local residents and. businesses.
a .'Living Stream Ministry personnel shall assess the parking during events to determine if
'parking demand is exceeding the supply and imposing on Local on-street parking.
Permit parking measures to encourage carpooling shall be utilized through issuance of a
invited number of parking permits and directing those without a permit to utilize bus
transportation.
a Living Stream Ministry personnel shalt direct and control arriving and departing traffic to
ensure smooth flow in APCC parking lot. and streets immediately adjacent APCC'
property.,,
(20) The updated traffic management plan provides the framework for alleviating potential traffic
`bongestion `problems on surrounding public streets and on nearby residential
neighborhoods. The combination. of police and private personnel directing off-site and on-
site traffic respectively, will serve to reduce potential traffic congestion. Commission should
:note that this plan is in draft form and maybe revised td improve efficiency based on field
observations.
j21) Theproposal to establish a teleconferencing center and conference/training center facility is
complementary to the existing businessesat this location and is an appropriate use for the
site; The facility would benefit from the fiber'optic lines;adjacentto the site and could have a
positive impact on area hotels and restaurants. However, appropriate operational measures
must be incorporated into the approval to ensure that the residential neighborhood located
bn the southside of La Palma Avenue is not negatively impacted by "event" traffic.' The
recommended' conditions of approval and mitigation measures are intended to facilitate
.movement of traffic during events and to minimize inconvenience to residents across La
Palma Avenue.
(22) .Since the facility would operate with structured procedures to eliminate/minimize impacts on
nearby uses, staff believes this use would not adversely affect. adjoining land uses or the
growth or development of the area.. In addition, the size and shape of the site is adequate
for the full development of the proposed use, and staff recommends approval of the request
to permit and retain a teleconferencing center and.private conference/trafning center as
conditioned.
FINDINGS:
(23) Before the Planning 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;
(a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the
Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined. in Subsection :030 (Unlisted Uses
Permitted) of Section No. 18.66.040 (Approval Authority);
(b) That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and' the growth and
:development of the area in which ifis proposed to be located;
.Page 7
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 7
(c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed' use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area
or to the health and safety;
(d) .That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and. improved to carry the traffic in the area; and
>(e) That thegranting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any,.
will not be detrimental: to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
RECOMMENDATION:
j24) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based;upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence
presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented. at the public hearing,
he Commission take the following actions:
(a) By motion, determine that the previously-approved Mitigated Negative Declaration is
adequate to serve as environmental documentation for this request, including
approval of Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 139.
(b) By resolution, approve the applicant's request to permit and retain a teleconferencing
.center andprivate conference/training center, by adopting the attached draft
resolution, including the findings,and conditions of approval contained #herein.
page 8
[D AFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2006 ="
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05121 BE GRANTED
(2411-2461 WEST LA PALMA AVENUE AND 1212 NORTH HUBBELL WAY)
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional
Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange,. State of California,
described as:
PARCEL A: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 3, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF
ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 126, PAGES
31, 32 AND 33 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF
SAID COUNTY, LYING WITHIN PARCEL 1, AS SHOWN ON A PLAT MAP ATTACHED TO
A "LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT" INSTRUMENT RECORDED FEBRUARY 8, 1979 IN BOOK
13026, PAGE 1491, OFFICIAL RECORDS.
PARCEL B; BEGINNING ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 6, DISTANT
THEREON SOUTH 0° 39' 00" EAST, 323.35 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID
WESTERLY LINE WITH WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF
PARCEL 1, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 40, PAGE 16 OF PARCEL MAPS,
RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTH 89° 19' 41" EAST, 374.00 FEET TO THE
EASTERLY TERMINUS OF THIS EASEMENT; THE SIDELINES OF SAID EASEMENT ARE
TO BE LENGTHENED OR SHORTENED TO TERMINATE IN THE EASTERLY LINE OF
MAGNOLIA AVENUE, 106.00 FEET WIDE.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on October 2, 2006, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18,60, 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 request to permit and retain a teleconferencing center and private
conference/training center is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim
Municipal Code Section No. 18.10.030.040.0402 (Community and Religious Assembly and Educational
Institutions).
2. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and
development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because an updated traffic management plan
was submitted. as part of this request (September 15, 20D6). Traffic Engineering Division staff has verified
that this traffic management plan is adequate to address traffic issues associated with the current proposal.
The plan includes the operational provisions which, where determined to be appropriate by the Anaheim
Police Department Traffic Bureau and Traffic Engineering Division.
3. ,That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of
the proposed. use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety, as the site
plan indicates adequate parking spaces are provided on-site. A study was conducted by Katz, Okitsu and
Associates on November 22, 2002, and updated on September 13, 2006, to reflect the latest proposed uses
and revised parking layout for the site and finds that the existing uses combined with the proposed
teleconferencing center would not create any additional demand beyond the proposed number of spaces.
Cr\PC2006-0 -1- PC2006-
4. 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.
5. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed,. will not be
detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
6. That *** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal; and does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration
previously-approved in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04710 (now expired) is adequate to
serve as the required environmental documentation in connection with this request, upon finding that the
declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the previously-
approved Mitigated Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no
substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does
hereby grant subject Petition for 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
health and safety of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That no church activities shall be permitted unless a separate conditional use permit is approved by
the City.
2. That this facility shall be used for teleconferencing, conferences and training activities only.
3. That no outdoor activities involving gathering of persons shall be permitted on-site.
4. That this facility shalt be limited to the following. operational characteristics:
• The public teleconferencing shall be limited to a maximum of one thousand nine hundred (1,900)
persons to ensure adequate parking for all businesses on-site. The hours of operation shall be
limited to B:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
The private conferencing/training center shall be limited to a maximum of five thousand (5,000)
persons. The facility shall be utilized for this purpose a maximum of 21 days per year, including
two (2) six-day conferences during winter and summer vacations. The hours of operation shall
be limited to 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, for the two (2) bi-annual
conferences; and 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday (and holidays), for the
remaining conference/training dates.
• That the Living Stream Ministry and Sa Rang Presbyterian. Church should coordinate their
events to avoid traffic impacts due to participants from both events arriving and leaving at the
same time. Additionally, no parking spaces at the Anaheim Palms Corporate Center (APCC)
site shall be utilized as overflow parking by Sa Rang Presbyterian Church without prior approval
by the Traffic and Transportation Manager.
5> .That a final traffic management plan (TMP) shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation
Manager for review and approval. Said plan shall include measures to efficiently and safely move
ingress/egress traffic during events as identified in the draft TMP dated September 15, 2006. The
TMP may be amended subject to review and approval of the Traffic and Transportation Manager, as
--- - appropriate, in order to improve the efficiency of said plan. Said. plan may include the following
components at the discretion of the Traffic and Transportation Manager:
-2- PC2006-
o That Special Events shall require registration, including information on the location where the
participant will be staying.
a That busing shall be provided to and from the facility to the designated conference hotels.
a That the event administrators shall require participants to use accommodations at designated
conference hotels in order to cluster the individuals and thus facilitate transit to and from the
teleconferencing center by bus, hotel shuttle, or taxi.
e That participants shall be informed of the parking available at the facility and every effort shall be
.made to encourage individuals to use the buses.
a Participants: shall be informed that on-street parking at the event should. be avoided as a
courtesy to local residents and businesses.
That Living Stream Ministry personnel shall. assess the parking during events to determine if
parking demand is exceeding the supply and impacting local on-street parking. Permit parking
measures to encourage carpooling will be utilized through issuance of a limited number of
parking permits and forcing those without a permit to utilize bus transportation.
m That Living Stream Ministry personnel shall direct and control arriving and departing traffic to
ensure smooth flow in APCC parking lot and streets immediately adjacent APCC property.
o That the Living Stream Ministry and Sa Rang Presbyterian Church should coordinate their
events to avoid traffic impacts due to participants from both events arriving and leaving at the
same time.
m That the developer shall comply with Ordinance No. 5209 and Resolution No. 91 R-89 relating to
the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) by providing on-site taxi and shuttle bus loading
zones, and byjoining and financially participating In the ATN and Clean Fuel Shuttle Program
and by installing bicycle racks. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted
for Traffic Engineering Division approval
e That Police Department and/or Traffic Management personnel will ensure the orderly and timely
ingress/egress of traffic on La Palma Avenue at staffing levels recommended by the Anaheim
Police Department Traffic Bureau.
m That prior to private events, the applicant shall notify the Anaheim Police Department, Traffic
Bureau, and provide a detailed schedule of the event and traffic management plan. Any costs
associated with the need for additional traffic control personnel as determined by the Anaheim
Police Department shall be paid by the applicant.
m That bus arrivals and departures shall occur on Woodland Drive.
That the movement of vehicles into and out of APCC for private teleconference events will be
facilitated by the coordinated use of interior traffic flow and parking assistants.
o That cars entering the site will be directed to interior areas of the site through the use of traffic
flow assistants and traffic cones to reduce backups and delay on public streets..
That parking assistants will systematically fill parking areas:'
6. That trash storage areas shall be provided and. maintained in a location acceptable to the Public
Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file
with said Department. Said. storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be
readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be
protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum 1-gallon size
`clinging vines planted on maximum 3-foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said information shall pe
specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
-3- PC2006-
7. 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.
8. That an on-site trash truck turn around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No.
610 and as required by the Streets and Sanitation Division. Said information shall be specifically
shown on plans submitted for building permits.
9. That due to the change in use and/or occupancy of the building, plans shall be submitted to the
Building division showing compliance 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.
10. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a Water Quality Management
Plan for the review and approval of the Public Works Department, Development Services Division.
11. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
Public Works Department, Development Services Division, that coverage has been obtained under
California's General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by
providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board
and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID)
Number. The applicant shall prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP). A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City
review on request.
12. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities will be at the property owner's expense.
Landscape and/or hardscape screening of all padmounted equipment will be required and shall be
outside the easement area of the equipment. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans
submitted for building permits.
13. That the property owner shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement far primary
lines and transformer location to be determined as electrical design is completed.
14. That this project has landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall
be installed and comply with Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
15. That prior to application for water meters, fire line or submittal of water improvement plans for
approval, the applicant shall submit to the Public Utilities Department Water Engineering Division an
estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the
.project.
16. That the water backflow equipment shall be above ground, outside of the street setback area in a
manner fully screened from alt public streets. Any other large water system equipment shall be
installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division in either underground vaults or outside
of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Said information shall
be specifically shown on plans and approved by Water Engineering and Cross Connection Inspector
before issuance of building permits.
17., That 4-foot high address numbers shall be displayed on the roof in a contrasting color to the roof
material. The numbers shall not be visible from the view of the street or adjacent properties. Said
information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
18. That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped with decorative lighting of sufficient
power to illuminate and make easily discernable the appearance and conduct of all persons on or
about the parking lot. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as
-4- PC2006-
not to unreasonably illuminate the window areas of nearby residences. Photometric plans shall be
submitted to the Anaheim Police Department for review and approval prior to issuance of building
permits.
19. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular
landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24)
hours from time of discovery.
20. That final landscape plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and
approval and shall reflect the following items. Any decision by the Planning Services Division may
be appealed to the Planning Commission as a'Reports and Recommendations".item.
• Retention of all mature landscaping features that are not impacted by construction of the new
buildings
• The extension of the row of Mexican Fan Palm trees and planter along the north property line
adjacent to the freeway. All trees shall be similar in height to the existing palms along this
property line.
• The installation of permanent irrigation within the grass area along the northern portion of the
site....
• An enhanced pedestrian area along the eastern portion of the building (entry colonnade).
o All trees shall be minimum 24-inch box in size. Said information shall be shown on plans
submitted for building permits.
21. That final elevation and sign plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division of the
.Planning Department for. review and approval... Any decision by the Planning Services Division may
be appealed to the Planning Commission as a'Reports and Recommendations' item.
22. That the developer shall be responsible for compliance with all mitigation measures within the
assigned time frames and any direct costs associated with the attached Mitigation Monitoring
Program No. 139 as established by the Gity of Anaheim and as required by Section 21081.6 of the
Public Resources Code to ensure implementation of those identified mitigation measures..
23. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications
submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning
Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 6, and as conditioned herein.
24. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos.. 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20 and 21,
above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may
be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.1.70 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
25. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 10 and 11,above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
Extensions for further time to complete said conditions maybe granted in accordance with Section
18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Cade.
26. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 23, above-mentioned, shall be
complied with.
27. 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
Federel 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.
-6- PC2006-
28. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director
upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original.
intent and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Anaheim Municipal
Code and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or
approved development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning. Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and
all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared
invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution,
and any approvals herein contained, shalt be deemed null and. void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying alt charges related.
to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or
prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges
shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
October 2, 2006. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Zoning.
Provisions -General" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and maybe replaced
by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on October 2, 2006, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,. I have hereunto set my hand this day of
2006.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-6- PC2006-
O
Z
E
r
.:.
c
d
E
L
V
Q
b~
M
wM
r~Y
W
y®
R-~
~~
~/
~-~
~1
r®r'~
N~
U ~
E b
~ c
m
b m ~;
~3 y
N N N
3~p
. ^ c
~xm
~ wo v
x ~
w c w
o '- .o
'c ~ ~
~ ~
C E ~ •C
OD ~ C
C Q y ~
c m
t s m ~
m
U m W C
[ w ">
C -~ v I
~ ~ ~ ~
~~'3
> C y
a
c C7 ~ ~
w
y c y .C
c v ~°- o
V C u .z
00 ~ y N
'U ¢ 3 N
U
d E «'°
~" C C
w m m
O 6. O N
°
o
C ~ ~ °
.y 7 E
~ U y 0.
d
C y ¢ a
:tl .3c m
E
q o ~ 3
m C 0. ,_
o -c"..a v
W N
a _~ ~ o I
a y ° v .
C ~ a'y V
U ~ O ~ v
d ~ X T
q ~ ~ °c m
„3
_ D ~« U
a a. ^ 'E
p~j 'p ° O V
2 y o. ~, °'
~ a '= ~« w
,e°-o o. a °m ~
c w ,c
u
°
C ~ m .u.
° = E
L C C u
c 'v '1'+~-. ~
o u m m o
Y d O C C
Q A '~ ~ s
Q ~ u F n
.° .°
v a a`3w
~E
V
9
C
W
E
m
[r
o m C v
•
0 C° °' 'flp
~ d .UO m `v .~
~
-n 6
`u ra .r
o O p d. m
a
mEm ~ A
o
~
c, E
~
~'
mb .L
'
.
.mE°
~ ~,~ a°i E..c~2
O E. o
E ~m ~ F U C. Q E
C~~
~ ~ v,C C
O ~ m U
u
33
h ~
G ='or ~ ~ aye m
°
.
' ' '
y.
O C ^ 'C
~ ~ C C U y ;C
~'mL 'ti o.pL a 'C E' 3
z o s a " c °' 3 ~ o a a~
U
•--~ d ° C .O O h
C m
.~ E rCii O y
d
y
3 '~
d o
n U
m
a
m b
c °.
~ ~^
o-co
d m
u
.
m•~ °
'
m u
b
m .
E m
m
c E
3~ E c
~ o d a
m
. . C 3 ~o
m F ~
E ~C C .-«F
0.
'
~
E u O p.
'u R .u. u
~ r
C 5 ~ ~
o ~ C ~ «
t° °
m y ~
w
o ~ ~ FF. m c. E. ,vr.
co~•3 v
~ E .^'. a~i
~ $
~~
'
' .
.
w
~
~
~ °w ° a3 ~'
V :~. ~ '
~ E v o
°JC. ~ ; F E 3
B m v`"
moo .
~.uo v.y '> m~~
~
.
w o E~ v .°c ~. o c .°~.. n •E w
`.~. c h ~
m ;: ca 'o ~`e 'C c
~ ~
U y m U a m
v
~ ^N ^ IJ" °
a ^ CO
U
G C
m C C p
«'L um. O .
~'.i .
c
O .
O O U..
C
. C C m m'om' y Cw m'O
q
q
rn $m
o •~3~
m' ~ ~~
~
~
~~ . .
:
U ? °1 b o U
Q ~ ° m w
w y E U C O
N
O ~
m o
O ti 0
.~ ~ C b O« .
j
U C
O
. .fl .E 'm m.
m v G m `°'E
C U w°
E D
d E N u..C C
m
md+~~. m 'E N'C. .~. N .m^p 4Q
~
7 C O ,C ~ U
L ~
« O O N O
,
N
d .D
y 'N > t..~ y
C ..~
'b d O
v E
m
'a F' j 'O .. E
y
c o u c° m .
d .D w o m
~ d
Q 4; y y
C C E A U Q,.~ « C E
N p
,
E
~ ^ c
h ~ y U
N
fn. ~` D E C
IL N .... y~ N
d
G
C ~
7
E m C.~ •C ~~
v
r] ~
n
..
O, C.
~ u i
o
m° o.~o ~ E m .. '~ o m o
N ~ ~ v O' ~ CO (Y
~ m
V :~~ ~
F
.
. C ~
s E m m ~ a
°
° ~ y
E s
m E
E c
I
N
-
, oTCO s3°
°O« ~ d~3~~0
i ~. o a... o pp o ~ ~ E
~
a, w o o «~ e A m o ~ e~ w w ~ o
~
A o'
c v ~ « ~ .o o ~ o ~
° o 'o
rr
~ . C .
m m
~
s m .y ~ ~
o ° ._ ^
00 U ,^_, 'E
c o
~ ..
C mB
w ~
.
aa ~; ~.E3mE
T ~ E
~.
0. E~
w~o E3swN aw o~~~o
¢
n+ N f7 Q Vl
M
O ~
~ o
E a
C
Q
3d
-
m;
Q -q
U
U O; `„ v o ro
H ~
L ~ ~
In
V v q E
C
ad 0. me mC 3 ~~= ~ G
3 s ~ c m ~,°
3 e E
~, .
~ ~ . .
~
y ~
m = N C vi. ..V.
.C .N 'U N .G .y .^ ti ..°. ,y G
C .N ^ '~ N ANp
N N A .> d
a
a a y OD >
°
wo a~ Op >
'
w0 a~ M 7 q~ N 7
°
wCa :.. a~ ty
°
a
C]
.G]C3. a
,g g
a o
.fa
a[.aa.la a
.
L1~
~ ~ ~
y
> ~ °
C
° m
~
f O m
tO . V O u
`' ~> a C m p m G GL 4. N
Y O ; 2 N G ~` 1..
...
fi Ua
..aAa c c o~o ^ c °
n ° ^
~,. oQ
a--tC ... > o .. >
.ti >
C' 0J ° W' OJ N N ~ ~ y"' ^ Q R1 N O 6n VI ~ U .~
~
m
; E C •E °
o ~~
~
° m o o a •o g w
° w E .
~
t
:
`
` .
o
w
~
0 0
'°
o o ,
"
m
a ~ a
~ ' o °. B o a
: .
o
.
o i
a a
n 8
i
A
s .C
~
t
m ~°
O t
y ~
° C ^. ~ U
s
'~ „
p
q ~
a.
0 •p '° w C C .° w .
L
D
W m
N
m O d
~ A m
T w ~° •W
~. r
y o ~ w° > ~"j o
C d N
.
'" m c C L°
d U
~ VvJ ~ ~
~ b ° a
~ y F 4r 4.
~
.~ .
C N L ....
N .E m O ~ d .
^ .°. ~ ~°
a' J b U N N
rJ' .0. itl ~
n. E
y
O ~
°
• ° .~
`
'~' n. 5
"
~ o c$
a v~
y
`.
~
Q b m .° G E v e h o b. n. ¢
. a"' '
'
~ „~ ~
,d.° ~.y
..
. ~ y.> 9?~ A > E a >s o E v v
p ~
~
~ m:°
>`3 vV v ai d'
^c= ~ o cTa.
c m~ 3
oy
~~ .~
.
"
v
~
C ~
~ o °.
v
v
~ i
-
a
O C
~+
C~ p N y ~ 7 o m a°i °' E y
0
ar
ai N U 7° > y y N
u ~ O a°~ ~.
v
^. a°i a v C C ~Cn O U G
A d o C~ ~. t C F"
° N
~ .~ d s m
0 3 y
"' o c
°
°
m b
C
m '
a
O ~ C'
m
.
On d O 0 A a
0
G O'
C
a p
m ~
> y -
C 9
°
y
c ~
a ~ i
U
O O
E
z y
C .
N
" N
.~ ° a t
O Q •
N
° s 7 w m o m ~^,, . c m y^ c ~ oa',
° •~ 3~ ~
m a~ v o m o
,c w m o h a o o .m y m o m
:`e° ~ n~
,e
° m
°
F rte. f p m
3
„
~ l-~ o n ° v ~ ~ o h H F ~ ~ ° c ~
F-~ ~O w "' c
o E~
w.,~
,
d ~ ^~ W
O U
r `~ O ~ ~ .o
r F O ~
Q OC
a
7 r7
¢ O C y° F
C C
C V
ESN C b0 'D D O. iT
° N C
m
~ ~n °•
~ ~
c
~1
U E
~° w ° ,°
~ ° ~ m h
~
^ O ~ C
O '° m
G_ .~
~ °
~ n ... ~ ° y
n °
t°
~
7 ~ O r
a ~ o a
, a
i O O o
1`4 & 0
e
~' ~ F
-~ ~
~mrQ 4
~z z
,.
~
^ N M ~
"~ ~ F F F F F
a
~ N
2 c
~a
4
0
O
0
`a
~0
K
Parking Study Update for the
Anaheim Palms Teleconference
Training Center Expansion
in the
City of Anaheim
September 13, 2006
ITEM NO.7
Prepared for:
Living Stream Ministry
2431 W. La Palma Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92801
(714) 236 -6001
Prepared by:
Katz, Okitsu Associates
17852 E. Seventeenth St, Suite 102
Tustin, CA 92780 -2142
Tel: (714) 573 -0317
Fax: (714) 573 -9534
Job No.: JA6625
17852 E. Seventeenth St.
Suite 102
Tustin, CA
92780 -2142
714.573.0317
fax: 714.573 -9534
koaoc @katzokirsu.com
www.kaaokitsu.com
Las Angeles
323.260.4703
fax: 323.260.4705
San Diego
619.683.2933
fax: 619.683.7982
San Bernardino
909.890.9693
fax: 909.890.9694
PC Katz, Okitsu Associates
L Planning and Engineering
Mr. John Pester
Living Stream Ministry
2431 W. La Palma Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92801
Subject: Revised Parking Study Update for the Anaheim Palms Teleconference
Training Center Expansion in the City of Anaheim
Dear Mr. Pester:
Katz, Okitsu Associates is pleased to present the revised Parking Study Update for a
proposed expansion of the Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center in the City of
Anaheim. The project is located at 2431 W. La Palma Avenue, between Magnolia Avenue and
Gilbert Street. The expansion includes the renovation of an existing building on the north
side of the property. Katz, Okitsu Associates prepared a Traffic Impact Analysis and
Parking Study in November 2002 to address the expansion. This proposed expansion was
approved by the Planning Commission in 2003. In August 2004, Katz, Okitsu Associates
prepared a parking study update to analyze potential changes in parking demand when
American Career College would occupy suites formerly occupied by Westwood College.
Currently, the owner of the property, Living Stream Ministry, wishes to change a Condition
of Approval by extending the hours of the public events to 10pm. The City of Anaheim has
requested an update to the previously prepared parking study to analyze any potential parking
effect of this change.
The report is being submitted to you for review and processing. Please contact me if you have
any questions about the report, or if you need additional information to complete your
review. If there are any comments that require my response, or revisions required, please
notify me as soon as possible for prompt attention.
It has been a pleasure to prepare this study for Living Stream Minist v Q� of.. E. 4/12
9
No. 1139
Fxp. 9/30/08
Sinc cceelly,
er
lir/ /Nt—
Rock E. Miler, P.E.
Principal
September 13, 2006
J:Icities\Ana /teitnlJA6625 Living Stream Parking Update\ReportlLiving Stream Parking Update_Rev.doc
Parking Study Update for the
Anaheim Palms Teleconference
Training Center
in the
City of Anaheim
Prepared for:
Living Stream Ministry
2341 W. La Palma Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92801
(714) 236-6001
Prepared by:
Katz, Okitsu Associates
17852 E. Seventeenth St, Suite 102
Tustin, CA 92780 -2142
Tel: (714) 573 -0317
Fax: (714) 573 -9534
September 2006
ab e of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. STUDY METHODOLOGY 5
OFFICE USE S
AMERICAN CAREER COLLEGE 6
TELECOMMUMCAIION BUILDINGS 6
MULTI— PURPOSE TELECONFERENCING BUILDING 7
Public Teleconferencing Use 7
Private Special Events Use 8
3. FORECAST PARKING DEMAND 10
4. PARKING SUPPLY 11
5. BUS PARKING 13
6. FINDINGS 15
7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 16
WA
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Anaheim Palms Teleconference at Training Center
Parking Study Update
List of,' ,figures
FIGURE 1— PROJECT VICINITY MAP 3
FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN 4
FIGURE 3 BUS PARKING 14
List of Tab es
TABLE 1 CITY OF ANAHEIM PARKING CODE 5
TABLE 2 PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR OFFICE USES 6
TABLE 3 AMERICAN CAREER COLLEGE PARKING DEMAND 6
TABLE 4 PARKING DEMAND FOR TELECOMMUNICATION AREA 7
TABLE 5 PERSONS PER VEHICLE ANALYSIS FOR 1853 WEST BALL ROAD 8
TABLE 6 PUBLIC TELECONFERENCING PARKING DEMAND 8
TABLE 7 PRWATE EVENTS PARKING DEMAND 9
TABLE 8 NORMAL PARKING DEMAND 10
TABLE 9— PRIVATE EVENTS PARKING DEMAND 10
TABLE 10 PARKING SUPPLY 11
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
ii Parking Study Update
1. Introduction
In November 2002, Katz, Okitsu Associates prepared a Traffic Impact Study and Parking Analysis
for the proposed expansion and renovation of the Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
(APTTC). The expansion was approved by the Planning Commission in 2003 (CUP 2003- 04710). In
August 2004, Katz, Okitsu Associates prepared a parking study update to address the occupancy of
American Career College in the former Westwood College space. Living Stream Ministry now
proposes a change to the approved CUP. The Letter of Operation submitted in support of the CUP
outlines two levels of service that will be available through the Teleconference and Training Center:
public and private. The Letter of Operation states, APTTC will provide corporate clients and the
general public access its teleconferencing services throughout the week from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Maximum occupancy for public operations will be limited to 1,900. No conflicts between the
operation of APTTC and those of current occupants are anticipated, given adequate parking support
and streamlined ingress and egress options for the overall site. APTTC will also provide private
teleconferencing services for Living Stream Ministry. These services will be limited to 21 days a year,
Mondays through Saturdays, from 2:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m., with participants arriving between 2:00
p.m. and 4:00 p.m. and departing from APTTC between 9:30 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. Maximum
occupancy for these special operations will be limited to 5,000. Currently, two international trainings
of six days occur each year, both of which are timed to coincide with major summer and winter
holidays. During these events, other teleconferencing services at APTTC will not be available to the
general public to avoid event conflicts. In addition, no conflicts between the operation of APTTC
during special events and those of APCC's current long -term occupants are anticipated given the
management of parking, multiple ingress and egress options, and other mitigating factors. "The
changes entail extending the hours and days of the public events in order enhance the economic
viability of the project by allowing for the flexibility to accommodate a variety of scheduling needs for
public and corporate clients. No changes are proposed related to private events. The project is
currently approved to operate public events between the hours of 8am -5pm Monday through Friday;
the owner of the project is seeking to modify operating hours to 8am lOpm everyday of the week.
The proposed changes would modify a Condition of Approval; therefore, the City of Anaheim has
requested an update to the previously prepared parking study to analyze any potential parking effect
of this change.
ECA
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
1 Parking Study Update
Site plan changes include the location and functionality of bus parking, taxi and hotel shuttle drop-off
site, and pedestrian pathways. The parking lot has been slightly redesigned to reduce pedestrian
interaction with moving vehicles in the parking lot, and an additional 43 parking stalls have been
added.
Land use changes since the previous parking update are limited to the addition of Orange Coast Title
in 13,992 sf in Building 9. This space was previously used for telecommunication storage.
The proposed uses in each building are listed below:
Building 1: Total Size: 75,736 sf
75,736 sf Office Use
Building 2: Total Size: 19,600 sf
19,600 sf Office Use
Building 3: Total Size: 7,664 sf
7,664 sf Office use
Building 4: Total Size: 62,748 sE
62,748 sf Telecommunications Equipment Storage
Building 5: Total Size: 26,460 sE
26,460 sf Office Use
Building 9: Total Size: 196,992 sf
25,000 sE— American Career College
13,992 sE Orange Coast Title Company
158,000 sf Telecommunications Equipment Storage
This study is prepared to analyze the parking adequacy of these proposed changes of the Anaheim
Palm Teleconference Training Center.
Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the project and the surrounding major street
system. Figure 2 depicts the project site plan.
Ca Katz, Okitsu Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Introduction
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
2 Parking Study Update
Project
Site
WA Katz, Okitsu Associates I Anaheim Palms Teleconferencing Training Center
Planning and Engineering in the City of Anaheim
Not to Scale
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
uIHTH?9TI17� nhil IJLIlIIb.
C P IC!IL [11111
a
I p1T1R 1•.tlu¢��ip
JiI ilJf +'}IfflSff }HffNJ
ill' InLll !1ll Iin
e=r i 11111:IIIIIY111111111
]11111 t H II 1010110HI1
etc uiH !ate a s
"t7mrlrrrn7i"7ln 7
OIfni„ r 1Hr tT l -I� a
r T 'OMN at aloft home ft-
e C)Illfll Olf #:fffNO .Its 0f11111 MI• IHIAIffiIW J€
saueugThieentiQ
WMOWN DMZ
11 a C
MlOW.��¢YIME nvo Pal,
OW92 PP RJ
I11111Y I111I
1■1111111111111111
i n W..L PMLt&AAvi.
tP_aryprcohIc W.
1v.0 Ft)
11111111001111111111
PROJECT SITE
LA MU. AVMUL
\eN
I nag
WA Katz, Okitsu Associates 1 Anaheim Palms Teleconferencing Training Center
Planning and Engineering I in the City of Anaheim
HCINRT MAP
C SITE 13 SHOWN
FOR RHINO
III IIIIII Ilnnnll
IIIIPI11111111W11L11111101 111 IIIIIIIIA tIIIIII .Iu I;n.LI.J
1 11111 I'll P 1L
DEIR 1110IIO
01I I{OIIIO
OIIOflif 010110
I
IIIOII11311011H011111110 n lllnln l II1tI
I1
01101 f1111011010
0'J' 1o1011h10
011HHT1110IDI1010
OHIIflIl0lllfil0
N
11 r
Not to Scale
Figure 2
Site Plan
2 Study iNtetliodo ogy
Parking supply and parking demand are normally measured or calculated on the basis of developed
building area, expressed in square feet (sf) per parking space or in parking spaces per 1000 sE. The City
of Anaheim Municipal Code indicates a parking requirement for each use in a proposed project.
Parking for office, training center, and telecommunication uses are calculated based on square footage,
while parking requirement for teleconferencing uses is calculated based on number of persons.
Parking demand for the proposed project land use can be partially forecast based on the City of
Anaheim Parking Code. The City of Anaheim Code requirement is shown in Table 1.
Type of Building Use
Office Use
Training Center
Telecommunication Use
Table 1 City of Anaheim Parking Code
Parking Spaces Required
Four (4.0) spaces per 1,000 sf of gross floor area
Twenty (20.) spaces per 1,000 of instruction area,
plus four (4.0) spaces per 1,000 sE of office area.
Not Specified
The project site at Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center includes five different uses:
office use, Orange Coast Title Company, American Career College, telecommunication equipment
space, teleconference use, and private event use. The office space has a parking supply rate, as
prescribed in the City of Anaheim Municipal Code. American Career College is categorized as
Training Center, and also has a parking rate prescribed by the City Municipal Code. However, the
other uses are rare, and the Code does not specify a parking rate. Katz, Okitsu Associates has
inspected the APPTC's existing telecommunications facility, and has made the determination as
described in this report.
Office Use
The City of Anaheim Parking Code requires four (4.0) parking spaces per 1,000 sf of gross floor area
for office uses. In our experience, large offices typically have an actual parking demand closer to three
(3.0) spaces per 1,000 sf of floor area; however, the rate in the Anaheim Municipal Code is adequate
for planning and analysis.
Buildings 1, 2, 3, and 5 will remain office uses. 13,992 sf in Building 9 occupied by Orange Coast Title
Company is considered as office use as well. Table 2 shows the required parking for each building
component and the aggregate requirement.
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
5 Parking Study Update
Office Area Parking Spaces
Building Number Parking Rate
(square feet) Required
1 75,736 4 1,000 sf 303
2 19,600 4 1,000 sf 78
3 7,664 4 1,000 sf 31
5 26,460 I 4 1,000 sf I 106
9 13,992 I 4 1,000 sf I 56
Total 143,452 I 574
Note: Excludes floor area for American Career College and telecommunication storage
American Career College
American Career College occupies suites in Building 9. American Career College is classified as a
"Training Center" under the City of Anaheim Municipal Code. The code specifies 20 spaces per 1,000
sE of instruction area, plus 4 spaces per 1,000 sf of office area. Parking demand for the college is shown
in the table below.
Use of Space
Instruction Area
Office Area
Total
Table 2 Parking Requirement for Office Uses
Table 3 American Career College Parking Demand
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Size (sf)
10,000
15,000
25,000
Study Methodology
Parking Rate Parking Spaces
Required
20 1,000 sf 200
4 1,000 sf 60
260
Telecommunication Buildings
Building 4 and part of Building 9 will be used for telecommunication and electronic equipment
storage. Currently, Building 9 is partially used by American Career College, Orange Coast Title
Company and other office uses. These areas will be used primarily for electronic and
telecommunication equipment storage, while a small portion will be used as workspace to monitor
the equipment.
Because the City has no current parking demand standards for this use, Living Stream Ministry
provided Katz, Okitsu Associates a list of sites with comparable uses in Orange County in order to
sample parking utilization at existing telecommunication sites. However, due to the nature of the
building and parking lot design, it was difficult and unfeasible to determine parking demand ratios at
those sites.
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
6 Parking Study Update
Upon inspection of APTTC's current telecommunications building, Katz, Okitsu Associates found
that 10% of the floor area of the building should be subject to the City's parking demand rate for
office use at 4 spaces per 1000 sf. The other 90% of the building area is used solely for electronic
computer network and telecommunication equipment storage. The use produces no parking demand
because it cannot be occupied by employees or the public. The resulting aggregate parking demand
rate for the entire telecommunications space would be approximately 0.5 spaces per 1,000 sf; however,
it would be more precise to calculate parking demand using the office rate and the equipment room
rate for the component areas.
Building
4
9
Total
Table 4 Parking Demand for Telecommunication Area
Telecommunication
Area (sE)
62,748
158,000
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Traffic Engineers ant! Transportation Planners
Areas Subject to
Office Rate (sf)
6,274
15,800
Parking Rate
4 /1000sf
4 1000 sf
Study Methodology
Parking Spaces
Required
25
63
88
Only 10% of each telecommunication area will be used for office functions. This amount of floor
space is subject to the parking demand rate for Office use at 4 spaces per 1000 sE, therefore, the
number of employees required to maintain the equipment will be no more than the number of
parking spaces required, which is 88.
Multi- purpose Teleconferencing Building
The proposed multi purpose teleconferencing building will serve two types of uses: public
teleconferencing and private conferencing. The new facility will be remodeled from the former
Hubble office building.
Public Teleconferencing Use
Public teleconferencing will be held between the hours of 8 OOam to 10:00pm throughout the week.
Public daytime teleconferencing use is proposed at a capacity of 1900 participants. From a site survey
conducted at Living Stream Ministry's other teleconferencing center located at 1853 West Ball Road, a
previously approved parking study, dated March 17, 2000, determined that the arrival rate for public
teleconferencing participants is 1.81 persons per car. Data on persons per vehicle were gathered on
Wednesday, November 10, 1999 for the time periods from 7 -9 AM and 4 -6 PM. The table below
shows the data collected from the survey. Collected vehicle occupancy data is included in Appendix
A.
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
7 Parking Study Update
MIME
Time Number of Entering Vehicles With Total
Period 1 person 2 people 3 people 4 people 5+ per of People
per veh per veh per veh per veh veh
7 -9 AM 37 20 7 I 3 2 124
4 -6 PM 47 19 8 I 5 I 3 150
Total 84, 39 15 1 8 I 5 274
WA
Table 6 Public Teleconferencing Parking Demand
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Table 5 Persons per Vehicle Analysis for
1853 West Ball Road
Study Methodology
Total of
Vehicles
69
82
151
Therefore, the daytime parking demand for public teleconferencing is thus estimated at 1 stall per 1.81
persons, as shown in Table 6.
I Occupancy Capacity I Parking Rate I Parking Spaces Required
1 1,900 Participants 1 1.81 persons Vehicle 1 1050
Private Special Events Use
The Anaheim Palms Teleconferencing Training Center will host private teleconferencing services
for Living Stream Ministry. These services will be limited to 21 (twenty -one) days a year, Monday
through Saturday, from 2:OOpm to 10:30pm. Participants will arrive between 2:O0pm and 4:OOpm,
and depart between 9:30pm and 10.30pm. Public events will not be scheduled on the same days as
private events to avoid any conflict of use or parking. Private teleconferencing events will
accommodate 5,000 participants. The previously approved study (CUP 2000- 04263) presented the
expected modal split of arriving private events participants and the average vehicle occupancy of each
mode. Approximately 60% of participants will arrive by car, 25% by bus, and 15% by hotel courtesy
shuttle. Since December 2000, private teleconference vents with a maximum attendance of 4000, as
authorized under CUP 2000 04263, have been conducted at Anaheim Palms Corporate Center. During
these events, the modal splits utilized for this study have been observed and closely confirmed.
During the summer of 2006 private events, LSM had 3566 registered attendants and utilized shuttles,
taxis, and 13 buses. Based on the registration count and a modal split of 60% cars, the APCC parking
lot was projected to be at full capacity. However, the lot averaged 415 empty regular spaces and 16
handicapped spaces during the six day event. Each automobile has an average occupancy of three
persons, each bus 55 persons, and each shuttle three persons. The parking demand for this use is thus
calculated as follows:
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
8 Parking Study Update
Average
Persons per
Vehicle
1.80
1.83
1.81
Rates per 1,000 Attendees
Travel Mode I Proportion I Number of Attendees
I Autos 60% 1 600
Buses 25% 1250
Shuttles 15% 1150
Parking demand rates of 200 stalls per 1,000 registrants and bus parking at 5 per 1,000 registrants are
suggested.
Teleconferencing use in the new multi -use teleconferencing facility is proposed to accommodate a
maximum of 5,000 participants. Utilizing the rates established above, the anticipated parking
demand is 1,000 parking spaces, and 23 bus spaces for 5,000 participants. The use of shuttles and drop
oEEs eliminates the need for car parking spaces for 750 attendees, while bus parking eliminates the
need for car parking spaces for 1250 attendees. As a consequence, a parking ratio of 1 to 3 for
attendees arriving in cars is the determining factor for parking demand. According to the modal split
for autos, 1000 spaces are needed for 3000 attendees. These spaces are provided on site. In addition,
the site plan shows that there will be a surplus of 126 spaces on site during private events. This
calculation is shown in Table 7.
Travel Mode
I Autos
I Bus
I Shuttle
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Tm(fia Engineers and Tmnspormi ion Planners
Table 7 Private Events Parking Demand
Persons Using Average Vehicle
Mode Occupancy
3000 3
1250 55
750 3
Number of
Vehicles
1000
23
250
Study Methodology
I Number of Vehicles
1 200
I
I
Parking Spaces
Required
1000
23
0
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
9 Parking Study Update
orecas ar (rig 6 ,e4tAand
Normal everyday uses at the APPTC are office use, American Career College, Orange Coast Title
Company, and telecommunication equipment buildings. Office uses are projected to require 574
spaces, American Career College requires 260 spaces, while telecommunication space needs 88 spaces.
When 1900- person public teleconferences are held, there will be a need for 1050 parking stalls. The
total parking demand is calculated in Table 8.
Typical Daily Use Parking Spaces Required
Office uses 574
American Career College 260
Telecommunication Space 88
Public Teleconferences (1900 persons) 1 1050
Total 1 1972
Katz, Okitsu Associates forecasts a total parking demand of approximately 1972 parking stalls.
Approximately 21 times a year the APTTC will hold private teleconferencing events. These events
will have a different parking need than the normal parking demand. Living Stream Ministry will not
schedule public teleconferences on the same day as private conferences due to logistical conflicts.
Parking demand on a day when private events are held is calculated in Table 9.
Typical Daily Use 1 Parking Spaces Required
Office uses 574
American Career College 260
Telecommunication Space 88
Private events (5,000 persons) 1 1,000 (23 buses)
Total 1 1922 (23 buses)
During evening private events, the proposed facility is forecast to generate a demand for 1922 parking
stalls, plus 23 bus parking stalls.
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Table 8 Normal Parking Demand
Table 9 Private Events Parking Demand
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
10 Parking Study Update
4. Parking Supply
The proposed project site plan provides surface parking for 2048 regular stalls and 23 bus parking
stalls. These spaces are adequate for all project scenarios. Table 9 shows parking demand and supply
for each scenario at the APTTC.
Scenario
(Normal 1,900- Person
Public Teleconference)
(Normal 5,000- Person
Private Conference)
Table 9 Parking Supply
Parking Demand Parking Supply I Supply Adequate?
Cars I Buses Cars I Buses I Cars I Buses
1972 0 2048 23 Yes Yes
1922 23 2048 23
Parking supply is sufficient for all uses during of the project at the APTTC.
Yes
Yes
It is important to note that for private special events the majority of the participants will be from out
of town and will be staying at local hotels. As a result, participants will be clustered in specific spots
and the Living Stream Ministry will have information on the location of their accommodations Erom
event registration documents. This facilitates the following measures, which are suggested to
alleviate parking pressure during the special events:
Special events now require and will continue to require registration, including information on
the location where the participant will be staying.
Busing will be provided to and from the facility to designated conference hotels. Living
Stream Ministry currently uses buses to reduce traffic and parking congestion at its existing
West Ball Road facility. Records indicate that 30% of participants routinely arrive and depart
in buses. As per the assumptions made earlier regarding bus utilization it will be necessary to
keep close to this level of bus utilization to adequately allow for on -site parking and
transportation of all conference participants at APTTC.
The event administrators will inform participants of available accommodations at designated
conference hotels in order to cluster the individuals and thus facilitate transit to and from the
teleconferencing center by bus, hotel shuttle, or taxi.
Participants will be informed of the parking available at the facility and every effort will be
made to encourage individuals to use the buses.
L.C Katz, Okitsu Associates
rrajjiz Engineers and Trnmpv:atwsi Planers
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
11 Parking Study Update
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Traffic Engineers and Tnmspanmion Planers
Participants will be informed that on- street parking at the event should be avoided as a
courtesy to local residents and businesses.
Living Stream Ministry personnel will assess the parking during events to determine if parking
demand is exceeding the supply and imposing on local on- street parking. Permit parking
measuies to encourage carpooling will be utilized, if necessary, through issuance of a limited
number of parking permits and forcing those without a permit to utilize bus transportation.
Living Stream Ministry personnel will direct and control arriving and departing traffic to
ensure smooth flow in APTTC parking lot and streets immediately adjacent APTTC property.
Par/zing Supply
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
12 Parking Study Update
5. ;us PaStips
The bus circulation plan for the project will allow 23 buses to park on the site in a parking area
adjacent to the proposed building site. The plan will allow event participants to safely unload to and
load from the teleconferencing building. The bus parking area and access is shown in Figure 3.
WA
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Tm ffie Engineers and Transportation Planners
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
13 Parking Study Update
Buses will be
instructed to
park in queue,
starting at the
southernmost
designated
parking space.
Exit
n I I 111 I I 111 PN
1
1
I
111111111 1111111
lilTIT 1111111 II
CIIIIIIIIIC11111I11
CIIIIIIIII {1111111 ICIIIIIIIC
01111111111111111111 1111111[}
LI111111111 111111111 111111111
mHHHH
IIIIIIIIICIIIIIII
CIIIIIIIIICIIIIIIIII_IIIIII I
LI1111L1151. WIJJ111111111 111P1111nuu n1L1111111n11(111111j'1
APTTC: PRIVATE CONFERENCE BUS CIRCULATION
H111 HIIIIIIL
1111111 ti
WA Katz, Okitsu Associates Anaheim Palms Teleconferencing Training Center
Planning and Engineering I in the City of Anaheim
SEC RI
Y
En.er
Not to Scale
Figure 3
Bus Parking
6. 'Fin a ings
The Anaheim Municipal Code requires certain findings to be made before parking waivers are granted
by the Planning Commission. On the basis of this report, five findings must be made. The findings
reported herein are made with the assumption that extra ordinary measures will be taken during the
private training conference events. The findings and specific responses are provided as follows:
The variance, under the 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 reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. The parking
study indicates that the parking demand for off street parking spaces will not exceed the supply
available at the facility.
2. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for
parking spaces upon the public streets in the inmtediate vicinity of the proposed use. The proposed project
will not cause any significant demand for on- street parking spaces, since the everyday use and
special events use will not exceed available parking off street.
3. That the variance, under the condition imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for
parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the inttnediate 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 the code). The proposed project will not cause any demand for parking on private
property in the vicinity of the proposed use. Adequate parking is provided on -site.
4. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off
street parking areas or lots provided for such uses. The amount of parking demand forecast for the site
is less than the supply provided on site. Traffic and parking congestion will not occur, because the
overall demand for parking at the site is within the supply. The layout of the parking area is such
that traffic congestion inside the parking area will not be excessive when parking demand is equal
to or lower than supply.
5. That the variance, under the conditions unposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from
adjacent properties, upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The proposed
project will not impede vehicular ingress or egress, because the project is not expected to result in
demand for on- street parking in the vicinity of any driveways or other locations in the project
vicinity.
WA
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
15 Parking Study Update
7 conclusions and IRecommeiidations
Based on the preceding technical analysis Katz, Okitsu Associates makes the following
recommendations:
Restricting the maximum number of attendees during to 1900 for daytime public
teleconferencing use.
Restricting the number of days for evening private training conferences to twenty -one (21)
days a year, in which the maximum allowable attendance per event equals 5,000 participants.
Implementation of suggested measures for alleviating parking pressure during the private
training events.
On -site parking should be provided per the site plan.
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Trait Engineers and Transportation Planners
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
Parking Study Update
Katz, Okitsu Associates
Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners
APPENDIX A
Vehicle Occupancy Survey
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center
Parking Study Update
bd WUTT:E0 6661 ST '^ON
W
O 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0
x 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N O. o O tl 0 0 0
a
P' 0 0 v- N N o F O
O M 0 t 0 M 000
O I� r n w ro 838
i r r r i r i
W 6 M spy M O b {pn rpm
4:. Q A r W W W
7
O
,„0- tl
O 0.
9
W 7 N 0 0 0 tl 0 N 0 Q 0
q Z q W
4
W_ w
0 0 to w 0
O n o 0
0 N 0 6
a
0 g n w
W o 0 0 e
a 0 r: n w
o
0 0
6 p N M 0
N o 0 N o N
LLB29bb 929 'ON 3N0Hd NOIll105 DIddtlNl 3H1 NObd
Sd WHTT :£0 666T ST 'AON
O
a te 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O
H
0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0
t n
W
W
Z
p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a
O
N 0 0 e O O a 0
a
6
0
VS
0 0 0 N O.- N
t i in �n 5 u+
0 000000 0
O w
0
0
0 ■t 000000000
-P W
W
a M 0 0 0+ 0 0 0 0
O
a
p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a
0
0 [0 0 00
o r
�n 0 0 U h 00
O Q p t µl 41 N s o
0 O O A M �y c
a v v v t w to N 40
LL8291Nb 99 ON 9NOHd NOILIlOS OIJdU'1 9H1 WONA
9d WU11:20 6661 S1 °N
0 w
o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W W
o 0.
I0
w
a (9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
J
,M 0 00 000000
0.
O x
0
N p O p 0 e O e e O
a
z
0
W
h O N N 0 o 0
O< v 3 N m X m
o us a 0 m c
e d N N
W
O
d 0 e O (1 O O g O O
M! O 0
eJ
b
J
OD
UU 0 C 0 O e- 7 p O O 0 O
W
w
W
m M 0 e e O 0 0
1— N m
4 C cc
4
i1 N
ma y Z_ V Q om I N p O M n N O o 0
Q M g a
o
X F p ti z
U O 0 W 0
U C.A. m r- w n M Y b N
z p P
O Ilg3$ w
ili
0 0 0 Ill a 0 e o
a C V' 0 C. 0 I T I w O 4L I
In q
c J i E W g r a o 0 0 00
LLBE9177 9E9 'ON 3NOHd NOIIIl19S DIddual 3H1 WONd
Ld W 1 :£9 666I St °N
W
W
O
0 o 0 00 O o o
0
c o o D o- D o o
X G a
a
y r) 0 00 ON o 0 0 0
5
A 9
CU
N O N N O O
W
a
z
O
uN' o
to
4
2 a
O 0000,0000
re
0 uW.
a
N .Y o) 0 0 0
La ti P ti 2 2 2 0 2
oil
W Q 00 o o g ui
9
0 V p 0 0 0 0 0 000
y w
a
Q W
pI 0 0 0 w o o Ill
N W
7,- 4
002
2 W p N 0
00000000
O o W
n o d
O o
W 6 Y
1i- a< 1O z
O N W 0
Z 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
g 3 o a
II o 4 q 8 0 q
W q N oO
U O ti ti r 2 2 m Z q 8.
y t1Y w 2 [2 p N
cc Q A h ry A O (O 0 Ol
o a O a
LLB291 929 'ON 3NONd NOI1fllOS OldJ d 3N1 WONd
Anaheim Palms Teleconference and Training Center:
Traffic Management Plan
ITEM NO. 7
OVERVIEW Revised: 9/15/2006
The revised site plan for the Anaheim Palms Teleconference and Training Center (APTTC), located
at the former site of Hubbell Electric, contains significant improvements in overall layout,
including an increase in the number of parking spaces, while, at the same time, segregating
streams of vehicular traffic to maximize the reduction in vehicular interaction with pedestrian
movement into and out of APTTC. Designated pick up and drop -off areas for bus, taxis, hotel
shuttles have been more effectively incorporated into the plan to ensure ease of access and
pedestrian safety. Bicycle racks, accommodating attendees who choose to utilize this
transportation modality, have also been clearly designated. (See Anaheim Palms Corporate Center:
Site Plan, attached)
Attendees to public and private events at APTTC, entering from Electric Way, will now be able to
travel north into the lot, enter into any one of ten (10) east/west parking aisles, and travel west to
spaces nearest the building. Upon exiting their vehicles, pedestrian will be functionally segregated
from later arriving vehicles, which will be parking behind them in open stalls to the west. The new
layout reduces the pedestrian interaction with vehicles moving through the parking lot and parking
on -site.
Pick -up and drop -off locations for buses, taxis, and hotel shuttles have been located in areas that
greatly reduce the potential for interaction with vehicles moving through the parking lot. Bus
parking has been relocated to the west side of APTTC, allowing buses to enter from Electric Way,
proceed around the north of the building to park. At the conclusion of any event, buses will be exit
without the need for any movement in reverse directly onto Woodland Avenue from Hubbell
Way. Exit doors on the west end of APTTC will allow bus passengers to quickly board buses
without the need to interact with vehicles from associated with attendees arriving by car, taxi, or
hotel shuttles. Bicycle racks are also located on the west side of APTTC. (See APTTC: Bus, Taxi,
and Shuttle Drop off Sites Bicycle Racks, attached)
Pedestrian circulation pathways have been enhanced to provide for maximum segregation of
pedestrian and vehicular movement. Four (4) pedestrian walkways spanning the length of the
parking lot are provided on the east side of APTTC, and two (2) are provided in the bus parking
area. (See APTTC: Pedestrian Circulation Plan, attached)
APCC Traffic Management Plan, Page 1 of 12
I
I Tniu
I. 1 Rrrlil llii(:
1� 1
ff
l
1 n W1J!' u mina(
1 IIRI? lr IIr (17tnitl
�lil�l i d14 Hl PlilltliNfrilllitifNio
iiitri tsresr:1rnr: C illIII:IL\
Nzi_ �!IWJ_,1LL
1111ID11 I LLLIIJ.!FF 1 ll11111]
ni: flm 'ni rruinTn Trn
U'�IIIII'EIllll�' }Ii1H
woouxo [QM
ll e—
YH1114.144fl*ICIA
tuthI._IUUtW
1IIII 1911ElIIlan111111
I;If.Cllf'•11111 1 1110 1 I+II Pi;W11llP1LLIL 1111L1fU1f
too
SCALE
Oii IIflf[O1117uiilih1Ll
6
Th
tm 200
FEET
PROJECT SITE
SITE PLAN: PROJECT SITE AND APCC
VICINITY MAP
ROHR OIfl110
tnOP„". =`am
Mt fIO1110
pp ,,1 111,�11,, 0M8 HMO
1 lIflIflIlOHNIMI101iOlIi000 IMO "IIl IWHWI
IA W. LA BULDPICISI
Pfl MWt
JI 111Plllllj 111(1111111111121
11 iffffTihnun(1®nn1-i
111111111iuu1uu11
C SITE IS SHOWN
RKING
BPI FhIIIIOII010
11
41011h1 0
OIIBO IIIOIOII010
OII1OIIIIO01O
'1 I C
Designated
Bus Loading
Unloading
Designated
Bicycle
Parking
i nimiliiiir.
trrirntrirritrwrr
L.N.
L I nwitiiiliii Lii
I WWHLUHUUL
tOBBEL
WAY
[111+111111[111111111111111111
c
1
1
1
1
111111111
APTTC: BUS, TAXI, AND SHUTTLE DROP OFF SITES
BICYCLE RACKS
111111111 111111111
1 -1 111111111 11111111111111111i
E/
Designated Taxi WAY 1
CTRI
Hotel Shuttle Drop-off Site
NORTH
111111111 1 11 111111 111111111
1 111111111 1111111d
tJBSEL
WAY
11' "1•1111., (11111111111F\
i
Pedestrian Walkways
APTTC
111111111 IIII V III �.9 s••
1111111 1111 111 1111111 1 111LI L
APTTC: PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION PLAN
1
1111111
Ill 1111q
11111111 1 111111111 111 1111 U
L
LLf111111f
=EC7RI
WAY
NORTH
PUBLIC EVENTS: Dates and Expected Attendance
Availability: APTTC will provide corporate clients and the general public access its
teleconferencing services throughout the week from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Maximum
occupancy for public operations will be limited to 1900. No conflicts between the operation
of APTTC and those of current occupants are anticipated, given adequate parking support and
streamlined ingress and egress options for the overall site. (See "Parking Study Update for
Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training Center in the City of Anaheim," July 2006.)
Attendance: 1900 maximum.
PUBLIC EVENTS: Parking Supply and Demand
Parking supply and demand for public events is detailed below.
1'ARKING DEMAND AND SUPPLY: PUBLIC TELECONFERENCES'.:
Building
Building 1
Building 2
Building 3
Building 4
Building 5
Building 6
American Career College
Instruction Area
Office Area
Orange Coast Title
Public Teleconf. (1900 persons)
Size (sf) Rate
75,736 4/1000
19,600 4/1000
7,664 4/1000
6,274 4/1000
26,460 4/1000
17,570 4/1000
Spaces Required
303
78
31
25
106
63
10,000 20/1000 200
15,000 I 4/1000 60
13,992 I 4/1000 56
1 1.81 pers /vehicle 1050
Total Parking Demand 1972
Total Parking Supply 2048
Surplus Parking on Site I 76
Source: Katz, Okitsu Associates, "Parking Study Update for Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training
Center in the City of Anaheim," Tables 2 -5, July 2006.
Use
Office
Office
Office
Office
Office
Office
Mixed
Instruction
Office
Office
PUBLIC EVENTS: Arrivals and Departures
Arrivals and departures will vary according to the event scheduling of each business client.
PUBLIC EVENTS: Modal Split
Attendants for public teleconference events are anticipated to primarily arrive by car at a rate of
1.81 passengers per car, generating a parking demand for 1050 stalls.
APCC Traffic Management Plan, Page 5 of 12
PUBLIC EVENTS: Traffic Flow Measures on Public Streets and Site Interior
Ingress and egress traffic for public events will occur primarily from Woodland Avenue. APTTC
event coordinators will specify this as the preferred route for entrance and exiting in its
communications with event planners and in its event contracts.
Ingress and egress traffic for public events can also be accommodated from Gilbert Street and
La Palma Avenue.
Movement of traffic on Gilbert Street and La Palma Avenue will be facilitated by newly
installed traffic signalization at the west entrance into APTTC on La Palma Avenue.
APTTC will allow on -site facilitation of traffic movement by event promoters, including
temporary directional signage and parking assistants.
APCC Traffic Management Plan, Page 6 of 12
PRIVATE EVENTS: Dates and Expected Attendance
Availability: APTTC will provide private teleconferencing services for Living Stream Ministry.
These services will be limited to 21 days a year, Monday through Saturday, from 2:00 p.m. to
10:30 p.m., with participants arriving between 2:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. and departing between
9:30 p.m. and 10:30 Maximum occupancy for these special operations will be limited to
5,000. Currently, two six day international trainings occur each year; both coincide with major
summer and winter holidays. Other shorter events occur around Memorial Day, Labor Day,
Thanksgiving, and New Years Day, as well as a conference in mid spring and in mid -fall.
During these events, other teleconferencing services will not be available to the general public
to avoid event conflicts. In addition, no conflicts between the operation of APTTC during
special events and those of APCC's current long -term occupants are anticipated, given the
management of parking, multiple ingress and egress options for the overall site, and other
mitigating factors. (See "Parking Study Update for Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training
Center in the City of Anaheim," July 2006.)
Attendance: 5000 maximum
PRIVATE EVENTS: Parking Supply and Demand
Parking supply and demand for private events is detailed below.
PARKING DEMAND AND SUPPLY: I'RIVATE TELECONFERENCES
Building
Building 1
Building 2
Building 3
Building 4
Building 5
Building 6
American Career College
Instruction Area
Office Area
Orange Coast Title
Private Teleconf. (5000 persons)
Cars
Buses
Shuttle
Use
Office
Office
Office
Office
Office
Office
Mixed
Instruction
Office
Office
Persons per Mode
3000
1250
750
Size (sf) Rate
75,736 4/1000
19,600 4/1000
7,664 4/1000
6,274 4/1000
26,460 4/1000
17,570 4/1000
10,000
15,000
13,992
20/1000
4/1000
4/1000
Total Parking Demand
Total Parking Supply
Surplus Parking on Site
Spaces Required
303
78
31
25
106
63
200
60
56
3/1000 1000
55 /per bus 23
3 /per vehicle 0
1922 (23 bus)
2048 (23 bus)
126
Source: Katz, Okitsu Associates, "Parking Study Update for Anaheim Palms Teleconference Training
Center in the City of Anaheim," Tables 2 -6, July 2006.
APCC Traffic Management Plan, Page 7 of 12
PRIVATE EVENTS: Arrivals and Departures
The impacts of arriving and departing traffic can be reliably anticipated given the set schedule of
private conference meetings, and they can be reliably mitigated given the forecasted trip
distribution of arrivals and departures.
The six day conferences consist of two meetings per day. The first meeting is scheduled from 4:00
PM to 5:30 PM. Ingress traffic will begin at approximately 3:00 PM and continue to approximately
3:50 PM. There is a meeting break from 5:30 PM to 7:00 PM. There is minimal egress /ingress
traffic during the dinner break because food catering services are provided to the attendees, who
remain on the campus due to the brevity of the break. The second meeting is scheduled from 7:00
PM to 9:30 PM. All vehicles are off -site by 10:30 PM.
PRIVATE EVENTS: Modal Splits
Approximately 1000 cars will be arriving and departing. In addition, 23 buses will be utilized with
arrivals and departures occurring on Woodland Drive. Shuttle vehicles from nearby hotels also
will drop off and pick up some of the attendees. (See "Parking Study Update for Anaheim Palms
Teleconference Training Center in the City of Anaheim," July 2006.)
PRIVATE EVENTS: Traffic Flow Measures on Public Streets and Site Interior
a Police Department and /or Traffic Management personnel will ensure the orderly and timely
ingress /egress of traffic on La Palma Avenue at staffing levels recommended by the Anaheim
Police Department Traffic Bureau.
New traffic signalization has been installed at the intersection of Gilbert and La Palma Avenue,
pursuant to engineering specifications provided by the City of Anaheim, to facilitate ingress
and egress from the east entrances of the APTTC site.
O Parking supply and parking demand estimates for private events indicate a surplus of 126
spaces.
6 Bus arrivals and departures will occur on Woodland Drive. The loading and unloading of bus
passengers at the APTTC site will occur in designated areas, separated from the interior
movement of cars, allowing for maximum safety during offloading and loading. Separate
entrances into the APTTC facility will ensure a maximum separation of bus pedestrian traffic
and interior vehicular traffic. (See attachment, APTTC: Private Conference Bus Circulation.)
During private events, Living Stream Ministry will
o Assess actual parking trends to determine if parking demand exceeds supply and provide
parking permits as needed in order to maintain the maximum use of available buses.
o Direct the movement of vehicles during private teleconference events through the
coordinated use of parking assistants to ensure a smooth flow of traffic into APTTC parking
areas from ingress points on public streets immediately adjacent to APTTC property. Cars
entering the site will be directed to interior areas of the site through the use of traffic flow
assistants and traffic cones to reduce backups and delays on public streets. Parking
assistants will systematically fill parking areas. (See attachments, APTTC: Private
Conference Car Entry and APTTC: Private Conference Car Exiting.)
APCC Traffic Management Plan, Page 8 of 12
Registered participants to private teleconference and training events will be:
o Provided with advance notification of traffic management and parking procedures in their
registration packets.
o Notified of off -site bus pick up points at designated conference hotels.
o Informed of parking availability and encouraged to make use of buses.
o Informed of need to avoid parking on public streets, given the surplus of on -site parking
sites and the availability of bus transportation.
PRIVATE CONFERENCES: Additional Measures
o Advance Notification of Event Schedule: A calendar of events will be submitted to the Code
Enforcement Division of the Planning Department by January 1 of each calendar year
indicating the dates and times of the two (2) six day conferences for the upcoming year. Notice
of any change in schedule will be given at least one (1) month prior to any event. A copy of
this schedule will be provided to the Anaheim Police Department Traffic Bureau. Events will
be confirmed with the Anaheim Police Department Traffic Bureau thirty (30) days prior to the
scheduled events for review and recommendations concerning the provision of Anaheim
Police Department traffic management assistance.
Police: Traffic management assistance will conform to the recommendations of the Anaheim
Police Department as determined by their review.
APCC Traffic Management Plan, Page 9 of 12
Buses will be
instructed to
park in queue,
starting at the
southernmost
designated
parking space.
08 EL
WO'
Exit
At
N
B111111111_11111111111111E_
n1m1i1H
APTIt: PRIVATE CONFERENCE BUS CIRCULATION
Enter
r
NORTH
iJ II111111 1h mil
0111
11111111111
1111 _111W IMC
MITI' ITITITIT •ITITIT n 1I (1111111 [`N
,IIIIIIIH II1111
M11111111 1111111
1
I
CIIIIII1ll Ilf 11111
I it
111111111
1111111111111111 IJ 1j 1111 I1_I 1111111111111 I11J1111 IJ2111111111 I fl
I I wI r
II II W,
APTTC: PRIVATE CONFERENCE CAR ENTRY
m111 1_111111111
A
NORTH
Cars will be
directed to
enter APTTC
only from
Electric Way
to avoid cross
directional
traffic flows.
17111TITI IWIIITRI'll 11111111111H\
111111111; 11
i J
•OBBEL
WAY
1 111HIM! =HMIII
i11111111IuI1111111 R111111W
Cars will be
rT 1 1 1 1 1 1 iI I I l l l l l l i I I I l I I I L directed to
Q111111111.111111111'.1.11 111111111111111111.1111n ElecfrcWa
I I I I I I 111 p 1 I) l l I_I_I n l I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 01111 1 1 1 1 1 rl I I I I I l l' di rectional
avoid cross-
t G di Ec c. traffic flows
w xl and conflicts
with buses
iting onto
Hubbell Way.
APTTC: PRIVATE CONFERENCE CAR EXITING
NORTH
Item No. 8
RCL 66-67-64 (14)
VAR 2678
CUP 3010
I-
W
W
V)
O
W
N
2
Q
SP 94-1 (SG)
DA2
RCL 65-66-24 (29)
CUP 3626
CUP 3D10
VAR 4132
VAR 4104
VAR 2876
IND. OFFICE BLDG.
SP 94-1 (SC)
DA2
RCL 6566-24 (29) CHURCH
CUP 2004-04945
CUP 3010
VAR 4133
VAR 2676
(CUP 2003-04793)
CHURCH
i
j® 610'
LANDON DR
SP
(SC)
DA 2
RCL 66-67-64 (14)
CUP 3010
VAR 4230
VAR 2878
INDUSTRIAL BLDG. RCL fib-67-64 (14)
CUP 3010
VAR 4230
VAR 2876
SP 94 1 (SC)
DA2 SP 94-i
RCL 66-67-64 (14)
CUP 2006-05126
m
~ ;3 CUP 3010- CUP 3010
-VAR 2678
~ VAR 2878
'
. VAR 4230' VAR 4230
ADJ 0150
":INDUSTRIAL BLDG. YKK 21PPER
- ~ ,.; COMPANY
d~ 319'-~
LA PALMA AVENUE
SP
SP 94-1 (SC)
DA 2
RCL 66-67-64 (10)
MTI LING
SP 94-1 (SC) I SP 94-1 (SC)
DA 2 DA 2
RCL 66-67-64 (10) RGL 66-61-64 (9) RCL 66-67-64 (9)
'~ I VAR 2323 I RCL 66-67-64 (7)
SMALL INDUSTRIAL THE ORMAN
FIRMS GRUBB CO.
SP 94-1
66-67-64 (4 RCL 66-67-64
MALL IND. FII
RCL 66-67-64 (~L 66-67-6
'BRED
CO. INC.
SP 941
RCL 66-67-64
ELECTRICAL P(
ci io eTnnr. N
_.
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE SCENIC CORRIDOR (SC) OVERLAY ZONE.
Conditional Use Permit ND. 2006-05128
Requested By: CINVEST LLC
4999 East La Palma Avenue
Subject Property
Date: October 2, 2006
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 172
10130
Subject Property
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05128
Requested By: CINVEST LLC
4999 East La Palma Avenue
Date: October 2, 2006
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 172
40130
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE SCENIC CORRIDOR (SC) OVERLAY ZONE. Date ofAedal Photo:
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 8
8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION {Motion)
8b. WAIVER OFCODE REQUIREMENT ' (Motion)
8c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0: 2006-05128 (Resolution)
SITEtOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This rectangulary-shaped, 3.13-acre property has a frontage of 319 feet on the north side of
La Palma Avenue, a maximum depth of,428 feet and is Jocated 610 feet east of the
centerline of Manassero Street (4999 East La Palma Avenue).
_ REQUEST.
(2) The applicant requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit to permit a church within an
existing industrial building under authority of Code Section 18.120.070.050.0511 with waiver:
of the following:
SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum numberof parking spaces
1243 required; 159 proposed).,,.
BACKGROUND:
j3) This property is developed with an industrial building and is zoned SP94-1;'Development
Area 2 (Northeast Area. Specific Plan No. 94-1, Expanded Industrial Area).' The Anaheim
.General Plan designates the site for Industrial land uses and further designates all
surrounding properties for Industrial land uses. The property is also located in the Merged
Redevelopment Area.
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
(4) The following zoning actions have occurred on the property:
® Variance No. 4230 (to waive the minimum numberpf parking spaces to construct a
tl 93,800 square building in two phases) was approved by the Zoning Administrator on
August 5, 1993). This variance applies to this property as well as other,parcels under
separate ownership.
> Administrative Adjustment No. 150 (to waive the maximum floor area to construct a
'69,705 square.foot industrial building) was approved by the Zoning Administrator on
February 4, 1999.
d Conditional Use Permit No. 3010 (to permit industrially-related office uses in
conjunction with. a proposetl industrial complex) was approved by the Planning
Commission on June 20, 1988.
Variance No. 2878 (waiver of lots abutting a public street to establish a 27-lot
subdivision) wes approved by the Planning Commission on`November 22, 1986.
'PROPOSAL:
__ ,(5) The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permiQto establish a.14,922
square foot. church in an existing 69,705 square foot industrial building. There are currently
two (2) other tenants within the industrial building which include a wheelchair distributor and
a research and development firm.
Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 8
(6) < The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates that the existing two story industrial building is
orated at the northeast portion of the site surrounded by a parking lot. The church is
proposed in the northwest portion of building do both the first and second floor
{7) The floor plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates that the church consists of an assembly/sanctuary
area,: multi-purpose room, storage, sound room, video room, cry room; toddler room,. youth
ministry,bookstore, prayerroom and andillary uses (restrooms, hallways dressing rooms,
foyer area, platform, electric room and corridor area).
(8) Vehicular access to the site is provided via two (2) existing driveways from La Palma
Avenue. Plans indicate a total of 159 existing and proposed on-site parking spaces for this
property. Code requires 243 spaces.based on the following::
CODE-REQUIRED pARKING
USE SQUARE FEET PARKING RATIO REQUIRED
:(per 1,000 sq. ft) ,
4995 E. La Palma Ave. 4,651 29/1,000 s.f. 135
Church ASSembly /area For non-fixed sealing area
Ancillary Uses
Restrooms, hallways,
janitor room, foyer, 7,370 N/A N/A
electrical room, dressing
rooms'
Sound room, vided room,
cry room, prayer room,
toddler room, ministry 2,901 N/A NIA
room, book store.{only open
dudn bhurch services '
4999 E. La Palma
Avenue
:Office Use 6,699 ' 4/1,000 s.f. 27
"(Research and Development
:: Tenant)
Mezzanine storage 2,385 1.55/1,000 s.f 4
4999 E:La Palma Ave.
WheelchairDistributor 2,129. 4/1,000s.f. 9
(africe use)
Wheelchair
Distributor
(Warehouse area including 10% 43,570. 1.55/1,OOOs.f. 68
of office area allowed to be
'wnslderert st warehouse
arkln standard) '
TOTAL 69,705. 243. spaces
"Cade does not require any parking for the accessory uses such as cry rooms, prayer rooms, etc. restrooms,
_ .. -',lobbies orhallways
Page 2
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2,.2006
Item No. B
(11) Sign plans (Exhibit No. 6) indicate two proposed 12 square foot fabric awning signs above
the main entry doors to the church facility. Currently there is one existing wall sign on the
south elevation facing to Palma Avenue for one of the existing tenants.:One awning sign
is proposed along the west elevation of the building facing theparking area and the other is
proposed on the north elevation of the building facing the rear parking area. Code permits
a maximum of three (3) wall signs on both the north and. west elevation for the church
based on the frontage of the tenant space, Wall signs shall not exceed a letter height of
twenty-four (24) inches (fora 2-story structure) and a maximum area of 10% of the facility's
elevation (or 200 square feet, vvhichever`is less}. The proposed wall signs comply with
code. Plans further indicate a 5 foot 6 inch high monument sign proposed along La Palma
Avenue. The sign complies with code in;~egards to size however the monument sign
.needs to be relocated to the east to comply with Engineering Standard Detail No. 115
pertaining to line of sight requjrements for signage ocated adjacent to a driveway. A
condition of approval has been added requiring staff review of final. sign plans including this
relocation:
(12) The applicant has submitted the attached letter of operation and project description
indicating the hours of operation are worship services in the Sanctuary on Monday,
Wednesday and Friday for four hours from 7:00 p.m. through,11:00 p.m. and on every ,
Saturday for six hours from 11:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m. No;private school or child
daycare is proposed. Office staff will not be on-site during the day as the church has an
off-site office.
(13) Reof plans (Exhibit tJos.4 and 5) have been submitted indicating that roof-mounted
equipment is proposed for the church facility. Plans indicate a proposed screen wall to hide
She equipment frompublic view. Staff has added a condition of approval requiring that all
roof mounted equipment and proposed screening shall comply with`code.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTANALYSIS:
(14) .Staff has reviewed the request to permit a'church within an existing industrial building and
the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and
finds no significant environmental impactand, therefore, recommends that a Negative
Declaration be approved upon a finding`by the Commission that the declaration reflects the
independentjudgment of theJead 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 hat the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
EVALUATION:
(15) .Churches are permitted in SP94-1, Development Area 2 zone subject to the approval of a
conditional use permit provided that the hours and,days of operetion and the duration of the
permit is specified in he approval. The Code furthe[ specifies where the church is not the
exclusive use of the broperty, that activities priorto 6:00 p.m. `during the week shall be
limited to church office staff. The proposed hours of operation comply with code limitations.
(16) The waiver pertains to the minimum number of parking spaces: `Code requires a minimum of
243 spaces for the entire industrial/office complex including the proposed church and plans
>'ihdicate 159 code-compliant spaces. (There are tahdem spaces shown in the loading dock
__ area on the site plan that do not comply with code that v/ere not counted towards the spaces
provided.) The City's independent Traffic Consultant hasprepared'a parking analysis dated
.August 2006, and has determined that the proposed parking area referenced in the study
would be sufficient for the proposed uses on the property. Based upon the recommendation
..Page 4
Staff Report to the
.Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 8
of the City's independent Traffic Cohsultant, staff recommends approval of this waiver based
on the following findings:;'
"(a) That the waiver, tender the conditions imposed, ff any, will not cause fewer off-street
parkingspaces to be provided for suchuse than the number of such spaces
necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such' use under the normal and
reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use.
The site will provide adequate parking onsite for all of the uses including the proposed
church use. No pffsite parking spaces will be needed.
(b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand
' <and competition for parking spaces upon the publiastreets in the fmmediate vicinity of
the proposed use.
The site will provide adequate parking onsite for all of the uses including the proposed
church use.' Curbside parking is not available along La Palma Avenue.
(c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand for
parking spaces upon adjacent private property inYhe immediate vicinity of fhe
proposed use.
The site will provide adequate parking onsite. Nb overFlow parking is anticipated to
occur upon adjacent ptivate property. The Cornerstone Church is Immediately
`adjacent to this site.
(d) That the waiver, Lnder the conditions: imposed, will not increase traffic congestion
within the off-street parking areas or lots provided forsuch use.
The site will provide sufficient parking onsite for its uses.. Because the supply of
.parking spaces is adequate for the observed parking demand, no congestion within
he parking lot fs expected.
(e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress to or
egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets is the immediate vicinity of the
proposed use.
The site will provide sufficient parking onsite fonts uses. The parking areas are set
sufficiently within the site, so as to preclude any backing up onto City streets. This
ensures that there will be no vehicles queuing to get in that could ih any way impede
the: ingress or egress from adjacent properties." <'
As a recommended condition of approval, staff is requiring that the security gates
alongthe north patking lot, as shown in the follov/ing photo, be opened at alt times
during church activities prevents.
Page 5
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 8
~/ g G
jy f ~ YfY L t/A Ggun~ u4
v.~ ~`
~~n ~ ~#i5°GI91~
,
r' ~~ ~ .security gaffe
e'
mid v - ~<
~,~.-~ «~
~~.,
'yr ~ ~ :L~
(17) The property is located in an area that allows a variety of industrial and industrially-related
uses, ranging from light industrial business to research and development offices. The
potential for operational conflicts with. the industrial building to the north, the warehouse to
the south and the industrial(officebuilding to the east is minimal due to the types of uses
occupied within those buildings, and because the church services occur: on Saturdays and
on weeknights after 6:00 p.m., when the industrial activities typically cease. The property
located to the west of the premises is a church and school facility;(Comerstone Church}.
There will be little overlap in the operating,hours for the two church facilities since the
Cornerstone Church has its main services on Sundays and study classes on Wednesday
evening and the proposed facility services will be on Monday, Wednesday and Friday
evenings,aod on Saturdays. The adjacent industrial .uses do not havebutdoor uses
associated with their;business operation nor do they operate in the evenings or do
weekends. Because this particular property is not adjacent to heavy manufacturing, the
likelihood of conflict with adjacent land uses is unlikely, therefore, the use would not
adversely affect the adjoining land uses or growth and development of the surrounding
properties, and staff recommends aoQroval of the project.
FINDINGS:
(18) Section 18.42.110 of the parking code sets forth the. following findings which are required to
be made before a parking waiver is approved. by the Planning 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 number of such spaces
necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and
reasonable foreseeable cohditions of operation of such use.
(b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand
and competition for parking spaces upon thepublic streets in the immediate vicinity of
the proposed use.
(c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand for
parking spaces upon adjacent private property in he immediate vicinity of the
.proposed use.
(d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion
within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for such use.
- (e) 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.
Page 6
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 8
Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the,granting of any waiver
pursuant to this section, the granting bf the waiver shall be deemed contingent upon
.:operation of the proposed use in conformance with the assumptions relating to the operation
and intensity of the use as contained in the Parking Demand Study that formed the basis for
.approval of the waiver. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or othervvise deviating from any of
.the assumptions as contained in the Parking Demand Study shall be deemed a violation of
the express conditions imposed upon the waiver, which shall subject the waiver to
revocation or modification pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.60.200 (City-Initiated
Revocation or Modificationpf Permitsj.
(19) Before the Commission: grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that
he evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
(a) That the use is property one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the
Zoning. Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses
..Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority);
(bj .That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and
development of the area in which it is proposed to be located;
(c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area
br to the health and safety;.
(d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the
streets ahd highways tlesigned 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 health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
RECOMMENDATION:
(20) .Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence
presented in this staff report., and oral and written evidence. presented at the public hearing,
that the Planning Commission take the following actions:
(a) By motion, approve a Negative Declaration for the project.
(b) By motion, approve the waiver of minimum number of parking spaces 243
required; 159 existing and proposed) based on the findings contained in the
parking study prepared by the City's Independent Traffic Consultant and
summarized in this staff report.
(c) By resolution, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05128 to establish a
church in an existing industrialbuilding by adopting the attached resolution
including the findings and conditions contained herein.
Page 7
[®F2t~F7]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2006--***
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05128 BE GRANTED
.(4999 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE)
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional
Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described as:
PARCEL B, AS SHOWN' ON THE PLAT ATTACHED TO LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LL386
RECORDED SEPTEMBER 16, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19970450945 OF OFFICIAL
.RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission. did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on October 2, 2006, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal. Code, Chapter 18.60, 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 church is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by
Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.120.070.050.0511 with the following waiver:
SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of oarkino spaces
243 required; 159 proposed)
P. That the parking waiver is hereby approved based upon the parking analysis prepared by
the City's Independent Traffic Engineer providing evidence that adequate parking exists on the property for
the combination of uses on the site;
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 ofspaces necessary to accommodate all
vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of
such use; because sufficient parking. spaces will be available immediately surrounding the building for the
church uses both on Saturdays, weekdays, and weeknights, and for the research and development facility
and wheelchair repair facility located on-site, and there will not fewer off-street parking spaces available for
the uses than provided on-site;
4. That the parking wavier, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion or
demand. and competition for parking spaces upon. the public street in the immediate vicinity of the use
because there is no existing on-street parking available along the frontage of East La Palma Avenue. All
parking for this site will be accommodated within the off-street parking lot;
5. -That the parking. waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and
competitioh for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use
as all parking spaces will be provided immediately surrounding the building. As indicated by the study, no
demand for parking on adjacent private property is anticipated;
Cr\PC2006- -1- PC2006-
6. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress or
egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use.
Furthermore, it has been determined by the parking study that adequate on•site parking. spaces are
provided;.
7. That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development
of the area in which it is proposed to be located as the parking study has demonstrated that the site can
accommodate the combined uses on-site and the existing land uses in the area are light industrial to office
uses,
8. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use as conditioned, in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to
the health and safety.
9. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose and undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area based on the Endings of the
parking study that indicate that adequate parking would be provided on-site and the area is already
developed with light industrial uses and office type uses in the vicinity.
10. That the granting of-the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be
detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim because the proposed use is
compatible with existing land uses in the area, and wilt primarily be operating when other businesses are
closed.
11. That'** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding
that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the
Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further
finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that
the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does
hereby grant subject Petition far 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 this establishment shall be operated as a church only. If at any such time the operational
characteristics of the church change, a detailed description of the operational changes shall be submitted
for review by the Ctty's Traffic and Parking Consultant to determine if the changes would cause fewer off-
street parking spaces to be provided than the number of spaces provided on site. If it is determined the
expected demand is greater than the spaces provided on site, an application for modification of the
conditional use permit shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for approval by the Planning
Commission.
2. That church operations shall be limited to the following:
(a) Church Services: Monday, Wednesday & Friday: 7:00 PM- 11:00 PM
-° Saturday: 11:00 AM - 4:00 PM
-2- PC2006-
3. That this facility shall not be used as a private daycare, nursery, elementary, junior and/or senior high
school. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
4. That no portable signs shall be utilized to advertise the church..
5. That final sign plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division of the Planning Department for
review and approval Any decision by staff regarding signs maybe appealed to the Planning
Commission as a 'Report and Recommendation' item.
6. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion through the provisions of regular
landscaping maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours
from time of discovery.
7. That plans showing the existing building conditions and the applicable building codes for the church,
shall be submitted to the Building Division for review and approval to ensure compliance with such
Building Safety Code requirement (i.e., existing requirements. and occupancy loads). Said plans shall be
prepared by a licensed architect and/or engineer.
8. That the on-site landscaping and irrigation system shall be maintained in compliance with City standards.
9. That at no time shall there be any outdoor storage on the site for the church.
10. That four (4) foot high address numbers shall be displayed that on the roof of the building in contrasting
color to the roof material. The numbers shale not be visible to adjacent and nearby streets or properties.
Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted to the Police Department, Community
Services Division, for review and approval
11. That if an alarm system is installed, aBurglary/Robbery Alarm Permit application, Form APD 516, shall
be completed and submitted to the Police Department prior to initial alarm activation. This form is
available at the Police Department front counter.
12. That a Fire Emergency Listing Card, Form APD-281, shall be completed and submitted to the Police
Department. The form is available at the Police Department front counter.
13. That at all times the church is in operation that the security gates shall be opened so that the parking lot
to the north is available for use by the church members on Monday, Wednesday and Friday evenings
and Saturday afternoons.
14. That the church shall not schedule weekday activities before 7:00 PM on weekdays. This restriction
includes weddings, funerals., religious ceremonies, meeting and classes.
15. That the parking area shall be re-striped in conformance with City Standard Detail Nos. 436-G and 470.
A plan. shall be submitted. to the Planning Services Division for review and approval prior to issuance of
building permits and the striping shall occur prior to final inspection.
16. That all air conditioning apparatus and other room mounted equipment shall be properly shielded from
view from the public right-of-way. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted
for building permits.
17. That an on-site trash truck turn around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476
or an approved alternative, which shall be shown on plans as required by the Department of Public
Works, Sanitation Division. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building
permits.
18. That there shall not be trash pick-up on Saturday unless approved by the Streets and Sanitation Division
of the Public Works Department.
-3- PC2006-
19. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with the plans and
specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the
Planning Department Exhibit Nos. 1 through 6 as conditioned herein.
20. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 3, 6, 7, 10, 15, 16, and 17 above-mentioned, shall be
complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions maybe granted in accordance
with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code
21. That prior to final. building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 11, 12, 15, and 19 above-mentioned,
shall be complied with.
22. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a
showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and
purpose of the conditions}, (ii) the modification complies with the Anaheim MunicipatCode and (iii) the
applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved
development.
23. That approval of this application"constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal
regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request
regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and
all of the conditions hereinabove set forth.. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared
invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution,
and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying. all charges related
to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final. invoice or
prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all. charges
shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
October 2, 2006. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Zoning
Provisions -General" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced
by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-4- PC2006-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on October 2, 2006, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
.2006.
SENIOR SECRETARY. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-5- PC2006-
,4ttachment -Item Mo. 8
Sanetuary.
In the Premises,. a Sanctuary is proposed on the submitted plans for a
Religious Assembly.
A, flours of ®peration.
In the Sanctuary, worship services will occur every Monday,.
Wednesday and Friday for four hours from 7:.00 p.m, through 11:00 p.m.
and every Saturday for six hours from 11:00 a.m. through 4:00 p.m.
The times and days of the worship services will be during
non-business hours, so that. Applicant's usage will not be during any times in
which the Building's other tenants will be in occupancy.
With the exception of national holidays, Applicant will limit its
activities in the Sanctuary, prior to 6:00 p.m., on Mondays through Fridays,
to church office staff and educational activities.
B. Gross Floor Area.
The proposed Sanctuary will have non-fixed seating, so that the fixed
seating computation per Table 42-A will not be applicable.
The Sanctuary will have 4,651 square feet Gross Floor Area measured
from each exterior wall. According to Table 42-A, Applicant is required to
have 135 ~arkin~ spaces (29 spaces x 4,651 GFA / 1,000) for the Sanctuary.
C. Excluded Gross Floor Areas.
Since the Ground Floor Area is designed to calculate the public
seating area, in order to determine the expected demand for parking spaces,
the following non public areas of the Sanctuary have been excluded from the
calculation of the GFA:
(1) Platform. The Platform will be utilized by the Pastor,
staff, and choir for leading worship services and for preaching and teaching.
The Pastor, staff, and choir will have seats in the main Sanctuary area.
There will be no additional public seating on the Platform.
(2) Multi-Purpose Room. The Multi-Purpose Room will be
used for only for storage of extra chairs and equipment during the main
worship services, and will not offer any public seating. Occasionally, when
the main Sanctuary is not in use, the equipment will removed, and the
Multi-Purpose Room will be used for a study class.
Rttachment -Item IVo. 8
I°e~th ®f fhe Spe~af Che~~ch
~a~°~as~g St~ud~
4999 East La Palma Avenue
Anaheim, California
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
Raf q ~
3 flss®tiaites, 9nc.
August 2006
'c'able of Contents
I.
II.
III.
N.
V.
VI.
VII.
VII.
IX.
X.
Section Page
Introduction 1
Project Location 1
Site Description I
A. Site 1
B. Current Tenants, Land Use and Hours 1
C. Current Congregation, Location and Hours 1
Parking Requirements per Municipal Code 1
Site Parking Counts 3
Methodology of Study 3
Site Observations 3
A. Security Gates 3
B. Pedestrian Access 3
C. Vehicular Access 4
Conclusions 4
Findings 4
Recommendations 5
Appendix A Site Plan 6
Appendix B-1 Parking Counts at Existing Site 7
Appendix B-2 Parking Counts at Existing Congregation 8
Appendix C Site Photos 9
1. Introduction
The purpose of this parking study is to determine the parking requirements for this site, as
the various land uses will have non-coincidental times of operation. The site contains an
existing building, which has two existing tenants: an R&D office use and a wheelchair
distributor. A third, new tenant, is the Breath of the Spirit church. This church has an
existing congregation in Anaheim, with offices located within. close proximity to the
proposed location.
2. Project Location
The site is located at 4999 East La Palma Avenue. It is located on the north side of the
street, west of Kellog. It is approximately one mile from State Route 91 freeway at
Lakeview.
3. Site Description
A. Site
The site is accessed via two full-access driveways at .the east and west sides of the
property. La Palma Avenue is a six lane major arterial highway with a continuous. two-
way left tum lane along the center.
B. Current Tenants, Land Uses, and Hours
Based upon information provided by City staff, the site contains 13,398 square feet of
office, a 2,385 square foot mezzanine storage space, and 53,922 square feet of
warehouse. A research and industrial firm occupies half the office and a wheelchair
distributor occupies half the office and 39,000 square feet of the warehouse space. The
hours of operation are 6:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday through Friday.
C. Current Congregation, Location and Hours
The Breath of the Spirit church wishes to move its congregation from their current
location at 1531 South Sinclair in Anaheim. They have an existing office within close
proximity of the proposed location; consequently, the proposed site will not contain a
church office. The church currently conducts services in the evenings and on Saturday
afternoon.
4. Parking Requirements per Municipal Code
The City of Anaheim specifies the following parking rates for the existing and proposed.
uses:
®" 4 spaces/TSF for offices-general for buildings. of 3 stories or lower
0 1.55 spaces/TSF of GFA for warehouse & storage, enclosed, which may include a
- maximum of 10"/0 office space, plus, if the percentage of office space exceeds
1
10% of GFA, 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA for the floor area in excess of
10%
0 29 spaces/TSF of GFA for community & religious (without fixed seats/without
kitchen/without concurrent classes or activities)
The following tabulation is based on square footages provided by City staff, and not from
the church documentation. The 13,398 square foot office is split between the R&D use
and the wheelchair distributor. The 6,648 squaze foot R&D use is evaluated at the office
parking rate.
The wheelchair distributor occupies a total space of 45,699 square feet: 6,699 square feet
of office and 39,000 square feet of warehouse. Per the code, up to 10% of a warehouse
use can be used as an office before the office rate is applied, so consequently 10% of
45,699 is 4,570 square feet, which is evaluated at the warehouse parking rate. The
remainder of the office, (6,699-4,570) 2,129 squaze feet, is evaluated at the office parking
rate of 4 spaces/TSF. The 39,000 squaze feet uses the warehouse rate.
The total warehouse portion of the building is 53,922 square feet, of which 39,000 is the
wheelchair distributor. Consequently, the remaining portion is 14,922 square feet for the
church uses. Per the documentation provided by the church, the sanctuary is 4,651
square feet. Subtracting the sanctuary from the 14,922 square foot total gives 10,271
squaze feet of ancillary uses. The church does not have fixed seats, other concurrent uses,
or a kitchen, therefore, the other parking rates for community and religious facilities do
not apply to this portion of the church.
Tabulation of Parking Requirements per City Code
Size Tenant Land Use Parking Spaces Spaces
Rate Re 'd :Provided
6,699 R&D Office 4 27
2,385 Vacant Mezzanine stora a 1.55 4
.4,570 Wheelchair 10% allowed to be 1.55 7
Distributor office considered at
wazehouse rate
2,129 Wheelchair Remainder of office 4 9
Distributor at office rate
:39,000 Wheelchair Wazehouse 1.55 61
Distributor
4,651 Church Sanctua church 29 135
10,271 Church First & upper floor 0 0
ancill s ace
Total Re aired 243 159
Based upon the City's Municipal Code this site would require 243 parking. spaces.
Because the church uses would be scheduled on three weekday nights from 7:00 PM to
11:00 PM and on Saturday afternoons, and the existing office and warehouse uses operate
` Monday through Friday 6:00 AM to 6:00 PM, the uses are non-coincidental.
2
This study has been provided to determine the parking requirements based upon observed
demand at the site for the existing uses and at the current location, to determine the
parking demand of the congregation.
5. Site Parking Counts
Counts were taken by Southland Car Counters on Wednesday and Saturday, August 19
and 23, 2006, to determine the existing parking demand of the congregation at the current
church, and at the proposed site to determine whether the current tenants use any parking
spaces during the times that the church would hold its functions. Based upon the counts
taken, the maximum number of occupied parking spaces during the two- day count was
106 on Saturday at 3:00 PM at the current congregation's location. At the proposed
location, the existing uses were occupying one pazking space at 10:00 PM on
Wednesday, and five parking spaces on Saturday at 2:00 PM. The count sheets are
provided in Appendix B.
6. Methodology of Study
The R&D office and wheelchair distributor activities on weekdays require 108 parking
spaces per the code. The site provides 159 parking spaces, which will be adequate for the
weekday uses. The church requires 135 spaces per the code. The observed parking
demand at the existing location was 106 pazking spaces on Saturday afternoon, when the
R&D tenant's office and wheelchair distributor are closed. The total number of pazking
spaces, approximately 159 will be adequate to accommodate all uses at this site due to the
non-concurrent uses.
Site Observations
A. Security Gates
The (north) rear parking lot has a capacity of approximately 83 pazking spaces as
shown on the site plan provided, however, per a site visit; these spaces may not be
striped. This. portion of the site is secured by a rolling gate. The church use will
require that the gates be opened, so that the rear parking lot is available in
addition to the 76 spaces in front and on the west side of the building.
B. Pedestrian Access
There is no existing pedestrian walkway from the sidewalk along La Pahna
Avenue to any of the doors of the building. Landscaping secures the frontage of
the site, such that any pedestrians that might arrive via bus along. La Palma, would
enter the site by walking within the driveway. There is no walkway along the
west side of the building. There aze no handicapped parking spaces along the
west side of the building.
C. Vehicular Access
There are two existing driveways that will continue to serve this site
S. Conclusions
The existing parking will be adequate to serve the non-coincidental uses of the three
tenants. The security gates will need to be open when the church has services. If the
gated, north parking lot does not have parking stall striping as shown on the site plan that
was provided with this application, the church should be responsible for the striping,
prior to its first scheduled service. The church should also provide handicapped parking
stalls near the entrance.
9. Findings
Finding Number .0101 That the variance, ur:der the conditions unposed, if any, will
not eause,fewer• off-street parking spaces to be provided for• the proposed use than the
number of such spaces necessary to acconunodate all vehicles attributable to such use
under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of suclr use.
The 4999 E. La Palma Avenue site will provide adequate parking onsite for its uses.
No offsite parking spaces will be needed.
Finding Number .0102 That flre variance, render the conditions unposed, if arry, will
not increase the den:arrd and competition far parking spaces upon tyre public streets in
the immediate vicinity of the proposed use.
The 4999 E. La Palma Avenue site will provide adequate parking onsite for its uses.
Curbside parking is not available along La Palma Avenue.
Finding Number .0103 Tl:at the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will
not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private
property in the Immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly
provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with subsection
18.42.050.030 (Non-Residential Uses-Exception).
The 4999 E. La Palma Avenue site will provide adequate parking onsite. No
overflow parking is anticipated to occur upon adjacent private property.. The
Cornerstone Church is immediately adjacent to this site.
Finding Number .0104 That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will
'not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the
proposed use.
4
The 4994 E. La Palma site will provide sufficient parking onsite for its uses.
Because the supply of parking spaces is adequate for the observed parking demand,
no congestion within the parking lot is expected.
Finding Number .0105 That the varimrce, ursder the conditions imposed, if any, will
not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public
streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use.
The 4999 E. La Palma site will provide sufficient parking onsite for its uses. The
parking areas are set sufficiently within the site, so as to preclude any backing up
onto City streets. This ensures that there will be no vehicles queuing to get in that
could in any way impede the ingress or egress from adjacent properties.
10. Recommendations
A. The security gates should be opened, so that the north (rear) parking lot is
available for use by the Breath of the Spirit parishioners on Monday,
Wednesday and Friday evenings and Saturday afternoons.
B. The church should not schedule weekday activities before 7:00 PM on
weekdays. This restriction includes weddings, funerals, religious ceremonies,
meetings and classes.
C. The church should stripe the north (rear) parking lot, if the stalls are not as
shown on the site plan. This striping should be done prior to the first
scheduled service.
D. Adequate signage should be provided for the church, as it will occupy the
west side of the building that is not readily visible from vehicles traveling
westbound on La Palma Avenue.
E. The church should provide handicapped parking spaces near the entrance of
the church, and the ushers and church leaders should assist handicapped
parishioners to use the most convenient door.
5
Appendax A
Site Plan
C
C
e~~
PAf
Appendix B-1
Parking Counts by Southland Car Counters
Counts taken of existing uses evenings and weekends at proposed site
7
La Palma Church Parking Study
Project# 06-1240-001
Location: 4999 E. La Palma
Appendix B-2
Parking Counts. by Southland Car Counters
Counts Taken at Existing Congregation
La Palma Church Parkirbg Study
Project# 06-1240-001
Location: 1531 South Sinclair Ave.
City: Anaheim
°-TIME. :SATURDAY " . :- People In
"# of Cars` attendance
1.00 PM "'. 42
`3t00~PM=" _ 106 197
"4;00 PAIL;,.."_'" 96
5:00 PAA ? 45
' TIME ": ~ 1NEDNESpAY ."~ ;" People in
# of Cat's ~: attendance
.7x00"P1N. ,° 15
8:00 PM :,. <<;: 64
"
9,00-PJIfl" -: ~~:; 99 180
"10.00'PM'~_`~"~ 101
~"1:,00 PAA -"'" 62
8
appendix C
Site Photos
Front of 4999 E. Ea Palma Avenue
4
Two roil-up doors, one small door,
Rolling gates separating north parking lot (at rear of building)
:~ppendit C (Continued)
Close-up off rollang gates that separate the north (~•ear) parking lot
from the parking lot along ttae wrest side of the building
10
Item No. 9
kw <_
ii °-~
o ~ a
i zw -
_
a ~0
Ej°
0
xG om Sa ~G w~ zm ~~ .,um ~m .< ~a LLm 3~°a 'uu°a °u~o
CpANGETHMPE
AVENUE
MA
LA PM
AVENUE
LWCGLN
AVENUE
OgIL w S
~ p
POAO
~- =
a3
Z4
i°¢
KA1ELw
AVENUE
LNAPMPN
AVENUE
w
kw ~
3 6 =
°i aw -
° ~~
m
x~ ~< m~ w~ ~g ~N .,gym
N
Zoning Code Amendment No. 2006-000 51. Subject Property
Date: October 2, 2006
Scale: Graphic
Q.S. No. n/a
Requested By: CITY OF ANA HEIM
Citywide ~oiaz
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No, 9
9a. CEQA EXEMPTION - CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15061(b)(3) (Motion)
9b. 'ZONJNG CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2006-00051 (Motion)
cLOCATION:
(1) Citywide.
...REQUEST.
(2) This is aCity-initiated (City Council) request to amend Chapters 4:04 and 18.44 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code to prohibit billboards in the City (advertised as "City-Initiated
request to amend provisions of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to signs
and billboards, including prohibiting billboards').
BACKGROUND:
(3) At its September 12, 2006 meeting, the City Council conducted a public workshop
relativeYo billboards. Copies of a presentation given by Planning staff have been
provided 3o Planning Commission and are available for review in the Planning
Department. A video of the erttire workshop maybe viewed: on the City's website
(www.ariaheim.net).
(4) At the workshop, Council directed Planning Department staff to seek input from billboard
companies about a`potentiat exchange program which would provide for he removal of
street-oriented'biliboards in exchange for installation of freeway-oriented billboards. In
order to ensure that new billboards could not be'installed in locations where they had
previously been removed, Council alsq directedthe City Attorney to prepare an
prdinance to prohibit new billboards in the City. Council directed the City Attorney to
place the introduction of the ordinance on the September 26, 2006, Council agenda. For
more informatics on the Council's requests, please refer o the City Council staff report
for the proposed ordinance (Attachment "A").
(5) At its September 26, Q006 meeting, Council introduced an ordinance to amend Chapter
4.04 of Title 4 and Chapter 18.44 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code tq:
a) :Add billboards to the list of prohibited uses in the City,
b) Repeal existing provisions permitting billboards as conditional uses in certain zones.
and areas of the City,
c) Repeal the development standards for new. billboards,
d) Adjust various Tables in Chapter 18.44 to remove billboards from the list of
conditionally permitted uses and place billboards in the list of prohibited uses, and
e) Clarify that billboards and other off-site advertising signs are not permitted under the
general. sign regulations contained in Chapter 4.04 of Title 4 of the Code except to
- -,. the extent expressly permitted elsewhere in the Code.
' ZCA2006-00051SRSJK C Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
October 2, 2006
Item No. 9
Existing legal. billboards in the City would be allowed to remain in existence as legal
nonconforming uses. The proposed ordinance is scheduled for a second reading and
consideration of its adoption at the October 3, 2006, City Council meeting..
(6) Planning Commission review is required for any proposed amendment to Title 18, as a
public hearing item on the Commission's agenda. The Commission provides a
recommendation to City Council for approval or denial of any such amendments. The
.City Council is the final approval authority.
(7) Letters have been sent to all of the outdoor advertisers that operate billboards within the
City of Anaheim notifying them of today's Planning Commission Public bearing and the
associated. City Council meetings, so they may participate and provide the City with
,input.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(8) This project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)
sinceahis activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies. only to projects which
have. the potential for causing significant effect on the;environment. Where it can be
seen with certainty that there is np possibility that the acfivity in question may have a
significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.
RECOMMENDATION:
(9) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based upon the evidence ubmitted to the Planning Commission, including
the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and,written evidence presented at
the meeting, the Commission take the following actions:
a) By motion, determine that the project is exempt under Section 15061'(b)(3) of the
::CEQA Guidelines.:
b) By motion, recommend that the City Council adopbthe draft ordinance introduced at
`its September 26,2006 meeting, to amend Chapters 4.04 and :18.44 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code toprohibit billboards in the City, for the reasons discussed in the
attached City Council staff report (Attachment "A") and based upon findings that the
proposed amendmentsare in conformance with and will implement the Anaheim
General Plan and will enhance and preserve the general welfare.
ZCA2006-00051 SRSJK Page 2
Attachment -Item No. 9
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
City of Anaheim
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
DATE: SEPTEMBER 26, 2006
FROMr CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
SUBJECT: PROHIBITION OF NEW BILLBOARDS
ATTACHMENT (Y/N): YES ITEM # 27
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council introduce the proposed ordinance amending Chapters 4.04 and 18.44 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code.. to prohibit new billboards in the City at its meeting on September
26, and adopt the ordinance at its meeting on October 3, 2006, following a public hearing by, and
receipt of a recommendation from, the City Planning Commission.
DISCUSSION:
At its meeting on September 12, 2006, the City Council conducted a public workshop concerning
the subject of billboards within the City. ,As a result of such workshop, and based upon past
expressions of interest from several outdoor advertising companies, the City Council directed
City staff to solicit interest and information from outdoor advertising companies concerning the
possible design, adoption and implementation of a voluntary billboard exchange program. As
currently conceived, such a program would involve the voluntary removal of existing non-
freeway-oriented billboards by companies in exchange for the right to construct one or more new
freeway-oriented billboards at prescribed locations. Freeway-oriented billboards are currently
prohibited in the City of Anaheim. Non-freeway-oriented billboards are currently permitted by
conditional use permit on arterial highways within certain limited zones and areas of the City.
No permit has been issued for a new billboard since ] 989.
The purpose of the. voluntary exchange program would be to reduce or eliminate existing non-
freeway-oriented billboards in the City. The incentive to outdoor advertising companies to
participate in such a program would be the ability to construct and maintain one or more new
freeway-oriented billboards at locations generally regarded as more valuable by outdoor
advertising companies. Whether to adopt such an exchange program, and the exact design of
any such program, remain policy issues for the City Council. to decide at a later date. However, a
_.:necessary component of any such voluntary billboard exchange program would be a prohibition
on new non-freeway-oriented billboards in the City. Lacking such a prohibition, an exchange
program would be ineffective in ensuring the reduction or elimination ofnon-freeway-oriented
billboards because it would not prevent companies from constructing new non-freeway-oriented
billboards after existing billboards are removed.
While any decision by the City Council concerning such a billboard exchange program will
occur at a later date, there is some urgency to consider and adopt a prohibition on future non-
freeway-oriented billboards at this time. On November 7, 2006, the voters of the State of
California will vote upon Proposition 90 (the so-called "Protect Our Homes Initiative") and, if
approved by a majority of those voting, such measure will become effective on November 8,
2006.
The proposed measure would amend Section 19 of Article I of the California Constitution in
numerous significant ways affecting exercise of the power of eminent domain by public entities
and the right of private property owners to compensation for the taking or damaging of property.
One of the most significant and potentially costly provisions of the measure involves the
redefinition of "regulatory takings.." Under existing state and federal law, a governmental
regulation which does not involve any physical taking of property but which may reduce the
value of property (such as a new zoning restriction or reclassification of property) does not
subject the govemmental entity adopting the regulation to liability for damages unless the
regulation denies the property owner of all or substantial all viable economic use of the property
(i.e. a "regulatory taking"). If adopted, Section 3 of Proposition 90 would provide as follows:
"Except when taken to protect health and safety, `damage' to private property
includes government actions that result insubstantial economic loss to private property.
Examples of substantial economic loss include, but are not limited to, the down zoning of
private property, the elimination of any access to private property, and limitations on the
use of private air space. `Government action' shall mean any statute, charter provision,
ordinance, resolution, law, rule or regulation."
Proposition 90 provides that, if it is adopted by the voters, it will become effective on November 8,
2006, but will "not apply to any statute, charter provision;brdinance, resolution, law, rule or
regulation in effect on the date of enactment that results in substantial economic loss to private
property." (Section 6.)
If Proposition 90 is adopted, it will undoubtedly be the subject of numerous court decisions,.
interpretations and clarifications. While the City may later be able to successfully argue that a ban
on non-freeway-oriented billboards does not "result in a substantial economic loss to private
property'' and is, therefore, not compensable under the provisions of Proposition 90, if the City
Council desires to further consider a comprehensive plan involving a voluntary billboard exchange
program and/or the elimination ofnon-freeway-oriented billboards, it would be prudent to adopt the
proposed ordinance prohibiting new billboards in time for such ordinance to be in effect prior to the
November 7 election to avoid the legal risks and possible exposure to liability that Proposition 90
may entail.
The proposed ordinance would amend Chapter 4.04 of Title 4 and Chapter 18.44 of Title 18 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code to (i) add billboards to the list of prohibited uses in the Ciry (ii) repeal
existing provisions permitting billboards as conditional uses in certain zones and areas of the City,
(iii) repeal the development standards for new billboards, (iv) correct various Tables in Chapter
18.44 to remove billboards from the tist of conditionally permitted uses and place billboards in the
list of prohibited uses, and (v) clarify that billboards and other off-site advertising signs are not
permitted under the general sign regulations contained in Chapter 4.04 of Title 4 of the Code except
to the extent expressly permitted elsewhere in the Code.
Billboards currently legally existing in the City would be allowed to remain in existence as legal
nonconforming uses.
In the event the City Council later determines to adopt a billboard exchange program, some of the
provisions being amended may need to be further amended, and other code provisions will need to be
added, to accommodate the billboard exchange program and possible new freeway-oriented
billboards.
IMPACT ON BUDGET:
The adoption of this ordinance would have no impact upon the City budget.
Respectfully submitted,
JACK L. WHITE
City Attorney
c: City Manager
Planning Director
63276.1.
Attachments:
1. Ordinance
2. Attachment to Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY. OF ANAHEIM AMENDING
TITLE 4 AND. TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO BILLBOARDS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
That new Section 4.04.040 be, and the same is hereby, added to Chapter 4.04 of Title 4 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code, to read as follows:
"4.04.040 PROHIBITION OF SIGNS NOT EXPRESSLY
PERMITTED.
Nothing contained in this chapter shall be deemed to permitor authorize any sign
except to the extent such sign is expressly permitted or authorized by any other
provision of this Code."
SECTION 2.
That Table 8-A (Primary Uses: Commercial Zones) of Section 18.08.030 of Chapter
18.08 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as
shown in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 3.
That Table 10-A (Primary Uses: Industrial Zone) of Section 18.10.030 of Chapter 18.10
of Title 18 of the Anaheim .Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as
shown in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 4.
That Section 18.44.020 of Chapter 18.44 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be,
and the same is hereby, amended in its entirety to read as follows:
"18.44.020 APPLICABILITY
Except as otherwise provided for in this chapter, it is unlawful for any person to
construct, erect, enlarge, alter or relocate within the City a sign as defined in this
chapter, without first obtaining the appropriate permits from the City. This
chapter is not intended to invalidate Chapter 4.04 (Outdoor Advertising Signs and
Stmctures -Genera() or Chapter 4.08 (Outdoor Advertising Signs and Structures
Near Freeways) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. In the event of any conflict
between this chapter and Chapter 4.04 or 4.08, the applicable provisions of
Chapter 4.04 or Chapter 4.08 shall prevail. All signs, regardless of content, shall
be subject to the provisions of this chapter. Except as may be otherwise expressly
provided in this chapter, signs shall direct attention to an occupancy, commodity,
service or entertainment conducted, sold or offered upon the premises where the
sign is maintained, as distinguished from an off-site advertising. sign as defined in
this chapter. A political or other noncommercial message may be substituted for
the copy of any commercial sign allowed under this chapter."
SECTION 5.
That subsection .080 of Section 18.44.030 of Chapter 18.44 of Title 18 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as follows:
".080 `Billboard' means a sign of any kind or nature whatsoever used to
advertise (i) any business, industry, entertainment or activity not conducted, or (ii)
any goods or other tangible items not produced, sold or available, or (iii) any
services or other intangibles not available or rendered, on the premises upon
which such sign is located; provided, however, such term shall not include any
regional guide sign, nameplate; temporary real estate sign, identification sign or
on-site advertising sign as such terms are defined in this chapter. Such term shall
also not include any notice posted by any public officer in the performance of an
official duty, or any directional, warning or informational sign required or
authorized by any federal, state, county or local authority."
SECTION 6.
That subsection .320 of Section 18.44.030 of Chapter 18.44 of Title 18 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as follows:
".320 `Off-Site Advertising Sign' means the same as the term `billboard' as
defined in this section."
SECTION 7.
That subsection .330 of Section 18.44.030 of Chapter 18.44 of Title 18 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as follows:
".330 `On-Site Advertising Sign' means a sign of any kind or nature
whatsoever which directs attention to any business, industry, entertainment,
occupancy, activity, goods or other tangible items,. services or other intangibles,
or other activity, conducted, produced, sold, offered, rendered or available upon
the premises where the sign is located, as distinguished from an off-site
..,.advertising sign. Apolitical or other noncommercial message maybe substituted
for the advertising copy of any on-site advertising sign allowed under this Code."
SECTION 8.
That subsection .035 be, and the same is hereby, added to Section 18.44.040 of
Chapter 18.44 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to prohibited uses, to
read as follows:
".035 Billboards."
SECTION 9.
That subsection .0104 of Section 18.44.050 of Chapter 18.44 of Title 18 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code, be and the same is hereby, repealed.
SECTION 10.
That Sections 18.44.230, 18.44.240 and 18.44.250 of Chapter 18,44 of Title 18 of
the Anaheim Municipal. Code be, and the same are hereby, repealed.
SECTION 11.
That subsection .130 of Section 18.120.050 of Chapter 18.120 of Title 18 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as follows:
".130 Sign Regulations -Advertising and Identification. Except as
provided in subsection .140 of this section, any signs installed or erected
in this development area shall. comply with the provisions of Chapter
18.44 (Signs) for the "I" Industrial Zone."
SECTION 12.
That subsection .130 of Section ] 8.120.060 of Chapter 18.120 of Title 18 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as follows:
".130 Sign Regulations -Advertising. and Identification. Except as
provided in subsection .140 of this section, any signs installed or erected
in this development area shall comply with the provisions of Chapter
18.44 (Signs) for the "I" Industrial Zone."
SECTION 13.
That subsection .1.20 of Section 18.120.070 of Chapter 18.120 of Title 18 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as follows:
".120 Sign Regulations -Advertising and Identification. Any signs
installed or erected in this development area shall comply with the
provisions of Chapter 18.44 (Signs) for the "I" Industrial Zone."
SECTION 14. SEVERABILITY
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 all
other portions of this ordinance independent of the elimination herefrom of any such
portion as may be declared invalid.
SECTION I5. 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 16. 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 (ti) 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 was introduced at a regular meeting of
the City Council of the City of Anaheim held on the 26th day of September, 2006, and
thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 3rd
day of October, 2006, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CITY OF ANAHEIM
By
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
G3?43.3
EXHIBIT "A"
Table 8-A P Permitted by Right
PRIMARY USES: COMMERC IAL ZONES C Conditional Use Permit Required
N Pro hibited
T Telecommunications Antenna Review
Permit Req uired
C-NC C-R C-G O-L O-H Special Provisions
Residential Classes of Uses
Mobile Ilome Parks N N C N N
Senior Citizens' I-lousing C C C N N Senior Citizens'
Apartment Projects
subject to Chapter 18.50
Non-Residential Classes of Uses
Alcoholic Beverage Sales-Off-Sale - C C C C C Conditional use permit
not required if use is. in
conjunction with
Markets-Large; in 0-L
and O-H Zones, must be
clearly accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
Alcoholic Beverage Sales-On-Sale C C C C C
Ambulance Services N C C N N
Animal Boarding N N C N N
Animal Grooming P N P N N
Antennas-Broadcasting C C C C C
Antennas-Telecommunications- T T T T T Subject to§18.38.060
Stealth Building-Mounted and }8.62.020
Antennas-Telecommunications- C C C C C Subject [o§18.38.060
Stealth Ground-Mounted
Antennas-Telecommunications - N N N N N Subject to § 18.38.060
Ground-Maun[ed.
Automotive-Car Sales & Rental N N C N N Subject to § 18.38.200
Automotive-Public Parking C C C C C
Automotive-Parts Sales C P P N N
Automotive-Repair & Modification C C C N N
Automotive-Service Stations C C C C C Subject to § 18.38.070
Automotive-Washing N C C C C In O-L and 0-H Zones,
must be accessory to an
" Automotive-Service
S[a[ion use
Bars & Nightclubs C C C C C In O-L and O-H Zones,
must be clearly
~-`"' " accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
Table 8-A P Permitted by Right
PRIMARY USES: COMMERCIAL ZONES C Conditional Usc Permit Required
N Prohibited
T Telecommunication s Antenna Review
Permit Req uired
C-NC C-R C-C O-L O-H Special Provisions
Bed and Breakfast Inns C C C C C Subject to § 18.38.080
Billboards N N N N N
Boat & RV Sales N N C N N Subject to § 18.38?00
Business & Financial Services P F P P P
Cemeteries N N C N N
Commercial Retail Centers C C C N N
Community & Religious Assembly C C C C C ]n O-H Zone, must be
clearly accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
Computer Internet & Amusement N C C C C In 0-L and O-H Zones,
Facilities must be clearly
accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
Convalescent & Rest homes
Convenience Stores
Dance & Fitness Studios-Large
Dance & Fitness Studios-Small
Day Care Centers
Drive-Through Facilities
Educational Instirabons-Business
Educational Institutions-Genera I
Equipment Rental-Large
Equipment Rental-Smolt
Group Care Facilities
N N C N N
C C C C C Subject to §18.38.110;
in O-L and O-PI Zones ,
must be clearly
accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
N C C C C In O-H Zone, must be
clearly accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
P P P P P In O-H Zone, must be
clearly accessory to and
integrated with an office
building, otherwise
requires a conditional
use permit
C C C C C
C C C C C
P P P P P
N C C N C
N C C N N
C P P C C In O-H and O-L Zones,
must be clearly
accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
C C C C C Subject to
§18.36.040.070
Table 8-A P Permitted by Right
PRIMARY USES: COMMERCIAL ZONES C Conditional Usc Permit Required
N Prohibited
T Telecommunications Antenna Review
Permit Required
C-NC C-R C-G O-L O-H Special Provisions
Helipads N N C N N Allowed only in
conjunction with a
hospital
Hospitals N N C C C
Hotels & Motels N C C N N
Markets-Large P P P N N
Markets-Small C C C C C
Medical & Dental Offices P P P P P
Mortuaries N N P N N
Offices P P P P P
Personal Services-General P P P P P Laundromats are subject
to § 18.38.150. 1n O-L
and O-H Zones, must be
clearly accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
Personal Services-Restricted C C C C C In O-L and O-H Zones,
must be clearly
accessory to and
integrated. with an office
building
Plant Nurseries N C P N N Subject to § 18.38.190
and § 18.38.200
Public Services C C P C C
Recreation-Bowling & Billiards C C C C C In O-L and O-H Zones,
must be clearly
accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
Recreation-Commercial Indoor C C C C C In O-L and O-H Zones,
must be clearly
accessory [o and
integrated with an offtce
building
Recreation-Commercial Outdoor C C C C C
Recreation-Low Impact C C C P P In 0-L and O-H Zones,
must. be clearly
accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
Recreation-Swimming & Tennis C C C C C
Table 8-A P Permitted by Right
PRIMARY USES: COMMER CIAL ZONES C Conditional Use Per mit Required
N Prohibited
T Telecommunications Antenna Review
Permit Required
C-NC C-R C-C O-L O-H Special Provisions
Recycling Services-Consumer P P P N N Subject to Chapter
18.48; reverse vending
machines located
entirely within a
structure do not require
any zoning approval
Repair Services-General P N P N N
Repair Services-Limited P P P C C In O-L and O-H Zones,
must be clearly
accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
Research & Development N C C C P
Restaurants-Drive-Through N C C C C Subject to § 18.38.220
Restaurants-General P P P C C Subject to§]8.38.220
Restaurant-Semi-Enclosed C C C C C Subject to § 18.38:220
Restaurants-Walk-Up C C C C C
Retail Sales-General P P P P P In O-Land O-H Zones,
must lie clearly
accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
Retail Sales-Kiosks C C C C C
Retail Sales-0utdoor C C C N N Subject to §18.38.190
and § 18.38.200
Retail Sales-Regional N P C N N
Retail Sales-Used Merchandise P P P N N
Room & Board N N C N N
Self Storage N N C N N
Sex-Oriented Businesses N N P N N Subject to Chapter 18.54
Smoking Lounge P P P N N Subject to Chapter 4.22
and §18.38.260
Smdios-Broadcasting C C P C C
Studios-Recording N N P C C In O-L and 0-H Zones,
must be clearly
accessory to and
integrated with an office
building
Transit Facilities C C C C C
Utilities-Major C C C N C
Table 8-A P Permitted by Right
PRIMARY USES: COMMERCIAL ZONES C Conditional Use Permit Required
N Prohibited.
T Telecommunications Antenna Review
Permit Required
C-NC C-R C-G O-L O-H Special Provisions
Utilities-Minor P P P P P Pay phones are
permitted by right in all
zones if located on the
interior of a building or
attached to fhe exterior
within 10 fee[ of [he
main building's entrance
Veterinary Services
Wholesaling
63244.v 1
C C C N N
N C C N N Shall be accessory to a
Retail Sales use
EXHIBIT °°B"
Table ] 0-A
PRIMARY USES: INDUSTRIAL ZONE P Permitted by Right
C Conditional Use Permit Required
N Prohibited
T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit
Required
I Special Provisions
Residential Classes of Uses
Mobile Home Parks C
Non-Residential Classes of Uses
Agricultural Crops P
Alcoholic Beverage Sales-Off-Sale C
Alcoholic Beverage Sales-On-Sale C
Ambulance Services P
Animal Boarding C
Animal Grooming C
Antennas-Broadcasting C
Antennas-Telecommunications- T Subjec([o§§18.38.060 and 18.62.020
Stealth Building-Mounted
Antennas-Telecommunications- C Subject to§18.38.060
Stealth Ground-Mounted
Antennas-Telecommunications- N Subject [o§18.35.060
Ground-Mounted
Automotive-Car Sales & Rentals C Subject [o § 18.38.200
Automotive-Impound Yards C Subject to §18.38?00
Automotive-Public Parking C
Automotive-Parts Sales C
Automotive-Repair and Modification C
Automotive-Service Stations C Subjec[to §18.38.070
Automotive-Washing C
Bars & Nightclubs C
Billboards N
Boat & RV Sales C Subject to § 18.38.200
Building Material Sales C Not more than 30% of the outdoor area; excluding parking, shall
be devoted to outdoor displays; subject [o § 18.38.190 and
§ 1$.38.200
Business & Financial Services C
Community & Religious Assembly C
Dance & Fitness Studios-Large C
Dance & Fitness Studios-Small C
bay Care Centers C
Table 10-A
PRIMARY USES: INDUSTRIAL ZONE
P Permitted by Right
C Conditional Use Permit Required
N Prohibited
T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit
1 Special Provisions
Drive-Through Facilities C
Educational Institutions-Business C
EducationalIMtitutions-General C
Equipment Rental-Large C Conditional use permit. not required if conducted entirely indoors
(Ord. 5944 § 8; Sep[. 28, 2004)
Equipment Rental-Small
Helipads & Heliports
Hospitals
Hotels & Motels
Industry-Limited.
Industry-General
Junkyards
Mortuaries
Offices-Development
Offices-General
Oil Production
Outdoor Storage Yards
Personal Services-General
Personal Services-Restricted
Plant Nurseries
Public Services
Recreation-Bowling & Billiards
Recreation-Commercial Indoor
Recreation-Commercial Outdoor
Recreati on-Low-Impact
Recreation-Swimming & Tennis
Recycling Services-Consumer
Recycling Services-General
Recycling Services-Processing
Repair Services-General
Repair Services-Limited
Research & Development
Restaurants-Drive-Through
P
C
C
C
P
C
C Subject to § 18,38.200
C
P
C Permitted without conditional use permit only if accessory [o an
industrial or other primary permitted use
C Subject to § 18.38.180
C Subject to §18.38.200
C Laundromats are subject to § 18.38.150
C
P Subject to § 18.38.190 and § 18.38.200; Retail only requires a
conditional use permit
P
C
C Amusement arcades are allowed only in conjunction. with a hotel,
motel, or bowling alley
C
P
C
P Subject to Chapter 18.48; reverse vending machines located
entirely within a structure do not require any zoning approval
C Subject to Chapter 18.48
C Subject to Chapter 18.48
P
C
P
C Subject to§18.38.220
Table ]0-A
PRIMARY USES: INDUSTRIAL ZONE
P Permitted by Right
C Conditional Use Permit Required
N Prohibited
T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit
i Special Provisions
Restaurants-General C Fast-Food and Take-Out service allowed without a conditional
use permit when a part of an indusVial complex of 5 or more
units; Subject to § 18.38.220
Restaurants-Semi-Enclosed C Subject to §18.38?20
Restaurants-Walk-Up C
Retail Sales-Household Fumi[ure C Permitted by conditional use permit only if the retail sales portion
of [he business occupies a minimum of 50,000 square feet of
building floor area
Retail Sales-General C Industrially-related only
Retail Sales-0utdoor C Subject to § 18.38.190 and § 18.38.200
Self Storage C Subject to Planning Commission Policy
Sex-Oriented Businesses P Subject [o Chapter 18.54 '
Studios-Broadcasting P
Studios-Recording P
Towing Services P
Transit Facilities C
Tmck Repair & Sales C Subject to § 18.38.200
Utilities-Major C
Utilities-Minor P
Veterinary Services C
Warehousing &Storage-Enclosed P
Wholesaling P
63245.v1